posted
I've heard of the so-called "Tihama cultural complex". What are of its characteristics, and is it African in origin that spread to the arabian peninsula, or the other way around? Thank you for your time.
Posts: 447 | From: Somewhere son... | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
So fattovich says that Tihama was African in origin and spread to the Arabian peninsula?
Posts: 447 | From: Somewhere son... | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Obelisk_18: So fattovich says that Tihama was African in origin and spread to the Arabian peninsula?
That's what it seems like, though he feels that state-formation in the Horn is Sabaean found (i.e. D`mt was ruled by a mixed Afro-Arabian elite).
(an earlier post of mine from the Ethio-Sabaean thread)
quote:Originally posted by Yom: I cited Martin Richards et al, and this is what they said: "The Afro-Arabian Tihama cultural complex, for which an African origin seems most likely, arose in the mid-2nd millennium." Apparently the 1997 work is different from the Urban complex article (it is cited thus: Fattovich R (1997) The Near East and eastern Africa: their interaction. In: Vogel JO (ed) Encyclopedia of precolonial Africa. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, pp 479–484.) Unless by African, they mean an area other than N Ethiopia/Eritrea, then I stand by my statement. As I said, I am not positing the African origin myself, I'm simply repeating what I have read. I don't know what exactly the other Fattovich article says because I don't have access to it, but it must have something positing an African origin for the paper to say that an "African origin seems most likely."
quote:Originally posted by Yom: Skipping Western Tigray for now since the studies are not that interesting (showing the existence of early cultures contemporary with the others described, but little research done so far), here's a very intersting study on early (pre-1st millenium BC) interactions between N. Ethiopia/Eritrea and Yemen (specifically Tihama). Note that the exact nature of the relationship between the Tihama and Saba' is not yet understood.
EALL, Dr. Edward J.
Contact across the Red Sea (between Arabia and Africa) in the 2nd millennium BC: circumstantial evidence from the archaeological site of al-Midamman, Tihama coast of Yemen, and Dahlak Kabir Island, Eritrea
Based on excavations along the Red Sea coast of Yemen, this paper explores the possibility that people had the ability to cross the sea in the 3rd - 2nd millennia BC. It is inconceivable that fishermen living along the Red Sea coast did not know about the seasonality of the winds. Whether others had both the will and the skill to make journeys into deep waters, is an entirely different matter. While the material record for al-Midamman is unique, circumstantial evidence points to connections between Yemen and the Horn of Africa. It is hypothesised that this **did not involve the mass movement of people, with their cultural baggage complete**. But it is suggested that **people on both sides of the Red Sea may have had a common ancestry, and their cultural expressions emerge from that common background.**
The earliest cultural record from al-Midamman is an ephemeral presence defined by the surface recovery of stone projectile points and scrapers belonging to a Neolithic culture, say, from before 4000 BC. The first substantial and monumental phase of the site starts in the 3rd millennium BC. It involved the setting up of **giant stone markers**. Certain slender pillars were once set up with infants buried beneath them, yet without grave goods; an isolated stone marked the grave of an adult male. Hypothetically, these burials pre-date the setting up of giant stones, an act dated roughly to 2400-1800 BC by the cache of copper-alloy tools and a core of obsidian found buried beneath one of the megaliths.
All of the stone used had to be imported from at least 50 km away. A later phase of the activity involved recycling the stone. Yet there is no evidence that this was a destructive act. Rather, it appears to suggest reverence for the past. The most impressive use of the stone was to create monumental buildings. Two rectilinear structures were built with foundations and walls of stone, and partition walls of mudbrick. A third stone building is likely slightly more recent in date, and may be an open-air shrine enclosure. Shallowly carved decorations date earlier than the 8th century BC.
Re-used stone was also employed in a cemetery. The pottery grave goods consist of whole vessels, of a kind known from the domestic settlement. This ephemeral settlement has furnished a rich record of pottery, obsidian, grind stones, and masses of fish bone. A commonality of artifact in all of the settings is, in fact, the most remarkable of the recent discoveries. Grind stones, for instance, were found in the context of the megaliths as well as in the domestic settlement, and set deliberately onto burnt stone, perhaps as field markers. Gold beads have been recovered from both the stone enclosure and the site of the standing stones.
The idea of different phases of the occupation has always been present in the eyes of the excavators. The idea of newcomers supplanting the old ways has always been a possibility. **The most recent work has demonstrated this to be untenable.** Finding only the same kind of pottery in both the domestic, the funerary and commemorative areas implies that the same people were involved throughout the site's life. Yet clearly their cultural habits did evolve.
Despite the fact that the inhabitants appear to have been obsessed with stone, there are no inscriptions carved in stone; no sacrificial offering trays of stone; no stone incense burners; no three dimensional sculptures of either animals or humans, in stone. All of these would be appropriate for a culture linked to Sabaean realm in its broad sense. But there are no statue-menhirs either, which would have made a plausible link to the people Zarins sees as reflecting a Bronze Age elite on the plateau.
From al-Midamman there is one bull's head in relief from a pottery vessel; two human figurines in pottery; incense burners of pottery; and an example of alphabetic letters scratched into a pottery vessel. But pottery items are very rare within the corpus of finds, representing four out of 4000 recorded (and diagnostic) fragments. As for the pottery itself, it is far superior to anything from classic South Arabia. Though hand-built, it is well produced from good quality clay. It is often burnished and decorated with punctate designs that call to mind Fattovich's Afro-Arabian cultural complex theories regarding the punctate incised pottery from Kassala in the Gash delta of southeastern Sudan. And upper Nile-area specialists will no doubt think of so-called wavy-line punctate pottery associated with the C-Group people. Yet, the one striking absence, which cannot be overlooked, is that Kassala does not have the same kind of obsidian record as al-Midamman where there is a clearly definable assemblage of obsidian microliths. It arrives **fully developed** as a lithic tradition, and it does not evolve out of the Arabian bi-facial tradition. Numerous *antecedents* can be found in East Africa. Our expedition has also observed obsidian of exactly the same technological tradition on the island of Dahlak Kabir, offshore from the Eritrean mainland. Other circumstantial evidence also points to possible links between the island and the coast of Yemen. In the Islamic cemetery of the 11th and 12th centuries, one tombstone is carved from a pillar of basalt that is foreign to the island and is likely recovered from a Bronze Age context.
I hasten to argue that we may not find a single, common template into which all of these cultures fit. We are not looking at a systematic expansion, with a socially cohesive, even politically based, organization. So different expressions may have been adopted by different groups, as they came into contact with others. At least four obstacles need to be removed before the Afro-Arabian connection becomes plausible. Our best analogy for the copper-alloy tools is drawn from Syria. I would counter here by saying that our knowledge of the copper-bronze industry from both Yemen and the Horn of Africa is so poor that the absence of parallels for our tools may not be significant.
The second problem is that we find obsidian with the same technology as from al-Midamman, both in the Wadi al-Jubah, in the interior of Yemen, and in the Hadramawt, and on Dahlak Kabir island. But in the last example we have found no related pottery. From Sabir, al-Hamid, and al-Kashawba there is generically similar pottery but no obsidian. Perhaps we may explain this as a difference of time. At al-Midamman there seem to have been both obsidian and pottery in use at all times.
Another difficulty is that we have scratched stone decorations that can be parallelled in the Jawf. Conveniently, Audouin has suggested that these carvings in the Jawf could easily be dated to the late 2nd millennium BC rather than the early 1st millennium BC as previously suggested. What is the connection between our two areas? None, if we look at political realities.
My current hypothesis is that during the late 3rd millennium BC, in response to a drying climate, people were on the move. Some settled on Dahlak island. The people who settled in al-Midamman **crossed the Red Sea and settled in the Tihama** where they found a window of opportunity for life as result of the **massive flooding that was emanating from the highlands**, from a landscape out of control. When checks and balances were put in place in the highlands, as part of the landscape stabilisation for which Yemen became synonymous, the people at the coast were forced to move on. Groups may have found their way into the Jawf, and the Hadramawt. They retained some of their specific lithic technology, but generally otherwise became integrated with the rest of the South Arabian populations.
Further reading
Keall, E. J. (2000) >Changing Settlement along the Red Sea Coast of Yemen in the Bronze Age=, First International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East (Rome May 18-23, 1998), Proceedings, (Matthiae, P., Enea, A., Peyronel, L. and Pinnock, F., eds), 719-31, Rome.
Giumlia-Mair, A., Keall, E. J., Shugar, A. and Stock, S. (2002) >Investigation of a Copper-based Hoard from the Megalithic Site of al-Midamman, Yemen: an Interdisciplinary Approach=, Journal of Archaeological Science 29, 195-209.
Very interesting stuff, though parts are difficult to interpret.
quote:Originally posted by Obelisk_18: So fattovich says that Tihama was African in origin and spread to the Arabian peninsula?
That's what it seems like, though he feels that state-formation in the Horn is Sabaean found (i.e. D`mt was ruled by a mixed Afro-Arabian elite).
I don't recall Fattovich ever saying such thing; from which work of his, did he make that statement?
I do however, recall him mentioning Sabean "influence" in the African Horn. The "founding of state-formation" and "influencing" are not one and the same. The same may well be said of the Tihama complex, whereby one sees influences from overseas [in this case, East Africa], but doesn't necessarily imply that such "influences" are responsible for state-formation in South Arabia or the start of the said complex.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Obelisk_18: So fattovich says that Tihama was African in origin and spread to the Arabian peninsula?
