Khalidi Lewis Gratuze 2012

Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 42 (2012): 122
New perspectives on regional and interregional obsidian circulation in

prehistoric and early historic Arabia
Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze
Summary
Until recently, the western Arabian Peninsula has had an enigmatic role in the large-scale prehistoric exchange networks of the
greater ancient Near East. New geological and archaeological data recovered from obsidian-rich zones as well as sites in southwest Arabia and beyond, have begun to elucidate the regions unprecedented position as a regional and interregional supplier
and consumer of obsidian as early as the sixth millennium BC. This paper reviews recent data on obsidian sourcing in Arabia
as well as new source matches to archaeological sites in the major source zone supplying obsidian across the region, namely the
Dhamr highland plains of Yemen, and discusses the results within the context of previous obsidian research. These data offer new
perspectives that will allow us to broaden our understanding of the development of ancient Near Eastern societies over time, to
include south-west Arabia. Furthermore, these new data provide us with a preliminary diachronic view of the intensification and
fluctuations in obsidian circulation and their relationship to the major societal transformations that occurred between the Neolithic
and early historic periods in the region.
Keywords: south-west Arabia, prehistory, early history, obsidian circulation, exchange networks
Introduction
The aim of this paper is to review past, present, and future
questions in light of the VAPOR1 projects recent obsidian
sourcing results for Arabia (Khalidi et al. 2010), and to
present the data in such a way that it is possible to begin
to see what new potentials such studies can have for our
understanding of prehistoric and early historic Arabias
intra- and inter-regional exchange spheres.
Our recent programme to develop obsidian research
thoroughly in the greater Middle East and the African
Horn has led to results that have allowed us to begin to
restructure research questions and agendas to facilitate
a reconstitution of such dynamics in Arabia and beyond
and to make use of negative data. These developments
in Arabian obsidian research result from the systematic
sampling and geochemical analysis of known and
unknown obsidian sources, and the analyses of over 200
obsidian artefacts collected and excavated by the Dhamr
The Volcanological and Archaeological Program for Obsidian
Research is a multi-institutional collaboration directed by L. Khalidi
(CSIC), B. Gratuze (CNRS), and C. Oppenheimer (Cambridge).
1
Survey Project (DSP) as well as by collaborating projects

from sites across Arabia and the African Horn. New data
has also made it possible to reassess previously published
obsidian data by comparing it to our growing database of
source and artefact compositions.
In this paper, we present the most recent results of
Laser Ablation High-Resolution Inductively Coupled
Plasma Mass Spectrometry (LA-HR-ICP-MS) of obsidian
artefacts collected from surveys and soundings carried out
by the DSP (currently directed by K. Lewis, University
of Arkansas at Little Rock) from 1995 to 2010, on sites
ranging from the Neolithic to the Himyarite periods in
the highland plains of Yemen. We focus mainly on the
DSP region in this paper because the highland plains
of Dhamr include the majority of Arabian obsidian
sources supplying obsidian to sites across the Arabian
Peninsula. This region is therefore a central point from
which obsidian is distributed. In addition, a large sample
of worked obsidian from both excavated and surveyed
sites in this localized region and dating to all periods of
interest has been analysed.
The substantial geological, archaeological, and
chronological datasets we have for this large and yet
geographically coherent zone allows us to begin to

illustrate local distribution networks near the sources, so
as to understand the intra-regional systems that were in
place and that would have obstructed or facilitated the
exchange of this material at longer distances. Finally, this
large dataset allows us to demonstrate the potentials and
limits of such data, including the way they can reorient
future research strategies and questions on prehistoric
exchange.
Studies of archaeological obsidian exchange

systems
Obsidian research has advanced considerably since
Renfrew, Cann, and Dixons seminal articles on obsidian
trade (Renfrew & Dixon 1976; Renfrew, Dixon & Cann
1966; 1968). In what concerns Near Eastern obsidian
circulation, years of continued work on the obsidian
rich zones of the Mediterranean basin, Anatolia, and the
Transcaucasus have enriched our understanding of the
way ancient cultures overlapped and forged economic
and cultural ties and breaks. Research on ancient
Near Eastern exchange systems rarely overlooks the
importance of obsidian circulation (Cauvin 2002; 1998;
Cauvin & Balkan-Atli 1996). The accumulated results of
this work show general trends of Cappodocian sources
supplying sites in the Levant and western Syria at large
distances as early as the Natufian and well into the pottery
Neolithic periods (Briois, Gratuze & Guilaine 1997;
Cauvin et al. 1998; 1991). Over time there is a general
increase in supply from Taurus mountain sources (Bader,
Merpert & Munchaev 1994; Fornaseri et al. 19751977),
which appear to have become the foremost suppliers
to Mesopotamia and the Gulf by the Ubaid period and
well into the end of the Chalcolithic period, when large
Canaanean blades made from chert began to replace
obsidian production.
Because Arabia has a youthful history of archaeological
research relative to other regions in the Middle East, and
hence patchy regional and chronological datasets, it is not
yet feasible to paint a clear picture of interaction dynamics
at any point in its ancient past. Despite the pioneering
work of V. Francaviglia, who initially documented and
analysed two of the larger and most visible obsidian
sources in Yemen, namely Jabal Isbl and Jabal Lis
(Francaviglia 1990a; 1990b), few matches have previously
been made between sites in Yemen and any source in
Arabia or beyond. Archaeological research programmes
in both the lowlands and highlands of south-west Yemen
demonstrated that while significant quantities of obsidian

could be found on most sites (Edens & Wilkinson 1998:
70; Keall 2004; Khalidi 2007: 38; Tosi 1986: 404),
some of which had few other preserved remains, source
analyses pertaining to these archaeological obsidian
artefacts were consistently inconclusive (Francaviglia
1990b: 134; Khalidi 2007: 40). Questions arose that
highlighted the need for continued obsidian research in
underexplored obsidian source zones such as those of
Arabia and East Africa.
The southern Red Sea region is rich in obsidian
source areas, which are concentrated in the highlands of
Yemen and Saudi Arabia and in the African Rift zone.
Most of these are largely unexplored. While isolated
data has been collected from single outcrops, there have
not previously been any comprehensive programmes to
recover geological and archaeological obsidian in the
area on a large scale.
The lack of correspondence between archaeological
materials and the known natural obsidian sources
(including those of outlying source zones such as those
of Anatolia, Transcaucasia, and the Mediterranean)
encouraged the initiation of a programme dedicated
to solving these issues. The VAPOR project, begun
in 2008 and sponsored by the CNRS (Centre national
de la recherche scientifique), the Fyssen Foundation,
and the Leverhulme Trust, is a collaborative project
initiated by L. Khalidi and involving B. Gratuze and S.
Boucetta, archaeometrists at the CNRS-Orlans, and
C. Oppenheimer, a volcanologist at the University of
Cambridge, as well as host projects such as the DSP and
a number of international archaeological projects with
which we have collaborated, both on the ground and in the
laboratory. The objectives of this programme are mainly
to consolidate previous research on obsidian and to update
and add to previous obsidian databases for the greater
region, with the aim of building a platform that makes
this data accessible to the archaeological community and
better allows us to understand the dynamics of prehistoric
exchange and social networks across all not just some
regions.
The Eritrean coast and Ethiopian highlands are littered
with unexplored sources, some inaccessible, while the
Yemen highlands are proving to have potential beyond
previous expectations. The presence of source zones on
each side of the Red Sea offers an exceptional setting
for the study of prehistoric and early historic exchange
mechanisms and for the study of the incentives that drew
populations to choose one region over another, despite
distance or rough or unfamiliar terrain.
New perspectives on regional and interregional obsidian circulation in prehistoric and early historic Arabia
Advances in obsidian source identification

and sampling
The overwhelming absence of matches between artefact
and source (Francaviglia 1990b: 134) previously
encountered in Arabia has been reversed as a result of
systematic geological sampling along obsidian sources in
the region. Implemented at small and larger scales, this
strategy has proved successful in identifying previously
unexplored major and minor primary and secondary
obsidian sources that were exploited in varying degrees
over time.
Past exploitation of minor sources, often of mediocre
quality and workability, is of particular interest for
understanding the subtle complexities of spheres
of interaction, as it provides evidence of alternative
modalities and human choices in resource acquisition
strategies. Unfortunately, such minor sources are often
overlooked because they are less evident in the landscape
and archaeological record. Nonetheless, extrapolated
from matches to these small minor sources are hints of
the inner workings of local economies and intra-regional
territoriality, a key element to understanding control
over resources within obsidian-rich zones like those
of highland Yemen. The identification of secondary
obsidian sources, such as those resulting from waterborne
deposition of cobbles, is essential to such studies, as these
sources are often more accessible to local populations.
In tandem with an intensive programme dedicated
to the geochemical analyses of obsidian artefacts
recovered from sites dating to different periods across
Arabia as well as in localized regions such as that of the
Dhamr highland plains (DSP), the results of thorough
geological source sampling have provided a geological
and archaeological data platform that is beginning to map
obsidian distribution within and out of Arabia during
the Holocene. Collaborations with colleagues working
on sites in the Middle East and Africa have contributed
significantly to an obsidian database, which currently
can also be applied to signal unexplored source areas
and their approximate localization through compositional
affinity to known obsidian sources.
Highland Yemen obsidian sources: sampling

strategies and chronology
From 2008, sampling and analysis of obsidian sources
has concentrated on the highlands of Yemen, and has
more recently expanded to the Ethiopian Rift valley.
Large numbers of samples from eight different

obsidian sources in the highland plains of Yemen, from
several sources in the Ethiopian Rift Valley, and from
one source in the Ethiopian Afar have been analysed
at the IRAMAT-CNRS (Institut de Recherche sur les
Archomatriaux) in Orlans using LA-HR-ICP-MS, a
virtually non-destructive method. This research has also
allowed us to identify two periods of volcanism in the
Yemen highlands, the younger in the eastern and the older
in the western central highland plains.
Of the younger Quaternary obsidian-rich volcanoes
in the eastern central highlands, Jabal Isbl happens to
be the largest (and hence most visible) volcano in the
Arabian Peninsula. It has an oblong caldera almost 4 km
long and a series of smaller adjacent outcrops (ayd alalal being the most prominent of these) that belong to
the larger Isbl complex. Accelerator Mass Spectrometry
(AMS) of a sample taken from an exposed section of
ayd al-alal dates it to the end of the fourth millennium
BC, suggesting large-scale eruption during this period
(Khalidi et al. 2010). In the same zone lies a second rather
large source, that of Jabal Lis and an associated collapsed
caldera, al-Gharga, which forms part of the Lis complex.
In the Yemeni western highlands four previously
unknown and/or unexplored sources were recorded and
analysed including Yaf (noted as DS179, a workshop
site, in Wilkinson, Edens & Gibson 1997: 122) and three
minor sources on and near the Manaat Mryah (DS3)
plateau (Jirb al-Sf, Mryah, Jibjibiyyah). The latter
sources make up what will later be referred to as the
Yaf region sources for the purpose of simplification.
All of these outcrops pertain to an Oligocene period of
volcanism.
These sources were sampled systematically along
their many flows and were complemented by and
compared to previously published geological data. The
analyses of these sources show compositional variation
across one source outcrop. For example, in the case of
Yaf we have variation that reflects slightly different
compositional groups from the same outcrop. Similarly,
the ayd al-alal and al-Gharga flows belonging to the
larger Isbl and Lis complexes have variant compositions
to their larger counterparts. Figures 15 demonstrate the
subtle overlap that can occur in compositions within
and across flows, and how these can nonetheless be
distinguished from one another and matched with artefact
compositions, as a result of the large number of elements
determined for each source.
From the large number of archaeological materials
analysed using the same laboratory method, we were also
able to distinguish seven compositional groups whose

precise source outcrop has not yet been identified. Many
of these groups (14) have very strong compositional
affinity to the Yaf source and therefore belong to a
Yaf source flow that remains unexplored, or to a source
nearby that is in the same compositional family as that of
Yaf. Group 5 has compositional affinities to the Jabal
Lis flows and signals an unexplored flow in its immediate
region. Not only can these groups be distinguished
from one another, but they also associate different sites

with each other via their relationship to a single source
outcrop, even if it is unknown. When this data is spatially
plotted, the distribution and density of sites exploiting the
same outcrops often allow us to isolate the general area in
which these unidentified outcrops may be located an
indication of the potential of such intensive programmes
of analysis in order to determine the presence and
location of unknown obsidian outcrops.
Jebel Lisi
Jebel Isbil
Al Gharga
Jirab al Souf
Hayd al Halal
La/Th
Maryah Jibjibiya
4
Yafa' Ridge
1.1
3
La/Th
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
1
La/Yb
0
0
10
15
20
La/Yb
Figure 1a. Diagram La/Th-La/

Yb for the geological obsidian
outcrops analysed.
Jebel Lisi
Jebel Isbil
Al Gharga
Jirab al Souf
Hayd al Halal
Maryah Jibjibiya
Yafa' Ridge
Artefacts from Yafa' ridge
Artefacts from Jirab al Souf
Artefacts from Al Gharga
Artefacts from Jebel Isbil

3
Artefacts from Hayd al Halal
1.5
Artefacts group 1
1.0
Artefacts group 2
0.5
Artefacts group 3
La/Th
La/Th
Artefacts group 4
1
1
0
10
La/Yb
2 La/Yb 3
15
4
20
Artefacts group 5
Artefacts group 7
Figure 1b. Diagram La/

Th-La/Yb matching obsidian
artefacts from highland sites
to highland obsidian sources
analysed.
400
Jebel Lisi
Jebel Isbil
350
Al Gharga
Jirab al Souf
300
Hayd al Halal
Maryah Jibjibiya
Ce
250
Yafa' Ridge
200
150
100
50
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Rb
Figure 2a. Diagram Ce-Rb for the geological obsidian outcrops analysed.
Jebel Lisi
400
Jebel Isbil
Al Gharga
350
Jirab al Souf
Hayd al Halal
300
Maryah Jibjibiya
Yafa' Ridge
250
Ce

200

150
Artefacts group 1
Artefacts group 2
100
Artefacts group 3
Artefacts group 4
50
Artefacts group 5
Artefacts group 7
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Rb
Figure 2b. Diagram Ce-Rb matching obsidian artefacts from highland sites to highland
obsidian sources analysed.

