wadi suq and iron age period ceramics from sharm, fujairah (u.a.e.)

Arab. arch. epig. 2002: 13: 1–94 C 2002 Blackwell MunksgaardPrinted in Denmark. All rights reserved

ISSN 0905-7196

Wadi Suq and Iron Age period ceramicsfrom Sharm, Fujairah (U.A.E.)

DIANE BARKERSchool of Archaeology, University of Sydney, Australia

The Wadi Suq period and Iron Age ceramics from Sharm are examined in termsof morphological, compositional and decorative features. The assemblage istypical of the second- and first-millennium BC ceramics of southeastern Arabia.The more unusual Iron Age ‘imitation soft stone’ ceramics are amply repre-sented and the Sharm assemblage considerably expands upon this corpus ofceramics which has hitherto been less than abundant in the region. Compari-sons with other second- and first-millennium sites suggest the tombs werelargely occupied in the late Wadi Suq period, a pattern of occupation whichagain peaked in the Iron Age II period.

Introduction and methodologyThe excavations at Sharm produced an im-pressive corpus of artefacts, not the least ofwhich is a ceramic assemblage comprisingpottery belonging to the Wadi Suq, IronAge, Pre-islamique recent and Islamicperiods. The diagnostic Wadi Suq (1)period and Iron Age (2) ceramics are thesubject of the current study (3).

The touchstone for the analysis of theSharm ceramic assemblage is the regis-tration database compiled during the fieldseason in the U.A.E. (4). Diagnostic sherdsare defined as rims and bases, as well asthose fragments featuring spouts, lugs,handles or decoration of any form, whetherit be painted, slipped, burnished or incised.The assemblage is classified in terms of itscomponent parts with the greatest em-phasis being placed on morphological fea-tures. Within both the Wadi Suq and theIron Age assemblages shape, fabric and

1

decoration/surface treatment are classifiedand described independently, but corre-lations are made if noticeable patterns be-tween attribute states are evident. The fol-lowing typology employs guidance fromthe shapes, decoration and fabrics, recog-nised from other assemblages in the OmanPeninsula and every attempt has beenmade to act consistently within the estab-lished framework.

The total amount of registered sherds is503, thirty-five of which fall outside thetwo archaeological periods under dis-cussion (5). Unfortunately, ten sherds wereremoved from the assemblage as part of anongoing PIXE-PIGME programme ofanalysis. As a result, a number of thesesherds were unavailable for the presentstudy. Thus, the concept of the totalworking assemblage (TWA) is used to referto the net second- and first-millennium ce-ramics. The final TWA is 459 sherds.

D. BARKER

Originally, a technique called ‘estimatedvessel equivalents’ (EVEs) was used toquantify the sherds of each period. It isbased upon a concept similar to theminimum number of individuals (MNI)method used in anthropological and ar-chaeozoological studies (6). AlthoughEVEs is the best method for quantifyingfragmentary assemblages such as the onefound at Sharm, it was eventually aban-doned as a matter of practicality. Thesystem is most useful with respect to di-agnostic rim and base sherds, but it is im-possible to measure and quantify otherfragments, such as body sherds. Con-sidering that some 22% of the TWA is un-able to be quantified using this method,it was not used in order to avoid dis-torting the results. Furthermore, only thediagnostic sherds were brought back toAustralia for study, not the entire assem-blage. Any figures obtained using EVEscan only ever, therefore, amount to aminimum.

In terms of the fabric, the microstructureis considered the most important factor inthe compositional characterisation of thesherds. Particular emphasis is placed onthe nature of the matrix (including texture),the size, shape, colour, frequency andsource of inclusions, and the size, shapeand frequency of the voids (pores). Majorclassifications based on colour are gener-ally avoided because the exact shade of afired vessel depends upon firing conditionsand the quantities of iron and carbon-aceous material present in the clay (7).

Microscopic analysis of samples em-bedded in a highly polished epoxy resinmixture was undertaken using a ScanningElectron Microscope (SEM, Philips 505) (8).Thirty-four sherds from a range of fabricgroups were analysed but for reasons ofspace, only a selection of micrographs arepublished. In some ways however, theanalysis hindered the typological compari-

2

sons made using basic visual characterisa-tion. Whilst a group of sherds could lookvery similar under a hand lens, the SEMconcentrated on the minute detail of anarea several microns in width, which mademinor differences appear drastic. Thus, thepotential for distortion is high, particularlysince a sample area may contain differentinclusions compared to other parts of thefabric. The risk of non-uniformity is par-ticularly evident with respect to coarsepastes with irregularly-sorted inclusions(9). Such fabrics are common to all of theperiods under review. Any variation be-tween a general fabric description and theSEM micrograph is therefore likely to bethe result of the specificity of the sampleand the number of inclusions within thesmall area being analysed, in addition tothe potential variation present within theentire sherd. For these reasons, such differ-ences did not necessarily impact upon thedefined fabric groups. Unfortunately, thebasic analysis was not specific enough todraw firm conclusions about the mineral-ogical and geological similarities and dif-ferences between fabrics.

Few parallels with other sites were madewith respect to pastes because of a lack ofaccess to other primary materials at thetime of study. Any comparisons that aremade are therefore carefully considered.

The Wadi Suq period ceramicsThe Wadi Suq period ceramics from Sharmrepresent, in addition to the other second-millennium artefacts, the first major periodof the tomb’s occupation. The ensuing dis-cussion will concentrate on the three majorceramic attributes of shape, fabric and dec-oration.

The shape typologyThe majority of the Wadi Suq sherds corre-spond to the corpora of defined shapes for

WADI SUQ AND IRON AGE CERAMICS

second-millennium ceramics in the OmanPeninsula. They are discussed according tothe major forms.

BowlsSimple open bowls with tapered rimseither gently curve inwards (Fig. 1.1, 1.2) orhave a steeper profile (Fig. 1.3, 1.4). Similarprofiles were also recognised at a numberof sites in the U.A.E. and Oman, enjoyingwide distribution both spatially and chro-nologically. A vessel from Tell Abraq witha thinned lip (10) finds a parallel in the

Fig. 1.Wadi Suq open bowls.Tapered rims: 1: SP-46. 2: SP-39. 3: SP-38. 4: SP-26.Rounded rims: 5: SP-281. 6:SP-485. 7: SP-395/410. 8: SP-32. 9: SP-135.

3

form of SP-39 (Fig. 1.2) from Sharm andwas given a Wadi Suq III date (1600–1400BC) (11). SP-39 also corresponds to a simi-larly dated example from the Shimal settle-ment (12). This is to be expected con-sidering that the preliminary phasing ofTell Abraq recorded Wadi Suq Phase III asindicative of the Shimal settlement com-plex (13).

Levels 6.47–6.27 in Square 0I at TellAbraq saw an increase in these types ofsimple open bowls represented by TA 492and 463 (14). The stratigraphy of Tell Abraq

D. BARKER

Fig. 2.Wadi Suq open bowls. Rounded, thickened rims: 1: SP-354. 2: SP-27. 3: SP-24. Flattened rims: 4: SP-183. 5: SP-220.6: SP-329. 7: SP-406/431. 8: SP-272/374. 9: SP-411.

suggested the square fell within the WadiSuq IV phase (1400–1300 BC), or during theLate Kassite period (15). The excavations ofQala’at al-Bahrain by the Danish Missionreinforces this date, represented by PeriodIIIa (16). Simple open bowls, therefore, ap-pear to have enjoyed a long period of fa-vour. A similar shape was identifiedduring a survey in Ras al-Khaimah whichbelongs to a corpus of ceramics assigned tothe first half of the second millennium BC(17). However, it is not inconceivable thatsuch a simple form was in use throughoutthe Wadi Suq period. This shape is alsoknown from the Wadi Suq (18), Hili 8 (19)and Bahrain (20).

SP-26 (Fig. 1.4) is a somewhat uniquebowl with a tapered rim and a thinned lip,which is the result of a sweeping inden-tation of the outer wall. A similar shapewas noted in a Wadi Suq III context at TellAbraq (21), but this was classified as abeaker. However, on the purity scale of 1to 5, its provenance (Sq. I: 7.37–7.17) scoreda 4 and the date therefore requires some

4

caution. De Cardi’s survey of ‘Abayah inthe Wadi Bani Battash produced twosimilar examples (22), although these wereclassed as goblet rims.

Open bowls with rounded rims (Fig. 1.5–1.9) are divided into simple rounded rimsand those which exhibit interior or exteriorthickening. Although a number of bowlswith tapered rims are also rounded incross-section, the vessels with simplerounded rims are characterised by profilesthat are of a generally consistent thickness.The shapes are simple to the point of beingunremarkable and, coupled with the smallsize of the remaining fragments, only gen-eral parallels could be adduced. This is alsotrue of the thickened rounded rims (Fig.2.1–2.3) although SP-27 (Fig. 2.2), with itsinternally thickened and ridged profile, iscomparable to a Wadi Suq III vessel fromTell Abraq (23). The Tell Abraq exampledoes, however, have a wider orifice and aslightly bevelled rim.

The incidence of flattened rims on openbowls (Fig. 2.4–2.9) is limited, a situation


reflected in the paucity of relevant paral-lels. In general, the majority of these sherdsexhibit some form of thickening around therim either internally or externally. SP-272/304 (Fig. 2.8) with its externally thickenedrim finds parallels at Shimal (24) and TellAbraq (25). The former consists of a platewith an out-turned inner face from the

Fig. 3.Wadi Suq closed bowls/bowls with incurving rims. Tapered rims: 1: SP-351/471, SP-269/479. 2: SP-294. Roundedrims: 3: SP-361. 4: SP-33. 5: SP-41. 6: SP-45. 7: SP-44. Thickened rims: 8: SP-47. 9: SP-421/464. 10: SP-43.

5

settlement at Shimal (26) and which datesto the Wadi Suq III period (27).

Closed and incurving rim bowls (Fig.3.1–3.2) are quantitatively less prominentthan their open counterparts, although anumber of close parallels exist. Like theopen bowls, the closed vessels are classi-fied according to the presence of tapered

D. BARKER

or rounded rims, either simple orthickened. SP-351/471 (ΩSP-269/479)(Fig. 3.1) and SP-294, with its tapered, in-curving rim, find close parallels at TellAbraq, including TA 1652 (28). Thisvessel, in addition to another piece fromthe settlement at Shimal (29) is remark-ably similar in shape, size and decorationto the first of the Sharm examples. Theshape itself is quite common, as furtherparallels will testify, yet the decoration isdistinct and will be discussed in turn. Itis sufficient to note at this point that sincethe Shimal example was found in thesettlement, the Sharm pieces may be as-signed a similar Wadi Suq III date (30).This is in complete accordance with thedate assigned to the Tell Abraq example(31). A more comprehensive publicationof incurving rim bowls is included inVelde’s MA Thesis on the settlement pot-tery from Shimal (32). Similar vesselswere also found at Hili 8 (33) and in theWadi Suq. In the latter region, one suchbowl was found in the grave field, yet itdiffers from the Sharm examples in termsof its decoration of opposed concentricsemi-circles between rows of stripes (34).

Closed or incurving rim vessels withrounded rims were also recovered fromthe tomb (Fig. 3.3–3.10), with many of thelips marginally thickened or the rims in-dented slightly. SP-43 (Fig. 3.10) with itspronounced rounded shape, is similar toSP-294 (Fig. 3.2), despite the obvious dif-ference in rim types. The shape is wellparalleled in the region, and includescomparisons from sites with reliablestratigraphic sequences. Once again, TellAbraq, by now recognised as one of themost important sites in the U.A.E., pro-duced several comparable examples. TA641 (35), found in a Wadi Suq III context,has a generally similar shape, but pos-sesses a more tapered, everted rim. Acloser parallel, however, comes from the

6

1990 season of excavations. Another WadiSuq III piece, TA 1360 (36), like SP-43, ischaracterised by a rounded body and arim emphasised by a slight indentation.Kennet and Velde also published a com-parable vessel (37) but it too has a moretapered and everted rim and the walls areonly slightly rounded. An example of ap-proximately the same size and shapecame from the excavations at Tawi Sa’idin Oman, yet only a relatively smallupper portion remains extant and, unlikethe Sharm example, it is painted with ablack geometric motif (38).

Two distinct ranges in rim diameter werenoted in the illustrated examples of thisgroup. The vessels depicted in Figures 3.4and 3.6–3.8 all have orifices within the 14to 20 cm range, with three of the fourexamples having rim diameters of either 18cm (Fig. 3.6 and 3.7) or 20 cm (SP-33, Fig.3.4). In contrast, two examples, SP-41 and421/464 (Fig. 3.5, 3.9), bear seemingly largeorifices for vessels of a tomb assemblage,at 30 cm and 26 cm respectively. A numberof comparable examples from Tell Abraq(39) were assigned either a Wadi Suq II ora Wadi Suq III date.

CupsA single biconical cup, with a pronouncedincurving upper portion tapering off to apointed rim, was recovered from Tomb I(Fig. 4.1). The form is somewhat enigmaticdue to an almost complete absence of par-allels. The comparisons are vague at best,with the result that fabric was a major de-terminant of its Wadi Suq date. A fragmentof a carinated cup from Tawi Sa’id in Omanis the closest parallel to the Sharm ex-ample, yet it is chronologically unhelpfulsince it came from an unstratified context(40). Unfortunately however, the Omaniexample is the closest morphological par-allel. It was described as a ‘new form’ (41),yet it appears that excavations since the


Fig. 4.Wadi Suq drinking vessels. Cup: 1: SP-468. Goblets: 2: SP-394. 3: SP-4. 4: SP-44. 5: SP-419. 6: SP-1. 7: SP-383. 8: SP-6. 9: SP-7. 10: SP-466. 11: SP-259. 12: SP-358. 13: SP-335. 14: SP-278. 15: SP-282. 16: SP-345.

late 1970s have done little to expand thecorpus of such shapes.

Goblet basesThe goblet bases (Fig. 4.2–4.16) are a gener-ally homogenous group, with basic differ-

7

ences in size and shape contributing to thevariations in form. The ‘feet’ of the gobletsare normally quite prominent and eitherslightly or markedly everted at the base.The illustrated examples have base diam-eters of between 4.5 and 7 cm, although the

D. BARKER

majority of the bases average approxi-mately 5 or 6 cm (Fig. 5).

Goblets were a largely ubiquitous formin the Wadi Suq period and there are alitany of examples comparable to the indi-vidual specimens in the Sharm assemblage.They were particularly common in thesettlement at Shimal (42) and were also at-tested at Tell Abraq (43). The Wadi Suq IIIdate assigned to the settlement at Shimallargely corresponds to the dating of thelevels from which the Tell Abraq gobletbases were excavated (44). On the basis ofparallels from both of these sites, theSharm goblets may be assigned to the WadiSuq III period.

The use of string-cutting to remove athrown vessel from the potter’s wheel (45),considered diagnostic of the Wadi Suqperiod, is emphasised by its rare occur-rence in the third millennium (46). Evi-dence of this practice comes from sites suchas Tell Abraq (47), Sites 1 (48), 6 (49) andthe settlement at Shimal (50) as well as Hili8 (51). The majority of the Sharm gobletsexhibit this trait (Fig. 6) and their additionto the list of sites which have string-cutbases testifies to the extent to which itspread. The cultural importance of this fea-ture was highlighted by Potts (52) whoidentified a number of regions and culturesbeyond the Straits of Hormuz which were

Fig. 5.A selection of Wadi Suq goblets.Left to right: SP-1, SP-6, SP-466.

8

also noted for their use of string-cutting,including the Harappan civilisation. Fur-thermore, as E. Carter noted, string cuttingwas a feature of Middle Elamite (1600–1300BC) ceramic technology (53). The Iranianchronology therefore bolsters the Wadi SuqIII date assigned to the goblet bases.

Several of the more unique finds requirecomment. SP-335 (Fig. 4.13) is notable forits two distinct carinations, one on the footand as a separator between the stem andthe body. Similar examples come from thesettlement assemblage at Shimal (54) andTell Abraq (55), both possessing Wadi SuqIII dates. A number of other examples inthe Sharm assemblage are carinated, butthe majority only possess a carination be-tween the stem and the body (eg. Fig. 4.14).

The delicately shaped SP-383 (Fig. 4.7) issomewhat distinct due to its small size,thin walls and egg cup-shaped body. Asimilar form was recovered from the settle-ment at Shimal, which is comparable inboth size and shape (56). Similarly, SP-6(Fig. 4.8), with its rounded body, draws par-allels from Shimal (57). SP-345 (Fig. 4.16),a particularly well-preserved example,boasts an exterior surface covered in therilling characteristic of wheel-made vessels(58), as well as a string-cut base. It is strik-ingly similar in shape to an example fromTomb 6 at Shimal, although the latter


Fig. 6.A Wadi Suq goblet (SP-282)with a string-cut base.

lacked SP-345’s characteristic rilling (59).Finally, SP-466 (Fig. 4.10) is notable for anunusual feature on the inside base. Thepurpose of a small pointed ‘cone’ pro-jecting from the centre of the goblet base isunclear. Although an aesthetic motivationmust not be dismissed, the occurrence of astring-cut base on the vessel strongly sug-gests that the feature is a result of themanufacturing process. However, no com-parable parallels were found to confirm ordeny this assertion.

JarsAn examination of published second-mil-lennium sites in the Oman Peninsula con-firms that jars are a ubiquitous artefact, anobservation equally true of the Sharm ma-terial (Fig. 7–13). However, the shapes arenot limited to tomb assemblages and arecomparable to artefacts from sites whichonce had human occupation.

Little variation is evident in this class, al-though the material forms several discreetgroups. All but one of the sherds (SP-334,Fig. 13.4) is categorised as a vessel with aflaring or everted rim. A number of sherds

9

possess everted rims, which are eithersimply tapered or rounded (Fig. 7.1–7.10).The tapered-rim sherds have pronouncedconcave bodies with SP-360 (Fig. 7.1) beingindicative of this shape. It is comparable toa number of other beakers, but the lack ofdecoration on the Sharm piece is the mostsignificant factor in the differentiation ofSP-360 and other typical Wadi Suq beakers.For instance, despite the similar size andrim shape of SP-360 to beakers from thelong tomb at Bidya (60), the distinct decor-ation close to the rims of these piecesmakes it unlikely that the Sharm examplewas once decorated. The Bidya vessels areindicative of the fact that Wadi Suq beakersare often painted on the upper half of thevessel. It may, therefore, be inaccurate toclassify the Sharm example as a beaker atall and the lack of decoration may be in-dicative of a later date for the vessel.

Simple everted rims with rounded lips(Fig. 7.4–7.10) are more common than theirtapered counterparts and they are gener-ally quite uniform. They are characterisedby a streamlined profile with a constantthickness up the entire length of the sherd.

D. BARKER

The rim is either gently or markedlyeverted, and in all cases where a portion ofthe body is extant, the lower part of thevessel is rounded. SP-286 (Fig. 7.8) is an im-portant example, not only due to its dis-tinct shape, but also because it is one of themore complete (reconstructed) vessels re-covered during the season. It is character-ised by a gently flaring rim and slim ‘milkbottle’ shape. A very similar vessel, albeitwith a more tapered rim and shorter neck,was recovered from excavations on Failaka.Højlund noted that the shape (type 62 inthe report’s notation) is a Mesopotamianform attested at Nippur and Tell ed-Dur

Fig. 7.Wadi Suq jars with flaring rims. Tapered: 1: SP-360. 2: SP-290. 3: SP-262/263. Rounded: 4: SP-277. 5: SP-299. 6: SP-264/402. 7: SP-261. 8: SP-286. 9: SP-295. 10: SP-279.

10

(61). Although Højlund maintained that‘[t]his shape is found through most of thesecond millennium’, quantitative analysisof the frequency of sherd types in specificareas and periods resulted in type 62reaching its maximum incidence in Period4A (tell F6). The relative chronology of thesite defined period 4A as Kassite, with itsadvent around 1450 BC (62). By extension,this date is comparable to the Wadi Suq IIIperiod, thus reinforcing the pattern of thetomb’s main second-millennium usage.Furthermore, several comparable Kassitevessels from the burial complex at Sar onBahrain also confirm this date (63). One


Fig. 8.Two Wadi Suq storage jarsherds with flaring rims. SP-393(left), SP-375 (right).

particular Sar vessel is strikingly similar inshape and size to SP-286 although theSharm piece lacks its shoulder decoration(64). Given this Kassite period date, it islikely SP-286 belongs to the Wadi Suq IIIperiod.

SP-279 (Fig. 7.10) with its simple flaringrim and rounded body, is paralleled byHøjlund’s Type 57D, another so-called Me-

Fig. 9.Wadi Suq storage jars. 1: SP-339.2: SP-375/393. 3: SP-288/289.

11

sopotamian form from Bahrain (65). Thisparticular shape reached its maximum fre-quency in period 3B on tell F6. The relativechronology suggests that Period 3B beganaround 1550 BC (66), a date which comfort-ably encompasses the Wadi Suq III period.

A number of thickened or ‘rolled’ rimmedjars were also excavated (Fig. 8–9) con-sisting of globular domestic (storage) jars

D. BARKER

Fig. 10.Wadi Suq ‘funerary’ jars with thickened flaring rims. 1: SP-469. 2: SP-302. 3: SP-363/490/491. 4: SP-13. 5: SP-396.6: SP-11. 7: SP-12/21. 8: SP-285. 9: SP-377. 10: SP-267.

and smaller (‘funerary’) jars. Both groupshave thickened everted rims, however thesize difference between the two types ar-gued in favour of a formal distinction. Thestorage jars are coarse, heavy vessels withthickened rims and raised ridges around theneck and shoulder. The minimum rim diam-eter recorded in this group is 16 cm (SP-20,

12

SP-339 and SP-379), with the maximumbeing 26 cm (SP-288/289). The Sharmstorage jars are not, however, sizeable com-pared with similar forms from other sites.For instance, Tell Abraq produced jars withrim diameters of approximately 50 cm (67).TA 507 (68), with its tentative Wadi Suq IIIdate, is similar both in size and rim shape to


SP-375/393 and SP-339, but the Tell Abraqexample lacks the ridges characterising theSharm jars. Further similar storage jars, with

Fig. 11.Wadi Suq ‘funerary’ jars with thickened flaring rims. 1: SP-284. 2: SP-16/321/435. 3: SP-9/22. 4: SP-337. 5: SP-370.6: SP-493. 7: SP-486. 8: SP-342. 9: SP-142. 10: SP-407/470.

13

rim diameters more than doubling theSharm vessels, were recovered from thesettlement at Shimal (69).

D. BARKER

The so-called ‘funerary’ jars withthickened everted rims (Fig. 10–12) holdthis label for convenience only, so as to dis-tinguish them from the larger domesticjars. A greater amount of variation existswithin this group. The thickening of therims ranges from a small, even negligible,amount (eg. Fig. 11.4) to more pronouncedexamples (eg. Fig. 11.9). Since these jarsform the largest single sub-group in theWadi Suq period ceramics, only a selectionof forms will be discussed.

Parallels with both Tell Abraq and thesettlement at Shimal suggest a Wadi SuqIII period date for many of the sherds. Forinstance, SP-284 (Fig. 11.1, 12) which formsone of the more complete (reconstructed)vessels in the assemblage, is comparable inboth shape and size to an example fromTell Abraq dated to the Wadi Suq III period(70). A similar example with a slightly be-aked rim and painted decoration, wasfound in a burial in the Wadi Sunaysl (71).Jars with thickened flaring rims were alsorecovered during a survey on the moundof Nud Ziba (72). One example (73) bearsthe same shape as SP-284 and SP-285 al-though it is distinguishable from the Sharmpieces by the presence of brown painteddecoration around the shoulder. The NudZiba material was given an early second-millennium date (Wadi Suq I), based uponthe continuation of certain Umm an-Nartraditions and a single radiocarbon date.However, the fact that a great deal ofpainted pottery was recovered from thesite is relevant to this early dating and doesnot necessarily reflect the dating of Sharm.

Few parallels exist for the interestinglyshaped SP-407/470 (Fig. 11.10) with itslong thickened rim. A much larger piecefrom Bidya (Site 2) provided the closestmorphological parallel despite a touch ofbevelling on the exterior face of the rim.Al-Tikriti asserted that the settlement datesto the Umm an-Nar period (74). That being

14

Fig. 12.SP-284, reconstructed as a jar with a thickened flaringrim.

the case, such a parallel, if indeed it is acompetent comparison, may explain thisanomalous sherd in the Sharm assemblage.However, the fabric for this sherd is typicalfor the Wadi Suq period, and the similarityof shape may perhaps be attributed to thecontinuation of third-millennium ceramictraditions into the early part of the WadiSuq period.

Another notable variation of this form isSP-370 (Fig. 11.5) with its prominent wallsand marginally thickened rim. It finds a di-rect parallel with an example from thesettlement at Shimal (Wadi Suq III), beingsimilar in both size and shape (75).

Several anomalous rims classified asmiscellanies require attention. Close paral-lels were difficult to find, and in the case ofSP-492 (Fig. 13.3), completely lacking. Thistiny fragment is notable for the two promi-nent ridges on the rim. However, the sherdis so small that even an approximate rimdiameter cannot be confirmed.


