Pottery [Southwest Arabia]

The long history of Ancient South Arabian (ASA) pottery dates back to the 3rd millennium BCE. It is made up of both local and regional types, transcending the boundaries of kingdoms in South Arabia. Some ASA pottery types, such as the chaff-tempered ovoid jar and the wavy rim bowl, were even widely distributed across south-western Arabia. ASA ceramics do not comprise distinctive shapes associated with specific functions, such as funerary and ritual purposes. External influences were rare and mainly came after the expansion of maritime trade at the turn of the Christian era.

In the realm of handicraft and artistic Ancient South Arabian (ASA) production, pottery has long been considered to be of limited interest and to display little typological and functional variety over time. However, studies conducted during the past two decades have altered this perspective, revealing composite forms and compositions, along with numerous regional variations that appear to have developed from a shared and common material culture (de Maigret 2010; Buffa 2016).

Tracing early pottery traditions in Southwest Arabia

The earliest evidence of pottery in Southwest Arabia can be traced back to the 3rd millennium BCE. Ceramics were found in the Yemeni highlands (Khawlān and Dhamār) during activities aimed at recognizing and identifying the characteristics of the Bronze Age in Yemen. This period, between the Neolithic and the Early South Arabian period, was poorly documented until the end of the 1980s (See Chronology of South Arabia). This pottery was crafted from local clays and used to create simple forms with burnishing treatment and occasional incised decorations. Although the technology and forms appear to reflect the traditions of the ancient Syro-Palestinian Bronze Age (de Maigret 2003), the ceramic assemblages of Khawlān and Dhamār exhibit differences. However, the latter seem to diminish towards the end of the 3rd and the beginning of the 2nd millennia. During this time, morphological and formal connections are recognized, but with the presence of different temper materials, linked to the specific geological characteristics of the diverse regions (Edens 1999). Similarities between pottery assemblages might reflect new connections and new contacts. Signs of interactions among diverse coastal regions during the Bronze Age have been brought to light through comparisons of ceramic assemblages. This is notably highlighted by the similarities observed between the ceramic materials discovered in the Gulf of Aden and those found in the Tihāma region, near the Yemeni-Saudi border, originating from geographically distinct areas (Buffa 2007). However, in the 3rd millennium BCE, pottery is notably absent from the region of Ḥaḍramawt, where the cultural phenomenon known as the Ḥaḍramawt Megalithic Complex appears to be completely aceramic. Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that the earliest Ḥaḍrami pottery documented in Raybūn (Early Raybūn Period: 1200-800 BCE) displays parallels with the pottery of the Late Bronze Age in Palestine and the “Qurayya Painted Ware”, albeit limited to decorative motifs and techniques (Sedov 2003).

Ceramic techniques and manufacture

The predominant technique employed in ASA pottery manufacture does not seem to involve the use of the potter’s wheel. This is obvious in both Minaean or Qatabanian ceramic traditions (Van Beek 1969; Antonini 2016). Instead, a coiling technique is favoured, mainly discernible through traces of fingerprints on numerous vessels (Van Beek 1969). Notably, large-sized containers appear to have been crafted using a “multi-piece method” (de Maigret 2003; Antonini 2016). Internal horizontal lines, not to be confused with wheel marks, probably result from the use of a flexible tool — possibly wooden — or fabric impressed onto the still-moist clay. This is also illustrated by the ceramics discovered in the Early Raybūn layers (12th–8th centuries BCE), which exhibit hand-made bodies alongside wheel-turned rims and ring bases (Sedov 2003). However, it is plausible that a slow wheel or ‘tournette’ was employed in specific contexts, as evidenced by ceramics discovered in recent layers from Maʿlayba (Buffa 2007) and in jars featuring ring bases in the Jawf region (Arbach & Schiettecatte 2006).

Fabrics and surface treatments

ASA pottery fabrics are characterized by regional specifics that naturally reflect the availability of raw materials in the production area. Despite long continuity in the use of the same pastes, already evidenced by Van Beek (1969) who observed a shift in shapes but not in pastes from the 9th century BCE to the 2nd century CE, there is a prevalent use of pastes containing lithic elements (mainly steatite or crushed local rocks) and organic temper (primarily straw and seeds) which impart lightness and porosity to the ceramics. In rarer cases, such as at Raybūn, manure is also present (Sedov 2003). The use of sand as a temper is relatively rare. The limited refinement of the mixtures making up the pastes is consistently observed.

