Arab seafaring in the Indian Ocean in ancient and early medieval times 9780691000329, 9780691001708, 9780691214894

Table of contents :
Frontmatter
INTRODUCTION TO THE EXPANDED EDITION (page xi)
PREFACE (page xv)
CHAPTER I: TRADE ROUTES IN THE PRE-ISLAMIC ERA (page 3)
Prehistory and Geography (page 3)
The East before Alexander (page 6)
The Persian Gulf in Hellenistic and Roman Times (page 13)
The Red Sea in Hellenistic and Roman Times (page 17)
The Sassanid and Byzantine Empires (page 36)
Appendix: Direct Sailing between the Persian Gulf and China in pre-Islamic Times (page 46)
CHAPTER II: TRADE ROUTES UNDER THE CALIPHATE (page 51)
General Consequences of the Islamic Expansion (page 51)
The Arabs on the Mediterranean (page 53)
Persian and Arab Sea Trade with the Far East (page 61)
East Africa and the Coasts of Africa (page 79)
Later Times (page 83)
CHAPTER III: THE SHIPS (page 87)
General Remarks (page 87)
Hulls and Their Equipment (page 89)
Masts and Sails (page 100)
Navigation and Life at Sea (page 105)
Appendix: Four Sea Stories (page 114)
NOTES ON CHAPTER I (page 129)
NOTES ON CHAPTER II (page 140)
NOTES ON CHAPTER III (page 150)
BIBLIOGRAPHY (page 157)
INDEX (page 179)

Citation preview

ARAB SEAFARING

BLANK PAGE

J/ /

;I

| ,§ ag. Arab}| / Seafaring | IN THE (

} INDIAN OCEAN |

/"|

iar, IN ANCIENT }

| AND EARLY (|| } MEDIEVAL TIMES

é

|(( ( George F. Hourani (

| REVISED AND EXPANDED BY _ |

(i. en / ,i || / John Carswell }

( Princeton University Press | } i,

| ( Princeton, New Jersey ( |

Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540

In the United Kingdom by Princeton University Press, Chichester, West Sussex Copyright © 1951 by Princeton University Press; copyright © renewed 1979 by Princeton University Press; new introduction and notes by John Carswell copyright © 1995 by Princeton University Press All Rights Reserved Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Hourani, George Fadlo. Arab seafaring in the Indian Ocean in ancient and early medieval times / by George F. Hourani ; revised and expanded by John Carswell. — Expanded ed. p. cm. — (Princeton paperbacks) Revision of the author's thesis—Princeton University. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-691-00170-7. — ISBN 0-691-00032-8 ( pbk.)

1. Navigation—Arab countries—History. 2. Indian Ocean— Navigation— History. 3. Trade routes—Indian Ocean—History. I. Carswell, John, 1931- . If. Title. If. Arab seafaring. VKg9.H68 1995

387.5'2'09165—dc20 94- 38343 Princeton University Press books are printed on acid-free paper and meet the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources First printing in the revised and expanded edition, 1995 Printed in the United States of America by Princeton Academic Press

I 3 5 7 g9 10 8 6 4 2

To Lello I have seen old ships sail like swans asleep —J. E. FLECKER, The Old Ships

BLANK PAGE

CONTENTS

Oe eee eee ee te:

PREFACE XV

INTRODUCTION TO THE EXPANDED EDITION Xl CHAPTER I: TRADE ROUTES IN THE PRE-ISLAMIC ERA

Prehistory and Geography 3 The East before Alexander 6 The Persian Gulf in Hellenistic and Roman Times 13

The Red Sea in Hellenistic and Roman Times 17

The Sassanid and Byzantine Empires 36 Appendix: Direct Sailing between the Persian Gulf

and China in pre-Islamic Times 46

CHAPTER I: TRADE ROUTES UNDER THE CALIPHATE

General Consequences of the Islamic Expansion 51

The Arabs on the Mediterranean 53 Persian and Arab Sea Trade with the Far East 61

Later Times 83

East Africa and the Coasts of Africa 79 CHAPTER III: THE SHIPS

General Remarks 87 Hulls and Their Equipment 89 Masts and Sails 100 Navigation and Life at Sea 105 Appendix: Four Sea Stories 114

NOTES ON CHAPTER I 129 NOTES ON CHAPTER II 140

NOTES ON CHAPTER IT] 150

INDEX 179

BIBLIOGRAPHY 157 { wit }

PLATES , eo ™,|, 0 “Qo TR, oT, OO Tyo CD, 0 “| OND, O Vy, oT, OQ, oO “,, OH, 0 MR, OR, O*RE,| OAR’

1. A Moprern ARaB SAILING SHIP OF THE INDIAN OCEAN facing page

Photograph by A. J. Villiers 18

2. AN ANCIENT EcypTIAN SHIP

From G. S. L. Clowes, Sazling Ships 19 3. A Roman SalILinc SHIP

From G. Contenau, La civilization phénicienne 34 4. THe AJANTA SHIP

Reproductions 35 From Ajanta, The Colour and Monochrome

5. [wo Byzantine Lareen-Riccep VEssELs |

Nationale 82

From a Greek manuscript in the Bibliothéque 6. ANOTHER ByzANTINE LaTEEN-RiccrEp VESSEL

From the same manuscript as 5 83 7. THe Hariri Sup

Nationale 98

From an Arabic manuscript in the Bibliothéque 8. A SEWN SurF Boat

Photograph by A. J. Villiers 99

TEXT FIGURES

Figure 1. Two PLanxs g2

Figure 2. TackING AND WEARING TIO

{ viii }

MAPS eM eRe Mee “Re Mee Re Me Mee Do De, OB oR, eM, oT, CR “| OR, OD,’ ©

I. THE ANCIENT ORIENT 12 IH. = THe Mrppce East 1n Graeco-Roman TIMEs 37 WI. THe Mrppce East in THE SrxtH CEnTuRY A.D. 49 TV. THe Mippve East anp East AFRICA

IN ‘ABBASID TIMEs 85 IN ‘ABBASID TIMES 86

V. Tue Far East as KNOWN TO THE ARABS

VI. Tue Inptan Ocrean Topay 123

VII. Lower Ecypr 124 VIII. Recentty ExcavatTep AND OTHER RELATED SITES 126-127

{ ix j

BLANK PAGE

INTRODUCTION TO THE EXPANDED EDITION om, oT, 0 Mo“, OM eM oe ML MRL Oo MR, OM MR, OR, OM oe TM Oe MO TM, oO “TO

My First encounter with George Hourani’s masterly work was, curiously enough, not as a work of scholarship, and long before I myself became interested in the same subject. [ was living in Lebanon and teaching at the American University of Beirut, and Paul Khayat, an enterprising young Lebanese bookseller with a shop just opposite the university decided to become a publisher as well; he asked me if I

would join him in his new venture as his designer. He embarked on a series of reprints of historical works concerned with the Arab world that had long been out of print and, with an eye to the student audience across the street,

asked their professors for advice on what he should do. Thus, Creasy’s History of the Ottoman Turks, Hitti's Memoirs of an Arab-Syrian Gentleman, and Maundrell’s Journey

from Aleppo to Jerusalem were all reprinted; and among them in this series was Arab Seafaring. My task was simply to make sure it was correctly done, and the only novelty was a new jacket. This first reprint of

the original Princeton edition of 1951 appeared in 1963, and has now itself been long out of print. Arab Seafaring, which is hardly more than a hundred pages long, is a deceptively simple work. It is, in fact, a mine of ideas, and the text could be expanded to ten times its present length. But brevity is its essential quality, as anyone who has consulted it on a particular topic will testify.

Hourani’s Preface makes it quite clear what the work is concerned with, and what it is not. It deals with the mar{ xi f

INTRODUCTION

itime routes of the Indian Ocean and the east, but not with the Mediterranean. It is a history of Arab navigation, but it is not a nautical manual. Although it deals only with the period until a.p. 1000, it draws judiciously on later Arab

and European texts when they can illuminate the past. Above all, it welds together a mass of material; as Hourani says, it is a history written both in space and time.

The whole is so carefully constructed that it would be impertinent to alter the fundamental text. For this new edition, although it is possible to comment on the literary and technical aspects of Hourani’s text, I have thought it of greater value to add material from the results of archaeological research since his tme. The additional material has been added as notes to each chapter; for this, I am deeply indebted to several scholars, in particular to David Whitehouse (D.W.), whose copious additions form a substantial commentary on the text. I must also thank Honor Frost (H.F.), Mark Horton (M.H.), David King (D.K.), Geoffrey King (G.K.), Peter Morgan (P.M.) , George Scanlon (G.S.), and Henry Wright (H.W.), whose valuable contributions are largely based on the result of their own field work. Two recent publications have also added much relevant information. The first is Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade, a collection of essays edited by Vimala Begley

and Richard D. De Puma, which primarily examine the structure of maritime trade in the pre-Islamic period; and the second is the recent entry by S. Soucek, V. Christides, G. R. Tibbetts, and G. Oman on milaha (navigation, seamanship, seafaring) in the revised edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam, particularly valuable for the discussion of the literary evidence. All the new contributions are indicated by the author’s initials at the end of each section. I have also added a revised index, including the place names mentioned on the { xii }

INTRODUCTION

maps, and a new map locating the sites referred to in the supplementary notes. The bibliography is collated from Hourani’s own footnotes, with as much additional bibliographical information as could be traced, and incorporates all the additional works cited. I would particularly thank Mona El Mamoun for her invaluable assistance in typing the new texts and checking many of the references, and Moira Day and Laure Soustiel for their help in the early stages of the revision. At Princeton University Press, I have also greatly benefited from Margaret Case’s patient encouragement and advice. Most of all, I must thank Albert Hourani for his wise counsel and his kind invitation to trim his brother’s sails for another voyage, for the benefit of all future students of this most fascinating topic. It is only sad that Albert did not live long enough to see the publication of this new edition, to which he was so keenly looking forward. JoHN CARSWELL

London, 1994

{ xii }

BLANK PAGE

PREFACE OR ee RL OR RL OR OR OR ORL O |! Tue history of seafaring by the Arabs is a subject of wide extension in space and time, fragments of which have been dealt with in a great number of scholarly articles and chapters. This book is intended to provide a general and continuous account of about a quarter of the subject. In space | have limited myself to Eastern waters, with only a brief excursion into the Mediterranean, where Arabs have been sailing since the beginning of Islam. Such a division can be justified by the many contrasts between the two seas and the lands bordering them in past times: geographical conditions, contacts with other nations, types of ship, methods of navigation were all different. In time, I have dealt with the earlier period: the historical account in the first two

chapters extends down to a.p. 1000 or thereabouts, although the third chapter ranges some centuries later. This book is a history of trade routes in the Indian Ocean

and of the ships which sailed on them. But it is not an economic history, and the products carried as cargoes are mentioned only incidentally. I have even made little use of the known facts of commercial intercourse between various countries as evidence for the history of navigation. The reason is that this commercial evidence, taken by itself, tells us nothing about our subject beyond the bare existence of navigation. If articles of Indian manufacture are found in Babylonia and dated to a certain period, well and good: but we still want to know whether they were carried there by Indians, or Babylonians, or an intermediary nation like the Arabs of ‘Um4n. Nor is this a history of “navigation” in the technical sense, a subject which could be adequately treated only by a trained navigator.

{xv}

PREFACE

These are the principal limits, of matter or method, which I have imposed on my work for one reason or another. On the other hand, in one respect this book goes beyond what its title suggests. I have wandered freely into the nautical history of other nations besides the Arabs: largely in order to show the historical background and environment of Arab efforts, but also because it is sometimes difficult to draw a sharp line between nations, when once they get onto the sea and mingle in the ports. This book was begun as a doctoral thesis for Princeton University in 1938-1939, entitled “Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean in the Ninth and Tenth Centuries.” My first debt of gratitude is to the wise guidance which I received at Princeton from Professor Philip K. Hitti and Professor Harold H. Bender—indeed it was Professor Hitti who first suggested Arab seafaring to me as a subject demanding investigation. That thesis has been rewritten and expanded to form the present book. I worked on it during vacations at Jerusalem, where the Director and library staff of the Palestine Archaeological Museum gave me every facility. I owe much to the suggestions and criticisms of other scholars and friends who will, I hope, be satisfied with this

general acknowledgment; as well as to the researches of Mr. Alan Villiers, the late Professor Gabriel Ferrand, the late Mr. James Hornell and others whose writings are mentioned in the notes. Thanks are also due to the authors or publishers who granted permission to quote from copyright works. I also wish to thank the Editor of the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society for permission to reprint the Appendix to Chapter I, parts of which appeared in an article in the Journal in Dec. 1947.

For my illustrations I owe the following acknowledgments and thanks: To Mr. A. J. Villiers for allowing me the use of his own photographs in Plates 1 and 8; to the { xvi }

PREFACE

Director of the Bibliothéque Nationale for the photographs of Plates 5, 6 and 7, and permission to reproduce them; to the Director of the Palestine Archaeological Museum for the photographs of Plates 2 and 3, taken from books in the

Museum library; to the publishers of these two books, H. M. Stationery Office and P. Payot; to the Oxford University Press for photographing Plate 4; and to the same Press and His Exalted Highness the Nizam of Hyderabad for permission to reproduce this plate. I am grateful to Princeton University Press for their patient work in preparing the text, maps, and illustrations.

My final thanks are due to my parents for the opportunities of study at Princeton which they provided, and to my wife for constant encouragement to complete this book.

G. F. Hourant Ann Arbor, August 1950

{ xvii }

BLANK PAGE

ARAB SEAFARING

NOTE All words of other scripts are transliterated into the Latin script, except in quotation of poetry or in connection with textual criticism. Greek names and words are transliterated in the traditional Latin way, “Coptus” for Kd6arros, etc. Arabic names and words are transliterated according to the system used by D. Hitti in his History of the Arabs. In quoting passages from the sources in English transla-

tion, I have used existing translations, where these are available, as bases for my own versions. Where this 1s done, the names of the translators are mentioned in the notes on the first occasion only. But I have not hesitated to emend a translation whenever the original seemed to require a different rendering.

References for quotations are given in the notes, followed by the word “(quoted).” Titles of books and articles are given in full at the first mention.

G. H.

As Hourani’s text is printed unchanged, the reader should be alerted that it has been difficult to impose an entirely uniform system of transliteration. Where there are variant spellings of the same name, they have been listed in the Index.

J.C.

TRADE ROUTES IN THE PRE-ISLAMIC ERA eo“, oa, e TM, oT, eo Me“, eo Me MB, oO“, eo “,, o MR eo TM OM, “BH, oD, OR, oR, oD, 0°

os Ce Cholgth Gp Le s90e SOL Colm jw Ses logb CM ly o92~ ok ol ode oe al Yave

AJ SU GL) ed US Ye Nog> WI ole oe When the lady of Malik rides her camel at dawn, her litter appears like a large ship in the midst of the valley of Dad, one of

the ships of Adulis or of ibn-Yamin, which the mariner now turns aside and now directs straight ahead; its prow cuts through

the foam of the water as a gambler divides the dust with his hand.—Taraftah, Mu‘allagat, u, 3-5 eo“ oe Mo M_o_R eM, Oe De, te, MeL eR, oR oO DE_| ea, DE, eR,’ OD, RL’

PREHISTORY AND GEOGRAPHY

Lone before history Arabs,’ like the rest of mankind, were making boats of skins, hollowed tree trunks, or other suitable material, and paddling or punting their way across easy waters. They went fishing on the sea, and began diving for pearls; perhaps they learned to row with oars. Out of these simple activities navigation in the proper sense developed, as 1In this book ‘‘an Arab’”’ means anyone who speaks Arabic, ‘fa Persian” anyone who speaks Persian; ‘‘an Arabian” means an inhabitant of Arabia, ‘‘an Iranian” an inhabitant of Iran. In the pre-Islamic period all Arabs were Arabians, except some tribes in the Egyptian desert between the Nile and the Red Sea; and all Arabians were Arabs, if we include Himyaritic and other South Arabian dialects as branches of Arabic. After the Islamic expansion, an Arabic-speaking inhabitant of Iran may be termed either an Arab or an Iranian; a Persian is one who continued to speak Persian. But we do not always know what language people spoke at home, so that there is bound to be a margin of choice in the use of these terms in some cases.

{ 3}

PRE-ISLAMIC TRADE ROUTES

men ventured further onto the sea. But this book is not con-

cerned with that obscure evolution of primitive craft. Our subject begins when the first Arabs erected a mast and a sail and trusted to the winds on the open sea, and to the mercy of their gods. This too was a prehistoric event. We can only guess the nature of their earliest sailing ships. It is likely that the planks of their hulls were not nailed but stitched together with twine; it is possible, but far from certain, that the sails

were square and not set fore and aft as they were in historical times.” In certain general respects geography favored the develop-

ment of sailing from Arabian shores. A very long coastline bounds the peninsula on three sides, stretching from the Gulf of Suez round to the head of the Persian Gulf. Near these coasts lie the most fertile parts of Arabia, al-Yaman, Hadramawt, and ‘Uman; communication between them by sea was

no more formidable than the crossing of the deserts and mountains which separated them on land. Commerce with neighboring countries was invited, to the west by the long shores of Northeast Africa, to the northeast by those of Iran, in both cases extending parallel to and not far out from the

Arabian shore, and approaching it closely at the extreme ends; so that across the enclosed waters of the Red Sea and | the Persian Gulf the Arabs might be in contact with two of the most ancient centers of wealth and civilization—Egypt and Jran—not to mention Mesopotamia, which they could reach either by sea or by land. Beyond Arabia to the southwest, it was easy to cross to East Africa and coast along it in search of tropical products; to the east, the coast of Iran led on to India—and eventually the monsoon winds were to assist voyages both to Africa and to India. Most important of all, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, supplemented by the 2 See Ch. II. On primitive craft: J. Hornell, Water Transport: Origins and Early Evolution (Cambridge, 1946); zdem, ‘‘Sea-trade in early times,” in Antiquity, vol. xv (1941), pp. 234-56.

{ 4}

PRE-ISLAMIC TRADE ROUTES

Nile, the Euphrates, and the Tigris, are natural channels for through traffic between the Mediterranean basin and Eastern Asia: the Arabs were astride two of the world’s great trade routes.

But the advantages of this geographical position could not be fully exploited until certain difficulties had been overcome.

Arabia does not and never did produce wood suitable for building strong seagoing ships. Neither does it contain iron for nailing them, nor is it near to any iron-producing country. It has no navigable rivers and few first-class harbors. The Red Sea, stretching for some 1,200 miles, had in early times the effect of isolating rather than uniting Egypt with South-

west Arabia. The northern half of this sea in particular presented severe obstacles, It is fanked on both sides by hundreds

of miles of waterless desert. Immense coral reefs skirt both coasts and in places extend far out into the sea; considerable knowledge and skill were required to avoid being wrecked

on them. The coral islands favored piracy, to which the hungry nomads on both sides were all too prone, regarding it as a simple extension of their desert raids. Good harbors are almost wanting here, so that there was no safe refuge from the dangers of storms or pirates. The northward passage was especially hard to early seafarers, because north-

erly winds blow down this part of the sea the whole year round.*® Rather than face the terrors of the Red Sea, the Arabs developed camel routes along the whole western side of their peninsula. Conditions in the Persian Gulf were more favorable; but here too there is a lack of fresh water on both sides, and piracy is encouraged by the number of the islands and the poverty of the coastal peoples.* As a result, ‘Uman was in none too close contact with Mesopotamia and Iran. Outside, in the Indian Ocean, the coasts leading to India are 8 Encyclopaedia Britannica, tath ed., “Red Sea”; The Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Pilot, oth ed. (London, 1944, British Admiralty), ch. 1; M. Cary, The Geographic Background of Greek and Roman History (Oxford, 1949), pp. 187-88. 4A. Wilson, The Persian Gulf (London, 1928), pp. 1 ff.

{ 5}

PRE-ISLAMIC TRADE ROUTES

extremely desolate, while the monsoons could not be used

to cross the open sea between Arabia and India and East Africa until ships could be constructed strong enough to endure their powerful blasts. These natural obstacles had to be overcome by human invention, before the natural advantages could be exploited. But the isolation of Southwest Arabia and ‘Um§n tended to perpetuate itself, for unless there was constant communication with the ancient centers of civilization in Egypt, Western

Asia, and India, the Arabs would not easily adopt the improvements in shipbuilding and navigation which those lands had to offer. Even the materials for building strong vessels had to be brought from India.” THE EAST BEFORE ALEXANDER

Nothing is known of the seafaring activities of the Arabs

before the Hellenic conquest of the Near East. But other nations have left records of their own voyages in Arabian waters long before that time. A brief account of these will show that the coasts of Arabia were in all historical ages in contact by sea with other countries.

Sumerian and Akkadian inscriptions of the third millennium B.c. report maritime relations between Mesopotamia and the countries of Dilmun, Magan and Melukhkha. Dilmun is probably the island of al-Bahrayn. Magan is now generally agreed to be ‘Um4an. Timber and copper are said to be found there, and there is mention of “the shipwrights

of Magan” in a text from Lagash of the time of Shulgi (c. 2050). Melukhkha is regularly associated with Magan in the inscriptions, but its location at this period cannot yet be more closely determined.° 5 See Ch. III, pp. 89 ff. 6 On Magan: H. Peake, “The copper mountain of Magan,” in Antiquity, vol. 1 (1928), pp. 452-57; Hornell in Antiquity, vol. xv (1941). The timber of Magan may have been imported from India for re-export: Wilson, p. 27. Mesopotamian boat-types, with curved hulls and lofty, almost vertical prows

{6}

PRE-ISLAMIC TRADE ROUTES

On the western side of Arabia, Egyptian vessels were sailing on the Red Sea from at least the reign of Sahure (c. 2470) of the Fifth Dynasty, and under the Sixth Dynasty (c. 23412181) journeys were made quite frequently by land or by sea

to the country of Punt, probably the Somali coast facing Arabia. At this period the Egyptian ships for this voyage were built at the head of the Gulf of Suez, so that they would

pass down the whole length of the Red Sea, and return the same way against head winds—no mean achievement in such an age, on such a sea. Egyptian texts sometimes refer to them

as “ships of Gebal,” which indicates either that they were of a type learned from this Phoenician city, or that they were the kind of ships used for sailing thither. The Egyptians also

obtained from Gebal the pine wood and resin required for building the ships. Again in the Middle Kingdom (c. 20001800) the Pharaohs sent expeditions by sea to Punt. These are reflected in the famous “story of the shipwrecked sailor,” in which the sole survivor of an Egyptian ship, wrecked in the

Red Sea, is cast on an island at a distance of two months’ journey from Thebes. The serpent on the island claims to be the prince of Punt, and has at his command a variety of spices

and African animals. In the New Kingdom, Queen Hatshepsut sent her Punt expedition probably in 1495. The reliefs and inscriptions of Dayr al-Bahri show how five large ships were dispatched down the Red Sea, how the Egyptians were

received in Punt, and how they returned. Three centuries later, Ramesses III (1198-67) sent a fleet of large ships from and sterns appear in predynastic Egyptian art, on the “painted tomb” of Hieraconpolis and the Gabal al-‘Arak knife-handle: H. Frankfort, “The origin of monumental architecture in Egypt,” in American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, vol. Lv (1941), pp. 329-58; H. J. Kantor, “The final phase of predynastic culture,” in Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 11 (1944), pp. 110-36. Frankfort suggests that the Mesopotamian influence may have reached Hieraconpolis via Wadi Hammamiat and the Red Sea from Mesopotamia, or from some Mesopotamianized country on the coasts of Iran or Arabia. But the evidence is slender and I doubt such voyages in the fourth millennium. Knowledge of Mesopotamian boat-types could as well have been acquired via Syria.

{7}

PRE-ISLAMIC TRADE ROUTES

a harbor opposite Coptus to Punt, as well as a naval expedition to some copper mines in the Sinai peninsula.’ After the decline of Egyptian power, Phoenicians appear as the mariners of the Red Sea. They may have been so for

many centuries before, but the earliest definite evidence comes from the first Book of Kings: “And King Solomon made a navy of ships in Ezion-geber, which is beside Eloth on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom; and Hiram sent in the navy his servants, shipmen that had knowledge of

the sea, with the servants of Solomon. And they came to Ophir and fetched from thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and brought it to King Solomon.” This Ezion-geber can now be identified with confidence as the site at Tall al-Khulayfah, west of al-“Aqabah, which was excavated by an American expedition in 1938-1940. It is quite likely that Solomon himself (c. 974-932) built the town and the large copper refinery which has been unearthed there, after the subjection of the Edomites by his father David. But the passage quoted above shows clearly that Solomon’s ships

were manned by Phoenicians sent by King Hiram of Tyre, 7™P, Montet, Byblos et l’Egypte, texte (Paris, 1928), pp. 6, 284, compares the phrase “ships of Gebal’ with the ‘‘Mari-boats,” ‘“Ur-boats” and “Akkad-boats” of the Ugarit lexicon, ed. F. Thureau-Dangin in Syria, vol. xm (1931), pp. 228-30. The shipwrecked sailor: A. Erman, The Literature of the Ancient Egyptians, Eng. tr. A. M. Blackman (London, 1927), pp. 29-35. Hatshepsut’s expedition: J. H. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt (Chicago, 1906-7, vol. m1, secs. 246-87; E. Naville, The Temple of Deir al Bahari, pt. mm (London, 1898), pls. 69-85. R. P. Dougherty, The Sealand of Ancient Arabia (New Haven, 1932), pp. 170-72, suggests that the ‘“‘God’s Land” of the Dayr al-Bahri texts may be in South Arabia; perhaps Punt too includes South Arabia. Breasted suggests (sec. 248) that the ships may have sailed from Thebes down the Nile, through the ancient Nile-Suez canal, then southwards on the Red Sea. But

see G. Posener, “Le canal du Nil a la mer rouge avant les Ptolemées,” in Chronique d’Egypte, vol. xxv1 (July 1938), pp. 259-73: there is no solid evidence

that the canal existed before the first millennium, and Dayr al-Bahri does not prove that the ships actually sailed from Thebes. Besides, Breasted’s route would involve a detour of some 800 miles. It is more probable that the expedition went overland from Thebes down the Wadi Hammamiat, and that the fleet sailed from a port in the region of al-Qusayr, as did the fleet of Ramesses III. See also P. E.

Newberry, ‘Notes on Sea-Going Ships” in Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, vol. xxvuI (1942), pp. 64-66.

{&}

PRE-ISLAMIC TRADE ROUTES

and succeeding verses also speak of a separate fleet of Hiram sailing with that of his ally. These ships must have been built at Ezion-geber, and at Tall al-Khulayfah there were actually

found large nails of iron and of copper alloyed with iron, fragments of thick ropes, lumps of pitch for caulking, and resin for coating. Wood for planks could be cut from the oak forests then existing in Edom. The “Ophir” to which these ships sailed may well have been in India, for the voyage was made only once every three years. The merchandise brought from Ophir—gold, silver, jewels, almug wood, ivory, apes and peacocks—smacks of India, etymologically and economically. The same passage in I Kings describes the visit of the Queen of Sheba to Solomon, but it is noticeable that she came

by camel caravan, not by sea. The inland route from alYaman to Syria, running through the desert parallel to the Red Sea, was evidently in use among the Sabaeans then, as among the Meccans in Muhammad’s day.* After the division of Solomon’s kingdom the sea trade ceased for some time. King Jehoshaphat of Judah (c. 873-849) attempted to revive

it, building ships once more in order to bring gold from Ophir; but they were “broken” at Ezion-geber, presumably wrecked by the strong winds of the Gulf of ‘Aqabah.” 8] Kings 9: 26-28 (quoted) and ff., Authorized Version. On Ezion-geber: N. Glueck, arts. in Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, Nos. 71 and 72 (October and December 1938), No. 76 (October 1939), No. 80 (October 1940); and in Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution (1941), pp. 453-78. On Ophir: J. Montgomery, Arabia and the Bible (Philadelphia, 1934), pp. 176 ff.; B. Moritz, Arabien (Hanover, 1923), pp. 63 ff. J. Hornell, “Naval Activity in the Days of Solomon,” in Antiquity, vol. xx1 (June 1947), pp. 66-73.

9II Kings 22: 47-49; II Chronicles 20: 35-37. Ezekiel 27: 23 shows Tyrian trafic early in the sixth century with Sheba, Canneh and Eden, but probably by caravan. I regard as legendary the story of a Phoenician voyage round Africa, c. 600 B.c. (Herodotus, bk. 1v, ch. 42). Such a voyage, of some 16,000 miles, would have been far longer than anything else done by man before the fifteenth century a.D.; and if it had been made it would not have left the ancients ignorant of the shape of Africa. The appearance of the sun to starboard on the southern coast of Africa was an easy guess to Herodotus’ Egyptian informants, who must have heard of the position of the summer sun in the Upper Nile valley, south of the

Tropic of Cancer. See J. O. Thomson, A History of Ancient Geography (Cambridge, 1948), pp. 71-72.