The only parallel obtainable for SP-280(Fig. 13.2) is a Kassite period sherd from Qa-la’at al-Bahrain (76). The shape is a nearexact match to the Sharm piece, yet the latterhas more ridges and incisions as well as asharper carination between the neck and theshoulder. Despite this, the similarities be-tween the two pieces are close enough tosuggest a tentative Wadi Suq III date.

Only one example of a straight-neckedjar (Fig. 13.4) is datable to the Wadi Suqperiod, with this form being more commonto the Iron Age. Whilst the overall shape isunparalleled, a similar tapered rim, al-though slightly more everted, can be foundon one example of Højlund’s Type 276from Bahrain (77).

Shallow bowls/platesThree fragments of shallow plates or bowls(Fig. 14.1–14.3) were recovered during the

Fig. 13.Miscellaneous Wadi Suq jars. 1: SP-59/60/61. 2: SP-280. 3: SP-492. 4: SP-334.

15

excavations. SP-428, with its tapered rimand externally ribbed profile, is paralleledin the settlement at Shimal (78). However,the Shimal examples have a greater verticalinclination compared with the Sharm frag-ment despite the similar external ribbing.

MiscellaneousThe remaining fragments consist of miscel-lanies and include decorated body sherds,bases, a single handle fragment and aspout (Fig. 14.4–14.7). Apart from the lackof decoration, the spout (Fig. 14.7) is par-ticularly characteristic of the Wadi Suqspouted vessels from Oman, despite itsfragmentary nature (79). Spouts were alsofound at Hili 8 (80) in addition to a numberof other second-millennium sites.

QuantificationDespite being known as a second-millen-nium tomb, the diagnostic sherds dating tothe Wadi Suq period comprise just over37% of the entire registered assemblage of172 sherds. Jars, counted collectively re-gardless of rim type, are by far the mostquantitatively abundant Wadi Suq Periodform, followed by bowls, goblet bases, mis-cellaneous sherds, shallow plates and thesingle cup. The results are reproduced inTable 1.

FabricsThe apparent heterogeneity of the WadiSuq pastes can, in many instances, be con-sidered the result of a huge range of firingconditions to which the individual vesselswere subjected in antiquity (81).

Colour variation across the surface ofsherds is particularly evident in this assem-blage, as are sherds exhibiting different col-oured cores. Some forty sherds have ob-vious grey cores, ranging from light greysmudges to thick, dark bands. This phe-nomenon may be attributed to several fac-tors, all of which are directly related to the

D. BARKER

Fig. 14.Wadi Suq bowls and plates: 1: SP-428. 2: SP-416. 3: SP-56. Miscel-laneous bases: 4: SP-25. 5: SP-57.Handle fragment: 6: SP-346. Spout:7: SP-312.

atmosphere of the firing environment. Itmay indicate that there was a large amountof organic material in the clay, which wasincompletely burnt, and/or the depositionof carbon during firing. However, the posi-tion of the grey streak is also informative.Dark cores located in the centre of a sherdare usually signs of the incomplete burning

Table 1. Percentage determinations for each diagnostic form as a function of the aggregate Wadi Suq sherd countand the total working assemblage (TWA).

Proportion of total Proportion of totalWadi Suq sherds working assemblage

Sherd/vessel type Number of sherds (%) (TWA) (%)

Bowls 42 24.42 9.15Cup 1 0.58 0.22Goblet Bases 21 12.21 4.58Jars 94 54.65 20.48Shallow Plates 3 1.74 0.65Miscellaneous 11 6.40 2.40TOTALS 172 100 37.48

16

of organic material in the clay. This is likelyto be the result of insufficient oxygenduring firing. In contrast, firing cloudsnear the surface are likely to be the resultof ‘smudging’, where carbon is depositedon the vessel’s surface. Many of the WadiSuq ceramics have grey cores towards thecentre or below the surface, and it is there-


Table 2. Wadi Suq fabric A (i).

Organic inclusions Colour HardnessGeneral Description Mineral inclusions (voids) (Munsell range) (Mohs reading)

Medium to coarse grit- Predominantly Common, usually 5YR 6/6 (‘reddish c.2.5.and chaff-tempered tempered with frequent c.2–4 mm long, caused yellow’); 10YR 6/3fabric. Generally rough grey and/or white by chaff temper burnt (‘pale brown’);texture. Evidence of inclusions, visible on out during firing. 10YR (‘very palegrey cores (eg. SP-264/ surface (possibly some Other voids probably brown’).402). Evidence of shell, mostly grit). Up caused by drag markspotter’s wheel in to 12 mm long, usually from grains torn outmanufacture. c.1–4 mm. Sub-rounded when surface

to angular in shape smoothing occurred.ranging from low to Variation in porosityhigh sphericity. Very noted, eg. SP-421/464poorly sorted (score: 1). is denser than

SP-288/289.

Table 3. Wadi Suq fabric A (ii).


Medium to coarse Variation between Range of (closed and/ Very wide range: c.2.5fabric. Rough to soapy sherds. Mixture of two or channel) pores – Buffs: 10YR 6/3 Little sinteringtexture. Similar to A(i). or more of the depending upon the (‘pale brown’); of fabric (low-Evidence of grey cores following: grey, white, amount of added 10YR 6/4 (‘light fired?).(eg. SP-359). Evidence brown and/or orange temper, but generally yellowish brown’);of potter’s wheel in grits. From grain-sized quite frequent. Average 10YR 7/4 (‘verymanufacture. See, Fig. (average of c.0.33 mm size 2–3 mm, including pale brown’).15. under the SEM) to c.7 some possible drag – Oranges/Browns:

mm. Range from sub- marks. Micropores 5YR 6/6 (‘reddishrounded (SEM observed using the yellow’); 7.5YR 6/4observation) to SEM analysis averaged (‘light brown’).angular; low sphericity. c.0.16 mm. – Oranges/Reds:Very poorly sorted 2.5YR 5/6 (‘red’);(score: 1). 2.5YR 6/8 (‘red’).

– Pinks: 2.5YR 7/6(‘light red’).– Greys: 2.5YR 6/2(‘light yellowishbrown’); 2.5YR 6/2(‘light brownishgrey’).

fore suggested that they were insufficientlyoxidised during firing (82). The actualmicrostructure of each sherd was thereforeobserved to avoid the subjectivity of fabricclassifications based on ambiguous colourdesignations.

The Wadi Suq fabrics are generally

17

coarse and underfired, and exhibit a rangeof colours and inclusions. According toMatson, a hardness scale of less than 3 indi-cates a firing temperature of less than 700degrees. Furthermore, he posited that agrey core is likely to remain in a fabric untilfiring temperatures reach 850 degrees (83).

D. BARKER

Such factors suggest the Wadi Suq fabricswere fired under low temperatures, poss-ibly for short periods of time.

Tables 2–8 give a brief description of thevarious Wadi Suq period ceramic fabrics.Since the microscopic analysis providedpurely descriptive results, the SEM obser-vations are combined with the basic visualcharacterisation. In many instances, theSEM results provided a greater amount ofdetail on which to base the fabric descrip-tions (84).

Many of the sherds are classified underwhat appears to be the main fabric, A(ii)(Fig. 15). It appears that this fabric wasalso found at Shimal, as evidenced by thesettlement pottery displayed in the Na-tional Museum of Ras al-Khaimah. It isalso found in the unpublished assemblagefrom Mereshid Tomb in Fujairah (85). Aless common variant of the main fabricgroup is A(i), with its crushed shell in-clusions. It is also represented in theShimal settlement collection and may beviewed in the Wadi Suq section of Ras al-Khaimah Museum.

Fig. 15.Wadi Suq fabric A(ii), SP-52.

18

Decoration and surface finishVery few sherds are decorated in com-parison to other funerary sites from theWadi Suq period (86). This is likely to be areflection of the relatively early date as-signed to those sites compared with thelater (Wadi Suq III to IV) material exca-vated from Sharm (87). For instance,Shimal Tomb 6, with its highly decoratedinventory of vessels, is dated to between1900 and 1700 BC, a date corresponding tothe Wadi Suq II period (88). In contrast,painted decoration is particularly notablein its near complete absence at Sharm inthe Wadi Suq period, although severalpainted bowls were recovered. SP-351/479(and 269/479, belonging to the samevessel) were discussed with respect toshape (Fig. 3.1). However its decoration isalso significant. The interior and exteriorrim are painted with dark red pendantloops hanging from a painted band of thesame colour. The loops are approximately4 to 5 mm thick. Several strikingly similarparallels exist for this vessel. The firstcomes from the settlement at Shimal (area


Table 4. Wadi Suq fabric A (iii).


Very similar to A(ii). Predominantly Common, but not as Uniform colour, c.2.5–3.Medium to coarse grit- tempered with orange/ frequent as (i) or (ii). evenly fired. Every Slightly harderand chaff-tempered dark brown inclusions, Visible on surface and sherd is c. 5YR 6/8 than the firstfabric. Rough texture visible on surface. in cross section as (‘reddish yellow’). two sub-groups.and pitted surface. Average size of c.5 approx. 1–4 mm long Fired at aEvidence of wheel mm, reaching up to 10 closed pores. highermanufacture. mm. Very angular with temperature?

low sphericity on largergrains. Very poorlysorted (score: 1).

Table 5. Wadi Suq fabric B.


Medium to fine grit- Brown/grey and/or Few small pores, c.0.5 Range from 5YR 6/ c.2.5 to 3.and chaff-tempered white inclusions. to 2 mm. Not a major 6 (‘reddish yellow’) Slightly harderfabric. Finer inclusions. Occasional mica. Grits feature. to 10YR 6/3 (‘pale (more highlyGenerally smooth range from grain-sized brown’). fired?) than A(i)texture. Evidence of up to 1–1.5 mm. and (ii).wheel manufacture. Generally well

rounded and spherical.Sorting seems fair(score: 3).

Table 6. Wadi Suq fabric C (i).


Coarse grit-tempered Rounded to angular Rare/invisible. Wide range: 5YR 7/ Range infabric. Rough texture. grains of various Occasionally seen, but 4 (‘pink’) to 10YR hardness may

colours: mixtures of main tempering agent 7/3 (‘very pale indicatebrown, grey, white and is grit. brown’). variations inoccasionally, mica. firingVery dense inclusions. conditions:Grain-sized inclusions c.2.5–3.mixed with gravel gritsup to severalmillimetres. Verypoorly sorted (score: 1–2).

SX) which is also decorated with smallpainted loops around the rim. This is oneof only two vessels with decoration whichvaried from the ‘typical’ thick vertical lines

19

draped off the rim (89). The second parallelis from Tell Abraq, again with red paintedloops around the exterior rim (90). How-ever, unlike these two examples, the Sharm

D. BARKER

Table 7. Wadi Suq fabric C (ii).


Miscellaneous coarse Brown grits up to 2 No visible pores 2.5YR 3/2 (‘dusky c.2.5.grit-tempered fabric. mm generally visible during basic visual red’) to 2.5YR 5/3Badly laminated/ on surface. Sub- examination; SEM (‘weak red’).sintered with a coarse rounded to angular analysis revealedtexture. Probably low- with low sphericity. infrequent closedfired. Grey towards Smaller white mineral pores.margins of sherd. See inclusions (up to c.1Fig. 16. mm) visible in cross-

section. Poor torelatively well sorted(score: c.2–3).

sherds have both internal and externalpainted decoration. In this respect, they aresimilar to an intrusive second-millenniumspouted bowl, with numerous black-painted loops on the interior and exterior,which was also excavated from an Umman-Nar grave on the Baat necropolis (91).The apparent scarcity of this motif on pot-tery of the period (92) therefore emphasisesthe importance of the Sharm finds, with theprovenance of the Tell Abraq and Shimal

Fig. 16.Wadi Suq fabric C(i), SP-32.

20

sherds suggesting a Wadi Suq III date.Other traces of red- or black-painted decor-ation occur in the assemblage but are, forthe most part, fugitive.

Another incurving rim bowl, SP-294 (Fig.3.2) is also reminiscent of the above-men-tioned parallels with its red-painted loops,although in a much less controlled manner.Despite Potts’ warning against confusingthe pendant loop with the Iron Age zigzagpattern (93), the decoration on this piece


Table 8. Wadi Suq fabric D.


Fine grit-tempered Mainly grain-sized Generally infrequent, Range of colours: Wide rangefabric. Sandy texture. although evidence of small (c.0.12 mm av.) – Pinks: 10R 6/6 from c.2.5–4Evidence of wheel grits up to c.1 mm. and/or poorly (‘light red’). (differences inmanufacture. Fig. 17. Mixture of inclusions: distributed (varies with – Oranges: 2.5YR firing

brown, black, white each sherd). 6/8 (‘red’). conditions?).and/or grey. Angular Micropores evident in – Buffs: 10YR 6/3to well-rounded for the SEM analysis not (‘pale brown’).smaller inclusions visible with hand lens.(average size 0.18mm viewed underthe SEM). Poorlysorted grains (score: 1–2).

falls at some point in between the two. Incontrast, the Iron Age parallels found by deCardi have exterior decoration (94). In thissense, SP-294 is closer to the other WadiSuq example discussed above.

SP-469 (Fig. 10.1) possesses the frag-mentary remains of a dark, plum-col-oured pigment around the exterior rim,which is paralleled at Shimal (95). Despitethe fugitive nature of the decoration, it is

Fig. 17.Wadi Suq fabric D, SP-2.

21

apparent that it once consisted of a wavyline. However, the fragmentary nature ofthe sherd makes it difficult to determineif the decoration extended to the body ofthe vessel.

Several Wadi Suq sherds are incised,either with a comb or with a sharp instru-ment. The decoration of SP-183 and SP-220(possibly from the same vessel) is abradedto such a degree that the zigzag incisions

D. BARKER

are hardly visible (Fig. 2.4, 2.5). However,the most interesting example, for which noexact parallel could be drawn, is SP-59/60/61 (Fig. 13.1) These delicate sherds are dec-orated with a combination of extremelyfine incision and thin ridges which contrastgreatly with the cruder comb incisioncommon to several of the other sherds. Al-though the shape of SP-280 (Fig. 13.2) hasbeen paralleled, the incised and ridgeddecoration is difficult to match. It appears

Fig. 18.Iron I bowls and cups. 1: SP-42. 2: SP-475. 3: SP-293/357. 4: SP-348. 5: SP-107. 6: SP-66. 7: SP-378. 8: SP-333.

22

therefore, that these latter two pieces aresomewhat unique.

The Iron Age ceramicsThe Iron Age occupation of the tomb atSharm is represented in the ceramic assem-blage by all three subdivisions of theperiod: Iron I: c.1300–1100/1000 BC; Iron II:c.1100/1000–600 BC; and Iron III: c.600–300BC (96). However, the ceramics suggest


that the tomb’s usage was not consistentthroughout these periods, with the Iron IIperiod being particularly well-represented.

Iron Age ILike other Iron I pottery of the Oman Pen-insula, the small amount of Iron I sherdsfrom Sharm are all handmade from coarsefabrics and have simply executed designs(97). The restricted settlement pattern ofthe period (98) may be a factor contributingto the scarcity of parallels.

The shape typologyLittle shape variation is evident in the IronI assemblage, with a majority of the sherdsbeing limited to simple bowl or jar forms.However, because of the limited number ofsherds and the non-standardised produc-tion employed during the Iron I period, itis difficult to defend the strict classificationof these forms with any great degree ofconfidence (99). Sharm produced evidenceof this in the form of open bowls with cru-dely flattened rims and undulating and un-even sides. Magee maintains that thesewere the most common shapes at TellAbraq and Shimal (100). SP-293/357 (Fig.18.3) is a poorly-fired open bowl indicativeof the Iron I period, which has parallels forits unassuming shape at Tell Abraq (101),Asimah Tomb 100 (102) and Ghalilah 2(103). Similarly, SP-475 (Fig. 18.2), a simpleopen bowl with a flattened and internallythickened rim, finds an almost exact par-allel in Khor Kalba’s Iron I assemblage(104).

The Iron Age I component at Tell Abraqhas been labelled the ‘western coastalvariant’ of the Arabian Iron Age ceramicrepertoire (105) with parallels from this sitesuggesting the variant occurred as far eastas Sharm. Several jars with simple evertedrims and flaring shoulders are comparableto examples from Tell Abraq, including SP-

23

291 and its associated joins (Fig. 19.3) andSP-347/366 (Fig. 19.2) (106). The shape ofthe latter example is also attested at Kalba(107). Ras al-Khaimah is also host to sev-eral parallels including vessels from anIron Age area at Shimal settlement (108)and Asimah AS 100 (109). However, theAsimah comparisons are tentative sincethey lack the more pronounced flaring rimsof the Sharm pieces. A further jar with avery elongated neck (Fig. 19.4) is difficultto assess, yet a jug from Hasanlu V in Iranhas a similar long neck and slightly evertedrim. This phase of the Hasanlu sequenceis dated to between c.1300/1250 and 1050/1000 BC (110) and corresponds to the IronI dating of the Sharm vessel. However, tooclose a connection must not be assumed,since the Hasanlu example is both finerand more elaborate in design than SP-198,and possesses a more everted rim.

Another shape not easily contextualisedis SP-107 (Fig. 18.5). Thought was given towhether this small sherd actually belongsto the Iron I period, although it remainscategorised in this phase on the basis of itstypical Iron I fabric. The closest obtainablemorphological parallel is a piece from aWadi Suq IV level at Tell Abraq (111) al-though it is not inconceivable that a latesecond-millennium shape could bridge thetransition between the Wadi Suq and theIron Age periods. Indeed, this phenom-enon has been noted with respect to thefabrics of the late second-millennium (112).

One final shape in the Iron I collectionmerits attention. SP-378 (Fig. 18.7) is asmall cup with a slightly incurving andtapered rim. Interestingly, its shape is re-markably similar to a small undecoratedsteatite cup from Iron III levels at TellAbraq (113). Rather than being a direct par-allel, it is more likely to represent the conti-nuity of the simplest of shapes throughoutseveral archaeological periods. Littleweight must therefore be given to this com-

D. BARKER

Fig. 19.Iron I jars and miscellanies. 1: SP-336/389. 2: SP-347/366. 3: SP-291/299/315/417/472/482. 4: SP-198. 5:SP-434. 6: SP-484.

parison, particularly in light of the fact thatSP-378 is made from a typical Iron I fabric.A vessel from the 1989 season with asimilar rim diameter and incurving taperedrim (114) is a more concrete parallel, withthe comparative stratigraphy suggestingan Iron I date (115). However, the extantportion of the vessel is too small to makemore decisive observations.

The small range of variation within themajor shape groups of the Iron I repertoiremakes it difficult to provide more detailedobservations on the material. However, thevery fact that an Iron I component ispresent in the assemblage, even in the faceof so little apparent occupation during theperiod (116), is important in itself.

QuantificationThe twenty-seven sherds belonging to theIron I period account for almost 6% of theTWA. Jars are only marginally morecommon than bowls, followed by cups andtwo miscellaneous fragments, which arelikely to be spouts, or a bottleneck in thecase of SP-434 (Fig. 19.5). The results arereproduced in Table 9.

24

FabricsLike the fabrics of the preceding Wadi Suqperiod, the Iron I fabrics from Sharm aregenerally coarse. Although the connectionbetween Wadi Suq IV and Iron I fabrics hasbeen recognised (117), the Iron I sherds, un-like a majority of the Wadi Suq sherds, aretempered with predominantly gritty in-clusions and a minimum of chaff.

Below is a basic description of each ofthe Iron I pastes (Tables 10–12). Once again,the major distinguishing factor betweenthe groups is the nature of the temperingagents or natural inclusions.

Although at the time of post-excavationanalysis, other Iron I materials were notavailable for comparison, it is possible tomake some general observations on the na-ture of the Iron I material from Sharm, inthe context of ceramic production in south-eastern Arabia. Magee asserted that ‘asingle ware is present’ during the Iron Iperiod in the region (118), and in retro-spect, it is likely that Wares E, F and G arein fact variants of one another. However,they are differentiated on the basis of theobservable inclusions, and may therefore


constitute subgroups of one overarchingfabric class.

It is likely that Fabric G corresponds toWare 1A from Tell Abraq, which is de-scribed as having ‘[f]lat sharp-edged greyto brown grits in high density, 2–5 mm insize. No vegetal voids’ (119). This fabricprobably corresponds to Velde’s ‘Ez’ warefrom Shimal (120), as well as the Iron I fab-rics from Ghalilah (121). It also appearsthat fabric G is represented by severalsherds in the unpublished assemblage fromMereshid in Fujairah and may represent a

Table 9. Percentage determinations of each diagnostic Iron I form as a function of the aggregate of Iron Age sherdsand the total working assemblage (TWA).

Proportion of totalProportion of Proportion of total working assemblage

Sherd/vessel type Number of sherds Iron I sherds (%) Iron Age sherds (%) (TWA) (%)

Bowls 10 37.03 3.48 2.18Jars 11 40.74 3.83 2.40Cups 4 14.81 1.39 0.87Miscellaneous 2 7.41 0.70 0.44(spouts?)TOTALS 27 100 (99.99 rounded) 9.40 5.89

Table 10. Iron Age I fabric E.


Coarse grit- and chaff- Numerous small to Outnumbered by All examples c.2.5.tempered ware. All large inclusions visible mineral inclusions. consist of a brown- Likely to havehandmade. Rough on the surface and in Usually quite fine orange paste with been low-firedinternal texture, cross-section. Large closed and channel dark-grey/black in uncontrolledsometimes smoothed size range: from grain- pores (av. c.0.25 up to smudged surfaces conditions.exterior. Evidence of sized (av. c.0.6 mm 1–2 mm), though 5 mm (interior and/ordark cores and using SEM) to c.7 mm. pores are not exterior, sometimessmudging. Fig. 20. Various colours, mostly unknown. quite pronounced).

black/grey, also red, Paste colour: 5YRorange and a few 5/6 (‘yellowishwhite. Range from red’) to 5YR 7/6rounded to angular (‘reddish yellow’).(flat), though SEMimages revealed moreangular grains withlow sphericity. Verypoorly sorted (score:1).

25

small Iron Age I contingent at that site(122). It is also possible that Fabrics E and Fare the same as Fabric 1B from Tell Abraq,which itself is a variant of 1A, differen-tiated on the basis of its chaff inclusions(123). This fabric also appears to corre-spond to the pastes from the vessels foundat Asimah site AS 100 (124).

DecorationThere is no surface enhancement evident inthe Sharm Iron I assemblage apart from thewet-smoothed surfaces of some of the ves-

D. BARKER

Fig. 20.Iron I fabric E, SP-42.

sels (eg. SP-357/SP-293). De Cardi alsonoted this practice in the context of surveymaterial from the Shimal shell mound(125).

Iron Age IIThe Iron II period is more than amply rep-resented at Sharm if the ceramic assem-blage is an accurate gauge. The different

Table 11. Iron Age I fabric F.


Coarse grit- (and chaff Very frequent. Visible Pock-marking the Brown/tan to grey: c.2.5.?)-tempered fabric. on both surface and in surface and as 10R 6/1 (‘reddishCoarser than fabric E. cross-section. Sizes micropores between grey’); 5YR 4/4Rough texture, but range from c.0.41 mm the mineral inclusions (‘reddish brown’);some evidence of (visible using the SEM) (c.0.18 mm). Larger 5YR 5/1 (‘grey’).smoothing. Laminated up to c.4/5 mm. Mostly pores up to 1–2 mm arebreaks. Handmade. angular grains (flat) outnumbered byFig. 21. with low sphericity. mineral inclusions.

Colours include white,grey and black. Verypoorly sorted (score:1).

26

shapes, fabrics and decoration ensure thatthe Iron II assemblage is the largest andmost varied of the entire collection.

The shape typologyThe Iron II corpus is characterised by anumber of distinct shapes. For this reason,morphological parallels were easily soughtfrom sites in the UAE, Bahrain, Oman andeven Iran. It is hoped that the following


Fig. 21.Iron I fabric F, SP-484.

discussion will highlight the veritable ex-plosion of stylistic exploration in the IronII period, particularly in comparison to theapparent paucity of innovation in the IronI phase.

BowlsCarinated bowls (Figs 22–23) are not onlyabundant in the Sharm assemblage, but asurvey of the literature attests to the popu-larity of this type of vessel during the IronII period in southeastern and northeasternArabia, as well as modern Iran (126). Thebowls are generally quite delicate, with an

Table 12. Iron Age I fabric G.


Grit-tempered ware. Grain-sized up to c.4 Generally few/ Brown to grey: c.2.5.Handmade. Coarse mm. Poorly sorted infrequent. ‘Gley’ 4/N (‘darktexture with evidence grains (score: 1) visible grey’) to 10YR 5/2of laminated breaks, on interior and exterior (‘greyish brown’).though not as coarse as surfaces, as well as infabrics E and F. cross-section. Angular

black, brown and greyinclusions.

27

average rim diameter of 13.7 cm, althougha number of sherds possess orifices of ap-proximately 12 cm. The point of carinationis generally between 1 and 5 cm from thelip. Liberally defined, carinated vessels in-clude those bowls with so-called ‘undu-lating’ profiles (127). A defining feature ofthis group is that the profile is not of a uni-form thickness along the length of thesherd. Despite the mixture of tapered,rounded and/or thickened rims, ca-rinations are considered important enoughin themselves to justify the grouping of dif-ferent rim types together (128).

