_'*.

¥»,~Q »- "'#'-"'"~_ "" ' ~ —~ M , , 7 _ I _ __

/Z»
0.‘-‘~31
'14?!
1~'\"~

-tr}:

5
-:-.
1 vii;
=-1 .=
5-
:‘»-‘ ‘\ i
'2 \; Iron Age Pottery
t 4,% D
in Northern Mesopotamia, Northern Syria and
\

LE ' South-Eastern Anatolia

Papers presented at the meetings of the international "table ronde"
'“ -lgi at Heidelberg (1995) and Nieboréw (1997)
Z4
-"1 Ei:5
and other contributions
1‘?
.‘ ,

Q '
edited by
5fl; wj;:
' Arnuif I-IAUSLEITER and Andrzej RBICHE

,.,
st‘
W
3;:
1
\
/
'1
A

A
Kr
I

.§
!:z

4‘(lgt
¢ IL
1\,

u
*- ...,. t. . ...,._,. L__A,_.,___.,__4___:__r__ . _ __ _ __ ___:;;_;_____ __ ,....___ , _ ,

1;‘ 1

>1x
1'14 1‘
‘g=
ii

ti?
| Altertumskunde des Vorderen Urients Iron Age Pottery
E
in Northern Mesopotamia, Northern Syria and
_ Archaologische Studien zur Kultur und Geschichte
South-Eastern Anatolia
Qix des Alten Orients
?apers presented at the meetings of the international "table ronde"
at Heidelberg (1995) and Nieborow (1997)
.,C,as;+§=‘*—;5»v :
<=-t and other contributions
i'>
1; , Band 10
edited by
V, =
*2» a
iii
kin hemusgegebcn Von Amulf HAUSLEITER and Andrzej Reici-ie
l

5 Manfried Dietrich — Reinhard Dittmann -— Oswald Loretz

I-5; '

‘ii '
l,~
41
~24
if’:
1;?
9/

;¢,,.
W
3::
V‘
H
1.
l

1
ll
ra
I;

1‘it :5
|

'55:
:1
K
‘5
'

n :
1
ii
it

if 1999
Ugarit~Verlag
Mfinster
1999
Ugariv-Verlag
Miinster
z="!.H'..'l.’.=".‘.-t\ ~.. . ..
‘§f;‘?);r~&fy
£%=E@z *;T:?ie<=:

liii ;
4%:
-A--.~ %'J'_55'Tl/‘ __ _ __ W - -_ - - __—-_-. -.v.~-..~.wW.-,.-,---.-._-,,.i-,.-~-»----——-—~»-v--~-»?----------------------~ """""~- W“

‘ 1

Table of Contents
'5
12
-.I Preface vii

Programmes of the meetings x

Part I The Heartland of Assyria

1. Neo-Assyrian Pottery from Nineveh

111I by STEPHEN Lomsoen ............................................................................. .. 3-15
1 2. Neo-Assyrian Potteryfrom Kallm/Nimriid - with special reference
to the Polish excavations in the "Central Building" (1974-76)
by ARNULF Hnusuaman .......................................................... ............. 17-60
3. Die Keramik der Areale A-F in Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta
Die Deutscne Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnanme by CLAUDIA SCHMIDT ...................... .................................................... .. 61-90
4. The Nineviie Countryside. Pots and Places of the Eski~M0siil Region
Iran Age Pottery in Northern Mesopotamia, Northern Syria and South- in the Neo-Assyrian and Post-Assyrian Periods
Eastern Anatolia; papers presented at the meetings of the international "table by Anrnozw GREEN ............................................................................ .. 9t-126
ronde" at Heidelberg (1995) and Nieborow (1997) and other contributions I ed.
by Arnuif Hausleiter and Andrzej Reiche. 5. Graves, Chronology and Ceramics: Some Considerations on Neo~
»
- Monster: Ugarit-Verl., 1999 Assyrian Assur -
t

L.
i (Altertumskunde des Vorderen Orients; Bd. 10) by ARNULF Hnosteima .................................................................... .. 127-147
ISBN 3-927120-78-2 W”
Part II The Khabur Valley

6. An Empire and its Sherds

by REINHARD BERNBECK ................................................................... .. 15t»1'/'2
I 7. Prospection archéologiqac do Hour-Khabar occidentale (Syria du
1
w
1 I
N.E. ). Preliminary Information on the Pottery of the Iron Age
by Snzmno ANASTASIO .................................................................... .. 173-191
1 8. Die eisenzeitliche Keramik der.TA V0-Geléindebegehung dcs
1 Unteren Hfibfir-Gebiets "e
© 1999 Ugarit-Verlag, Miinster by DANIELE MORANDI BONACOSSI ..................................................... .. 193-229
*11»
=11 , Alle Rechte vorbehalten 9. Iron Age Potteryfrom Tell Rad Shaqrah (North-East Syria)
Alt rights preserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
by ANDRZEJ REICHB ........................................................................... 23 E-259
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
|-rZ\.;Q1.2, -.2
electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise,
6 Af without the prior permission of the publisher. Part III On the Euphrates and to the West
Herstellung: Weihert-Druck GmbH, Darmstadt
F650 -32 Printed in Germany 10. Iron Age Potteryfrom Tille Hoyiik, South-Eastern Turkey
1 by STUART R. BLAYLOCK ................................................................. .. 263-286
=1 1 /\/if ISBN 3»927120-78-2
Til i1 it. Neo-Assyrian Pottery from Tell Ahmar
)
4
.
ISSN 0948-1737 by ANDREW S. Jnmnsson ................................................................... .. 287-308
Z 76
-if \,'_1,? _, ‘J
Printed on acid-free paper
.v "5

°1?673 "' li~=| 1 iii‘ ‘

ei nun-an-nu-_ W **
...-__._~_s>....-..-<........._.-..... . .__.~. -.,~w..-.-.-. —m-. W. -- -~ ~- :—-- V -~—-<-~-»--=----»~—-i»~~-»~~~-

vi Table of Contents
ff]
l
12. The Iron Age Ceramics from Tell Jurn Kabir Preface
ll.’ l
ll
ll by Znsrnn EIDEM and RAPIEL ACKERMANN ......................................... .. 309-324
l

13. Die eisenzeitliche Kerczmik 1/on Tell Shel/ch Hasscm (Syrien) In the last couple of years, interest in the archaeology of the Iron Age has generally
l ll by ELLEN $CHNElDER ....................................................................... .. 325-346 increased. Fieldwork and study of settlement patterns as well of the history in the
region has been expanded during the last decades, though under different
14. ”ASsyrische" Gefafiformeri ans Tell Shaikh Hassan (Syrien) und ihre
conditions and with different approaches. New excavations and surveys added new
I Stellung innerhalb der Keramik ales assyrischen Einfluflgebietes
\
I
information to a considerable amount of existing assemblages from earlier
I.
by ELLEN SCHNEIDER ........................................................................ .. 347375 excavations. The topic of this publication, "Iron Age Pottery in Northern
i5. Catal0guistics.' The Experience at Tell Afis, Syria Mesopotamia, Northern Syria and South-Eastern Anatolia" forms part of this
it
l by IDA OGGIANO.................................................................................. 377-402 general interest.
i
-
V.
16. Die eisenzeitliche Keramik des Lidar Héiyiik in view of this interest, the idea to intensify the international exchange on iron
l
l by Uwn MULLER ............................................................................... .. 403-434 Age Pottery in Northern Mesopotamia and adjacent regions seemed legitimate. In
|
1992, during the Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale in Heidelberg the editors
discussed the plan of a meeting for the first time. Two years later, on the Berlin
Appendices Rencontre, Uwe Muller and Arnulf Hausleiter decided to hold a "round table"
focussed on Iron Age pottery. It was considered as a matter of priority to bring

l
Bibliography ..................................................................................... .. 437-472 together younger colleagues working on qualification theses on Iron Age material
Index ................................................................................................ .. 473-491 or being involved into current excavation projects. The large geographical area as
represented by the sites (see Fig. i), and the different research conditions were very
interesting and, in view of their diversity, at the same time problematic.
From 24th to 26th February i995, a group of scholars met at the Institut fur Ur-
und Frtihgeschichte und Vorderasiatische Archaologie of the Ruprecht~Karis-
E Universitat in Heidelberg. The meeting was predominantly characterised by the
presentation and analysis of results from excavations and surveys (cf. p. xi).
Original potsherds from several sites brought to the meeting helped to illustrate
what had been stated in the papers before. In 1995 we discussed publication plans.
However, this idea was postponed to a subsequent meeting which was scheduled for
1997 . As a substitute, an unpublished collection of papers was distributed among
the participants.
The next conference was conceived to concentrate less on the presentation of
"facts than on the discussion of specific problems within the Iron Age pottery
assemblages. This time the meeting was held in another European university town,
the city of Warsaw. From 28th February until 2nd March 1997 the group of
.
scholars stayed at the baroque palais of Nieborow near Warsaw, at present owned
I
E
1
by the National Museum, formerly by the Radziwill family. The concept, papers
and discussion focussed mainly but not exclusively on aspects of ceramic
chronology within the Iron Age (cf. p. xii). In 1997, participants and organisers of
the "table ronde“ agreed to pubiish the papers read at both meetings.

Some notes on organisation and contents of the book: As a criterion for the
sequence of the contributions served geographical borders, here represented mainly
by river names used for the chapters‘ headlines. However, they do not necessarily
t correspond to existing cultural frontiers. Geographically, the articles are generally
arranged in direction from east to west.
4
h
4 Within the Heartland ofAssyria (chapter I), one focus is set on pottery corpuses
from excavations in the capitals of the Assyrian empire. For the first time since
1933, Ne0~Assyrian pottery from Nineveh is published, this time from excavations

i
w ---------------- --_- ._.. __ ,_ II --wf- ’******" W»
. - I : _‘ ‘ ' 3
' .,_....'._._ .1. V .4. - '.
 M.
x,
K17!
W

viii Preface Preface ix

1 ti

of the University of Berkeley in the late 80s and 1990 in an affluent private house and politics‘), although the earlier part of the period is archaeologicaliy
near the Mashki-Gate. The pottery record from British excavations at Nimrud underrepresented. The sherd collections from two survey projects, the French on
i always it reference point for Neo—A.ssyrian pottery studies, is reviewed and enlarged
by material from Polish excavations in the Central Building (19'74~76). Though
the western area of the Upper Khabur valley, and the 'I‘AVO~Survey on the Lower
Khabur. the latter carried out some 20 years ago, try to fill this severe gap of
both urban sites bear a potential for 8th and 9th century pottery, the material archaeological material, which still exists in the Assyrian heartland as well. Rad
. li
l
‘L il l |
presented in this volume is dated to the 7th century BC. To these assemblages Neo~
Assyrian pottery from an excavated stratigraphic sequence at Kar~'l‘ukulti~Ninurta
Shaqrah, a site near Hasseke, offers instead a Neo- and/or Post-Assyrian pottery
complex.
\
lliii is added - previously known as Neo~Assyrian through two governors mentioned in The region on the Euphrates and to the West (chapter Ill) covers the third part
J5,
administrative texts. The presence of both, Micldle- and Neo—Assyrian pottery of this book. Starting in present-day Turkey, one of the key-sites of the Euphrates
:3I1‘‘l allows statements on the extent of the pottery tradition at this gii¢_ area, Tille Hoytik, illustrates the problem of change and continuity in the Late
ll:
“*—-1;”... /-'7'” ‘-."\'= r "_ m" — W 7 _, _
Bronze/Early Iron Age transition and the role of local style and different "foreign"
Tillc-lrloyiilt o‘_ ,_/ i H / < 1‘,/" (i.e. also Assyrian) influence within a stratified pottery corpus. Excavations at
\ 7 Ql.llll11‘Hfi}IU5l\ y ‘ _'
- , /D ~\ Upper Tigri
, Lidar Hoyiik, situated on the opposite side of the Euphrates river, revealed an
T l ~\ ' '
impressive sequence of stratified pottery which forms another reference point for
-_--.-it\ r K "V"
‘TQH:\hmtll"~"” 5”’ “ \ I _}\\.v 4'5 1 the pottery chronology within the region and beyond. Iurn Kabir, a smaller site
.‘Ivv'. l:c_!!Jlt‘iLlGfi;'_\\.»$<"T‘.r- Elliim
.- Kglbifl
. 3:"" X T H .-\b at \: {’_l__/_‘_I‘*'9““‘
-- “}~;”/
. '.=;_. :5\ .1
._-/' "'L) .’ _ C :"-'-t.l.i’i: .TCllR11dSil3Ql‘fll\_;:~\-\L3~€l|_RljI;lI'-T-' km,l,\n~¢S|;i;|y|\;||-| O within the Syrian Tishrin area, is another example for the possible presence of
i-1' .‘
fl.-_;1
.“~
_ ._._: m__
o1‘¢[| ,\ii;'_,
OTell Sheikri Hussan;
, 5 _, .'
' " "
....../'
--~»
pu ,
Nineveh
i '1
(
V
-
-
\ 1 Nll'\'1l'lJLl_V H.
.\ \ Early iron Age pottery, while the Nco-Assyrian pottery corpus from Area C at Tell
Ahinar dates to the 7th century BC. As to its cultural position, the Khabur valley
fa
~, .
P ,v _:_
_
.._i y L‘ . K _ \ 1
Q
~: ger4»/Mb”, l'l‘i:iiShi::l:l>l'la1:i:1d
-J \Vudi'1\;ij
/J
‘ ,oi<;;’-tiiirliiiiizlji-nt;i?__\ -. pottery shows already some links to "western" sites like e.g. Tell Abu Danne. But
i ; I _ Q-it at Shi:rgaW\s>ui'/ V. - there are also strong parallels to the central Assyrian pottery complex (cf. the
l ‘ 5.3; ‘ \ rd 4"";
-,‘~/ _ {tr
results of the analysis of the TAVO-Survey material). On the Euphrates, affinities
_. a , -
- \g/"‘/ . . to the west are much stronger, though in Assyrian provincial centres as Tell Ahmar
3»-/’ ~. .\ /1.»...
li
ti

if/< p My __g i I, H
l presence of local and "Assyrianising" pottery was traced at the site of Tell Sheikh
i
Fig. I Map of Northern Mesopotamia
“I
l §Vhereas tlge Alssyrian capitals have always been in the centre of interest, and this
or more t an SQ years, the rural landscape of Assyria irnmediately north of these
capitals was studied only during the 80s of the 20th century in the Eski-Mosul
1 iglgrgge pjroljecg. The publication of thepsites of Qasrij Cliff and Khirbet Qasrij in
an in 997_ot Khirbet Khatuniyeh, at present the largest Neo-Assyrian
V pottery corpus published, had a strong impact on the debate of the archaeological
3:iiterrahlisat;on_ of the Neo- and Post-Assyrian periods in pottery. The overview on
I
_ e are aeo ogical record and the analysis of Neo- and Post-Assyrian pottery given
in this volume opens the way to first considerations on the settlement hierarchy in
the Eski-Mosul region. Additionally, the relationship between fabric and time as for
its relevance for the differentiation between Neo- and Post-Assyrian periods is
questioned.
As to the ancient Assyrian capital, Assur, study on the chronology and
composition of assemblages concentrates on graves, because pottery from other
sources at this site is still rare.
”Comp2ged to the Assyrian heartland, archaeological activity in the Khabur
va ey (c. apter II) goes on ' uninterruptedly. Numerous excavations were
accoinpanie by survey operations throughout the area. Six years after the
publication of the A31] survey the combination of archaeological and historical
information together with an elaborated analysis of the settlement data offers new
insight into the settlement development during the Neo»Assyrian period (‘pottery
("raisin we 7, f} 7\P/>~’.~ the pottery seems fairly identical to material from Nimrud and Nineveh. The
Hassan, part of the rescue excavations initiated because of the construction of the
first Euphrates dam in Syria. Apart from the presentation of the local pottery
repertoire of the iron Age, it becomes visible that the link to pottery from the
Palestinian/Levantine region is much stronger than to other regions.
The material from Tell Afis is most relevant for the study of Iron Age pottery in
Syria. The discussion of the cataloguing process of pottery from excavations at this
site underlines the importance of methods of pottery analysis which are not just
restricted to the morphological-typological approach through time. The increasing
relevance of the results of technological observations including micro~analysis
becomes visible in this contribution as well as in other contributions to this book.
The articles of this volume showithe wide range of diversity of the subject as well as
the impact of the state of research within the different regions. A uniform approach
or result was not intended and cannot be achieved. The editors consider the
contributions pieces to a mosaic serving to improve the knowledge of the
archaeology of the Iron Age in Northern Mesopotamia and its adjacent regions.
Due to its relatively low quantity of archaeological as well as historical sources
within the area the transition from Late Bronze to Iron Age is less represented in
this book. Authors and editors are conscious of the fact that this particular period
needs further investigation. Naturally, pottery forms only one part of the features of
I a "culture", though, as archaeologists very well know, the most frequently found
one. if the contributions in this volume facilitate and stimulate further discussions

A ;\».,. ‘v"t.‘~""'—""1"l—»‘/,',c3,.1 i ' '~-‘ , " I - ~ ~ > -r M — r =i1,a.,-ii;--..»,-..;;¢.1,~‘

V -' ,~_,;t,a-¢¢..,,e:ts,....,..
_ _ U p YA'lY
_ V i V _ H _,,,._
_ , ' V 1 r I — _ , , I _-
I _‘ "W s "WWW s — .___ ..__. _. T

. V _ _ , .; _~ t - ». :
V .,;.,,.'..._ I. , .).- V .
" VV -»-.--= »- ~ 1;
/IQ > l
i

‘ {fut
;; Preface

. l.
then one of the main goals of the "table ronde" and this publication would have
been fulfilled. Programmes of the meetings
As to the bibliographic data it was decided to locate the full references at the
iil end of the book. At the end of each contribution, instead, there appears the Heidelberg J 995
ti abbreviation of author's name and year of publication. In this short listings,
2:4
F publications of one author from the same year are numbered according to the
Friday, 24th February ‘I
bibliography at the end of the volume (e.g., l992a~c). As a consequence, in some of
it the contributions there appears a 1992-: date without a previous 1992a or b 3 pm. Welcome (ARNULF HAUSLEITER, Uwn MULLER)
“ ti. reference. 2.30 p.m. Tell Afis (IDA Ooomuo)‘
3.15 p.m. Tell Jirtderis (DIETRICH S{fRENi~lAGEN)
if Acknowledgements
I|
4 pm. Break
| The editors and participants of the meetings are indebted to several individuals and 4.15 p.m. Lidar Heyttk (Uwn MULLER)
é institutions: For the organisation of the 1995 meeting, thanks go to Uwe Muller for
1
his effective contribution to its excellent arrangement. Further thanks are due the 5 p.m. Title Hayitk (STUART R. BLAYLOCK)
University of Heidelberg. In 1997, the editors were assisted by Franciszek M. 5.45 pm. Break
l 5 p.m, Tell Sheik/t I-Iasscm (ELLEN SCHNEIDER)
Stepniowski. To him, the National Museum Warsaw, the Komitet Badari
Naukowych (Committee for Scientific Research), the University of Warsaw and the 6.45 p.m. Tell Jurn Kabir (JESPER EIDEM)
l..udwig*Maximilians-Universitat Mtinehen we are grateful for support and help.
Welcome guests at the meetings were Kim Duistermaat, Barbara Heiwing, Marta Saturday, 25th February 9
Luciani, Anna Smogorzewska, Piotr Bieliriski, Christoph Gerber, Rafa} Kolinski 9.30 a.m. Tell Ahmar (ANDREW S. Jameson)
and others. 10.15 a.m. Tell Barri (Srerauo ANASTASIO)
As regards the present publication, we convey our warmest thanks to the editors
l ll a.m. Break
l of the series Altertumslcttnde ales Vorderen Orients, Munster, for their enthusiastic
i. support. With appreciation we thank those colleagues who - not attending the r r15 a.m. Rad Shaqrah and Abe Hafw (ANDREI RE¥¢HE>
meetings ~ followed the invitation to the publication. Finaliy, the experience and E2 a.m. Upper Khabur Survey (BERTILLE LYONNBTI XAVXER FAIVRE)
knowledge of Lida Perin was extremely useful in the area of modern computer 12.45 a.m. Lunch
imaging. 2.30 p.m. Wadi Ajlj Survey (REINHARD BERNBECK)
3.15 p.m. Tall S2211 Hamad (SABINA KULEMANN-OSSEN)
Berlin/Warsaw, October E999
4 p.m. Break
£5
Arnulf Hausleiter and Andrzej Reiche 4.15 p.m Kalhu/Nimrud (HELEN MCDONALD)
5 p_m_ Assttr and Kar-Tukttlti-Ninttfla (Anuutn HAUSLBi'1"ER)
I
5.45 pm. Break
6 p,n'1, Zendan-e Suleiman (K£~3RSTiN MAKSI-3N*)

Sunday, 26th February s ”

l() a.m. Plenum
12.30 a.m. Lunch
2 pm. Final session

‘ OGGIANO 1997.

l """ '7; % ._~.

. _
t. . _ V . V W" W _ _ 'M_’W_Wv__"_,__(_WW _f_V,,_,,‘w,,, , W,.,._.fi._‘~.,,.‘.,,,...,,_;,:,..,.,.,,p...,,_,,,,,..,,. —~— ~ » _ . > H _ ; _ H -$5 _. _ . » E , 1 .

’ . '__.. .1. > '

 ___ _ »..,.,,.,,,......,..a.........................i.....m , .. .

xii Programmes

}
Nieborow 1997
5
; Friday, 28th February
g 4.30 pm. Weicome (ARNULF HAUSLEITER, ANDRZEJ REICHE, FRANCISZEK M.
STEPNIOWSKI)
5 pm. A model ofAnalysis and Elaboration of Data forCatalogarion and
\
\
Study ofpottery (IDA OGGIANO*)
i 3
S
5.45 p.m. Discussion

V Saturday, 1st March 1997

~winwmw -=:Qg=e ;~
V 9 a.m. The Earliest Iron Age Pottery of Tille Hayiik (STUART R. BLAYLOCK)
9.45 am. The Iron Age Sequence at Tell Jurn Kabir/Syria (JESPER EIDEM/ Part I
:_ RAHEL ACKERMANN’-“)
10.30 a.m. Coffee Break ‘
1
10.45 a.m Ne0- and P0st~Assyrian Potteryfrom the Survey in NW-Habur- Valley The Heartland of Assyria
(STEFANO ANASTASIO)
X
11.30 am Assernblages, Chronology and Geographical Distribution: An
Evaluation of Single Period Iron Age Sites in the Upper Tigris Area
(BRADLEY PARKER)’
12.15 am Lunch l
2 p.m. Neo~Assyrian Potteryfrom Khirbet Khatuniyeh, Eski~Mosul Dam
Salvage Project (ANTHONY GREEN)
2.45 pm. Neo-Assyrian Potteryfrom Tell Rijm, Eski-Mosul Dam Salvage
Project (ANDRZE1 Rmcrrz) V
Notes on the Neo-Assyrian Potteryfrom the Central Building at
Nimrud (ANDRZEJ REICHE)
l
1
3.30 p.m. Coffee Break
' 3.45 p.m. Aspects ofNeo-Assyrian Potteryfrom the Graves ofAssur (ARNULF
HAUSLEITER)
1 4.30 pm. Rationing bowls ( ?) in the Potteryfrom Bijan (FRANCISZEK M.
STEPNIOWSKI)
5.15 p.m. Coffee Break |
I
5.30 p.m. Assyrian Influences on the Pottery of Tell Sheikh Hassan (ELLEN
SCI-lNEIDER)**

Sunday, 2nd March 1997

i
9 a.m. Final Session
5 10.30 am. Visit to the Radziwill palace at Nieboréw
E
|
* read in absence ** cancelled

2 cf. PARKER 2991.

2“ »,/ _> ’ V 1 ;\_ 1 .

. > L _: f , 1 . .

' .,,_.‘. '._._ _L. . .'-. ' ' .-

..._»_,.._.._\..___..._ .,...____i'.;: _ .si»,.W....t..c__
<

Neo~Assyrian Pottery from Nineveh

STEPHEN LUMSIJEN
Copenhagen

“\
Introduction
This brief report is aimed at offering a preliminary assessment of the corpus of
Neo-Assyrian pottery from the University of California, Berkeley investigations at
Nineveh during 1987, 1989-90.' Fuller treatments of this material will appear in
the Excavation Volume of the Nineveh Reports.
Under the overall direction of David Stronach, investigations during these
seasons were undertaken in the following locations (STRONACH/LUMSDEN 1992;
STRONACH 1997) (Fig. 1): On Kuyunjik, in Sennacheribs Palace (John Russell)
¢4—%l‘*$';4:="’I“‘-T=“—‘4'-E“*
(RUSSELL 1998; 1999); in a gully on the eastern edge of Kuyunjik (KG - Augusta
McMahon and Pierre Bikai) (MCMAHON 1998); at the Halzi Gate (HG ~ David
Stronach and Stuart Brown); in the northwestern corner of the lower town (NWM -
E‘; Pierre Bikai); just inside the Mashki Gate (MG22 - Stephen Lurnsden and Leigh-
Ann Bedal); and in a survey of the northern lower town (LTP - Stephen Lunisden).
The largest collections of Nco-Assyrian pottery come from the excavations at
the NWM and MG22 Areas, and from the surface survey and welt-hole
investigations of the Lower Town ‘Project. Of these, by far the greatest number
come from the pottery production center in the NWM Area. Most of the pottery
from these excavations and the survey appear to fit well within the 7th Century BC
corpus known from other sites. The lowest levels at MG22, only tested in two
confined areas, may contain late 8th Century BC pottery. The pottery from the lower
levels of the two well-hole sections studied on the Lower Town Mound (LUMSDEN
1991; in press; STRONACH/LUMSDEN 1992) seem to carry the sequence farther into
the 8th and 9th Centuries BC, and perhaps even earlier. This paper will deal
exclusively with the pottery from the investigations in the MG22 Area.

Area MG22 ” .
In 1989 and 1990 excavations were carried out in an area that had been disturbed
some 20 years earlier when farmfhouses were removed during the excavation and
fin reconstruction of a city gate generally accepted as Sennacherib’s Mashki Gate
(MADHLOOM 1968148-50; 1969: 45-7; READE 1978: 53). The main excavation unit
uncovered the partial plans of three successive buildings just inside the gate
(STRONACI-l/LUMSDI-EN 1992: 228~9; STRONACH 1997: 31345) (Fig. 2).
Excavations up to 1990 revealed most about the plan of the second building
level (Fig. 3). Although incompletely uncovered, its paved courtyard, associated

i ' 1 would like to thank Arnulf Hauslcitcr for inviting mo to contribute to this volume even
though I was unable to participate in the conference at Nieborow, and also for sharing his
knowledge of Neo~Assyrian ceramics. Thanks also to David Stronach for the opportunity to
work at Nineveh.

1 iiilllt-5-z=il 5.! hive ‘;:'i3“j

'22 " V ~ - V library
.1. '51
,.;-- >, ,. , '.,.< ~ -» —. » it _ , I ~ v ~ I - > V ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ ——""* pp-umqqq _ ,————————~ _ _

I i . 1 V . _ ; ; ; ; 1 ,
,,___,_,_,___,_,_,,__,_,_,_,__,'__,._,.
ll
;an"Rf-a»41-~%-
:___ _ -- ~>~:w an - -~-»--r~<~- ~ -r ’— *'~=/" —'””"'"’“"'
4 The Heartland ofAssyria
suites of rooms, and elaborate stone door sockets and niche drains match well with
house plans known from Ashur, most especially with the Rates Hans (PREUSSER
1954: pl. 9). The function, however, of the Mashki Gate building is not clear. its
close proximity to the gate may indicate a functional connection as a "Gate House"
such as that mentioned for the Shamash Gate in a 7th Century BC house inheritance
:-.r=r_=. 1-*4‘;
text (KWASMAN 1988: 80; LUMSDEN in press).
The second building could not have been constructed before the end of the 8th
Century BC, when Sennacherib made Nineveh his capital, because an inscribed
brick from his "Palace Without Rival" was found in the fill between this building
and the earlier, third building level. It seems certain, then, that at the least the two
latest versions of the building inside the gate date to the 7th Century; a provisional
date for the second building may be the first half of the 7th century, while the
uppermost building may date to the second half of the 7th century (to 612 BC). It
seems probable that the only "Post-Assyrian" - or later, pre»modern - activity in the
main excavation unit of MG22 may be represented by the numerous pits dug
through the remains of the uppermost building. However, not far away, in the
"Flats below Kuyunjik", Campbell Thompson reported Romano-Parthian remains
(CAMPBELL THOMPSON/MALLOWAN 1933: 75-9).Madhi0om also uncovered
Hellenistic and Islamic deposits between MG22 and Kuyunjik (MADHLOOM I968:
50-1).
MG22 Ceramics
I begin with some general statements about the pottery from Area MG22:
1
1. Potsherds are relatively minute. Very few complete - or substantially intact -
E
profiles were uncovered.
2. As at other 7th Century sites, surface and fabric colors range from pink and
l
reddish buff to white and greenish, and grey. A reddish buff surface color
represents by far the greatest percentage, followed by the whitish variety.
7 3. Vegetable~tempered wares are the norm. Mineral-tempered wares are very rare.
4. The clay is fairly well levigated, with few inclusions.
5. Shapes match well with the basic 7th Century categories published from Nimrud
(LINES 1954; OATES, J. l959), Ashur (HAUSLEITER 1995; 1996), Qasrij Cliff (but,
also, to a certain extent, Khirbet Qasrij) (CURTIS 1989), Khirbet Khatuniyeh
(CURTIS/GREEN 199?), and other sites.
6. In addition to the standard ware (and some cooking ware), fine ware is
represented by fairly plentiful "palace ware" sherds, including many examples of
the dimpled ware, as well as a few glazed sherds. The grey tripod bowls are also
fairly common. Some stamped ware is present (rosettes), as well as a fragment of a
ram-headed rhyton. Imported ceramics (or, locally made versions?) may be present
in the form of a red-polished ware which is probably Phoenician (Patricia Bikai,
pets. comm.) as well as by possible examples of Godin II ware. Pot~stands are fairly
common, and, in addition to the standard Neo-Assyrian lamp, the so-called "cup
r XXXV/9; HAUSLEITER 1996: pl. XCVIII/1, 5-6; CURTIS/GREEN 1997: figs. 28/2
i and saucer" is also represented in the MG22 repertoire.
7. Evidence from MG22 and the deep we1l-hole sections on the Lower Town
Mound may indicate a possible change in pottery production at Nineveh when it
became the imperial capital in the 7th Century BC As noted above, 7th Century
ceramics from MG22 are uniformly relatively finely ievigated and finished,
ti
ii
l
& ”7* ~ it — ’ ' ' ~ -- I‘ "
...,.,.j...- ;. ..'-. _ v.
Nineveh 5
suggesting an industry that mass-produced a utilitarian, standardized and
serviceable table and storage ware with little attention to surface detail, but
competently made. In contrast, pre-7th Century ceramics at Nineveh (admittedly
based on relatively little evidence), with their mineral inclusions, frequently
marring the surface, which is often highly polished, seem to be characterized by
more attention spent on surface finish rather than to the production of a
standardized and mass-produced utilitarian ware. Although speculative to a large
extent, such a development may indicate a change ~ in scale and type - of ceramic
production in the 7th Century when, presumably, the demand increased
exponentially at the largest city in the Near Eastern world.
Because so much of the material from the MG22 excavations comes from
disturbed contexts - due both to ancient and modern activity - the pottery presented
here represents a sample from a single context: the fill between the second building
and uppermost building in the main excavation unit. These potsherds, then, come
from a context that probably dates to sometime in the middle decades of the 7th
Century BC What follows is a very brief summary of the main types from this
deposit.
Bowls
The entire range of common 7th Century bowl types published from other core
Assyrian sites is present at Nineveh; most are also found in this single context in
the MG22 Area excavations. Present, but relatively infrequent, are simple bowls
with plain rims (1) (LINES I954: pl. XXXVII/i; CURTIS/GREEN 1997: figs. 29/19
and 35/ 109). More common are the carinated, shallow bowls with flaring rim (2-3)
(O/irns, J. 1959: pi. XXXVI/31; rlnustetrea 1995: pl. 9/52; CURTIS 1989: fig.
30/107-110), and the type with a thickened and flattened rim (4) (OATES, J. 1959:
pt. XXXV/4; H/iusterrnn 1996: pl. LXXXVI/1-5; Courts 1989: fig. 7/2;
CURTIS/GREEN 1997: figs. 29/20 and 30/41).
There are also types (5-6) (Cunrts 1989: fig. 23/9; Cunrrs/Gtu-zen E997: fig.
35/113) which develop into the quite numerous category of bowls with inverted and
thickened rim (Cuarts 1989: 47, figs. 28-9; Courts/Gtuaun 1997: 88, fig. 35/122-
29), for which there are many variations in size and rim shape (7-11). As at other
sites, another common variety is thetype with ribbed rim (12-14) (OATES, I. 1959:
pl. XXXV/13-14, 25; l"lAUSLEi'I"r'ZR 1.995: pl. 6/9-11; CURTIS 1989: fig. 2'7).
In common with other Neo-Assyrian assemblages, by far the most numerous
type in this single context, as well as in the Nineveh assemblage as a whole, is the
carinated bowl with everted rim. Simple versions of this type (15-16) (HAUSLEITER
I995: pl. 9/50; CURTIS/GREEN 1997: fig. 36/140) lead to softer, s-shaped
carinations and slightly everted rims (17-18) (HAUSLEITER E995: pl. 9/45;
CURTIS/GREEN 1997: fig. 36/137). Most numerous in this type, however, are those
with sharp carinations and more everted rims (19-23) (OATES, J. 1959: pl.
and 33/90).
Jars
Dominating this class of vessel are medium- and large-sized jars with narrow necks
and thickened and everted rims - types common, of course, at other core Assyrian
3 I 1.‘ J '- - 1' _ »:... _I :.. 1,; . .. . .. _ 1:
1.. .2 »- ;- _ . V i Ill i in pV - p|_4nn.'_r_1n r ’
»
_a._.__-a_.._..___.._..,.._.._..... __ , ....................M.,,,,,,,,-- .._.»_- -.. ,, _,,,,_ _ g___

6 The Heartland ofAssyria Nineveh 7

I

sites as well. This series, too, includes simple versions, with thickened, flared rims qttality of the standard ware and the numerous examples of fine ware are what one
(24) (Cut-"ms 1989: fig. 32/151; CURTIS/GREEN 1997: fig. 50/241), those with might expect from what has been suggested elsewht-zre (LUMSDEN 1991: 2; in press;
i t
'1
7
:1 thickened and everted rims (25-27) (OATES, J. 1959: pl. XXXVIII/95, 97; STRQNACH 1997: 313-15) was an elite neighborhood in the central city of the
Hnustnrren 1995: pl. 8/29-30; CUR'I'1S/GREEN 1997: figs. 39-41/166-81), examples empire.
S.
with slightly incurved, thickened rims (28-29) (HAUSLEITER 1996: pl. CXXIVI
1,6,8; CURTIs 1989: fig. 33/166-8; CURTIS/GREEN 1997: fig/11/183, 185), and more
\
I elaborate types (30-31) (CURTIS 1989: fig. 34/188', CURTIS/GREEN 1997: fig. References cited
I 1 34/92). CAMPBELL THOMPSON/MAl.I..()WAN 1933, Cuarrs 1989, CURTIS/GREEN 1997,
Another common type represented at Nineveh is the large, straight-sided HAUSLEITER 1995; 1996, KWASMAN 1988, LlNES 1954, LUMSDEN 1991; in press,
storage vessel. As at other sites these take the form of versions with a variety of Mnnrnoom 1968; 1969, MCMAHON 1998, O/m";s, .1. 1959, Pasossen I954, READE
rolled rims (32-35) (LINES 1954: pl. XXXIX/2-3; HAUSLEITER 1995: pl. ll/82-3; 1978, RUSSELL 1998; 1999,S'1‘RONACI-I 1997. STRONACH/LUMSDEN I992.
i i Cuarrs 1989: fig. 37; CURTIS/GREEN: fig. 42).
Other types include wide-mouthed versions of the jars with everted rims (36-37)
(DATES, J. 1959: pl. XXXVHI/99; CURTIS 1989: figs. 11/51 and 32/162, 164). Figs. 1-8 on pp. 8-15.
Deep, wide-mouthed vases are represented (38-39) (I-IAUSLEITER 1996: CXXXV/'3;
CURTIS 1989: figs. 12/72, 38/248, 39/253), as well as pots with short, or no necks
and thickened rims (40-41) (CURTIS 1989: fig. 33/182; CURTIS/GREEN 1997: figs.
32/71, 35/207, 47/219). Hole-mouthed cooking pots include simple forms known
from other sites (42) (_HAUSLE.ITt=.R 1996: pl. CXXXVIIE/1; CURTIS 1989: fig.
41/286, 288; CURTIS/GREEN 1997: figs. 32/81, 53/315) and more elaborate versions
(43) apparently not represented elsewhere.
I1

Miscellaneous
Beakers, familiar from other sites, are present (44-47) (LINES 1954: pl. XXXVIH/4;
Hxustnrren 1995: pls. 8/37, 11/77; CURTiS £989: fig. 41/47-8; CURTIS/GREEN
1997: figs. 32/72~4, 38/160). Another type in the M622 repertoire, and said to be
common at other sites, is the miniature, squat jar with everted rim (48~49) (OATES,
J. 1959: pl. XXXVII/76; CURTIS 1989: fig. 32/148-50). Bases follow the general
Neo-Assyrian categories: various types of ring bases are most common (50-51)
(CURTIS 1989: fig. 14; CURTIS/GREEN 1997: fig. 53/319-20); nipple bases are also
nurnerons (52-53) (CURTIS 1989: figs. 14/96-9, 43/311; HAUSLEITER 1995: pl.
8/39); standard types of storage jar bases are present (54-55) (HAUSLEITER 1995: pl.
£2/88; CURTIS 1989: fig. 43/325; CURTIS/GREEN 1997: fig. 39/167-8), as well as
pedestal bases, perhaps for goblets (56-57) (OATES, 5. 1959: pl. XXXVIU 54-7;
HAUsLE17‘ER 1996: pl. CIX). Finally, earinated bowls and beakers in "palace ware"
are well represented in the MG22 excavations (58-60) (LINES 1954: pl. XXXVIII 7-
9; HAUSLEITER 1996: pl. CV; 1995: pl. 11/74; OATES, J. 1959: pl. XXXVII/'64).
I;
if
ii
1)I
i Conclusion
I
This brief summary of the pottery from a single mid-7th Century BC context in the
i MG22 Area excavations places the Nineveh assemblage firmly in the long-
established corpus of late Neo-Assyrian ceramics. Of the rim sherds collected
during the 1990 season in the excavations in MG22, carinated bowls with everted
4 rims, bowls with inverted and thickened rims, jars with narrow necks and
u
thickened and everted rims, and the large straight-sided storage vessels account for
almost 80% of the total. Although collected from a non-palatial context, the high

1
-i

. = » : . 9 . : \ v
 . . . . . . . . . . . . ._.__,- . _ ;; ggg

R 8 The Heartland ofAssyria Nineveh

l
. %\\ HU GATE I
it.5' ‘I ADAD one /\/HMAH
I, \\
I / 1 \\
l /' \\ . st
NERGAL one ,1 \\\ I
/ ‘\ '1 \ \ 3.
SIN one /w ‘. ,»’ \ \ I
\ / SHIBANHSA one
I \\ 1 \ \ \ I
‘ /I \ \‘
NWM \_ ,' \\
\ I I‘ I

- . 1 I I
\ \
\I
»)‘\_
n
‘ la \\
Far nhouses
, MG ,-' ,I MUSHLALU \
A MASHKI GATE / GATE _,
qr
II
\\ 1‘ Z
J I’ I
I
Il /
U 4’

"-9
\\ “I
‘~I - .\\\\
Sennacherib s \
i(I8fIssIT
Gm; I
‘l AI
Palace ‘(\ I I
I QUAY I U113
1. one \\ I MOAT
I I I I Squar
l\9es
. \\\ I I I II I
oneMASHKI
r._..._.-... .....
I ‘ assent one\ I G
..--—-.'| '

I
\ SHAMASH ,,.,
I GATE -1' ’"”"I‘ l
I ARSENAL G >/
2&7‘
/ NEE‘ I I 91
I \ YUNUS I
it; I TS

cf.

11
IIII
I
I

\‘\ \
HANDURI one
\\
\\ \
\ \
\ \\
\ HALZI » J-M
one ‘"1’ W
.
I
I

I
‘
I I
amieitxn
EAR
OU?
1.

I
I

I ‘"'-*-~_... ii
‘—-._,_,,,_‘ ___

_§_ > W K
_ II )_/ \\ \\\ . .i
5 V
I
II
I
Os /.51 \\-\ ant Ij . I
l
=5 V >11 1 We
lot-A

Farmhouses

l.
. I I
‘ O 500 1000M
s

I Fig. 1 - Nineveh. Locations of UC Berkeley Investigations.

(Adapted from Stroll-sch 199% Fis 2) Fig. 2 » Area MG22 (After Lumsden in press: Fig. 3).
J

T T W "7 '-I"-L— - i _é __ I
---- Q‘-----~ - -- __________ i I“ Q i

_)__ v__ ‘ J‘. . . V . . .

iJ?_I w“ _ W [y |‘>H_$1|l"¢n_“'P:]k[§V"TEH_fi: H_ _ _V
1O
_w ___V
W W M_ HW I_ HMMWrM _N

W M
_ H d PWA, WH_a S
_m8 V8h W‘1 _FW;H_Ew',

m
O
EW F“‘ 1U‘! i W/Ni T
W i W W i__ ii
Mi_ T_W :

TL‘Mj
47
m_
S_ ‘
‘_7;‘I_e\:_1'_:_ ‘__)'I
__.
_:in
_k_“.:_‘4A._:' _‘ _ _
‘ NUHIU":-I:H H_“”_g““:
HU ‘.-‘
A
gnu“!
Hu P"
‘H‘
'.‘"5'
A_'.‘-_'_"__"".J.
._” ‘____“
_______O
;_._:_I._______‘
.I_I‘
'__D._:'._‘._
_.______
‘ %i§_
6
%
My
‘__"“ "“fl__ m_ m_hmumu_ 1‘.
‘II.
kn”
Q‘
D.‘I’D
‘H_"H_“ __UM_ ___“__I__A_\I:_'. _____ ,_1 .:_ :

8\3
K _ll‘_ _II_ _ "__H"I_n‘q_uI_"H€?H__l+v"_u‘“_._“ __ _“
’_I“_H"‘_“
ll_‘I:_9q_‘
_hI“_ulM_H “_H h_“ ._ _:i‘__‘___
Q
J’ N

_ch_ _ __?_.OO_ ___§._'.__:

'__l_.
'DI_F‘. lI_l‘ _ ‘I.:‘_ _
_
_ “ h“
____-___ N nuuu”m"§m_m_ m"fl H_“ ‘_I‘-I I II:I- _m m m g"”“um.g_ "_
_I amflflnuunnuwhul
‘Ifil_ $“"_n"_Hn“u_HU_ mun"? finww‘__"Mum__@__/
-“NAN
1' I“
Ma“_x “‘H'_ m‘?“_H “_H M_ _“ W_H_"' _h
M
‘Q

._H_'_
__"_H_H_n Q M
6T 7
i y_

-‘V
\-

.“"“ H"‘__v

‘|_‘., ___
L

‘ Q‘
4F
A7
L 7
\
1I II

I
I
WV EMan~A“m~

O.
w

C
_” _?0bn_ B
_ _ _ M_ Q
djM
_ WWMW_L W
0_
(HI, 5 my
E} __

W
F

0 40

F kw 3 _
d _m
M Hg _m m r SWWt r_ __
I I a C7 hw 1 9 9 "H
W_ F _l_GU 3 a ‘I.’ 4"’
_ ~Y

_
___ ____ _ 1

u __
 ..... .....
.. W .......‘...~...M......¢.......,..~_.4._.-

12 The Heartland 0fAssyria , Nineveh 13

2,4» Z6 ‘

,5
W(
ié I

; Z”
fig Q I J9 \, I

~ ,9 f 31 [

\
\ 29 Mm W
fig E1 ii

Z3
2% ( I M; K
W H1?
Fig.5. 1 Fg 6

1 *******" § **************W yum ——————————

 _‘_
4
_
1_

%
Lii
TM Hm MMd rmA S WM
S

U
M
_
W
5W
V__i

?_m
W{lJ%
WMW mu5
N _m8 V 8h

%
/

g
_
$H
fi
E
mm
H W
W5
_I

_ _‘W

|'_!“)Hz lv‘|_“S:6H4U.’|_flH _)_‘['§_I{l;i_‘,Z}J_|;$It

%WW0%

W3
/wI1
I

%“W

W
WU
_

__
w _

1
_ _-._ -_ -,. _,,___._,..__.......t.__._... 1. ,,..., , 1-4 -r‘-U'"JP<7“iU'JY"J"l .. . . .---.-- . . - _,,?,__ »----~—~~ ~

I
E
x.5.

Neo~Assyrian Pottery from Kalhu/Nimrud

with special reference to the Polish excavations in the "Central Building"
(1974- 76)

ARNULF HAUSLIEITER
\
Berlin

Since the first excavations at Nimrud started in the mid-19th century, the
'- :
E uncovered buildings and their equipment and furnishings, especially the famous
1 carved limestone reliefs from the palaces as well as finely worked ivory collections,
i
t
1 have attracted excavators and scholars. Additionally, numerous texts gave
important information on administration and economy, and private, public and
religious life within a capital of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. The last archaeological
activities at Nimrud were excavations, survey activities and, finally, the exciting
discovery of rich royal tombs.‘ In spite of,,or rather because of, these splendid
finds, pottery was more or less neglected at Nimrud, at ieast so far as fall
5
publication is concerned. This situation finds a close parallel at the other Assyrian
capitals of Assur, Nineveh and Dur-§arn1kin/Khorsabad as well as at those smaller
sites in the Assyrian heartland which were excavated a long time ago. From the
large sites only a small selection of pottery has been published? At the beginning
of the post~Wor1d War II excavations at Nimrud, a different publication strategy
seems to have been developed. In addition to the usual short remarks within the
preliminary excavation reports, three articles exclusively dedicated to pottery soon
2
appeared - already in the 50s, while the excavations were ongoing? Later on, these
articles were, unfortunately, not followed by other publications concerning pottery,
I though this was originally intended.“ Only in 1966, after excavations had come to
1
i
an end, did Mallowan mention several findspots where pottery had been found. He
concentrated, however, mainly on the so-called "palace ware".5 Thus, the three
articles, though presenting a rather limited amount of data, remained the only and
most important reference points for studies of Neo~Assyrian pottery from Nimrud
(and in general). Until today these ‘contributions remain significant, because the
pottery was "among the most precisely dated sets of vessels yet discovered in
Assyria".‘
During the last decades an increasing interest in Neo-Assyrian pottery in
general, and consequently also from Nimrod, could be observed.7 This was partly

1 DAMERJI 1999.
2 Cf. ANDRAE 1923, HALLER 1954 (Assur). CAMPBELL THOMPSON/HUTCHINSON I929,
CAMPBELL THOMPSON/MALLOWAN 1933 (Nineveh).
3 LINES 1954, RAWSON 1954, Onras, J. 1959.
“ oAnss,1. 1959, 130.
4 5 MALLOWAN 1966, passim.
i
6 MALLOWAN 1966, 187.
Z 7 Cf. Gnrrr 1987, REICHEL 1990, Oursu 1991, MCDONALD 1995b, HAUSLEITER 1992; 1995;
1996; 1997.

i
il.
———t—— ———— 77. 7 Tfrr r r r" "r " W r r "7"***""""1-,II.~ '1" """"""""""j'* '— , ~ 7 7, ix?’**********7
. . __________,____,__.____,,,,, ___,,,,,,___,___,-,_,,,,,M,gM______,_,,,_,_,,_ "~‘*'-'-‘V-Y"/'»!*-'*"~"'*""A‘¢t'-/"'4~""""""""~'*"" V V >- *******~-*~'“ """"""""'""“”""' ""'
18 The Heartland 0fAssyria
the result of new excavations in the Assyrian heartland ~ in the capitals of Assyria
as well as at rural sites, where pottery similar to the Nirnrud material had been
found*~ and archaeological surveys and excavations in the area of the Assyrian
provinces or adjacent regions. Furthermore, the aim of a final publication of the
results of the excavations at Nimrud docs not seem to have been given up, at least
so far as specific groups of objects are concerned? Some pottery vessels fi'om
\
Nimrud and other sites were also discussed in the catalogue Art and Empire.-
Treasures from Assyria in the British Museum. ‘O
The intention of this contribution is to give an overview on the condition and
state of research on Neo-Assyrian pottery from Kalhu/Nimrud based on published
-
material.“ Most of it was excavated and recorded by the expedition of the British
School of Archaeology in Iraq between "I949 and 1963. The pottery from these
excavations is still under study, but a significant increase in available material can
be expected only from the completed pottery catalogue and/or final report. Thus,
l
the general conditions are rather provisional and delimiting. It is clear that the
published corpus of "Late Assyrian Pottery" from Nlmrud, though fairly well dated,
is very small and selective compared to the quantity and diversity of all the other
places at this site where pottery was recovered. The findspots can be connected
exclusively with the élite of the Assyrian population, with the probable exception of
the remains (if not reused) of the so~called "squatter occupation". So far, the
majority of the published pottery comes from a late 7th (and early 6th) century
i
context. It would not be surprising, however, if the amount of 8th or even 9th
i century material should increase at a site which was at its peak in these earlier
centuries of Neo~Assyrian rule (this is possibly the case with the pottery from the
i,3
Central Building discussed below)” Additionally, one has to recall the discovery
of numerous graves at Nimrod - partly containing pottery. Some of them are
marginally mentioned in the preliminary reports, but all of them remain
unpublished.
1. British Excavations (1949-63 and 1989)
Main mound (Citadel) (Fig. 1)
Private Houses (T. W. 53)
"
F2
lz At least six houses of rather wealthy individuals (officials and merchants) were
excavated in 1953 at the eastern fringe of the main mound ("Town Wall 53“).
R} 8 Cf. CURTIS 1989, CURTIS/GREEN 1997, NEGRO 1997; cf. GREEN (pp. 91-126), Lumsoen
(pp. 3- 15) and SCHMIDT (pp. 61»90) this volume.
9 Cf. CURTIS 1979 (metalwork), G. Herrmann has several contributions on the Nimrud
ivories, GREEN in preparation (foundation figurines) as well as the text publications CTN 1»
IV. As far as pottery is concerned, Helen McDonald has been working on the catalogue
during recent years.
'° Cukrts/READE eds. 1995, l52~160(includes MCDONALD 1995a).
2
“ The wide distribution of Nimrud material renders it difficult to offer 21 complete list of
pottery finds. As an example the catalogue of the 5th anniversary of the Middle Eastern
4
‘*1
Culture Center of Japan (Tokyo 1984) should be mentioned. Several pots from the British
t-s\»._c-.s_~“
excavations were donated to the Center (p. 59) by the British School of Archaeology in Iraq:
t. cf. pp. 16»l9, nos. 21-23; 25-28.
l ‘Z cr. the resume of Cuuris (2979, 19) for the metal finds.
!
- -.
7 *7 ' ' ' 7
Kalltu/Nimrud l9
Three of the eight levels discovered are considered to be Neo-Assyrian in date (4-
2). Level 4 contained "palace ware" (PW) as well as a rhython-shaped vessel“
together with a PW beaker from a grave. in Level 3 the archive of Sama§-sarru-
usur (ranging in date from 665 BC to the posncanonical period) was found in room
19 of house III.” This level was covered by an ashy layer which was identified with
the first sack of the city. Another level (2) was again covered with ashes, probably
caused by a second sack in 612 BC.“
Pottery from this area was published in 1954 (Figs. 9.-3a).“ It consists of
common ware vessels as well as of PW beakers and bowls. The published material
was presented in summary, with the addition of some information on fabric,
distribution of pottery types” and dating.” The dating of the pottery found within
the private houses was linked to the date of the archive and, thus, was placed in the
second half of the 7th century BC.”
North-West Palace
Even though a fairly high quantity of pottery is recorded as having been found in
the NW Palace, only the "palace ware" beal-cers from the northern part of the
building complex are well known. Pottery vessels, though mostly unpublished, are
recorded for the well in roonn NNQO (lying above a collection of ivories dated to the
end of the 8th century 130,2‘ though the circumstances of deposition remain open to
interpretation), and several rooms of the residential wing of the palace.” A few
sherds of glazed pottery were also found,” poor remains of the former life within
the palace. Storage jars, partly bearing inscriptions on their capacity (or content)
were recovered in situ in several rooms east of the northern court.“ Whether the
tablets found in room Z.T. 30 (within the formerly designated "ziggurrat terrace"
area) relate to these jars remains uncertain. They record the delivery of oil to the
palace and date - with one exception ~ to the end of the 8th century BC.” In the
northern wing of the NW Palace (Z.T.) pottery was found in several rooms. Aside
*3 Mittcwxs 1966, 190493.
“ On the distribution of the tablets see HERBoRo‘1‘ 1992, 27.
*5 cf. Cunrts 1979, 39-40. -
*6 LINES 1954.
*7 LINES 1954, 165; cf. MALLOWAN 1953,36, n. 1 relating to pottery types designated by
Roman numbers which were apparently used during excavation.
‘S The "Sargonid" attribution of some of the vessels results from preliminary chronological
conclusions in the NW Palace area, where destruction layers had been attributed to this
period. Several of those layers were re-dated more precisely to the end of the 7th century BC;
cf. CURTIS 1979, passim; HAUSLEITER 1996, passim. The present lack of published reliable
stratigraphic data precludes, however, a thorough chronological-stratigraphic review of
findspots at this site.
'9 cf. nncnn. 1990.
1° Rnwsou 1954, Pl. XL,2.
2‘ Mnttowan/Davies 1970. 8.
Z’ cf, e.g., R/lwson 1954.191. XLIL2.
‘*3 cr. Mxttoivnt 1952, s; :0; MALLOWAN 1966, 119, Fig. 61.
2“ Mntcowau 1952, 10; cf. MALLOWAN 1966, 166, Fig. I00 (room [Z.T.] 30).
1‘ rv1.».n.ow».~1954, 127.
. ., .. . _____________________ .., vv ws ~-~~---~~-------~<------—---------~¢-*~--~---~'-~~
-» » -1~"~~---"-~"~"""-M-~’»=Ww%-- '-~-'--'
20 The Heartland ofAssyria
from jars and other vessel shapes” made of common or cooking pot ware and the
storage jars mentioned above, a number of PW beakers were discovered in room
Z.'I‘. 12.27 In view of the associated texts they were dated to the 7th century 312.28
Summing up, the published pottery record of the NW Palace is very
fragmentary. This situation is, of course, partly caused by repeated cleaning
operations while the palace was in use. Though the different functional areas of the
"\ building are to some extent reflected in the pottery, it is, especially in view of the
limited stratigraphic information,” too early for any conclusive interpretation.
Governor's Palace
This building was excavated in the first years of archaeological activity at Nimrud
-.1.
after the Second World War.” A detailed plan containing at least some of the room
numbers was, however, published only in 1973.3’ If the Governors Palace (GP)
was part of a larger building, as has been suggested,” it should have its possible
|
continuation to the east rather than in other directions.” The recovered texts,
mainly legal or administrative documents, cover the years‘ 835-710 BC, most of
them dating to the reign of Adadnirari III,“ but they were found in the debris of
the building, which - in theory - could have accumulated at any time after 710
1
BC.” The destruction of the GP was initally dated to the time of Sennacherib but
1
I afterwards to the end of the 7th century BCL36 Several graves, some of them
containing pottery, were found in the court and in some of the rooms; they are,
however, not yet adequately published.”
By far the largest quantity of "palace ware“ has been recovered in the GP on a
x
1 mudbrick table in room S.” Only a few vessels are published as profile drawings,
some others as photographs.” Two tripod bowls, one of them red-slipped with
l
1
"ring burnish" pattern, the other made of grey ware, should also be mentioned
here“) as representing fabrics other than PW.“ At least the vessels of the
2“ Cf., e.g., MALLOWAN 1966, 176, Fig. 108; 180, Fig. 115; cf. Mxttownn 1953, 36.
1? ct. MALLQWAN 1966, 51, Fig. 14; 113, Figs. 110-112; 179, Figs. 113414.
2“ PARKER 1954; Mnttowan 1954, 66; differences in the shape of these vessels compared to
earlier shapes are referred to by Mallowan, but not explicitly explained (cf. 1966, 178-180
and 1953, 36). They may refer to PW beakers withouth incised horizontal lines.
2° See, however, Courts 1979, 19-20 and passirn.
3° Originally called the "1949 Building"; cf. MALLOWAN 1950, 163-173; 1952, 4-5.
3' Posronra 1973, Fig. 1.
32 Mxteowxn in Posronrs 1973, xiii; Heimucu 1984, 125-126.
33 Cf/l'uR1~taR 1970, 197-198.
3‘ ct. Posroxrs 1973, Fig. 2.
35 HAUSLEITER 1996 offers a detailed discussion of the possible succession of deposits in the
Governor's Palace, based on published information.
3“ Mattowxn 1950, 167; cf. Marrow/uv in Posro/ma 1973, xiv.
3’ cr. 11/IA1.LowAN 1950, 168 (feferflng :6 glazed p0ltt3l'y)§ M/u.LowAN 1966, 49; 43, Fig. 10.
Consequently, the chronology of these graves could not be established with certainty.
3“ Mxttowxs 1966,50, Fig. 13.
u
4
3° MAt,1.owA1\1 1966, 51, Fig. 15-17; Rxwson 1954, Pl. XL,1; 61. Mcnnnxte 199511, 153, 66.
127.
4° MALLOWAN 1950, Pl. XXXl1,l (red-slipped); RAWSON 1954, Pl. XLL2 (grey ware).
4' MCDONALD 199521, 156, no. I39 (small bottle, common ware).
l-..__.__-_-__i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~—T-—- -~--—— -- ":r"*.r-f. a - ~ . ._
_ .. a.
Kallgu/Nimrud 21
assemblage of PW in room S should be considered contemporaneous. If we assume
a chronological relationship between the texts and the pottery found in the GP, a
late 8th century date should not be excluded. Though this date might apply to some
of the material, the amount and quality of accumulated deposits prevents us from
attributing this proposed date to the whole pottery corpus of the GP. Several mud
floors can be considered as material evidence of continuous use of the GP, though it
remains - stratigraphically speaking - difficult to attribute these floors with
certainty to, e.g., the 7th century BC.“ The chronological range of most of the
pottery can, surely, not be limited to the 8th century.
Burnt Palace
From the few pottery remains of the BP,“ located west of the temple of Nabu, a jar
has recently been published.“ The discovery of other pottery vessels or vessel
fragments is poorly recorded, though red-slipped pottery with ring burnishing
pattern and kitchen ware have been found.“ Pottery from the well of this
building“ seems to show some differences from Neo-Assyrian pottery so far
recovered.” The sounding in the street between the Burnt Palace and the temple of
Nabu, however, is not helpful for a pottery sequence in this area.“ Presently, the
data concerning pottery from the BP is insufficient for further conclusions, though
an earlier date than the late 7th century BC (i.e. 8th century BC) seems possible.”
Temple oflilabfi (Ezida)
Situated east of the Burnt Palace, this building is of significant religious, historical
and architectural interest.” Whereas the textual evidence is very rich, pottery
remains are poorly recorded.“ Information on the shape of some cornptetely
preserved vessels can, for example, be obtained by comparative material discussed
42
Cf. Matrowan in POSTGATE 1973, xiv; Posrcwrs 1973, 5, with n. 9; cf. CURTIS 1979, 41.
The rechslipped bowl illustrated in MAI.LOWAN 1950, XXX1l,1, was found "on a beaten mud
floor of room B, in the Governor's Palace, 30cm. above the tevel of the original floor"
(MALLOWAN 1950, 183). MCDONALD 1995a, 153 and 156 dates vessels from the GP (rooms
C and M) to the "8th/7th century BC“.
‘*3 MALLOWAN 1954, 94; 1966, 20s. -
44 MCDONALD 199511, 158, no. 144; Ltivns 1954, Pl. XXXVIIL4 can be identified as ND
1819 from the BP. Reference to material--from the BP is made in LINES 1954, Pl. XXXVIL3;
6; 8; 9; 10; Rnwsotv 1954, E69-170; OATES, J. 1959, P1. XXXVIL63.
‘*5 Mxttownv 1953, s-9; 15. On PW fragments, possibly from the 31>, $66 Mattownn 1953,
13 and 1954, 83; 94.
4° cr. Mxttowtn 1966, 201, Fig. 126.
4? MALLOWAN 1956, 3; cf. MCDONALD 1995a, 158 proposing an 8th century BC date for the
jar from the well (no. 144). This dating may be supported by the occurrence of jars with
horizontally incised lines on their shoulder or between neck and shoulder from graves at
Assur, possibly used during the 8th century BC (Ass. 1119021: SURENHAGEN/RENGER 1982,
119, Fig. 12; Ass. l2054c: HAUSLEYFISR 1996, P1. CXXIIL2).
48 READE in Cutms ed. 1982, 111.
“" Cf.PosTGArE/READ15 1976-so, 316.
5" Formerly "South East Building" 61 "South East Palace“; cf. Mxttowxn 1956, s~9;
Posrcme/Renee 1976-80, 309.
5' MALLOWAN 1966, 282, pertaining to completely preserved vessels.
Y . **"*"~*--" er
,’ 'F: >,L .I 1 ,...,»-’_.»_;-
_.._.. - 1- — W“
I-E
22 The Heartland ofAssyria
in the publication of the 'lI‘.W. 53 pottery.“ Additionally, some vessels from the
temple of Nabfi are stored in the British Museum.
Temple 0fNin11rta
Similarly to the temple of Nabu, this building could have been in use from the time
of its construction by Assurnasirpal II until the fall of Nimrud.” In rooms 3, ll
and 13 large storage jars were installed on rnud~brick benches; they are shown on
the plan and in a photograph“ but no profile drawing is published. Some of them
bore inscriptions with information on content or capacity (see above). No other
pottery vessels from the temple of Ninurta are mentioned. As to their size and
function these storage jars may cover a wider chronological range than
transportable jars,” a conclusion which could in theory be adopted for all the other
storage jars discovered in buildings which were constructed as early as the 9th
century BC.
1950 Building 1 main mound, namely from T.W. 53, was immediately recognised; the
The magazine rooms of this building east of the NW Palace contained storage jars
which are not illustrated in publication. Additionally, pottery was discovered in a
grave at the northern end of the building, presumably from the late 7th century
1210.56 It has been thought that the 1950 building represents the successor to the
Governor's Palace, discussed above.“
i I
i similarities between some shapes from the assemblage discovered in the Central
Outer Town
"Fort Shalmaneser”
The ekal masarti ("review palace“) of Kalhu was begun by Shalmaneser III and
probably finished by his grandson Adadnirari IZI (Fig. 4). In the 7th century BC
Esarhaddon carried out several building activities, such as that at the southern
fortification wall.” According to the textual evidence, this monumental building
complex was in use for two and a half centuries until the end of the Assyrian
empire.“ The observations of deposits in Port Shalmaneser not only led Mallowan
to the assumption of a two-stage sack of Nimrud by the Median-Babylonian
alliance,“ it was also the place where, for the first time, traces of resettlement after
the destruction of the building were discovered (so-called "squatter occupation").6Z
1 1
52 cr. LXNES 1954, Pl. xxxv111,2; 4.
53 Cf. MALLOWAN 1966, 91.
5‘ MALLOWAN 1966, 84, Fig. 35 (the two rooms 11 and 13 were created by a division of a
larger room); cf. MALLOWAN 1957, P1. IX.
$5 cr. MLLLS 19s9, 135-145, esp. p. 144, Table 6.
5*‘ M.41.i.owAN 1950, 174.
5’ Posroarn 1973, 7; cf. HEINRICH 1984, 121-122.
58 POSTGATE 1973, 2.
5” MA1.1.owAN 1966, 3'14; 315, Fig. 305. cf. Pos'roA'ra/READE 1976-s0, 319.
6° On the textual dating evidence for FS see PARPOLA 1976, 165, n. 1.
6‘ Cf. Runes in Courts ed. 1982, 110.
6’ MA1.LownN 1966, 391; 437438; OATES, 13. 196st, ss-59; cf. CuR'r1s 1979, 49.
"7 r ‘" "" "‘ “”“
§
1E
i
1
Kallm/Nimrud 23
This observation still plays a key role for our understanding of the development of
the material culture and its relation to political events.“
As for the pottery record, single or groups of storage jars were found in situ in
several parts of the buiiding. As with the NW Palace and elsewhere, they are
recognisable in the plans and in one published photograph.“ Some of them again
bore incised information on their capacities.“ Though it cannot be decided with
certainty, these storage jars could be slightly earlier than the latest phase of use of
the building.“ From the squatter occupation some 100 pottery types were published
shortly after excavations within PS had come to an end (Figs. 5~7).67 As in 1954,
only complete vessels were drawn.“ Therefore, a large range of bowls, "isrikarzs“
and smaller bottles and only a very limited number of jars were published.” Some
of the FS potteiy is now available as colour photographs, including the addition of
previously unpublished vessels.7° In 1959 the study on fabric and techniques,
previously given by Rawson on "palace ware", contained a more systematic listing
than in the 1954 report." The identity of the FS pottery with the pottery from the
stratigraphical conclusions were concisely discussed." The typological uniformity
led to the illustration of drawings of types from the main mound within the report
on FS pottery.“ As regards the chronological setting of the FS assemblages, it was
already discussed in 1959 that the "squatters" who may have "returned" to the city
reused pottery which had been produced before the fall of the city, thus, strictly
speaking, of Neo-Assyrian date.“ Interestingly enough, there are typological
Building and types discovered in Fort Shahnaneser (see below).
In addition to the storage jars mentioned above, some other fragments of pottery
vessels which were not designed for eating and drinking should be discussed here.
'1
l
63 Cf. HAUs1.t£1Tt=;R 1997, 274. The evidence of the Tell Sheikh Hamad excavations can be
added here (cf. KUHNE 1993).
64 MALLOWAN 1966, PE. VIII; Oates, D. 1961, P1. lib.
‘*5 MAL1.owAN 1958, 207-10s.
1‘
66 Cf. r1. 54. For similar evidence of an 8th century ac context at Khorsabad see
.1 Louo/A1.r1vn>.1~1 1938, 69, Fig. 10; Pl. 71; cf., however, the warning remarks of Renee in
CURTIS ed. 1982, 110. A
6’ OATES, 1. 1959; the "types" are numbered 1-114.
"3 Except DATES, J. 1959, Pl. X.XXV,1.4;-Pl. XXX)/ll, 63; 65; 68; Pl. XXXVHL82; 89; Pl.
J
'1
XXXIX,10l; 108.
6° This may, however, also reflect the functional categories of the pottery used by the
"squatters", i.e. short term storage (if at all) and food consumption.
Z
E
’° MCDONALD 199511, 153, no. 123; 66. 124; 155, 116. 131; no. 132; I10. 133; no. 135; n6.
136; 156, no. 140; 158, no. 143; no. 145; 159, no. 146; no. 147; no. 148; no. 150; E60, nos.
151 and 152; for black-and-white photos of several findspots cf. MALLOWAN 1966, 391, Fig.
316; 438, Fig. 364.
" Onrns, J. 1959, 135-138; what ¢6u1<1 be called common ware is discussed on p. 13r.
7’ Oares, 1. 1959130.
” According 16 OATES, J. 1959, 13s. ND numbers under 5,000 were found 611 1116 main
mound, not in Fort Shalmaneser. In the British Museum, however, some pots bearing ND
\.~.W~_.l.. M,.~»—-c.Ma numbers above 5,000 could be identified as coming from somewhere other than FS, so there
is not a strict division at this point.
1‘ Ones, J. 1959, 130.
_~.._._-1.-.._._.,_.___.._,...._...,_..... s.»»»c--»».»-W.-at».»---.---_~44-1-1
24 The Heartland ofAssyria
Fragments of pottery containers decorated in the style of a city wall (or fortress)
show the use of rosette stamps.“ Similar rosette stamps were found on storage jars
which were discovered during the excavations of the British Museum team in room
T 20 in 1989 (Fig. 3b).“ The use of rosette and other stamped and impressed
decoration during the Neo-Assyrian period finds further confirmation in two
vessels from Assur, a large jar and a double jar in the form of pigs.” Thus, the
\
presence of rosette~stamped pottery during the Neo-Assyrian period is once more
confirmed, though it is not necessarily restricted to Assyria proper.”
Town Wall Palace
The exact location of this building, "set up against the southern city wall between
-.1.
Fort Shalmaneser and the acr0polis",79 remains uncertain.“ Though mostly
neglected, it is cut into the remains of two earlier buildings.“ Pottery, including
sherds of PW, is recorded to have been found east of this palace.” It remains
<
unclear, however, whether the pottery originally belonged to the Town Wall
Palace.33 None of the sherds has yet been studied, though "these when examined
3
will no doubt also be an interesting pointer both to the date of the building and the
varieties of ceramic that were used in it".34 The date of the Town Wall Palace is in
any case dependent on the dating of a foundation deposit discovered in the western
of the earlier buiidings ("late Neo-Assyrian or siightly post-Assyrian").35
is READE in Cuirris/READE eds. 1995. 106, no. 57, cf. Mattowm 1966, 462, Fig. 378.
7° CURTIS/COLLON/(§RE£N E993, 28. Fig. 27,4; cf. HERRMANN/CUR'I‘lS £998 with further
stamped jars from Nimrod.
” Large jar fragments: accesses 1939, 166, Fig. 7; cf. Haustsrran 1996, P1. XXXIX;
identical lotus flower motives are present on the wall paintings at Teil Ahmar/Til Barsip (cf.
Tl-IUREAU-DANGIN/DUNANIJ 1936, Pls. XLV1-XLVIH) and Nimrud (cf. Onrss, D. 1959, It?-
l_l9; Pl. XXiX) as well as on ivories from the latter site: MALLOWAN E966, 561, Figs. 501-
502; the pig~shaped double jar shows a combination of these motives with star stamps:
Srx».rt.ic1~ie Museum zu Bantam eds. 1992, 191, no. 130.
73 This was pointed out by H. MCDONALD in her contribution to the 1st session of the Table
Ronde on Iron Age Pottery (i995h); the statement by O/was, J. 1959, 137 on stamped and
incised decoration (“such ornament is uncommon in the Assyrian period, aithough elaborate
rosette and pomegranate stamped are occasionally found") should, therefore, be emended.
it GREEN1986,224.
E 8° Jones (in 1852) apparently did not recognise remains which he identified with a building
(Cf.READE in CURTES ed. 1982, 103, Fig. 75).
8‘ Mxttowxn 1957, 24; Pi. X; Cf. discussion by GREEN 2986, 224~22s, with fi. 40.
However, whether this should lead to the assumption of a "series of major public buildings"
(p. 224) is open to question; it should not, however, be rejected a priori (cf. the several
residences of high officials in a provincial town as Dar Katlimrnu, though not an Assyrian
capital: cf. KUHNE 1994, 65); cf. TURNER 1970, 203~204.
S’ Mxttowxu 1957, 24; the findspot should be somewhere south of 1116 "older building"
which was cut by the northern part of the Town Wall Palace (cf. MALLOWAN 1957, Pl. X).
Had the pottery been recovered from the older building, the excavators might possibly be
-<
4 expected to have stated it.
83 MALLOWAN 1957, 24 gives no information on stratigraphical observations.
k R‘ Mattowan 1954, 24.
‘*5 GREEN 1986, 225.
” ““' 7 "’::j’;T ’ W 7 7 77’
l Kal_lgu/Nimrod 25
1
Building offldadnirari III
From this palace only the big water _iars deserve to be mentioned here. They were
found in room 9, apparently the bathroom.“ The existence of a very limited
i number of other recorded pottery finds can be deduced from the description of the
singie rooms.” Furthermore, there is evidence of graves of a post»Assyrian
occupation, possibly to be dated to the Neo-Babylonian period.“
J
2. Polish Excavations (1974-76)
A short account of the results
Between 1974 and 1976, under the direction of J. Meuszyriski, excavations of the
Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology took place in the middle of the citadel
of Nimrod.” Previously, Layard, Rassam and Maliowan had been working here.
Excavations were concentrated on three areas, North, West I and West II (Fig. 8).
In area West II few architectural remains were uncovered: a paved entrance set
in a north-south direction with remains of three man~bul1 colossi (so-called
"lamassu"). '1“-he courtyard north of it was plastered with burnt bricks which were
covered with a layer of bitumen.” At the beginning the excavators tentatively
associated these remains with the "Central Palace" of Adadnirari III, though no
further evidence of dating couid be established.” In a revised analysis of the results
of excavation, this gateway was tentatively identified with remains of the "Centred
1
Palace“ of Tiglath-pileser III, because of stylistic paralleis with reliefs dated to the
1 reign of this king.”
Trenches West I and North are located in angarea where Layard and Rassam
had previously made soundings (Fig. 9a).” In West l the "Centre Bulls" of
Shalmaneser III, already discovered by Layard, and a collection of about 120 relief
I fragments of the time of Tiglath-pileser III were re-excavated. In the North Area
I was rediscovered the so-cailed "Rassam's Facade" and remains of its original
building. As compared with the sounding in area West II, the architecturai remains
of both areas, North and West I, were more substantial and complex. The first
reconstruction considered the remains of area North and the lower remains of West
1
II as parts of one building, which was named the "Central Building" of
‘*6 Mxttowxn 1954, Pi. xxxvtze; For similar water jars from Khirhet Khatuniyeh cf.
CUR'I‘1S/GREEN 1997, Figs. 43-45.
I
87 MALLOWAN 1954, 153-163, et passim; for excavations in, and objects from, PD. 1~4
(private houses with some burials) cf. pp. i52»153 (and cf. RAWSON 1954, P1. XLILI, from
PD. 3).
E8 Mattowan 1954, 163.
*9 Cf. Sonotswsio 1974/77; MIERZEJEWSKI/SOBOLEWSKI 1980; Sonotnwsto £981, all with
5-
further references.
9° MIERZEJEWSKI/SOBOLEWSKJ 1980, 159 with Fig. tl.
"1 soaotswsio 1974/77, 234.
92 SOBOLEWSKI l981, 272; according to the written sources, the "Central Palace" of Tiglath~
pileser ill on the main mound of Kalhu had access to the River Tigris. Therefore, a slightly
more western position than previously proposed (see below) seems more plausible; cf.
2 READE 1968; POSTGATE/READE 1976-80, 314-315 (for the term "Centre Palace" cf. ibid., p.
314).
” cf. SOBOLEWSKI 1981, 255463.
i
JX
2.5.
-5-‘ . ., , l Ill i_. 444.. ii _ am.
.. . . . ______“_____,__._,,_.____"_. . _ ___
26 The Heartland ofAssyria
Assurnasirpal ll, In that case, the building would have been restored by
Shalrnaneser III whose briclcs (North) and carved and inscribed figures (West II)
were indeed discovered. The remains of walls with a slightly different orientation
and lying above the "Central Building" were interpreted as parts of the "Central
Palace" of Tiglath-pileser III, because many reliefs dated to his reign were found on
a plastered courtyard.“
In a later reconstrucion Sobolewskf” discerned three different phases:
\
l) The "Central Building" of Assurnasirpal H (CB in Fig. 9a), including
"Rassarn's Facade" and the possible original location of the so-called Rassam
Obelisk?“ The entrance and 6 rooms of this building could be identified.” Room 5
contained the “pottery deposit" (DP) which will be discussed below. Because of the
-
"mythological" themes of the reliefs the building was thought to have a cultic
purposegs This building was then restored by Shalrnaneser III, whose inscribed
bricks were found in the pavement (together with bricks of Assurnasirpal ID.”
2) The "Centre Bulls" and a few architectural remains as well as the large
pavement west of them belonged to an independent building constructed by
Shalmaneser Ill (SB in Fig. 9a). The new reconstruction shows a piazza, west of it
an entrance, flanked by towers, followed by a wide room and a court. Remains of a
wall should join the entrance room, though they are not exactly rectangular.
Contrary to the previous reconstruction“ the distance between the two doorways
was considered as too small and the space between the "Centre Bulls" as too wide.
-1 Thus, it followed that the "bulls" were not found in situ but had been removed when
ii
Ti the latest building had to be erected.“ The grave in the doorway (B~l) which
contained pottery and a calcite alabastron most probably dates to a period after the
entrance had gone out of use?” A date sometime between the end of the 9th
i century and the construction of the later building could be adopted for the other
burials (B-2 and B-3), though one of them. was found on the pavement of
1; "ShaImaneser‘s Building"."’3
9‘ Cf. SOBOLEWSKI 1974/77, 234 and Plan ll, fig. 2 (=M11znz1zJ1awsit1/Sonot.nws1<1 1980, 154,
Fig. 13).
°5 Sonotnwslti 1981, 255-272.
9° cr. READE 1920, esp. pp. 2-3, with Fig. 1.
97 Cf. Sonocawsiu i981, Fig. 3, plan 3; in all plans there appears the symbol for a seventh
"room" (®) which, however, is not referred to in the text.
98 Misazatnwsxi/SoBoLEws1<1 I980, 162 with n,24;R1/mos 1980, 2; Sououawsro 1981, 256;
rejected, however, by HEINRICH 1984, 107.
9° SOBOLEWSKI 1981, 258.
1
2
‘°° MIERZEJEWSK1/SOBOLEWSKI1980, 154, Fig. 13.
‘°‘ Cf.Sono1.i:ws1<.I 1981, 260-261.
I
1.
W2 According to the suggestion of A, MIERZEJEWSKI (pets. comm.) burials within gates
might have taken place, however, in times of siege, possibly at the end of Shalmanesers HI
reign. A small jar (light in colour) and a small glazed bottle, the only two objects from this
grave, are depicted in the first row of Fig. 9b (cf. SoBoLEwsK1 1981, 258, caption to the Fig.
'*
t ;
1
5).
‘O3 Simple burials in the eastern wing of the Neo-Assyrian palace of Assur are considered to
be Post-Assyrian in date (MIGLUS 1996, 99»l01). Only tomb Ass. 19119 B is dated to the
Neo-Assyrian period, but lies outside the palace area.
‘imam '1"""""""7 — — —— T’ ' '
....__,,, . . . ..
1.1 Kalfitmimrud 27
3) Building remains previously considered as the "Central Palace" of 'i‘iglath-
pileser III (see above) are now dated to the "late Assyrian period or even later" (LB
in Fig. 9a).‘°“ For reasons of difference in level, it does not seem probable that the
i pavement of the Shalrnaneser III building was reused in the "Later Building".'°5
Thus, presumably above this pavement, some 120 relief fragments "undoubtedly
deriving from the so~ca1led Central Palace of Tig1ath—pileser III"‘°“ were
rediscovered. Among them three groups were discerned (one register, two registers,
corner slabs).‘m
Thus, the major group of finds of the Polish Expedition to Niinrud consists of
reliefs. A cylinder seal made of baked clay,“ an inscribed foundation tablet of
Assurnasirpal II, and the large deposit of pottery in room 5 are also recorded.
Potsherds were, of course, present throughout the excavations;‘°9 and some vessels
were found in the graves (B*i~3)."°
Potteryfrom room 5
The registered part of the pottery assemblage discovered in room 5 of the CB
consists of some 300 vessels.'" The assemblage was concentrated in the southern
part of the room and the vessels seemed to be "grouped according to their shape",
as if they had fallen from a shelf.” 20 different types could be discerned by the
excavators. The following functional groups have been recordedzm "two-handled
water jars, ring-based jars, heavy bowls with high ring base, beakers, jars with ring
base, squat jars, istikans, saucer lamps, pedestal goblets, potstands". Published
photographs show the pottery in situ (Fig. l0) and with more than half the
assemblage (c. 160 vessels) (Fig. 9b). In a tentative conclusion it was stated that
this material was largely analogous to the pottery from Fort Shalrnaneser.““ By this
a connection to material of the late Neo-Assyrian and immediately Post~Assyrian
period was established, although there was no explicit suggestion on dating. Before
1°‘ Soao1.Ews1<1 1981, 261.
“*5 Cf.MlERZElEWSK1/SOBOLI.-EWSKI 1930, iss, with the information that the Tigiath~pileser
Ill reliefs were rediscovered "on the baked brick pavement of the earlier building",
Souotawsin 1981, 261 states instead that the foundation walls [my italics} were "built
directly on the mudbrick~platform of the citadel. This so-called ‘Later Building‘ was
probably constructed at a time whenthe earlier constructions had become ruined and were
buried beneath several meters of rubble". l-le does not, however, explicitly specify the
findspot in terms of its stratigraphic relati'onship to the excavated architectural remains.
l
l
“)6 SOBOLEWSKI I981, 263. Whether Esarhaddon was involved in this operation cannot be
known; cf., however, POSTGATE/READE 1976-80, 31E, on the removal of a relief from the
NW Palace.
‘M Mlnnzaiewslo/Sosouawsiu 1980, 155-159; SOBOLEWSKI 1981, 263-272, with further
references on p. 263.
5 ‘°* cr. Miekzasewslo/Sonocawslo 1981, 161, Fig. 15 (NF. N 6174).
1
'°" Mentioned by SOBOLEWSKI 1974/7'1, 236.
"° SOBOLEWSKl 1981, 258, n, 18,
'“ Room 5 was not completely excavated. A pottery layer of c. 25-30 cm thickness remained
in place (A. Mreazenswsio, pers. comm.)
I
"2 Mraazaiawsld/Soaotewsid 1980, 161 and A. MIERZEJEWSKI, pers. comm.
1
“3 Sonouawsto i974/77, 236; cf. MIERZEJEWSIG/SOBOLEWSK1 l980, 161, Fig. 14 (=our Fig,
9b).
5
"4 Sonotnwsio 1974117, 236.
- t _,,_,,..,_,....._..,__.. Pa,-.. - 7 *****7******r""""""""W r " ,_____,_______________,_........

is
l
28 The Heartland ofAssyria Kallzu/Nimrud 29

r discussing the potential of the material for chronology, we shall present a selected
number of pottery vessels from the deposit.
Fabric and surface treatment
Though it was not possible for the present author to analyse the objects personally,
some general information can be briefly given here.“5 All of the vessels were
produced on a fast-turning potter’s wheel. They were fired in an oxidising milieu.
Some shapes show irregularities which could have been caused by overfiring (Fig.
10 right). In other cases (e.g., beakers, isrikans, squat jars) the careless (mass?)
production process influenced the final shape. The surface is mostly finished with a
l
regular sl<in,“‘ though the final treatment of some beakers and bowls seems to have
been very rough. Engobe, painted or incised decoration could not be observed. Most
of the vessels are greenish or yellowish to buff, some tending towards a reddish
colour. Inclusions and temper, as far as could be observed, are mineral and
vegetable in nature, though, at this remove, it is difficult to give details. Sorne of
the vessels were rather heavy - a result of the apparently controlled production
process. "Palace ware" has not been recorded within the pottery deposit of room 5.
|:
l Three main categories of fabric could be discerned: a _
I
1) Medium fine to coarse clay was used for thick~walled _]ElfS (such as, e.g. Fig. 16-
18). Traces of its vegetable temper were always visible on the surface.
2) Commonly used was a medium fine to fine clay with vegetable temper. Bowls
(e.g., Fig. 10) were made of this kind of clay.
3) By far the finest clay was used for thin—walled mostly necked jars (Fig. 14a-b) as
well as for isrikans (Fig. 13b-d) and the situla~shaped beaicers (Figs. lie-d).
Discussion of shapes and parallels
Open vessel shapes represent a small quantity of the corpus.” Closed (and high)
it
;|
it shapes (isrikarzs, beakers, jars, etc.) are much more numerous. Special shapes (such
as lamps and potstands) are also present.
a) Bowls
Small shallow bowls with flattened rim
1 H8
I
‘Fig. lNo. Sh2_ipe___ Dimensions ‘Parallels
l
‘Ila N29/75 ____________§_r51_r3l_l_!;-_9}»\__i_1______________D,_9;._l_l_;fl_§§11
We start with a badly illustrated small bowl. lt has a slightly thickened rim (outside) with a
flattened, though convex surface. The profile shows a marked transition inside and outside.
This small howl has no exact parallel so far, though the shape of the rim is not totally
unknown in the Neo-Assyrian period. lts base ought to have a flat ring—stand.
Shallow carinated bowls with ring-base and pointed rim
Fig. I Shape Dimensions __, }'1{ra11¢l$,,
11¢ (er lb left) Caiinated bowl with D C. 19 cm Assur(8tl1 century. and 8th/7th
ointed rim H c. 4.3 cn2"_W__W century l;_C_)___
< (Late Assyrian level of Area A and Area C levels l-3; C. Postgate, pers. comm).
H5
With reference to A. MIERZEIEWSKI, pers. comm., and study of the photographs.
*1‘ cr. FREESTQNE/Pluones 1989, '13-74.
H" According to the excavators, many bowls were left in situ in the remaining pottery layer.
Shallow bowls with carination and pointed rim (Fig. llb) were found at Nimrod, so far in
7th century contexts. Also at Nineveh they are attested for the 7th century Bc.“3 A number
of parallels, though, are recorded in graves from Assur, with a possible 8th/7th century uc
date. As to their size, there seem to be two main groups. A smaller one (average rirn
H diameter c. l8-19.5 cm) and a larger, more shallow one (rim diameter 20.2 and 23 crn).“9
Both types are also present at Nim1'ud.m
One example from the CB (for others cf. Fig. llc) is made of a rather sandy clay. It is
thick-walled and has a ring-base. The rim is rounded; the carinazion is visible on the inner
side as a groove. In a sarcophagus and a brick-tomb at Assur similarly thiclowalled
examples are recorded (both with the groove inside), though not with such a high ring-
standm The sarcophagus Ass. ll"/'48 has been dated from the late 8th to the 7th centuries
BC, though any date post~Shalmaneser III is possible. Its rich finds are presently
unpublishedm Tomb Ass. l023l has two separate layers ofinhurr1ations.'23 The parallel to
our bowl comes from the lower (earlier) inhumation and could have been buried sometime
during the 8th century ac. However, bowls with a rather high ring-base, as our example
from the CB, have no exact parallels in the material discussed.
Deep bowl
Fig. WViiimcnsions Parallels
lid Deep conical D c. 36.6 cm Nimrucl,‘ main mound, PS (7th century): OATES, J.
bowl nt~.22.s cm 1959, Pi. x>o<vr,36;““ Tell til-Rimah, Area c
(TR 5014 =BM WA I988-440,8: "late 7th to 6th
century": Posronrs. C./OATES, D./Onrns, J. 1997,
66; Pl. 56, no. 493); Khirbet Qasrij: CURTIS 1989,
Fig. 28, no. 96 (7th/6th century BC); see also Tell
Ahmar, Area C: IAMIESON, this volume, p. 299,
Fig. l:13 (7th century BC), but with considerably
_________ H smaller diangeter
This deep conical bowl has a ring~base and a folded rim which tends slightly inwards and
has a rounded oblong profile. Outside, below the rim there is a horizontal groove. Parallels
from Nimrud (main mound, FS) are higher. A bowl from Tell al-Rirnah, Area C, now in the
British Museum, has the same shape.‘ 5 For the relevant layers a date “from the late 9th to
the 7th centuries BC" was proposed.“ Bowls with a folded rim are quite frequent at Khirbet
Cf. LUMSDEN this volume, p. 5. ‘ -
W
“9 Smaller examples can also be added; cf. HAusi.Eii'nR 1996, Pl. XCL4; 7.
_____.. ___--- '*° nan group: LINES 1954, Taf. xxxvi,-3; second group: Onrns, J. 1959, Pl. XXXVL31.
‘*‘ Ass. ll"/480 teuiusisnen 1996. Pl. xcrs) and Ass. l023lx (==l~lAusi.EiTER 1996,1>1.
XCL6, =this volume, p. 139, Fig. 8,8).
"2 HALLER 1954,64.
"3 Horns 1954, ios-109; cf. MIGLUS 1996, 73-74316; 322; cf. HAUSLEITER this volume,
p. 139-141.
I P2‘ Possibly identical to the bowl illustrated by MALLOWAN 1966, 176, Fig. 108, from the
. ............ - North-West Palace, room Zfl‘. 13 (7th century BC).
"5 cf. Posronris, C./Osrns, D./oms, J. 1997, Pl. 56, no. 493 (ware: medium-coarse
orange~buff; inclusions: white grit and chaff; base: hole mended in antiquity with small
potsherd set in bitumen). Of this shape another 97 examples have been found at this site
"6 Onrus, D. 1972, as; for a similar conclusion Oxrns, D. 1968b, 123-124 (Area A). For
_ _ the remains in Area B an 8th century date was proposed because differences from the
Nimrud pottery could be recognised: cf. Onras, D. 1965, 76.

1
 7 _ ...... ,,

30 The Heartland of/lssyria Kalilu/Nimrud 31

Qasri} a late Nee» or Post-Assyrian site.m The present evidence of parallels tends, comparative material offers insufficient evidence for a dating of our beakers from Nimrud.
therefore, to suggest a late Neo-Assyrian dating for this particular bowhm However, we could interprete the difference between the unpublished situla-shaped beaker
in the British Museum (see n. 128) and our examples as a chronological one. Such a
2
b) Beakers conclusion is tempting, in so far as the unpublished piece from Fort Shalmaneser does
resemble the Neo-/Late Babylonian examples of bronze beakers. Thus, it should not be
Small cylindrical beakers excluded that the beakers from the Central Building represent an earlier fom of situla-
Ilia Tibial-"5 I$aai3§iil1$5€i?9<>ns.,._ fréiéiléié shapcd clay beakers, though different from the "Babylonian" group.
‘\ 12a7lef7t _ l4/75 {Small beaker l~lc.5.5 cm,D c. _3_8
. em
" __ _ _ _ 7 7
12a right _____7_j7_Small beaker He. 6.6 cm.l5c. 4.1 cm ______________________ Cylindrical pedestal beakers
Two small beakers with flattened base, cylindrical body and simple rounded rim can be Fla N9 Sham- __.. . .. Diutsusilms, Parallels
discussed here. One of them shows a carlnation between base and wall (Figs. 12a left), the 13b Beaker with ll c. 11.4 cm Nimrud, PS, area SW, upper
-_ second one has a fluent transition. Miniature bealcers with a rather small capacity are flat foot Dam c. 5.7 cm fill: OATES, J. l959, Pl.
attested for the late Neo~Assyrlan period (7th century Bc).m However, for our relatively _ ,g t D113‘ 6.6 cm xxxvn,s0 l
rough examples no convincing parallel has been found among the published material. t 13¢ N20/75 Beaker with itiieliifoféieifiiiii” iiiiiiiiiiif 1
(am right) modelled foot l 1),,-.,, c. 5.3 cm
Sitnla-shaped beakers J- . .. @919.-1.919 .........-. 3
13a Beaker with 1 H c. 11.9 cm
Fig. l No. , _l Shape Dimensions ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, j,l1.’al'al191S _ modelled foot 1 19..., ¢. 5 cm 1
125*" N155/15 Beaker with conical H c. 12.9 cm, 1) c. 5.2 p ___________________ ,7 ,__, ,7 Pa c. 5.6 cm ____________,
base crn 13:‘: Beaker with H c. 12.3 cm
A number of situla-shaped beakers with conical lower body and flattened pointed base have 1 modelled foot Dfim c. 5.1 cm
been found (Fig. i2b). For Nimrud it has been stated that "this type is not common, but it 7 77777777777777777777777777777777 _7_ Dr. c. 4.9 cm______________________
occurs not infrequently".13° The drawing of the published example from the main mound, to
Pedestal bealcers with a cylindrical body have so far been found only at Nimrud. Their feet
which this statement refers, does not, however, show much more than a general similarity to
are of different shapes.“ A number of completely preserved and fragmentary examples
our beakenm Though the general form of these beakers seems not dissimilar to earlier have been recovered in the CB (Fig. l3a). They can be described as beakers with flat and
examples from the Late Kassite or Isin II periods in Babylonia, we do not see a direct modelled foot. Similar to the published examples, the foot is rather substantial and thus
connection between them because of typologlcal differences between these two groupsm gives stability.
Undecorated situla-shaped bronze beakers (Knopjbecheflm appear in Babylonia during lsin The example of the first group is characterised by the low height of the foot. lt is disk-
ll and are more frequent in the subsequent Neo-/Late Babylonian periodm Therefore, the shaped and has a rounded rim (Fig, 13b). The transition from base to body is without any
carinatlon. Parts of the rim seem to be externally slightly thickened, a result of the final
"1 cum-rs 1989. Fig. 29, n. 103. turning. The vertical axis of the body does not concide with the axis of the foot. A similar
"8 Posronrtz, C./Oartzs, 15./oxrss, J. 1997, as "late an to em century BC". piece has been found in FS. Beakers with modelled foot have a higher foot. The base of our
"9 Cf., e.g., OATES, l. i959, Pl. XXXVL37 (FS, room C 6). This beaker is made of a very three illustrated examples is no longer flat but thick, and has a thickened rim which can be
fine and welhlevigated buff clay. bevelled or round; the transition between rim and foot is marked by a step or groove. The
m Oates, J. 1959, I42. profile of the foot can be concave (Fig. 13c), almost conical (Fig. l3d) or carlnated (Fig.
'3‘ oxras, J. 1959, Pl. xxxvttss. Even less similar seems the drawing of a beaker from l3e).*3° The latter shape is probably caused by adding together two separately produced
T.W. 53 (LINES 1954», Pl. XXXVIILB). An example from Nimrud, PS (ND '73l6 =BM WA parts. The body profile of these beakers is cylindrical, although there is always a tendency
i992-3-2,lO4) has an S»shaped profile, a small button base and a slightly everted rim. towards an S-shaped profile. The rim profile is simply rounded.
m Whereas beaker fragments from Tell lmlihiye (BQEHMER/DAMMER 1985, Pl. 51, nos. From the drawings of the published beakers from FS we get the impression that they are
249-250) and a complete example from grave 8 at Tell Zubeidi (Pl. 132, no. 434) in the generally more cylindrical in shape than our examples. Only one published piece can, to any
Hamrin Basin are dated to the Late Kassitc period (13th/l2th(?) century BC; cf. p. 19) and
the 12th century BC (p. 52), the almost completely preserved beaker from Uruk/Warica
(BOEHMER 1988, 466, Pl. l6, no. 3l) was dated to the poorly attested Isin ll period. These
examples show a Tropfenboden and not a flattened rounded base as our examples. Knopjbecher aus Bronze from NB/LB graves. The only piece said to come from a pit burial
‘$3 For this term cf. CALMEYER 1965, 3; 1966, 63. is, however, not to be found in the catalogue. - The clay beakers are attested in Babylonia
*3‘ For decorated bronze-"situlae" cf. cxtvravsn 1965; 1966 (tom/9m century nc for earlier than the undecorated bronze beakers; but it can be questioned whether they served as
Luristan pieces); PORADA 1962, 66»67 (with a later date for the Neo-Elamite examples); cf. "prototype" for the production of bronze beakers, and not the other way around (cf. BOEHMER
most recently Low 1998; for undecorated ones cf. CALMEYER 1966, 57-63; for the evidence in BOEHMER/PEDDE/SALIE 1995, 32, n. 5; CALMEYER 1966, 61; 63).
from the graves at Uruldwarka cf. Boenmen in BOEHMER/PEDDE/SAUE 1995, 32-33 (lsin II ‘*5 cr. OATES, J. 1959, Pl. xxxv11.50»54; many of theses beakers have been found in "fin"
period), and SALIE on p. 40 (with reference to lron Age Ill sites in the Pusht—i Kuh area: cf. or "floor fill" material (cf. OATES, J. i959, 142).
VANDEN Banana/Tounovers 1995); passim; 129 (Neo»/Late Babylonian period: "2nd half of *3‘ Possibly the slight elevation of the foot of Fig. 12d could be morphologically paralleled
the 8th to the lst half of the 6th century Bc"). On p. 40 SAUE counts l4 examples of with the carination of Fig. 12c.

****pm T*f*’<*:;:ff-<1";* '''*' *''*'' '' ' '*W*"*"f**’***7f* **" ****”*’**" " ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ”
-..1-.-.-.-..-4...:-.r-..-...._..---.'-_._.... _. ..T...'_. . _.....,.._._.__._..¢...<. _ .._...,WM A/ [#9/( . _,

i
4
r

) 32 The Heartland ofAssyria Kalltu/Nimrud 33

I

real degree, be compared to our Fig. 13b. It is, however, considerably higher and the central d) Jars
part of the foot has a larger diameter. [37 Fine ware jars with conical neck

Chalice Fig. Shape Dimensions ______ __ _ Parallels V V

15b Neckedjar Hc. 11.5 cm,Dc.7.7 Assur(Assl,§§§Ta§§*'l§l;ll.l;i3R 1954,1>1. sa
1 Fig. lNo. Shape Dimensions [Parallels cm ________, ( ossibly 7th century tic) H
li 14a N 9/75 Chalice H c. 14.6 cm Nimrud, FS, S I0: DATES, J. 1959, Pl.
Dfjm c. 10.1 cm XXXVILS5 All fine ware necked jars from the CB have a uniform shape (Fig. 15a): an ovoid body with
“\
Dfl C. Cm fir
pointed base, a visible, though not extremely marked, shoulder and a conical neck. The rim
sometimes turns outwards. Fig. 15b, thus, shows a typical example of the CB assemblage.
Similar to the pedestal beakers there exist pedestal chalices at Nimrud. Chalices occur also Its body shape is slightly irregular. The parallels from other sites are rather limited. The
at other Iron Age sites of northern Mesopotamia - with various shapes/38 They have a high drawing of a necked jar from Assur represents a larger version with a button base.
and substantial foot, a globular body and an evertcd neck. The lower part of the foot of our Nevertheless, the grave where it was found can be dated to the 7th century no.1“
-.
example is identical to the beakers' foot, though there is an additional clay ridge between the It is interesting to note that no "palace ware" ~ dimpicd or not » has been discovered
base and cylindrical part of the foot. The transition from foot to body is marked by two large within the CB assemblage.“ The stratigraphical situation within the CB and the, in part,
grooves.” Another groove marks the beginning of the shoulder. The everted conical neck very striking similarities of CB pottery to shapes dated to the 7th century BC at Nimrud and
ends with a thickened rim. A small groove is recognisable on the outside. S0 far, the elsewhere precludes a rapid generalisation. For the moment, indeed, a functional difference
immediate parallels can be dated at least to the second half of the 7th century BC.M° - whether or not with chronological signficance - should not be excluded.

c) Istikarts Jars with cylindrical neck

{Shape Dimensions Parallels ,__,,_,__,__,_ .Iiis@..-!..§n=;p@. T *5lBiEh€l5Es"llllllllllllllllllA liléréiiéis "1.. . .-
I46 istiknn H C. 5 Cm, D C. 4.5 Cm Nimrud, NWP2 ND 3119, BM WA 199} l5ci liar _ ll c. 19.8 cm, D c. 8 cm__,_, _ ______________f __
§*l»_1_§?.@l1?_€¥l‘.)...- -
.. .. __._. Jars with ovoid body, pointed, rounded or Wackelboden-base, an almost cylindrical neck and
1 _l4d i.rijlg;_r_ri_ l H c. 5 cm, D c. _5.8 cm l exterior thickened rim belong to the typical Neo~Assyrian repertoire (Flasche). in the
i Numerous small beakers with widely flaring rim, so~called "i.rtikans", were among the Central Building they occur in three different sizes at least (Flg. i$c).
pottery assemblage from room 5 (cf. Fig. 14b). There exists a variety of shapes because The jar of Fig. ’l5d has a regular shape and an almost pointed base. The neck is slightly
normally they were produced rather quickly and a specific shape, in the sense of our "types", concave in profile and ends in a thick rounded rim showing some edges from the finishing
was hardly intended. Once they were finished, they were cut off from the remaining clay process. A well distributed skin can be recognised as well as several horizontal grooves. One
with a string. of them marks the transition between shoulder and neck, though the carination itself seems
An istikan with bulbous and cylindrical body (Fig. l4c) and everted rim finds a rough rather "smooth". A rather close parallel is Ass. 1.l373b from a possibly 8th century BC brick
parallel, though considerably higher, in the NW Palace. Others from the same building (area grave at the Binnenwall of Assur.M6 However, the base of Ass. 113'/3b is not pointed, but is
Z.T. 30, at present in the British Museum) date to the 7th century SC {see above). of Wackelboden type. The shape is less regularly made than the jar from the CB.
Comparative material comes from Residences K and M at Khorsabad and provides us with A bigger jar of the same shape (Fig. l5 second from right, l-l c. 35.5 cm) finds a very
an late 8th-century date."" However, these have a slightly different shape and were certainly close parallel in a jar from a well in the NW Palace, room NN, which can be dated to the 8th
not as thick walled as the example from the CB. century or later.” Between these in size is the jar on the far right of Fig. 15c (H. c. 28.8
Another istikan from our corpus has a flattened base, an extremely conical shape, and a cm), so far without an exact parallel.
widely everted neck (Fig. 14d). The rim seems to be flaring. Similar but certainly not
I
identical istikcms have been f0tln(i in t=s."" Small squat }ars
Though the isrikans from the Central Building seem to be fairly well made, the majority
of them were produced in a rather rough way. Typological comparisons, therefore, are
lhiglwlihléltt t t t t Shape ' _Qi_r}1_e_1_1_sior_1s My ggggggggg _1§:;;1¢§ii§j§_ **** it
fruitful only to a certain extent. lt remains only to say that istikans are hardly to be found .l§_b..__l.N 24/is ,S,rna_1l,§99§ti§,t,,, or H c. 4.6 <:m.1> C. 3.8 cm
W Small squatjar I H (1. 5.1 cm, D c. 4.8 cm __
outside the Assyrian heartland.”

'3’ Onres, J. 19s9,1>1.xxxv11,54. V

*3“ Tell Halaf: HRounA 1962, Pl. 58, no. 59; 63, no. 18-, 65, no. 62; for the region west and differences for this "uneven" distribution. '
southwest of the Euphrates cf. LEHMANN 1996, Pl. 22, "Form 125 1'“ cr. HALLER 1954, t>1. 51, which shows the drawing of a similar jar (nipple base?) from El
"9 cf. oms, J. 1959, Pl. XXXVIL57. context which could go back to the 8th century ac (Ass. l2054b); cf. n. 46. Possibly the ink»
14° Cf. OATES, J. I959, I42 quoting a similar example from S, Y, second destruction level. drawing of OATES, J. 1959, Pl. XXXVIL78 (from the main mound with comparative material
u
I.
"1 Louo/ALTMAN 1938, Pl. 63, 241-242. from FS) does not accurately represent the original necked jar.
*4” Onres, 1. i959, Pl. xxxv1,43, other similar pieces from rs are stored in the British "5 cf. 01-rrsu 1991.
Museum. *4‘ HAUSLHTFR1996 Pi cxx119
M3 Cf. BERNBECK 1993, 116 who stresses regional and social rather than chronological “" BM WA 1992-3-2 29 H 31 5 cm

‘lilllciir 1 "tr: rsiS‘.y

.‘.~;, V v J Z.ib1"3rynnm.
* ’" *’**1:.- ':'_;1"*—*1i""""" "’
.__,,____,__,,___.,____,,_....._........ __,,.-- - - ~ M ~ —\- "~

“ “" “" '"“ " f 34 The Heartland 0fAssyria Kalltu/Nimrud 35

A quite uniform group of small squat jars with short neck and thickened rim occurs among
the room 5 pottery (Fig. l6a). Several shapes seem to be attested, partly due to the
apparently quick and rough production process.
One small thick-walled squat jar with rounded base (Wackelboden), gobular body and
conical everted neck has a simple rounded (or slightly thickened) rim (Fig. 16b). The surface
~
bears a thick skin. This jar has no exact parallels. Many examples with a cylindrical or
i
everted neck, thus different from our jar, have been found in graves at Assur. Their surface
is either plain or has a combdncised pattern on the shoulder. The rim is normally flattened
and externally flaring. '48
Another example with flattened base has a squat gobular body (S~shaped profile) and a
flattened base (possibly string~»cut). The exterior rim is thickened and has a rectangular
pl"0fil6. The whole jar is rather roughly made and has, similar to the preceding one, a thick
skin (Fig. l6c). A recently published photograph of a small squat jar from Fort Shalmaneser
shows more similarity to our jar than the previously published ink-drawing of another
example of this group.M9
Squat jar (small pot)
with a folded rim (oblong profile).m lt should consequently be dated to the late 8th century
BC. Though in a very limited quantity, the material from Khorsabad indicates a similar range
in height as with the examples from Nimrud.‘53
Four jars from the Central Building could be studied on the basis of individual
photographs: Pig. 17b left shows a regularly ovoid shaped jar with high shoulder, flat but
apparently uneven base, short neck (almost non-existent) and thickened rim (flattened or
bevelled outside) with edge. Similar to most of the other examples traces of the turning-
process are visible on the exterior surface. The shape of the jars on Figs. 17b right and 17c
is slightly irregular. The basic difference from Fig. l7b left is a high and concave neck and a
horizontal rib between neck and shoulder. The rim seems to be rounded and less sharp; at
least Pig. l7b right seems to have a ring-base. The surface of the jar depicted on Fig. 17c
shows remains of a skin and holes caused by the firing of the inclusions. The latter examples
have a good 7th-century BC parallel from PS, but this jar is slightly taller and has a thinner
rim.*54 With fewer similarities in detail, though generally comparable, is the drawing of
another jar from PS with an intentional groove on its shoulder.'55 Our last jar (Fig. 17d) has
a regular shape and no grooves left by the production process. Neck and rim are similar to
the two examples previously discussed, but there is no rib on the shoulder. It seems that this
jar also has a ring-base. Compared to the other jars, this one is rather tall, but nevertheless

l Figgm Shape
16d Squatjar
Dimensions
I-l c. 10.5 cm
D c. 8.7 cm ___________________
Parallels _ _

A globular, though slightly carinated, jar with rounded base is twice as big as the previous
jars (Fig. 16d). If the term "pot" is chosen, it does not imply use in cooking, but food
_ fits well in the group shown on Fig. l'/a.

Big ovoid wide-necked jars

rial Sham _,,,,, l>im@fl$i9_n§,. . - . . . ,1"ar=il <=,¥§ 11 _
18c I Big ovoidjar I-l c. 19-19.5 cm, I) c. 14 cm
processing could have been the purpose of this small jar. It is regularly produced. The 18d iBig ovoidjar ll c. 18.5-20 cm, D c. 11.4 crn
profile shows a marked transition between short conical neck and shoulder. The rim itself is
slightly thickened, flattened (outside) and with slightly rounded surface. On the two group photographs the close typological correspondence between all jars of this
group becomes clear (Figs. 18a-b). Similar to the slim wide-necked jars there are differences
Slim ovoid wide-necked jars in the shape of neck and rim as well as in the general profile. Common to these jars is a
ring-base, an ovoid to globular body and a short neck with a thick flattened rim, sometimes
‘Fig. g_Shape g g Qixgensions [Parallels flaring.
17b Gvoicl wide-necked jar H c. E8.2 cm ' One example (Fig. I80) has almost no neck (cf. Fig. 17b left), the transition from
I¢ft___ 1 D19-1 .859513...................................................................W.___________- shoulder to rim being a concave curve. The rim is slightly everted, thick and flattened. There
17b Ovoid wide-necked jar l~l c. 17.5 cm Nimrucl, FS, SE l8: MCDONALD 1995a, is no edge or other separating feature. Most of the skin has come off. A jar with cylindrical
right D 9-.8-499... ..1.§§te9.,15t3,(.fT?th..9¢11u.tY,§9?i)............- neck, carination and flaring rim represents a more common variant - as far as can be seen on
17c $Ovoid wide~nec1<ed jar H c. 16.5 cm Nimrod, FS, SE 18: MCDONALD 1995a, Figs. 18a-b. The ring-base is much more elaborated, whereas the shape of the body is not
P c. 10.3 cm 153, no. 143 ("7th century BC") __ quite symmetrical. The rim is rounded on the exterior. The fragmentarily preserved jar in
17d Ovoid wide-necked jar H c. 23. .3 cm Fig. 18a top right seems to show amarked transition between shoulder and body, but
D c. 9.9 cm remains an exception. These jars have ho parallels among the known Nco-Assyrian material
from other sites. The drawing of a jar from Nimrod PD. 1 (Outer Town) shows a globular
Fig. 17a shows a photograph with 18 examples of slim ovoid jars with short wide neck,
partly with high ring-base. On several examples grooves as traces of the turning process are
body, a smaller size and a different r1nq1snnpe.‘5° Examples possibly of the 8th century from
Qasrij Cliff show similar and different rim shapes, but all have a rib and a groove between
visible. Their height ranges between c. 17 and c. 22 cm (as far as measurable from the neck and body. Their body is not ovoid, but also much more globulanm Finally, some
photograph). Comparative material is scarcely to be found.'5° The jar in the top row far right
polychrome glazed jars from Assur, though admittedly with an ovoid body, are too much
has a vague parallel at Assur, though the latter has a less ovoid body.'5‘ Similar in shape dissimilar in shape and size as to be compared with our jars.'58
(i.e., cylindrical rather than ovoid) and size is ajar from Khorsabad (Residence K, room 58)
‘$2 mun/Atrnnn 193s,1>1.63, no. 22"/.
15“ Loot)/AljrMAN 193s,1>1. 63, nos. 227-223 (small: H c. 18 cm); 229 (tall: H c. 21 cm).
“*8 cf. Hatter 1954, Pu. 4n and 4d. 15“ This jar was also mentioned by O/ores, J. 1959, 145.
'4” MCDONALD l995a, 155, no. 136; the drawing published by oarss, 1. 1959, Pl. ‘S’ onres, J. 1959, Pl. XXX\/111,98.
XXX)/ll,76, depicts a jar from T.W. 53, house V1, room 43, level 2. "6 O/mas, J. 1959, Pl. xxxvntss; comparative material comes, e.g., from FS.
15° Though at Nimrud it is described as "one of the most popular jar types" (GATES, J. i959, ‘5’ ct. Cuaris 1989, Fig. 21,51; 53; Fig. 12,67. Similar examples have been found at Assur
l45). (1990 excavations) in a late Neo~Assyn'an context; cf. HAUSLEITER 1996, Pl. CXXXV,l ; 4.
‘S’ ct. HAUS1.n1Tnn 1996, Pl. CXXXIIL2 (Ass. 10s4s<;); 2nd half of 7th century ac. “B ct. ANDRAE 1923, 18, Figs. 9-10.
‘ _ I_v_¢_W__ r __ __,_,_____,__________ ____,..,»_ _ .... I j ----~ » - >

36 The Heartland 0fAssyria Kallzu/Nimrud 37

Big jars with two-handles and everted rim ("water jars")
Fig. Shape W 7 _ Dimensio_n_s_
l9a left Big "Waterjar" with two opposite H c. 22 cm
hanrdlesflanrl everted rim VVVVVVVVVV c_._22 cm
19a right Big "Waterjar" with two opposite H c. 21.5 cm
handles and everted rim
These big "jars" were already visible on the first photographs showing pottery from the
Central Building (cf. Figs. 9b, 10a-b). One of them could be almost completely restored
(Fig, l9a_ left). They are, indeed, open vessels. A large base rests on a ring-base. The lower
part of the body is conical, while the main part is basically cylindrical but with a concave
outline. The rim is everted, rather similar to the istikans. Two directly opposing vertical
handles (with round diameter) are placed in the middle of the concave part of the body.
Below and above them a deep horizontal groove is incised. As to the function of these jars,
we assume a role in food processing or consumption. Long~time storage purposes can be
excluded because of the wide neck. An exact designation, whether as "water jars" or craters
('2) cannot presently be defined. A slightly differently shaped but similar sized jar was found
in Fort Shalmaneser. Its two handles are reconstructed, with the grooves "missing".'59
Cylindrical jar with two handles
Fig- ishave _ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii if Dimensions, W,,,.lPer=;ll9h
19b Bigjar with cylindrical body and two H c. 20 cm
handles ___” D c.13.3
A similar functional purpose might have been served by a rather thick-walled jar with flat
base, conical lower and almost cylindrical upper body (Fig. 19b). its flat shoulder is marked
by a sharp carination, as it is the case with the cylindrical neck. At both carinations a clay
edge is visible. The externally very thick rim is flattened, but has a rounded profile. The two
vertical handles were not exactly opposite to each other; only one of them was still
preserved. No similar jar has been found. Though the clay was medium to coarse this jar
was carefully finished and seems much more elaborate than the two preceding "waterjars".
The thick wail and the shape of body and handle are very reminiscent of a stone jar, though
no parallel can be offered.
e) Special shapes
Saucer lamps
ins;ii i i i i it lShape or gggggg lljmensionsiiiiii"iiirmrras __, 1 gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggit
19¢, N .16,/t§,,,-i,§aw ramp Hcacmu
At least 16 saucer lamps were found in room 5. This type occurcd at Nimrud in FS as well
as in Neo~Assyrian graves and tombs at Assur. On the photograph (Fig. 19c) several variants
can be recognised. A rather narrow shape with curved transitions and low "saucer" seems to
be more typical than examples with a high "foot" and/or deep saucer section (cf., e.g., Fig.
19c, second row, first and third from left).“°
Our example (Fig. 19d) is made of medium-fine to coarse clay. The shape is rather
regular, although most of these lamps were produced with little care)“ It has a flat base, a
‘5° Onres, 1. 1959, PI. xxx1x,1o0; cf. P. 145, with reference to an "identical jar" from SE
17 and other examples from C 3 and S, Y, first destruction level.
it4
< '6“ Cf. OATES, J. 1959, Pl. XXXlX,lO6 (and other examples from FS).
'°' As most of the other examples from Nimrud: Onras, J. 2959, Pi. XXXlX,i04»105;
CURTIS/COLLON/GREEN 1993, 28, Pig. 27,10. On examples from Assur the central cylindrical
shallow saucer with thickened and bevelled rim (triangular profile). The foot has a concave
Parallels profile and leads directly to the upper part of the lamp (the bowl for fuel and burner). The
thickened rim is rounded and below it there is a large groove, similar to some bowls. When
the clay was still flexible the "spout" for the burner was shaped. As with all the other lamps,
no traces of firing could be observed.
As to the chronological limits, it seems that saucer lamps can be traced from the 9th ('?)
or 8th century ac down to the 7th century BC.
Potstands
Some potstands are also recorded from the CB. Both photographs (Figs. 9b and 19e) show
three examples with thickened rims. A chronological development cannot yet be determined,
and different types seem to have existed contemporaneously. At Nimrud several potstands
were registered. 62
Deep bowl with ring-stand
Etta tfihapg Dimensions .,Paral19Is ____
19f Deep bowl with ring- D c. 17.9 cm Nimrud, FS, SE 11: GATES, J. E959, Pi.
stand l-I c. 14 cm XXXVL36; trench IA 50, room 3:
V MCDONALD 1995a, 153, no. 128 ("7th
century BC’)
The examples recorded so far of a deep bowl with high ring-stand, conical body and
777777777777W_ thickened (folded) rim have the same dimensions. As the ring-stand is cverted to give a
better support, there is a sharp carination between the lower and the upper part of these
"bowls". The comparisons come from Nimrod and Assur, in both cases from a late 7th-
century context/63
Functionally, we propose that they were used as potstands (although they could have
been used as bowls as well). The elaborate ring—stand and its profile suggests the use as a
potstand for big }ars which could not stay upright lay themselves.
Conclusions
The excavators stressed "analogies" for the pottery from the CB to the pottery from
Fort Shalrnaneser. A survey of comparative material from Nimrod and elsewhere
shows that this general impression is correct. However, the discussion of the CB
material illustrates also that there are some vessel shapes which are so far
unparalleled at Nimrud and other Neo-Assyrian sites.
As for the findspot, the pottery was found grouped according to shapes, as if it
r had fallen from a shelf. The homogeneity of the corpus was immediately
recognised, and the presence in l~arge numbers of certain shapes (pedestal beakers,
fine-ware necked jars, slim ovoid jars, saucer lamps) suggests that we are dealing,
indeed, with a pottery deposit where pottery was stored in order to be used -
possibly in the Central Building itself or neighbouring architectural complexes. The
part of the lamps seems to have been more stable (cf. HAUSLEITER 1996, Pl. CXXXIXJ-3;
5-6).
“*2 O/mas, 1. 1959, P1. XXXIX,1l0-1i4; cf. McDoNALo 1995a, 159, nos. 149 (trench 0.20;
8th century BC) and 150 (FS, NW 19: 7th century BC).
“'3 For Nimrud, cf. above (under "paral1eIs"); for further examples from FS, cf. OATES, J.
1959, 145 (SE 17, SE 10, S, Y, first and second destruction levels). Ass. 11297, a
sarcophagus in a private house, yielded an identical bowl (Ass. l1297c), though slightly
higher (cf. HAUSLEITER 1996, 46).
._. ._ ,,,_ _ _ ~— — — — — ~ ~—* ------------——--—----~ ' '

38 The Heartland ofzlssyria Kallzu/Nimrud 39

existence of a pottery storeroom implies that building and pottery were in use at the general way (Tell al-Rirnah); others, instead, have so far no parallels within
same time but this does neither necessarily affect the construction date of the published Neo-Assyrian pottery (e.g., Fig. 17). Parallels to what is considered
building nor the production date of the pottery.” "earlier Neo-Assyrian" at the site of Assur are, however, not present.“
For an absolute dating of the corpus there are some data which set a As to the chronological limitations, the existence of numerous parallels to
chronological frame: the bricks of Assurnasirpal ll indicate a first construction of material from a late 7th (or even early 6th) century BC context within Nirnrud
the building (whether or not a temple) during the first half of the 9th century BC. suggests a corresponding date for parts of the CB corpus. ln view of an existing
Inscribed bricks of his son and successor Shalmaneser Ill found in the pavements pottery tradition at this site and because of comparisons from other sites dating to
suggest (re)construction activities during the later part of the 9th century BC. Other the 8th or 7th centuries BC, the range of possible dates starts to extend into the 8th
building inscriptions were not found. Thus we obtain a terminus ante quem non for century BC. The findspot and the occurrence of a number of vessels unparalleled to
depositions within the Central Building. The style and scenes of the two cylinder '/th century material would even serve as an additional argument for a
seals from the building provide us with a rough indication of the dating to the chronological interpretation different from "late 7th century BC" (e.g. the situla»
9th/8th centuries BC. 1“ As for the "upper" chronological limit, a Hellenistic "pipe"- shaped beakcrs, Fig. 11b-c, or the jars on Fig. 17), but a different functional context
lamp which was found above room 5 - apparently out of its original context - as expressed in the occurrence or absence of certain pottery shapes should be taken
indicates the latest date, though the end of the time-span in question should better in consideration (note, e.g., the high percentage of bowls recovered in FS vs. the
be placed earlier. quantity ofjars in the CB).
Turning back to the material itself, it was already stated that the use of different Looking at the close parallels to the PS pottery assemblage, it remains, however,
sorts of temper and different qualities of clay could be observed.“ Vegetable and difficult to argue for an earlier date for the pottery from the "squatter occupation" in
mineral inclusions are recorded; the clay ranges from a fine ware to medium fine or FS without convincing evidence for it. And even if it has to be considered as
coarse raw material. There is no record of decoration. The finish consists most possible that there is pottery among it which was produced before the later 7th
often of a skin. Though it is not possible to produce any evidence of statistical century BC, e.g., because it was robbed from within 138,169 we do not presently see
relevance (e.g., shape-fabric ratios), the occurauce of comparatively heavy and reasons for a fundamental change in the dating of the FS material.
roughly made vessels with vegetable temper should be noted here (e.g., Figs. 12, Independently from its absolute dating, the content of the pottery deposit in
16, 17). This observation can be hardly considered as more than a potential general room 5, however, can be considered as homogeneous and therefore
indication in favour of an "earlier" chronological position of the relevant vessels?“ contemporaneous - covering a rather limited span of time. As has been shown
Though general trends in the composition of temper and inclusions have been elsewhere, an accumulation of rather small pottery items throughout several
discussed, knowledge of the development of pottery production techniques at centuries can be excluded here because of several factors: size, transportability,
Nimrud is still insufficient. , frequency of use, fragmentation and value. This would have been possible rather for
Seen from the morphological-typological perspective, some of the shapes from storage jars or large pottery bins."° This opens up two possible ways of
the CB pottery show striking parallels to material found in Fort Shalrnaneser and interpretation: 1. the CB pottery is of a late 7th century BC date and includes so far
other sites or contexts dating to the later part of the Neo-Assyrian period, i.e. the unknown shapes of the Late Assyrian pottery repertoire at Nirnrud; 2. the parallels
7th century BC. Some other pieces have parallels in later 8th century BC material to late l\leo~Assyrian shapes are to be explained as shapes which did not change
(e.g., from Khorsabad) or contexts which were dated to the 8th century in a rather during the last 200450 years of the Neo-Assyrian period, thus being part of earlier
ceramic traditions at Nimrud - as has to be said for the unparalleled vessel shapes.
*6“ On the relationship between residual pottery sherds and "in situ“-contexts cf., e.g., It is, however, problematic to gain results here, because there is hardly material
Guzman 1.997/98, 232~233. from this or other sites dating to the earlier part of the Neo-Assyrian period.
“*5 The cylinder seal made of baked clay N-6/74 was found in sector N30/E10 (BIELINSKI But apart from the pottery itself there is evidence for activity in the area after
l978, 64: "darts la salle 1"), which, according to MIERZEJEWSK1/SOBOLEWSKI 1980, 154, Fig. the 9th century BC: the 120 sculptured reliefs and fragments which were found near
13, covers the area in front of entrance "a": cf. MIERZEJEWSKI/SOBOLEWIQ 1980. 161, Fig. 15 the area of the Central Building were brought here either in the middle of the 8th
(eMsuszYt~isr<i 1977, 313, photo 29); cf. Bintittsto 1978. 64 (Fig. l “cat. no. 1" on p._65). century BC - during or after the time of Tiglath~pileser‘s Ill reign - or later, possibly
The cylinder seal made of "black stone" (chalcedony?) N~1/74 (B1E1.ntsi<i i978, 66, Fig. 4 in the time of Esarhaddon, i.e. the 7th century BC (see above, n. 106). Though it
"cat no. 2") was found in sector N30/E10 in the debris which was left behind by Rassam.
Both seals are discussed by Bieriusiu (1978); cf. Henaonor 1992, S5-86. has still to be proved, even these activities might be connected with the pottery
'66 This information is based on the statements of A. Mierzejewski and in part on the deposit in room 5. It is well known, moreover, that on many other parts of the main
photographic record. _ _ A _
67 The tendency towards an increasing percentage of sandy f21l)1'"lCS during the Neo»Assynan
168
period has been observed so far only at the excavations at Khirbet Khatuniyeh, and. together Cf. HAusLs1rsu this volume, pp. 136-I38, Figs. 5-7.
with the interpretation of the evidence at Qasrij Cliff and Khirbet Qasrij, it is not yet certain ‘t9 cf. RBADB in cums 1982, 109-:10 for the history of deposition of the lVOI"l€S at Fort
whether this has to be considered as a local phenomenon of pottery technology or a large- Shalmaneser.
scale development with chronological implications; cf. GREEN this volume, pp. 115-116. "° cf. MILLS 1989, 144, Ttlb. 6 and discussion.

W WV’ W". W r i W I r 'I;3:'13'i3"¢':-".;..

7 __ _ ****** **********_** 7 7 771’ """"’ "'7" _ _ _ _ i » __ W _ T ‘h 7
‘___? .,_, _,_ _4 .....___ 77 __ _ _ ~»»-»-- _ ___ .. .....5a,.,»..,,W.~w~,..x.»
1"”

40 The Heartland offilssyria Kallzu/Nimrua‘ 41

mound — as well as most probably near to the CB ~ there was occupation of the
later Nee-Assyrian period.
Although some new material couid be presented here, the chronological setting of
the CB pottery deposit can be solved at present only in a preliminary way - also,
and especially, due to the circumstances of its incomplete recovery. Analysing the
given facts, a date beginning at around the end of the 8th century BC (and
extending to the 7th) can be adopted with some probability, although it cannot be
defined with satisfying certainty. Though weak, the basis of technological
considerations may point in the direction of an earlier dating. Some of the shapes,
moreover, may even support this argumentation. However, the comparisons to
material dating to the 7th century BC together with the occurrence of human
activity in this area of the main mound during that time are rather convincing. An
(8th-)7th century BC date is therewith proposed for the CB pottery from room 5.
The lack of parallels to material dated to the 9th/8th century BC (i.e., from Qasrij
Cliff and Assur) is certainly not adverse to our conclusion, though should not yet be
taken as a reliable argument because the material basis is still not sufficient and,
additionally, a strong local pottery tradition beginning with the refoundation of
Kalhu by Assurnasirpal Ii should probably be recognised at this site.
3. Survey of the Italian Missionm
In 1987, 1988 and 1989 an Italian mission headed by Paolo Fiorina conducted
excavations in Fort Shalmaneser and in buildings in its northern vicinity.
Additionaily, a survey within the lower town was carried out along the northern
and eastern walls of the city. Thus, an area of 160 ha in the shape of a letter "L"
was almost entirely covered by survey operations. Less than half of the surface of
the site (360 ha) was surveyed. The area immediately east of the main mound was
not covered by the survey. Collections of potsherds, ranging from the Ubaid to
Islamic periods, included also Neo-Assyrian and Hellenistic materialm It seems
quite possible that some parts of the Lower Town area were not densely settled, as
indicated by the absence of surface sherdsm Pottery from the Italian excavations at
Fort Shalmaneser is presently unpublished."“
his permission for the publication of a selected group of photographs. - l gratefully
remember my stay at the British Museum in 1993, where 1 had the opportunity to study Neo-
Assyrian pottery from Nimrud. In particular I am very much indebted to John Curtis and
Helen McDonald. Carolyn Postgate then generously sent me an extract of her manuscript on
Neo~Assyrian pottery from “Fell al»Rimah (cf. now POSTGATE, C./Onrtts, D./Oarss, J. 1997).
Finally, my warmest thanks go to Anthony Green who patiently corrected the English of this
article and provided me with some detailed information on several findspots at Nimrud.
References cited
ANDRAE 1923, Bnnuencx 1993, B11~21.11<1s1<1 1978, BOEHMER 1988, BOEHMER/'
DAMMER 1985, BOEHMER/PEDDE/SALIE 1995, CALMEYER 1965; 1966, CAMPBELL
THOMPSON/HUTCHINSON 1929, CAMPBELL THOMPSON/MALLOWAN 1933, CURTIS
1979; 1989, CURTIS/GREEN 1997, CURTIS/COLLON/GREEN 1993, CURTIS ed. 1982,
CURTIS/READE eds. 1995,DAMERJ1 1999, FIORINA 1998, Faaesrone/Huoiriss 1989,
GATTI 1987, GERBER 1997/98, GREEN 1986; in preparation, HALLER 1954,
HAUSLEXTER 1992; 1995; 1996; 1997, HEINRICH 1984, Hsnsouor 1992,
i"IERRMANN/CURTIS 1998, I-Lacuna 1962, Kill-INE 1993; 1994, LEI-{MANN 1996,
LINES 1954, Low 1998, LOUD/ALTMAN 1938, MALLOWAN 1950; 1952; 1953; 1954;
1956; 1957; 1958; 1966, MALLOWAN/DAVIES 1970, MCDONALD 1995a; 1995b,
MEUSZYNSK1 1977; 1978, Mrenzenzwsnrl Soeotewsxr 1980, Mrotus 1996, MILLS
1989, NEGRO 1997, Ones, D., 1959; 1961; 1963; 1965; 1968a; 196811; 1972,
Ones, D./Oarns, J. 1958, POSTGATE, C./Omns, D./0A'l'ES, J. 1997, Orvrss, J.
1959, OHTSU 1991, PARKER 1954, ?ARr>o1.A 1976, Pnnensnn 1989, PORA1)A 1962,
POSTGATE 1973, POSTGATE/READE 1976-80, RAWSON 1954, R1-sane 1968; 1980;
1995, Reicnni. 1990, SOBOLEWSKI 1974/77; 1981, STAATLICHE Musasn zu BERLIN
eds. 1992, Srnomcn 1994, STRONACH/LUMDSEN 1992, Sunannaoatv/Ramona
1982, Tl-IUREAU-DANGIN/DUNAND 1936, TURNER t970, VANDEN .BERGl~l"E/
TOUROVETS 1995, WILKINSON! TUCKER 1995, WELKINSON/MA‘TTHEWS eds. 1989.
Figs. 1-19 on pp. 42-60.

Acknowledgements
My sincere thanks go to Andrzej Reiche who established contact between the author and
Antoni Mierzejewski (National Museum Warsaw), member of the Polish excavation team
during the 1970s (as archaeologist and epigraphist), and now in charge of the excavation
records. In a vivid discussion we went through the excavations at Nitnrud which were
carried out more than 20 years ago. Mierzejewslti made relevant information and records
accessible and took much time in discussing the evidence and results. Furthermore, he gave

l’?
’ WlLKlNSON/MATTHEWS eds. 1989; GREEN in preparation.
"=1 cr. Flonma 1998; 161 the Hellenistic period at Nimrud, cf. Onrrzs, D./Oates, J. 195s,
O/ites, 1). 19688, 63-66, Pls. XIV-XV (and pp. 122-144).
‘"3 For the evidence at Nineveh, cf. Sraowacn/Lumoseu 1992. 228; smnnacn 1994, 102;
cf. Lumosoen, this volume, pp. 3-15.
"“ cf. FIORINA 1998. P1018118 Negro (Turin) 15 in charge of the pottery publication of the
ltaiian Mission.

xi

_.,-.-1. -.
 Q E
E
*
fi n
%
___‘1 F‘ U IP%
7 _ :

\(\m1‘mm_

X
@NU
2
4___) R
Hm
wm
swan
6‘!
_\__‘
X :__:“___:%
m_'_'l_
W ¢u%m’
’ mUUM<m_‘_E
z‘_\\
mw
____
\“T_m/f‘\)gm
/ “___, Hd ‘WA S S y N_d
FMmy MNM rud 43

O_
h_ ‘““‘__‘
‘1 ‘

mt‘X’ U‘
__IWM“
F\l‘|_H“‘AI
Wl‘;‘ On_’___\
‘___.
_
:0"fir
kw m>0o w
Wéa
m_m02N_ummdwwzE _‘‘‘‘‘
____
__\
_Y
_0:‘_
xx
( /\_%/L_W\
$2
x___ W
U__m___;M_‘_ H
“2_ k
M
__W
uxw
W
fly
my
_
__\____T‘W
___"Ii
‘\‘_ mfigw
ma"? J.
Q1“;
\““___
_J%¢
__F_OM_“
'_%_H__,_W\A_,§ ‘M VT\kg\ \ \ \K iv
D‘1fiW‘mlmmhiIq‘mKzixif __§L‘
’NMx_>N “I_‘k ‘_
2m_
3m“w
"_
_w80o
M‘__ nf
I1“‘ T‘‘‘\'“W
lii
__v_j_(___wAW
‘lll““‘l_;“HH
L1T“:‘} 1‘
“L
‘\“|‘
W( O4‘
(v
g_0
mH :_- MN“x
__4° _43
_2__zMm
)\\
uJ_‘E_VN__4_\_Am
H I,__“_\m1
~__
miE‘uflommkl
“_,a_
__
_mzAvsmkfwR‘
_L‘U_'7
‘j&4_WI!
iin__>_W
J
___’ __”wvUonI___m___o
Nmy ‘_<:_\_\4/K
n__\__ ____
\_.“
>\h“
C
___}Z“_‘
V ,\
____ mw>%%_‘___
&/_‘‘‘\_\&H_\mH \v\\oflhuomn
H_‘l\_H_|_ _ m____’ Hout‘8“8
8"_Ommon
8_8
_ V‘_3_&m‘
NkwQ
_ §m_§gYm;_mM
_mUU_m_<
_Qmm_OlEwQmUO >Wfl_m_ 3QN_
‘ ‘“:
w

D
___
mm__>;
mwt‘\‘\\\
if
mgQo_xV‘_P hI‘_U _ _
\
H
J
§M‘Hwwwmi
_\Hu\\
2yfl __~_
IH\_/[J
__<
wU_____§fl
5
_W
Mxx
5mfi’\\
__/Afl_WM
- w_mzK§_w_Wh_\
vW
fig
figs;mK
\ m =Hun:
n____
__‘lit
_._bbw/_,__
’_ _ ___'vzz___'m___ ‘

gEfig
>fiafizN
xwmza
vbufiom_§%2_8zHQ
Ofig
g>5O_>/n H
DT
/
uA__uhwYz04$ z WT
on
m
_M
H___KJb\A|IH“_
\
___
__’_ _1‘
'\-_ _l_’
’N_u_m_'
_W_ \__u
__\_~,_ _ A4 ‘ lH“

__

wM
QQ
@
N~
t_

¥i
1v'
_

H I/0

L,

:0 _A__¥____ ‘_
r

F‘WW 1 M W _G’m3 _m m O U Hd M MW M 11 9 5 7’ H I)
L_ _ 4_
_4

TM HM NMn d 0M SSy rM M MNM M H»

r

L‘_53_m m y7_aq §_¥$m

M
w

% E
“fl_O1”‘___'‘H__,7_“w_n _n
I’Amy Mb““E’.'M“
>’_y_
V_:_wv___‘'_K“|'vS"A
HM

‘_I‘“___
V_“
'._fi,__>m‘_T
_
by
W Jmy
_”__“I
Lt
/ MV ‘YI’
mi __ WU
D“UJ__
L"N
k___Nan
VN‘“rd
‘
_WMHA1’Vv_H‘umPW>_yI_HWM“VWW‘M W“
‘Q0‘ “A__1WMN_
J
_31WQ_EUh0_ ‘*7
_V‘
__iR_“_‘__~_
‘_ ‘H,
3_$I’3:
_~_‘VV_
Q
M3
_“H
aw_*‘_fa
"
_4“
'‘__ll
__’%Z
JVW>_‘(‘___‘_I_4_

%_HgFA__!
__5’‘_____ M
n_inJ
’NM
“E
a_|um_> _
W‘ _ I_}
___“
I:3|;1__v_‘A_ G‘I_5::_'031‘
_>A _'I__' _'I
HV?M,
“5!W’WV
__P
l_
’§
‘ykH
\
H‘
71u_TV_ '
IU =_I)_ 3%_ 1__
___w_g!lv__V_
u_!1:1_‘_1g:__l|LV_i‘__‘
I‘V_

IW
F‘
Wm
“,4!
‘w1 1_ "$1
_>‘i _
_vJ___
0'0;
_W?‘
H I__C_ ____“
_i ’ : ‘ U_“L
YL1|
K
2W“?
i'_155;y2
t_ me ___sgm
W‘ “J__\__l
33u) p~§‘4|_'i‘_|_M_‘ U|Eu_ w_‘ 0_
Jw‘V5TN
(__
I\L V ~_gmV
W rm‘
M‘ 1 ‘ ‘

JC
H_I‘,_L0Ev‘P” I _"x§II‘
_I_I‘!__ SW
‘>dz‘
u‘FA4_)‘Y:0“
__ _HrpVHb]r_"_hH"_ Ml‘w_iyhv:u§“vnv_ ‘:_wh
F"Hy
_‘g
‘_P_“_
FLIII
_1_ _' 2_m‘Vy__ 'B‘
av>'_
_ ,_>
_‘_
__‘_h_hgm___;$___;h_._\

3awk
.jv|I'|%2‘|_P“>‘IL _‘8
m
1V.__V
_'_ ‘_17!1"‘Al__
.:_‘l: l>_ ,_ §i|"“|:l

CA[1EMIJ
R FrL
r_‘L
r|I__s_V,‘l'1>fMI“g__t;_‘MIIi“_v|l‘EH_wH_‘‘' __ I T;‘LI2 ;l1___ ’_°_:o
H:A
rfir?_'__iWln[ I_W“
g§;‘_‘_\:1_i_"_'_H__T_
_%_Er‘
_r\’_“m_‘ \_ 'fi“_ ‘H E|_11l __k_w_:‘_‘|M;_m>5__t_;¥_L_M _‘H_
‘_‘ha
H‘ F
33WVV;l V_
'./>
_ FM“?
Q>Iv_J_M_‘
_W" YY‘_ ‘4_|‘Kv_
I 2 3

Ah3
f‘E____\
'_IRVM%a_:
7_éf‘;_ >_ \na M
N _mr U ‘Q T W_ 5 fix N6 O Am$ Y _mn D_ mw W @WE N 5 4, H X X XW
I S
_V_V‘_l_I_Vv

:__“W_
_.3“___?_R,”
1:U“___;_,_u_
‘ _ ‘mm.

TiW07; Wm
N E_W _»W_M
QM _$
\M_i
w _(_,‘/\_];
A v
___\_I té
i
am%
_WI> §_, _i]W
!Pi_V _WWQ
i _ _;|I,“ i‘
LI I‘K_:v_ ‘u_V|V_|‘
"__““gm_V_~““___V_VH‘_
é
hr
‘'_;1___‘"_I)_

_‘ _I_/Kma
W
_\_ N W
_

/_'\‘\__‘_____If:5
_W__ _ _‘ ;\'_ _1_g§_)2‘F’_'){.iILl_“}i. ‘ \1\l_ |\_| g1_l £I$‘_]_|i|_|_|l‘lY]I“I|[)__/J

__3‘
__ _>

h__‘Ry";_\_

__
t
My
YQ
I

//

M Wd, FO Yt S _h 3 m8 nC S 6 Y, rOO m T 2Q N 60 AS S y _n8H p O

99 0% 2R” F GU 2? 1 '1
ft m_y (\ C U RTE E O LL W E R EW
‘_
V
‘I4 V39Ki
‘_ Z
2L_
F ._‘g 3‘ U7 by
3
MM W M MHi
2
MW» W
W, “I kl3
M

F aw 4
I] N M Ud, FON S h H m & H6
r S 6r ( 0A M D 11 9 6 QM H II )
. _,______._............. __., ___ __ ,... __ __ ,,,,,,,,Y‘

| 46 The Heartland ofAssyria KGM”/N‘”””'“d 47

I

“K ._.,.;_. 1
-Pw

'11
~-
CE“
@\??\ ___.__. .‘.M._,- ._ 4% _ ._ .._.__.__
/\
>-1
7--1
1-1

U1

wm
$/W ii‘Q £mm%M
r at
xi] _
{|§ "<71 ‘ Q); U»|?L_ __/'2 />

qfim W wQ@%@flfln%fi@
-1 »-
C3 X XVI}-X XV
?.
ox“
V3
O\
v-M

‘P
S5
9N
.1I‘ l'fE€-§j—_ >-§

§
<1
Assv-0
E.
an
=
>0
o
CT} O
\_/

Q)
D
¢-A
w
Z?
ca npo
A Y} Kg
""1
=<
/‘“~
O
:3 52 I:_.
as:

(_-5'—53
C/J
¢
F-1
>-I
\D
U1
:0

>--
:1

/
5H; 4%)€\“ ;_ -Z!_ -‘
NcN'on-1Arvusd,yFnSa:

E
AX X'f\X X
cs
M %&£m: H%WQ$@§) KO
on
on-1
F-=1

., ?,_, ,_,_ _ IL --W-w-~»»

K ?;jlI.iij.i.;_’ f'Cjj;1.;i"T J4 -é ,

L_ 65:3 {H \\<‘>
/‘1 ‘Q
,_ _ ,_ _K?
;..-_»...»..;=...'..-..-.-,-.-,<=.---~»--~v--.- W _ _ — 7 7— __ _ _____ ,_ , _!__ ___.. , , ,

‘ 48 The Heartland ofAssyria i Kallm/Nimrud

in
\~_.fi_._; _*_“
O
O
-
\ l > ih.“ W4 §:_M_,_

= ' E

M M1 fig
j
73
I
\.
1.

E
l‘
¢
ri
"1 an
{'0
O
E-I
Q
‘ELD 114%, \ M/
Q
'4'

RINORH4
TE
1 _ \
I_
'"~~_ \
asI \\\__Z
J?
/.’//
u.
u. /.
MM§\ \
zz A3I.
-~-
>1—-"
t
VKN
DO
HM 5
I
s J
\
\\
AA
Ie/\\_'\_

1
atrv Uvsa
W/é/'““\_\ \___
:":\
-
Y,“
"\_.._ F‘_ <
~ _~\_ _ ,_ /i"
lls
\
\_\__i,;/
-_/-__
~»»--»»-4
*~ / ../

$551 (
"MK 66
' .

*2‘/
\ ‘-.‘ _
i
M
: N
‘\,'§\/
\‘\7*
‘ “\~“"1”.l*: .;f
yaE.

/
\_____,\
,
./"_>’/y/48
~..,_ .

2
‘
‘~
\ W

"'
H
A
Q‘

, -"""

qmx
,”
..“/-~" I4
M/flu.
~~.,~_\ ‘"-~_/
..

‘:9.
1»|” >\.
M kx
\
WV’

~\___,
\>\
‘\.4
':.--,-- J
, ,“ "-__ -~ ,,,. 2 ', .- - ‘. . ’ ,.— 4--- _....
_____.. \

. .-.._ "”‘\~~. 1
“ -._‘~.»\ //

\/
\fii::f" ___ "ijL_? \
" /”d'-.d—“_—
_. ; A a \) W.‘
‘Z ‘ v,:_-.2"? ___‘ \
Fig. 7 Nimrud, FS: Neo~Assyrian pottery (OATES, J. 1959, P1. XXXIX)
' -a8-
qq “___...-ni-I §/§_»2\*\
PluI1l- fig; I, P<»lM: I‘Ixcu\-euimla and 1\‘nr:h-\\‘c.-': Palace - I976. ll'hm \~lnbm-ured by arch. H. .~}¢>i;<»5~-\\'.¢l.1
lm==<'tI 11 1 | 1 1| ¢ - n a 11] - gu
» blki
| m( I b-c
_ M.E. L. .\!a Huunm.
‘
I ~\ .'~\\'
\ Paint:-. 1-I -—. L'p|\\-r (fi1mr\3u>x.\. J z P-mm‘ of Adm!-Ximri III. O ‘"1 Building 195% It ¢_
(1-mml~ Building. S m Central "Palace.

Fig. 8 Nimxud, main mound (SOBOLEWSIG 1974/77, Plan I, fig. 1)

1. _~<~~ I _=':_<:_*iiiiiiii _ _ ******************fl"f:'""__ 1: ’ _|5__ T V nu mum: V

 _ .._._.._,,,___,_, __ _ ____

‘ 50 The Heartland ofAssyria Kall:u/Nimrud 5g

.|_..__. . I , ~
"::“‘*'V""'~7:V\_:__:<'V' 1'5.‘-."__"F,f'*,!‘.$'§*“-(Y$£$!f"WV"§T“‘“Kf"1KTr;f_‘ } ‘Q -§ _ *""')‘- ‘ , _. " -4 -I v;V.--.‘_, V V__ M»...-V»_»_. _» .,..-.-..-,.V... ,7 . .
I :w: -1»--~-».. ,,
»»~-.,-=-V¢.;V.:=\>~.’1
V.VV-'-,-V.V=--;.~<~\": . ‘ 1.“-,“;Vli:~n-
. -*1: \-JIM» @V.‘arm _V.~#6;#<.- :1»-V V .ywr,. $1/- V .. .~-
.-.,VV V x-::1:'V1*;-.-‘ ‘§a“~<j§§,.'
-V ;¢.%@€'V-V-Vi»~.€V.“?:£!X¢*Ii@%“‘&,_;.
.V~.VVV. =V.~. =V -. 5:31
rt‘ V ..,a;~*:;r.'i<“'§»
..-._ .
'3.-‘Z V—.V¢.":.V.=Vs’*,.>V.§-*~.Ve§."_P~»¥-‘"“rV/-V.-1 V; 1.-V <2/.~V-1.»
' V-
5;
ui xi
.,;1;\‘.'=
Z_;§
. . . __ , , “,$:'!‘?‘1\w§-,‘g‘-“'L'-r~ 1“; 1 ..V' ‘ ..,.:--f,.¢;.>V'¢?
i -_ .._ ! | 1 _,..-_ .fifi"' ".1. ~..¢;-..'.<r~~ >~. Q97 * . V-15* . .
Q’aV<u‘{'"‘§";';é?l. 1%.,.1* bwy.-fig, ~ =1Ty _ 3Jcv ~: <4-‘Pl. W ...-$1 Y. . 1 - V av‘VV -. V ,'\'€ »,.:.F
V_V, 491$». “fix:'¢ “$6;
F“”__ _ ‘ I‘ . ..
.
.M",{"=' .1 YR.-.l\_V A V=’.R.,\, 1,11-.=< ,4-’. Q
, V._"‘
,1;
3;‘- V ms"V 1- 1.Y Jr"
_,, .< .‘
~V V 7 _ . E.
7.,» -W
.
.. A-'»m_,._~.
=¢.V§* VV” -.1 VVK”-'-.*~ 1. - VV~~s,'2‘ - ~*§<..~
Q “~‘ .j' ,-= _'L~‘-¢.,.‘;.'.¢V ,saw!‘ ‘-‘ WVYVV’-3 *5‘ V. " . L \ . - .. *;;'». *'
" :15”
17.
£1“ --°~-!§;:2az§A:§ "‘1l:..@‘
l‘, ,R’?-.
ll ‘ ' 11-5‘ '5: hi 29 _ .
5. V V V.*VV**l‘”‘=Iw
',=_-'-."~_='V"=‘“
-*1» §* (
.
,2. - ’ _ " V
"*i3Ԥ
V'.V"‘;-'.‘-
W” *V "* ~V**°»V~l
l . V, 3§‘:'."§§?‘: -V.V‘
‘fig ;V‘*:-‘V1- - "<'V';V~..<‘ @.V -".;.V ir;'>.~.'. V- .V1V‘.VV~ -'IiV .‘¢. ‘4V‘V;‘*'VV~,-,V>~q§;--‘V . V_V*Vr.‘:_‘V-,1 .V=“»‘.‘-.“ "-1-in-:=.~.VV"=“» .~' r; V _ V‘ *:‘,'-‘ .V‘.V'»¢.;:¢.- '-“, -.
11,1 <9 in lgl; 1. ‘ .. .‘ , , lv'}§&-~’~#@‘-/""
€
XV?‘ . M .
, F' . »~V+ -r " ~.V'V»-,.‘_.-M" ‘:12’ , _--. V". 7*
i3'33’?
V'V?=V‘*=‘ , ‘I5’ A-,=
.,.
V‘-"- -,~m;,,
IV
"V¢-V,;-‘-
1 "~.,"~&5
.1. V" in
V , “ 1- .‘ P‘,.__,. .,.?f';"=£/1
==V-. “-l;
..~ -1ޤzVw"
£55, '
._ ._ .
'IV‘==:"
_..‘\;;l.$§.,-
‘_, M».
pa“-\‘==V.'
.
-- V'-r“~.. 3'? '
._ ll». ,,,..,_
v‘ '-L1‘.V-'Mr‘
j
1 ='.4 ="#§.»
-'_¢.*.‘¢§>-A ..»}bé‘_\.
2; ' ~,T'
,.ail»:
5V"é.‘V-‘V.'¢.‘- .5'5‘4-
H.l,y*.’
..—.---.r~:V
.1. .if
V”~ . ‘&’".@§
.V VV_*1
‘
’ .~.r_>-3'2-:
/-‘_g~v‘
_.sa.~.~.¢5
1
Q1~ V ‘.1. _
_V4=§ V V~ =V Piazza - --l “VV. ..§€‘:“’
~H
*" 1-n
V Vs". -. .-:1 V $V-‘~ V ‘ ViV,V,.‘.'":
.. w.»
"' *1 V.» V-." .
"43-...~.lV.
' »;‘V"‘~' V
V V .V. ‘r’ ~..'*:< ‘ vi;~VVZ
.‘. "V!.'
~” V
__»Z~
‘
'9.‘-v‘.
“§%“%»~V'i%v5¥V-.‘:’=\¢"¥‘%*-
I-V
J Q 1-"‘*¢.‘ V.-~ V2;-. 1;» V~ :‘V-1-V
¢_ _ L‘ . .,:-‘.1’‘.
=V".!=' . -.->VV:V.*'V-V1‘ V-V .. ~ rs
4,,.¥ 4,.
L. 1. m-g
V eV ‘ P;
.
8) li"i
'.K~5
.

1|
. ,
.:. --rm-‘*1: A
; .-1;» .
-
.V
iVV.
"4
.V.
V?»
. -. .
Vr. ‘,‘$__£
"”
-.
H:
V
_V
.’ ‘=‘=‘ ‘fir ~{=:=-
W .~;V»~ ;=.V=-
. ~~ ._.__“.u'%,
IV. V ‘ ~...
-V"?§1‘.. ‘ “

V»-‘=.~.~V;“ -¢ .
.V,_.;.;.:.I;V;.2&$,r
2V .. ‘n;
V
“F 1 I | - f
.. . V V. V . V. §g §V*.V-V éa*3 .V\‘1 ._-‘,=..~-'.'.I.V‘.~-=.V_;.,VV V VV ~.V.-.V-
“V17;-:.V-VV-..
V‘-' V
51.; ".V'.’°‘£“.;:
' '~.:=‘.‘V ¢
V. .>=.l.=. -V,{' "".l‘V.*._. V;
V- 4 /~

l
§‘F:
.'+~9V'.‘*"‘%vY-‘$33-,r":’w"'
- '.V'+l+‘%'< »"‘%4("
,.‘V - V5.31
V »‘V’! . *6‘ < .~.. r?'é.~~<:v"“4§’
."'=.V'V .55 E7‘ fix;=.-V_.V. % "¥’.t:"_l
‘ V 65¢.“
7.5‘
'1 s
| p"-"—"-T"'I V. 1:‘: V
"'“
...V
' _-1, -,,.
'
K'12:3.1*%'*" “"-""1
P
M,-.-_.,..-.~-..~..-':.:.:'.
L.
l
L...........-
AgarV->1:-VVr'.~".'V=-VV.V".'f?v’.<V‘¥:'-.;:~V*V -V ~%.wtV- -' --‘rVV<
1=:»<~'.V-..V-» V 1 V,.
V'*-
' V.~5.;~,>'¢.;»-V..V=V:*55.‘. :.=VV.- _-VV:
V..=;..—.V...~.-V.
. _ .. .. 3! .' ‘ -.-V-1*: »VJ¢V.. w =-V.:.-.V.V\v~V~.\1w2‘
.
:1-V.-.-.-V .~.--VV.*V-¢-Vl~V- “fir
-.~s:€.' .-
3J»A A
./.
xi’
LB? 1,; ;. V" 1 l F. V l.~%"V‘=V€V"“:-V-an
.
4'.""" V.V -iV,iZ;a:- "I7;-’~"'§Y'V§"V?’2'."**' 1 ..V"' “*" ‘.V.-V‘-'.=- .-. ' ‘,‘V‘V‘-5i'e’:‘-.V"‘ 51/ I
____M___‘__; -.',;:_ '_""'_¢:V- "___.._.._

V ....
V
"nu H I 12- -Ti‘

I
Yi>*‘l Q
u . . :._,‘l
_:I'
V314
_-_% _____.. l
V‘
M. 55*“
"-'> V. F; . " -'-U ‘JV *1-1V -. :V~-:-?<VI-='
: ff;.VV V3‘*.I* Y.V’J
r
.~_.-W. ...
1 ,A_.,.s§ Y... L-~-
. -- ~ \ n \ ' ‘“-’*. _V + - '»-r~' ‘.~. ‘-‘lrliiiifii IQ
‘ "
~“‘ .V . .~
VV. " < ?
E 6
.V".‘r.V-V .. _‘. _ *
$85 .. “,'X.'cV,V¢
~ “V . §‘" -V~.= . ‘ 5-1,.1
‘XV.
"_-_'=.-z.-_-_-r.
. U . »--
. .E.’.Tz .,,.
1‘-e ='“=""
. L.-
;V,:1“_1§\$§§§-"11? IV
_ ma
A-‘V --~~ -
V ‘M i*=~‘~‘*"'<¢VVw~»“V'. . -~'<"~-‘V.‘ - j r' .
',
Q
.1 V. ’
. ..-. Vi‘-‘hi. .,
U \s-.i~§g-c.~Y.;;;;Z_%3 1.-V -,-._. . _'_'1 +2
|.. _ ' I "f:‘}‘V'r-.Ve-{Q ‘“w§1:%?!‘ *‘-3“ -' 'f_ . V V "MT .
-
,1-3“*' 4, J‘:
‘ - 71§:;*€: V-V t lzi-:§§5::';.' rt V:
.‘V..VVV:.1V,v.;.j,r-,‘:r;-‘::;" .-,...;.V
1.;
JV: ~=V.gg;.~ -V ,»V.
V;:.V-‘,=u;V;=.VV;,%" .V'VV';¢r=*~V:;- V.VV,V.-e:V=VaV.=»"f€.';
: if. .-;i~V&.V*f;:‘V4VIV‘1;‘ ' fiijfil’ '
51?
.V=-’.1'V=*».,.*V-.:;=.1Vt'/»~;V..=_**~‘\
V.
‘WI ._,; . .,_~_.,w,V-,
.;‘.y-V. 'V".¢..»:-V"e¢.'VV.-=..V-V "
‘l 2° ..__ .....Z9 _ ___“ . .39“
=2?‘ *5:.1}?
3-:;'V-N
I'.
.5 5"-'¢%‘§‘ ”‘:5T=_=., VV V---~VV-;;;<_-/.V¢»;;;;,‘,<;;.V.-4;;,
:- 1- -V ‘ ~' ;.-VV-V; ‘ . . _(f\¥‘.\-
V. -'*' >~.- ='V'-‘=V‘V V.-VV- “ fl-V1 ' » . V e .~~ .;\;‘>‘_~»v@‘(‘,V‘_V.-V¥a;.V.V.;.VV... V..V.V.
.'.V~:...;=~.~:=~ .V _- 1 <VV~"V-.5...-V»'VV
-;-V~-;V.',;--.=;VV
,i,.__.. _. .
T.-r*- _ _
-¥:.. .~.r=s-V.»~:w.r.»*-_V».».“=~:.vV:..»..5;;~*' .w,.
('\'I- " V l-V'V‘ V . ..@;V:».--;:=...=.-'1» ~<??!9/iv. *V- -V~<\-VV"'> 3
1
Fig.10a Central Building, room 5: Neo-Assyrian Pottery (=MEUSZYNSKI 1978,
Fig. 3, l.’l:m 3. The Polish lixcavations in the central area of the Nimrud Citmltil. 418, Fig. 1) V
C13~Canlral Bmldi-ng of Ashzrrnasirpal II. 1. 2. 3.: reliefs; 4. 5. 6. 7: Lamassws; II: pedestal of the
Rassam Obelislq?) DIV‘: deposit of pottery.
< SB-Building 0/ Shabnmzaser III. 8: relief; 12. 13: The “Centre Bulls”; DR: deposit of reliefs of Tig-
. lathpileser Iii. , ,
LB-Later Buildivxg. B-I. 2. 3. 1 the graves.
€
Fig. 9a Nimrod, Polish Excavations on ihe main mound (SUBOLEZWSKI 198},
i . Fig. 3, Plan 3)
fi4._.};,..,___,,_> _>fi§ . .,._ 4» J7“ .-_, - . ......»... -W. .- ~.-...;:.»- -V» = -- ---~\-
, , '?,’§$}"K .7» ,, _ 1* ,.-- 4: 3..:,.,r..@.,-,,;:,_. ,,»,<;_,¢_ .<...»4._._--3-wen. V‘ ,\ ;-..»».-..»_- ‘4'>‘1>‘»
;.r¢r.L~w»:.= if , {vs--¢.w*¢z<$ -.a»’ii-_~,-
.1 "~?“'~‘
W.. 1 ~~» -,-,;f‘~,.f»$€9’;:»"‘
'€'¢fi;,.=-M’-1'“,-V=,¢:!' 2. 2 .;:~<’V1.,<:»*+V-1 :<'- .- ~.»~»--.1‘
1.;>**~,;;¢§1, “='2§57%J§ $\ ~:.:». 14%; ,- ¢;,»§~;*~¢~‘&~;..*£*>& Q -*1-¢»:.-.»».»;-.1
N'>-1;) .- “W N
-"»2:'¢»~'" ;.
.<. a ..
5-" "W-*=2"~<e-“A "i*‘- ~ -*""--$9/P44.-.n. *
<. "‘
‘ V ~1r*:r
2¢’>' ,__v-an
'14“ <.~<!‘-("Z
M,-> »..- r»-V~-V.(»‘5:>r:>z~"' »#<-5'z-.-:'I>m
.-.» ..V . . "*~'*‘~»‘~
-,.>.--.-K:'........- . "‘~*»+~**="\-.<'4-.."i'.Y:.‘=
~\"—11,V_,.-~V ' x-raga .2*~'~:.">"
...'.-_r..»:».' .. 3,»?-'.
..:::~
»r,:;.»\;;;>;-..-»-+-:3)‘ gstswm L I
”‘°’*V 5,. gf *r~<2£€~’ V r*~‘ V :’ » +ti . ;=»V-V:..**
~ . .- . _~ ‘ " 1- ~ 1»-,2:an -‘ "¢.,..¢ *4

‘ ,\ .1, _ »
_ .,\_ , , . V-_ .V,-- —
' I r
V. Lkjr I
.. _;..-~_~,¢e,‘__-,-.» ‘
73.:
‘ii?
.$1‘.§"§é=T53?as§»V* V‘* 5*
/ 3
1 V=—=".-‘-‘mu.
¢‘.x&$1e~> l ‘
'8 V ‘
.
? V--V-,,V,. V;-,VVV;<‘;_;»V V:V._ + 1 . ‘. _,, ,~ M).
~ 11..
1;:
>3/“.1-,.',V
.'l_7‘::-.i;‘;._V,‘;.-.aV-Q‘ =V \ ..~
_ >,. .\
45$

I "-'7':-'-VV~' ’ ‘ "
gl
V‘*".V.V V- ..*"_' ¥V-:-“*5: 45?“.. :':j?’.VfI'V'=‘ V
V 9»

W
...>=-~
V .V .
ii V V.
ll
l:1
1%-$3 . '~ - -.‘+r.~-'V~ ..v mi-‘ v.l?r;V.:tV ‘ .
‘"1’ ,3\§‘?""'V.V
‘§V~V.V-l‘!"“*~IV's‘
.. V‘ , V .,.V—‘=V'VV‘-*" l §"‘ "V
¢.15- * , ,,.
f 5
;.
= l‘ 4 ;~‘<=.
‘ ‘ 'f " Q ,;,¢-'gV‘;_;'.,5.rV'a».-‘I *§§.__
mgr; W“
.V"'.V! V --_-. V-=g\";»- \:-
H
Q-I. I‘ ,1 '~. M,
-:_r<*»'
' _-'-;,;;‘R‘VV'~'.:- "4.’ -,.~Q,
'
. i; V "E.
73-'9Vf:V’_‘_:‘~.‘?:,§3“>
'
:2.1
‘Y2.2’.. ‘
#3 mm‘
1
i= >»?;’V»
_ ~».-_r.
w "V#?5&““. azwyf
V ~V 5*1"§"ef‘.»§ 3'
‘*1V»
V AV-
V,_- ‘ ..
' . ' VV ...
%‘~V:~.<*1 V WV;
‘*3, .-V.“ *
-V 11, ...,§ " V
ll “W V’~ . *‘ *'v‘*?:.~.V' . ‘V V41"
V
':*
Ga

f Fig. 9b Central Building, room 5: Neo-Assyrian Pottery (SOBOLEWSKI 1981, ' Fig. 10b Central Building, room 5: NeoV~Assyrian Pottery (photo: W. Icrko)
258, Fig. 5)

l ?

L..._._...._..................
,.
. '.,._ .}. ¢.
 " “’ """“"" '"' """‘_"""""'""' ' ---~- ______i_rm“W_ fi W ii
t

Kallm/Nimrud 53
The Heartland ofAssyria

‘ -V<;~l<.. 'V‘
V
=
» VVVV Vet.
fig
V‘-V=
: ='Vr.V.VVV ~.V»'., -.V;'VV »-‘.V-V<.VV';~V. .. ~, V'V=-.V.+»>' ‘B .
Fri-‘,-I‘ ‘ .'V!“§Eh7$_éé_"$i12§1%_;;,¢W.:--:hJE$lZ:§§$F{¥$j».V|
t. ‘ ‘ ' -* . " V =~‘..,»..~¢.- 1 V-..t.V=~.\. V.. V
mi * VV-‘
WV-5~'....;:'.1'§
"‘:1."V.-‘sn:‘=§..o rilmg V ~»V»5,W»§.»}¢
=- *~. ~
-V ' ,**;<~;;;=,VE,
"-'=t==~:¢;
'-'=:*.*=‘~'.
;:V-V r" / we N 93‘
VV-.'-V‘ V “:2 .31» .V.‘<‘>'%"
15.'.V";z rV=.V . Q, _ ..w%>*--=;rm'>»*:§g§¢;,1,.»+.’V.‘:<;<:~.*'
1.‘ "“~<V-*i'"*"-<1‘~~~' .V-V"V‘: V-V."-.';V=.=.:IV=:-‘ V.r-‘V
V11’-'V‘V-"¢VVI=. V1: 1-=V;11V'-'. =V~‘-.-VVV:-‘ V.V:2..Vg;; 13 "-I-§“:‘V\-':'\>““l“.‘1i‘-V: V1.7.
V.V ¥I'V'VV:-:Ii»_‘.§. =-'.;1=‘;- V:;‘V;'¢.j~J=-.V:,i1=:.1=_;VV_1.-1_ =‘- . .--. V

* '
3

b.

B b

1.
d c .

~v.
1‘.
I Fig. 12 Central Building, room 5: Small cylindrical and situla-shaped beakers
Fig. 11 Central Building, room S: Bowls (photo: W. Jerke) (P110101 W- J@Il<¢)

. WWWWWW.

.0 .. -. ¢
' 54 The Heartland 0fAssyria Kalhu/Nzmrud

-35-<.-“_-F.;¢ ‘ ' ."" , ¥-,»::-,:1=‘;-:_= 1'1:-.‘-.~;:'.‘: 1-.‘.-.; ~ *

I‘T§.€§ I
-':;‘;+'\¢,T;:;=-‘2;a51;§§<i§€§?2*?.§?{E‘55j-}}a;? \
~;~:¢-\:-»:»¢.1q\
Z;/.:»'s.>_~,:1 “
Y ,<§ZZ~z€1:“<3;§i»;“515.0%?'-574$ vi M »'::-
. "’
'-;;‘~"5‘l113§-1‘-1»--* ‘ Z-9'" "1?"¢.F@YQ2f~é2§%$¥$‘“*7"Z*5£Q;E.: -‘I53. I’ '
15;;
:-
\
1;-‘;,; 3‘ '.1;'.~:”- £._>m:<g “_;:>1.+'?,>;~_':-_ P ~
:.=~.€'-,“
- -‘ -*3‘ ’*'\7:¢vfi'“<*{*-'.§"Y";é5.’Z~c._¢Z;$;Z°q’;% fir ‘ 1-.W ‘
~,<F*f\;§”Z.=l?$‘;:;::~»v.-i<'
-at:-mu-1:~':1= 1 ‘1 '
1-1'-1
as Q,
:>1,'£v.>~;>:
¢: --
~,“~<*-Y-~ '-~ ~'*¢1"'.~f» \ ‘ .
‘
‘
§‘-A';1;,'
:;:_=:-‘ >1
?5:;'_¢¢‘:~§¢:'~,:.:
~:; _ ‘ ~
,
»_>:,= .
"=43 -:\@¢"Y)’!tl({¢:-:Vr‘:((:\’{ .¢'A.‘:~‘£»A‘,1r,‘1-1'-*1 -' ‘ ;
“
-tr.-1 ?‘2<“'*“;i*$i??'A':»;°:- ._ ,4
2.1
‘ ‘ -.1, ‘-.‘>5-Y?’<M,%<,s:“.2§>
"€,}§é“~.’§":}'~?L",Z">Z'§£§"£>4.-'-I"$,i,~(<\-< Q- _\
. §‘f1iE5T{i>.-‘I¥§¥@=1§§3£353‘;-5233;?2%‘ "-‘:‘£\'5§~i‘: . I
.-‘-aw~::==r.=<ia:~,' ’-‘;'$<1~~- ‘ I ,- ‘ ;;1?=£:.‘ :A, 1
’=w~=-‘<",:~=~=1-.-M
'-:.=-%»==¢.m=~A;wW\-
"1-‘-‘ W“ -‘ *"'-‘-'~"~= ‘ -._..‘
.. x e,;_-‘I ;5,;1$ia>a£;$,§4;=q:;):=!q=:;
. ...'<:::';=,<.<:»'
\'-W>=¢<-¢»:>c»,~-:@,v=;rrfla . 6/'v ¢~;»_~:,L-5‘,;=_-;;,
N ‘ .‘::_::J;‘_\ H
-.-»-;.1*-.;<\;
.
.~
‘
\.¢-in» .19.;2;»;-_a<;;§fiY=;'sz\ '"-~'~1¢€i* '1.'?‘~v,»=*‘~’#?,‘
,-;~‘_- “igiji;Elf£5.15;-,‘;;-;'5‘_~;,>-1;‘s;.§:.§*:.:;7sa$$.*r:.»2‘:4-';»j.-"»E1";v;.
" =“i?'1f:1 ~‘~
4 4,~; --.,‘;z;;,\@;.z;;<.=.51.-;~.»_§g..;-.=_,;¢;~/\»»q.,;>. ,~ ‘;».\ 1
‘ - -val-$1g»..-..,ivxkaz‘,-.a!u-@:»<5:;<..:~>.<%- A V ‘Q:
7 » :::;‘:;,__;:;‘\ *'-'*,m;~;;;g-,;‘;=,~'»::."'~~~ V -

c 7 .

3.
,7*~"
,
- 1‘ §‘-
~ ‘ 1:»3&1-Xi - "*‘;“_;;»‘»
, . .4’ F! -gs;
;.= , \
X>>~¢-- ‘:.~ ",1 =,~ ~.',(,-§_-g§*v

,;w -~~"-= »*,@=-.\-»~; "=

J! >1 ‘&,,,"“*,»*%§§,*>ga?“~*~’ ’/I:
ii"1‘
7 ‘aw’ .f@¢;@¢‘ >~ M %:;=; > M as
r;~¢ 1 ,-W"
<A\ v‘
Q4 % $“[g;@$\ r"
*3‘; ”mm€<¢~‘&; W<.**.u
zl ;§ ‘
~\‘ <1 NYE‘-;%: ~{~§f~.:~ , ,-.
,; my “~..~‘-M.‘
M1-c ~*/, um»;
~> -<:¢;w~»v
“H 35$§§ "fr;
‘J’-*3‘
*~‘;§~,
/1 , % :2
'§->-,
‘*‘@% ~* »~j;;~ 5/»“
' ‘K4???’ ‘Q’ »¢‘a@,§'fi’ wx
»~
-¥r§;%1%
‘-L-‘J‘='¢:~.z' >:=§?'3§¥%§€;‘<*:.4w%$‘:1 ‘W?’
..~,,__.5:__,;._31~,;;,?‘;~.%¢.,.,_ , W X15“ ...‘;
>~ V.
W” - 1
:='=!l‘¢; ‘=‘.=&’".=:~;~r,=‘»; ’>:=m'w.:-‘»=¢1>>1 <;
.2. .»~‘a~"’
¢“fir”<" 9, ~
75- ;:=
¢1‘;1'-~‘.~:I=‘=.- '°
‘AM. »F ~ ~ "-
“:1
~¢:$<=~<:.:. :‘;‘:.<‘- ’:
, yw;,:»¥!{*}=?1 wggg‘ ‘
W-»M-‘~»mW-/<'36‘><" ‘ . > ,,
6 /\ »_\ 3:1. W
1w’~>1\:»-,-M.-.~, _ :'”*B€§5.”"’*"\/ _ - '"~ ;,_z:¢-we i“
,. "=>“<>Ir@~“..==»:,w\ ~
* "3y , ,-M" ~<»~=:;~.-:=:=~.=,~
' ‘ aw‘. .».;**~<‘
*~ <~ ,11‘ a >~"*
.
. ~m>~\<}1 ..w...,,,,..-» -
. ___“ ~ N"' J‘ ‘
\-‘».§~,‘-_\,~,‘.=;;4\;,,U~,;,5‘,; -‘.‘-.‘.H..‘-, ,
D— ._..‘ ,, *;',.'<';-¢,-‘:3-‘.§¢':1.~~:¥"“F --‘¢_'3j~,_‘_.;1\‘="-'"~';~‘< '~ ‘ '

d e

Fug 13 Central Buzldmg, r00m5 Cylnndrxcalpedestaibeakcrs (photo: W. Ierke) Fig 14 C@n{fa1]3]_]]_1d}11g,I'()Q1'}’]5 (finance and1$t1ka_nS (photo W Jerks)

1
..__‘. .>.- .- ¢
 4

5 6v
mm TM H e d N M H d "W
A SW H G UM _£RV Wm r M _d 5?

Fa
QMW_“M5
Agog“
MUHWQV
603%wgamu303mu33fig_
Nag
fig
mag
€_
M5Hm_%8_ _gW_wn_
_I3l;_‘V27”)f“"3lIEi‘v.V_ “hnJq"13E”L:‘F6pkrLl£§'(X_qh“n3gfiwv}:l4kp‘ryf_/(&'h;i)“un\¥k[£Pfiv_*4l5:;{‘"§,'»~V_k0§l!1"/h'$_E%]_v '

Y’_,_‘_
_K‘\ ‘ _"viF“aw‘HQ£R_a¥H_wW‘_wh§W_‘",
$3 “Mk Hwy
“QM
"MnYW‘‘__$n_‘
_‘‘.vW’“‘_vflMM71“\8___w_“m‘_“m"Wu*‘‘1__V’|““_1H~v-m_é\_Il~‘\’%MWlWm_‘\nR“l$w__M"W”$\u_‘fi ‘_$(__I‘_h“MV%“hQ"__§Ah,
(VYwN__ if
H~W___
‘Hu'__$F"Wm’__2*W‘;
Tw__‘v:‘\xvV‘W_H_m?_wm§ 2;_‘H_\_H mu
__V“_MW_14$”: ‘_WX_(M{;“__ ‘_§‘M ‘V
gm _gupm”
Q mH{%‘“M____
;Wwypfi ‘IHQ€_\lHwM/’W$N_\~H)mWMHVWY_‘m~_ _ W
M$E
/_KM;
g _anNm_ _iW
1£%@_GW(
U’
1W’MW,“
M ‘%M»Ii
“_M"UvH_ >“HV_Mkw L?gfll&_My_ mW_
‘A1_\_v3 K“x‘‘A
myfi_EM’
u_WW‘H“_W\‘u%M_w“__“”>_0H%U@%_€N¥\fi“_w_vmU"_/_%&4‘_mMy£_ vhf
xvi?“
‘
‘_z£JmMmWN_ M_W_m“Jmu‘‘”HN~(m1w‘ fi'“H‘:MA_m‘“W_"qIN_‘‘W_flW7LUW_mwHMm m_¥WMN"m
&wm‘w~\_‘
‘ _*
at_
_Y¢
FkQ/W
‘W Qmnwwk

“
_
ON
ad

T
__
_\

b c

II

q_"_5

F WW 1 6 W fl ow
C 6 n U M B _m r OO m & S mm Sq u Mm 3I S (Ph O t
_j NW J
6 I ‘K6 )

a _ _
 ._,_ , __ _ __________ H HW

Kalbu/Nimrud 59
SS The Heartland ofAssyria

-_

3
51

i b

' h

1
|
32!
fl
ii
‘-5
as
3

1'
I,
1l5
4
l c V d
>.
c (1

Central Building, room 5: Slim ovoid widemecked jars (p hotoz W . Ierke ) Fi g. 18 Central Building , room 5: Big ovoid wide-necked jars (photo: W. Jerks)
1
Fig. 17

Fl
_v__”____""_w__.____v_'_"__y_ ?€'___; __ _ ,____mW___ _ __ "' '" *“‘*-="""~-“'-“-"-""’“”"'""""" “"

60 The Heartland ofAssyria

Die Keramik der Areale A-F in Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta

i=2.L;§)t<:Y: ;($ .‘1TTI\:§l‘.?T:-
1; jig, _>\ -~ A ,¢;1-:—,1=._;;.
"’ ' -‘f.
-=.< 1 in CLAUDIA SCHMIDT
1-l .-» -~r¢<.-~-.~.,;>‘- ;.{:~T~~3~f‘<;‘;-2:2.‘ :1
;;§§;;:;§¢,,,;,;;-<4¥~§3meé<:»=,;:;%§§<5. :9 l ".
;:2:;e’*\":'¢\ ~{»-~ 4{>C,<1“w‘.;2igi,Q‘¢\-1y ,;;;:_u: Miinster
l \-, l‘4:v1E:;!‘/§€Yym'>’?n1l‘:if»;)§§‘7{.l/‘\
V 71‘-5~’§‘>.'~"3-{Th/‘-§\Z4'{)’i'2b,<§.:,.*,i-3.38‘*’<l.rr#1::=
/",‘q.\\% in. , ' =~‘.1=»
‘<;.v_::;¢m»=@~- ~‘ '£m~ _~.‘».;;~_?;.;;g.».a.-.~c~5 1.;=»-51-ii?“
5-1» ¢. \-
-=1-=5 » W?’ i=.,;,¢@: >
2» ‘-wz‘-' '2‘-I¥1E‘lI1.l'-11‘
‘',‘.¢:e;.~:.=~;:E;1-r='-:=;- Einleitung
W-1" ~~- -~. aw“ “
\A Seit den Neuuntersuchungen der Ruine Kar-Tukulti~Ninurta in den Iahren 1986
und 1989‘ ist sicher, daB auch nach Tukulti Ninurta I. das Stadtgebiet in grofiem
a ' b Umfang besiedelt wurde. Davon zeugen nicht nur historische Uberlieferungen von
Statthaltern des 1. Jahrtausendsf sondern auch das wéhrend eines Surveys und
insbesondere einer stratigraphischen Grabung im Bereich n61-dlich des
Nordpalastes gewonnene Keramikrepertoire sowie einige Kleinfunde. Wfihrenci der
Ausgrabungen in den etwa 60m nordnordwestlich des Nordpalastes gelegenen
Arealen A-F kennten fiinf Bauphasen bis zum anstehenden Kieskonglomemt
unterschieden werden: ' (
Die éilteste Bauphase 1 zeigt einen anhand der Ziegelinschriften und
zahlreicher Kleinfunde sicher in die Zeit Tukulti Ninurta I. datierbaren Teil eines
repréisentativen Gebéiudes, dessen Funktion (Tempe1- oder Palast?) nur durch
weitere Grabungen gekliirt werden kann. Diese Bauphase ist durch einen Hiatus
von den néichstjiingeren Phasen getrennt.
c dH
ii In den darauffolgenden Bauphasen 2~4 zeigen sich dann Wohnhansstrukturen,
zu denen sich gate Paralleien im neuassyrischen Assur und Nimrud finden lassen.3
Der Raumkomplex der Bauphase 2 ist nur auf kleiner Fiéiche ergraben und, da er
nahe der Tigrisabbruchkante geiegen ist, sehr rudimentéir erhalten. Zudem wurde
der gesamte fiereich in der néichst jiingeren Bauphase 3 planiert. Dabei wurden
allerdings bei iihnlicher Raumaufteilung einige Mauerteile wieder aufgegriffen.
Bauphase 3 wurde in fast alien Arealen erfalfit und bietet daher den reiativ
vollstéindigen Grundrilfi eines Hauses, das am Ende der Bauphase 3 durch ein Feuer
zerstiirt wurde. Da in ciieser Brandschicht zwei offensichtlich nicht bestattete
. e V menschliche Skelette gefunden wurden, wurde das Gebéiude mtiglicherweise
wéihrend einer kriegerischen Auseinandersetzung zerstiirt. Dittmann héili es fiir
l
*2
nicht ausgeschiossen, dalrl es sich dabei um einen Angriff von Medern and
Chaldéiern um 612 v.Chr. gehandelfhaben kennte.‘ Sollte diese These zutreffen,
E2 wiire ein zeitlicher Ansatz fiir den Beginn der néichst jiingeren Bauphase 4 in
§:
postassyrische Zeit denkbans Auch in dieser sind die meisten Mauern wieder
aufgegriffen Worden, allerdings mit deutlichen Veriinderungen in der
iE: DITTMANN et al. 1988, 97-138; Dm"MAN:~1 1990, 157-171; BASTERT 1994; $CHMlDT 1997.
El
1% Die Gesamtpublikation is: in Vorbereitung.
2 EICK!-{OFF-' 1985, 51.
l f . 3 MALLOWAN I966, 185, Fig. 120: Rfiume R 24, 25, 28; Pmsussnn 1954, Taf. 13: Hans Nr.
21, Taf. 23: Hans Nr. 58.
‘ DITTMANN etai. 1988, 134.
Fig. 19 Central Building, room 5: "Water jars", jar, saucer-lamps, potstands 5 Da der archiiologische Befund diese These insgesamt nur vage unterstiitzt, wurde bei der
(photo: W. Jerke) Beschriftung der Abb. 6a-b (S. 87-88) auf cine zeitiiche Differenzierung (sp2"it~ oder
'3 postassyrisch) verzichtet.

l
l._____ _ H ee C
 ' - ' 1. ..._+:---- ...,..,..._ ....... M

62 The Heartland ofAssyria Kar-Tukulri-Ninurta

Typ 2 Schiisselnz 2.1 konische Schiisseln

Raumanordnung. Die wenigen Kleinfunde aus den Bauphasen 3-4, z.B.
Pfeiispitzen, Panzerpléittchen und Zierbuckel, sind vergleichbar mit Exemplaren 2.2 gerunclete Sehtissein
aus dem spiitassyrischen Nim.rud.6 Das bestétigt den anhand der Keramik 2.5 steiie Schtissein
ermittelten Datierungsansatz fiir diese Bauphasen in Kar~Tuku1ti-Ninurta. Typ 3 Néipfe: 3.1 konische Néipfe
Die Kontinuitét, die sich in den Bauphasen 2-4 beobachten 15151, setzt sich in 3.2 gerundete Néipfe
der jiingstcn Bauphase 5 nicht fort. Zwar haben die Erbauer des in spiirlichen 3.3 leichte Knickwandnéipfe
1
\ Resten erhaltenen Raumes (Einraumhaus?) noch anstehendes Mauerwerk der 3.4 starke Knickwandnéipfe
11
Bauphase 4 vorgefunden, dosh weicht die Ausrichtung des Raumes um minciestens 3.5 steiie Niipfe
70° db. Aufgrund der Oberflfichennéihe muB die Daticrung dieser Bauphase 3.7 einknickende Niipfe
offenbleiben, denn das Keramikspektrum bietet neuassyrische, parthische (Abb. 7b, 3.10 runde, leichte Knickwandnéipfe
6) und islamische (Abb.7b, 7) Funde. 3.11 runcle, starke Knickwandnéipfe
Die Keramik der Areale A-F Typ 4 Becher: 4.0 nach inner: konische Beeher
Die Keramik der Areale A-F stammt fast ausschliefilich aus Verfiiilungezfl Zudem 4.1 gerundete Becher
sind die jeweiligen Réume nie in ihrem vollstfindigen Grunldrifi erfafit worden, so 4.5 steile Becker
dafi eine Funktionsanalyse beziiglich der Réiume nicht miiglich war. 4.7 einknickende Becher
|
Die Keramjk wurde vor Ort warenspezifisch und morphologisch erfafitz Die 4.9 nach aufien abknickende Becher
Warendefinitionen folgen zum einen dem 1986 flit die Ausgrabungen in Assur und Typ 5 Tiipfe: 5.0 konische Tdpfe
Kat-Tukulti-Ninurta bestimmten Warenschliissels und werden fiir die vorliegende 5.2 gerundete Tijpfe
Bearbeitung zuséitziich in dem Raster PFALZNERS9 zusammengefafit (vgi. hier Abb. 5.5 Tiipfe mit abgesetztem Hals
1
la). Zur Benennung der Formentypen diente Pfnlzners numerisches System mit 5.6 Tépfe mit eingezogenem Hals
1 einigen Erweiterungen.” Es ergeben sich folgende Bezeichnnngen:
Typ 0 Teller Typ 6 Flaschen: 6.0 konische Flaschen
6.5 steilwandige Flaschen
< ~.»:><!~.m»<-1.2,
Typ 1 Schalenz 1.1 konische Schalen 6.6 nach innen gerundete, eingezogene Flaschen
1.2 gerundete Schalen 6.9 nach aulien abknickende Fiaschen
1.3 konische Schalen mit leichtem Wandungsknick
1.4 konische Schaien mit starkem Wandungsknick Typ 7 Groligeféfie
1.6 eingezogene Schaien Typ 8 Stiinder
1.7 einknickende Schalen Typ 9 Siebe
1.10 runde Schaien mit ieichtern Wandungsknick
~=»\w :m¢w.1:<= 1.11 konische Schalen mit starkem Wandungsknick Geféfibéclenz
Typ 80-83 Flachbiiden
5 ~ 11 Typ 34 Wulstbtiden
rave:
’£ 6 MALLOWAN 1966, 402, Fig. 332a-b; CURTIS/COLLON/GREEN 1993, Fig. 8,1; Fig. 11,3-11. Typ 85 Wackelbifiden
7 Nu: eine vollstiindig erhaltene Flasche (Abb. Sb, 26) wurcie in Bauphase 3 in situ Typ 86-91 Ringhiiden
gefunden.
DITFMANN etal. 1988, 136, Tab. 1. Typ 92-96 Gefiilifiifie
9 PFALZNER 1995, 33, Abb. 13; Typ 98»99 Rundbifiden
Hiickselgemagerte Waren: W1, W2, W3, W4, W5, W8, W10, W11, W15, W18 Typ 100 Dreischlaufenfufiscbalen
Quarzgemagerte Waren: W7, W13
Kalkgemagerte Waren: W6, W19, W20, W21
Mit dunklen Mineralien gemagerte Waren: W9, W14 In den Abbildungen Abb. 3-'7 wurde ftir jede Bauphase das gesamte neue
\$9l’§54‘V-mIA\'—9)$.T-@><I“fiw§\'.n_¢~‘>$S-'=\I(4
Ungemagerte Waren: W12, W16, W17 Formenspektrum aufgenommen. Geféifiuntertypen, die bereits in der
1, Schmelzfarbengeféiflez SFG vorhergehenden Phase belegt waren, wurden fiir die jiingere Phase nicht noch
E0 PFALZNER 1995, 59ff.: Ais neuer Formtyp wurden der Typ 0 fiir Teller und zwei neue einmal aufgefiihrt, um den terminus ante quem einzelner Geféifiuntertypen
Kiiterien der Wand-/Halsklassifikation (.10 leicht abknickcnd und .11 stark abknickenci und feststellen zu kénnen. Fiir die mittelassyrische Zeit wurden nur die Typen der
1 gerundet) eingefiihrt. Zudem wurde Pféilzners Zéihlung der Untertypen abgeéindert.
r

L. ~
..-i,_-.__...._....,_.__..._.._.. ,,.___. .. __.____.____ W W»

64 The Heartland ofAssyria Kar-Tukulti-Ninurra 65

Areale A-F in Kar-Tnknlii-Ninurta abgebildel. Die mittelassyrische Keramik aus Bis auf konische Schalen mit starkem Wandungslcnick (Typ 1.4) und runde
Tell O“ wurde in der Auswerumg zwar beriicksichtigt, jedoch nicht in die Sehalen mit leichtem Wanclungskniek (Typ 1.10) sincl alle Librigen Schalentypen in
Abbiidungen einbezogen. geringer Zahl bereits vorhandenz
Insgesaml ist die Mtiglichkeit zu beaehten, daB einzelne Beispiele auf den Eingezogene Schalen (Typ 1.6) treten bereits auf, erreichen aber erst in
Abbildungen 4-7 iilter sein kiinnen, als die Bauphase, in der sie erstmals gefunden Bauphase 3 ihr Maximum. Der Anteil der einknickenden Schalen (Typ 1.7) ist in
wurden. Zum einen bestehen Kerarniktraditionen von der mittelassyrischen bis in Bauphase l und 2 mil 5,6-6,5% ebenfalls noch unspektakuléir. Der Antell
K
a
1 die neuassyrische Zeit, und zurn anderen sind durch sekundére Umiagerungen vergriilfiert sich von Bauphase 3 an mit 26,5-29,5% beachtlich. Ebenso verhéilt es
2
nachweislich mittelassyrische/dltere? Scherben in neuassyrischen Kontext sich mil den Typen 1.2 (gerundete Schalen) und 1.11 (runde Schalen mit starkern
gelangt." Wandungsknick).
Die steilen Schiisseln (Typ 2.5) werden mtiglicherweise, wie in Tell Sheikh
Keramik der Bauphase 1 (Abb. 3a-b) I~lamad,"’ in jiingerer Zeit von konischen Schiisseln (Typ 2.1) verdréingt.
Des weileren fallen Kleingefiifie (Typ 3) rnit 32,7% zahlenméillig ins Gewicht:
lm mittelassyrischen Keramikrepertoire, wie auch in den neuassyrischen
erwilhnenswert sind hierbei konische, Eeichte Knickwandnéipfe (Typ 3.3)" und
Kellektionen, herrscht die héckselgemagerte Ware vor. Dabei hat allein Ware W1”
konische Néipfe (Typ 3.1),“ deren Anteil ~ vergleichbar Typ 1.3 und 1.1 - in den
bereits einen Gesamtanteil von 82,1%, gefolgt von Ware W2 mil £2,6%. Weitere
jlingeren Bauphasen aufféillig zuriickgeht. Konische, starke Knickwandniipfe (Typ
héickselgemagerte Waren, LB. W3, W5, W8, W10, W11 und W15, komrnen in
3.4) kornmten erst von Bauphase 3 an nennenswert vor.”
geringer Zahl ebenfalls bereits in Bauphase 1 vor. '
Konische Flaschen (Typl 6.0) hahen ihren hiichsten Anteil in Bauphase 1.
l=,. in geringern Urnfang treten anch kalkgemagerte Waren (W20, W21), mil dun-
Steilwandige Flaschen mit abgesetztem I-Ials (Typ 6.5) sind in den Bauphasen 1-2
klen Mineralien gemagerte Waren (W9) und ungemagerte Waren (W12, W17) auf.
{E
noch rechl wenig vertreten, ihr Anteil nimmt erst von Bauphase 3 an rapide zu. In
ll Nicht ungewiihlich filr die mittelassyrische Zeit ist das Vorkommen einer
1. Tell O und in Tel} Sheikh Hamad gewinnt dieser Typ aueh vor allem in nach-
gs Schmelzfarbenscl1erbe."‘
Tukulti-Ninurta I.-zeitlichem Kentext an Bedeutung. Beobachtungen zum Typ
'r Vorherrschend ist bier die Gruppe der Schalen, wobei besonders Sclialentyp 1.3
(konlsche Schalen mit leichtem Wandungsknick) mil einem Anteil von 63 ,0% aller 6.5.36, der als signifikant spéiimittelassyrisch gilt, konnten fiir Bauphase 1 (Abb.
¢ Schalen hervorzuheben ist. In der Bauphase 1 lierrschen ftir cliesen Untertyp die 3b, 6) nur unter Vorbehalten gernacht werc€en.’° Nach innen gerundete,
<< Lippenformen 6, 10 und 11 vor.” Mil 21,7% stellen die konischen Schalen (Typ eingezogene Flaschen (Typ 6.6) haben in Bauphase l ihren htichsten Anteil
Ll) die zweitgr6Bte Schalengruppe dar. In dieser Gruppe herrschen die (429%). Sie werden, wie Typ 16.0, von Bauphase 2 an zugunsten des Typs 6.5
Lippenformen 21 und 23 vor, wobei die filr die jiingeren Bauphasen 2-5 iibliche abgeltist. In Tell Sheikli I-Iamad gilt Typ 6.6 mil Lippe 28-40 (dort Typ 6.3,
Lippenform 26 fehlt. ' Pffilzner 1995: 136) als ,,mitte1assyrische Standard-Flasche“, die bier allerdings bis
zur Bauphase 5 - mil verringertem Anteil ~ 1-elativ konstant vorhanden ist.
Flachbodentyp 82, besonders 82.2, hat seinen liechsten Anteil in Bauphase 1.
“ BASTERT 1994. Er stellt allerdings auch in den jiingerern Bauphasen den jeweils hechsten Anteil,
12 Z.B. Abb. 4, 12: mlttelassyrisclfl; Abb. 4, 13: mittelassyrisclfl; Abb- 5a. 5 nur ist die Varianz an Untertypen clort grtilier.
mitzelassyrische ,,Standard-Knickwz>.ndschale“; Abb. 6b, 35 und Abb. 7, 30 Der Ringbodeniyp 87 kornmt zwar in dieser Bauphase vor, doch hat er in den
,,Kassi:enflaschen“ (vgl. BQEHMERIDAMMER 1985, Taf. 109, 75-77). folgenden Bauphasen teilweise einen zwei- bis dreifach hdheren Anteil, er liist
‘3 Relativ gesehen nimmt allerdings der Anteil von Ware W1 in den folgenden Schichten
zugunsten neuer Typen ab.
“‘ Mooney 1985, 167.
*5 Die ,,Standard-Knickwandschalen" werden von PFALZNER (1995; 132) anhand des '6 PFALZNER 1995, 133. "3
Geféfilippentyps 5-ll (stumpfer Rand rnit Einzug dlrekt unter der Lippe) definiert und '7 Sie haben ihren Schwerpunkt in der Bauphase E, ihr Anteil nimmt bereits von Bauphase 2
A stellen die ,,priignanteste Leitform der mittelassyrischen Keramlk“ dar, deren Anteil in an drastisch und stetig ab. Dasselbe lconnte auch PPALZNER (1995, 134) fiir Tell Shaikh
‘(»x'41:vm~<»>1 ;@4=1v.+¢~<v-.e mAss IH (Tiglatpileser I.) nur noch ein Fiinftel ausmacht. Auch in den Arealen A-F haben Hamad ab rnA Ilb feststellen. Der Typ 3.3 wird dann von den Typen 3.7 und 3.11 abgellist.
die Gefiifilippen 6~1l an den Schalen des Typs 1.3 einen bemerkenswerten Anteil, doch '8 ln Tell Shaikh Hamad kommt Typ 3.1 dagegen vor allem in nach-Tukulti-Ninurta 1.»
a->\<»:-~>,\».< veningert sich ihr Anteil in den jfingeren Bauphasen nicht derart auffé-illig. An dieser Stella zeialichem Kontext (mA 11¢) vor (PFALZNER 1995, 134).
ll
mull auf die Problemazik einer schematlschen Typenklassifikatien anhand der Lippenform '9 Er tritt auch in Tell Sheikh Hamad erst ab mA llc und H1 deutlicher auf {PFALZNER 1995,
hingewiesen werden: in der Auswertung des Materials mullte aufgrund der insgesamt 135)
niedrigen absoluten Zahlen der Unzertypen stark zusammengefallt werden, wobei schnell 2° Bmm 1994, 23; 228. In den Arealen A-F wurden fasi keine vollstiindigen Geféille
;..=- <~.-l =-. -
l;:‘:
wichtige Detaiis verloren gehen. So wird nicht deutlich, daB der ,,Standard- geborgen. daher konnten an dieser Slelle nur Randscherben herangezogen werden, die
4
K.nickwandschalen“-Typ PFALZNERS (1995, Taf. 67g-71b, l02b-106e, 138a-f,h) in den mtiglicherweise 6.5.36 enisprechen. Da in den Arealen A~F eine spétmittelassyrische Phase
Arealen A-F in dieser eewas ansladenden Fomi - vergleichbar rnit Abb. 5a, 5 - gar nicht wie in Tell O nicht nachgewiesen werden konnme, Rann es sich nicht um Umlagenmgen
i vorkomrnt. Nur in den mittelassyrischen Schichten des Tell O (BAsTeRT 1994) ist er in handeln. sondern vielmehr urn einen Flaschenzyp, der auch in neuassyrischer Zeit
3 grtillerer Zahl belegt. Verwendung fand.
l

L...__.___..._.. . . . . . . _
-.»-Q.-.--4.-.--___.._.,-e.,.'......._..., ,___..;...,__
I .. V ., ~ -~.»..~».—.—.—..-.:_~w~.__'____, _ __ __
66 The Heartland ofAssyria
demnach Flachbodentyp 82 ab. Ebenso verringert sich der Anteil cler Scheibenftifie
(Typ 95) von Bauphase 2 an.
Keramik der Bauphase 2 (Abb. 4)
Es war nur unter Vorbehalten mtigiich den zeitlichen Abstand zwischen der
Zersttirung Kat-Tul<ulti~Ninurtas und der Wlederbesiedlung zu kléiren, da nur sehr
J‘
geringe Mengen verwertbarer Keramik gefunden wurden?‘
Einfrfihneuassyrischer Ansatz lcénnte anhand der Beobachtungen Bernbecks”
fiir die Bauphase 2 insofern bestéitigt warden, als auch hier die sogenzmnten
Wulstrandschalen (mit Randleiste) (vgl. Abb. 5a, 9;l(); Abb. 621, 19;20) fehlen.
-.1. Allerdings kann fiir Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta ein aufféilliger Riickgang von Ringbéden
gegeniiber Flachbtiden in spélerer Zeit nicht beobachtet werden (vgl. Abb. 2b).
Zudem finden sich rxicht wenige Vergleichsstiieke innerhalb spfitassyrisch datierter
Keramik.”
Die relativen Zahlen des Warenspektrums heben sich von denen der Bauphase 1
nur teilweise ab, dennoch ist von Bauphase 2 an eine zunehmende Ahnlichkeit des
i
Warenspektrums (Abb. lb)“ zu den folgenden Bauphasen zu verzeichnen. Neu isl
9 von nun an nur die quarzgemagerte Ware W7” (mit einer Scherbe).
1
Schalen (Typ 1, bzw. konische Schalen mit leichtem Wandungskniek Typ 1.3)
und Néipfe (Typ 3) sind nach wie vor zahlenméifiig stark vertreten. Doch treten jetzt
einige neue Untertypen auf (Schiisseln vorn Typ 2.1,“ und 2.2, Niipfe vom Typ
3.11, Tepfe vom Typ 5.0 und Typ 5.5,” Flaschen vom Typ 6.9,” Grollgeféifie vom
Typ 7.5, Flachbéden vom Typ 83.2, Ringbéden vom Typ 86.8 und 87.0,
Rundbiiden vom Typ 98 und 99), die auch in den folgenden Bauphasen nicht an
12 Bedeutung verlieren.
1%
1?
Keramik der Bauphase 3 (Abb. 5a~b) ' Der Beehertyp 4.1 tritt von Bauphase 3 an zahienméffiig etwas hervor, im
Wie zuvor sind die héckselgemagerten Waren W1 and W2 antgisméifiig are
stfirksten. Weitere héickselgemagerte Waren wie W4 und W15 treten Hill
E‘(
E
2‘ Da die Anzahl nur sehr gering ist (1-18 Scherben p1'0 Typ), ism die Aussagekraft der
E spitmEtte[assyrisch-neuassyrlsehes Merlcmal der Keramik zu sehen sein lctinnte. In Tell
Prozentzahlen sehr begrenzt. Das Scherbenaufkommen ist lnsgesamt recht gering, zuclem
=:
mulfiten einige Kollelctionen wegen der Hanglage der Areale von der Auswertung
ausgeschlossen werden.
2’ BERNBECK 1993, 117; datierl Qasrij Cliff ins 9. 1:1. v. cm.
*3 Z.B. vgl. mil Khirbet Qasrij: CuRT1s 1939, und Khirbet Khamniyeh: cums/cmzw 1997,
Ii
level 4.
M Ermittelt anhancl des R0biS0nSCl1en iihnlichkeitskoeffizienten: ROBINS()l\1 1951, 293-301.
25 Der Kar~Tul<ulti~Nlnurta W7 emsprechende Waremyp W21 in Tell Sl'161l(l'1 1-lamad sehemt
erst in spéitmittelassyrischer Zeit an Bedeutug zu gewinnen, insgesamt (13%) blelbt er
jedoch auch dortse1ten(vg1.PFAL2maR 1995, 115, Abb. 84).
. l1é; 26 Typ 2.1 ist allerdings in Tell O in mittelassyrischem Kontext belegz (BASTERT 1994, Taf.
52,1; 3; Taf. 68,1).
27 Typ 5.5 fehlt auch in Tell O, so dal3 hierin eventuell cine rein neuassyrische Form zu
sehen ist (Abb. 4,7; Abb. 5a, 33).
~.
4
28 Von nun an tritt Typ 6.9 aaf, der vermutlich als rein neuassyrisch gelten darf.
1’ Bel PFIKLZNER (1995, 115; 129, Abb. 115, 213) entsprechen die Waren 3, 4 und 15 dem
?P
Warentyp 2, der min 0.7% elnen geringffigig grblleren Anteil hat als die Waren 3, 4 und ‘15
1 insgesamt mit 0,l% in Kar-Tukulti~Ninurta. Die Waren W4 und W15 fehlen 1m
a
1
........ .,..,_ 2% ..
Kar-Tukulti~Ninurra 67
geringem Anteil hinzu. Die wichtigste Neuerung ist, (12215 von nun an die un-
gemagerle Ware W173“ - besonders in der Gruppe der Becher (Typ 4) - mil 2,8%
am drittslélrksien vertreten ist. Aufféillig ist ferner das im Vergleich zu den
vorhergehenden Bauphasen hohe Aufkommen der kalkgemagerten Ware W20.“
Neu, aber mil unbedeutendem Anteil sind die quarzgemagerte Ware W13 und die
mit dunklen Mineralien gemagerte Ware W 14.
Der Anteil der lconischen Schalen mil leichtern Wandungsknick (Typ 1.3,
besonders mit Lippe 10 und ll)” lélfit jetzt zugunsten anderer/neuer Formen nach:
besonders eingezogene Schalen (Typ 1.6), einknickende Schalen (Typ 1.7 rnit
Lippe 14,15,26) und konische Schalen mit starkem Wandungsknick (1.11,
besonders mit Lippe 16)” treten zahlenmiifiig neu hervor. Neue Untertypen sind
ferner3§erundete (Typ 1.2)” und runde Schalen mit leichtem Wandungsknick (Typ
1.10).
Mil 30,9% repréisentieren Schalen jetzt nicht mehr den hiiehsten Anteil,
sondern wurden von den Flaschen (mit 319%) abgeltist. Erwéihnenswert ist der
Flaschentyp 6.5, der in Tell Shaikh Hamad (dort Typ 6.2, PF/XLZNER 1995, 136) vor
allem in spfitassyrischem Kentext vorkommt. Sein Aufkommen nimmt hier von
Bauphase 4 an wieder ab, so c1aB ein spéitm§ttel~/friihneuassyrischer Ansatz fiir
diesen Flaschentyp unterstrichen werden kiinnte.
Neu sind gerundete Néipfe (Typ 3.2), die von nun an wenig, aber relativ
Konstant vorkommen. Die konischen, leichten Knickwanclnépfe (Typ 3.3) scheinen
jetzt die einknickenden Néipfe (Typ 3.7) abzultisen. Kennzeichend sind fur Typ 3.3
rundlich verdickte Geféifilippen 15, 21 und 26. Im Gegensatz zu runden, leichten
Knickwandnépfen (Typ 3.10), die in alien Bauphasen konstant gering sind,
erhalten runde, starke Knickwanclnépfe (Typ 3.11) von Baupbase 3 an cine gewisse
Bedeutung rnit einem Anteil von 21,3% aller Népfe, der his Bauphase 5 relativ
konstant bleibt.
tibrigen sind Becher eher selten.
miltelassyrischen Kontext der Areale A-F und des Tell O (BASTERT 1994), so dal3 hierin ein
Shaikh Hamad hat die Warengruppe 2 vor allem in mA Ilb und {I1 lhr Maximum, was riiese
Vermutung unterstreicht. h
3° Neu ist auch w16, allerdings mil nur,-e‘i'ner Scherbe.
3‘ Neu is: auch W19, allerdlngs nurlmifzwei Scherben.
32 Einzig Typ 1.3.10.x-7 (Abb. 5a, 5), der in Bauphase 3 vorkommt, karm als klar
mittelassyrische ,,Standard~»Knickwandschale" angesprochen werden.
33 Die Geféilllippe 15 scheint bei diesem Typ stéirker in den Bauphasen 4/5 vertreten zu seln,
wtihrend in der Bauphase 3 die Geféifilippe 16 vorherrschz. In den Bauphasen 1 und 2 kommt
der Typ 1.11 nurjeweils einmal vor.
34 Auch PFALZNER (1995, 132) verzeichnct ftir diesen Typ in Tell Shaikh Hamad ein
verstiirktes Aufkommen erst ab mA llc, in Tukulti-Ninurta I.-Komext ist er spiirlich belegt.
Wéhrend dort vor allem aufien leicht verdickte Geféifilippen vorhemschen, sind hier vor
allem die Typen 21, 26 (aufien und innen verdickte Gefiililippen) zu beobachten. Auch in
Tell O (BASTERT 1994) hat clieser Typ erst in der nach-Tukulti-Ninurla I.-zeitlichen Phase
einen hiiheren Anteil.
35 Vergleichsbeispiele liefem einen Datierungsansatz von der mittel- bis in die
spfitassyrische Zeit.
_4__,_;.__,.,.._,....._.,_....._.__. --7 T-7---~ - 7 -
68 The Hearrland ofAssyria
Bei den Geféifibfiden lcornrnen jetzt Gefzififiifie neu emf, von denen besonders Typ
93 einen hohen Anteil einnlrnmt.” Von Bauphase 3 an sind Runclbéden (Typen 89-
99) konstant vertreten. In diesem Kontext fand sich ein Beispiel eines Fufies einer
Dreibtigelfufischale (Typ 100).
Keramik der Banphase 4 (Abb. 6a-b)
l
\ 1
Das Warenspektrum hebt sich bis auf die héickselgernagerte Ware W11 (187
Scherben!) nicht besonders von der der Bauphase 3 ab. Gfinzlich neu sind die
beidenl Exemplare der kalkgemagerten Ware W6, die auch in beiden
mittelassyrischen Schichten auf Tell O fehlt.
Jetzt siellen wieder Schalen den hiichsten Geféifianteil, wobei konische, starke
Knickwandschalen (Typ 1.4) neu hinzutreten," Typ 1.11 (runde Schalen mit
starkem Wandungsknick) aber an Anteil verliert.
Typ 2.5 ist wieder etwas zahlreicher, wiihrend der Anteil der konischen
Schiisseln (Typ 2.1) zuriiekgeht.
Konische, leichte Knickwandnéipfe (Typ 3.3) erreichen inder Bauphase 4 ihren
Minimaianteil, dafiir treten jetzt einknickende Néipfe (Typ 3.7, Abb. 6a, 30-32)
1
hervor.
Die Zahl der Tdpfe (Typ 5, Abb. 61>, 1-6) deutete schon in der Bauphase 3 auf
einen klaren Funktionswechsei zwischen dem représentativen Gebéiude der
Bauphase 1 und den jiingeren Wohnhausanlagen der Bauphasen 2-5 hin.
Bel den Fiaschen dréingen neue Typen wie konische Flaschen (Typ 6.0), nach
innen gerundeie, eingezogene Fiaschen (Typ 6.6) und nach aufien abknickende
Flaschen (Typ 6.9) die bisher vorherrschenclen sieilwandigen Flaschen mit
abgesetztem Hals (Typ 6.5) leicht zuriick.
Teile von Grofigeféilien (Typ 7)” slnd nur in dieser Bauphasen belegt.
Auch Stiinder (Typ 8) - aufier Typ 8.5, tier in Bauphase 1 belegt ist ~ kommen
jetzt erstmals vor. Die in Tell Shaikh Harnad typische Gefiililippe Typ 76 ist in Kan
Tukulti-Ninurta nur in den Bauphasen 3-5 dutch den Typ 8.1 belegt und kann
_~\-. >-
demnach nicht als signifikant mittelassyrisch gelien.
Ferner treten nun erstrnals eckige Kn0pffi1Be(Typ 94) auf.
ig.s
Keramik der Bauphase 5 (Abb. 7a-b)
Da die Kollelctionen der Bauphase 5 vor allem ans dem Oberfliiehenbereich
stammen, sind die Ergebnisse der Auswertung mit Einschrfinkungen zu betrachten.
Ware W5 (héickselgemagert) triit hier stéirker hervor als Ware W17 (nngemagert).
Doch sons! haben sich die Anteile der héickseigernagerten Waren W1 und W2 nicht
nennenswert veriindert.
Auch das Formenspektrum zeigt keine aufféilligen Neuerungen. Eine Datierung
des Baubefundes féllt schwer, da sich unter der Keramik auch einzelne parthische
1-I
36
Typ 96 gewinnt in Tell Sheikh Han-rad erst ab mA Ill an Bedeutung. Perner neu: Typ 94.
-s
37 Auch in Tell O kommt er nur in nach-Tukulti-Ninurta I.~ zeitllclien Kontext vor. Ebenso
e
4
ist er in Tell Shaikh Hamad erst ab mAss Ilc zu verzeichnen (dort wird allerdings nlcht
zwischen gerundeten und konischen starken Knickwandschalen unterschleden), was einen
E sffitmitlelassyrischen Ansatz als terminus ante quem flir Typ 1.4 unterstiitzt.
3 In dieser Bearbeitung wie folgt definiert: Wandung > 1cm, Durchmesser > 30cm.
|
inn" * — ' - -—I'
--Wm . _-1 .0».
Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta 69
(Abb. '71), 6) und islamisehe Scherben (Abb. "lb, 7) befinden. Der einzige Teller”
ans dieser Bauphase hat, wie der Groifiteil der Keramik der Bauphase 5, ein eher
assyrisches Geprfige und kann somit keinen Hinweis auf ein jiingeres Datum geben.
Schlullbetrachtung
Die Betrachtung der relevanten Keramik der Bauphasen 2-4 fiihrt nur unter
Hinzunahme der sicher mittelassyrlsch datierten Keramik der Bauphase 1 zu einem
befriedigenden Ergebnis: So 151151 sich in Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta seit mittelassyrischer
Zeit zum Tell eine traditionelle Kerannkproduktionm beobachten, die in
neuassyrischer Zeit (von Bauphase 2 an) zwar neue Typen aufnirnmt, welche die
traditioneilen Formen jedoch nicht vollstiindig verdréingen. Aufgrund dieses
Ergebnisses rnul3 Pffilzners“ Auffassung, dal$ in Kat-Tukulti-Ninurta originéir
mittelassyrische Formen in den jiingeren Schichten generell als sekundéire
Umlagerungen anzusprechen sind, teilweise korrigiert werden. Zum einen iiefien
sich im Bereich des mittelassyrischen Gebéiucleteils keine Stlirungen durch jiingere
Gruben feststellen, zum anderen untermauert Pféilzner seine Auffassung anhand
von Beispielen, die jeweils in neuassyrischem Kontext gefunden wurden.
Unbestritten bleibt die auf mittelassyrische Zeit beschréinkte Verwendung der
,,Standard~Knic1<wandschalen“ (2.13. Abb. 5a, 5), die in Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta
allerdings nur in den beiclen mittelassyrischen Bauphasen des Tell O“ belegt sind.
Hinweise ans Textquellen liefern ein Datum vom Ende des 9. Jh. bis zum Ende
des 7. $11.43 Kleinfunde und Wohnhausarchitektur fiigen sich gut in das Bild der
(spémneuassyrisclaen Zeit Assurs und Nimruds ein.“ D0011 ein differenzierter
Datierungsansatz der neuassyrlschen Schichten'(Bauphase 2-4) ist nur unter
Vorbehalt miiglich:
Aus elem Keramikrepertoire der Bauphase 2 kann bedingt“ ein
frlihneuassyrischer Ansatz (vgl. o.g. Textquellen, Anrn. 2) abgelesen werden,
sofern sich der von Bernbeck“ vorgeschlagene friihe Ansatz fiir Qasrij Ciiff” auch
3° Vgl. Gm 1928, Typ 2.63 (Defilrmentepez s.-1.111.); 515119111 1994, Taf. 34,3.
4° Als traditioriell sind Geféiliuntertypen mlt einer Laufzeit von der Bauphase 1 an bei
konstant hoher Stiickzahl in den jilngeren Bauphasen 2-5 anzusehen, wobei ein leichter
Rticl-(gang der relativen Anteile aus dieser Definition nicht widerspricht. Dieses gilt fiir
folgende Typen: Typ 1.3, 3.3, 6.0, 6.5, 6.6, 82, 8'7. Des Ergebnis 'kann mit den filr die
Formenspektra ermitaelten Ahnlich1<ei;tskoef!12ienten (Abb. 2c, vgl. Anm. 23) bestlitigt
werden, da sie alle (also auch bei Vefgleichspaar Bauphase 1/2) fiber 100, d.h. iiber 50%
liegen. Noah deutlicher zeigt sich die traditionelie Produktion bei der Wahl der
Mzigerungszusétze (vgl. Ware W1 und W2 und Abb. 2b).
"‘ PFALZNER 1995, 212, Anm. 175.
“Z BASTERT 1994.
1
‘*3 E1c1<11o1=1= 1985,51.
“ Vgl. Anm. 3 und 4.
45 Geringe Scherbenanzahll Vgl. Anm. 20.
4° BERNBECK 1993, 117. Wichtigstes Kriterium were in diesem Fall das Fehlen dfif sog.
Wulstrandschalen, die in den Arealen A-F erst ab Bauphase 3 auflcommen (z.B. Abb. 5a,
9;l0).
‘*7 Curms 1989, 51: die von Curtis als postassyrisch herausgeslellten Typen Nr. 79-100
kommen ab Bauphase 3 verstéirlct vor. Die Flaschen Nr. 227-240 fehlen géinzlich bis auf eine
vage Parallele in Banphase 2 (Abb. 4, 22).
..,_-._,_..,a|.._._~,-.-.- ._...-_.._ _. _ 7 _ =. .. ..._ I _ ___... ___

