Abu Sha'ar Nile Road AJA 95

Survey of the 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile Road Author(s): Steven E. Sidebotham, Ronald E. Zitterkopf and John A.
Riley Reviewed work(s): Source: American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 95, No. 4 (Oct., 1991), pp. 571-622 Published by: Archaeological Institute of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/505894 . Accessed: 03/08/2012 05:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of Archaeology.
http://www.jstor.org
Survey of the 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile Road

E. STEVEN SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD ZITTERKOPF, JOHN A. RILEY E. AND
Abstract In January 1989 a survey conducted by the University of Delaware studied all, and redrew plans of most, key installationsalong the ancient thoroughfarebetween the Red Sea coast at 'Abu Sha'arand the Nile emporium of Kainopolis(Qena). Installationsin the Romanquarriesat Mons Porphyriteswere also examined. The surveydated activityat these sites primarilythrough carefulanalysisof surface ceramics and secondarilywith reference to epigraphic and numismatic evidence and ancient literary sources.The projectalsolocatedapproximately125cairns and towers that marked the course of this trans-desert and "highway" investigatedsome for ceramicevidence. Taken in conjunctionwith the resultsof excavationsat the late third/fourth-seventhcenturyRomanfort at 'Abu Sha'arand with known activitiesat the imperialquarries at Mons Porphyrites and MonsClaudianus,it is clear that the 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile road and its installationshad a variety of uses between the firstand seventh centuriesA.C. These includedfacilitating movementof convoyshaulthe ing stone from the quarriesto the Nile in the first to the third/fourthcentury,actingas a limesat least in the period following the Diocletianic-Constantinian reorganization of the Roman frontier, and perhaps later in its history aiding and protectingChristiantravelersmakingpilgrimages to holy sites in the desert north of 'Abu Sha'ar,in the Sinai, and in the Holy Land itself.*
THE SURVEY Steven E. Sidebothamand Ronald E. Zitterkopf

THE INSTALLATIONS In January 1989 the University of Delaware conducted an archaeological survey of the ancient thoroughfare between the late Roman/Byzantine fort at 'Abu Sha'ar/Deir Umm Deheis (27022' N, 33041' E) on the Red Sea coast (ca. 20 km north of Hurghada just off the main Hurghada-Suez highway) and the Nile emporium of Qena (Kainopolis26'10' N, 32o43' E) 181 km to the southwest (fig. 1). The objectives were to determine-as precisely as possible without excavation-dates of activity at the various installations along the road and to ascertain the relationships between the forts at 'Abu Sha'ar and Bir 'Abu Sha'ar
el-Qibli (27022' N, 33037' E), on the one hand, and
the quarries at Mons Porphyrites (Gebel 'Abu Dukhan), and the installations between 'Abu Sha'ar and
Gebel 'Abu Dukhan and Qena, on the other. This was done by collecting, analyzing, and dating diagnostic surface artifacts (mainly pottery). The survey measured and made plans of the hydreumata (fortified water stations) and other sites on or near the route. These plans were prepared on the basis of comprehensive field measurements taken with a tape measure. Because of the non-parallel walls frequently found in the structures, diagonals were also measured to aid in drawing the plans. Azimuth readings from a hand-held compass verified the direction of the wall lines. Due to the generally irregular plan of the forts, descriptive measurements in this report have been rounded off for convenience to indicate the general size of the structures. The survey also examined numerous ancient towers and cairns that marked the
* A General UniversityResearchGrantfrom the University of Delawareprovided funding for this project.A generous subvention from the Office of the Provost of the Universityof Delawareprovided partialfunding for publication of this manuscript. We wish to thank the Egyptian AntiquitiesOrganizationfor the help that it extended to us and particularly Tawfekand M. Balboushin Cairo,M. ElS. Saghirin Luxor,H. Afyoni in Qena, and our inspectorAbdel Regal Abu Bakr MohammedAbbas.Destructionin the desert by electricalfire of the surveyvehicle hamperedefforts to achieveall the project'sobjectives.Surveyteam members included Sidebotham(director),Zitterkopf(architect), Riley and (ceramicist), AtullahSuliemanMeraieand Awad Muter Selmi as guides. The following abbreviations used: are American Journal of Archaeology95 (1991) 571
BFAFU BSRGE MIFAO NARCE
Bulletin of the Faculty of Arts Fouad I University Bulletin de la Socidte royale de geographie d'Egypte Memoires de l'Institut frangais d'archeologie orientale American Research Center in Egypt Newsletter
Whitcomband
Johnson 1979
D.S. Whitcomband J.H. Johnson eds.,

Quseir al-Qadim 1978, Preliminary Re-
Whitcomband
Johnson 1982
port(Princeton1979). D.S. Whitcomband J.H. Johnson eds.,

Quseir al-Qadim 1980, Preliminary Report (American Research Center in Egypt Reports 7, Malibu 1982).
572
STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY

Clysma (Cleopatris)
[AJA 95
Aila
St.
Antony'.s
St. Pauls
SINAI
St. Catherine's Raithou Leuke Kome (P)
Antinoi
'Abu Sha'oor
-1-
Mons
Porphyrites
Mons Claudianus
Kainopolis
Leukos
RED
Limen(P)
SEA
Coptos
Magna
0 SI Kilometers
50
100
B e r e nice
Fig. 1. The northern shores of the Red Sea in the Roman-Byzantineperiod route between 'Abu Sha'ar and Qena to establish more accurately the course and character of the ancient road. Earlier scholars believed that the installations in and around 'Abu Sha'ar were remains of the PtolemaicRoman port of Myos Hormos' and that the road, dotted with hydreumata, leading thence to the Nile (seemingly referred to by Strabo 17.1.45), protected and monitored traffic between the Red Sea emporium and Qena.2 The road also provided watering points
I For a summary,see S.E. Sidebotham,J.A. Riley, H.A. Hamroush, and H. Barakat, "Fieldworkon the Red Sea Coast: The 1987 Season," JARCE 26 (1989) 131-33; cf. J.
Burton, Collectiones Aegyptiaca (1820-1839)
Introduction, Translation, and Commentary(Princeton 1989)
53-54; L. Casson, The PeriplusMaris Erythraei.Text with 94-97, 273. 2 J.G. Wilkinson, "Noteson a Part of the EasternDesert of Upper Egypt,"JRGS (1832) 28-60; E.A. Floyer,"Notes 2 on a Sketch Map of Two Routes in the Eastern Desert of
Egypt," Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society 11 (Nov.
Lettersfrom Egypt, Ethiopia, and the Peninsula of Sinai (Lon-
in manuscripts the British Museum,Add. Mss.25,624: 102108 (1822) and 25,626: 50-53 (March 1831); R. Lepsius,
unpublished
don 1853) 289; A. Bernand, Pan du Desert(Leiden 1977)
1887) 659-81; J. Couyat, "Portsgreco-romainsde la mer
1991]
SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD
573
and rest stops for teams hauling stone from the quarries at Mons Porphyrites and, over that portion from the el-Saqqia station westward to the Nile, from the quarries at Mons Claudianus.3 The University of Delaware archaeological survey and excavations in the 'Abu Sha'ar/Bir 'Abu Sha'ar elQibli region in the summers of 1987 and 1990 proved that the area was not the location of Myos Hormos, but rather the site of a large late Roman/Byzantine (late third/fourth-seventh century) fort, a smaller fort, and related contemporary installations.4 The 1987 and 1990 excavations at 'Abu Sha'ar discovered no recognizably datable pottery earlier than the third nor later than the seventh century.5 Clearly the extant remains in the 'Abu Sha'ar area were not associated with Ptolemaic-early Roman maritime commerce in the Red Sea-Indian Ocean and cannot, therefore, be Myos Hormos. There has been some speculation as to the precise location of the famous emporium of Myos Hormos mentioned in Diodorus Siculus (3.39.1-2), Strabo (2.5.12; 16.4.5; 16.4.24; 17.1.45), the Nicanor ostraca archive,6 Pliny the Elder (HN 6.33.168), the Periplus Maris Erythraei (1; 19),7 and Claudius Ptolemy (Geog. 4.5.8), but no suitable site has yet been identified.8 The cairns/towers, stations, and tracks prove that there was an ancient road from the coast at 'Abu
Sha'ar to the Nile River at Qena (fig. 2). Given the nature of the sites in the 'Abu Sha'ar/Bir 'Abu Sha'ar el-Qibli region, however, it is clear that the road leading thence to the Nile was not a commercial thoroughfare in the same manner as the routes joining Quseir al-Qadim (Leukos Limen) to the Nile at Qift (Coptos)9 or Berenice to Edfu (Apollonopolis Magna) and later to Qift (fig. 1).10Those thoroughfares carried commerce between the Red Sea ports and the Nile as well as traffic from the mines and quarries in the region. The 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile road facilitated the movement of stone from the quarries at Mons Porphyrites and Mons Claudianus, and the movement of troops and communications among the various desert forts and, from the late third/early fourth century on, between the fort at 'Abu Sha'ar and the Nile. The road and installations may also have facilitated Christian pilgrims traveling between Upper Egypt and sites in the Eastern Desert, Sinai, and the Holy Land. This road, however, most likely did not carry commercial traffic stemming from the Red Sea-Indian Ocean commerce in the Ptolemaic-early Roman period. This 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile road is, most likely, not the one Strabo (17.1.45) described. The misidentification of the site of 'Abu Sha'ar with Myos Hormos led previous scholars to a partial misunderstanding of the dates and purpose of the road
rouge et grandes routes du desert arabique,"CRAI 1910, 525-42; J. Couyat, "La route de Myos Hormos et les carrieresde porphyrerouge,"BIFAO7 (1910) 15-33; F. Bisson de la Roque, "Voyagedu Djebel Shaib,"BSRGE 11 (1922) 113-40; G.W. Murray,"The Roman Roads and Stationsin the EasternDesertof Egypt,"JEA11 (1925) 138-50; C.H.O. Scaife, "A Note on Certain Inscriptionsat Gebel Dokhan, and on a Small Station,Hitherto Unrecorded,on the Road from Kainopolisto MyosHormos,"BFAFU 2.1 (1934) 10615; C.H.O. Scaife, "Two Inscriptionsat Mons Porphyrites (GebelDokhan).Also a Description,withPlans,of the Station between Kainopolis& Myos Hormos Together with Some Other Ruins in the Neighbourhood of Gebel Dokhan," BFAFU 3.2 (1935) 58-164; C.H.O. Scaife, "FurtherNotes on MyosHormos and Tadnos Fons,"BFAFU4.1 (1936) 551955) 89-239; D. Meredith and L.A. Tregenza, "Notes on RomanRoadsand Stationsin the EasternDesert I. (a) From Qena to Bab el-Mukheiniq.(b) The Roman Station in W. Abu Zawal," BFAFU 11.1 (1949) 1-19; D. Meredith,"The Roman Remains in the Eastern Desert of Egypt," JEA 38 N.G. 36 Coptos (Oxford 1958) passim:A revised version of this map sheet will be prepared by S.E. Sidebothamas part of the AmericanPhilologicalAssociation's Atlas of the Greek and Roman World,edited by J.A. Talbert; Bernand (supra n. 1) 44-49 for bibliographyand 49-54 on the road; M. Redd6andJ.-C. Golvin,"DuNil a la MerRouge:Documents anciens et nouveaux sur les routes du desert oriental d'Egypte," Karthago21 (1986-1987) 5-64; S.E. Sidebotham,
(1952) 94-111; cf. D. Meredith, Tabula Imperii Romani Sheet 64; L.A. Tregenza, The Red Sea Mountains of Egypt (London
A.D. 217 (Leiden 1986) 58-59. 3 Supran. 2. 4 Sidebothamet al. (supra n. 1) 127-66 and results of the 1990 excavations,publicationforthcoming(infra n. 26). 5 Sidebothamet al. (supra n. 1) 149-61 and results of the 1990 excavations,publicationforthcoming. 6 For this archive,see Sidebotham(supra n. 2) 50-51. 7 See now Casson(supran. 1) 13-14, 94-97; supra n. 1. 8 Redd6 and Golvin (supra n. 2) 63 believe that Myos Hormos is located at Quseir al-Qadim,but excavationscarried out there in 1978, 1980, and 1982 revealed only a Romanand MedievalIslamicport; there was, except for the find of a single very worn bronze coin of Ptolemy III, no evidence of Ptolemaicactivity;cf. S.M. Burstein, Agathar36 and notes. For Quseiral-Qadimsee: WhitcombandJohnson 1979;Whitcomb Johnson 1982;D.S. Whitcomb and and J.H. Johnson, "1982 Season of Excavationsat Quseir alQadim,"NARCE 120 (Winter 1982) 24-30; final report forthcoming. and S.E. Sidebotham,"Stations and 9 See R.E. Zitterkopf Towers on the Quseir-Nile Road," JEA 75 (1989) 155-89; M. Redd6 and T. Bauzou, "Pistes caravanieresde Syrie, d'Arabieet d'igypte," in T. Fahd ed., L'Arabie prdislamique
et son environnement historique et culturel. Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg, 24-27 juin 1987 (Travaux du Centre de Recherche sur le Proche-Orient et la Grace antiques 10, Leiden chides of Cnidus On the Erythraean Sea (London 1989) 135-
Roman Economic Policy in the Erythra Thalassa, 30 B.C.-
1989) 485-90. 10 Summarizedin Sidebotham (supran. 2) 59-61.
574
[AJA 95
Bir 'Abu Sho'or El- Qibli -Umm Sidro -I
RED
S EA
Abu
Sho'or
Mons Porphyrites Umm Bolod Qattar /,
Abu Sloor I, Wadi Belih (Hurghodo) W' Qtt oBodia'
II
Wadi Nagat Monastery
7/ I/
Deir EI-Atrash
SBob EI-Mukhenig El- Saqqia

II
,)5
Mons
Claudianus
/
/
16
I'
El
Heita
/
/
'I
S'--
Abu
Sho' or - Nile
Route
Other Routes 11 II
II I'
/ */Qreiya UOry
Major Quarry Praesidium / Hydreuma
Kainopolis (Qena) Tentyris (Dendero ? Coptos (Qift)
10 Scale
30 40 20 in Kilometers
50
REZ 1989
Fig. 2. Principalroute from 'Abu Sha'arto Kainopolis(Qena) joining 'Abu Sha'ar and Mons Porphyrites to the Nile. Earlier scholars did not date the installations on the road through detailed ceramic analysis"1nor did they record evidence of extensive rebuilding/reuse of several of the major hydreumata on the road or explore the implications of such remodeling for the history and function of these sites. Most plans of these installations drawn by earlier travelers are, to a greater or lesser extent, only of a general nature and often inaccurate, thereby requiring the University of Delaware survey to make new plans. The survey team investigated the following sites from the Red Sea coast at 'Abu Sha'ar to Qena on the Nile: 1) the Roman quarry installations in the Mons
" Burton (supran. 1) Add. Mss.25,625: 50 recto (16 May 1823) notes a large quantity of blue frit pottery at Mons Porphyrites,which he says "seemsto have been in general use at all the stations on the road to Kend."De la Roque (supran. 2) 138-40 describespotteryhe found, but he made
no drawingsand did not date these ceramics; Tregenza 1955 (supra n. 2) 178 describes pottery from the settlement at Wadi Nagat as fourth century; Meredith 1952 (supra n. 2) 109 describespotteryat el-Heita as second-third century.
1991]
575
r
";4A::-:::::;:
.-:... ::::_:?: . S:i :...::::; X:; xp: :9:::n ~ ::-;:: DUF :-:::;;::-:-::,::-. : :: "'Viii~i:iibi a::;:: Miiii~ii
07i-i;iii;:~:ii;.:
7:
from the WadiMa'amal. Fig. 3. Mons Porphyrites(Gebel'AbuDukhan).Rampleading up to Lycabettos Porphyrites/Gebel 'Abu Dukhan region, 2) the Roman fort at the edge of Wadi Belih, 3) the Roman fort, fortified rock outcrop, and animal-tethering lines at Badia', 4) the Roman fort at Umm Balad, 5) the animal-tethering lines (?) and Roman fort at Qattar, 6) the settlement in Wadi Nagat/Wadi Qattar, 7) the animal-tethering lines and Roman fort at Deir elAtrash, 8) a small mining settlement about 2 km northwest of Deir el-Atrash, 9) the animal-tethering lines and Roman station at Bab el-Mukhenig, 10) the animal-tethering lines, hydraulic installations, and Roman fort at el-Saqqia, 11) the animal-tethering lines (?) and two Roman forts at el-Heita, and 12) the animal-tethering lines (?) and Roman fort at el-'Aras.
MONS PORPHYRITES
The first sites investigated were in the quarry areas of Mons Porphyrites (Gebel 'Abu Dukhan 27013' N,
E). These included the so-called Northwest Village and its outbuildings, the well and nearby castellum and trash dump in the Wadi Ma'amal, and the quarry site, small village, and nearby cemetery in the area known as Lycabettos (fig. 3). The survey did not investigate the station at Umm Sidra, on the route from the quarries and castellum to the main road, because previous visits to Umm Sidra revealed a scarcity of surface pottery. Ancient sources refer to Mons Porphyrites and the purple and black porphyritic andesite stone quarried there.12 A German survey of 1964 drew plans of the major structures at Mons Porphyrites;13 numerous earlier visitors to the region also wrote about or drew plans of some or all of these installations.'4 The survey did not produce plans of any structures in the Mons Porphyrites area, but given our limited time, concentrated instead upon collecting, analyzing, and dating pottery from the region,
33o16'
12
Pliny, HN 36.11.57; 36.19.88; Suet. Ner. 50; S.H.A.
Antoninus Pius 11; S.H.A., Elagabalus 24; S.H.A., Severus Alexander 25; S.H.A., Probus 2; Claud. In Ruf. 2.135; Isid. CIL 15.7191 = ILS 8729 and CIG 2.3148; cf. R. Gnoli,
J. HekekyanBey, "Notes on the Eastern Desert of Egypt, from GebelAfrit,by the AncientPorphyry Quarriesof Gebel Dukhan, Near to the Old Stationof Gebel Gir; with a Brief
Account of the Ruins at Gebel Dukhan,"Journal of theAsiatic
Etym.16.5.5; Bernand(supran. 1) 54-65, 66-68, 70-77; cf. Marmora romana(Rome 1971) 100-102, 112-14. 13 T. Krauset al., "MonsClaudianus-MonsPorphyrites. Bericht fiber die zweite Forschungsreise1964,"MDIK 22 (1967) 157-201 for Mons Porphyrites. 14 Burton (supra n. 1) Add. Mss. 25,625: 34-51 for a during description,plansand drawingsof MonsPorphyrites his visit on 10-19 May 1823; Wilkinson(supran. 2) 42-49;
Societyof Bengal 17.ii (1848) 584-87; Lepsius (supra n. 1)

286-88; C. Dubois, Etude sur l'administration et exploitation des carrieres marbres, porphyre, granit, etc. dans le monde romain (Paris 1908) 61-68; K. Fitzler, Steinbriiche und Bergwerke im ptolemiiischenund r6mischenAgypten (Leipzig 1910) 94-99; V. Stuart, "Gebel Dokhan," Cairo Scientific Bulletin 4 (1910) 64-66; A.E.P. Weigall, Travels in the Upper Egyptian
roDeserts(Edinburgh1913) 90-114; J. Lesquier,L'armee
576
[AJA 95
which had never before been undertaken. The pottery collected from the Northwest Village, its outbuildings, and Lycabettos (see infra, cat. nos. 1-23) dates to the first-second century, that from the castellum trash dump to the first-second and thirdfourth centuries. Overall, the ceramic evidence supports earlier scholarly conclusions that the quarries functioned between the first and fourth centuries A.C.15 A Greek inscription, found in the cemetery area below and on a separate spur from the Lycabettos quarries, is on a tombstone of a Christian named John from Hermopolis,16 who died and was buried in the quarry area. Another Greek inscription, beneath the "John" inscription and carved upside down, indicates a probable secondary use of the stone. On the reverse is an apparent Christian symbol. Scaife,17 Meredith,'8 and Bernand'9 noted and described this tombstone, which members of the project collected and deposited in the Cairo Museum. The stone, of purple porphyry and broken in two parts, measures 60 cm long x 21 cm wide x 5.5 cm thick.20 The text reads: Obverse AHOK HETO HOEHIIKI IHCN IAOC OYNIA OCTOY EPMOHI OAITOY Reverse C9Y
I(WA NHCA
Pottery associated with the Lycabettos site dates to the first-second century (cat. nos. 11-17), but it is uncertain if the inscription can be dated to this period. Meredith and Scaife were unsure whether this tombstone belonged to an individual who died working the quarries as convict labor or was inscribed for a later Anchorite who lived in the region after the quarries were no longer exploited. There is archaeological evidence of a fourth-century Christian church in the Mons Porphyrites area and there were such settlements elsewhere in the Eastern Desert.21 Literary evidence suggests that there may have been an Anchorite settlement at Mons Porphyrites, but interpretation of these texts remains enigmatic.22 Literary and archaeological evidence indicates that free labor and military personnel also worked at the quarries.23 Given that the tombstone is of a Christian, associated with "Roman" pottery from the nearby village, one might conclude that John's presence here was penal in nature. Convict laborers including Christians were regularly condemned to mines and quarries in the first to early fourth century throughout the empire.24 It is unlikely, however, that a convict would have received a tombstone; John may well have lived in the area later in the fourth century as free corv6e labor working in the quarries or as an Anchorite hermit.
