The Achaemenid pottery

CHAPTER 11 THE ACHAEMENID MATERIAL By DAVID FLEMING 1 INTRODUCTION andahar was one of the major centres of the Achaemenid empire and amongst the largest imperial sites east of the core area of the Achaemenid kingdom in south-western Iran. To understand the development of the eastern empire, a region which was not intimately known to the Greeks and the Babylonians and, therefore, not well described in their written records, one must concentrate upon archaeological evidence. Until the excavations at Kandahar there was practically nothing of value for such an examination, since the few excavations which had taken place in the region were either of earlier sites whose major material sequences ended before the mid-first millennium B.C., or of sites dating from the subsequent historical periods. With the material from Kandahar, one can begin to trace what happened politically and materially in the eastern Iranian region before the Greek and Mauryan invasions. The following discussion will consider the evidence of the earliest pottery from Kandahar (the architecture and other archaeological material is covered elsewhere in this volume), and comparative material from other sites. K THE OLD CITY AT KANDAHAR The major occupation of Kandahar began in the mid-first millennium B.C. and continued (albeit with interruptions) until A.D. 1738 when the town was destroyed by Nadir Shah. The massiveness of the architectural remains, the height of the water table, and the depth of deposit prevented detailed horizontal exposure of the lowest levels of the site. There was, therefore, no examination of an apparent Bronze Age occupation of the site that was deduced from the presence of Mundigak IV sherds collected by Casal (now in the Kabul Museum; see Ball 1982: 145-7, as well as a residual sherd from Site F: Fig. 137: 12). The excavations at Kandahar (McNicoll 1978; Whitehouse 1978; Helms 1979 and 1982) are of extraordinary importance for the archaeology of South Asia from the middle of the first millennium B.C., since they have provided the first properly stratified ceramic types for that period. The number of separate types recovered in the excavations is far in excess of any other excavations in the area, and the stratigraphic principles on which the classification was conducted gives the corpus a validity which extends into the surrounding area. An historical point here is that the Old City at Kandahar was an enormous fortress whose walls were undoubtedly heavier than was strictly necessary to oppose any conceivable local foe in the region. This would probably have resulted from the fact that for at least some of its existence Kandahar would have been the major south-eastern frontier post of the Achaemenid empire; the conquest of Sind by Darius I after 519 B.C. would have placed the eastern frontier on the Indus rather than in the hills east of Kandahar (Fleming 1982a), but initially the city would have had to serve as the centre for frontier administration as well as the local district capital, and the great walls would have been as much for show as for defence, a physical demonstration of the power of the empire I took part in the 1978 season of excavations at Kandahar, and therefore had no direct experience of working with Anthony McNicoll. However, in 1981 I met Tony at Oxford University, where I was completing a D.Phil. thesis on the archaeology of the eastern Achaemenid empire, and he offered me the early ceramics from Kandahar to form part of the material I could use. In the end, the Kandahar pottery became one of the most important sources of information I had and helped me form some of the most decisive conclusions of my work, which was accepted by the Oriental Studies Faculty of Oxford University in 1982 under the title "Pottery of the mid-first millennium B.C. on the Iranian plateau and in neighbouring regions". All those who knew Tony would recognize this gift as a typically generous gesture, intended to help a younger scholar at a crucial point in his career. I therefore dedicate these remarks to the memory of Tony McNicoll, whose untimely death has robbed archaeology of one of its most effective and gentlemanly practitioners. Excavations at Kandahar confirmed in Site D that the lower level reached in a trench within the wall was composed of the same hard rammed earth that made up the Whitehouse Period II construction in his cut (layer 1.37). The height of the water table prevented deeper digging here, but the earlier pottery in Sites D and H seems to relate in stratigraphic terms to Period II and not to Period I, so that there has not been any exposure away from the walls of the earliest levels on the site as a whole. The excavations did not reveal any specific domestic architecture, as the only building found was that of Site H (Chapter 