- Email: [email protected]
Sails from the Roman port at Berenike, Egypt
The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology (2001) 30.2: 211–220 doi:10.1006/ijna.2001.0354
Sails from the Roman port at Berenike, Egypt Felicity C. Wild and John P. Wild 30 Princes Road, Heaton Moor, Stockport, Cheshire, SK4 3NQ, UK A 1st-century AD midden deposit at Berenike, a major port on the trade route between the Roman Empire and India, has produced cotton textile fragments reinforced with a rectangular grid-pattern of cotton strips, interpreted as the remains of sails. Webbing fragments of cotton and linen, in some cases attached to stout cotton or linen cloth, may also have come from sails. The only published example of a Roman-Period sail is a linen sail of 1st-century BC–AD date from Thebes in Egypt, to which the Berenike fragments bear a close resemblance. The S-spun linen sails were presumably manufactured in Egypt. Most of the Berenike material, however, was of Z-spun cotton: an import, it is argued, of Indian origin. The construction of Mediterranean-type sails entirely from Indian materials has implications for the presence of westerners on the Indian sub-continent. 2001 The Nautical Archaeology Society Key words: Berenike, cotton, India, Roman, sails, webbing.
Introduction: the historical background
T
he site of Berenike lies on the Red Sea coast of Egypt in the lee of the Ras Banas peninsula (Fig. 1). The author of the shipping handbook known as the Periplus Maris Erythraei, generally considered to have been written in the middle of the 1st century AD, regarded it as one of the two main ports of trade between the Graeco-Roman world and East Africa, South Arabia and India. According to Pliny the Elder (NH 6.33.168), the town was founded c. 275 BC by Ptolemy II Philadelphus and named in honour of his mother, but it appears to have come into prominence during the expansion of trade between the Mediterranean world and the East from the time of Augustus, when it acted as a transit port from which goods from the East were transported overland to the Nile Valley and thence to the Mediterranean (Sidebotham, 1995). Strabo (2.5.12), writing of the year AD 26, notes Myos Hormos (Quseir al-Qadim) as the main port for the India trade, noting elsewhere (17.1.45) that Berenike had no harbour. By the middle of the 1st century AD, however, this had been rectified: Pliny specifically refers to a harbour (NH 6.26.103) and it may be argued that the author of the Periplus implies its greater importance by starting his account of the voyage to India from Berenike rather than Myos Hormos/
1057–2414/01/020211+10 $35.00/0
Quseir (Casson, 1989: 143). To the sailor, the advantage of Berenike over Myos Hormos was that, although the journey overland to the Nile was longer, it obviated the necessity of beating against the north wind for the further 230 nautical miles up the Red Sea on the return journey. The latest mention of the site, in the Martyrium Sancti Arethae, suggests that Berenike was still a functioning port in the early 6th century (AD 524–5), contributing two ships, but only two, to an Ethiopian expedition to South Arabia (Acta Sanctorum Octobris X, VII (29)). Soon after this, the town must have been abandoned permanently. Excavations at the site since 1994, directed by Prof. S. E. Sidebotham of the University of Delaware and Prof. W. Z. Wendrich of the University of California, Los Angeles, have started to reveal more about the history of the site and the extent of its contacts with India. The archaeological evidence confirms the impression gained from the literary sources that the port was particularly active in the 1st century AD. After a possible decline in occupation in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, when evidence for mercantile activity is more scanty, the town experienced a renaissance in both occupation and commerce in the late 4th century, which appears to have continued until the final evacuation, probably in the early 6th century AD. 2001 The Nautical Archaeology Society
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2
Alexandria Coptos Thebes
Myos Hormos
RED
IN DU S
Berenike
GANG ES
SEA
Barygaza
0
1000 km
INDIAN OCEAN Muziris
Arikamedu
Nelkynda
Figure 1. Location map of the area and sites mentioned in the text. (Drawing: J. P. Wild)
Evidence for trade with India and, indeed, for the presence of Indians on the site, has come in the form of: a graffito on a 1st-century AD amphora in Tamil-Brahmi (Mahadevan, 1996); Indian and Sri Lankan beads (Francis, 2000: 221–223); pottery of South Indian origin (Begley & Tomber, 1999; Tomber, 2000); and botanical remains such as coconut and, in particular, large quantities of black peppercorns (Cappers, 1998a: 311–319; 1998b: 80–84). A high proportion of the wood remains from the site was of teak, including reused planks, possibly from dismantled ships (Vermeeren, 1999: 319). The textiles from the site were, in general, not well preserved. The proximity of the sea and the neighbouring wadi have led to the disintegration of the textiles from the lower levels of the site: heavy dews alternating with day-time heat have attacked those near the surface. A high proportion of the textiles recovered came from two rubbish deposits, one dated by the associated pottery and ostraka to not later than AD 75 (Bagnall et al., 2000), the other to the late 4th–5th century AD. Fragments were small and, in many cases, badly degraded by salt. The textiles from the earlier deposit, coinciding with the main period of early Roman activity on the site, can best be described as utilitarian: amalgams of wool scraps probably reused as saddle packing, fragments of medium-weight and coarse 212
linen and cotton tabbies (plain weaves), sometimes heavily and repeatedly patched, pieces of webbing and sacking. They appear to represent rubbish from the docks rather than the remains of clothing and furnishing and their functions are likely to have been concerned with the packing and transport of traded goods. It seems a reasonable supposition, borne out by the presence on site of the teak planks and of brailing rings, that at least some of the contents of the deposit are the remains of sails, the almost complete absence of which in the ancient world has been commented upon by Black and Samuels (1991; 1992). The purpose of the present article is to assess the evidence from Berenike for sails and their nature (see also Wild & Wild, 2000).
The textile remains The greater proportion of the material considered here is of cotton, a situation without parallel on sites within the Roman Empire. The cottons can be divided into two distinct groups: the one is woven exclusively from S- or anticlockwise-spun yarns (S/S), the other from Z- or clockwise-spun yarns (Z/Z). Ancient spinners were highly conservative and the tradition in Egypt and the neighbouring Roman provinces was for the Sdirection. It would be fair to assume that the
F. C. WILD & J. P. WILD: SAILS FROM THE ROMAN PORT AT BERENIKE, EGYPT Table 1. Reinforcing strips, Z-spun cotton, from Berenike (ER: Early Roman; LR: Late Roman) No.
