POTTERY FROM JĀ M 107 POTTERY FROM JĀM: A MEDIAEVAL CERAMIC CORPUS FROM AFGHANISTAN By Alison L. Gascoigne University of Southampton with a contribution by Rebecca Bridgman University of Cambridge Abstract This paper presents preliminary results of field recording of ceramic material from Jām, Ghūr province, Afghanistan, a site which has been associated with Fīrūzkūh, the summer capital of the Ghurid dynasty. A fabric series and catalogue of forms is presented, in addition to the results of some initial scientific analyses. Comparisons have been drawn with corpora from other sites in Afghanistan, Iran and Central Asia, and the significance of the material is discussed in light of the regional and chronological significance of assemblages from this area. Keywords Jām; ceramics; Ghurids; petrology; Afghanistan I. INTRODUCTION Claude Gardin in the 1950s and early 1960s.2 In the light of this situation, one of the aims of the MJAP The Minaret of Jam Archaeological Project (MJAP) has been to initiate recording of an inevitably very was conceived in 2003 to undertake archaeological preliminary ceramic typology that will clarify the net- work at the badly looted site of Jām in Ghūr prov- works connecting the site of Jām with neighbouring ince, central Afghanistan. The project was initially regions, in addition to addressing aspects of ceramic under the auspices of the Istituto Italiano per l’Africa production and use at the site itself. Circumstantial e l’Oriente, directed by Giovanni Veradi and funded evidence for pottery production was identified among by UNESCO. The first, small-scale, season in 2003 the archaeological remains at Khar Khūj, a short dis- was designed to undertake an impact assessment for tance south of the minaret along the Jām Rūd valley. the proposed route of a road.1 The project conducted Here, we recorded a large rectangular kiln, perhaps of a second season of fieldwork under the direction of the two-stage updraught type, although the upper lev- David Thomas in 2005, comprising a larger team with els are not well preserved. Pieces of slag, one with an independent funding. During this season, thanks to the embedded sherd, were observed on the surface in the generous support of the Fondation Max van Berchem, area, although clear wasters were not seen.3 Extensive the author was able to participate as ceramicist to the marl deposits were located by geomorphologist Kevin project; this paper presents an analysis of the corpus White in the hills flanking the Jām Rūd valley, close recorded during four weeks spent at Jām in July and to the kiln. More limited deposits of fluvial clay were August 2005. also present; although too scattered to be practical In the absence of recent work in Ghūr (and very for large-scale exploitation, these may have provided limited research elsewhere in Afghanistan), no modern archaeological publications of the region’s 2 It is unfortunate that the only recent publications of Afghan ceramics have been art-historical presentations of often un- ceramic material exist. Indeed, our current knowl- provenanced material, usually in private collections. The edge of mediaeval ceramics from Afghan sites still citation of parallels from such publications is in no way in- relies almost completely on work undertaken by Jean- tended to indicate support for academic involvement with artefacts of such uncertain origins. 1 Thomas et al. 2004. 3 Thomas 2007: 134–35. Iran XLVIII 2010, 107–50 © 2010 The British Institute of Persian Studies 108 ALISON L. GASCOIGNE 2500 2400 2300 2400 2300 2200 2200 2100 23002300 2000 2100 1900 . 2000 NBHR 1900 1900 2000 ‘Bazaar’ ‘Arcade’ 1900 Minaret 20002000 2100 WBJR Watchtowers 2200 21002100 2300 2200 2200 2000 N 2100 Kiln c. 75 m Cemetery to the south 2100 0 500 m 1000 m 2000 m Fig. 1. Map of the Jām area (by David Thomas after Herberg and Davery 1976: 61). POTTERY FROM JĀ M 109 some material for more limited domestic production.4 2003); the west tower on the south bank of the Harī The evidence for ceramic manufacture at Jām thus Rūd (14 sherds); and the archaeological remains at remains ambiguous, but the balance of probabilities Khar Khūj (15 sherds). would indicate local pottery production. Fabrics were examined in the field under a ×10 hand-lens. Separate series were described for hand- made and wheelmade wares, both for convenience and II. METHODOLOGY due to the much coarser nature of the former. Seven- teen examples of the most common (primarily wheel- Jām lies on the junction of the Jām Rūd and Hārī made) fabrics were subjected to scientific analysis in Rūd, along steep, mountainous slopes which have the UK, but the current number of exported samples is been extensively plundered by looters over the past small. Two tile fragments from the site were also ana- three decades or more (Fig. 1). As a result, the sur- lysed, including a turquoise-glazed piece fallen from face pottery