70 The Heartland ofAssyria Kar-Tuku lti-Ninu rta 71

1 in Zukunft bestatigt. Dem widerspricht nicht, rial?» sich in der Bauphase 2 anch The examination of the sherds showed a tradition of types and wares from the
1. Vergleiche mit Keramik ans spat- oder sogar postassyrisch datiertern Kontext earliest level to the latest:
i finden. The wares W1 and W2 (chaff-ware) are predominant in all levels. Some new
Die Vermutung, dali die Brandschicht der Bauphase 3 mit dem Angriff der wares - like quartz tempered wares W7 and W13, limestone/calcite tempered wares
Meder und Babylonier auf Assur urn 612 v.Chr. in Verbindung zu bringen ist, W 6, 19, 20, 21, grit-tempered wares W9, 14, and unternpered wares W12, 16, 17»
konnte dutch ein spatassyrisches Keramikspektrum in der Bauphase 4 bestéitigt appearing in small quantities since "Bauphase 2" do not significantly change the
'\ werden. Doch finden sich wenig eindeutige I-Iinweise im vorliegenden Material overall picture.
daftir, zumal kaum Vergleichsmoglichkeiten zu gesichert postassyrisch datierten In the case of vessels beside the traditional types 1.3 (conical bowls with slight
Fundstellen bestehen. carination), 3.3 (conical beakers with slight carination), 6.0 (conical bottles), 6.5
Ein weiteres Indlz fiir einen postassyrischen Datierungsansatz konnte die (bottles with carinated straight neck), 6.6 (round inverted bottles), 82 (flat
Entwicklung der Waren sein: In Qasrij Cliff herrschen hackselgemagerte Waren bottoms), 87 (ring-feet) alteration could be verified:
-..
I
vor. In Khirhet Qasrij dagegen fallen Waren mit mineralischer Beirnengung auf, Since "Bauphase 2" some of the traditional types are getting less in quota, vice
die auch in Kar-Tukulti~Ninurta von Bauphase 4 an (Ware W8 und W11) an versa some new types appear or become more important (cf. Abb. 2a-b).
1 Bedeutung gewinnen. Within the present corpus the discussion of a differenciated neo-Assyrian
i Ftir die Bauphase 5 kann aufgrnnd der Oberfliachennahe der Befunde keine pottery chronology is still open: With reservations, "Bauphase 2" is early-neo-
1 Datierungshinweis anhand der Kerarnlk gewonnen werdenzes finden sich neben Assyrian (cf. the historical evidence) since Bernbeck” attributed Qasrij Cliff to that
1
der aus den vorhergehenden Bauphasen bekannten Typen auch einige parthische date.
(Abb. 7b, 6) und islamische (Abb. 7h, '7) Beispiele. The question whether the destruction by fire of the buildings in "Bauphase 3" is
connected to an invasion of Medes and Bahylonians in 612 B.C. must also remain
So ergibt sich unter Vorbehaiten folgende abschliefiende Datierung der Bauphasen unanswered for the time being. Furthermore, we are not able to prove a post-
1 -5: Asssyrian date for "Bauphase 4" due to a lack of pUlT)l_lSl‘l€(l, well dated reference
Bauphase 1 - mittelassyrisch (Tukulti-Ninurta I.) material.
Bauphase 2 - friiiineuassyrisch
Bauphase 3 ~ spatassyrisch
=
Bauphase 4 » spat-/postassyrisch? Zitierte Literatur
Bauphase 5 - postassyrisch, parthisch, isiamisch? Bnsrnnr 1994, Benuencx 1993, Boar-imam/IDAMMER 1985, CURTIS 1989,
CURTIS/GREEN 1997, CURTIS/COLLON/GREEN 1993, Drrrmauu 1990, DITTMANN et
al. 1988, EICKHOFF19S5, MALLOWAN 1966, MO0REY1985, Case 1988, Pnittznizn
1; Conclusion 1995, Pnnussen 1954, Roemsou 1951, SCHMIDT 1997.
E The most recent excavations in Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta in 1986 and 1989 uncovered,
3
1
60m northnorthwest of the "Nordpalast", a stratigraphy of five construction levels
down to virgin soil .48 Abb. 1-7 auf S. '72-90.
The stamp-impressed bricks of a floor, bearing the name of Tulculti-Ninurta I,
give a clear evidence for the middle-Assyrian date of the deepest level "Bauphase
1". The function of this fragmentary building cannot be identified yet. For the
following later construction levels ("Bauphase 2-4"), with remains of neo-Assyrian
private houses, the pottery and a number of small finds give a relative date.
1
§
Moreover, for the lst millennium several govenors of Kar-Takulti-Ninurta are
known through textual material, which gives evidence for the resettlement of Kar-
Tukulti-Ninurta in neo-Assyrian period.” The ceramic assemblage of the single
room in "Bauphase 5" is not available for dating purposes as it is, to all intentions,
a surface collection which contains - besides the well known material of the earlier
1
I
levels - a few Parthian (Abb. 7b, 6) and lslamic examples (Ahb. 7b, 7).
1
1
4 Y

i.
48 See n. l. ; ' "
49 EEKHOFF 1935, 51_ BERNBECK 1993. 117.
1

1
_ —-w. ~- - --

._ .1.
....._.,.._-..._._..,.,.,_.,,_=... ._....._, !._.>.>.._-; , ._..4..:_,¢ _ ____,_ W -""~ -~

72 The Heartland of/issyria Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta 73

Ware B .1 +gp.2 7 i__i;|».s Ps_p.4 iwml ITYP ____,¥_}!;_§___________________ ,_ _ ,_ 3131114, ,_ ___ B?-5 _10lBl _,
w1 s<>sn"2<wr21<s2,1) 326(’r5,5) so25+1o?m.s) sz2c»+z<sn0r>,s; 3419(7?,3) ll2654+£’71?+T20»i-T2I(”l'I,2) ‘RS 7 7
wz 94019)
ws l(0.l >
§s:(1s.s> |e4s+:+?(1s::) |1oo1{27()§7(7717}17,fi_J7}11s<1s,9) 255454-23?(15.5) H(),t_qtal 3(2,s%) I0(0,0%) ?<1,o%> 2(0,4%) 4(1,2%) 12(9,9%)
4:09) l6<o.2> n<0.2> ,_i§<0.5> 5l(0.3) 1.1.t0:al 10(2 1 ,7 %) }4(Z_Zl2.j%>) ( §(_6-_3%)_ 16+2?(s,2%> 8(s7.7§%i****777 Z4+2?(9,3%)
W4
ws
l0(o,0)
{mu
<><<>><>>
no.2) s(0,2)
t W-2)
$ 16(0.2> Bu .8)
§ii?;>7,7fjf
§ 34(0.2)
2(0.04) W01) ,_,_77ff7f77,7777,7 \7i17i07;¢57mi 7 0 0 3§§2_)__ 4(2.0)_ , _,§(S,2) ___” l3(2,8)_______ _
\1.11.tota1 TZ727§727)7((((((((((( 7177(7757}767)7 ********77 17(l7,9) g2+3?(l__I,2> 26<13,3) é57+3?(12,10)
we [0<o.0) _ ______ o(0,o) _ 0(o,0> E2<0,02§77777777 777 140,02) E 3<o,o2> l.2.totz1l___I(2,2) W\1(5,6) 56,3) 30+2v<1§,37>777777777 787(767,9)77 7 4757;27?7(§§6)7777777
(((( 777
w7_( |g=@,0) __ __(____j no.2) g(0_;)__ s(0,1) 7131(0.v>_ _! 42<0.3)
’ W8 1(0. I ) I no.2) 777i 7<0._2> __________ 35<<>.5> 23<0.5) _ ___ m<o,4) 1A3-I991 J 1(}(55,6) l25(26,3) Z_((5_2g;g?(29,s> ___43(31,1> 165+2?(35,0) _
‘ W97 7;‘ 1<<1-1) o<o.o> (l<>c0.<>1 (_(,___,(,L<><0.<>> 7316.706) __j 4<0,02> l.4.totaI O O 7§L1l’,<_*él,,,,(,_,_W2€,1-71( _ ,5+1'?(1»?),W_,(,(,,,
W10 l(0,l) 77_ ?»,(°(-5)”
77 _ :3(0,3> J8-+2:>(o,n 71727503) 7 ___] 3c»m<0.2> 7I7_.f>_.:mzg1 2(4(-3), ,,,____ 1(-5,6) _, we.. . /’\_1l,6l’__ _;i1(5,6) \2(1,7) 27(5,7)
f7vY7?§i§j I27<7<7>73,7> 50.2) 4(0.:) ______ 18'/(2,7) !3j17(Q.4)
i7<6J> _ ?W' 21<~=> i .7_:otal 3(6,5) l(5,6) 28l22,5) 52+5 ?(26.5) 3I,(_Z,6_.7) W I 1s+5'1<2441 7 ‘
WEE §(9_§) 7 77 0(0;0) 0(0.0) ________}4(0.1> _____ 27(0,2) 1.t0l§a1 4s(4s,0%) 1s<4s,2%)(__9s(3o,79?i37} ’’’’’’ 77\7i797é;7~L7i75*z(736,0%) \116(34,s%)77 411+1s'.>(3s,4%) 7
wxs 931,0) 7 7 7E<>7<7<>;<>7>77 77 t=>1<0@02>,,,_ , J 4+<wm<0.|> 512 ¢>s<<1121ml 14<<>.n 2. 1 .total <5 ((((H }_(§Q,Q) 501,8) \5<1f/,2)(__7_ (_1_7<43,s) Ts7(2s,s)
.. Wiit 0(0.07)77 7 o(70,07) 1(0_.02) _ t4<0,1) 450,03) _, L9<0,n 2.2_1orai 0 1(50,0)777777777717i(761;717)777777 7 7!1'1(5s.6) 13(1s,s) _32(4'],l) W
W15 k 0(0.0> o(0.0) r(0,o2)(_ 0(<>.0> 1159,08) ( ___5(0,03) 2.5.wtal___ woo) ( H9_ _Z__g(_n,1) 1+1".I(24,717)7777777777777Bk31;$)7 7 l8+l?(26.5)
W16 [0<(0,0) (mo) l£0.Q_Z_)_______,_( 4(0.i) :(o.o2)(___ ( @<o,o41 71176571 7 3(2,8%) 2($r,_1_‘f79r)W 29(5,3 %)_ __ 16(4,8%)__,i68+1?(5,1 %)
wu 12(1.§)( H H 2(_0,5(;W__j_|0s+n<2.a1_ !m+2?(2.<s) 777s72<1.2) ____J 3s1+n(2.:>
(W18 5(Q-,7)", _( <§;14>_,___, 6<<>.2> iw<0.2> 31(0Q)_ es(0,4) i3.1.zo:al_W_ 4(Il,4) l(14,3) i(2,l) 1+l?(1,3) 2(3.l) \9+ 1i.>(3,9)
W151 ,_ ,_
0(O,01 __ <)(0.0) __ 2(0.1) 8(0,l) _ 6_(0.|) ;6(0.!) (3_.1(§>_:@;;1g ¢1{r20<: 1.4) 1(<14.3> W2<4.3> 1+1?<8.9$7 (((((((((((((77 746,2) \ 1sm+"r20("/.7) 77
w20____j 369.4) _ l(O.2)_____V_ 47( l ,2) $2(Cl,8) _2__4<0,s) 128(0,8) \3.11.wra! 0 1(1_=}l§l |0(21,3) 1r>(20,3) 12<1s,5)13906,?)
w21 12019) ( ( 77 1:<_>31_ !o<o,o>_ l2(0,2) 1s_<_<>.4) i 33(0,2> 3.2.totai 1;2.9> 10 (((((((77j787<77i777.7i>7i777777777771<8;9)77 §*<9,2)jjjjjjjjj7777777 2249.4)
0(0.0) Q(Q9l ,,,,,,, 0(0.0) 3(0,94) (_ ,0(Q_,0) 3(0,02> W ,24§68,6)
3. § :r_rgmiwm ‘2(2§.6> (,:,1l1(_23;!J( 71002,?» 903.8) 56<24,0>
WY 7og0,q)ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZN (mo) 001.0) 1 _ mm) 136106) _ 4(<>.02) 3.4.totzL1 ii(2,9) _______Q_____________________ _3_(_§,€§)__ __ _ i7(_8;9) ,, ____ §5(7-7) 17(7,3)
((((77 0(0,0)____
sFc; I1(0,1) *****777771762670)
* * * 7 7i1I@I<i>f7j77777 ?<mo>?
1 0
77 ( W , w>.@1> b7@_§p) W
3(0.0§1____,_r l6_£9-11
1(0.01)
__
3.S.eoml (0 0 0 ‘oI ___________ __§}_(_i-5_)__ __ l((),4)
V CPW i0(0,0) 0(0,0)
_<°-)1”
f|(0,02) |(o,o2> l2(0,01> _ ,_,__
l 1 ((1,2)
I0(0,01 _ _ §fl-*°_L1_,,, _,1@~,9),- ,!,(!?L3_L__,,_,( i2(25,S) ,,,,,,7 31-|~3?(39,2) ;26(40,0) 1|+s?(30.5) 7
3.totaI 35(32,7%) 7(l7,9%) 47(I5,3%) _'l9+5?(l4,5%) 16S(_1Q,§fZ¢_>l____W233+5?(17,5%) \
_;p_¢_a| j _;§§{qf§‘_;(}fJ!f;_I_(5§,_4)__ __§§_27(g,gi_)___7l38s9+14i=‘@§j17_76833+1s5?(41,7)E_g§0_1(25j):_1763s3+199?+T20+'1"21
4.().eo:a1___70 ( Z0 Z Z "9 _______ 77i7(?7;77377777777 77 7 7 101,1) 2(4,4) 7777i
Abb. la Waren: Vorkommen pro Bauphase (relative Angahen in Kiammern, alle 7I7l1<7>7z7a§I1§33,3)”___ moo) Z1_§~_.~W1'.I(9/4,7) \9<a9,2) 4<44,4) 3s+1?(1a,3> X
Angaben ohne Beriicksichtigung der Hangkoilektionen) 4.5.tot&l 163.3) 0 1<s37>77777777777777777 77\§7<27sJi}j__ 363,3) _8(11.8) *
4-7-I(<>I2L_ ‘0 ____T_(_( 0___ W !0 '
‘F,. Y-~. ., M-. Ware l_§p.1=Bg_ __|§p_.2;1i>Y377 7 773%-3=Bv-4( BI!;§i~'B,l,;-757: 4.9 .tota£ !(33.3) 0 0 _ 0 f______________ H §l(2.2)
W1 as W 2.3 _ _ " Q8 393;;ZZZZZZ_H:§g2,s(%() i1(2,6%) 19+1?(6,2%) 13(2,4%) 9(2g;U1g ;4s+1?(3,4%)
wz 6,2 2. 1 ‘mt: \ _ _______l_!2 ;5.0.total 0 ‘1<50.Q_T;_¥_1_3(§_9,1> 19+2'.>(3s.s) 12<42,9) 45+2?(42,5)
W3 ,j7§_77_f7 (Tit 0-71 0,3 \5.2.to:al 1000) M1 7<3;1,?s37777777,777jfjf,(28>;2?<5g,§?1jjjjjjjjjj 71503.6) 7 5i+2'.>(48,1>
E ,Y_v,4__
ws
we W
w1
___" ,_9_7
__
________9,(1,,
HH
_ 9! 7
J
0&
eT27{777777777770_1E
0,2
9
__

? ? ? ?7763
Qg;¢>
3 ,. _
77777777 7707
‘

j 0
§:—
<:>‘o~
5.5.:oml

\ 5.toml 21(0,9%)
6.0.totai
o( ( (
5}’>7IiE>7¢E1;l7777_ Q
1408.6)
lg
100,0) 12<9,:>
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZj_q_”__
5(9,4)
1(1,9)
12(s,1%) igg<7,i%7§77777777 7 7s3+4?(9,1%)
0 ______
Q ,__
26,6)
_,”\s(1,s>
120,9)
2s(s,4%) z06+4?(s,0%)
_1__§_(}_§l2_)_______________,_i3_5+3?(5!737.5,_7)7_:77 777 I I40“/,3)
7
64+3'?(13.1)
, ( 94 6.5.noml ,,4(28,6) 6(75,0) \ 73+1?(74,5} 83+8?(54,6) ;42(5 Z ,9) 208+9‘?(58,9)
X21 _ 0,-(1 ,__ _ 7777?) 0.03 6<42,9) gums) ___;11<11,2) 19+1?(12,5) 7777777771T77(7i717,707>7777777777 574+}‘it7175;3)777777777777777\
E W10 § 0,4 P0M . -,_ - Q Man
P
6.610121
E
7 7 0,9 *7 *z>;;e:? W 2 6.9.£otal \0
6.t0tal W W\14(13,1%)
______,_ j(i2L5_)_______ §}_@;_l)__________________ \ 15+ 1 ?(9_.2)
s(z0,s%) 9s+1?<31,9%)77]7i5i+713?(2';,9%)W s(1(24_,;§f@__ ss3+14?(26,s%77)777
\
_ 3(9,9) 27+l’-'(7-6) 1
W12 0.8 _Q;l_[_ 0-3
( 1 (9 0,08 0 ,1 7.0.tota1 1 0 0 0 6<e6,7;__ 7”” \I1(5v.1) 777¥107<s57,76)777
(01 0.02! f>75i§7[§§ -(,” {L92 7_1 mtai 07 7 77 0 ‘z<2a.6) 2<11,1>
_, 9W _ 0,9; W "Q08
é,7;_3(-“PW , 00 70 ,,,,, ,, 1'? 0 0 11?
W16 IQ _ _ 0,08 __0.08 17.5.t0£al 7_\gg51@1___”(1(<100.0> H s<3s_.3> 104,3) 777 3673137)7777777777777 7
T\7/7i;/7777777777777777 77 7 0.3 l ,4 7.t0zal 0(0,0%)
;www
1@?ii1i??i17""?**"77 jjjjjjj" 97 _( ,, 0.11.2 79.:-' -_,|¢— W9?”
0
vs0 1‘8‘O't°5a5**** (jg
W r 1\1(2,6%)
I
1+1?(0,3%)
3 ***********110
__
7 “lo
9(1,7%)
( ) *????????????? ’7(2,1%)
j
06(35.7)
\18+1?(g4(%() I
****W *
1(4,5)
Vi/7167777777 7 7 7 77 7 777 8. i .totai ‘ ____ _§§ }_O_Q__§_))________________ _6_('<_30.Q) _ 15(63.2)
"2_ I 04 03
8.5.com1_ @( 100,0} "W 0 {0
’
2(20,0) 0 4( 1 8,2)
P .- 0.2 0,2
2
W21 ‘..._
_ OP 777707.47 ___ 0,04 8.8.zotal_____\Q ???????????????????W9? we *\1<1<>,<» 777;7177<77177437j777777777720,1) "7*
WY ,____Q _ __7Z7_7_£>;.0_: ( ___: 0.05 8.lotal 12(1,9%) 0<0,0%) __ ;§g_,0%) \10(1,s%) ( ________ v<2,1 %) zz(1,7%) \
ii A57 _o_p1_ ( _____ 0.0: 9.(a@;@-_1____ <1<0,0%) 0(0,o%) 1(e,757%577777777777777717(0,72%> \1<0,s%> s(0,2%) 77
svc 0.021 0.2 0,04 RStogzgrw}§)]_______________ ( 39 HH3<;j1i3g_ s4s+as'.> 77777777 m2+41?77
4 ,7¢7i?13’: 7§§7_7Q7_ E
1 07 0,02 0.0% (_ 0.02
~<
i§2s:i£iiL¢ .-. D 7.. 1s1(,_s( ass 4 191,; 190,1 Abb. 2a Gefiifitypen (Randscherben =RS): Vorkommen pro Bauphase
(Zusammenfassung. Prozentzahl der Untertypen (z.B. Typ 1.3) bezieht
1 Abb. lb Waren: Vergleich der Bauphasen mittels Iihnlichkeitskoeffizient
sich jeweils auf den Grundtyp (z.B. Typ }); Prozentzahl der Grundtypen
bezieht sich auf Scherbengesamtzahl

j* - - ’ ”'
_.1.___~_5,_,...~.,-.~,--~ -
i
1i "#77
1
i

74 The Heartland 0fAssyria Kar-Tukulti~Ninurta

1 Typ _1_z_p.17777777777777777 15519

7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 77\@}J;Z17777777777777777777777777 7%m1;mp,57,__7_:777f71&{;§]77777_7_7 _ 1 B 1>17i77¥7i77717ii7i1iQ-,’,5_§*!, ‘ , ,1i5,11¢_~°ai4, B11- 4-=5
‘ Flgqhlgfiden: Typfi 291 199 199 199771
80.total 5 ,_,,_,,_0, ____,_______,Q ,Z(1,,7_%_)____,1 0 __,_, 1(1-0%) ,3(0,7%) T111 1 1 185, 109 166 1737
7751115017 0s(s,5%) Z Q 1(0,s%)__}2(1,g<@Z””W,Z,1;1(3,9%) H ,,10(2,3%) IYPL, 0 156 I74 12017
1 §2.0.1otai 01 O 0 6 1 '1 IT§fi3 1231 131
56,7L_ 189 7777777717219
192,, 1891
151‘
182 1.11
*;1"‘1f________, 2 "WW2, ___" 1+1? 01 6+1’? 115924
0E 118 154 121
_ 3 1

, 02_2.1<>m 77 14 >.. 8 ,,,,,,,,, W17 '12,, 52 Typ5

‘ 8},t0tal Hl‘7(4'Z,2) ”l(S,9) _10(8,5%) __ 24-1-1?(14,2%) 13(12,6%) 1 6s(14,1%) \Typ6 82.1 178 1 607 __l_,8 3
\
05.0.1501 5 ,_ 9 0 0 5, 2 1” 1 T197 V100 100 _ 66,6 147377
§3_ 1 1012111. 3 1 0 ,5 ,3 5 556+?’ TLP3 100 100 120 1 140
33.2_.t0tz17 1 , _, , ,,Q_ _________1__ 11 1, 1 4, T1129 1 j 20707777 777771070 7 200 29°
83.101111 3(8,3%) 2(l1=3%2__1£9»_3i/9),, ,,§_?l?_(3»6%) 9,5519%) z1+1'.>(3,s%> 71100707117 96,11 ISLW 156 1747
1 W9l$£1?5d@"1__,1 1 1 7 1 1 _ __
1 135* 1 104! 139 1 155, 168
34.total ‘ 0 0 \,2(1fl'%),,_ Q 1(0,6%)_ 0 73(9,7%)
1 Wac1<é11$E5Zi7é1§ 1 __ Abb. 2c Gefifitypenz Vergleich der Bauphasen 1»5 mitteis
‘ 35551181 0 0‘ 1(0,8%) 6»!-2?(3,6%) 4(3,9%) I ,1_1+2‘.?,(2,S%) Ahnlichkeitskoeffzient (Zusammenfassung); Ds* ¢DU1'C11SC11l11l1Z/K08f171Zl81111
Ringbiidenz
1 787€.0{10717a17 kl Q O 6, 7777777 9
_86.1.1otal O G - 1Q Q U1 Zu Abb. 3a (S. 82) Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 1 (mittelassynsch)
86.2.1001! ._1 »- M) >—- 9+1?;
Nr Typ are 5 Rad1us(c,m)
' Vorkflmmen
86.8£otal CD >- O 1 1 177777777777 77 10 7 79 _\i{_,_,,,
i8§:10¢a1 ,,__ 30.3%) 2(11,8%) ;4(3,4%) 13';-l'.’(7,'7]q)rrrrrr"wf}’Q,§!‘Zq)__ _,26+l?(5,9%} W 0.1.21.0-1 W1 -14,0 Bp.l
87.0t0t:li 1 01 1 _ 7 1+1?\ E
1.0 , 9+1?‘ 0.1.22.1-1 W1 15,0 Bp.1 ,3 ,5
_fl.1.:o1al 11 01 1-1 (5 U? - [Q 0.1.24.1-1 W1 9,0 Bp.1
37.110131 1‘
(((((((_,_. _1‘ __ 5 1 __,,18>- »-0 l\J l.l.l.()~I W1 10,8 Bp. 2 ? (T011 0)
1 1750517" 2 __ 4 26 (#53311 ,_. s0+1? 1.1.1.28 W1 10,8 Bp.1,4,5
i 87.101111 4(11,1%) s(5s,3%) aT6{i§07,75?v;7j77 ki57;;j:(26,s%)_z5(2z,3%) \114+z?(2s,7%) 1.1.21.7-4 W1 24,5 Bp.1?
971.901 5 0 jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj,01go,s%) s+'1?1s,0%> 413,99-@),_ ;10+1?(2,s%) 1 1.1.23.0-l WE 12,6 _ Bp.1,4,5
Gefzififiifie: 1.1.26.7-2 WI 15,1 Bp.1?
92.£0_1al 1(2,8 %) 3(17,1s%) 1z(i0,2%) 110(§737%§77777777777,“11+2?(x0.1%) 31+1?(s,4%) 1 1.2.21.0-1 W1 10,0 Bp.E,4,5
93.201111 777777jfjf;§ 7 _ 0 **********_,o,9(1,§j@,,,,,,,122+s;?(1s,0%) i12111095177777i§14?7(97fi%717777777 \0 0- J0\t1:-l=-L»>t~J;v- 1.3.6.21-1 W1 9,0 Bp.I~5
5 94.tota1 0 70 37(2,5,%)____7 g(;,2.%) *******,5 1 ,5 0 5(1 , 1%) , E0 1.3.10.x-6 W1 11,0 Bp.1
= 95.10151 505.9%) 1115,9920 1115,09,) 10+2'.>(s,9%) 116.9%) ____ ,s0+2?_(e_,s~/_»_>___,_,_ 11 1.3.11.x~5 W1 11,0 Bp.£-5
,7§§.7t701a717 5
___‘ ______ _____ _ _ __ Q L1jj j j j j Wmwmw ‘xw%> 1uw%> ,7@E%77 7 12 l.3.12.8~4 W1 13,4 Bp.1
Rundbiidenz 13 1.3.15.I0~1 W1 10,0 Bp.1,3,4,5
97.10131 91 ************#9),,_W,__W0,,;g1,2%1,, @771)_ 0 201.5%) 14 1.3.1511.-I W1 9,8 Bp.1,4,5
1 99-1099, __ 97 {(53%) 16(13,6%) 16(9,5%) 44(9,9%) 11(10,7%)
15 13.15.12-2 W1 15,0 Bp.1
799.t0taI 0 ,1§s,,9%1,, 1,1195%) i 212111.291»: W 2113951777777777777’716l¢»i?7(3l6%7i777777:
= Dreisch1..- 1.626.104 WI 12,9 Bp.1,4
fuflschalenz 1
1.7.26.22—l »W£ 12,5 Bp.1
1 100.1-1 1 0 0,;1§0,s,%),
,5 01 9,1012%) 1 »-> - 00*-JCA 1.11.15.l6—1 W1 11,2 Bp.1?,3,4,5
19 1.11.1524-1 Wl,3 8,5 Bp.i,3,4
9 1B3 19,19!,,,, 13025991 17(30,4%) 11$(27,8%) 169+16?(23,7%) I03-1-1?(23,6%) 443+1‘7?(2S,0%) 20 2.2.26.1-1 ‘-Wl,2 17,0 Bp.1,3~S
21 2.5.68.4-1 V1/1,2 10, 0 Bp. 1,3,5
V Abb.2b Gf'Bt
(28 ypen (Bd
O €l1SC h Cl‘ b B11 3 BS): V OI‘k0l‘Iil'!l€l'|: I)I'0 B3Uph3S€ 22 3.l.50.2~1 W1 7,0 Bp.1
; (Zusammenfassung). Prozentzahl der Untertypen (z.B. 82.0) bezieht sich 23 3.l.48.2~1 W1 7,8 Bp.1
1 jeweils auf den Grundtyp (z.B. 82); Prozentzahl der Grundtypen bezieht 24 3.2.S7.6~2 W1 7,5 Bp.1
sich aul’ die Scherbengesamtzahl. 27 3.3.5.74 W1 6,0 Bp.1
28 3.3.8.5~»l W1 5,0 Bp.1,4
26 3.4.12.1~2 W? 5,0 Bp.1
25 3.7,15.8~4 W1 5,9 Bp.1,3~5
29 3.10.8.'7~2 W1 4,6 Bp.1,4,5
30 4.13.0-8 W? 4,5 Bp.1
4
\ 31 4.5.3.0-5 W17 4,0 Bp.1
32 4.9.3.1-2 W17 4,0 Bp.1

,5
'3}? 7.‘,-3; ,
Q, ...
~ .__T__ . 7' _ — 7****77777
_4+__._ ..__. _ _. _ _ _ _.,,,__7 ~— 4 _ .
-—--—-~~- 2 .._

The Heartland ofAssyria Kar"T”k”lti'Ni”“"m

99.3-I 3,0 Bp.2

Zu Ahb. 311 (S. 83) Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 1 (mittelassyrisch) 86.8-2 1,9 Bp.2,5
T20 Ware Radiuswm} _ , Vorkommen 86.2-6 6,6 Bp.2
5.2.26.1-2 W1,2 18,0 Bp.1,3-5 6.0.55.4-1 Bp.2
6.0.30.7-2 Wl,2 7,0 Bp.1,2,4 6.9.57.2-1 6,0 Bp.2
6.0.33.2-2 W1 8,7 Bp.1? 9,5 Bp.2
6.0.33.7-1 W1 5,7 Bp.1,3-5 8,5 Bp.2
6.5 .431)-2 W1 5,5 Bp.1,3,4 8,0 Bp.2?
6.5.36.6-1 W1 3,5 Bp.1,3-5
6.5.47.0-2 W1 4,6 Bp.l-5
Zu Abb. 5a (S. 85): Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 3 (neuassynsch)
6.5.69.1-1 W1 6,5 Bp.l,3-5
6.6.30.7-1 W1,2 5,2 Bp.l,4,5 TIP. R0dius(cm1 Vorkornmcn
6.6.41.3-1 W1 6,0 Bp.1,4,5 1.2.4.4-3 11,8 Bp.3-5
>- \O ~JO\U-£>l)3t\>—' >--“O 6.6.43.0-1 W1 6,2 Bp.l,4 1.2.26.3-1 9,1 Bp.3
7.1.43.8-1 W2 34,0 Bp.1? 1.1.21.3-2 Bp.3
8.5.4.1-1 W1 5,5 Bp.l 1.2.50.8-2 23,5 1313.3
8.5.41 .0~1 W1,2 8,0 Bp.1,4 1.3.10.x-7 11,3 Bp.3
9.1.21.0~1 W1 4,0 Bp.1,3-5 1.6.56.6-1 9,5 Bp.3
81.2-1 W1,2 2,0 Bp.1,4,5 1.6.26.I1-1 11,7 Bp.3,5
82. 1~1 W1 2,1 Bp.1,3 ®-JU\ -£>L»éK\3" 1.6.26.9-2 13,4 Bp.3,4
82.2~'7 W1,2 4.4 Bp.1,4,5 1.7.2614-2 12,0 Bp.3-5
82.16 W1 5,5 Bp.1,3,4 1.7.26.1’?-2 1 1,5 Bp.3-5
87.7~1 W1 1,7 Bp.1,3-5 1.7.2621-3 9,0 .Bp.3
87.1~3 W1 3,5 Bp.1,3,5 l. 10.15.14-1 13,0 Bp.3
83.1~5 W1,'2. 4,2 Bp.l,4,5 4.5.42.1-1 3,3 Bp.3
86.2-5 W1,2 5,2 Bp.1,3,5 l.l1.3.0~1 9,5 Bp.3
92.0~6 W1 Bp.l,3~5 1.11.1525-l 14,0 Bp.3-5
92.0~3 W1,5 Bp.i,3,4 l.ll.16.l3-2 1 1,0 Bp.3
95.2-1 W1 0,8 Bp.1?,5 1.11.1616-2 10,2 Bp.3
95.0~2 W1,2 2,4 Bp.1,5 1.11.198-2 9,8 Bp.3
W.,.M-. ‘,\-.w-_. _.~,_.~
95.2~1 1 W2 2,8 Bp.l 2.1.68.5-1 12,0 Bp.3
95.15-1 Wl,2 2,8 Bp.1,4 2.1.14.1-1 13,6 Bp.2,4
22.19.14-1 18,5 Bp.3
Zu Abb 4 (S 84): Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 2 (neuassyrisch) 2.5.68.5-1 12,2 Bp.3
3.2.1.7-1 5,7 Bp.3
T.v.P Ware. _Rg1_g§_i__1_1_s(_cm) __ Vorkommen 3.2.54.0-1 "/,5 Bp.3-5
1.1.$8.11—1 W1 Bp.2 3.2.76.3-1 7,9 ‘Bp.3
1.2.21.9-1 WE 15,5 Bp.2 3.7.2634-2 2,2 Bp.3-5
1.7.15. 17-1 W1 10,0 Bp.2-4 3.10.4.6—l 5,5 8pf3,4
1.11.1618-1 W1 14,5 Bp.2.,4 3.11.4.0-1 5,8 Bp.3
2.1.43.9-1 W1 12,5 Bp.2 3.11.105-1 5,2 Bp.3-5
2.2.4.24 WI 12,5 Bp.2 3.11.15.27—1 5,5 Bp.3
5.5.62.7-1 W1 14,5 Bp.2 3.11.16.13~1 7,8 Bp.3-5
3.11.186-2 W1 5,0 Bp.2 3.11.42.2~1 7,0 Bp.3,4
6.5.46.2-1 W1 4,0 Bp.2,4 5.5.14.1-2 Bp.3,4
6.5.41 .8—l WE,11 6,8 Bp.2-5
-—6\DOO'-lO\Ll\4>LrJI\ '— 6.5.28.7-3 W1 5,5 Bp.2,4
Bp.2
Zu Abb. Sb (S. 86): Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 3 (neuassyrlsch)
6.6.37.6-1 W2 7,0
83.1-4 W1 5,0 Bp.2 N1; Typ ___W;1re Radius(,cm) _ ___\!9_rk0mmen
87.7-3 W1,2 2,2 Bp.2-5 5.0.30.7.-1 w1,s 9,0 015.3-5
87.0-4 W2 4,5 Bp.2,3 5.0.31.6-1 w2 11,5 015.3
92.2-3 W1 Bp.2,4 Lnél\J>—1 5.0.43.1 1-1 w1 10,0 Bp.3
98.3-3 Wl,2 Bp.2—4

§ , . 9,--. *_:W
__.,_._-._-__.._......._.__._..._.._.. \=
_,_ ,___ _.. . .. . - .2

78 The Heartland ofAssyria Kar-Tukulti-Ninurza

5.0.52.9-i W1,2 14,8 B9-3 Zu Abb. 6a (S. 87}: Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 4 (neuassyrisch)
5.0.62.3-1 W1 14,8 Bp.1 N Y
5.0.75.5-1 W2,20 10,0 Bp.3,4 " W210; R:1diuS(crn1 ___}/Qrkomrnen
@--iC7\-Ii 6.5.50.5-1 WL2. 2,2 Bp_3’4 0.1.21 W1 11,2 Bp.4
12 Ow
1.2.15 iv;-M ~ W1 11,5 Bp.4
1
9 6.0.35.7-l W1 6,5 Bp.3,4 12.19.14- _ W1 15,0 Bp.4
10 6.0.43.0~1 W1 5,8 Bp.1'?,3,4 l.2.2l.4~l W1 7,2 Bp.4,5
11 6.0.58.2-1 W1 7,5 3pA3,4 1.2.26.1-1 W1 13,5 Bp.4
J
12 6.5.20.0-1 W1 2,3 BP3 1.2.2620-1 W1 10,0 B-p.4
.13 6.5.20.1-2 W1 5,4 Bp_3,5 l.2.42.0~1 W1 15,0 Bp.4
14 6.5.28.6-I W1 6,5 BP3 1.2.5791 W1 10.3 Bp.4
1
15 6.5.33.6~l W1 5,2 39,3 1.3.1711-5 W1 1"/.0 Bp.4
»_ ' 16 6.5.37.7-1 W1 4,5 Bp_3_5 1.3.18.9-2 W1 11,0 Bp.4,5
17 6.5.34.7-1 W1 6,5 ;3p_3,4 1.4.1010-1 W1 14,4 13p.4,5
18 6.5.46.0-1 W1 3,5 Bp_3 1.4.5210-1 W1 11,0 Bp.4
19 6.5.48.1-1 W1 6,0 Bp_3,4 1.6.56.7-1 W1 11,0 Bp.4
20 6.5.50.1-1 W1 4,0 gp’3’4 3.11.424-1 W1 7,0 Bp.4
21 6.5.58.0-3 W1 9,5 Bp_3,5 3.11.501-1 W1 7,5 Bp.4
22 6.5.6210-l W1 7,0 393,4 -> - =>- \O-3U\ -PuJI\->O—\U0 -3;-U >I~J>—© 1.7.1519-2 W1 10,0 Bp.4
23 6.6.69.0-1 W1,2 4,8 Bp.3_§ 17 1.7.1913-1 . W1,2 16,5 Bp.4,5
24 6.9.32.x-1 W1 4,5 Bp_3_5 18 1.7.2613-1 W1 1-2,5 813.4
25 6.9.20.2~1 W1 6,8 593,4 19 17.26.15-1 W1 11,0 Bp.4,5
26 6.5.43.0~3 W1 5,0 Bp_3 20 1.7.2616-2 W1 9,7 Bp.4
27 7.5.66. l»1 Wi,2 Bp_314 Z1 l.7.26.2l—2 W1 9,0 Bp.4
28 84.5-6 W1 6,6 Bi)_3’4 22 1.10.1712-2 Wi 13,0 Bp.4,5
29 80.3~i W1 5,6 393,5 23 1.l0.50.2~1 W1 10,0 Bp.4,5
30 86.2-4 W1, 5,1 Bp.3,4 24 1.l1.15.l3~l W1 11.0 Bp.4
SFG Z5 1.11.1115-1 W1 11.0 Bp.4,5
31 85.0-3 W1,2 6,3 gp_3_5 26 1.11.1526-1 W1 14,7 Bp,4
32 100.1-E W1 2,7 Bp_3 27 1.11.1617-1 W1 9,5 Bp.4
33 87.7-2 W1 2,0 B93 28 2.2.77.0-l W1 15,0 Bp,4
34 87 .7-4 W1 2,3 Bp_3 29 2.5.61.1-1 W1 11,4 Bp,4
.? ~.>_w-.~< 35 92.10-1 W1 3p_3 30 3.7.3.0-1 W1 9,0 3p.4
36 92.0-8 WE Bp_3,4 31 3.7.21.5-1 W1 7,5 Bp.4,5
Wl,5 Bp_3,5 32 3.7.2617-1 W1 6,8 Bp.4
3'7 92.0-9
38 93.1-4 W1 Bp_3_5 33 3.10.182-1 W1 4,5 Bp.4
39 93.l~8 W1 Bp_3_5 34 3.2.2.X»1 Wi 7,8 B114
40 93 .3-1 W1,2 Bp‘3,4 35 3/$.16.11~1 W1 6,8 B9/1,5
1 1 41
42
94.2-1
94.5-3
W5
W1,2
6,0
1,9
BP3
Bp_3’4
36
37
4.0.4.14
4.1.47.0»1
W1
W17
2,5
4,0
Bp.4
Bp.4
43 96.6-1 W1 1,0 Bp_3,4 38 4.1.3.0-7 W1 4,4 Bp.4
44 95.2-4 W1 2,0 Bp'3,4 39 4.5.3.0-6 W? 4,3 Bp.4
45 95.7-1 W1 1,2 Bp_3 40 4.5.4.0-5 W1 4,3 B04
1
1
46 95 .2- 11 W1 2,8 Bp.3
1
47 95.9-1 W1 Bp.3
Bp $5 _ Zu Abb. 615 (S. 88): Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 4 (neuassyrisch)
48 98.3-1 W1,17
49 99.2-1 W5 Bp.3 Typ Ware RacEius(cm) Vorkommen
- 2
1 50 99.0-1 W1,2 13p.3.4 5.0.26.2-3 W2 16,0 Bp.4
51 - W20 7,0 015.3 5.0.5211-1 W1 16,0 Bp.4
52 - W20 >-15,0 Bp.3 5.0.55.7-1 W1 10,6 Bp.4
4
5.0.75.0-1 W1 14,0 Bp.4
5 Ln4>L>-7l\J'—' 5.5.15.3-1 W1 14,5 Bp.4
6 5.5.14.1-1 W1 B114

z
<

1
<

in.
1
__..~_._-._._,._...______..__. *,__:_,,,-~- .1...,,..,,..,,_,..._.....,.v-_-,.._..,.,,~,._......_.._. _

80 The Heartland of/issyria Kar‘T"1<14m"Nm"F¢¢1

6.5.18.1»1 W1 6,7 Bp.4 1 6.5.45.2-1 W1 4,2 Bp.5

6.5.3261 W1 5,0 Bp.4 £6 6.9.47.2-1 W1 3,0 Bp.5
6.5.33.6»2 W1 5,5 Bp.4,5 17 8.1.76.0-1 W1 6,0 139.5
6.5.43.9»1 W1 5,3 Bp.4 18 3.1.67.4-l W1 8,5 139.5
6.5.48.0-1 W1 2,3 Bp.4,5 19 6.0.37.7—l W1 6,7 Bp.5
_ -M.»-\0o ~_t.-1)~—*© 6.5.56.9»1 W1 6,0 Bp.4 20 6.9.58.7~2 W1 7,8 Bp.5
R 13 6.0.28.6»1 W1 4,8 Bp.4,5 21 7.1.76.8'l W2 15,5 Bp.5
J
14 6.0.33.2~l W1 6,0 Bp.4
15 6.6.58.12~l W1 5,0 Bp.4,5 Zu Abb. 7b (S. 90): Keramikvorkommen in Bauphase 5 (Oberfléichenkollektxon)
.16 6.9.3’/'.8»E W1 7,5 Bp.4
17 7.0.66.l0~E W2 22,0 Bp.4 Nr. Tm. Ware ,_ _ Radius(<:m) ,_ Vorkornmen
18 8.0.4.04 W1 8,5 Bp.4 W20 6,5 Bp.5
v<—-A\4,~
~_ ’ 19 8.1.51.2»! W1 9,5 Bp.4 W20 5,5 E’-p.5
20 82.0~2 W1 2,2 Bp.4 W 19 6,5 Bp.5
21 83.0~1 W1 1,4 Bp.4,5 W19 8,9 Bp.5
1 22 83. l~3 W1,2 4,2 Bp.4,5 W20 8,0 Bp.5
1 23 83.0/I‘ W1 4,1 Bp.4,5 Bp.5
1: 24 95.1 1»1 W1,5 1,4 ,Bp,4-,5 2,0 Bp.5
25 95.2-5 W1,2 2,0 Bp/1 84.5-1 W1 2,0 Bp.5
26 95.2-6 W1 2,5 Bp.4 \O0 -JO\U!.&LA!\J>-‘ 82.0-9 W1 3,5 I-3p.5
,1 27 86.5-1 W1 3,7 Bp.4 10 85.0-1 W2 4,5 811.5
28 87.9-1 W1 5,0 Bp.4 11 86.8-1 W1 0,6 Bp.5
29 93.1-5 W1,2 Bp.4 12 95.2-3 W1 1,7 Bp.5
30 93.1-6 W1 Bp.4 13 95.7-4 W1 2,6 Bp.5
3E 93.1 -'7 W1,2 Bp.4 14 93.4-E W1 Bp.5
32 93.8-1 W1 Bp.4,5 15 87.2-E W1 Bp.5
33 93.94 W1 Bp.4 16 96.3-1 W1 2,2 Bp.5
34 93.1~ 10 W2 Bp.4 1'7 96.1 1-1 W1 0,9 Bp.5
35 96.3~2 W1 3,0 Bp.4 18 99.1~2 W1 139.5
36 91.2-1 W1 4,0 Bp.4,5
37 91.1-2 W1,2 4,7 ' Bp.4,5
38 97-1 W1 Bp.4
39 97-2 W17 Bp.4
40 98.1-1 W2 Bp.4

Zn Abb. 7a (S. 89): Keramikvorkommen in Bauphase 5 (Oberfliichenkoliektion)

NR T189, Wam Radiush-:m1 Vorkommw
1 0. .1 .21 .2-1 W1 13,5 Bp.5
1.10.15.18~l W1 12,0 Bp.5
2.2.41.5-1 W1 17,0 Bp.5
2.5.26.1-1 W1 14,5 Bp.5
5.0.78.0-1 W1 7,2 Bp.5
2.5.26.9-1 W1 20,0 Bp.5
7.1.76.2-E W2 Bp.5
5.0.55.1-1 W1 18,0 319.5
2.5.68.4-2 W1 10,8 Bp.5
5.0.55.5-1 W1 10,0 Bp.5
5.2.52.5-1 W1 15,0 Bp.5
6.0.28.7-1 W1 4,5 Bp.S
4 6.0.36.6-1 W1 5,0 Bp.5
1.
-v—1 »->—~\.’JO0-C\L!l-S>iAt\J>—* ~$>b~>l\-9'-‘Q 6.5.32.7-1 W1 6,0 Bp.5 1<
<

¢
;

x1
<1

:1,
531'.

——— _ _.__~- __ _ _ __ _

_-..».
._Q_.,._.~_,_...._._,-_..._..._._..

32 The Heartland ofAssyria 1 Kar-Tu/cuzlxi-Nirmrza 83

g‘*““;;_;;_,;_:;;j;; ;§._j‘_“_; 6 ” M) F\,:,;~. f:._ iiiiiiiiif H

1 2

R
Q”? T T 0 ,
-.

./\ ~11 /{X “W 1 ‘H

""""W’ ' j ' ' 0 I 7 is f 5 1 _;S '——”~— M 12

\, n 13 14 Wm 15

---------- 7 1 ‘Z T 7777777777777777H 7 ‘B [21, H as 1 }%j;

?,[ij-JE, , 2
/I1
~11[ g
11
'1"\\\\\| H1
"e
<5] /;,3 \5 1"/1., -
31 .

Abb . 3a Keramik“-,1-kommen ab Bauphase 1 (mittelassyrisch) Abb. 3b Keramlkvorkommen ab Bauphase 1 (mattelassyrxsch)

K
._.|..__@..__ ___ __ H ._ 1 ,--~-~-....... .....,

34 The Heartland of/1ssyria Kar~Tukulti-Ninurta 85

\‘. 1 2 3 .

* 4

2 t,' $7
*2:
@411
10 11 -

K ”””W WW’ 13

‘;::1
flr
...;_.'
~—i—
_m---------'
....._.__..__."»~.--—-
'5 1
-
.2
___
,__..
1.37
/
6

Y';:""‘ '2. 20 m»——

5'67.
21

22 -~
22

‘Z 26 “—"""='"_= 27 ........—"'.i_

2: ' 1 \2S
71:1,
-/,*1,
Abb. 5:1 Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 3 (neuassyrisch) Clix
Abb. 4 Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 2 (neuassyrisch) Ent-
 ,,,,, , , ,,,,,W _, _

86 The Heartland of/1ssyria Kar-Tu/culti~Ninurta 87

5:1,
2
L
\ 1

1%
2

1 8
3__

4
S

6
7,
§"—I /“'*r1'f1
\

2%, §_~,;(.. \~\=§?11?———#0

-_

W5‘! 3-I
<—f_——1
0 =~v ;‘\

Q*~= rimz
2 -7*’ :":i?ii;f;.. 13

_,-/

%;r—~—4>: T7...R
W
_,
_/

,._....- § WW
,,, [
“-.,_'_"_ ---.....__
_“...,___
~_\,_ -_~__.,._.

\ .2

Q1 Q17.
_ 29 ~ _.
1

‘ \\t::; W

1
1
__.._.._,.-

Q _,-

3'1
111 1 1"1iI111na=w
/ _W 11 mg%i% *él-;\12Q
Abb. 6a Keramikvorkommen ah Bauphase 4 (neuassyrisch) Kim
Abb. 5 b Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 3 (neuassyrisch) 1:I:I:_

:';_ V W’ Wiky fifi I iV iiW

I 1,. »
__',___,.-._.....__..____....___. ,, . _..' - — —_ _ _ ---

88 The Heartland 0fAssyria 7 Kar—Tukulti-Ninurta 89

.1>=rr:t\ԤW
%
W1 W11, M >~ 1—~
1
2 5 5

-.

E;r'~a~1 We $1 5 0' 0
1
‘FITT. »-
- 31 \.
1?
,__,@_rr r 1
_

9
s

__

W
r
___ " "'7'
_r
'
13
I
~
/~ —

33
,
a2
--Z

35
gjjjjjjjjjjjjj
W

W’
_____________ ____ ‘

' Mi?”
r
V
10
"' if

2.0 t

Q we”
Z gar Q;
. 1 01? F150 “
V, ,2 $7
1
i

1
~%_,.-mm. 23 2a 40
( ~ — _ _ _ ~»-—

21

2
Abb. 6b Keramikvorkommen ab Bauphase 4 {neuassyrisch) 113::
Abb. '7a Keramikvorkommen in Bauphase 5 (Oberflfichenkoliektion)
 _____ ___, H ___ _ _ , W

90 The Heartland 0fAssyria

The Ninevite Countryside

‘» Pots and Places of the Eski-Mosul Region
er" I in the Neo-Assyrian and Post-Assyrian Periods

S ANTHONY GREEN
"\ 1 Berlin

~_

. E:-; =: :i
‘ )
Abstract. The Bski~Mosul region of northern Iraq lies within the Tigris Valley to the
northwest of Mosul and the urban centres of Assyria. Between 1981 and 1988 the area was
explored in an internationai archaeological "salvage" project in which more than 60 sites
were excavated by various missions, providing the potential for a meaningful area study. At
ieast 16 of the excavated sites show identifiable evidence of Neo-Assyrian and/or
immediately Post~Assyrian settlement. In this paper I make a preliminary review of the
results for this period from these mostly still unpublished or preliminarily published
excavations. Pottery forms are examined for material deriving from 8 of the excavated sites.

Global development and rescue archaeology

Ever increasing destruction of sites and entire regions and habitats has been a
wt" ' '~,,.

0 )1‘ t
feature of late 20th-century economic trends in many parts of the world, and has
been a development of concern not only to archacoiogists but also to
.-, ,
.,1,,,!‘ ta
\, environmentalists, anthropologists, geologists, zoologists, botanists, medicinal
chemists and scientists in various other areas of study. Whereas in many disciplines
the response taken to this development has been one of moralistic, if often
1 . ineffectual, protest and resistance, archaeologists have generally opted for
acceptance and collaboration, and have even welcomed the opportunities created
for survey, large-scale excavation and area studies. Certainly, in most cases
archaeology has been the principal recipient of research opportunities and financial
resources in the wake of these destructive developments, while study of the local
fauna and flora, for example, has been largely neglected.‘
In recent years there have been a significant number of engineering projects
12 '
/ -
involving the damming of rivcrsgand the creation of artificial lakes, with the
1
‘IS explicit or tacit aims of altering agricultural and irrigation practices, producing
hydro-electric power, protecting against periodic river flooding, supplying water for
10 13 I/i industry and sometimes for human consumption, providing recreational settings
and promoting tourism, and enhancing personat, governmental and national
r \_y ,1 *6 I8 prestige. Most ambitious is the Three Gorges Dam Project in China, now nearing
t
completion} but the largest number of such projects has been in the Near East,
e
' 14 usually with associated archaeological "salvage" operations. These began in the
~ I
1
IIII: 1 For the Eski-Mosul area, the only study of the fauna was some basic notes taken by Anne
Searight on reptiles observed in the area of Khirbet Khatuniya during the archaeological
Abb. 7b Keramikvorkommen in Bauphase S (Obcrfliichenkollektion) excavations in March 1985 (SEARtGl-rt 1997). No teams of scientists made any systematic
4 study of the local fauna and flora of the region, now inundated. ln Syria, there has
~
admittedly been more work on the setting and environment: cf., e.g., KUHNE ed. 199};
MORANDI BONACOSSI 1996 (with review by Hausuarrea 1998).
2 Press reports.

