Iranica Antiqua, vol.

XXXIII, 1998

CULTURAL INTERACTION AND

SOCIAL COMPLEXITY IN THE SOUTHEAST
ARABIAN IRON AGE

BY

Peter MAGEE
(University of Sydney)

Introduction
Initial perceptions of the southeast Arabian Iron Age were based largely
on its relationship with the more well-known cultures of Iran and Mesopo-
tamia (eg. Humphries 1974). In the last ten years this situation has changed
and the excavation of stratified prehistoric sites such as Tell Abraq (Potts
1990, 1991) has provided data for examining aspects of Iron Age cultural
change within frameworks constructed from local archaeological, environ-
mental and ethnographic data (Magee 1995). Regional surveys and problem-
orientated settlement excavations have also contributed by providing evi-
dence for the consequences of falaj irrigation and the social costs of irri-
gation management and control (Lombard 1991; Magee 1995: 338-344).
The role that international interaction played in cultural change in south-
eastern Arabia should, however, never be underestimated and in this brief
paper we would like to present evidence for the importation of foreign
goods into the Iron Age settlement of Muweilah and discuss the role such
objects may have played in socio-political developments.

Muweilah
Since 1994, a team from the University of Sydney has been excavating the
Iron Age settlement at Muweilah in the United Arab Emirates (Magee
1996a)1. The site is located in the most arid of all the geographical zones
in southeastern Arabia; in an area which receives less than 100 mm of

1
The excavations at Muweilah were conducted under the auspices of the Australian
Archaeological Expedition to the United Arab Emirates headed by Professor DT Potts of
the University of Sydney. This work was generously sponsored by General Motors (Dubai)
136 P. MAGEE

Fig. 1. Location of Muweilah.

rainfall a year (Fig. 1). Most of our attention has focussed on Area C
where, in the first season, remains of a large mudbrick structure were
revealed. After three seasons of excavation, the plan of the structure (Fig. 2)
reveals a complex building which underwent several phases of construc-
tion, is surrounded by a wall and contains a series of rectangular rooms.
Ceramic analysis joins with 14c data in suggesting that the building was

who have supplied invaluable financial assistance and vehicles. I would like to thank Prof.
D.T. Potts who supported the work at Muweilah and provided funds for the excavations
and the airfares to and from Sydney. The research for this report was conducted while the
author was a Visiting Postdoctoral Research Fellow in the Department of Near Eastern
Archaeology, University of Gent, Belgium. Special thanks to Susanna Billson, the expedi-
tion’s architect, who did all the architectural plans and pottery drawings.
 INTERACTION AND SOCIAL COMPLEXITY IN THE ARABIAN IRON AGE 137

Fig. 2. Area C after the third season of excavations.

destroyed sometime between 750 and 600 BC (Magee 1997) or at the end
of the Iron Age II period (Magee 1996b: 247-249). The destruction is evi-
denced by burning and ash throughout the structure and the skeleton of an
individual who did not escape the conflagration (Magee 1996a: Fig. 12).
For the most part, the evidence provided by the Area C excavations
conforms to that excavated at other Iron Age sites. Several artefacts, how-
ever, have no local parallels and provide clear evidence for cultural inter-
action with areas outside the Gulf.

The Artefacts
Two of the most unexpected bronze finds of the third season were a pair
of ladles (Figs. 3-4). Both were found on floors in rooms in different parts
138 P. MAGEE

Fig. 3. Bronze ladle, Area C Muweilah.

of Area C2. One of the ladles was found near hundreds of bronze frag-
ments and slag and may well have been destined for re-melting. The other
ladle was found on a floor with grinding stone fragments, a possible frag-
ment of a bronze bowl3 and some bowl sherds.
Both ladles are similar in shape: they contain shallow cups with slightly
rolled lips; vertical handles which join the cup at near-right angles and
curving termini on the handles. Both are unparalleled in the southeast Ara-
bian Iron Age and we are inevitably drawn to Iran and other areas of the
Near East for parallels.
The most complete discussion of such objects is by Moorey who details
their context in wine-sets and banqueting in the ancient Near East (Moorey