Jebel Lisi
2500
Jebel Isbil
Al Gharga
2000
Jirab al Souf
Hayd al Halal
Maryah Jibjibiya
1500
Zr
Yafa' Ridge
1000
500
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Rb
Figure 3a. Diagram Zr-Rb for the geological obsidian outcrops analysed.
Jebel Lisi
2500
Jebel Isbil
Al Gharga
Jirab al Souf
2000
Hayd al Halal
Maryah Jibjibiya
Yafa' Ridge
1500
Zr

1000

Artefacts group 1
Artefacts group 2
Artefacts group 3
500
Artefacts group 4
Artefacts group 5
Artefacts group 7
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Rb
Figure 3b. Diagram Zr-Rb matching obsidian artefacts from highland sites to highland
Jebel Lisi
50
Jebel Isbil
45
Al Gharga
40
Jirab al Souf
Hayd al Halal
35
Maryah Jibjibiya
Yb/Eu
30
Yafa' Ridge
25
20
400
300
Yb/Eu
15
200
100
10
0
0
100
200
Sm/Eu
300
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Sm/Eu
Figure 4a. Diagram Yb/Eu-Sm/Eu for the geological obsidian outcrops analysed.
Jebel Lisi
80
Jebel Isbil
300
Al Gharga
Yb/Eu
70
200
Jirab al Souf
Hayd al Halal
100
60
Maryah Jibjibiya
0
0
Yb/Eu
50
100
Sm/Eu
200
Yafa' Ridge
300

40

30
Artefacts group 1
Artefacts group 2
20
Artefacts group 3
Artefacts group 4
10
Artefacts group 5
Artefacts group 7
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Sm/Eu
Figure 4b. Diagram Yb/Eu-Sm/Eu matching obsidian artefacts from highland sites to
highland obsidian sources analysed.

Jebel Lisi
0.40
Jebel Isbil
Al Gharga
0.35
Jirab al Souf
Hayd al Halal
0.30
Maryah Jibjibiya
Yafa' Ridge
Nb/Zr
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
Y/Zr
Figure 5a. Diagram Nb/Zr-Y/Zr for the geological obsidian outcrops analysed.
Jebel Lisi
0.40
Jebel Isbil
Al Gharga
0.35
Jirab al Souf
Hayd al Halal
Maryah Jibjibiya
0.30
Yafa' Ridge
0.25
Nb/Zr

0.20

Artefacts group 1
0.15
Artefacts group 2
Artefacts group 3
Artefacts group 4
0.10
Artefacts group 5
Artefacts group 7
0.05
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
Y/Zr
Figure 5b. Diagram Nb/Zr-Y/Zr matching obsidian artefacts from highland sites to highland
Figure 6. A map of the DSP survey area in the Dhamr central highland plains of Yemen, illustrating all the
registered sites in relation to major modern towns and the three major source zones in the area.
10
Archaeological obsidian sampling in the

Dhamr Survey Project area
As a result of the geochemical data collected from
geological sources, we can report many matches between
archaeological material and obsidian outcrops in Yemens
highland zone.
In this paper we present the results of LA-HRICP-MS analysis of 163 samples of archaeological
obsidian collected from forty-three different sites in
the DSP survey area where since 1995, the DSP has
recorded 410 sites (Fig. 6). Although these forty-three
sites represent approximately 10% of the total sites
recorded, the selection process used reflects a spatially
and chronologically representative sample. Thirty-nine
per cent of samples come from excavated strata, and
the remaining 61% from surface collections. Two sites
in particular (DS3: Manaat Mryah and DS15: Ashrf)
are over-represented, with forty-eight obsidian samples
analysed from DS3 and twenty analysed from DS15.
Two sites therefore represent about 40% of the total
archaeological obsidian analysed. In this paper, the DS3
samples are figured into calculations in a proportional
way so as not to skew the data.
Trends in obsidian supply across periods
The most striking result of the site-to-source analyses
for the Dhamr area archaeological obsidian is that the
Yaf region in the western highland plains was the major
source zone supplying most sites during all periods
(76% of all archaeological obsidian analysed matches
sources in the Yaf region). Forty-three per cent of all
archaeological obsidian analysed matches the Yaf
source itself, while 33% of all archaeological obsidian
analysed matches the other related Yaf region (YR)
sources (Fig. 7). These include compositional groups 14
that are probably unexplored flows of the Yaf source
itself, the minor source of Jirb al-Sf (predominantly
supplying sites in its immediate vicinity, namely DS3
and DS15), and the minor Oligocene traps of Mryah
and Jibjibiyyah (compositionally related minor sources)
which lie in proximity to each other and, along with Jirb
al-Sf, belong to the same plateau system that marks the
western edge of the highland plains and the eastern edge
of the 3000m escarpment that descends to the Tihmah
coastal plain.
Matches to Lis and Isbl are low across periods,
making up only 10% of obsidian supply, with Lis
Figure 7. Overall percentages of obsidian source

matches for all analysed DSP sites.
having supplied 4% and Isbl 6%. Group 5, however, has

compositional affinities to Jabal Lis and may consist of an
unexplored flow of the Lis outcrop or another outcrop in
its immediate vicinity. It makes up 13% of archaeological
obsidian across periods. The remaining 1% cannot be
matched to known sources or to other archaeological
sample compositions.
Trends in obsidian supply in the DSP survey region
by period
Many sites surveyed and excavated by the DSP have
multiple periods of occupation (Fig. 8). With surface
finds on multiple occupation sites, save in cases where
tools or debitage are chronologically diagnostic, it is
not always clear to which period the obsidian collected
pertains. With this and the fact that 39% of obsidian was
collected from excavated and dated contexts in mind, we
are still able to see spatial trends in obsidian supply over
time.
Neolithic sites
Of 410 sites identified by the DSP, only sixteen have clear
Neolithic components. Thirty-nine samples of obsidian
were analysed from nine of these sites. These analyses
indicate that in the Neolithic only three source areas
were exploited. Fifty-nine per cent of archaeological
obsidian analysed matches the Yaf source, while 21%
is attributed to the Yaf region sources (Fig. 9/a). The
third source supplying obsidian in this period is that of
Group 5/Lis. Twenty-three per cent of archaeological
obsidian corresponds to this group. No other groups or
source areas are represented in the Neolithic assemblage.
New perspectives on regional and interregional obsidian circulation in prehistoric and early historic Arabia 11
Site
Number
DS3
DS15
DS34
DS82
DS101
DS136
DS144
DS163
DS179
DS181
DS217
DS226
DS226
DS226
DS227
DS228
DS234
DS269
DS283
DS293
DS297
DS301
DS302
DS314
DS319
DS319
DS320
DS321
DS322
DS324
DS326
DS336
DS336
DS338
DS339
DS340
DS341
DS342
DS343
DS344
DS352
DS355
DS359
DS360
DS394
DS396
DS397
HU24A
HU29B
HU51
JR1
Site Name
Mryah
Ashraf
Al-Hijrah
Qarn Omr
ammat al-Q
Bothn
Shadharbah
Khol al-Mathari
Dhwran
Al-Irr
Ribat Amran
Ribat Amran
Ribat Amran
Al-Wtyah
Al-Kharrayb
Al-Kiswer
Jabubat al-Jeruf
Al-aradhi
awgir
Ghazwn
Afar
Site Name
(Arabic)
anakat
Shatham
Miqta
ayd al-Sawad
Jabn
Jabal adman
Jabal adman
ayd Bayn
Musowliq
umaydiyyah
Madyar
Al-Khniq
Jabal adman
Al-Qur
Zulm
ayd Mahf
Manjida
Khirra 1
Khirra 2
Shab al-Ra
Shab al-Ra
abl al-Jamal
Source Matches
Period
Yaf (21), YR (27)