D. BARKER

Fig. 22.Iron II open bowls with carinations or undulating profiles. 1: SP-72. 2: SP-26. 3: SP-447. 4: SP-73/476. 5: SP-123. 6:SP-331. 7: SP-87. 8: SP-332. 9: SP-350. 10: SP-125. 11: SP-95. 12: SP-70. 13: SP-74. 14: SP-83/352.

SP-72 (Fig. 22.1) with its high carinationand rounded rim finds a very close parallelin an Iron II context at Rumeilah (Period I)(129). The only discrepancy is a mere 3 cm

28

difference in rim diameter and a lack ofdecoration on the Rumeilah example.However, these differences are virtually ir-relevant in a discussion of shape parallels.


Several of the Sharm bowls have ‘knife-shaped’ profiles which are more undu-lating than carinated. However, as Figure22 shows, there is a clear developmentfrom the more streamlined vessels to thosewith profiles that sharply change directionand lose this ‘knife-shaped’ form. Yet, theyare all characterised by a certain thickeningof the rim. SP-123 (Fig. 22.5) is but one ex-ample of this feature. Apart from its exter-nally thickened rim, it is notable for the un-dulations appearing on the exterior. TheHili region offers several parallels whichdiffer in their more upright stance (130).Perhaps one of the closest comparableexamples comes from de Cardi’s survey ofthe Shimal shell mound. It produced an ex-ample with a knife-shaped and undulatingprofile (131), yet the sherd is apparentlyslightly thicker than the Sharm example.Further close parallels also come fromGhalilah (132).

SP-331, SP-87 and SP-332 (Fig. 22.6–22.8)represent a variation of this shape. Ratherthan possessing a relatively straight stance,the profile is interrupted with an elbow-

Fig. 23.Iron II spouted/carinatedbowls. 1: SP-75. 2: SP-317.

29

like projection. Characteristic of this shapeis a thickened rim, followed by a thinnedsection, which leads directly into the‘elbow’. This form was relatively commonin the Iron II period and was found at sitessuch as Tomb H at Hili (133), Rumeilah(134), Qarn Bint Sa’ud (135) and ‘AmlahSite 1 (136). In contrast, SP-332 (Fig. 22.8)differs from the other Sharm exampleswith its internally, as opposed to externally,thickened rim.

Carinated bowls in the Sharm assem-blage also include examples with a thinnedupper section separated from a thicker baseby a carination (Fig. 22.4, 22.11, 22.13) (137).This shape was also attested at Dibba 76in the form of a carinated bowl in a sandyorange fabric (138).

The presence of a spout on several cari-nated bowls led to the creation of a newcategory. One of the more complete vesselsfrom the tomb is SP-317 (Fig. 23.2) with itscarinated profile and subtly spouted,albeit fragmentary, lip. Similar bowls werefound at Hili 2 (139), Jabal Buhais (140)and Bithnah (141). Several comparable

D. BARKER

Fig. 24.Iron II open bowls. Taperedlips: 1: SP-69. 2: SP-498.Rounded lips: 3: SP-380/399. 4:SP-439. 5: SP-319.

examples from Fashgha 2 are also dis-played in the National Museum of Ras al-Khaimah.

Open Bowls with tapered and roundedlips are reasonably common. There is amixture of steep profiles (eg. Fig. 25.2, 25.5,25.8) as well as more gently curved vessels(eg. Fig. 24.1, 24.3, 24.4). The latter exampleis particularly interesting despite its simpleshape, because of its relative completenessand the presence of potter’s wheel stri-ations on the interior surface. One of theclosest parallels comes from Fashgha 1 inthe Wadi al-Qawr (142). Despite the ab-sence of a rim, this example appears to pos-sess a similarly thickened lower profilewhich is curved internally but trimmed ex-ternally to achieve a more angular tran-sition between the base and the vessel wall.Both vessels appear to have been made

30

from a similarly fine, grit-tempered fabricwith external burnishing (143).

Of the tapered variety, SP-69 (Fig. 24.1)is also a simple shape characterised by adistinctive base. This vessel has a relativelythin profile apart from the raised ‘mound’in the centre of the base. A comparable ex-ample comes from Bithnah (144), whichalso features this raised mound on the ves-sel’s interior. The similarity of shapes ishardly surprising given the relatively shortdistance between Sharm and Bithnah.

Bowls with incurving rims are fairlyubiquitous Iron Age II vessels and anumber of parallels can be drawn to con-firm their date. This general category formsa considerable proportion of the bowls re-covered from Sharm, a group which hasbeen subdivided into two discreet cate-gories; those with tapered lips and those


with rounded lips. SP-436 (Fig. 25.2) how-ever, with its steep profile and very slightincurvature of the rim lies between thetwo. It is paralleled with examples fromRumeilah, Period I (145), and Muweilah(146), the latter possessing only a veryslight incurvature of the rim. This commonform was also found at site BB-15 in Oman(147), the examples of which are compar-able to Iranian vessels from Tepe Yahya IIIand Baba Jan III. The eighth- to seventh-century BC date assigned to Phase III for

Fig. 25.Iron II bowls with incurving rims. Tapered lips: 1: SP-117/195/225. 2: SP-436. 3: SP-124. 4: SP-122. Rounded lips:5: SP-415. 6: SP-416. 7: SP-287. 8: SP-259. Diagonally-offset lip: 9: SP-252/448.

31

both sites is synchronous with an Iron II(Rumeilah I) dating for the shape (148).

One of the more interesting shapes in thisclass is SP-122 (Fig. 25.4) with its almostexaggerated convex shape. A close parallelis traceable to Jabal Buhais (149) where anincurving rim bowl with a tapered rim andbody incision was recovered.

Of the incurving rim bowls withrounded lips, SP-287 (Fig. 25.7) is the mostnotable. It is almost biconical in shape dueto its originally everted walls which curve

D. BARKER

Fig. 26.Red-slipped and painted Iron II bowl (SP-252/448)with a diagonally-offset lip. Note the repair holes onthe left of the sherd.

in towards the rim after a change in direc-tion of the profile. A similar example witha more tapered rim, but less pronouncedcurvature, was recovered from Iron IIlevels from Tell Abraq (150). Furthersimilar examples in Iron II contexts wereexcavated from the T-shaped tomb atBithnah (151). However, the incurving rimis more exaggerated on the Sharmexamples and bears a distinctive decor-ation which the others lack.

Bowls with flattened rims are largely un-remarkable, generally consisting of asimple rim which may be thickened intern-ally or externally. SP-40 (Fig. 27.5) is atypical example of a vessel with an intern-ally thickened rim. Apart from parallels inthe Arabian Peninsula (152), a similarvessel of comparable proportions comesfrom the Shahr-e Khord Plain in Iran (153).The rim shape is also similar to SP-193 andSP-215 (Fig 27.3). Although the Iranian

32

vessel was unstratified, a series of parallelsled to the tentative date of c.700 BC (154)or comfortably within the Iron II period.

SP-252/448 (Fig. 25.9, 26), in addition toseveral sherds (SP-189 and SP-248) that arelikely to belong to the same vessel, are am-biguous. Originally it was believed that thedistinctive diagonally offset lip and or-ange/red slip formed part of the so-called‘Burnished Maroon Slip Ware’ (BMSW)complex of Iran, equivalent to the OmanPeninsula’s Iron Age III. A bowl with anoffset rim, reminiscent of the Sharm vessel,was found in a Period II (Iron III) contextat Rumeilah (155). However, in contrast tothis dating comes a piece from early Iron IIlevels on Qala’at al-Bahrain. The Bahrainibowl, almost identical to the Sharmexamples apart from its slightly longer rim,is dated to Period IIIC, which, according toits excavators, began c.1000 BC and lasteduntil 800 BC (156). However, a very similarbowl from site SH-11 in Oman, foundduring a surface survey, was given a sev-enth-century (late Iron II) date (157). Thus,it is difficult to pinpoint whether the Sharmbowl is an early or late Iron II artefact. It ispossible that it is a transitional form be-tween the type of offset rimmed bowlfound on Bahrain and the vertically-offsetrimmed bowls found in Iron III contexts inIran and Arabia. Whilst the Bahraini andOmani Iron II bowls have diagonally-offsetrims very similar to the Sharm example,the Rumeilah Iron III (Period II) vesselspossess vertically-offset rims. It is possibletherefore that at some stage between theIron II and III periods, offset rims under-went a change in stance.

CupsSeveral very similar cups were given anIron II date. The two illustrated examples(Fig. 27.6, 27.7) bear incurving tapered rimswith relatively steep walls. SP-85, with itsextant rim and base, has an interesting pro-


file. Although the rim is tapered, the baseis even more so. This particular feature re-mains unparalleled, although a ‘mediumconvex bowl’ found in a Lizq period de-posit at Samad/Maysar is similar in shapeif not in size (158).

JarsHigh-necked jars were initially classifiedon the basis of their protracted necks, al-though they represent a number of dif-ferent rim shapes. SP-182 (Fig. 28.8) andSP-296/473 (Fig. 28.4) are two very similarpieces characterised by a high neck and aslightly everted and thickened rim. Asimilar rim to the former example was at-tested at Tell Abraq (159), although it pos-sesses a squarer cross-section. Simplerhigh-necked jars can be found in the form

Fig. 27.Iron II open bowls (with flattened rims) and cups. 1: SP-481. 2: SP-271. 3: SP-215. 4: SP-193. 5: SP-40. 6: SP-85. 7:SP-364/365. 8: SP-276.

33

of SP-239/454 and SP-153 (Fig. 28.2). It isdifficult to assert whether a stylistic par-allel bears chronological significance in thecase of such simple forms as these. How-ever, the rim of a vessel from the Qala’aton Bahrain (160), dated to Period IIIC(c.1000–900 BC), corresponds to an Iron IIdating for this particular shape (161).

Several of the more interesting jars arecharacterised by flaring rims. SP-120/121(Fig. 28.9) have two remarkably similarparallels in the Oman Peninsula and Iran.The first of these comes from Tell Abraq(162) and although the rim is slightly be-aked and the body marginally more con-cave than the Sharm examples, the inciseddecoration is quite similar. The second par-allel is derived from the Shahr-e KhordPlain in Iran. It is closer in shape to the

D. BARKER

Fig. 28.Iron II jars. High-necked: 1: SP-323. 2: SP-153. 3: SP-372. 4: SP-296/473. 5: SP-68. Flaring rims: 6: SP-14. 7: SP-23.8: SP-182. 9: SP-120/121. 10: SP-190. 11: SP-247. 12: SP-230. 13: SP-457. Bottleneck: 14: SP-373/374.

34


Fig. 29.Painted sherds (SP-247, left andSP-230, right), exhibiting therunning spiral motif.

Sharm example, although it is painted withblack zigzag patterns rather than incisedwith wavy lines (163).

Several jars with flared bodies and flat-tened rims (Figs 28.11–28.13, 29) are not-able for their form and decoration, yet

Fig. 30.Iron II jars. Globular jars with nose lugs. 1: SP-258. 2: SP-397. Jar bases. 3: SP-105. 4: SP-109.

35

there are fewer parallels for the shape thanfor the decorative elements. A shape remi-niscent of the Sharm examples is derivedfrom Ghalilah Site 2 (164), although thebody does not compare with the moreexaggerated examples from Sharm. A

D. BARKER

Fig. 31.Iron II jars. Beehive jars (ISS, 2–4): 1: SP-212. 2: SP-152/231/240. 3: SP-151/318/322/349/477. 4: SP-456. OtherISS jar. 5: SP-104.

storage jar from Fashgha 1 (165) also bearsa similar triangular rim shape, yet the na-ture of the vessel and the prominent raised

Fig. 32.Iron II ISS beehive jar (SP-151/318/322/349/477).

36

Fig. 33.Iron II ISS jar fragment (SP-104).


Fig. 34.Decorated Iron II body sherds (ISS, 1–13): 1: SP-149. 2: SP-147. 3: SP-211/214. 4: SP-176/178. 5: SP-204. 6: SP-164.7: SP-458. 8: SP-160. 9: SP-158. 10: SP-191. 11: SP-218. 12: SP-205. 13: SP-210. 14: SP-249.

cordon distinguish it from the delicateexamples from Sharm.

A small jar with a flaring bottleneck (Fig.

37

28.14) is not easily paralleled, and the pro-position that it may not belong to the Iron IIperiod must be entertained. The closest

D. BARKER

Fig. 35.ISS body sherd (SP-149).

Fig. 36.ISS body sherd (SP-147).

Fig. 37.ISS body sherds (SP-176/178).

38

Fig. 38.ISS body sherds (SP-204, left and SP-319, right).

comparison comes from a surface collectionby de Cardi and Doe (166). A mere 1 cm dif-ferentiates the two rims which are bothcharacterised by fugitive black paint (167).The fact that this comparison is derivedfrom an insecure context does not dispel thepossibility of a date other than the Iron IIperiod. Similar bottlenecks are character-istic of Samad period assemblages, whichdate to the later first century BC. However,this culture is distinguished by ceramicswith incised, rather than painted, decor-ation. Furthermore, the Sharm vessel iswheel-made, a characteristic that is absentfrom the Samad period pottery (168). There-fore, SP-373/374 is unlikely to find a con-crete parallel from this region.

Two examples of globular jars with verti-cally-pierced nose lugs (Figs 30.1, 30.2) areeasily paralleled in Iron II contexts. Period Iat Rumeilah produced several pieces (169)which are, however, slightly different to thesquat Sharm vessels. Numerous otherexamples exist for this distinctive form, oneof the most important being an Iranianvessel from Gandomkar tentatively dated tothe eighth century BC (170). A lugged IronAge II jar from Dibba 76, stored in FujairahMuseum, is also very similar to SP-258 (Fig.30.1), in terms of both form and fabric.


Fig. 39.Miscellaneous Iron II sherds. Base: 1: SP-298. Spouts: 2: SP-91. 3: SP-88. Lugs: 4: SP-159. 5: SP-222. Handles/lids:6: SP-92. 7: SP-155. Ledge rims: 8: SP-65. 9: SP-314.

Miscellaneous itemsThe fragmentary nature of these objectscalls for little discussion, yet several dis-tinct and chronologically importantexamples should be noted. Spouts, repre-sented at Sharm by SP-91 and SP-88 (Fig.39.2, 39.3) and particularly Iranian bridgedand unbridged spouted vessels, are Iron IIleitfossils which were copied in the Oman

39

Peninsula (171). A number of sites and re-gions have played host to these distinctforms, including Rumeilah, Period I (172),Iron II levels at Tell Abraq, (173), Hili 2(174), Bahrain (175), Sialk (176) and Has-anlu IV (177), to name but a few. Unfortu-nately, the severely fragmentary nature ofthe Sharm examples hinders the discussionof shape. However, a peculiar feature of

D. BARKER

SP-88 (Fig. 39.3) is worth noting in terms ofits potential function. A circular perfor-ation through the spout, situated above thechannel through which the liquid contentsof the vessel would have been poured, ex-hibits signs of wear. It is possible that asupport or handle, perhaps consisting of alength of rope or leather, was passedthrough the perforation to assist thepouring action. However, as the illustrationtestifies, there is very little clay support be-tween the perforation and the nearbychannel and this suggestion may be unten-able (178).

The ledge-rims depicted in Figures 39.8and 39.9 do not sit comfortably in any par-ticular archaeological period under review,yet the shape finds its closest parallels inIron II contexts. The seven examples foundduring excavations, all very similar in formand fabric (apart from the different paste ofSP-314), are classified as Iron II artefacts.Despite their presence in Iron Age contextsat Tell Abraq (179), Potts asserts that thelack of parallels for these forms means they‘may not in fact be datable to the Iron Age’.Bowls with a similar type of rim, but whichcurve inwards rather than out, were alsofound during the 1990 season, where theonly parallel came from a coastal survey inSharjah (180). However, the Iron Age de-posits at Shimal produced several verysimilar examples to the Sharm rims (181)which would seem to support an Iron IIdate. Potts also maintains that the ledge

Table 13. Percentage determinations of each diagnostic Iron II form as a function of the aggregate of Iron Age IIsherds and the total working assemblage (TWA).


Sherd/vessel type Number of sherds Iron II sherds (%) Iron Age sherds (%) (TWA) (%)

Bowls 105 41.34 36.59 22.88Cups 4 1.58 1.40 0.87Jars 51 20.08 17.8 11.1Miscellaneous 94 37.0 32.76 20.48TOTALS 254 100 88.55 55.33

40

rims found during the 1989 season are‘clearly in the Iron Age tradition’ (182).

QuantificationThe two hundred and fifty four Iron IIsherds comprised over 55% of the TWA.Bowls are the most common item, closelyfollowed by miscellanies (largely made upof a contingent of decorated body sherds),then jars and cups. As a component of thewhole Iron Age period (1300–300 BC), thediagnostic Iron II sherds (1100–600 BC) arethe most quantitatively significant (Table13).

FabricsOnce again, the structural features of thepaste, with particular reference to the na-ture of the inclusions, were guiding factorsin the definition of different groups. Al-though the colours of individual sherdsare, for the most part, quite even (sug-gesting controlled firing conditions) thepastes are not defined on colour. It wouldbe difficult, if not impossible, to reconstructthe ancient firing conditions of each sherd.

The Iron II ceramics have a greaternumber of fabric classifications than anyother single group. The results are organ-ised according to fabric groups H to O(Tables 14–24).

The descriptions indicate the extent ofthe variation within the Iron II fabricgroups. One can only suggest possible rea-sons for this variation, although the more


Table 14. Iron Age II fabric H.


Medium to fine grit- Small, black, grain- Very few pores even in Varying shades of Varies accordingtempered fabric. sized inclusions SEM images. Closed grey. to the surfaceSmooth-textured (due (average size 0.14 micropores with a – Burnished tested:to burnishing or wet mm). Rounded to sub- maximum size of 0.03 surfaces: ‘Gley’ 5/N – Burnishedsmoothing). Generally rounded. Occasionally mm. Unlikely to be (‘grey’); ‘Gley’ 4/N surface: c.4–4.5well fired throughout small white, orange, or from organic (‘dark grey’); ‘Gley’ – Fabric: c.2.5.(more highly fired than micaceous specks. inclusions? 7/N (‘light grey’).Iron I fabrics but not Sorting of grains is – Fabric: ‘Gley’ 6/vitrified). See Fig. 40. poor (score 2) to fair N (‘grey’); 7.5YR 6/

(score 3) with some 3 (‘light brown’ butvisible on the surface. unevenly fired).

intense ceramic activity in the Iron IIperiod, as compared to the Iron I period forinstance, may explain much.

Before leaving the Iron II fabrics, it ispossible to make some tentative compari-sons regarding the ‘Sandy Ware’ complexand the ‘White-Gritted’ complex of thisperiod. It is possible that Fabric L in par-ticular, with its frequent white, grain-sizedinclusions, compares with Magee’s white-gritted complex from Muweilah (183). Fur-

Fig. 40.Iron II fabric H, SP-67.

41

thermore, the sandy texture of fabrics M (ii)and N suggest a link with Magee’s ‘SandyWare’ complex (184). This particular fabricappears to have been common in the OmanPeninsula during the Iron Age, withfurther examples of this fabric coming fromFashgha 2 and the settlements at Rafaq andShimal (185), as well as Bithnah (186). Re-cent PIXME-PIGME analysis of sandy-waresherds from Qarn Bint Sa’ud and TellAbraq suggest that it was locally produced

D. BARKER

Table 15. Iron Age II fabric I (i).


Very fine grit- Small black, brown Occasional small Orange to buff in c.2.5.tempered fabric. Fine and occasionally white surface pores of several colour: 10R 6/8texture (mostly mineral inclusions. millimetres. (‘light red’) tosmoothed). Rounded, generally 7.5YR 6/3 (‘light

well sorted (score: 2-3). brown’).Occasional bigger(anomalous) grains(up to 3–4 mm indiameter), althoughvery uncommon.

Table 16. Iron Age II fabric I (ii).


Fine grit-tempered Present but not overly Relatively small, – Surface: 10YR 5/2 c.3fabric, dense matrix frequent. Sub-rounded infrequent micropores, (‘greyish-brown’); (harder surface(see Fig. 41). Interior to rounded grains in a up to 0.13 mm. Voids – Fabric: 2.5YR 3/3 due toand exterior range of sizes (from on surface are likely to (‘dusky red’). smoothing).smoothing. 0.17 to 0.37). White be the result of drag

grain-sized grits and marks from the processlarger (up to 1 mm) of smoothing (ratherbrown inclusions. than the consequencePoorly sorted of carbonised chaff).(score: 2).

Fig. 41.Iron II fabric I(ii), SP-481.

42


Table 17. Iron Age II fabric J.


Dense (brown), coarse Very frequent. Few large pores, c.1.5– Little variation (all c.2–2.5.grit- and chaff- Rounded to sub- 3 mm long. Closed are a shade of darktempered fabric. angular grains with a micropores are brown): 5YR 4/6Laminated surfaces mixture of low and uncommon compared (‘yellowish red’) toand rough texture. high sphericity. Black, with mineral 7.5YR 5/4Evidence of wheel brown and/or orange inclusions. Maximum (‘brown’).manufacture. Greater in colour. Between of 0.72 mm in length.density than Iron I c.0.36 and 0.55 mm forfabrics, although no grain-sized inclusionsevidence of and c.1.5 to 3 mm forvitrification. See Fig. larger grits. Sorting:42. poor (score: 2) to fair

(score: 3).

in the former region, with the evidencesuggesting that Hili 17 was the centre ofproduction. It is not known whether Hiliwas the only production centre (187).Therefore, it is impossible at this stage toconclude definitively that the sandy-warefabrics from Sharm were produced at ornear Hili 17, although the issue may be re-solved with further analysis (188).

Fig. 42.Iron II fabric J, SP-420.

43

Decoration and surface finishA number of the Iron II period ceramics aredecorated using painting, slips, incisionand smoothing and/or burnishing.

Painted decoration and slipsThe motifs applied to the Iron II ceramicsare generally recognisable in other assem-blages in the immediate surrounds and in

D. BARKER

Table 18. Iron Age II fabric K (i).


Coarse grit- and chaff- Very frequent, Basic visual The majority of – Fabric: c.2.5tempered fabric. Rough rounded to sub-angular examination suggested sherds are grey: – Burnishedtexture with laminated (flat). White to grey a porous fabric with – ‘Gley’ 5/5 PB; surfaces: c.3–3.5.breaks, although and/or brown grits voids on the surface ‘Gley’ 6/5 PBburnished surfaces are from grain-sized (c.0.1 and in the cross- (‘bluish grey’),present on some mm) up to c.3 mm section (1–3 mm long; ‘Gley’ 3/5 PB (‘darkexamples. Fig. 43. long. Slightly mostly closed but bluish grey’) to 7.5

micaceous. Poorly some channel pores). YR 6/4 (‘lightsorted grains (score: 2). The SEM sample brown’).Visible on surface and suggested a less porousin cross section. fabric, yet the size of

the sample is too smallto contradict the visualexamination. SEManalysis showed theexistence of roundedmicropores (up to 0.24mm).

Iran. The fact that parallels from south-eastern Iran exist is supportive of thesuggestion that the fabrics constitutingthe Arabian painted wares may havebeen produced in Iran (189). Painted dec-oration is usually characterised by a red/

Fig. 43.Iron II fabric K(i), SP-138.

44

plum or red-brown pigment and may beapplied to an orange-slipped surface. Thischaracteristic slip, found both on the in-terior and exterior of the sherds, is alsocommon to unpainted fragments. Perhapsthe most common design, particularly on


Table 19. Iron Age II fabric K (ii).


Medium to coarse grit- Grey/black and/or Very frequent in the Generally 10R 5–6/ c.2.5.and chaff-tempered white mineral specks. cross section and on the 6 (‘red’ to ‘light Not highlyware. Very similar to Very small (grain- surface of the sherds. red’). fired?fabric K (i), although it sized) grits which are Average 1–2 mm inis characterised by the well-rounded. Fair length, up to c.5 mm.presence of greater sorting of grains (score:amounts of chaff than 2–3). Possibly naturalgrit. Generally rough inclusions?textured on non-burnished areas.Evidence of very lightgrey cores.

Table 20. Iron Age II fabric L.


Medium to fine grit- Frequent white grain- Generally small and Generally brown- Low hardnessand chaff-tempered sized inclusions (c.0.02 frequent. Largest grey to grey and range:fabric. See Fig. 44. to 0.07 mm). average size 0.13 mm. one red example. – Fabric: c.2.5Largely smooth Occasional larger Evenly dispersed The majority are – Burnished(burnished) textures grains, still less than 1 throughout fabric ‘Gley’ 5/5PB surfaces: c.3with generally clean mm in size. Very few (score: 4). SEM (‘bluish grey’);breaks and fine matrix. grey and brown grits. micrograph reveals 2.5Y 5/2 (‘greyishThis fabric largely Generally sub-rounded that some samples are brown’). Single redmade up of incised to rounded and flat more porous than example (SP- 205):‘imitation soft stone’ grains. Sorting of others. 5YR 6/4 (‘light(ISS) sherds. grains: fair (score 3) to reddish brown’).

good (score: 4).

bowls with carinated profiles or incurvingrims, is the cross-hatch motif which is un-failingly limited to the exterior rim regionand extends between 1 and 3 cm belowthe rim (Fig. 22.4, 22.8). It consists of aseries of diagonal lines; one set trans-posed onto another, each set extending inopposite directions. A large array of par-allels exist for this design, including sitessuch as al-Thuqaibah (Sharjah) (190),Bithnah (191), Site 3 in the Wadi al-Qawr(192) and even Baba Jan in Iran (193). Thecross-hatching, however, is far from uni-form in its execution with variations inthe general size of the motifs (Figs 24.3,25.2, 25.3).