2
The two ladles are registered as M 410 (Locus: 8001; Level: -300; EW: 115.26,
NS: 198.50) and M 989 (Locus: 6113; Level: -366; EW: 87.93, NS: 217.11).
3
M411 (Locus: 8001; Level: -302; EW: 114.40, NS: 198.50)
 INTERACTION AND SOCIAL COMPLEXITY IN THE ARABIAN IRON AGE 139

Fig. 4. Bronze ladle, Area C Muweilah.

1980). Most other Iron Age examples differ, however, from those at
Muweilah. Examples from Sialk, for example, are characterised by a hor-
izontal handle rather than a vertical one (Ghirshman 1939: Pl. L. s452).
Those found at Neirab in Syria (Abel & Barrois 1928: Fig. 4b) and on
Bahrain (Lombard & Kervran 1989: No. 133)4 contain a deep situla-like
bowl and, in the case of the Bahrain example, a hinged handle. Repre-
sentations of contemporary ladles on Assyrian reliefs also differ from
the Muweilah example as they are characterised by a shallow bowl and
a curving horizontal handle (eg. Hrouda 1965: Pl. 19.20-21). A recently
published example from Büyüktepe Hoyük in Turkey (Sagona et al. 1993:
Pl. IX.b.) parallels the Muweilah examples although the terminus of the
handle contains a ring while a similar example from Burnt Building III at

4
See also the Tylos period example from the Karannah mound on Bahrain: Herling A.
Excavations at Karannah mound, I. Bahrain. A preliminary report, Ir. Ant. 1994, XXIX,
(= Festschrift K. Schippmann): Fig. 7f. This example, with its fluted handle, differs com-
pletely from the other example from Bahrain and the examples under discussion here.
140 P. MAGEE

Hasanlu IVB (Muscarella 1988: No. 12) is said to have a pouring spout.
The closest parallels for the Muweilah examples are found in the Royal
Tombs at Gordion. Although more highly decorated, these ladles, like the
Muweilah examples, have shallow bowls and vertical handles. (Young 1981:
Pl. 8. h & i; Pl. 64. a & b; Pl. 89. a & b.). The late eighth to early seventh
century BC date for these tombs accords perfectly with the chronology of
the Muweilah examples.
An iron artefact, tentatively identified as a dagger, was also recovered
in the Area C complex in the third season (Magee 1997: Fig. 2). Iron is
virtually unknown in the southeast Arabian Iron Age (Lombard 1989) and
this artefact is the earliest well-contexted implement so far recovered. As
discussed in more detail elsewhere (Magee 1997), the lack of local parallels,
both in form and material, suggest that Iran was the most likely origin for
this piece.

Discussion
The possible social implications of the iron at Muweilah have already been
discussed by the author. In the context of this discussion it is worth re-iter-
ating the status power which is often attached to iron when it initially
appears in prehistoric societies. Its presence at Muweilah suggests that the
inhabitants, or perhaps the elites, of that settlement had access to goods
which were not commonly available.
A similar symbolism can be attached to the two bronze ladles. Despite
the morphological heterogeneity of Iron Age ladles in the ancient Near
East there does seem to be a functional homogeneity which sheds light
on their role at Muweilah. Ladles are most often recovered with other
bronze objects which are associated with banqueting and, possibly, wine
drinking (Moorey 1980: 180-197)5. Furthermore as David Stronach, to
whom this paper is dedicated, has shown, by the ninth century in
Assyria, the symbolism of wine and the objects used to consume it were
purposefully exploited by Assyrian kings as a emblem of their power
and prestige (Stronach 1995: 175-180). Their presence at Muweilah is,
therefore, of some importance in understanding the adoption of foreign

5
Note that the horizontal-handled ladles which were found at Sialk and which differ
in shape from the Muweilah example were probably associated with food-consumption:
Moorey, 1980: 194.
 INTERACTION AND SOCIAL COMPLEXITY IN THE ARABIAN IRON AGE 141

social habits in this region. We do not know what the ladles were used
for at Muweilah but their association with foreign rituals and their uniquity
within southeastern Arabia suggest the existence of a non-acephalous
population at the site.
These artefacts are highly suggestive, therefore, of a structured society
members of which exploited foreign status symbols as emblems of their
social position. Such an interpretation jibes with the glimpses provided to
us by Mesopotamian epigraphical sources. As discussed in detail by Potts
(1985), the Ishtar Slab Inscription of Assurbanipal, dating to 640 BC,
records the bringing of tribute by a king from southeastern Arabia to the
Assyrian court. Although this king’s (Pade) polity has been identified as
modern Izki in Oman (Potts 1985). it is likely that such polities existed
throughout the region at this time. The artefacts discussed above would
play an important part in such polities, providing elites with physical man-
ifestations of their power, even if such power was ultimately subordinate
to the might of Assyria.

References

ABEL M. & BARROIS A., 1928: Fouilles de l’école archéologique Française de

Jerusalem, Syria, IX, 303-315.
GHIRSHMAN R., 1939: Fouilles de Sialk près de Kashan. Vol. II. Paris.
HROUDA B., 1965: Die Kulturgeschichte des assyrischen Flachbildes, Saar-
brucker Beitrage zur Altertumskunde, Band 2, Bonn.
HUMPHRIES J.H., 1974: Harvard archaeological survey in Oman 1973. II: Some
later prehistoric sites in the Sultanate of Oman, PSAS, 4, 49-77.
LOMBARD P., 1989: Âges du Fer sans fer: Le cas de la péninsule d’Oman au 1er
millénaire avant J.C. In: Fahd T. ed. L’Arabie préislamique et son environment
historique et culturel. Lyon.
LOMBARD P., 1991. Du rythme naturel au rythme humain: vie et mort d’une tech-
nique traditionnelle, Le Qanat, In: Cauvin M.-C. ed. Rites et Rythmes Agraires.
Lyon.
LOMBARD P. & KERVRAN M., 1989: Bahrain National Museum Archaeological
Collections, 1. Bahrain.
MAGEE P., 1995: Cultural change, variability and settlement in the southeast Ara-
bian Iron Age. Phd thesis submitted to the University of Sydney, Australia.
MAGEE P., 1996a: Excavations at Muweilah. Preliminary report on the first two
seasons, AAE, 7, 195-212.
MAGEE P., 1996b: The chronology of the southeast Arabian Iron Age, AAE, 7,
240-252.
142 P. MAGEE

MAGEE P., 1997: New evidence of the initial appearance of iron in southeastern
Arabia, AAE, 8, 112-117.
MOOREY P.R.S., 1980: Metal wine-sets in the ancient Near East, Ir. Ant., XV,
181-197.
MUSCARELLA O.W., 1988: Bronze and iron. Ancient Near Eastern artifacts in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York.
POTTS D.T., 1985: The location of Iz-ki-e, RA, LXXIX (1), 75-76.
POTTS D.T., 1990: A prehistoric mound in the Emirate of Umm al-Quwain. Munks-
gaard.
POTTS D.T., 1991: Further excavations at Tell Abraq. Munksgaard.
SAGONA A., PEMBERTON E. & MCPHEE I., 1993: Excavations at Büyüktepe Hoyük
1992: Third preliminary report. Anatolian Studies, XLIII, 69-84.
STRONACH D., 1995: The imagery of the wine bowl: Wine in Assyria in the early
first millenium B.C. In McGovern, P.E., Fleming, S.J. and Katz, S.H. eds. The
Origins and Ancient History of Wine. Philadelphia.
YOUNG R.S., 1981: Three great early Tumuli. The Gordion excavations. Final
reports, Vol. 1.: University Museum Monograph, 43, Philadelphia.