Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Archaeological Research in Asia

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ara

Islamic ancient Termez: An active and long-established ceramic

manufacturing centre along the silk road
Agnese Fusaro a, *, Josep Maria Gurt Esparraguera a, Enrique Ariño Gil b, Paula Uribe Agudo c,
Jorge Angás Pajas d, Shakir R. Pidaev e
a
ERAAUB, Departamento de Historia y Arqueología, Universitat de Barcelona, carrer de Montalegre 6-8, 08001, Barcelona, Spain
b
Departamento de Prehistoria, Historia Antigua y Arqueología, Universidad de Salamanca, calle Cervantes, 37002, Salamanca, Spain
c
Departamento de Ciencias de la Antigüedad, Universidad de Zaragoza e Instituto de Patrimonio y Humanidades de la Universidad de Zaragoza, calle Pedro Cerbuna 12,
50009 Zaragoza, Spain
d
Departamento de Ingeniería Topográfica y Cartografía, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid - Campus Sur, calle Mercator 2, 28031 Madrid, Spain
e
Institute of Fine Arts, Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan, 100029 Toshkent, Mustaqillik maydoni 2, Uzbekistan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper presents the most recent comprehensive archaeological investigation at ancient Termez, a large site
Termez located in southern Uzbekistan along the Amu Darya river. The Joint Uzbek-Spanish team has worked there since
Islamic pottery 2006. After a first phase of investigation up to 2012, the campaigns restarted in 2018. The paper concentrates on
Ceramic manufacture
the pottery manufacturing centres related to the Islamic period, located outside the rabad (suburbs) to the north-
Kilns
Photogrammetric techniques
west and in the shahristan (lower town). Besides accurately investigating the structures and the stratigraphy of
3D reconstruction each context, ceramic vessels have been collected during surveys and excavations and a selection of them is
presented in this paper to give a broad overview of the wares produced and circulating at Termez. First of all, the
finding of several pottery workshops unquestionably proves that the city was a very active manufacturing centre
for a long period of time. Moreover, the study demonstrates that a large variety of glazed and unglazed items
were locally produced, such as fine tableware, storage and kitchen vessels, but also sphero-conical vessels. Their
forms and decorations largely conform to the Central Asian Islamic ceramic horizon. The ceramics collected have
been dated between the 8th/9th and the 16th/17th century CE.

1. Introduction ceramic items collected in each context have been classified and studied
to give reliable chronological attribution for the workshops and offer a
This paper presents the most recent archaeological investigation of comprehensive overview of the wares circulating and produced at the
the Uzbek-Spanish team (IPAEB - International Pluridisciplinary site of ancient Termez between the 8th/9th and the 16th/17th century
Archaeological Expedition to Bactria) at the site of ancient Termez, and CE.
it concentrates on the local pottery manufacture of the Islamic period.
Since the beginning of the archaeological research at Termez in 2006,
1.1. Historical notes
the IPAEB team has been interested in the study of pottery production,
taking into account that the city was one of the most important
Termez (also Tirmidh or Tarmiz in Arabic-Persian sources) lies in the
manufacturing centres of the region almost throughout its history. The
fertile Surkhan Darya-Amu Darya flood plain in southern Uzbekistan, 7
research on the Islamic phase started in 2009 and it has been continued
km north-west of the modern city (Fig. 1). In ancient times, it was
and developed in the most recent campaign in 2018. Three workshops
located in the northern part of the Bactria/Tokharistan region, and at the
and their kilns have been accurately examined through surface surveys,
southern border of the Transoxiana region, known as Mawarannahr in
interpretation of CORONA aerial images (Angas et al., 2019: 95; Angas
the Arabic sources. The strategic position of Termez, at one of the main
et al., 2021: 36), excavation campaigns, and three-dimensional
crossing points of the Amu Darya and along one of the routes of the Silk
archaeological reconstruction of the kilns. At the same time, the
Road, gave the city an important political and commercial role

* Corresponding author at: carrer de Montalegre, 6-8, 08001 Barcelona, Spain.

E-mail address: agnese.fusaro@gmail.com (A. Fusaro).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ara.2022.100375
Received 19 July 2021; Received in revised form 6 May 2022; Accepted 9 May 2022
Available online 28 May 2022
2352-2267/© 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 1. Map of the site of ancient Termez, with the indications of the ceramic workshops dated to the Islamic period (based on Natural Earth, Google Satellite and
Lesguer, 2015: Fig. 1); top left: Central Asia map with the location of Termez (OpenStreetMap).
throughout its history.
After the Muslim conquest of the city at the end of the 7th century
(Leriche, 2001; Leriche and Pidaev, 2008: 85–86), Termez started to
flourish especially during the 9th–10th centuries, when the city and
whole region passed under the control of the Samanids. The dynasty,
with its strong centralised state, promoted the development of agricul­
ture, mining and craft industries, as well as urban expansion; regional
and trans-Asian trade acquired importance, the major caravan routes
passed through Khurasan and Mawarannahr (Negmatov, 1998: 83–92).
Within this framework, the city became an important port on the Amu
Darya and a great trading post, maintaining this role almost until the
beginning of the 13th century (Le Strange, 1966: 439–441; Karomatov,
2001: 23; Leriche, 2013: 155). Termez also took an active part in the
trade as a manufacturing centre: it exported boats and soap and was also
famous for asafoetida, a much appreciated natural product (Karomatov,
2001: 20, 23–24; Leriche and Pidaev, 2008: 117–118). Historical sour­
ces report that the city also exported jugs (Barthold, 2002: 583), thus
suggesting that the city had a very intense level of ceramic
manufacturing which could provide enough products for its own con­
sumption and at the same time satisfy the external demand. This local
artisanal activity has been widely demonstrated also by the archaeo­
logical discoveries of numerous potters’ workshops and quarters dated
from the early to the very late Islamic period (see § 1.2, § 3).
With respect to the urban planning of the Islamic city, since the
9th–10th century Termez covered an area of about 550 ha and consisted
of three main fortified areas (Fig. 1): the rectangular citadel (kohandez or
ark), located on the southern hill along the Amu Darya River; the city
2
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
proper or lower town (shahristan), north-east of the citadel, densely
inhabited within about 35 ha; and the suburbs (rabad), the biggest area
of the city, where the largest part of the commercial and artisanal ac­
tivities took place, lying east and north-east of the other two settlements.
Between the 11th and the beginning of the 13th century CE the city saw
intensive building activities in the rabad and the shahristan. The rabad
was expanded towards the southeast and it had at least eight or nine
gates. It acquired a well-organised system that included at least ten
caravanserais and three mosques (Karomatov, 2001: 21–22). Metal and
glass workshops were located to the south, a manufacturing area for
boats was on the banks of the river, while the pottery production centres
were situated inside of the walled space, but also in the northern area
outside the enclosures of the rabad and the shahristan (Leriche and
Pidaev, 2008: 109–114; Lesguer, 2015).
Stride has clearly outlined the political role of Termez throughout its
history within the Central Asian framework; the city never reached in­
dependence or created its own power network, but it was a place used by
more powerful states for their own interests. In any case, its strategic
position and related military and commercial role always attracted the
attention of supra-regional states who fought each other for the control
of the city (Stride, 2007: 112–114). Especially during the Islamic period,
this city was a point of contention between Ghaznavids, Qarakhanids,
and Seljuqs, Ghurids and Khwarazmshas, until the Mongols in 1220 took
and sacked the city, slaughtered the population and largely destroyed
ancient Termez (Leriche and Pidaev, 2007: 182). Afterwards, a new city
was rebuilt east of the ancient one, closer to the Surkhan Darya (Kar­
omatov, 2001: 31, 32 and 71; Le Strange, 1966: 441).
A. Fusaro et al.
With respect to ancient Termez, the sources (especially Ibn Ara­
bshah, writing in the 15th century; Karomatov, 2001: 71) say that the
grandson of Timur, Khalil Sultan, decided to reoccupy the citadel of the
abandoned city restoring and strengthening its fortifications. Ancient
Termez was used and occupied until the 16th–17th century, as also
testified by the late ceramic findings recovered in the citadel and the
shahristan (Mirzaakhmedov and Pidaev, 1993; Houal, 2001; Martínez
Ferreras et al., 2020).
1.2. Previous archaeological research-work
The site of ancient Termez has undergone a series of archaeological
investigations on an almost continuous basis since the beginning of the
20th century. The scientific survey of the site in 1926–1928 led by B.P.
Denike (Museum of Eastern Cultures of Moscow), and the archaeological
excavation campaign started in 1936 under the direction of M.E. Masson
(University of Tashkent), were the first that brought to light findings and
structures dated to the Islamic period (Leriche, 2001: 77–79; Pidaev,
2001: 62; Pugachenkova, 2001). Specifically concerning ceramic
manufacturing centres at the site (Fig. 1), a general overview has been
recently published by Fabien Lesguer (Lesguer, 2015). Here we follow
the numbering given to the workshops by the latter to ensure continuity
with previous studies.
Important systematic archaeological investigations were conducted
between 1979 and 1986 as part of the Termez Expedition headed by S.R.
Pidaev. Outside the rabad, north-west of it and north of the shahristan,
Pidaev found a potters’ quarter with two workshops (nos 1–2) dated to
the 11th-beginning of the 12th century (Leriche, 2001:78, 98); Lesguer
(2015: 435–436) reported that unglazed large containers were fired in at
least two kilns. This potters’ quarter was probably destroyed during the
Mongol invasion, and its ruins were partially covered by the latest
graves of a cemetery dated to the 12th–15th century (Moustafakoulov,
2001: 64).
The joint Uzbek-French MAFOuz mission (‘Mission archéologique
franco-ouzbèke de Bactriane septentrionale’) started working at ancient
Termez in 1993 under the direction of P. Leriche and T. Annaev, later
directed by S.R. Pidaev. The focus of MAFOuz is the most ancient periods
of the history of ancient Termez. Nonetheless, they also include the
study of Islamic remains. They found a kiln from the 11th-12thcenturies
in the western part of the site, between the citadel and the Kushan
fortress Tchingiz Tepe, close to the river bank (workshop 4; Leriche and
Pidaev, 2008: 114; Lesguer, 2015: 435).
They investigated more pottery workshops in other areas of the site
(attributed to the 8th–12th centuries; Leriche and Pidaev, 2011: 19;
Lesguer, 2015: 435). One workshop comprising several kilns and a
wasters pit (no. 5) was brought to light in the western portion of the
shahristan by Larissa Baratova, where unglazed fine vessels seem to have
been produced (Lesguer, 2015: 436). Some of the specimens presented
in this paper were collected during this excavation. Furthermore, one of
the workshops found by Pidaev outside the rabad (no. 2) was re-
excavated by the Uzbek-French team (Lesguer, 2015: 436).
Apart from the findings just described, more remains related to
ceramic manufacture were identified (Leriche and Pidaev, 2008:
109–114). In the northern sector of the rabad, very close to and east of an
important caravanserai, there was a workshop (no. 9) with three kilns
specialised in producing unglazed fine high-quality vessels (Karomatov,
2001: 21; Lesguer, 2015: 436). Another workshop (no. 10) was located
in the south-eastern part of the rabad and it manufactured sphero-
conical vessels (Leriche and Pidaev, 2008: 110). Outside the rabad,
just north the shahristan, there was another workshop (no. 8) producing
sphero-conical vessels and glazed items. Outside the rabad, to the south-
east, was a manufacturing centre that specialised in producing fired
bricks (Leriche and Pidaev, 2008: 112; this workshop is not mentioned
by Lesguer).
Between 2006 and 2008, the IPAEB Uzbek-Spanish team also
contributed to a better knowledge of the manufacturing areas at ancient
3
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
Termez by discovering two of the three pottery kilns dated to the pre-
Islamic period: one in the area of Tchingiz Tepe, north-west of the
citadel along the river (workshop 7; 3rd-4th century CE) and another in
the area of Kara Tepe, north-west of the city (workshop 6; 5th century
CE) (Ariño et al., 2007; Martínez Ferreras et al., 2014; Gurt Esparraguera
et al., 2015; Lesguer, 2015; Tsantini et al., 2016). During the recent
campaign in 2018 they found a new workshop (no. 11) dated to the
Islamic period in the area north-west of rabad.
To summarise, eleven pottery workshops in total have been discov­
ered so far at ancient Termez. Three workshops (3, 6, 7) belong to the
pre-Islamic period (dated between the 3rd and the 5th century CE)1 and
eight have been attributed to the Islamic period (1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, and
11). They testify to the continuity and longevity of the tradition of
ceramic manufacture at Termez throughout the centuries.
2. Materials and methods
Of the eight pottery workshops dated to the Islamic period, two (nos
2 and 5) have been further investigated and one (no. 11) was newly
discovered by the Uzbek-Spanish IPAEB team within the new Palarq
project, which started in 2017. The areas of the three workshops
investigated were accurately surveyed and photogrammetric techniques
were used for rapid extensive documentation in the archaeological
prospection. Furthermore, workshops 2, 5, and 11 have been precisely
positioned and georeferenced. The other five Islamic workshops have
not been georeferenced by the Uzbek-Spanish team as they could not be
precisely located in the field during the 2018 survey campaign. There­
fore, we decided to use the location proposed by Lesguer in this latter
case (2015: Fig. 1).
Regarding the photogrammetric system used for the data extraction
of the kilns, a 5 m pole with a micro four-thirds Olympus EPM 1 camera
and a Zuiko Digital ED lens 12 mm f2 perpendicular to the ground was
set up.
We obtained an 8.2 × 6.2 m image footprint with a resolution of 2
mm per pixel, with an overlap between longitudinal and transverse
images of 65–70%. This technique was used at several points of the
archaeological site as it allows for digitizing an area of approximately
2000 m2 in just one hour in high resolution, which guaranteed docu­
mentation in a short time with a better resolution obtained in the final
orthophoto set.
The documentation collected was processed using Agisoft Metha­
shape Professional. The results were exported in different formats. Thus,
we created a web platform that could be accessed online with a browser
in high resolution and different types of scale:
- 3D point clouds on Potree (free open-source WebGL based point
cloud renderer for large point clouds). Potree is based upon three.js
library.
- JSON meshes for the browser viewer and Sketchfab platform for
information sharing (https://sketchfab.com/IPAEB).
- Web mapping of each orthophoto of the excavation sites using
Leaflet and open-source JavaScript library.
The work carried out so far has produced accurate 3D models for
each of the three workshops investigated and of the related kilns.
While the kiln of workshop 2, north of rabad, was just cleaned to
obtain its precise 3D model, the kilns of workshop 5 in the shahristan
were also partially re-excavated by the Uzbek-Spanish team in order to
clarify their structure (firebox, grate, firing chamber, entrance, etc.) and
to collect organic remains and ceramic items inside the kilns, useful to
1
Kiln 3 was excavated by the Uzbek-Japanese team, but no chronological
attribution has been proposed so far (Tsantini et al., 2016). According to the
investigations conducted by the Uzbek-Spanish team, kilns 3 and 6 should be
considered a single workshop, also because of their proximity.
A. Fusaro et al. Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375