That's what it seems like, though he feels that state-formation in the Horn is Sabaean found (i.e. D`mt was ruled by a mixed Afro-Arabian elite).
I don't recall Fattovich ever saying such thing; from which work of his, did he make that statement?
I do however, recall him mentioning Sabean "influence" in the African Horn. The "founding of state-formation" and "influencing" are not one and the same. The same may well be said of the Tihama complex, whereby one sees influences from overseas [in this case, East Africa], but doesn't necessarily imply that such "influences" are responsible for state-formation in South Arabia or the start of the said complex.
As for the Tihama complex, what he says below (about a year ago, see citation at bottom of post) makes it seem as if the TCC (Tihama Cultural Complex) originated in both the coastal area of Eritrea and the Tihama, and the PubMed citation for the 1997 paper states that an African origin is most likely (as does the al-Midamman article, talking about the move of people from the Western Red Sea coast to Dahlak and the Tihama).
Fattovich concludes that the elite of D`mt were Afro-Arabian mixes in some of his summaries, though I don't have access to many of his works so I couldn't explain any subtleties.
A citation from here, among other places (I posted this in the Ethio-Sabaean thread as well).
First the important parts,to be followed with full unhighlighted text:
quote: The "Ethio-Sabaean State" (ca. 700-400 BC)
Rock inscriptions at the edge of the plateau in Qohaito suggest that South Arabs (maybe traders) penetrated into the plateau beginning in the 9th century BC. The dynamics of this penetration are still unclear. Most likely, individuals or small groups settled on the plateau and mixed with the local people, **originating an Afro-Arabian elite** in conformity with the later Swahili model in East Africa. The Ona people of Hamasien and northern Akkele Guzzay may have had a relevant role in this process as the Ona pottery formed a consistent component of the pre-Aksumite ceramics. In the 7th century BC the Afro-Arabian complex society (-ties) in Eritrea were included in the area of influence of the Sabaean state, and a new state arose on the plateau. Sabaean cultural features were adopted by the local elite in conformity with the same model of cultural contact we can observe in the Nubian Kingdom of Kush. The present evidence points to an expansion of the so-called "Ethio-Sabaean" state along a straight and narrow transect from Qohaito in Eritrea to the Takkazze river in Tigray, and this expansion was probably marked by the foundation of ceremonial centers such as Kaskase and Yeha.
In the above, it seems that he implies state formation was indigenous though Sabaean-influenced, though the state was founded by a mixed Afro-Arabian elite according to him.
Here's what I posted in the Ethio-Sabaean thread, the full summary of his paper:
quote:Originally posted by Yom: Here's some new interesting information.
Some exceprts. First, Rodolfo Fattovich, who believes that D`mt was ruled by an Ethio-Sabaean mixed upper class ala the Swahili (which doesn't actually seem to be the case for the Swahili, see here (Nile Valley)).
FATTOVICH, Prof. Rodolfo
The Pre-Aksumite Period in Northern Ethiopia and Eritrea Reconsidered
The culture history of Tigray (northern Ethiopia) and Eritrea during the 1st millennium BC was characterized by a strong South Arabian (mainly Sabaean) influence, due to intense contacts between the opposite shores of the southern Red Sea. The result was the emergence of an early state modeled on the Sabaean one in the region. In this paper some new considerations about the dynamics of these contacts, the origins and development of the >Ethio-Sabaean= state, and the relationship of this state with the later Kingdom of Aksum (late 1st millennium BC-1st millennium AD) will be presented in the light of recent fieldwork in Yemen, Eritrea and Tigray.
At present, we can distinguish three phases of development of these contacts: 1) progressive inclusion of the Eritrea plateau in the South Arabian area of influence in the late 3rd-early 1st millennia BC; 2) rise of a pre-Aksumite state in Eritrea, and progressive inclusion of Tigray into this state in the mid-1st millennium BC; 3) collapse of the pre-Aksumite state and rise of the Kingdom of Aksum in Tigray in the late 1st millennium BC.
The emergence of the Afro-Arabian interchange circuit (2nd-early 1st millennia BC)
The northern Horn of Africa was included into a network of exchanges and contacts with Southern Arabia since the 3rd millennium BC. Potsherds similar to Bronze Age ones in South Arabia occur in assemblages of the Gash Group (ca 2700-1400 BC) in the Gash Delta (Kassala). In the mid-2nd millennium BC, a new pattern of interregional contacts and exchanges emerged along the coastal regions of the southern Red Sea, in Eritrea and Arabia (Tihama Cultural Complex). The main sites of this complex (Adulis in the Eritrean Sahel, Sihi in the Saudi Tihama, Wadi Urq= in the Yemeni Tihama, and Subr near Aden) share enough pottery features to be considered regional variants of one cultural complex. In the late 2nd-early 1st millennia BC the eastern plateau in central Eritrea was included in the area of influence of the Tihama complex, as some ceramics from the lower strata at Matara (Akkele Guzay) and Yeha (Tigray) are comparable to those from Subr. The range of contacts of the Ona Group A (late 2nd-early 1st millennia BC) in the Hamasien plateau (Eritrea) cannot be established on the available evidence. Similarities in pottery style may point to contacts with Nubia, eastern Sudan, and perhaps southern Arabia.