{9}

PRE-ISLAMIC TRADE ROUTES

On the Persian Gulf, the ancient kingdom of “Sealand,” which has been located with near certainty in Northeastern Arabia, held the coast from near the Euphrates mouth to Dilmun. This kingdom in the first millennium seems to have comprised Chaldaeans and Arabs. Early in the seventh century the king of Sealand, after an unsuccessful revolt against his Assyrian overlord Sennacherib (705-681), escaped with some followers across the Persian Gulf and took refuge in Elam. This shows a certain minimum of nautical activity, but more interesting is the reaction of Sennacherib. He brought Phoenicians to Nineveh to build him powerful ships, then manned the ships with Tyrian, Sidonian, and Cyprian sailors and had them sent down the inland waterways, and in places

hauled overland, till they came to the mouth of the Euphrates. Warriors were there embarked, and the expedition sailed to the mouth of the river Ulai (the Kariin): this river now enters the Shatt al-‘Arab, but then flowed directly into the Persian Gulf, which extended further to the north and

west than it does today. Here the troops made a landing against the Sealanders drawn up on the shore, and defeated them. The account of this campaign, narrated in a vivid Assyrian inscription, demonstrates either that the Persian Gulf lacked the craftsmen to build sound vessels even for such a short voyage, or that Sennacherib expected naval opposition and so required a superior navy. The timber for the ships, too, may have been fetched from Lebanon to Nineveh by the Phoenicians, since Mesopotamia probably produced little suitable timber.” There is no substantial evidence for maritime activity under the Neo-Babylonian dynasty (626-539).”* But their suc10S, Luckenbill, Anctent Records of Assyria and Babylonia (Chicago, 1927), vol. 11, secs. 318-21. On “Sealand”: Dougherty, passim; the name may be due to proximity to the sea, or to swamps near the Euphrates, or the sea-like appearance of the desert. On changes in the coastline and river beds: Wilson, p. 42. 11 Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica, bk. 1x, ch. 41, preserves a tradition about

the public works of Nebuchadnezzar II (605-562) at Teredon (probably the former Eridu) at the Euphrates mouth; Isaiah 43: 14 speaks of Chaldaean ships,

{ 10 }

PRE-ISLAMIC TRADE ROUTES

cessors, the Persians, opened up fresh possibilities of economic development by uniting the whole of Western Asia and Egypt

in an enduring empire. Darius the Great (521-485) appreciated the value of linking Persia with India and Egypt by sea as well as by land, and for this purpose organized some notable maritime operations. He sent a fleet down the Indus and

thence round Arabia to Egypt. One of the captains of this expedition is named by Herodotus, “Scylax of Caryanda.” Darius also had a ship canal dug, or re-dug, from the old Pelusiac arm of the Nile near Zaqaziqg, down the Wadi Tumilat, and through the lakes to Suez; he then sent a fleet from the Nile down this canal and the Red Sea to Persia. Ships may even have come through from the Mediterranean, for during the revolt of Egypt in 460-454 the Athenian navy sailed up the river as far south as Memphis.” Such are the main facts known about Arabian waters before the Greek expansion. Passing them in review, we may notice the prominence of the Phoenicians in the seas of the

East. In transferring their energies to that quarter from the Mediterranean, they probably found little difficulty in learning the dialects and understanding the mentality and customs of their Semitic cousins in Arabia. About the Arab seamen of the ancient East we have met no evidence. But in view of the flourishing condition of the Minaeans and Sabaeans in the first millennium, and in the light of what can be learned of their nautical activity in Hellenistic times, it is a sound conjecture that Arabs were playing some part in the seafaring life of their times for many centuries before Alexander. according to one interpretation; Aeschylus, Persians, line 54 has a vague reference to Babylonian ships. Wilson, pp. 32-34. 12 On Scylax: Herodotus, History, bk. 1v, ch. 44; E. Herzfeld, Zoroaster and his

World (Princeton, 1947), vol. 1, pp. 652-69. Canal inscription in Posener, La premiére domination perse en Egypte (Cairo, 1936), pp. 48-87. Thucydides, Peloponnesian War, bk. 1, chs. 104, 109, Darius’s inscription contains a reference

to an earlier canal, which must be that of Necho (late seventh century) mentioned , by Herodotus, bk. m, ch. 158, and bk. 1v, ch. 42, and other Greek writers. Indian merchant ships carried a peacock to Babylon, perhaps as early as 4oo: The ]dtaka, Eng. tr. E. B. Cowell and others (Cambridge, 1897 sqq.), vol. 11, pp. 83-84.

{ 11 }

,

" 3 ee}

ne, ”, he ote = . A LF Noy LZ s 8 a NSN ~ 8 ds © Sore irnemaeas ern Soe oct SoS tere sean Re ee pss ae SS oe : 3 = tas Seer iene meters Seatac een Sie oe sees eae erases serene rete Soni Seana Sen % Ss Sais Sane > Sey oe < Ske SS

ee ’ = : , — 2 _ _ . f! , : i 8 _- ->-_: -A aoo :_i ‘d '#" I|3:| ,3, _Ce _ S a { | i , rs _ i a i | : Cr _ 3 7 q f = : -. : | | } = se ee See .2 Ses re VY _.._—Cdidsias — , Dee =~ Sie oe st : .ss -. Saree Se eee oe : Cre uae QO. = 4 A > ex .Sees Supa _._.fe — ; : : ena a / : Sse ee vu = —=S=Ssesese erates % Shana See , res|LSee|o| ee statetenes SomanCc screenees | if < ee u ee aMise pabarsrcce eesiecono eeoe ee: |7wees ~~ Saas sinareins SS — |. a=scence x=—seO = ae eo ases— x _— as ce . _ : . 2 | I f —e ee os— *:Sa Senos Sa earn.” 3: oe Ba So %a|||.ife a: -'s:: |ji - Sons SS Sasoees Sia istaeS Spee ceo bs y See SS eos > se foe ale eS = ae Se oe Ses es mS _EE =—=—e Sane Ss Ss = ' ‘ 4 —rr—eB : . ! j | | | ee= See sre Sau seers pti ES Se SRS Boh ow Ww — Sea meRa paranta ee eS SoeES nae Se eS ee Sens “ Sanerenneens Sh so en EES : anecnace ae a3Ste Speer oS .>Sirs ek(o)3 ie“ re Pe Pasetehar stata nara, RD ereteretearnatatat Sake Pate eeterd eieteteee sotetatadhalatete caent eset eteratatere setetatetete! catatetetetctehe ee Rees ~, eaten SS ee atatene aes ean tea P peeeratane SEPP Pts! eee aneeel ante cad : By ae Et ie :
. ; = : ud “S oe # "3 % Ee - SS > ae . Pevwe oo ae PH cx feo w“~

aSe o Ry pete os 5 ae8n= CF Sing Pe 23 > Sree oeothe ok f RES a: O tied- seaeLeSER Pewees ee he oeeeOe Ps. SS 3 aG2 . }&s: Bie< is : aORS oS ae Reae: >'¢f aeebe : := 5

ae, eeSsatRS, aePOR ogre;jer! : ‘iueEee» ean= oll oe Bes xf .Pe; se o% SS Be Bes: a ey - a a+I SEO Bec sot ae cies oa estsodSeRFeet mete es a$2HS Sevine RO BRE oe me > es seersoe SitetscetsLR FS a Pe we ae SS és PEER # j RES >: oe ne 3 cute See “4 Bo Se of ; ee o : : a s | : eH) a OS, i . p 4.

me See ge ge ee eee a Sp ef ca eS kd ae a % ee eae Smee 3 eee bu °

Powe ee Be: ee See Coker eae aa aay BEE ee oe ee “SS Fe tae ge ae ee Sik: co of Cod PREC Lo oe oe he vee te bee ape. ici Silly eo De ase RE oe See ee Se RE Ceara oe = ia Paty Oe . Shes aa he aod BS Soe CSN SS ge PRS Pes Se Pas:

Seges_—. igSate RfaaGE i eee oekt Ate sist feSPaeeeee = oe aiatenon eee — $i: ye ge: oe de: eet oea4 ae, hs oe:ee eo ae eeeSSE ~ Oo eee ae 3 Big Saree coeur s ee = S ae Kees Bak oe Fees p hes 3 z *¢ bee of Sas Se ee sc es col be eee ne_eg FeSE gt OO shee Ce£4 esysie¥J Pee. s eeeieoh Peto, age ee Los r-reHei r #8 eee : a =ee: o Ss %8 whe BF: ro ey $e eaeteaes eee pee ba aaei = ae ee ee Be gh pS ss 3 Ee tie we Scares! «° Poa me} eirge ere gee: e. 23 cee ee te cae F—

gs Bre eae See eS tes Sa a BP ae pee Me ~~. Pree te om o> rat Bios S See, Becta: eae 4 EOS ees ‘ oe : SSee eeSems& aboot |: ae ‘aSeeee oe He fe Bs ee ae ee: es ue “Se & : 32 ee: * Ne} :é Psrp aos== — a ie Se isoe eaege eeEeSe apBe og 2s : . seeBs3 sok Yee SEPM ete ¥ Shi NS ae iepeer > NS Bre Be SRR Socee ee ie eae Ke SS . on PeBe ae . &- Ne —ie ee oe Pr eetae S ecs{ Peat ; i .rete E Se eea & PEEaed 1 gees mSste 3F ee Rg gS Gareed OSeS omoe oe S a oS

:: —aa“oc coee3Se ya €ESaeco eu; fot we Ag Sees a Be gave Rk PES eas ae aS aan Sg oS a Si Be ee ae Ss eo >enees PoPa Pa ~ os eee ee cal oe oe Soe y G8 beg — Ps Siig ok OS ae Es peo 92:aeeS SSa igo sex! lhPy ada eRe Pee ee eS Re eaae She. - Ee E a rea2 SaaS — hia Res eiop,Bain | Pie as ae eed. ye ss Z. + na) eae RR Poe ae So ay eecnnanetg ee »Ps Decoder: : y oes eeae es nak ae Met: Seage Be

Rigo Saux ey ee SE OS Soa Sasso aso aaas eae a o . Pi s fy cif # f a iF s ? é coSwereensaee gee aot tis coe ger # fet aes&SBBak tes itaerm = oe Le RS eRtas See prises ep es See pot ieie Riese oe seBin. >3 a aGoes es aeeae sab > Ses “ #3 a Speer ae. :iS Jeeu Le eee - ee See EF x6 ge RE Se oe et Rigs 3 Rig Re ae OS (en ee a ome of pee pee Pe : oooe: .7ee a ee aeBS a ES BeeFee BgpeesSg? ag ss oe . eg yg see atePs: See as SeoF 2 8) 5 oe oo. ae eee =Sees, ee Asta=apa aieShas otaeRa 3eeSea Seog: BO SS Bee ea =. Po ee Snes Oo ae a — eee ea ” ae Es = eae SS Rot eR ses S i ea 3 é e :

gp ee samen a : : eee

Be - .set = eae ee oS eeoe m. oe#¥3Fra., “esc 3cane ee as xa baaSe— .Ps eatleena, es . a.aee segs ceSORE ea ©Gra ee Sas a Bee oees ee oeOe As Sah ae Sern SoeSoe Re Ps aS ee a Ss eee ESE Se ER 7 HSges ae ee EAR = aee Se: Sa Bi ate Se Sane Ba me Se ees isis tiecna RS .

PET io :"BEE SN ONL DON eaaace >aeae ee ERE nsOeRa RN ee ekae RsSeow ieaERG a OR a Ps SS aps Sea aie enna Se aa. giaery ee Sg PS PRI ae pee ae Ee aie apt rama. oes Ext nae eeFee eo as oS fe ‘4 oe=aeBR .-“— s Sa See. *Beck ee ea Stan meee tere aae aepa RR, Seca. Ra ei et.RR oe cane Se.ieRs ee2he NT SSP ieKae SR aeee=

re ae se ee oh Ce eee em RS Se a se Re ao ace. ae, ae to 5s uv

Sato So3 Ros Ses ROR haa Rena ee ots Bi Reasemneos ae Set Rs So OSS aerate Sei SESS oe ee may ae a Rez SI | ~~ = SSS RRR Ramanan Sehese Senna. Cae Roe Rotate ooeaaes. Oe =Sean Bs eae neeit See ee te oa Aaa eee. eeSec oe Sees ne honate ate a ema SS eeo S55 5,aeSee ie Eo; ; on eeMatos ; Stee RS oo Be Sse eee Sears ERRORS Sores *een Se oe e's. aaa So3:SeR S wx pom SeeLe —“eee 5 =a

ge pa ee : % ERER ae gs Pte me ae Fag PE" ees oT Ss

Senta og " 2 % 4% OF eh ee Sige ip eo Lae ye ee Bi eessoeSPaRee PeeSeBR RO, me Se ; i Se Pi See ee eos ee Bee “

’. 2 ee ke Ot eee ae ee ee 6 CO Ca Ne tad ss yt fk FES ‘ OV

Se ee eet ee ee > be a Pe ee

eee os ae ann a Pig SS Sieben 8 SOSoSar BhsSig SS.AS eae. Sai SER Soe : PR SSPCaN OT SRR BR| aSPS a Shear Pe Se PN Se. 9 A% Se Oe Ser See Rok =| yofa oe ES ee: “iota naman aes Bi a se: Ss, aan ; Sy, ae Se oe eR Ree Sara ee Be Se aS Q, © Senae eaereainis ooaea NeesSS See bees nen £3 “pre Ome ae SF ge Re ~~ Se So eS eon es pe Ne Pecan er ier nd;+s Seo Eossgp om ee ee Sa #. en Sos eySores Re SSSs eee eenscaee 5 tae x.. ea 9SS“|neSe. a ee weeee aeSete = :Se =SPear oePeiree9aae =

Be Sa a | See = ties ES, aeeNee "in Se ee Pe TO Ree A—_aa _ pas BSR na besieetantrnpemeine Be See a Reeahsomsasettontsoneesee Po piers a Ses Big ae eS Se an = ea cae SO ea ee 3Sc ae Se Bi ies Lec ee. ee = ete ane cara Ran ae $7 Ps 2 =. ne Se ene S ae “4 sr ii a i é ee a 5 ~) SO ead ae. eR PnSESS iS xy aeae ae Naa aafe ieSis SO SR gh Bae BS ee Ou: os Be Pe. oe toes Pe eee g SES a5 Saas a ee a ER Ca, «Stk 5 Soe ee SR EN en SO i ae ae Sy ae Bee aa Seo 5 By seme SSRI Shae ges si eee es ae aces Pas ae Ride Ce elt ba He ge ea ain, a #2 oll tes pean ane Se eee Spa cone aca Ben sgt ae ae 4 paaermrenees Be ot ¥ Se Piste BIS Sigs hes SS aeHE Se se Seon. afsEE Oy BEsgoes = 9*-3“«~~ © Ssee eteas aes sea Secg Ss aeSR pee F ieaS o zaeae 3 oo SBS RT«5: ao we ee SEE aie game ese SE Seana caine Se TEESE Se Se nee eng eee Seton eS XRaIO Sone Rea Ry gente Eas Saaageeae baerieBee yae &eee SihMS Seana ODeas BR ec ae aseee SORES SSR eo FSS rwrs) wna as Rat Sass ee ae Sea Sioa See ae Seon, Se re mae oe Po Sean rae ae

ae ee kw te Se ae pe a aie 2 hed ” © SS ge i, Sa ae. ae See. SS Pe: 2% 5 £2 See Be RPS ee SOR copie Stats See Qn ae eee. y Sree oy sone ten)ee a Seen Sg Sos Rat eee2Bi, $MRIS Rees Psatten Ses. aS es pin en ienaaens eeSe nePee se pete go e246 —0 Pesan ea ° OS SES ne Benge bs ethene e Ss es SRC Te at¥ etsae

ésy3iaeeeee a Oe ya Sn a Oe. ans Stee ae rans aon ‘7 TERA an RE B x % oe se ae SMe ote a: gee ee Scpmea sea, SE, ape re) © SESS aa jciataasanatat se “ee 24BPee “4 rh Chae ees nt eee wo >ae ov 4: cor 3 3vY eS tee 7 Oe ‘Sees nga eeebores aS eeaA hy eae$‘ees ,oe AR occaah meee Bee Q= “TIER INee ai nase= edatnvncatacesetetars Ss a>ae Sian aia» : 2aSa neh CRD % ais eM ke. ee ts “are on eeo5 seen oe ee ae Soe 5.PeRose oie aatptetes e eeodSee REPS

Se > eeSRR, Ses : See pata ~petro = ie SI ae ee ae ee Be ae ae SikBee: Sa f 2 r= SeeSSSs>oOo Rea rR ae ae. ES >RS SeeaeOR

SS Renneson Se SEES Ntotatetecnt tate. | tlsSR eens aera r SRY aay Se Mana. soe eee o cca Bene SyRSa o>SeUseae. Spree, ecm Be SF x Saray okae Baa Lekee ae

—_ 3> wae BEER SeenUne SOS5EY ’ ef*s 4 =eaten ae ig Tels See: aS Se a ee . Pee ond $“oex aebecca eee isn te ataper at e5 ceaSe7ee —se,; i ee ? oo 33 :; Se ; #aR = .ee: ;Bia $s hors he Be e «sagen es Ree Stacy kai AB A oO © “SRR > % HERS knés meaac: SC > aeae RS“Sit FOSitET TS RE ae ~”

Rae See Bisel Pa.ad naeSP be,CCS, eeor ani. eeLee eses ES BS Pag . y inktae ee ‘aPg Ba Se Ps‘soreennenpr het Seat Ree Oe OE: Seee ae °se BO etenions .Pos ER ° See £33 Sig PR RR ee Pend 2FS ae ence SR oaneaairn oF See : Po Been. egies Re SRE ere aR Boa : Ovi sss rage rtsSAB eat none neereZa BH,“ee Eno ak ena a Reamt: RRR eA aanae Re oR Renee :: ss“Sy eSBets =3Si2Someemenmeasinas eesSeti Ses.ee Sams, “ate, Se SaeRee cm SoeeTwice ROC” a pat

3 ae es See eae Se a Re eR gl es: - fe ©

E: ; Picea Sate Bia Sa oR ome cate St ess ana asSee atl SS SE aeBeate. SO" PPO Mog Sa eR ERS, «ene =: ee te ok So as aeAIRS oaSee oo" ‘3 on See Rae pean cee ee hin ES, EE LO SOE SDS |$gh is Semen ,VY ? e So sees Renee Bo Be eee CRE eee bs eatSpecs, eetiretetrtecmeneenterstens NeSES ARN.BR AS aeee. NeeSe SOE. Sea oO as > SR. Sa Seae Nee nln)et ae eae oo eyPe Q.- = U SES Siete aie = een sensei nD ROR EE OS ON See eS Se ee ES Cu aa a 5 2

se ee ee en oe Sees ag Reepts BENSirc onetime see SSaaee Baie eae % RS aaaeee. ae SS Se Soon ore oe “ 4 aBs Sat oe seSeese RES eeSateen Sa 2 ee a eeco: pe ee Sones apes sectaiee a a Sega Sea st SF eee eee eee eee oe eS 5 eaee sGe & Sk Q = ete : %, Caaah eae San, ge ce reer re a ak a ee Se Sus SS 5aeeeRS - Se Serenata naar aesSens, See aoe ee aieERR ee ee ccsorssees SS Se Sssoars GOS Seeks nia > eaten Se B Serna a RT. a oe Pies ene, a ae Se Eee —s ie ae 2 ~ ar Sires Se Ra SN NE Sone Ba Sa aan cna TRA RIOR ap» ~. wate Biss ee ge SE Fieee eee aiSee ; ESSeen es BeSe ee Scere eS eeaoi aie A SONS aeSS ie~ee SR

, 8S oss Se ae Se San eee See PS Soo" soot ae ee = BE ore ai ieee te bet es = Soe ere fk ae is oe oS pan ogSe eat anaatsieeniate nats’ sete| earn singRee “> ee Rea annBeers ne a ees Seesist. et apie Rees Petr & mee 3 os : i : . ~~ & Bs ee Se RO CS cose se ee cs Se ae 3 an ona sesso Simiteicnomee eae Seo Se a a COR Ue Reese eee eo patente iotasonensnathansss ea ea nee A ee si UR en CROC SSeS ae RS ae ae ae 3 Sais ee Sas Pea aa . eee Saric risen at at bea etaanteatinee as aneata Ba ass eeeae Boo): 3 Sia sae2st ee : a ps ox uy=ga oe Sporearenaas eshs RR Seeee teats Cae guise see wrohiehtipeenen toootte cee ee reSe sary 5ee Bee ce ceca sikncaa oe. #8OF egwe 5 Nee, - > 2 ReRe © = Re § See Re eee ai uae cin ar istic eer ee scene ara ape O-bs —_ 2 RR ie ig cc age eRe ad Coes 5 ee 3 < te ZRtae x See BORER. Sarai oo i eeiccnacanem cee Sa hoses aaa Seana mee sae nt See eR 2 ee Se Soe x RE Rs ee oa ag ~~ VA %

oe ES a RESON ee eee ON RS eis . we ae aden nnn enccnene tenctetetener ag ‘ y Ses aearleiepeee So ERS Patpceretatstalahatesnsppe NBN esas Pagans ae aS & SS ee Ree

poe a i 8 S . : a. ee ue ne 5

FF. i...eeees) 2 egwy S 5 2 SR eee: et cn eee oo Sr ES ie fF ae)> Oo Bene Stee Soe ee : Se Se ns es Peano Rint a Becca ae Ser sceptics tei ee 4 a gt See & es af =

Be: 2SSagar Raa meets Sierras aeSites a i ESS SSS a RI Bs Rrra cone ao oman Sa:aaa See aecBeSS SESS ae ag ger Me ge agpeer Se sa), -) ~

SeBee peSe ee Secuencia Bier. eaeRecta Uae ure re See : ee Be cae sSS AP Bee a Eas oO 9 >. eine ro rte see eR Ra RS eae Se pe BeSern acecate rca seineeratetesereretetitetes ee eee aRare. oeea Se Pe i eadae oe Paren een wetaterensecostetstalaterchnrsteusisvaturesnsn\etsteraneesses stores rn ONT cee en Sot CE, Sosi Shannen enna se: eS Se Oe u es = Reece. aa prostate usncrnne omsuceneen nn Be ee eRe oecemam neeesetSMR caORCL zc Sipe as, Ses see Siete. = +3 ss se 35 2

ee cc cae oR can ai an anne ee eee,Sos Smee SSoe Fee — F: RS oe pena eee BR ogee SR aSeon eRSgSS a ae ge~~ ¥—

Be: LL aOr: ee Berea cc aon ene ae Kf ieeae 3CS ; pe. Be: PR he Rasen Savane ee hi a. FS, PSS os & ee Pe aaee Speen Pon cee ae cee Se rr % eo eoOd9

ee OS a es rr ee a bg oe eee ee eg ee ec. i oe aimed aS” ae — . . weeeten arene ek pone eree nn Ray PSR eae an 7 Ps. . nehanstate ae See . on > os 3 Seok ps Se: ~— Pe” a Seer aes SSeS SES SSS acorn aR gee ats “Sea * is ee ~ oe CeROce Seae oars SES eee ee a aesich eeae Sees em aebee ai ite 22aeOe SE ae OO a ss Q, SR gg Ne gills ee Sey ee ee Sack CoRR Re Prcontnans SaaS ROyeaSegened Sia es c as Re Sesto ee SeRE sO eats anee. aaaieeee ee OO . Rg coneates ata aha oo ene near, Ps Be sas SO ae Sr eaten: eee Se St Soe Padatevaroentehe Sere FO eer ee ea WY

SOR SEEN iain SoS eee one3coo Sa os aaa ~ ww Pipes ease es RSE acosas SSE : Rf >.“>Re. SE b4w= SRR aRSnaannsseununass Be aMSSnen aeie... steaaa % ee ee Bassons ce cnc nennametatnns catayenetetoe . — oe) Oo Reena Seesee eRaa eSN Sea Ge ae SScapper eee ath aie eo Sores So Rae RR. eee ‘ a.> ©& Se SRR es Se reece nc caper Se meeneren Z. VY eaten SRNR SRN a ee RNR eas RI ON. eS ; Suthers eee ee “Soak aeA C ~ ‘Oo 3 rs) Lae SERSce SP Biacstnasens connate cage ean a eaeee RNsite, eR ee Se Sectseee < Rete CERES. a a ERS SERRE R LN. Sith, eM See aita s SNA, «naa oh Seater Ree RD ME.s) alateaf < a: eee Eee =aenoScape ean eS ee an sea He ae eieteceatisane aMBS sss aaa cae eee cathe oeastiuop neseaa enone te eenBain eae SST NS Sos Piss RRR aioe aaa Se ate ae BoiSine RRctasearenneenntetteors RSSenn cetera Soiree eae RRS a ataeronnohaeens SeeBN ~ ov ¥emcn bonnes seen ements seein Sees Sesame . ee “ Sonatas Roe ees Mamencibess nen Pa= Ea aecannes esas see ieeeRo pagans nena nae SSS araBie = -sea fQ co eo Oo boo omen ea : ra SORES aera oo Tio RRR RR SR Soe Sa cee aie 2 3Bis Saar se [eS oe unease ease se selenite ese SS Sra aR © “ Son a) 3Aion epee SSS: Sige peaBa es 3: ES Sahota SES Se Na eee Pe Oeon a ==a afee Kes. aee :3ae pat eee CONS aaa, Sate ee: Pico. reas “SSSR : ae i-_eee 1) RS Sears os ai ae SR a ee 3 eaten eS ee RES : 3 eR eR SEES setae Boma ae: SRS eee nn SEER SES ie Stee SS... a ts Se ~ Ie ra Dns ED SRE eer eg 3 ia ce BS Re ny.

ae BeSateen(x, ieee ee Seon aRC, ee BS oeSe TR a ee a a ee pee: SiC ig se sage “SRE RES easier - Berssaratceccessasetotee-oiessrereste antes MR eons tore cooenineeees nonetaraapptes eS: oe SRR RR ce \O

Beesessasat > Samm ate oe ge Se. CHR see aS SS saa a es ; Baas 3 aces cere re Si LSS ee eR. SORE ae ee Be Se ake Rae oa o)

ROE SI es ‘ : Sette: Seam. Be aie Ree: ke » COO aa sa Es 4 Beas ashes ‘

Res aSA raASS oo SS =ait > ptr Pie i)= eae ee ae= 1 : BeSaki Sa PA isSees Sate as: eeee : Seas Ry Shem = 2: ods ,BS... Mo FS :: ==7 ¥ i. Shoham ee it —:Settee Snore rary) eanSy : ty)a Seeeeee aae.ie-;Spans Pata ¥aSi esccne sce eR . |-Se eeaeeae aes See ea Gea Neee: es oma iCee ee eee Cerra: aaah at Pena niet. aan =—— rea SoeSee Speman occ < :%eeont Parrot aecca ¥- aaa & oe Qos. Sa =isrameare a in ee “on aa. araeae -eee a“4 Aen Pe, ane = ikgee oe ..¥mS Be :fo eo hare es: :cotans ea. ae cman bomen sien eeeee aR. a

ied eos re a ee “Sece Pitan belgie Se a * Si comeeae SnSee co eeO ee See Mes eeeaehe ccSeagate: ee. ee ESetc pecns eea. Pe OE cos Cau SE A > oo ee So Est em 5 Ben 2 : SE Sa RN RE ESN tat ERR Oe I ee Seema See pens Sars “ . “ Seen ee x FR CRIA ne NE Rn ON PPS ease eee ae RAS RRA Si. ea —

een shee eR: ON SOM Bee te ewes RiSiea tienen eannense aon me cen ae a no 9 Bao ahah,» SNR a ox Soe Sethe : aed mon sans Siig ne % NAR : 3 ae tei ROR RRaAR cn Asae et :oe BC Rsnant ; sn ete eneea SS. ate soe t ate Gin es me % “Miibessncoktiee atnnct : babies StSe cpa.) Ramee

Sis aS ies~~ Sect ane «aetna ied ck:Saiatatanerehatststes Gea ae: cra ih Roost. : ae Soames otic neers ois paar erent on oa a RRS eeeaR sma ae pono ean : Dok meen ae aielstote?aPatpteceseretet et erase 5 Kounce ne shin aipresetone a a Beietratete Seigehteeer rns 25 mes ; Sipacuartanme “Se ats ean nee sia eens Rass Se Be. iki. So. . Semen ee ae a Bas RR eae Re ae a aca eae : Bic Sia cat nae pa ae Ben ete gy, ih Re ea Ce eee
: (

nn . ae °LANGABALUS .