WADI BELIH
The fort at Wadi Belih (27014' N, 33023' E) is the last major installation one encounters coming from
maine d'Egypte d'Auguste & Dioclitien (MIFAO 41, Cairo
1918) 439-41; C.H.O. Scaife, "Note on a Visit to the ImpeBFAFU 1.1 (1933) rialPorphyryQuarriesat GebelDokhan," 144-45; L.A. Tregenza, "Noteson Inscriptionsand Graffiti at MonsClaudianusand Mons Porphyrites and on the 'Flavius' Stone in Wadi Qattar, Collected during a Visit to the S.E. Desert in the Summer of 1949,"BFAFU 11.2 (1949) 141-46 for Mons Porphyrites;D. Meredithand L.A. Tregenza, "Mons Porphyrites: The North-West Village and BFAFU 12.1 (1950) 131-47; D. Meredith,ConQuarries,"
For numismatic evidencesee Tregenza(supran. 2) 123. It is unclearwhich Hermopolis:HermopolisParva(Damanhur, in the Delta) or Hermopolis Magna (Ashmunein, in Upper Egypt). Hermopolis and the Hermopolite Nome were heavilyChristianas papyrisuggest: see E. Wipszycka,
15 16
Les ressourceset les activites iconomiques des iglises en Egypte du IVe au VIIIe sikcle (Papyrologica Bruxellensia 10, Brussels
Egypt(Diss. Univ. of London 1954): most of this opus deals withMonsPorphyrites associatedinstallations; Meredith and 1952 (supra n. 2) 108 for numismaticevidence from the castellum in the Wadi Ma'amal;G.W. Murray,Dare Me to the Desert(New York 1968) 115-29; Bernand (supra n. 1) 51-53, 54-65, 66-68, 70-77; RE 22.1 (1953) 313-14 s.v. Porphyrites(H. Kees); for the geology of the Mons Porphyritesregion, see T. Barronand W.F.Hume, Topography
and Geology of the Eastern Desert of Egypt-Central Portion
tributions to the Roman Archaeology of the Eastern Desert of
(Cairo1902) 27-28; Gnoli (supran. 12) 112-14; Redd6and Golvin (supra n. 2) 33 reproduce an earlier plan of the castellumat Mons Porphyrites;see now M.J. Klein, Untersuchungen zu den kaiserlichen Steinbriichen an Mons Porphyrites und Mons Claudianus in der distlichen Wiiste Agyptens
1972) 43-47. 17 Scaife 1934 (supran. 2) 109-10. 18 Meredith 1954 (supra n. 14) 426-32; Meredith 1952 (supran. 2) 108. 19 Bernand (supran. 1) 73-74 dates it "Peut-etredu IVe p. C." 20 Bernand (supran. 1) 73 gives slightlydifferent dimensions. 21 Meredith 1952 (supran. 2) 108. 22 Cf. Tregenza (supran. 2) 177-79; See Bernand(supra n. 1) 70-73, inscription no. 28 for the Didymos church, which he believes is contemporarywith the "John" Herof mopolis inscription. 23 Palladius, Historia Lausiaca 34; 36; cf. R.T. Meyer,
trans., Palladius: The Lausiac History (Westminster, Md.
1965) 195 n. 294; J. Moschus,PratumSpirituale124 (in J.-
88.
P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Paris 1865) 2985-
(Bonn 1988); on porphyry see LA IV (1982) 1071-73, s.v. Porphyr(R.S. Bianchi).
24 F. Millar,"Condemnation to Hard Labour in the Roto man Empire,from theJulio-Claudians Constantine," BSR
1991]
577
//
r~
II i
I/ II -
I,
\ \
a
1,
\t4 \
\ \\
]
I
Ii
5 10 SCALE IN METERS
REZ 1989
Fig. 4. Planof fort in the WadiBelih. A) buttresswith batter, B) later (?) constructionof poorer quality,C) low retaining walls (?), D) area washed away by wadi torrent, and E) buttress(?). the Nile before reaching the forts in the Bir 'Abu Sha'ar el-Qibli/'Abu Sha'ar area on the Red Sea coast (fig. 4). The Wadi Belih fort is also one of the most enigmatic structures in the region. Plans and descriptions by earlier travelers25 do not reflect its true configuration and, thus, it was redrawn by the Delaware survey. The size, design, apparent lack of either an extant intra- or extramural well or cistern, and early date determined by pottery analysis (first-second century A.C.; see cat. no. 24) suggest that the installation had fallen out of use long before construction of the forts at Bir 'Abu Sha'ar el-Qibli and 'Abu Sha'ar. The
asymmetrical polygonally planned fort has a long narrow passageway leading south from the fort wall to the single gate. The main body of the fort, minus the gate and passageway, measures ca. 28 m north-south x ca. 25 m east-west. The passageway itself is ca. 10 m long with an interior width of ca. 2 m. Fort walls are approximately 1 m thick and there are 14 internal rooms (plus one or two that are clearly later additions of unknown date, fig. 4.B), the function of which could not be precisely determined from surface surveying due to the presence of much wind-blown sand. The 14 rooms probably served as quarters and storage facilities for the garrison, which could not have numbered more than 100 men-probably considerably fewer-and were undoubtedly mounted troops, given the climate and terrain of the area. Adjacent to the east and northeast perimeter wall are exposed segments of a low wall (fig. 4.C). This outer wall is on the opposite side of water flow in the wadi and seems to have been merely a retaining wall or other small enclosure built up against the exterior face of the fort at some unknown date; it does not appear to represent a patently different chronological phase of the fortification wall of the fort itself. No evidence of exterior animal-tethering lines is found at this fort, but adjacent wadis/seyels show severe scouring from floods over the years, further borne out by the missing southeast corner (fig. 4.D) and part of the western wall of the fort, washed away by periodic flash floods. Possibly, any animal-tethering lines or wells and cisterns that existed outside the fort lay in these wadi areas and have been destroyed leaving no surface trace. The fort may have monitored and assisted traffic coming from the quarries at Mons Porphyrites via Wadi Umm Sidra in which case accommodations for men and animals would be expected. The fort, however, is somewhat east of the road linking Umm Sidra to the Nile. Alternatively the installation at Wadi Belih may have been a station on the second-century Via Hadriana, which linked Antinoe on the Nile over to the Red Sea and south along or near the coast to Berenice, but this interpretation is also tentative.26 An architectural feature visible above
52 (1984) 124-47, 140 for Egypt specifically;Meredithand Tregenza (supran. 14) 142; Aelius Aristeides,Orat.Aegypt. Orations XVII-LIII [Leiden 1981] 209 and 407, ns. 95-96); Palaest. possiblyJoseph. 6.418; possiblyEuseb.De Martyr. BJ 8.1 (may be a corrupt passage);cf. Klein (supra n. 14) 42; for convictlabor in Egyptianmines in the Ptolemaicperiod, see Burstein (supra n. 8) 58-68 (=Bk 5.23-29). Evidence from ostracaexcavatedby the IFAO team at Mons Claudianus suggests that the bulk of the work force there was free labor (personalcommunication). 25 Cf. Scaife 1935 (supran. 2) 101-102 and plan X; Mer67 (cf. C.A. Behr, P. Aelius Aristides: The Complete Works 2.
edith 1952 (supran. 2) 97 for sketchplan of the fort in Wadi Belih; Tregenza (supran. 2) 141-42 for a descriptionof the fort; Burton (supran. 1) Add. Mss.25,626: 53 verso drew a map of the WadiBelih. 26 R.E. Zitterkopfconducted a survey of this region in July 1990, publicationof which will appear in S.E. Sidebotham ed., 'AbuSha'ar, 1990 Preliminary Report (forthcom-
ing). On the Via Hadrianasee Meredith 1958 (supra n. 2) 7; Sidebotham(supra n. 2) 61-62; S.E. Sidebotham,"Ports of the Red Sea and the Arabia-India Trade,"in Fahd (supra n. 9) 212-14.
578
[AJA 95
~~Li~~~~~~i~i: :---:-:--~~?;:~-:-~~:RM:i
2m:_-~i-i ii?ii:ii:ii:ii~i~;-iiii~
i-
?i -i ~
:-
:1:::;-:::;:1: ::sr ::iw

of"_4 A#----:''iiiii': kI :?: i~:iiiiii~ :i i:i 414.: V will?_-:l;:_-_ : _.. :
?: ;_:i _ ;- : :- _: .?-:. : : -: - ~-: -j~i:' :

::?--i-:;
:::::IS
i::::: :::--:
at Fig. 5. View of installations Badia',looking north ground, suggesting extended use of the site, is a wellmade stone buttress with a batter added to the eastern side of the entrance gate (fig. 4.A); a heap of stones randomly piled against the western side of the entrance may also be the remains of a buttress (fig. 4.E).
BADIA'
The installations at Badia' (27013' N, 33021' E) also serviced the men and animals hauling stone from the quarries at Mons Porphyrites27 and probably also supported logistics and communications between the fort at 'Abu Sha'ar and the Nile (figs. 5-6). The water source was extramural,28 located about 500 m to the north, and still existed as a modern well in January 1989. The discovery of kiln-fired bricks and piles of burned and unburned seashells-mainly murex and strombus bulla-to make lime to line such hydraulic structures and extensive external animal lines attests to the fort's function as a water supply and rest stop. The project, due to lack of time, did not draw a plan of this site, but plans were made by Wilkinson
during one of his visits to the region in the 1820s1830s (fig. 6) and by Scaife in the 1930s.29 The survey collected substantial surface pottery. Analysis of the pottery, which included imported Tripolitanian amphoras and African Red Slip ware, indicates activity at the hydreumain the first-third and third-sixth centuries (see cat. nos. 25-43), which coincides, in the first four centuries, with ceramic dates from sites in the quarry areas of Mons Porphyrites. Numismatic evidence discovered by earlier visitors supports this dating.30 Clearly, however, the site continued in use after the Mons Porphyrites quarries ceased operation. Continued activity at Badia' must, then, have been mainly as support for communications and logistics between the Nile and the installations at 'Abu Sha'ar and, no doubt, as part of the limes system in place in the region after the early fourth century, if not earlier. An unusual feature of Badia' is the presence of two separate walled enclosures. The easternmost one is clearly a traditional fort: a rectangular structure ca. 37 x 45-47 m built of stacked stones with a total of
Cf. Kraus et al. (supra n. 13) 201-203; Scaife 1935 plan of 1823); (supran. 2) 78-81 and plan VI (Wilkinson's Meredith 1952 (supra n. 2) 97 for sketch plan of the hydreumaat Badia'; Redd6 and Golvin (supra n. 2) 31-32 drawnby earlierscholars. reproduceplans of the hydreuma 28 Meredith 1952 (supra n. 2) 105 also notes the extra27
muralwatersource at Badia'. 29 Scaife 1935 (supran. 2) 79-80, plan VI. 30 Meredith1954 (supran. 14)544-45 and Meredith1952 (supra n. 2) 109 note three coins of ConstantineI and one of Theodosius I found here; cf. Tregenza (supra n. 2) 144 for a descriptionof the fort and the numismaticevidence.
1991]
579
III
4
"'s 'o 441Lt i
ICL~a5 5~1?p `?~
at WilkinsonPapersfrom CalkeAbby),BodleianLibrary, Fig. 6. Planof the installations Badia', J.G. Wilkinson,pl. 103 (Gardner Oxford. (Courtesythe NationalTrust) nine round or semicircular towers along the enceinte, including two towers flanking the single southernfacing gate.31 The interior has a number of rooms. Part, at least, of the interior northwestern face of the main fort wall, has a parapet. In the interior of the fort is a large, broken grinding stone. Just outside the gate and to the south are the animal-tethering lines. The other fortified structure to the west is an unusual ovoid shape built of stacked stones with massive walls ca. 4 m high. This fort wall encircles a large rock outcrop rising substantially higher than the surrounding enceinte.32 There is a single entrance on the south-, east flanked by dilapidated round or semicircular towers or wing walls. Parts of the interior walls on the eastern side facing the other fort have remains of a catwalk. There is no apparent reason for the existence of this installation although it has been suggested that it was for signaling purposes or that the rock provided shade or was a sacred site.33The presence of a shallow horizontal shaft on one side of the outcrop may indicate mining exploitation at some phase. Its unusual shape, the highly perplexing large rock outcrop that takes up the entire interior, and the absence of anything but the most rudimentary interior rooms or edifices have no,parallel in the Eastern Desert. Surface surveying did not reveal whether or not the two fortified sites at Badia' were contemporary. Large, well-preserved animal-tethering lines ca. 65 m north-south x ca. 46 m east-west lay south of the main fortified enclosure. They were segregated from the present water source north of the fort. Although the drinking-water source for draft animals may have been available closer to the fort in antiquity, there is an apparent segregation of exterior water facilities from animal-tethering lines here as well as at Deir elAtrash, Bab el-Mukhenig, el-Saqqia, el-Heita, and
~' Krauset al. (supra n. 13) 201-203 for discussion:199, Abb. 24 are mistaken in the number of defensive towers: they omit the center tower on the north rear wall.
32 Scaife 1935 (supran. 2) 79-80, plan VI and pl. VI. Cf. Wilkinson's plan (fig. 6). 33 Scaife 1935 (supran. 2) 79-80.
580
STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF, AND JOHN A. RILEY

UMM BALAD
[AJA 95
The fort and nearby buildings at Umm Balad (27010' N, 33017' E) were directly tied to satellite :_-m-::;-:i~;--I-:_-i--i__~__~- .....-:~--.-:i~i-iiiili-iii~iii~~iilii: :-I:::ii-l~ii ib~,:_-il8:l~ii-:-quarrying operations associated with Mons Porphyrites (figs. 7-8). The fort itself was off a branch road from the main road connecting Mons Porphyrites to Badia' and onward to the Nile.34 The fort is typical of others on the 'Abu Sha'ar-Mons Porphyrites-Qena siciijiiiiiiiii :?:;::;;::: I_:: -;:----:~i~,i-i__-~i ::::: ::i::ii:- ~ .rlR'si-: 'iii~~i:~3~a~,:~~: i~i::::r~::~j: iai~i-~;,i ----_:~_-iir: ::~?::::_:-~~-:i ~lri~-;i~:::: ?-:iii-::::::::--:::IN:o- route in _~i- i--ii~-i~~i~~ii~~ii~i~-i"F~IZ ::~--:; :::.::-:-;:- ~u~4f ~ ,I:-:,::::~ _i::. 5,V,-?-i::--i:-?::;:i~~i;~Cii~~~~i~iiii i~i~ii~ii-i~~~iii-:~!*:~i-: ~ many respects. It is a rectangular structure built of stacked stones with a single entrance on the ~ 9~ .~iiiis Or, Z.:ii~~ii~i~i- Pi~si~~-~iii~ south flanked by semicircular towers. Similar towers dot the exterior walls and the four corners of the fort (cf. fig. 8 for a plan without towers). The interior has numerous rooms and at the back (north interior) is a nicely constructed large rectangular cistern lined with waterproof mortar. Around the top perimeter of the cistern is a recess to allow some type of covering that would have reduced water evaporation losses. The
Fig. 7. View of fort at Umm Balad,looking south possibly at Qattar and el-'Aras (see infra). The animals would have been brought in rotation to drink and then returned to the tethering lines where they would have been fed and rested. The objective was, undoubtedly, to provide orderly control over the thirsty animals, to supply water to as many draft animals as possible using a minimum of water troughs and, given the restricted water supply available, to ration intake to stretch limited quantities. The segregation also prevented the animals from fouling the water supply by moving them quickly away once they had consumed their quota. The project's Ma'aza Bedouin guide indicated ancient graves southwest of the ovoid fort. The presence of scattered bones of indeterminate species, seen by the authors during visits in July 1987, January 1989, and July 1990, and numerous robber holes in this area lend support to the hypothesis that an ancient burial site existed here.
xx
I II Scale
Fig. 8. Plan of fort at Umm Balad. (After C.H.O. Scaife, BFAFU 3.2 [1935] plan VIII)
34 The plan of this site was not drawn by the surveydue to time lost by destructionof the survey vehicle. Cf. sketch plan in Meredith1952 (supran. 2) 97; Scaife 1935 (supran.
and 2) plan VIII, reproducedby Redd% Golvin (supran. 2) 34.
1991]
581
;.
. . ..
tween the quarries and Qena suggests that this was either an active period of quarry use or that there were other functions-unassociated with the quarries-that these road installations performed at that time. We cannot, at present, determine which of these possibilities is the most likely, but given Umm Balad's location off the main road joining Mons Porphyrites, Badia', and the Nile, it is unlikely that it played a role in communications between the fort at 'Abu Sha'ar and the Nile. It seems that Umm Balad was closed as a result of cessation of activities in the nearby quarries and served no purpose other than that directly associated with quarrying activities there. Surface surveying did not reveal the specific functions of several edifices near the fort at Umm Balad. Some of these were built up against the face of a nearby rock outcrop; others were freestanding. Two Roman roads led from Umm Balad: one to the northeast and the other to the southeast (fig. 9). The roads were unpaved, but the Romans made significant efforts to clear stones leaving a relatively smooth, even surface. The roads vary in width from ca. 14 m for the northeast road to ca. 8 m for the southeast road. On the southeast road near its junction with the northeast road the survey recovered a large worked granite stone weight (fig. 10) shaped
Fig. 9. View of road leading southeastfrom Umm Balad water source was outside the fort.35 Several of the rooms have blocked doorways suggesting multiplephase use of at least sections of the fort. There are no animal-tethering lines extant, but a large trash dump, recently badly robbed, sits just outside the gate. Illicit excavations had scattered about large quantities of organic and ceramic artifacts. Included in the finds are an ostracon in Greek that is the end of a letter. The translation is: ". . . in five days, greetings." Cloth and a leather shoe sole were also recovered. Analysis of the pottery, which included imported Tripolitanian amphoras and Cypriot-made Eastern Sigillata A/I ware, reveals that Umm Balad had a long period of occupation. The collected pottery dating from the first-second and, possibly, into the third-fourth centuries A.C. (see cat. nos. 44--80)36 indicates that Umm Balad ceased to be important after that time. Quarrying continued into the third and fourth centuries at Mons Porphyrites and evidence from other hydreumataon the road be-
..........
Fig. 10. Granitespheroid weight from Umm Balad
35 36
Cf. Meredith 1952 (supra n. 2) 105. Tregenza(supran. 2) believessome of the potteryfrom
Umm Baladto be late; see 147-48 for the fort.
582

QATTAR
[AJA 95
like a spheroid with a flattened top and bottom bearing on its top the incuse letters "NE." The stone has the following maximum dimensions: height = 19 cm; diameter = 25 cm; circumference = 91 cm. The overall dimensions of the letters "NE" are 4.8 cm in height and 8.4 cm in width. The letters "NE" are Greek for the number 55, which may have indicated the weight of the stone. Slightly chipped on the top, the stone today weighs 28.9 kg. Taking into consideration the chipped portions, the original weight of the stone was slightly over 29 kg; each unit of the 55 would, therefore, have equaled slightly over 0.527 kg."3 The weight was too small to have been used to weigh stone coming from the quarries; there is no parallel for such weighing of quarry stone in any case. It is possible that the stone represented a standardized weight for fungible items such as sacks of grain shipped to Umm Balad, which would have been weighed upon receipt by the garrison. This, too, however, would have been unusual for most grain in antiquity was measured by volume rather than by weight.
The Delaware survey drew a new plan of the poorly preserved station at Qattar (2707' N, 33013' E) (fig. 11) and noted differences from a plan drawn by J.G. Wilkinson in the early 19th century.38 In January 1989 the fort was in a much poorer state of preservation than in Wilkinson's day due to modern construction in the interior that took place between Murray's visit39 and Scaife's sometime in the 1920s or early 1930s.40 Scaife noted that sand obscured much of the fort interior and that he could see little shown on Wilkinson's plan.4 The rectangular fort, ca. 34 m northsouth x 44 m east-west, originally had one extant entrance on the west flanked by semicircular towers. The towers at the northwest and northeast corners are also round/semicircular, not rectilinear as indicated on Wilkinson's plan. There were probably towers at the southeast and southwest corners, too, but these had been washed away before Wilkinson's visit. Modern well-building activity in the center of the hydreuma has contributed to its deteriorated condi-
I---'.-
L-.JL-0
I=I
I SLI
ANIMAL LINES
i,
rjI
]JL..
E
SCALE IN METERS
Fig. 11. Plan of installationsat Qattar.A) parapet, B) blocked doorway,C) modern well, D) modern basin, E) area leveled in recent times for well construction,F) modern solid core construction,G) large stone rubblepile, and H) windbreak(?)of poorer and later construction.
1855 (London 1967) 65 for parallelsin stone of a similar shape, pl. IX for a weight of 10 libra (ca. 3.2 kg). No comparandaof similarweight to the specimen from Umm Baladcould be found. 38 J.G. Wilkinson(GardnerWilkinsonPapersfrom Calke
37 Cf. F.G. Skinner, Weights and Measures: Their Ancient Origins and Their Development in Great Britain up to A.D.
Oxford ms. XLV D. 19), Scaife 1935 Abby,BodleianLibrary, (supra n. 2) plan V (see text 77-78); Redd' and Golvin (supran. 2) 29 reproduceWilkinson's plan. 39 Murray(supran. 2) 147. 40 Scaife 1935 (supra n. 2) 77. 41 Scaife 1935 (supra n. 2) 78.