The >Ethio-Sabaean State= (ca. 700-400 BC)
Rock inscriptions at the edge of the plateau in Qohaito suggest that South Arabs (maybe traders) penetrated into the plateau beginning in the 9th century BC. The dynamics of this penetration are still unclear. Most likely, individuals or small groups settled on the plateau and mixed with the local people, originating an Afro-Arabian elite in conformity with the later Swahili model in East Africa. The Ona people of Hamasien and northern Akkele Guzzay may have had a relevant role in this process as the Ona pottery formed a consistent component of the pre-Aksumite ceramics. In the 7th century BC the Afro-Arabian complex society (-ties) in Eritrea were included in the area of influence of the Sabaean state, and a new state arose on the plateau. Sabaean cultural features were adopted by the local elite in conformity with the same model of cultural contact we can observe in the Nubian Kingdom of Kush. The present evidence points to an expansion of the so-called >Ethio-Sabaean= state along a straight and narrow transect from Qohaito in Eritrea to the Takkazze river in Tigray, and this expansion was probably marked by the foundation of ceremonial centers such as Kaskase and Yeha
The collapse of the >Ethio-Sabaean= state and the rise of Aksum
Archaeological and epigraphic evidence suggest that the >Ethio-Sabaean= state collapsed in Tigray in the 4th-3rd centuries BC, although most likely an Afro-Arabian urban (state?) society survived in the Akkele Guzzay. At this time, a new polity emerged at Aksum in central Tigray (Proto-Aksumite Period). The Proto-Aksumite polity distinguished itself from the former Ethio-Sabaean one, focusing ideologically on platforms with stele and pit-graves for the funerary cult of the elite rather than on monumental cult temples of the gods. The remains of a monumental building, constructed in a technique reminiscent of Ethio-Sabaean architecture at Ona Nagast may suggest that some symbols of the earlier state were maintained in Proto-Aksumite times. At present, the Proto-Aksumite culture can be ascribed to an indigenous tradition of Tigray, maybe related to the cultural traditions of the western lowlands. Actually, the style and symbolism of the funerary stelae suggest a possible link with the late prehistoric cultures in the Eritrean-Sudanese lowlands. Finally, in the early 1st millennium BC the Aksumite kingdom progressively expanded to the east and included Eritrea and Yemen into the area of political control of Aksum.
Further reading
Fattovich, R. (1977) >Pre-Aksumite Civilization of Ethiopia: a Provisional Review=, Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 7, 73-78.
__________ (1980) Materiali per lo studio della ceramica preaksumita etiopica, Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale.
__________ (1990a) >The Peopling of the Northern Ethiopian-Sudanese Borderland between 7000 and 1000 BP: a preliminary model=, Nubica 1/3, 3-45.
__________ (1990b) >Remarks on the Pre-Aksumite Period in Northern Etiopia=, Journal of Ethiopian Studies 23, 1-33.
_________ (1992) Lineamenti di storia dell'archeologia dell'Etiopia e Somalia, Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale.
__________ (1996a) >Punt: the archaeological perspective=, Beiträge zur Sudanforschung 6, 15-29.
__________ (1996b) >The I.U.O. and B.U. Excavations at Bieta Giyorgis (Aksum) in Tigray (Northern Ethiopia)=, Journal of Ethiopian Studies 30/1, 1-29 (with K. A. Bard).
__________ (1997a) >The Peopling of the Tigrean Plateau in ancient and Medieval Times (ca. 4000 B.C. - A.D. 1500): Evidence and State of Art=, The Environmental History and Human Ecology of Northern Ethiopia in the Late Holocene (Bard, K. A., ed.), 81-105, Napoli.
__________ (1997b) >The contacts between Southern Arabia and the Horn of Africa in late prehistoric and early historical times: a view from Africa=, Profumi d'Arabia (Avanzini, A., ed.), 273-86, Roma.
__________ (1997c) >Archaeology and historical dynamics: The case of Bieta Giyorgis (Aksum), Ethiopia=, Annali dell=Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli 57 (published 1999), 48-79.
__________ (2000a) >The Environmental History of Tigray (Northern Ethiopia) during the Holocene: a Preliminary Outline=, The African Archaeological Review 17/2, 65-86 (with K. A. Bard, M. Coltorti, M. C. Di Blasi, F. Dramis).
_________ (2000b) The Archaeological Area of Aksum: A Preliminary Assessment, Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale (co-author with K.A. Bard, L. Petrassi and V. Pisano).
