No title

- g':. , ? rI, ?~O Y ~ (, JSOTTO PUBLISHASORMONOGRAPHSERIES The AmericanSchools of OrientalResearchandJSOTPres...

Author: American Schools of Oriental Research

7 downloads 306 Views 19MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

..- g':.

,

?

rI, ?~O

Y

~

(,

JSOTTO PUBLISHASORMONOGRAPHSERIES The AmericanSchools of OrientalResearchandJSOTPress are pleased to announce the resumption of the ASOR MonographSeries.

C)r --

4,

"6na

r~\~

forthe ASORMonograph forconsideration The AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearchinvitesmanuscripts Series. biblicalstudiesand interests,particularly arewelcomedon topicsthatreflectASOR'straditional Manuscripts in a yearareto be published Atleasttwosuchmonographs ancientNearEasternhistoryandarchaeology. with Sheffield, Press, England. JSOT conjunction SUBMITMANUSCRIPTS PLEASE)TO: (INDUPLICATE, ERICM. MEYERS,EDITOR SERIES MONOGRAPH ASOR-JSOT BOXH.M., DUKESTATION 27706,USA DURHAM,NORTHCAROLINA

Front cover:Representationof spiral columns from the north facade of the Building-Level-II temple on the Acropolis-northeastat TellLeilan.Back cover: Variousviews of Leilan.

Bi blical

A rchaeologist

A Publication of the American Schools of Oriental Research

Volume 48 Number 1

March 1985

Leilan on the Habur Plains of Syria Tell Harvey Weiss

Page 5

5

Tell Leilan is one of the more imposing sites in northern Mesopotamia. Three seasons of excavation have now been conducted there, and the findings suggest a great deal about this region in the third and early second millennia B.C.,including the possibility that Leilan is ancient Shubat Enlil, the capital city of Shamshi-Adad,a fascinating historical figure who in the last years of the nineteenth century B.C.briefly controlled all of northern Mesopotamia from the ZagrosMountains to the EuphratesRiver.

TheCuisineof AncientMesopotamia

36

Jean Bottdro Until recently the oldest cuisine we knew in depth was that of ancient Rome. The recoveryof a half-million written documents from numerous sites in the ancient Near East, however,has now shown us that the culture of Mesopotamia also included a discriminating choice of foodstuffs and advancedtechniques for preparing them.

SalvageExcavations at Tell Hadidi in the EuphratesRiver Valley Rudolph H. Dornemann

Page36

49

Because one of the major trade routes in antiquity followed the Euphrates,the ancient sites along this river are particularlysignificant. In recent years many of these sites, threatenedby the creation of a large artificial lake, Al Assad, have been the subject of an international salvageeffort. As a part of this effort, five seasons of excavations have been conducted at Tell Hadidi, yielding the essential outline of its development through more than 4,000 years.

Departments

Page49

FromtheEditor's Desk

3

Introducingthe Authors BookReviews

4 60

Biblical Archaeologist is published with the financial assistance of the Endowment for Biblical Research,Boston, a nonsectarian foundation for the study of the Bible and the history of the Christian Church. BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/MARCH1985

1

AMERICAN SCHOOLS

OF

ORIENTAL RESEARCH

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, ASOR, 4243 SPRUCE STREET, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104

James A. Sauer, President Eric M. Meyers, First Vice President for

Publications William G. Dever,Second Vice President for ArchaeologicalPolicy GeorgeM. Landes,Secretary Charles U. Harris, Treasurer ElizabethB. Moynihan, Chairmanof the Boardof Mitchell S.7rustees Rothman,Administrative Director Cynthia J.Eiseman,Development and Public Relations Officer

ASORNewsletter;JamesA. Sauer,Editor BiblicalArchaeologist;EricM. Meyers, Editor Bulletin of the American Schools of OrientalResearch;WalterE. Rast, Editor Journalof CuneiformStudies;Erle Leichty,Editor

W.E AlbrightInstitute of ArchaeologicalResearch(AIAR). P O. Box 19096, 91 190 JerusalemIsrael. SeymourGitin, Director JosephA. Callaway,President First Vice JoyUngerleider-Mayerson, President Carol Meyers,Second Vice President EdgarKrentz,Secretary-Tieasurer

(215)222-4643

LSOF 19 u rn

~~fr

BaghdadCommittee for the Baghdad School. JohnA. Brinkman,Chairman Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, 1155East 58th Street,Chicago, IL60637. American Center of OrientalResearch (ACOR). P O. Box 2470, JebelAmman, Amman Jordan. David W McCreery,Director Gough W Thompson, Jr.,President LawrenceT. Geraty,Vice President Nancy Lapp,Secretary Anne Cabot Ogilvy, freasurer

CyprusAmericanArchaeological ResearchInstitute (CAARI). 41 KingPaul Street, Nicosia Cyprus. StuartSwiny,Director Charles U. Harris,President AndrewOliver,Jr.,Vice President Ellen Herscher,Secretary Norma Kershaw,freasurer Damascus AdvisoryCommittee. GiorgioBuccellati, Chairman Center for MesopotamianStudies, University of California,405 Hilgard Avenue,LosAngeles, CA 90024.

Biblical Archaeologist P. O. BOX H.M., DUKE STATION, DURHAM, NC 27706

Biblical Archaeologist (ISSN 0006-0895) is published quarterly (March, June, September, December) by the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR), a nonprofit, nonsectarian educational organization

with administrativeoffices at 4243 Spruce Street,Philadelphia,PA 19104. Subscriptions.Annual subscriptionrates are $16 for individualsand $25 for institutions. There is a special annual rate of $14 for students and retirees.Subscriptionorders and correspondenceshould be sent to ASORSubscriptionServices,Department BB,P.O.Box 3000, Denville, NJ 07834. Single issues are $6; these should be orderedfrom Eisenbrauns,P.O. Box 275, WinonaLake,IN 46590. Outside the U.S., U.S. possessions, and Canada,add $2 for annual subscriptions and $1 for single issues. Second-classpostagepaid at Philadelphia, PA 19104and additionaloffices. Postmaster:Sendaddresschangesto ASOR SubscriptionServices,DepartmentBB, P.O.Box3000, Denville, NJ 07834.

2

Editor Associate Editor ExecutiveEditor Assistant Editor Book ReviewEditor Art Director AdvertisingDirector

(919) 684-3075

EricM. Meyers LawrenceT. Geraty MartinWilcox KarenS. Hoglund PeterB. Machinist LindaHuff KennethG. Hoglund

EditorialAssistants Melanie A. Arrowood Daniel M. Cohen Nephi W BushmanII StaceyFlur JuliaO'Brien EditorialCommittee A. T. Kraabel LloydR. Bailey BaruchLevine JamesFlanagan CaroleFontaine David W McCreery VolkmarFritz CarolL. Meyers SeymourGitin JackSasson David M. Gunn JohnWilkinson

Composition by LiberatedTypes,Ltd., Durham, NC. Printedby PBMGraphics, Inc., Raleigh,NC. Copyright? 1985by the American Schools of OrientalResearch.

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/MARCH1985

Advertising.Correspondenceshould be addressedto the ASORPublicationsOffice, P.O.Box H.M., Duke Station, Durham,NC 27706 (telephone:919-684-3075). Biblical Archaeologist is not responsible for errorsin copy preparedby the advertiser. The editor reservesthe rightto refuse any ad. Ads for the sale of antiquities will not be accepted. EditorialCorrespondence.Article proposals, manuscripts,and editorialcorrespondence should be sent to the ASOR PublicationsOffice, PO. Box H.M., Duke Station, Durham, NC 27706. Unsolicited manuscriptsmust be accompaniedby a self-addressed,stampedenvelope.Foreign contributorsshould furnish international reply coupons. Manuscriptsmust conformto the format used in Biblical Archaeologist,with full bibliographicreferencesand a minimum of endnotes. See recent issues for examples of the properstyle. Manuscriptsmust also include appropriate illustrations and legends.Authorsare responsiblefor obtainingpermission to use illustrations from sources other than themselves.

MilwaukeePublicMuseum

Rudolph

H.

Dornemann

Harvey Weiss

Introducing the

Authors

HarveyWeiss is Associate Professor of Near Eastern Archaeology at Yale University. From 1966 to 1973 he studied Assyriology, archaeology,and anthropologyat the University of Pennsylvania,and conductedfield work in western Iran.He has directed the T11lLeilan Project since 1978. He is also Guest Curator of the Smithsonian Institution exhibition "Eblato Damascus,"which opens in the United States in Septemberand will travel to a number of major museums over the next two years, and he is currently editing the catalog for the exhibit. With this article he wishes "to thank his Syrian friends and colleagues in the Directorate-Generalof Antiquities, in the municipalities of Kamishli and Qahtaniyeh, and in the village of Tell Leilan for their generous support, assistance, and hospitality." The well-known scholar JeanBottero is Directeur d'ttudes at the tcole Pratique des Hautes ttudes (Assyriologie)in Paris. Among his many important contributions, he has published et the Textes des ArchivesRoyales Economiques Administratifs de Mari (ImprimerieNationale, 1957). RudolphH. Dornemann is Curatorof History and Head of the History Section at the Milwaukee Public Museum. With a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago,he has extensive archaeological field experience and has directed several excavations, most recently the excavationsat T11lHadidi from 1974-1978. His experience in Jordanianarchaeology, including the first directorshipof the American Center of Oriental Research in Amman, Jordan, led to his book The Archaeology of the Transjordanin the Bronze and Iron Ages (MilwaukeePublic Museum, 1983). A recently completed monograph for the University of Chicagois the first majorpublication coming out of his involvement with Syrian archaeology for the past two decades: A Neolithic Village at Tell El Kowm in the Syrian Desert will be published later this year.

4


Readers,TakeNote! All subscription servicesforASORperiodicalsarenow beinghandledbyFulcoInc.Pleaseaddressanysubscription correspondence to: ASORSubscriptionServices DepartmentBB P.O. Box 3000 Denville, NJ 07834 Annual subscriptionsto the ASORNewsletter are $15. Students and retireesare chargedonly $11.Both must pay $2 more for overseassubscriptions. Annual subscriptionsfor BiblicalArchaeologistare $16forindividuals and $25 for institutions. Thereis a special rate of $14for students and retirees.Outside the US., US. possessions, and Canada,add $2 for annual subscriptions. Annual subscriptionsto the Bulletin of the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearchare $35, althoughstudents and retireespay only $27. An additional $2 is chargedfor subscriptionsmailed outside the U.S., U.S.possessions, and Canada.Institutional subscriptions are $45 in the US., its possessions, and Canada;foreignsubscriptions are $50.

Advertising in BiblicalArchaeologistis nowhandledby the ASORPublications Office.Correspondence shouldbe addressed to: ASORPublications Office P.O. Box H.M., Duke Station Durham, NC 27706 Wewelcome inquiries about ad placement and will providea rate card on request. Writeto us at the addressabove or call (919) 684-3075. Biblical Archaeologist is not responsible for errors in copy prepared by the advertiser. The editor reserves the right to refuse any ad. Ads for the sale of antiquities will not be accepted.

Lawrence T Geraty

From

the

Editor's

Desk

It

is a special pleasure for me to welcome with this issue a new Associate Editor,LawrenceT. Geraty,of Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Michigan. Larrybrings a distinguished recordof excavation in Jordanto this task. His work at Tell Hesban is now in the final publication phase and he has undertakena new and exciting projectat Tell Umeiri in the vicinity of Amman. He is a scholar of broadhumanistic interest with a strong commitment to the scientific and interdisciplinary aspects of the archaeological endeavor.A professor of Old Testament and archaeology at Andrews, he is also an excellent teacher and lecturer and is another one of the many students of the late G. ErnestWright,founderof the magazine. I know that Dr. Wright would be especially pleased at the thought that now two of his former students arechargedwith publishing BiblicalArchaeologist forty-eightyears after its inception. I'dlike to take this opportunity to express my thanks to James Flanagan of the University of Montana who served as Associate Editor these past two years. Dr. Flanagan remains a member of our Editorial Board.I'd also like to welcome two new members of the board,Dr. SeymourGitin, Director of the W.F.Albright Institute of Archaeological Research in Jerusalem, and Dr. David McCreery,Director of the American Center of Oriental Research in Amman. Hopefully both of them will be steering many new authors to publish their exciting discoveries in these pages. With this issue we conclude a series of presentations on Syrian archaeology-a project meant to precede the opening this Septemberof a special traveling exhibition on Syrian archaeology sponsored by the Smithsonian Institution. This series began last year with a special

issue on Ebla (volume 47, number 1)and continued with subsequent issues on Mari (volume 47, number 2) and Dura-Europos(volume47, number 3). Wehope that these have been helpful and that they will proveto be a useful guide for some of the materials in the exhibition. In the present issue we are especially pleased to providereports on new and important excavation work in Syria by ProfessorHarveyWeissof YaleUniversity (onTell Leilan)and by Dr. RudolphH. Dornemann of the Milwaukee Public Museum (on Tell Hadidi). (Dr.Weiss, by the way, is guest curatorof the Smithsonian exhibit and editor of its catalog.) If the two articles on these sites do not whet the readers'appetite for Syrian archaeology,then surely the essay by ProfessorJeanBott6roon Mesopotamiancuisine will. The article by ProfessorBotterooriginally appeared in the fine Frenchmagazine L'histoire.It has been translated by JonathanGlass and then fully adapted by our editorial staff. We are grateful to the editors of L'histoire for their kind permission to publish this new version. As a final note, I'mpleased to announce that the Mari issue of BA was recently given an awardfor outstanding design andproductionby PICA(thePrintingIndustriesof the Carolinas and America). We'renaturally gratifiedby this and other evidence that the high quality of BA continues to be recognized.

Eric M. Meyers Editor

BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST/MARCH

1985

3

Rediscovering HormuzdRassam.

Tell

Leilan

1846,HormuzdRassam,a resident of Mosul, in northern InMesopotamia, signed on with Austen Henry Layard, a young Englishexplorersent out by his governmentto retrieve antiquities for the British like those that the Frenchhad just begun to extract fromthe mounds of northernMesopotamia. Twoyearslater,Layardwas being lionized by the Britishpress as the first shipments of Assyrian bas-reliefs and statuary wereunloadedat the doorsof the BritishMuseum. Layardhad excavated the sculpture from the great mound of Nimrud, where in the first days of his work he found himself in the palace of king Ashur-nasirpalof Assyria. With these discoveries,and those of the Frenchat nearbysites, the retrieval of the lost civilizations of Mesopotamiabegan.

Around 1930 the FrenchinvestigatorAndre Poidebardtook this early aerial photographof TellLeilanfrom the northwest.

explorer, Max Freiherrvon Oppenheim, began a series of travels across northemrn Mesopotamia, during which he decided to undertakeexcavationsat'Tll Halaf,near the sources In 1849 Layard published Nineveh and its Remains, an of the HaburRiverat Ras el cAin. Oppenheim also took note account of his discoveries and adventures in Mesopotamia of Tell Leilanand, mimicking Rassam'sobservation,declared that swiftly became a best-seller among the English upper Leilanto be "anAssyrianor still older site"(Oppenheim1899: classes. Tnwo yearslater,at the ageof thirty-four,Layardretired 141, 167-68). This notice was kept alive in the world of from Near Eastern archaeology to London, where he soon ancient Near Easternscholarshipby Emil Forrer,the German enjoyedthe first of many fruits broughtby his archaeological the fame-election to the House of Commons. But what Assyriologist, whose widely read study of the history of that Leilan may have Assyrian provinces again suggested happenedto Hormuzd Rassam? been an Assyrian capital (Forrer1921:20). Rassam had supervised the excavations undertaken in The period between the two WorldWarssaw Frenchand Layard'sname for the British government, but Layard's British imperial interests competing for still largershares of account of the field work hardlyearnedfor the Mosul native the land,people, andproductiveresourcesof WestAsia. In the the fame and wealth that accrued to the dashing Londoner. wake of their armies and colonial bureaucrats,French and Rassam remained in Mesopotamia where, as the most ex- British scholars, prominently including historians and arperienced British archaeologicalagent, he was soon charged chaeologists, poured into Syria and Mesopotamia, continuby the British Museum with additionalexcavationsat Ashur, ing the traditionbegun some fifty yearsearlierby Layardand Nineveh, and Sippar.Hoping, however,to secure some of the his contemporaries.Startlingdiscoverieswere soon made on limelight surroundingLayard,Rassam undertook a series of Syrian territorywith excavationsat Tl Hariri(ancientMari) mule-bornetravelsin searchof still more spectacularancient and Dura-Europos.From 1925 through 1932, one unusual sites in northern Mesopotamia. On May 21, 1878, he gazed French investigator,Andre Poidebard,even took to the air southward from a roadside mound in what is now northwith the Air Ministry of the "Haut-Commissariaten Syrieet easternSyriaandspottedThllLeilanrising abovethe horizon. au Liban"in his attempt to trace the frontier wall of the Anothermuch largermoundcouldbe seen standing Roman empire through the so-called deserts of Syria. One fiveorsixmilessouthward, called"Lailan," whichIwas product of Poidebard'sprodigiousefforts is his folio of more toldhasawallroundit likemostoftheAssyriansitesof than two hundred aerial photographs of the mounds of importance.I hada greatdesireto go andexamineit, ancient Syria, including Tell Leilan (Poidebard1934: plate butcouldnotaffordthe time.I hoped,however, whenI shouldbein thatneighborhood 160).The TeillLeilanphotographshows the outer City Wall, again,tobeableto visit it and try it for a short time (Rassam1897:232-33). the Acropolis, and the ziggurat nestled between the Jarrah Rassam chose to pass Leilan by. Three years later he was and Qatraniwadis. Also visible is anotherwall, to the north, absorbedin his excavationof the ancient site of Sippar,where which Poidebardtook to represent the remains of a Roman he was knee-deepin more than 60,000 cuneiform tablets. camp. One hundred years after Rassam'sgaze across the horiKnowledge of Leilan did not, however,remain a serendipitous note tucked away in Rassam's travel accounts. zon towardsTll Leilan,YaleUniversity begana new archaeShortly thereafter, that inveterate German orientalist and ological projectat the site.


1985

5

Tell Leilan

05~

Leilanphotographedfrom the west. Seen from a distance the modern village, which is built on top of the Acropolis,probably looks much as the site did in antiquity

T

ell Leilan is certainly one of the more imposing sites in northern Mesopotamia. Situated on the left bank of the WadiJarrah,in the heart of the fertile HaburPlains of northeastern Syria,the massive extant walls rise more than 15 meters abovethe level of the plain, and enclose an area of some 90 hectares (900,000 square meters), making it one of the largest ancient sites in northern Mesopotamia, even largerthan Ebla (56 hectares),Ashur (50 hectares), and

6

BY HARVEY WEISS

Tel Brak(43 hectares).The gates of the city were on the north, south, and east, while on the west the ancient riverprobablyprovideda protective shoulder. The site is dominated by a 15-hectareAcropolis, which probablyfeaturedlargepublic buildings in its northern section and a "ziggurat"to the south. In 1978, with the cooperation of the Directorate-Generalof Antiquities in Damascus, YaleUniversity began its work at Tell Leilan with a topographicsurvey of the


site. In association with the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, three full seasons of excavation (1979, 1980, and 1982)have since been conducted. These excavations have tested four areasof the site. The Acropolis-northeasthas been the focus of horizontal excavations, while three stratigraphicsoundings have also been undertaken:Operation 1, a 4.5-meter-widestep trench, now almost 16 meters deep, which goes down the northwest slope of the Acropolis;a small sounding

t

Gate?

,

4

LowerTown

Acropolis-nortileast Operation 1

Gate?

Gate?

-

11

Operation57F02

r-

Operation2

• Acropolis \

5k

Ziggurat , Gate

A

Gate?

might provideevidence for the site's historical role, this areahas become one of the central researchloci of the Tell Leilan Project. Initial explorations in 1979, barely scratching its surface, allayed all previous fears that the Leilan Acropolis was cappedby a Romanperiod fortress.At 50 centimeters down, the trained excavatoris able to articulate the tops of massive, sun-driedmudbrick walls erected some 4,000 years ago. Three building levels of such collapsed structures have now been identified within our excavations on the Acropolisnortheast. Building LevelI. Immediately under the surface,Building LevelI comprises the remains of a mudbrick platform or paving, now only a few courses high in some places. This surface and its brickworkwere set againstthe collapsed southern facade of an earlier building level, Building LevelII (see stratigraphicsection). Latersurfaces relatedto the BuildingLevel-Ibrick platform have also been identified elsewhere within the collapsed walls of Building LevelII, and associated with these surfaces are potsherds of the "Haburware"variety that is securely dated to the nineteenth century

Topographical map of Tell Leilan showing areas of excavation as of the 1982 season.

(designated57F02)in the Lower Town;and Operation 2, a small sounding at the City Wall. In the first part of this paperI shall briefly present some results of the excavation of the Acropolisnortheast, and then discuss what these suggest for our understanding of the site during the early second

Tell Leilan in the Second Millennium B.c.: Excavationson the Acropolis-northeast Three seasons of excavation on the Leilan Acropolis now providenew data for the significance of Leilan, its ancient name, and its role on the HaburPlains of the early second

millennium B.C.In the second part I

the Acropolis suggests that large public buildings are situated within the northeast quadrant.Forthe purposes of establishing the chronology of settlement within the site and its Acropolis, as well as testing loci that

shall summarize what we have learned in the three soundings, and consider what this may tell us about northern Mesopotamia in the third millennium

B.C.

millennium

B.c.

The topography of

B.C. These

same

kinds of ceramics also comprise the assemblages of Building LevelII and Building LevelIII.This then is the terminal occupation on the Acropolis, perhapsrepresentingscrappy, insubstantial habitations, possibly of squatters or temporarysettlers who were seeking shelter within the ruins of large, recently collapsed buildings. These ruins are now known to be the remains of a major second-millennium-B.c.temple. Building LevelII. Thirteen hundred squaremeters of the Building-LevelII temple have now been retrieved, with an equivalent areaprobably remaining to be excavated.The northern facade of the temple presented an imposing configuration of niches and engagedcolumns arrangedin panels, alternately spiral and plaincontinued on page 12


7

The north facade of the Building-Level-IItemple on the Acropolis-northeastextends for more than 50 meters and is decoratedwith an impressiveseries of niches and engaged columns that are either plain-facedor spiral. The east side of the facade is shown above and the west side is below

8


Todate 1,300squaremeters of theBuilding-Level-II temple have beenretrieved. 45R11 'p,

~ "

Left: View of excavation area 45 P/Q12of the SBuilding-Level-IItemple of the Acropolisnortheast taken from the north. Below: Plan of the temple from Building LevelII of the Acropolis-northeast.The areas in darker color indicate secondary wall constructions of a slightly later date; these were done with a whiter, coarser,and more fragilemudbrick than was used in building the original walls.

South

+ 45013

+45014

+ 4511

South

9

45-12

10

4501

+

11

O 6 7I19

,

17

-45P14

+C rrfPT

t

ttc

lfffS

45P11

116

Cn

3 ~tl

5

11

13

4511

12

4 1#f

+~2

4 015

~s-~

f

7F~

4

18 4~Bf-t5N11

e

4 -PitJ

0 15N14,

5

10meters 45N13

NOrthi

451

45N11,,,, BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST/MARCH1985

9

Dahil Abbas, a veteran workmanfrom the Leilan village, excavates one of the Building-Level-Il columns of the northfacade of the temple on the Acropolis-northeast.

Trees and

Spiral Columns Sizes of Syro-Mesopotamian Sites During the Third and Early Second Millennia B.C. Ancient Area in Name Hectares Site Chuera 100 100 Taya Leilan ShubatEnlil? 90 Hamoukar 90 Khoshi 90 90 Hadhail Mardikh Ebla 56 Ashur 50 Qal'atSherqat Nilabshinu? 43 Brak 37 Emar Meskene/Balis Tuttul? 36 Bi'a Urshu? 28 Touqan Karana? 28 Rimah 25 Hammam et-Turkman Zalpah? Kahat 23 Barri Shibaniba 15 Billa 15 Germayir 13 ChagarBazar 13 Arbit 12 Ailun 4 Nuzi YorganTepe 1 Gawra Sizes of Other Mesopotamian Sites 100 Mishrife Qatna Shuruppak 100 Fara,ED III 54 Hariri Mari 50 Kish Inghara,ED III 48 Agade? Mizyad, ED III

10

Eachyearthe deadand dyingouterfronds(Arabic sa'af)arecut fromthe palm abouta footfromits trunk ... When the palm is about

fourteenyearsoldthe base woodyandexpanded of the fronds(Arabickarib) arecut awaycloseto the trunkof the palm.This operationgenerallykills anysuckerbudsfromthe tree(Dowson1921:26). he mudbrick columns of the two Leilan temples provide,so far, facadedecorationusing four different types of engagedor "half"columns: (1)a palm trunk column, with diamond-shapedfrond scars, surroundedby braidedcolumns (Building LevelIII);(2)a palm trunk column with petallike imbricated (overlapping)fronds (BuildingLevelII, south facade);(3)columns of mudbrick spirals twisting in alternate directions (BuildingLevelII, north facade);and (4)plain-facedcolumns either twisted (BuildingLevelIII)or straight (BuildingLevelII). What are palm-treecolumns doing in northeasternmostSyria? Palm trees certainly arenot at home in northernMesopotamia.Indeed, they are rarelyfound furtherupstream than modern Abu Kemal,on the Euphratesnear ancient Mari,at the borderof Syriaand Iraq.But they are and were at home in southern Mesopotamia,and apparentlywere an


1985

architecturalconvention for the decoration of public building facadesfrom at least as early as the Uruk period when the pillars and engagedcolumns of the Uruk temples were emblazoned with cone-mosaic designs imitating the trunks of palm trees (Buren1945: 29; Brandes1968).At Al-Ubaid,in the late EarlyDynastic period, palm trunks were used as the cores for mosaic and sheathed columns (Hall and Woolley 1927: 100;HowardCarter 1983:65). Largemudbrick date-palmcolumns with diamondshapedfrond scars decoratedthe gateway into the so-calledBastion of Warad-Sinat Ur in the nineteenth century B.C.(Woolley 1936).