1991]
SURVEY THE 'ABUSHA'AR-NILE OF ROAD
583
tion. The concrete wellhead (fig. 11.C)had a modern Arabic inscription carved into it while the concrete alwas still wet. Transliteratedit reads "Maslaha Huand, therefore, dates to the dud, Bir al-'AmirFarouk" time of PrinceFarouk(prince 1920-1937, king 19371952).42 Next to the wellhead was a modern concrete basin (fig. 11.D). Whereas clear evidence exists that the southwest corner of the fort was destroyed by waterflow,the cause of the southeastcorner'sdestruction is more difficult to determine. It may have suffered water erosion, and was then used as an access way for traffic arriving in modern times to construct and use the well (fig. 11.E). The presence south of the fort up the Wadi Qattarof what the local Ma'aza road leading to a modern Bedouin term an "English" settlement fosters speculation that the conmining structionof the modern concrete wellhead and basin were associatedwith this nearby mining activityconducted earlierin this century,presumablyin the 1920s or 1930s.43 Undoubtedly,one source of water for the modern miners would have been the well at Qattar station. One other modern feature, a solid 2.2 m2 tower 1.6 m high and of unknown function (fig. 11.F), composed of cobbles cemented together and located just outside the western gate, might also be associated with this modern constructionor use of the well. There are a number of interior rooms, most badly damaged. There are remains, unnoted by Wilkinson and Scaife, of a catwalkand parapet(fig. 11.A)on the west, north, and east interior fort walls. A blocked doorway (fig. 11.B) pierces a rather thick interior southern cross-wall,suggesting multiple phase use of the site. The ceramicsfrom Qattar,which include imported Africano Grande amphoras from Tunisia, date mainly to the third-fourth century; the amount of first-second century pottery is small (cf. cat. nos. 8188). This evidence suggests that the initial fort constructionwas in the first-second century with subsequent or continuinguse and remodeling(e.g., blocked doorway"B")in the third-fourth centuries. Approximately 35 m west of the gate are stone foundations measured by the Delawaresurvey. H6k6kyan Bey noted these remains, calling them buildNeither Wilkinsonnor ings, stables,and outhouses.44
Scaife, however, recorded them on their plans. Most of the stones were scatteredhaphazardlydue to water flow in the wadi. The overall dimensionsof this stone scatterare ca. 66 x 46 m. These structuresmay have been animal-tetheringlines associatedwith the fort.
SETTLEMENT IN WADI NAGAT/WADI QATTAR
South of the Romanstationat Qattaris an extension of the WadiQattarknown as WadiNagat. At intervals along both eastern and western sides of the wadi are numerous pictographsand some dipinti. These drawings appear to be prehistoric,pre- or early dynastic and depict ibex, other quadrupeds,possiblya giraffe, One drawingdepicts a boat with both and humans.45 and stern high out of the water with a person prow riding in the center. This is typical of the so-called prehistoric sickle-boatpictographs found elsewhere in the EasternDesert.46 The maximumdimensionsof the ship and passengerare 82 x 32 cm. The dipinti, in red paint,fartheralong on the east side of the wadi, depict two warriors each carrying a shield and a
B B
AA A
'
A
I
I
2 I 0 SCALE IN METERS
Lii
REZ 1989
Fig. 12. Planof buildingaboveWadiNagat.A) doorwaywith lintel, and B) vent hole.
42 Murray (supra n. 2) 147. 43 Forthe likelylocationof these mines,see M.G.Ghobrial
and M. Lotfi, The Geology of Gebel Gattar and Gebel Dokhan Areas (Geological Survey Paper 40, Cairo 1967) attached map.
44
46 F. Petrie, "EgyptianShipping Outlines and Notes," Egyptand theEast (March, June 1933) 10-13; H.A. Winkler,
H6k6kyanBey (supra n. 14) 586. and 45 S. Redfordand D.B. Redford,"Graffiti Petroglyphs Old and New from the EasternDesert,"JARCE (1989) 3 26 n. 2 for possibledatesof giraffe graffitiin the EasternDesert of 8000-3600 B.C.
Archaeological Survey of Egypt Rock-Drawings of Southern Upper Egypt I. Sir Robert Mond Desert Expedition Season, 1936-1937: Preliminary Report (London 1938) 35-39 and
pls. XXXIII-XXXIV; Redford and Redford (supra n. 45) 35-37 (figs. 63-64) from Wadi 'Abu Qwei are similar:late Predynastic.
584
[AJA 95
.II
-II
FC
III
K1
S.. II
iIi
IIII
IL
II Ir IL'
\\
o
~~~I
II ".j
[E:u
w
-u SCALE IN METERS 1989l \
_ _
KM
{''"'
REZ
19
at Fig. 13. Planof installations Deir el-Atrash.A) stone parapet,B) stone parapetfilled with mudbrick,C) stairs,D) blockedarch, E) bench, F) brick-linedwell, G) retainingwall for well depression,H) cistern,I) mudbrickplatform,J) massivemudbricktower, K) scatteredstones, L) animallines, M) trash dump, and N) waterchannel. sword; there are other dipinti drawn near these warriors on the same rock face.47 Near the upper end of the wadi is a pool fed by a seasonal waterfall. High above the cataract and hidden from view from below is an edifice (2705' N, 33018' E) of three rooms and two exterior square columns in an excellent state of preservation. Door lintels are still in situ and two of the rooms have windows. The survey's measurements and plan show that the building was very carefully laid out. Maximum exterior dimensions are 7.5 m north-south x 8.3 m east-west (fig. 12).48There is pottery associated with the building (cf. cat. no. 89), but it is not easily datable; Riley dates the ceramics here as "probably at least first-second century A.C." J.G. Wilkinson, G.W. Murray, L.A. Tregenza, D. Meredith, and others visited this site and noted a Greek inscription recording the presence of a Christian Anchorite community in the fourth century; Murray removed the inscription to Luxor in 1949.49 Subsequent to our visit a Ma'aza Bedouin told us that further up the slope of the mountain there are additional huts.50
DEIR EL-ATRASH
The next station after Qattar is Deir el-Atrash

(26057' N, 33o5' E). The plan of this site, drawn by
Burton, Wilkinson,5' and later visitors,52was redrawn by the Delaware survey (fig. 13). The maximum di-
47 Tregenza (supra n. 2) 189 refers to these pictographs. In an interviewwith Sidebothamat his home in Cornwallin July 1988, Mr. Tregenza said he no longer had the photographs he had taken of these pictographs. 48 G.W. Murray, "The Christian Settlement at Qattar," BSRGE 24 (1951) 107-14; Meredith 1952 (supran. 2) 108, n. 3 notes Wilkinson's plan of the structure. 9 Wilkinson(supran. 2) 49-50; Tregenza 1949 (supran. 14) 146-50; Murray(supran. 48) 113; Meredith1952 (supra n. 2) 108 and n. 3 writesthat Wilkinsonmade a drawingof this inscription;cf. Tregenza (supra n. 2) 176-79. 50 Tregenza (supra n. 2) 178-79 also notes these huts.
51 Burton (supran. 1) Add. Mss.25,625: 54 of May 1823; Wilkinson,Papers(supran. 38) ms. XLV D.10; Scaife 1935 (supra n. 2) plan IV with description72-77, pl. V; Redde and Golvin(supran. 2) 27 reproduceWilkinson's plan. 52 Barronand Hume (supra n. 14) pl. IX reproduced by Murray(supra n. 2) pl. XII (with brief description, 140); also reproduced by Redde and Golvin (supra n. 2) 28 and
B. Isaac, The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in the East
(Oxford 1990) 202, fig. 11; sketch plan in Meredith 1952 (supra n. 2) 97; Tregenza (supra n. 2) 205-206 for a brief descriptionof the site; Burton(supran. 1) Add. Mss.25,625: 56 verso for a smallsketchof the site.
1991]
ROAD OF SURVEY THE 'ABUSHA'AR-NILE
585
At
?SZ
2"M ka
44 41
A,
16.
Aw.
Fig.14.Viewof southgateof fortat Deirel-Atrash mensionsof the quadrilaterally shaped outer fort wall are ca. 55 x 55 m; the massive perimeter wall has a batter.The average wall width at the top is ca. 1 m; the wall is much thicker at its base. This is the first on hydreuma the route coming from the Red Sea that has substantialportions built of mudbrick. In some instancesmudbrickis added to lower stone-builtfeatures: in other instanceswhole towers,both along the enceinte and at the gate (fig. 14) as well as in the interior adjacent to the cistern, appear to have been built to their full height in sun-dried mudbrick.The function of the mudbricktower inside the fort adjacent to the southwest cistern (fig. 13.J) is enigmatic. It may have supported a shadoof that helped to move water from the well or basin to a cisternin the southwest corner of the fort (see infra); it may have been a watchtower.This tower has a close parallel in the lower fort at el-Heita (see infra, fig. 20.F). The Deir el-Atrash fort has a single entrance on the south flankedby two mudbrickrectangular towers (fig. 14).56 A trash dump was found outside the fort entrance to the south (fig. 13.M). There are other towersat the corners-one in mudbrickat the southeast corner, the others in stone and, approximately midway along two of the walls, other towers or buttresses with stone bases and mudbrick superstructures. Wilkinsonnoted these latter features, but they were in a very poor state of preservationin January there are animal1989. In addition to the hydreuma lines outside, adjacentto the east wall of the tethering fort (fig. 13.L). West of the fort is a segmented water channel with plug holes on the bottomjoining each segment. It is ca. 30 m long and ca. 1.2 m wide and was noted by It Wilkinsonand Meredith.54 fed a square or rectanplan). gular cistern(fig. 13, ext. H; not on Wilkinson's This exterior channel was, perhaps, associatedwith a pylon-shapedstructureat the southwestinterior corner of the fort adjacentto the large cistern there (fig. 13, int. H). Water from this cistern was lifted, most likely by bucket, and conveyed thence to the exterior channel and cistern. The interior cistern has access steps down to it on the east side and all around its periphery at the top is a recess that undoubtedly accommodatedsome type of removable covering to reduce evaporation.The pylon-shaped structure for transportingwater to the exterior segmented water channel (fig. 13.I) was, however, constructed on top of the recessin the middle of the southern side of the cistern. Any cistern cover probablydid not provide a cutout for this pylon. It more likely indicates a later constructionat a date when the concept of covering the cistern was abandoned. This hydraulic complex undoubtedly provided drinking water for teams of
53See Barronand Hume (supran. 14) pl. VIII for a fanciful sketch the gateandtowers Deirel-Atrash. of at
n. 1952(supra 2) 96. 54Meredith
586
[AJA 95
draft animals conveying stone from the quarries at Mons Porphyrites. Perhaps in this period and most probably later in the fourth-seventh centuries this facility also supplied military units patrolling the region. This hydraulic feature was totally divorced from the animal lines themselves (fig. 13.L) where the beasts would have been tethered to rest and eat. There was a similar segregation of exterior watering facilities from animal lines (noted above) at Bab el-Mukhenig, el-Saqqia, el-Heita, and seemingly at Badia'. A huge gaping hole, the probable remains of a depression for a well, dominates the interior of the fort. Portions of the stone lining of this pit are extant at the northern end (fig. 13.G). At the bottom is a smaller well ca. 1 m in diameter and lined with kilnfired bricks (fig. 13.F). Although this type of huge well depression exists frequently inside other forts in the Eastern Desert, this is the only occurrence inside a fort on the 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile route.55 The remains of another hydraulic structure (fig. 13.N) stand on the southeast rim of the depression. A segment 4.5 m long of a curved water channel is visible. The channel is constructed of fired brick covered with waterproof plaster. It was probably filled by buckets drawn from the well; it either conveyed water for use within the fort or else was part of a system to transfer water to the cistern in the southern corner of the fort. The functions of other parts of the structure are unclear. Although almost all of the structure had collapsed into the depression, remnants of plastered surfaces indicate a cistern-like facility that had been filled with rubble, perhaps even in antiquity. There are mudbrick additions to the stone fort wall on its southern side. There are also rooms inside the fort built of stone in the lower courses with upper courses of mudbrick. Adjacent to one of these rooms in the northeast side is a narrow bench-like structure of unknown function built of stone (fig. 13.E). Several interior rooms are long, narrow, and built in mudbrick using apses and barrel vaults. These structures are, judging by parallels from elsewhere in Egypt and the Roman world, storage magazines (horrea). Mudbrick architecture at this fort and at the forts at ElHeita (see infra) make regular use of arches and vaults. There is a long tradition in Egyptian architecture of the use of mudbrick arches and vaults;56 the tensile strength and nature of the mudbrick was best
applied in this type of architecture rather than in the post-and-lintel tradition commonly found in stone architecture. One extant stairway parallel to the western interior wall of the fort at its northwest corner gives access to the top of the wall and the nearby tower (fig. 13.C). There were undoubtedly other such stairways-Wilkinson noted one at the northeast corner-in the fort now either destroyed or covered by fallen debris, but none is evident today. Stone parapets are extant along parts of the northern, eastern (not noted completely by Wilkinson), and southern interior walls of the fort (fig. 13.A); in the southwest corner this stone parapet is topped by mudbrick (fig. 13.B). The southwest corner tower, extant to a height of ca. 3.5 m, is built entirely of stone and the angle of batter increased partway up. On the other hand, the southeast tower is constructed of sun-dried mudbrick with a rubble and sand fill. Towers on the northwest and northeast corners are rectilinear stone structures of varying sizes. The one at the northwest corner is rather slight, that at the northeast corner more substantial in size; both are in very poor condition. The mudbrick towers flanking the fort gate are obvious repairs or additions to the original stone fort structure. The eastern gate tower was, most likely, originally built of stone, possibly with kiln-brick portions or later kiln-brick additions or repairs. In its latest phase the tower consisted of sun-dried mudbrick. It is clear from the eastern gate tower, from mudbrick repairs, additions, blocked doorways (e.g., fig. 13.D), and from the pylon-shaped structure at the southern edge of the southwest interior corner cistern (fig. 13.I) that Deir el-Atrash was used over a long period of time. It cannot be determined when these mudbrick additions were made or if they were made at the same time or over a period of years, but pottery analysis indicates occupation in the first-second centuries and during the fourth-seventh centuries (cf. cat. nos. 90-100). This site, along with the lower fort at el-Heita, also built of mudbrick and stone, had ceramic evidence suggesting later periods of use than any of the other stone-built forts on this route. Deir el-Atrash produced ceramic evidence from the fourth-seventh centuries, but little from the first-second, and none from the third century. This is odd since the hydreumaand
55 For a descriptionof similarwells in the EasternDesert on the Quseir-Nile road, see Zitterkopfand Sidebotham (supran. 9) 175-76, 178.
in 56 A.J. Spencer,BrickArchitecture AncientEgypt(Warminster 1979) 123-26.
1991]
587
~~rriEL.
ev,
Fill
~ ~
LiiT
NL
at Fig. 15. Plan of installations Bab el-Mukhenig.(After C.H.O. Scaife,BFAFU 3.2 [1935] plan III) its associated facilities here suggest support for quarrying operations in the first-fourth centuries at Mons Porphyrites. This is clearly seen in the extramural hydraulic installation west of the fort and the extensive animal-tethering lines east of the fort measuring ca. 37 x 57 m (fig. 13.L). After the quarries at Mons Porphyrites ceased to function in the fourth century, however, the purpose of the fort at Deir el-Atrash is less clear. It may have served as a support facility for the garrisons and forts on the Red Sea coast at Bir 'Abu Sha'ar el-Qibli and 'Abu Sha'ar and as part of a limes system in the Eastern Desert that defended the region from nomadic incursions in the later third/ fourth-seventh centuries (see infra).
MINING SETTLEMENT NORTHWEST EL-ATRASH OF DEIR
The Ma'aza Bedouin indicating gold-mining activity.5" guide who accompanied the survey did not know the name of the wadi nor of the site and it does not appear in the records of earlier travelers.
BAB EL-MUKHENIG
The survey examined a small mining settlement up a side wadi about 2 km northwest of the main fort at Deir el-Atrash. The settlement, composed of small roundish and squarish huts with walls built of cobbles and occasionally built up against larger rock outcrops, had mainly non-diagnostic pottery associated with it; one sherd appeared to be of the fourth or fifth century A.C. (see cat. no. 102). The buildings hugged the lower slopes of the mountains bordering the east side of the wadi. Brick-red fired clay inside one of the edifices indicates a furnace complex. A large number of grinding stones, many intact, litter the site, perhaps
Bab el-Mukhenig (26o52' N, 33'2' E) has no hydreuma nor fortified structure of any kind. Plans were drawn by earlier visitors (see e.g., fig. 15)58 and the Delaware survey did not have sufficient time to redraw the site plan. Located at the intersection of Wadi el-Atrash and Wadi el-Ghazza, it appears to be a station supporting either quarry traffic from Mons Porphyrites or traffic to the habitations and mines up Wadi Ghazza (not included in the survey area): there are animal-tethering lines-smaller in dimension than those at other sites along the route-and hydraulic structures segregated from the animal lines as at Deir el-Atrash, el-Saqqia, Badia', and el-Heita. Some distance from the hydraulic installation are the main buildings, at the foot of a rock outcrop. On top of one end of the rock outcrop is a small edifice that may have had a security function. The association with quarry operations at Mons Porphyrites cannot, however, be proven; while the pottery from this site consists of amphoras, very large open terracotta vessels serving, no doubt, a hydraulic function, and some coarse ware, none can be closely dated (see cat. nos.
106-108).
57 Cf. Burstein (supran. 8) 59-68 (=Bk 5.25-29). 58 Scaife 1934 (supra n. 2) 113-15; Scaife 1935 (supran. 2) 72 and plan III; Redd6 and Golvin(supran. 2) 26 repro-
duce Scaife's plan; See Tregenza (supra n. 2) 207 for a descriptionof the area.
588
[AJA 95
00
A'
20 30 0) 40 SCALE IN METERS REZ 1989
50
Fig. 16. Plan of installationsat el-Saqqia.A) southern depression, B) eastern depression, C) earthen embankment around southern depression, D) earthen embankment around eastern depression, E) southeast channel, F) northwest channel, G) rectangularedifice, H) rectangularedifice, I) elevated water channel, J) elevated water channel, K) rectangularcistern, L) rectangularcistern, partlycollapsed, M) well (?), N) entranceto southerndepression,0) wall, P) animallines, Q) elevated water channel, and R) fort. EL-SAQQIA The Delaware survey drew new plans of el-Saqqia {26044' N, 32o53' E), which had been drawn initially by Wilkinson59 and by at least one later visitor (figs. 16-17).60 Ceramic evidence, including imported amphoras of the Africano Grande type from Tunisia, indicates activity in the first, second, and third/fourth centuries (see cat. nos. 109-17).61 A striking aspect of el-Saqqia is the emphasis on hydraulic structures: two large rounded depressions with substantial, apparently natural, earthen berms (fig. 16.A-B), cisterns, troughs, channels, and related installations. Neither of the depressions appears to have been lined unless that lining has now totally disappeared. The massive earthen embankments (fig. 16.C-D) surrounding each depression suggest that all or part of the water source was precipitation run-off collected in the large cavity for subsequent use. The depression south of the fort entrance (fig. 16.A) is the larger of the two. It has two large water channels lined with cobbles leading into it: one from the southeast (fig. 16.E) and one from the northwest (fig. 16.F). The channel from the southeast also could have served as an entryway into the depression. The cavity measures
59 Wilkinson,Papers (supra n. 38) ms. XLV D.19; Scaife 1935 (supran. 2) plan II (see description,67-72) and Redd& and Golvin(supra n. 2) 24 reproduce Wilkinson's plan. 60 De la Roque (supra n. 2) 117, fig. 3, reproduced by Redd6 and Golvin (supran. 2) 25; cf. Meredith 1952 (supra
n. 2) 97 for sketchplan of fort only. See Tregenza (supran. 2) 219-20 for a descriptionof the area. 61 For numismatic evidence from the site see Scaife 1935 (supra n. 2) 71; cf. de la Roque (supra n. 2) 118 for his ceramicdates: Romanand Modern.
1991]
589
N
ca. 55 m in diameter. This southern depression has several small installations associated with it at the top edge of the cavity. On the northern side ca. 40 m from the gate of the fort is a rectangular edifice of unknown function built of brownish sandstone (fig. 16.G); the southern wall has collapsed into the depression. On the western edge is a second rectangular shaped edifice of brownish sandstone measuring ca. 7 x 9 m (fig. 16.H). Part of its eastern wall has disappeared into the depression; its function is also unknown. On the southern edge of the depression are several other structures. Built of grayish mudstone, these are lined, elevated water channels built of cobbles and flat stones mortared together (fig. 16.IJ). The channels, lined with waterproof mortar, are segmented and have plug holes at the base joining one segmented section to another. They are elevated above the surrounding ground surface. The channel on the southeast (fig. 16.J) is rather weathered; part of it has collapsed and fallen into the adjacent southeastern cobble-lined water channel mentioned above. The other water channel on the southern edge of the southern cistern (fig. 16.1) and west of the above mentioned mortar-lined water channel is in an excellent state of preservation. At its southern edge the channel was fed from a grayish mudstone-lined rectangular cistern measuring 5.5 x 6.5 m (fig. 16.K). Access stairs on the northwest side.allowed descent into the cistern and it is clear from remains adjacent to the stairway that this entire structure was, at one time, lined with waterproofed mortar. At the northern end of the channel are the remains of another cistern the northern end of which is missing, having collapsed into the depression (fig. 16.L). There may have been a well dug at a later date (fig. 16.M) into the bottom of this depression. Our hypothesis is that a bucket or shadoof raised water from the depression into these water channels on the southern edge of the large southern depression. Their elevated nature and the fact that the interiors are segmented into a number of sub-basins suggest that these channels were primarily watering troughs for draft or mount animals. Animals are likely to have been brought in via an entrance gate (fig. 16.N)--joined by a long wall (fig. 16.0) to the fort-that formed part of an apparently natural silt and sand enceinte around the southern depression, led to drink, and led out again back to the animal-tethering lines (fig. 16.P) to the east and northeast of the southern depression. Segregation of the drinking water from the animal lines here, as at Deir el-Atrash, Bab el-Mukhenig, Badia', and el-Heita was, no doubt, to control water consumption and to prevent the animals from fouling the water source.
E
c
'1--
I 0
I 5 10 SCALE IN METERS REZ 1989
Fig. 17. Plan of fort at el-Saqqia.A) large rubble pile from collapsed tower, B) blocked doorway,C) plasteredwall, D) remainsof low wall, and E) holes in fort wall. The depression east of the fort (fig. 16.B) has a 40m diameter and was thus smaller than the southern depression. It, too, has on its eastern edge an elevated channel of cobbles mortared together with a segmented interior lined with mortar (fig. 16.Q). Plug holes connected each of the segmented channels. Wind-blown sand covers the east end of the trough and it is not known whether a cistern was located there. This water trough is more accessible and closer to the animal-tethering lines than the southern depression and, given its elevated and segmented nature, probably also serviced draft animals. It is difficult to determine why there are two large depressions associated with this fort. There may have been a great demand for water; alternatively, one may be earlier than the other and either fell out of use when the second was dug or, more likely, supplemented the water supply with additional access points and additional quantities of water for passing traffic. One must remember that el-Saqqia is at the junction of routes coming to the Nile from the quarries at
590

jo??~
[AJA 95
-OW -10-
42o--
dpIM
Fig. 18. View of south gate of fort at el-Saqqia
Mons Porphyrites and also from the quarries at Mons Claudianus via Wadi Fatireh el-Beida, Wadi Fatireh 'Abu Zawal, and the Naq' el-Teir Plain. Additional watering facilities, far larger than needed on the route further north and east where only Mons Porphyrites traffic was serviced, were vital to supporting this increased traffic in the first-third/fourth centuries. The animal-tethering lines (fig. 16.P), with maximum external dimensions of ca. 42 x 55 m, are south of the eastern depression and east and northeast of the southern depression. It is impossible to date their construction and use from surface surveying alone, but one would expect them to be contemporary with the earliest phase of the fort. The fort itself is quite small (figs. 16.R, 17). Maximum dimensions of the exterior fort wall are ca. 19 x 25 m. It has a single entrance on the south side flanked by two semicircular towers. These are apparently the only towers along the enceinte. The original gate entrance was narrowed at some later time (fig. 18) and a huge pile of brownish sandstone atop and behind the original southwest gate tower (fig. 17.A) suggests collapse of a large tower, perhaps a later addition to the fort. There is a similar constructiona huge mudbrick tower or keep-behind the eastern tower gate at el-Heita (see infra, fig. 20.A). The original fort at el-Saqqia seems to have been built primarily of grayish mudstone. There are other later additions and repairs--obvious in the narrowed fort gate and one other internal blocked doorway (fig. 17.B)-made in gray mudstone, reused from the original structure, or brownish sandstone. The fort has
II
II MEII S E II
II
--
"
II II
II
II
10
REZ
SCALE IN METERS
1989
Fig. 19. Plan of upper fort at el-Heita. A) path up hillside, B) stairwayfrom ground level, C) stairway,D) barrel vault and alcoveunder stairs,E) barrelvault, complete arch, and F) evidenceof barrelvault.
1991]
591
no apparentinternalsourcesof water(cf. WadiBelih,

Badia', and Umm Balad), but depended upon its
0.5 m wide pierces the western wall at its juncture with the northern wall of the fort (fig. 17.E).
EL-HEITA
waterfrom one or both of the extramuraldepressions.

The fort at el-Saqqia was the only installation in which the survey discovered painted wall plaster. The red plaster, abundant on a wall perpendicular to the center rear wall (fig. 17.C) of the fort, may have decorated the quarters of the station commandant. Given that el-Saqqia was the first installation on this route responsible for servicing traffic from both Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites, its importance probably warranted a relatively high ranking officer to oversee operations. Could it be that his quarters, made as comfortable as possible in this inhospitable environment, included walls decorated with painted plaster? Parts of the fort enceinte were damaged since the original construction. A gaping hole ca. 2 m wide appears at the back north wall and a smaller hole ca.
The next majorstop, the penultimateone prior to

arrival at Qena, was el-Heita (26o37' N, 32o46' E),
known by some as Qasr el-Jin. This site, drawn in

plan by Wilkinson and others,62 was redrawn by the Delaware survey (figs. 19-20). This is a noteworthy site for several reasons. There are two forts here and there is extensive use made, as at Deir el-Atrash, of sun-dried mudbrick. One fort sits in the wadi (fig. 20) and the other is on top of a nearby hill ca. 100-150
m north of the wadi fort and ca. 40 m above it (fig. 19). Pottery from the lower (wadi) fort at el-Heita
includes ceramics (faience) from the first-second centuries; imported amphoras suggest that this site, like Deir el-Atrash, was used in the late period, the late fourth-seventh century A.C. (see cat. nos. 118~40),63
Do
F\ \
~',,
'*C
"I-"
I
II II II
II II
" II
\ \ \ \ \\
\i
an II r--
oLULJJ
LiE
W%
L_,,E: E
E
~,~-----LE7J
I
.
0I
L
0
L
to 20 SCALE IN METERS REZ 1989
Fig. 20. Plan of lower fort at el-Heita. A) gate tower with elevated room, B) stone stairwayincorporatedinto perimeterwall, C) lookout station in mid-wallsection, D) extant barrel vault, E) evidence of vaulting, F) solid mass tower,G) cistern, H) filled-in well, I) well,J) water trough, K) external cistern,and L) animallines. 62 Wilkinson,Papers (supra n. 38) ms. XLV D.23; de la Roque(supran. 2) 115-16, fig. 1, reproducedby Redde and Golvin (supra n. 2) 23; Scaife 1935 (supran. 2) plan 1 and 64-67; cf. Meredith 1952 (supran. 2) 97 for sketch plan of fort only.
Scaife 1935 (supra n. 2) 62-63 and Meredith 1952 (supra n. 2) 109 note an ostracon dated on paleographic grounds to the second century B.C. from el-Heita, but the ceramicevidence collected by the survey does not support such an earlydate for activityat the site; Tregenza (supran.
63
592
[AJA 95
"r"4:51
00:. Apt-:
-,?JvB?b'~i :,
:
47:::: :::
llbl::::~lr*: ::~ ML_:: :: -:_::~: :'~_-':_-:-:_-::: ,~~-~::::-:?:::
Fig. 21. View of south gate of lower fort at el-Heita long after quarrying operations at Mons Porphyrites and Mons Claudianus came to an end. The fort on the hill is, except for one to four courses of foundation stones, built entirely of sun-dried mudbrick and is the only fort on the 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile road so constructed. It is an odd shape, dictated by the contours of the top of the hill on which it is built. The maximum dimensions of the exterior fort wall are ca. 35 x 75 m. Walls average ca. 0.6 m thick and, in places, are quite high: ca. 6-8 m. Towers are extant at three of the corners. Interior rooms on the west and east sides and the location of barrel vaulting suggest that vaulting formed part of an ascending series of staircases in the tower interiors of this hilltop fort (fig. 19.B-F). The entrance to this fort was probably from the south, facing the lower fort, judging by what appears to be the remains of a gate. A path leads up to the fort from the south (fig. 19.A). Most of the northern wall of this hilltop fort has disappeared if it was, indeed, ever built. There are no parapets or catwalks, unless one considers the stairways in the towers as such; the towers, however, have observation/ firing positions from their topmost floors. It is difficult to see how the garrison defended the fort in view of these conditions. One scholar believed that this fort was never completed or even used in antiquity.64 The almost complete absence of pottery at the hilltop fort lends support to this hypothesis. The lower fort (fig. 20) is similar to other forts on the route in several respects. It is rather unusual in shape, however, and, like Deir el-Atrash, has a single entrance gate (fig. 21) on the southern side of a trapezoidal fort enceinte. Overall dimensions are ca. 76 x 45 m. The new plan differs significantly from that drawn by Wilkinson. Semicircular mudbrick towers in very damaged condition flank the gate. A huge rectangular mudbrick tower, not noted on Wilkinson's plan, was found inside the fort gate behind the south-
2) 228-29 (noted by Meredith 1952 [supran. 2] 109) found three coins of the fourth century at el-Heita (two probably of Maximianus LiciniusI and one of Crispus).Tregenza and (228-29) also found 20-30 ostraca (two or three in Latin, the rest in Greek, mainly first-second century) and an incompletebroken Latininscriptionvariouslydated to Domi-
on tian, earlysecond century,or Elagabalus; this inscription and see D. Meredith,"The MyosHormosRoad:Inscriptions Ostraca," ChrEg31 (1956) 358-60 and Bernand (supra n. 1) 65 (no. 23). 64 Tregenza (supran. 2) 228.
1991]
593
4r iV A
jo pl* 'YJ4
ZIF7V "WT
jr
36
E"'I awl,
on Fig. 22. View of blocked stone stairway north wall of lower fort at el-Heita (B on figure 20) east gate tower (fig. 20.A). This massive edifice survives to an estimated height of over 8 m and may have served as a keep or tower analogous to the one in stone behind the southwest gate tower at el-Saqqia (fig. 17.A). The fort wall is badly damaged or missing on the northwest and west ends possibly due to the action of flash floods passing through the adjacent wadi. Modern road building may also have contributed to the dilapidated condition. It is clear from Wilkinson's plan that most of this destruction postdates his visit. Wilkinson did not indicate external towers protruding from the fort wall on its southwestern and northwestern corners. The square/rectangular tower on the southeast is made of cobblestones in its lower courses and mudbrick in its upper; the mudbrick remains preserve evidence of vaulting (fig. 20.E). The tower on the northeast, drawn by Wilkinson as square or rectangular, is badly damaged and all that survives is a heap of fallen mudbrick. A barrel-vaulted corridor flush with the northern interior face of the fort wall at its eastern end gives access to this tower (fig. 20.D). The fort wall as a whole is, in its lower sections, built of cobbles and mud mortar; in all extant sections there are mudbrick additions topping the cobblestone portions. The mudbricks frequently contain sherds that had been included as part of the matrix during manufacture. Only one of the sherds (cat. no. 137) from a mudbrick portion of the perimeter wall was chronologically diagnostic offering a terminus post quem date of the first-second century A.C. On the northern wall facing the hilltop fort is a very unusual architectural feature not found in other forts along this route. Partway along the northern perimeter wall of the fort is a semicircular lookout post in mudbrick (fig. 20.C). A huge mound of fallen mudbrick suggests that some type of mudbrick tower or building inside the fort was originally connected to this lookout post.65 Further west along the north wall it is clear that in the cobblestone phase of the fort a stairway led to the top of the wall (fig. 20.B). The additional heightening and reinforcement of the wall with mudbrick subsequently blocked off that staircase (fig. 22). Most of the interior buildings of the lower fort at el-Heita are of mudbrick. The interior mudbrick architecture here is better preserved in a few locations than that at Deir el-Atrash and there is extensive use of arches and barrel vaults to roof these structures (fig. 23). Many of the structures are long and narrow with single entrances at one narrow end. The design and plan is typical of Roman storage magazines (horrea) seen in forts elsewhere along this route at Deir
65
Cf. Murray(supran. 14) photo no. 7, facing 112, showingthis structureprior to its collapse.
594
[AJA 95
.... ..
OWN*;:
Fig. 23. View of interiorstructuresshowingremainsof barrelvaultingin lower fort at el-Heita el-Atrash, at the fort at 'Abu Sha'ar, and at other Roman installations in Egypt and throughout the empire. Inside the gate and to the west is a large rectangular-shaped cistern (fig. 20.G). Wilkinson believed this structure to be a well, but he could not see much of the remains. It was cleared out by persons unknown since Wilkinson's day and its details are now evident. It is partially lined with kiln-fired bricks. Two extant wells are associated with this cistern. One extends up to ground level and cuts the southeast corner of the cistern (fig. 20.H). Only cobbles remain of whatever lining it once had. This well hole was filled in to the bottom of the cistern. The other is located in the bottom of the cistern (fig. 20.I). This second well is lined with kiln-fired bricks. The well undoubtedly postdates the original cistern, suggesting that at the time the well was cut into the cistern, the cistern no longer functioned. Adjacent to the cistern-inside the fort-is a mudbrick tower (fig. 20.F). There was a similar mudbrick tower between the rectangular basin and the large well excavation at Deir el-Atrash (see supra, fig. 13.J). It remains to be determined what functions these towers at Deir el-Atrash and el-Heita served; the one at Deir el-Atrash may, as noted above, have had a hydraulic function. The tower at el-Heita, however, probably did not, given its spatial relationship to the rectangular basin there. These towers occur at none of the other hydreumata along the route and may be associated with the later fifth-seventh century phases of these mudbrick forts; perhaps they were lookout posts. A number of architectural features at the lower fort suggest multiple-phase use of the site: mudbrick repairs and additions to the cobblestone structure, a blocked stairway (fig. 20.B), an added lookout post on the north wall (fig. 20.C), and wells excavated at different elevations (fig. 20.H-I). The ceramic evidence (see cat. nos. 118-40) supports this conclusion. Outside the south wall of the fort, and perhaps originally joined to the cistern inside the fort by a channel-now destroyed-through a hole in the wall, was an exterior segmented water trough with plug holes (fig. 20.J). Ca. 10 m southeast of this trough was an external cistern (fig. 20.K). It appears that someone broke down a portion of the southern fort wall at a later date to facilitate access between the well inside the fort and the exterior water trough. The interior of the trough is 90 cm wide and 45 cm deep; 21 m of this extramural hydraulic installation remain. Its western end is destroyed where the modern road passes and some distance separates it from the putative damaged animal-tethering lines. The animal-tethering lines (fig. 20.L) lie to the south and southeast of the fort and measure ca. 43 m north-south x ca. 61 m east-west. Whereas the perimeters of the animal-tethering lines of other stations along the route are rows of heaped stones, the animal lines of el-Heita are bounded on the north, east, and south sides by a low, sturdy, well-constructed wall 75 cm thick. Damage to the interior, including some illicit excavations, precludes any accurate determination of the internal configuration of this facility. In fact, some of the robber holes reveal remnants of mudbrick walls, which raises the question of another possible use of this installation. West of the fort is a modern paved road and a wadi. Just to the west of the modern asphalt road is a section of what may have been ancient road pavement.
1991]
EL-'ARAS
595
El-'Aras (26021' N, 32047' E) is the last station before Qena and it is in the most ruinous condition of all the installations on the 'Abu Sha'ar-Mons Porphyrites-Qena road (fig. 24). The Delaware survey drew a plan of this site, which had been roughly sketched by previous visitors, including Tregenza and Meredith.66 Only the vaguest outline of the hydreuma and associated animal-tethering lines or huts can now be discerned. Analysis of ceramic evidence from the site indicates occupation in the first-second, secondthird, and third-fourth centuries A.C. (see cat. nos. 141-51). One sherd (cat. no 141) bore a graffito ANIT or ANTI, and non-Egyptian imported wares (Tripolitanian, cat. no. 142, Tunisian Africano Grande amphoras, and African Red Slip ware, see infra) were also discovered here. The fort is approximately square in plan measuring ca. 44 x 48 m. The gate seems to have been on the east side. Few architectural remains survive above ground level. South of the putative gate on the east enceinte of the fort are the scanty remains of mudbrick walls (fig. 24.B) and abutting the interior of the south wall near its western end are the remains of some type of hydraulic installation (fig. 24.A) with portions of plaster lining extant. Northeast of the fort and badly eroded by wadi flow (fig. 24.E) and modern activity by earthmoving equipment (fig. 24.D) are structures so damaged that it is difficult to determine if these were animal-tethering lines associated with the fort or some other affiliated structures (fig. 24.C). One would certainly expect to find substantial animal lines here as this was the last station on the route coming from the quarries at Mons Porphyrites and Mons Claudianus. It is still ca. 23 km from el-'Aras to the Nile. To the north-northwest of the fort is a modern wellhead and some palm trees. This may have been the location of the ancient wells of el-'Aras, but we are quite uncertain about this. Tregenza and Meredith also noted an additional water source to the west of the fort,67 but the survey did not locate this site, which may since Tregenza's time have been destroyed by flash floods through the nearby wadi.
THE ROAD AND ITS TOWERS AND CAIRNS
ROMAN WELL 0/
SHUTS OR c \
IN
FORT
I
II I,
U G
GATE (P)
S10 20 ] L SCALE IN METERS A ==.....
RE
1989
at Fig. 24. Plan of installations el-'Aras.A) cistern, B) mudbrick walls, C) area contains scattered boulders and many sherds, D) surface disrupted by bulldozer, and E) area washedawayby wadi flow (?).
The ancient road from 'Abu Sha'ar and Mons Porphyrites to the Nile River can be clearly traced for most of its length. The geography of the region, especially in the more mountainous areas, dictates the general location of the road. The route follows and is
controlled by a major series of wadis from northeast to southwest: Wadi Umm Deheis, Wadi Belih, across the watershed into Wadi Qattar, Wadi el-Atrash and the Naq' el-Teir plain, and Wadi Qena. The road out of Mons Porphyrites travels the Wadi Ma'amal into Wadi Umm Sidra and then into Wadi Belih. The branch road to Umm Balad station traverses Wadi Umm Balad, a tributary of Wadi Belih. The road surface is predominantly sandy. There are hard rocky sections in Wadi Belih west of the Wadi Belih fort and also in the upper reaches of Wadi elAtrash between Qattar and Deir el-Atrash. The road gradient is gradual for most of the route with the steepest slope being the drop into Wadi Qattar just before the fort at Qattar. The actual Roman route can be located in several instances by existing segments of the ancient road surface and by extensive remains of ancient wheel tracks. The most prevalent indicator, however, is the multitude of towers and cairns flanking the road. The small stone structures dotting the 'Abu Sha'arNile road can be designated as either towers or cairns. Their height is less than their width, and referring to them as towers may be misleading. On the other hand, those that are still well preserved have nearly vertical sides, a definite plan for the base, and stones placed
Meredithand Tregenza (supran. 2) 4-9 refer to earlier visitors;plan reproduced by Redd6 and Golvin(supran. 2) 21; cf. Tregenza (supra n. 2) 237; Meredith 1952 (supra
66
n. 2) 97 for smallsketchplan. 67 Meredithand Tregenza (supran. 2) 4-5.
596
[AJA 95
AVOWo~-~~-s~-
4
4,t
at tower near installations Badia' Fig. 25. View of stone route-marking/signal with care, and are obviously more substantial than a loosely heaped pile as is typical of a cairn. The University of Delaware survey identified approximately 125 towers/cairns along ca. 125 km of road from Wadi Belih fort to el-'Aras; not all could be examined thoroughly enough to determine dates of use. The survey did not include the area from 'Abu Sha'ar to the Wadi Belih fort as this was part of a survey undertaken in July 1990 by the University of Delaware to be published elsewhere. The survey noted no towers between el-'Aras and the Nile nor along the spur joining the station at Umm Balad to the main road. On a promontory overlooking the approach to Umm Balad there are remains of a hut that could have served the same purpose as a watchtower. Towers in the Mons Porphyrites area were observed, but not recorded. The towers are randomly placed at intervals along the ca. 25 km distance from the Wadi Belih station to the castellum at Mons Porphyrites. There are also many watchtowers overlooking the quarries and habitations in the Mons Porphyrites area. Small cairns line the footpath over the mountains that connects Badia' station to Wadi Ma'amal and the Mons Porphyrites area; these cairns served as route markers and are placed at much more frequent intervals than on the main route. Large cylindrical cairns flank the causeway from Wadi Ma'amal to the quarries near Lycabettos at frequent intervals (fig. 3). Several scholars have speculated that these cairns were used as winches in moving the blocks of stone down the steep causeway.68Similarly shaped cairns occur at the granite quarries at Mons Claudianus. The use of these cairns as winches is very doubtful; they themselves could not have held ropes bearing any substantial weight although they could have supported some type of brace. Perhaps they were meant as guard posts or stockpiles of stones to smooth the ramps that work crews used to lower stone blocks from the quarries. Time limitations prevented a comprehensive survey along the route. In most cases the survey noted only towers readily visible from the ancient track; there was no extensive search for badly damaged and less visible towers. Many towers had undoubtedly collapsed or had been obliterated or covered over by floods in the wadis. Furthermore, those towers on wadi sides were constructed of local material and thus blended into the hillsides; many could be located only with a comprehensive search and a sharp eye. The typical tower is a mass of stacked stone on a rectangular base and constructed without use of mortar (fig. 25). The survey discovered no towers with circular bases along the route from Wadi Belih station
68
Scaife (supran. 14) 145; Murray(supran. 14) 124; Tregenza (supran. 2) 123-24.
1991]
: - ?-' : -: : '.

!
597
:! !
i!
i
j: : :! `i~i~i~ii~i
!i i i i
il
iiii~iiii~iiii~ii~iii~iiiiiiii~iiiiiiiiii~i::iii!iiiiii i-lii!i i-ii!iiiii!~i! !i~!!i!i~iiiiiil
~ ~
::_ !!!!!i!!iiii!
. ~~. ...............................
~
I1
Ik
at Fig. 26. View of Romanwagon wheel ruts betweenthe installations Bab el-Mukhenigand el-Saqqia to el-'Aras although other areas of the Eastern Desert do contain such structures. In general, the towers are constructed of stone from the immediate area. In the large sandy wadis the stones were obviously imported from the nearest source. Some towers are constructed from water-rounded boulders and cobbles, but most are made of rough flat stones either existing naturally or quarried from the surface. In general, the towers along this route are much smaller and not as visually impressive as those on the next major route to the south, the road from Quseir al-Qadim (Leukos Limen) to Qift.69 The towers on the route served several functions. For example, those on hilltops north of el-Heita, and having a direct line of sight with the upper fortress there, were probably watchtowers that also signaled the arrival of approaching convoys or marauders. So, too, were those immediately southwest of Deir elAtrash. The majority of the towers along this road, however, had a route-marking function. Table 1 summarizes the information on those towers examined between the stations at Qattar and el-Heita and reflects the prevalence of the route-marking towers. These towers/cairns existed in pairs spanning the route. In areas where the wadi narrowed, the routemarking towers were located on the wadi sides above the road. In most locations the wadi is very wide and the pairs of towers located on the wadi bottoms have a span of ca. 100-200 m between them. The route-marking towers are relatively small; their rectangular bases are ca. 1.6-1.7 m on a side. Many exist to a height of ca. 0.5-1.0 m; they probably were not originally higher than ca. 1.5 m. The route-marking towers were placed at regular intervals. As the odometer of the project vehicle only measured increments of a full kilometer, accurate distances from one pair to another could not be determined. As a general indication, the ca. 21-km stretch of road between elSaqqia and el-Heita contained 17 pairs of towers, indicating an average interval of ca. 1.1 km. In the 1930s Scaife reported the interval between cairns/ towers on this road to be constant.70 This, however, probably applied only to those parts of the route passing through a broad expanse of wadi, namely between Bab el-Mukhenig and el-Heita or, possibly, between 'Abu Sha'ar and the fort at Wadi Belih, and not to the route through mountainous areas with narrow wadis where the towers were constructed at irregular intervals on the tops of the mountains and on wadi walls.