ASA ceramics typically undergo burnishing or polishing treatment. Painting is rather uncommon and limited mainly to the early phase of Raybūn ceramics, featuring motifs such as gazelles, goats, ibexes, bulls, ostriches, ducks, along with geometric designs and occasional letters (Sedov 2003).

Early South Arabian pottery is characterized by meticulous surface finishing with a thick dark/red burnished slip, which is also found in Ḥaḍrami contexts, although with the presence of applied incised and painted decorations. Surface treatments play a minor role in Middle South Arabian and Late South Arabian periods, and fewer variations in forms are observed.

ASA pottery between specific characteristics and common threads, conservatism, and evolution

In a notable contribution introducing the typological examination of Tamnaʿ ceramics, Buffa (2016) outlines the methodological approach utilized for studying ASA pottery over the past decades, introducing, moreover, different lines of thought. While underscoring that the connections between ASA kingdoms and material culture remain unclear and evolve with the discovery and analysis of new assemblages, the scholar points out that ASA ceramics exhibit both specific types and parallels, transcending the boundaries of various kingdoms in South Arabia (Buffa 2016). To date, similar ceramic traditions, both technically and morphologically, are observable in geographically distant areas, such as, for example, the ceramic corpora of Hajar ibn Ḥumayd and Yalā. This is also evident in the ceramics found during the deep sounding conducted in the courtyard of the temple of Athirat in Tamnaʿ, which show comparisons with materials unearthed in Barʾān temple in Maʾrib (for a review of these parallels, see Buffa 2016). The occurrence of such similarities led de Maigret (2010) to hypothesize the existence of a shared material culture across most of the territory during the Early South Arabian period, excluding Ḥaḍramawt, which underwent its own distinct and independent development, associated with the Megalithic Complex.

In the second half of the first millennium, the material culture of different kingdoms seems to initiate a process of diversification: during the Middle and Late South Arabian pottery assemblages, it is not possible to establish a unified typological classification common to various kingdoms (Buffa 2016).

Even within individual kingdoms, developmental shifts are observable: for instance, in the Jawf region, there was a progression from the production of jars with orange paste and slip to the production of yellowish/greenish pastes with abundant vegetal temper, which finds parallels in the Ḥaḍramite assemblage, such as the ones attested in Shabwa and Makaynūn (Arbach, Schiettecatte 2006). Beyond the differentiations and evolutions within the different regions, certain types of ASA pottery can, however, be regarded as transversal, acting as guiding fossils for major historical periods due to their widespread presence across the entire South Arabian territory.

Carinated bowls are among the earliest forms to emerge in the South Arabian ceramic horizon during the Early South Arabian period (12th-6th centuries BCE). As this form is not documented in pottery assemblages dating to the Bronze Age, it has been proposed that this particular combination of shape and treatment (carination/slip/burnishing with a certain degree of finishing) was adopted from North Arabian and Levantine cultures (Japp 2015). This form initially defined the early phase of the Sabaean culture, and later became prevalent, spanning various centuries and regions across South Arabia. This confirms the Sabaean culture as a driving force in the spread of culture in South Arabia during the first millennium BCE.

From the 3rd century BCE to the 5th century CE, the chaff-tempered ovoid jars with a ring base and narrow out-turned rim spread across the entire South Arabian territory, attesting to prolonged continuity, albeit with variations in fabric composition and distribution (Buffa 2015). Fabric is characterized by the presence of vegetal inclusions, particularly chaff, which imparts porosity and lightness to the ceramics. The treatment of these jars is usually limited to wet-smoothing, while the colour of the ceramic body varies from yellowish to light reddish. In the light-red variant, ovoid jars are attested throughout south-western Arabia, although with slight variations in the rim that do not seem to correspond to specific regional distributions (Buffa 2015): they were found in Qatabān (Hajar ibn Ḥumayd, Wādī Ḍuraʾ), in Ḥaḍramawt (Shabwa, Biʾr ʿAlī, Khawr Rūrī), in the Sabaean area (Maʾrib and Ṣirwāḥ), in the Minaean kingdom (Barāqish), and as far north as Qaryat al-Fāw.

These vessels were prevalent across south-western Arabia until the second cent. CE. Subsequently, their presence is exclusively documented in Sabaʾ and Ḥaḍramawt. Their widespread distribution and utilization are subjects of debate as they have been linked to transportation and storage, but indirect confirmation comes from their discovery beyond the confines of South Arabia. They were notably exported to Egypt (Myos Hormos), Jordan (Ayla), Eastern Arabia (Mleiha), and India (Kerala).

Wavy rim bowls, also known as Bayḥān bowls due to their prevalence in the Wādī Bayḥān area, coexisted with the diffusion period of chaff-tempered ovoid jars, and served as diagnostic artefacts from the 2nd cent. BCE to the 2nd cent. CE. These are open bowls featuring a wavy rounded or flattened rim, a bulge or swelling at the connection between the body and rim, and ring bases. Treatment is consistently limited to wet-smoothing, while a variety of pastes reflect regional productions (Pavan 2017). In 2004, Glanzman asserted that wavy rim bowls were the exclusive ceramic type delineating a consistent cultural horizon throughout south-western Arabia. While this is not the only type exhibiting transregional diffusion, the remarkable prevalence of this type is striking. It has been documented from the turn of the Christian era onwards, extending from Qatabān (Hajar ibn Ḥumayd) to Ḥaḍramawt (Shabwa, Jūja, Makaynūn, Khawr Rūrī), and from Sabaʾ (Maʾrib) to Maʿīn (Barāqish) and Najrān (al-Ukhdūd).

The distribution of vessels imitating steatite containers, characterized by a fabric made of soft-stone, greasy to the touch, was also transregional. The rocky temper can be so abundant as to make the containers appear to be made of stone rather than ceramic. This type of fabric is mostly associated with hemispherical bowls with lug handles often serving a purely decorative function. Used in food preparation activities, these containers spread throughout Arabia, although they seemed typical, at least in an early phase, of the Ḥaḍramawt region (hence the name of Ḥaḍrami stoneware). They remained in use throughout the entire first millennium BCE, and ceased to be employed in the 1st cent. BCE (Pavan 2017).

Exploring diversity in ASA ceramics: functions, influences, and unique shapes over time

ASA ceramics do not exhibit distinctive shapes associated with specific functions such as funerary and ritual purposes. Domestic vessel forms are used in funerary contexts (Antonini 2016), and even the ceramics found in temples and shrines lack special shapes, except for occasional decorations featuring animal protomes (Japp 2014). However, some shapes appear to be limited to specific regions and brief temporal intervals. For instance, chalices were typical during the period between the 10th and 5th centuries BCE in Sabaʾ, although in both funerary and domestic contexts (Japp 2014), as well as Sabir containers. Miniaturized vessels, often employed in funerary contexts, also recur frequently (Japp 2002).

The relationship between ASA ceramics and imported ceramics is not yet well-defined, and it remains uncertain to what extent South Arabian potters adopted and reworked external models. External evidence of pottery is only sporadic until the pre-Roman era, and can be linked to the possible personal belongings of merchants involved in caravan trade. Things change with the opening of significant trade between Rome and the East. Ports involved in international trade, such as Biʾr ʿAlī and Khawr Rūrī, handled a considerable quantity of imported ceramics (exceeding 50 % in Biʾr ʿAlī), which however arrived in small quantities within the interior of Arabia (Japp 2019). It is therefore challenging to imagine how imported ceramics, transported by cargoes making stops in southern Arabia, may have influenced local productions. For instance, on the bottoms of some jars, like those discovered at Tamnaʿ in TT1, letters or groups of letters are observed, created with stamp seals. This was thought to be a practice inspired by the Roman world, where seals served a similar function to tituli picti. In the meantime, Sedov and Antonini (see Buffa 2016) believe that Thin-Walled Red Slip Ware may have been inspired by the circulating luxury item, Terra Sigillata, in Arabia. The potential production of amphorae in Yemen, modelled after Roman ones, is also an intriguing topic. It arose recently after the discovery of a talc-based paste not connected with amphorae, except in some specimens found at Khawr Rūrī and tentatively attributed to a production located between Wādī Bayḥān and Wādī al-Juba (Pavan & Pallecchi 2009).

Alexia Pavan

References and suggested reading

• Antonini, S. 2016. Pottery found in the houses of the “Market Square” in Tamnaʿ, in A. de Maigret & C.J. Robin (eds) Gli scavi italo-francesi di Tamnaʿ (Repubblica dello Yemen) Rapporto finale. In memoria di Alessandro de Maigret: 451–456. Paris: De Boccard.
• Arbach, M. & J. Schiettecatte 2006. Vaisselle en céramique, in Catalogue des pièces archéologiques et épigraphiques du Jawf au Musée National de Sanʿāʾ: 84–96. Sana’a: UNESCO, CEFAS.
• Buffa, V. 2007. Malʿayba et l’Âge du Bronze du Yémen (ABADY, 12). Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert.
• Buffa, V. 2015. Shape versus ware. The South Arabian Straw Tempered Ovoid Storage Jars. 3rd cent. BC – 5th cent. AD, in I. Gerlach (ed.) South Arabia and its neighbours. Phenomena of intercultural contacts. 14. Rencontres Sabéennes: 47–62 (ABADY, 14). Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert.
• Buffa, V. 2016. Naming types, defining shapes: the case of the typologycal study of the pottery assemblage from Tamnaʿ, in A. de Maigret & C.J. Robin (eds) Gli scavi italo-francesi di Tamnaʿ (Repubblica dello Yemen) Rapporto finale. In memoria di Alessandro de Maigret: 447–450. Paris: De Boccard.
• De Maigret, A. 2003. La ceramica sabea. Specificità e sviluppi da uno studio delle forme. Arabia. Revue de Sabéologie 1: 89–96.
• De Maigret, A. 2010. A Sabean stratigraphy of Barāqish. Arabia. Revue de Sabéologie 4 (2007–2010): 205–240.
• Edens, C. 1999. The Bronze Age of Highland Yemen: Chronological and Spatial Variability of Pottery and Settlement. Paléorient 25(2): 105–128. DOI: 10.3406/paleo.1999.4690.
• Glanzman, W.D. 2004. Beyond their borders: a common potting tradition and ceramic horizon within South Arabia during the later first millennium BC through the early first millennium AD. PSAS 34: 121–138. www.jstor.org/stable/41223811
• Japp, S. 2002. Die Miniaturkeramik aus der Nekropole des Awām-Tempels in Marib, in ABADY 9: 137–147. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.
• Japp, S. 2014. Chronology of Sabean pottery – Some remarks. ZOrA 7: 302–323.
• Japp, S. 2019. Imports of Pottery and Glass Vessels in First Millennium CE South Arabia: Signs of Commercial and Cultural Contacts via the Red Sea Trade Routes, in A. Manzo, C. Zazzaro & D.J. de Falco (eds) Stories of Globalization. The Red Sea and the Persian Gulf from Late Prehistory to Early Modernity: 154–179. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
• Pavan, A. 2017. A cosmopolitan city on the Arabian Coast. The imported and local pottery from Khor Rori. Khor Rori Report 3 (Arabia Antica, 12). Rome: "L’Erma" di Bretschneider.
• Pavan, A. & P. Pallecchi, 2009. Considerazioni su alcuni frammenti di anfore con impasto a base di talco rinvenute nell’antico porto di Sumhuram (Oman). EVO 32: 221–229. www.jstor.org/stable/24238231
• Sedov, A.V. 2003. Notes on the Stratigraphy and Pottery Sequence at Raybūn I settlement (Western Wādī Ḥaḍramawt). Arabia. Revue de Sabéologie 1: 173–196, 245–291.
• Van Beek, G.W. 1969. Hajar Bin Ḥumeid: investigations at a pre-Islamic site in South Arabia (Publications of the American Foundation for the Study of Man, 5). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins press.

_{Alternate spellings: Ceramic, Ware, Earthenware, Potsherd, Sherd, Shard}