Yaf (14), YR (6)
Yaf (2), Gr5 (1)
Gr5 (1)
Yaf (2)
Yaf (2)
Gr5 (2)
Yaf (2)
Yaf (3), YR (1)
Unknown (2)
Lis (2)
Gr5 (1)
Isbl (1), Yaf (1)
Yaf (1)
Isbl (1)
Lis (1), Gr5 (1)
Yaf (1)
Lis (2), Gr5 (1), Yaf (1)
Gr5 (2)
YR (2)
Gr5 (1), Yaf (2)
Yaf (1)
Lis (2)
Yaf (4), YR (1)
Isbl (1)
Gr5 (3)
Isbl (1)
Isbl (2)
YR (1)
YR (5)
Yaf (1)
Lis (1)
YR (1)
YR (2)
YR (2)
YR (2)
YR (2)
YR (2)
YR (2)
YR (1)
YR (2)
YR (1)
YR (2)
YR (1)
Yaf (3)
Yaf (4)
Yaf (5), YR (1)
Yaf (2)
YR (2)
Yaf (2)
Yaf (1), YR (1)
NEO BA IA IMY
IA NEO
BA
IA
BA
IA
BA NEO
HIMY
BA IA HIMY NEO?
HIMY ISL
EBA
HIMY
EBA
NEO
BA
LBA
BA
EBA
NEO
BA
NEO
BA
BA HIMY
HIMY NEO
BA
NEO
BA HIMY
IA HIMY
IA
EBA
IA
IA
NEO
IA HIMY
BA
IA
IA HIMY
BA
IA HIMY
IA
BA
IA HIMY
BA HIMY
BA
BA NEO
BA
BA IA
NEO BA
NEO BA
NEO BA
Prehistoric ISL
Excavated
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Key: DS: Dhamr Survey; HU: azm al-Udayn; JR: Jabal Ras; Gr: Group; YR: Yaf region;
NEO: Neolithic; BA: Bronze Age; IA: Iron Age; HIMY: Himyarite; ISL: Islamic
Figure 8. A list of the DSP and Western Escarpment sites (HU and JR) from which obsidian
artefacts were collected and analysed, and their relative (surveyed sites) or absolute
(excavated sites) single-period or multi-period designation(s).
12
Figure 9a. Overall percentages of obsidian source

matches for Neolithic period sites in the DSP region.
Figure 9b. Distribution of Neolithic sites in the DSP area in relation to the major
source zones. The icons represent source matches identified for each site analysed.
The spatial distribution of Neolithic sites shows an
eastwest division in acquisition strategies, with sites
supplied with Yaf obsidian restricted to the west of Lis
and trending along a northsouth axis. Sites that were
being supplied with Group 5 obsidian are concentrated to
the south of Lis. The Group 5 obsidian does not appear
west of a certain point, and clearly shows Yaf having
a monopoly over the western portion of the plains and
along a large northsouth corridor, signalling a potential
territorial demarcation. One area, however, of clear
overlap in the Yaf and Group 5 use can be seen at
two adjacent sites, DS297 Ghazwn and DS 226 Ribat

Amran, midway between and slightly south of the two
sources, suggesting a contrasting economic or political
situation to what is seen in the rest of the survey area in
this period (Fig. 9/b).
Bronze Age sites
Of 410 sites identified by the DSP, 101 have Bronze
Age components. Fifty-seven samples of archaeological
obsidian were analysed from twenty-five of these sites.

matches for Early Bronze Age period sites in the DSP
region.
Figure 10b. Overall percentages of obsidian source

matches for later Bronze Age period sites in the DSP
region.
Figure 10c. Distribution of Bronze Age sites in the DSP area in relation to the major
These can be broken down into Early Bronze Age sites,

which are represented by thirteen samples from four sites,
and Middle and Late Bronze Age sites represented by
forty-four samples from twenty-one sites.
A major shift in obsidian supply trends is visible
between the Neolithic and the Bronze Age periods.
Generally, the dominant suppliers of obsidian during the

Bronze Age remain the western highland sources (Yaf
and Yaf region; Fig. 10/a, b). After the Neolithic period,
however, there is an increased exploitation of the Yaf
region sources (38% Early Bronze Age; 35% Bronze
Age), in tandem with a major proportional decrease in
14
exploitation of the Yaf outcrop in the Early Bronze Age

(15%) that picks up again by the later Bronze Age (43%).
Even if the majority of suppliers of obsidian in the Yaf
region are later proved to pertain to the Yaf outcrop,
local Bronze Age populations appear to be intentionally
intensifying their exploitation of flows other than those
(currently) attributed to the Yaf outcrop. During the
Bronze Age, we also see a dramatic episodic introduction
of Lis in the Early Bronze Age followed by a sharp
decrease in the later Bronze Age (31% Early Bronze Age;
7% Bronze Age). Isbl obsidian was also first introduced,
although in smaller quantities (8% Early Bronze Age; 6%
Bronze Age), on sites in the region during this period.
Exploitation of Group 5 obsidian drops markedly from
23% to 8% from the Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age,
and then stays nearly the same through the Bronze Age.
Despite the introduction of obsidian from the source
of Isbl to sites in the region during the Bronze Age,
the percentages of obsidian matching this source are
consistently low during this period. The Yaf zone
supplies significantly fewer sites in the Early Bronze Age
than in the Neolithic (79% Neolithic; 53% Early Bronze
Age) but exploitation of its sources increases dramatically
from the Early to later Bronze Age to return to a level
similar to that seen in the Neolithic (78%). Exploitation
of the Lis zone (if we take Group 5 into account) shows
an opposing trend. Group 5 accounts for 21% of obsidian
supplied to sites in the Neolithic, but with the introduction
of the Lis outcrop in the Early Bronze Age, the supply of
Lis zone obsidian almost doubles to 39%, and then drops
again to 16% in the later Bronze Age.
Spatial distribution of matches for Bronze Age sites
shows a continuation (from the Neolithic period) of the
Yaf zones monopoly of a northsouth corridor (Fig.
10/c). In this period, however, an additional geographic
distinction is evident; north of Yaf sites are only
supplied by Yaf region sources, while south of Yaf
sites are only supplied by the Yaf outcrop. Group 5, Lis
and Isbl source matches appear on sites south of the Isbl/
Lis complex. These overlap with obsidian with a Yaf
origin, in the southern part of the northsouth aligned
corridor, e.g. at the sites of DS34 al-Hijra and DS 226
Ribat Amran. Interestingly, this is the very same area for
which we noted overlap in source utilization during the
Neolithic period.
Iron Age sites
Of 410 sites recorded by the DSP, ninety-two have
Iron Age components. Fifty samples of archaeological
obsidian were analysed from fifteen of these sites.