69 For which see Zitterkopfand Sidebotham(supran. 9) 180-89.
70 Scaife 1935 (supra n. 2) 67, 72-73, 77; Scaife 1936 (supran. 2) 56-58; cf. Murray(supran. 48) 114.
598
STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY Table 1. Distances between Towers and Stations on the Road between Qattar and el-Heita
[AJA 95
Item QattarStation Tower on top of hill Two route-marking towers
Approx. Distance (km) 0 2 2
Size (m)
Pottery
(r) 1.60 x 1.80 x 1.20
Two route-marking towers "Tower"as rubble in wadi Two route-marking towers in wadi Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Three towers (at south edge of wadi and on each wadi wall); hut Deir el-AtrashStation Tower overlooking narrow pass Tower on outcrop overlooking wadi constriction "Step"tower in wadi bottom to northwest; tower on wadi wall to southeast Two route-marking towers in wadi bottom Bab el-MukhenigStation Tower in wadi bottom One route-marking tower, another possibly washed away by wadi torrent (?) Two towers on sides of wadi Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers
(1) 1.65 x 1.65 x 0.95 (r) 1.70 x 1.80 x 1.10 (1) 1.75 x 2.20 x 1.70
(r) coarse ware, amphoras, no diagnostic pieces (1)none amphora base in road
5 6 8 9 11
ribbed edge of amphora
23/0 4 5 6 (r) 1.60 x 1.60 (1)none (1)-
7 9/0 0 2
4 6 8 9 11 13
(1)coarse ware (1)amphora, coarse ware
(r) much coarse ware
(1)
15 17 1820 20 22
Ancient wheel tracks along the route are still very evident between Deir el-Atrash and el-Heita and had been noted by earlier scholars.71 Measurement of one set by the Delaware survey indicated a wagon gauge of 2.40 m (fig. 26). On the Naq' el-Teir plain Tregenza
measured several spans of 7 ft (2.13 m) and 9 ft (2.74 m) and even noted one pair with a span of 11 ft (3.35 m).72 Murray observed another pair in the same plain with a span of 9 ft (2.74 m) as well as ruts at Bab elMukhenig pass with a gauge of 2.7 m.73 The ancient
71 Tregenza (supra n. 2) 106 near loading ramp at Wadi Umm Sidra;208 near Bab el-Mukhenig;212-13 in the Plain of Naq' el-Teir; 220 at el-Saqqiastation;237-38 where the
WadiQreiyaflowsinto the WadiQena; Murray(supran. 2) 140 and Meredith1952 (supran. 2) 102 sawwheel ruts near Bab el-Mukhenig;Meredith1952 (supran. 2) 102 and Mur-
1991] Item el-SaqqiaStation Tower near south depression of el-Saqqia Two route-marking towers One route-marking tower, missing one may be washed away by wadi torrent (?) Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Large tower on hill
SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD Approx. Distance (km) 23/0 0 1 3 (r) too ruined (1) Size (m) Pottery
599
(r) coarse ware (1)none
(r) 1.55 x 1.70 (1) 1.60 x 1.60
(r) amphora sherds (1)much coarse ware
7 9 10 10+
2.30 x 2.30 x 1.70
Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two towers (r) on hill, (1)gravel mounds in wadi to north
11
(r) (1)-
many large amphora sherds, fine ware, pottery in road (r)(1)body sherds, handle one coarse ware sherd (r) much pottery, ribbed amphora (1)coarse ware, gravel mounds: amphoras, coarse ware amphoras, coarse ware, with one, did not check other (r) amphoras, coarse ware (1)coarse ware (r) coarse ware (1)amphoras
12 13 13+ (r) 1.50 x 1.50 (1) 1.50 x 1.50
Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers Two towers on crest of hill: (r) large, (1)small Two route-marking towers: (r) small in wadi, (1)large on hill Two route-marking towers Two route-marking towers
14
15
(r) (1)(r) 2.30 x 2.20 x 1.50 (1)-
16 17 18 19
(r) 1.70 x 1.70
(1) 1.60 x 1.50 x 0.85 Two route-marking towers 20 (r) too ruined (1)2.60 x 1.85 x 0.75 21
el-Heita Station
(r) amphora body sherds, coarse ware, diagnostics (1)small quantity coarse ware (r) amphora, coarse ware, many diagnostics (1)coarse ware
Dimensions givenas widthx depth x height."(1)" are indicates towerandassociated on pottery the left sideof the routewhentraveling from'AbuSha'ar the Nile, "(r)" rightside.A dash(-) indicates towerwasnot measured examinedfor to the that or pottery.
ray (supran. 2) 147 in WadiNaq' el-Teir.

72
Tregenza (supra n. 2) 213.
Murray(supran. 2) 140 for wheel ruts at Bab el-Mukhenig Pass.
73
Murray(supra n. 14) 120 for the Naq' el-Teir Plain;
600
STEVENE. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD ZITTERKOPF, JOHN A. RILEY E. AND
[AJA95
tracks pass between the pairs of cairns; extensive stretches of tracks are still evident between Bab elMukhenig and el-Saqqia. Occasionallysome of the tracksalso pass outside the pairs of cairns/towersindicatingthat the latterdid not rigidlycontrol the path of travelon the route. At least three distinctsectionsof the originalRoman road surface are preserved in the Wadi Belih near Badia'station on the way to that at Qattar.There are no paving stones as such, but the larger sharp-edged stones have been removed from the surfaceand piled in a row along each side of the road, a techniqueoften used for road constructionelsewherein Rome'sdesert a provinces;74 hard graveled surface remains. As the survey observed a very smooth surface it is possible that it had been rolled with a stone roller.The widths of these cleared sections vary greatly. One section in the Wadi Belih measures 53 m wide; several other measurements averaged ca. 22 m. At these cleared sectionsthere was non-diagnosticpotteryon the road surface. A similar extensive stretch of cleared road exists on the branch to the fort at Umm Balad (see supra).At three locationsadjacentto and south of elHeita the surveylocated paved sections.Cobblestones or irregularlyshaped stones and stone chips provide a firm surface along sandy portions of the route. Attributionto the Roman era for these sectionsis not conclusive.
The survey investigated39 towers for ceramic evidence; 31 of those searched had surface sherds. No chronologicallydiagnosticpieces were found, but the sherdswere generallyfrom amphoras,the shapes and
fabrics of which appear at many of the hydreumata
along the route. Sometowersshow evidenceof several different terracotta containers. This abundance of ceramicevidence at the towers is in stark contrastto the few sherdsobservedby an earliersurveyat towers along the Quseir-Qiftroad.75 Much of the ceramic evidence is located at the towers.The functionof route marking route-marking impliesno need for habitationat the tower.The presence of sherds there may be explained by the additionaluse of the towersas wateringpoints. Emergency water supplies could have been kept in terracotta vessels availablefor travelers,with the towers serving as convenient markers to locate the water supplies. Maintenanceof the water supplies was, undoubtedly, anotherduty for garrisonsstationedin forts along the route.
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE NEWARK, DELAWARE 19716 3500 WEST 128TH STREET SHAWNEE MISSION, KANSAS 66209
THE POTTERY John A. Riley

Pottery from surface surveys can at best provide only patchy evidence for dating and for typological information.The pottery from this surveyof the sites between the Nile and the Red Sea does, however, provide a unique perspective as the sites are effectively one extended site. There is only one road surrounded by desert. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect similarpottery from similarsources to appear in each fort at each period. As the surface pottery representsa jumble of periods, and as little is known about the dates of pottery from this region from the third to the seventh centuries,it is not possibleto drawup a convincingchronologicallyordered typology of the coarse wares.This has not, therefore, been attempted. However,distinctive shapes (i.e., easily recognizable)have been drawn and are presentedhere to provide approximatedates for the fortsuntil detailedtypologiesbecome available as the result of stratifiedexcavation. The pottery from this survey is importantin other ways. It provides a broad but skeletal chronological frameworkon the basis of imported wares or wares that can be tied in chronologically or typologically with other sites. Similar shapes are not necessarily contemporary-the fabrics of the pottery must be identicaland the shapescloselysimilarfor meaningful chronologicalcomparisonsto be made. This pottery is also importantwhen considering its range of use.
Frontier from the Air (Austin 1990) 78-94.
Roads(London 74 R. Chevallier(trans.N.H. Field),Roman 1989) 91-94, 143; D. Kennedy and D. Riley,Rome'sDesert
of 75 Personalobservations R.E. Zitterkopfand S.E. Sidebotham between 1980 and 1987, and Zitterkopfand Sidebotham(supran. 9) 155-89, esp. 180-89.
1991]
601
In general, recurring shapes or fabrics ("type fossils") provide good chronological ranges for many of the sites. The most reliable categories are, in rough order, the imported fine wares, the imported amphoras, the imported coarse wares, followed by the local wares. The chronological evidence provided by local pottery in the Roman period from stratified contexts is slight. Much of the pottery from the sites under discussion is, however, similar to that from dated early Roman deposits at Quseir al-Qadim, and Mons Claudianus in particular.76 The published pottery from the excavations at Quseir al-Qadim on the Red Sea coast is a valuable source of parallels for the first and second centuries A.C. Current excavations at Mons Claudianus also provide a good range of wares dated to the late first and early second centuries (although wares of the third or fourth centuries also occur in the trash dumps there). The 1987 University of Michigan excavation at Coptos77provides one or two early Roman parallels. Apart from one class of fifth-seventh century Mediterranean amphora at Deir el-Atrash and el-Heita, few clear parallels were noted with pottery published from Roman sites on the Nile.78
FINE WARES
exception, there was no Italian Arretine ware (the several shapes related to Arretine are not of Arretine fabric). These wares certainly occurred at Coptos and were abundant at Quseir. Eastern Sigillata A (Cypriot) ware was found (e.g., no. 44), and, from the second century onward, a few sherds of African Red Slip ware were present. has Egyptian Red Slip "A" ware"79 a distinctive pale flesh-colored fabric (Munsell 5YR 7/4) with occasional red grits. Particularly distinctive is its lightweight "feel." A mauve-red slip (Munsell 10R 5/6-5/8) is applied to the exterior and interior of vessels.
COARSE WARES
In general, there was a paucity of fine ware on the surface of these forts. This could be due to previous visitors taking the more distinctive red gloss wares as souvenirs (although there are plenty of fine wares on the surface of some of the mining villages between the Red Sea and the Nile on the road between Quseir and Qift, which are more accessible than the forts surveyed here). Although too much must not be made of the information prior to excavation, it is useful to record not only what was there, but also what is not present. For the first century A.C. we found none of the distinctive micaceous Eastern Sigillata B ware; with one possible
Orange ware,80 the commonest of the slipped forms, is fairly coarse and pale orange in color (Munsell 5YR 6/6-5YR 7/6) with flecks of lime. In the hand, it feels light in weight. There is a poor pale orange slip (Munsell 2.5YR 5/8-5/6), usually abraded. This fabric occurs on all sites. There is a cluster of the ware in the Umm Balad trash dump, which shows a wide range of forms (see nos. 65-71, 73, 75, 80). Several of these forms are paralleled at Quseir. The commonest form (not paralleled at Quseir) is represented by no. 132, and occurs on several sites (Mons Porphyrites, el-Heita, Badia', and Qattar). Dull Red ware, a common class of coarse ware similar to cooking ware, is easily identified by its crinkly dull red (Munsell 10R 5/6), thick slip, which cracks on the surface. The clay is a gritty orangebrown (Munsell 2.5YR 4/6-4/8), often with a dull redbrown core (Munsell 10R 4/6) and occasional lime grits. There is no clear indication as yet of the date of this ware.
FAIENCE
Faience,8' abundant in the early Roman levels at Quseir, occurred on several sites (Mons Porphyrites, Badia', Umm Balad, and el-Heita).
76 For potterypublishedfrom Quseiral-Qadim,see Whitcomb and Johnson 1979; Whitcomb and Johnson 1982. Mons Claudianusis currentlybeing excavatedand the pottery is to be published by RobertaTomber of the Museum of London, England.I am grateful to Dr. Tomberfor showing me pottery from Mons Claudianuson a visit there in February1989 and for much helpful informationabout it. 77 For a brief notice of pottery from the 1987 excavation at Coptos, see S. Herbert and H. Wright, "Reporton the 1987 Universityof Michigan/University AssiutExpedition of to Coptos and the EasternDesert,"NARCE 143/144 (Fall/ Winter 1988/1989) 1-4. Furtherinformationis availablein an unpublishedmanuscript(receivedcourtesyof S. Herbert and H. Wright). 78 These include: Kellia (M. Egloff, Kellia: la poterie copte
[Geneva 1977]);Ashmunein(A.J. Spencerand D.M. Bailey, British Museum to (1981) Expedition MiddleEgyptAshmunein [BMOP 41, London 1982]; A.J. Spencer, D.M. Bailey,and A. Burnett,BritishMuseumExpedition MiddleEgyptAshto munein (1982) [BMOP 46, London 1983]; W.Y. Adams, Ceramic Industries MedievalNubia [Lexington1986]);and of 'Abu Sha'ar(Sidebothamet al. [supran. 1] 127-66). 79 ForEgyptianRed Slipware,seeJ.W.Hayes,LateRoman (London 1972) 387-401. Pottery 80 See Whitcomband Johnson 1982, pl. 11, bowls. The fabric is described as "Orange Ware," and that term is adopted here. andJohnson 1979, passim.There is also 81 See Whitcomb abundant faience in the trash dumps at Quseir (personal observation).
602
AMPHORAS
[AJA 95
A very limited selection of amphora types was found. By far the commonest was the Nile amphora, which formed a high proportion of the surface finds on most sites. The forts did not exhibit the range of western Mediterranean early Roman amphoras found at Quseir or at Mons Claudianus.82 The sample comprised only a few double-barreled amphora handles and rims and body sherds of second to fourth century African amphoras and later Roman Aegean amphoras. Although imported amphoras were rare, Tripolitanian/Tunisian amphoras were found at several sites, dating from the first to the fourth centuries A.C.83 Combined with the evidence from Quseir (e.g., Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pls. 13e, 15e, and personal observations), and 'Abu Sha'ar (Riley in Sidebotham et al. [supra n. 1] 154-55), the present finds suggest that these classes of amphora were widespread in the Eastern Desert and coastal regions of Egypt. The wide distribution probably points to consistency of supply rather than large quantities. Ubiquitous throughout the Mediterranean with distribution from Ballana in the south to Britain in the north, the "Antioch" amphora is an important "type fossil" for the later Roman period and indicates activity from the late fourth to the seventh century.84 Other imported amphoras are rare: one amphora (probably from the central Mediterranean) with a biconical rim dates to the later second to third century at Saqqia, and one Gaza amphora rim (of the later fourth to mid-sixth century) was noted from Badia'. In all periods local amphoras were made of the visually (and petrologically) distinctive, drab brown
Nile clay. A wide range of forms was noted, but virtually all are of the earlier "cleaner cut" varieties rather than the thick, sharply corrugated later Roman types so frequent at 'Abu Sha'ar.
COOKING WARES
Cooking wares represent the bulk of the ceramic sample, with wide variation in form. Cooking wares were always important in the Roman period, and good-quality cooking wares (particularly those with volcanic grits) traveled widely in the Mediterranean during the Empire.85 As it describes survey material, this report cannot break new ground in dating cooking wares, but a wide variety occurred and the most distinctive are published here. In general, the main parallels are with those cooking wares published from first- and second-century contexts from Quseir (see catalogue below). There are also some parallels with the contents of the late first and early second century trash dump at Mons Claudianus. Corrugated cooking wares (with corrugated body) are abundant on some sites, especially el-Heita, Saqqia, el-'Aras, Badia', and Deir el-Atrash. Corrugated cooking wares occur rarely at Mons Claudianus, but most are plain (information from Roberta Tomber). The corrugated wares here are unlike those from later Roman contexts at Ashmunein. The examples here had more elaborate rims than those at Ashmunein. Other Roman Egyptian sites such as Kellia and Coptos are not particularly helpful for dating these assemblages. There are no parallels with material from 'Abu Sha'ar.
82 For an introduction to Mediterraneanamphoras, see D.P.S. Peacockand D.F. Williams,Amphoras theRoman and
Economy: An Introductory Guide (London 1986). Although
Mediterraneanamphoras represent only about 1% of the amphorasat Mons Claudianus,there is a wide range from Italy(Dressel2-4), Spain(Dressel20, Haltern70), Gaul,and Tripolitania(informationRobertaTomber).At Quseir,these same types occur regularly.The Quseir excavationreports have abundantillustrationsof these (although not assigned their origins; my own personal observation of the trash dumps at Quseir confirmed the abundanceof these types. 83 See Peacockand Williams(supra n. 82) classes 36 and 37 for Tripolitanianamphoras.For a detailed evaluationof the distributionof this class of amphora,see M.G. Fulford, "To Eastand West:The Mediterranean Trade of Cyrenaica and Tripolitaniain Antiquity," LibSt20 (1989) 169-91; see also Peacock and Williams(supra n. 82) classes 33-35 for the Africanoseries of amphoras.Both types occur throughout the region to the east of the Nile, including Berenice, Quseir al-Qadim, 'Abu Sha'ar,and along the Quseir-Nile
road: cf. Sidebothamet al. (supran. 1) 155. 84 For this amphora see Sidebothamet al. (supra n. 1) 152-54, 'Abu Sha'ar amphora type 2. At 'Abu Sha'arthe amphoracomprisedabout 4% of the total amphorasin the later Romanlevels. See also Peacockand Williams(supran. 82) class44. 85 On the importanceof cookingwaresthroughoutantiquity, see J.A. Riley,"The Late Bronze Age Aegean and the Roman Mediterranean: A Case for Comparison," in
H.Howard and E.L. Morris eds., Production and Distribution: A Ceramic Viewpoint (BAR-IS 120, Oxford 1981) 133-43.
An indicationof their relative importancein 19th-century Egypt (and this is probablya fair reflectionfor earlier periods) is given by Floyer (supra n. 2) 659-81: "A Bedawi is not generally supposed to have much property, but he is distinctlya propertyowning creature.His gun and his camel saddle he keeps with him; but in nine cases out of ten his wife would take care that he did not have a very expensive gun until she had got at least a cooking pot and a flat metal baking platter."
1991]
603
COARSE POTTERY AS CHRONOLOGICAL INDICATORS
In mixed assemblages of pottery such as this, with few diagnostic fine wares, there are usually very distinctive recurring shapes or fabrics among the coarse wares that are useful for helping to provide general dates. The main types from the forts in the Eastern Desert are as follows: 1) "Antioch" amphoras (Peacock and Williams amphora class 44).86 The hard, gritty, yellowish fabric is distinctive, as are the prominent but rough ridgings on the body and the stumpy handles. Common throughout the Mediterranean, this type is a clear chronological indicator for the late fourth/fifth to early seventh centuries. The amphora appears to have been most frequently produced in the later fifth and sixth centuries. This type is found at Deir el-Atrash and el-Heita. Originally believed to be from the region of Antioch or Cyprus (cf. Riley in Sidebotham et al. [supra n. 1] 1989: 154 Riley Type 2), it is now attributed to the Tarsus-Adana region of Cilicia (personal communication, John Hayes). 2) "Africano Grande" amphoras.87 The shapes and fabrics of these amphoras are distinctive, and body sherds are often readily identifiable as they have a greenish surface color (caused by the potter mixing salt water with the clay) and vertical spatula striations. The fabric is generally reddish with various proportions of lime inclusions. These amphoras date broadly from the later second to fourth century (e.g., nos. 84, 111, 112). Rims were found at el-Saqqia and el-'Aras. 3) Tripolitanian amphoras.88 These have distinctive rim shapes. The fabric is either superficially like that of the "Africano" amphoras or hard with abundant fine lime grits. The surface treatment is similar. Depending on rim shape these can be bracketed either in the later first to fourth century (nos. 50 and 142, from Umm Balad and el-'Aras respectively), or the second to fourth century (nos. 32 and 33, from Badia'). 4) Double-barreled amphoras.89 These amphoras of Mediterranean origin with distinctive handles date from the later first century B.C. until about the midsecond century A.C. and are good type-fossils for the early Roman period. They are frequently found at Mons Claudianus (although in a Nile fabric, according to Roberta Tomber) and occur at Quseir (e.g., Whit-
comb and Johnson 1982, pl. 15f). Interestingly, few were found at the forts in this survey, and those from Umm Balad and el-'Aras remained uncatalogued. 5) "Kegs" (e.g., no. 10). A distinctive spout is generally all that remains. Its floruit includes the first to second century A.C. as it occurs regularly at Quseir and at Mons Claudianus. It is found at Umm Balad and Mons Porphyrites. 6) Orange ware hemispherical bowl with two grooves on body (e.g., no. 132). Although there are no published examples from Quseir, Tomber reports that the shape does occur at Mons Claudianus. This supports a first to second century date. The form occurs at Badia', Qattar, Mons Porphyrites, el-Saqqia, and Deir el-Atrash. 7) Orange ware bowl with sharp carination below approximately vertical rim (e.g., nos. 66 and 72). This was one of the more common shapes at Quseir, and occurred also at Umm Balad and el-Heita (sealed in a wall). Again, the date is probably at least first- to second-century. 8) Cooking pot with vertical rim (e.g., no. 54). This is a common form at Quseir,90 pointing to a first to second century date. The form also is found at elSaqqia, Umm Balad, and el-'Aras. 9) Strainer (e.g., no. 76). This distinctive shape appears at Quseir and Mons Claudianus, suggesting a first to second century date, and is found at Umm Balad and el-Heita.