Las Ges ‘ “Tiyamah

8 Ralus Nan Nivin® an» @

) We KS Ss 9 Akhbar §§ 11-16 =. Vt, Bhdga ?

vanes AKAD GP Me A (Palembang) a

English miles Ce ? be KT ABA oe

0 100 300 500 700 900 1000 “ey sO, ) Kilometers

( ) Modern names

? Location uncertain

V. THE FAR EAST AS KNOWN TO THE ARABS IN ‘ABBASID TIMES

THE SHIPS eM eo Me “Ro “MQ Oo “MR e MRL te “Me “Re MRL Oe “Lo MR “Ro “TR, “Ro “| OME’, OTM, “RF

Quale nell’ arzana de Viniziani bolle Pinverno la tenace pece

a rimpalmar li lor legni non sani, che navicar non ponno, e in quella vece

chi fa suo legno nuovo, e chi ristoppa le coste a quel che piu viaggi fece;

che ribatti da proda, e chi da poppa; altri fa remi, ed altri volge sarti;

chi terzeruolo ed artimon rintoppa... —Dante, Inferno xx1 7-15 0 ey, 0 “Ry 6 “ao “Ra eo “Ro “Mo “RQ eo “RO Ty 0 Ty” OR oO “| Oe , oO“, 0 “| Oo TQ OD, CO “RL #

GENERAL REMARKS

TuHere is hardly any pictorial evidence for Indian Ocean shipping such as exists to clarify the ship types of the ancient Mediterranean. We have to rely on scattered literary sources

of all periods down to later medieval times. To exclude all evidence later than the tenth century, on grounds of an artificial symmetry in this book, would have ruled out much valuable information. There are later Arab travelers and geographers, such as al-Idrisi and ibn-Jubayr in the twelfth century, ibn-Battiitah in the fourteenth; there are the books of nautical instructions of Ahmad ibn-Majid and Sulayman

al-Mahri; and there are short accounts by the European travelers of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries—Marco Polo, John of Montecorvino and others. In attempting to reconstruct the Arab type of vessel in the classical days of the { 87 }

THE SHIPS

‘Abbasids, we are on fairly safe ground in using evidence down to the coming of the Portuguese. Before that event, there is no reason to believe that ship types changed very much, except in certain features which will be noted. But after the Portuguese, European influences on Arab shipbuilding have been manifold. Thus we have to use with caution the detailed accounts of modern British travelers. Within the broad limits of time mentioned, hardly any attempt is made to show the evolution of shipping at each period in chronological order. Such an attempt would leave too many gaps. There are risks in constructing a composite account from materials of different ages, but it seems less unsatisfactory than the chronological method. Similarly, the treatment cannot be limited in space to the Arab world. The western half of the Indian Ocean, from Ceylon round to East Africa, forms a cultural unity, which has to be treated as a whole. Traditional ship types do not always take account of national barriers; evidence from Western India may be as significant as that which comes from the Persian Gulf. In the discussion of the evolution of the lateen sail it is necessary to range still further afield, over the whole of the Old World. On the other hand, we can make a fairly sharp distinction between the ships of the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean; even the vocabulary of the two seas differed. Mediterranean ships are not dealt with here. The outstanding features of the medieval Arab ship of the Indian Ocean are two: the manner in which the planks of the hull were sewn together, not nailed; and the fore-andaft set of the sails. The modern type differs from its medieval forebear in two main respects: its planks are now usually

nailed, and its stern is often square, not double-ended as in all the older vessels. These characteristics will be explained further in the detailed description which follows. { 88 }

THE SHIPS

HULLS AND THEIR EQUIPMENT

Modern Arab types of craft take their various names, not from the rig as in Europe, but from the shape of the hull. Thus baghalah, ganja, sanbiq, jthdzi and other names are now applied to vessels with square, “transom” sterns, with various modifications of shape and decoration. But the square

stern with its elaborate carving or painting is altogether a product of European influence since the sixteenth century. The older type is represented by the vessels now called bum,

zarig, badan, etc., which are double-ended, coming to a point at both bow and stern (Plate 1). But these names are not found in medieval literature. We find sanbigs mentioned, but these cannot be of the modern square stern type; the name seems to refer to small craft of the Red Sea. Similarly we read of the jalbah in the Red Sea, of the darijah of the Indian pirates, of the zawraq, diunij and qarib as small ship’s boats. Many other names are barely mentioned in lists of names for “ship,” “boat,” recorded by certain authors. But in no single instance are we informed of the particular shape to which a name applies. None the less we can assume that the form of the hull was the basis of classification, then as

today. The generic words for “ship” were markab and safinah. Fulk is Koranic. Daw is a Swahili name, not used by the Arabs but popularized by English writers in the incorrect form “dhow.”” The timbers of hulls were of teak wood or coconut wood. “Teak” in Arabic and Persian is sa, originally ség, from 81 J, Hornell, “A Tentative Classification of Arab Seacraft,” in Mariner’s Mirror

(January 1942). A. Villiers, Sons of Sindbad (London, 1940), passim. R. L. Bowen, Arab Dhows of Eastern Arabia (Rehoboth, Mass., 1949). Lists of boat names can be found in Maqdisi, p. 31; Azdi, Hikaydt abt-al-Qasim al-Baghdad1, ed. A. Mez (Heidelberg, 1902). See also J. Gildemeister, “Uber arabisches Schiffswesen,” in Géttinger Nachrichten (1882); H. Kindermann, “Schiff” im Arabischen (Zwickau, 1934).

The only statement of the length of a hull I have come across is in Buzurg, pp. 17-19, a ship of 50 common dhirda‘, i.e. exactly 76 feet. The common dhira‘ or cubit was 18.24 inches: see E. Nicholson, Men and Measures (London, 1912).

{ 89 }

THE SHIPS

Prakrit séka; (the European names are derived from the Dravidian form zéka). This wood is described by the Encyclopaedia Britannica (eleventh edition) as “the most valua-

ble of all known timbers.” It is very durable, and “Once seasoned, teak timber does not split, crack, shrink, or alter its

shape. In contact with iron, neither the iron nor the teak suffers.” It is not very hard, is easily worked, and has great elasticity and strength. It grows well in the hills of Southern India, Burma, Siam, and Indonesia. From ancient times it has been imported to the Persian Gulf from India, and has

been found in Babylonian, Achaemenid and Sassanid remains. It is evidently referred to by Theophrastus (c. 300 B.c.) where he writes: “In the island of Tylus [al-Bahrayn ] off the

Arabian coast they say that there is a kind of wood of which

they build their ships, and that in sea water this is almost proof against decay; for it lasts more than 200 years if it is kept under water, while, if it is kept out of water, it decays sooner, though not for some time.” As there is no such dura-

ble wood in the Persian Gulf area, this is almost certainly teak imported from India. Equally the “rafters and beams” mentioned by the Periplus as imports of Omana from Barygaza probably included teak for shipbuilding. Al-Mas‘tdi states plainly that ships of the Indian Ocean were built of teak. Ibn-Jubayr says that the timber for shipbuilding at ‘Aydhab was imported from India and al-Yaman.” “Coconut” in Arabic is narjil or nargil, derived through Persian from Prakrit nargil. It is also called by the Arabs aljawz al-Hindi, “the Indian nut,” and this is the name used by 82 Fac. Brit.. 11th ed., “Teak” (quoted). On ancient teak remains: Schoff's Periplus, p. 152; J. Hornell, “The Origins and Ethnological Significance of Indian Boat Designs,” in Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. vir (Calcutta, 1920); W. Ouseley, Travels in Various Countries of the East (London, 1819 ff.),

p. 280, note 67. Theophrastus, History of Plants, bk. v, ch. 4, Eng. tr. A. Hort in Loeb Classical Library (London, 1916), (quoted); Periplus, p. 36: dokén kat keraton, translated by Schoff “timbers of teakwood,’’ by a legitimate inference. Mas‘itidi, Muri7, vol. 1, p. 365; ibn-Jubayr, Travels, ed. W. Wright, 2nd ed. revised M. J. de Goeje (Leyden, 1907), p. 71.

{ 90 }

THE SHIPS

Marco Polo. This tree seems to be native to Southern India, Indonesia, Ceylon, the Maldive and Laccadive Islands. Gradually it spread westward to Arabia: in the eleventh century

Nasir-i-khusraw observed it in ‘Uman, in the fourteenth ibn-Battitah mentions it as growing at Zafar, a port of Hadramawt in close commerce with India. But the older Arabs and Persians used either to import it from India and its islands, or to go and build their ships on the spot. The Maldives and Laccadives were the scene of a remarkable shipbuilding activity, for there ships were built entirely of the diverse products of the coconut tree: hulls, masts, stitches, ropes and even sails, as will be shown below. The ships made

in this way were then loaded with coconut wood and fruit and brought to ‘Uman and the Gulf.” Thus the timber from which hulls were constructed, anywhere east or south of Suez, nearly always came from India and its islands. The only exceptions known to me are the fleets of Sennacherib and Alexander, built of timber from Lebanon or Upper Mesopotamia. The palm trees and cypresses which grow round the Persian Gulf were generally found unsuitable for ships’ timbers.” The hulls were put together in the simplest manner possible. First the keel was laid on the ground, then horizontal planks on each side were fastened to it and to each other by means of stitches (sing. kAayz) of fiber. There is no mention in the sources of ribs or any framework, nor are these found in the two Greenwich Museum models of traditional Arab vessels, constructed by a boatman at Masgat late in the nineteenth century. But ocean-going ships of any size must have had ribs, otherwise their hulls would have been too weak. 83 Enc. Brit., 11th ed., “Coconut”; Ta al-‘Ards, “Narjil.”’ Ibn-Battitah, vol. u, pp. 204 ff. Pertplus, p. 17, mentions coconuts growing in East Africa, if Miiller is

correct in emending vavmAtos to vapyiAcos. Abu-Zayd, pp. 130-31; Buzurg, p. 189; Idrisi, fol. 19r. 84D, D. Luckenbill, Anctent Records of Assyria and Babylonia (Chicago, 1927),

vol. 1, pp. 318 ff.; Arrian, Anabasis, bk. vu, chs. 19-20; Hornell, “Indian Boat Designs,” p. 194.

{ 91 }

THE SHIPS

The sides were carvel-built (planks edge-to-edge), for clink-

er-built boats (with overlapping planks) are indigenous to North European waters and were not known in the Indian Ocean before the sixteenth century. The stitches were passed through holes bored at intervals near the edges of adjacent planks. In the Greenwich Museum models, they are pulled tight on the inside over stringers, long narrow pieces of wood. It is possible that the stringers are a modern invention, but it is hard to see how carvel planks could have been held together without either stringers or ribs. Neither nails nor treenails were used in the whole construction.”

tht FO Fic. 1. Two PLaNnxks

ATT HE_ SREE

| 10: | on A OUTSIDE INSIDE

The use of stitches instead of nails to fasten the planks was noticed by all observers—Greek, Indian, Arabic and European—and does indeed deserve the fullest attention. The best description of the stitches is given by ibn-Jubayr concerning

the jalbahs built at ‘Aydhab: “For they are stitched with cords of coir [ gznbar |, which is the husk of the coconut: this they [the builders] thrash until it becomes stringy, then they twist from it cords with which they stitch the ships.” Threads of palm fibers, and even of rushes and grass, are also mentioned. The stitches are clearly visible in two historical illustrations: on one of the Sanchi sculptures of the second cen-

tury B.c., and in a painting accompanying al-Hariri’s Magamat in the thirteenth century a.p. (Plate 7). 85 W. H. Moreland, “The Ships of the Arabian Sea about a.p. 1500,” in ].R.A.S. (January and April 1939). Idrisi, fol. 84r.

{ 92 }

THE SHIPS

This manner of construction was observed by ancient and

medieval writers in the Red Sea, along the East African coast, in ‘Uman, the Persian Gulf, the Malabar and Coromandel coasts of India, the Maldive and Laccadive Islands.

In fact it is fairly clear that this was the only method indigenous to the western half of the Indian Ocean before the fifteenth century.** Soon after 1500, the ships of Malabar were already being built with many iron nails, according to European observers; this may be due to a desperate attempt to imitate the new Portuguese enemy, or to the example of

the Chinese junks which had long been visiting Calicut. Since the coming of European ships the sewn vessels have been gradually driven out of most waters by iron-fastened vessels. But they still survive in humble forms—fishing boats

and canoes—on coasts remote from modern economic influences: South and East Arabia (Plate 8), South India and the adjacent isles; until recently Lamu in Kenya.*’ We can only guess how, where, and why this method originated. All round these shores we have records of the usual primitive craft—skin boats, reed bundles, and dug-out 86 Sources for sewn ships: (a) Indian: see R. Mookerji, A History of Indian Shipping and Maritime Activity (London, 1912); J. Marshall and F. Foucher, The

Monuments of Sancht, vol. u, pl. 51. (b) Greek: Periplus, pp. 15-16, 36, 60; Procopius, Persian Wars, bk. 1, ch. 19. (c) Arabic: Ya‘qibi, p. 360, abu-Zayd, pp. 87-88, 130-31; Mas‘tidi, Murz, vol. 1, p. 365; Idrisi, fols. ror, 34r, 84r; ibnJubayr, pp. 70-71 (quoted); ibn-Battitah, vol. 1v, p. 121. Hariri ship, see Plate 7 and comments. (d) European: Jordanus, Mirabilia Descripta, Eng. tr. H. Yule (London, 1863), Hakluyt rst Series, vol. xxx1, p. 53; John of Montecorvino in Yule, Cathay and the Way Thither (London, 1915, 2nd ed.), pt. 11, p. 67: Marco Polo, Eng. tr. H. Yule, 3rd ed. (London, 1903), vol. 1, p. 111; Friar Odoric, in M. Komroff, Contemporaries of Marco Polo (London, 1928), p. 217; G. Carreri, quoted by A. W. Stiffe, “Former Trading Centres of the Persian Gulf,’’ in Geographical Journal, vol. xu, p. 294. See Moreland. 87 Moreland in J.R.A.S. (April 1939), pp. 179 ff., discusses the Portuguese and Italian observations of nails in Arab ships of this period. Present-day survivals of sewn ships: Villiers, pp. 54, 131; B. Thomas, Arabia Felix (London, 1932), p. 2; Hornell, “Indian boat designs,” and ‘The Sea-Going Mtepe and Dau of the Lamu Archipelago” in Mariner’s Mirror, vol. xxvu (January 1941), pp. 54-68. I shall not attempt to name the many references in Western writings since the Renaissance: some are mentioned by J. Hornell, Water Transport: Origins and Early Evolution (Cambridge, 1946), p. 235.

{ 93 }

THE SHIPS

canoes. It seems that canoes were first enlarged by the super-

imposition of planks stitched upon the underbody. The Indian provenance of the teak wood and coconut wood used in historical times may be taken to indicate that the method of stitching, too, was spread from India. This may be so; but we cannot rule out the possibility that stitching was first used

on palm wood in the Persian Gulf and later transferred to the superior timbers imported there from India, and even spread from there to India itself. The reason for the use of the stitching method in the first place must surely have been that the materials for stitching lay close at hand to primitive men in these regions, whereas iron or bronze for nails were still hard to procure.” No more than this can be said about origins. But of greater

interest is the question: Why did the stitching method survive for so many centuries after the use of nails was known and feasible? The weakness of the sewn ships was apparent to observers from Mediterranean regions: to ibn-Jubayr who came from Spain, to Marco Polo, to Jordanus; to John of Montecorvino who writes: “The ships in those parts are | mighty frail and uncouth with no iron in them and no caulking [see below]. And so if the twine breaks anywhere there is a breach indeed! Once every year, therefore, there is a mending of this, more or less, if they propose to go to sea.” To build really large ships such as the Chinese junks was impossible by this method. These craft were likely to come to pieces under prolonged buffeting by violent winds and waves, and we get the impression from Buzurg that shipwreck by storm was all too frequent. If such vessels sailed to China and Mozambique, it was due to the courage and skill of their sailors and the desire for gain of their merchants. Even when wreck did not occur, water was always 88 Agatharchides, p. 101; Isidore of Charax, p. 20 (in Geog. Gr. Min., vol. 1); Periplus, pp. 7, 27; Pliny, N.H., bk. v1, ch. 34. Hornell, Water Transport.

{ 94 }

THE SHIPS

being bailed out of the bilge well, due to the leaky seams as well as the absence of decks. (See below pp. 97-08.)

... gemuit sub pondere cymba sutilis, et multam accepit rimosa paludem.

(Vergil)* (“... the sewn boat creaked under the load, and leaking took in much water of the marsh”.) If sewn ships, then, were so weak, why did they survive? This was felt to be a problem by many ancient and medieval writers, and they offer a wide variety of reasons to explain it. (1) An ancient Sanskrit writer, Bhoja, is the first to bring

forward the theory that there were magnetic rocks (loadstones) in the sea, which would drag iron-fastened ships to their doom. This legend must have been widespread in antiquity, for it is mentioned again by Procopius. But Procopius

refutes it by sound reasoning, pointing out that GrecoRoman ships in the Red Sea do have nails and other parts of iron, yet have never suffered any harm. But the legend crops

up again in two fourteenth century works, an Arabic description of an “Expedition against Alexandria” and the fabulous “Travels” of Sir John Mandeville.*° (11) Two of the versions of Marco Polo attribute the absence of iron nails in the ships of Hurmuz to the hardness of the wood used, which was said to split if iron nails were driven in. But even if this explanation is true of those particular ships, it is not of general application. It has been seen that teak wood at least is eminently workable; and the 89 Ibn-Jubayr, pp. 70-71; Marco Polo, vol. 1, p. 1113 Jordanus, p. 53; Montecorvino in Yule, Cathay, pt. m1, p. 67 (quoted). Vergil, Aeneid, bk. vr, lines 413-14 (quoted). Buzurg; Moreland. Hornell, Water Transport, p. 236: sewn boats in Ceylon, recently extinct, had to be annually taken to pieces, reassembled and resewn. 80 Bhoja, in Mookeryji, p. 21; Procopius, Persian Wars, bk. 1, ch. 19; “Expedition against Alexandria,” ed. J. Gildemeister; “Uber Arabisches Schiffswesen,”’ in Géttinger Nachrichten (1882), p. 437; Mandeville, ed. J. Ashton (London, 1887), ch. 53, p. 125.

{ 95 }

THE SHIPS

fact that iron has now been long in use all over this area disproves this reason.”*

(iii) Another insufficient reason is given by al-Mas‘tdi, in a valiant attempt to find a scientific explanation: “Now this

kind of structure [stitching] is not used except in the Indian , Ocean; for the ships of the Mediterranean and those of the Arabs [there] all have nails, whereas in ships on the Indian Ocean iron nails do not last because the sea-water corrodes the iron, and the nails grow soft and weak in the sea; and therefore the people on its shores have taken to threading cords of fibre instead, and these are coated with grease and tar.” This argument has no force, because the two seas differ only to a negligible degree in salinity and other chemical qualities. On the contrary, the teak timbers of the Indian Ocean do not give rise to iron-sickness as the oak timbers of the Mediterranean.” (iv) A possible advantage of sewn hulls, noticed by ibnJubayr, al-Idrisi and ibn-Battiitah, is that they are pliant, and so less easily broken than nailed ships if they run. onto the coral reefs of the Red Sea or elsewhere. Similarly, on the Coromandel and Malabar coasts of India sewn boats can ride ashore on the heavy surf and stand the shock of being

landed on a sandy beach from a breaker.” | (v) But probably the decisive reason for the survival of sewn vessels was the comparative expensiveness of construc-

tion with iron in the regions with which we are concerned. It is not that iron was not available. It has always been mined

and worked in many regions of India, in Iran, in Sudan (but inland); and it could be obtained in Egypt. But it seems ®1 Marco Polo, Latin 2 and Ramusio, ad loc. cit.; see Moreland, pp. 68 ff. and

oe Mas‘adi Mura}, vol. 1, p. 365 (quoted). Vegetius, Epitome Ret Militaris, ed. C. Lang (Leipzig, 1885), bk. rv, ch. 34. J. Johnstone, Introduction to Oceanography (London, 1923), p. 137. Moreland, pp. 191-92. 83 Idrisi, fol. 84r; ibn-Jubayr, pp. 70-71; ibn-Battiitah, vol. rv, p. 121. J. Bruce, Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile, 3rd ed. (Edinburgh, 1813), vol. un, p. 107.

{ 96 }

THE SHIPS

that the processes of mining, smelting, and manufacturing the nails was expensive in India, and in the other regions the iron-industry was on a small scale. Iron-fastening could not compete in cheapness with stitching, the raw material for which was ready to hand, and required no elaborate manufacture. Strangely enough, this economic reason is not mentioned in any of the sources; yet it provides the simplest and most substantial explanation.” (vi) And after all this has been said, it is permissible to mention the force of tradition. Men are not wholly rational; seamen are notoriously conservative. A slight balance of superiority in the nailing method would not be enough to drive out the older ways. It was only when European commerce changed the entire economy of the Indian Ocean that the sewn ships began to disappear rapidly. After the hull was put together, it had to be protected from the inroads of the sea. Proper caulking of solid substance is mentioned by only one author, ibn-Jubayr: he refers to something called dusur “from the wood of the date palm,” and we can translate this “oakum.” John of Montecorvino denies that there was any caulking in the ships which he saw on the Arabian sea. Generally the Arabic authors say that the seams were blocked with a mixture of pitch or resin and whale oil. Al-Idrisi in describing whales in the Indian Ocean writes, “. . . they catch the smallest, which they cook in cauldrons, so that their flesh melts and changes into thick liquid. This oily substance is renowned in al-Yaman, Aden, the coasts of Faris, ‘Uman, and the sea of India and China. The people of these regions use this substance to block the holes in their ships.” This also served | the purpose of protecting the bottom against the ravages of 94 Moreland, p. 188, shows the high cost of iron around a.p. 1600, the earliest time for which figures are recorded. The only real puzzle is about Egypt: why were the ships of al-Qulzum different from those of Alexandria? Perhaps we must

fall back on (1v), the pliancy of sewn ships, bearing in mind the coral reefs of the Red Sea.

{ 97 }

THE SHIPS

the shipworm. Coating was generally of fish-oil—ibn-Jubayr says shark-oil is the best.”° The extent of decks is obscure. Jordanus writes of Malabar,

“Nor are the vessels ever decked over, but open, and they

take in water to such an extent that the men always, or almost always, must stand in a pool to bail out the water.” And Marco Polo says of the ships of Hurmuz that they have no deck, but the cargo is covered with hide. There are similar statements by Duarte Barbosa and Varthema about the ships of Malabar soon after 1500. I have not come across a single mention of decks on the Arab ships of the Indian Ocean. On the other hand Buzurg mentions cabins (balanj), and it is hard to believe that ships which could hold 400 men, such as he mentions, were without decks over some part of their extent.” The only kind of rudder known in the ancient and medieval world was the side-rudder, consisting of a large oar on the quarter. There had to be one on each side in seagoing ships, because if there was any wind on the beam the rudder on the windward side might be clean out of the water or not deep enough to have any effect. This double rudder may be indicated by the dual form of the Arabic word sukkan. By

the thirteenth century, however, the Arabs had a sternrudder. John of Montecorvino says, “And they have a frail and flimsy rudder, like the top of a table, of a cubit in width, 95 Ibn-Jubayr, p. 70. On dusur: Wright’s glossary to ibn-Jubayr, rst ed., p. 22; Jawhari’s definition; translated as ‘‘flamenti’’ by C. Schiaparelli, lon Gubayr, Viaggio (Rome, 1906), p. 42. Contrast Koran 54:13, where it is understood as ‘wooden pegs.’ Montecorvino, in Yule’s Cathay, pt. 11, p. 67. Abu-Zayd, pp. 140-

41; Mas‘idi, Murzj, vol. u, p. 365; Idrisi, fols. 24r (quoted), 34r, 84r; Marco Polo, in Yule’s transl., vol. 1, p. 111. Procopius, Perstan Wars, bk. 1, p. 19, says, “For neither are they smeared with pitch, nor with any other substance,” but I think his informant must be mistaken in this sweeping statement. 96 Jordanus, p. 53 (quoted); Marco Polo, in Yule’s transl., vol. 1, p. 111. Duarte Barbosa, in Hakluyt Society, 2nd Series, vol. xxx1x, p. 76; Varthema, in Hakluyt Society, 1st Series, vol. xxx, p. 152. Buzurg, pp. 33, 94, 141 (cabins); 165 (a ship holding 400 men); also 53 (200 slaves). Small ships are still undecked, see Villiers’ account of a zar#q in the Red Sea, pp. 5-7.

{ 98 }

pee S ee ee ee ee See aS bait ght ak tg eae oP Se Bee Be es Re ee ee ee ae

OM ga ee

2 Zo 5 See aS ee x Sartre ORS ane eatetatectatatarstttencn eee FN OR ees Se re & = ‘ > ete nee seecstetaea . os 5 Wome atahatat-® “a

ge agi Re eae ; Ras aac pees a Se 3 Crane ear ae see oe Se aa Ser eee at, ae ¢2 Seeiee sist

eo eee ne Soe Se er re haa pics: Se cae ee ae ca = —hU6-e.hl(C;«w rst—~—is

ea AR ers Sire gene aR a: Seaton Rens Pea S Bee wee : steer Se See porersreheceie crete

ae . a De ig a ¢ ee : ee See = ce 8 Posen Sasa ee se

: aco ll” ee 2 ees. : a 66S ld Cc a ee oe rr——“ Perr re Boe EN a ae SS co os cago nnn SoS Shoo seas : Bits Seago ace.| aes eecae Sea ss = Batesasas Bath. wetness “ier Sos SRE see se na Ses ot: SSS “SRR eee :

= esBie pee cS Ss SeePca a pas ee|| ae oe Poe oe easa aS eoBeee mee SOR 8 8 sisters es Sheen. eee a : : ommamensaniis So Sea pean soins be panne smn Bee See Ses

SS - = — l,l r—~—~—*—‘a‘_r—~—~«s«s«S:~= < ys & Ow Ss iS

a2°8SORRE 92900 9 ° 2° © S 8 HE wm 4 pd bd OW) IW CO

a a | ~7nN ©

ag@se OSMER WO WO YQGTO ew AB"

= _ 3 4 2 => 4 en & 2S baa eg:a Se S & SF33 a=

°2S a— 8) x>O2£on47 Mw o©= ~ of) Hcdoa Gn OT ome a: ie) > CH we FS Bet wie

Sid aq Ymoei'sOM tt oaQB Z=M4MZ Ne) ~G a ‘Q q oe) My. . OB q Z, XX

=S = 3

A i A al) ) | 3 Be s Ey) 8 c %

2rs) ON 8 ee 1 Suez = oi Canal . ” $

S

-Z, Rog gS &§« = £ S ESA ° — \h i S, Poem ul NY ES Ls w ‘ qipa o 8 3 SO £ 2 "3 lo ‘OY seg338. E Bus 3

:s 'i!ee 3 = é a me? ( wl

~ a SO"! R., °-Nile ry

Ss

xj

GF : ~ rt te Y

eS = =




BLANK PAGE

Lp gs Sergi Liman

J

TURKEY quntioch

Alexandria’\) Copia

Fostar IRAQ

EGYPT ‘Agabah

Myos Hormu IRAN ) Charax(?) Quseir Forat(?) Basra

Failaka Bushehr AFGHANISTAN

bayl Siraf Begram®

Den, e %, \ Ra’s al-Khayma

) Bahrain nae ss Dalma I. PS Jinliar , RED Sir Bani Yas Soh (nd SEA ‘ _RaPy Adulis Oman S add Cambay Nigwa® Musqat Rann, of Kutch

Aksum Qishin(?) | Broach Kane

C. Guardafui S4| Heis ~“Socatra & SOMALIA Ra’s Haftin S & Kolhalpu

| Muziris * = | Fort Jesus Lamu Male’ ° gs Calicut s Quilon

Bir Gao INDIAN OCEAN - Kayal < ‘

Comoros Is.

Dares /@remba I. | Maldive Salaam 8 Zanzibar slands} Kalwa Anjouan I.

&

= RS Sofala MADAGASCAR Cy

KOREA ; sina wreck

aN ro DA XY) yes CHINA (

THAILAND {lo Ko Kho Khao /

{

kamedu ; gaikondacholapuram

SH ° 0 SS 5 |

~ . “eter, Tioman I. lantai

21 LANKA “47>.

~INDONESIA Sembirang

oS TAVAN 87

VIII. RECENTLY EXCAVATED AND OTHER RELATED SITES

BLANK PAGE

NOTES ON CHAPTER | Oe eT TR OTR ORL eR oT oe TRL eo Le RL ee RL eR eR eRe Me |e PREHISTORY AND GEOGRAPHY Page 4. For early representations of model boats from Mesopotamia, see: a Clay model with sail fittings from an Ubayd grave at Eridu, c. 4000 B.c.; and an oared boat made of silver from the Royal Cemetery at Ur (2,600-2,500 B.c.); both are illustrated in M. D. Roaf, Cultural Atlas of Mesopotamia. (P.M.) Page 5. Although the prevailing north wind in the Red Sea and the desolation and dangerous nature of the coastline were not conducive to navigation, this appears to have been no obstacle to trade in the early Islamic period. Donald Whitcomb’s discovery and recent excavation at ‘Aqabah (one of the first towns to submit to the Prophet Muhammad, in A.D. 630) have revealed significant amounts of Chinese porcelain of the Tang dynasty, as well as early Islamic material from Mesopotamia,

demonstrating that long-distance maritime trade with the Far East penetrated right up to the top of the Gulf of ‘Agabah; see the works by DD. S. Whitcomb in the bibliography, and G. T. Scanlon, “Egypt and China.” (J.C.) THE EAST BEFORE ALEXANDER

Page 6. Regarding Magan and Melukhkha, it is now widely agreed that Melukhkha must refer to the area of the Indus Valley civilization, that is, Sind, the Punjab, Gujarat, and parts of adjacent provinces. The contacts between the Indus Valley and Mesopotamia are admirably summarized by Shireen Ratnagar in Encounters. However, this is a fast-developing field and her work does not include the exciting new evidence of Indus Valley seaports in the Rann of Kutch and near Ra’s al-Hadd in ‘Oman. Some of this will be summarized tn articles in the volume arising from the Indian Ocean Symposium at the British Museum, edited by Julian Reade. There is a very preliminary article on ‘Oman by Maurizio Tosi; there are also brief reports on the ‘Oman

work in the journal East and West, published by the Istituto per il Medio ed Extremo Oriente in Rome. (H.W.) For an analysis of the Arabic term for “seafaring,” milaha, see the entry

by S. Soucek, V. Christides, G. R. Tibbetts, and G. Oman under that

{ 129 }

NOTES ON CHAPTERI title in the new edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam. The term is attested at least as early as the ‘Abbasid period and would appear to derive from earlier Akkadian and ultimately Sumerian. (J.C.)

