Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:24:59.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tell Brak 1976: The Pottery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2014

Kate Fielden
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The pottery from the 1976 excavations at Tell Brak comprises a fairly homogeneous, probable Late ED—Late Agade group, much of which proves to be similar in character both to that of the ED—Agade periods obtained by Sir Max Mallowan in 1937–8 and to the more recently excavated ED material from Tell Chuera.

The four principal wares and the majority of rim profile types were present in all phases but despite the overall similarity of the pottery it is reasonable to suggest that it falls stratigraphically into three groups:

The earliest, Phase 3, consists of a small amount of material from pre-Temple levels and is probably of the Late ED period.

Phase 2 finds are of Agade date and were obtained from levels associated with the building phases of the Temple.

Phase 1 pottery, the largest group, from levels subsequent to the Temple, is probably of post-Naram-Sin to, at the latest, Ur III date. There may however, have been a break in occupation of the site during this period.

The volume of the 1976 ceramic sample is small and this discussion is mainly limited to that which was obtained from Trenches A, B and the lowest levels of D where the stratigraphy is best understood. The sample is unlikely to be comprehensive and it will therefore be pertinent at this stage to describe and illustrate as much of the material as possible and to comment upon its relation to material from other sites where relevant. Statistics quoted and conclusions reached should be considered as preliminary findings which may be enlarged or altered by the consequences of further excavation at Brak.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , Autumn 1977 , pp. 245 - 255
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1977

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 Mallowan, M. E. L., Iraq 9 (1947)Google Scholar.

2 H. Kühne, Die Keramik vom Tell Chuera; hereafter abbreviated: Kühne, 1976.

3 References to similarities between specific examples will be made in the Catalogue of Illustrations,

4 An interesting Stone ware jar bore vertically-pierced, double-barrelled lug-handles. Illustration: Plate XIII, 14, and discussion on p. 247.

5 Braidwood, R. and Braidwood, L., Excavations in the Plain of Antioch I, 370Google Scholar; and Kühne, 1976, 33 ffGoogle Scholar. where he points out that metal vase forms at Chuera are similar to those of the Metallic ware which may have been derived from them. This ware should not be confused with the part-contemporary Anatolian Metallic ware described by Mellaart, J., An. St. 12 (1963), 228 ffGoogle Scholar.

6 Speiser, E., Excavations at Tepe Gawra I, 50Google Scholar.

7 Reade, J., Iraq 33 (1968), 351Google Scholar.

8 Prag, K., Levant 2 (1970), 78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Kühne, 1976, 33Google Scholar.

10 Ibid., 81 and 70 ff.

11 Ibid., 49 ff.

12 Donald Easton has kindly informed me that well stratified examples of this pot form occur in his Troy II. 6, that is at the beginning of his Anatolian EB III (see: Easton, D. F., An. St. 26 (1976), 145–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chronological Table, p. 165); this fits fairly well in Kühne's Chronological Table (Kühne, 1976, 114Google Scholar) and gives an approximate parallel of ED III in Mesopotamian terms for Troy II. 6.

13 Lloyd, S., Iraq 5 (1938), 133, Fig. 6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Egami, , Thalathat I, 80, fig. 21: 1 and 2 respectivelyGoogle Scholar.

15 Mallowan, M. E. L. and Thompson, R. Campbell, AAA 20 (1933), Pl. LII, 11Google Scholar.

16 Reade, J., Iraq 30 (1968), Pl. LXXXV, 17Google Scholar. The similarity between Ninevite 5 Plain ware from Grai Resh and late third millennium material from Taya has been noticed by Reade; ibid., 237, footnote 6.

17 Kühne, 1976, 72 and 104Google Scholar.

18 See Catalogue descriptions for Plate XI, 12 and 14; XII, 10.

19 The majority of triangular-lug-handled pots were hand-made at Chuera (Kühne, 1976, 99Google Scholar), as at Harran (Levant 2 (1970), 83Google Scholar).

20 Prag, K., Levant 2 (1970), 83CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Kühne, 1976, 99 ffGoogle Scholar.

22 Ibid., 99, footnote 816.

23 Kühne, 1976, 46, footnote 284Google Scholar.

24 Ibid., p. 46.

25 Braidwood, R. and Braidwood, L.; Excavations in the Plain of Antioch I, 450 (T. Tainat, Amuq J)Google Scholar.

26 Prag, K., Levant 2 (1970), 81 (Late 3rd. mill. Harran)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 Mellink, M., in Ehrich, R. W., Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (1965), 110–111Google Scholar.

28 Kühne, 1976, 37 and 63–6Google Scholar, where he discusses the form and its distribution on sites in Mesopotamia, Syria and Anatolia.

29 Goldman, H., Tarsus II, Pl. 255; p. 109–110Google Scholar.

30 von Luschan, F., Sendschirli V, 38 ffGoogle Scholar.; Pl. 15–16.

31 Braidwood, R. and Braidwood, L., Excavations in the Plain of Antioch I, 518 and Pl. 87:2Google Scholar.

32 U.B., and Alkım, H., Belleten 30 (1966), 53Google Scholar.

33 Alkim, U. B., Archaeohgy 22 (1969), 286 ffGoogle Scholar.

34 Alkim, U. B. and Alkim, H., Belleten 30 (1966), 48 and Fig. 42Google Scholar.

35 Goldman, H., Tarsus II, Fig. 255, 280Google Scholar.

36 Kühne, 1976, 74–5Google Scholar.

37 Kühne, 1976, 59 ff. and 108 ffGoogle Scholar.