Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T06:59:45.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Part I. Brak and Chagar Bazar: Their Contribution to Archaeology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2014

M. E. L. Mallowan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The district in which the Expedition operated is roughly triangular in shape. The base of the triangle is conveniently defined by the railway line running from Tall Halaf to Nisibin which demarcates the frontier between Turkey and Syria, a distance of about 75 miles: the two sides, each about 50 miles long, are marked by the lines of the rivers Khabur and Jaghjagha which converge at Hasaka into a single stream. Below Hasaka the steppe on either side of the lower Khabur becomes drier towards its southern end, being more remote from the rain-belt which hangs around the Turkish hills. Moreover, the wadis which drain into the basin of the upper Habur-Jaghjagha triangle have mostly been sucked dry before they can filter through to the southern steppe. Thus the climate in the district of Brak and Chagar Bazar resembles that of Ninevite Assyria and differs from the drier Babylonian conditions of the country below the latitude of Hasaka. The summers are indeed intensely hot, even the northern stretches of the steppe then become arid, and only the Khabur and the Jaghjagha retain perennial water. In the Spring, however, there comes a magical change, and striding northwards between these two rivers one treads upon a gaily variegated carpet of wild flowers. As far as the eye can see there is mile upon mile of scarlet ranunculus and golden marigolds interspersed with tall and smiling hollyhocks. Far to the southwest loom the wild and inaccessible hills of the Jabal ‘Abd al-‘Aziz and Baida, where till within living memory monuments of the early dynastic age had stood undisturbed for nearly five thousand years.

Type
Excavations at Brak and Chagar Bazar
Information
IRAQ , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , Spring 1947 , pp. 10 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1947

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 10 note 1 See Freiherr Von Oppenheim, Der Tell Halaf, Chapter VIII, Taf. 62, 63. These rudely carved stone monuments may date back to the early dynastic period, perhaps even earlier, Christian, V., Altertumskunde des Zweistromlandes, Band 1, Lief. 1, p. 35 Google Scholar, appears to ascribe them to the Agade period.

page 11 note 1 cf. Sarre, F. and Herzfeld, E., Archaeologische Reise im Euphrat-und Tigris-Gebiet, Band 1, p. 190 Google Scholar, “Also muss im Altertum die Besiedlung eine ganz erstaunlich dichte gewesen sein, wo jetzt weit und breit kein Mensch mehr haust.”

page 12 note 1 See Gadd, C. J. in Iraq, VII, Pt. IGoogle Scholar, Tablets from Chagar Bazar and Tall Brak, pp. 21–61, and Iraq, IV, p. 178 ff.Google Scholar In these interesting articles, Mr. Gadd has fully discussed the contents of the tablets discovered in the excavations and readers should consult this work for further information.

page 13 note 1 Miss Bate also identified the following specimens from the grey brick stratum containing the earlier “Eye-Temple”: Pig; Gazelle; Ox; Small Equus. These remains are not likely to be later than 3200 B.C.

page 13 note 2 The term “radical change” needs definition. I mean that there is no evidence to show that there has been any major climatic change since the third millennium B.C. at all comparable with the major climatic changes which are known to have occurred in the principal successive phases of the Old Stone Age. The evidence does however show that there has been a progressive desiccation of the Khabur steppe, more especially since the second millennium B.C. But this phenomenon is apparently due to the improvident activities of man,—over-cultivation of the soil and deforestation, as I have explained below.

page 13 note 3 See U.V.B., VIII, s. 31 Google Scholar.

page 14 note 1 See Smith, Sidney, Early History of Assyria, p. 65 Google Scholar.

page 14 note 2 Chambers' Encyclopaedia (1881), article entitled Lion states: “The lion is not, in general, an inhabitant of open forests, but rather of open plains in which the shelter of occasional bushes or thickets may be found (the italics are mine). The breeding place is always some much secluded retreat,” etc. For an interesting account of the natural habitat of the elephant cf Thompson, J. Arthur, The Outline of Natural History, pp. 194–203 Google Scholar. “The herds never remain long in one place, for they so quickly devastate a feeding ground that new ones have constantly to be sought. … Elephants are wholly vegetarian, and, though they have their favourite food-plants, nothing in the way of grasses, leaves or even young branches comes amiss to them … the one thing that seems absolutely indispensable to them is abundant water for drinking and bathing.’

page 14 note 3 Destruction of undergrowth and consequent decline in the number of larger mammals has obviously taken place in Libya since Roman times. In Tripolitania I have seen extensive traces of Roman irrigation in the now unoccupied desert round Mizda where the monuments represent the now extinct lion and ostrich. Similarly there are parts of the Gefaraeast of African Tripoli where the new metal ploughshare has within recent years cut away the undergrowth which the blunter wooden plough left undamaged: the result is that what was once fields is ndw desert.

page 15 note 1 cf. Iraq, VII, Pt. 1, p. 33 Google Scholar.

page 15 note 2 cf. Dossin, G., Les Archives Epistolaires du Palais de Mari, p. 129 Google Scholar, in Syria, XIX, Pt. 2.

page 16 note 1 cf. Gadd, C. J., in Iraq, VII, Pt. 1Google Scholar, for list of names from Chagar Bazar.

page 17 note 1 cf. Smith, Sidney, Alalakh and Chronology, p. 11 Google ScholarPubMed, referring to Dossin in Syria, XIX, p. 117–8Google Scholar. The reader should also consult Dr. Sidney Smith's detailed account of the complicated succession of political events which took place in N. Syria at this time.

page 18 note 1 cf. Gadd, C. J., History and Monuments of Ur, p. 155 ff, 168, 174Google Scholar, for the incidence of commercial documents in periods of prosperity … “always the most reliable barometer of the land's fortunes which the modern student is still able to consult.”

page 18 note 2 See Lacheman, E. R., Epigraphic Evidences of the Material Culture of the Nubians, pp. 528–544 Google Scholar, in R.T.F. STARR, Nuzi, Vol. 1.

page 19 note 1 cf. SIDNEY SMITH, Early History of Assyria, Chapter X, for an interesting account of the conditions under which merchants in Cappadocia were operating at the end of the third millennium B.C.

page 19 note 2 cf. Dossin, in Syria, XIX, p. 125 Google Scholar; XX, p. 111 ff.

page 19 note 3 cf. Iraq. VIII, 1946 Google Scholar. M. E. L. Mallowan; Excavations in the Balikh Valley.

page 20 note 1 For a general account of this white painted Nuzu or Subartu pottery see my article in Mélanges Syriens, offerts à M. René Dussaud, Vol. 11, pp. 886–894 Google Scholar.

page 20 note 2 See the Catalogue in Part III under Plate XXII, No. 1. and Hrozny, F., Code Hittite Paras. 168, 169 Google Scholar.

page 20 note 3 See Iraq VIII for the archaeological evidence from the Balikh valley.

page 20 note 4 cf. Alalakh and Chronology, p. 38 ff.

page 21 note 1 cf Andrae, W., Das Wiedererstandene Assur, p. 121 ffGoogle Scholar; and for the illustrations of the pottery see his Coloured Ceramics from Ashur.

page 21 note 2 For the evidence see Luckenbill, D. D., Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, A.J.S.L. LVIII, 365 f.Google Scholar

page 21 note 3 For the position of these sites on the lower Khabur see Iraq, III, Pt. I, Fig. 1.

page 22 note 1 The dates quoted for the dynastic rulers mentioned in the text are based on the chronological scheme proposed by Dr. Sidney Smith in his Alalakh and Chronology. The reduction of the date of Kham-murabi's reign of course automatically involves a reduction in the scheme for the preceding dynasties. I am indebted to Dr. Smith for advising me on the dating of the third dynasty of Ur and Agade periods.

page 21 note 2 cf. Gadd, C. J. in Iraq, VII, Pt. 1, p. 61 Google Scholar. There was also a number of seal impressions in the style of that period. Ur Nammu's name also occurred on a clay bulla.

page 21 note 3 In this connection the evidence from Eshnunna is interesting. The texts discovered on that site show clearly that the third dynasty of Ur began losing its grip on the Diyala after the reign of Gimil Sin. Eshnunna apparently became independent after the second year of Ibi Sin's reign, cf. O.I.P., XLIII, p. 196 Google Scholar. Presumably therefore the rulers of Ur lost control of the Khabur country about this time, too, though it does not follow that Brak was then entirely abandoned. It would appear, however, that in the late phases of the tliird Ur dynasty Brak was but a poor settlement and the population much diminished.

page 21 note 4 At this time Eshnunna also was having to contend with Amorite pressure as is indicated by the records of the reign of Bilalama, cf. O.I.P., XLIII, pp. 159, 197 Google Scholar. On the new reduced chronology this would have been about two decades after 2000 B.C.

page 21 note 5 See History and Monuments of Ur, p. 126.

page 23 note 1 For the site of Germayir, see Iraq, IV, Pt. 2, p. 116.

page 23 note 2 Khabur ware, cf. Iraq, IV, Pt. 2, pp. 102–104 Google Scholar. The term “Persian” is, of course, used in this context to signify the geographical boundaries of modern Persia. I do not imply that there was any ethnographical relationship between the makers of this pottery and the modern Persians.

page 23 note 3 See Contenau, G. and Ghirshman, R., Fouilles du Tepe Giyan, Geuthner, 1935 Google Scholar.

page 23 note 4 Copper wine-strainers. See Iraq, IV, Pt. 2, Pl XIVc for specimens from Chagar Bazar and discussion on pp. 99, 100, 151. The similar examples from Persia are illustrated in Tepe Giyan, Pl. 35 from stratum 3.

page 24 note 1 See footnote 2 on p. 23 above.

page 24 note 2 For evidence of antagonism between the later Assyrian monarchy and the tribesmen of the Nihavand district, see the references in Ghirshman, R., Fouilles de Sialk, Vol. II, p. 95 Google Scholar. This, however, depends on the assumption that ancient Ellipi or Illi conquered under the reign of Tiglath-pileser III was situated in that part of Persia.

page 24 note 3 Gadd, C. J. in Iraq, VII, Pt. 1, pp. 34, 35 Google Scholar.

page 24 note 4 Khabur ware has been found at Billah and Gawra, near Nineveh, cf. Speiser, E. A., in Museum Journal of the University Museum, Philadelphia, Vol. XXIII, Pl. LIXGoogle Scholar, and in Excavations at Tepe Gawra, Pl. LXXIII, Nos. 177, 194; cf. also Starr, R. F. S., Nuzi, II, Pl. 70 BGoogle Scholar.

page 24 note 5 On the possible relationship of Hurrian to “Urartian, the pre-Indo-European language of Armenia,” see Speiser, E. A., Introduction to Hurrian, A.A.S.O.R., XX, p. 10 Google Scholar.

page 25 note 1 The evidence for the existence in Syria, at a date not later than 2000 B.C., of a painted pottery closely allied to Khabur ware, comes at present principally from two sites; Hama and Til-Barsib. No doubt the publication of the excavations at Judaidah and Alakh will yield additional information on this subject. For the specimens from Hamay see Ingholt, H., Rapport Préliminaire sur Sept Campagnes de Fouilles à Hama en Syrie (Kopenhagen, 1940), especially Pl. XI, No. 3Google Scholar. Some small painted vessels are recorded as having been found in the later portion of stratum J, but there is no indication that these vessels were very numerous either there or elsewhere in the Orontes valley at that period, and it remains to be seen whether that the Orontes is likely to have been the original home of Khabur ware. It should, moreover, be noted that the miscellaneous series of objects discovered in Hama stratum J must be assigned to a period extending over several centuries, and the end of that occupation level may well have continued as late as 2000 B.C. In a relatively early context we should again note the presence of a number of burnished and painted vases allied to Khabur ware at Til-Barsib, a site on the Euphrates twenty kilometres below Carchemish. These vases figure among the contents of the- hypogeum, cf. F. THUREAU-DANGIN et M. DUNAND, Til-Barsib, Pl. XXII, Nos. 13–15 and Pl. XXIII, Nos. 1–4, series 4 and 6, which are described as painted and sometimes burnished in op. cit., p. 106. The dating of the Barsib tomb was discussed by me in Antiquity, 1937, and I there argued that the contents of that tomb should be assigned to a period between 2500 and 2300 B.C. These dates, however, were arrived at before the evidence for a reduction in the date of Khammurabi was available, and should now be lowered by at least one hundred and fifty years. It is, moreover, quite possible that this series of vases, akin, but not exactly similar, to Khabur ware, was deposited in that tomb between 2100 and 2000 B.C., for I still incline to the theory that the enormous quantity of vases discovered in the hypogeum at Til-Barsib represented a series of successive deposits and covered a period of several centuries, cf. especially Antiquity, loc., p. 339. Khabur ware originated further north, or in Western Syria, it may have reached the neighbourhood of Carchemish some centuries before the date of its maximum diffusion on the Khabur steppe. We have, of course, also to reckon with the possibility that at other sites in the Khabur-Jaghjagha valley, as yet unexcavated, Khabur ware may have been in existence before the time of its first appearance at Chagar Bazar, i.e., before 1800 B.C.

page 26 note 1 cf. Catalogue Pl. LIV, No. 11, B.318, for the references to Cappadocian horses. Smith, Sidney, Alalaleh, pp. 48, 49 Google Scholar, for the period covered by the Cappadocian tablets, and Early History of Assyria, p. 155 ff.

page 26 note 2 See footnote 3 on p. 22 above.

page 27 note 1 This inscription was translated by Mr. Gadd, cf. also Ur Excavations, Texts, 1, Royal Inscriptions, Nos. 9, 10.

page 27 note 2 History of the rulers of Agade. See SIDNEY SMITH, Early History of Assyria, Chapter VII, and C. J. GADD, History and Monuments of Ur, Chapter III.

page 27 note 3 See Thompson, R. Campbell in A.A.A., XIX. p. 59 Google Scholar.

page 28 note 1 See Smith, Sidney, Early History of Assyria, p. 78 Google Scholar.

page 28 note 2 See Andrae, W., Das Wiedererstandene Assur, p. 74 Google Scholar, for his revised opinion on the date of the destruction of the Ishtar Temple in level G. The actual finding-place of the head was originally given by him in A.I.T.A., Taf. 6a (see also section in Taf. 8) whence it appeared that the head was associated with material of the early dynastic period. The stratification of the head as described on p. 68 of A.I.T.A. may also be interpreted as indicating that this object really belonged to Ashur F. The first mention of a ruler of third Ur dynasty (Shulgi) occurred in stratum E.

page 28 note 3 See Andrae, W., Das Wiedererstandene Assur, pp. 94–96 Google Scholar and Abb. 43, for the plan of the “Oldest Palace at Ashur.” Andrae attributed this building to the period of Samsi-Adad I (the end of whose reign is now known to have overlapped with the beginning of Khammurabi's) partly on account of the depth at which it was found, partly because of its general resemblance to early Babylonian buildings, and also because of the appearance and size of its bricks, 34 sq. by 10 cms. But as no other relevant archaeological evidence was recorded, the date of its construction must for the present remain a matter of doubt. The internal planning of the Brak and the Ashur Palaces is not identical, but there is clearlv a general resemblance between these two buildings which cannot be matched elsewhere. It seems likely that the arrangement of the smaller chambers in the plan of the Ashur Palace owes much to conjectural restoration.

See Ur Excavations, Texts 1, Royal Inscriptions, p. 81, for the walls of Sikumal(?n)um, a fortress which probably lay in the district if Ibla.

page 29 note 1 Amurru. See Smith, Sidney, Early History of Assyria, p. 79 Google Scholar. A settlement with a circular town wall discovered in the fifth level at Jidle on the Balikh may have been built by a Sargonid ruler, cf Iraq, VIII, p. 134 f.Google Scholar

page 30 note 1 Elburz Mt. sites. See Arne, T. J., Excavations at Shah Tepe, Stockholm, 1945 Google Scholar; E. SCHMIDT, Excavations at Tepe Hissar; F. K. Wulsin in A Survey of Persian Art, ed. A. Upham Pope, Vol. I, Chapter 8, Tureng Tepe. For the general sequence of early Persian ceramic, see also D. E. McCOWN, The Comparative Stratigraphy of Iran.

page 30 note 2 Hand-made pottery superseded older wheelmade pottery in Hissar III, cf. E. SCHMIDT, op. cit., p. 17 8. The contemporaneous pottery from Shah Tepe was also apparently hand-made.

page 30 note 3 cf. E. SCHMIDT, op. cit., p. 157 f.

page 30 note 4 cf. E. SCHMIDT, op. cit., p. 219 and Pl. LXIII, H.1800, H.1884, which are exactly similar to the lanceolate arrow-heads from Brak Pl. XXXVII.

page 31 note 1 cf. Kuftin, B. A., Archaeological Excavations in Trialeti 1, Tbilsi, 1941 Google Scholar (Publishing House of the Georgian SSK.). Compare the black burnished knobbed ware on Pl. LXXXV from Trialeti with Shah Tepe, op. cit., Pl. XXI.

page 31 note 2 cf. Iraq, IV, Pt. 2, Pl. XIIIB and XII, No. 4Google Scholar; also Brak, Pl. XXI, No. 9, for a seal which probably belongs to the early dynastic period.

page 31 note 3 e.g., Pl. XXI, No. 5.

page 34 note 1 For a reference to Col. A. N. T. Belaiew's views on this subject, see E. A. Speiser, in B.A.S.O.R., No. 62.

page 36 note 1 The “Sammelfund.” See Heinrich, E., Kleinfunde aus den Archaischen Tempelschichten in Uruk, Berlin, 1936 Google Scholar. Circumstances of the discovery are described on pp. 1–6. Heinrich formed the impression that this was a foundation deposit containing offerings of an older period, deliberately dedicated to the god at the time when a new building was erected, and he supposed that what had once belonged to the god remained his property and could not be removed from the site of his dwelling. Subsequently, however, Lenzen, in U.V.B., VII, p. 15 Google Scholar, affirmed that there were no grounds for this theory and emphasised the fact that many of the objects were lying in situ in the rooms in which they had originally been deposited: the remainder were simply buried under the ruins of the destroyed building. See also O.I.P., LVIII, p. 18, footnote 25AGoogle Scholar.

page 36 note 2 The practice of preserving foundations apparently for pious reasons, occurred as early as the T. Halaf period, cf. Mallowan, M. E. L. and Rose, J. Cruik-Shank, Arpachiyah, Chapter 2, p. 26 Google Scholar. On that site fresh stones were imported for the walls of each successive tholos, the earlier foundations being carefully preserved. It is also clear that throughout the Tigris-Euphrates valley, from the earliest epochs down to the neo-Babylonian period special sanctity attached to the preservation of ancient foundations. The evidence of Royal inscriptions also displays the anxiety of the kings on this subject. Thus an inscription of Samsi-Adad I ran: “When that temple shall have fallen to decay, whoever it may be among the kings, my descendants who shall restore the temple, let him anoint my foundation cylinder and my memorial stele with oil, let him pour out libations upon them and return them to their places,” cf. Luckenbill, D. D., Ancient Records, Assyria and Babylonia, Vol. I, p. 17 Google Scholar. It was also not unusual to call down curses upon those who in after time would tamper with such remains.

page 37 note 1 See O.I.P., LVIII, p. 180 ffGoogle Scholar, describing the discovery of hoards of statuary and other objects intentionally hidden under the floor of a sanctuary of the Abu temple. In the Nintu VI temple at Khafajah, a number of objects including models of a bearded cow, human-headed bulls, and mace heads were found embedded inside the altar which stood in the sanctuary, cf. op. cit., p. 89.

page 37 note 2 cf. A.A.A., XIX, p. 79 Google Scholar.

page 39 note 1 cf. Gadd, C. J., History and Monuments of Ur, p. 136, 244 Google Scholar.

page 37 note 2 In addition to liver divining it was also the practice to examine kidneys, albeit at a much later date, in Babylonia. It is, however, impossible to say if these ancient models of kidneys were in any way connected with kidney-divination. Mr. C. J. Gadd has kindly given me the following interesting note which I quote hereunder, but there is, of course, no suggestion that the later evidence can be used to explain the purport of the stone models of kidneys discovered at Brak.

“The kidneys (BIR, kalitu) were observed by diviners from inspection of the entrails of sacrifices though they furnished only a minor part of the recorded omens. Characteristic details are: one missing, one or both upside down, too small, withered, and marks on the surface to the right or left. The consequences believed to be shewn by these were of the same kind as usual in this branch of divination; they concerned mainly the fortunes of kings and warlike occasions.

“There was also a ‘Kidney Star,’ belonging to the ‘Way of Ea,’ i.e. stars seen in a great arc south of the equator. This star was also called the ‘Yoke of Ea,’ and evidently derived both names from the shape of the constellation. It is possible that the diviners imagined a similar signification of both ‘kidneys,’ whether in the sky or in the entrails.”

page 40 note 1 cf. Parrot, A., Les Fouilles de Mari, Troisième Campagne, Syria, XVIII, 1937, p. 75 ff.Google Scholar and especially Fig. 11 illustrating a series of moulds with the simple linear designs which also occur on the Brak stamps. See also the article entitled Pain in Larousse Gastronomique, and the illustration on p. 767, No. 6, of a flat circular country loaf with the criss-cross markings characteristic of ancient bread.

page 40 note 2 cf. U.V.B., II, Abb. 41 and p. 48 Google Scholar, where J. Jordan suggested that certain small clay objects from archaic level IV at Uruk might perhaps represent food.

page 42 note 1 See Minns, E. H., The Art of the Northern Nomads, Proceedings of the British Academy, Vol. XXVIII, pp. 3, 4 Google Scholar, for the possibility that “the first vehicle of the style was horn, bone, or hard wood.” In op. cit., Pl. XX, No. 9, there is an illustration of an Ordos bronze typologically similar to some of the animal models from Brak. The Ordos bronzes were, of course, made atf very much later date.

page 42 note 2 See Petrie, Flinders, Abydos, II, Pl. VI, XI Google Scholar. Petrie ascribed these to the first dynasty of Egypt. cf. also O.I.P., LX, Fig. z, for a model of an alabaster baboon dedicated by King Narmer.

page 42 note 3 See Buren, E. D. Van, The Fauna of Ancient Mesopotamia as Represented in Art, Analecta Orientalia 18, pp. 22, 23 Google Scholar.

page 43 note 1 cf. O.I.P., XLIV, pp. 34–36 Google Scholar, and ROGER FRY, Last Lectures, Chapter V.

page 43 note 2 cf. C. LEONARD WOOLLEY, Summon Art, PL VI.

page 43 note 3 See the illustration in O.I.P., LX, Fig. 1.

page 44 note 1 For the significance of a pair of shoes as “token payments to validate special transactions,” see E.A. Speiser in B.A.S.O.R., No. 77. quoting a number of interesting passages from the O.T. and the Nuzu texts.

page 44 note 2 cf. Dhorme, P., La Religion Assyro-Babylonienne, p. 274 Google Scholar.

page 45 note 1 cf. Iraq, VIII; 115 f Google Scholar.

page 45 note 2 See Oppenheim, Freiherr Von, Der Tell Halaf, Leipzig, 1931 Google Scholar.

page 46 note 1 See A. POIDEBARD, La Trace de Rome dans le Desert de Syrie.

page 46 note 2 See Syria, 1930, p. 360 ff.Google Scholar