45

Painted ‘stripes’ also feature in the as-semblage (eg. Figs 22.1, 34.14). The formerexample is an untidy representation, withseveral stripes running into each other orleaning inwards, close to touching. How-ever, the more standard design is repre-sented by the latter example with its simplevertical stripes and slightly rounded tips.The fineness of the strokes indicate that acorrespondingly fine implement was usedto apply the pigment. Like the cross-hatchmotif, the paint is of a dark red/browncolour and is applied to an orange-slippedexterior surface. Striped decoration of thiskind is common during this period. Stripesaround the belly of the vessel, both of the

D. BARKER

Fig. 44.Iron II fabric L, SP-48.

vertical variety and with a slight diagonallean, are attested in classic Period I (Iron II)contexts at Rumeilah (194).

Motifs also exist in combination. For in-stance, the upper portion of SP-74 (Fig.22.13) is painted with a cross-hatch motif,

Table 21. Iron Age II fabric M (i).


Very fine grit- and Mostly black, white Generally not very Generally buff and c.2.5–3.chaff-tempered fabric. and/or brown mineral frequent, although orange colours: 5YRSEM micrographs inclusions; some mica. smaller closed pores 6/6 (‘reddishrevealed minor Generally well- are visible. Some yellow’); 2.5Y 8/3–differences not visible rounded grains (uncommon) larger 4 and 2.5Y 7/3–4to the naked eye. (average size up to 0.22 surface voids up to c.2– ‘pale yellow’).Fig. 45. mm). Some evidence 3 mm. Average

of larger inclusions (up micropore size 0.3 mm.to 3mm in diameter). Generally wellVariation between dispersed throughoutsamples in the amount the fabric (score: 3),of inclusions, size, although not true in allshape and sphericity instances (some scores(see Fig. 45). Range of of 2).sorting values: frompoor (score: 2) to good(score: 4).

46

from which a set of irregular diagonalstripes extends past the carination of thebowl. There is also one instance of a vesselwith a dark-painted wavy line on the in-terior of a small carinated bowl (SP-447,Fig. 22.3). It is remarkably similar to an-


Fig. 45.Iron II fabric M(i), SP-14.

other carinated bowl found on a survey atGhalilah tomb by de Cardi (195) with theonly notable difference being that the Ghal-ilah example is painted on the exterior rim,whereas the decoration is situated on theinterior of the Sharm piece. A further par-allel comes from Bithnah and consists of acarinated bowl with black painted decor-ation on the interior and exterior surfaces

Table 22. Iron Age II fabric M (ii).


Similar (very) fine grit- Sandy and micaceous Quite frequent (more Oranges (eg. 10R Less than 2.5.and chaff-tempered fabric with brown/ than Fabric M (i)). 5/8, ‘red’) to 7.5YRfabric to M (i). A more orange and black Visible on surface and 7/4 (‘pink’).porous fabric with inclusions. Occasional in cross-section. Sizeincreased visible white grits. Frequent range: frominclusions. Range of grain-sized inclusions micropores, up to c.3textures from sandy to (average size 0.23 mm) mm.pasty (the latter due to up to c.1–1.5 mm.smoothing). Visible on surface and

in cross-section. Well-rounded with highsphericity. Well sorted(score: 3).

47

of the vessel (196). It is likely that SP-447was once also characterised by black paintor a black slip on the exterior which is nowdifficult to detect due to the fugitive natureof the remaining pigment and the inter-ference caused by surface concretions.

SP-287 (Fig. 25.7) is decorated both in-ternally and externally with a loop motif ina pale red pigment. The decoration extends

D. BARKER

Table 23. Iron Age II fabric N.


Very fine matrix. Sandy fabric, fine Fewer voids than Similar to M (i) and c.2.5.Similar to M(i) and (ii), inclusions despite Fabric M (ii) and M (ii).although coarser than gritty paste. Largely resembles M (i) in this(i) and not as porous as brown grain-sized respect. Quite(ii). Fine sandy texture. inclusions. Some white infrequent and smallFig. 46. Dark rings grits. Generally well- (not more than 1 mmaround mineral rounded and well- across).inclusions in SEM sorted (score: 3). Visibleimages suggest a lack on surface and cross-of sintering between section. Some mica. Allcomponents. of the above inclusions

are possibly naturallyoccurring in the clay.Larger (added?) grainsof c.1 mm areinfrequent.

some 3.5 cm beyond the lip and each strokeis approximately 1.7 cm thick, indicatingthat the design was applied with a rela-tively broad instrument. No exact parallelscould be located for the motif, yet theshape is well recognised in Iron II contexts.

SP-252/448 (Figs 25.9, 26) has remnantsof a black painted ‘star’ motif on its in-terior walls and base. This decorationsupports the Iron II dating assigned onthe basis of its diagonally-offset lip. Thedesign, whilst somewhat fragmentary onthe Sharm example, is comparable to ves-sels from Rumeilah I (197), Hili 2 (198)and Iron II levels (Period IIIC) from Qa-la’at al-Bahrain (199).

SP-230 (Figs 28.12, 29) and SP-247 (Figs28.11, 29) are notable for their distinctpainted motifs. The top of the flattened rimis, in both instances, painted with plum-coloured rectangles, whereas the body ofeach sherd bears an unusual running spiralmotif between painted bands and/or thickdiagonal stripes (Fig. 29). The execution ofthis motif appears somewhat careless onSP-247, and stylised on SP-230, yet the gen-eral design, common throughout the Ar-

48

abian Peninsula, is recognisable on bothsherds. The central motif revolves around acircular object, which is framed by a ‘wave’peaking above and below the circular de-sign. The Sharm examples are two stylisedversions of a similar, but more carefully ex-ecuted, motif found at Rumeilah (200). ThePeriod I context from which they were ex-cavated suggests an Iron II date for theSharm examples. The design was alsofound at various other places including theHili region (201), Sites 10 and 6 in the Wadial-Qawr (202) and on Bahrain (203). It hasalso been suggested that the running spiralmotif is reminiscent of the decorationfound on the ceramics from southeasternIranian burial cairns (204).

IncisionIncision is one of the more common dec-orative techniques applied to the Iron IIvessels. Although the incised sherds willbe kept for a later discussion, one par-ticular sherd deserves to be mentioned.The incised wavy line extending acrossthe shoulder of SP-120/121 (Fig. 28.9) isvery similar to a piece from Tell Abraq


(205) although the latter has a set ofdouble-incised lines. The shallowness ofthe incision suggests that the operationwas performed with a broad, flat instru-ment.

Burnishing and smoothingApart from the most basic incision, per-haps the simplest forms of surface en-hancement noted in the Iron II assem-blage are smoothing and burnishing.However, the distinction between the twois not always readily apparent due to thefragmentary nature of the sherds and thegenerally poorly-preserved surfaces. Littleneeds to be said of the smoothed surfacesin the Sharm assemblage. However, theimportance of burnishing is particularlyapparent since it most often occurred inconjunction with a particular type offabric and incised decoration, to whichwe now turn.

The ‘imitation soft stone’ ceramicsThe discussion of the so-called ‘imitationsoft stone’ (ISS) ceramics has been reserved

Fig. 46.Iron II fabric N, SP-75.

49

until this point because of the symbiosisbetween shape, fabric, decoration and sur-face finish in relation to the sherds peculiarto this complex. Vessels made from greyfabrics with specific forms of incised decor-ation and often burnished surfaces, are be-lieved directly to imitate Iron Age softstone vessels (206). The Sharm ISS ceramicsare easily datable to the Iron II horizonsince they are considered a leitfossil ofPeriod I at Rumeilah (207). However,whilst fewer than ten sherds were found atRumeilah (208), some sixty fragments camefrom Tombs 1 and 2 at Sharm (see Figs31.2–31.5, 32–38).

Although a majority of the ISS fragmentsare body sherds, several of the more com-plete examples indicate that they were oncebeehive-shaped vessels with restricted ori-fices, triangular-shaped bodies and flat orslightly curved bases (Fig. 31.1–31.4). Thesevessels find some of their closest parallels inthe beehive-shaped soft stone vessels of thefirst millennium (209), including piecesfrom Jabal Buhais (210) and Hili Tomb H(211). However, ceramic comparisons also

D. BARKER

Table 24. Iron Age II fabric O (miscellaneous coarse grit and chaff fabrics).


Fabric O (i): Very coarse Angular brown, black, Visible on the surface Orange: c.7.5 YR c.2.5.with predominantly orange and white and interior cross- 6/6. Not evenlymineral inclusions. mineral inclusions section. Up to 3 mm fired.Relatively rough fabric with low sphericity long.despite an attempt at dominate the matrix.smoothing. Grains range in size

and the larger grits areup to 3mm across. Verypoorly sorted (score:1). Visible on surfaceand in cross-section.

Fabric O (ii): Relatively Brown, black and Frequent large and Range of colours, c.2.5.coarse fabric despite white inclusions, in small pores (from c.0.50 including ‘very palesome evidence of addition to some mica. mm up to c.8 mm). brown’: 10YR 7/4.surface slips. A range of shapes and Irregularly shaped, as

sizes exist: rounded to well as round. Visibleangular; from grain- on surface and in cross-sized up to 3 mm. section.Visible on surface andin cross-section. Poorlysorted (score: 1). Veryfrequent.

Fabric O (iii): Coarse Black or white sub- Badly sorted. From Large range of c.2.5.grit- and chaff- rounded to angular less than 1 mm to up to colours: from 10Rtempered fabric. inclusions up to 2 mm. 7 mm (round and 5/8 (‘lightIncludes smoothed and Ill sorted (score: 1) and long). Visible on yellowish brown’)rough-textured infrequent. Some mica. surface and cross- to 10R 7/6 (‘lightsurfaces. Visible on surface. section. red’), including

variations withinsingle sherds.

Fabric O (iv): Generally Mostly grey mineral Regular small pores – Paste: 2.5YR 6/6 c. 2.5.fine matrix made inclusions up to 6 mm. throughout the matrix, (‘red’) and greycoarse by larger usually less than 1 core.inclusions and surface mm.concretions. The resultis a rough texture withirregular breaks.

Fabric O (v): Coarse Small grains less than Irregularly occurring. 2.5 YR 6/4 (‘weak c.2.5.grit-tempered fabric. 1 mm. Rounded and Up to 2 mm long. red’).Rough breaks. angular. Mainly

brown. Frequent. Illsorted (score: 1).

Fabric O (vi): very Grey and white Few small pores, less 2.5 YR 6/6 (‘red’). c.2.5.coarse grit- and chaff- inclusions up to c.2 than 1 mm.tempered fabric. mm.Rough texture.

50


Fabric O (vii): Very Small to large (grains Generally few, 10R 4/6 (‘red’) with c.2.5.coarse fabric; mainly up to 2–3 mm) grey, although SP-276 has grey core.grit-tempered. brown, black and larger pores of up to 5

white inclusions. mm on the surface.Poorly sorted (score:1). Very angular withlow sphericity.

Fabric O (viii): Coarse Grain-sized inclusions Few surface pores, c.2.5 YR 6/8 (‘red’). c.2.5.grit-tempered fabric up to c.5 mm. White small.with sandy texture. and angular. Larger

inclusions are poorlysorted (score: 1).

Fabric O (ix): Coarse Orange, brown, black, Few irregular voids. 10YR 7/3 (‘very c.2.5.grit-tempered fabric grey, white and Usually c.1 mm. pale brown’) to 5YRwith sandy texture. micaceous inclusions. 7/8 (‘reddishSimilar to (viii) but for Visible on the surface. yellow’).a larger range of Poorly-sorted (score: 1)mineral inclusions. and frequent. They

range from rounded toangular in shape fromgrain-sized up to 1–3mm.

exist. A number of similarly shaped ‘vasesa parois convergentes’ were excavated fromthe T-shaped tomb at Bithnah (212). Quitesignificantly for Sharm, at the time of theBithnah excavations, Fashgha 1 in the Wadial-Gawr was the only other site which pro-duced ISS beehive-shaped vessels. Rume-ilah and Ghalilah Site 2 are limited to bowls(213). Furthermore, the ISS material fromBahrain also lacks these vessels with con-verging sides (214). As a result, Bithnah,Fashgha 1 and now Sharm, stand as havingthe closest connection to the characteristicbeehive-shaped soft stone vessels of the Ar-abian Peninsula.

As a distinct type, it is not surprising todiscover that the ISS material is limited tocertain fabric groups, namely Fabrics K (i)and (ii), and Fabric L. The distinction be-tween these fabrics is the result of variouslevels of coarseness or differences in thenature or amount of temper. Whilst pub-lished descriptions of the ISS fabrics fromthe region are described in such terms as‘ceramique grise ‘‘imitation pierre tendre’’’

51

(215) and ‘grey ware’ (216), the Sharmcorpus extends beyond this colour classifi-cation. A number of red-slipped examples,similar in all respects to the grey waresapart from their colour, were recovered andremain somewhat unique in Arabian ar-chaeology. All except one are classifiedunder Fabric K(ii), whereas SP-205 is thesingle red example belonging to Fabric L.Since the fabric typology is not based oncolour, the similarity of microstructures be-tween the red and grey pastes does notnecessarily pose a classificatory problem.Fabric L, the more common paste used forthe ISS ceramics, appears to have also oc-curred at Shimal, although the examplefrom Shimal tomb SH 101 (or 106?) dis-played in Ras al-Khaimah Museum is notincised. However, it appears that the ISSfabrics from Bithnah are also directly com-parable to Sharm’s Fabric L, judging by theexamples displayed in Fujairah Museum.

Perhaps the most distinct indicator of ISSceramics is the decoration and surface treat-ment. The majority of the Sharm ISS sherds

D. BARKER

are characterised by grey (and a minority ofred) burnished surfaces in addition to a dis-tinct form of incision usually, though not al-ways, performed with a sharp instrument.An examination of the ISS material fromSharm (Figs 24.5, 31–38) testifies to thepopularity of what shall be called the ‘radi-ating triangular’ motif. The most commonincarnation of the design is the repetition ofa series of three downward-pointing isos-celes triangles suspended from a horizontalincised line. Variations on this basic themeoccur but they are merely concerned withthe number of horizontal lines or triangles.As was noted by the Swiss team in the con-text of the material from Bithnah, the tri-angular motifs of ISS ceramics are usuallyreversed in relation to their most common(upward-pointing) position on soft stonevessels (217). The reason for such a distinc-tion is unknown. This particular motif,whether depicted as hanging from the par-allel lines or pointing upwards, is knownfrom many sites in the Oman Peninsula onboth soft stone, and less commonly, ceramicmaterial. The repertoire of shapes and dec-orative elements of the Bithnah assemblage(218) is comparable in almost all respects toSharm, and the assemblage remains theclosest source of comparison, both in termsof geographical location and stylistic devel-opment. However, other (stone) parallelsfor this particular form of decoration havebeen located, including on soft stone vesselsfrom Site 3 in the Wadi al-Qawr (219), TombH at Hili, with its downward-pointing radi-ating triangular motif (220) and an incisedstone vessel with upward-pointing tri-angles, from site SH-11 in Oman (221). Anexample of a first-millennium incised vesselwas also found outside the local area, at thesite of Pirak (222). However, it differs fromthe typical radiating triangle motif and, as aresult, parallels in the Oman Peninsula arecloser.

One need look no further than Sharm for

52

further Iron Age soft stone parallels. Anumber of sherds, published elsewhere inthis volume (223), are directly comparableto the Sharm ISS ceramics. Two particularrim sherds, S-25 and S-30, are characterisedby restricted orifices and converging sides.They are directly comparable to SP-456, SP-152/231/240 and SP-151/318/322/349/477 (Fig. 31.2–31.4) in terms of shape. Thedecoration suggests upward-pointing tri-angles emanating from incised parallellines, although the fragmentary nature ofthese particular stone sherds hinders a fullappreciation of the decoration. Surpris-ingly, several of the beehive-shaped basesherds are decorated with downward-pointing triangles, although in the case ofS-51, the decoration consists of singlerather than triple triangular motifs (224).

Burnishing and slips are also commonattributes of the Sharm ISS ceramics. Postincision brown slips (eg. Fig. 34.10) wereapplied possibly in an effort to imitate thebrown/grey colours of particular stonevessels. However, burnishing is not limitedto incised grey ceramics. It is also found onplain grey fabrics (especially Fabric L), inaddition to other non-grey fabrics in the as-semblage.

Incised grey ceramics are attestedduring the third-millennium (225) andprovide the first form of evidence that con-tact occurred between the Oman Peninsulaand Iran. For instance, such material wasfound at ‘Amlah (Site 1) in Oman andShahr-i Sokhta and Tepe Yahya in Iran.However, the latter site possessed onlyminimal amounts of grey incised ceramics(226), a reasonable situation according tode Cardi since ‘if one is correct in re-garding incised ware as a poor man’s ver-sion of carved chlorite, its absence fromYahya, an important chlorite producingcentre, is hardly surprising’. It is notknown whether the first-millennium greyincised ceramics represent an incarnation


of the third-millennium tradition (227).However, it is not untenable to attach so-cial or ideological connotations to this typeof ceramic. Unlike the situation at Yahya,the Sharm assemblage is characterised byan abundance of both ISS fragments andsoft stone. Whilst a majority of the nearly200 soft stone finds occurred in Tomb I, alarge proportion of the ISS sherds were re-covered from Tomb II. This suggests a dis-tinction in the type of artefact recoveredfrom the two areas of the site. If de Cardiand her colleagues were correct in at-taching socio-economic connotations to in-cised grey ceramics, then it would appearthat Tomb II represents the burials of indi-viduals from lower-ranking, or different,social groups. Furthermore, the lack of de-finable architectural remains in Tomb IIcontrasts greatly with the impressive andrather elaborate stone-built structure com-prising Tomb I. Such suggestions are atbest tentative given the paucity of infor-mation in this regard. Yet the potential so-cial significance of the ISS ceramics, in-cluding the motivation behind the produc-tion of the material, must not be ignoredmerely because definite answers are not, atthis point, obtainable.

Iron Age IIILike Tell Abraq, the Iron III period atSharm is poorly represented (228),amounting to a mere six registered sherds.In contrast to the gritty fabrics of Iron I andII, the ceramics are generally made of a finepaste. Particular forms of decoration arealso indicative of the distinctiveness of thisphase in the Iron Age horizon.

The correlation of shape, fabric anddecoration/surface finishAs a result of the small size of the Iron IIIassemblage, shape, fabric and decorationare combined, and the combination of

53

these factors is instrumental in the datingof the artefacts. Despite the few sherds rep-resentative of this group, the constituentsare quite distinct.

The first Iron III sherds consist of a cari-nated bowl base (SP-437, Fig. 47.1). Al-though it could fit into an Iron II context,Potts maintains that the shape of a smallcarinated bowl found in an Iron III contextat Tell Abraq ‘is not chronologically diag-nostic as it is so widely spread in time andspace within the Iron Age of southeasternArabia’ (229). As a result, the shape alonecannot confirm the date of this artefact de-spite a number of common parallels. Thebowl is made from a very fine, well-levi-gated paste (Fabric Q, Fig. 48), yet its dis-tinct decorative motif is the chronologicalcatalyst. The exterior rim is painted with aplum-coloured cross-hatch design but,more importantly, the interior base ismarked with a very faint, but similarly-col-oured rosette with undulating prongs androunded edges. Whilst only half of themotif remains extant, the decoration findsan exact parallel in an Iron III context atRumeilah (230). It is described as a ‘[b]uffware painted in black’ which is not dis-similar to SP-437. This motif is known fromvarious other sites, including the Shimalshell mound (231) and Shimal site 40b(232), yet the Rumeilah II example remainsthe most chronologically important.

Two simple open bowls (Fig. 47.2, 47.3)one with a tapered rim, the other with arounded rim, are notable not so much fortheir shape, but the distinctive red/brownburnished slip evident on both the interiorand exterior of the vessels. An even moreinteresting vessel comes in the form of SP-112/208 (Fig. 47.4) which in all probabilitybelongs to the Burnished Maroon Slip Ware(BMSW) complex of Iran. This complex,made up of a set of four distinct shapesdecorated with a highly polished red tored/brown slip, is diagnostic of the Iron III

D. BARKER

period in Iran and is therefore seen as anIron III/Rumeilah II leitfossil in south-eastern Arabia (233). SP-112/208 has an S-shaped curving rim, corresponding toBowl Type B in the BMSW complex, yet the‘S’ shape is slightly different to that of theexamples commonly found in Iran. Un-doubtedly, however, the finely levigatedfabric and the highly polished red slip withhorizontal burnishing are comparable tothe BMSW complex. Although theexamples from a Bakhtiari Mountainsurvey in Iran were unstratified, Zagarell

Fig. 47.Iron III sherds. Bowls: 1: SP-437. 2: SP-253.3: SP-114. 4: SP-112/208. Body sherd: 5: SP-257.

54

(234) was able to date the pieces from thesixth to the early fifth centuries BC basedon comparisons with material from suchsites as Ziwiye and Baba Jan (235). Further-more, Iron III BMSW bowls with S-cari-nated rims have also been recovered fromTepe Yahya (236) and Tel-I Zohak (237) inIran. An exact shape parallel comes fromPhase I (late Iron III) levels of Baba Jan, andalthough the vessel is described as havinga ‘burnished surface’, the colour is notspecified (238). However, red-burnishedslip ware was present at the site in Phase I,


Table 25. Percentage determinations of each diagnostic Iron III form as a function of the aggregate of Iron Agesherds and the total working assemblage (TWA).


Sherd/vessel type Number of sherds Iron III sherds (%) Iron Age sherds (%) (TWA) (%)

Bowls 5 c.83.33 c.1.74 c.1.09Miscellaneous 1 c.16.67 c.0.35 c.0.22body sherdTOTALS 6 100 c.2.09 c.1.31

and it is likely that the example was partof the BMSW complex (239). The possi-bility of SP-112/208 being an Iranian im-port must not be dismissed, although claysourcing would need to be conducted toconfirm this suggestion. Vessels from sev-eral other sites in the U.A.E. are also remi-niscent of the Sharm example. Several S-shaped carinated bowls (with morerounded S-shaped profiles than the IranianBMSW bowls) were recovered from Iron IIIcontexts at Tell Abraq (240) and RumeilahII (241) to which Potts attributes an Achae-menid date.

One final Iron III sherd remains to bementioned. It consists of a whole mouth jarfragment which is decorated with an in-cised wavy line above a single horizontalline running around the shoulder of thevessel (Fig. 47.5). A near exact parallel wasfound on the surface at Tell Abraq, with the

Table 26. Iron Age III fabric P.


Commonly known as Very small mineral Very few pores in Burnished slip is c.3.‘Burnished Maroon inclusions. Small cross-section. Any closest in colour to Hard firedSlip Ware’ due to amounts of mica and visible voids are less 10R 3/6 (‘dark throughout.Iranian parallels. Very rounded grain-sized than 1 mm. red’). Thefinely levigated paste. brown and white grits smoothed interiorExtremely fine texture: (possibly natural?) is 7.5YR 7/3burnished exterior and Very well sorted (score: (‘pink’). The pastesmoothed interior. 4). is of a veryPossibly an Iranian uniform colour.import?

55

only difference between the sherds con-sisting of an extra horizontal line on theTell Abraq example (242).

QuantificationThe Iron III assemblage from Sharm isquantitatively marginal, making up a mere1.31% of the TWA. However, like the IronII shapes, bowls were the most commonsingle item, consisting of five of the sixsherds (Table 25).

FabricsNot surprisingly, the small number of IronIII sherds recovered from the site results invery little fabric variation. Each sherd ismade from a paste with a fine matrix, thedescriptions of which (Fabrics P to R) ap-pear in Tables 26–28.

D. BARKER

Table 27. Iron Age III fabric Q.


Finely levigated paste. Grain sized brown Frequent in – Slips: 2.5 YR 4/6 c.3.Several examples inclusions and some micrograph, but not (‘dark red’). Well firedpossibly reminiscent of mica. Ill sorted (score: visible to the naked – Pastes: 2.5YR 5/6 throughout.BMSW with their red 2). Angular to sub- eye. Closed and (‘red’).slipped exteriors, yet rounded up to c.0.9 channel pores ofthey differ to Fabric P mm. Very fine. various shapes andby having more visible sizes.inclusions. See Fig. 48.Very smooth texture(burnishing andsmoothing) evident.

ConclusionsDespite the fragmentary nature of the IronAge and Wadi Suq period ceramics fromSharm, a number of aspects were studiedin great detail. The following brief dis-cussion presents several conclusions ar-rived at by the author after the analysis ofthe Sharm ceramics.

Typological considerationsClearly, the Wadi Suq and Iron Age periods

Fig. 48.Iron III fabric Q, SP-114.

