Mortuary and Bioarchaeological Perspectives on Bronze Age Arabia: Bioarchaeological Interpretations of the Human Past: Local, Regional, and Global Perspectives 1683400798, 9781683400790

Citation preview

Mortuary and Bioarchaeological Perspectives on Bronze Age Arabia Bioarchaeological Interpretations of the Human Past: Local, Regional, and Global Perspectives

Mortuary and Bioarchaeological Perspectives on Bronze Age Arabia

Edited by

Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka Foreword by Clark Spencer Larsen

University of Florida Press Gainesville

Copyright 2019 by Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka All rights reserved Published in the United States of America. This book may be available in an electronic edition. 24 23 22 21 20 19

6 5 4 3 2 1

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Williams, Kimberly D., editor. | Gregoricka, Lesley A., editor. | Larsen, Clark Spencer, author of foreword. Title: Mortuary and bioarchaeological perspectives on Bronze Age Arabia / edited by Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka ; foreword by Clark Spencer Larsen. Other titles: Bioarchaeological interpretations of the human past. Description: Gainesville : University of Florida Press, 2019. | Series: Bioarchaeological interpretations of the human past: local, regional, and global perspectives | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018037044 | ISBN 9781683400790 (cloth : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Bronze age—Arabian Peninsula. | Arabian Peninsula—History. | Excavations (Archaeology)—Arabian Peninsula. Classification: LCC DS231 .M67 2019 | DDC 939.4/9—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018037044

University of Florida Press 2046 NE Waldo Road Suite 2100 Gainesville, FL 32609 http://upress.ufl.edu

CONTENTS

List of Figures vii List of Tables ix Foreword xi 1. A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia 1 Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Part I. Mortuary Transitions 2. Promoting Group Identity and Equality by Merging the Dead: Increasing Complexity in Mortuary Practices from the Late Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age in the Oman Peninsula and Their Social Implications 21 Olivia Munoz

3. Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change from the Neolithic to the Late Pre-Islamic 41 Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

4. The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition of the Third Millennium BC: Evidence from Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb Necropolis 76 Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

5. Tombs in Time and Towers in Space: Making Sense of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition in North-Central Oman through Its Monuments 108 Charlotte Marie Cable

6. Exploring Continuity and Discontinuity from the Early to the Middle Bronze Age in Central Oman: The Graveyards of Adam 121 Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

7. A Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Prehistoric Monumental Burials of Southeastern Arabia 141 Eugenio Bortolini

Part II. Evidence from the Bones 8. Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula in the Third Millennium BC 163 Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

9. The Tomb at Tell Abraq (ca. 2100–2000 BC): Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity 182 Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

10. Temporal Trends in Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island 201 Lesley A. Gregoricka

11. The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity from the Peter B. Cornwall Collection 220 Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

12. Conclusions, Challenges, and the Future of Mortuary Archaeology and Bioarchaeology in Arabia 240 Peter Magee

List of Contributors 251 Index 253

FIGURES

2.1. Evolution of grave types from the Late Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age in the Oman Peninsula 22 2.2. Schematic representation of the management of collective Hafit and Umm an-Nar tombs 26 2.3. Location and schematic layout of several Umm an-Nar tombs 28 2.4. Mean cost of the construction of a tomb and average number of individuals per tomb by period 31 3.1. Distribution of burial cairns in Qatar 42 3.2. A schematic view of burial cairn typology in Qatar 49 3.3. A Type 9 burial from Wādī Ḍebayān 56 3.4. A steatite bowl from a Type 10 burial at Umm Tarqa, early first millennium BC 60 4.1. Map of study area 86 4.2. Schematic plan of Tomb S007-001 88 4.3. Schematic of Tomb S007-003 91 4.4. Bronze rivets from Tomb S007-011 92 4.5. Schematic plan of Tomb S007-012 93 4.6. Schematic plan of Tomb S007-057 95 5.1. Third millennium BC monuments 109 6.1. Map of the area of Adam 122 6.2. Map and picture of Jabal Qarah 124 6.3. Jabal Qara and Adam North graveyard 126 6.4. Schematic map of Adam South graveyard 128 6.5. Map of Adam North graveyard 132

viii · Figures

7.1. Map of the study region of structural variability in monumental tombs 147 7.2. Neighbor-joining tree of tomb classes 150 7.3. Neighbor-joining tree of individual tombs 152 9.1. Tomb structure at Tell Abraq 187 9.2. Example of the access database collection sheet for the os coxa 189 9.3. Preliminary ArcGIS reconstruction of the distribution of pelvic bones in the tomb 193 10.1. Map of the settlement and tombs of Umm an-Nar Island 203 10.2. Temporal changes in archaeological human radiogenic strontium isotope values from three tombs on Umm an-Nar Island 212 10.3. Radiogenic strontium and stable carbon isotope ratios from human dental enamel on Umm an-Nar Island 213 11.1. Proximal right fibula of 12–10149 227 11.2. Facial reconstruction of 12–10152 229 11.3. Ostrich eggshell and ceramic jar interred with Individual 12-10147 232 11.4. Restored ivory vessel interred with Individual 12-10147 233

TABLES

3.1. Radiocarbon determinations from burials excavated as a part of the QNHER project 54 4.1. Characteristics of Transitional Tower Tombs at Al Khubyab 87 4.2. Radiocarbon dates of third millennium BC monuments in the Dhank Region 89 9.1. Distribution of select bone elements for which a sex assignment was attempted 190 10.1. Descriptive statistics for strontium, oxygen, and carbon values of archaeological fauna and humans from Umm an-Nar Island 211

FOREWORD

The ancient Near East—the vast terrain encompassing western Asia—is among the best known archaeological regions of the world, especially with regard to the study of the rise of complex societies, the origins and evolution of food production, and population dynamics. All would agree that developments in the Near East over the last five to ten millennia of human prehistory and history provide a crucial record for understanding the world we live in today with its history of population increase, dietary and nutritional shifts, and changing living conditions. The Near East has a long history of archaeological and bioarchaeological study and is especially well known in a number of contexts, including Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and the southern Levant. In stark contrast to those settings of the ancient Near East, the archaeological and bioarchaeological records of the Arabian Peninsula, especially its southeastern region, are far less known. Although archaeological investigations of southeastern Arabia extend back more than five decades, the breadth and depth of understanding is very new. The Arabian Peninsula has long been thought of as a place of discrete periods that lack transitional states and that was a kind of backwater of “civilization.” However, the new work presented in this book reveals a clear record of transformative processes, dynamic change, and complexity. From the beginning of discovery of sites in the region in the 1950s, the focus has been on the most visible record: the thousands of above-ground tombs dotting the landscape, sometimes in clusters of hundreds of large monumental structures that contain the skeletal remains of hundreds of individuals. As discussed in the following pages, this region contains one of the most highly visible mortuary records in the archaeological past for anywhere in the world. The central importance of this record is that it gives us an opportunity to document and interpret mortuary space and key insights into the human experience in the region, especially regarding the evolution

xii · Foreword

of mortuary variation, ritual, and bioarchaeology during the Early Bronze Age (ca. 3200–2000 BC). In the following pages, you will find a monumental effort to interpret this record in spatial, temporal, and behavioral contexts; to develop an informed research agenda; and to explore and study an incredibly interesting and important region of the world. By pulling this volume together, the editors and contributors provide the archaeological community with an important monograph in a number of key respects. Unlike much of traditional archaeology in the Near East, which focuses on elaborate contexts and the elite, this volume attempts to express a broad picture of human behavior, identity, foodways, health and well-being, and adaptation in a highly challenging setting of dramatic climate change and seasonality. The investigation of past societies in this setting offers new opportunities to explore and document not only segments of population structure but also individuals and the challenges they faced in tough circumstances. That is what the bioarchaeological record can reveal—the individual members of past societies, their living conditions and access to resources, their lifestyles, and the social and cultural worlds they constructed. I have followed the literature on and research in the region for the last couple of decades and have often hoped to see a comprehensive treatment such as that presented in this volume. In compilation, the book presents the first broad treatment of a region that has long deserved this kind of exposure, attention to detail, and growing understanding of the complex landscape and the people that occupied it. Surely the book will inspire others to challenge, refine, and address the myriad issues the contributors raise, drawing us into a better understanding of a region of the world that heretofore has been so understudied and so underrepresented. This book will provide a template for more research and an even better understanding of issues related to population dynamics and the lives and lifestyles of ancestors. Clark Spencer Larsen Series Editor

1 A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

The interconnected disciplines of bioarchaeology and mortuary archaeology practiced today in southeastern Arabia (which includes the Sultanate of Oman, United Arab Emirates [UAE], Bahrain, and Qatar) face serious challenges that may cloud and obscure the behavior and life histories of prehistoric peoples. These include poor preservation of skeletal material (a common characteristic of many arid environments), the reuse of monuments over time, and mortuary traditions involving communal burial or reuse that destroy evidence of many singular events. In response to such challenges, this volume seeks to contribute new data to a fundamental question in Arabian archaeology: What do we know about mortuary rituals and the prehistoric people who performed them and who once inhabited southeastern Arabia? In the following chapters, we focus primarily on the transition from the earliest to most complex mortuary monuments (chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7) in the Early Bronze Age (ca. 3200–2000 BC) on the Arabian Peninsula. This work is complemented by considerations of broader changes in mortuary ritual from the Neolithic period through the Early Bronze Age on the Oman Peninsula (chapter 2) and from the Neolithic period through the late Pre-Islamic period on the Gulf peninsula of Qatar (chapter 3). Case studies from specific sites and subsamples from the Arabian Peninsula highlight the role of animal offerings in the Hafit/Umm an-Nar transition (chapter 8), the possibilities for nuanced understandings of complex communal Umm an-Nar tomb use (chapter 9), residential mobility and subsistence strategies of Umm an-Nar people interred on Umm an-Nar Island (chapter 10), and an example of detailed life histories of three Early Dilmun men on

2 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

the island of Bahrain (chapter 11). Finally, Peter Magee summarizes this volume and offers his opinion on the future of bioarchaeology and mortuary archaeology in Arabia. A Short History of Mortuary Archaeology and Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia

Excavations in southeastern Arabia did not begin until the second half of the twentieth century, and as such, the archaeology of this region is still very much in its infancy (Højlund 2012). Danes Peter Glob and Geoffrey Bibby pioneered archaeological excavations in the Gulf (Bibby 1970), beginning in 1953 on the island of Bahrain and eventually expanding elsewhere in the Arabian Peninsula. These excavations centered on mortuary archaeology, which is not surprising in that thousands of above-ground tombs are the most discernible markers of the region’s cultural landscape. Nonetheless, because the living make deliberate choices in structuring death and burial, remembrance of the dead in actuality presents a reflection of the structures and ideologies of the living population (Parker Pearson 1999). This is especially relevant in this region because the nomadic and semi-nomadic lifestyles of prehistoric groups who inhabited southeastern Arabia produced few domestic or public spaces yet prioritized commemoration of the dead, thereby creating a vast mortuary terrain in which the living and the dead were connected spatially and (presumably) spiritually. While an underappreciation of the prehistory of this area is evident when compared with larger and better-understood regions of the Near East, including Mesopotamia and the southern Levant, significant new work is finally starting to change that reality. From the perspective of bioarchaeology, two key papers—Soren Blau’s (1996) “Attempting to Identify Activities in the Past: Preliminary Investigations of the Third Millennium BC Population at Tell Abraq” and Debra Martin’s (2007) “Bioarchaeology in the United Arab Emirates”—have acted as milestones in the implementation of modern, scientific methods of analyses of human skeletal remains and the integration of these with mortuary archaeology in southeastern Arabia. While both of these papers focused on the archaeological potential of human skeletal remains in the UAE, these modern geographic boundaries are not relevant to an understanding of the prehistory of the region and rather reflect the reality of political boundaries and modern fieldwork permits. These papers served as a beacon for the need for an integrated approach to archaeology and bioarchaeology (Blau 1996) and as a signal of the arrival of

A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia · 3

a significant large-scale systematic bioarchaeological study (Martin 2007). Whereas Blau (1998) lamented the marginalized study of human skeletal remains, the lack of integration with the rest of the archaeological record, as well as overly simplistic interpretations that characterized skeletal analyses in the region, nearly ten years later Martin (2007) heralded the publication of groundbreaking work at Jebel al-Buhais. The publication of this study (Uerpmann et al. 2006) demonstrated world-class bioarchaeological analyses and comprehensive documentation of architecture and material culture from a significant necropolis used during the Neolithic, Bronze, and Iron Ages. Finally, the “extraordinary potential of the human skeletal remains” had been demonstrated on the Arabian Peninsula (Martin 2007:125). This was soon followed by the contribution of Weeks (2010), Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond, which presented a wide-reaching collection of work that documented mortuary rituals, material culture, and bioarchaeological analyses from the Neolithic through Islamic periods in Arabia and elsewhere in the Near East and North Africa. This volume has not been matched or surpassed in its presentation of quality bioarchaeological analyses from the Arabian Peninsula. It was also exceptional both for its inclusion of work from so many eras of human prehistory and for helping to contextualize the mortuary archaeology and bioarchaeology of the Arabian Gulf (Weeks 2010). Blau (1996, 2001a, 2001b), Martin (2007), and others have been careful to reference the often-poor quality of the human skeletal remains recovered from this region, which are usually fragmented, commingled, and badly preserved. A glance at most publications on the earliest Early Bronze Age mortuary monuments from the Arabian Peninsula (Hafit-type cairns; ca. 3200–2700 BC) reveals references to “fragments” or “splinters” of bone inside tomb chambers. More often than not, no further documentation or analyses are undertaken. Monuments that date to the subsequent Umm an-Nar period (ca. 2700–2000 BC) have received far more attention, but the enormous complexity of these large communal tombs has limited interpretations of health, diet, and lifestyle, in part because of the inability to reconstruct the skeletons of hundreds of commingled and fragmented individuals. For both periods, then, it is easy to understand how earlier scholars saw little value in Early Bronze Age bones. Over time, it became dogma in the region that there is not much information to be gleaned from their study. Preservation is still a problem for the excavation of prehistoric skeletal material in this region. The arid environment and multifaceted mortuary

4 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

practices surrounding these monuments usually preclude the study of complete, articulated, and well-preserved skeletons, but this has not deterred forward scholarly movement in understanding the lives and lifestyles of these past individuals. Indeed, recent work has demonstrated the value of this approach, documenting the potential to learn more about mortuary ritual, health, and monument use/reuse during the Early Bronze Age (e.g., Munoz 2017; Munoz et al. 2012; Williams and Gregoricka 2013; Williams et al. 2014) than previous approaches that divorced skeletal remains from their context for analyses. An important emergent theme characterizing recent work in Arabia is the need to rely less on the discrete and stringent temporal boundaries of “black boxes” based on regionally defined time periods, including the three phases that make up the Bronze Age: Hafit, Umm an-Nar, and Wadi Suq. Too often, tomb forms and prehistoric behavior are wedged into the confines of these boxes while important variation is discarded or not considered in detail. For example, from the earliest surveys of the Arabian Peninsula, researchers have recognized differences in Early Bronze Age cairn forms, and as such, a variety of names have been used (e.g., cairn, Hafit-type cairn, Beehive tomb, Tower tomb) to describe them. Subsequently, it was not lost on these archaeologists that potentially significant variation existed in those forms, leading some to suggest that this variation may represent an intermediate phase of tomb form between the Hafit and Umm an-Nar (e.g., Frifelt 1975). This is significant because dramatic changes in community organization and mortuary ritual clearly differentiated these periods. For instance, it is thought that during the Hafit period, people were largely nomadic or semi-nomadic based on the scarcity of their settlements. By contrast, the Umm an-Nar period was characterized by settlements that included buildings for habitation and industry, monumental towers, and finely built monumental communal tombs. Given a lack of written history for the region, the reason for this change and the pace at which it occurred are not well understood. Consequently, and because of the common need for both Hafit and Umm an-Nar communities to dispose of their dead, tombs represent an important means of investigating social change. A brief exploration of mortuary practices for both the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods and recent developments in methodological approaches and archaeological thought in the region is thus warranted.

A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia · 5

Hafit Period (3200–2700 BC) During the Hafit period, the first large-scale efforts to build mortuary monuments emerged across southeastern Arabia as both single and communal tower-like tombs populated the foothills of the Al-Hajar Mountains. These monuments did not develop in isolation. Indeed, they shared many similarities with other Early Bronze Age tombs across all of Arabia and into the Levant. The parallels between these monuments are not exact, but the most parsimonious interpretation based on tomb architecture, placement on the landscape, and use of these monuments is that monumentality in Arabia was a widespread, shared ideological development. In northern Oman, these tombs are known as Hafit-type cairns, although terminology has varied extensively (see Williams and Gregoricka [2013] and chapter 7, this volume, for a more detailed discussion). Nevertheless, beyond differential usage of terms to describe these tombs, real variation existed in architecture and perhaps mortuary ritual. A large number of Hafit-type cairns have been excavated, but publication of these results is relatively infrequent. The earliest excavations focused on descriptions of grave goods, while skeletal remains (when present) were rarely discussed in detail (e.g., de Cardi et al. 1977; Frifelt 1971). Considerable work over the past five decades on these mortuary monuments has improved our understanding of this era in terms of spatiality, architecture, and mortuary ritual. Spatiality The ubiquity of Hafit period monuments on the landscape and the surge in geospatial technologies available to archaeologists has led to a significant number of studies that have mapped the location of these mortuary structures and sought explanations for the patterns observed. Many of the earliest surveys conducted in northern Oman and the UAE have reported the frequency, distribution, and (in some cases) descriptions of these tombs, among other sites of archaeological interest (e.g., Al Belushi and ElMahi 2009; Biagi 1988; Brass and Britton 2004; de Cardi 1975; de Cardi and Doe 1971; de Cardi et al. 1975, 1977; Gentelle and Frifelt 1989; Haser 2003; Hastings et al. 1975; Ibrahim and ElMahi 2000; Meadow et al. 1976; Schreiber and Haser 2004; Stocks 1996; Yule 1996; Yule and Weisgerber 1998). These data have been very useful for refining the regions of greatest potential for archaeological exploration of mortuary rituals of the Bronze Age (and other periods) but were conducted without the benefit of

6 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

modern geospatial tools (Al Jahwari 2008) and during a time when archaeologists were just beginning to understand mortuary diversity. More recent surveys have employed far more accurate GPS technologies (e.g., During and Olijdam 2015; Giraud 2010; Giraud and Cleuziou 2009; Giraud et al. 2010; Al Jahwari 2013a, 2013b; Williams and Gregoricka 2013) and have thus considerably improved our knowledge of monument distribution patterns. As these larger databases are generated, spatial analyses (Deadman 2012; Deadman and Al Jahwari 2016; Giraud and Cleuziou 2009) have been conducted. Such work has supported both the notion that Hafit-type cairns were built to mark territory or important seasonal resources (Deadman 2012; Al Jahwari 2013a; chapter 5, this volume; chapter 6, this volume, building on the work of Saxe 1970) and the notion that these tombs were constructed in relation to possible habitation areas that later influenced the development of Umm an-Nar settlements (Giraud and Cleuziou 2009). Still other work challenges the overgeneralization of these models for the entirety of the Oman Peninsula, instead favoring a regional approach and the possibility of multiple and perhaps overlapping motivations for tomb placement (Williams and Gregoricka 2013; chapter 4, this volume). Architectural Variation, Mortuary Ritual, and Bioarchaeology Variation in Hafit-type cairn architecture has long been recognized. In particular, Frifelt (1975)—based on her work on both Hafit-type cairns and Umm an-Nar tombs—suggested that this variation may be due to changing monument structure in the transition between these periods. Until recently, it has been very difficult to document this transition because of reuse of monuments over time and the poor preservation of bone in these arid environments, which has resulted in an absence of bone collagen necessary for traditional radiocarbon dating. Recently, however, new methods for bone bioapatite dating (e.g., Zazzo and Saliège 2011) have been employed to more scientifically explore the chronology of Early Bronze Age monuments (Williams and Gregoricka 2013; Williams et al. 2014) with exciting results. This work supports Frifelt’s original hypothesis that tomb features such as the appearance of internal architecture, an increase in overall size, and more-refined building techniques characterize tombs that date to an intermediate phase between the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods. These were the first radiocarbon dates published for Early Bronze Age human skeletal remains from the Oman Peninsula, and since that time, bone bioapatite dates for Neolithic human skeletal remains (Zazzo et al. 2014, 2016)

A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia · 7

and an extensive list of dates from Hafit, Umm an-Nar, Wadi Suq, and Iron Age contexts (Williams and Gregoricka 2019) have now been successfully documented. The application of this method helps us understand architectural shifts and further contextualizes problematic material culture and intrusive burials that characterize Early Bronze Age cairns across Arabia. Moreover, bioarchaeological analyses have documented that the mortuary ritual in some of these “transitional” tombs differs from that seen in Hafit and Umm an-Nar tombs (Williams and Gregoricka 2013; chapter 4 and chapter 8, this volume). These newly acquired temporal datasets open entirely new avenues of inquiry regarding individual and group identity, landscape modification, continuity of habitation, and the development or preservation of social memory. For instance, the popular view that Hafit-type cairns were built along trade routes and at high places so that they could communicate territory or some other aspect of group identity can now be considered within the context of monument reuse hundreds or thousands of years later. Chronometric dating can thus be used in combination with stratigraphy and material culture to document reuse events (Williams and Gregoricka 2013) and help contextualize the regional variation in tomb form that has been observed across the entire region. For example, Jasim (2012) similarly considered the Hafit/Umm an-Nar transition at Jebel al-Buhais. Here, four different transitional tomb forms were identified, and it was observed that these tombs were larger and often clustered near one another. While our sample size is smaller, the Al Khubayb Necropolis near Dhank, Oman, provides absolute dates for these transitional monuments (Williams and Gregoricka 2013; chapter 4, this volume). We observed that these tombs, like those observed by Jasim (2012), were larger and clustered together. At the Al Khubayb Necropolis they are found on the relatively flat portions of the landform compared to smaller Hafit-type cairns (dating to the earlier third millennium BC) found on the slopes leading down to the wadi. In this volume, Bortolini (chapter 7) provides additional insight into this question through the application of phylogenetic modeling. This theory of the evolution of tomb form is based on an older model for understanding the mechanisms of cultural transmission within and between generations. Using this approach, he attributes structural changes in tomb construction to the movements of people responsible for tomb building. In other words, his application of cultural evolutionary modeling creates an explanation for the variation in tomb architecture seen during the Bronze Age.

8 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Due to small sample sizes coupled with poor preservation, there are very few publications on human skeletal remains from Hafit-type cairns. Indeed, from a bioarchaeological perspective, the earliest part of the Bronze Age is the least well-known period in the prehistory of Arabia. As a result, it has been possible to glean only preliminary data on tomb membership and basic health indicators (e.g., Williams and Gregoricka 2013; chapter 4, this volume). A notable exception to this is a recent publication that examines the emergence of agriculture in southeastern Arabia (Munoz 2017), but unfortunately only 27 individuals from the Hafit period were available to study. This highlights another challenge when working with skeletal remains from Hafit-type cairns: the reuse of these monuments in later periods. Many Hafit-type cairns were reused in later periods (Al Jahwari 2010). For example, the Hafit-type cairns documented at Jebel al-Buhais (Jasim 2012) included more recent intrusive burials and/or material culture. As such, it is often impossible to discern Hafit period interment(s) from later inclusions. Moreover, it is also possible that Hafit interments were destroyed or removed prior to reuse events or were simply more poorly preserved because of their longer depositional history. Hafit period interments that have not been disturbed are typically found in a semi-flexed position and placed on either their left or right side (e.g., Williams and Gregoricka 2013; chapter 4, this volume). Unfortunately, however, not enough data exist for commentary on potential variation in body positioning or the demography of the people interred. Hafit period grave goods often included imported or imitation Jemdet Nasr/Early Dynastic ceramic vessels, beads and other jewelry items, bronze awls, bronze points, bronze daggers, and shells. On the other hand, tombs that date to between the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods appear to employ a slightly different use of space inside the monuments (chapter 4) so that each corpse occupied a discrete space and was accompanied by specific grave goods. Further, there is evidence of symbolic animal part offerings associated with dual female/child interments (chapter 8, this volume). These datasets are still small, however, and at this time they are merely suggestive of differential mortuary treatments during this transitional period. Umm an-Nar Period (2700–2000 BC) The Umm an-Nar period was a time of significant socioeconomic change in southeastern Arabia. During this time, settlements, including monumental towers and residential buildings, were first seen in the region. Because of their beautifully cut stone, complex internal organization, occasional

A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia · 9

carved motifs, and large-scale communal use, Umm an-Nar tombs have received much more attention than their Hafit predecessors. Spatiality Umm an-Nar communal tombs were built adjacent to or even within settlements, not typically in the high places that were characteristic of cairns from the preceding Hafit period. It is not known how many Umm an-Nar tombs were associated with each settlement, partly because the cut-stone blocks that were used to build these monuments were often taken for later monument construction (e.g., Al Tikriti and Méry 2000). Additionally, the tombs were often looted in antiquity (Méry et al. 2004). These activities removed or weakened much of the above-ground structure, promoting later erosion and roof and/or wall stone collapse. Substantive surveys (e.g., Al Jahwari 2013b) have documented far fewer Umm an-Nar tombs than Hafit-type cairns. While this is an accurate assessment of the distribution of Umm an-Nar funerary structures and fits well with the communal mortuary ritual that dominated this time, it is increasingly evident that the full spatiality of Umm an-Nar mortuary traditions included more than these enigmatic circular tombs. In fact, Umm an-Nar tombs are often associated with “invisible” (Méry et al. 2001, 2004), adjacent Umm an-Nar bone pits that were certainly part of the extended mortuary ritual of the time. Reuse of Hafit-type cairns during the Umm an-Nar period has also been suggested based on late third millennium BC material culture recovered from these cairns (e.g., Munoz et al. 2012). This is now supported by chronometric dating of human skeletal remains even in the absence of Umm an-Nar material culture (Williams and Gregoricka 2019). Further, transitional tombs that do not fit squarely into Hafit or Umm an-Nar traditions (chapter 4) were also in use during both the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods, thus challenging the assertion that Hafit-type cairns were abandoned when Umm an-Nar circular tombs came into use and demonstrating that not all people from the Umm an-Nar period were placed in monumental circular tombs at death. Architectural Variation, Mortuary Ritual, and Bioarchaeology Despite the large amount of architectural disturbance to many Umm anNar tombs, internal architecture is often discernable or unaffected due the subterranean construction of the chambers. Tombs consisted either of a single chamber or were divided into a number of chambers that communicated via passageways (e.g., Blau 2001a; Boehme and Al Sabri 2011;

10 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Haerinck 1991; Schmidt and Döpper 2014), or were completely isolated from one another by internal cross-walls (e.g., Benton 1996; Cleuziou and Vogt 1983; Monchablon et al. 2003; Schmidt and Döpper 2014). Several examples of two-story structures also exist (Blau 2001a; Cleuziou and Vogt 1983; Monchablon et al. 2003), and it appears that these vertical spaces were used differentially for progressive aspects of secondary mortuary ritual. Cremation is a common aspect of Umm an-Nar mortuary ritual, but the reason for the use of fire and the practice of cremation is not well understood. Corpses were sometimes initially placed in lower tomb compartments to allow for decomposition prior to their removal for secondary burial rituals including cremation and were then re-deposited in upper compartments (e.g., Hili Tomb A, Unar 2 at Shimal). In others tombs, archaeologists do not believe the lower stories were reserved for inhumations but that instead bone simply fell into the subfloor space (e.g., Ra’s al-Jinz Tomb 1). Cremation has also been documented in associated bone pits (Benton 1996; Munoz et al. 2012; Al Tikriti and Méry 2000). Common practices among most, if not all, Umm an-Nar circular tombs—regardless of architectural complexity—include primary inhumation, manipulation of the skeletal remains after partial or full decomposition, occasional cremation, and transfer of the bones into associated bone pits (Bondioli et al. 1998; Munoz et al. 2012). The degree and completeness of cremation and the transfer of bones into an adjacent bone pit represent two aspects of these mortuary rituals that exhibit the greatest variation between sites. Primary challenges to analyses of any Umm an-Nar circular tomb or bone pit include disturbances due to looting, preservation environment, complex and successive treatment of bones in the mortuary ritual, and older excavation techniques (in the case of osteological analyses attempted before the complexity of these tombs was appreciated). The French teams who have led the way in tomb excavation, especially at Hili (Méry et al. 2001, 2003, 2004) and Ra’s al-Jinz (Monchablon et al. 2003; Munoz et al. 2012), have relied on the recent theoretical and methodological contributions of Duday (1978, 1981, 1995) to great effect. The resulting excavations have revealed small bone articulations (such as those of the hands and feet) and emphasized the importance of recognizing partial articulations as indicators of primary interments or manipulations of incompletely decomposed or desiccated remains. Other excellent analyses of the skeletal material and mortuary ritual have emerged from Tell Abraq (Blau 1996;

A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia · 11

Baustian and Martin 2010; Cope et al. 2005; Cope 2010), Mowaihat (Blau 2001b), and Shimal Unar 2 (Blau 2001a, 2001b). Bone pits and partly built subterranean tombs have been discovered at a number of Umm an-Nar sites. The subterranean structures documented at Hili N (Al Tikriti and Méry 2000) and Mowaihat (Haerinck 1991) stand out because they are partly built tombs—subterranean pits with stone walls and roofs. They differ from the simple pits found at other Umm an-Nar sites. There may well be a structural function to the stone constructions within these partially built pits; in fact, Al Tikriti and Méry (2000) described the walls of Hili N as potentially built to strengthen the pit given its close proximity to Tomb A, a large circular tomb. Perhaps more important than these structural differences are the disparities in mortuary ritual observed. Whereas most pits clearly contained the broken and disarticulated skeletal remains of individuals that were very likely first deposited in nearby circular tombs, there is strong evidence of the regular practice of primary interment in the subterranean pits at some sites. For example, clear evidence of primary burials and partially articulated skeletons at Hili Tomb N led Méry et al. (2003) to assert that this was a demonstrably different mortuary structure and ritual compared with other Umm an-Nar pits. Bioarchaeological analyses of these materials prove challenging, and important criticism includes the presentation of frequencies of pathologies without reporting sample size coupled more broadly with the overinterpretation of data. Munoz et al. (2012) illustrate an example of expert presentation of the percentage of fragments with, for example, pathology or exposure to cremation while not overinterpreting the results to suggest morbidity or mortality rates that cannot be inferred from such limited information. Along these lines, multiple publications have asserted that life during the Umm an-Nar period was characterized by high infant mortality, high young adult mortality, infection, and poor dental health (McSweeney et al. 2004, 2008, 2010). These assertions, however, are based on relatively few individuals that do not necessarily reflect the true overall membership in Umm an-Nar tombs. By the late third millennium BC, for instance, hundreds of individuals were interred together over the course of only 100–200 years. Thus, the importance of bioarchaeological work by Martin et al. (chapter 9) in this volume cannot be overstated. Martin and colleagues present a detailed evaluation of the minimum number of individuals (MNI) contained within in the Umm an-Nar tomb at Tell Abraq and use these available data

12 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

to conduct advanced paleodemographic analyses. This work provides additional strong support for the notion of high infant mortality during the Umm an-Nar period by effectively utilizing large sample sizes. Conclusions and Suggestions for Future Research

While mortuary archaeology in southeastern Arabia has been practiced since the 1950s, bioarchaeology is still very much in its infancy, and it is only recently that the scientific study of human skeletal remains has been integrated with broader archaeological questions in a serious way. This volume contributes to the forward movement of the integration of bioarchaeology and mortuary archaeology by challenging traditional categories of behavior and mortuary ritual during the Arabian Early Bronze Age and beyond. Variation and transition hence represent the major themes of this volume as we work to create a space for the consideration of several new questions and research trajectories in this region. Such objectives center on understanding variability and nuance in tomb form and, correspondingly, how these changes reflect shifting mortuary rituals and social organization. It is hoped that these chapters will together initiate a broader dialogue on the growing importance of bioarchaeology and mortuary archaeology in this region, while highlighting scientific and interpretive frameworks that more holistically synthesize available archaeological data. Subsequently, amid landscapes structured by death and burial, contextualized mortuary and bioarchaeological methodologies enable us to shed new light on Arabian prehistory and gain valuable insight into its people. Acknowledgments

This edited volume was born from two symposia on the archaeology of southeastern Arabia: “Archaeology, Death, and Change in Ancient Arabia” at the 2014 annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology (organized by Kimberly D. Williams, Lesley Gregoricka, and Gwen Robbins Schug), and “Mortuary Perspectives from Outside the Levant” at the 2014 annual meeting of the American Schools of Oriental Research (organized by Gregoricka and Williams). Research in this region of the world is being conducted by a number of international scholars, and it was our honor to gather so many of these colleagues together in the United States at these two venues to talk about their research.

A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia · 13

Special acknowledgment is due to the Sultanate of Oman Ministry of Heritage and Culture for its research support for many of the projects discussed this book. We also thank the peer reviewers, whose comments improved this volume. Finally, KDW thanks colleagues at Sultan Qaboos University for their support, collaboration, and comments on chapters in this volume, which was completed in large part during her time at the university. References Cited Baustian, Kathryn, and Debra L. Martin 2010 Patterns of Mortality in a Bronze Age Tomb from Tell Abraq. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 55–59. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Al Belushi, Mohammed, and Ali Tigani ElMahi 2009 Archaeological Investigations in Shenah, Sultanate of Oman. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 39:31–41. Benton, Jodie 1996 Excavations at Al-Sufouh: A Third Millennium Site In the Emirate of Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Abiel 1, Turnhout. Biagi, Paolo 1988 Surveys along the Oman Coast: Preliminary Report on the 1985–1988 Campaigns. East and West 38(1/4):271–291. Bibby, Thomas Geoffrey 1970 Looking for Dilmun. Knopf, New York. Blau, Soren 1996 Attempting to Identify Activities in the Past: Preliminary Investigations of the Third Millennium BC Population at Tell Abraq. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 7(2):143–176. 1998 Finally the Skeleton: An Analysis of Archaeological Human Skeletal Remains from the United Arab Emirates. PhD dissertation, . University of Sydney, Australia. 2001a Fragmentary Endings: A Discussion of 3rd-Millennium BC Burial Practices in the Oman Peninsula. Antiquity 75(289):557–570. 2001b Limited Yet Informative: Pathological Alterations Observed on Human Skeletal Remains from Third and Second Millennia BC Collective Burials in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Osteoarcheology 11(3):173–205. Boehme, Manfred, and Buibwa Al Sabri 2011 Umm an-Nar burial 401 at Bat, Oman: Architecture and Finds. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 22(2):113–154. Bondioli, Luca, Alfredo Coppa, and Roberto Macchiarelli 1998 From the Coast to the Oasis in Prehistoric Arabia: What The Human Osteodental Remains Tell Us about the Transition from a Foraging to the Exchange Economy? Evidence from Ra’s al-Hamra (Oman) and Hili North (U.A.E.). Proceedings of the XIII Congress: 229–234. Forli, Italy.

14 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Brass, Leanne, and Georgia Britton 2004 An Archaeological Survey of Northern Fujairah, United Arab Emirates. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 15(2):149–196. Cleuziou, Serge, and Burkhard Vogt 1983 Umm an-Nar Burial Customs: New Evidence from Tomb A at Hili North. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 13:37–45. Cope, Janet M. 2010 Discerning Health, Disease and Activity Patterns in a Bronze-Age Population from Tell Abraq, United Arab Emirates. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 61–70. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Cope, Janet M., Alison C. Berryman, Debra L. Martin, and Daniel T. Potts 2005 Robusticity and Osteoarthritis at the Trapeziometacarpal Joint in a Bronze Age Population from Tell Abraq, United Arab Emirates. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 126(4):391–400. Deadman, William M. 2012 Defining the Early Bronze Age Landscape: A Remote Sensing-Based Analysis of Hafit Tomb Distribution in Wadi Andam, Sultanate of Oman. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 23(1):26–34. Deadman, William M., and Nasser Said Al Jahwari 2016 Hafit Tombs in Ash-Sharqiyah, Oman: Assessing the Accuracy and Precision of Google Earth Remote-Sensing Survey and Analyzing Their Distribution in the Landscape. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 27(1):19–30. de Cardi, Beatrice 1975 Survey and Excavations in Central Oman, 1974–1975. Journal of Oman Studies 1:109–111. de Cardi, Beatrice, and Donald B. Doe 1971 Archaeological Survey in the Northern Trucial States. East and West 21(3– 4):225–289. de Cardi, Beatrice, Donald B. Doe, and Steve P. Roskams 1977 Excavation and Survey in the Sharqiyah, Oman 1976. Journal of Oman Studies 3(1):17–33. de Cardi, Beatrice, Claudio Vita-Finzi, and Anne Coles 1975 Archaeological Survey in Northern Oman, 1972. East and West 25(1–2):9–75. Duday, Henri 1978 Archéologie funéraire et anthropologie. Application des relevés et de l’étude ostéologique à l’interprétation de quelques sépultres pré- et proto-historiques du Midi de la France. Cahiers d’Anthropologie 1:55–101. 1981 La place de l’anthropologie dans l’étude des sépultures anciennes. Cahiers d’Anthropologie 1:27–42. 1995 Anthropologie de ‘terrain’ archéologie de la mort. In La mort: Passé, présent, conditionnel: Actes du colloque de la Roche-sur-Yon, edited by R. Joussaume, pp. 33–75. Groupe vendéen d’Etudes Préhistoriques, La Roche-sur-Yon.

A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia · 15

During, Bleda, and Eric Olijdam 2015 Revisiting the Suhar Hinterlands: The Wadi al-Jizi Archaeological Project. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 45:93–106. Frifelt, Karen 1971 Jamdat Nasr Fund fra Oman [Jamdat Nasr graves in Oman]. Kuml: Årbog for Jysk Arkæologisk Selskab 1970:355–383. 1975 On Prehistoric Settlement and Chronology of the Oman Peninsula. East and West 25(3–4):359–424. Gentelle, Pierre, and Karen Frifelt 1989 About the Distribution of Graves and Settlements in the Ibri Area of Oman. In Oman Studies: Papers on the Archaeology and History of Oman, edited by Paolo M. Costa and Maurizio Tosi, pp. 119–126. Serie Orientalia Roma 63. Instituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome. Giraud, Jessica 2010 Early Bronze Age Graves and Graveyards in the Eastern Ja’alan (Sultanate of Oman): An Assessment of the Social Rules Working in the Funerary Landscape. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 71–84. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Giraud, Jessica, and Serge Cleuziou 2009 Funerary Landscape as Part of the Social Landscape and Its Perceptions: 3000 Early Bronze Age Burials in the Eastern Ja’lan (Sultanate of Oman). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 39:163–180. Giraud, Jessica, Ali Hamood Saif Al Mahrooqi, Guillaume Gernez, Sabrina Righetti, Emilie Portat Sévin-Allouet, Christophe Sévin-Allouet, Marion Lemée, and Serge Cleuziou 2010 The First Three Campaigns (2007–2009) of the Survey at Adam (Sultanate of Oman). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 40:175–183. Haerinck, Ernie 1991 The Rectangular Umm an-Nar Period Grave at Mowaihat (Emirate of Ajman, United Arab Emirates). Gentse Bijdragen tot de kunstgeschiedenis 29:1–30. Haser, Jutta 2003 Archaeological Results of the 1999 and 2000 Survey Campaigns in Wadi Bani Awf and the region of al-Hamra (Central Oman). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 33:21–30. Hastings, Anne, J. H. Humphries, and Richard H. Meadow 1975 Oman in the Third Millennium BCE. Journal of Oman Studies 1:9–55. Højlund, Flemming 2012 The First Excavations in the UAE, 1959–1972: Glimpses in to the Archive of Moesgård Museum. In Fifty Years of Emirates Archaeology: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the United Arab Emirates, edited by Daniel T. Potts and Peter Hellyer, pp. 10–19. Motivate Publishing, Abu Dhabi.

16 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Ibrahim, Moawiyah, and Ali Tigani ElMahi 2000 A Survey between Quriyat and Sur in the Sultanate of Oman (1997). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 30:119–136. Al Jahwari, Nasser Said 2008 Settlement Patterns, Development and Cultural Change in Northern Oman Peninsula: A Multi-Tiered Approach to the Analysis of Long-Term Settlement Trends. PhD dissertation, Department of Archaeology, Durham University, United Kingdom. 2010 Cairn Burials in the Oman Peninsula: The Problem of Dating Hafit Period Graves, End of 4th–Early 3rd Millennium BC. Journal of Oman Studies 16:93– 112. 2013a The Early Bronze Age Funerary Archaeological Landscape of Western Ja’alan: Results of Three Seasons of Investigations. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(2):151–173. 2013b Settlement Patterns, Development and Cultural Change in Northern Oman Peninsula: A Multi-Tiered Approach to the Analysis of Long-Term Settlement Trends. British Foundation for the Study of Arabia Monographs No. 13. Archaeopress, Oxford. Jasim, Sabah Abboud 2012 The Necropolis of Jebel al-Buhais: Prehistoric Discoveries in the Emirate of Sharjah United Arab Emirates. Department of Culture and Information, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Martin, Debra L. 2007 Bioarchaeology in the United Arab Emirates. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 18(2):124–131. McSweeney, Kathleen, Sophie Méry, and Roberto Macchiarelli 2008 Rewriting the End of the Early Bronze Age in the United Arab Emirates through the Anthropological and Artefactual Evaluation of Two Collective Umm an-Nar Graves at Hili (Eastern Region of Abu Dhabi). Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 19(1):1–14. McSweeney, Kathleen, Sophie Méry, and Walid Yasin Al Tikriti 2010 Life and Death in an Early Bronze Age Community from Hili, Al Ain, UAE. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 45–54. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. McSweeney, Kathleen, Sophie Méry, Walid Yasin Al Tikriti, and S. van der Leeuw 2004 New Approaches to a Collective Grave from the Umm an-Nar Period at Hili (UAE). Paleorient 30(1):163–178. Meadow, Richard H., James H. Humphries, and Ann Hastings 1976 Explorations in Oman, 1973 and 1975: Prehistoric Settlements and Ancient Copper Smelting with Its Comparative Aspects in Iran. In Proceedings of the IVth Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran, edited by F. Bagherzadeh, pp. 110–129. Iranian Centre for Archaeological Research, Tehran. Méry, Sophie, Kathleen McSweeney, S. van der Leeuw, and Walid Yasin Al Tikriti 2004 New Approaches to a Collective Grave from the Umm an-Nar Period at Hili (UAE). Paleorient 30(1):163–178.

A Path Forward to an Integrated Study of Bioarchaeology in Southeastern Arabia · 17

Méry, Sophie, J. Rouquet, Kathleen McSweeney, G. Basset, Jean-François Saliège, and Walid Yasin Al Tikriti 2001 Re-excavation of the Early Bronze Age Collective Hili N Pit-grave (Emirate of Abu Dhabi, UAE): Results of the First Two Campaigns of the Emirati-French Project. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 31:161–178. Monchablon, Cécile, Rémy Crassard, Olivia Munoz, Hervé Guy, Gaëlle Bruley-Chabot, and Serge Cleuziou 2003 Excavation at Ra’s al-Jinz RJ-1: Stratigraphy Without Tells. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 33:31–47. Munoz, Olivia 2017 Transition to Agriculture in South-Eastern Arabia: Insights from Oral Conditions. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 164(4):702–719. Munoz, Olivia, Royal Omar Ghazal, and Hervé Guy 2012 Use of Ossuary Pits during the Umm an Nar Period: New Insights on the Complexity of Burial Practices from the Site of Ra’s al-Jinz (RJ-1), Oman. In Aux marges de l’archeologie. Hommage a Serge Cleuziou, edited by J. Giraud and G. Gernez, pp. 451–467. Travaux de la Maison Rene-Ginouves 16. De Boccard, Paris. Parker Pearson, Michael 1999 The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Texas A&M University Press, College Station. Saxe, Arthur 1970 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. PhD dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Schreiber, Jurgen, and Jutta Haser 2004 Archaeological Survey at Tiwi and Its Hinterland (Central Oman). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 34:319–329. Schmidt, Conrad, and Stephanie Döpper 2014 German Expedition to Bat and al-Ayn, Sultanate of Oman: The 2010 and 2013 Seasons. Journal of Oman Studies 18:187–230. Stocks, Robyn 1996 Wadi Haqil Survey November 1992. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 26:145–163. Al Tikriti, Walid Yasim, and Sophie Méry 2000 Tomb N at Hili and the Question of the Subterranean Graves during the Umm an-Nar Period. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 30:205–219. Uerpmann, Hans-Peter, Margarethe Uerpmann, and S. A. Jasim (editors) 2006 The Archaeology of Jebel al-Buhais, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates: 1. Funeral Monuments and Human Remains from Jebel al-Buhais. Department of Culture and Information, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Weeks, Lloyd 2010 Introduction to the Contributions on Burial Archaeology. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. v–x. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford.

18 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Williams, Kimberly D., and Lesley A. Gregoricka 2013 The Social, Spatial, and Bioarchaeological Histories of Ancient Oman Project: The Mortuary Landscape of Dhank. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(2):134–150. 2019 New evidence of prehistoric monument diversity in Dhank, Oman. Unpublished manuscript submitted to the Journal for Oman Studies. Williams, Kimberly D., Tara Steimer-Herbet, Lesley A. Gregoricka, Jean-François Saliège, and Joy McCorriston 2014 Bioarchaeological Analyses of 3rd Millennium BC High Circular Tower Tombs in Dhofar, Oman. Journal of Oman Studies. 18:153–173. Yule, Paul 1996 The 1995 German Archaeological Mission to the Sultanate of Oman. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 26:175–176. Yule, Paul, and Gerd Weisgerber 1998 Prehistoric Tower Tombs at Shir/Jaylah, Sultanate of Oman. Beiträge zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archäologie 18:183–241. Zazzo, Antoine, Oliva Munoz, Emilie Badel, Irène Béguier, Francesco Genchi, and Lapo Gianni Marcucci 2016 A Revised Radiocarbon Chronology of the Aceramic Shell Midden of Ra’s alHamra 6 (Muscat, Sultanate of Oman): Implication for Occupational Sequence, Marine Reservoir Age, and Human Mobility. Radiocarbon 58(2):383–395. Zazzo, Antoine, Olivia Munoz, and Jean-François Saliège 2014 Diet and Mobility in a Late Neolithic Population of Coastal Oman Inferred from Radiocarbon Dating and Stable Isotope Analysis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 153(3):353–364. Zazzo, Antoine, and Jean-François Saliège 2011 Radiocarbon Dating of Biological Apatites: A Review. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 310(1–2):52–61.

I Mortuary Transitions

2 Promoting Group Identity and Equality by Merging the Dead Increasing Complexity in Mortuary Practices from the Late Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age in the Oman Peninsula and Their Social Implications Olivia Munoz

Archaeological investigations in the Oman Peninsula conducted over the last forty years have highlighted dramatic socioeconomic transformations characterizing the transition from the Late Neolithic (fifth to fourth millennia BC) to the Early Bronze Age (3200–2000 BC; Cleuziou and Tosi 2007). The distribution of natural resources is thought to have favored a subsistence economy based on seasonal mobility; during the Late Neolithic, communities engaged in herding, fishing, hunting, and gathering (Tosi 1975). However, on some coastal settlements from the shores of the Arabian Sea, close to wadi mouths, mangroves, or lagoons (Berger et al. 2013; Biagi 2004), the combination of a diversity of available terrestrial foods and a wealth of maritime resources may have favored more sedentary occupations (Biagi and Nisbet 2006; Zazzo et al. 2014). Substantial pluristratified anthropogenic deposits characterized these coastal sites, and extensive excavations have revealed domestic structures consisting of circular huts and shelters made with perishable materials, sometimes associated with hearths, waste and storage pits, and activity areas (e.g., Biagi 1999; Cavulli 2004; Charpentier et al. 2003; Gaultier et al. 2005; Marcucci et al. 2011, 2014). Beginning around 3000 BC and during the whole of the third millennium, southeastern Arabia experienced dramatic changes in land use, population growth (Munoz 2014), and territorial expansion into the hinterland

Figure 2.1. Evolution of grave types from the Late Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age in the Oman Peninsula. Credits: O. Munoz (left top and bottom); S. Cleuziou (center top); O. Munoz (center bottom); Mission Archéologique Française à Abu Dhabi (right top and bottom).

Complexity in Mortuary Practices in Oman and Their Social Implications · 23

(Bortolini and Munoz 2015). These transformations were accompanied by changes in subsistence strategies, including the development of date palm cultivation and agriculture in the piedmonts and valleys (Cleuziou and Costantini 1980; Munoz 2017; Tengberg 2012) and intensification of fishing on the coast (Azzarà 2012; Cleuziou and Tosi 2000). Moreover, numerous technical innovations and craft specializations appeared, including copper exploitation and metallurgy (Weeks 2003; Weisgerber 1980), pottery production (Méry 2000), soft-stone vessel production (David 2002, 2011), mud bricks, and stone architecture (Azzarà 2009; Cleuziou 1989). Archaeological evidence and textual sources both attest to the development of trade and the intensification and diversification of exchange networks at local, intraregional, and interregional scales (Cleuziou 1992; Méry 1998, 2000; Méry and Schneider 1996; Potts 1993). Changes are also perceptible in settlement structure, particularly the development of permanent villages made of rectangular houses and monumental towers made of stone or mud brick (e.g., Azzarà 2009; Cable and Thornton 2012). Finally, important changes characterized mortuary practices during this time: burials shifted from mostly individual graves made in simple pits to collective, stone-built, monumental, and highly visible tombs (Bortolini and Munoz 2015; Figure 2.1). Although not contemporaneous (Munoz 2014), these processes all attest to an increasing social complexity during the third millennium BC on the Oman Peninsula (Cleuziou 2007; Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; Rouse and Weeks 2011), for which burial practices are a good indicator (Cleuziou and Munoz 2007). This chapter discusses how the modalities of Early Bronze Age collective tomb management may shed light on the funerary ideology of the groups living in the Oman Peninsula in relation to their social evolution. Late Neolithic Mortuary Practices

During the late Neolithic, the dead were generally buried in simple pits dug into the sediment not far from domestic and activities areas. Examples of such mortuary practices come from most known sites along the Omani coast: Ra’s al-Hamra (RH-5, RH-6, and RH-10; Marcucci et al. 2014; Munoz 2014; Salvatori 2007; Santini 1987), Wadi Shab (GAS-1; Gaultier et al. 2005), Ra’s al-Khabbah (KHB-1; Munoz et al. 2010), and Suwayh (SWY-1; Charpentier et al. 2003 and see review in Munoz 2014). The dead were deposited in a flexed position and were sometimes accompanied by jewelry (e.g., shell pendants, necklaces, stone earrings) and, more rarely, tools (e.g., fishing

24 · Olivia Munoz

implements or bone or stone utensils; Figure 2.1). In several coastal Neolithic graveyards, faunal deposits were associated with the deceased and graves were ultimately covered by stones gathered locally or from around the site (Munoz 2014). The cost of constructing the grave itself was minimal in most cases; a few hours’ labor by one or two people was sufficient to dig the pit and cover the deceased with stones. Sometimes animals were deposited in the pit, however, which may have necessitated a greater investment in mortuary rituals. For example, at Ra’s al-Hamra (RH5), some individuals were covered by numerous turtle heads, which could have been gathered and added to mortuary pits over time (e.g., Munoz 2014). An extended Neolithic mortuary ritual is likewise suggested by the apparent manipulation of skeletons after a certain period of decomposition. Manipulation of partially or totally defleshed bones is seen at al-Buhais 18 (Kutterer 2010), Umm al-Quwain 2 (Phillips 2002), Ra’s al-Khabbah KHB-1 (Munoz 2014; Munoz et al. 2010), Ra’s al-Hamra RH-4 (Durante and Tosi 1977), Ra’s al-Hamra RH-5 (Munoz 2014; Salvatori 2007), and Wadi Shab GAS-1 (Gaultier et al. 2005). Data derived from 444 Neolithic graves document a preponderance of primary, individual interments, but secondary and multiple burials were also recorded (e.g., see Munoz 2014). If one relates the number of individuals to the number of burial pits, a range from one to five individuals per grave has been reported, yielding an average of 1.7 individuals per pit structure. Early Bronze Age Mortuary Practices

From the end of the fourth millennium BC, tombs took the form of circular, above-ground, stone-built monuments, highly visible in the landscape, where several individuals were deposited through time. Two main types of Early Bronze Age tombs existed: earlier Hafit-type cairns (ca. 3200–2700 BC) and later Umm an-Nar tombs (ca. 2700–2000 BC), although some structural variability and gradual evolution can be observed through both types (Bortolini 2014; Potts 2012; Williams and Gregoricka 2013a). Hafit-Type Cairns Hafit-type cairns were truncated cone- or igloo-shaped stone structures standing two to eight meters high and had diameters that ranged between three and six meters (Figure 2.1). Several concentric layers of stone walls were built surrounding a single chamber accessed from only one entrance,

Complexity in Mortuary Practices in Oman and Their Social Implications · 25

giving the inner chamber a keyhole-like appearance when viewed from above. These entrances took on various shapes (e.g., triangular, trapezoidal, with or without a threshold and lintel). It is estimated that building a Hafit-type cairn would have required the labor of up to five individuals for one month, depending on tomb height and availability of materials (M. Böhme, personal communication, 2015). The stones were acquired locally from rocky outcrops and appear to have been worked minimally. They were likely gathered together and sorted into similar shapes to maintain integrity between layers and minimize irregularities in the structure. These monuments were often grouped in necropoles (of up to several hundred tombs) on the high points of the landscape (rocky ridges, cliffs) and are quite remote from potential habitation sites (up to 1 km away; Cleuziou et al. 2011; Salvatori 2001). In these tombs, the dead were not buried but were deposited on the ground surface within the structure. According to the data available for 34 tombs for which the minimum number of individuals (MNI) has been determined, an average of 6.1 individuals per tomb has been calculated (Munoz 2014:Table 7.7). Hafit-type cairns containing the remains of several dozens of individuals have been excavated in the Ja’alan region of Ra’s al-Jinz RJ-6 and Ra’s al-Hadd HD-10 (Munoz 2014; Salvatori 2001; Santini 1992). In most cases, they contained between one and six individuals (and exceptionally up to 30), deposited successively over a time span that may have exceeded several centuries (e.g., Williams and Gregoricka 2013a). The material objects commonly found in these tombs consisted of ornamental elements (e.g., beads, rings), copper objects, and Jemdet Nasr–style ceramic vessels imported from Mesopotamia (Méry and Schneider 1996). A review of available data suggests the following pattern for the management of these tombs (Figure 2.2): 1. The tomb was built and primary deposit of one or more individual(s) occurred. 2. Occasional reorganization resulting in the total or partial disarticulation of remains occurred as the result of pushing them against the walls of the chamber (e.g., Cleuziou et al. 2011; Salvatori 2001; Santini 1992) and/or covering them with a layer of stones (e.g., Salvatori 2001; Santini 1992). 3. Primary deposit of a second set of one or more individual(s) occurred.

Figure 2.2. Schematic representation of the management of collective Hafit and Umm an-Nar tombs. Credit: O. Munoz.

Complexity in Mortuary Practices in Oman and Their Social Implications · 27

This cycle might have been repeated several times. It should be noted that this pattern is present even in Hafit-type cairns where a significant number of individuals had been deposited. For instance, in Cairn 1 from Ra’s al-Jinz (RJ-6), where the remains of at least 29 individuals were recovered, excavation brought to light three different layers of bones separated by stones covering the whole surface of the chamber (Santini 1992). Larger bones (e.g., skulls, long bones) were mostly located close to the inner wall of the chamber, while the center returned only small bones and fragments. Importantly, while this pattern was prevalent in the Ja’alan, in other regions of the Oman Peninsula, steps two and three differ and individuals were not shifted from their primary placement (Williams 2012; Williams and Gregoricka 2013a, 2013b, 2014). This may indicate regional variation in how these tombs were used for deposition of the dead. Umm an-Nar Mortuary Practices At about 2700 BC, tombs were reintegrated into habitation areas that were built only 1–100 m from villages. While tombs from the Umm an-Nar period were far more imposing in scale and dynamic in their internal design, they were located on low ground rather than on cliffs or other promontories. Umm an-Nar tombs were less numerous than the Hafit-type cairns, and while they were still built with stones and circular in shape, they became increasingly monumental over time (e.g., Böhme 2012; Gagnaison et al. 2004). Later tombs reached over 14 m in diameter and 3 m high (e.g., Blau 2001; Figure 2.1). Their internal spaces were usually compartmentalized by internal walls, which took on many idiosyncratic layouts (Figure 2.3). In some of the excavated tombs, vertical partitions have also been found, revealing a two-story system or the presence of a shallow subfloor under the ground pavement (e.g., Blau 2001; Frifelt 1991; Jasim 2003; Vogt 1985). These tombs included one or two entrances composed of a removable stone door. Toward the end of the third millennium BC, Umm an-Nar tombs were comprised of blocks carefully masoned from white limestone. Some had zoomorphic and/or anthropomorphic decorations carved into the lintel stone over the tomb entrance (e.g., Blau 2001; Böhme and Al Bakri 2012; Frifelt 1975, 1991; Jasim 2003; Figure 2.1). The limestone used for the façade of these late Umm an-Nar tombs was quarried from deposits located up to 10 km from the tombs (e.g., Böhme 2012). Based on recent tomb reconstruction, it has been estimated that 16 to 24 people were needed for one year to construct one of these monuments, counting the time required for

Figure 2.3. Location and schematic layout of several Umm an-Nar–type tombs showing their common features and variability. Credit: O. Munoz.

Complexity in Mortuary Practices in Oman and Their Social Implications · 29

extraction, preparation, and transportation of the blocks and for assemblage and refacing (Böhme 2012). Umm an-Nar tombs usually contained a significant number of individuals (e.g., 121 individuals at Al Sufouh [Benton 1996]; 362 at Tell Abraq [Baustian and Martin 2010]; more than 300 at Hili North Tomb A [Cleuziou et al. 2011]; 431 and 438 at Shimal Unar 1 and 2, respectively [Blau 2001]). On average, 147 individuals were interred in Umm an-Nar tombs. This was calculated from 20 tombs for which the MNI (ranging from 6 to 438) was available (Munoz 2014). These remains were generally found fragmented and commingled and associated with numerous pottery and stone vessels, ornamental objects (e.g., beads, pendants, earrings, rings), and metal objects (Baustian and Martin 2010; Cleuziou et al. 2011; Frifelt 1991; Gernez and Giraud 2015; Haerinck 1991; Munoz et al. 2012). Management and maintenance of Umm an-Nar tombs appears to have been much more complex than for Hafit-type cairns (Figure 2.2). Excavations at Ra’s al-Jinz RJ-1 (Monchablon et al. 2003) found that its tomb had been emptied on three separate occasions and that the human remains and associated grave goods were deposited in adjacent pits (Munoz et al. 2012). Evidence of mortuary practices from RJ-1 has helped archaeologists reconstruct the Early Bronze Age procedures employed in the construction and use of these types of collective tombs, particularly the selective removal of partially or completely defleshed remains and their eventual cremation in pits located near the tomb. A review of the published data shows that similar operations were performed in other areas of southeastern Arabia. Indeed, pits filled with human remains and artifacts were not rare around Umm an-Nar graves (e.g., Benton 1996; Blau 2001; Munoz 2014; Schmidt 2012). Most of these pits were found fortuitously, and one may suppose that systematic surveys around the tombs would result in additional pit discoveries. In reported cases, pits were dug into the sediment or bedrock near the original tomb. Some masoned pits dating to the end of the third millennium BC were also reported and may have been a place for primary deposition of corpses (Haerinck 1991; Méry et al. 2004), foreshadowing the following Wadi Suq period (ca. 2000–1300 BC) tombs (Righetti 2012). Additionally, the use of fire for the secondary treatment of human remains was common during this period. Burned human remains are reported, in greater or lesser proportions, at Tell Abraq (Baustian and Martin 2010), Al Sufouh (Benton 1996), Bahla (Munoz 2014), Hili Tombs A and N (Bondioli et al. 1998; Gatto et al. 2003), Maysar 4 (Kunter 1981), Mleiha

30 · Olivia Munoz

(Blau 2001), Munay’e (Benton 2006), Moweihat (Blau 1998), Ra’s al-Hadd HD-7 (Munoz 2014), Ra’s al-Jinz RJ-1 (Munoz et al. 2012), Ra’s al-Jinz RJ-11 (Munoz 2014), and Shimal (Blau 2001). The most significant example of this comes from Tomb A at Hili North (Bondioli et al. 1998; Cleuziou et al. 2011). This exceptionally well-preserved tomb had two levels. The lower level was situated underground and was divided into four compartments. Primary deposits were made in the lower level, while the top level was apparently used for the cremation of remains already defleshed and disarticulated. Furthermore, cut marks have been observed on some bones at Hili, Bahla, and Tell Abraq, suggesting that defleshing of the remains was performed (Baustian and Martin 2010; Bondioli et al. 1998; Munoz 2014). Such processing may have represented a ritualized, liminal period positioned between tiered ceremonies associated with death and eventual interment in which a fundamental shift in personhood took place during which the deceased individual gradually was initiated into the collective of ancestors via body fragmentation and incorporation (Andrews and Bello 2006; Rebay-Salisbury et al. 2010; Saxe 1970; van Gennep 1909). This manipulation of the corpses or skeletal remains as part of secondary mortuary practices may be explained by the need to make space in the tomb (handling and removal) or even to accelerate the decomposition of its corpses (cremation, defleshing). Nevertheless, beyond the seemingly utilitarian nature of these practices, the recurrence of similar processing operations over a large territory suggests that they may have represented a codified component of a larger social system that was fully integrated in funerary rites that sought to assimilate individuals into a collective entity that linked them to the ancestors (Hertz 1907; Metcalf and Huntington 1991; Shanks and Tilley 1982) and at the same time reinforced broader social structures (Stutz 2010). This act of removing the individual identity of corpses—achieved in part through the intentional commingling and fragmentation of the body as part of a series of long-term mortuary rituals—would probably have been an integral part of the mortuary program (Rebay-Salisbury et al. 2010). The Societies behind the Tombs The evolution of funerary structures and material culture from the Late Neolithic to the end of the Early Bronze Age suggests increasing social complexity that culminated with the Umm an-Nar period. From an architectural point of view, the investment made for tomb construction in-

Complexity in Mortuary Practices in Oman and Their Social Implications · 31

Figure 2.4. Mean cost of the construction of a tomb and average number of individuals per tomb according to the periods. Credit: O. Munoz.

creased significantly over time (Figure 2.4) and attests to growing social differentiation in the third millennium BC that included the emergence of specialized craftsmen, a development that is also apparent in other aspects of the material record. Indeed, artifacts recovered in the tombs and domestic structures testify to a diversification of the material used, new crafts, and an integration of communities in long-distance trade networks. The consequential emergence of disparities in wealth and the formation of elites (e.g., Rouse and Weeks 2011) could have been a source of instability in the internal exchange economy on the Oman Peninsula, as reciprocal interrelations between regions with complementary resources were thought to be the base of the Early Bronze Age socioeconomic system (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; Tosi 1975). In addition, the population would have been confronted with new social, economic, and political pressures resulting from long-distance intercultural encounters. The construction of collective tombs, where individuals would have been ultimately merged into a community of ancestors, may have constituted an ideological response to the destabilizing character of growing social inequalities among the living by promoting a group identity and principles of equality between individuals in death (although funerals may have been

32 · Olivia Munoz

more sumptuous in terms of energy expenditure and associated artifacts for certain people deposited in the tombs). In this regard, the withdrawing from circulation of valuable goods by depositing them in the tombs or in their surroundings may have been seen as a way to avoid inheritance (Ghazal and Munoz 2010; Testart 2004) and therefore minimize accumulation of wealth by the living. According to the increasing number of individuals per tomb, particularly evident during the Umm an-Nar period (Figure 2.4), it seems that grouping the dead—which had been previously limited to small, probably kin-related units (Neolithic and Hafit periods)—expanded into a larger degree of affiliation, that of the village community (Cleuziou and Munoz 2007; Munoz 2014). Indeed, for Hafit-type cairns, except in rare cases reported in the Ja’alan, the number of interred individuals did not exceed six. Moreover, these tombs may have been in use for centuries and may even have been reused for thousands of years (e.g., Williams and Gregoricka 2013a). Thus, individuals recovered in these graves may not always actually belong to the Hafit period. The “collective” nature of these tombs seems to be associated more with the intention that presided over their construction than with the reality of the deposits that were made, which contrasts with the Umm an-Nar graves. Funerary practices would have thus acted to compensate for the social dynamic among the living through the acceptance of a higher community principle (that may have been based on tribalism; see Tosi 1989) in death. Conclusion

Field observations and analyses of human skeletal remains reveal how Early Bronze Age collective tombs were managed. The observed operations were much more complex during the Umm an-Nar period. These included removal of human remains and their deposition in adjacent pits, cremation episodes, and, less frequently, active defleshing. Although these material traces are probably evidence of the ultimate state of a complex procedure in the tomb itself, the widespread prevalence of such a system suggests that these practices were codified and were informed by a shared ideology, thus attesting to a strong cultural homogeneity across a large geographic area over the United Arab Emirates and Oman. Umm an-Nar tombs can be regarded as a powerful way to strengthen social cohesion by assimilating individuals to the community of ancestors, a higher entity within a society in which inequalities were increasingly prevalent.

