Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:05:56.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Excavations at Ras al ‘Amiya

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2014

David Stronach
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The prehistoric site of Ras al ‘Amiya is situated about five miles north of Kish, at a point midway between the rivers Tigris and Euphrates (Fig. 1). The whole settlement lies under the present surface of the alluvium and it only came to light some four years ago when a series of canals were cut through the area in connection with the Greater Musseyib Drainage Project.

Attention was first drawn to the site when it was discovered that sherds of the richly painted Hajji Muhammad variety, such as those shown in Plates XLIV, 5, XLVII, 10, XLVIII, 2, XLIX, 7 and LVI, 1–5, were associated with others of a more standard ‘Ubaid type (Plates XLIV, 2 and 7–9, XLV, 1, 2 and 9 and XLVI, 2, 5 and 6). The association of the two wares at once suggested that the settlement might have an important bearing on certain problems connected with the evolution of ‘Ubaid pottery and that excavations might produce useful results. At the same time the impending use of the canals in the area seemed to call for an early start to any such field work. With these considerations in view the British School of Archaeology in Iraq decided to support a small sounding at the site in the early summer of last year.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 23 , Issue 1-2 , 1961 , pp. 95 - 137
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1961

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

1 For the final publication of this material see Ziegler, C., Die Keramik von der Qal’a des Hağği Mohammad, 1953Google Scholar.

2 See Lloyd, and Safar, , Sumer III–VIGoogle Scholar and Oates, J., Iraq XXII, p. 32 f.Google Scholar

3 J. Oates, op. cit., loc. cit.

4 J. Oates, op. cit. p. 40, has shown that all four phases might well be designated as al ‘Ubaid 1–4, although she admits that we may have to continue to use the labels established already in archaeological literature.

5 It should be added that the simplest approach for visitors from Baghdad is to drive first to Kish (by way of Babylon) and then due north along the track that leads to the modern Pumping Station beside the site.

6 Recent drillings in connection with the Musseyib Project have shown that the overburden in this area varies considerably from one locality to another, so that a long series of local floods and sandstorms would seem to have been responsible for it.

7 Braidwood, R. J. and Howe, B., Prehistoric Investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilisations No. 31), 1960, p. 40Google Scholar.

8 Braidwood makes a strong case for vising the Arabic word tauf to describe the very similar sun-dried mud walls found in the excavations at Jarmo. As he points out, the French word pisé implies the pressing of rather fluid mud between built forms—a feature never attested in the early tauf walls of Iraq. Braidwood and Howe, op. cit., p. 40.

9 By contrast mud plaster appears to have been a common feature in the Halaf settlement at Arpachiyah. See Mallowan, M. E. L., Iraq II, Part 1, p. 16Google Scholar.

10 See below under Level III.

11 Mud bricks of a very similar type are reported from the somewhat earlier context of Baghouz. (Du Mesnil du Buisson, Baghouz, p. 15). But on tne whole mud bricks only seem to have come into general use during the course of the ‘Ubaid period. See Perkins, A. L., The Comparative Archeology of Early Mesopotamia, p. 88 f.Google Scholar

12 Due to the fact that further deposits of this material were found in the debris of a number of rooms, it looks as if this curious substance may have been used for repairing roof-leaks or other such defects.

13 Comparable ovens appear to have existed at Hajji Muhammad (U.V.B. IX, p. 37Google Scholar), not to mention more northern parallels from Jarmo (Braidwood and Howe, op. cit., p. 40 f.), Hassuna (Lloyd, Seton and Safar, Fuad, J.N.E.S. IV, fig. 28Google Scholar) and Arpachiyah (M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., p. 14 and fig. 6).

14 These enigmatic objects first occur at Eridu in level XII (J. Oates, op. cit. p. 36), at a moment when many ‘Ubaid features appear for the first time.

15 Cf. the much richer flint assemblage found at Jarmo. (Braidwood and Howe, op. cit., pls. 17–19).

16 Seton Lloyd and Fuad Safar, op. cit., fig. 37.

17 Cf. the examples found at Hassuna (Seton Lloyd and Fuad Safar, op. cit., figs. 19, 20 and 23–26), Hajji Muhammad (C. Ziegler, op. cit. pl. 35 h) and other later ‘Ubaid sites (A. L. Perkins, op. cit., p. 85).

18 Similar polished axes come from many other Southern sites, including Eridu, Hajji Muhammad, al ‘Ubaid, Telloh and ‘Uqair. See A. L. Perkins, op. cit., p. 85.

19 Ground obsidian also occurs in the later ‘Ubaid period at both al ‘Ubaid and Eridu. See Hall, H. R., J.R..A.S. (Centenary Supplement, 1924), p. 109Google Scholar and Lloyd, and Safar, , Sumer III, p. 104 f.Google Scholar

20 For a very similar series of spindle whorls from a Northern ‘Ubaid context, see A. J. Tobler, Excavations at Tepe Gawra II, pl. XXCV.