ContemporaryMari, however, providesthe most contexts for palmtree decorationwithin public buildings: three for palaces and one for a temple. A much discussed chamber within the Palaceof Zimri-Lim,later occupied by Shamshi-Adad'sson Yasmakh-Adad,was known as the

"DatePalm Court"(Al-Khalesi1978), while the famous "Investiture" wall

paintings of the palace depict palm trees with frondstrimmed in the "diamond"fashion, like the mudbrick columns of LeilanBuildingLevelm and the Bastion of Warad-Sinat Ur (Parrot1958:plates 10- 13).Less well known, but very intriguing, is the referenceto a "PalmTree"Palace in Shamshi-Adad'sletter of reprimandto Yasmakh-Adad,quoted in the sidebar to the present article entitled "The Searchfor Shamshi-Adad'sCapital City."(Mightthis be referringto yet anotherMaripalace?)A stone-column base from Mari cut in imitation of palm scales suggests that columns resemblingpalm-treetrunks would have been quite at home here (Parrot 1939:plate V, 2). And lastly, it did not escape the notice of Andr6Parrotthat the left side of the doorwayinto the Dagan emple at Mari"sembleavoir 6te decore de troncs de palmiers" (Parrot1938:21). In southern Mesopotamia,palm trees are also mentioned in association with the Shamash temple at Larsa,a majorcontemporarycity on the Euphrates.Gungunum, king of Larsafrom 1932 to 1906 b.c., went so far as to name a year "Theyear he broughttwo bronze date palms into the temple of Shamash"(Ungnad 1938: 155).The ].BABBARShamash temple at Larsahas, for severalyears, been under excavationby the Univer-

sity of Paristeam directedby Professor J.-L.Huot, but bronze palms have not been retrieved.However,a set of beautifully constructed courtyards have been exposed. The interior walls of one of these, CourtyardI, were decoratedwith spiral columns very similar to the spiralcolumns used as exterior facadedecoration in Leilan Building LevelII (Calvetand others 1976;Huot and others 1983). A very intriguing parallelfor the use of columns, both palmlike and spiral, is availableat the contemporarytemple of Tll al-Rimah,just across the bordernear Tell Afar,Iraq. The Rimah temple features spiral columns similar to those of Leilan,as well as two kinds of palmlike columns, a "scale"pattern, and the diamond-shapedpattern.The petallike imbricatedpattern of Leilan Building LevelII is not in evidence here, but may have been used in the still unexcavatedportions of the temple. Two carvedstone blocks depicting deities standingbetween palm trees have recently been published from the excavationsat 1ll al-Rimah (Howard-Carter1983).One of these presents a goddess standingbetween palm trees with frondstrimmed with "compass-likescale patterns."A second block features a bullman between palms with trunks decorated"witha herring-bonepattern"(Howard-Carter 1983:67, plate LlA). The "herringbone pattern"here precisely replicates

the spiral patternpresentedby the spiral columns at Rimah. Indeed,the spiral columns at Rimah, Leilan,and Larsa,accompanyingother palm tree columns, probablyalso represented palm trees whose frondimbrications could be perceivedand representedas diagonalcuts along the palm trunk. In southern Mesopotamiathe annual fertilization of the female palm resulted in a bounty of dates and date by-products.Hence, the palm tree was a symbol of agriculturalfertility, even in northernMesopotamia. On the treeless HaburPlains, and across northern Mesopotamia,the mudbrickpalmlike spiral columns of Leilanand Rimah probablyreflect, as well, the practicaluse of palm timbers in building construction. As ShamshiAdadhimself wrote to Yasmakh-Adad: The palms,cypressesand myrtles that have been broughtfrom the town of Qatanumlie at presentin the townof Subrum.SendMashiya and a few officials with him to Subrum,wheretheyshalldividethe palms,cypresses,and myrtlesinto three lots. Send one-thirdof the palms, cypresses,and myrtles to Ekallatum,one third to Nineveh, and one thirdto ShubatEnlil... Thatwhichyousendto ShubatEnlil is to be transported by ship to the townof Saggaratum, thenfromSaggaratum to Qattunan. From Qattunan let the men of Qattunan take it in wagons,and let them bring it to ShubatEnlil (ARMI. 7: 4-31).

A small portion of the southern facade of the Building-Level-IItemple has thus far been excavated. Like the northernfacade it was decorated with niches and engaged columns but was not as well preserved.One mudbrick column was clearly sculpted to resemble the trunk of a "dressed" palm tree.

BIBLICAL ARCHAEO)LOGISTMARCH

1985

11

During the 1979 season an earlier temple was found, Building LevelIII of the Acropolisnortheast. See accompanying text for an explanation of the plan.

faced arrangements, across a distance of more than 50 meters. The western portion of this facade apparently extends across a massive mudbrick platform, still only partially excavated, that seems to antedate the construction of the temple, and

North

_

+

against which it was built. Portions of this facade still stand to heights of 3 meters; to judge from the thickness of its walls, the facade may have stood as high as 6 or 7 meters in antiquity. Looming over the plain, more than 20 meters below, this arrayof mudbrick architectural power would have imposed itself as a formidable vision upon the merchants and mule caravanners trekking along the great east-west "trans-Mesopotamian" trade route that passes alongside Tell Leilan. On the Acropolis interior, and looking southward toward the ziggurat, the southern facade of this temple also featured niches and engaged columns. Only 9 meters of this facade have been excavated so

S C, e0

.

,

A?r?ri

Pit

q-

Thetemplein BuildingLevelIII was rebuiltin Building Level II.

45S11

~";

45Vl 1 _ -

South

A

-

45Tl

I

AI

45V10

-

o

t

far, but the niches here surround the badly eroded surface of a mudbrick column coated with thick mudplaster and sculpted to resemble the trunk of a "dressed"palm tree. Indeed, that is what the spiral columns of the north facade may have represented to the observer in the eighteenth century B.c. (See the accompanying sidebar, "Palm Trees and Spiral Columns.") Building Level III. Immediately south of the south facade of Building

Level II our excavations have retrieved portions of what appears to be an earlier temple, more than likely a larger temple whose restoration or reconstruction in Building Level II resulted in its foreshortening. That is, Building Level II seems to be a rebuilding of Building Level III, but without a southern courtyard with side rooms. The extant plan of this structure reveals a large central courtyard (A) on the south that is flanked by narrow rooms (B) on the east, and probably the west as well.

4W1

A Pit

0

1

2

3

4

5

10

METERS

B

45Wt~.

12


Left-edgefragmentof an inscribed stele in a fine-grainedblack stone. Withparts of three lines of Old Babylonian-style "monumental" script, this fragment,which is obviously only a small portion of a verylarge stone monument, was retrievedwithin wall-collapse strata of room 3 of the Building-Level-II temple.

Examples of Habur ware dating to the nineteenth century B.c.from Building LevelsII and III of the Acropolis-northeast.

The northern face of the east-west wall that closes the northern rooms was decoratedwith stepped niches symmetrically set against a central, engagedmudbrick column (C).The face of this column was heavily coated with mudplaster,and then sculpted to resemble the trunk of a palm tree. (See sidebar.)The floors that are set against this facadewere relaid three times; their extension to the north underlies the slightly later constructions of Building LevelII (see the stratigraphicsection). Second-millennium-temple artifacts. The floors of the Building-Level-II temple were littered with thousands of potsherds, as well as animal bones and carbonizedwheat, barley,and other seeds-the refuse of daily cooking and eating, from which we hope to reconstruct not only the rangeof comestibles consumed within the temple but also the crops and agriculturalpractices that characterized the HaburPlains during the second millennium

Detail of the northernfacade of the Building-Level-IIItemple on the Acropolis-northeast.An engaged,mudbrick column that is sculpted to resemble the trunk of a palm tree is the focal point of this section of the facade. (Its location is indicated by the letter "C"on the accompanyingplan.)

B.C.

Cuneiform tablets were also retrievedwithin several rooms; most are economic documents, recording the receipt of various commodities


13

ities, by definition, are functional centers serving a dependent hinterland. When cities first emerged in southern Mesopotamia,a means of recording the transactionsthat maintainedthis new social and economic system became a necessity. The transactions were complex and involved a multitude of groups, individuals, and institutions: cities and villages, classes of administratorsand laborers,and officials regulatingand recordingthe transferof goods and services. Two devices evolved and were regularlyemployed to facilitate these exchanges. One was writing, and the second was cylinder sealing. Writing was, of course, used to recordthe details of transactions;but some means was needed to insure the veracity of the inscription, or in cases where only the goods were to be transportedor received, the integrity of the shipment. Ancient Near Eastern officials, therefore,sealed tablets as well as containers and even storeroomswith cylinders bearing their names and titles, much the way post offices stamp telegrams,or customs officials bind and seal international shipments.

Above: Cylinder seal impression (L82-105) found on the floor in the southern part of room 13 of the Building-LevelII temple. Its inscription reads, "Suri-Adad,son of Zidriya, servant of Shamshi-Adad." Middle: Thirteencylinder seal impressions found in the Building-Level-Iltemple bore the second Suri-Adadinscription: 'Adad .. . canal inspector of the god ..., and the god ..., Suri-Adad,the ...."Seven were found on the floor of room 12 (L80-176, -180, -186, -190, -191, -194, and -195); three were found on the floor of room 13 (L82-118, -119, and -120); and three were discoveredin the secondary blockage between rooms 8 and 12 (L82-123, - 126, -127). The scene depicted on this seal is a standard, Old Babylonianrepresentationof the "godwith mace"in front of the "suppliantgoddess." Below: Also scattered among the rubbish of room 8 were 227 seal impressionsin various stages of preservationbearing this inscription:"Beli-emuqi, servant of Khaya-abum,servant of the god Adad."The standard Old Babylonian-style glyptic design, the "godwith mace"and "suppliantgoddess," is here supplemented with a "winged-lamassu"demon standing behind the goddess. A crescent-starand a monkey are used as filler between the god and goddess.

14


important for the temple economy. Systematic sieving of the temple floors also made it possible to retrieve numerous inscribed cylinder seal impressions. From the southern part of room 13, one seal impression bears the inscription of Suri-Adad,son of Zidriya,servantof Shamshi-Adad, thereby conclusively proving the occupation and use of this temple during Shamshi-Adad's reign. Seven impressions of another seal of (the same?) "Suri-Adad"were also found on the floor of room 12 and three more were found on the floor of room 13: Adad . . . canal inspector of the god..., and the god..., Suri-Adad, the.... But sometime, probably not too long after the initial use of these floors, three alterations were made to this building, each utilizing a characteristic mudbrick that was whiter, coarser, and more fragile than that of the structure's original walls. The relationship of the alterations to the temple's original walls can be observed in the plan of Building Level II, where the alterations are indicated in dark shading. A portion of room 12 was walled off to become a doorless room 13, with a north-facing window; the long central cella, which probably had a mudbrick altar set squarely in front of its northern wall, would have then ceased to serve as the carefully planned focus of cultic activity. The floor of room 13 is the last living surface in this room. This floor passes under the enclosure wall; a similar situation obtains to the west of the enclosure in room 12. The face of the eastern wall of room 13 extends below this last floor. The two sets of rooms 15 - 16 and 8- 9, which are essentially parallel arrangements, each had one of their two entrances sealed with a curtain wall. Removing the secondary blockage of the doorway between rooms 8 and 12, three additional clay seal

impressions of the second Suri-Adad inscription were retrievedfrom the interstices of the brickwork.These were probablylying on the floor when a mason swept them up to fill cracks in his sloppy construction of the secondarywall. After the construction of this wall, a deposit of ash and trash built up against it upon the floor of room 8. Within this organic rubbish 229 additional seal impressions were tossed as jars of commodities were opened. Twoof these bore the inscription of: Apil-ilishu,son of Ali-banishu,servantof Thrum-natki, while 227 (complete and fragmentary)bore the inscription of: Beli-emuqi,servantofKhaya-abum, Above: tvo impressions from a cylinder seal (L82- 74 and - 75)were found among the organic servantof the godAdad. rubbish of room 8 in the Building-Level-IItemple. Theirinscriptionreads as follows: 'Apil-ilishu, with other temples. Comparison son of Ali-banishu, servantof Turum-natki." These cylinder seal impressions are derivedfrom a cylinder seal with an apparentlyunique design. A "hero" holds the tails of a cow and a lion. The Building-Level-IItemple at Tell Other "heroes"appearto jump over the backs of these animals. On each side of a mythological Leilan, apartfrom its historically bird,in the lower register,thereis a guilloche. Some parallels for this seal's designs occur in fascinating floor debris, remains an contemporaryAnatolia and in southernMesopotamiaduring the third millennium B.c. Below: This macrophotographof a jar stopper(measuringapproximately40 millimeters wide) artifact, an expression of personal found in room 8 shows the seal impression of 'Apil-ilishu,son of Ali-banishu, servant of and social styles identifiable in Thrum-natki. space and time. As such, it is worthy of comparison to other, similar, monumental architecture,even though its plan is not yet complete. Wehave speculated that the original plan of the temple will be available in Building LevelIII,with Building LevelII only representinga partial rebuild of that temple. If this suggestion provescorrect, the Leilan temple may have been one of the largest constructed during this period, for it would then be approximately 6,000 squaremeters, or about twice the size of the Sin-Shamash temple at Ashur and the temple at Tell al-Rimah, and the equal of the Ischali temple and the Ashur Temple at Ashur. This, however,is not too surprisingbecause there does seem to be a gross correlation between the size of a city and the size of its public buildings. A "langraum"-temple? The specific plan of this building is, however,rather surprising. (Note that the isometric plan of the BuildingLevel-IItemple does not include the building's secondarywall construc-


15

1980: 535; J. Oates 1979: 79). These temples, however, do not really have the room arrangement characteristic of "langraum"-temples, and seem to be examples of the period's characteristic "Babylonian"temple with a "breitraum" ("wide-room")cella (Hrouda 1971: 152; Heinrich 1982: 189). The earliest "langraum"known at present is that of the Sin-Shamash temple at the Assyrian capital of Ashur, constructed by Ashur-nirari I in the sixteenth century B.C. The next oldest is the famous Innin Temple of Karaindash at Warka, TwoLeilan village workmen sieve floor debris of the Building-Level-IItemple with millimeter- which dates to the fifteenth century screens. Supervisingthe work is FaroukIsmail, then a graduatestudent and now a professor B.C. (Heinrich 1982). of ancient Near Easternlanguages at the University of Aleppo. If the Leilan temple is of the "langraum"-type it is no longer Excavation is not forthe faint of heart.There is a daringkind of brinkmanship, necessary to hypothesize extraa continuous tension, between the need to excavateand remove,andthe need Mesopotamian, possibly "Kassite," to preserveand isolate, while the clock ticks away,workmen stand by waiting, origins for this temple-type as was and precious research funds dwindle. In a building such as the Leilan temple, argued in the past (Martiny 1936; massive brick collapse is first removed, and wall faces of mudplaster are then Jaritz 1960; Matthiae 1975). Concurcarefully picked with hand tools so as not to "create"walls but to define them however, the Leilan temple rently, the matrix of identical mudbrick against virtually collapse. raises new questions: Why is this Followingwall faces down to their floors can be nerve-racking.There is temple-form appearing at Leilan at the ever-presentdangerof missing the this time, and what are its origins? tions.) Here it is possible to see the almost symmetric arrangement of floor, following the wall-face down to One hypothesis that might now its subfloorfoundationsor to an earlier side rooms (rooms 4, 5, 8, 14, 15, and be entertained is that the "Assyrian floor, and thereby mixing the strati16) around a long central cella (room langraum" temple-plan actually was graphic deposition that provides the a Shamshi-Adad, or Shamshi-Adad12), which itself is, apparently, pretemporal framework for archaeolog- ceded a wide antecella (room 10), period, innovation subsequently by ical reconstruction.Delicately tracing only fragmentarily defined in the adopted or copied by later Assyrian with handpicks the "break"between areas excavated to date. With the In much the same way that royalty. collapse andwall-facedown to the first Shamshi-Adad mimicked the royal centimeter-sized patch of "break," addition of the secondary blockage walls, access to the cella would have titulature of the Akkadian dynasts, which indicates the stamped, somebeen so later Assyrian monarchs perpetimpossible except through the times lightly plastered floor, is an antecella and, presumably, a doorway uated many Shamshi-Adad innovaanxiety-filledprocess. There is no second chance. Unique among research to the south through the south tions. Two outstanding examples of disciplines, archaeology destroys part facade. Have we then a "langraum"-, this are his name, which was subof its data, the archaeologicalcontext, or long-room, temple, the classic sequently adopted by four other as that data is retrieved and then reAssyrian temple-form of the first Assyrian kings, and his Ashur inmoved in the excavationof still earlier millennium B.C.,which always scriptions, whose style and dialect deposits. features the lineal arrangement of were imitated by Middle Assyrian When floors are located, student "doorway"-"wide-room" antecellakings in their royal annals (Laessge supervisors and pickmen call out for 1963: 95). Is the "langraum"-temple "long-room" cella? If the Buildingfine one-millimeter screens. The floor then an innovation of ShamshiLevel-II temple at Leilan is "landeposits provide the crucial evidence Adad? If this were the case, we for activities that can be securely graum" it may be the earliest temple as of to this would expect the temple condated, opposed postoccupation type. collapse deposits. Sieving assures uniSome archaeologists have arstructed by Shamshi-Adad at Ashur form retrieval: No artifacts, however gued that "langraum"-temples do to be "langraum."Unfortunately, the small, will be passedover as the debris excavation of this structure does not appear in the early second millenresting immediately upon the floor nium B.C.at Ischali and Tell Harmal allow us to make definitive statesurfaces is cleared. 1962: Amiet ments about the temple's plan in the 416; (Strommenger

16


1985

N V '4'"?j~?r

Isomtri uilingLeve-Iltempe pla ofthe o th ln ro This shw tebilig' Acropolis-northeast.''''

(roms 4, 5,8,1, smetricaarrangemen ofesuide roomsl-I

5 .

aendr 16).a Roomm 10)is an antecella.::r:1 rune

11 K,?

\16

So~>10 /l;

15

:

~::.?()

4

12

N~?~

: N'

?.'

~

)

0

3

4?etr5

CI

days of Shamshi-Adadbut, as Anton Moortgatnoted, the foundations of this structure leave open the possibility that the temple's cella was originally "langraum"(Moortgat 1969:76). Veryintriguing, as well, are the engagedcolumns that once decoratedthe exterior of this temple (Haller 1955:33, figure 8; Heinrich 1982: 198-99). We do not know how they were decorated.They might have been spirals or have been

because the Leilan temple has not yet defined itself conclusively as "langraum." A bent-axis temple? Recall the decoratedwith one of the other note aboveconcerning the disposition of the temple doorway.Wehave palm-frondmotifs. assumed that the main doorwayinto Forthe moment, however,we must refrainfrom absolute statethe temple lies directly in line with the doorwayinto the long cella bements about origins and explanacause when the secondaryblockage tions, for definitive evidence is not available-nor, in the archaeological was in place there would have been no other access into the building. At world, is it ever likely to be. The present, therefore,we anticipate typology of temple-plans seems to allow for the categorization of the finding a magnificent doorwayalong Building-Level-IItemple, but only in the facadewhere we have already located a palm-treecolumn. And if so far as it has been excavateduntil the doorwayis not there? now. This last caveat is necessary


17

4P1145 Q11 45P11

-

-

Wa ll A

.

•

~rt

~ F3Pr

2

Wll L.2

FOor

4

FOO0

Limitof Exc2v4tion

N0 0

i

2

3

4

5

i0 Meters

The stratigraphicsection of Building LevelsI, II, and III on the Acropolis-northeastis shown above and is continued on the following pages. The entire section documents sixty meters of stratigraphyacross the Acropolis.Note Building LevelII in squares 45P11,45Q11,and 45Rll and the foundation trenchfor the south facade of Building LevelII identified as stratum 4 in square 45Rll. The exteriorsurfacefor Building LevelII is identified in square 45R11as floor-stratum2. Building LevelI, the low platform and paving that was set against the ruins of Building Level II, is also visible in 45R11above floor 2.

Another characteristicof the These temples mark a clear disLeilan temple's decoration is the use juncture with those of preceding of "reveals," or doorjambinsets, to periods in the south; their existence accent important passageways.On in the Diyala, east of the Tigris, has the isometric plan of the temple, a led some archaeologiststo see the "cookie-crumbtrail"of reveals detype as an "osttigridischeErfindung" to be associated with the thirdfines first the corners of the long cella, and then leads the worshipper millennium-B.C.Hurriansof north out, not through the hypothesized Mesopotamia and north Syria doorway,but to the "langraum"-type (Lenzen 1955: 17;Hrouda 1984:65). Farfrom being a Shamshi-Adadwest, along a bent axis, or "knichachse,"past two side rooms and then periodinnovation, then, the Buildinginto room 19, at which our excavaLevel-IItemple plan may harkenback tion has halted. Quite simply, an to the still earlier,third-millennium, urban roots of Tell Leilan (see the important route has here been desection below on Tell Leilan in the fined that, in spite of its eventual once featured blockage, prominently third-millennium B.C.). Leilan and ShubatEnlil. Does in the traffic pattern of the building. 'Tel If our next excavation season shows the deposition of seal impressions of that there was no doorwayout of the Suri-Adad,Turum-natki,and Khayabuilding directly in front of the long abum within the Building-Level-II cella, this reveal-decorated"benttemple allow us to equate Tell Leilan axis"route must have providedacwith Shubat Enlil through the docucess to the cella. Such a "bent-axis" mentation for the city's last days? type temple-plan takes us back to (See the accompanyingsidebar,"The the Diyala excavations of the Searchfor Shamshi-Adad'sCapital Oriental Institute at Khafajahwhere City.")Such a suggestion would be the famous Sin temple sequence for bold, if not rash. The deposition of the EarlyDynastic period is seal impressions inscribed "SuriAdadservant of Shamshi-Adad"cerdominated by "bent-axis"temples.

18


tainly, however,occurredprior to those of Turum-natkiand Khayaabum, and these rulers only figure in the Mari documentation for Shubat Enlil after the death of ShamshiAdad. Tobe sure, we have no Tell Leilan documentation as yet for Kunnam the Elamite and Atamrum of Andariq,the other rulers of the city. Nor do the impressions of "SuriAdad,servant of Shamshi-Adad" by themselves requirethat Tell Leilan be considered the seat of ShamshiAdad'spower,for such seal impressions are known from other sites across the HaburPlains and northern Iraqsuch as ChagarBazar,Tell Taya,and Tell al-Rimah,and even A9emhiiyiik on the Anatolian plateau (Loretz1969:no. 23; Postgate 1973: 173-75; Hawkins 1976; Ozgu9 1980:99). There remains, too, the conundrum of 227 seal impressions and fragments inscribed "Khaya-abumof Apum."In most circumstances such would be taken as prima facie evidence for identifying Tell Leilanwith Apum, a city near Shubat Enlil that also has yet to be

-

45Q11 45R11

45R11

i 2

Woll B 3 4

B /

Foor

~ F

II

wall A-B

E•I

•

•-

Limit of Excovotion

identified on the Habur Plains. At this time, it seems safe to answer our questions only with additional questions. In consideration of Tell Leilan's location, size, morphology, and terminal occupational history, if the site is not Shubat Enlil, what is it? Apum? But Apum is not known to have existed in the third millennium B.c., which is when our excavations indicate that Tell Leilan first became a large city (see the second half of this paper). Similarly, Shubat Enlil is not known as a city name prior to the reign of Shamshi-Adad. If Tell Leilan is Shubat Enlil, what was its name in the third millennium?. In the early second millennium Tell Leilan was B.C. clearly one center of regional power on the Habur Plains. The sequence of Acropolis building levels, their artifacts and inscriptions, and their debris, litter, and collapse provide an arena for historical investigation, just as they dramatically draw attention to the actions of individual personalities who represented the contending interests of villages, cities, regions, and empires in the early second millennium. Whether Tell Leilan was Shubat Enlil, or another documented large city such as Apum, remains to be

determined and adds another, if tangential, problem for resolution. Sites such as Tell Leilan do not draw their inherent archaeological significance from their correlation with historically documented settlements. On the contrary, it is the settlement itself that is of signifi-

torical referencesto a city named Shubat Enlil inform us of that city's significance in the region. If the two kinds of evidence pertain to each other a series of well-established historical problems can be defined. If they do not, an entirely new set of problems may emerge. Regardless,therefore,of Tell Leilan'sname in the second millen-

In 1800B.C.TellLeilan

nium B.C.,the details of its historical

wasa centerofpowner on theHaburPlains. cance because of the role that it playedwithin a region. A useful example of this name-site relationship is Tell Mardikh(ancient Ebla). Prior to the recoveryof the thirdmillennium-B.c. palace at Mardikh, Eblawas simply one of severalwest Syriantoponyms known from southern Mesopotamian documents to have been destroyedor conqueredby Sargonand Naram Sin. The archaeological recoveryof Tell Mardikh, however,now informs us of Ebla's role in Syrianhistory. Similarly,Leilan'ssize and geographicalposition inform us of its general role within the region. His-

and regional role remain to be examined. The imperial and local dramasof the early second millennium on the HaburPlains were not without precedent, however.Nor was it simply fortune that situated this very large second-millennium occupation at Tell Leilan. T1ll Leilan in the Third Millennium B.c.:Soundings at the Acropolis-northwest, Lower'IbTwn,and City Wall In orderto establish a frameworkfor problem-specificinvestigations of the site, a preliminary series of three, deep stratigraphicsoundings were undertakenin 1980. These soundings- designated Operation 1, Operation 57F02, and Operation2 - retrievedthe ceramics associated with each stratum of occupation, as well as radiocarbonsamples and floral and botanical remains that


1985

19

N • ()

0

2

3

I

4

2Meters

5

I0

145T 4~45S

411

Floor

-

2

-

-

-

F-r

-

-~ x4

-

---+----, ,:=:,--II oo--'...? >

II

2 .--D

•

Flooor+=__ •+

•Y

__..++.•

Limitof Excavotion

j -•.

•

".

C-

+,''•

IFIoor

-

r

4!;

.