Percentages for the Iron Age period show two interesting
trends. The first is an increase in the exploitation of the
Yaf region sources from 35% in the Bronze Age to 44%
in this period (Fig. 11/a). The second is that Iron Age
populations in the highland plains appear to be highly
focused on the western highland sources (92%, including
the Yaf outcrop [48%], and the Yaf region sources
[44%], which is an even more specialized supply pattern
than in the Neolithic [79% western highland source
supply]). The major contrast to Neolithic networks,
however, is that the remaining sources are all represented
in the sampled assemblages but to a very small degree.
For example, the Group 5/Lis sources make up only 4%
and the Lis outcrop only 2% of obsidian supplied to Iron
Age sites. Just as we see in the Bronze Age, Jabal Isbl
remains a consistently low supplier (4%).
The Yaf region outcrops continue to dominate the
same northsouth corridor that is spatially evident in
previous periods. As in earlier periods, the southern end
of this corridor has an overlap of supply, although in
smaller quantities and variability than the Bronze Age.
As in the Bronze Age, we continue to see that the Yaf
region outcrops dominate as suppliers north of the Yaf
outcrop, while the Yaf outcrop dominates to its south,
with a single exception (Fig. 11/b).
Himyarite sites
Of 410 sites recorded by the DSP, 133 have Himyarite
(first century BCsixth century AD) occupation. Thirty
samples of archaeological obsidian were analysed from
fourteen of these sites.2 Percentages for the Himyarite
period demonstrate a significant decrease in the
exploitation of Yaf outcrop obsidian from the preceding
Iron Age period (from 48% to 27%), and a dominance
of the Yaf region outcrops (46%), unlike the preceding
Bronze and Iron Age periods (Fig. 12/a). Supply from
Isbl (10%) is slightly higher than in the Bronze and
Iron Ages while matches to the Lis outcrop remain low
in numbers (7%) since its introduction and abundant
exploitation in the Early Bronze Age.
Group 5 appears to be on a decline as a supply
zone from the Neolithic onwards (from 21% to 3%).
The site of Manaat Mryah is represented by forty-eight samples
of analysed obsidian. The results of the analyses show that the supply
was roughly equal in numbers of obsidian artefacts originating from the
Yaf outcrop and from the Yaf region (see Lewis et al. 2010). In an
effort not to skew the data, these forty-eight samples are represented as
two samples, as a ratio of 1/1 Yaf outcrop:Yaf region.
2

matches for Iron Age period sites in the DSP region.
Figure 11b. Distribution of Iron Age sites in the DSP area in relation to the major
Interestingly, two samples analysed from a single site
with a dominant Islamic component (making up 6% of the
total) do not match any known outcrops or compositional
groups. The site of Dhwran (DS181) is located in an
area at the north-east edge of the DSP survey area and
is close to the escarpment where Oligocene traps of
poor quality are likely to be exposed. The dominantly
Islamic occupation of this site (exploitation of obsidian
in the Islamic period often only occurs when a site
is on the location of a source outcrop) and its position
along the zone of exposures of Oligocene obsidian traps

make these unknown compositions likely candidates
for minor sources in the vicinity and thus very localized
consumption trends.
Besides Yaf outcrop sources continuing to supply
sites of the Himyarite period at longer distances and in
more directions than other sources, we also note that
the southern end of the northsouth corridor remains a
juncture where source supplies overlap. Significantly, the
remaining matches to other sources remain very close to
16

matches for Himyarite period sites in the DSP region.
Figure 12b. Distribution of Himyarite sites in the DSP area in relation to the major
the source outcrops in this period. Four sites matching
source outcrop are located on or in extreme proximity to
the sources (Yaf outcrop: DS179; Isbl: DS320, DS321;
Lis: DS302) and are therefore not visible on the map as
they overlap with the source icon. Their distribution is
restricted, a trend that is more common as metal becomes
more accessible to populations, as it does in this period. A
good example of this trend is DS 3, whereby 50% (n=24)
of the sites worked obsidian comes from the source of
Jirb al-Sf, immediately adjacent to the site.
Comparing site-to-source matches across periods with

attention to their geographical distribution demonstrates
an additional benefit of such studies. If exploitation of
obsidian sources is by and large limited to sites near
outcrops during this period (the case of Yaf being the
exception; Fig. 12/b), then the spatial distribution of
Himyarite sites matching sources should help us to zone
in more precisely on the locations of unexplored outcrops
and flows. For example, the distribution of Himyarite
site-to-source matches on the map reveals a distinct
cluster of Yaf region matches, which probably point to
an unknown local source in this area.
Discussion and conclusion

When interpreted in isolation, obsidian source
characterization can provide information on the geological
origin of worked obsidian recovered from archaeological
sites. It does not, however, necessarily allow for a proper
understanding of the dynamics of the exchange and
movement of this and other materials (i.e. in what form,
by whom, and through what precise channels the material
was transported). Data on site-to-source matches become
increasingly pertinent to understanding contact spheres
when they accompany comprehensive volcanological
and geomorphological studies as well as technological
studies of craft production (lithic studies being foremost),
and the social and economic structures that accommodate
the activities taking place on inter- and intra-site levels.
The eastern highland sources that were analysed by
V. Francaviglia (1990a; 1990b) did not produce matches
with archaeological specimens at the time of their
analysis because many of the artefacts were either older
in date than the eastern highland eruptions (Khalidi et al.
2010: 2341) or originated from source outcrops and flows
not yet identified at the time. Our systematic sampling
methodology and our new source finds have helped to
identify the origins of most of the artefacts that we have
collected as well as those that were previously published
as unidentified (Khalidi et al. 2010: 23392340; Lewis et
al. 2010: 222223; Barca, Lucarini & Fedele 2011).
All analysed obsidian material (n=163) excavated and
dated by the DSP to between the sixth millennium BC
and the Himyarite period, corresponds to local highland
obsidian exchange networks. Our register of highland
sites analysed and matching highland obsidian sources
and highland composition Groups 15 now stands at
forty-three (of 410) DSP sites across the highland central
plains. Only two of the analysed obsidian samples (from
a single site) have an unknown origin but are most likely
from unexplored highland Tertiary traps of poor quality
near the site in question.
Complementary technological studies of the obsidian
industries in the region demonstrate that obsidian
production continued to play a significant role well
into the Himyarite period (e.g. DS 181 Dhwran, DS
3 Manaat Mryah; see Lewis et al. 2010) despite the
introduction of iron production and use. In later periods,
however, the functional role of obsidian tools became
increasingly more minor. By the Himyarite period it is
mainly characterized by relatively informal utilization