Fig. 2. Left: orthophoto mosaic of the surveyed area of workshop 11; right: overlapped layers of kiln 1, workshop 11.

Fig. 3. 3D model and sections (above: western section, below: southern section) of kiln 2, workshop 2.

date and identify the ceramic manufactures related to this workshop. not only on the surface but also in the layers just below (Fig. 2). The
The team conducted more extensive work in workshop 11, north- metric references were taken with a laser distance measuring device
west of rabad. First, a photographic survey was carried out on a rect­
angular area of 20 × 15 m to acquire field data through SfM (Structure
from Motion) photogrammetric techniques and obtain geometric
documentation that allowed for analysing the archaeological remains

4
A. Fusaro et al. Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375

Table 1
Selected ceramics from workshop 2, collected in the area of the kiln 2.
North-west of rabad – workshop 2

Inv.no. Context Description Chronology

TNWR1 Kiln 2 Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, coarse fabric. Large flat lids. Carved and comb incised decoration. (unknown diam.) 11th–12th
TNWR2 c.
TNWR3 Kiln 2 Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Handled jug, cone-truncated neck and vertical strap handle. Carved decoration; 10th–11th
applied button-shaped elements on the handle. (diam.: ca 13 cm) c.
TNWR4 Kiln 2 Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse and coarse buff fabric. Large jars, cone-truncated neck. TNWR5 and TNWR6 bear a 10th–11th
TNWR5 carved decoration. (diam.: 35–45 cm) c.
TNWR6
TNWR7 Kiln 2 Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse buff fabric. Large jars, cylindrical neck; TNWR8 also has a vertical strap handle. 10th–11th
TNWR8 TNWR7 bears a carved decoration. (diam.: 30 cm; 40 cm) c.

Fig. 4. Selected ceramics found in the area of kiln 2, workshop 2.

(Angas et al., 2019; Angas et al., 2021).2
Excavations were also conducted in the whole surveyed area, and
this brought to light a large living/working area and a kiln belonging to
workshop 11.
As far as the pottery is concerned, the classification and the analysis
of the ceramic material found in the three workshops, inside the kilns
and in the stratigraphic layers of the western area of workshop 11 have
been conducted in parallel and are still ongoing.
Selected ceramic items will be presented for each context and layer,
they best exemplify the most widespread wares found at this site ac­
cording to their fabric and morphological and stylistic features. Most of
the selected samples are being further examined through archaeometric
analysis for a better technological characterization of the local produc­
tion and to clearly distinguish items made locally, manufactured within
the region, and imports coming from more distant lands. The chronology
of the workshops has been proposed by matching the ceramic data and
the results obtained from the 14C tests on organic remains, conducted by
the Beta Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory, Miami, Florida.
2
The 3D models of the kilns presented herein are available online at https://
sketchfab.com/IPAEB, Courtesy of the IPAEB project.
3. Workshops, kilns and ceramics
3.1. North-west of Rabad, outside the city wall
3.1.1. Workshop 2
Workshop 2 is located north of the rabad outside the defensive walls
on a natural slope (Fig. 1). It has been partially excavated and comprises
at least three kilns (Pidaev, 1986; Pidaev and Rakhmanov, 1995; Les­
guer, 2015: 436). Two kilns were brought to light by the MAFOuz team,
one circular (kiln 2–1), not excavated, and the other with a trapezoidal
shape (kiln 2–2), recently re-examined by the Uzbek-Spanish team. As
the latter was previously excavated by the MAFOuz team, the new
investigation was restricted to the emptying and cleaning of the kiln
chambers in order to document the structure in detail. At the base of the
firebox, a few remains of the original deposit were recovered; as they
appeared undisturbed, they were used for 14C dating (see § 3.1.2).
Kiln 2–2 is quite large and has a grate supported by arches dividing
the firebox from the firing chamber (Fig. 3). Unfortunately, the grate has
not been preserved. Nonetheless, judging from the static system of
arches which had supported it, the grate would have been of consider­
able size and thickness. It is possible that the heating from the firebox
flowed into the firing chamber through the interstices between the

5
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 5. Plan of workshop 11 showing the artificial cuttings in the bedrock. Bottom: photo and plan of the most regular and better-preserved cutting found during
the excavation.
arches on the four sides. The firebox is particularly large, 3.76 m in
width and 4.78 m in length without including the lateral walls; its
height, calculated in the axis of the chamber, would exceed 3 m. Its
entry, located in the upper part of the firebox, is quite small.
The presence of arches and the quadrangular shape of kiln 2–2 are
features which make it different from the majority of the kilns of the
Islamic period found at the site, except for the comparable but smaller
example discovered in workshop 4 (Lesguer, 2015: 435). Kilns of similar
shape and with two chambers have been found in other Central Asian
sites such as Samarqand (Shishkina and Pavchinskaja, 1992: 42), Merv
(Herrmann et al., 1997: 1–33; Siméon, 2012: pl. 3/2), and Khar Khuj, a
site in the Jam area, where a large rectangular kiln with two chambers
was found (Gascoigne and Bridgman, 2010: 107). In Iran, at the site of
Gurgan, there exists an elongated kiln of 2.30 × 1.90 m (Kiani, 1984:
6
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
37–38).
3.1.2. Ceramics and chronology
As the kiln had been previously investigated, no pottery items were
found inside the structure, but several ceramic vessels were recovered
from the surrounding area. They comprised unglazed handled jars and
flat lids that are attributed to the 10th–12th century (Table 1: TNWR1–8;
Fig. 4). This chronological attribution is based on the comparative
analysis of the items with similar vessels from coeval Central Asian sites,
such as Balkh, Lashkari Bazar, Nishapur, Hulbuk, Vardanzeh and Uč
Kulah-Bukhara. The suggested dating is in accordance with the original
dating proposed by Pidaev after its excavation (see § 1.2). However, it is
in contrast to the results of the 14C tests on ashes and charcoal collected
by the ERAAUB team inside the firebox of the kiln 2 that give an earlier
A. Fusaro et al. Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375

Table 2
Selected ceramics from the workshop 11, collected in different archaeological contexts and stratigraphic layers of the area (© A. Fusaro).
North-west of rabad, north of shahristan – workshop 11

Inv.no. Arch. context Description chronology

TNWR 9 above the bedrock, inside Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine pale red fabric. Hemispherical bowl. 10th c. ca
the cuttings White slip and transparent colourless glaze. Underglaze dark brown geometric lines and red dots. (diam.:
ca 20 cm)
TNWR 10 above the bedrock, inside Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Hemispherical bowls. Carved ribbed decoration. 9th–11th c.
TNWR the cuttings (diam.: ca 25 cm)
11
TNWR 12 above the bedrock, inside Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse buff fabric. Conical basins. Plain surfaces. (diam.: 9th–11th c.
TNWR the cuttings 30 cm; 40 cm)
13
TNWR 14 above the bedrock, inside Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Jugs. Carved and cut geometric decoration. 9th–10th c.
TNWR the cuttings
15
TNWR 16 above the bedrock, inside Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse pinkish fabric, with cream white surface. Disc 10th–12th c.
the cuttings base possibly belonging to an item similar toTNWR27. Horizontal carving. (diam.: 20 cm)
TNWR 17 above the bedrock, inside Unglazed hand-made(?) earthenware, coarse brown fabric. Small globular cooking pot. Soot marks. 10th–13th c.
the cuttings (diam.: 12–13 cm)

TNWR 18 above the bedrock, under Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware. Medium-fine pale brown fabric. Conical bowl, slightly inturned 11th–12th c.?
the first floor flat rim. (diam.: 22 cm)
TNWR 19 above the bedrock, under Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine pale brown fabric. Bowl. 10th–12th c.
the first floor White slip and transparent colourless glaze. Smeared brown grid pattern. (unknown diam.)
TNWR 20 above the bedrock, under Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware. Medium-coarse buff fabric. Flattened lid (?). Plain surfaces. unknown
the first floor (diam.: 14 cm)

TNWR 21 northern room, occupation So-called Buff ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine light red to pale brown fabric. 9th–10th c.
TNWR layer Hemispherical bowls, TNWR22 also preserves the disc base. White slip and transparent colourless glaze.
22 Underglaze polychrome painted brown, green, and yellow geometric decoration. (rim diam.: 20 cm;
base diam.: 10 cm)
TNWR 23 northern room, occupation Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine buff fabric. Lamp with open reservoir, ring-shaped Late 9th–12th c.
layer handle. Soot marks on the mouth. (rim diam.: 5,5 cm; base diam.: 4)
TNWR 24 northern room, occupation Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Jug, disc base.(diam.: ca 12 cm) 10th–11th c.
layer
TNWR 25 northern room, occupation Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Jug, disc base with three small cone-truncated 9th/10th–11th c.
layer feet added to the lower surface. Plain surfaces. (diam.: 9 cm)
TNWR 26 northern room, occupation Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware. Fine light grey fabric. Tall jar, ovoid body. Plain surfaces. (rim 9th–12th c.
layer diam.: 15 cm; base diam.: 9 cm)
TNWR 27 northern room, occupation Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine buff fabric. High cylindrical stand with disc base, 10th–12th c.
layer resembling a candlestick. Horizontal moldings and stamped floral decoration. (base diam.: 14 cm)

TNWR 28 northern room, Sphero-conical vessels. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine grey fabric, highly overfired. 10th–12th c.
TNWR abandonment layer Globular body. Horizontal carvings and comb incised lines. (maximum body diam.: 10 cm; 12 cm)
29
TNWR 30 northern room, Sphero-conical vessel. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine grey fabric, highly overfired. Oval Probably 12th c.
abandonment layer body. Comb impressed and comb incised decoration and carvings. (maximum body diam.: 8 cm)
TNWR 31 northern room, Sphero-conical vessels. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine grey fabric, highly overfired. 10th–12th c.?
TNWR abandonment layer Globular body, carinated shoulder. Carved, comb impressed, and comb incised decoration, and stamped
32 triangles. (maximum body diam.: 9 cm; 10 cm)
TNWR 33 northern room, Sphero-conical vessels. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine light grey fabric, highly overfired. Probably 12th c.
TNWR abandonment layer Cylindrical body, carinated shoulder. Comb impressed segments and comb incised lines. (maximum
34 body diam.: 8–9 cm)

