By Tereza Belanová

In a nutshell

The 2004 and 2006 excavations at Al-Khidr yielded a large assemblage of bitumen fragments, which were inspected in course of the digs in February and March 2006. The finds represent lumps of bituminous substance with sherds, bones, shells and a pearl. More importantly, occurrence of wide variety of impressions was attested. As for the artefactual evidence, impressions of basketry as twining, coiling, plaiting, as well as some cordage were distinguished. Of notice are few indistinctive stamp-seal imprints. Next, many impressions of plants occurred. Notably a large number of in part very fine date stones imprints, which substantially enriched our collection of plant macro-remains, are of importance. Some impressions of miscellaneous organic matters were recorded as well.

Uncovering the evidence

All bitumen finds were initially cleaned from adhering sediment with a fine brush. Impressions were identified by bare-eye and magnifying-glass inspection. In order to help recognize and classify a find, positive cast was made in white clay, which hardens in air. Results varied relative to the indistinctiveness of design or lack of detail, obviously, the method was not applied on fragile fragments. Having examined the finds, each piece was given a new number and sample details were registered.

The finds of bitumen were separated into these major groups:

• basketry, cordage and possible netting impressions,
• stamp seal impressions,
• jar stoppers made of bitumen,
• bitumen coated pottery,
• plant impressions (various reeds, palm-leaves, date stones),
• small finds in bituminous fragments, e.g. shark and bird bones, a pearl and pieces of shells,
• bituminous material with barnacles – possible boat remains.

Pre-analyzed perishable specimens impressed in bitumen comprise of basketry and cordage. Impressions of plants including date stones were left aside for further discussions with the archaebotanist in charge. Classification, terminology and definitions are based on terms outlined by Adovasio (basketry) [1] and Hurley (cordage) [10], with respect on other terms used for the same basketry techniques like Seiler-Baldinger [12], Emery [6] or Wendrich [15].

Results

Altogether 334 samples of bitumen were processed, among which 46 pieces were considered significant in regard with basketry and cordage material. Over 140 samples were carrying plant impressions, many of which were date stones. Furthermore, there were 5 impressions of stamp seal, 6 pieces with barnacles and possibly 3 jar stoppers (Fig. 1). Few solid bitumen lumps are present in this assemblage as well. Next, some remains from bitumen coating of pottery occurred. These thin lamellar fragments originate from coating of mostly large vessels; the sherds with retained bitumen coating on both inner and outer surface occurred accordingly.

Baskets were also coated from both in- and outside. A nice example of this is a coiled basket coated with bitumen found in situ in 2006 (Fig. 2). It was demolished, but nearly complete and the basket construction is well preserved (Fig. 3). Other similar pieces were recognized after having been cleaned in the laboratory. They give evidence on coiled baskets and possibly on plaited mats (Fig. 4, Fig. 5). Twining impressed in bitumen appears to be very fine, but the use of this basketry technique is not clear yet (Fig. 6, Fig. 7). Besides, some cordage is present in a smaller amount. Until now, it occurred mostly on the other side of stamp seal impressions (Fig. 8), which may be evidence of rope sealing a container. As for material for construction of basketry artefacts, various kinds of palm-leaves and reeds are proven.

The plant impressions will be closely examined during the forthcoming fieldwork season (Fig. 9). Date stones impressed in bitumen occurred in around 20 cases and can be easily compared to the pieces acquired by flotation (Fig. 10). (see palaeoenvironmental research).

Barnacles on bitumen pieces occur strictly only on one side, whereas reed impressions on the other. These remains are commonly thought to have been a part of the coating of reed-bundle boats (e.g. [2], p. 55-58, [5], [13], p. 617, [14]).

Considering the presence of bitumen and the extent of its use at Al-Khidr, it can be assumed to have been extensively used. Impressions in bitumen are unique source of knowledge about perishable materials used in Dilmun. In comparison with other sites of the Gulf region (e.g. Qala’at al Bahrain [3], [8], Saar [3], [9], [11] (Bahrain), Umm an-Nar [7] (UAE), Ra’s al-Jinz [5] (Oman), As-Sabbiyah [5] (Kuwait), see also [4]) and regarding some ethnographic parallels, we can state that bitumen at Al-Khidr served as waterproof agent and bonding material in buildings.

