(Third Report 1986) Annual Magazine concerned with publication of the result of archaeological excavations and researches in the Emirate of Sharjah Sharjah Archaeology Authority - Govt. of Sharjah

Chairman: Dr. Sabah Abood Jasim

General Supervisor: Eisa Yousif

Managing Editor: Fawzy Saleh

CONTRIBUTORS: R.Boucharlat - S. Calley R.Dalongeville - P.Gouin - A.Prieur - P.Sanlaville - A.Boucher - Y.Calvet - P.Garczynski - A.Hesse - C.Robin - M.A.Santoni - Michel Mouton

Directorate of Archaeology Dept of Culture & Information Sharjah - U.A.E

French Archaeological Mission Ministère des Relations Extérieurs GIS- Maison de l’Orient- CNRS- France - 1997

Designed & Printed by: Fairmont P.P.S Copyright Reserved© for Sharjah Archaeology Authority Third Edition - 2019 P.O. Box: 30300 - SHARJAH Tel.: +971 - 6 - 5668000 Fax:+971 - 6 - 5660334 Website: wwwsharjaharchaeologycom E-mail: info@saagovae Index

THIS REPORT ...... 7

INTRODUCTION ...... 9

THE SHARJAH COAST SURVEY ...... 14

PRELIMINARY REMARKS ABOUT MOLLUSC FAUNA COLLECTED ON

THE NORTH COAST OF THE SHARJAH EMIRATE IN 1985 ...... 17

SOUNDING AT THE PREHISTORIC SITE AL-QASSIMIYA ...... 21

THE DHAID-FILLI PLAIN-GEOMORPHOLOGY AND PREHISTORY ...... 24

A PREHISTORIC SITE IN MLEIHA AREA (P.28): A SHORT NOTE ...... 34

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS IN MELIHA AREA ...... 36

ANNEXE: Inventory of the Archaeological Remains ...... 44

Excavation At Mleiha Site: A Preliminary Report ...... 49

INSCRIPTION FROM THE MLEIHA REGION ...... 66

TABLE OF SAMPLING POINTS AND SURVEYED STRUCTURES IN 1986 ...... 67

THIS REPORT

The joint Sharjah - French expedition resulted in gaining some very important valuable information about the past. From objects found till 1986 from the three sites excavated so far, it was possible to draw a panorama of these areas dating back from neolithic period, through different civilizations like 1st millennium and Hellenistic period. It is proved that keen interest and tireless effort will pay off. This 3rd report, on the excellent excavation works carried out in 1986, by a 14-member team of highly experienced French archaeologists and specialists, in various sites of Sharjah Emirate, brings up fresh evidence on historic periods back to the Modern Stone Age (location of Al-Qassimiya in Sharjah and Al-Fayah mountain in Central Region of the Emirate). We can now talk about the people of those times, their life style, their culture and customs, their neighbouring regions etc. etc. The discovery of Mleiha settlement (Hellenistic period) provides us with a great deal of information about the inhabitants of that period, their way of life, their crafts, their trade relations with the nearby region like “Al-Faw” of Saudi Arabia and the far away countries like Greece. Taking into consideration the successful collaboration with the French team, the Sharjah Government made negotiations with the representatives of French archaeological expedition group and the French Embassy to have an agreement to plan and re-organize archaeological excavation in the Emirate for future.

Department of Cultural and Information

INTRODUCTION

(by R.Boucharlat)

The third excavation and survey season of the Joint Expedition (Department of Archaeology, Sharjah and French Archaeological Mission in Sharjah) took place from the 13th January until the 20th April 1986. The survey of the West coast of Sharjah was continued, but efforts were mainly concentrated on the geomorphological and prehistoric survey of the inland plain between Dhaid and Filli, and also on surveying and excavating the Hellenistic site in Mleiha in the middle of this same plain. As well as this research the team had the additional, continual preoccupation of actively participating in the reconnaissance and also the preservation of the country’s Heritage over all the territory of the Sharjah Emirate and Beyond (the urgent sounding carried out at Al-Qassimiya in Sharjah city is the best example of this). The result obtained from all three operations are important, but without the effort furnished by all the members of the French Expedition, by the Department of Archaeology in Sharjah and the help and collaboration of several people and different institutions, this work would not have been possible. This programme does in fact benefit from the support and concern of the Ruler of Sharjah, H.H. Shaikh Sultan bin Mohammad Al Qassimi, Chairman of the Department of Culture. In France it is under the patronage of Ministry of Foreign Affairs and financed by the Sub-Direction of Social Sciences of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and by the Maison de l’Orient (C.N.R.S. Lyon University2). In the field the work was carried out by the French team, under the responsibility of R.Boucharlat, and by the Dept. of Archaeology of Sharjah led by Nassir H. al-Aboodi. We would like to thank all those who contributed to the success of the research campaign in Sharjah and the development of this research in France. We would like to express our gratitude to H.H. Shaikh Sultan bin Mohammad Al Qassimi who always shows such a great interest in the research and ensures that it is carried out as smoothly as possible. Also to Shaikh Ahmed, Chairman of the Department of Culture, who did his utmost to ensure the success of the operation, constantly inquiring about the results and even visiting the region in question with us. The personnel from the

Third Report 9 Department of Culture upon whom we frequently imposed, and who always very kindly complied with our requests. The collaboration begun in 1984 with the Dept. of Archaeology was continued under the most favourable conditions, thanks to its director Mr. Nasir al Aboodi. We would particularly like to thank our colleague Mr. Mustafa Tawfiq Hazeem. Not only was he more than the foreman for the dig in Mleiha, but he had also efficiently prepared the Expedition before the French team’s arrival; and then continued to look after all the day to day problems which arose and dealt with them accordingly. His experience of archaeological digs and also his competence. In many other domains was very valuable to us. The French Embassy in Abu Dhabi put a lot of effort into ensuring the success of the joint programme. We must particularly thank M.Andre Fromilhague, Cultural Attache to the French Embassy and Mr. J.J.Herve, French Consul in Dubai who took part in the setting up the Expedition and who gave as much help as they possibly could. In Sharjah, the Municipality of Sharjah gave us much assistance. Dr.Ibrahim Director of the Survey Dept. provided us with all the information we needed and put the topographical equipment necessary for the ground plotting at our disposal all throughout the stay, and also provided us with maps of the region and even allowed a member of his department to work with us for a while. This help was invaluable. Al Qassimi Hospital also gave us their assistance by the means of the X-Ray Department; Mr. G.Mc Carville from this department agreed to X-Ray all the bronze objects found during the dig and the survey. This analysis shows up details and decoration which oxidation prevents the naked eye from detecting, especially for example a small inscription on a vase. Several other people showed great interest in the research in particular, Mrs. Shirley Kay (British Embassy in Dubai) who is actively involved in communicating to the public, information concerning the National Heritage and history of the country, kept us regularly informed of other discoveries made elsewhere in the country and of the dangers which menace certain sites. By the same token, Mr. Peter Hudson (B.ENG C. ENG MICE ACI ARB.), and excellent connoisseur of the country’s archaeological sites, very kindly allowed us to make use of his observations, in particular of the sites which have now disappeared but which are going to be mapped. Finally, it was a great pleasure to welcome other colleague archaeologists working in the country and also to visit their digs. We would particularly like to mention Mrs. Beatrice De Cardi from London and Mr. Carl Philipps from Edinburgh (Ras al-Khaimah) as well as Dr. Walid Yasin al-Tikriti (al-Ain) at that time operating in Ajman, Professor

10 Third Report Dr. Klaus Schippmann and Dr. Bukhard Vogt and their team in Shamal (Ras al-Khaimah). The French specialists team under the responsibility of Dr. Remy Boucharlat (C.N.R.S) consisted of eleven members all working in close collaboration. Dr. Albert Hesse (C.N.R.S. Geophysical Research Center) and Mr. Andrew Boucher (Bradford University) conducted the archaeological survey of the coast and the geophysical surveys of the Mleiha area. The survey of the inland plain was carried out by Dr. Remi Dalongeville and Dr. Paul Sanlaville, geomorphologists (C.N.R.S. Maison de l’Orient) and Dr. Sylvie Calley and Miss Marie-Anne Santoni, prehistorians (Lyon University2). The Mleiha excavations were conducted , under the direction of R.Boucharlat, by Mr. Michel Mouton (Paris University 1) with the collaboration of Dr. Francesca Gandolfo (Rome University), Dr. Philippe Gouin archaeologist and draughtsman (C.N.R.S. Paris), Mr. Paul Garczynski architect and topographer (C.N.R.S. Archaeological Research Center). After the field work, the results were studied and interpreted in France by the members of the team at the Maison de l’Orient, Lyon; the data from the surveys have been dealt with at the Grachy Geophysical Research Center. The shell specimens taken from the coastal settlements were examined by Dr. A.Prieur (Claude Bernard University, Lyon1) and the (14C) samples by the Radiocarbon Laboratory of the same university (Director: J.Evin). The amphora stamped handle found in Mleiha was examined in this report by Dr. Yves Calvet (C.N.R.S. Maison de l’Orient, Lyon): Dr. C.Robin (C.N.R.S. Aix-en-Provence) has studied the small inscription on a vase which came from the same site and re-examined an inscription on a brick discovered by chance in the region during the 1970’s. The results of the second season in 1985 (cf. Second Archaeological Survey Report. 1985) clearly showed the direction in which the programme had to be pursued: - The greater part of the coast to the North of Sharjah had been surveyed, but several areas remained unexplored, and others although visited, seem to bear very few traces of human occupation. Exploration must therefore be continued in the hope of completing the survey and improving our understanding: the kind of occupation and its development since the known origin, at the end of Prehistory up until the modern age. A.Hesse and A.Boucher present the conducted surveys and propose several theories. Within the framework of this study, A.Prieur undertook the laboratory analysis of the shells collected on each sampling point. First of all the represented types must be determined, their relative importance and their scattering in the different areas must be evaluated. Such a study is party to the reconstruction of the ancient environment, at the

Third Report 11 same time providing precious indications about the diet of the human groups who collected these shells. The sounding carried out over several days on the al-Qassimiya site (see S.Calley and M-A.Santoni’ Report) right in the centre of the town of Sharjah revealed itself to be necessary. As a matter of fact, while discovering the site, A.Hesse noticed that it had already been partially destroyed though the exploitation of a sandy quarry; moreover as it is situated next to an important road junction it is part of an area which is being built on. It is for these reasons that the team of Prehistorians from the French Mission carried out a general survey and a sounding in order to obtain information about the nature, extent and occupation date of the site. The preliminary results are to be found in this report and they indicate that this site must be protected at all costs; following this a more extensive dig should be envisaged; in fact the industry on quartz of the site is exceptional in the area of Sharjah. - On the inland plain the survey was concentrated on a well-defined region in order to cover the area in a precise and complete manner. Together the geomorphologists (R. Dalongeville and P. Sanlaville) and the prehistorians (S.Calley and M-A. Santoni) decided to explore the Northern part of the plain from Dhaid to Filli in the South. From East to West the area includes the piedmont of the Oman Mountains to the isolated Jabals to the West of Mleiha (J.Mleiha and J.Fayah). The geomorphological survey allowed us to study the ancient environment and follow is evolution up to the present day; at the same time the plotting of flint sites and the studying of the different qualities represented, indicated the area where man was able to find flints. The prehistorians have studied the sites (extent, material)to analyse the work done by prehistoric men (or men from a more recent period), the importance of the settlements and an estimation to the production. All the sites surveyed were surface ones and it did not appear necessary to carry out soundings in order to set out the queries concerning these sites. Following this detailed surface survey some problems still remain unsolved, but several hypotheses have been put forward. Progress concerning corrections or confirmations to the first statements make in the 1985 preliminary report can be measured in this report. - Two objectives were aimed at concerning the undertaking of new digs at Mleiha archaeological sites: A- to judge more precisely the importance of the site. B- to carefully organize its preservation.

12 Third Report Mleiha which is situated 20 km South of Dhaid is certainly one of the most important sites in the U.A.E and also one of the rare witnesses to an important part of the area’s history: after the amazing revival of human occupation (at least a sedentary one) of the Peninsula during the first millennium B.C. notable transformations took place: certain occupation areas seem either in decline or abandoned, certain raw materials change, exchange activities spread out further than the Peninsula. This period often called the Hellenistic one has been mainly observed at Ed Door (Umm al Quwain Emirate) and at Mleiha by a Joint Expedition (U.A.E - Iraqi, in 1973-74). The work carried out by this Expedition shows elaborate architecture both domestic and funeral and also an important production of objects and the importation of products from the Eastern Mediterranean countries. The excavation at Mleiha was a safely measure; in fact, the undertaking of the Sharjah Emirate Authorities to develop modern agriculture results in the expansion of cultivated areas, this of course at the loss of archaeological remains. These two requirements; the protection of the country’s heritage and economical activity can be reconciled if close and constant collaboration exists between the two parties concerned, as is hoped for by the Government. In full agreement and cooperation with the Municipality of Sharjah, the archaeologists started surveying and levelling this vast site (more than 4km²) using various complementary methods and carried out the soundings. The objective was two fold, firstly to produce a precise map of the archaeological area which is essential for the comprehension and preservation of the site and secondly, a better knowledge of the remains buried underground. One of the results which could be immediately made use of is the enriching of the areas to preserved and therefore indicating the areas which can be cultivated. The first scientific results are given in the following reports. It is absolutely clear that all the specialists taking part in the mission are very willing to collaborate in an active manner to the discovery and understanding of the country’s history whilst at the same time respecting the demands of modern economy. One of the lessons learned from the 1986 season was that these two differing interests are perfectly reconcilable where the different areas studied are concerned, thanks to the collaboration of authorities and institutions involved. As well as the very satisfactory scientific results, precise maps have been handed over to the authorities enabling them, with complete knowledge of the situation, to take the necessary measures in pursuit of different types of economic activities as well as preserving their Heritage.