7), which was seemingly too massive to have been a house. The following discussion will begin with an evaluation of the ceramics from Site C, and will then consider pottery from Sites D and H of the McNicoll excavations of 1975. that would have compared very favourably with whatever had been there before. There is, as a result of these various excavations, a- corpus of pottery shapes that is stratigraphically secure and attributable to the period of pre-Hellenistic (on the evidence of the coins) occupation of Kandahar. The exact correspondence of the material from the Citadel trenches (in Helms' excavations; see Helms 1979) to that from the fortifications and the other trenches across the site shows that the construction of the second, major phase of the encircling walls and towers was a product of the Achaemenid occupation; but one also notes that the initial construction of the walls at Kandahar is to be dated before the construction of the Citadel and, therefore, probably to before the initial Achaemenid Persian occupation of the site. The earliest pottery at Kandahar is extremely important here, as it will compare with material from the end of the Mundigak VII settlement. Site C The earliest vessels recovered from Site C are related by Whitehouse broadly to those of Mundigak VI (Chapter 2). The carinated bowls are more of the "Iranian" design with a relatively high carination and a vertical or slightly inturned upper profile, as opposed to the more specifically "Indian" carination I describe below that is more sharply inturned. This early Kandahar pottery is marked by simplicity of form and lack of decoration or embellishment; even the few painted pieces (Fig. 48: 155-160) are very simply marked and have none of the elaboration seen in Mundigak IVY or Pirak II. This simplification, when coupled with the late marker of the mixture of grey and red wares found in Period I at Site C, would show that the earliest Kandahar pottery is not made until well into the first half of the first millennium B.C. or even at mid-millennium. Large jars from Site C are very little differentiated (Fig. 4 7): there is little variety in rim form or in the apparent proportionate diameter of the mouth relative to the maximum diameter of the whole vessel. This suggests that, even at this stage, the large jars were being produced in standardized fashion. Such an increase in the prevalence of nonindividual artifact production may have been a result of the obvious concentration of settlement within the walls and a decrease in small-scale generalized manufactures that would have accompanied the centralization of economic resources in the town. Few of the large jars are provided with more than a vestigial neck, and elaboration of the rim is confined to sharp lips and an occasional internal ridge within the mouth (Fig. 47: 135) which may have been the seating for a lid. Small The early pottery from Kandahar The excavations of Whitehouse and Helms ( 1978 and 1982) have concentrated upon the provision of a detailed stratigraphic sequence of the site's occupation by cutting through the eastern wall of the town. McNicoll's excavations in Sites D and H have broadly confirmed the sequence of settlement on the site as a whole, although McNicoll did not record the initial level that was recovered by Whitehouse at the foot of his cutting, and by Helms (1979: 7; 1982: 11) at the base of the great trench in the NE Area. This was probably because his trenches were placed in areas that would not necessarily have had the concentration of activity which was noticeable at the wall and rampart. Whitehouse (Chapter 2) records that the initial construction of walling at Kandahar (apart from an ephemeral pre-rampart phase) was a clay rampart that was replaced without break by a wall of pakhsa or rammed earth built in casemates. This is broadly the nature of the cut by Helms in his NE Area (1979: Fig. 1), and the conclusion reached there was that the two different stages of construction were not separated by any appreciable time. In both these areas the pakhsa continued to in use for some time and was only replaced gradually by a mud brick wall in Period III. Whitehouse's Periods IV and V were later and do not concern us here: in any case the remains of his Period V were very fragmentary due to erosion and the destruction of Kandahar by Nadir Shah. McNicoll's excavations have corroborated the material sequence for the early periods at least, and 366 The Achaemenid Material Islamic graves that contaminated the levels and rendered the stratigraphy of at least some of this site unreliable. It has, therefore, been necessary to examine the pottery notes for Site H carefully and to strike out those layers in which glazed Islamic sherds were found. This has meant that only the pottery from the lower layers may be considered initially for the discussion of parallels and external relations. The layers of Site H which were contaminated with glazed Islamic sherds were: jars are the amorphously simple sort seen at Nad-i Ali, Mundigak VI and Tepe Yahya Period II that is a western rather than an eastern shape. 