TNWR 35 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Turquoise monochrome ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse pale brown fabric, 10th–12th c.
with cream white outer surface. Small shallow hemispherical bowl. Opaque (?) turquoise glaze. (rim
diam.: 6 cm; base diam.: 3 cm)
Kiln 1, abandonment layer Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine red fabric. Hemispherical bowl. Probably 11th c.
TNWR White slip and transparent colourless glaze. Smeared brown parallel oblique lines. (diam.: ca 23 cm)
36
Kiln 1, abandonment layer Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine dark red fabric. Probably 11th c.
TNWR Hemispherical bowl. White slip and transparent colourless glaze. Brown geometric decoration and large
37 green dots. (diam.: ca 24 cm)
TNWR 38 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Splashed sgraffiato ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine red fabric. Hemispherical bowls. White 10th–11th c.
TNWR slip and transparent colourless glaze. Incised geometric decoration; inglaze mustard yellow and green
39 splashes, and brown dots. (rim diam.: ca 12–25 cm; base diam.: ca 6–10 cm)
TNWR
40
TNWR
41
TNWR
42
TNWR 43 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Splashed sgraffiato ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine red fabric. Pot or jar, cylindrical body. 10th–12th c.
White slip and transparent colourless glaze. Incised palmette motifs, inglaze mustard yellow and green
splashes. (diam.: 8 cm)
TNWR 44 Kiln 1, abandonment layer 10th–12th c.
(continued on next page)

7
A. Fusaro et al. Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375

Table 2 (continued )
North-west of rabad, north of shahristan – workshop 11

Inv.no. Arch. context Description chronology

Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Stopper for jugs, cylindrical body and upper disc.
(maximum diam.: 8–9 cm)
TNWR 45 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine buff fabric. Flattened lid, shallow conical body and 9th–12th c.
cone-truncated handle. Concentric carvings. (base diam.: ca 10 cm; maximum diam.: 20 cm)
TNWR 46 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Convex lid (or very shallow conical dish). Plain unknown
surfaces. (diam.: ca 16 cm)
TNWR 47 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine buff fabric. Handled jug, high cylindrical neck. 10th–12th c.
Horizontal molding with finger impressions, carved and comb incised decoration. (diam.: ca 6 cm)
TNWR 48 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff-pinkish fabric. Handled globular jugs, high narrow 10th–11th c.
TNWR cylindrical neck. Horizontal molding with finger impressions and carvings, TNWR49 also has rosette and
49 cross motifs made of applied stamped button-shaped elements. They possibly belong to the same object.
(diam.: 10 cm)
TNWR 50 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Handled jugs, high cone-truncated neck, ovoid 10th–11th c.
TNWR body, vertical strap handle. Row of applied stamped button-shaped elements on the neck. (rim diam.:
51 6–7 cm; base diam.: 7–8 cm)
TNWR
52
TNWR
53
TNWR 54 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Jar, short cylindrical neck. Carvings on the neck. 10th–12th c.
(diam.: 15 cm)
TNWR 55 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Jug, cylindrical neck. Carvings below the rim. 10th–12th c.
(diam.: 10 cm)
TNWR 56 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Handled jugs, cone-truncated neck, biconical 10th–11th c.
TNWR body, and vertical strap handle. Some show a row of applied stamped button-shaped elements on the
57 neck. TNWR58–59-60 also have three small conical feet added to the disc base: this feature leads
TNWR proposing an attribution to the 9th/10th–11th centuries. (rim diam.: 7–9 cm; base diam.: 7–10 cm)
58
TNWR
59
TNWR
60
TNWR 61 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse buff fabric. Large jar, biconical body. Horizontal 10th–12th c.
wavy molding, parallel carved lines and comb impressed notches. (diam.: 30 cm)
TNWR 62 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed earthenware, possibly wheel-thrown neck and mould-made body; coarse pale red fabric. Possibly Early Islamic
Handled globular jar, cylindrical neck, two vertical tubular handles. Red slip. Carved zig zag pattern on period (7th/8th–9th c.)
the handles. (diam.: ca 9 cm)
TNWR 63 Kiln 1, abandonment layer Unglazed hand-made earthenware, overfired coarse grey fabric. Handled cooking pot, vertical strap 10th–13th c.
handle, it probably had two. Incised zig zag pattern on the handle. Soot marks. (diam.: ca 20 cm)

TNWR 64 surface layers Slip-painted ware, lustreware imitation. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine pale red fabric. Large 10th-early 11th c.
TNWR carinated dish with wide everted rim. White slip and transparent colourless glaze. Underglaze brown
65 and mustard yellow vegetal motifs. They most probably belong to the same object. (rim diam.: ca 30 cm,
base diam.: ca 20 cm)
TNWR 66 surface layers Slip-painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine pale red to red fabric. Dishes. White slip and 10th c.
TNWR transparent colourless glaze. Underglaze black decoration: epigraphic Kufic band (TNWR66) and
67 geometric motifs (TNWR67), with details scratched through the painting. (diam.: 25 cm; 32 cm)
TNWR 68 surface layers Slip-painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine red fabric. Bowls, ring base. White slip and 10th–11th c.
TNWR transparent colourless glaze. Underglaze red and black decoration: Solomon’s knot and floral motifs
69 (TNWR68) or pseudo-epigraphic bands (TNWR69). (diam.: 11 cm; 12 cm)
TNWR 70 surface layers Slip-painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine red fabric. Hemispherical and conical bowls, 10th–11th c.
TNWR TNWR70 and TNWR71 have ring bases. White slip and transparent colourless glaze.
71 Underglazepolychrome decoration with mustard yellow, dark brown/black, red, green, and white
TNWR paintings: geometric motifs, TNWR71 also shows a stylised crane-like bird.(TNWR70, base diam.: 12 cm;
72 TNWR71, rim diam.: 28,4 cm – base diam.: ca 10 cm; TNWR72, rim diam.: 12 cm).
TNWR
73
TNWR 74 surface layers Slip-painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine red fabric. Bowl, disc base. Mustard yellow 10th-early 11th c.
slip and transparent colourless glaze. Underglaze polychrome dark brown and white decoration, most
probably a human or zoomorphic representation. (diam.: 10 cm)
TNWR 75 surface layers Slip-painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine red fabric. Bowl, disc base. White slip and 10thc.
transparent colourless glaze. Underglaze polychrome dark brown, red, mustard yellow, and white
geometric decoration: four irregular frames divided by pearled bands. (diam.: 10 cm)
TNWR 76 surface layers Splashed sgraffiato ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine pale red fabric. Large dish with wide 10th–11th c.
everted rim. White slip and transparent colourless glaze. Incised geometric decoration; inglaze mustard
yellow and green splashes and brown dots.(rim diam.: ca 35 cm, base diam.: 26 cm)
TNWR 77 surface layers Splashed sgraffiato ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine pale red fabric. Small hemispherical 10th–11th c.
bowl. White slip and transparent colourless glaze. Incised stylised floral and vegetal motifs; inglaze
mustard yellow and green splashes, and green dots.(rim diam.: 12,5 cm; base diam.: ca 6 cm).
TNWR 78 surface layers Unglazed hand-made earthenware, fine buff fabric. Small flat cover for jugs with a circular piercing hole. (9th)-10th c.
Stamped rosette framed by concentric circles. (diam.: 9 cm)
TNWR 79 surface layers Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, coarse compact pale brown fabric, with lighter colour upper 11th–12th c.
surface. Large flat lid. Comb impressed oblique segments. (diam.: ca 32 cm)
TNWR 80 surface layers 9th–11th c.
(continued on next page)

8
A. Fusaro et al. Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375

Table 2 (continued )
North-west of rabad, north of shahristan – workshop 11

Inv.no. Arch. context Description chronology

Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse light red fabric, with cream white surfaces.
Shallow conical basin. Plain surfaces. (rim diam.: 40 cm)
TNWR 81 surface layers Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine buff fabric. Closed (?) vessel, high narrow disc base. Plain Unknown
surfaces. (diam.: ca 4 cm)
TNWR 82 surface layers Unglazed hand-made earthenware, coarse brown fabric. Globular cooking pot. Double zigzag carving on 10th–13th c.
the shoulder. Soot marks. (diam.: ca 20 cm)
TNWR 83 surface layers Sphero-conical vessel. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, highly overfired fine grey fabric, with 10th–12th c.
greenish surfaces. Globular body. Stamped relief concentric circles. (outer body diam.: ca 9 cm)
TNWR 84 surface layers Sphero-conical vessel. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, very fine grey fabric, highly overfired. Probably 12th c.
Carinated shoulder. Carved, impressed, and stamped geometric decoration. (outer shoulder diam.: ca 8
cm, inner rim diam.: 1 cm)

Fig. 6. Selected ceramics found above the bedrock and inside the cuttings of the south-eastern area, under the layers related to the tannur, workshop 11.

date, to the mid-9th-mid-10th century (Table 4).
All the items have coarse to medium-coarse buff fabrics. The ma­
jority of the jars selected are large in size, with a rim diameter of about
30–40 cm. Rims are invariably rectangular-section thickened, projecting
outwards, and the necks are cylindrical or more frequently cone-
truncated. All are plain, except for the presence of simple carvings
(TNWR5–7). Going by item TNWR8 (Fig. 4), it is highly probable that all
the jars could have had one or more vertical handles. The handled jug
TNWR3 is the smallest and finest vessel of the group; it has a cone-
truncated neck and a large vertical strap handle with two applied
button-shaped elements on the upper part. Especially its morphology
and decorative features lead to attributing this jug to the same ware
exemplified by the jugs collected in workshop 11(see § 3.1.4). The
substantial number of large flat lids found in this kiln is represented by
the selected items TNWR1–2 (Fig. 4).
3.1.3. Workshop 11
North-west of the rabad and north of the shahristan, Workshop 11 is
the fourth Islamic pottery manufacturing centre with an extra moenia
location but it had never been investigated before. In 2018 the Uzbek-
Spanish team thoroughly surveyed and excavated a large area with ev­
idence of anthropic activities, mainly ceramic wasters. The area is
delimited by the defensive walls of the shahristan to the south and by the
walls of rabad to the south-east, while a series of low hillocks forms its
northern limit, dividing it from the Buddhist monasteries of Kara Tepe
and Fayaz Tepe (Fig. 1). Through the survey and the photogrammetry, it
was possible to detect remarkable concentrations of ceramic artefacts as
well as structures with a southeast-northwest orientation (345◦ from the
magnetic North), identified in the central and north-western portions of
the surveyed area. Furthermore, the photogrammetry of the surface in
the southern part led to finding a kiln (no. 1) prior to the excavation
based on the change of colour of the ground due to the humidity of the
mud-brick walls, as well as the large ash stains (Fig. 2).
Extensive excavations of the area west of kiln 1 followed, confirming
the preliminary results of the photographic survey: a ceramic workshop
was brought to light comprising a living/working area with several
rooms (delimited by the structures mentioned above that have been
identified as walls of different phases), the kiln itself and dumps nearby.
The excavations reached the virgin soil. The first evidence related to
human occupation consists of a series of cuttings made directly in the
sandstone bedrock (phase one; Fig. 5). The archaeological data at our
disposal do not clarify if these cuttings were coeval or earlier than the
workshop activity. The ceramics associated are dated to the Islamic
period (Table 2: TNWR9–20; Fig. 6). Of the 12 selected items, three are
glazed. The most interesting one is bowl TNWR9, which has an under­
glaze painted decoration in brown and red. Its form and painting recall
similar bowls dated to the 10th century. The underglaze painted bowl
TNWR19 shows a brown grid pattern whose lines are highly smeared
(Fig. 6). This feature possibly suggests that it can be considered a badly
fired product that circulated in the market as a second-rate product.
Four of the unglazed items are fine hemispherical bowls and jugs made
of buff fabric and have a carved and cut decoration (TNWR10, 11, 14,
15); they could be dated around the 9th–11th century, the most ancient
ones being TNWR 14–15 (9th–10th century, for comparisons, see Gar­
din, 1957: 32, 39, pl. VI, pl. XVI/3; Morgan and Leatherby, 1987: pl. 37,
figs. 40–41; Shishkina and Pavchinskaja, 1992: cat.nos 75, 76, 82, 85,

9
A. Fusaro et al. Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375

Fig. 7. From top to bottom: plan of the western area of workshop 11; photo and drawings of the tannur and its pipe lying directly on the ceramic quadrangular item,
found in the southernmost room of workshop 11; plan and photo of the square-shaped fireplace found in the layer above the tannur.

