ABSTRACT WENNER, SARAH E. Petra's
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ABSTRACT WENNER, SARAH E. Petra’s Hinterland from the Nabataean through Early Byzantine Periods (ca. 63 BC-AD 500). (Under the direction of S. Thomas Parker, Jennifer Gates- Foster, Gary Mathews.) Traditionally, research on Nabataea and Roman Arabia has focused on larger cities, centers of trade, and military sites. Hinterland sites, on the other hand, remain almost completely unexcavated. This means that little is known about non-elite or non-urban life from the Nabataean through the Early Byzantine periods (ca. 63 BC-AD 500), nor is Petra’s true economic relationship with its periphery understood. When extensive excavation is impossible, surveys provide the best remedy for this knowledge gap, identifying smaller villages and even single farmsteads, examining field and water-management systems, and tracing general changes in landscape use over time. All three topics are being explored by a Dutch-Jordanian team currently surveying the area around Udhruh, 15 km east of Petra in southern Jordan. In ca. AD 300, the Roman army built a legionary fortress for legio VI Ferrata in Udhruh, but the site’s history began long before its construction, with significant occupation beginning in the Nabataean era. In the 1980s a British team led by Alistair Killick conducted a regional survey and excavated both the fortress and an associated pottery kiln, the latter only briefly mentioned in preliminary reports. A final report from this project was never published and, as a result, little is known about the site, which is now experiencing rapid development. Partially in response to this growing threat, a Dutch-Jordanian team began an ongoing survey in 2011. This thesis uses ceramic data collected by the Udhruh Archaeological Project and other regional surveys, as well as other archaeological and documentary evidence, to address changes in land use within Petra’s hinterland between the Nabataean and Early Byzantine periods. It includes an analysis of various survey methodologies, a critical examination of recent surveys in Petra’s hinterland, and a historical and archaeological study of diachronic change in Udhruh’s settlement patterns from the Nabataean to the Early Byzantine periods using original survey data. On this basis, it becomes clear that Petra had an intimate relationship with the marginal desert environment, which in turn was connected not just to the Nabataean kingdom’s core but also to the eastern Roman Empire based on the presence of fine wares and amphorae in Petra’s hinterland. Upon Rome’s annexation of Nabataea, it was not only Petra but also the hinterland that contracted, reflecting the close relationship between the Petra region and the larger Roman Empire. Petra’s declining population only accelerated the process of nucleation that likely existed already in the Nabataean period. When Udhruh’s legionary fortress was constructed ca. 300, the new urban city (later called Augustopolis) drew inhabitants away from the former Nabataean capital towards Rome’s eastern frontier and back into Petra’s hinterland. © Copyright 2015 Sarah E. Wenner All Rights Reserved Petra’s Hinterland from the Nabataean through Early Byzantine Periods (ca. 63 BC – AD 500) by Sarah E. Wenner A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of North Carolina State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts History Raleigh, North Carolina 2015 APPROVED BY: _______________________________ _______________________________ S. Thomas Parker Jennifer Gates-Foster Committee Chair _______________________________ Gary Mathews BIOGRAPHY Sarah E. Wenner graduated from the Honor’s College at Albion College in 2010 with a double major in Economics & Management and Anthropology, with an emphasis on archaeology. She minored in Dance and explored the intersection of dance and archaeology for her Honor’s thesis, for which she received the Edmund and Kathleen Jenkins Honors Thesis Award. After working for two years as a Market Analyst in Madison, Wi, Sarah began a Master’s program under the guidance of S. Thomas Parker and began a study of Classical languages. She also had the opportunity to begin an intensive study of southern Jordan’s Classical era ceramic tradition with Parker’s materials from his 1994-2003 excavation of Roman Aila. This allowed her to join the Dutch-Jordanian team surveying Udhruh as the ceramicist in 2013 and 2014, when she also reviewed the 2011 material. After graduation, Sarah will enter the University of Cincinnati’s PhD program in Classics, with an emphasis on Classical Archaeology. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This thesis would not have been possible without the help and support of so many individuals. Thank you to my lab and MA friends—Pamela Koulianos, Tiffany Key, Jesica Jayd Lewis, Russell Gentry, Ashley Jones, Lindsay Holman, Anna Hendrick, CJ Rice, Alex Zarley, and Chris Mansfield—who not only helped me learn the RAP pottery but who also looked at countless papers and abstracts; Leigh-Ann Bedal and Jennifer Ramsey, who gave me my first dig experience in Petra and have continued to support my scholarship since; Helen Dixon, who always found time to review my materials and provide direction when I needed it; Gary Mathews, who helped me struggle through Greek and work though every other translation; Jennifer Gates-Foster, who helped me decipher my survey results and provided wonderful mentorship throughout the PhD application process; Mark Driessen and Fawzi Abudanh, who welcomed me onto their project and always answered my questions, no matter how many I asked; my parents, who learned more about Petra’s ceramics then they ever wished; S. Thomas Parker, who pushed me farther than I thought I could go and made me grateful for the process every step of the way; and most especially Andrew Maximiuk, who always provided encouragement, clarity, and sense, even when I wasn’t ready to hear it, and who continues to support me with grace in everything I do. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................... vi Chapter I: Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 The Primary Sources .......................................................................................................... 2 Thesis Structure .................................................................................................................. 9 Chapter II: Survey Methodology and its Role in the Roman World ............................... 11 Braudel, Binford, and Survey .......................................................................................... 12 Survey Concerns ............................................................................................................... 15 Survey Design .................................................................................................................... 23 Survey Models ................................................................................................................... 23 Representative/Probability/Systematic Sampling .......................................................... 29 The City and the Survey ................................................................................................... 31 Udhruh’s Survey Methodology ........................................................................................ 33 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 36 Chapter III: Previous Surveys of Petra’s Hinterland ....................................................... 38 Historiography .................................................................................................................. 39 The Umm Rattam Survey ................................................................................................ 45 The Jabal ash-Shara Survey ............................................................................................ 52 The Nabataean Period of the Jabal ash-Sharah Survey .................................................. 55 The Roman and Early Byzantine Periods in the Jabal ash-Sharah Survey ..................... 59 Wadi Musa Salvage Excavation and Survey .................................................................. 60 Bayda .............................................................................................................................. 64 Umm Sayhun .................................................................................................................. 68 Wadi Musa ...................................................................................................................... 68 At-Tayyiba ...................................................................................................................... 77 Qa’................................................................................................................................... 78 Finnish Jabal Haroun Survey .......................................................................................... 81 Bir Madhkhur ................................................................................................................... 94 The Petra Area and Wadi Silaysil Survey ...................................................................... 96 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 105