Mery Et Al 2017 Indus Salut Ceramics PDF

Copyrighted material - no unauthorized reproduction in any medium
Proceedings
of the
Seminar for Arabian Studies
Volume 47
2017
Papers from the fiftieth meeting of the

held at the British Museum, London,
29 to 31 July 2016
Archaeopress
Oxford
Orders for copies of this volume of the Proceedings and all back numbers should be sent to
Archaeopress Publishing Ltd, Gordon House, 276 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 7ED, UK.
Tel +44(0)1865-311914 Fax +44(0)1865-512231
e-mail info@archaeopress.com
http://www.archaeopress.com
For the availability of back issues see The British Foundation for the Study of Arabia’s website:
http://www.thebfsa.org/content/seminar-proceedings

c/o the Department of the Middle East, The British Museum
London, WC1B 3DG, United Kingdom
e-mail psas@thebfsa.org
The British Foundation for the Study of Arabia: www.thebfsa.org
The Steering Committee of the Seminar for Arabian Studies is currently made up of fifteen academic
members. The Editorial Committee of the Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies includes seven
additional members as follows:
STEERING COMMITTEE EDITORIAL COMMITTEE: ADDITIONAL MEMBERS

Dr Derek Kennet (Chairperson) Professor Alessandra Avanzini
Dan Eddisford (Secretary) Professor Soumyen Bandyopadhyay
Dr Robert Wilson (Treasurer) Dr Ricardo Eichmann
Dr Janet Starkey (Editor of PSAS) Professor Clive Holes
Dr Harry Munt (Assistant Editor of PSAS) Professor Khalil Al-Muaikel
Dr Julian Jansen van Rensburg Professor Daniel T. Potts
(Assistant Editor of PSAS) Professor Christian J. Robin
Professor Rob Carter
Dr Nadia Durrani
Dr Orhan Elmaz
Michael C.A. Macdonald
Dr Tim Power
Dr St John Simpson
Dr Lucy Wadeson
Professor Lloyd Weeks
Dr Iwona Zych
Opinions expressed in papers published in the Proceedings are those of the authors and are not
necessarily shared by the Editorial Committee.
The Proceedings is produced in the Times Semitic New font, which was designed by Paul Bibire for the
Seminar for Arabian Studies.
© 2017 Archaeopress Publishing, Oxford, UK.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted,
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the
prior permission of the publisher.
ISSN 0308-8421
ISBN 978-1-78491-520-9
ISBN 978-1-78491-521-6 (e-pdf)
The Steering Committee of the Seminar for Arabian Studies is most grateful to the
MBI Al Jaber Foundation
for its continued generosity in making a substantial grant towards the running costs of
the Seminar and the editorial expenses of producing the Proceedings.
Contents
Guidelines and Transliteration�� iii
Editors’ Foreword��v
Textiles and personal adornment in the Arabian Peninsula: papers from the special session of the Seminar for
Arabian Studies held on 29 July 2016��vii
Aisa Martinez
In memoriam Beatrice Eileen de Cardi OBE FSA FBA, 1914–2016��xi
In memoriam Ernie Haerinck, 1949–2016��xix
In memoriam Maurizio Tosi, 1944–2017�� xxiii
Pearl merchants of the Gulf and their life in Bombay��1

Saif Albedwawi
An integrated approach to surveying the archaeological landscapes of Yemen��9

Rebecca Banks, Michael Fradley, Jérémie Schiettecatte & Andrea Zerbini
Traces of date palm in an early third-millennium BC tomb in Zukayt, al-Dākhiliyyah, Sultanate of Oman (poster)��25
Eugenio Bortolini, Juan José García-Granero & Marco Madella
A niche construction approach to vegetation community development in the south-west Arabian Neolithic:
preliminary results��31
Abigail F. Buffington, Michael J. Harrower, Joy McCorriston & Eric A. Oches
A Crowded Desert: early results from survey and excavation of nomadic sites in north-west Qatar (poster)��43
Jose C. Carvajal Lopez, Kirk Roberts, Gareth Rees, Frank Stremke, Anke Marsh,
Laura Morabito, Andrew Bevan, Mark Altaweel, Rodney Harrison, Manuel Arroyo-Kalin, Robert Carter,
Richard Fletcher & Faisal Abdullah al-Naimi
Excavation at the Bronze Age tower of al-Khutm (Bāt, Sultanate of Oman): a preliminary evaluation of the
monument (poster)��51
Maurizio Cattani, Hassan al-Lawati, Sultan al-Bakri, Maurizio Tosi, Enzo Cocca, Alessandro Armigliato,
Simone Mantellini & Giacomo Vinci
Excavations in Area 2A at Sarūq al-Дadīd: Iron Age II evidence of copper production and ceremonial activities��57
Fernando Contreras Rodrigo, Bernardo Vila, Pedro Albarracín, Rashad Mohammed Bukhash,
Sheikha Obaid Al Abbar, Mansour Boraik Radwan Karim & Hassan Mohammed Zein
Zooarchaeological analysis of two dromedaries (Camelus dromedarius L.) from late Iron Age graves in
Wādī ΚUyūn at Sināw (al-Sharqiyyah, Sultanate of Oman) (poster)��67
Antonio Curci & Elena Maini
New Iron Age funerary data from collective graves in Wādī FizΉ, northern Oman��75
Bleda S. Düring, Eric Olijdam & Sam A. Botan
An archaeological overview of the landscape of the al-Duqm development area, Sultanate of Oman (poster)��93
Francesco Genchi, Gabriele Martino, Maria Pia Maiorano, Roman Garba & Waleed Hamad Al-Ghafri
The discovery of a new Iron Age ritual complex in central Oman: recent excavations near Ādam��101
Guillaume Gernez, Mathilde Jean & Anne Benoist
Pre-Islamic ‘Дamāsah’ verses from north-eastern Jordan: a new Safaitic poetic text from Marabb al-ShurafāΜ,
with further remarks on the ΚĒn ΚAvdat inscription and KRS 2453��117
Ahmad Al-Jallad
Incense and imagery: mapping agricultural and water management systems on the island of Socotra, Yemen��129
Julian Jansen van Rensburg & Kristen Hopper
Snake decorations on the Iron Age pottery from Sarūq al-Дadīd: a possible ritual centre?��139
Steven Karacic, Mansour Boraik, Hussein Qandil & Hélène David-Cuny
Chronology of stucco production in the Gulf and southern Mesopotamia in the early Islamic period��151
Agnieszka Lic
Indus potters in central Oman in the second half of the third millennium BC. First results of a technological
and archaeometric study��163
Sophie Méry, Michele Degli Esposti, Dennys Frenez & Jonathan Mark Kenoyer
First campaign of survey and excavations at ShiyāΜ (Sūr, Sultanate of Oman)��185

Olivia Munoz, Valentina Azzarà, Pierre-Henri Giscard, Raphaël Hautefort, Fanny San Basilio & Léa Saint-Jalm
The expression h-rhwy in Thamudic B inscriptions from north-west Arabia��193

Jérôme Norris
Al-ΚAyn Oases Mapping Project: Jīmī Oasis (poster)��209

Timothy Power, Peter Sheehan, Fatima Nasser Al Mansoori, Maitha Saleh Al Mansoori, Mai Hareb Al Mansoori &
Mariam Nabeel Mohammed
The development of complexity at third-millennium BC al-Khashbah,Sultanate of Oman: results of the first two
seasons, 2015 and 2016��215
Conrad Schmidt & Stephanie Döpper
The bitumen imports at Tell Abraq — tracing the second-millennium BC bitumen industry in south-east Arabia��227
Thomas Van de Velde, Peter Magee & Frederic Lynen
Embroidery from the Arabian Peninsula��239

Gillian Vogelsang-Eastwood
An eighteenth-century merchantman off the Red Sea coast of Saudi Arabia��253

