Navigation – Plan du site
Archéologie des rituels dans le monde nabatéen recherches récentes

A religious building complex in the ancient settlement of Tayma (North-West Arabia) during the Nabataean period: changes and transformations

Sebastiano Lora
p. 17-39

Résumés

Des fouilles germano-saoudiennes menées dans le centre antique de Tayma ont révélé un temple monumental (Building E-b1), fondé durant la seconde moitié du Ier millénaire av. J.-C. et utilisé jusqu’à la période romaine tardive. Un total de cinq phases principales de construction y a été identifié (E-b1:3a-e). Situé au sein d’une aire de 1 700 m2 enceinte par un mur, ce bâtiment de plus de 500 m2 fut par la suite relié à un puits voisin au moyen d’un tunnel. Outre des inscriptions araméennes et des statues monumentales de souverains de la dynastie de Lihyan, de nombreuses installations liées à l’utilisation et à la mise en valeur de l’eau ont été découvertes à l’intérieur et à l’extérieur de l’édifice. Durant la période nabatéenne, celui-ci subit plusieurs reconstructions, ajoutant à l’édifice de nouvelles colonnes et de nouveaux pavements. Outre la présentation de la stratigraphie du temple et de ses contextes, cette contribution prend en compte l’analyse de la céramique provenant de l’intérieur et de l’extérieur du bâtiment pour proposer une reconstruction de sa séquence chronologique.

Haut de page

Notes de la rédaction

In collaboration with : Arnulf Hausleiter [contributor] Francelin Tourtet [contributor]

Texte intégral

  • 2 The interdisciplinary research project is jointly conducted by the Orient Department of the German (...)
  • 3 Purschwitz forthcoming.
  • 4 Dinies et al. 2015; Dinies et al. 2016; Dinies et al. in press; Hausleiter & Zur 2016.
  • 5 Schneider 2010 and 2015; Klasen et al. 2011; Hausleiter 2011; Hausleiter 2017; Intilia and Tourtet (...)
  • 6 Al-Hājirī 2011; Hausleiter 2015; Hausleiter & Zur 2016; Zur & Hausleiter in press.
  • 7 Sperveslage 2014.
  • 8 Eichmann, Schaudig & Hausleiter 2006; Schaudig in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 137-138 and in 2011, p. (...)

1Since 2004, a joint Saudi-German project has been investigating the oasis of Tayma, located in the north-western part of the Arabian Peninsula, with the aim of reconstructing its history and its role as an important centre on one of the main trade routes of the Ancient Near East. 2 The ancient settlement lies south of a former salt lake (Arabic: sabkha) and stretches over more than 9.2 km2 (fig. 1). The main archaeological area, known today as Qrayyah, is found south of the oasis. In addition to prehistoric surface findings, 3 the first traces of human presence in the oasis can be dated to the late 5th–4th millennium bc4 but it is in the 3rd millennium bc that Tayma gained considerable size and importance, as evidenced by the construction of a substantial wall system 5 surrounding the oasis and by the find of bronze-weapons 6 with parallels in Syria and the Levant. Contacts with Egypt and the Levant continue in the Early Iron Age (12th–9th cent. bc) and in subsequent periods. 7 Tayma is well known for the 10 years stay of the last Neo-Babylonian king, Nabonidus. A stela and six more fragments bearing cuneiform inscriptions 8, recovered next to the building discussed in this article, clearly point to a central role of this part of Qrayyah also during the 6th cent. bc. The focus of the present paper lies, however, on the archaeological evidence of times after Nabonidus and especially the Nabataean phases of a large public building in the centre of Qrayyah, which has been interpreted as a temple.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

General plan of the oasis of Tayma with Sabkha basin and ancient settlement

© DAI Orient Department, S. Lora

Stratigraphic evidence in Area E

2Excavations in the centre of Qrayyah (fig. 2) revealed a 6 m. thick stratigraphic sequence divided into at least three major phases of occupation, labelled “Occupation Levels” (henceforth OL in connection with the mention of the pertaining area [table 1]). OL E:3 has been extensively excavated and is characterized by the above mentioned large monumental building labelled Building E-b1, according to its location in Area E (fig. 3). Under excavation since 2004, it has been almost completely exposed, along with some of its surrounding structures, such as a residential quarter south of it. The earlier OLs E:5 and E:4 were explored in a number of soundings.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Plan of the central part of the ancient settlement

© DAI Orient Department, S. Lora

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Building E-b1 and the surrounding area (from S-E)

© DAI Orient Department, J. Krumnow

Occupation Level E:5

  • 9 A first sounding was carried out in Square E11 by Andrea Ricci in 2005; a second sounding was carr (...)

3The first Occupation Level in the area can be dated to as early as the 3rd millennium bc (equivalent to the Early Bronze Age) when a building (E-b14) in stone masonry with 1.4 m thick main walls was constructed on a natural outcrop; the building, of unknown dimensions, is divided into small units by thinner walls (0.6 m). In one of the soundings investigating OL E:5 (Square E11) 9 a 2 x 1 m large room (E-b14:R1, fig. 4) revealed a well-preserved sequence. At least three “Building Stages”, i.e. sub-phases of Occupation Level E:5, have been identified, from the earliest to the latest:

  1. Levelling of the area above the bedrock at 825 m 10 and construction of the building of which the investigated room is part; installation of a first trodden floor;
  2. Rebuilding of the room’s eastern wall and installation of a new trodden floor;
  3. Construction of an inner wall giving the room its actual layout, reducing its former dimensions, and installation of a third trodden floor.

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

3D model of the room E-b14:R1 (from N-E)

© DAI Orient Department, M. Kolbe

  • 11 Sample TA 17495 from SU 9778; identification by Reinder Neef, Scientific Division at the Head Offi (...)
  • 12 Similar dates have been provided from the two above-mentioned other soundings in Area E; see ftn 9 (...)

4Each of these Building Stages is characterized by a trodden floor made of broken and crushed mud bricks. Charred seeds of grapes from a pit dug into the first floor of the room provided a calibrated date of 2889 bc–2669 bc11 This dating and the pottery recovered from the three trodden floors suggest a maximum chronological range of this Occupation Level from between the early-to-mid 3rd millennium bc until the early 2nd millennium bc12

Occupation Level E:4

  • 13 A limited number of sherds belonging to the Tayma Early Iron Age Ware and Sanaʾiye Ware were found (...)

5The second occupation level is badly preserved due to the subsequent construction and restoration of Building E-b1. The rooms of the earlier OL E:5-building (E-b14) were filled with stones and a new building (E-b15), again of unknown shape, dimensions and of slightly different orientation was set directly onto the older structures. The lack of primary deposits precludes a precise dating of OL E:4. Late 2nd and early 1st millennium bc ceramics 13 from deposits associated with either the construction or the use of these structures indicate an approximate date for this Occupational Level. This chronological reconstruction indicates a gap in the occupation of the area between the end of OL E:5 and the beginning of OL E:4. It remains however unclear if this is the result of a period of abandonment or rather a bias caused by the poor preservation of the deposits. Further pottery, in particular 9th to 5th cent. bc Sanaʾiye painted ware, has been identified in SU 7825, located outside Building E-b1 and sealing remains of Occupation Level E:4; thus a terminus ante quem non with regard to the subsequent deposits of OL E:3 and the foundation of the temple is provided.

Occupation Level E:3

6Probably in the 4th or 3rd cent. bc (see below), a completely new, NE–SW oriented building of trapezoid shape was constructed, covering a surface of 500 m2 (Building E-b1) (fig. 5). This building is located inside a roughly rectangular open area (1,700 m2) delimited by smaller buildings at its northern, western and southern sides. The eastern limit of this area has not been clearly identified yet. East of the building there is a well within a roughly square enclosure.

Figure 5.

Figure 5.

General view of Building E-b1 (from South-West)

© DAI Orient Department, I. Wagner

7Large parts of older OL E:4 structures were removed and the area was levelled at 828 m to construct the southern part of Building E-b1. The northern wall of the edifice, instead, was built at a much lower level (825.7 m) directly over OL E:5 layers, encompassing substantial deposits of collapsed large stones originating from earlier occupation. Thus, in the north-eastern corner, the walls are still preserved for a height of 5.5 m. Any older standing architectural remains at least in this part appear to have been completely removed.

8During its six to seven hundred years of use (OL E:3), Building E-b1 saw five major changes in layout (table 1), the last one dated to the 2nd to 3rd cent. ad. Each of them has been defined as a Building Stage, from the earliest E-b1:3e to the latest E-b1:3a. This sequence is based mainly on the reconstructions of the western side of the building and on the remains of inner floors within its limits. These Building Stages are discussed in detail later in this contribution.

Occupation Level E:2 and Occupation Level E:1

9The building was later abandoned and, since its walls are preserved at different heights and no clear evidence of systematic demolition has been identified, it seems to have gradually collapsed (OL E:2), forming massive deposits of stone debris (e.g. SU 2480 in the south) both inside and outside the old structure. Some of the walls remained visible until the modern era, as shown by a graffiti bearing the date 1329 H (1911 ad). It seems also that after the abandonment, substantial amounts of building material were removed from the area. This process severely impacted the reconstruction of the building history since it led to the loss of information at a number of crucial locations.

  • 14 Bawden, Edens & Miller 1980, p. 86.

10In modern times (OL E:1) the visible ruins were known as Qasr al-Ablaq and there are traces of scarce building activities (i.e. few low walls, built over the modern surface) probably the results of temporary occupation. Two large, rectangular pits filled with sand may correspond to the soundings carried out within the frame of the general survey of Saudi Arabia in 1979. 14

  • 15 Tourtet in Hausleiter et al. in press d: TA 10136.65.

11Chronological evidence for the date of OL E:2 is provided by pottery from a flattening layer (SU 2480). The latest date is provided by a bowl with thickened everted rim well attested at Tayma and reaching from the 4th to 6th cent. ad (i.e., Early Byzantine period). 15 Earlier material can be dated from 1st to 2nd and from 1st to 4th cent. ad. Thus OL E:2 may be dated at the earliest to the 4th cent. ad.

Building E-b1: Dating and function

  • 16 A number of people has been involved in the excavation of the deposits which returned this stratig (...)

12Considered as a whole, the dating evidence from Building E-b1 is fairly uneven. Inside the building the archaeological sequence is clear in many parts, but not all of these parts are stratigraphically interconnected. Furthermore, most of the preserved layers do not contain significant dating material. A well-preserved stratigraphic sequence with datable pottery has been uncovered from a number of contexts mainly outside the building, in particular next to its south-western corner. 16 These deposits, though often characterised by the presence of older material, cover almost completely large parts of the chronological horizon of Occupation Level E:3. Some of the Building Stages of Building E-b1 can be connected with this sequence outside of the building; however, in other cases the connection remains tentative.

  • 17 Lora & Tourtet in prep.; for the time being see Tourtet, Daszkiewicz & Hausleiter forthcoming. I a (...)

13The pottery record from such stratified contexts, in this contribution, is considered mainly from its chronological perspective and will be discussed in the paragraphs of the pertaining Building Stages to which these deposits belong as archaeological contexts (see below). A detailed discussion of ceramic shapes and fabrics from a chronostratigraphic perspective within and outside of Building E-b1, including extensive comparisons, will be published elsewhere. 17

Table 1.

Occupation Level Building Stage Dating Evidence
E:1 - 19th–20th cent. ad Modern material and graffiti
E:2 - Unclear (later than 4th cent. ad) Pottery sequence from outside the building
E:3 E-b1:3a Post 2nd–4th cent. ad Radiocarbon date from inside the building
Pottery sequence from outside the building
E-b1:3b 2nd cent. ad Pottery sequence from outside the building
Imitation of Athena coin from inside the building
E-b1:3c 1st cent. ad–early (?) 2nd cent. ad Pottery sequence from outside the building
E-b1:3d 1st cent. bc–1st cent. ad Pottery sequence from outside the building
Inscriptions from secondary deposits
E-b1:3e Second half of the 1st millennium bc post OL E:4 (Early Iron Age) Pottery sequence from inside and outside the building
Inscriptions and artefacts from secondary deposits
E:4 ? Early to Middle Iron Age? Pottery sequence from deposits still under evaluation
E:5 E:5a-c Middle Bronze Age–Early Bronze Age Radiocarbon dates Pottery sequence from inside Building E-b14
  • 18 Respectively: TA 2250, TA 2382, TA 4915, and TA 4916; Stein in press.
  • 19 TA 4915 and TA 4916, which are similar in shape and dimensions to the monoliths of Building Stage (...)
  • 20 Cf. Stein in press, combining the mention of a “[PN], son of PSGW, king of Lihyan” (the son being (...)
  • 21 TA 964 from Square C4, see Al-Said in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 141-142 and Stein in press.
  • 22 Schneider 2010 and 2015; Hausleiter 2017.
  • 23 Winnett & Reed 1970, p. 88-112.
  • 24 Hausleiter in Eichmann et al. 2012, p. 90-93.
  • 25 Al-Said 2010.
  • 26 A fragment (TA 12568) of a left leg of one of these monumental statues, found in secondary context (...)

14The above mentioned critical chrono-stratigraphic situation pertains in particular to the foundation date of the building represented by Building Stage E-b1:3e. The tentative dating to the period of the Lihyanite dynasty of Dadan is based on a number of artefacts which were found in secondary or tertiary contexts. These bear inscriptions 18 in Imperial Aramaic by King Tulmay of Lihyan from his 4th, 20th, 30th and 40th regnal years, discovered inside and outside of the building. Two 19 of them are carved on monolithic stone pillars which were reused as building material in Building Stage E-b1:3a. From these finds a tentative dating of Building Stage E-b1:3e to the last three or four centuries of the 1st millennium bc can be deduced (see below). The absolute dating of the Lihyanite dynasty, however, is still under discussion. 20 In any case, together with a further inscription 21 of a governor of Tayma possibly carrying out building activities at the inner wall 22 of the city and mentioning a Lihyanite king, these texts suggest that Dadan may have been successful in the reported wars against Tayma, possibly installing a form of control over the neighbouring oasis. 23 In addition to the epigraphic evidence, numerous fragments of several monumental statues 24 as well as of similar representations in smaller size have been recovered from the building and its immediate surroundings. Not only do they suggest, that at least the larger-than-life size items may have adorned the building in the same way as at ancient Dadan, 25 but they can be understood as expression of the cultural identity as well as of the political power of that dynasty, especially if connected with its hypothesized gaining of control over one of the major oases of Northwest Arabia. 26

  • 27 TA 4590, SU 219 (fill/collapse in E-b1:R8/9): no year; TA 10277, SU 6358 (accumulation covering a (...)
  • 28 TA 14763, SU 2473 (re-used in the western wall of E-b1:R8/9): no year; TA 14285 + TA 14286, SU 655 (...)
  • 29 Eichmann 2009 p. 63; Hausleiter in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 127; Nehmé 2011, p. 139, Tourtet & Wei (...)
  • 30 Hausleiter in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 122
  • 31 Tourtet & Weigel 2015.

15With the dating of the following Building Stages E-b1:3d to E-b1:3b to the Nabataean period we are on firmer ground, since this attribution is mainly based on stratified ceramics, including Nabataean sherds, from the monumental entrance outside the building (see below). Four inscriptions bearing the names of kings Aretas IV 27 (9 bc–40 ad) and Malichus II 28 (40–70 ad) were found inside or in proximity of Building E-b1, albeit all in secondary contexts. A number of architectural elements in Nabatean style were also brought to light from similar secondary contexts, among which a typical Nabatean horned capital (TA 325), 29 a decorative stone element in the shape of a vessel (TA 988), 30 a relief (TA 7596) 31 with triglyphon and rosette.

16Both the inscriptions and the architectural elements were probably originally placed inside and/or near the building and their presence is further evidence of the existence of a connection between Tayma and the Nabataean Kingdom (see below) as well as of the importance of Building E-b1 within the settlement during this period.

  • 32 TA 7809 found in a preparatory layer (SU 4386) for floor SU 318 (see below).
  • 33 On the distribution and dating of these coins see, with references, Huth 2010 and Rohmer & Charlou (...)

17A bronze imitation of an Athena coin 32 found in a preparatory layer of the E-b1:3b floor gives a wide teminus post quem between the last centuries of the 1st millennium bc and the 1st cent. ad for the installation of this floor; it not only does not contradict our dating of Building Stage E-b1:3b but also represents further evidence on the economic connections between Tayma and its neighbouring cities 33 in this period.

  • 34 Eichmann et al. 2006, p. 109. TA 9273 (originally E-CC2) from SU 215, Laboratory Number: KIA 24636 (...)

18As to the dating of the last Building Stage E-b1:3a to the Late Antiquity, a radiocarbondate 34 of a charcoal fragment from a mud deposit in which a body fragment of a Lihyanite statue had been set when re-used provides a terminus post quem.

19The interpretation of this Building E-b1 as a temple is based on a number of elements: its central location; its general layout; the installations within and outside it; epigraphic and iconographic evidence found in the area.

  • 35 Bawden, Edens & Miller 1980, p. 75-78; cf. Hausleiter 2017.
  • 36 This artificial mound is created by the remains of earlier structures pre-dating OL E:3 and restin (...)

20In the period when the building was in use the main part of the settlement occupied a roughly circular area of 21 ha (Compound E), densely built and enclosed by the inner wall. 35 Located almost exactly at the centre of this area, Building E-b1 occupied a key position within the urban tissue and represented a major landmark. The building, constructed on the top of a mound, 36 was in fact clearly visible from within Compound E as well as from other parts of the settlement.

21Even though Building E-b1 faced three major reconstructions during its early building stages (E-b1:3e–b), these operations did not alter significantly its inner layout. All features characterising the building as public were maintained, such as three niches at the (inner) northern side, the inner open space being surrounded by pillars and, later, by columns (and completely lacking any fully separated spatial unit; see below). A strong symbolism regarding the relation of the building to the main resource of the oasis, water, is clearly recognisable, as expressed by a more than 15 m long tunnel connecting a basin in the centre of the building with a well east of it. This is reinforced by three monumental basins located at or near to its entrance. At the same time, none of these installations is connected to any function with direct impact on the economic aspect of water management, such as, e.g., to irrigation purposes.

  • 37 Hausleiter 2010, 2011 and 2012a, p. 321-322; Macdonald in press; Stein in press.

22A series of artefacts with a cultic connotation have been found inside or in the proximity of the building. They are supposed to have been part of its original assemblage; however, all of them were found reused as building material either in walls or in fills dating to Building Stage E-b1:3a, when the function of the building was most probably changed. Among the most relevant items for the present discussion are a series of divine representations, i.e. the relief of a standing bull (TA 2467) and two idols in the shape of a bucranium (TA 943 and TA 944), as well as a number of inscriptions connected to the god ṢLM, one of the main gods of the oasis; the latter has been used as argument in favour of a tentative identification of the building with a shrine of this god. 37

  • 38 Al-Said 2010.

23Finally, there is a clear similarity to nearby Dadan / al-Khuraybah, where a number of royal monumental statues similar to those found inside and outside Building E-b1 were found in a cultic context, i.e. next to a temple. 38

Reconstructing the architectural history of the temple

The first layout of the building: E-b1:3e

  • 39 From these deposits, one of several 3rd millennium bc 14C-dates has been recovered (see ftn 12).
  • 40 The dimensions of the stones stone blocks have been classified as: very small (< 0.06 m); small (0.06-0.2 m); medium (0.2-0.6 m); large (0.6-1 m); and very large (> 1 m).

24Only some parts of the original (first) building are preserved: the entire northern side including the whole north-eastern corner, the south-western corner, seven monolithic pillars, and a pyrotechnical installation in the north-eastern part of the building (fig. 6). However, only the northern side remained continuously in use until the abandonment of the building. At 825.7 m the 3 m thick northern wall (SU 370) was built onto a series of layers 39 accumulated over the bedrock. No evidence of a foundation trench was identified in the deposits investigated next to this wall. This massive wall is made of stone masonry using medium-sized, 40 roughly squared stones which are unevenly coursed. Two semi-pillars create three niches at the inner side of the northern wall, each of them approximately 3 m wide. The outer two niches are framed by the north-eastern and north-western corners of the building, respectively. No primary context can be associated with this wall. Only the northernmost 5 m of the eastern side of the building, including the pyrotechnical installation (see below), can be identified as part of the original construction.

Figure 6.

Figure 6.

