The current project of the German Archaeological Oman Expedition, „ A Structuring of the Iron Age in Eastern Arabia", developed out of a previous interest for the Iron Age and more particularly, the L I A in the Sultanate2. Such excavations took place mostly in the late 1980's and early 1990's at Samad al Shan in the Eastern Central Province, the Sharqlyah. The overall goal of the current project is to refine the relative and abso-lute chronology of the Iron Age with the help of settle-ment contexts which we consider to have existed over a limited time span. More particularly, four problem areas for our project were determined:
First, the Sultanate, as large as the old Federal Re-public of Germany, encompasses some 250.000 km2. The majority of the research has taken place in Central Oman.
To the north, excavation has centred on the Hafit3, Umm an Nar4, and Wadi Suq Periods5. Information on the Lizq/
Rumaylah Period (Early Iron Age = EIA)6 derives from these two eponymous sites, on the one hand in Central
Oman, and the other in the United Arab Emirates. Both were investigated in the early 1980s7. In Central Oman most of the evidence for dating the Iron Age reveals it-self from a time between 0 and 900 A.D., being its later part following the onset of the Samad Culture8. With the exception of Suhar, in the north next to nothing is known
1 Our 15th season was made possible by a grant from the Fritz Thyssen Foundation granted to Paul Yule. Suggestions and correc-tions in the text were contributed by B. Salje, B. Vogl, P. Larscn, and K. Sachsenberg. The team consisted of three groups. Members of the first team (P. Yule, P. Eckcrle, C. Falb, K.-J. Rommel, J.
Schreiber) arrived on the 6th and 13th of February. The team was in the Field 44 days from 17 February to 31 March. A. Morwood, an expatriate resident, joined the staff of our excavation at ul Maysur.
A second team consisting of G, and A. Weisgerber, J, Cicrny, T.
Klaus, A. Maas, and O. Sprave carried out investigations in Rflki 2 from 28 February to 22 March. On the 3rd of March a third group consisting of F. Begemann, A. Hauptmann, M. Prange, and S.
Schmilt Strecker conducted a brief sampling campaign on prc-Is-lamic copper metallurgy. The projects of the teams ended respec-tively on April 8th, March 30th, and March 10th. While in the capital area, we used the Ministry flat in al Ghubrah as our base. We rented a house in Sulaif and another in al Ma'mQrah/Samad al Shan.
At the end of the excavation season the first team studied finds in the department for 8 further days. We were pleased to welcome M.
Ibrahim (al Khod), C. ROsch (Wiirzburg), a group of visitors from the Oman Historical Association, and Dr. A. al Shanfari, Director General of Archaeology, who visited the site.
2 The discovery and definition of Central Oman's Late Iron Age:
G. Weisgerber 1981, 174-263; idem 1982, 81-93; P. Yule and B.
Kazenwadel 1993, 251-277; P. Yule 1994, 527 Fig. 4 below, 528-544; idem in press,
3 P. Gentelle and K. Frifelt 1989, 119-126.
4 B. de Cardi - S . Collier - D.B. Doe 1976, 101-187; K. Frifelt 1975, 329-423.
5 A.A.B. al Shanfari and G. Weisgerber 1989, 17-30.
6 This term indicates the wide distribution of this assemblage over North-west, Central and less so South Oman.
7 R. Boueharlat and P. Lombard 1985, 44-73; S. Kroll 1981, 226-231. Kroll's new text has been prepared for publication.
8 Potentially problematic is the question whether it is appropri-ate to speak of a prehistoric LIA in Central and South Oman. First
$uhar had a partly literate Christian population. While Islam ex-isted in $flhar and perhaps Samfl'il I the question remains whether literacy had any real currency. With the spread of Islam in the 9th and 10th eenturies in Oman, and with the availability of the Qur'fln one can speak at least of a literate minority. The earliest available texts are fiqh texts of about this time. Therefore much of Oman was prehistoric for example the way Scandinavia was until the begin-ning of the Viking Period. The terms ..Hellenistic/Parthian", useful in the north-west, are ill-suited for Central Oman which needs to be discussed in its own terms. In short, there is no Mediterranean and little visible Persian influence in the archaeological record of Cen-tral Oman at this time.
98 Studies in the Archaeology of the Sultanate of Oman
from the terminal Wad! Suq until Islam9. Regional and chronological differences which must be sorted out, are manifest in the Lizq/Rumaylah pottery.
Second, the semi-historical national epoch, the-Kashf al Ghumma, recounts the emigration of tribes from the Yemen to Central Oman. Without clarifying the chro-nology of the archaeological periods in the Sultanate, there is no way to correlate them archaeologically with the arrival of the tribes: Are the migrating tribesmen the population of the Samad Culture, and does their arrival coincide with its onset? To date, no plausible explana-tion has been presented neither for the demise of the Lizq/
Rumaylah Culture after 300 B.C., the rise of the Samad Culture, nor for the transition between them. It therefore is now especially fitting to study this problem with a new stratified ceramic material.
Third, only since sufficient radiocarbon determina-tions became available in 1993, has the chronology of the Samad Culture become known. But its beginning is neither secured in terms of antiquarian parallels nor ra-diocarbon dates. One solution to this problem is to con-firm its onset by means of an investigation of a settle-ment, as an alternative to the present chronology which is based on grave architecture and grave inventories.