Third Report 13 THE SHARJAH COAST SURVEY

(by A.Hesse)

1986 programme On the Western coast of the Emirate the survey was limited to the Hamriyah area. No new operation was undertaken and the work consisted of continuing the sampling of the surface remains of the shell-concentrations in order to complete the exploration of the areas which were insufficiently studied in 1985 (particularly from the North part to South of the Umm al Quwain road). Twenty-five new samples were collected and several structures were surveyed (Table 1) and the area map was brought up to date (fig.3). Particular attention was paid this year to mapping and marking out the limits of the areas covered with shells and also areas empty of shells: as has been stressed in the last report (1985), the significance of the shell-concentrations is important for the final interpretation in relation to the collected material and the geomorphological evolution of the coast. We hope to come up with a reliable representation despite certain difficulties, by using aerial photographs and by ground observation. We can now confirm that the sample distribution to the North of the surveyed area is quite representative of the visible ground situation: the area marked out by sites 69,132,143,136 and 130 is to be particularly noted and is devoid of all signs of occupation (this is to be confirmed by the geomorphology), it could be a lagoon which has recently filled up. The situation is less obvious to the East of the perimeter set out by 15/45, 104,138,150 and129, where several factors indicate that the sites might be hidden under an important dunary covering, in spite of the fact that there is quite a distance to the edge of the lagoons. The procedures used for the collected samples were the same as in 1985 with one exception the sifting of the first centimeters under the surface over one square meter (see Preliminary Report 1985) was abandoned as it did not in fact bring any extra interesting information and did not provide enough microliths compared to the surface collecting. So we decided to penetrate the surface very slightly with a spade to measure the thickness of the superficial shell-layer and to take a shell sample. As for these shells,we replaced the procedure which consists of choosing the most well-preserved shells with a systematic recovery of all the sifted product (several re-adjustment samples of the two

14 Third Report collecting methods were kept from sites 104 and 117 from 1985). The material collected is not very different from that of 1985. Several pottery categories have however been added (22 to 27), which results in a revision of certain imperfect classifications in 1985. The specificity of the flint typology led S.Calley to reclassify all the material from 1985 and 1986 together in order to obtain some uniformity. A summary analysis of the composition of the new samples clearly shows a slight reduction in the number of sites in the area North of the Hamriyah area, where flint is abundant and where there is particularly no other material (none between 125,83,141, to the South and 69 to the North). On the other hand, Bronze age material (fine pink beige ware) appears more often in particular on the neighbouring sites of the big quarry of site 130. Recent destruction in this area endangers the structures and important stratigraphical levels. It was also ascertained that recent Islamic occupation, whilst remaining close to the shore line, is not exclusively limited to the coastal spit (sites 126,127,133,149). Finally, it must be noted that several shell-concentrations quite far from the lagoon shores and further inland, have been observed and sampled (sites 135,146).

Result Analysis Since the Preliminary Report in 1985, several attempts at mapping the area have been made to show the distribution of different types of material collected over the area (flint, pottery, metallic objects etc.). In spite of the results from the 1986 survey these maps remain incomplete for definite analysis. A factorial analysis of the principal components has also been attempted on the 1985 material. This analysis shows up the separation of the sites predominantly Prehistoric, Iron Age or Islamic on the first two areas. On the third axis, the pottery types stand out in a more complex manner: the pottery which we should be able to associate to the Iron Age, we remain Cautions about because of superpositioning and mixing due to reoccupation. On the other hand the introduction of shells in the analysis clearly shows the close relationship between “terebralia palustris” and the flint sites.

1987 Programme It would seem that up to date the density of the observations on this area is near to presenting a satisfactory homogeneousness and a dozen or so extra samples should be

Third Report 15 enough to balance out the overall picture. However, the survey concerning the extent of the flint sheets in the Northern part of the area remains insufficient. A number of details like the sections which accidentally appeared near sites 129 and 130 still have to be studied carefully and compared to the surface observations. Lastly, it would seem necessary to explore in depth a small shell-concentration to be able to back up the interpretation of the obtained results with surface samples: - A. On a precise knowledge of the internal structure of these concentrations. - B. Of deposit conditions of the shells (successive layers, local concentrations or accumulations on one flat area or dune, concentrations visible on the surface because or erosion).

16 Third Report PRELIMINARY REMARKS ABOUT MOLLUSCA FAUNA COLLECTED ON THE NORTH COAST OF THE SHARJAH EMIRATE IN 1985

(by A.Prieur)*

The study is based on a series of samples (more than 50) taken in the Sharjah Emirate, along the coast, between the town of Ajman in the South, and the Umm Al Quwain Emirate in the North. These samples are shown in figure 11 of the 1985 Report and in fig.3 of the present report. Laboratory analysis has enabled, nearly all the material to be identified, countings even be done for each species, the ecological conditions to be drawn and even sometimes their dietary role to be determined. Fauna Inventory: a) Bivalves: Saccostrea cucullata (Born) Tivelia ponderosa (koch) Katylesia japonica Adam et Leloup Chlamys ? squamosus Gmelin Spondylus aculeatus Chemn. Trapezium sublaevigatum Lmk. Callista umbonella Lmk. Pinctada sp. Aspaphis deflorata (L.) Glycymeris sp. Mactra sp. Mytilicardia (Beguina) gubernaculum (Reeve)

* UA 11 Centre de Paléontologie stratigraphique et Paléoécologie. Universite Claude Bernard Lyon 1 - C.N.R.S.

Third Report 17 Dosinia sp. Anodontia edentuala (L.) Tellina sp. Pinna sp. Arcidae (2 or 3 species at least) b) Gastropods: Terebralia palustris(L.) Murex (Hexaplex) kusterianus Tapparon canefri Cerithidea cingulata Gmelin Strombus decorus persicus Swainson Turbo coronatus Gmelin Strombus fusiformis Sow. Erronea (Erronea) aurica (L.) Conus rubiginosus Hwass in Bruguiere Drupa (Morula) concactenate Lmk Cerithium (Clypeomarus) morus Lmk Nassarius pullus L. Oliva bulbosa (Roding) Thais caranifera Lmk. In all, there are more than 30 species some of which are very common and abundant (e.g S.cucullata. T.palustris. K.japonica. M.kusterianus). The presence of T.palustris (L.) seems to indicate a mangrove environment, because this species is typical of the muddy areas of the channels, or of the interior of the mangrove area from the intertidal to supratidal limits. Another especially interesting species is: The Saccostrea cucullata (Born). This quite small oyster lives fixed onto the rocks in the intertidal area and can survive uncovered at lowtide. As well as this, it can fix itself onto either T.palustris, or onto the mangroves roots. During observation we noticed that certain oysters showed traces of this fixation on the roots.

18 Third Report This analysis of the fauna evidences 3 areas: - A T.palustris zone characteristic of briny waters and particularly associated with mangroves areas. - A rocky supra-mesolittoral area with S.cucullata. - An area with sand banks where Strombus decorus persicus. Arcidae. Calista sp. live. There does not seem to be a very clear frontier between the first two areas. The list given previously shows that some species played an important part in feeding ancient peoples, providing them with an important amount of proteins. Such is the case of T.palustris. S.cacullata. Murex (H) kusterianus, Tellina sp., Tivelia ponderosa, Chalmys? Squamosus. Callista umbonella. Generally speaking, all of these species live in shallow waters (less than 10m) and are therefore easy for man to collect especially at lowtide. At the beginning of 1986, another survey was done in this region, and detailed and through sampling was carried out using a much more methodical way of collecting. More accurate laboratory analysis of these samples will perhaps allow us to determine more precisely former coastlines and mangrove areas; to show that some species to certain type or area of certain period etc… To sum up, perhaps a systematic study could enable us to retrace the history of this region from 8000 B.P.

Third Report 19 REFERENCES

- ADAM (W) and LELOUP (E), 1939. Gastropoda - Pulmonata, Scaphopoda et Bivalvia, Resultats scientifiques - Voyage aux Indes orientales néerlandaises. Mem. Mus. Roy. Hist. nat. Beig. II(20): 126, 7pl. - BIGGS (H.E.J.) 1973. “The marine Mollusca of the Trucial coast (Persian Gulf)” Bull. of the British Museum (Natural History). Zoology vol. 24, n*8. - BOUCHARLAT (R) ed, 1985. Second Archaeological Survey in the Sharjah Emirate, 1985 - A Preliminary report. 73 p., 33 fig., 16 pl. - DURANTE (S) and TOZI (M) 1979. “The Ceramic Shell Middens of Ra’s al Hamra” : A Preliminary Note Journal of Oman Studies, 3.2 - HAAS (F). 1952. “ Shells collected by the Peabody Museum Expedition to the Near Easst, 1950. I-Mollusks from the Persian Gulf”, Nautilus. 65, (4): 114-116. - PLAZIAT (J.C.), 1977 “Les Cerethides tropicaux et leur polymorphisme lié à l’écologie littorale des mangroves:. Malacologia 1977, 16: 35-44. - SMYTHE (K.R.) 1973. “Marine Mollusca from Bahrain Island. Persian Gulf” J.Conch 27. 491- 496.

20 Third Report SOUNDING AT THE PREHISTORIC SITE AL-QASSIMIYA

(by. S.Calley and M-A.Santoni)

The Al-Qassimiya site is situated in one of the outlying quarters of the town of Sharjah; it appears like a dune-hillock about 5 meters high, much cut into by the excavation of quarry (PI.la). In the section left by the excavation we observed, very near to the surface, interstratified shell beds us of the importance of carrying out a sounding. A sounding of 9m² was carried out on the highest preserved part of the dune. We proceeded to dig by levels of 10cm thick. All of the sediment was sifted layer by layer and by square metre. Systematic shell samples were taken from each layer and by square meter (about 500 to 800 gr.). All the fauna (animal and fish bone remains) from layers 1 and 2 have been kept (samples being studied). The stratigraphy is divided up into a surface layer and 3 subjacent layers. - Layer 1 is a layer packed sand, relatively homogeneous of about 30 cm thick, quite poor in shells. It is at the bottom of this layer that lithic industry is most abundant, there are also many bone remains. - Layer 2 corresponds to a shell-concentrations made up essentially of oysters about 15 cm thick. Within the limits of the sounding these shells are unevenly spread out: one can observe a more important concentration over 4m² and absolutely nothing over another area of 2m² (PI.Ib). This layer is poor in flint industry. - Layer 3 has hardly any shells and we quickly come through to the clear and packed sand of the dune. Particularly no industry here. Apart from a small ashy basin (sampling of a few preserved charcoal remains for dating) there are apparently no traces of habitational structures, except perhaps for an empty space clearly marked out in the middle of the shell-concentration in layer 2, which might suggest the remains of some sort of light construction. The material (apart from lithic industry) found during the dig includes two thick grey pottery sherds, a pierced semi-disc, a block of sandstone with opposite notches (a net

Third Report 21 weight?). Two tiny pierced semi-discs of 4 mm in diameter are perhaps beads which were make in shells, an unpierced small oyster shell was also found.

Lithic industry The industry consists of 270 flint-flakes (70%) and quartz (30%). For the most part the flint is of excellent quality, it’s grain is fine. Other rougher flint-flakes can be seen, the texture of Dhaid. The fine-grained flint is of various colours, which we have already seen in other coastal sites which were surveyed in 1984 and 1985 (see previous reports). The quartz, mainly hyaline, rarely a milky shade, has been knapped into small flakes whose sizes do not exceed 3m², only one of them had been make into tool (fig. 4:13). Because of the small size and number of the flakes and the scarcity of the cores, it does not seem very probable that all of the flintknapping took place on the site. It is possible that some small flakes had been extracted from small fragments of flint, but this activity was probably not very important and the proper tools (finely-worked), were most probably not made on this site; moreover they have all been abandoned broken. Tool making represents 6% of the industry. The arrowheads have all been found in pieces. A fragment of a leaf-shaped bifacial point with covering retouch (fig. 4:2) which resembles the points found on site 69 (see 1984 Report). A distal fragment of an arrowhead pressure retouched with the sides heavily denticulated (fig. 4:1). A proximal fragment is that of bifacial arrowhead with a flat section and an irregular covering retouch (fig. 4:7). Two of the tools have one side only retouched. The first one is a leaf-shaped piece of an irregular section, triangular and piano-convex, the pressure retouched face of which has remained partially covered with cortex: the retouch are lamellate and abrupt (fig. 4:12). The second object has flaky covering retouches of regular piano-convex section, broken at both ends. This objects has probably been subjected to heat treatment before retouching for the retouch ridges have a particularly blurred aspect, however an accidental heating after the retouch has brought about the appearance of thermal cupula (fig 4:11). Amongst the other retouched products, we find a flake shaped in the form of a facetted butt (fig. 4:6) a retouched blade (fig. 4:5). A fragment of blade with two backed sides which is perhaps a piece of micro-drill (fig. 4:4), 3 fragments of end-scrapper (fig. 4:8). One splintered piece, a scrapper-burm from a thick flake (fig. 4:15), 3 small flake cores (fig. 4:14) and a small quartz blade with a retouched side (fig. 4:13). Tools found during the sounding were few and broken up, so it is not possible to

22 Third Report establish a proper typological group. However, because of the presence of pressure retouched arrowheads, we can compare this industry with that of Kapel’s group D in Qatar (sites LX and LXII). The two unifacial tools do not fit in this group and we have not found any other similar pieces in illustrated publications about other industries in the Gulf and Arabian Peninsula.

Conclusion Like many neolithic sites along the Arabian coast of the Gulf, the Al-Qassimiya site corresponds to a temporary settlement without any built structures, where the occupants ate shellfish and fish. It is interesting to note that the industry on this site has certain affinities with several other coastal sites in the region, notably site 69, and that this confirms a relatively important coastal occupation by the same human group or several groups of the same culture. The presence of inland flints (probably from Jabal Fayah) shows that raw material circulated locally. We still have to find out where these other types of flint come from. Perhaps they are isolated nodules of rock, more silicified on the inside from the coaster local outcrops or perhaps allochtoneous flint which would imply circulation. Whilst waiting to be able to complete this study with an extensive dig on this site, we can tentatively place Al-Qassimiya in a late Neolithic period, during the 4th millennium B.C. A.C.14 dating of one of the sell samples being examined at the moment will permit us to place a first chronological mark.

Third Report 23 THE DHAID-FILLI PLAIN-GEOMORPHOLOGY AND PREHISTORY

(by S.Calley R. Dalongeville P.Sanlaville M-A. Santoni)

In 1986 the geomorphologist (R.Dalongeville and P.Saniaville) and the prehistorians (S. Calley and M-A.Santoni) together prospected the inland area between Dhaid and Filli (fig.2). This sector is comprised of two types of land which are physically very different; to the East the great glacis which come down from the Oman Mountains, and to the West the Jabal Fayah. This teamwork, with the help of the industry we thought we would find mixed in with the material on the terraces, should have allowed us to date the geomorphological changes. Unfortunately we did not find any lithic industry in stratigraphy or more precisely the few pieces of flint which were extracted have not been able to attributed with certainly to human industry. All the prehistorical material which has been observed and studied is surface material which is difficult to date and at first sight seems to belong to a later Neolithic. In the coastal region the absence of Palaeolithic is understandable because it is most likely under the sea (18,000) years ago the level of the Gulf was established according to the Ormuz Straits coastline, or under the dunes; but in this inland region where water was not lacking to the Pleistocene, as the forms of accumulation, flattening and incision show thus where man could live. The absence of ancient remains is even more astonishing because no outside phenomena came to destroy them or wipe them out forever. We can only hope to continue our study by moving our survey towards the Oman Mountains. 1 Area of the great glacis and the piedmont of the Oman Mountains. As well as the mainly very high buttes which are witness to the very ancient glacis (Lower Pleistocene) (Pl.lla), we recognized four generations of glacis which date from the Middle and Higher Pleistocene up to the Holocene period (fig.5). A geomorphological map scale 1/25000 of this area is being drawn up and will be published at a later date. The high glacis is well represented on the piedmont of the Oman Mountains between Khadra to the North and the Wadi Halah to the South. More Southwards (Wadi Mansab, Wadi Niyam, Wadi Barag) we did not have all the aerial photographs to precisely map this area. Because of the pre-existing topography we have a real oblation glacis, with a

24 Third Report thinnish covering of large broken stones and blocks (with a very dark patina) or perhaps an accumulation terrace which learnt against the mountainous slopes. Some butts, situated more downstream belong perhaps to this first group but we do not have all the elements necessary for this conclusion. A later generation of glacis (Middle Glacis) was formed at the coast of this high surface (Pl.llb). It is mainly to the West of Khadra (between the village and the dunelined which is West of the maint road) that the evidence of this Middle Glacis has been preserved. It can also be observed more to the South on the site of a disaffected military base. Series of morphological measurements upstream-downstream have been carried out on the surface material in order to evaluate the powers of rain-wash which formed it. This surface disappears under the dunes downstream (Sharjah’s greaterg) and probably joins up with the terraces of the great wadi which runs along the Jabal Mleiha. Because of the lack of isotopic dating, it would seem that we can attribute this glacis to the last Pulvia (wurm), the first part of the Wurm (85,000 to 35,000 years B.P.) or more likely the later humit phase and which Mc Lure dates from 30.000 to 21,000 B.P. (Mc Lure 1976). In the Tawi Nubaybighen quarry, hollowed out in this Middle Glacis (which is situated 10 kilometers West of Dhaid, on the side of the motorway) we found several flakes. The absence of typologically definable tools does not allow us to give a precise date for this industry. It does not have a real palaeolithic character. The third generation of glacis (Recent Glacis) takes up a very large area (Pl.llla and b). Being situated on average two or three meters lower than the Middle Glacis it represents most of the flat surfaces in the area. The hellenistic site of Mleiha and the village of Khadra are situated on the Recent Glacis. The material is of a smaller scale to that of precedent glacis and has a clearer patina whilst remaining a very sustained colour, dunes and nebulas often hide it from view. The glacis goes quite a long way into the mountain where important terraces were formed (Wadi Halah for example), but these terraces have never yielded lithic tools. It is a major episode which we attribute to the terminal phase of the last Pluvial or even the beginning of the Holocene (9,000 - 6,000 B.P.). The fourth generation of glacis is the actual glacis. It corresponds to the flood plain of the wadis and is by definition much more linear than the precedent. The material is fine without patina. The sandy fraction is important. The identity of these different surfaces is especially noticeable upstream where the glacis profiles tend to merge into one another, it is difficult to distinguish them. In the region of Filli, recent and present day the glacis tend to evolve with one another which results in one identical surface. All of these glacis took their materials from the Oman Mountains: gabbros, basalts, ophiolites, rhyolites are found in important quantities. But it is the flint which interests us the most.