corpus largely consists of whatever has the minaret itself. It should be emphasised, though, been thrown down the slopes from robber holes above. that the fabric designations presented here rely largely The difficult terrain and the disturbed nature of the on classifications made in the field. [A.G.] archaeology have created circumstances that are not Permission was kindly granted by the Afghan easily conducive to controlled sampling techniques. authorities to export a small number of ceramic sam- Furthermore, limited time and the inaccessibility of ples to the UK after the 2005 season, and these were many of Jām’s archaeological features resulted in the analysed by Rebecca Bridgman.6 Petrological analysis collection of surface sherds by multiple team mem- was employed to test fabric groups established follow- bers, inevitably introducing biases into the data; col- ing hand-specimen examination. Ceramic petrology oured glazed wares in particular are over-represented uses geological criteria to characterise and classify the in the recorded corpus. It had been intended to address clay fabric of ceramic vessels using a high-powered these issues during a further season in 2007, when the microscope.7 Today, it is one of a number of scientific remaining sherds from 2003 were to be recorded and techniques employed to identify the distribution or analysed, but, due to the uncertain political situation, provenance of ceramic vessels.8 this has yet to take place. In order to carry out petrological analysis of the Pottery was collected during the cleaning of a clay fabric of a ceramic vessel, a thin section of this number of robber holes, carried out as part of the fabric must be obtained. This process involves fixing archaeological impact assessment in 2003, as well as a small fragment of pottery to a microscope slide and during the 2005 season. Recording has so far con- grinding it down until it reaches a thickness of approx- centrated on the 2005 material, although some of the imately 0.03 mm, when mineral and rock fragments backlog was also examined in order to make connec- present become transparent and can be analysed using tions between the 2003 preliminary type descriptions a petrological microscope.9 Once the thin section is and the revised ceramic recording system created in made, the fabric sample can then be classified and 2005 (see appendix below);5 the material presented described based on the identification, arrangement, here thus comprises primarily unstratified surface frequency, size, shape and composition of component finds. Both a fabric series and a catalogue of forms inclusions.10 Samples which share similar characteris- were recorded, and are presented here in the spirit tics can then be grouped together, although it should of reportage, given the unlikelihood of further work in Ghūr in the near future. Ceramic material from 6 Preparation of sections was undertaken by Julie Miller. several locations at Jām was analysed. The areas Additional analyses of the tiles were undertaken by Bruno sampled were: the mountain-top site of Kūh-i Khāra, Fabbri and Sabrina Gualtieri. A generous grant from the apparently an elite residence (113 sherds); the area Isaac Newton Trust was intended to expand this programme of the robber holes on the north bank of the Harī of research, but the cancellation of the 2007 visit to Jām has meant that no further samples have yet been exported from Rūd (150 sherds); the cleaned robber holes on the Afghanistan. west bank of the Jām Rūd (57 sherds, plus 159 from 7 Williams 1983. 8 Tite 1999: 194–95. 4 White in Thomas et al. 2006. 9 Peacock 1970: 379. 5 Thomas et al. 2004: 112–15. 10 Whitbread 1995: 368. 110 ALISON L . GASCOI GNE TABLE 1. Hand-specimen descriptions of fabrics used in the manufacture of handmade vessels. Fabric Petrological Description group HF1 1 Characterised by common, sub-angular dark red-brown inclusions.* Medium-hard, granular fabric with abundant, medium to very coarse, red-brown grains, which dominate the break. This fabric can also have secondary fine to medium grains, including white limestone; rounded sand; fine mica; fine, grey lithic pieces as HF2. Fires pink to red-brown. HF2 1 Characterised by grey lithic fragments. Medium-hard, granular fabric with abundant, medium to very coarse, sub-angular, dark grey lithic pieces, and dark brown fragments. Secondary grains include soft, white limestone; crystalline quartz; plates of mica; and red-brown, sub-angular grains as HF1. Fires beige to grey-brown. HF3 2 Characterised by unmixed clay/marl. Very hard, dense fabric with smooth texture; dominated by common, small to medium, soft beige, pale green or ginger-brown inclusions, probably unmixed clay/marl; also small amounts of cream, semi-decomposed limestone. Secondary grains include red-brown inclusions as HF1; rare mica; rare crystalline quartz; rare, fine to coarse, rounded black grains.