inn r W
t
I
92 The Heartland ofAssyria
1960s, with the beginning of large-scale darn construction - most famously the
Aswan High Dam on the Nile in Egypt (completed in l970)3 - and continue to the
present.“
International rescue archaeology in Iraq, 1977-90
19'/'7 marked the beginning of a new era in the archaeological investigation of Iraq,
when the State Organization for Antiquities and Heritage invited foreign and Iraqi
archaeological expeditions to join the Organization's own teams in a project for the
excavation of sites to be inundated following the construction of a darn on the
Diyala river in the area of the iebel I-lamrin, northeast of Baghdadf‘ Thus began
over a decade of "rescue" or "salvage" archaeology in Iraq, the project in the
Harnrin (1977-1984)“ being succeeded by similar rescue projects in the wake of the
construction of dams in the areas around Haditha (1978-1984)’ and Eski-Mosul
(1981-88),8 and from the digging of associated irrigation canals in the Iraqi North
and East Jazira (1986-1990).” Aii this activity, and the emergence of what had
promised to be an era of renewed research excavations by foreign missions at major
and famous sites (from 1987),“? was brought toa sudden end bythe-advent of the
Gulf War of January-February 1991 and the subsequent and continuing
international lsoiation of, and United Nations sanctions against, Iraq.
An invitation by the State Organization for Antiquities and Heritage for
participation in the excavation of sites threatened with flooding due to the
construction of a dam across the Tigris river in the region of Eski-Mosul (Baiad)
was first issued at a symposium in Baghdad in 1981." Construction of the dam
3 cf., e.g., Bnowis 1981,4143, 445.
“ cf. review by scmvxrnz 2997. - 273; $URENHAGE-IN 1987, 129; and Cunrrs/Gaunt: E997, 1. It was issued to participants at the
5 Cf. Damned: 1977, 7-8.
6 Cf. review by Roar 1997b, with bibliography; also, briefly, KILLICK 19961).
7 There is a short general review by K_u.uci< 1996a. Cf. reports in DAMERII ed. E986, 7-26;
and brief accounts in POSTGATE/WATSON eds. i979, 148-149, i55; ROA§=/POSTGATE eds.
1981, 192-198; KILLICK/ROAF eds. 1983, 202-224; NASHEF ed. 1983/84, 207-213;
l{ILi.1ci</BLACK eds. 1985, 218-226; NASHEF ed. I987, 155-175. The only "final" report
published so far is on work at Ana: NOR‘1"HEDG!£/BAMBER/ROAP 1988.
Cf. SOAH ed. 1987; review by ROAF i997a (and very briefly Roar E996); topographical
and chronoiogical synthesis by Fates 1993. Although the project was officially launched
only in 1981, Mosul University's excavations at Tell Abu Dhahir, in anticipation of the
forthcoming project, took place in 1977-79.
9 Cf. WILKINSON in WILKINSON /Mmrrnews eds. 1989, 262»265; WXLKINSON/TUCKER 1995.
‘O E.g., German work at Kar 'l"ukulti-Ninurta and Assur (DITFMANN et al. 1988; 1989/90,
DITTMANN 1990; 1992; BECKER 1993; Hnouoa E991; 1992, 288-299), Italian and British
work at Nimrod (W1LKlNSON/MATTHEWS eds. 1989, 259; CURTIS/COLLON/GREEN I993;
FIORINA 1998), US excavations at Nineveh (Srnouncn 1989; 1989/90; £994; 1995; E997;
LUMSDEN 1991; S'IRONACillLUMSDEN 1992; STRONACH/CODELLA 1997), British excavations
at Jerndet Nasr (MA't'rl-lnws 1989; 1990; 1997), Japanese excavations at Kish (MATSUMOTO
1991), Italian work at Babylon (BERGAMIN1 1995), and French excavations at 'I‘ell~es~
Sawwan (cf. M/rrrnnws in Wtcktnson/MArrHews eds. 1989, 261; in MA'l'l‘1~lEWS/
Witkinsou eds. 1991, 180).
“ Cf. DAMERH 1984, 83. For a description of the project, with list of sites excavated by Iraqi
and foreign teams, see AL»SOOF 1987. Cf. ROAF 1997a for a general review.
.............. .........- .....
-. _ .. ».
The Ninevite Countryside 93
between 1981 and 1985 was followed by the final flooding of the valley in 1988,
forming a lake at maximum 4.5 kI1'l in width, stretching almost to the Turkish-
Syrian border. The project area extended some 60 kin northwesosoutheast along
the Tigris Valley within a stretch at maximum 11 km in width (Fig. 2). Before the
commencement of excavations, the SOAH conducted a general survey of the area
and prepared a map of sites, numbered and named in Arabic and English, with
suggestions of the archaeological periods represented, based on collections of
surface ceramics.” Subsequently some 15 institutional expeditions from 9
countries” conducted excavations and localised surveys within the project, on more
than 60 sites“ ranging in date from the palaeloithic and pre~pottery neolithic to
late Islamic times.
Sites of the Neo-Assyrian and Post-Assyrian period excavated in the Eski-
Mosul Project
Very little of this work is published in anything like a complete form.” It is
therefore difficult, at this juncture, to make any general remarks about the results of
the project or about the area in any period, still less about specialist studies such as
the pottery. Nevertheless, it is hoped that drawing together here what information is
presently available about Neo~Assyrian settlement and the Neo-Assyrian pottery
corpus of the region will be a useful, if necessarily inadequate, basis for further
study, and might help to stimulate such study and the presentation of additionai
material. In general, although the area shows something of a paucity of material for
the Neo-Assyrian period, it is of interest as the rural hinterland to the great urban
I2
SOAH ed. 1981. This is the map referred to, e.g., by CURTIS 1989, 9; BIELINSKI 1992a,
1981 Baghdad conference and subsequently to expeditions working in the project. The only
gegriral publication of this map is at too small a scale to read the site details: HUSSAFN 1987,
l ~.
'3 Austrian Archaeological Expedition to Iraq, British Archaeologicai Expedition to Iraq,
British Museum, Centre National do la Recherche Scientifique, Deutsche
Forschungsgerneinschaft, Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin, Edinburgh University,
German-Itaiian Expedition, Kokushikan University, Manchester University, Mosul
University, Soviet Archaeological Expedition, State Organization’ for Antiquities and
Heritage, Turin University, Warsaw University.
'4 According to ROAF 1997a, 266, thereiwere excavations at 63 sites. The excavated sites in
the project reported on in the bi-annual review of excavations in the journal Iraq
(KILLICK/ROAP eds. 1983; KILUCK/BLACK eds. 1985; BALL/BLACK eds. 1987,
\N1LK1NSON/MATTHEWS eds. 1989) number 51. There are reports on some additional sites in
SOAH ed. 1987. Further sites which could be added include the Ninevite 5 and 2nd
‘millennium BC site of Tell Durdara (SPANOS 1988, 61-77) and Khirbet Aqar Babira, which
is Neo-Assyrian (see below, p. 95). The map in Nnsnen ed. 1987, 98, Abb. lc, marks some
of these sites and certain others.
'5 To date there are "final" reports for Tell Karrana 3 and other work of the German-Italian
Expedition (Wl1.HELM/ZACCAGNINi 1993), for Kharabeh Shattani (WATKKNS/CAMPBELL
1986.; Bxrno/CAMPBeuJWAritrNs eds. 1995), for Khirbet Qasrij and Qasrij Cliff (CURTIS
1989), for Khirbet Khatuniya (CURTIS/GREEN E997) and for Khirbet Hatara (FIORINA et al.
1997), as well as a continuing series of "final" reports on the excavations at Nemrik 9
(Koctowsxr ed. 1990; 1992; MAZUROWSKJ 1997).
t
...|__._._-a_._.._._.___... ..__.-. ...
. -"'"'~"::'_-fr... i " . .1_|||1- _-______~* -- -- ------~-A _ ___
94 The Heartland ofAssyria
heartland of Assyria, an oasis region on the banks of the Tigris, on one of the two
traditional routes from I-Ianigalbat to Nineveh (Figs. 1-2).“ In this context it is of
some fascination to observe how the settlements of the area, so close to the main
cities of the Empire, nevertheless show some significant contrast with them.
Of the more than 60 excavated sites in the Eski-Mosul Project, at least 16"
showed evidence of Neo~Assyrian, or immediately "Post-Assyrian" (i.e., post-
imperial) occupation.“ The amount of information is in most cases proportional to
the level of published data. With the exception of four sites for which published
pottery corpuses are available, little or nothing of the pottery is published for the
sites here listed. Nevertheless, it was, one must presume, on the basis of the
excavators‘ dating of ceramic material that these sites were attributed to the Neo-
Assyrian period. Only occasionally is this reported explicity, as with the pottery
demonstrating "Neo-Assyrian characteristics" from Khirbet Aqar Babira,” the
presence of "palace ware" sherds at Rownak,2° or a nipple-based beaker fragment
from Tell Rijim.” In a very few instances small finds help confirm the dating, as
with the cylinder seals from Rownakfz Baqaq 2” and Tell Rijim,“ certain items
from Khirbet Khatuniya,” or crucially in the case of the stone duckweight from
Khirbet Qasrij.“ Only in the case of Tell Baqaq 2 was there clear architectural and
epigraphic evidence of date.” Discussion of the sites here follows a rough order on
I6
Cf. Oates, D. 1968a, 54. The other, possibly more important, route passed by Tell Abu
Marya, ancient Apqu.
17 There is a short discussion of Neo-Assyrian sites in the area by FALES 1993, 6-'7. To his
list I have added several sites, but also excluded Tell Msefna, 5 km northeast of Zumrnar,
within a meander of the river, on the west bank, since it is not clear to me on what grounds
it was considered Neo-Assyrian. it was excavated in 1981-82 by Adil ‘Abbii of Mosul
University. These excavations, to the south of the tell itself, revealed Sasanian remains, with
a monastery and church of worked stone, probably continuning in some kind of use in the
llkhanid period (Sth century An). Cf. ‘Aunt; 1987, 133; KILLICK/ROAF eds. 1983, 2.17.
*8 in my view the term "Post-Assyrian" for the period and culture of northern Mesopotamia
immediately after 612 BC is not very appropriate, for the following reasons. Firstly, whether
under Median, Babylonian or locally autonomous control (cf. CURTIS 1989, 52-54), the
people and, to some extent, the culture of the area most probably remained "Assyrian" at this
time (cf. to the west, the epigraphical evidence at Tell Sheikh Hamad: Ktlnwa 1998, 288,
with reference). Secondly, the same term "Post-Assyrian" may be employed, perhaps more
properly, for any later period, or as a general term for a later period of undetermined date (as
in, e.g., Bietntsto l987a, 18; KAIM 1995). A distinction between "Neo-Assyrian" before 612
and "Late Assyrian" after (on analogy with the use of the terms rteubabylonisch and
spéitbabylonisch in, e.g., Stator. 1989) might seem attractive, but is presently precluded by
the widespead use of of the form “Late Assyrian" as synonymous with "Neo-Assyrian".
*9 Susan:-moan 1987, £31 -1 SURENHAGEN in NASHEF ed. 1987, 177.
1° K1LLiCK in K_1LL!CK/BLACK eds. 1935, 233. See below, p. 109.
2' BIELINSKI 1987a, 17. Cf. also reference to the pottery from Khirbet Shireena in
BALL/BLACK eds. 1987, 247.
*2 KILLXCK in K1LL1CK/BLACK eds. 1985, ass.
1’ Totvm Yusn= 1987, ts, with Figs.
2" BIELINSKI 1987b, 26; 31, Fig. 20; 1992a, 277; 1992b, 287. See below, n. 88.
25 Esp. the ram-headed vessel and the coffin: CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 16-18, Nos. 20-21.
2“ Cunrts 1989, 26.
ll See below, p. 97.
__ _ _ r ___
The Ninevite Countryside 95
a route away from Eski-Mosul, and in general away from Nineveh and the Assyrian
urban heartland, moving upstream along the Tigris (Fig. 3).
Khirbet Khatuniya is located on a low bluff on the east bank of the river. It was
excavated in 1984-85 by John Curtis on behalf of the British Museum. Levels 6~4
were apparently of Neo-Assyrian date. Of these, 6 and 5 were exposed only within a
2 x 2.25 m sondage. The principal Neo~Assyrian level, the main occupation level of
the site, is designated Level 4. Two large rooms of an apparently important
building were uncovered, with thick pisé walls on stone foundations, destroyed in a
fierce fire. In the l)lO€3l(6(‘l-t1p connecting doorway between the rooms was a coffin,
apparently in use as a grain storage bin. A large corpus of pottery was crushed in
situ on the floors, together with some equipment, associated with weaving and
agriculture (Fig. 4). Since it is assumed that the destruction of the Level 4 building
is associated with the fall of Assyria in ca. 612 BC, the subsequent Level 3 is
thought-to be immediately Post-Assyrian.”
The Qasrrj Clijf site is on the cliff overlooking the east bank of the river, ca.
l500 m east of the village of Babneet, 250 in west of the former village of Qasrij. It
was excavated in March 1983 by John Curtis on behalf of the British Museum.
Neo-Agsyrian presence is represented by a large pit full of sherds and animal
bones.
I(IhirbetHQasrr]' is a village site positioned just upstream of Qasrij Cliff on the
Wadi Q8.S1'1_], excavated by John Curtis on behalf of the British Museum in March
1983 and February-March 1984. The area covered by the site is substantial, perhaps
up to ca: 0.5 km across and at least 375 m cast-west. In the view of the excavator, it
1S of a single period‘, probably short-lived. The main area of excavation, in the east
of the site, was an industrial complex centred on a pottery kiln. East of this were
buildings of a more domestic character. About 12,000 sherds were recovered,
attributed to a Post-Assyrian date.”
The small mound of Rownak, which sits on a natural ridge, west of Rownalc
village, east of the Tigris, was excavated in 1983-85 by Abdul-Salaam Sam’an on
behalf of the Iraqi State Organization for Antiquities and Heritage. Two building
levels were encountered, one assigned to the Post-Assyrian period, the other
thought perhaps to be Neo-Assyrian. The level attributed to "Post-Assyrian" yielded
shercis described as of "palace wa1fe",3' a couple of cylinder seals and a stamp seal
depicting a winged genie. A number of burials around the site, all with consistent
orientation, apparently belonged to this Neo-Assyrian/Post-Assyrian horizon.”
The site of Khirbet Aqar Babirzz, on a natural bluff, ca. 650 x 200 in, is situated
on one of the many wadis in the area east of the Tigris river, in the southeast of the
Project area, 2 km from the village of Babira, not far from the the Mosul-to-Zakho
road. it was excavated in August-September 1985 on behalf of the Deutsche Orient-
Gesellschaft zu Berlin by Dietrich Stirenhagen. The periods represented were
2“ CURTIS/GREEN 1997.
2° Crnms 1989, 9-18. Cf. review by SIMPSON 1990, 119-121.
if Cunrls 1989, :9-54. cr. review by SIMPSON 1990, 212-13}.
32 But cf. below, p. 109.
KILLZCK in KILLICK/BLACK eds. 1985, 238; and personal observation.
h . ______*_ _ _ ______ if______________ _ _ ...
96 The Heartland of/lssyria
Halaf, Ninevite 5, Neo-Assyrian and Abbasid. Pottery in a Neo-Assyrian style was
restricted to an area in the eastern third of the site on the upper southern slope.”
Khirbet Hatara also lies east of the Tigris, near the Mosul-Zakho road, about a
kilometre north of Babira village. it was excavated by Paolo Fiorina on behalf of
the Centro Scavi dell'Universita di Torino in three seasons between autumn 1984
and December 1986. It is a multi-tell site, with two main parts, the village (Areas
l-2) and the cemetery (Areas 3-6). A long and complex stratigraphic sequence was
uncovered, involving Halaf (sherds only), Ubaid, Uruk, eariy Ninevite S, Middle
Assyrian, Neo-Assyrian, Hellenistic and Islamic remains.“ The Neo-Assyrian
pottery comes from "Level 8", encountered only in small soundings, though with a
few minor structures including the remains of stone walls.”
According to Fates, Tell Jigan, at ca. 750 in north-south x 400 m east-west, and
rising some 10-12 rn above the plain, the largest site in the Eski-Mosul Project,
"would seem to be devoid of Neo~Assyrian levels altogether".3‘ The site was
situated at the juncture of the Tigris and Baqaq rivers. It was partly covered by the
modern village. It was excavated for the State Organization for Antiquities and
Heritage by Mahfudh Abdullah Najib in August 198237 and by separate expeditions
of, firstly, Hikrnet Bashir al»~Aswad, and then Madfudh Abdullah together with
Saiahuddin Hamid in 1983~84.3“ In February-Eune 1984 the Kokushikan University
Expedition under Hideo Fujii worked there,” in October i984 the German-Italian
Expedition under Sebastiano 'i‘usa,“° and at some point in 1983-84(‘?) the Austrian
Archaeological Expedition to Iraq.“ In the southeast area of the SOAH excavations
were encountered massive stone foundations, attributed to the "Parthian" period.
On the top of the mound a 50 x 50 in area was opened with Middle Islamic
remains." In the north along, deep trench cut by the SOAI-I expedition through the
side of the "mound showed a massive mud-brick wall. it had earlier been suggested
that this wali could be Neo-Assyrian.“ The summaries of the Iraqi, Japanese and
Austrian excavations then tended to suggest that the ancient occupation of the tell
ended in the Middle Assyrian period.“ Some Neo-Assyrian presence, however,
33 Sonnwnnonw 1987 e Sunrsm-tnostv in Nnsnea ed. 1987, 175-177.
3“ FIORINA et al. 1997.
35 Neono 1997. Cf. Fronrm 1997, 46.
3° Fates E993, 6.
3’ Kiu.Ic1</Roar eds. 1933, 213.
3*‘ KJLLICK in KILLECK/BLACK eds. 1985, 231.
x 39 Fun: et al. 1987b; KAWAMATA et a1. in Nasser‘ ed. 1987, 183-188; KILLXCK in
KILLICK/BLACK eds. 1985, 231-232; BALL in BALL/BLACK eds. 1981240-241.
4° Tush 1993.
‘“ Ku.1.1c1< in KTLLICK/BLACK eds. 1985, 232.
42 KIi.L1CK/ROAF eds. 1983, 223; KILLICK in KJLLICK/BLACK eds. 1985, 231; BALL in
BALL/BLACK eds. 1987, 240»2-41.
1
i 4’ KrI.1.1c1</RoA1= eds. 1983, 213; Fates in wnnetn et al. 1987. 107; FALES 1993, 6, n. 87;
TUSA 1993, 258.
44 As pointed out by FALES 1993, 6, n. 87. Note also CURTIS E989, 18, n. 1: "It used to be
thought there was late Assyrian occupation at the large site of Tell Jikan, but this seems to
be due to a misunderstanding arising from the publication of a photograph showing objects
from Jikan in association with a Late Assyrian brick (PiLI..iiT 1962: fig. 28). The brick,
however, is almost certainly from Khorsabad". Cf. also ROAF l997a, 267.
2
1
5
- ~W~- ~——~ i .-+
The Ninevite Countryside 9'7
seems to be evidenced, if only slightly, by ceramic material. Tusa notes "a typical
heart-shaped goblet with button base" retrieved from "the same stratigraphical
context" as the large mud-brick wall,“ whiie Hausleiter compares a ribbed bowl
with everted rim and a nipple-based jar found in graves excavated by the Japanese
expedition“ to similar apparently 9th-8th century BC examples from Assurf"
Tell Baqaq 2, which may have been ancient Bitussu,“ lies east of the Tigris on
the Baqaq river, also beside the Mosul-to-Zakho road. A sizeable Neo-Assyrian
settlement, "a place of some local importance",“9 partly covered by a modern police
post, was excavated in June E982 to mid 1983 by Kerim Toma Yusif on behalf of
the Iraqi State Organization for Antiquities and Heritage. A Neo-Assyrian paiatial
building was uncovered, with three courtyards, one with burnt brick pavement and
a stone pathway. On the east side of the burnt brick courtyard was a suite of four
rooms, one, with burnt brick floor, possibly a bathroom. On the west side was a
reception room with red painted walls, burnt brick floor and stone "tram-lines" of
the type commonly found in the thr0ne—roorns of Neo~Assyrian palaces.” The end
of the room where the throne would have stood was eroded by the river. Finds
include a couple of cylinder seals. One of agate is inscribed, and depicts a
worshipper and deity beneath a winged disc and other symbols. The second seal
shows a reception scene. A stone pendant hasa winged disc on one face and a
repeated tab-sign on the other. Also from this building come the only two Neo-
Assyrian tablets found in the course of the Project.“ One of these tablets is dated
by limmu to Yahalu (late 9th century BC). Unfortunately there is apparently no
published Assyrian pottery from the site.” Above the Neo-Assyrian building were
two later, possibly ?arthian, ievels.53 .
Tell Rzjim Omar Dalle, on the west bank of the Tigris, approximately a
kilometre northwest of the village of Rafan Uiiye, i0 km upstream from the Dam
itself, was excavated by Piotr Bielinski in May-June 1984, March-May £985 and
September-November 1985, on behalf of the Polish Centre of Mediterranean
Archaeology of Warsaw University. The site is 250 m in diameter, and rises some
28 rn above the river bank, on a natural bluff. On three sides it is surrounded by the
river, and on the fourth by a line of low hills.
‘*5 Tbs», 1993, ass.
‘"5 awn et al. 1987b, 65, Fig. 5. -
‘T HAUSLEITER 1996, 11, table to Taf._LXXXlII:2, citing HALLER 1954, Taf. Sat, ap, and
further unpublished examples; also table to Taf. CXX:4, unpublished.
“” So F/ices 1993, 7.
‘*9 Fates 1993, 6.
5° For so-called "tram-lines", parallel rows of stone paving, perhaps used for a transportable
brazier or other heavy object, cf. FRANKFORT 1952, 125-126; MALLOWAN 1966, 1, 96-97.
5' ISMAIL 1989; cf. description of F/\LEs 1993, '7. Another cuneiform tablet is recorded as
coming from Grai Qasim (KIl.1.1CK/ROAF eds. 1983, 210; not mentioned in Roar‘ 1997a); its
date is unstated, but Neo-Assyrian was apparently not represented at this site. ROAF 199721,
267, refers to "two further Middie Assyrian tablets from Tell Madhhur" (sicl; read "from
Tell Mohammad Arab"). It has been suggested that a tablet from a Hellenistic pit at Tell
Fisna represents the latest known example of cuneiform writing from north Mesopotamia
(BLACK E997).
52 TOMA Yusn= 2987, 46-47, appears to illustrate only later pottery forms.
*3 Totvm Yuslr 1987.
*****"ti" --.. .
. : ' = '2 1 I 1 2 ' 2
 The Ninevite Countryside 99
98 The Heartland ofAssyria

doorway with pivot stone and one stretch of a substantial stone wall with a
A maximum of 5 rn of cultural deposits lay above natural soil. Seven main
trenches were excavated, designated A-G, with extensions A-l and E-l, all doorway. These remains are thought probably to be part of a single substantial
containing inter aha remains of the Neo-Assyrian period. The overall stratigraphy structure, likely an earlier phase of the Level 2 (AI) building. Three rooms were
has been preliminarily analysed as: (a) immediately above virgin soil, Level 6, Late thought to have been delineated, although the remains did not make a coherent
Uruk; (b) "Level 5", Ninevite 5 (not found as an occupational level, but represented overall plan. A baked clay figurine fragment in the form of a human head was
by material mixed with other periods and by a well-preserved grave; also with some discovered in this layer. In Trench B, Level 3 was the uppermost layer (Bl), almost
at surface level and very disturbed. There were building fragments and Assyrian
Akkadian sherds); (c) Level 4, "K.habur", with at least two phases; (cl) Level 3,
Middle Assyrian and/or very early Neo-Assyrian; (e) Level 2, early Neo-Assyrian; and "Khabur" pottery sherds.
(f) Level 1, late Neo-Assyrian; (g) a later (so~called "Post-Assyrian") destruction Level 2, which has tentatively been placed in the early Neo-Assyrian period,
was represented as the uppermost layer in Trenches A, B, C, E, F and G. Because
level; (h) the use of the site as a cemetery, attributed to a "Post~Assyrian" horizon,
these layers were close to the surface, they were all paticularly heavily disturbed. In
perhaps in the Achaernenid period; (i) later, probably fairly recent, graves.
Trench A the top of the level lies merely 10 cm below the surface. It was very
The reports make much reference to "layers" in individual trenches, which seem
to correspond to this unified statigraphy in the following way: disturbed, but the remains of stone foundations and pavements could be identified
as belonging to at least four rooms of a substantial building. The largest room,
Level/Trench Period ,__ A A~1 B C_'__ D E____ E-1__ F G measuring 4 x at least 8 rn, and stone—paved, was probably an internal courtyard. In
later cemetery modem‘? the south wall, a doorway, ca. 80 cm wide and with a stone threshold, led to a
"Post-Assyrian" cemetery Achaemenid‘? second room with stone-paving. Some stone walls or wall foundations were
"post Assyrian layer" '2 I structurally part of the Level‘3 (AI) building and had been reused. In Trench C the
Level l late NA ll
Level 2 early NA I l l I I I level was represented by a destruction deposit (Cl), some 1.5 m thick. In Trenches
Level 3 MA/early NA ll E and F (El, Fl) there was a stone foundation ca. 9 rn long and on its northern side
Leveld "K.lti!1')B!"' lll (l~)1Il II-lV In ll u ll ll an area of stone paving. These remains are thought to be part of a western extention
“Level"5 Ninevite5 (lll~lV) (IV) (ill) (ill) (111)
Levelfi Late Uruk IV V (IV) (Ill) IV IV to the building in Trench A. On the pavement in F a steatite linear style cylinder
seal was found; it depicts an archer targeting a winged monster. Fragments of stone
It should be stressed, however, that from the point of view of the pottery, while the foundations and paving apparently of the same period were uncovered in Trenches
"Khabur" Level 4 was delineated clearly enough, the later levels were very B and G (BI, GI). A second cylinder seal in Neo~Assyrian linear-style, depicting a
disturbed and there were apparently no sealed contexts. Since a preliminary study worshipper before a seated deity and altar with bird, was found in Trench G; it is of
seerns to show that in these later levels the pottery was somewhat mixed, it is not at serpentine and has a copper alloy pin placed through its hole. The pottery from this
this stage clear even that further work now in progress will be able to provide more level in Trench E is said to have included a sherd from a large nipple beaker.
secure dating criteria.“ Level l is represented only by layer $311. It is interpreted as Neo-Assyrian, but
The Levels which should concern us here are 1-2, and possibly 3. The latter later than layer AI. It was characterised by fragments of stone foundations, with
may, however, be exclusively Middle Assyrian. The so-called "post Assyrian two walls meeting at a corner. Finds included a baked clay figurine of a dog and a
destruction layer"55 (DZ) might also fall within the chronological perirneters of this pottery beaker on a flat base.“ _
study, but this is uncertain since it is clear that the term "post Assyrian" is here » Layer DI is described as "later than the latest Assyrian occupation"? but no
used very widely, "later than APE” Similarly with the "Post-Assyrian" graves.” further information is given. A precise dating of the so-called "Post-Assyrian"
Bielinski originally assigned them to "the Hellenistic or post»I-iellenistic period"? cemetery is extremely problematic (see above). 63
or else to a "Parthian/Sasanian" horizon,” but Kaim suggests they may be of Beyond Tell Rijim, one must travel more than 20 km upstream, to the area of
the large village of Zummar, before there are further sites for which Neo—Assyrian
Achaemenid date.“
material is recorded.
Level 3 was tentatively attributed to a Middle Assyrian and/or very early Neo-
Tell Selal, a large rectangular mound, ca. 300 x 200 rn and ca. 18 m in height,
Assyrian horizon. In Trench A (layer A-I1), it is described as some 30 cm in depth,
was situated on the west bank of the river just east of Zumrnar. The site was
with scattered fragments of stone foundations and paving stones, a tannur, a
excavated from August 1982, apparently until 1984 or later, by ‘Ami? Suleiman of

54 A. REICHE, personal communication.

55 Biamtsio 1987a, 18. 6' For these Neo-Assyrian levels, cf. BteLrNs|<t 1987a, 15-18; 1987b, 26, 29, 31; 1992a, 276-
277; l992b, 287.
5° Bin1.11~'|s1<1 1987a, 17.
4
57 KAIM 1995. 6’ B1nnn~'1s1<11987a, 17.
1.
5* BIELINSKI 1987b, 27»2s. ‘*3 Bietmstn 1987a, l3-18; BIELINSKI 19871»; Beuusin 1992a, 276-277; BIELINSKE 1992b;
5’ BlELIl~'ISK1l992b,287. BIELINSKI in NASHEF ed. 1987, 206-208; KAIM 1995. Cf. KILLICK in Kil.LlCK/BLACK eds.
6° Karin 1995,41. I985, 237-238; BALL IN BALL/BLACK eds. 1987, 244.

§.., i _ _ ,,,,"___
1
 100 The Heartland of/lssyria
Mosul University. Evidently it was almost continuously occupied from at least the
Ninevitc 5 period down to the l7th»18th centuries AD. In the first season (1982) a
deep sounding in the northeast of the tell revealed six levels; the latest was said to
be Neo-Assyrian.“ Subsequent work did not involve this level.“
A few kilometres further upstream on the same bank, at the western extremity
of the Zummar area, some 80 km northwest of Mosul, was Tell Dimwazj. The
mound was 26 m high and 300 in square. Excavations were conducted in 1983
\
and/or 1984 (?) by an expedition from Mosul University under the direction of
Zamir Suleiman, and between November 1985 and February 1986 by I-Iideo Fujii
for Kokushikan University. The Iraqi excavations showed a Hellenistic and a Taya
period level.“ The main area of Japanese excavation yielded many levels of
».
Ninevite 5, with Uruk (sherds only), "Khabur", Neo-Assyrian and Hellenistic
periods also represented. Smaller test trenches yielded "Khabur" and Neo-Assyrian
pottery and structu1'es.67
The remains of Khirbet Karhasan covered a flat area on a prominent terrace on
the west bank of the Tigris, between the edge of the terrace and the low hills of the
western slope of the valley, overlooking the flood plain a few kilometres
downstream from Tell Abu Dhahir and some 75 km northwest of Mosul (at the
time of excavation next to the site of the main pumping station for the North Jazira
irrigation project). Excavations were conducted by David Tucker for the British
Archaeological Expedition to Iraq, under the direction of Warwick Ball, in
February-March 1986. There was a dense surface coverage of sherds, including
"Khabur", Neo-Assyrian, Hellenistic and Islamic material. One trench gave a
sequence of Mitannian, Middle Assyrian, Neo-Assyrian and lslamic levels, while
another had "Khabur" material represented just beneath the surface.“
Tell Abu Dhahir was situated on the west bank of the Tigris, some 90 km
northwest of Mosul, close to the eastern limits of the area flooded. The site was first
excavated by ‘Amr Suleiman for Mosul University in l977-79, and then by Stlohn
Simpson for the British Archaeological Expedition to Iraq, under the direction of
Warwick Bali, in October 1985 — April 1986. There is a high main mound, rising
to some 20 m above plain level, with a lower town mound stretching some 100 in
along the river. In the British excavations, a long sequence (Hassuna, Ubaid, Uruk,
Ninevite 5, Akkaciian, "K.habur“, Neo-Assyrian and Hellenistic or Parthian) was
uncovered in a 4 m-wide step-trench, and additional soundings at the edge of the
€‘?
main mound and in the lower mound gave evidence of the general area of
settlement. The site probably reached its maximum extent in the Akkadian period,
"~?1‘.'*:".'€:
and was thereafter less extensive.” The excavated Neo»Assyrian remains consisted
of "a series of stone pavements associated with a mud»~bricl< revetment wall at the
edge of the mound"?
T,
I ‘*4 1<:1.t1c1</R<>».1= eds. 1983, 219-220.
| ‘*5 l<11.uc1< in KB.LICl</BLACK eds. 1985, 23s.
li 6° KILLICK in KILLICK/BLACK eds. 1985, 230.
1
1
x ‘l F0111 ‘iii al. 1989/90, as-48. ct. Bau. in and/amen eds. 1987, 232. Numoro 1996
4 pguhlishes the work in Trench C (mainly Ninevite 5).
-».
Tucxua in press. Cf. BALL. in BALL/BLACK eds. 1987, 24i; BALL 1987, 80; TUCKER 1992.
x
*9 SIMPSON in press. cf. BALL in Bnu./Buick eds. 1937, 234; Bxn. 1987, 79.
t
7° BALL 1937,79.
I.
The Ninevite Countryside 103
Seh Gubba represents the remains of a small town on a high natural bluff
overlooking the Tigris Valley, on the right bank of the river about a kilometre
upstream of Tell Abu Dhahir. Excavations were conducted by Susan Gill for the
British Archaeological Expedition to Iraq, under the direction of Warwick Ball, in
January to March 1986. These revealed a fortified town of more than 100 ha with
ramparts dating to the Sasanian or Byzantine period, though probably founded by
the Romans." A Roman mosaic floor, as well as remains of the Sasanian/By2:an-
tine(?) and Late Islamic periods were uncovered.” Though Neo-Assyrian remains
are not mentioned in the published summary reports, some of the surface sherds
from this site definitely seem to involve Neo-Assyrian forms (Fig. 7).
Khirbez Shireena was the first of a number of small mounds (less than 6 In in
height) upstream on the Wadi Suwaidiya,” located at the point where the Wadi
flows into the floodplain of Tell Abu Dhahir. It was excavated by Timothy Clayden
in December 1985 and by Anthony Green in February-March 1986, on behalf of the
British School of Archaeology in Iraq, under the direction of Warwick Ball. The
thirteen excavated trenches revealed seven distinct building levels, as well as a
number of pits and graves ofunknown date, apparently dug from the surface or
from an eroded level above. Levels 1-3, anda large pit dug into Level 3 but sealed
by Level 2, were apparently Neo~Assyrian in date. The earliest of these levels,
Level 3, was characterised by a building with mud-brick and beaten earth floors
running up against substantial mud~brick walls. The large pit, probably a grain silo,
was dug from above this level, but was sealed by Level 2, implying a break in
building activities. Level 2 was characterised by mostly pebbledash and flagstone
paving, probably an outside surface. Much oi’ Level 1 was characterised by a
flagstone pavement, whose original dimensions must have been something in
excess of 13,4 in x ca. 7.85 m. Levels 3 and 2, as well as the large pit, can be dated
by their Neo-Assyrian pottery in sealed contexts. The Level 1 pavement, however,
lay only a little way below the topsoil, which contained a mixed collection of
pottery. However, sitting on the floor in Trench E was the upper profile of a large
pottery storage jar of a type well known from Nirnrud, Khirbet Khatuniya, and
other sites of the seventlvcentury BC.“ Although the evidence is thus slight, this
seems to imply that Level l should also most likely be attributed to the Neo-
Assyrian period, and indeed probably. to the 7th century BC. In the fields around the
site, on all sides, were clear traces on the ground, as amassed river pebbles and in
crop—markings, of a system of field boundaries, though of unknown date. On the
basis of this and the limited sizeand nature of the building activities, the site has
been interpreted as an isolated farmstead.“
7‘ It is suggested that the site was a limes Outpost of Roman rule on the west bank of the
xigris, perhaps to be identified as Castra Maurorum (BALI. 1989).
19é989; B/u.1. in BALL ed. in press. Cf. i~3/tu. 1987, 80; BALL in BALL/BLACK. eds.
*3 Another of these sites to be excavated is "rut Durdara (SPANOS 1988. 61-77).
Z‘; cr. CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 90, with reference to other sites.
Gustav In press. Cf. BALL/BLACK eds. 1987, 241248. BALL 1987, 80, suggests also a
military puropose for Khirbet Shircena (referred to under its temporary site—name "Wadi
Suwaidiya 1"), which is eminently plausible on grounds of its strategic location, though
nothing at the site itself evidenced such a role.
_______..__..__._._ _._ Hi_,,__ _ ___. _~ — ~ — ~---~~>~--—-~~- —— W _ * _ _,,,,,,,._,,,,,
102 The Heartland ofA.s'syria
Tell Slielgiyya is situated on the west bank of the Tigris at the top of the Eski-
Mosul Dam reservoir, ca. 5 km downstream from where the Tigris crosses the
Turkish-Iraqi border, and immediately south of the Iraqi-Syrian border (Fig. 2).
The site consists of a steep main mound, ca. 80 x l20 m and _22 m in height, and
more than 400 in of further remains of settlement, including another, largely
natural, mound, in the fields to the south. It was excavated by the British
Archaeological Expedition to Iraq under Warwick Ball in March-April, by
Edinburgh University Expedition under Trevor Watkins in April—l\/lay l9li6, and by
the Iraqi Department of Antiquities and Heritage in 1987-$8. Three main periods
were represented at the site, namely Early Uruk (characterised especially by large
. . , . - - 76
quantities oi "Spr1g Ware’ ), Neo-Assyrian and Hellenistic.
Other Neo-Assyrian sites in the area
These are the sites, then, that provide evidence of the rural landscape in the
neighbourhood northwest of Nineveh. Some further Neo-Assyrian sites within the
area which were not excavated should also be mentioned. ' _ _ _
Firstly, Eski-Mosul itself, 40 kin northwest of Mosul (Fig. 2). It was identified
by Forrer as ancient Balatu.” Balatu was an administrative district (palzatu) in the
late 8th~7th centuries 130.78 The site was long a crossing-point for the Tigris
.
river. 19 . * _ ,
Mention might also be made of Girepan, just beyond the northeastern limits of
the project area (Fig. 3). This is "an 6X£61'1_SiVC‘S1t6 ..: and one which has produced
good evidence for Nee-Assyrian occupation including bricks of an unidentitiecl
king".8° Reade has suggested that the site may be identifiable as ancient Rirnusa or
possibly §abiresu.8‘ _ _
A little to the southeast of Girepan, on the eastern border of the Eski~Mosul
Project area, lies Faida, which IS linked to Girepan by water“/ay,_ ihfi Ff1l¢l'¢f-
Bandwai Canal, reaching to a seasonal stream connecting with Girepan. This
ancient primary canal, hewri through the rock, fed the waters of the Wadi Bandwai
(Bahandawaya), part of the water system of the _Khosr suppiying Nineveh. At
intervals along the walls of the canal are Ne<§;Assyrian sculptured panels, and at its
head is a rock stela, possibly of Sennacherib.
The Ninevite countryside
In a general review of Neo-Assyrian settlement in the Eski-Mosul Project area,
Fales has commented that
7° BALL/PAGAN in press. Cf. BALLR1 BALL/BLACK eds. 1987. 247; BALL1997-
” FORRER 1921, 106.
ll FALES 1993, 1. I1. 93, citing FALES/POSTGATE 1992, 16$, No. 161120.
79 On the ford at Eski-Mosul, cf. references in FALES 1993, 7, R- 95-
'” READE 1978. 159460. with Fig. l0a; citing PLACE 1870, 152.
8* READE 1978, 160-161.
*2 Rimes 1978. 159-163; cf. PALES 1993. "1.
, ._.......rt._ ..__ 7
, "-57--" »»~»--~W~-- -~-Me” M
The Ninevite Countryside £03
all these sites are, in point of fact, “small fry" and do not even seem to indicate a
particularly tight-knit settlement pattern, especially if one takes into account the closeness
and the might of the capital city Nineveh ".8
As Fales has further pointed out,“ there are also only a few Neo- or Post~Assyrian
small finds from the region of really exquisite worlmianship. He notes a
duckweight of grey and black stone from Khirbet Qasrijss and a painted pottery
ram-headed drinking vessel from Khirbet Kliatuniyafé adding as a possible third
item a well-preserved serpentine cylinder seal from Tell Rijim.87 We might note
that there are three more cylinder seals from Tell Rijirngg and four others are also
reported, two each from Rownakgg and Tell Baqaq 2,90 as well as stamp seals from
Khirbet Khatuniyam and Rownak;92 but items of fine art from the area remain
scanty. The excavated pottery also includes very little in the way of "palace ware"
or other fine wares.93
In similar vein, Roaf concludes that the Neo-Assyrian period "does not seem to
have been a time of particular prosperity in the region".94
As representing the countryside behind the Assyrian urban centres, we should
not necessarily expect any sizeable settlements of the period here. Rather, we
shouid expect a pattern of rural settlement linked in some indirect way to the
Assyrian heartland closeby. For a general picture of the ancient landscape” in such
an area, we might consider the pattern of rural suburbs which until this century
83
FALES 1993, 6. He adds that "the two largest iocations in the area, Tell Fisna and Tell
likan, would seem to be devoid of Neo-Assyrian levels altogether". in n. 87, he says that
‘Yell Fisna had "no Neo-Assyrian to speak of", which seems to imply that it did have some.
The summary reports of the excavations by the Kokusiiilcan University expedition (1983-84),
directed by Hideo Fujii, however, make no mention of material from this period (NUMOTO
1988; Finn et at. 1987a, 43; FUJI!/NUMOTO in NASHEF ed. 1987, 181483; KILLICK in
KILLICK/BLACK eds. 1985, 230-231). For evidence of l\Ieo~Assyrian occupation at Tell Jigan,
see above, pp. 96-97.
3‘ Fates 1993, 7. with I1. 92.
‘*5 corms 19s9, 25-26; Fig. 2i; P1. xii.
8° CURTIS/GREEN 1987, 15-l7: No. 20;_Fig. is; Pls. XV-XVI {captions to Pl. xvii and b
transposed}; cf. colour photo. in CURTIS 1995, 133, Fig. -
87 BIELINSKI 1987b, 26; cf. BIELIl5€SKI-- 1992b, 287, giving the material (Trench G,
unpublished). - 71
“K BIELIFISKI 1987b, 3:, with Fig. 20 (steatite, Trench F); 1992a, 277 (serpentine, Surface
find); and another fragmentary one (rock crystal, surface find; A. REICHB, pets. comm). The
cylinder seals from Tell Rijim are the subject of an article by Bieliiiski in the forthcoming
Festschnfl for Huot.
3° KILLICK in KILLICK/BI..ACl< eds. 1925, 23s.
9° "roux YUSIF 1987. 4s, with Figs. [very poor photographs}; also described by FALES E993,
6-7.
91 CURTIS/GREEN 1997, l4. No. 5; note also the clay sealing with impression, No. 6.
9“ KILLICK in KILl.lCK/BLACK eds. 1985, 238.
93 See below, pp. 108-109.
9‘ Roar 1997a, 267.
95 For differing views about the agrarian setting in Neo-Assyrian times, cf. POSTGATE i974,
230-233; FALES i990, 81-83; and references there cited.
--4-_--s,-c--,¢.----_-- _ < -_...__.._v..__._______v - .. . _. ’~““-“”*“ _:W i WW __
lO4 The Heartland ofAssyria
existed on the close periphery of major European cities, a pattern which was only
very recently changed to one of full urbanisation.
The sites listed, which may well, of course, not represent the full extent of Neo~
Assyrian settlement in the area, since their was no systematic survey or sampling,
can in general terms be divided into the following categories:
a. Large villages, or small "suburban" settlements, distinguished by evidence of
some major building. The site which most obviously belongs to this group is
‘\
Tell Baqaq 2, which gives every indication of being an official Assyrian
government foundation. We might also place in this category, however, Khirbet
lrlatara, Khirbet Khatuniya, Khirbet Qasri}, Tell Rijirn, and perhaps Tell Abu
Dhahir.
-
b. Small rural village settlements or hamlets, with the supposition of a number of
domestic residences. Rownak may be an example, and probably several of the
other sites for which insufficient remains of the period were exposed to give any
assessment.
c. Isolated farmsteads, with very limited building and evidence of agricultural
systems. Khirbet Shireena provides a case, and the presumed lost settlement
associated with Qasrij Cliff may also have fallen within this group.
This last category, together with the presence of agricultural tools and spilt grain in
Room 1 of the Level 4 building at Khirbet K.hatuniya,°6 does suggest that arable
farming was a feature of the area, as it is today, although to what degree remains
unclear.” The excavated remains at Khirbet Qasrij, moreover, present, in contrast,
a picture of a largely industrial settlement.
Although it is difficult with such scanty evidence to determine reliable
"settlement patterns“, in broad gregraphical terms, moreover, one can perhaps
l
realise a grouping of the known Neo-Assyrian sites in two main locations (Fig. 3):
1. Small west~banl< settlements spread out atintervals in the western part of the
area, reaching nearly 40 km from Tell Selal” to Tell Shelgiyya. Most of these
sites were probably manors or farmsteads, perhaps also with some military or
security, or else trading, function.
2. An area of larger villages clustered on the east bank of the Tigris in the eastern
part of the area, in close proximity to the main cities of Assyria, and in some
way associated with the water system supplying Nineveh. This grouping of sites
.1 1» perhaps represented a kind of rural "suburbia" to the Assyrian urban heartland.
Between these two groupings of sites, though nearer to, and probably more closely
associated with, that to the east, was the west-bank settlement at Tell Rijim.
Eski-Mosul Project sites for Neo-Assyrian/Post-Assyrian pottery study
Of the Neo-Assyrian and Post-Assyrian sites excavated in the Project, only four
have been fully published - Khirbet Hatara,” Khirbet Khatuniya,‘°° Qasrij Cliff'°'
‘?“"'*"w“‘.i
7 nos
96 CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 8; I4-20, Nos. 8~9 (iron sickles), 10 (iron spade?), 80 (whetstone).
m Cf. Roan 1997a, 267: "lt seems probable that in the Late Assyrian period arable farming
was concentrated on the more fertile plains of northern Mesopotamia, and that areas such as
Q
c
Y] that of the Eski Mosul region were used for animal husbandry, perhaps including horse
rearing".
1 9*‘ Or, rr included, Tell Msefna: cf. n. 17 above.
99 FIORINA i997, with Neo-Assyrian (Level 8) pottery by NEGRO 1997.
it
q _.w----»» J r;<_..<___ _ T — 7 7777777
__4 ‘V
The Ninevire Countryside 105
and Khirbet Qasrijm - and it is on the corpuses of pottery from these sites that any
preliminary analysis of pottery types must be based. The material from one
additional Neo-Assyrian site in the Project - Khirbet Shireena - is known to me
through personal involvement in the excavations, but is not considered here, as it
will be the subject of a separate study after the basic excavation report has
appeared.” Some limited analysis of the pottery from another four sites - Khirbet
Karhasan, Tell Abu Dhahir, Sch Gubba and Tell Shelgiyya (Figs. 5-8) - is pggsiblg
from unpublished documentation, ‘°“ though here too full publication is awaited.
We should first consider the nature of these sites. For two of the sites, Seh
Gubba and Tell Shelgiyya, we have absolutely no idea of the extent of settlement at
the time, since levels of the Neo-Assyrian period were not directly revealed. Khirbet
Hatara, Khirbet Khatuniya, Khirbet Qasri} and possibly Tell Abu Dhahir, however,
can be broadly categorised as large village settlements. Unfortunately, the areas of
exposure at the first two of these sites, though suggesting some major building,
were too small for any meaningful assessment of the general nature of the
settlements. Level 8 at Khirbet Hatara was reached only in some small soundings,
and only a few structures, including stone walls, were uncovered.‘°5 Apart from
these meagre remains, therefore, our assumption that the settlement was relatively
large, therefore, is based only on the overall size of the site, and its long sequence
ot occupation. It seems that Level 8 does not, however, represent continuing,
uninterrupted settlement from the fairly substantial "Middle Assyrian-Mitannian“
remains of Level 7,“ because on the basis of recovered pottery it has been
suggested that Level 8 should be dated to the late 7th to early 6th centuries sc.“”
Certainly, there are a number a parallels with material from Khirbet Qasrij.
As for Khirbet Khatuniya, it is not impossible that the site should be viewed as
associated by "horizontal stratigraphy" with Tell Mohammed Arab,“ the
settlement having been moved at the beginning of the Neo~Assyrian period from
that Middle Assyrian site. The main interest of the Khirbet Khatuniya excavations
is the large corpus of apparently well-dated Nee-Assyrian pottery from the floors of
the Level 4 building (Fig. 4).‘°° However, the degree of exposure of this building
was insufficient for any real idea of its status or function, or of any meaningful
overview of the site.
The much greater exposure at Khirbet Qasrij allows a clearer idea of the nature
of this site, which is, perhaps surprisingly, largely of an industrial rather than an
I00
CURTIS/GREEN 1997, with Neo-/Post-Assyrian pottery (Levels 7? and 6-4) pp. I5-1'7 (No.
225(3), 24~l0l, Figs. 'l_8, 2722-68, Pls. XV~XVl, XVIII-XIX. p
km CURTIS I989, with Neo-Assyrian pottery pp. l2»l8, 6l»75, Figs. 7-l4, 47-49a.
XI CURTIS 1989, with Nee»/‘Post Assyrian pottery pp. 29-54, 61-75, Figs. 23-49a, Pls. Vll~
lm Gnnnrv in press.
Kindly made available to me by Mr Warwick Ball, former Director of Excavations for
the British Archaeological Expedition to Iraq.
‘°“ FIORINA 1991,46.
‘°° Fromm/t 1997, 3145.
‘O7 NEGRO i997, esp. p. 175.
’°* For this site, cf. Roan 1983, Roar 1984.
“’° CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 34459, ssoi , Figs. 35-53. cr. sum. 1998.
. ,________,,__h,_____ ,_ . . . . .. .. _. I .| . I [$4. ____ __
106 The Heartland of/lssyria
agricultural character.“° The size of the site is also somewhat substantial,
estimated at around half a kilometre in length and at least 375 rn across east-west,
while further evidence that the settlement may have been "a place of some
substance" is perhaps to be seen in the discovery of "a few terracotta wall-nails of
the sort usually associated with important administrative or religious buildings".“‘
Curtis has argued for a post-imperial, perhaps early 6th century, date for the
pottery, and therefore for the site,” and suggested that Khirbet Qasrij may
represent a short-term settlement by former city dwellers from Nineveh or
Nirnrud.“3 After 612 BC it is unclear whether northern Mesopotamia was under the
control of the Medes, the Babylonians, or neither,” until it became part of the
Persian Empire in the second half of the 6th century.
The remaining site which can be considered for our analysis of pottery is Qasrij
Cliff. The large pit cleared at Qasrij Cliff was circular (diameter ca. 3.70 in) with
steep straight sides, at least 2.25 m deep, and flat-bottomed. Lenses of dark grey
ash were common in the fill and there was a thick layer of ash along the bottom.
On the northeast side the pit fill was eroded by the cliff-section, and as no
occupation levels were found, any associated settlement is presumed to have been
destroyed by the action of the river and/or adjacent wadi, or, less likely, to have
eroded from the surface of the mound.” The remaining fill of the pit was emptied
out. Fragments of mud~bricl< and part of a baked brick were present. Animal bones
were found in the lower two-thirds.“ The dense accumulation of pottery was in
excess of 1,000 sherds?"
Diagnostic sherds were exclusively Nee-Assyrian, although the precise dating is
in some doubt. Curtis attributed the pottery to the 8th century BC.“ This dating has
been doubted and modified, Bernbeck, on the basis of the absence of bowls with
ribbed rims,” suggesting an earlier date in the 9th-century BC.m Ribbed rim
bowls were also absent, however, in 7th-century Level 4 at Khirbet Khatuniya, and
in my view the possibility of a later date for the Qasrij Cliff pottery, perhaps in the
7th century BC, should also not be completely ruled out, especially when one
“° cr. analysis by SIMPSON 1990, 121-131.
1“ CUR'I‘iS 1989, 51; cf. p. 27.
m Cunrrs 1989, 5162. However, one of the type-fossils for a i>ost-Assyrian dating there
cited - the bowls with inverted and thickened rim — is now recognised as a common form
r
ii also in the 7th centu1y(CuRrIs/GREEN 1997, 88).
“3 CuRris1989,54.
“" See cums 1989, 5264. For Assyria after 612 BC, cf. also DALLEY 1990; 1993; BLACK
1997, 229-230; Rsnon 1998.
“5 So Currris 1989, ll, 1'7. Fates 1993, 6, proposes that this pit was associated with the
pottery kiln and pottery production complex at Khirbet Qasrij, but the differences in pottery
forms and so probably in date seem to preclude this.
1*‘ Cuivris 1989, 9»1o. cr. review by SLMPSON 1990, 119-121.
ii ‘*7 So Cunrrs 1989, 10; the sherd count on p. 16 numbers only 835, but this is apparently
because registered fragments were "counted as single items even when they are made up of a
number of sherds".
1.
4
"3 Cunris 1989, 17-l8; also CURTIS 1992, 150.
“Q For the type at Khirbet Qasrij, cf. Cunrrs 1989, 47.
"0 BERNBECK 1993, 117. Cf. also HAUSLEITER 1996, 145, n. 926; SCHMIDT, this volume pp.
69170.
Z‘
- .. a.
A... W...
The Ninevite Countryside I07
considers some of the parallel pieces from other sites. In his fundamental study of
the chronology and typology of pottery from the Neo-Assyrian heartland, Hausieiter
usefully collects together illustrations of similar forms from diffe1'ent sites and
suggested date ranges. Among the profile drawings which are there reproduced are
20 of material from Qasrij Clifff” while another 25 are noted as parallel piecesm
Following the dating of the excavator, and in recognition of the modification
suggested by Bernbeck, they are all listed as "early Neo-Assyrian, (9th-) 8th
century". The illustrative format, however, allows us to realise that this dating is
often in conflict with the contextual dating evidence for similar forms from other
sites, which are reproduced or cited on the same pages. One Qasrij Cliff ring-based
riged bowlm is similar to examples from Assur attributed to the 9th—8th centuries
BC,l24 but close parallels to other forms from Qasrij Cliff are given a late Neo-
Assyrian (8th-7th century) or Post~Assyrian date.“
Very similar to the pit at Qasrij Cliff was a large, roughly circular deep pit
containing Neo-Assyrian pottery excavated at Khirbet Shireena. It out the lowest
Neo-Assyrian level and three levels with "Khabur" ceramics, but was sealed by a
later Neo-Assyrian stone pavement. It had straight sides, with a diameter of
something in excess of 1.28 In (the maximum excavated). The maximum depth was
2.57 m. The fill was mixed. The uppermost metre was a very loose rubbly fill,
including mud-brick and sandstone fragments. Thereafter the soil was slightly
more compact with, towards the bottom, an increasing amount of grey ash. There
was a quantity of animal bone in the lower levels. The pottery was exclusively Neo-
A$$yrian.'2‘5 -
These pits have been interpreted as disused grain silos which were subsequently
used as landfill sites for general household refuse.m The examples of silos closest
in space and time to those of Qasrij Cliff and Khirbet Shireena are the Middle
*2‘ HAUSLEHBR 1996. 11, Taf. LXXXll:8; 1.>o<x111=3,7; xcvr;4; xcvtrs; xcvnrz-3;
XClX:2,4~6; Ci:5; Clli:l,3; CXXXV:3,5-6; CXXXVIII:3{=CuR"r1s 1989, Fig 13:80, not 8l},4~
5.
m HAUSLEITER 1996, II, under Tat’. LXXXll:'7-8; LXXXIlI:3,'7; XCI: 14; XCViIi:3; XClX:2,5;
CI:5; Cill: I ,3; CXII:l6; CXXX\/13,5; CXLl:4.
‘B CURTIS 1989, Fig. 14:89 e HAUSLEITER 1996, ll, Taf. LXXXIll:3.
'2“ HAUSLEITER1996,ii,Taf.LXXXIli:1~2. -
‘*5 or. Hnustnirna 1996, 11, Taf. xcvtu:-2-3 (9 Cutzris 1989, Figs. 7:8. 8:17) with ibid. 1
(from Nimrud, = OATES, J. 1959, Pl.‘XXXV:23) and with CURTIS I989, Fig. 24:30 (from
Khirbet Qasrij); Taf. XClX:2 (= CURTIS 1989, No. 3) with ibid. 1 (from Khirbet Khatuniya,
= CURTIS/GREEN 1997, No. 142) and 3 (from Nimrod, 2 O/mas, J. 1959, P1. XXXV:26);
CXXXV:3 and 5 (= CURTlS 1989, Figs. 11:53, 11:51) with ibid. 1 (from Assur) and 4 (from
Assur), all attributed to "late Neo-Assyriatt/post-Assy1“ian"; also cf. ibid. Clllzl (= Curtis
1989, Fig. 9:19) with ibid. 2 (from Nimrud), "late Neo-Assyrian 8th-7th C '2"; and ibid.
CXXXV:3 and 5 (above) with ibid. 2 (from Nimrud, = OATES, J. 1959, Pl. XXX\/111193),
"late Neo»Assyrian 8th-7th C". Note also that HAUSLE1'rnrt remarks on the similarity of
certain ovoid wide-necked jars from a late Neo-Assyrian context at Assur to examples from
Qasrij Cliff (this volume, p, 35, n. l54).
'26 Grtnnrt in press.
m So CURTIS 1989, 10, l7; GREEN in press, with further discussion. Cf. also ROAF 1984,
144, on Hellenistic pits at Tell Mohammed Arab. The evidence for the practice in Northern
Iraq in the Hellenistic period is reviwed in CURTIS/GREEN in press.
-—- -~~->—-—--- ' # -— -— —-— -~- — --—>-----~--——~-—-~-—-~----------»- 4» _
r

l08 The Heartland ofAssyria The Ninevite C0um‘I'y.S'ide’ 109

Fragments of small common-ware beakers without dimples are known from Qasrij
Assyrian ones at Tell Mohammed Arab,“ which were straight-sided and
Cliff,” and even, for example, from Nimrud.‘35 Published examples of dimple
cylindrical in shape. 129 That the Qasrij Cliff and Khirbet Shireena silos appear to be
beakers from Nimrod, however, are all described as "palace »ware".‘36 Although this
the only recorded examples from the Neo-Assyrian period is almost certainly an
imprecisely defined term is not specifically used in the case of fragments of dimple
accident of discovery. Such silos would probably be dug at some distance from the
beakers from Khirbet Qasrij, it is clear that these too were of a very fine fabriom
settlements. The silo at Khirbet Shireena, though within the area of the settlement
Dimple beakers from Tell Abu Dhahir and Tell Shelgiyya are also of very fine
remains, is probably no exception. Since it was dug from above the earlier (Level 3)
Neo-Assyrian floor, but is directly sealed by the later (Level 2) pavement, it must (buff-coloured) "palace ware" with no visible vegetable or mineral inclusions (Figs.
‘\

belong to a period between the two. This implies a break in occupation within the 5:19; 6:17). At Khirbet Shireena, however, a near-complete dimple beaker, and
fragments of another,’ though still comparatively thin-walled, were of a rather
Neo-Assyrian period between these levels. Probably Khirbet Shireena itself was still
occupied, but the settlement was moved to elsewhere on the mound. Alternatively, coarse fabric with grit inclusions of differing sizes.“ S0 it could be that true palace
it is possible that during this intermediate phase the entire site was reduced to a ware was known only at places of some importance, such as cities or the larger
-
villages, while an agrarian site like Kh1rbetShireena would have local imitations in
storage depot attached to Tell Abu Dhahir. In any event, the silo does not appear to
common ware. It is true that "palace ware" sherds are said to come from
be contemporaneous with any of the building levels, and does no belong directly
with the excavated remains of settlement.
Rownakf” which cannot have been more than a small hamlet, but this may in fact
indicate only that sherds with dimple decoration were found there, or else it might
be an exceptional case.“°
General discussion of Neo-Assyrian and Post-Assyrian pottery forms from the
Eski-Mosul Project area
Glazed vessels ' I_
We conclude with some basic, if preliminary, notes on the Neo-Assyrian and Post- Although the second half of the 8th and the 7th centuries BC have been described as
Assyrian pottery forms represented from excavated sites in the Eski-Mosul Project. "the heyday of polychrome glazed vessels",“" at no time, it seems, were they
Numbers standing alone refer to the numbers given in the published pottery common, and indeed glazed pottery appears to be very rare in Neo- and Post-
corpuses for Khirbet Hatara, Khirbet Khatuniya, Qasrij Cliff and Khirbet Qasrij. Assyrian contexts.” Only two more-or-less complete glazed vessels are known
Material from other sites shown in the illustrations to this article (Figs. 5~8) are from the Eski~Mosul Project excavations. One is a small polychrome bottle from
referred to by number of figure. Khirbet Khatuniya (No. 161)."‘3 The form is loosely paralleled by vessels from Fort
Shalmaneser at Nimrudm and from Tell Ha1af.‘“5 However, these vessels are not
1' Finc wares and dimple beakers glazed. Closely analogous are some little botttles from Assur with similar glazed
i
0 We begin with the fine and glazed wares, because these are often regarded as petaled decoration on the shoulder, which are comparable in form to the Khatuniya
r
1 evidence of a degree of local wealth. In particular the so~called Neo-Assyrian vessel except that they have more rounded bases, while other approximate parallels
.2; "palace ware" - a pottery with very fine or virtually no fabric inclusions ~ has, as its can be found from Kish, Babylon and Lachish."“ The petalled design is found on
ii
name suggests, generally been thought to be indicative of a high social status.‘3° the base of a glazed bottle of unknown size from a grave of the l0th~8th centuries
Because of their very fragile nature, fine wares tend, however, to be found BC at Babyonm and on the shoulders and bases of large polychrome glazed jars
rather exceptionally in any event, and are under-represented among published
pottery because complete vessels or full profiles rarely survive. It is therefore
difficult to assess their original frequency. Examples of fine wares from Qasrij Cliff ‘$4 Courts 1989, 17. - ,
and Khirbet Qasrij have been discussed in the published report.'3‘ There is a small
‘$5 E.g., OA'rEs, 1. 1959,1>1.xxxv11=7s-so.
t.
ll collection of fine ware fragments from Sch Gubba, mostly, perhaps, istikans (Fig.
Onrns, J. 1959, Pl. XXXVll:60-6'7. . ,-
U8 Cuims 1989, 34, bio. 132; cf. ibid. 111.4%}.
ll 7:8, 10, 11). Some fine ware beakers were also found at Khirbet Khatuniyam U9 inaccurately described as "palace ware" lll BALL/BLACK eds. 1987, 247.
ii "Fine ware", including "palace ware", is a classification of fabric, not of form. W KILLICK lfl KIl.LlCK/BLACK eds. 1985, 238. _
gl
ti
ex
Nevertheless, the terms are closely associated with certain forms, such as the so- See also below, p. 113, for a common ware bottle from Khirbet Khatuniya with palace
called istikans and, in the case of palace ware, in particular the dimple beakers.” ware parallel at Nimrud.
it
ii
¢| It is therefore important to note the presence at Eski-Mosul Project sites of dimple Cunrzs 1929, 51.
beakers in a coarser fabric, which should not properly be called "palace ware“. Cf. CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 89. Cf. OATES, J . 1959: "Although not uncommon at Nimrod,
only a few fragments and no complete specimens have been unearthed thus far at Fort
"8 cf. Roar 1984, 150. Shalmaneser". _
‘*9 Roar in CUR"l“lS 1989, t0. ‘*3 CuR'r1s/GREEN 1997, s9.
*3“ Rawsou 1954; OHTSU 1991. “’“‘ owes, J. 1959, Pl. XXXVll:80.
.":iwv.,-1r;<'t—:=*1)!v-':;*~:=w".1 '3‘ CURTIS 1989, 17, 48. ‘*5 l-lizouoa 1962, Taf. 59:109.
'32 Cunrts/Guess 1997, 91. “6 CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 89-90, gives references.
m For which see REICHE, this volume, p. 236. *4’ Srnommenoeiz 1964, 167, Abb/1:14.

-‘r/"*_-;2W¢"-'.;‘!.tl-€_-

2.;
-a_._‘¢'-.-_-____¢~—--~-:~\-|-_< F_ . V - in” V -----4-‘iii------~ -------if------~ e 4

1 10 The Heartland ofAssyria The Ninevite Coimtryside 111

from Assurf“ Tell Sheikh l-Ia1'nad“‘° and allegedly "Ziwiye".’5° As noted
elsewhere,’5' there is an especially close parallel to the Khatuniya example in a
private collection, attributed to "Ziwiye" but possibly of Assyrian manufactured”
0 The second Neo- or Post-Assyrian glazed vessel from the Eski-Mosul area is, in
contrast, a large polychrome glazed jar from Khirbet Qasrij (No. 35l),‘53 very
similar to one from a late grave dug into the Temple of Nabfi at Nimrud.’5“
\
No. £21 from Khirbet Khatuniya demonstrates an exceptionally heavy inversion
of the rim. This is paralleled by an example from Level 4 at Tell Keisan in the
Plain of Acco,‘“9 which level demonstrates extensive Assyrian influence and has
been dated to ca. 650-580 BC.”°
No. 137 from Level 4 at Khirbet Khatuniya has an everted rim tending towards
the form of No. 428 from the Hellenistic Level 2. It is paralleled by an example
from a Neo-Assyrian grave at Assurm A similar example is also known from a

Open forms grain silo containing Neo-Assyrian pottery at Tell Jemmeh, south-east of Gaza in
<
Small bowls with everted rim and flat base were found at Khirbet Qasrij (Nos. 9» the north-western Negev.m
lO)*55 and in the main Neo-Assyrian building at Khirbet Khatuniya (No. 108))” It Carinated bowls with everted rim represent a typical form, well attested at
is quite a common Neo-Assyrian type“? An otherwise rather similar vessel from Qasrij Cliff (Nos. 7-10)” and Khirbet Qasrij (Nos. 24-25),“ as well as in Level 8
7-».
the Town Wall excavations at Nimrod has a ring-base;'53 according to Joan Oates at Hatara (Nos. 4-1 l)'75 and in Neo- and Post-Assyrian levels at Khirbet Khatuniya
“it appears to be solely a late type, not having been found in Sargonid levels".*59 (Nos. 62-63, 89-90, 138-152, 331, 358-363).“ Significant numbers are also known
Bowls with inverted and thickened rim were a common type at Khirbet from Tell Abu Dhahir and Tell Shelgiyya (Fig. 5:9, '1 ‘l-17; 6:2, 4-6, S, ll, 13), with
Khatuniya (NOS. 27, 43-44, 52-59, 86-37, 118~13l, 328-329, 350-351)”) and smaller number from Seh Gubba and Khirbet Karhasan (Figs. 7:4; 8:1, 6). The
Khirbet Qasrij (Nos. 79-100),“ and examples are known from Hatara (No. 12- form is known at Assurm and at Nimrud,'78 where it is said to have been "by far
16),” Shelgiyya, Sch Gubba and Karhasan (Fig. 6:3, 9, 12; 7:1-3; 8:2-5). the most common type" among the Neo-Assyrian corpus.”9 Of the examples
Although it probably continued in Post-Assyrian times, perhaps even down to the published or known to me from the Eslti-Mosul sites, there is no complete example,
Aehaemenid period,"’3 its presence in Neo-Assyrian levels at Khirbet Khatuniya as though one piece from Khirbet Qasrij (No. 24) did preserve a part of the ring»base.
i well as at other sites)“ demonstrates that it was a Neo-Assyrian type. It is not In no other known case from the Project is any of the base preserved, though at
represented among the published pottery of Nimrud or Assur.'°5 Curtis, however, Assur and Nimrucl most published examples also have ring»~hases,‘*° although
has drawn attention to an unpublished example from Nimrod, which he thought roundedm‘ and flat bases” are also found.
might be Post-Assyrian,“ and it is now known that the type was not completely Bowls with ribbed rims were common enough in the later pottery corpuses from
absent at Assur either.“ Examples have also been found in excavations at Kar- Khirbet Qasrij (Nos. 67-'78),“ and Hatara (Nos. 1-8-20),“ as well as at Tell Abu
9 Tukulti-Ninurta.“ Dhahir, Shelgiyya, Sch Gubba and Karhasan (Figs. 5:1; 6:3; 7:2-3; 8:5). They were
absent, however, at Khirbet Khatuniya and Qasrij Cliff.
§
ti: ‘*8 ANDRAE 1925,P1s. 18-20.
“*9 KUHNE 1984b, 175, Abb. 67:16.
.-Awzi-:>v.~:1$ 1*‘ E.g., Poimna 1965, 131, colour Pl. 36.
‘S’ CUR'I‘lS/GREEN 3997, 90, with reference. *6” Saunas 1989.91. 35:8.
‘S2 PORADA 1965, 130, regards the "Ziwiye" vessels in Assyrian style as local imitations, "° sxttss 1980, 131-156; 61". nunmm 1993, 866.
while TERRACE 1966, 42, under No. 49, thinks they are Assyrian imports. ”' HALLERl954, Taf. 6n.
“*3 Cusrts 1989,50. m PETRIE 1928, Pl. LXV:l8, without scale. Tell Jemrneh is now generally identified as
>9.W-;~.-»\.x ~_t, - -1
5
s '5“ GATES, D./Ones, J. 1958, P1. XX\/I[I:15. Cf. CURTIS 1989, 50; Cunrrs/Gnnnn 1997,89. Yurza and as the "Arza near the Brookof Egypt" mentioned in Assyrian royal inscriptions:
§
*5‘ Cunrrs 1989, 47. cf. MAISLER 1952; NA'AMAN l979, with further references. ~
l
s ‘$6 Cunris/Gnesn 1997, 88. 173 CURTIS 1989, 17.
m Examples from other sites are noted in CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 88. There are several 1“ Cunrls 1989, 47. - ‘-1
unpublished examples from Assur, Nineveh and Nimrud (cf. Hxustnrrnn 1996, Tat. ‘ls NEGRO 1997.166-167.
LXXX). "6 Cuaris/GREEN 1997, 87, 89, 91.
*5“ LINES 1954.191. xxxvna. ‘ll rotten 1954, Taf. 6a-m, aa-ac, ai~al<, afibd; also I—lAt1s1,erraR 1996, Taf. 1.xxxn=2, 6-7;
*5’ LINES 1954, 165. LXXXI‘\/:14.
"’° CUR1‘lS/GREEN E997, 87-88, 91. t
Us LINES 1954, Pl. XXXVll:4-5, 10 (opp. p. 164); OATES, J. 1959, Pls. XXXV-XXXVI:8-l0,
‘°' CURTIS 1989, 47. 17-24, 32-34 (after p. 147).
e;-@v,~_.-=<,~:m¢_s-~“r:»<—-~*rw1->*.\
‘Q NEGROIQQ7, 168. '79 Oates, J. 1959, 132.
l 163 CURTIS 1989, 47. “*° As nn. 177-178 above.
*6“ CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 87-88. "“ McDONAu> 199521, 153, Nos. 126-127.
n 1
“’5 Cf. CURTIS 1989, 47; CURTIS/GREEN 1997, S8. i
*8: HALLER 1954, Taf. 6b, f-g, k, ac, av; OATES, J. 1959, Pl. XXX\/:26; from Tell Sheikh
~.
5 “*6 CURTIS 1989,47. Harnad: KUHNE. 2984b, I74; Figs. 1, 3. Cf. CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 89.
ml I~iAus1.emzR 1996, Taf. XCIV:2. '33 CURTIS 1989, 47.
'6“ nxustsirsn 1996, Tai. xc1v;4, 10. ‘M NEGROI997, 169.

ta»
 1l2 The Heartland ofAssyria The Ninevire Countryside 113

Fragments of tripod bowls were found in significant numbers at Khirbet Qasrij, a more bulbous body is a jar from Tell Ha1af.2°°. The wider diameter of Khatuniya
mostly from the kiln (Nos. 112-ll5).‘*5 As tar as is presently known to me, No. 159 is loosely paralleled by another bottle from Fort Shalmaneserfm but the
however, they were not recovered at any other site in the P1‘0_]6C€. exact form of the Khirbet Khatuniya example is seemingly-unique.
No. 160 from Khirbet Khatuniya is a small beaker with flared rim and nipple
Closedforms base?” The closest parallel appears to be from the Adad Gate excavations at
Examples of small simple elongated bottles come from Khirbet Qasrij (No. 276) Nineveh,“ and there are other comparable beakers from Nineveh, Nimrod and
and from Khirbet Khatuniya (No. 158))“ Both have painted horizontal bands on Assur, as well as a more flat~based example from Tell Sheikh I-Iarnad.Z°“ Vessels of
\
the exterior, though the former is flabbased, while the latter has a pointed base this basic form can have a pointed base” or a flat base.“
("carrot-shaped"). In form and size they approximates to carrot-shaped vessels from Another form of small bottle has a globular body and constricted neck. This
Nirnrudm and Assur,“‘8 as well as to one from Tell I~Ialaf.“‘9 A little bottle from a type is represented by No. 264 from Khirbet Qasrijzm and by Nos. I62-163 from
Neo-Assyrian grave at Assur is also close in form, but is half the size.“ The larger Khirbet Khatuniya.2°3 They are comparable in form to several from Nimrod.” Of
-_
example from Assur,‘9' one of the examples from Nimrudm and a rather similar these, the closest in size and form to the Khirbet Khatuniya examples is of "palace
vessel from Ninevehm preserve horizontally painted bands, as in the case of the ware".2‘° In contrast, the Khatuniya examples have, in contrast, a fabric with dense
Khirbet Qasrij and Khirbet Khatuniya pieces. An unpublished example from Ur grit inclusions?“ Other close parallels come from Neo-Assyrian burials at Assur
also has painted horizontal bands; it probably belongs to the period of Assyrian and from Tell Halalim
occupation?“ From Fort Shalmaneser at Nimrud come a couple of vessels of For convenience of discussion we have elsewhere grouped together under the
similar form but with double strap~handle applied to neck and shoulder.“ Since heading "vases" the medium-‘sized jars with everted rims and rounded tapering
most of the painted bottles from Fort Shalmaneser were found scattered in Corridor bodies, represented by No. 269 from Khirbet_Qasrij and Nos. 166-171 from Khirbet
E of the Residency, Joan Oates suggests that they may have been toiletry articles Khatuniya?" The general type is also represented at Khirbet Hatara (Nos. 24-
belonging to Shamurtu, a woman official who seems to have resided there.“ 41),“ Tell Abu Dhahir (Fig. 5:21, ?24) and possibly at Seh Gubba (Fig. 7:5-7). At
No. 159 from Kliirbet Khatuniya is a different fonn of small bottle, with Nimrucl the form is described as "A common type" and is said to have been "found
constricted neck, angular shoulder and rounded base.” Rather similar examples frequently?" so there was probably a wide range of variations as at Khatuniya,
are known from Nirnrud, Nineveh and Assurf” The upper part of one of the which is also evidenced at Assur and other sites.“ Similarly, "storage jars" is a
2% Nineveh exampiesm is mid~way between the two forms represented at Khatuniya, convenient term for the medium to very large jars with rounded or straight-sided
No. 158 and the anguiar neck and shoulder of No. 159. The other example from bodies and rounded or pointed bases found in quite large numbers and with several
1<
Nineveh and the pieces from Nimrud and Assur are more sharply angular and variations of fonn at Khirbet Khatuniya (Nos. 172-221). They find parallels at
£1;
155 closer to Khatuniya No. 159, although maintaining the elongated appearance of No. =51 Nimrod, Kish and in Neo-Assyrian tombs at l~lurnaidat.2'7 Interestingly, the
1:;
158. These little bottles are strangely reminiscent in fomi of large-scale straight- straighbsided examples (Nos. 188491 at Khatuniya) resemble in form a type of
t
sided storage vessels. Also comparable to Khatuniya No. 159, but smaller and with
1
200
1 HROUDA 1962, Taf. 59: 103.
20 l
1
i '85 CURTIS 1989,48. 1 OM85, J. 1959, Pl. XXXVlll:85.
202
;.
5: '8“ CURTIS i989, 49; CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 89. CURTLS/GREEN 1997, 89.
203
i *8’ MCDONALD l995a, 156, no. 139, with colour p11<>1<>.; Onrns. 1- 1959» Pl. XXXVIlI:88. 204
SULEIMAN 1971, 8th unnumbered page of illustrations after p. 96, extreme right.
90. Cunris/GREEN 1997, 89, gives references. . "
iii§:: 205
< 1*“ l~lAusLn1'rER 1996, Taf. CXVll:26. 206
Hnouo/1 1962, Taf. 59:85-86, from Tell-Halaf.
‘*9 HROUDA1962,T21f.592l11. _ I CAMPBELL THOMPSON/MALLOWAN ‘£933, Pl. LXXI\/:15, from Nineveh (apparently at
“’° Hatter 1954, Taf. 41 .-. HAus1.E1"raR 1996, Taf. cxv11;24, who suggests a date in the scale 1:6).
second half of the 7th century BC. 2°? CURTIS 1989, 49.
ll" Hnususirnn 1996, Tat. cxv11;26. 2°“ CUR'r1s/GREEN 1997, 90.
"1 Onras, 1. 1959, Pl. xxxv111;90. 2°’ OAr1ss,J. 1959, Pl. XXXVIlI:8i-85.
'93 CAMPBELL Thompson/Mnueownn 1933, Pl. LXXD/:19, apparently at scale 1:3 (cf. 2"’ Ones, 1. 1959, P1. XXXVlll:8l; p. 144. cr. CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 90.
CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 89, n. 8). 2“ Courts/GREEN 1997, <39), Nos. 162-165; p. 90.
*9“ BM WA 138319, mentioned in Cunrrs/GREEN 1991, s9. 2'2 Cf. CURTIS/GREEN 1997,90, for references.
i1 W5 Oates, 1. 1959, Pl. xxxv111= 217, s9. 2'3 CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 90.
1”“ OA"rEs,J. 1959,134. 2“ NEGRO1997, 170-172.
11
t
41
‘.1
‘W As STERN 1982, 125427, type c. i
i 2“ Onres, 1. 1959, 145, 135. As cited in CuR'1‘1s/GREEN 1997. 90, the latter pagoreference
W8 CURTIS/GREEN 1997. 89, gives references. is wrong, and the quotation slightly inaccurate (though without consequence).
*9’ CAMPBELL THOMPSON/MALIDWAN 1933, Pl. LXXlV:l8, from the SH Building 1 2'“ CURTIS/GREEN £997, 90, gives references.
(apparently at scale 1:6). 2" CURTIS/GREEN 199"/, 90, with references. See also 11>1<1. p. 7.

55
.-+.______....-___“... V . ..

114 The Heartland ofAssyria The Nirtevite Countryside l 15

Neo-Assyrian v. Post-Assyrian pottery

Neo~Assyrian little bottle, represented at Khatunil/*1 by *1 rather umwical examplm
but at Nineveh and Nimrud by vessels very likely miniature versions of the large
jars (as referred to above). A relief carving from the North Palace of Assurbanipal
I
at Nineveh depicts a servant carrying a large "storage jar".2“‘ D immediately Post-Assyrian from Neo-Assyrian ceramics. There do seem to be some
One example of a ring-stand for- supporting a jar was recovcrfid FY0111 Khlfbfil
Khatuniya (No. 184)?” Similar stands, of slightly differing sizes, are known from
Nimrud, Assur, I-Iumaidat and Tell Sheikh I~lamad.”° ' H
Jars with everted and club-shaped rims, known from Khirbet Q-“STU (N0$- 14_7"
226)?” are also present among the material from Abu Dhahir and Seh Gubba (Fig.
5:21, 24; 7:5-7). _ _
»~ Ring-based jars with everted rims are represented at Khirbet Khatuniya by Nos.
224-226. The squat form (Nos. 224-225) finds close parallels at Nineveh and
Nimrud; at the latter it is said to be the most common Neo-Assyrian jar type. The
more elongated example (No. 226 at Khatuniya) has no very close parallel, though
from Nimrud similarly taller versions, though with wider necks, are published and
I1 said to be comrnon?" ' century BC,23° while the latter is rare at other sites and not elsewhere a good
The form of jars with folded rims, rare in the early iron Age, but present at
Khirbet Qasrij, including in the secure context of the kiln (Nos._22“}':24t)), is
curiously not known to have occurred at any other Neo- or Post-Assyrian site ill the
v Eski~Mosui Project. Similar forms are known from Hellenistic contexts at at least
three sites in the project. 223 _ _
A rather unusual vessel form from Khirbet Khatuniya (No. 227), which We have
labelled a "crater", had been made in two parts, the stand having been fitted before
tiring?“ Parallels are few, the closest, rather surprisingiy, being vessels from the
Fortress of the Sasanian citadel at Qasr-i Abu Nasr. The pottery from this
fortress has been given a wide range of dates, but is in any case considerably lap:
than any date which can be assigned to Khirbet Khatuniya Level 4, AD 109-809-
The above remarks on some Neo-Assyrian and Post-Assyrian pottery forms from
the Eski-Mosul Project sites leave open the thorny question of how to distinguish
subtle evolutions through time in Neo-Assyrian pottery forms, which might
sometimes be able to be extended into definitely post-612 BC types, and the
presence and absence of certain forms may prove chronologically significant with
more refined work. At the present time, however, a differentiation of Post-Assyrian
from Neo-Assyrian pottery on the basis of fotm remains extremely difficult. While
the pottery corpus from Khirbet Qasrij seems, in overall terms, somewhat
distinctive, even there Curtis notes that "many forms find close parallels with
Late Assyrian pottery of the late seventh century BC". Moreover, the two vessel
types on which he bases his Post-Assyrian date are the bowls with inverted and
thickened rims (Nos. 79-100) and the jars with folded rims (Nos. 227~240).22° The
former of these type-fossils is now recognised as a common type also in the 7th
5
t
1 criterion of date?“ Furthermore, at Khirbet Khatuniya, where Neo-Assyrian
(Levels 6~4) and, apparently, Post-Assyrian (Level 3) pottery was stratified in
1 sequence, the latter, such as it is, includes no very distinctive forms which can be
I
2 differentiated from those of the Neo-Assyrian levels?”
§
In the absence of convincing formal differentiation, there has been some interest
I in the possibility of distinguishing Post-Assyrian from Neo-Assyrian pottery by
means of fabric clay. The hope was aroused by the numerical analysis by Curtis of
»t
visible fabric inclusions in pottery sherds from Khirbet Qasrij contrasted with those
l
of Qasrij Cliff:
a conspicuous feature of the Qasrij Cliff pottery was the high proportion of vegetable-
tempercd wares. At Khirbet Qasrij the situation was completely different, in that grit-

l
nii There is a Neo-Assyrian parallel from Nineveh; although this vessel has a smaller
tempered wares and wares with mixed grit and vegetable temper predominated?”
capacity (and is technically a bowl rather than a jflf) and a‘ higher foot, nag
evidently almost exactly the same height as No. 227 from Khirbet Khatuniya. li This observation was taken up by Wilkinson and Tucker in their survey of the
Another vessel of the same general type is from the Middle Assyrian stratum 2 at
North Jazira:
Tell Billet?” p
At Khirbet Karhasan there was a total absence of rims or profiles of jars of Neo- I
Sand temper, in the north Iazira and Tigris regions, becomes more significant in the later
E
Assyrian form. i1 phases and during the "post-Assyrian" period, but it is not clear when this change took place.
ill
ii
253 it should be appreciated that even _the_1_'above generalizations are based on a sparse record
of stratigraphic excavations and even one of the best records, that from Qasrij Cliff and
2"‘ Bannarr 1976, Pl. LXIV = CURTIS/GREEN 1997.P1. X74111- Khirbet Qasrij is from two adjacent sites not stratigraphically superimposed.”
” CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 90.
1.. 11° Hatlsu.-trren 1996, Taf. CXXXII, with references.
iii 22* Cunrts 1989, 48.
2*” CuRr1s1989,51.
23° CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 88.
m Cunris/GREEN 1997, 90, with references. 23‘ Cunris 1989, 49, with discussion of the form in the Near East from Late Kassite to
"3 CUR”1'lS1989,48-49.
*1‘ Cukrrs/GREEN 1997, 90-91.
Z” WHITCOMB 1985, 135, Fig. 5011, p.
l Hellenistic times.
232 CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 91.
cg
1%.
21° W1-l1'1"COM131985,ll1, 1” Cuims 1929, 52; cf. sherd counts ibid. pp. l6 and 46. See also sennim, this volume p.
4
55$
iii
"7 CAMPBELL Tnomrson/Mnttowm 1933, Pl. LXXIV:14. Our assessment of the height
70.
v.
4
rests on the assumption that the published drawing is at 1:12 rather than 1:6 (cf.
1“ WILKINSON/TUCIQER 1995, 100, with p. 200. Fig. 59. or. already in the Ajij survey:
J3 BERNIRECIC i993, l0O, with Tab. 48-49, showing a decrease in sites with vegetable-tempered
it
'52
Cunris/Gnnnn 1997, 89, n. 8). pottery from Neo»Assyrian Phase B to Post-Assyrian Phase C, though with statistically non-
2*“ Sretsnn 1933, Pl. LXV:7.
S

i.

El.
.,,

~. ' 5 ';:313_:1iS-
-.e_....,......__.__.......,,_..... . . . - . .. ..
1 16 The Heartland ofAssyria
A stratigraphic link is now provided by the excavations at Khirbet Khatuniya, in
which Level 3, being above the Level 4 destruction, is assumed to be of post-612 BC
date. The pottery from Level 3 showed a marked increase in grit inciusions on that
of earlier levels?”
On the other hand, it might be noted, firstly that the dating of the Qasrij sites
and even of the stratified levels at Khirbet Khatuniya are uncertain, and that Curtis
suggested a Post-Assyrian date for Khirbet Qasrij in part on the basis of the
difference in the fabric of the pottery from um found at Qasrij citrr?“ Secondly,
the resiilts of survey necessarily depend on pre-selected period type-fossils which
can often prove inaccurate, while for the North Jazira the supposedly "Post-
Assyrian" types were in part selected on the criterion of greater grit content in the
fabric?” Thirdly, that while on a macroscopic level the distinctions in fabric seem
clear enough, on microscopic examination of thin-sections "the bulk of the sherds
from Khirbet Qasrij are not readily distinguishable from those of Qasrij ciirr'.”*
Moreover, even should the fabric distinction prove to be a genuine chronological
indicator at Khirbet Khatuniya and the Qasrij sites, it may prove to be no more than
of very local application.
Concluding remarks
Given the present state of work on and publication of material from the Eski-Mosul
Project, the aims of this article have had of necessity to be modest and the results
correspondingly so. It is hoped, however, that this short review of the sites with
evidence of Neo~Assyrian and immediately Post»Assyrian settlement in the Eski-
Mosui Project area, together with presentation and brief discussion of some of the
ceramic material currently avaiiabie, will prove to be of use as a general summary
of what is known, as a basis for future work and, hopefully, as a stimulus to the
presentation of additional data. ' I"l.AUSLEI’i‘ER 1996; 1998, Hnounn 1962; 1991; 1993, HUSSIAN E987, ISMAIL 1989,
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the organisers, A1-nulf Hausleiter and Andrzej Reiche, for inviting my
participation at the 2"“ table ronde in Nieborow (28th February - 2nd March, 1997), and for
a smooth and delightful meeting. Full publication of the paper 1 there gave, on Neo-Assyrian
valid sample size.
1” Cunris/GREEN 1997, 81; Fig. 278. ct. warms i999, 172-173: "Als besoders interesszint
erweist sich die Beobachtung, dal3 es nach level 4 einen starken Rtickgang der
vegetabilischen Magerung zugunsten hoherer Sandmagerung gibt. Moglicherweise lcann dies
ein Ansatz fur die Unterscheidung zwischen spaltassyrischer und neuassyrischer Keramik
sein”.
236 Cunris 1989, 52.
237 Wii.i<n~1soNfl‘UCKER 1995, 100: "Because of the persistence of Late Assyrian forms
through into post»Assyrian times, the presence of Late Assyrian occupation should be judged
on both vessel form and fabric, the sandier examples being separated out as potentiaily post-
Assyrian". See also ibid. 101, where Khirbet Qasrij is named as site of reference for
ii
v. immediately Post-Assyrian material.
238 FREESTONE/HUGHES 1989, 71. This disparity was recognised by Wiiucinson/Fucitss
1995, 100. On the difficulties on ceramic fabric analysis as a chronological indicator, cf.
SC!~1N1i1DER 1994; also Amsrnsro, this volume, p. 176.
—-— _ —_e_
The Ninevite Countryside 1 }'7
ceramics from léhirbet Khatuniya, is now made unnecessary by the publication of [hg fma;
report on that site {CURTIS/GREEN 1997), and, at the suggestion of the Editors, I therefore
offer the present article, which inciudes some further consideration of materiai from Khirbet
Khatuniya as weil as from other sites. I have to thank Warwick Ball for providing me with
ghe pottery drawings of Neo-Assyrian sherds from sites excavated under his direction, and
or permission to publish a selection ahead of his own full publication. Thanks are due to
Arnulf I-lauslerter for the loan of a copy of his unpublished thesis (HAUSLEITER 1996) The
research for this paper was conducted during my tenure of an Alexander von Humboldt
Research Fellowship at the Free University of Berlin, 1996-98, and the Alexander von
Humboldt-Stiftung also gave financial support for my attendance at Nieborow. During the
time of my fellowship Professor Hans J. Nissen kindly acted as my academic host and
sponsor. The research for the first part of the paper, reviewing the Neo~ and Post-Assyrian
sites in the Eski-Mosui Project, was undertaken in connection with, and partly presented in
an invited guest-lecture at the Carsten Niebuhr Institute of Near Eastern Studies at the
University of Copenhagen on 6th March 1998.
References cited .
‘A1950 1987, AL-SOOF 1987, ANDRAE 1925, B_AlRD/CAMPBELL/VVATKINS eds. 1995,
BALL 1987; 1989; 1997; in prep.; BALL ed. in press, BALL/BLACK eds. 1987,
BALL/PAGAN in press, BARNETT 1976, BECKER 1991, BERGAMINI 1995, Btinnntacn
1993, Bietnisio 1987a; 1987b; 1992a; 19921:, BLACK 1997, BRIEND/HUMBERT
1980, Buown 1981, CAMPBELL THOMPSON/MALLOWAN 1933, Conrrs 1989; 1992;
1995, CURTIS/COLLON/GREEN 1993, Cuims/GREEN 1997; in press, DALLEY 1990-
1993, DAMERJI 1977; 1984, DAMERII ed. 1986, Di'I'1‘MANN 1990; 1992, Di'rriviAN1~i
et al. 1988; 1989/90, F/11.55 1990; 1993, FALES/POSTGATE 1992, FIORINA 1997-
1998, FIORINA et al. 1997, Foruuzn 1921, FRANKFURT 1952, FRBESTONEIHUGHE8
1989, Finn et al. 198'/a; 19871:‘. 1989/90, GREEN in press, I-IALLER 1954,
KAIM 1995, KtLt.1ci< 1996a; 1996b, KILLICK/BLACK eds.1985, Krttrctt/Roan eds.
1983, KOZLOWSKI ed. 1990; 1992, KGHNE 1984b; 1998, KUHNE ed. 1991, LINES
1954, LUMSDEN 1991, MCDONALD 1995a, MMSLER 1952, MALLOWAN 1966
MATSUMOTO 1991, MATTHEWS 1989; 1990; 1997, MATTHEWS/VVILKINSON eds:
1991, MAZUROWSKI 1997, MORANDl BONACOSSI 1996, NA'AMAN 1979, NASHEF ed.
1983/84; 1987, Nnono 1997, NORTHEDGE/BAMBER/ROAF 1988, Nuzuoro 1988;
1996, OATES, D. 196811, Onrns, J. 1959, Onriés, D./O/mas, 1. 1958, OHTSU 1991,
PETRIE 1928, PILLET 1962, PLACE 1870, PORADA 1965, POSTGATE 1974
Posromn/Wnrsou eds. 1979, Rnwson 1954, Ream; 1978; 1998,KROAF 1983:
1984; 1996; 19971; 19911», ROAF/Posronrn eds. 1981, SALLES 1980, scnneieeri
1994, SEARIGI-1'1‘ 1997, SEIDL 1989, SCHWARTZ 1997, SIMPSON 1990; in press
SPANOS 1988, SPEISER 1933, SOAH ed. 1981; 1987, STERN 1982, STROMMENGEIQ
1964, STRONACH 1989; 1989/90; 1994; 1995; 1997, STRONACH/CODELLA 1997
STRONACH/LUMSDEN 1992, SURENHAGEN 1987, SULEIMAN 1971, TERRACE 1966,
Tom Yusir 1987, TUCKER 1992; in press, Tusn 1993, WAR"r1<:a 1999’
WATKINS/CAMPBELL 1986, WHITCOMB 1985, WILHELM/ZACCAGNINI 1993:
WlLl£ELM et al. 1987, W1Li(1NSON/lViATTHEWS eds. 1989, ‘WILKINSON/TUCKER 1995.
Figs. 1-8 on pp. 118-126.
inn
*_
' _M_r‘ _g_

1 18 Md ‘QA s yH_d
TM HM _m S
TM N _mE V __“B C0 M WS M8 I 1 19

E+}
YH
_‘M
)IW_>Y‘v>H
‘ll‘
H“IuM‘
,M\__>__m\"¥H_vll
\‘_IflHY’{_HuIw_>MI_\H$&5
2%‘
_N\‘I‘\\Y1
IL J’
fih"’n!v_>,HIw“‘_¢HMvIMy
Y_\/“__»'_"H>_kv\“m__l‘H_V>___$H_
'‘x \:9
‘\1J‘
_“¢B‘"H_MIv(>£nh‘\|fl“_uW,vgybH_“7"i>xlfiH_.uv'!4“_@_vuI‘_V5(HI“_"y §u_vH_l Ih‘\
_“Wk
\(’
Jun
vY“"_UIv_R
§I‘L ‘“H” /J_(l_ _vb‘ M_UVh,mg___?xuH“wumqfi§N”WnHMVv_‘hmUHTfi_WQHn_vW_I__fi*>H“_‘\
_Y"KhJw,H_WUv$HflIw#:_‘“>U”WNvmV£“?_‘IfW4wqflMi§_RI
n"“;___
AHqH
_(x
u_m"'V‘“fi_HnNM,IwK_vm“V”Hu"mN>_fi "_u“>|,_FJfl“Hm_v“ _ r_WW\
T%WkE’/"A can_
I- __Lubfik
___é_m_A: _mz _mu
‘EI W,
N_Rh“_3W_

1‘I\‘L
fK‘_W
\\/i
_ fig
\“:36
.
_‘[1
fig
mfimég
M558
fi_“O
mag
RsmEaO_\
_fiA_mE
UmwEQEOZ
mE6_%gfiUSHOmgmCwO_QOw2_mwOH2

\_ _w~_H_J“H'_"_H_‘‘_'Hv¢”_vH“A_Ww-_V‘_7H%Qfi_\3A_ ’H_W\_ I
M_ mh_\_ ____EM £3
MW _d_§_h_’
3_ g_Ov,‘n_uffihflH_wuM_1mh€_ ‘“n_‘vH__
Hu_‘W _ _B°_ _v'|_"v?'_HT_:,___m_‘_ _h_n“‘ ___
__‘5 H‘_'‘_\ ‘_ U"' N__UMONCE ‘m'H“_V"__'> _ deoyH__ m_____,
nxw ‘J’ aaw “Hunumhmmx\_h"I\
_ Lu_gIHm_ _‘ n_V~m_v _ u_?_“ '_ *9
‘\__”§$
\_
_Kflz/“/H___
_\_I2‘_ m'__ HW _i__
xE_c_s;
____’
’__I‘
“____*c_“_‘gr/_O__q____J_|_ N
I
___
”N
__w_____
um‘
"J
/__‘_‘_Iu___
_‘0__
_
‘"1
/_
Q6
I’ M
9%
H“/_ %"_ u_ m_:‘v_‘ _ _ Mgzx)0_‘,_
M5/%"
Pf”)
IWI
__ 3W“
A"“_$%_\8D
___ MOUEEMZ IQ
Om
2“kc
_“HO
SHOMAOE
fig
WC52:2
mgl
moOE_QOOOM05wfiagmfig
2E_N_wfi
PamBwOH>M'_§wm
manna’
_3_o:°___v___m_"“ _I_h W
__v__8_1'
up
_\__D
goo?
x
_!I_‘_H_%_m__
__
_‘.Hy
_‘v_J_~
_~__‘h_:__\_/H_\__'v _J"'H I¢§\‘_¢
'__ \I
3%
MH
___VVn_0_ £___“I__(N__ 982
\€m_ N_o:N_‘fl5:wmO_g__
§wm 4_%
“:2I
j_ii_'
n_’,__h
x_ /M
$1/j
_______9__oxF‘
t_,
iYogaldvh‘ _*I,>_ "_ I ’%‘
N52%_I_M__\V“___\_
m_:"v_’____‘
§‘;_|‘ .A;_o;_:”_Hw_g?____H_gI
;_N_wh_Y
: __£ \_
J
_\__“,_//I
~Mw_y
__4_v“wA J(0\v
_/f __'_ uOou_'
\ \\ o__m
___t _ $H
___"
_to
u3nag“
gP_w___
_Hif
%_I/if
___
_H_'_ .‘> _¢ ___oLw;
__"H_‘___r_":/‘Ir
‘ye
"'___"' ____V__ __ _ _‘'_‘_
_‘\ah
’_E\_\
\_E0\
' ___:_g‘_ _,xi? .\‘
‘I,\ ‘ __
I,’/I\_\If v"_UIf‘xi
J___{u/‘_H-Iv_"_bl_

N
~\_HV“H“"_“‘vH_‘ ,
I, j
U_ NEQQQC
J
_ ‘_ _
8I___"
'‘R
_H
W“
"_(_; “F:
I_ ‘

M" “HI 1h_ 0

‘R\_
J
»_____T
\_r
'_
‘M,
‘1‘‘
_
__W ' \
"_a.
°E‘§$H \

A:£5
Q_mg_<O
Egg EgagH
*
Ir‘
A_3“
O02
_5_:o'E_ _C° _U_ 3_
M£3“
xomG0mgHQ )‘_ gga
2
AiH83m‘mm
“__°re:
2__“‘MixExbezoh
!i_
Ma:
‘ ‘‘
\1%?/
\ A‘
MM ?%fi_
QmgME
fi‘*8x5 /RN“ ‘VNi1 :1‘
_8_S
_“’ ‘
__ Q_ §

4!I_ v
E:
ho
¢~mEP_£02305
W mg_\053
ill‘!-

'___ b_:( lrt’:E__ °g_

‘ta_

*y,,‘If:l

_
WClE6eE‘O_mh_'>

W
502“
x_N
I33“
I MW

gfij _ Av“
\

‘X
I J

0
_
_

J_
/_
_

Hfim
am
_

‘S _

‘"__ L ml 8!

1
_u‘ M
_ W __v‘ _ Qdnpflo
®\Oif_ “gag
gaggw_ __\“_
W __
“\\;..*

\e
“E
mmwwmfi
_“1flgw1_2.‘\\ TM HM r Ifla n _d ‘WA SSy TM TM N ‘m6 V M CW fl WS M6 t I 21

w‘ _\ 9__M4_‘\ N
fil§
m
‘WU;_&W5_§\_ _ _\§
yM
M
O[3_
avi_ ofié
E3
§“EH5 §
\
gag
fir
gnaw_(
M
2
Jk1/_
V6
_ 8‘
_ 8w>"
$13
E3NMEmwgm
' _¢ i _ma“MO
§“gag
Mmugmésfi
88GHw_$o9&2
“EH
2<g|OSH
uOwfinm<®§G§m%_m
‘WE
ma<|O02
QH/ML a
I
_
Ti
Vflly.
5xi
_%_
._ M“
_My
%
~_\\
\
Lil
E1}_Il\M MO
w$23
MO
J“
8E__m
_QgO@
magma
UEHEMS
wfiggm
“E
gafigg EOW
wgumgm
0%
ENEQQNE
Mmf$kIifiLQLLgf%¥gvdxr QM
TL
% _jM/%_ xi
Q|
2\
K_N_
MK.
%___\
_KMg
0&3OPEuwm__W___ §
__§aM:E_
“
H_
2_‘‘_
_ J]‘__
I‘i‘ IIll“
‘
._W
iv_
F“ @3
\
ME@‘_
“M°m___f
gm
£3
gogm“mg
Mogs
mg
MN"Mm"$2
Eis
g%mfiée6uo3g_fioaiwH _\ \\_W

O
‘ agoI
%
\\\\“
é_‘avg\
+\\_\”m\\
N
Q'
H3
“V
M
er
H»
W__\
H
_\
M
___E
__‘:
M
“D
__ __‘
WA W
W
{V
m_ M
‘IIIu
_‘I_iI‘i‘3 V1‘III‘‘I_“‘_
.Ҥ._'
_ _ i‘ W0
_QM
mi W_
A;bJ" _ “_ "| _|_"I|"‘_

x
\‘
\\\\|\ Ahgmgs
gmE8£maU
z$63?
WMOOEU6GO
mE23
_%6\m“Sow
;%O
‘_Z A3
do
$2
$5
"MN“AWE
MoE5<zfim‘D“mg
héMZ“Ma“$2
m

Ex
a
‘
\
H\m
\_\\__‘_y‘
W
_
3'_m_
__\
“lo
MH__a
__
M_M/__,_W
_x_'___|0__W_
w~
\\‘_ ___
Q“
-M_Q
_“ ‘I _‘a W
\
%

IFm

?
J‘
ME‘ _$53M
“\ “NW
.‘ _.\.__‘§“ hflfidma /
W%
:_w

‘ \\w
_ ‘M
‘Hz:

v‘
‘.'n W
H__
I
.‘\
\.°

2
O UlLl_
|. l. ‘|'lI “l

xv“
_3§523
I _E_E96=2
M
/M_W____\
fl!"
If-J_

\
E
A]
33
§\
.A{V
X
\m“
\\\~\-
_

‘
I N‘Q
__

/H9
E
W
__ 1‘
_.,_._,__._,..-......__._...¢. .. It _ - V 77 ___, _ I "V _ _ .._h ,____,,,,“,_,,¢,,____,”,“____,_, __.,

122 The Heartland ofAssyria The Ninevite Countryside 123

N ( 1 2 W ( M 1 iI {( ( /<
“ 3 ( ((( \ 9 4 »[ §
jW

6 \ D
3
1 M 17

§fiAli>
{{ I

5%".
7

i
Y

{»
$5\
in
X \ ( 1 ;
K
24
‘?__...m~m. ..,..?°“‘
25

I
’ ”””””” " W W Fig. 5. Selection of pottery shards from Tc11Abu Dhahir demonstrating
Iron Age II forms. Scale 1:3

-1 B3 I3

Iz_m_______...__.M_WM _,._»~_ N V Hm _
 mvwmnr "W _ """"“““"‘““'"""" *""

124 The Heartland ofAssyria The Ninevite Countryside

___ '—-._

" 13

2 \ J

I7

4
5 ‘l-~-1--»-~5’°‘“ \:/ 20
_ _ ___,_ _ Fig. 6. Sfilection of pottgary shards from Tell Shelgiyya demonstrating

6 (1
1 {
1 _ _
1( ( ____H __3
1

I
Irgn Age II forms. Scale 1:3

I ?
7
2

"T\
Kn n
f jf ¢__€\
"
(( {{{{{{{ 3\ ( ( ( ( %
_ _ _.
» 1:
4 .

n_-_n_”____ \ l

aw
.11.
:1 9
_> }
5 6
*2

?
F
8 LLi
_‘ $1

1:1 \l/
16
Q Scm
5,. »..._|___ J.__.J__A.¢-J

I Fig. 7. Selection of pottery shards from Sch Gubba demonstrating

Iron Age II forms. Scaie 1:3
@ 11 1* e
$

i
 12,6 The Heartland ofAssyria

Graves, Chronology and Ceramics:

Some Considerations on Neo-Assyrian Assur’

I
ARNULF HAUSLEETER
Berlin
\

2 3 Introduction
During the period of scholarly Near Eastern archaeological fieldwork a
s... _____ __ ———————~— 7 —~—~ ' 7' 7 considerable number of sites with burials has been excavated in Iron Age Northern
Mesopotamia. However, in most cases the available archaeological information
consists of fragmentary remarks or the material is only partially published.‘ Where
this is not the case there are questions concerning context and documentation. As a
4 consequence, the manifold archaeological questions on more general aspects, for
example the development of burial customs as a reflection of the role of the buried
individuals within the ancient Near Eastern society in this region, could not be
addressed adequately until now. Additionally, we have to keep in mind the
, / existence of extensive textual evidence of rituals which has to be used when dealing
with this question.’
One of the most interesting sites with Iron Age burials in Northern
Mesopotamia is Assur. At this site a very high number of burials was uncovered
during the excavations of Walter Andrae at the beginning of this century. Of these
graves, around 1,100 were published in 1954 by Arndt Haller, 40 years after
6 fieldwork had come to an end? I-IaIler‘s numbered entries, however, do not refer to
single inhumations but to graves and tombs as constructed burial units. Thus, the
number of buried individuals is much higher than the number of graves and
tombs.‘ Haller attributed 440 of these graves to the Neo-Assyrian periodf which

‘ 1 N * This contribution is based on a paper read at the 2nd round table meeting in Nieborow
(1997) and a paper given at the lst International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient
Near East {ICAANE) in Rome I998. lam indebted to Anthony Green not only for discussion
and additional references but also for correcting my English. Thanks go to Marta Luciani for
criticism and discussion of this contribution. . ‘
I This becomes clearly visible in the--most recent volume on "burial archaeology"
(CAMPBELL/GREEN eds. 1995) where only a few cases from Northern Mesopotamian sites of
the Iron Age arc studied.
2 Cf. the MA-thesis of S. LUNDSTRGM, Untersuchungen zur Funktian akkadischer
Grabinschrfien in den Jenseitsvorstellungen Mesopotamicns (Freie Universitat Berlin,
4-QIv)”!_<‘P§'lYFI(“V\€_*3!47\P<
to E 11 - --~——~ lnstitut ftir Altorientalistik), submitted £999.
3'HA1.LER E954.
0 5cm
4 Cf. HALLER 1954, 4 (table). His sum of 1,082 includes 16 tombs with "Kraggewo'lbe".
. tw.tn._r.__t__¢._J There are, however, only 15 such catalogue entries (1,081). 13 tombs from the catalogue,
though without any remains of their vault, should be added (making 1,094). Finally, there
are the six royal tombs, reaching a total so far as the numbers of the publication are
» Pig, 8. Selection of pottery sherds from Khirbet Karhasan demonstrating concerned, of 1,100. Until there is a final publication of all burials from Assur, any
calculations of the number of excavated graves should be regarded as provisional.
Iron Age II forms. Scale 1:3 5 Two possibly Old Assyrian urns Nr. 664 and 665 (Ass. 14485) should be substractcd from
2
the number of 10 Neo-Assyrian urns in HALLER 1954, 4 (table).
»

i
I e
£1 _ _ W ___,” ~ ___ _ __ _____ _______________T_ _
-1-——----—--—~»~»-~ - - , W.
128 The Heartland ofAssyria
for him was the time between llO0 and 6l2 BC.6 His chronological subdivision of
the Neo-Assyrian period, with a division at the end of Shalmaneser's Ill reign] is,
however, only occasionally mentioned in his publication. Today, the beginning of
the Neo-Assyrian empire is generally set slightly later, during the reign of King
Assurdan II at the end of the 10th century BC. This and other proposed
subdivisions, however, mainly reflect political and historical changes, and do not
\ necessarily represent a marl-zed break within the material culture.“
Another substantial part of the graves at Assur, almost 40%, was described as
not datable or of low interest.° At first this high percentage seems surprising, but it
reflects to a certain extent the archaeological situation at the site itself: disturbed
-_ findspots and burials without grave goods, often robbed or otherwise destroyed,
made dating difficult. Though apparently the result of l~Ialler’s caution, it may also
reflect the working conditions immediately after World War ll, when Haller seems
to have used only part of the archaeological record.
Recently, Mlglus, who had more archive material at his disposal, added not only
previously unknown burials to the number of known graves at Assur but also at
least 165 additional entries to the existing Neo»Assyrian graves.” So far, there are
altogether 605 graves which can be considered Neo~Assyrian in date. However, this
attribution itself as well as the dating within the Neo-Assyrian period, very often
remain open to debate.“ Furthermore, the differentiation between Middle and Neo-
Assyrian as well as between Neo-Assyrian and Post-Assyrian graves at this site has
still to be discussed thoroughly.“
As the term "Iron Age" is concerned, until now there is not more than a general equation of
the Iron Age ll period with what is called "Neo-Assyrian" in North(east)ern Mesopotamia:
HAUSLEl'i‘ER 1997, 273, note 4; BERNBECK 1993, 120. '
7 HALLER 1954, 5: Early Period: i100-824 BC, Late Period: 824-612 BC.
8 The ceramic sequence of Level II of the excavations carried out by the Free University of
Berlin at Assur (1988/89) seems to cover the later Middle and earlier i\leo~Assyrian period,
as I proposed at the first round table meeting in Heidelberg 1995 (cf. HAUSLE1TER 1995;
1996). Signs of continuity and tradition appear to be visible in the pottery record rather than
a marked break between the Middle and Neo~Assyrian periods. Preliminary study of the
evidence shows that typical late Ned-Assyrian (7th century ac) shapes were found only
4
above the incised limestone slab (cf. l)i'I“rMANN 1990, 160, Abb. 3; LARSEN in preparation). I
I am very grateful to R. Dittmann who has continually provided me with relevant data and
information.
l For similar evidence at Ker-Tukulti-Ninurta, cf. now SCHMIDT in this volume, pp. 6l~90.
1
9 I-IALLER 1954, 4 (table): 397, possibly including several post-Assyrian graves.
'0 MIGLUS 1996, 3'77-4l8. This number includes newly dated entries defined as "nAss"
(112), "nAss'?" (30), "vPrt {vorparrhisch} (nAss‘?)" (1), and "wahrscheinlich/wohl/vermutlich
nAss" (21). A previously unpublished tomb of limestone (Ass. 12738) dated as
"wahrscheinlich nAss." but not marked as newly dated should also be added here (Mtows
1996, 189-190, and pets. comm). Altogether 55 entries labelled “nAss or NAss
[nachassyrisch}" (25), "(spat)mAss or (friih)nAss" (27), “woh1 mAss oder nAss“ (1),
"spatestens nAss" (1) are not included here, nor the tomb of baked bricks called simply as
A
s
"Assyrian" (1).
" Cf. MOFIDI NASRABADI 1999, 81 who defines “etwa 582" graves as neo~Assyrian. Tombs
are treated separately (pp. 146-155).
12 Cf. GREEN, this volume, p. 94, n. 18; see also p. 115-»l 16.
.. .. A
-.-~ . ___,
Graves, Chronology, Ceramics: Assur 129
A multiperiod and overall history of burial customs in Assn: based on the
complete record has still to be written. Here some results of a reexamination of
some 200 graves from the Neo-Assyrian period will be discussed.“ This number
represents almost one-third of the total amount of Neo-Assyrian graves presently
known at Assur.
The goals of this study were, firstly, the elaboration of a chronology of the
graves at the site and, secondly, a closer examination of the ceramic evidence.
One of the main reasons for this approach was that pottery is the most common
of the grave goods in Neo~Assyrian burials at the site. Furthermore, it is also the
only group of material which could be studied in the Vorderasiatisches Museum
without the need of intensive restoration work." This, for example, is still
necessary for the majority of the metal finds from these graves.
Another rather convenient aspect is that numerous sites in Northern
Mesopotamia offer comparable and mostly datable ceramic material from the Neo-
Assyrian period, though in most cases from a different functional context and still
without clear sequence throughout the Neo~Assyrian period. However, the
examination ofa single, albeit large and well represented, group of funerary gifts“
should not lead us to over-generalise our results and interpretation.
It should be stressed that a one-track approach is no substitution for the
reexamination of the full assemblages within these burials. it is to be expected that
further evidence especially for the graves will come to light in the course of the
Assur Project of the Vorderasiatisches Museum and the Deutsche Orient-
Gesellschaft in Berlin.“
In the present contribution the different types and locations of graves are first
discussed. This is followed by an examination of the dating methods, leading to the
chronological attribution of the Neo-Assyrian graves at Assur. The third part deals
with some typical ceramic assemblages of the earlier and later Neo-Assyrian
period. However, we do not want to focus on external comparisons with regard to
the pottery, but rather than to have a close look at the development within the site of
Assur, mainly based on stratigraphic results. A final part of our contribution deals
with aspects of the composition of pottery and other grave goods in the Neo»
Assyrian graves. - _
'3 HAUSLEITER 1996. Cf. the recent study of MOFIDI NASRABAD1 1999 based, however, on the
published record.
4 I would like to express my warmest thanks to Evelyn Klengel-Brandt, former Director of
the Vorderasiatisches Museum in Berlin.
*5 in our contribution we use "funerary gifts" or "grave goods" as a general term which does
not necessarily exclude other and more specific designations of objects relating to burial
contexts; for a recent discussion cf., e.g., MEYER 1998, 46; cf. Bonitrz/Nov/S14/Onrrtat eds.
in press. Posronre 1980, 7'7 (with further discussion) distinguishes between a) personal
ornaments etc, inseparable from the body; b) possessions peculiar to the individual (such as
cylinder seal, toilet set, and perhaps a weapon or two); c) possessions intended for the use of
the individual, but not necessarily peculiar to him or her during life; d) food and drink
offerings and their containers (for the deceased's consumption); e) ditto (for the consumption
of others). ,.
“ ct. RENGER i997; Hausan, n.d.
-¢.---'-9------M -.. it-9-.,... 7." ..._,;_, _ ...__..,,,,, V ___

139 The Heartland ofAssyria Graves, Chronology, Ceramics: Assur 131

of the corpus.“ A general study on Neo-Assyrian grave types including their

I. Graves chronological development is yet to be done.”
Types ofgraves Location
The buriais at Assur are almost exclusively inhurnations, whereas cremation occurs Most of the graves and tombs were discovered in private houses. According to the
only a few times. As regards the attribution of individual buriais to burial units, it conventional interpretation, they were buried under the floor (when the house was
has already been stated that several of the 605 "graves" (Gréiber) contained remains in use), or often in so~ca1led grave or tomb rooms?“ However, because of the lack
\
of more than one skeleton, while, on the other hand, there are "tombs" (Gritfle) of clarity over the exact stratigraphic position of the graves, it is not always clear to
with remains of only one individual (most of them, however, contained the remains which building period the grave pit belongs. Though it was noted that "cine
of more than one individuai). Where there was no division into compartments datierre [my italics] Bestattung liefert den terminus ante quem ftir die Schicht, in
within the tomb, the earlier burials were put aside or placed in a corner in order to welche sie eingebettet ist",” it remains difficult to define the moment at which the
»~
give space for the later corpses. This way of using tombs extended possibly over burial was dug if there are no means of dating.
more than one generation." However, it remains very difficult to attribute specific Another group of graves was found inside or immediately outside former
assemblages of funerary gifts to individual burials within these tombs, even if the temples and palaces after they had partly or entirely gone out of use. A considerable
recovered material sometimes shows visible chronological differences. The state of number of graves were found on top of (Binnenwall), or close to, the city walls
preservation and recording methods do not allow the reassembly of individual sets (Binnem and Aufienwall) which were constructed and substantially renovated in the
of funerary gifts. 9th century BC by Sha1maneserIII.”" Some of them were again found inside houses,
As regards the quantitative representation of burial types (Fig. 1), most while others had no connection with architectural ground-plans. These latter graves
prominent among the graves are the sarcophagoi and the "sherd graves" - burials seem, therefore, to differ from the usual custom of burial practice inside houses.”
covered with the sherds of big jars - both with 30%. Jar and double urn graves
II. Chronology
Tombs Earth Graves Stratigraphic dating
Composite Graves 8% 8% Stratigraphical observations at Assur were mostly connected with the sequence of
8% single architectural units, such as, e.g., the temples of istar. In his study on the
--e;;,\ .‘ .'.E15:}:;1E:1:E:E:5:3:5:}:5;;3:5:;:;:;:;:;:;:;;;.;.;.;.;._.,.,
<
<
-.-:~:»:=:=:¢E=E="I‘E=E=5=i=E1:=:-.-.“' -'
- vré:E5E55?§§5@5535E5£5E5Ei 5Ei§§éi£55ii5§5E52;E5E;£; = tés». ii»Et5;ta;;z;a;:;s;s;a;z;z;s;§t;s;z:z:1--'
151E=EIiiitEIiiE15Ii1E=EfiIE15¢*=EIE=i=E=i=i=E1E=E=""' excavated parts of the living quarters and the test trenches of Assur, Miglus made a
""~=-=-f:1:=:1:=:;§rn;:3:5:;:5:§a5:§s5E5=;:=,,I_
3'99, ‘ ,11;:$5:522;F33$5;E523E;E5Z;E;E;E:£;Eg5g£;E;5;£;£;.1.,.;..
IE1E11¢‘I111Y1:111:=:1:15:151:1:15¢E1EIEIE=EI51EIEiE1;I:¢:=:-:-:-i.‘""7">1'11=:=!1:=5$:=:=E1:-:-.-. “y4’$*”/ »<
{kl
-=1>1*r1r¢r1:1:1:Yr1§I11:¢:1:1:1:I:=:1:I:=:1:1:f:1:=:I:1:=:1:121:15 151:‘-:~. substantial step towards the development of a broader stratigraphical understanding
E=2=E5;E£E53$5;E53{E3E53gigE5335355555353E555E1555=E1E=5:5:E:5:E:E:5:;§§:5:§5§E;:£:{:§:-;:;:;. . .-1=1=E555;$53553555555555E;E55£55K553553535E555£35E55352553555§E¢E1E;3=E=i=E=:;15:;:r :; : ; ;:; ,._ 531°" GTQVBS
of the site aside from the large building complexes. He recognised two main periods
* K :35
-"'“‘2:=2:.;.;.;.;,;.;.;,;.;.;.;.;.;.;.g.;.;.;.-.-.~.¢.-M-.~,4.-1>1-.t.~:;:;:;:;:;;;:;:;:;;;;;;;;;;;;;:;;;;»'
i=2=2:is5252:;Ea?252fa?212E212?292Pati=EItE1515at=2=2:2:2=at=2:2:2=5:2:2is=z=2:zisi2Ez€:i2izisE:¥=*"
.-L-3'2-L-1»!-I-$24-1»!-I-I-1»Z-I~:-Q1-;-:5;3:1;1;3;?;§'!;$;§;7*l~1'I*i~I'I‘I-I-H-11I~i-!iZ~I'i~2~I~‘ =-t=._.'=="-_-_.'I;Z;!;‘-\__
.~ 1'"1'=:1: :2:1: 12:‘2'<‘IT-I4'2-I-I-2-7'2-E7-Z-I-I-I'2-I-1'2'J'I‘I-2'2-I-2-Z-I-2-Z-I
-\;._ _ _ \‘~~§§,1~.-._._
:2:22::E2?25:‘"-:-:-1;;;:;:;;;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;;;:;:;:;:;:;:;
72555:52%;E;Be?5E;52%5EaE:%:E:i:¥2i:E:%2Ezi:E2E of private domestic architecture at Neo-Assyrian Assur, according to building
l - t qt »\_
< ;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:§1;:;:§:§:§:--'
.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.-
}:§:§:§:§:§:§:§:§:§:§:!*‘
:_';.;'
~ §‘\'*\
w. ~~.~,\_‘-- t\
""3'11111:5CZ:§:}:§:§:E:§:§:§:}:?:j:
3.;,_I_ ~,;\1.;.;-.;._ -
"~:;.§:E1;:;¢§.j:§:;t‘:§:¢&:Zz?1§i'1'i"" V-:’.':i;Y1»:
technique and architectonic structure. Those periods are linked to three
s ;-;;.¢.¢.;.;.;.;.- '1-;-;.\---~‘ , _._,._.;.;.g;;.;:;:g:;.;£ §;:;:;:;:;:;§;
1===111==5i:-:.:-;1;;.;.;.;
?5E5E5455553555i,_.;.;,;,;.1.;.;.1.;<<.;.;44.;4.=¢:;:;:;:;g:»:e>>:;-m:
§&5€55355555E5E555£53555253555551E15£1515=51E=£=E1E=2=51Z=l=BE1=5E12151212123513151513155213¢5=* =15=5=5l5E5E55i15:1;
5E=51515=““‘¢‘< chronological phases of development (Fig. 2).“ .
:-:-:t:-:-:-:-:-:t:-:-:-:-:-:-:~:I:i:=:I:I:-:->1-:.
_ , , _ _, """":Q1‘PE':‘:'i'1‘:':':‘:III:Y:*:*I|:|:r:\:|:>:n:n:n:n:nj::1:|1t:.:.1-E-:,::.1.'.{.1::.:.[.'::.:,:I::\::::-‘:::[:‘:':':‘:':‘:'.
"“‘:1;i:1;:-:-:;
--:;:;. -1$5;-:<:,¢;;<;.;.;.;4.;.;.;.;:;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.¢:¢.;:-:;g:;:-32+:
I'1:7:?:1:1:1:1:5:1:1:I11:1:1:1:1:¢:¢:1:¢:?:I:¢:1ri;=:1t:-2:11:-:-1»:-:-:-:-0 -:-:1:-:-:-1' :<:1:-:<:-:':1:-;':I:-:':I:=1¢:I:i:5:1 , __ ,
:~1-:-:-1-:4-1-:-:-1-:-;-:;:;:;:;:-:-i-:-:-:-:;:-:
I.1 1» 1» a a an \ , .¢ .¢ , 1* .0 1-:4I-1v:7:5:!:3:i:7:-15:1it-.l:1:1'-'
;.;..
5 _;.-_;_-;-3;;5-gs<3-;4.;.;.;,>;,;.;,;g.;.;,;.;,;,;r;.;.;. 1 ;.;,;.;.;:§:§:§:E:1:1t=r!-=-'-’-‘
:~:2-itF:-xit5-.2¥:1:i:El:1:ki:1:~.i:ltI:1:i:t1:it§i ‘\ ‘'‘
Saroophagoi
»
iii
39% Jar I Double Um Back-graves Comparative calculations of the data collected by MOFIDI NASRABAIJI l999 {with
Graves ° discussion HAt,LER‘s typology of gravesbn pp. 73-81) come to almost identicai results.
9% “' ct. BAKER 1995, 214, Fig. 25 .4 for NeovBabyionian sarcophagoi. Mor=in1NAsRAem31 1999
(cf. p. 73) does not discuss the chronology of the Neo-Assyrian graves.
Fig. I: Percentages of "grave" and "tomb" types at Assur during the Neo~Assyrian
2“ MOFIDINASRABAD1 1996 mentioned the possibility of burials within ruined buildings at
.~w ./-»—,~.t»-sFmQ,-.s M-.
period
Assur; see, however, PEDERSEN 1992, 163464. For burials within a (partly?) ruined building
"at Tell Knedij see K1.aNoaL-BRANDT ct al. E997, 68; 1998, 78 (cf. 1996, 41-42).
55
3:
1! 2‘ Miows 1996,50.
’»
make up only 9%. Similarly poorly represented are simple earth graves and 22 Cf. ANDRAE 1913, 4-7, and Amounts 1977, 24»28; 201-211. Mono! NA-SARABADI 1999, 83
composite graves (each 8%). Brick covered graves make up 7%. "Tombs" form 8% underlines the high presence of sarcophagoi of the type "zweiteiliger Wannensarkophag"
near the western gates of the city wall.
t gs ——~~ - -A i 23 For general remarks on the distribution of Neo-Assyrian grave types within the city area
~ n Cf. MOFIDI NASRABADI 1999, 81-83 with Tab. 2 and 3. Earth graves and sherd graves cf. MOFIDI Nasnntmor £999, 83.
1.
were the preferred place for single inhumations, whereas sarcophagoi often contained 2“ MIGLUS 1996, 59-61. Earlier, SLJRENHAGEN/RENGER 1982 studied a very limited area
several subsequent inhurnations. within the northern part of the city.