• -• ?-

012

• -d

"

.. :. :

Floor FloorLimit.of.Excava

tG Limitof Exccovotionr

Squares45S11and 45T11show the continuation of Building-Level-Ipaving. Underneath the paving in 45S11and 45T11the continuation of floor-stratum2 of Building LevelII can also be seen. Underneath that, however,are severalstrata of bricky wall collapse derivedfrom wall A in 45T11.Below those strata of wall collapse, numbered 6 through 12, the last of three Period-IIIfloors can be seen. These plasteredfloors abut the plastered face of wall A. The extension of Building LevelIII to the south can be seen in the remainderof 45T11and 45V11.

allow for the initial occupational sketch of the site as far back as the

RelativeChronology Northern Iraq B.C. NorthwesternSyria HaburPlains 1600 Old SyrianPeriod Leilan I Old Assyrian 1900 (MardikhIIIA-B)

Late Protosyrian (MardikhI1B2)

(B.L.I-III...?) TayaVI Leilan IIb

MatureProtosyrian 25O0 (MardikhIBl1)

3200

TayaIX

SouthernIraq Old Babylonian Isin- Larsa Ur III Guti Akkadian EarlyDynastic In

LeilanHa Leilan IIc EarlyProtosyrian Leilan IIb (MardikhIIA) LeilanlIIa (AmuqH)

Ninevite V

Amuq G

LeilanIV

LateUruk

Leilan V LeilanVIa

EarlyUruk EarlyUruk Late Northern Ubaid Ubaid 4

EarlyDynastic II

EarlyDynastic I Late Uruk

3500 (Mardikh I) 4100

Amuq F

5000 Amuq E

Amuq D 5500

20

LeilanVIb EarlyNorthern Ubaid Ubaid 3 Halaf Halaf Ubaid 2 Ubaid 1


fifth millennium B.c. (Forthe precise

locations of the soundings, see the topographicalmap at the beginning of this paper.) The stratigraphicsequence of ceramics has now been statistically analyzed, and allows us to characterize each occupation floor by the presence or absence of specific kinds of pottery and, still more importantly, the relative frequencyof each pottery-typewithin the sample for each stratum. This kind of quantitative analysis, a prerequisitefor eventually establishing smaller periodizations and linking occupations at different loci to each other, also makes possible an "objective" lumping of strata to form ceramic periods. Judgingfrom the relative frequency of ceramic types, stratamore similar to each other than to other strata can be statistically defined as a ceramic "period." Sets of radiocarbonsamples retrievedfrom these soundings have augmented the periodization available from the ceramic analyses. In a

45Tll 45V11

4

45V

3 p

C

6 0

( 0

2

U

Wall B4

Wall A ,

-i

,

3 P I0

region as sparsely explored as the HaburPlains, these radiocarbon samples mark the beginning of the resolution of fundamental chronological problems, including some that have still not been resolved in adjacentregions where archaeologists have worked for many years. To facilitate the resolution of some basic chronological problems, we have attempted to process a large number of samples from individual contexts, thereby providingfor the reduction, through weighted averaging, of the standarddeviation that accompanies each determination. The first stratigraphicsounding at Leilan, which we have called Operation 1, was actually started briefly in 1979 but became a major researcheffort in 1980 (see Schwartz 1982). This sounding is now 16 meters deep and presently has reached to the Ubaid period (see the stratigraphic section of the Acropolisnorthwest; see also the Tell Leilan ceramic periodizations).Virgin soil, probablyunder several strata of Halaf-periodsettlements, is likely to be another 10 meters below. Above the Ubaid-periodstrata (periodVI), which comprise the remains of domestic structures, are several stratawith similar ceramic shapes

Limitof

.

.

.

.

.

Excovotion

-

but few painted vessels (periodV). These may be contemporarywith the "EarlyUruk"period in the south. Fourdistinct strata then follow with sherds from beveled-rimbowls that characterizethe "LateUruk"period in southern Mesopotamia. Immediately following these are some 25 strata (periodIII)with painted and incised "Ninevite V"ceramics and residential remains. This sequence of Ninevite-Vperiod strata is perhapsthe longest yet retrieved.It appearsto span the enigmatic gap between the northern equivalents of the south'sUruk period and the EarlyDynastic IIIperiod (Schwartz1982;Weiss 1981-1982; 1983). Startling,however,is the occupational history that can be reconstructed from the stratigraphic evidence of Operation 1 and from additional tests on the LowerTown (Operation57F02)and at the City Wall (Operation2). Cumulatively these tests indicate that at the end of the Leilan III/NineviteV period and at the beginning of the Leilan II period a majortransformationof settlement occurredon the Habur Plains. Operation 2, we thought, might provethat the City Wallwas first built in the time of Shamshi-Adad. Who else would have been able to

muster and control the labor requiredfor the construction of a mudbrick wall 3.5 kilometers long, at least 15 meters thick, and at least 15 meters high? In the last days of the 1980 excavation season, however, it was with considerableshock that we found ourselves against the City Wall excavatingsurfaces much earlier than those littered with "Haburware"and trampedupon in the days of Shamshi-Adad.These earlier surfaces and City Wall construction phases are characterized by ceramics of the period that we designate Leilan II, or the "Leilan" period, because it is the period when the site emerged to regional prominence. The ceramics associated with the first interior floors set against this wall, visible in the section drawingof Operation2, are illustratedhere. Operation 57F02 revealed precisely the same ceramicstratigraphicphenomenon: The first LowerTown occupation, set on virgin soil, was associated with the early Period-IIceramics. Through the Leilan III/Ninevite V period, therefore,settlement at Leilan had not extended beyond the area of the 15-hectareAcropolis, and conceivably was still smaller. Suddenly, however,at a time when Ninevite V ceramics had passed


21

from use and Leilan II ceramics had just begun to be used, the settlement expandedsixfold, from 15 to 90 hectares, and the enormous City Wall was constructed. This kind of alteration in settlement is unlikely to have been a unique event. As geographershave long observed,"Cities do not grow up of themselves. Countrysides set them up to do tasks that must be performedin central places"(Jefferson 1931:435). The new information providedby the soundings at the City Walland LowerTown sets the stage, therefore,for an examination of the regional forces and conditions behind this development. Twoquestions immediately requireattention. When did this expansion of settlement and circumvallation occur?

What other developments, historical, demographic,or economic, might have occurredat this same periodi When did the expansion of the city occur?Two sets of data allow us to begin to clarify the relative and absolute date for the construction of the City Wall,when the rapidexpansion of settlement took place. Four radiocarbondates derivedfrom a very largedeposit of charredgrain retrievedin stratum 20 of Operation 1 have now been analyzed. Twoof

these samples were sent to a laboratory in Floridaand two were sent to a laboratoryin Tokyo;the dates determined by these laboratoriesare indicated in the chart of Leilan radiocarbondates. Because these dates are derived from one large sample, they can be averagedin a fashion that allows us

P

~44

3

1aj

-

1 -.

4 C

36

3

41

*B~/ -.

*

.

.

* *? 42 4 • _

-

57S

_

W- Wall s-Stone P -Pit

I

--1 F - Feature aJ-Burial a-Animal burrow

- Ash

PP

Operation 1, north section, Acropolis-northwest. Operation 1, which is now 16 meters deep, was the first stratigraphic sounding made at Leilan. At present the lowest excavated strata

date to the Ubaid period.

22


20

25

0.- S ,

"

19

_-

P

43

-y

-~

28

W25si

-19

-

-------•

•

,..

2

11

I

1-3 4 wi

a

5-7 a

s

8

10 9 W3

s 12

W2

Examplesof Leilan III (Ninevite V)potteryfrom TellLeilan Operation 1. Incised ware (rim and body sherds)and painted ware (complete vessels). The date of these intricate and very beautiful ceramic vessels has been a mysteryfor decades. The retrievalof twenty-fivesuccessive strata characterizedby such ceramics within Operation 1 now permits us to date them to the periodimmediately precedingthe circumvallation of TellLeilan and immediately after the Late Urukperiod in northernMesopotamia.Reproducedfrom Glenn M. Schwartz,

to Historyon the HaburPlains(1982). FromPrehistory

'Tll LeilanRadiocarbonSamples Lab.Number UM-1816 N-3900 N-3901 N-3902 UM-3101 UM-1818 UM-3098 N-3896 N-3897 N-3898 UM-1777 UM-3099 N-3899 UM-1814 UM-1815 UM-18131 UM-1812 UM-1817

Provenience L80 45Q12 10 C-14no. 1 L79 45V10 22 C-14no.5 L79 45Tl1 16 C-14no. 8 L79 45T11 8 C-14no. 3 L79 45V10 13 C-14no. 2 L80 Op 267 C-14no. 2 L80 Op 1 41 C-14no. 9 L79 Op 1 26 C-14no. 2 L79 Op 1 40 C-14no. 5 L79 Op 1 40 C-14no. 6 L79 Op 1 40 C-14no. 6 L80 Op 1 40 C-14no. 2 L79 Op 1 45 C-14no. 7 L80 Op 1 94 C-14no. 6 L80 Op 1 96 C-14no. 7 L80 Op 1A 6 C-14no. 6 L80 Op 1A 40 C-14no. 6 L80 Op 1C 35 C-14no. 1

Context Acropolis-northeastBuildingLevelII Acropolis-northeastBuildingLevelIII Acropolis-northeastBuildingLevelIII Acropolis-northeastBuilding LevelIII Acropolis-northeastBuildingLevelIII "CityWall"phaseE Op 1 stratum 19 Op 1 stratum 19 Op 1 stratum 20 Op 1 stratum 20 Op 1 stratum 20 Op 1 stratum 20 Op 1 stratum 34 Op 1 stratum 34 Op 1 stratum 35 Op 1 stratum 38 Op 1 stratum 44 Op 1 stratum 58

Material wood wood contaminated contaminated contaminated wood grain wood grain grain grain grain grain grain grain + wood grain grain grain + wood

beforepresent 3895 ? 80 3330 ? 80 rejected rejected rejected 4320 ? 90 2870 ? 130 4980 ? 80 3970 ? 85 4070 ? 70 4090 ? 70 4060 ? 60 4210 ? 85 4890 ? 70 4625 ? 85 4735 ? 110 4705 ? 85 6580 ? 100

B.c. ? 2s 2760-2143 1885-1415

3355-2665 1410-790 3935-3565 2865-2190 2885-2415 2895-2420 2880-2410 3150-2555 3875-3395 3655-3055 3783-3193 3775-3173 5785-5240

Notes: The "s"in right-hand column signifies standard deviation. Numbers N-3897, N-3898, UM-1777, and UM-3099 were the samples sent to laboratories in Florida and Tokyo for analysis, two samples being sent to each place.


23

'• , .• __ ..__...V _.-.

a

-

-i

-]

0 5

.'

'

1

2

'phase

D

E

3 9mphase

. 0..

W-WaII S-Stone - ,,,

-L .'11 -

P -Pit

STERILE

p.- Ash

phase A

L

Above:North stratigraphicsection of Operation2. Strata 1 and 2 are surfaceslittered with Habur ware, while strata 3 through8 are characterizedby Period-IIceramics. The foundation trenchfor the City Wallis stratum 9. Below: Representativewheel-made pottery of Leilan PeriodII (circa2500-2000 B.c.)from strata 3 through8 in Operation2.

to reduce the standard deviation (the plus/minus figure that accompanies a radiocarbon "date").This weighted average date is 2673 B.c. - 70, which means that the date of the original sample (short-lived grain) is 85 percent certain to fall within 2755 and 2595 B.c. This date for stratum 20 in Operation 1 provides us with a terminus post quem (that is, the point after which) for the construction of the City Wall (Weiss 1983). But it seems clear that the extant surface upon which the City Wall now rests in Operation 1 was not the last surface deposited there. This area had been scraped and levelled prior to the City Wall's constrtction. How many intervening strata were removed cannot now be known. Probably, however, strata with ceramics similar to those now retrieved at Tell Mohammad Arab, across the border near Eski Mosul in Iraq, are to be situated between the last pre-wall strata and the construction of the wall in Operation 1 (Weiss 1985b). The date of the City Wall's construction, therefore, might be around 2500 B.c. A second set of dating evidence is comprised of the ceramics associated with the construction and first use of the City Wall (see the section drawing for Operation 2, north section, and the illustration of representative pottery). It is now quite certain that these ceramics are the same as those recently retrieved

at Tell Brak. Tell Brak is a large, 43-hectare site, located 51 kilometers southwest of Leilan, alongside the Jaghjagh River, another of the effluents of the Habur that join together near Hasseke to form the "triangle,"as the Habur Plains are sometimes called. Brak was first excavated by Sir Max Mallowan in 1936 and 1937, and until recently those excavations have served as the major guide to the archaeology of the Habur Plains. Sir Max was fortunate in the time that he spent at Brak to uncover a very large mudbrick fortress, almost one

24


Chronological Relationships 11el Brak

circa

CH, ST,and

s.c.

Other Soundings Habur ware

1800

Tell

Leilan Period I

Op.

Acropolis-

1 1-12

northeast B.L. I-III

Leilan

ell Taya

circa

Op. 57F02 1-3

2 1-2

Acropolis III-IV

B.c. 1800

4

1 3

16 virgin soil

9 city wall virgin soil

V-VI VII destruction VIII destruction IX

2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800

1900

1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800

2900 3000 3100 3200

3300 3400 3500

? 13 14 15

1 "UrIII" 2 "initcrregnum" 3-4 Late Agade 5 reconstruction destruction, levelling 6 "late El) III"building

II

city wall gapa IIIc

16- 20

IIIb

21 - 34

Nincvite V

IIIa

35 - 40

Late Uruk

IV

41-44

[levelling]

Ninevite V

(surface]

3200

3300 3400 3500

3600

3600 3700 3800

3700 3800

45 Early Uruk

V

3900

3900 4000

52

4000

52a

4200

4100

4100 4200

4300

VIb

4300 4400 4500

4600 4700 4800

2900 3000 3100

57

4400 4500

58

4600

61

4700 4800

VIa Ubaid

4900 5000

4900 5000 5100

5100

5200 5300

5200 5300

5400

5400

Halat

5500

5500 aPerhaps the same as levels M through R at Mohammad Arab.

hectare in size, with bricks bearing the stamped inscription of NaramSin, Sargon'simperial grandson. Within the partially excavatedfill of the fortress,Mallowan also retrieved a fragmentaryvotive inscription bearingthe name of Rimush, Sargon'sson. It is possible, therefore, that the fortress was even constructed prior to Naram-Sin.This imposing structure has been taken

as unequivocal evidence for Sargonic control of the HaburPlains (Mallowan 1947).More recently, David Oates, successor to Mallowan at Tell Brak,has retrievedportions of a largebuilding adjacentto, but stratigraphicallybelow, the Naram-Sin fortress, and he assigned it to the "lateEarlyDynastic"period. The excavatorsalso suggest that this structure "hadsome official-politi-

cal or military-character, and was not simply an indigenous phase in the continuous occupation of the city as a whole" (Oates 1982a:67). This building was, in turn, destroyed,and then rebuilt, prior to the foundation of the Naram-Sinfortress. It is entirely possible, therefore, that this building was destroyed by Sargon(Oates 1982b: 197).The ceramic assemblage associated with


25

TURKEY

TURABDIN

i'

.~~

---0Amuda

10

CLaIIr

2

30

: :! ?!:'

*1~

0 ,•i. 5......