2 Despite the number of separate forms presented, there is little variation within the few types found at Site C. The overall impression is that of a local set of usages that is part of the same general pattern as those recovered at Mundigak VI-VII, but slightly later and influenced by western Iranian elements. This continues into Period II at Site C, which is separated from Period I stratigraphically rather than by gross differences in material. Period II at Site C sees the introduction of certain vessel forms that are also found in the lowest levels of Sites D and H, and which would firmly date these earliest levels to Period II or the phase of major construction of the town walls. The majority of vessel forms of Site C Period II continues earlier usages, but there is also the first instance of the more specifically Iranian carination described below in which the vessel profile above the point of carination flares outward rather than curving inward (Fig. 49: 162). There are numerous shallow vessels in the collection from Site C Period II, but it is not possible to tell from these fragmentary examples whether there is any increase in proportionate vessel shallowness in Period II over Period I. There is relatively little overlap between the pottery of the early levels; the earliest pottery from the 1975 trenches is more or less equivalent to that from Site C Period II, or the period of major construction on the site. In the areas that were excavated by McNicoll there are no indications of the first occupation that was found by Whitehouse and Helms: the very much simpler rampart which preceded the main rampart construction. The pottery recovered in McNicoll's excavations supports the more Iranian identification of the pottery of the second major phase on the site and tentatively confirms the historical reconstruction that makes the second major occupation of Kandahar that of the western Achaemenid Persians. H (Y) 541.2, 541.3. H (Z) 501.1, 501.2, 501.3; 503.2; 505.1, 505.2. 502.2; Layers whose contents were not mixed (so far as one may tell from the site notes) were: H (Y) 543. H (Z) 501.4, 501.5, 501.6. H (Z) 504.1, 504.2. Of these, 501.4-6 were deposits below 501.1-3 that were not cut into by graves and should be safe (Fig. 177). It does not appear certain from the notes that the layers 501.4-5 were floors, since they were described merely as "stony grey-brown" without further qualification. Layer 501.6 within Room 2 of the building (Fig. 179, the room at top right) was a "floor deposit" that was also "above floors"; the height of the water table on the site as a whole prevented very deep exploration to virgin soil and in McNicoll's sites prevented reaching the early levels found in Whitehouse's and Helms' deepest cuts. The great thickness of the walls of the building on Site H (at least I .50m, Fig. 178) and the peculiar construction of interconnecting passageways would suggest that the building was not a domestic structure, although its real use is still not known. Finding graves cut deep into it indicates that there was no great depth of overburden on the structure after its disuse. Layers 504.1-2 were not mixed by graves; they were within a room built of pakhsa, plastered with mud, and with floors of stony brown soil. Layer H (Y) 543 was below 541 and 542; the upper two of these layers were contaminated by pitting and later trenching, but the lowest, H (Y) 543, was not noticeably mixed and pottery from it is probably safe. Site D (Fig. 59 for a section of the deep sounding) was in the southern portion of the town and did not reveal any significant architectural remains of the Achaemenid period. It was, by contrast with Site H, a deep excavation of nearly nine metres, and the lowest layers were not contaminated in any way. The lowest layers, D 1.37-1.35, were sealed by an erosion layer that was probably destruction Pottery from Sites H and D The location of Sites H and D is shown on the site map (Fig. 2). Site H yielded a large pakhsa structure and Site D a platform. Work in Site H was complicated by the presence in the upper layers of 2 502.1, Dales 1977: pl. 13 Type Al; Casal 1961: Fig. 123.658-9; Lamberg-Karlovsky 1972: Fig. 1.Q. Eastern jars of this sort often had proportionately narrower necks, most obviously at Taxila-Bhir Mound (Sharif 1969: Fig. 13.9, 9a, 9b), although little more can be said about it. 367 ._ Excavations at Kandahar not duplicated at Site D, although a similar form is that in Fig 273:7 (fine ware from D 1.34), - early in the