Fourth, the Samad Culture and its distinctive pottery are concentrated in the northern part of the Sharqlyah and in Dakhllyah, particularly near Nizwa. Until recently, the distribution seemed to end to the south with the Wahlba sands, although a few years ago such pottery was excavated at Ra's al Hadd and al WafI'0. Since there is no desert barrier to the north of Central Oman, the border here is not defined geographically, but rather in terms of datable sites and finds. The distribution of the recently published finds and sites in the present-day United Arab Emirates (North-west Oman) into the north-ern part of the Sultanate requires clarification. A key problem centres on the nature of the Iron Age in the north-ern part of the Sultanate because the few excavations are located in adjacent areas, and are little published.
The question remains open as to the nature of the culture in the northern part of the Sultanate coeval with the Samad Culture/Period of Central Oman. We also sought to shed light on the technique of copper produc-tion during Oman's Iron Age. Over the years work on this topic illuminated the metal production of the Early Bronze Age, the Early Iron Age, and the Medieval Pe-riod (8th-10th century A.D.), but that of the L I A remains undefined. Indications exist that the size of the slag cakes increased, and that there must have been some accom-panying development in the metallurgy.
Cultural resource management of archaeological monuments plays a key role in the selection of the sites which we excavate. The authors have pointed out
sev-eral times that nowadays in the Sultanate even remote places are subject to stone robbing and destruction due to building activities. Many of the places investigated by our Mission in former years subsequently have been damaged, or now exist only in our photographs. The sites selected for investigation recently were damaged, face gradual and/or imminent destruction, and cannot be pro-tected. In a few years time the archaeological sources will thin out, will yield fewer results, and for this reason will become more expensive. But one of the advantages of the northern region in our work, is that it is not as densely settled as Central Oman. For this reason archaeo-logical sites there have a better chance for survival.
Al Maysar
Excavation began again this year on two sites close to one another, both 1 km north of the village al Maysar (Fig. 1). The village has doubled its area in the past 10 years and has extended over the southernmost part of the settlement M43. As a result of the rebuilding of the falaj to al Maysar in 1992, more than a dozen of the
grave mounds just west of M43 hill 01 (Fig. 2) were bulldozed, but surprisingly most of the known setdement mounds still remained intact. M43 consists of some 44 mounds. In the next 10 years the present-day village will have covered the entire ancient settlement.
Both M42 and M43 lie alongside the falaj which to-day supplies the village of al Maysar. The falaj origi-nated to supply the Early Iron Age settlement M42. Dur-ing this period the water table fell, the floor of the falaj was deepened and its end exited a few hundred metres to the south and deeper than M42 at the site of M43. A cross section drawing made above the new falaj at a point between M42 and M43 shows the possible position of the original one lying at about 3 m below the present surface (Fig. 3). The entire structure was robbed but possibly preserved as a „ghost structure". According to local informants, the old parts of \hefalaj still in use are 3 m high inside.
In 1981 the M43 settlement was described as resem-bling beads strung on a necklace alongside the falaj".
On the strength of finds from survey and excavation, M43 mound no. 04 was dated to the Lizq/Rumaylah (1200
-For Islamic finds see the useful article of Donald S. Whitcomb:
Whitcomb 1975, 123-157. This article centres on the Sharqlyah.
10 Ra's al Hadd, pers. communication J. Reade. Al Waft: internal report of the German Archaeological Mission.
" G. Weisgerber 1981, 234-238. Falaj and qanat are the Arabic terms for the Persian Kariz. Qanat is an Arabic loan-word used in Persia.
Fig. 1 Sultanate of Oman, main Early Iron Age sites. 1 Abu Magirah, 2 al Akhdar; 3 Bahla; 4 Bandar Jissa; 5 Bawshar; 6 Bilad aIMa'din;7 Dibba; 8 al Dhurra, 9 Ghalllah; lOGhasurghas; 1] Hilf; 12 'lbri/Selme; 13alKhatt; 14Jebel Hamr;15 Jebel Qidi;
16 Jebel Salayli, 17 Lizq; 18 al Madam; 19 Magan; 20 al Maskuteh; 21 al Maysar; 22 Nud Ziba; 23 Qarn Bint Sa'ad; 24 Qidfah, 25 al Qusais, 26 RakI; 27 Ra's al Hadd; 28 Ra's Zarri 29 Rasya fi WadI Wahid; 30 Rawdah-Muqatta; 31 Rumaylah; 32 Samad al Shan; 33 al Saruj; 34 Sawir al Tuyer; 35 SH-11 (Ghail Shabul); 36 al Shew!; 37 Shimal; 38 Sur Masirah; 39 Tell Abraq; 40 WadI al Kawr; - WadI al Tayya, Bilad Tabud; 41 WadI Salh; 42 Zahra. Hatching: 500-1000 m, fine hatching 1000+ m.
• W j J l A i l (iA.J*Jl j-*ll g\
ycoUi A
100 Studies in the Archaeology of the Sultanate of Oman
Legend reference point
• Pre-lslamic grave O settlement hill
1— fragmentary wall o falai
— i track
site border wadi l':;::) Wadi Samad
t * ridge piedmont excavation 199B
A L M A Y S A R