, Page 7. The location of Punt has been debated extensively, and the consensus of opinion places it within the Red Sea, possibly on the African coast in the region of Eritrea. See K. A. Kitchen, “Punt and How to Get There,” and D. O’Connor, “Egypt, 1552-664 B.c.” A useful summary of theories is found in R. Hertzog, “Punt.” Archaeological work work in the Gash Delta in Kassala Province, Sudan, a likely area for locating African Puntite groups, has identified burials, funerary monu-

ments, and settlements to the late third to early second millennium B.c.; see R. Fattovich’s articles in the bibliography. For earlier reports see Nyame Akuma 28, 29, and 31. An ancient Egyptian settlement has

been located on the Red Sea that facilitated maritime contacts; see A. M. Sayed, “Discovery of the Site.” (M.H.) Page 9. Ophir. This is probably not India but southern Arabia. The

main evidence is philological: the Hebrew words for ape, ivory, and peacock are loans from Sanskrit and Tamil. Literary and archaeological evidence for trade with India during this period are discussed by P. Crone, Meccan Trade, pp. 30-37. (M.H.) Page ro. The evidence for post-Kassite polities in general, including the “Sealands,” have been assembled by J. Brinkman, A Political History. Hourani seems to have been unaware of the considerable evidence

for Kassite activity in the Gulf. A Kassite port with texts is known from Bahrain. An interesting general summary of the Kassites in the Gulf is Christopher Edens’ unpublished Harvard dissertation, and his article entitled “The Arabian Gulf in the Ind Millennium s.c.” For a general overview of the entire Gulf, see the recent publication by Daniel Potts, The Arabian Gulf. (H.W.)

The principal port for Mesopotamian trade with the Gulf was the city of Ur, where after the collapse of the Third Dynasty in about 2000 B.c. trade was funded by wealthy individuals rather than the temple. (P.M.) THE PERSIAN GULF IN HELLENISTIC AND ROMAN TIMES

Pages 13-17. Our knowledge of the Persian Gulf in the Hellenistic and Roman periods has advanced rapidly, mainly as a result of archaeological work. The bibliography is extensive. The following works are

{ 130 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER! particularly to be noted: Remy Boucharlat and Jean-Francois Salles, Arabe orientale, and D. T. Potts, The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity. In the northern part of the Gulf, field work and excavation have revealed the locations of several major settlements, some of which may be identified with places mentioned by Graeco-Roman authors. In southern ‘Iraq, two such places (both mentioned by Pliny) are Forat and Charax; the site of the former is thought to lie some thirty kilometers northwest of Basrah and that of the latter some fifty kilometers northwest of the same city. In the Gulf itself, one of the most spectacular discoveries has been the remains of a Hellenistic fort, two temples, and other buildings on the island of Failaka (ancient Ikaros). One of the temples has a Greek plan with a portico consisting of two columns in antis. The site was occupied in two periods: between the mid-third and the late second or early first century B.c., and from the late first century B.c. to the first century a.p. The sites in southern ‘Iraq are described by John Hansman in “Charax and the Karkheh.” There are convenient summaries of the work of the Danish expedition on Failaka in Lise Hannestad’s articles in R. Boucharlat and J.-F. Salles, Arabie Ortentale.

On the mainland, the largest site of any period in northeastern Arabia is Thaj, ninety kilometers from the port of al-Jubayl. Thay was a walled city with overall dimensions of 825 meters by 990 meters. Small-scale excavations have revealed pottery, coins, and other material of the Seleucid period, with occupation probably continuing at least until the first century a.p. From time to time, it has been suggested that Thaj is the site of Gerrha (see p. 14); but although its size and the presence of well-built defences indicate that it was a major site, its identity is still uncertain. Other “Hellenistic” and “Roman” sites in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia include Tarut, where a cemetery of cist-graves and pithos-burials yielded a stone stela with a Greek inscription, and glazed fish plates and other pottery of the Seleucid period. Similarly, a large site near the airport at Dhahran yielded a hoard of jewelery that included a gold ring containing a garnet engraved with a winged Nike in Hellenistic style, and other Hellenistic objects, as well as burials accompanied by Seleucid or Parthian pottery. The most up-to-date discussions of these sites with extensive bibliographies can be found in D. T. Potts, The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity, pp. 23-102 and 197-263.

{ 131 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER!

Further south, Bahrain (ancient Tylus) was well known to the Greeks, and its plant life was the subject of extensive notes by Theophrastus, who mentioned several species of clear or apparent Indian origin. The most extensive pre-Islamic remains were brought to light on the site of the early Islamic fort excavated by a Danish expedition in the 1950s. Renewed excavations at the fort in 1977-1981 have revealed that the Islamic building is in fact a much earlier structure refurbished in the tenth century a.p. or thereabouts. Discussion about the original fort has led to a number of hypotheses about its date and origin, ranging from the view that it is Seleucid to the suggestion that it is Parthian of the second or third century a.p. A hoard of 292 silver coins deposited some time between the late third and the first century B.c. and pottery and other objects of Seleucid type have been found at Ra’s al-Qal‘at and other sites on Bahrain, although there is no indication that the island ever formed part of the Seleucid empire. However, an inscription of a.p. 131 at Palmyra shows that, at least for a short time, Tylos

was governed by a representative of the Parthian ruler of Charax; Potts, The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity, pp. 103-53, discusses this site. The

pre-Islamic fort is discussed by Monique Kervran in her article in Bahrain through the Ages. Also noteworthy, by Boucharlat and Salles, is

“The Tylos Period,” in Bahrain National Museum Archaeological Collections.

For a long time it was believed that the presence of Palmyrene mer-

chants in the Gulf was attested by two elaborate rock-cut tombs on Kharg Island, near the Iranian coast. Each tomb has a vestibule, a main chamber, and numerous loculi. Although the plans have a family like-

ness to Palmyrene hypogea, however, and although one tomb has a bas-relief of a person reclining on a couch and holding a cup (a common feature of funerary reliefs at Palmyra), the resemblances are generic rather than specific. Thus, although the tombs do appear to be imitations of the tombs of Palmyra, it is unlikely that they were constructed by Palmyrenes. The key publications on the so-called Palmyrene chamber tombs on Kharg Island are by R. Ghirshman, The Island of Kharg, and by E. Haerinck, “Quelques monuments funéraires,”

The largest archaeological site of the Seleucid and Parthian periods on the Iranian side of the Gulf is at Rishahr, a few kilometers south of

Bushehr. A convenient summary of what is known about the Achaemenid and Hellenistic occupation of Rishahr is by D. S. Whitcomb, “Bushire and the Angali Canal.”

{ 132 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER!

The most important site of the Parthian period near the mouth of the Gulf is ed-Dur in the Emirate of Umm al-Qaiwain. Here, following exploratory excavations by an ‘Iraqi expedition, teams from Belgium, Denmark, France, and Great Britain have excavated houses, a temple, tombs, and other buildings that belonged to a large settlement occupied between the first and the fourth centuries a.p. Among the Roman finds from the site are fragments of Eastern terra sigillata and an impressive collection of first-century glass. Material on ed-Dur can be found in the publications of Jean-Francois Salles, in Boucharlat and Salles, Arabie Orientale, pp. 241-70; Boucharlat, Haerinck, Phillips, and

and Potts, “Archaeological Reconnaissance”; Boucharlat, Haerinck, Lecomte, Potts, and Stevens, “The European Archaeological Expedition”; Haerinck, Metdepenninghen, and Stevens, “Excavations at edDur”; Haerinck, Metdepenninghen, and Stevens on the third Belgian season; and further by Haerinck on the fourth season. As Hourani noted on page 16, the traders who frequented the Gulf included Indians. The archaeological evidence for trade between India and the Gulf consists mainly of “red polished ware,” which was made in Gujarat and adjoining regions in the first few centuries a.p., and which occurs at Siraf, Suhar, and other coastal sites in Iran and the Arabian peninsula. On this subject see Whitehouse and Williamson, “Sasanian Maritime Trade,” pp. 29-49, especially pp. 37-40 and the map of find-places up to 1972. For two possible Buddhist sites of Indian origin and place-name evidence for the presence of Indians in the Gulf, see Warwick Ball, “Some Rock-cut Monuments” and “How Far Did Buddhism Spread West?” (D.W.) The importance of Barygaza (Broach) on the west coast of India, on the Gulf of Cambay, cannot be overstressed. Lying some thirty miles up the estuary of the Narmada (Nerbudda) river, on the north bank, the present town covers a vast mound at least fifty meters high, with a ditch on the north side, resembling nothing so much as a Syrian tell. No excavations of any significance have ever been undertaken here; see J. Carswell, “China and Islam.” (J.C.) THE RED SEA IN HELLENISTIC AND ROMAN TIMES

Page 17. The complexity of the subject of the nomenclature and identification of ports mentioned in literary texts from antiquity, and their actual location (that is, archaeological trace) can be confirmed by anyone who has been tempted to investigate the ports themselves. Par-

{ 133 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER I

ticularly in the Indian subcontinent and further east, the devastating effect of the semi-annual monsoons effectively ruins any archaeological deposit and any trace of organic material; see Carswell’s articles in the bibliography. Whitcomb and Johnson’s excavations at Quseir al-Qadim revealed a Roman origin for the primarily early medieval Islamic port, and unlike sites across the Indian Ocean, has extensive deposits of well-preserved material such as textiles and leather; see Whitcomb and Johnson’s articles in the bibliography. (J.C.) Pages 17-35. The most significant advances in the study of the written evidence for pre-Islamic maritime trade in and beyond the Red Sea are surveys by M. G. Raschke, “New Studies in Roman Commerce,” and Steven E. Sidebotham, Roman Economic Policy, and a new translation and commentary on the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea by Lionel Casson. Casson not only confirms the date of its compilation (the middle of the first century a.p., as Hourani maintained) but also provides a

wealth of information on Roman sailing and trading practices in an area that extended from Rhapta (perhaps near Dar es Salaam in Tanzania) to Sri Lanka. In an appendix, for example, he provides a clear description of the effect of the monsoons on the seasonal pattern of sailing between ports in the Red Sea and East Africa and India. Another source on trade in this area is by Koji Kamioka and Hikoichi Yajima, The Inter-regional Trade. For a general synthesis, written in the spirit of Braudel, see K. N. Chaudhuri, Trade and Civilisation in the Indian Ocean. Archaeologists have made major contributions to our knowledge of

the Red Sea and of more distant regions visited by merchants from Egypt in Hellenistic and Roman times. Much of this information 1s summarized in Begley and De Puma, eds., Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade. In the northern Red Sea, Sidebotham has directed surveys and excavations at the fifth- to seventh-century Byzantine fort at ‘Abia Sha’ar, in the vicinity of Myos Hormus, while Whitcomb and Johnson have excavated Roman and post-Roman remains at Quseir al-Qadim, probably the site of Loukos Limen. Publications on exca-

vations in these areas include Sidebotham, Riley, Hamroush, and Barakat, “Fieldwork on the Red Sea Coast,” and Whitcomb and Johnson’s works in the bibliography. Further south, Neville Chittick excavated at Aksum, the capital of a kingdom, which by the third century a.p. had extended its influence to

{ 134 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER I

parts of southern Arabia and the eastern Sudan, and (through its port at Adulis) was a major participant in the trade of the Arabian Sea. Three publications by Munro-Hay concern themselves with Aksum. Outside the Red Sea, fragments of Roman glass, datable to the first century B.c. and the early first century a.p. have been found at Heis in northern Somalia, and amphorae and other pottery from Egypt and the eastern Mediterranean have been excavated at two sites at Ra’s Hafiin (or Xaafuun) on the south coast of Somalia, 160 kilometers south of Cape Guardafui. The earlier site probably dates from the first centuries B.c. and a.p., and it may be connected in some way with the emporion of Opone. The later site contained pottery from the Persian Gulf region and perhaps also from South Asia; it appears to have been frequented between the second and the fifth centuries a.p. The significance of these sites resides in the fact that, at present, Ra’s Hafiin is the only place on the East African coast south of Cape Guardafui that has yielded evidence for long-distance maritime trade before the Islamic period. Publications on material found on sites in Somalia include E. M. Stern, “Early Roman Glass,” and Matthew Smith and Henry Wright, “The Ceramics from Ra’s Hafiin.” On the eastern shore of the Arabian Sea, excavations have provided information on two regions mentioned in the Periplus: the Indus delta and southern India. In the Indus delta, Roman merchants frequented Barbarikon, where they off-loaded manufactured goods such as silver plate, glass vessels, and wine, and took on commodities and products from distant regions that included Afghanistan (lapis lazuli) and China (silk). The only large site in the Indus delta, which was occupied in the first century a.p., is Bhanbhore, where excavations have revealed one of the longest sequences of continuous occupation in the whole of the Arabian Sea. Sources on Bhanbhore include an anonymous article in Pakistan Archaeology; S. M. Afshaque, “The Grand Mosque of Banbhore”; and F. A. Khan, Banbhore. Perhaps the most vivid glimpses of the luxury items exported from the Roman world to rulers who controlled the trade of entrepots, such as Barbarikon, are provided by two caches discovered at Begram, north

of Kabul in Afghanistan, and at Kolhapur, in Maharashtra, westcentral India. Among the western objects from Begram, which may have been concealed in the late first century a.p., are vessels of bronze, rock crystal, and glass, and plaster molds for gold or silversmiths. The hoard from Kolhapur consisted of more than one hundred coins and

{ 135 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER I

bronze objects. Among the latter were thirteen Roman items, including a statuette of Poseidon. For Begram, the primary sources are J. Hackin, Recherches archéologiques a Begram, and R. Ghirshman, Begram. For a reassessment of the date of the hoard, see David Whitehouse, “Begram.” For Kolhapur, see R. D. De Puma, “The Roman Bronzes from Kohlapur.” The key site in southern India is Arikamedu

on the Coromandel coast, which was excavated by Sir Mortimer Wheeler in 1945 and by Jean-Marie Casal in 1947-1950. Among the finds from the site are fragments of Roman Arretine ware, amphorae, and glass. Wheeler concluded that the site was an Indo-Roman trading station that flourished in the first and second centuries a.p. Recent reassessments of the finds suggest the Arikamedu was first occupied in the third century s.c., that the earliest amphorae from the Mediterra-

nean arrived in the late second century B.c., and that the Arretine pottery belongs to the period between about a.p. 10 and 30. The primary sources are Wheeler, Ghosh, and Krishna Deva, “Arikamedu,” and J.-M. Casal, Fouzlles de Virampatnam-Arikamedu. For reassessments

of the Roman material from Arikamedu, see Vimala Begley, “Arikamedu Reconsidered”; Howard Comfort, “Terra Sigillata from Arikamedu”; and Elizabeth Lyding Will, “The Roman Shipping Amphoras from Arikamedu.” Before the excavations at Arikamedu, the most important physical evidence for Roman trade with southern India consisted of coins, which occur in large numbers, often in hoards. , The first- and second-century coins fall into three groups: Augustan and Tiberian denarii, Julio-Claudian aurei (which seem to have replaced the denarii as the preferred medium of exchange), and secondcentury aurei. The clear contrast between the scarcity of republican coins and the abundance of Augustan denarii reinforces Strabo’s statement about the growth of Roman trade with India during the reign of Augustus. See the publication by Paula Turner, Roman Coins from India. (D.W.) Muziris was on the southwest coast near Cranganore; Hourani appears to be alone in equating it with Mysore. (H.W) Page 32. On the Arabian coast, the site of Kane, where merchants from the Red Sea acquired frankincense, has been identified at Hisn al-Ghurab in the Yemen Arab Republic. The topography (a towering headland) accords with the description in the Periplus and an inscription from the site bears the place name “Qn’.” Notes on the site appear in Gervase Mathew, “The Dating and Significance of The Periplus of

{ 136 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER! the Erythraean Sea.” He reported finding fragments of Rhodian pottery on the site. Another source is Brian Doe, Southern Arabia. (D.W.)

More recently, a joint Soviet-Yemeni expedition has carried out five seasons of excavations at Kane/Qana since 1985. Finds include quantities of coins, Greek texts circa fourth century a.p., and both imported African and Mediterranean pottery; there is evidence that the extensive port flourished from the first to the sixth/seventh centuries a.p., with three major periods of activity. A fourth-century Greek inscription incised in plaster in a large building in the lower city, probably a Christian chapel, mentions one “Kos{mas],” and evokes blessings on his car-

avan and a sea voyage; the lowest levels included Punic amphora fragments and east Italian terra sigillata of the second century a.p., of a

type found elsewhere in south Arabia and at Arikamedu; and firstcentury a.p. Nabataean painted pottery. Traces of frankincense were found throughout the site. See A. V. Sedov, “New Archaeological and Epigraphical Material.” (J.C.) Pages 33-34. The exact location of Rhapta 1s sull to be determined; what Hourani says is quite acceptable. Most people who have examined the sources believe it was somewhere in modern Tanzania. See Datoo, “Rhapta”; Casson takes a similar position in The Periplus Maris

Erythraet. Recently, however, in a review of the latter work, Mark Horton compares the Periplus and Ptolemy, and suggests Rhapta was further north (see below). (H.W.) No archaeological evidence has been found for the location of Rhapta,

and theories range widely from the Lamu archipelago to Dar es Salaam to the swamps of the Rufigi delta. For the recent literature see M. Horton, “The Periplus and East Africa”; Kirwan, “Rhapta”; and B. A. Datoo, “Rhapta.” One of the difficulties in locating Rhapta has been the inconsistent locations given in the Geography of Ptolemy and the Periplus, in particular its relationship to the island of Menouthias, which may be Pemba or Zanzibar. Indeed, Rhapta may not have been a permanent settlement but rather an ill-defined turning point to conduct trade and await the change in the monsoon. No well provinced and correctly associated finds of the first- or second-century date are known from the whole of the coast south of R’as Haftin. For a list and discussion of Roman coin finds, see Raschke, “New Studies in Roman Commerce,” note 1,536, pp. 1,023-1,024. A large find in Zanzibar of Roman coins of doubtful origin, not included in this list, is cited by

{ 137}

NOTES ON CHAPTER I!

A. M. H. Sheriff, “The East African Coast,” p. 554. One of the most famous Roman coin finds is from Bur Gao, a possible candidate for Nikon of the Periplus; see Chittick, “An Archaeological Reconnaissance,” pp. 129-30, for a discussion of the circumstances of the find, described in C. W. Haywood, “The Bajun Islands and Birikau,” and H. Mattingly, “Coins from a Site Find”; he concludes they are a medieval deposition. The most significant finds of pottery and glass from the classical period have been made in the extreme northeast corner of the African coast, during surveys undertaken in 1974-1975, by Chittick. He was

able to identify three sites, with apparently stratified material; see H. N. Chittick, “An Archaeological Reconnaissance,” “Early Ports in the Horn,” and “Pre-Islamic Trade,” pp. 364-66. A detailed account of

the ceramics from Ra’s Hafiin, one of the main sites that Chittick investigated, and probably identified with Opone, has recently been published; these modify Chittick’s preliminary conclusions: see M. C.

Smith and H. T. Wright, “The Ceramics from Ra’s Hafun.” The Hafiin west site contained a range of material from Mesopotamia and

Iran, the Nile and the Eastern Mediterranean, and a few shards of possibly South Asian origin. A date in the first century B.c. to early first century A.D. is suggested by Smith and Wright, on the basis of a fragment of a late Ptolemaic lamp, some shards of late Hellenistic lagynos, and sandy buff late Parthian glazed wares. At Daamo, Chittick found a third classical period site, five kilometers to the west of Cape Guar-

dafui, which is often identified as Aromaton Emporion and was the last convenient anchorage before rounding this headland. The site had been disturbed by quarrying, but there was much pottery, some shards of Parthian glazed ware, and a number of amphorae handles. Also reported were a number of rock-cut depressions cut into the natural sandstone, which gave the appearance of wall foundations. A fourth group of material from northern Somalia was excavated in the nineteenth century by G. Révoil: see Révoil, “Tumuli dans l’Aromatica region,” La vallée du Darror, pp. 279-93, 584-89, and “Recueilles dans le Comal,” pp. 11-15 and plate opposite p. 81. He reported finding a large quantity of pottery and glass in burial mounds at Salwayn, east

of Heis. Included were millefori beads and fragments of an alabaster vase, as well as Roman pottery, including red slip wares and amphorae. The glass from the site has recently been reconsidered, and placed

within the first four decades of the first century a.p.; see E. Stern, “Early Roman Glass.” (M.H.)

{ 138 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER! THE SASSANID AND BYZANTINE EMPIRES

Page 36. The role of Sassanian merchants in the maritime trade of the Indian Ocean has been reviewed on several occasions since the publication of Arab Seafaring: in D. Whitehouse and A. Williamson “Sasanian Maritime Trade”; by Valeria Fiorani Piacentini, “La presa di potere sassanide” and “International Indian Ocean”; and D. Whitehouse, “Sasanian Maritime Activity.” (D.W.)

Axum (Aksum). This town has most recently been investigated by Neville Chittick in 1972-74. See S. C. Munro-Hay, Excavations at Aksum, who suggests considerable revision of the accepted chronology, mainly on the evidence of coins; he proposes to date the beginnings of the state between 100 B.c. and 200 a.p., and the abandonment of the town as a capital around 630 a.p. The main evidence for trade comes from metalwork, glass, and pottery found by Chittick, mostly pointing

to a Nile Valley origin. It is possible that some shards of Sassanian Islamic pottery, from the Gulf, were found here as well (Munro-Hay, Excavations at Aksum, p. 315). For a discussion of trade through Adulis

see S. C. Munro-Hay, “The Foreign Trade of the Aksumite Port of Adulis.” (M.H.) Page go. There must be a typographical error in Hourani’s text here. Cosmas Indicopleustes was not “theoretical,” but he might well be described as a “theological geographer.” (H.W.)

{ 139 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER II o™,, oe “,, 0 TO “Mo “Re MR oe “WR oO “Re “Tn, oT oT oe TEL OL oO ee, oO M_ OD, *

GENERAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE ISLAMIC EXPANSION

Page 51. V. Christides’ entry on Islamic navigation in the new edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam (milaha) supplies much additional information on the Arab maritime expansion into the Mediterranean in the Umayyad and ‘Abbasid periods and the military and economic confrontation with Byzantium. (J.C.) THE ARABS ON THE MEDITERRANEAN Page 54. Istakhr cannot be identified with Persepolis; it is a large site about eight kilometers east of Persepolis. The Achaemenid capital was completely abandoned after its destruction by Alexander. (H.W.) Page 57. For the famous battle between the Arabs and Byzantines, see Dhat al-Sawari, in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Supplement. (J.C.) PERSIAN AND ARAB SEA TRADE WITH THE FAR EAST

Page 61. Our knowledge of early Islamic maritime trade with South

and East Asia has increased considerably in the last three decades, thanks to archaeological surveys and excavations in the Persian Gulf, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and elsewhere. One of the most important results of this activity is the demonstration that regular maritime

trade between Western Asia and China began not later than about A.D. 800. (ID. W.)

Page 69. In the Gulf, the largest excavations have taken place at Siraf. Between about a.p. 800 and 1000, Siraf played a leading role in the network of trade that brought commodities and luxury goods from South and Southeast Asia, East Africa, and the Red Sea to Baghdad and other cities in Western Asia. Despite torrid summers, poor soil,

and low rainfall, the city flourished as the home port for ships that ventured as far afield as Canton in China and Sufalah in Mozambique. The early Islamic city developed around a shallow bay four kilometers across, and occupied an area defined by the sea, a precipitous ridge on the landward side, and two seasonal water courses. The heart of the early Islamic city consisted of 110 hectares of houses, bazaars, mosques, and workshops built of stone and mortar. A larger area seems to have contained either gardens or the bidonvilles of the poorest members of

{ 140 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER II the community. Among the buildings excavated in 1966-1973 are the congregational mosque and other mosques, a palace, houses, part of the bazaar, part of the potters’ quarter, and a monumental cemetery. The congregational mosque underwent three main periods of construction between about a.p. 800 and 1150. The original mosque measured 51 by 44 meters and consisted of a courtyard surrounded on three sides by a single arcade and with a sanctuary three bays deep. This was enlarged before about a.p. 850 by the addition of a lateral extension, external washing facilities, and other features. In the twelfth century, when Siraf was in decline, the mosque was repaired. The houses, some of which had several stories, differ in detail, but share a family likeness with a central courtyard. The palace, which stood in the coolest part of the city, consisted of several such units, enclosed by a wall. Among the finds from Siraf are abundant Chinese ceramics. These and other stratified finds indicate that limited (perhaps indirect) trade with China was already under way in the eighth century a.p. and that a

sharp increase in the number of imports, accompanied by a general } increase in the wealth of the city, took place at the beginning of the ninth century. Interim reports on the excavations at Siraf appeared in Ivan, vols. 6-10 (1968-1972) and 12 (1974). Two volumes of the final report have been published: David Whitehouse, Siréf III. The Congregational Mosque, and Nicholas M. Lowick, Siraf XV. The Coins and Monumental Inscriptions.

Elsewhere in the Gulf, surveys and excavations have taken place at Suhar in ‘Oman, a contemporary of Siraf, on the island of Kish, which replaced Siraf as the principal port in the middle reaches of the Gulf, and at Hormuz. Publications on Suhar include A. Williamson, Sohar and ‘Omani Seafaring, and Kervran,” “A la recherche de Suhar.” A note

on Kish was written by David Whitehouse in Jran in 1976. Valeria Floriani Piacentini wrote at length about Hormuz in “L’emporio ed 11 regno di Hormuz.” (D.W.) Page 7o. For a detailed analysis of the Chinese material collected by

Andrew Williamson from Old Hormuz, see Peter Morgan, “New

Thoughts on Old Hormuz”; there is a mass of thirteenth- to fourteenth-century celadon. Slightly later Yuan blue-and-white of the

second quarter of the fourteenth century has been recovered from Hormuz Island; see U. Weisner, Chinesische Keramik. (J.C.)

Julfar is the principal Arabian port of the Islamic period of the lower Gulf, and it is frequently mentioned by early and mediaeval Islamic

{ 141 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER II sources. The name is currently associated with an area of tells extending for about two kilometers along the coast north of Ra’s al-Khayma in the United Arab Emirates. In about a.u. 16 / a.p. 637, Muslim forces

sailed from Julfar against the Sassanians, according to al-Tabari (Ta’rikh) (I, 2,698), apparently the same force that set out for Qishm under ‘Uthman b. Abi al-‘As according to the tenth-century writer ‘Abd Allah b. Humayd al-Salimi; see B. de Cardi, “Archaeological Survey, p. 230. Under the Umayyads, the ‘Abbasids and the Buwayhids, Julfar repeatedly emerges as a harbor providing a secure anchorage for fleets operating off southeastern Arabia. Toward a.p. 705, the Umayyads sent a large force under Muja‘a b. Shi‘wa against the ‘Omani tribe of Azd, half by land and half by sea, but the Umayyad forces were defeated. After losing fifty ships, Muja‘a fled from Musgat with the rest of his fleet to Julfar, where they remained and summoned reinforcements from Syria. Subsequently, they put down the Azd in ‘Oman with great severity; see E. C. Ross, “The Annals of Oman” pp. 119-20; and G. P. Badger, ed., A History of the Imams and Seyyids of ‘Oman, pp. 1-2.

