|
|
 |
|
|
|
During the last ten years I have been collecting pits and pieces of pottery from all over Nabataea. All of the pottery shards that I have picked up have been pieces that are simply laying on the surface of the myriad ancient sites scattered around Nabataea. Most of the pottery has been Nabataean, Roman, or Byzantine. A few pieces have been Painted Edomite, and a number of them have been East African Red Pottery. My collection isn't large, but it does contain a number of interesting pieces found in some of the isolated locations around Nabataea. Recently, however, I have been brought face to face with an interesting challenge.
Indian archeologists, working in India have discovered this same African red slipped ware at the coastal site at Alagankulam. When they conducted a mineralogical analysis of this pottery however, they discovered that it originated from the Ganga Plains of North India, and not Tunisia as had been previously supposed. Dr. D. V. Gogte an Archaeological chemist of the Deccan College Research Institute has called for a further studies to be done on the so called African Red Pottery found throughout Nabataea. He feels that there is a distinct possibility that much of the pottery classified as African pottery found in Jordan could be revealed as Indian in origin.
Dr. Gogte has also pointed out some other interesting connections between India and the Nabataeans in his article Petra, the Periplus and Ancient Indo-Arabian Maritime Trade. He feels that according to the Periplus, Nabataean/Indian trade was very active in the first century AD. He goes on to say that "in spite of these references, no serious attempt has been made in the archaeological context to evaluate both spatially and temporally the trade of the Nabataeans with India. Considering the perishable nature of the trade items imported from India, the study of pottery appears to be a logical step in this direction." In other words, if the goods have disappeared, perhaps we can find a connection by looking for remnants of the pottery that was used to transport and store these goods. He goes on to state that Indian Red Polished Ware and Indian Rouletted Ware from India should be compared with pottery found in Nabataea. Those wishing to study this topic in detail should get a hold of Dr. Gogte's writings. However, we will try and summarize his findings below for those interested in just the highlights.
First of all, Identical pottery, known as Mould Ware has been
found at Petra, and also on several early historic Indian sites.
(100 BC - 200 AD). This mould ware is small, ranging in size from
4 to 6.5 cm, and was produced by joining two vertical moulded
pieces together. The vertical joint is clearly visible, running
from the rim to the bottom. The ware has different shades of red,
from bright red to brownish. The archeologist Begley (1991) has
classified this mould ware into four shapes.
1. Cup with out-turned rim
2. Straight sided bowls
3. Deep cups with two bulges
4. Bottles having bulbous body and a long next.
The most common decoration is a series of long petals radiating from the bottom part of the pottery. Other motifs consist of beads, ovals, bead and reel, and rosettes which appear between the ridges on the upper body.
The Petra mould ware was reported on by Schmitt-Korte in 1984. This pottery is different from the mould ware found at Samaria-Sebaste, and also different from Hebrew mould ware. The mould ware from Petra is identical in all respects to the pottery found in India. While this pottery is rare in Petra, it is found in large quantities in India, particularly at Ter and Kondapur. These sites were the principle settlements during the Early Historic periods of Indian History. These sites are also the same sites that Roman glass and bronzes have been found. The Periplus also tells us that all sorts of muslins and common cloth went from Ter to the harbors and marts on the coast of the Red Sea. To date, however, little physical proof of trade with India has been found within Nabataea.
 |
 |
|
|
|
Dr. Gogte ends his paper by mentioning that it would be interesting to search for Arabian pottery on the ancient sites along the coasts of India. Archeologists have noticed Mediterranean Amphorae and Arretine ware in India, but he notes that unpainted Nabataean pottery on Indian sites would be assumed to be Red Polished Ware from western India. Only mineralogical analysis could reveal their origin.
Bibliography
Ahmad, K. M. Inscribed and Riveted pottery from Kondapur, Kodapure Series 1, Hyderabad, India, 1950
Begley, V., Ceramic Evidence for Pre-Periplus Trade on the Indian Coasts, Pp 157-196, in V. Begley and R. D. De Puma (eds), Rome and India, Madison, The University of Wisconsin Press, 1991
Deshpande, M, N, Roman Pottery in India, Pp 275 - 284, in B. P. Sinha, (eds) Potteries in Ancient India, Patna, 1969
Gogte, Vishwas, D., Petra, The Periplus and Ancient Indo-Arabian Maritime Trade, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, XLII, Amman, 1999
Gogte, Vishwas, D., Chandraketugarh-Tamlik Region of Bengal: Source of the early Historic Rouletted Ware from India and Southseast Asia, Man and Enviroment XXII (1):69-85, 1997
Nagaswamy, R., Alagankulam: An Indo-Roman Trading Port. Pp 247 - 254 in C. Margabandhu, K. S., Ramachandran, A. P. Sagar and D. K. Sinha (eds) Indian Archaeological Heritage, K. V. Soundarafan Felicitation Volume., New Delhi: Agamkula, 1991
Schmitt-Korte, K., Nabataean Pottery: A typological and Chronological
Framework. Pp 7-40 in A. M. Abdalla, S. Al-Sakkar and R. Mortel
(eds), Pre-Islamic Arabia, Studies in History of Arabia II,
Riyadh: King Saud University, 1984