/

S

Ras ICAin (HeJ *

~~~~~

,,s

:.~i

... ;,;7.,:-,n ....? ?~ ,..... ?:( -.:•?.,....

eSYRIA

../A

:::::::::::: ..

,

i

. . ..

.

SN ,

..

"*" ,i':

.

I

I

-,,ROiI,

.,.'.'.

--,,

, kilometers IRAQ.

..7•:

Map of the Habur Plains, with modemnisohyets (lines that connect points of equal rainfall)drawn in. Figuresare in millimeters.

this building is remarkablysimilar to the early Leilan-period-IIceramic assemblage, the assemblage associated with the sixfold expansion of Leilan and the construction of the City Wall (J.Oates 1982;Weiss 1983). A pre-Naram-Sindate, and possibly pre-Sargondate for the City Wall at Tell Leilan is, therefore,now suggestedby the Leilan radiocarbon dates, the relative ceramic chronology of Leilan ceramics and Mohammad Arabceramics, and the building sequence at TIi1 Brak.If correct, this date may alter considerablyour understandingof the origins of cities and civilization in Syriaand Mesopotamia. Subirin the late third millennium B.c. After its probabledate, the most significant feature of Leilan'scircumvallation, and the most important feature for understandingits genesis, is the observationthat Leilan

26

was not unique. Surfacecollections made by the Tell Leilan Projectin 1979 at TellHamoukar,46 kilometers southeast, indicate that this 90-hectaresettlement was also occupied during the early Leilan II period, and in fact was alreadya very large settlement in late Uruk times. Similarly, surface collections at Tell Mozan, 43 kilometers northwest of Tell Leilan, indicate that this site too, was probablya largeearly LeilanII settlement, which continued to be occupied in Leilan-Itimes. Hence the circumvallation of-that is, the City Wallconstruction aroundLeilan allows it to be understoodas a regional phenomenon, within a specific portion of the HaburPlains: the extremely fertile area of the plains that receives more than 400 millimeters of rainfall per annum. Similar sites appearacross the borderin Iraq,south of the Jebel Sinjarand near TellAfar.


Another site in the region, Tell Brak,appearsto be a different kind of settlement, however.Tll Brak might be understoodas one of a class of settlements, occurring in a variety of historical and geographical contexts, sometimes labelled "gateway cities."Such settlements characteristically control the entrance into a region, command the connections between that region and the "outside world,"and are often located eccentrically at one end of the region, sometimes at the borderbetween regions defined by different kinds of agriculturalproduction (Burghardt 1971).These characteristicsfit the geographical,climatic, and cultural situation of as we know it, ell Brak, quite well. Brakis located at the southern extremity of the Habur Plains, quite distant from its most productivecenters. A glance at the map displaying mean annual rainfall on the HaburPlains shows that Brak

receives only 289 millimeters of rainfall per annum, just enough rain to generate a dry-farming (that is, farming that depends on rainfall and doesn't utilize irrigation) cereal crop. This location is markedly distinguished from that of the three largewalled settlements (Tell Leilan, Tell Mozan, and Tell Hamoukar) that are each much larger than Brak, and situated almost equidistant from each other within the dry-farming belt at points that apparently maximize access to cultivable flatland. Locationally, Brak controls the entrance into the Habur Plains provided by the Habur River itself as it passes through the "gates"of the Jebel Abd al-Azziz and the Jebel Sinjar. This situates Brak directly between the area of high-rainfall dry farming that characterizes the area of gently rolling plains around Leilan, Mozan, and Hamoukar and the irrigation-dependent regions of the south. The cultural inventory of Tell Brak in the late prehistoric and early historic periods may also be understood in terms of the settlement's "gateway"status, since it seems to have many elements of southern culture, while also apparently preserving indigenous elements foreign to southern Mesopotamia (Amiet 1983: 51). The Habur Plains, entered through Tell Brak, were known to the third-millennium dynasts of southern Mesopotamia as the land of Subir. Later, in the second and first millennia B.C.,the region was called Subartu, and came to include much of northern Mesopotamia (Gelb 1944; Edzard, Farber,and Sollberger 1977: 146-47). Beginning in the late Early Dynastic period and continuing through the Sargonic period, southern Mesopotamian rulers repeatedly claim to have conquered or subjugated Subir, a claim that until now has lacked historical meaning. But the evidence for large third-millennium-B.c. cities on the Habur Plains changes our evaluation of these sources. Cities such as

The

Search for ShamshiCapital City from still unidentified roots, perhapsamong recently sedentarized Amorite-speaking peoples from the Habur Plains, Shamshi-Adad (whosename means "Mysun is the god Adad")briefly transformedthe political and economic landscape of northern Mesopotamia in the last years of the nineteenth century B.C.,just prior to the accession of Hammurabiin Babylon. In an unexplainedflash of historical stardom, Shamshi-Adadmanaged to subjugatethe towns and cities of the northern plains and extend his imperialhold acrossall of northernMesopotamiafrom the ZagrosMountainsto the EuphratesRiver. Quickly seizing control of the upperTigris Riverarea, including Ashur itself, he deposed local dynasties at nodal control points (Ekallatumon the Tigris and Mari on the Euphrates),and then installed a son at each city as ruler. Shamshi-Adadthen established a new capital at a place that he called ShubatEnlil ("TheResidenceof Enlil"). Thereafter, dynastic alliances were createdwith distant city rulers,tribute and gifts were extracted from subject kings, long-distance trade relationships were reestablishedacross Mesopotamia and into Anatolia, and a hierarchy of regional control, descending from Shamshi-Adad, was extended across the northern dry-farming plains. No city ruler could successfully challenge the armed forces of Shamshi-Adadwithin this region during his reign of less than thirty-five

Rising

years (1813-1782 B.c.). In spite of his apparentadministrative and organizationalcapabilities and the strength of armed forces loyal to him for still unknown reasons, the disintegrative and centrifugal forces that characterizedthe plains of northeastern Syria and northern Iraqeventually proved too fractious for the bonds that tied Shamshi-Adad'sempire. The difficulties included independent and widely spacedcities with extensive tracts of cultivated plains, large seasonally migrant forces of pastoral nomads moving between the irrigatedtracts along the Euphratesand the rain-fedHabur Plains, and persistent challenges from the centralized powersof southern Mesopotamia.Particularly vulnerablewere the outposts of the empire, such as Mari,where the incompetence of Shamshi-Adad'sson, Yasmakh-Adad,only made matters worse. In the ancient Near East, as in more recent Europe, diplomacy was sealed by marriage. Yasmakh-Adad's personalaffairs,however,seem to have made it difficult for Shamshi-Adadto preservehis imperial alliances. Hence this letter from Shamshi-Adad to Yasmakh-Adad: Did not the former kings . . . estab-

lish their spouses in the palace? Yakhdun-Lim, (however), honored his consorts, placed his wife to the side, and moved her into the desert. Perhaps, in the same way, you are planning to place the daughter of Ishi-Adad(the king of Qatna)in the

BIBLICALARCHAEOLOGIST'MARCH1985

27

desert.Her fatherwill be gravely disturbedby this. This is not good! Therearemanyroomsin the "Palm Letthemchoosea room Tree"Palace. forherthere,andlet herstayin that room.Do not makeherdwellin the in Sasson1973:76) desert.(AO.2548 While the Mariarchivesrelate the details of imperial rule across the northernlandscape,we still haveyet to understand the origins of ShamshiAdad'srule, its development, and its eventual crash. The crash, however, was dramatic and conclusive. The death of Shamshi-Adadwas a major Mesopotamian event even celebrated as the name of the year after which it occurred. (For a discussion of the Mesopotamian calendar, particularly that of Mari, see Sasson 1984: 24950). The Last Days of ShubatEnlil In the tumultuous two decades that followed the death of Shamshi-Adad, the princes and kings of the city-states on the Habur Plains ransacked and pillaged Shubat Enlil and fought with each other over its spoils. Some of these postmortem activities can be followed quite clearly in the graphic, detailed documentation provided by numerous letters within the Maripalace archives and two letters from the palace at Tell al-Rimah. The chart shown here is one orderingof the available documentation, and although it cannot presume to be totally accurate, it allows us to follow some of the movement of armies back and forth acrossthe HaburPlains for almost two decades. After the death of Shamshi-Adad one of his sons, Ishme-Dagan,was able to brieflypreservethe northernempire and hold off armies from the southeast, from along the Diyala River (Eshnunna) and southwestern Iran (Elam).But Ishme-Daganwas shortly defeated, and the northern capital of Shubat Enlil was seized by a former Shamshi-Adad officer. Thrum-natki, the ruler of an unmentioned but probably close-by city, allied himself with the forces of Zimri-Lim who had regained the Mari throne and decided to establish his own order on the fertile Habur Plains (see A on the chart). Zimri-Lim'svassal, Yassi-Dagan,now

28

controlled Shubat Enlil, but a threat from Qarni-Limwas alreadyperceived (B). Qarni-Lim, ruler of the nearby town of Andariq, apparently beat Zimri-Lim to Shubat Enlil, and was able to plunderthe grainof the city (C). Qarni-Limthen joined forces with the "man of Eshnunna,"and established himself at the city of Apum with Turum-natki.According to this document the son of Turum-natkiwas then appointed ruler of Shubat Enlil, but the document was one of the earliest retrievedfrom the excavationsat Mari and was never fully published (D). The ruler of Eshnunna (Ibal-pi-El) then apparently turned his attention towardsZimri-Lim.The latter sought the help of yet another ruler, Khatnurapiof Karana,who recapturedShubat Enlil from the king of Eshnunna, pillaged the city a second time, and walked off with his booty without sharing any with Zimri-Lim (Eand F). From Tell al-Rimah, a small kingdom east of the JebelSinjarin northernIraq, the following letter recordsthe jealous exchanges among the looters of the fallen capital: thus BunuSpeakto Khatnu-rapi: Ishtaryourbrother."Youarebringsharefromthe ing out Zimri-Lim's spoilthatyouaretakingfromShubat Enlil,but why areyou still keeping his share?Will he just look on?" (Dalleyandothers1976:number5) A temporary coalition of otherwise contending forces (Eshnunnaand Elam to the southeast and IshmeDagan at Ashur) then attempted to defeat Zimri-Lim'sally, Razama(G). At some later point, Zimri-Lim regained control of Shubat Enlil and installed an Elamite by the name of Kunnam (or Kunnama), as the city's governor.At the same time Zimri-Lim had apparently already organized a tiered system of control, such that Kunnamwas actually liable to the king of Apum, Khaya-abum,who in turn was liable to Zimri-Lim. Railing against this vassalage, Kunnam protested to Zimri-Limfor status equal to that enjoyedby Khaya-abum(H and I). Shortly thereafter yet another local ruler gained control of Shubat Enlil, Atamrum, who succeeded Qarni-Limas the ruler of Andariq (J


through N). A military officer and emissary of Atamrum (Lawala-Addu) eventually took chargeof ShubatEnlil and from this base proceeded with 3,000 soldiers to attack Khaya-abumof Apum, Zimri-Lim's vassal in the Habur (O). Thereafter, there is no recordof Shubat Enlil. In time, it was forgotten. Whereis ShubatEnlil? It was only with the recovery of the Mari archives centuries later that the existence of Shubat Enlil was once again known and scholars began suggesting sites as candidates for the ancient capital. The distinguished Assyriologist Francois Thureau-Dangin with GeorgesDossin, the future doyen of Mari studies, proposedthat Shubat Enlil was simply anothername used in the Mari texts for the city of Ashur (Thureau-Dangin1937).Although this identification had its long-term,vocal supporters,such as JuliusLewy (1953), it was challenged early on by the redoubtable Benno Landsberger,who suggestedthat the site of ChagarBazar is ancient Shubat Enlil (Landsberger and Balkan 1950);Landsbergerwas followed in this by Albrecht Goetze of Yale University (Goetze 1953). The issue was one of several,substantiveas well as personal, which divided the leading Assyriologists of the time. ChagarBazar.Before the outbreak of the SecondWorldWar,Max Mallowan, who had been Sir LeonardWoolley's assistant at Ur, was forcedto abandon the territorythat is now Iraqin the face of the political and cultural inroads that German political agents were cutting within Iraqi official circles. (Upto that time Britishagentsliterally controlled archaeology in Iraq.)Still wishing, however, to pursue his archaeological research, Mallowan retreated across the border onto the HaburPlains in the Frenchmandateof Syria and proceeded to undertake his now famous excavations at Tell Brak and Chagar Bazar (Mallowan 1947). His colleague C. J. Gadd from the In addition to those cited in the chart, the following sources were consulted in preparingthis information:Anbar 1978 and 1981;Sasson 1973;and Sauren 1971.

ShubatEnlilAfterthe Death of Shamshi-Adad Documentation of ShubatEnlil Date/Chronology Shamshi-Adad'sson Ishme-Daganboasts to his 1781 B.C.Death of Shamshi-Adad brotherYasmakh-Adadthat he holds Elam and Eshnunna. IARMIV.201 A. Zimri-LimordersThrum-natkiof (?city) and 1772 B.C.Zimri-Lim year 1 Khaya-Sumuof Ilansurato join forces with Sima-ila-khanemof Numkha to liberate Shubat Enlil from Samiya, (renegade?)servant of Shamshi-Adad,who holds the city (?).ZimriLim has orderedspies into the city but they have not returned.(ARMX.5) B. Yassi-Daganholds ShubatEnlil for Zimri-Lim but Qarni-Limof Andariqis "rumoredto be passing through to ShubatEnlil."(ARM11.130) C. Qarni-Limof Andariqplunders the grainof Shubat Enlil. (ARMXIV.109) D. Qarni-Limand the "manof Eshnunna"(Ibal-piEl?)are in ShubatEnlil. Qarni-Limand Thrumnatki are entrenched at Apum. Thrum-natki's son is appointedthe ruler of ShubatEnlil (?). (Jean1938) E. Ibal-pi-Elof Eshnunnamoves from ShubatEnlil towardsZimri-Lim'sterritoryat Mari. ZimriLim requests help from Khatnu-rapiof Karana. (Dalley and others 1976, Rimah letter 2) retakes ShubatEnlil from Ibal-pi-E1, Khatnu-rapi F. takes booty remaining from the first pillage by Ibal-pi-Eland Qarni-Lim,and doesn'tshare with Zimri-Lim. (Dalley and others 1976, Rimah letter 5) G. Eshnunna,Elam, and Ishme-Daganjoin forces to defeat Razama.(ARMVI.27;11.25) H. (Elamitestake control of ShubatEnlil.) I. Kunnam,the "manof Elam,"writes to his lord Zimri-Lim:"Khaya-abum(ofApum) is the 'son' of Zimri-Lim,but I, I am not his (Khaya-abum's) 'son.'I want to meet with my 'father.' iARMXIV.102) J. Atamrum of Andariqplots to raid Zimri-Lim's territorywhen Zimri-Limmarches to help Razama.(ARMVI.51) K. Atamrum wants to enter ShubatEnlil, but Kunnamawon'tleave. (ARMXIV.101) L. "Thecity is the city of the sukkal (Kunnama?)." (ARMXIV.104) M.? Shubramis the shapitum-official of ShubatEnlil under Zimri-Lim. (ARM11.109and X.84) N. Atamrum controls ShubatEnlil. His Qututroops are within the city. (ARM11.41;Rouault 1970:48, 77) 1762 B.C.Atamrum, last O. Lawala-Addu,the rabi-amurrim-commander regnalyear (andemissary of Atamrum),leads 3,000 troops from ShubatEnlil to attack Khaya-abum. (ARMII.135) 1760 B.c.Hammurabi conquersMari

British Museum published a preliminary analysis of the cuneiform tablets retrievedfrom both sites shortly after the conclusion of the excavations (Gadd 1940). Gadd's report included mention of a document recording grain shipments to Shubat Enlil. Hence Landsberger'sproposal that ChagarBazaris ShubatEnlil, a notion that persists to this day (Kupper1973: 45). Scant attention was paid to Sidney Smith, the eminent British Assyriologist, who observed that other placenames as well occur among the documents mentioning Shubat Enlil, thus making it unlikely that it is the ancient name of Chagar Bazar (Smith 1956: 36). In his memoirs, published only a few years beforehis death, even Mallowan felt obliged to emphasize the obvious with regardto the Chagar Bazaridentification: But in my opinionthis (identification) is wrong,becauseone tablet recordsthe dispatchof suppliesto ShubatEnlil-not receivedbyit, and moreoverour site seems insufficiently massiveand importantand not strategicallyplaced for the lies Assyriancapitalwhichprobably somewherein thedistrictnotfaroff. (Mallowan1979: 122)

Tll Leilan. It was the Assyriologist MargareteFalknerwho pickedup Emil Forrer's,and ultimately Max Freiherr von Oppenheim's and Hormuzd Rassam's, mention of 11l Leilan (see accompanyingsidebaron "Rediscovering Tell Leilan")and first connected the site with the missing capital of Shubat Enlil (Falkner1957:37). At almost the same time Barthel Hrouda, who was then a young archaeologist working with Anton Moortgat of Berlin and who was able to assess the significance of surfacearchaeologicalobservations, also suggestedthat Leilancould be the missing capital (Hrouda1958). When new documentary evidence was brought forwardwith the cuneiform "itineraries,"they too were found to present routes that matched the available archaeological facts suggesting the identification of Tel Leilan with ShubatEnlil (Hallo 1964). Tll Brak.Over the years other suggestions for the location of Shubat Enlil have been made. Tll Brak-a tall, imposing site of 43 hectares, whose an-


29

cient name is still unknown-has sometimes been suggested (D. Oates 1982: 70). But even the Mari documentation for Shubat Enlil precludes serious candidacy for Tell Brak. One famous Mari letter (ARM 1.21) provides a portion of the itinerary from Mari to Shubat Enlil, indicating that travellerswould have passed en route through the city of Kahat. Kahat is probablyTellBarri,where a largestone foundation document for a temple of Kahat was located years ago (Dossin 1961- 1962).Therefore,ShubatEnlil is likely situated beyondTellBarri,andof course Tell Brak, as one passed from south to north acrossthe HaburPlains. Referencesto ShubatEnlil in the MariTablets The Mari archives present a range of descriptive information that can be used to help narrow the search for Shubat Enlil candidates. Here are some of the characteristicsof the city presentedwithin the Mari texts: 1. A city size large enough for troops to enter (ARM1.31,11.41,II.135, XIV.104). 2. A palacethat could hold at least 400 Haneanguards,andrich enough to provide sustenance for at least 200 "poorsoldier"guards(ARMII.1). 3. The temple beletApim, approximately twice the size of a temple at Kahat(Charpin1983). 4. The presence of (public)buildings requiringthe installation of palm, cypress,and myrtle timbers (ARM1.7). 5. Silversmiths and silver workshops (ARM1.74). 6. A separatehouse for YasmakhAdad (ARM1.6). 7. A location possibly near a swampor inundatedland (ARMIV.38). 8. Wealthto justify repeatedsacking and looting upon the death of Shamshi-Adad(texts A through F in adjacentchart). 9. Fortifications(ARMXIV.101). These characteristicssuggest a walled city (9)with a considerablelower town (1) and a substantial public building area (2, 3, 4, 6, and 8). The location, size, and morphology suggest a site like Tell Leilan to be Shubat Enlil but, of course, do not preclude some other similar site, should one be identified.

30

View from the North Gate of the City Wall looking south to the Acropolis with the ziggurat situated behind.

Leilan, Hamoukar, and Mozan constituted the heartland of a region that apparently had undergone sufficient centralization and deployment of its agricultural resources to pose a threat or at least a suitable target for the expanding interests of southern Mesopotamian rulers. Because it was the gateway to Subir, NaramSin's fortress at Tell Brak was an important control point for the southern forces. Although the record of southern intrusions into Subir is most eloquent for the reign of Naram-Sin, it actually begins in the late Early Dynastic period with Eannatum, the ruler of Lagash who claims to have "conquered Elam, Subir and Urua... Kish, Akshak and Mari" (Sollberger and Kupper 1971: 59). Eannatum's claim now joins the evidence presented by the large building in CH level 6 at Tell Brak, and the circumvallation of Tell Leilan, to suggest that large-walled cities were in place on the Habur Plains by the twentyfifth century B.c., and quite possibly earlier. This places Leilan, Hamoukar, and Mozan in a category with Tell Mardikh: large-walled centers, developing apparently independently in the dry-farming regions that surround the irrigation-agriculture south. It also raises the possibility that walled cities on the Habur


1985

Plains are as old as, or even older than, the walled cities of the plains south of Aleppo. The Habur Plains therefore comprise a missing quarter of the early Mesopotamian cultural arena, but the culture of the thirdmillennium-B.c. cities of Subir is still poorly known. Linguistically the region was apparently dominated by speakers of Hurrian, a nonSemitic, non-Indo-European language, for which there are presently few third-millennium documents. Hurrian was, therefore, one of the five major linguistic milieus, with Sumerian, Akkadian, Eblaite, and Elamite, within which Mesopotamian civilizations developed (Wilhelm 1982; Edzard and Kammenhuber 1975, 1976, 1977). Of the few documents or other artifacts that can be associated with the third-millennium Hurrians perhaps the most famous are the two cast bronze lions that served as temple foundation deposits for Tishatal of Urkish. Each was purchased on the antiquities market. One of these lions resides in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the other is at the Louvre (Parrot and Nougayrol 1948; Metropolitan Museum of Art 1966; Amiet 1983: 101). When the "Tish-atal" lion was first brought to the attention of the

In 1978 the Yaleexpedition began its work at TellLeilan by surveyingthe site. In the foregroundof this photograph,taken from the west, MarkKrossof the surveyingteam is seen working. The LeilanAcropolisis visible in the background.

This "Hurrian" foundation peg with a cast bronzelion served as a temple foundation deposit for Tish-atalof Urkish. The date of the lion, and its "sister"inthe Louvre,has been much debated but certainly falls within the last quarterof the third millennium B.c. It is 11.7centimeters high and 7.9 centimeters wide. Courtesyof the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase,JosephPulitzer Bequest, 1948, 48.180.

academic world its proveniencewas said, by its dealer,to be the site of Amuda, west of Kamishli (vanLiere 1957).The site of Amuda has been identified with Urkish in the archaeological literature ever since. Two surveysof the site by the Tell Leilan project,however,have failed to retrieve sherds of Leilanperiods III,II, or I, although nearbyTell Mozan, now being excavatedby M. Buccellati seems to have each of these. Still a regional center in Zimri-Lim's struggle for control of the Habur Plains after Shamshi-Adad'sdeath, Urkish was located just three caravan stops west of Shubat Enlil (Sasson 1973: 74; Hallo 1964:65). Assyriologists have reasoned that the "royaltitulature"of the Hurrianrulers, referringto the cities of Urkish and Nawar,"groupstwo cities distant from each other in orderto designate the entirety of the land of"Subir (Sollbergerand Kupper1971:128).Dependent, therefore,upon where one locates Nawar,the land of Subircontrolled by late-third-millenniumHurrians may have been quite extensive (Hallo 1978: 17).It remains unlikely, however,that Nawar could be as distant

from Urkish as the JebelHamrin or the ZagrosMountains, and a location upon the HaburPlains is probable (ARM2: 57). Historical geographicalproblems will always plague ancient Near Easternresearchto lesser or greaterdegrees.Verysubstantial gains seem close by, however,in a region that until recently, and in spite of years of research,was virtually unknown. But another,and perhapsmore substantial, contribution remains to be made by archaeological researchon the Habur Plains for the genesis of thirdmillennium urbanism here, and its trajectorythrough the early part of the second millennium, remains to be delineated and analyzed. Postwararchaeologicalresearch is now entering its second research phase on the plains of Syriaand Mesopotamiawith researchhorizons considerablymore extensive than those of its predecessors.The dry-farmingplains of northwestern Syria, extending from the Amanus rangesouth to Aleppo, Tell Mardikh, Hama, Homs, and Qatna, present themselves as one region of high rainfall and high agriculturalproduction with its own developmental history coming into conflict with the irrigation-agriculturesouthern regions aroundMari and Sumer in the late third millennium. Similarly, the HaburPlains, long known from third-millennium documents recordingthe conquests of southern dynasts, and famous as the most productive cereal agricultureregion in Syria and Mesopotamia, apparently also experienced sudden urbanization in the third millennium. The inevitable conflict with southern forces, however,may have curtailed this development, as it did in the northwest. The cuneiform recordfor late-third-millenniumdevelopments in this region is sadly laconic, and the extensive archaeologicalexploration of such settlements is just beginning at Tell Leilan and other sites.


31

The renewed attempt by the forces represented by Shamshi-Adad to centralize control of the Habur Plains may indicate that the region's productive strengths and organizational potentialities were not diminished, continued to emerge and dominate the plains at permissible junctures, and again threatened the irrigation-agriculture centers of the south. This may explain why Shubat Enlil was no longer occupied and "Shamshi-Adad"was just a name on little pieces of mud when Hammurabi returned to Babylon from his last campaigns against Subartu. Conclusion Archaeological and historical documents are by their very nature partisan sources that must be evaluated in the light of our own intellectual biases, as well as the biases of the sources themselves. It has long been recognized that the history of Mesopotamia that we have been retrieving, recording, and interpreting is mostly the history of southern Mesopotamia observed through excavations at southern sites. At Tell Leilan, however, we have before us another source for the early history of the ancient Near East: an important city in the heartland of Subartu, the "other Mesopotamia." For the years ahead, the Tell Leilan project has now set the stage for the investigation of a formidable array of historical problems: the origins of cities and civilizations on the Habur Plains, the ancient history of Sumer's rival Subir, the interaction between pastoral nomads and city-based powers, and the history of Shubat Enlil and Shamshi-Adad's northern empire. Archaeology, perhaps the only discipline to presume to study the long-term history of human societies, will be put to the test. Acknowledgments The Tell Leilan Project's field epigraphers, Dr. B. R. Foster (Yale University), Dr. Daniel Snell (Uni-

32

der stiftmosaiken in der Pfeilerhalle der Schicht IVain Uruk-Warka. Series:BaghdaderMitteilungen, Beiheft 1. Berlin:Mann. Buren,E. D. van 1945 Symbols of the Gods in Mesopotamian Art. Series:Analecta Orientalia 23. Rome:PontificalBiblical Institute. Burghardt,A. E 1971 A Hypothesis About GatewayCities. Annals of the Association of American Geographers61: 269-85. Calvet, Y.,and others 1976 Larsa;rapportpr6liminairesur la sixibme campagnede fouilles. Syria 53: 1-45. Charpin,D. 1983 TemplesAd~couvriren Syrie du nord. Iraq 45/1:56 - 63. Curtis, J.,ed. 1982 Fifty Yearsof MesopotamianDiscovery.London:British School of Archaeologyin Iraq. Dalley, S., and others 1976 The Old Babylonian Tabletsfrom Tellal-Rimah.London:British Note School of Archaeologyin Iraq. Dossin, G. Partsof this article are revised and 1961- Site de la ville de Kahat.Annales expandedfrom two articles by the author 1962 archdologiquessyriennes 11-12: that appearedin the YaleAlumni 197-206. Magazine and Journal(Weiss1981 and Dowson, P.H. W. 1984).These are used with permission of 1921 Dates and Date Cultivation in Iraq. the editors.This article also includes AgriculturalDirectorateof Mesopomaterials presentedin Weiss 1985a,b. tamia. Cambridge,England:Heffer. All excavationphotographsareby the Edzard,D. O., Farber,G., and Sollberger,E. 1977 Die Orts-und Gewassernamender author. pridsargonischenund sargonischen Bibliography Zeit. Series:Repertoiregeographique des textes cun~iformes 1. WiesY.M. A1-Khalesi, baden:Reichert. 1978 TheCourtof thePalms:A FunctionalInterpretation Edzard,D. O., and Kammenhuber,A. of theMari Palace.Series:Bibliotheca Meso1975 Hurriter,Hurritisch.Reallexikon der Assyriologie 4/6-7: 507-14. potamica8. Malibu,CA:Undena Publications. Falkner,M. 1957 Studien zur Geographiedes alten Amiet,P. 1980 Artof theAncientNearEast.New Mesopotamien.Archiv f!r OrientYork:Abrams. forschung 18: 1-37. Forrer,E. Amiet,P, editor 1921 Die Provinzeinteilungdes Assyris1983 Aupaysde Baalet dAstartd.Paris: chen Reiches. Leipzig:Hinrichs. Mus~eduPetitPalais. Anbar,M. Gadd,C. J. 1978 Reviewof TheOldBabylonian 1940 Tabletsfrom ChagarBazarand Tell TabletsfromTellal-Rimahby Brak, 1937-38. Iraq 7: 22-61. S.Dalleyandothers.Bibliotheca Gates, M.-H. Orientalis35/3-4: 208-16. 1984 The Palaceof Zimri-Limat Mari. 1981 LesrelationsentreZimri-Lim, roide Biblical Archaeologist 47: 70-87. roid'Andariq. Gelb, I. J. Mari,et Qarni-Lim, 1944 Hurriansand Subarians.Series: Journalof Cuneiform Studies33/1: 48-51. Studies in Ancient Oriental CivilizaARM tion 22. Chicago:University of 1942- Archivesroyalesde Mari.Paris:Paul Chicago Press. GeuthnerandImprimerie nationale. 1982 Termsfor Slavesin Ancient MesopoM. tamia. Pp. 81-98 in Societies and Brandes, 1968 Untersuchungenzur komposition Languagesof the Ancient Near East,

versity of Oklahoma) and Dr. Robert Whiting (University of Chicago), copied the seal impression inscriptions from Leilan 1979, 1980, and 1982. Ms. Lorraine Ferguson (Yale University) chief draftsperson for Leilan 1979 and 1980, drew the ceramics presented here. Dr. Nancy Leinwand drew the seal impression designs from field drawings and macrophotographs. The Tell Leilan Project, sponsored by Yale University and the Metropolitan Museum of Art, has also been supported by grants from the National Science Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities and the Hagop Kevorkian Foundation, and the generosity of Barbara Clay Debevoise, Betty Starr Cummin, Roger and Barbara Brown, Jonathan Rosen, and Daniel Foster.


edited by N. Postgate.London: Warminster. Goetze, A. 1953 An Old BabylonianItinerary.Journal of CuneiformStudies 7: 51- 72. Hall, H. R., and Woolley,L. 1927 Al-cUbaid. Ur Excavations, Volume I. Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press. Haller,A. 1955 Die Heiligtiimer des Gottes Assur und der Sin-Samal-Tempelin Assur. Series:WissenschaftlicheVeroffentlichungen der Deutschen OrientGesellschaft 67. Berlin:Mann. Hallo, W.W. 1964 The Roadto Emar.Journalof Cuneiform Studies 18:57-88. 1978 Simurrumand the HurrianFrontier. Revue Hittite et Asianique 36: 71-83. Hawkins, J.D. 1976 The InscribedSeal Impressions. Pp. 247-55 in The Old Babylonian Tabletsfrom Tellal-Rimahby S. Dalley and others. London:British School of Archaeologyin Iraq. Heinrich, E. 1982 Die Tempelund Heiligtiimer im Alten Mesopotamien. Series: Denkmaler Antiker Architektur 14, Deutsches Archiologisches Institut. Berlin:de Gruyter. T. Howard-Carter, 1983 An Interpretationof the Sculptural Decoration of the SecondMillennium Templeat Tell al-Rimah.Iraq 45/1:64-72. Hrouda,B. 1958 WaBukanni,Urkii, SubatEnlil. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft 90: 22-35. 1971 Vorderasien,I. Munich:Beck. 1984 Die Kunstund Kulturder Hurriter in neuererSicht. Pp. 63-69 in Mededelingenvan de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letterenen Schone Kunstenvan Belgie, Klasse der Letteren,Jaargang 46, 1. Huot, J.-L.,and others 1983 Larsaet 'Oueili. Paris:Editions recherchesur les civilizations, MImoire no. 26. Jaritz,K. 1960 Die Kulturresteder Kassiten. Anthropos 55: 17-84. Jean,C.-F. 1938 Excerptade la Correspondancede Mari.Revue des &tudessemitiques 1938: 128-32. 1939 Excerptade la Correspondancede Mari. Revue des etudes semitiques 1939:62-69. Jefferson,M. 1931 The Distribution of the World'sCity Folks:A Study in Comparative

Civilization. GeographicalReview 21:446 - 65. Kammenhuber,A. 1976 Historisch-Geographische Nachrichten aus der althurrischen Uberlieferung... vor dem Einfall der Gutier. Pp. 157- 247 in Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft im alten Vorderasien,edited by J.Harmatta and G. Komoroczy.Budapest:Kiado. 1977 Die Arier im VorderenOrient und die historischen Wohnsitzeder Hurriter.Orientalia 46/1: 129-44. Kupper,J.-R. 1973 Northern Mesopotamiaand Syria. Pp. 1-41 in The CambridgeAncient History,2/1, third edition. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press. Laess~e,J. 1963 Peopleof Ancient Assyria. London: Routledgeand KeganPaul. Landsberger,B., and Balkan,K. 1950 Die Inschriftdes Assyrischen Konigs Irihum.Belleten, ThrkTarikh Kurumu14:219-68. Layard,A. H. 1849 Nineveh and its Remains. London: JohnMurray. Lenzen,H. J. 1955 MesopotamischeTempelanlagenvon der Friihzeitbis zum zweiten Jahrtausend. Zeitschrift fir Assyriologie, Neue Folge 17: 1-36. Lewy,J. 1953 Subat-Enlil.Annuaire de l'Institute de Philologie et d'Histoireorientales et slaves 13:293-321. Loretz,O. 1969 Texteaus ChagarBazarund Tell Brak.Teil 1. Series:Alter Orient und Altes Testament3/1. NeukirchenVluyn: Butzon and BerckerKevelaer. Mallowan,M. 1947 Excavationsat Brakand Chagar Bazar.Iraq 9. 1979 Mallowan'sMemoirs.London: Collins. Martiny,G. 1936 Die Gegensatzeim babylonischen und assyrischen Tempelbau.Series: Abhandlungenfor die Kundedes Morgenlandes,21,3. Leipzig: Deutsche Morgenlandische Gesellschaft. Matthiae,P. 1975 Unite et d~vellopementdu temple dans la Syriedu bronze moyen, in Le Templeet le Culte, Nederlands Historisch-ArchaeologischInstituut te Istanbul,37. Moortgat,A. 1969 The Art of Mesopotamia.New York: Phaidon. Oates, D. 1967 The Excavationsat Tell al-Rimah, 1966.Iraq 29/2: 70-96.

1982a Tell Brak.Pp.62-71 in Fifty Yearsof MesopotamianDiscovery,edited by J.Curtis. London:British School of Archaeologyin Iraq. 1982b Excavationsat Tell Brak,1978-1981. Iraq 44: 187- 204. Oates, J. 1979 Babylon. London:Thames and Hudson. 1982 Some LateEarlyDynastic IIIPottery from Tell Brak.Iraq 44: 205-19. Oppenheim,M. F.von 1899- VomMittelmeer zum Persischen 1900 Golf. Berlin:Reimer. Ozgu9,N. 1980 Seal Impressionsfrom Agemhayiik. Pp. 61-99 in Ancient Art in Seals, edited by E. Porada.Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press. Pardee,D., and Glass, J.T. 1984 LiterarySourcesfor the History of Palestine and Syria:The Mari Archives.Biblical Archaeologist 47: 88-99. Parrot,A. 1938 Les fouilles de Mari, quatribme campagne(hiver1936-37). Syria 19: 1-29. 1939 Lesfouilles de Mari, cinquibme campagne.Syria20: 1-22. 1958 Lepalais: Peinturesmurales. Series: Mission archdologiquede Mari 2. Institut Frangaisd'Archdologiede Beyrouth.Biblioth~quearch&ologique et historique 69. Paris:Paul Geuthner. Parrot,A., and Nougayrol,J. 1948 Un document de fondationhourrite. Revue dAssyriologie 42/1- 2: 1- 20. Poidebard,A. 1934 La Thacede Rome dans le disert de Syrie.Paris:Geuthner. Postgate,N. 1973 AppendixI: Tell TayaTablets, 1972-73. Iraq 35: 173-75. Rassam,H. 1897 Asshur and the Land of Nimrod. New York:Eatonand Mains. Rouault,O. 1970 Andariqet Atamrum.Revue dAssyriologie et dArchdologie Orientale 64: 107-18. Sasson, J. 1973 BiographicalNotices on Some Royal Ladiesfrom Mari.Journalof Cuneiform Studies 25: 59-78. Sauren,H. 1971 L'intronisationdu roi en Israela la lumibred'unelettre de Mari. Orientalia LovaniensiaPeriodica2: 5-12. Schwartz,G. M. 1982 FromPrehistoryto History on the Habur Plains: The Operation1 Soundingat TellLeilan. Doctoral dissertation,YaleUniversity.


33