CATALOGUE
The catalogue of pottery, other terracotta finds, and glass is organized by site, and each entry is identified by three groups of numbers. The first is the number as published here. The second (in square brackets) is the original catalogue number and the number actually written on the pot. The third series of numbers (between 001 and 020) refers to the site location. The fabric descriptions use the Munsell color classification system (e.g., 7.5YR 6/6).91 In addition, fr. = fragment, and D. = external diameter. Dating coarse pottery is not as accurate as dating fine pottery, as many coarse ware types occur over a long period. The chronological range summarized below indicates the period within which the form was current. For example, the presence of an amphora rim dated from the fourth to sixth century means a date of at least the fourth century, but not necessarily
86
87 88 89
Supra n. 84. Supra n. 83. Supra n. 83.
This is the Mediterraneanform Dressel 2-4. See Pea-
cock and Williams(supra n. 82) class 10. For the type at Quseir,see Whitcomband Johnson 1982, pl. 27. 90 See Whitcomband Johnson 1982, pl. 10a-h. 91 MunsellSoil ColorCharts(Baltimore1973).
604
[AJA 95
10
trashdump southeastof castellum,and castellum(1:4) Fig. 27. Potteryand lamps from Mons Porphyrites:
the fifth or sixth century. As a wider range of wares is dated in the future through excavation and study of sealed or independently dated deposits, the dates suggested here will inevitably be refined. At present we can only provide a general indication of period. Mons Porphyrites:Trash Dump Southeastof Castellum and Castellum(fig. 27, table 2) Dating evidence: first-second century: faience; local copy (in Nile clay) of first-century lamp; Ptolemaic lamp; "keg"spouts. Third-fourth century: one body sherd of Africano Grande amphora, with distinctive vertical wash striations and pale rose fabric; two(?) Egyptian Red Slip rims. 1. [69](001) Rim fr. of blue faience. D. 12 cm. Yellow fabric (2.5Y 7/6) with turquoise blue interior and exterior. 2. [75](001) Base fr. of faience bowl. D. Base 4.8 cm. Buff fabric (10YR 7/4) with blue glaze. A similar example is known from Umm Balad. Cf. also Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pls.201 and 33m. 3. [149](006) Ptolemaic-style lamp. Ht. 4.2 cm; D. 5.8 cm. Nile clay. Grayish fabric, with dirty creamishgray exterior. 4. [147](006) Decorative applique to back of lamp. Crude Nile clay.
Table 2. Distribution of Finds

Types
Nile amphoras Af. Grande amphoras Misc. amphoras Cookware Plain ware Jugs Fine ware: ERS Faience Flue Tile Glass Lamps 2 1 1 2
Rims
Bases
14 5 23 4 3 2 1
Handles
4
Body Sherds
2 3 2 6 11 1
5. [119](003) Rim fr. of cooking ware. D. ca. 24 cm. 6. [21](001) Rim fragment. D. 21 cm. Orange ware; slipped interior and exterior. 7. [67](001) Rim of large bowl. D. 28 cm. Fairly gritty grayish-brownfabric (1OYR5/3) fired orange-brown at edges. Cream wash exterior and interior (2.5Y 7/ 4). Shape paralleled at Quseir (see Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pl. 25r; from the description the fabric appears to be different). 8. [30](001) Rim and body of bowl. D. 34 cm. Gritty dark orange-brown (2.5YR 3/6) fabric fired brownish-gray at edges. Blackened interior and exterior.
1991]
605
12V
173
16
Fig. 28. Potteryfrom Mons Porphyrites: Lycabettos Village (1:4) A possibly related form occurs at Quseir (Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 9a). 9. [20](003) Bowl. D. 17 cm. Orange-brown fabric (2.5YR 4/6) with occasional white specks. Dull red (1OR5/6) slip traces on exterior and interior. Crackly surface. Dull Red ware. 10. [14](003) Large body spout. D. spout 6.4 cm. Compact cooking pot: fabric pale mauve-gray (5YR 4/2) with lime. Reddish (10R 5/4) exterior. Paralleled at Umm Balad, this spout type may also be related to the "kegs"identified at Quseir (Whitcomband Johnson 1982, pls. 14e, 12k; and Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pl. 22, B4a-5f). Occurs at Mons Claudianus. Mons Porphyrites: Lycabettos Village (fig. 28, table 3) evidence: first-second century: bowl shape (cf. Dating no. 132) that occurs at several of the forts (but not at Quseir); corrugated cooking ware sherds. 14. [117](002) Rim and handle fr. of cooking ware. D. 12 cm. Fairly compact orange fabric (2.5YR 6/6) containing some argillaceous lumps and occasional calcareous specks. 15. [78](002) Rim of bowl. D. 18.5 cm. Orange ware with slip on exterior and interior. Parallels known from Badia', el-Saqqia, el-Heita, and el-'Aras. 16. [112](002) Rim fr. of small bowl with groove on top of rim. D. 15 cm. 17. [40](002) Rim fragment. D. 14 cm. Pale grayish redbrown (5YR 5/4-6/4) to orange-brown (2.5YR 6/8) fabric. Dull red slipped exterior (O1R5/6). For the general shape at Quseir, see Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 26n. Mons Porphyrites: NorthwestVillage (fig. 29, table 4) evidence: first-second century: faience; trefoil Dating jug paralleled at Quseir; cooking wares similar to wares from Quseir.

Types
Nile amphoras Misc. amphoras Cookware Plain ware Jugs Fine ware: ESA Misc. fine
Rims
1 2 12 1 1 3 1
Bases
2
Handles
2
Spouts
Body Sherds Types

Nile amphoras Cookware Plain ware

Rims
18 1 4 11 2 1
Bases
3 11
Handles
6 1 1
Body Sherds
Jugs Faience Misc. Red Slip Misc. painted ware Decorated ware
11. [106](002) Base fr. brown Nile fabric. Fairly clean but with very occasional shining grits. 12. [93](002) Rim fr. of amphora? D. ca. 9 cm. Orange ware. Firm slip, interior and exterior. 13. [38](002) Rim of cooking pot. D. 28 cm. Pale orangebrown fabric (2.5YR 5/6) with a little lime and black specks.
18. [57](004) Body sherd of decorated pot. Flesh-colored fabric (5YR 7/4) with red grits. Fired to pale orange exterior. Fabric resembles that of Egyptian Red Slip A ware (as described in Hayes, supra n. 79) Black decorated lines on exterior surface.
606
[AJA 95
11
S1
20
19
21
22
23
24
Fig. 29. Potteryfrom Mons Porphyrites:NorthwestVillage (18-22), outbuildingsnorth of NorthwestVillage (23), and fort in WadiBelih (24) (1:4) 19. [53](007) Decorated bowl rim and body. D. 13 cm. Pale gray fabric core (10YR 5/2) fired orange-brown (5YR 5/6) with occasional lime. Reddish (10R 5/4) slip on exterior and interior. Three black horizontal lines A, upper part of body. 20. [36](004) Rim and body of cooking pot. D. 16 cm. Fairly gritty bluish gray fabric fired mauve-red on interior and exterior with lime grits. For the general form at Quseir, see Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 9n, from a post-villacontext, where it is suggested that the form could be a lid. 21. [48](004) Rim of bowl. D. ca. 21 cm. Orange ware. Slip on exterior and over rim, with dribbles down inside. 22. [56](004) Rim neck and handle of one-handled jug. D. 2.5 cm. Fairly compact, pale brown fabric containing occasional pale gray grits, resembling a "Nile"fabric. Dull red "slip"on exterior (2.5YR 4/4). Mons Porphyrites:OutbuildingsNorth of Northwest Village (fig. 29, table 5) Dating evidence: first-second century: faience. Table 5. Distribution of Finds
Types
Nile amphoras Misc. amphoras Cookware Plain ware Jugs FaienceI
Fort in WadiBelih (fig. 29, table 6) Dating evidence: first-second century: barbotine decorated sherd. Table 6. Distribution of Finds
Types
Nile amphoras Cookware Barbotine
Rims
2
Bases
Handles
2
Body Sherds
Rims
Bases
3
Handles
2 1
Body Sherds
24. [42](011) Sherd with barbotine decoration. Fairly compact bluish-gray fabric (2.5YR 5/0), core containing occasional lime. Fired pale orange at edge. The barbotine decoration comprises separately applied cream clay (7.5YR 7/4). Barbotine decorated sherds were attested at Quseir, although on thinwalled wares. (This example imitates thin-walled ware.) For parallels from Quseir see Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pl. 22, B4n-5, pot a; also Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 25d. Barbotine decoration occurs at Coptos (see Herbert and Wright [supra n. 77] fig. lj) and, in Nile clay, at Mons Claudianus (information Roberta Tomber). Badia' (fig. 30, table 7) Dating evidence: first-second century: faience. Second-fourth century: Tripolitanian amphoras. Fourth century: ARS Form 58b (A.D. 290/300-375); ARS Form 59 (320-380+); later painted jug. Fourth century onward: Gaza amphora rim. 25. [63](015) Rim of African Red Slip ware. D. uncertain but more than 22 cm. ARS Hayes Form 59 (Date: 320-380+). 26. [59](015). Rim fr. D. 28 cm. Compact dull fleshcolored fabric (2.5YR 5/6) with reddish slip (10R 5/
2 1 1
23. [22](005) Rim fragment. D. 16.5 cm. Bluish-gray (5YR 4/1) fabric fired red (O1R5/6) at edges. Crackled surface.
1991]
607
25
26
27
29
34
36
38 37
40
39
4 41
44 42 4
Fig. 30. Potteryfrom Badia'(1:4) 6-5/8). It is more compact than normal African Red Slip ware. Probably ARS Hayes Form 58b (Date: 30. [6](015) Painted body sherd. Shoulder, probably of jug. Faded red paint lines with black painted circles beneath. Mauve-brown fabric (2.5YR 3/6) with occasional lime inclusions and creamish exterior. This is typical of later Roman painted pitchers at Ashmunein (see Spencer and Bailey [supra n. 78] figs. 70-71). 31. [5](015) Painted body sherd. Open vessel with black paint dipinto on red (2.5YR 6/6-7/6) painted background. Compact pale salmon (5YR 7/4) to creamish yellow (7.5YR 7/6) fabric.
290/300-375).92
27. [127](015) Rim fr. of painted ware. D. uncertain. Cream/buff fabric. Black paint on interior, cf. no. 123 below. 28. [44](015) Body sherd of amphora with graffiti. Pale gray fabric with creamish surface. 29. [88](015) Body sherd of decorated bowl. Fairlygritty gray-brown fabric (5YR 5/4) containing lime. Creamish exterior (5Y 8/2) with black paint.
92
See Hayes (supra n. 79) fig.14, no.11 for this form.
608
STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF, AND JOHN A. RILEY Table 7. Distribution of Finds
[AJA 95
Types
Nile amphoras Gaza amphoras Misc.amphoras Trip. amphoras Misc. cookware Hunched bowl Misc. plain ware String-cut base Jugs Jugs: footed bases Nile clayjugs Dolia ARS Fine ARS Lid Egyptian RS Faience Fine double-groove Flanged bowl, Red Slip Misc. painted ware Graffiti Strainer
Body Rims Bases Handles Spouts Sherds

2 1 2 2 39 1 8 4 7 1 3 2 I 1 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 1 3 3 1 3 3 6 1 6
1 10 1
39. [136](015) Rim and body fr. of corrugated cooking ware. D. ca. 18 cm. Bluish-gray gritty core (2.5Y 4/ 0) fired orange-brown (10R 5/6) at edges. Fired dull reddish-brown (10R 4/3) on exterior and interior. 40. [97](015) Rim fr. of bowl. D. ca. 15 cm. Orangebrown gritty fabric with dull red core (Dull Red ware). Slipped exterior and interior. 41. [10](015) Rim fr. of large bowl. D. ca. 24 cm. Surface is rough and pitted. Bluish-gray (5Y 5/1) fabric fired mauve (2.5YR 5/4) on exterior. Contains occasional lime-like flecks. 42. [132](015) Rim fr. of flanged bowl. D. ca. 22 cm. Orange-brown (2.5YR 5/6) fabric containing minute shining particles. Fired dull reddish-brown (2.5YR 4/4) on exterior and interior. 43. [31](015) Complete profile of small bowl. D. ca. 11 cm. Est. Ht. 7.2 cm. D. base 6 cm. Fairly compact light brown fabric (7.5YR 4/4) fired grayish-red (10R 5/4) on exterior and interior. UmmBalad: TrashDump (figs. 31-33, table 8) Dating evidence: This is a typical Quseir al-Qadim type of assemblage. Augustan to mid-first century: double-
32. [86](015) Rim fr. of Tripolitanian amphora. D. ca. 15 cm. Fairly compact, light brown fabric (O1YR6/ 4) with a little lime. Cream exterior (O1YR7/3). No parallels published from Quseir for this particular form. This shape was not noted at Mons Claudianus (information Roberta Tomber). This form is generally later in the series, from the second to the fourth century (see Peacock and Williams [supra n. 82] class 37 and refs). 33. [87](015) Rim fr. of Tripolitanian amphora. D. 13.9 cm. Fairly compact orange fabric (2.5YR 6/8) with some lime. Cream (10YR 7/4) exterior. Cf. no. 32. 34. [24](015) Rim fragment of amphora. D. 16 cm. Wavy incised groove below rim. Mauve-red (2.5YR 4/4-5/ 6), fired to creamish gray exterior. Greenish cream (2.5Y 7/4) self-wash exterior. 35. [72](015) Rim fr. of Gaza amphora. D. ca. 10.4 cm. Typical drab brown fabric (5YR 5/6-6/6) containing gray pebbles and lime. For this distinctive type, which occurs throughout the Mediterranean region from the fourth to the sixth century, see Peacock and Williams (supra n. 82) class 49. With its cleancut rim this fragment may belong to a version early in the series. 36. [137](015) Rim fr. of cooking ware. D. ca. 19 cm. Dull reddish-brown fabric (10R 4/6) fired dark gray at the edges. 37. [33](015) Rim and body of corrugated cooking pot. D. 12 cm. Fairly compact, reddish-brown fabric (2.5YR 4/4), fired grayish-red on exterior (2.5YR 5/ 4). Fabric has abundant white specks. 38. [108](015) Rim fr. of cooking ware. D. 18 cm. Brown fabric (5YR 4/6) containing lime and gray grits. Traces of red slip (10R 5/4) on exterior and over rim. Echoes first-century forms in the Mediterranean. Vague parallel in Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 10q from a pre-villa context.

Types Nile amphoras Trip. amphoras Double-barreled Misc. cooking wares Cookware (as no. 63) Cookware (as no. 62) Cookware (as no. 55) Cookware (as no. 54) Cookware (as nos. 57-58) Misc. Plain ware Jugs Thin-Wall undec. Footed bases Fine ware: ESA Fine footed bases ERS footed bases Orange ware (as nos. 65-66) Orange ware (as no. 75) Misc. Orange ware Faience Misc. Red Slip Pompeian(?) Red ware Arretine? Misc. painted ware Strainer Misc. Lids Roundel with hole Shell Rims 5 1 10 19 20 23 8 7 4 2 1 5 9 2 7 5 9 1 1 1 5 1 Bases 4 Handles 1 2 Spouts Body Sherds
1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1
1 I
1991]
609
45
4446 47
49
48
51
Fig. 31. Potteryfrom Umm Baladtrash dump (1:4) barreled amphora handle. First-second century: faience; E. Sigillata A; "keg"; Nile amphoras; Quseir-type Arretine imitations. Later first to fourth century: Tripolitanian amphora. 44. [79](012) Body sherd of closed Eastern Sigillata A ware. D. body ca. 12 cm. Bright, but patchy and worn slip exterior. Unslipped interior but with typical dribbles of slip. 45. [23](012) Base fr. D. 9 cm. Very compact, dull fleshcolored (2.5YR 5/6) fabric with good slip (O1R5/65/8). Cf. fabric to that of no. 26. 46. [85](012) Base fr. of faience bowl. D. base 7 cm. Pale buff fabric (10YR 7/3). 47. [89](012) Thin-wall ware base. D. base 4 cm. Pale buff fabric (7.5YR 7/4) with blackish paint on exterior. For a non-painted version from Quseir, see Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl.25j. 48. [25](012) Rim, neck, and handle fr. of amphora. Est. D. 10.5 cm. Dull grayish-brown (7.5YR 3/2) fabric (fired to 10YR 4/3 on exterior). This may be a reduced version of Nile clay. For a close parallel of the shape from Quseir see Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pl. 21 (C4c-9-10) z; see also pl. 32m. A parallel also is found at Badia', and the form was noted at Khams al Menih (Herbert and Wright [supra n. 77] fig. 7a). 49. [111](012) Base of Nile amphora. Typical Nile clay. Paralleled at Quseir (Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pl. 23q). 50. [70](012) Rim fr. of Tripolitanian amphora. D. 19 cm. Reddish-brown fabric (2.5YR 5/6) with many lime specks. Exterior is a dull brownish-red. For parallels from Quseir, see Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 15e; Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pls. 24i,
610
[AJA 95
52
53
54
577
5859
61
62
Fig. 32. Potteryfrom Umm Balad trashdump (1:4) 27h. Several similar rims were noted by the writer in the trash dumps of the Quseir excavations. Also present at Mons Claudianus (information Roberta Tomber). This type dates from the later first to the fourth century (see Peacock and Williams [supra n. 82] class 36). 51. [17](012) Rim and handle fr. of amphora. D. 12 cm. Dull brown (5YR 4/4) fabric, with general Nile appearance. The fabric is harder than normal, however, and contains much lime, some erupting through the surface to form greenish punctured bubbles. 52. [49](012) Rim of cooking ware. D. uncertain. Fairly compact brownish fabric (7.5YR 4/4) with lime and occasional glistening specks. Black (reduced?) slip interior and over rim. There are no obvious parallels at Quseir, but the fabric resembles burnt Pompeian Red ware. Pompeian Red occurs at Coptos (Herbert and Wright, supra n. 77). 53. [37](012) Rim of cooking pot. D. 13 cm. Biscuit brown-red (2.5YR 3/6), fired gray at edges. Dark bluish-gray (2.5YR 3/0) exterior. This resembles a later Roman type of cooking ware (cf. example from 'Abu Sha'ar: Sidebotham et al. [supra n. 1] no. 28), which also occurs at Mons Claudianus (Roberta Tomber, pers. comm.). 54. [1](012). Rim, body, and handle fr. ofjar. D. 10 cm. One handle extant; high, plain vertical rim. Com-
1991]
611
73?'
76
77
78
7980
Fig. 33. Potteryfrom Umm Balad trashdump (1:4) pact reddish-brown fabric (2.5YR 4/6) with thin gray (2.5YR 4/0) core. Exterior blackened in patches. The fabric texture is similar to that found in Roman cooking wares throughout the Mediterranean. For the form at Quseir, see Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, 53, pl. 10a (from villa period to first and second centuries); pl. 10a-h illustrates a variety of rim forms assigned to a general "verticalneck" category at Quseir. This form is also typical at Mons Claudianus. [116](012) Rim fr. of cooking ware. D. ca. 24 cm. [3](012) Rim and one handle of coarse cooking pot. D. 10.8 cm. Everted rim. Thick biscuit, orangebrown fabric (2.5YR 4/6) with regular black inclusions (0.5 mm across), occasional stones (averaging 1 mm), and lumps of lime (up to 5 mm across). The form appears broadly to conform with the "thick flaring rim"at Quseir (WhitcombandJohnson 1982, pl. 9u), although the Quseir version has horizontal handles. [115](012) Rim fr. of cooking pot. D. ca. 30 cm. [39](012) Rim of cooking pot. D. 23 cm. Contains a lot of mica in the clay. Grayish-red slip (2.5YR 5/4) on exterior and interior. This may be a version of the Dull Red ware. This shape occurs at Mons Claudianus. See also Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 261. [55](012) Rim and body fr. of cooking pot. D. 21 cm. Grayish-brown core (5YR 4/2) fired orangebrown on exterior (5YR 4/6). Contains lime with some large lumps to 4 mm across erupting through the interior surface. Fire-blackened exterior. [13](012) Rim and horizontal handle of cooking pot. D. 21.3 cm. Biscuit, reddish brown (2.5YR 4/6) core fired dull brown (5YR 4/4). [43](012) Rim and body of cooking pot. D. 18 cm. Fairly gritty reddish fabric (Munsell 10R 5/6), core fired orange-brown (2.5YR 4/6). For a similar form (although with corrugations inside base), see Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pl. 33q. [7](012) Rim and handle fr. of cooking pot. D. 12 cm. Lid seating on top of rim. Traces of corrugation on exterior and sharp corrugations on interior. Mauve to orange-brown (5YR 4/6-4/4) biscuit and compact fabric. See Whitcomb and Johnson 1982 (supra n. 8) 53-54, pl.10, esp. j; this is described as
59.
60.
55. 56.
61.
62.
57. 58.
