Saba and the depiction of South Arabia

Recently I've been reading Arabia Felix (1998) by Jean-François Breton, since it was recommended in the EB bibliography topic, I think by a team member. Whilst I haven't yet read all parts and am not (yet) particularly familiar with the subject, what I have read has made me wonder why Saba has been chosen as the most suitable faction in South Arabia over other possibilities, and in particular Qatabân. In particular, the following quotes set me off:

Quote:

---

In the eighth century B.C., South Arabia was politically fragmented. Each of the four major valleys that flow down to the desert was occupied by a state whose territory corresponded to the valley and its tributaries. From east to west, these were Hadramawt (in the wadis 'Irma and Hadramawt), Awsân (in the Wadis Markha), Qatabân (in the Wadi Bayhân), and Saba (in the Wadi Dhana). The great valley of Jawf, which lies north of the Wadi Dhana, was divided up between Saba and several smaller kingdoms. In the early seventh century B.C., Saba extended its dominance to a large part of South Arabia and probably held this territory until the fourth century B.C., when Qatabân took it over until the first century A.D. p. 29

---

The above phrase in bold appears to me to say that Saba was the dominant power in the region in the centuries leading up to the start date of EB, but by that time was being overtaken in that role by Qatabân.

Quote:

---

Let us pause to examine the two monumental inscriptions from Sirwâh. Composed at the end of the reign of Karib'Il Watar, or perhaps after his death, these inscriptions celebrate the founding of the Sabaean empire, which by then had spread over a large part of modern-day Yemen. Though the exact dates of his reign are unknown, it was likely during the first half of the seventh century B.C. [...]
The empire of Karib'Il was apparently far too vast to have much of a chance of surviving very long, although it is difficult to say exactly when it began to disintegrate. It is known that one of his successors sent military expeditions into diverse regions, with the earliest interventions apparently in Jawf, only a hundred kilometers or so from Ma'rib. The kindom of Ma'in attempted to regain its autonomy and take control of Barâqish, prompting the Sabaean king to lay waste the entire area. Later, Karib'il led a campaign as far as Najrân, north of Jawf, where the local tribes were becoming restless. The situation was far graver in the southern region around Yafa' and in the Highlands overlooking the Gulf of Aden, where the kingdom of Qatabân was attempting to lure certain tribes away from Saba's sphere of influence. Qatabân, a former ally of Saba, had become its rival. The Sabaean mukarrib was thus forced to take action against a tribe of Dahas in the Wadi Tudan, where he massacred some four thousand people. The emergence of Qatabân at the end of the sixth century B.C. was a major development in the region. p. 43-44.

---

Quote:

---

Though little is known about [the early Qatabanite sovereigns], some were already attempting to gain the prestigious title of mukarrib, and eventually the title did pass from Saba to Qatabân, triggering several wars between these powerful neighbors. Qatabân appears to have been the eventual victor, judging from the Qatabanite texts found in several regions formerly held by Saba. The expansion of Qatabân was first directed toward the valleys to the west, in Harîb and Jûba, and later toward those which bordered the Jabal an-Nisiyîn to the east. The Qatabanites later extended their presence into the southwestern mountains of Yemen, in the regions of Radâ, Yafa', and Yarîm, and into the mountains rising above the Gulf of Aden. This expansion was a symptom of Sabaean retreat, a reversal confirmed by Strabo, who cited sources from the second century B.C.: "The territory of the Cattabanians [Qatabanites] extends down to the straits [Strait of Bab al-Mandab] and the passage across the Arabian Gulf; their royal seat is called Tamna'." Pliny reported that the Qatabanites also controlled a port on the Red Sea at Okélis, the modern-day Shaykh Saîd, On the ancient map, these points described a vast empire both on land and sea.
In certain respects, Qatabân and Saba owed their prosperity to the same sources. Agriculture was their main asset. Aerial photography has revealed that Qatabân's main riverbed was the site of remarkable development, from al-Haraja in the south all the way to Muqanna some forty-five kilometers to the north. The area under cultivation was at least as large as that of the Ma'rib oasis. Qatabân also derived significant wealth from the spice trade. We learn from Pliny that all frankincense was exported via the intermediary of the Gebbanitae (Qatabanites), and that the great route toward the Mediterranean began at Thomna (Tamna'). In its break from Saba, Qatabân perhaps aspired to gain a greater share of the revenues from this trade. But it did have another sizable rival in Ma'in. p.44-45

---

In these sections it appears that Saba, as political power, was being forced back by in particular Qatabân, which carved out a sizeable and lucrative area for itself in the time depicted within EB. In fact, the falling apart of the Sabaean empire had taken place some time before the start of EB, and although it retained its heartlands it was no longer on the rise within the timeframe of EB, whereas Qatabân was. Further carving up of Sabaean territory had taken place by Axum, and took place even later in the first century B.C., by for instance Himyar.

These examples are what made me wonder about the choice of including Saba as the South Arabian faction in EB. Could someone from the team, or otherwise knowledgeable on this subject, inform me about this? I'm presuming there must be information about this in the EBH, or barring that I'd much appreciate some more pointers towards literature on the subject. I find it a fascinating subject.

Thanks in advance,
Geoffrey

[quote]e Sabaean mukarrib was thus forced to take action against a tribe of Dahas in the Wadi Tudan[/quoe]

Wasn't there a Daha tribe in Parthia? Are they the same people, different people with the same name or am i remembering wrong?

Dahae means "robbers" so that could be an answer.

Looks like quite a few people have viewed this topic; does anyone intend to respond to the opening post, either here or via PM? Within a week or so I'll be borrowing some more works on South Arabia from the library for more information, since perhaps I'm drawing hasty conclusions from just one source right now, but some pointers from the EB team's people on Saba would be welcomed.

I think there are a lot of views and few posts because while a lot of us are interested in the Saba faction we don't really know a lot about them outside of what he have learned from the game and here so can't add anything to your post. Personally I would be interested in anything else you learn though.

Our Sab'Yn expert is unavailable at the moment.

A shame. For the moment I'll do what I can to find some more literature on the subject. Of course, meanwhile anyone is welcome to post what they know, EB team or not!

Geoffrey S,
We do, sir, seem to hang out in the same threads. A pleasure. I am currently playing Sab'yn - inspired mostly by that phenomnal Sab'Yn AAR posted up not so long ago. :verycool: I do feel it is a bit of an exercise in futility as I can't see anyway around either of the "Deaths" - grey or yellow. I am still with the campaign b/c I want to see how it plays out and a few House Rules (ala Konny) have added some spice (maybe some frankensence or myrrh) :laugh4: and besides, EB is just damn good fun.
So here is one person who is happy that you are delving more into the subject. I think, sir, that you are embodying the spirit of EB. It has inspired me to pick up my old copy of Tacitus and give it a re-read. My next book will be from the EB Bibliography.
So, please, keep us posted on your reading/research and we are waiting to hear from the EB in-house expert.~:cheers: