Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T19:40:16.592Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Excavations at Nimrud (Kalḫu) 1956

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2014

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

Extract

The seventh expedition to Nimrud sponsored by the British School of Archaeology in Iraq took the field on March 4th, 1956, and concluded its work on May 5th. As usual we are indebted to several institutions and to many persons for their help. Generous financial aid was received from: the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; the Birmingham City Museum and Art Gallery; the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford; Les Musées Royaux d'Art et d'Histoire, Brussels; the Iraq Petroleum Company, which also furnished the Expedition with apparatus and invaluable technical help through the good offices of the Fields Manager in Kirkuk, Mr. L. J. Teyssaud.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , Spring 1957 , pp. 1 - 25
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1957

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 4 note 1 Iraq, XVI, Pt. 2, p. 117 Google Scholar.

page 4 note 2 Gadd, C. J., The Stones of Assyria, 92 Google Scholar.

page 5 note 1 L.A.R., I, para. 745.

page 5 note 2 L.A.R., II, para. 1131.

page 6 note 1 See references and detailed description on p. 16 below, and also the reference by Mr. David Oates to a merman on a repoussé bronze panel from Khorsabad.

page 6 note 2 But see the discussion by David Oates below on p. 29. They were probably situated at the entrance to the Nabu Sanctuary.

page 6 note 3 On this subject see the suggestion by David Oates on p. 35.

page 7 note 1 See also below under the description of the contents of rooms NT.13–14 for details of ivories and other small objects discovered in this wing of Ezida.

page 8 note 1 Iraq, XVIII, Pt. I, pp. 9, 35, 36 Google Scholar.

page 8 note 2 Andrae, W., Das Wiedererstandene Assur, 159–163, Abb. 69Google Scholar.

page 8 note 3 Loc. cit., p. 162.

page 9 note 1 O.I.P., XL, pl. 71 Google Scholar.

page 10 note 1 Koldewey, R., Die Tempel von Babylon und Borsippa (1911), 50–57 and taf. XIIGoogle Scholar.

page 10 note 2 OIP, XL, Plate 70, 71, 79, Temple of Nabu, p. 56–64 Google Scholar.

page 10 note 3 Koldewey, R., Babylon (Translated by Johns, ) fig. 142, p. 230, period of NabopolassarGoogle Scholar.

page 10 note 4 This cross-section K1–K7 is not marked on the Plan, Plate II. Another section line A-A is however indicated and is recorded on Plate XII. See the full discussion by D. Oates in the subsequent article.

page 11 note 1 Iraq, XVIII, Pt 1, p. 16 Google Scholar.

page 11 note 2 L.A.R., II, para. 1131.

page 11 note 3 L.A.R., II, paras. 1140, 1159.

page 11 note 4 Iraq, XVIII, Part 1, pp. 20, 32 Google Scholar.

page 11 note 5 This grave was situated approximately 5 metres south-east of the S.E. corner of NT.17.

page 12 note 1 See also Twenty-Five Years of Mesopotamian Discovery, 71 Google Scholar.

page 12 note 2 See also p. 7 above.

page 14 note 1 See also p. 7 above.

page 16 note 1 Oppenheim, and Moortgat, , Tell Halaf (1955), Taf. 94, A.3, 163 (also in English version of small book under same title by Oppenheim, Plate XXXV B.)Google Scholar. The figure was inscribed: “Temple of the Weather God.”