To sum up, bitumen coated baskets, mats, storage jars, boats and bitumen as adhesive for other domestic artefacts seem to have been very common at Al-Khidr.

Conclusion and look ahead

The 2006 bitumen research was focused on enhanced bitumen retrieval and a subsequent preliminary examination of finds by an expert on perishable-materials. The investigations resulted in amounting of an impressive and important find collection. If not for the bitumen, we would miss explicit and partly very specific evidence on basketry, cordage/netting, sailing, use of stamp seals/sealing, and on plant macro-remains.

With regard to the assemblage at hand, the forthcoming works will be aimed at:

• continuation of systematic collecting of bitumen from archaeological contexts,
• strengthening the cross-connection with palaeoenvironmental research,
• setting up classification of bitumen finds and basketry techniques,
• making use of detailed measuring and microscopic observation of the finds,
• tracking down chronological and spatial distribution of bituminous fragments at the site,
• conducting a detailed comparative research of Al-Khidr impressions with the coeval finds from the Gulf,
• study of recent basketry of the Gulf and building a modern reference collection of employed plant materials,
• analysis of bituminous substance and detecting its source,
• contributing to the research on bitumen distribution and trade in the Gulf and adjacent regions.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank to Dr. Mark Beech (Abu Dhabi Islands Archaeological Survey, UAE) for his suggestions and advice when processing the bituminous material during field campaign 2006. My thanks go to Jeffrey S. Illingworth (R. L. Andrews Center for Perishables Analysis at Mercyhurst Archaeological Institute, Pennsylvania) for discussions held on basketry impressions for the past year.

References

[1] Adovasio, J. M. 1977: Basketry Technology: A Guide to Identification and Analysis. Aldine Publishing Co., Chicago.

[2] Carter, R. 2006: Boat Remains and Maritime Trade in the Persian Gulf During the Sixth and Fifth Millennia BC. Antiquity 80, 52-63.

[3] Connan, J. et al. 1998: The Archaeological Bitumens of Bahrain from the Early Dilmun Period (c. 2200 BC) to the Sixteenth Century AD: a Problem of Sources and Trade. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 9 (2), 141-181.

[4] Connan, J. 1999: Use and Trade of Bitumen in Antiquity and Prehistory: Molecular Archaeology Reveals Secrets of Past Civilizations. Biological Sciences 354 (1379), 33-50.

[5] Connan, J. et al. 2005: A Comparative Geochemical Study of Bituminous Boat Remains from H3, As-Sabiyah (Kuwait), and RJ-2, Ra’s al-Jinz (Oman). Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 16 (1), 21-66.

[6] Emery, I. 1966: The Primary Structure of Fabrics. The Textile Museum, Washington, D.C.

[7] Frifelt, K. 1995: The Island of Umm an-Nar, Vol. 2. The Third Millenium Settlement. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXVI:2, Aarhus.

[8] Højlund, F. – Andersen, H. H. 1994: Qala’at al-Bahrain, Vol.1. The Northern City Wall and the Islamic Fortress. Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXX:1, Aarhus.

[9] Højlund, F. 1995: Bitumen-coated Basketry in Bahraini Burials. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 6 (2), 100-102.

[10] Hurley, W. M. 1979: Prehistoric Cordage: Identification of Impressions on Pottery. Aldine Publishing Co., Chicago.

[11] Killick, R. – Moon, J. (eds.) 2005: The Early Dilmun Settlement at Saar. London Archaeological Expedition, Institute of Archaeology, University College London.

[12] Seiler-Baldinger, A. 1994: Textiles. A Classification of Techniques. Smithonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.

[13] Schwartz, M. 2002: Early Evidence of Reed Boats from Southeast Anatolia. Antiquity 76, 617-618.

[14] Vosmer, T. 2000: Ships in the Ancient Arabian Sea: The Development of a Hypothetical Reed Boat Model. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 30, 235-242.

[15] Wendrich, W. 1999: The World According to Basketry. An Ethnoarchaeological Interpretation of Basketry Production in Egypt. Leiden: Research School CNWS.