The series editors would like to thank the following organizations and individuals for enabling the eight years of archaeological work at Berenike on which the annual reports and final compilations such as the present volume are based: National Geographic Society, Netherlands Foundation of Scientifi c Research , Gratama Foundation, donors of the Berenike Foundation, Mallinson Architects of London, the University of Delaware, the American Philosophical Society, the Dorot Foundation, the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, Lotus Hotel in Cairo, Utopa Foundation, Organon Egypt, Eastmar Travel in Cairo, Philips Egypt, 3-Com Computer, Dionysus Systems, and in alphabetical order the following private donors: Carmine Balascio, Millie Cassidy, Bruce Gould, James Harrell, Charles Herndon, Susan Hodge, Dorothy Johnson II, Norma Kershaw, Carol Maltenfort, W. Weissman and W. Whelan.For a long time Berenike has been on the list of desiderata of many archaeologists. It was not until 1818, however, that G. B. Belzoni,raspberries in pots a weightlifter engaged in hunting antiquities in Egypt, identified Berenike south of the large Ras Banas peninsula.
Several visitors became interested in the site, and the expeditions that followed were mainly focused on excavating the temple dedicated to the Greek-Egyptian god Serapis, situated on the highest ground at Berenike . These visits, however, were short-lived due to the extreme desert conditions and related logistic problems. Food and water were not locally available and could be only delivered over large distances. In addition to the logistic problems, security reasons were also a serious hindrance to the realization of a large-scale excavation. The strategic location of the Greek-Roman harbor of Berenike has its modern counterpart in the presence of a large military base on Ras Banas and scattered bunkers on the limestone outcrop on which Berenike was founded. Furthermore, both Egypt and Sudan have a claim to the Hailab area, a triangular piece of land bordered along the Red Sea by Shelateen and Hailab. For these reasons, the Eastern Desert south of Marsa Alam was until recently only accessible with special permission. A couple of years after the Gulf War , it became possible to start the Berenike project, which included excavations at Berenike and Shenshef and the survey of the southern part of the Egyptian Eastern Desert. The excavations and surveys were directed by Prof. Dr. S. E. Sidebotham from Delaware University and Dr. W. Z. Wendrich from Leiden University.
After a pilot excavation season in 1994, large-scale excavations began and continued until December 2003, when the threat of an invasion of Iraq was at hand. Including the pilot study, a total of eight excavations seasons were conducted. The aim of the research project was to study the organization of trade and the subsistence economy at Berenike. Berenike was, together with Myos Hormos, an important harbor along the Red Sea coast. It was founded approximately 275 BC for the import of all kinds of luxury commodities from Africa south of the Sahara, Arabia, and India. Only at the beginning of the seventh century AD before the Arabs arrived in Egypt, was Berenike abandoned by the Romans. Several written historical sources deal with this trade, and these documents have been used for a long time to reconstruct this foreign trade. It remained uncertain, however, how reliable this picture was. Written sources are certainly not complete in their enumerations, and the interpretation of certain exotic commodities is still under discussion, as can be judged by the different translations of the Greek and Latin texts. The available information on the ancient trade contrasts sharply with that dealing with the subsistence economy of Berenike. Although located along the Red Sea, Berenike faced a desert climate that must have drawn heavily on its food supply. Much progress was therefore to be expected from the Berenike project, which had the cooperation of all kinds of specialists. This book synthesizes the results of the archaeobotanical research carried out over the years at Berenike and Shenshef and includes information that has been published in previous interim reports. The archaeobotanical research is based on the study of plant remains that have been preserved in both sites.
In Egypt, plant remains are predominately preserved by desiccation owing to the arid climate. Additionally, plant remains may become charred as a result of deliberate burning, such as in the offering of food items, or by accidental fire. The desiccated plant remains, in particular, are still in an excellent condition and facilitate, in most cases, identification to the level of species. In this way, a detailed list of plant species could be produced from Berenike and Shenshef, providing a solid basis for a reconstruction of the international trade of plant products and the food economy. The sub-fossil plant remains from Berenike originate from 794 samples and those from Shenshef from 86 samples. The samples from Berenike represent 34 different trenches, which are partly related with buildings and partly with trash deposits. Those from Shenshef originate from 10 different middens. Basically, each soil unit from a particular trench has been dry-sieved over a sieve with a mesh size of 4.0 mm. All sieve residues have been sorted out and have yielded many so-called “hand-picked” plant remains. A disadvantage of this procedure is that it is highly biased in favor of plants that produce large fragments. Cereals, for example, will only be secured in this way by the long rachis fragments in such sieve residues, whereas most of the grain kernels, threshing remains, and accompanying seeds of weed plants will get lost. To obtain a representative record of plant remains from Berenike and Shenshef, botanical samples were collected that have been processed by using sieves with a standardized mesh size of 5.0 mm, 2.0 mm, 1.0 mm, and 0.5 mm. The botanical samples from trash deposits, in particular, proved to be rich in well-preserved plant remains. Samples that were secured from the inside of buildings, on the other hand, were in most cases soil samples with only a low concentration of plant remains. Because these sediments were, for the greater part, considered as wind-blown secondary fillings of buildings, the plant records from these samples could not be used for an interpretation of the use of these buildings. For the reconstruction of agricultural practices, it is desirable to have at one’s disposal a considerable number of samples that presents one particular crop and associated weed plants. Unfortunately, almost all samples did contain at least two crops, such as wheat, barley, or lentil. This makes it frustrating to reconstruct the specific agricultural practices and also hampers the tracing of the origin of the crops. Most crops have acquired a broad tolerance to environmental factors as a result of selection processes, which is, for example, expressed by the many land races that have evolved. In most cases it is not possible to identify the area of origin of a cultivated plant found outside its production area, such as in Berenike, by studying the morphological features of its remains. Weed plants, on the other hand, are partly indicative of specific environmental conditions. Such plants can be used to trace the source of a particular crop plant indeed,blueberries in containers growing though its association with a particular crop should be evidenced by the archaeobotanical record. Samples with only a few plant species, rather than those with a high diversity, are suitable in this respect because one can usually unequivocally match these crops with their associated weed plants. Because the samples from Berenike and Shenshef did not meet this condition and also because of the large number of samples, it has been decided to categorize all plant records in several tables. Although Berenike was inhabited throughout the Ptolemaic and Roman periods, the archaeobotanical results are confined to the Roman period. It appeared that most of the Ptolemaic remains are located eastward of the Roman settlement. The few Ptolemaic contexts that have been unearthed had suffered seriously from salt seepage and did not yield identifiable plant remains. It was realized at an early stage in the project that the interpretation of the archaeobotanical records would benefit from the study of the current natural vegetation around the Roman installations and from observations of the local Ababda nomads who live in the southern part of the Eastern Desert.
For that reason, inventories have been made of the desert vegetation around the Roman installations during the various excavation seasons. Additionally, a separate visit was organized to the Gebel Elba area, located some 260 km south of Berenike, which was one of the source areas of some of the trade products. The ethnoarchaeobotanical research of the Ababda nomads was focused on the basic necessities of desert life with special emphasis on their material culture, their exploitation of the natural environment, and the possibilities of local food production. The reconstruction of the former natural vegetation is based on the archaeobotanical records, evidence from written sources, and the current vegetation. The interpretation of the cultivated plants found at Berenike and Shenshef summarizes their possible use, including the possibility of local food production, the differences in habitation periods, and the identification of their possible source of supply. The identification of the possible area of supply proved to be rather problematic because of the botanical richness of most of the samples. Determining the supply area is based on the natural distribution of the plant species, its archaeobotanical record from Egypt and the surrounding areas, and on the evidence from written historical sources, if available. A special topic related to the long-distance transport and the hot climate in Egypt is the preservation of food and the luxury status of food items. Based on the different methods of food preservation known from historical sources and those practiced today, the possible ways in which the various plant products might have been treated are discussed. Finally, the archaeobotanical record of exotic plant species from ancient Egypt is discussed, with special emphasis on those evidenced from Myos Hormos, the other important harbor along the Red Sea.Knowledge of Indian trade comes from various historical sources. Two of these sources, the Alexandrian Tariff and the Periplus Maris Erythraei, are of particular interest since they include a considerable list of botanical commodities that might have been traded through Berenike . Both sources provide first hand information. It is assumed that the author of the Periplus was an Egyptian Greek who had traveled at least along the African coast south to Rhapta and to the west coast of India. Contrary to other periploi that have survived, this Periplus is exceptional in its emphasis on trade items, in addition to information on the trade route proper. The Alexandrian Tariff was issued between AD 176 and 180 by Marcus Aurelius and enumerates 54 items subject to import duty at Alexandria on their way to Rome. It includes 20 different plant products, only half of which are also mentioned in the Periplus: costus, cassia, aloe, lykion, myrrh, malabathron, black and long pepper, nard, and aromatics. The Periplus, dated between AD 40 and 70, describes in great detail the trade routes from Myos Hormos, now identified as Quseir al-Qadim, and Berenike to India, including many harbors along the African, Arabian, and Indian coasts. The Erythraean Sea formerly included the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden, and the Indian Ocean. The Periplus enumerates a vast number of import and export commodities, including 34 products of botanical origin, of which 18 are reported as import items from Berenike. The trade items mentioned in both documents represent a wide variety of plant parts: root; wood; bark; plant secretions such as resins, gums, and oils; leaves; flowers; seeds; and fruits, as well as whole plants . Plant secretions and seeds or fruits are the best-represented categories. A few trade items are either unspecified or not documented in such a way that a reliable identification can be made . The arrangement according to plant part is in some cases arbitrary. Aloe, for example, may be either a resin or fragrant wood, and both rhizomes and leaves were traded asnard. In some cases, trade items are reduced to a common trade name, such as “cassia” for “cassia turiana” and “xylocassia.” The scientific plant names are mainly based on Warmington , Miller , and Casson and have been updated where necessary.