_________ (2000c) Aksum and the Habashat: State and Ethnicity in Ancient Northern Ethiopia and Eritrea, W.P. No 238, Boston University, African Studies Center, Boston.
__________ (2001a) >The Proto-Aksumite Period: An Outline=, Annales d=Ethiopie 17, 3-24 (with K. A. Bard).
__________ (2001b) >Some Remarks on the Process of State Formation in Egypt and Ethiopia=, Africa and Africans in Antiquity (Yamauchi, E., ed.), 276-90 (with K. A. Bard), East Lansing.
Note that his idea that this was a gradual incorporation of more and more of the inland areas of Tigray doesn't seem to be the case. For one, the existence of Yeha as an early capital (in Western Tigray, the farthest area from the coast, yet the center of Ethiopian civilization pre-1st millenium AD), which was included in the "Tihama Cultural Complex." I'll follow this post with some studies on early Western Tigray and early contacts with South Arabia.
posted
I misspelled (in both threads) the name of the author of the al-Midamman paper, his last name should read Keall, not Eall.
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
As for the Tihama complex, what he says below (about a year ago, see citation at bottom of post) makes it seem as if the TCC (Tihama Cultural Complex) originated in both the coastal area of Eritrea and the Tihama, and the PubMed citation for the 1997 paper states that an African origin is most likely (as does the al-Midamman article, talking about the move of people from the Western Red Sea coast to Dahlak and the Tihama).
Yeap, the article does talk about movement of people, but what it doesn't state [unless I've missed it], is that there was no pre-existing complex in the Tihama region prior to the arrival of the said immigrants from east Africa, such that these immigrants would become the creators of a complex in the region [which had none prior to their arrival].
Again, I see talk of influences from the East Africa, which the author attributes to the movement of people from that part of the world. But then, from your own citation:
While the material record for al-Midamman is unique, circumstantial evidence points to connections between Yemen and the Horn of Africa. It is hypothesised that this **did not involve the mass movement of people, with their cultural baggage complete**. But it is suggested that **people on both sides of the Red Sea may have had a common ancestry, and their cultural expressions emerge from that common background**...
The idea of different phases of the occupation has always been present in the eyes of the excavators. The idea of newcomers supplanting the old ways has always been a possibility. **The most recent work has demonstrated this to be untenable**...
...My current hypothesis is that during the late 3rd millennium BC, in response to a drying climate, people were on the move. Some settled on Dahlak island. The people who settled in al-Midamman **crossed the Red Sea and settled in the Tihama** where they found a window of opportunity for life as result of the **massive flooding that was emanating from the highlands**, from a landscape out of control. When checks and balances were put in place in the highlands, as part of the landscape stabilisation for which Yemen became synonymous, the people at the coast were forced to move on. Groups may have found their way into the Jawf, and the Hadramawt. They retained some of their specific lithic technology, but generally otherwise **became integrated** with the rest of the South Arabian populations.
quote:Yom:
Fattovich concludes that the elite of D`mt were Afro-Arabian mixes in some of his summaries, though I don't have access to many of his works so I couldn't explain any subtleties.
A citation from here, among other places (I posted this in the Ethio-Sabaean thread as well).
First the important parts,to be followed with full unhighlighted text:
quote: The "Ethio-Sabaean State" (ca. 700-400 BC)
Rock inscriptions at the edge of the plateau in Qohaito suggest that South Arabs (maybe traders) penetrated into the plateau beginning in the 9th century BC. The dynamics of this penetration are still unclear. Most likely, individuals or small groups settled on the plateau and mixed with the local people, **originating an Afro-Arabian elite** in conformity with the later Swahili model in East Africa. The Ona people of Hamasien and northern Akkele Guzzay may have had a relevant role in this process as the Ona pottery formed a consistent component of the pre-Aksumite ceramics. In the 7th century BC the Afro-Arabian complex society (-ties) in Eritrea were included in the area of influence of the Sabaean state, and a new state arose on the plateau. Sabaean cultural features were adopted by the local elite in conformity with the same model of cultural contact we can observe in the Nubian Kingdom of Kush. The present evidence points to an expansion of the so-called "Ethio-Sabaean" state along a straight and narrow transect from Qohaito in Eritrea to the Takkazze river in Tigray, and this expansion was probably marked by the foundation of ceremonial centers such as Kaskase and Yeha.
In the above, it seems that he implies state formation was indigenous though Sabaean-influenced, though the state was founded by a mixed Afro-Arabian elite according to him.
Well now, that would be different from your earlier claim about "Sabean" foundation of "state-formation", would it not?
Given the contact between the two regions, through trade and other political ties, some level of gene flow is NOT unlikely to occur within the elite classes interacting.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Yeap, the article does talk about movement of people, but what it doesn't state [unless I've missed it], is that there was no pre-existing complex in the Tihama region prior to the arrival of the said immigrants from east Africa, such that these immigrants would become the creators of a complex in the region [which had none prior to their arrival].