Third Report 25 Strictly speaking there is no flint in the region of the glacis but to the fore of the first reliefs of the Oman Mountains appears a belt of reddish rocks which provided man with an acceptable raw material with which to carry out his lithic industry. This is a complex of ultrabasic rocks, brownish-red in colour with veins of magnesite and chrysotile and presents hatched siliceous horizons. The texture resembles that of flint. The buttes have been levelled out locally by the glacis and the later have taken material from the buttes and flattened them out. Blocks of “flint” are frequently found in the covering of the High Glacis. Men made use of this rock and two types of exploitation can be located; either directly on the outcrops (e.g. P14 and P26) or on the transported blocks (e.g. P1 and P3). in the latter case as on P1 the smallest artifacts could be explained by the small volume under which the raw material occurs rather than by a different technique, but it is still too early to make a decision about this. On the high buttes which dominate the recent glacis by several tens of metres in some places, man find the flint he needed and could also keep an eye on game for food. It is equally the case of P14 because the flint outcrop appears at the top of one wadi bank. Whatever the type exploitation by man and the implantation context only one surface industry is found which makes this industry a later one. In 1986 the site P26 is the only Prehistoric one where the glacis are concerned, which has been sampled and studied. It is a knapping factory, which spreads out over about 1,000 m² on one of the brownish- red siliceous rock outcrops. In spite of the fact that is easy to knap it does not allow fine debitage. Being exposed to all weathers has not changed the colour but produced a sort of varnish (wind erosion and chemical transformation?) which gives the flakes a shiny effect. The lithic industry from P26 is abundant, it is made up of large flakes of solid cores scattered amongst the unknapped blocks. The sample taken, consists of about forty artifacts and cores. The cores are generally a single striking - platforms and do not seem to have produced many flakes. The most characteristic tools are some bifacial pieces, very irregular in some flakes (5 to 8 cm long) with direct or inverse step retouch. Among the tools there are two peculiar pieces: a side scraper with bifacial retouch on one side and a thick natural back on the opposite side. The retouch is rather flat and invasive, it is broken at the end. The other tool is a kind of a pick triangular in section. One of the surfaces is flat, and less retouched than the others. In general, the retouch of this tool are also steplike and invasive. The butt is broken, perhaps intentionally because the back clearly presents a counter-bulb. The assemblage of P26 at a first glance is more similar to the industries of Oman than

26 Third Report to the ones of Qatar, even if some coarse small bifacial pieces are more or less like Kapel’s A Group. At present, we can compare the pick from P26 with those of Oman and Habaruk in Qatar (Pullar, 1974: 44 and fig. 1011: Smith, 1978: fig. 4: 25-26 and fig. 6: 32-33). This assemblage has no palaeolithic trait. We could link it to the Final Neolithic and the smaller bifacial pieces known in this area in the Arabian Peninsula.

11 The area of Jabal Fayah We especially studied the Eastern slope of this anticlinal seam outcrop of miocene limestone (fig. 6 a-b). The preferential dip on the layers towards the West, the sand accumulations on the West face (face towards predominant wind), the presence of a great number of flint beds on the Eastern slope that geomorphological and human evidence is greater on the Eastern slope. So it is on this slope that we hope to establish a connection between the shaping dynamics which are a result of the Oman Mountains and those of the Jabal. Great piedmont glacis and small fans of the Jabal Fayah have had and still have as their local base level, a principal streaming axis direction South-North in this inland basin; an axis which stands completely against the Jabal Fayah because of difference in the importance of the water-supply in these reliefs and the impulse force they represent. The Eastern face of the Jabal Fayah is dissected in long spines towards the East, in front of which rocky fans or alluvial fans have developed (Pl.lVa-b). Several phases of shaping can be distinguished. The ancient fans are the highest up and the most erect. They carry a calcareous material which is very coarse and badly rolled. They correspond to a phase much more humid than the present one. Today, they are often disconnected from the mountain by regressive erosion on both sides of the higher part. These fans were than covered over a thick layer of sand in which were mixed very angular-shaped block (Pl.Va). the forming of this stand must correspond to a drier period than that of today, since it has exacerbated the dunary process. The sand has accumulated in great quantities on the Western slope (sections show this, see Pl.VI), it has reached the crest of the jabal and has alimented the face under the wind (the phenomena continues in the Southern part). Debris is mixed in with these sands and the mixture has clogged the pre-existing fans. It is at the end of the preceding wet period or during the dry period that one can imagine the beginning of the streaming inclusion (linear erosion) and the dissection of the elevated fans. In a third phase wetter than the present one these sandy covering were mobilized locally, but the incision continued in these upper fans and they broke away from the original relief, some of them remained however (Pl.Vb). lower and flatter fans developed at the expense of the former ones and still continue to evolve.

Third Report 27 We do not yet have the means to relate these events to those characterized in the first part, and even less to put a precise date to them. Restoring to prehistory turned out to be of no use, at least for the moment. All of the lithic industry that has been observed is surface material. If however, some flints have been found in stratigraphy, they cannot give us a chronological element because it is uncertain whether they were knapped by man. We find ourselves in the same situation as before. The flint-knapping factories are numerous. The Eastern face of the Jabal Fayah has an important number are numerous. The Eastern face of the Jabal Fayah has an important number of outcrop points of different textures and qualities. The very erect calcareous layers forced man to extract the flint, of a much better quality than the ultrabasic rocks used in the context of the great glacis, is of varying colours but usually light in colour. These vigour of the slopes means that the extracted rocky material rolled easily towards the bottom, so that the knapped products spread out from the extraction points up to the top of the fans. It is however possible that on the lower and functional fans, the dispersion of the artifacts that on observe is due to the sheet- flooding.

Lithic Industries Following the surveys carried out in 1985, we made a systematic inventory of the knapping factories on the Eastern flank of the Northern part of the Jabal Fayah. About fifty lithic industry concentrations of varying density were found. The most important one are shown on a map of the Jabal (fig.7) .

Raw material A systematic sampling of raw material was carried out during the survey as it seemed important to us to know about the eventual variations in the quality of the flint whose sources are scattered all along the jabal. With the help of the MUNSELL code an evaluation of the colours allowed us to establish quite a variety of shades of brown and red. Although the colour guide approach does not tell us anything about the petrographic nature of the flint, this extensive study revealed important variations in the quality of the grain, with the coarse grain domination. The sampling was also intended to find the origin of the varieties of flints used on the coastal sites, but brought no definite answer. Sometimes in the flint beds, isolated blocks of a different colour and quality, with a finer grain (lie de vin. translucid, lacteal or black) than the dominating flint, can be seen. Even though we are not able to confirm a direct link between the jabal sources and the coastal sites, we can propose the following hypothesis; that the occupants of the coastal sites chose the finest blocks in particular. It should be noted however, that there has not been any on the spot preparation

28 Third Report of the fine-grained flint tools which were found on the coast and that the knappers from the factories situated on the slopes of the jabal mainly worked with the coarse flint. The surveys have finally allowed us to observe important differences of the patina density, which we confirmed by breaking the samples. There is sometimes a very marked difference. Some flints are greyish-beige inside and rusty brown on the surface. The formation conditions of these patina are at this moment in time, impossible to define: they depend as much on the quality of the raw material as how much they have been exposed to the elements. We can only state the important differences -perhaps because of the length of exposure- that only an industry dating (by radiocarbon dating or by typology) could prove. We can however hypothetically relate the elaboration industries and a more pronounced patina, as is the case on sites P.15 and P.28, which would favour the “time” theory to explain the intensity of the patina.

Collecting Procedures Throughout the survey in the jabal, we collected lithic industry samples from the most important factorry sites, in order to make a preliminary typological and technological study. The Collecting procedures were adopted according to the restraints imposed by the general conditions for the preservation of the sites: - The industries of these factories present all the inconveniences of surface material (scattering, breaking up of trampling or treading, patina, etc.). - Tools are rare. - There are no evident habitational structures (stone circles etc.), nor there are any preserved combustion structures. - There are no real debitage heaps (high and clearly marked concentration) which permit us to characterize most definitely a knapping factory. The industry is generally very scattered and it is out of question to try to resemble it. We tested four types of collecting: - Total collection of all the flint, knapped or unknapped, over an area of 9m² and 10 cm thick with shifting (P.19). - Collecting over 25 m² of all the flint which was definitely knapped by man (P18). - Random collecting of tools, cores and flakes over 200m² (sampling of approx 400 objects P.15 and P.22).

Third Report 29 - Reduced sampling of cores and tools (10-20 characteristic objects). According to collected data on the material from the jabal sites, it is difficult to characterize each one of these sites individually. we propose to present the data by comparison in order to bring the technological and typological differences to the core, differences which are already discernible in this first approach.

Technological Aspects There is no trimming element to prove that the cores were prepared. There is no true crested - blade and on the cores which are essentially prismatic ones with a single plain platform of shapeless cores, there is no evidence of shaping. The blade production is low on most of the workshops, except for site P.15 where it represents about 50% of the sample: elsewhere it never exceeds 25%. No more than 5 or 10 blanks seemed to be detached from each core. The butts on flakes and blades are most often plain or cortical (73% to 87%). Punctiform and facetted butts are uncommon (0% to 7%). The platform abrasion is more frequent on the site P.15 (4.7%), P19 (13.3%) and P.22 (14.3%). The trace of impact point, which is often due to the use of the hard hammer, occurs on 20% and 43% of the butts. The dorsal scars are often parallel and unidirectional on the blanks of site P.15 (59%) but generally irregular on site P.18 (86.7%), P.22 (61.2%) and P.21 (40.4%). On the site P.19, Cortex occurs on 50% of the flakes. The dimensions vary a lot from one site to another. The longest flakes came from site P.22 (66.1 mm average length) and the smallest from P.15 (35.3mm). On the other hand, the blades are much elongated on site P.15 (length/ width ratio = 2.8) even if they are short (49.7 mm average length). In conclusion of the technological processes, one can observe that site P.15 is effectively different from that sites because of the frequency of abrasion, the high proportion of small blades, the length/ width ratio which is nearly 3. Site P.22, on the other hand, has a large flakes industry; this is perhaps a workshop where large flakes were produced to be used as cores. On sites P.18 and P.19, the waste material is more difficult to characterize because it is very broken.

Typology Tools are scarce on the workshops of Jabal Fayah. There are no pressure-flaked arrowheads like the ones from the coastal sites. The only tanged point was discovered on site P.15: on this arrowhead, made on the bladelet, the

30 Third Report tang is manufactured by direct and abrupt retouch. It shows swell in the middle. Only the extremely of the point has direct retouch (fig. 8:1). It is important to observe that this arrowhead has been made a flint which probably came from one of the outcrops of Oman Mountains. Site P15 is the richest one with bifacial pieces; some of the (fig.8) can also be classified among the arrowheads. Their cross-section is not often regularly bi-convex and there is no covering retouch. One of these pieces, with retouch has a herring - bone pattern, and has been made thinner in the distal end of the other surface, perhaps in order to be hafted (fig. 8:8). Other foliated bifacial pieces were collected on sites P.18, P.19, P.19b, P.21 and P.22, but only one (fig. 10:1) can be compared to the ones from the P.15 the others have irregular surfaces with very sinuous edges and an unbalanced shape, which made them difficult to classify among the arrowheads. In general, these pieces have a rather elongated shape which is not the case of one bifacial piece, discovered in 1985 on P.16, in the Western part of the jabal, which has an ovular morphology. These bifacial pieces are rather small (length = 46.7; width = 23.4); important in comparison with the length. Lastly, the term bifacial can be applied to some flakes roughly retouched on both surfaces, as well as these tools, the lithic industry of the Jabal Fayah includes backed pieces, denticulated flakes and uncharacteristic end - scrapers. The last tool category of note is comprised of flakes with inverse retouch.

Conclusion The geomorphological research carried out during the 1986 mission has enabled us to better our knowledge and understanding of inland basin Dhaid - Mleiha. Thanks to the systematic coverage of the land and to the analysis of the photographs we had at our disposal we have drawn up a detailed geomorphological map of one part of this plain (Northern part), as well as the Jabal Fayah. We have through study and deposits (glacis, earthworks, fans, wind formations etc.) acquired a better vision of the sequence of geomorphological and palaeo climatological events (alteration of dry and wet periods) from the end of the Pleistocene and Holocene periods. Unfortunately, this chronological remains relative owing to the absence of isotopically datable material, as well as extreme rarity of artifacts discovered in stratigraphy. We know that some important climatic changes have taken place during the last twenty and thirty thousand years and that the landscape has been considerably altered (dunary accumulations are at most several thousand years old).

Third Report 31 With regard of human occupation of the basin, we have not found any proof of the presence of Palaeolithic man. As water and flints are abundant, the absence of man is surprising to us. However, the flint outcrops have not perhaps always been so easily accessible, this area could have been too out of the way from the roads followed by men. As all the assemblage was found on the surface, it is not possible to date it, nor to make reference to the geomorphology or the Palaeolithic in Southern.