Building E-b1: sequence of Building Stages E-b1:3e-3a. Excavated structures in grey, reconstructed structures in light grey

© DAI Orient Department, S. Lora

  • 41 Western line: SU 388, SU 6412, and SU 9131; eastern line: SU 8787 and SU 8797.

25Monolithic pillars, seven of which preserved, set regularly along the main walls create a peristyle-like hall inside the building. Five of the lateral pillars are still preserved. 41 A sixth pillar (SU 9128) is placed in front of the central niche of the northern wall, and the seventh (SU 7217) west of the entrance to the building. The lateral pillars share similar sections (almost square) and dimensions (approximately 0.5 x 0.4 m); the northern pillar is slightly larger. Only the southern pillar has a rectangular section. All pillars show similar traces of dressing on their preserved sides. The pillars were installed into foundation pits dug into earlier deposits; the foundations of two of them (SU 8797 and SU 7217) have been reached (see table 2).

26At present only pillar SU 8787 (fig. 7) shows a decoration on its southern face consisting of a series of chiselled representations (from top to bottom): three human figures (upside-down); three daggers in a vertical row; and a group of three identical wavy strokes. Other figures and symbols are only partially preserved and not clearly recognisable. It remains unclear if the figures were chiselled before or after the pillar was installed.

Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Southern face of pillar SU 8787 with figures (from S)

© DAI Orient Department, I. Wagner

Table 2.

SU Position Dimension Level of preserved upper part Foundation Decoration
SU 388 Western side 0.53 x 0.41 m 828.68 m
SU 6412 Western side 0.54 x 0.39 m 828.61 m
SU 9131 Western side 0.27 (or more) x 0.37 m 829.10 m
SU 8787 Eastern side 0.48 x 0.33 m 829.10 m Human figures, weapons and patterns
SU 8797 Eastern side 0.54 x 0.40 m 828.95 m 827.27 m
SU 9128 Central, north 0.47 x 0.54 m 828.78 m
SU 7217 Central, south 0.74 x 0.36 m 828.65 m 826.15 m
  • 42 The western wall of Building E-b1 in the later Building Stage E-b1:3d (SU 341) is located 1 m fart (...)

27Since the original shape and dimensions of Building E-b1 are not completely preserved any more (see below), the position of the monolithic pillars is crucial for their reconstruction. Only partly preserved, these pillars outline a regular trapezoid: its shortest northern side made by a row of three pillars (only the central one preserved: SU 9128); the two lateral sides made by four pillars each (two preserved on each side; in the West: SU 9131 and SU 388; in the East: SU 8797 and SU 8787); and the longest southern side made by four pillars (the westernmost two preserved: SU 6412 and SU 7217). The associated and badly preserved walls (SU 1761 and SU 1785) suggest that during Building Stage E-b1:3e the temple may have had the largest extension. 42 Accordingly, the original western wall was located 4.7 m west of the western line of pillars; exactly the same has been recorded for the distance between the eastern line of pillars and the eastern wall.

28Until now, no unequivocal evidence of a floor of this Building Stage has been found; there are, however, several elements suggesting that the elevation of the original floor was at 828.1 m: remains of a possible stone-paved floor (SU 7222, only five stones preserved) next to pillar SU 388; a possible working surface (SU 9676) associated with the first phase of the oven in the north-eastern corner of the building (see below). Furthermore, the fact that the walls from earlier OL E:4 were all razed at an elevation of 828 m or lower seems to support this reconstruction. The level of the threshold (SU 5129) of the southern main entrance of the building, which stays at 829 m, i.e. one meter above this floor level, is in contrast with this reconstruction; however, its attribution to Building Stage E-b1:3e is not certain.

  • 43 Excavation of the pyrotechnical installation was started in 2008 by Arno Kose, continued in 2009 b (...)

29A key element of this first layout of Building E-b1 is a pyrotechnical installation 43 located 5 m south of its north-eastern corner and partially inset into its eastern wall. This installation (fig. 8) is composed of a smaller (0.9 m wide) inner semi-domed chamber, surrounded by two external walls; these either form a larger (2.4 m wide) chamber of the same shape or function as separated screen walls. The remains of the installation show heavy traces of fire, as does a related working surface (SU 9692) next to it at a level of 828.1 m. Archaeometric analyses, carried out on mortar samples from the walls of the installation, indicate a functional temperature of less than 800°-900°C, therefore excluding its use for production purposes (for example metal or pottery).

Figure 8.

Figure 8.

General view of the central part of Building E-b1 with pyrotechnical installation, central basin and tunnel (from W)

© DAI Orient Department, I. Wagner

  • 44 Huber 2015, p. 33-35.

30Most probably the oven was not dedicated to single exclusive purpose, but it should be viewed as a multifunctional installation. 44 Its main function was probably of a culinary nature, but most likely it was also strongly related with the cultic character of the building itself, and it may have played an essential role for the rituals carried out inside it (e.g. for the burning of offerings and for the production of ember for the burning of incense). Heating may have also been an important secondary use especially during the winter season.

  • 45 Only the eastern jamb and the threshold are preserved. The western side, reconstructed twice in th (...)

31Access to the building was granted through an approx. 4 m wide 45 entrance at its southern side. The doorway, framed by large monoliths inset into the walls, may have been closed by a double gate, as suggested by two poorly preserved pivot holes on the threshold.

32The entrance opened onto an external elevated paved platform (10 x 5 m; at 828.6 m) accessible from the East by means of a monumental stair (and probably also from the West, as in later building stages, but nothing of the supposed E-b1:3e stairs is preserved; see below). This platform reached the buildings located 5 m southwest of Building E-b1 which enclosed the area of the temple from this side.

  • 46 Courtyard’s elevation is 827.85 m.

33The four steps of the stair (fig. 9), each made of a single 4 m long roughly squared stone, were reached from the open courtyard east of the building, which lays 0.8 m lower than the platform. 46

Figure 9.

Figure 9.

Overview of the monumental entrance to Building E-b1 with basins, stair and platforms (from S)

© DAI Orient Department, S. Lora

  • 47 Hausleiter in Hausleiter et al. in press d.

34The monumentality of the stair is enhanced by a 4 m long low wall (SU 2302). This wall, as high as the platform, is attached to the south-eastern corner of the building and flanks the access to the stairs from the north. An elongated monolithic basin is placed at its eastern end (length 2.7 m; width 0.7 to 1 m). Basin and wall belong to a rectangular construction attached to the eastern side of the building which may have been modified in subsequent building stages. Within this enclosed area there was a (smaller) platform covered with flagstones made of red sandstone. It seems possible that this platform, as well as its preceding rectangular construction may have served in context of performing ritual activities outside building and ‘above’ the large open courtyard east of Building E-b1. 47 However, no remains of any other installation/s survived.

35In later stage E-b1:3c the access to the stair is flanked also from the South by a second monumental basin (SU 8305) set onto a second low wall. This configuration with two basins was most probably the original one which was readapted in E-b1:3c when the area in front of the building was extended (see below). If this reconstruction is correct, then in BS E-b1:3e basin SU 8305 was set on a second low wall located 1 m south of the stair and parallel to wall SU 2302.

  • 48 This artefact is poorly preserved, the head and the front legs are missing; Sperveslage 2013. Exca (...)
  • 49 Sperveslage 2013.
  • 50 Fragments of two more sphinxes/large felines (paws TA 6233 and TA 12210) were also found in the pr (...)

36The body (TA 3837) of a sphinx 48 found near wall SU 2302 is supposed to have been part of the monumental decoration of the entrance. Although there is no direct evidence to reconstruct its original position, it may have been placed on the top of wall SU 2302, facing the basin. The body of a second sphinx, similar for type of stone and dimensions to TA 3837, was identified in the collections of the Tayma Museum. 49 It seems possible that it was also part of the monumental decoration, in which case its placement on the second low wall at the southern side of the stairs may be suggested. 50

Subsequent transformations: E-b1:3d to E-b1:3b

37Following Building Stage E-b1:3e, the layout of Building E-b1 underwent major changes, especially in its western side, which was rebuilt twice. These operations impacted the supporting elements for the roofing and the floors. On the basis of the sequence of floors exposed in the southern part of the building, three changes of layout have been identified and were defined as Building Stages E-b1:3d–b. They have been correlated with a sequence of ramps south of the building (see below).

38Throughout these building stages, the interior of the building remained an open space delimited by pillars and, later, by columns; three key installations, two of which already existing in Building Stage E-b1:3e, were continuously in use with minor adaptations: the monumental entrance at the southern side; the fire installation near the north-eastern corner of the building; and a newly built central basin connected with the well east of the building through a tunnel.

E-b1:3d

39In Building Stage E-b1:3d (fig. 6), the western side of the building, including the whole south-western corner and part of the southern façade, was completely rebuilt. A new western wall (SU 341) was built approx. 1 m east of the previous one. Thus, the original trapezoid shape of the building was maintained, though reducing its width (see above). The reason for this partial rebuilding remains unknown, even if the irregular join between the old and the new walls (SU 370 and SU 341, respectively) suggests a static failure of the western side.

40The building technique of wall SU 341 differs completely from that of northern wall SU 370. Instead of small to medium-sized stones, this time very large stones, regularly coursed, were used. The northern part of this new wall is still preserved for a length of 12 m, its southern part being completely lost due to later interventions (see below). Three buttresses protrude at regular intervals (every 2.4 m) from the inner face of the preserved section of wall SU 341. Each of them is 1.1 m wide and 0.9 m thick and bonds with wall SU 341. Considering the supposed original length of this wall, two more buttresses (for a total of five) may have existed in its southern part, as suggested by remains of a later buttress built during Building Stage E-b1:3c with similar dimensions but poorer masonry.

41The new western side of Building E-b1 (wall SU 341) required shifting the western line of support installations accordingly. These pillars (E-b1:3e) were intentionally broken; their lower parts were left in place but were not visible anymore, since a new floor (see below) was installed at a level (828.8 m) higher than their remains (see table 2).

42New pillars measuring 0.8 x 0.8 m were built in stone masonry in front of each buttress of wall SU 341 at a distance of 3 m, reusing some large fragments of the old monoliths as building material (fig. 10). As for the buttresses, five pillars may have originally existed, but only two of the central ones are still preserved, SU 223 and SU 2746.

Figure 10.

Figure 10.