occupation of that part of the site. Otherwise, the occurrences of carinated shallow bowls at Site H are of regular minimally-differentiated designs that show that the production of these utilitarian vessels was probably broadly standardized. Where it is possible to see the whole profile one finds that these carinated bowls are flat-bottomed (Figs 269: 13, 273:5) and without elaborate rim forms. The markedly sharper and more shallow carination found on Site F layer 281 .8 (Fig 136:7) is more in the later Iranian matter than the earlier, western Iranian Iron Age Ill-IV forms. This sort of carination is like that seen at Tureng Tepe (Deshayes 1979: 33 Fig. 3), and McNicoll (1978: 53) has compared it to a form from the Central Asian site of Yaz Tepe, near Merv. It may have been a usage found more usually in Central Asia. One example of this was also recovered from Site H 501.4, Fig. 270:1; this layer was one of the safer late layers of Site H, which perhaps correlates with the finding from Site F in a layer that was similarly later than the first occupation there (Chapter 5, Fig. 121, trenches V-W, layer 281.8). A small bowl whose outline recalls metalwork from western Iran of the earlier first millennium B.C. was found in Site H (Z) 501.5 (Fig. 270:2). This vessel has the more angular transitions in the profile that have been noticed in metalwork from western Iran (Moorey I 971: Fig. 2 I .497), although one cannot say in this instance whether the inspiration had a western source. The carination of Fig. 270:3 from Site H (Z) 501.4 similarly recalls metalworking, but it also illustrates the development of the sharply curved upper profile that reached its most pronounced form in the later shallow bowls from Balambat (Dani 1967: Fig. 53.9, red ware), rather than in purely Iranian shapes. Kandahar's location on one of the major routes to the Indian subcontinent would have ensured that occasional artistic influences passed through the city. Plain carinated bowls are less frequent in the lower layers from Site D (Figs. 272: 9-13; 273: 112; 274: 4-9). Those shown in Fig. 272:9-13 are of the same basic design as those already discussed from Site H, but in Fig. 273: 2-5 one sees examples of more exotic carinated bowls for which I have not been able to find noticeable parallels in the contemporaneous Indian corpora, or in the Painted Grey Ware assemblage from Hastinapura in northern India. The profile of Fig. 273:2 from D 1.32 is one that is strongly reminiscent of metal forms in the regularity of thickness of the vessel wall, while the profile of Fig. 273:4 from D 1.28 is and post-destruction accumulation in layers D 1.341.32. The pakhsa platform was layer D 1.36, or one of the lowest in the trench and probably contemporaneous with other early structures on the site such as the fortifications and Citadel of Helms' "second fortified town" (Helms 1979: 7) and the building in Site H. What is not clear from the two excavations is the relationship between the platform of D 1.36 and the pakhsa of Site C: it would seem more probable, on the basis of the other stated relationships, to equate D 1.36 with Site C's Period II casemate, rather than the Period Ia revetment. The pottery from Site D would certainly suggest that the earliest levels in Site D are part of the same period of ceramic use as Period II. Layers D 1.31-1.28 were not well defined, and to some degree merged into the layers below and above. Layer D 1.28 was a band of rubble and general accumulation that was sealed by the material of the subsequent third occupation. There was no noticeable difference between the ceramics of layers D 1.37-1 .32 and those of D 1.31-1.30, and I have treated them together in the study outlined below. Layer 1.28 may have dated from the occupation that succeeded the first major occupation on the site; I shall comment on pottery from this layer as I come to them, in order to show whether they were related to the earlier levels, or to subsequent ones. The earliest vessels from Site H are shown in Figs. 192 & 193. Their basic details (find-spot, catalogue number, and technical description) are listed with accompanying catalogue. 3 The shallow carinated bowls (Figs. 269-70: 1-6) from Site H are mostly within the set that was marked by a flared profile above the carination, first found at Kandahar by Whitehouse in his Period II, and which I note below as an Iranian rather than an Indian feature. The Site H carinated vessels (Fig. 193) exhibit this same outward flare in the earliest material noted in his excavations. There are, however, certain of the Site H vessels that show features that are more immediately like those of contemporaneous Indian collections, in particular Fig. 269: 2&4, in which the shallow bowls are marked by incurved sides in the manner of vessels found at Hastinapura in India (Thapar I 954-55: 48 Fig. 12.XXVI). Both of these bowls were found in the deepest level of Site H, layer H 501.6; they are 3 The initial descriptions of these vessels were compiled by Lady Margaret Wheeler, and while most of the ware descriptions are self-explanatory, those described as "Category [ 1-8]" are various grades of plain red wares of good quality and clean manufacture. All the vessels were wheel-made, and many were painted to some extent, although the paint was always simple in design and never particularly obtrusive in colour. 368 The Achaemenid Material profiles and in two cases (Figs 271 :2; 276: 9) have bevelled rims. The vessel Fig. 271: 12 was provided with spouts through the profile wall, although the utility of these is unclear, especially as the base of the vessel is missing. This form does not appear to have any noticeable external parallels and did not continue to be made in subsequent occupations. The quantity of jars, or closed vessels of all sorts, was considerable in all the excavated parts of the site and continued throughout the various occupations. Large jars - those with a rim diameter of more than 20cm - have short or vestigial necks, while the smaller jars begin to develop the taller necks seen both in Iran and the northern Indus region. In one case (Fig 270:14 from H (Z) 501.5) there remains the lower portion of a jar profile with its base, which is the only indication one has of the probable form of many of the smaller jars. Whether the small jars often had the upright necks, as seen in Fig 270: 18, is not certain; certainly, few of the large jars have the elaborate neck forms seen in Fig. 270: 19. Far more typical of the jar neck or rim forms are those of Figs. 271: 13-15; 272: 1 & 2, 68; 275: 6-14; 276: 1-3, and the very large jar rim Fig. 277: I, that recall the early form from Whitehouse's Period I (Figs 46 & 47). The large jars are by their intrinsic nature not very elaborate or distinctive; the slightly varied rim forms are obviously designed to provide a seating for fastening a cloth or leather cover over the mouth, but beyond that there seems to be little attempt to modify the form of a hollow pottery sphere that held solids or liquids. The jar shown in Fig. 271: 13 is provided with lug handles, but this is the only jar so treated and the handles do not appear to have been very practical. Whether jars were ever provided with pottery lids is not clear: the form shown in Fig. 272: 5 may have been a lid that could be inverted over the mouth of a large vessel, but the lack of a complete profile of this piece prevents one from seeing whether there was a handle in the centre. There are very few of the small jars with relatively tall and narrow necks in the material from early Kandahar. This design is common in contemporaneous assemblages from the Iranian plateau (see especially Stronach 1978: Fig. 117.6, 10) and from sites in the northern Indus region (Taxila, Bhir Mound, Marshall 1951: 402-403), but is not attested in any amount at Kandahar until the later part of the first millennium B.C. Surface decoration apart from paint is rare, and usually consists of concentric incised lines in the outer profile (Figs 270: 14; 271: 15; 272: 7; 274: 3; 277: 8). In one instance a wavy line is incised around a jar (Fig. 274: 1) in the manner seen at something of a grotesque that bears no resemblance to other vessels from Kandahar and is in any case probably somewhat later4 . From Site D 1.34 comes one example of a bowl with multiple carinations (Fig 274:6) of the sort found at Nad-i Ali (Dales 1977: Pl. 21.2-5) and Dahan-i Ghulaman (Sceratto 1966: 29 Fig. 61 ), as well as from Site F (W) at Kandahar (Fig. 137:3). This usage seems to have been an older practice that died out by the end of the period under review (Fleming I 982b: 138); certainly, the example from Site F (W) at Kandahar comes from a layer at the bottom of that trench (Fig. 121 ), and it does not occur in the later material from either Whitehouse's or McNicoll's excavations. The only example recorded by Whitehouse (Fig. 56: 308) is from an accumulation layer in the main ditch. Uncarinated bowls are usually of undistinguished profile that is too simple to ascribe confidently to any particular source. By their stratigraphic location such vessels as Fig 270: 4-6, Fig. 273: 14 are all products of the earliest large urban complex at Kandahar (Whitehouse's and Helms' Period II), but are not distinctive in any way. The only unusual feature of the shallow bowls of simple profile is the occasional presence of radial burnishing in the bowl's interior (Figs. 192:2 & 194:52 both from H (Z) 501.6, and 5.25.G, 999): I have not found examples of radial burnishing elsewhere, and it does not continue long into later periods. It may be the technical predecessor of the subsequent