32 Third Report References

- KAPEL (H) 1967 Atlas of the Stone - Age Cultures of Qatar, Jutland Archaeological Society Publications. Vl, Aarhus. - PULLAR (J) 1974 “Harvard Archeological Survey in Oman, 1973. l-Flint Sites in Oman”, Proceeding of the Seminar for Arabian Studies, 4, p.33-48. - SMITH (G.H.) 1978 “The stones industries of Qatar” - “Two Prehistoric sites on Ras Abaruk, sites 4” in B. DE CARDI ed. Qatar Archaeological Report - Excavations 1973, Oxford, p.35-38; 80-106.

Third Report 33 A PREHISTORIC SITE IN MLEIHA AREA (P.28): A SHORT NOTE

(by S.Calley and M-A Santoni)

The site called P.28 by the prehistorians was the object of a surface collecting and a wide sampling of small flake lithic industry, this site is situated near to architectural remains (see fig. 7). The knapped objects present several varieties among which flint from Jabal Fayah and finer flint of varying colours (resembling that of the coastal sites, which perhaps originates from the jabal as well) were discovered. The flint is a lot less patinated than The Flints from most of the knapping factories which mark out the slopes of the jabal. The industry from P.28 is of smaller dimensions to that of the factories. Of the tools collected there was only one arrowhead from a small flake with marginal bifacial retouches and the tang hardly defined. It looks like an arrowhead from the site of Al-Da’asa at Qatar (Smith 1978). The most characteristic tools which come from this first sampling are bifacial objects of small dimensions (3-5 cm long) and of flat section and amygdaloid in shape (not always very regular). It is important to note that some of them have been broken transversally, perhaps on purpose. The phenomena seems very similarly to that observed by M.L. Inzan and J.Tixer(1978) on bifacial pieces from Qatar and on the other hand that a few of the retouched flakes show negatives typical of winged-flakes on the flaking surface. Although it is still too early to go into depth about these comparisons, it is interesting to come across this technical trait particular to the Gulf region, again in Sharjah. It reveals an original technological trait which can permit us to characterize more precisely the cultural affinities between the different human groups who moved along the Gulf coasts. A roughly rectangular shaped tool with an almost piano-convex section, shaped by irregular covering touch on the two faces, also belongs to the previous group. A cortical flake of an irregular-shaped flat section, with the flaking face shaped entirely with covering retouch and whose higher face edges are partially retouched, could be morphologically classed amongst the bifacial tools.

34 Third Report Apart from these bifacial pieces which are probably arrowheads, the tool collection includes inverse retouched flints. One of them is pointed and has preserved the butt and the bulb, another has been retouched on the bulbous part. Finally, certain flints can be classified with the end-scrapers and the scrapers. Three irregular shaped globulous cores indicate that the debitage has been partially carried out on the spot. The first surface collecting does not permit a precise dating of the site. However, the small flint arrowhead shows that it is possible to associate P28 to the arrowhead sites in Qatar (al-Da’asa, site 46 cf. Smith 1978); the bifacial pieces are similar to these from site LXll, classified by Kapel (1967) in group D. It is important to continue research on this site for several reasons. Firstly, P.28 is situated near the Jabal Fayah but is much further away from it than the factories,, so perhaps the choice of its location is connected to the fact that there could be spring, in which case we should try to locate it. Although surface collecting did not reveal to us the type of implantation, this site offers the possibility (exceptional in Sharjah) for finding an industry, if not is stratigraphy, at least protected by surface layers, and therefore perhaps to discover well-preserved architectural structures (fireplaces, traces of settlement etc.). Secondly, site P.28 is the intermediary which will perhaps allow us to relate the Jabal Fayah to the settlements on the coast. In fact it is the only site we have found at the moment in the Dhaid-Mleiha area whose industry shows similarities between the Jabal factories (some raw materials, tools which are mainly beneficial), distinctive aspects (bifacial pieces are small, usually well-knapped and associated with winged-flakes) and affinities with the coastal sites (diversity of knapped flint material, amongst which figure fine grain flints of varying colours, small dimensions of the industry and collecting and predominance of tools compared to debitage etc.). So by carrying out a systematic collecting and doing soundings we will be able to throw some light onto a certain number of problems concerning Sharjah. - This site represents perhaps an intermediary type of occupation (prolonged habitt) between the factories at the raw material sources and the temporary settlements on the coast. - If we assume that all these sites belong to the same period, an “economical” type of relationship could be envisaged between them, that is that they represent the different stages of a route organized according to prehistoric man’s needs concerning raw material and food.

Third Report 35 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS IN MELIHA AREA

(A.Boucher and A. Hesse)

Introduction The 1986 survey had two aspects: a general reconnaissance of the visible surface structures and a geophysical survey of a number of bumps which we supposed contained built-structure remains.

Visible surface structures This operation consisted of a sort of archaeological inventory of this area which is East of the road, from Mleiha to Al Madam. The detailed, mapped area is limited to the West by garden fences and to the East by a wadi which probably defines the maximal extent of the site in this direction. The study should be completed to the North; to the South it would seem that the extent limit of the bumps has been reached, giving way to vast rubble areas which are abundant in surface flint. Visual marking of archaeological remains (some heaps, stretches of sherds, bumps etc.) has allowed us to make an inventory of the points of interest (noted from A to BD) the descriptions of which are given in the Annexe. This inventory does not pretend to be an exhaustive one because so much depends on the preservation state of the remains and the chances of their being found. The same rule applies to a bump plotted outside of the topographical swelling (presence of small whitish concretions which are perhaps brick debris which can lead to mistaken identification). The same applies to the rotation of “gravel mortar” or rubble which can result in confusion with rubble or alluvial subjacent outcrops which apparently have the same composition. Different ground-reading conditions (zenith of the sun or lower on the horizon, against the light or indirect light) can equally be the origin of an over or under-estimation of the visible dimensions. The inventory given in the Annexe shows without any pretation, the diversity in the nature of observed traces, the estimation of their archaeological importance or their degree of antiquity. The points put the map (fig. 12) mainly correspond to the center of the bump or of the marked out area; if there has been a geophysical survey, then it is mentioned in the list to be found in the Annexe.

36 Third Report The 1986 geophysical surveys were carried out on five reasonably well distributed flattened bumps continuing the aim of 1985 in trying to locate archaeological features under these. The same apparatus was used as in 1985 (EM15, GEONICS) although this year the display was modified from a needle to a digital one, which it was hoped would minimise problems caused by the apparatus not being on a level surface all the time. Measurements were taken every meter over thirty meter long profiles depending on the line of consecutive measurements) the number of profiles depending on the dimensions of the flattened bump. The heat sensitive parts of the apparatus also had to be sheltered from the elements due to the rapid changes in temperature which could occur during a survey. Apart from the geophysical surveys several others studies were made to aid the interpretation of results from these surveys and those carried out last year. A comparison was made between the digital display used this year and the needle display used last year so that the results from the two sets of surveys could be compared. A series of soil samples was taken to enable the soil’s magnetic susceptibility to be measured directly (samples were also taken from walls).this should indicate what type of feature will produce a particular strength of response. The response of the apparatus was also measured in comparison to varying degrees of magnetic susceptibility at different depths beneath the surface to gain some idea about how subsurface changes of magnetic susceptibility affect the measurements on the apparatus. The above factors should aid the archaeological interpretation and help to define subsurface features.

Methodology and Equipment Comparison between digital and needle displays on the EM15(Table 2). The aim of this comparison is to examine the relationship between measurements made with the EM15 using a needle display device and those using a digital display device. This was done by doing two surveys on the same site one from 1985, and the other from 1986 (using the digital display device). The apparatus has an adjustable zero which will usually remain the same during a survey. In 1985 the zero was set at 40 and in 1986 at 20. The needle display also has an upper limit of 100 its measurement scale. Whereas the digital also has no mechanical limit (it appears however that the actual instruments saturates as around 130). Overall 194 measurements, taken with each device, were plotted and the scattergram in Table 2 was produced. Values on this graph have not been calculated in terms of magnetic susceptibility so the values used are the values read on each device. The line on the graph represents the

Third Report 37 theoretical relationship between the two types of display if the zeros are connected (i.e. on the digital display 20 is zero and on the needle display (-40) is zero because these were the original settings on their respective devices). The first noticeable effect from the graph is that as the magnetic susceptibility increases there is a greater divergence from the theoretical norm, the weaker magnetic susceptibilities being closer to the norm. It is difficult to say from just looking at the scattergram whether this is just a straight line relationship or a curve. It may be that the apparatus is affected by the zero value chosen in each case, and if for example a value of 10 had been chosen for the zero on the digital device then the appartus may have been able to measure a large range of values and would approach the gradient of the theoretical line. It does however seem that the scattergram flattens out towards its upper range. As it stands this comparison can be used as an approximate guide for comparing anomalies in the 1985 surveys to those of 1986 aiding interpretation due to the excavation of several sites surveyed in 1985 (e.g. Mleiha 1 and 2 see 1985 Report, fig. 32-33).

The magnetic susceptibility measurements Of all twenty-five magnetic susceptibility samples which have been taken from the excavations at Mleiha, eighteen of these were taken 1986. Here a sample of soil or brick is carefully removed from its context so as not to mix it with surrounding material. Then one hundred grams or the sample is mixed with a non-magnetic powder to obtain a constant volume and weight for each sample. These were the measured in and ELSEC magnetic bridge and the resulting measurement was calculated in terms of 10 -5 USI/m³ (standard magnetic susceptibility). The lists of these measurements can be found in the Appendix. The reason for taking and measuring the magnetic susceptibility of these soil samples is to use the results as a guideline for interpreting the electromagnetic maps produced by the EM15. these results give some idea of the sorts of magnetic contrast that can be expected to exist between the different types of building material, sand and gravels that are found at Mleiha. The response of the EM15 to varying degrees of magnetic susceptibility at different depths beneath the surface. The site Mleiha 2 which was surveyed in 1985 and excavated in 1986 (Area B) exposed a section made up of light and dark diagonal layers possibly affected by human activity. Soil samples were taken of these layers in the manner described above (Magnetic susceptibility soil samples) and their magnetic susceptibilities were measured. Then the EM15 measurements taken the year before along the line of the section were calculated

38 Third Report in terms of 10 -5 USI/m³ and graphically displayed above the section with the magnetic susceptibility of each layer noted in the same units (Table 3). From this figure it is possible to roughly identify two factors in the response of the EM15 which may aid interpretation of anomalies measured during the 1986 surveys. These factors are the depth of investigation and the response of the apparatus of situations where many layers of differing magnetic susceptibility occur at the same point. For example (Table 3) at three meters, samples 2,3,4,5 and 8 are all taken from layers that are present at this point. The measurement on the graph above of 350x10-5 USI/m³ is combination of the magnetic susceptibility of these layers. Each layer depending on its width and depth below the surface, will constitute a fraction of the measurement. Therefore the measurement on the EM15 is a combination of the magnetic susceptibilities of each layer within range of detection. The depth of detection of the EM15 can be estimated by following response as a layer of high magnetic susceptibility approaches the surface. This is illustrated by the layer from which sample 4 taken. At 2 meter it does not appear that this layer is contributing to the reading on the EM15 (300x10-5 USI/m³). However at 3 meters (where this layer is slightly near the surface) the response of the EM15 rises to 350x 10 -5 USI/m³. At 3 meters the top of this layer is 0.35m below the surface and the lower part of the layer is at a depth of 0.45m. Considering that as the layer gets near the surface the response of the EM15 increases to a peak at 4 meters 375x10 -5 USI/m³ it appears that at 3 meters the magnetic susceptibility the layer is only partly affecting the response of the EM15. Therefore surface for high magnetic features, it may however be less than this features with a low magnetic susceptibility which could possibly be masked by layers of high magnetic susceptibility. Five maps of the 1986 surveys have been produced and these should be referred to during the following discussion. To aid the discussion each map has been divided into a grid labelled with letters and numbers on their respective axis. Al is always the origin (or the point representing the first measurement on the first profile). The profiles run vertically on each map for example the first profile on Mleiha 5 starts at Al and finishes at A4. also each individual grid square can be referred to by the point at its top right hand corner (for example the grid square with corners B2, C2, B3, C3, would be called the grid square C2). Before a specific discussion of any of the surveyed sites is made it is useful to lay down the guidelines for interpretation based on the soil sample measurements described earlier. This is shown in the table below and the following analysis.

Third Report 39 RANGES OF VALUES MEAN OF VALUES MATERIAL MEASURED X10-5 USI/m³ MEASURED X10-5 USI/m³ Brick 36.2 - 227.2 128.4 Sand 129.3 - 248.3 182.0 Layers containing black 339.8 - 595.1 477.5 gravels Table 4- The magnetic susceptibility of various materials found at Mleiha.

The materials shown in the Table 4 are among the most common to be found related to the archaeological sites at Mleiha, it is for this reason that the discussion has been restricted to these of the three the brick shows by far the lowest magnetic susceptibility although the more magnetic bricks show the same range of measurement as the sand samples do. This is possibly due to the inclusion of the black gravels in the brick material which would therefore raise the brick’s magnetic susceptibility. The presence of small amounts of black gravel may also influence the reasonably high reading from these samples the resulting magnetic susceptibility is still quite high. In this case it must be assumed that the sand has a relatively susceptibility in relation to the brick material. The black graverls have by far the highest magnetic susceptibility the weakest measurement of these being 100x105 USI/m³ higher that the most magnetic sample of sand. It is therefore probable that high readings on the EM15 will be caused by large concentrations of black gravels in one form in the sand however, due to the similar magnetic susceptibilities observed in both of these. This is the basic guideline that will be used for interpreting the maps, however it does not exclude the existence of other types of material for example fried bricks which have a higher magnetic susceptibility than the bricks measured. It is now possible to proceed with a brief interpretation of the surveyed sites.

Mleiha 5 This survey was carried out on two flattened bumps South-West of Mleiha A. The most noticeable features on this map are a set of parallel alignments running North// South and East// West possibly outlining a structure. The westernmost alignment runs through D2 and off the map at a point between D1 and E1, this alignment appears to continue in a southerly direction for about 10 meters. The easternmost alignment running perpendicular to the two above (situated in the grid square E2) possibly join the North/South alignments creating an anomaly orientated in this direction. It is possible that anomalies related to this rectangular feature mentioned above exist (although they are difficult to discern from the map). The three possible anomalies falling roughly with its alignment and magnitude of

40 Third Report magnetic susceptibility are situated near the point B4, between D3 and D4, and slightly SouthWest of C3. Also around the point C3 there is a rapid change from high to low magnetic susceptibility from measurements above 72 to measurements below 57. The latter of these is roughly the same magnitude as the bricks from the wall 10 on site C. The calculated magnetic susceptibility of the main North/West aligned anomaly is approximately 141x10-5 USI/m³ which is within the range of the slightly more magnetic bricks on table A. It is not possible to interpret any of the other anomalies with the evidence in hand because they are quite disordered and have no easily definable form.