10
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 8. Plan of the eastern area of workshop 11 showing the walls (orange) and the lime whitewash covering them (black); photo of the east-west oriented wall with
its mud bricks disposed to form a checkerboard pattern.
86; Simeón, 2009: figs. 124–127).
Among the cuttings identified in the bedrock, only one has a more
regular shape (Fig. 5); it is rectangular in plan (96 × 69 cm), with a cone-
truncated section and a north-south orientation, showing a further su­
perficial rectangular cutting inside with the opposite orientation (144 ×
134 cm). The rectangular cutting also has a hole on the southern side, in
the lower part. We cannot exclude the possibility that it was a decan­
tation tank for clay. Inside the cutting, ceramic sherds, fragments of
glass, bones, charcoal, and even incomplete iron scissors were found.
The first built structure found in the area and lying just above the
bedrock is a massive wall of mud bricks with a North-South orientation
(mud-brick sizes: 32 × 29, 28 × 31, 28 × 26, 28 × 25 cm). Afterwards, to
the west, three mud-brick walls were built to establish two rooms: one
wall parallel and two perpendicular to the ancient one (phase two;
Fig. 7). The new spaces delimited by these three walls belong to a later
phase than that of the massive N-S wall as the new walls lie on
archaeological layers and not directly on the bedrock. A lime floor was
discovered in the southernmost space/room, as well as a large ceramic
quadrangular flat item (55 cm side) with a circular hole in the centre, its
diameter being 10 cm (Fig. 7). This could have been the lower part of a
potter’s wheel.
In the next phase (phase three), a tannur3 with its related pipe was
placed on this floor and supported by ceramic sherds, this partially
destroyed the floor to better fit in the lowest layers (Fig. 7). The pipe
related to the tannur, which allows for the flow of air inside the oven to
feed the fire, lies directly on the quadrangular item of the previous
phase; the pipe was found covered by reused fragments of jars. The
microfaunal remains and charcoal collected inside the oven suggest its
culinary use and the 14C analysis on the charcoal dates the use of the
tannur to between the late 8th and the late 9th centuries (Table 4; Por­
tero et al., 2021).
During a later occupation phase of the area (phase four), the wall
3
This term defines a cylindrical or cone-truncated vertical clay oven for
cooking and baking. For comparisons with tannur similar to the one found in
Termez, see Whitehouse, 1970: pl. IIc; Wilkinson, 1986: 89, 190, 223–224, figs
3.7–3.9, 261; Bernard et al., 1992: 290, fig. 12; Pozzi et al., 2013: 114, pl. 14;
Fusaro, 2014: pl. CLXVII.
11
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
between the two areas was covered and obliterated by a filling layer,
thus creating a single larger space and raising the level of the floor above
the rim of the tannur. A square-shaped ceramic fireplace with a large
circular opening was placed in the centre (Fig. 7).
A new eastern space was delimited by a wall, covering the first
massive N-S wall and with the same north-south orientation (Fig. 8). The
wall was quite thin and was made with mud bricks laid vertically on
their narrower sides; most of the mud bricks were burnt and the wall had
a lime whitewash. A perpendicular wall was placed to the east of the
former, leaning against it; its mud bricks were disposed to form a
checkerboard pattern, and both sides of the wall had a facing made of
horizontal rows of lined up rectangular mud bricks (mud-brick sizes: 34
× 27, 33 × 28, 32 × 30, 31 × 28, 30 × 28, 30 × 27 cm) (Fig. 8). It formed
two rooms. The southern space showed traces of a further fireplace that
was not excavated. On the opposite side, in the northern room, the floor
covered the regular cutting made in the bedrock (Fig. 5) and the walls
were covered with a thin lime whitewash.
A large quantity of complete sphero-conical vessels and several
wasters of the same type were collected in the abandonment layer of this
space (selected specimens are presented in Table 2: TNWR28–34;
Figs. 9–10). All are made of overfired grey body. They have hemi­
spherical mouths on very short necks and pointed bases, their bodies
range from spherical to oval and cylindrical. All have a decorated sur­
face: horizontal carvings, comb impressed and comb incised motifs are
the most frequent. The ceramic assemblage collected in the occupation
layer of this room (Table 2: TNWR21–27; Fig. 9), just below the aban­
donment layer, could give a terminus post-quem for the production and
circulation of the sphero-conical vessels. Among the most interesting
items found there were: unglazed fine buff jugs TNWR24–25, identical
to those found inside kiln 11–1, an unglazed lamp with open reservoir
TNWR23, and a single high cylindrical stand with stamped floral motifs
TNWR27, possibly interpreted as a high lamp or an incense burner
(Gardin, 1957: 35, fig. 9; Wilkinson, 1973: 314, cat.nos 73, 75; VV.AA.,
2018: figs. 13, 20; Siméon, personal communication). Within the same
assemblage, the glazed vessels are represented by two underglaze
painted hemispherical bowls belonging to the so-called “Buff ware”
(TNWR21–22, Fig. 9). These can be considered remarkable chronolog­
ical markers, attributable to the 9th–10th century (Wilkinson, 1973: 8,
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 9. Selected ceramics from the north-eastern room, workshop 11.
17, cat.nos 5, 6, 56; Shishkina, 1979: pl. XLI/1–6; Nekrasova, 1999: fig.
7/1; Simeón, 2009: fig. 369; Houal and with the collaboration of S. Le
Maguer, 2013: s. 4/2). Therefore, the sphero-conical vessels can be
dated to a 10th–12th century timespan.
To summarise, several spaces/rooms were created in this area above
the bedrock cuttings and were probably part of a larger living/working
area. A series of filling layers cover these rooms, thus obliterating them.
Inside these layers, more specifically over the area of the square-shaped
fireplace, there have been found several items connected with the pot­
tery manufacturing process that are particularly worth mentioning: raw
clay lumps scattered in the soil, a compacted and solid clay cylinder
ready to be shaped by the potter, and three fragments belonging to the
pointed bases of unfired sphero-conical vessels, that were probably left
to dry in this area before their firing in the kiln (Fig. 10). These items are
12
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
not associated with any specific structure of the workshop. This evi­
dence, along with the wasters of sphero-conical vessels above
mentioned, clearly seems to point to this area having been used for
artisanal activities until its last phase of occupation and having speci­
alised in the manufacture of pottery and sphero-conical vessels. There­
fore, north-west of the rabad in an extra moenia area of the city of ancient
Termez, a ceramic workshop was active at least since the 9th century.
An updraft circular kiln (kiln 11–1) is also associated with this
workshop (Fig. 11). The structure cuts through some of the surface
filling layers just described that were used as a foundation for its con­
struction. According to the 14C analysis conducted on charcoal pieces
collected on the grate and in the firebox, the kiln could be dated between
the second half of the 8th and the late 9th century (Table 4).
The kiln has two chambers: a firebox, that partially cut previous
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 10. Items related to the pottery manufacturing process found in the filling layers of workshop 11. a) clay cylinder, b) bases of unfired sphero-conical vessels; c)
two wasters of sphero-conical vessels.
buildings and some of the earlier filling layers, and a firing chamber, dug
into the bedrock and covered with mud bricks laid horizontally. The two
were divided by a very thick grate, whose diameter is between 2.61 and
2.75 m. Each chamber has its own access, that of the firebox is under­
ground and is located north-east, while the entrance to the firing
chamber is at the same level as the grate, to the north. The grate has
three concentric circles of 11, 10 and 3 holes respectively, through
which the heating passes from the firebox into the firing chamber
(Fig. 12). The first circle, closer to the inner wall of the kiln, has the
largest openings when compared to the other two. A large hole has been
found just in the centre of the grate. It was surely opened after the kiln
was completed, and probably when the kiln was still in use, as suggested
by the undisturbed abandonment layer above the grate which seals it.
The larger central hole is possibly related to a slight technological
change in the firing process of ceramics. Kilns with similar grates were
found at the sites of Nishapur and Takht-i Suleiman (Naumann, 1971:
173, 180, figs. 1, 6), they also exist in modern pottery workshops in
Central Asia, such as at Tashqurgan and Charasyab in Afghanistan
(Demont and Centlivres, 1967: 43) and in Uzbekistan (Rakhimov, 2006:
52–56, figs. 6–7).
Only one thick abandonment layer was recovered in the kiln, filling
both the area above the grate (i.e. what remains of the firing chamber)
and the firebox. This layer is related to only one human activity, as
testified by the finding of different fragments of the same vessel scat­
tered inside the kiln. This is probably due to the presence of the large
central hole of the grate, easily connecting the firebox with the spaces
above. A large quantity of ceramic material comes from this layer (a
selection is in Table 2: TNWR35–63; Fig. 13).
Traces of a dump, later than the abandonment of the kiln, were
identified above the filling layers.
3.1.4. Ceramics and chronology
The new stratigraphy brought to light in the western area of work­
shop 11 by the Uzbek-Spanish team produced a large collection of ves­
sels dated between the 9th and the 11th–12th centuries. The large
amount of sphero-conical vessels found in the area is also worth
mentioning and can be dated approximately to the 10th–12th centuries,
13
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
also according to the associated ceramic assemblages. This finding,
along with the presence of unfired items and wasters, is further evidence
that Termez was among the well-known production sites of these
peculiar containers. Some scholars have suggested that the manufacture
of sphero-conical vessels in such great quantity was possibly linked to
the transportation of the asafoetida (see § 1.1, Karomatov, 2001: 24;
Leriche and Pidaev, 2008:110, 115, 118).
There are no wasters among the ceramics collected inside the kiln
11–1, therefore there is no conclusive proof regarding what was origi­
nally manufactured in the kiln. Nonetheless, it is possible to suggest that
it was probably associated with the production of unglazed handled fine
buff jugs, as these are the most abundant vessels found there (Table 2:
TNWR47–60; Fig. 13). Moreover, most of them have been recovered
lying on the grate in a quite good condition, some are almost complete;
therefore, we cannot exclude the possibility that these were the last
items fired in the workshop.
The jugs collected can be divided into two main groups (Fig. 13a).
The first is represented by items with high narrow cone-truncated necks,
frequently decorated with rows of applied stamped button-shaped ele­
ments (for comparisons, see Simeón, 2009: figs. 79–80; Pozzi, 2012: pl.
10/56; Siméon, 2013: fig. 4c), sometimes associated with an applied
strip with finger impressions and comb incised motifs; they have an
ovoid body, disc base and vertical strap handle with a thumb-stop
(TNWR47–53). The second group comprises jugs with a much squatter
body and shorter neck; the neck shape ranges from cylindrical to cone-
truncated, and the body has a biconical shape with a vertical strap
handle usually with a thumb-stop; the disc base sometimes has three
additional small feet (TNWR56–60; for comparisons, see Gardin, 1957:
32, pl. VI/11b, 11e; Wilkinson, 1973: 297–299, 304, cat.nos 11, 18, 36;
Nekrasova, 1999: fig. 13/8; Simeón, 2009: figs. 63–64, pls 17, 19; Houal
and with the collaboration of S. Le Maguer, 2013: figs. 4/5–6-8, 6/7).
The specimens of this second group are usually undecorated, and a few
show two or three applied stamped button-shaped elements on the neck.
No sphero-conical vessels were found inside the kiln, in contrast with
the large quantity recovered in the excavated western and northern
areas. This evidence should indicate that even if the manufacturing area
was also dedicated to the production of these peculiar containers, they
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 11. Plan of workshop 11 with kiln 1. Colours legend: purple for phase one; orange for the structures built during phases two and four; brown for phase three; red
for phase four; black for lime whitewash covering the walls.
were fired in another kiln, whose location is still to be verified.
Besides the abundant fine jugs, the ceramic assemblage of the
abandonment layer of the kiln comprises a large quantity of other un­
glazed vessels such as small flat lids and stoppers, probably related to the
same jugs, jars (also coated with red slip), and cooking pots (Fig. 13b).
The amount of glazed vessels recovered inside the kiln is far smaller.
Among those selected for the study, the majority are hemispherical
bowls belonging to the splashed sgraffiato ware (TNWR38–42, Fig. 13a),
dated to the 10th–11th century (Wilkinson, 1973: 58–59, 63, 64–67, cat.
nos 4, 27, 29, 40–43, 58; Nekrasova, 1999: fig. 12; Simeón, 2009: figs.
485, 491, 506, 508, 513; Houal and with the collaboration of S. Le
Maguer, 2013: fig. 4/11) and there is only one closed form (TNWR43,
Fig. 13a). There is also a turquoise monochrome small shallow bowl
(TNWR35, Fig. 13a), one hemispherical bowl with highly smeared
brown painting (TNWR36, Fig. 13a) that recalls the vessel TNWR19
from the filling inside the bedrock cuttings, and one hemispherical bowl
with underglaze painted decoration in brown, green, and red (TNWR37)
which in terms of form and painting palette resembles the bowl with the
bird (TNWR71, see Fig. 14) found in the surface layers. The ceramic
material found inside the kiln should be coeval or slightly later than the
use of the structure. The parallels with pottery from other Central Asian
sites such as Nishapur, Balkh, Bukhara, Akhsiket, Hulbuk, lead us to
14
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
propose a chronological attribution to the 10th–12th century.
The ceramic material found in the surface layers of the workshop
seems coeval to the pottery from the kiln (Table 2: TNWR64–84;
Fig. 14). For example, the splashed sgraffiato specimens found in the
surface layers and inside the kiln share many similar features such as the
colour scheme and the pattern of the decoration (see, for example,
TNWR42 and 77). Indeed, the most important chronological markers
suggest a dating to the 10th–11th century (for a comparison with a
similar context, see Wilkinson, 1986: 226–228, 262). They are slip-
painted vessels of two different types: two dishes clearly imitating the
luxury lustre-painted ware (TNWR64–65, Fig. 14; Gardin, 1957: pl.
XVIII/3; Wilkinson, 1973: 193, cat.nos 49–51; Morgan and Leatherby,
1987: fig. 9/5; Shishkina and Pavchinskaja, 1992: cat.nos 108, 148, 177;
Nekrasova, 1999: fig. 11/2); two conical dishes with monochrome black
painting over white slip (TNWR66–67, Fig. 14; Wilkinson, 1973: 101,
103–104, cat.nos 31, 36, 48, 51, 53; Shishkina, 1979: pl. LIV/1; Shish­
kina and Pavchinskaja, 1992: cat.nos 124–125; Watson, 2004: 217, cat.
Ga.16) and the bichrome type comprises two bowls with red and dark
brown/black painted decoration (TNWR68–69, Fig. 14; Gardin, 1957:
71; Gardin, 1963: 58–65, 81, fig. 49, pls XIII, XVIII/277; Wilkinson,
1973: 135, 141, cat.nos 12, 40; Shishkina, 1979: pls LIX/4, LXVII, LXX/
30–37). The polychrome slip-painted group is the most numerous, with
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 12. Kiln 1, Workshop 11. a) east-west section, b) north-south isometric view on the 3D section of the firebox, c) orthophoto of the grate, d) photo of the filling
layer with ceramics covering the grate taken from West.
six specimens (TNWR70–75). Two are particularly worth mentioning:
TNWR74 with a zoomorphic or human representation is a very high-
quality item and can be dated to the 10th-early 11th century (Fig. 14;
Wilkinson, 1973: 161; Shishkina, 1979: pl. LXXV; Shishkina and Pav­
chinskaja, 1992: cat.nos 172, 200, 205; Watson, 2004: 241–242, cat.
Gf.1). The other is the hemispherical bowl TNWR71 (Fig. 14), bearing a
refined representation of a crane-like bird, comparable to those depicted
on vessels of the so-called “Black on White Ware” from Nishapur
(Nekrasova, 1999: fig. 11/8; Wilkinson, 1973: 91–92, fig. 10; Houal and
with the collaboration of S. Le Maguer, 2013: fig. 4/13); the vessel is also
very similar to specimens from Samarqand and Transoxiana (Shishkina
and Pavchinskaja, 1992: 64, 100). This ceramic assemblage also in­
cludes two selected splashed sgraffiato specimens: one large dish with a
wide everted rim and a flat base TNWR76 (Fig. 14; Morgan and Leath­
erby, 1987: fig. 25/5; Shishkina and Pavchinskaja, 1992: cat.nos
117–118; Simeón, 2009: fig. 539; Houal and with the collaboration of S.
Le Maguer, 2013: fig. 4/10) and a small hemispherical bowl TNWR77
(Wilkinson, 1973: 58, 65, cat.nos 4, 46; Houal and with the collabora­
tion of S. Le Maguer, 2013: fig. 4/9). A few unglazed vessels were also
collected in the same area: a large flat lid with comb impressed notches
on the rim, similar to those found in workshop 2; a globular cooking pot,
of the same type as the small one found in the fillings of the bedrock
cuttings; a shallow conical basin almost identical to those collected in
the filling of the bedrock cuttings (TNWR12–13); a small flat cover for
jugs with a piercing hole, with a refined floral stamped decoration
(TNWR78, Fig. 14; Nekrasova, 1999: fig. 13/17; Morgan and Leatherby,
1987: fig. 57; Shishkina and Pavchinskaja, 1992: cat.nos 78–79; Joel
15
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
et al., 2005: 114). The presence of two sphero-conical vessels is also
worth mentioning (TNWR83–84; Fig. 14).
3.2. Shahristan
3.2.1. Workshop 5
Workshop 5 is located in the westernmost part of the shahristan,
within the walled area, close to the western part of the wall (Fig. 1). The
presence of at least one ceramic workshop within the shahristan, where
the majority of people lived in the early Islamic period, and not in the
suburbs or outside the city, is worth noting (see § 4). Three updraft
circular kilns, probably coeval, were discovered and partially excavated
by the MAFOuz Uzbek-French team in 2009 and have been recently
investigated by the Uzbek-Spanish team during a sampling campaign for
the palaeomagnetic study. The latter also identified two new kilns to the
north-east of those previously discovered. They all could be related to a
single workshop (Fig. 15).
The first circular updraft kiln 5–1 (3.30 m outer diameter) is quite
well preserved (Fig. 15). The inner diameter of the firebox is 2.70 m and
the average height is 2.50 m, reaching a maximum of about 2.70 m. The
door is located to the south and measures 0.58 m wide and 0.78 m high.
The firing chamber has disappeared while the grate is still in place. It is
provided with eight openings allowing air and heat circulation between
the firebox and the firing chamber, even if originally there should have
been many more. Surprisingly, the grate is very thin, a feature that does
not allow for the supporting of any weight above it. This could suggest
that probably none of the ceramics to be fired were laid directly on the
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 13. a. Selected ceramics from the abandonment layer inside kiln 1, workshop 11.
b. Selected ceramics from the abandonment layer inside kiln 1, workshop 11.
grate and that bars and flat shelves were used to support them instead.
Nonetheless, no bars or traces of them4 have been found in the inner
walls of the kiln, or any other kiln furniture. Kilns with similar features
concerning the grate and the firebox can be found in Gurgan, Iran (Kiani,
1984: pl. 34.1).
Associated with this first kiln, a dump was excavated where a large
quantity of vessels has been collected, along with the abundant ceramics
recovered all over the area of the kiln 5–1 (Table 3: TS1–26).
The second and third kilns (Fig. 15) are very close to each other and
they are located to the north of the first one. Kiln 5–2 is circular in shape
4
According to Lesguer, only one bar was found during recent excavations in
workshop 9, located in the north-eastern part of the rabad (Lesguer, 2015: 436).
16
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
and is only partially preserved: the parts still in place are the firebox, its
access on the south-east, and the grate above it. The grate with five holes
is very thin, like the previous one, which led us to think that the pottery
to be fired was not located on the grate itself but on supports such as bars
and clay shelves, even though no kiln furniture has been found. The
firebox was found totally filled with sediments. Unglazed moulded flasks
and jugs are the most common ware found during the IPAEB excavations
(Table 3: TS27–32). As far as the third kiln is concerned, only the firebox
still exists, while both the firing chamber and the grate are lost. The
firebox has a diameter of 1.75 m and it is accessed from the west; it has
not been excavated. The chamber was created by digging the structure
into the previous depositional layers of the area. No kiln furniture was
found during the investigation.
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 13. (continued).
3.2.2. Ceramics and chronology
A set of pottery samples obtained from the excavations carried out by
Larissa Baratova in the area of kiln 5–1 was included in an archaeo­
logical and archaeometric study conducted by the Uzbek-Spanish team
between 2015 and 2017 (Fusaro et al., 2019; Martínez Ferreras et al.,
2020; Molera et al., 2020; the same labelling provided in these studies
has been used here for these samples). It comprises a wide variety of
vessels, both unglazed and glazed, with many different fabrics, shapes,
functions, and surface treatments (Table 3: TS1–26; Fig. 16). Of the 14
unglazed specimens selected, most are high-quality items: they are jugs
or pilgrim flasks, whose fine fabrics range from buff to greyish colour.
Eight of them bear moulded relief decoration (TS10–12, 23–26) and the
most complete vessels are TS25 and TS26. The local production of these
specimens is confirmed by the finding of three hemispherical moulds
(TS13, TS14, TS46; Fig. 16), part of the potters’ furniture, in workshop
5, but also by the archaeometric analyses (Martínez Ferreras et al., 2020:
17
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
262, 265, 272). They are all dated to the 12th–13th century and possibly
later, until the 14th century.
Besides the moulded decorated vessels, there are other unglazed
artefacts coming from the area of kiln 5–1. Specimens TS15 and TS17
(Fig. 16) have an incised decoration, the latter having a complex and
refined pattern with thin incisions, comb impressed dots, comb incised
lines, and a band of cut pierced rhomb-shaped motifs.
The coarser vessels of the unglazed group from the area of kiln 5–1
are TS18 and TS19. The first is a pot, probably made using the coiling
technique. It retains one ledge handle, but it probably had more than
one originally (Fig. 17). Judging from its coarse fabric and rough
appearance, TS19 is a fragment of a cooking pot. Moreover, a soot mark
is visible on the outer surface. Proposing a chronological attribution for
these items is more difficult than for the finer pieces, both examples
belonging to very common coarse functional types.
The glazed group from the same area comprises vessels whose dating
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 14. Selected ceramics collected in the surface layers of workshop 11.
ranges from the 10th to the 17th century. TS2 is the earliest glazed vessel
recovered. It is the ring base of a slip-painted bowl whose stylised veg­
etal decoration is made of a thick and dense dark brown painting over a
white slip (Fig. 16). According to parallels with similar vessels from
other Central Asian sites, it could be dated to the 10th–11th century
(Shishkina and Pavchinskaja, 1992: cat.no. 153; Houal and with the
collaboration of S. Le Maguer, 2013: fig. 4/13). TS3 is the rim of a bowl,
probably carinated. It belongs to the green monochrome ware and it
could be dated around the 12th century (VV.AA., 2016: fig. 18).
The conical bowls TS5 and TS6 and the fragment of an open form TS7
are turquoise monochrome ware. TS6 and TS7 also have a decoration,
the former has carved vertical ribs creating a polylobate cavetto
(Fig. 16), and the latter has a sgraffiato spiral motif incised over the
white slip. Their features suggest chronological attribution to the late
12th–13th century (Mirzaachmedov, 2001: 100).
The glazed group also comprises two late underglaze painted bowls.
TS4 is a hemispherical bowl with an everted rim and ring base. Its form
and the geometric decoration painted in black, and partially blending
18
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
with the glaze, suggest dating it to the 14th–15th century (Fig. 16). TS8
is later, and it can be attributed to the 16th–17th century drawing
parallels with vessels from other Central Asian sites (Martínez Ferreras
et al., 2020: 262). It is a large conical bowl with stylized black and
turquoise floral motifs painted (Fig. 16).
Also worth mentioning is the finding of two sphero-conical vessels,
TS20 and TS21, the former showing refined vegetal scrolls carved on the
outer surface (Fig. 16).
Several unglazed vessels were recently collected by the Uzbek-
Spanish team from the filling inside the firebox of the kiln 5–2
(Table 3: TS27–32). The selected items presented in this paper are six
fragments of jugs and pilgrim flasks with fine pale brown to grey fabrics.
Five are mould-made, their body is composed of two halves whose
joining area is still visible in TS27–29. All have a moulded relief deco­
ration with floral, vegetal and geometric elements (Gardin, 1957: 35–36,
pl. XIV/4, 8; Gardin, 1963: pls VI, VII), except for the closed vessel TS32,
which bears a relief epigraphic band in foliated Kufic script, possibly
created with the use of a stamp (Gardin, 1957: 37, fig. 14) (Fig. 17).
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 15. Ortophotomosaic of workshop 5, with the indications of kilns 1, 2, 3; on the left, isometric view on the 3D models of the firebox of kilns 1 and 3.
They could be dated to the 12th–13th century.
During the IPAEB excavations in 2018, unglazed moulded vessels
(Table 3: TS43–45; Fig. 17) and numerous underglaze painted speci­
mens (Table 3: TS35–42; Fig. 17) were collected in the firebox of the kiln
5–3. This ceramic assemblage can be dated between the 12th/13th
century and the 14th/15th century. The unglazed selected sherds belong
to mould-made jugs or pilgrim flasks made of fine grey body and share
common features with vessels collected in kilns 5–1 and 5–2. The
underglaze painted specimens were most probably produced in one of
the kilns of this workshop, as also demonstrated by the fact that many
are badly fired defective pieces. As suggested by the better-preserved
items, they belong to the category of hemispherical bowls or conical
bowls with ring bases. All are covered with a white siliceous coating and
transparent colourless glaze, similarly to the items from the area of the
kiln 5–1. The underglaze painting is blue in the case of TS36–39 (Fig. 17)
and it is used to draw delicate vegetal and floral motifs (Gardin, 1957:
77–78, pl. XX/4; Helmecke, 1997: fig. 279; Houal and with the
19
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
collaboration of S. Le Maguer, 2013: fig. 7/1). A bichrome blue and
black geometric decoration characterizes the conical bowls TS40 and
TS41 (Fig. 17; Gardin, 1957: pls XIX/2, XX/6; Fehérvári, 2000: pls
102–104). The hemispherical bowl TS42 shows a wider colour palette,
with blue, black and turquoise geometric and stylised vegetal decoration
(Fig. 17; Gardin, 1957: 78–79, pl. XXI/2.c-d; Golombek et al., 1996:
111–114, fig. 5.2 Form B, pl. 14; Helmecke, 1997: figs. 294–295).
All considered, even if previous studies dated workshop 5 to the 12th
century (Lesguer, 2015: 436), the recent analysis of the pottery collected
in the three kilns and in the dump lead us to suggest that this workshop
was mainly active from the late 12th–13th centuries until the 14th–15th
centuries. At least since the beginning of its activity, the workshop
manufactured fine unglazed vessels, including moulded flasks and jugs
with relief decoration. The workshop also produced underglaze painted
earthenware artefacts and some turquoise monochrome vessels between
the late 12th and the 14th/15th centuries, and possibly until the 16th/
17th centuries, the latter chronology is suggested by the item TS8. 14C
A. Fusaro et al. Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375