of unstructured debitage that enabled inhabitants to
produce sharp-edged multi-purpose tools on a need-touse basis and where obsidian was easily accessible. This
was a major change from the previous technologies and
industries that characterize the Neolithic and Bronze
Age highlands such as carefully worked hunting tools
(bifacially worked projectiles [Neolithic] and composite
backed barbs and points [Bronze Age]).3
Our results show that the most extensively exploited
source areas in the highland plains of Yemen were the
Yaf outcrop and Yaf region source areas. In the Dhamr
survey region, western sources dominate the supply of
obsidian across periods of occupation, except during the
Early Bronze Age when we notice a clear introduction
and maximum use of previously unexploited sources
(Lis and Isbl outcrops) in the east. Following the Early
Bronze Age, these sources continued to be used to supply
sites locally but appear to decrease in importance for the
overall region. Furthermore, their supply was limited to
a distribution that is concentrated immediately south of
the outcrops.
Our observation that the Yaf outcrop dominated
the supply of obsidian across all periods represented is
strengthened by the fact that obsidian varieties from the
Yaf outcrop are of the highest quality yet known in the
region and that the geological obsidian at the outcrop is
most abundant in the form of sub-angular medium-sized
nodules, which are ideal natural supports for laminar
and lamellar debitage. The existence of extensive blade
and bladelet workshop areas along the Yaf outcrop
(DS179) is of no surprise, given the evident demand
for this particular variety of obsidian over time and the
potential ease with which it could be exploited for blade
production.
Hypothesizing routes of exchange through spatial
analysis
Applying our new matches to diachronic statistical and
spatial analysis of analysed obsidian from sites in this key
resource-rich region has thus enabled us to observe trends
in obsidian circulation, potential territorial demarcations
Neolithic industries are referred to as Arabian Bifacial Tradition in
the literature (Edens 1982), while backed barbs and points are referred
to as geometric microliths. Little micro-wear has been carried out
on Yemeni industries as a result of poor surface alteration on tools.
Preliminary observations of impact wear and techno-morphological
characteristics on certain of these artefacts, however, point to a
likelihood that both these industries were used as projectiles for hunting.
3
18
and/or corridors of movement of people and goods across

periods, as well as possible trends in local preferences
and choices relating to resource quality and acquisition
strategies.
Neolithic exchange routes
During the Neolithic the finer-quality Yaf sources were
dominant, with Group 5/Lis playing a substantial but
secondary role. During this period, however, we observe
a total absence of supply from the Lis outcrop and Isbl
complex. Interestingly, the same trends hold true for
obsidian from Neolithic sites excavated by the Italian
Archaeological Mission (IAM) to Yemen in the Khawln
eastern highlands. Obsidian from these sites was recently
sourced by LA-ICP-MS and applied to our published
geological database (Barca, Lucarini & Fedele 2011;
Khalidi et al. 2010). The IAM results demonstrate that the
majority of sites match the Yaf outcrop, and a smaller
but significant number match the Lis complex (Barca,
Lucarini & Fedele 2011). These Neolithic sites (Wd
al-Najd al-Abya [NAB] group and Wd al-Thayyilah
[WTH] group) are located approximately 2560 km north
of the Lis and Isbl complexes and approximately 3075
km north-north-east of the Yaf outcrop along the Wd
Dnah drainage system.4 Matches between Yaf outcrop
and these sites extend supply further north and east than
is visible on our DSP map (see Fig. 1; Barca, Lucarini &
Fedele 2011).
A Yaf outcrop match to the Neolithic site of
Mtfa in the Omani Dhofar region, located 1000
km (as the crow flies) from Yaf (Khalidi et al. 2010:
2339), adds an interesting challenge to future studies
on the dynamics of Neolithic long-distance exchange
systems. Spatial analyses applied to our site-to-source
matches in the immediate region of the Yemen highland
obsidian outcrops allow us to hypothesize where local
route systems may have passed and which of these may
have extended further distances from the source areas.
For example, a southern route (corridor passing near the
modern town of Yarm) is discernible (see Fig. 9/b) where
there is a visible overlap in the representation of source
It must be noted that in this paper distances refer to the shortest distance
between two points (in this case, source outcrop and site) and do not
reflect the topography, the distance travelled if following potential
corridors of movement, or the presence of intermediaries or points of
redistribution like marketplaces, for example. Kilometres are used to
compare approximate distances to one another, and not to insinuate that
these were the actual distances travelled by people at any one time or
that these networks were not hierarchical or complex.
4
outcrops on sites. This suggests that all varieties exploited

during this period were moving south.
Using this data we observe that this northsouth
corridor may have extended north into Yaf territory
where the Yaf outcrop prevails, and only western
sources are represented. This corridor may well have
continued northwards towards the an plains, although
this remains to be determined. Given matches to other
contemporary sites in the Khawln area (Barca, Lucarini
& Fedele 2011; Khalidi et al. 2010: 2339), however, this
route may have branched, veering east towards the Wd
Dnah drainage, which links the eastern highlands to
the Marib region. Interestingly, our analyses (Khalidi et
al. 2010) as well as those of Barca, Lucarini and Fedele
(2011) validate the presence of a supply of Lis obsidian
along this eastern route during this period. We would then
expect Neolithic sites in eastern lowland Yemen (desert
fringe and aramawt) to have access to both Yaf and
Lis obsidian. Both possible routes (the southern and the
eastern) may have been used to redistribute Yaf obsidian
to the Omani Dhofar region during this period, although
the eastern remains the less circuitous of the two.
Analysis of eight obsidian samples from surveyed
sites (all with Neolithic components) in the western
escarpment survey area (azm al-Udayn and Jabal Ras,
directed by L. Khalidi) match the Yaf outcrop and
the Yaf region sources (Jirb al-Sf, Groups 2 and 4;
Khalidi et al. 2010: 23392340). These sites are located
between 970 and 470m above sea level along the Wd
Zabd drainage and are distributed as far west as the
Tihmah foothills (see Fig. 8).
While the western highland sources (Yaf outcrop
and Yaf region sources) were clearly also supplying
obsidian to the west, there is little indication of circulation
of highland obsidian beyond the natural interface
separating the highlands and coastal lowlands of southwest Yemen. Of thirty-three obsidian artefacts analysed
from fourteen (of 180) sites surveyed along the Tihmah
coastal plain (Khalidi 2007: 40), there is only one match
to highland sources reported west of the foothills. This
match to the Yaf outcrop pertains to a recent analysis
by LA-HR-ICP-MS carried out at the IRAMAT-Orlans
(2011) on an obsidian flake from a multi-period (Neolithic
to Bronze Age) shell midden site on the Red Sea littoral.
It is unclear whether this single surface sample dates
to the Neolithic, Early Bronze Age, or Bronze Age
period. The presence of one Yaf outcrop match on the
coast, however, is interesting given the evident African
orientation of the Tihmah coastal peoples at this time
(Khalidi 2008; 2009).
Bronze and Iron Age exchange routes
Intensive use of a greater diversity of sources is noted
during the Early Bronze Age, with the Lis outcrop both
appearing for the first time and reaching its supply peak.
This increased diversity may reflect increased territorial
control and competition over resources; developments
that would be further supported by transformations in
highland settlement patterns at the time (settlement
growth, greater number and dispersal of sites, higher
demographics; see Wilkinson 2010: 56, 59).
By the later Bronze Age, the Yaf source region
recovered its position as the foremost supplier of obsidian
in the area. The southern route continued to have sites
with a diversity of sources represented and persisted in
this way across periods. All eastern highland sources
continued to be represented but in extremely small
quantities. This obsidian was limited to sites in the region
due south of the eastern obsidian source zone. During
this period, we also observe a clear northsouth territorial
divide in the western source zone. The distribution of
Yaf region obsidian is concentrated in a cluster north of
the Yaf outcrop. The lack of overlap with Yaf outcrop
obsidian on the sites falling in this cluster suggests that the
distribution of obsidian from the assumed source outcrop
in this area (signalled by the density of a single type of
obsidian in one area) was being controlled within up to a
10 km radius from the point of extraction or production.
The introduction of previously unencountered obsidian
varieties (namely eastern), fluctuations in degrees of
exploitation from the Early Bronze Age to the later
Bronze Age, and what may be interpreted as the first signs
of competition over resources (and territory) are in line
with the socio-economic transformations that occurred
during the highland Bronze Age (Edens 1999; Edens,
Wilkinson & Barratt 2000).
The Yaf source region prevailed in the Iron Age
during which time it provided over 90% of obsidian to
sites in the region. Very little obsidian from the eastern
sources is witnessed during this period, and what we have
analysed was not circulating far from its origin. Otherwise,
spatial trends continue to appear as they did for the Bronze
Age, save a more pronounced and dominant northsouth
corridor. In addition to the spatial northsouth pattern
observed from mapping the obsidian data, more than one
prehistoric to early historic northsouth corridor is noted
by Wilkinson, who interprets the presence of large sites
such as Bronze Age awgir (DS293) and Bronze and
Iron Age Kharbat Jabn (DS326) as well as major Iron
Age/Himyarite sites and inscriptions found in alignment
in a passage conducive to moving and pasturing