Complexity in Mortuary Practices in Oman and Their Social Implications · 33

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Kimberly D. Williams, Lesley A. Gregoricka, and Gwen Robbins Schug, who organized the session at the 2014 Society for American Archaeology symposium, for inviting me to participate. This chapter would not have been possible without the support of the Ministry of Heritage and Culture of the Sultanate of Oman, the Labex les passés dans le présent (ANR-11-LABX-0026–01), the project NeoArabia (ANR-16-CE03–0007–01/NEOARABIA) founded by the French National Research Agency, and the trust and legacies of Professor Serge Cleuziou and Professor Maurizio Tosi, pioneering researchers of Oman’s past and former directors of the Joint Hadd Project. The author is grateful to Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud, who shared the drawing of Tomb 2000 from Adam South. Special thanks are due to Royal O. Ghazal for his assistance in editing this chapter and for his comments and our discussions and to the reviewers for their comments, which improved this chapter. References Cited Andrews, Peter, and Silvia Bello 2006 Pattern in Human Burial Practice. In Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains, edited by Rebecca Gowland and Christopher J. Knüsel, pp. 14–29. Oxbow Books, Oxford. Azzarà, Valentina M. 2009 Domestic Architecture at the Early Bronze Age Sites HD-6 and RJ-2 (Ja’alan, Sultanate of Oman). Proceedings of the Seminars for Arabian Studies 39:1–16. 2012 The Organization of Food Processing at HD-6 (Sultanate of Oman). In Proceedings of the 7th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, 12–16 April 2010, the British Museum and UCL, London, edited by R. Matthews and J. Curtis, pp. 251–268. Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden. Baustian, Katherine, and Debra L. Martin 2010 Patterns of Mortality in a Bronze Age Tomb from Tell Abraq. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 55–60. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Benton, Jodie N. 1996 Excavations at al-Sufouh: A Third Millennium Site in the Emirate of Dubai. Brepols, Louvain. 2006 Burial Practices of the Third Millennium BC in the Oman Peninsula: A Reconsideration. PhD dissertation, University of Sydney, Australia.

34 · Olivia Munoz

Berger, Jean-François, Vincent Charpentier, Rémy Crassard, Chloe Martin, Gourguen Davtian, and Jose Antonio Lopez-Saez 2013 The Dynamics of Mangroves Ecosystems, Changes in Sea Level and the Strategies of Neolithic Settlements along the Coast of Oman (6000–3000 cal. BC). Journal of Archaeological Science 40(7):3087–3104. Biagi, Paolo 1999 Excavations at the Shell-Midden of RH6 1986–1988 (Muscat, Sultanate of Oman). Al-Rafidan XX:57–84. 2004 Surveys along the Oman Coast: A Review of the Prehistoric Sites Discovered between Dibab and Qalhat. Adumatu 10:29–50. Biagi, Paolo, and Renato Nisbet 2006 The Prehistoric Fisher-Gatherers of the Western Coast of the Arabian Sea: A Case of Seasonal Sedentarization? World Archaeology 38(2):220–258. Bibby, Geoffrey 1965 Arabiens arkaeologi. (Arabian gulf archaeology). Kulm 1964:132–152. Blau, Soren 1998 Studies of Human Skeletal Remains in the United Arab Emirates. Where Are We Now? Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 28:7–12. 2001 Fragmentary Endings: A Discussion of 3rd Millennium BC Burial Practices in the Oman Peninsula. Antiquity 75(289):557–570. Böhme, Manfred 2012 The Recurring Monument: Records on Hafit and Umm an-Nar Period Tomb Architecture in the Oman Peninsula. In As Time Goes By? Monumentality, Landscapes and the Temporal Perspective Vol. 2, edited by M. Furholt, M. Hinz and D. Mischka, pp. 85–93. Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn. Böhme, Manfred, and Sultan Saif Nasser Al Bakri 2012 An Umm an-Nar Culture Stone Bas-Relief from Al-Qutainah, Sultanate of Oman. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 23(2):156–164. Bondioli, Luca, Alfredo Coppa, and Roberto Macchiarelli 1998 From the Coast to Oasis in Prehistoric Arabia: What the Human Osteodental Remains Tell Us About the Transition from a Foraging to the Exchange Economy? Evidence from Ra’s al-Hamra (Oman) and Hili North (U.A.E.). In The Prehistory of Arabia and Oceania: Proceedings of the XIIIth Congress of the IUPPS, Forli, 8–14 Sept. 1996, edited by G. Afanas’ev, S. Cleuziou, J. Lukacs, and M. Tosi, pp. 229–234. ABACO, Forli. Bortolini, Eugenio 2014 An Evolutionary and Quantitative Analysis of Construction Variation in Prehistoric Monumental Burials of Eastern Arabia. PhD dissertation, Institute of Archaeology, University College London. Bortolini, Eugenio, and Olivia Munoz 2015 Life and Death in Prehistoric Oman: Insights from Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Funerary Practices (4th–3rd Mill. BC). In Proceedings of the International Symposium The Archaeological Heritage of Oman held at UNESCO, Paris,September 7, 2012, pp. 61–80. Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Muscat.

Complexity in Mortuary Practices in Oman and Their Social Implications · 35

Cable, Charlotte M., and Christopher Thornton 2012 Monumentality and the Third-Millennium “Towers” of the Oman Peninsula. In Connections and Complexity: New Approaches to the Archaeology of South and Central Asia, edited by S. Abraham, P. Gullapalli, T. Raczek, and U. Rizvi, pp. 375–399. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, California. Cavulli, Fabio 2004 L’insediamento di KHB-1 (Ra’s al-Khabbah, Sultanato dell’Oman): Lo scavo i resti struttrali e i confronti etnografici. Ocnus, Quaderni della Scuola di Spezzializzazione in Arqueologia 12:37–48. Charpentier, Vincent, Philippe Marquis, and Eric Pellé 2003 La nécropole et les derniers horizons Ve millénaire du site de Gorbat al-Mahar (Suwayh, SWY-1, Sultanat d’Oman): Premiers résultats. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 33(33):11–19. Cleuziou, Serge 1989 Chronology of Protohistoric Oman as Seen from Hili. In Oman Studies, edited by Paolo Costa and Maurizio Tosi, pp. 47–78. Serie Orientale Roma LXIII. Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome. 1992 The Oman Peninsula and the Indus Civilization: A Reassessment. Man and Environment 17(2):93–103. 2002a The Early Bronze Age of the Oman Peninsula from Chronology to the Dialectics of Tribe and State Formation. In Essays on the Late Prehistory of the Arabian Peninsula, edited by S. Cleuziou, M. Tosi, and J. Zarins, pp. 191–236. Serie Orientale Roma XCIII. Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome. 2002b Présence et mise en scène des morts à l’usage des vivants dans les communautés préhistoriques : L’exemple de la péninsule d’Oman à l’Âge du Bronze ancien. In Primi Popoli d’Europa: Proposte e riflessioni sulle origini della civiltà nell’Europa mediterranea, edited by M. Molinos and A. Zifferero, pp. 17–31. All’Insegna del Giglio, Firenze. 2003 Early Bronze Age Trade in the Gulf and the Arabian Sea: The Society behind the Boats. In Archaeology of the United Arab Emirates: Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Archaeology of the U.A.E., edited by D. T. Potts, H. Al Nabooda, and P. Hellyer, pp. 133–148. Trident Press, London. 2007 Evolution toward Complexity in a Coastal Desert Environment: The Early Bronze Age in the Ja’alan, Sultanate of Oman. In The Model-Based Archaeology of Socionatural Systems, edited by T. A. Kohler and S. van der Leeuw, pp. 213–231. SAR Press, Santa Fe. Cleuziou, Serge, and Lorenzo Costantini 1980 Premiers éléments sur l’agriculture protohistorique de l’Arabie orientale. Paléorient 6(1):245–251. Cleuziou, Serge, and Olivia Munoz 2007 Les morts en société : Une interprétation des sépultures collectives d’Oman à l’Age du Bronze. In Pratiques funéraires et sociétés: Nouvelles approches en archéologie et en anthropologie sociale, edited by L. Baray, P. Brun, and A. Testart, pp. 293–317. Presses Universitaires de Dijon, Dijon.

36 · Olivia Munoz

Cleuziou, Serge, and Maurizio Tosi 2000 Ra’s al-Jinz and the Prehistoric Coastal Cultures of the Ja’alan. Journal of Oman Studies 11:19–74. Cleuziou, Serge, and Maurizio Tosi (editors) 2007 In the Shadow of the Ancestors: The Prehistoric Foundations of the Early Arabian Civilization in Oman. Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Muscat. Cleuziou, Serge, Sophie Méry, and Burkhard Vogt (editors) 2011 Protohistoire de l’oasis d’Al-Aïn, Travaux de la mission archéologique française à Abou Dhabi (Émirats Arabes Unis): 1. Les sépultures de l’âge du Bronze. BAR International Series 2227. Archaeopress, Oxford. David, Hélène 2002 Soft Stone Vessels from Umm an-Nar tombs at Hili (UAE): A Comparison. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 32:175–185. 2011 Les vases en chlorite. In Protohistoire de l’oasis d’Al-Aïn, Travaux de la Mission archéologique française à Abou Dhabi (Émirats Arabes Unis): 1. Les sépultures de l’âge du Bronze, edited by Serge Cleuziou, Sophie Méry and Burkhard Vogt, pp. 184–201. BAR International Series 2227. Archaeopress, Oxford. Durante, Silvio, and Maurizio Tosi 1977 The Aceramic Shell Middens of Ra’s al-Hamra: A Preliminary Note. Journal of Oman Studies 3(2):137–172. Frifelt, Karen 1975 A Possible Link between Jemdet Nasr and Umm an-Nar Graves of Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 1:57–80. 1991 The Island of Umm an-Nar: 1. Third Millennium Graves. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI, Aarhus. Gagnaison, Cyril, Pascal Barrier, Sophie Méry, and Walid Yasin Al Tikriti 2004 Extractions de calcaires éocènes à l’Age du Bronze et architecture funéraire à Hili (Emirat d’Abou Dhabi). Revue d’Archéométrie 28:97–108. Gatto, Esther, Gautier Basset, Sophie Méry, and Kathleen McSweeney 2003 Étude paléodémographique et utilisation du feu à Hili N, une sépulture collective en fosse de la fin de l’âge du bronze ancien aux Émirats Arabes Unis. Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris, n.s. 15(1–2):25–47. Gaultier, Matthieu, Hervé Guy, Olivia Munoz, Maurizio Tosi, and Donatella Usai 2005 Settlement Structures and Cemetery at Wadi Shab-GAS1, Sultanate of Oman: Report on the 2002 and 2003 Field Seasons. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 16(1):1–20. Gernez, Guillaume, and Jessica Giraud 2015 Protohistoric Graveyards in Adam (Oman). Preliminary Report on the 2013 and 2014 Seasons of the French Archaeological Mission to Adam. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 45:107–122. Ghazal, Royal Omar, and Olivia Munoz 2010 The Social Death of Things: An Archaeological Inquiry into the Implications of Foreign Exchanges and the Role of Ritual De-Commoditization in Ancient Magan. Paper presented at the American Anthropological Association Conference, November 18, New Orleans.

Complexity in Mortuary Practices in Oman and Their Social Implications · 37

Haerinck, Ernie 1991 The Rectangular Umm an-Nar Period Grave at Mowaihat (Emirate of Ajman, United Arab Emirates). Gentse Bijdragen, tot de Kunstgeschiedenis en Oudheidkunde 29:1–30. Hertz, Robert 1907 Contribution à une étude sur la représentation collective de la mort. Année Sociologique 10:48–137. Jasim, Sabah A. 2003 Third Millennium Culture in the Emirate of Sharjah. In Archaeology of the United Arab Emirates: Proceeding of the First International Conference on the Archaeology of the UAE, edited by D. T. Potts, H. al Naboodah, and P. Hellyer, 86–99. Trident Press, London. Kunter, Manfred 1981 Bronze und eisenzeitliche Skelettfunde aus Oman, Bemerkungen zur Bevölkerungsgeschichte Ostarabiens. Homo Göttingen 32:197–210. Kutterer, Adelina U. 2010 Remarks on Neolithic Burial Customs in South-East Arabia. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 1–10. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Marcucci, Lapo Gianni, Francesco Genchi, Emilie Badel, and Maurizio Tosi 2011 Recent Investigations at the Prehistoric Site RH-5 (Ra’s al-Hamra, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 41:201–222. Marcucci, Lapo Gianni, Emilie Badel, Francesco Genchi, Olivia Munoz, Antonio Todero, and Maurizio Tosi 2014 New Investigations at the Prehistoric Shell Midden of Ra’s al-Hamra 6 (Sultanate of Oman): Results of the 2012 and 2013 Excavation Seasons. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 44:235–256. Méry, Sophie 1991 Émergence et développement de la production céramique dans la péninsule d’Oman à l’Age du Bronze, en relation avec l’Asie moyenne. PhD dissertation, Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne. 1998 Ceramics and Patterns of Exchange across the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf in the Early Bronze Age. In The Prehistory of Arabia and Oceania: Proceedings of the XIIIth Congress of the IUPPS, Forli, 8–14 Sept. 1996, edited by G. Afanas’ev, S. Cleuziou, J. Lukacs, and M. Tosi, pp. 169–179. ABACO, Forli. 2000 Les céramiques d’Oman et l’Asie Moyenne: Une archéologie des échanges à l’âge du Bronze. Monographie du CRA 23. CNRS, Paris. Méry, Sophie, and G. Schneider 1996 Mesopotamian Pottery Wares in Arabia from the 5th to the 2d Millennium BC: A Contribution of Archaeometry to the Economic History. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 26:79–96. Méry, Sophie, Kathleen McSweeney, Walid Yasin Al Tikriti, and Sander van der Leeuw 2004 New Approaches to a Collective Grave from the Umm An-Nar Period at Hili (UAE). Paléorient 30(1):163–178.

38 · Olivia Munoz

Metcalf, Peter, and Richard Huntington 1991 Celebrations of Death: The Anthropology of Mortuary Ritual. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Monchablon, Cécile, Rémy Crassard, Olivia Munoz, Hervé Guy, Gaëlle Bruley-Chabot, and Serge Cleuziou 2003 Excavations at Ra’s al-Jinz RJ-1: Stratigraphy without Tells. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 33:31–47. Munoz, Olivia 2014 Pratiques funéraires et paramètres biologiques dans la péninsule d’Oman du Néolithique à la fin de l’âge du Bronze (5–3e millénaires avant notre ère). PhD dissertation, Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne and Universita di Roma La Sapienza. 2017 Transition to Agriculture in South-Eastern Arabia: Insights from Oral Conditions. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 164(33):702–719. Munoz, Olivia, Royal Omar Ghazal, and Hervé Guy 2012 Use of Ossuary Pits during the Umm an Nar Period: New Insights on the Complexity of Burial Practices from the Site of Ra’s al-Jinz (RJ-1), Oman. In Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 451–467. Travaux de la maison René-Ginouvès, De Boccard, Paris. Munoz, Olivia, Simona Scaruffi, and Fabio Cavulli 2010 The Burials of the Middle Holocene Settlement of KHB-1 (Ra’s al-Khabbah, Sultanate of Oman). In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 1–10. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Munoz, Olivia, Antoine Zazzo, Eugenio Bortolini, Guillaume Seguin, Jean-François Saliège, and Serge Cleuziou 2008 Reconstructing the Diet of the Ancient Fishermen of Ra’s al-Hadd and Ra’s alJinz (Sultanate of Oman) Using Radiocarbon Dates. Poster presented at the conference Les Déserts d’Afrique et d’Arabie : Environnement, climat et impact sur les populations, colloque de l’Académie des sciences, Institut de France, Paris. Parker Pearson, Michael 2009 The Archaeology of Death and Burial. The History Press, Stroud. Phillips, Carl S. 2002 Prehistoric Middens and a Cemetery from the Southern Arabian Gulf. In Essays on the Late Prehistory of the Arabian Peninsula, edited by S. Cleuziou, M. Tosi, and J. Zarins, pp. 169–186. Serie Orientale Roma XCIII. Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome. Potts, Daniel T. 1993 Rethinking Some Aspects of Trade in the Arabian Gulf. World Archaeology 24(3):423–440. 2012 The Hafit-Umm an-Nar Transition: Evidence from Falaj al-Qaba’il and Jabal al-Emalah. In Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 371–377. Travaux de la maison RenéGinouvès, De Boccard, Paris.

Complexity in Mortuary Practices in the Oman and Their Social Implications · 39

Rebay-Salisbury, Katharina, Marie Louise Stig Sørensen, and Jessica Hughes 2010 Body Parts and Bodies Whole: Changing Relations and Meanings. Oxbow Books, Oxford. Righetti, Sabrina 2012 Analyse des pratiques funéraires à l’âge du Bronze moyen et récent dans la péninsule omanaise: Une fenêtre sur la société. In Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 379–385. Travaux de la maison René-Ginouvès, De Boccard, Paris. Rouse, Lynne M., and Lloyd Weeks 2011 Specialization and Social Inequality in Bronze Age SE Arabia: Analyzing the Development of Production Strategies and Economic Networks using AgentBased Modeling. Journal of Archaeological Science 38(7):1583–1590. Salvatori, Sandro 2001 Excavations at the Funerary Structures HD 10–3.1, 4.1, 4.2, and 2.1 at Ra’s alHadd (Sultanate of Oman). Rivista di archeologia Anno XXV:67–83. 2007 The Prehistoric Graveyard of Ra’s al-Hamra 5, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 14:5–202. Santini, Geraldina 1987 Site RH-10 at Qurum and a Preliminary Analysis of Its Cemetery: An Essay in Stratigraphic Discontinuity. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 17:179–198. 1992 Analisi dei caracteri dominanti per la definizione dei rituale nelle necropoli preistoriche e protostoriche della Penisola di Oman. PhD dissertation, Istituto Universitario Orientale, Universita di Napoli. Saxe, Arthur 1970 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. PhD dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Schmidt, Conrad 2012 German Expedition to Bat & Al-Ayn, report 2012. University of Tübingen, IANES / Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Sultanate of Oman. Shanks, Michael, and Christopher Tilley 1982 Ideology, Symbolic Power and Ritual Communication: A Reinterpretation of Neolithic Mortuary Practices. In Symbolic and Structural Archaeology, edited by I. Hodder, pp. 129–154. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Stutz, Liv Nilsson 2010 The Way We Bury Our Dead. Documenta Praehistorica XXXVII:33–42. Tengberg, Margareta 2012 Beginnings and Early History of Date Palm Garden Cultivation in the Middle East. Journal of Arid Environments 86:139–147. Testart, Alain 2004 Deux politiques funéraires, dépôt ou distribution. In Archéologie des pratiques funéraires. Approches critiques. Actes de la table ronde des 7–9 juin 2001 (Gluxen-Glenne—F.58), edited by L. Baray, pp. 303–316. Centre archéologique européen, Glux-en-Glenne.

40 · Olivia Munoz

Tosi, Maurizio 1975 Notes on the Distribution and Exploitation of Natural Resources in Ancient Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 1:187–206. 1989 Protohistoric Archaeology in Oman: The First Thirty Years (1956–1985). In Oman Studies, edited by Paolo Costa and Maurizio Tosi, pp. 135–161. Serie Orientale Roma LXIII. Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome. van Gennep, Arnold 1909 Les rites de passage. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Vogt, Burkhard 1985 Zur Chronologie und Entwicklung der Gräber des späten 4.-2. Jtsd.v.Chr. auf der Halbinsel Oman: Zusammenfassung, Analyse und Würdigung publizierter wie auch unveröffentlichter Grabungsergebnisse. PhD dissertation, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen. Weeks, Lloyd 2003 Early Metallurgy of the Persian Gulf: Technology, Trade and the Bronze Age World. Brill Academic Publisher, Boston. Weisgerber, Gerd 1980 “ . . . und Kupfer in Oman”: Das Oman-Projekt des Deutschen Bergbau-Museums. Der Anschnitt 32(2–3):62–110. Williams, Kimberly D. 2012 SOBO 2011–2012: A Report for the Ministry of Heritage and Culture. Report to Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Sultanate of Oman. Williams, Kimberly D. and Lesley A. Gregoricka 2013a Social, Spatial, and Bioarchaeological Histories of Ancient Oman: Mortuary Archaeology of Dhank, Oman 2009–2013. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(2):134–150. 2013b SOBO 2012–2013: A Report for the Ministry of Heritage and Culture. Report to Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Sultanate of Oman. 2014 Report to the Ministry of Heritage and Culture: SOBO 2013–2014 Season in Dhank, Oman. Report to Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Sultanate of Oman. Yule, Paul, and Gerd Weisgerber 1998 Prehistoric Tower Tombs at Shir/Jaylah, Sultanate of Oman. Beiträge zur allgemeinen und vergleichenden Archäologie 18:183–241. Zazzo, Antoine, Olivia Munoz, and Jean-François Saliège 2014 Diet and Mobility in a Late Neolithic Population of Coastal Oman Inferred from Radiocarbon Dating and Stable Isotope Analysis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 153(3):353–364.

3 Burial Archaeology in Qatar Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change from the Neolithic to the Late Pre-Islamic Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

Introduction

In keeping with the general topography of Qatar, the surface evidence for prehistoric burials is subtle and most cairns are heavily deflated. However, significant numbers of prehistoric burial cairns are evident in most regions of Qatar. These are by far the most ubiquitous prehistoric monument type. The distribution of burial sites appears to have been very much influenced by the local topography, geomorphology, and the regional environment, and marked differences in the extent and density of remains exist between the north and the south of the country. In some cases, burial cairns are the only surviving monument type from some periods of Qatar’s prehistory. They offer a rare opportunity to fill current gaps in our knowledge of prehistoric populations. This chapter briefly examines the geomorphological and environmental factors that may have influenced prehistoric populations in their choice of burial sites and reviews the results of research conducted in Qatar over the past fifty years in the context of more recent discoveries. Geomorphology, Hydrology, and the Environment

Geomorphology Qatar is the surface expression of one of the largest structural features of the Arabian Plate, an anticline aligned north-south through the center of

Figure 3.1. Distribution of burial cairns in Qatar.

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 43

the country that allows seasonally charged wadi channels to extend from the center of the country toward the coast. Qatar is comparatively small, approximately 160 km from north to south and 90 km from west to east (Figure 3.1). As a peninsula, the country is constrained by the sea on three sides, and coastal resources must have been as important to prehistoric populations as they were during Late Islamic periods. Much of the northern extent of Qatar is characterized by sinkholes and dissolution hollows; more than 9,700 caves (duhul) or karst-related features have been recorded to date (Sadiq and Nasir 2002). In an otherwise deflated landscape, these dissolution hollows trap sediment and encourage areas of natural vegetation, known as riyadh (sing. rawdha). Sediment-filled depressions account for approximately 335 km2 of the surface area of Qatar (approximately 3%) and form endorheic basins through which aquifers are recharged from surface runoff that would otherwise flow along wadi channels to the sea. In the south, there are significantly fewer areas of riyadh and less groundwater circulation. As a result, there is poor surface recharge and groundwater contains higher levels of dissolved solids (i.e. brackish water) than in the north (Al Sharhan et al. 2001). The north of Qatar is characterized by a generally rocky, desert landscape interspersed with riyadh, a sharp contrast to the southern and southeastern regions, which feature extensive areas of Aeolian sand deposition and large barchan dunes that mark the northern extent of the ar-Rub al-Ḫālī Desert. Because there are more riyadh in the north and more barchan dunes in the south, it is unsurprising that for all periods except the Paleolithic, more sites are recorded in the north of the country. This may indicate that the extent of sand coverage during the Pleistocene was different than it was in the early Holocene (Cuttler and Al Naimi 2013). However, the north of Qatar currently remains largely free of Aeolian sand. Hydrology and Palaeorecharge Given the low level of rainfall in Qatar, aquifers and groundwater provided a key resource for prehistoric populations. Recently researchers have suggested that lower sea levels during the Last Glacial Maximum (~18,000 years ago) would have lowered the groundwater table to such an extent that groundwater was inaccessible to prehistoric populations, “making permanent occupation unlikely” (Macumber 2011:190). While Paleolithic finds are certainly rare, they are not entirely unknown in Qatar. Lithic assemblages found mostly in the southern regions are indicative of Lower Paleolithic chopper technology, and some evidence for early Upper Paleolithic

44 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

technology has been found in central Qatar (Kapel 1967; Scott-Jackson et al. 2014, 2015). As sea levels rose in the terminal Pleistocene, an increase in hydrostatic pressure would have resulted in a rising groundwater table and presumably easier access to fresh water, particularly in the north. The majority of groundwater is recharged from rainfall (Lloyd et al. 1987). Endorheic basins are a key part of this process because they provide catchment areas for surface water runoff. This allows water to permeate into the aquifers. Thus, groundwater is recharged in the hinterland and discharges around the coast, where it occurs as a fresh water lens above saline water (Lloyd et al. 1987). The Environment and the Arabian Holocene Subpluvial The analysis by McClure and others of lakebed sediments from the Mundafan palaeolake in the Rub al Khali (ar-Rub al-Ḫālī ), Saudi Arabia (Crassard et al. 2013; McClure 1976, 1984; Parker and Rose 2008), demonstrated that the Arabian Peninsula underwent a period of increased rainfall during the early to mid-Holocene. This increase in rainfall is thought to be related to a shift in the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) and a northward movement of the Indian Summer Monsoon (ISM; Parker and Rose 2008) by at least 500 km (Gasse 2000). Speleothem profiles indicate a rapid increase in ISM precipitation between ~10.6 and 9.7 thousand years ago in southern Oman (Fleitmann et al. 2007) and between ~10.1 and 9.2 thousand years ago in northern Oman. The later dates in northern Oman might imply that the onset of monsoon-related precipitation occurred 400 years earlier in southern Oman than in northern Oman. This theory is supported by the onset of lacustrine conditions in Ra’s al-Khaimah, United Arab Emirates (UAE), at ~8.5 thousand years ago (Parker et al. 2006), which indicates an isochronous advance of the ISM from southern Oman to the northern Emirates between ~400 and 1,600 years. It seems likely that Qatar was also subject to a limited increase in precipitation from ~8.5 thousand years ago onward. However, it is also likely that the duration and intensity of the ISM was less than it was in Oman and the UAE, and the return of hyperarid conditions was possibly asynchronous across the southern Arabian Peninsula from ~6.3 thousand years ago (Fleitmann et al. 2009). This period of increased precipitation was punctuated by several abrupt hyperarid periods (Parker and Goudie 2008; Thomas et al. 2007) that prompted the temporary remobilization of dunes in the ar-Rub alḪālī around ~8.2 thousand years ago (Cuttler et al. 2007; Johnsen et al. 2001). Parts of Arabia were also influenced by increased precipitation from

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 45

Mid-Latitude Westerlies (MLW; Cuttler 2013; Parker and Rose 2008; Parker et al. 2014). However, the impact of both weather systems on Qatar and their influence on the distribution of early Holocene occupation currently remains unclear. This is compounded by the complete absence of late/terminal Pleistocene sites in Qatar, which means that comparative analysis between late Pleistocene and early Holocene occupation patterns is flawed by an absence of data. Consequently, it cannot be argued that an increase in early Holocene sites was the direct result of increased precipitation, particularly since these settlements could have developed because of a range of other factors. Rising sea levels, for example, may have been responsible for forcing marine-dependent populations onto higher ground while at the same time rendering late/terminal Pleistocene sites inaccessible for research. Alternatively, Holocene settlement could have been prompted by increased paleodrainage as a result of increased rainfall across the southern extent of the Arabian Peninsula (Al Sharhan et al. 2001; Cuttler 2013) or a rise in the fresh ground water table in the interior as sea levels rose (Faure et al. 2002). Burial Archaeology in Qatar

Due essentially to its visibility on the landscape, the stone-built burial cairn or tumuli has been the focus of numerous investigations over the past fifty years. Pioneering excavations were undertaken on burial cairns during surveys led by Glob and G. Bibby during the late 1950s and early 1960s (Bibby 1965; Glob 1957, 1959; Højlund 2017; Kapel 1967) at Umm al-Mā in northwest Qatar under the auspices of the University of Aarhus (Denmark). This was followed by a British archaeological mission led by Beatrice de Cardi in 1973 (de Cardi 1978); expeditions for the Centre National de la Recherché Scientifique in Paris (Inizan 1979; Midant-Reynes 1985; Tixier 1980); excavations by Rikkyo University, Tokyo (Konishi et al. 1988, 1994); and a mission from the University of Heidelberg (Muhle and Schreiber 2009). In addition to these, there have been several independent excavations and work undertaken by the Qatar Museums. Most of the excavations have been small-scale, unlike other regions of Eastern Arabia such as Bahrain or Oman, where the tradition of burial archaeology is more established. Excavations over the past fifty years suggest that a significant percentage of the cairns were robbed in prehistory (Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Tetlow 2013), and the organic survival of the undisturbed tombs has been poor. Furthermore, the larger tombs have been found to be less productive. They

46 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

seem more likely to have been targeted for looting because of their greater visibility on the landscape. Until very recently most cairns (particularly looted cairns and those with no finds or absolute dates) were dated to the Seleucid and Sasanian periods (between ca. 350 BC and ca. AD 300) due to their spatial or cultural association with other tombs. One exception was a group at Al Khor (Figure 3.1), which is thought to date to the fifth millennium BC based on the presence of obsidian artifacts (Midant-Reynes 1985). As more tombs are excavated, it is becoming clear that the use of a burial cairn was a fairly ubiquitous prehistoric funerary practice from the Neolithic to the Late Pre-Islamic periods (Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Tetlow 2013). The earliest cairns with absolute dates have been excavated at Simaisma, western Qatar (Al Naimi and Arrock 2010), and Al Khor (Tixier 1980), and date to the early to mid-fifth millennium BC, while the larger majority of cairns appear to date to the later first millennium BC and early first millennium AD. Recent excavations have begun to establish clear typological differences between the structures found in the mounds, although generally there are no distinguishing surface morphological characteristics that would facilitate the dating of cairns prior to excavation. The Qatar National Historic Environment Record (QNHER) project undertaken by the University of Birmingham developed a national geospatial database for the documentation and protection of heritage (Cuttler, Tonner, Al Naimi, Dingwall, and Al Hemaidi 2013). It was rebranded as QCHIMS (Qatar Cultural Heritage Information Management System). QCHIMS was populated through cultural mapping (satellite images and aerial photographs), data mining (gray literature reports and data from other ministries), and extensive surveys. Systematic remote sensing and extensive survey was used to identify areas for further research. These areas included Wādī Ḍebayān (northwest), Wādī al-Jalta (northeast), and Al Ghāfāt (central Qatar; Figure 3.1; Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Tetlow 2013; Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, and Al Naimi 2015; Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Owens 2015). In particular, extensive surveys have led to the recording of significant numbers of prehistoric sites and have allowed us to revise earlier assumptions about the origins and distributions of the burial cairns: 1. The discovery and recording of more than 7,000 archaeological features, of which more than 2,000 are burial cairns (Spencer et al. 2015), suggests that the density and number of these features is much higher than was originally thought. In northern Qatar,

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 47

surveys have recorded up to 10 burials per square kilometer, suggesting that the density of burials in Qatar is similar to numbers recorded in Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Oman, all countries with a long tradition of funerary archaeology (Potts 2012; Weeks 2010). 2. Surveys have demonstrated that these cairns were not only focused around the coast but were also fairly evenly distributed across northern Qatar. While the landscape is relatively flat, the location of the cairns suggests selective use of the landscape, as they were almost always located on areas of higher ground, often on the edge of a ridge or on a slope overlooking a rawdha or a wadi (Spencer et al. 2015). Elevated areas are normally limestone bedrock where there has been no significant collapse from subsurface karst. Thus, a burial chamber was significantly more difficult to dig in the elevated areas than they were in the lower-lying riyadh and wadis. However, such a strategy meant that burial cairns were more visible on the landscape and did not encroach into valuable areas of limited vegetation. In addition, they were raised above a level where they might have been destroyed by flash floods. 3. While prehistoric cairns may have had a similar surface morphology, we can now be clear that a distinct typology was associated with funerary practice (Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Tetlow 2013). A burial type that had recently been added to the typology is a small Neolithic cemetery at Wādī Ḍebayān, tentatively dated between the fourth and fifth millennia BC. The discovery of this cemetery during 2013 was entirely unexpected, as none of the inhumations were associated with a cairn or any form of surface marker. This burial type, previously unrecorded in Qatar, is almost impossible to detect without extensive fieldwork (Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Owens 2015) that includes geophysics and test pitting. In addition to the Neolithic cemetery, a new burial type was also identified at Al Ghāfāt that features structural differences in the construction of the cairn (rather than the burial chamber). This structural difference includes a retaining wall around the outer edge of the tumulus (henceforth described as a mound wall) that when first constructed would have given the appearance of a pillbox shape to the structure. Radiocarbon samples from cairns with a mound wall suggest they date from the early first millennium BC onward (Figure 3.2; Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, and Al Naimi

48 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

2015). Note that it is important to differentiate between a mound wall and an outer ring wall (a wall constructed away from the tumulus that forms a circular enclosure around the tumulus). 4. We can now be clear that the combination of a burial cairn and crouched inhumation was a practice used fairly continuously from at least the mid-fifth millennium BC (Wādī al-Jalta and Wādī Ḍebayān; Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Tetlow 2013) to the early first millennium AD (Al Ghāfāt; Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, and Al Naimi 2015). Excavation and research over the past fifty years has largely been driven by foreign research missions. However, more recently surveys have been driven by rescue work in advance of modern development. Most new developments have focused along the eastern coastline between the towns of Al Wakra in the south and Al Khor in the north. To some extent the present distribution of known archaeological sites in Qatar reflects this. The western coast to the south of Al Zubara forms part of the Al Reem Island Biosphere Reserve and is largely protected from development. However, plans for widening roads and the construction of a bridge between Qatar and Bahrain led to the discovery of a significant number of burial cairns and the Neolithic settlement at Wādī Ḍebayān, located south of Al Zubara (Cuttler, Tetlow, and Al Naimi 2011). Structural Classification of Burial Types

In the period 1959 to 2014, a minimum of 141 prehistoric burials were the subject of archaeological excavation and research in Qatar. From these 141 burials, only eight undisturbed articulated skeletons have been discovered (approximately 5.7% or 1 in 18 of the burials excavated). In addition, another seven burials contained the articulated remains of partial skeletons, and 19 burials produced human bone fragments or disarticulated remains (approximately 1 in 6 burials). Grave goods were recovered from 27 of the burials, mostly where burials had not been the subject of looting. In the absence of grave goods and radiocarbon dating, some burials (even those that had been looted) were tentatively dated by their proximity to other burials of a known date. However, it is not uncommon to find burials of several different periods in the same locale. Given that burial grounds were reused over long periods of time and in the absence of absolute or relative dating, the development of a typology for burial chamber and cairn construction

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 49

Figure 3.2. A schematic view of burial cairn typology in Qatar.

is a key factor in understanding burial practices in Qatar. A schematic view of the proposed typology for burial cairns in Qatar is shown in Figure 3.2. For Types 1 to 4: the deceased was placed directly onto the ground surface, with no evidence for a burial pit (subterranean chamber), but in Types 2 to 4 there was evidence for some form of above-ground, stone-built burial chamber. In some cases, the deceased appeared to have been laid in a depression or hollow in the natural ground before a mound or chamber was

50 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

constructed. Types 5 to 8 featured a subterranean burial pit, while Type 9 was tentatively the first example from Qatar of a prehistoric cemetery without a burial cairn or surface marker. The following typology was developed after Konishi and colleagues (1994) and Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Tetlow (2013). Type 1: The deceased was laid directly on the natural ground surface under a superstructure of cobble, sand, and silt. This was the most basic version of burial cairn as there was no evidence for either an above-ground or a below-ground chamber. The majority of Type 1 burials appeared to date to (but are not exclusive to) the Neolithic period. Examples of Type 1 burials include: Al Khor Burial B (Midant-Reynes 1985), Wādī al Jalta QNHER Ev179 (Izquierdo Zamora and Cuttler 2015a), Al Da’asa Cairns 1 and 2 (de Cardi 1978), QNHER 1064 (Cuttler 2012), and Ras Abaruk OA165, OA166, OA168, and OA186 (Madsen et al. 2017a). Occasionally, heavily weathered, semi-articulated human skeletal remains were found on the surface that did not appear to have been disturbed by animals. In most cases, these seemed likely to be the result of the disturbance or complete removal of a cairn from a Type 1 burial. At Al Thakira (northwest Qatar) a partially articulated skeleton (QNHER 20598, EV180; Cuttler and Davies 2014) was recorded on top of a limestone outcrop together with 17 bone beads and a flint blade. Type 2: The deceased was laid on the natural ground surface and a burial chamber was constructed around the body using upright slabs (vertically set stones) and capstones. This was then covered with a superstructure made of cobble, sand, and silt. Type 2 burials are the rarest type. (Only 5 burials of the 141 excavated to date are considered to be of this type.) All of the recorded Type 2 cairns were robbed in antiquity. It remains possible that larger stones from the top of a Type 3 burial chamber collapsed inward and came to rest in a vertical position after the tomb was robbed. As a result, there is a slight chance that these may be misidentified Type 3 cairns. Examples of Type 2 burials include: Ras Abruq Site 1, Cairn 1 (de Cardi 1978); Umm al-Mā UM004, 006, and 007 (Schreiber and Muhle 2008); and Ras Abaruk OA164 Mound 1 (Madsen et al. 2017a). Type 3: The deceased was laid on the ground surface in an above-ground burial chamber made with unmortared limestone walls, normally of two or three courses. The chamber was then sealed with capstones and covered with a superstructure made of cobble, sand, and silt. Type 3 cairns are rare (only 3 burials out of 141), and to date the classification is tentative for the 3 burials from Umm al-Mā and Wādī Ḍebayān (northern Qatar). Perforated

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 51

shell disks discovered in a Type 3 grave from Wādī Ḍebayān are indicative of a Neolithic date. Examples of Type 3 burials include Umm al-Mā UM001 and UM010 (Schreiber and Muhle 2008), QNHER 179 (Cuttler and Roberts 2011), and Ras Abaruk OA185 Mound 4 (Madsen et al. 2017a). Type 4: These are similar to Type 3 but have no evidence of capstones. Multiple chambers in one tomb have also been observed in a Neolithic burial at Simaisma (Mound C1). Examples of Type 4 burials include QNHER 177 to 178 (Cuttler and Roberts 2011); Umm al-Mā UM0012 and UM0013 (Schreiber and Muhle 2008); Al Mughammadat AM-001 (Kallweit 2008); and Simaisma Mounds C1 and C2 (Al Naimi and Arrock 2010). Type 5: The deceased was placed in a burial pit, which was then covered with a mound of cobble, sand, and silt. Even though there was a mound or superstructure, no capstones were used and no above-ground burial chamber was evident. Several Type 5 cairns from Al Wakra in southeast Qatar were OSL dated between the fourth millennium BC and the mid-first millennium AD. Examples of Type 5 burials include Umm al-Mā UM005 (Schreiber and Muhle 2008) and QNHER 55, 295, 1292, 1351 and 1352 (Bain 2012). Type 6: The deceased was placed in a subterranean burial pit, which was sealed with capstones and covered with a superstructure made of cobble, sand, and silt. There are no absolute dates from Type 6 burials as yet. However, grave goods including Ubaid pottery, obsidian, shell beads, and flint artifacts indicate a Neolithic date for this funerary practice. Examples of Type 6 burials include Al Khor A, C, D, G, and H (Midant-Reynes 1985) and Wādī al Jalta QNHER 3438 and 3444 (Izquierdo Zamora and Cuttler 2015a). Type 7: Type 7 burials featured a subterranean burial pit with upright slabs (vertically set stones) that form a stone cist, which was sealed with capstones and a superstructure of cobble, sand, and silt. A stone lining seems to have been used in cases where the natural ground surface was particularly soft, such as sand and shell beach deposits. This may suggest the stones were used to prevent the sides of the burial pit from collapsing, inferring the practice was practical rather than being primarily culturally motivated. The structural feature of vertically set stones to form a cist for the primary burial was mostly evident in the late-first millennia BC to early-first millennia AD. Examples of Type 7 burials include Umm al-Mā J2 (Konishi et al. 1988), Ras Abruq Site 2 Cairns 1 and 2 (de Cardi 1978), Al Khor E and F (Midant-Reynes 1985), and Umm al-Mā UM0018 to 0020 (Schreiber et al. 2009).

52 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

Type 8: These were the most common burial type featuring a subterranean burial pit enclosed by a low dry-stone wall built on the natural ground surface around the edge of the pit. This had the effect of raising the height of the chamber, which was then partially below and partially above the natural ground surface. A capstone sealed the chamber, and a superstructure of cobble, sand, and silt was constructed over the capstones. A subtype of Type 8 burials has been documented (Type 8B) in which the burial chamber was normally smaller in plan and consequently not large enough to take a crouched inhumation. The smaller diameter was accompanied by an increased chamber height (up to 1 m); this, along with the collapse of the skeleton within the chamber, may be indicative of burial in the sitting position. Types 8 and 8B appear to be closely related to Type 10, which featured a retaining wall around the mound. The earliest Type 8 burial was dated to the early first millennium BC, a funerary practice that would appear to continue until the Late Pre-Islamic period. One complete crouched inhumation produced an iron sword (Umm al-Mā UM0023), while crouched inhumations at Al Ghāfāt produced radiocarbon dates in the early first millennium BC. Examples of Type 8 burials include Umm al-Mā J1 (Konishi et al. 1988), Umm al-Mā UM0021–0023 (Schreiber et al. 2009), Lisha AL0001 (Schreiber et al. 2009), Umm Tarqa QNHER 20778 (Cuttler and Izquierdo Zamora 2014), and Al Ghāfāt QNHER 20783, 20785, and 20786 (Izquierdo Zamora and Cuttler 2015b). Type 9: In Type 9 burials, the deceased was placed at the base of the burial pit, which was then backfilled with cobbles and sand. No kind of surface expression remains. This burial type was identified as part of a small cemetery in 2012 at the Neolithic site of Wādī Ḍebayān (Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Owens 2015). An interment from Al Khor (Tixier 1980) has also been included in Type 9, as it is not clear if this was associated with a mound. The interment at Al Khor appears to have been partly cremated prior to burial; however, the size of the burial pit was as expected for a crouched inhumation. Examples of Type 9 burials include Al Khor (Tixier 1980; Inizan 1988) and Wādī Ḍebayān Ev66 5004 (Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Owens 2015). Type 10: Type 10 burials feature a subterranean burial pit enclosed by a low dry-stone wall around the edge of the pit. This is a derivation of Type 8B, which had the characteristics for a sitting position (normally not large enough to take a crouched inhumation), but featured a ring of mortared or unmortared stone around the edge of the mound, forming a mound wall

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 53

normally of three or four courses of unworked stone. It is possible that this mound wall was not contemporaneous with the original mound construction but was used to demarcate later interments (as detailed below). As a variation of Type 8, Type 10 appears to date to the early first millennium BC and continued until the Late Pre-Islamic period. Crouched inhumations from Al Ghāfāt (QNHER 20794) produced a steatite bowl and radiocarbon dates in the early first millennium BC. Examples of Type 10 burials include QNHER 20777 (Cuttler and Izquierdo Zamora 2014) and QNHER 20784 (Izquierdo Zamora and Cuttler 2015b). Later Interments Some of the burial types listed above featured secondary burials inserted into the mound or superstructure in the form of a small cist comprised of upright, vertically set stones. These generally appear to be later than the primary burial (de Cardi 1978). Additionally, the latest research at Al Ghāfāt revealed two ossuaries buried in the interior of the mound wall of Type 10 tombs. This may suggest that the interior of the mound, as defined by a mortared or unmortared wall in Type 10 tombs, may have also demarcated the extent of the ossuary. The use of an ossuary for later burial or deposition implies funerary practices that involved the desiccation or disarticulation of the corpse. This funerary practice may not have been contemporaneous with the primary burial, which raises the possibility that the mound wall was not an original feature of the mound but was constructed later as an ossuary wall to demarcate secondary interments. While prehistoric burials in Qatar are extensive, there is a general lack of data regarding multiple, secondary, and ossuary burials. However, further research has the potential to illuminate the variety, richness, and complexity of burial types in prehistoric and Pre-Islamic Qatar. Chronology and Distinctive Features

Neolithic to Late Bronze Age (Sixth Millennium BC to Late Second Millennia BC) Traditionally burial cairns were associated with Ubaid-related cultures of the fifth millennium BC (Midant-Reynes 1985; Tixier 1980) or what was considered to be a rise in population during the Seleucid to the Sasanian (late first millennium BC to early first millennium AD). This was based on a small number of excavations and an absence of absolute dating, contributing

54 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

Table 3.1. Radiocarbon determinations from burials excavated as a part of the QNHER project Beta No.

Location

Sample Type

δ13C ratio

2 Sigma Calibration Dates

Description Of Origin

281262

Simaisma

Charred material

-22.9 ‰

cal BC 4780 to 4560 (cal BP 6730 to6500)

Sample from Burial Type 4

281263

Simaisma

Charred material

-23.3 ‰

cal BC 4690 to 4460 (cal BP 6640 to 6410)

Sample from Burial Type 4

366071

Wādī al-Jalta

Organic sediment

-19.3 ‰

cal BC 3510 to 3500 (cal BP 5460 to5450)

Sample from Burial Type 6

cal BC 3500 to 3430 (cal BP 5450 to 5380) cal BC 3380 to 3360 (cal BP 5330 to 5310) 351431

Wādī Ḍebayān

Organic sediment

-21.5 ‰

cal BC 2020 to 1990 (cal BP 3970 to 3940)

Sample from firepit overlying Burial Type 9

cal BC 1980 to 1880 (cal BP 3930 to 3830) cal BC 1110 to 1100 (cal BP 3060 to 3050) 351432

Wādī Ḍebayān

Charred material

-22.2 ‰

cal BC 1080 to 1060 (cal BP 3030 to 3010)

Sample from firepit overlying Burial Type 9

cal BC 1060 to 920 (cal BP 3000 to 2870) 386051

Al Ghafat

Organic sediment

-17.9 ‰

cal BC 925 to 815 (cal BP 2875 to 2765)

Sample from Burial Type 8c

386047

Al Ghafat

Charred material

-27.1 ‰

cal BC 380 to 200 (cal BP 2330 to 2150)

Sample from Burial Type 8c

386052

Al Ghafat

Charred material

-22.5 ‰

cal BC 90 to 55 (cal BP 2040 to 1895)

Sample from Burial Type 8b

386050

Al Ghafat

Charred material

-25.3 ‰

cal BC 90 to 55 (cal BP 2040 to 1895)

Sample from Burial Type 8

to the idea of a population vacuum between the fourth and second millennia BC. The concept of a reduced population during the fourth millennium BC was further reinforced by a theory that the abrupt end of Ubaid-related cultures in eastern Arabia was the result of a changing climate that created a so-called Dark Millennium across Arabia (Uerpmann 2003). As more burials are excavated it is becoming clearer that burial cairns were a consistent

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 55

funerary practice during all prehistoric periods. The results of radiocarbon analysis of samples from recent excavations are shown in Table 3.1. As the corpus of information increases, it will become possible to refine the typology and assign a tentative chronology as shown in Table 3.1. Burial Types 1, 5, 6, and 9 Burials of Type 1 (surface burials with no chamber) and Type 6 (subterranean burial pits with capstones) were clearly a Neolithic funerary practice, and most (but not all) burials of these types tend (but not exclusively) to date to this period. While the absence of a burial pit is largely associated with earlier burials, it may have been used in later periods, as the decision to dig a pit appears to have been partly determined by the nature of the substrate. Where the substrate is rock and a burial pit difficult to excavate, burials of Type 1 or 3 are more prevalent irrespective of period. Thus, Type 3 burials, such as those at Umm al-Mā, may be contemporaneous with Type 8 burials in the same necropolis. Furthermore, where tombs have been robbed it is often difficult to distinguish between Type 1 and Type 3. This is because a “robber trench” through the middle of a mound can give the illusion of a stone chamber. Burials of Type 5 are very similar to Types 6 (but without capstones) and Type 9 (with the addition of a burial cairn). Types 6 and 9 have both been found to date predominantly to the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. In the southeast of Qatar, a Type 5 (QNHER 55; Bain 2012) burial provided a date of mid-fourth millennium BC (University of Oxford Luminescence Dating Laboratory X6072 5490, BP ± 610). This appears to have been a burial type that extended from the early fourth millennium BC to the first millennium AD. In some cases, it can be difficult to distinguish between Type 5 and Type 1, as a natural depression in the ground may be mistaken for a burial pit. Neolithic Burials at Wādī Ḍebayān, Northwest Qatar Most Neolithic burials that have been excavated to date are located close to the two main wadi channels in the north of the country, Wādī Ḍebayān (in the northwest) and Wādī al-Jalta (in the northeast). Archaeological and paleoenvironmental research at Wādī Ḍebayān and surveys around the northwest coast of Qatar have revealed a complex intertidal environment of marine influence, paleocoastlines, and shifting mangroves between 7500 and 4500 BP (Cuttler, Tetlow, and Al Naimi 2011; Spencer 2014). At the western edge of the wadi, on what is thought to have been a headland

Figure 3.3. A Type 9 burial from Wādī Ḍebayān.

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 57

during periods of higher sea levels, was a settlement comprised of pits, hearths, and postholes that have been dated to between the mid-sixth and late fourth millennia BC. In the base of the wadi was a tidally reworked ancient shoreline that sealed a midden, postholes, and hearths that have been dated to between the late fourth and mid-third millennia BC. Both sides of Wādī Ḍebayān feature burial cairns that have tentatively been ascribed to the Neolithic. Excavation of these burial cairns has produced cylindrical and disc beads made from shell and bone, perforated bivalves, and struck flint, all of which have been recorded as common goods during the Neolithic across the Near and Middle East (Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Tetlow 2013). Test pitting in 2012 led to the discovery of a small Neolithic cemetery that contained five inhumations with no surface expression (Type 9) such as a cairn or mound (Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Owens 2015). The excavation of one of the burials (Ev66 5004) in the cemetery revealed a tall adult female placed at the base of a small oval pit that was back-filled with cobbles and sand. It appeared to be in a “forced” fetal position whereby the ribcage and pelvis remained in a supine position but the legs were rotated westward into a crouched position. The body was aligned approximately northeast–southwest with the head in the north, facing west (Figure 3.3). As it would be difficult to lay out a fresh corpse in such a position, it is possible that the body was not buried immediately but was stored or transported. When finally placed in the grave, the body was laid on its back and the legs were forced into a crouched position. Three fragments of Ubaid-type ceramics recovered from the fill of the grave (possibly residual) provide a terminus post quem for the burial in the fifth millennium BC (Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Owens 2015). Several hearths that cut the upper fill of the burials provide a terminus ante quem, constraining this inhumation between the fifth and third millennia BC. Neolithic Burials from Wādī al-Jalta A second Neolithic cemetery was discovered in the Wādī al-Jalta, a large wadi in the northeast of Qatar that discharges to the north of Al Khor. A survey by a French mission in the 1970s recorded 18 burial cairns on the top of a small jabal located in the middle of the wadi (Inizan 1988; MidantReynes 1985). Eight of the burials were excavated during campaigns in 1977, 1978, 1980, and 1981. These have been tentatively ascribed to the fifth millennium BC based on obsidian beads and flakes. Investigations as part of the QNHER Project excavated 4 additional cairns of Types 1, 3, and 6 that have been radiocarbon dated to the mid-fourth millennium BC (QNHER

58 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

Ev179; Izquierdo Zamora and Cuttler 2015a). Of the 12 burial pits excavated by both teams, nine contained skeletal remains or fragments. Where the remains were articulated, the individuals were placed in the fetal position in various orientations. Most pits contained remains from just one individual. However, one burial contained two individuals, while another burial contained the remains of three. There was no proportional relationship between the size or type of burial and their contents in terms of the number of interments or grave goods. Some of the burials produced beads made from fish bone, fish teeth, shell, and stone (carnelian, greenstone, and obsidian), while others produced nothing. In the Gulf, the fourth millennium BC has been recorded as a period of higher sea levels (Cuttler 2013), and it seems likely that when the cemetery was in use the jabal was an island or part of a small archipelago in the mouth of the wadi. As there is no evidence for settlement on the jabal, it seems likely that the island was used purely for funerary practices in a ritual landscape. Northeastern Qatar: Simaisma and Al Khor One of the earliest radiocarbon dated burials, excavated by a French team at Al Khor, is thought to date to the early fifth millennium BC (Inizan 1988; Tixier 1980). The interment was either Type 5, Type 6, or Type 9; as no mound was described it has been tentatively ascribed to Type 9. As the skeleton appeared to have been burned outside the burial pit, this might also be classed as a cremation, the only one recorded to date in Qatar. However, the burial pit was large, and the long bones and skull were fairly intact. Grave goods included a bifacial flint spearhead, a diamond-shaped arrowhead, and a sherd of Ubaid pottery. Absolute dates were also obtained from a large circular burial cairn (C1) at Simaisma, an area to the south of Al Khor bay and the Wādī al-Jalta system (Figure 3.1). This provided dates of 5,690 ± 40 BP (Beta 281263: cal BC 4690 to 4460 [cal BP 6640 to 6410]) and 5,790 ± 40 BP (Beta 281262: cal BC 4780 to 4560 [cal BP 6730 to 6500]; see Table 3.1). The burial cairn was similar to Type 1 but contained multiple chambers (what the excavators called a “rosette burial”) in which a crouched, articulated skeleton was discovered, together with a small alabaster vase and fragments of a plaster vessel (Al Naimi and Arrock 2010; Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Tetlow 2013). These plaster vessels were sometimes painted on the outside and are thought to have been imitations of imported Ubaid pottery. This discovery is rare; to date, such pottery has been found only in the southern Gulf (eastern Qatar

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 59

and northern Abu Dhabi) in association with Neolithic levels, such as those from Marawah Island MR11 (Beech et al. 2005; Figure 3.1). While the majority of burials without a burial pit or a raised chamber (Type 1) appear to have been typical of the Neolithic or Bronze Age, it seems likely that this funerary practice was not exclusive and may have continued into later periods. This may have been due to the difficulties of excavating a burial pit in rock, although later types without a burial pit would normally feature a raised chamber such as those of Types 2, 3, or 4. It is not unusual for Neolithic burials to feature multiple interments in one pit. These should not be classed as collective graves, as there is usually no evidence for an enclosed chamber that was subsequently revisited. All Neolithic burials were crouched, and most were placed on their right side and faced either east, south, or west, but to date, none have been found facing north. Late Bronze Age to Early Pre-Islamic (Early First Millennium BC to Mid-First Millennium AD) The early first millennium BC saw a major change in tomb construction with the introduction of Type 8, Type 8B, and Type 10 burials. Chambers were constructed by the excavation of a burial pit and a wall built around the edge of the pit in order to raise the height of the chamber. Carbon samples recovered from the fill of a Type 8 burial from the necropolis at Al Ghāfāt (QNHER 20784) have so far produced the earliest determination for any Type 8 burial: 2730 ± 30 BP (Beta 386051: cal BC 925 to 815 [cal BP 2875 to 2765]). A Type 10 burial (QNHER 20777) from Umm Tarqa in central Qatar provided a radiocarbon date of 2220 ± 30 BP (Beta 386047: cal BC 380 to 200 [cal BP 2330 to 2150]; Izquierdo Zamora and Cuttler 2015b). QNHER 20784 also produced an almost complete steatite bowl (Figure 3.4). The presence of an iron sword and associated pottery in other Type 8 burials from Umm al-Mā (UM0023) and Lisha (AL001; Schreiber 2009; Figure 3.1) suggest that this funerary practice continued in central and northern Qatar until the Late Pre-Islamic period. It is not uncommon to discover two or more individuals in Type 8 burials, as was the case with QNHER 20778 (Cuttler and Izquierdo Zamora 2014). Due to the fragmentary nature of the skeletal material, it was not entirely clear if this represented multiple burials or later reuse of the tomb. Other late first millennium BC to early first millennium AD tombs have included the articulated camel skeletons at Mazrua (Figure 3.1), soft-stone carved bowls, agate beads, bronze and silver jewelry, iron swords, and arrowheads. Fragments

60 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

Figure 3.4. A steatite bowl from a Type 10 burial at Umm Tarqa (QNHER 20784), early first millennium BC.

of glazed ceramics have also provided relative dates of between 300 BC and AD 300 for these monuments (Bibby 1965; de Cardi 1978; Højlund 2017; Kallweit 2008; Muhle and Schreiber 2009). The development of Type 10 burials, which feature a wall around the edge of the mound, appears to have been roughly contemporaneous with Type 8 burials. At Al Ghāfāt (Type 10, QNHER 20784; Izquierdo Zamora and Cuttler 2015b) and Umm Tarqa (Type 10, QNHER 20777 and Type 8, 20778; Cuttler and Izquierdo Zamora 2014), both the above-ground burial chamber and the mound wall were bonded using a reddish sandy mortar or degraded sandstone. The burial pits at Al Ghāfāt were rather small; the largest was a maximum of 1.2 m in length. However, depths of up to 0.8 m may indicate that the interments were placed in the sitting position (Type 8B/10) that Konishi et al. (1994) described. Two of the burials from Al Ghāfāt were preserved with the capstones in situ, and although the skeletons were badly damaged, it seemed likely that the deceased had been placed in the sitting position because of the way the skeleton had collapsed. Although Type 2 burials were fairly rare, burials with vertically set stones

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 61

that created a central cist (as in Type 2 and Type 7) appear to have been a Late Pre-Islamic development. No tombs predating the late first millennia BC have thus far been associated with this burial practice. Such tombs appear to date between the Seleucid and Sasanian periods (late first millennium BC to early first millennium AD). Cairn Clusters While cairns were often found in linear groups (de Cardi 1978), in northern Qatar, particularly around Umm al-Mā and Lisha, cairns were found in such close proximity that they overlapped. Often they overlapped to such an extent that it was only possible to distinguish between mounds through the process of excavation. This overlap was clearly deliberate as areas of higher ground do not lack space. These have been termed cairn clusters in the QCHIMS geospatial database. It is possible that clusters represented a family group or the desire to construct cairns within an area designated as a sacred space. Marker Stones A distinctive feature of some cairns is the presence of a triangular-shaped, upright baetyl stone normally found in a socket 3 or 4 meters to the west of the burial chamber. To date these have only been found in association with Type 7 and 8 burials that date to the late first millennium BC to early first millennium AD (Seleucid to Sasanian) at Umm al-Mā and Lisha (J4B [Konishi 1994] and UM0017-UM0020, UM0022, UM0023, and AL0001 [Schreiber 2009]). These stones are normally preserved below the canopy of a cairn, and thus are not revealed until a mound is subject to excavation. This also suggests that the stones may have once stood higher and that they fractured at the point of exposure above the mound. Until more excavation is undertaken it is not possible to detail the number and type of cairns with baetyl stones or their geographical extent. Schreiber (2009) argued that these stones may have marked the outer extents of the cairn or served some form of ritual function. Common practices relating to the Pre-Islamic period polytheism and animism described in early Islamic literature include blood sacrifices (normally from animals) and milk libations, which were poured upon a stone erected in front of the grave. The stones were representations of a deity or an idol and were a token of the dead for the living and a place where propitiation to the dead was practiced (Moreman 2010). A much larger baetyl stone with a bowl-shaped depression was recorded at Ed-Dur, in the Emirate of Umm al-Qaiwain. The stone was found close

62 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

to a temple that dates to the late first century BC to the first century AD. Haerinck (2012) suggested that it could have served for collecting blood from a sacrificial animal. Discussion

Cultural Influences in the Neolithic and the Bronze Age If an empire is founded on military muscle, the lifeblood is the economy that flows through the arteries of trade networks. Grave goods found in Qatar range from eastern Anatolian obsidian and southern Mesopotamian ceramics to plaster vessels from the southern Gulf. These imported goods imply that extensive trade networks were firmly established by the Neolithic. While the inhumation cemetery at Wādī Ḍebayān (Type 9) is unique for Qatar (Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Owens 2015) there are clear cultural parallels with funerary practices from well-known fifth and fourth millennia BC coastal settlements across the UAE and the Oman Peninsula (Figure 3.1). The similarities in burial customs between the cemeteries and burials at Wādī Ḍebayān (Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Owens 2015), Wādī al-Jalta (Inizan 1988; Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, and Al Naimi 2015; Midant-Reynes 1985), Al Khor (Inizan 1988; Tixier 1980), Jabal al-Buhais 18 FAY_NE15 (Kutterer 2010; Kutterer and Beauclair 2008; Uerpmann et al. 2006); Umm al-Qaiwain Site 2 (Phillips 2002), Ra’s al-Hamra RH5 (Coppa et al. 1985; Munoz et al. 2010; Salvatori 2007), and As-Suwayh SWY-1 (Charpentier et al. 2003; Charpentier and Méry 2010) hint at a Neolithic funerary culture that was more widespread across southeast Arabia and Qatar than was previously thought. However, in the absence of a corpus of data from Arabia, the northern extents of such practices have yet to be defined. The fact that so few Neolithic cemeteries are known in Arabia is almost certainly due to the absence of a surface expression or marker (such as stones or a tomb). At al-Buhais 18, later burials regularly disturbed earlier burials, which suggests that markers were probably absent in the Neolithic (Kutterer 2010), rather than being something that has since then been removed. While this means that most Neolithic burials fortunately escaped looting in antiquity, discovering them today is particularly difficult and is often entirely unexpected. For example, the Neolithic cemetery at Wādī Ḍebayān was discovered only when a section cut through a chenier beach ridge revealed the remains of a late Neolithic midden. This prompted a sampling strategy of test pits to determine the

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 63

presence or absence of associated structural remains. Although no structural remains were associated with the midden, the presence of metacarpals in one test pit prompted a wider excavation. Since archaeological research in Qatar over the past 50 years has focused on features with a surface expression, it seems likely that this class of burial is underrepresented in the archaeological record. Of similar concern is how such features may be detected in the future, particularly in the face of the extensive commercial development that is currently taking place in Qatar. Research frameworks for the study of burials in Qatar need to consider new methodologies and field techniques if we are to appropriately investigate and record such features in the future. Beginning in the fifth millennium BC, cemeteries in the Oman Peninsula occupied knolls or promontories (Charpentier and Méry 2010), a trend that was replicated at the Neolithic cemetery at Wādī Ḍebayān and the mounds on the “island of the dead” in the Wādī al-Jalta (Inizan 1988; Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, and Al Naimi 2015; Midant-Reynes 1985). These are both areas where sea level rise during the fifth and fourth millennia BC would have meant that the cemetery at Wādī Ḍebayān was on a promontory and the burials at Wādī al-Jalta were on an island in the wadi. Both the Neolithic burial at Wādī Ḍebayān (Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, Al Naimi, and Owens 2015) and one from Al Khor (Inizan 1988; Tixier 1980) appear to be secondary burials. The burial from Al Khor displayed signs of burning that took place prior to burial, as there is no evidence for burning in the burial pit. This has been classified as a Type 9 burial because the bone appeared to be relatively complete. However, the extent of burning suggests that this should perhaps be classified as a cremation. Cremation was not a common practice in Neolithic Arabia, which is not surprising given the low level of vegetation and the amount of fuel required. However, the partial burning of skeletons has been noted at al-Buhais (Kieserwetter 2006) and Ruwaiz (Charpentier and Méry 2010). The forced-fetal position of the Neolithic skeleton from Wādī Ḍebayān (Ev66 5004) is of particular interest as it would not have been possible to place a recently deceased individual in such a position. Furthermore, the absence of a burial chamber removes the possibility that the body would have been able to slump into the forced-fetal position post-interment. This suggests that this person had already been dead for some time before they were interred, although it is important to note that the body was fully articulated when buried.

64 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

Several of the burials from al-Buhais were thought to have been buried as dry mummies following complete desiccation (Kutterer 2010). Evidence from Neolithic burials in the southeast of the Arabian Peninsula suggests that “these people had no fear of physical contact with the remains of their deceased. In this respect they are part of a long tradition in the Middle East starting in the Natufian of the Levant” (Kutterer 2010:6). Secondary burials from al-Buhais were thought to have been buried elsewhere and later transported to al-Buhais for reburial, suggesting a seasonally nomadic population with areas traditionally demarcated for the final burial of group members. Thus, while the population may have been mobile, it attached ownership and meaning to the landscape. There was no evidence of earlier burial, exhumation, and reburial for the Neolithic interment from Wādī Ḍebayān. While it is possible that the body had been transported some distance, it is also possible that the body remained unburied due to local rites and customs or simply awaited the return of absent family members or relevant members of associated, extended groups before burial rituals took place. Not all Neolithic burials from Qatar are Type 9: Burials of Type 1 and 6 have been recorded in the Wādī al-Jalta (Midant-Reynes 1985; Tixier 1980). A radiocarbon date of 4,630 ± 30 BP (Beta 366071: OxCal 4.2, IntCal 13 curve at 95.4% probability) provided a date of cal BC 3,515 to 3,352 from one burial at Al Khor (QNHER1808). This placed it firmly in the middle of the fourth millennium BC (Izquierdo Zamora, Cuttler, and Al Naimi 2015). This preference for tombs with a mound (and in some cases capstones) may reflect a change in burial practice (from Type 9 to Types 1 and 6) between the fifth and fourth millennium BC, or it may reflect different cultural groups in Qatar. Four tombs from As-Suwayh 1 that date to between 4,400 and 4,420 BC were especially distinguished by stone slabs placed directly on the body. This appears to have been a deliberate act intended to hold the deceased in place (Charpentier et al. 2003; Charpentier and Méry 2010). This is reminiscent of burials from Oman (Ra’s al-Hamra RH5; Coppa et al. 1985; Munoz et al. 2010), where stones were placed directly on the deceased as if to anchor it to the ground rather than being part of a burial marker. While the emergence of capstones on tombs in Qatar may be associated with necrophobic concerns, it may alternatively reflect a desire for a sealed chamber or the prevention of animal disturbance. While the fourth millennium BC until the second millennium BC witnessed a period of extended trade networks, there is a paucity of finds and

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 65

trade goods from inhumations that would otherwise help to close gaps within the chronology of burial archaeology in Qatar. These gaps are unlikely to be due to the level of survival of burial cairns over subsequent millennia, as there are a significant number of the cairns that have survived from the Neolithic. This dearth of data more likely reflects both a reduction in regional trade and a decline in the population, as Margarethe Uerpmann (2003) has suggested for Oman and the UAE. In contrast to Oman and the UAE, there is little evidence that Qatar was subject to dramatic environmental change, as Qatar was probably hyperarid for much of the Early Holocene. However, changes in the environment in other parts of the Arabian Peninsula had a dramatic effect on regional trade and exchange networks and, correspondingly, this has influenced the level of trade goods available in Qatar. While Neolithic burials in Qatar show a distinct typological similarity with burials across the Oman Peninsula, several produced ceramics that demonstrate links with southern Mesopotamia, suggesting that the Neolithic/Bronze Age was a period influenced by extensive trade and exchange networks. In the third millennium BC, quite distinctive cultures developed as a result of the emerging copper trade along the route from Oman to Mesopotamia. This included the Umm an-Nar in the Emirates (to the south of Qatar) and Dilmun in Bahrain (to the north). Even though Qatar is located between these two cultural centers, there is no evidence that they influenced burial practices in Qatar during the Bronze Age. Bronze Age burials in Qatar are rare, but clearly burial practices developed in the early fourth millennium BC that continued through the third and second millennia BC, particularly burial Type 1 and Types 3 to 6. However, no burials of Types 8, 9, or 10 have (as yet) been dated to the third or second millennia. There are also no tombs that might be considered equivalent to the monumental stone-built collective Hafit and Umm an-Nar tombs evident in the Oman Peninsula during the late fourth to late third millennia BC (Al Tikriti 2011; Boehme 2011; Cleuziou et al. 2011; Deadman et al. 2015; Potts 2012). Neither the monumental structure nor the concept of collective tombs influenced funerary practice in Qatar between the late fourth and early second millennia BC. Unfortunately, the number of excavated Bronze Age cairns in Qatar is still too small to draw meaningful conclusions or comparisons with other parts of the Arabian Peninsula, and attempts to characterize unexcavated cairns reveal little or nothing about chronological or cultural similarities.

66 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

Development and Change from the Early First Millennium BC In the early first millennium BC, burial typology changed markedly. It is during this period that we find the first evidence for Type 8 and Type 10 burials, which are the first to feature a burial pit with an above-ground burial chamber. Enough of these burials have been excavated and dated to be fairly clear that this was a Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age development. At the moment it is unclear if this resulted from a change in population, external cultural influences, or autochthonous development. In the early first millennium BC, innovation and new technologies were being introduced across the Arabian Peninsula. The most notable were the introduction of iron weapons and the domestication of the camel. It is easy to see how both of these technologies would have been a major step forward for regional populations in the Arabian Peninsula. In Bahrain, a small number of both Early Type (ca. 2200–2050 BC) and Late Type (ca. 2050–1750 BC) mounds were encircled by an outer ring wall that apparently marked the mounds as belonging to elites (Højlund et al. 2008). Højlund and colleagues (2008) have defined Early Type mounds were as being low and flat, built directly on the natural ground surface (i.e., no subterranean burial chamber) with a rocky fill and an above-ground chamber. Since the mound fill consisted of fragments of the same material, close attention was required to spot the larger stones in the chamber walls and the outer and inner ring walls during excavation. The absence of capstones was thought to be partly due to the location of the tombs in an area where stone of a type with the necessary cohesion and strength was not present (Højlund et al. 2008). Qatar Type 10 tombs, which have a central burial chamber and a mound wall, are reminiscent of Early Dilmun Late Type burials (although they are slightly smaller). The Late Type tombs were typically a conical mound built of sandy soil with limestone chips and a chamber covered by capstones. These mounds are situated in closely packed clusters (Frøhlich 1986). Højlund and colleagues (2008) suggest that stonework on the interior of one chamber may be the collapsed remains of a corbelled roof. The burial chamber and the mound wall were constructed above ground and there is no below-ground burial chamber. This was fairly typical of Qatar Type 3. To date the only burials discovered in Qatar with a mound wall are Type 10 burials, which date to the early first millennium BC, over a thousand years later than burials with similar elements in Bahrain (Laursen 2010). While burials with a cist built from upright stones (Types 2 and 7) were mostly in evidence in burials from late first millennia BC to the early first millennia

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 67

AD burials, their use in earlier periods cannot currently be ruled out. Type 2 is very rare and has only been evidenced in tombs that have been robbed. It is thus feasible that the upright stones from Type 2 burials were capstones or larger stones that have collapsed into the burial pit from a Type 3 burial. Surveys around the Yabrin Oasis in eastern Saudi Arabia recorded large numbers of burial mounds at Barq as-Samr, Jebel Jawamir ash-Sharqui, Jebel Makhruq, and Ain Tuwairif. Bibby (1973:52) noted that “further reconnaissance of the hills around Yabrin showed that the moundfields of Barq as-Samr were no isolated phenomenon. It soon appeared that mounds lay thick on practically every height around the oasis and from these heights further mounds could be seen on the hilltops to the limits of vision perhaps 30kms.” Mounds were generally around a meter or so tall and were built of untreated stone. Three main types of mounds were identified: simple or plain mounds, ring or “bezel” mounds, and “tailed mounds” that were mostly short, but could be up to 75 m long. None of the Qatar mounds were surrounded by outer ring walls comparable to those in eastern Saudi Arabia or Bahrain, and no tail mounds have as yet been recorded. In the absence of more extensive excavation, comparisons between simple mounds in Qatar and eastern Saudi Arabia are unlikely to produce meaningful results, particularly because the natural geology and topography appear to have influenced tomb construction in Qatar. Position and Orientation The low level of available data (15 articulated or semi-articulated skeletons from 141 burials) means that only tentative conclusions about prehistoric burial practices can be drawn from the position and orientation of the body. All the articulated prehistoric skeletons excavated to date were either placed in a crouched or forced fetal position or for later Type 8B (from the first millennia BC onward) were likely buried in a sitting position. Burials were more often placed on their right side than on their left side: of the 14 articulated or semi-articulated remains, 11 were placed on their right side and 3 on their left side. Two of the bodies placed on their left side were associated with Neolithic artifacts (Al Khor E and F; Midant-Reynes 1985), while the remaining left-side inhumation was thought by association to date to the late first millennium BC to early first millennium AD (Umm al-Mā’ UM005; Schreiber and Muhle 2008). However, this inhumation remains undated, and could be significantly earlier as the burial was unusually Type 5 with no grave goods. While a small number of burials do not fit into this typology, such as the

68 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

possible cremation/burial at Al Khor, which is thought to date to the early fifth millennium BC (Inizan 1988; Tixier 1980), and the use of a pottery vessel as burial receptacle in one instance (Madsen et al. 2017b), this typology provides a firm chronology for burial archaeology in Qatar. Conclusions: Location, Landscape, and Cultural Influence

Regional differences in the density of burials were strongly determined by the landscape, geomorphology, and hydrology of Qatar. Even where cairns were of similar construction, this may reflect the influence of environmental and geological factors more than the result of cultural interaction. This also suggests that it may be spurious to make detailed comparisons with tombs of similar appearance in other parts of the Arabian Peninsula until a wider range of scientific techniques become available. However, the significantly greater number of burials in the north of Qatar is clearly no accident. Areas of riyadh and improved access to water resulted in a larger population density in the north of Qatar. The use of higher ground for funerary practices avoided using areas of riyadh that could otherwise be used for grazing or small-scale agriculture. Such practices also placed ancestors in a prominent position in the wider landscape and may have served to establish landscape ownership, even among highly mobile groups (e.g., Goldstein 1980; Saxe 1970). This choice of burial locale during prehistory is in sharp contrast to Islamic burials which were more often noted along the wadi sides or along the edge of riyadh. In the absence of extensive settlement during prehistory, the impact of mobile populations is almost imperceptible. As most of the cairns excavated have not been subject to modern analysis, techniques such as scientific dating and isotope or aDNA analyses offer the best opportunity for the study of trade, exchange, cultural influence, and chronological change among Qatar’s prehistoric nomadic populations. Acknowledgments

We would like to thank H.E. Shaykha al-Mayassa bint Hamad bin Khalifa Āl-Thāni (Chairperson of the Board of Trustees for the Qatar Museums) and H.E. Shaykh Hasan bin Mohammed Āl-Thāni (Vice-Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Qatar Museums) for kindly supporting the Qatar Cultural Historic Information Management System (QCHIMS) geospatial database development project (The QNHER).

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 69

References Cited Bain, Kate 2012 Excavations South of Wakra. In Archaeological Assessment, Terrestrial Survey and Terrestrial Excavation 2011–2012, edited by Richard Cuttler, pp. 89–124. Unpublished manuscript, University of Birmingham, Doha. Beech, Mark, Richard Cuttler, Derek Moscrop, Heiko Kallweit, and John Martin 2005 New Evidence for the Neolithic Settlement of Marawa Island, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 35:37–56. Bibby, Geoffrey T. 1965 Arabian Gulf Archaeology. Kuml 1964:86–111. 1973 Preliminary Survey in East Arabia 1968: Reports of the Danish Archaeological Expedition to the Arabian Gulf, Vol. 2. Jutland Archaeological Society, Copenhagen. Boehme, Manfred 2011 The Bat-Type: A Hafit Period Tomb Construction in Oman. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 22:23–31. Charpentier, Vincent, Philippe Marquis, and Eric Pellé 2003 La nécropole et les derniers horizons Ve millénaire du site de Gorbat al-Mahar (Suwayh, SWY-1, Sultanat d’Oman): Premiers résultats. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 33:11–19. Charpentier, Vincent, and Sophie Méry 2010 On Neolithic Funerary Practices: Were There ‘Necrophobic’ Manipulations in 5th–4th millennium BC Arabia? In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 17–24. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford. Cleuziou, Serge, Sophie Méry, and Burkhard Vogt (editors) 2011 Protohistoire de l’oasis d’al-Aïn, travaux de la mission archéologique française à Abou Dhabi (Emirats Arabes Unis): 1. Les sépultures de l’âge du Bronze. BAR International Series 2227, Archaeopress, Oxford. Coppa, Alfredo, Roberto Macchiarelli, Sandro Salvatori, and Geraldina Santini 1985 The Prehistoric Graveyard of Ra’s al-Hamra (RH5): A Short Preliminary Report on the 1981–83 Excavations. Journal of Oman Studies 8:97–102. Crassard, Remy, Michael D. Petraglia, Nick A. Drake, Paul Breeze, Bernard Gratuze, Abdullah Alsharek, Mounir Arbach, Huw S. Grocutt, Lamya Khalidi, Nils Michelsen, Christian J. Robin, and Jeremie Schiettecatte 2013 Middle Palaeolithic and Neolithic Occupations around Mundafan Palaeolake, Saudi Arabia: Implications for Climate Change and Human Dispersals. PLoS ONE 8(7):e69665. Cuttler, Richard 2013 Considering Marine Transgression as a Mechanism for Enforced Migration and the Littoral Gulf Ubaid phenomenon. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(1):37–43. Cuttler, Richard (editor) 2012 Qatar National Historic Environment Record Project: Stage 4, Historic Land-

70 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

scapes and Palaeoenvironments, Terrestrial and Marine Analysis 2011–2012. Unpublished report, University of Birmingham, Doha. Cuttler, Richard, Mark Beech, Anja Zander, Heiko Kallweit, and Walid Yasin Al Tikriti 2007 Nomadic Communities of the Holocene Climatic Optimum: Excavation and Research at Kharimat Khor al Manahil and Khor Al Manahil in the Rub’ alKhālī, Abu Dhabi, UAE. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 37:61–78. Cuttler, Richard, and Talfan Davies 2014 Excavations at Al Thakhira, Event 180. In Qatar National Historic Environment Record and Remote Sensing Project: Stage 5, Historic Landscapes and Palaeoenvironments, Terrestrial and Marine Analysis 2012–2014, edited by Richard Cuttler, pp. 186–189. Unpublished report, University of Birmingham, Doha. Cuttler, Richard, Simon Fitch, and Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi 2012 Considering the “Terra Incognita” and the Implications for the Cultural Resource Management of the Arabian Gulf Palaeolandscape. In Fifty Years of Emirates Archaeology: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the United Arab Emirates, edited by Daniel T. Potts and Peter Hellyer, pp. 231–243. Motivate Publishing, Abu Dhabi. Cuttler, Richard, and Aurea Izquierdo Zamora 2014 Excavations at Umm Tarqa, Event 180. In Qatar National Historic Environment Record and Remote Sensing Project: Stage 5, Historic Landscapes and Palaeoenvironments, Terrestrial and Marine Analysis 2012–2014, edited by Richard Cuttler, pp. 120–121. Unpublished report, University of Birmingham, Doha. Cuttler, Richard, and Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi 2013 From Land-Locked Desert to Maritime Nation: Landscape Evolution and Taphonomic Pathways in Qatar from 14 ka. Adumatu 28:7–22. Cuttler, Richard, Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi, and Emma Tetlow 2013 Typological and Chronological Variation of Burial in Qatar: Ubaid to Late PreIslamic. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 43:99–110. Cuttler, Richard, and H. M. Roberts 2011 Excavation of Cairns North of Wādī Ḍebayān. In Environment Record and Remote Sensing Project: Stage 3, Historic Landscapes and Palaeoenvironments, Terrestrial and Marine Analysis 2010–2011, edited by Richard Cuttler, pp. 68–86. Unpublished report, University of Birmingham, Doha. Cuttler, Richard, Emma Tetlow, and Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi 2011 Assessing the Value of Palaeoenvironmental Data and Geomorphological Processes for Understanding Late Quaternary Population Dynamics in Qatar. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 41:1–14. Cuttler, Richard, Tobias Tonner, Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi, L. Dingwall, and N. K. Al Hemaidi 2013 The Qatar National Historic Environment Record: A Platform for the Development of a Fully-Integrated Cultural Heritage Management Application. ISPRS Annals of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences II (5/W1):85–90.

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 71

Deadman, William M., Derek Kennet, and Khamis Al Aufi 2015 Hafit Tombs and the Development of Early Bronze Age Social Hierarchy in alBatinah, Oman. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 45:49–56. de Cardi, Beatrice (editor) 1978 Qatar Archaeological Report: Excavations 1973. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Faure, H., C. R. Walter, and R. G. Grant 2002 The Coastal Oasis: Ice Age Springs on Emerged Continental Shelves. Global and Planetary Change 33:47–56. Fleitmann, Dominik, Stephen J. Burns, Augusto Mangini, Manfred Mudelsee, Jan Kramers, Igor Villa, Ulrich Neff, Abdulkarim A. Al Subbary, Annett Buettner, Dorethea Hippler, and Albert Matter 2007 Holocene ITCZ and Indian Monsoon Dynamics Recorded in Stalagmites from Oman and Yemen (Socotra). Quaternary Science Reviews 26:170–188. Fleitmann, Dominik, and Albert Matter 2009 A Speleothem Record of Climate Variability in Southern Arabia. Geoscience 341:633–642. Frøhlich, Bruno 1986 The Human Biological History of the Early Bronze Age Population in Bahrain. In Bahrain through the Ages: The Archaeology, edited by Shaikha Haya Ali Al Khalifa and Michael Rice, pp. 47–63. Kegan Paul International, London. Gasse, Francoise 2000 Hydrological Changes in the African Tropics Since the Last Glacial Maximum. Quaternary Science Reviews 19:189–211. Glob, Peter Vilhelm 1957 Oldtidsfund I Qatar. Kuml 1958:167–174. 1959 Arkæologiske undersøgelsen I fire arabiske stater. Kuml 1960:233–240. Goldstein, Lynne 1980 Mississippian Mortuary Practices: A Case Study of Two Cemeteries in the Lower Illinois Valley. Northwestern University Archaeological Program, Evanston, Illinois. Haerinck, Ernie 2012 The Temple at ed-Dur (Emirate of Umm Al-Qaiwain) and Pre-Islamic Cult in South-Eastern Arabia. In Fifty Years of Emirates Archaeology: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Archaeology of the United Arab Emirates, edited by Daniel T. Potts and Peter Hellyer, pp. 163–171. Motivate Publishing, Abu Dhabi. Højlund, Flemming (editor) 2017 Danish Archaeological Investigations in Qatar 1956–1974. Moesgaard Museum and the Jutland Archaeological Society, Aarhus. Højlund, Flemming, Anna S. Hilton, Christian Juel, Nanna Kirkeby, Steffen T. Laursen, and Lars E. Nielsen 2008 Late Third-Millennium Elite Burials in Bahrain. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 19:144–155.

72 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

Inizan, Marie-Louise 1979 Troisième mission archéologique Française à Qatar 1978–1979. Paléorient 5:477– 480. 1988 Mission Archéologique Française à Qatar tome 2: Préhistore à Qatar. Recherches anthropologiques au Proche et Moyen Orient. Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris. Izquierdo Zamora, Aurea, Richard Cuttler, Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi, and Lawrence S. Owens 2015 Between Rocks and a Hard Place: Prehistoric Funerary Practices at Wādī Ḍebayān, Northern Qatar. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 26:1–11. Izquierdo Zamora, Aurea, Richard Cuttler, and Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi 2015 Pre-Islamic Burial Practices in Qatar: New Results and Perspectives. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 45:159–174. Izquierdo Zamora, Aurea, and Richard Cuttler 2015a The Excavation of Neolithic Burial Cairns at Wādī al-Jalta (Event 179). In Qatar National Historic Environment Record and Remote Sensing Project: Stage 5, Historic Landscapes and Palaeoenvironments, Terrestrial and Marine Analysis 2012–2014, edited by Richard Cuttler, pp. 175–178. Unpublished report, University of Birmingham, Doha. 2015b Extensive Survey and Excavation Near Al Ghāfāt (Event 191). In Qatar National Historic Environment Record and Remote Sensing Project: Stage 5, Historic Landscapes and Palaeoenvironments, Terrestrial and Marine Analysis 2012– 2014, edited by Richard Cuttler, pp. 120–127. Unpublished report, University of Birmingham, Doha. Johnsen, Sigfus J., Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, and Niels Gundestrup 2001 Oxygen Isotope and the Palaeotemperature Records from Six Greenland IceCore Stations: Camp Century, Dye-3, GRIP, GISP2, Renland and NorthGRIP. Journal of Quaternary Science 16(4):299–307. Kallweit, Heiko 2008 Systematic Investigation of Potential Palaeolithic Sites in Qatar Caves, Sink Holes and Other Karst Forms. Unpublished report, Qatar Museums Authority, Doha. Kapel, Holger 1967 Atlas of the Stone-Age Cultures of Qatar. Reports of the Danish Archaeological Expedition to the Arabian Gulf. Aarhus University Press, Aarhus. Konishi, Masatoshi A., T. Gotoh, and Y. Akashi 1988 Archaeological Researches in the Gulf: A Preliminary Report of the Excavations in Bahrain and Qatar, 1987/8 Season. Paléorient 24:18–46. 1994 Excavations at Umm al-Ma’ Burial Field, Qatar 1990/91. Occasional Papers no. 4, Rikkyo University, Centre for Asian Studies, Tokyo. Kutterer, Adelina 2010 Remarks on Neolithic Burial Customs in South-East Arabia. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 1–10. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford.

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 73

Kutterer, Adelina, and Roland de Beauclair 2008 FAY-NE15—Another Neolithic Graveyard in the Central Region of the Sharjah Emirate. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 19:139–143. Laursen, Steffen T. 2010 The Emergence of Mound Cemeteries in Early Dilmun: New Evidence of a Proto-Cemetery and Its Genesis c. 2050–2000 BC. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 115–139. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford. Lloyd, John W., J. G. Pike, B. L. Eccleston, and T. R. E. Chidley 1987 The Hydrology of Complex Lens Conditions in Qatar. Journal of Hydrology 89:239–258. McClure, H. A. 1976 Radiocarbon Chronology of Late Quaternary Lakes in the Arabian Desert. Nature 263(5580):755–756. McClure, H. A. 1984 Late Quaternary Palaeoenvironments of the Rub’ al Khali. PhD dissertation, Institute of Archaeology, University of London, London. Macumber, Phillip G. 2011 A Geomorphological and Hydrological Underpinning for Archaeological Research in Northern Qatar. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 41:187– 200. Madsen, Hans Jorgen, Jens Aarup Jensen, and Flemming Højlund 2017a Burial Mounds at Ras Abaruk. In Danish Archaeological Investigations in Qatar 1956–1974, edited by Flemming Højlund, pp. 19–26. Moesgaard Museum and the Jutland Archaeological Society, Aarhus. 2017b A Pot Burial at Ras al-Matbakh. In Danish Archaeological Investigations in Qatar 1956–1974, edited by Flemming Højlund, pp. 27–30. Moesgaard Museum and the Jutland Archaeological Society, Aarhus. Midant-Reynes, Béatrix 1985 Un Ensemble de sépultures en fosses sous cairn à Khor (Qatar): Étude des rites funéraires. Paléorient 11(1):129–144. Moreman, Christopher M. 2010 Beyond the Threshold: Afterlife Beliefs and Experiences in World Religions. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland. Muhle, Barbara, and Jurgen Schreiber 2012 Ein römisches Schwert aus dem Gräberfeld von ‘Umm al-Mā,’ Qatar. In Stories of Long Ago: Festschrift für Michael D. Roaf, edited by H. Baker, K. Kaniuth, and A. Otto, pp. 373–383. Ugarit Verlag/Eisenbrauns, Münster. Munoz, Olivia, Simona Scaruffi, and Fabio Cavulli 2010 The Burials of the Middle Holocene Settlement of KHB-1 (Ra’s al-Khabbah, Sultanate of Oman). In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 25–32. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford.

74 · Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler and Áurea Izquierdo Zamora

Al Naimi, Faisal Abdulla, and Hatem Arrock 2010 Report of the First Season of Rescue Excavations at Aerospace City, North Simaisma. Unpublished report, Qatar Museums Authority, Doha. Parker, Adrian G., and Andrew S. Goudie 2008 Geomorphological and Palaeoenvironmental Investigations in the Southeastern Arabian Gulf Region and Their Implication for the Archaeology of the Region. Geomorphology 101(3):248–470. Parker, Adrian G., Andrew S. Goudie, Stephen Stokes, Kevin White, Martin J. Hodson, Michelle Manning, and Derek Kennet 2006 A Record of Holocene Climate Change from Lake Geochemical Analyses in Southeastern Arabia. Quaternary Research 66(3):465–476. Parker, Adrian G., and Jeffrey I. Rose 2008 Climate Change and Human Origins in Southern Arabia. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 38:25–42. Parker, Adrian G., Frank Preusser, Joachim Eberle, Sabah Jasim, and Hans-Peter Uerpmann 2014 Establishing a Chronology for Holocene Climate and Environmental Change from Mleiha, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Tribulus: Journal of the Emirates Natural History Group 22:78–81. Phillips, Carl S. 2002 Prehistoric Middens and a Cemetery from the Southern Arabian Gulf. In Essays on the Late Prehistory of the Arabian Peninsula, edited by Serge Cleuziou, Maurizio Tosi, and Juris Zarins, pp. 169–186. Serie Oriental XCIII. Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, Rome. Potts, Daniel T. (editor) 2012 In the Land of the Emirates: The Archaeology and History of the UAE. Trident Press, London. Sadiq, Abdulali M., and Sobhi J. Nasir 2002 Middle Pleistocene Karst Evolution in the State of Qatar, Arabian Gulf. Journal of Cave and Karst Studies 64(2):132–139. Salvatori, Sandro 2007 The Prehistoric Graveyard of Ra’s al-Hamra 5, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 14:5–202. Saxe, Arthur 1970 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Schreiber, Jurgen, and Barbara Muhle 2008 Excavations at the Burial Ground of Umm al-Mā, Qatar: Preliminary Report on the First Season, February–March 2008. Unpublished report, Qatar Museums Authority, Doha. Schreiber, Jurgen, T. T. Daroczi, Barbara Muhle, and J. Ewersen 2009 Excavations at Umm al-Mā, Qatar: Preliminary Report on the Second Season, 2008/2009. Unpublished report, Qatar Museums Authority, Doha.

Burial Archaeology in Qatar: Landscapes, Chronology, and Typological Change · 75

Scott-Jackson, Julie E., Jeffrey I. Rose, William Scott-Jackson, and Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi 2015 Found the Palaeolithic of Qatar. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 45:329–336. Scott-Jackson, Julie E., William Scott-Jackson, Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi, Emma Tetlow, and Remy Crassard 2014 The Stone Age of Qatar: New Investigations, New Finds; Interim Report. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 44:317–324. Al Sharhan, Abdulrahman S., Zein A. Rizk, Alan E. M. Nairn, D. W. Bakhit, and S. A. Al Hajari 2001 Hydrogeology of an Arid Region: The Arabian Gulf and Adjoining Areas. Elsevier, Amsterdam. Spencer, Peter 2014 University of Birmingham Coastal Survey North-Western Qatar. QNHER Event 207. Unpublished report, University of Birmingham and Qatar Museums Authority, Doha. Spencer, Peter, Faisal Abdulla Al Naimi, Richard Cuttler, and Talfan Davies 2015 Between the Desert and the Sea: The Prehistoric Landscape of North-Western Qatar. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 45:347–362. Thomas, Elizabeth R., Eric W. Wolff, Robert Mulvaney, Jorgen Steffensen, Sigfus J. Johnsen, Carol Arrowsmith, James W. C. White, Bruce Vaughn, and Trevor Popp 2007 The 8.2 ka Event from Greenland Ice Cores. Quaternary Science Reviews 26(1– 2):70–81. Al Tikriti, Walid Yasin 2011 Archaeology of Umm an-Nar Island: 1959–2009. Department of Historic Environment, Abu Dhabi Culture and Heritage, Abu Dhabi. Tixier, Jacques (editor) 1980 Mission archéologique française à Qatar: 1976–77, 1977–78. Recherches anthropologiques au Proche et Moyen Orient. Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris. Uerpmann, Margarethe 2003 The Dark Millennium—Remarks on the Final Stone Age in the Emirates and Oman. In Archaeology of the United Arab Emirates: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on the Archaeology of the U.A.E., edited by Daniel T. Potts, H. Al Naboodah, and Peter Hellyer, pp. 73–84. Trident Press, London. Uerpmann, Hans-Peter, Margarethe Uerpmann, and Sabah Abboud Jasim (editors) 2006 The Archaeology of Jebel al-Buhais, Volume 1: Funeral Monuments and Human Remains from Jebel al-Buhais. Department of Culture and Information, Government of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Weeks, Lloyd (editor) 2010 Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford.

4 The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition of the Third Millennium BC Evidence from Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb Necropolis Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka .

In the late fourth millennium BC, the inhabitants of southeastern Arabia initiated a monumental above-ground cairn-building tradition, mysteriously abandoning the subterranean cemetery interments that characterized the preceding Neolithic era. Soon, the high ridges of mountains and tall foothills were populated with cairns, which held single interments in some regions and multiple interments in others. While these monuments lack the relative grandeur of the great contemporaneous constructions in the ancient Near East, they remain an important indicator of the dramatic sociopolitical changes that occurred during the Early Bronze Age. These early tower-like mortuary structures were clearly and purposefully positioned on high places throughout the region. Such placements and their resultant visibility from great distances have led scholars to postulate that they may represent assertions of territory, access to water, or control of trade routes (e.g., Cleuziou 2002; Deadman 2012; Al Jahwari 2013; Siebert et al. 2005). Along the northern and eastern shores and the northern interior of the modern-day Sultanate of Oman as well as the whole of the modern United Arab Emirates (UAE), these tombs date to the Hafit period (3200–2700 BC). Complicating our understanding of this era of monument building, only a few Hafit period settlements or campsites have been identified. Thus, very little is known about the lifeways of the people who built these first monuments of ancient Arabia.

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 77

In the early 1970s, Karen Frifelt led a Danish expedition to Jebel Hafit (a mountain straddling the border of modern-day northern Oman and the UAE) and excavated more than 200 mortuary structures, naming them Hafit tombs (Frifelt 1975a). Despite awareness of the cultural, historical, and visual importance of these monuments, most attention was paid to prestige items and exotic trade goods (such as personal ornaments and imported pottery) interred alongside the dead. As was the custom until very recently, the human skeletal remains were considered to be under the purview of biological anthropologists, and it was not clear that the poorly preserved skeletal remains found in these tombs could provide much insight into the use of these monuments or the people who lived during this time. No skeletal analyses were published from Frifelt’s excavations at Jebel Hafit because of poor preservation, but comprehensive reports detail the burial goods found in the tombs, including imported Mesopotamian Jemdet Nasr pots, bronze artifacts, and beads. Some scholars have speculated that these tombs were used to inter family members, although because of (often) poorly preserved skeletal remains as well as the use of excavation techniques before the advent of modern bioarchaeological methods, this assertion has never been tested. Certainly some cairns were used to inter more than one person, and it is possible that these people were related. However, reports from decades-old excavations do not clearly indicate if these were contemporaneous interments or subsequent interments long after an initial deposition. For example, lengthy intervals between interment events have been documented through careful excavation and bone bioapatite dating of the stratigraphically distinct burial events (Williams and Gregoricka 2013). Furthermore, others have documented later material culture in Hafit-type cairns, providing strong evidence for later interments (e.g., Jasim 2012; Munoz et al. 2012). While the shift from underground interments to above-ground funerary monuments began with cairns that were constructed for one or only a few individuals, it culminated during the mid-third millennium BC with the construction of elaborate Umm an-Nar tombs that contained hundreds of occupants and complex mortuary rituals. In these larger tombs, human remains and evidence of their mortuary treatment have been far better documented than Hafit period skeletal assemblages (e.g., Baustian and Martin 2010; Benton 1996; Blau 1999, 2001, 2007; Bondioli et al. 1998; Cope et al. 2005; McSweeney et al. 2008, 2010; Martin 2007; Méry et al. 2001, 2004; Al Tikriti and Méry 2000; Vogt 1985). This is partly because of

78 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

better preservation of later third millennium burials and partly because of an improved awareness of the importance of bioarchaeological excavation. Nevertheless, major gaps in knowledge remain in our understanding of the transition from small individual/communal cairns of the Hafit period to large collective tombs and associated pits of the Umm an-Nar (Blau 2001; Martin 2007). Theories of cultural and socioeconomic interaction and collapse at the end of the third millennium BC (e.g., Algaze 1993; Cleuziou 2007; Frank 1993; Stein 1999)—fueling many inquiries into the subsequent Umm an-Nar/Wadi Suq transition with the commencement of the second millennium BC—have largely overshadowed the dynamic changes that occurred one thousand years earlier as monumentality increased in the land of Magan in the late fourth millennium to mid-third millennium BC. Data presented here provide evidence of the transitional behavior of ancient people in the interior of northern Oman between the periods known as Hafit and Umm an-Nar as well as type-tombs from each of these periods: relatively small tower-like cairns and large, collective well-built monuments. Survey and excavation of a Bronze Age necropolis near the village of Dhank have illuminated this poorly understood transition. Like many Bronze Age necropoles throughout southeastern Arabia, the Al Khubayb Necropolis includes large numbers of tombs constructed in lines along sloping ridges that lead down to the wadi channel. These were often built in clusters or with close regard to other nearby tombs. However, unlike other known examples, Al Khubayb presents an unusual glimpse into the mortuary practices of a semi-nomadic pastoral culture that inhabited a remote desert locale because the tombs here are undisturbed. Further, while all of these tombs might be superficially categorized as Hafit-type cairns due to similarities with other early monumental tombs scattered throughout Oman and the UAE, the mortuary structures at Al Khubayb are far from uniform in either size or architectural features. Our analysis is focused on the entire mortuary landscape and its components including human skeletons, which constitute a significant, yet largely untapped source of evidence with which to examine this transitional period as well as the architectural features of the monuments themselves. Third Millennium BC Tomb Typologies of the Oman Peninsula

Historically, archaeologists have delineated two main tomb-building traditions in southeastern Arabia during the early and middle third millennium

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 79

BC: Hafit-type cairns and Umm an-Nar communal tombs. These types resulted from a casual meeting of Arabian archaeologists held in Germany in 1981, where the terms “Hafit” and “Umm an-Nar” (and the subsequent moniker “Wadi Suq”) were used to define the earliest division of the Bronze Age in the northern and eastern portions of the Oman Peninsula, replacing the traditional “Bronze Age” descriptor used elsewhere in the Near East (Potts 2012). The Hafit period was based on the type-site of Jebel Hafit, where cairns dating to the early third millennium BC were first excavated (Potts 2012; Weisgerber 1981). Subsequently, Bronze Age cairns have been classified as “Hafit” despite the clear variation in form and function across the region. This simple classification masks important variation within each tomb type, and scholars have increasingly questioned the usefulness of this typology as more nuanced understandings of tomb structure, use, placement, funerary practices, and offerings have come to light (e.g., Al Belushi and ElMahi 2009; Boehme 2011; Al Jahwari 2013; Jasim 2006; Potts 2012; Williams and Gregoricka 2013). For example, are designations of structures as “Hafit” tombs limited to cairns constructed only within the confines of the Hafit period? Or must the tomb meet particular architectural or ritual specifications that were built predominantly during the Hafit period but may also date earlier or later? Do the number of individuals interred in these tombs, or how the space in the chamber is used, matter? Are the material goods interred with the dead important for this designation or can this simply be attributed to regional variation, personal preference, or unknowable relationships between the living and the deceased? Must the tomb be placed at a high place, or are those many examples of cairns in wadi valleys representative of a different mortuary practice entirely? The transition from a Hafit period tomb form that espoused visibility (as indicated by their positioning atop high places) and individuality (based on the interment of one or only a few individuals) to an Umm an-Nar form that destroyed the symbolic concept of the individual in favor of communal identity (with the commingled interment of hundreds) and promoted a shift in placement to low areas near increasingly sedentary communities is not well understood. While these periods are discussed in greater detail elsewhere (e.g., Hellyer 1998; Potts 1990, 2001), here we describe the traditional tomb typology and mortuary rituals surrounding the interment of the dead.

80 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Cairn Tombs

A cairn-building tradition occurred throughout Arabia (and farther afield) at the end of the fourth millennium BC. These tombs have been called by a number of different names. There is reference to “High Circular Tower” tombs (McCorriston et al. 2011, 2014; Steimer-Herbet et al. 2006; Williams et al. 2014), “Beehive” tombs (e.g., Al Belushi and ElMahi 2009; Al Jahwari 2013; de Cardi et al. 1977; Frifelt 1975a, 1975b; Potts 1990), “Tower Tombs” (Yule and Weisgerber 1998), “Sugar Lump” stone tombs (e.g., Cleuziou and Vogt 1983; Frifelt 1975a; Yule and Weisgerber 1998), “Bat-type tombs” (Boehme 2011), “turret graves” (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007), and variations on the terms “Hafit graves” or “Hafit-type cairns” (e.g., Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; Potts 1990; Weisgerber 1981). While semantic variation has in some cases hindered comparisons between these funerary monuments, it also reflects the geographic and temporal variation inherent in these structures and may represent differences in local meaning, symbolism, and individual or community decisions that surrounded the use of these tombs. Careful consideration of the variation in tomb form and tomb use may help elucidate variation in third millennium BC communities across Arabia. It therefore becomes difficult to develop an effective tomb typology when the existing terms are so complexly and intimately tied with temporal periods or geography. The purpose of this chapter is not necessarily to redefine or replace previous terminology but to promote a new way of thinking about Bronze Age tombs in Arabia that is clearly descriptive and that does not conflate time period, tomb type, and/or geographic location. In addition to this work, other scholars are also advocating for a better understanding of tomb typology in this region (e.g., Boehme 2011; Bortolini and Munoz 2015; Potts 2012). It is our hope that revisions of current terminology should follow a continued debate on the subject. Variations on the Cairn Tomb Form in Southeastern Arabia

In the current chapter, the descriptive term “Hafit-type cairn” (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007) is used. This term indicates that the tomb (1) is an aboveground cairn built of unworked stone, (2) contains a single round internal chamber, and (3) was used to inter either a single individual or a small number of individuals. It also assumes that Hafit-type cairns were placed high on the landscape and would have been visible from a great distance. This definition is based entirely on the form and function of the tomb, not

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 81

on a specific range of dates or geographic location. We refer to the primary use of these tombs as the way that the tomb was utilized by the people who built it (e.g., over a single or multiple consecutive generations), as opposed to later reuse many generations removed from the original tomb builders and with many generations separating tomb usage. Furthermore, we do not refer to the reuse of these tombs as “disturbance” events but instead reserve that term for intrusive actions that disrupt the contents of the chamber due to looting, animal burrows, and other natural taphonomic events that take place in the postmortem environment. While it is expected (but not required) that the majority of tombs that fulfilled this form and these functions were built and used from the latter fourth millennium BC to the early to middle third millennium BC, later reuse of this tomb type is by no means clearly understood. Instead, we are concerned with how these tombs were built (form) and what these mortuary structures communicated (function) to the living during the Bronze Age. Owing to poor preservation, looting, destructive reuse, and a lack of bioarchaeological excavation, little is known about the mortuary rituals associated with many Hafit-type cairns in southeastern Arabia. Researchers who have examined the human remains from this region report that individuals were variably laid on either their right or left sides and were always initially placed in a flexed position, in some cases with the hands positioned directly in front of the face (Benton and Potts 1994; Hellyer 1998; Potts 2001). Unlike the previous Neolithic and succeeding Umm an-Nar periods, where cremation is evident in some cases, Hafit-type cairns show no indication that cremation was part of the mortuary tradition (Benton 2006). Grave goods, including pins, copper rivets (possibly from clothing that has not survived), awls, beads, and ceramic vessels, accompanied the deceased. The presence of carnelian and jade beads imply long-distance acquisition from Central Asia or the Indus Valley, while Jemdet Nasr/Early Dynastic ceramics have been traced to southern Mesopotamia. These goods are indicative of the reemergence of interregional trade with the northern Gulf beginning in the late fourth millennium (Frifelt 1980; Potts 1993, 2001). While many ceramics recovered from Hafit-type cairns are Jemdet Nasr ceramics that made their way to the Oman Peninsula through trade, others were poorly fired and constructed with what appears to have been locally sourced clay, which suggests that these may have been local imitations. While some researchers have noted that these tombs may have been used continuously throughout the late fourth and early third millennium BC and that tomb reuse in subsequent periods may influence recovered assemblages (Méry 1997),

82 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

excavations at the necropolis of Al Khutma near Dhank, Oman, have demonstrated that instances of reuse are clearly distinguishable from Bronze Age primary interments (Williams and Gregoricka 2013). Moreover, at the Al Khubayb Necropolis, there is no evidence of tomb reuse. Instead, we find signs of tomb deconstruction: older stone was used to construct newer and larger nearby monuments. Hafit-type cairns are above-ground structures built with unworked limestone arranged in two (or occasionally three) concentric, corbelled ring walls (Nayeem 1996; Potts 1990). A triangular side entrance is present for most Hafit-type cairns, although in some cases erosion of the exterior ring wall is too significant to definitively identify an entrance. In other cases, a side entrance is clearly absent. A small, single internal chamber held one or very few interments, and scholars have generally assumed that these individuals were family members, since both sexes and all ages appear to have been interred together (e.g., Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; Potts 2001, 2009). However, no systematic examination of the skeletal remains has been conducted to test this assumption. The Social, Spatial, and Bioarchaeological Histories of Ancient Oman (SoBO) research team has systematically excavated tombs in the northern interior of Oman near Dhank (Williams and Gregoricka 2013). All of these tombs have contained single individual interments, differing substantially from the more considerable tomb membership (MNI = 20–30) of Hafit period monuments constructed along the coast (e.g., Bortolini and Munoz 2015; Cleuziou and Tosi 2007). This suggests that the Hafit-type cairn mortuary tradition in the Ja’alan region may have been substantially different from that practiced in the interior of the peninsula or as far west as those found in the modern-day UAE. Indeed, much of what researchers know about Hafit-type cairns comes from excavations of these tombs in the Ja’alan, where long-term, extensive archaeological inquiry has been conducted into the prehistory of the Oman Peninsula. This region differs significantly from the area that is the focus of this chapter in terms of geography, natural resources, and pattern of contact with other civilizations. In the Ja’alan, Hafit-type cairns are built of unworked stone of various colors (Al Jahwari 2013) and can contain many individuals (to the point where they have been called collective graves by some) and large quantities of burial goods such as beads and ceramics (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007). High Circular Tower (HCT) tombs (ca. 3100–2200 BC) of Yemen and Dhofar (southern Oman) also represent third millennium BC cairns in this region (e.g., McCorriston et al. 2011, 2014; Steimer-Herbet et al. 2006;

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 83

Williams et al. 2014). As with tombs constructed throughout the northern portion of the Oman Peninsula, these structures are most often characterized by two concentric walls of unworked, locally sourced stone. However, in Dhofar, HCT tombs are much smaller and less well built than Hafit-type cairns in northeastern Oman and the UAE. Further, there is no evidence that HCT tombs have side entrances like many cairns in the north. Instead, it is apparent that the tombs were sealed from the top after interment of the dead. Single or small numbers of interments were placed inside the chamber with far fewer material goods (notably, they do not contain any of the Jemdet Nasr/Early Dynastic ceramics that characterize the Hafit-type cairns of the north, or any ceramics at all). Nevertheless, despite these differences, they are arguably variations in the same mortuary cairn-building movement. Therefore, the descriptive term High Circular Tower tomb may also be appropriate for Arabian cairns, which do not borrow from a temporal/cultural division or geographic location. In the most basic sense, the placement of third millennium BC cairns in high places throughout Arabia speaks to the importance of visibility from afar, between cairns, or both. It has been suggested that high placement of mortuary monuments at many different locales around the world holds significance with regard to territoriality (Chapman 1995). In the dramatic environs of southeastern Arabia, this idea has also been posited (e.g., Cleuziou 2002; Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; de Maigret 2005; Giraud 2010; Kepinski 2007; Steimer-Herbet 2001, 2004; Wilkinson 2003). Alternatively, Deadman (2012) and Al Jahwari (2013) have both demonstrated that Hafittype cairns were placed at locations of importance connected to water. Despite the elegance of these ideas, it is unlikely that territoriality alone fueled the placement of these monuments. Instead, variation in architectural and mortuary practices between these regions may be the most fruitful lines of evidence to understand their local function. For example, these cairns are commonly constructed atop high places, and in some areas with a high density of cairns, tombs sometimes extend down ridgelines and into wadis, presumably due to lack of space in preferred high areas. Communal Tombs (Umm an-Nar Tombs)

The subsequent Umm an-Nar period (ca. 2700–2000 BC) was exemplified by highly impressive monumental tombs constructed throughout southeastern Arabia during the latter portion of the third millennium BC. These large, communal mortuary structures have received significant attention

84 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

because of their clear association with middle and late third millennium BC monumental towers (see chapter 5, this volume) and because of their close proximity to settlement sites (Potts 1990). Unlike Hafit-type cairns, Umm an-Nar tombs were not positioned along high ridges but on low ground. Built of finely worked stone, these tombs were also more elaborate in their interior construction, with multiple chambers defined by a series of dividing walls (Blau 2001; Potts 2001; Méry 2010). These communal tombs were partially subterranean, and all segments of society were interred together (McSweeney et al. 2010). Umm an-Nar tombs were used for multiple generations (likely between 100 and 300 years) and contained hundreds of individuals (Al Tikriti and Méry 2000; McSweeney et al. 2008). No selective burial appears to have taken place, as individuals of all ages and of both sexes were interred in these monumental structures. The vast majority of human remains are fragmentary and disarticulated, primarily a product of intentional mortuary practices that included the manipulation and movement of the skeletonized remains as part of an extended mortuary ritual (Bondioli et al. 1998; Munoz et al. 2012). Pit-graves were sometimes dug adjacent to these monuments for the apparent removal of remains from the primary structure, which would make room within the monument for its continued use (Munoz et al. 2012). Additionally, primary burials were placed in at least some of these pits (Al Tikriti and Méry 2000; Haerinck 1991), thereby differentiating two types of subterranean ossuaries in use during the Umm an-Nar period. Objects that accompanied the dead in Umm an-Nar tombs and pits included hundreds of ceramic vessels (both local funerary and domestic ware and imported vessels), rings, beads, soft-stone vessels, seals, weights, a plethora of bronze objects, and shells (Méry 1997; Potts 2001). Foreign artifacts comprised a variable proportion of grave goods, indicative of interregional trade primarily involving Mesopotamia, Dilmun, and the Indus Valley (Carter 2003; Cleuziou and Vogt 1983; Hellyer 1998; Potts 2009). Umm an-Nar tombs and pits represent a significant shift in mortuary ritual on the Oman Peninsula. It is not known if Hafit-type cairn use was completely abandoned at this time (Frifelt 2002), but we can infer by the size and long-term use of communal tombs during the Umm an-Nar period that the practice of building tombs for individuals or small groups of individuals dramatically declined. Instead, the third millennium BC— which first marked the landscape with small mortuary monument building—culminated with a monumental tomb form that effectively removed

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 85

individual identity and instead focused on the collective identity of local communities. “Transitional” Tombs

A third type of third millennium mortuary structure is known across the region as “Beehive” tombs (e.g., Brunswig 1989; Frifelt 1976, 1985; Yule and Weisgerber 1998). This tomb type is inadequately described and poorly understood, although some (e.g., Frifelt 1975a) have postulated that these may represent transitional mortuary structures between the Hafit-type cairns and the more finely built monumental Umm an-Nar tombs. Five of these postulated transitional tombs from Al Khubayb are discussed in this chapter. The findings from Al Khubayb provide important insight into this transition and offer evidence that it may not have been as dramatic as it initially appeared, but instead, that precursors to later Umm an-Nar complexity and changing ideas about mortuary identity were happening in the latter years of the Hafit period. The Al Khubayb Mortuary Landscape

The Al Khubayb Necropolis is located approximately 10 km north of the village of Dhank and just west of the Al-Hajar mountain system (Figure 4.1). The route along the western foothills of the Al-Hajar Mountains is an obvious path for ancient trade; Frifelt (1975b) envisioned such a route from Bat through Al Buraimi and Al Ain (Hili) to the port of Umm anNar Island. The Wadi Fida and Wadi Khubayb break through the Al-Hajar Mountains near the site of Al Khubayb as well, making the necropolis not only the last significant formation to be encountered before Jebel Hafit but also the first landform that would have been seen upon emerging from either wadi en route to Ibri or Bat. Its prominence along this corridor makes it likely to have been a landmark during travel through this otherwise empty expanse of desert. Its limited physical extent, lack of disturbance, and the remarkable spatial distribution of tombs make this a promising location to examine the evolution of tomb-building technology in the region. Although tombs in this region had been noted by early researchers (e.g., Frifelt 1975a), systematic mapping and sampling occurred throughout 2010–2013, and excavations continue today. More than 400 tombs with a remarkable continuity in structure are present on this necropolis (see Williams and Gregoricka 2013).

86 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Figure 4.1. Map of study area. Source: after Williams and Gregoricka (2013).

Tomb S007–001 Tomb S007–001 stood 2.9 m tall before excavation. Despite a good deal of wall fall, the large size of the tomb coupled with its relatively well-organized stone courses suggested that it was not a typical Hafit-type cairn. The external appearance of the tomb was circular and did not betray its H-shaped burial chamber (7 m in diameter; Table 4.1). Corbelled alcoves in all four corners (or “arms” of the H) created distinct compartments in the tomb (Figure 4.2). Corbelled walls culminated in a dome-shaped roof and were reinforced by a sizable internal support wall. This wall was possibly built to support the false dome, but it also acted as a partial dividing wall in the burial chamber. It is not known if this division was intentionally designed

Transitional Tower Tomb

Transitional H-shaped Tower Tomb

Transitional Tower Tomb

S007-011

S007-012

S007-057

Oval

Round

Round

Transitional Tower Tomb

S007-003

5.8m

3.2m

3.3m

3.6m

7.0m

4.5m

2.8m

3.0m

3.9m

2.9m

Chamber Chamber Maximum shape diameter standing height

Transitional H-shaped Tower Tomb

Type

S007-001

Tomb #

Corbelled

Corbelled

Corbelled

Corbelled

Corbelled

Wall

Table 4.1. Characteristics of Transitional Tower Tombs at Al Khubyab Entrance facing

West

West

Unknown

West

False dome Unknown

Roof slab

Roof slabs

False dome Unknown

Roof

Unworked limestone

Unworked limestone

Unworked limestone

Unworked limestone

Unworked limestone

Material

2

3

2

2

2 plus partial 3rd wall (retaining wall?)

# Walls

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

6

1

1

5

3

Reuse? Disturbance? MNI

88 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Figure 4.2. Schematic plan of Tomb S007-001 (not to scale).

or if the effect was simply happenstance as a result of a structural need to build a very large Hafit-type cairn, the size of which required additional support. The presence of an internal support column is a significant modification that distinguishes what we are calling “Transitional Tower Tombs” from Hafit-type cairns. Other researchers have interpreted this development as a possible precursor to the dividing walls and chambers seen in Umm an-Nar communal tombs (Frifelt 1975a; Potts 2012). Moreover, the developed shape of the burial chamber of Tomb S007–001 did not fit the

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 89

Table 4.2. Radiocarbon dates of third millennium BC monuments in the Dhank Region Tomb

Material

Individual

Bone

UGAMS Lab # Uncalibrated

2-sigma (cal. BC)b

Bone bioapatite C Wood charcoal Associated with Individual C Wood charcoal Associated with Individual B Bone bioapatite C

Femur n/a

11156a 11161a

4110 ± 30 4230 ± 25

2865–2575 2904–2707

n/a

11160a

4030 ± 25

2619–2475

Femur

11158a

4170 ± 25

2880–2690

S007-011

Bone bioapatite

A

Femur

17148

4045 ± 25

2831–2481

S007-012

Bone bioapatite

A

Femur

17149

4030 ± 25

2619–2475

S007-057

Bone bioapatite

A

Femur

14212

4030 ± 20

2618–2477

Bone bioapatite

D

Femur

14213

4050 ± 25

2832–2487

S007-001

S007-003

Notes: a. Previously published in Williams and Gregoricka (2013). b. Calibrated with OxCal.

typology of previously described Hafit-type cairns and appeared to be not only a set of deliberately designed features, but a finely executed design as well. Final excavations of the exterior of the tomb revealed a partial third wall that functioned as a retaining wall for a portion of the tomb. Well-preserved skeletal remains were recovered from Tomb S007–001. There was no evidence of disturbance with the exception of typical taphonomic processes: smaller skeletal elements had been pushed toward the walls by water and rodent activity. The interred individuals included an adult male (Individual A, 40+ years old) positioned east–west in the northern alcove, an adult female (Individual B, 20–30 years old), and a subadult (Individual C, approximately 3 years old). Beads and an unpainted Jemdet Nasr/Early Dynastic cylindrical neck jar were found with the adult male. A calibrated radiocarbon date from the subadult skeleton (UGAMS #11156) dated to 2865–2575 cal BC (2σ; Table 4.2). Charcoal found in association with this individual (UGAMS #11161) was also analyzed and produced a slightly earlier date of 2904–2707 cal BC (2σ), possibly the result of wood reuse over decades, if not hundreds of years (e.g., see Potts 2001 for a discussion on the reuse of wood as a rare material in this region). Dates from the organic material associated with this individual as well as the ceramic mortuary find are consistent with the later Hafit/early Umm an-Nar period.

90 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Tomb S007–003 Before excavation, this tomb stood 3.9 m at its highest point. Its substantial size relative to the majority of the other tombs on the necropolis was indicative of a mortuary structure that did not fit well within the traditionally defined confines of Hafit-type cairns. While the stone courses of this tomb were not as well defined as those at Tomb S007–001, portions of organized wall were evident after wall fall was cleared from the exterior. While significant amounts of the external wall of this tomb had fallen since construction, this did not affect the chamber or the most interior ring wall. The tomb entrance opened toward the west and was uncovered from the interior of the burial chamber. Unlike Tomb S007–001, this tomb did not possess any internal architecture and was circular in shape (3.6 m diameter; Table 4.1). Its corbelled walls culminated in a false dome that was clearly visible on the northeastern summit of the tomb. The skeletal remains of five undisturbed individuals were recovered from the unpaved bedrock floor of the tomb (Figure 4.3). These included an isolated adult female (Individual A, 30–40 years old); a second adult female (Individual B, 30–40 years old) associated with Individual E (see below); an isolated subadult (Individual C, approximately 8–10 years old); an older adult male (Individual D, aged 40+ years); and a subadult (Individual E, 4–5 years old). Charcoal discovered near the face as well as on the torso of each individual, and on the exposed surfaces of two daggers positioned at the waists of Individuals C and D, clearly indicate small burning events on the floor of the tomb chamber near the faces of two individuals, on the chests of all the individuals interred in the tomb, and on the blades of the daggers (Williams and Gregoricka 2013). Moreover, Individuals A and C were each accompanied by a single Jemdet Nasr/Early Dynastic ceramic vessel. Interestingly, the ceramic vessel that accompanied Individual A was a poorly fired, thin, local sandy red ware, Jemdet Nasr–like vessel, whereas the polychrome painted vessel that accompanied Individual C was finely made and was likely a traded object. Beyond these vessels, Individual B was interred with a butchered ovicaprid ilium (see chapter 8, this volume), and Individual A was interred with various beads and a bronze pin (Williams and Gregoricka 2013). Bone bioapatite dating produced a calibrated radiocarbon date for Individual C (UGAMS #11158) of 2880–2690 cal BC (2σ; Table 4.2). Charcoal from the thoracic region of Individual B (UGAMS #11160) produced

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 91

Figure 4.3. Schematic plan of Tomb S007-003 (not to scale).

a somewhat later date of 2600–2480 cal BC (2σ). These results support use of this tomb bridging the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods. Because all of the interred individuals were found on the bedrock floor, these dates can reasonably be attributed to the building and first use of this tomb. Tomb S007–011 Tomb S007–011 is located on the southwestern end of the Al Khubayb Necropolis. Another suspected Transitional Tower Tomb, S007–010, is located approximately 2 m to the west. The roof of this tomb was not intact at the beginning of the excavation: a large roof stone had fallen into the chamber and windblown silt had subsequently covered it. The tomb was 3 m

92 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Figure 4.4. Bronze rivets from Tomb S007-011.

in height at its tallest intact point prior to excavation, but it was apparent that substantial height had been lost due to the walls and roof falling into the chamber. Some corbelling was still visible in the upper portions of the wall, but overall, the walls were not well preserved and slumped inward, obscuring the original dimensions of the chamber and the exterior appearance. Still, it was clear that the chamber had been roughly circular when it was built and that its internal diameter was originally 3.3 m. A probable entrance was identified to the west. The entire fill of the chamber consisted of wind-blown silt and large wall and roof stones that had fallen into the chamber. A single individual was interred in this tomb. Nine large bronze rivets (likely for clothing; Figure 4.4), a large shell pendant, badly eroded sherds of an unidentified ceramic vessel, and an ovicaprid astragalus were also recovered. The bones of this single adult individual were too poorly preserved to estimate sex, more specific age, or body position in the tomb. Nevertheless, the skeletal remains returned a calibrated radiocarbon date that fell between 2831 and 2481 BC (2σ; Table 4.2). These results support use of this tomb during the late Hafit or early Umm an-Nar period.

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 93

Tomb S007–012 Tomb S007–012 is a large Bronze Age tomb on the Al Khubayb Necropolis (Figure 4.5). This tomb was selected for excavation because of its location facing the Wadi Al Khubayb, its well-preserved external ring wall, its proximity to a number of Hafit-type cairns, and its intact roof. The tomb was 2.8 m at its highest point and measured 12.1 m wide (including wall fall) before excavation. Despite significant wall fall surrounding the tomb, its exterior was clearly round in shape. The burial chamber was H-shaped and 3.2 m long (northwest to southeast), with a maximum width of 2.2 m in the northwest alcove and 1.8 m in the southeast alcove at bedrock. Both alcoves

Figure 4.5. Schematic plan of Tomb S007-012 (not to scale).