In a similar manner, the ‘Abbasid Caliph Abu‘l-‘Abbas al-Saffah sent a military force against ‘Oman in a.H. 132 / A.D. 750 to suppress a

rebellion led by Julanda b. Mas‘id, the first Ibadhi Imam of ‘Oman. The ‘Abbasid force was at first defeated, but reinforcements were sent and there was fighting with Imam Julanda’s forces at Julfar in which

the ‘Omdnis were overwhelmed; see al-Tabari, HI, 78. In a.n. 280 / a.p. 893, an ‘Abbasid army was sent to punish the Ibadhi movement in ‘Oman. Once again it was Julfar where the “Abbasids landed, before marching into the interior of ‘Oman; S. B. Miles, The Countries

and Tribes of the Persian Gulf, p. 81. It is to be assumed that these armies used the safe anchorage at Julfar to leave their ships while proceeding by land along the foot of the Jabal Hajar, where water 1s

plentiful. Thereafter, the troops would have crossed the mountains to : the Batina coast of ‘Oman. By doing this, fleets avoided risking the hazards of the straits of Hurmuz. The Buwayhids repeatedly used Julfar as their point of entry into ‘Oman. The Buwayhid amir, Mu‘izz al-Dawlah, sent expeditions to Julfar in a.w. 352/a.D. 963 and a.H. 354/ A.D. 965 to compel the ‘Omnis to submit to his rule; Miles, Countries and Tribes, pp. 110, 114. In a.H. 362 / a.p. 972, the Buwayhids again sent a fleet to Julfar, this time from Siraf to suppress an uprising in “Oman. It is in this period

{ 142 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER II that al-Maqdisi includes Julfar among the gasabas of southeastern Ara-

bia, along with Suhar, Nizwa, and other places. Subsequent reports refer to Julfar as a pearling center and mention its sheep-rearing, its samn, and its cheese. This fits well with the environment of the coastal plain at Julfdr and the Hajar mountains behind it, which are notably fertile, in marked contrast with most of the Arabian shore of the Gulf. Recent archaeological work suggests that the Julfar settlement moved along the coast over time, possibly because the harbor channels tended to silt up and become inaccessible to shipping. It also seems that there was settlement in the neighborhood from at least the Sassanian period, with evidence of a pre-Islamic and early Islamic occupation at Jazirat al-Hulayla, to the north of Ra’s al-Khayma. The main occupation of the Julfar tells just outside Ra’s al-Khayma belongs to the fourteenth to seventeenth centuries or later, dating based on the numerous Chinese, Vietnamese, and Thai ceramics found in excavations; see J. Hansman, Julfar, and T. Sasaki, “Vietnamese, Thai, Chinese, Iraqi and Iranian Ceramics.” By this point, Julfar was ruled either by the kings of Hurmuz or by the Portuguese, who had come to dominate the trade with the Far East. Much of the late Far Eastern pottery found at Julfar was imported during the Portuguese period, when the harbor seems to have served as a major entrepét in the eastern trade. Indeed, no other

port on the Arabian coast has such extensive remains from the later Islamic period as Julfar. According to local tradition, the famous Arab navigator, Ibn Majid was from al-Gib, near to Julfar and Ra’s alKhayma. For recent excavations at Julfar, see G. R. King’s reports in the bibliography, and B. Vogt, “A 1988 Test Trench.”

In later times, Julfar was supplanted by its neighbors, Ra’s alKhayma and al-Rams. The coast and hinterland were briefly occupied

by the Turcoman Nadir Shah between 1739 and 1749, but after his withdrawal, the Arab al-Qasimi shaykhs came to dominate the district, and have continued to do so until the modern period. By the time that

the British attacked al-Qasimi fortifications to suppress Wahhabi piracy in 1809 and again in 1819, Julfar had given way to Ra’s alKhayma as the main town on this part of the coast. The island of Dalma lies east of Qatar, and belongs to ‘Abu Dhabi. It is one of the few islands off the Arabian coast in this area to have a good water supply, accessible by wells. There is evidence at Dalma of settlement in the ‘Ubayd period, and in Sassanian / early Islamic times through to the later Islamic period. To the southeast of Dalma is the island of Sir Bani Yas, also in the

{ 143 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER II territory of “Abu Dhabi. There are remains of various types of buildings scattered across the coastal plain on the east side of Sir Bani Yas, which are dated to the Sassanian and the early Islamic period. These sites have yet to be investigated in detail, but they provide prima facie evidence—along with Jazirat al-Flulayla in Ra’s al-Khayma and alJumayra in Dubai—of settlement on the Arabian islands and coast of the lower Gulf in the first millennium a.p. (G.K.) The most important archaeological site of the first millennium a.p. in southern Pakistan is Bhanbhore in the Indus delta, sixty kilometers east of Karachi and forty kilometers from the present coast. Excavations have revealed that Bhanbhore was already occupied in the ScythoParthian period (first century B.c. to second century a.p.), and that it became a major entrepét in the ninth century. The early Islamic site, which is generally identified as al-Daybul, the first city in Sind to fall into Muslim hands (in a.p. 712), contained several elements: a walled enclosure 525 meters across; extramural quarters, including an industrial area; and an artificial lake, perhaps the harbor basin. Among the structures discovered during the excavations were the city wall, a congregational mosque, and several domestic, commercial, and industrial buildings. Among the inscriptions from the mosque was a dedication bearing the date a.H. 109 / a.p. 727. Three publications on Banbhore include an anonymous article in Pakistan Archaeology; S. M. Afshaque, “The Grand Mosque of Banbhore”; and F. A. Khan, Banbhore. (D.W) Page 71. The Persian presence in Ceylon is known from Cosmas Indicopleustes; see J. W. McCrindle, The Christian Topography of Cosmas, pp. 365-68. This is corroborated by a Persian/Sassanian bakedclay bulla recovered from Mantai, with seal impressions of a Nestorian cross, an old Persian inscription, and a quadruped; see J. Carswell, “The Port of Mantai.” The Po-sse / Persians would almost certainly have sailed from Mantai to the Far East. Mantai, at the northwest tip of Ceylon, was the trading emporium for a millennium until it was finally sacked by the Cholas about a.p. 1000. There was also an Arab presence there; see, for instance, an Arab tombstone recovered from the site, with a kufic inscription; see J. Carswell, “China and Islam in the Maldive Islands.” The imported early Islamic and Chinese pottery at Mantai demonstrates clear links with similar material from Siraf, Bhanbhore, and ‘Aqabah. Quantities of early Islamic glass have also been found, and the Islamic pottery includes imitation Tang white ware, Samarra splashed

{ 144 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER II

ware, lusterware, and turquoise-glazed earthenware. The latter type has been found in mainland China, in the tomb of Liu Hua (d. a.p. 930) near Fuzhou, in Fujian province; and excavated at Yangzhou, in Jiangsu province; see F. Xianming, “Persian and Korean Ceramics.” As Hourani says (p. 71), little is known about the Indian ports on the west coast, and surveys in 1974 / 1976 revealed that unlike the Coromandel coast, where the ports are up rivers, those on the west coast, such as Quilon, are simply roadsteads; see J. Carswell, “China and Islam in the Maldive Islands,” and “China and Islam, A Survey.” Later surveys by N. Karashima record Chinese ceramics at various

coastal sites in Malabar and Coromandel, eleventh- and twelfthcentury imports at Gangaikondacholapuram, the Chola capital in Tamil Nadu, and thirteenth- to fourteenth-century celadon and blueand-white from Periyapattinam opposite the Gulf of Mannar, which Karashima believes is the port of Fattan mentioned by Ibn Battita. A

| quantity of thirteenth-century material from Kayal confirmed that this was Marco Polo’s Cail, the port associated with the horse trade from Arabia to the Pandyan kingdom. From Kollam / Quilon came further shards of Yuan thirteenth- to fourteenth-century century celadon and blue-and-white; this was the port from which Ibn Batttita sailed to China. See N. Karashima, “Trade Relations” and “Discoveries.” Although Hourani maintains that shipping passed through the Palk

Strait, this is unlikely for vessels of any size; see J. Carswell, “China and Islam in the Maldive Islands” and “China and the West,” and below, pp. 152-153. The importance of Tiuman Island is testified by the recovery of much Chinese porcelain there, although mostly of the Song dynasty and later; see Lam, Carswell, Russell, Abu Bakar, Kwan, and Martin, A Ceramic Legacy of Asia's Maritime Trade. The Maldives were an important stop on the return voyage, presum-

ably for fresh water. Quantities of Chinese shard material have been recovered from Male (now in the Ashmolean Museum) from the ninth to nineteenth centuries, and the almost complete absence of Islamic material would indicate that it was very much a one-way traffic. This is further corroborated by a fifteenth-century Chinese gazeteer; see Ma Huan, Ying-yai Sheng-lan, and Carswell, “China and Islam in the Maldive Islands.” George Scanlon’s excavations at Fustét have unearthed quantities

of Chinese material; see G. T. Scanlon, “Egypt and China,” and Gyllensvard’s two works in the bibliography; and Tang sherds have been recovered from as far aheld as Brahminabad in Sind, Bhan-

{ 145 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER II

bhore / al-Daybul, Siraf, Nishapur, Kifa, ‘Aqabah, East Africa, and even at Antioch in Syria; see J. Carswell, “China and Islam in the Maldive Islands” and F. Waage, ed., Antioch-on-the-Orontes. (J.C.)

Recent research in southern Thailand has revealed the remains of two sites, Ko Kho Khao on the west coast and Laem Pho on the east coast, connected with the transportation of trade goods across the peninsula; Chinese and Southeast Asian merchandise destined for Sri Lanka and ports further west were off-loaded at Laem Pho and carried to ships waiting at Ko Kho Khao, while goods from India, Sri Lanka, and the

Arabian Sea were taken in the opposite direction. Ko Kho Khao in particular has yielded large quantities of Chinese and Western Asiatic ceramics, which suggest that the period of greatest mercantile activity

lasted for a short time in the ninth century. Publications on the two sites include Bennet Bronson, Pisit Charoenwongsa, Ho Chuimei, and Tharapong Srisuchat, “Excavations at Ko Kho Khao”; and Ho Chuimei, “Ceramics Found at Excavations at Ko Kho Khao and Laem Pho, Southern Thailand.” (D.W.) For important evidence of trade contacts between South India and Sri Lanka and the Indonesian Archipelago, see E. Edwards McKinnon, Trade Contacts with the Indonesian Archipelago.” Rouletted ware of

the first and second centuries has been found in West Java, and at Sembiran on the north coast of Bal. (J.C.) Page 78. There has been an excellent critical study of the Zanj revolts by Alexandre Popovic, “La révolte des esclaves en Iraq.” (H.W.) EAST AFRICA AND THE COASTS OF ARABIA

Page 79. Slaves. Modern scholarship has discounted the possibility that the first slave revolt in a.H. 75 / a.v. 694, involved the Zany, but involved instead the Zull, cattle-keeping immigrants from Sind; see J. S. Trimingham, “The Arab Geographers,” especially note 2, p. 116. (M.H.) Pages 79-82. Archaeological research has provided a welcome commentary on the descriptions of the East African coast recorded by al-

Ma'‘sidt and Buzurg. The principal archaeological discoveries are those of Neville Chittick at Kilwa in Tanzania and Manda in Kenya, and of Mark Horton about Shanga in Kenya. At all three sites, pottery

from the Persian Gulf, from other parts of Western Asia, and from China 1s common, and it ts clear that the settlements were participants

{ 146 }

NOTES ON CHAPTERII in the network of maritime trade described in contemporary literature. The character and origins of these settlements, however, is a matter of debate. Works by Chittick include Kilwa and Manda. Mark Horton

has written on Manda, “Asiatic Colonization” and “Early Muslim Trading Settlements,” and on Shanga with T. R. Blurton, “‘Indian’ Metalwork in East Africa.” Chittick excavated on the island of Kilwa in 1961-1965. He revealed the remains of a city which, for three hundred years before the arrival of the Portuguese, was the most important trading center on the East African coast. The earliest settlement at Kilwa, which appears to date from the ninth century, consisted of houses of wattle and daub, and was supported by a subsistence economy based on cultivation, fishing, and gathering shellfish. One Arabic graffito (on a piece of fine-grained stone, possibly a whetstone) may suggest the presence of Muslims. After his excavations at Kilwa, Chittick worked for three seasons (1965, 1970, and 1978) at Manda, an island site in the Lamu Archipelago. Here, he discovered a site of some ten hectares, the occupation

of which began in the ninth century. Unlike the early settlement at Kilwa, Manda had buildings of stone and burnt brick, and Chittick concluded that it was founded by immigrants from the Persian Gulf. This “colonial” hypothesis has been challenged by Horton, mainly on the basis of his excavations at Shanga, another site in the Lamu Archipelago, and on a reinterpretation of the earliest finds from Manda. Horton excavated at Shanga between 1980 and 1988. The excavations at Shanga revealed a settlement that was occupied from the eighth to the fourteenth century. The original settlement was small, and consisted of timber buildings which, almost from the beginning, included a mosque—the earliest mosque so far discovered in East Africa. Later, in the mid-tenth century, the mosque and other structures

were rebuilt in stone. Reinterpreting the sequence at Manda in the light of these discoveries, Horton argued that the buildings of stone and brick did not belong to the original settlement; indeed, they were probably preceded by houses of mud and timber. Thus, the present evidence suggests that Muslim traders were already present in the Lamu Archipelago in the eighth century, where they probably constituted small, perhaps elite minorities in otherwise traditional Swahili communities. Al-Ma‘siidi reported that the most distant ports of call for merchants from Siraf and ‘Om4n were Qanbalu, Sufalah and Waqw4aq. Qanbalu may be one of the sites in the Lamu Archipelago, Sufalah is in Mozam-

{ 147 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER II bique and Waqwagq is either another place on the African coast or an island—possibly one of the Comoros Islands or Madagascar. Ninth- or tenth-century pottery from Western Asia and other imported objects have been found at Chibuene in southern Mozambique, at Dembent and other sites in the Comoros, and at Irodo in Madagascar. Publications on the above-mentioned sites include Paul Sinclair, “Chibuene”; Henry Wright, “Early Seafarers of the Comoro Islands”; and Pierre Vérin, “Austronesian Contribution to the Culture of Madagascar,” especially p. 184. (D.W.)

Page 80. Trade with East Africa. Archaeological finds in recent years have very much borne out Hourani’s conclusions about the scale of trade during the ninth and tenth centuries. The major excavations

have taken place in the Lamu Archipelago at Manda and Shanga. Other sites have included Kilwa and Kisimani Mafia: see H. N. Chittick, Kistmani Mafia, and “Report on the Excavations at Kisimani Ma-

| fia and Kua,” pp. 15-16; on Zanzibar and Pemba, see C. Clark and M. Horton, Zanzibar Archaeological Survey 1984/1985; on the Comoros, see

H. T. Wright, “Early Seafarers of the Comoro Islands,” and C. Allibert, “Le site de Dembeni”; at Irodo in Northern Madagascar, see P. Vérin, The History of Civilization, pp. 142-45, and at Chibuene in southern Mozambique, see Paul Sinclair, “Chibuene” and “Space, Time and Social Formation,” pp. 86-91. (M.H.)

Pages 80-81. Almost no one presently thinks Qanbalu could have been on Madagascar. There is very little evidence of major trade interaction with Madagascar prior to the twelfth century. The most com-

mon opinion is that Qanbalu was on Pemba, perhaps on Ra’s Mkumbuu. The issue is discussed by James Kirkman, “Excavations at Ras Mkumbuu,” who found no evidence of occupation earlier than the

thirteenth century on this site. J. S. Trimingham, however, in “The Arab Geographers,” continues to support an earlier eleventh-century date to Ra’s Mkumbuu; see also Catherine Clark and Mark Horton, Zanzibar Archaeological Survey, pp. 29-31, 35. A minority opinion is that Qanbalu was on the Comoros, specifically at Sima on Anjouan (properly Nzwani); for example, see Gillian Shepherd, “The Making

of the Swahili.” However, I have excavated at Sima and surveyed | widely throughout Anjouan. Sima seems to have been a small village, not a walled town in the ninth to tenth centuries a.p., and I found no other candidates. See H. T. Wright, ed.,”Early Seafarers of the Comoro Islands.” In sum, we do not yet have an archaeologically convincing candidate for the important documented port of Qanbalu.

{ 148 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER II Houran1 is following Ferrand, who was writing before the comparative linguistic work had been done. The linguistic evidence indicates that the Proto-Malagasy came from somewhere in Indonesia, but there Is NO reason to presume it was Sumatra. The closest linguistic relatives

to Malagasy are the Barito languages of Borneo. The most balanced recent source on this is probably Pierre Vérin. (H.W.) Paul Sinclair, Space, Time and Social Formation, p. 89, has reported

tenth- century Muslim burials on the coastal site of Chibuene in the area that could be identified as Sufalah, in Buzurg’s account, suggest-

ing that the area was not wholly pagan. At the site of Shanga, in the Lamu Archipelago, excavations have identified a series of early mosques dating from the late eighth century A.D., set within a preIslamic enclosure. Locally minted coins from the Lamu Archipelago suggest a Muslim ruling dynasty in the ninth to tenth centuries, see

M. Horton, “Primitive Islam.” (M.H.) | Because of the prevailing north wind (pp. 20, 82), takkiya/tacking was essential for shipping to procede up the Red Sea; see G. R. Tibbetts, Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean before the coming of the Portuguese, pp. 310-312. This difficulty led to extensive use of land routes

northward from ‘Aydhab and Jeddah. (J.C.)

{149 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER III TF SO So Se Oe Te OE Ce te Oe te Oe te te te te te Oe Oe Oe ee GENERAL REMARKS

Page 87. For the study of shipping and the construction of the boats themselves, the scientific investigation of underwater wrecks has added immeasurably to our knowledge. Curiously, serious underwater archaeology was initiated just about the moment that Hourani’s work appeared; see Honor Frost, “Two Carian Wrecks” and “Vers une solution.” So far, not much scientific work has been carried out on wrecks in the Indian Ocean, although a number of later seventeenth-century wrecks with important cargoes of Chinese ceramics have been discovered, for instance the Witte Leeuw (1613; St. Helena); Banda (1615; Mauritius); Sao Gongalo (1630; Cape of Good Hope); Concepcion (1641;

Haiti); the Hatcher wreck (1640-1645; South China Sea); and the Vung Tau wreck (c. 1690, off Vietnam); see M. Rinaldi, Kraak Porcelain; C. Sheaf and R. Kilburn, The Hatcher Porcelain Cargoes; and The Vung Tau Cargo. Although the water is apparently too deep and risky for a survey of

the vessel itself, the contents of the early fourteenth-century Sinan wreck off the coast of South Korea are of paramount importance for the study of early medieval Chinese ceramics; see Special Exhibition of Cultural Relics and The Sunken Treasures of the Sinan Coast. Much of the scientifically credible information has come from Mediterranean wrecks; of particular relevance is the Serge Liman wreck off the southwest coast of Turkey, of an eleventh-century vessel carrying a vast quantity of Islamic glass; see G. Bass and F. van Doorninck, “The rith Century Shipwreck at Sergi Liman.” (J.C.)

For ships and shipping, see also H. Kindermann and C. E. Bosworth, “Safina,” in the Encyclopaedia of Islam.

HULLS AND THEIR EQUIPMENT Page 89. For the modern reconstruction of a medieval Arab dhow, and the securing of a teak-like wood (@ini) from South India, Tim Severin’s account is invaluable; see Severin, The Sindbad Voyage. It is noteworthy that when he sailed a dhow from ‘Oman to China in 1980, he was becalmed east of Sri Lanka for thirty-five days; earlier voyagers knew that it is impossible to travel all the way on one monsoon, and that one is bound to pass some months on the voyage either in India or

{ 150 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER III Sri Lanka. On the other hand, it is feasible to return all the way from the Far East on one monsoon if the time of departure from the Malacca Straits is carefully observed, but it necessitates a route further south, passing through the Maldives; see Ma Huan, Ying-yai Sheng-lan; G. R. Tibbetts, Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean before the Coming of the Portuguese; and J. Carswell, “China and Islam in the Maldive Islands,”

for a fifteenth-century Chinese map corroborating the importance of this southerly route. (J.C.) Page 93. Throughout the world and at most periods, stitches (sometimes combined with wooden pegs) have been used instead of nails to make various types of craft to sail on the sea as well as on inland waters. Besides ethnological survivals, archaeological examples include the Pharaonic “Cheops Ship” (P. Lipke, The Royal Ship of Cheops). In

the Ancient Mediterranean “sewing” coexisted with the more usual mortise and tenon joinery; examples include a sixth-century B.c. Greek

or Etruscan wreck excavated off the south of France (P. Pomey, “L’épave de Bon Porté”) and a Greek cargo-carrier of the same period (in the course of excavation) off Gela, Sicily. In the Adriatic, similar hull remains were found off Croatia (see P. Pomey, “L’épave de Bon Porté”), while a large Roman first-century B.c. vessel complete with cargo, discovered in a canal near Comacchio (Emilia-Romagna), is in the course of conservation (O. Bacilieri, et al., “Anatomia di un naufragio’). In Finland the technique was used from the first century B.c. up to the 1970s (Maritime Museum of Finland Annual Report, 1980).

Although as yet few archaeological examples may be known elsewhere, these European wrecks imply the universality of sewn joinery, rather than its intercultural transmission. Shortage of metal and the tenacity of local tradition only partly account for sewn joinery; the technique also has positive advantages. First, where safe havens are few, the resilience and elasticity of a hull ts important. Second, sewn hulls can be unpicked for either minor repairs or major reservicing and, in regions where timber is scarce, also for recycling. Although al-Magqrizi remarked that he had not seen a single nail in ferryboats crossing the Red Sea to Jeddah (J. Hornell, Water Transport: Origins and Early Evolution), stitching is not among the current prac-

tices in the boatyards that now flourish (as a result of sport-diving tourists) in the port of Hurghada, but current practices there well illus-

trate the factors that have always governed modifications in boatbuilding techniques. Smart sun-decked cabin-cruiser superstructures are grafted onto traditional wooden hulls of transom-sterned khatira /

{ 151 }

NOTES ON CHAPTERIII kutiyya (of Indian origin), not only because wood is stronger than fberglass but it is easier to repair after the inevitable damage caused by coral pinnacles and reefs. As in antiquity, wood has to be imported to the shores of the Eastern Desert and, since coraline growths make cabbotage impractical, it is either brought down wadi-roads from the Nile or by road from Suez. As always, it is geography that poses the problems; the successive solutions are but modifications of each other, made in response to changing social patterns. One of the best guides to local ships as artifacts, both from the archaeological and the constructional point of view, is to be found in ‘Oman, a Seafaring Nation. (H.F.)

In the context of Hourani’s discussion of sewn boats, mention should be made of the continuing practice of this technique in Sri Lanka and the Maldives. In the Maldives, the boats are entirely constructed of coconut wood, and extensive use is made of wooden dowels (not mentioned by Hourani); see J. Carswell, “China and Islam in the Maldive Islands.” (J.C.)

The East African sewn boats have recently been studied by A. H. J. Prins, “The Mtepe of Lamu,” see pp. 85-100. Surviving fragments of a sewn hull are preserved in a roof at Fort Jesus, Mombasa. Prins sug-

gests that there are two distinct types, the Daw la Mtepe, and the Mtepe proper, reflecting Indian and Arab/Persian maritime traditions. The tradition of sewn boats has disappeared from the Swahili Coast,

but sewn boats were recorded in use on the coast of Somalia in the 19708, where they were recorded by Chittick, “Early Ports in the Horn of Africa.” (M.H.) Page 99. For the study of stone anchors, one should refer to Honor Frost’s seminal contributions on this topic since 1951; see Frost, Under the Mediterranean, “From Rope to Chain,” “The Stone Anchors of Byblos,” “The Kition Anchors,” and “Anchors Sacred and Profane,” and below.

The use of smaller ships is particularly prevalent on the west coast of

India, where many of the ports are dangerous roadsteads, such as Quilon and Calicut, where the vessels are obliged to anchor out at sea; see J. Carswell, “China and Islam in the Maldive Islands” and “China and Islam, A Survey”; and Ibn Battita. Here smaller craft are impor-

tant both for land contact and transporting merchandise back and forth. At Mantai in northwest Sri Lanka, for instance, a major empo-

f 152 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER III rium for over a millennium, large ships from both east and west apparently anchored on either side of Mannar Island, and exchanged goods through the narrow channel between it and the mainland. (J.C.)

Stone anchors of this type are also well known on the East African coast. There are several in Fort Jesus Museum, Kenya. One example (now in the Zanzibar Museum) was used as the foundation of the central post of a twelfth-century mosque at Tumbatu. (M.H.) Anchors being more numerous than wrecks, they can be used as an overall guide to patterns of maritime activity, providing a typology is established. In the Mediterranean, where Bronze Age stone anchors of specific shapes are found on sites on land, it follows that sealanes, dimensions, dates, and provenance of vessels can be deduced from the anchors that had once belonged to them and that, for one reason or another, had had to be abandoned on the sea floor. Arab seafaring poses more complex problems, since Muslims from China, Africa, and the European Atlantic coast converged on Mecca in craft built in a variety of traditions, to withstand a variety of climatic and physical conditions ranging from the monsoon to lack of safe havens, and from the shallow, sandy, tidal conditions in the Gulf to the deep, windy, tideless Red Sea, whose coasts are fringed with dangerous

coraline spikes. Technically, anchors of different designs would be needed to immobilize craft in such very different conditions: spike-like arms designed to grip into sand would, for instance, get inextricably caught among corals, and so on. Although Arab anchors have as yet received little attention, what 1s known of them in combination with wrecks bears out Hourani’s view that Arabic ship construction played no great role in the Mediterranean. No distinctively Arabic form of anchor has emerged there; those found on tenth-century wrecks (identified as Islamic only by their contents) either conform to a Byzantine pattern (often T- or Y-shaped and made of iron), or take the form of crude pierced stones. The hull remains of the wrecks themselves also suggest that the Arabs took over existing Mediterranean shipyards. For wrecks off the French coast, see Trabelsi Dramoul, “Les épaves sarrasines”; J. Joncheray, “Le navire de Batiguier”; A. G. Visquis, “Premier inventaire du mobilier de l’épave”; and S. Ximinez, “L’étude préliminaire de l’épave sarrasine.” For those off Sicily see G.-F. Purpura, “Un relitto di

eta Normana,” and off Turkey see G. Bass and F. van Doorninck, { 153 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER III

“The rith century Shipwreck at Sergi Liman.” Furthermore, no valuable cargoes, such as porcelain, have been found in the Mediterra-

nean; even the cargo of Islamic glass on the wreck at Sergi Liman seems. to have been scrap for recycling.

In the East the pattern is very different. From the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Cambay, pre- and post-Islamic stones are typologically distinct from each other. Arab anchors from Siraf (D. Whitehouse, “Excavations at Siraf,” 1968, 1970) have a tendency to elongation, which elsewhere produced an obelisk shape with two piercings running through the base in opposite directions, so that, once wooden arms were fixed into such shanks they would give the general appearance of a grapnel. As Chittick suggested (“Stone Anchor Shanks), this might have been what the illustrator of the Magamat of al-Hariri (Plate 7) was attempting to represent. The discovery of an astoundingly long

stone grapnel shank (nearly three meters) in the sea east of Crusade Island, off Tamil Nadu (personal communication by V. Rajamanajam) is a thought-provoking indication of the size of vessels that could carry

such anchors, and material evidence of the weight to which Buzurg refers in his story of Captain ‘Abhara (Kiab ‘aja’tb al-Hind), p. 114.

(H.F.)

MASTS AND SAILS

Page 103. Hourani’s most substantial argument for the Arabic origin of the lateen sail was based on its post-Islamic appearance in Mediterranean iconography during the late ninth century (Plates 5 and 6). His illustrations have been superseded by the recent excavation of a painting of a vessel with a lateen sail in a group of Christian monastic cells, or kellia, in the desert near Alexandria, which predate the Arab conquest in 641. Lucien Basch now argues a Romano-Egyptian origin for the sail; see Basch, “La félouque des Kellia.” (H.F.) NAVIGATION AND LIFE AT SEA

Page 105. The study of the history of Islamic astronomy in general and navigation in particular has made considerable progress since 1951. The interested reader may consult the articles “‘Ilm al-hay’a” (astronomy), “Milaha” (navigation) and “Mikat” (timekeeping) in the new edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam. The most important single work on navigation is G. R. Tibbetts, Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean before the Coming of the Portuguese, now supplemented by various

{ 154 }

NOTES ON CHAPTER III

chapters in J. B. Harley and D. Woodward, eds. The History of Cartography.

On the distinction between Islamic mathematical astronomy and folk astronomy, see D. A. King, “Astronomy for Landlubbers.” On Islamic mathematical astronomy, see E. S. Kennedy, Studies in the Islamic Exact Sciences, and D. A. King, Islamic Mathematical Astronomy; also P. Kunitzsch, The Arabs and the Stars.

These two branches of astronomy were conducted on two completely different levels and quite independently of each other. The. mathematical astronomy of the ancient Babylonians, Greeks, and Muslims was not used by seafarers. They were content with astronomical knowledge based purely on what they saw in the sky, and they did not use sophisticated instruments such as the astrolabe. (D.K) Page 113. Pilot poems were an important feature of maritime literature, and provide useful sailing directions that can still be followed.