animals, as evidence of three parallel northsouth routes
(Wilkinson 2003: 163165, fig. 6). The fact that the
alignment holds true across periods and more or less still
retains its function today, both locally and more formally
in the case of the asphalted DhamrIbb road, is further
testament to the fact that this passage may have been an
avenue of movement from as early as the Neolithic. What
we interpret as the increased demarcation of routes in the
Iron Age is in line with the formalization of trade routes
during this period, when the South Arabian kingdoms
vied for control over access routes to valued resources
and to regions exchanging goods for incense.
Himyarite exchange routes
During the Himyarite period, we observe that the western
sources were not as overwhelmingly dominant as during
the Iron Age, but remained major to supply. We note,
however, that most sites match nearby sources. Within the
Yaf region source group, the poor-quality Jirb al-Sf
outcrop is heavily represented on sites in the surrounding
micro-region, unlike in earlier periods. This and other
minor poor-quality outcrops are near the site of Manaat
Mryah (DS3), which was a major Himyarite centre and
certainly the most important site in the region at the time.
It is likely that these minor sources were exploited and
redistributed micro-locally by the inhabitants of Manaat
Mryah (Lewis et al. 2010).
The Isbl outcrop reached a peak in exploitation
(although at only 10%) during this period. All of the
sites supplied by Isbl, however, are located on the flanks
of the outcrop itself. With the exception of the Yaf
outcrop, which continued to have high representation and
wide distribution although in smaller quantities and to
fewer sites the remaining sources were supplying only
to sites in their immediate area, or were located on the
outcrops themselves. The quantities of obsidian generally
decrease in the Himyarite period, but we have noted
that they decrease or are non-existent especially with
distance from source. One could argue that the desire for
quality obsidian became less of a factor with time; but
the fact that the highest-quality obsidian (Yaf) available
continued circulating at relatively large distances from
the outcrop, albeit in smaller densities, while poor-quality
obsidian did not, makes this a disputable statement, and
further highlights the need to understand the intricacies
of exchange dynamics in tandem with continued
complementary archaeological studies in this region.
20
Discussion summary
Our current obsidian data match the highland obsidian
sources to local highland sites (510 km) as well as those
in the eastern highlands (2575 km) in differing intensities
over time, with evident fluctuations both in supply and in
demand. The large dataset provides a window, for the first
time, into the complex and changing economic structures
that existed in the highlands of Yemen. Furthermore, we
are able to link these localized and competing interaction
spheres to sites in the east and as far afield as the Omani
Dhofar region (1000 km), and to sites as far west as the
western foothills (100 km) and the Tihmah littoral (160
km).
As we have demonstrated, the addition of obsidian
data to existing scholarship will only further associate
Yemens prehistoric to early historic populations with the
wider archaeology of the Near East, and demonstrate that
the same socio-economic transformations and expressions
of territoriality were occurring in the highlands of Arabia

as in the rest of the ancient Near East.
Acknowledgements
The Yemeni Social Fund for Development and the
University of Arkansas at Little Rock provided funding
for DSP fieldwork. Lamya Khalidi was funded by a
Fyssen Foundation postdoctoral grant in 2008. Analyses
were made possible at the IRAMAT-CNRS as part of
a Plan Pluri-Formation grant. We would like to thank
the Yemeni General Organization for Antiquities and
Museums (GOAM), and specifically Ali Sanabani and
Ahmed al-Mosabi, for their active participation in the
VAPOR project. We would also like to thank the CEPAMCNRS for having hosted the VAPOR project in its initial
years and the IMF-CSIC in Barcelona for continuing to
support it.
References
Bader N.O., Merpert N.J. & Munchaev R.M.

1994. Les importations dobsidienne sur les sites des IXeVIIe millnaires B.P. du Djabal Sinjar, Iraq.
Palorient 20/2: 68.
Barca D., Lucarini G. & Fedele F.G.

2011. Provenance of obsidian artefacts from the Wd Ath-Thayyilah 3 Neolithic site (Eastern Yemen Plateau)
by LA-ICP-MS Method. Archaeometry 21 December: 120. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4754.2011.00643.x.
Briois F., Gratuze B. & Guilaine J.

1997. Obsidienne du site nolithique prcramique de Shillourokambos, Chypre. Palorient 23/1: 95112.
Cauvin M.C.

2002. Lobsidienne et sa diffusion dans le Proche-Orient Nolithique. Pages 1330 in J. Guilaine (ed.),
Matriaux, productions, circulations du Nolithique lge du Bronze. Sminaire du Collge de
France. Paris: ditions Errance.
Cauvin M.C. & Balkan-Atli N.

1996. Rapport sur les recherches sur lobsidienne en Cappadoce, 19931995. Anatolia Antiqua 4: 249271.
Cauvin M.C., Besnus Y., Tripier J. & Montigny R.

1991. Nouvelles analyses dobsidiennes du Proche-Orient: modle de gochimie des magmas utilis pour la
recherche archologique. Palorient 17/2: 520.
Cauvin M.C., Gourgaud A., Gratuze B., Arnaud N., Poupeau G., Poidevin J-L. & Chataigner C. (eds).

1998. Lobsidienne au Proche et Moyen Orient: Du volcan loutil. (British Archaeological Reports,
International Series, 738). Oxford: Archaeopress.
Edens C.