21 Similar objects occur at many other sites. From the evidence found at Sialk I Ghirshman also favours the view that they represent miniature pestles and mortars for grinding cosmetics Ghirshman, R., Iran, p. 30 and fig. 5Google Scholar.

22 A. J. Tobler, op. cit., p. 169.

23 See C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 35 1.

24 See C. Ziegler, ibid., pl. 35 f.

25 Eridu, Ur, Hajji Muhammad and Nippur (see footnote 106) in Iraq and sites like Jowi and Jafferabad in Susiana.

26 J. Oates, op. cit., p. 33.

27 For detailed arguments concerning the date of Ras al ‘Amiya, see pp. 121–124.

28 See J. Oates, op. cit., p. 33 and U.V.B. XI (1940), p. 27Google Scholar.

29 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 28 a.

30 M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., fig. 64, 2.

31 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 28 d.

32 Note the additional pattern shown in Pl. LVIII, 12.

33 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 28 e and 30 d.

34 J. Oates, op. cit., pl. IV, Type 4 a.

35 See M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., fig. 60, 3 and fig. 66, 6 and 7.

36 See J. Oates, op. cit., pl. IV and p. 34.

37 Cf. the patterns shown in Pl. III, 7 and 8 with C. Ziegler, op. cit., motifs 57 and 86.

38 J. Oates, op. cit., pl. IV, Type 17 a.

39 J. Oates, ibid., pl. IV, Type 17 b.

40 See Lloyd, and Safar, , Sumer IV, 1948, pl. VIIGoogle Scholar. Also note that the Ras al ‘Amiya bowls find quite close parallels in levels XVII and XVIII at Tepe Gawra. Tobler, op. cit., pl. CXX, 83–88.

41 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pls. 14 and 15.

42 For similar internal patterns see C. Ziegler, ibid., pls. 16 and 17.

43 See M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., frontispiece.

44 See C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 15 e and f.

45 C. Ziegler, ibid., pl. 24 f.

46 C. Ziegler, ibid., pl. 28 a and b and pl. 24 d.

47 C. Ziegler, ibid., pl. 21 and 22 b.

48 C. Ziegler, ibid., pl. 23 b.

49 See M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., figs. 61 and 63.

50 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 26 a and b.

51 C. Ziegler, ibid., pl. 29 a and b

52 See J. Oates, op. cit., p. 37.

53 Lloyd, and Safar, , Sumer IV, p. 124Google Scholar.

54 Apart from Pl. LIV, 3, note the decoration of the variant forms shown in Pl. LIII, 8 and Pl. LIV, 4.

55 Particularly levels XI–IX: see J. Oates, op. cit., pl. IV, Type 11b.

56 Cf. Hall, H. R. and Woolley, C. L., Al ‘Ubaid, 1927, pl. LI, p. viiiGoogle Scholar

57 See C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 27 a for a somewhat similar form.

58 J. Oates, op. cit., pl. IV, Type 19.

59 J. Oates, ibid., pl. IV, Type 11 a.

60 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 29 f.

61 At Eridu the earliest spouted vessels that are close to this shape occur in the Late ‘Ubaid Cemetery. J. Oates, op. cit., pl. IV, Type 23. [But note that at Arpachiya spouted vessels of a much cruder kind appear already in Halaf times. M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., fig. 79, 5.)

62 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 29 e.

63 In particular, compare J. Oates' tall, slendernecked Type 11 c with Pl. LIII, 6.

64 C. Ziegler, op. cit., p. 53 and pl. 27 e and f.

65 J. Oates, op. cit., p. 34, Type 12.

66 A. J. Tobler, op. cit., p. 136 and pl. LXXV d and e.

67 A feature apparent also at Eridu and Tepe Gawra well into the ‘Ubaid period. See J. Oates, op. cit., p. 36 and A. J. Tobler, op. cit., loc. cit.

68 See J. Oates, op. cit., pl. IV, 8.

69 See J. Oates, op. cit., pl. IV, 13.

70 See Footnote 60 above.

71 J. Oates, op. cit., p. 34.

72 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 20, c and d.

73 The exposed side of the sherd is shown in black in order to emphasize its section.

74 von Oppenheim, M., Tell Halaf I, pls. XXIII and XXIVGoogle Scholar.

75 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 25 c and d.

76 Cf. the perforations appearing on the edge of the bowl in Pl. XLVIII, 2.

77 J. Oates, op. cit., pl. IV, Type 9

78 See C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 30 c and M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., fig. 58, 3.

79 A. L. Perkins, op. cit., p. 82.

80 For illustrations of all these motifs from Hajji Muhammad itself see C. Ziegler, op. cit., pls. 37a–d. Also for a striking parallel to the centrifugal design in Pl. XLIX, 7, which comes from Tepe Jowi in Susiana, see Breton, Le, M.D.P. XXX, 1947, fig. 23, 4Google Scholar.

81 C. Ziegler, ibid., pl. 37c.

82 See J. Oates, op. cit., p. 38 and C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 23b and pl. 23f. Also note that the proportion of unpainted to painted sherds at Hajji Muhammad, which is reported to have been about 5 to 2, is possibly even higher than that observed at Ras al ‘Amiya.