Chiara Zazzaro, Romolo Loreto & Chiara Visconti
Papers read at the Seminar for Arabian Studies held at the British Museum, London, on 29 to 31 July 2016 ��265
Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 47 (2017): 163–184
Indus potters in central Oman in the second half of the third millennium BC.
First results of a technological and archaeometric study
Sophie Méry, Michele Degli Esposti, Dennys Frenez & Jonathan Mark Kenoyer
Summary
The nature of cultural interactions between the Indus Civilization and Magan is explored in this paper. The presence of Indus potters
in eastern Arabia can now be demonstrated based on a combined technological and petrographical study of a range of pottery types
found at the site of Salūt ST1 (Sultanate of Oman). Similar discoveries from other Umm an-Nar sites in the Sultanate of Oman
and the UAE supports the hypothesis that Indus communities were living alongside the Magan people at Umm an-Nar sites more
extensively than previously thought.
Keywords: eastern Arabia, Salūt, Hīlī, technology, pottery, potters
The Indus Civilization and the Oman trading jars and the distinctive long biconical beads and
peninsula: an overview bleached carnelian beads (Méry 1991; 2000; Blackman
& Méry 1999; Méry & Blackman 1999; 2006; Frenez,
Various regional craft traditions and styles developed in forthcoming).
the Indus basin (Fig. 1) from the Chalcolithic and early To date, the earliest evidence of Indus goods traded
Harappan culture into the Indus Civilization during the to south-east Arabia dates to c.2600–2400 BC and is seen
second half of the third millennium BC (Kenoyer 2001; in the well-dated pottery of Hīlī 8 Period IIc2 (Cleuziou
Vidale 2000; Méry et al. 2007; Possehl 2007: 40–42). 1989: pl. 24/5), Umm an-Nar Period II (Frifelt 1995: 62–
Strong continuities can be seen in many of these crafts, 88), and RaΜs al-Jinz RJ-2 Period II (Méry 2000: 228).
particularly that of pottery production (Bouquillon et al. Based on the variety and quantity of Indus artefacts found
1996), which is remarkable in terms of style (by ‘style’ in Umm an-Nar period tombs, the peak of exchange
we mean not only forms and decoration but techniques between the Indus region and the Oman peninsula seems
as well; see Lemonnier 1992). At the same time, new to have occurred from c.2400 to c.2100 BC. This trade,
and elaborate pyro-technologies emerged around the however, continued until the very end of the Indus period
mid-third millennium BC, such as faience and stoneware at the beginning of the second millennium BC, according
for the production of bangles used by elites in the major to the finds at tomb Hīlī N, the Umm an-Nar tombs at Tell
cities (Blackman & Vidale 1992; Halim & Vidale 1984; Abraq (Tall Abraq) and Shimāl (Potts 2000; Carter 2002;
Kenoyer 1994; Vidale 2000: 89–93). Indus traders and McSweeney, Méry & Macchiarelli 2008). Moreover, at
urban elites were stimulating — and also probably Shimāl and Hīlī 8, to mention two more examples, there
organizing — foreign trade with the other regions of is evidence of Indus items in Wādī Sūq levels dating to the
Middle Asia (Tosi 1991; Ratnagar 2004; Possehl 2007; beginning of the second millennium BC (de Cardi 1989;
Kenoyer 2008). Cleuziou 1989: 77). Following the chronology proposed
A wide range of Indus artefacts have been found over in Frenez et al. (2016: fig. 1) these 500–700 years of
the past forty years at many coastal and inland sites in the connections correspond almost precisely to Periods 3B
Oman peninsula, including utilitarian and ritual pottery, and 3C at Harappa, that is, c.2400 to 1900 BC. In the
ornaments, seals, weights and, more recently, terracotta Oman peninsula, this time span corresponds to the second
toys for children (Méry 1991; 2000; Cleuziou 1992; half of the Umm an-Nar period (c.2700–2000 BC) and
Possehl 1996; Vogt 1996; Frenez et al. 2016; Frenez, the beginning of the Wadi Suq period (Cleuziou 1989).
forthcoming). The most extensively studied Indus items The recent discovery of Indus pottery and other
found at sites in the Oman peninsula are the black-slipped objects at Salūt ST1, an Umm an-Nar stone tower in the
164 Sophie Méry, Michele Degli Esposti, Dennys Frenez & Jonathan Mark Kenoyer
Figure 1. Main Early Bronze Age Umm an-Nar sites of the Oman peninsula and contemporaneous sites in
Middle Asia.
interior of central Oman (Figs 1 & 2/a–b), was published University of Rennes 1. Instrumental Neutron Activation
in the last Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies Analysis (INAA) of select samples has been carried out
(Frenez et al. 2016). A collective project of analytical at the University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR)
study of the Indus pottery is ongoing in order to test under the direction of Michael Glascock and will be
provenance and various manufacturing hypotheses put reported separately by the authors.
forward on the basis of macroscopic observations. The
first results of the technological and petrographic study
of a sample of the ST1 pottery assemblage are presented Salūt ST1 and the context of discovery of
here. In 2016, technological and petrographic studies the Indus pottery
were carried out at CNRS Rennes by Sophie Méry. The
aim of the study was to provide information about the The pottery samples were collected during excavations at
provenance of the clays used for making pottery and, as a an Umm an-Nar circular stone tower, ST1, near Salūt in
consequence, about the geographical locations where the central Oman, from the autumn of 2010 until late 2015.
pots were probably made. In total, forty pottery sherds These excavations were carried out at the request of the
(mostly rims) were macroscopically examined. Of these, Office of His Excellency the Adviser to His Majesty the
twenty-four thin sections were prepared and studied at the Sultan for Cultural Affairs, Muscat, by the team of the
Indus potters in central Oman in the second half of the third millennium BC 165
Figure 2. Salūt ST1 Early Bronze Age tower and surrounding structures: a. aerial view; b. a general plan showing
the areas of pottery finds.
Italian Mission to Oman (IMTO – University of Pisa) charcoal indicate the presence of cultivated surfaces near
directed by Prof. A. Avanzini (Degli Esposti 2016). ST1, which were manured and burned (Degli Esposti &
As is the case with some other towers of the Umm Cremaschi, forthcoming). The local pedological profiles
an-Nar period, tower ST1 is surrounded by a large ditch show moderate weathering and strong bioturbation due
linked with water management and storage, possibly used to a denser vegetal cover than today, thus indicating that
for agricultural activities (Fig. 2/a–b). One third of the precipitation in the past was higher than in the present
ditch was completely excavated and the Indus pottery (Cremaschi & Zerboni 2010).
sherds discussed in this paper were discovered in one The stratigraphical study of the sediments that filled
specific area of its outer channel (Fig. 2/b). the ditch can be divided into five major phases (Fig. 3/a).
The geoarchaeological study of the sediments that The earliest phases are associated with layers that reflect
filled the ditch provides substantial information on the colluvial and erosive episodes linked to percolating and
palaeo-environment and the local availability of water. running water, while the latest layers included massive
According to M. Cremaschi, micro-laminated units post-abandonment deposits. Phase 3 is the only level
from the erosion of the ditch’s walls reflect a seasonal connected with direct human activities inside the ditch,
rhythm of deposition (Degli Esposti & Cremaschi, evidenced by a number of fireplaces and anthropogenic
forthcoming). In addition, various types of micro- soils (Fig. 3/b). Artefacts related to this phase are
Figure 3. a. A section of the

main ditch showing the main
stratigraphic sequence; b.
fireplaces and occupation layers
excavated inside the ditch.
numerous, and consist mainly of pottery. Among them, of typical Umm an-Nar vessels known at Hīlī and in the
Indus pottery types are quite common, but the total northern UAE (Figs 4/b–c; 6/a).
assemblage is still being quantified. Several potsherds of the Umm an-Nar Fine Red Ware,
Phase 5, the final phase of the Bronze Age occupation which was primarily a funerary ware during the Umm an-
at ST1, dates to 2460–2145 BC (2-sigma 95%) or (2345– Nar period, have also been found in the ditch of Salūt
2200 1-sigma 68%) (Lab Code: 14Fi2250/14Fi2255/14 ST1 (Fig. 5/b–c). They correspond in all their features
Fi2258, 3830 ± 35 years BP, OxCal 4.0, IntCal09), based — colour and fineness of the paste/ware, shaping and
on a radiocarbon date obtained from a charcoal sample finishing macro-traces, colour of the slip and paint —
collected in one of the upper levels of the ditch (SU 55; to the Umm an-Nar Fine Red Ware pots widely attested
Degli Esposti 2016: 675 and fig. 6/a). This date fits with from Shimāl in the north to MaΒīrah Island in the south
the relative dating types and styles of the pottery and (Méry 2000: 79–123).
objects discovered in the adjacent and stratigraphically
equivalent levels, such as SU 89, where several of the Study method
sherds discussed below were found. Other charcoal
samples were collected from contexts belonging to Phase The manufacturing process of a pottery container
3 and earlier, and have been submitted for radiocarbon depends on several factors, for example, the raw material,
dating. the tools used, the technical skill of the potter, as well
as the demands of the customers (Van der Leeuw 1994).
Main features of the third-millennium BC Technological studies focus on the identification of
pottery assemblage of Salūt ST1 macro- and micro-traces present on the surface and in
the section of potsherds and pots in order to reconstruct
The Early Bronze Age Umm an-Nar pottery analysed the different techniques and technologies used in the
here comes from the phases of human activities inside manufacturing processes (Mahias 1993; Van der Leeuw
the ditch (Degli Esposti & Cremaschi, forthcoming; Figs 1994; Roux & Courty 1998; Boileau 2005). This kind of
4–10). They belong to levels between the two phases study requires the recording of information on the general
characterized by a consistent water flow (Phases 1 and 4). morphology of the pot (ovoid, cylindrical, globular, etc.)
The bulk of the material includes local or regional or of one part of its body (base, belly, rim), as well as
wares, but there are also types connected to the the possible presence of additional features (handle,
contemporaneous Indus ceramic productions, such as spout, element of suspension, etc.) and of macro-traces
Indus cooking pots (Figs 5/f–g; 6/c,e,f,i,j; 7/d–f,h), left on the pot by tools. The same approach is used for
perforated jars, pedestalled dishes, and black-slipped jars. describing the finishing (smoothing, scraping of the base,
These materials were already described in detail by the turning, etc.), the type of decoration (colour of the slip
authors in an earlier publication (Frenez et al. 2016). The and painting, decorative pattern, and ornamental themes),
local or regional Umm an-Nar ceramics include open- and the firing (temperature and atmosphere of the firing
mouth jars, pots, goblets, and bowls with the usual motifs chamber, regular or irregular firing, etc.).
of horizontal and undulating lines on the shoulder (Figs When determining the way in which a pot is shaped,
4/b,c,i–j; 5/d; 6/a). All these productions can be positively one can distinguish between moulding, hand modelling,
compared, on the basis of both their general and detailed coil work, and wheel throwing. Each technique — alone
shape, volume, and decoration (techniques, decorative or in combination — varies according to the culture and
elements, and association of elements) with types from period of time when a pot was made. These processes can
contemporaneous residential sites in the Sultanate of be defined most clearly when one has a complete profile
Oman and the UAE, such as Hīlī 8 IIc2-f, Bāt, Maysar 1, of the vessel. The production process of fragmentary
among others (e.g. Frifelt 1975; Méry 2000: 125–168). vessels, however, can be reconstructed or ‘mentally
A unique feature of the Umm an-Nar open-mouth jars or reassembled’ by extrapolation (Averbouh 2000) as is
pots found at Salūt ST1, however, is that many of them the case, for example, of a thrown rough shape, whose
have rims comparable to a selection of Indus-type rims lower part was then beaten without deforming the neck
(rim types IIB, IIc, and IIIC in Dales & Kenoyer 1986: of the pot. When archaeologists have the opportunity to
32–37). The shape of the rim, which is linked to the final study sufficiently large and well-preserved assemblages,
phase of vessel formation, is thus different from the range it is possible to distinguish the chaîne opératoire, or
Figure 4. Pottery sherds from SU60, SU66, and SU177 at Salūt ST1.
Figure 5. Pottery sherds from SU57, SU58, and SU177 at Salūt ST1.
Figure 6. Pottery sherds from SU58, SU89, SU91, SU145, SU163, SU171, and SU178 at Salūt ST1.
Figure 7. Pottery sherds from SU89 and SU270 at Salūt ST1.