Buttress on wall SU 341 and pillar SU 2746 in stone masonry (from South)

© DAI Orient Department, S. Lora

43The monolithic pillars (E-b1:3e) at the eastern side of the building and the one at the northern side were not affected by the reconstruction and remained in use.

44The reconstruction of the western side required an intervention also outside the building. The new side of the building, a new ramp and a new western side of the platform were installed directly over deposit SU 7825 which seals underlying remains of OL E:4 (see above).

  • 51 This corner was later removed in Building Stage E-b1:3c and is, therefore, not preserved.

45Following the construction of the new façade, a ramp (SU 6414, SU 6385, and SU 7824) made of grey silt was set against it, running from the new south-western corner 51 to the entrance (fig. 11). The new western side of the platform was built directly over this ramp. It consists of a 0.7 m high wall (SU 3730) perpendicular to the façade of the building. The crown of this wall was integrated into the paving of the platform, its stones being smaller than the flagstones used in the eastern part. Two 2 m long walls are attached to the western side of the platform probably flanking an access structure of which nothing is preserved (either stair or a short ramp which would be rather steep, with a slope of 22°, if ending together with the walls).

Figure 11.

Figure 11.

General view of E-b1:3d and E-b1:3c ramps (from S-W)

© DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer

46On the excavated surface (SU 6414) of ramp SU 6385 it was possible to identify:

  • A stone (SU 6415), probably a stele set vertically into the ramp about 4 m west of the platform. Only its lower part is preserved (preserved height: 0.4 m; width 0.3 m; thickness 0.2 m); the artefact was most probably broken in later Building Stage E-b1:3c. Its original dimensions, appearance, and function remain unknown.
  • A line of three circular post-holes (two 0.2 m wide and a smaller central one 0.1 m wide) located 2 m south of the façade of the building and possibly related to construction activities in the area (during this Building Stage E-b1:3d or in the later E-b1:3c).

47Inside the building the levels were raised (828.8 m) and the floor was completely paved with roughly squared stones of different dimensions (medium to very large). Five parts of this floor are preserved both in the northern and in the southern part of the building.

48The pyrotechnical installation was partially restored. Its base was raised to a level of 828.8 m, as the new floor; its southern screen wall, including a 2 m section of the eastern wall of the building next to it, was rebuilt over the remains of the earlier one; the upper part of the installation was remade as well.

  • 52 The installation was firstly identified as a basin in 2007 by Arno Kose, who also excavated this p (...)

49In this Building Stage, a rectangular basin 52 was installed in the centre of the building (fig. 8). It seems likely that it was connected with the tunnel leading to the well located east of the building (see below); the basin and the tunnel seem to have been built at the same time. This reconstruction however remains tentative, since no direct connection between basin and tunnel survived; during later Building Stage E-b1:3a the basin was in fact dismantled and the access to the tunnel inside the building was heavily modified.

  • 53 The whole basin measures approx. 2.6 x 1.2 m and is 0.5 m deep; the western pool measures 1.9 m in (...)

50Originally, the basin was divided into two pools 53, a western and larger pool made with vertically set stone slabs and an eastern and smaller one made in stone masonry (fig. 12). Its installation required the excavation of a very large pit (approx. 6 m in diameter and at least 1.6 m deep) which was completely filled with lime mortar. The slab forming the northern side of the larger pool was inserted directly into the white mortar while it was still wet; the two slabs forming its western and southern sides were instead installed into two pits dug into the mortar once it had hardened. The fourth slab, which divided the two pools, is missing, but its position can be reconstructed on the basis of a negative print left on the mortar. It should therefore be assumed that this slab was installed into the wet mortar as the northern one. The eastern pool was made with a U-shaped low wall attached to the main pool from the East. Due to the aforementioned missing slab, it is unclear whether the pools were connected. Both pools were most probably completely paved with stones at 828.5 m (two are preserved).

Figure 12.

Figure 12.

3D model of the central basin after reconstruction (from E)

© DAI Orient Department, M. Kolbe, S. Lora

51The floor surrounding the basin was paved with flagstones set onto the lime mortar the upper part of the basin emerging from this floor level for 0.4 m. East of the basin, a canal was left in the lime mortar at the eastern side of the basin, which may have allowed liquid to flow from the smaller pool into the tunnel.

  • 54 The tunnel has been excavated by Arnulf Hausleiter from 2008 onwards within Building E-b1 and outs (...)
  • 55 The well consists of an upper, circular part built in in stone masonry and a lower, horseshoe-shap (...)

52The layout of the tunnel next to the basin in this Building Stage remains unclear. The construction of a new access shaft of the tunnel within the building in Building Stage E-b1:3a (see below) removed large part of the original installation leaving only two poorly preserved walls which have been tentatively attributed to this earlier phase. Under the eastern wall of the building, there is a narrow passageway rather difficult to negotiate 54 due to protruding remains of walls earlier than Building E-b1. Outside of the building, the tunnel (fig. 13) is instead a regularly-made passage (15 m long, 0.8 m wide, and 1.4 m high) apparently abutting the eastern façade. The sides consist of two walls in dry stone masonry supporting the tunnel’s cover, made with very large stone slabs. The tunnel runs for 11 m roughly perpendicular to the eastern wall of Building E-b1 and continues for further 4 m after a slight turn to the South. The floor of this section is 3 m lower than the level of the inner floor of the building. The eastern end of the tunnel opens into the circular shaft of the well 55 built in stone masonry. The floor of the tunnel slopes gently from the well (825.68 m) in direction of the building (825.32 m, immediately outside of Building E-b1), thus allowing water to flow from the former to the latter. There are however no remains of a conduct for liquids and the trodden floor is made of permeable material.

Figure 13.

Figure 13.

The tunnel outside the building leading to the well (from W)

© DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer

  • 56 Probably the southern side of the tunnel was also partially rebuilt when this support was installe (...)

53In addition to subsequent changes within the building, it seems that the construction of the tunnel may have caused a partial collapse of the eastern wall of Building E-b1. This is indicated by the presence of a support 56 built right under the wall, and also by the reconstruction of the part of the building’s eastern wall located exactly over the tunnel. Such a rebuilding would therefore have to be dated to either Building Stage E-b1:3d or c (see below).

  • 57 Schmid 2000, p. 24 and ftn 117.
  • 58 Durand 2012, p. 333; p. 350 fig. 14: 91027_P01.
  • 59 Lora & Tourtet in prep.

54On the basis of the pottery record from the lowest layer (SU 7824) of E-b1:3d ramp, a dating to the 1st cent. bc is suggested for this building stage. Among the significant sherds with regional parallels there are: a Nabataean painted fine ware sherd with thick red lines (fig. 14 a) (corresponding to Schmid’s Phase 1, dated at the latest to the late 2nd/early 1st cent. bc); 57 several everted bowls (fig. 14 b-d), with a slight thickening of the inner side of the rim with parallels at late 1st cent. bc to early 1st cent. ad Hegra. 58 Other sherds with comparisons in Syria, Jerusalem and Petra cover the range from the late 3rd to 1st cent. bc59

Figure 14.

Figure 14.

Pottery sherds from Building Stages E-b1:3d-b

© DAI Orient Department, F. Tourtet

E-b1:3c

  • 60 In the earlier building stages on the other hand, most of the stones were not squared and there se (...)

55With Building Stage E-b1:3c, Building E-b1 reached its final shape, which remained unchanged until its abandonment in OL E:2 (fig. 6). The south-western corner was rebuilt a second time, bringing it back near to its original position (as in E-b1:3e) and partially reusing the remains of the earlier corner as foundation. This operation basically enlarged the building by 2 m to the West, but only in its southern half since the northern part of the western wall (SU 341, see above) remained unchanged. New walls (SU 252 and SU 1880) were constructed with regularly coursed stones of similar type and dimensions, suggesting that the stones were squared on purpose. 60 Wall SU 252 replaced the southernmost 12 m of the western side of the building and wall SU 1880 replaced the westernmost 10 m of the southern façade. As in the previous building stage, this operation may have been forced by a static failure of the wall, as suggested by the construction of a massive retaining structure (SU 387; 6.5 m long, 3 m thick, at least 4 m high) against western wall SU 341.

56The construction of wall SU 1880 modified also the main entrance of the building reducing its width from 4 to 3 m. In the same wall, a second smaller entrance (1 m wide) was set 5 m west of the main one. The function of this second entrance in this Building Stage remains unclear. In following Building Stage E-b1-3b, a monumental basin (SU 5192, see below) was located exactly in front of this opening and it seems probable that these two installations were related to each other. However, there is no clear evidence that basin SU 5192 and its supporting wall SU 5193, attached to the façade of the building, were already in place in Building Stage E-b1:3c.

  • 61 The south-western extension of the building required the first row to have one additional column c (...)

57Whereas in the northern part of the building the pyrotechnical installation (E-b1:3e) and the basin-tunnel complex (E-b1:3d) remained most probably in use without substantial modification, in the southern part, two rows of columns were installed replacing the existing pillars. The southern (first) row was set 4 m north of the southern wall of the building; the second (northern) row is located 4 m north of the first. The bases of three columns are preserved in the southern row. These bases are round, with a square plinth (0.7 x 0.75 m), and were set over a low foundation made in stone masonry (fig. 15). Based on their position and the intercolumniation of approx. 3.7 m, it is possible to reconstruct the southern row with four columns, and the northern one with three. 61 The northern column bases are not preserved, since they were replaced in the following Building Stage E-b1:3b by new ones (see below).

Figure 15.

Figure 15.

E-b1:3c column base SU 210 after the removal of the E-b1:3c and E-b1:3b floors (from W)

© DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer

58After the installation of these column bases, the levels in the area were raised by approx. 0.5 m by setting a series of flattening layers, covering the older E-b1:3d floor. Over these layers a new floor was installed at a level of 829.20–30 m, paved with irregular medium-sized flat stones, often with rounded edges. Three parts of this floor are preserved.

59The installation of this new floor created a significant difference in height (0.4–0.5 m) between the now elevated southern part and the lower northern one (828.70–80 m), where the E-b1:3d floor remained in use, apparently unchanged. If this reconstruction is correct, the difference in level would have to be bridged by a suitable installation, which is however not preserved. After the installation of the columns, the southern half of building became a hypostyle hall, while the northern one kept its original organisation.

60Outside the building, a new ramp was set over the earlier one (SU 6385) raising the level by 0.4 m with a layer (SU 6393) of medium to small stones, silt, and sand. This new ramp started at the new south-western corner of the building and, contrary to the previous one, reached directly the top of the platform, with a 9° inclination (fig. 11). All the installations related to E-b1:3d ramp (SU 6385, see above) were dismantled and completely covered.

  • 62 Cf. Lora & Tourtet in prep.
  • 63 Durand 2012, p. 328; 337 fig. 2: 10228_P05.
  • 64 Durand 2012, p. 329; 342 fig. 7: 27010_P01.
  • 65 Parr 1970, p. 368 fig. 7.104-105; Schmid 2000, p. 97-99.
  • 66 Tourtet & Weigel 2015, p. 390; 393 fig. 6.

61From layer SU 6369 of this new ramp chronologically significant pottery 62 has been recorded: comparisons with late 1st–early 2nd cent. ad Madaʾin Salih consist of a jar fragment with simple, slightly everted rim and a thick rib on the short neck (fig. 14 e), 63 and a second with a groove on the inner side of the neck and a small ridge (fig. 14 f) (at Madaʾin Salih: mid-1st/early 2nd cent. ad64 Petra: 1st/early 2nd cent. ad 65). Large, coarse, handmade vessels (fig. 14 g) decorated by a shallow grooved wavy line are well-known at Tayma in deposits attributed to OL F:4, roughly dated between the late 2nd cent. bc and the mid-1st cent. ad66 Combining the dating suggested above for the earlier Building Stage and the pottery evidence from Building Stage E-b1:3c, the latter assemblage seems to be dated to the late 1st cent. ad.

E-b1:3b

62In Building Stage E-b1:3b, two main building operations took place inside Building E-b1: the replacement of the three columns of the northern row by new ones and the setting of a new paved floor (fig. 6, 16). As in earlier Building Stage E-b1:3c, these operations were limited to the southern part of the building, its northern part remaining basically unchanged.

Figure 16.

Figure 16.

Reconstructive 3D model of Building E-b1 in Building Stage E-b1:3b (from S-E)

© DAI Orient Department, S. Lora

63For the setting of the three new columns (fig. 17), foundation pits were excavated into the older E-b1:3c floor. Each was filled with very large stones, providing a stable foundation. Two column bases (SU 208 in the east and SU 209 in the centre) are preserved; of the third, only the underground foundation survived (SU 389). The new bases are slightly larger than their predecessors (0.85 x 0.8 m) and were installed approx. 0.2 m higher, i.e. at the new floor level.

Figure 17.

Figure 17.

E-b1:3b column base SU 209 (from S-W)

© DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer

64The new floor was set at a level of 829.4 m and only two parts (SU 317 and SU 318) of it are preserved. Its regularly dressed flagstones were laid directly over the remains of the earlier E-b1:3c floor and set into a bed of lime mortar: The imitation of an Athena Coin TA 4386 (see above) was found under the flagstones of floor SU 318. This new floor covered completely the plinth of the old E-b1:3c column bases, only their round base remaining visible. Two of the flagstones (preserved total length 1.5 m), located next to the entrance, show a groove in the middle and they were probably part of a canal conducting liquids from the inside to the outside of the building (fig. 18).

Figure 18.

Figure 18.

Entrance to the building in Building Stage E-b1:3b, with inner canal (from N-W)

© DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer

  • 67 Five further similar items have been recovered, re-used in later retaining wall SU 1515, built ove (...)
  • 68 With an inclination of 2°–3°.

65Outside the building, the area west of the platform was again modified. Wall SU 5953 was attached to the façade, partially over remains of the E-b1:3c ramp. On top of this low wall and directly in front of the side door (see above), a monolithic basin (SU 5952, length: 6.4 m, width: 0.9 m, preserved height 0.6 m) was installed (fig. 19). In the narrow space between the basin and the building façade (SU 271), a canal was installed, running from the main entrance to the south-western corner of the building. The basin and canal are juxtaposed but in no way connected. Two sections of the canal are preserved for a total length 5.6 m, with a gap of 1 m between them. The channel is composed of elongated stone elements 67 with a longitudinal groove (8 cm wide and 2–3 cm deep). It slopes gently 68 to the West, in direction of the corner of the building.

Figure 19.

Figure 19.

Basin SU 5192 and side door (from S-W)

© DAI Orient Department, S. Lora

66This canal was most probably connected with the above-mentioned canal (SU 5128) found inside the building, next to its entrance. Unfortunately, no further parts of this installation are preserved, and even if it is tempting to relate it to the basin at the centre of the building, there is no evidence to confirm this hypothesis. The outer end of the canal, probably located near the south-west corner of Building E-b1, is also lost, removed in later Building Stage E-b1:3a.

67The enclosed area in front of the building was enlarged, removing parts of the buildings south of it. An enclosure wall was constructed at a distance of 8 m south of Building E-b1 and the platform was extended accordingly. A new, third ramp (SU 6381), made mainly of small and medium-sized stones, was set directly over earlier ramp SU 6393. In the area in front of basin SU 5952, the new ramp is relatively flat, creating a kind of unpaved extension of the central platform. From the western end of the basin, the ramp slopes down relatively steeply (13°) until the corner of the building.

  • 69 Schmid 2000, p. 24 and ftn 117.
  • 70 Tourtet & Müller 2012, p. 356-357, 359 fig. 7; Tourtet & Weigel 2015, p. 395, 398 fig. 10.n-o, p.  (...)
  • 71 Lora & Tourtet in prep.
  • 72 Dehner 2013, p. 244 fig. 11.E; Gerber 2001, p. 11 fig. 2.E.
  • 73 Dehner 2013, p. 243; Gerber 2001, p. 8, 11.

68SU 6381 of the third ramp provides a context with stratified pottery. Part of this collection, e.g. Nabataean painted ware of Schmid’s Phase 1, 69 can be dated to the 2nd–1st cent. bc and it is interpreted as residual material. The youngest datable and chronologically significant material is characterised by jars, such as a short-necked jar with bevelled rim (fig. 14 h) well attested in the 2nd to 4th cent. ad residential area of Tayma 70 and with comparisons in the entire Southern Levant starting with the late 1st cent. ad71 A further jar rim with a deep groove on the inner wall (fig. 14 i) just above the transition to the shoulder can be compared to ‘Late Roman’ vessels from Petra 72 (2nd and 4th cent. ad 73). Thus, the pottery indicates the 2nd to 4th cent. ad as terminus post quem for the construction of the ramp – a closer dating cannot be provided based on the pottery evidence.

Radical changes in Late Antiquity: E-b1:3a

E-b1: 3a

  • 74 Lora in Hausleiter et al. in press a.

69In the last building stage, the configuration of the building was radically changed by the construction of inner walls, which divided the available space into at least ten smaller units of different size (fig. 6). The floor was raised to a level of 829.9 m and was most probably not paved with stones. 74 All the key installations inside the building were dismantled; the monumental statues and the Lihyanite and Nabataean architectural elements were broken, the pieces reused as construction or filling material.

  • 75 Lora in Hausleiter et al. in press c.

70The pyrotechnical installation was dismantled and walls (SU 224 and SU 225) were built over its remains, SU 224 containing a fist of a Lihyanite statue (TA 9345). 75 The central basin was also dismantled, tilting the flagstones which formed its sides. Wall SU 2734 was built over its remains, completely sealing the basin and creating the western side of a square room (labelled E-b1: R8-9) with a large pillar in stone masonry at its centre. With the basin no longer in use, the supposed westernmost part of the tunnel (within the building) was shortened by 2 m and an opening framed with re-used flagstones was created on the floor to access it.

  • 76 Hausleiter in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 124-125; Hausleiter 2011, p. 102.

71In the southern part of the building, the columns were removed and partition walls were built over their bases, which were left in place (fig. 20). One of these walls (SU 1598) incorporated also a body of a monumental Lihyanite statue (TA 200) as well as the two inscribed pillar fragments mentioning king Tulmay (TA 4915 and TA 4916). The head of a monumental statue (TA 489) was re-used upside-down in a nearby installation, possibly a bench attached to the wall. 76

Figure 20.

Figure 20.

Wall SU 1589 built over earlier column base SU 210, reusing fragments of inscribed pillars (from S-E)

© DAI Orient Department, S. Lora

72Contrary to the preceding building stages, in E-b1:3a there is dating evidence from within built contexts. A fragment of a stone block (TA 14763) re-used as building material for wall SU 2734 bears a partly preserved inscription of Nabataean king Malichus II (40–70 ce), providing a terminus post quem for this Building Stage (see above).

73Outside the building, the levels were further raised in the whole area in front of it with a series of flattening layers (among which SU 6387). The platform, the eastern stair, and the two monumental basins were also covered and no longer in use. A retaining wall (SU 1515) was built against the whole southern façade and over monumental basin SU 5952, closing completely the side door. The threshold level of the main entrance was also raised, adapting it to the new levels inside and outside the building.

74These modifications may have been the result of a change of function of the entire building. It may even have lost its public character, though it is difficult to base such an assumption on the drastic change of layout alone. The fact that the royal statues and many inscriptions were destroyed and reused as building material for the construction of the inner walls seems to support this interpretation.

  • 77 Lora & Tourtet in prep.

75As to the chronological horizon of Building Stage E-b1:3a, there is a 14C-date from within the building recovered from the foundation level of wall SU 216 and covering the 2nd–3rd cent. ad (see above). Pottery has only been recovered from ramp SU 6387 as well as from wall SU 1515, and it covers a range from the 1st to the 4th cent. ad —mostly with comparisons at the site of Hegra. 77 Similar to the situation of Building Stage E-b1:3b, older material appears to have been reused for the construction of the ramp, and a more refined dating is not possible at least if based on the pottery record. Building Stage E-b1:3a must be dated at the earliest to the 2nd cent. ad, likely later. Up to now, it is however not possible to refine the date of either Building Stage.

Conclusions

  • 78 Hausleiter & Zur 2016.
  • 79 Stein 2014, p. 222-234; Hausleiter 2012b.