83 For Hajji Muhammad parallels for most of these patterns see C. Ziegler, ibid., pls. 37a–d. Also note the very fragmentary patterns shown in Pl. LVIII, 36 and Pl. LIX, 13, 25 and 30.

84 See M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., p. 158 f.

85 M. E. L. Mallowan, ibid., fig. 68, 2.

86 M. E. L. Mallowan, ibid., fig. 74, 3.

87 M. E. L. Mallowan, ibid., pl. XVIa and fig. 60, 3.

88 A. J. Tobler, op. cit., pl. LXXa, 17 and pl. LXXIVa, 11.

89 M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., fig. 58, 2. The same basic pattern occurs also on a jar rim from Tepe Gawra XVIII. See A. J. Tobler, op. cit., pl. LXXIa, 20.

90 Cf. Tepe Gawra XIX. A. J. Tobler, ibid., pl. LXIXb, 21.

91 Cf. the Halaf pottery from Arpachiyah (M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., fig. 58, 4 and fig. 67, 2) and Tell Halaf (M. von Oppenheim, op. cit., pl. L, 1 and pl. LV, 11). Also note the use of the same design in Tepe Gawra XVIII, where it appears on a bowl similar to those shown in Pl. XLVI. See A. J. Tobler, op. cit., LXIIIa.

92 Cf. Tell Halaf (M. von Oppenheim, op. cit., LXVII, 2) and Arpachiyah (M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., fig. 77, 6).

93 Cf. Arpachiyah (M. E. L. Mallowan, ibid., fig. 78, 19) and Tepe Gawra (A. J. Tobler, op. cit., pl. LXIXa, 7 and pl. LXXb, 5).

64, 2) and Tepe Gawra (A. J. Tobler, op. cit., LXXIVb, 14.

94 Cf. Arpachiyah (M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., fig.

95 See C. Ziegler, op. cit., pl. 37d.

96 M. E. L. Mallowan, op. cit., fig. 77, 10 and p. 165.

97 A. J. Tobler, op. cit., pl. CL, 467, 470, 471 and 472.

98 Cf. the patterns shown in Pl. XLIV, 1–4 and 7–10; Pl. L, 3–8; and Pl. LI.

99 In particular, note the narrow, multiple zones of the design shown in Pl. XV, 16 which at once recall the Samarran style.

100 C. Ziegler, op. cit., pls. 21 and 22.

101 A. J. Tobler, op. cit., pl. LXXIIIe.

102 Notably the jar shape in Pl. LV, 2; the spouted shape in Pl. LIV, 7; and the high foot shown in Pl. LVII, 14.

103 None of the sherds from these levels were found far from areas of disturbance, created by the original construction of the Side Canal, but the balance of evidence makes it clear that such pottery must have been known throughout the life of the site.

104 It should be noted that the same combination of ‘Iranian’ straw-tempered fabric and Mesopotamian design occurs also in the provincial ‘Ubaid’ Pisdeli Ware ‘found at Hasanlu. See Dyson, Robert H. and Young, T. Cuyler, Antiquity XXXIV, 1960, pp. 19–28Google Scholar.

105 Hajji Muhammad material was found at Nippur during a sounding made in 1952. J. Oates, op. cit., p. 48.

106 See E. Herzfeld, Die Ausgrabungen von Samarra V and A. L. Perkins, op. cit., p. 5 f.

107 Cf. J. Oates, op. cit., p. 42.

108 In particular, note the patterns shown in Pl. LIX, 6–9. (Although it should be added that quite similar motifs occur also at Tepe Jowi in Susiana. Cf. Le Breton, op. cit., fig. 28, 23.)

109 See A. L. Perkins, op. cit., p. 25.

110 For an earlier discussion of this question see A. L. Perkins, op. cit., p. 94 f. But in many ways we are dependent on the appearance of the definitive Eridu report for a final treatment of this subject.

111 Lloyd, Seton and Safar, Fuad, J.N.E.S. II, 1943, p. 14gGoogle Scholar.

112 Lloyd, Seton, I.L.N., 09. 11th, 1948, pp. 303–5Google Scholar.

113 Lloyd, and Safar, , Sumer VI, p. 30Google Scholar. Note also the circular oven in fig. 2, which is of very similar dimensions to that illustrated in Fig. 6.

114 See H. Lenzen's report in Miss Ziegler's Hajji Muhammad publication, pp. 9–12.

115 In a future publication.

116 If the evidence for domestication can be upheld, these bones are somewhat earlier than any other examples quoted by Charles Reed, A., in Prehistoric Investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan, pp. 134–7 and pp. 141–5Google Scholar.

117 Carbon dates for this period in Iraq are particularly rare. If we follow Mallowan, M. E. L. (Twenty-Five Years of Mesopotamian Discovery, 1956, p. 13Google Scholar) in believing that the Halaf period dates back to at least 5000 B.C., the date of Ras al ‘Amiya may fall somewhere within the first quarter of the fifth millennium B.C.