Spiral Burnish (Chapter I, above), since it shows that potters were experimenting with a method of decoration that relied on the contrasting colours of ware and slip, but radial burnishing would not have been produced in the same manner and would not have been a result of treatment on a potter's wheel. The profile of Fig. 271: I is unique in the examples recovered in the 1975 season. Other examples of this form of elaborately clubbed rim cannot be found in lran 5 or in the northern Indus region that date to this period. This elaboration of the rim is a practice found in later pottery from Kandahar, and it may be that this particular piece is a stray from the later layers of Site H. 6 On both Sites D and H the excavations revealed several large coarse flared bowls or basins. These basins (Figs 271: 11, 12; 276: 8, 9) are apparently uncarinated, undecorated vessels with very simple 4 5 6 A similar form occurs at Site F from a mixed Saka/IndoParthian context. See Fig. 149: 4, Chapter 5. Such rims were found in the west, in Iran (Fleming I 982b: 130). Such clubbed rims might be Saka. E.g., see Figs 145: 4,147: 13 and 148: JO from Site F (Chapter 5). 369 --------- Excavations at Kandahar Balambat (Fleming I 982b: Fig 5.6.A) and on Saka period jars from Kandahar (Fig. 148), but this treatment is apparently very rare. One has the impression that little time was wasted decorating utilitarian pottery. Other surface treatment is uncommon, and very few of the early vessels from Sites D and H are decorated with any applied features, or any elaboration of the rim or profile. Apart from sporadic use of surface incisions mentioned above, the only cutting into an outer profile is that shown in Fig. 277: 3, from the possibly later layer D 1.28: this possibly later attribution of the layer is supported by finding an elaborate applied handle on the same vessel. None of the pottery from the early layers shows any elaboration of the plain vessel forms, which further emphasises the utilitarian nature of this pottery. In subsequent periods there was much more luxurious pottery, but the initial production was of plain useful pieces. It is also clear that in the second major period of occupation at Kandahar the identifiable external influences are traced to the Iranian plateau, rather than to the Indian subcontinent. It would in this case support the historical conclusion that the second major settlement at Kandahar was politically linked to the western Iranian Achaemenid Persians, and that the production of more western pottery designs may be due to the deliberate reproduction of foreign designs as a facet of an extension of political rule (Fleming l 982b: 26-28). Although even this would not have been pure "Achaemenid pottery", it would certainly have been "pottery produced in a period of Achaemenid political domination"; it is inconceivable to me that the site of Kandahar in the sixth to fourth centuries B.C. could have been anything but Achaemenid and run by Achaemenid administrators, whatever the local population was. Kandahar is the only excavated site between Seistan and the northern Indus region that has yielded evidence of a western Iranian settlement south of the Hindu Kush in the mid-first millennium B.C. Its pottery will serve as the basis for all subsequent work in the region, and has provided the first comprehensive collection of ceramics for comparative purposes. Conclusion One concludes that the pottery excavated in 1974 and 1975 at Kandahar was, initially at least, intended simply to be a collection of utilitarian vessels used for the daily purposes of the town's populace. The repetitive nature of many of the vessel forms shows that the designs of the various pieces are more or less standardised, and were probably being made by full-time potters in workshops, rather than by individuals as required. 370 The Achaemenid Material POTTERY CATALOGUE Figures 269 to 277 are from Sites H and D of the 1975 excavations (A few have been repeated in the relevant pottery catalogues to Sites D, F and H Chapters 3, 5 and 7 - but rather than introduce complicated cross-referencing, are repeated here for the convenience of the reader). The conventions for the listings of the individual shapes are: been disturbed by intrusive burials of early Islamic and (possibly) Sasanian date, so that the ceramics recovered from these levels could not be relied upon. The lower levels were (at least on the basis of the trench notebooks) not mixed (see Chapter 7). All the Kandahar pottery is wheel-made unless otherwise noted. Ware types (from Wheeler's notes): Trench/locus/area/layer/drawing number/sherd number Red Medium: well-levigated, fired to a metallic finish, red paste. Sometimes red slipped and burnished. Red Medium 2: the same, but painted brown. Red Medium 3: the same, with a cream slip