56

are characterised by different typologicalconstraints, namely the various types ofshapes, fabrics, decoration and surface fin-ishes. If one were to characterise the shapesof each period, the Wadi Suq and Iron I as-semblages are dominated by jars, particu-larly those with everted rims. In contrast, asthe quantification of individual vessel typeshas shown, various bowl shapes dominateboth the Iron II and III periods. The reasonfor this distinction is unknown and in all


Table 28. Iron Age III fabric R.


Fine paste, although Small rounded brown Few small pores visible 2.5Y 7/8 (‘light c.2.5.not as fine as Fabrics P grits. Well sorted on the surface. All less red’). Evenly fired.and Q. Smooth texture. (score: 3). Slightly than 1 mm. Well

micaceous. sorted.

probability elusive, particularly if they arereduced to social factors which leave littleimprint in the archaeological record.

The near-complete absence of decorationin the Wadi Suq period assemblage is not-able, particularly for a tomb assemblage,and a similar situation exists with respectto the Iron I ceramics. This lack of decor-ation for the Wadi Suq assemblage is, how-ever, a reflection of the comparatively late(Wadi Suq III/IV) date assigned to the ce-ramics. Decorated vessels are characteristicof the earlier, rather than the later, WadiSuq burials (243).

Once again, the Iron II and III ceramicsstand in opposition to the former groupsby possessing a number of highly decor-ated examples. Furthermore, social factorsconcerning the intensity of labour re-sources allocated to pottery production arelikely to have played a major role in ce-ramic technology. The differences betweenthe handmade, coarse Iron I fabrics and theoften wheel-turned Iron II fabrics are quiteapparent and may reflect a change in thenature of the ceramic ‘industry’ during theIron Age (244). It is interesting to note that,whilst the majority of Wadi Suq sherds areobviously wheel-made, there is a ‘rever-sion’ to handmade techniques in the Iron Iperiod, followed by the use of the slow andfast wheel in later periods. No direct evi-dence exists to explain this trend, althoughMagee suggests (245) that household pro-duction using labour-intensive methods re-sulted because of the absence of any needfor high productivity.

57

The interrelationship of quantification andchronologyThe Wadi Suq parallels, particularly thosefrom Tell Abraq, Shimal, Failaka and Bah-rain, suggest that the major period ofsecond-millennium occupation in thetombs occurred during the Wadi Suq IIIperiod. Although the number of Iron AgeII sherds outnumbered those for the WadiSuq period, it appears that this is a functionnot so much of a greater number of IronII vessels, but rather of a greater level ofbrokenness compared with the Wadi Suqperiods. Such a result is possibly attribu-table to the more delicate Iron Age fabrics,which are more prone to breakage, as op-posed to the more resilient Wadi Suqsherds.

Original quantification results suggestedthat the most dominant period of occu-pation was the Wadi Suq (III) period, withthe Iron II period following closely behind.However, as mentioned, the EVEs methodof quantification, plagued with the disad-vantage of being unable to quantify bodysherds, greatly affected the results obtainedfor Sharm. Therefore, it would not be sur-prising if the Iron II period outstripped theWadi Suq period in terms of the number ofvessels as a function of the tomb’s use in anyone period. This possibility must not be ig-nored given that body sherds form a largecontingent of the Iron II corpus, but whichcannot be quantified in the same manner asthe diagnostic rim and base sherds. The onlyconclusion that may be made therefore, isthat the most significant periods of the

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Reg

istr

atio

nd

atab

ase

for

the

Shar

mce

ram

icas

sem

blag

e.

SPTo

mb

Eas

tN

orth

Lev

elL

ayer

Dat

eFa

bric

Type

Per

iod

Join

sN

otes

1I

1.38

17.9

78.

783

21.1

.97

A(i

)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

q

2I

1.7

048.

963

4.2.

97D

gobl

etba

seW

adi

Suq

3I

1.75

13.8

78.

566

4.2.

97A

(ii)

gobl

etba

seW

adi

Suq

grey

core

,str

ing-

cut

base

4I

1.37

17.9

28.

863

27.1

.97

A(i

)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

q

5I

0113

.68.

605

1.2.

97A

(ii)

gobl

etba

seW

adi

Suq

stri

ng-c

utba

se

6I

1.9

6.67

9.03

34.

2.97

A(i

i)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qst

ring

-cut

base

7I

2.1

13.8

58.

437

4.2.

97A

(ii)

gobl

etba

seW

adi

Suq

stri

ng-c

utba

se

8I

1.75

5.28

9.00

?3.

2.97

A(i

)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qst

ring

-cut

base

9I

0113

8.70

–8.6

05

30.1

.97

A(i

)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

22gr

eyco

re

10I

0003

9.20

–9.0

02

3.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

11I

2.03

13.7

88.

397

4.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

grey

core

12I

0113

.98.

605

1.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s21

13I

1.37

17.7

8.78

421

.1.9

7A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

14I

0005

9.20

–9.0

02

3.2.

97M

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onII

?

15I

2.18

16.1

28.

625

21.1

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qSa

me

vess

elas

16/

321/

435

16I

0213

8.60

–9.5

06

4.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

321/

435,

sam

eve

ssel

as15

17I

0008

9.20

–9.0

02

4.2.

97A

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

grey

core

18I

0111

8.90

–8.7

04

28.1

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

19I

0.62

7.74

9.04

23.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

20I

0115

8.80

428

.1.9

7A

(iii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

21I

2.43

17.1

68.

605

25.1

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

12

22I

2.25

15.9

88.

655

25.1

.97

A(i

)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

9gr

eyco

re

23I

0508

8.40

628

.1.9

7O

(viii

)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

IIjo

ins

497;

sam

eve

ssel

as12

0/12

1?

24I

0109

9.90

–9.8

03

4.2.

97B

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

25I

0508

8.40

628

.1.9

7D

base

frag

men

tW

adi

Suq

(bow

l?)

58


26I

0114

8.70

–8.6

05

30.1

.97

A(i

)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

27I

0003

9.00

–8.8

03

5.2.

97C

(i)

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

grey

core

28I

0106

9.00

–8.8

03

4.2.

97A

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

29I

0106

9.00

–8.8

03

4.2.

97A

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

30I

0.88

13.9

78.

654

1.2.

97A

(i)

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

31I

0211

9.10

115

.1.9

7B

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

sam

eve

ssel

as38

?re

dsl

ipin

t./ex

t.

32I

0112

9.30

–9.1

02

18.1

.97

C(i

)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

33I

0112

9.30

–9.1

02

18.1

.97

A(i

i)cl

osed

bow

lW

adi

Suq

34I

2.1

15.0

28.

783

29.1

.97

A(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

35I

0012

8.90

–8.6

03

1.2.

97B

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

36I

0005

9.20

–9.0

02

3.2.

97M

(i)

clos

edbo

wl

Iron

II

37I

0111

8.70

–8.6

05

29.1

.97

A(i

i)cl

osed

bow

lW

adi

Suq

38I

0213

surf

.–9.

00su

rfac

e22

.1.9

7B

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

sam

eve

ssel

as31

?re

dsl

ip

39I

0111

8.90

–8.7

04

28.1

.97

Dop

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

40I

0210

8.70

–8.6

05

1.2.

97O

(ix)

open

bow

lIr

onII

41I

0210

8.70

–8.6

05

1.2.

97B

clos

edbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

42I

2.02

17.3

38.

635

23.1

.97

Eop

enbo

wl

Iron

Isa

me

vess

elas

313

43I

1.87

10.7

9.06

318

.1.9

7B

clos

edbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

44I

n/a

n/a

surf

.–9.

001

2.2.

97B

clos

edbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

45I

n/a

n/a

surf

.–9.

001

2.2.

97B

clos

edbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

46I

0.2

4.63

9.08

23.

2.97

Bop

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

47I

01–0

213

–17

surf

.–9.

00su

rfac

e16

.1.9

7A

(ii)

clos

edbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qgr

eyco

rean

dsm

udgi

ngar

ound

rim

48I

01–0

213

–17

surf

.–9.

00su

rfac

e16

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dco

ncen

tric

ring

sar

ound

shou

lder

49I

01–0

213

–17

surf

.–9.

00su

rfac

e16

.1.9

7B

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Wad

iSu

qin

cise

dco

ncen

tric

sher

dri

ngs

50I

0113

–17

surf

.–9.

00su

rfac

e16

.1.9

7B

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Wad

iSu

qin

cise

dco

ncen

tric

sher

dri

ngs

Tabl

e.29

Con

t.

59

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

51I

0115

8.70

–8.6

05

28.1

.97

A(i

i)d

ecor

ated

bod

yW

adi

Suq

com

bin

cisi

onsh

erd

52I

0115

8.70

–8.6

05

28.1

.97

A(i

i)bo

dy

sher

dw

ith

Wad

iSu

qun

even

lyfi

red

com

bin

cisi

on

53I

0114

8.70

–8.6

05

30.1

.97

A(i

i)bo

dy

sher

dw

ith

Wad

iSu

qco

mb

inci

sion

54I

0114

8.90

–8.7

03

29.1

.97

A(i

)bo

dy

sher

dW

adi

Suq

red

slip

ext.,

grey

int.

55I

0103

9.20

–9.0

02

3.2.

97J

inci

sed

bod

ysh

erd

Iron

IIco

mb

inci

sion

(ext

.)

56I

2.45

17.3

28.

565

21.1

.97

A(i

ii)sh

allo

wpl

ate/

bow

lW

adi

Suq

57I

0212

surf

.–9.

001

16.1

.97

Bba

sefr

agm

ent

Wad

iSu

q

58I

0212

surf

.–9.

001

16.1

.97

Dja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

59I

0111

surf

.–9.

001

16.1

.97

Dsh

ould

erw

ith

com

bW

adi

Suq

join

s60

/61

inci

sion

60I

0111

surf

.–9.

001

16.1

.97

Dja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

59/

61

61I

0111

surf

.–9.

001

16.1

.97

Dbo

dy

wit

hri

dge

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

59/

60

62I

2.02

17.3

8.64

523

.1.9

7J

perf

orat

edle

dge

rim

Iron

II?

63I

0213

8.60

–8.5

06

4.2.

97J

led

geri

mIr

onII

?

64I

1.15

13.6

8.62

430

.1.9

7J

led

geri

mIr

onII

?

65I

2.3

14.5

58.

644

30.1

.97

Jpe

rfor

ated

led

geri

mIr

onII

?d

iago

nally

-pi

erce

dho

le

66I

1.7

6.75

8.93

34.

2.97

Fop

enbo

wl

Iron

I

67I

2.38

11.6

48.

754

28.1

.97

Hhi

gh-n

ecke

dja

rIr

onII

(bod

ysh

erd

)

68I

0.97

11.8

88.

645

29.1

.97

Hhi

gh-n

ecke

dja

rIr

onII

(bod

ysh

erd

)

69I

0113

.98.

555

1.2.

97O

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

70I

1.6

6.2

8.81

34.

2.97

Nca

rina

ted

bow

lba

seIr

onII

71I

0011

8.80

–8.6

54

29.1

.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIbr

own/

red

slip

int./

ext.

72I

2.22

14.6

58.

674

1.2.

97M

(i)

cari

nate

dbo

wl

Iron

IIre

dpa

int

60


73I

1.8

2.7

9.01

23.

2.97

M(i

)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

join

s47

6re

d-p

aint

edcr

oss-

hatc

hing

,ext

.

74I

2.5

17.5

48.

605

25.1

.97

M(i

)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

brow

n-pa

inte

dd

iag.

lines

,ext

.

75I

1.4

16.4

8.61

519

.1.9

7N

cari

nate

dbo

wl

wit

hIr

onII

brow

npa

int

spou

t

76I

0215

8.70

–8.6

05

27.1

.97

M(i

)d

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

burn

ishi

ngan

dsh

erd

blac

kpa

int.

77I

1.7

16.9

8.75

418

.1.9

7O

(ix)

bow

lw

ith

spou

tIr

onII

78I

0011

9.00

–8.9

03

21.1

.97

Nca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

79I

0110

9.00

–8.7

03

30.1

.97

M(i

i)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

sam

eve

ssel

as11

8an

d44

4?

80I

0111

8.70

–8.6

05

29.1

.97

O(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

275

81I

0111

9.30

–9.1

02

18.1

.97

Iop

enbo

wl

Iron

II

82I

0115

8.70

–8.6

04

27.1

.97

Nbo

dy

sher

dIr

onII

brow

nsl

ipin

t./ex

t.

83I

2.37

15.1

58.

655

27.1

.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

352

84I

1.5

16.2

58.

655

19.1

.97

Ncu

pIr

onII

85I

1.11

15.9

38.

695

27.1

.97

Ncu

pIr

onII

86I

0113

9.00

–8.8

03

27.1

.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

II

87I

0108

9.00

–80

34.

2.97

Nca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

88I

5.3

9.5

8.78

315

.1.9

7O

(iv)

perf

orat

edsp

out

Iron

IIgr

eyco

re;

perf

orat

ion

atbo

dy

join

89I

0212

.68.

903

29.1

.97

M(i

)lu

gIr

onII

90I

0106

9.20

–9.0

02

4.2.

97N

lug

Iron

II

91I

1.35

4.55

9.10

24.

2.97

O(v

)sp

out

Iron

IIin

den

tati

ons

onsu

rfac

e

92I

1.66

3.2

8.92

34.

2.97

Nlid

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

surf

aces

93Ir

onII

unav

aila

ble

(PIX

E-

PIG

ME

anal

ysis

)

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

61

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

94II

clea

ning

surf

.–8.

00?

3.2.

97M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

sam

eve

ssel

asbl

ack-

pain

ted

124,

207

cros

s-ha

tch

mot

if

95II

clea

ning

surf

.–8.

00?

3.2.

97M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

fugi

tive

brow

nsl

ip

96Ir

onII

unav

aila

ble

(PIX

E-

PIG

ME

anal

ysis

)

97Ir

onII

unav

aila

ble

(PIX

E-

PIG

ME

anal

ysis

)

98I

0214

8.80

–8.7

04

30.1

.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIcr

oss-

hatc

hin

plum

pain

t,in

t./ex

t.

99I

0214

8.80

–8.7

04

30.1

.97

Lhi

gh-n

ecke

dja

rIr

onII

sam

eve

ssel

asbu

rnis

hed

surf

aces

320?

100

I01

188.

80–8

.60

41.

2.97

Lop

enbo

wl

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

int.

101

I01

118.

80–8

.70

429

.1.9

7L

high

-nec

ked

jar

rim

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.?

102

I00

108.

7–8.

65

30.1

.97

Lop

enbo

wl

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

int.

103

I1.

512

.72

8.74

430

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIin

cise

d,b

urni

shed

,sh

erd

ISS

104

I1.

313

.16

8.60

530

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIin

cise

d,b

urni

shed

,sh

erd

wit

hfr

agm

ent

ISS

ofba

se

105

I0.

8211

.46

8.64

529

.1.9

7H

jar

base

Iron

II

106

I1.

8513

.38.

665

30.1

.97

Gcu

pIr

onI

join

s10

8/33

3

107

I1.

8513

.38.

665

30.1

.97

Gop

enbo

wl

Iron

I

108

I02

13.1

8.63

51.

2.97

Gcu

pIr

onI

join

s10

6/33

3

109

I1.

939.

359.

803

4.2.

97H

jar

base

Iron

II

110

I01

–02

13–1

7su

rf.–

9.00

?16

.1.9

7O

(i)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIin

cise

d,I

SSsh

erd

111

I01

/02

13–1

7su

rf.–

9.00

?16

.1.9

7L

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onII

burn

ishe

din

t./ex

t.

112

II4.

79.

658.

705

19.1

.97

Pop

enbo

wl

Iron

III

join

s20

8hi

ghly

burn

ishe

dre

dsl

ip,I

rani

an(B

MSW

)

113

I01

049.

00–8

.80

24.

2.97

fine

buff

,ca

rina

ted

bow

lP

IRjo

ins

324,

371,

386,

relic

tgl

aze

459

62


114

I1.

2313

.65

8.60

530

.1.9

7Q

open

bow

lIr

onII

I

115

II05

058.

73–8

.68

218

.1.9

7H

high

-nec

ked

jar

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

red

slip

(bod

ysh

erd

)in

t./ex

t.

116

II5.

966.

928.

43?

3.2.

97M

(ii)

bow

lw

ith

spou

tIr

onII

red

pain

tin

t./ex

t.

117

II5.

856.

678.

386

30.1

.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

195/

225

brow

nsl

ip

118

II5.

77.

438.

327

1.2.

97M

(ii)

cari

nate

dbo

wl

Iron

IIsa

me

vess

elas

79an

d44

4?

119

II5.

836.

538.

386

30.1

.97

M(i

i)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

sam

eve

ssel

as44

7bl

ack

slip

ext,

fugi

tive

wav

ylin

esin

t.

120

II5.

679.

088.

376

29.1

.97

O(v

iii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onII

join

s12

1;sa

me

vess

elas

23/

497?

121

II5.

849.

058.

406

28.1

.97

O(v

iii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onII

join

s12

0;sa

me

inci

sed

wav

ylin

eve

ssel

as23

/49

7?ar

ound

neck

122

II5.

616.

258.

386

29.1

.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIre

d-b

row

nsl

ip,

int./

ext.

123

II04

–06

058.

68–8

.58

320

.1.9

7M

(ii)

cari

nate

dbo

wl

Iron

IIbl

ack

pain

tin

t./ex

t.,sm

ooth

edor

burn

ishe

din

t.

124

II5.

76.

778.

386

30.1

.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIsa

me

vess

elas

94bl

ack

pain

tex

tan

d20

7?(c

ross

-hat

ch),

relic

tbr

own

slip

int./

ext.

125

II5.

76.

778.

386

30.1

.97

M(i

i)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

sam

eve

ssel

as23

6re

dsl

ipin

t./ex

t.

126

II4.

355.

058.

376

1.2.

97M

(i)

cari

nate

dbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

232

red

pain

tin

t.

127

II4.

878.

988.

436

23.1

.97

O(i

i)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

red

slip

int./

ext.

128

II04

–05

058.

58–8

.53

422

.1.9

7N

open

bow

lIr

onII

red

slip

int./

ext.

129

II04

–05

058.

58–8

.53

422

.1.9

7N

open

bow

lIr

onII

dar

ksl

ip,r

elic

tpa

int.

130

I01

12su

rf.–

9.00

115

.1.9

7M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

131

II4.

565.

28.

406

28.1

.97

M(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Iron

II

132

II5.

824.

789.

25?

3.2.

97O

(ii)

lug

frag

men

tIr

onII

red

slip

int./

ext.

133

II5.

976.

058.

42?

4.2.

97O

(ix)

lug

frag

men

tIr

onII

Tabl

e.29

Con

t.

63

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

134

Iron

IIun

avai

labl

e(P

IXE

-P

IGM

Ean

alys

is)

135

II5.

436.

748.

386

30.1

.97

O(v

i)tu

bula

rsp

out

Iron

IIfr

agm

ent

136

II04

069.

73–8

.53

521

.1.9

7J

spou

tfr

agm

ent

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

int./

ext.,

inci

sed

?

137

Iron

IIun

avai

labl

e(P

IXE

-P

IGM

Ean

alys

is)

138

II04

068.

73–8

.53

521

.1.9

7K

(i)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbr

own

slip

int./

sher

dex

t.,in

cise

dIS

S

139

II04

068.

73–8

.53

521

.1.9

7M

(i)

cari

nate

dbo

wl

Iron

II

140

II04

068.

73–8

.53

521

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edba

seIr

onII

inci

sed

ISS

141

II04

068.

73–8

.53

521

.1.9

7M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

burn

ishe

din

t./ex

t.

142

II04

068.

73–8

.53

521

.1.9

7A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

smoo

thed

orse

lf-

slip

143

II04

068.

73–8

.53

521

.1.9

7N

open

bow

lIr

onII

144

II04

058.

73–8

.68

218

.1.9

7K

(i)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIjo

ins

146;

sam

ein

cise

dIS

Ssh

erd

vess

elas

145?

145

II04

058.

73–8

.68

218

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIsa

me

vess

elas

dar

kbr

own

sher

d14

4/14

6?bu

rnis

hed

slip

,in

t./ex

t.;in

cise

dIS

S

146

II04

058.

73–8

.68

215

.1.9

7K

(i)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIjo

ins

144;

sam

ein

cise

dIS

Ssh

erd

vess

elas

145?

147

II04

–05

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

148

II04

–05

05su

rf.–

8.00

129

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

149

II5.

927.

78.

336

13.1

.97

Ld

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

burn

ishe

dex

t,sh

erd

inci

sed

ISS,

fugi

tive

brow

nsl

ip

150

II04

06su

rfac

e1

13.1

.97

Llid

frag

men

tIr

onII

inci

sed

ISS

151

II04

06su

rfac

e1

25.1

.97

Lbe

ehiv

e-sh

aped

jar

Iron

IIjo

ins

318/

322/

burn

ishe

d,i

ncis

ed34

9/47

7IS

S

64


152

II5.

726.

418.

446

22.1

.97

K(i

)be

ehiv

e-sh

aped

jar

Iron

IIjo

ins

231/

240

inci

sed

ISS

153

II04

068.

53–8

.33

823

.1.9

7L

high

-nec

ked

jar

Iron

II

154

II6.

74.

658.

386

21.1

.97

Ld

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

burn

ishe

dex

t,sh

erd

inci

sed

ISS,

fugi

tive

brow

nsl

ip

155

II5.

886.

128.

456

21.1

.97

Llid

frag

men

tIr

onII

inci

sed

ISS

156

Iron

IIun

avai

labl

e(P

IXE

-P

IGM

Ean

alys

is)

157

II04

088.

535

21.1

.97

Ld

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

burn

ishe

dex

t,sh

erd

(jar)

inci

sed

ISS,

fugi

tive

brow

nsl

ip

158

II04

058.

73–8

.68

218

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIin

cise

dIS

Ssh

erd

159

II05

05su

rfac

esu

rfac

e20

.1.9

7L

lug

Iron

IIin

cise

dIS

S?

160

II05

05su

rfac

esu

rfac

e20

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S,fu

giti

vebr

own

slip

161

Iron

IIun

avai

labl

e(P

IXE

-P

IGM

Ean

alys

is)

162

II05

05su

rfac

esu

rfac

e20

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S,fu

giti

vebr

own

slip

163

II05

05su

rfac

esu

rfac

e20

.1.9

7H

base

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.

164

II4.

746.

738.

46?

20.1

.97

Ld

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

inci

sed

ISS

sher

d

165

II4.

746.

738.

46?

20.1

.97

red

-d

ecor

ated

bod

yJu

lfar

?re

dpa

int

brow

nsh

erd

grit

and

chaf

f

166

II05

078.

33–8

.23

71.

2.97

Ld

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

inci

sed

ISS

sher

d

167

II04

068.

53–8

.33

623

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIin

cise

dIS

Ssh

erd

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

65

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

168

II04

068.

73–8

.53

522

.1.9

7N

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbl

ack

pain

tex

t.,sh

erd

brow

n/re

dpa

int

int.,

loop

sor

circ

les?

169

II04

068.

73–8

.53

522

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIin

cise

dIS

S,fi

nger

sher

dim

pres

sion

sin

t.

170

II04

068.

73–8

.53

520

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IID

ark

slip

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

171

II04

068.

73–8

.53

520

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IID

ark

slip

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

172

II04

068.

73–8

.53

520

.1.9

7K

(ii)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIre

din

cise

dIS

Ssh

erd

173

II04

068.

73–8

.53

520

.1.9

7K

(i)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbr

own

slip

int./

sher

dex

t.,in

cise

dIS

S

174

II04

068.

73–8

.53

520

.1.9

7M

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onII

slip

ped

,bur

nish

ed(f

rag.

)in

t.,ex

t.

175

II04

068.

73–8

.53

520

.1.9

7re

dgr

itd

ecor

ated

bod

yJu

lfar

?ro

peri

dge

sher

dd

ecor

atio

n

176

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

Ld

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

join

s17

8bu

rnis

hed

ext,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

177

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

Ld

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

inci

sed

ISS

sher

d

178

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

Ld

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

join

s17

6in

cise

dIS

Ssh

erd

179

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

Lba

seIr

onII

?re

dsl

ipin

t./ex

t.

180

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIsa

me

vess

elas

light

lyin

cise

d,I

SS21

5?

181

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

M(i

i)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

182

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

Lhi

gh-n

ecke

dja

rIr

onII

183

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

A(i

)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qgr

eyco

re.f

aint

inci

sion

184

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

Nop

enbo

wl

Iron

IIbr

own

slip

int.

185

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

tan

chaf

fbo

wl

Julf

ar?

and

grit

66


186

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIre

lict

brow

nsl

ipin

t./ex

t.

187

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

int./

ext.

188

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

M(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIre

dpa

int

ext.

189

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIsa

me

vess

elas

blac

kpa

int

onre

d24

8,25

2/44

8sl

ip

190

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

Lja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

II?

burn

ishe

dex

t.

191

II04

058.

53–8

.33

61.

2.97

Ld

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

brow

nsl

ipex

t.,sh

erd

burn

ishe

d,i

ncis

edIS

S

192

II04

068.

53–8

.33

629

.1.9

7M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

red

slip

?

193

II04

068.