612
STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY "no neck but concave sloping shoulder forming rim" (from villa context at Quseir-first and second centuries). [12](012) Profile of carinated cooking pot. D. 16.4 cm; Ht. 6.3 cm. Dull brown (5YR 4/4) core fired dark gray at edges. Shape parallels noted at Mons Porphyrites (including a larger, deeper version), elSaqqia, el-'Aras, and Badia'. [54](012) Rim and body fr. of cooking ware. D. 16 cm. Dark gray, heavily reduced fabric with some lime and occasional mica. [52](012) Rim of bowl. D. ca. 11.2 cm. Orange ware. Traces of slip on exterior. Form (although not the fabric) resembles Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 1lp. [62](012) Rim and body of bowl. D. 11 cm. D. base 4.7 cm. Ht. 6.2 cm. Orange ware with traces of slip on exterior. Cf. Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 1lo, where the form is classed as among the "more common" type of bowl. The form is taken from faience shapes, and occurs in a post-villa context there. [41](012) Rim of small bowl. D. 8 cm. Ware similar to Orange ware but not slipped. [105](012) Rim fr. of small bowl. D. 18 cm. Orange ware. Patchy slip on exterior and interior. [29](012) Rim. D. 20 cm. Orange ware. Traces of slip over rim and exterior. [28](012) Rim. D. 16 cm. Orange ware. Slip on exterior and over rim. [51](012) Rim. D. 22 cm. Orange ware variant. Similar to no. 47, but with black grits to 2 mm across. Slip on exterior is duller (5YR 5/4). For variants of the form at Quseir, see Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl.1 lh (pre-villa) and i (post-villa). [103](012) Rim fr. of small bowl. D. 13 cm. Dull Red ware. Thick red slip over burnished exterior and interior. [47](012) Rim and neck of bowl. D. ca. 17 cm. Orange ware, but the slip is firmer and lighter (5YR 6/ 6) and the fabric is lighter and creamier (7.5YR 6/ 6). The slip is on the exterior and over the top of the rim only. [99](012) Rim fr. of bowl. D. uncertain. Bluish-gray fabric fired orange-brown. Red slip (10R 5/6) exterior and interior. [77](012) Profile of bowl with incurved rim. D. 18 cm. Ht. 4.5 cm. D. base 12 cm. Orange ware with traces of slip on exterior and over rim. See Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 1 Ik, from a post-villa context. [74](012) Rim and handles of strainer. D. rim 8 cm. Distinctive vertical rim surrounding strainer holes. Buff fabric (5YR 6/6) with green wash over exterior (5Y 7/2). The form occurs at Mons Claudianus (Roberta Tomber, pers. comm., and inspection of sample by the writer). There is one example known from el-Heita. A first-second century date seems assured. The form also occurs at Quseir (Whitcomb and
[AJA 95
63.
77.
64.
78.
65.
66.
79.
80.
Johnson 1979, pl.22, B4a-5b); Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl.12o (pre-villa), although this version has no depression on the top of the rim and the vertical walls are higher; see also pl. 24h (no clear date). [19](012)Jug spout. Cream-colored (2.5Y 7/4) fabric and exterior. See Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 12f, for the shape in a post-villa context at Quseir (although in a red fabric). The shape also occurs at Qattar and el-Saqqia. [15](012) Rim and one handle of flagon. D. ca. 12.5 cm. Pale, chocolate brown (5YR 5/3) fabric fired greenish-cream (2.5Y 7/4) exterior. This form occurs at Qattar (although larger) and appears to be common at Quseir (see Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, 53, pl. 10f, from a post-villa context). [146](012) Trefoil jug rim. Orange ware. Also occurs at Mons Porphyrites in more faded Orange ware. [73](012) Base fr. ofjug(?). D. base ca. 8 cm. Orange ware. Pale reddish-gray slip on underside of base. No slip on interior.
67. 68. 69. 70. 71.
QattarStation (fig. 34, table 9) Dating evidence: first-second century: Orange ware bowl (as no. 132). Third-fourth century+ : Africano Grande.

Types Nile amphoras Misc. amphoras Af. Grande Trip. amphoras Misc. cookware Cookware (as no. 62) Cookware (as no. 38) Misc. plain ware Footed bases Misc.jugs ARS fine Fine double-groove Misc. painted ware Lids CoralI Rims 1 2 1 11 2 1 8 Bases 3 Handles 2 4 1 Spouts Body Sherds
72.
73.
2 7 1 1 3 1 2 2
74.
1 1 4
75.
76.
81. [125](016) Rim fr. of painted ware. D. 13 cm. Creamy fabric, white dusty powder glaze on interior and exterior. Two brown narrow bands painted on interior. 82. [50](016) Decorated sherd. Orange-brown fabric (2.5YR 4/6) with cream-colored wash on exterior. Black decoration. 83. [107](016) Base fr. of amphora. Drab Nile clay. Similar form with flanged knob at Bab el-Mukhenig. 84. [66](016) Rim fr. of Africano Grande amphora. D. 15 cm. Reduced gray fabric (10YR 6/3-5/3) with
1991]
613
81
86
S84
87
89
82
83 858
Nagat (89) (1:4) Fig. 34. Potteryfrom QattarStation(81-88) and Anchoritebuildingin WadiQattar/Wadi greenish-cream slipped exterior (10YR 6/4). The fabric and surface treatment are typically African. This amphora is likely to date from the third or fourth to sixth century. Cf. Peacock and Williams (supra n. 82) class 35, type LXII.A. [16](016) Fr. of amphora handle. Compact pale orange/buff fabric (7.5YR 6/4) with occasional small dark grits. [34](016) Rim fr. of cooking pot. D. 16 cm. Orangebrown (2.5YR 4/6) biscuit, core fired brownish-gray at edges. Traces of fire-blackening on exterior and interior. This is a typical form at Mons Claudianus and occurs at Quseir (Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 28j). [148](016) Rim and handle fr. cooking ware. D. 12 cm. Spaced bands of narrow sharp grooving on body. Dull cream (10YR 6/4) fabric fired light orange (2.5YR 6/6) at edges. Regular reddish grits. Surface fired pale greenish-cream (5Y 8/3). [145](016) Profile of small cooking pot. D. 14 cm. Ht. 4.4 cm. Corrugated underside of base. Dull reddish-brown fabric (10R 4/6) with dark gray smudges. Creamish-colored wash on surface. Deir el-Atrash(fig. 35, table 11) Dating evidence: first-second century: Nile(?) amphora rim. Fifth-seventh century: Antioch amphora; Gaza amphora. Table 11. Distribution of Finds
Rims 2 1 1 2 32 4 3 2 3 3 1 11 1 1 2 4 Bases Handles 3 Body Sherds
85.
86.
Types Nile amphoras Bii amphora Gaza amphora Misc. amphoras Misc. cookware Misc. plain ware Misc.jugs Dolia Misc. Red Slip Fine ware Lids Shell
87.
88.
AnchoriteBuilding in Wadi Qattar/WadiNagat (fig. 34, table 10) Dating evidence: The few nondescript sherds cannot be easily dated. Probably at least first-second century. Table 10. Distribution of Finds
Types Nile amphoras Cookware Plain ware Dolia Glass Rims 1 4 1 Bases 1 6 2 1 Handles 2 Body Sherds
89. [138](010) Rim fr. of cooking ware. D. ca. 12 cm. Medium gray gritty fabric (2.5YR 3/0) fired pale orange on surface (2.5YR 6/6).
90. [118](017) Rim fr. of cooking ware. D. 18 cm. Reddish-brown fabric (2.5YR 4/6). 91. [155](017) Rim fr. of cooking ware(?). D. ca. 16.5 cm. Fairly compact, orange-brown fabric (10R 5/6) with argillaceous matter and shining grits. 92. [27](017) Rim and carinated body fr. of cooking ware. D. 17 cm. Dull grayish-brown fabric (5YR 3/ 3-4/3), fired to reddish-brown 2.5YR 5/4 on exterior and interior. 93. [101](017) Rim and profile of low cooking pot. D. ca. 15.2 cm. Ht. 2.8 cm. D. Base 11.7 cm. Gritty purplish-brown fabric (5YR 5/4) fired light gray at edges. Cracklyred slip (10R 5/4). Similar to secondthird century pan forms in the Mediterranean. 94. [35](017) Cooking pot. D. ca. 13.6 cm. Reddish cooking fabric (10R 5/6) fired orange-brown. 95. [134](017) Rim and body fr. of cooking ware with corrugations. D. 12 cm. No corrugations on interior. Similar rim known at Qattar. 96. [113](017) Rim fr. of cooking ware. D. uncertain. Narrow grooves on exterior body below rim.
614
[AJA 95
9092
93
94
96
7 997
100
101
102
104 103 105
Fig. 35. Potteryfrom Deir el-Atrash(90-100) and from a site 2 km northwestof Deir el-Atrash(101-105) (1:4) 97. [120](017) Rim fr. of corrugated cooking ware. D. ca. 11 cm. Orange-brown fabric (2.5YR 5/6) containing a little lime. 98. [150](017) Open vessel. D. ca. 24 cm. Nile clay. 99. [142](017) Bowl with a semicircular incision on top of rim. D. 22 cm. Light, flesh-colored fabric (5YR 7/4) with orange slip (Munsell 10R 5/8) and occasional red grit specks. 100. [151](017) Thick Nile clay amphora. D. ca. 12 cm. Site 2 Kilometers Northwestof Deir el-Atrash(fig. 35, table 12) Dating evidence: fourth-fifth century: ARS? It is unusual that no Nile amphoras were collected from the surface. 101. [84](018) Slipped body sherd with gouged notching on exterior. Flesh-colored fabric (5YR 7/4), similar to Eastern Sigillata "A" ware, containing lime. Dull light red slip (10R 5/6), firm on the interior and patchy and thin on the exterior. 102. [60](018) Rim fr. of Egyptian(?)Red Slip "A"ware. D. ca. 29 cm. Pale flesh-colored fabric (5YR 7/4) with occasional red grits. Mauve-red slip on exterior and interior (lOR 5/6-5/8). The fabric is typical of this ware but the form is not paralleled in Hayes (supra n. 79). 103. [94](018) Rim fr. of amphora. D. 10 cm. Narrow band of horizontal grooving toward top of neck. Pale brown-gray fabric (10YR 5/3) fired pale orTable 12. Distribution of Finds
Types
Misc. amphoras Misc. cookware Misc. fine ARS? Misc.jugs Misc. plain Gouged sherd (fine)
Rims
4 1 1 1 1 2
Bases
Handles
2
Body Sherds
1 1 1
1991]
615
ange brown at edges. Cream-colored (10YR 7/4) exterior. 104. [91](018) Base fr. of Orange ware. D. uncertain. Slipped interior and exterior. 105. [130](018) Rim and body fr. of large open vessel. D. 20 cm. Widely spaced grooves. Bab el-Mukhenig(fig. 36, table 13) Dating evidence: uncertain Bii (?) finely grooved probably is not Bii proper. Table 13. Distribution of Finds
Types
Nile amphoras Bii amphoras? Dolia Misc. fine
106
Rims
3 8 5
Bases
4
Handles
3 1
Body Sherds
107
-i
108
106. [76](014) Rim and handle fr. of Nile amphora. D. ca. 12.7 cm. Compact, but typical drab brown Nile fabric. This is a particularly well-formed version. Cruder versions occurred at el-Saqqia (three examples) and el-'Aras. 107. [92](014) Rim fr. of Orange ware. D. uncertain. Firm slip on exterior, patchy on interior. 108. [18](014) Rim fr. of dolium. D. uncertain. Dark gray (2.5YR 3/0) gritty fabric, fired dull mauve-red (2.5YR 5/4) exterior and interior. El-Saqqia (fig. 37, table 14) Dating evidence: none. Table 14. Distribution of Finds
Types Nile amphoras Bii amphoras? Misc. amphoras Af. Grande Cookware Plain ware Jugs Dolia Misc. Red Slip Misc. painted ware Lids? Rims 3 4 2 13 1 4 4 1 Bases 1 3 2 1 5 2 1 2 4 2 Handles Spouts Body Sherds
Fig. 36. Potteryfrom Bab el-Mukhenig(1:4) 111. [4](009) Rim and one handle of Africano Grande amphora. D. 12.5 cm. Compact salmon fabric (2.5YR 6/8) with occasional limestone eruptions (one is 5 mm long). Distinctive creamy (10YR 7/3) surface (caused by sea water during firing). Cf. no. 84. 112. [65](009) Base for Africano Grande amphora. Fabric identical to that of no. 111. Probablyfrom same amphora: 113. [153](009) Rim and handle fr. of amphora. D. 15 cm. Pale greenish-gray fabric (10YR 5/3) with calcareous specks. Fired pale grayish-orange exterior (5YR 6/4). 114. [141](009). Rim and neck fr. of amphora with biconical rim. D. ca. 5 cm. Fairly compact, pale orange-brown (2.5YR 6/6) fabric containing minute gray and shining grits with occasional red argillaceous matter to 1 mm across. Exterior fired dirty cream (O1YR7/4). This form is typical in the Mediterranean in a range of fabrics in the second and third centuries A.C. (see Peacock and Williams [supra n. 82] class 40). 115. [32](009). Rim and body of corrugated cooking pot. D. 28 cm. Bluish-gray fabric (7.5YR 5/2), fired grayish-red exterior and interior (2.5YR 5/4). Contains abundant white specks. For a version of this rim without corrugations, see Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 9s (post-villa period). 116. [140](009) Complete profile of small bowl. D. 15 cm. Ht. 6.3 cm. D. base 6.2 cm. Light orange-brown (2.5YR 5/6) fabric with occasional shining particles. Fired dull red (10R 4/6) on surface. 117. [98](009) Rim fr. of bowl. D. ca. 23 cm. Gritty mauve core (10R 5/6), fired brown (5YR 4/6), containing lime.
109. [61](009) Misc. Red Slip rim. D. 24.8 cm. Fairly compact, pale orange-brown to flesh-colored fabric (2.5YR 5/8) containing occasional white specks. Pale reddish slip on exterior (10R 6/8) and interior. 110. [152](009) Amphora rim and handle fr. D. 15.2 cm. Heavy ragged corrugations on neck. Compact medium-gray (10YR 4/1) fabric containing occasional black grit stains to ca. 1 mm across. Exterior fired cream in color (10YR 7/3) with white calcareous specks through surface.
616

109
[AJA 95
111
110
112
113 115
11617
17
Fig. 37. Potteryfrom el-Saqqia(1:4) EI-Heita (fig. 38, table 15) Dating evidence: first-second century: faience. Fifthseventh century: Antioch amphora. Table 15. Distribution of Finds
Types Nile amphoras Antioch amphoras Misc. amphoras Cookware Plain ware Jugs Faience Misc. Red Slip Arretine Strainer Flue Tile Lids? Misc. decorated Rims 3 4 45 20 9 2 15 Bases 4 1 Handles 9 5 4 4 3 3 1 1 10 1 4 1 9 1 12 Body Sherds
120.
121.
122.
18
123.
124.
125. 118. [95](008) Rim fr. D. ca. 23 cm. Grittyorange-brown fabric (2.5YR 4/6-4/8) with dull red-brown core (10R 4/6). Dull red (10R 5/6) slip on exterior and interior. 119. [80](008) Base fr. of fine ware. D. 9.3 cm. Reddishbrown fabric (10R 4/6), fired brown (5YR 4/6).
126.
Traces of thin, dull reddish-brown (2.5YR 4/4) slip. This is an Arretine form but not of Arretine fabric. [102](008) Base fr. of miscellaneous Red Slip ware. D. ca. 24 cm. Fairly compact, clean flesh-colored (5YR 6/6) fabric. Fairly rich orange slip (2.5YR 4/ 8) on exterior, but poor interior. [81](008) Rim fr. of faience bowl. D. uncertain. Fabricis 10YR 7/3. Blue glaze turned green on the interior. Cf. Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pl. 26. [83](008) Rim fr. of faience bowl. D. ca. 16 cm. Yellow fabric (2.5Y 8/6). For a possible parallel from Quseir, see Whitcomb and Johnson 1979, pl. 30 (top), n. [124](008) Rim fr. of painted ware. D. uncertain. Cream/buff fabric. Black paint on interior, cf. no. 27 above. [109](008) Rim, neck, and handle fr. of Nile amphora. D. ca. 10 cm. Drab grayish rather than brown fabric. [104](008) Rim of large cooking pot. D. 15 cm. Coarse, bluish-gray fabric containing lime. Greenish-cream (10YR 4/1) wash on exterior and over rim. Also known from el-'Aras (nine similar rims), Badia', and Qattar. [90](008) Rim and handle fr. of amphora. D. 9 cm. Gritty cream fabric (10YR 7/4) with many black
1991]
617
118
119
120
12
121
122
123
124
125 125
128
129 126
131
132
V3
135
136
'1i/
136
~I
. 138
Fig. 38. Potteryfrom el-Heita (1:4)
grits and some shell. The fabric distantly resembles the Antioch amphora fabric. Uncertain origin. 127. [110](008) Rim neck and handle fr. of Nile am-
phora. D. ca. 8 cm. Typical drab brown Nile fabric. 128. [139](008) Rim fr. of corrugated cooking ware. D. ca. 21 cm. Compact biscuit, reddish-brown fabric
618
[AJA 95
142 141
145 143
147
146
148
5
149150
151
Fig. 39. Potteryfrom el-'Aras(1:4) (2.5YR 5/6). Cream wash on exterior. Similarshape at Coptos (Herbert and Wright [supra n. 77] fig. 6b). [114](008) Rim fr. of cooking ware. D. 19 cm. Fairly compact, chocolate brown fabric (5YR 5/4) containing occasional white lime and shining grits. The form also occurs at Qattar. [133](008) Rim fr. of corrugated cooking ware. D. ca. 16 cm. Compact biscuit, slightly micaceous pale brown fabric (2.5YR 4/4). [8](008) Rim of cooking ware. D. 11.5 cm. Corrugated exterior and interior. Crisp orange brown (2.5YR 4/6) fabric with purplish-red (10R 5/6) core. For a possible parallel from 'Abu Sha'ar, see Sidebotham et al. (supra n. 1) no. 26. [58](008) Rim of bowl. D. 14 cm. Distinctivedouble groove on exterior below incurved plain rim. Orange-ware. Firm slip on exterior and interior. This was a commonly recurring form on several sites. Although not published at Quseir, this form is present at Mons Claudianus (information Roberta Tomber), Badia', Qattar, Mons Porphyrites, elSaqqia, and Deir el-Atrash. [64](008) Decorated base. D. base ca. 8 cm. Fabric appears like Orange ware in consistency but is slightly darker orange (2.5YR 6/6). Exterior slip is also darker (2.5YR 5/6). [156](008) Rim fr. of misc. bowl. D. ca. 26 cm. [9](008) Rim of bowl. D. 13 cm. Friable dull brown (5YR 4/6) fabric with occasional pale gray grits (to 0.3 mm across). [100](008) Rim fr. of bowl. D. ca. 23 cm. Drab brown Nile fabric (5YR 4/6). Fairly clean, with occasional lime. No parallels for this more distinctive form at Quseir. [143](008) Profile of flanged bowl. D. 13.5 cm. Ht. 6 cm. D. base 6.8 cm. Flat base. This sherd was discovered sealed in a mudbrick wall. 138. [45](008) Rim fr. of dolium. D. uncertain. Bluishgray fabric fired grayish red (1OR5/4). Inside and exterior are cracked, resembling sun-dried mud. Dull Red ware. 139. [68](008) Rim of jug. D. 3.3 cm. 140. [129](008) Base fr. of jug? D. base 6.4 cm. Corrugated exterior. This base form is present at el-'Aras and the Anchorite building in Wadi Qattar/Wadi Nagat. The general shape and style are common in second-third century North Africa. El-'Aras (fig. 39, table 16) Dating evidence: first-second century: Tripolitanian amphora; double-barreled amphora handle. Secondthird century: ARS ware slipped on both sides. Thirdfourth century: Africano Grande amphoras. 141. [11](013) Body sherd with graffito, bowl or amphora. Beige, fairly gritty fabric (7.5YR 6/4) containing lime specks, fired greenish-cream on exterior. 142. [71](013) Rim fr. of Tripolitanian amphora. D. 16 cm. Buff fabric (5YR 6/6) with scatters of lime specks. Traces of creamish-salt on exterior. This form occurs at Mons Claudianus. Cf. also no. 50. 143. [46](013) Rim and body fr. of bowl. D. ca. 40 cm. Compact, light grayish-brown (5YR 5/4) fabric, fired pale orange-red on exterior. Fairly gritty with much lime (to 2 mm across). Decoration as if twisted string has been applied to the wet clay over the carination before firing. Although this general form does not occur in the Quseir publications, it is known in first- and second-century contexts in the eastern Mediterranean, and at Coptos (Herbert and Wright [supra n. 77] fig. 3d-e).
129.
130.
131.
132.
133.
134. 135.
136.
137.
1991]
SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD Table 16. Distribution of Finds
619
Types
Nile amphoras Misc. amphoras Af. Grande Trip. amphoras Misc.cookware Plain ware High-footed base Ring bases Cookware ring base String-cut base Molded-base Jugs Nile clayjugs Dolia Misc. heavy bowl ARS fine Misc. Red Slip Thin-Wall ware Strainer Lids Misc.decorated
Body Rims Bases Handles Spouts Sherds

2 2 1 1 49 27 2 2 5 1 1 1 11 5 4 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 8 3 1 3 1
1 1 1 3 1 1
1 1
144. [26](013) Rim and body fr. of "hunched" bowl. D. 20 cm. Typical orange-brown (2.5YR 4/6) cooking fabric, fired bluish-gray on exterior and interior. For a similar form (although with more everted rim), see Whitcomb and Johnson 1982, pl. 9i. 145. [82](013) Rim of bowl. D. 13.2 cm. Orange-brown (5YR 4/6) cooking ware fabric with few inclusions.
146. [96](013) Rim fr. of bowl. D. uncertain. Bluishgray fabric, fired pale reddish color on exterior and interior (2.5YR 5/6). 147. [144](013) Rim fr. of incurved bowl. D. 38 cm. Fairly compact, orange-brown fabric (5YR 5/4) containing a little lime. 148 [2](013) Painted jug fragment. Compact, dull orange-brown (5YR 5/6) fabric without obvious inclusions. Black paint with traces of very thin creamcolored wash on exterior. 149. [157](020) Rim fr. of cooking ware. D. ca. 24 cm. 150. [142](020) Rim and body of heavy bowl. D. 40 cm. Light flesh-colored fabric (5YR 7/3) with occasional lime (similar to Egyptian Red Slip ware). Patchy thin orange slip (2.5YR 5/8) on exterior and interior. Body has notched string impression on exterior. 151. [154](020) Rim fr. of bowl. D. 32 cm. Fairly compact, pale mauve fabric (10R 4/3), fired pale orange (10R 5/6). Cream-colored wash on surface. Reminiscent of a typical first-century A.C. Mediterranean forms with a "hunched"shoulder and groove on the outer face of the thick, slightly overhanging rim. For the general shape see Herbert and Wright (supra n. 77) fig. 3d-e.
