2
A noria from the Syrian city of Hama. (after Wikimedia Commons:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=20&offset=20&ns0=1&
3
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
1.1. An endangered water lifter 6
1.2. Problems and unanswered questions 8
1.3. Research strategy and research features 9
2. Methodology 2.1. The noria devices terminology 11
2.2. Material study 12
2.3. The norias of Ta’as 13
3. Theoretical framework 3.1. Noria devices 14
3.1.2. Recent studies 16
3.2. The area of Ta’as 17
3.2.1. Archaeological data 17
3.2.2. Climatic and faunal studies 18
4. Make order: new tools to describe noria devices 4.1. Noria: a device with multiple names 19
4.2. A new definition 20
4.3. Noria device typologies: a threefold proposal 21
4.3.1. Type 1: Compartmented noria 21
4.3.2. Type 2: Containers noria 25
4.3.3. Type 3: Chain noria 27
4.4. Implications 30
5. Ta’as 5.1. The site 32
4
6. From the U product to the noria vase
6.1. The U product 35
6.2. Three comparisons 36
6.2.1. First comparison: base fragments 1 and 2 36
6.2.2. Second comparison: base fragment 3 38
6.2.3. Third comparison: base fragment 4 39
6.3. Noria vases chronology 41
7. A noria vase from Ta’as 7.1. Linking the noria fragments 42
7.2. The rims 42
7.3. A possible reconstruction 44
8. The ancient landscape of Ta’as 8.1. Comparing the ancient and the present environmental layout 47
8.2. The environment of Ta’as: modern layout 47
8.2.1. The Euphrates river 47
8.2.2. The Euphrates inundation 48
8.3. Reconstructing the Medieval environment of Ta’as 51
8.3.1. The river path and the plane 51
8.3.2. The inundation season 52
8.4. A general overview 52
9. Applying the new classification: what kind of device? 9.1. Comparing the archaeological record and the landscape reconstruction 55
9.2. Two possibilities 55
9.2.1. Around the river: un inconvenient environment 55
9.2.2. Towards the Djebel Aruda 56
9.2.3. The most suited device 56
5
10. Further evidence
10.1. The water sources and the animal power 58
10.2. Water pits distribution 58
10.2.1. The relevance of the chain norias 62
10.3. Faunal remains 63
11. Discussion 11.1. Assessing the data 65
11.2. Connecting the dots 11.3. Chronological statement 67
11.3.1. The landscape reconstruction 67
11.3.2. Pits distribution 68
11.4. Limitations 68
12. Conclusion 12.1. Answering the research questions 70
12.2. Achievements and outcomes 71
12.3. Further research 73 Abstract 75 Bibliography 76 Figures 85 Tables 88 Appendices Appendix 1 89 Appendix 2 91 Appendix 3 92 Appendix 4 96
6
1. Introduction
1.1. An endangered water lifter
Water lifters have played a crucial role in granting a more effective exploitation of water resources. Different devices have been developed throughout time. Among those, the noria had a capillary diffusion in the Mediterranean basin (Schiøler 1973, 174). The noria device framework consists of a wheel connected with compartments, containers or vases. Through the rotation of the wheel, the containers collect the water from a water body below the framework. Then, while the wheel is performing its descendent movement, the containers pour the liquid in an elevated duct. This process lifts the fluid from a lower to an higher lever; so that the water can be used for various purposes. The noria containers can be made of different materials such as wood, metal, pottery and leather (Carrion and Fornes 2016, 96; D’Angelo and Todaro 2003, 43; Schiølter 1973, 148; Vera 1999, 186). The word noria comes from the Arabic nā´ūra. This term derives from the peculiar creaky sound produced by the wooden waterwheel rotation (Baroja 1954, 52). From the invention of the device during the Hellenistic age (3rd -1st century BCE) until the beginning of the 20th century, water lifters have been essential in allowing agriculture to be performed in several dry areas of the Near and Middle East, Northern Africa, Southern Spain and Sicily (Al-Dbiyat 2009, 208; D’Angelo and Todaro 2003, 44; de Miranda 2005, 137). Through the Islamic conquest, these particular water wheels spread widely, becoming a fundamental element for the introduction of more water-consuming crops, in areas where such harvests were previously unknown (Watson 1974, 8). Eggplants, oranges, lemons and rice represented just some of the new crops introduced by the Arabs after their expansion (Primavera 2018, 439). This Medieval green revolution raised ample debates (Watson 1981). Therefore, the implications of this agricultural theory have been questioned and contested over the last years (Butzer et al. 1985; Decker 2009; Johns 1984).
Regardless of the outcomes of those debates, the importance of norias as water lifters has been considered to the extent that some scholars have claimed that a second revolution accompanied the green one: the noria revolution (Glick 1977, 646). The success of this noria revolution is proved by the noria presence in many Mediterranean landscapes for centuries after the Islamic domination stopped, until more sophisticated gas pumps replaced this ancient technology during the 1930’s
7
(Al-Dbiyat 2009, 206; Calvet and Geyer 1992, 41; D’Angelo and Todaro 2003, 46; Glick 1977, 648; Icomos 2017, 159; Sanchez Balibrea 2007, 201; Velez 2001, 196).
The introduction of gas pumps does not represent the only factor that influenced the disappearing of this ancient technology. Noria landscapes have been endangered also by the construction of massive infrastructures. The Tabqa Dam Region (Raqqa Governorate, Northern Syria) represents an example. In the mid 1960’s the government of the Syrian Arab Republic decided to build a dam in this area, situated along the Middle Euphrates river (Bourgey 1974, 348). As a consequence, a big portion of the region was going to be flooded. As it is rich in archaeological sites, a large-scale project of rescue excavations started in 1968 (Gaborit 2018a, 12). Consequently, several archaeological areas were investigated. Ta’as was one of those (figure 1): in 1972 a Dutch archaeological mission
Figure 1: The geographical distribution of the archaeological sites mentioned in this thesis (figure by the author).
1. Ta’as, Syria 5. Apamea, Syria
2. Rabita de Guardamar, Spain 6. Tuna al Gabal, Middle Egypt 3. Maredolce, Sicily 7. Abu Mina, Northern Egypt 4. Potamia-Agios Sozomenos, Cyprus 8. Hama, Syria
8
individuated a Middle Age settlement in that locality (Clason and Buitenhuis 1978, 75). Among the archaeological findings, a kiln associated with thousands of vessel fragments was found (Leeuw 1976a, 29). Unfortunately, more detailed studies of the fragments of Ta’as were not conducted because of the urgency of other projects in the dam area. Nevertheless, almost 50 years after the excavation of the site, several vase fragments from Ta’as have been recovered from the depot of the Faculty of Archaeology of Leiden University. With the indispensable help of the LID project (Leiden Inventory of the Depot), these materials have been made available for the present study. This thesis will reveal that the fragments from Ta’as are noria vases. A deeper analysis of these archaeological findings and the use of archaeological reports, climatic studies and archaeozoological evaluations will provide new insights into the use of norias in the medieval landscape of the Tabqa Dam Region and the connection between these devices and the surrounding Euphrates valley.
1.2. Problems and unanswered questions
The importance of the noria device is reflected in the attention that the academic community has given in describing it. Nevertheless, many noria-related aspects have not been systematically investigated yet, and some deficiencies still affect the study field. The lack of a clear terminology can be addressed as the main one. As the basic elements of the noria have been composed in different ways through time, different typologies of this device can be distinguished.
According to the new classification proposed in this thesis (Infra 4.3), a type 1 noria is composed by a waterwheel with several compartments along the rim of the wheel (figure 3). Instead, a type 2 noria comprises a wheel connected with containers disposed on the wheel perimeter (figure 4). Finally, the type 3 is the result of the union of a wheel with a rope to which many containers are tied (figure 5). As mentioned before, the compartments and the containers can be made of several materials (Infra 1.1). Unfortunately, for each of these three types, multiple names exist. In addition, the lack of a standard shared terminology results in the proliferation of varied terms, inconsistently used by different academic traditions. As a consequence, the research field is extremely hard to access for those who do not have a previous knowledge of the topic, as the terminological confusion often represents a relevant obstacle in understanding which device typology is described.
9
Because of this situation, some relevant issues about noria devices still remain unanswered. The first part of this research will be mainly focused in answering to the following general questions:
1) How can noria devices be typologically subdivided? 2) What are the main features of each typology?
3) What are the best strategies to spot a more suited terminology for each typology?
Furthermore, the second part of this thesis will focus on the Ta’as case study, as the ceramic fragments from the site have a potential that has not been fully investigated yet. These sherds are an interesting proof of the presence of norias in this region. Therefore the main questions of the second part of this thesis will be:
4) What was the use of the pottery fragments from Ta’as? 5) What are the main features of the ceramic fragments? 6) How can these fragments be connected to noria devices?
7) What typology of noria device was more efficient to be used within the region?
8) To what extent were norias relevant in improving the exploitation of the water resources around the Euphrates valley?
1.3. Research strategy and research features
Starting from these premises, the first part of this research aims to disentangle the above-mentioned shortcomings. To do so, the available academic literature will be analysed. The names that the different noria devices can carry among different authors will be listed and compared. This process will highlight the co-existence of several terminologies and how their incoherence represents an obstacle in the description of the devices themselves. Consequently, a new terminology will be proposed. Much care will be paid in using clear terms immediately connectable with the more evident elements of the frameworks of each device typology.
This new classification represents an innovation in the study field as it can be considered an useful tool to connect even a few archaeological traces with a
10
specific device. This process will be illustrated in the second part of this thesis: using the typologies introduced in the new classification, the ceramic fragments from the site of Ta’as will be associated with a chain noria device. The use of climatic and archaeozoological studies will be pivotal to reach this conclusion.
This thesis will start describing the methodologies used to achieve the goals of this research (Chapter 2). A discussion about the previous studies concerning the noria devices and the area of Ta’as will follow (Chapter 3). Subsequently, the noria terminology will be discussed and widened through the introduction of a coherent lexicon referred to various noria devices (Chapter 4). Then, the second part of this work will start: the main features of the archaeological site of Ta’as and its excavation will be presented (Chapter 5). A more detailed description of the noria base fragments found in the area will be the topic of Chapter 6. In the same Chapter, this fragments will be compared with some contemporary materials from other Mediterranean sites of the same age. In the following Chapter (7) the noria rim fragments will be discussed. Four rim typologies will be presented. Furthermore, the comparison of these rims with the vessel bases will provide a possible reconstruction of a noria vase from Ta’as. In Chapter 8 the environmental features of the site during the Abbasid period will be reconstructed through the use of climatic studies and excavation reports. This landscape reconstruction will be used in the following chapter to assess which noria typology was mainly used in the area. A type 3 noria will be indicated as the most convenient device to be employed in the surroundings of Ta’as (Chapter 9). In Chapter 10 this result will be sustained through the use of two evidences. Firstly, the distribution of the water pits in the flood plain on the Eastern part of the site. Secondly, the study of the presence of animal power in Ta’as during the Abbasid period, which will be clarified by an archaeozoological report. To finish, the Chapter 11 will summarise the evidences proposed in the previous sections of the thesis. Those will be discussed and explained, further highlighting their main limitations. Then, a conclusion will follow in Chapter 12. It will claim the main results of this thesis and their possible applications. To conclude, further researches will be advocated.
11
2. Methodology
2.1. The noria devices terminology
The methodology of this research is strongly connected with its aims. A multidisciplinary approach has been applied. First of all, a review of the academic literature about the history and the features of noria devices has been conducted. In this phase the majority of the information have been collected from academic works developed within subjects as archaeology, philosophy of science, history, history of technology, engineering and landscape studies. Different academic traditions have been compared: literature in Spanish and English has been mainly used, even if researches in Italian and French have not been neglected. The use of academic contributions from different linguistic and cultural traditions provides a broad view of the current paradigms and issues in the research field. The analysis of the literature review clearly highlights that noria devices can be divided in three main categories. Another important element that emerges from the literature review was the lack of a clear terminology to define the abovementioned typologies (Infra 1.2). This state of fact have been stressed through the creation of three tables where the multiple names of each noria device have been listed in alphabetic order (see table1, 2 and 3). To disentangle these issues, a new terminology has been developed. Considering the importance of Visual Working Memories (VWM) in cognitive and mnemonic processes, a descriptive name has been created for each kind (Schurgin 2018, 1035). In fact, the three typologies names have been selected according to the most evident (and most visual) elements of each noria typology (Infra 4.3). In particular those are the compartments in type 1, the containers in type 2 and the rope chain in type 3. Moreover, the new terminology of the noria devices has been used to develop a noria types classification. In doing so, the debate about the concept of classification itself and classificatory categories has been taken into account. Accordingly, the classification put forward in this study starts from the premise that no right or wrong classifications exist (Dwight 1988; Idem 2018). Rather, the possible combination of the adopted classificatory categories can grant different degrees of clarity. Again, the device features have been selected as the main classificatory categories, while the devices engines have been used to develop subtypes (Infra 4.4.).
12
2.2. Material study
The pottery fragments used in this thesis come from the depot of the Faculty of Archaeology, Leiden University. As the 1972 excavation was conducted by this University, part of the discovered materials were brought to the Netherlands (Freedman and Lundquist 1977, 4). After selecting the sherds from Ta’as, the available literature concerning the Northern Syrian site has been analysed. The analysis of the excavation reports has allowed to date the majority of the pots fragments of the site back to the Abbasid period (8th-13th century CE), thanks to the presence of an Abbasid coin in the layers where the potsherds were buried (Infra 5.2.). Then, drawings and measurements of the ceramic fragments have been conducted according to the standard methodology for archaeological pottery drawings (de Laurenzi 2006). Contextually, the shape and the colour of the clay fabrics have been studied. The analysis has been conducted comparing the different shapes of each sherd and studying the features (colour, inclusions, diameter) of each piece. These data have been transcribed and associated with the drawing of each fragment. Appendix 3 and 4 present respectively a catalogue of the base and the rim fragments.
In conclusion, the comparative analysis has been used. This method is considered to be a cornerstone of the archaeological research and its validity has been proved by several archaeological researches (Peregrine 2001; Smith and Peregrine 2011). In this thesis, the fragments of several ceramic containers from Ta’as have been compared with noria vases from the archaeological sites of Rábita de Guardamar (Southern Spain), Maredolce (Northern Sicily) and Potamia-Agios Sozomenos (Cyprus) (Infra 6.2.). The comparisons show the similarity between some of the Ta’as pieces and these Mediterranean materials. This process proved the fragments from Ta’as to be noria vases (those were previously considered to be transportation jars) (Leeuw 1976a, 280). Moreover, the comparison of different fragments and the use of graphic programmes (Adobe Photoshop), has allowed to reconstruct the possible shape of a noria vase from the site (Infra 7.3.).
13
2.3. The norias of Ta’as
In the last part of this thesis, the noria vases fragments have been hypothetically connected with a chain noria device. Firstly, the new noria devices classification has been used. Applying a process of elimination, the device 1 and 2 have been excluded. The former has been discarded according to its framework characteristics (device type 1 does not have vases), the latter has been excluded as the climatic features of the Tabqa Dam Region represented an obstacle in the use of this device. To reach this conclusion climatic and archaeozoological studies have been adopted. As far as environment discussion is concerned, the fluctuation of the Euphrates river waters and the climatic conditions around of the area of Ta’as have been studied. As type 3 norias are associated to underground water reservoirs or wells, the geographical distributions of several water pits in the flood plain on the Eastern part of the site has been addressed as a further evidence. Moreover, archaeozoological researches have been used to validate this hypothesis. In particular, archaeological faunal studies has proved the existence of big mammals in Ta’as during the Abbasid period. The described species are all extremely well suited to power a type 3 noria.
14
3. Theoretical framework 3.1. Noria devices
Because of the possible applications norias can have, those have been discussed by several scholars. Among the Roman authors, Vitruvius (ca. 80-15 BCE) has been one of the first to describe a noria device. In the De architectura the author listed several water lifters. Although the author did not use the term noria, a device with the typical features of a type 1 noria is described (Vitr. De arch. 10, 5, 1). The Vitruvian description and the discovery of several type 1 norias in roman mines in Spain, clearly demonstrate how this device was already known in ancient times (Dominiguez and Santamaria 2015). Furthermore, a similar device is represented by a 460 CE mosaic found in Apamea, Syria (figure 2) (Al-Dbiyat 2009, 199; Calvet and Geyer 1992, 44; Icomos 2017, 153; Vannesse 2011, 295).
As far as the other devices are concerned, in one of the most complete works about Roman and Islamic water lifters, the Danish archaeologist T. Schiøler provides relevant archaeological data that clearly demonstrate how the noria types 2 and 3 where known in the antiquity as well. A mosaic depicting a type 2 noria is reported by the author to be stored in the Museum of Mosaics in Istanbul. It has been dated back to the 5th century CE (Schiøler 1973, 154). As far as type 3 is
Figure 2: The mosaic of Apamea (ca. 460 CE). On the right side of the water wheel some pierced compartments are depicted. As the mosaic shows, the water spills from some holes situated between the wheel paddles (after Al-Dbiyat 2009, 199).
15
concerned, its first occurrence is dated back to 250 CE, as this kind of device is mentioned in some papyrus fragments from the Fayyum area (Idem, 127). Furthermore, type 3 devices have been spotted in two other Egyptian localities. The first one is from Tuna al Gabal in Middle Egypt (figure 1) and it has been dated to the 1st century CE (Idem, 141). The second one, situated in Abu Mina, about 45 kilometres South-West of Alexandria (figure 1), has been traced back to the 5th-6th century CE (Idem, 133). The abovementioned archaeological and literary evidence contradicts a long lasting tradition that addresses the Arab as the inventors of the noria, in particular of the type 3 device (Baroja 1954, 5; Baroja 1955, 58; Cordoba de La Laave 1996, 301; Drachmann 1948, 66; Garcia Blanquez 2013, 1; Molina 1995, 19). According to the information available so far, the noria device was probably designed in the Hellenistic age (3rd-1st century BCE), in a cultural environment close to the museum of Alexandria of Egypt (Balty 1987, 10; Canas 2016, 139; Dominguez and Santamaria 2015, 35; Viollet 2005, 16; Wilson 2004, 119).
Despite the fact that the Arab cannot considered to be the creators of the device, the Islamic world played a crucial role in improving and spreading the noria in the Mediterranean basin area (Bazza 2007, 205). The Arab expansion, and with that the diffusion of sophisticated irrigation techniques, was the main engine of the noria propagation (Wilson 2004, 140). From this point of view, the role of the Arab as the main propagators of the noria is supported by the Arabian etymology of the word noria itself (Infra 1.1) (Al-Dbiyat 2009, 197; Baroja 1954, 52; Canas 2016, 49; de Miranda 2007, 21).
The interest of the Arab for the norias and the waterwheels in general is proved by an abundancy of medieval literature on the topic. Many medieval Arab engineers like Al-Ansari, the Banu Musa brothers, Muradi, Buzjani and Taqi al-Din focused their attention on the possible shapes and gears of water lifters (de Miranda 2007, 18). Moreover, the 13th century scholar Al-Jazari in the fifth chapter of The book of the Knowledge of Ingenious Mechanical Devices studied type 3 norias in particular (Hill 1998; Schiøler 1962, 483). A description of the possible applications of noria devices for agricultural purposes is provided by The Book of
Agriculture of the agronomist Ibn al Awwam (second half of the 12th century), who discussed different practices to improve the crop yield (Olson and Eddy 1943).
16
3.1.2. Recent studies
Noria devices started to be systematically investigated from the 1950’s onwards, when the academic community became aware that norias were gradually, but constantly, disappearing from several rural landscapes as a result of the introduction of pumps powered by electricity, gas, or fossil fuels. This phenomenon implied the substitution of the norias with modern pumps and the consequent loss of the knowledge connected with the device construction.
The research conducted by the Spanish historian and anthropologist J. C. Baroja represents one the first attempt to describe the noria typologies according to scientific standards (in particular: Baroja 1954; Idem 1955; Idem 1983). A great advancement from this point of view is provided by Danish scholar T. Schiøler. His study, published in 1973, still represents the most analytical inquiry on the noria devices description (Schiøler 1973). Another relevant research in the field of ancient water technology is represented by the work of the ancient technology specialist P. Oleson. In the chapter III of the Handbook of Ancient Water
Technology edited by the Swedish archaeologist O. Wikander, Oleson deals with
water lifters and norias (Oleson 2000a; Idem 2000b).
In addition to these more general studies, other researches deal with more specific aspects. The features of noria devices have been studied in particular in Spain, as norias have been a peculiar element of many rural landscapes of that country for centuries (Bazzana 1987; Bazzana et al. 1987; Butzer et al. 1985; Canas 2016; Carrion and Fornes 2015; Cordoba de La Llave 1995; Dominguez and Santamaria 2015; Hierro and Macias 2009; Molina 1995; Schiøler 1962). Other important researches have been conducted in Syria. As a great abundancy of compartmented noria can be spotted in the Orontes valley (Western Syria), that area attracted the attention of several scholars (Al-Dbiyat 2009; Calvet and Geyer 1992; Colin 1933; de Miranda 2007; Delpech et al. 1992; Kamel 1990; Mouton and Al-Dbiyat 2009; Vannesse 2011; Zaqzouq 1990). Moreover, fewer studies concern other Mediterranean areas where the presence of noria has been more marginal. A good example is represented by Northern Sicily. Here some archaeological traces of noria vases have been spotted in the area around the city of Palermo in particular (Arcifa 1998; Arcifa 2010; Arcifa and Lesnes 1997; D’Angelo and Todaro 2003; de Miranda 2005; Rotolo 2011; Tullio 1997). The classification and description of the possible typologies of noria vases represent another relevant branch of the
17
research field. These studies have been mainly developed by Spanish scholars (Bazzana 1983; Garcia Blanquez 2014; Glick 1977; Gutiérrez Lloret 1986; Gutiérrez Lloret 1996). In conclusion, the importance of the norias in agricultural landscapes has been investigated, with a specific focus on the preservation of traditional water lifters in rural areas (Sanchez Balibrea 2007).
3.2. The area of Ta’as
As far as the area of Ta’as is concerned, several studies have been conducted over the last decades. Considering that the region where the site lays was endangered by the construction of the Tabqa Dam, scholars of different research branches flown toward the area to collect as much data as possible. In this context, important researches have been conducted by archaeologists, climatic experts, geologists, engineers, botanists and historians.
3.2.1. Archaeological Data
As a consequence of the construction of the Tabqa Dam, the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic and the Unesco launched an international programme of surveys and rescue excavations starting from the early 1960’s (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003, 10). Therefore, the area around Ta’as was interested by several survey activities. The first ones were conducted by M. N. van Loon in 1964 and A. K. Rihaoui in 1965. Some information appeared in 1965, while a complete catalogue of the outcomes of the survey activities was published in 1967 (Rihaoui 1965; Loon 1967). These works are extremely useful as those include important information about the position and the features of many sites around the Tabqa Dam Region.
After the survey activities, archaeological excavations were conducted in different parts of the region. More than 20 excavations were organised between 1970 and 1975. An accurate account of these activities have been developed by D. N. Freedman and J. M. Lundquist (Freedman and Lundquist 1977). Moreover, another important study of the historic characteristics of the area has been conducted by the French scholar J. Gaborit. The first volume of his research has focused its attention on the historic geography of the Middle Euphrates valley (Gaborit 2018a). In addition, the second volume is an useful catalogue of the archaeological sites of the area (Gaborit 2018b).
18
More specific data about the site of Ta’as itself have been provided by S. E. van der Leeuw. The Dutch scholar took part in the archaeological excavation that interested the site in 1972. A precise record of this activity has been included in the two volumes of his unpublished MA thesis (Leeuw 1976a; Leeuw 1976b).
3.2.2. Climatic and faunal studies
The geological formation of the Euphrates valley in Syria has been studied by several scholars (among the others: Trifonov et al. 2013; Liere 1960). The Tabqa Dam Region has been specifically studied during the surveys and the archaeological activities undertaken in the area. An important study has been conducted by J. Heinzelin (Heinzelin 1967). This work focus its attention on the formation of the rocky terraces around the Middle Euphrates valley. These geological evaluations have been included in the Appendix of the general catalogue of the sites of the region, edited by van Loon in 1967 (Infra 3.2.1.). Other relevant information about the environment and the climate of Ta’as are included in the abovementioned research from S. E. van der Leeuw (Leeuw 1976a, 209-224 in particular). Moreover, the fluctuation of the Euphrates flood has been investigated by water experts and engineers (Al-Ansari 2018 et al.; Ammar et al. 2013), highlighting the existence of recurrent pattern in the river inundation dynamics (Infra 8.2.2.).
As far as the faunal studies are concerned, although many archaeozoological studies investigate the distribution of animals in the ancient Syria, just one research focuses its attention on the site of Ta’as itself (Clason and Buitenhuis 1978, 75).
19
4. Make order: new tools to describe the noria devices 4.1. Noria: a device with multiple names
Over the centuries, the noria spread in countless areas of the world. Beyond the Mediterranean basin, the presence of the device has been further spotted in countries such as India, China and Japan (Baroja 1955). Because of this vast diffusion, the term noria has been used, more or less properly, to designate an extensive number of water lifters (de Miranda 2007, 22; Glick 1977, 646). Therefore, the term noria has acquired an extremely fluid semantic value and it is often used to indicate water lifters that cannot considered to be norias, as those do not present the basic elements of the device (as the independent containers to quote an example) (Baroja 1954, 59).
Moreover, the terminological confusion had a domino effect on the conceptualisation of the noria itself (Watson 2004, 116). It means that the available definitions of noria strongly differ from each other’s. It obviously entails that the specific elements of a noria remain undefined as well. In Appendix 1 several norias definitions have been collected from different pieces of academic literature. As the Appendix shows, the abundancy of different definitions makes a standard and shared terminology unavailable.
As a further consequence of the massive diffusion of the device, a multitude of local terms indicating noria devices or noria-like devices flourished. This phenomenon particularly affects the nomenclature of the noria typologies, as each of the three types introduced above can carry multiple names. This situation is clearly reflected in the academic tradition. In fact, even though several studies describe noria types, the terms used to describe each type differ from research to research. Because of this occurrence, it is not rare to find different denominations to describe the same kind or, alternatively, the same term applied to different typologies. This terminological confusion makes hard to compare different studies to such an extent that sometimes it is even hard to understand clearly what kind of noria type is discussed.
20
4.2. A new definition
To disentangle the abovementioned issues, it will be useful to start defining the main features of a noria. Comparing the available literature about the device, some general trends and patterns emerge, so that a new definition can be developed. The following definition can be applied to the three noria typologies: a noria is a water lifting machine composed by a rotating wheel associated with a series of independent containers in contact with the wheel rim (like vases or buckets), or inside the wheel framework itself (as compartments recessed along the wheel perimeter). The rotation of the wheel drives the containers in a circular path. This movement allows the containers to harvest the water while ascending and to pour the liquid while descending. The process brings the fluid from a water body to a more elevated duct. From the duct, the water can be distributed and used for different purposes. Various engines can activate the rotatory movement of the wheel. The containers and the device framework can be made of different materials. According to this definition two are the most peculiar elements of a noria: the wheel and the containers. The features and the position of the latter is extremely important to define the device. As long as the features of the containers are concerned, the containers are always independent in all the known examples of norias. It means that in the type 1 noria the compartments in the wheel framework are never communicating and the fluid of each container is separated from the others until the liquid is poured in the duct. The same can be said for type 2 and 3 norias. Because of this specific characteristic the water harvesting capacity of a noria in a given time is calculated starting from the capacity of each container, multiplied by their total number (Molina 1995, 25).
Concerning the position of the containers, those are always in contact with the wheel rim. In type 1 and 2 the containers are in contact with the rim during the whole water lifting process, as the containers are enchased (type 1) or tied (type 2) along the rim itself. On the other hand, in type 3 devices the containers are in contact with the rim just during a part of the lifting process (Infra 4.3.3.). Nevertheless, the contact between the rim and the vases grant those to be lifted with the same rotating mechanism already observed in types 1 and 2.
21
4.3. Noria device typologies: a threefold proposal
After defining the main elements of the noria, a new terminology will be proposed for the three device typologies. This proposal aims to overcome the terminological problem individuated so far. To do so, a new name for each type will be proposed. The name is composed by two parts.
The first one recalls a peculiar element of the device itself. This element has been selected according to its high visibility and recognisability. For example, even if both type 2 and 3 present vases or containers, the type 2 has been called
containers noria, while type 3 has been named chain noria. This is due to the fact
that in a type 2 device the presence of noria vases along the wheel rim express the main characteristic feature of the device itself, while in type 3 the collocation of the vases along an annular cable is a more distinctive component. Consequently, the
chain noria denomination has been preferred for type 3, as the position of the vases
gives the impression that those are rings of a chain. This name has also been adopted as the term chain already appears several times in previous terminologies (table 3). The second part of the name is the term noria itself. Despite the terms noria and
saqiya are considered to be interchangeable (de Miranda 2007, 21), the former has
been favoured as the latter is more often connected with type 3 devices (see table 3). Therefore, noria appears to carry a more neutral connotation and the term is also more recurrent in the previous academic tradition.
After defining the type name, a short description will follow. Eventually, the names used in the academic tradition to designate each type will be listed in tables (table 1, 2 and 3). It will be helpful to have an overview on the multiple denominations that have been applied to describe noria types. The following descriptions have the only purpose of introducing the main features of each typology. Further implications of the adoption of this threefold classification are discussed below (Infra 4.4)
4.3.1. Type 1: Compartmented noria
The compartmented noria (figure 3) is featured by a rotating wheel which rim presents several pierced compartments. The compartments collect the water while in contact with the liquid surface, streaming the fluid during the descending movement of the wheel. As the water is collected from the surface of the water body, the device does not have a deep harvesting capacity.
22
The device can be activated by water power and human power (Baroja 1954, 32; Canas 2016, 48; Schiolter 1973, 15). In the first case, the water wheel is powered by the water stream. As figure 3 shows, several radial plates are disposed along the device rim. As the plates protrude from the noria framework, those can better capture the water power. This energy allows the rotation of the wheel to be constant and controlled. The water current can activate compartmented norias of different sizes depending on the strength of the flow of the water body where the water wheel is installed. Streams and small canals can power comparted norias of modest sizes, while big rivers can activate bigger devices. A good example is provided by the Orontes, an important river situated in the South-Western part of the modern state of Syria. Several medieval compartmented norias are still situated along this river, in particular in the area of the city of Hama (figure 1) (Al-Dbiyat 2009, 196). As the Orontes river is featured by a strong constant flow, it can activate norias of impressive size: some of those reach 22 metres of diameter (figure 4) (Idem, 200).
Figure 3: The compartmented noria (type 1). As the figure stresses, the compartmented rim is the most evident feature of the device. The water poured by the compartments is collected in an elevated duct situated above the central pole of the water wheel (Weulersse 1940, 28 in Al-Dbiyat 2009, 200).
23
As far as other power sources are concerned, the compartmented noria can also be activated by humans (figure 5). In this case, the person in charge of the noria stands on the top of the water wheel, walking on the rim of the device. In this way, its weight brings down the framework, allowing the slow rotation of the device. This power sources can be applied just to devices built with light woods or of a small
Figure 4: One of the compartmented norias from the Syrian city of Hama, along the Orontes river. The norias of this region can have impressive sizes (after de Miranda 2007, cover page).
Figure 5: An human powered compartmented noria. A person walks on the wheel framework. The power is applied on the rim of the water wheel. It allows the rotation of the device (after Schiøler 1973, 140).
24
size. In fact, a framework of an excessive weight would nullify the intensity of the force applied by the weight of the person in charge of the noria powering. Figure 5 shows how human power was exploited to activate type 1 norias.
Table 1: The table lists several alternatives names of the compartmented noria (table by the author).
Names (in alphabetic order) Reference
Azuda Baroja 1954, 30
Bucket chain Wood et al.1977, 80
Compartmentalized waterwheel Yannopoulos et al. 2015, 5035 Compartmented rim treadwheel Schiøler 1973, 15
Compartmented rim water-driven wheel Schiøler 1973, 15
Dawlab Wood et al.1977, 80
Dulab Colin 1933, 156
Noria Dominguez and Santamaria 2015, 33; Wood
et al.1977, 76 Noria de corriente Canas 2016, 47
Persian wheel Wood et al.1977, 80
Rota aquaria Dominguez and Santamaria 2015, 33
Roue à godets Al-Dbiyat 2009, 192
Rueda de corriente Canas 2016, 47 Rueda elevadoras Baroja 1954, 30
Rueda vitruviana Canas 2016, 47
Sakia Wood et al.1977, 80
Scoop wheel Wood et al.1977, 80
Tabliyya Wood et al.1977, 80
Tanbusa Wood et al.1977, 80
Tulumba Wood et al.1977, 80
25
4.3.2. Type 2: Containers noria
The containers noria (figure 6) consists of a rotating wheel associated with several containers disposed along the wheel rim. The wheel rim is disposed on the water surface so that the containers can collect the water from the water body. As the containers are bounded to the wheel, those follow its rotatory movement pouring the water when the wheel is performing a descending movement. The water falls in a duct; from here it can be driven wherever is needed. This device is well suited to lift liquids from the surface of a water body. This device is extremely similar to the compartmented noria. The more important difference between these devices consists in the fact that in type 2 norias the compartments are replaced by containers.
Similarly to type 1 noria, the containers noria can be powered both by water power and by human power (Molina 1999, 19; Schiøler 1973, 15).
Figure 6: The containers noria (type 2). The presence of a multitude of containers along the water wheel is the main feature of this device (Pavon Moldonado 1990 in Canas 2016, 51).
26
Table 2: The table lists several alternative names of the containers noria (table by the author).
Names (in alphabetic order) Reference
Aceñas Canas 2016, 37
Azuda Baroja 1954, 30
Bucket wheel Wood et al.1977, 80
Dawlab Wood et al.1977, 80
Egyptian waterwheel Yannopoulos et al. 2015, 5034
Egyptian wheel Bazza 2007, 205
Noria Dominguez and Santamaria 2015, 35;Wood
et al.1977, 77
Noria de coriente Canas 2016, 37; Todaro 1997
Noria de vuelo Molina 1995, 481
Noria fluvial Molina 1995, 23
Persian noria Yannopoulos et al. 2015, 5039
Persian wheel Ewbank 1842, 115
Rota aquaria Dominguez and Santamaria 2015, 35
Rueda elevadora Baroja 1954, 30
Sakia Wood et al.1977, 80
Sakkia Yannopoulos et al. 2015, 5039
Saquia Schiøler1962, 481
Scoop wheel Wood et al.1977, 80
Stream noria Canas 2016, 37
Tabliyya Wood et al.1977, 80
Tanbusa Wood et al.1977, 80
Tulumba Wood et al.1977, 80
Waterwheel elevator Wood et al.1977, 80
27
4.3.3. Type 3: Chain noria
The chain noria (figure 7) is formed by a rotating wheel connected with a rope ring. The rope ring circumference exceeds the wheel circumference. Doing so, the rope hangs from the wheel in a U shape. The lower part of the rope is in contact with the body of water. Several containers are tied along the rope. In this way, the containers in the lower apex of the rope can collect water. The rotation of the wheel lifts the rope and the containers that pour the liquid in a duct while the wheel is performing a descendent movement. According to the length of the rope, water can be collected in different depths: the longer will be the rope, the deeper will be the device harvesting capacity. Nevertheless, 15 meters is considered to be the limit of the depth that this device can reach (Canas 2016, 49; Vera 1999, 185). Because of its features, this device is mostly used to collect water from wells and underground streams. This characteristic implies that the chain noria is predominantly used in areas where water resources are not abundant.
In contrast to noria type 1 and 2, the chain noria cannot be activated by water power or human power. In fact, the framework of a type 3 noria is not in contact with a water body. Therefore, the water stream cannot be captured. As far as human power is concerned, it cannot be employed in this type of device as the distance
Figure 7: The chain noria (type 3). The characteristic disposition of several containers on a long rope represents the most visible element of this device (after Yannopoulos et al. 2015, 5038).
28
between the water wheel and the body of water represents a danger for the safety of the person in charge of the noria. Another element that prevent human power to be applied to this device is provided by the fact that the containers are tied along a rim that passes on the water rim. Because of that layout, the rim surface is occupied by the containers themselves. It prevents a person to walk on the rim as it would result in the damaging of the noria containers (often made off ceramic). According to these evaluations, the chain noria can be only activated by animal power. Power is applied on the device through a system of gears connected with a shaft where an animal (such as donkeys, oxen, asses or dromedaries) is yoked (figure 8) (Canas 2016, 49; Schiøler 1973, 15; Vera 1999, 185). As figure 8 shows, a donkey is yoked to a wooden shaft connected to an horizontal geared wheel. This horizontal element moves a vertical wheel in contact with the water wheel itself. This layout allows the containers tied along a double rope to be lifted. In the left side of the figure it is visible a square basin where the water is poured.
Figure 8: The depiction of a chain noria in a 16th century Spanish manuscript .
The drawing clearly shows a possible layout of the device gears. (Carrion and Fornes 2016, 96).
29
Table 3: The table lists several alternative names of the chain noria (table by the author).
Names (in alphabetic order) Reference
Acena Garcia Blanquez 2013, 1
Bindolo Baroja 1955, 54
Blood noria Canas 2016, 37
Bucket wheel Wood et al. 1977, 74
Cadena de cangilones Gutiérrez Lloret 1996, 11
Cemia Gutiérrez Lloret 1996, 11
Chain-bucket pump Wood et al. 1977, 74
Chain-of-pots Wood et al.1977, 74
Chain water wheel Carrion and Fornes 2015, 95
Chirriones Canas 2016, 37
Dawlan Schiøler 1973, 58
Dolab Schiøler 1973, 164
Dulab Baroja 1955, 30
Egyptian noria Wood et al.1977, 74
Egyptian sakia Wood et al.1977, 74
Noria D’Angelo 2004, 131; D’Angelo and Todaro 2003,
43; Glik 1977, 645; Vera 1999, 184 Noria de cangilones Carrion and Fornes 2015, 95
Noria de sangre Baroja 1955, 15; Canas 2016, 37; Molina 1999, 26; Schiøler 1962, 481
Noria de tiro Baroja 1955, 15; Canas 2016, 37 Paternoster wheel Schiøler 1973, 42; Wood et al.1977, 74 Persian waterwheel Yannopoulos et al. 2015, 5037
Persian wheel Wood et al. 1977, 72
Polea de cangilones Dominguez and Santamaria 2015, 34
Pozos-noria Canas 2016, 37
Sackyeh Baroja 1955, 54
Sakkia Yannopoulos et al. 2015, 5039
Saniya Baroja 1954, 56; Canas 2016, 37; Glik 1977, 645
Saniyas Canas 2016, 37
Sanya Garcia Blanquez 2013, 1
Saqiya Baroja 1955, 30
Saquiya Schiøler1962, 481
Saquiyah Yannopoulos et al. 2015, 5039
Scoop wheel Wood et al.1977, 74
Senia D’Angelo 2004, 131; D’Angelo and Todaro 2003,
43; Glik 1977, 645; Vera 1999, 184
Syrian style wheel Glik 1977, 645
Raha Yannopoulos et al. 2015, 5037
Rahat Wood et al.1977, 74
30
4.4 Implications
This classification introduces new classificatory categories. In fact, the noria device classifications developed so far were mainly focused on dividing the noria devices according to their engine. Before the introduction of gas powered devices, the water, the animal and the human power were the only possible engines (de Miranda 2007, 22). Despite this conceptualisation has a theoretical reason, it is not always easy to understand what should have been the original noria engine starting from (often few) archaeological traces. The classification proposed above uses the most evident features of the device structure as its main classificatory category. The application of this new classificatory elements can grant the different noria typologies to be easily recognised and described. In fact, the frameworks elements are way more easily detectable than the original engines, especially in archaeological contexts. These engine classificatory categories can rather be used to develop further subcategories for each type. Table 4 provides a proposal in this direction. The use of this classification simplifies the noria devices terminology making explicit the engine and the features of the device, avoiding misunderstanding and confusion. Table 5 includes some examples.
Table 4: A new proposal in subdividing noria devices. A further classification of the type A has been systematically developed by T. Schiøler according to the position of the wheel shaft and the features of the vases chain (Schiøler1973, 15) (table by the author).
Type Name Subtype Engine
Type 1 Compartmented noria Sub-type A Water power Sub-type B Human power
Type 2 Containers noria Sub-type A Water power Sub-type B Human power
31
Table 5: Compared terminologies. The column on the right highlights the differences between the traditional terminology (left column) and the new terminology proposed in this thesis (central column) when it is referred to the same device (table by the author).
Traditional terminology
New terminology Issues with the previous terminology
Noria de corriente Water powered compartmented noria (Type 1A)
The traditional terminology does not specify the features of the device framework
Dawlab Compartmented noria (type 1)
The traditional terminology does not specify whether the device is a noria, the features of the device framework. Compartmented rim treadwheel Human powered compartmented noria (Type 1B)
The traditional terminology does not specify whether the device is a noria.
Sakkia Containers noria (Type 2)
The traditional terminology does not specify whether the device is a noria. Framework features are not clear.
Bucket wheel Containers noria (Type 2)
The traditional terminology does not specify whether the device is a noria.
Stream noria Water powered containers noria (Type 2A)
The traditional terminology does not specify the device framework features.
Persian waterwheel Chain noria (Type3)
The traditional terminology does not specify whether the device is a noria. The features of the device framework remain unclear.
Chain-of-pots Chain noria (Type 3)
The traditional terminology does not specify whether the device is a noria
Noria de sangre Chain noria (Type 3)
The traditional terminology does not specify the features of the device framework.
32
5. Ta’as 5.1. The site
Ta’as (38.11887744, 36.246797) is situated in the Al-Thawrah District in the Raqqa Governorate, Northern Syria (figure 9) (Gaborit 2018b, 157). The archaeological area is placed at the foot of the Djebel Aruda, an elevated rocky plateau situated alongside the right bank of the Middle Euphrates river (figure 10). The site surroundings are also known as the Tabqa Dam Region. It comprises the territories around the artificial Assad lake, formed after the construction of the Tabqa dam in 1975 (Cullman 2013, 182).
The site was identified in 1964, thanks to a survey campaign meant to spot as much sites as possible before the construction of the Tabqa dam (Rihaoui 1965). During these activities, several occupation phases have been recognised at Ta’as. The first traces of occupation can be dated back to the Roman Age: a settlement and a rupestrian necropolis have been associated to this phase. The area continued to be inhabited during the Sassanid period (ca. 220-650 CE) and the Middle Ages. As far as the latter phase is concerned, several levels of occupation have been dated to the late Byzantine period (in this area ca. 7th century CE), the Umayyad (7th-8th century CE) and the Abbasid Caliphates (8th-13th century CE) (Gaborit 2018b, 156).
Figure 9: The red dot marks the position of the archaeological site of Ta’as in the modern state of Syria. The site is situated on the right bank of the Euphrates river. The waterbody in proximity of the site is the artificial Assad lake (figure by the author).
33
5.2. The 1972 excavation
Considering the long lasting occupation of the site, an archaeological excavation was conducted in Ta’as in 1972. The research was organised by professor H. Franken from the Leiden University, with the financial support of the Organisation for the advancement of Pure Research (ZWO) (Clason and Buitenhuis 1978, 75; Freedman and Lundquist 1977, 4). Although surveys had been undertaken around the area of Ta’as in 1973 and 1974, more excavations have never been conducted in this site, as the Dutch mission spent the following years in investigating other endangered areas (Clason and Buitenhuis 1978, 75). The report of the campaign of 1972 has been produced by S. E. van der Leeuw, a collaborator of professor Franken. The report was incorporated by van der Leeuw in his MA thesis (Leeuw 1976a; Leeuw 1976b). Both the volumes of his research have not been published.
According to the information contained in the report, the site of Ta’as was just partially investigated through three small square trenches (named A, B, and D) (figure 10). Trench A yielded the remains of a small building that has been hypothesized to be a “small chapel or church” (Leeuw 1976a, 227). This was assumed because of the presence of several plaster fragments depicting crosses and Christian iconographies. This deposit has been dated to the Umayyad period (ca. 8th
Figure 10: The position of the squares A, B and D on the archaeological area of Ta’as (marked in red). A portion of the Assad lake is situated on the right of the site (the lake perimeter is marked in blue). The Djebel Aruda (an elevated rocky plateau) lays North-West from the three archaeological trenches (after Clason and Buitenhuis 1978, 77).
34
century CE) (Ibidem). Square B has been dated to the same phase. In this trench the remains of two buildings and several fragments of a glass drinking set were discovered (Leeuw 1976a, 229). Eventually, in square D the traces of the lower chambers of two kilns were found. These structures were associated with hundreds of pottery fragments. The presence of an Abbasid coin (8th-13th century CE) in one of the layers allowed to date the deposit to this chronological phase. Unfortunately, it was not possible to reconstruct a more precise dating (Idem, 235).
35
6. From the U product to the noria vase 6.1. The U product
Square D is particularly important for this thesis. In that square thousands of pottery fragments were found (Leeuw 1976b, 57). In his report, van der Leeuw identified 26 pottery typologies used or produced at Ta’as. Among those, the U
product was described as a “large jar without
handles” which main feature is a “bulbous base” (Leeuw 1976a, 281). More than 1373 fragments of this type have been found associated to the kiln of Ta’as (Ibidem). Considering the large size of the U product and its characteristic base (sometimes similar to an amphora bottom), van der Leeuw suggested these vases were used to transport goods of considerable weight. Nevertheless, some depictions of these U product lead to consider a different interpretation. Some
pictures of the abovementioned type were attached in the second volume of van der Leeuw’s MA thesis (Leeuw 1976b, plate 12). These pictures can be consulted in Appendix 2 of this research. Moreover, a drawing of a U product can be found in the van der Leeuw’s report itself (figure 11). As it is shown in this figure, the apex of the vase does not present a thickening. This feature makes the U Product base not particularly strong, preventing it to be suited for bearing huge weights. The
Figure 11: An archaeological drawing of a U product as described by S. E. van der Leeuw (after Leeuw 1976b, figure 83).
Figure 12: The comparison between a U Product base (left) and an amphora base (right). The full base of the amphora makes this container well suited to store and transport heavy goods. The same can not be said for the U Product base, featured by a thin vessel wall (after Leeuw 1976b, figure 83 and Bonifay and Leffey 2002, 75).
36
fragility of the bulbous base is more evident if it is compared with the base of an amphora (figure 12). In this kind of pottery container the thick bottom bears the shock of a huge weight avoiding the base to crack. As the figure demonstrates, the
U product does not present this feature. According to these evaluations, the
presence of the bulbous base in the U product must be explained in a different way. [It is important to specify that noria vases can have sometimes full bases, as a few archaeological examples of this kind have been found in Spain (Garcia Blanquez 2014, 83). The reasoning here proposed just wants to highlight that in this specific case the identification of the U Product as an amphora-like container should be rejected considering the weakness of the bulbous base].
6.2. Three comparisons
As the U Product was not meant to be the bottom of a transport container, its function must be found elsewhere. Comparing the base fragments of some U
products from Ta’as with similar vessels, it is possible to claim that this pottery
typology was instead a noria vase. Accordingly, the bulbous base was meant to be a gripping point that granted the vase to be tied to a wooden framework or a rope (Infra 4.3.2, 4.3.3). This interpretation is validated by the comparison of four U
product bases with some noria vessel bottoms from Sicily, Cyprus and Spain. The
following examples will highlight the similarities between these pieces, proving how the pottery sherds from Ta’as should be considered to be noria vase fragments. A short catalogue of all the studied base fragments have been developed by the author. It is attached in Appendix 3.
6.2.1. First comparison: base fragments 1 and 2
Fragment 1 (figure 13) is featured by a yellow-orange fabric, with a few number of white grainy inclusions. The vessel surface is smooth with a few wheel traces. The thickness of the vessel wall is consistent. The base presents an approximately rectangular shape with bevelled edges. Moreover, the fragment bottom presents a pronounced concavity. The base is connected to the vessel body by a slightly pronounced narrowing.
37
Fragment 2 (figure 14) is featured by a yellow-grey colour, with several small sandy inclusions. The fabric presents several small holes due to the presence of air bubbles in the clay during the vase shaping process. As the fragment is not well preserved, its inner and external walls are extremely corroded. Probably because of that, no wheel traces have been spotted on the vessel surface. Nevertheless, the presence of a clay spiral in the inner part of the base bottom suggests the wheel has been used to produce this piece. The thickness of the vessel wall is consistent. The base presents an approximately rectangular shape with bevelled edges. Its bottom has a sinuous concavity. The vessel base is connected to the vase body by a slightly pronounced narrowing.
As figure 15 shows, both fragment 1 and 2 can be compared with a noria pot base found in the Spanish site of la Rábita de Guardamar (Alicante). In fact, the three bases are characterised by a rectangular bottom with bevelled edges connected
Figure 13: The base fragment 1 (figure by the author).
Figure 14: The base fragment 2 (figure by the author).
38
to the vessel body through a slightly pronounced shrinkage. The Spanish piece has been dated back to the late Caliphal Age in Andalusia (last part of the 10th century CE), a chronological phase parallel to the Abbasid period in Syria (García Blánquez 2014, 95).
6.2.2. Second comparison: base fragment 3
Fragment 3 has a grey-brown colour (figure 16). Small black grains appear in the fabric of the vase. A consistent thickness features the vessel wall even if a pronounced thickening can be individuated on the vase foot. It is characterised by a marked concavity with a peculiar mushroom-head shape. This piece can be compared with some archaeological vessels from Sicily. Several noria vases with a mushroom-head shape are described to be found in the excavation conducted by the
Figure 16: The base fragment 3 (figure by the author).
Figure 15: The comparison of fragment 1 (letter A) and fragment 2 (letter C) with a noria vase base from the archaeological site of la Rábita de Guardamar , Southern Spain (letter B). The three pieces present a rectangular bottom with bevelled edges (after García Blánquez 2014, 94).
39
Sicilian archaeologist A. Tullio in the castle of Maredolce near Palermo (figure 17). According to the stratigraphic interpretation of the site layers, those pieces have been dated to the 12th-13th century CE (Tullio 1997, 475). Therefore, the Sicilian pieces belong to the same chronological phase of the Ta’as fragments.
6.2.3. Third comparison: base fragment 4
Fragment 4 is featured by a yellow-red fabric without many inclusions (figure 18). The vessel surface is quite smooth even if parallel wheel traces can be detected in the upper part of the piece. The wall of the vase presents a consistent thickness except for the bottom of the base, where a thickening can be observed. The base has an approximately rectangular shape with bevelled edges; its bottom is completely flat. A marked narrowing connects the base with the vessel body. This fragment can be compared with a noria vase found in Potamia-Agios Sozomenos (Cyprus). As figure 19 shows, both the sherds present evident traces of wheel processing, a flat base and a pronounced narrowing between the vessel foot and the vase body. The noria vase from Cyprus has been dated to the 13th century CE
(Vallauri 2004, 232).
Figure 17: The comparison between the fragment 3 and a noria vase from Maredolce, Northern Sicily. On the left, a picture of the Sicilian vase. On the right, the fragment 3 from Ta’as. Both the materials present a characteristic base featured by a mushroom-head shape (after Tullio 1997, 475).
40
Figure 19: The comparison between the noria vase from Cyprus (left) and the fragment 4 from Ta’as (right). The two pieces share a similar flat base and a marked narrowing between the vessel base and the vase body (after Vallauri 2004, 232).
Figure 18: The base fragment 4 (figure by the author).
41
6.3. Noria vases chronology
It is now important to make one point about some chronological evaluations connected with the three comparisons proposed above. In the previous section the base fragments from Ta’as have been compared with some similar materials from different medieval sites situated in the Mediterranean basin. These pieces have been selected according to their shape (that proves the sherds of Ta’as to be noria vases) and their chronology. As far as this latter point is concerned, the three comparisons demonstrate that the base fragments of Ta’as should be associated to a period close to the dating of the Mediterranean materials. Nevertheless, it does not mean in any way that the fragments from Ta’as have the same chronology of the materials to which have been compared. Therefore, the chronological associations proposed above should only be considered indicative.
The fragment 3 from Ta’as provides a good example. This fragment has been compared with a Sicilian noria vase from Maredolce. The noria vase from this site has been dated to the 12th-13th century CE (Tullio 1997, 475). This dating has been developed considering that the noria vase sherds were found in an archaeological layer dated to those centuries (Ibidem). Nevertheless, it should not be excluded that the noria fragment of the Sicilian site could be older. It is due to the fact that the noria vase of Maredolce could had been made (and used) before the abovementioned dating. In a later moment (around the 12th-13th century), when the vase was old or damaged it could have been discarded. It means that the fragment from Maredolce has been made at the latest during the 12th-13th century, but no further claims can be made on a more precise chronology of the piece. This reasoning can be applied to all the Mediterranean fragments presented above. Accordingly, the fragments of Ta’as can just indicatively be associated to a period comprised between the 10th century CE (the dating of the earlier fragment from Rábita de Guardamar) and the 13th century CE (the later chronology of the sherds from Maredolce and Potamia-Agios Sozomenos). Nevertheless, this broad dating is in accordance with the general chronology of the archaeological layers where the noria sherds of Ta’as were buried (as those have been dated to the Abbasid period (8th-13th century CE) (Infra 5.1.).
42
7. A noria vase from Ta’as 7.1. Linking the noria fragments
After establishing that the U product fragments were actually noria vases, it is now possible to guess the probable shape of the ceramic noria containers of Ta’as. To do so, it is necessary to compare the abovementioned base fragments with their rims. Fortunately, during the archaeological excavation of Ta’as a great number of noria vase rims were found. An important step of this thesis consists in the study and drawing of these pieces. Appendix 4 contains a short catalogue of the analysed rims. Each fragment is accompanied by its archaeological drawing and the measurement of its most relevant parts, such as the diameter and the wall thickness. In this chapter, the base fragment 4 and the rim sherd T’/D258a will be associated. As a result, the possible shape of a noria vase from Ta’as will be reconstructed.
7.2. The rims
Hundreds of noria rims have been found in the square D at Ta’as. From the materials stored in the Leiden University depot, eight rim fragments have been selected and studied (see Appendix 4). The analysis of the sherds allows to detect four main rim typologies. Those are represented in figure 20. As the figure shows, the type A lip is featured by a sharp V shape profile. Fragments T’/D303 and T’/D258c have been associated to this type. Then, the type B is characterised by a peculiar triangular shape with a straight groove. Fragment T’/D258b is the only studied piece with this rim. On the other hand, type C presents a rounded profile. It is the most recurrent type as four fragments are featured by this rim shape (D240, D335, D248, D349) (table 6). In conclusion, type D has an hybrid profile, as it can be considered a cross between type A and C. In fact, the D lip presents an extremely rounded V profile with bevelled edges. Just the fragment T’/D258a has this rim. Table 6 schematizes the abovementioned type distributions.
Figure 20: The four rim typologies of the noria vases from Ta’as (figure by the author).
43
Unfortunately, the study of the rims does not provide any information on a possible connection between a rim type and a specific vase diameter, as no patterns have been detected (see table 7). Nevertheless, it is possible to notice that the internal diameter of the noria vases of Ta’as measures on average between 12 and 14 centimetres. This information is in line with the studies of Lucy Vallauri, a French archaeologist who studied the diameter of several noria vases. According to her evaluations, noria vases diameters changed throughout time. The average noria vase rim diameter is considered to measure around 13 centimetres before the 14th century CE. On the other hand, a lower figure of 11 centimetres is considered to be the most shared noria vase diameter between the 14th and the 16th century CE (Vallauri 2004, 225). Although a greater amount of data could provide more precise information, the average diameter of the analysed noria vase rims supports their dating to the Abbasid period (8th – 13th century CE).
Table 6: Rim typologies distribution. As the graph shows, Type C is the most common one (table by the author).