outside. Red Fine 2 and 3: the same paste as Red Medium 2 and 3, but finer. Painted purplish-brown; the paste can be very dark and sometimes black. Crude Red Painted: an early version of Red Medium. The ware and fabric descriptions were devised by Lady Margaret Wheeler to describe the bulk of the pottery. Only those sherds recovered from apparently stratigraphically secure contexts have been included in this catalogue, since they are to be used for dating as well as for material comparisons. Site H was a small operation in the south-western portion of the Old City at Kandahar that was found to be a series of rooms within massive walls constructed of rammed earth: the upper levels had 371 Excavations at Kandahar Figure 269 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. H (Z) 501.2 92/1014. Bowl, black. Slightly flared, shallow carinated bowl. H (Z) 501.6 76/1301. Bowl, pale tan. Shallow bowl, carinated, inward sloping sides. H (Z) 501.4 XX/1007. Bowl, Category 4. Diameter uncertain. H (Z) 501.6 65/1052. Bowl, Category 5. Shallow carinated bowl, incurved sides. H (Z) 504.2 134/1257. Bowl, Category 5 Coarse. Shallow carinated bowl, slightly flared sides. H (Z) 501.6 63/1287. Bowl, Category 5. Shallow carinated bowl, flared sides. H (Z) 501.6 6511286. Bowl, Category 5. Shallow carinated bowl.nearly vertical sides. H (Z) 501.4 XX/1025. Bowl, Category 7. Shallow carinated bowl, nearly vertical sides. H (Z) 501.6 133/1284. Bowl, Category 5. Shallow carinated bowl, slightly flared sides. H (Z) 501.4 XX/1274. Bowl, Category 7. Shallow carinated bowl, slightly flared sides. H (Z) 501.6 98/1058. Bowl, Red Fine 2. Shallow carinated bowl, slightly flared sides. H (Z) 501.5 9911280. Bowl, Red Fine 2. Slightly carinated bowl, deeper than 5. I 0 .A. H (Z) 504.2 63/1256. Bowl, Category 5. Flat-based, slightly flared, carinated bowl. H (Z) 504.1 XX/1292. Bowl, Category 8. Shallow carinated bowl. H (Z) 543.1 XX/1312. Bowl, Category 7. Sharply carinated bowl, slightly flared sides. H (Z) 504.1 68/1293. Bowl, Category 8. Carinated bowl, flared sides. H (Z) 501.5 XX/I 060. Bowl, Category 7. Wide carinated bowl, slightly flared sides. 372 The Achaemenid Material I , L l_J 3 b , \ 'C-· I 13 f- -- 7 'l 'l Ｙｾ＠ ｍｾ＠ '" \.- 16 J Ｇﾰｾ＠ -- 17 \ Fig. 269: Bowls from Site H. - J Excavations at Kandahar Figure 270 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. H (Z) 501.4 133/1015. Bowl, Crude Red Painted. Shallow carinated bowl, slightly flared sides. H (Z) 501.5 99/1269. Bowl, Category 4. Deep bowl, carinated and with flared rim. H (Z) 501.4 XX/1275. Bowl, Category 7 Coarse. Deep bowl, carinated and with everted rim. H (Z) 501.4 97/!009. Bowl, Red Fine 2. Shallow, slightly flared bowl. H (Z) 501.5 133/1265. Bowl, Category 5 Coarse. Flat based bowl decorated on the exterior with black paint. H (Z) 501.5 138/1318. Bowl, Category 4 Coarse. Outtumed rim, flat base. H (Z) 501.6 74/1056. Jar, Pale Tan. Slightly collared neck, flared rim. H (Z) 501.6 [number not recorded on original sherd drawing]. Slightly collared neck, flared rim with raised line on rim. H (Z) 501.5 61/1276. Jar, Grey Ware. Plain profile with slightly flared neck. H (Z) 501.5 86/1263. Jar, Sandy Burnished. Deep jar. H (Z) 501.4 75/1026. Bowl [sic], Pale Tan. Deep jar with slightly worked neck. H (Z) 501.4 59/1008. Jar, Buff Painted Black; paint around rim. Flared rim. H (Z) 501.6 491916. Jar, Red Fine 2. Globular body, collared neck with sharply flared rim. H (Z) 501.5 129/1264. Jar base, Sandy Buff Painted. Incised bands around body of vessel. H (Z) 501.4 125/1012. Jar, Sandy Buff Painted (brown). Short necked jar. H (Z) 501.5 127/1067. Jar, Sandy Buff Painted. Ornate rim, wide-mouthed jar. H (Z) 501.5 138/1270. Jar, Category 4. Sharply downturncd rim on wide-mouthed jar. H (Z) 501.4 7311013. Jar, pale Tan. Heavy rim, tall-necked vessel. H (Z) 501.4 134/1273. Large jar, Category 8 =Red Coarse Painted Red. Elaborate rim on large jar. 374 The Achaemenid Material ｾ＠ ")- '}-. ｭﾷＭｾ＠ Ｍｾ＠ ｲ･ｾＭ｜＠ ,,, n '"1 Ic 19 - -- Ｍｾ 1----------- 0...... cm i.....f w w 5 1,,,,,,,1 Fig. 270: Bowls and jars from Site H. Ｍｾ＠ Excavations at Kandahar Figure 271 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. I 0. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. H (Z) 501.4 133/912. Bowl, Coarse Red Painted. Shallow bowl with clubbed rim. H (Z) 501.5 83/1262. Bowl, Sandy Buff. Deep bowl with slight carination and flared sides. H (Z) 501.6 XX/1327. Bowl, Category 8. Shallow bowl of simple profile, slight band around exterior rim. H (Z) 501.4 127/1259. Bowl, Sandy Buff Painted. Deep bowl with slight interior bevel on rim. H (Z) 501.4 109/1027. Bowl, Category 4. Deep bowl, slightly carinated and with carinated sides. H (Z) 501.5 109/1028. Bowl, Coarse Red Painted. Deep bowl, slightly carinated and with incurved sides. H (Z) 501.5 136/1268. Bowl, Category 4 Coarse. Deep bowl, carinated and with incurved sides. H (Z) 501.5 84/84. Deep carinated bowl, with groove incised in upper outer profile. H (Z) 501.6 110/1285. Bowl, Category 4. Wide bowl, carinated. H (Z) 501.5 I 0911281. Bowl, Category 4. Plain profile wide bowl. H (Z) 504.2 112/1258. Bowl, Category 8 Coarse. Plain profile bowl with ledge rim. H (Z) 501.4 130/1064. Jar [sic), Red Coarse Painted Red. Shallow large basin with spouts through the fabric, bevelled rim. H (Z) 501.5 119/1265. Jar, Red Coarse. H (Z) 501.5 138/1271. Jar, category 4. H (Z) 501.5 XX/1065. Jar, Dark Coarse. 376 The Achaemenid Material Ｑｾ＠ 2\ 4 l\ 5( ｾＭＹ＠ I c ,, J I 7 ) I ........... ) l Ｂｾ＠ Ocrn5 ) I 6 I Ｍｾ＠ I 7 "l ) ) 7 12 ----·- '"». ,--··- r ;J - [:____ ----Ｍｾ＠ .·. ·.·.·.··;·..·:-··: .. ··· ... Ｍｾ＠ Fig. 2 71: Bowls and jars from Site H. ---- Excavations at Kandahar Fig. 272 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. H (Z) 501.4 110/914. Casserole [sic], Painted Cream. H (Z) 501.5 134/1064. Jar, Red Coarse Painted Red. H (Z) 501.4 XX/1016. Jar, Coarse Red Painted. H (Z) 501.4 61/1307 or 1006 [sic]. H (Z) 501.4 87/913. Lid, Sandy Biscuit. H (Z) 501.5 122/1282. Jar, Red Coarse 2. H (Z) 501.6 125/1066. Jar, Sandy Buff Painted. H (Z) 501.4 124/1005. Jar, Red Coarse 2. D 1.34 85/962. Bowl, Sandy Biscuit. D 1.32 60/1129. Bowl, Buff Painted Black. D 1.33 73/1101. Bowl, Category 8. D 1.32 XX/1128. Bowl, Red Fine 2. D 1.31 70N955. Bowl, Category 8. 378 ,- The Achaemenid Material \ - - ｾＳＱ｣ｭ＠ ｾＭｲＮ＠ t----] J )--· J I I ｾ＠ m / __ cm ............. w w 0 ｾ＠ 5 Fig. 272: Jars.from Site Hand bowls.from Site D. J ) Excavations at Kandahar Figure 273 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. I 0. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. D 1.32 64/906. Bowl, Category 5. D 1.32 XX/1141. Bowl, Category 4. D 1.34 XX/1123. Bowl, Category 8 Fine. D 1.28 115/729. Bowl, Red Medium Painted. D 1.30 132/908. Bowl, Coarse Red Painted. D 1.30 XX/911. Bowl, Crude Red Painted. D 1.34 XX/1124. Bowl, Category 8 Fine. D 1.28 63/1026. Bowl, Category 5. D 1.34 XX/ 1117. Bowl, Category 8. D 1.31 76/956. Bowl, Pale Tan. D 1.35 137/1151. Bowl, Category 6. D 1.30 61/999. Bowl, Grey Ware. D 1.28 XX/730. Bowl, Pale Tan. D 1.30 XX/1102. Bowl, Crude Red Painted. D 1.28 1261717. Bowl, Red Fine3. D 1.30 53/1163. Bowl, Crude Red Painted. D 1.34 XX/1105. Category 7. D 1.35 124/1144. Red Medium 2. D 1.35 XX/1146. Category 9. 380 'l Ｌｾ＠ n 14 - r - Ｍｾ＠ "\ -R \ '" - - - 'l-_ - ----_ ---- ｾｉ＠ 1 _ ｟Ｚｷｾ＠ Q.... ｾ＠ 5 - . ow s from Site D. Fig. 273· B l - 381 Excavations at Kandahar Fig. 274 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. D 1.30 78/909. Orange Painted Buff. D 1.32 133/1131. Crude Red Painted. D 1.31 XX/972. Crude Red Painted. D 1.34 50/1119. Category 6. D 1.34 6811118. Category 8. D 1.34 XX/1120. Category 7. D 1.36 XX/1107. Category 8. D 1.32 XX/905. Category 5. D 1.28 XX/850. Buff Painted Black. D 1.32 XX/1140. Category 4. D 1.31 94/J 042. Black. D 1.33 XX/1100. Category 8. 382 The Achaemenid Material ｾ＠ Fig. 274: Bowls from Site D. - ... Excavations at Kandahar Figure 275 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. D 1.32 XX/1126. Dark Coarse. D 1.32 XX/1138. Painted Cream. D 1.28 130/984. Putty Painted red. D 1.28 125/982. Sandy Biscuit Painted. D 1.32 130/992. Putty. D 1.32 130/1137. Gritty Sandy Biscuit. D 1.37 XX/1157. Category 8 Coarse. D 1.32 123/1112. Red Medium 2. D 1.28 124/918. Red Medium 2. D 1.35 70/1152. Category 8 Coarse. D 1.28 130/985. Red Coarse Painted Red. D 1.34121/1121. RedCoarse2. D 1.34 91/1116. Category 8 Coarse. D 1.34 122/1109. Red Coarse 2. 384 r 'J-·· - _--_·-- ,' J --- ,,- ｾＭ - ＮﾷｾＭＬ＠ ?------- _9,---, r r ｾ＠ ! ｲＭｾ＠ Ｍｾ＠ -r----r ｾＭ Ｍｾ＠ --\ --r-- ｾＭﾷ ' \ Fig. 275: Jar, from Site D. 385 Excavations at Kandahar Fig. 276 I. 2. 3. 4. D 1.32 126/907. Sandy Biscuit Painted. Dl.31137/1043.RedCoarsePaintedRed. D 1.28 125/921. Sandy Biscuit Painted. D 1.35 XX/1147. Category 9. 5. D 1.35 XX/1150. Category 7. 6. D 1.28 961713. Orange Medium. 7. D 1.31 134/1044. Crude Red Painted. 8. D 1.35 131/1153. Gritty Sandy Biscuit. 9. D 1.28 110/922. Pale Tan. 10. D 1.35 XX/1149. Category 9. 11. D 135 13811154. Painted Cream. 12. D 1.28 132/1207. Crude Red Painted. 386 I \ r-- ' !---------- - --7 11 12 _ ｾ f 387 - ··. _ --- Ｍ Fig. 276: Bowls from Site D. Q.. CC!]w ..§ w. Excavations at Kandahar Figure 277 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. D 132 XX/1127. Category 8 Coarse. D 1.31 I09/954. Pale Tan. D 1.28 134/1204. Crude Red Painted. D 1.28 106/732. Red Medium 3. D 1.35 XX/1143. Category 8 Fine. D 1.32 XX/991. Red Fine 2 Painted. D 1.28 1261714. Red Fine 3. D 1.28 129/983. Putty Painted Red. 388 The Achaemenid Material cp39cm _ 2 ' 3 \f( 4 7 ---. .. --::..:...=---=-- ::.:__--;ｾ＠ Fig. 277: Bowls.from Site D. 389