operational sequence, which can be considered both ancient Near East (Franken & Kalsbeek 1975; Van der
as a concept and as an analytical tool. In our case, the Leeuw 1976; Buson & Vidale 1983; Roux & Courty 1997,
chaîne opératoire may materialize the dernier degré among others). Moulding, modelling, and fast wheel
du fait (final achievement) of A. Leroi-Gourhan (1945– throwing from a lump of clay, have not been identified in
1973). Petrographic analysis of thin sections — sections our Salūt ST1 sample.
of the sherds thinned down to a thickness of 30 µm and In the case of the local Hīlī ceramic, the so-called
studied under the polarizing microscope in polarized or Hili Red Sandy Ware, the study of the base-shaping
normal light — may help to refine macroscopic groups. techniques led to the identification of different methods
One might in some favourable cases conclude that pots of production (Méry, Dupont-Delaleuf & Van der Leeuw
were produced in the same workshop if not — sometimes 2010). The rarity in our Salūt sample of bases and sherds
— by the same hands. A ‘production type’ is defined as comprising a portion of the lower part of the belly does
the synthesis of technological, morpho-functional, and not allow a similar definition: the two bases examined at
decorative features (Méry 2000: 64–67). It may regroup this stage are pinched (sherds nos. 171.17 and 177.2; see
several chaînes opératoires. This approach was created Fig. 16).
and developed at Hīlī Tomb N pit-grave (Méry, Dupont- At Salūt ST1, the local and regional style of domestic
Delaleuf & Van der Leeuw 2010), based on the study of pottery comprises three main functional categories
800 complete and incomplete Early Bronze Age pottery (goblets, open-mouth jars, and suspension vessels),
vessels from various local and regional ceramic wares, but whereas the Indus-style pottery includes cooking pots,
the assemblage also included Indus wares. This approach perforated vessels, pedestalled dishes, small globular jars
made it possible to define several shaping methods used with black-on-red decorations, and black-slipped jars.
in the manufacturing of Early Bronze Age pots made of Within the study sample, the most widely represented
local domestic ware. categories are Indus cooking pots — open and open-
In the case of Salūt ST1, only a relatively small mouth pots — and only a few suspension vessels, bowls,
number of pot rims have been studied in addition to and goblets as well as several Indus black-slipped jars.
Except for the Indus cooking pots, more material is needed
different isolated parts of the same or similar pots. It
to make any generalization about shaping techniques
was not possible, therefore, to gather information on
at Salūt. Archaeological sherds were compared with
the degree of symmetry and discontinuities in the pots’
a reference collection of modern replicas held at the
profile and the location of their gravity centre, except for
University of Rennes 1, France, originally manufactured
those shapes that are already well known and belong to
in the field at Hīlī in the UAE (2010). The shape types
fairly ‘standardized’ productions from morphometric and
(large jars, small jars or pots, goblets, and bowls) were
morphological points of view.
first examined to identify the problems intrinsic to the
manufacturing of a given shape (with its own constraints
First results of the technological study at that can be variously solved; see Van der Leeuw 1976).
Salūt ST1 The specific difficulties possibly met by the Salūt potters
were defined at this stage and differentiated from regional
The Umm an-Nar pottery and the Indus pottery from the (Sultanate of Oman and UAE during the Umm an-Nar
sample of Salūt ST1 appears to have been shaped by the period) and foreign potters’ productions (Greater Indus
addition of clay elements or coils after the earlier levels Valley).
had dried sufficiently to hold the form. The use of the As was the case in Hīlī (Méry, Dupont-Delaleuf &
fast wheel where a vessel is made from an initial mass of Van der Leeuw 2010), the potters that made the pottery
clay formed to obtain the shape does not appear to have found at Salūt ST1 do not seem to have had any particular
been an established manufacturing tradition at this site. or recurrent problem in shaping the spherical pots and
With one exception, the vessels were built up by adding goblets made in the local style fabric and ware (ST1
and shaping coils on a rotating device. Different shaping Sandy Ware). As noticed at Hīlī, however, the cordons
methods were distinguished based on sets of macro- applied on the ‘suspension’ vessels made of Omani Umm
traces, surface topography (Van Dooselaere 2014), and an-Nar Fine Red Ware tended to detach. This is because
discontinuities. As a first result, the techniques identified their bond was not controlled enough while drying.
on the basis of the sampling from Salūt ST1 correspond The different shaping techniques that can be identified
to part of the range of main techniques witnessed in the in the Salūt ST1 sample are as follows:
1. Coil shaping without rotation (one case only: no. situation may yield a low degree of circularity of the
178.2). vessel or an uneven thickness of its wall. Such evidence
2. Coil shaping with a slow and intermittent rotation in the sherds from ST1 suggests the use of a relatively
used for the finishing: only the surfaces are shaped fast turning device or the incipient use of the ‘fast wheel’,
(one case only, not illustrated). but the technology was not fully mastered by the potter.
3. Coil shaping with a slow and intermittent rotation At ST1, however, the coil throwing is well mastered for
used for shaping and finishing: both the surfaces most of the vessel shapes, including black-slipped jars,
and walls of the vessel are shaped (Figs 8/d–f, cooking pots, open-mouth pots, suspension pots, small
9/d). pots, bowls, and goblets.
4. Coil shaping with a fast and continuous rotation
used to stretch up (or creep) the body by adding Petrographic analysis of Salūt ST1 pottery:
the coils one by one: more than one coil can be first results
shaped at the same time (Figs 8/b–c, 10/a–b, 11/b).
At this stage of the research programme, four main
The accomplishment of creep guided by the potter’s hands petrographic groups (or micro-fabrics) were identified
in shaping technique 4 is indicative of the use of some from the twenty-four samples examined:
kind of potter’s wheel (or ‘fast wheel’), used to produce a
fast and rather regular rotation to create a balance between — ST1 PG01. This group (not illustrated) corresponds
the centrifugal force released by the spinning clay wall to Petrographic Group C defined by Méry (2000:
and the fingers’ pressure. Shaping techniques 1, 2, and 3 39, table 8; 71, pl. 1; 106). It is characteristic, so
required only a turntable or ‘slow wheel’. The terms ‘fast far, of the Umm an-Nar Fine Red Ware all over the
wheel’ and ‘slow wheel’ are used here by convention as Oman peninsula. The main characteristic feature
the shapes, measurements, materials, and capabilities of of the matrix is its argillaceous component, but
the rotating devices used by the potters in ancient Oman, there is variability in terms of granulometry and
the UAE, Pakistan, and India are so far not known. mineralogical composition of the non-plastic
A number of sherds examined from Salūt ST1 were fraction. As an example, sherd no. 57.8 belongs
shaped using technique 4. As at Hīlī, the imperfections to Méry Microfacies C1 (Méry 2000: 106, n. 59)
observed in some of the ST1 sherds are indicative (few minerals, most of them ≤50 µm: angular
of poorly controlled friction of the ‘fast wheel’. This crystals of quartz and feldspars, fine elongate
Figure 8. Salūt ST1 Beige

Sandy Ware: a–c. 178.a;
d–f. 58.14 (see Fig. 16).
Figure 9. Salūt ST1 Red

Sandy Ware: a–c. 58.4; d.
DT2014A-1.1; e. a sherd with
an impression of an Indus
seal; f. fragments of Indus
pedestalled dishes.
Figure 10. Fine Red Umm

an-Nar Ware found at Salūt
ST1: a–b. 57.4; c. 57.8.
Figure 11. Thin sections

of ST1 Beige Ware under
polarized light.
biotites and white micas [muscovites], a few The percentage of non-plastic fraction temper
iron oxides fragments), while sherd no. 58.4 elements, well calibrated, and mainly angular
belongs to Microfacies C6 (numerous minerals ranges between 10 and 20%. Quartz is mixed with
between 10 and 200 µm, poorly calibrated, same numerous opaque minerals (iron oxides), biotites,
mineralogical composition as C1 but a number and serpentinized, orange-coloured olivines.
of fragments of serpentinized olivines, well Recrystallized bioclasts (fragment of biological
identified because sufficiently large, plus iron origin, such as a fossil or a shell in a sedimentary
oxides). rock) are also present. Vacuoles left by fully
— ST1 PG02 (Fig. 11). This group was not known burned large vegetal fragments are detectable.
before. The matrix is a mix of calcite and micas — ST1 PG04 (Fig. 13). This group corresponds to
crystallites (under 5 µm). The optical activity is Méry’s Petrographic Group G (2000: 230–232).
low. When the pottery is low fired, the matrix The fabric of these samples is characterized by
appears beige under cross polarized light (XPL), a fine micaceous matrix. The coarse fraction is
because a number of crystallites are superimposed constituted by calibrated silico-micaceous sand.
in the 30 µm of the thin section, but it turns light The micas are less than 0.7 mm long, the quartz
green as soon as slightly over-fired. Variations and other minerals less than 0.5 mm in diameter or
in the firing atmosphere are often markedly length. The presence of regrouped sand grains and
visible. The surface percentage of the visible pure clay pellets as well indicates that the temper
non-plastic fraction ranges between 2 and 10%. was intentionally added.
As in Group PG01, the particle size variability
(granulometry) is striking (from 50 to 300 µm) Other thin sections are distinct from the described groups
and the percentage of mineralogical components and also from each other, or form only pairs. Their
is also variable. Angular crystals of limpid features may be due to the use of different clays or clay
quartz with a straight or wavy extinction are the sources, either local (Salut area) or from another region
most numerous: mixed with alkaline feldspars, or country (UAE, Pakistan, or India). They will be not
iron oxides, and a few orange-coloured olivines described in detail here but in a separate article.
affected by various degree of serpentinization Except for PG04 which is certainly not a local (Salūt
(serpentinite is the product of the hydrothermal area) or regional (south-eastern Arabia) production
alteration of highly mafic and ultra-mafic rocks (Méry 2000) but is typical of the contemporaneous
rich in olivine). pottery production in the Indus Valley, the composition
— ST1 PG03 (Fig. 12). This group was not known of the Salūt ST1 PG02 and PG03 is well compatible
before. The matrix is a mix of clay and micas with the petrography of the piedmont region of the Hajar
that appears pale to dark brown under XPL. mountains (Jibāl Дajar).
Figure 12. Thin sections of

ST1 Red Sandy Ware under
polarized light.
Figure 13. Indus Micaceous

Ware, black-slip jar sherds:
a–b. 177.b; c–f. 58.18. Thin
sections under polarized
light: d. 89.2; e. 58.18.
Early Bronze Age types of production its production area has so far not been geographically
identified at Salūt ST1 located.
As in the case of Hīlī, a key diagnostic feature of the Indus Micaceous Red Ware (microfabric: PG04)
Salūt ST1 sample includes the ways in which clay is
prepared, rotated, and finally shaped. The reconstruction Its paste/ware is dense, mechanically resistant, most often
of the shaping technique is based on the observation pale red in colour, with visible and sometimes numerous
and description of the macro-traces, the vessel wall- micas. This paste/ware was used to manufacture the black-
relief (or micro-topography), and the discontinuities in slipped jars as well as other pottery types of Indus origin
the sherd’s profile. The residual finishing traces left on exported to south-eastern Arabia and along the shores of
the surface by smoothing, scraping, or turning activities the Arabian Gulf (Méry 2000: 219–245). In the Oman
are also relevant criteria. Among the samples from Salūt peninsula, Indus black-slipped jars were associated with
ST1, three main production types were differentiated: the utilitarian Indus pottery types, for example, perforated
Umm an-Nar Fine Red Ware, the Indus Micaceous Red vessels, cooking pots, and pedestalled dishes, and also to
Ware, and the ST1 Sandy Ware (further divided into two small painted vessels. This production type was clearly
main sub-groups: ST1 Beige Sandy Ware and ST1 Red identified by applying both petrographic analysis and
Sandy Ware). INAA on a sample of almost 100 pottery sherds from
about twenty sites in Pakistan, India, the Sultanate of
Umm an-Nar Fine Red Ware (microfabric: PG01) Oman, and the UAE (Blackman & Méry 1999; Méry &
Blackman 1999; 2006). Analyses showed that the sample
Together with a specific range of shapes and decoration studied originated from the Indus River Basin in present-
motifs and themes, this well-known production type day Pakistan, precisely from Sindh (where Mohenjo-Daro
is characterized by distinctive features, for example, is located) and not from the Rāvi River valley in Punjab
argillaceous to fine silty beige to pale orange fabric, (where Harappa is located). Vessels made in Micaceous
internal surface often covered with numerous, deep Red Ware, including black-slipped jars, were traded to
tool marks (shaping with a hard and irregular tool; Fig. Gujarat (Méry, Ajithprasad & Blackman, forthcoming),
10/b), fine smoothing of its external surface (shaping Makrān, Baluchistan, south-eastern Arabia, and Bahrain
with a smoother and regular tool; Fig. 10/a,c), turning for about 500 years. A limited number of replicas in local
of its base (with a hard and regular tool), red-orange wares of some of these pottery types originally made in
slip (most often unpreserved or scarcely preserved), Micaceous Red Ware have been identified at Hīlī 8 and Bāt
and black-brown pigment. In the Oman peninsula, (Méry 2000; Méry & Blackman 2006). The first replica in
this group is homogeneous in terms of petrographic local ware of an actual black-slipped jar is now identified
and chemical composition (Méry 2000: 109–110), but at Salūt ST1 (Fig. 14, sherd no. 91.12).
Figure 14. ST1 Red Sandy Ware,

black-slip jar rim 91.12; d. thin
section under polarized light.
ST1 Beige Sandy Ware (microfabric: PG02) Ware. As at Hīlī, the variety of local technical styles and
degree of technical skill indicates that pottery fabrication
This is one of the most widely represented groups followed different traditions. Among the Beige Sandy
among our Salūt ST1 samples. The fabric is very fine Ware the manufacture of cooking pots is generally well
but sandy, beige yellow to white greenish; the clay used mastered. The walls of the cooking pots are more regular
by the potters was suitable for building thin walls. The and thicker than for the other shapes, which may be due to
sherds often have traces on the inside of finger marks the requirement for this type of pot to withstand repeated
left during the shaping and finishing stages, careful heating and cooling.
wet hand smoothing outside, and red wash and brown-
purple painted decoration. Oxidation and reduction firing Discussion
variations are often visible in the section of the sherds. At
Salūt ST1, pots of Umm an-Nar shape and decoration are Together with Indus-type cooking pots, the Salūt ST1
associated with this ware, but Indus-type cooking pots are domestic pottery includes typical Umm an-Nar globular
also present. Unexpectedly, some rims of the Umm an- open-mouth jars and pots decorated with the usual motifs
Nar jars and pots are of Indus style. of horizontal and undulated lines on the shoulder. Its
mineralogical and petrographic composition (ST1 GP02
ST1 Red Sandy Ware (microfabric: PG03) and GP03) is different from other Umm an-Nar domestic
pottery wares found at Hīlī, Bāt, ΚAmlah, and Maysar
This production type, well represented in the studied 1, but they correspond to the same type of geological
sample, is characterized by a fine, hard, and clunky sandy environment. Like the domestic pottery from Hīlī, ST1
fabric, pale to dark orange, red or brown, with traces of Beige Sandy Ware is characterized by elements from
finger marks left on the inside by the shaping and finishing, sedimentary carbonaceous environments with a few traces
and careful smoothing outside. A brown wash sometimes of ophiolitic rock fragments (Méry 2000: 39, table 8; 71, pl.
covers the external surface of the sherd. Oxidation and 2; 156, 157, 160). Salūt ST1 Red Sandy Ware is, instead,
reduction firing variations were observed. At Salūt ST1, rich in ophiolite-related minerals and rock fragments, as is
pots of Umm an-Nar shape and decoration and Indus-type the case of Bāt and Maysar (2000: 165–167).
cooking pots are associated to this production type. Some Four of the five samples of black-slipped jar analysed
rims of the Umm an-Nar jars and pots are also of Indus have the same petrographic composition characteristic of
style. the black-slipped jars from Pakistan, the UAE, and the
Shaping Technique 4 is identified in the two groups Sultanate of Oman already studied (Blackman & Méry
of Sandy Wares, but there is generally a better level of 1999; Méry & Blackman 1999; 2006). The fifth sample
integration of the coils into the pottery walls for the (sherd no. 91.12) is different. Its composition is similar
ST1 Beige Sandy Ware compared to the ST1 Red Sandy to that of ST1 Red Sandy Ware sherds. This is the first
and only case identified so far of a black-slipped jar that completely coating their internal and external surfaces
may have been produced outside the Greater Indus Valley suggests that they were probably used to ship foodstuffs
using local clay. or liquids in non-porous conditions (Méry 2000). Black-
The evidence of local production of a black-slipped slipped jars were also very durable pottery containers and
jar is unexpected because black-slipped jars are a very were probably reused over a long period before eventually
complex pottery type to produce. Their manufacture breaking. Moreover, they were originally designed with a
involved multiple production stages and the use of particular profile and thick walls, probably so that they
different technologies and, most important in this context, could be tightly stacked in the hull of seagoing vessels
required a ware with specific physical characteristics instead of being transported overland on the backs of
(Dales & Kenoyer 1986: 83–84). Black-slipped jars were donkeys, cattle, or even people.
tall, large containers c.70 cm high and 50 cm wide on The composition of all Indus-type cooking pots found at
average, with a capacity of 30–40 l (the largest jars hold Salūt ST1 is similar to the Umm an-Nar pots discovered at
as much as 85 l), made in three or more separate stages, the site. This may be a strong indication, but not by itself a
that formed a very distinctive curvilinear profile. The decisive validation, for the presence of Indus-trained potters
presence of layers of black or dark purplish brown slip active in the region, as proposed by Frenez et al. (2016).
Figure 15. Examples of rims similar to those on Indus types IIC and IIIC, complex external projecting narrow to
wide — the ‘short beaked’ to ‘beaked’ of Dales and Kenoyer (1986): a. Bāt (after Frifelt 1975: fig. 30a); b. RaΜs al
Jinz RJ2 sherd 84; c. Tell Abraq (after Potts 1990: fig. 56.2); d. Maysar 1 DA40421 (after Weisgerber 1980: 2 Abb.
6). Examples of rims similar to Indus type IIB, complex external projecting narrow — ‘triangular’ of Dales and
Kenoyer (1986): e. Bāt settlement (after Frifelt 1975: fig. 34g); f. Bāt settlement (after Frifelt 1975: fig 30h);
g. Maysar 1 (after Weisgerber 1980: Abb. 17 n. 5).
Nevertheless, mental templates and common gestures

Shard
Stratigraphic unit Phase Fig. of traditional potters are so deeply rooted and entrenched
inventory
that they can be revealed by specific details (Ingold 2001;
57.4 5c
Eerkens & Bettinger 2008; Gandon, Coyle & Bootsma
57.6 5e
57 3/4 2014). At Salūt ST1, this is the case for the numerous
57.7 5d
and various Indus-type rims associated with Umm an-Nar
57.8 5b style jars: Indus-trained potters were able to replicate the
58.4 5f general shape of the Umm an-Nar style pots, but did not
58.6 5g replicate Umm an-Nar style rims.
58.8 5i Pottery specialists learn how to make certain types of
58 3/4 58.11 5h rims during the apprenticeship period in their childhood:
58.12 6a mental templates and gestures become deeply integrated
58.14 6c and almost unconscious (Van Dooselaere 2014). The
58.18 6b shape of the rim may therefore have been used here as
60 2/3 60.1 4f a ‘fingerprint’ of the cultural identity of the potter. The
66.1 4a fact that some of the Umm an-Nar style pots have Indus-
66.4 4b style rims could indicate the presence of Indus potters,
66 2 66.5 4c or Indus-trained potters and small communities in Salūt,
66.11 4e central Oman. These potters may also have been those
66.14 4d who produced Indus-style cooking pots and possibly even
89.1 7a black-slipped jars. Further studies are needed on offering
89.2 7b stands in the same fabric (see Fig. 9/f). The presence
89.4 7c of Indus or Indus-trained potters is also supported by
89.7 7f the study of other Umm an-Nar pottery from the Oman
89 5 89.8 7d peninsula, such as at Bāt and possibly Hīlī. As has been
89.11 7g recognized at the site of Salūt, both Bāt and Hīlī have
89.12 6j a similar set of pottery types related to the preparation,
89.23 7e presentation, and consumption of food, which were not
89,a - local but related to the ceramic and culinary tradition of
91 5 91.12 6h the Indus Civilization (Méry 2000: 219–245). Moreover,
145 5 145.3 6i several Umm an-Nar style pots also present Indus-type
163 3/4 163.8 6d rims at various sites in the UAE and Oman (Fig. 15).
171 4/5 171.17 6g The multiplicity of chaînes opératoires witnessed
174 3 - at Hīlī for the local domestic pottery, within a range
174.19
of well-defined methods covering a long chronology
177.2 4g
(several generations, from c.2300/2200 to 2000 cal
177.8 4h
BCE at Hīlī N pit-grave), testify to a production
177.9 4i
organized within domestic units (Méry, Dupont-
177.15 4j
177 3? Delaleuf & Van der Leeuw 2010). Can this model be
177.17 5a
applied to the Beige Sandy Ware and Red Sandy Ware
177,b -
that characterizes the domestic assemblage discovered
177,c - at Salūt ST1? Compared to the domestic ceramic of
177,d - Hīlī, the Salūt ST1 Red Sandy Ware shows the same
178.2 6e level of technical skills of the most elaborate groups
178 3/4 178.11 6f of Hili Red Sandy Ware, identified at Hīlī North and
178,a - Hīlī North Tomb A (Méry et al. 2010: fig. 2). Only the
270 5/6 270.1 7h Salūt ST1 Beige Sandy Ware (or at least certain vases
ditch’s upper filling 6 DT2014A-1,1 7i of this group) perhaps shows a slightly higher degree
of technicality, such as finer walls, better-integrated
Figure 16. Inventory of the Salūt ST1 pottery samples. coils, working of the rims, etc.
Nevertheless, none of the productions analysed from of technological and petrographic studies of the pottery
Salūt ST1 shows the mastery in shaping and finishing of found at Salūt ST1. These groups appear to have been
the painted flasks imported from the Indus Valley (Méry well integrated, culturally and economically, in Umm an-
& Blackman 2006). These flasks, together with the high Nar society, both inland and along the coast during the
goblets found at Hīlī N or the black-slipped jars, were second half of the third millennium BC, although the Kot
shaped by highly qualified Indus craftsmen with great Dijian grooved sherd fount at Salūt ST1 (Frenez et al.
technical skills and specialization in processing the clays 2016: 112–113; Fig. 4/e) indicates that contacts between
of their homeland. the Indus Valley and inland Oman may have developed
even earlier, from c.2800 BC onwards. This is a new
Conclusions and important discovery as the stratigraphic position
of a number of Indus sherds in inland UAE and Omani
In the past, the Indus pottery types found at Umm an- sites (Méry 2000) did not indicate a contact range before
Nar sites were thought to be there as a result of trade 2600–2500 BC.
and exchange. The discovery at many sites occupied by The presence in the pottery assemblage of Salūt ST1
indigenous Umm an-Nar communities in the interior of of a wide range of Indus pottery types, including utilitarian
the Oman peninsula of black-slipped jars and other types pottery and, among them, specific forms used for food
of Indus vessels made in Red Micaceous Ware at sites in preparation and presentation, demonstrates that strong
Sindh, along the Indus River, was explained as evidence intercultural interactions occurred, along with an increase
of reuse by local groups (Vogt 1996: 125; Méry 2000; of Indus trade. This is also supported by the local production
Méry & Blackman 2006). of Indus-type vessels in Oman, by the impression of an
These earlier interpretations are now revised on Indus seal on a ST1 Red Sandy Ware sherd (Fig. 9/e), and
the basis of the abundant and diversified data on Indus by the presence at Salūt ST1 of children’s toys and a type
interactions with coastal sites along the JaΜalan region, of decorated pottery vessel from the Indus (Frenez et al.
for example, RaΜs al-Jinz RJ-2, RaΜs al-Дadd HD-1, 2016: fig. 5). All these examples of distinctive artefacts
and SuwayΉ SWY-3, and more recently on the island of and technological processes can be linked to social and
MaΒīrah and along the BāΓinah coast (Charpentier et al. ideological characteristics deeply embedded in pre-Indus
2013; Al Jahwari, Douglas & Al Belushi 2016), which and Indus cultures of the Greater Indus region.
included mainly pottery and also stamp seals, copper
tools, seashells, and ornaments in semi-precious stones Dedication
(Cleuziou & Tosi 2000; Cleuziou & Méry 2002; De
We wish to dedicate this paper to the memory of Maurizio
Waele & Haerinck 2006; Charpentier et al. 2013). Some
Tosi (Zevio, 31 May 1944–Ravenna, 24 February 2017),
types of Indus pottery found in south-eastern Arabia such
pioneer of archaeological research in the Sultanate of
as cooking pots, perforated jars, and pedestalled dishes,
Oman. Among his many accomplishments, Maurizio
were considered as ‘un mode de préparation culinaire
Tosi discovered and excavated the site of RaΚs al-Jinz
et d’un mode de consommation étrangers aux traditions
RJ-2, which first provided evidence of direct connections
locales’ (Méry 2000: 236), based on the functional
between south-eastern Arabia and the Indian subcontinent.
interpretation of the Indus pottery assemblage by J.M.
Kenoyer or P. Gouin (Kenoyer 1998; Dales & Kenoyer
1986; Gouin 1990; Bourgeois & Gouin 1995). It was References
proposed that, at coastal sites such as RaΚs al-Дadd HD-1
local groups organized themselves to trade directly with Averbouh A. 2000. Technologie de la matière osseuse
Indus merchants (Cleuziou & Tosi 2007: 237–239), or travaillée et implications palethnologiques: l’exemple
indirectly through sites in the interior (Méry & Marquis des chaînes d’exploitation du bois de cervidé
1999). chez les magdaléniens des Pyrénées. Thèse de
In a previous paper (Frenez et al. 2016), we proposed, doctorat, Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne.
on the basis of Salūt ST1 discoveries, that direct [Unpublished].
interactions occurred between Umm an-Nar and Indus Blackman M.J. & Méry S. 1999. Les importations de
people along the coasts and also in inland central Oman. céramiques harapéennes en Arabie orientale: état de
The presence of small Indus groups, including specialized la question. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian
potters, is now documented and is based on the results Studies 29: 7–28.
Blackman J.M. & Vidale M. 1992. The production and preliminary report. Report submitted to the Office of
distribution of stoneware bangles at Mohenjo-Daro and His Excellency the Adviser to His Majesty the Sultan
Harappa as monitored by chemical characterization for Cultural Affairs, Muscat. [Unpublished circulated
studies. Pages 37–44 in C. Jarrige (ed.), South Asian report].
Archaeology 1989. Madison, WI: Prehistory Press. Dales G.F. & Kenoyer J.M. 1986. Excavations at
Boileau M-C. 2005. Production et distribution des Mohenjo-Daro, Pakistan: The Pottery. (University
céramiques au IIIème millénaire en Syrie du nord- Museum Monograph, 53). Philadelphia, PA:
est. Paris: Éditions de la Maison des Sciences de University Museum Press.
l’Homme/Éditions Epistèmes. de Cardi B. 1989. Harappan finds from Tomb 6 at Shimal,
Bouquillon A., Méry S., Schneider G. & Quivron G. 1996. Ras al-Khaimah, United Arab Emirates. Pages
Third millennium BC pottery at Nausharo (Pakistan): 9–14 in K. Frifelt & P. Sorensen (eds), South Asian
first results of a mineralogical and chemical program. Archaeology 1985. London: Curzon Press.
Proceedings of the 29th International Symposium on Degli Esposti M. 2016. Excavations at the Early Bronze
Archaeometry, Metu Ankara, Turkey, 9–14 May 1994: Age site ‘ST1’ near Bisyah (Sultanate of Oman): notes
151–168. on the architecture and material culture. Pages 665–
Bourgeois G. & Gouin P. 1995. Résultats d’une analyse 678 in R.A. Stucky, O. Kaelin & H-P. Mathys (eds),
de trace fossile dans une ‘faisselle’ harappéenne. Proceedings of the 9th International Congress on the
Paléorient 21/1: 125–128. Archaeology of the Ancient Near East. June 9–13, 2014,
Buson M. & Vidale M. 1983. The forming and finishing University of Basel. iii. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
process of the pear-shaped beakers of Shahr-i Sokhta: Degli Esposti M. & Cremaschi M. (forthcoming).
analysis of the relationships between technological Facing Early Bronze Age climate change in south-
and morphological evolution through experimental east Arabia: new data from the IMTO excavations at
simulation. East and West 33/1–4: 31–50. Salūt-ST1, central Oman.
Carter R. 2002. Preliminary report on Unar 2 and its De Waele A. & Haerinck E. 2006. Etched carnelian
ceramics. Bulletin of the Society for Arabian Studies: beads from northeast and southeast Arabia. Arabian
5–14. Archaeology and Epigraphy 17/1: 31–40.
Charpentier V., Berger J-F., Crassard R., Borgi F. et al. Eerkens J.W. & Bettinger R.L. 2008. Cultural transmission
2013. Conquering new territories: when the first black and the analysis of stylistic and functional variation.
boats sailed to MaΒīrah Island. Proceedings of the Pages 21–38 in M.J. O’Brien (ed.), Cultural
Seminar for Arabian Studies 43: 85–98. transmission and archaeology: issues and case
Cleuziou S. 1989. Excavations at Hili 8: a preliminary studies. Washington, DC: Society for American
report on the 4th to 7th campaigns. Archaeology in the Archaeology.
United Arab Emirates: 61–87. Franken H.J. & Kalsbeek J. 1975. Potters of a medieval
Cleuziou S. 1992. The Oman peninsula and the Indus village in the Jordan Valley: excavations at Tell Deir
Civilization: a reassessment. Man and environment Alla – a medieval tell. New York: American Elsevier.
17/2: 93–103. Frenez D. (forthcoming). Ancient Magan and the Indus
Cleuziou S. & Méry S. 2002. In between the great powers. Civilization External Trade. In S. Cleuziou & M. Tosi
Pages 265–308 in S. Cleuziou, M. Tosi & J. Zarins (eds), In the shadow of the ancestors: the prehistoric
(eds), Essays on the late prehistory of the Arabian foundations of the early Arabian civilization in Oman.
Peninsula. (Serie Orientale Roma, 93). Rome: Istituto (2nd extended edition). Muscat: Ministry of Heritage
italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente. and Culture of Oman.
Cleuziou S. & Tosi M. 2000. RaΜs al-Jinz and the Frenez D., Degli Esposti M., Méry S. & Kenoyer
prehistoric coastal cultures of the JaΜalan. Journal of J.M. 2016. Bronze Age Salūt (ST1) and the Indus
Oman Studies 11: 19–73. Civilization: recent discoveries and implications.
Cleuziou S. & Tosi M. 2007. In the shadow of the Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 46:
ancestors. The prehistoric foundations of the early 107–124.
Arabian civilization in Oman. Muscat: Ministry of Frifelt K. 1975. On prehistoric settlement and chronology
Heritage and Culture. of the Oman peninsula. East and West 25: 359–424.
Cremaschi M. & Zerboni A. 2010. Geoarchaeological Frifelt K. 1995. The island of Umm an-Nar. ii. The third
investigation in the Salut area. 2010 field season millennium settlement. (Jutland Archaeological
Society Publications, 26/2). Aarhus: Aarhus and artefactual evaluation of two collective Umm
University Press. an-Nar graves at Hili (Eastern region of Abu Dhabi).
Gandon E., Coyle T. & Bootsma R.J. 2014. When Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 19: 1–14.
handicraft experts face novelty: effects of shape Mahias M-C. 1993. Pottery techniques in India:
and wheel familiarity on individual and community technical variants and social choice. Pages 157–
standardization of ceramic vessels. Journal of 180 in Lemonnier P. (ed.), Technological choices:
Anthropological Archaeology 35: 289–296. transformation in material cultures since the
Gouin P. 1990. Râpes, jarres et faisselles: la production et Neolithic. London: Routledge.
l’exportation des produits laitiers dans l’Indus du 3e Méry S. 1991. Origine et production des récipients de
millénaire. Paléorient 16/2: 37–54. terre cuite dans la péninsule d’Oman à l’Âge du
Halim M.A. & Vidale M. 1984. Kilns, bangles and coated Bronze. Paléorient 17/2: 51–77.
vessels: ceramic production in closed containers at Méry S. 2000. Les céramiques d’Oman et l’Asie
Moenjodaro. Pages 63–97 in M. Jansen & G. Urban Moyenne: une archéologie des échanges à l’Âge
(eds), Reports on field work carried out at Mohenjo- du Bronze. (Monographie du Centre de Recherches
Daro, Pakistan 1982–83 by the IsMEO–Aachen- Archéologiques, 23). Paris: Centre d’études
University Mission, Interim Reports. i. Aachen/ Préhistoire-Antiquité-Moyen Âge.
Rome: German Research-Project Mohenjo-Daro, Méry S. & Blackman M.J. 1999. Harappa et Mohenjo-
Rheinische-Westfalische Technische Hochschule & Daro: deux zones de production de jarres à engobe
Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. noir au Pakistan à la Période Indus. Paléorient 25/2:
Ingold T. 2001. Beyond art and technology: the 167–177.
anthropology of skill. Pages 17–31 in M.B. Schiffer Méry S. & Blackman M.J. 2006. Socio-economical
(ed.), Anthropological perspective on technology. patterns of a ceramic container: the Harappan Black
Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press. Slipped Jar. Pages 226–235 in C. Jarrige & V. Lefèvre
Al-Jahwari N., Douglas K., and Al-Belushi M. 2016. (eds), Sixteenth International Conference on South
Umm an-Nar settlement patterns in north Oman: Asian Archaeology, Paris, 2–6 July 2001. Paris:
Dahwa case study. Paper delivered at the Seminar for Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations.
Arabian Studies 2016. [Unpublished]. Méry S. & Marquis P. 1999. Un habitat côtier de l’Âge
Kenoyer J.M. 1994. Faience from the Indus Valley du Bronze à Khor Bani Bu Ali SWY-3 (Sultanat
Civilization. Ornament 17/3: 36–39. d’Oman): deuxième campagne de fouille. Bulletin of
Kenoyer J.M. 1998. Ancient cities of the Indus Valley the Society for Arabian Studies 4: 9–12.
civilization. Karachi: Oxford University Press. Méry S., Ajithprasad P. & Blackman M.J. (forthcoming).
Kenoyer J.M. 2001. Early Developments of art, symbol and Evidence of 3rd millennium BC black-slipped jars
technology in the Indus Valley tradition. INDO-KOKO- from the Indus river at Bagasra, India.
KENKYU Indian Archaeological Studies 22: 1–18. Méry S., Dupont-Delaleuf A. & Van der Leeuw S. 2010.
Kenoyer J.M. 2008. Indus and Mesopotamian trade Analyse technologique et expérimentations, les
networks: new insights from shell and carnelian techniques de façonnage céramique mettant en jeu la
artifacts. Pages 19–28 in E. Olijdam & R.H. Spoor rotation à Hili (Émirats arabes unis) à la fin du IIIe
(eds), Intercultural relations between South and millénaire (Âge du Bronze Ancien). Nouvelles de
Southwest Asia. Studies in commemoration of E.C.L. l’Archéologie 119: 52–58.
During Caspers 1934–1996. (British Archaeological Méry S., Anderson P., Inizan M-L., Lechevallier M. &
Reports, International Series, 1826). Oxford: Pelegrin J. 2007. A pottery workshop with flint tools
Archaeopress. on blades knapped with copper at Nausharo (Indus
Lemonnier P. 1992. Elements for an anthropology of Civilization, ca.2500 BC). Journal of Archaeological
technology. (Anthropological Papers, 88). Ann Arbour, Science 34: 1098–1116.
MI: Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan. Possehl G.L. 1996. Meluhha. Pages 133–208 in J. Reade
Leroi-Gourhan A. 1945–1973. Évolution et techniques ii. (ed.), The Indian Ocean in antiquity. London/New
Milieu et techniques. Paris: Albin Michel. York: Kegan Paul International & The British Museum.
McSweeney K.S., Méry S. & Macchiarelli R. 2008. Possehl G.L. 2007. The Middle Asian Interaction
Rewriting the end of the Early Bronze Age in the Sphere. Trade and Contact in the 3rd millennium BC.
United Arab Emirates through the anthropological Expedition 49/1: 40–42.
Potts D.T. 1990. A prehistoric mound in the Emirate of Van der Leeuw S.E. 1976. Studies in the technology of
Umm al-Qaiwain: excavations at Tell Abraq in 1989. ancient pottery. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam,
Copenhagen: Munksgaard. Amsterdam. [Unpublished].
Potts D.T. 2000. Ancient Magan. The secrets of Tell Van der Leeuw S.E. 1994. Cognitive aspects of technique.
Abraq. London: Trident Press. Pages 135–142 in A.C. Renfrew & E. Zubrow (eds),
Ratnagar S. 2004. Trading encounters. From Euphrates The Ancient Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University
to the Indus in the Bronze Age. New Delhi: Oxford Press.
University Press. Van Dooselaere B. 2014. Le roi et le potier. Étude
Roux V. & Courty M-A. 1997. Les bols élaborés au tour technologique de l’assemblage céramique de Kumbi
d’Abu Hamid: rupture technique au 4e millénaire av. Saleh, Maurétanie (5e/6e–17e siècles). Frankfurt:
J.-C. dans le Sud-Levant. Paléorient 23: 25–43. Africa Magna Verlag.
Roux V. & Courty M-A. 1998. Identification of wheel- Vidale M. 2000. The archaeology of the Indus crafts.
fashioning methods: technological analysis of 4th– Indus craftspeople and why we study them. (Reports
3rd millennium BC oriental ceramics. Journal of and memoirs, Series Minor 4). Rome: Istituto italiano
Archaeological Science 25: 747–763. per l’Africa e l’Oriente.
Tosi M. 1991. The Indus Civilization beyond the Indian Vogt B. 1996. Bronze Age maritime trade in the Indian
Subcontinent. Pages 111–128 in M. Jansen, M. Ocean: Harappan traits on the Oman peninsula.
Mulloy & G. Urban (eds), Forgotten cities on the Pages 107–132 in J. Reade (ed.), The Indian
Indus. Early civilization in Pakistan from the 8th to Ocean in antiquity. London/New York: Kegan Paul
the 2nd millennium BC. Mainz: Verlag Philipp von International & The British Museum.
Zabern. Weisgerber G. 1980. Und Kupfer in Oman. Der Anschnitt
32: 62–110.
Authors’ addresses
Sophie Méry, Université de Rennes 1, CNRS UMR 6566 CReAAH, Campus de Beaulieu, Bâtiment 25 – Pièce 007,
avenue du Général Leclerc – CS 74205, 35042 Rennes Cedex, France.
e-mail sophie.mery@mae.u-paris10.fr
Michele Degli Esposti, Via Larga Castello 10, 40061 Minerbio, Bologna, Italy.
e-mail michele.degliesposti@gmail.com
Dennys Frenez, Department of History and Cultures, University of Bologna, Via San Vitale 28/30, 48121 Ravenna,
Italy.
e-mail dennys.frenez@gmail.com
Jonathan Mark Kenoyer, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1180 Observatory Drive,
Madison, WI 53706, USA.
e-mail: jkenoyer@wisc.edu

Mery Et Al 2017 Indus Salut Ceramics PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mery Et Al 2017 Indus Salut Ceramics PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyrighted material - no unauthorized reproduction in any medium

Seminar for Arabian Studies

Papers from the fiftieth meeting of the

Seminar for Arabian Studies

Seminar for Arabian Studies

STEERING COMMITTEE EDITORIAL COMMITTEE: ADDITIONAL MEMBERS

© 2017 Archaeopress Publishing, Oxford, UK.

In memoriam Beatrice Eileen de Cardi OBE FSA FBA, 1914–2016�����������������������������������������������������������������������������xi

An integrated approach to surveying the archaeological landscapes of Yemen��������������������������������������������������������������9

First campaign of survey and excavations at ShiyāΜ (Sūr, Sultanate of Oman)�����������������������������������������������������������185

The expression h-rhwy in Thamudic B inscriptions from north-west Arabia��������������������������������������������������������������193

An eighteenth-century merchantman off the Red Sea coast of Saudi Arabia�������������������������������������������������������������253

Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 47 (2017): 163–184

Keywords: eastern Arabia, Salūt, Hīlī, technology, pottery, potters

Figure 3. a. A section of the

Figure 7. Pottery sherds from SU89 and SU270 at Salūt ST1.

Figure 8. Salūt ST1 Beige

Figure 9. Salūt ST1 Red

Figure 10. Fine Red Umm

Figure 11. Thin sections

Figure 12. Thin sections of

Figure 13. Indus Micaceous

Figure 14. ST1 Red Sandy Ware,

Nevertheless, mental templates and common gestures

You might also like

In memoriam Beatrice Eileen de Cardi OBE FSA FBA, 1914–2016��xi

An integrated approach to surveying the archaeological landscapes of Yemen��9

First campaign of survey and excavations at ShiyāΜ (Sūr, Sultanate of Oman)��185

The expression h-rhwy in Thamudic B inscriptions from north-west Arabia��193

An eighteenth-century merchantman off the Red Sea coast of Saudi Arabia��253