page 17 note 1 The date of the orthostats at T. Halaf has been reconsidered by Professor Albright, in Anatolian Studies, VI, 1956, 75 f., article entitled “The Date of the Kapara period at Gozan (Tell Halaf).”CrossRefGoogle Scholar Albright concludes that “there does not seem to be any good reason for dating any of the monumental art of this period at Gozan before the middle of the tenth century or after the first quarter of the ninth.” The arguments used to sustain this conclusion are open to objection and have been advanced in one-sided fashion regardless of other historical possibilities. Albright's thesis appears to rest on the contention that “the Kapara art of Gozan is not neo-Assyrian and shows no traces of influence by Assyrian art of the ninth century B.C., it is Mesopotamian as well as Syro-Hittite in its inspiration.” This statement however seems to be based on a preconceived notion that the Halaf monuments must have been created before the Assyrian advance westwards, that is before the second quarter of the ninth century B.C. The reasons given for this are that “neither iconographically nor stylistically is there anything neo-Assyrian about the sculpture of Gozan (omitting a few admittedly later objects).” This appears to me to be a prejudiced judgement, for in fact many of the subjects chosen to illustrate the Halaf sculptures occur frequently on neo-Assyrian seals of the ninth and eighth centuries B.C, e.g. archer in the wild bull hunt, bull-men carrying the winged sun disc. The monumental sculpture, especially as regards the rendering of the heads, hair-dressing, crowns, illustrate many details familiar on the Nimrud ivories. Nor does Albright refer to the abundant evidence obtained since 1949 from Nimrud and published in Iraq during recent years for dating several groups of ivories to the end of the eighth and even to the seventh centuries B.C. However that may be, the crux of the matter is that Halaf-Gozan was a provincial centre largely inhabited by unsophisticated Aramaeans; there is no reason why its monumental or its orthostatic sculpture should have been bound by the traditions or fashions current in metropolitan Assyria; indeed it is evident in many cases from the poor quality of the stones and the incompetent execution of the sculpture, that Gozan did not possess the master-masons and sculptors (at all times rare) whom the kings of Assyria had at their command. Consequently it is difficult and indeed dangerous to base chronological conclusions on stylistic comparisons between sophisticated and unsophisticated material. In points of style the orthostats of T. Halaf surely have far more in common with the rude work of Kara Tepe than any other; Albright does not consider the problem which that would raise for his dating since the monunents of the latter site appear to belong to the last quarter of the eighth century B.C. Finally Albright has altogether excluded other later historical possibilities for the existence in Gozan during the neo-Assyrian period of the Kapara dynasty. Here in my opinion we have two attractive alternatives. First there was the reign of Shamshi-Adad V (824–810 B.C.) which followed on a general revolt after the death of Shalmaneser III; Assyria was then recovering lost ground and there is no reason why Guzana should not have enjoyed a full measure of independence during that time: we hear of an Assyrian attack on Guzana in 809 B.C. Secondly there was the period after the reign of Adad-nirari III and before the advent of Tiglath-pileser III, 781–746 B.C., when Assyrian power was at a low ebb; indeed there was a revolt in Guzana in the year 759 B.C., admittedly a date which most authorities would consider too low for the sculpture in question. On the whole therefore I would for the present incline to the view that the last quarter of the ninth century B.C. is a possible date for much of the Kaparan material, not excluding the possibility that some of the orthostats may have been executed even later. I understand that Ekrem Akurgal favours the late rather than the early half of the ninth century for this material and would probably reject Albright's view. The final verdict must, however, as I have said above, depend on the evidence advanced in the last volume on T. Halaf. It must be left to the epigraphists to decide whether or not in this outlandish country chronological arguments based on script and orthography are any more conclusive than those based on style: Albright himself has stated that the language is strongly influenced by Assyrian dialectical forms. He has made a most interesting suggestion (loc. cit., p. 82) for a transcription of a part of the second longest inscription which he now re-reads: “Palace of Kapara son of Hadianu, king of the land of Ḫatte.”

page 18 note 1 L.A.R., II, para. 761B.

page 18 note 2 Delaporte, L., Catalogue des Cylindrts Orientaux, I, 12a (D. 81), plate 54, shows a pair of fish-men on the base of an elliptical stone sealGoogle Scholar; they carry a vase from which water flows; in the middle of the field is the sign bar.

page 18 note 3 Corpus of Ancient Near Eastern Seals in North American Seal Collections, II, plate 119, No. 785, depicts the type of monster represented by the Nimrud carvingsGoogle Scholar; second, less good example, No. 788. The text, loc. cit., p. 95, states that the earliest of this set of seals dates from the time of Nebuchadrezzar II, in the early half of the sixth century B.C., and the latest from the time of Darius II.

page 19 note 1 Illustrated on Plate IX, No. 2.

page 20 note 1 Iraq, XVI, Pt. 2, p. 122 f.Google Scholar, for references to the tablets in ZT, discussion on p. 132, and especially footnote 2 on p. 134 which must now be supplemented by the evidence from Ezida described above. Moreover tablets found in 1956 in Ezida also refer to artisans who were employed in the temple of Ninurta at Calah during the reign of Aššur-bani-pal, e.g., ND.5469 dated to the year 661 B.C. by limmu; this document will be published subsequently by Miss Barbara Parker.

page 24 note 1 Two other models of birds in sun-dried clay, ND.5302–3 (Plate XI, 2), were found under the floor of the same room (DD1) together with a bifrons figure, ND.5296, which had a human body and heads of a lion and a man.