Page 135 - Life & Land Use on the Bahrain Islands (Curtis E Larsen)

-111-

although the islands are argued to have been under Sasanian political control for
various lengths of time from the fourth through the seventh century. If the
external trade network was in operation, Bahrain did not display the predicted
expansion in rural land use. An explanation for this may lie in the security
afforded by sailing in close proximity to the Persian coast and using Persian ports
rather than dealing with the Arab tribal groups that had attacked the shores of
Fars in the fourth century. Although historic sources record the presence of a
Sasanian port on the Arabian coast in the vicinity of Gerrha, the evidence for
major long distance Sasanian maritime trade on Bahrain is limited. While this
condition may be directly related to our lack of understanding of Sasanian pottery
assemblages in the Gulf, the lack of a major influence affecting Bahrain's land use
should also be considered.
By the late seventh and eighth centuries A.D., Arab seafarers had made
direct contact by sea with China. During the Abbasid caliphate, trade with the Far
East was an important entity. Yet, the archeological evidence for Early Islamic
and Abbasid occupations on Bahrain is scarce. These sites are found only on the
northern third of the island, in an area equal to that indicated for the first
millennium B.C. One would anticipate far more visible socioeconomic effects if
the external trade model were solely responsible for the observed phenomena in
Early Islamic times. Bahrain became the customs station for the Carmathian state
during this period, implying that maritime trade was flourishing. Perhaps this was
not the case from the perspective from Bahrain. The short-lived but competing
port of Siraf on the Persian coast was a thriving city throughout the same period.
Such successful competition indicates that there was not a gap in the network, but
that Siraf had an advantage over Bahrain as a trading place. The exact nature of
this advantage is not known, but in part it may be related to a conscious avoidance
of the Carmathian state by Abbasid and Buyid vessels seeking to escape the
customs duties levied at Bahrain.
An additional anomaly involves the early third millennium B.C., when
Bahrain shows no clear evidence for extensive Uruk and Early Dynastic period
settlement. Settlements of these periods are, however, in evidence on the Arabian