Mleiha 6 The site of this survey has already been partially excavated to the West (Area C), and when the survey was completed a test trench was excavated in the area surveyed considerably aiding interpretation. The most predominant anomaly is roughly square North/South aligned outline of very low magnetic susceptibility, the North/East corner of which is located at D3. a sample of brick taken from the West wall of this (wall 10) shows the wall to be considerably less magnetic than the surrounding sand (sample 4) explaining the weak magnetic anomaly measured. Another anomaly of similar magnitude can be seen at D1 and may also have been caused by bricks with a low magnetic susceptibility although its from is altogether less distinct. The rest of the interior of the flattened bump consists of higher magnetic anomalies (in black and hatched areas). Around B2 these seem to have rough North/South, East/West alignments although it is probable that they are caused by concentrations of black gravels of around the same magnitude as those sampled at sampling point 3. Until any relationship between these black gravels and some form of human activity is found it is not possible to propose further archaeological interpretations for these anomalies.

Mleiha 7 This is characterized by a region of high magnetic susceptibility in the grid square C2-C3, which is probably caused by concentrations of black gravels (the magnitude being within the region defined in Table 2). The anomaly is not obviously aligned North/South and could possibly be similar in form to Mleiha A and B. there does however appear to be a rough alignment of high magnetic susceptibility from A1 to C3 with a possible perpendicular about mid way along this running roughly South/East from a point between B1 and C1, and the other around the point C4. most of the North-East / South-East linear anomalies can be obviously due to external disturbances in line with the survey profiles. The blank area with its center between points C2 and C3 was not surveyed as it had previously been

Third Report 41 disturbed by people digging there. One cannot reject the hypothesis that the main anomaly, in the center of the map, can be produced by gravels rejected from this dig. Similarly, the high susceptibility values, outside the bump can be explained by gravel layers close to the surface of the ground.

Mleiha 8 In this case it appears that there are a large number of possibly significant anomalies occurring in a quite small area. It is therefore necessary to describe them one at a time for the purpose of charity. The first of these is roughly circular in form and can be found in the North/Eastern corner of grid square D2. This is about five meters in diameter and of a magnitude which could be associated to bricks of high magnetic susceptibility or black gravels at a reasonable depth beneath the surface. The second anomaly is located at a point just South of B3 and is characterized by a region of low magnetic susceptibility (spotted standing). This could be caused by slightly less magnetic bricks than normally found or sand. However, it does appear to have two roughly perpendicular sides running approximately East/West separated by a distance of about three meters. One can also notice that this area of low values is surrounded by relatively high value readings (>87) in a more or less rectangular pattern, which correspond to an alignment of relatively high magnetic susceptibility which runs approximately from B4 to B1 with two perpendiculars at four and fourteen meters along its length going from West to East. A little East of apoint halfway between A4 and B4 there is an area of high magnetic susceptibility (possibly associated with black gravels) surrounding an area which is relatively low in magnetic susceptibility. There is also a similar area South of this but it is not as well defined. The alignment of high magnetic susceptibility A1 is caused by black gravels deposited in a small (wadi) that exists there. Also in the grid square D3 the region of high magnetic susceptibility may contain several alignments but its form is indistinct and may be related to the presence of black gravels and to some disturbances due to car tracks in a North-West/ South-East direction. On the top of the mound some evidence of excavation can be observed as well as a concentration of “hard” bricks with matting traces.

Mleiha 9 The most interesting area on this map is one of high magnetic contrast in the grid square AB-34. Here two parallel alignments of very high magnetic susceptibility border a similarly aligned area of very low magnetic susceptibility with a North-South orientation. Another similarly oriented alignment of high magnetic susceptibility runs from a point between

42 Third Report A2 and A3 to B1. several perpendiculars crossing this third alignment may be postulated, the most obvious of which runs from A1 to C2. A roughly semi-circular feature may also exist starting just North of B2 passing in between the points B2,C2 and B3, C3 finally terminating at a point in the center of grid square B3 where it may joint the easternmost alignment of high magnetic susceptibility. It is difficult to say what sort of feature may have caused these anomalies, however due to the high magnetic susceptibilities present on the map they are probably associated with black gravels or materials containing black gravels. These anomalies can be of some interest in consideration with the possible existence of remains of a tower and of a wall surrounding the building previously excavated by the Iraqi expedition. However the disturbances produced by deep tracks visible on the ground must not be neglected especially if they correspond to the direction of the anomalies.

Conclusion In comparison to last years surveys a lot more experience of the problems involved in performing and interpreting electromagnetic surveys at the site to Mleiha has been gained. An accumulation of magnetic susceptibility measurements for specific materials found at Mleiha has helped to build a framework upon which the interpretation of electromagnetic survey maps can be based. The results of the five surveys carried out this year are satisfactory in so much as they have located areas of possible interest to the archaeologist which can be excavated on a small scale. It must however be pointed out that the EM15 cannot differentiate between archaeological and natural features of similar magnitudes making the interpretation partially subjective. One must also take into account that the EM15 detector is not a deep features detector but a subsurface susceptibility recorder (maximum depth penetration 0.4m).

Third Report 43 ANNEXE Inventory of the Archaeological Remains

A = Bump diameter approx. 20m: EM15 survey in 1985 (index Mleiha 2) 1986 dig (Area A).

B = Bump diameter approx. 20m: EM15 survey 1985 (index Mleiha 1)

C = Very large bump (tomb (?) which has completely excavated Diameter 38m 1986 dig (Area C)

D = N = Certain letters have been given to areas with archaeological remains but which have not been methodically surveyed: Some of them however, have been excavated like D and F in 1986 and H in 1974. I corresponds to a hellenistic era occupation but also to the prehistoric site P28. it must also be noted that several sites in this series are beyond the area which was methodically surveyed; they are in fact fields, some of which are West of the main road.

O = Large bump: EM15 survey 1986 (Index Mleiha 7 see fig.15) Distinct bump, diameter approx. 20m. In center, a deep excavation of 5-7m in diameter; the rubble from this bump seems to been thrown to the North-West.

P = Mediumsize bump: Diameter approx.20m Small uncertain bump 7-8m to the North

Q = Flattened bump: Diameter approx. 15m, identification uncertain

R = Medium size bump: More or less oval-shaped 20mx12m

S = Medium size bump: EM15 survey test 1982 (index Mleiha 0) Distinctive bump, diameter approx. 20m with an approx. E-W axis. Tow- heaps of erratic bricks are to be observed at a distance of 4 meters (rejects from a former sounding)

T = Large bump: Apparently open in horse-shoe towards West (ancient excavations? or plan of installation). Dimensions E-W = 25m, N-S = 30m. A track hackles it slightly on its Eastern limit and reveals bricks.

44 Third Report U = Local accumulation of calcareous stones: More or less circular on plan from 3-4m in diameter (tomb?). A stone of whitish concertions (bricks ?) appears around it over about 20 m in diameter without any distinctive bumps.

V = Large bump: Diameter 23m slightly elongated in a N-S direction.

W = Small bump: Dimensions E-W = 15 N-S = 20m Noteworthy sherds on the surface. There is another uncertain bump 20m to the South.

X = Large bump: EM15 survey in 1986 (index Mleiha 8 see fig. 16) Along with BB the bump makes up an lengthened entity in a E-W direction; it was considered at a first as alone entity artificially divided by a modern track. The survey only covers X i.e. the biggest part East of this entity. The surface is abundantly covered with brick fragments and gravel. A prior sounding brought a dozen large hard bricks with weaving traces to the surface.

Y = A small flattened bump: Diameter approx. 15m, few sherds (dubious)

Z = Two extremely flattened bumps (?), marks of white concretions (brick debris?) at , distance of approx. 12m on a E-W axe a few sherds.

AA = Very flattened small bump: Diameter : 15m, brick fragments and very few sherds.

AB = Medium size flattened bump; Consists of 2 marks of white concretions very few sherds.

AC = Circle of 6.2m; traces of dampness appeared after rain on 16.02.86 within the circle there is a concentration of black gravel. A rectilinear trace of the same nature at an Eastern tangent spreads out in a Northerly direction (wall?)

AD = Very flattened bump: Diameter: 15m not very distinct, brick fragments and sherds found here.

AE = Small stone paving: Approx 1m2 on circular plain; the colour of the brick tends to be brown and perhaps shows signs of combustion. Presence of an iron arrowhead and pottery and pottery sherds “ cooking pot” types.

AF = Medium size bump: Small in diameter (12m), the elevation of the bump is very noticeable presence of brick fragments, stones and gravel mortar (?); tange to the Eastern bank of a small Wadi.

AG = Small flattened bump: The bump is prolonged as a dune towards the North; the diameter of the visible part is 1-0-12m. Beyond this bump towards the South no other similar structures are to be observed. Vast areas, which are quite well-levelled, with gravel but without bushes have quite a lot of knapped flint flakes.

Third Report 45 AH = Mound of stones: Diameter approx 20m; turned over by cultivation; the structure is an exception to the rule by which visible traces in cultivated areas are not taken into account in this inventory (it is also an exceptional structure because o the amount of stones).

AI = Large bump:

AJ = Medium size bump bordering on AI: EM15 survey 1986 which covered the two bumps ( index Mleiha 5 see fig. 13), the two structures are very clear and are covered with ceramic material

AK = Unscattered broken pottery.

AL = Unscattered broken pottery: To the North-West and South of these objects we observed a surface which was relatively rich in sherds and brick fragments (?) without a bump

AM = Large bump: Diameter: 30m, very isolated slight depression to the North.

AN = Stone and brick fragment concentration: Diameter 3m

AO = Center of a distribution surface of brick: Fragments and shards without any real bump over diameter of approx 50m, to the West of AN.

AP = Superial concentration of sherds: Diameter approx 1m; the age of this structure is doubtful; it is perhaps a collection of surface material made by visitors to the site before the present dig.

AQ = Superficial concentration of sherds: Diameter approx 1m; same interpretation as for AP

AR = Medium size flattened bump: Diameter approx 20m; the bump is not very distinct; it is especially a distribution surface of sherds and small fragments of bricks; tangent to the fencing or even the part stepped by it.

AS = Large bump: EM15 survey 1985 (index Mleiha 3) Diameter approx: 28m; widely cut into by cultivation. The bump stands out very clearly, (elevation 1m) with sherds and brick fragments. The registered magnetic susceptibility is quite low and the anomalies are practically uninterpretable (see second archaeologist survey in the Sharjah Emirate, 1985 p26)

AT = Medium size bump: EM15 survey 1985 (index Mleiha 4), diameter 18m, slightly less obvious than the previous one. Same remarks for the survey as AS.

46 Third Report AU = Large bump: Diameter 25m; excavated over 6m in diameter in the centre; the rejected debris on the edge accentuate the elevation which without this debris would be comparable to the elevation of the two previous ones.

AV = Small bump: Diameter: 16m elevation between 0.5m and 1m. The bump has bush vegetation which has brought about partial choking up with sand; brick fragments, rubble and sherds are visible on the periphery of the ground which is not sand covered.

AW = Small bump: Diameter 15m; not very high 0.5m. Presence of brick fragments and sherds.

AX = Medium sized flattened bump: Diameter 18m; elevation inferior to 0.5m. Surface has rubble and brick fragments with an important concentration of sherds on the southern edge.

AY = Point where a small jar was found during the 1982 visit and was given to the Department of Culture, Sharjah.

AZ = Small group of stones: 3 or 4 are buried, 3 are around the surface level.

BA = Superficial concentration of sherds: Diameter approx: 1m, same interpretation as for AP.

BB = Small bump bordering on X: Diameter 17m.

Third Report 47 APPENDIX (MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY SOIL SAMPLES)

Magnetic Susceptibility Sample number Material 10 5 USI/m³ MLEIHA A(2) 1 Brick 146.8 2 Sandy layer: With black gravels 229.2 without black gravels 207.1 3 White layer 110.6 4 Black gravel layer 524.8 5 White layer 281.5 6 Black gravel layer 595.1 7 White layer 211.1 8 Sandy layer 248.3 9 Sandy layer 138.9

MLEIHA B(1) 1 White patch 94.7 2 Black gravel layer 339.8 3 Sandy layer 129.2 4 Sandy layer: With black gravels 224.2 Without black gravels 158.4 5 Sandy layer 135.9

MLEIHA C(6) 1 Brick 77.6 2 Brick 227.2 3 Black gravel layer 450.4 4 Sandy fill 185.0 5 Brick 75.4

MLEIHA (9) 1 Sandy fill 156.8 2 Brick 138.7

MLEIHA (S) 1 Brick 36.2

MLEIHA (X) 1 Brick 197.0

48 Third Report Excavation At Mleiha Site: A Preliminary Report

(R.Boucharlat and M.Mouton) (with the collaboration of P.Garczynski and Ph.Gouin)

Introduction A long season of excavation took place at Mleiha site from January 18 until April 3, 1986. The fieldwork was carried out under the supervision of the authors, who were assisted for three weeks by Miss Francesca GANDOLFO. Dr Philippe GOUIN was in charge of the excavation in Area B, and acted as a draughtsman. Mr Paul GARCZYNSKI was in charge of the levelling of the site and the mapping plans of the remains. The Department of Culture provided the workmen, under the direction of Mr. Mustafa Tawfiq Hazzem. The excavations started with 5 workers, then 10 during the second week; there were 20 from Feb.6 until March 20. The aim of the programme was three fold: - Test soundings on small mounds previously surveyed by an electromagnetic survey (Areas A and B). - Large scale excavations at a well preserved site (Area C), to establish a stratigraphy and a chronology of the site upon a firm basis. - Rescue excavations in the modern “farms” to get an idea of the remains partly destroyed (Areas D and F). Besides the excavations, a geophysical survey was carried out on six new areas (See A.HESSE and A.BOUCHER’s Report), and several visits were paid to the “farms” on both sides of the main road. On the whole, the results are very promising and the two main excavations quite successful, showing the various types of archaeological remains and which often in a good state of preservation. All of them provide us with much information about the human occupation which took place in the Mleiha area from the 3rd century B.C. onwards.

Third Report 49 Surface finds The surface survey and its results are described in the report by A.Boucher and A.Hesse (fig.12). In the area covered, the artifacts were not collected; however several objects were picked up by the different members of the team if they risked being destroyed or displaced by traffic; 15 fragmented objects were in this case and they were plotted according to the site grid, and the surveyed marks. Amongst these modest objects, about ten stone fragments of vases, bowls and basins of well-polished grey stone are worthy of note (fig.31:1-7). Everything about them differentiates them from the chlorite vases dating from the Iron Age; some have already been found in Mleiha (De Cardi 1971: fig.17:178-181). Lastly, a real concentration of these objects situated in the area North and North-West of site (B) was found. The observation should be checked with a more methodical and wider survey. If it is confirmed this could mean that a study of the distribution of the different groups could give us information about the various activities and perhaps about the chronological differences of the occupation of the site. On a bump (AM) situated North-East of site (B), a ring base pottery made of the fine pink ceramic with a red slip was found. If it is a terra sigillata, it cannot be older than the second or first centuries B.C. (fig.37:5). Lastly the chance finding by an inhabitant of Mleiha of a fragmented bronze figuring must be noted (fig. 32; PI XIIIa). The figuring represents a naked masculine figure whose head is encircled with a headband and who holds a dove in his right hand. The style and iconographic reveal a piece of work from the Western world.

Area A Area A is a flattened bump which is hardly visible. It was surveyed in March 1985 by an electromagnetic survey; the map (1985 Report, fig. 33) showed a large L-shaped structure. A test trench (10x3m) was dug in the center of the mound and the work lasted from Jan. 18 until Jan 25. Below the surface, a thick layer of disintegrated mortar and mud brick covers a layer of small black gravels, which sealed a badly-preserved occupation level (0.10m thick). A NNW-SSE mud-brick wall is the only anthropic structure. No traces of a floor are observed, but the sandy layer yields numerous sherds, metal fragments, charcoal and some shell fragments. As evidenced by the electromagnetic survey, this bump yields some structures, but

50 Third Report there is no connection between the plan given by geophysical survey and the L-shaped wall. As a matter of fact, the picture given by the survey only shows the upper layer which covers the structure. Because the archaeological remain were badly preserved, we chose to abandon this excavation. The material taken from this sounding consists of ceramics (not very abundant) and fragments of iron. The pottery similar to that from site B is illustrated in fig. 35 (n° 2-5,7- 11) it is described with the pottery from site B it must be noted however that glazed ceramics are not represented (in the small collection from site A).

Area B (fig.18; PI VII) Area B was also tested by an electromagnetic survey in 1985 (1985 Report), fig. 32. A first phase of excavation (15x15m trench) was carried out by Ph. Gouin from Jan. 27 until Feb.11. Later the excavations were resumed there on March 8-20, and supervised by M.Mouton. The present surface covered a thick layer of whitish and granulous marly earth mixed with gravels. It lies over a sand layer 0.20m thick. The stratigraphy and the composition of this level show that it is quite different from the lower one. Its shape is that of an arc of circle and the marly earth which is known to be the substratum of the plain led Ph. Gouin to suggest that this layer was only the refuse from the digging of a pit or a well. The second and lower level is covered by the sand layer. Its surface consists of marl and light brown sand. It is pierced by numerous holes whose diameter varies from 0.15 to 0.40m and depth from 0.15 to 0.30m (PI.VIIa). In several cases, the holes contained pottery fragments, small bronze slags and traces of charcoal. They are dug in the upper part of the marly substratum. From the positioning of the holes we have tried to find some sort of plan that might correspond to a structure formed by pegs and poles painted in the ground. At present, we cannot make out a coherent plan, which is all the more difficult to figure out as the holes do not seem to be contemporary with each other. By excavating an extended area we will probably have more coherent picture which might in turn clarify the presence of bronze slags in the filling of most holes. Four soundings of 1x2m at 2m intervals outside the excavation area in all four directions, have allowed us to check the size of the area containing pole holes. The remains found on this show a marked difference when compared to those from

Third Report 51 sites C and F. Iron, which was found in such great quantity on the latter, does not seem on site B. Although there are plenty of bronze slags, only one object of bronzeware was found here. On the other hand 66% of the objects recorded on this site are grinding stones and pestles; on site F the grinding stones constitute only 3.5% of the remains and on site C there was only one small fragment from a grinding stone. Note that site B was the only one to give steatite (soapstone) vases (3 fragments). The marked originality of the objects found on site B sets it apart from the others. It is still to be determined whether this difference stems from functional or chronological causes. In order to test the hypothesis of a well, dug near by, the excavations were resumed West of the trench with a 5x2m sounding. In fact, the sounding evidenced a well, dug through the lower level that had the holes. It is c. 2.50m in diameter at the upper part. We excavated it down to 5m deep from the present surface without reaching the bottom. At its lower part it has a rectangular shape of more than 1 x 1.50m (fig. 18; PI VIIb).

Material Several examples of the pottery found in the layers covering the levels of the circular holes are illustrated here in fig. 36. The potsherds (which are quite numerous) can be grouped by their type and category, which in fact does not very much. In the excavated part of the pit hundreds of fragments of big jars were collected (about a quarter of the total find), but this material will be studied next season when the whole of the well has been excavated. Already several remarks can be made about this material: - It is similar to that found during the sounding of site A, and very different in shape and category to the material found on sites C and F. - Glazed pottery is very rare (cf. fig. 36: 1-4), and if the pottery is glazed it is not decorated. - Pottery with brown/red slip of grey/black slip is abundant. - The different shapes include wide-necked jars with everted or thickened rims, basins or bowls and also flat lids which sometimes have incised decorations. These few characteristics remind us immediately of Iron Age pottery that was found from al-Ain in the South (Boucharlat and Lombard 1985) to Ras al-Khaimah in the North (De Cardi 1971, 1976, 1984) and in Oman (Weisgerber 1982). However, one category (two groups of painted pottery) characteristic of Iron Age pottery, even if rarely found, is missing in Mleiha.

52 Third Report This material requires a more complete study but even at this stage one may presume that a settlement contemporaneous with the “classical” Iron Age (1st millenium B.C) exists in Mleiha or perhaps which carried on the traditions of the Iron Age until the end of the first millenium. At this point, the work has stopped for the workers security because of lack of a protective barrier for humans and animals. We decided to put a temporary fence around the pit, hoping that the protection around Area B would be so up very quickly.

Area C (fig. 19-25; PI VIII-I X) The excavations started there on Jan 27 and lasted until April 3. This flattened mound of 50 m in diameter and less than 1m in height was tested by the Iraqi Expedition in 1973. They cleared out an interesting structure which was interpreted as the grave of a rich local man (Al Athar 1972. Summer 1975). This structure, standing today on the Western slope of the mound, was only partly-excavated. Our aim was to check the complete shape and building techniques, its function, and to get an idea of any other structures porbably beneath the mound. After clearing out this building (P5) by opening a large area (15x10m), a second E-W trench (20x4m) was dug towards the East. Then, due to the results of an electromagnetic survey covering the mound, we added an extension on the NE part. The total excavated area covered 300m². At the end of the season, six platforms like P.5 were evidenced (fig.19). As a first conclusion, one can assume these square platforms are sort of mausoleums built above a grave; therefore Area C is a necropolis. The graves are in alignment: one can now count at least 4 graves in a E-W row we suppose there are 4 or 5 similar rows, indicating the total amount of graves, which is between 20 and 25. At the present time, 6 of them have been cleared out and only two grave pits have been completely excavated (including the one excavated by the Iraqi fig. 19, plan). Each grave consists of three parts (fig.19, section): the grave pit or burial chamber, the foundation pit and the mausoleum. The necropolis has been built on a flat gravel soil which seems to have previously been the bad of a wadi. From this light but firm soil, it was easy to reach the layer of very hard white marl, situated at 0.80 cm from the surface. It was only in the marl that the grave pit could be dug. The foundation pit, dug in the gravel, was refilled after the body and the offerings were put in the grave pit; and in certain cases, the gravel and sand from the digging were thrown back into the pit (P.20 fig. 23), in other cases, bricks and mortar were used, to ensure a better protection of the grave pit (P. 5, P.21, P.36) (fig.21-22). Only afterwards, the mausoleum, made of bricks,

Third Report 53 was built over the foundation pit it was meant both as a protection and as a grace mark. These platforms, or these towers (their original height is unknown to us) reflect the wealth of the dead person. They all are quadrangular, measuring from 2.75m (P.36) to 4.25m (P.21) on the side. They are usually built of mud bricks, but some of them have outer walls made of hard white bricks (45x455cm), used either whole or halved (45x22cm; thus, the mausoleum of P.11 is made of proper walls of hard white bricks between which there are several layers of mud bricks, and the mausoleum of P.5 has similar walls, the thickness here being of one brick and a half. On the other hand, the mausoleums of P.20, P.21, P.22 and P.36 were built uniformly with mud bricks and there is no difference between the outer walls and the filling. All the graves excavated so far have been looted in the past. The level corresponding to this period (0.30-0.40m below the present surface) shows that one or two looters pits were dug in the center of the platforms and along one side to reach the grave pit (PI.IXb): at this time, the graves were already eroded. After this looting one cannot expect to find many objects; however we found what the robbers left around the grave or did not see in the grave pit. The human bones were probably scattered all around the grace, since we did not find any evidence of skeletons.

P.22 This grave is built of whole mud bricks of 38x38cm and half brick (19x38cm ). Its plan is square shaped measuring 3.75m on each side. The outer faces are covered down to the base with a thick white coating that penetrates into the joints between the bricks (P1. IXa). the center of this brick platform is destroyed by a wide sandy hole (looter’s pit) which is dug from the level of the floor S.16 which corresponds to the time of the looting. The plastered floor S.26, which has been cleared all around this structure, goes up the walls. No traces of a foundation pit are visible around P.22 (fig.25, left), or in the section dug at the base of wall M.17 (section F-G). the structure lies directly on the light soil formed by fluviatile gracel, which must have formed the ground surface at the time of construction. Consequently the size of the foundation pit is probably smaller than the mausoleum that covers it. The inner filling and the grave pit have not been excavated.

P.11 It was discovered thanks to the geophysical survey. With P.36 it constitutes part of a second line of graves. Only the South-West quarter of the structure has been excavated (fig. 24; PI.VIIIb). It is built up mudbricks inside and one row of white hard half bricks (45x22cm) for the outer walls. A white coating, similar to that of P.22 covers the outer walls down to the base. The inside of the mausoleum was filled up with wide mud bricks

54 Third Report (38x38cm) laid flat on three courses that have been preserved. This covering, pierced by the looters pit that opens through wall P.29, covered the foundation pit (fig 24). Not as wide as the mausoleum, this pit was dug in the layer of loose gravel and has its sides protected by mud bricks running on 4 or 5 courses (M.28). the looters pit has upset the filling of the foundation pit. The grave pit has not been excavated.

P.36 This small grave of 2.75m sides, is situated West of P.11 from which it is separated by a narrow space of 0.25cm (PI.VIIIb). It was built of mud-bricks (38x38cm), some whole and some laid by halves. The central part of this structure is quite damaged, destroyed by the susal looter’s pit, which opened at level S.16. the outer limits of a foundation pit dug through level S.37 are visible on the periphery of the structure. A rapid sounding through wall M.35 showed that the filling of the foundation pit was made of mortar and mud bricks laid flat. The inner filling and the grave pit not been excavated.

P.21 This is the only grave we have almost completely excavated (PI.IXb). slightly larger than the ones above (4.25m side), it is built of mud-bricks and has no coating on the outer walls. The outer limits of the foundation pit, dug through level S.25, are visible on the periphery of the structure. As in the case of P.36, the foundation pit goes beyond the limits of the mausoleum (fig.19). The filling is made of mud-bricks, laid flat, and mortar. The excavation of the looter’s pit, which opens at level S.16, has allowed us to reach the grave pit P.33. sub-rectangular in shape (2.40m N.S × 1.50m E.W), P.33 was dug in the white marl which forms the virgin soil beneath the layer of fluviatile loose gravel. The excavation of this grave has allowed a clear view of the method of construction of the graves: 10 digging the foundation pit; 2) digging and preparing the grave pit; 3) filling the foundation pit; 4) building the mausoleum. The bottom of the foundation pit, or just the top of the grave pit, os covered with a thin layer of charcoals and ashes which are also found on the upper rim of the side walls of the grave pit.

P.20 Situated between P.5 and P.21, this structure was destroyed on the West side by the looters pit (PI.VIIIa). It is built of mudbricks preserved on 5 courses, and it measures 3.50m on each side. There is no coating on the outside walls.

Third Report 55 The limits of the foundation pit, dug through level S.25 are visible around the perimeter of the mausoleum (fig. 19). The section at the base of M.15 shows the limits of this pit very clearly (section C-D-E) starting at the gravel layer of about 20 cm thickness, which lies on level S.25. contrary to the previous ones, the foundation pit was not filled up with mortar and bricks, but with the refuse earth from the digging (fig.23). The grave pit itself was not excavated this season.

P.5 Previously excavated by the Iraqi team, this grave was only checked over (fig.19; PI.VIIa). With the same dimensions as grave P.22 (3.75 x 3.75m), the mausoleum was erected with an outer wall which was formed of a double row of hard white bricks. The inner part of the platform has been dug out by the Iraqi excavation, but it seems there was masonry work of mud bricks mixed with white hard bricks. The foundation pit, dug in the light gravel soil down to the layer of white marl goes (5m x 4m) beyond the limits of the platform, particularly towards the South. The mausoleum was filled with layers bricks, as is shown on the section of the base of M.4 (fig. 21). On the upper rim of the side walls of the grave pit (already excavated by the Iraqi team) some traces of charcoal which seem to have been laid in the same way as in P.21 can be seen, i.e. at the bottom of the foundation pit.

Stratigraphy and relative chronology The establishment of the necropolis such as we find it, was done over a period of time, which we cannot determine at the present stage of our work. A relative chronology of the graves, can only be achieved by stratigraphy; the remains alone do not allow a precise dating of the structures (cf. infra). The two graves that seem to be the oldest ones are situated on the East side of the graves P.11 and P.22; the base of their coated walls lies at about 30 cm below level S.26. this level is at the same depth as level S.25 through which the foundation pits of the graves P.20 and P.21 were dug. P.20 and P.21 were therefore built later than P.11 and P.22. moreover the foundation pit of P.20 was dug through a gravel layer lying on level P.25. Hence, it would seem that grave P.20 is slightly more recent than the previous above ones. It previous foundation pit goes through level S37, more recent than S26 and very close in certain places to level S16 which corresponds to the surface of the mound at the time of

56 Third Report the looting. The construction of P36 is therefore more recent than the construction of P.1, P.22 and P.21, and later or contemporaneous to P.20. The relative dating of grave P.5 is questionable. Any stratigraphic relationship to P.20 is impossible to establish, as the Iraqi excavation dug out the soil and the archaeological layers East of the structure. At most we can note that the base of the mausoleum of P.5 is 10 cm above that of the mausoleum of P.20 which was slightly underground. Level S7, which goes up the wall of P.20, is the same level as S8 which rises up the Western wall of P.5. West of P.5, the wall M.12, made of mud bricks and which is badly damaged, goes along a sandy ditch. By associating it to a perpendicular alignment of mud bricks this wall might be the remains of a grave which is more recent than level S8 which in turn is more recent than the construction of P.5. From the relative chronology of the graves it will be possible to start studying the architectural evolution, after a larger number of structures has been excavated. It would seem, from what we have already seen, that in the oldest graves, the mausoleum goes beyond the limits of the foundation pit and covers it completely. Thus P.22 and P.11, which also have in common the white coating that protects the outer walls, are the only graves where the outline of the foundation pit is not visible beyond the walls of the mausoleum.