53–8

.33

629

.1.9

7M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

relic

tbr

own

slip

int./

ext.

194

II04

068.

53–8

.33

629

.1.9

7H

open

bow

lIr

onII

burn

ishe

dex

t.

195

II04

058.

68–8

.58

319

.1.9

7M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

join

s11

7/22

5re

lict

brow

nsl

ipin

t./ex

t.

196

II04

058.

68–8

.58

319

.1.9

7L

stra

ight

-nec

ked

jar

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

int./

ext.

rim

197

II04

058.

73–8

.53

319

.1.9

7N

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbr

own

slip

int/

ext.

sher

d

198

II04

068.

73–8

.53

519

.1.9

7G

high

-nec

ked

jar

wit

hIr

onI?

shou

lder

199

II04

068.

73–8

.53

519

.1.9

7K

(i)

base

Iron

IIin

cise

dIS

S?

200

II04

068.

73–8

.53

519

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIjo

ins

202

burn

ishe

dex

t.,sh

erd

inci

sed

ISS

201

II04

068.

73–8

.53

519

.1.9

7N

open

bow

lIr

onII

relic

tsl

ipin

t./ex

t.

202

II04

068.

73–8

.53

519

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIjo

ins

200

burn

ishe

dex

t.,sh

erd

inci

sed

ISS

203

II04

068.

73–8

.53

519

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IId

ark

slip

ext.,

sher

dbu

rnis

hed

,inc

ised

ISS

204

II04

068.

73–8

.53

519

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

67

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

205

II04

068.

73–8

.53

519

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIre

dbu

rnis

hed

slip

sher

dex

t,in

cise

dIS

S

206

Iron

IIun

avai

labl

e(P

IXE

-P

IGM

Ean

alys

is)

207

II04

068.

73–8

.53

519

.1.9

7M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

sam

eve

ssel

as12

4bl

ack

pain

t(c

ross

-an

d94

hatc

h),b

row

nsl

ipin

t.

208

II4.

79.

658.

705

19.1

.97

P(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

III

join

s11

2hi

ghly

burn

ishe

dre

dsl

ip,i

nt.a

ndex

t.(B

MSW

).

209

II04

?8.

525

20.1

.97

Lbo

dy

sher

d(b

owl)

Iron

IIri

lled

int.

from

pott

er’s

whe

el

210

II04

?8.

525

20.1

.97

K(i

)d

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

dar

kgr

eysh

erd

burn

ishe

dsl

ipex

t.,in

cise

dIS

S,d

ark

grey

core

.

211

II04

?8.

525

20.1

.97

K(i

i)d

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

join

s21

4re

dbu

rnis

hed

slip

sher

din

t./ex

t.,in

cise

dIS

S

212

II04

?8.

525

20.1

.97

K(i

i)be

ehiv

e-sh

aped

jar

Iron

IIre

dsl

ipin

t./ex

t.ba

se

213

II04

–06

06–1

18.

93–8

.73

418

.1.9

7A

(ii)

inci

sed

base

Wad

iSu

qgr

eyco

re,

214

II04

–06

06–1

18.

93–8

.73

418

.1.9

7K

(ii)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIjo

ins

211

red

burn

ishe

dsl

ipsh

erd

int./

ext.,

inci

sed

ISS

215

II04

–06

06–1

18.

93–8

.73

418

.1.9

7M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

slip

int./

ext.

216

II04

–06

06–1

18.

93–8

.73

418

.1.9

7O

(ii)

lug

Iron

IIre

d-b

row

nsl

ip

217

II04

–06

06–1

18.

93–8

.73

418

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIin

cise

dIS

Ssh

erd

218

II04

–06

06–1

18.

93–8

.73

418

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

219

II04

–06

06–1

18.

93–8

.73

418

.1.9

7M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

join

s25

4re

dbu

rnis

hed

slip

int./

ext.

68


220

II04

–06

06–1

18.

93–8

.73

418

.1.9

7A

(i)

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

grey

core

,bu

rnis

hed

,cro

ss-

hatc

hd

ecor

atio

n

221

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7H

beeh

ive-

shap

edja

rIr

onII

base

222

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7N

shou

lder

wit

hlu

gIr

onII

relic

tbr

own

slip

ext.

223

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

224

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7O

(ix)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onII

red

slip

int./

ext.

225

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

join

s11

7/19

5br

own

slip

int./

ext

226

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

227

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

red

slip

int./

ext.

228

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7L

stra

ight

-nec

ked

jar

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

?ri

m

229

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7B

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

230

II04

–06

05su

rf.–

8.00

115

.1.9

7M

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onII

blac

kpa

int

onre

dsl

ip(e

xt.):

runn

ing

spir

alpa

tter

n.

231

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7K

(i)

beeh

ive-

shap

edja

rIr

onII

join

s15

2/24

0in

cise

dIS

S

232

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7L

cari

nate

dbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

126

red

pain

tin

t.

233

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

234

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

smoo

thed

ext.,

relic

tsl

ip

235

II04

058.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

236

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7M

(ii)

cari

nate

dbo

wl

Iron

IIsa

me

vess

elas

red

slip

125?

237

II04

058.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.

sher

d(r

elic

t),i

ncis

edIS

S

238

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7N

open

bow

lIr

onII

blac

kpa

int

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

69

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

239

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7L

high

-nec

ked

jar

rim

Iron

IIjo

ins

454

burn

ishe

dex

t.?

240

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7K

(i)

beeh

ive-

shap

edja

rIr

onII

join

s15

2/23

1in

cise

dIS

S

241

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

relic

tsl

ipin

t./ex

t.

242

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7L

bod

ysh

erd

(bow

l)Ir

onII

burn

ishe

dex

t.(r

elic

t),i

ncis

edIS

S

243

II04

068.

53–8

.33

625

.1.9

7M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

relic

tsl

ipex

t.

244

II04

058.

53–8

.33

628

.1.9

7L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIin

cise

dIS

Ssh

erd

245

II04

058.

53–8

.33

628

.1.9

7K

(ii)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIlig

htgr

eyco

re,r

edsh

erd

slip

int./

ext.,

inci

sed

ISS

246

II04

–06

06–1

1su

rfac

esu

rfac

e13

.1.9

7M

(i)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbl

ack

pain

tex

t.sh

erd

247

II5.

078.

838.

436

23.1

.97

M(i

)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

IIbl

ack

pain

ton

red

slip

(ext

.):ru

nnin

gsp

iral

patt

ern.

248

IIse

ct.

–su

rf.–

8.00

surf

ace–

4.2.

97M

(i)

base

Iron

IIsa

me

vess

elas

189

blac

kpa

int,

red

clea

n.8.

0an

d25

2/44

8?sl

ip.

249

II04

–05

08–0

98.

436

23.1

.97

M(i

)d

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

blac

kpa

inte

dsh

erd

stri

pes

onre

dsl

ip;

fing

erpr

int

onin

teri

or

250

II04

–05

08–0

98.

436

23.1

.97

Nd

ecor

ated

bod

yIr

onII

red

slip

sher

d

251

II04

–05

08–0

98.

436

23.1

.97

red

-bo

dy

sher

dJu

lfar

?or

ange

,fi

negr

it

252

II5.

876.

378.

396

30.1

.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

448.

sam

ebl

ack

pain

t,re

dve

ssel

as18

9an

dsl

ip?

248?

253

II5.

139.

148.

436

23.1

.97

Qop

enbo

wl

Iron

III?

red

burn

ishe

dsl

ip

254

II04

–06

06–1

1?

315

.1.9

7M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

join

s21

9re

dbu

rnis

hed

slip

,re

pair

hole

s

70


255

II04

–06

06–1

1?

315

.1.9

7bu

ff.f

ine

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Isla

mic

brow

npa

int

chaf

fsh

erd

256

II04

–06

06–1

1?

315

.1.9

7K

(i)

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIfu

giti

vebr

own

slip

sher

dex

t,in

cise

dIS

S

257

I2.

118

8.90

327

.1.9

7R

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

III

inci

sed

wav

ylin

esh

erd

onsh

ould

er

258

II5.

845.

858.

416

30.1

.97

M(i

i)gl

obul

arja

rw

ith

3(?

)Ir

onII

brow

nsl

ip,i

nt./

nose

lugs

,2ex

t.pr

eser

ved

259

II4.

365.

288.

406

28.1

.97

M(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Iron

II

260

II4.

365.

288.

406

7.2.

97M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

pain

ted

.int

./ex

t.

261

I01

178.

50–8

.30

77.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qgr

eyco

re,f

ugit

ive

red

pain

t,ex

t.

262

I01

178.

50–8

.30

77.

2.97

A(i

i)be

aker

/m

ini.

jar

wit

hW

adi

Suq

may

join

263

flar

ing

rim

263

I01

178.

50–8

.30

77.

2.97

A(i

i)be

aker

/m

ini.

jar

wit

hW

adi

Suq

may

join

262

grey

core

flar

ing

rim

264

I01

168.

50–8

.40

77.

2.97

A(i

)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qsa

me

vess

elas

fugi

tive

red

slip

402?

int./

ext.

265

I01

168.

50–8

.40

77.

2.97

Lbo

dy

sher

dIr

onII

hard

burn

ishe

dex

t.

266

I01

168.

50–8

.40

77.

2.97

Lbo

dy

sher

dIr

onII

hard

burn

ishe

dex

t.

267

I01

058.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

268

I01

058.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

269

I01

058.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

Bcl

osed

bow

lW

adi

Suq

join

s47

9;sa

me

relic

tre

dpa

int,

vess

elas

351/

pend

ant

loop

son

471?

int.

rim

,lig

htly

(uni

nten

tion

ally

?)in

cise

d

270

I00

048.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

Hhi

gh-n

ecke

dja

rri

mIr

onII

271

I01

158.

50–8

.35

77.

2.97

Hop

enbo

wl

Iron

II

272

I01

158.

50–8

.35

77.

2.97

A(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

304

grey

core

,bla

cksm

udgi

ngex

t.

Tabl

29.C

ont.

71

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

273

I01

158.

50–8

.35

77.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

274

I01

098.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

oran

geca

rina

ted

bow

lP

IRjo

ins

325,

326,

327,

relic

tgl

aze

buff

.fin

e32

8,41

2gr

it

275

I01

098.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

O(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

80

276

I01

098.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

O(v

ii)op

enbo

wl

(bas

e)Ir

onII

277

I00

98.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

Bbe

aker

/m

ini,

jar

wit

hW

adi

Suq

flar

ing

rim

278

I1.

999

8.74

47.

2.97

A(i

i)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qun

even

lyfi

red

,st

ring

-cut

base

279

I1.

797.

548.

724

7.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

280

I01

068.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qR

idge

san

din

cisi

onun

der

rim

and

arou

ndsh

ould

er.P

ossi

ble

trac

esof

red

slip

.

281

I01

068.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

A(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

282

I1.

857.

638.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

A(i

)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qst

ring

-cut

base

283

Iron

II?

unav

aila

ble

(PIX

E-

PIG

ME

anal

ysis

)

284

I1.

525.

98.

784

7.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

285

I1.

25.

78.

784

7.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

286

I1.

765.

312.

754

7.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

287

I1.

265.

918.

784

7.2.

97O

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

red

pain

ted

loop

s,in

t./ex

t.?

288

I0.

8514

.75

8.50

77.

2.97

A(i

)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

289

grey

core

289

I0.

9512

.59.

357

7.2.

97A

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s28

8gr

eyco

re

290

I0.

514

.98

8.49

77.

2.97

A(i

)be

aker

/m

ini.

jar

wit

hW

adi

Suq

flar

ing

rim

291

I1.

654.

958.

704

7.2.

97E

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onI?

join

s29

9/31

5/bl

ack

core

417/

472/

482

292

I1.

6615

.52

8.45

77.

2.97

tan

buff

bow

lor

beak

erP

IRsa

me

vess

elas

301

gold

en/

gree

ngl

aze

72


293

I1.

0216

.89

8.43

77.

2.97

Eop

enbo

wl

Iron

Isa

me

vess

elas

surf

ace

blac

kene

d35

7?d

urin

gfi

ring

?

294

I2.

1616

.64

8.26

77.

2.97

C(i

)cl

osed

bow

lW

adi

Suq

over

lapp

ing

loop

sar

ound

int./

ext.

rim

;sm

ooth

edor

burn

ishe

d,p

ossi

ble

crea

msl

ip?

295

I1.

775.

418.

717

7.2.

97C

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

296

I01

118.

60–8

.45

67.

2.97

Lhi

gh-n

ecke

dja

rIr

onII

?jo

ins

473

burn

ishe

dex

t.,la

min

ated

surf

ace.

297

I01

118.

60–8

.45

67.

2.97

Lhi

gh-n

ecke

dja

rIr

onII

298

I1.

654.

558.

804

7.2.

97L

ring

base

Iron

II

299

I1.

74.

958.

704

7.2.

97E

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onI?

join

s29

1/31

5/gr

eyco

re41

7/47

2/48

2

300

I1.

9115

.34

8.43

77.

2.97

M(i

)ca

rina

ted

bow

lw

ith

Iron

IIof

fset

spou

t

301

I02

168.

437

7.2.

97fi

neta

nbo

wl

orbe

aker

PIR

sam

eve

ssel

as29

2go

lden

/gr

een

glaz

e

302

I0.

34.

68.

764

7.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

303

I1.

9216

.05

8.41

77.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

304

I1.

7516

.16

8.42

77.

2.97

A(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

272

grey

core

,bla

cksm

udgi

ngex

t.ri

m

305

I2.

516

.86

8.25

77.

2.97

Eop

enbo

wl

Iron

I?bl

acke

ned

int.

from

firi

ng

306

I1.

235.

68.

714

7.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s30

7

307

I1.

235.

68.

714

7.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s30

6

308

I1.

2504

8.78

47.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

II

309

I1.

126.

188.

704

7.2.

97sa

ndy

bod

ysh

erd

ofP

IRjo

ins

356/

381/

gree

ngl

aze

grit

ped

esta

lled

egg-

351/

401;

sam

esh

aped

bow

lve

ssel

as39

1,40

5,41

8,43

2,49

6

310

I0.

854.

158.

754

7.2.

97gr

eygr

itja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Julf

arm

aybe

long

tobu

ffsl

ip.r

ed-

sam

eve

ssel

as31

1br

own

pain

t

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

73

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

311

I1.

65.

858.

813

7.2.

97gr

eygr

itja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Julf

arm

aybe

long

tobu

ffsl

ip.r

ed-

sam

eve

ssel

as31

0br

own

pain

t

312

I1.

75.

28.

823

7.2.

97A

(ii)

spou

tW

adi

Suq

fugi

tive

brow

nsl

ip

313

I02

178.

7–8.

56

7.2.

97E

open

bow

lIr

onI?

smud

ged

dur

ing

firi

ng

314

I02

178.

70–8

.50

67.

2.97

O(i

i)le

dge

rim

wit

hIr

onII

?re

mna

nts

ofpe

rfor

atio

nin

cisi

on

315

I01

048.

80–8

.70

47.

2.97

Eja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

I?jo

ins

291/

299/

grey

core

417/

472/

482

316

I02

178.

70–8

.50

67.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

317

I1.

74.

658.

774

7.2.

97M

(i)

cari

nate

dbo

wl

wit

hIr

onII

burn

ishe

dbr

own

offs

etsp

out

slip

318

I1.

948.

488.

843

5.2.

97L

beeh

ive-

shap

edja

rIr

onII

join

s15

1/32

2/bu

rnis

hed

,inc

ised

base

349/

477

ISS

319

I2.

2417

.18.

487

8.2.

97L

open

bow

lIr

onII

inci

sed

ISS

320

I00

118.

6–8.

456

8.2.

97L

high

-nec

ked

jar

Iron

II?

sam

eve

ssel

as99

?bu

rnis

hed

int./

ext.

321

I1.

5918

.05

8.30

78.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

16/

435

burn

ishe

d,i

ncis

edIS

S

322

I0.

829.

188.

823

8.2.

97L

beeh

ive-

shap

edja

rIr

onII

join

s15

1/31

8/(b

ody

frag

.)34

9/47

7

323

I2.

4917

.29

8.39

78.

2.97

Hhi

gh-n

ecke

dja

rIr

onII

324

I1.

765.

758.

685

8.2.

97fi

nebu

ffca

rina

ted

bow

lP

IRjo

ins

113,

371,

386,

relic

tgl

aze?

459

325

I2.

0117

.82

8.30

78.

2.97

oran

ge,

cari

nate

dbo

wl

PIR

join

s27

4,32

6,32

7,re

lict

glaz

e?fi

negr

it32

8,41

2

326

I1.

611

.62

8.33

78.

2.97

oran

ge,

cari

nate

dbo

wl

PIR

join

s27

4,32

5,32

7,re

lict

glaz

e?fi

negr

it32

8,41

2

327

I1.

1718

.96

8.50

68.

2.97

oran

ge,

cari

nate

dbo

wl

PIR

join

s27

4,32

5,32

6,re

lict

glaz

e?fi

negr

it32

8,41

2

328

I1.

9516

.12

8.55

68.

2.97

oran

ge,

cari

nate

dbo

wl

PIR

join

s27

4,32

5,32

6,re

lict

glaz

e?fi

negr

it32

7,41

2

329

I1.

4618

.58.

277

8.2.

97C

(i)

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

330

I2.

5616

.82

8.57

68.

2.97

M(i

)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

relic

tre

dsl

ip?

74


331

I2.

5417

.95

8.19

78.

2.97

M(i

)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

332

I1.

6716

.18

8.51

68.

2.97

M(i

)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

red

-bro

wn

pain

tex

t.(c

ross

-hat

ch)

333

I2.

5717

.38

8.37

78.

2.97

Gcu

pIr

onI

join

s10

6/10

8

334

I1.

1615

.88.

576

8.2.

97A

(i)

stra

ight

-nec

ked

jar

Wad

iSu

q

335

I2.

4516

.97

8.50

68.

2.97

A(i

i)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qun

even

lyfi

red

:gr

eyco

rean

dsm

udgi

ng;s

trin

g-cu

tba

se

336

I1.

7618

.07

8.30

78.

2.97

Gja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

I?jo

ins

389

337

I2.

417

.38.

437

8.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

338

I0.

059.

028.

536

8.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

339

I1.

0818

.33

8.58

68.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

340

I0.

985.

528.

76?

8.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

341

I0.

556.

188.

77?

8.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

red

slip

ext.?

342

I2.

4517

.48.

377

8.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

343

I1.

586.

428.

71?

8.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

344

I0.

8411

.52

8.36

78.

2.97

A(i

i)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qsl

ight

lygr

eyco

re,

stri

ng-c

utba

se

345

I2.

5217

.88

8.35

78.

2.97

A(i

i)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qpr

omin

ent

rilli

ngfr

ompo

tter

’sw

heel

,ext

.;st

ring

-cu

tba

se

346

I1.

7111

.45

8.39

78.

2.97

A(i

i)lid

frag

men

tW

adi

Suq

grey

core

347

I0.

9215

.18.

387

8.2.

97G

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onI?

join

s36

6

348

I1.

575.

538.

65?

8.2.

97F

open

bow

lIr

onI?

349

I0.

465.

38.

76?

8.2.

97L

beeh

ive-

shap

edja

rIr

onII

join

s15

1/31

8/bu

rnis

hed

,inc

ised

rim

322/

349/

477

ISS

350

I00

098.

64–8

.50

68.

2.97

Ica

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

relic

tbr

own

slip

?

351

I0.

486.

038.

76?

8.2.

97B

clos

edbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

471;

sam

epe

ndan

tlo

ops

and

vess

elas

269/

479

fain

tly

inci

sed

rim

352

I2.

5717

.34

8.37

78.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

83

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

75

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

353

I1.

2317

.95

8.47

?8.

2.97

O(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

382

hand

mad

e,fi

nger

prin

td

ecor

atio

non

exte

rior

rim

and

base

354

I2.

5717

.15

8.40

78.

2.97

A(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

355

I1.

453.

998.

734

8.2.

97N

lidIr

onII

?

356

I4.

961.

588.

68?

8.2.

97sa

ndy

bod

ysh

erd

ofP

IRjo

ins

309/

381/

gree

ngl

aze

grit

ped

esta

lled

egg-

401;

sam

eve

ssel

shap

edbo

wl

as39

1,40

5,41

8,43

2,49

6

357

I2.

2117

.01

8.31

78.

2.97

Eop

enbo

wl

Iron

I?sa

me

vess

elas

blac

kene

din

t.29

3?fr

omfi

ring

358

I1.

536.

138.

80?

8.2.

97A

(i)

gobl

etba

seW

adi

Suq

stri

ng-c

utba

se

359

I01

038.

70–8

.60

?8.

2.97

A(i

i)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qlig

htgr

eyco

re,

stri

ng-c

utba

se

360

I00

068.

80–8

.70

?8.

2.97

A(i

i)be

aker

/m

ini.

jar

wit

hW

adi

Suq

flar

ing

rim

361

I00

058.

70–8

.60

58.

2.97

Dcl

osed

bow

lW

adi

Suq

362

I00

058.

70–8

.60

58.

2.97

Jle

dge

rim

Iron

II?

363

I1.

89.

458.

576

8.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s49

0/49

1;fu

giti

vere

dpa

int.

may

join

375/

393

ext.

and

368/

460/

461

364

I1.

4119

.12

8.33

78.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

II?

join

s36

5re

lict

red

pain

tex

t.,ri

m

365

I1.

4119

.12

8.33

78.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

364

red

pain

tor

slip

366

I1.

8218

.54

8.37

78.

2.97

Gja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

Ijo

ins

347

367

I0.

974.

968.

526

9.2.

97M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

368

I1.

856.

458.

655

9.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s46

0/46

1;m

ayjo

in36

3/49

0/49

1an

d37

5/39

3

369

I0.

165.

986.

62?

9.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

crea

msl

ipex

t.?

370

I1.

196.

459.

675

9.2.

97A

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

76


371

I1.

736.

28.

675

9.2.

97fi

nebu

ffca

rina

ted

bow

lP

IRjo

ins

113,

324,

386,

relic

tgl

aze?

459

372

I1.

157.

748.

526

9.2.

97L

high

-nec

ked

jar

Iron

II?

burn

ishe

d,e

xt.

and

int.

373

I1.

755.

68.

62?

9.2.

97fi

negr

eybo

ttle

neck

edja

rIr

onII

??jo

ins

374

relic

tbl

ack

pain

tgr

itan

dch

aff

374

I1.

326.

458.

625

9.2.

97fi

negr

eybo

ttle

neck

edja

rIs

lam

ic??

join

s37

3re

lict

blac

kpa

int

grit

and

chaf

f

375

I1.

027.

348.

665

9.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s39

3;m

ayjo

in36

3/49

0/49

1an

d36

8/46

0/46

1

376

I1.

535.

68.

685

9.2.

97A

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

slig

htly

grey

core

377

I0.

47.

028.

616

9.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

378

I0.

94.

078.

507

9.2.

97F

cup

Iron

I?

379

I2.

1518

.46

8.45

79.

2.97

A(i

ii)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

380

I1.

077.

348.

637

9.2.

97O

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

join

s39

9re

dpa

int

ext./

int.

381

I1.

386.

238.

645

9.2.

97sa

ndy

base

ofpe

des

talle

dP

IRjo

ins

309/

356/

gree

ngl

aze

grit

egg-

shap

edbo

wl

401;

sam

eve

ssel

as39

1,40

5,41

8,43

2,49

6

382

I2.

2218

.19

8.33

79.

2.97

O(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIjo

ins

353

hand

mad

e

383

I1.

147.

428.

59?

9.2.

97A

(ii)

gobl

etba

seW

adi

Suq

stri

ng-c

utba

se

384

I1.

765.

778.

655

9.2.

97N

cari

nate

dbo

wl

Iron

II

385

I1.

25.

828.

65?

9.2.

97A

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

386

I0.

515.

658.

545

9.2.

97fi

nebu

ffca

rina

ted

bow

lP

IRjo

ins

113,

324,

371,

relic

tgl

aze?

459

387

I0.

575.

528.

545

9.2.

97M

(i)

open

bow

lIr

onII

hand

mad

e

388

I0.

845.

868.

61?

9.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s42

9sl

ippe

dan

d/

orbu

rnis

hed

389

I1.

918

.32

8.23

89.

2.97

Gja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

I?jo

ins

336

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

77

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

390

I0.

6510

.25

8.59

69.

2.97

A(i

i)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qgr

eyco

re,s

trin

g-cu

tba

se

391

I1.

755.

98.

635

9.2.

97sa

ndy

bod

ysh

erd

ofP

IRsa

me

vess

elas

gree

ngl

aze

grit

ped

esta

lled

egg-

309/

356/

381/

shap

edbo

wl

401,

405,

418,

432,

496

392

I1.

228.

048.

526

9.2.

97A

(i)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

393

I1.

8910

.18.

486

9.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s37

5;m

ayjo

in36

3/49

0/49

1an

d36

8/46

0/46

1

394

I0.

810

.46

8.52

69.

2.97

A(i

i)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qst

ring

-cut

base

395

I01

098.

30–8

.42

79.

2.97

C(i

)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

410

396

I01

088.

70–8

.60

59.

2.97

A(i

)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

397

I0.

848.

718.