Smith, S. 1956 and Hasum. Anatolian Uruu Studies 6: 35-43. Sollberger,E., and Kupper,J.-R. 1971 Inscriptionsroyalessumeriennes et akkadienes. Paris:Leseditions du Cerf. Strommenger,E. 1962 FiinfJahrtausendeMesopotamien. Munich:Hirmer. Thureau-Dangin,F. 1937 Iasmah-Adad.Revue d'Assyriologie et d'ArchdologieOrientale 34: 135- 39. Ungnad,A. 1938 Datenlisten. Reallexikon der Assyriologie 2: 131-96. van Liere,W 1957 Urkish, centre religieux hourrite. Annales archdologiquesde Syrie 7: 91-94. 1963 Capitals and Citadels of Bronze-Iron Age Syria.Annales archdologiques syriennes 13: 107-22. van Liere,W.,and Laufray,J. 1954- Nouvelles prospectionsdans la 1955 Haute Jezirehsyrienne.Annales archdologiquessyriennes 4-5:

1984 BackIssues of

BiblicalArchaeolo March 84

December 84

Biblical Archaeologist

r-

.?t

~~

ASER .c~

June 84

.

September 84

Biblical Archaeolog

129-48.

Viganb,L., and Pardee,D. 1984 LiterarySourcesfor the History of Palestine and Syria:The Ebla Tablets.Biblical Archaeologist 47: 6-16. Weiss,H. 1981 CapitalCity of a Lost Empire.Yale Alumni Magazine and Journal45: 20-26.

1981- Tell Leilan.Archiv fir Orient1982 forschung28: 226-29. 1983 Excavationsat Tell Leilanand the Origins of North Mesopotamian Cities in the ThirdMillennium B.C. Paldorient9/2: 39- 52. 1984 History from Bits of Clay. Yale Alumni Magazine and Journal47: 22-26.

1985a Tell Leilanand ShubatEnlil. Mari: Annales de RecherchesInterdisciplinaires 4. (Colloqueinternationaledu Centre nationale de recherchescientifique, no. 620, Strasbourg,7/83.) 1985b Reviewof Fifty Yearsof MesopotamianDiscovery,edited by J.Curtis. Journalof the American Oriental Society 105/2. Wilhelm, G. 1982 Grundziugeder Geschichte und Kulturder Hurriten.Darmstadt: WissenschaftlicheBuchgesellschaft. Woolley,L. 1939 Ur Excavations,volume V:The Zigguratand Its Surroundings.New York:British Museum and University Museum, Philadelphia.

34

ThrLqrl

a(m'd

"Whenreadingthe bibliographicessay by Vigand,keep in mind the new cuneiformdiscoveries reportedby Matthiae,presentedhere for the first time to Englishreaders."(March84, Ebla) "Althougheveryonehad told Zimri-Limto ignorethe prophecy,he kept returningto it. Addu-duriwas competentandnot proneto hysterics,andthe dreamshe reportedwas bloodcurdling." (June84, Mari) "Concentratingon the synagogue,mithraeum,and Christianchapel of Dura-Europos, Gates illustrateshow the art andarchitectureof differentreligiousfaiths sharea common heritage." (September84, Dura-Europos) "Foundedin 1900,the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearchhas participatedin most of the importantarchaeologicalevents in the MiddleEast,includingthe discoveryand publicationof the Dead Sea Scrolls."(December84, ASORat 85) Please send check or money order,payableto the AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch,for $6.00 postpaid(U.S.)for each issue ordered.Be certainto specifywhich issues you want. Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery.


ASORPublications P.O. BoxH.M., Duke Station Durham,NC 27706

ooking is as old as human culture. The choice of foods and their prepara-

The

tion have always been

UK

fC

dependent on each society's natural resources, economy, and the likes and dislikes of its members. The merging of these factors results in an original cuisine for each society. Which culture, then, had the oldest cuisine in the world? The earliest physical remains -cooking utensils, hearths, and foodstuffs - date to our remote prehistory. None of these artifacts, however, allows us to describe with precision how certain foods were prepared. Only written materials can give us an idea of the recipes which make up every cuisine. Since writing does not make an appearance before the third millennium B.C.E. it is only at the beginning of that era that we are able to learn about the oldest systems of changing

sINE

Anc ient Mesopotamia of Sncient eSOfOdi !1

j(I $Iii: li'j '' I'

i

iiiii i~:ii 4

jliii:~~lI~ii

I; i;;i'i.j~/;iIII\,I i\ ;.j i j \ri\~\\ --~E;n II jjj 1i IiI II' II/?;? i~ i\ ??;F~~C~ ~~~~illlj((IiI'' .r ,, Iv~i~ ~riP?r

?.? ~. .,.

i I'II~ \:ji

i? ~ i :i //1

r

I,!

i:i"i i

I

I'

i! ''

i 1,1 :~I(~(~~

OI:k,,? :i~ey6'"? ii

?!I ?( f

r .,

i

111 i'!i!I ,, 1ii,))1 r i/ I/ ; "i? 1;

ii

~i ~?'?I

i.~tS,, uT~

?? ~I

?t~? ~j

~9~C` r

iR

?1

Ir..,,

"

'J:

IriI: ' '' I ij 'j II$ ??-~ ici";" i I c 1C\t/ C ~e~,~ :? r:r

\r r~r.'??

=`XY~YI~ ?. ???

.Y irrh s D

I: -

*C ?~~

~ 8

:Bt:. ,, r,

.~~:~CSC ?? ;?????!1~~-~ ~J*N~~/~ ~) ,,

/

'

*L1Li: J ~:?~it~i~.~YYI~:

ul ~'c-?

?I:I

i

/--.-C

;2" .??-:

~r

I 1!/I

~L~4=

:;r

r

a:it

??

i:?I:?i

Y-"

:..... :,?

ii

?II

,,

, i .. ,ill

?r(

:~:

ii:i! FIl;liii;II! ;t.rlj ?~?1 ~IIII i ?,::::;~;

i

,,

.?L;~~"~?1

j

'''i?1;1Ir

i

iJ.-111

I

?I \/4II (?r~i; r r ;1

IL;jl , ;?? u: ...

?~~

I?~ii!

ilg "

e C;I: ''aS~,~ PVP~!,

---? ??

ill ;i I:

?~

'' '''":'

~1~11

,, b'?';il ~I

--

,, r:

';42 :'% I"'\t~t~

";

';

.??I

i,;

I.li B~i

;;?

F;--~----;_

:!A

l~,.,.li

1

?r~ ?,?u !j??

" ?I?~',J!?SQ~. !\?

I

?D

"'

i r\ P-~L~-YCY~Zi;4

W

t~.";l

6. c,;

:,!,,

II :"!;/i

"

1 ~P~rj~i 1 ii:

a

??~'

i?i ?i: :rl ~It ii' '1 ?i?:?; ? 'I '!:'~~"n. ,II ? ?i

,1

???

./r

?::

rr ,,,1, Z -1 z

r

: :~d:

~I

i:

//

i

I-d!

~sV~

S;ir~

~

II

a~l

ill!rB I

rliiii(lii I 1!(ljj

I,,ii sI sji .II

:

:li:

AI

(hill i ii! I;j\ 1

li/il/( II

i

IrJI ~IIii

II

I I?,I

Iiir~,,,iIiir I/ii''a u:~ \\ 1~ 1~ Jlijjf(il ''!iI'ni"l :/I :?i d ,i 'I rii:(i "'

??I,, I

irL

1i

,

5reL MI~,I~Tlr~

BYJEANBOTTtRO

36

i'

\Rr:? li/

I(I;


i

i

I

I raw foods into dishes designed for specific tastes and for immediate consumption. Until recently the oldest cuisine we knew in depth was that of ancient Rome. It was thought that the oldest collection of recipes extant was that of Apicius, the Roman gourmet celebrated for his

extravagance,who lived at the beginning of the common era. Apicius' work is the famous De Re Coquinaria (On Culinary Art) which probably took its present form in the fourth century C.E.

A few Greeks, most of whom lived in southern Italy,had composed culinary anthologies some time before Apicius. The first such anthologist about whom we have any information was a native of Syracuse,Mith6kos, who lived around 400

B.C.E. All

of these anthol-

ogies, however,are lost except for a few brief quotations preservedin the work of Athenaeus of Naucratis (second century

C.E.)

which is en-

titled The LearnedBanquet (Deipnosophistai). Little written information on ancient cuisine is known from most Near Easterncivilizations. There is no significant mention of cooking techniques in the Bible, and alIr

~rc

r...~I

j?~??

though we know that both the Egyptians and the Hittites had developed distinctive cuisines, we do not, in either case, have a single recipe which would give us a sufficiently detailed picture of how the food was prepared. Fortunately,knowledge of the cuisine of one very original and ancient civilization, that of Mesopotamia, has been preserved.We have recovereda half-million written documents from its long cultural era and, although unequally distributed in time and place, these documents have given us enough information to know that the rich and complex culture of Mesopotamia included a discriminating choice of foodstuffs and advancedtechniques for preparing them. The Mesopotamian Diet Written documents, along with art and archaeologicalremains, reveal (,

I.

i' ?1' ~I.

cyv ~C~~~L ~

~_?i7; *

!I(t~h~:)l

an impressive list of foods in the diet of the ancient Mesopotamians.The meats included beef, lamb, pork, deer, and fowl (with the exception of chicken which came along later). The birdsprovidedboth meat and eggs. A brief satirical text reveals that the Mesopotamians knew how to fill intestine-casings with a forcemeat of some kind. Is it too much to credit these extraordinarypeople with the earliest form of sausage? Salt-and freshwaterfish were eaten along with turtles and shellfish. Pickled grasshopperswere considered a delicacy.Variousgrains, vegetables, and fruits (chiefly dates from the palm trees but also apples, pears,figs, pomegranates,and grapes)were integral to the Mesopotamian diet. Roots, bulbs, truffle-like fungi and mushrooms were harvested for the table. Mineral products (possibly salt and ashes) added flavorto the foods, as did a variety of

r?

?r, r?~;.5

~E~

I~

cc

1

?rP

'? r? ~???

,

I~S~T~i~-~t~t

1

..

\r?

r tIII

;I;

z? I 3 Z

rl

?, r

tr--?-

I

I?~---?C

~

If~trch :

t~s'

1

( II?~

r

It

?u I~:Ir, r_

/

f~t;

(c~i?,

The feast of Ashurbanipalis the subject of this Assyrian bas-relieffrom the North Palace of Nineveh dating to the seventh century B.C.Celebratinghis victory over the Elamites, the king dines in luxurious style with a favoredqueen at his side. Attendants carrytrays of food in one hand and fly whisks in the other and a harpistprovidesmusic for the occasion. The severed head of Teuman,the Elamite king, is prominently displayed hanging from a tree as Ashurbanipal'strophyof his recent military campaign. The drawings are by Saint-Elme Gautier.

Twoattendants are shown here carrying choice delicacies for a banquet-pomegranatesand grasshoppers- in this scene from Nineveh.

herbs. Tree sap and honey were used as sweeteners. Milk, a kind of butter, and fats from both animals (lard)and vegetables (sesame, linseed, and olive oils) were used to providemoisture


37

to the terms in this work, the list would double in size. The Mesopotamians had a huge "menu"!

Fishingin Assyria was done with the use of nets or, as in this drawing of a basrelief from Nineveh, on a line. The relief dates to the time of Sennacherib

The Many Uses of Grains A standardmethod for preparing grains existed in the ancient Near East for millennia: Grain was crushed on a grindstone to make various meals and flours, which could then be made finer by sifting. Porridgesand mushes were made out of these meals and if not immediately eaten, they were preservedby drying or allowed to ferment. Beer was made out of the malted grain and was the national beverageof this region, although wine was drunk as well in the north and northwest. Frombeforethe third millennium

(704-681 B.c.).

B.C.E.,the brewing of beer was as

and adhesiveness to a dish. All of these foods were native to the area and providedsuch a varied diet that the Mesopotamians never needed to import foods from other areas. The most impressive textual evidence of the variety in the Mesopotamian diet comes from a vocabularythat lists natural and man-madethings by their Sumerian and Akkadian names in two parallel columns. All entries are carefully groupedunder major classifications. The entire vocabularyincludes over 24 tablets with approximately400 headings. The last two tablets are under the "food"section, and contain about 800 entries which are but a representativeselection of all food and drink known to the Babylonians. The vocabularylists about 18 or 20 different kinds of cheese. Even if they all describe one basic type of cheese, so many varieties indicate an extremely discriminating palate and an advancedprocess for flavoring and differentiatingthe cheese. The basic cheese might well have been a fresh cream cheese. There are over a hundredkinds of soup in the list. The soups are dishes preparedby cooking food in

38

water. They are known generically as TU7 in Sumerian and ummaru in Akkadian. There are 300 kinds of bread, each with a different combination of ingredients.A choice of flours, spices, and fruit fillings and the addition of oil, milk, beer, or sweetener enabled such variety.The breads rangedfrom "verylarge"to "tiny"and were given special shapes such as a heart, a head, a hand, an ear, and even a woman'sbreast. In the palace at Mari

much a part of Mesopotamian haute cuisine as was breadmaking. Cooking Techniques The Mesopotamians used fire in very sophisticated ways. They placed their food on an open flame or on glowing coals in orderto broil or roast it. To control the heat of the fire, they put hot ashes or potsherds on the coals.

(circa 1780 B.C.E.) more

than 50 different "molds"were discovered which some scholars believe were used for forming breador perhaps cheese into unusual and decorative shapes (butwhich I think were more likely decorativeserving dishes). If one conservatively estimated the number of terms for food and drink mentioned in other such vocabularylists plus technical and literary documents, and addedthese


This terra-cotta"mold"depicting a lion attacking a stag was found in the palace of Mari. Thephotographis used courtesy of MusdesNationaux, Paris.

Unleavened breadwas baked as it is today in many parts of the Middle East. A fire was built inside an upright clay cylinder, resulting in very hot exterior walls, upon which loaves of unleavened breadwere placed to bake. This breadbakingtechnique is still commonly used in the Middle East, where even the name tanntir is derivedfrom the name used by the ancient Mesopotamians-

tinfiru.

By the third millennium B.C.E.,dome ovens were built to

ing in a smaller amount of liquid in Thiscuisinewasmeant the open kettle. forpalaceortemple. The Storage,Preservation,and

Fermentationof Food The Mesopotamians had several methods for storing and preserving food. They dried grains, legumes (beansand lentils), and some vegetables and fruits, especially dates, grapes,and figs. Meat and fish could have been dried or smoked, but they were generally preservedin salt (the texts mention "saltbeef," "saltgazelle,"and "saltfish"). They preservedcertain fruits in honey and knew how to put up fish, most likely in oil. They prepareda fermented sauce (8iqqu),for both kitchen and table use, out of fish, shellfish, or grasshoppers. Siqqu seems to have been

providea less intense heat that was retained in the oven walls and floors. The steam produced by the foods being cooked in the dome ovens made a more humid cooking environment. Using this oven, the Mesopotamians were able to preparefermented doughs and leavened Upper: The royalkitchen is portrayedin this seventhbreadswith success. century-B.c.scene from the palace of Ashurbanipalat They also appear Nineveh. Twoviews are shown simultaneously: a bird's-eyeview revealingthe groundplan of a fortressand a cross section showing the activity within four to have brought into chambers of the building. The four scenes include (beginningat the upperleft generaluse and reand continuing counterclockwise)a person opening wine jars to let them breathe,two people in the butcher'sshop where a sheep is being dressed, a baker fined the practice of tending his oven, and two women preparingvariousfoods. Lower:In this cooking foods in drawing of a Nimrud bas-reliefthe king is shown enthroned within a fortified some kind of liquid. city that he has lust captured.His troopshave erected tents in the city which the sculptorhas representedin longitudinal sections in orderto reveal the tent They certainly used interiors.Some of the soldiers shown in the tents arepreparingtheir meals. water at times; on other occasions they may have used various oils or fats. Twoimportant vessels were invented in orderto cook with a liquid medium. The first was the coveredpot, usually made of fired clay. The second, the open kettle, was made of bronze. In Akkadian, these vessels were called diqaru and ruqqu, respectively. Each of these vessels was used for a particular cooking method, perhapsboiling in deep water for the coveredpot and some kind of slow simmer-

similar to Worcestershire sauce or nuocmam, the Vietnamese fish sauce now in vogue in the West. They also had the knowledge of lactic fermentation needed to make sour milk and cream cheese. Ancient Recipes In a collection of cuneiform tablets at Yale University there are three Akkadian tablets, dating to approximately 1700 B.C.E.,which originally were thought to have contained pharmaceutical formulas.' Upon closer examination, they proved to contain collections of recipes. They have revealed a cuisine of striking richness, refinement, sophistication, and artistry,


39

B'E'E'R

and

WINE

r~r Sr

,J

rr

r•

? ?~,r~t t

r ).Iv[

wj

Courtesy '... ~3..-j ot the YakeBabylonian Collection

",

s?,

'"

j

. •.

•\l )r ,rLi-~~ :'d4 ',,• 1,:.'•., 1".I

:r '' r' ',,.,. Sr' j?,,.

" iF

'

"..

r

Obeseadrevr ,e ofYB 44 an ees o B 68 Obvcrse

The

Fermented Beverages of Mesopotamia

Itis not known when fermentationwas firstdiscoveredbythe cultures of the

which is surprising from such an early period. Previously we would not have dared to think a cuisine four thousand years old was so advanced. Unfortunately all of these clay tablets, to varying degrees, suffered damage. The shortest (YBC 4648),

which contains 53 lines of text, is the most badly preserved. Apart from a few decipherable fragments, it is not of much use to us. There is enough of it left, however, to show that it is related to the other two. The latter are, happily, much more complete and coherent, despite the breaks in the text which interrupt its continuity. The better preserved tablet of

ancient Near East, but evidence suggests that wheat and barley, both essential to beer-making,were domesticated by the sixth millennium B.C.E. Fermentationplayedan integralrole in ancient societies byprovidinga means for preservingsome of the food-valueof various cereals and fruits. Fermentation became more than a technique formanagingagriculturalsurplusesas the ancient Mesopotamiansdevelopedways to enhance their enjoyment of these beverages. The Mesopotamiancultures made fermentedbeveragesfrom a varietyof agricultural products that were available to them. For example, cuneiform texts note a kind of date-wine,made from dates, raisins, and driedfigs, which was sold in the streets by wandering vendors. While many such liquid refreshmentswereproduced,none matched the popularityandimportanceof beer and wine. Beeris noted in the earliest written sources from Mesopotamia.Overthe centuries an elaboratevocabularydevelopedto describethe variousaspects of the brewingprocess and the kinds of beerswhich resulted.As a consequence, many of the terms found in Sumerian and Akkadian texts are still poorly understood. Mesopotamian beer-makingutilized those cereal grains which were extensively cultivated, especially barley.The basic process used to brew beer began by allowing barley grains to sprout, then crushing the sprouted grains.Often flavoringswere mixed in at this stageandthe mixture bakedinto lumps or cakes. The malted barleywas then mixed with waterand introduced into a special fermenting vat where it was kept for a period of time until transferredto a clarifyingvat to allow the graindregsto settle out. While the precise ways in which Mesopotamianbrewerscontrolled the rate and extent of fermentation are not clear, it is apparentfrom textual evidence that many

the two (YBC 4644) lists 25 recipes in

40

BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGIST

MARCH 1985

its 75 lines of text; 21 recipes feature meat as their chief ingredient, while 4 are vegetable dishes. The recipes are brief-from 2 to 4 lines each. Their style is extremely compressed, reminding one of the cookbooks written for professional chefs in our own era, such as the Guide Culinaire by Auguste Escoffier (the creator of Peach Melba). They list the chief ingredients and the basic steps of preparation in a businesslike, even understated, fashion. The other tablet (YBC 8958) is a good deal longer, but, unfortunately, is in poorer condition. In its original state, it contained some 200 lines of text but gave no more than 10 recipes in detail, all of which describe the preparation of various kinds of birds, both domestic and game. These recipes are outlined in infinitely greater detail than the entries in the other recipe tablets. Yale Babylonian Collection Tablet 4644. In the tablet with 25 recipes, all of the dishes are prepared with water and fats, usually cooked by simmering for a long time in a covered pot. In two of the recipes, however, a type of braising is used in the open kettle. While meat is used in the first 21 recipes of the tablet, the last 4 add a vegetable to it. In fact the last recipe may contain no meat at all. The meat recipes vary according to the use of different cuts, dif-

R.E.C.I.PE..S

Courtesyof the YaleBabylonianCollection

Yale

Babylonian Tablet

Meat Stew Takesome meat. Preparewater, throw fat into it, then add (the word is lost), leeks and garlic, all crushed together, and some plain iuhutinni. Red Stew Youdo not need meat. Prepare the water. Throw in fat. Pluck,

variations in brewing practice existed, leading to a wide assortment of beer flavorsand strengths. Wine was also popular,though probablymore expensive than beer since grapevines could be grown only in the northern regions of Mesopotamia. Compared to beer-making,little is known of the Mesopotamian vintner's craft.Wine is mentioned in cuneiformsourcesunder a numberof titles which relate to its color, strength, quality, and origin. The well-stocked Mesopotamian wine-cellar might boast "redwine," "clear(or white) wine," "sweet wine,"and"sweetclear (orwhite) wine."Also availablewere"strong"wines and "early"wines. At Mari, the king always enjoyed "goodquality wine,"while some of his subjects made do with "secondquality wine.""Badwine"is also noted in some sources. A concern for the wine-growingregion may also be indicatedby the frequentidentification of wines by their place of origin such as "wine of Carchemish."Wine was a standardgift nobles and other royalty presented to a king, and was often a base into which herbs and other ingredientswere mixed for medicinal purposes. KennethG. Hoglund

number

4644

tripe, and belly, salt, hulled malt, onions, samidu, cumin, coriander,leeks, and surummu, crushed together.Beforeplacing on the fire (in the pot) the meat should be marinatedin the blood which has been saved (fromthe animal butcheredfor this dish). This is not only a complicated recipe, but the laconic tone of the text is striking. It is only concerned with the essential ingredientsand never specifies quantities or cooking time. These are left to the discretion of the cook, who, we may assume, knew his business. Stew of a Kid In this recipe we note that the cooks knew how to combine different cooking techniques in order to enrich the food'staste. Head, legs and tail should be singed (before being put in the pot). Takethe meat. Bringwater to a boil. Add fat. Onions, samidu, leeks, garlic, some blood, some fresh cheese, the whole beaten together. Add an equal amount of plain Euhutinnii.


41

Stew with Crumbs The name of this dish may have been taken from its final step: Before removing (the pot from the fire) sprinkle the mixture with the crumbs sifted from a roundgrainloaf which has been crumbled. Wemay assume that the stew hadbeen cooked prior to this procedure. The crumbs were evidently added to give the dish a pleasant consistency. Pigeon Stew Split the pigeon in two. There must also be meat. Prepare water. Throw in the fat. Salt, hulled malt, onions, samidu, leeks, and garlic: all the herbs should be softened insome milk (beforeadding them to the pot). Tbbe presented for carving. ParruStew This is one of the longest recipes. It may have been made with wild pigeons,quail,or partridge- in anyevent, a small bird. Besides the birds, therehas to be freshleg oflamb. Preparethe water. Add fat. Restrain (truss) the tarrus, salt, hulled malt, onions, samidu, leeks, and garlic, which are crushed together with milk. (Having cooked the tarrus once in the) water of the pot, (next) crack them and place them (to braise)in a vessel with the broth taken from the pot, before returning the whole lot to the pot (for a final boiling, we may assume). Tb be presented for carving. Th'u Stew Here, at last is a vegetablerecipe. The main ingredient, tuh'u, is unidentifiable. There must (also) be the flesh from a leg of lamb. Preparethe water. Add fat, [... ], salt, beer, onions, (an herb called) spiney, coriander, samidu, cumin, and beetroot to throw into the pot. Then,crushgarlic and leeks, and add them. Let the whole cook into a stew, onto which you sprinMe corianderand Muhutinni.

42

ferent cooking methods, and various garnishes. Above all, variety was assured through the many seasonings that flavored the food. Among the aromatics, the most frequently used were the members of the onion family- garlic, onions, and leeks seem to have been the special favorites of these ancient gourmets. Other seasonings, however, are more difficult to identify with certainty: mint; juniper berries; uhutinnh and samidu which were probably in the onion family; possibly mustard, cumin and coriander; and surummu about which we know nothing. Various grain products, meals, flours, and perhaps malted barley, which had been pressed into cakes, were used to thicken the liquids and give them some consistency. Milk, beer, or blood were used occasionally for the same purpose. Salt was added, but not as a matter of course. Certain dishes appear to have gained their rich flavor simply from their ingredients and aromatic herbs. Like modern recipes, each recipe begins with its name, derived from its chief ingredient or its appearance at serving time. The name of each dish is preceded by the generic term ma which literally means water but in this context signifies something similar to bouillon, stew, or possibly a sauce. The entire dish, not just its liquid part, was intended to be eaten. If we knew the strength and consistency of the liquid in its final form we would better understand what ma means. The meat stews include stag, gazelle, kid, lamb, mutton, squab, and a bird called tarru. There is also a boiled leg of lamb and spleen stew. We read of "mustard(?) stew,""astew with salt," "ared stew,""aclear stew," and "atart stew." In two instances the name of the dish seems to be derived from its foreign place of origin. An "Assyrian stew" comes from the northern part of the country, and an "Elamite stew" is borrowed from neighbors who had settled in the southwest corner of Iran. The Ela-


mite stew preserves its original name at the end of the recipe. It was called zukanda. The last four recipes are named according to their principal vegetable ingredient. Three of these cannot be defined with any certainty; only the stew with turnips is definitely translated correctly. The meat stews could be cooked with a whole carcass (as in the pigeon or tarru stews). They also could be cooked with a cut of meat, which often was not specified, but occasionally a leg of lamb and organ meats, including the spleen, were mentioned. The Mesopotamians almost always added another cut of meat (possibly mutton) to vegetable dishes and, on occasion, to meat dishes. The Akkadian verb (izzaz) which notes the presence of the other cut of meat is ambiguous. Izzaz has two possible meanings: 1) "should be present in the dish," or 2) "should be divided or cut into pieces." Regarding these recipes, I prefer the first meaning because one recipe which begins with izzaz (referring in some way to meat), ends with the directions "to be presented for carving." In this case the other meaning would be redundant.

YaleBabylonianCollection Tablet 8958. This tablet is longer than tablet YBC4644 and its recipes are more complete and detailed. The recipes have a syntactical complexity which never bothered the ancient cooks but which makes the translator's work very difficult. It is challenging for the decipherer and translator to re-create the ancient culinary method and to try to follow the successive steps of each recipe. The syntactical problems are compounded by the number of words and technical terms whose meanings are lost to us. There are also frustrating breaks and gaps in the text. Therefore, for any one recipe, my version of the text and my translation are only provisional (see accompanying sidebar).

R.E.C.I.P.E.S Yale

Babylonian

Tablet

number

8958

The shortest recipe in this tablet is eleven lines long and is not too different from the ones we have alreadyencountered. It is for kippu or qeppu, which cannot be identified positively but appearto be a type of birdwith which the recipe assumes familiarity.They are also mentioned elsewhere in this tablet. KippuStew If you want to cook kippu in a stew, then preparethem as you would agarukku.First, clean them and rinse them in cold water and place them in an openpot. (Is this done to braise them in water?)Thenput the pot back on the flame (after the initial braising) and add some cold water to it and flavor it with vinegar. Next, crush (together)mint and salt and rub the kippu with the mixture. After this, strain (?)the liquid in the kettle and add mint to this sauce. Place the kippu back into it. (Weassume they will cook for a moment.) Finally, add a bit more cold water and turn the entire mixture into a pot (in order to complete the cooking). Tobe presented and then dished out. The next recipe is a good deal longer for it has 49 lines of text. Due to breaksin the text and the lack of punctuation, I haveparaphrasedit instead of making a direct translation.The name of the recipe is lost, but we gatherthat it is concernedwith a dish of small birds,and that it was called by their name. It apparentlytook some time to prepare.First,the birdshad to be preparedfor cooking: Remove the head and feet. Open the body in order to remove (along with everything else) the gizzards and the pluck. Split the gizzards, then peel them. Next, rinse the birds and flatten (?)them. Preparea pot, in which you place all together the birds, gizzards, and pluck, then place it on the fire. It is unknown whether water or fat was added.The basic method, no doubt, was so familiar to those who preparedthe dish that no amplification was necessary. After the initial boiling or braising had taken place, the instructions call for a second stage of cooking: Put the pot back on the fire. Rinse out a pot with fresh water. Place beaten milk into it and place it on the fire. Takethe pot (containing the birds,gizzards, and pluck) and drain the lot. Cut off the inedible parts, then salt the rest, and add them to the vessel with the milk, to which you must add some fat. Also add some rue, which has already been scrubbed. When it has come to a boil, add a mince(?)of leek, garlic, samidu, and onion. But as the texts warns,"holdthe onion!"Whilethe birdscook, the preparations for the serving of the dish must be made. Rinse crushed grain, then soften it in milk and add to it, as you knead it, the salty condiment (iiqqu, we assume), samidu, leeks, and garlic, along with enough milk and oil so that a soft dough will result, which you will expose to the heat of the fire (?)for a moment. Then cut it into two pieces. The text suffers here from a number of small gaps, which makes my restorationvery tentative.Wemay supposethat one of the pieces of doughwas used to make unleavenedbread.Beforeit was used, it was placed in a pot with milk, possibly in order to become soft and puffy. (This interpretationpre-

Courtesyof the YaleBabylonianCollection


1985

43

Mesopotamian Cuisine and Modern Cooking Thousands of years separate our culture and world from that of Mesopotamia. We are vastly different from them in our perceptions, self-awareness, and outlook on life. An unfortunate anachronism would result if we were to evaluate these recipe tablets with the same standards that we use to judge our own cookbooks. In theory, today's cookbooks are intended to be read by everyone. Each of them is the work of a master who wishes to share his knowlege. Their orientation is totally didactic. Today, almost everyone can read. Even in the days of Mith6kos of Syracuse and Apicius, learning to read was easier than in Mesopotamia. In ancient Mesopotamia, the writing system was very complicated. It was not alphabetic, but both ideographic and syllabic, and it contained several hundred

supposes that leavenedbreadwas alreadyknown by the Mesopotamianssince the unleavened bread used in this recipe was made to imitate its texture.) Next, the serving dish was prepared,with an eye to its appearanceat table: Takea platter large enough to hold (all) the birds. Place the prepared dough on the bottom of the plate. Be careful that it hangs over the rim of the platter only a little [ ... ]. Place it, i order to cook it, on top of the cooker. (This refers to one of the clay cylinders already mentioned.) When the dough has finished cooking, it is sprinkledwith seasonings, among which are the inevitable onion and garlic. On the dough, which has already been seasoned, place the pieces of the birds.Stew the gizzards and pluck among them. Moisten it all with the sauce. Coverit with a lid and send to table. There are many steps taken in the above recipe in orderto produce one dainty.Ifthe goal hadbeen simply to cook them, it would have sufficedto have thrown the birdson the fire. Insteadwe see a cooking method which has been adaptedto differenttechniques of preparation,numerous utensils used, each with its own purpose,and complex combinations of foods, especially seasonings. Eventhough the seasonings combined are complementary,some dishes call for as many as ten of them. The Mesopotamian taste does not seek unseasoned food, nor does it savoreach flavorseparately.A differentgoal, in my opinion a superiorgoal, is sought- the savorof the combination of all the ingredients'flavors. Finally, we note the great attention paid to the garnishes. All of the features of Mesopotamian cookery point to a serious interest in food on the partof the guests, which we aresurely entitled to call gastronomy.They reveal a level of technical skill, a professional dedication, actually a complex and detailed art practicedby the cooks and other kitchen workers. ~ -r?

".1 II ?7,~;T-1~4~Ty,

11i:?

?ii t

i

~63 I

??

f~l

5-~2

:~s-

181'

i

c 2/1~4~____________~

\~??I~,.?L-\\ `\i

'P-

cr~i~~i~1~t~i~d~. ?:s

-I

?;:",~~

`` .~~~--T?t`.

~?`\?~.

~~ 1

~L~S,

r.,

c?js 9. - 'L.

:W~5;?~ r

j-

?r?:

-~?--r ;. ~ag~ ~C/ ?~?tig

~?~J~ -?

j%'

'3~

?c~~Q?~i?i

!:tb~i:*:~ f ?~~~t d z

~:*~i: =i~i:\I

?t-~ I ?u, :i

lb r'"E~,~ ?',i?

.. ?.~

,,

~

?I

~? .;

i

1?i"i3,

,Yi~3~e;:j

I??~'

~?t*~

rl.

;I . -u ~YFP~':

.`F

j

.~,.. h ,:~?k"~~~ ??

.. i./ ----`--

i,

?,

'' ~-- --~-'- - -~~-


1985

~1

r?:

L!

:7~;r ~t~? ( ,,;.?? 1?1I.?~?~,., ?IJij~:,

1

~?~

"~.

i ~ AL i ? ~

44

~;LEr,-C`~ r

?.,

4~b

I

1

:

Z

.~i

I~ i ; II '

IIIt'

Y.

~-

I?

Cy '

' !~r,J1 I i?

;-~?~?

'?

:~ rYi

r i

w

j r

i: /

1

?

\\1~7J5~

?!~3~~s~t~':? :' ;? i

z- .P -t?

~ig

r

F:l'';I' In~~,l!Il~n

rl.u

~t~S~~f~ ?i:

=:

~?':i .`i 1~5~j` ~~ ~/.Z? ti, a' r lil~ir

e i ,ric~ g

`i;C~

?r ,,

.t~

?;

I;r?, ~MPI "~-"Jcl ~

iCi~ll;qt

II: ,

?~t?

1 ;~

?,

r,

;I B;~ jX~ili~ !, l~~~ 5?'1?~~ .?~r: 7~f~:~~,?5~=:;;;sj

..

~ ~iir~""~-~

r'1

ill(~

' ,'fd:'r

~ri~i:i~f~-~i~5t~~ L? ;;i .c-.

,,

::

z

.1

l~jl

u`?t~:.~~

i

i,.

?~?~

'i''i

.... ? /

'1 Y-LLL-^ II -y

i LILL~ZLLC

I-- ---e

? ,? -Li~L---C~ ~ ? _ L~

r ___JI~1 :I-LZ

Io

Wild game supplemented the domestic meats used in Mesopotamian cuisine. In this scene from Nineveh, dating to the seventh century B.c., gazelles are shown fleeing hunters. The

drawing is by Wallet.

Theserecipetabletsare a recordof culinary ritual,not a cookbook. signs that possessed a number of possible meanings or values. Long years of practice and study were demanded of those who sought its

mastery. Such leisure was only available to the elite or the members of a professional class. The ability to write and, consequently, the ability

to readwas in itself a profession. It was the work of a few scribes who were responsible for readingeverything. A cook-who,

along with

almost everyoneelse, was illiterate -would not have had the slightest idea of writing books for other

cooks, who were as unlettered as he. Nor would a cook write a cookbook Because of the expense of producingit, the Mesopotamiancuisine examined in this article was available only to the elite of the society. This groupalso enjoyedstaging elaborate hunting expeditions, an activity that providedmany of the wild meats used in their cuisine. The drawing to the left is by Saint-ElmeGautier of a bas-relieffrom the palace of Ashurbanipalwhich shows the dogs being used in such a hunt.

for an audience of scribes who had no other desire than to learn how to create these dishes. A general reading audience did not exist.

It is best not to evaluate these recipe tablets as didactic pieces.


45

They were written for administrative, normative purposes, so that what was done in cooking might be set down and codified by means of recipes. Similarly,court procedure was established by means of protocol, temple activity was regularizedby means of a liturgy,the dispensaries of doctors and apothecarieswere normalized by formulas, and some crafts were governedby rules and traditional procedures.These recipe tablets form a culinary codex or, if you will, a culinary ritual, ratherthan a culinarymanual, that is, a cookbook. They set down the practices of the day, which had developedfrom everydayhabits, enhanced by constant changes and improvements. This cuisine, ritualized and codified in its written form, was essentially the cuisine of the palace or the temple. Such unparalleled care in cooking and complex culinary technique requiredspaciousfacilities and a wide rangeof equipment, plus many of the ingredients needed were hardto come by and, therefore,were costly. This cuisine could only havebeen carriedout by real experts, the nuhatimmu, and it existed for the benefit of and under the patronage

women who cooked in modest homes knew how to turn out dishes which were just as tasty and imaginative as those which the nuhatimmu of the palace created, though they were probablysimpler and not so varied.Notice that I say that the domestic cooks were women. The haute cuisine was the preserveof the male nulatimmu, who functioned somewhat along the lines of our own

senting the daily life of the lower class, including its culinary practices and recipes, because of the lack of documentation. Let me conclude with the caution that these recipes from the Mesopotamianhaute cuisine are virtually impossible for us to cook today.Since we do not know the exact meaning of many terms, which appearto be technical, we cannot understandthe series of steps for each recipe that were apparent to the Mesopotamians who used them. Complicated recipes such as these cannot be properlyunderstood or analyzed, let alone duplicated,unless they can be seen in demonstration. Everycuisine, like every skilled craft, is made up primarily of tricks of the trade. It is important that we remember as well that the civilization of ancient Mesopotamia, along with its languageand literature, disappearedfor two thousand years. Such a huge gap in the history of human culture is a terrible handicap for the historian. This is demonstratedby the number of foods, procedures, and utensils that cannot

of the elite. Those peasants and laborers who made up the bulk of the population could not have had the time to prepare or the means to afford the elaborate stews or platters of birds which we have found in these tablets. Haute cuisine in Mesopotamia was reserved for the upper class and the gods, while the masses had a popular form of cookery. It is the haute cuisine which we have been examining and which impresses us so. In any society and culture, however, imagination and taste are contagious. I am convinced that the

This basalt bas-relieffrom the palace of SargonII at Khorsabadmay depict Sennacherib, then the crownprince, hunting birds.

be positively identified. We have to be content with "some dairy product," or "some kind of onion." This does not, obviously, lend itself to success in the kitchen. It would be disastrous, in any cuisine worthy of the name, to replace a mild cream cheese with a pungent Limburger, even though they are both dairy products! Though we hail the ancient Mesopotamians as the oldest gourmets and gastronomes, it appears that their concept of good food and ours are worlds apart. For instance, they adored their food soaked in fats

46

chefs who work in the great restaurants or private homes. On the other hand, the mainstream, popular cooking among the Sumerians and Babylonians was "woman's work." I have never agreed, by the way, with the grim picture of Mesopotamian proletariats reduced to chewing dull pottages like a herd of depressed cows for century upon century. This would be misrepre-


the tablets. ProfessorBott~rolearnedof the texts from Dr. van Dijk. These three tablets will soon appearin EarlyMesopotamian Incantations and Rituals, by Jaanvan Dijk, YaleOrientalSeries 11, 1985.

Suggestions for FurtherReading Bottero,J. 1966 Getrinke. Pp.302-306 in Reallexikon der Assyriologie 3. Editedby W.von Soden.Berlin:Walterde Gruyterand Co. 1981 Kiche. Pp. 277-98 in Reallexikon der Assyriologie 6. Editedby D. O. Edzard.Berlin:Walterde Gruyter and Co. Finet, A. 1974- LeVin AMari.Archiv fir Orient1977 forschung25:122-31. Flower,B.,and Rosenbaum,E. 1958 The Roman CookeryBook. A Critical Translationof The Art of Cooking by Apicius for use in the study and the kitchen. London: GeorgeG. Harrap& Co. Ltd. Hartman,L. E, and Oppenheim,A. L. 1950 On Beer and Brewing Techniquesin Ancient Mesopotamia.Supplement to the Journalof the Ancient Oriental Society 10. Baltimore:American Oriental Society. Kinnier-Wilson,J. 1972 The Nimrud WineLists:A Study of Men and Administration at the Assyrian Capital in the Eighth Century,B.C.London:British School of Archaeologyin Iraq. Oppenheim,A. L. 1977 Ancient Mesopotamia:Portraitof a Dead Civilization. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.

Unless

Fromthe North Palace of Ashurbanipala scene carvedon gypseous alabaster depicts a very simple meal being eaten by Elamite prisoners.

and oils, they seem obsessed with every member of the onion family, and, in contrast to our tastes, salt played a ratherminor role in their diet. Although I will never try to re-createtheir recipes, I would refer anyone interested in Mesopotamian cookery to the contemporarycuisine known as "Turco-Arabic," which, most likely, can be traced back through ages of modification

and refinement to the nuhatimmu, the chefs of Sumer and Babylon. Notes This article is a translationand revision of a paperby JeanBott~rothat originally appeared in L'histoire,number 49, in October 1982. Editorialassistance in preparingit in English was providedby JonathanT. Glass. 'The three tablets were first copied by the late MaryHussey.After her death Professor William Hallo of the YaleBabylonianCollection asked Jaanvan Dijk to continue work on

otherwise indicated, the

illustrations in this article were taken from the following publications: A. H. LayardandM. Botta, The Buried City of the East: Nineveh (London:Office of the National Illustrated Library, n.d.); A. H. Layard, Discoveries Among the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon (New York:Harper& Row,Publishers, 1856); G. Contenau, Everyday Life in Babylon and Assyria (London: Edward Arnold Publishers, Ltd., 1954); and G. Perrot and C. Chipiez, A History of Art in Chaldaea & Assyria, 2 volumes (London: Chapman and Hall, Limited, 1884).


47

Salvage Excavations at Tell Hadidi in the EuphratesRiver Valley

Themain buildingsof the 1974-1976campareshownbeingfloodedin thisrenderingbyLinda Huff.

H. DORNEMANN BYRUDOLPH

In

1976 the first stage of a hydro-

electric dam was completed at Tabqa- present-day Al Thaoura -on the Euphrates River in Syria. The large artificial lake, Al Assad, that formed behind it has since covered or endangered many ancient sites - sites that are particularly significant because one of the major trade routes in antiquity followed the Euphrates. Naturally aware of the historical importance of these sites, the Syrian government, through UNESCO, initiated an international effort in 1963 to save the architecture and artifacts, as well as the knowledge, threatened by the lake (for more detailed information on the effort, see Bounni 1979 in volume 44 of the Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research). One of the institutions taking part in the salvage effort was mine, the Milwaukee Public Museum, which excavated for five seasons (1974-1978) at Tell Hadidi, (see Dornemann 1978, 1979, 1981). During this time the essential outline of

the development of the site through more than 4,000 years has been determined, and not incidentally the name of the Bronze Age city located there-Azu-was discovered. I would like to take this opportunity to summarize what we

Hadidiwasoccupied for 4,000years. learned at Hadidi, and to discuss the general implications of our finds, placing them in a broader archaeological and cultural context. I shall concentrate on the Bronze Age, the major period of occupation found there. The Earliest Remains: The Beginning of the Early Bronze Age Where we reached bedrock, or more accurately for Hadidi, where we reached the virgin gravels under the tell, we encountered pottery or building remains of the Early Bronze

Age. Though not spectacular, the finds were extremely significant because similar materials are not well represented in previous excavations elsewhere in Syria, though some of our colleagues had found small samples at four nearby sites: Tell Sweyhat (Holland 1976: figures 4 and 5), Tell Mumbaqat (Orthmann and Kiuhne 1974: figure 6.1 and 2), Tell Halawa (Orthmann 1981: 44-48), and El Qatar. Our evidence provides a vital link between the well-documented later phases of the Early Bronze Age and the spectacular finds of the preceding Protoliterate period. The latter have recently been revealed by Belgian (Finet 1979), Dutch (van Driel and van DrielMurray 1979 and 1983), and German (Heinrich and others 1969, 1970, 1971, 1973, 1974; Strommenger 1979) excavators, providing evidence that will revolutionize the early history of urbanization in Syria. Our materials, which date between 3050 and 2900 B.c., are somewhat scanty because of the restricted size of the sounding and


1985

49

The TabqaDam Area During the ProtoliteratePeriod

JebelAruda. TellHadidi can be seen in the upperright-handcorner.

xcavations in the TabqaDam areahave revealedspectacularremains dating to the end of the fourth millennium B.c.Majorarchitecturalcomplexes have been uncovered at Jebel Aruda, Habuba Kabire, and Tll Qanas and there is evidence of occupation during this time at four other sites. Protoliterateoccupation is characterizedby temple buildings, substantial houses, sophisticated drainagesystems, elaboratefortifications, and distinctive pottery and small finds. The TabqaDam Salvage Project recoveredexcellent examples of niched temple architecture,characteristicceramic forms,and many cylinder seal impressions. These are typical of the widespreadculture reaching out from southern Mesopotamiawhere it is known from many sites but is best illustratedby the finds fromUruk in Iraqand Susa in Iran.The commercial route along the Euphrates River was obviously important in making our area an integralpartof the developingandexpandingurbanismof the time. Although the earliest materials from Tell Hadidi are quite limited they demonstrate both continuity with the past and innovation diagnostic of a new period. RudolphH. Dornemann

able to expose only a small portion of each building as we proceeded toward virgin gravel some 4.5 meters , below modern ground surface. Time did not permit us to enlarge our small exposure to the north and west since that would require excavating the adjacent area to the same depth. Several other areas of the site, both on the high portion of the tell and on its lower portion to the east, provided handfuls of the characteristic sherds of this Early Bronze period mixed in later fills. The earliest settlement at Hadidi apparently covered the entire area of the ancient tell, as was the case later in the Early Bronze (2500 - 2000 B.c.) and Late Bronze (1550 - 1350 B.C.) periods. In most areas excavated on the site, however, traces of the earliest buildings had been removed by the buildings of the last quarter of the third millennium B.C. Extensive cutting and terracing were found everywhere under the area of the highest part of the site but also far off in the distance to the east. The size of the Early Bronze Age city,

In areaRa successionoffive EarlyBronze buildingswas

found. In stratum 1 of area R parts of five buildings from Early Bronze I were excavated one above the other.

the clean and well-maintained portions of buildings we excavated. Within a meter and one-half (of depth) in area R, we excavated parts of five buildings, one above the other. The succession did not seem too rapid for evidence was found that each building was used for an extended period of time. In one

50

Left: Earliest building phases and virgin gravel. Right: Final building phase.

phase we counted about fifty thin whitewash layers, possibly marking annual refurbishings, on one side of a room against a buttress. The careful maintenance of these rooms, the positions of the doorway and buttress, and other features resemble that of contemporary temples in Mesopotamia. We were, however,


1985

about 135 acres, apparently remained stable for about 1,000 years until around 2000 B.c., when it was destroyed. The Major Period of Occupation: the End of the Early Bronze Age The city of the end of the Early Bronze Age was encountered in

twelve areas of excavation.In five of these areaswe found a sequence of house remains, best illustrated on the high tell by a nearly complete house plan and on the low tell by a number of buildings along both sides of a street. In both cases the sequence of occupation was shallow and rested on virgin gravel.A longer sequence is preservedon the lower portion of the tell but is complicated with many buildings and rebuildings. The sequence here seems to continue to the end of the Early BronzeAge, but in our majorareaon the high part of the tell, areaB, the latest occupation was removedby leveling operations for Middle BronzeAge construction. Little evidence of Middle Bronze occupation was found on the low tell, but the extensive sequence in areaB on the high tell has alreadybeen mentioned and the earliest of this Middle Bronze material is clearly transitional. Though major changes took

Left:Remains of the floors and foundations of an EarlyBronzeAge building that dates around the twenty-thirdcentury B.c.The building was built on virgingraveland had been leveled to make room for succeeding buildings during the Middle BronzeAge (see upperleft of page 55 for photographof Middle Bronzeremains in the same excavation square). Above:Foundationsof Late BronzeAge buildings were set on virgingravel, after the removalof EarlyBronzeAge remains. These buildings were excavated during the 1974 season, at which time a street was also traced along the foundations of the buildings to its corner(indicated with an arrow).

A selection of terracotta figurinesfrom area B and an inscribed stone plaque from area R (lower right)from the Early Bronzelayers at Hadidi.

place around 2000 B.c., there seems

to have been little, if any,break in the continuation of settlement. Despite our best efforts, we were able to clear less than 1 percent of the area of this EarlyBronze city and did not encounter majorbuildings or written materials. We are left with pottery sherds, metal objects, fragments of figurines, samples of grain, large quantities of animal bone, and similar evidence from which to reconstruct what we can of the city's history.

In our initial seasons, we devoted a good portion of our effort to attempts at documenting the burial practices of the inhabitants of the city, in the hope of addinganother dimension to our study. Our hopes were high at the beginning, as we viewed the remains left scattered on

the surface near empty tomb chambers that had been cleared by the local villagers. We tackled the most promising candidates for undisturbedtombs, only to find all had been robbed,mostly in recent times. Wewere able, however,to document some impressive tomb structures.


51

El Qatar.

BronzeAge sites in black.

SRmale

Shash

Hamrndan Tell Sweyhat

Tell Hadidi ?

Tell el Abd

.

Shams Tell el

Tel Othman

ed Din Tannira

Mumbaqat Mumb~aqat

Hajll

Habuba Kabire ,

Tell Oanas?

oUg

TellTawi

,

Tell Jefle

Tell Halawa Selenkahiye.

Mureybit village

Meskene Oadime

Tell Faqous Tell Frey *

Excavations of the 'TabqaDam Salvage Project

TombI in Area L Top:Entranceshaft, doorway,and door-stone.Middle: Tomb interiorafter clearance.Below: Plan and section.

Site Mureybit

Periodsof Occupation Natufian, Neolithic,

ExpeditionDirector(s) M. van Loon (American)

EarlyBronze,Late

J.Cauvin (French)

Protoliterate

surface - village

Bronze

Sheikh Hassan Nahr el Homr Abu Hureyra

-

--

Neolithic Byzantine,Islamic Neolithic Neolithic, Islamic

I rr

'Anabas Safina el Hajj

_

-

-

0

`-•?

i__._._

5M

We are still piecing together the hundreds of vessels once carefully placed in the tombs in antiquity but roughly thrown aside and smashed within the past two decades. We had not expected treasures equalling those of King Tutankhamon but

52

Ubaid, Roman Ubaid, Protoliterate, EarlyBronze,Middle Bronze,Iron,Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine, Islamic Shams ed Din Tannira Halaf surface Protoliterate,Early Bronze El Qatar Halaf, EarlyBronze, Middle Bronze,Late Bronze,Hellenistic, Roman JebelAruda Protoliterate HabubaKabire-South

Protoliterate,Roman

HabubaKabire-North Protoliterate,Middle Bronze,LateBronze


J.Cauvin (French) A. Bounni (Syrian) IJ.J.Roodenberg(Dutch) A. Moore (British) R. Dahman (Syrian) Y. Jabali (Syrian)

A. Bounni (Syrian) R. Stucky (Belgian)

H. Seeden (American) S. al Radi (American) R. Dornemann (American) T. McClellan (Australian) H. Franken(Dutch) G. van Driel (Dutch) E. Heinrich (German) E. Strommenger(German) E. Heinrich (German) E. Strommenger(German)

Qanas

Tawi surface

Hadidi

Shash Hamdan Selenkahiye Halawa-North Halawa-South

Rmale

el 'Abd Sweyhat Othman Jefle Mumbaqat

Frey

Protoliterate,Early Bronze,Middle Bronze, Roman, Islamic EarlyBronze Protoliterate,Early Bronze,Middle Bronze, Iron, Roman EarlyBronze,Middle Bronze,LateBronze, Roman,Islamic EarlyBronze EarlyBronze,Persian, Roman EarlyBronze EarlyBronze,Middle Bronze Byzantine, Islamic EarlyBronze,Middle Bronze,LateBronze, Roman EarlyBronze,Middle Bronze,Hellenistic EarlyBronze,Middle Bronze,LateBronze, Iron,Hellenistic EarlyBronze EarlyBronze EarlyBronze,Middle Bronze,LateBronze, Roman,Islamic EarlyBronze,Middle Bronze,Late Bronze, Roman,Byzantine, Islamic

Meskene Qadime-Balis EarlyBronze,Iron, Roman,Byzantine, Islamic Meskene Qadime-Emar LateBronze LateBronze,Roman, Faq'ous Islamic KhirbitZmale Iron,Byzantine KhirbitKhalid Hellenistic, Byzantine, Islamic Roman Jouef Shajara Dibsi Faraj JusefPasha Ta'as Qalat Ja'bar

Roman,Byzantine Roman,Byzantine, Islamic Byzantine, Islamic Islamic Islamic

A. Finet (Belgian) W.Orthmann (German)

H. Franken(Dutch) R. Dornemann (American)

M. van Loon (American) (Dutch) W.Orthmann (German) W.Orthmann (German) J.C. Balty (Belgian) R. Hafez (Syrian) Egami (Japanese) A. Bounni (Syrian) T. Holland (British)

W.Orthmann (German) E. Heinrich (German) W.Orthmann (German) D. R. Frank(German) D. Machule (German) M. Wafler(German) A. Bounni (Syrian) S. Sha'ath(Syrian) T. Carter(American) D. Hillers (American) P.Matthiae (Italian) L. Golvin (French) A. Raymond(French) J.Margueron(French) J.Margueron(French)

E. Heinrich (German) E. Strommenger(German) K. Toueir(Syrian) R. Harper(American) H. Franken(Dutch) R. Dahman (Syrian) Y. Jabali(Syrian) A. Zakzouk (Syrian)

hoped we would farebetter than just the long, arduoustask confronting us now to rescue the maximum information from the tombs we cleared. As the pottery from the various tombs has been reconstructed,it has become clear that a long rangeof pottery forms existed. Most of the tombs had been used for a long period of time. The first of the tombs worked on were smaller groups that contained materials from the end of the EarlyBronzeAge, but as the largertomb groups were studied it became evident that typologically earlier pottery vessels were present as well, material which was very poorly representedin the stratified excavations.As a result, where at first we thought the site was inhabited primarily at the beginning and the end of the BronzeAge, it now seems that occupation was fairly continuous. The practice of drastic leveling and rebuildingremoved much of the tell's occupation remains from their original contexts. In those areas lacking complete stratigraphy,the gaps can be reconstructed by the careful evaluation of comparablematerials from other parts of the tell. EarlyBronze Age occupation, primarily domestic occupation, and tombs have been encountered by many other expeditions at sites in the dam salvage area.In this period, occupation density reached one of its high points. Tell Hadidi and nearbyTell Selenkahiye, about 10 miles to the southwest, are two of the largest cities in this area at this time, Tell Hadidi measuring about 135 acres and Selenkahiye even more. Unfortunately,because no archives of this period have been found in our area it is impossible to identify the ancient names of most of the sites. Contemporarywritten materials from the extensive and remarkable archives from Ebla (modernTell Mardikh),about 100 miles to the west, just southwest of Aleppo,


1985

53

_S_

m American Expedition Dutch Expedition

--

Extent of Early Bronze city Extent of Middle Bronze city Expansion of city from Middle Bronze IICthrough Late Bronze I Areas where fortificationwalls were located during excavation Occupation of Roman and Islamic period concentrated in this area

mention trade and tribute from this areaas well as political and military interaction with its cities and villages (see Matthiae 1980, 1981, 1984;Pettinato 1981;and Vigan6 and Pardee1984).The even more important political and cultural center of Mari (see Pardeeand Glass 1984),on the Euphrates,far to the south near the present-dayborderwith Iraq, ee Rive H,v was one of the majorpowers that Ar fought against Eblafor control of the cities and trade routes along our stretch of the Euphrates.Unfortunately, the capital city that Ebla used to control its dependencies in this areahas not been excavated,but this city, Emar (modernTell Meskene Qadime), is mentioned frequently in the Eblatexts. Also menTopographicmap of TellHadidi showing the areas excavatedduring the 1975 through1978 tioned severaltimes is the city of seasons. Azu, near Emar.We consider it fairly safe to assume that the name Azu was alreadythe name of our city at Tell Hadidi and that this name was HadidiStrata ApproximateDatesof 'Tell perpetuatedfor over a millennium Stratum Period/Dates Number Locationof Stratum and possibly for the entire history of the site. 8 south of high and low tells (Ayyubid)(1174-1263 A.D.) Reducedbut Well-fortifiedMiddle Bronze Age Settlement Forthe Middle Bronzewe found a small (only about 55-acre),wellfortified settlement. We clearedportions of a massive defense system in severalareas.Its builders had little regardfor us in the way they dumped fills in certain areasto create huge earthen embankments and carried off the buildings of other areasto create places at the desired levels for new building projects.The constant massive building projects make reconstruction of the occupation sequence a tremendous challenge and requiremassive effort and massive earth-movingto try to understand what they did. Our limited efforts yielded a basic ceramic documentation but little more. The area on the north edge of the high tell yielded a complex of rooms built against a thick wall. In its final Middle BronzeAge phase, a sloping pebble surface ran down

54

Islamic (630- 1918A.D.) Byzantine (324-630 A.D.) Roman (60 B.c.-324 A.D.) Hellenistic (325-60 B.c.) Persian(535-325 B.C.) Iron (1200-535 B.C.) LateBronzeII (1400-1200 B.c.) LateBronze IB(1500-1400 B.C.) LateBronzeIA (1550-1500 B.C.) Middle BronzeIIC(1650-1550 B.C.) Middle BronzeIIB(1775-1650 B.c.) _ Middle BronzeIIA(1900-1775 B.c.) Middle BronzeI (2000-1900 B.c.) EarlyBronzeIV (2350-2000 B.c.) EarlyBronzeI (2700-2350 B.c.) EarlyBronzeII (2900-2700 B.c.) EarlyBronzeI (3050-2900 B.c.) Protoliterate(3500-3050 B.c.) Ubaid-Halafor Chalcolithic (50003500 s.c.) LateNeolithic (5400- 5000 B.c.) Middle Neolithic (6050- 5400 B.c.) EarlyNeolithic (8300-6050 B.c.) Natufian (10,000- 8300 B.c.)

sparse remains 7 south of high and low tells sparse remains

6

high and low tells

5 4 3

high tell only high tell only high and low tells

2 1

high and low tells high and low tells

Note: The pre-Iron-Agedates have been estimated at quarter-centuryintervals.The early sequenceof dates is calculatedin approximateyearson the basis of the short, 5568 half-life for carbon 14 and havenot been recalibrated.


from the outer face of the wall to the edge of a 4.2-meter-wide, 2.1-meterdeep ditch or fosse. Longevity of fortification techniques is indicated by the repetition of this same pattern in the final, Late Bronze, stage of the city. The massive pebble fills covering the Middle Bronze system are a testimony to a city organization that was obviously undaunted by the great amount of labor involved. The rooms inside the wall at the top of the fortification system were rebuilt even more frequently than these heavy walls themselves. The earliest buildings are preserved only as floor layers, ovens, and the lowest courses of some of the wall founda-

Left:A complex of rooms belonging to the Middle BronzeAge city was located on the northernedge of the high tell. Right: Excavationof the earliest wall foundations, platforms, ovens, and floors of the Middle Bronzesettlement.

tions. Laterphases show numerous changes of groundplan in the shifting of doors and walls. The remains are a complex puzzle but provideus with one of the best stratified sequences availablefor the first half of the second millennium B.C.

(Dornemann,in press). Dr. Joanna McClellan, the expedition'sassistant field directorfor the last two seasons and supervisor of areaB for all five expedition seasons, has been working on the analysis of this architecturalsequence for the final publication. The final phase of the Middle Many fragmentaryfigurines were found in the Middle and Late BronzeAge levels of area BronzeAge was apparentlyrich and B at TellHadidi. Shown here are two typical prosperous,and led to the expansion female figurines which date to the middle of the second millennium B.c.

1Tvoplaque figurines, each bearingthe image of a male lute player. The one on the left was discoveredin area B; the one on the right was a surfacefind.

This Middle Bronzefortification wall was discovered under the tablet building in areaA.

of the city. Excavationin areaH (beneaththe tablet building discussed in the next section) indicated that the fortification wall was leveled on this side of the site, huge


55

fills were placed outside, to the west, and a new fortification wall erected there. This extended city was then inhabited continuously through the

scene painted on the walls of the palace of the king Zimri-Limat Mari (see Gates 1984: 77). Recordsof the destruction of Zimri-Lim'sMariby the famous Hammurabiof Babylon tie down the date of the destruction of the palace and also help to establish the date of the contemporary plaque from Hadidi.

sixteenth and fifteenth centuries B.C.

Remains of Middle BronzeAge settlement have been excavatedat many sites in the big bend areaof the Euphrates,from El Qatar (Culican and McClellan 1983- 1984), Rmale, and Sweyhat (Holland 1976 and 1977)farthest north to Mumbaqat (Heinrichand others 1969, 1970, 1971, 1973, and 1974;Orthmann and Kihne 1974),Halawa,Tell el Hajj (Krause,Schuler,and Stucky 1972), HabubaKabirenorth (Heusch 1978), and in the south to Tell Frey.Some sites have only short occupations duringMiddle Bronzewhile others were major centers, but how many were contemporarywith each other for any length of time is still a matter of discussion since the detailed sequences from each site are not yet published in their final form. Excavationsin area N at the northwest corner of the site yielded one of our prize finds, a small plaque figurine. Though the small bit of mold-formedclay measures only 2.25 inches by 2.5 inches, it is a very fine example of the art style of this period. It is important in providinga clear link to the city that is our major source for written recordsin

Remains from the Late BronzeAge Our most exciting season was our third, 1976, when the largestbuilding we had excavatedyielded a small collection of clay tablets written in One of the most exciting finds of the Tell Hadidi excavations is this small clay plaque depicting a beer-drinking ceremony. Found in area N at the northwest corner of the tell, it dates to the Middle Bronze II period and is strikingly similar in many details to the famous "Investiture" scene from the ZimriLim palace at Mari (Gates 1984).

the fifteenth century B.C.in the

Babylonianlanguageand in a Syrian version of the cuneiform script that was so long-lived in its Mesopotamian homeland. Though limited, the tablets give us a historical context, particularlywhen compared with others found at nearbysites. Syriafor this time, Mari. Our plaque The pottery,other artifacts,and has no exact parallels there but dates obtained from the analysis of carbon-14samples, in combination represents a combination of two scenes shown on quite a number of with the languageand writing of the Mari plaques (Dornemann,in press). tablets, arguefor a destruction of One scene depicts two figures facing this building in the last half of the each other, holding a standardwith fifteenth century B.C.Sir Leonard sun disk at the top; the other repWoolley'sexcavations at Tell resents two facing figures, again in Atchana, ancient Alalakh (Woolley profile, drinking from a vessel with 1955),provideone of our best points straws.The garments and hats on of contact with close ceramic paralour figures can be paralleledin detail lels in levels 4 and 5 and several by figures on the famous "Investiture" referencesto the city of Azu in the

r-----~~~ run~ePi

c .I i~i~'n~x

?

SOo

ovens o(rOi

s-~ 1

B

:-"

ri

?`

r 8 b!i

:?

?~_Q" r, c,

i-?

Left: Plan of the Late Bronze Age tablet building (on right with ovens) and an adjacent building (on left) in area A that was first excavated by the Leiden University expedition. The tablet building was the home of a man named Yaya and the tablets found there confirm that the ancient name of the site was Azu. Right: The tablet building photographed from the western side.

56


palace archives (Wiseman 1953; Dornemann 1979: 149). The building was a private dwelling that had belonged to a certain Yaya,son of Huziru, son of Daganna;this Yayais identified as a citizen of the city of Azu, the ancient name for Tell Hadidi. One additionalmajoroccupation followec the destruction phase connected with this building but apparently did not last for any appreciable length of time into the fourteenth century B.C.

Historical recordsfrom major Near Easternsites indicate a destruction of the Mitannian kingdom that controlled northern Syria and northern Iraqin the fifteenth and early fourteenth centuries B.c. and

the administrative consolidation of northern and central Syriaby the victorious Hittites. Archaeological remains, including tablets found by French, Syro-Italian,and recent Australian expeditions at nearbyTell Meskene Qadime (ancient Emar; Arnaud 1975 and 1982),Tell Frey, and El Qatar (Snell 1983-1984), respectively, amply document this final phase of the Late BronzeAge. The basic analysis of all the pottery vessels smashed in the destruction of the house of Yayawas published in a preliminary reportin the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research (Dornemann 1981).We have turned over the carbonizedgrain and other samples collected in the house to specialists for study. The tablets, accordingto the study of Dr. Robert Faience cylinder seal from the tablet building and its impression. The decorativestyle of this seal is typical of the fifteenth to fourteenth centuries B.c. when the Mitannian kingdom dominated north Syria.

Whiting of the University of Chicago'sOriental Institute, are a personal archive containing administrative documents (house sales, and sales of lots, orchards,and fields, all confirmed by long lists of witnesses), simple economic lists, a letter, and the will of Yaya,the owner of the house. When the analyses of all the materials found in the building are complete and can be comparedwith the almost identical adjacentbuilding excavatedin 1974 by the University of Leiden expedition (directedby ProfessorHank Franken)it will be possible to see the many component features of a household and from these remains gain some insight into a poorly documented phase in the history of ancient Syria. Searchfor a Palace Severalreferences in the tablets to the local palace motivated us in our last seasons to excavatein areas of the tell where we had hopes of finding such a structure. Forthat reason work startedin two areaswith limited crews before the full staff arrived for the start of our last season. Earlierexcavationsby our expedition north of the tablet building and the deep soundings near that building made in 1973 and 1974 by the LeidenUniversity projectindicated the existence of massive architecture under the western edge of the tell. After ten days of excavation Upper: This tablet records the sale of a house adjacent to Yaya'shouse. It lists the properties located on three sides of the house that was being sold and mentions that a street leading to the palace borderedthe fourth side. This sale contract was witnessed by fourteenindividuals and was sealed with two cylinderseals. Middle: The will of Yayawas recordedon this tablet. It was sealed with the seal of the temple of Dagan and there is a curse against anyone who tried to alter the declarationfollowing the name of the last witness. Lower:Drawing of Tell Hadidi TabletH-76-T7,a letter from Urhi to Arihalpa. The expedition epigrapher,Robert Whiting,has translatedit as follows: 7bArihalpa, thus (says) Urhi:(concerning)their... that belong to the villages of the city Azu, if ..., return their .. (to them).


57

Above:A view of the tell looking south. Below: This 1974 photographof the low tell was taken from across the river.

Acknowledgments The major part of our funding for the excavations at Hadidi was obtained from the Friends of the Museum at the Milwaukee Public Museum, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the National Geographic Society, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and the University of Michigan. My first step each season on the way to Hadidi was to stop in Damascus to visit with Dr. Afif Bahnassi and his staff at the DirectorateGeneral of Antiquities and Museums, and then to do the same in Aleppo with the district directorfirst Shoki Sha'ath, then Mahmud Heretani, and finally Wahid Hayatta - and his staff. Bibliography

beneath the floor of the courtyard of the tablet building, it was clear that we had indeed excavated the remains of massive architecture. Unfortunately, a large building did not materialize but rather the remains of a heavy city wall, erected on virgin gravels at an earlier time. Further excavation revealed a stretch of wall about twenty feet thick (possibly representing several buildings and rebuildings) that was constructed of large stones and faced on

the outside with a yellow clay mortar. Important intermediate phases and an early phase of the tablet building were preserved between the fortification wall remains and the latest Late Bronze Age layers. The search for the palace in the other area proved equally disappointing. The excavation areas were positioned near the modern cemetery, since we were looking for an area in the southeast portion of the tell but away from the edges. Soundings closer to the southern edge of the tell had shown that only a limited sequence of Bronze Age layers was preserved as a result of deep intru-

58

sions by medieval Islamic house foundations and pits. Interesting hints of Late Bronze Age buildings were revealed in the new area, but these were from the beginning of the period, a century earlier than the phase contemporary with the tablet building. If a palace had existed in this area no trace of it remained in the excavation plots, since the Islamic floors and building foundations had gone deep enough to destroy all possible remains. As the excavations were carried down to bedrock, there was some compensation for the disappointment in our excavating a well-stratified sequence of buildings that represented the earliest occupation on the site. Conclusion We have scarcely tapped the riches of Tell Hadidi, having excavated less than one percent of the ruins at the site. We have, however, uncovered enough to keep us busy for years to come as we study and publish our finds, and I am confident that we have an excellent outline of Tell Hadidi's history.


Arnaud,D. 1975 Les textes d'Emaret la chronologie de la fin du BronzeRecent. Syria52: 87-92. 1982 Les textes sumdro-accadiens:un florilge. Pp. 43-52 in Meskin&Emar:Dix ans de travaux1972-82. Paris:Editions Recherchesur les civilisations. Bounni, A. 1979 Campaignand Exhibition from the Euphratesin Syria.Pp. 1-7 in Archaeological Reportsfrom the TabqaDam Project-Euphrates Valley,Syria,edited by D. N. Freedman. Annual of the American Schools of OrientalResearch44. Culican, W and McClellan, T. L. 1983- El-Qitar:FirstSeason of Excavations, 1984 1982-83. Abr-Nahrain22: 29-63. Dornemann, R. H. 1978 Tell Hadidi:A BronzeAge City on the Euphrates.Archaeology31: 20-26. 1979 Tell Hadidi:A Millennium of Bronze Age City Occupation.Pp. 113-51 in ArchaeologicalReportsfrom the TabqaDam Project-Euphrates Valley,Syria,edited by D. N. Freedman. Annual of the American Schools of OrientalResearch44. 1981 The LateBronzeAge PotteryTradition at Tell Hadidi, Syria.Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research241: 29-47. in press The SyrianEuphratesas a Bronze Age CulturalUnit Seen from the Point of View of Mariand Tell Hadidi.Annales archdologiques

Alten Mesopotamien, 2 volumes. arabes syriennes. Berlin:Walterde Gruyter. Finet, A. 1972 Aperyusur les fouilles Belges du Tell Heusch, J.-C. 1978 Tall HabubaKabiraim 3. und 2. Kannas.Annales archdologiques arabes syriennes 22: 63-74. Jahrtausend-die Entwicklung der Baustruktur.Ktema 5: 159-178. 1979 Bilan provisoiredes fouilles Belges du Tell Kannas.Pp. 79-95 in Holland, A. 1976 PreliminaryReporton Excavations Archaeological Reportsfrom the at Tell Es-Sweyhat,Syria 1973-4. TabqaDam Project-Euphrates Levant8: 36-70. Valley,Syria,edited by D.N. Freedman. Annual of the American 1977 PreliminaryReporton Excavations Schools of OrientalResearch44. at Tell Es-Sweyhat,Syria 1975. Levant9: 36-65. Gates, M.-H. 1984 The Palaceof Zimri-Limat Mari. Krause,C., Schuler,K., and Stucky,R. 1972 Tellel Hafjjin Syrien:ErstervorBiblical Archaeologist 47: 70-87. lidufigerBericht Grabungskampagne Heinrich, E. and others 1971.Bern:Archiologisches Seminar 1969 Bericht iber die von der Deutschen der Universitit von Bern. Orient-Gesellschaftmit Stiftung Margueron,J.C. Volkswagenwerkim Euphrattalbei 1975 Quatrecampagnesde fouilles Aleppo begonnenenarchiologischen Emar(1972-1974): un bilan proviUntersuchungen.Mitteilungen der soire. Syria52: 53-85. Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft101: 27-49. 1982 Aux marches de l'empireHittite: une campagnede fouille BTell 1970 Zweiter vorlaufigerBericht iber die von der Deutschen OrientFaq'ous(Syrie),citadelle du pays dAstata.Pp. 47-66 in La Syrieau Gesellschaft mit Mitteln der Stiftung BronzeRecent: Cinquantenaire Volkswagenwerkin HabubaKabira und in Mumbaqatunternommenen d'Ougarit-RasShamra.Paris:tdiRecherchesur les civilisations. tions Untersuchungen archaologischen Margueron,J.C., editor (Herbstkampagne1969).Mit1978 Le moyen Euphrate:Zone de conteilungen der Deutschen Orienttacts et d'echanges.Ktema 5. StrasGesellschaft 102:27-78. 1971 Dritter vorlaufigerBericht iber die bourg:Universite des Sciences von der Deutschen OrientHumaines de Strasbourg. 1982 Meskind-Emar:Dix ans de travaux Gesellschaft mit der StiftungVolks1972-1982. Paris:editions wagenwerkin HabubaKabiraund in Recherchesur les civilisations. Mumbaqatunternommemen Matthiae,M. P. archaologischenUntersuchungen 1980 TwoPrincely Tombsat Tell Mardikh(Herbstkampagne1970).MitEbla.Archaeology33: 8-17. teilungen der Deutschen Orient1981 Ebla. An EmpireRediscovered. Gesellschaft 103:5-58. GardenCity: Doubleday. 1973 ViertervorlaufigerBericht tiberdie 1984 New Discoveries at Ebla:The Excavon der Deutschen Orientvation of the WesternPalaceand the Gesellschaft mit Mitteln der Stiftung RoyalNecropolis of the Amorite Volkswagenwerkin HabubaKabira Period.Biblical Archaeologist 47: (HabubaKabira,Herbstkampagnen 18-32. 1971und 1972 sowie Testgrabung in und Orthmann, W. Mumbaqat 1973) Friihjahr 1981 Halawa 1977-1979. Series:Saar(TallMunbaqa,Herbstkampagne 1971)unternommen archaolobriicknerBeitrige zur Altertumskunde 31. Bonn:RudolphHabelt. gischen Untersuchungen.MitOrthmann,W, and Kiihne,H. teilungen der Deutschen Orient1974 Mumbaqat1973,VorlaufigerBericht Gesellschaft 105:5-52. 1974 Viertervorliufiger Bericht iber die iber die von der Deutschen Orientvon der Deutschen OrientGesellschaft mit Mitteln der Stiftung Gesellschaft mit Mitteln derStiftung Volkswagenwerkunternommenen Ausgrabungen.Mitteilungen der Volkswagenwerkin HabubaKabira Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft106: (HabubaKabira,Herbstkampagnen 53-97. 1971und 1972 sowie Testgrabung Pardee,D., and Glass, J.T. Fruhjahr1973)und in Mumbaqat 1984 LiterarySourcesfor the History of (TallMunbaqa,Herbstkampagne Palestine and Syria:The Mari 1971)unternommen archdoloArchives.Biblical Archaeologist 47: gischen Untersuchungen(Fortset88-99. sung).Mitteilungen der Deutschen Parrot,A. Orient-Gesellschaft106:53-97. 1956 Le temple d'Ishtar.Series:Mission 1982 Die Tempelund Heiligtiimer im

Archdologiquede Mari 1. Institut FrangaisdArchdologiede Beyrouth. Bibliothhquearchdologiqueet historique 65. Paris:Paul Geuthner. 1958 Lepalais: Peinturesmurales. Series: Mission Archbologiquede Mari2. Institut FranyaisdArchbologiede Beyrouth.Bibliothbquearch&ologique et historique 69. Paris:Paul Geuthner. 1959 Lepalais: Documents et monuments. Series:Mission Arch&ologique de Mari 2. Institut Franyais dArcheologiede Beyrouth.Bibliothbque archeologiqueet historique 70. Paris:Paul Geuthner. Pettinato,G. 1981 TheArchives ofEbla. GardenCity: Doubleday. Snell, D. 1983- The CuneiformTextfrom el-Qitar. 1984 Abr-Nahrain22: 159-70. Strommenger,E. 1979 Ausgrabungender Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaftin Habuba Kabira.Pp. 63-78 in Archaeological Reportsfrom the TabqaDam Project --Euphrates Valley,Syria,edited by D. N. Freedman.Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research44. van Driel, G. 1983 Seals and Sealingsfrom JebelAruda 1974-1978. Akkadica 33: 34-62. van Driel, G., and van Driel-Murray,C. 1979 JebelAruda 1977-1978. Akkadica 12:2-8. 1983 JebelAruda 1982,A Preliminary Report.Akkadica 33: 1-26. van Loon,M. 1968 FirstResults of the 1967 Excavations at Tell Selenkahiye.Annales archeologiques arabes syriennes 18: 21-36. 1973 FirstResults of the 1972 Excavations at Tell Selenkahiye.Annales archeologiques arabes syriennes 23: 145-59. 1979 1974 and 1975 PreliminaryResults of the Excavationsat Selenkahiye Near Meskene, Syria.Pp. 97-112 in Archaeological Reportsfrom the TabqaDam Project- Euphrates Valley,Syria,edited by D. N. Freedman. Annual of the American Schools of OrientalResearch44. Viganb,L., and Pardee,D. 1984 LiterarySourcesfor the History of Palestine and Syria:The Ebla Tablets.Biblical Archaeologist 47: 6-16. Wisemann,J.D. 1953 TheAlalakh Tablets.London:British Institute of Archaeologyat Ankara. Woolley,L. 1955 Alalakh. Oxford:OxfordUniversity.


59

in five other comparativeanthologies. cultural sphere, summarizedunder the Though the prefacesuggests that readers theme of "realityand withdrawal."The interested in more specific information quest for realism is found in the intelon either Old or New Worldarchaeology lectual achievements in science, literaconsult two other Scientific American ture, and the arts, counterpoisedby the PrehistoricTimes, edited by BrianM. readers(Hunters,Farmers,and Civiliza- more generalpursuit for ataraxia- that tions, 1979 and Pre-ColumbianArchaeis, philosophical and religious peace of Fagan,Series:Readingsfrom Scientific American, 8 + 262 pp. San Francisco: mind. The rise of Stoics, Epicureans,and ology, 1980),one-thirdof the articles W H. Freemanand Co., 1983; $12.95 published here overlapthese two Cynics; the prevalenceof mystery relivolumes. (Paper),$24.95 (Cloth). gions, astrology,and magic; and literary creations like romances and utopias are Faganhas selected eighteen reprinted KaySimpson viewed as reflections of the latter escape articles from Scientific American and WesternArchaeologicaland syndrome.Twelvemaps and sixteen ConservationCenter organizedthem accordingto four topics: quality illustrations enhance the text. National ParkService human origins;hunter-gatherers;farmAlthough Grant'snarrativeis comers and peasants;and cities and civiliprehensiveand intelligible, there are zations. The anthology'sstated objective some serious flaws both in perspective is to providea summary of the major FromAlexanderto Cleopatra:The and methodology. Since 1837, when J.G. Hellenistic World,by Michael Grant,xv developments of human prehistoryand Droysenfirst coined the term hellenistic to highlight innovations in methodology + 319 pp. New York:Charles Scribner's to designate the centuries intervening between Alexanderand the establishapplicableto all subfields of archaeology. Sons, 1983; $14.95 (Paper),$19.95 The great strength of this set of readings (Cloth). ment of the RomanEmpireunder is Fagan'sthirty-pageintroduction to the Augustus, historians have focused on the volume in which he summarizes world After the death of Alexanderthe Great, spreadof Greek culture in the eastern his immense empire- extending from prehistoryand recent anthropological Mediterranean,the praeparatioevangelissues in a lively and informativestyle. Greece to the Indus- disintegratedinto ica, or transition periodbetween classiFaganalso supplies a succinct introduc- a number of warringmonarchical states. cal Greece and the rise of Christianity. tion to each section, placing the articles The resulting complex world, so geoConsequently, Hellenistic history has in the broadercontext of cultural devel- graphicallydiffuse, culturally diverse, been a study of interculturaldynamics. and politically fragmented,almost defies In contrast, Grantconcentratespriopment and currenttheory. Thus, the articles in this readerare better inteany coherence. Nonetheless, these inmarily on the Greeks,with only fleeting herent difficulties have not deterred gratedinto a coherent picture of antiqglimpses of the enlargedoikoumen, or "civilizedworld,"that embracedEgypuity than most collected papers. scholarly inquiry or stymied popular Intendedeither for the general interest, as is attested by the recent array tians, Jews,Syrians,Arabs,Babylonians, of volumes on the obscure era. But in readeror as a supplementarytext for and Iranians. This western orientation is reflected introductoryprehistorycourses, this spite of this growingliterature,there collection does not assume familiarity in Grant'sdocumentation for his remains a need for an introductoryhiswith anthropologicalissues or in-depth themes. Forexample, in discussing tory of the Hellenistic age. The latest Hellenistic art, illustrations are drawn knowledge of particulargeographic attempt to fill this void is by Michael areas.Everyauthor,however,is a Grant,the renownedclassical historian solely from the Aegeanand Italy.Neprominent researcherin his or her field. and perhapsthe most prolific writer on glected are the tomb paintings frown Some of the better articles indicate the Marisain southern Palestine, the animal antiquity for the generalreader. In some respects,his FromAlexanreliefs at Araqal-Amirin Jordan,and the rangeof content: M. Leakey'sdiscovery of hominid footprints at Laetoli;Isaac's der to Cleopatrais a remarkableachieve- impressive bronze statuaryand wall excellent graphicsof artifactdistribution ment, representingan admirablysucpaintings from Qaryatal-Fauin Saudi within early man campsites; Moore's cinct yet graphicaccount of the major Arabia.Furthermore,the evidence for the spreadof Dionysiac cults is sought salvageexcavationof the largestEarly political and cultural developments of Neolithic village discoveredso far in the the Hellenistic world. The first section only in Ptolemaic Egyptand Italy,not in of texts consists of excellent sketches of Levantand his recoveryof economic Phoenicia and Syria,where the cult seems to have flourished under Seleucid evidence through flotation techniques; the majormonarchies established by Schmandt-Besserat'scontroversialbut Alexander'ssuccessors and the federal aegis. Non-Greek sources are absent innovative article on clay tokens as the states of Greece. Includedin this pofrom the notes, revealingthat the Hellenistic world for Grantis confined to litical overview are the independent precursorof Sumerianideographs;and western Greeks IfromItaly and Sicily) Fowler'sdescription of excavationsat Alexandria,Athens, and Rome (perhaps Cahokia and overview of the Formative and the subjectpeoples of the Near East, explaining why R. S. Bagnall'sThe societies in eastern North America. Administration of Ptolemaic Possesparticularlythose who successfully revoltedfrom their MacedonianoverThe only criticism of this book lies sions Outside Egypt [Leiden,E. J.Brill, with Scientific American'srepetitive lords (that is, the Judeans,Parthians,and 1976]is a missing entry in his lengthy publishing of the same articles. Elevenof Bactrians).The second part of the book bibliography).Egyptis analyzed without referenceto the Demotic Chronicle or the eighteen articles have been reprinted concentrates on developments in the

Book

60

Reviews


the Oracle of the Potter;Judeawithout the Essenes or Qumranmaterials; Arabiaexclusive of the Minean texts; and Irandivorcedfrom the Oracle of Hystaspes.In essence, this is a narrow view of the Hellenistic world, essentially devoid of the native element. Another significant limitation to Grant'svolume is that the text is basically derivedfrom literary sources, ignoring the substantial archaeologicalcontributions that have accumulated in recent years.Any discussion of Seleucid trade should now referto the Danish excavations at Failaka(ancient Ikaros)and Bahrain,the Missouri-Michigandiscoveries at the thriving settlement at Anafa in Galilee, and the Sydney- Tel Woosterfinds at the Decapolis city of Pella;for Ptolemaic economy, some assessment must now be made of the Smithsonian discoveryof the extensive grain-storagedepot at Tell Jemmehnear Gaza and the archiveof the bilingual Idumeanmoneylender at KhirbetalKom in the Negev of Palestine. The inclusion of such materials would temper the current trend to emphasize only the limitations of and resistance to Hellenism by Near Easterners. Nor is Grant always successful in adequatelyincorporatingrecent scholarship into his account. Of more than 250 bibliographicitems listed among "Some ModernBooks,"none appearsas documentation in his notes. This procedure leaves the impression that such materials were anonymously synthesized into the narrative,which is sometimes misleading. A case in point is his tracingthe origins of biographicalliteratureto Ion of Chios in the fifth century B.c.Such a view ignores Arnaldo Momigliano's suggestion that the beginnings of the literarygenre lie even earlierwith Skylax of Caryandaand that its development among Asiatic Greeks points to an eastern stimulus for its appearancein the Aegean.The relevantentry, (The Development of Greek Biography, Cambridge,HarvardUniversity Press, 1971),is contained in the bibliography, but the discussion fails to offer any explanation for divergingfrom this novel but intriguing view. Such deficiencies prohibit any generalrecommendation of Grant's treatment of the Hellenistic age without adequatesupplementation of other materials. Forthe most part, the serious

student or curious readercan find them safely tucked awayin his bibliography. Among them, W.W Tarn'sHellenistic Civilisation (London,E. Arnold, third edition, revised, 1953)is not to be overlooked. Although the impact of Greek culture on Judaismand Christianity imbued the Hellenistic world with importance,an up-to-date,readable account of a similar broadand balanced perspectiveis yet to be announced.

helpfully illustrate the pastoralproblems that Paul faced, using concrete sources from the historical context. One must note, nonetheless, several criticisms. One serious oversightis that no attention is given to postbiblical Christian sources. These "foregrounds" of literaryevidence seem to me often as For important as the "backgrounds." example, 1 and 2 Clement contain some clues, although widely unknown, about Corinthian Christianity:thus 1 ClemDavid E Graf ent 47-49 and the issue of "party-spirit" Montana State University among the Corinthian Christians. Surely such materials are worthy of St. Paul'sCorinth: Txts and Arinclusion in a work seeking to be chaeology, by JeromeMurphy-O'Connor, comprehensive. Another majorcriticism, especially O. P, 192 pp. Wilmington,Delaware: Michael Glazier, 1983; $7.95 (Paper). relevantto BA readers,is the very scant use of archaeologicalinformation. This This useful and insightful book should is especially regrettablebecause of the be welcomed by all students, teachers thorough excavationof Corinth (under and other readersinterested in the culway for almost a century!).Most of the tural history of the Pauline mission. In it relevantarchaeologicalfinds are noted, we have a collection of primarydocubut are inadequatelydescribedor interments concerning Corinth which cover preted.As one example, there is only a severalcenturies. These are ably intromention of the large sanctuaryof duced by a scholar who has written, Demeter and Koreon Acrocorinth, among other works, a guide to Paleswhich has been extensively investigated tinian biblical sites and a commentary and published in numerous reports.This on the Corinthian letters. excavationhas revealedoverforty dining In format the book has three parts: rooms adjacentto - or perhapsincluded the ancient texts (overhalf the book);an within-the sacredprecincts; these insightful twenty-pagestudy on dating rooms may well have been a setting for Paul'swork in Corinth;and an archaecult meals such as discussed in 1 Corinological section (regrettably,the briefest thians 8 and 10. (The author does disand weakest section). These parts are cuss, however,the similar rooms below supplemented by ten well-produced the Asklepion, recently damagedin an illustrations and an appendixgiving the earthquake.) Greek text for the Gallio inscription, a Another oversightis neglect of the key datum for fixing the chronologyof competing religions of first-century Paul'slife. Corinth. Nothing is made, for example, Here we have in brief compass all of the Isis cult, known from Lucius' those texts that are so often scatteredin adventuresin the Metamorphoses, diversepublications, where, to make whose shrine in Cenchreaeis described matters worse, they may be relegatedto in the multivolume excavationreports, footnotes or presentedwithout the infor- and, more briefly,in Dennis Smith's mation showing their importance to the survey article:"TheEgyptianCults at student of the Corinthian letters. Beyond Corinth,"HarvardTheological Review, these very useful and readablesources, volume 70 (1977),pages 201-31. Other the author also providesseveralimagina- cults suffera similar neglect. tive reconstructionsbased upon his readMoreover,Murphy-O'Connorrepeats ing of the evidence. Forexample, there is the now familiar distinction between an interpretationof the inner church "old"(= Greek)and "new"(= Roman) squabblesof 1 Corinthians 11 using eviCorinth. In his words,"Therewere in dence about dining customs in the fact two Corinths, one Greek and the RomanImperialage and the prevailing other Roman, each with its distinctive domestic architecture(pages155-61). institutions and ethos"(page1).This is a reconNaturally,Murphy-O'Connor's commonplace worthy of reconsiderastruction cannot be proven,but it does tion, as may be seen from the recent


1985

61

overview in JamesWiseman, "Corinth and Rome"(pages493-96 in Aufsteig und Niedergangder r6mischen Welt, VII/1,edited by H. Temporini,Berlin, de Gruyter, 1979).Finally,it seems to me that the issue of Christian participation in pagancult banquets is treatedin a too perfunctorymanner.This may be a result of the fact that the author has a valuable article on the subject elsewhere ("Freedomor the Ghetto: 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-11:1,"Revue Biblique, volume 85 (1978),pages 543-74). But since it is one of the places where archaeologicaland literarysources best illumine a topic, more ought to have been included here. Despite these criticisms, I certainly applaudthe appearanceof this book. It fills an urgent need to relate nonPalestinianChristianity to its environment in concrete ways.And it does so in a very readablemanner!It will help add historical depth to our perceptionof an important center of Pauline Christianity -a city about which we have much availableinformation, although too little of it has been communicated to those in the field of biblical studies. book is, indeed, a Murphy-O'Connor's worthy purchase. WendellWillis Southwest Missouri State University PharaohTkiumphant:The Life and Times of Ramesses II, King of Egypt,by KennethA. Kitchen, vi. + 272 pp., 74 illus., 4 maps. Warminster:Aris & Phillips Ltd., 1982;$29.00 (Cloth). At a CanadianEgyptologicalmeeting severalyears ago,KennethA. Kitchen reada paperentitled "SomeRamesside Friendsof Mine"which he subsequently published in The Society for the Study of EgyptianAntiquities Journal(volume 9, 1978: 13-20). Frankly,I can think of no other Egyptologistso qualified to make such a statement; in the preparationof his monumental corpus of the hieroglyphic and hieratic texts of the Egyptian Nineteenth and TwentiethDynasties, Ramesside Inscriptions:Historical and Biographical(awork which has earnedhim the undying gratitudeof his colleagues present and future),he has become more familiar with the history of these two dynasties of Egyptthan any other living individual. Kitchen is prob-

62

ably the best qualified scholar alive to write a history or historical biographyof the Ramessides in general and of Ramesses II in particular. Modernposterity has accorded Ramesses II the epithet "theGreat."His kingly successors of the Twentieth Dynasty (startingwith the second pharaoh, Ramesses III),used the throne name, Ramesses, embellished with various epithets, as their own throne names. When the InternationalCampaignto Savethe Monuments of EgyptianNubia was organizedovertwo decades ago,it was the temple which Ramesses IIhad carvedin the living rock at Abu Simbel that was the focal point of world attention. The other monuments of Nubia were dismantled and reerectedelsewhere. Only Abu Simbel and the Ptolemaic temples at Philae were preservedas closely as possible to their original sites. And in the last few years his mummy, which had been in the EgyptianMuseum at Cairo for a century, was sent to the conservationlaboratory of the Louvrein Paristo be cured of a fungus which was destroyingit. Moreover,to the readersof this journal Ramesses II is particularlyfascinating, since he is often assumed to have been the pharaohof the biblical Exodus. In the twelve chaptersmaking up this book, Kitchen not only meticulously recounts the life of Ramesses II but also gives a political, social, and cultural history of Egyptduringthe Nineteenth Dynasty. Indeed,approximately half of the work is devotedto the contemporariesof Ramesses II,be they the members of his family, the high magnates of the court and the administration, or the lowly artisans,the necropolis workers,sculptors,and artists of Deir el-Medineh (the men who fashioned and decoratedthe royaltombs and monuments and whose life and activities have been painstakinglyreconstructedfrom the plethoraof hieratic ostracaand papyrirecoveredfrom the excavationsof that site). The last is a sober,often chapter,"Retrospect," amusing, appraisalof the impact that Ramesses made on history from his own time until today.Wheneverpossible, Kitchen lets Ramesses II and his other Egyptianfriends speak for themselves in their own words.The book is laden with reliable, readable,and accuratetranslations of most of the majorroyalinscrip-


tions of the king and with many from the documents of the king's contemporaries.While this is, without question, a laudablepractice,it can sometimes lead to a misunderstandingof the historical reality to which an inscription relates. Beforeany text can be accepted as relating an unassailablyaccurateand correct picture of the event(s)that it narrates,it should first be thoroughly scrutinized and analyzed for its bias, reliability,and credibility.In short, we should first attempt to discern why a particulartext was written beforewe accept at face value what it says.We must alwayskeep in mind that in the ancient Near East, including Egypt, documents that todaywe regardas historical, particularlyroyaldocuments, were not written in orderto convey an accuratepicture of what happenedto whom, when, and why. In Pharaonic Egyptthe so-called royalhistorical documents were primarilyintended to glorify the king, his acta and his dicta. This is the only flaw in Kitchen'swork, namely that he accepts the texts at face value. Although this does no harm in the case of the mass of documents from Deir elMedineh, which are the day-to-day memorandaand documents of that community of artisans,it can and does lead, on occasion, to distortion when he uses the royaldocuments of the king himself. The problem is best seen in Kitchen'sretelling of the battle of Qadesh, which Ramesses IIfought in his fifth regnalyear againstthe Hittites. Although Kitchen'saccount faithfully follows the Egyptiannarrative,the picture he presents of the battle is quite misleading. Without question Qadesh was a defeat for the Egyptians,not a victory, as the subheadingof that particular partof chapter4 would imply (pages53 and 60), or a stalemate, as Kitchen states in his text (page62). Ramesses'personal couragecannot be denied, but the truth of the matter is that he led his army into an ambush, was mauled by the Hittites, and then mauled them in returnbadly enough so that they were unable to preventhis subsequent retreat.The Hittites, it should be noted, remainedin possession of Qadesh;and in antiquity,holding on to territoryin the face of attack was clearly an indication of victory. According to the Egyptianaccount, the Hittite

chariotryforce comprised 2,500 chariots. If we were to accept this figure at face value, ratherthan assuming that the largenumber was chosen in orderto emphasize the prowess of the king, then the logistical problems faced by the Hittites under their ruler,Muwatallish, would have been enormous. Each chariot was drawnby a team of two horses, which means that there would have been a minimum of 5,000 horses for the chariotry.In addition, Muwatallish would have needed reservehorses and remounts-Yigael Yadinin his The Art of Warfarein Biblical Lands (New York: McGraw-HillBook Co., Inc., 1963)has estimated that these would have numberedhalf as many as the teams in action-and this would have broughtthe number of horses of the Hittite armyup to 7,000. Weknow that the Hittites were alreadyin ambush behind Qadesh while the Egyptianarmywas still on the march south of the forest of Lebaweythat is, south of the biblical LeboHamath. The Hittites should have then been concentratedfor some time at Qadesh, and one might wonderjust how they were able to provision such a vast number of horses for any lengthy period of time without being forced to range furtherand further afield in search of fodder.All this, in sum, suggests that the figure 2,500 should not be given the respect Kitchen is inclined to give it. Regardingthe biblical Exodus (pages 70 and 71),Kitchen presents a very dramaticpicture of it but admits that not a single inscription of Ramesses contains even an echo of this event which is central to the history of Israel, assuming that the Egyptianswould hardlyhave acknowledgedwhat would have been for them a catastrophe.Unfortunately such a reconstruction as Kitchen has made is based more on faith than on any historical document other than the biblical account, and the latter, although it may contain historical data, is in itself more of an epic than a history. Kitchen'sbook is conceived of as a popularwork, intended for the general public, and it lacks the critical apparatus that is an integral part of a volume designed primarilyfor the scholar.Fifteen pages at the end of the work contain suggestions for furtherreadingsand references to the various topics dealt with in each chapter.Consideringthe readership for which it was intended, however,

Kitchen'sbook, in spite of its few flaws, is highly recommendedas the best and most up-to-dateaccount of Ramesside Egyptand Ramesses II. Alan R. Schulman Queens College, City University of New York What Are They SayingAbout Biblical Archaeology?by Leslie J.Hoppe, O.E.M., 107 pp. Ramsey,New Jersey:Paulist Press, 1984; $4.95 (Paper). This is one of those books that should pleasantly surpriseprofessionalarchaeologists. These days one might initially be suspicious of a book like this: It is short and easy to read,deliberately gearedto a popularaudience interested primarily in the Bible, written by a professor at a school of theology, and published by a "religiouspress"as part of a series including such titles as What are They Saying about Creation?/Sexual Morality?/theEnd of the World?,and so on. One might expect to see critical scholarly concerns sufferthrough an attempt to strengthen a faithful "we" against the challenges of a secular "they." Happily,this book is not at all like this. Leslie Hoppe'soverridingconcern is to providea clear and sober introduction to the current status of biblical archaeology. He writes with an enviable style that meets his readersat the elementary level of their popularinterests and misunderstandingsabout archaeology,but then quickly yet graciously transports them beyondthe elementary to a sympathetic and, in fact, fairly sophisticated understandingof the problems,methods, and accomplishments of biblical archaeology. Hoppe succeeds largely because he possesses the ability to simplify complex, technical issues without distorting them, therebydoing justice to critical scholarshipwithout losing the reader'sinterest. Significantly,the structureof this book has been determinedby the current status of biblical archaeology,not by any "popular"agenda.The first, second, and seventh chaptersexamine with remarkable clarity the ongoing discussion of various theoretical issues within the discipline. In presenting the issue of archaeology's relation to biblical history, Hoppe is cautious, noting that "themost archaeologycan do is to establish some

of the facts which the Bible has employed in its interpretationsof Israel's history"(page6). He carefullyunderscores for the readerthe issues underlying the "biblical"versus "SyroPalestinian"debate of adjectives,and seems quite sympathetic to the concerns of the latter. In presenting"thenew archaeology,"Hoppe similarly seems to arguefor a broadanthropologicalscope over a narrowpolitical-historicalone, although he stresses that archaeologists have a responsibility to synthesize the recovereddata into a coherent, historical reconstruction of ancient culture. The sheer pace of excavationshas also quickened;and in the third through sixth chaptersHoppe describes four recent projects (Ebla,Jerusalem,Capernaum, Nabratein),which, as he shows, are importantnot simply because they have each capturedheadlines in the popular press. Each falls within a different archaeologicalperiod,providingHoppe with an opportunityto explore the issue of archaeology'srelation to the Bible. He asks penetratingquestions (Whatcan a third-millennium Syriansite really tell us about the Bible?Why have biblical archaeologistsshown considerablyless interest in sites of the New Testament period?),and his answersprovidesobering insights. To say that Hoppe "desensationalizes"these projectswould be a crass oversimplification;he uses each one of these to illustrate an important aspect of methodology.Forexample, the chapteron Capernaumprovidesan importantglimpse into how excavatorsuse, and often revise, workinghypotheses (for example, in dating strata).The reader not only gains a sober perspectiveon these projectsand their finds but confronts clear examples of how the theoretical issues often manifest themselves in the realities of excavation. Some of the visual aids seem gratuitous (see pages 2, 41, and 47), while others are not well-integratedinto the text (see pages 61, 64, and 69). A map of Jerusalemwith its water systems would have been a valuable aid (to pages 45 and 46), as would plans of the octagonal structureof Capernaum(pages72 and 73) and the synagogueof Nabratein (pages82 and 83). The sample page of field notes (page21) should have been identified as such; if it correlateswith the sample top plan (page23), then this should have been noted. Perhapsa


63

sample balk drawingwould also have been helpful (page24). The very nature of archaeologylends itself to visual presentations, and readerscan often learn a great deal simply by letting their eyes wanderover such things. On the whole, however,professors responsiblefor introducingundergraduatesto biblical archaeologymight consider this book as an addition to their students'readinglist early in the semester. Its sensitive awarenessof the nonprofessionalreader,its ability to simplify without distorting, and its wide and responsible coverageof issues related to the theory and application of biblical archaeologycommend it as a very useful and readableintroduction to the discipline.

BackIssues of

BiblicalA rchaeologist BAIkaJ Arhekgs

Eminent Sumerologist Samuel Noah Kramer offers a remarkable review of laments in the earliest culture of the ancient Near East. Other articles discuss the Scythian threat to ancient Israel and the origins of counting in the Near East. (Spring 83, Sumerian Lamentations)

SBItBLICAL ARCE IFOLOGIST

GaryA. Herion University of North Carolinaat Chapel Hill

BOOK PUBLISHERS Please send all review copies to: Dr. Peter B. Machinist Department of Oriental Studies The University of Arizona Thcson, Arizona 85721

z

In a significant article, Bezalel Porten offers a sweeping overview of the Aramaic papyri found at Elephantine. Other articles provide a glimpse into village life in ancient Israel under the monarchy and Avigad's finds related to Baruch, secretary to the prophet Jeremiah. (Spring 79, Elephantine Papyri)

Biblical Archaeologist . Hcw"' Habor at

CausatS~

Moving?

Make Sure BA Moves With You

BIBLICAL r ARCHEOLOGIST

An assessment of the current state of biblical archaeology, the articles in this issue review past developments in Palestinian archaeology as well as discussing current research in Jordan, Syria, and Israel. (Spring 82, Palestinian Overview)

Attach Label Here

Please send check or money order, payable to the American Schools of Oriental Research, for $3.25 postpaid (U.S.) for each issue ordered. Be certain to specify which issues you want. Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery.

Name (please print) Your New Address City

64

_1: -* (I

Herod's masterful harbor at Caesarea is described as a "twentieth-century harbor constructed 2,000 years ago." Other articles are Malamat's report on evidence of Hazor's importance found in Mari documents and a reappraisal of the Jacob and Laban story in Genesis. (Summer 83, Herod's Harbor)

Please attach your magazine mailing label to this coupon and send both to: ASOR Subscription Services, Department BB, P.O. Box 3000, Denville, NJ 07834. Be sure to include your new address on the form. Thank you!

State

.:

Zip


ASOR Publications P. O. Box H.M., Duke Station Durham, NC 27706

oO":OFg V) ?rll\ Z 1 3~co,

?

W.F.Albright ;3iub Institute of ArchaeologicalResearch in Jerusalem

S• OF 0O

p r ~1 m

CyprusAmerican Archaeological ResearchInstitute in Nicosia, Cyprus

~C;~ba

American Center of Oriental Research in Amman, Jordan

welcomes visiting scholars and interestedlaymen.

is pleased to announce new Academic Excavation Appointment Field trip Publication Fellowship programs and improved Research library Workshops Scholars' residence

welcomes visiting scholars and interested laymen. Programs include: Archaeology classes Lectures and seminars Guided site visits A research library Study collections Annual appointments Scholars' residence Vehicle and equipment rental Liaison with local officials Rescue archaeology

Facilities and programsinclude: Researchlibrary Scholars'residence Annual researchappointments Study collections Informalsummer seminars Periodiclectures Guided site visits Vehicle and equipment rental Forfurtherinformationcontact CAARI(41King Paul St., Nicosia, Cyprus)or: ASORAdministrativeOffices 4243 SpruceStreet Philadelphia,PA 19104 Tel:(215)222-4643

For further information contact: ASOR Administrative Offices 4243 Spruce Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 Tel: (215) 222-4643

7p

*

For further information contact: ASOR Administrative Offices 4243 Spruce Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 Tel: (215) 222-4643

I-. J;j

~ it

:e I?

?jl 2

::

r ~Jr~u\~ :I?I

??? z" r ";,~i~ic~s)?.~ljS

:,:. -?? ~5'' ?? "l"' .( r.' r r; ... P;;C~~~ )~f;??./:'r ''=?.~?.-~j~rCI',?~~ ,, T *;

..s?

I"

'' f

t?

*? ???L* ,? ?? JyC.C ~C~ r 1C~~ t I.;. L.Z?\ '~?t?? ????;'?:*~11??~ ''' v Ci?;?Z ?C~??~??'a :~~~f;;S~II:? '" (iiYc;.;?'e

??

t ????()

\)k

""5' ?h~

i?

~ ?u

r,~':

?1~B

4,

. ~(??

\'cL LI7?? ...,.;. L` ~?r;.C)r.P: ~i?

r 52.:k:I

... ?r?4~~r?!-i) j:i?~r ''' r~

-,?? .( ~I 2'sJ

?:, ,,,Z~ , ? ~Ji~L' I? .r.

4, !?;~CS~ ;, ,,

t` ?P

???? (R

tCi

rr.F'~

?~?LI

" ?) ?.~~ ~??,.?? ?, ~;C~I:? ?;~.??? .I .?? II

~PL(~i 5:

????? r? '''.

C'':~5~ : ~ ??; :g

i?~?2. ~r