76Building E-b1, apparently one of the major temples of the oasis of Tayma, is located in the central part of the ancient settlement, an area most probably uninterruptedly occupied from the mid-3rd millennium bc until Late Antiquity. 78 This long lasting occupation, the presence of most prominent artefacts of the official sphere, starting from the Neo-Babylonian period at the latest and reaching into later periods, suggest that this location remained continuously significant throughout the centuries. From its foundation onwards, Building E-b1 played a central role in the life of the oasis most likely as a temple of god ṢLM HGM, whose introduction to the oasis is referred to in the Tayma Stone. 79

77The absolute dating of its foundation to the period between the 4th and 2nd cent. bc, when the dynasty of Lihyan may have exercised some kind of control over the oasis of Tayma, as based on the available evidence, must remain tentative.

78Despite the absence of direct or comparative evidence, many elements suggest a cultic function for the building: its prominent location at the centre and top of the ancient settlement, its architecture and the efforts invested in its maintenance, its installations, its building elements and the quantity and quality of artefacts assumed to have belonged to its original furnishing but retrieved in secondary deposition.

79Despite changes in the layout of the building in the Nabataean period, probably as a result of static failures mainly in its south-western part, there was an interest in preserving the building’s general structure, which was not heavily modified since its foundation. In fact, the most significant change is being connected with a change of function in Building Stage E-b1:3a, whereas the conceptual uniformity of the building is basically maintained through the four preceding building stages (E-b1: d–b). Some key installations, e.g. the three northern niches and the oven, were kept and renewed, while others, such as the complex basin-tunnel-well, were added at the beginning of the Nabatean Period.

  • 80 Eichmann, Schaudig & Hausleiter 2006, p. 168; Eichmann 2009, p. 63-64; Hausleiter in Eichmann et a (...)
  • 81 Tourtet & Weigel 2015.
  • 82 The exact administrative status of Tayma within the Nabataean Kingdom is still under investigation (...)

80As already suggested, 80 inscriptions and artefacts (e.g. a horned capital, a triglyph, and a vessel similar to those attached to the grave façades at Madaʾin Salih) from Building E-b1 and the surroundings areas indicate the existence of strong ties between Tayma and the Nabatean world; but the virtual lack of Nabatean fine ware 81 (less than 50 sherds among over 15,000 recorded items) and of Nabataean coins suggests that it may have been a peripheral place, at least as seen from the central administration of the Nabataean Kingdom. 82 It may, though, not have been without intention, that an already existing cultic building was kept in use without really fundamental changes, without an interruption in the local tradition. At the same time, the addition of key installations (e.g. the water basins) and the possible presence of typical Nabataean architectural elements may indicate that it was integrated into the Nabataean cultural (and possibly also political) sphere.

I am very grateful to Caroline Durand and Laurent Tholbecq for the invitation to the workshop « Archaeology of Rituals in the Nabataean World », which took place at the Ifpo Amman (Jordan) in September 2015, a great moment of discussion and inspiration. This contribution could not have been written without help from the many colleagues involved in the Tayma project. I would like to thank especially Arnulf Hausleiter, for the many comments on the text and the discussions in the field (in particular for the provocative ones), and Francelin Tourtet not only for the study of the ceramic material and his help with the text, but also for the time spent with me working on the reconstruction of the chronological sequence of the building. Ricardo Eichmann read an earlier version of this contribution and provided valuable comments. I am also grateful to Andrea Intilia for his useful comments on the text and for the many hours spent discussing Building E-b1 with me in the last years. The excavation of Building E-b1 has been a team effort involving a number of people in the last 12 years both in the field and in Berlin: I want to extend my gratitude to all of them. All errors are, of course, only mine.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Al-Hājirī (M.) 2011 « Syro-levantine bronze weapons from Taymaʾ », Franke et al. 2011, p. 112.

Al-Said (S. F.) 2010 « Dédān (al-ʿUlā) », André-Salvini et al. 2010, p. 263-269.

André-Salvini (B.) et al. (éd.) 2010 Routes d’Arabie. Trésors archéologiques du royaume d’Arabie Saoudite, Paris.

Bawden (G.), Edens (C.) & Miller (R.) 1980 « Preliminary Archaeological Investigations at Taymā », Atlal 4, p. 69-106.

Dehner (M.) 2013 « Continuity or change in use? Banqueting rooms in the so-called Soldier tomb complex in Petra », M. Mouton & S. G. Schmid (éd.), Men on the Rocks: The Formation of Nabataean Petra, Berlin, p. 237-250.

Dinies (M.), Plessen (B.), Neef (R.) & Kürschner (H.) 2015 « When the desert was green: Grassland expansion during the early Holocene in northwestern Arabia », Quaternary International 382, p. 293-302.

Dinies (M.), Plessen (B.), Neef (R.) & Kürschner (H.) 2016 « Holocene palaeoenviroment, climate development and oasis cultivation in NW Saudi Arabia, latest results of palynological investigations at Taymāʾ », Luciani 2016, p. 57-78.

Dinies (M.), Neef (R.) & Kürschner (H.) In press « Early to Middle Holocene vegetational development, climatic conditions and oasis cultivation in Tayma. First result from pollen spectra out of a Sabkha », A. Hausleiter, R. Eichmann & M. H. al-Najem (éd.), Tayma I, Reports 1: Archaeological Exploration, Palaeoenvironment, History, Oxford.

Durand (C.) 2012 « Pottery Study », Nehmé (éd.) 2012, p. 325-354.

Eichmann (R.) 2009 « Archaeological evidence of the pre-Islamic period (4th-6th cent. ad) at Taymāʾ », J. Schiettecatte & C. J. Robin (éd.), L’Arabie à la veille de l’Islam (Orient & Méditerranée 3), Paris, p. 59-66.

Eichmann (R.), Hausleiter (A.), Al-Najem (M. H.) & Al-Said (S. F.) 2006 « Tayma. Spring 2004, Report on the Joint Saudi-German Archaeological Project », Atlal 19, p. 91-116.

Eichmann (R.), Hausleiter (A.), Al-Najem (M. H.) & Al-Said (S. F.) 2010 « Tayma, Autumn 2004 and Spring 2005, 2nd Report on the Joint Saudi-Arabian-German Archaeological Project », Atlal 20, p. 101-147.

Eichmann (R.), Hausleiter (A.), Al-Najem (M. H.) & Al-Said (S. F.) 2011 « Tayma, Autumn 2005-2006 (Spring and Autumn), 3rd Report on the Joint Saudi-Arabian-German Archaeological Project », Atlal 21, p. 64-118.

Eichmann (R.), Schaudig (H.) & Hausleiter (A.) 2006 « Archaeology and Epigraphy at Tayma, Saudi Arabia », AAE 17, p. 163-176.

Farès-Drappeau (S.) 2005 Dédan et Liḥyān. Histoire des Arabes aux confins des pouvoirs perse et hellénistique (ive-iie s. avant l’ère chrétienne), TMO 42, Lyon.

Franke (U.), Al-Ghabban (A.), Gierlichs (J.) & Weber (S.) éd. 2011 Roads of Arabia. Archaeology and History of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Berlin.

Gerber (Y.) 2001 « A Glimpse of the Recent Excavations on ez-Zantur/Petra: The Late Roman Pottery and its Prototypes in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries ad », E. Villeneuve & P. M. Watson (éd.), La céramique byzantine et proto-islamique en Syrie-Jordanie (ive-viiie siècles apr. J.-C.). Actes du colloque tenu à Amman les 3, 4 et 5 décembre 1994 (BAH 159), Beyrouth, p. 7-12.

Hausleiter (A.) 2010 « The Oasis of Tayma », André-Salvini et al. 2010, p. 218-262.

Hausleiter (A.) 2011 « Ancient Taymaʾ: an Oasis at the interface between culture. New research at a key location on the caravan road », Franke et al. 2001, p. 103-123.

Hausleiter (A.) 2012a « Divine Representations at Taymāʾ », Sachet & Robin 2012, p. 299-338.

Hausleiter (A.) 2012b « North Arabian Kingdoms », D. T. Potts (éd.), A Companion to the archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Oxford, p. 816-832.

Hausleiter (A.) 2014 « Pottery Groups of the Late 2nd/Early 1st Millennia bc in Northwest Arabia and New Evidence from the Excavations at Tayma », M. Luciani & A. Hausleiter (éd.), Recent Trends in the Study of Late Bronze Age Ceramics in Syro-Mesopotamia and Neighbouring Regions: Proceedings of the International Workshop in Berlin, 2-5 November 2006 (Orient-Archäologie 32), Rahden, p. 399-434.

Hausleiter (A.) 2015 « Tayma, Saudi-Arabien – Rettungsgrabungen im Gräberfeld von al-Nasim. Die Arbeiten des Jahres 2014 », e-Forschungsberichte des DAI 2015/2, Berlin, p. 74-76.

Hausleiter (A.) 2017 « The outer wall of Taymāʾ and its dating to the Bronze Age », L. Nehmé & A. Al-Jallad, To the Madbar and Back Again, Studies in the languages, archaeology, and cultures of Arabia dedicated to Michael C. A. Macdonald (Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics 92), Leyde, p. 341-370.

Hausleiter (A.), Eichmann (R.), Al-Najem (M. H.) & al-Said (S. F.) In press a « Tayma 2008. 5th Report on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project », Atlal.

Hausleiter (A.), Eichmann (R.), Al-Najem (M. H.) & al-Said (S. F.) In press b « Tayma 2009. 6th Report on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project », Atlal.

Hausleiter (A.), Eichmann (R.), Al-Najem (M. H.) & al-Said (S. F.) In press c « Tayma 2010. 7th Report on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project », Atlal.

Hausleiter (A.), Eichmann (R.), Al-Najem (M. H.) & al-Said (S. F.) In press d « Tayma 2011. 8th Report on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project », Atlal.

Hausleiter (A.), Eichmann (R.), Al-Najem (M. H.) & al-Said (S. F.) In press e « Tayma 2012-2013. 9th -10th Reports on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project », Atlal.

Hausleiter (A.), Eichmann (R.), Al-Najem (M. H.) & al-Said (S. F.) In press f « Tayma 2014-2015. 11th-12th Reports on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project », Atlal.

Hausleiter (A.) & Schaudig (H.) 2010a « Stèle cintrée de Nabonide, roi de Babylone », André-Salvini et al. 2010, p. 252-253.

Hausleiter (A.) & Schaudig (H.) 2010b « Objet en forme de disque portant une inscription du roi Nabonide », André-Salvini et al. 2010, p. 253.

Hausleiter (A.) & Zur (A.) 2016 « Taymāʾ in the Bronze Age (C. 2,000 bce): Settlement and Funerary Landscapes », Luciani 2016, p. 135-173.

Huber (B.) 2015 Pyrotechnology in Northwest Arabia. Construction, Technology and Interpretation of the Oven in Building E-b1. Unpublished BA Thesis, Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin.

Huth (M.) 2010 « Athenian Imitation from Arabia », M. Huth & P. G. Van Alfen (éd.), Coinage of the Caravan Kingdoms. Studies in the Monetization of Ancient Arabia (Numismatic Studies 25), New York, p. 227-256.

Klasen (N.), Engel (M.), Brückner (H.), Hausleiter (A.) et al. 2011 « Optically stimulated luminescence dating of the city wall system of ancient Tayma (NW Saudi Arabia) », J. Archaeol. Sci., 38/8, p. 1818-1826.

Lora (S.) & Tourtet (F.) In preparation « Building E-b1: Stratigraphy and Ceramic chronology ».

Luciani (M.) éd. 2016 The Archaeology of North Arabia: Oases and Landscapes. Proceedings of the International Congress Held at the University of Vienna, December, 5-8, 2013 (OREA 4), Vienne.

Macdonald (M.) In press « Taymāʾ Aramaic, Nabataean, and Taymanitic inscriptions from the Saudi-German excavations at Taymāʾ 2004-2015 », Macdonald (éd.) In press.

Macdonald (M.) éd. In press Tayma II. Catalogue of the Inscriptions from the Saudi-German Excavations 1, Oxford.

Nehmé (L.) 2011 « The Nabataeans in Northwestern Arabia », Franke et al. 2011, p. 137-149.

Nehmé (L.) 2015b « Strategoi in the Nabataean kingdom: a reflection of central places? », Arabian Epigraphic Notes 1, p. 103-122.

Nehmé (L.) éd. 2012 Report on the Fourth Excavation Season (2011) of the Madāʾin Sālih Archaeological Project, Ivry-sur-Seine [http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00671451].

Parr (P. J.) 1970 « A Sequence of Pottery from Petra », J. A. Sanders (éd.), Near Eastern Archaeology in the Twentieth Century. Essays in Honor of Nelson Glueck, New York, p. 348-381.

Purschwitz (C.) In press « Prehistoric Tayma: The Chipped Stone Evidence. Surface finds and a techno-typological analysis of the Chalcedony bead workshop in Square SE2 », ZOrA 10.

Rohmer (J.), Charloux (G.) 2015 « From Lihyān to the Nabataeans: Dating the End of the Iron Age in North-West Arabia », PSAS 45, p. 297-320.

Schaudig (H.) In press « Cuneiform Texts from Tayma, Seasons 2004-2015 », Macdonald (éd.) In press.

Schmid (S. G.) 2000 « Die Feinkeramik der Nabatäer. Typologie, Chronologie und kulturhistorische Hintergründe », S. G. Schmid & B. Kolb (éd.), Petra ez Zantur II. Ergebnisse der Schweizerisch-Liechtensteinischen Ausgrabungen (Terra Archaeologica 4), Mayence, p. 1-199.

Schneider (P. I.) 2010 « Die Mauern von Tayma », J. Lorentzen et al. (éd.), Aktuelle Forschungen zur Konstruktion, Funktion und Semantik antiker Stadtbefestigungen (BYZAS 10), Istanbul, p. 1-25.

Schneider (P. I.) 2015 « Tayma », S. Müth, P. I. Schneider, M. Schnelle & P. D. De Staebler (éd.), Ancient fortification. A compendium of theory and practice (Fokus Fortifikation Studies 1), Oxford/Philadelphie, p. 343-354.

Sperveslage (G.) 2013 « Ägyptische Einflüsse auf der Arabischen Halbinsel in vorislamischer Zeit am Beispiel der Oase von Tayma », ZOrA 6, p. 234-252.

Sperveslage (G.) 2014 Ägypten und Arabien, ein Beitrag zu den interkulturellen Beziehungen Altägyptens. Unpublished PhD thesis, Freie Universität Berlin.

Stein (P.) 2014 « Ein aramäischer Kudurru aus Tayma? », M. Krebernik & H. Neumann (éd.), Babylonien und seine Nachbarn in neu- und spätbabylonischer Zeit. Wissenschaftliches Kolloquium aus Anlass des 75. Geburtstags von Joachim Oelsner, Jena, 2. und 3. März 2007 (AOAT 369), Münster, p. 219-245.

Stein (P.) In press « Die reicharamäischen Inschriften der Kampagnen 2005–2009 aus Taymāʾ », Macdonald (éd.) In press.

Tourtet (F.), Daszkiewicz (M.) & Hausleiter (A.) Forthcoming « Tayma Pottery: Chronostratigraphy, archaeometric studies, cultural interaction », M. Luciani (éd.), Archaeology of the Arabian Peninsula - Connecting the Evidence, Proceedings of the workshop at the 10th ICAANE, Vienna, 25-29 April 2016.

Tourtet (F.) & Müller (N.-A.) 2012 « Appendix: A Comparative Study Between Taymāʾ and Madāʾin Sālih », Nehmé (éd.) 2012, p. 355-361.

Tourtet (F.) & Weigel (F.) 2015 « Taymāʾ in the Nabataean Kingdom and in Provincia Arabia », PSAS 45, p. 385-404.

Winnett (F. V.) & Reed (W. L.) 1970 Ancient Records from North Arabia (Near and Middle East Series 6), Toronto, p. 88-112.

Zur (A.) & Hausleiter (A.) In press « Funerary Landscapes in 2nd millennium bce Tayma, Northwest Arabia », Archaeology of the Arabian Peninsula - Connecting the Evidence, Proceedings of the 10th ICAANE, Vienna, 25-29 April 2016, Wiesbaden.

Haut de page

Notes

2 The interdisciplinary research project is jointly conducted by the Orient Department of the German Archaeological Institute (DAI, Berlin) and the Saudi Commission for Tourism and National Heritage (SCTH, Riyadh). The German component of the project is mainly funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG, Bonn).

3 Purschwitz forthcoming.

4 Dinies et al. 2015; Dinies et al. 2016; Dinies et al. in press; Hausleiter & Zur 2016.

5 Schneider 2010 and 2015; Klasen et al. 2011; Hausleiter 2011; Hausleiter 2017; Intilia and Tourtet in Hausleiter et al. in press f.

6 Al-Hājirī 2011; Hausleiter 2015; Hausleiter & Zur 2016; Zur & Hausleiter in press.

7 Sperveslage 2014.

8 Eichmann, Schaudig & Hausleiter 2006; Schaudig in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 137-138 and in 2011, p. 113-115; Hausleiter & Schaudig 2010a; Hausleiter & Schaudig 2010b; Schaudig in press.

9 A first sounding was carried out in Square E11 by Andrea Ricci in 2005; a second sounding was carried out by the author in spring 2015. Remains of OL E:5 have also been exposed by a sounding in Square E2 carried out by Arno Kose in 2008-2009.

10 All elevations are in meters above sea level.

11 Sample TA 17495 from SU 9778; identification by Reinder Neef, Scientific Division at the Head Office of DAI; Laboratory Number: Poz – 75820 analyzed at Poznan Radiocarbon Laboratory; radiocarbon date 4185±30 BP; calibrated date: 2889–2669 calbc (2σ; 95.4%) with OxCal v 4.2.4.

12 Similar dates have been provided from the two above-mentioned other soundings in Area E; see ftn 9 and Hausleiter & Zur 2016.

13 A limited number of sherds belonging to the Tayma Early Iron Age Ware and Sanaʾiye Ware were found in a sounding exploring OL E:4 deposits in correspondence of the south-western sector of the later Building E-b1. On the characteristics of these wares see Hausleiter 2014, p. 414-418; Maritan et al. in Hausleiter et al. in press b; Tourtet, Daszkiewicz & Hausleiter forthcoming.

14 Bawden, Edens & Miller 1980, p. 86.

15 Tourtet in Hausleiter et al. in press d: TA 10136.65.

16 A number of people has been involved in the excavation of the deposits which returned this stratigraphic sequence: Anselm Ullmann (2006), Martin Christiansen (2009), Denise Resch (2011), Alina Zur and Jan Hubert (2012), as well as the author (2006-2016).

17 Lora & Tourtet in prep.; for the time being see Tourtet, Daszkiewicz & Hausleiter forthcoming. I am indebted to Francelin Tourtet for providing information on bibliography and comparative material used in this contribution.

18 Respectively: TA 2250, TA 2382, TA 4915, and TA 4916; Stein in press.

19 TA 4915 and TA 4916, which are similar in shape and dimensions to the monoliths of Building Stage E-b1:3e (square section 0.4 x 0. 4 m), but more carefully dressed (see also Lora in Eichmann et al. 2012, p. 87); a third fragment (TA 2550) bearing the inscription referring to the 4th regnal year of King Tulmay is smaller in dimension (0.3 x 0.3 m) but may have been part of a similar building element.

20 Cf. Stein in press, combining the mention of a “[PN], son of PSGW, king of Lihyan” (the son being the king) on the paw of a sphinx (TA 6233) found near Building E-b1 in secondary context with a PSGW mentioned on the al-Hamra stela; cf. Rohmer & Charloux 2015). This, however, does not provide any evidence with regard to an absolute dating, the king list of Dadan being still fairly provisional (Stein in press; Farès-Drappeau 2005).

21 TA 964 from Square C4, see Al-Said in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 141-142 and Stein in press.

22 Schneider 2010 and 2015; Hausleiter 2017.

23 Winnett & Reed 1970, p. 88-112.

24 Hausleiter in Eichmann et al. 2012, p. 90-93.

25 Al-Said 2010.

26 A fragment (TA 12568) of a left leg of one of these monumental statues, found in secondary context, bears five poorly preserved lines of Nabataean. It is unclear whether these lines belong to a single text; they may represent a carving exercise (Macdonald in press). It is also unclear whether the statue was still standing when the inscription was made. These uncertainties make the use of this evidence in the reconstruction of the history of the building very problematic.

27 TA 4590, SU 219 (fill/collapse in E-b1:R8/9): no year; TA 10277, SU 6358 (accumulation covering a platform attached to Building E-b1): dating formula of a funerary inscription: year 24 (15 ad); see Macdonald in press.