For the voyage to East Africa, see R. B. Serjeant, “Hadramawt to Zanzibar.” (M.H.)

{ 155 }

BLANK PAGE

BIBLIOGRAPHY ee Re, OR OR OR OR ORL ORL ORL OR ORL eRe Do Be Do Ben Note: When Hourani’s use of a particular edition is not specified, only the general title is given; e.g., Aeschylus, Perszans. ‘Abd al-Masth, Y., and O. H. E. Burmester, eds. and trs. History of the Patrtarchs of the Egyptian Church. 2 vols. Cairo, 1943. Abu-Zaid Hasan al-Sirafi. Supplement to ‘Akhbar as-Sin wa l-Hind. Edited by L. M. Langlés, with French translation and introduction by J. T. Reinaud. In Relation des voyages faits par les Arabes et les

Aeschylus. Persians. | Persans dans U’Inde et a la Chine. Paris, 1845.

Afshaque, S. M. “The Grand Mosque of Banbhore.” Pakistan Archaeology 6 (1969), pp. 182-219. Agatharchides. On the Erythraean Sea. In K. Miller, Geographi graeci minores. Paris, 1882. Ahmad, N. “Muslim Contributions to Astronomical and Mathematical Geography.” Islamic Culture 18 (July 1944). ———. “The Arabs’ Knowledge of Ceylon.” Islamic Culture 19 (July 1945).

Ahbar as-Sin wa l-Hind. Relation de la Chine et de l’Inde. Redigée en 851. Edited and translated by J. Sauvaget. Paris, 1948.

Allibert, C. “Le site de Dembeni, Mayotte, Archipel des Comores.”

Asie du sud-est et le monde insul-indien 18 (1987). | Ammiuanus Marcellinus. Res gestae.

Anderson, J. G. C. (On the date of the Periplus.) In Cambridge Ancient History, vol. 10. Cambridge, 1934. Anderson, R., and R. C. Anderson. The Sailing Ship. London, 1926. Années d'Epigraphie. (1912). Antoninus Martyr. De locis sanctis. In Itinera Hierosolymitana, edited by

Tobler and Monier, vol. 1. Geneva, 1885. Arrian (Arrianus Flavius). Anabasis and Indica. al-Azdi, al-Basri, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah. Hikayat abi-al-Qasim alBaghdad:. Edited by A. Mez. Heidelberg, 1902. Bacilieri, O., et al. “Anatomia di un naufragio.” Archaeologia Viva n.s. 12 (1990).

{ 157 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY Badger, G. P., ed. A History of the Imams and Seyyids of ‘Oman. Hakluyt Society, vol. 44. London, 1871.

Bakhsh Khan as-Sindi, B. N. “The Probable Date of the First Arab Expeditions to India.” Islamic Culture 20 (July 1946). al-Baladhuri, Ahmad ibn Yahya. Futdh al-buldin. Edited by M. J. de Goeje. Leiden, 1866.

Ball, W. “Some Rock-cut Monuments in Southern Iran.” Ivan 24 (1986).

————.. “How Far Did Buddhism Spread West?” Al-Rafidan 10 (1989). “Banbhore.” Pakistan Archaeology 1 (1964), pp. 49-54.

Barbosa, D. The Book of Duarte Barbosa—An account of the countries bordering on the Indian Ocean and their inhabitants. Hakluyt Society, 2nd series, vol. 39 (1918-1921). Barhebraeus. The Chronography of Gregory Abi'l Faraj, the son of Aaron, the Hebrew Physician, commonly known as Bar Hebraeus, being the first part of his political history of the world. 2 vols. Edited and translated by E. A. W. Budge. Oxford, 1932.

Barthold, W. “Der Koran und das Meer.” Zeitschrift der Deutschen morgenlandischen Gesellschaft n.s. 8 (1929).

Basch, L. “La félouque des Kellia.” Neptunia (Paris, 1991). Bass, G., and F. van Doorninck. “The 11th Century Shipwreck at Sergi Liman, Turkey.” International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 7:2 (1978).

Baylaq al-Qibjaqi. Kitab kunz al-tugjar (Bibliothéque Nationale, Paris. Ms. 2779). Quoted by de Saussure; copied by al-Magqrizi, KAi#at, vol. 1. Bulag, A.H. 1270, p. 210. Begley, V. “Arikamedu Reconsidered.” American Journal of Archaeology 87 (1983).

———, and Richard ID. De Puma, eds. Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade. Madison, Wisconsin, 1992. Bell, H. I., ed. The Aphrodite Papyri. London, 1910. al-Birint, Muhammad ibn Ahmad (Abu al-Raihan). Alberuni’s India. Translated by E. C. Sachau. 2 vols. London, 1910. Blochet, E. Musulman Painting. London, 1929.

Boucharlat, R.; E. Haerinck; O. Lecomte; D. T. Potts; and K. G. Stevens. “The European Archaeological Expedition to ed-Dur, Umm al-Qaiwain (U.A.E.). An interim report on the 1987 and 1988 seasons. Mesopotamia 24 (1989), pp. 5-72.

Boucharlat, R.; E. Haerinck; C. S. Phillips; and D. T. Potts. “Archae-

{ 158 } }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ological Reconnaissance at ed-Dur, Umm al-Qaiwain U.A.E.” Akkadica 58 (1988), pp. 1-26. Boucharlat, R.; and J.-F. Salles. Arabie orientale, Mésopotamie et Iran méridionale de l'age de fer au début de la période islamique. Paris, 1984.

———. “The Tylos Period.” In Pierre Lombard and Monique Kervran, eds., Bahrain National Museum Archaeological Collections: A Selection of Pre-Islamic Antiquities. Bahrain, 1989. Bowen, R. L. Arab Dhows of Eastern Arabia. Rehoboth, Mass., 1949. Breasted, J. H. Ancient Records of Egypt. Chicago, 1906-1907.

Brindley, H. H. “Early Pictures of Lateen Sails.” Mariner’s Mirror 12 (1926).

————. “Primitive Craft—Evolution or Diffusion.” Mariner’s Mirror (July 1932). Brinkman, J. A Political History of Post-Kassite Mesopotamia, 1158-722 A.c. Rome, 1968. Bronson, B.; P. Charoenwongsa; Ho Chuimei; and T. Srisuchat. “Ex-

cavations at Ko Kho Khao: A Preliminary Report.” Unpublished manuscript. Bangkok, 1989. Browne, E. G. A Literary History of Persia. Cambridge, 19209. Bruce, J. Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile. 3rd ed., vol. 2. Edinburgh, 1813. Bunbury, E. H. A History of Ancient Geography among the Greeks and Romans from the Earliest Ages till the Fall of the Roman Empire. London, 1879. Bury, J. B. History of the Later Roman Empire. London, 1923. Butler, A. J. The Arab Conquest of Egypt. Oxford, 1902. Buzurg ibn Shahriyar, al-Ram-Hurmuzi. Kitab aja’1b al-Hind, In Le livre des merveilles de l’Inde, edited by P. van der Lith; translated to French by L. M. Devic. Leiden, 1883-1886. Caetam, L. Annali dell’Islam. Milan, 1905-1926. Cambridge Ancient History. Cambridge, 1927-1984.

Cambridge Mediaeval History. Planned by J. B. Bury. Cambridge, IQII-1936.

Carreri, G. “Former Trading Centres of the Persian Gulf.” Geographical Journal 12 (quoted by A. W. Stiffe). Carswell, J. “China and Islam in the Maldive Islands.” Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society, 1975-1976, 1976-1977 41 (London, 1977).

———. “China and Islam, A Survey of the Coast of India and { 159 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ceylon.” Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society, 1977-1978 42 (London, 1979).

———. “China and the West: Recent Archaeological Research in South Asia.” Asian Affairs 20:1 (February 1989).

———., “The Port of Mantai, Sri Lanka.” In V. Begley and R. D. De Puma, eds., Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade. Madison, Wisconsin, I1ggI.

—_——., and M. Prickett. “Mantai 1980: A Preliminary Investigation.” Ancient Ceylon 5 (1984).

Cary, M. The Geographical Background of Greek and Roman History. Oxford, 1949. Casal, J.-M. Fouilles de Virampatnam-Arikamedu. Paris, 1949. Cassius, D. (Cassius Dio Cocceianus). Roman History. Casson, L. The Periplus Maris Erythraei: Text with Introduction, Translation and Commentary. Princeton 1989. Charlesworth, M. P. Fore and Aft and Their Story. London, 1927. ———. “The Periplus Maris Erythraet.” Classical Quarterly 22 (1928). ————. Trade Routes and Commerce of the Roman Empire. Cambridge, 1926.

Chatterton, E. K. Fore and Aft Craft and their Story. London, 1927. Chaudhuri, K. N. Trade and Civilisation in the Indian Ocean: An Economic History from the Rise of Islam to 1750. Cambridge, 1985.

Chau Ju-Kua (New History of the Tang). Translated by F. Hirth and W. Rockhill. St. Petersburg, 1grt. Ch ten-han-shu. Translated by F. Hirth. In China and the Roman Orient. Leipzig, 1885. Chittick, H. N. “An Archaeological Reconnaissance in the Horn: The British Somali Expedition, 1975.” Azania (1976), pp. 117-33. ————. “An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Southern Somali Coast.” Azania 4 (1969).

———. “Early Ports in the Horn of Africa,” International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 8:4 (1979), pp. 273-77. ———. Kilwa: An Islamic Trading City on the East African Coast. Mem-

oir No. 5 of the British Institute in Eastern Africa. Nairobi, 1974. ————. Kisimani Mafia. Dar es Salaam, 1961. ———. Manda: Excavations at an Island Port on the Kenya Coast. Mem-

oir No. 9 of the British Institute in Eastern Africa. Nairobi, 1984. ————. “Pre-Islamic Trade and Ports of the Horn.” In R. E. Leakey and B. A. Ogot, eds. Proceedings of the 8th Panafrican Congress of Prehistory and Quarternary Studies. Nairobi, 1977.

{ 160 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

———. “Report on the Excavations at Kisimani Mafia and Kua.” Tanzania Antiquities Report for 1964. Dar es Salaam, 1964.

———.. “Stone Anchor Shanks in the Western Indian Ocean.” International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 9:1 (1979).

———. “Unguja Okuu: The Earliest Imported Pottery and an ‘Abbasid Dinar.” Azania 1 (1966), pp. 161-63.

Chung, K. W., and G. F. Hourani. “Arab Geographers on Korea.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 58 (December 1938), pp. 65861.

Clark, C., and M. Horton. Zanzibar Archaeological Survey 1984/1985. Zanzibar, 1985. Clemesha, W. W. “The Early Arab Thalassocracy.” Journal of the Polynesian Society 52 (1943).

Clowes, G. S. L. Sailing Ships. London, 1932. —_——. The Story of Sail. London, 1936.

Codazzi, A. “Il compendio geografico arabo di Ishaq b. al-Husayn.” Rendicont della R. Accademia Nazionale dei Lince1. Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche, ser. 6, vol. 4 (1929). Colomb, P. H. Slave-Catching in the Indian Ocean. London, 1873.

Comfort, H. “Terra Sigillata from Arikamedu.” In V. Begley and R. D. De Puma, eds., Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade. Madison, Wisconsin, 1992, pp. 134-50.

Cosmas Indicopleustes. The Christian Topography of Cosmas Indtcopleustes, an Egyptian Monk. Hakluyt Society, ser. 1, vol. 97. Reprint London, 1987. Crone, P. Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Princeton, 1987.

Datoo, B. A. “Rhapta: The Location and Importance of East Africa’s First Port.” Azania 5 (1970), pp. 65-75. De Cardi, B. “Archaeological Survey in the Northern Trucial States.” With a Gazeteer by D. B. Doe. East and West 21: 3-4 (1971). ———-. “Trucial Oman in the 16th and 17th Centuries.” Antiquity 44 (1970).

De Goeje, M. J., ed. Bibliotheca geographorum arabicum. Leiden, 1879.

De Puma, R. D. “The Roman Bronzes from Kohlapur.” In V. Begley and R. D. De Puma, eds., Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade. Madison, Wisconsin, 1992, pp. 82-112. Doe, B. Southern Arabia. London, 1971.

Dolley, R. H. “The Warships of the Later Roman Empire.” Journal of Roman Studies 38 (1948).

Dougherty, R. P. The Sealand of Anctent Arabia. New Haven, 1932.

{ 161 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY Economic Survey of Ancient Rome. Baltimore, 1933-1940. Vol. 2, no. 235.

Edens, C. “The Arabian Gulf in the IInd Millennium s.c.” In Shaikha H. A. al-Khalifa and M. Rice, eds., Bahrain through the Ages. London, 1986. Elliot, W. Coins of Southern India. London, 1885. Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Coconut” and “Teak” in 11th ed. (Cambridge and New York, rg1o-1g11); “Red Sea” in 14th ed. (New York, 1929).

Encyclopaedia of Islam. “Shihab al-Din,” and “Sulaiman al-Mahri.” Leiden, 1934. Encyclopaedia of Islam (new edition). “Milaha,” and “Safina.” Leiden, 19QI.

Eratosthenes. In Strabo, Geography. Erman, A. The Literature of the Ancient Egyptians. Translated by A. M. Blackman. London, 1927. Eusebius, Pamphili (Bishop of Caesarea). Praeparatio evangelica. Eutropius, Flavius. Breviarum historiae romanae.

Fattovich, R. “Gash Delta Archaeological Project: 1988-1989 Field Season.” Nyame Akuma no. 3 (1990).

———. “At the Periphery of the Empire: The Gash Delta, Eastern Sudan.” In W. V. Davies, ed., Egypt and Africa, Nubia from Prehistory to Islam. London, 1991. Fawzi, H. Hadith al-Sindabad al-Oadim. Cairo, 1943. Ferrand, G. “L’élément persan dans les textes nautiques arabes.” Journal Astatique 204 (April-June 1924). ———. Introduction a l'astronomie nautique arabe. Paris, 1928. ———. “Le K’ouen-Louen et les anciennes navigations interocéaniques dans les mers du sud.” Journal Asiatique (1919). ———. “Madagascar” and “Waqwaq.” In Encyclopaedia of Islam. Leiden, 1936. ————. Relations de voyages et textes géographiques arabes, persanes et turks, rélatfs a ' Extréme Orient du VUI au XVII siécles. 2 vols. Paris, 1913-1914. Fraenkel, S. Die aramdischen Fremdwé6rter im Arabischen. Leiden, 1886.

Frankfort, H. “The Origin of Monumental Architecture in Egypt.” American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 58 (1941).

Frost, H. “Anchors Sacred and Profane: The Ugarit-Ras Shamra Stone Anchors Revised and Compared.” Ras Shamra-Ougarit IV: Arts et industries de la pierre (ERC) (1991). ————. “From Rope to Chain: On the Development of Anchors in the Mediterranean.” Mariner’s Mirror 49 (1963).

{ 162 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

———. “The Kition Anchors.” Excavations at Kition 5, Appendix 1 (1985).

———. “The Stone Anchors of Byblos.” Mélanges de l’ Université SaintJoséph 65 (1969). ———-. “Two Carian Wrecks.” Antiquity 34 (Cambridge, 1960). ————. Under the Mediterranean. London, 1962. ————. “Vers une solution: comment faire des relevés élémentaires pour décrire une épave archéologique.” Le plongeur et l’archéologie (CMAS) 4 (1960).

Ghirshman, R. Begram: recherches archéologiques et historiques sur les | Kouchans. Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique Frangaise en Afghanistan, no. 12. Paris, 1946. ————. The Island of Kharg. Tehran, 1971. Gildemeister, J. “Uber arabisches Schiffswesen.” Géttinger Nachrichten (1882).

Glaser, E. Skizze der Geschichte und Geographie Arabiens. Berlin, 1890. Glueck, N. Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution. 1941. ————. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, nos. 71, 72

(October and December 1938); no. 76 (October 1939); no. 80 (October 1940). Greek Papyri in the British Museum. Vol. 4. London, 1910. Gunther, R. T. The Astrolabes of the World. 2 vols. Oxford, 1932.

Gyllensvard, B. “Recent Finds of Chinese Ceramics at Fostat. I.” Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 45 (Stockholm, 1973). ———. “Recent Finds of Chinese Ceramics at Fostat. II.” Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 47 (Stockholm, 1975). Hackin, J. Nouvelles recherches archéologiques 4 Begram. Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique Francaise en Afghanistan, no. 11. Paris, 1954:

————. Recherches archéologiques 4 Begram. Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique Francaise en Afghanistan, no. g. Paris, 1939.

Haerinck, E. “Excavations at ed-Dur, Umm al-Qaiwain (U.A.E.). Preliminary Report on the Fourth Belgian Season (1990).” Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy (in press).

———.. “Quelques monuments funéraires de |’'Ile de Kharg dans le Golfe Persique.” Iranica Antiqua 11 (1975), pp. 134-67. ———, C. Metdepenninghen, and K. G. Stevens. “Excavations at edDur, Umm al-Qaiwain (U.A.E.). Preliminary Report on the Second Belgian Season (1988).” Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 2 (1991), pp. 31-60.

{ 163 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY ——— —. “Excavations at ed-Dur, Umm al-Qaiwain (U.A.E). Preliminary Report on the Third Belgian Season (1989).” Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy (in press). Hannestad, L. “Danish Archaeological Excavations on Failaka.” In R. Boucharlat and J.-F. Salles, eds., Arabte orientale, Mésopotamie et Iran méridionale de lage de fer au début de la période islamique. Paris, 1984. —_——. “The Hellenistic Pottery from Failaka.” In Ikaros: The Hellenistic Settlements, vol. 2. Aarhus, 1983. ———. “The Pottery from the Hellenistic Settlement on Failaka.” In R. Boucharlat and J.-F. Salles, eds., Arabie orientale, Mésopotamie et Tran méridionale de lage de fer au début de la période islamique. Paris, 1984.

, Hansman, J. “Charax and the Karkheh.” Iranica Antigua 7 (1967). ———.. Julfar. An Arabian Port. London, 1985.

Hardy-Guilbert, C. Julfar, cité portuaire du Golfe arabo-persique a la periode tslamique. Paris, 1991. al-Hlarirl, Qasim ibn ‘Ali. Magamdat. Bibliothéque Nationale, Paris. Ms. arabe 5847, Schefer collection. Harley, J. B., and D. Woodward, eds. The History of Cartography, vol. 2, book. 1: Cartography in the Traditions of Islamic and South Asian Societies. Chicago and London, 1992. Hartmann, M. “China.” In Encyclopaedia of Islam. Leiden, 1936. Hasan, H. A History of Persian Navigation. London, 1928. Flaurani, G. F. Al-‘Arab wa'l-milaha ft 1-muhit al-hindi. Being an authorized translation by Satyid Ya‘qub Bakr of Haurani’s Arab Seafaring in

the Indian Ocean. Cairo, 1958. Haywood, C. W. “The Bajun Islands and Birikau.” Geographic Journal 85 (1935), Pp. 59-64.

Hermann, A. “Die Verkehrswege zwischen China, Indien und Rom.” Veréffentlichung des Forschungsinstituts fir Vergleichende Religionsgeschichte a.d. U. Leipzig 7 (1922).

Herodotus. History. Hertzog, R. “Punt.” Abhandlungen des deutschen archaeologischen Insttuts Kairo 6 (Cairo, 1968). Herzfeld, E. Pazkuli. Berlin, 1924. —_——. Zoroaster and His World. Princeton, 1947. Hirth, F. China and the Roman Orient. Leipzig, 1885. ————, and W. Rockhill. Chau Ju-Kua. St. Petersburg, 1grt. Hitti, P. K. History of the Arabs. 2nd ed. London, 1940.

{ 164 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ho Chuimei. “Ceramics Found at Excavations at Ko Kho Khao and Laem Pho, Southern Thailand.” Journal of Trade Ceramics (in press). Hornell, J. “Indian Boat Designs.” Mariner’s Mirror 27 (January 1941). ———. “Naval Activity in the Days of Solomon.” Antiguity 21 (June 1947).

———~. “The Origins and Ethnological Significance of Indian Boat Designs.” Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 7 (Calcutta, 1920).

———. “The Sea-going Mtepe and Dau of the Lamu Archipelago.” Mariner's Mirror 27 (January 1941). ———. “Sea-trade in Early Times.” Antiquity 15 (1941). ————. “A Tentative Classification of Arab Seacraft.” Mariner’s Mirror (January 1942).

———. Water Transport: Origins and Early Evolution. Cambridge, 1946.

Horton, M. “Asiatic Colonization of the East African Coast: the Manda Evidence.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 2 (1986), pp. 201-11.

———. “Early Muslim Trading Settlements on the East African Coast: New Evidence from Shanga.” Antiquaries Journal 67:2 (1987). ————. “The Periplus and East Africa.” Azania 25 (1990), pp. 95-99. ————. “Primitive Islam and the Architecture in East Africa.” Muagarnas 8 (1991), pp. 103-16. ———. Trading Settlements on the East African Coast, Excavations at Shanga 1980-1988. Forthcoming. —————, and T. R. Blurton. “‘Indian’ Metalwork in East Africa: The Bronze Lion Statuette from Shanga.” Antiquity 62 (1988).

Hou-han-shu. Translated and edited by F. Hirth. In China and the Roman Orient. Leipzig, 1885.

Hourant, G. “Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean in the Ninth and

Tenth Centuries.” Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University, 1938-1939.

—_——., See also Haur4ni (in Arabic).

Hui-Chao. Translated by F. Hirth. Journal of the American Oriental Society 33 (1913).

Ibn “Abd al-Hakam. Futah Misr (The History of the Conquest of Egypt, North Africa and Spain). Edited by C. C. Torrey. New Haven, 1922.

Ibn Battitah. Voyages d’Ilbn Batoutah. Edited and translated into French by C. Defrémery and B. de Sanguinetti. 4 vols. Paris, 1853-1859.

{ 165 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ibn al-Faqth, al-Hamadani (Ahmad ibn Muhammad). Kitab al-buldan. In M. J. de Goeje, ed., Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum. Leiden, 1885.

Ibn Hauqal, Muhammad. Kitab surat al-ard. In M. J. de Goeje, ed., Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum. Leiden 1879; second edition by J. H. Kramers, 1938.

Ibn Jubayr, Muhammad ibn Ahmad. Travels. Edited by W. Wright. 2nd ed., revised by M. J. de Goeje. Leiden, 1907. Ibn Khurdadhbah, ‘Ubaid Allah ibn ‘Abd Allah. Kitab al-masalik w’almamalik. In M. J. de Goeje, ed., Bibliotheca geographorum arabicum. Leiden, 18809.

Ibn Majid, Ahmad (Shihab al-Din) al-Najdi. Kitab al-fawa'id fi usul tlm al-bahr wa’l gawa’id. Bibliothéque Nationale, Ms. 2292, reproduced in Ferrand, Le pilote des mers de I’Inde et de la Chine et de l'Indonesie. Paris, 1921-1923. Translated in Tibbetts, Arab Navigation

in the Indian Ocean before the Coming of the Portuguese. London, 1971.

Ibn Rustah, Ahmad ibn ‘Umar. Kitab al-a‘lag al-nafisah. In M. J. de Goeje, ed., Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum. Leiden, 1879. I-ching. Translated by J. Takakusu in A Record of the Buddhist Religion. Oxford, 1896.

al-Idrisi, Muhammad ibn Muhammad. Kitab nuzhat al-mushtag fi ikhtirag al-afag. In Opus Geographicum. Edited by A. Bombaci, U.

Rizzitano, R. Rubinacci, and L. V. Vagliere. Naples and Rome, 1971.

Ishaq, M. “A Peep into the First Arab Expeditions to India under the Companions of the Prophet.” Islamic Culture 19 (April 1945).

Isidore of Charax. Parthian Stations. Translated by W. H. Schoff. Philadelphia, 1914.

al-Istakhri, Ibrahim ibn Muhammad (Abu Ishaq), al-Farisi. Kitab masalik al-mamalik. In M. J. de Goeje, ed., Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum. Leiden, 1879. Jal, A. Glossatre des termes nautiques. Paris, 1848.

Jataka, The. Translated by E. B. Cowell et al. Cambridge, 1897. Johnstone, J. An Introduction to Oceanography with Special Reference to Geography and Geophysics. London, 1923. Joncheray, J. “Le navire du Batiguier.” Archéologia 79 (1975); and Gallia Informations 1 (1987-1988). Jordanus, Catalani. Mirabilia descripta. Translated by H. Yule. Hakluyt Society, 1st series, vol. 31. London, 1863.

{ 166 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY Kahle, P. “Zur Geschichte des mittelalterlichen Alexandria.” Der Islam 12 (1922).

Kamioka, K., and Hikiochi Yajima. The Inter-regional Trade in the Western Part of the Indian Ocean. The Second Report on the Dhow Trade. Tokyo, 1979. Kammerer, A. La Mer Rouge, L’Abyssinie et l'Arabie vol. 3. Cairo, 1929.

Kantor, H. J. “The Final Phase of Predynastic Culture.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 3 (1944).

Karashima, N. “Discoveries of Chinese Ceramic-sherds on the Coasts of South India.” Unpublished paper, UNESCO Trade Conference, Madras, 1990. ————. “Trade Relations between South India and China during the 13th and r4th Centuries.” Journal of East-West Maritime Relations 1 (Tokyo, 1989). Kennedy, E. S. Studies in the Islamic Exact Sciences. Beirut, 1983.

Kervran, M. “A la recherche de Suhar.” In R. Boucharlat and J.-F. Salles, eds., Arabie orientale, Mésopotamie et Iran méridionale de lage de fer au début de la période islamique. Paris, 1984, pp. 285-98.

———. “Qal‘at al-Bahrain: A Strategic Position from the Hellenistic Period until Modern Times.” In Shaikha H. A. al-Khalifa and M. Rice, eds., Bahrain through the Ages The Archaeology. London, 1986. Khan, F. A. Banbhore. 3rd ed., revised. Karachi, 1969. Kia Tan. In Chau-Ju-Kua (New History of the T’ang). Translated by F.

Hirth and W. Rockhill. St. Petersburg, rgrt. Kien Chen. In J. Takakusu, First Congress of Far Eastern Studies. Hanoi, 1903. Kindermann, H. “Schiff” im Arabischen. Zwickau, 1934. King, D. A. “Astronomy for Landlubbers and Navigators: The Case of the Islamic Middle Ages.” Revista da Universidade de Coimbra 32 (1985). ————. Islamic Mathematical Astronomy. London, 1986.

King, G. R. D. “Excavations by the British Team at Julfar, Ra’s alKhaimah, United Arab Emirates: Interim Report on the First Season (1989).” Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 20 (1990).

——_—. “Excavations by the British Team at Julfar . . . Report on the Second Season (1990).” Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 21 (1991). —————. “Excavations by the British Team at Julfar . . . Report on the Third Season (1991).” Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 22 (1992).

{ 167 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kirkman, J. “Excavations at Ras Mkumbuu.” Tanganyika Notes and Records 53 (1958).

Kirwan, L. P. “Rhapta, Metropolis of Azania.” Azania 21 (1986), Pp- 99-104.

Kitchen, K. A. “Punt and How to Get There.” Orientalia 40 (1971), pp. 184-207. Komroff, M. Contemporaries of Marco Polo. London, 1928.

Kornemann, E. “Die historischen Nachrichten des Periplus maris Erythraei tiber Arabien.” Janus 1 (1921). Koster, A. Das antike Seewesen. Berlin, 1923. —————. Studien zur Geschichte des antiken Seewesens. Leipzig, 1934.

Kunitzsch, P. The Arabs and the Stars. Northhampton (U.K.), 1989. Kuwabara, J. “On P’u Shou-kéng.” Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko 2 (1928).

Lam, P.; J. Carswell; T. Russell; M. M. Abu Bakr; K. Kwan; and J. Martin. A Ceramic Legacy of Asia’s Maritime Trade. Southeast Asian Ceramic Society, Malaysia, 1985. Laufer, B. Sino-Iranica. Chicago, 1919. Le Strange, G. The Lands of the Eastern Caliphate. Cambridge, 1905.

Lewicki, T. “Les premiers commergants arabes en Chine.” Roczenik Orientalistyceny 11 1935.

Lipke, P. The Royal Ship of Cheops. British Archaeological Reports (International Series), 1984. Littmann, E., et al. Deutsche Aksum-Expedition. 4 vols. Berlin, 1913. Lokotsch, K. Etymologisches Wérterbuch der europiischen Worter ortentalischen Ursprungs. Heidelberg, 1927. Lowick, N. M. Sivaf XV. The Coins and Monumental Inscriptions. London, 1985. Luckenbill, S. Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, vol. 2. Chicago, 1927.

Ma Huan. Ying-yai Sheng-lan (The Overall Survey of the Ocean’s Shores).