Material The dug out material consists mainly of fragments of weapons (for some examples see fig.33). The excavation of mound C yielded 133 objects, 67 of which are fragments of arrowheads (50.4% of the material) and 25 fragments of Iron blades (18.8% of the material), the total amount of iron objects represents 70.6% of the material. The fragments of bronze vessels (11 pieces fig.33), of alabaster vessels (fig.33) (9, among which 4 lids that closely resemble those found at Qaryat al-Faw (in Saudi Arabia, al-Ansary 1982: 74-75), glass vessels (3) and the beads (6:2 of which are in gold) give us an idea of the luxury of the life. It is to be noted that the major part of the vessels fragments were found on the East side of the excavation and come from the clearing out of structures P.21 and P.22. in spite of the large amount of fragments of weapons found in the grave pit (P.33) of P.21, this area did not yield a large amount of weapons, compared to the quantity of fragments of arrowheads and blades found on the Western side which, however, has already been partly excavated by the Iraqis. It is also be noted that the arrowheads, often found whole, show 5 or 6 different types which will have to be defined accurately. It would seem that the different types can be related to certain graves and not to others. For example, the arrowheads found West of

Third Report 57 P.20 and around P.55 are rather short and thick and such a type was not found on the Eastern side of the excavated area. Also, the majority of the arrowheads discovered in the grave pit P.33 of the grave P.21 are of a particular design which is not found in any of the other graves: long and flat, they have the maximum width towards the point. The pottery gathered over an area of more than 300m² is poot. No complete vases and very few sherds were found in the tombs (the most import one is illustrated in fig. 37: 7-10), but one must take into account the fact that all the graves we know have been looted. The sherds found on the surface layer must be carefully considered because nothing goes to indicate that they are just rejects that the looters threw away. Amongst the rest of the pottery, the number of amphora fragments is remarkable, either gazed or fine pink pottery or the common type with a brown/red slip. The fine pink pottery amphoras (even more abundant on site F) are probably Western imports or imitation of Western amphoras, it must be remembered that two rhodian amphora stamps were found in 1974 during the dig at tomb P.5 (Madhloom 1974: Salles 1980). We were unable to date the material as a whole, but certain objects of note allow us to place chronological marks: - Glazed pottery, probably later than the beginning of 3rd century B.C. the same goes for Western type amphorae of the fine pink clay. - The two amphora stamps found in 1974 are dated from the end of the 3rd or beginning of the 2nd century B.C. (the stamp found this year on site F is from the beginning of 2nd century B.C). - Several types of iron arrowheads can be compared to those found at Samad in the Sharqiyah and at Failaka. In both cases, the dates put forward are later than 300 B.C (Weisgerber 1982 fig.11 Vogt 1984 fig.5 Salles 1984 fig. 45, 219-220). - The alabaster lids have been compared to those from Qaryat al-faw in Central Arabia, but we have no precise dating. We do know however, that the site was occupied during the first centuries of the Christian era (Al Ansary 1982). These precise data point to a dating which at the earliest is placed in the 3rd century and more likely the 2nd century B.C. but they do not indicate a more recent chronological mark. Perhaps more will be found but is equally possible that the cemetery was not used for a very long time. A social and/or chronological distribution of the graves could probably be done by studying the distribution of the material in the area. But such data would have to be re-

58 Third Report analysed when all the graves have been excavated in the same way, excluding the material found in the destruction layers between the mausoleum, under level S.16 which was the surface level at the time of the looting.

Area D At the West of the main road, in a cultivated field (a.”farm”), a 3x5m sounding was carried out on the site of a long wall, which is quite visible on the surface (see fig.12). After three days, we were obliged to stop the excavation, which was make impossible because of the humidity brought about by permanent irrigation. This very short fieldwork did not evidence any part of a building but it is more likely an outer wall, which could have enclosed an agricultural area.

Area F This area is located as area D in the same “farm” 80m to the West (fig. 12). At first, we only planned a test sounding at a place where pottery sherds and numerous fragments of white bricks have been brought to light by a bulldozer (PI.Xa). Given the interest of the remains the excavations were later extended over more than 150m² and lasted until March 30. The excavation has uncovered four pits dug into the ground and surrounded by what could have been outlets into irrigation (?) channels. Here we probably have a complex system for stocking water or liquids, similar to those known through narratives and drawings of both ancient and modern travellers. On the North part the pits P.207 and P.204 form a whole, which we should distinguish from the two pits, P.208 and P.205, situated South of C.203 (see fig. 26-27: PI.Xb-XIa).

P.204 This is the first pit that was found, below a sandy area. Like the other pits, P.204 was only partially excavated. We do not know its exact dimensions. A row of large stones forms a limit to a quadrangular shape. 4.75m long on the South side. This boundary is the extremity of the well. A floor, made of mudbricks (38x38cm), with a width of 0.60m to 1m, separates the stone frame from the opening of the pit itself. This is cut into the white marl at a depth of 1m below the level of the brick floor. The marl visible on the East and South faces of the well, alternates with two fluviatile layers of compact gravel. At the flat bottom of the well. 2.80m, down from the level of the mud brick parapet wall, there is a small trench dug in the shape of a bean and approximately 10cm deep (PI.XIb). On the

Third Report 59 North side, a rough covering wall of mud bricks placed on the stones reduces the width of the well and because of this we could not reach the original Northern face of the well. This construction is of a later date to that of the well itself and lies on a sand filling of 30 to 40 cm thickness. The filling up to P.204 (mainly sand) (fig.29) is a result of the structure having been neglected. Nothing points to an intentional filling in.

P.207 Situated to the West of P.204, this pit presents very similar characteristics to those of P.204. The two should be associated. The outer edge, marked by a row of stones, forms a square 5.5m of the side (limits clearly recognizable to the West and to the South). A floor, made of mudbricks, separates the outer stone rim from the opening of the well itself. We did not reach the side walls of this well, but the flat bottom, cut into the white marl, is at the same depth as the bottom of P.204, i.e. 2.60m below the level of the mud bricks floor. The filling up of the well with sand does not seem to have been intentional. This structure was only rapidly uncovered on the surface and the well has only been excavated down a trench of 2.5x0.5m.

P.205 Situated to the South of P.204, this pit is surrounded by C.203 to the North, by C.202 to the East and by C.211 to the West which separates it from the well P.208. like the precedent pits dug into the white marlgand fluviatile layers, its flat bottom is at the same level as those of P.204 and P.207. A covering wall of seven courses of stones set in mortar, strengthens the upper sides (fig.28). This covering is bordered by the channels set in the exact pattern as the limits of the pit which measures 4.75x4.75 m. its Northern and Southern limits were verified from two later smaller pits which were dug into the brick platform which seals the well. On the top of the sand filling (0.80m to 1m deep), a protective cover of horizontal layers of mudbricks was laid. This intentional packing in of the space in the pit has transformed it into a hard floor area slightly higher than the brick floor of the pits P.204 and P.207.

P.208 Bordered by the channels C.203, C.202,C.210 and C.209, P.208 opens West to pits P.205 to which it must be connected. One can guess that the channel border follows exactly the

60 Third Report limits of the pit like in P.205 and therefore P.208 is nearly square, measuring about 4.50m on each side. A North-South trench 3mx0.50m long, opened in its center, allows access to the flat bottom situated at the same depth as that of the other pit (that is exactly 3m below the present surface), and in this flat bottom, is dug a small ditch similar to that of P.204. The Northern wall, presents a face of mud brick courses in the upper part which is partly destroyed (see fig.30); it lies on a white marl layer. These mudbrick layers serve the same purpose as the stone layers of P.205. like P.205, this well was deliberately packed up with bricks and mortar which lies on top of the accumulated sand, at a depth of about 1-1.20m, filling the pit bottom (see fig.30).

The channels Concerning the channels, the wall plaster is 2 to 8 cm thick, made up of a mortar very similar to the material used for the white bricks. In some cases the plaster is preserved up to 35-40cm. The floors of the channels are not plastered, but thin layers of earth hardened by running waters rest upon a rough Filling of bricks. The built-up sides rest on large stones which serve as upper walls of the wells P.205 and P.208 and which no doubt, allowed these canals to be higher. C.202 (40 to 50 cm in width) is the only channel with both walls plastered (PI.XIa): oddly enough, the others only have one side carefully plastered (still visible). A second N-S channel, C.211 parallel to C.202, almost unexplored, seems to divide P.205 and P.208. C.203 does not have mortar strengthened sides to the North. At the present stage of the excavation, it is impossible to determine whether or not this wall existed before the development of the wells P.204 and P.207; if did not, then this is not a proper ancient channel (PI,Xb,XIa,XIIa). It is to be noted that the excavation of C.210 to the South of P208 did not reveal any wall constructed parallel to the bordering the well either. All the areas which we call channels were deliberately filled in. an irregular filling of hard white broken bricks brought their level up to the height of the stone limits of the pits P204 and P.207 and that of the platform of Pits P.205 and P.208. Finally, the presence of a small pit (P.206) made of hard, white halfbricks and of the same date as the installation of the channel sides should be noted. This pit 0.75 x 1m, is connected to the well P.205 and is situated exactly at the center of its Northern side. Symmetrically, the remains of similar pit (P.212) are found in the middle of the Northern face of the pit P.208 connected in the same way to the wall (in white mortar) bordering this well.

Third Report 61 At present stage of the dig, not exact interpretation can be put forward. However, two stages of utilization can be defined. Although all the pits could have been constructed at the same time, the use of these pits did not occur over the same time period. The pits P.208 and P.205 were deliberately filled up before P.204 and P.207 were abandoned (fig.30). On the other hand different ground arrangements separate the two groups: 1) Mud-brick floor and stone border in both P.204 and P.207. 2) Built walls in the upper part and presence of basins (P.212, P.206) in the group P.205, P.208. One hypothesis, can be formulated. If they were connected to a major well the pits P.208 and P.205 stocked the waters which were distributed through the channels. There could be a third pit to the East of P.205 connected to this structure. After being abandoned during which period the pits filled up with sand these pits were carefully plugged up transforming them brick platforms at the same time two new pits slightly different were dug to the North P.204 P.207 the ancient channels having blocked up with white hard broken bricks. After having been used for some time, P.204 was modified, its opening being reduced by the elevation of the brick and stone walls next to its Northern side. The wells P.207 and P.204 were in turn abandoned and eventually filled up naturally. It remains to be determined why the ancient pits were filled in only for new ones to be dug again, or why it was necessary to reduce their numbers. In any case, it seems the wells served the same function: their bottoms are all at the same depth, their size is approximately equal (see fig.27*1) and the two groups have small hollows dug into, the bottom (P.204 and P.208) which served perhaps to collect the water to the last drop.

Material 115 registered objects were unearthed on the site. As on site C, the iron objects are the most common, representing 82% of the material. These are mostly arrowheads (50.4%). Most of the iron blade fragments counted (34 fragments) have only one sharp edge and could be used as much as a weapon as an agricultural implement (fig. 34, 1, 3-6: PI.XIVa). This material comes mostly from small sand pits placed at regular intervals on the site (tomb looters or ancient palm tree pits)and from the surface layers. A very small number of vase fragments (some decorated) in bronze, alabaster or glass were also excavated (fig. 34, 2, 7, 8: PP.XIIb-c).

62 Third Report Material The pottery found in the pits and in the surface layer is scarce compared to the amount or other objects found pottery falls into only a few categories, amongst which the most note worthy is the fine pink pottery, represented by amphora fragments like those on site C. Several high vertical handle belong without doubt to import amphoras (fig. 37: 1-4 P.XIVb): the most notable one bears a stamp dated by Y.Calvet from the beginning of the 2nd B.C century and which comes from the island of Rhodes (see Y.Clavet’s report below). The most striking element of the material is the close similarity between the types of objects and materials found on site F and those from site C. this similarity conveys without doubt doubt a contemporaneous occupation of the two sites, but curious that these same objects have been used in two areas for two very different reasons,seeing that one has a necropolis, the other a functional settlement which may have been linked to agriculture or craftsmanship. Area F belong to the same period as Area C, but its function is still to be understood. The remains are not yet completely excavated and are sometimes badly preserved. Before suggesting any interpretation, we will compare them to other examples known elsewhere in the near East. We may assume that these remains are related to water (storage or distribution), but why and how the water was used remain the fundamental question. It must be said that the excavations were stopped before reaching an end, because any protection barrier was impossible to obtain rapidly. The sensible decision to stop the programme left many questions pending.

Conclusions The remain of this first excavation mission in Mleiha are very satisfactory: - The remains which were discovered clearly showed, if indeed there was need of confirmation, the importance that should be granted to the protection of this site. This aspect concerns the authorities of the Emirate who have a complete understanding of the situation. This expedition brought about results and allows us to have a better understandings of the problems facing us in this area. The results concern the chronology and the types of activity during the occupation of the site. We have an idea of relative chronology, which would indicate that the occupation began before real contact was made with Western Cultures (as the Greek amphora show) or

Third Report 63 “hellenised” Mesopotamian ones (e.g.glazed pottery). Sites A and B illustrate this aspect, whether it be before or contemporaneous to the necropolis of site C. We hope to establish, in the near future, a transition between the Iron Age in the Peninsula, which has now been defined in the better manner, and the “Hellenistic” period which is almost exclusively illustrated by the two sites of Mleiha and Ed-Door. In comparison to this last site we are tempted to date the principal occupation of Mleiha slightly earlier, this is because of the scarcity of the pottery and total lack of decoration on this pottery. In a contrary manner, evidence of the third century occupation at Ed-Door is scarce. The 1986 dig also has brought to light the fact that the tomb excavated in 1974 was not an isolated one but was one of many monuments, perhaps several dozen according to the site C topography. Finally, the enigmatic structures excavated on site F might allow us better understanding of what the bases of the economy were at Mleiha, whether they be agricultural (which is quite probable) or they be associated to handicraft, which the iron fragment abundance hints at. These results and these hopes reveal the major problems which we should be able to begin to solve during the next excavation season: chronological problems, which themselves, are minor problems if they were not connected to the cultural and technical evolution of the region’s populations from the end of the first millenium B.C. transition from bronze workings, from decorated chlorite ware to vases made of different materials; the shape and the absence of decoration, the disappearance of painted pottery (which doubtlessly happened before glazed pottery came on the scene and perhaps the two are not connected); the type of tombs which were used, because the tombs from the Iron Age (as yet not well known) having nothing to do with the blocks of masonry from site C. Questions concerning the type of site occupation are equally important. The study of the distribution of the remains by means of surveys makes the interpretation a difficult task. On almost flat and vast ground like that of Mleiha, the implantation of different structures and the concentrations of certain types of objects are almost certainly not just a coincidence. The results of the excavations indicate which way future research should be directed concerning occupation displacements and/or habitation distributions, working areas and graves. This research must be carried out win the collaboration of different specialities because the excavation alone cannot provide the answers to all of these questions.

64 Third Report References

- AL ANSARI (A.R.) 1982 Qaryat AL Faw, University of Riyadh. - AL QAYSI (R.) 1975 “Archaeological Investigations and Excavations at the State of the U.A.E Arabian Gulf”. Summer XXXI.P.75-157. - BOUCHARLAT ( R) and LOMBARD (P) 1985 “The Oasis of Al Ain in the Iron Age. Excavations at Rumeilah 1981-83. Survey at Hili 14”. Archaeology in the United Arab Emirates. IV. P44-73. - DE CARDI (B) 1971 “Archaeological Survey in the Northern Trucial States” East and West 21. P.225 – 228. - DE CARDI (B) 1976 “Ras al Khaimah”: Further Archaeological Discoveries. Antiquity. Vol. 50, P.216-222. - DE CARDI (B) 1984 “Ras al Khaimah, U.A.E. “ Arabie orientale mésopotamie et Iran méridional de l’âge du Fer au début de la periods islamique. R.Boucharlat & J-F Salles eds. Paris. P.201-215. - MADHLOOM (T) 1974 “Excavations of the Iraqi Mission at Mleiha. Sharjah, U.A.E”. Sumer XXX.P. 149-158. - SALLES (J-F) 1984 Failaka. Fouilles françaises 1983. Travaux de la Maison de l’Orient. n*9 Lyon. - VOGT (B) 1984 “1st mill. Graves and Burial Customs in the Samad Area (Oman)”, Arabie orientale, Mésopotamie et Iran méridional…., P. 271-284. - WEISGERBER (G) 1982 “Aspects of Late Iron Age Archaeology in Oman The samad- Civilization”. Proc. of the seminar of Arabian studies. P.81-93.