28 TA 14763, SU 2473 (re-used in the western wall of E-b1:R8/9): no year; TA 14285 + TA 14286, SU 6558 (collapse outside of the building): year 17 (56/57 ad); see Macdonald in press.

29 Eichmann 2009 p. 63; Hausleiter in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 127; Nehmé 2011, p. 139, Tourtet & Weigel 2015, p. 387.

30 Hausleiter in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 122

31 Tourtet & Weigel 2015.

32 TA 7809 found in a preparatory layer (SU 4386) for floor SU 318 (see below).

33 On the distribution and dating of these coins see, with references, Huth 2010 and Rohmer & Charloux 2015.

34 Eichmann et al. 2006, p. 109. TA 9273 (originally E-CC2) from SU 215, Laboratory Number: KIA 24636 analysed at the Leibniz Labor für Altersbestimmung und Isotopenforschung, Christian-Albrechts-Universität, Kiel; radiocarbon date 1824±21 BP; calibrated date: 130–241 calad (2σ; 95.4%) with OxCal v 4.2.4.

35 Bawden, Edens & Miller 1980, p. 75-78; cf. Hausleiter 2017.

36 This artificial mound is created by the remains of earlier structures pre-dating OL E:3 and resting on a natural sandstone outcrop.

37 Hausleiter 2010, 2011 and 2012a, p. 321-322; Macdonald in press; Stein in press.

38 Al-Said 2010.

39 From these deposits, one of several 3rd millennium bc 14C-dates has been recovered (see ftn 12).

40 The dimensions of the stones stone blocks have been classified as: very small (< 0.06 m); small (0.06-0.2 m); medium (0.2-0.6 m); large (0.6-1 m); and very large (> 1 m).

41 Western line: SU 388, SU 6412, and SU 9131; eastern line: SU 8787 and SU 8797.

42 The western wall of Building E-b1 in the later Building Stage E-b1:3d (SU 341) is located 1 m farther inwards (see below).

43 Excavation of the pyrotechnical installation was started in 2008 by Arno Kose, continued in 2009 by the present author and completed in 2015 by Barbara Huber. The discussion of this installation is based on the BA thesis of the latter (Huber 2015). Archaeometric analyses, in this context, were carried out by M. Daszkiewiecz and G. Schneider.

44 Huber 2015, p. 33-35.

45 Only the eastern jamb and the threshold are preserved. The western side, reconstructed twice in the following building stages, collapsed definitively after the abandonment of the building. The width of the entrance is tentatively reconstructed on the basis of its preserved parts, on the position of the inner paved floor, and of the external platform.

46 Courtyard’s elevation is 827.85 m.

47 Hausleiter in Hausleiter et al. in press d.

48 This artefact is poorly preserved, the head and the front legs are missing; Sperveslage 2013. Excavations in the area at the south-eastern corner of the building were conducted by Gunnar Sperveslage in 2006 and 2007; Lora in Hausleiter et al. in press a.

49 Sperveslage 2013.

50 Fragments of two more sphinxes/large felines (paws TA 6233 and TA 12210) were also found in the proximity of Building E-b1. Although made of similar stone, they do belong neither to TA 3837 nor to the body from the Tayma Museum. They may also have been part of the original monumental decoration of the building but it is impossible to reconstruct their original location.

51 This corner was later removed in Building Stage E-b1:3c and is, therefore, not preserved.

52 The installation was firstly identified as a basin in 2007 by Arno Kose, who also excavated this part of the building in 2007 and 2008. The basin was fully exposed by Luna Watkins in 2014, and further investigated in 2015 by the author during its restoration carried out by Jennifer Jurgasch.

53 The whole basin measures approx. 2.6 x 1.2 m and is 0.5 m deep; the western pool measures 1.9 m in length and the eastern 0.7 m, their width and depth are similar. At present, the reconstruction of the basin as a structure with two pools seems to be the most probable. Alternatively, the eastern U-shaped wall could be interpreted as a later addition to the original basin after the removal of its existing eastern side, thus enlarging the installation. Existing evidence does not allow solving this issue; no date for the potential enlargement can be offered at this point.

54 The tunnel has been excavated by Arnulf Hausleiter from 2008 onwards within Building E-b1 and outside of it. Excavations in the well took place in 2010 and 2012; from 2014 onwards, Alina Zur participated to the further investigation of the tunnel and its surroundings; see contributions by Hausleiter in Hausleiter et al. in press a-c; Hausleiter and Zur in Hausleiter et al. in press e and f.

55 The well consists of an upper, circular part built in in stone masonry and a lower, horseshoe-shaped part cut into the bedrock.

56 Probably the southern side of the tunnel was also partially rebuilt when this support was installed. The width of the external section of the tunnel remained unchanged; Hausleiter and Zur in Hausleiter et al. in press f.

57 Schmid 2000, p. 24 and ftn 117.

58 Durand 2012, p. 333; p. 350 fig. 14: 91027_P01.

59 Lora & Tourtet in prep.

60 In the earlier building stages on the other hand, most of the stones were not squared and there seems to be no pattern in the selection of the building material.

61 The south-western extension of the building required the first row to have one additional column compared to the second row.

62 Cf. Lora & Tourtet in prep.

63 Durand 2012, p. 328; 337 fig. 2: 10228_P05.

64 Durand 2012, p. 329; 342 fig. 7: 27010_P01.

65 Parr 1970, p. 368 fig. 7.104-105; Schmid 2000, p. 97-99.

66 Tourtet & Weigel 2015, p. 390; 393 fig. 6.

67 Five further similar items have been recovered, re-used in later retaining wall SU 1515, built over the basin.

68 With an inclination of 2°–3°.

69 Schmid 2000, p. 24 and ftn 117.

70 Tourtet & Müller 2012, p. 356-357, 359 fig. 7; Tourtet & Weigel 2015, p. 395, 398 fig. 10.n-o, p. 399.

71 Lora & Tourtet in prep.

72 Dehner 2013, p. 244 fig. 11.E; Gerber 2001, p. 11 fig. 2.E.

73 Dehner 2013, p. 243; Gerber 2001, p. 8, 11.

74 Lora in Hausleiter et al. in press a.

75 Lora in Hausleiter et al. in press c.

76 Hausleiter in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 124-125; Hausleiter 2011, p. 102.

77 Lora & Tourtet in prep.

78 Hausleiter & Zur 2016.

79 Stein 2014, p. 222-234; Hausleiter 2012b.

80 Eichmann, Schaudig & Hausleiter 2006, p. 168; Eichmann 2009, p. 63-64; Hausleiter in Eichmann et al. 2010, p. 122, 127, 130.

81 Tourtet & Weigel 2015.

82 The exact administrative status of Tayma within the Nabataean Kingdom is still under investigation as is the presence and, in case, the role, of a strategos in the oasis (see on the topic Nehmé 2015b).

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1.
Légende General plan of the oasis of Tayma with Sabkha basin and ancient settlement
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, S. Lora
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,1M
Titre Figure 2.
Légende Plan of the central part of the ancient settlement
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, S. Lora
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,8M
Titre Figure 3.
Légende Building E-b1 and the surrounding area (from S-E)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, J. Krumnow
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,1M
Titre Figure 4.
Légende 3D model of the room E-b14:R1 (from N-E)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, M. Kolbe
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,9M
Titre Figure 5.
Légende General view of Building E-b1 (from South-West)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, I. Wagner
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,3M
Titre Figure 6.
Légende Building E-b1: sequence of Building Stages E-b1:3e-3a. Excavated structures in grey, reconstructed structures in light grey
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, S. Lora
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,4M
Titre Figure 7.
Légende Southern face of pillar SU 8787 with figures (from S)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, I. Wagner
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 4,1M
Titre Figure 8.
Légende General view of the central part of Building E-b1 with pyrotechnical installation, central basin and tunnel (from W)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, I. Wagner
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,9M
Titre Figure 9.
Légende Overview of the monumental entrance to Building E-b1 with basins, stair and platforms (from S)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, S. Lora
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,0M
Titre Figure 10.
Légende Buttress on wall SU 341 and pillar SU 2746 in stone masonry (from South)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, S. Lora
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,5M
Titre Figure 11.
Légende General view of E-b1:3d and E-b1:3c ramps (from S-W)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,0M
Titre Figure 12.
Légende 3D model of the central basin after reconstruction (from E)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, M. Kolbe, S. Lora
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,0M
Titre Figure 13.
Légende The tunnel outside the building leading to the well (from W)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 4,9M
Titre Figure 14.
Légende Pottery sherds from Building Stages E-b1:3d-b
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, F. Tourtet
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 270k
Titre Figure 15.
Légende E-b1:3c column base SU 210 after the removal of the E-b1:3c and E-b1:3b floors (from W)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-15.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,5M
Titre Figure 16.
Légende Reconstructive 3D model of Building E-b1 in Building Stage E-b1:3b (from S-E)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, S. Lora
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-16.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 950k
Titre Figure 17.
Légende E-b1:3b column base SU 209 (from S-W)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-17.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,5M
Titre Figure 18.
Légende Entrance to the building in Building Stage E-b1:3b, with inner canal (from N-W)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, J. Kramer
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-18.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,9M
Titre Figure 19.
Légende Basin SU 5192 and side door (from S-W)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, S. Lora
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-19.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,9M
Titre Figure 20.
Légende Wall SU 1589 built over earlier column base SU 210, reusing fragments of inscribed pillars (from S-E)
Crédits © DAI Orient Department, S. Lora
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/5766/img-20.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,0M
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Sebastiano Lora, « A religious building complex in the ancient settlement of Tayma (North-West Arabia) during the Nabataean period: changes and transformations », Syria, 94 | 2017, 17-39.

Référence électronique

Sebastiano Lora, « A religious building complex in the ancient settlement of Tayma (North-West Arabia) during the Nabataean period: changes and transformations », Syria [En ligne], 94 | 2017, mis en ligne le 15 décembre 2019, consulté le 19 février 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/syria/5766 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/syria.5766

Haut de page

Auteur

Sebastiano Lora

Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Berlin – sebastiano.lora@dainst.de

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

© Presses IFPO

Haut de page
  • Logo IFPO
  • Logo CNRS - Institut des sciences humaines et sociales
  • Logo Maison Archéologie & Ethnologie
  • Logo ERIH PLUS | NSD
  • OpenEdition Journals