Translated by J. V. G. Mills. Hakluyt Society, Cambridge, 1970. Magie, D., tr. Historia Augusta: The Scriptores Historiae Augustae. 3 vols. London and New York, 1922-1923. Mandeville, J. Travels. Edited by J. Ashton. London, 1887. al-Maqdisi. Ahsan al-tagasim fi ma‘rifat al-agalim. In M. J. de Goeje, ed., Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum, Leiden, 1894. Translated by G. S. A. Ranking and F. Azoo. Calcutta, 1897. Maritime Museum of Finland Annual Report, 1980.

{ 168 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Marshall, J., and A. Foucher. The Monuments of Sanchi, vol. 2. Calcutta, 1947. Martyrdom of St. Arethas. In Patrologia Graeca 115. Paris, 1890. Massignon, L. “Zandj.” In Encyclopaedia of Islam. Leiden, 1936.

al-Mas‘idi, ‘Ali ibn Husain. Kitab al-tanbih w’al-ashraf. In M. J. de Goeje, ed., Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum. Muraj al-dhahab wa ma din al-jauhar. Edited and translated into French by C. B. de Meynard and P. de Courteille. 9 vols. Paris, 1861-1877.

Mathew, G. “The Dating and Significance of the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea.” In H. Chittick and R. T. Rothberg, eds., East Africa and the Orient: Cultural Syntheses in Pre-Colonial Times. New York and London, 1975, pp. 147-63. Mattingley, H. “Coins from a Site Find in British East Africa.” Numismatic Chronicle ser. 5, vol. 12 (1932). McCrindle, J. W. The Christian Topography of Cosmas, an Egyptian Monk. Hakluyt Society, ser. 1, vol. 97. Reprint London, 1987.

McKinnon, E. E. “Trade Contacts with the Indonesian Archipelago 6th to 14th Centuries.” Unpublished paper, UNESCO Trade Conference, Madras, 1990. Meyer-Liibke, W. Romanisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Heidelberg, IQII. Mez, A. Die Renaissance des Islams. Heidelberg, 1922. Miles, S. B. The Countries and Tribes of the Persian Gulf. With a new introduction by J. B. Kelly. London, 1966. Moberg, A., ed. Book of the Himyarites. Lund, 1924. Montet, P. Byblos et l/Egypte. Paris, 1928. Montgomery, J. Arabia and the Bible. Philadelphia, 1934. Mookerji, R. A History of Indian Shipping and Maritime Activity. London, 1912.

Moreland, W. H. “The Ships of the Arabian Sea about a.p. 1500.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 2 (January and April 1939), PP. 173-92.

Morgan, P. “New Thoughts on Old Hormuz: Chinese Ceramics in the Hormuz Region in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries.” Iran 31 (1991).

Moritz, B. Arabien. Hanover, 1923. Muir, W. The Caliphate, Its Rise, Decline and Fall. Revised by T. H. Weir. Edinburgh, 1924. Miller, K. Geographi Graeci Minores. Paris, 1882.

{ 169 }

BIBLIOGRAPAY Munro-Hay, S. C. The Coinage of Aksum. New Delhi, 1984. ———. Excavations at Aksum: An Account of Research at the Ancient Ethiopian Capital Directed in 1972-74 by the Late Dr. Neville Chittick. London, 1989. —_——.. “The Foreign Trade of the Aksumite Port of Adulis.” Azania 17 (1982).

Nadvi, S. S. “Arab Navigation.” Islamic Culture 15 (October, 1941); 16 (January, April, and October 1942). Nainar, S. M. H. Arab Geographers’ Knowledge of Southern India. Madras, 1942.

Nallino, C. A. “Astronomy.” In Encyclopaedia of Islam. Leiden, 1936.

N§sir-i-Khusraw (Abu Mu’in). Sefer Nameh. Relation du voyage de Nassirt Khosrau, en Syrie, en Palestine, en Egypte, en Arabtie, et en Perse, pendant les années de l’Hegire 437-444 (1035-1942). Edited and translated into French by C. Schefer. Paris, 1881. Naumachica. Edited by A. Dain. Paris, 1943. Naville, E. The Temple of Deir al Bahari. London, 1898. Newberry, P. E. “Notes on Sea-going Ships.” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 28 (1942).

Newbold, D. “The Crusaders in the Red Sea and the Sudan.” Sudan Notes and Records 22, pt. 2 (1945). Reprinted in Antiquity 20 (1946). Nicholson, E. Men and Measures. London, 1912. Noldeke, T. Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sassaniden. Leiden, 1879. ———. Sketches from Eastern History. Translated by J. S. Black. London, 1892.

Nonnosus. In L. Dindorfius, ed., Historici Graecit Minores, vol. 1. Leipzig, 1870-1871.

©’Connor, D. “Egypt, 1552-664 B.c.” In J. D. Clark, ed., The Cambridge History of Africa, From the Earliest Times to c. 500 BC, vol. 1, chap. 12. Cambridge, 1982, pp. 830-970. Oman, a Seafaring Nation. Oman, 1979. Otto, W., and H. Bengston. Zur Geschichte des Niederganges des Ptolo-

maerreiches. Munich, 1938. |

Ouseley, W. Travels in Various Countries of the East. London, 1819. Palmer, J. A. B. “Periplus Maris Erythraei: The Indian Evidence as to

the Date.” Classical Quarterly 41 (1947). |

Parkinson, C. N. Trade in the Eastern Seas, 1793-1813. Cambridge, 1937.

{ 170 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY Pauly, A. F. von, and G. Wissowa. “Saba.” Real Encyclopédie der classtschen Altertum-wissenschaft. Stuttgart, 1893- . Peake, H. “The Copper Mountain of Magan.” Antiquity 2 (1928). Pelliot, P. “Deux itinéraires de Chine en Inde a la fin du VIIIe siécle.” Bulletin de ’Ecole Francaise d’Extréme-Orient 4 (1904). Periplus Maris Erythraei: The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea. Translated with notes by W. H. Schoff. New York, 1912. See also H. Frisk, ed., Geographi Graect Minores, vol. 1. Géteburg, 1927. Philostorgius. The Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius. Translated by Edward Walford. London, 1855. Piacentini, V. F. “L’emporio ed il regno di Hormoz.” Memorie dell’ Isti-

tuto Lombardo, Accademia di Scienze e Lettere, Classe di LettereScienze Moralt e Storiche 35, fasc. 1. Milan, 1975.

————. “International Indian Ocean Routes and Gwadar Kuh-Batil Settlementin Makran.” Nuova Rivista Storica 72:3-4 (1988), pp. 307-39. ————. “La presa di potere sassanide sul Golfo Persico tra leggenda e

realta.” Cio 20:2 (April-June 1984), pp. 173-210. Pirenne, H. Mahomet et Charlemagne. Paris, 1937. Pliny the Elder. Natural History. Polybius. Histories.

Pomey, P. “L’épave de Bon Porté et les bateaux cousus de Méditerranée.” Mariner’s Mirror (1981). Popovic, A. La révolte des esclaves en Irag au IIleme/IXeme siécle. Paris, 1970.

Posener, G. “Le Canal du Nil a la Mer Rouge avant les Ptolomées.” Chronique a’Egypte 26 (July 1938). —_——. La premiére domination perse en Egypte. Cairo, 1936. Potts, D. T. The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity, vol. 2: From Alexander the Great to the Coming of Islam. Oxford, 1990. Poujade, J. La route des Indes et ses navires. Paris, 1946.

Prins, A. H. J. “The Mtepe of Lamu, Mombasa and the Zanzibar Seas.” Paiduema 28 (1982).

Prinsep, J. “Note on the Nautical Instruments of the Arabs.” Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 60 (December 1836), pp. 784-93. Procopius. Gothic Wars.

————. Persian Wars. Translated by H. B. Dewing. Loeb Classical Library, London, 1914. Ptolemy Claudius. Geography. Purpura, G.-F. “Un relitto di eta Normana a Marsala.” Bolletino a’Arte, supp. 29 (1985).

{ 171 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY Qudamah ibn Ja’far. Kitab al-khara@dj. In M. J. de Goeje, ed., Biblio-

| theca geographorum arabicorum. Leiden, 1879. Raschke, M. G. “New Studies in Roman Commerce with the East.” Aufstieg und Niedergang der rimischen Welt 2:9.2 (Berlin, 1978), pp. 604-1,378. Ratnagar, S. Encounters: The Westerly Trade of the Harappa Civilization. London, 1981. Reade, J., ed. The Indian Ocean in Antiquity. London, 1995. The Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Pilot. British Admiralty. gth ed. London, 1944.

Reinaud, J. T. Relations des voyages faits par les Arabes. Paris, 1845. Révoil, G. “Recueilles dans le Comal.” Revue d’Ethnographie et de Soctologie. Paris, 1882.

———. “Tumuli dans l’Aromatica region, prés Aden.” Bulletin de la Sociéte d’Anthropologie de Paris, ser. 3, no. 4 (Paris, 1881), pp. 584-89. ———.. La vallée du Darror. Paris, 1882.

Rhodokanakis, N. “Die Sarkophaginschrift von Gizen.” Zeitschrift fiir Semiutistik 2 (1924).

————. Handbuch der altarabischen Altertumskunde, vol. 1. Copenhagen, 1927. Rinaldi, M. Kraak Porcelain—A Moment in the History of Trade. London, 1989.

Roaf, M. D. Cultural Atlas of Mesopotamia. New York and Oxford, 1990.

Rodgers, W. L. Naval Warfare under Oars, gth-16th Centuries: A Study of Strategy, Tactics and Ship Design. Annapolis, 1939.

Ross, E. C., tr. and annotator. “The Annals of Oman from Early Times to the Year 1728 a.p. From an Arabic MS by Sheykh Sirhan

bin Sa‘id bin Sirhan bin Muhammad, of the Banu Ali tribe of Oman.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal 2 (1874), pp. 111-96. Rossini, C. “Expeditions et possessions des Habasat en Arabie.” Journal Astatique, ser. 11, vol. 17 (July-September 1921).

Rostovtzeff, M. “Zur Geschichte des Ost- und Siidhandels im ptolomaisch-rémischen Agypten.” Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung 4 (19071908).

————. The Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire. Oxford, 1926.

———. The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World, vols, 1 and 2. Oxford, 194t. { 172 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY de Saint Denis, E. “La vitesse des navires anciens.” Revue archéologique 18 (July-September 1941). Salles, J.-F. “Céramiques de surface 4 ed-Dour, Emirats Arabes Unis.” In R. Boucharlat and J.-F. Salles, eds., Arabie orientale, Mésopotamie et Iran méridionale de Vage de fer au début de la période islamique. Paris, 1984. ———. Failaka: fouilles frangaises, 1983. Lyon, 1984.

Sasaki, T. “Vietnamese, Thai, Chinese, Iraqi and Iranian Ceramics from the 1988 Sounding at Julfar.” Al-Rafidan 12 (1991), pp. 206-16.

Saussure, L. de. “L’origine de la rose des ventes et l’invention de la boussole.” Archives des Sciences Physiques et Naturelles 5 (Geneva, 1923).

Sauvaget, J. “Sur d’anciennes instructions nautiques arabes pour les mers de l’'Inde.” Journal Asiatique 236 (1948), pp. 11-20.

Sayed, A. M. “Discovery of the Site of the 12th Dynasty Port at Wadi Gawesis on the Red Sea Shore.” Revue Egyptologique 29 (1977), pp. 138-77.

Scanlon, G. T. “Egypt and China: Trade and Imitation.” In D. S. Richards, ed., Islam and the Trade of Asia. Oxford and Philadelphia, 1971, pp. 81-95.

———, and W. B. Kubiak. Fustat Expedition Final Report, vol. 2: Fustat-C. American Research Center in Egypt, Winona Lake, 19809. ———.. “Re-dating Baghdat’s Houses and the Aqueduct.” Art and Archaeology Research Papers 4 (1973). Schiaparelli, C. Jon Gubayr, Viaggio. Rome, 1906.

Schur, W. “Die Orientpolitik des Kaisers Nero.” Kio 15 (Leipzig, 1923).

Schwarz, W. “Die Inschriften des Wiistentempels von Redesiye.” /ahrbuch fiir Klassische Philologie 153 (1896).

Sedov, A. V. “New Archaeological and Epigraphical Material from Qana (South Arabia).” Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 3 (1992).

Serjeant, R. B. “Hadramawt to Zanzibar: the Pilot Poem of the Nakhudha Sa‘id ba Tayi‘ of al-Hami.” Paiduema 28 (1982), pp. 109-28. Severin, T. The Sindbad Voyage. London, 1982. Sharaf al-Zaman Tahir, Marvazi on China, the Turks and India, Translated and edited by V. Minorsky. London, 1942.

Sheaf, C., and R. Kilburn. The Hatcher Porcelain Cargoes. Oxford, 1988.

Shepherd, G. “The Making of the Swahili: A View from the Southern End of the East African Coast.” Patduema 28 (1982), pp. 149-64.

{ 173 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sheriff, A. M. H. “The East African Coast and Its Role in Maritime Trade.” In G. Mokhtar, ed., Ancient Civilizations of Africa. UNESCO General History of Africa 2. Berkeley, California, 1981. “Shihab al-din.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. Leiden, 1936.

Sidebotham, S. E. Roman Economic Policy in the Erythra Thalassa. Leiden, 1986. ————~. J. A. Riley; H. A. Hamroush; and H. Barakat. “Fieldwork on

the Red Sea Coast: The 1987 Season.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt 26 (1989).

Sinclair, P. “Archaeology in Eastern Africa: An Overview of Current Chronological Issues.” Journal of African History 32 (1991).

———. “Chibuene—An Early Trading Site in Southern Mozambique.” Paideuma 28 (1982), pp. 149-64. ————. Space, Time and Social Formation. Upsalla, 1987.

Smith, M. C., and H. T. Wright. “The Ceramics from Ra’s Hafun in Somalia: Notes on a Classical Maritime Site.” Azania 23 (1988), pp. 115-41. Smyth, H. W. Mast and Sail in Europe and Asia. London, 1906. Sottas, J. “An Early Lateen Sail in the Mediterranean.” Mariner's Mirror (1939).

Soucek, S., V. Christides, G. R. Tibbetts, and G. Oman. “Milaha.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, and. ed., 7 (1991). Special Exhibition of Cultural Relics Found off the Sinan Coast. Seoul, 1977-

Stern, E. M. “Early Roman Glass from Heis on the North Somali Coast.” Annales du roe Congrés de l’Association Internationale pour l’Histoire du Verre, Madrid—Segovie/23-28 septembre 1985. Amsterdam, 1987, pp. 23-36. Strabo. Geography. Strong, S. A., ed. “The History of Kilwah.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1895).

al-Sali, Muhammad ibn Yahya. Kitab al-awraq. Edited by J. HeyworthDunne. London, 1934. Sung-shu. Translated by F. Hirth. In China and the Roman Orient: researches into their ancient and mediaeval relations, as related in old Chinese records. Leipzig, 1885. Sunken Treasures off the Sinan Coast. Vokyo, 1983. al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir. Annales. Edited by M. J. de Goeje et al. Leiden, 1879-1901.

{ 174 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Taha, M. Y. “The Excavations of the Iraqi Archaeological Expedition at al-Darbhaniya Settlement” (in Arabic). Sumer 31:1-2. Baghdad, 1975:

Taj al-‘Arus. “Narjil.” Benghazi, 1306 H. T’ang-Kuo-shi-pu. Paraphrased in Hirth and Rockhill, Chau Ju-Kua. St. Petersberg, 1grt. Tarafah, ibn al ‘Abd. Mu allaqat. Tarn, W. W. The Greeks in Bactria and India. Cambridge, 1938. ————. “Ptolemy II and Arabia.” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 15 (1929).

Theophanes, Byzantius. Chronographia. In L. Dindorf, ed., Historic: Graeci Minores, 1 (1870-1871), pp. 446-49. Theophrastus. History of Plants. Translated by A. Hort. Loeb Classical Library, London, 1916. Theophylactus Simocatta. Histories. Thomas, B. Arabia Felix. London, 1932. Thomson, J. O. A History of Ancient Geography. Cambridge, 1948. Thucydides. Peloponnesian War. Thureau-Dangin, F. “Ugarit Lexicon.” Syria 12 (1931). Tibbetts, G. R. Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean before the Coming of the Portuguese. Royal Asiatic Society, London, 1971. Torr, C. Ancient Ships. Cambridge, 1894.

Tosi, M. “Early Maritime Cultures of the Arabian Gulf and the Indian

Ocean.” In Shaikha H. A. al-Khalifa and M. Rice, eds., Bahrain through the Ages. London, 1986. Toynbee, A. J. A Study of History. London, 1934. Trabelsi Dramoul, A. “Les épaves sarrasines.” L’Homme méditerranéen et la mer. Tunis, 1985. The Travels of Fa-Hien. Translated by J. Legge. Oxford, 1886.

Trimingham, J. S. “The Arab Geographers.” In H. N. Chittick and R. Rotberg, eds., East Africa and the Ortent. New York and London, 1975, Pp. 115-46.

Turner, P. J. Roman Coins from India. Royal Numismatic Society Special Publication, 22. London, 1989. Varthema, Lodovico di. The Travels of Ludovico di Varthema in... In-

dia... 1503 to 1508, Edited by J. W. Jones. Hakluyt Society, old series, no. 32. London, 1863. Vegetius, R. F. Epitome ret militaris. Edited by C. Lang. Leipzig, 1885. Vérin, P. “Austronesian Contributions to the Culture of Madagascar:

{175 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1986. /

Some Archaeological Problems.” In H. N. Chittick and R. Rotberg,

eds., East Africa and the Orient. New York and London, 1975, pp. 164-91. ———~. The History of Civilization in North Madagascar. Rotterdam,

Villard, U. M. de. “Note sulle influenze asiatiche nell’Africa orientale.” Rivista degli Studi Orientals 17 (July 1938). Villiers, A. J. “Some Aspects of the Arab Dhow Trade.” Middle East Journal 2 (October 1948). ————. Sons of Sindbad. London, 1940. Virgil. Aeneid. .

Visquis, A. G. “Premier inventaire du mobilier de l’épave des jarres a Agay.” Cahiers 2 (1973). Vogt, B. “A 1988 Test Trench at Julfar, Ra’s al-Khaimah.” Al-Rafidan 12 (1991).

The Vung Tau Cargo. Sale catalogue, Christies. Amsterdam, April 7-8, 1992.

Waage, F., ed. Antioch-on-the-Orontes. Princeton, 1948. Warmington, E. H. The Commerce between the Roman Empire and India. Cambridge, 1928.

Wei-Shu. Translated by F. Hirth in China and the Roman Ontent. Leipzig, 1885. Weisner, U. Chinesische Keramik auf Hormoz—Spuren einer Handelsmetropole im Persischen Golf. Museum fiir Ostasiatische Kunst, Klein Monographien I. Cologne, 1979.

Wheeler, R. E. M.; A. Ghosh; and Krishna Deva. “Arikamedu: An Indo-Roman Trading-station on the East Coast of India.” Ancient India 2 (1946). Whitcomb, D. S. ‘Agaba “Port of Palestine on the China Sea.” The University of Chicago, Oriental Institute, Chicago, 1988. ———.. “Bushire and the Angali Canal.” Mesopotamia 22 (1987). ————. “Excavations in ‘Aqaba: First Preliminary Report.” Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 31 (Amman, 1987).

—— —. “Glazed Ceramics of the Abbasid Period from the Aqaba Excavations.” Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society, 1990-1991

55 (London, 1992). | Whitcomb, D. S., and J. H. Johnson. Qusezr al-Qadim 1978 Preliminary Report. Princeton, 1979. —_——.. Quseir al-Qadim 1980 Preliminary Report. Malibu, 1982.

{ 176 }

BIBLIOGRAPHY ———. “1982 Season of Excavations at Quseir al-Qadim.” Newsletter of the American Research Center in Egypt 120 (Winter 1982). Whitehouse, D. “Begram, the Periplus and Gandharan Art.” Journal of Roman Archaeology 2 (1989).

———. “Excavations at Siraf, First Interim Report.” /ran 6 (1968). ———. “Excavations at Siraf, Second Interim Report.” [van 8 (1970). ———. “Kish.” Iran 14 (1976). ——_——. “Sasanian Maritime Activity.” In Julian Reade, ed., The Indian Ocean in Antiquity. London (1995). ———.. Sivaf III. The Congregational Mosque. London, n.d.

———-, and Andrew Williamson. “Sasanian Maritime Trade.” Jran 2 (1973).

Wilkinson, J. C. “A Sketch of the Historical Geography of the Trucial Oman down to the Beginning of the 16th century.” Geographic Journal 130:3 (1964).

Will, E. L. “The Roman Shipping Amphoras from Arikamedu.” In V. Begley and R. D. De Puma, eds., Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade. Madison, Wisconsin, 1992, pp. 151-56. Williamson, A. Sohar and Omani Seafaring in the Indian Ocean. Muscat, 1973:

Wilson, A. T. The Persian Gulf. London, 1928.

Wright, H. T. “Early Seafarers of the Comoro Islands: the Dembeni Phase of the [Xth-Xth Centuries AD.” Azania 19 (1984), pp. 13-59. Xianming, Feng. “Persian and Korean Ceramics Unearthed in China.” Orientations 17:5 (Hong Kong, 1976).

Ximinez, S. “L’étude préliminaire de l’épave sarrasine du Rocher de l’Estéou.” Cahiers 5 (1976).

al-Ya‘qabi, Ahmad ibn Abi Ya‘qib ibn Wadih. Kitab al-buldan. In M. J. de Goeje, ed., Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum.

Yaqit, ibn Abd Allah al-Hamawi. Kitab mu’jam al-buldan. Edited by H. F. Wiistenfeld. 6 vols. Leipzig, 1924. Yuan-chao. Cheng-yuen. Translated into French by S. Lévi. Journal Asiatique 15 (May-June 1900). Yule, H. Cathay and the Way Thither. London, 1915. ———., tr. Marco Polo, vols. 1 and 2. 3rd ed. London, 1903.

{ 177 3} ,

BLANK PAGE

INDEX eM, o_o Myo My oR, oy, 0 Ty, 0 Rg, OT, Oy, OR, OME OM OB,’ OTD, OH, DH,,| RL

Note: Roman numerals refer to map numbers

‘Abbadan, tv, 69 Alexander the Navigator, 35 ‘Abbasid, 53, 64-65, 77, 106, 130, 140, 142 Alexandria, 11, 111, vi, Vu, vit, 18-19, 23,

‘Abd Allah b. Humayd al-Salimi, 142 28-29, 31, 34, 42, 52, 56-60, 95, 97, 106,

‘Abdallah ibn-abi-Sarh, 58 154

‘Abdallah ibn-al-Junayd, 118 ‘Ali ibn-—‘Isa, 106

Abhar, 121 Almagest, 106 Abrahah, 44 Ampelone, 20

‘Abharah, 66, 114-17, 154 Ammianus Marcellinus, 38, 48

‘Abu Dhabi, 143 amphorae, 135-138

‘Abi Sha’ar, 134 ‘Amr tbn-al-‘As, 54, 56, 60, 82 Abu‘l-‘Abbias al-Saffah, 142 Anatolia, 52, 56 Abyssinia, 36, 39, 42-46, 54, 114. See also anchors, stone, 152-154

Ethiopia Andaman Islands, v, v1

Achaemenid, go, 140 Angali Canal, 132

Acila, 17 Anjouan Islands / Nizwani, vu, 148

Acre, 57 An Lu-shan, 63

Aden, ‘Adan, Adane, 111, IV, vi, 23, 26, 31, Annam, 35 35, 39, 69, 78-80, 84, 97. See also Arabia Annus Plocamus, 30

Eudaemon; Eden Antioch, 1, «1, vitt, 57, 78, 146

Adriatic, 151 Antiochus 11, 14 Adulis, 11, 11, Vit, 3, 19, 29, 39-43, 545 Antonines, 34-35 134, 139 Antoninus Martyr, 42

Aegean, 23 An-tun, 35 Aela, 1, ut, 16, 34, 40, 42. See also Aylah Aphiodtto Papyrt, 58, 60

Aelius Gallus, 30-31 Apologus, 11, 15-17, 41, 69. See also

Aemilianus, 39 al-Ubullah

Aeschylus, 11 al-‘Aqabah, tv, vi, vitt, 9, 20, 22, 34, 82,

Afghanistan, vit, 135 129, 146

Agatharchides, 14, 18-23, 94 Arabia (Roman province), ", VI, 34

al-Ahwaz, rv, 64 Arabia Eudaemon, 23, 25, 31-32, 35, 39.

Ajanta, 101-2 See also Aden

Akhbar as-Sin w-al-Hind, ww, v, 66, 68-70, Arabian Gulf (Red Sea), 28, (Persian),

725 74s 78-77 I 30-133

al-Akhdar, al-Jabal, vr Arabian Nights, 68, 112

Akkad, 1, 6, 8 Arabian Sea, vi, 19, 97, 135, 146

Akkadian, 130 Aradus, 1, 56

Aksum, see Axum Ardashir 1, 38, 69 al-*Ala’, 54-55 Ariace, I, 33 alabaster, 138 Arikamedu, vitt, 136-137 Alexander the Great, 11, 13, 15-16, 19-20, Ariston, 18, 20 52, 82, 91, 129, 140 Aristotle, 82 { 179 }

INDEX

Armenia, 64 Banda wreck, 150

Aromaton Emporion, 138 Bandar al-Kayran, 65

Arretine ware, 136 Bandar Nus, 65

Arrian, 13, 19, 27, 9! Bandar Raysit, 65

Arsinoe, 1 Banu-Ghassan, 1

Arwad, 1, 56 Banu-Lakhm, 11

Ashur, 1 Barbara, 81 Asoka, 23 Barbaria, 11, 42. See also Somalia Assyrian, 10 Barbarikon, 135

astronomy, 154-155 Barbosa, Duarte, 98

Athambelus, 15 Barhebraeus, 66, 70

Athenian, 11, 53 Barito, 149

Augustus, 18, 28-31 Barr al-Banadir, 65 Australia, 84 Barygaza (Broach), tm, vitl, 16-17, 25, 29,

al-A‘war, abu, 58 32-33, QO, 133

Axum, Auxume, I, 111, VIII, 29, 33, 36, al-Basrah, Bassorah, tv, vitt, 54, 64, 66,

39-44, 46, 134, 139 68-70, 74, 76, 78, 112, 131 ‘Aydhab, tv, 82, go, 92, 113, 149 Batina, 142

Aylah, rv, 82. See also Aela Batne, 111, 48

Azania, al-Battani, 106 al-Azdi, 89 beads, 138

Azd, 45, 81, 142 Baylaq al-Qibjaqi, 109 Begram, vi, 135-136

Bab al-Mandab, v1, 19-20, 32, 40 Bengal, Bay of, v1, 35, 71, 74-75. See also Babylon/al-Fustat (Egypt), 1, vit, 34, 60; Harkand, Sea of Babylon (Mesopotamia), 1, 1, 11, Berenice, 11, 20, 29-31 13-14, 90, 106. See also al-Fustat; Neo- Bhanbhore, see al-Daybul

Babylonian Bhoga, 62; ? / Palembang, v Baghdad, tv, v1, 53, 64, 66, 78-79, 106, Bhoja, 95

140 Bible, 9, 10, 11

Bahr Faris, tv Bilad al-Habashah, rv Bahr al-Habashah, tv Bilad al-Hind, rv, v Bahr Harkand, v Bilad al-Sin, v Bahr al-Hind, tv Bilad al-Zanj, 1v Bahr Larawi, tv Bilal, 45 Bahr al-Qulzum, rv Bir Gao, vir Bahr al-Sankhi, v Birikau, 138 Bahr al-Zanj, tv al-Biriini, 71, 106 al-Bahrayn, 11, Iv, vi, vit, 6, 13, 38, 45, Bombay, v1, 18, 33, 41, 535 71 47 53-55» 94, 66, 70, 76, go, 130, 132. Borneo, 149

See also Dilmun; Tylus Island Boro-Budur, 102

Bakr, abu-, 54 Bostra, 34

Ba-‘labakk, 57 Brahman, 62 al-Baladhurt, Ahmad ibn Yahya, 45, 46, Brahminabad, 145

47, 54, 59, 70 British travelers, 88 Bali, vin, 146 Broach, see Barygaza

Balis, v Bronzes, 135 { 180 }

INDEX

Bullin, 71 153

Buddha, 48; Buddhism, 133 China, viii, 129, 135, 140-141, 145, 150,

Bur Gao (? Nikon), 137 China, Sea of, 75, 115

Burma, go Cholas, 144-145

Bushehr, vit, 132 Christian, 36, 39, 43, 52, 62, 76, 82-83

Buwayhid, 142 Chu‘an-Chow-Fu, 72

Buzurg ibn-Shahriyar, al-Ram-Hurmuzi, — Cilicia, §5 1v, 65-66, 68, 74, 76, 78-82, 91, 94-95, Claudius (Roman emperor), 18, 24, 31 g8-100, 104, 110, 113, 114, 146, 149, 154 Clowes, 104 Byzantine, 41-42, 44, 46, 52, 55-58, 60, 82, Clysma, 111, 34, 40, 42, 60. See also

103, 105, 134, 140, 153 al-Qulzum; Suez coconut, go-9!