566

9.2.

97N

glob

ular

jar

wit

hIr

onII

blac

kpa

int/

slip

hori

zont

ally

-pie

rced

ext.?

lug

398

I1.

168.

528.

586

9.2.

97A

(ii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

join

s40

9gr

eyco

re

399

I0.

846.

648.

456

9.2.

97O

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

join

s38

0re

dpa

int,

int./

ext.

400

I00

058.

70–8

.60

?9.

2.97

Nop

enbo

wl

Iron

II

401

I1.

525.

18.

685

9.2.

97sa

ndy

bod

ysh

erd

ofP

IRjo

ins

309/

356/

gree

ngl

aze

grit

ped

esta

lled

egg-

381;

sam

eve

ssel

shap

edbo

wl

as39

1,40

5,41

8,43

2,49

6

402

I02

188.

50–8

.30

79.

2.97

A(i

)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qsa

me

vess

elas

grey

core

,fug

itiv

e26

4?re

dsl

ipin

t./ex

t.

403

I00

068.

70–8

.60

59.

2.97

A(i

ii)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

404

I01

078.

70–8

.60

59.

2.97

O(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

II

405

I1.

265.

898.

65?

9.2.

97sa

ndy

bod

ysh

erd

ofP

IRsa

me

vess

elas

gree

ngl

aze

grit

ped

esta

lled

egg-

309/

356/

381/

shap

edbo

wl

401,

391,

418,

432,

496

406

I00

078.

60–8

.50

69.

2.97

C(i

)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

431

407

I00

078.

60–8

.50

69.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

470

78


408

I01

098.

60–8

.50

68.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

409

I01

098.

60–8

.50

69.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

398

410

I01

098.

60–8

.50

69.

2.97

C(i

)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

395

411

I01

098.

60–8

.50

69.

2.97

Dop

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

412

I01

068.

70–8

.60

59.

2.97

fine

tan

cari

nate

dbo

wl

PIR

join

s27

4,32

5,32

6,ch

aff

327,

328

413

I00

058.

80–8

.70

49.

2.97

O(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

II

414

I01

068.

70–8

.60

9.2.

97B

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

fugi

tive

red

pain

tex

t.,to

ofa

int

toill

ustr

ate.

415

I01

058.

70–8

.60

59.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

II

416

I01

058.

70–8

.60

59.

2.97

A(i

i)sh

allo

wpl

ate/

bow

lW

adi

Suq

417

I01

058.

70–8

.60

59.

2.97

Eja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

Ijo

ins

291/

299/

grey

core

,31

5/47

2482

unev

enly

-fir

ed

418

I01

058.

70–8

.60

59.

2.97

sand

ybo

dy

sher

dof

PIR

sam

eve

ssel

asgr

een

glaz

egr

itpe

des

talle

deg

g-30

9/35

6/38

1/sh

aped

bow

l40

1,39

1,40

5,43

2,49

6

419

I0.

498.

768.

73?

5.2.

97A

(ii)

gobl

etba

seW

adi

Suq

slig

htgr

eyco

re,

stri

ng-c

utba

se

420

I02

128.

50–8

.35

75.

2.97

Jle

dge

rim

Iron

II?

421

I0.

254.

558.

98?

9.2.

97A

(i)

clos

edbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

464

422

I00

029.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

423

I00

079.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

Bja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qtr

aces

ofbl

ack

pain

t

424

I00

069.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

425

I01

089.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qun

even

lyfi

red

,sm

udgi

ngon

rim

426

I01

089.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

427

I01

089.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

428

I00

089.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

A(i

i)sh

allo

wpl

ate/

bow

lW

adi

Suq

ext.

ribb

ing,

light

grey

core

429

I01

089.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

388

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

79

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

430

I00

088.

80–8

.70

?5.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

431

I00

088.

80–8

.70

?5.

2.97

C(i

)op

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

406

432

I01

049.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

sand

ybo

wl

PIR

sam

eve

ssel

asre

lict

gree

ngl

aze

grit

309/

356/

381/

401,

391,

405,

418,

496

433

I01

089.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

Lhi

gh-n

ecke

dja

rIr

onII

burn

ishe

dgr

ey

434

I1.

928.

238.

803

5.2.

97E

bott

lene

ck/

-spo

utIr

onI

fria

ble,

blac

kene

dfr

ag.?

int.

435

I01

148.

60–8

.50

65.

2.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

16/

321

436

I01

148.

60–8

.50

65.

2.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIre

dpa

int

437

I2.

5714

.12

8.56

65.

2.97

Qca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

Ire

dsl

ipin

t./ex

t.,pl

um-c

olou

red

cros

s-ha

tch

dec

orat

ion

(ext

.ri

m),

rose

tte

patt

ern

(int

.bas

e)

438

I00

029.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

Iop

enbo

wl

Iron

II

439

I1.

718.

028.

73?

5.2.

97H

open

bow

lIr

onII

?bu

rnis

hed

ext.

440

I1.

276.

338.

973

5.2.

97gr

itty

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mim

port

from

join

s44

1,48

0re

dpa

int,

purp

lish-

Ind

iaor

geom

etri

cd

esig

nbl

ack

Bal

uchi

stan

?

441

I1.

887.

778.

87?

5.2.

97gr

itty

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mim

port

from

join

s44

0,48

0re

dpa

int,

purp

lish-

Ind

iaor

geom

etri

cd

esig

nbl

ack

Bal

uchi

stan

?

442

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97O

(ix)

open

bow

lIr

onII

?

443

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97B

open

bow

lW

adi

Suq

444

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

sam

eve

ssel

as79

and

118?

445

I?

?8.

5–8.

47

5.2.

97F

open

bow

lIr

onI?

446

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

sam

eve

ssel

asbr

own

slip

int./

450?

ext.

(fug

itiv

eon

int.

surf

ace)

80


447

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97M

(ii)

cari

nate

dbo

wl

Iron

IIsa

me

vess

elas

119

blac

kpa

int

ext.?

,w

avy

blac

klin

ein

t.ri

m

448

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97M

(i)

bow

lba

seIr

onII

join

s25

2;sa

me

red

slip

,bla

ckve

ssel

as18

9an

dpa

int

248

449

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97N

open

bow

lIr

onII

brow

nsl

ip

450

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

relic

tbr

own

slip

,in

t./ex

t.

451

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

452

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97M

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

red

-bro

wn

slip

int.

ext.,

relic

ton

int.

453

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97L

high

-nec

ked

jar

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

int./

ext.?

454

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97L

high

-nec

ked

jar

rim

Iron

IIjo

ins

239

burn

ishe

dex

t.

455

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIin

cise

dIS

Ssh

erd

456

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97K

(i)

beeh

ive-

shap

edja

rIr

onII

brow

nsl

ipin

t./ri

mex

t.in

cise

d,I

SS

457

II?

?8.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97L

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mIr

onII

inci

sed

ISS

458

I01

089.

0–8.

83

5.2.

97L

dec

orat

edbo

dy

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

ext.,

sher

din

cise

dIS

S

459

II01

088.

33–8

.23

e.se

ct.

5.2.

97fi

nebu

ffca

rina

ted

bow

lP

IRjo

ins

113,

324,

371,

relic

tgl

aze

386

460

I1.

766.

218.

526

10.2

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

368/

461;

may

join

363/

490/

491

and

375/

393

461

I1.

86.

298.

516

10.2

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

368/

460;

may

join

363/

490/

491

and

375/

393

462

I0.

544.

788.

467

10.2

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

463

I0.

745.

088.

466

10.2

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

81

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

464

I01

058.

50–8

.40

710

.2.9

7A

(i)

clos

edbo

wl

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

421

465

I1.

37.

428.

516

10.2

.97

A(i

)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

466

I1.

168.

788.

436

10.2

.97

A(i

)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qst

ring

-cut

base

467

I1.

565.

448.

516

10.2

.97

A(i

i)go

blet

base

Wad

iSu

qst

ring

-cut

base

468

I0.

925.

828.

13?

10.2

.97

A(i

)cu

pW

adi

Suq

469

I1.

465.

228.

51?

10.2

.97

A(i

ii)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q?fu

giti

vepl

um-

colo

ured

pain

t,ex

t.ri

m(z

ig-z

ag)

470

I0.

326.

788.

506

10.2

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

407

471

I0.

365.

368.

516

10.2

.97

Bcl

osed

bow

lW

adi

Suq

join

s35

1re

dpa

int,

pend

ant

loop

s,in

cise

dri

m

472

I1.

725.

848.

51?

10.2

.97

Eja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

I?jo

ins

291/

299/

grey

core

315/

417/

482

473

I01

058.

50–8

.40

710

.2.9

7L

high

-nec

ked

jar

Iron

II?

join

s29

6fu

giti

vebu

rnis

hing

,ext

.

474

I0.

786.

338.

546

10.2

.97

Lja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

II?

burn

ishe

din

t.,ex

t.

475

I0.

75.

518.

576

10.2

.97

Gop

enbo

wl

Iron

I?

476

I0.

955.

88.

497

10.2

.97

M(i

)ca

rina

ted

bow

lIr

onII

join

s73

red

pain

t(c

ross

-ha

tch

des

ign)

,ext

.

477

I1.

1811

.41

5.49

710

.2.9

7L

beeh

ive-

shap

edja

rIr

onII

join

s15

1/31

8/bu

rnis

hed

,inc

ised

322/

349

ISS

478

I1.

3806

8.42

710

.2.9

7fr

iabl

ebo

ttle

neck

edja

rla

teP

IRor

oran

geIs

lam

icgr

it

479

I0.

725.

68.

467

10.2

.97

Bcl

osed

bow

lW

adi

Suq

join

s26

9;sa

me

red

pain

t,pe

ndan

tve

ssel

as35

1/47

1lo

ops,

inci

sed

rim

480

I0.

8410

.75

8.58

610

.2.9

7gr

itty

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mim

port

from

join

s44

0,44

1re

dpa

int,

purp

lish-

Ind

iaor

geom

etri

cd

esig

nbl

ack

Bal

uchi

stan

?

481

I01

068.

60–8

.50

610

.2.9

7I

(ii)

open

bow

lIr

onII

482

I1.

796.

128.

526

10.2

.97

Eja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Iron

I?jo

ins

291/

299/

grey

core

315/

417/

472

82


483

I04

058.

23se

ct.

10.2

.97

M(i

)op

enbo

wl

Iron

IIbu

rnis

hed

slip

,cl

ean.

int./

ext.

484

I1.

76.

758.

933

10.2

.97

Fsp

out

frag

men

tIr

onI?

fria

ble

485

II4.

365.

288.

406

10.2

.97

Dop

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

486

I0.

8813

.97

8.65

?10

.2.9

7B

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

487

I1.

3717

.78.

784

10.2

.97

Bop

enbo

wl

Wad

iSu

q

488

I01

069.

2–9.

0?

10.2

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

q

489

I01

069.

20-9

.00

?10

.2.9

7M

(i)

cari

nate

dbo

wl

(bod

yIr

onII

fugi

tive

red

pain

tfr

ag.)

490

I1.

89.

458.

576

10.2

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

363/

491;

may

join

368/

460/

461

and

375/

393

491

I1.

89.

458.

576

10.2

.97

A(i

i)ja

rw

ith

flar

ing

rim

Wad

iSu

qjo

ins

363/

490;

may

join

368/

460/

461

and

375/

393

492

I01

–02

13–1

7su

rf.–

9.00

?10

.2.9

7B

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

grey

core

,red

pain

t

493

I01

–02

13–1

7su

rf.–

9.00

?10

.2.9

7B

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

brow

npa

int

int./

ext.

494

I01

–02

13–1

7su

rf.–

9.00

?10

.2.9

7A

(iii)

jar

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mW

adi

Suq

495

I01

099.

00–8

.80

310

.2.9

7L

base

Iron

II

496

I01

068.

70–8

.60

58.

2.97

sand

ybo

dy

sher

dof

PIR

sam

eve

ssel

asgr

een

glaz

egr

itan

dpe

des

talle

deg

g-30

9/35

6/38

1/ch

aff

shap

edbo

wl

401,

391,

405,

418,

432

497

II05

08–0

9?

628

.1.9

7O

(viii

)bo

dy

sher

dof

jar

Iron

IIjo

ins

23;s

ame

wit

hfl

arin

gri

mve

ssel

as12

0/12

1

498

II5.

3310

.98.

33?

10.2

.97

Nop

enbo

wl

Iron

IId

usky

red

pain

ted

dec

orat

ion,

exte

rnal

rim

:pe

ndan

tst

ripe

sab

ove

hori

z.ba

nd

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

83

D. BARKER

Tabl

e29

.Con

t.

499

II5.

3310

.98.

33?

10.2

.97

Nop

enbo

wl

base

Iron

II

500

I00

039.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

O(i

i)op

enbo

wl

Iron

II

501

I00

039.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

M(I

)bo

dy

sher

dIr

onII

dus

kyre

dbu

rnis

hed

slip

,int

.an

dex

t.

502

I00

039.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

M(i

i)bo

dy

sher

dIr

onII

ext.

rid

ging

;dar

kgr

eysm

udge

din

t.;re

lict

red

slip

ext.

503

I00

039.

00–8

.80

35.

2.97

Nbo

dy

sher

dIr

onII

relic

tbr

own

slip

int.?

84

Table 30. Morphological database showing the discreetshape divisions for all major periods, and the rim andbase diameter (where applicable) for the sherds.

Vessel Type Reg No (SP) Rim/Basediameter

Wadi Suq period sherds

1 (a) (i): Open 26 22?bowls, tapered rims 31 indeterminate

34 1435 2338 1839 1246 16

414 10

1 (a) (ii): Open 30 18bowls, simple 32 22rounded rims 135

281 6395/410 13?443 8485 12487 12?

1 (a) (iii): Open 24 16bowls, rounded 27 14rims, thickened 354 14

1 (a) (iv): Open 183 12bowls, flattened 220 10rims, simple or 272/304 16thickened 329 20

406/431 13.5411 6

1 (b) (i): Closed 269/479, 351/ 14bowls/bowls with 471incurving rims, 294 12tapered

1 (b) (ii): Closed 33 20bowls/bowls with 37 16incurving rims, 41 12simple rounded rims 44 18

45 14361 8

1 (b) (iii): Closed 43bowls/bowls with 47 18incurving rims, 421/464 26thickened

2: Cup 468 4.5

3: Goblet Bases 1 5.52 indeterminate3 5?4 6


5 4.5?6 4.57 68 5

44278 5282 5.5335 6344 5.5345 6355358 7?359 6.5383 4.5390 5394 6.5419 5466 5467 5.5

4 (a) (i): Jars with 262/263 10flaring rims, simple 290 6tapered lips 360 10?

388/429 6

4 (a) (ii): Jars with 28 10flaring rims, 229 7rounded lips 261 16

264/402 12277 8279 10286 7295 9422 10

4 (a) (iii): Jars with 20 16flaring rims, 288/289 26externally 339 16thickened/rolled, 343 24globular (domestic 368/460/461 22storage?) jars 375/393 22

379 16

4 (a) (iv): Jars with 9/22 18flaring rims, 10 18externally 11 11thickened/rolled, 12/21 14other (funerary?) 13 14jars 15 24

16/321/435 2417 1818 819 22?29 24

142 20?267 24?268 8?

85

273 10284 9285 10302 11303 12306/307 18337 20338 8340 10341 10342 16363/490/491 11.5369 24370 12376 18377 22385 8392 30396 10398/409 9403 10407/470 8?408 16423 10424 24425 14426 18427 14430 14462 10463 10465 8469 11486 10488 18493 12?494 10?

4 (a) (v): 58 16Miscellaneous jars 59/60/61 16with flaring rims 280 12

492 indeterminate

4 (b): Straight- 334 8necked jar

5: Shallow bowls/ 56 14plates 416 10

428 16

6 (a): Miscellaneous 49 N/Adecorated body 50sherds 51

525354

Table 30. Cont.

D. BARKER

Table 30. Cont.


6 (b): Miscellaneous 25 8bases 57 indeterminate

213 indeterminate

6 (c): Handle 346 N/Afragment

6 (d): Spout 312 N/A

2. Iron Age I sherds

1 (a): Bowls with 42 15simple rounded 313 15rims

1 (b): Bowls with 293/357 16flattened rims 305 8

348 24445 20475 12

1 (c): Bowl with 107 10everted rim

1 (d): Miscellaneous 66 6.5bowl base

2: Cups 378 8106/108/333 8 (RD), 4

(BD)

3 (a): Jars with 291/299/315/ 11?simple flaring rims 417/472/482

336/389 9347/366 8.5?

3 (b): High-necked 198 6jar

3 (c): Jar with 434 N/Abottleneck? (orspout?)

4: Miscellaneous 484 N/Aspout fragment

3. Iron Age II sherds

1(a) (i): Open 26bowls, carinated 36 10

72 12 (RD), 6(BD)

73/476 12 (RD), 6(BD)

78 1079 2087 1495 22

118 15

86

119 10123 18125 15? (RD), 7?

(BD)126/232 18127 10139 10181 12330 12331 12332 12350 15444 15447 10 (RD), 5

(BD)

1 (a) (ii): Carinated 70 5bowl bases 74 7(miscellaneous) 125 7

384 6

1 (a) (iii): 83/352 11.5 (RD), 7.5?Undulating profile (BD)

1 (b): Open bowls, 77 indeterminatespouted 367 indeterminate

1 (c): Open bowls, 75 indeterminatecarinated and 300 11 (RD), 6spouted 317 (BD)

1 (d): Open bowls, 69 11? (RD), 7?tapered lips (BD)

81 14 (RD), 6?(BD)

143 8188 14234 10308 14 (RD), 7

(BD)400 14438 18?483 12498 14

1 (e): Open bowls, 71 12simple rounded 100 8lips 102 8

128 6130 14141 14194 8238 16316 10319 22380/399 12404 8.5439 16 (RD), 18

(BD)


449 8451 14

1 (f) (i): Open 80/275 20bowls, incurving 86 14?rims, tapered lips 94 18

98 14117/195/225 20122 12124 12129 14131 14187 10192 14201 10207 16219/254 18241 14243 16260 10436 14446 14450 14452 indeterminate

1 (f) (ii): Open 259 12bowls, incurving 287 9 (RD), 7rims, rounded lips (BD)

353/382 13 (RD), 8.5(BD)

387 11 (RD), 6.5?(BD)

415 20442 14500 12 (RD), 8?

(BD)

1 (f) (iii): Open 189 20 (RD), 6bowl, incurving (BD)rim, diagonally- 252/448 20offset lip

1 (g): Open bowls, 40 23miscellaneous 180 24flattened rims 184 10

186 14193 18215 24227 8271 9481 8

1 (h): Miscellaneous 276 7.5?open bowl bases 499 7

2: Cups 84 8 (RD), 6?(BD)

87

85 8 (RD), 4?(BD)

364/365 10

3 (a) (i): 99 8Miscellaneous 101 8high-necked jars 153 7.5

182 10?196 8228 10239/454 8270 6296/473 9297 6320 8323 6.5372 10433 8453 8474 8.5

3 (a) (ii): 67 N/AMiscellaneous high- 68 N/Anecked jar body 115 N/Asherds

3 (b) (i): Jar with 14 4flaring rim, taperedlip

3 (b) (ii): Jars with 23 8flaring, rounded 111 10rims 120/121 12

182190 10413 8?

3 (b) (iii): Jars with 174 10?flaring, flattened 224 14rims 230 6

247 8457 8

3 (b) (iv): Jar with 373/374 4bottleneck

3 (c) (i): Globular 258 7 (BD)jar with nose lugs

3 (c) (ii): Globular 397 N/Ajar with nose lugs,body sherd

3 (d) (i): Beehive- 151/348/322/ 6.5 (RD),14shaped jars, vessels 349/477 (BD),and/or rims 152/231/240 6 (RD),11

(BD)456 7

Table 30. Cont.

D. BARKER

Table 30. Cont.


3 (d) (ii): Beehive- 199 12shaped jars, bases 212 17.5?

221 13.5

3 (e): Miscellaneous 105 8jar bases 109 8

4 (a): Miscellaneous 48 N/A (all)body sherds 55

7682

103110138144/146145147148149154157158160162164166167168169170171172173176/178177191197200/202203204205209210211/214217218223226233235236237

88

242244245246249250256265266455458489497501502503

4 (b): Miscellaneous 104 8bases 140 8?

179 6?248 6?298 4?495 10

4 (c): Spouts 88 N/A (all)91

116135136

4 (d): Lugs 89 N/A (all)90

132133159216222

4 (e): Handles and 92 N/A (all)lids 150

155355

5. Ledge rims 636465

314362

4. Iron Age III sherds

1 (a): Carinated 437 4bowl base

1 (b): Bowl with S- 112/208 20shaped flaring rim

1 (c): Bowl with 253 11.5tapered rim


1 (d): Bowl with 114 16rounded rim

2. Decorated body 257 N/Asherd (jar)

tomb’s usage were the late Wadi Suq (III/IV) periods and the Iron II period.

Final RemarksThe fragmentary nature of the ceramic ma-terial did not entirely detract from the in-formation obtainable from the Sharm as-semblage. Whilst parallels in the OmanPeninsula placed the tomb in its localisedcontext, comparisons with ceramics as farabroad as Iran and Bahrain indicate thetruly diverse nature of the artefacts that be-lies the tomb’s village setting. It is hopedthat the material may now be looked uponas a solid source of useable information onsecond- and first-millennium BC ceramics.

AcknowledgementsThe current paper grew out of the author’s fourth-year Honours dissertation supervised by Prof. D.T.Potts and Dr A. Betts in 1997. The author would liketo extend a debt of gratitude to Prof. Potts for the op-portunity to work in the U.A.E. and for his unfailingassistance during the study. The success of the seasonwould not have been possible without the generoussupport of HH Sheikh Hamad bin-Mohammad al-Sharqi, Supreme Council Member and Ruler of Fu-jairah. Thanks must also be extended to Mr A.K. al-Shamsi, Director of Antiquities, Mr Salah Ali Hassan,Archaeologist of Fujairah Museum and Mr Mo-hammad, Secretary of the Museum, for their assist-ance. Dr C. Nockolds, T. Romeo, A. Sikorski and I.Kaplin from the Electron Microscope Unit at the Uni-versity of Sydney are owed a great debt for assistingthe author in the analysis of the ceramics using elec-tron microscopy. The author is also indebted to H.Potts for draughting instruction, and M. Riley and K.Davis for assistance in the draughting of several pro-files. M. Ziolkowski is also to be thanked for her tire-less effort in providing all of the photographs.

References1. The Wadi Suq period phases used in this article

89

conform to the periodisation of Magee P, Mort-ensen A-M, Potts DT & Velde C. PreliminaryPhasing of Tell Abraq. Unpubl., 1994. The fourphases are as follows: Wadi Suq I: 2000–1900 BC;Wadi Suq II: 1900–1600 BC; Wadi Suq III: 1600–1400 BC; and Wadi Suq IV: 1400–1300 BC.

2. The Iron Age is dated as 1300–300 BC. See PottsDT, The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity, Vol. I: From Pre-history to the Fall of the Achaemenid Empire. Ox-ford: Clarendon Press, 1990. It consists of threedivisions: Iron I: 1300–1100/1000 BC; Iron II:1100/1000–600 BC; and Iron III: 600–300 BC.These phases represent a revision of the Rume-ilah sequence. See Magee P. The Chronology ofthe Southeast Arabian Iron Age. AAE 7: 1996:240–250, and Magee P. The Iranian Iron Age andthe Chronology of Settlement in SoutheasternArabia. Ir Ant 1997: 91–105.

3. An analysis of the Preislamique recent and Islamicmaterial has been undertaken by C. Petrie andappears elsewhere in this volume.

4. D. T. Potts and L. Weeks compiled the database.The author later added a small number ofsherds. The revised registration is reproduced inTable 29.

5. See C. Petrie’s article in this volume on the Preis-lamique recent and Islamic sherds.

6. Rice P. Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook. Chicagoand London: University of Chicago Press, 1987:292. See also Egloff BJ. A method for countingceramic rim sherds. American Antiquity 38/3:1973: 352.

7. Bishop R, Rands R & Holley G. Ceramic com-positional analysis in archaeological perspective.In: Schiffer MB, ed. Advances in ArchaeologicalMethod and Theory, Volume 5. New York: Aca-demic Press, 1982: 277.

8. The exact steps for the second method of samplepreparation are outlined in the author’s Honoursthesis. Barker DE. Sharm: A Typological and Scien-tific Analysis of Wadi Suq and Iron Age Period Ce-ramics from Fujairah, United Arab Emirates. Sydney:unpubl. Honours thesis, 1997: 58–80. The methodgenerally conforms to the procedure outlined byReed SJB. Electron Microprobe Analysis and Scan-ning Electron Microscopy in Geology. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1996: 177–187.

9. This situation is particularly true of the often ill-sorted Wadi Suq period fabrics. Velde C, pers.comm. 30/12/97.

10. Potts DT. A Prehistoric Mound in the Emirate ofUmm al-Qaiwain, U.A.E.: Excavations at Tell Abraqin 1989. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1990: Fig.87:8.

11. All references to the internal divisions of the

D. BARKER

Wadi Suq period are derived from Magee et al.Preliminary Phasing. Each phase, loci or squaredesignation is given a purity rating from 1 to 5,the former indicating the purest context.