Table 3
Selected ceramics from workshop 5, collected in the area of kiln 1, and inside kilns 2 and 3.
Shahristan – workshop 5

Inv. Context Description Chronology

NO.

TS2 area of Kiln Slip-painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine pale brown fabric. Probably bowl, ring base. Opaque whitish glaze. 10th–11th c.
1 Underglaze dark brown stylised vegetal decoration. (diam.: 8 cm)
TS3 area of Kiln Green monochrome ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse pale brown fabric. Carinated bowl. Transparent green 12th c.
1 glaze. (diam.: ca 15 cm)
TS5 area of Kiln Turquoise monochrome ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine pink-brownish fabric. Small conical bowl. White slip 12th-early 13th
1 and transparent turquoise glaze. (diam.: 10 cm) c.
TS6 area of Kiln Turquoise monochrome ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine yellowish fabric. Conical bowl. White slip and 12th-early 13th
1 transparent turquoise glaze. Carved polylobate decoration. (diam.: 25 cm) c.
TS7 area of Kiln Turquoise monochrome sgraffiato ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine pale brown fabric. Open vessel. White slip 12th-early 13th
1 and transparent turquoise glaze. Sgraffiato decoration. c.
TS4 area of Kiln Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine buff fabric. Deep hemispherical bowl. White siliceous 14th–15th c.
1 coating and transparent colourless glaze. Black (and also possibly turquoise) geometric decoration. (diam.: ca 19 cm)
TS8 area of Kiln Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine pink-brownish fabric. Large bowl with wide oblique rim. 16th and 17th c.
1 White siliceous coating and transparent colourless glaze. Dark brown and turquoise stylised floral and geometric decoration. (diam.:
30 cm)
TS10 area of kiln Unglazed mould-made earthenware, medium-coarse pale brown fabric. Jugs or pilgrim flasks. Moulded relief decoration, reversed S- 12th- 13th c.
TS11 1 shaped motifs or rosette motifs.
TS12
TS22 area of Kiln Unglazed mould-made earthenware, fine grey fabric. Jugs or pilgrim flasks. Moulded relief decoration, rosettes are the main motifs, 12th–13th c.
TS23 1 placed on a fish-scale or a dotted background.
TS24 TS22 and TS23 possibly belong to the same object.
TS25 area of Kiln Unglazed mould-made earthenware, fine grey fabric. Pilgrim flasks, flattened spherical body; TS25 also shows two vertical strap 12th–13th c.
TS26 1 handles. Moulded relief decoration: medallions with rosettes are the main motifs. (TS25 diam.: 4 cm)
TS13 area of Kiln Moulds. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse pale greyish fabric. Hemispherical body (TS13, diam.: ca 30 cm), disc 11th/12th–13th
TS14 1 base (TS14, diam.: ca 11 cm). Geometric decoration. c.
TS15 area of Kiln Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine cream white fabric. Probably jugs. TS15 has an incised and combed incised 10th–12th c.
TS16 1 decoration.
TS17 area of Kiln Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-fine cream white fabric. Handled jug, biconical carinated body. Incised vegetal motifs, 12th-early 13th
1 combed impressed dots and cut pierced grid band. c.
TS9 area of Kiln Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse pale greyish fabric. Jar, biconical body. Carved horizontal lines and red painted 9th–10th c. (?).
1 band on the neck. (diam.: 18 cm)
TS18 area of Kiln Unglazed (coil-made?) earthenware, medium-coarse red fabric. Pot, cylindrical ribbed body, two horizontal ledge handles. Black slip 10th-early 13th
1 partially covering the surface. (diam.: ca 22 cm) c.
TS19 area of Kiln Unglazed hand-made earthenware, coarse pale brown fabric, badly fired. Cooking vessel. Plain rough surfaces. Unknown
1
TS20 area of Kiln Sphero-conical vessel. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, highly overfired grey fabric, greenish outer surface. Oval body. Carved Probably 12th c.
1 geometric-vegetal motifs on the shoulder.
TS21 area of Kiln Sphero-conical vessel. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, highly overfired grey fabric, greenish outer surface. Spherical body, 10th–12th c.
1 warped during the firing process. Plain surface.

TS27 Kiln 2 Unglazed wheel-thrown mould-made earthenware, fine pale brown to grey fabric. Jugs or pilgrim flasks. Moulded relief decoration: 12th–13th c.
TS28 geometric, stylised floral, and rosette motifs. TS27–28–29 most probably belong to the same object.
TS29
TS30
TS31
TS32 Kiln 2 Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine light grey fabric, with whitish outer surface. Closed vessel. Stamped relief decoration, 12th–13th c.
epigraphic band in foliated Kufic.

TS33 Kiln 3 Monochrome ware (or possibly underglaze painted ware). Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine pinkish fabric. Probably open 9th–11th c.
vessel, shallow ring base. White slip and transparent colourless glaze.
TS34 Kiln 3 Monochrome ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine pinkish fabric. Possibly open vessel. White slip and transparent turquoise 12th–13th c.
glaze.
TS35 Kiln 3 Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, slightly overfired medium-coarse light grey fabric. Bowl or dish, small 13th–15th c.
ring base. White siliceous coating and transparent colourless glaze. Blue decoration. (diam.: ca 4,5 cm)
TS36 Kiln 3 Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, badly fired medium-coarse greyish-greenish fabric. Hemispherical 14th–15th c.
TS37 bowl. White siliceous coating and transparent colourless glaze. Blue vegetal decoration, with floral/fruit motifs and scrolls. They
TS38 probably belong to the same object.
TS39
TS40 Kiln 3 Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse buff fabric. Conical bowls. White siliceous coating and 14th–15th c.
TS41 transparent colourless glaze. Blue and black geometric decoration. (diam.: ca 20 cm; ca 22–23 cm)
TS42 Kiln 3 Underglaze painted ware. Glazed wheel-thrown earthenware, medium-coarse pinkish-pale brown fabric. Fragmentary hemispherical 14th–15th c.
bowl. White siliceous coating and transparent colourless glaze. Blue, black, and turquoise geometric and vegetal decoration. (rim
diam.: ca 20 cm; base diam.: 6 cm)
TS43 Kiln 3 Unglazed wheel-thrownmould-made earthenware, fine grey fabric. Large carinated jugs or pilgrim flasks. Moulded relief vegetal 11th-13thc.
TS44 decoration on a dotted background.
TS45 Kiln 3 Unglazed mould-made earthenware, fine pale grey fabric. Jug or pilgrim flask. Moulded relief decoration, rows of dot-and-circle 12th–13th c.
motifs.
TS46 Kiln 3 Mould. Unglazed wheel-thrown earthenware, fine pale brown fabric. Flat base. Rosette motifs and dots. Smoothed outer surface. 11th/12th–13th
(diam.: ca 8 cm) c.