1982. Toward a definition of the western Rub al-Khali Neolithic. Atlal 6: 109124.

1999. The Bronze Age of Highland Yemen: chronological and spatial variability of pottery and settlement.
Palorient 25/2: 103126.
Edens C. & Wilkinson T.J.

1998. Southwest Arabia during the Holocene: recent Archaeological developments. Journal of World
Prehistory 12/1: 55119.
Edens C., Wilkinson T.J. & Barratt G.

2000. Hammat al-Qa and the roots of urbanism in southwest Arabia. Antiquity 74: 854862.
Fornaseri M., Malpieri L., Palmieri A.M. & Taddeucci A.
19751977. Analyses of obsidians from the Late Chalcolithic levels of Aslantepe (Malatya). Palorient 3: 231246.
Francaviglia V.M.
1990a. Obsidian sources in ancient Yemen. Pages 129136 in A. de Maigret, G. Gnoli & D. Faccenna (eds),
The Bronze Age Culture of Khawlan at-Tiyal and al-Hada (Yemen Arab Republic). Rome: ISMEO.
1990b. Les gisements dobsidienne hyperalcaline dans lAncien Monde: tude comparative. Revue dArchomtrie
14: 4364.
Keall E.J.

2004. Possible connections in antiquity between the Red Sea coast of Yemen and the Horn of Africa. Pages 43
55 in P. Lunde & A. Porter (eds), Trade and Travel in the Red Sea region. (Society for Arabian Studies
Monographs, 2). (British Archaeological Reports, International Series, 1269). Oxford: Archaeopress.
Khalidi L.

2007. The formation of a southern Red Seascape in the late prehistoric period: tracing cross-Red Sea culturecontact, interaction, and maritime communities along the Tihmah coastal plain, Yemen in the third to
first millennium BC. Pages 3543 in J. Starkey, P. Starkey & T. Wilkinson (eds), Natural Resources and
Cultural Connections of the Red Sea: Proceedings of Red Sea Project III. (Society for Arabian Studies
Monographs, 5). (British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1661). Oxford: Archaeopress.

2008. The late prehistoric standing stones of the Tihma (Yemen): the domestication of space and the
construction of human-landscape identity. Revue du Monde Musulman et de la Mditerrane (RMMM):
Ymen, territoires et identits 121122: 1733.

2010. Holocene Obsidian Exchange in the Red Sea region. Pages 279291 in M.D. Petraglia & J.I. Rose
(eds), The Evolution of Human Populations in Arabia: Paleoenvironments, Prehistory and Genetics.
Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology. New York: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
Khalidi L., Oppenheimer C., Gratuze B., Boucetta S., Sanabani A. & al-Mosabi M.

2010. Obsidian sources in highland Yemen and their relevance to archaeological research in the Red Sea
region. Journal of Archaeological Science 37: 23322345.
Lewis K., Khalidi L., Eisenberger B. & Sanabani A.

2010. Mapping Masnaat Mryah: using GIS to reconstruct the development of a multi-period site in the
highlands of Yemen. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 40: 213226.
Renfrew C. & Dixon J.E.

1976. Obsidian in western Asia: a review. Pages 137150 in G. de G. Sieveking, I.H. Longworth & K.E.
Wilson (eds), Problems in Economic and Social Archaeology. London: Duckworth.
Renfrew C., Dixon J.E. & Cann J.R.

1966. Obsidian and early cultural contact in the Near East. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 32: 3072.

1968. Further analysis of Near Eastern obsidian. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 34: 319331.
Tosi M.

1986. Archaeological activities in the Yemen Arab Republic, 1986: Neolithic and protohistoric cultures,
survey and excavations in the coastal plain (Tihmah). East and West 36: 400415.
Wilkinson T.J.

2003. The organization of settlement in highland Yemen during the Bronze and Iron Ages. Proceedings of the
Seminar for Arabian Studies 33: 157168.

2010. Environment and long-term population trends in southwest Arabia. Pages 5166 in M.D. Petraglia
and J.I. Rose (eds), The Evolution of Human Populations in Arabia, Vertebrate Paleobiology and
Paleoanthropology. New York: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
Wilkinson T.J., Edens C. & Gibson M.

1997. The Archaeology of the Yemen high plains: a preliminary chronology. Arabian Archaeology and
Epigraphy 8: 99142.
22
Authors addresses
Lamya Khalidi, Institucin Mil Y Fontanals (IMF), Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientficas (CSIC), C/
Egipcaques, 15 Barcelona, E-08001, Spain.
e-mail lamya.khalidi@imf.csic.es
Krista Lewis, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Department of Anthropology, 2801 S. University Ave, Little Rock,
AR 72204, USA.
e-mail kxlewis@ualr.edu
Bernard Gratuze, Institut de Recherche sur les ArchoMATriaux (IRAMAT), UMR 5060 du CNRS, Universit
dOrlans, Centre Ernest-Babelon, 3 D rue de la Frollerie, F-45071 Orlans, Cedex, France.
e-mail gratuze@cnrs-orleans.fr

Khalidi Lewis Gratuze 2012

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Khalidi Lewis Gratuze 2012

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 42 (2012): 122

New perspectives on regional and interregional obsidian circulation in

Survey Project (DSP) as well as by collaborating projects

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

geographically coherent zone allows us to begin to

Studies of archaeological obsidian exchange

demonstrated that while significant quantities of obsidian

Advances in obsidian source identification

Highland Yemen obsidian sources: sampling

Large numbers of samples from eight different

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

able to distinguish seven compositional groups whose

from one another, but they also associate different sites

Figure 1a. Diagram La/Th-La/

Artefacts from Jebel Isbil

Artefacts from Hayd al Halal

Figure 1b. Diagram La/

Artefacts from Jirab al Souf

Artefacts from Jebel Isbil

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

Artefacts from Jirab al Souf

Artefacts from Al Gharga

Artefacts from Hayd al Halal

Artefacts from Yafa' ridge

Artefacts from Al Gharga

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

Artefacts from Jirab al Souf

Artefacts from Hayd al Halal

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

Archaeological obsidian sampling in the

Figure 7. Overall percentages of obsidian source

having supplied 4% and Isbl 6%. Group 5, however, has

Yaf (21), YR (27)

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

Figure 9a. Overall percentages of obsidian source

two adjacent sites, DS297 Ghazwn and DS 226 Ribat

Figure 10a. Overall percentages of obsidian source

Figure 10b. Overall percentages of obsidian source

These can be broken down into Early Bronze Age sites,

Generally, the dominant suppliers of obsidian during the

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

exploitation of the Yaf outcrop in the Early Bronze Age

obsidian were analysed from fifteen of these sites.

Figure 11a. Overall percentages of obsidian source

along the zone of exposures of Oligocene obsidian traps

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

Figure 12a. Overall percentages of obsidian source

Comparing site-to-source matches across periods with

Discussion and conclusion

mainly characterized by relatively informal utilization

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

and/or corridors of movement of people and goods across

outcrops on sites. This suggests that all varieties exploited

in a passage conducive to moving and pasturing

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

of territoriality were occurring in the highlands of Arabia

Lamya Khalidi, Krista Lewis & Bernard Gratuze

Você também pode gostar