12. Velde C. Preliminary Remarks on the SettlementPottery in Shimal. In: Schippmann K, HerlingA & Salles, J-F. Golf Archaologie: Mesopotamien,Iran, Kuwait, Bahrain, Vereinigte Arabische Emirateund Oman. Buch-am-Erlbach: Internationale Ar-chäologie, 1991: Fig. 8.8.

13. Magee et al. Preliminary Phasing.14. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 91.6, 91.7.15. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: 73, 77.16. Højlund F & Andersen H. Qala’at al-Bahrain, Vol.

I: The Northern City Wall and the Islamic Fortress.JASP, XXX: 1: 1994: 179, 264.

17. de Cardi B, Kennet D & Stocks RL. Five Thou-sand Years of Settlement at Khatt, U.A.E. PSAS24: 1994: 48, Fig. 6.21.

18. Frifelt K. On Prehistoric Settlement and Chron-ology of the Oman Peninsula. EW 25: 1975: Fig.22b, 27b.

19. Cleuziou S. The Second and Third Seasons ofExcavations at Hili 8. AUAE 2–3: 1978–79: Fig.36.5.

20. Højlund F. Failaka/Dilmun: The Second MillenniaSettlements, Vol. 2: The Bronze Age Pottery. JASP,XVII: 2: 1986: Fig. 79, 94. Zarins J. Eastern SaudiArabia and External Relations: Selected Ceramic,Steatite and Textual Evidence: 3500–1900 B.C. In:Frifelt K & Sørensen P, eds. South Asian Archae-ology 1985. London: Occasional Papers 4, CurzonPress, 1989: Fig. 14.13.

21. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 95.2.22. de Cardi B. Surface Collections from the Oman

Survey 1976. JOS 3/1: 1977: Fig. 1.4, 1.5.23. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 99.6.24. Velde, Preliminary Remarks: Fig. 9.1. Velde C. Die

Spatbronzezeitliche und Fruheisenzeitliche Siedlungund ihre Keramik in Shimal/Ras al-Khaimah (Verei-nigte Arabische Emirate). University of Gottingen:unpubl. MA thesis, 1992: Pl. 58, Dsa 01: 4.

25. Potts DT. Further Excavations at Tell Abraq: The1990 Season. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1991:Fig. 39.5.

26. Velde, Preliminary Remarks: 268.27. Velde, Preliminary Remarks: 272. Cf. Magee et

al. Preliminary Phasing.28. Potts, Further Excavations: Fig. 71.2.29. Franke-Vogt U. Area SY. In: Vogt B & Franke-

Vogt U, eds. Shimal 1985/1986: Excavations of theGerman Archaeological Mission in Ras al-Khaimah,U.A.E.: A Preliminary Report. Berlin: BBVO, 8:1987: Fig. 46.6.

30. Velde, Preliminary Remarks: 272.

90

31. Potts, Further Excavations: 60. Cf. Magee et al.Preliminary Phasing.

32. Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl 57.33. Cleuziou, The Second and Third Seasons: Fig.

36.5. Cleuziou S. Oman Peninsula in the EarlySecond Millennium B.C. In: Härtel H. SouthAsian Archaeology 1979. Berlin: Reimer, 1981: Fig.4.5.

34. Frifelt, On Prehistoric Settlement: Fig. 22b.35. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 84.9.36. Potts, Further Excavations: Fig. 71.6.37. Kennet D & Velde C. Third and early second-

millennium occupation at Nud Ziba, Khatt(U.A.E.). AAE 6: 1995: Fig. 10.29.

38. de Cardi B, Bell RD & Starling NJ. Excavationsat Tawi Silaim and Tawi Sa’id in the Sharqiyah,1978. JOS 5: 1979: Fig. 11.20.

39. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 80.11. Potts,Further Excavations: Fig. 71.3, 72.6.

40. de Cardi et al. Excavations at Tawi Silaim: 87, 88,89; Fig. 29.

41. de Cardi et al. Excavations at Tawi Silaim: 86–87.42. Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl. 62–64.43. Eg. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 87.11, 87.13,

95.8–12.44. Velde, Preliminary Remarks: 272. Cf. Magee et

al. Preliminary Phasing.45. Rice, Pottery Analysis: 129.46. Cleuziou, Oman Peninsula: 282. Mery S. Notes

on the Wadi Suq Pottery from Shimal. In: Vogt &Franke-Vogt, eds. Shimal 1985/1986: 99.

47. Eg. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 87.48. Donaldson P. Prehistoric Tombs of Ras al-

Khaimah. OA 24: 1984: 199.49. de Cardi B. The Grave Goods from Shimal Tomb

6, Ras al-Khaimah, U.A.E. In: Potts DT, ed. Arabythe Blest: Studies in Arabian Archaeology. Copen-hagen: CNIP, 7: 1988: 47.

50. Mery, Notes on the Wadi Suq Pottery: 99.51. Cleuziou, Oman Peninsula: 282.52. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: 61.53. Cited in Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: 61.54. Franke-Vogt U & Velde C. The Pottery. In: Vogt &

Franke-Vogt, eds. Shimal 1985/1986: Fig 43.2,43.10. Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl 62: Dst01.1, 11; Pl. 64: Fst 06.3.

55. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 95.8.56. Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl. 62: Dst 01.1.57. Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl. 62: Dst 01.11,

Ost 02.1.58. See Rice, Pottery Analysis: 129.59. de Cardi, The Grave Goods: Fig. 6.43.60. al-Tikriti W. The Excavations at Bidya, Fujairah:

the 3rd and 2nd Millennia B.C. Culture. AUAE 5:1989: Pl 63.A-C, 64.A.


61. Højlund, Failaka/Dilmun: 76, 109, Fig. 282.62. Højlund, Failaka/Dilmun: 76, 109, 159.63. Mughal M. The Dilmun Burial Complex at Sar: The

1980–92 Excavations in Bahrain. State of Bahrain:Ministry of Information, Directorate of Archae-ology and Museums, 1983: Fig. 20.2, 20.5, 20.7.

64. Mughal, The Dilmun Burial Complex: 93, Fig. 20.7.65. Højlund, Failaka/Dilmun: Fig. 248.66. Højlund, Failaka/Dilmun: 109, 159. Cf. the dif-

ferent chronology of Højlund F. The Chronologyof City II and III at Qal’at al-Bahrain. BTAA:1986: 224. The slight differences do not, however,negate the Wadi Suq III date of either SP-279 orSP-286.

67. Potts, Further Excavations: Fig. 69.1, 69.2.68. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 90.8.69. Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl. 39: Dvo 05.2.70. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 76.2.71. Frifelt, On Prehistoric Settlement: Fig. 27a.72. Kennet & Velde, Third and early second-millen-

nium occupation: Fig. 8, 9.73. Kennet & Velde, Third and early second-millen-

nium occupation: Fig. 9.23.74. al-Tikriti, The Excavations at Bidya: 110, Pl. 89E.75. Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl. 35: Skr 10.1.76. Højlund & Andersen, Qala’at al-Bahrain: Fig. 730.77. Højlund, Failaka/Dilmun: Fig. 276.78. Velde, Preliminary Remarks: Fig. 8.11. Velde, Die

Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl. 51: Dss 01.8. Franke-Vogt & Velde, The Pottery: Fig. 44.2.

79. Frifelt, On Prehistoric Settlement: Fig. 20a, 20b,21a.

80. Cleuziou, The Second and Third Seasons: Fig.35.1–3.

81. For the effect of firing atmosphere on the finalcolour of a vessel, see Rice, Pottery Analysis: 335,344.

82. Rice, Pottery Analysis: 80–81, 334–335.83. Cited in Magee P. Cultural Change, variability and

settlement in southeastern Arabia from 1400 to 250BC: The view from Tell Abraq. Sydney: unpubl.PhD thesis, 1995: 279–280.

84. The correlation of each sherd with the fabricgroup to which it belongs is reproduced in theregistration database (Table 29). References tothe shape and sorting of grains are standardisedusing ‘Powers’ Scale of Roundness’ and apebble-sorting chart, derived from Orton C,Tyers P & Vince A. Pottery in Archaeology. Cam-bridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995: 239.The latter operates on a scale from 1 to 5 with ascore of 1 indicating very poorly-sorted grains interms of both size and distribution. The poresare described with respect to a shape chart de-rived from Rice, Pottery Analysis: 350.

91

85. It is hoped that the author will publish Mereshidin the near future.

86. Cf. the large proportion of painted sherds in theolder tombs excavated at Shimal and Ghalilah.See Donaldson, Prehistoric Tombs: Figs 3–10.Vogt B & Kastner J-M. Shimal Tomb SH 102. In:Vogt & Franke-Vogt, Shimal 1985/1986: Fig. 12,13, 23, 24, 32. Also refer to Frifelt, On PrehistoricSettlement: Fig. 20, 22, 23, 26, 27, 71, for paintedvessels from tomb assemblages in the Wadis Suqand Sunaysl.

87. See the discussion of the dating of Sharm in theconclusion to this study.

88. de Cardi, The Grave-Goods: 46, Figs 5–10.89. Franke-Vogt & Velde, The Pottery: 77–78, Fig.

44.6.90. Potts, Further Excavations: Fig. 71.2.91. Frifelt, On Prehistoric Settlement: Fig. 29d.92. Potts, Further Excavations: 57.93. Potts, Further Excavations: 42.94. de Cardi B. Ras al-Khaimah: Further Archae-

ological Discoveries. Antiquity 50: 1976: Fig. 4.31,4.34, 4.37.

95. See for instance, Mery, Notes on the Wadi SuqPottery: Fig. 51.15.

96. Magee, The Chronology: 249.97. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:

276, 279.98. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:

261.99. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:


153.101. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 134.4.102. Vogt B. Asimah: An Account of a Two Months’

Rescue Excavation in the Mountains of Ras al-Khaimah, United Arab Emirates. Dubai: Shell Mar-kets Middle East, 1994: Fig. 40.5.

103. Donaldson, Prehistoric Tombs: Fig. 21.80, 21.88.104. Magee P & Carter R. Agglomeration and Region-

alism: Southeastern Arabia between 1400 and1100 BC. AAE 10: 1999: Fig. 9.6.

105. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: 103–105.106. See Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 129.107. Magee and Carter. Agglomeration and Region-

alism: Fig. 9.11.108. Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl. 71: Efl 01.3, 5.109. Vogt, Asimah: Fig. 41.7–9.110. Cuyler Young T. A Comparative Ceramic Chron-

ology for Western Iran, 1500–500 B.C. Iran III:1963: Fig. 8.1, 14.

111. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 93.3.112. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:

74.

D. BARKER

113. Potts, Further Excavations: Fig. 133. Cf. Magee etal. Preliminary Phasing.

114. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 15.7.115. Magee et al. Preliminary Phasing: Sq. III: 2.76–

2.56.116. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:





276. Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: 18, 100–101.121. de Cardi, Ras al-Khaimah: 219.122. See note 85.123. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:

72.124. Vogt, Asimah: 86.125. de Cardi, Ras al-Khaimah: 219.126. See for instance, Boucharlat R & Lombard P. The

Oasis of al-Ain in the Iron Age: Excavations atRumeilah 1981–1983, Survey at Hili 14. AUAE 4:1985 (Rumeilah); Cleuziou, The Second andThird Seasons (Hili 8); Potts, A Prehistoric Mound(Tell Abraq); Corboud P, Castella A-C, HapkaR & im-Obersteg P. Les tombes protohistoriques deBithnah, Fujairah, Emirats Arabes Unis. Mainz: vonZabern, 1996 (Bithnah); Lombard P, L’Arabie ori-entale a l’age du fer. Thesis submitted to the Uni-versity of Paris, 1985 (Bahrain), and CuylerYoung, A Comparative Ceramic Chronology(Hasanlu). All of these sites, and a number ofothers, provided ceramic parallels for the SharmIron II material on the basis of shape and decor-ation.

127. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: 49, dis-tinguish between ‘bols a carene’ and ‘bols a paroiondulee’. This division is not strictly followedfor the Sharm assemblage since some of thebowls fall in between these two categories.Consequently, reference to a ‘carination’ does notnecessarily imply a sharp disruption of the ves-sel’s profile, but may indicate more subtlecurves.

128. The accompanying illustrations are however, in-ternally coherent and pay heed to groupings ofthe various rim types together.

129. The current paper follows the revised Rumeilahsequence established by P. Magee who loweredthe dates in accordance with the Iranian chron-ology. In effect, the Rumeilah I phase issynchronised with the Iron II period, and phaseII can be correlated with the Iron III period. See

92

Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:152–90; Magee, The Chronology: 242–50; andMagee, The Iranian Iron Age: 92–105.

130. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:Fig. 7.9B, C, 7.23A.

131. de Cardi, Ras al-Khaimah: Fig. 4.33.132. de Cardi B. Further Archaeological Survey in

Ras al-Khaimah, U.A.E., 1977. OA 24: 1985: Fig.2.4.

133. ur-Rahman S. Report on Hili 2 Settlement Exca-vations: 1978–1979. AUAE 2–3: 1978–1979: Fig.8.3.

134. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: Pl.49.1, 17, 18, 20.

135. Cleuziou, The Second and Third Seasons: Fig.10.19.

136. de Cardi B, Collier S & Doe DB. Excavations andSurvey in Oman, 1974–1975. JOS 2: 1976: Fig.18.85, 86.

137. See Cleuziou S, Pottier MH & Salles J-F. FrenchArchaeological Mission: 1st Campaign, De-cember 1976/Februrary 1977. AUAE 1: 1976–1977: Fig. 10.10.

138. Unpublished, Fujairah Museum stores.139. ur-Rahman, Report on Hili 2: Fig. 4.2.140. Boucharlat R, ed. Archaeological Surveys and Exca-

vations in the Sharjah Emirate, 1990 and 1992: ASixth Interim Report. Lyon: GREMO, 1992: Fig.7.11. Cf. the carination of Fig. 7.6. Examples fromBuhais, dating to c.1000 BC, are displayed inSharjah Archaeological Museum (display case11, no. 2, 16).

141. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: Pl. 4.1–4.4.

142. Phillips CS. Wadi al-Qawr, Fashgha 1: The Exca-vation of a Prehistoric Burial Structure in Ras al-Khaimah, U.A.E., 1986. Edinburgh: 1987: Fig. 19.3.

143. Phillips, Wadi al-Qawr: 27, for ‘Grey Ware 1’.144. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: Pl. 1.4.145. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: Pl.

45.3.146. Magee P. Preliminary Report on the First Season of

Excavation at Muweilah, Sharjah, United ArabEmirates. Report prepared for Sharjah Archae-ological Museum: 1995: Fig. 10A.

147. Humphries J. Harvard Archaeological Survey inOman: Some Later Prehistoric Sites in the Sul-tanate of Oman. PSAS 4: 1974: Fig. 8.o, s.

148. Humphries, Harvard Archaeological Survey: 69.149. Boucharlat, Sixth Interim Report: Fig. 7.6.150. Potts, Further Excavations: Fig. 117.10.151. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: Pl. 1.4,

6.1.152. These include: Tell Abraq (Magee, Preliminary Re-

port: Fig. 4.9D), Shimal (de Cardi, Surface Collec-


tions: Fig. 2.24; Velde, Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl.73, Eso 03.3), and Site BB-4 in Oman (Humphries,Harvard Archaeological Survey: Fig. 6f).

153. Zagarell A. The First Millennium in the BakhtiariMountains. AMI 15: 1992: Fig. 7.19.

154. Zagarell, The First Millennium: 38.155. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: Pl.

58.5–7.156. Højlund & Andersen, Qala’at al-Bahrain: 476, Fig.

830, 2104.157. Humphries, Harvard Archaeological Survey: 74,

Fig. 11.c.158. Yule P & Kervran M. More than Samad in Oman:

Iron Age Pottery from Suhar and Khor Rori.AAE 4: 1993: Fig. 1.Gr S2114 DA 11143.

159. Potts, Further Excavations: Fig. 120.6.160. Højlund & Andersen, Qala’at al-Bahrain: Fig.

868.161. Højlund & Andersen, Qala’at al-Bahrain: Fig.

2104.162. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 136.11.163. Zagarell, The First Millennium: Fig. 9.5.164. Donaldson, Prehistoric Tombs: Fig. 19.7.165. Phillips, Wadi al-Qawr: Fig. 13.49.166. de Cardi B & Doe DB. Archaeological Survey in

the Northern Trucial States. EW 21: 1971: 286,Fig. 17.173.

167. The decoration is too abraded to depict on theillustration.

168. Yule P & Weisgerber G. Samad ash-Shan, Exca-vations of the Preislamic Cemeteries: Preliminary Re-port. Bochum: Selstverlag des DeutschenBergbaus-Museums, 1988: 21. Yule P. Exca-vations at Samad al-Shan, 1987–1991, Summary.PSAS 23: 1993: Fig. 5, ‘klein Flaschen’ and ‘Bal-samaria’. Weisgerber G. Aspects of Late Iron AgeArchaeology in Oman: The Samad Civilization.PSAS 12: 1982: 82.

169. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: Pl.47.1, 52.3.

170. Zagarell, The First Millennium: 38, Fig. 5.2.171. Magee, The Iranian Iron Age: 94–95.172. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: Pl.

50.1, 2, 3 etc.173. Potts, Further Excavations: Fig. 112.8.174. ur-Rahman, Report on Hili 2: 10 (middle).175. Lombard, L’Arabie orientale: Fig. 33.66–69.176. Ghirshman R. Fouilles de Sialk, pres de Kashan

1933, 1934, 1937, Vol. II. Serie ArcheologiqueTome V, Paris: Musee du Louvre: Pl. LXXXVII,S-1421.

177. Dyson RH Jr. Notes on Weapons and Chron-ology in Northern Iran around 1000 B.C. In: Mel-link MJ, ed. Dark Ages and Nomads, c.1000 B.C.:Studies in Iranian and Anatolian Archaeology. Is-

93

tanbul: Nederlands Historich-Archaeologish In-stituut, 1964: Fig. 4.12.

178. The tensile strength of this area, althoughshowing no signs of fracture, is potentially quitesmall, due to the limited solid clay support be-tween the two regions. Barker M, pers. comm.1997.

179. Potts, Further Excavations: 90, Fig. 120.15, 16.180. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: 107, Fig. 135.12, 136.8.

Cf. Boucharlat R, ed. Second Archaeological Surveyin the Sharjah Emirate, 1985: A Preliminary Report.Lyon: GREMO, 1985: Fig. 20.10, 15; 21.7.

181. Velde, Preliminary Remarks: Fig. 16.1–2. Velde,Die Spatbronzezeitliche: Pl. 71: Efl 04.1–2.

182. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: 112.183. Magee, Preliminary Report: 17.184. Magee, Preliminary Report: 16–17.185. See examples displayed in the Iron Age section

in the National Museum of Ras al-Khaimah.186. See examples displayed in Fujairah Museum.187. Magee P, Grave P, Barbetti M, Yu Z, Bailey G &

al-Tikriti WY. New evidence for specialised ce-ramic production and exchange in the south-eastern Arabian Iron Age. AAE 9: 1998: 239–240.

188. Magee et al. New evidence: 240–241. The PIXE-PIGME analysis carried out on the Sharm ce-ramics will be published in the near future.

189. Magee et al. New evidence: 242–343.190. Boucharlat R, ed. Archaeological Surveys and Exca-

vations in the Sharjah Emirate, 1988: A Fourth Pre-liminary Report. Lyon: GREMO, 1988: Fig. 13.5.

191. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: Pl. 4.4.192. de Cardi B. Survey in Ras al-Khaimah, U.A.E. In:

Boucharlat R & Salles J-F, eds. Arabie orientale:Mesopotamie et Iran meridional de l’age du fer audebut de la periode islamique. Paris: Editions Re-serche sur les Civilisations, Memoire 37, 1984:Fig. 5.7.

193. Goff C. Excavations at Baba Jan: The Pottery andMetals from Levels III and II. Iran 16: 1978: Fig.1.14.

194. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: Pl.49.1, 17.

195. de Cardi, Survey in Ras al-Khaimah: Fig. 2.1.196. Displayed in Fujairah Museum.197. Lombard, L’Arabie orientale: Fig. 91.235.198. ur-Rahman, Report on Hili 2: Fig. 6.199. Højlund & Andersen, Qala’at al-Bahrain: Fig. 881.200. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: Pl.

49.1, 2; 50.1–3.201. ur-Rahman, Report on Hili 2: Fig. 6. Cleuziou,

Pottier & Salles, French Archaeological Mission:12.

202. de Cardi, Survey in Ras al-Khaimah: Fig. 7.3,8.11.

D. BARKER

203. Lombard, L’Arabie orientale: Fig. 34.72–73.204. Magee et al. New evidence: 243. However, as the

authors assert, not all scholars agree on an IronAge date for these ceramics.

205. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 136.11.206. Boucharlat, Second Archaeological Survey: 55. De

Cardi B, pers. comm. February 1997 in relationto an ISS vessel from the Wadi al-Qawr housedin the National Museum of Ras al-Khaimah. SeePhillips, Wadi al-Qawr: Fig. 21.3 for this vessel.

207. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: 55.Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:215.

208. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: 55.209. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: 51.210. Boucharlat, Fourth Preliminary Report: Fig. 9.1, 3,

5.211. ur-Rahman, Report on Hili 2: 11, Fig. 8.3.212. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: Fig. 42,

Pl. 9.1–5.213. See Phillips, Wadi al-Qawr: 18, 27–28, Fig. 21.3, 6.

ISS beehive-shaped vessels from Fashgha 1 arealso displayed in the Iron Age section in the Na-tional Museum of Ras al-Khaimah.

214. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: 51.215. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: 51.216. Phillips, Wadi al-Qawr: Fig. 27–28.217. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: 51.

However, cf. Lombard, L’Arabie orientale: Fig.35.80–92 for a selection of incised ceramic vesselsbearing triangular motifs which point upwardsafter the fashion of soft stone. A lidded jar fromQidfa, which is displayed in Fujairah Museum,also possesses an upward-pointing radiating tri-angular motif similar to soft stone.

218. Corboud et al. Les tombes protohistoriques: Pl. 9.1–3.

219. de Cardi, Survey in Ras al-Khaimah: Fig. 6.220. ur-Rahman, Report on Hili 2: Fig. 8.3.221. Yule & Kervran, More than Samad: Fig. 8.71.222. Enault J-F. Fouilles de Pirak, Vol. II: Etude architec-

turale et figures. Paris: CNRS, 1979: Fig. 76. 418.223. See the article by M. Ziolkowski forthcoming

(AAE).224. Further Sharm soft stone fragments, which are

comparable to the ISS ceramics in terms of dec-oration and/or shape, include S-28, S-31, S-208/222, and S-323. The cross-hatch decoration andopen bowl shape of S-14 are very similar to SP-319. Few cross-hatch motifs appeared in the ISScorpus, although several examples include SP-210 (Fig. 34.13) and SP-155 (Fig. 39.7), the latterbeing a ceramic lid with incised strokes, andwhich is similar in shape to S-61.

94

225. Vogt B. The Umm an-Nar Tomb at Hili North: APreliminary Report on Three Seasons of Exca-vation, 1982–1984. AUAE 4: 1985: 30, Pl. 26.6–8.

226. de Cardi et al. Excavations and Survey: 119.227. The phenomenon of imitating earlier traditions

is not unknown in the Oman Peninsula. Con-sider the revival of lime-tempered Barbar vesselsin the form of ‘pseudo-Barbar’ ware in the firstmillennium. See Højlund & Andersen, Qala’at al-Bahrain: 204.

228. See Magee, The Chronology: 241.229. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: 112.230. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: Pl.

56.3.231. de Cardi, Ras al-Khaimah: Fig. 4.39.232. de Cardi, Further Archaeological Survey: Fig.

8.44, 8.46.233. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:

173–174, Fig. 6.9. Magee, The Iranian Iron Age:99–103, Fig. 3.5.

234. Zagarell, The First Millennium: 41, 45, 46, Fig.8.2, 5.

235. Goff C. Excavations at Baba Jan, 1968: Third Pre-liminary Report. Iran 7: 1970: 152.

236. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:Fig. 6.9.

237. Hansman J. An Aechaemenian Stronghold. ActaIranica 6: 1979: 298–299, 301, Fig. 3.3–5.

238. Goff, Baba Jan, 1968: 156, Fig. 8.11.239. Goff, Baba Jan, 1968: 152.240. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 137.4.241. Boucharlat & Lombard, The Oasis of al-Ain: Pl.

57.6, 7.242. Potts, A Prehistoric Mound: Fig. 136.9.243. Cf. Shimal Tomb SH 103, for instance. Its highly

decorated assemblage with strong affinities toUmm an-Nar period pottery indicated a date ofc.1800 BC, at least several hundred years prior tothe peak second-millennium usage of the tombat Sharm. See Vogt B & Velde C. Ghalilah TombSH 103. In: Vogt & Franke-Vogt, Shimal 1985/1986: 41, 43.

244. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:286, 336–337.

245. Magee, Cultural change, variability and settlement:287.

Address:Diane BarkerSchool of Archaeology A14The University of SydneyNSW 2006Australia

wadi suq and iron age period ceramics from sharm, fujairah (u.a.e.)

Documents