20
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 16. Selected ceramics found in the area of kiln 1, workshop 5.
tests on organic material from the kiln 5–3 confirm its latest use in the
14th century (Table 4).
4. Discussion
Of the eight workshops dated to the Islamic period recognised at
Termez, at least five are attributed to a pre-Mongol phase between the
8th–9th and the 12th century (workshops 1, 2, 4, 8, 11). Workshops 9
and 10 still await proper investigation.
The presence of these ceramic workshops in the marginal areas of the
city (workshops 4, 9, 10) and outside it (1, 2, 8, 11) is a common feature
of ancient Islamic cities, where most of the manufacturing quarters were
placed in the less inhabited areas of the city or even outside it. Indeed,
the unhealthy fumes coming from the ceramic kilns led to locating these
workshops far from the residential area. Moreover, the circumstance
21
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
that four ceramic workshops are outside the walled city, to the north of
the site, could also suggest that the city flourished since the 8th/9th
century and its safety was guaranteed by the strength of the powerful
Samanid dynasty.
The large quantity of unglazed fine jugs and large jars found in
workshops 2 and 11, along with the related covers and lids, indicates
that these unglazed productions were probably among the most
important of ancient Termez in the early Islamic period. This hypothesis
is also supported by the written sources reporting that jugs were among
the items that this city exported (see § 1.1). The recent archaeological
and archaeometric study conducted by the Uzbek-Spanish team on a
pottery assemblage from another archaeological context of the site
(sector AC2) has confirmed the local provenance of jugs and flat lids, as
well as of a few basins, almost identical to those found in the workshops
presented in this paper (Fusaro et al., 2019: 256–260; Martínez Ferreras
A. Fusaro et al.
Fig. 17. Selected ceramics found in the area of kiln 1, and inside kilns 2 and 3, workshop 5. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
et al., 2020: 265, 269, 271–272). Furthermore, the same archaeometric
study has proved that some glazed vessels belonging to the underglaze
painted, slip-painted and splashed sgraffiato wares, were also produced
in ancient Termez in the same period. Nonetheless, the associated
workshops still need to be clearly identified.
The large number of complete finished sphero-conical vessels from
workshop 11, as well as the finding of many unfired specimens or
wasters related to the same vessels (Figs. 9–10), is all conclusive evi­
dence of local production of these peculiar containers during the early
Islamic period.
Only workshop 5 is inside the proper city, the shahristan, originally
intended as a dense residential area, at least during the early Islamic
period. The new chronological attribution to the post-Mongol phase
suggested by the Uzbek-Spanish team (13th century onwards) clarifies
the unusual location of this workshop. The circumstance that since the
22
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
13th century local potters decided to move their productions inside the
residential area seems to be a direct consequence of a significant change
in the urban planning of the ancient city of Termez. Indeed, the his­
torical sources report that the siege of the Mongols in 1220 was very
long and the final conquest left Termez in such a bad state that it never
fully recovered its previous level of flourishing. Moreover, most of its
population was slaughtered and killed (see § 1.1). The sudden drop in
the city’s population after the Mongol invasion probably led to a sig­
nificant shrinking of the urban area, leaving large parts of ancient Ter­
mez uninhabited, while both the population and their activities
concentrated in a smaller area. Therefore, the suggested hypothesis is
A. Fusaro et al.
Table 4
14
C dates of organic remains from several archaeological contexts at Termez (Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory, Miami, Florida).
Context Ref. no.
Kiln 2–2, firebox Beta-511,509
Workshop 11, Tannur Beta-511,509
Kiln 11–1, firebox and grate Beta-502,183
Kiln 5–3 Beta-511,510
that the citizens concentrated in the citadel, the new living quarters,5
which turned the shahristan into the new suburbs, while the rabad was
possibly left largely uninhabited or was used for other purposes.
A similar situation seems to have occurred in Samarqand, where the
relocation and the gathering of several different ceramic workshops into
new potters’ quarters was, during a first phase, an effect of the weak­
ening of the Samanids and the simultaneous advance of new powers
such as the Qarakhanids, and was afterwards a result of the Mongols’
invasion (Shishkina and Pavchinskaja, 1992: 42; Siméon, 2012: 17).
Another comparable case is that of Vardanzeh/Bukhara, whose citadel
was occupied and used in the 17th century by the potters for moving
their manufacturing centres (VV.AA., 2010: 22–24). A similar situation
has been suggested for Pajkend, where only the citadel and part of the
shahristan were still populated during the 15th–16th century, while in
the rabad other facilities were located, like a cemetery which was fully
used especially between the 13th and the 15th century (Rante and
Raimkulov, 2013: 246, 248–250).
The finding of moulds and badly fired defective glazed vessels inside
the kilns of workshop 5 clearly demonstrate that ancient Termez was
still a very active manufacturing centre even during the middle-late Is­
lamic period; it produced unglazed high-quality moulded relief deco­
rated jugs and pilgrim flasks as well as underglaze painted and glazed
monochrome turquoise items. This hypothesis has been recently
confirmed by the archaeometric investigation conducted on samples
from the area of the kiln 5–1.
The kilns active in the workshops analysed are, in the main, of the
updraft circular type; they have two chambers, a firebox and a firing
chamber divided by a grate. No kiln furniture has been found and in
many cases the walls of the firing chamber are not preserved at all or just
their lowest part, therefore it is difficult to state the specific firing pro­
cess for each kiln considered. Nonetheless, according to the specific
features of some kilns, it is not possible to exclude that at least some of
them could have functioned with bars set into the inner walls of the
firing chambers and shelves positioned upon them to place the ceramic
objects (Keblow Bernsted, 2003: 53–55). Indeed, this type of kiln was
widespread all over the Islamic lands (Thiriot, 1997; Keblow Bernsted,
2003: 53). Only two kilns are quadrangular, in workshops 2 and 4
respectively, and the grate was sustained by arches; they were used for
firing large items.
5. Conclusions
The research carried out so far at ancient Termez, including the more
recent investigations by the Uzbek-Spanish team, reveals a clearer and
more comprehensive overview of this city as an important ceramic
manufacturing centre throughout the Islamic period. Termez produced
5
This hypothesis can be indirectly proved by the finding of several ceramics
dated to the late Islamic period in the citadel (Mirzaakhmedov and Pidaev,
1993).
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
14
Conventional C age 95.4% probability (2σ)
1140 ± 30 years BP (78.6%) 854–981 cal AD (1096–969 cal BP)
(7.2%) 802–848 cal AD (1148–1102 cal BP)
(0.7%) 776–792 cal AD (1174–1158 cal BP)
1180 ± 30 years BP (87.5%) 768–900 cal AD (1182–1050 cal BP)
(7.2%) 920–951 cal AD (1030–999 cal BP)
(0.7%) 730–736 cal AD (1220–1214 cal BP)
1190 ± 30 years BP (89%) 766–898 cal AD (1184–1052 cal BP)
(3.5%) 924–945 cal AD (1026–1005 cal BP)
(2.9%) 722–740 cal AD (1228–1210 cal BP)
560 ± 30 years BP (50.1%) 1306–1363 cal AD (644–587 cal BP)
(45.3%) 1385–1429 cal AD (565–521 cal BP)
both unglazed and glazed vessels in large quantities, some were prob­
ably also exported outside the city along the routes of the Silk Road. The
high quality of some unglazed wares and the variety of the glazed pro­
ductions testify to the high level of technical skills of the local potters.
Moreover, this preliminary study reveals that the workshops
discovered so far were used in different periods through the lifetime of
the city, as suggested by the changes in the urban plan:
- the workshops located outside the city or in its marginal areas were
active in the early Islamic period;
- the workshop found in shahristan was created later, after a re-
planning of the three fortified areas, at a time when the main set­
tlement probably shrank and the workshops had to be located closer.
Finally, the recent investigation and excavation of workshop 11 shed
new light on the organization of the working spaces. Different areas/
rooms were used by the potters, probably for different stages of the
production process and during different chronological phases: storage of
raw material (related to the finding of raw clay lumps), preparation of
the clay (related to the finding of a decantation tank), shaping of the
items (associated with the finding of the lower part of a potter’s wheel
and of a clay cylinder ready to be shaped), areas for drying the objects
before the firing (western area).
In conclusion, this new ongoing research on the Islamic workshops of
ancient Termez fully responds to the need for greater knowledge and
understanding of the ceramic manufacturing centres in Central Asia,
their organization, their production and their location within the city,
which to date is limited to very few sites (Siméon, 2012: 15).
Credit authorship contribution statement
Agnese Fusaro: Conceptualisation, Investigation – ceramic analysis
and stratigraphic analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review &
editing. Josep Maria Gurt Esparraguera: Investigation –excavation,
Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Enrique Ariño Gil:
Investigation –excavation, Writing – original draft. Paula Uribe Agudo:
Investigation – topography, Visualisation. Jorge Angás Pajas: Investi­
gation – topography, Visualisation. Shakir R. Pidaev: Resources.
Eamonn McDonagh and Virginia Hormaeche: English revision.
Author statement
None.
Conflict of interest
None.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by two R&D&I projects, CERAC (HAR2016-
23
A. Fusaro et al.
75133-C3-1-P) led by V. Martínez and J.M. Gurt, and CONCERAC
(HAR2016-75133-C3-3-P) led by E. Ariño, both funded by the Spanish
Ministry of Science and Innovation. Foundation Palarq supported the
archaeological campaign in Termez in the year 2018. We are grateful to
Julia Miquel for the graphic documentation in the field and to Ramón
Álvarez for the pottery drawings.
References
Angas, J., Uribe, P., Ariño, E., Gurt, J.M., Martínez Ferreras, V., Pidaev, S., 2019. A multi-
scalar photogrammetric recording approach in Termez (Uzbekistan). The
international archives of the photogrammetry. Remote sensing and spatial. Inf. Sci.
XLII-2/W15, 93–100. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W15-93-2019.
Angas, J., Uribe, P., Bea, M., Farjas, M., Ariño, E., Martínez Ferreras, V., Gurt, J.M., 2021.
Potential of CORONA satellite imagery for 3D reconstruction of archaeological
landscapes. In: CIGeo. Polytechnic University of Valencia Congress, 3rd Congress in
Geomatics Engineering, pp. 35–41. https://doi.org/10.4995/
CiGeo2021.2021.12703.
Ariño, E., Sala, R., Lafuente, M., Gurt, J.-M., Pidaev, Sh., Stride, S., 2007. The ceramic
kilns of Kara Tepe. In: Gurt Esparraguera, J.M., Pidaev, S., Rauret, A.M., Stride, S.
(Eds.), Preliminary Report of the First Season Work of the International
Pluridisciplinary Archaeological Expedition to Bactria 2006 IPAEB, vol. 1.
Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, pp. 13–44.
Barthold, W., 2002. Tirmidh. In: Bearman, P.J., Bianquis, Th., Bosworth, C.E., van
Donzel, E., Heinrichs, W.P. (Eds.), Encyclopédie de l’Islam, Nouvelle édition, Tome
X, T-U. Brill, Leiden, pp. 582–584.
Bernard, P., Grenet, F., Muxammadzon, I., 1992. Fouilles de la mission franco-ouzbèque
à l’ancienne Samarkand (Afrasiab) : deuxième et trosième campagnes (1990 et
1991). In: Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-
Lettres, 136e année, 2, pp. 275–311.
Demont, M., Centlivres, P., 1967. Poteries et potiers d’Afghanistan. In: Bulletin annuel du
Musée et Institut d’Ethnographie de la Ville de Genève, p. 10.
Fehérvári, G., 2000. The pottery sequence. In: Bivar, A.D.H., Baker, P.L., Errington, N.,
Shokoohy, M. (Eds.), Excavations at Ghubayrā, Iran 1971–1976. University of
London, London, pp. 127–194.
Fusaro, A., 2014. Studio del corpus ceramico di età islamica dagli scavi italiani a Ghazni,
Afghanistan (X-XIII secolo): contributo alla ricostruzione storica del palazzo
sultaniale e della “casa dei lustri”. PhD thesis. Sapienza Università di Roma, Roma.
Fusaro, A., Martínez Ferreras, V., Gurt Esparraguera, J.M., Angourakis, A., Pidaev, S.R.,
Baratova, L., 2019. Islamic pottery from Ancient Termez (Uzbekistan): New
Archaeological and Archaeometric Data. ArcheoSciences 43 (2), 249–264.
Gardin, J.-C., 1957. Céramiques de Bactres, MDAFA. Tome XV. C, Klincksieck, Paris.
Gardin, J.-C., 1963. Lashkari Bazar. Une residence royale ghaznévide. II Le trouvailles.