Context
Date
97.103
16.010
LR
0170
6.004
LR
0169
6.004
LR
97.106
13.002
ER
0724 0758
19.006 19.006
ER ER
0827
19.008
ER
2509 Possible 0829 0895
33.026 reinforcing 19.008 19.008
ER strips: ER ER
Measurements
Folded width
Fragments of tabby, 7–87 per cm, max. length 710 mm380 mm crossed by two reinforcing strips, at right angles, probably of same textile. 1. (vertical) 20 mm Two lengths of strip sewn end to end. Overlies 2. (horizontal) 25 mm Sail fragment shows patch, carefully aligned with warp. Strip of tabby, probably once blue and undyed check, 7–86 per cm, max. length 40 mm250 mm, crossed by two reinforcing strips at right angles, also probably blue check. 1. (vertical) c. 25 mm 2. (horizontal) c. 25 mm Pieces of reinforcing strip, probably from 0170, with traces of blue check where edges turned under. 1. 120 mm30 mm 22 mm 2. 150 mm30 mm 22 mm 3 pieces c. 70 mm20 mm 18 mm Two strips 1. 285 mm65 mm 35 mm 2. 300 mm60 mm 35 mm two lengths sewn end to end 300 mm40 mm about 210 mm33 mm Edges folded two strips sewn end to end Nine strips, 1915, wide spaced, per cm. All probably sailcloth? 1. 265 mm70 mm 2. 400 mm85 mm 3. 480 mm85 mm 4. 250 mm65 mm 35 mm (folded) 5. 100 mm60 mm 40 mm (folded) 6. 70 mm30 mm 7. 100 mm15+ mm 8. 100 mm30 mm 9. 90 mm25 mm 240 mm56 mm 33 mm 130 mm45 mm Two strips folded longitudinally, 138 per cm 1. 105 mm (lower count)50 mm 2. 110 mm50 mm
S-spun cottons were produced within Egypt, where cotton-growing is attested by the 1st century AD (Wild, 1997: 289–290). The Z-spun cottons are best described as ‘intrusive’, but the weight of ancient literary and documentary evidence indicates India to be the only practical source (Wild, 1997; Wild & Wild, 2000: 271–273). All the cotton fragments discussed here were Z-spun and presumably imported. The linen fragments were uniformly S-spun and presumably of Egyptian origin. Among the fragments of Z/Z cotton tabby were a number of strips, up to about 300 mm long, often sewn end-to-end with others (Table 1). The raw edges on the long axis had been folded in to form a band about 35 mm wide. The warp (taking
Cotton yarns sewn through it
the denser system as warp) seems to run more often widthways than lengthways and there is a marked variability in yarn diameter (a characteristic of the Z/Z cottons in general). Although most of the strips came from the Early Roman deposit, the key to understanding their function lay in two pieces from Late Roman contexts. The first (97.103, Figs 2 & 3) was a large, tattered and patched fragment which, when stretched out, proved to have strips, torn from the same or an identical fabric, attached to it at right angles to each other. The edges had been turned in, sewn down to the main cloth on one side with running stitches, and oversewn on the other. Two sections of the vertical strip were sewn end-to-end. The strips concealed nothing: there was no seam in the 213
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2
Figure 2. Sail fragment from Berenike (97.103). (Photograph: J. P. Wild & Berenike Project) Figure 3. Outline of sail fragment from Berenike (97.103). (Drawing: J. P. Wild)
fabric beneath. The other fragment (0170) was a strip of what was probably once a blue and undyed cotton check, 250 mm40 mm, to which had been sewn, at right angles, strips of the same faded check (the blue yarn was barely visible except where protected by the turned-in edges). (It is interesting, but perhaps coincidental, that the bands are narrower on these two late examples (20–25 mm) than on the early Roman ones (approximately 35 mm).) Are these the reinforcing bands for sails? Sails are generally depicted in Mediterranean art as bearing a grid pattern which has been variously interpreted (Casson, 1971: 233–234; Roberts, 1993). Most recently it has been suggested, on the grounds that these dividing lines are portrayed as being of a different colour from the sail itself, that they represent reinforcing bands sewn on separately (Weski, 1997: 89–90). The evidence from Berenike appears to confirm this suggestion. 214
A relief of a Roman ship from Ostia (Graefe, 1979: 121–123, Abb. 133, Taf.124,2; Daremberg & Saglio, 1877–1919: fig. 5295) (Fig. 4) clearly shows brailing rings attached to the bands. A number of circular brailing rings, of wood and bone, have been found at Berenike, pierced with two small holes for attachment to the sail. Although none was found attached to a fragment of sail, they occurred in the same contexts as potential sail fragments within the early midden. One example still retained Z-spun cotton string through its holes. Similar string was attached to the reinforcing strips (Fig. 5). The Early Roman deposit also produced pieces of webbing which may have served a similar purpose to the reinforcing strips. These can be divided into two categories: of S-spun linen (Table 2) and of Z-spun cotton (Table 3). The flax webbing, uniformly 30–35 mm wide, was in basket weave (paired warp and weft) or half-basket
F. C. WILD & J. P. WILD: SAILS FROM THE ROMAN PORT AT BERENIKE, EGYPT
Figure 4. Relief of a Roman ship from Ostia. (After Daremberg & Saglio, 1877–1919)
weave (paired warp or weft). One example (97.115) had single warp and paired weft. The others had paired warp with a specific number of single warps at each selvedge, generally either eight or four, and either single or paired weft. The singles at the selvedge, no doubt, provided added strength. In four cases, three with paired weft, one with single, there were the remains of a narrow red pin-stripe within the eight singles to each side, now faded to a pale pink and barely visible except where protected. It is possible that, originally, other fragments may also have had such stripes. The cotton webbing varied from 35–43 mm in width: all had a plied warp, with either single or paired weft. In some of the examples with single weft, there was a coloured pin-stripe to each side. In at least one case, the stripe was blue-green (Fig. 6); in another it appeared as brown, but was badly decayed and may once have been red. A third showed a bare strip to each side where the coloured yarn had disappeared altogether. The cotton webbing was less common than the flax webbing: the ten pieces listed (Table 3) probably
came from only eight examples. If indeed these are from sails, their scarcity may be accounted for by the more common use of cotton tabby strips for this purpose. It is impossible to be certain that the webbing was used on sails, but there are three pointers which suggest this. Firstly, there is a marked correlation in width between the webbing and the reinforcing strips from Early Roman contexts. Secondly, three pieces of linen webbing were sewn firmly onto pieces of medium weight S/S flax tabby (1210, 1211, 139 threads per cm respectively) and one piece of cotton webbing onto a piece of Z/Z cotton tabby (1616 per cm). One of the linen examples showed a red stripe: the cotton example had also had a stripe. Finally, there is the evidence of the ‘Lyons’ sail.
The ‘Lyons’ sail There is one published parallel to the Berenike sail fragments: fragments of what have been argued to 215
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2
Figure 5. Reinforcing strip (0758) and brailing rings from Berenike. (Photograph: J. P. Wild & Berenike Project)
have been a linen sail, torn up and used as packing for a mummy from a grave in Thebes (Rouge´ , 1987; Schoeffer et al., 1987). The textile, dated by radiocarbon to 50100 BC, has been studied and conserved and is currently in the Natural History Museum at Lyons. The sail was reinforced with strips of linen webbing to which, in one place, half a wooden brailing ring was still attached, of a similar pattern to those found at Berenike. From the 46 fragments recovered, a sail some 550 cm square is suggested. The present writers were fortunate to have been able to spend a day in Lyon examining the sail, but in the time available were only able to make a detailed study of four of the fragments. The ground weave was of S/S linen, approximately 2212 threads per cm. The webbing bands, however, although ostensibly uniform, showed minor variations in detail and had, on occasion, been renewed at least once. A common feature was a narrow coloured stripe to each side of the band. On the fragments studied, the vertical bands (35– 38 mm) were wider than the horizontal bands (25–29 mm). All were in basket weave (paired warp and weft), though on some of the narrower bands the outer two warps on each side were singles. All have a narrow coloured stripe of blue and/or red to each side, the blue on the outside, the red on the inside. There is, however, variety in the number of pairs of each colour used and in the 216
number of pairs between the coloured stripes. Two pieces showed a red stripe only, another a blue stripe on its own. The wider, vertical bands showed a double stripe (blue/red/blue/red). Light brown streaks in the undyed linen of the bands, particularly the narrow ones, suggest that the bands may originally have been of a different colour to the sailcloth. As well as the renewal of the webbing bands, the sail also showed considerable evidence of patching during its period of use. Pieces of sail, with bands attached and sometimes already themselves patched, had been seamed together, in one case with the broad band oblique to the weave. The final act of construction appears to have been to add string ties down the side of the fragment (the edge of the sail?) at about 80 mm intervals, on and between the horizontal bands, possibly to attach the brailing rings. In all, the sail appears to have been made, patched and remade until it was no longer fit to use for its original purpose, after which it was torn up to recycle as mummy packing. The fragments from Berenike show similarity to those from Thebes in both construction and date. The main difference, only to be expected of oceangoing ships, is that they appear to be considerably stouter and stronger than the rather fine (though obviously badly worn) Thebes sail, from a Nile river-boat, no doubt. Many of the cotton tabby