Third Report 65 INSCRIPTION FROM THE MLEIHA REGION

(by C.Robin)

Concerning the “stone” inscription which was found several years ago this text is hitherto unknown. It is not the document mentioned by J.C.Wilkinson, Water and Tribal Settlement, 1977. P.135, note 6, translated by Beeston (who sent the exact transcription to me). My preliminary deciphering is not very precise because it was quite difficult to read. Several indications suggest that the funeral inscriptions written in South arabian from Hasa (saudi Arabia) date from the “Hellenistic” era (3rd - 1st century B.C.). differences in the palaeography allow us to distinguish two periods. As for the Mleiha text, it seems likely that is the same era. If we can go on the shape of the letters (which is uncertain as the graphics have been carelessly written) especially the open mim from the line 3 or the waw which is quite small in line 1. I would be inclined to classify this text in the second period (2nd - 1st cent.). This is of course hypothetically. A date as early as the 5th or 4th cent. B.C. seems unlikely; on this subject. I completely disagree with T.C Mitchell (and irvine), but at the risk of repeating myself, the conclusions made with the palaeography could be wrong; we are reconstructing logical evolutions which do not necessarily correspond to what really happened. We are waiting for some reliable indications from the archaeologists. The letters on the small bronze bowl found at Mleiha are quite easy to read, despite the fact that they are incomplete on the photos which I have. The palaeography seems relatively old (3rd century B.C). to my knowledge, the iconography does not have an equivalent in South Arabia (hair, sword, shape, shield especially). The name Mara’shams, which is already known, has nothing extraordinary about it, except perhaps the fact that Shams (= the sun) is the great deity of Gerrha and perhaps of Eastern Arabia.

66 Third Report TABLE OF SAMPLING POINTS AND SURVEYED STRUCTURES IN 1986

n*123 to 147: shell-concentration at Hamriyah (samples) n*148: shell-concentration at Al-Qassimiya (sample) n*149: stone structure ruins (Islamic?) n*150: 5 small stone heaps (tombs?) divided into 2 groups

N.B. Site 148 is situated inside of Sharjah. By means of it partial destruction by a quarry, important shell-layers in a thick ashy layer were discovered. Although it is not in the area being studied around Hamriyah, this site was sampled in order to use it as a comparison.

- For sampling Points in 1984-85 see Report 1985 p.19 fig. 11 and 13.

- Appendix 1 p.68-69

Table 1- List of 1986 sampling points and archaeological remains.

130

120

50

20

-40 0 50 100 130

Table 2- Comparison between needle and digital displays on the EM15.

Third Report 67 450

400

7 8 =

6 9: ; <

> >=

? : @ ;

¡¥ - USI M3 / 350

300

250

01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

kEY

 

      

 VEL

 

     

¡



     

¡¥ ¡

( - USI/M ! )

¢ ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¢ ¡ £ ¦¢

¢ ¡£ ¢ ¥ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦

¢

¤

¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¡¡¥ ¦

¡¡¥ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦

§

¤ §

© ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ ¢ © ¦£

¨

¢© £ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦

¨

©

¤

¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¢ ¡ £ ¦

¨ ¨

¢ ¡£ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦

¨

¨

¤

¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¡

¨ ¨

¡ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦

¨ ¨

§

¤

§

¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¢ ¡¡¦¡

¢ ¡¡ ¡ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦

¤

£ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¢© £ ¦

¢ © £ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦

£

¤

¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¡ £ ¦

¡ £ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦¦

¤

$ , - - , 3 - - $ - - ,, - -

¡

 & &  ¨ &

"# % % ' %( )*+ (% * % * . "' / 0+1 2%1' %%( * "1 +% 04 ( (4%) 0# 0 0 / " 20 %'%+ 2 %) (

5

- - ,

& &

#%+%" % ( ' "4% 5

68 Third Report Figure 1- The Oman Peninsula: the two regions of Sharjah Emirate surveyed in 1985 and 1986 are outlined on map

ﺑﺤﺮ $ن Oman

Sea

ُﻋ

Third Report 69 Figure 2- Map of the main geographical regions Figure 2- Map

70 Third Report Figure 3- The coastal area between Ajman town (in the South) and Umm al-Qowain Emirates border (in the Distribution of sampling (1985 and 1986 surveys). In 1986, border North). points survey was concentrated in the of coastal areaNorthern part 119 114

Third Report 71 Figure 4- Al Qassimiya. Flint tools 1-3 and 7:fragments of arrowheads; 4: micro drill; 5: retouched bladelet; 6: retouched flake; 8: end-scraper; 9-10: beads (?); 11-12: unifacial pieces; 13: retouched quartz blade; 14: core; 15: burin; 16: splintered piece on a core

72 Third Report 



 

اﻟﺸﻜﻞ ((5 ) ﻣﺪرﺟﺎت وﺻﺨﻮر ﻣﻄﻤﻮرة ﻣﺎ ﺑ6 ﺳﻬﻞ اﻟﺬﻳﺪ وﺟﺒﺎل ُﻋ !ن

sand

 ColluvialCo not patinaled gravels

LowerLo we terrterrace

 Quartzone sandstone

Figure 6- The Jabal Fayah. a. Cross-section of the Northern extremity of the Jabal. b. cross-section at the foot of the Jabal

Third Report 73 B A N I Q I T A B Khasawinah

J a b a l F a y a h

0 1 Km

Figure 7- Prehistoric sites of the Jabal Faiyah where surface collecting was carried out

74 Third Report Figure 8- Tools from site P.15. 1: tanged arrowhead; 2-7: bifacial points; 8: tanged flake with inverse retouch; 9: flake with inverse retouch and partial retouch into an end-scraper

Third Report 75 Figure 9- Cores from site P.15

76 Third Report Figure 10- Tools from site P.19, 1,6 and 8: bifacial pieces; 2,3,5 and 9: end-scrapers; 4: retouched bladelet; 7: borer

Third Report 77 H A W F I R 4 Km Khasawinah B A N I Q T 0 and Jabal Fayah to the West. The grey area indicates the area covered byThe grey area indicates the covered the 1986 survey West. and Jabal Fayah to the Figure 11- Map of the Mleiha region. The marked out area shows the location of archaeological Map of the Mleiha region. Figure 11- site during the “Hellenistic” period; it is situated betweenpiedmontperiod; to the East and Jabal Mleiha site during the “Hellenistic” it is situated

78 Third Report Figure 12- Map of the Mleiha archaeological area. The letters indicate the which were and surveyed. points plotted These are flattened and/or archaeological remains (bricks, stones, sherds, etc…)bumps pottery points 0 0 0 0 0100 10 20 30 40 50 200 m p.garczynskl – Architecte (C.N.R.S) H MIEIHA 1986 – AK AL AI AM AT AJ AS AP AQ AR AO AH AF B AV T O BA AW C AZ P BB O AY S X Y AD AX AE U R AB W AC AA Z Y AG

Third Report 79 Figure 13- Mleiha 5. Levels of magnetic susceptibility.

80 Third Report Figure 14- Mleiha 6. Levels of magnetic susceptibility.

Third Report 81 Figure 15- Mleiha 7. Levels of magnetic susceptibility

82 Third Report Figure 16- Mleiha 8. Levels of magnetic susceptibility

Third Report 83 Figure 17- Mleiha 9. Levels of magnetic susceptibility

84 Third Report 1986 IHA arczynskl l g MLEIHA 1986 chantier B – 1986 chantier B 456 MLEIHA Paul garczynskl – Architeet (C.N.R.S) – Paul garczynskl

Figure 18- Mleiha, site B. Plan of the excavation. In the main trench, plan of the holes often containing copper slags. In the sounding to the West, a partially excavated well

Third Report 85 Paul garczynskl – Architecte (C.N.R.S) MLEIHA 1986 chantier B 456– 1986 Gravel Layer Marl Layer Mud-Bricks Sand

Figure 19- Mleiha, site C. Plan and section of the excavated area. Six tambs are visible, and there are traces which perhaps mark out a 7th one. Near the Eastern limit

86 Third Report Figure 20- Mleiha, site C. outline plan of the excavation indicating the position of the sections (see figure 21-25)

157.4 m 157.6 m

Figure 22- H I section to the West of P.5.

§ ¨ ¡ ¢£ ¤¥¦ ¤ Figure 21- Mleiha, site C. MNO Mudbrick or pise

section to the North-East of tomb P.5. 

   

  

¤

  

Loose black gravel (virgin)



©

! £ ¤¥¦ ¡

layer



   

  

¤

  

Compacted Black gravel



©

! £ ¡

(virgin) layer



   

 

¤  White marl (virgin) layer  









¥ ¥

 

ﺭﻝ sand



©

   ¡

Black gravel layer  Stone ¤

Third Report 87 Figure 23- C D E section to the East of P.20

Looters pit

Figure 24- J K L section to the North of P.36 and P.11

Figure 25- S T section between P22 and P.11

88 Third Report Mleiha 1986 – Area F –Area F General plan – Mleiha 1986

Figure 26- Mleiha, site F. General plan of the excavated area. To be particularly noted: 4 pits P.204, P.205, P.207 and P.208, and the channels C.203, C.202, C.211, C.209 and C.210

Third Report 89

اﻟﺸﻜﻞ (27) ﻣﻠﻴﺤﺔ: اﳌﻮﻗﻊ F اﳌﻘﻄﻊ اﻟﺠﻨﻮP - اﻟﺸ!ﱄ، اﻟﻮاﻗﻊ ﰲ وﺳﻂ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﺘﻨﻘﻴﺐ

¨

¡¢ £ ¤¥¦ ¤ §

Mudbrick or pise



     

 

 ¤

Loose black gravel (virgin)  

!



©

£ ¤ ¥¦ ¡

layer



     

 

 ¤

Compacted Black gravel  

!



©

£ ¡

(virgin) layer



     

  ¤

White marl (virgin) layer  



¥ ¥ 

ﺭﻝ sand

©

   

Black gravel layer ¡  Stone ¤ 

Figure 28- Mleiha, site F. Elevation of the Northern face of pit P.205. In the lower part, the pit is cut out of the marly and fluviatile layers only; in the upper more sandy part, it is reinforced with a wall of unhewn stones.

90 Third Report Figure 29- Mleiha, site F. South-North section in the pit P.204. the materials which fill the pit are the result of progressive accumulation of sand and mud-bricks which have fallen from the upper part. Upper left, note the mud-brick layer remains: lower right, the remaking of the Northern face rebuilt with mud-bricks and stones in the pit

Figure 30- Mleiha, site F. North-South section in the pit P.208. On top of the partial filling of sand and rubble the upper part has been filled in with several courses of mud-brick up to the ground surface.

Third Report 91 Figure 31- Mleiha, stone case sherds (n. 1-7) and glass fragment (n.8) from surface collecting and site B.

92 Third Report Figure 32- Mleiha. Vases and bronze objects from site C. the figurine n.5 was found by chance in a field

Third Report 93 Figure 33- Mleiha. Site C. Alabaster vases (n. 1-4) and iron objects

94 Third Report Figure 34- Mleiha. Site F. Iron objects (n.1, 3-6), bronze object (n.2), alabaster vase (n.7) and glass vase (n.8)

Third Report 95 Figure 35- Mleiha. Pottery from site H surface (n.1 & 6), and from sounding at site A (n.2-5, 7-11), n°.1 & 6: grey ware: 2-3: red/brown slipped ware; 5: plain ware; 4, 9-11: coarse ware; 7&8: red/brown slipped coarse

96 Third Report Figure 36- Mleiha. Site B. pottery from the main trench. 1-3: yellow glazed ware; 4: fine ware; 5-6 coarse ware; 7-8, 11, 13: plain ware; 12, 14-17: red slipped ware; 10: red slipped coarse ware

Third Report 97 Figure 37- Mleiha. Pottery from various sites. 1-4: fragments of amphora, fine pink ware; 6: fine buff ware, site F. 5: terra sigillata ring base, site AM. 7: neck of an amphora, fine pink ware; 8: plain ware; 9: red slipped common ware; 10: yellow glazed amphora

98 Third Report `A stone piece with ancient writings - from Sharjah

Third Report 99 Plate I- a. View of the section left by the quarry in the dune. Shell layers are at the summit. b. Al Qassimiya shell concentration in layer 2

100 Third Report Plate II-a. The large buttes of the Oman Mountains piedmont and their gravel cover. to the left, the elements of the high glaces. b.The middle glacis - gravel cover on marl bedrock

Third Report 101 Plate III-a. Recent glacis downstream part: reg, sandy-silky matrix and gypsum crust. b. Wadi inclusion in the recent glacis upstream

102 Third Report Plate IV- a. South Eastern part of Jabal Fayah. Long ridges and fans (left part of the photo). b. Alluvial fans of the Eastern face of Jabal Fayah. In the background, fan above younger deposits.

Third Report 103 Plate V- a. Eastern face of jabal Fayah: upper part of an olds fan showing mixed sands and angular rocks. b.On the Western face of Jabal Fayah, the old fans tend to break away from the mountainous relief

104 Third Report Plate VI - Western face of Jabal Fayah. The very high fans are the result of erosion (upstream - downstream action) and of earlier accumulation (downstream - upstream) action

Third Report 105 Plate VII - Mleiha. Site B. a. General view of virgin surface which is pierced with holes. Halfway up the right side, the mouth of the well is partly visible. b.The well partially excavated; in the background the level of the circular holes

106 Third Report Plate VIII.- Mleiha, site C. a. Western part. The tombs P.5 (already excavated in 1974) and P.20. b. Eastern part. To the left tombs P.21, P.22, P.3 and P.11 in the background

Third Report 107 Plate IX.- Mleiha, site C. a. Eastern part. Foreground, outer faces of P.22 are plastered. b. Tomb P.21 after excavation. The looters pits are visible in the foreground and in the centre

108 Third Report Plate X.- Mleiha site F.F a. The cultivation of the field has brought ancient bricks to the surface (visible in the center of the photo), but the remains are not marked by a flattened bump. b.General plan of the excavation towards N.E. in the center, the channel C.203 and the soundings on the pits P.204. P.205, P.207 and P.208

Third Report 109 Plate XI.- Mleiha, site F. a. Eastern part. In the foreground to the left is the pit P.204, behind it wide channel C.203 and the narrower channel C.202, b. A closer view of the Southern face of pit P.204. in the upper part, the face is reinforced with a mud brick wall laying on stones. Note the flat bottom which has been hollowed out again with a small elongated pit

110 Third Report Plate XII- a. Mleiha site F.F channel C.203: in the foreground a hard white brick structure which forms a small basin. b. Mleiha, modern well to the West of the main road showing the building techniques of the face.

Third Report 111 Plate XIII- a. Mleiha. Bronze figurine found by chance in a field West of the main road (site G). b. Site F. Bronze handle in the form of a horse’s fore parts.c. Site C. Alabaster lids with lugs shaped like quadrupeds.

112 Third Report