Again, I see talk of influences from the East Africa, which the author attributes to the movement of people from that part of the world. But then, from your own citation:
While the material record for al-Midamman is unique, circumstantial evidence points to connections between Yemen and the Horn of Africa. It is hypothesised that this **did not involve the mass movement of people, with their cultural baggage complete**. But it is suggested that **people on both sides of the Red Sea may have had a common ancestry, and their cultural expressions emerge from that common background**...
The idea of different phases of the occupation has always been present in the eyes of the excavators. The idea of newcomers supplanting the old ways has always been a possibility. **The most recent work has demonstrated this to be untenable**...
...My current hypothesis is that during the late 3rd millennium BC, in response to a drying climate, people were on the move. Some settled on Dahlak island. The people who settled in al-Midamman **crossed the Red Sea and settled in the Tihama** where they found a window of opportunity for life as result of the **massive flooding that was emanating from the highlands**, from a landscape out of control. When checks and balances were put in place in the highlands, as part of the landscape stabilisation for which Yemen became synonymous, the people at the coast were forced to move on. Groups may have found their way into the Jawf, and the Hadramawt. They retained some of their specific lithic technology, but generally otherwise **became integrated** with the rest of the South Arabian populations.
It seems he's proposing a pre-existing culture spanning the Tihama and N. Ethiopia/Eritrea in which more East African elements of the culture were (re-?) introduced to the Tihama side of the culture, such as the lithic tradition (see quotation below; also the pottery, though not as clear in citation), though it's not entirely clear. The preceding Neolithic culture known involves the setting up of giant stone burial markers similar to Aksumite (also in preceding eras) hawilts (Stelae/Obelisk), and he advocates a "common ancestry" for people on both side of the Red Sea. Whether this would be extant from the first migration out of Africa and continued contacts from then on, preventing differentiation, or due to another later (Paleolithic?) migration(s?).
The earliest cultural record from al-Midamman is an ephemeral presence defined by the surface recovery of stone projectile points and scrapers belonging to a Neolithic culture, say, from before 4000 BC. The first substantial and monumental phase of the site starts in the 3rd millennium BC. It involved the setting up of **giant stone markers**. Certain slender pillars were once set up with infants buried beneath them, yet without grave goods; an isolated stone marked the grave of an adult male. Hypothetically, these burials pre-date the setting up of giant stones, an act dated roughly to 2400-1800 BC by the cache of copper-alloy tools and a core of obsidian found buried beneath one of the megaliths.
...
As for the pottery itself, it is far superior to anything from classic South Arabia. Though hand-built, it is well produced from good quality clay. It is often burnished and decorated with punctate designs that call to mind Fattovich's Afro-Arabian cultural complex theories regarding the punctate incised pottery from Kassala in the Gash delta of southeastern Sudan. And upper Nile-area specialists will no doubt think of so-called wavy-line punctate pottery associated with the C-Group people. Yet, the one striking absence, which cannot be overlooked, is that Kassala does not have the same kind of obsidian record as al-Midamman where there is a clearly definable assemblage of obsidian microliths. It arrives **fully developed** as a lithic tradition, and it does not evolve out of the Arabian bi-facial tradition. Numerous *antecedents* can be found in East Africa. Our expedition has also observed obsidian of exactly the same technological tradition on the island of Dahlak Kabir, offshore from the Eritrean mainland.
quote:Well now, that would be different from your earlier claim about "Sabean" foundation of "state-formation", would it not?
Given the contact between the two regions, through trade and other political ties, some level of gene flow is NOT unlikely to occur within the elite classes interacting.
That's sort of what I meant by Sabaean foundation - Sabaeans come in as an elite (mixed with the locals in this case) and found D`mt on South Arabian models, which is what Fattovich proposes
[My statement earlier: That's what it seems like, though he feels that state-formation in the Horn is Sabaean found (i.e. D`mt was ruled by a mixed Afro-Arabian elite).]
Either way, Fattovich isn't implying simply gene flow between the elite classes, but the creation of a new elite class from these Sabaean ex-pats and the local population mixing together, from which D`mt arises.
Rock inscriptions at the edge of the plateau in Qohaito suggest that South Arabs (maybe traders) penetrated into the plateau beginning in the 9th century BC. The dynamics of this penetration are still unclear. Most likely, individuals or small groups settled on the plateau and mixed with the local people, **originating** an Afro-Arabian elite in conformity with the later Swahili model in East Africa.Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
As for the pottery itself, it is far superior to anything from classic South Arabia. Though hand-built, it is well produced from good quality clay. It is often burnished and decorated with punctate designs that call to mind Fattovich's Afro-Arabian cultural complex theories regarding the punctate incised pottery from Kassala in the Gash delta of southeastern Sudan. And upper Nile-area specialists will no doubt think of so-called wavy-line punctate pottery associated with the C-Group people. Yet, the one striking absence, which cannot be overlooked, is that Kassala does not have the same kind of obsidian record as al-Midamman where there is a clearly definable assemblage of obsidian microliths. It arrives **fully developed** as a lithic tradition, and it does not evolve out of the Arabian bi-facial tradition. Numerous *antecedents* can be found in East Africa.