94 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

were corbelled and remained in excellent condition, despite the considerable weight of the false dome that had capped the tomb for many millennia. A single individual was interred in this tomb, directly on bedrock. The skeletal remains were in a poor state of preservation, with no diagnostic sex- or age-related features present, although some aspects of the skeleton (e.g., left distal tibia, left proximal ulna) were in good condition; epiphyseal fusion suggested that this was an adult individual. A proximal manual phalanx that was pushed against the southern wall of the southeast alcove displayed multiple indictors of pathology, including osteoarthritic lipping at the proximal end and lytic lesions and remodeling of the diaphysis, possibly indicative of infection. An articulated ovicaprid humerus and scapula as well as an astragalus were interred with this individual. A small bronze rivet and a single steatite seed bead were the only material goods recovered from the tomb. Bone from this single individual produced a calibrated radiocarbon date between 2619 and 2475 BC (2σ; Table 4.2), supporting tomb use during the late Hafit or early Umm an-Nar period. Tomb S007–057 At its highest point, this tomb was 4.5 m tall before excavation. There was no evidence of an intact exterior wall, likely because it was damaged by the large amount of wall fall on all sides of the tomb. This exterior wall fall was not removed in order to preserve the structural integrity of the tomb during excavation. An interior ring wall remained intact and revealed a burial chamber with a diameter of 5.8 m. An entrance was located from the interior of the burial chamber and opened to the west. The skeletal remains of five undisturbed individuals were recovered from the unpaved bedrock floor of the tomb (Figure 4.6). These included a young adult male (Individual A), a poorly preserved adult of indeterminate sex (Individual B), an adult female (Individual C) interred with a subadult (Individual D, approximately 8–9 years of age), and finally, a second poorly preserved adult of indeterminate sex (Individual E). It was not possible to estimate the ages of the adult tomb members due to the poor preservation of bone, although for Individual A an overall lack of degenerative change to joint surfaces was observed and is likely indicative of a younger adult. Calibrated radiocarbon dates for Individual A (UGAMS #14212) fall between 2618 and 2477 cal BC (2σ; Table 4.2). Additionally, bone bioapatite from Individual D dated to between 2832 and 2487 cal BC (2σ). Faunal remains were found in direct association with two burial events in Tomb S007–057 (see detailed analysis in chapter 8 this volume). An

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 95

Figure 4.6. Schematic plan of Tomb S007-057 (not to scale).

ovicaprid astragalus was recovered in association with Individual A, while Individuals C and D were unearthed with several large bovid ribs and two large bovid innominate bones. Surprisingly, however, each innominate came from a different animal—one adult and one subadult—and represent opposite sides of the pelvis. A Jemdet Nasr–style jar made of local materials (sandy red ware) had also been placed with Individual E. Finally, an isolated bronze rivet was recovered with no clear association to any of the five individuals interred in this tomb. Discussion

This chapter seeks to generalize the concept of a Hafit/Umm an-Nar transitional tomb type and situate it within a third millennium BC northern

96 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Oman standardized tomb typology (and associated terminology) in a specific region of the Oman Peninsula. We present the results from the excavation of five examples of this tomb type found on the Al Khubayb Necropolis near Dhank, Oman. These tombs contained undisturbed human interments and datable materials that—for the first time in the Oman Peninsula—provided absolute dates for Beehive tomb use and mortuary ritual. We refer to these tombs as “Transitional Tower Tombs,” corresponding to architecture that became progressively more complex and representing a transition in mortuary rituals from single to communal interments. This term is an effort to move away from terminology that is used casually to refer to both Hafit-type cairns and these later cairns. Before we excavated the tombs described here, most Transitional Tower Tombs previously identified by archaeologists had been robbed of their content, including skeletal remains, making the suggestion that they were a transitional form somewhat speculative. Moreover, due in part to difficulties of regional mapping prior to current geospatial technologies (GIS, GPS, and satellite imagery) very little is known about the spatial distribution of these tombs or the variation in their form. Variation in how people expressed their views through monumental architecture and mortuary rituals must also be recognized. Like others (e.g., Cleuziou 2002), we recommend a reevaluation of tomb type distributions and dichotomies, particularly using archaeological methods: first, to excavate the tomb exteriors (to learn about tomb construction through examination of the standing architecture); second, to excavate the burial chambers, with a specific focus on the human remains—placement, chronology, and association with burial goods; and third, to survey mortuary monuments in the region using modern geospatial technologies. These are powerful data that when considered in coordination will contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the life history of people who lived in this region. Hafit-type cairns have been described as having considerable variability in size. Recent excavations at the Al Khubayb Necropolis in northern Oman suggest that an overly simplified mortuary dichotomy of Hafit versus Umm an-Nar for this region has inadvertently grouped Transitional Tower Tomb forms into a Hafit-type cairn classification. This has had the effect of producing a very large range of sizes and possibly obscuring important information about the form and function of these tombs. Here, we have attempted to tease apart some of this lumping of tomb features

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 97

to explore the gradual continuum that we hypothesize characterizes the temporal development of tomb forms in this region of southeastern Arabia, thereby blurring the traditionally discrete boundaries that divided the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods. While traditional labels of “Hafit” and “Umm an-Nar” represent useful classifications of two distinct mortuary traditions, the categorization of all monumental tombs from the early third millennium BC into one of two typologies masks a complex and dynamic mortuary history. Transitional forms have largely been ignored or attributed to local variants of traditional architecture. Certainly, tomb structure, use, and mortuary ritual changed in a dramatic fashion around 2700 BC, and the suggestion of the existence of such transitional structures is not new. As mentioned previously, Frifelt (1975a) hypothesized that the “Beehive Tower” tomb represented a transitional form between Hafit-type cairns and Umm an-Nar communal tombs (see also de Cardi et al. 1976). She observed these tombs at Bat and Al Ayn and suggested that the architecture did not fit either the Hafit-type cairn or the Umm an-Nar tomb styles. Frifelt classified other large tombs as Hafittype cairns (there are many nearby on much higher ridges in addition to the Beehive tombs) but noted that their architecture was different from the Beehive tombs, which she described as having the same double wall construction as a traditional Hafit-type cairn, but with thinner walls and stone courses more regularly placed. All of the tombs she excavated had been previously disturbed, and only a few bone fragments were observed; despite this disturbance, third millennium BC beads and bronze rivets as well as Umm an-Nar period ceramics were found inside of the tombs. However, without radiocarbon dates and more excavated examples, the suggestion that these represented a transitional form did not gather much support. Many scholars do not accept Beehive tombs as a distinct tomb type and rightly point out that too little research has been conducted to determine whether differential construction methods and mortuary rituals varied enough to warrant a third category of Early Bronze Age tomb in the Oman Peninsula (e.g., Cleuziou and Tosi 2007). An arguably more significant gap in knowledge lies in the lack of information regarding who would have been buried in Beehive tombs, the items they were buried with, and how mortuary practices changed in response to shifts in economic and sociopolitical organization during the Hafit/Umm an-Nar transition. Nevertheless, variation in tomb form has gained recognition since Frifelt’s initial identification of a possible transitional type in 1975. Vogt (1985) defined a “Tawi Silaim type” at Sharqiyah in eastern Oman as an architectural variant, namely

98 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

the inclusion of an additional ring wall. In their report on the tower tombs of Shir in northeastern Oman, Yule and Weisgerber (1998) described possible Hafit-type cairns as well as Beehive Towers and Umm an-Nar tombs. Some Beehive Towers at Shir exhibited similar construction techniques to the tombs observed by Frifelt at Bat and Al Ayn, including the characteristic triangular entrance, while others appeared to date to the Umm an-Nar period based on architectural form as well as the presence of late third millennium BC ceramic sherds. Still others have documented Beehive tombs with rectangular doorways and placement closer to modern villages (e.g., Al Jahwari 2013). Unfortunately, because of the lack of available human remains from any Beehive tombs, relatively little is known about the function of these tomb types. Others, including Boehme (2011), contend that while further typological assignments may be introduced, these can only be accurately defined within a limited geographic space, and that variability in tomb construction precludes overarching labels to be applied to all tombs in a given region. He posited that a Hafit-period tomb construction at the UNESCO World Heritage site of Bat constitutes a regionally specific tomb type that he designates as “Bat-type,” characterized by an internal support wall, a plinth-topped doorway, and locally sourced, finely worked stones used to construct the façade. Finally, at Jebel al-Emalah and Falaj al-Qaba’il, Potts (2012:376) recognized the presence of multiple burial chambers and internal dividing walls as indicative of a “late-Hafit” or “proto-Umm an-Nar” type. In fact, these tombs are similar to the H-shape chambers we describe from Al Khubayb. Both Boehme (2011) and Potts (2012) made an important contribution to the literature on tomb typology in the region, particularly since they described multiple examples of intermediate tomb forms. While chronometric dating methods were not employed in any of these assessments, the recognition of such a tomb type is nonetheless a productive step towards a more nuanced understanding of the evolution of communal tombs in the region. Our work at Al Khubayb contributes substantially to this discussion, providing chronometric dates coupled with architectural features and evidence (both archaeological and bioarchaeological) of the mortuary customs practiced in these tombs during the late Hafit and early Umm an-Nar periods. First, the five Transitional Tower Tombs excavated at Al Khubayb produced radiocarbon dates from bone and charcoal that place these mortuary structures directly between traditional definitions of the Hafit (ca.

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 99

3200–2700 BC) and Umm an-Nar (ca. 2700–2000 BC) periods. These data are corroborated by correspondingly “transitional” architectural features, which not only include a considerable increase in overall tomb size (total height and internal chamber diameter) and better organized, more expertly corbelled internal walls culminating in a false dome, but also more complex burial chamber configurations, including the H-shaped chambers of Tomb S007–001 and Tomb S007–012. Additionally, distinct mortuary practices distinguish these tombs from their earlier Hafit counterparts yet demonstrate continuity and evolving definitions of identity constructed by the living and expressed in death. In the case of Tomb S007–003, five individuals of all ages and both sexes were found with large quantities of charcoal from material burned in situ near their heads, on their chests, and/or on the daggers at their waists. The intentional inclusion of this charcoal is indicative of funerary ritual, and the later date of the charcoal associated with Individual C could suggest that when the tomb was revisited to deposit the newly dead, burning events may have been performed on previously interred individuals. Such a burial custom has never been reported from the Hafit period, and although small areas of burning and cremation have been noted from the Umm an-Nar period, no targeted burning events such as those at Al Khubayb have been unearthed. While mortuary structure and rituals show an evolution between Hafitand Umm an-Nar–type burials or monuments, the deposition of animal bones alongside human interments on the Oman Peninsula has been largely unknown in the Early Bronze Age until now. Nevertheless, too few animal bones have been recovered in conjunction with human interments to make definitive interpretation feasible. The inclusion of whole and partial animals is a common feature of third millennium tombs in Greater Mesopotamia, where they are frequently interpreted as food offerings, meals for the deceased, or as draft or service animals. The specific association of faunal ossa coxae with paired adult female or subadult interments in two of five Transitional Tower Tombs is noteworthy and may represent symbols associated with fertility (see chapter 8, this volume, for a full discussion). Both of these meaningful mortuary developments—localized burning events and the placement of fauna with female or child burials—complement the overall increase in grave goods in these tombs in comparison to those in the Hafit period and speak more broadly to the increasing complexity of funerary customs that clearly demarcate these tombs from preceding practices. Still, these findings do not provide enough evidence to document a larger pattern of burning or faunal offerings and must be treated as preliminary

100 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

indications of the mortuary rituals at Al Khubayb until further excavations provide more data. The Hafit tradition of highly visible tombs (due to their placement along mountain and/or foothill ridges throughout the Al-Hajar Mountains) continued into this liminal period, but instead of such visibility highlighting the burial of a single individual, identity began to be negotiated in a different way, as 3–5 individuals were now interred in some transitional types (Tombs S007–001, S007–003, and S007–057). Importantly, inside these Transitional Tower Tombs—which from the outside look like larger versions of the very familiar Hafit-type cairn—not only were a larger number of people interred, but these individuals enjoyed discrete placement within the mortuary monument. This is contrasted with the observations in the Ja’alan of a) many individuals placed in Hafit-type cairns but older interments pushed to the side for the newly deceased; b) grave goods that often cannot be associated with individuals but that are also pushed aside or perhaps left for all occupants; and c) otherwise egalitarian treatment of the deceased and their burial ritual. The Transitional Tower Tombs we have excavated reveal specific placement of bodies and material goods on the bedrock in the tomb chamber that were not disturbed with subsequent interments. During this transitional period, a substantial amount of space inside the chambers went unused or at least was not used in ways that can be recovered through archaeological excavations. The recovery of larger numbers of grave goods was in part related to an overall increase in the number of individuals interred in Transitional Tower Tombs in the Dhank region. This appears to suggest a shift in the way the living constructed identity from a focus on the individual (in single-interment Hafit-type cairns) to one highlighting the collective, a concept effectively transmitted and reinforced by the living through mortuary practices. In these examples, individual identity is still respected through the assignment of discrete space inside the chamber for each individual and with the external appearance of a well-known tomb structure. The communal identity, at least after the tomb was sealed and only visible from the exterior, still communicated a similar message that the Hafit-type cairn did—with its placement high on the landscape adjacent to other Hafit-type cairns and with its similar (except for size) external architecture. How then, do Tombs S007–011 and S007–012 fit into this model of transition, including increased tomb membership and architectural changes? It is noteworthy that the two Transitional Tower Tombs with only a single interment are both very large and date to the Umm an-Nar period. Instead of speculating that mortuary

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 101

monuments continued to be used past the Hafit period, we argue that these two examples provide chronometric evidence for both the persistence of single interments and increasing tomb size, which we suggest is indicative of late Hafit period transitions in mortuary ritual. This evidence shows that rather than wholesale adoption of new mortuary rituals, individuals in a single community made different decisions about monument construction and tomb inclusion. This is further evidence of the erosion of the previously accepted egalitarian but individual treatment of all people during the Hafit period. We suggest that these various lines of evidence are precursors to the complete removal of individual identity that was practiced in the Umm an-Nar period, and that further examination of the transitional mortuary ritual may help elucidate other aspects of social change between the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods. Conclusions

Our results contribute new information on architecture, mortuary ritual, and radiocarbon dates to the discussion of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar transition. While our study of the Al Khubayb Necropolis is still in its early stages, these results provide important insights into the liminal period between two well-known archaeological eras during the early to middle third millennium BC in southeastern Arabia. Previously, it was thought that Hafit period interments in the interior of northern Oman were uniform in their treatment of the deceased: single individuals or small numbers of multiple interments were placed in monumental cairns at high places. The material goods interred with the deceased may have varied slightly but generally included standard items such as Jemdet Nasr ceramics, bronze daggers or personal adornments, and beads of local and/or foreign origin. Compared with the subsequent Umm an-Nar period when all members of a community were placed in the same elaborate communal tomb close to or within a settlement, Hafit-type cairns allowed for some individual mortuary space on the landscape. However, there is no evidence that this individuality was expressed in any greater detail. The current work adds nuance to the dichotomy between the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods and demonstrates transitional architectural features and mortuary rituals that may help us recognize more subtle yet concomitant transitions in social organization and identity construction.

102 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the Ministry of Heritage and Culture in the Sultanate of Oman. This work was supported by National Science Foundation grants 1321203 and 1318019, a Temple University Faculty Senate Seed Grant, and Temple University. Thank you also to David Ross of the Temple University Digital Scholarship Center who provided invaluable assistance with the schematic plans. References Cited Algaze, Guillermo 1993 The Uruk World System: The Dynamics of Expansion of Early Mesopotamian Civilization. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Baustian, Kathryn, and Debra L. Martin 2010 Patterns of Mortality in a Bronze Age Tomb from Tell Abraq. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 55–59. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford. Al Belushi, Mohammed, and Ali Tigani ElMahi 2009 Archaeological Investigations in Shenah, Sultanate of Oman. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 39:31–41. Benton, Jodie 1996 Excavations at Al-Sufouh: A Third Millennium Site in the Emirate of Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Abiel 1, Turnhout. 2006 Burial Practices of the Third Millennium BC in the Oman Peninsula: A Reconsideration. PhD dissertation, School of Archaeology, University of Sydney. Benton, Jodie, and Daniel T. Potts 1994 Jebel al-Emalah 1993–1994: Report Compiled for the Department of Culture and Information. Unpublished report submitted to the Directorate of Antiquities, Government of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Blau, Soren 1999 Studies of Human Skeletal Remains in the United Arab Emirates: Where Are We Now? Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 28:7–13. 2001 Fragmentary Endings: A Discussion of 3rd-Millennium BC Burial Practices in the Oman Peninsula. Antiquity 75(289):557–570. 2007 Skeletal and Dental Health and Subsistence Change in the United Arab Emirates. In Ancient Health: Skeletal Indicators of Agricultural and Economic Intensification, edited by Mark Nathan Cohen and Gillian M. M. CraneKramer, pp. 190–206. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Boehme, Manfred 2011 The Bat-Type: A Hafit Period Tomb Construction in Oman. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 22(1):23–31. Bondioli, Luca, Alfredo Coppa, and Roberto Macchiarelli 1998 From the Coast to the Oasis in Prehistoric Arabia: What the Human Osteo-

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 103

dental Remains Tell Us about the Transition from a Foraging to the Exchange Economy? Evidence from Ra’s al-Hamra (Oman) and Hili North (U.A.E.). Proceedings of the XIII Congress: 229–234. Forli, Italy. Bortolini, Eugenio, and Olivia Munoz 2015 Life and Death in Prehistoric Oman: Insights from Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Funerary Practices (4th–3rd mill. BC). Proceedings of the International Symposium, “The Archaeological Heritage of Oman: An Early Cradle of Arabian Civilization Brought to the Forefront of Cultural Resource Management,” September 7, 2012: 61–80. UNESCO/Ministry of Heritage and Culture of Oman, Paris. Brunswig, Robert H. 1989 Cultural History, Environment and Economy as Seen from an Umm an-Nar Settlement: Evidence from Test Excavations at Bat, Oman, 1977/78. Journal of Oman Studies 10:9–50. Carter, Robert 2003 Tracing Bronze Age Trade in the Arabian Gulf: Evidence for WayStations of the Merchants of Dilmun between Bahrain and the Northern Emirates. In Archaeology of the United Arab Emirates: Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Archaeology of the UAE, edited by D. Potts, H. Al Naboodah, and P. Hellyer, pp. 123–131. Trident Press, London. Chapman, Robert 1995 Ten Years After: Megaliths, Mortuary Practices, and the Territorial Model. In Regional Approaches to Mortuary Analysis, edited by L. Beck, pp. 29–51. Plenum Press, New York. Cleuziou, Serge 2002 The Early Bronze Age of the Oman Peninsula from Chronology to the Dialectics of Tribe and State Formation. In Essays on the Late Prehistory of the Arabian Peninsula, edited by Serge Cleuziou, Maurizio Tosi, and Juris Zarins, pp. 191–236. Serie Orientale Roma XCIII. Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, Rome. 2007 Evolution toward Complexity in a Coastal Desert Environment: The Early Bronze Age in the Ja’alan, Sultanate of Oman. In The Model-Based Archaeology of Socionatural Systems, edited by T. A. Kohler, and S. van der Leeuw, pp. 209–227. SAR Press: Sante Fe, New Mexico. Cleuziou, Serge, and Maurizio Tosi (editors) 2007 In the Shadow of the Ancestors: The Prehistoric Foundations of the Early Arabian Civilization in Oman. Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Muscat. Cleuziou, Serge, and Burkhard Vogt 1983 Umm an-Nar Burial Customs: New Evidence from Tomb A at Hili North. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 13:37–45. Cope, Janet M., A. C. Berryman, Debra L. Martin, and Daniel T. Potts 2005 Robusticity and Osteoarthritis at the Trapeziometacarpal Joint in a Bronze Age Population from Tell Abraq, U.A.E. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 126(4):391–400. Deadman, William M. 2012 Defining the Early Bronze Age Landscape: A Remote Sensing-Based Analysis of

104 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Hafit Tomb Distribution in Wadi Andam, Sultanate of Oman. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 23(1):26–34. de Cardi, Beatrice, Stephen Collier, and Donald B. Doe 1976 Excavations and Survey in Oman, 1974–1975. Journal of Oman Studies 2:101–187. de Cardi, Beatrice, Donald B. Doe, and Steve P. Roskams 1977 Excavation and Survey in the Sharqiyah, Oman, 1976. Journal of Oman Studies 3:17–33. de Maigret, Alessandro 2005 Excavations of the Turret Tombs of Jabal al-Makhdarah. In South Arabian Necropolises: Italian Excavations at Al-Makhdarah and Kharibat al-Ahjur (Republic of Yemen), edited by A. de Maigret and S. Antonini, pp. 11–40. Istituto Italiano per L’Africa e L’Oriente, Rome. Frank, Andre Gunder 1993 Bronze Age World System Cycles. Current Anthropology 34(4):383–405. Frifelt, Karen 1975a On Prehistoric Settlement and Chronology of the Oman Peninsula. East and West 5(3–4):359–424. 1975b A Possible Link between the Jemdet Nasr and Umm an-Nar Graves of Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 1:57–80. 1976 Evidence of a Third Millennium B.C. Town in Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 2: 57–67. 1980 “Jemdet Nasr Graves” on the Oman Peninsula. In Death in Mesopotamia, edited by B. Alster, pp. 273–279. Akademisk Forlag, Copenhagen. 1985 Further Evidence of the Third Millennium BC Town at Bat in Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 7:89–104. 2002 Bat, a Centre in Third Millennium Oman. In Essays on the Late Prehistory of the Arabian Peninsula, edited by Serge Cleuziou, Maurizio Tosi, and Juris Zarins, pp. 101–110. Serie Orientale Roma XCIII, Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, Rome. Giraud, Jessica 2010 Early Bronze Age Graves and Graveyards in the Eastern Ja’alan (Sultanate of Oman): An Assessment of the Social Rules Working in the Evolution of a Funerary Landscape. In Death and Burial in Ancient Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 71–84. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford. Haerinck, Ernie 1991 The Rectangular Umm an-Nar-Period Grave at Mowaihat (Emirate of Ajman, United Arab Emirates). Gentse Bijdragen, tot de Kunstgeschiedenis en Oudheidkunde 29:1–30. Hellyer, Peter 1998 Hidden Riches: An Archaeological Introduction to the United Arab Emirates. Union National Bank, Abu Dhabi. Al Jahwari, Nasser Said 2013 The Early Bronze Age Funerary Archaeological Landscape of Western Ja’alan:

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 105

Results of Three Seasons of Investigation. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(2):151–173. Jasim, Sabah Abboud 2006 The Archaeological Sites of Jebel al-Buhais. In The Archaeology of Jebel al-Buhais, Volume 1: Funeral Monuments and Human Remains from Jebel al-Buhais, edited by Hans-Peter Uerpmann, Margarethe Uerpmann, and Sabah Abboud Jasim, pp. 13–63. Department of Culture and Information, Government of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. 2012 The Necropolis of Jebel al-Buhais: Prehistoric Discoveries in the Emirate of Sharjah United Arab Emirates. Department of Culture and Information, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Kepinski, Christine 2007 Tribal Links between the Arabian Peninsula and the Middle Euphrates at the Beginning of the Second Millennium BC. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 37:125–134. Martin, Debra L. 2007 Bioarchaeology in the United Arab Emirates. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 18:124–131. McCorriston, Joy, Tara Steimer-Herbet, Michael Harrower, Kimberly D. Williams, JeanFrançois Saliège, and Abdullah Bin ‘Aqil 2011 Gazetteer of Small Scale Monuments in Prehistoric Hadramawt, Yemen: A Radiocarbon Chronology from RASA-AHSD Project Research 1996–2008. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 22(1):1–22. McCorriston, Joy, Michael Harrower, Tara Steimer-Herbet, Kimberly D. Williams, Matthew Senn, M. Al-Hadhari, M. Al-Kathiri, Jean-François Saliège, and Jennifer Everhart 2014 Monuments and Landscape of Mobile Pastoralists: The Dhofar Monument Survey 2009–2011. Journal of Oman Studies 18:117–144. McSweeney, Kathleen, Sophie Méry, and Roberto Macchiarelli 2008 Rewriting the End of the Early Bronze Age in the United Arab Emirates through the Anthropological and Artefactual Evaluation of Two Collective Umm an-Nar Graves at Hili (Eastern Region of Abu Dhabi). Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 19(1):1–14. McSweeney, Kathleen, Sophie Méry, and Walid Yasim Al Tikriti 2010 Life and Death in an Early Bronze Age Community from Hili, Al Ain, UAE. In Death and Burial in Ancient Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 45–54. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford. Méry, Sophie 1997 A Funerary Assemblage from the Umm an-Nar Period: The Ceramics from Tomb A at Hili North, UAE. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 27:171–191. 2010 Results, Limits and Potential: Burial Practices and Early Bronze Age Societies in the Oman Peninsula. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisci-

106 · Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka

plinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 33–44. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford. Méry, Sophie, J. Rouquet, Kathleen McSweeney, G. Basset, Jean-François Saliège, and Walid Yasin Al Tikriti 2001 Re-excavation of the Early Bronze Age Collective Hili N Pit-grave (Emirate of Abu Dhabi, UAE): Results of the First Two Campaigns of the Emirati-French project. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 31:161–178. Méry, Sophie, Kathleen McSweeney, S. van der Leeuw, and Walid Yasin Al Tikriti 2004 New Approaches to a Collective Grave from the Umm an-Nar Period at Hili (UAE). Paleorient 30(1):163–178. Munoz, Olivia, Royal Ghazal, and Hervé Guy 2012 Use of Ossuary Pits During the Umm an-Nar Period: New Insights on the Complexity of Burial Practices from the Site of Ra’s al-Jinz (RJ-1), Oman. In Aux marges de l’archeologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 451–467. Travaux de la maison Rene-Ginouves. De Boccard, Paris. Nayeem, Muhammad Abdul 1996 The Sultanate of Oman: Prehistory and Protohistory from the Most Ancient Times (c. 1:000:000 B.C. to 100 B.C.). Hyderabad Publishers, Hyderabad, India. Potts, Daniel T. 1990 The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity: 1. From Prehistory to the Fall of the Achaemenid Empire. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 1993 The Late Prehistoric, Protohistoric, and Early Historic Periods in Eastern Arabia (ca. 5000–1200 B.C.). Journal of World Prehistory 7(2):163–212. 2001 Before the Emirates: An Archaeological and Historical Account of Developments in the Region c. 5000 BC to 676 AD. In United Arab Emirates: A New Perspective, edited by I. Al Abed and P. Hellyer, pp. 28–69. Trident Press, London. 2009 The Archaeology and Early History of the Persian Gulf. In The Persian Gulf in History, edited by L. Potter, pp. 27–53. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 2012 The Hafit-Umm an-Nar Transition: Evidence from Falaj al-Qaba’il and Jabal al-Emalah. In Aux marges de l’archeologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 371–377. Travaux de la Maison ReneGinouves. De Boccard, Paris. Reimer, P. J., E. Bard, A. Bayliss, J. W. Beck, P. G. Blackwell, C. Bronk Ramsey, C. E. Buck, H. Cheng, R. L. Edwards, M. Friedrich, P. M. Grootes, T. P. Guilderson, H. Haflidason, I. Hajdas, C. Hatté, T. J. Heaton, A. G. Hogg, K. A. Hughen, K. F. Kaiser, B. Kromer, S. W. Manning, M. Niu, R. W. Reimer, D. A. Richards, E. M. Scott, J. R. Southon, C. S. M. Turney, and J. van der Plicht. 2013 IntCal13 and MARINE13 Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curves 0–50000 years calBP. Radiocarbon 55(4):1869–1887. Siebert, S., J. Haser, M. Nagieb, L. Korn, and A. Buerkert 2005 Agricultural, Architectural and Archaeological Evidence for the Role and Ecological Adaptation of a Scattered Mountain Oasis in Oman. Journal of Arid Environments 62(1):177–197.

The Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition: Architecture and Mortuary Ritual at Al Khubayb · 107

Steimer-Herbet, Tara 2001 Results of the Excavation in Jabal Jidran, February 99. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 31:221–226. 2004 Classification des sépultures à superstructures lithiques dans le Levant et l’Arabie occidentale (IVe et IIIe millénaires avant J.-C.). BAR International Series 1246. Archaeopress, Oxford. Steimer-Herbet, Tara, Gouguen Davtian, and F. Braemer 2006 Pastoralists’ Tombs and Settlement Patterns in WadiWash’ah during the Bronze Age (Hadramawt, Yemen). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 36:257–265. Stein, Gil 1999 Rethinking World-Systems: Diasporas, Colonies, and Interaction in Uruk Mesopotamia. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Al Tikriti, Walid Yasim, and Sophie Méry 2000 Tomb N at Hili and the Question of the Subterranean Graves during the Umm an-Nar Period. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 30:205–219. Vogt, Burkhard 1985 The Umm an-Nar Tomb A at Hili North: A Preliminary Report on Three Seasons of Excavation, 1982–1984. Archaeology in the United Arab Emirates 4:20–37. Weisgerber, Gerd 1981 Evidence of Ancient Mining Sites in Oman: A Preliminary Report. Journal of Oman Studies 4:15–28. Williams, Kimberly D., and Lesley A. Gregoricka 2013 The Social, Spatial, and Bioarchaeological Histories of Ancient Oman Project: The Mortuary Landscape of Dhank. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(2):134–150. Williams, Kimberly D., Tara Steimer-Herbet, Lesley A. Gregoricka, Jean-François Saliège, and Joy McCorriston 2014 Bioarchaeological Analyses of 3rd Millennium BC High Circular Tower Tombs in Dhofar, Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 18:153–173. Wilkinson, Tony 2003 Archaeological Landscapes of the Near East. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Yule, Paul, and Gerd Weisgerber 1998 Prehistoric Tower Tombs at Shir/Jaylah, Sultanate of Oman. Beiträge zur Allgemeinen und Vergeichenden Archäologie 18:183–241.

5 Tombs in Time and Towers in Space Making Sense of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition in North-Central Oman through Its Monuments Charlotte Marie Cable

The mortuary record has been a significant (though often frustrating) source of knowledge for archaeologists of the Oman Peninsula. Current explanations of late fourth and third millennium BC Oman recognize both that a) the Hafit period is part of the Umm an-Nar culture, and that b) the two periods are also somehow distinct. The Umm an-Nar period is generally understood as an intensification of Hafit period cultural traditions. This has broadly played out in archaeological interpretations of the mortuary record, with Umm an-Nar tombs as aggrandized, communal versions of Hafit tombs. What has been slower in coming is an explanatory framework. In part, this is because such explanations frequently come in comparisons with settlement data, of which Oman archaeology has a dearth. Furthermore, as Morris (1991) pointed out more generally, the mortuary realm provides dense insights into resource transmission but is mediated by complex social and political factors working at several scales. These confounding factors make the side-by-side analysis of mortuary and non-mortuary data even more important and all the more difficult pragmatically in the relatively early years of southeastern Arabian archaeology. However, other non-mortuary data are available for third millennium BC Oman. This chapter reflects on changes over time in the mortuary realm in light of the development of the Umm an-Nar “tower,” positing the uses of one kind of monument to understand the other and, together, to understand broader culture change across the third millennium BC (Figure 5.1).

Making Sense of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition through Its Monuments · 109

Figure 5.1. Third millennium BC monuments to scale. Clockwise from upper left: a late Hafit period tomb; an Umm an-Nar period tomb; an Umm an-Nar period tower.

Cemeteries, Resources, and Identity in the Third Millennium BC

Building on Salvatori (e.g., 1996, 2001) and others, this author has argued elsewhere (Cable 2012a) that the Hafit period development of the burial monument marked not only new ways of impacting the landscape but also new ways of participating in a broad heterogeneous cultural identity. Salvatori (1996, 2001) convincingly employed what Morris (1991) identified as the Saxe/Goldstein Hypothesis to state that fifth and fourth millennium BC cemeteries linked groups to specific resources (Goldstein 1981; Saxe 1971). However, these cemeteries were pit interments and probably nearly invisible. Society-wide, these changes were rooted in an ideology that accorded with Casimir and Rao’s (1992) concept of social boundary defense: that is, where resources are unpredictable and scarce and where population pressure is relatively low, middle-range societies can successfully maintain access to a wide variety of resources by developing a system of long-distance reciprocity. However, spatial boundary maintenance (i.e., territories)

110 · Charlotte Marie Cable

and social maintenance systems are not discrete (Casimir 1992). Thus, it is possible for both exclusionary and integrative tendencies to be in play at the same time, particularly if they serve social functions at different scales. These are also responses to regularizing access to different things: while a territory can mark out a space within which lies a variety of different types of land and resources (Dresch 1989; Janzen 1986; Wilkinson 1983), a cemetery space—the “permanent, specialized bounded area” for the dead (Goldstein 1981:61)—correlates instead to rights over an adjacent resource. Furthermore, systems of reciprocity must necessarily allow for what O’Shea and Milner (2002:201) note as the tension between two major (and potentially opposing) elements of tribal (in this case, middle-range) systems: “large-scale integration and local differentiation.” In the Hafit period, these are visible archaeologically in several ways: • Iconic tomb structures, located on highly visible parts of the landscape (e.g., Cable 2012a) • Individual features that are not easily differentiated from a distance (Böhme 2012, 2013) • A “no-skills necessary” approach to tomb construction, in which any member of the community could participate (Cable 2012a) • A low person–tomb ratio, providing numerous occasions upon which to build tombs (e.g., Frifelt 1971) • Demographic inclusion of all parts of the population in the tombs (e.g., Salvatori 2001) • Grave goods that symbolize intracultural and intercultural exchange networks (Frifelt 1971; Thorvildsen 1962) The Umm an-Nar period that followed continued and intensified these trends as well as the ideas behind them. As third millennium BC trade networks expanded, so did Oman’s exports and expertise. Extensive and intensive trade relations would have required significant and ever-increasing emphasis on local, reciprocal access to resources. Similarly, there were significant changes to the mortuary realm, but a few important elements were retained and suggest that Umm an-Nar people likewise retained symbolic hold of Hafit claims to resources and referenced those broad, culture-wide affiliations in order to do so. These elements include the following: • Tombs remained circular in plan, stone-built, and predominantly above-ground monuments (but see Méry 2010). • Tombs exhibited different combinations of Hafit and Umm an-Nar

Making Sense of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition through Its Monuments · 111

• • • •

type tomb characteristics, which suggests that there was no clear break in either form or ideology (Böhme 2012, 2013; Frifelt 1971; Thorvildsen 1962). Tombs were located “in the shadow of the ancestors” (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007), adjacent to Hafit period tombs (Cable 2012a). Initial interment appears to have occurred soon after death, while the body was still articulated (e.g., Vogt 1985). Demographically, it still appears that all parts of the population were interred in the tombs (McSweeney et al. 2010; Salvatori 2001). Grave goods indicate intensified and extensified long-distance trade both across the peninsula and abroad.

However, the Hafit and Umm an-Nar mortuary traditions exhibit significant differences: • Primary interment was often (but not exclusively; see McSweeney et al. 2010; Vogt 1985) followed by secondary, and sometimes tertiary, handling of the remains and grave goods. These practices sometimes included moving previous interments to the side of the tomb (Munoz et al. 2012), burning remains (Cleuziou and Vogt 1983), and/or removal of remains to burial pits (Döpper and Schmidt 2011). • A high person–tomb ratio (Blau 2001) when compared to that of the Hafit period. • This resulted in fewer opportunities to help build a tomb and fewer opportunities to participate in mortuary practices (Cable 2012). • Significant, highly visible energy expenditure and skilled labor used to construct a single tomb (increasing “monumentality”; e.g., Méry 2010). • Umm an-Nar tombs were located near (and within) settlements and would have been encountered regularly instead of remotely (e.g., Cable 2012a). The first of these points to an “exhaustion” of the mortuary realm, visible with a variety of funerary practices, and the reuse of tombs. The latter of these points to the association of individuals with a specific community and identification with a specific tomb. Along with Cleuziou and others (e.g., Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; Salvatori 2001), this author sees these differences as marking a transition from the primary importance of the individual as a member in the broadest conceptions of affiliation—that of the broader

112 · Charlotte Marie Cable

culture—to the individual as a member in a local group. At the same time, the Umm an-Nar tombs, through proximity and the retention of certain elements from the Hafit mortuary tradition, suggest that the idea of broad cultural affiliation was still an important trope. Even as the mortuary realm became, literally, closer to home (one wonders about the smell), the mortuary monument became itself grander and more important. That is, while the ideology was still one of equal access and solidarity in heterogeneity, it became one that subtly refocused on the ritual structure—specifically, the monument and rituals surrounding it—rather than on the relationships that underwrote and were underwritten by them. Non-Mortuary Evidence

What happened between the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods? If ideological systems built on a delicate balance between integration and flexibility were crucial to the success of the Umm an-Nar culture, how is it that this balance became threatened, if indeed that is what is visible in the mortuary record? While the tombs suggest a tension between past and present affiliations, examples in other parts of the archaeological record might provide clues. At Hili, an oasis site in the interior of the Oman Peninsula, the water table fell about 4.5 m over the course of the third millennium BC, from 4 m to 8.5 m below the (ancient) surface (Cleuziou 1989). Lézine (2009) suggested that the climate of Oman was relatively wet until the mid-third millennium BC, when the region shifted toward a more arid climate. At the same time, local hydrological conditions produced varied environments. This variation is quite clear around piedmontane oases such as Bat. Fouache and Desruelles (2010) noted that the modern water table was 17–20 m below surface. In a location three kilometers to the northwest this author has seen animals watering at rude holes dug only a few meters deep. In these kinds of environments and during times of increasing aridity, access to predictable water sources would have been fundamental to success at almost every scale. Matariya—Frifelt’s (2002) Tower 1147—is one of the earliest known towers on the Oman Peninsula. Radiocarbon dating placed its beginnings, when it was a raised mud brick platform with a central stone-lined well, firmly in the Hafit period (Cable 2016). Over time, the structure surrounding the well became larger and more monumental and in the process the central well became less accessible. Considering the importance of a stable water source to an oasis such as ancient Bat, controlling access to the

Making Sense of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition through Its Monuments · 113

wellhead would have been akin to holding the well-being of the community in hand. This would have been true even if the increased structure provided a basic hydro-agricultural advantage (e.g., raising the wellhead may have increased the number of fields to which the water could be routed). Certainly, Umm an-Nar “towers” in general seem to follow an increasing trajectory of aggrandizement, with the earliest towers (i.e., Matariya, 1156) barely identifiable as such, and later towers (e.g., Kasr al-Khafaji, Kasr alRojoom) visibly more monumental (Thornton et al. 2012, 2016). According to Casimir (1992), where a resource such as ghayl (subsurface water) is spatially limited (i.e., to wells) and relatively predictable, access is more likely to resemble a defense of the space itself. It is possible to see the Umm an-Nar tower as a compromise between two competing strategies of access: on the one hand, the horizontal access signaled by the mortuary realm, on which the entire structure of the social system relied; and on the other hand, a space as limited and inaccessible as technology and group effort could make it. In a place like Oman, guarding the territories where wells were located would have been nearly impossible: an endless and fruitless (not to mention counterproductive) activity. Towers, on the other hand, had the “convenience” of requiring only infrequent exertions of great, collective effort. They also limited access both through their location—in the heart of the contemporary settlement, which itself is surrounded by ancestral monuments—and through their very structure. This hypothesis also addresses one of the conundrums facing any Umm an-Nar tower study: that towers seem to have had very little in common beyond being monuments. At the height of the Hafit period, a tower tradition began: at first, towers were made of mud brick, then later of stone (but see 1156; Mortimer 2016). Over time, the features increased in monumentality, as measured by the effort needed to build the structure. The tower tradition began around control of wells as access to ghayl (i.e., limited and crucial resources). But the monumentality of these features exceeded simple access. These monuments were employed to make statements about those at the top (literally and figuratively), and those on top had access to and control of a limited resource. Subsequently, limited physical (and thereby social) access to monumental structures that were already associated with a crucial resource would make it possible for the monument itself to be leveraged by sub-groups within the society to gain ascendance. These individuals or groups need not have been directly involved in agriculture, although there is little doubt that the well water would have served that purpose, just as Ibn

114 · Charlotte Marie Cable

Khaldûn ([1377] 1967) saw oases as belonging to the Bedw (a decentralized tribal society, irrespective of specific subsistence strategies), even though the elite and much of the population were settled. The Umm an-Nar tower was originally both a monument and a means of accessing and, more specifically, a means of limiting access to ghayl. Recent excavations of tower 1156 at Bat (Possehl et al. 2011; Thornton and Mortimer 2012) confirm that the towers that we know were built in the Hafit period were also associated with regular access to water. In addition, the people who controlled towers that continued to be used into the Umm an-Nar period also controlled access to ghayl, the only water source that is consistent year-round rather than seasonal. That is, early tower “success,” measured by its existence as a tower, was based on its association with unvarying access to water. Mortuary and Non-Mortuary Evidence Combined

It is possible that Umm an-Nar culture was so successful in this marginal environment that it began to outstrip its own resources, creating tension between local and regional needs that played out in terms of rights of access. Strategies of unequal gain in middle-range societies require a delicate balancing act; as unequal access, fissioning, and potential inequality grow, more effort is required to maintain ideologies of flexibility, predictability, and cohesion. The balance between tombs and towers continued: both monument types marked access to resources but in precisely opposite ways. In the case of the tomb, participation in the mortuary ritual provided access to the living via resources marked by the dead. In the case of the tower, access to water was limited through social and physical exclusion. These two different types of monuments simultaneously signaled two disparate social ideologies: in one, group members may have sought to access and leverage specific resource nodes; in another, group members sought to use access to specific resources to gain access to an entire network of resources. In the Levant, the evidence for growing social inequality and population constriction at the beginning of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic has led Kuijt (2001) to suggest that mortuary practices that emphasized the solidarity of the group were attempts to limit—or at least to mask—the effects of social inequality as it was taking hold. Porter (2002) contended that multistaged mortuary practices at Tell Banat in northern Mesopotamia were enacted in the face of growing social inequality and that the eventual collapse of Banat was the result of an inability to reconcile social reality and ideology. In the

Making Sense of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition through Its Monuments · 115

same way, mortuary practices in ancient Oman became opportunities to reinforce access, even if, in reality, such access was complicated by other social forces. Conclusion: Monumental Artifacts

This research began with a look at Hafit period mortuary practices, which provide the earliest evidence of region-wide social cohesion and regularized (though not routinized) access to resources. Since the Hafit period there was a shift in third millennium BC social, economic, and environmental arenas as certain resources became increasingly inaccessible. Restrictions on access to resources such as wells may have been a means of leveraging sociopolitical power. For those who were able to take advantage of circumstances and social capital, the well towers may have provided an avenue for aggrandizement. But the limitation of a critical resource flew directly in the face of Hafit and Umm an-Nar strategies of integration. The mortuary realm was used by Hafit and Umm an-Nar groups to make fundamental statements to themselves about themselves, specifically about the essential nature of their groups’ one-ness and about their autonomy within an integrated system. Through time, the primary actors may have shifted from the individual to the group, but the intent of the third millennium BC mortuary realm was inclusion and integration. Abrupt and dramatic cultural change at the end of the Umm an-Nar period suggests that the Hafit-period ideology of local independence and large-scale social solidarity may have become too far removed from the Umm an-Nar’s sociopolitical reality, and was rejected by the Wadi Suq period culture that followed. In Morris’s classic examples, ancient Athenians and Romans used the dead to resolve social conflicts “which defined the groups which had access to political power and through it productive resources” (1991:156) The mortuary record still has much to tell us about third millennium BC life and death in Oman, particularly in terms of understanding exceedingly fragmented Hafit traditions. Yet even with this patchwork of data, it is important to go beyond descriptions of the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods, first to identify changes over time and then to look at potential explanations for those changes and to consider the processes and interactions that fueled them. These changes may be best understood when superimposed against non-mortuary data, particularly when a material phenomenon provides the axis of alignment. The use of monuments in both mortuary

116 · Charlotte Marie Cable

and non-mortuary settings, in the case of third millennium BC Oman, can help us better understand both contexts independently and as major parts of the whole. In this, this chapter follows Goldstein (1995:116) in thinking about above-ground monuments “as artifacts in themselves.” In Goldstein’s case, these artifacts consisted of effigy mounds, many (but by no means all) of which contained burials. Considering the monuments of third millennium BC Oman in this same light is useful for several reasons. First, it at least partially addresses the issues affecting all archaeological surface finds. Reuse, repurposing, weathering, and reconfiguration (including removal and reconstruction) are just some of the factors that come to mind in this regard. Beyond the pragmatics, it allows us to consider that the built landscape has significance that can be viewed, literally, as a single image: the towers are not separate from the tombs, and vice versa. Diachronic and area studies will no doubt refine or refute the arguments presented here, which have been deliberately painted with broad strokes. In particular, it is known that the geographic ranges of tombs and towers overlap but are distinct and that most towers are located only on the inner piedmont of the Al-Hajar Mountains (Cable and Thornton 2013). Thus, while the towers make a reasonable proxy for “settlement” (broadly defined) at ancient oases, they cannot, for example, be used to compare trends in coastal communities. This opens the potential for something quite different along the coast, and future studies that focus on subregional mortuary trends (or that look at mortuary practices across the Arabian Peninsula but are based in similar ecological zones) are likely to provide a much more complex picture of Umm an-Nar culture. Regardless, this framework provides numerous avenues for future research. Acknowledgments

Fieldwork was supported by the Ministry of Heritage & Culture of the Sultanate of Oman, the Bat Archaeological Project of the University of Pennsylvania, and several generous grants from the Department of Anthropology and The Graduate School at Michigan State University. Endless thanks to Lynne Goldstein, who provided both knowledge and wisdom; to Chris Thornton, who gave regional expertise and emotional support; Greg Possehl, who made the opportunity for this research possible; and the many people of the Department of Archaeology and Excavations, Ministry of Heritage & Culture of the Sultanate of Oman—most particularly Mrs. Biubwa al-Sabri, who facilitated numerous aspects of this research. More

Making Sense of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition through Its Monuments · 117

thanks to Kimberly Williams and Lesley Gregoricka (and an anonymous reviewer) for their insights and efforts. Finally, thanks to the people of the villages of Bat, al-Wahrah, and ad-Dariz for their graciousness, interest, willingly given expert local knowledge, and superior coffee and dates. Data Availability Statement

This research took place in the context of two projects: the Bat Archaeological Project of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Anthropology and Archaeology and research conducted in conjunction with the Bat Archaeological Project. Data are stored with the Ministry of Heritage & Culture, Sultanate of Oman, in both the Muscat headquarters and the regional office in Bat. They are also archived with the University of Pennsylvania Museum and are published in an appendix to “Permanence and Impermanence: Structuring Social and Spatial Identity in Ancient Oman” (Cable 2012b). Disposition into a digital repository in KORA (http://kora.matrix. msu.edu/), a national data repository, is ongoing. References Cited Blau, Soren 2001 Fragmentary Endings: A Discussion of 3rd-Millennium BC Burial Practices in the Oman Peninsula. Antiquity 75(289):557–570. Böhme, Manfred 2012 The Recurring Monument: Records on Hafit- and Umm an-Nar Period Tomb Architecture on the Oman Peninsula. In “As Time Goes By?” Monumentality, Landscapes and the Temporal Perspective. Proceedings of the International Workshop “Socio-Environmental Dynamics over the Last 12,000 Years: The Creation of Landscapes II (14th–18th March 2011)” in Kiel, Vol. 2, edited by Martin Furhold, Martin Hinz, and Doris Mischka, pp. 85–94. Habelt, Bonn. 2013 The “Petrographic-Polychrome Style” and the Symbolic Meaning of White Stones in Hafit Grave Architecture. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 43(1):77–84. Cable, Charlotte Marie 2012a Permanence and Impermanence: Structuring Social and Spatial Identity in Ancient Oman. Paper presented at the 111th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, November 18, San Francisco, California. 2012b A Multitude of Monuments: Finding and Defending Access to Resources in 3rd Millennium BC Oman. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Michigan State University, East Lansing. 2016 Excavations at Matariya. In The Bronze Age Towers at Bat, Sultanate of Oman: Research by the American Expedition at Bat, 2007–2012, edited by Christopher P.

118 · Charlotte Marie Cable

Thornton, Charlotte Marie Cable, and Gregory L. Possehl, pp. 49–82. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Cable, Charlotte Marie, and Christopher P. Thornton 2013 Monumentality and the Third Millennium “Towers” of the Oman Peninsula. In Connections and Complexity: New Approaches to the Archaeology of South and Central Asia, edited by S. Abraham, P. Gullapalli, T. Raczek, and U. Rizvi, pp. 375–399. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, California. Casimir, Michael J. 1992 The Dimensions of Territoriality: An Introduction. In Mobility and Territoriality: Social and Spatial Boundaries among Foragers, Fishers, Pastoralists and Peripatetics, edited by Michael J. Casimir and A. Rao, pp. 1–26. St. Martin’s Press, New York. Casimir, Michael J., and A. Rao (editors) 1992 Mobility and Territoriality: Social and Spatial Boundaries among Foragers, Fishers, Pastoralists and Peripatetics. St. Martin’s Press, New York. Cleuziou, Serge 1989 Excavations at Hili 8: A Preliminary Report on the 4th to the 7th Campaigns. Archaeology in the United Arab Emirates 5(1):61–87. Cleuziou, Serge, and Maurizio Tosi (editors) 2007 In the Shadow of the Ancestors: The Prehistoric Foundations of the Early Arabian Civilization in Oman. Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Muscat, Oman. Cleuziou, Serge, and Berkhard Vogt 1983 Umm an-Nar Burial Customs: New Evidence from Tomb A at Hili North. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 13(1):37–52. Döpper, Stephanie, and Conrad Schmidt 2011 Die Grabtürme der Nekropolen von Bat und Al-Ayn im Sultanat Oman. Mitteilungen der Deutsschen Orient-Gesellschaft 143(1):293–321. Dresch, Paul 1989 Tribes, Government, and History in Yemen. Oxford University Press, New York. Fouache, Eric, and Stéphane Desruelles 2010 Report of the Mission of Eric Fouache and Stéphane Desruelles, Bat Archaeological Project. Manuscript on file, Université Paris Ouest Nanterre la Défense (Paris 10), Institut Universitaire de France, EA 375 Gecko and UMR 8591. Frifelt, Karen 1971 Jamdat Nasr Graves in the Oman. Kuml 1971(1):355–383. 2002 Bat, a Center in Third Millennium Oman. In Essays on the Late Prehistory of the Arabian Peninsula, edited by Serge Cleuziou, Maurizio Tosi, and Juris Zarins, pp. 101–110. Serie Orientale Roma XCIII, Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, Rome. Goldstein, Lynne G. 1981 One-Dimensional Archaeology and Multi-Dimensional People: Spatial Organization and Mortuary Analysis. In The Archaeology of Death, edited by R. Chapman, I. Kinnes, and K. Randsborg, pp. 53–69. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1995 Landscape and Mortuary Analysis: A Case for Regional Perspectives. In Re-

Making Sense of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition through Its Monuments · 119

gional Approaches to Mortuary Analysis, edited by Lane A. Beck, pp. 101–121. Plenum Press, New York. Ibn Khaldûn 1967 [1377] The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History. Translated from the Arabic by Franz Rosenthal. 2nd ed. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Janzen, Jorg 1986 Nomads in the Sultanate of Oman: Tradition and Development in Dhofar. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado. Kuijt, Ian 2001 Place, Death, and the Transmission of Social Memory in Early Agricultural Communities of the Near Eastern Pre-Pottery Neolithic. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 10(1):80–99. Lézine, A.-M. 2009 Timing of Vegetation Changes at the End of the Holocene Humid Period in Desert Areas at the Northern Edge of the Atlantic and Indian Monsoon Systems. C. R. Geoscience 341:750–759. McSweeney, Kathleen, Sophie Méry, and Walid Yasin al Tikriti 2010 Life and Death in an Early Bronze Age Community from Hili, Al Ain, UAE. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 45–53. BAR International Series 2107, Archaeopress, Oxford. Méry, Sophie 2010 Results, Limits, and Potential: Burial Practices and Early Bronze Age Societies in the Oman Peninsula. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 33–43. Society for Arabian Studies Monographs No. 10, BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Morris, Ian 1991 The Archaeology of Ancestors: The Saxe/Goldstein Hypothesis Revisited. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1(2):147–169. Mortimer, Anne 2016 Excavations at Tower 1156. In The Bronze Age Towers at Bat, Sultanate of Oman: Research by the American Expedition at Bat, 2007–2012, edited by Christopher P. Thornton, Charlotte Marie Cable, and Gregory L. Possehl, pp. 123–154. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Munoz, Olivia, Royal Omar Ghazal, and Hervé Guy 2012 Use of Ossuary Pits during the Umm an-Nar Period: New Insights on the Complexity of Burial Practices from the Site of Ra’s al-Jinz (RJ1), Oman. In Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 451–467. Travaux de la maison René-Ginouvès, De Boccard, Paris. O’Shea, John M., and Claire McHale Milner 2002 Material Indicators of Territory, Identity, and Interaction in a Prehistoric Tribal System. In The Archaeology of Tribal Societies, edited by W. A. Parkinson, pp. 200–226. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

120 · Charlotte Marie Cable

Porter, Anne 2002 Communities in Conflict: Death and the Contest for Social Order in the Euphrates. Near Eastern Archaeology 65(3):156–173. Possehl, Gregory L., Christopher P. Thornton, and Charlotte M. Cable 2011 Bat 2011: A Report from the American Team. University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. Salvatori, Sandro 1996 Death and Ritual in a Population of Coastal Food Foragers in Oman. In The Prehistory of Asia and Oceania, Vol. 16, edited by G. E. Afanas’ev, S. Cleuziou, J. R. Lukacs and M. Tosi, pp. 205–222. Forli, Rome. 2001 Excavations at the Funerary Structures HD 10–3.1, 3.2, 4.1, 4.2 and 2.1 at Ra’s al-Hadd (Sultanate of Oman). Rivista di Archeologia 25(1):67–77. Saxe, Arthur 1971 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Thornton, Christopher P., Charlotte Marie Cable, and Gregory L. Possehl 2012 Three Seasons at Kasr al-Khafaji (Tower 1146) at Bat, Oman. In South Asian Archaeology 2007: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference of the European Association of South Asian Archaeology, Ravenna: 1. Prehistoric Periods, 255–268. BAR International Series 2454, Archaeopress, Oxford. Thornton, Christopher P., Charlotte Marie Cable, and Gregory L. Possehl (editors) 2016 The Bronze Age Towers at Bat, Sultanate of Oman: Research by the American Expedition at Bat, 2007–2012. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Thornton, Christopher P., and Anne F. Mortimer 2012 The AJBAP 2011–2012 Season at Bat. Manuscript on File, Department of Archaeology and Excavations, Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Muscat, Oman. Thorvildsen, Knud 1962 Burial Cairns on Umm an-Nar. Kuml 1962:191–219. Vogt, Burkard 1985 The Umm an-Nar Tomb A at Hili North: A Preliminary Report on Three Seasons of Excavation, 1982–1984. Archaeology in the United Arab Emirates 4:20–37. Wilkinson, John Craven 1983 Traditional Concepts of Territory in South East Arabia. Geographical Journal 149(3):301–315.

6 Exploring Continuity and Discontinuity from the Early to the Middle Bronze Age in Central Oman The Graveyards of Adam Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

Adam is located on the southern flank of the Al-Hajar Mountains, 60 km to the south of the city of Nizwa in the Sultanate of Oman. The landscape is characterized by the Salakh Arch, a series of mountains 1,014 m above sea level that is isolated from the main range of the Al-Hajar Mountains and crossed by major and minor wadis (Figure 6.1). Five survey and three excavation campaigns by the French Archaeological Mission to Adam have yielded a large amount of data that have facilitated an examination of funerary practices and their evolution from the Early Bronze Age to the Late Iron Age. Here we will deal only with the Early and Middle Bronze Ages (3200–1600 BC) and propose some initial ideas about continuity, change, and social meaning over almost two millennia. In southeastern Arabia, the first phase of the Early Bronze Age (Hafit period, 3200–2700 BC) was called “the great transformation” (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007), as many changes happened across the entirety of the peninsula: new settlement patterns, the first sedentary villages, novel domestic architecture and monumental buildings, long-distance contact with Mesopotamia, and the development of agriculture amid oases. The second phase of the Early Bronze Age (Umm an-Nar Period, 2700–2000 BC) was characterized by both continuity and evolution, including new interregional connections with the Indus Valley, Iran, and Mesopotamia; the development of local copper production and subsequent exportation of these materials;

122 · Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

Figure 6.1. Map of the area of Adam. Credit: Guillaume Gernez/French Archaeological Mission to Adam.

pottery production; wider use of oasis agriculture; and an increase in the number of sedentary settlements. The region as a whole, which Mesopotamian texts refer to as Magan, thus became an actor in international trade. Conversely, the Middle Bronze Age (Wadi Suq period, 2000–1600 BC) was a period of major changes in material culture, funerary practices, and settlement patterns that were likely due to environmental crisis (gradual aridification), the decline of international trade, and internal economic difficulties. This chapter presents an archaeological assessment of the site of Adam and describes how the site may be more broadly contextualized relative to the larger region. The First Graveyards: The Hafit Period in Adam and Jabal Qarah

Several Hafit period necropoles have been discovered in the area of Adam, some of which are comprised of several hundred tombs. Most (but not all) of these tombs contain less than a dozen individuals (Cleuziou and Munoz 2007; Munoz 2011; Munoz et al. 2012; Williams and Gregoricka 2013a), are

Continuity and Discontinuity among the Bronze Age Graveyards of Adam · 123

found across the whole of the Oman Peninsula, and have been debated and discussed since the early 1970s (e.g., Bortolini 2012; Cleuziou and Munoz 2007; Frifelt 1975; Yule and Weisgerber 1995; chapter 7, this volume). In Adam, two main tomb types are recognized: small or medium-sized cairns and larger, taller tower tombs (some of which reached a height of over 5 m at Jabal Qarah). Both are built of dry stone and often have identifiable entrances. During survey, little Hafit period pottery (Jemdet Nasr, presumably imported) was recovered, while more plentiful, recent materials (especially from the Iron Age) such as metal arrowheads and pottery indicate later reuse of the site. Importantly, in most surveyed and excavated Bronze Age necropoles, evidence of Iron Age and Samad burials suggests reuse of earlier tombs. As observed elsewhere in southeastern Arabia, the placement of these tombs is quite remarkable. All were built on the highest points of the landscape, atop hills, terraces, crests, and slopes (Figure 6.2). This situation differs substantially from the previous Neolithic period, when monumentality was absent. Only pit graves from the Neolithic have been recovered within or nearby small dwellings (Cleuziou and Munoz 2007). These tombs were therefore easily noticeable from far distances and give the impression of a well-bounded territory (but see chapter 4, this volume, for a competing argument). They formed defined ensembles identified as necropoles. In some cases, spatial analysis of tomb density showed that their structure was organized according to a “center towards periphery” plan (Giraud 2012). Moreover, the association of these necropoles with settlements coupled with favorable conditions for oasis agriculture (Giraud 2012; Giraud and Cleuziou 2009) might indicate the creation of a territory linked to a new, sedentary way of life. It is interesting to note that more recent funerary structures (or reuse events) such as Umm an-Nar, Wadi Suq, and Iron Age tombs are all located in the vicinity of Hafit necropoles. Near Adam, three large necropoles have already been surveyed (Figures 6.1 and 6.2). The first important necropolis is located along the western end of Jabal Salakh, while the second, larger, necropolis is situated further north, on the hills of the Jabal Qarah. The third surrounds Adam itself and is characterized by tombs located to the west of Jabal Mudhmar (Adam North) and to the east of the Jabal Hinaydil (Adam South) where two excavations are currently being undertaken.

Figure 6.2. Map and picture of Jabal Qarah. Credit: Jessica Giraud/French Archaeological Mission to Adam.

Continuity and Discontinuity among the Bronze Age Graveyards of Adam · 125

The Necropolis of West Jabal Salakh

The Hafit period necropolis located west of Jabal Salakh contains fifty small and medium-sized Hafit period tower tombs identified among a total of over 150 archaeological structures. The tombs, which are situated in high places along the lateral crests of the jebel, all dominate the wadi and lower terraces, where Wadi Suq tombs similar to those found in the Adam North graveyard have been found. Here again, Hafit-type tombs marked the funerary landscape, which was also organized from the center (looking over the wadi) to the periphery. This area gathers the waters of the Wadi ’Umayri, which would have made oasis agriculture possible during this period (as it is today). Several small modern gardens were positioned close to the site. The Necropolis of the Jabal Qarah

The Jabal Qarah Necropolis is the largest and best preserved in the Adam region. It is located 20 km to the north of Adam and lies on a series of rocky hills near the Wadi Halfayn. To date, only one-third of this area (750 ha on a total of 2,300 ha) has been surveyed. Thus far 324 tombs have been found, including tower tombs 5 to 6 meters high (Figure 6.2). Located on the tops of hills, crests, and sometimes along slopes, these funerary structures are highly concentrated in the northeast and southeast parts of the jebel. Graves were constructed to be visible across long distances and appear to have marked territory (Giraud 2012; Saxe 1970). In several cases, pottery and metal artifacts found in these graves can be linked to reuse during the Iron Age. No settlement has been identified, although evidence of settlement could be hidden by meters of windblown sediment. The Hafit Necropoles of Adam

A large Hafit period necropolis occupied the two jebels (which have flat summits, crests, and slopes) that surrounded the oasis. They can be divided into two main parts (possibly representing two separate necropoles): the northern portion near Jabal Mudhmar and the western/southern portion near Jabal Hinaydil. Around 200 Hafit-type cairns and tower tombs (medium-sized mortuary structures 1–3 meters high built with local hard limestone) have been recorded. The tombs were badly preserved because of the poor quality of the limestone and because of looting and reuse events.

Figure 6.3. (a) Jabal Qara and (b) Adam North graveyard. Credits: Guillaume Gernez/French Archaeological Mission to Adam (a) and Olivier Barge/French Archaeological Mission to Adam (b).

Continuity and Discontinuity among the Bronze Age Graveyards of Adam · 127

Analysis of the organization of the necropolis through its tomb density revealed an empty center (in the plain, where the oasis is still located) and two dense groups of graves forming the periphery. No graves or other structures have been found in the center, suggesting that Early Bronze Age oasis gardens and domestic dwellings may have been located there, near areas where water was available and where gardens still exist today, but were destroyed by later settlements, modern development of the area, and by successive millennia of agricultural work. This may support the hypothesis linking sedentary life and the new funerary landscape that appeared during this period, even though dwellings have not yet been discovered (Cleuziou and Munoz 2007; Giraud 2012). The later graveyards of the Umm an-Nar, Wadi Suq, and Iron Age periods are located amid or in close proximity to the Hafit period two-part necropolis (described below as the Adam South and Adam North excavations). From the Umm an-Nar period, tombs were built on low-lying plains (Figure 6.3), and their visibility and monumentality were maintained by the tomb builders but with a new conception of space and with placement closer to probable settlements and gardens. During the Umm an-Nar, there was no apparent need to occupy the tops of crests and hills since this highly visible funerary landscape already existed: Hafit people lived and died, as Serge Cleuziou and Maurizio Tosi have said, in the shadow of their ancestors (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007). Adam South Graveyard The site at Adam South is located on the plain near the eastern foothills of Jabal Hinaydil and is surrounded by two small wadis that mark the limits of the site. Several possible Haft-type tombs on the crests of the foothills are present, but the graveyard itself lies on the flat center of the glacis, which is oriented west–east with a very slight slope. Tomb density here is important: 46 structures have been found in an area of only 200m × 70m (Figure 6.4a). To be clear, we use “grave” as a generic term for most types of funerary structures of the second and first millennia BC. The graves of the western part of the graveyard were very close to each other and appear to have been similar in structural organization (e.g., circular shape, small size). In contrast, tombs of all shapes and sizes were present in the eastern portion of the graveyard. It should be mentioned that there were no other tombs in the vicinity, even though these locales were environmentally similar.

128 · Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

Figure 6.4. (a) Schematic map of Adam South graveyard; (b) Grave 2000, view from the north; (c) Grave 2006, view from the west; (d) Grave 2007, view from the east; (e) detail of the reused facing stone from Grave 2000. Credits: Jessica Giraud/French Archaeological Mission to Adam (a); Guillaume Gernez/French Archaeological Mission to Adam (b and d); Guillaume Gernez/French Archaeological Mission to Adam (c); Guillaume Gernez/French Archaeological Mission to Adam (d).

Six tombs of different shapes were excavated in the eastern graveyard in order to develop a typological and chronological overview of the site. At least four major periods have been identified from these excavations and surveys: Umm an-Nar, Wadi Suq, Iron Age, and Late Iron Age (Samad) reuse. Only the first two will be presented in this chapter.