ROBINSWOOD 12 BOURNE GROVE FARNHAM, SURREY GU1O 3QT ENGLAND
CONCLUSIONS Steven E. Sidebotham

The hydreumata and forts along the 'Abu Sha'arNile road fall into a category paralleled in size in Jordan, Syria, Israel, and Iraq. Fortified installations on this route are generally no larger than ca. 1 acre and are usually quadrilateral or trapezoidal in plan. They frequently have towers flanking the gates, at the corners and occasionally along the walls; these installations are generally located (except for the upper fort at el-Heita) in low-lying terrain not suitable for defense, but rather to control a line of communication or secure a water supply.93 Architectural analysis, and epigraphic, numismatic, and ceramic evidence from the various sites on or near the 'Abu Sha'ar-Qena road reveal that most installations were active throughout part or all of the period between the first and fourth centuries. Some have evidence of activity in the first century (Mons Porphyrites, Wadi Belih, Badia', Umm Balad, Qattar, el-Saqqia, el-Heita, and el-'Aras). Association with the quarrying operations at Mons Porphyrites strongly favors operation at many sites between Mons Porphyrites and the Nile during part or all of the first-fourth century span. Activity in the second century is positively attested by ceramic finds from Mons Porphyrites, Badia', Umm Balad, Qattar, el-Saqqia, and el-'Aras. The most active period for installations along the road was clearly the first-second centuries: ceramic analysis demonstrates activity at all sites at that time except the Wadi Nagat Monastery, the mining settlement ca. 2 km northwest of Deir el-Atrash, and Bab el-Mukhenig. This quarrying activity was apparently not conducted yearround; contemporary inscriptions from other sites in Egypt suggest that quarrying operations were basically seasonal (November-June) so that crews could
93
Kennedyand Riley (supra n. 74) 194-212; cf. Isaac (supran. 52) 186-204.
620
STEVENE. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD ZITTERKOPF, JOHN A. RILEY E. AND
[AJA95
avoid the intense summer heat.94Ceramic evidence suggests that only three stations-Badia', Deir elAtrash, and el-Heita-showed definite activityin the fifth-sixth and/or seventh centuries; two others--elSaqqiaand Bab el-Mukhenig--mayhave been active at that time, but ceramic analysisdoes not definitely prove this. Mostceramicsfound were of Egyptianprovenance; the few imports were generally amphoras from Tripolitania,Tunisia, Gaza,and Antioch. Very little fine ware was discovered, most of it imported (African Red Slip ware from Tunisia and EasternSigillataAI ware from Cyprus). Ceramicand architecturalanalysissuggests that at least one of the sites, WadiBelih, had a relativelybrief period of use in the first-second century.Others had longer periods of use: Mons Porphyrites,first-second and third-fourth centuries;Umm Balad,first,second, and perhaps third-fourth centuries; Badia', firstthird and third-sixth centuries; Qattar, first-second and third-fourth centuries; Deir el-Atrash, fourthseventh centuries and possiblyfirst-fourth centuries; el-Saqqia, first-second, third-fourth, and perhaps fifth-sixth centuries; el-Heita, first-second and fourth-seventh centuries; and el-'Aras, first-fourth centuries. The site at the Christian Anchorite community in the Wadi Nagat was, according to epigraphic evidence, active in the fourth century, but ceramicanalysisis inconclusiveon this date. The mining site about 2 km northwestof Deir el-Atrashproduced little datable pottery except one possible African Red Slip sherd of the fourth-fifth century. The non-diagnosticsherds found there resemblenondiagnostic Roman ceramics from some of the other dated sites on the road. The military installationson the Red Sea coast at 'AbuSha'arand at Bir 'AbuSha'arel-Qibliwere active in the late third/fourth-seventh centuries. Ceramic analysisindicates that many installationson the road leading thence to the Nile functioned at that time. By the fifth century,however,most had ceased operation except Badia',Deir el-Atrash, and el-Heita. The sta-
tions on this route served in part as support facilities for transportingstone from the quarries, indicated by the dates of their operation, and the extensive lines and wateringfacilities.Surface animal-tethering surveyingdid not demonstratethat the extant animaltethering lines at Deir el-Atrash and el-Heita were activein the fifth-seventh centuries.El-Heitawas certainlyactivein the first-second centuries and Deir elAtrash with its extensive facilities was also active at least in the first-second centuries to support quarrying operationsat Mons Porphyrites.El-Saqqia,active in the first-fourth centuries,also functioned as a support facilityfor all quarrytrafficfrom Mons Porphyrites and some from Mons Claudianus, which could also have bypassedel-Saqqiaby going from the 'Abu Zawal station to Qreiya. Bab el-Mukhenig is an enigma: it may have servicedthe quarriesat WadielGhazza as well as Mons Porphyrites. The ceramics from Bab el-Mukhenigcould not be positivelydated; animaltethering-lineswere found although they were substantiallysmaller than those at other sites on the route. Those other facilitiesinvestigatedby this survey, except Wadi Nagat, all had hydreumata;there was
none evident at Bab el-Mukhenig.It was a station the function of which was either associated, at least in part, with supporting quarryingoperations at Mons or Porphyrites with support functions for activitieson the Red Sea coast in the 'Abu Sha'ar/Bir'Abu Sha'ar el-Qibliarea. The sites that had both (putative/possible)earlier and later fifth-seventh century phases (Badia', Deir el-Atrash, and el-Heita) obviously served multiple functionsduring theirlifetimes;the other installations where activityterminatedby the fourth century may also have had multiple functions, although this is difficultto prove withoutexcavation.One function in the early phase has already been indicated: support facilitiesfor quarryingoperations at Mons Porphyrites and, at the sites of el-Saqqia, el-Heita, and el'Aras,also support facilitiesfor quarryingoperations at Mons Claudianus (which seem to have ceased in the thirdor fourth century).95 Supportfor the military
1988) 97-101; cf. Bernand (supra n. 1) 78-111; cf. POxy. 45.3243 of A.D. 215. Mention of "Claudianus" stone in Diocletian'sEdict of MaximumPricesof A.D. 301 suggests that the quarriesmay have continued in use until the fourth century: cf. S. Lauffer,Diokletians Preisedikt (Berlin 1971) 192 (section33.6), 281, and Klein (supran. 14) 92-94, 11417. J.A. Harrell,"An Inventoryof Ancient EgyptianQuarries,"NARCE 146 (Summer 1989) 3 observesthat the stone here is tonaliteand granodiorite,not quartzdiorite quartz; or cf. Burton (supran. 1) Add. Mss.25,625: 59 recto-84 recto for plansand descriptionsof the site that he visited29 May3 June 1823.
94 J.T. Pefia, "P. Giss. 69: Evidence for the Supplyingof Stone Transport Operationsin Roman Egypt and the Production of Fifty-Foot Monolithic Column Shafts,"JRA 2 (1989) 129-30, n. 19. 95 The IFAO internationalteam currentlyexcavatingthe site confirmed a third- or fourth-centurydate through ceramicanalysis(pers. comm. 1989); cf. J. Bingen, "Premiere campagne de fouille au Mons Claudianus.Rapport prdliBIFAO87 (1987) 45-52; cf. D.P.S.Peacock,"The minaire," Roman Quarries of Mons Claudianus,Egypt. An Interim Marble: Report,"in H. Herz and M. Waelkenseds., Classical
Geochemistry, Trade. Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Workshop on Marble in Ancient Greece and Rome (Boston
1991]
SURVEY THE 'ABUSHA'AR-NILE OF ROAD
621
'Abu facilitieson the Red Sea coast at 'Abu Sha'ar/Bir Sha'ar el-Qibli is another possible function of those road installations active from the late third/fourth century on. By the fifth-seventh century,Roman activityin the variousinstallations along the road seems to havebeen at reduced to the coastalinstallations 'AbuSha'ar,and to Badia',Deir el-Atrash, and el-Heita. These installations are all approximatelyequallydistantfrom one another (ca. 40-45 km) and would have acted as support facilities for the garrison at 'Abu Sha'ar. There were, however, other roles that these desert outposts would have served in the late Roman/Byzantine period. Ancient literary testimony reveals that in the late Roman/Byzantine period (late third/earlyfourth-seventh century)there were repeated threatsto the Eastern Desert and Sinai from nomadic bands, especially These raids posed the Nobatae and the Blemmyes.96 potential threats to the Nile valley. To control these maraudersor at least act as an early warning system to areas on the Nile and perhaps monitor the threats, forts in key locationsmust have continued in use and been refurbished, remodeled, or repaired. The most
active period for the hydreumata between Mons Por-
an installation built only at this time to act as an intermediaryrest stop and watering facility between for Deir el-Atrashand el-Saqqia/el-Heita the mounted troops who patrolled the region against the depredations of nomads in the latest pre-Islamicperiod of road activity:the fifth-seventh centuries. The discoveryof a monumental Latin inscription during Universityof Delawareexcavationsin 1990 at the west gate of the fort at 'Abu Sha'ar established one major purpose of the fort there and determined at leastone of the functionsof the installations joining it to the Nile. The inscriptionmentions the emperors Galerius (Augustus 305-311), Licinius I (308-324), and ConstantineI (306-337) and recordsthat the fort
at 'Abu Sha'ar was ". . . LIMITIBUS NPTAIN (or APTAIN) LITO[RUM] ... CURANTE AUREL(ius)
phyrites and Qena, according to ceramic evidence, was in the first and second centuries and, to a lesser extent, in the third and fourth centuries.Activityhere supported quarry traffic and, perhaps, monitored these nomadicmovements.Activityat Badia',the massive mudbrickadditions and repairsmade at el-Heita and Deir el-Atrash,and repairsand narrowingof the gate at el-Saqqia may also have been part of this monitoring effort. Bab el-Mukhenig may have been
MAX[IMINUS]"who was "dux Aegypti Thebaidos Clearly this fort was part utrarumque Libyarum."97 of a limessystem in place by the early fourth century in the desert east of the Nile. Although this region may have had an embryoniclimesprior to Diocletian, the 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile road seems to have been established as a new defensive and administrativezone in the period during or following Diocletian'sabandonment of the Dodekaschoinosin southern Egypt (cf. Procop.,De Bell. Pers. 1.19.27-37). These installations may also have been part of a broader reorganization of the Roman frontier, especially in the East, in the period from Diocletianto Constantine.Thus, in addition to support for quarryingoperations in the late third/fourth century, these forts were also meant to protect the populous regions of the Nile valley through an advanced warning system of desert outFrench scholarshave identified a limesin the posts.98
96
traditions I'histoire Sinaidu IVe au VIIe s." du et tier,"Les

d'Egypte a l'ipoque grecque, romaine et byzantine d'apres les documents grecs. (Recherches de papyrologie et d'dpigraphie
Cf. Procop.Historyof the Wars1.19.29ff; cf. P.-L. Ga-
in Fahd (supra n. 9) 499-523; Cf. G. Wagner, Les oasis
the site. Prof. Bagnallpoints to a very close parallelfor these on emperorsand AureliusMaximinus the second tetrastylon at the Roman camp at Luxor: M. El-Saghiret al., Le camp
romain de Louqsor (avec une itude des graffites grico-romains
grecque)(Cairo 1987) 394-400 for the Western Desert;J. et scienceshumaines,Publications la Sectiond'histoire4, de Dakar 1962) 184-87 for the Blemmyesand 192-93 for the
du temple d'Amon) (MIFAO83, Cairo 1986) 20-21, 122; also

cited in D. van Berchem, L'Arm'e de Dioclitien et la riforme
clasDesanges, Catalogue des tribus africaines de l'antiquitW sique d l'ouest du Nil (Universit' de Dakar,Facult6des lettres Nobatae; A.M. Demicheli, Rapporti di pace e di guerra dell'Egitto romano con le popolazioni dei deserti africani (Milan
Applebaum ed., Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies 1967, Held at Tel Aviv (Tel
constantinienne (Paris 1952) 59 and D. van Berchem, "L'ocmilitairede la Haute Egyptesous Diocl6tien," S. in cupation
ArabConquest (Athens 1988) esp. 213-27. 97 Found at the west gate of the fort: R.S. Bagnall will publish this inscriptionand other epigraphicmaterialfrom
Sea. Relations with Nubia, Ethiopia and South Arabia until the
1976) 127-58 for relations in the third century with the Blemmyes and Nobatae; R.T. Updegraff, "The Blemmyes I: The Rise of the Blemmyes and the Roman Withdrawal from Nubia under Diocletian,"ANRW 2.10.1 (1988) 44106 for the Blemmyes;D.G. Letsios,Byzantium theRed and
Aviv 1971) 126. 98 Cf. B. Isaac, "The Meaning of the Terms Limesand 78 Limitanei,"JRS (1988) 125-47; Isaac (supra n. 52) 198on 218, 408-410; B. Isaac,"Reflections the RomanArmyin the East,"in P. Freemanand D. Kennedyeds., TheDefence
of the Roman and Byzantine East: Proceedings of a Colloquium Held at the University of Sheffield in April 1986 (BAR-IS 297,
1986) 390-91; for Diocletian's reorganization in Upper Egypt, see van Berchem 1952 (supra n. 97) 59-71 and van Berchem 1971 (supran. 97) 123-27.
622
RONALD ZITTERKOPF, STEVENE. SIDEBOTHAM, E. ANDJOHN A. RILEY seen from one anotherand, no doubt, served as signal platforms. Prearrangedsignals would probablyhave been sent using colored flagsor reflectivemirrors;the extant remains and practical considerations do not indicateuse of smoke or flame as signalingdevices.'05 The dating of these towersand cairnsis very difficult, but their antiquityis confirmed by the frequent discovery of Roman/Byzantine ceramics, usually amphoras and larger terracotta vessels of a hydraulic function. It is highly unlikely that passing travelers broke or abandoned water storage/shipmentjars in such numbersat these cairnsand towers. Rather,it is set probable that teams from nearby hydreumata out jars of water,perhapsshaded by palm fronds or small shacks, next to the cairns and towers so that passing travelers,those using the towers,and troops on patrol could in an emergency have drinking water. This is common practice today along main routes in the Egyptiandesertsand is the most plausibleexplanation for the relativedensity of sherds at these desert sites. Additional archaeologicalwork is vital along this road in the near future due to the rapid destruction of the sites by touristsand antiquitieshunters. Future workshould, if logisticaldifficultiesof waterand food supply and storage for an excavation team in the desert can be surmounted, concentrate on the trash dumps associated with these installations,especially at el-Heita, el-Saqqia, Deir el-Atrash, Umm Balad, at Badia',and the castellumin the WadiMa'amal Mons Porphyrites.The evidence that might be recovered from these dumps, especially ostraca and papyri, would shed a great deal of light on activityat these outposts, and perhaps reveal their raison-d'etre at different periods of their existence.
and there desert west of the Nile in Upper Egypt99 We was a limesin Lower Egypt.'00 now know that the region east of the Nile in Upper Egypt including the area of the 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile road was a limes.'o'It has yet to be determined how or even if these various limiteswere tied together.
These desert garrisons may also have facilitated
Christian pilgrims traveling from Upper Egypt to religious sites such as the Monasteriesof St. Antony and St. Paulin the northern partof the EasternDesert or via the Red Sea coast at 'Abu Sha'arand thence by ship to religious sites in Sinai via Raithou (Tor) and the Holy Land via Aila (Aqaba);due to adverse prevailingnorth winds in this region of the Red Sea such maritime travel would have been difficult, but not impossible.02 Evidence recovered from excavations in an apsed edifice inside the fort at 'Abu Sha'arin 1990 suggests that this structure, originally the garrison headquarters,was at some point in its history converted into a church. It is, however, uncertain what, if any, connection this church had with the pilgrim traffic,which can only be determined by further excavation at these desert sites and at 'Abu Sha'ar.'03 Most of the road, together with the trunk routes leading to it from quarries and other off-road installations, was unpaved. The surfaces were clearedof boulders and debris. Its course was marked in many sections sometimesby cairns,occasionallyby lines of stones on each side, and frequentlynot at all. This is typicalof EasternDesert roads and is, indeed, the most common method of constructing desert highways in the Roman period; only in very sandy places such as wadi crossingswas paving used.'14The cairns and towers on the route also seemed to have had multiple functions associatedwith the larger installations.The cairnsalwaysseemed to have a routemarking function and the towers occasionallyserved this purpose. Towers, where they occurred, could be
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE NEWARK, DELAWARE 19716
n. 99Wagner (supra 96) 120,383,390-92;394-400.

100
13 to 15, 1974 (BAR suppl. series 15, Oxford 1976) 14351. 101 Cf. C. Daniels, "Africa," J. Wachered., The Roman in WorldI (London 1987) 223-31; S.E. Sidebotham,"ALimes in the Eastern Desert of Egypt: Myth or Reality?," V.A. in Maxfieldand M.J.Dobsoneds., Roman Frontier Studies1989. Proceedings theXV International of Congress RomanFronof tierStudies(Exeter 1991) 494-97. 102 Lepsius (supra n. 1) 274-90 made a journey by ship in the Gulf of Suez from Zeit Bay north to Tor in Sinai in
burn and P. Bartholomew eds., Aspects of the Notitia Dignitatum Papers Presented to the Conference in Oxford, December
R.M. Price, "The Limes in Lower Egypt,"in R. Good-
March1845.A sailorfrom Tor informedSidebothamin July 1989 that a modern sailing ship travelingfrom Zeit Bay to Tor tookone or twodays,depending on the departurepoint, to make the trip; cf. Isaac (supra n. 52) 204-208 for forts facilitatingpilgrimtrafficin Arabia,Syria,and Palestine. 103 Evidence includes a Christianinscription in Greek, a room resemblinga baptistery,and human bones wrapped in cloth(a martyr saint?): or Sidebotham, forthcoming(supra n. 26); cf. Isaac(supran. 52) 204-208 for fortswithchurches elsewherein the East. 104 Chevallier (supran. 74) 91-94, 143; Kennedyand Riley (supran. 74) 78-94.
105
9) 184-89.
Cf. discussion Zitterkopf Sidebotham in and n. (supra

Abu Sha&#39;ar Nile Road AJA 95

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abu Sha&#39;ar Nile Road AJA 95

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Survey of the 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile Road Author(s): Steven E. Sidebotham, Ronald E. Zitterkopf and John A.

Survey of the 'Abu Sha'ar-Nile Road

THE SURVEY Steven E. Sidebothamand Ronald E. Zitterkopf

BFAFU BSRGE MIFAO NARCE

D.S. Whitcomband J.H. Johnson eds.,

port(Princeton1979). D.S. Whitcomband J.H. Johnson eds.,

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY

Introduction, Translation, and Commentary(Princeton 1989)

Lettersfrom Egypt, Ethiopia, and the Peninsula of Sinai (Lon-

don 1853) 289; A. Bernand, Pan du Desert(Leiden 1977)

1887) 659-81; J. Couyat, "Portsgreco-romainsde la mer

SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD

Roman Economic Policy in the Erythra Thalassa, 30 B.C.-

1989) 485-90. 10 Summarizedin Sidebotham (supran. 2) 59-61.

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY

Bir 'Abu Sho'or El- Qibli -Umm Sidro -I

Mons Porphyrites Umm Bolod Qattar /,

Abu Sloor I, Wadi Belih (Hurghodo) W' Qtt oBodia'

Wadi Nagat Monastery

SBob EI-Mukhenig El- Saqqia

Major Quarry Praesidium / Hydreuma

Kainopolis (Qena) Tentyris (Dendero ? Coptos (Qift)

SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD

Pliny, HN 36.11.57; 36.19.88; Suet. Ner. 50; S.H.A.

Societyof Bengal 17.ii (1848) 584-87; Lepsius (supra n. 1)

roDeserts(Edinburgh1913) 90-114; J. Lesquier,L'armee

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY

maine d'Egypte d'Auguste & Dioclitien (MIFAO 41, Cairo

tributions to the Roman Archaeology of the Eastern Desert of

1965) 195 n. 294; J. Moschus,PratumSpirituale124 (in J.-

P. Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Paris 1865) 2985-

(Bonn 1988); on porphyry see LA IV (1982) 1071-73, s.v. Porphyr(R.S. Bianchi).

SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY

:1:::;-:::;:1: ::sr ::iw

?: ;_:i _ ;- : :- _: .?-:. : : -: - ~-: -j~i:' :

SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD

ICL~a5 5~1?p `?~

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF, AND JOHN A. RILEY

and 2) plan VIII, reproducedby Redd% Golvin (supran. 2) 34.

SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD

Fig. 10. Granitespheroid weight from Umm Balad

Cf. Meredith 1952 (supra n. 2) 105. Tregenza(supran. 2) believessome of the potteryfrom

Umm Baladto be late; see 147-48 for the fort.

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY

SURVEY THE 'ABUSHA'AR-NILE OF ROAD

Fig. 12. Planof buildingaboveWadiNagat.A) doorwaywith lintel, and B) vent hole.

42 Murray (supra n. 2) 147. 43 Forthe likelylocationof these mines,see M.G.Ghobrial

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY

The next station after Qattar is Deir el-Atrash

B. Isaac, The Limits of Empire. The Roman Army in the East

ROAD OF SURVEY THE 'ABUSHA'AR-NILE

n. 1952(supra 2) 96. 54Meredith

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY

in 56 A.J. Spencer,BrickArchitecture AncientEgypt(Warminster 1979) 123-26.

SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF, AND JOHN A. RILEY

20 30 0) 40 SCALE IN METERS REZ 1989

SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD

I 5 10 SCALE IN METERS REZ 1989

STEVEN E. SIDEBOTHAM, RONALD E. ZITTERKOPF,AND JOHN A. RILEY

SURVEY OF THE 'ABU SHA'AR-NILE ROAD

no apparentinternalsourcesof water(cf. WadiBelih,

waterfrom one or both of the extramuraldepressions.

Abu Sha'ar Nile Road AJA 95

Abu Sha'ar Nile Road AJA 95