F. C. WILD & J. P. WILD: SAILS FROM THE ROMAN PORT AT BERENIKE, EGYPT Table 2. Flax webbing, S-spun, from Berenike No.
Context
Width
97.115 0759 0797 0798 0799 0838 0839
13.002 19.006 19.008 19.008 19.008 19.008 19.008
0869 0890 1372 1465
19.008 19.008 19.009 29.002
damaged 30 mm 35 mm 35 mm
1480 1508 1509 1511 2357 1788 1818 1875 1876 1952 1953 3174 3238 2762 2802 2849 2851 2887
29.006 29.006 29.006 29.006 33.017 31.007 31.007 31.007 31.007 31.007 31.007 31.cbn 31.cbw 48.005 48.005 48.008 48.008 48.008
2907 2920 2921 2923 2990 3081
48.008 48.009 48.009 48.009 48.019 48.cbw
Warp
30 mm singles 30 mm pairs 43 mm pairs 30 mm pairs (scrap of similar band 30 mm pairs 35 mm pairs
Weft pairs singles singles singles to 0798) singles singles
35 mm 30 mm 32 mm 30 mm 30 mm 30+ mm 38 mm 32 mm 30 mm 30 mm 35 mm 40 mm damaged 28 mm 38 mm c. 30 mm 32 mm 25+ mm
pairs pairs pairs pairs and singles pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs S/Z pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs
singles singles singles singles singles singles pairs pairs pairs singles pairs pairs singles pairs S/Z pairs pairs singles singles singles singles pairs pairs
45 mm damaged damaged damaged 30 mm damaged
pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs
singles singles singles singles singles pairs
Structure about 46 singles in warp 8 singles at each selvedge 5 singles at each selvedge about 6 singles at edge 10 singles at each selvedge 8 singles at each selvedge. 3 lengths, sewn to S/S flax tabby (1210 per cm) traces of singles at edge 8 singles at one side, 6+ the other (damaged) 4 singles at each selvedge Wa: Z spun pairs? in centre S spun singles at edges no singles noted in warp 8 singles at each selvedge no singles noted in warp 4 singles at each selvedge 8 singles at each selvedge 4 singles/2 pairs/4 singles/4 pairs/1 single/8+ pairs 2 outer warps single, 3rd thicker single 4 singles at each selvedge 8 singles at each selvedge 8 singles at each selvedge. 4 und./4 red/27–28 pairs/4 red/4 und. 9 S spun singles at each side (thicker than normal) 4 singles at each selvedge singles at selvedge, uncountable 8 singles at each selvedge 4 singles/1 pair/4 singles/26 pairs/4 singles/1 pair/4 singles 8 singles at each selvedge. 4 und./2 red/2 und./ . . . no singles noted 4 und./4 red/12 pairs/4 red/4 und. Attached to S/S flax tabby (1211 per cm) 4 singles one side, 6 the other 6 singles one side, other missing 8? singles one side, other missing 4 singles/1 pair/4 singles/ main pairs 8 singles at each selvedge. Attached to S/S flax tabby (139 per cm) 8 singles at selvedge. 4 und./4 red
fragments reveal evidence for extensive and skilled patching, sometimes several times over. Apart from the piece with the crossed reinforcing bands (Figs 2–3), which shows a small, neat patch firmly sewn down with two or more rows of stitching, there is no specific evidence that these heavily patched pieces are from sails. They may have been used, or reused, as tarpaulins or for wrapping goods, but the evidence of the Lyons sail raises the possibility that sails may indeed have been patched to this extent.
Discussion The ‘Lyons’ sail was of linen, S-spun, and presumably of local Egyptian manufacture. One would
expect the ocean-going vessels constructed in Roman Egypt also to have had linen sails, of which the pieces of S-spun flax webbing and largely undiagnostic scraps of medium-weight flax tabby are all that survive. A surprisingly high proportion of the Berenike evidence, however, has been for sails of Z-spun cotton, a material which it is argued above was of imported, probably Indian, origin. The sailcloth, the webbing, the rope and sewing thread, even the patching materials, are uniformly Z-spun, indicating manufacture in India and/or the use of Indian materials for running repairs during the voyage. These were not, however, Indian ships, but ships of Mediterranean type, with a single main mast and large, square, reinforced sail, ideal for 217
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2 Table 3. Cotton webbing, Z-spun, from Berenike No.
Context
Width
Warp
Weft
Structure
97.107
13.002
35 mm
plied
0888
19.008
38 mm
plied
singles? (invisible) singles
1414 1510 1512 1539 1599 1686 2848 2988
29.001 29.006 29.006 29.006 29.cbn 31.006 48.008 48.019
32 mm 43 mm 35 mm damaged 43 mm 30 mm 33 mm 38 mm
plied plied plied plied plied plied plied plied
pairs pairs singles singles pairs singles singles singles
brown line, ?3 threads wide, now largely missing, 6 warps from one selvedge, 8 from the other Wa: ?5/ dec. missing/24/dec. missing/ ?5. Sewn to Z/Z cotton tabby, 1616 per cm about 38 in total warp sheet blue-green stripe. Wa: 4 undyed/2 blue/ 18 und./2 blue/4 und. blue stripe (=1512) 36 in total warp sheet (probably=1510) no decoration noted no decoration noted no decoration noted
running before the wind (Peka´ ry, 1999). The ships portrayed in Indian art (Schlingloff, 1988: 195– 207) are vessels with two or three main masts and no sign of a grid pattern of reinforcement on the sails. The evidence from Berenike suggests Mediterranean-style ships, or at least sails, constructed of Indian materials and copying which extended, in some cases, even to the conventional coloured stripe on the webbing reinforcements. The construction of ships at Berenike, in the Eastern desert, cannot have been easy. The raw materials would all have had to be brought from elsewhere: perhaps down the Red Sea from the Levant, certainly by land from the Nile Valley. An ostrakon from Krokodilo, on the road between Coptos, on the Nile, and Myos Hormos, records a wagonload of timber for shipbuilding on its way to Myos Hormos (Bu¨ low-Jacobsen, 1998: 66). Berenike lies almost 320 km (200 miles) south of
Figure 6. Detail of Z/Z cotton webbing (1512) from Berenike (the faded blue-green stripe is not visible in black and white). (Photograph: J. P. Wild & Berenike Project) 218
Myos Hormos; it is an estimated 11–12 days journey overland from Coptos, as against sixseven for Myos Hormos (Casson, 1989: 13). By contrast, along the coasts of India materials must have been ready to hand. There were Greeks settled in the North of India from the time of Alexander’s expedition, familiar with Graeco-Roman ships. Tamil literature, reviewed by De Romanis in 1997 refers to the presence elsewhere in India, too, of Yavanas, foreigners of Mediterranean origin, a term which clearly includes the merchants arriving annually from Egypt (Akananuru 149: 7–11) as well as others, presumably settled, acting as mercenaries for local rulers (Cilappatikaram 14: 66–7). The Peutinger Table, a Roman map originally compiled in the 3rd century AD (Rivet & Smith, 1974: 149–150), places a ‘temple of Augustus’ near Muziris, the main port of South India. Although the significance—and reliability—of this is in dispute, for instance, Kartunen (1997: 334) dismisses it, if it had any basis in fact at all, its presence must imply the work of westerners. F. Richard’s suggestion (pers. comm.) that it may be connected with the cult of the emperor epibaterios, to whom temples and dedications were made in ports (Richard, 1988) rather than being a chronological indicator of Augustan date makes the presence of such a temple more probable, while reinforcing the idea of the existence of westerners in the area. In addition, there is the archaeological evidence, best exemplified by Arikamedu, near Pondicherry on the east coast of India, which produced small quantities of Italian terra sigillata tableware dating to the early 1st century AD, as well as other items of Mediterranean pottery and glassware. Wheeler (Wheeler et al., 1946: 18–22) and,
F. C. WILD & J. P. WILD: SAILS FROM THE ROMAN PORT AT BERENIKE, EGYPT
more recently, Comfort (1991: 144–147) argue for its use by westerners in what was, effectively, a trading enclave. If there were indeed groups of westerners settled all year round in or at the edges of local communities, as Thapar suggests (Thapar, 1991: 21), they would have been ideally placed to assist in obtaining local materials to repair or replace worn-out sails or boats for the merchants arriving from Egypt on the south-west monsoon, before their return on the gentler North-East monsoon in December–January (Pliny, NH 6.26.106). The south-west monsoon of the outward journey was characterized by rough winds and heavy rain. Arrival on the west coast of India before September, when the winds slacken, was dangerous and to be avoided. The ships could well have suffered from storm damage as well as the depredations of pirates, mentioned in both Tamil and Classical literature (Pliny, NH 6.26.101). The following weeks in port would have provided a
convenient pause, not just for acquiring and loading cargo, but also to make good any damage before the less arduous return journey to Egypt. That this may provide a context for the cotton sails from Berenike is not beyond the bounds of possibility.
Acknowledgements The Society of Antiquaries of London, the British Academy, the Pasold Research Fund and the G. A. Wainwright Near Eastern Archaeological Fund have all kindly provided travel grants to enable the authors to work at Berenike over five seasons. The Directors of the Berenike Project, Professor S. E. Sidebotham and Professor W. Z. Wendrich gave every practical assistance. The authors are particularly indebted to Dr Dierdre Emmons of the Muse´ um d’Histoire Naturelle de Lyon for allowing them to study in detail the sail fragments from the museum’s collection.
References Bagnall, R. S., Helms, C. & Verhoogt, A. M. F. W., 2000, Documents from Berenike Volume I: Greek Ostraka from the 1996–1998 Seasons. Papyrologica Bruxellensia, Fondation Egyptologique Reine Elizabeth. Brussels. Begley, V. & Tomber, R. S., 1999, Indian pottery sherds. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1997. Report of the 1997 Excavations at Berenike and the Survey of the Egyptian Eastern Desert, including Excavations at Shenshef, 161–181. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Black, E. & Samuel, D., 1991, What were sails made of? MM, 77: 217–226. Black, E, & Samuel, D., 1992, Ancient sails. Archaeological Textiles Newsletter, 14: 9. Bu¨ low-Jacobsen, A., 1998, Traffic on the roads between Coptos and the Red Sea. In O. E. Kaper (Ed.), Life on the Fringe. Living in the Southern Egyptian Deserts during the Roman and early-Byzantine Periods, 63–77. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Cappers, R. T. J., 1998a, Archaeobotanical remains. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1996. Report of the 1996 Excavations at Berenike (Egyptian Red Sea Coast) and the Survey of the Eastern Desert,, 289–330. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Cappers, R. T. J., 1998b, A botanical contribution to the analysis of subsistence and trade at Berenike (Red Sea Coast, Egypt). In O. E. Kaper (Ed.), Life on the Fringe. Living in the Southern Egyptian Deserts during the Roman and early-Byzantine Periods, 75–85. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Casson, L., 1971, Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton. Casson, L., 1989, The Periplus Maris Erythraei. Princeton. Comfort, H., 1991, Terra Sigillata at Arikamedu. In V. Begley & R. D. De Puma (Eds), Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade, 134–150. Wisconsin. Daremberg, C. V. & Saglio, M. E., 1877–1919, Dictionnaire des Antiquite´s Grecques et Romaines. Paris. De Romanis, F., 1997, Rome and the No´tia of India: relations between Rome and Southern India from 30 BC to the Flavian Period. In F. De Romanis & A. Tchernia (Eds), Crossings. Early Mediterranean Contacts with India, 80–160. New Delhi. Francis, P., 2000, Human adornments. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1998. Report of the 1998 Excavations at Berenike and the Survey of the Eastern Desert, 211–225. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Graefe, R., 1979, Vela Erunt: Die Zeltda¨cher der ro¨mischen Theater und a¨hnlicher Anlagen, Mainz. Kartunen, K., 1997, India and the Hellenistic World. Studia Orientalia, 83. Helsinki. Mahadevan, I., 1996, Tamil-Brahmi Graffito. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1995. Preliminary Report of the 1995 Excavations at Berenike (Egyptian Red Sea Coast) and the survey of the Eastern Desert, 205–208.Research School CNWS, Leiden. Peka´ ry, I., 1999, Repertorium der hellenistischen und ro¨ mischen Schiffsdarstellungen. Boreas, Beiheft 8. Mu¨ nster. Pferdehirt, B., 1995, Das Museum fu¨r Antike Schiffahrt. Ein Forschungsbereich des Ro¨misch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums. Mainz. Richard, F., 1988, Les Souverains en ‘Theoi Epibaterioi’. Cahiers d’Histoire, XXXIII, 3–4: 441–452. 219
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2 Rivet, A. L. F. & Smith, C., 1979, The Place-Names of Roman Britain. London. Roberts, O. T. P., 1993, The sailing rig of Olympias. In T. Shaw (Ed.), The Trireme Project: Operational Experience 1987–90, Lessons Learnt, 29–38. Oxford. Rouge´ , J, 1987, La Momie contenait-elle les fragments d’une voile? Nouvelles Archives du Muse´ um d’Histoire Naturelle de Lyon, 25: 91–96. Schlingloff, D., 1988, Studies in the Ajanta Paintings: Identifications and Interpretations. Delhi. Schoeffer, M., Cotta, D. & Beentjes, A., 1987, Les Etoffes de Rembourrage: du Chiffon au Veˆ tement et a` la Voile de Bateau. Nouvelles Archives du Muse´um d’Histoire Naturelle de Lyon, 25: 77–80. Sidebotham, S. E., 1995, Historical Sources. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1994. Preliminary Report of the 1994 Excavations at Berenike (Egyptian Red Sea Coast) and the Survey of the Eastern Desert, 5–11. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Thapar, R., 1997, Early Mediterranean Contacts with India: An Overview. In F. De Romanis & A. Tchernia (Eds), Crossings. Early Mediterranean Contacts with India, 11–40. New Delhi. Tomber, R., 2000, Indo-Roman trade: the ceramic evidence from Egypt. Antiquity, 74: 624–631. Vermeeren, C. E., 1999, Wood and charcoal. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1997. Report of the 1997 Excavations at Berenike and the Survey of the Egyptian Eastern Desert including Excavations at Shenshef, 307–324. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Weski, T., 1997, Review of Pferdehirt (1995). IJNA, 26: 89–90. Wheeler, R. E. M., Ghosh, A. & Deva, K., 1946, Arikamedu. An Indo-Roman trading station on the east coast of India. Ancient India, 2: 17–124. Wild, J. P., 1997, Cotton in Roman Egypt: Some problems of origin. Al-Rafidan, 18: 287–298. Wild, J. P. & Wild, F., 2000, The textiles. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1998, Report of the 1998 Excavations at Berenike and the survey of the Eastern Desert, 251–274. Research School CNWS, Leiden.
220
Sails from the Roman port at Berenike, Egypt Felicity C. Wild and John P. Wild 30 Princes Road, Heaton Moor, Stockport, Cheshire, SK4 3NQ, UK A 1st-century AD midden deposit at Berenike, a major port on the trade route between the Roman Empire and India, has produced cotton textile fragments reinforced with a rectangular grid-pattern of cotton strips, interpreted as the remains of sails. Webbing fragments of cotton and linen, in some cases attached to stout cotton or linen cloth, may also have come from sails. The only published example of a Roman-Period sail is a linen sail of 1st-century BC–AD date from Thebes in Egypt, to which the Berenike fragments bear a close resemblance. The S-spun linen sails were presumably manufactured in Egypt. Most of the Berenike material, however, was of Z-spun cotton: an import, it is argued, of Indian origin. The construction of Mediterranean-type sails entirely from Indian materials has implications for the presence of westerners on the Indian sub-continent. 2001 The Nautical Archaeology Society Key words: Berenike, cotton, India, Roman, sails, webbing.
Introduction: the historical background
T
he site of Berenike lies on the Red Sea coast of Egypt in the lee of the Ras Banas peninsula (Fig. 1). The author of the shipping handbook known as the Periplus Maris Erythraei, generally considered to have been written in the middle of the 1st century AD, regarded it as one of the two main ports of trade between the Graeco-Roman world and East Africa, South Arabia and India. According to Pliny the Elder (NH 6.33.168), the town was founded c. 275 BC by Ptolemy II Philadelphus and named in honour of his mother, but it appears to have come into prominence during the expansion of trade between the Mediterranean world and the East from the time of Augustus, when it acted as a transit port from which goods from the East were transported overland to the Nile Valley and thence to the Mediterranean (Sidebotham, 1995). Strabo (2.5.12), writing of the year AD 26, notes Myos Hormos (Quseir al-Qadim) as the main port for the India trade, noting elsewhere (17.1.45) that Berenike had no harbour. By the middle of the 1st century AD, however, this had been rectified: Pliny specifically refers to a harbour (NH 6.26.103) and it may be argued that the author of the Periplus implies its greater importance by starting his account of the voyage to India from Berenike rather than Myos Hormos/
1057–2414/01/020211+10 $35.00/0
Quseir (Casson, 1989: 143). To the sailor, the advantage of Berenike over Myos Hormos was that, although the journey overland to the Nile was longer, it obviated the necessity of beating against the north wind for the further 230 nautical miles up the Red Sea on the return journey. The latest mention of the site, in the Martyrium Sancti Arethae, suggests that Berenike was still a functioning port in the early 6th century (AD 524–5), contributing two ships, but only two, to an Ethiopian expedition to South Arabia (Acta Sanctorum Octobris X, VII (29)). Soon after this, the town must have been abandoned permanently. Excavations at the site since 1994, directed by Prof. S. E. Sidebotham of the University of Delaware and Prof. W. Z. Wendrich of the University of California, Los Angeles, have started to reveal more about the history of the site and the extent of its contacts with India. The archaeological evidence confirms the impression gained from the literary sources that the port was particularly active in the 1st century AD. After a possible decline in occupation in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, when evidence for mercantile activity is more scanty, the town experienced a renaissance in both occupation and commerce in the late 4th century, which appears to have continued until the final evacuation, probably in the early 6th century AD. 2001 The Nautical Archaeology Society
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2
Alexandria Coptos Thebes
Myos Hormos
RED
IN DU S
Berenike
GANG ES
SEA
Barygaza
0
1000 km
INDIAN OCEAN Muziris
Arikamedu
Nelkynda
Figure 1. Location map of the area and sites mentioned in the text. (Drawing: J. P. Wild)
Evidence for trade with India and, indeed, for the presence of Indians on the site, has come in the form of: a graffito on a 1st-century AD amphora in Tamil-Brahmi (Mahadevan, 1996); Indian and Sri Lankan beads (Francis, 2000: 221–223); pottery of South Indian origin (Begley & Tomber, 1999; Tomber, 2000); and botanical remains such as coconut and, in particular, large quantities of black peppercorns (Cappers, 1998a: 311–319; 1998b: 80–84). A high proportion of the wood remains from the site was of teak, including reused planks, possibly from dismantled ships (Vermeeren, 1999: 319). The textiles from the site were, in general, not well preserved. The proximity of the sea and the neighbouring wadi have led to the disintegration of the textiles from the lower levels of the site: heavy dews alternating with day-time heat have attacked those near the surface. A high proportion of the textiles recovered came from two rubbish deposits, one dated by the associated pottery and ostraka to not later than AD 75 (Bagnall et al., 2000), the other to the late 4th–5th century AD. Fragments were small and, in many cases, badly degraded by salt. The textiles from the earlier deposit, coinciding with the main period of early Roman activity on the site, can best be described as utilitarian: amalgams of wool scraps probably reused as saddle packing, fragments of medium-weight and coarse 212
linen and cotton tabbies (plain weaves), sometimes heavily and repeatedly patched, pieces of webbing and sacking. They appear to represent rubbish from the docks rather than the remains of clothing and furnishing and their functions are likely to have been concerned with the packing and transport of traded goods. It seems a reasonable supposition, borne out by the presence on site of the teak planks and of brailing rings, that at least some of the contents of the deposit are the remains of sails, the almost complete absence of which in the ancient world has been commented upon by Black and Samuels (1991; 1992). The purpose of the present article is to assess the evidence from Berenike for sails and their nature (see also Wild & Wild, 2000).
The textile remains The greater proportion of the material considered here is of cotton, a situation without parallel on sites within the Roman Empire. The cottons can be divided into two distinct groups: the one is woven exclusively from S- or anticlockwise-spun yarns (S/S), the other from Z- or clockwise-spun yarns (Z/Z). Ancient spinners were highly conservative and the tradition in Egypt and the neighbouring Roman provinces was for the Sdirection. It would be fair to assume that the
F. C. WILD & J. P. WILD: SAILS FROM THE ROMAN PORT AT BERENIKE, EGYPT Table 1. Reinforcing strips, Z-spun cotton, from Berenike (ER: Early Roman; LR: Late Roman) No.
Context
Date
97.103
16.010
LR
0170
6.004
LR
0169
6.004
LR
97.106
13.002
ER
0724 0758
19.006 19.006
ER ER
0827
19.008
ER
2509 Possible 0829 0895
33.026 reinforcing 19.008 19.008
ER strips: ER ER
Measurements
Folded width
Fragments of tabby, 7–87 per cm, max. length 710 mm380 mm crossed by two reinforcing strips, at right angles, probably of same textile. 1. (vertical) 20 mm Two lengths of strip sewn end to end. Overlies 2. (horizontal) 25 mm Sail fragment shows patch, carefully aligned with warp. Strip of tabby, probably once blue and undyed check, 7–86 per cm, max. length 40 mm250 mm, crossed by two reinforcing strips at right angles, also probably blue check. 1. (vertical) c. 25 mm 2. (horizontal) c. 25 mm Pieces of reinforcing strip, probably from 0170, with traces of blue check where edges turned under. 1. 120 mm30 mm 22 mm 2. 150 mm30 mm 22 mm 3 pieces c. 70 mm20 mm 18 mm Two strips 1. 285 mm65 mm 35 mm 2. 300 mm60 mm 35 mm two lengths sewn end to end 300 mm40 mm about 210 mm33 mm Edges folded two strips sewn end to end Nine strips, 1915, wide spaced, per cm. All probably sailcloth? 1. 265 mm70 mm 2. 400 mm85 mm 3. 480 mm85 mm 4. 250 mm65 mm 35 mm (folded) 5. 100 mm60 mm 40 mm (folded) 6. 70 mm30 mm 7. 100 mm15+ mm 8. 100 mm30 mm 9. 90 mm25 mm 240 mm56 mm 33 mm 130 mm45 mm Two strips folded longitudinally, 138 per cm 1. 105 mm (lower count)50 mm 2. 110 mm50 mm
S-spun cottons were produced within Egypt, where cotton-growing is attested by the 1st century AD (Wild, 1997: 289–290). The Z-spun cottons are best described as ‘intrusive’, but the weight of ancient literary and documentary evidence indicates India to be the only practical source (Wild, 1997; Wild & Wild, 2000: 271–273). All the cotton fragments discussed here were Z-spun and presumably imported. The linen fragments were uniformly S-spun and presumably of Egyptian origin. Among the fragments of Z/Z cotton tabby were a number of strips, up to about 300 mm long, often sewn end-to-end with others (Table 1). The raw edges on the long axis had been folded in to form a band about 35 mm wide. The warp (taking
Cotton yarns sewn through it
the denser system as warp) seems to run more often widthways than lengthways and there is a marked variability in yarn diameter (a characteristic of the Z/Z cottons in general). Although most of the strips came from the Early Roman deposit, the key to understanding their function lay in two pieces from Late Roman contexts. The first (97.103, Figs 2 & 3) was a large, tattered and patched fragment which, when stretched out, proved to have strips, torn from the same or an identical fabric, attached to it at right angles to each other. The edges had been turned in, sewn down to the main cloth on one side with running stitches, and oversewn on the other. Two sections of the vertical strip were sewn end-to-end. The strips concealed nothing: there was no seam in the 213
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2
Figure 2. Sail fragment from Berenike (97.103). (Photograph: J. P. Wild & Berenike Project) Figure 3. Outline of sail fragment from Berenike (97.103). (Drawing: J. P. Wild)
fabric beneath. The other fragment (0170) was a strip of what was probably once a blue and undyed cotton check, 250 mm40 mm, to which had been sewn, at right angles, strips of the same faded check (the blue yarn was barely visible except where protected by the turned-in edges). (It is interesting, but perhaps coincidental, that the bands are narrower on these two late examples (20–25 mm) than on the early Roman ones (approximately 35 mm).) Are these the reinforcing bands for sails? Sails are generally depicted in Mediterranean art as bearing a grid pattern which has been variously interpreted (Casson, 1971: 233–234; Roberts, 1993). Most recently it has been suggested, on the grounds that these dividing lines are portrayed as being of a different colour from the sail itself, that they represent reinforcing bands sewn on separately (Weski, 1997: 89–90). The evidence from Berenike appears to confirm this suggestion. 214
A relief of a Roman ship from Ostia (Graefe, 1979: 121–123, Abb. 133, Taf.124,2; Daremberg & Saglio, 1877–1919: fig. 5295) (Fig. 4) clearly shows brailing rings attached to the bands. A number of circular brailing rings, of wood and bone, have been found at Berenike, pierced with two small holes for attachment to the sail. Although none was found attached to a fragment of sail, they occurred in the same contexts as potential sail fragments within the early midden. One example still retained Z-spun cotton string through its holes. Similar string was attached to the reinforcing strips (Fig. 5). The Early Roman deposit also produced pieces of webbing which may have served a similar purpose to the reinforcing strips. These can be divided into two categories: of S-spun linen (Table 2) and of Z-spun cotton (Table 3). The flax webbing, uniformly 30–35 mm wide, was in basket weave (paired warp and weft) or half-basket
F. C. WILD & J. P. WILD: SAILS FROM THE ROMAN PORT AT BERENIKE, EGYPT
Figure 4. Relief of a Roman ship from Ostia. (After Daremberg & Saglio, 1877–1919)
weave (paired warp or weft). One example (97.115) had single warp and paired weft. The others had paired warp with a specific number of single warps at each selvedge, generally either eight or four, and either single or paired weft. The singles at the selvedge, no doubt, provided added strength. In four cases, three with paired weft, one with single, there were the remains of a narrow red pin-stripe within the eight singles to each side, now faded to a pale pink and barely visible except where protected. It is possible that, originally, other fragments may also have had such stripes. The cotton webbing varied from 35–43 mm in width: all had a plied warp, with either single or paired weft. In some of the examples with single weft, there was a coloured pin-stripe to each side. In at least one case, the stripe was blue-green (Fig. 6); in another it appeared as brown, but was badly decayed and may once have been red. A third showed a bare strip to each side where the coloured yarn had disappeared altogether. The cotton webbing was less common than the flax webbing: the ten pieces listed (Table 3) probably
came from only eight examples. If indeed these are from sails, their scarcity may be accounted for by the more common use of cotton tabby strips for this purpose. It is impossible to be certain that the webbing was used on sails, but there are three pointers which suggest this. Firstly, there is a marked correlation in width between the webbing and the reinforcing strips from Early Roman contexts. Secondly, three pieces of linen webbing were sewn firmly onto pieces of medium weight S/S flax tabby (1210, 1211, 139 threads per cm respectively) and one piece of cotton webbing onto a piece of Z/Z cotton tabby (1616 per cm). One of the linen examples showed a red stripe: the cotton example had also had a stripe. Finally, there is the evidence of the ‘Lyons’ sail.
The ‘Lyons’ sail There is one published parallel to the Berenike sail fragments: fragments of what have been argued to 215
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2
Figure 5. Reinforcing strip (0758) and brailing rings from Berenike. (Photograph: J. P. Wild & Berenike Project)
have been a linen sail, torn up and used as packing for a mummy from a grave in Thebes (Rouge´ , 1987; Schoeffer et al., 1987). The textile, dated by radiocarbon to 50100 BC, has been studied and conserved and is currently in the Natural History Museum at Lyons. The sail was reinforced with strips of linen webbing to which, in one place, half a wooden brailing ring was still attached, of a similar pattern to those found at Berenike. From the 46 fragments recovered, a sail some 550 cm square is suggested. The present writers were fortunate to have been able to spend a day in Lyon examining the sail, but in the time available were only able to make a detailed study of four of the fragments. The ground weave was of S/S linen, approximately 2212 threads per cm. The webbing bands, however, although ostensibly uniform, showed minor variations in detail and had, on occasion, been renewed at least once. A common feature was a narrow coloured stripe to each side of the band. On the fragments studied, the vertical bands (35– 38 mm) were wider than the horizontal bands (25–29 mm). All were in basket weave (paired warp and weft), though on some of the narrower bands the outer two warps on each side were singles. All have a narrow coloured stripe of blue and/or red to each side, the blue on the outside, the red on the inside. There is, however, variety in the number of pairs of each colour used and in the 216
number of pairs between the coloured stripes. Two pieces showed a red stripe only, another a blue stripe on its own. The wider, vertical bands showed a double stripe (blue/red/blue/red). Light brown streaks in the undyed linen of the bands, particularly the narrow ones, suggest that the bands may originally have been of a different colour to the sailcloth. As well as the renewal of the webbing bands, the sail also showed considerable evidence of patching during its period of use. Pieces of sail, with bands attached and sometimes already themselves patched, had been seamed together, in one case with the broad band oblique to the weave. The final act of construction appears to have been to add string ties down the side of the fragment (the edge of the sail?) at about 80 mm intervals, on and between the horizontal bands, possibly to attach the brailing rings. In all, the sail appears to have been made, patched and remade until it was no longer fit to use for its original purpose, after which it was torn up to recycle as mummy packing. The fragments from Berenike show similarity to those from Thebes in both construction and date. The main difference, only to be expected of oceangoing ships, is that they appear to be considerably stouter and stronger than the rather fine (though obviously badly worn) Thebes sail, from a Nile river-boat, no doubt. Many of the cotton tabby
F. C. WILD & J. P. WILD: SAILS FROM THE ROMAN PORT AT BERENIKE, EGYPT Table 2. Flax webbing, S-spun, from Berenike No.
Context
Width
97.115 0759 0797 0798 0799 0838 0839
13.002 19.006 19.008 19.008 19.008 19.008 19.008
0869 0890 1372 1465
19.008 19.008 19.009 29.002
damaged 30 mm 35 mm 35 mm
1480 1508 1509 1511 2357 1788 1818 1875 1876 1952 1953 3174 3238 2762 2802 2849 2851 2887
29.006 29.006 29.006 29.006 33.017 31.007 31.007 31.007 31.007 31.007 31.007 31.cbn 31.cbw 48.005 48.005 48.008 48.008 48.008
2907 2920 2921 2923 2990 3081
48.008 48.009 48.009 48.009 48.019 48.cbw
Warp
30 mm singles 30 mm pairs 43 mm pairs 30 mm pairs (scrap of similar band 30 mm pairs 35 mm pairs
Weft pairs singles singles singles to 0798) singles singles
35 mm 30 mm 32 mm 30 mm 30 mm 30+ mm 38 mm 32 mm 30 mm 30 mm 35 mm 40 mm damaged 28 mm 38 mm c. 30 mm 32 mm 25+ mm
pairs pairs pairs pairs and singles pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs S/Z pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs
singles singles singles singles singles singles pairs pairs pairs singles pairs pairs singles pairs S/Z pairs pairs singles singles singles singles pairs pairs
45 mm damaged damaged damaged 30 mm damaged
pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs pairs
singles singles singles singles singles pairs
Structure about 46 singles in warp 8 singles at each selvedge 5 singles at each selvedge about 6 singles at edge 10 singles at each selvedge 8 singles at each selvedge. 3 lengths, sewn to S/S flax tabby (1210 per cm) traces of singles at edge 8 singles at one side, 6+ the other (damaged) 4 singles at each selvedge Wa: Z spun pairs? in centre S spun singles at edges no singles noted in warp 8 singles at each selvedge no singles noted in warp 4 singles at each selvedge 8 singles at each selvedge 4 singles/2 pairs/4 singles/4 pairs/1 single/8+ pairs 2 outer warps single, 3rd thicker single 4 singles at each selvedge 8 singles at each selvedge 8 singles at each selvedge. 4 und./4 red/27–28 pairs/4 red/4 und. 9 S spun singles at each side (thicker than normal) 4 singles at each selvedge singles at selvedge, uncountable 8 singles at each selvedge 4 singles/1 pair/4 singles/26 pairs/4 singles/1 pair/4 singles 8 singles at each selvedge. 4 und./2 red/2 und./ . . . no singles noted 4 und./4 red/12 pairs/4 red/4 und. Attached to S/S flax tabby (1211 per cm) 4 singles one side, 6 the other 6 singles one side, other missing 8? singles one side, other missing 4 singles/1 pair/4 singles/ main pairs 8 singles at each selvedge. Attached to S/S flax tabby (139 per cm) 8 singles at selvedge. 4 und./4 red
fragments reveal evidence for extensive and skilled patching, sometimes several times over. Apart from the piece with the crossed reinforcing bands (Figs 2–3), which shows a small, neat patch firmly sewn down with two or more rows of stitching, there is no specific evidence that these heavily patched pieces are from sails. They may have been used, or reused, as tarpaulins or for wrapping goods, but the evidence of the Lyons sail raises the possibility that sails may indeed have been patched to this extent.
Discussion The ‘Lyons’ sail was of linen, S-spun, and presumably of local Egyptian manufacture. One would
expect the ocean-going vessels constructed in Roman Egypt also to have had linen sails, of which the pieces of S-spun flax webbing and largely undiagnostic scraps of medium-weight flax tabby are all that survive. A surprisingly high proportion of the Berenike evidence, however, has been for sails of Z-spun cotton, a material which it is argued above was of imported, probably Indian, origin. The sailcloth, the webbing, the rope and sewing thread, even the patching materials, are uniformly Z-spun, indicating manufacture in India and/or the use of Indian materials for running repairs during the voyage. These were not, however, Indian ships, but ships of Mediterranean type, with a single main mast and large, square, reinforced sail, ideal for 217
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2 Table 3. Cotton webbing, Z-spun, from Berenike No.
Context
Width
Warp
Weft
Structure
97.107
13.002
35 mm
plied
0888
19.008
38 mm
plied
singles? (invisible) singles
1414 1510 1512 1539 1599 1686 2848 2988
29.001 29.006 29.006 29.006 29.cbn 31.006 48.008 48.019
32 mm 43 mm 35 mm damaged 43 mm 30 mm 33 mm 38 mm
plied plied plied plied plied plied plied plied
pairs pairs singles singles pairs singles singles singles
brown line, ?3 threads wide, now largely missing, 6 warps from one selvedge, 8 from the other Wa: ?5/ dec. missing/24/dec. missing/ ?5. Sewn to Z/Z cotton tabby, 1616 per cm about 38 in total warp sheet blue-green stripe. Wa: 4 undyed/2 blue/ 18 und./2 blue/4 und. blue stripe (=1512) 36 in total warp sheet (probably=1510) no decoration noted no decoration noted no decoration noted
running before the wind (Peka´ ry, 1999). The ships portrayed in Indian art (Schlingloff, 1988: 195– 207) are vessels with two or three main masts and no sign of a grid pattern of reinforcement on the sails. The evidence from Berenike suggests Mediterranean-style ships, or at least sails, constructed of Indian materials and copying which extended, in some cases, even to the conventional coloured stripe on the webbing reinforcements. The construction of ships at Berenike, in the Eastern desert, cannot have been easy. The raw materials would all have had to be brought from elsewhere: perhaps down the Red Sea from the Levant, certainly by land from the Nile Valley. An ostrakon from Krokodilo, on the road between Coptos, on the Nile, and Myos Hormos, records a wagonload of timber for shipbuilding on its way to Myos Hormos (Bu¨ low-Jacobsen, 1998: 66). Berenike lies almost 320 km (200 miles) south of
Figure 6. Detail of Z/Z cotton webbing (1512) from Berenike (the faded blue-green stripe is not visible in black and white). (Photograph: J. P. Wild & Berenike Project) 218
Myos Hormos; it is an estimated 11–12 days journey overland from Coptos, as against sixseven for Myos Hormos (Casson, 1989: 13). By contrast, along the coasts of India materials must have been ready to hand. There were Greeks settled in the North of India from the time of Alexander’s expedition, familiar with Graeco-Roman ships. Tamil literature, reviewed by De Romanis in 1997 refers to the presence elsewhere in India, too, of Yavanas, foreigners of Mediterranean origin, a term which clearly includes the merchants arriving annually from Egypt (Akananuru 149: 7–11) as well as others, presumably settled, acting as mercenaries for local rulers (Cilappatikaram 14: 66–7). The Peutinger Table, a Roman map originally compiled in the 3rd century AD (Rivet & Smith, 1974: 149–150), places a ‘temple of Augustus’ near Muziris, the main port of South India. Although the significance—and reliability—of this is in dispute, for instance, Kartunen (1997: 334) dismisses it, if it had any basis in fact at all, its presence must imply the work of westerners. F. Richard’s suggestion (pers. comm.) that it may be connected with the cult of the emperor epibaterios, to whom temples and dedications were made in ports (Richard, 1988) rather than being a chronological indicator of Augustan date makes the presence of such a temple more probable, while reinforcing the idea of the existence of westerners in the area. In addition, there is the archaeological evidence, best exemplified by Arikamedu, near Pondicherry on the east coast of India, which produced small quantities of Italian terra sigillata tableware dating to the early 1st century AD, as well as other items of Mediterranean pottery and glassware. Wheeler (Wheeler et al., 1946: 18–22) and,
F. C. WILD & J. P. WILD: SAILS FROM THE ROMAN PORT AT BERENIKE, EGYPT
more recently, Comfort (1991: 144–147) argue for its use by westerners in what was, effectively, a trading enclave. If there were indeed groups of westerners settled all year round in or at the edges of local communities, as Thapar suggests (Thapar, 1991: 21), they would have been ideally placed to assist in obtaining local materials to repair or replace worn-out sails or boats for the merchants arriving from Egypt on the south-west monsoon, before their return on the gentler North-East monsoon in December–January (Pliny, NH 6.26.106). The south-west monsoon of the outward journey was characterized by rough winds and heavy rain. Arrival on the west coast of India before September, when the winds slacken, was dangerous and to be avoided. The ships could well have suffered from storm damage as well as the depredations of pirates, mentioned in both Tamil and Classical literature (Pliny, NH 6.26.101). The following weeks in port would have provided a
convenient pause, not just for acquiring and loading cargo, but also to make good any damage before the less arduous return journey to Egypt. That this may provide a context for the cotton sails from Berenike is not beyond the bounds of possibility.
Acknowledgements The Society of Antiquaries of London, the British Academy, the Pasold Research Fund and the G. A. Wainwright Near Eastern Archaeological Fund have all kindly provided travel grants to enable the authors to work at Berenike over five seasons. The Directors of the Berenike Project, Professor S. E. Sidebotham and Professor W. Z. Wendrich gave every practical assistance. The authors are particularly indebted to Dr Dierdre Emmons of the Muse´ um d’Histoire Naturelle de Lyon for allowing them to study in detail the sail fragments from the museum’s collection.
References Bagnall, R. S., Helms, C. & Verhoogt, A. M. F. W., 2000, Documents from Berenike Volume I: Greek Ostraka from the 1996–1998 Seasons. Papyrologica Bruxellensia, Fondation Egyptologique Reine Elizabeth. Brussels. Begley, V. & Tomber, R. S., 1999, Indian pottery sherds. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1997. Report of the 1997 Excavations at Berenike and the Survey of the Egyptian Eastern Desert, including Excavations at Shenshef, 161–181. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Black, E. & Samuel, D., 1991, What were sails made of? MM, 77: 217–226. Black, E, & Samuel, D., 1992, Ancient sails. Archaeological Textiles Newsletter, 14: 9. Bu¨ low-Jacobsen, A., 1998, Traffic on the roads between Coptos and the Red Sea. In O. E. Kaper (Ed.), Life on the Fringe. Living in the Southern Egyptian Deserts during the Roman and early-Byzantine Periods, 63–77. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Cappers, R. T. J., 1998a, Archaeobotanical remains. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1996. Report of the 1996 Excavations at Berenike (Egyptian Red Sea Coast) and the Survey of the Eastern Desert,, 289–330. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Cappers, R. T. J., 1998b, A botanical contribution to the analysis of subsistence and trade at Berenike (Red Sea Coast, Egypt). In O. E. Kaper (Ed.), Life on the Fringe. Living in the Southern Egyptian Deserts during the Roman and early-Byzantine Periods, 75–85. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Casson, L., 1971, Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton. Casson, L., 1989, The Periplus Maris Erythraei. Princeton. Comfort, H., 1991, Terra Sigillata at Arikamedu. In V. Begley & R. D. De Puma (Eds), Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade, 134–150. Wisconsin. Daremberg, C. V. & Saglio, M. E., 1877–1919, Dictionnaire des Antiquite´s Grecques et Romaines. Paris. De Romanis, F., 1997, Rome and the No´tia of India: relations between Rome and Southern India from 30 BC to the Flavian Period. In F. De Romanis & A. Tchernia (Eds), Crossings. Early Mediterranean Contacts with India, 80–160. New Delhi. Francis, P., 2000, Human adornments. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1998. Report of the 1998 Excavations at Berenike and the Survey of the Eastern Desert, 211–225. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Graefe, R., 1979, Vela Erunt: Die Zeltda¨cher der ro¨mischen Theater und a¨hnlicher Anlagen, Mainz. Kartunen, K., 1997, India and the Hellenistic World. Studia Orientalia, 83. Helsinki. Mahadevan, I., 1996, Tamil-Brahmi Graffito. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1995. Preliminary Report of the 1995 Excavations at Berenike (Egyptian Red Sea Coast) and the survey of the Eastern Desert, 205–208.Research School CNWS, Leiden. Peka´ ry, I., 1999, Repertorium der hellenistischen und ro¨ mischen Schiffsdarstellungen. Boreas, Beiheft 8. Mu¨ nster. Pferdehirt, B., 1995, Das Museum fu¨r Antike Schiffahrt. Ein Forschungsbereich des Ro¨misch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums. Mainz. Richard, F., 1988, Les Souverains en ‘Theoi Epibaterioi’. Cahiers d’Histoire, XXXIII, 3–4: 441–452. 219
NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 30.2 Rivet, A. L. F. & Smith, C., 1979, The Place-Names of Roman Britain. London. Roberts, O. T. P., 1993, The sailing rig of Olympias. In T. Shaw (Ed.), The Trireme Project: Operational Experience 1987–90, Lessons Learnt, 29–38. Oxford. Rouge´ , J, 1987, La Momie contenait-elle les fragments d’une voile? Nouvelles Archives du Muse´ um d’Histoire Naturelle de Lyon, 25: 91–96. Schlingloff, D., 1988, Studies in the Ajanta Paintings: Identifications and Interpretations. Delhi. Schoeffer, M., Cotta, D. & Beentjes, A., 1987, Les Etoffes de Rembourrage: du Chiffon au Veˆ tement et a` la Voile de Bateau. Nouvelles Archives du Muse´um d’Histoire Naturelle de Lyon, 25: 77–80. Sidebotham, S. E., 1995, Historical Sources. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1994. Preliminary Report of the 1994 Excavations at Berenike (Egyptian Red Sea Coast) and the Survey of the Eastern Desert, 5–11. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Thapar, R., 1997, Early Mediterranean Contacts with India: An Overview. In F. De Romanis & A. Tchernia (Eds), Crossings. Early Mediterranean Contacts with India, 11–40. New Delhi. Tomber, R., 2000, Indo-Roman trade: the ceramic evidence from Egypt. Antiquity, 74: 624–631. Vermeeren, C. E., 1999, Wood and charcoal. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1997. Report of the 1997 Excavations at Berenike and the Survey of the Egyptian Eastern Desert including Excavations at Shenshef, 307–324. Research School CNWS, Leiden. Weski, T., 1997, Review of Pferdehirt (1995). IJNA, 26: 89–90. Wheeler, R. E. M., Ghosh, A. & Deva, K., 1946, Arikamedu. An Indo-Roman trading station on the east coast of India. Ancient India, 2: 17–124. Wild, J. P., 1997, Cotton in Roman Egypt: Some problems of origin. Al-Rafidan, 18: 287–298. Wild, J. P. & Wild, F., 2000, The textiles. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (Eds), Berenike 1998, Report of the 1998 Excavations at Berenike and the survey of the Eastern Desert, 251–274. Research School CNWS, Leiden.
220