Page 268 - Life & Land Use on the Bahrain Islands (Curtis E Larsen)

-244-

Kish, and in the Diyala region at Khafajah; all in Early Dynastic III contexts, ca.
2500 B.C. (During Caspers 1972a,b). These occurrences suggest to her an early
third-millennium date for the beginning of the Barbar pottery.
Brunswig and Parpola’s (n.d.) analysis of Persian Gulf seals, and Gelb’s
dating of the Amorite tablet from the base of the Barbar n sequence give a quite
different view. Their post Ur-m or early Isin-Larsa date (ca. 2050 B.C.) for the
base of the first city wall is consistent with the Ur III identification presented here
for the Barbar I levels. Further aid in dating the Barbar II sequence is also based
upon Persian Gulf seals. Hallo and Buchanan (1965) noted the impression of a
similar seal on a dated, Old Babylonian, merchantile agreement in the Yale
University collections. The suggested date for the text was 1923 B.C. Bibby (1971)
notes that an almost identical seal design was found in the upper Barbar n levels.
This supports a later interpretation for the sequence.
Rather than a long chronology as initially suggested by During Caspers,
the Barbar n phase of early Dilmun apparently was relatively short, encompassing
the 2050-1800 B.C. range. This short chronology is also supportive of the
tentatively identified Ranjapur HA painted pottery (ca. 2000-1050 B.C.) in levels 17
and 18.
The material remains of the Barbar n phase point to trade in
commodities foreign to Bahrain. Copper, diorite, ivory, and steatite all indicate
distant sources. The Indus script on seals and the presence of an Indus system of
measures (Bibby 1969, 1970, 1971) signify close contact with the Indus Valley. But,
pottery parallels are difficult to assess. There are a few indications of
Mesopotamian, Indus Valley, and Omani influences in the pottery. The greatest
affinity, however, appears to be with other Barbar n period sites at Tarut and
Failaka islands. The pottery, then, suggests a coherent assemblage centered along
the east Arabian littoral. Strong links with Umm an-Nar are no longer recognized
and may indicate the decline of its influence in the gulf.