In: MDAFA, tome XVIII. C. (Ed.), Céramiques et monnaies de Lashkari Bazar et de
Bust. Klincksieck, Paris.
Gascoigne, A.L., Bridgman, R., 2010. Pottery from Jām: a medieval ceramic Corpus from
Afghanistan. Iran 48, 107–151.
Golombek, L., Mason, R.B., Bailey, G.A., 1996. Tamerlane’s Tableware. A New Approach
to the Chinoiserie Ceramics of Fifteenth- and Sixteenth-Century Iran. Mazda
Publishers, Costa Mesa, California.
Gurt Esparraguera, J.M., Ariño Gil, E., Martínez Ferreras, V., Pidaev, S.R., 2015. The
Buddhist occupation of Tchingiz Tepe (Termez, Uzbekistan) in the Kushan period
through the ceramic contexts. Archaeol.l Res. Asia 3, 19–33.
Helmecke, G., 1997. Like porcelain: Fourteenth to sixteenth century ceramics from
Uzbekistan. In: Kalter, J., Pavaloi, M. (Eds.), Uzbekistan. Heirs to the Silk Road,
Thames & Hudson, London, pp. 156–165.
Herrmann, G., Kurbansakhatov, K., Simpson, St.J., 1997. The international Merv project.
Preliminary report on the fifth season (1996). Iran 35, 1–33.
Houal, J.B., 2001. La céramique de la citadelle de l’ancienne Termez d’après les travaux
de la MAFOuz B (Premières indications). In: Leriche, P., Pidaev, C., Gelin, M.,
Abdoullaev, K. (Eds.), with the collaboration of Vincent Fourniau, La Bactriane au
carrefour des routes et des civilisations de l’Asie Centrale: Termez et les villes de
Bactriane-Tokharestan. Actes du colloque de Termez 1997. IFEAC and Maisonneuve
et Larose, Paris, pp. 131–144.
Houal, J.B., with the collaboration of S. Le Maguer, 2013. La céramique de Termez des
époques antique et médiévale. In: Bendezu-Sarmiento, J. (Ed.), L’Archéologie
française en Asie Centrale. Nouvelles recherches et enjeux socioculturels. Cahiers
d’Asie Centrale, 21/22. Édition-Diffusion De Boccard, Paris, Bichkek, Kaboul,
pp. 423–442.
Joel, G., Peli, A., under the direction of Sophie Makariou, 2005. Suse. Terres cuites
islamiques. Musée du Louvre. Département des arts de l’Islam, Snoeck, Gand, Musée
du Louvre, Paris.
Karomatov, I.A., 2001. Termez – An Ancient and Modern City at an Important Crossroad.
Publishing-poligraphic share company «Sharq», Tashkent.
Keblow Bernsted, A.-M., 2003. Early Islamic Pottery. In: Materials and Techniques.
Archetype Publications, London.
Kiani, M.Y., 1984. The Islamic City of Gurgan. Verlag von Dietrich Reimer, Berlin.
Le Strange, G. (Ed.), 1966. The Lands of the Eastern Caliphate. Mesopotamia, Persia, and
Central Asia from the Moslem Conquest to the Time of Timur, first ed. 1905. Barnes
& Noble, New York.
Leriche, P., 2001. Termez antique et médiévale. In: Leriche, P., Pidaev, S., Gelin, M.,
Abdoullaev, K. (Eds.), with the collaboration of Vincent Fourniau, La Bactriane au
carrefour des routes et des civilisations de l’Asie Centrale: Termez et les villes de
24
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
Bactriane-Tokharestan: actes du colloque de Termez 1997. IFEAC and Maisonneuve
et Larose, Paris, pp. 75–99.
Leriche, P., 2013. L’apport de la mission archéologique franco-ouzbèke (MAFOuz) de
Bactriane du Nord à l’histoire de l’Asie Centrale. In: Bendezu-Sarmiento, J. (Ed.),
L’Archéologie française en Asie Centrale. Nouvelles recherches et enjeux
socioculturels. Cahiers d’Asie Centrale, 21/22. Édition-Diffusion De Boccard, Paris,
Bichkek, Kaboul, pp. 135–164.
Leriche, P., Pidaev, C., 2008. Termez sur Oxus. In: Cité-capitale d’Asie Centrale. IFEAC
and Maisonneuve et Larose [Publication AURORHE n◦ 3], Paris.
Leriche, P., Pidaev, S.R., 2007. Termez in antiquity. In: Cribb, J., Herrmann, G. (Eds.),
After Alexander. Central Asia before Islam, Proceedings of the British Academy, vol.
133. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 179–211.
Leriche, P., Pidaev, S.R., 2011. Bactriane. Mission archéologique franco-ouzbèque de
Bactriane septentrionale. In: Bilan de la campagne 2005. Rapport pour la
Commission consultative des Recherches archéologiques à l’Etranger (Session de
Décembre 2005).
Lesguer, F., 2015. Les fours de potiers à Termez (Ouzbékistan) du IV siècle au XII après
J.-C. In: Thuillier, F., Louis, É. (Eds.), Tourner autour du pot. Les ateliers de potiers
médiévaux du Ve au XIIe siècle dans l’espace européen. Actes du colloque
international de Douai (5–8 octobre 2010). Publications du Craham, Presses
Universitaires de Caen, Caen, pp. 433–437.
Martínez Ferreras, V., Ariño Gil, E., Gurt Esparraguera, J.M., Pidaev, S.R., 2014. The
enclosure of Tchingiz Tepe (ancient Termez, Uzbekistan) during the Kushan and
Kushan-Sassanian periods. Archaeological stratigraphy and 14C dating analyses. Iran.
Antiq. 49, 413–474.
Martínez Ferreras, V., Fusaro, A., Gurt Esparraguera, J.M., Ariño Gil, E., Pidaev, Sh.R.,
Angourakis, A., 2020. The Islamic Ancient Termez Through the Lens of Ceramics: A
New Archaeological and Archaeometric Study. Iran 58 (2), 250–278. https://doi.
org/10.1080/05786967.2019.1572430.
Mirzaachmedov, D.K., 2001. Mid-12th and early 13th century pottery from Uč Kulāh. A
source for the economic and social history of Bukhara. In: Pagani, S. (Ed.), Italo-
Uzbek Scientific Cooperation in Archaeology and Islamic Studies. An Overview.
Rome, January 30, 2001. Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente / Institute of
Archaeology of the Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan – Samarkand / al-Beruni
Institute of Oriental Studies of the Uzbek Academy of Sciences – Tashkent, Rome,
pp. 99–104.
Mirzaakhmedov, D., Pidaev, S., 1993. Glazurovannaya kyeramika starogo Termeza XVII-
nach. XVIII vv. [the glazed pottery from ancient Termez of the 17th-18th century]. In:
Bactriya-Tokhariston kadimida va ŭrta asrlarda, pp. 51–53.
Molera, J., Martínez Ferreras, V., Fusaro, A., Gurt Esparraguera, J.M., Gaudenzi, M.,
Pidaev, S.R., Pradell, T., 2020. Islamic glazed wares from ancient Termez (southern
Uzbekistan). Raw materials and techniques. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 1–11. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.102169.
Morgan, P., Leatherby, J., 1987. Excavated ceramics from Sı̄rjān. In: Allan, J., Roberts, C.
(Eds.), Syria and Iran. Three Studies in Medieval Ceramics. Oxford University Press,
Oxford, pp. 23–174.
Moustafakoulov, S., 2001. Anthropologie d’une nécropole de l’ancienne Termez (IXe-
XIVe s.). In: Leriche, P., Pidaev, S., Gelin, M., Abdoullaev, K. (Eds.), with the
collaboration of Vincent Fourniau, La Bactriane au carrefour des routes et des
civilisations de l’Asie Centrale: Termez et les villes de Bactriane-Tokharestan: actes
du colloque de Termez 1997. IFEAC and Maisonneuve et Larose, Paris, pp. 63–71.
Naumann, R., 1971. Brennöfen fur Glasur keramik. Istanbuler Mitteilungen, 21,
pp. 173–190.
Negmatov, N.N., 1998. The Samanid state. In: Asimov, M.S., Bosworth, C.E. (Eds.),
History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Vol. IV. The age of achievement: A.D. 750 to
the end of the fifteenth century, Part One: The historical, social and economic
setting. UNESCO Publishing, Paris, pp. 83–124.
Nekrasova, E., 1999. La citadelle de Bukhārā de la fin du 9e siècle au début du 13e siècle.
Archéologie Islamique 8–9, 37–54.
Pidaev, S., 2001. Mosquées de quartier dans l’ancienne Tirmidh (Ouzbékistan).
Archéologie Islamique 11, 61–74.
Pidaev, S.R., 1986. Khozyastvyenno-zhiloy komplyeks XI-nachala XIII vyekov na
gorodishchye Starogo Termeza [A craftsmanship and dwelling complex of the 11th-
beginning of the 13th century at the site of Ancient Termez]. ASU 11, 8–10.
Pidaev, S.R., Rakhmanov, U.V., 1995. Raskopki kyeramichyeskikh mastyerskikh za
pryedyelami styen Starogo Termeza [excavations of ceramic workshops outside the
walls of ancient Termez]. In: O’rta Osijo Tarikhi va Arkheologijasining Dolzarb
Muammolari, pp. 14–15.
Portero, R., Fusaro, A., Piqué, R., Gurt, J.M., Elorza, M., Gabriel, S., Piadev, S.R., 2021.
The Environment in the Islamic City of Termez (Uzbekistan): Zooarchaeology and
Anthracology of a 9th-century tannūr. J. Islam. Archaeol. 8 (1), 1–21.
Pozzi, S., with contributions by J. Mirzaahmedov, Sh. Adylov and the drawings by S.
Mirzaahmedov and M. Sultanova, 2013. Report on the fourth Archaeological
Excavation at Vardanze (Ancient Vardāna), by the West Sogdian Archaeological
Expedition (2012). In: VV. AA. (Ed.), Vardanze, Uzbekistan. Archaeological
excavation of an ancient city in the oasis of Bukhara. The Society for the Exploration
of EurAsia, published online, pp. 76–134. http://www.exploration-eurasia.com/inh
alt_english/frameset_projekt_0.html.
Pugachenkova, G.A., 2001. C’était hier; c’était il y a longtemps (Souvenirs d’une
participante à l’expédition archéologique de Termez en 1938). In: Leriche, P.,
Pidaev, S., Gelin, M., Abdoullaev, K. (Eds.), With the Collaboration of Fourniau, V.,
La Bactriane Au Carrefour Des Routes et Des Civilisations de l’Asie Centrale: Termez
et les Villes de Bactriane-Tokharestan. Actes du colloque de Termez 1997. IFEAC and
Maisonneuve et Larose, Paris, pp. 37–46.
Rakhimov, M.K., 2006. Artistic Ceramics of Uzbekistan. UNESCO, Tashkent.
A. Fusaro et al.
Rante, R., Raimkulov, A., 2013. Les fouilles de Paykend: nouveaux éléments. In:
Bendezu-Sarmiento, J. (Ed.), L’arqueologie francaise en Asie Centrale. Nouvelles
recherches et enjeux socioculturels. Cahiers d’Asie Centrale 21-22. Édition-Diffusion
De Boccard, Paris, Bichkek, Kaboul, pp. 237–258.
Shishkina, G.V., 1979. Glazurovannaya kyeramika Sogda [Glazed ceramics from
Sogdiana]. FAN, Tashkent.
Shishkina, G.V., Pavchinskaja, L.V., 1992. Terres secrètes de Samarcande. In: Ceramiques
du VIIIe au XIIIe siècle, Institut du Monde Arabe, Paris, 26 juin-27 septembre 1992;
Musee de Normandie, Caen 23 octobre 1992 – 25 janvier 1993; Musee des Augustins,
Toulouse 4 mars – 7 juin 1993. Institute du Monde Arabe, Mairie de Caen, Mairie de
Toulouse, Paris.
Simeón, M.P., 2009. Étude du matériel de Hulbuk (Màwarà’al-nahr-Khuttal), de la
conquête islamique jusqu’au milieu du XIe siècle (90/712-441/1050). In:
Contribution à l’étude de la céramique islamique d’Asie centrale. BAR International
Series 1945. Oxford.
Siméon, P., 2012. Les ateliers de potiers en Asie Centrale, entre Samarqand et Nı̄shāpūr:
approche critique, de la conquête musulmane au XIIe siècle. In: Gelichi, S. (Ed.), Atti
del IX Congresso Internazionale sulla Ceramica Medievale nel Mediterraneo.
Venezia, Scuola Grande dei Carmini. Auditorium Santa Margherita, 23–27 novembre
2009. All’Insegna del Giglio, Firenze, pp. 15–21.
Siméon, P., 2013. La céramique de Hulbuk (capitale du Ḥuttal) entre Māwarā’al-nahr et
Țuhāristān. Nouvelles données sur la céramique médiévale d’Asie centrale entre le
IXe et le XIe siècle. In: Bendezu-Sarmiento, J. (Ed.), L’Archéologie française en Asie
Centrale. Nouvelles recherches et enjeux socioculturels. Cahiers d’Asie centrale, 21/
22. Édition-Diffusion De Boccard, Paris, Bichkek, Kaboul, pp. 443–460.
Stride, S., 2007. Regions and territories in southern Central Asia: What the Surkhan
Darya province tells us about Bactria. In: Cribb, J., Herrmann, G. (Eds.), After
Alexander. Central Asia before Islam, Proceedings of the British Academy, vol. 133.
Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 99–117.
25
Archaeological Research in Asia 31 (2022) 100375
Thiriot, J., 1997. Géographie du four de potier à barres d’enfournement. In: Marchesi, H.,
Thiriot, J., Vallauri, L. (Eds.), Marseille, les ateliers de potiers du XIIIe s. et le
quartier Sainte-Barbe (Ve- XVIIe s.), Documents d’Archeologie Francaise 65. Editions
de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Paris, pp. 345–372.
Tsantini, E., Martínez Ferreras, V., Ariño Gil, E., Gurt Esparraguera, J.M., Pidaev, S.R.,
2016. Pottery production in the Buddhist communities in Central Asia: the Kushan-
Sassanian pottery workshop of Kara Tepe (Termez, Uzbekistan). Archaeometry 58
(1), 35–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/arcm.12161.
VV. AA., 2010. Citadel of Wardana (Vardanze-tepa) investigated by The West Sogdian
Archaeological Expedition. Excavation Report, July August 2010. In: VV. AA. (Ed.),
Vardanze, Uzbekistan. Archaeological excavation of an ancient city in the oasis of
Bukhara, Excavation Reports. The Society for the Exploration of EurAsia published
online, pp. 20–35. http://www.exploration-eurasia.com/inhalt_english/frameset_p
rojekt_0.html.
VV. AA., 2016. Preliminary Report on the 2016 Field Work at Vardanzeh. In: VV. AA.
(Ed.), Vardanze, Uzbekistan. Archaeological excavation of an ancient city in the
oasis of Bukhara, Excavation Reports. The Society for the Exploration of EurAsia
published online, pp. 161–180. http://www.exploration-eurasia.com/inhalt_english
/frameset_projekt_0.html.
VV. AA., 2018. Preliminary Report on the 2018 Field Work at Vardanzeh. In: VV. AA.
(Ed.), Vardanze, Uzbekistan. Archaeological excavation of an ancient city in the
oasis of Bukhara, Excavation Reports. The Society for the Exploration of EurAsia
published online, pp. 198–223. http://www.exploration-eurasia.com/inhalt_english
/frameset_projekt_0.html.
Watson, O., 2004. Ceramics from Islamic Lands. Thames & Hudson, London.
Whitehouse, D., 1970. Excavations at Sı̄rāf: third interim report. Iran 8, 1–18.
Wilkinson, C.K., 1973. Nishapur. In: Pottery of the Early Islamic Period. The
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
Wilkinson, C.K., 1986. Nishapur. In: Some Early Islamic Buildings and Their Decoration.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.