Yom great points.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Yeap, the article does talk about movement of people, but what it doesn't state [unless I've missed it], is that there was no pre-existing complex in the Tihama region prior to the arrival of the said immigrants from east Africa, such that these immigrants would become the creators of a complex in the region [which had none prior to their arrival].
Again, I see talk of influences from the East Africa, which the author attributes to the movement of people from that part of the world. But then, from your own citation:
While the material record for al-Midamman **is unique**, **circumstantial evidence** points to connections between Yemen and the Horn of Africa. It is hypothesised that this **did not involve the mass movement of people, with their cultural baggage complete**. But it is suggested that **people on both sides of the Red Sea may have had a common ancestry, and their cultural expressions emerge from that common background**...
The idea of different phases of the occupation has always been present in the eyes of the excavators. The idea of newcomers supplanting the old ways has always been a possibility. **The most recent work has demonstrated this to be untenable**...
...My current hypothesis is that during the late 3rd millennium BC, in response to a drying climate, people were on the move. Some settled on Dahlak island. The people who settled in al-Midamman **crossed the Red Sea and settled in the Tihama** where they found a window of opportunity for life as result of the **massive flooding that was emanating from the highlands**, from a landscape out of control. When checks and balances were put in place in the highlands, as part of the landscape stabilisation for which Yemen became synonymous, the people at the coast were forced to move on. Groups may have found their way into the Jawf, and the Hadramawt. They retained some of their specific lithic technology, but generally otherwise **became integrated** with the rest of the South Arabian populations.
It seems he's proposing a pre-existing culture spanning the Tihama and N. Ethiopia/Eritrea in which more East African elements of the culture were (re-?) introduced to the Tihama side of the culture, such as the lithic tradition (see quotation below; also the pottery, though not as clear in citation), though it's not entirely clear. The preceding Neolithic culture known involves the setting up of giant stone burial markers similar to Aksumite (also in preceding eras) hawilts (Stelae/Obelisk), and he advocates a "common ancestry" for people on both side of the Red Sea. Whether this would be extant from the first migration out of Africa and continued contacts from then on, preventing differentiation, or due to another later (Paleolithic?) migration(s?).
This author would not be the first to proclaim common heritages across either side of the Red Sea, and ongoing historic exchanges of culture, and perhaps gene flow in these parts of the world. The author doesn't advocate a Neolithic migration from East Africa, or necessarily draws connections at this point. Only a vague reference to importation of "stone" from elsewhere has been mentioned. There is nothing in the author's article, that suggests "no" differentiation of culture. However, the author does make it clear that certain elements in the historic period, like pottery and microlithic tools, seem to emanate from East Africa. The author thereby provides reasoning for such possible migration from east Africa, whereby people didn't come in to impose their culture, with an intact political element, but as a product of an adverse situation in their homelands.
quote:Yom:
That's sort of what I meant by Sabaean foundation - Sabaeans come in as an elite (mixed with the locals in this case) and found D`mt on South Arabian models, which is what Fattovich proposes
[My statement earlier: That's what it seems like, though he feels that state-formation in the Horn is Sabaean found (i.e. D`mt was ruled by a mixed Afro-Arabian elite).]
Either way, Fattovich isn't implying simply gene flow between the elite classes, but the creation of a new elite class from these Sabaean ex-pats and the local population mixing together, from which D`mt arises.
What you have to understand, is that Fattovich isn't implying that there was no complex in the region upon the arrival of the "potential" Sabean immigrants. In fact, he makes it clear that there were complexes over there prior to Sabean influence. Fattovich works with the thesis that the Sabean complex became notably economically powerful in the region by some time in the first millennium B.C. It is under these circumstances, that we see Sabean influence in the Ethiopian region. With the Sabeans having the initiative in economy during this period, elite layers of their society may well have made their way into the African Horn, where their progeny with the locals had the upper hand in the social ladder, to the extent of forming the ruling layers. With extant cultural similarities and interactions between the regions across the Red Sea, perhaps it wouldn’t have been too difficult for Sabean immigrants to mix with the locals. This seems to be impression created in Fattovich’s work.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
It seems he's proposing a pre-existing culture spanning the Tihama and N. Ethiopia/Eritrea in which more East African elements of the culture were (re-?) introduced to the Tihama side of the culture, such as the lithic tradition (see quotation below; also the pottery, though not as clear in citation), though it's not entirely clear. The preceding Neolithic culture known involves the setting up of giant stone burial markers similar to Aksumite (also in preceding eras) hawilts (Stelae/Obelisk), and he advocates a "common ancestry" for people on both side of the Red Sea. Whether this would be extant from the first migration out of Africa and continued contacts from then on, preventing differentiation, or due to another later (Paleolithic?) migration(s?).
