The choice of this subject originates from the fact that the area of research to which I have been devoting myself recently includes the figurative cultures of Mesopotamia and Syria in the Early Dynastic and the Early Syrian periods, specifically in the field of war. Some of the data resulting from this research focus on the representation of the “head of the enemy”, which appears repeatedly in the documentation of the second millennium BC in Syria but so far seems to be absent in contemporary Mesopotamia. Despite the evident difference between the forms of representation from these two areas, I perceived in the figurative cycles of the Neo-Assyrian reliefs not only the recurrence of this theme but also the intentional display of severed heads, which reaches its climax in the numerous examples from the South-West Palace in Nineveh. My first aim is, therefore, to suggest a plausible approach towards identifying the origin of the display of “severed heads”, previously absent from Mesopotamian scenes of warfare, in the visual communication of the Neo-Assyrian period. My second aim is to offer an interpretation which may help shed light on ideological, cultural and anthropological aspects essential to the Neo-Assyrian political programme and its visual representation.

Dr Matthews was kind enough to show us a draft of the preceding article before publication so that we could reply, for which we thank him. Our original article was intended as a review of the problem of the Early Dynastic to Akkadian transition and as a quick general overview of the WF excavation at Nippur, rather than the final statement on either. The point of the article was not to define the Akkadian Period but to make steps towards the identification of an assemblage of material culture (pottery, tablets, objects, and seals) found in levels which are dated to the historical Akkadian Period. That assemblage included pottery types, but we did not suggest that a single pottery type or a few types alone should be the basis for dating; nor would we prefer, as is implied by Matthews, to define a period by pottery as opposed to other objects. What the Nippur WF excavation gave us was a well-stratified sequence of artifacts; and we were careful when suggesting the level at which we might have entered the Akkadian (historical) period not to be adamant about the date of the pertinent level and to precede it with a “transitional” level (Level XVII) which might have been either Early Dynastic or Akkadian. Perhaps we should have been more cautious and extended that transitional label to cover Level XVI as well.

Hundreds if not thousands of statuettes of the Hellenistic and Roman times of alabaster, clay, and bone have been found all over Babylonia in Graeco-Roman ruins and tombs and in many places in Middle-Mesopotamia, e.g. at Dura. They present a great interest not only from the artistic but also from the religious and mythological points of view. Those of clay have been collected and illustrated by Mrs. E. Douglas van Buren and all those found at Seleucia will soon be published and illustrated in a comprehensive study by Miss W. van Ingen of the University of Michigan. I have dealt with some of them repeatedly, especially from the point of view of the history of art.

In this short note I wanted to correct a mistake of mine regarding some of these statuettes and at the same time to draw the attention of fellow-students to one very curious variety occurring among them. I mean the statuettes which represent a human figure—without doubt a deity—in the squatting position so typical for the Orient in general.

The first of the two daggers I propose to discuss I bought from Mr. John Whitaker of Cambridge, who acquired it from Messrs. Sotheby's sale on December 10th, 1932. The type, the patina, and the date when it came into the market suggest the possibility that it may have been associated with the two similar daggers recently acquired by the British Museum and said to have been discovered in a cave near Kirmanshah in the Luristan province of Persia, and with another now in the Louvre in Paris.

The dagger in my possession belongs to a series of Late Bronze Age daggers and swords best characterized by their inlaid hilt. The inlay of wood, ivory, or some other material has usually vanished and the remaining part of the hilt consists of a flanged tang, frequently with one or more rivet-holes and with a tang or a flange to hold the pommel.

The media coverage of the severe weather patterns of 1982–3 and 1997–8 has reasserted for the study of history the possible influence of abrupt climate change at transitional periods. Modern theories on the fall of Ur have already looked beyond the Elamite invasion to the evidence of food shortage and failing water supply as preconditions of the event. The present study seeks to enlarge upon this theme, and will suggest that, following a period of storm and flood, a sustained drought brought an unprecedented loss of life to the city of Ur and across Sumer. The paper will finally suggest a modern and scientific explanation of the ud-šu-bala, or “weather change”, of the period.

In the Mémoires de la Délégation en Perse, Vol. I, Plate 16 (repeated in II, 24), there stands among the symbols carved upon a finely-executed and preserved ‘boundary-stone’ one that is at present unique, namely, that in the lower left corner, numbered 22 in subsequent publications. It is true that one other has been compared with it—L. W. King, Babylonian Boundary-Stones, Plate III (at bottom)—but there is really no resemblance here. Dismissing, therefore, the suggestion (most inapparent to the eye, and founded only upon this supposed identity) that a sheaf of corn is the object depicted on top of the divine seat or shrine, the only remaining explanation offered of this thing is that it is a shell, in particular that of the pecten, the comb-shell. While it is not possible to disprove this, several arguments may be brought against it. First, the representation is not much like the thing compared. Three typical pecten-shells, from species which occur particularly in the Persian Gulf, do not show anything like the transverse line following the curved border which is so carefully marked upon the emblem; contrariwise, the sculpture has nothing like the prominent ‘wings’ at the apex of the shells. Next, even the largest of the three shells proffered as specimens, Pecten townsendi Sowerby, is quite small, being about 4 inches in extreme measurement, so that if the object resting upon the ‘seat’ is a pecten-shell it must be many times magnified in the representation.

In the Iraq Museum are displayed two large fragments of a floor mosaic found during a series of emergency surveys and excavations, carried out in 1957–58 by the Directorate General of Antiquities of Iraq. The works were conducted in the plain on the Lower Zab river, south of Rānya (Arbil Liwa), which was due to be flooded on the completion of the Dokan dam.

This work was necessary because in the plain—known locally as Dasht-i-Bitawīyn and some 80 square miles in area—there were at least forty tells which would be submerged on the completion of the artificial lake.

The mosaic was found about 10 miles south of Rānya, at Tell Khwāris which is situated at the confluence of the Lower Zab and its tributary Rubar-i-Basalam. Tell Khwāris is 100 m. long, 80 m. wide and 4 m. high.

Nearby dwellers in the course of their agricultural works had dug a deep trench on the summit of the mound and had brought to light several pieces of the floor mosaic which were subsequently destroyed. Members of the Directorate General of Antiquities when informed of the discovery, were able to trace all extant parts of the ancient floor and remove them to Baghdad.

I try to show here that we do not at present have any substantial evidence for fixing the absolute value of any Assyrian capacity unit. This situation is likely to remain so until epigraphist-philologists and archaeologists recognize the need for common effort to solve this problem. Departure point of the present study was the discovery that, in a group of twenty-one documents from Nimrud dated in the period 699–652 B.C. which derive ultimately from the temple of Nabû, eighteen have common patterns from which one can deduce a few basic facts about metrological practice and terminology in the Neo-Assyrian period. To what extent they can be generalized must be decided by specialists in Neo-Assyrian on the basis of more evidence than I have at my disposal.

In his very useful treatment of Neo-Assyrian measures, J. N. Postgate called attention to ND 5457, which contains the phrase ina KAL-ti, i.e. ina sūte dannate, “in the heavy sūt”. He further observed that a calculation in the text indicates that this “heavy” sūt is twice the size of another (unspecified) sūt in the same text and went on to draw parallels between the well-attested light and heavy Assyrian weight norms, which stand to one another in the relationship of 1: 2, and with the Nimrud wine vessels, which were thought to show a similar pattern. He then identified this heavy capacity norm with an emār of 184 litres, deduced by the excavators of Nimrud on the basis of marked jars found there. There are, however, several points that still need clarifying.