Continuity and Discontinuity among the Bronze Age Graveyards of Adam · 129

Umm an-Nar Tomb 2000 Tomb 2000 dates to the Umm an-Nar period. During survey, only a few pottery sherds found on the surface of a very flat, large circular structure indicated the presence of the tomb. Excavation confirmed that this tomb was almost destroyed because of the plundering of its facing stones, foundation, and wall stones (Figure 6.4b). However, several parts have been preserved so that the architecture remains at least partially understood. The tomb was 9.5 m in diameter, was stone-paved, and was surrounded by a circular wall. Only the large foundation slabs remained, although some facing stones made of finely worked limestone dressed on five sides have also been discovered in the collapsed layer surrounding the tomb. Two internal parallel walls (oriented east–west) made of large stone slabs divided the tomb into three parts: three chambers or perhaps two chambers and one corridor. Despite the destruction of a large portion of the tomb and its contents, 8,267 human bone fragments were identified. Most skeletal remains were badly preserved and highly fragmented, so the minimum number of individuals (MNI, which was obtained from a count of the left calcaneus) is likely an underestimate of the true number of individuals initially interred in the tomb. We recovered evidence of 23 adults and 2 children (under 10 years of age). While human bone was recovered throughout the entire tomb, only the less-damaged northeastern portion of this structure revealed whole long bones, ossa coxae, and portions of crania. These were found amid the top layers, while smaller bones (particularly of the hands and feet) were recovered clustered in lower layers. No intentional organization was observed. This is quite common in this type of communal interment where bones became commingled during contemporaneous funerary use (Bortolini 2012) or during later looting events. Like its bones, most of the mortuary goods were broken, perhaps during stone looting or as a result of tomb use itself. Copper objects and carnelian beads have been found, and of course ceramic sherds were prevalent. Blackpainted fine red ware and painted grey ware (imported from southeastern Iran or Baluchistan) and sherds of small storage jars with meandering cordon, possibly representing snakes, could support a mid-third millennium BC date (Jarrige et al. 2011). On the other hand, chlorite rectangular boxes may suggest a late third millennium date (David 2011; Potts 2008). Taking this evidence into account along with the similarities between the size,

130 · Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

shape, and quality of facing stones at Hili (Méry 2010), Tomb 2000 was likely in use between circa 2500 and 2300 BC. A similar grave is known at Bat (55B), but only a schematic plan has been published (Frifelt 1975). Wadi Suq Graves 2005, 2006, and 2007 Most other excavated graves at Adam South appear to date to the Wadi Suq period, but as all were looted and/or reused, this estimate was based on their structural similarities with graves from other sites in the peninsula (e.g., Samad ash Shan S101110 and S2126 [Yule 2001], Adam North [Gernez and Giraud 2015]). The size of the chambers and known regional parallels indicate that each grave likely contained a single interment (e.g., Buhais BHS 3 [Jasim 2012]). Grave 2005: This simple rectangular stone-lined grave was surrounded by a single, oval ring of stones. Despite a lack of in situ material culture, its architecture—which is well known in Adam North—indicates a Wadi Suq date (Righetti 2012). Grave 2006: Partly destroyed and reused, this tomb was similar to Tomb 2005 but lacked a ring wall. The rare stone discovered around the grave most likely came from episodes of looting. This rectangular stone-lined grave had a subterranean chamber orientated north–south (Figure 6.4c). The undisturbed northern end of the tomb contained a skull and a Wadi Suq painted bowl similar to that recovered at Shimal (Velde 2003) and Hili 8 period III (Righetti and Cleuziou 2010). Both of these finds were crushed by large roof stones that are similar to the foundation stones of the Umm an-Nar Tomb 2000. This makes it likely that this Wadi Suq roof stone came from the looting of Tomb 2000. Grave 2007: The small cist Grave 2007 (Figure 6.4d), which is located very close to the other graves, was nearly empty but had the same north– south orientation as Graves 2005 and 2006. The stones that formed the cist could have originated from the foundations of Tomb 2000, particularly a white Umm an-Nar facing stone recovered from the tomb’s northwestern corner (Figure 6.3e). Possible Wadi Suq Tomb 2001 Tomb 2001 was a wide stone monument constructed directly atop bedrock and topped by a stone tumulus. The structure consisted of a succession of concentric circles: the first layer was laid directly on the ground, and the others (at least three have been identified) rose until they reached the

Continuity and Discontinuity among the Bronze Age Graveyards of Adam · 131

burial chamber atop the mound, which is orientated east–west. Iron arrowheads found inside date to the Samad period, but it is difficult to date the construction of this tomb precisely, because according to its shape and architecture, it could have been constructed during the Wadi Suq. Several large circular graves are also known in Adam North. Summary: Early and Middle Bronze Age Tombs in Adam South During the Hafit period, a dozen small cairns (unexcavated, but possibly containing several individuals each) were built along the crests of the jebel and piedmonts close to the site. After several centuries, a large collective Umm an-Nar tomb was built on the plain below, “in the shadow of the ancestors” (i.e., highly placed Hafit period tombs), and then later abandoned. There is evidence of the almost complete looting of Umm an-Nar stones (including facing stones and foundation stones) used to construct later graves, including (and maybe exclusively) Wadi Suq tombs. No continuity was observed between Umm an-Nar and Wadi Suq funerary traditions nor any respect given to older tombs by the newcomers, who dismantled Umm an-Nar structures to build Wadi Suq tombs. Nevertheless, the graveyard was used during both periods, possibly even until the end of the Iron Age. Because the plains surrounding the graveyard were empty and because the graveyard was concentrated in a small area, the inhabitants of each period were likely motivated to construct their tombs precisely in the same places as their ancestors. More than continuity of the settlement, this fact seems to indicate a possible awareness of the specific purpose and corresponding symbolism of the area. It could also be linked to the presence of valued raw materials (e.g., building stones), starting with the first Umm an-Nar tomb, whose stones were conveniently located nearby for reuse during the construction of tombs in the Wadi Suq period. Adam North Graveyard The Adam North Graveyard (also called Qala’a) is located near the foothills of Jabal Mudhmar, mostly on the gravelly surface of the plain (glacis), in the suburbs of the modern village of Adam. In 2007, 138 tombs were located on the western tip of the Jabal Mudhmar, along the northeastern side of Adam. This total grows to 178 if the Hafit-type tombs on the tops of the hills are included (Giraud et al. 2012). The graveyard extended across three main areas: the northern part, which was separated from the center by a small wadi that cut across the plain; the central part, which contained a high density

132 · Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

Figure 6.5. Map of Adam North graveyard. Insets: (a) Grave 1001, view from the east; (b) Grave 1013, view from the west; (c) Grave 1017, view from the west; (d) Grave 1029, view from the east. Credit: Guillaume Gernez/French Archaeological Mission to Adam.

of tombs, 37 of which have been excavated (Figure 6.5); and the southern portion of the graveyard, which was also very dense. Tombs can be divided into five main types, including an Umm an-Nar tomb that has been fully presented elsewhere (Gernez and Giraud 2015). The following describes a sample of this Early and Middle Bronze Age tomb typology.

Continuity and Discontinuity among the Bronze Age Graveyards of Adam · 133

Umm an-Nar Tomb 1001 Before excavation, Tomb 1001 was a very low and wide circular mound only around 20 cm above ground level. After the first cleaning, this Umm an-Nar tomb was revealed to be approximately 6 m in diameter, with a perfectly circular external wall 1 m wide, including facing stones positioned over a plinth (Figure 6.5a). The chamber was fully paved and a centrally placed wall divided the space into two chambers. Only a few traces of eroded bone were found and a single bead represented the only material culture preserved. As in Adam South, stone looting was almost complete. Size, morphology, and architectural characteristics (especially the form and quality of facing stones, which were flat and roughly dressed) suggested that this grave could date earlier than the Adam South Umm an-Nar tomb (with comparable parallels at Hili H, Phase 1 [Méry 2010]), but the lack of preserved funerary material and bones did not allow firm confirmation of this date. Regardless, it remains certain that, as in Adam South, this tomb was the first to be built on the plain. Additional evidence indicated the presence of a few other unexcavated Umm an-Nar tombs in the graveyard. Wadi Suq Graves 1017, 1029, and 1013 Very few (or no) human bones were found in tomb levels associated with Wadi Suq vessels and weapons throughout the entire graveyard. The absence of human skeletal remains is likely attributable to the nature of the soil and to the standing water from rain entering the structure that caused the complete disintegration of the bones interred. However, from the size of the chamber, the types and location of artifacts (chlorite pots, bronze-socketed spearheads, and tanged daggers), and known parallels (Jasim 2012; Righetti 2012; Yule 1999), it is likely that at one point, these Wadi Suq graves contained individual (or double) interments (Righetti 2012). Grave 1017: Grave 1017 consisted of a small oval stone construction built over a subterranean pit. Its chamber had a wall made of medium-size stone blocks (Figure 6.5c) and was largely empty except for a small chlorite suspension vessel discovered in the northwestern wall and an associated lid under a large flat stone slab in the northeast corner. The chlorite pot can be dated to the early Wadi Suq period based on similarities with vessels recovered at Shimal Tomb SH99 (David 1996). Several iron fragments in the grave suggest that the tomb was plundered and later reused for a new interment during the Samad period (also subsequently looted). Graves of

134 · Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

this type were located in the western part of the graveyard; similar parallels are well known in Samad (Yule 2001). Grave 1029: This oval, stone-lined grave was surrounded by a larger ring of stones (Figure 6.5d). The eastern side of this ring was no longer preserved, but at least one layer of stones encircling the tomb remained. The grave consisted of a subterranean chamber oriented north–south that was lined with a wall that had partially collapsed into the chamber. It was built with three layers of stone blocks and tiered, corbelled, flat stones that were still in place along the southeastern and southwestern sides (28–45 cm long, ca. 10 cm thick). Inside the tomb itself, two bronze spearheads embedded in gritty compact sediment were discovered near the southeastern corner of the chamber, next to a few collapsed stones, and a chlorite lid near the opposite corner. Even though two variants of this grave type were recognized in Adam North (depending on tomb size), the concept was the same: an oval chamber dug in the soil, lined with stones, and oriented north–south and a ring wall around the whole of the tumulus made of stones and sand. Again, all were located in the western part of the Adam North Graveyard. For both variants, Wadi Suq objects were discovered in the lower level of the tomb, including spearheads and chlorite vessels. Parallels are well known in Samad (Yule 2001) and in Wadi Suq and Bidya 5A (Righetti 2012). Grave 1013: This circular grave 6 m in diameter contained a small ovoid above-ground chamber (2.1 m by 0.9 m) orientated east–west and surrounded by a wall made of large slabs and one or two concentric ring walls made of large triangular white limestone blocks. The second row was only present to the east and the north. The gap between the circular rows and the chamber wall was filled with medium-size stones, gravel, and small limestone blocks (Figure 6.5b). The southern part of the grave was damaged, with a portion of the wall missing on the inside, either because the stones were removed and used for another purpose, or because they were worn by erosion. The burial chamber was built atop the ground using two or three layers of large slabs that measured up to 0.60 m by 0.60 m. It was later filled with loose sand and small bone fragments following a looting event. There was no evidence of corbelling. Since no stones have been found inside the chamber, it is possible that the roof was made of wood or other perishable materials. While it is difficult to ascertain the original height, it is likely that this grave had only two or three layers of stones. In other graves of this type, evidence of single, primary burials have been observed but with

Continuity and Discontinuity among the Bronze Age Graveyards of Adam · 135

no associated material culture, making it difficult to know whether these skeletons belonged to the original grave or to a later reuse event. In Adam North, this tomb type was situated in the eastern portion of the graveyard on the plain or on the slope. Comparisons can be made with Bawshar Tomb B1 (Costa et al. 1999), which corroborate its Wadi Suq date, and with Bidya 5B and 5C, Jebel al-Buhais, and Wa’as (Righetti 2012). Summary: Early and Middle Bronze Age Graves in Adam North Beginning in the Umm an-Nar period, local inhabitants at the site started building their tombs on the flat plain near the piedmont of Jabal Mudhmar, once again in the shadow of the Hafit-type tombs located on the mountain’s crests. At least one Umm an-Nar tomb (Tomb 1001) has been identified during excavation. However, while the graveyard’s main phase of construction was the Early Wadi Suq period, it is difficult to pinpoint the exact chronology of these second-millennium graves. The large circular type with concentric walls (e.g., Grave 1013), located in the eastern part of the graveyard and on the slope, could be a transitional type inspired by Umm an-Nar tradition. However, the single rectangular chamber containing one to three individuals was a novel development. While this type may be older than other Wadi Suq tombs in the western portion of the graveyard, these architectural and spatial differences could likewise suggest differences in social status among the deceased. The other graves (individual interments, stone-lined graves with or without external ring walls—see Graves 1017 and 1029) contained artifacts of the same categories and types and were probably contemporaneous. Two main lines of evidence allow us to suggest this chronology: 1) changes in the height of tomb stone walls (very high for Umm an-Nar Tomb 1001, high for the transitional large oval/circular graves, and lower for the other supposed Wadi Suq graves); and 2) the almost complete destruction of two graves of the large type, which were clearly used as a stone quarry, while Wadi Suq graves remained intact except for the chamber, which was often reused. With one exception, sometime after the Wadi Suq period (probably a short time span in the beginning of this period, according to the homogeneity of vessels and bronze objects), no new graves were constructed in the Adam North Graveyard. The only clear evidence of a later grave is a circular tomb dated to the Middle Iron Age (1000–600 BC). Nevertheless, Wadi Suq graves continued to be reused up until the Samad period, when larger Wadi Suq graves were reopened in order to inter a single individual before being carefully closed.

136 · Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

As at Adam South, the Adam North graveyard demonstrated a mortuary structural evolution from the Hafit period to the Umm an-Nar period, followed by a more dramatic change in tomb typologies between the Umm an-Nar and Wadi Suq periods. Additionally, as at Adam South, the continuity of the graveyard is obvious, despite several differences in the size, placement, and density of tombs. Subsequently, these two graveyards seem to have shared the same history. Discussion and Preliminary Conclusions

How do we explain the evolution of these funerary practices and the corresponding continuity of tomb morphology? Several levels of interpretation that are probably linked can be proposed. The evolution from the Hafit period to the Umm an-Nar period seems to be linked to economic and demographic development. There is an obvious continuity between the two periods as evidenced by funerary practices (Potts 2012; Williams and Gregoricka 2013a). In contrast, the transition from the Umm an-Nar period to the Wadi Suq period is characterized by a series of changes in mortuary traditions, settlement types and patterns, and material culture. Such major changes may be related to corresponding changes in social organization (Cleuziou 2006; Magee 2014) and ways of life (the population became partly nomadic), economic crisis due to a decrease in trade with southern Mesopotamia following the fall of Ur, and difficulties with subsistence strategies caused by aridification (Gregoricka 2016). For these reasons, the spatial continuity between the Umm an-Nar and Wadi Suq periods in the Adam North and Adam South graveyards was unexpected. This continuity may be linked to the continued occupation of local settlements; if this continuity is in fact the case, it would partly contradict the idea of a major change in social organization between Umm an-Nar and Wadi Suq ways of life. Moreover, the evidence at Adam South, where tombs and graves of both periods were deliberately concentrated in a small area, leads us to conclude that settlement location is not the primary or the only explanation. Continuity in space could also simply have been pragmatic: raw materials from older Umm an-Nar graves provided easy access to stone “quarries.” This may at least partially explain the looting of Umm an-Nar tombs for stone. The fact that the Umm an-Nar period graves were looted seems to show that Wadi Suq period communities did not respect the earlier graves. This behavior has also been observed for the Umm

Continuity and Discontinuity among the Bronze Age Graveyards of Adam · 137

an-Nar period itself, at Hili 8 period II, where it seems clear that inhabitants did not hesitate to reuse facing stones from graves made by previous Umm an-Nar people (Méry 2010). It is also possible, though less probable, that stones were reused as a way to evoke the memory of ancient peoples. Were these people able to understand the meaning of the former spatial landscape (both Hafit and Umm an-Nar), and did they occupy the same location for a symbolic purpose or a practical one? There is little doubt that the inhabitants of the Oman Peninsula during the Wadi Suq period were able to recognize the human bones and artifacts they found during the plundering of old graves and thus were able to identify the funerary past of these places. If they did choose to locate their graveyards near older graves not only for pragmatic but also symbolic reasons, two quite contradictory explanations can be proposed: either later inhabitants recognized the funerary purpose and symbolism of the natural and constructed landscape linked to people considered ancestors, so they installed graves around them with the idea of continuity; or the later inhabitants understood the funerary purpose of the graves but wanted to delineate their own territory by erasing the past and occupying this place in their present. Further research at Adam and comparisons with data from other sites with similar evidence of continuity (e.g., Bat [Williams and Gregoricka 2013b], Ra’s al-Jinz RJ-1 [Monchablon et al. 2003], Hili 8 [Cleuziou 1989], and Tell Abraq [Potts 2000]) should continue to inform our understanding of the transition between the Umm an-Nar and Wadi Suq periods in the Oman Peninsula. Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Department of Archaeology of the Omani Ministry of Heritage and Culture for making this research possible at Adam. Our thanks also go to our friends in Adam, to the workers who helped us in the field, and to all the members of the French Archaeological Mission to Adam who played an essential role in the survey and excavations of the graveyards. In chronological order, they are Sabrina Righetti, Julien Charbonnier, Emilie Portat, Christophe Sévin-Allouet, Marie Grousset, Julie Delmotte, Ali al-Mahrooqi, Olivier Blin, Aude Simoni, Vincent Le Quellec, Claire Bernard, Laëtitia Munduteguy, Marion Lemée, Khamis al-Asmi, Yannick Prouin, Anne Benoist, Victoria De Castéja, Julie Goy, Mathilde Cervel, Damien Arhan, Mathilde Jean, Hugo Naccaro, Aurélie Paci, Clélia Paladre, Elodie Germain, Olivier Barge, Emmanuelle

138 · Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

Regagnon, Pascal Rieunier, Xavier Desormeau-Bedot, Louise Neuville, Morgane Rossignol, and Waleed Almandhari. We also thank Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley Gregoricka for their advice and their invitation to contribute to this book. References Cited Bortolini, Eugenio 2012 The Early Bronze Age of the Oman Peninsula: From Chronology to Evolution. In Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 353–369. Travaux de la maison René-Ginouvès, De Boccard, Paris. Cleuziou, Serge 1989 Excavations at Hili 8: A Preliminary Report on the 4th to 7th Campaigns. Archaeology in the United Arab Emirates 5:61–85. 2006 La société de Magan à l’âge du Bronze: Entre tribu et État. In L’Etat, le pouvoir, les prestations et leurs formes en Mesopotamie ancienne: Actes du colloque assyriologique franco-tcheque, Paris, 7–8 Nov. 2002, edited by Petr Charvát, Bertrand Lafont, Jana Mynářová, and Lukáš Pecha, pp. 43–66. Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Filozofická faculta, Prague. Cleuziou, Serge, and Olivia Munoz 2007 Les morts en société: Une interpretation des sépultures collectives d’Oman à l’âge du Bronze. In Pratiques funéraires et sociétés: Nouvelles approaches en archéologie et en anthropologie sociale, edited by Luc Baray, Patrice Brun, and Alain Testard, pp. 295–319. Presses Universitaires de Dijon, Dijon. Cleuziou, Serge, and Maurizio Tosi (editors) 2007 In the Shadow of the Ancestors: The Prehistoric Foundations of the Early Arabian Civilization in Oman. Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Muscat. Costa, Paolo M., Germana Graziosi Costa, Paul Yule, Kari Kunter, Carl Phillips, and Ali b. Ahmad b. Bakhit al Schanfari 1999 Archaeological Research in the Area of Muscat. In Studies in the Archaeology of the Sultanate of Oman, edited by Paul Yule, pp. 19–23. Orient Archäologie Band 3. Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden. David, Hélène 1996 Styles and Evolution: Soft Stone Vessels during the Bronze Age in the Oman Peninsula. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 26:31–46. 2011 Les vases en chlorite. In Protohistoire de l’oasis d’al-Ain, Travaux de la Mission archaeologique francaise a Abou Dhabi (Emirats arabes unis): Les sepultures de l’age du Bronze, edited by Serge Cleziou, Sophie Mery, and Burkhard Vogt, pp. 184–201. BAR International Series 2227. Archaeopress, Oxford. Frifelt, Karen 1975 A possible link between the Jemdet Nasr and the Umm an-Nar graves of Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 2:57–73.

Continuity and Discontinuity among the Bronze Age Graveyards of Adam · 139

Gernez, Guillaume, and Jessica Giraud 2015 Protohistoric Graveyards in Adam (Oman): Preliminary Report on the 2013 and 2014 Seasons of the French Archaeological Mission to Adam. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 45:107–122. Giraud, Jessica 2012 Les espaces du passé: L’exemple du Ja’alan à la période Hafit. In Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 133–151. Travaux de la maison René-Ginouvès, De Boccard, Paris. Giraud, Jessica, Julien Charbonnier, Guillaume Gernez, Marion Lemée, and Sabrina Righetti 2012 Occupation ancienne dans la région d’Ādam (Sultanat d’Oman) du Néolithique à la période préislamique. Arabian Humanities 17. Accessed August 20, 2018. http://cy.revues.org/1841. Giraud, Jessica, and Serge Cleuziou 2009 Funerary Landscape as Part of the Social Landscape and its Perceptions: Three Thousand early Bronze Age Burials in the Eastern Ja’alan (Sultanate of Oman). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 39:163–180. Gregoricka, Lesley A. 2016 Human Response to Climate Change during the Umm an-Nar/Wadi Suq Transition in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 26(2): 211–220. Jarrige, Jean-François, Aurore Didier, and Gonzague Quivron 2011 Shar-i Sokhta and the Chronology of the Indo-Iranian Regions. Paléorient 37(2): 7–34. Jasim, Sabah Abboud 2012 The Necropolis of Jebel al-Buhais: Prehistoric Discoveries in the Emirate of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Department of Culture and Information, Sharjah. Magee, Peter 2014 The Archaeology of Prehistoric Arabia: Adaptation and Social Formation from the Neolithic to the Iron Age. Cambridge World Archaeology, Cambridge. Méry, Sophie 2010 Results, Limits and Potential: Burial Practices and Early Bronze Age Societies in the Oman Peninsula. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 33–43. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Monchablon, Cécile, Rémy Crassard, Olivia Munoz, Hervé Guy, Gaëlle Bruley-Chabot, and Serge Cleuziou 2003 Excavations at Ra’s al-Jinz RJ-1: Stratigraphy without Tells. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 42: 31–47. Munoz, Olivia 2011 Étude anthropologique des restes humains des cairns C2 et C3 du Jebel Hafit (1977). In Protohistoire de l’oasis d’al-Aïn, Travaux de la Mission archéologique française à Abou Dhabi: 1. Les sépultures de l’âge du Bronze, edited by Serge Cleuziou, Sophie Méry, and Burkhard Vogt, pp. 218–224. BAR International Series 2227. Archaeopress, Oxford.

140 · Guillaume Gernez and Jessica Giraud

Munoz, Olivia, Royal O. Ghazal, and Hervé Guy 2012 Use of Ossuary Pits during the Umm an-Nar Period: New Insights on the Complexity of Burial Practices from the Site of Ra’s al-Jinz (RJ-1), Oman. In Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 451–467. Travaux de la maison René-Ginouvès, De Boccard, Paris. Potts, Daniel T. 2000 Ancient Magan. The Secrets of Tell Abraq. London: Trident Press. 2008 An Umm an-Nar-type compartmented soft-stone vessel from Gonur Depe, Turkmenistan. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 18:167–180. 2012 The Hafit–Umm an-Nar Transition: Evidence from Falaj al-Qaba’il and Jabal al-Emalah. In Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 371–377. Travaux de la maison RenéGinouvès, De Boccard, Paris. Righetti, Sabrina 2012 Analyse des pratiques funéraires à l’âge du Bronze Moyen et Récent dans la Péninsule omanaise: Une fenêtre ouverte sur la société. In Aux marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 379–385. Travaux de la maison René-Ginouvès, De Boccard, Paris. Righetti, Sabrina, and Serge Cleuziou 2010 The Wādī Sūq Pottery: A Typological Study of the Pottery Assemblage at Hili 8 (UAE). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 40:283–292. Saxe, Arthur 1970 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Velde, Christian 2003 Wadi Suq and Late Bronze Age in the Oman Peninsula. In Archaeology of the United Arab Emirates: Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Archaeology of the U.A.E., edited by Daniel Potts, Hasan Al Naboodah, and Peter Hellyer, pp. 102–113. Trident Press, London. Williams, Kimberly D., and Lesley Gregoricka 2013a The Social, Spatial, and Bioarchaeological Histories of Ancient Oman Project: The Mortuary Landscape of Dhank. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(2):134–150. 2013b SoBo 2012–2013: A Report for the Ministry of Heritage and Culture. Report to Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Sultanate of Oman. . Yule, Paul 1999 ‘Amla/al Zahira—Späteisenzeitliche Gräberfelder. In Studies in the Archaeology of the Sultanate of Oman, edited by Paul Yule, pp. 119–186. Orient Archäologie Band 3. Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden. 2001 Die Gräberfelder in Samad al Shan (Sultanat Oman). Orient Archäologie Band 4. Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden. Yule, Paul, and Gerd Weisgerber 1998 Prehistoric Tower Tombs at Shir/Jaylah, Sultanate of Oman. Beiträge zur allgemeinen und vergleichenden Archäologie 18:184–241.

7 A Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Prehistoric Monumental Burials of Southeastern Arabia Eugenio Bortolini

Research on Early Bronze Age (ca. 3200–2000 BC) southeastern Arabia (encompassing Oman and United Arab Emirates [UAE]) has long been interwoven with the study of the thousands of monumental tombs built during the third millennium BC. Although our knowledge of Early Bronze Age settlements and subsistence activities is growing, these monumental stone tombs and their contents are still the best source of information on the past in the region. Karen Frifelt (1975a) was the first to investigate the chronological typology of these mortuary monuments. She described Jemdet Nasr tombs (ca. 3000 BC), Beehive tombs (early third millennium BC, later grouped into Hafit-type cairns with the Jemdet Nasr type), Umm an-Nar tombs (early to late third millennium BC), Wadi Suq tombs (ca. 2000–1300 BC), and Iron Age tombs (ca. first millennium BC). More recent studies have greatly improved our understanding of the complex funerary practices from this period, and while the basic typological subdivision proposed by Frifelt has been maintained as a general reference, the parameters archaeologists use to define tomb types have been expanded and stretched in order to encompass the emerging variability of the archaeological record. Today, third millennium BC tombs are commonly divided into Hafit-type cairns and Umm an-Nar tombs (e.g., Cleuziou and Tosi 2007). While this subdivision is the convention, many debates focus on the issue of potentially transitional structural forms (Potts 2012; Williams and Gregoricka 2013). The idea of continuous funerary development from one end of the spectrum to the other (Frifelt 1975a; Potts 1986; Vogt 1985) has often permeated

142 · Eugenio Bortolini

the study of Early Bronze Age funerary structures. Cleuziou (2002) has suggested that the development of Bronze Age civilization in eastern Arabia may be ascribed to mechanisms of gradual change with no significant chronological hiatus. Recently, more substantial evidence has emerged from fieldwork that confirms the possibility of continuity between earlier and later forms (Bortolini 2012; Potts 2012; Williams and Gregoricka 2013) and within types (Méry 2010). The first explicit exploration of the possible evolutionary links between different tomb types and their variants can be found in Burkhard Vogt’s unpublished PhD dissertation (Vogt 1985), which contained various hypotheses about tomb evolution and a schematic graphical representation of the diachronic development he inferred for monumental burials of the region. In Vogt’s view, Hafit-type cairns developed from simpler Neolithic pit graves (Salvatori 2007). Around 2600–2500 BC, a sort of “mutation” appeared in which Hafit-type monuments were built with internal partitions (as in the case of Tomb 1137 and 1138 at Bat, Oman; Frifelt 1975a) and an explosion of different tomb forms took place. Thus, for Vogt, later Umm an-Nar tombs represented further elaborations of this first concept of subdivision resulting in multiple chambers. The underlying assumption is a gradual increase in structural complexity and articulation, accompanied by more elaborate external dressing and a stronger sense of monumentality. More recent works have offered quantitative study of funerary structures, from the point of view of building techniques (Gagnaison et al. 2004; Méry 2010) and of possible links between structural change and specific kinds of grave goods (e.g., beads and chlorite vessels; Benton 2006). However, open questions remain about the complexity of the trajectory monumental tombs may have followed during the third millennium BC in the region. These issues include the many different processes of knowledge transfer and human interaction and the differential adoption of particular structural variants. Over the past 30 years, a thorough analysis of change over time in material expressions of human culture has been the main objective of a rich and incredibly prolific tradition of cross-disciplinary research. This vein of studies draws on the now-established parallels between processes regulating genetic and cultural evolution, labeled as “dual inheritance theory” or “cultural evolutionary theory.” This framework developed from the quantitative study of the coevolution of genes and culture (Cavalli-Sforza and Feldman 1981) and relies on the definition of culture as information, which is taught, imitated, and learned between groups or individuals and between

Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Monumental Burials of Arabia · 143

generations over time (Boyd and Richerson 1985). This approach makes it possible to model the mechanisms that underlie cultural transmission within the same generation (horizontal transmission) and between generations over time (vertical and oblique transmission; Boyd and Richerson 1985; Cavalli-Sforza and Feldman 1981). In this framework, some cultural elements are consistently transferred and adopted because of inherent qualities that make them more suitable for performing a task or because of the systematic preferences acting on a relevant part of the population in a particular moment in time (e.g., conformism, anti-conformism, model bias, particular social values; Henrich 2001). On the other hand, some cultural information is passed on and copied over time with no link to a particular preference or to specific functional requirements. In this case (a process defined as unbiased transmission), cultural transmission takes place with no direct bias and the probability of adoption of a given cultural variant is simply a function of time, the frequency of the variant in the past, the amount of copying errors, the amount of interaction between individuals or groups, and demographic pressure (Bentley and Shennan 2003; Neiman 1995; Shennan and Wilkinson 2001; Steele, Glatz, and Kandler 2010). Models of unbiased transmission closely resemble theoretical models of random genetic drift and are particularly useful because they offer a working null hypothesis against which unexpected deviations due to specific selective biases can be tested. Theories and methods of cultural evolution have been widely adopted in archaeology and have generated a great amount of contributions, including cultural phylogenies (Cochrane and Lipo 2010; Collard et al. 2006; Eerkens and Lipo 2007; Henrich 2001, 2004; Neiman 1995; O’Brien and Lyman 2003; Powell et al. 2009; Shennan and Wilkinson 2001; Steele, Jordan, and Cochrane 2010; Tehrani et al. 2010). Cultural phylogenetics assume that in the presence of unbiased transmission—that is, in the absence of population-level selective pressures—patterns observed in the cultural/ archaeological record are the result of combined vertical transmission (a process that entails the diachronic transfer of information between subsequent generations), horizontal transmission (the result of interaction and exchange of information between coeval individuals or groups of individuals, also referred to as blending), and functional convergence under similar selective pressure (Borgerhoff Mulder et al. 2006; Collard et al. 2006; Crema et al. 2014). When vertical transmission is likely to be the most effective process, cultural evolution can be modeled as a series of steps, each of which represents

144 · Eugenio Bortolini

a progressive divergence of individuals or groups of individuals from a common ancestral state. Such descent with modification (a process that the cultural evolutionary literature defines as branching) is accompanied by decreasing within-group diversity and increasing between-group distance. Because of these characteristics, this mechanism is comparable to speciation in biological evolution, and at the population level it is often associated with movements of people (demic processes; Guglielmino et al. 1995). Vertical transmission through branching assumes a single ancestor or root from which the observed elements or populations may have inherited traits over time (monophyletic structure) and can be graphically represented with an evolutionary or phylogenetic tree. The present work follows this line of inquiry and for the first time attempts to produce a tentative phylogenetic tree of southeastern Arabian prehistoric monumental tombs believed to date from 3200 to 2000 BC. The main objectives are as follows: • to build a systematic description of monumental burials by focusing on variation in the same diagnostic elements (traits) over time and space rather than on fixed aggregates of characters (types) • to experiment with a flexible and theory-laden framework that can benefit from the addition of newly generated data • to explicitly link variability in monumental burials to mechanisms of cultural transmission • to explore formal models of tomb structural change over time so that novel hypotheses can be formulated and then tested in future studies, in order to address issues of continuity/discontinuity in this particular archaeological record Archaeological Background: Traditional Tomb Types

Drawing on the established sequence of tomb types during the third millennium BC, the present work will consider structures defined as Hafittype cairns (ca. 3200–2700 BC) and structures commonly referred to as Umm an-Nar tombs (ca. 2700–2000 BC). Hafit-Type Cairns (ca. 3200–2700 BC) The so-called Hafit-type cairns are the product of complex funerary practices distributed over a large geographical and cultural landscape. Tradi-

Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Monumental Burials of Arabia · 145

tional descriptions draw on generalizations that overlook variation among these structures. In very broad terms, these tombs are monumental, truncated cone-shaped towers, formed by two (or rarely three) concentric ring walls built around a central chamber. Walls were erected using local stones (although some exceptions have been found; e.g., Böhme 2013) that were in most cases only partially worked. Chambers were slightly elliptic and entrances could be sealed by erecting a second ring wall. These cairns were collective inhumation burials. Available evidence indicates that they usually contained one to five individuals deposited in successive events. However, in coastal Ja’alan (eastern Sharqiyyah, Oman), some tombs contained up to 20 or 30 individuals with no apparent selection for sex or age (Benton 1996, 2006; Munoz 2011). The dead were deposited in association with ornamental beads obtained from a variety of materials in standardized forms (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; Salvatori 2001). The majority of Hafit-type tombs in which ceramic materials have been documented contained imported pottery vessels, specifically Jemdet Nasr or Early Dynastic I and II vessels (ca. 3200–2700 BC) from southern Mesopotamia (Cleuziou 2002; DuringCaspers 1970; Frifelt 1970, 1975b). These tombs are located in elevated, highly visible places. The explosion in the number of these cairns possibly mirrors demographic expansion and greater mobility among Hafit-period communities (Cleuziou 1996). Previous studies have used their spatial distribution to predict the exact location of nonremnant settlements (Giraud 2009, 2010) or to explore their relationship with independent environmental variables such as arable land, seasonal watercourses, and drainage areas (Deadman 2012). Umm an-Nar Tombs (ca. 2700–2000 BC) Umm an-Nar tombs were documented for the first time in 1958 on the island of Umm an-Nar in the UAE (Bibby 1969; Frifelt 1991). Since then, many examples have been uncovered throughout the UAE and the Sultanate of Oman. These monuments are circular and are larger in diameter than the Hafit type. Inner partitions divide the tomb into two or more chambers, and they have a different kind of entrance than Hafit-type cairns (usually trapezoidal in shape, small, and often located above ground level). When more than one entrance was present, doors were positioned at two opposite extremes of the tomb’s diameter. The entrance was then sealed by specially worked stones. Inner walls were built with local, undressed stone slabs, and external ring walls were made using squared and polished limestone

146 · Eugenio Bortolini

blocks (which in some cases were imported from more distant quarries). Umm an-Nar tombs seem to have been either one or two-storied structures (Cleuziou and Vogt 1983, 1985; Vogt 1985). Ornaments and grave goods were abundant in Umm an-Nar tombs and include beads and elaborated metal objects (Benton 1996; Cleuziou and Vogt 1985; Potts 2000; Al Tikriti and Méry 2000). Ceramic materials were deposited in great numbers and consist of sandy, grey, or black-on-red fine local pottery or of fine potteries imported from areas corresponding to present-day Iran and the Indus Valley (Cleuziou 2002; Méry 2000). Softstone vessels were also commonly placed in these tombs (David 1996). Each of these tombs contained a few dozen to several hundred individuals (e.g., Benton 1996; Blau 2001; McSweeney et al. 2008, 2010; Méry et al. 2001). Children under the age of five were underrepresented in some cases (Munoz et al. 2012), while other tombs exhibit a considerable number of subadults (Cleuziou et al. 2011; McSweeney et al. 2010; Potts et al. 2013). Researchers have inferred that these tombs were often used for at least a century based on evidence that tomb contents were moved over time to allow for the deposit of new corpses and on the existence of deposits of human skeletal material and mortuary goods in nearby pits (Benton 1996; Döpper and Schmidt 2010; Méry et al. 2001, 2004; McSweeney et al. 2008, 2010; Munoz et al. 2012; Al Tikriti and Méry 2000). Materials and Methods

Considering the great range of expressions and ritualized activities that constitute the complex funerary practices of prehistoric southeastern Arabia, tomb architecture offers the most appropriate and quantifiable evidence to explore cultural changes over the third millennium BC. The dataset chosen for this study consists of 120 mortuary structures from both published and unpublished material (see Bortolini 2012:Figure 6; Bortolini 2014:Appendix A). The sample includes only standing structures that have been dated to the third millennium BC (3200–2000 BC) based on their external appearance or from material culture obtained through excavation. The study region includes parts of northern Oman (sites within the AdDhahirah, Ad-Dakhilyya, and Sharqiyyah governorates) and sites within the United Arab Emirates (Figure 7.1; Bortolini 2014). All collected evidence has been defined using a newly developed systematic description. This method expanded on previous attempts based on the same theoretical background (Bortolini 2012) and is a considerable

Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Monumental Burials of Arabia · 147

Figure 7.1. Map of the study region with names and locations of the sites that have been sampled to obtain evidence of structural variability in monumental tombs.

change in the scale of analysis. In fact, the focus of the present study has shifted from traditional types (essentialist aggregates of elements) to cultural traits. The objective was to build a more flexible description of tombs that would allow the investigator to consistently focus on change in diagnostic elements over time, making it possible to observe variation in the same parameters across an ever-growing sample. In practice, potentially diagnostic traits (characters or dimensions) are identified (such as type of entrance, articulation of internal space, and external dressing), and their different expressions are coded as mutually exclusive variants (character states or modes). As a result, each tomb can be described as a string of character states (Bortolini 2014). Since no assumptions about the relationship between dimensions or modes can be made at this point, all states are given the same weight and all characters are considered independent from one

148 · Eugenio Bortolini

another (O’Brien et al. 2002). Characters and character states have been proposed according to recent observations of variability and by eliminating every possible postdepositional parameter (such as preserved height). In Case Study 1, individual tombs have been grouped into classes (Bortolini 2012). Each class is intentionally defined (Dunnell 1971) by a univocal string of character states shared by a variable number of individual tombs. This method is known as paradigmatic or monothetic classification (Clarke 1978; Dunnell 1971) and can be more effective than chronological typology when quantifying change over time in diagnostic traits. Traditional types do not show an adequate level of redundancy because they do not measure change on the same diagnostic characters, as problem-oriented classifications should do (O’Brien et al. 2002). In the present study, analyses were aimed at testing the impact of branching events on the patterns observed in tomb structure. A phylogenetic tree assumes a common, ancestral tomb form from which all the other forms derived. This is in line with Vogt’s scheme and with some of the hypotheses of gradual change several scholars have expressed. Hamming distance (e.g., a measure of the number of differences between pairs of strings of character states; Hamming 1950) was calculated between classes (for Case Study 1) and between individual tombs (for Case Study 2). Distance matrices were then used to compute “neighbor-joining” phylogenetic trees (Saitou and Nei 1987) through the function NJ implemented in the package phangorn in R (Schliep 2011) and to compute parsimony trees using the parsimony ratchet algorithm in the same package (Nixon 1999; Schliep 2011). To formally assess how tree-like the obtained phylogenetic models were, δ-scores and retention indices were calculated and compared for all cases (using the packages ape and phangorn in R, respectively; Paradis et al. 2004; Schliep 2011). The former (δ-scores; Holland et al. 2002) measure “treeness” via a direct assessment of the distance matrix and range between 0 and 1, with δq = 0 indicating a perfect tree-like structure and δq = 1 suggesting a strong effect of functional convergence or other processes of cultural change in the absence of vertical transmission. Retention index (Collard et al. 2006; Farris 1989a, 1989b) was calculated as the ratio between the number of character state changes observed in a tree and the number of character state changes expected given the original distance matrix. In contrast to δ-scores, a retention index value of “0” indicated no vertical signal, while a retention index value of “1” suggested that functional convergence was almost absent.

Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Monumental Burials of Arabia · 149

Discussion

Case Study 1 The first set of analyses was carried out to test the applicability of the methods outlined above in this particular context. Phylogenetic trees were generated using a theoretical dataset previously presented by the author (Bortolini 2012). The dataset was comprised of 10 classes created using 22 tombs whose structural diversity across seven dimensions was evident and effective for demonstration purposes. Crema and colleagues (2014) have established that these data may be particularly amenable to phylogenetic analysis. Both the neighbor-joining and parsimony trees presented with the same topology, and both returned a retention index of 1. The mean δ-score for the entire distance matrix was 0.27, which suggested a strong effect of branching and a limited impact of functional convergence and blending (horizontal transmission). In fact, the obtained retention index positively exceeded the range of values expected for cultural variants (0.42–0.78; Collard et al. 2006), while the δ-score was at the lower limit of the empirical range calculated in recent meta-analyses (Crema et al. 2014). To plot and examine the resulting trees (Figure 7.2) class 7 was chosen as the outgroup (i.e., the first taxon to branch out from the tree root). In this case, as O’Brien and colleagues (2002) have suggested, the most ancient taxa (traditionally attributed to the interval 3200–2700 BC) were identified as plausible outgroups. Among them, class 7 exhibited a type of entrance that was less elaborate and structurally simple (with lintels). For the sake of the experiment, it was therefore chosen as the closest to a hypothetical ancestral state. This assumption functioned to better visualize results and to more clearly test current hypotheses of structural evolution from Hafit-type tombs to Umm an-Nar tombs. Aside from this assumption, relative or absolute tomb chronology was not used to perform the present analysis, in order to avoid possible circularity. The tree suggests that if the initial assumption holds, Hafit-type tombs whose entrance did not present with a lintel (class 6) branch out first and from this divergent path more elaborate forms emerge that exhibit more thoroughly worked facades (tombs Shi-1, Shi-2, and Shi-10 at Shir/Jaylah; class 5). However, this branching event was less statistically supported (bootstrapped node value = 0.32) than a second branching event that took

150 · Eugenio Bortolini

Figure 7.2. Neighbor-joining tree of tomb classes presented in Bortonlini (2012) Figure 6 and Bortolini (2014) Appendix A. Numbers are bootstrap results and measure the statistical support for each node. The tree has been computed using the NJ algorithm implemented in the package ape in R (Paradis et al. 2004).

place at further distance from this node. Class 10—a single tomb taxon— was the first to emerge. This class included Grave 1137 at Bat (Ad Dhahirah, Oman), an exceptional example with inner supporting walls, embryonal spatial articulation, and a half-worked facade typical of Hafit-type tombs (Frifelt 1975a) In this case, statistical support is quite low, possibly due to the peculiarity of the structure. It followed a cluster comprised mostly of remaining taxa, all of which consisted of structures that have been assumed to date to the second half of the third millennium BC. Class 8 (Tomb IV on Umm an-Nar Island) was isolated from the rest. Class 3b showed the highest distance from all other taxa of the remaining group and included Tomb

Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Monumental Burials of Arabia · 151

I on the Island of Umm an-Nar (ca. 2500–2250 BC). It was followed by the sister clades class 3a/class 4 and class 2/class 1. The second group included earlier tombs located at Hili and Tomb I at Al Sufouh. Statistical support for ancestral nodes of Umm an-Nar–like structures was considerably higher than for earlier taxa (bootstrapped node values = 0.44–0.68). Although this first analysis was run on a small and nonrandom subset of the entire available dataset, this preliminary exploration strongly suggests that branching may be the major force driving change in tombs during most of the third millennium BC. This could in turn mean that cultural transmission took place at a regional level, mostly through the movement of people and fission events. In addition, the model indicates a first bifurcation between a branch that led to increasingly complex Hafit-type tombs and another one that led to Umm an-Nar tombs through the appearance of partitions in class 10. Case Study 2 The second set of analyses was run on the entire dataset of 120 individual tombs. The neighbor-joining tree obtained a retention index value of 0.92, and the most parsimonious tree (out of 26 equally parsimonious trees) that exhibited the same topology as the neighbor-joining phylogeny returned a comparable retention index of 0.93. In terms of δ-scores, the summary statistic for the entire distance matrix is 0.18. These results—again outside the range expected for cultural traits—seem to confirm what has been obtained in Case Study 1: the resulting tree is quite stable and could be interpreted as relatively free from the effects of convergence and blending mechanisms. By looking at the actual tree (Figure 7.3), it becomes immediately clear that at higher taxonomic levels, many tombs tended to group together because of limited interindividual variability. At lower taxonomic levels (rightward) there was increased diversity between single structures. This suggests that intertomb diversity increased considerably during the third millennium BC; the branching event that generated Tomb I at Jabal al Emalah and Grave 1137 at Bat represents a major leap forward. Tombs at Jebel Hafit and Zukayt and most tombs at Shir/Jaylah were the most proximate to the hypothetical ancestral states. The first bifurcation was statistically well supported (bootstrapped value = 0.62) and led to the emergence of tombs at Mazyad, Ra’s al-Hadd, and Asimah. The other branch, which led to the construction of all the remaining tombs, was immediately divided into two groups of clades (bootstrapped node value = 0.32). The group on top was comprised of the most elaborate

Figure 7.3. Neighbor-joining tree of individual tombs coded according to the systematic description reported in Bortolini (2012) Figure 6 and Bortolini (2014) Appendix A. Numbers are bootstrap results and measure the statistical support for each node. The tree has been computed using the NJ algorithm implemented in the package ape in R (Paradis et al. 2004).

Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Monumental Burials of Arabia · 153

and finished Hafit-type tombs currently known in the entire region (Al Ayn; Tombs 1–10 at Shir/Jaylah). The node linking these structures to the remaining tombs at the bottom represents a possible transition toward Umm an-Nar–type tombs and more clearly points to the second half of the third millennium BC. This node was quite well supported (bootstrapped node value = 0.37) and appears to give origin to two diverging developmental trajectories. The first one leads through Tomb I at Jabal al Emalah to the formation of the monumental tombs on Umm an-Nar Island, Hili, and Al Sufouh (with the exception of one tomb at Bat). The structures broadly appear in the diachronic order we might expect if, in accordance with current interpretations and Vogt’s hypothesis, we assume that tombs at Jebel Hafit and the structures most similar to them represent a plausible outgroup (in other words, they are closer to possible ancestral states). Through Grave 1137 at Bat, the second trajectory led to the great majority of the Umm an-Nar tombs at Bat and to single structures closer the coast of the United Arab Emirates (Umm an-Nar Island, Abu Dhabi, and Shimal, Ra’s al-Khaimah). Quite intuitively, Tomb Unar 2 at Shimal appears to be the most distant tomb from aggregates of hypothetical ancestral character states. This structure is dated to the last quarter of the third millennium BC, and the long branch linking it to Bat tombs may also hint at isolation in time and space. In summary, the current study carried out with individual tombs has confirmed that prehistoric monumental burials of southeastern Arabia are amenable to phylogenetic analysis and that branching may well have played a critical role in the formation of this empirical evidence. This suggests that demic processes could be relevant in the transmission of information over time: in other words, that the movements of people were the main vectors of ancestral character states, knowledge concerning tomb construction, and innovation. If fission events can be hypothesized as the generative process behind tomb structural evolution, it must be considered that higherlevel branches include tombs that were distributed all over the study region, while lower-level branches (which can be chronologically assigned to the second half of the third millennium BC) exhibited possible signs of segregation between the UAE and surrounding areas on one side and central and eastern Oman on the other. Overall, the picture emerging from both case studies is that of an initial formation of Hafit-type tombs followed by more elaborate Hafit-type forms and by a parallel, longer-lasting tradition that led to the development of Umm an-Nar tombs through leaps (innovation) or gradual change (transitional forms).

154 · Eugenio Bortolini

Conclusions

The present work has confirmed the possibility of implementing a fully evolutionary approach in the study of the Early Bronze Age funerary traditions of southeastern Arabia. Monumental tombs exhibited clear patterns of change over time that can be effectively quantified and analyzed. This endeavor can be greatly facilitated by the adoption of the systematic description proposed in this research. This classificatory arrangement is based on a shift in the scale of analysis, namely from chronological typologies to single diagnostic traits whose variability can be diachronically observed and measured in an ever-growing dataset. In this framework, hypotheses about continuity, gradual variation, nonlinear dynamics, and transitional forms can be linked to questions about the mechanisms of cultural change and transmission, enabling archaeologists to investigate the many processes underlying empirical diversity. All analyses presented here hint at complex dynamics of structural development, with major branching events taking place at different points in time and leading to parallel developmental trajectories. The first of these trajectories led to more elaborated Hafit-type structures (such as Al Ayn or Shir/Jaylah). The second branch, which led to later types (Umm an-Nar structures), was itself bifurcated. The branch that led to evidence that has been primarily uncovered in Oman appears to have been strongly related to Tomb 1137 at Bat (Ad Dhahirah, Oman), while the line predominantly related to coastal sites of the UAE appears to have descended from the same node as Tomb I at Jabal al Emalah (Sharjah, UAE). This narrative fits well with the intuitions expressed by Vogt (1985), who first envisaged the relevance of the node in which a critical “mutation” took place, such as the development of internal partitions dividing the tomb’s chamber. The present research has confirmed this possibility and may suggest that such an innovation evolved into two separate lines, one of which may have more directly affected the building traditions of the United Arab Emirates. While all the obtained trees exhibited a diachronic trend (from left to right), the individual-tomb tree better mirrored the expected chronological topology between structures. Classes, on the other hand, may alter the expected relative chronology. However, it must be considered that tomb chronology was in most cases only inferred and has not yet been tested through excavation. For this reason, the present analysis did not consider tomb chronology to be a parameter. It is therefore remarkable that a good

Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Monumental Burials of Arabia · 155

approximation of the expected diachronic order emerged from a phylogenetic model that considers only formal variability. It is also worth noticing that in the individual-tomb analysis the first half of the third millennium apparently showed lower intertomb variability. This result may be attributable to a more intense exchange of cultural information at a regional level in this early phase, but it may also be ascribed to the relatively small sample size of excavated Hafit-type tombs and for this reason needs to be further investigated. The second half of the millennium seems instead to hint at increasing diversity. This speculative statement, based on qualitative evidence, will be quantitatively addressed in future studies. As far as the mechanisms of cultural transmission are concerned, branching is the most plausible generative process. In other words, the movement of people involved in tomb construction appears to be strongly responsible for significant change in structural features over time, and convergent adaptation and blending appears to have had limited effect. Nevertheless, the results of these phylogenetic analyses must be considered as formal hypotheses that should be further and repeatedly tested in light of new and more substantive evidence. Future research will more comprehensively address these questions, both in general terms and in relation to particularly relevant structures and will include material culture and tombs dated to earlier and later periods. References Cited Bentley, Alexander R., and Stephen J. Shennan 2003 Cultural Transmission and Stochastic Network Growth. American Antiquity 68(3):459–485. Benton, Jodie N. 1996 Excavations at Al Sufouh: A Third Millennium Site in the Emirate of Dubai. Brepols, Turnhout. 2006 Burial Practices of the Third Millennium BC in the Oman Peninsula: A Reconsideration. PhD dissertation, School of Archaeology, University of Sydney. Bibby, Geoffrey T. 1969 Looking for Dilmun. Praeger, New York. Blau, Soren 2001 Fragmentary Endings: A Discussion of 3rd-Millennium BC Burial Practices in the Oman Peninsula. Antiquity 75(289):557–570. Böhme, Manfred 2013 The Petrographic-Polychrome Style and the Symbolic Meaning of White Stones in Hafit Grave Architecture. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 43:77–84.

156 · Eugenio Bortolini

Borgerhoff Mulder, Monique, Charles L. Nunn, and Mary C. Towner 2006 Cultural Macroevolution and the Transmission of Traits. Evolutionary Anthropology 15(2):52–64. Bortolini, Eugenio 2012 The Early Bronze Age of the Oman Peninsula: From Chronology to Evolution. In Aux Marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 353–369. Travaux de la maison Rene-Ginouves. De Boccard, Paris. 2014 An Evolutionary and Quantitative Analysis of Construction Variation in Prehistoric Monumental Burials of Eastern Arabia. PhD dissertation, The Institute of Archaeology, University College London. Boyd, Robert, and Peter J. Richerson 1985 Culture and the Evolutionary Process. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi L., and Marcus W. Feldman 1981 Cultural Transmission and Evolution: A Quantitative Approach. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Clarke, David L. 1978 Analytical Archaeology. 2nd ed. Methuen, London. Cleuziou, Serge 1996 Emergence of Oases and Towns in Eastern and Southern Arabia. In The Prehistory of Asia and Oceania, Vol. 16, edited Gennady E. Afanas’ev, Serge Cleuziou, John R. Lukacs, and Maurizio Tosi, pp. 159–165. Forli, Rome. 2002 The Early Bronze Age of the Oman Peninsula from Chronology to the Dialectics of Tribe and State Formation. In Essays of the Late Prehistory of the Arabian Peninsula, edited by Serge Cleuziou, Maurizio Tosi, and Juris Zarins, pp. 191–236. Serie Orientale Roma XCIII. Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome. Cleuziou, Serge, Sophie Méry, and Burkhard Vogt (editors) 2011 Protohistoire de l’oasis d’Al-Aïn, Travaux de la Mission archéologique française à Abou Dhabi (Emirats Arabes Unis). Les sépultures de l’âge du Bronze. BAR International Series 2227. Archaeopress, Oxford. Cleuziou, Serge, and Maurizio Tosi (editors) 2007 In the Shadow of the Ancestors: The Prehistoric Foundations of the Early Arabian Civilization in Oman. Al Nahda Printing Press, Muscat. Cleuziou, Serge, and Burkhard Vogt 1983 Umm an-Nar Burial Customs. New Evidence from Tomb A at Hili North. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 13:37–52. 1985 Tomb A at Hili North (United Arab Emirates) and Its Material Connections to Southeast Iran and the Greater Indus Valley. In South Asian Archaeology 1983, edited by Janine Schotsmans and Maurizio Taddei, pp. 249–277. Istituto Universitario Orientale, Naples. Cochrane, Ethan, and Carl Lipo 2010 Phylogenetic Analyses of Lapita Decoration do Not Support Branching Evolution or Regional Population Structure during Colonization of Western Re-

Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Monumental Burials of Arabia · 157

mote Oceania. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 3651(1559):3889–3902. Collard, Mark, Stephen J. Shennan, and Jamshid J. Tehrani 2006 Branching, Blending and the Evolution of Cultural Similarities and Differences among Human Populations. Evolution and Human Behavior 27(3):169–184. Crema, Enrico R., Tim Kerig, and Stephen Shennan 2014 Culture, Space, and Metapopulation: A Simulation-Based Study for Evaluating Signals of Blending and Branching. Journal of Archaeological Science 43:289– 298. David, Hélène 1996 Styles and Evolution: Soft Stone Vessels during the Bronze Age in the Oman Peninsula. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 26:31–46. Deadman, William 2012 Defining the Early Bronze Age Landscape: A Remote Sensing-Based Analysis of Hafit Tomb Distribution in Wadi Andam, Sultanate of Oman. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 23(1):26–34. Döpper, S., and Conrad Schmidt 2010 Die Grabtürme der Nekropolen von Bāt und Al-Ayn im Sultanat Oman. Bericht über die Vorkampagne 2010. Technical report. https://uni-tuebingen.de/fakultaeten/philosophische-fakultaet/fachbereiche/altertums-und-kunstwissenschaften/ianes/forschung/vorderasiatische-archaeologie/projekte/die-archaeologischen-untersuchungen-in-bat-bat-al-zebah-und-al-ayn-sultanat-oman/ Dunnell, Robert C. 1971 Systematics in Prehistory. The Blackburn Press, Caldwell, New Jersey. During-Caspers, Elizabeth C. L. 1970 Trucial Oman in the Third Millennium B.C.: New Evidence for Contacts with Sumer, Baluchistan and the Indus Valley. Origini 4:205–276. Eerkens, Jelmer W., and Carl P. Lipo 2007 Cultural Transmission Theory and the Archaeological Record: Providing Context to Understanding Variation and Temporal Changes in Material Culture. Journal of Archaeological Research 15(3):239–274. Farris, James S. 1989a The Retention Index and Homoplasy Excess. Systematic Zoology 38(4):406–407. 1989b The Retention Index and the Rescaled Consistency Index. Cladistics 5(4): 417– 419. Frifelt, Karen 1970 Jemdet Nasr Graves in the Oman. Kuml:374–383. 1975a On Prehistoric Settlement and Chronology of the Oman Peninsula. East and West 25(3/4):359–423. 1975b A Possible Link between the Jemdet Nasr and the Umm an-Nar Grave of Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 1:57–80. 1991 The Island of Umm an-Nar: 1. Third Millennium Graves. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI, Aarhus.

158 · Eugenio Bortolini

Gagnaison, Cyril, Pascal Barrier, Sophie Méry, and Walid Y. Al Tikriti 2004 Extractions calcaires eocenes a l’Age du Bronze et architecture funeraire à Hili (Emirat d’Abou Dhabi). Revue d’Archeometrie 28:97–108. Giraud, Jessica 2009 The Evolution of Settlement Patterns in the Eastern Oman from the Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age (6000–2000 BC). Comptes Rendus Geosciences 341(8– 9):739–749. 2010 Early Bronze Age Graves and Graveyards in the Eastern Ja’alan (Sultanate of Oman): An Assessment of the Social Rules Working in the Evolution of a Funerary Landscape. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 71–85. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Guglielmino, Carmela R., Carla Viganotti, Barry S. Hewlett, and Luigi L. Cavalli-Sforza 1995 Cultural Variation in Africa: Role of Mechanisms of Transmission and Adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 92:7585–7589. Hamming, Richard W. 1950 Error Detecting and Error Correcting Codes. Bell System Technical Journal 29(2):147–160. Henrich, Joseph 2001 Cultural Transmission and the Diffusion of Innovations: Adoption Dynamics Indicate that Biased Cultural Transmission Is the Predominant Force in Behavioral Change. American Anthropologist 103(4):992–1013. 2004 Demography and Cultural Evolution: How Adaptive Cultural Processes Can Produce Maladaptive Losses: The Tasmanian Case. American Antiquity 69(2):197–214. Holland, Barbara R., Katharina T. Huber, Andreas Dress, and Vincent Moulton 2002 Delta Plots: A Tool for Analyzing Phylogenetic Distance Data. Molecular Biology and Evolution 19(12):2051–2059. McSweeney, Kathleen, Sophie Méry, and Roberto Macchiarelli 2008 Rewriting the End of the Early Bronze Age in the United Arab. Emirates through the Anthropological and Artefactual Evaluation of Two Collective Umm an-Nar Graves at Hili (Eastern Region of Abu Dhabi). Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 19(1):1–14. McSweeney, Kathleen, Sophie Méry, and Walid Y. Al Tikriti 2010 Life and Death in an Early Bronze Age Community from Hili, Al Ain, UAE. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 45–53. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Méry, Sophie 2000 Les céramiques d’Oman et l’Asie moyenne. Une archéologie des échanges à l’Âge du Bronze. CRA Monographies 23. Maison René-Ginouves, Paris. 2010 Results, Limits and Potential: Burial Practices and Early Bronze Age Societies in the Oman Peninsula. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 33–43. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford.

Trait-Based Analysis of Structural Evolution in Monumental Burials of Arabia · 159

Méry, Sophie, Jerome Rouquet, Kathleen McSweeney, G. Basset, Jean-François Saliege, and Walid Y. Al Tikriti 2001 Re-Excavation of the Early Bronze Age Collective Hili N Pit-Grave (Emirate of Abu Dhabi, UAE): Results of the First Two Campaigns of the Emirati-French Project. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 31:161–178. Méry, Sophie, Kathleen McSweeney, Sander van der Leew, and Walid Y. Al Tikriti 2004 New Approaches to a Collective Grave from the Umm an-Nar Period at Hili (UAE). Paléorient 30(1):163–178. Munoz, Olivia 2011 Étude anthropologique des restes humains des cairns C2 et C3 du Jebel Hafit (1977). In Protohistoire de l’oasis d’Al-Ain: Travaux de la Mission archéologique française à Abou Dhabi (Emirats Arabes Unis). Les sépultures de l’âge du Bronze, edited by Serge Cleuziou, Sophie Méry, and Burkhard Vogt, pp. 218–224. BAR International Series 2227. Archaeopress, Oxford. Munoz, Olivia, Royal O. Ghazal, and Hervé Guy 2012 Use of Ossuary Pits during the Umm an-Nar Period: New Insights on the Complexity of Burial Practices from the Site of Ra’s al-Jinz (RJ-1), Oman. In Aux Marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 451–467. Travaux de la Maison René-Ginouvès. De Boccard, Paris. Neiman, Frasier D. 1995 Stylistic Variation in Evolutionary Perspective: Inferences from Decorative Diversity and Interassemblage Distance in Illinois Woodland Ceramic Assemblages. American Antiquity 60(1):7–36. Nixon, Kevin C. 1999 The Parsimony Ratchet: A New Method for Rapid Parsimony Analysis. Cladistics 15(4):407–414. O’Brien, Michael J., R. Lee Lyman, Youssef Saab, Elias Saab, John Darwent, and Daniel S. Glover 2002 Two Issues in Archaeological Phylogenetics: Taxon Construction and Outgroup Selection. Journal of Theoretical Biology 215:133–150. O’Brien, Michael J., and R. Lee Lyman 2003 Cladistics and Archaeology. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. Paradis, Emmanuel, Julien Claude, and Korbinian Strimmer 2004 APE: Analysis of Phylogenetics and Evolution in R Language. Bioinformatics 20(2):289–290. Potts, Daniel T. 1986 Eastern Arabia and the Oman Peninsula during the Late Fourth and Early Third Millennium BC. In Ğamdat Nas. r: Period or Regional Style? Papers Given at a Symposium Held in Tübingen, November 1983, edited by W. Finkbeiner and U. Rollig, pp. 121–170. Reichert, Wiesbaden. 2000 Ancient Magan: The Secrets of Tell Abraq. Trident Press, London. 2012 The Hafit-Umm an-Nar transition: Evidence from Falaj al-Qaba’il and Jabal alEmalah. In Aux Marges de l’archéologie: Hommage à Serge Cleuziou, edited by

160 · Eugenio Bortolini

Jessica Giraud and Guillaume Gernez, pp. 371–377. Travaux de la Maison RenéGinouvès. De Boccard, Paris. Potts, Daniel T., Debra Martin, Katie Baustian, and Anna Osterholtz 2013 Neonates, Infant Mortality and the Pre-Islamic Arabian Amuletic Tradition at Tell Abraq. Liwa 5(9):3–14. Powell, Adam, Stephen Shennan, and Mark G. Thomas 2009 Late Pleistocene Demography and the Appearance of Modern Human Behavior. Science 324:1298–1301. Saitou, Naruya, and Masatoshi Nei 1987 The Neighbor-Joining Method: A New Method for Reconstructing Phylogenetic Trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution 4(4):406–425. Salvatori, Sandro 2001 Excavations at the Funerary Structures HD 10–3.1, 3.2, 4.1, 4.2 and 2.1 at Ra’s al-Hadd (Sultanate of Oman). Rivista di Archeologia, XXV: 67–77. 2007 The Prehistoric Graveyard of Ra’s Al Hamra 5, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 14. Schliep, Klaus 2011 Phangorn: Phylogenetic Analysis in R. Bioinformatics 27(4):592–593. Shennan, Stephen J., and J. Richard Wilkinson 2001 Ceramic Style Change and Neutral Evolution: A Case Study from Neolithic Europe. American Antiquity 66(4):577–593. Steele, James, Claudia Glatz, and Anne Kandler 2010 Ceramic Diversity, Random Copying, and Tests for Selectivity in Ceramic Production. Journal of Archaeological Science 37(6):1348–1358. Steele, James, Peter Jordan, and Ethan Cochrane 2010 Evolutionary Approaches to Cultural and Linguistic Diversity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 365(1559):3781–3785. Tehrani, Jamshid J., Mark Collard, and Stephen J. Shennan 2010 The Cophylogeny of Populations and Cultures: Reconstructing the Evolution of Iranian Tribal Craft Traditions Using Trees and Jungles. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 365(1559):3865–3874. Al Tikriti, Walid Y. A., and Sophie Méry 2000 Tomb N at Hili and the Question of the Subterranean Graves during the Umm an-Nar Period. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 30:205–219. Vogt, Burkhard 1985 Zur Chronologie und Entwicklung der Gräber des späten 4.-2. Jstd. v. Chr. auf der Halbinsel Oman: Zusammenfassung, Analyse und Würdigung publizierter wie auch unveröffentlichter Grabungsergebnisse. PhD dissertation, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen. Williams, Kimberly D., and Lesley A. Gregoricka 2013 Social, Spatial, and Bioarchaeological Histories of Ancient Oman: The Mortuary Landscape of Dhank. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(2):134–150.

II Evidence from the Bones

8 Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula in the Third Millennium BC Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Archaeology on the Oman Peninsula operates under a unique set of circumstances. Much of our understanding of its economic, social, and political complexities has long been rooted in pan-regional models of interaction spheres and exchange. This is based on the decades of work performed in neighboring polities in the Indus Valley and Mesopotamia, Iraq, in particular, from which vast bodies of information have been recovered. That information is organized with Mesopotamia as the center and with surrounding areas as peripheral based on the written word (guided by the egos of the ancient documentarians) and material culture (guided by the bias of the sheer quantities recovered). Particular emphasis has been placed on the role of exchange between Mesopotamia and southeastern Arabia in shaping the society and economy of the latter (e.g., Edens [1992] and Frank [1993], but see also Ratnagar [2001] and Stein [1999]). Such exchange was a significant aspect of ancient socioeconomic complexity on the peninsula (e.g., Cleuziou and Tosi 2007). Of course, as more exploration, survey, and excavation has been conducted on the Oman Peninsula, perspectives from Arabia have strengthened and broadened the role of local innovation, evolution, adoption, and adaptation in the development of the region (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; Gregoricka 2013a, 2016; Magee 2014; Martin 2007; Potts 2009; chapter 12, this volume). Yet, the Oman Peninsula remains best known for its rather enigmatic mortuary and funerary culture. Mortuary architecture easily trumps settlement structures in terms of sheer numbers. As a result, much “direct”

164 · Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

evidence for ancient life on the peninsula has been gathered primarily from the monuments and rituals that were putatively created and performed for the dead. Yet mortuary rituals—like written documents and glyptics—are themselves performances (e.g., Parker Pearson 1999) and thus indirect echoes of actual lifeways. Their material culture and monumentality are reflections of supposed and ideal attitudes of society as much as they are of actual societal attributes. More direct references to life and lifestyle can be gained from bioarchaeological materials found within the mortuary landscape. Specifically, human skeletons, animal bones, and botanical materials can help us reconstruct the actual movements and motivations of the daily lives of people within their landscape. These goals are embodied in the aims and praxis of the bioarchaeology-centered Social, Spatial, and Bioarchaeological Histories of Ancient Oman (SoBO) project that K. D. Williams began in 2009. The SoBO project’s survey and excavation of mortuary landscapes at and around the Al Khubayb Necropolis (near Dhank, Oman) have revealed innovative architectural forms and behavioral features in the third millennium BC burial landscape (Williams and Gregoricka 2013). In particular, such innovations involved the intentional inclusion of sheep, goat, and cattle bones in the tombs, a mortuary ritual unique for the Early Bronze Age funerary monuments in southeastern Arabia that form the basis for this study. The very specific selection and placement of the animal bones—together with data wrought from the mortuary landscape and the human skeletal material— suggests that certain animal bones were symbolic representations of the social means for their reproduction, stemming from their significance to socioeconomic resources and movements. Mortuary Landscape

In the late fourth to early third millennium—the Hafit period, ca. 3200– 2700 BC—a new tradition of monumental tomb architecture spread across the Oman Peninsula. In contrast to the Neolithic standard of underground pit inhumations, the Hafit period featured above-ground large-scale cairns built of stone. At the same time, the interaction between the tombs and the landscape also shifted. During the Neolithic period, pit graves were placed in subterranean cemeteries; in contrast, Hafit-type cairns were very visibly located on high ridges that, to this day, command prominent sightlines from and to the surrounding topography (e.g., Williams and Gregoricka 2013). Moreover, few Hafit period settlements have been found in

Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula · 165

association with these tombs (though see Giraud and Cleuziou [2009] and Giraud [2010]). These iconic tower-type tombs became larger and more complex as the millennium progressed. Hafit-type cairns were single-chambered tombs made with stacked, undressed stone that contained one or a few primary interments when constructed at inland locales. Tombs of the succeeding Umm an-Nar period (ca. 2700–2000 BC) were larger multichambered structures made of tight-fitting, dressed stones that contained hundreds of interments that were commingled as more individuals were placed in the tomb (Blau 2001). The locations of these tombs shifted to lower, less-visible positions nearer to known settlements (Potts 2001). The tombs of the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods are characterized by their monumentality and visibility. It has been suggested that these features demarcated and visibly referenced ownership (in the broadest sense) and use rights over territory and productive resources (Al Jahwari 2013; Cleuziou 2002; Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; Deadman 2012; Giraud 2010; chapter 5, this volume). This demarcation would have signaled control of territory to outsiders, guided seasonal and/or long-distance movements for members of local groups, and generally mapped the lay of the land and its resources. Yet, this signaling and spatial mapping was altered over time. Not only did the topographic orientation of tombs shift, but the emphasis within tomb monuments changed from an individual (or small-group) focus to large-scale collective burials containing hundreds (Potts 2001). Hafit-type cairns, particularly the inland tombs that contained few individuals, seem to represent individual identity clearly displayed across the landscape, while Umm an-Nar tombs emphasized corporate identity that was more narrowly and locally displayed (Cleuziou 2007). This is a significant shift for the act of referencing and mapping resources, as burials are not merely structures for the dead but are also constructs of the relationships of and between people and places (McAnany 1995; Parker Pearson 1982). Those relationships vary widely in scale, from validations of familial inheritance of home and property (Goody 1962) to the social politics of corporate grazing territories to the dynamics of nation building (Ben Amos 1991). What they all share is common reckoning through burial rituals that structure ancestral continuity with a particular place or space (Cannon 2002; Kertzer 1983). What internal changes in property, resources, or their reckoning would such a shift reflect? In addition to changes in the placement, structure, and membership within mortuary structures, larger social transformations characterize the transition from the Hafit to

166 · Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

the Umm an-Nar period. These include the first-known appearance of locally produced ceramics (Potts 2009), permanent settlement (Potts 2001), monumental public architecture (Hellyer 1998), and oasis agriculture (Blau 2007; Méry and Tengberg 2009), all of which point to increased sedentism and investment in the local landscape. Coupled with the growing involvement of the Oman Peninsula in interregional trade with Mesopotamia, Dilmun, and the Indus Valley, these changes likely reveal a society undergoing considerable sociopolitical reorganization and coping with such restructuring through internal hierarchical developments. These changes in social structure eventually led to its downfall at the beginning of the second millennium BC (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007; Gregoricka 2016; Magee 2014). However, our understanding of what these archaeological differences mean or reflect is superficial at best and is severely hindered without additional economic, social, and political data that could be gleaned from extensive excavation of contemporaneous surrounding settlements. While such settlements are scarce in northern Oman, the prevalence of tomb fields in this area may offer an alternate avenue to reevaluate the daily lives of those inhabiting this Early Bronze Age landscape. In particular, recent finds from the SoBO project may help shed light on the transition from individual to collective, from externally visible to internally dominant. The findings of researchers on this project indicate that local tomb typologies do not strictly adhere to discrete temporal blocks representative of a sociocultural break between the Hafit and Umm an-Nar way of life, but instead that tomb morphology, placement, and associated mortuary processes slowly transitioned over the millennium. Al Khubayb Necropolis

Al Khubayb is located just west of the Al-Hajar mountains in the interior of northern Oman in what was likely a prominent corridor for travel between the inland sites of Bat and Ibri and the coastal port of Umm an-Nar Island (Frifelt 1975). Survey and excavation on the Al Khubayb Necropolis by the SoBO team show that the site contains almost 400 mortuary monuments. While most of these funerary structures are consistent with Hafittype cairns, another intermediate type of tomb has been identified that shares characteristics with both Hafit and Umm an-Nar types (Williams and Gregoricka 2013; chapter 4, this volume). Excavation of six such tombs demonstrates that they are constructed of well-stacked cobbles, have greater internal complexity with more chambers

Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula · 167

than do Hafit-type tombs, generally house multiple interments, and are placed intermediately between high ridges and flat points. Radiocarbon dates from bone apatite recovered by the SoBO team place these transitional structures between ca. 2800 and 2400 BC, corresponding with the end of the Hafit period and the beginning of the Umm an-Nar period. As such, these monuments have been dubbed “Transitional Tower Tombs” (chapter 4, this volume). Inside the tombs, innovations that included the use of animals in the mortuary process provide more evidence for the transitional status of these structures. Animal bones were deliberately interred along with more traditional items of ceramic, metal, and shell accompanying the dead. Five of the six Transitional Tower Tombs excavated to date included faunal remains. In this chapter, we focus on these animal bone finds as, to our knowledge, they are rather extraordinary for the time and place. While fauna have been recovered from a number of fourth millennium BC (Neolithic) graves at Ra’s al-Hamra (Biagi et al. 1984; Coppa et al. 1985) and Wadi Shab (Gaultier et al. 2005; Usai 2006) and from late third/early second millennium BC graves in Bahrain (Frohlich 1986), nonintrusive (or nonnaturally accumulated) bones in the Bronze Age on the Oman Peninsula are limited to an articulated dog skeleton found in Unar 2, a tomb that dates to the very end of the Umm an-Nar period in the Emirate of Ra’s al-Khaimah (Blau and Beech 1999). Animal Bone Mortuary Deposits at Al Khubayb

Five of the six Transitional Tower Tombs that have been excavated at the Al Khubayb Necropolis contained animal bones. • Tomb S007–003 contained the skeletons of five human individuals and three animal bones. (1) The left innominate of an ovicaprid was found in association with two paired human skeletons: an adult female and a juvenile. Morphological features indicate that the bone is from a female goat. The bone bore ancient breaks at the pubis and on the ilial and ischial shafts. The break at the pubis is relatively smooth with striations and could have resulted from a knife cleave. (2) The left tibia of an ovicaprid was found against the tomb wall not in association with any of the bodies. It is rather small and compact (Bd, 23.5). The bone was broken midshaft.

168 · Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

• •

•

•

(3) The left astragalus of an ovicaprid was also found against the tomb wall. There is no indication that the tibia and astragalus come from the same animal. The bone is small and compact (GLl, 26.8; GLm, 24.5; Dl, 14.5; Bd, 16.7). Morphological characteristics indicate that it is a goat. Tomb S007–011 was a disturbed tomb with fragments of human bone and the unidentified fragments of an animal bone. Tomb S007–012 contained one human individual and animal bones from two individuals. (1) Four poorly preserved bones from the right forelimb of an ovicaprid were found in association with the tomb’s human interment. A scapula, a humerus, a radius, and an ulna were recovered. Morphological traits suggest that the animal was a goat. (2) A right astragalus of an ovicaprid was also found inside the tomb. It was very poorly preserved. Tomb S007–057 contained skeletons of five human individuals and three animal bones. (1–2) Two innominate bones were found together in association with two human skeletons: an adult female/juvenile pair. A larger, left innominate (LAR ca. 62.6), was from an adult female cow. A smaller right innominate (LAR ca. 50.1) came from a juvenile Bos of unclear sex. (3) A left astragalus was found in association with a human adult male. While the bone was very poorly preserved, it has morphological characteristics that are consistent with goat. It is relatively small and compact (GLl, 27.38; Dl, 13.3; Bd, 18.0). Tomb S007–167 contained two human individuals and one animal bone. (1) A poorly preserved right astragalus of an ovicaprid was found in association with both individuals.

Interpreting Animal Bones from Bronze Age Tombs

The relative singularity of the animal bone finds in the Al Khubayb Transitional Tower Tombs begs for an explanation of their placement. Yet that very uniqueness makes such understanding difficult. The few third millennium tombs that contain animal remains are not comparable to those found at Al Khubayb; small animal remains (i.e., reptiles, rodents, and small birds) found in graves at Umm an-Nar Island were postburial

Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula · 169

accumulations from burrowing animals and predators (Hoch 1991; Uerpmann and Uerpmann 2003), while the deliberately interred articulated dog skeleton from the Umm an-Nar tomb of Unar 2 was probably a companion animal (Blau and Beech 1999). Butchered animal remains in Bahrain found in second millennium BC tombs that postdate the Umm an-Nar period are interpreted as food remains (Frohlich 1986), while animal bones found more generally across the peninsula in tombs that predate the Hafit period have been interpreted as both food remains and trophies. Those categories are fluid and complementary; it is their importance for consumption and as raw materials that underlies the societal relevance of green turtles at the Neolithic cemeteries of Ra’s al-Hamra, where their skulls and carapace (bony shell) covered and accompanied dead humans (Coppa et al. 1985; Salvatori 2007). The same is true of the symbolic significance of dugong displayed in the structured accumulation of their bones at the Neolithic site of Akab (Méry et al. 2009). The structure is clearly of a symbolic or ritual nature but likely celebrates the significant resources that the dugong long provided: meat, grease, hide, and tusks. Less clear in function and intent are the burned fish bones and fragments of turtle carapace found in Neolithic burial pits at Wadi Shab. Both marine and terrestrial animals were recovered from occupation debris there, but only marine resources were included in burial pits (Gaultier et al. 2005). Companion animals, too, may belong to multiple categories of function and purpose. Thus dogs may also have been consumed as food (Blau and Beech 1999; Uerpmann and Uerpmann 1994), as at Neolithic Ra’s al-Hadd (Frohlich 1986). The much later examples of a camel and horse “cemetery” at Mleiha, Sharjah, dating from ca. 300 BC to AD 200 (Jasim 1999), and the co-burial of a human with a camel at al-Buhais 12 in Sharjah (Uerpmann and Uerpmann 1999) share similar, intersecting classifications. The camels and horses may have been sacrificed for the dead due to their import as beasts of burden, but also as a display of value and wealth (Uerpmann 1999). The overlapping of categories—“food,” “trophy,” “companion,” “draft”— suggests that the dynamics of mortuary signaling via animal remains cannot be read solely through taxonomic patterning, but additionally through the specific components of the skeletons and their interment. This is also true for third and second millennium BC Syro-Mesopotamia, where texts inform our understanding of contemporary burial practices. These indicate that the same animals might be interred in tombs with the intent as food for the traveling dead, as traction or transportation to or in the netherworld, or as gifts for netherworld dignitaries and denizens

170 · Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

(Jacobsen 1991; Kramer 1967; Tinney 1998). They might further result from sacrifice—either by the living or by the dead within the netherworld (e.g., Collins 2002; Gurney 1977; Katz 2003; Kramer 1967; Pardee 1996). Extensive mortuary data from Syro-Mesopotamia indicates that relative completeness and included body parts of the interred animals are a significant component of their meaning and purpose: single elements and partial animals generally constitute food remains, while articulated skeletons comprise a category of “other” that includes companion, sacrifice, gift, trophy, symbol, and draft animal (see also Vila [2005] and Weber [2012]). While it would be naïve to apply the same details of the Syro-Mesopotamian case to the Oman Peninsula’s enigmatic mortuary culture, the conclusions drawn from those studies are pertinent. Both the taxonomic identification and the element representation of the skeletal deposit are germane to interpreting fluid categories behind function and purpose. Moreover, we must consider that the bones may have had underlying practical, symbolic, and/or ritual significance in their mortuary setting. Certainly, the animal bone finds from tombs on the Oman Peninsula—scant though they are— demonstrate a strong particularity in selection of taxa and skeletal elements that transcends their solely functional characterization. Meaning of the Al Khubayb Animal Bones

Thus far, deliberately interred animal remains that have been recovered consist of goat and/or sheep and cattle. While adjacent settlement is lacking, three lines of evidence suggest that these animals were likely food animals for contemporary humans who were active in the mortuary landscape. First, these are animals that have been recognized as food remains from third millennium BC settlements elsewhere in the region. They are found alongside terrestrial game at Hili and Maysar (Uerpmann and Uerpmann 2008) and with marine resources at the coastal sites of Tell Abraq (Uerpmann 2001), Kalba (Eddisford and Phillips 2009), and Umm an-Nar Island (Hoch 1979; Uerpmann 2001). Among these domesticates, cattle was of particular importance to the diet. Coastal Ra’s al-Jinz is one of the few sites where cattle was of little to no significance (Uerpmann and Uerpmann 2008). Second, biogeochemical analyses tentatively suggest that cattle, in particular, were eaten by those humans interred at Al Khubayb. Human teeth demonstrated a similar chemical signature to teeth from local, modern cattle (a predominantly C3-based diet), but different from the signatures

Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula · 171

exhibited by modern ovicaprids (mixed C3-C4 diet) and camels (C4 diet; Gregoricka and Williams 2012). Third, all of the animal bones recovered thus far have been one or a few elements from single individuals. There has been no sign of any complete faunal skeleton. In particular, the articulated upper forelimb from Tomb S007–012 probably constituted a food offering. It is one of the meatier parts of the body (with large muscles attached to the bones), and was separated from the less meaty parts (the extremity, including metatarsus and phalanges) before inclusion in the tomb. There is no evidence that meat was removed from the bones. It is a common “package” consistent with food waste, as opposed to butchering waste. While the above indicates at least one example of a food offering, the remainder of the interred animal bones bears a different signature. Food preparation and consumption varies culturally, and thus categorizations of “food” and “waste” are value specific and are ideally assessed from settlement remains—which in this case are not extant. However, when we look at the distribution of the most common elements, we find a very limited range of specially selected items that are not specifically associated with food. The astragalus bone (n = 4) is the most frequent element found in the transitional tombs. This ankle bone is among the least meaty parts of the body. It is a near-universal meat-waste bone from the removal of the skin and extremities from the meaty parts of the hind limbs. Instead, astragalus bones are often kept and valued for use as game pieces or dice. However, none of the bones here shows any evidence of modification for such use, which involves flattening the many sides of the bones. Pelvic bones are the second most common element recovered (n = 3). While the pelvis might technically be considered a meat bone given its many muscle attachments in the meaty rump, these attachment points also feature sinew that is difficult to remove. It is an awkward and difficult bone to dismember, and not one that meat typically remains attached to for cooking and serving. Given the inclusion of a more typical cut of meat in the form of the forelimb, it does not seem likely that astragalus and innominate bones were meant as such: whether the meat of the animals was eaten or not, the interment of these specific bones does not seem to have been intended as a meat offering. Another possibility is that the single bones are representatives of greater wholes—that is, pars pro toto, whereby the part is something intrinsic to and recognizable as the whole (e.g., Becker 2000; Meyer 2000). For instance, a spoked wheel might represent a wagon, or a skull, hide, or horns

172 · Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

might stand in for an animal. If the astragalus and pelvis do serve as representative for a whole animal, from what intrinsic value does that choice stem? Neither is inherent to the appearance or recognition of the animal, nor are the disparate parts equivalent to each other. That a distinction was made between bones associated with adult males versus those associated with adult females suggests that the included bone is not solely symbolic of the physical animal. Just what, then, are these elements symbolic of? We can speculate a bit more about the nature and meaning of these animal bones when their spatial patterning and association with specific human individuals is taken into account. As noted above, astragalus bones— all of which are identified as either goat or sheep—were found in direct association with adult males or adults of unidentified sex. They were also found in tombs with human skeletons without direct association to any individual. By contrast, in all three cases in which animal pelvic bones were interred, they were found in association with a human female and juvenile pair. The adult pelvis bones belonged to a female goat and a cow, while the sex of the juvenile cattle pelvis was unclear. Thus, not only was the pelvis associated with adult females (as the astragalus was paired with adult males), but adult and juvenile animal pelves were together associated with adult female and juvenile human pairs. Given these contextual associations, it is possible that astragalus bones had meaning related to adult males, while pelvic bones had an intrinsic relationship to the more specific pairing of adult females and juveniles. The most specific relational association was between the adult cow and juvenile Bos pair and the human, adult female and juvenile pair from Tomb 007–057. These are the only example of Bos bones. Examining this association further, one intrinsic aspect of the pelvis is its role in reproduction for all female mammals, both animal and human. The pelvis is the hard structure of the birth canal, the channel through which the offspring leaves the mother. While the presence of this bone itself is not necessarily a reference to reproduction, the specific association of female animal pelvic bones (adult and juvenile) with female adults and juveniles is suggestive of a concern with reproduction in a way that an astragalus—or any other part of the skeleton—is not. If we take reproduction as the intrinsic aspect that is being displayed by the pelvic bones, what can we say about the message that is being relayed? For that, we need to revisit the function of the tombs themselves.

Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula · 173

Evolving Social Dynamics and the Changing Mortuary Landscape

One of the putative purposes of the tombs of southeastern Arabia was to signal and mark territory and resources (Cleuziou 2002; Giraud 2010; Giraud and Cleuziou 2009; Siebert et al. 2005). They also served to link individuals—those buried in the tombs as well as those who buried them—to those resources and to each other. Hafit-type cairns in their high places were geared toward long-distance display. Because there are few known Hafit settlements, it is likely that society was at least semi-nomadic at this time. The visibility of the tombs from long distances would signal resources and structure mobile movements in a dynamic and vast landscape, while establishing the use rights of the individuals buried in the tombs and propagating them to living descendants. The succeeding Umm an-Nar period exhibits increased sedentism—as evidenced not only by an increase in known settlements, monumental architecture, oasis agriculture, and material culture but also by recent biogeochemical analyses of human dental enamel that demonstrates isotopic homogeneity and an overall lack of mobility in the neighboring Emirates during the mid to late third millennium (Gregoricka 2013a, 2013b, 2014; chapter 10, this volume). Decreased mobility resulted in changing relationships between people and land as discrete resources became more heavily burdened by permanent use, and fixed “ownership” developed to define static territory and boundaries. The central location and collective membership of the monumental Umm an-Nar tombs were integral links between the settled community and its distinct boundaries (Giraud 2010; Giraud and Cleuziou 2009) and may have actualized social identity (e.g., Tilley 1996). Common identity—wrought by the creation of shared ancestors through burial—cemented the link between people and their common territory. Does this transition—embodied by the Al Khubayb tomb—spark a human relationship with the landscape that falls between the two extremes of the Hafit period and the Umm an-Nar period? While few settlements contemporary with Hafit tombs have been located, the period’s highly visible mortuary monuments imply an intentional, constructed relationship with the surrounding landscape. This would create stronger links to specific territories and resources, though not yet as strong as for Umm an-Nar communities. As the composition of individual tombs remains clustered in relatively high places, we would suggest that it is not only relationship

174 · Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

to the land, per se, that is being signaled. Rather, the newly interred resources—the animals—physically represent the link to those resources over which the tombs gaze. Placement within tombs ties them to the land, but also to the people within. Cattle bones were recovered from the transitional tombs in lower frequency than were bones of sheep/goat, but that does not mean they were a less valuable taxa. Isotopic evidence indicates that modern, local cattle and Bronze Age people were eating isotopically similar plants, and those ancient people were likely eating cattle (Gregoricka and Williams 2012). This conjunction of plants, animals, and people suggests that people and cattle were living in close proximity to each other, and therefore that cattle were a primary meat source for the ancient inhabitants. The significance of cattle was not limited to Al Khubayb, as is clear from known settlements of both coastal and inland third millennium BC sites. Cattle at some of those sites may have been imported from elsewhere, as is indicated at the harbor site of Umm an-Nar (Hoch 1979; Uerpmann and Uerpmann 2008). This fact, coupled with strong homogeneity of cattle sizes from across the Arabian Gulf in the Bronze Age (Uerpmann and Uerpmann 2008:Figure 7), suggests that cattle breeding may have been limited to a few locales. The countryside around Al Khubayb may have been one of those locales, making cattle breeding a source of value for its meat and for exchange. People construe their identities in relation to the land and its signifiers, those elements that inform interaction with landscape and “place,” of which animals are a strong indicator (after Jones 1988). In that sense, cattle may have been as inextricably tied to the landscape for the people buried at Al Khubayb as dugong or green turtle were on the coast. But, while the green turtle was signified by its skull and carapace, and the dugong by its skull and ribs, the astragalus (signifying meat) and the pelvis (signifying breeding)—associated with human adult males and human adult female/juvenile pairs, respectively—construed the intrinsic identity of these cattle. The latter, perhaps, alludes to an important difference between the relationships that people have with hunted resources and with domesticated resources. Domestication itself is concerned with offspring, and thus with reproduction and replacement. The cow pelvic bones may embody the significance of these domestic herds through reference to their physical reproduction. Reproductive success is based on the viability and production of stock over time, which is incumbent on secured and maintained land and water resources—all of which bring us back to the pelvis and its intrinsic link between people and the landscape.

Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula · 175

Moreover, their placement within the realm of the tomb ties both cattle and people to the local territory and its uses—in essence marking boundaries, enculturing the landscape, and promoting ancestral rights. That the cow bones were so specifically paired with adult female/juvenile groupings leads us to further speculate that this innovative inclusion of animal bones was a structuring agent for the transfer of cattle wealth and land use rights through maternal lineage. Such a tie would have been strengthened through its enshrinement within the traditional venue of ancestral display and demarcation of people, land, and resources: the monumental tomb. Though speculative, the particular character of the monumental tomb’s repository of both people and resources provides the material for future testing of at least certain of these hypotheses. If the tombs are markers of use-rights, their matriarchal (or, conversely, patriarchal) structuring might be evident via DNA analysis of human relatedness in the tombs. So, too, might a linkage between females and cattle wealth be embodied via further biogeochemical analyses of teeth: if females were owners of cattle, they might be more likely to remain in physical proximity to the animals, visible by similarity in isotopes for food and water resources. Conclusion

The Transitional Tower Tombs of Al Khubayb provide a snapshot in time of an evolving social interaction between people and their land and its resources. Radiocarbon dating places this transition after the Hafit period but before the zenith of Umm an-Nar monumentality and centrality. The many facets of the SoBO project—survey, excavation, and bioarchaeological analysis—together indicate that these transitional tombs show greater attention to tomb form and have increased numbers of individuals, more “local” visibility, and a unique inclusion of animal bones that may emphasize resource reproduction and transmission. Animal bones are no less intentioned than pots, points, or people interred within the tombs, and their placement must be considered to be deliberate, meaningful, and patterned. In view of the unique relationship-structuring aspects of burials and tombs, we infer that the Al Khubayb Transitional Tower Tombs interacted with the landscape in a setting in which animals were property, subject to inheritance and lineage just as resources and territory may have comparably been claimed by the descendants of those placed in the tombs themselves.

176 · Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

References Cited Becker, Cornelia 2000 Tierknochenfunde—Zeugnisse ritueller Aktivitaten. Altorientalische Forschungen 27(1):167–83. Ben Amos, Avner 1991 The Sacred Center of Power: Paris and Republican State Funerals. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 22(1):27–48. Biagi, Paolo, Wolfgang Torke, Maurizio Tosi, and Hans-Peter Uerpmann 1984 Qurum: A Case Study of Coastal Archaeology in Northern Oman. World Archaeology 16(1):43–61. Blau, Soren 2001 Fragmentary Endings: A Discussion of 3rdMillennium BC Burial Practices in the Oman Peninsula. Antiquity 75(289):557–570. 2007 Skeletal and Dental Health and Subsistence Change in the United Arab Emirates. In Ancient Health: Skeletal Indicators of Agricultural and Economic Intensification, edited by Mark Nathan Cohen and Gillian M. M. CraneKramer, pp. 190–206. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Blau, Soren, and Mark Beech 1999 One Woman and Her Dog: An Umm an-Nar Example from the United Arab Emirates. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 10(1):34–42. Cannon, Aubrey 2002 Spatial Narratives of Death, Memory, and Transcendence. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 11:191–99. Cleuziou, Serge 2002 The Early Bronze Age of the Oman Peninsula from Chronology to the Dialectics of Tribe and State Formation. In Essays on the Late Prehistory of the Arabian Peninsula, edited by Serge Cleuziou, Maurizio Tosi, and Juris Zarins, pp. 191–236. Serie Orientale Roma XCIII. Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, Rome. 2007 Evolution toward Complexity in a Coastal Desert Environment: The Early Bronze Age in the Ja’alan, Sultanate of Oman. In The Model-Based Archaeology of Socionatural Systems, edited by Timothy Kohler and Sander van der Leeuw, pp. 209–227. SAR Press: Sante Fe, New Mexico. Cleuziou, Serge, and Maurizio Tosi (editors) 2007 In the Shadow of the Ancestors: The Prehistoric Foundations of the Early Arabian Civilization in Oman. Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Muscat. Collins, Billie Jean 2002 Necromancy, Fertility and the Dark Earth. In Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World, edited by Paul Allen Mirecki and Marvin W. Meyer, pp. 224–242. Brill, Leiden. Coppa, Alfredo, Roberto Macchiarelli, Sandro Salvatori, and Geraldina Santini 1985 The Prehistoric Graveyard of Ra’s alHamra (RH5): A Short Preliminary Report on the 198183 Excavations. Journal of Oman Studies 8:97–102. Deadman, William M. 2012 Defining the Early Bronze Age Landscape: A Remote-Sensing Based Analysis of

Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula · 177

Hafit Tomb Distribution in Wadi Andam, Sultanate of Oman. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 23(1):26–34. Eddisford, Daniel, and Carl Phillips 2009 Kalba in the Third Millennium (Emirate of Sharjah, UAE). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 39:99–112. Edens, Christopher 1992 Dynamics of Trade in the Ancient Mesopotamia “World System.” American Anthropologist 94(1):118–139. Frank, Andre Gunder 1993 Bronze Age World System Cycles. Current Anthropology 34(4):383–405. Frifelt, Karen 1975 On Prehistoric Settlement and Chronology of the Oman Peninsula. East and West 25(3–4):359–424. Frøhlich, Bruno 1986 The Human Biological History of the Early Bronze Age Population in Bahrain. In Bahrain through the Ages: The Archaeology, edited by Shaikha Haya Ali Al Khalifa and Michael Rice, pp. 47–63. Kegan Paul International, London. Gaultier, Matthieu, Hervé Guy, Olivia Munoz, Maurizio Tosi, and Donatella Usai 2005 Settlement Structures and Cemetery at Wadi Shab-GAS1, Sultanate of Oman: Report on the 2002 and 2003 Field Seasons. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 16(1):1–20. Giraud, Jessica 2010 Early Bronze Age Graves and Graveyards in the Eastern Ja’alān (Sultanate of Oman): An Assessment of the Social Rules Working in the Funeral Landscape. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Examples, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 71–84. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Giraud, Jessica, and Serge Cleuziou 2009 Funerary Landscape as Part of the Social Landscape and Its Perceptions: 3000 Early Bronze Age Burials in the Eastern Ja’alān (Sultanate of Oman). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 39:163–180. Goody, Jack 1962 Death, Property and the Ancestors: A Study of the Mortuary Customs of the LoDagaa of West Africa. London: Tavistock. Gregoricka, Lesley A. 2013a Residential Mobility and Social Identity in the Periphery: Strontium Isotope Analysis of Archaeological Tooth Enamel from Southeastern Arabia. Journal of Archaeological Science 40(1):452–464. 2013b Geographic Origins and Dietary Transitions during the Bronze Age in the Oman Peninsula. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 152(3):353–369. 2014 Assessing Life History from Commingled Assemblages: The Biogeochemistry of Inter-Tooth Variability in Bronze Age Arabia. Journal of Archaeological Science 47(1):10–21. 2016 Human Response to Climate Change during the Umm an-Nar/Wadi Suq Transition in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 26(2):211–220.

178 · Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

Gregoricka, Lesley A., and Kimberly D. Williams 2012 Not So Fragmentary Endings: Bioarchaeology of the Hafit/Umm an-Nar Transition in the Oman Peninsula. Presentation at the American Schools of Oriental Research, November 14–17, Chicago. Gurney, Oliver 1977 Some Aspects of Hittite Religion. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Hellyer, Peter 1998 Hidden Riches: An Archaeological Introduction to the United Arab Emirates. Union National Bank, Abu Dhabi. Hoch, Ernie 1979 Reflections on Prehistoric Life at Umm An-Nar (Trucial Oman) Based on Faunal Remains from the Third Millennium B.C. In South Asian Archaeology 1977: Papers from the Fourth International Conference of the Association of South Asian Archaeologists in Western Europe, Held at the Istituto Universitario Orientale, Naples, edited by M Taddei, pp. 589–638. Instituto Universitario Orientale 197. Instituto Universitario Orientale, Naples. 1991 Bones of Small Animals in Grave I. In The Island of Umm an-Nar: 1. Third Millennium Graves, by Karen Frifelt, pp. 180–183. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI, Aarhus. Jacobsen, T. 1991 Comment on Pollock: Of Priestesses, Princes, and Poor Relations: The Dead in the Royal Cemetery of Ur. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1(2):185. Al Jahwari, Nasser Said 2013 The Early Bronze Age Funerary Archaeological Landscape of Western Ja’alan: Results of Three Seasons of Investigation. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(2):151–173. Jasim, Sabah Abboud 1999 The Excavation of a Camel Cemetery at Mleiha, Sharjah, U.A.E. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 10(1):69–101. Jones, Andrew 1998 Where Eagles Dare: Landscape, Animals and the Neolithic of Orkney. Journal of Material Culture 3(3):301–324. Katz, Dina 2003 The Image of the Netherworld in Sumerian Sources. CDL Press, Bethesda, Maryland. Kertzer, David J. 1983 The Role of Ritual in Political Change. In Culture and Political Change, edited by Myron J. Aronoff, pp. 53–73. Transaction Books, New Brunswick, New Jersey. Kramer, Samuel Noah 1967 The Death of Ur-Nammu and His Descent to the Netherworld. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 21:104–122. Magee, Peter 2014 The Archaeology of Prehistoric Arabia. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula · 179

Martin, Debra L. 2007 Bioarchaeology in the United Arab Emirates. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 18(2):124–131. McAnany, Patricia 1995 Living with the Ancestors: Kinship and Kingship in Ancient Maya Society. University of Texas Press, Austin. Méry, Sophie, and Margareta Tengberg 2009 Food for Eternity? The Analysis of a Date Offering from a 3rd Millennium BC Grave at Hili N, Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates). Journal of Archaeological Science 36(9):2012–2017. Méry, Sophie, Vincent Charpentier, Ginette Auxiette, and Eric Pelle 2009 A Dugong Bone Mound: The Neolithic Ritual Site on Akab in Umm alQuwain, United Arab Emirates. Antiquity 83(321):696–708. Meyer, Jan-Waalke 2000 Zur Möglichkeit einer kulturhistorischen Einordnung von Grabfunden. Altorientalische Forschungen 27(1):21–37. Pardee, Dennis G. 1996 Marzihu, Kispu, and the Ugaritic Funerary Cult: A Minimalist View. In Ugarit, Religion and Culture: International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburgh, July 1994. Essays Presented in Honour of Professor John C. L. Gibson, pp. 237–287. Ugaritisch-biblische Literatur 12. Ugarit-Verlag, Munster. Parker Pearson, Michael 1982 Mortuary Practices, Society, and Ideology: An Ethnoarchaeological Study. In Symbolic and Structural Archaeology, edited by Ian Hodder, pp. 99–113. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1999 The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Texas A&M University Press, College Station. Potts, Daniel T. 2001 Before the Emirates: An Archaeological and Historical Account of Developments in the Region c. 5000 BC to 676 AD. In United Arab Emirates: A New Perspective, edited by Ibrahim Al Abed and Peter Hellyer, pp. 28–69. Trident Press, London. 2009 The Archaeology and Early History of the Persian Gulf. In The Persian Gulf in History, edited by Lawrence G. Potter, pp. 27–53. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. Ratnagar, Shereen 2001 The Bronze Age: Unique Instance of a PreIndustrial World System? Current Anthropology 42(3):351–365. Salvatori, Sandro 2007 The Prehistoric Graveyard at Ra’s Al-Hamra RH-5. In In the Shadow of the Ancestors: The Prehistoric Foundations of the Early Arabian Civilization in Oman, edited by Serge Cleuziou and Maurizio Tosi, pp. 98–102. Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Muscat. Siebert, Stefan, J. Haser, Maher Nagieb, Lorenz Korn, and Andreas Buerkert 2005 Agricultural, Architectural and Archaeological Evidence for the Role and Eco-

180 · Jill Weber, Kimberly D. Williams, and Lesley A. Gregoricka

logical Adaptation of a Scattered Mountain Oasis in Oman. Journal of Arid Environments 62(1):177–197. Stein, Gil J. 1999 Rethinking WorldSystems: Diasporas, Colonies, and Interaction in Uruk Mesopotamia. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Tilley, Christopher 1996 An Ethnography of the Neolithic: Early Prehistoric Societies in Southern Scandinavia. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Tinney, Stephen J. 1998 Death and Burial in Early Mesopotamia: The View from the Texts. In Treasures from the Royal Cemetery of Ur, edited by Richard L. Zettler and Lee Horne, pp. 26–28. University of Pennsylvania Museum of Anthropology and Archaeology, Philadelphia. Uerpmann, Hans-Peter 1999 Camel and Horse Skeletons from Protohistoric Graves at Mleiha in the Emirate of Sharjah (U.A.E.). Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 10(1):102–118. Uerpmann, Hans-Peter, and Margarethe Uerpmann 1999 The Camel Burial of al-Buhais 12 (Sharjah, U.A.E.). In Historia Animalium Ex Ossibus: Beitrage zur Palaoanatomie, Archaologie, Agyptologi, Ethnologie u Geschichte der Tiermedizin; Festschrift fur Angela von den Driesch zum 65, edited by Cornelia Becker, Henriette Manhart, Joris Peters, and Jörg Schibler, pp. 455– 462. Leidorf, Rahden. 2003 Stone Age Sites and Their Natural Environment: The Capital Area of Northern Oman. Ludwig Reichert, Wiesbaden. Uerpmann, Margarethe 2001 Remarks on the Animal Economy of Tell Abraq (Emirates of Sharjah and Umm al-Qaywayn, UAE). Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 31:227–233. Uerpmann, Margarethe, and Hans-Peter Uerpmann 1994 Animal Bone Finds from Excavation 520 at Qala’at al-Bahrain. In Qala’at alBahrain, 1: The Northern City Wall and the Islamic Fortressi, edited by Flemming Hojlund and H. H. Andersen, pp. 417–444. Jutland Archaeological Society, Højbjerg. 2008 Animal Economy during the Early Bronze Age in South-East Arabia. In Archaeozoology of the Southwest Asia and Adjacent Areas VIII: Actes du 8e colloque de l’ASWA (Archaeozoology of Southwestern Asia and adjacent areas, Lyon 28 juin-1er juillet 2006), edited by Emmaneulle Vila, Lionel Gourichon, Alice M. Choyke, and Hijlke Buitenhuis. Travaux de la Maison de l’Orient, Lyon. Usai, Donatella 2006 A Fourth-Millennium BC Oman Site and Its Context: Wadi Shab-GAS1. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 36:275–288. Vila, Emmanuelle 2005 Réflexions sur les offrandes animales dans des tombes de la nécropole de Abu Hamad sur les piémonts du Bischri (Syrie, 3e millénaire av. J.-C., Bronze ancien). In Der Friedhof von Abu Hamed (Syrien), Gräber des 3.Jahrtausends v. Chr,

Animals and the Changing Landscape of Death on the Oman Peninsula · 181

edited by Christian Falb, Klaus Kraznik, Jan W Meyer, and Emmanuelle Vila, pp. 335–357. Saarländische Druckerei & Verlag, Saarwellingen. von den Driesch, Angela 1976 A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Peabody Museum Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts. Weber, Jill A. 2012 Restoring Order: Death, Display, and Authority. In Sacred Killing: The Archaeology of Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East, edited by Anne M. Porter and Glenn M. Schwartz, pp. 159–190. Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana. Williams, Kimberly D., and Lesley A. Gregoricka 2013 Social, Spatial, and Bioarchaeological Histories of Ancient Oman: The Mortuary Landscape of Dhank. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24(2):134–150.

9 The Tomb at Tell Abraq (ca. 2100–2000 BC) Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

Mortuary practices during the Bronze Age in the southeastern Arabian Peninsula are challenging to synthesize both because of their variability and also because of the nature of their preservation. This is particularly evident for Umm an-Nar-period sites (ca. 2500–2000 BC), as mortuary assemblages were often plundered in antiquity, making interpretation of the burial process and general community behavior difficult. The tomb at Tell Abraq (ca. 2100–2000 BC) was the repository for over 400 individuals of all ages and both sexes. Due to the complicated mortuary processing of the tomb, however, the determination of baseline data (the minimum number of individuals as well as the age at death and sex distribution of individuals in the tomb) needed to be addressed with techniques specific to the analysis of commingled remains. The methodology, therefore, is important to the overall interpretation of the assemblage. Situated on the Arabian Gulf in the Emirate of Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates, the tomb contained the commingled remains of minimally 276 adults and 127 subadults. Among the subadults, there was a surprisingly high frequency of premature (28%) and newborn infants (9%) in the tomb. This chapter provides the demographic structure of the tomb population based on a detailed minimum number of individuals (MNI) study and the complex nature of the mortuary program. Collective burials such as the one at Tell Abraq are not unique. Cauwe (2001) made an association between collectivizing of burials and agriculture, noting that in Europe and Southwest Asia, the number of collective graves increased during the Neolithic period. Keswani (2004) drew an association between collective tombs and maintenance of tradition, particularly

The Tomb at Tell Abraq: Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity · 183

during times of economic change. Hertz (1960) theorized that the dead are used as a touchstone for the living and once interred collectively, the individual disappears and is subsumed into the identity of the ancestors. Hertz argued that the physical manipulation of the bones may have been necessary for a successful transformation. This kind of ritual could then have been used to cement social ties or assert economic rights over specific resources or land (Keswani 2004; Saxe 1970; chapter 8, this volume). Keswani (2004:17) argued that collective burial both expresses and creates a sense of lineage and/or descent group identity. Using Tell Abraq as an example, the context and meaning of collective mortuary tombs are examined by an emphasis on the demography of the tomb’s population and the way in which the individuals were interred within the tomb. Umm an-Nar Mortuary Patterns

Tombs of the late Early Bronze Age, that is, the Umm an-Nar period, are well-attested across the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Oman. However, in most cases they were badly robbed in antiquity and not associated with a corresponding settlement. Umm an-Nar tombs are circular, above-ground stone constructions with one or more interior chambers delimited by stone partition walls and diameters of 4 to 14 meters (Blau 2001; Cleuziou et al. 2011; Frifelt 1975; Potts 1990; Al Tikriti 1989). Built of stone that varied according to the geology of the surrounding area, tombs of this type were invariably faced with finely masoned limestone ashlars. Entrances are rarely preserved, but at Hili a reconstructed, well-preserved tomb has an entrance shaped like an inverted U raised about 1 m above the ground, through which an adult would have been able to crawl (Potts 2009). Umm an-Nar tombs tend to have one or two entrances facing north and/or south; however, they can also face other directions (Al Tikriti 1989). These entrances often were sealed with trapezoidal-shaped stones (Cleuziou and Vogt 1983; Potts 2000a, 2000b). Roofing is indicated by large, flat slabs of stone supported by the internal cross-walls that divided the interior space. Tombs were floored with unworked stone slabs. The number of chambers in these tombs ranges from one to a dozen, depending on the diameter of the structure (Blau 2001). More chambers and larger tombs do not, however, correlate with the number of individuals interred (Blau 2001). The depositional history of Umm an-Nar–type burials has been discussed (e.g., Benton 1996; Cleuziou et al. 2011; McSweeney et al. 2008). Collective tombs of this type do not represent single episodes of mass burial

184 · Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

due to such events as plague or warfare. Rather, they were almost certainly used over several generations for both primary and secondary interments. However, since tombs were utilized frequently over a period of time, primary burial treatment is much more difficult to surmise. The placement of newly deceased individuals in a tomb already containing partially or wholly decomposed human bodies could easily shift those previously deposited remains, disturbing the anatomical position of individuals. It is also possible that there was intentionality and meaning in the manner in which the skeletonized elements were shifted and moved. Regardless of how it happened, the result has been commingling of skeletal elements and the loss of individual mortuary treatment information such as initial burial location. Umm an-Nar tombs may or may not have been used until they were full, although in some places on the Arabian Peninsula this was likely the case. At Hili, in the interior of Abu Dhabi, and on Umm an-Nar Island, off the coast of the city of Abu Dhabi, the presence of multiple tombs suggests the need for more space to inter the dead, perhaps over the course of centuries, than a single tomb could provide (Benton 1996; Cleuziou et al. 2011). At Al Sufouh in Dubai and at Hili Tomb N, pits containing bone and artifacts were discovered just outside of a built tomb, suggesting that tombs were periodically cleaned out and bone and artifacts were removed and re-deposited in exterior pits in order to make room for more interments in the main structure (Benton 1996). The deceased from Umm an-Nar–style mortuary features were interred with grave goods that included ceramics, stone vessels, stone lamps, personal adornments such as jewelry and ivory combs, bronze weaponry, and both cylinder and stamp seals. The discovery of textile impressions in the corrosion products of bronze objects indicates that textiles were part of mortuary equipment. It is assumed that each community had one or more tombs and, to date, nothing suggests segregation by age, sex, or social status in the population interred in these tombs. Rather, given the presence of both high-status objects (e.g. ivory, gold, and alabaster; Potts 1994, 2000a, 2000b) and locally manufactured pottery and stone vessels typical of the period, it is presumed that the individuals interred represent all social and economic categories in a community, even if the grave goods originally associated with specific individuals reveal status differences. At the same time, the foreign provenience of some of the objects in the tomb—ceramics of southwest and southeast Iranian, Mesopotamian, and Dilmunite (Bahraini) origin (Potts 1994, 2000a, 2000b, 2003); soft-stone and alabaster

The Tomb at Tell Abraq: Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity · 185

vessels from eastern Iran, Afghanistan, and/or Central Asia (Potts 2000a, 2000b); and ivory combs with distinctively Bactrian (Central Asian) floral iconography (Potts 1994, 2000b)—raises the possibility that not only goods but also people were moving between southeastern Arabia and contemporary settlements in these areas (Potts 2009, 2012). Reconstructing mortuary rituals in a multiepisodic interment pattern, in which both primary and secondary burials are present, is difficult. In Mesopotamia, the raison d’être of proper burial was to prevent the restless ghost of the deceased from plaguing the living (Potts 1997). It is likely that a similar motivation operated in southeastern Arabia, where ceramic, stone, and ostrich eggshell vessels may have been interred not because of any intrinsic value but because they were containers for food and drink for the afterlife or as propitiation to divine beings and other spirits (Potts 1997). The inclusion of personal jewelry, presumably on the corpse at the time of interment, is also a feature of Umm an-Nar–type tombs (Potts 2000a, 2000b). Weaponry may have been included to serve the deceased in the afterlife or as a commemoration of deeds performed in life. The tomb at Tell Abraq contained a large quantity of small charcoal flecks that may represent the residue of bundles of burnt twigs, aromatic or simply functioning to provide illumination in the dark confines of the tomb on the occasion of a new interment. Whether the burning of aromatics occurred as part of the ceremonial behavior of interment is difficult to say, but an incense burner found at the contemporary site of Ra’s al-Jinz 2 in the Sultanate of Oman has a blackened patch of frankincense (Boswellia sp.) residue that was almost certainly obtained from Dhofar in southern Arabia (the nearest source). This evidence shows that aromatics were already available and utilized in the late third millennium BC (Cleuziou and Tosi 2007). The Tell Abraq Settlement and Tomb

The tomb at Tell Abraq provides an intriguing case study for the analysis of tomb use, commemoration of the dead, and possibilities for memorializing individuals within the tomb. Tell Abraq is located in the northern UAE on the border of the emirates of Sharjah and Umm al-Quwain, about an hour’s drive northeast of Dubai. The site covers 4 ha and consists of a small mound standing about 10 meters above a plain surrounded by attenuated settlement remains spread out in all directions. As it is currently located only about 100 meters from the southern edge of a sabkha, or salt flat, it can

186 · Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

be deduced that Tell Abraq was situated beside a lagoon when it was occupied. Thus, though its location is well away from the present-day lagoon of Umm al-Qaiwain, it should be considered a coastal site. Occupation at Tell Abraq began around 2200–2100 BC and lasted until around 400–300 BC, although there are some traces of subsequent use in the first century AD (Potts 1994, 2000a, 2000b, 2009, 2012). The stone tomb (Figure 9.1), which is 6 m in diameter, was discovered 10 m to the west of a fortification tower on the same ancient ground surface. The tower and tomb were apparently built together as the first settlement structures at the site when it was settled circa 2200–2100 BC. One intriguing aspect of the relationship of the tomb to the tower is that the tomb was only used for a relatively short period of time. Radiocarbon dates and artifacts suggest that the tomb was used for around 100 years (2100–2000 BC; Potts 2000b, 2003a). The tower continued to be used and reused as a habitation area well into the Iron Age (Magee et al. 2009). At Tell Abraq the floor of the tomb was constructed first, on top of which the walls were then erected, followed by their ashlar limestone facing, and finally the roof (Potts 1993a, 2000a, 2001). This floor extended to the south of the tomb, constituting a paved area outside and terminating in a small retaining wall of upright stone slabs with a clearly defined threshold that served as an entrance to the tomb precinct. The tomb itself seems to have been entered through a trapezoidal opening about 50 centimeters above the floor, where a neatly made, trapezoidal limestone ashlar is clear. Inside, the tomb was divided by a single wall, running south from the northern side of the interior and stopping directly opposite the presumed entrance point. Thus, access to either chamber (east or west) was gained directly upon entering through the trapezoidal opening in the wall. Steeply angled, irregularly shaped slabs of stone found in the interior were almost certainly collapsed roofing stones. As Tell Abraq was directly on the coast, no terrestrial stone was locally available for tomb construction, so beach rock (Arabic farush) was used instead. This conglomerate forms in shallow water and can easily be broken into flat slabs that can serve as ready-made building blocks. The limestone used to face the tomb, however, must have been brought from a distance of at least 50 kilometers, since the nearest sources would have been the Al-Hajar Mountains or some of the isolated rock outcrops in the interior of Sharjah. The tomb at Tell Abraq was largely well preserved except for a portion that was completely missing. The external facing stands highest around the north and east sides of the tomb, while it is missing entirely to the northwest

The Tomb at Tell Abraq: Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity · 187

Figure 9.1. The tomb structure at Tell Abraq showing the eastern and western chambers separated by a middle wall. The rear portion of the tomb went missing in antiquity.

and southeast, as is the interior flooring. This clearly suggests that some sort of damage was inflicted on the tomb in antiquity but, uniquely for Umm an-Nar–period sites in the region, the tomb was entirely covered over by settlement debris soon after it went out of use. Pottery discovered in the uppermost fill of the tomb and directly above it was clearly datable to around 1900–1700 BC, and a large amount of fishbone, comprising the remains of thousands of individual fish, overlaid the tomb area (Potts 2000b). Thus, as settlement debris accumulated outside the tower, the tomb inside was inundated by a combination of refuse and sand, disappearing entirely from sight by the early second millennium BC. This accounts for the relatively good state of preservation and the large number of artifacts found in the tomb. Unlike many other tombs of this type, looting and reuse in the Iron Age or later never occurred as the tomb was entirely hidden from view (Potts 2000a, 2000b). The fact that the tomb was used repeatedly is clear because the resulting bone deposit was mostly disarticulated and commingled. It is possible that articulated individuals were placed in the tomb year after year, resulting in the commingling of bone as earlier interments were pushed aside to make room for new ones. Although only one individual was articulated and in

188 · Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

place in the whole tomb (Martin and Potts 2012), it was not unusual to see partially articulated feet, vertebral columns, and limbs. The Tell Abraq Tomb Assemblage

The development of baseline data such as the age and sex distribution of those interred is imperative in any analysis of commingled and fragmentary assemblages. First, the determination of the MNI present in the tomb was completed. The analysis of the Tell Abraq tomb assemblage employed a modified zonal method that emphasizes skeletal features of differing bony density (Knüsel and Outram 2004). Foundational work for this methodology was modeled after analysis of a large, commingled, and fragmented collection from the prehistoric American Southwest (Osterholtz and Stodder 2010, 2011; Stodder and Osterholtz 2010; Stodder et al. 2010). In the Tell Abraq tomb, taphonomic features of the bone were largely due to natural degradation. Features chosen for analysis were based on their degree of density (thus, having better preservation) and ability to provide information about age and sex. It is through the choice of these features that we were able to examine not only what has been preserved, but what has not been preserved or was not present. This provides insight into elements of the body that may have been used in other contexts. The methodology for this analysis was designed to perform several functions. First, demographic data were recorded for individual bone elements using methodologies developed specifically for those elements. For example, to estimate sex based on the talus, Steele’s (1976) discriminant functions were used because they do not rely on the presence of more than a single element. We chose methodologies with at least 70 percent accuracy for the estimation of sex. Second, the methodology was designed to provide standardized methods for inventory. These included the use of anatomical features and visual recording forms. Other mechanisms to ensure consistency included the use of a single analyst to complete data collection for a single element (i.e., the analyst who began the recordation of the scapulae finished the recordation of the scapulae). Third, by recording a variety of features of both dense and spongier bone, breakage and representation of elements within the tomb assemblage was analyzed. This provided an assessment of whether denser bone was more prevalent than less-dense bone. If elements were recorded as present

Figure 9.2. An example of the access database collection sheet for the os coxa showing how bone features were used to make the assessment of MNI. Credit: A. Osterholtz.

190 · Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

Table 9.1. Distribution of select bone elements for which a sex assignment was attempted Frontalprocess

Frontalglabella

C1

C2

Total # examined

n/a

n/a

129

181

Left

56

Left female

24

Left male

21

Sternum Scapula Clavicle Humerus 122

464

169

749

97

62

157

Left ambiguous

8

Left indeterminate

3

97

62

157

Right

56

98

59

156

Right female

17

Right male

23 98

59

156

Right ambiguous Right indeterminate

6 10

Midline

72

Midline female

30

Midline male

34

Midline ambiguous

4

Midline indeterminate

4

92

170

57

92

170

57

based solely on their degree of completeness, this level of detail would not be possible. In order to manage the great amount of detailed data being collected, a database was built by one of the primary analysts (A. Osterholtz) based on a database developed by Kristina Horton and Ann Stodder for the Sacred Ridge assemblage (as described in Stodder and Osterholtz [2010]). This simplified version used a visual form to ensure consistency among observers (see Figure 9.2 for an example). To further minimize interobserver error in the identification of elements, features were marked as present or absent, which could then be tabulated and compared with other features from the same bone (with additional comparisons regarding sex, side, and age). This was done to provide consistency in age and sex criteria and in the identification of features present. Table 9.1 presents selected adult bones for which the MNI for rights and lefts are reported, as well as the assignment of sex based on published standards for bones that are more universally dimorphic, such as the cranium,

The Tomb at Tell Abraq: Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity · 191

Radius Ulna Scaphoid MC 1 Os Coxa Patella Fibula Talus Calcaneus Cuboid MT 1 603

n/a

297

238

740

484

628

561

328

319

259

71

160

144

121

112

240

110

259

166

158

141

26

45

50

13

36

132

101

45

1

25

6

1

71

160

144

121

80

38

110

103

107

158

141

90

176

153

110

112

243

109

276

158

161

118

23

6

43

14

28

6

79

55

4

0

9

0

93

231

145

89

161

118

90

176

153

110

109

os coxae, patella, talus, and calcaneus. The bone for which there was the highest number, representing at least 276 adults, was the right talus. While 154 of the right tali could not be confidently sexed, there were 43 females and 79 males that could be confidently sexed. Among 240 left patellae, there were 45 female and 132 male assignments. The pattern of adult males outnumbering females is worth noting, but it is too soon to say that this represents an actual asymmetry in adult sexes. The subadult MNI (including preterm and full-term infants, children, and adolescents) has been accomplished using one element. The current MNI for subadults stands at 127 and was based on the left femur (Baustian 2010). The methods Baustian used draw on all available techniques for aging subadults using only the femur (Anderson et al. 1964; Baker et al. 2005; Fazekas and Kosa 1978; Gindhart 1973; Jeanty 1983; Maresh 1970; Mehta and Singh 1972; Scheuer et al. 1980; Scheuer and Black 2000, 2004). Although not ideal and possibly masking the effects of stress on the growth and development of subadults in the tomb, long-bone length was used as a

192 · Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

very rough approximation of age for the subadult population. Patterns in growth velocity as affected by external stressors cannot be assessed, but an estimate of the numbers of infants and children in broad age categories was reconstructed and used with the proviso that the data are imperfect and only an approximation. A few consistent taphonomic patterns are present among the postcranial bones. The proximal and distal ends of long bones were better represented than shafts, although there is a very large number of unidentifiable longbone splinters. Denser bone is better represented, as typified by the greater representation of the tali and patellae, which are both small, round bones. Thinner bone (such as blades of the scapulae) was highly fragmented. Individual fragments could still be identified as scapulae, but these did not contribute to the MNI because of the small size of the fragments. A very small number of bone elements showed burning. This appears to have happened when burning material touched the bones, leaving small dots of burned tissue. As discussed above, the burning of incense and candles may have taken place. Location of Bones within the Tomb

The tomb was excavated by a team that included one of the authors (Martin) over several field seasons in the early 1990s. Bones were not individually mapped for provenience, but were assigned to a unit 50 × 50 × 10 cm in size. This made it possible to develop a two- and three-dimensional map of these units and the bones that were contained within them. Mapping the tomb provides insight into how the deposition was created. It also provides insight into tomb use. In a preliminary study using ArcGIS 3-D mapping software, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, graduate students Maryann Calleja and Alecia Shrenk reconstructed the location of 5,000 of the over 27,000 bone elements for which there was good provenience. Drawing on the positioning of bone clusters in the tomb, the early reconstructions suggested that there were no differences in the distribution of bone elements in the western and eastern chambers of the tomb (Figure 9.1). Figure 9.3 shows the distribution for ossa coxae elements as an example. For the 5,000 bones that have been mapped thus far, all bone elements were found in all strata, in both east and west chambers and near exterior walls and toward the middle wall. While this image shows some blank spots, there were no areas in the tomb that did not have densely packed bone

The Tomb at Tell Abraq: Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity · 193

Figure 9.3. A preliminary ArcGIS reconstruction of the distribution of pelvic bones in the tomb. Credit: Maryann Calleja.

elements. The blank areas represent the small subsample that has been mapped thus far. The darker color means there were more ossa coxae in that one 50 × 50 cm square. The completely commingled nature of the bones and the fact that every bone of the body was recovered (including small hand and foot bones) suggest that as bodies became skeletonized within the tomb, they were moved to accommodate new burials. This moving of bones (whether done intentionally or more expediently) resulted in a tomb that contained the skeletons of hundreds of individuals commingled from the floor to the ceiling. Many of the bones were broken and found in such small pieces they are not identifiable. One theory is that after pushing and moving elements around to create more space, many of the dried bones broke and were crushed as

194 · Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

the tomb was repeatedly rearranged to accommodate over 400 individuals in a relatively small and compact space. The mortuary program appears to be what Boz and Hager (2014:19) have described as being “primary disturbed.” While we cannot rule out secondary burial, the evidence (presence of infant bones and small elements from adult bones) suggests this did not take place. Summary of Human Remains within the Tomb

The mortuary behavior at Tell Abraq is complex and provides evidence for intentionality by the living population on several levels. This tomb, used for less than two centuries during the time that the large fortification tower and tell were constructed, may hold the bones of the original pioneering community that settled on the shores of the Arabian Gulf. Evidence of trade items found in the tomb, such as bone hairpins and Harappan weights, suggests that the site was in a good location for arriving and departing seafaring vessels (Potts 1993b). Isotopic analysis of dentition from the tomb suggests a largely homogeneous population, but there was evidence of at least a few individuals who were immigrants to the region (Gregoricka 2013). Thus, we hypothesize that the tomb was a commemorative place where ritualized preparation of the dead took place. Due to the age and sex structure of the tomb population (all age categories from preterm infants to elderly and both male and female adults), it appears that the community used this tomb for everyone who died. Sexing dimorphic postcranial fragments and available ossa coxae consistently showed that there were more adult males (approximately 65%) than females (Osterholtz et al. 2014). The approximately 400 individuals interred in the tomb over a 100-year period would represent two to three deaths per year. It is likely that the total number in the tomb was actually much higher. The large proportion of premature and full-term infants is confounding; there is no precedent for this in other tombs from the Near East or the Bronze Age in this region. Multiple competing hypotheses that can account for presence of premature and full-term infants would necessarily include both cultural factors (infanticide, sacrifice, consanguinity, high fertility) and/or environmental factors (toxic environment for maternal and infant health, endemic diseases, poor diet). Baustian (2010) investigated such mortality patterns using clinical, ethnohistoric, and paleopathological literature to argue that these deaths stemmed from ideological beliefs that underpinned the local kinship and marriage arrangements. Practices such as consanguineous and arranged

The Tomb at Tell Abraq: Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity · 195

young marriages (practiced extensively in the region for at least many centuries) are known to negatively affect infant viability (e.g., Frisancho 2006; Al Gazali et al. 2005; Rajab and Patton 2000; Scholl et al. 1992). Given the tomb’s proximity to the habitation area and its diverse demographic configuration, these cultural practices may have contributed to a significant proportion of spontaneous abortions and high infant mortality. Because of a desire to have the tomb be a resting place for every member of this culturally (based on grave goods) and mostly genetically homogeneous community (based on isotopic composition of the dentition of adults), preterm and term infants were memorialized in the tomb along with the adults. The inclusion of the very young, including premature infants, also suggests culturally specific notions of status in the community. Given their interment with adults, it is likely that their social standing in the community was considered co-equal. Due to the likelihood of the use of the Arabian Gulf as a major route for trade, travel, and migration, Tell Abraq may have represented a bustling port with a constant influx of nonlocal people. Based on artifacts from Tell Abraq, Potts (1993b) has argued for a reassessment of trade and migration. He states that findings from Tell Abraq “demonstrate that there were more connections spanning a greater period of time between Magan and Dilmun, Magan and Elam, and Magan and Mesopotamia, than ever before imagined. . . . There is evidence for contact between Magan and her northern neighbours from the early third millennium” (436). Tell Abraq was situated in a location that connected civilizations in Mesopotamia and Elam with those in nearby Oman (Magan) and Saudi Arabia and Bahrain (Dilmun). The dental isotopic data, which shows that a small percentage of individuals may have been extralocal, could be a reflection of this central location within a vast trade network. The fact that only the late Early Bronze Age occupation of the Tell Abraq site has mortuary representation suggests several things about mortuary behavior in the region. Since no other mortuary features or collective graves have been located at the site, a shift in mortuary rituals must have occurred at the end of the Bronze Age and during the transition to the Iron Age. It is possible that there are additional tombs at the site, but current excavation and survey data have not revealed their existence. The tomb at Tell Abraq indicates a ritual ideology in which the dead were memorialized as individuals (as seen in the grave items associated with some of the skeletal remains) as well as a community (as seen from their collective burial). In several cases, ivory combs were still adhered to crania

196 · Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

(Potts 2000b, 102) and bronze toe rings were found on phalanges (Potts 2000b, 94). The individuals in the tomb represent all ages and both sexes who were a mostly culturally and genetically homogeneous population. The presence of at least two nonlocal individuals based on the strontium isotope data shows that some immigrants into the region were folded into the community and thus into the tomb upon death (Gregoricka 2013). The commingled nature of the individuals interred in this Umm an-Nar tomb presents a challenge in understanding individual identities and variation in mortuary treatment. The location of the tomb and its close proximity to the large tell, however, suggest that during the late third millennium BC the dead were important to the living. The close proximity of the tomb to the living spaces and the near-constant use of the tomb over a 150-year period suggest continuity between the dead and the living. Although some aspects of the relationship between the living and the dead have been clarified through the analysis of the tomb, its unique features raise many more questions. We were able to show, through the detailoriented MNI and demographic analysis, that the entire community was interred together and received similar treatment. We still have little information about how the tomb population compares to the population as a whole. Furthermore, we do not know about mortuary behaviors throughout the site’s chronology. We are limited by the confines of the tomb and the number of individuals located within it. When examined in a larger regional sphere, though, the tomb demography and mortuary treatment indicated through the baseline data add to the complexity of the overall understanding of mortuary variability associated with the Umm an-Nar period. The location of the site on the Arabian Gulf, the close proximity of the tomb to the fortress, the presence of trade goods and possibly traders themselves in the tomb, and the unusually high number of premature and full-term infants together suggest a port town that utilized the tomb for most if not all of the individuals who died over a period of approximately 100 years at the very end of the Early Bronze Age. There is no doubt that this tomb held a special place in the daily lives and rituals of community members: it confirmed on a regular basis the continued connections between the dead and the living. Acknowledgments

Initial funding for the excavation and curation of the human remains from Tell Abraq was provided by two grants from the Wenner Gren Foundation

The Tomb at Tell Abraq: Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity · 197

for Anthropological Research. Support from the University of Nevada Graduate and Professional Student Association facilitated presentation of some of these results at three national conferences. We also thank the anonymous reviewer who provided many good suggestions for strengthening the chapter. References Cited Anderson, Margaret, Marie Blais Messner, and William T. Green 1964 Distribution of Lengths of the Normal Femur and Tibia from One to Eighteen Years of Age. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 45(6):1–14. Baker, Brenda, Tosha Dupras, and Matthew Tocheri 2005 The Osteology of Infants and Children. Texas A&M University Press, College Station. Baustian, Kathryn M. 2010 Health Status of Infants and Children from the Bronze Age Tomb at Tell Abraq, United Arab Emirates. MA thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Benton, Jodie N. 1996 Excavations at Al Sufouh: A Third Millennium Site in the Emirate of Dubai. Brepols, Turnhout. Blau, Soren 2001 Fragmentary Endings: A Discussion of 3rd-Millennium BC Burial Practices in the Oman Peninsula. Antiquity 75(289):557–570. Boz, Basak, and Lori D. Hager 2014 Making Sense of Social Behavior from Disturbed and Commingled Skeletons: A Case Study from Catalhoyuk, Turkey. In Commingled and Disarticulated Human Remains, edited by Anna J. Osterholtz, Kathryn M. Baustian and Debra L. Martin, pp. 17–33. Springer, New York. Cauwe, Nicolas 2001 Skeletons in Motion, Ancestors in Action: Early Mesolithic Collective Tombs in Southern Belgium. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 11(2):147–163. Cleuziou, Serge, Sophie Méry, and Burkhard Vogt 2011 Protohistoire de l’oasis d’al-Aïn, Travaux de la Mission archéologique française à Abou Dhabi (Emirats arabes unis): 1. Les sépultures de l’âge du Bronze. BAR International Series 2227. Archaeopress, Oxford. Cleuziou, Serge, and Maurizio Tosi 2007 In the Shadow of the Ancestors: The Prehistoric Foundations of the Early Arabian Civilization in Oman. Ministry of Heritage and Culture, Sultanate of Oman, Muscat. Cleuziou, Serge, and Burkhard Vogt 1983 Umm an Nar Burial Customs: New Evidence from Tomb A at Hili North. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Seminar for Arabian Studies 13(1):37–52. Fazekas, Istvan Gyula, and F. Kosa 1978 Forensic Fetal Osteology. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest.

198 · Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

Frifelt, Karen 1975 A Possible Link between the Jemdet Nasr and Umm an-Nar Graves of Oman. Journal of Oman Studies 1:57–80. Frisancho, A. Roberto 2006 Reduction of Birth Weight among Infants Born to Adolescents: Maternal-Fetal Growth Competition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 817(1):272– 280. Al Gazali, Lihadh. I., R. Alwash, and Y. M. Abdulrazzaq 2005 United Arab Emirates: Communities and Community Genetics. Community Genetics 8(3):186–196. Gindhart, Patricia Schwager 1973 Growth Standards for the Tibia and Radius in Children Aged One Month through Eighteen Years. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 39(1):41–48. Gregoricka, Lesley A. 2013 Residential Mobility and Social Identity in the Periphery: Strontium Isotope Analysis of Archaeological Tooth Enamel from Southeastern Arabia. Journal of Archaeological Science 40(1):452–464. Hertz, Robert 1960 Death and the Right Hand. The Free Press, Glencoe, Illinois. Jeanty, Philippe 1983 Fetal Limb Biometry. Radiology 147:601–602. Keswani, Priscilla 2004 Mortuary Ritual and Society in Bronze Age Cyprus. Equinox Publishing Ltd., London. Knüsel, Christopher J., and Alan K. Outram 2004 Fragmentation: The Zonation Method Applied to Fragmented Human Remains from Archaeological and Forensic Contexts. Environmental Archaeology 9(1):85–97. Magee, Peter, Hans-Peter Uerpmann, Margarethe Uerpmann, Sabah Abboud Jasim, Marc Händel, Don Barber, Crystal Fritz, and Emily Hammer 2009 Multi-Disciplinary Research on the Past Human Ecology of the East Arabian Coast: Excavations at Hamriya and Tell Abraq (Emirate of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates). Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 20(1):18–29. Maresh, Marion M. 1970 Measurements from Roentgenograms, Heart Size, Long Bone Lengths, Bone, Muscles and Fat Widths, Skeletal Maturation. In Human Growth and Development, edited by R. W. McCammon, pp. 157–200. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois. Martin, Debra L., and Daniel T. Potts 2012 Lesley: A Unique Bronze Age Individual from Southeastern Arabia. In The Bioarchaeology of Individuals, edited by Ann L. Stodder and Ann M. Palkovich, pp. 113–126. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. McSweeney, Kathleen, Sophie Méry, and Roberto Macchiarelli 2008 Rewriting the End of the Early Bronze Age in the United Arab Emirates through the Anthropological and Artefactual Evaluation of Two Collective Umm an-Nar

The Tomb at Tell Abraq: Demographic Structure and Mortuary Complexity · 199

Graves at Hili (Eastern Region of Abu Dhabi). Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 19(1):1–14. Mehta, Lalit, and H. M. Singh 1972 Determination of Crown–Rump Length from Fetal Long Bones: Humerus and Femur. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 36(2):165–168. Osterholtz, Anna J., Ryan P. Harrod, and Debra L. Martin 2011 Differential Diagnosis of Patellar Pathology: Use-Wear Patterns and Pathology from Tell Abraq (2200–2000 BC). Poster presented at the 80th annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, Minneapolis, MN. Osterholtz, Anna J., and Ann L. W. Stodder 2010 Conjoining a Neighborhood: Data Structure and Methodology for Taphonomic Analysis of the Very Large Assemblage from Sacred Ridge. Paper presented at the 78th annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, Albuquerque, NM. 2011 Personal Taphonomy at Sacred Ridge: Burial 196. Paper presented at the 76th annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Sacramento, CA. Osterholtz, Anna, J., Katheryn M. Baustian, Debra L. Martin, and Daniel T. Potts 2014 Commingled Human Skeletal Assemblages: Integrative Techniques in Determination of the MNI/MNE. In Commingled and Disarticulated Human Remains, edited by Anna J. Osterholtz, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Debra L. Martin, pp. 35–50. Springer, New York. Potts, Daniel T. 1990 The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity: 1. From Prehistory to the Fall of the Achaemenid Empire. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 1993a A New Bactrian Find from Southeastern Arabia. Antiquity 76(256):591–596. 1993b Rethinking Some Aspects of Trade in the Arabian Gulf. World Archaeology 24(3):423–440. 1994 South and Central Asian Elements at Tell Abraq (Emirate of Umm al-Qaiwain, United Arab Emirates) c. 2200 B.C.–300 A.D. In South Asian Archaeology 1993, Vol. 2, edited by A. Parpola and P. Koskikallio, pp. 615–666. Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae Series B-271. Helsinki. 1997 Mesopotamian Civilization: The Material Foundations. Cornell University Press, Ithaca. 2000a Arabian Time Capsule. Archaeology 53(5):44–48. 2000b Ancient Magan: The Secrets of Tell Abraq. Trident, London. 2001 Before the Emirates: An Archaeological and Historical Account of Developments in the Region c. 5000 BC to 676 AD. In United Arab Emirates: A New Perspective, edited by Ibrahim Al Abed and Peter Hellyer, pp. 28–69. Trident Press, London. 2003 Tepe Yahya, Tell Abraq and the Chronology of the Bampur Sequence. Iranica Antiqua 38:1–24. 2009 The Archaeology and Early History of the Persian Gulf. In The Persian Gulf in History, edited by Lawrence G. Potter, pp. 27–56. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

200 · Debra L. Martin, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Anna J. Osterholtz

In the Land of the Emirates: The Archaeology and History of the UAE. Sultan bin Zayed Culture and Media Centre, Abu Dhabi. Rajab, A., and Michael Patton 2000 A Study of Consanguinity in the Sultanate of Oman. Annals of Human Biology 27(3):321–326. Saxe, Arthur 1970 Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. PhD dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Scheuer, J. Louise, and Sue Black 2000 Developmental Juvenile Osteology. Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, California. 2004 The Juvenile Skeleton. Elsevier Academic Press, London. Scholl, Theresa, Mary Hediger, Jianping Huang, Francis Johnson, Woollcott Smith, and Isadore Ances 1992 Young Maternal Age and Parity: Influences on Pregnancy Outcome. Annals of Epidemiology 2(5): 565–575. Steele, D. Gentry 1976 The Estimation of Sex on the Basis of the Talus and Calcaneus. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 45(3):581–588. Stodder, Ann L. W. and Anna J. Osterholtz 2010 Analysis of the Processed Human Remains from the Sacred Ridge Site: Methods and Data Collection Protocol. In Animas-La Plata Project: XV, Bioarchaeology, edited by E. M. Perry, A. L. W. Stodder, and C. A. Bollong, pp. 241–278. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Phoenix, Arizona. Stodder, Ann L. W., Anna J. Osterholtz, Kathy Mowrer, and Jason P. Chuipka 2010 Processed Human Remains from the Sacred Ridge Site: Context, Taphonomy, Interpretation. In Animas-La Plata Project: XV, Bioarchaeology, edited by E. M. Perry, A. L. W. Stodder, and C. A. Bollong, pp. 279–415. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Phoenix, Arizona. Al Tikriti, Walid Yasin 1989 Umm An-Nar Culture in the Northern Emirates: Third Millennium BC Tombs at Ajman. Archaeology in the United Arab Emirates 5(5):85–99. 2012

10 Temporal Trends in Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island Lesley A. Gregoricka

The Umm an-Nar period is notable for the appearance of oasis agriculture and monumental towers and tombs that accompanied large settlements. These changes are reflective of an increasingly sedentary lifestyle and growing social differentiation (Cleuziou 2007; Potts 2009). Ceramics, copper, soft-stone vessels, and other manufactured goods from both domestic and mortuary contexts suggest thriving local production centers and the region’s growing engagement in interregional exchange networks with Mesopotamia, Dilmun, and the Indus Valley (Potts 2009). These societal transformations as interpreted through the archaeological record raise the question of whether correspondingly dynamic changes in social organization took place during the third millennium BC. A bioarchaeological approach makes possible a unique glimpse into early strategies of human social organization on Umm an-Nar Island, the location of the earliest recorded tombs of the Umm an-Nar period. Nevertheless, assessing mobility among human groups in the past is a complex endeavor because of the multifaceted ways human communities adapt and respond to their physical and social surroundings. While recent applications of biogeochemical analyses to ancient human skeletal remains have done much to illuminate patterns of residential mobility and migration, these evaluations are complicated by geologic, environmental, and cultural influences that may mislead bioarchaeologists when interpreted without additional context. Thus, a multi-isotopic approach was undertaken to assess the mobility and subsistence economy of those interred in

202 · Lesley A. Gregoricka

the Umm an-Nar–period (ca. 2700–2000 BC) tombs of Umm an-Nar Island in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The Archaeology of Umm an-Nar Island

Situated just 200 m off the western coast of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi, Umm an-Nar Island is part of an archipelago along the southwestern coast of the Emirates, stretching only 3 km long with an area of 4.5 km2 consisting of limestone rock and calcite sands (Potts 1990). The Umm an-Nar tomb fields on the island cluster into two distinct groups atop two plateaus partitioned by a wide expanse of sand (Figure 10.1; Frifelt 1991). The southern plateau houses Tombs I–IV, and its northern counterpart contains Tombs V–XLVIII. A forty-ninth grave constructed in isolation is located at the northeastern tip of the island (Frifelt 1991). While stone monuments on the island have been known to area residents for some time, T. Hillyard initially “discovered” them in 1958 (Glob 1959). Although a formal archaeological campaign by the Danish Gulf Expedition to the island began in 1959 and lasted until 1965, it remained largely unpublished until the issuing of Karen Frifelt’s reports on the tombs (1991) and associated settlement (1995). During the first season in 1959, the Danish expedition initiated excavations in three areas, including two large mounds (Tombs I and II) and a nearby settlement (Frifelt 1991, 1995). However, the unexpected complexity of the mortuary structures led archaeologists to halt work on Tomb II and the settlement in order to focus on Tomb I (Frifelt 1991). It was not until a second season in 1960 that excavations on this first cairn were completed. Like subsequent Umm an-Nar tombs excavated across the peninsula, Tomb I possessed an exterior double ring wall approximately 1 m thick, with an inner band constructed of unworked limestone and an outer ring of carefully fitted, dressed ashlar (Frifelt 1991). This circular grave, 11 m in diameter, surrounded numerous cross-walls that segregated the tomb into eight chambers, as well as a central passage flanked by two median dividing walls and oriented north–south (Frifelt 1991). This arrangement mirrored the two parallel entrances on both the north and south sides of the tomb (Frifelt 1991). Flat stones paved the floor of the tomb, while large slabs found caving into the tomb’s interior suggest a stone roof (Frifelt 1991). Tomb I enclosed both grave goods and human skeletal material. Around forty clay and alabaster vessels, small copper objects and fragments, grinding slabs, and hundreds of beads made of various materials were recovered

Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island · 203

Figure 10.1. Map of the settlement and tombs of Umm an-Nar Island. White circles designate tombs; black circles highlight the tombs discussed in this chapter. Adapted from Frifelt (1991:15).

from all chambers of the tomb. These artifacts suggest a date of approximately 2500–2300 BC (Benton 2006). A MNI (minimum number of individuals) of 21 has been estimated from this burial monument, including nine males, five females, one individual of indeterminate sex, and six subadults (Højgaard 1980; Kunter 1991). While poor preservation precluded any conclusive diagnoses, Kunter (1991) reported two healed cranial fractures and three healed Parry’s fractures in conjunction with a high prevalence of osteoarthritis of the mandibular condyles. However, these assessments lacked information about the methods used to estimate age and sex as well as to determine MNI and pathological identification. A second campaign on Umm an-Nar Island in 1960 also witnessed the excavation of five graves (IV, V, VI, VII, and VIII). Smaller relative to Tombs I and II, the limestone-built Tomb V was circular in shape and had a diameter of only 6.5 m. Like its larger counterparts, it had a double ring wall faced with shaped, smoothed blocks (Frifelt 1991). Entrances on the north and south walls of the tomb also corresponded to a cross-wall oriented north–south separated from the ring wall by two short passages.

204 · Lesley A. Gregoricka

A second, complete dividing wall perpendicular to the cross-wall created four inner chambers (Frifelt 1991). As with Tomb I, the floor of Tomb V was paved with stone and was originally roofed with large pieces of flat stone (Frifelt 1991). An abundance of material culture and skeletal remains occupied Tomb V. Particularly thick deposits had accumulated in the two southern chambers. Approximately 60 clay vessels, including one depicting a humped oxen similar to motifs found at Tepe Yahya, were found, as well as quernstones, alabaster vessels, and 17 copper awls, daggers, fish hooks, pins, rivets, and other fragments (Frifelt 1991). More than 5,000 beads from all chambers of the tomb were also unearthed (Frifelt 1991). Based on these grave goods, Tomb V was likely in use from circa 2700 to 2500 BC (Benton 2006). Heavily fragmented and disarticulated human remains were scattered throughout the tomb, representing at least 37 individuals (12 males, 8 females, 10 indeterminate, and 7 subadults; Kunter 1991) and up to 49 persons (Højgaard 1980). Four burials lining the exterior ring wall of the tomb were also noted. In 1961, a third expedition to Umm an-Nar Island focused primarily on the massive Tomb II after preliminary excavations in 1960 had delineated the ring wall of this tomb (Frifelt 1991). Positioned just 80 m to the southeast of Tomb I, Tomb II boasted the largest diameter of any funerary monument on the island at 12 m. It was constructed in typical Umm anNar fashion with a circular double ring wall and multiple interior crosswalls that formed eight chambers and a central passage, flanked on both its north and south sides by two entry points (Frifelt 1991). However, the most fascinating aspect of this tomb consisted of five limestone blocks carved in bas-relief that depicted a bull, a camel and an oryx, a humanlike figure, another camel, and two snakes, respectively, which likely embellished the two entrances of the tomb (Frifelt 1991). At least 55 ceramic vessels, 6 copper objects, grinding slabs, net sinkers, hammerstones, and more than 5,000 beads had been placed in Tomb II in the period circa 2500–2300 BC (Benton 2006; Frifelt 1991). Poorly preserved and commingled human skeletal material accompanied these grave goods, with an estimated MNI of 34 (Kunter 1991) to 38 (Højgaard 1980), including at least 20 males, 6 females, 4 individuals of indeterminate sex, and 4 subadults (Kunter 1991). In addition to several Umm an-Nar tombs, the Danish team undertook excavations of a contemporary settlement (approximately 200–300 m2) on the northeastern shores of the island. They unearthed numerous limestone foundations; based on their construction, it is likely that these buildings

Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island · 205

were not covered with stone or mud brick but with palm leaves or other plants in barasti-like fashion (Frifelt 1995). Interestingly, the rooms examined contained impressive quantities of imported pottery sherds, shell, and copper objects and fragments, suggesting that the more permanent structures of the settlement may have served as workshops rather than as private residences (Frifelt 1995). One particularly impressive complex, dubbed a “warehouse,” had seven rooms and measured 16 m2. This complex contained a casting mold, copper refuse, and ingots indicative of copper working, as well as faunal remains that imply that meats and fish were cured there (Frifelt 1995). Large numbers of Mesopotamian ceramic vessels in the structure also suggested the building’s use for storage, and perhaps redistribution, of liquids such as oil (Frifelt 1995; Mynors 1983; Potts 2001). Domestic dwellings were almost certainly constructed of organic material such as palm fronds (Frifelt 1995). Unlike some other sites that date to this period (e.g., Tell Abraq, Hili), no evidence of a fortified tower exists on this island settlement. However, this may simply be because of the areas chosen for excavation, as only a very small percentage of the site has been exposed. The inhabitants of Umm an-Nar Island were clearly involved in interregional trade (Frifelt 1995). The strategic position of Umm an-Nar Island in the Gulf made it a major trading port on the Oman Peninsula from the early and middle Umm an-Nar period until its abandonment circa 2200 BC, around the time that other coastal sites like Tell Abraq began to flourish in the late third millennium BC (Frifelt 1995). Significant quantities of ceramic sherds from Mesopotamia, the Indus Valley, and southeastern Iran indicate the development of these exchange networks during the first part of the Umm an-Nar period (Frifelt 1995). Additional finds such as etched carnelian beads of probable Harappan origin, imported incised grey and black-on-grey Iranian wares, and an unusual seal impression reminiscent of Syrian forms further speak to interregional contacts and relationships (Amiet 1975; Frifelt 1991, 1995; Potts 2005). Subsistence on Umm an-Nar Island centered primarily on maritime resources, with large quantities of bone and shell originating from fish, mollusks, dugong, turtles, sharks, stingrays, and whales recovered from settlement middens (Hoch 1995). The local community’s dependence on the sea is further illustrated by the considerable number of net sinkers, fish hooks, and other marine artifacts unearthed at the settlement and in the tombs (Frifelt 1991, 1995; Benton 2006). Coastal birds, especially the cormorant, seem to have been frequently trapped as well (Hoch 1995; Potts 1990). These remains vastly outnumbered those of domestic and wild

206 · Lesley A. Gregoricka

terrestrial mammals, which included sheep, goat, cattle, gazelle, oryx, and camel (Hoch 1995). While no plant remains were recovered directly from the settlement area, plant impressions on materials such as ceramic sherds, mud bricks, and bitumen show the presence of wheat, barley, straw, and date stones (Willcox 1995). The presence of a few quern-stones, deposited in graves and in the workshops of the settlement, hint at some cereal processing on site (Frifelt 1995). Interestingly, the island contained no supply of fresh water, which would have made it necessary for its Bronze Age inhabitants to travel frequently to the mainland (Frifelt 1991). Various analyses of human teeth from Graves I, II, and V have been conducted (Højgaard 1980, 1981; Kunter 1991) to discern dietary patterns on Umm an-Nar Island. In conjunction with zooarchaeological evidence, severe wear, the relative absence of caries, the presence of calculus, and a low prevalence of antemortem tooth loss has been interpreted as indicative of a diet dominated by coarse marine resources rather than agricultural products, which likely played only a supplementary role. Based on both dental metric and nonmetric traits, Højgaard (1980, 1981), Kunter (1991), and Alt et al. (1995) suggested that these individuals were members of a homogeneous, endogamous kin-based group. Isotopes and Bioavailability in Southeastern Arabia

Radiogenic strontium (87Sr/86Sr) isotope data from ancient teeth and bone are increasingly utilized by bioarchaeologists seeking to illuminate patterns and strategies of human movement in the past. Strontium isotope ratios differ across geographic space because of geologic differences in the age and mineral composition of bedrock (Ericson 1985). While processes of fractionation change the ratios of lighter isotopes such as carbon and nitrogen as they pass from one trophic level to another, strontium moves unaltered through local ecosystems and into the water, animals, and plants utilized by humans (Graustein 1989). These isotopes enter the body and, like calcium, are stored within the skeleton during the formation of bone and enamel hydroxyapatite (Price et al. 2002). In particular, as the crowns of human permanent first molars begin forming in utero and continue to form up until 4.5 years of age (AlQahtani et al. 2010), 87Sr/86Sr ratios from enamel hydroxyapatite reflect the geographic region where an individual resided during this period of childhood (Bentley 2006; Ericson 1985). Despite an overall reliance on geologic 87Sr/86Sr ratios for developing the

Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island · 207

local baselines necessary for evaluating residential mobility and migration in human populations, 87Sr/86Sr ratios derived from soil or plant samples reflect bioavailable strontium for only a small geographic area and may not take into account isotopically dissimilar minerals in the vicinity or other strontium inputs, such as sea spray (Price et al. 2002). Instead, 87Sr/86Sr ratios from local fauna more comprehensively reflect strontium bioavailability in a given area, generating ranges (±2 s.d.) that can be compared with human 87Sr/86Sr ratios to assess geographic origins and residential mobility (Bentley 2006). A survey of Bronze Age fauna (n = 39) from across the UAE has produced a regional bioavailability of 87Sr/86Sr = 0.7086–0.7090 (Gregoricka 2013a), distinct from ranges generated by local fauna in Mesopotamia (0.7080–0.7081) and the Indus Valley (0.7158–7189; Kenoyer et al. 2013). More detailed descriptions of local geology for the UAE can found elsewhere (Gregoricka 2013a, 2014). Stable oxygen isotope values in meteoric water (δ18Ow) reflect temperature, altitude, humidity, and other local environmental and hydrologic variables (Gat 1996). When humans maintain a regular body temperature (37°C), the oxygen isotope values incorporated into the carbonate of dental enamel (δ18Oc) are the same as those found in body water (Luz et al. 1984). The δ18Oc values exhibited by body water and enamel are principally determined by local drinking water, although other factors, including foods ingested, perspiration, urination, and respiration, play a minor role (Longinelli 1984; Luz et al. 1984; Luz and Kolodny 1985). Culturally prescribed treatments of water, from storing it in containers, boiling it, and preparing beverages, may introduce additional variability to local δ18O values (Brettell et al. 2012; Knudson 2009). Breastfeeding can also impact δ18O values in teeth undergoing mineralization, and as such, must be taken into account when examining first molars. While fractionation resulting from the consumption of breast milk produces enamel oxygen isotope signatures elevated by 0.5–0.7‰ relative to the mother (Wright and Schwarcz 1998), an anticipated local variability of around 2‰ (Kenoyer et al. 2013) would likely encompass any variation caused by breastfeeding. Unlike strontium, oxygen isotope values obtained from local fauna cannot be used to estimate the values available to humans due primarily to interspecies differences in metabolic uptake. Instead, local ranges can be estimated using δ18O values from humans themselves. Bronze Age human enamel samples (n = 98) dating to the Umm an-Nar period from across the Emirates exhibited a mean δ18Oc value of -2.5 ± 0.8‰ (1σ; Gregoricka 2013b). Other third millennium

208 · Lesley A. Gregoricka

BC human δ18Oc values from the larger region include those from Harappa in the Indus Valley (-4.8 ± 0.9‰, 1σ) and from the Royal Cemetery at Ur in Mesopotamia (-3.4 ± 0.9‰, 1σ; Kenoyer et al. 2013). Stable carbon isotopes from enamel apatite [δ13Cap(VPDB)] have traditionally been examined as a means of reconstructing diet among members of past populations. However, because nonlocal diets may have distinct carbon isotope signatures relative to locally consumed foods, these values complement interpretations of residential mobility using strontium and oxygen isotopes. Plants obtain carbon from atmospheric CO2 using one of three biochemical pathways (C3, C4, and CAM; Schoeninger and Moore 1992). Most plants employ a C3 carbon fixation strategy; these grow in temperate climates and range in δ13C value from -35‰ to -20‰ (DeNiro 1987). Tropical C4 plants such as maize, sorghum, and sugar possess values enriched in 13C, generating higher δ13C values (-14‰ to -9‰) distinct from their C3 counterparts (DeNiro 1987). Because marine plant life derives carbon from dissolved CO2 in water and produces δ13C values between those of terrestrial C3 and C4 plants, it is difficult to differentiate between contributions to human diet from C4 and from marine resources without taking into account accompanying δ15N values. However, due to poor preservation of bone collagen on Umm an-Nar Island, these values are not available for comparison (Richards and Hedges 1999). Fractionation processes that take place as dietary δ13C values are incorporated into human enamel apatite result in human values +11–12‰ above those of the plants and plant-consuming animals they ingest (Dupras and Tocheri 2007; Krueger and Sullivan 1984). Correspondingly, humans who consume primarily C3-based foods will possess δ13C values of around -12‰, while those who consume primarily C4-based diets produce values closer to -1‰. In order to reconstruct local trophic levels in a given environment, animal δ13C values are necessary for interpretations of the types of foods utilized by human populations. The large-bodied ruminants sampled here (ovicaprid, oryx, and cattle) typically exhibit a fractionation over plant δ13C values of +14.3‰ (Cerling et al. 1997). Combining strontium, oxygen, and carbon stable isotope data from prehistoric human skeletal remains enables bioarchaeologists to examine human movement and diet in complex ways, particularly in discerning whether temporal changes in isotope values are the result of changing patterns of mobility and/or shifting systems of subsistence. Correspondingly, isotope ratios from the human dental enamel of those interred on Umm anNar Island were used to test the hypothesis that Umm an-Nar populations

Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island · 209

in southeastern Arabia became increasingly sedentary and more reliant on coastal resources over time. Materials and Methods

Materials Enamel from the molars of 15 Bronze Age fauna recovered from the settlement area of Umm an-Nar Island were sampled for both strontium (Gregoricka 2013a) and carbon (Gregoricka 2013b) isotope analyses as part of previous studies. While the majority of these animals represent domesticated species—including cattle (n = 2) and ovicaprids (n = 12)—one sample was derived from a wild oryx, likely hunted by the inhabitants of the site. Ideally, small mammals with limited home ranges should be used to assess bioavailability; however, the limited geographic area of Umm an-Nar Island makes the strontium values of larger ungulates appropriate for comparison. Human permanent first molars from 33 individuals were also tested for strontium, oxygen, and carbon isotope values. The specific tooth types selected for analysis differed for each tomb, depending on the highest tooth count per molar for a given tomb. These included right maxillary first molars for Tomb I (n = 4) and left mandibular first molars for Tombs II (n = 15) and V (n = 14). None of these teeth were found in situ within the jaw, resulting in a lack of sex- and age-related data for these commingled individuals. Methods A carbide drill bit attached to a Dremel rotary tool was used to clean tooth surfaces and mechanically remove layers of outer enamel susceptible to diagenesis (Budd et al. 2000). Powdered enamel (3–5 mg) was then extracted before sample preparation and analysis. Preparation methods for strontium isotope analysis were taken from Perry et al. (2008). Samples were dissolved in 3.5M HNO3 before column extraction of strontium using EiChrom Sr-Spec resin (SR-B100-S). Following this step, 0.1M H3PO4 was then added before liquid samples were dried down, redissolved in TaCl5, and dried with an electrical current after placing them on Rhenium filaments. A VG Micromass Sector 54 thermal ionization mass spectrometer in quintuple-collector dynamic mode analyzed the samples for their isotope ratios. An internal ratio of 86Sr/88Sr = 0.1194 was utilized to correct for mass fractionation. Ratios are reported relative to the NBS-987 standard (0.710270±0.000014, 2σ). Based on 100 dynamic

210 · Lesley A. Gregoricka

cycles of data collection, internal precision for strontium runs is typically ±0.000012–0.000018% (2σ). Samples were prepared and analyzed at the Isotope Geochemistry Laboratory at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Preparation methods for oxygen and carbon isotope analysis were taken from Garvie-Lok et al. (2004). First, 2% NaOCl was added to enamel powder, and samples were rinsed to neutrality after 13 hours. Samples were then treated with 0.1M acetic acid for 4 hours, rinsed to a neutral pH, and lyophilized for 48 hours. Resultant carbonate was analyzed with a Finnigan Delta IV Plus stable isotope ratio mass spectrometer coupled to an automated Kiel IV Carbonate Device at the Stable Isotope Biogeochemistry Laboratory at The Ohio State University. Samples were acidified under vacuum with 100% orthophosphoric acid. The resulting CO2 was cryogenically purified and normalized using NBS 19. The standard deviation of repeated measurements of an internal standard was ±0.03‰ for δ13C and ±0.06‰ for δ18O. Statistical data analyses were completed with Statistical Analysis Software (SAS 9.3). Nonparametric Mann-Whitney U and Levene’s tests were chosen because of the small and variable sample sizes of the tomb groups. Results

Descriptive statistics for both animal and human 87Sr/86Sr values can be found in Table 10.1. Bronze Age fauna (n = 15) from the settlement on Umm an-Nar Island displayed a mean 87Sr/86Sr ratio of 0.70879 ± 0.00009 (1σ), producing a local range (2σ) of 0.70861–0.70897 (Gregoricka 2013a). Oxygen isotope values are reported for fauna, but because these values cannot be used as a baseline for determining locality among human individuals, these results are not discussed here. δ13C values exhibit a substantial range of values from -9.0 to +5.9‰, largely because of an outlier, the wild oryx. When the oryx data is removed, this range is considerably reduced to -9.0 to -1.7, and the average δ13C value changes from -5.4 ± 3.6‰ (1σ) to -6.2 ± 1.7‰ (1σ). Human isotope values can be temporally evaluated by examining results from Tomb V (ca. 2700–2500 BC; n = 14) and comparing these data to Tombs I and II (ca. 2500–2300 BC; n = 19). Human 87Sr/86Sr ratios from the earlier Umm an-Nar period average 0.70894 ± 0.00005 (1σ), while later individuals exhibit a lower mean of 0.70888 ± 0.00009 (1σ; Figure 10.2). The respective medians of these two groups are statistically significant

Tomb II

Tomb V

Human

Human

Human Summary

4

Tomb I

Human

33

14

15

14

1

Fauna Summary (w/out oryx)

Settlement

Oryx

2

15

Settlement

Cattle

n 12

Fauna Summary

Location Settlement

Species Ovicaprid

0.70890

0.70894

0.70887

0.70889

0.70879

0.70879

0.70878

0.7088

Mean 0.7088

0.00008

0.00005

0.00009

0.00009

0.00009

0.00009

-

0.0001

SD (1σ) 0.0001

0.70865 to 0.70904

0.70887 to 0.70904

0.70865 to 0.70900

0.70880 to 0.70900

0.70859 to 0.70890

0.70859 to 0.70890

-

0.70875 to 0.70890

Range 0.70859 to 0.70889

87Sr/86Sr

-2.3

-2.3

-1.9

-2.3

4.4

4.8

10.2

5.6

0.5

0.6

0.1

0.4

1.7

2.2

-

3.8

Mean SD (1σ) 4.2 1.3

-3.1 to -1.1

-3.1 to -1.1

-2.7 to -1.1

-2.0 to -1.8

1.6 to 8.3

1.6 to 10.2

-

2.9 to 8.3

Range 1.6 to 6.3

δ18Oc(VPDB)

-5.9

-5.9

-5.6

-6.0

-6.2

-5.4

5.9

-3.1

2.4

1.6

4.3

2.5

1.7

3.6

-

2.0

-11.3 to 0.9

-8.5 to -2.8

-11.3 to -1.7

-8.4 to 0.9

-9.0 to -1.7

-9.0 to 5.9

-

-4.5 to -1.7

Mean SD (1σ) Range -6.7 1.1 -9.0 to -5.3

δ13Cap

Table 10.1. Descriptive statistics for strontium, oxygen, and carbon values of archaeological fauna and humans from Umm an-Nar Island

212 · Lesley A. Gregoricka

Figure 10.2. Temporal changes in archaeological human radiogenic strontium isotope values from three tombs on Umm an-Nar Island. Dotted lines define the range of local values as determined by multiple species of domestic and wild fauna.

(Mann-Whitney; U = 67, z = 2.39, p = 0.02) and approach but do not reach unequal variances (Levene’s; F = 2.19, p = 0.15). Mean δ18O values vary only slightly over time—from -2.3 ± 0.6‰ (1σ) to -2.2 ± 0.4‰ (1σ), while δ13C values average -5.9 ± 1.6‰ (1σ) for Tomb V and -5.9 ± 2.8‰ (1σ) for Tombs I and II (Figure 10.3). Correspondingly, median oxygen (Mann-Whitney; U = 162.5, z = -1.06, p = 0.29) and carbon (Mann-Whitney; U = 124.5, z = 0.29, p = 0.77) isotope values do not differ between periods. Equal variances between tomb groups were present for both δ18O (Levene’s; F = 0.48, p = 0.49) and δ13C (Levene’s; F = 3.46, p = 0.07) ratios. Discussion

The majority of individuals sampled (n = 29) from all three tombs on Umm an-Nar Island fell within local strontium boundaries as determined by Bronze Age fauna, indicative of a community whose members were local to the region. Conversely, four others exhibited 87Sr/86Sr ratios that placed them just above the maximum value of this range. While values

Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island · 213

Figure 10.3. Radiogenic strontium and stable carbon isotope ratios from human dental enamel on Umm an-Nar Island.

outside local ranges typically represent individuals of nonlocal origin, the island’s proximity to coastal resources make it likely that seafood played an important role in diet for the settlement’s residents. Because seawater possesses a 87Sr/86Sr ratio of 0.70923, the maritime resources contained within it produce higher 87Sr/86Sr ratios than terrestrial sources of food (0.70861–0.70897) used to estimate locality in this study. This fits with zooarchaeological evidence recovered from middens near the island’s settlement, which were dominated by fish, shellfish, turtles, numerous species of marine mammals and birds, and a plethora of domestic and grave artifacts suggestive of a focus on maritime subsistence, including fish hooks and net sinkers (Frifelt 1991, 1995; Hoch 1995). Subsequently, the four individuals whose 87Sr/86Sr ratios exceeded the upper limits of the local range likely consumed more marine foods and fewer terrestrial plants and animals than the other inhabitants of the island. Nevertheless, the temporal shift in strontium isotope variability is of particular note and could be interpreted in one of two ways. First, increasingly variable 87Sr/86Sr signatures over time may indicate greater residential

214 · Lesley A. Gregoricka

mobility or a shift to a more mobile lifestyle in the latter part of the Umm an-Nar period at Umm an-Nar Island. However, this interpretation does not fit well with archaeological evidence indicative of the presence of a major trading port and flourishing interregional exchange on the island. Conversely, changes to the subsistence economy with a shift in emphasis to terrestrial, maritime, or even traded food resources could introduce new or more variable 87Sr/86Sr ratios into the diet. While strontium isotope ratios alone cannot differentiate between these possible interpretations, additional context may be introduced by examining stable oxygen and carbon isotope values from the same individuals. An assessment of human δ18O values demonstrated that water was consumed from isotopically similar sources in both the earlier and latter Umm an-Nar period. Moreover, with a range spanning only 2‰ (-3.1 to -1.1‰), an overall lack of δ18O variability (p = 0.49) exhibited by the Bronze Age inhabitants of the island suggests that mobility did not increase or change dramatically over time. The homogeneity of the oxygen isotope dataset does not necessarily conflict with the growing variability of 87Sr/86Sr ratios over time, but instead points to the likelihood of a relatively sedentary community whose variable 87Sr/86Sr ratios require an alternate explanation. Changing dietary patterns among those interred on Umm an-Nar Island could account for both the temporal variability seen in the strontium isotope data and the uniform oxygen values. While a difference in medians was not apparent, in the earlier Umm an-Nar period (Tomb V), human δ13C values fell into a more narrow range (-8.5 to -2.8‰) spanning less than 6‰. This evidence suggests a mixed C3-C4 diet that consisted of foods estimated to exhibit δ13C values of between -20‰ and -14‰. In contrast, the more expansive δ13C value range (-11.3 to +0.9‰) of those who died during the latter Umm an-Nar period (Tombs I and II) doubled the previous value span at over 12‰. While not statistically significant, the variance for δ13C values between the tomb groups closely approached significance at p = 0.07, with visual inspection of the data clearly demonstrating an increase in both 87Sr/86Sr and δ13C variability from 2700 to 2300 BC. Such variability indicates an increasingly broad diet among the island’s inhabitants that for some, included more marine resources (evidenced by individuals who exhibited elevated 87Sr/86Sr ratios and δ13C values), and for others emphasized C3 terrestrial plants and plant-consuming animals (evidenced by lower 87Sr/86Sr and δ13C ratios). The expansiveness of this distribution also suggests that in childhood, individuals had disparate access to certain foods. Such differential access

Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island · 215

may indicate the development of hierarchies as the social organization of the Umm an-Nar period changed from that of the previous Hafit period (ca. 3200–2700 BC). As part of this transformation, local communities became increasingly sedentary and more invested in the landscape, evidenced by the construction and maintenance of monumental towers and tombs. These communal public works, coupled with the community’s growing involvement in long-distance interregional trade, likely instigated a gradual shift from a kin-based system of organization to one in which power was less evenly distributed (Cleuziou 2007; Gregoricka 2013a, 2014). Alternatively, variability in δ13C values may instead suggest that while those interred on Umm an-Nar Island were local to the larger region, they may have initially lived in different areas where certain foods were not easily obtainable, and only later congregated on the island. For instance, marine resources may not have been readily accessible, preferred, or locally utilized by individuals raised on the coast or farther inland. Such individuals may have sought opportunities for social advancement by leaving their inland or coastal homes to reside on the island in order to participate in interregional trade, whether through craft production or management. Moreover, the inclusive presence of males, females, adults, and subadults interred within Umm an-Nar Island’s tombs confirms that those who arrived and worked on the island did not do so alone, but that instead, families had congregated in this space and were buried there. Residential movement to the island from elsewhere in the Emirates was therefore not limited only to those actively involved in trade relations, potentially making these migrations (and possibly even craft production) a family affair. The relatively short distance between Umm an-Nar Island and any mainland Emirati site (both coastal and inland) would have made moving to the island very feasible, even with a family group in tow. Comparable 87Sr/86Sr ratios from the mainland sites of Tell Abraq (0.70887 ± 0.00002, 1σ; n = 27), Mowaihat (0.70886 ± 0.00001, 1σ; n = 12), and Unar 1 (0.70881 ± 0.00007, 1σ; n = 25) support the assertion that those who lived on the island could have come from nearby third millennium settlements in the region (Gregoricka 2013a). A lack of fresh water on the island also suggests that regular, short-distance travel was necessary to support those living there (Frifelt 1991). Subsequently, individuals from across the western Emirates may have constituted at least some portion of the community at Umm an-Nar Island, migrating there sometime after 4.5 years of age, when the formation of the M1 enamel crown was complete.

216 · Lesley A. Gregoricka

Conclusions

Radiogenic and stable isotopes from human dental enamel were used to interpret patterns of residential mobility and subsistence strategies at the Early Bronze Age site of Umm an-Nar Island in the UAE. Increasingly variable strontium isotope ratios from 2700 to 2300 BC allude to a transition of some kind, either toward a more mobile lifestyle or a more diverse diet. Corresponding oxygen and carbon isotope values suggest that residents of the island did not become more mobile in the latter Umm an-Nar period, and that instead, dietary variability became more pronounced. This shift in the community’s subsistence economy may be explained by differential access to certain food resources, possibly a result of growing social hierarchies and disparate access to power or because of dissimilar regional (but still local) geographic origins of those interred on the island. These data reveal the importance of contextualizing biogeochemical datasets using multiple isotopic indicators of mobility, and in particular, emphasize how isotopic markers of subsistence (δ13C) complement mobility (87Sr/86Sr and δ18O) data to generate a more holistic picture of life in the past. References Cited Alt, Kurt W., W. Vach, Karen Frifelt, and Manfred Kunter 1995 Familienanalyse in kupferzeitlichen Kollektivgrabern aus Umm an-Nar; Abu Dhabi. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 6(2):65–80. Amiet, Pierre 1975 A Cylinder Seal Impression Found at Umm an-Nar. East and West 25:425– 426. Bentley, R. Alexander 2006 Strontium Isotopes from the Earth to the Archaeological Skeleton: A Review. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 13(3):135–187. Benton, Jodie 2006 Burial Practices of the Third Millennium BC in the Oman Peninsula: A Reconsideration. PhD dissertation. University of Sydney, Sydney. Brettell, Rhea, Janet Montgomery, and Jane Evans 2012 Brewing and Stewing: The Effect of Culturally Mediated Behaviour on the Oxygen Isotope Composition. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry 27(5):778– 785. Cerling, Thure E., John M. Harris, Stanley H. Ambrose, Meave G. Leakey, and Nikos Solounias 1997 Dietary and Environmental Reconstruction with Stable Isotope Analyses of Herbivore Tooth Enamel from the Miocene Locality of Fort Ternan, Kenya. Journal of Human Evolution 33(6):635–650.

Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island · 217

Cleuziou, Serge 2007 Evolution toward Complexity in a Coastal Desert Environment: The Early Bronze Age in the Ja’alan, Sultanate of Oman. In The Model-Based Archaeology of Socionatural Systems, edited by T. A. Kohler and S. van der Leeuw, pp. 209–227. SAR Press, Santa Fe. DeNiro, Michael J. 1987 Stable Isotopy and Archaeology. American Scientist 75(2):182–191. Dupras, Tosha L., and Matthew W. Tocheri 2007 Reconstructing Infant Weaning Histories at Roman Period Kellis, Egypt Using Stable Isotope Analysis of Dentition. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 134:63–74. Ericson, Jonathon E. 1985 Strontium Isotope Characterization in the Study of Prehistoric Human Ecology. Journal of Human Evolution 14(5):503–514. Frifelt, Karen 1991 The Island of Umm an-Nar: 1. Third Millennium Graves. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI, Aarhus. 1995 The Island of Umm an-Nar: 2. The Third Millennium Settlement. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI, Aarhus. Garvie-Lok, Sandra J., Tamara L. Varney, and M. Anne Katzenberg 2004 Preparation of Bone Carbonate for Stable Isotope Analysis: The Effects of Treatment Time and Acid Concentration. Journal of Archaeological Science 31(6):763– 776. Gat, Joel R. 1996 Oxygen and Hydrogen Isotopes in the Hydrologic Cycle. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 24(1):225–262. Glob, Peter Vilhelm 1959 Rekognoscering i Abu Dhabi (Reconnaissance in Abu Dhabi). Kuml: Årbog for Jysk Arkæologisk Selskab 1959:164–165. Graustein, W. 87Sr/86Sr Ratios Measure the Sources and Flow of Strontium in Terrestrial 1989 Ecosystems. In Stable Isotopes in Ecological Research, edited by P. Rundel, R. Ehleringer, and K. Nagy, pp. 491–512. Springer-Verlag, New York. Gregoricka, Lesley A. 2013a Residential and Social Identity in the Periphery: Strontium Isotope Analysis of Archaeological Tooth Enamel from Southeastern Arabia. Journal of Archaeological Science 40(1):452–464. 2013b Geographic Origins and Diet during the Bronze Age in the Oman Peninsula. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 152(3):353–369. 2014 Assessing Life History from Commingled Assemblages: The Biogeochemistry of Inter-Tooth Variability in Bronze Age Arabia. Journal of Archaeological Science 47(1):10–21. Hoch, Ella 1995 Animal Bones from the Umm an-Nar Settlement. In The Island of Umm an-

218 · Lesley A. Gregoricka

Nar: 2. The Third Millennium Settlement, by Karen Frifelt, pp. 249–256. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI, Aarhus. Højgaard, Karen 1980 Dentition on Umm an-Nar (Trucial Oman), 2500 B.C. Scandinavian Journal of Dental Research 88(5):355–364. 1981 Dentition on Umm an-Nar, c. 2500 B.C. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 11:31–36. Kenoyer, J. Mark, T. Douglas Price, and James H. Burton 2013 A New Approach to Tracking Connections between the Indus Valley and Mesopotamia: Initial Results of Strontium Isotope Analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 40(5):2286–2297. Knudson, Kelly J. 2009 Oxygen Isotope Analysis in a Land of Environmental Extremes: The Complexities of Isotopic Work in the Andes. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 19(2):171–191. Krueger, Harold W., and Charles H. Sullivan 1984 Models for Carbon Isotope Fractionation between Diet and Bone. In Stable Isotopes in Nutrition, edited by J. Turnlund and P. Johnson, pp. 205–220. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC. Kunter, Manfred 1991 The Human Skeletal Remains from the Graves of Umm an-Nar, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E. In The Island of Umm an-Nar: 1. Third Millennium Graves, by Karen Frifelt, pp. 163–179. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI, Aarhus. Longinelli, Antonio 1984 Oxygen Isotopes in Mammal Bone Phosphate: A New Tool for Paleohydrological and Paleoclimatogical Research? Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 48(2):385–390. Luz, Boaz, and Yehoshua Kolodny 1985 Oxygen Isotope Variations in Bone Phosphate of Biogenic Apatites. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 75(1):29–36. Luz, Boaz, Yehoshua Kolodny, and Michal Horowitz 1984 Fractionation of Oxygen Isotopes between Mammalian BonePhosphate and Environmental Drinking Water. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 48(8):1689– 1693. Mynors, H. Siriol 1983 An Examination of Mesopotamian Ceramics Using Petrographic and Neutron Activation Analysis. In The Proceedings of the 22nd Symposium on Archaeometry, edited by A. Aspinall and S. Warren, pp. 377–387. Schools of Physics and Archaeological Sciences, Bradford, UK. Perry, Megan A., Drew Coleman, and Nathalie Delhopital 2008 Mobility and Exile at 2nd Century A.D. Khirbet edhDharih: Strontium Isotope Analysis of Human Migration in Western Jordan. Geoarchaeology 23(4):528– 549.

Mobility and Subsistence Economy among the Tomb Builders of Umm an-Nar Island · 219

Potts, Daniel T. 1990 The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity: 1. From Prehistory to the Fall of the Achaemenid Empire. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 2001 Before the Emirates: An Archaeological and Historical Account of Developments in the Region c. 5000 BC to 676 AD. In United Arab Emirates: A New Perspective, edited by I. Al Abed and P. Hellyer, pp. 28–69. Trident Press, London. 2005 In the Beginning: Marhashi and the Origins of Magan’s Ceramic Industry in the Third Millennium BC. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 26: 67–78. 2009 The Archaeology and Early History of the Persian Gulf. In The Persian Gulf in History, edited by L. Potter, pp. 27–53. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. Price, T. Douglas, James H. Burton, and R. Alexander Bentley 2002 The Characterization of Biologically Available Strontium Isotope Ratios for the Study of Prehistoric Migration. Archaeometry 44(1):117–135. Al Qahtani, Sakher Jaber, Mark P. Hector, and Helen Liversidge 2010 Brief Communication: The London Atlas of Human Tooth Development and Eruption. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 142(3):481–490. Richards, Michael P., and R. E. M. Hedges 1999 Stable Isotope Evidence for Similarities in the Types of Marine Foods Used by Late Mesolithic Humans at Sites along the Atlantic Coast of Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 26(6):717–722. Schoeninger, Margaret J., and Katherine Moore 1992 Bone Stable Isotope Studies in Archaeology. Journal of World Prehistory 6(2):247–296. Willcox, George 1995 Some Plant Impressions from Umm an-Nar Island. In The Island of Umm anNar: 2. The Third Millennium Settlement, by Karen Frifelt, pp. 257–259. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI, Aarhus. Wright, Lori E., and Henry P. Schwarcz 1998 Stable Carbon and Oxygen Isotopes in Human Tooth Enamel: Identifying Breastfeeding and Weaning in Prehistory. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 106 (1): 1–18.

11 The Elders of Early Dilmun A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity from the Peter B. Cornwall Collection Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

Ancient Near Eastern archaeologists and historians have regularly assumed that an ethic of patriarchy structured Bronze and Iron Age social life, in which men assumed positions of real and symbolic authority over the persons and things in their immediate households (e.g., Schloen 2001). Written sources and visual culture portraying strong and potent men dominating social orders seemingly corroborate the patriarchy’s persistence. Indeed, scholarship has accepted these idealized depictions as normative, resulting in tacit assumptions in which a generic “man” stands for all ancient Near Eastern persons regardless of biology and identity (Alberti 2006:401). During the past few decades, however, research exploring the roles of ancient Near Eastern women from a diverse range of second-wave (Chavalas 2014; Grosz 1987; Meyers 2013) and third-wave (Bahrani 2001; Croucher 2005; Meskell 1999; Pollock and Bernbeck 2000) feminist perspectives has corrected for such narrow androcentric scholarship. This emphasis on the complexities of women’s lives, however, has inadvertently led to missed opportunities to examine ancient Near Eastern masculinities—that is, ideologies that prescribed how a person who was understood socially as a biological “male” was to practice a gendered identity (Alberti 2006; Joyce 2007; Knapp 1999). Recent publications have begun to close this gap (e.g., Peled 2016; Zsolnay 2016), but far more research is needed to understand notions of masculinity in the complex and dynamic world of ancient Near Eastern societies. This chapter contributes by drawing attention to the ways that notions of masculinity shifted over a person’s

The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity · 221

life course, from infancy to marriageable age to an elder on the cusp of death. Here, we demonstrate how evidence from Early Dilmun mortuary contexts, including human remains, tomb architecture, and interred objects, offers insight into embodied experiences of ancient Near Eastern men and the ways the living commemorated them upon their death. Mortuary contexts are best interpreted using methods drawn from what have often been considered two distinct fields in archaeological research: bioarchaeology and mortuary archaeology (Porter and Boutin 2014). Bioarchaeologists analyze human remains to explore the lives and deaths of past persons and populations. The plasticity of human skeletons across the life course makes them important archives of embodied identities (Sofaer 2006). Careful osteological analysis can shed light on sex and gender, occupation, diet and health, age and aging, and occasionally, cause of death. Understanding the relationship between sex and gender as materialized in the skeleton is not straightforward (Geller 2017; Hollimon 2011). Indeed, bioarchaeologists are only beginning to grapple with masculinity as a form of embodied identity (e.g., Knüsel 2011; Torres-Rouff 2011). Mortuary contexts offer additional insights into how the deceased were remembered and commemorated in death. The body’s treatment prior to and during interment, mortuary architecture, and funerary objects together offer evidence of how the living chose to commemorate the dead over both the short term (e.g., primary and secondary funerary rituals) and the long term (e.g., ancestor veneration). This evidence also offers a window into how the social identities of the decedent and the community that survived him or her were transformed during the processes of dying, death, and commemoration (for discussion of this in the ancient Near East, see Chesson [2001], Laneri [2007], Meskell and Joyce [2003], and Porter and Boutin [2014]). As one aspect of identity, critical explorations of masculinity in the context of mortuary archaeology are rare (but see Gilchrist [2009], Sullivan [2001], and Whitley [2002]). This chapter draws on bioarchaeology and mortuary archaeology to investigate three adult men in a brief case study from Early Dilmun, a Bronze Age polity that spanned the western edge of the Arabian Gulf at the end of the third and the beginning of the second millennium BC. Our evidence is drawn from the Peter B. Cornwall Collection at the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology on the University of California, Berkeley, campus. Cornwall (1913–1972) excavated this evidence on Bahrain during his expedition to the region in 1940 and 1941 (Porter and Boutin 2012). He later analyzed these mortuary contexts in his doctoral dissertation and a

222 · Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

handful of articles, eventually depositing the skeletal remains and objects in the Hearst Museum. Since 2008, we have been analyzing and publishing materials from this collection under the auspices of the Dilmun Bioarchaeology Project. Using this evidence, we demonstrate both the possibilities and limitations of investigating masculinity in one specific ancient Near Eastern society. Seeking Identities in Early Dilmun

Dilmun spanned much of the western central Gulf coast, including, from north to south, Kuwait, the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Qatar. Written sources from Dilmun during the Early Dilmun period are limited, unfortunately, to a small number of fragmentary texts (Potts 1990:217–231). Mesopotamian sources are slightly more illuminating, describing the dates, pearls, and textiles that Dilmun contributed to the exchange networks that extended from southern Mesopotamia to the Indus River Valley. Archaeological research on Dilmun’s settlements has provided some evidence in the absence of written sources (e.g., most recently, Højlund 2007:123–127; Killick and Moon 2005; Laursen 2008). Excavations at Qala’at al-Bahrain, Barbar, Failaka, and Saar have collectively identified a gradual increase in political complexity between the third and first millennia BC. Dilmun’s first period of growth, the Early Dilmun Period, occurred at the end of the third and the beginning of the second millennia BC. Evidence from Early Dilmun settlement phases (e.g., Qala’at al-Bahrain’s period IIa; Saar phases 1–4) such as seals, weights, and distinct ceramic vessels points to close commercial connections with Mesopotamia, western Iran, the Oman Peninsula, and the Indus River Valley (Potts 1990, 192–231). During later phases of the Early Dilmun period, the size of public architecture increased at settlements such as Qala’at al-Bahrain (Period IIb–c) and Barbar (Temple II). Settlement activity began to abate at approximately 1800 BC and did not revive for another few centuries when the Middle Dilmun Period began circa 1500 BC (Qala’at al-Bahrain stratum IIIa–IIIb). Despite this understanding of Early Dilmun’s development, evidence that could provide specific information into the ways identities were constructed and performed is still limited. The few written sources that exist record little about Dilmunite society. Visual culture that could shed light on idealized social relationships is confined to seals and sealings that present abstract scenes that are difficult to interpret (Crawford 2001). Currently, the best window into Early Dilmun’s social identities is the extensive mortuary

The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity · 223

landscapes of mounded tumuli that line the eastern coast of Saudi Arabia and the western and northern sides of Bahrain Island. Peter Cornwall and the archaeologists who followed him (e.g., Højlund 2007) have documented these tumuli, many of which were robbed in antiquity and are now facing destruction due to local population growth. Additional insight into Early Dilmun mortuary practices can be observed in the design and construction of mortuary tumuli. In most instances, a stone wall several courses high encircled the burial chamber (Højlund 2007:Figure 25). This structure served as a retaining wall for the dirt, sand, and gravel that was placed above and next to the stone chamber to protect it from erosion and to deter vandalism. Many tumuli were modest in size, containing a single person and their mortuary items. The deceased was usually positioned on his or her side with legs flexed and hands curled under the head in a “sleeping” position (e.g., Højlund 2007:Figure 258). Other tumuli, however, were conspicuously tall and contained a more elaborate chamber design with rooms for multiple individuals (e.g., Højlund 2007:25–31). More resources and effort were needed to construct these larger so-called royal tumuli (Laursen 2008). Given the increased levels of political and social complexity in the Early Dilmun Period, it is quite possible that these tumuli were reserved for individuals in positions of authority whose stature in society called for heightened levels of commemoration (Højlund 2007). The Elders of Early Dilmun

Osteological analysis of the Cornwall collection has identified a minimum of 36 people who were analyzed using methods from Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994). Where the state of preservation permitted, transition analysis was used to estimate the age of adults (Milner and Bolsen 2012; ADBOU, Version 2.1). Twenty-four adults and one adolescent were sufficiently well-preserved to permit sex estimation. Over three-quarters (19/25, 76%) of these were males or probable males. The majority of the skeletons for whom an age category could be estimated were adults (27/36, 75%). However, adolescents, children, infants, and one fetus were also present in smaller numbers. The demographic profile for this small sample must be regarded with extreme caution: due to the paucity of Cornwall’s field notes, we know little about his excavation methods and even less about his strategies for recovering human remains. Therefore, the extent to which the Cornwall collection is representative of the larger Early Dilmun population is uncertain. Our

224 · Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

interpretations rely on the working assumption that the tumuli Cornwall excavated had not been looted and that his collection strategies were comprehensive. Although impossible to verify, our assessment of the Cornwall collection as a whole supports this assumption. The current analysis focuses on three persons in the Cornwall collection identified as belonging to the middle adult (35–50 years) or old adult (50+ years) age classes, all of whom were males. Two of them were aged at least 70 years at death (12–10147 and 12–10152). While the other was younger, he seems to have suffered from skeletal fluorosis, a disease whose severity correlates with increasing age (Mohammadi et al. 2017). Given the small size and the uncertain representativeness of the Cornwall collection, we have looked to other published skeletal assemblages from Bahrain for clues about which characteristics would have indexed the notions of “old” and “elderly” in Early Dilmun. Earlier studies that have drawn on larger sample sizes are helpful for answering this question. Frohlich’s (1986) analysis of over 300 skeletons from the Early Bronze Age (ca. 2500–1800 BC) proposed an estimated life expectancy of 35–40 years. In her analysis of survivorship for a large later Tylos (i.e., Hellenistic) period sample, Littleton (1998) argued that only 7% of the population would have lived past the age of 50, the majority of whom would have been males due to higher female mortality during childbearing years. However, all of these age estimates were arrived at using traditional macroscopic aging methods, which are notoriously coarse-grained for older adults, whose bodies have been cumulatively influenced by culturally and environmentally specific stressors (Lovejoy et al. 1985). In addition, estimates of physiological age from the skeleton—which are expressed as a chronological age range in years—do not necessarily correlate with local social constructions of age and aging (Gowland 2006). Finally, it should be noted that the cranial morphology of females becomes increasingly masculine following menopause (Meindl et al. 1985). For this reason, pelvic morphology was prioritized for sex assessment in the analysis of all adults in the Cornwall collection. Tumulus C-3: 12–10147 This skeleton was recovered from Tumulus C-3, although the location of the C-series tumuli cannot be verified with any certainty. This male was at least 70 years old at the time of death. Healed cribra orbitalia lesions of at least moderate severity in both eye orbits indicate that this man survived significant physiological stressors such as nutritional deficiencies and/or chronic infectious disease during childhood (Walker et al. 2009). Despite

The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity · 225

these early health setbacks, stature estimates based on the maximum length of the humerus (Trotter [1970], based on regression formulae for African Americans; see Boutin [2008:124] for rationale) suggested that he stood 169.35 ± 4.43 cm (ca. 5 feet, 6.7 inches) tall, which is fairly average for males in the ancient Near East (mean 165.61 cm, s.d. 7.3; Boutin 2008:489–495). However, these figures represent maximum height, which is usually attained between 18 and 30 years of age. The loss of fluids from intervertebral discs over time causes progressive reduction in height as a person ages. Applying a correction factor for adults beyond 30 years of age produced a stature estimate for 12–10147 of 167.25 cm ± 4.43 cm, or the loss of approximately one inch in height. Other degenerative changes evident in this male’s spine include Schmorl’s nodes centrally located on the lower thoracic and upper lumbar vertebral bodies. The result of prolapsed intervertebral disc material, these lesions have been shown to cause significant pain in modern populations (Faccia and Williams 2008). Skeleton 12–10147 shared a number of conditions with the other elderly males in the Cornwall collection, which will be discussed further below. His antemortem tooth loss (AMTL) was extensive (18 of 26 extant alveoli afflicted). His hips exhibited moderate to severe degenerative joint disease (DJD): slight eburnation of the right femoral head indicated that he would have endured pain when he walked. Sites of muscle attachment on the scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna were strongly hypertrophied and rugose. Notably, the left talus from a subadult (likely an infant [0–3 years] based on size and morphology; Scheuer and Black 2000), was commingled with the remains of 12–10147. Perhaps members of multiple generations were buried in this tumulus. Tumulus G-11: 12–10149 The remains of this skeleton were excavated from Tumulus G-11, which was likely in the Umm Jidr mound cemetery near Bahrain’s western coast. This middle adult (35–50 years) male had lost at least 14 teeth prior to death, starting at the back of the mouth and moving anteriorly. Schmorl’s nodes on several thoracic and lumbar vertebrae may have been the source of back pain. Degenerative joint disease was generally in its early stages (e.g., shoulders and vertebrae), becoming more moderate in the hips. Most striking was 12–10149’s widespread osteophytosis (the pathological formation of new bony outgrowths) and calcification of soft tissues. Littleton (1999:469) defined stage 2 osteophytosis (moderate) as “protruding masses of bone, and the beginning of joint ankylosis” and stage 3 (severe)

226 · Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

as “ankylosis of joints, near complete ligament ossification.” The sites of ligamentous insertion on 12–10149 were in various stages of ossification: bones affected moderately include the sternum, ribs, thoracic vertebrae, sacrum, os coxae, tibia, and calcaneus. The lumbar vertebrae, radius, and fibula were affected severely (Figure 11.1). Areas of muscle attachment were strongly hypertrophied and rugose, including the deltoid tuberosity of the humerus, radial tuberosity, and linea aspera and gluteal lines of the femur. Localized areas of pathological bone loss were also evident at the acetabulum and the distal femur. One cause of this suite of pathological conditions could be diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH), a disease characterized by excessive ossification that preferentially afflicts adult males in the middle to old age range. The right side of the thoracic spine is most commonly affected, due to the ossification of the anterior longitudinal ligament. Ossification also occurs at joint margins and ligamentous and tendinous insertions, most frequently on the calcaneus, olecranon process of the ulna, iliac crests, and patellae (Mays 2000, 2006; Ortner 2003). DISH is diagnosed in a clinical setting by the radiological observation of “flowing calcification and ossification along the anterolateral aspect of at least four contiguous vertebral bodies,” the absence of extensive DJD of the spinal column, and the absence of sacroiliac joint erosion, sclerosis, or fusion (Resnick 1989:440). Skeleton 12–10149’s condition is not consistent with a diagnosis of DISH: excessive ossification in the vertebral column occurred in the lumbar (as well as thoracic) region, affected the intratransverse, supraspinous, and intraspinous (as well as anterior longitudinal) ligaments, and manifested ankylosis (the “flowing” appearance) across only three contiguous vertebrae. His olecranon process and iliac crests were not affected, and sclerosis of the sacroiliac joint was present. A more likely cause is skeletal fluorosis. Skeletal fluorosis, which is caused by excessive intake of fluoride, is a metabolic disease that impacts both teeth and bone. Although it affects modern populations around the globe, bioarchaeological evidence for it is fairly limited (Brickley and Ives 2008). One of the areas for which it has been best documented is ancient Bahrain (e.g., Frohlich et al. 1989). Littleton’s (1999) landmark analysis of a large Tylos period sample from the al-Malikiyah mound field argued convincingly that males over the age of 50 exhibited high frequencies of skeletal fluorosis. Among the diagnostic changes associated with fluorosis that she identified were osteophytosis of the thorax, lumbosacral vertebrae, radius and ulna, patella, and tibia and fibula, and pronounced hypertrophy and rugosity at numerous sites

The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity · 227

Figure 11.1. Proximal right fibula of 12-10149, exhibiting calcification of ligaments possibly characteristic of skeletal fluorosis. Photo by B. Porter.

of muscle attachment. Littleton also noted that a deficiency of dietary calcium, when coupled with excessive fluoride, can cause secondary hyperparathyroidism, leading to pathological bone loss. High fluoride levels in Bahrain’s groundwater, which continue to affect modern populations, as well as predisposing environmental and cultural factors enabled Littleton (1999) to conclude with certainty that skeletal fluorosis was at fault. It is tempting to diagnose 12–10149 with skeletal fluorosis, based on similarities between his patterns of pathological bone formation and loss and those Littleton (1999) described. However, further differential diagnosis is needed, as is confirmation via radiography and chemical analysis of bone. Whatever the precise cause, the bodily impacts this man experienced would likely have been very similar to those of skeletal fluorosis: back pain, stiffness and rigidity, and limits on mobility (Littleton 1999). Tumulus G-14: 12–10152 Cornwall excavated the remains of this skeleton from a tumulus that was likely from the Umm Jidr mound cemetery. This male was at least 70 years old when he died. A long lifetime of physical activity was evident in mild to moderate DJD throughout his skeleton. Degenerative joint disease occurs when chronic stress on joints progressively damages articular cartilage, and eventually, underlying bone surfaces. Bone formation and destruction characterize DJD, including the breakdown of articular cartilage,

228 · Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

formation of osteophytes at joint margins and entheses, degeneration and consequent porosity of the articular surface, reactive bone formation (sclerosis), and polishing (eburnation) caused by direct bone-on-bone contact (Larsen 1997; Ortner 2003). This male’s DJD was more severe in the right shoulder, facet joints of three cervical vertebrae (C4–6), lower lumbar vertebral bodies (L3–L5), hips, and knees. Significant osteophyte growth on the articular margins of the right humeral head would have made movement stiff and painful, but extensive eburnation here and on the glenoid fossa suggest that the right shoulder joint was still in use despite almost certain pain during his last weeks and months. Osteophyte formation on the distal femora, more extensive on the left side, indicated degeneration of both knee joints. The articular surface of the left patella (the only one extant) exhibited macroporosity and destruction of the subchondral bone, suggesting that the severity was lateralized; a limp favoring the right leg could, in theory, have resulted. This male also experienced extensive AMTL. His mandible was edentulous, and many of his maxillary teeth had fallen out, leaving only five maxillary incisors and canines at the time of his death. Resorption of all posterior alveoli was extensive, suggesting that the loss of these teeth occurred many years before death. The resorption of the anterior alveoli was less advanced, so they may have been lost more recently. Moderate DJD of the right temporomandibular joint was evident, although the left side was unaffected. Atrophy of the right half of the mandible was also apparent, perhaps caused by a preference for the non-arthritic left side when chewing. The atrophied and edentulous nature of the mandible would have given this male’s lower face a sunken and asymmetrical appearance. Forensic artist Gloria Nusse incorporated these attributes into a facial reconstruction of 12–10152 (Figure 11.2; Boutin et al. 2012). Like skeletal fluorosis and DJD, AMTL is an embodied change whose effects accumulate across the life course, as is evident in the Cornwall Collection. One adolescent person, a probable male 12–15 years of age (PAHMA 12–10156), had already lost one maxillary molar antemortem and was about to lose another due to caries. Even though the three young adults exhibited no AMTL, this process accelerated in middle and old age. Seven middle adults in the collection with extant dentition each had lost an average of 14.7 teeth before they died, representing 46.08% (47/102) of alveoli. Three old adults had each lost an average of 17.7 teeth before death, representing 55.3% (42/76) of alveoli. Bearing in mind that these numbers are minima, based on only the maxillae and mandibles that were extant, AMTL seems

The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity · 229

Figure 11.2. Facial reconstruction of 12-10152. Note the collapsed, asymmetrical appearance of the lower face. Reconstruction by G. Nusse; photo by B. Porter.

to have been a normative component of becoming an elder in Dilmun (and in other societies across the Gulf in prehistory; see Blau [1999], Littleton and Frohlich [1989, 1993], and Nelson et al. [1999]). It is also a process that, based on modern analogues, can involve pain (both acute and chronic), adjustments to diet, changes in self-image, and alterations in social behavior (Fiske et al. 1998). Commemorating Masculinity

This bioarchaeological analysis reveals some of the physical conditions that these three men experienced during the course of their lives. As they reached old age, the strength, stature, and physical vigor of their youth were certainly behind them. Excessive ossification (in one case likely caused by skeletal fluorosis) would have caused stiffness and pain. They apparently maintained their mobility, however. Despite being slowed by DJD, they

230 · Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

continued to carry out their daily routines, a fact that is demonstrated by joint eburnation. Antemortem tooth loss may have made them more reliant on others to prepare specialized meals they could comfortably consume. Skeletal fluorosis and AMTL, diseases that are typical of old age, would have developed slowly and progressively. Only people who survived into their fifth decade would have experienced the most extreme expressions of these conditions. These physical conditions at the latter stages of life shaped their identities as old men. Written sources and visual culture describing ideologies of masculinity and age are unfortunately absent throughout Dilmun’s history, making it difficult to discern local notions of what it meant to be an old man. A cautious examination of written sources from neighboring Mesopotamia, with whom Dilmun shared many cultural and economic connections, may shed some light on the situation. Close readings of these texts (summarized in Harris 2000) indicate that persons gained and lost aspects of their identities over the life course. As persons began to embody the characteristics of old age—gray or thinning hair; stooped, weaker bodies; and impotence or menopause, to name only a few—their ability to carry out the duties of younger adults became difficult and eventually impossible. They were no longer able to participate in household and extra-household production, military and labor projects, and sexual reproduction—in other words, many of the essential duties that able-bodied adults carried out to sustain their societies. The concomitant loss of physical and economic selfsufficiency may have been particularly significant for men as their status became more akin to that of women and children (Harris 2000). Old persons did retain one highly valued aspect in their later years, of course: the wisdom gained from past experiences that could be shared with younger generations. Additional insight into these men’s identities can be found in an examination of the ways the living commemorated them shortly after their death. A normative mortuary assemblage in Early Dilmun—and these patterns are indeed reflected in the Cornwall Collection—consisted of one or two ceramic vessels that likely contained foodstuffs (e.g., grains, dates); in some instances, a slaughtered sheep or goat accompanied the body. The living were likely motivated to inter these objects with the deceased so that the latter could use them during their journey to the underworld, a realm portrayed in ancient Near Eastern literature (e.g., “The Descent of Ishtar to the Underworld”; “The Underworld Vision of an Assyrian Prince”; “Gilgamesh, Enkidu and the Netherworld”) as an arduous and uncomfortable

The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity · 231

journey (Katz 2003). In some instances, however, decedents were commemorated with a greater amount of objects. For example, a young adult woman with disabilities also excavated by Cornwall (PAHMA 12–10146) was commemorated with twelve ceramic vessels and an alabaster vessel (Boutin and Porter 2014; Boutin 2016). Based on this and other interments, it appears that the living modified their contributions to the deceased depending on how they wished to commemorate a specific individual. Unfortunately, Cornwall’s notes do not describe the mortuary tumuli in which these three people were interred. This information would have made it possible to compare tumulus sizes in order to estimate differential amounts of effort that the living expended to commemorate the deceased. Cornwall did, however, recover materials that were associated with bodies in the burial chamber. Animal bones were found alongside the remains of all three men. Eight bones belonging to a sheep (Ovis aries) were recovered with 12–10147, including four humeri, a femur, and a skull. Similarly, eleven cranial and postcranial bones of a sheep were recovered with 12–10152. Six cranial and postcranial bones from a goat (Capra hircus) accompanied 12–10149 to the grave. In all instances, the faunal evidence indicated that a whole or nearly whole carcass of a recently butchered animal was interred with the deceased. Butchered sheep and goat appeared in other Early Dilmun burials at A’ali, Dar Kulayb, and Saar in Bahrain and followed the same pattern of butchering (Kveiborg 2007). What is surprising, however, is the lack of at least one ceramic vessel with 12–10149 or 12–10152, such as the cylindrical jars (e.g., B73A and B73B in Højlund 2007) that were seemingly designed more for mortuary settings than daily life, given their limited numbers in Early Dilmun settlements. In contrast, the commemoration of individual 12–10147 was distinct from that of the other two men. In addition to a butchered animal, 12–10147 received three luxury objects that can be classified as exotica. The first was a large ostrich eggshell that was found broken in four pieces (PAHMA 9–4701; Figure 11.3a); when whole, the egg may have been used as a drinking vessel. Although broken and whole ostrich eggshells have been identified in other Early Dilmun tumuli at Saar and A’ali (Højlund 2007:Figures 33, 144, 160), their appearance is still rare. The second object was a cylindrical ceramic jar with a sharp shoulder, a tall neck, and a flaring rim that likely contained organic foodstuffs (PAHMA 9–4702; Figure 11.3b). The vessel’s diameter is 14 cm and its base was broken in antiquity. This vessel type was manufactured in southern Mesopotamia at the end of the third and beginning of the second millennia BC (Type 2; Laursen 2011:35, 40). Like the ostrich

232 · Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

Figure 11.3. (a) Ostrich eggshell (PAHMA 9-4701). Photo by C. Morgan; (b) ceramic jar (PAHMA 9-4702) interred with Individual 12-10147 in Tumulus C-3. Illustration by K. Leu.

egg, imported jars from Mesopotamia and the Indus River Valley only occasionally appeared in Early Dilmun mortuary contexts. The third luxury object interred with 12–10147 was a vessel at least 15 cm tall made from elephant ivory (PAHMA 9–4703; Figure 11.4). Cornwall recovered this vessel in several fragments and unfortunately it is not possible to restore the entire object. Like ostrich eggshells and imported Mesopotamian vessels, ivory objects have occasionally been found in Early Dilmun tumuli (e.g., Højlund 2007:Figure 168), but most are not as well preserved as this specimen. It is tempting to locate the origin of the vessel, or at least the raw ivory, in the Indus River Valley, given the close commercial contacts that Early Dilmun traders had with Harappan societies.

Figure 11.4. Restored ivory vessel (PAHMA 9-4703) interred with Individual 12-10147. The vessel is 9 cm wide and at least 15 cm tall. Photo by J. Williams.

234 · Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

Conclusion

When the examination of mortuary objects is combined with bioarchaeological analysis, a few noteworthy patterns in the masculine life course emerge. Aside from some small differences, the three men shared a number of aspects in common, such as skeletal degeneration, AMTL, and other physical conditions associated with a long life span. Yet the commemoration of these three persons was hardly standardized. While two men were interred with only a slaughtered goat or sheep, a third person received a collection of exotic luxury goods, at least two of which were imported. These differences suggest that men’s identities were multifaceted in Early Dilmun society, certainly during their postmortem commemoration, even though they experienced relatively similar physical effects of aging. In other words, if individual 12–10147 was in some way an “elite” man, he did not escape the ravages of old age. This brief case study demonstrates how a careful analysis of mortuary and skeletal evidence can shed light on the embodied lives of old men in Early Dilmun. As scholars continue to pursue social archaeologies of ancient Near Eastern societies, the complex identities of men cannot be ignored regardless of the androcentric bias that characterized earlier scholarship. Rather than leading to a reification of patriarchy, as some scholars have suggested (Alberti 2006), such investigations stand to reveal the diverse ways in which masculinity was embodied. Exploring what it meant to be a man—in terms of age, socioeconomic status, health, religious practice, and so forth—could potentially even identify the limits of their patriarchal authority in ancient Near Eastern societies. Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank their colleagues in the Dilmun Bioarchaeology Project, specifically Gloria Nusse (facial reconstruction), Daniel Cusimano and Jennifer Piro (faunal analysts), and Charles Morse and Sheel Jagani (former research assistants). The authors would also like to thank the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology, particularly its late director Mari Lyn Salvador, curator of biological anthropology and professor of integrative biology Tim White, collections manager Leslie Freund, former conservator Jane L. Williams, and former HERC-PAHMA liaison Socorro Báez.

The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity · 235

Porter conducted the archival research and material culture analysis and Boutin conducted the osteological analysis. This chapter was written collaboratively. References Cited Alberti, Benjamin 2006 Archaeology, Men, and Masculinities. In Handbook of Gender in Archaeology, edited by Sarah Milledge Nelson, pp. 401–434. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland. Bahrani, Zainab 2001 Women of Babylon: Gender and Representation in Mesopotamia. Routledge, London. Blau, Soren 1999 The People at Sharm: An Analysis of the Archaeological Human Skeletal Remains. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 10(2):190–204. Boutin, Alexis T. 2008 Embodying Life and Death: Osteobiographical Narratives from Alalakh. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 2016 Exploring the Social Construction of Disability: An Application of the Bioarchaeology of Personhood Model to a Pathological Skeleton from Ancient Bahrain. International Journal of Paleopathology 12(1):17–28. Boutin, Alexis T., Gloria L. Nusse, Sabrina B. Sholts, and Benjamin W. Porter 2012 Face-to-Face with the Past: Reconstructing a Teenage Boy from Early Dilmun. Near Eastern Archaeology 75(2):68–79. Boutin, Alexis T., and Benjamin W. Porter 2014 Commemorating Disability in Early Dilmun: Ancient and Contemporary Tales from the Peter B. Cornwall Collection. In Remembering the Dead in the Ancient Near East: Recent Contributions from Bioarchaeology and Mortuary Archaeology, edited by Benjamin W. Porter and Alexis T. Boutin, pp. 97–132. University of Colorado Press, Boulder. Brickley, Megan, and Rachel Ives 2008 The Bioarchaeology of Metabolic Bone Disease. Academic Press, Oxford. Buikstra, Jane E., and Douglas H. Ubelaker 1994 Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains. Arkansas Archaeological Survey, Fayetteville. Chavalas, Mark W. 2014 Women in the Ancient Near East. Routledge, London. Chesson, Meredith S. 2001 Embodied Memories of Place and People: Death and Society in an Early Urban Community. In Social Memory, Identity, and Death: Anthropological Perspectives on Mortuary Rituals, edited by Meredith S. Chesson, pp. 100–113. American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Virginia.

236 · Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

Crawford, Harriet 2001 Early Dilmun Seals from Saar: Art and Commerce in Bronze Age Bahrain. Archaeology International, Ludlow. Croucher, Karina 2005 Queerying Near Eastern Archaeology. World Archaeology 37(4):609–619. Faccia, Kate, and Robert C. Williams 2008 Schmorl’s Nodes: Clinical Significance and Implications for the Bioarchaeological Record. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 18(1):28–44. Fiske, Janice, David M. Davis, C. Frances, and Stanley Gelbier 1998 The Emotional Effects of Tooth Loss in Edentulous People. British Dental Journal 184(2):90–93. Frohlich, Bruno 1986 The Human Biological History of the Early Bronze Age Population of Bahrain. In Bahrain through the Ages: The Archaeology, edited by Shaikha Haya Ali Al Khalifa and Michael Rice, pp. 47–63. Kegan Paul International, London. Frohlich, Bruno, Donald J. Ortner, and Haya Ali Al Khalifa 1989 Human Disease in the Ancient Middle East. Dilmun 14:61–73. Geller, Pamela L. 2017 The Bioarchaeology of Socio-Sexual Lives: Queering Common Sense about Sex, Gender, and Sexuality. Springer International, Cham, Switzerland. Gilchrist, Roberta 2009 Rethinking Later Medieval Masculinity: The Male Body in Death. In Mortuary Practices and Social Identities in the Middle Ages, edited by Duncan Sayer and Howard Williams, pp. 236–252. Liverpool University Press, Liverpool. Gowland, Rebecca 2006 Ageing the Past: Examining Age Identity from Funerary Evidence. In Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains, edited by Rebecca Gowland and Christopher J. Knüsel, pp. 143–154. Oxbow Books, Oxford. Grosz, Katarzyna 1987 Daughters Adopted as Sons at Nuzi and Emar. In La femme dans le ProcheOrient Antique: Compte rendu de la XXXIIIe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, edited by Jean Marie Durand, pp. 81–86. Éditions Recherche sur les civilisations, Paris. Harris, Rivkah 2000 Gender and Aging in Mesopotamia: The Gilgamesh Epic and Other Ancient Literature. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Højlund, Flemming 2007 The Burial Mounds of Bahrain: Social Complexity in Early Dilmun. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications, Moesgaard. Hollimon, Sandra E. 2011 Sex and Gender in Bioarchaeological Research: Theory, Method, and Interpretation. In Social Bioarchaeology, edited by Sabrina A. Agarwal and Bonnie A. Glencross, pp. 149–182. Blackwell, Oxford. Joyce, Rosemary 2007 Embodied Subjectivity: Gender, Femininity, Masculinity, Sexuality. In A Com-

The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity · 237

panion to Social Archaeology, edited by Lynn Meskell and Robert Preucel, pp. 82–95. Blackwell, Oxford. Katz, Dina 2003 The Image of the Netherworld in the Sumerian Sources. CDL Press, Bethesda, Maryland. Killick, Robert, and Jane Moon (editors) 2005 The Early Dilmun Settlement at Saar. Archaeology International, Ludlow. Knapp, A. Bernard 1999 Who’s Come a Long Way, Baby? Masculinist Approaches to a Gendered Archaeology. Archaeological Dialogues 5(2):91–125. Knüsel, Christopher J. 2011 Men Take Up Arms for War: Sex and Status Distinctions of Humeral Medial Epicondylar Avulsion Fractures in the Archaeological Record. In Breathing New Life into the Evidence of Death: Contemporary Approaches to Bioarchaeology, edited by Aubrey Baadsgaard, Alexis T. Boutin, and Jane E. Buikstra, pp. 221–249. SAR Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico. Kveiborg, Jacob 2007 Appendix 2: Animal Bones from the Aali, Saar, and Dar Kulayb Mound Cemeteries. In The Burial Mounds of Bahrain: Social Complexity in Early Dilmun, edited by Flemming Højlund, pp. 149–153. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications, Moesgaard. Laneri, Nicola (editor) 2007 Performing Death: Social Analyses of Funerary Traditions in the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago. Larsen, Clark Spencer 1997 Bioarchaeology: Interpreting Behavior from the Human Skeleton. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Laursen, Steffen Terp 2008 Early Dilmun and Its Rulers: New Evidence of the Burial Mounds of the Elite and the Development of Social Complexity, c. 2200–1750 BC. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 19(2):156–167. 2011 Mesopotamian Ceramics from the Burial Mounds of Bahrain, c. 2250–1750 BC. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 22(1):32–47. Littleton, Judith 1998 Skeletons and Social Composition: Bahrain 300 BC–AD 250. Archaeopress, Oxford. 1999 Paleopathology of Skeletal Fluorosis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 190(4):465–483. Littleton, Judith, and Bruno Frohlich 1989 An Analysis of Dental Pathology and Diet on Historic Bahrain. Paleorient 15(2):59–75. 1993 Fish-Eaters and Farmers: Dental Pathology in the Arabian Gulf. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 92(4):427–447.

238 · Alexis T. Boutin and Benjamin W. Porter

Lovejoy, C. Owen, Richard S. Meindl, Robert P. Mensforth, and Thomas J. Barton 1985 Multifactorial Determination of Skeletal Age at Death: A Method and Blind Tests of Its Accuracy. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68(1):1–14. Mays, Simon 2000 Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH) in Skeletons from Two Mediaeval English Cemeteries. Journal of Paleopathology 12:25–36. 2006 The Osteology of Monasticism in Medieval England. In Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains, edited by Rebecca Gowland and Christopher J. Knüsel, pp. 179–189. Oxbow Books, Oxford. Meindl, Richard S., C. Owen Lovejoy, Robert P. Mensforth, and Lydia Don Carlos 1985 Accuracy and Direction of Error in the Sexing of the Skeleton: Implications for Paleodemography. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68(1):79–85. Meskell, Lynn 1999 Archaeologies of Social Life: Age, Sex, Class, et cetera in Ancient Egypt. Blackwell, Oxford. Meskell, Lynn M., and Rosemary A. Joyce 2003 Embodied Lives: Figuring Ancient Maya and Egyptian Experience. Routledge, London. Meyers, Carol 2013 Rediscovering Eve: Ancient Israelite Women in Context. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Milner, George R., and Jesper L. Boldsen 2012 Transition Analysis: A Validation Study with Known-Age Modern American Skeletons. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 148(1):98–110. Mohammadi, Ali Akbar, Mahmood Yousefi, Mehdi Yaseri, Mohsen Jalilzadeh, and Amir Hossen Mahvi 2017 Skeletal Fluorosis in Relation to Drinking Water in Rural Areas of West Azerbaijan, Iran. Nature Scientific Reports 7:17300. Nelson, Greg C., John R. Lukacs, and Paul Yule 1999 Dates, Caries, and Early Tooth Loss during the Iron Age of Oman. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 108(3):333–343. Ortner, Donald J. 2003 Identification of Pathological Conditions in Human Skeletal Remains. 2nd ed. Academic Press, San Diego, California. Peled, Ilan 2016 Masculinities and Third Gender: The Origins and Nature of an Institutionalized Gender Otherness in the Ancient Near East. Ugarit-Verlag, Münster. Pollock, Susan, and Reinhard Bernbeck 2000 And They Said, Let Us Make Gods in Our Image: Gendered Ideologies in Ancient Mesopotamia. In Reading the Body: Representations and Remains in the Archaeological Record, edited by Alison Rautman, pp. 150–64. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Porter, Benjamin W., and Alexis T. Boutin 2012 The Dilmun Bioarchaeology Project: A First Look at the Peter B. Cornwall Col-

The Elders of Early Dilmun: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Age and Masculinity · 239

lection at the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 23(1):35–49. Porter, Benjamin W., and Alexis T. Boutin (editors) 2014 Remembering the Dead in the Ancient Near East: Recent Contributions from Bioarchaeology and Mortuary Archaeology. University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Potts, Daniel T. 1990 The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity. 2 vols. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Resnick, Donald 1989 Bone and Joint Imaging. W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia. Scheuer, Louise, and Sue Black 2000 Developmental Juvenile Osteology. Elsevier, San Diego, California. Schloen, J. David 2001 The House of the Father as Fact and Symbol: Patrimonialism in Ugarit and the Ancient Near East. Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana. Sofaer, Joanna R. 2006 The Body as Material Culture: A Theoretical Osteoarchaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Sullivan, Lynne P. 2001 Those Men in the Mounds: Gender, Politics, and Mortuary Practices in Late Prehistoric Eastern Tennessee. In Archaeological Studies of Gender in the Southeastern United States, edited by Jane E. Eastman and Christopher B. Rodning, pp. 101–126. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Torres-Rouff, Christina 2011 Piercing the Body: Labret Use, Identity, and Masculinity in Prehistoric Chile. In Breathing New Life into the Evidence of Death: Contemporary Approaches to Bioarchaeology, edited by Aubrey Baadsgaard, Alexis T. Boutin, and Jane E. Buikstra, pp. 153–178. SAR Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico. Trotter, Mildred 1970 Estimation of Stature from Intact Long Limb Bones. In Personal Identification from Mass Disasters, edited by T. Dale Stewart, pp. 71–83. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. Walker, Phillip L., Rhonda R. Bathurst, Rebecca, Richman, Thor Gjerdrum, and Valerie A. Andrushko 2009 The Causes of Porotic Hyperostosis and Cribra Orbitalia: A Reappraisal of the Iron-Deficiency-Anemia Hypothesis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 139(2):109–125. Whitley, James 2002 Objects with Attitude: Biographical Facts and Fallacies in the Study of Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Warrior Graves. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 12(2):217–232. Zsolnay, Ilona (editor) 2016 Being a Man: Negotiating Ancient Constructs of Masculinity. Routledge, New York.

12 Conclusions, Challenges, and the Future of Mortuary Archaeology and Bioarchaeology in Arabia Peter Magee

The chapters presented in this book represent an important milestone in our understanding of mortuary archaeology in prehistoric Arabia. Through chemical analysis, careful excavation methodologies, detailed bioarchaeological research, and the application of cultural theory, we have arrived at a greater understanding of the social and cultural significance of how people buried their dead from circa 3000 BC onward. The opportunity to write a response to these varied and invariably excellent studies is daunting. An easy path would be to summarize each chapter. However, I don’t believe I could do all the chapters justice and, in any case, that would be too easy a way out. Instead, I want to focus on what I see as one of the major themes resulting from this work and then turn to some of the future challenges. Periodization, Continuity, and Identity

Nearly fifty years ago, when archaeological research began in southeastern Arabia, the area with which most of these chapters are concerned, fieldwork aimed to establish a broad outline of some of the major phases of prehistoric settlement (Frifelt 1970, 1975). It is hard to imagine that up until that point it was thought that this region contained little to no prehistoric archaeology. This had resulted from a contouring of research that had prioritized fieldwork in the other well-known areas of the ancient Near East.

Conclusions and the Future of Mortuary Archaeology and Bioarchaeology in Arabia · 241

The initial fieldwork in the Arabian Gulf focused on Bahrain, an area that Near Eastern archaeologists had long known as Dilmun (Bibby 1969). Moving south to the Trucial states revealed tombs dated to the Bronze Age on the island of Umm an-Nar and in the inland oasis of Al Ain (Frifelt 1991, 1995). These tombs and subsequent discoveries were used to establish a periodization of southeastern Arabian prehistory based on what was considered to be unique to each of these burial cultures, which stretched from the Hafit culture to the Umm an-Nar culture and then moved into the second millennium BC on the basis of the excavations at Wadi Suq in Oman. Over the last five decades, these cultural phases have become relatively calcified so that individual places of discovery (Umm an-Nar Island, Jebel Hafit) are understood to represent unique and separate material cultures, each of which is characterized by a defined set of behavioral responses to both the arid climate and shifting patterns of trade in the broader Near Eastern world. A defined and self-enclosed package of material culture traits, especially tomb architecture, accompanied these cultural phases. Excavations at sites such as Hili 8, in the Al Ain oasis, hinted at a much more gradual shift from nomadic pastoralism, which was characterized by limited agricultural activity, to a full-fledged oasis economy around 2500 BC (Cleuziou 1996). However, confusion about the chronology and a lack of a final report has hindered a complete understanding of this site. One of the first and most important results of this volume is that the funerary architecture and rituals appear to support a blurring of these material culture phases, both chronologically and in terms of internal consistency. This is represented in the work of Bortolini (chapter 7), for example. His contribution aims to break down broader cultural phases to individual traits of tombs by observing how these traits have manifested and mutated through time. His results are both compelling and raise many questions. On the one hand, he is able to show the links between the earliest Bronze Age tomb structures and examples from the latter third millennium BC. This supports the concept of continuity throughout this period, despite the massive changes that occurred throughout the region around 2500 BC. At the same time, the phylogenetic approach he takes hints at differences between the earlier third millennium BC and the classical Umm an-Nar tradition. These differences are manifested in differing levels of trait variation, with lower variation in the third millennium BC and increased variation in centuries after circa 2500 BC. As he notes, “This result may be attributable to a more intense exchange of cultural information at a regional

242 · Peter Magee

level in this early phase, but it may also be ascribed to the relatively small sample size of excavated Hafit-type tombs and for this reason needs to be further investigated. The second half of the millennium seems instead to hint at increasing diversity. This speculative statement, based on qualitative evidence, will be quantitatively addressed in future studies” (155). While we look forward to the future research that attempts to address this issue, it is interesting that his conclusion engages the ever-present and assumed dichotomy between what are considered more mobile elements of southeast Arabian society (in this case, pastoral nomadism) and a sedentary and often agricultural economy. Of course, there is no reason to believe that there was ever a seismic shift between these two lifeways, and indeed individual population groups moved from one to the other as the situation required. This is reflected in the more recent history of the region in which tribal confederations, such as the Bani Yas, moved from a mixed economy of small-scale farming and pastoralism to marine exploitation of pearls as a result of shifting economic factors on both a local and global level. Not only can we assume that lifeways shifted and never in a linear fashion, but the chapters presented in this volume also indicate that social concepts of individual and community identity were transformed, reaffirmed, challenged, and communicated at a very local level. In this regard, the contribution of Williams and Gregoricka (chapter 4) is critical. Their work at the Al Khubayb Necropolis in Oman has provided, for the first time, discrete chronological evidence for not only the transition between the Hafit and Umm an-Nar horizon but also manifestations of how these shifts were individualized. As they note, their research “shows that rather than wholesale adoption of new mortuary rituals, individuals in a single community made different decisions about monument construction and tomb inclusion. This is further evidence of the erosion of the previously accepted egalitarian but individual treatment of all people during the Hafit period. We suggest that these various lines of evidence are precursors to the complete removal of individual identity that was practiced in the Umm an-Nar period, and that further examination of the transitional mortuary ritual may help elucidate other aspects of social change between the Hafit and Umm an-Nar periods” (101). I see this work as important, not just in terms of funerary ritual and tomb architecture but also as a reminder that the perspective that homogenizes human behavior on the basis of apparent material culture uniformity runs the risk of erasing individual and group agency. As I noted in a recent

Conclusions and the Future of Mortuary Archaeology and Bioarchaeology in Arabia · 243

publication (Magee 2014:124–125), the major shifts we see in the material culture between the Umm an-Nar and Wadi Suq periods around 2000 BC may be understood as a form of reaction to changing social and economic conditions across the region. Instead of being forced to return to nomadic pastoralism by shifting global economies and climate, as archaeologists argued in the 1980s (e.g., Cleuziou 1981), individuals, families, or entire “tribes” (if we choose to use that term) may have shifted their economies as a conscious choice. How these choices were expressed in funerary ritual and how people culturally “remembered” their previous lifeways is the subject of chapter 6, by Gernez and Giraud. It would be surprising if the shift between the Umm an-Nar and Wadi Suq material cultures was manifested as either a completely smooth transition or a complete and utter break with the past, as pioneering scholars tentatively argued (e.g., Cleuziou 1981). Indeed, renewed excavations at Tell Abraq (Magee et al. 2017) have shown that this was certainly not the case. Gernez and Giraud’s work at Adam North and South reveals in brilliant detail the tensions and complexities within the community regarding individual and/or group agency, something that is typically difficult to access archaeologically. However, there is spatial continuity in where the dead are buried before and after ca. 2000 BC. This may have just been pragmatic, as they note, but surely this also reflects a sense of connection to a cultural landscape. Indeed, if there was a shift toward nomadic pastoralism during the Wadi Suq period, then these cultural landscapes would have served as important reminders of community identity and belonging, as they had in the Neolithic period at Jebel Buhais. However, that sense of community continuity or identity appears to have been challenged by the fact that the Umm an-Nar tombs were looted for stone and reused. As Gernez and Giraud conclude: “There is little doubt that the inhabitants of the Oman Peninsula during the Wadi Suq period were able to recognize the human bones and artifacts they found during the plundering of old graves and thus were able to identify the funerary past of these places. If they did choose to locate their graveyards near older graves not only for pragmatic but also symbolic reasons, two quite contradictory explanations can be proposed: [First,] later inhabitants recognized the funerary purpose and symbolism of the natural and constructed landscape linked to people considered ancestors, so they installed graves around them with the idea of continuity” (chapter 6:137). Nevertheless, it seems incomprehensible that respect for ancestors could coexist with a willingness to rob and effectively deface their funerary monuments. However, there is so

244 · Peter Magee

much we do not know about the relationship between individual and group identity in southeast Arabian prehistory, particularly when such identity is transmuted through major shifts in economy and subsistence strategy. To this end, it is worth considering the latter part of Gernez and Giraud’s conclusion when they state that for the people of Adam, “the later inhabitants understood the funerary purpose of the graves but wanted to delineate their own territory by erasing the past and occupying this place in their present” (chapter 6:137). The understanding of the funerary purpose (of Umm an-Nar tombs) may have been based on a memory of a collective identity that indeed appears to have been particularly pronounced during the end of the Umm anNar period. As Munoz (chapter 2) concludes in her chapter on collective burials of the Umm an-Nar period: “Umm an-Nar tombs can be regarded as a powerful way to strengthen social cohesion by assimilating individuals to the community of ancestors, a higher entity within a society in which inequalities were increasingly prevalent” (32). I would argue that it is possible that what we see in the Adam cemetery is that this assimilation was never completely resolved and may indeed have been increasingly challenged by the living populations in the decades before 2000 BC. What Sort of Data Do We Have to Address This Issue?

It cannot be emphasized enough that the unique mortuary record of southeastern Arabia provides an unparalleled dataset for examining people’s lives within a very short time frame and answering questions such as the one posed above. In the rest of the ancient Near East, such data is available only episodically. For example, textual sources in Mesopotamia occasionally give detailed insights into the lives of small groups of workers (Englund 1991) or even those of individual merchant families and firms (Stolper 1974, 1985). Although these sources often provide glimpses of personal histories and agency, the economic activities that were the reason for creating these texts invariably block our access to deeper understanding of personal life. Bioarchaeological data is, of course, also available from these regions. However, in the case of Mesopotamia, poor excavation standards, a desire to focus on burials of the elite and wealthy, and an inability to aggregate evidence from individual inhumations (the most common burial mode) into broader societal-level conclusions has restricted our understanding of the lives of what may be termed everyday people.

Conclusions and the Future of Mortuary Archaeology and Bioarchaeology in Arabia · 245

It is fair to say that for most of southeast Arabian prehistory, especially the Bronze Age, we have more data on health, diet, and disease for communities than we do for most of the rest of the Near East. In this volume, the bioarchaeological data Martin, Baustian, and Osterholtz (chapter 9) present is not only stunning but goes a long way toward helping us understand the tensions that existed at a societal level during periods of transition in southeast Arabian prehistory, especially between the Umm an-Nar and Wadi Suq periods. Martin and colleagues present an overview of the bioarchaeology of the Umm an-Nar tombs of Tell Abraq. These tombs provide compelling evidence for the lives of at least 400 people during a relatively short time frame (perhaps as little as 100 years) leading up to the end of the Umm an-Nar period. To put this in the context of broader Near Eastern archaeology: this would be comparable to having texts on the lives and deaths of 400 people during the Ur III period in Mesopotamia. To compare with the bioarchaeological data discussed by Martin and colleagues, not to mention by Gregoricka (chapter 10) and Boutin and Porter (chapter 11), such textual sources would detail where these specific people were from and what they ate, the diseases they had, and how they died and were remembered. We do have evidence for all these aspects of past human life from the thousands of Ur III texts, but we don’t have all of these types of evidence for the same 400 people. The evidence discussed in this volume offers a unique opportunity to increase our understanding of the transition from the Umm an-Nar period to the Wadi Suq period. The bioarchaeological data presents a clear image of a population under stress in the last century of the Umm an-Nar period (e.g., Blau 2001). The evidence of porotic hyperostosis, cribra orbitalia, and linear enamel hypoplasia indicates a population with dietary challenges. Moreover, the tomb at Tell Abraq, as do others in the UAE (McSweeney et al. 2004, 2010), contains remarkably high numbers of premature and full-term infants. The reasons for this unparalleled evidence are unclear. As Martin and colleagues note, “The large proportion of premature and full-term infants is confounding; there is no precedent for this in other tombs from the Near East or the Bronze Age in this region” (chapter 9:194). Martin and colleagues raise the possibility that the inclusion of infants speaks to culturally specific concepts of group and family membership. I would tentatively argue that late Umm an-Nar period tombs may have become important symbols of the concept of smaller group identity, possibly “family,” in contrast to the

246 · Peter Magee

increasingly imposed sense of collective group identity. The latter identity was reinforced and communicated by the increasing labor and attention paid to Umm an-Nar tombs, as seen for example in the Grand Tomb at Hili. This interpretation cannot be insisted upon and clearly more data is needed to refute or confirm this suggestion. To return to the question of how to resolve the apparent contradiction evident in the Adam cemetery, we can hypothesize that the early Wadi Suq population of that area understood that their ancestors had been part of a society that stretched across a vast region. This “memory” would have been visually reinforced by existing Umm an-Nar tombs, perhaps especially the Grand Tomb at Hili, which they might have seen. However, there was also a more personal memory of a time of hardship and pain, a time when infant mortality was rampant and disease was common. This was a time when a monumentalized collective identity was resisted and smaller-scale identity was maintained. Indeed, the latter identity may have been responsible for the changes from the Umm an-Nar to the Wadi Suq period. This may be the reason why Wadi Suq tombs are still collective, but there is pronounced individual identity in tomb structure and layout, as we see from areas where multiple examples have been excavated, such as Jebel Buhais in Sharjah (Jasim 2012). This tension between a memory of a collective, region-wide (Maganite?) identity, and small-scale (family, small tribe) identity is reflected in the simultaneous respect for and alteration of the Umm an-Nar tombs at Adam. The reason the local population both embraced and resisted the past may have been that the past was both negative and positive for them, just as it is for us. It contains memories of who we were, but it also affirms that our society today is “better” than it once was. I believe an analogous situation existed in Al Khubayb in earlier centuries, when there was a tension between concepts of individualism and collectivism that is manifested in the transitional tombs. Tombs S007–011 and S007–012 indicate this most clearly, as two individuals held on to concepts of individuality at a time when communities were moving toward collective burial in the Umm anNar period. I find it interesting that these manifestations of tension exist at a time of major economic and subsistence shifts during the transitions from the Hafit to the Umm an-Nar periods and from the Umm an-Nar to the Wadi Suq periods. They so poignantly reveal that all societies are made of individuals with agency and choice. In short, these chapters offer new insight into continuity and identity within the periodization of prehistory that pioneering archaeologists

Conclusions and the Future of Mortuary Archaeology and Bioarchaeology in Arabia · 247

established in southeastern Arabia nearly fifty years ago. They challenge the strict, and often calcified, concept of material cultures that compartmentalized southeast Arabian prehistory using a type site approach, similar to what had been applied elsewhere in the ancient Near East. This approach can be unpacked in southeastern Arabia to an extent not possible elsewhere for two reasons. First, the standard of fieldwork, especially its multidisciplinarity, makes it possible to examine microchronological changes, as, for example, at Al Khubayb and Adam. This makes it possibly to more closely examine periods of transition in a process that, in effect, blurs material culture horizons. Second, the enormous amount of bioarchaeological data from tombs provides an opportunity to move away from artifacts, such as ceramics, as indicators of cultural homogeneity, and toward the individual. Increasingly this suggests that the Hafit, Umm an-Nar, and Wadi Suq periods were never uniform in terms of identity and cohesion. Communities were sometimes in flux. They were sometimes challenged by concepts of the collective, and when needed, they held on to resistant (and sometimes earlier) modes of identity. From Arabia to the Near East

In writing this chapter I was asked to consider outlining where I saw future challenges. Of course, it is more likely, and probably far more productive, that the community of scholars working in Arabia will collectively move the study of the region forward. However, as a prehistorian who has worked in Arabia and the adjoining regions, I wanted to offer some tentative ideas. The field of Near Eastern Archaeology is in flux. The wave of changes, often violent, that has beset the region will result in a fundamental shift in the epistemological boundaries of the discipline. Traditional areas of research, for example Mesopotamia and Syria, are now largely out of bounds for field research. In the short term this has prompted scholars to transfer their questions, which largely focused on the emergence of complexity and the state, to other areas such as Kurdistan, although this endeavor also was short lived. Given that these areas were fundamental in establishing Near Eastern archaeology as a discipline, it would appear that the time has come to consider that the field of Near Eastern Archaeology as envisaged in its colonial roots of the early twentieth century is dead, or is at least being slowly carried to the funerary pyre. At the same time, in the last few years, we have witnessed an increase in fieldwork throughout Arabia. New projects in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,

248 · Peter Magee

Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Oman have continued to reveal new and important evidence on past lifeways in the region. Some of this work is presented in this volume. The work of Boutin and Porter (chapter 11) is one example that eloquently engages broader concepts in Near Eastern archaeology, such as masculinity. Through a detailed study of bioarchaeological and artifactual evidence, they skillfully challenge and deconstruct the homogeneity of masculinity. They conclude that “as scholars continue to pursue social archaeologies of ancient Near Eastern societies, the complex identities of men cannot be ignored regardless of the androcentric bias that characterized earlier scholarship. Rather than leading to a reification of patriarchy, as some scholars have suggested (Alberti 2006), such investigations stand to reveal the diverse ways masculinity was embodied. Exploring what it meant to be a man—in terms of age, socioeconomic status, health, religious practice, and so forth—could potentially even identify the limits of their patriarchal authority in ancient Near Eastern societies” (chapter 11:234). I would argue that now is indeed the time to bring our observations on the archaeological record from Arabia, as Boutin and Porter so eloquently do, into discussions of the broader ancient Near East. For too long, Arabia has remained on the margins of the study of the ancient world. As the discipline of Near Eastern Archaeology collapses, both epistemologically and in practice, an opportunity arises to bring more nuance to our knowledge of how people lived in southwestern Asia in the distant past. It is clear in the many chapters in the volume that the societies that existed around the Arabian Gulf were fundamentally different than those that existed in Mesopotamia and elsewhere in the Near East. Not only were they different, they also occupied an enormous part of ancient southwestern Asia. Thus, I believe it is important when discussing the evidence from prehistoric Arabia that we engage with the archaeology from adjoining regions. Doing so will illuminate not only what is unique about Arabia but also how interactions between Arabia, Mesopotamia, Iran, and South Asia impacted societies in all of these regions. Praxis and Inclusion

The last comment for future directions I would make builds on the preceding comments concerning how Arabian archaeology is a relatively new field. In contrast with Near Eastern archaeology, which finds its roots within the colonial enterprises of European powers in the nineteenth and

Conclusions and the Future of Mortuary Archaeology and Bioarchaeology in Arabia · 249

twentieth centuries, Arabian archaeology is a young discipline that embraces new conceptualizations of ancient societies, new methodologies, and new modes of practice. Indeed, in reference to the last point, it is worth noting that the vast majority of authors in this volume are female. In a collected volume on the archaeology of the ancient Near East, this would be an exception. In Arabian archaeology it is not. Nevertheless, when we consider that the authors are not culturally from the region they study, the volume does reflect existing modes of practice in Near Eastern archaeology. There are numerous reasons for this, many of which are deeply embedded in the history of archaeology as an academic discipline. Challenging this situation is a long-term project that requires engagement and training, something I know all of us are aware of. However, inclusivity in the interpretation of the unique archaeology and history of settlement in Arabia is a first step in this process. As a community of scholars, we need to more actively ask the people whose cultural heritage we are investigating what they believe its importance is and what it means to them. Engaging such community archaeology cannot be done in a paternalistic or colonial fashion: it must be done in a way that fully recognizes how the past speaks to different people and how their lives today are contoured by the monuments and artifacts they see at archaeological sites and in museums. This is the subject for a future, but much needed, volume. In summary, the chapters in this volume represent a milestone in our understanding of the mortuary archaeology of ancient Arabia, and I would like to thank the editors for the opportunity to contribute to this volume. The book represents a culmination of new approaches, field methodologies, and modes of thought that fundamentally alter our understanding of Arabian prehistory, especially in the Arabian east. There is more to be done, both in the field and as a discipline. Bringing these results to both the broader community of scholars working on the ancient Near East and to those communities whose cultural heritage is the focus of our work will enrich our understanding of the past on a local and global level. References Cited Bibby, Geoffrey T. 1969 Looking for Dilmun. Praeger, New York. Blau, Soren 2001 Limited Yet Informative: Pathological Alterations Observed on Human Skeletal Remains from Third and Second Millennia BC Collective Burials in in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 11(3):173–205.

250 · Peter Magee

Cleuziou, Serge 1981 Oman Peninsula in the Early Second Millennium B.C. In South Asian Archaeology 1979, edited by H. Härtel, pp. 279–293. Reimer, Berlin. 1996 Emergence of Oases and Towns in Eastern and Southern Arabia. In The Prehistory of Asia and Oceania: Proceedings of the XIIIth Congress of the IUPPS, Forli, 8–14 Sept. 1996, edited by Gennady E. Afanas’ev, Serge Cleuziou, John R. Lukacs, and Maurizio Tosi, pp. 159–165. ABACO Edizioni, Forlì. Englund, Robert 1991 Hard Work—Where Will It Get You? Journal of Near Eastern Studies 50(4):255– 280. Frifelt, Karen 1970 Jemdet Nasr Graves in the Oman. Kuml 1970:374–383. 1975 On Prehistoric Settlement and Chronology of the Oman Peninsula. East and West 25(3–4):359–423. 1991 The Island of Umm an-Nar: 1. Third Millennium Graves. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI, Aarhus. 1995 The Island of Umm an-Nar: 2. The Third Millennium Settlement. Jutland Archaeological Society, Aarhus. Jasim, Sabah Abboud 2012 The Necropolis of Jebel al-Buhais. Prehistoric Discoveries in the Emirate of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. Department of Culture & Information, Sharjah. Magee, Peter 2014 The Archaeology of Prehistoric Arabia: Adaptation and Social Formation from the Neolithic to the Iron Age. Cambridge World Archaeology, Cambridge. Magee, Peter, Marc Handel, Steven Karacic, Margarethe Uerpmann, Hans-Peter Uerpmann 2017 Tell Abraq during the Second and First Millennia BC: Site Layout, Spatial Organisation and Economy. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 28(2):209–237. McSweeney, Katherine, Sophie Méry, and Walid Yasim Al Tikriti 2010 Life and Death in an Early Bronze Age Community from Hili, Al Ain, UAE. In Death and Burial in Arabia and Beyond: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lloyd Weeks, pp. 45–54. BAR International Series 2107. Archaeopress, Oxford. Méry, Sophie, Katherine McSweeney, S. van der Leeuw, and Walid Yasim Al Tikriti 2004 New Approaches to a Collective Grave from the Umm an-Nar period at Hili (UAE). Paleorient 30(1):163–178. Stolper, Matthew 1974 Management and Politics in Later Achaemenid Babylonia: New Texts from the Murasu archive. PhD Dissertation. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 1985 Entrepreneurs and Empire: the Murasu Archive, the Murasu Firm, and Persian Rule in Babylonia. Publications de l’Institut historique et archeologique neerlandais de Stamboul, Leiden.

CONTRIBUTORS

Kimberly D. Williams is associate professor of anthropology at Temple University. She is an archaeologist who researches prehistoric mortuary ritual, funerary landscape formation and use, interred material culture, and archaeological human skeletal remains in Southeastern Arabia. She leads ongoing work in Dhank, Oman, that focuses on Bronze Age mortuary practices south of the Al-Hajar Mountains, which has been supported by the National Science Foundation and the Fulbright Scholar Program. Lesley A. Gregoricka is associate professor of anthropology at the University of South Alabama. As a bioarchaeologist, she specializes in stable isotope biogeochemistry and the examination of mobility patterns, mortuary practices, and social complexity in the Near East and Arabia. Her publications have appeared in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, the Journal of Archaeological Science, and the Journal of Anthropological Archaeology.

*

*

*

Kathryn M. Baustian, Department of Anthropology, Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, NY. Eugenio Bortolini, Department of Cultural Heritage, University of Bologna, Ravenna, Italy. Alexis Boutin, Department of Anthropology, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA. Charlotte Marie Cable, School of Humanities, University of New England, Biddeford, ME.

252 · Contributors

Richard Thorburn Howard Cuttler, University of Birmingham, UK. Guillaume Gernez, Department of Archaeology, Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Paris. Jessica Giraud, Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Institut Français du Proche-Orient, Erbil, Iraq. Áurea Izquierdo Zamora, Department of History and Archaeology, University of Chester, UK. Peter Magee, Department of Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, PA. Debra L. Martin, Department of Anthropology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Olivia Munoz, Archéologie et Science de l’Antiquité, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Nanterre, France. Anna J. Osterholtz, Department of Anthropology and Middle Eastern Cultures, Mississippi State University, Starkville. Benjamin W. Porter, Department of Near Eastern Studies, University of California, Berkeley. Jill A. Weber, consulting scholar, Near East Section, The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.

INDEX

Page numbers in italics indicate illustrations. Abu Silah necropolis, 86 Adam: site, 121–137, 243–244, 246–247; North graveyard, 123, 125–127, 130–136, 243; South graveyard, 123, 127–131, 133, 136, 243 Aflaj necropolis, 86 Age estimation, 92, 94, 129, 188, 191–192, 203, 223–224 Agriculture, 8, 23, 68, 113, 121–123, 125, 166, 173 Ancestors, 30–32, 68, 111, 113, 131, 137, 165, 175, 183, 221, 243–244, 246 Animal bones, 1, 8, 24, 92, 94–95, 99, 163– 165, 167–172, 174–175, 205–207, 209–213, 230–231, 234 Antemortem tooth loss, 206, 225, 228–230, 234 Arabian Plate, 41–43 Bahla site, 29–30 Bahrain, 1, 2, 45, 47–48, 65–67, 167, 169, 184, 195, 221–234, 241, 248 Bat site, 85, 97–98, 112, 114, 117, 130, 137, 142, 150–154, 166 Bat-type tomb, 80, 98 Bawshar site, 135 Bidya site, 134–135 Bronze Age, 1, 3–8, 12, 21–24, 29–32, 53, 55, 59, 62, 65–66, 76–84, 93, 97, 99, 121–123, 127, 131–132, 135, 141–142, 154, 164, 166–168, 174, 182–183, 194–196, 206–207, 209–210, 212, 214, 216, 220–221, 224, 241, 245

Bronze/copper, 8, 23, 25, 65, 77, 81, 84, 90, 92, 94–95, 97, 101, 121, 129, 133–135, 184, 196, 201–202, 204–205 Al-Buhais site, 3, 7–8, 24, 62–64, 130, 135, 169, 243, 246 Burial position: crouched, 48, 52–53, 57–59, 67; flexed, 8, 23, 81, 223; sitting, 52, 60, 67 Capstone, 50–52, 55, 60, 64, 66–67 Carbon isotopes, 54, 206, 208–216 Carious lesions, 206, 228 Carnelian, 58, 81, 129, 205 Ceramics, 8, 23, 25, 29, 51, 57–60, 62, 65, 68, 77, 81–84, 90, 92, 97, 98, 101, 122–123, 125, 129, 145–146, 166–167, 184–185, 187, 201, 204–206, 222, 230–232, 247 Copper. See Bronze/copper Cremation, 10–11, 29–30, 32, 52, 58, 63, 68, 81, 99 Cribra orbitalia, 224, 245 Cultural evolution, 7, 22–24, 30, 85, 98–99, 121, 136, 141–154, 163 Cultural phylogenetics, 7, 143–144, 148–149, 151, 153, 155, 241 Cut stone, 8–9 Al Da’asa site, 50 Dating: bone bioapatite and, 6, 77, 89–90, 94; charcoal and, 89, 98–99; radiocarbon, 6, 47–48, 52–55, 57–59, 64, 89–90, 92, 94, 97–98, 101, 112, 167, 175, 186 Defleshing, 24, 29–30, 32 Degenerative joint disease (DJD), 94, 225–230

254 · Index

Demography, 8, 12, 110–111, 136, 143, 145, 182–183, 188–192, 195–196, 223 Desiccation, 10, 53, 64 Dhank, 7, 78, 82, 85, 89, 96, 100, 164 Diet, 1, 3, 23, 114, 136, 141, 170–171, 194, 201, 205–206, 208, 213–216, 221, 227, 229, 244–246 Dilmun culture, 1, 65–66, 84, 166, 184, 195, 201, 220–234, 241 Disarticulation, 11, 30, 48, 53, 84, 187, 204 Ed-Dur site, 61 Energy expenditure, 32, 111 Falaj al-Qaba’il site, 98 False dome, 86–87, 90, 94, 99 Faunal remains. See Animal bones Fluorosis, 224, 226–230 French Archaeological Mission to Adam, 121 Al Ghāfāt site, 47–48, 52–54, 59–60 Grave goods, 5, 8, 29, 48, 51, 57–58, 62, 67, 77, 79, 81–84, 94–100, 110–111, 129, 142, 146, 184, 195, 202, 204, 234 Hafit: period, 1, 3–9, 24–27, 29, 32, 65, 76–86, 88–101, 108–115, 121–123, 125, 127, 131, 135– 137, 141–142, 144–145, 149–155, 164–167, 169, 173, 175, 215, 241–242, 246–247; HafitType Cairns, 3, 5–9, 24–27, 29, 32, 65, 77–85, 88–90, 93, 96–101, 110–112, 123, 125, 127, 131, 135, 141–142, 144–145, 149–155, 164–167, 173, 242 Al-Hajar Mountains, 5, 85, 100, 116, 121, 186 Harappa. See Indus Valley High Circular Tower Tomb, 80, 82–83 Hili site, 10–11, 29–30, 85, 112, 130, 133, 137, 151, 153, 170, 183–184, 205, 241, 246 History of excavation, 2–4, 45–46, 97–98, 202–205, 223–224, 240–241 Hydrology, 41, 43–44, 68, 112, 207–208 Identity, 7, 21, 30–31, 79, 85, 99–101, 109, 165, 173–174, 183, 220–221, 240, 242–247 Incense, 185, 192 Indus Valley, 81, 84, 121, 146, 163, 166, 194, 201, 205, 207–208, 222, 232

Iron Age, 3, 7, 59, 66, 123, 125, 127–128, 131, 135, 141, 186–187, 195, 220 Ivory, 184–185, 195, 232–233 Ja’alan, 25, 27, 32, 82, 100, 145 Jabal Hinaydil, 123, 125, 127 Jabal Mudhmar, 123, 125, 131, 135 Jabal Qarah, 122–125 Jebel Hafit site, 77, 79, 85, 151, 153, 241 Jemdet Nasr, 8, 25, 77, 81, 83, 89–90, 95, 101, 123, 141, 145 Jewelry, 8, 23, 25, 29, 50–51, 57–59, 77, 81–82, 84, 89, 90, 92, 94, 97, 101, 129, 133, 142, 145–146, 184–185, 202, 204–205 Al Khor site, 46, 48, 50–52, 57–58, 62–64, 67–68 Al Khubayb Necropolis, 7, 76, 78, 82, 85–96, 98–101, 164, 166–168, 170–175, 242, 246–247 Al Khutma necropolis, 82, 86 Kinship, 32, 61, 64, 82, 194, 206, 215, 245–246 Last Glacial Maximum, 43 Lisha site, 52, 59, 61 Marawah Island, 59 Masculinity, 220–222, 224, 229–230, 234, 248 Matariya tower, 112–113 Maysar site, 29, 170 Mesopotamia, 2, 25, 65, 77, 81, 84, 114, 121, 136, 145, 163, 166, 170, 184–185, 195, 201, 205, 208, 222, 231–232, 244–245, 247–248 Minimum number of individuals (MNI), 11, 25, 29, 82, 87, 129, 182, 188–192, 196, 203–204, 223 Mleiha site, 29, 169 Mobility, 1, 21, 145, 173, 201, 207–208, 214–216, 227, 229 Mowaihat site, 11, 215 Al Mughammadat site, 51 Munay’e site, 30 Neolithic period, 1, 3, 6, 21–24, 30–32, 41, 47–59, 62–65, 67, 76, 81, 114, 123, 142, 164, 167, 169, 182, 243

Index · 255

Oman, 1, 5, 7, 23, 21–32, 44–45, 47, 64–65, 76–101, 108–116, 121–137, 141–142, 145–147, 150, 153–154, 163–175, 183, 185, 195, 241–242, 248 Ossuary, 53 Oxygen isotopes, 207–212, 214, 216 Paleolithic period, 43 Paleopathology, 11, 94, 194, 203, 206, 224–230, 234, 245 Patriarchy, 175, 220, 234, 248 Pits: burial, 9–11, 23–24, 29, 32, 55, 58, 60, 78, 84, 111, 146, 169, 184; Neolithic, 23–24, 55, 58, 169; Umm an-Nar, 9–11, 29, 32, 78, 84, 111, 146, 184 Pottery. See Ceramics Pre-Islamic period, 1, 41, 46, 53, 59, 61 Proto-Umm an-Nar tomb, 98 Qala’at al-Bahrain site, 222 Qatar, 1, 41–68, 222, 248 Ras Abaruk site, 50–51 Ras ‘Abruq site, 50–51 Ra’s al-Hamra site, 23–24, 62, 64, 167, 169 Ra’s al-Jinz site, 10, 25, 27, 29–30, 137, 170, 185 Ra’s al-Khabbah site, 23–24 Ra’s al-Khaimah, 44, 153, 167 Al Reem Island Biosphere Reserve, 48 Reuse: of monuments, 1, 4, 6–9, 32, 48, 59, 81–82, 87, 111, 116, 123, 125, 128, 130, 133, 135, 187; of stones, 81, 125, 128, 131, 137, 243 Samad period, 123, 128, 131, 133, 135 Sasanian period, 46, 53, 61 Saudi Arabia, 44, 47, 67, 195, 222–223, 247 Seleucid period, 46, 53, 61 Settlement, 4, 6, 8–9, 21, 23, 45, 48, 57–58, 62, 68, 76, 84, 101, 108, 111, 113, 116, 121–122, 125, 127, 131, 136, 141, 145, 164–166, 170, 173–174, 183, 185–187, 202–206, 210–211, 213, 215, 222, 231, 240, 249 Sex estimation, 82, 84, 89–90, 92, 94, 99, 145, 167–168, 172, 182, 184, 188, 190–191, 194, 196, 203–204, 209, 215, 221, 223–224 Shell, 8, 23, 51, 57–58, 84, 92, 167, 169, 185, 205, 213, 231, 232

Shimal site, 10–11, 29–30, 130, 133, 153 Simaisma site, 46, 51, 54, 58 Stable isotope analysis, 68, 173–175, 194–196, 201, 206–216 Status, 135, 167, 184, 195, 230, 234, 248 Steatite/soft-stone vessels, 23, 53, 59–60, 84, 94, 146, 184, 201 Strontium isotopes, 196, 206–216 Subadult, 8, 89–90, 94–95, 99, 129, 146, 182, 191–192, 194–196, 204, 215, 223, 225, 245 Subsistence. See Diet Al Sufouh site, 29, 151, 153, 184 Sugar Lump tombs, 80 Suwayh site, 23, 62, 64 Tawi Silaim type, 97 Tell Abraq site, 2, 10–11, 29–30, 137, 170, 182–183, 185–196, 205, 215, 243, 245 Territory, 6, 21, 30, 76, 83, 109–110, 113, 123, 125, 137, 165, 173, 175, 244 Al Thakira site, 50 Tomb typology, 41, 46–68, 78–85, 89, 95–98, 128, 132, 136, 141, 148, 154, 165 Tools, 8, 23, 81, 204 Tower tomb, 4, 80, 123, 125, 145, 165 Trade, 7, 23, 31, 62, 64–65, 68, 76–77, 81, 84–85, 90, 110, 111, 122, 136, 166, 194–196, 205, 214–215, 232, 241 Transitional Tower Tomb, 85, 87–88, 91, 96–100, 167, 171, 175 ‘Ubaid period, 51, 53–54, 57–58 Umm al-Mā site, 45, 50–52, 55, 59, 61, 67 Umm al-Quwain, 24, 61–62, 185–186 Umm an-Nar: Island, 1, 85, 145, 150–151, 153, 166, 168, 184, 201–206, 208–216, 241; Period, 1, 3–4, 6–12, 27, 30, 32, 65, 78–79, 81, 83–85, 89, 91–92, 94, 96–101, 108, 110, 112, 114–116, 121, 127, 129, 131, 135–137, 165–167, 169, 173, 182–183, 187, 196, 201–202, 205, 207, 210, 214, 215–216, 242–247; settlement, 4, 6, 8–9, 23, 84, 101, 111, 113, 116, 122, 127, 131, 165–166, 170, 173–174, 183, 185–186, 202–206, 210–211, 213, 215; tombs, 1, 3–4, 6–12, 26–32, 65, 77–79, 83–85, 88, 92, 97, 101, 108–112, 114, 116, 127, 129–133, 135–137, 141–142, 144–146,

256 · Index

Umm an-Nar—continued 149–155, 165–170, 173, 182–196, 201–205, 211, 214–215, 241–246; towers and, 8, 23, 84, 108–109, 112–116, 186–187, 194, 201, 205, 215 United Arab Emirates, 1–2, 5, 32, 44, 47, 62, 65, 76–78, 82–83, 141, 145–146, 153–154, 173, 182–183, 185, 202, 207, 215–216, 245, 248 Upright stone, 50–51, 53, 61, 66–67, 186 Visibility, 9, 23–24, 45–47, 76, 79–80, 83, 100, 109–113, 125, 127, 145, 164–166, 173, 175 Wa’as site, 135 Wādī Ḍebayān, 46–48, 50–51, 54, 55–57, 62–64

Wadi Fida, 85 Wadi Halfayn, 125 Wādī al-Jalta, 46, 48, 50–51, 54–55, 57–58, 62–64 Wadi Khubayb, 7, 78, 85, 93 Wadi Shab site, 23–24, 167, 169 Wadi Suq: period, 4, 7, 29, 78–79, 115, 122–123, 125, 127–128, 130–131, 133–137, 141, 243, 245–247; site, 134, 241 Wadi ‘Umayri, 125 Al Wakra site, 48, 51 Zonal method (zonation), 188–192 Al Zubara site, 48

Bioarchaeological Interpretations of the Human Past: Local, Regional, and Global Perspectives Edited by Clark Spencer Larsen Ancient Health: Skeletal Indicators of Agricultural and Economic Intensification, edited by Mark Nathan Cohen and Gillian M. M. Crane-Kramer (2007; first paperback edition, 2012) Bioarchaeology and Identity in the Americas, edited by Kelly J. Knudson and Christopher M. Stojanowski (2009; first paperback edition, 2010) Island Shores, Distant Pasts: Archaeological and Biological Approaches to the Pre-Columbian Settlement of the Caribbean, edited by Scott M. Fitzpatrick and Ann H. Ross (2010; first paperback edition, 2017) The Bioarchaeology of the Human Head: Decapitation, Decoration, and Deformation, edited by Michelle Bonogofsky (2011; first paperback edition, 2015) Bioarchaeology and Climate Change: A View from South Asian Prehistory, by Gwen Robbins Schug (2011; first paperback edition, 2017) Violence, Ritual, and the Wari Empire: A Social Bioarchaeology of Imperialism in the Ancient Andes, by Tiffiny A. Tung (2012; first paperback edition, 2013) The Bioarchaeology of Individuals, edited by Ann L. W. Stodder and Ann M. Palkovich (2012; first paperback edition, 2014) The Bioarchaeology of Violence, edited by Debra L. Martin, Ryan P. Harrod, and Ventura R. Pérez (2012; first paperback edition, 2013) Bioarchaeology and Behavior: The People of the Ancient Near East, edited by Megan A. Perry (2012; first paperback edition, 2018) Paleopathology at the Origins of Agriculture, edited by Mark Nathan Cohen and George J. Armelagos (2013) Bioarchaeology of East Asia: Movement, Contact, Health, edited by Kate Pechenkina and Marc Oxenham (2013) Mission Cemeteries, Mission Peoples: Historical and Evolutionary Dimensions of Intracemetery Bioarchaeology in Spanish Florida, by Christopher M. Stojanowski (2013) Tracing Childhood: Bioarchaeological Investigations of Early Lives in Antiquity, edited by Jennifer L. Thompson, Marta P. Alfonso-Durruty, and John J. Crandall (2014) The Bioarchaeology of Classical Kamarina: Life and Death in Greek Sicily, by Carrie L. Sulosky Weaver (2015) Victims of Ireland’s Great Famine: The Bioarchaeology of Mass Burials at Kilkenny Union Workhouse, by Jonny Geber (2015; first paperback edition, 2018) Colonized Bodies, Worlds Transformed: Toward a Global Bioarchaeology of Contact and Colonialism, edited by Melissa S. Murphy and Haagen D. Klaus (2017) Bones of Complexity: Bioarchaeological Case Studies of Social Organization and Skeletal Biology, edited by Haagen D. Klaus, Amanda R. Harvey, and Mark N. Cohen (2017) A World View of Bioculturally Modified Teeth, edited by Scott E. Burnett and Joel D. Irish (2017) Children and Childhood in Bioarchaeology, edited by Patrick Beauchesne and Sabrina C. Agarwal (2018) Bioarchaeology of Pre-Columbian Mesoamerica: An Interdisciplinary Approach, edited by Cathy Willermet and Andrea Cucina (2018) Massacres: Bioarchaeology and Forensic Anthropology Approaches, edited by Cheryl P. Anderson and Debra L. Martin (2018) Mortuary and Bioarchaeological Perspectives on Bronze Age Arabia, edited by Kimberly D. Williams and Lesley A. Gregoricka (2019)