The preceding Neolithic culture according to the article, is associated with 'stone pojectile points and scrapers' dating back to prior to the 4th millennium BC:
The earliest cultural record from al-Midamman is an ephemeral presence defined by the surface recovery of stone projectile points and scrapers belonging to a Neolithic culture, say, from before 4000 BC. The first substantial and monumental phase of the site starts in the 3rd millennium BC. - E J Keall
The article is *not* associating this Neolithic culture with the giant stone burial structures. Those "markers" or structures appear at a phase dated later, specifically to some time in the 3rd millennium BC. Hence, as noted earlier, this would indicate 'differentiation' of culture with time. It is this 3rd millennium phase wherein Keall draws archaeologically substantiated links, via the type of stone used, pottery, as well as obsidian microlithic assemblage. So the implication here, is that those "giant burial markers" that you speak of, were likely a tradition brought by East African immigrants some time in the 3rd millennium BC. This could not be more clearer in the following:
*The first substantial and monumental phase of the site starts in the 3rd millennium BC. It involved the setting up of giant stone markers.
*Certain slender pillars were once set up with infants buried beneath them, yet without grave goods; an isolated stone marked the grave of an adult male. Hypothetically, these burials **PRE-DATE** the setting up of giant stones, an act dated roughly to 2400-1800 BC by the cache of copper-alloy tools and a core of obsidian found buried beneath one of the megaliths. - E. Keall
Keall makes this estimation, presumably from the finding that the said burials lacked grave goods, whereas later burials - as is the case with those maintained with "recycled stones" or "re-used stone" - had been furnished with grave goods. The question then becomes, why would people at this phase of stone monument appearances pay tribute to burial sites of the past, which were very likely not marked as such in their original state? Well, that's where one can assume *cultural sympathy* to be the likely motivator, if not a link, between the folks of the earlier archaeological phase and the later one. So, while no specific mention of migration in the Neolithic period is made, it is suggested however, that "people on both sides of the Red Sea may have had a common ancestry, and their cultural expressions emerge from that common background."
Furthermore, to the extent that cultural *differentiation* occurs between the mentioned Neolithic phase and the 'monumental' phase, involving people from a common ancestry, Keall's mention of this might give one a clue:
It is hypothesised that this did not involve the **mass movement of people, with their cultural baggage complete**.
Further differentiation is noted even in 'monumental phase' of the site in question, as exemplified by the later 'recycling of stones', yet consistency in pottery design, and in many cases [though obviously, not in all], reappearances of obsidian tools, make it clear that there was socio-cultural continuity here, and hence:
The idea of different phases of the occupation has always been present in the eyes of the excavators. The idea of newcomers supplanting the old ways has always been a possibility. **The most recent work has demonstrated this to be untenable.** Finding only the same kind of pottery in both the domestic, the funerary and commemorative areas implies that the **SAME PEOPLE** were involved throughout the site's life. Yet clearly their cultural habits did evolve. - by Keall, E.
This sums up my take on the article in question.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So Sabeans were arab type people that built civilization in East Africa or am I interpreting this incorrectly?
Posts: 87 | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
First of all 'Arabs' are diverse people of various lineages including African. The Southern Arab types were also known as Arabian 'Kushites' and even today there are black types in Yemen that differ little from Africans on the other side of the Red Sea.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Arab type people is really meaningless because Arab is a reference to a land mass, which is inhabited by different types of people, both physically and culturally. In addition, the languages spoken were also different, up to the point of the spread of Islam and the Arabic language. Sabeans were Arabians, but that only tells you they were mainly indigenous folks of the Arabian peninsula. However their language and culture was distinct among Arabian populations. And this is going back to the 10th century B.C. which means the unification of Arabian people under the banner of Islam and the Arabic language had not occurred yet.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Correction, 'Arab' is a reference to culture, particularly language. The original Arabs were southern Arabian Qahtani like the Mahra, Saba, etc; Then later the Adnani desert nomads; and with the propagation of Islam, others.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Arab type people is really meaningless because Arab is a reference to a land mass, which is inhabited by different types of people, both physically and culturally. In addition, the languages spoken were also different, up to the point of the spread of Islam and the Arabic language. Sabeans were Arabians, but that only tells you they were mainly indigenous folks of the Arabian peninsula. However their language and culture was distinct among Arabian populations. And this is going back to the 10th century B.C. which means the unification of Arabian people under the banner of Islam and the Arabic language had not occurred yet.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic