Maritime Trade

Goods brought back from Punt via Mersa/Wadi Gawasis (Whitewright 2019)

-aromatics, namely myrrh and frankincense from textual sources

-in contrast to other Egyptian seafaring expeditions which were primarily concerned with raw materials (eg Levantine cedar for shipbuilding)

-also found ebony, obsidian, foreign pottery wares (Bard and Fattovich 2015)

Mersa/Wadi Gawasis Frequency of Use (Bard and Fattovich 2015)

-textual evidence: used in Middle Kingdom for at (approx 400 years) for at least 10-15 seafaring expeditions

-consistent with number of ceremonial structures

Liminality of the sea (Monroe 2011)

-anthropological concept of liminality from Turner (1974): liminality as space of anti-structure where liminal agent is ambiguous and dangerous yet uniquely powerful due to removal of strong confining social structures

-LBA sea people people gained power through destabilizing nature of unpredictability, exploitation of such risk/unpredictability, and existence neither here nor there

Egyptian Boat Types (Ward 2016)

-Imported cedar from Lebanon, big import/readily available

-unlike other cultures built of thick planks fastened by pegless mortise-and-tenon joints

-Boats at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis very similar to Nile Craft so prob built on Nile and then carried across Desert disassembled

-unique Egyptian design and construction techniques successful both on the Nile and at sea

Multicultural Nature of Mersa/Wadi Gawasis (Bard and Fattovich 2015)

-Middle Nubian and Canaanite ceramics suggest Nubian and Levantine workers/sailors may have participated

-domestic ware from Yemen and Eritrea

-evidence of African ebony and obsidian from Eritrea

Mersa/Wadi Gawasis (Bard and Fattovich 2015)

-identified with Middle Kingdom harbor of Saww where seafaring expeditions sent to Punt

-debris incl food supplies, coils of work, workshop for carpentry (reassembling and dissassembling boats)

-ceramics associated with later 12th Dynasty

-indicated Ancient Egyptians capable of seafare as far as Southern Red Sea using ships up to 30 m long, sophisticated technology

Mesopotamian boats: Structure (Bagg 2017)

-vessels made of reed and wood, composite vessels said to be seaworthy as well

-caulked with bitumen

-stitching way in which wooden elements often connected

-no unequivocal evidence for masts and sails but must have been used for seafaring

Mesopotamian boats: textual evidence (Bagg 2017)

-Ur III period: great number of texts regarding procedures and transactions related to boats, delivery notes about shipping of grain

-Control of ships and maritime trade big point of pride for Mesopotamian Kings

-proverbs emphasizing dangers of maritime trade

-no written info on sea routes themselves

Trade in Mesopotamia (Bagg 2017)

-Maritime trade essential to economies of the cities along Euphrates and Tigris

-commercial ties with coastal communities around Arabian Gulf incl Bahrain, Oman, and Indus Valley

-source of foreign goods

Uluburun Shipwreck Route (Bachhuber 2006)

-Near Eastern anchor type likely provenance of boat

-possibly Syro-Palestinian origin based on goods aboard

-last port of call Cyprus based on pottery, oil, pomegranates, and copper

-on way towards Aegean destination

Commercial actors (Zangani 2016)

-Ugarit: goods delivered to royals by non-royal private actors who played a role in faciliating international exchange

-”entrepreneurial class”, present in other urban areas, mediated relations of trade

-thus Uluburun not state-run or private but combo: explains mix of luxury items and raw materials

Theory of Exchange in LBA Eastern Mediterranean (Zangani 2016)

-reciprocal trade of ‘gifts, usually luxury items, between urban elite

-attempt to create diplomatic networks

-competitive manner, seeking recognition as the “great king”

Pointless exchange (Liverani 1979)

-in Amarna letters governor of city in Cyprus speaks of sending ivory to Egypt while requesting Egyptian ivory in the same letter

-as neither party benefits from exchange must be a reason other than economic exchange

Uluburun Shipwreck Cargo: raw materials (Bachhuber 2006)

-10 tons of copper and est ton of tin, fits ratio for bronze production

-other raw materials like glass, resin, ivory, ebony

-not finished luxury goods but still should not be excluded from gift exchange relations

Uluburun Shipwreck crew: Evidence (Bachhuber 2006)

-pairing of ornamental and utilitarian personal objects of Aegean manufacture

-points to two men of Aegean/Mycenaean origin on board (among crew of 2-3)

-however tenuous assumption

Uluburun shipwreck cargo provenance (Bachhuber 2006)

-most pottery of Near Eastern origin but some Aegean, more use wear

-canaanite jars of resin, olives, and glass beads prob from Syro-Palestinian port

-cypriot pithoi of oil, pomegranates, pottery, and copper= Cyprus may have been one of last ports of call

-anchors of Near Eastern origin

Uluburun shipwreck context (Bachhuber 2006)

-shipwrecked off Lycian coast (modern day Turkey)

-dates to late 14th century BCE/Amarna period

Olives in Amarna (Kelder 2009)

-estimated 1500-2000 Mycenaean sherds uncovered

-mostly stirrup jars used to contain liquid

-primarily in central city (royals/court) but not in temple

Olives in Amarna: Implications (Kelder 2009)

-first olive imagery in Egypt contemporaneous with widespread introduction of Mycenaean pottery

-associated with royal elites eg Tutankhamun’s sarcophagus

-procurement of large quantities of ‘exotic’ goods like non-native olive as display of wealth and international power

Rochelongue Underwater Site (Aragón et al. 2022)

-Early Iron Age (7th-6th century BC) southwest France

-unclear exactly what site is, many think shipwreck, others ritual deposit

-large deposit of copper ingots and other finished and unfinished items of local and foreign origin

-did elemental and lead isotope analysis from selection of ingots

-found that ingots had Iberian, Alpine and possibly Mediterranean origins

-Williams et al. (2025): tin ingots likely from Britain, eg Cornwall and Devon

Rochelongue context (Aragón et al. 2022)

-by at least 8th century BCE seafaring people from Levant, Aegean, and Greek mainland also established coastal settlements in western Mediterranean

-indigenous societies experienced transformative changes in their social hierarchies

-maritime interlopers gained access to minerometallic and other natural resources, indigenous elites gained access to foreign prestige goods and control over trade

-importance of imported Phoenician ceramics or local imitations in funerary contexts, not only in areas with an established Phoenician presence

Uluburun cargo connection with Amarna Letters (Zangani 2016)

-Amarna letters: diplomatic clay tablets consisting of diplomatic correspondence between Egyptian elite and those of other Eastern Mediterranean areas

-date to mid-14th century BCE

-contain details of gift exchange of goods very similar to the context of the Uluburun shipwreck

-led to interpretation of trade as generally diplomatic in nature

-however: no mention of the Aegean in the letters, Zangani questions this interpretation