Caesar, 31 coins, 137, 139; Islamic, 141, 149; Roman,

Cail, see Kayal 135-137; Seleucid, 131-132 Cairo, Iv, VI, VII, 34 Colomb, Captain, 100, 110 Calicut, vitt, 83, 93, 99, 152 Columbus, 104

Calliana, m1, 11, 41 Comacchio, 151 Cambay, Gulf of, vt, vitr, 16, 133, Comara, u

154 Comorin, Cape, v1

Cana, Cane, Canneh, see Kane Comoros Islands, virt, 148

Canopic arm of the Nile, 34 Concepcién wreck, 150 Canton, v, 50, 61-63, 66, 68, 72, 74-75, Constantinople, 36, 52, 56, 59

77-78, 108, 140. See also Khanfu; Copts, 56-59

K wang-chou Coptus, 1, 11, 8, 20, 24, 29

Cape Comorin, v1 Coromandel, vt, vit, 93, 96, 136, 145 Cape of Good Hope, 104, 150 Cosmas Indicopleustes, 19, 23, 39-42, 139,

Cape Musandam, 13, 15 144 Cape of Spices, 11, 25, 29-30. See also Cragnagore, 136 Guardafui, Cape Croatia, 151

Cape Syagrus, 11, 29 Crusade Island (Tamil Nadu), 154

Caracalla, 36 Crusades, 82-109

Carmania, , 16-17, 22. See also Kirman Ctesiphon, 41

Carmatians, 78 Cutch, Gulf of, 70. See also Rann of

Cattigara, 35 Kutch Caryanda, 11 Cyprus, 10, 54, 56

Ceylon (Sri Lanka), vi, vit, 29-30, 35, 38, | Cyrus-Muqawais, 56 40-41, 43-44, 62, 70-71, 76, 88, 91, 95,

108, 134, 140, 144, 146, 150, 152. See Daamo, 138 also Sarandib; Singalese; Taprobane/ Dad, 3

Sielediva Dahlak Island, rv

Chaldaea, 1, 9-10, 14-15 Dalma Island, vit, 143

Champa, 71 Damascus, 1, 11, 11, 34, 64, 106 Chandragupta, 23 Damietta, mouth, vir Charax, 1, vit, 14-16, 131, 132 Damirica, 1, 25

Cheops ship, 151 Dar es Salaam, vit, 134, 137 Chibuene, 148, 149 Darius the Great, 11

Ch’ten-han-shu, 16 David, 8 { 181 }

INDEX al-Daybul (Bhanbhore), tv, 53, 63, 135, Eudoxus of Cyzicus, 24, 27

144, 146 Eulaeus River, 11, 14. See also Karan Delos, 23 Euphrates River, vt, 5, 9-10, 14, 38, 47-48,

Dayr al-Bahri, 7-8 River; Ulai River

Dembeni, 148 64, 78 Dhahran, vin, 131 Eusebius, 10

Dhat al-Sawari, 56-59, 140 Eutropius, 35

Dhu Nuwas, 43 Ezekiel, 17, 32 Diaz, 104 Ezion-geber/Elath, 1, 8-9

al-Dibayjat, rv

Dibos, 39 Failaka (Ikaros), vit, 131

Dijlah, rv Fa-hien, 38 Dilmun, 1, 6, 10. See also al-Bahrayn; Fanstir, v, 117

Tylus Island al-Farama’; tv, 78. See also Pelusium Dio Cassius, 16, 35 Faris, tv, 64, 80, 97

Diodorus Siculus, 18 Farj al-Hind, or al-Uballah @.v.), 111, 47 Dioscorida Island, 1, m1. See also Socotra Fatimid, 79

Diyar Mudar, 64 Fattan, see Periypattanam

Diyar Rabi‘ah, 64 al-Fayyim, vit Duarte Barbosa, 98 Finland, 151

Dravidian, go Ferrand, 81, 108

Dubai, 144 Firmus, 39

ed-Dur, 133 Flavian emperors, 28 Dvipa Sukhatara, 22, 39. See also Socotra Forat, vill, 131 Fort Jesus, vitt, 152-153

East Africa, 134, 137, 140, 146-148, 153, France, 103, 109, 151, 153

155 Frankincense, 136-137

East Indies, 83-84, 105. See also Indonesia —- Fujian province, 145

Eden, 1, 9. See also Aden, Arabia al-Furat, Iv

Eudaemon al-Fustat, (Babylon), tv, vir, vitt, 34, 60, Edessa, 48 79, 145 Edom, 1, 8-9 Fuzhou, 145 Egypt, vi, Vill, 129, 135

Ela-Atzbeha, 43 Gabal al-‘Araq, 7

Elam, 1, 10 Gaius Caesar, 31

Elath, see Ezion-geber Gallienus, 39

Elbing, 99 Gallus, see Aelius Gallus Eloth, 8 Gangaikondacholapuram, vul, 145

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 90 Ganges River, Iv, 29-30, 33, 35

Eratosthenes, 19 Gash Delta, 130

Eridu, 1, 10, 139. See also Teredon Gates of China, v

Eritrea, 32, 130 Csaza, 1, I

Etesian winds, 25 Gebal, 1, 7-8 Ethiopia, 1, 111, 20, 43, 45. See also Gela, 151

Abyssinia Gemelli Carreri, 99 Eudaemon, 1 German, 52, 99

Etruscans, 151 Geography of Ptolemy Claudius, 35 { 182 }

INDEX Gerrha, 1, 14, 17, 21, 131 Hisn al-Ghurdab, 32, 136. See also Kane

Ghassan, 44 History of the Tang, 62-63

al-Gizah, vir, 21 Homeritae, 11, 31. See also Himyar Glass: Roman, 133, 135-136, 138; Islamic, | Hormuz, see Hurmuz

150, 154 Horse trade, 145

God’s Land, 1, 8 Hou-han-shu, 36 Golden Chersonese, 35. See also Malaya Huang Ch'ao, 77-78

Goths, 59 Hurghada, 151

Great Bitter Lake, vir Hurmuz, rv, vitt, 70, 95, 98, 141, 153

lso C f Spi al-Gab, 143 .

Greenwich Museum, 91-92 Hurmuz Strait, 16-17, 142

Guardafui, Cape, v1, 18, 80, 135, 138. See Huwi-chao, 62

ane ape on spices Ibadite, 63, 66, 142

, Ibn Battiitah, 83, 87, 91,— 96, 145, 152 Gujarat, 113, 129, 133 Guyot de Provins, 10 Ibn al-Faqih, 67, 82 Y ante Ibn Hauaqal, 67

. 8-79

H / Sh h 1: L -bIbn 5 3Jubayr, b] 6, b87, go, 92-98, 110, 113-14, 122

Hadrian, 7 4 Ibn Majid, Shihab al-Din Ahmad, 83, 89, Hainan, v, 62 7-8 Lea 107-8, 143 mee PE MOAI Ns Ay 25 33 Ibn Khurdadhbah, tv, 66-67, 69, 70-72,

al-F1ajjaj, 63, 79

al-Hakam, ibn-‘Abd, 59, 61 Ibn Rustah, 41, 67, 82

Han, 15, 35, 48, 62 ; Hangchow, ee 96-98 , al-Idrisi, 88,72 91-93, Ibn Yamin, 3 I-ching, 46, 62

Hanoi, 72 ,;

. Ikaros (Failaka), 131 Happy Isles, 22. See also VIII, Socotra , 132-134, _ India, 111, IV, 130,

al-Hariri, 92, 99, 154

136, 146,

Harkand, Sea of, 117. See also Bengal, Bs 12

Bav of Indian Ocean, vi, vitl, 129, 134, 139, 150 = 7 Indo-China, Harin al-Rashid, 82 ,71

al-Hasa, v1, 14 ; Hatcher wreck, 150 Indus B; 54-2 Indonesia, vit, 78, 83, go-g1, 102, 146, 149. See also East Indies

Hatshepsut, 7-8 ns iver, VI, VIL, LI, 22, 24-25, 33, 543 Heis, vit, 138 ““India,” ‘as 1299 1398 . Inner 11"44

Hellenistic, 11, 19, 22, 101, 130-131, 134

Heraclius, 55, 56 Tra 5 8 Herodotus, g, 11 abe ITA) NTE, 794 79 131 Iran, vi, vilt, 133, 138

.; / Irodo, 148 Hieraconpolis, 7_ al-Hijaz, 39, 45, 54, 61, 120-21 Isfahan, tv, 64

Hims » 39» 45» 945 OF Isidore of Charax, 16, 17, 48, 94 Him aan 1, 36 1-44. See also al-Iskandariyah, 1v

eR ae Aaa Isma‘ilawayh, 81 Homeritae al-Hind, tv Istakhr,67,54, 140 80, 82 ; VN 47 al-Istakhri, 69-70,

Hippalus, 24-28 Ital 10

al-Hirah, 111, 42, 44, 47 anans 93» 193-4

Hiram, 8-9, 20 Jaba, v

Hirth, 76 al-Jabal al-Akhdar, vr { 183 }

INDEX

al-Jabal Hajar, 142-143 Kharg Island, 132

Jafiina, 81 al-Khayyam, 106

al-Jar, 11, Iv, 45, 60, 78, 82 Khurdasan, rv, 63, 64 ,

Jataka, 11 Khusraw Anishirwan, 44 Java, vin, 71, 78, 102, 146 al-Khwarizmi, 106 Jazirat al-Hulayla, 143-144 Kia Tan, 66, 76

Jeddah, see Juddah Kilwa, vu, 146-148 Jehoshaphat, g Kings, First Book of, 8-9

Jerusalem, 1 Kirman, rv, 114. See also Carmania

Jews, 41, 76, 78 Kish Island, 141

Jiangsu province, 145 Kisimani Mafia, 148 al-Jibal, 64 Kitab ‘Aja’ ib al-Hind (Wonders of India),

Jih-nam, 35 65, 68 Jordanus, 93-95, 98 Kitab al-Fawa'd, 108

al-Jubayl, vir, 131 Kitab al-Tanbih w-al-Ishraf, 67

Judah, rv, vi, 9 Ko Kho Khao, vi, 146

Juddah (Jeddah), 60, 78-80, 82, 113, Kolhalpur, vit, 135-136

120-22, 149, 151 Koran, 45, 51, 89, 98, 106 Julanda b. Mas‘ad, 142 Korea, vil, 72, 150

Julfar, vin, 141-143 Kua, 148

Julio-Claudian emperors, 28 al-Kifa, 146

al-Jumayra, 144 Killam Malt (Quilon), rv, v, vit, 50, Junde-Shapir, 106 70-71, 73-75, 110, 145, 152

Justinian, 40, 43 Kir, 64

Ka‘bah, 45 Kush, 1 Kabul, 135 Kuwait (Quwayt), 84 Kurk, 70

Kalah Bar, v, 71, 74-75, 78, 110 Kwang-chou, 46, 63. See also Canton

Kanbayah, tv. See also Cambay Kwang-tung, 46 Kanduranga, v

Kane (Cana, Cane, Kanneh, Hisn al- Laccadive Islands, v1, 71, 91, 93 Ghurab), 1, 1, vit, 9, 17-18, 25, 29, Ladrone Islands, 105

32-33, 35, 136-137 Laem Pho, 146

Kan-ying, 15-16 Lagash, 6

Karachi, 144 Lamu, V1, VIL, 93, 137, 147-149,

Karkeh, 131 152

Karin River, vi, 10, 14. See also Eulaeus Langabalis, v

River; Ulai River lapis lazuli, 135 ,

Kassala Province, 130 Latin, 38, 104

Kassites, 130 Layth ibn-Kahlan, 108

Kathiawar, Gulf of, 70 leather, 134 Kayal / Cail, vin, 145 Lebanon, 10, 91

Kedah, 71 Leuce Come, 11, 16, 30-32, 34, 40

Kenya, 93, 146, 153 Li-chien, 16. See also Petra; Ta-ts‘in Khalid ibn-al-Walid, 47 Liu Hua, tomb of, 145 Khanfu, v, 72, 76. See also Canton Liverpool, 69 Khanju (Chu‘an-Chow-Fu), v, 72 Loukos Limen, 134

{ 184}

INDEX

Lower or Bitter Sea, 1 Mari, 8 Liigin (Hanoi), v, 72 Martyrdom of St. Arethas, 40

Lycia, 56, 58-59 al-Marwazi, 63, 67, 73

Masqat, Iv, Vi, VIII, 17, 70, 74-75, QI, 142

Ma Huan, 145, 151 al-Mas‘tdi, ‘Ali ibn Husain, 47, 67-69,

Macedonia, 13 74-76, 78, 81-82, 90, 93, 96, 98, 100, Madagascar, vitt, 80-81, 148 104, 110, 146-147

al-Mada’in, 41 Mauritius, 150 al-Madinabh, 111, 1v, v1, 56, 60, 82 Maurya, 23 Magan, 1, 6, 129 Mayd, 70

Magellan, 105 Mazdean, 36, 45. See also Magian;

al-Maghrib, 64 Zoroastrian

Magian, 62, 76. See also Mazdean; Mecca, III, IV, VI, 9, 45, 60, 82, 130, 153

Zoroastrian Mediterranean Sea, vil, 11, 13-14, 27-28,

Maharashtra, 135 34-35, 51-52, 55-57, 59, 61, 62, 88, 96, Mahomet et Charlemagne, 51 99, 103-5, 109, 138, 153

Mahrah, 24, 73 Melkite, 56 Majiis, 62 Melukhkha, 6, 129

Makr§an, tv, 70 Memphis, 1, vir, 11 Malabar, vi, vit, 24, 26, 29, 33, 41, 70-71, Menouthias Island, 137

74, 83, 92, 96, 98, 100, 145 Mesopotamia, v1, 129, 130, 138 Malacca Strait, vitl, 71, 74-75, 1513 penin- Mihran, tv

sula, 78 Milesian, 20

Malalas, John, 40, 42-44 Milton, 23 Malaya, 35, 62, 71, 100 Minael, 1, 21-23

150-152 Misr, 79

Maldive Islands, vi, virt, 71, 91, 93, 145; Ming, 50 Male (India), 11, vitt, 41. See also Kulam Mombasa, 152

Mali Montecorvino, John of, 87, 93, 94, 97-98,

Male (Maldives), 145 100 Malindi, 83 Mopharitic, 33 al-Ma’min, 106 Morocco, 101 Manchester, 69 Mosul, rv, 64

Manda, 146-148 Mozambique, vitt, 80, 94, 101, 140, 147 Mandeville, Sir John, 95 Mu allagat, 3 Mannar, Gulf of, vitt, 145, 153 Mu‘awiyah, 54-57

al-Mansir, 64 Muhammad, 9, 51, 129. See also Prophet al-Mansitrah, rv, 63, 70 Muhammad ibn-Babishad, 117-18 Mantai, vill, 144, 152-153 Muhammad ibn-Shadhan, 108

Manuel, 56 Muir’s Caliphate, 54

Magdamat of al-Hariri, 92, 99, 154 Muja‘b b. Shi‘wa, 142 al-Maqdisi, 67-70, 79-80, 89, 107-8, 142 Mukha, 32. See also Muza

al-Maqrizi, 151 Muraj al-Dhahab wa Ma din al-Jawhar, Marco Polo, 87, 93-96, 98, 100, 113-14, 67. See also al-Mas‘adt

145 Musandam, Cape, 13, 17

Marcus Aurelius, 35 Musgat, see Masqat Mare Erythraeum, 11 Muza, I, 29, 32-35 f 185 }

INDEX Muziris, 11, vit, 26, 29, 33, 136 Opone, 11, 29, 135, 138

Mylae, 58 Ostrogoths, 59 Mysore, see Muziris

Myus Hormus, n, vin, 28-29, 31, 134 Pacific, 103, 105 Pakistan, 140 Nabataea, 11, 16, 20, 30-32, 34; Nabataean =‘ Palembang, v, 62

pottery, 137 Palestine, 20-21, 56

Nadir Shah, 143 Palk Strait, vi, viii, 71, 145

Nahr ‘Isa, 64 Pallava, ror

al-Najaf, 11, 47 Palmyra, 1, vill, 15, 34, 132

nargil, gt Pan-Ch‘ao, 15 Narmada River, 133. See also Nerbudda Pandyas, 145 River Paracel reefs, 72

Narseh, 38 Parthia, 14, 16, 38, 48, 52, 131, 138, 144 Nasir-i-Khusraw, 69, 91 Patala, 1, 22

Natural History of Pliny, 19 Pelusiac mouth, vir

al-Nazar, ibn Maymin, 66 Pelusium, 11, 78. See also al-Farama’

Nearchus, 13-14, 25 Pemba Island, vin, 137, 148

Nebuchadnezzar II, 10 Pertplus of the Erythraean Sea, 15-19,

Necho, 11 23-275 34-33 35s 90s 99, 134-137

Negus, 46 Periyapattinam (? Fattan), 145

Nelcynda, u Persepolis, 54, 140

Neo-Babylonian, 10. See a/so Babylon Persian Gulf, v1, 130-133, 140, 147,

(Mesopotamia) 153-154

Nerbudda River, v1, 17, 133. See also Persian Wars of Procopius, 40

Narmada River Persis, 11, 22, 33 Nestorian, 40, 144 Pharaohs, 7, 151

Nero, 18, 29 Petra, 11, 16, 34 Nicobar Islands, v, v1, 71, 110 Pharos, 61

Nikon (? Bur Gao), 137 Philostorgius, 40

Nile River (al-Ni), tv, vi, vit, 3,5, 8-9, 11, Phoenicia, 7-11, 13, 20-21, 57, 101,

20, 29, 34, 42, 60, 82, 102, 138, 152; 106

delta, vir; old arms of, vit Phoenix, 56, 58

Nineveh, 1, 10 Photius, 18 Nishapur, 146 Pirenne, 51-52

Niyan, v Plaster molds, 135

Nizwani, see Anjouan Islands Pliny the Elder, 15-17, 19, 24-27, 29, 35;

Nizwa, Vu, 143 94, 109-10, 131 Nonnosus, 42, 44 Polybius, 14

Nubia, 60 Pontic Tauri, 20 Poppaea, 29

Ocelis, 11, 26, 29, 33, 35 Port Said, vi, vit Omana, ny, 16-17, 33, 90 Portuguese, 83-84, 88, 93, 143 ‘Oman (‘Um an), 1m, vi, vit, 4-6, 17, 35, Poseidon, statue, 135 45) 47) 53» 55 63-64, 68, 70, 75, 77-82, Po-sse, 46, 62-63, 144 91-92, 97, 99, 117, 129, 141-142, 147, Pottery: blue-and-white porcelain, 141,

150-151; Gulf of, v1, 41, 73 145; celadon, 141, 145; Chinese, 129,

Ophir, 1, 8-9, 130 141, 143-144, 146, 150, 154; Hellenistic, { 186 }

INDEX 138; Indian, 133; Islamic, 129, 139, Ra’s Hafiin / Xaafuun, vit, 135, 137144-145; Korean, 145; Kraak porcelain, 138 150; lustreware, 145; Nabataean, 137; Ra’s al-Khayma, vill, 142-144 Parthian, 131, 138; Ptolemaic, 138; Ra’s Mkumbuu, 148 Punic, 137; Rhodian, 136; red-polished Ra’s Musandam, vi, 13, 17 ware, 133; Roman, 133, 135-138; Sa- Ra’s al-Qal‘at, 132 marra ware, 144; Sassanian, 139, 145; Raysit, tv, 73, 75, 117-18 Seleucid, 131-132; Song, 145; South Red Sea, vi, Vill, 129-130, 133-134, 136, Asian, 139; Tang, 144-146; Thai, 143; 140, 151, 153

Vietnamese, 143 Renaud de Chatillon, 82

Prakrit, go Rhapta, "1, 33-35, 134, 137 Procopius, 40, 42-44, 48, 59, 93, 95, 98 Rishahr, 132 Prophet, 46, 54, 129. See also Muhammad rock crystal, 135

Proto-Malagasy, 149 Rockhill, 76

Ptolemies, Ptolemaic, 18-24, 28, 30, 30, Rome (trade route to), 1

34, 52 Rosetta mouth, vii

Ptolemy Claudius, 35-36, 106, 137 Rudaystyah, 23 Ptolemy II Philadelphus, 18-21, 23 Rufigi delta, 137 Ptolemy VIT Euergetes, 11, 24

Punic amphorae, 137 Saba, Sabaean, Sabaei, 11, 9, 11, 21-23, 29,

Punjab, 129 31, 33, 36, 38, 118. See also Sheba

Punt, 1, 7-8, 130 Sa-bo, 38

Puteoli, 31 Sagittarius, 74 Sahl ibn-Aban, 108 al-Qahirah, Iv Sahure, 7 Qana, see Kane Salaht, v, 71

Qanbalu, rv, 80-81, 147-148 Salwayn, 138

Qantu, Qansu, v, 72 Sanchi, 92

~al-Qasimi, 143 Sandar Fiat, Sandal Falat, Sanf Falaw, al-Qatar, vi, 70, 143 Sanf, Sinf, v, 71, 74, 115 Qays Island, tv, 70 San Gongalo wreck, 150 Qishm, vit, 142 Sanji, Sankhi Sea, 115. See also China,

Qudamah, 67 Sea of, al-Bahr al-Sankhi Quilon, see Killam Mali Sanskrit, 95, 130

al-Qulzum, rv, 60, 78, 80, 82-83, 97. See Sarandib, tv, v, 71. See also Ceylon

also Clysma; Suez Sassanid, 36, 38, 44-47, 52, 55, 61, 79, 90,

Quraysh, 45 IOL, 133, 139, 142-144 al-Quseir al-Qadim (Qusayr), vii, 8, 134 Sauvaget, 68, 108

Quwayt, see Kuwait Saymir, rv, 118, 120 Scylax, 11

Ramesses III, 7-8 Scythia, 25, 33, 144 Ramni, v Sealand, 1, 9-10, 130 al-Rams, 143 Seleucia on the Tigris, 11, 14 Rann of Kutch, vit, 129. See also Cutch, Seleucid, 13-15, £7, 19, 52, 131-132

Gulf of Sembiran, vin, 146

al-Raqqah, 64 Semitic, 11, 15

Ra’s Fartak, tv, v1, 80 Sena Gallica, 59

Ra’s al-Hadd, vi, vir, 129 Sennacherib, 10, 91 { 187 }

INDEX Sergi Liman wreck, vim, 150, 154 Souppara, II

Seres, 41, 48 South Asia, 138, 140

Severus ibn-Mugaffa‘, 58 South China Sea, 150

Shahriyari, Captain, 115 Spain, 61, 94 Shanga, 146-149 Spasinus, 15. See also Charax

Shapor IT, 38 Sri Lanka, see Ceylon Sharaf al-Zaman Tahir, Marvazi, 67-68 St. Helena, 150

Shatt al-‘Arab, ro Strabo, 14, 18-20, 28-30, 38-39 Sheba, 1, 9. See also Saba Sudan, 46, 96, 102, 130, 134

Shi‘ah, 63 Suez, vi, vit, 8, 11, 60, 78, 82, 84, g1, 152. Shihab al-Din, see Ibn Majid See also Clysma; al-Qulzum

al-Shihr, tv, 73 Suez, Gulf of, 4, 7, 20, 30, 34; Canal, vir Shihr Lubin Hadramawzt, rv, 110 Sufalah, rv, 80-81, 140, 147, 149

Shipwrecks, 150 Suhar (Sohar), tv, vir, 17, 70, 133,

Shiraz, tv, 69, 79 141-143

al-Shu‘aybah, m1, 45 Sulayman al-Mahri, 87

Shulgi, 6 Sulayman the merchant, 68 Siam, go al-Suli, 74 Sicily, 56, 151, 153 Sumatra, vim, 46, 62, 71, 78, 81, 108, 149

Sidon, 1, 10 Sumer, | Sielediva, See Ceylon Sumerian, 6, 130 al-Sila, al-Shila, v, 72 Sung, 78 silk, 135 Sung-shu, 48 silver plate, 135 Surat, v1

Sima, 148 Swahili, 89, 147-148, 152

al-Sin, 47, 75, 114. See also Sinae Syene, 20 Sinae, 41, 48. See also al-Sin

Sinai, 8, 22, 60; Peninsula, vir al-Tabari, 38, 41, 43-46, 54-55, 59, 64, 70,

Sinan wreck, vu, 150 80, 114

al-Sind, tv, 61, 63, 70-71, 78, 129, 144-146 — takkRitya, 149

Sindan, rv, 118 Tall al-Khulayfah, 8-9

Sindbad, 68, 74, 112, 150 Tamil, 130;— Nadu, 145 Singalese, 42, 44. See also Ceylon Tanah, rv, 53, 118

Sinus Arabicus, 11 Tanbih, 70

Sir Bani Yas Island, vit, 143-144 Tang, 61, 77, 129 Siraf, rv, virt, 64, 66, 68-71, 73-80, 115-16, Tanzania, 134, 137, 146 118, 120, 133, 140-141, 146-147, 154 Taprobane / Sielediva, u, 111. See Ceylon

slaves, 146 Tarafah, 3, 42

Socotra, (Dioscorida Island, Dvipa Su- Tarshish, 75 khatara, Happy Isles, Usqutrah), 1, m1, = Tarut, 131 VI, VIII, 22-23, 29, 33, 39, 41-42, 70, Ta-shih, 62-63, 66

79-80 Ta-ts‘in, 15-16, 35, 38, 48

Sofala, vin Tayy, 66

Sohar, see Suhar Ta-zik, 66. See also Ta-shih

Solomon, 8-9, 20 Teredon, 1, 10, 14, 38. See also Eridu Somalia, vi, vin, 7, 18, 29, 32-33, 38, 42, Terra sigillata, 137

46, 80, 135, 138, 152 Textiles, 134

Soph6n Indos, 23 Thailand, vit, 140, 146 { 188 }

INDEX

Thay (? Gerrah), 131 Vietnam, 150

Thaqafite, 53 Vung Tao wreck, 150 Thebes, 1, 7-8

Theophanes, 59 Wadi al-Hammamit, v1, 7-8

Theophilus, 39 Wadi Tamilat, vir, 11 Theophrastus, 19, 9O, 132 Wahhabi, 143

Theophylus Simocatta, 41 Wahriz, 44 Thucydides, 11 Waqwag (Eastern), v, 80; (Western), rv,

T‘iao-chih, 15 147-148

Tiberius, 18 al-Wasit, 1v, 64 T‘ten-chu, 48 Wei-shu, 38 Tigris River, vi, 5, 14, 41, 64, 69-70 wine, 135

Timsah, Lake, vit, 60 Witte Leevau wreck, 150 Tiuman Island (Tiyimah), v, vit, 71, 145 Wonders of India, 65, 68, 73. See also

Tz, Iv, 70, 120 Kitab ‘Aja’ib al-Hind

Tongking, 66

Tongking, Gulf of, 71 Xaafuun, see Ra‘s Hafan Trajan, 15-16, 34, 60 Trajan’s Canal, vir

Tsinistan, 41; the route to, 111 Yam Suph, !

Tumbatu, 153 al-Yamamah, rv, 64

Turkey, virt, 63, 152, 153 al-Yaman, U1, IV, 4, 9, 15-10, 30, 32-33, Tylus Island, 11, go, 132. See also al- 39-41, 43s 55» 75-77» 80, 90, 97; 99, 136

Bahrayn; Dilmun Yangzhou, 145

Tyre, 1, 8-10, 57 al-Ya'qubi, 64, 67, 69, 74, 76, 82, 93 Yaqit, ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Hamawi, 68

‘Ubayd, 129, 143 Yathrib (al-Madinah), m1 ‘Ubaydah, abu-, 63 Yemen, see al-Yaman al-Ubullah, 111, 1v, 41, 45-47, 64, 69, 73, Yuan -chao, 62 76-78. See also Apologus

Ugarit, 1, 8 al-Zabay, al-Zabi, v Ulai River, 10. See also Eulaeus River; Zafar (in Hadramawbt), 9!

Kariin River Zafar (in al-Yaman), ut, 31

‘Uman, see ‘Oman Zand Afrik Shah, 38

Umayyad, 61, 63, 140, 142 Zanj, Zang, 38, 78-80, 146 Umm al-Qaiwain, 133 Zanzibar, Iv, VI, VT, 33, 137, 148, 153 underwater archaeology, 150 Zaqazig, Vu, Ut

Ur, 8, 129-130 Zayd, abu-, al-Hasan ibn al-Yazid, 68, Usqutrah, tv. See also Socotra 76-80, 82, 91, 93, 98, 100

‘Uthman b. Abi al-‘As, 142 Zayd-Il, 21

‘Uthman the Caliph, 56 Zayla, Iv

‘Uthman the Thagaftte, 53 Zaytin (Hang-chow), v Zeugma, 48

Varthema, 98-99 Zingion, 1

Vasco da Gama, 83, 104 Zoroastrian, 62. See also Magian; Vegetius, Mazdean Vergil, 9596Zull, 146

{ 189 }