~~~k

-?

?\ ?'

i ; ?~

~2~?~~ ??:-r?~-?ir

T~~;

?I, ~?, ,~S~~I~,~? ;?? ?A ??~:~~! ~?*~~ ~~,Y ~-~~t??.:~?': ~,,?.s5~ ?i(.. 5 ~~) M, 2. "~ :+~ss~:... ,3 r r :ii ;;Z~g~,~?~u

i~i~l

::?;4 r )?

~t~F~


35

It's the media's secret. best-kept But

The

what

Review

won't

they

of

Books

tel

you,

and

Religion

wil . Religiousbookpublishinghas neverbeen healthier.Morethan 2,000 new popularand scholarlytitles arepublishedannually,but you won'thearaboutmostof them unlessyousubscribeto TheReviewof BooksandReligion. Formorethan a decade,TheReviewhas been the only publicationofferingtimelyand dependablecoverageof the broadrangeof AmericanreligiousthoughtandscholarshipProtestant,CatholicandJewish,conservative and liberal,popularandscholarly.

reviewsof currentbooks, thought-provoking criticalessayson the largerissueswhichthey help raise,stimulatinginterviewswith key figuresin the religious,scholarlyandpublishing communities,and a host of newfeatures of the whichwill broadenpublicawareness relevanceof the nation'sprincipalreligious resourcesto the perplexingproblemsof these difficulttimes.

That'sa storythat'ssimplynot beingcovered to viewthe role by secularmediapredisposed Issueby issue,TheReviewof BooksandReligion of religionin the affairsof this worldwith monitorsreligiouspublishingin America,and hostility,suspicionor indifference. selectsfromthe morethan 2,000 new titles publishedannuallythose booksdeemedmost But you'llfind it in everyissueof TheReview, importantforreviewand comment. Now beingpublishedby DukeDivinity School,the new andexpandedReviewoffers

TheReview of

Books

month aftermonth. And all for only $16. Such a deal. And it's easy to arrange.Justmail this coupon.

to TheReviewforone year(publishedmonthly Pleaseentermysubscription and exceptAugust December)at $16.

andReligion

Name

The DivinitySchool DukeUniversity NC 27706 Durham,

Address City

(Please Print)

State

Zip

Rates to foreigncountries-$20 a year (U.S. funds only). Please allow four weeks

forstartof service.

48


Publications from

the

Couresy HarnardSemiticMuseum

American Schools of Oriental Research: Essential Guides to the Ancient East Near

Since its founding in 1900, the American Schools of Oriental Research has pioneered North American and international research projects into the fascinating world of the ancient Near East. ASOR publications represent the highest standards in disseminating the results of this research to the non-specialist and the scholar. The following sampling of ASOR publications is of interest to all general libraries as well as specialized collections in religion, archaeology, or the Near East.

AmericanArchaeology in the Mideast:A Historyof the American Schools of Oriental Research byPhilip] J. King

This engagingbook tracesthe longstandingAmerican interestin exploring the worldof the Bible. While focusing primarilyon American excavationsand surveys,Dr. Kingpresentsa greatdeal of informationon other national research effortsas well as the intellectual currents which have shapedarchaeologicalresearch in the Near East. "The readeris left with the cumulative impressionof a remarkablepiece of historical writing.... King'sbook will proveto be a valuableaddition to the libraryof archaeology."

-Theology Today ISBN0-89757-508-3

"Lucidlyand skillfullywritten.... a fine choice for anypublic or academiclibrary." 4th ed. -Magazines for Libraries,

BiblicalArchaeologist The leading illustratedmagazineon the entire worldof the ancient Near East. Since it began in 1938, BA has offeredits readers reliabilityand readability.Publishedquarterly, it reviewsnot only what has been found, but what these discoveriescontributeto our understandingof the worldof the ancient Near East. information. See insertforsubscription

Forsubscriptionsto BiblicalArchaeologist, send orderto: ASOR SubscriptionServices, DepartmentBB, P O. Box 3000, Denville, NJ 07834

cloth$15.00

The Biblical Archaeologist Reader,; Vols. I and 2 This highly regardedseriesoffersreprints of seminal studieswhich firstappearedin

from1938-1963. Biblical Archaeologist

A wide diversityof topics arerepresented fromthe worldof the Old Testament patriarchsto the social environmentof earlyChristianity. Vol.1ed. byG. ErnestWrightand DavidNoelFreedman ISBN0-89757-501-6 paper$6.00 Vol.2 ed.byDavidNoelFreedman and E Campbell,Jr. Edward ISBN0-89757-502-4 paper$6.00

The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, Vol. 4, ed. byEduward E Campbell,Jr. andDavidNoel Freedman The latest issue in this seriescollects the most significantarticleswhich appeared in BA between 1969-1975. The selections include generalconsiderationsof the aims of BiblicalArchaeology,Archaeologyand the Common Life, Archaeologyand the ReligiousLife, and the contributionsof archaeologyto a greaterunderstandingof the backgroundto the New Testament. Publishedjointly with the Almond Press. ISBN0-907459-34-X ISBN0-907459-35-8

Bibliography of Holy Land Sites This extremelyusefulworklists all significant archaeologicalpublicationson sites in the Levantand Transjordan. The bibliographyoriginallyappearedin 1971and has now been fully broughtup to date with the publicationof Part2. Publishedjointly with the HebrewUnion College. Part1 EleanorK. Vogel,comp. ISBN 0-87820-626-4 paper$5.00 Part2 (1970-1981) EleanorK. Vogeland BrooksHoltzclaw,comps. ISBN 0-87820-625-6 paper$5.00

cloth$24.95 paper$ 9.95

ToorderASOR booksor for more informationon ASOR publications,write:Eisenbrauns,P.O.B.275, Winona Lake,IN 46590

3900 19013

3S

I,,

1903

1906 1-90

,•

1906 ' •7

10 1911 4912

85

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

No title

Recommend Documents