Article Surah 100 · Ayah 1

The al‑Maqar case: an ideological historical reconstitution

4Until 2010, al‑Maqar [often written al‑Magar] was nothing but a dot on the map of the governorate of Tathlīth (province of ʿAsīr, Saudi Arabia). The submission to the Saudi Commission of Antiquities and National Heritage (SCTH) of hundreds of artefacts sampled on that locality by a certain Mutlaq ibn Gublan, a camel herder native of the area, threw this institution into turmoil.
5While digging a cistern, Mutlaq ibn Gublan had fortuitously discovered an 86‑cm‑long sculpture fragment of an equid; afterwards, he collected some 300 artefacts including other fragmentary animal statues (among which a dog, an ostrich, a falcon), stone tools, arrowheads, scrapers and spearheads, stone grinders and stone pestle.
6A team of the SCTH along with international scholars carried out a one‑day expedition on the site. This permitted them to complete the ground sampling of artefacts and to collect organic material for radiocarbon dating. The extracted collagen of four burned bones of unpublished provenance was dated to 7,300–6,640 cal BC.
1⦁ ⦁ Al⦁ ‑⦁ Ghabban⦁ ⦁ et al⦁ ., 2011. A translation of the text in English has been made available on the websit ⦁ (...)
2⦁ ⦁ Harrigan⦁ , 2012.
7This discovery got media attention and was displayed in a short book in Arabic1. It was usefully summed up and critically reviewed in a short paper by Harrigan2. The Saudi experts came to the conclusion that:
3⦁ ⦁ Al⦁ ‑⦁ Ghabban⦁ ⦁ et al⦁ ., 2011.
“The artefacts and objects found at the site showed that the Neolithic period was the last period when human beings lived on the site 9,000 years ago. All objects and stone tools found on the surface of the site dated back to the said history”3.
4⦁ ⦁ Idem⦁ .
“The features of the horse statue are similar to that of the original Arabian horses […]. On the head of the statue there are clear signs of a bridle which in turn confirms that inhabitant of al‑Magar domesticated horses”4.
5⦁ ⦁ Idem.
“Presence of horse statues of big sizes, coupled with Neolithic artefacts and tools dating back to 9,000 years ago is considered an important archaeological discovery at the international arena particularly in view that the latest studies indicated that animal domestication was known for the first time 5,500 years ago in central Asia. This site demonstrated that horses were domesticated in Saudi Arabia before a long period of the afore‑mentioned date”5.
6⦁ ⦁ Idem.
“Al‑Magar site incarnated four significant Arabian cultural characteristics for which the Arabs are highly proud of. These aspects include horsemanship and horse breeding, hunting with falcons, hunting with hound dogs and using the Arabian dagger as part of the Arabian dress. These cultural inherited characteristics were found at al‑Magar in the central region of the Arabian Peninsula before nine thousand years. This impressive discovery reflects the importance of the site as a centre and could possibly the birthplace of an advanced prehistoric civilization that witnessed domestication of animals, particularly the horse, for the first time during the Neolithic period”6.
7⦁ ⦁ Harrigan⦁ , 2012.
8⦁ ⦁ Al⦁ ‑⦁ Ansary⦁ , 1996, p. 54.
9⦁ ⦁ Abdul⦁ ⦁ Ghafour⦁ , 2011.
8Harrigan has already emphasized how “the discovery at al‑Magar and the electrifying question it raises come as Saudi Arabia experiences a resurgent pride not only in its archaeological heritage but also, particularly, in the legacy and culture of the desert‑bred Arabian horse”7. The assumed late introduction of the horse in Arabia by Western scholars —see below— had already been questioned in the past8. Making the heart of the Arabian Peninsula the cradle of the Arabian horse and of horsemanship was not only a matter of scientific debate, it also achieved ideological purposes. When the results were officially presented to King Abdallah, “he urged the SCTH to publish the results of the excavation that proved that the Arabian Peninsula had precedence in taking care of horses”9.
9Now, when much detail has been left vague, the conclusions about al‑Maqar were hardly convincing.
10⦁ ⦁ Al⦁ ‑⦁ Ghabban⦁ ⦁ et al⦁ ., 2011.
10Concerning the context of these discoveries, the official report downplays the way most of the artefacts were collected —namely through illegal excavation/surface collection, with no archaeological record. The reports states that the discovery of the site was done by a Saudi national who collected some archaeological objects scattered on the surface, and followed by field work of a team of international experts; the proportion of artefacts sampled by the different actors is not mentioned10. Enlightening is the lecture of Harrigan’s detailed account of the discovery, confirming that most of them have been collected without record:
11⦁ ⦁ Harrigan⦁ , 2012.
“Ibn Gublan unearthed some 300 objects there. Though none was as large as the first, his finds included a small stone menagerie: ostrich, sheep and goats; what may be fish and birds; a cow‑like bovid; and an elegant canine profile (...) he found mortars and pestles, grain grinders, a soapstone pot ornamented with looping and hatched geometric motifs, weights likely used in weaving and stone tools. […] Two years ago, he loaded it all up in his Jeep, drove it to Riyadh and donated it to the Saudi Commission for Tourism and Antiquities (SCTA). […] In March 2010, the SCTA flew Saudi and international archaeologists and pre‑historians to al‑Magar for a brief daytime survey. The team fanned out and, in a few hours, collected more stone objects, including tools and another horse‑like statue.”11
12⦁ ⦁ Al⦁ ‑⦁ Ghabban⦁ ⦁ et al⦁ ., 2011.
13⦁ ⦁ Curtis⦁ ⦁ et al⦁ ., 2012, p. 46.
14⦁ ⦁ Al⦁ ‑⦁ Ghabban⦁ ⦁ et al⦁ ., 2011; ⦁ Harrigan⦁ , 2012.
11Concerning the dating of the statues of equids, it has been considered that all the objects and stone tools found on the surface of the site dated back to c. 9,000 BP12. This date is asserted after the presence of specific types of arrowheads and four fragments of bones, whose collagen was radiocarbon dated to c. 9,000 cal BP. Yet, the exact provenance of these organic samples is unknown, and as stated by others the relationship between the stone figures, the arrowheads and radiocarbon samples is not clear13. Moreover, the idea that all the artefacts belong to the same period of time is questioned by the presence of Middle Palaeolithic tools nearby14.
12Concerning the identification of the statues of equids as domesticated horses, Henzell summed it up clearly:
15⦁ ⦁ Henzell⦁ , 2013.
“The evidence from the 86‑centimetre‑long fragment spotted by Gublan is tantalisingly inconclusive. The carving features a rounded head, arched neck, muzzle, nostrils, shoulder, withers and overall proportions that are clearly horse‑like. The contention about domestication comes from two distinctive features, one of which suggests some kind of strap going from the shoulder to the forefoot and the other involving delicate incising around the muzzle. The proof from the find goes no higher than that, being just carvings indicative of a kind of primitive bridle. One expert on the subject of horse domestication, David Anthony, says he will go no further than suggesting that the sculpture at al‑Magar ‘might be’ from the horse genus.”15
16⦁ ⦁ Harrigan⦁ , 2012.
17⦁ ⦁ Uerpmann⦁ , 1991.
13The relief considered by some as a bridle, and hence evidence of domestication, could portray natural aspects of the animal itself such as musculature or coat markings16. It would be much more conclusive to interpret this relief as the black shoulder stripe marking some donkeys and asses, an hypothesis reinforced by the high frequency of wild ass (Equus asinus) in faunal assemblage from Arabian Neolithic sites17 (Table 1).
14To sum up, al‑Maqar is a location where human presence is attested at least from the Middle Palaeolithic down to the Protohistoric period. Besides, the Middle Holocene occupation is clearly a major discovery, shedding light on a culture whose features were only partly known up to now. The animal sculptures could be part of this occupation and some of them definitely depict equids. However neither the presence of horses in this part of Arabia nor their domestication 3,000 years earlier than expected can be proved on the basis of the sculptures on site.
15The best way to address the question of the domestication of the horse and its introduction in the Arabian Peninsula is still to consider available data systematically (see in this issue: Olsen; Robin and Antonini).