. ,,.,,,,, .. ..__.;TT,__,T_, , ,,,_ _ _.___ _

- .. .. -.
 _ — — W * ’ " ' """" W

132 The Heartland ofAssyria Graves, Chronology, Ceramics: Assur ‘E33

Dated clay tablets from private archives and other inscriptions

Period Phase?-5 5 Centuries Architectural Characteristics
A total of 6 libraries and 30 archives” with cponym-dated tablets have been found
I 1 10th-9th century BC No visible break between MA and NA on the floors of private houses at Assur. The chronological range covers the period
architecture. No complete ground-plan between the middle of the 8th and the end of the 7th centuries, the majority dating
preserved. Apparently rather large to the second half of the 7th century BC (post-canonical period). Graves or tombs
‘ rooms.
are very often found under the floors of such private houses. In the Nco-Assyrian
'\ ‘ ll 2 Post-Shalrnaneser lll I 8th Large and regularly constructed period there are scvcrai cases with a possible chronological relationship between
1 century BC houses, carefully founded. graves or tombs and archives.“ Indeed, Pedorsén and others, connecting burials
l
‘ 3 End of Blh /7th centuw BC Small houses, not very carefully with individuals mentioned in texts which have been found above the tombs, have
constructed. Only a few large and argued for more than a merely chronological relationship between archives and
-
i representative buildings. tombs.”
Returning to the question of chronology, we can say that Nco-Assyrian private
Fig. 2: Development of private house architecture at Assur during the Nee-Assyrizm archives associated with houses and/or graves form a relevant factor for a more
period (after MIGLUS 1996, S9451)
refined dating of the archaeological context of the burials themselves. In the bottcr
Though the general development seems clear, the reconstruction of the process of
cases the nature of this relationship can be described as providing a terminus ante
qtrem; in other cases there is only a loosc connection, if any at all. Strictly speaking,
stratification of deposits and the sequence of superimposed layers and architectural
the relationship itself between archives and graves has to be considered as a
units remains very complex at this site: centuries of settlement within a limited
space have resulted in continuous construction and destruction of buildings or units stratigraphical one. '
and very often the associated rcmoval of previous structures.” A terminus post quem relation exists also for many graves and tombs containing
Nevertheless, if we accept a close relationship between houses and graves, a roused stamped bricks from various buildings of Assyrian kings (Assurnasirpal II,
general chronology for most of the Neo-Assyrian burials is possible. However, it Shalmancscr III, Sargon II and others), thus delimiting their date of construction.
has to be kept in mind that reexamination of stratigraphy is only one possible way As tombs were in use much longer than graves, the relevance of reused bricks is
to improve the chronological understanding of a burial place.” As far as Assur is restricted to the date of construction of the relevant tombs, rather than to their
concerned, the recognition by Miglus of ‘horizons of layers‘ (Schichtenhorizonre) entire contents, as could be shown for Ass. U190 (tomb no. 30).”
provides us with useful information on the stratgraphic setting of parts of the site. Finally, it might be added that graves which contained the remains of Aramaic
in other places, stratigraphic relationships can be defined less precisely. On tho inscriptions should not necessarily be excluded from the Neo-Assyrian period.“
i
Binnenwall there is a general terminus post quem relation to the time of its
4 Grave goods andfunerary gifts: the "smallfinds”
I
construction by Shalmancscr III. it seems, however, that the wall itself wont out of
KI use more than a century later, during the late 8th or early 7th century BC. A further important element for the dating of Neo-Assyrian graves and tombs is the
I
Therefore, the many private houses situated on top of the inner city wall can be grave goods or other parts of the personal equipment of the buried individual”,
\
dated as late as the "lth century BC.”
Finally, the discovery of a potter's kiln under the southern city wall (lAl5V) ~
thus prcdating Shalmanescr III - has provided us with a limited quantity of 3° PE1)eRsENl998, 234443. - . . - '
» 2
}
t stratified pottery vessels. These vessels couicl date to anytime between the 3‘ Haustsmtn 1996. At least 15 graves and tombs were found in association or close to
foundation of the southern city and the construction of the city wall of Shalmancser Neo-Assyrian private archives. Two among them seem to have no visible relationship, while
III. Furthermore, they come from a context different from the burials.” in four other cases of them they could belong together.
32 Psonnssu 1992 (to be added to MIGLUS 1996, 203-204 and 397 (Ass. 14630)).
33 The most discussed object, a bronze bowl of Assurtaklak, was inscribed. Cf.
Sl'JRENHAGEN/RENGER 1982; for further discussion cf. Boanrvnzn 1984, Muscatuattn 1984,
is These numbers are not explicitly used by Miglus. Kossncx 1987 and PEDDE 1999 The pottery of Ass. 11190 consists of late Neo-Assyrian
1“ ct. Dmnutn 1990, 165. shapes (late 8th/7th century BC) as well as earlier Neo-Assyrian vessels, to be dated
27 For the limits even of a detailed reexamination of stratigraphy for chronological worlc at approximately to the 9th/8th century ac. This, and the high number of skeleton remains,
,1. the Royal Cemetery of Ur cf. POLLOCK 1985, 130 ("one cannot reconstruct plans and sections again supports thc suggestion of the extended use of tomb Ass. 11190.
with the dcgrcc of accuracy that this approach demands"). 3“ HALLER 1954 regularly attributed such burials to the post-Assyrian period; cf., c.g., his
s 28 MIGLUS I996, 60~6i. The presence of only two layers of Nco-Assyrian private houses conclusions on layer Il of tomb 29, Ass. 10231; ibid., 109 (for an Aramaic inscribed shcrd
\
supports his view. This dating might not be considered as valid for graves on top or close to covering the Neo~Assyria.n grave Ass. E0648 cf. PEDERSEN 1989, 166, Fig. 7). It is evident,
the city wall without relation to ground-plans of houses. however, that there was already a strong Aramaic presence within the Assyrian Empire.
*9 Arvonns 1913, 141, Abb. 252 (Ass. 19330), Taf. LX,2. 35 See note 15.

i
i
, Hill/tent University
15 ‘ a Libffl

- .. a
_.-__._..e._i...._-._. . .rm;..__-___.._.____ .- ;—~——.—_<—_;=_~—— — “‘

134 The Heartland ofAssyria Graves, Chronology, Ceramics." Assnr 135

such as seals, fibulae, needles, bronze bowls, jewellery and other _objects.3“ In spite III. Pottery
of the importance for the dating, one has to take into consideration that seals and The greatest quantity of grave goods is represented by pottery vessels. Normally
fibulae were very often precious heirlooms, and thus can be much older than the they are interpreted either as containers for food and drink for the long journey of
burial itself.” Finally, the pottery from graves and tombs itself can be used as a the dead individual to the underworld; though they might also have contained some
chronological indicator. In the course of the present study, however, pottery has of the presents for the gods of the underworld.“ As to their possible contents, one
been used only as secondary reference material, because our aim Was the can only refer to published texts, because thus far no micro-analyses of the inside of
construction of a pottery chronology based on stratigraphic and contextual these vessels have been carried out." In a few cases remains of grain have been
evidence.” found. In other cases the position of a vessel, usually a bowl close to the mouth of
the dead corps indicated its function as a drinking vessel.”
Based on the three main arguments just discussed, the chronological position of
-»_ 204 graves and tombs at Assur has been reexamined. Naturally, the set of 1. Potteryfrom graves dated to the earlier Neo-Assyrian period
conditions as relating to the individual graves or tombs differs from one to the
Graves and pottery dated to this period correspond approximately to the first part of
other. This results in a quite differentiated picture for the Neo-Assyrian period (Fig.
Miglus' phase II (see Fig. 2: "period 2") covering the later part of the 9th century
3). Clearly recognisable is the majority of graves. to be dated to the late 8th 7th
and the first hail’ of the 8th century BC.
centuries BC, whereas graves or tombs from earlier 1l'1 the Neo~Assyr1an perio are
Tomb Ass. 10907 (no. 66; see Fig. 4) belongs to an architectural complex in the
less well represented.” '
1 1 northwestern part of the city built sometime after the middle of the 9th century.“
‘:;‘fw":g $0111-Qlh 4 Reused bricks of Assurnasirpai Ii provide us with a terminus post quem for its
1 1 c Qthldth 5
3 ?“m_mm ls‘ ha" gm 7th c oblecls (gmiwm construction ~ as in the case of Ass. ll E90. in the same stratigraphicai and
?|h and later 6 3 3 3 architectural context as Ass. 10907 and Ass. 11190 was discovered another tomb
c 1uu»stn 3 late 9lhIB!b 2
13
2nd hail “llh
TU§Ip05l~l\55. Qlhqmji _;)°st_S|m I", em 1
me em
_ fllh-Til! u
posl Sim Iii
with pottery finds (Ass. 11917).
1t
cm-1m 8.

in
. $1331’?-'r'?’fT/’,"".-'-"i”¢4?:¢‘.'//A G’ /V
we ~13‘t':"1,1,l§il£¥"'<5ilr-:*¢,:;'.< _ ‘ Q51.‘
78: n- 7 an -ru----%|'e"~~ - -- '.'§":‘mFii’~Li.’"7“i --"'-'~"-?~""‘fi$Eili‘7‘\'\
I.¢_'£-11:---i—=""-‘i. i %|i*l‘“~“‘h§>\;*-\§ _\l_
_;- ,» .-4'/1;?) ’\_ i: "J .

h~ 1 2-”“".""-"2'-'”'E€‘A /4 -:_..»n=.~_==-:=,,.__.,__.>_,.>,
i
\\ '24"-‘$-if‘-E’ I~ar
.3. §§
ll:~.
"- ,1 -'-5.?‘-‘"*-----' Zseai-—_.=.-=;-:.~ ...i.'-2< /9/7,!-"Ix:
_ , ,.,,,_,.,, ,/j
’/i
W/>»/;~'" :':*z:a;'E:.:-
.
/,..1..-.- . -.',1_-I
. _. W, z / /
/2

“wan”-m * 0ll£R$mW/71' B->4. A

rem/)~7m 400 II x Q In

mu ,9
(Iota Blhifllh 8 4° _ Fig. 4: Tomb Ass. 10907 (after HALLER 1954, 162, Fig. 180)
with rm c. objects we smmm llgiibgixlgh

Fig.3: Chronological range of 20¢ graves from Assur during the Neo-Assyrian In Ass. 10907 two inhumations were found. T_o the left was a rectangular hole in
r
period the shape of a sarcophagus surroundedwith bricks. To the right some of the bricks
ll

3° Study of the Middle Assyrian jewellery from tomb 45 by R.-B. Wartke shows the
difficulties of identifying and attributing single objects to specific grave contexts. On Neo-
ASSyl'i2l.B jewellery from graves at Assur, cf. JAKOB-ROST 1962. The recognition dunng
analysis of cloth and other objects made of perishable material (leather, textile, wood, etc.)
may be recalled. , itself) rather than ‘burial gifts‘. The sources quoted by Tsu1<iMoT0 "sprechen dafiir, dali (...)
37 On fibulae from Assur cf. now PEDDE 1999. I would like to thank F. Pedde for fruitful
discussion. _ _
) 38 Cf. note 27; a chronology of the graves of Assur by means of pottery seriation (cf.
1
Pot.t.oc2< 1985 130-135) can serve as a control mechanism of the results achieved in the
A
s course of this study.
29 The phsnomenon Qf a wide chronological range of graves and tombs caused by lack of
i chronological evidence corresponds to Morcmur Bouncossrs observations (cf. hlS pottery
groups B, C and E, this volume, p. 209, Tab. l).
1
»
“° See Tsuiomoro 1985, 107; 229 and, e.g., also Posro/we I980, BOLT‘/GREEN in press,
PEINGLASE 1995, 192-194; cf. BLACK/GREEN 1992, 27-28; 58-62; 180482. It remains
uncertain whether at least some of the vessels and objects found inside tombs (and graves?)
are remains of ritual activities on the occasion of a kispum ritual (after the burial procedure
kispLt(m) minclestens in der neuassyr. Zeit am wirklichen Grab veranstaltet wurde" (ibid.
109). Tombs had to be 1'6~0pe11Cl when additional corpses were placed there.
4' This field remains to be explored in the course of the Assur Project. As a substantial part
of the pottery from Assur is completely preserved one should not exclude results from a
chemical-physical analysis; cf., e.g., MCGOVBRN/MICHEL 1996.
‘*2 For so burials at Tell Abu smarts (and generally) cf. POSTGATE 1920, 7"/-78; see also
BOLT/GREEN in press.
43 Suaaunnosu/Ramona 1982, MIGLUS 1996, 75-76.

*7 _ _ _ I lfl _ ”” "in
 Y: _ V _ A _V _ _____ , V _ ... _ __..- ~-. W

136 The Heartland 0fAssyria Graves, Chronology, Ceramics: Assur 137

had been taken away before the body was buried, presumably indicative of a
chronological distinction between the two inhumations.
The total number of ceramic vessels recovered in tomb Ass. 10907 is 18, many
of them depicted on Fig. 5. The other objects consisted of modest items of silver
jewellery and some stone beads.
»---l
part of the Neo-Assyrian period, and do not occur any more in late Neo-Assyrian
contexts. In contrast, small bowls, as shown in Fig. 5:4-5, seem to continue until
the later part of the Neo-Assyrian period (8th-7th centuries BC).
A second characteristic group of earlier Neo-Assyrian vessels consists of ovoid
up to almost globular jars with a short neck and button base (Fig. 5:840). The rim
is mostly everted and shows a slim triangular profile. On the shoulder a thin rib is
regularly to be found. Among the large jars, the one with a conical neck (Fig. 5:2)
also indicates an earlier date.

3 Ass. 10907111

ans
4 Ass. musu
4 Ass. 10901:,

I Ass-111-Mu 2, A55, nzasis

1 ,,,_,,_ N997” Z Ass. I090’-Tb 5 5“ 1"9°7“

\ \\\ $> 5 As. H113:

e‘**?/,.%
“”
///,4
4/h

3 Au. 11236:
6 Am 19997] 7 Ass. 1099‘lk
cm 6 Q1194} Um

ii Fig. 6 Earlier Neo~Assyrian -pottery from graves at Assur (I~4: Ass. 11286, 5: Ass.
ll
ll 14123; HAUSLEITER 1996, Taf. X) and from Qasrij Cliff (6: CURTIS 1989, Fig.
14, no. 89)
ifIE
ii
The double»-urn grave (Kapselgrab) Ass. 11286 contains a single inhumation. It
ii was found under the northeastern street of the large living quarter in the NW part
:1
of the city. Together with the stratigraphical position of the grave the orientation of
the ground-plan of the lower building differed from the overlaying 7th century BC
.s,...i.,.>.,i. structures.“ In this grave several globular shaped jars were found, as shown by a
sketch drawing by Haller (Fig. 6:132). They are identical to the jars mentioned
720 cm 9 ASMWDVD 10 Ass. rosund " above in tomb Ass. 10907 (Fig. 5:840). Again, a number of zriiddleasized deep
w=>.~:<'r.v~'-r<.>-r/~1
bowls are recorded. This time, however, there is a rounded carination marked by a
rib. The rim tends sharply towards the inside (Fig. 614).“ Another similar example
Fig. 5 Earlier Neo-Assyrian pottery from tomb Ass. 10907 (HAUSLEITER 1996, Tat‘.
X-XI) was glazed. This type of bowl occurs also in grave Ass. 14123 (Fig. 6:5) which was
3
found in the test trench 81 and should be dated sometime after Shalmaneser III
1
is
As for the pottery, medium~sized deep bowls (diam. c. 16.5 cm) with arather thick because of the presence of a stamped brick bearing that king's name close to the
i
bottom and ringabase (Fig. 5:6-7) are among the characteristic shapes of this tomb. child burial. The presence of this shape in earlier Neo-Assyrian graves could
i

In the centre of the base a high concentration of chaff could be observed which
4
1. served to avoid breaks in the clay during the process of drying and firing. Another
M HALLER 1954, 48, PREUSSER 1954, Taf.'l6 ("l 1280"), MIOLUS 1996, 384; Plans 3 (no. 65)
shape is characterised by its even body line, a C3.I'1l'1&[i0l'i and a rim folded towards
T and 98, where the underlying building is visible.
the outside and slightly flattened (Fig. 5:3). These bowls appear during the earlier ‘*5 Fig. 6:3 should have the same shape.
l
 138 The Heartland 0fAssyria Graves, Chronology, Ceramics: Assur £39

confirm the proposed dating of Qasrij Cliff (8th or 9th century BC“), where a
similar fragment (Fig. 6:6) has been found.”
Another example for Neo(?)‘“ -Assyrian pottery stratigraphically clearly
predating the period of the construction of the Binnenwall of Shalmaneser III are
some beakers from a potter's kiln at the southern end of the lower town.” They are
made of a fine ware of greyish clay without any visible traces of chaff. Additionally,
\
some small jars and a bowl have been found but they are not depicted here. The
beakers, are generally U-shaped. The small examples (Fig. 7:1-2) show a slightly
everted rim and a slightly curved profile, as does a larger variant (Fig. 7:3). Other
examples of a similar size (Fig. 7:4-5) have a regular body line. So far unique is
s-_ Fig. 7'25, the tallest beaker of this group. Common to all these beakers are their
bases. They do not have a button base as is usual during the later Neo-Assyrian
period but » with the exception of Fig. 7:2 - have flat bases.
increasingly to a refinement in the treatment of raw materials and production
processes."
2. A later Neo-Assyrian assemblage
Stratigraphically, the tomb Ass. 10231 (no. 29) must have been built later than the
time of Shalrnaneser Ill. Its connection with house 81 in the Aujlenhaken as well as
its mostly unpublished finds (seals and fibulae),” however, favour a more precisely
defined dating of the latest inhumation, to the 7th century BC.
If we turn to the pottery vessels of the two burial layers, we can observe that
there are considerable differences from the assemblages discussed above and which
we dated to the earlier Neo-Assyrian period. In Ass. 10231 bowls generally tend to
be shallow. Deep bowls, as seen before, are not among the ceramic repertoire of this
tomb. Small howls, quickly produced (Fig. 8:1, 9) were often used as lamps.
Widespread are small bowls with a slight carination and thickened rim
surrounded by an external rib (Fig. 8:3-5). Often the rib is interrupted two times
(for several centimeters) at two-points exactly corresponding to each other (see Fig.
8:4). Flat bowls (diam. c. 18-22 cm) with narrow standring or flattened bottom

@u®@@ .
(Fig. 8:7-8, 9:2) occur within Ass. 10231. Among the jars (Fig. 8:11; 9:3»~5, 8-9)
the presence of thin-walled necked jars should be mentioned. The bottoms of the

Fig. 7: Pottery from a potter's kiln (Ass. 19330} (flsusmrren 1996, Tat’. CVIII, 36- 1 Mr-10331? 2 Ass. tozsru 9 A55. 10131,
é
41)
t0 - 20 cm left
at Summing up, an earlier Neo-Assyrian date can be proposed for the pottery types
r presented above (Figs 5-6; the beakers in Fig. '7 could date even earlier). It is not
yet clear whether they, precisely, date to the late 9th or the early 8th century, an
exact attribution of these pieces to a single century, still less a smaller time~span,
has not yet been achieved. The evidence of stratigraphy, epigraphic finds anti, 88 3 Ass. mam 6 Me 11113111 I0 10 '\~“- “"3"”
far as tombs are concerned, the number of burials as well as, finally, the pottery
seem for the moment to support the proposed dating.
, .
It seems possible that in a traditional place as Assur, an earlier (9th century BC)
date is more probable for vessels with heavy chaff temper - often in connection with
a rather limited elaboration of the shape - as refers to all those vessels made of a 4 )\$$.llIZ31l' V H 7 Ass.1023Iy
"common ware". This observation could serve to confirm the interpretation made
during surveys and excavations in rural Assyriam but implies that the conditions l

were the same. During the 8th century the need for larger quantities of pottery led _ 5
l
I g
,......_...,.,..,,ss,r,_n..
2

5 Ass. iozau 8 M,-. 101311 11 Ass. 19231»,

_»--~;>-14—¢.',1w=f~S-"*t;.¢~,'Y-:7‘=A,vt-wXM%se3t.“
K ‘*6 CURTIS £989, 1'7~20; BERNBECK 1993, 117. _
9
/ 4’ cr. GREEN, this volume, p. 9'1. Fig. 8: Late Neo-Assyrian pottery from tomb Ass. 10231, first burial layer
‘*3 For a similar fragment of a thin-walled beaker from Kar»TulcuEti-Ninurta made of fine (HAUSLEITER 1996, Tat’. XVI)
J
Q.
.~< clay cf. SCHMIDT, this volume, p. 82, Abb. 321,31 (Bauphase 1, "mittelassyrisch").
"9 See note 28.
5‘) BERNBECK 1993, 100, Tab. 48-49; WILKINSON/TUCKER 1995, 200, Fig. 59, Cuarts 1989. 5‘ cr. BERNBECK 1993, l00,'1"ab. 4s~49.
52; cf. GREEN, this volume, pp. 115-I16. 5* cr. turner 1954. 108-109; cf. Penna 1999.

1;-
_ .. at
 w___- V -- --- ,_ W,’ —--———————» __:f_~:<_ _ A - ‘~~ ~ ' """'”"""'“"'“"'“"'“"”‘“'”" " M“

140 The Heartland ofAssyria Graves, Chronology, Ceramics: Assur 141

jars differ from flattened variants to "Wackelboden"—shapes, sometimes

intentionally modelled (Fig. 9:6 and 9:8).
It is interesting that in Ass. 10231 (with its stratigraphic evidence for a post-9th
century construction combined with a 7th century dating by "small finds") the
1 Ass. l023l|n 2 A5“ 1923"’
potteiy repertoire shows differences to those vessels from tombs dated to the early
Neo-Assyrian period. If we look at external comparable material, we recognise the
\
¢ G
presence of standard late-Neo-Assyrian types in Ass. 10231 well represented in the
Assyrian heartland (Kalhu/Nimrod) as well as in the provinces (Tell Ahrnar Area
/‘I
rap,’
C), both to be dated to the 7th century BC.”
/IlQ."‘
la».
The close parallels of pottery vessels from Ass. 10231 to other dated late Neo-
,.//
~_
1 Assyrian pottery assemblages have not only a chronological significance. They
:1’, show that pottery from graves, houses and pataces do resemble each other in shape
and are not different.

"I0rl/
00¢’;
IV. On the distribution of pottery and other objects within the graves
¢>,_',1: -or”,¢rIV"

~ ."0,I 1. Pottery ' 7

\o
00 Aside from the chronoiogicai implications, the composition of the funerary
-.""~.....
I].
assemblages can he studied in detail. As to the difficulties in attributing grave
we 0-E
d;_.i01.3lu 0,,‘ goods within tombs to single individuals, we decided to work exclusively with
'0
ll,"
single inhurnations which were not robbed or disturbed.“ By this criterion, at total
"""""} 5 Mt. 102314:
‘a of93 graves coutd be reexamined.
1 °jzjoj cm 6 Ass. 10131b

i Vessel shapes represented

311 vessels were recovered altogether (Fig. i0). By calculation, there are 3.3 pots
per inhumation.
4 Ass. 102311» Almost half of the vessels in the graves under study beiong to the morphological
r.
5;
(and also functional) group bottle/jar (group D), ranging from smail bottles to jars
of 20 cm height. Less than a quarter consists of bowls (group A). The third
significant group form necked jars (group C) with 15%. Small pots, sometimes
ii glazed, are represented by 5% (group H). Aii the other groups occur in very small
quantities (B: beakers, E: big jars, F~:Lpotstands, G: wide necked jars, I: lamps).

._,n ._ .,_¢,._; ,. L.. __.i As can be seen, the presence of specific types within the morphological-
functionai classes of shapes shows a rather differentiated picture (Fig. 11). Among
group A (bowls) there is a high percentage of flat bowls with a diameter between 16
8 Ass. llJ2.3ld
v.,5.<., .s 7 Ass. 102311
and 20 cm (A4). They represent almost half the quantity of bowls. Small deep
9 Ass. 102311’ bowis (A2, diam. 9-10 cm) represent one fifth, mediurmsized deep bowls (A3, 15-
as v /// Ia’//@0’ I /%’ ' I 16 cm diam.) make around 14%. All the other groups (Al, A5, A6, A9: one tripod
bowl) are under 10% as well as bowls of unknown shape. Groups A7 (deep bowis
/W/4 , %/ I
~b“\\
,,,.,,/
/1// , with a diameter of more than 20 cm) and A8 (bowls and necked bowls of fine ware)
"““,<~:¢- ~wr*~ &#9 \\\*
\ \ \ \ -\ are not represented in the graves of Assur,
$ \\\\\V\\
' ""I% ”//// """=-., ,_,,,, ,//////I~--.1.114411:////‘I _
~1n
10 Ass.l0231k 11 Ass.lO23lh 12 As»-10231!
4
s
<
Fig. 9: Late Neo-Assyrian pottery from tomb Ass. 10231, second burial layer (after
i
HAUSLEITER 1996, Tat‘. XVI and XVII)
5’ cf. 1AM1Es0N this volume, p. 299, Fig. 111-2, 5, 7, 14; p. 300, Fig. 214; p. 304, Fig. 6:10.
5‘ Cf. MOFIDI NASRABADE 1999, 97.
5

M,,._
_. .... .-. -
 ,__. ~ 4'VF‘4 ..._...s ,_ __ _ . __ ._~__________..._.....___,._.,...,_.,..v,..........,.__._.._»..._.. ......~.»..-....~.,_.».. .. _ Wm _ *_,,,,<,____,_.,.._.__ __,~_ _

142 The Heartland of/lssyria Graves, Chronology, Ceramics: Assur

|

(3..
Lamps 15
Big ‘Ears 0%
0‘, Small pots U"k"°W" Bowie
Wide necked jars 5% 1°/° 23% 1 4 on *
o U‘
j ° "-=-=1=51E13=E=€=5:E=£:E=E=i=£=E=i-1 \ " '~"~ ‘* I - W Ba
I i: _’~' ’<‘/51¢ ’~_‘ -11¢-_.~._.'~.;'_q _'v_ ~'_‘~ _~_ _»'_»_ ‘l).:i:<f.:|:lL.j>jr 2:. /_// 7/ //
6/I
/1 ' \,

.-_.;, 1--ax .-;.._ .~¢-, . ._-.;.,-._.;. -.;_. ._ _.-._.;,¢.

_ -.4_.;.;.; \ gt
" =2'4;-¥s;€~?=t$-1:-$:€$i$<" FY» ->'€‘z¥‘1=*ri‘=>/.‘1'P’<z-=--> ' ~-=- -~=-<-:-:-:-:-1.:-:-<»=¢=E:5=215:?=512:51*=515=21E15=5=E1E=51E13151E1?ri=Er==51E:5=1=E:E=21E1i¢5=£:£:§=E=21£1E=¢=*
120 ~-
'-.j=;-,-
If ¢( ,, M,.=~ W
&(>’;%,~W,-,.1¢~,~,
j: .- 4,, /¢-v/‘$-‘>§-
5. 23Z1Iv'\-'
~IjI;E>.=S'ms“
2~,.=
, ,{sf} (If!.?‘§; ~."Y1=IE551513=2:E1E=51iZ121E12131E12521£;E3i;£=Z=21E3£52;Eg3;£;ig§;E;i;i;Er£:i:Z=3:itE:3:3E1E¢§=E¢£:i=E¢E:i=1r¢.; 5j‘
'~‘ '=‘<=€=..~='»/ltd ,\ t
~*#- tf~*~‘>fr:{’~>">4,¢»\~fsZ.’»fsi=»
§:§:§:{:§:§:;:;._.,‘
b:\:A:>:4:i:V:4:i:1:\:A‘>.' . /,..~ :'<; ._;:=',,~-'1: - .,,,,, .- .- .,;. ~'~?’-:-‘D3$:;:‘.I:-1".1'
:”i .I*-:~' - I“? ff 6 ft’ ~:;$'7_Faeisfi >»<»t
-fl - ;.;.\‘_'-.1'-i:1;§:§:§:§:§:§:$1}:5:5:5:5:§:§:§:3:35:{:5:5:5:5:§:§:§:E:{:3:E:§:§:§:}:{:§:{;f:§:f:§:1:I-I'
Iffll _ 1-wt --4.;i;.;.;.;.;.;.¢.;.:4-:.:-¢-;-;-1-1-:4-1-:-z-;-:~;-;v;~:-:-:-:-:»=' ..-;-:-:~:-:-:~:1:-x‘‘_ Beakers
’\".{-’:‘(/J‘,/“4$\‘:f\':)
.‘--.fi:--,>,.-¢<-¢,4'_$-,3»/;/v.--1-<=’e§f>»<’ -'$-"§’,("$»$,jt=>’ ‘>”'»$/fv&”i’» - >f( ~¢"<'
-fl:-~1.-*c~ r 2',
'--. ~';’¢
~*»~ -:/--<I}!--:-.»-~-:=-,:=:.-:
.- -f»,/:';',;~»;;~ _, _/H 1:-,~- Q‘-w-5
:3,'_,,~, ,3‘/~,{~'/).':.~.,
,,,;_,’
.-- ..ta,
/:7/iv»
J -. --~-:4-:>:-1-~-1-:-;>:~;-1-1+1-:4-1-'~1-:1-z-1+:-='-'-
We,. \'\ \~ s\- -.~\“ '~'\‘\.'~\‘\
o
6/; ..~.
:5:5:3:§:E:}:E:§:§:;:;:;:;:;: ;:;:;:;:;:;¢;:;:;¢;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;;;.;.;.V.,.,M -I-.-.-1+-<1:-:-5;-:-s:~:1::l:-£:1:-:1:-:I:!:¢:$Z5:1$:?$$§i$:I:1.¢>I'-“'1'? ~ ,i-.-.-.4-:-11:1:151:1:1:I:=:1:1:1ti:¥:%i:k=:i:¥:§k¢:l:tI:=:=:¢:1:¥I: ' 100
1:12!:1:§:§:§:§:3:§:§:I:§:3:I :j:§:£:§:?:}:§:§:}:3:§:i:§:§:§:§:§:{:§:§:§:1:§:§:5:§:§:5:§:§:§:§: §:;:;:;:;:~:-;~;¢.-.~.~.'.-.-.~»~»~-V~.»~<-.-.».-.-.~.-.»:--:-:-:-:-:-:=:I:1:?:1: :1:I:l:1:5:1:1:21:1:5:}:3:{:55:35:5:1:;:5:5:55:it153$:I:§:§:§:§:§:=:§:£:1ri: 3‘ '‘
--. i i ?351E15=53E5?=5=E§E=51ii ;E59;S3E§E;E5€5£;E5£5$§E1I'E=E=€'E=E=E=E¢E5E=ErE=E=E=E=E=E=E=£tit=5:E15:55E52ii?i ?i i55E55E555E5?55%E55555E5E555E53$55E52555E35$53E555E5E55?i5%5E5E555E5E5E5E3E5%35 " ‘ D2
"1EEi§i§E§:§:{E§i§:§E§:Z:§:§1E12:515:5:5:2:}IE:Z:5:5:%iE:if:§:§:§1§:§§§:§i§§§:§i§E§:{:5:1:{iiti:{EIE:{E5E5:7:4ii:1:4E1:iEl1=5151Eii i i i Eli15$ii TEEIE5{ii i {5}555{$5§E§1§§li§§§§§E§§E§5EZ1§E 3}5;}§§§§i§:§E51ES:§l§§§1;:55$:51E5:5:{:5tiE15ti:i i521EIiCZIEIi¢E¢EIiiE:E5“
‘ Y‘:52:i:1:1:::1:I:i:i:::i:il::i:::i::::::::l::1 :i:I: :1:1:1:I:1:1:1:1:=:i:1:1:1:1:¢:1:1:1:1:1:3:1:1:I5E15ii Eli1E1ii IE!E1?1:1:ii E1ii iE1:1:1ii:IF:1:7:1xi:1:1Li:i:1ii:1§1:i:i:1:i:i:1Zi: :7:¥:1:1:5:1:=$:1:1:$215:3:1:4:5:1:1:5:7:i$:1:=1=5:=:5;<:1:=:i:¢:=:l:l'="
V-.-is===;¢; ; ; a;s;2;a;:a§;%zis%%F§%i?Ii i tiaszzziai;&;%a%s1:&;%ziz&a%ziz%s%z%s%ai;%:1s%z%z§s%aiziziaiaisisiaiziaEzizi;&z5;%;%aIai2fi iziaiaisisiéili55255255525izi sisisizisisisiziziaiésisisi i i i i i=?=‘=‘*" “"
"‘4'1:¢:1:511:1:4:1:1:411:1;=:i:1:=:?:1' :15;:5:5F:i:511:1:¢1=:=:l:1:1:=1I:1:111:1:=15:1:=:7:1;=:i:¢;!:§ii :F121:51:1‘K’i157:115:11l:1;I:I:1:!:!:1;!:l;!:I:f;!*=:l:1:¢:l:=:I; :3*1:1:1:2:?:1:1S:1:1:1:111:1:21:5:2:{:2:5:EE:§1Z:§:i:§:E:§:=:?'=" ' I 1
" '*'1'='1r=tr1:5rE=3;Z;§;5;5;E;5;2;5;5;Eft523E5555;5; gi;Z552535:555;E:5;E55£55E5555;£55353£55gig5;;35;Z32gigE35;=;Z53Zgégipigigigigigégi 3E5:5233:;:;E=§1?=‘===='4'="""' 80
Bottles and |ars NQ¢|<@¢ jafg
49% 1 5% o1
_- \.
Fig. 10: Pottery shapes represented in Neo-Assyrian graves from Assur 03 O e-- --4 :§:}i§i§:§:§:1 A4 _
:

Whereas beakers (group B) occur only in low quantities, necked jars are better
represented (group C). Most of them (about a half of them) are handsome beakers 401- E5535;
$4
reaching a height of between 9 to c. I4 cm (C2). Small beakers with everted rims
(Ci), similar to "i.s'tikans“ found at Nimrucl, occur only two times among the single A3 tisizizisiz
inhumations at Assur. Necked jars (C3) higher than 15 cm (up to 22 cm) and 555255553555 C2
20 ~~
dimpled "palace ware" beakers (C4) occur in the same quantity (each one fifth of A2
group C).
Smail bottles, often glazed or pottery vessels in the shape of an alabastron (Di),
make more than half of group D. This is also the most represented group of vessels I O 4| .I .\ _.I 523252552513 .I um .5 _.,,, .C ...,. .I .-.E2E2E;E;?: E I I I
within the graves of Assur. Medium-sized jars (D2, with height from 12 to 26 cm) A B C D E F G H E
are less well represented than is group D3, ovoid jars with often cylindrical neck
(D3, with height between 18 and 20 cm). They make a quarter of group D and Fig. I1: Groups of vessel shapes
almost 13% of the vessels from individual graves. Larger jars (D4, height >20 cm
and D5 >30 cm) occur in minimal quantities. '
From the remaining groups (E to I) H need be mentioned. Small pots, often 1
, glazed (H1) are the only vessels belonging to the functional group of "pots" in Neo- 10 11121314‘
B 9 ~ 1~/ or-r 22/
67,9/,,2%l%M’°°°" 1
Assyrian graves. Larger pots or cooking pots are not represented.
, v '~:;;;v_ '1S.§:f‘§'l= h\ \‘;\;. . \ . "~i;...~§;s\i ~:=$L:E:3:-:;.;,_1_.,‘_
As could be shown, small bottles, middle-sized fiat bowls and ovoid jars belong 4 5% n|':':‘:':':‘:>:':‘:Y:':)l-iI:‘:-:I:':V:|V‘l'AIII
to the most represented vessel shapes among the set of ceramic funerary gifts in 1;1;1;:_
%/ ' -\-;-\- - - ' ' "'<-"\"»'-"».-,

Neo-Assyrian graves at Assur. The function "(short term) storage of limited ._ 4.-_.;,;.
.—/,_ 4 <¢ we ,_ ~.» .(vv.V ,_:;
'4». .4 '-:-:~s.>.-':1~:'.\.~+.-:»:.-:-:- "*- "*5" M) "\> ¢*--"“* ‘
=;;,._ ’_,._.'.1.;.;.;.,1.;=1;1;,:;:;5:31;.3:5:5:33:5;=:;:;;;:;:;:;;;:;;;:;:5:55;;5:5:;:r:;;1=¢:;:¢=r;;;I~';¢;;§;7_:;.~.
~ £,‘»;§~§‘<\<§*‘?¢»‘,V' ‘a sis’ ‘ 1:
quantity of food and food consumption" (i.e., serving“) is covered by these groups. _._~_ __ /__-1, _-_;; Z_€_<-
1-I-1--L-. '~'-I'I~I-Z'L~I-I-I~l-1'1-1-Z'I~L-I-I~I-I-I~l-1'1-I-I-I-7-1:1-I-I~L-1+1-I-1-I-I-I~I-I-I-I-I-I72-1:171-"I" ;_:-:;§.'7:-§:;<§:'¢iht-$§'§-:3:-.\35f§2i§.’§'¥{;{~)".¢$;§§;&$}§;“$~ ~2§§§é§Z§$’@_l‘~$fi§»;§-€'~I-
,;§;:;:§;§;:;§;§;:;.,._'-:~:;:1:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:1:5;1;:;:;:;:;1;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:¢:;:;:¢:;:;:;:;;:;:;:»:-' _. “A -.»:-:711:l:371:i:7:i:~
<j%2;P\
54252‘+==1:==s=z=2;;;2;s;2;z;s;2;z;2;a;s;z;2;z;s;;:z;s;sz:s=e:z===*.-anits=ti22:isasz=<4se»se’§§>2e>sazs¢s;¢ts<§$tss->e
, It is clear that functions like "food processing" (i.e., cooking) and "storage (in large 2 _.>.,.,.\._.,._i,.,._,.,._..,._.,.,._.,.,._._,_ 0¢$3‘;-,}$é;.-t$<§~.-:5-"Q-:Q£5?:t_¢-,9»-z%\}st9€‘_;=\-»$,.‘\;$:6_ Q... . E4|I‘V.4‘I-I-)1‘!-I‘?-V-IAIAI-Ill‘7.1‘?-

( quantities)" are not represented by vessel shapes (such as group A7, D4 and D5, 4 . :1:-r-:»:-. :»:-: :-:-:-:t:-:-:»:-:-:-:t:-:-:4-:-rt:-:-:-:-:-:~:-:- -
1 9% 35:1::1:1=5:‘ :1:1:1:7$57:5>1:7:55:7:1:1:1:?:5:7:1$2$155t¥:=:=$$:=:=:4$$:1:51=:
-:;:;$$5;:§;:5;:<4-:<<-:~:-;<~: -:~:¢<¢-:$§‘:5;:<;:§;:~:-:<<-:-:<-:- :¢:¢:1:4:f:1:=11:1:111:1:41=:=:11?:1:1:1:1:111:1:1:1:1;515:=:1:7:1:1:7:¢:=:75:1:=:¢;=:=:?:=:1:¢:1:=:3:1:=:51¥:l :?:1:1:5:l:!‘ :Y:?:i:!:3: 17:3: :7:1;i
~:-:-:~:-:-:~:-:-:~:-:-1-:-:-1-:-1-1»:-1-1-:-:-1-1-:-:~:-:-:;:;:;:¢:;:;:;:5 :;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;¢;:;:;:;:| :1:1:1:E?5:1:3:7:1:=:1:1:!:I:l:=;¢:1:3:i:I I'
1;::;2;¢;:;2;i;£;:;:;£;:;:;£;:;:;£;C;i;£;:;t;£;2;§
><.|i..i..\.
r E2, H2-3) in these graves. Additionally, precious (?) essences or other substances ~- \
' '-1:\-sss§:===;=:=:=:\-\:=:=:=sE=27:1:=$:}:§:§<\""
\
:E:§:§:§.~}:5:E:}.§: :7:i:1:Z'i:1:7:¢:1:i:i:1:7:‘ ‘ ' ' " ' " ' ‘ ‘ i:1:1Li:1:1:i:1:1$:!J:¥:i:7:¥:l:7:1 ' ' ' I:1:1:1:1:2?:7:‘:1:i:1:1ri:i:1:i:1:1:I:I:1 :¥:I:i:1:=:=:¥:1:I:l:1:=:<:=:=:1:=:" ' ‘
= of smaller quantity were, presumably, the content of the numerous small bottles and * :-:~:-:- <~:-:‘:-1-:-:<»;~:-:-:1
~
\
¢ W;-;-:-:4:-;-;-:-;»:-:-; -;~:»:»:‘¢-:-:~:-:-:-¢
¥ -E
-:-:-:-:~:»:~:-:-:-:»:-:-:-:-:-:-:-'-:-I:-:~:-:1:--'~*
1
1 the small pots, both of them often decorated with polychrome glaze. l 3 i v 5555355 555; :;:;:;;;;;;;;;§;;;; ;;;§;;;. :;:-:-1-:-:-'- ~-
2
4 $4-%
~< 32%
55 MLLLS1989,138.
56
Cf. the evidence at Tell Knedij on the Khabur river (KLENGEL-BRANDT et al. i996, 43-49; Fig. 12: Number of pots in single inhumations
1997, 62-70; 1993, 78).

,,
~ _... ¢
 144 The Heartland of/lssyria Graves, Chronology. Ceramics: Assur 145

Numbers ofpots per grave In graves with up to five pots, pottery can occur as the only ‘funerary gift‘. Not
More than two thirds of the 93 graves with single inhurnations do not contain more more than half of the graves which have up to three pottery vessels are associated
than three vessels. Our ‘mathematical’ result of an average number of 3.3 pots per with other classes of objects (Fig. l3).57 Each grave with six or more pottery
l

inhurnation, just obtained, has to be slightly corrected downwards. As is illustrated

|
vessels, on the other hand, includes ‘funerary gifts’ other than pottery. The number
by Fig. 12, graves with one pottery vessel are represented by almost 25%, two pots of these burials is relatively low.
appear in 31% and three vessels in 14% of the graves. This makes a percentage of
\
70%. Graves with four pots or more make less than a third of our corpus (30%). In Other classes of objects
this latter group, there seems to be no obvious "preference" for a specific number of Finally, we shall have a brief look at the different classes of "objects" apart from
pots. Graves with 6 vessels and more (up to l4) are each present in segments of less pottery. In Fig. l4, the 58 graves containing pottery are grouped according to the
than 5%. number of pots from left to right. In the first row there are seals and scarabs (R1).
s-_ The second row stands for bronze bowls (R2). Next to it are fibulae (R3) and
2. Pottery and other objects: Numeric relations behind them jewellery (R4). The fifth row shows weapons (R5) and the sixth one
From the 93 graves under discussion 58 (c. 62.3%) yielded objects other than
I
alabastra or glass vessels (R6), while the last row of columns (R7) indicates the
pottery. Graves containing only pottery thus make almost 38%. it is very interesting number of graves according to the quantity of pottery vessels.”
to see that the percentage of graves with additional objects like jewellery, fibulae, In general, the graph seems to show a distribution of objects loosely
seals, bronze bowls, weapons, etc. grows with the increasing number of pots in the corresponding to the percentage of graves present in the last row (R7)? Only the
graves. Apparently, there exists a relationship between the number of pots and the iv occurrence ofjewellery seems to show a very close and proportional correspondence
presence of other objects. to the number of graves with pottery vessels; It is clear that seals, bronze bowls,
1 fibulae and jewellery appear as grave goods also in those graves with a lower
number of pottery vessels. Therefore the number of pots cannot be considered as
30- relevant for the presence of these kind of objects. The numerical relation between
ii seals, fihulae and bronze bowls and the number of pottery vessels shows a slightly
different picture than is the case with jewellery. Among our graves they are
generally more widely distributed.“ Q
E as i l :v Weapons seem to occur only in graves with more pottery vessels. Apparently,
they are also linked to a presence of jewellery.“ If the presence of weapons and
t jewellery is an indicator of prestige and/or wealth, the few graves with many pots
and weapons or jewellery could be reflecting not only the wealth (and status) of the
20 -1- V2525 ,1 buried individuals as such, but might simultaneously serve as evidence for the
Vt
.., "need" of a rather high number of pottery vessels.“
All As could be preliminarily observed, the presence-or-absence-ratio of alabastra
and glass vessels in relation to other classes of objects does not show any significant
15 W trend. This is possibly a result, however, of the (statistically) low number of graves
chosen for examination. - i '

5’ ct. MOFIQINASRABADI 1999, 133, Tab. st with similar results.

5“ cf. MOFIDI NASRABADI 1999, 134-13s, Tab. ss-95.
59 As to the low absolute number of "other objects" recorded in the graves under study, the
presence of an object as such was considered relevant rather than the absolute numeric
l value.
l 6° C. 38% of the grave studied here, have no pottery (and other) objects at all; the
1‘ percentage of single inhumations without any funerary gift given by Mono: Nnsnannor
3. 1999, 133, Tab. 87 is much lower (c. 13%).
it 6' lt should be stressed that two of these graves, Ass. ll659 and Ass. 11960, were buried
0 close to each other (square dB9IV, outer part of the inner fortification wall, close to bastion
é i Zili —-i il i l ~ T%§i <-§i §%=§ i§ ‘Y§li§ts§ i§ §i Z w '7’}g:1;¢ :; :; : 9» ‘O:}:§:} §:1:{ §:§: %--A 1o
553555 325555;.. E. . 2N
1535;}; as i. & §2h
E:%z%: ;Es¥z!1 no. I9).
%-1 -A
it 62 Other interpretations related to sex, age and/or profession of the buried persons could be
Fig. 13: Number of pots and occurrence of associated objects added here, but at present the available data do not suffice for further analysis at this place.
i

‘?‘
la. _ ._ .'~_.J ~ M _
"“*““'"-""“““'“‘"" " '" -

i
l
146 The Heartland ofAssyria l Graves, Chronology, Ceramics: Assur 147
;
l

bronze bowls, on the other hand, show a more widespread distribution among
' ;~~ “NW”.
Mun -v-.---0......
' l"“““"' ""--,-u..,-W.
graves containing pottery. The quantity of pottery and the presence of these objects
seems not closely related to each other. These visible and different lines in
14 é l
< distribution might well reflect the different social purpose of prestigious objects
i made of of metal and stone and daily-used pottery vessels.“
The considerations of this contribution are only one step towards more insight
‘i 2 "1 $15 ; ‘l :;:- 11:1 =:1:1:~ L : ‘
\ 1 I into the "archaeology of death" in Ancient Assyria. Further study of location,
chronology, development of the distribution of the graves within the site of Assur
1°41 1 ‘ will sharpen our view on the Iron Age burials oi’ Northern Mesopotamia.
on Q5:-v$Z2-+Z5Si£:Z3I 5_ 1

1
eraves ,1 ,; ;. _.g. .; ;,;,;,; ;.; .;,;.;.; ;.;1. .1 ;:;:; . ~:-;-: »:-:-;:-;- 4.-::-:»?- 1- 1:»?-. 1: -1:1:
..
#1 --
‘ 1 References cited
ANDRAE. 1913; 1977, BAKER 1995,BERNs'sc1<t993, Bt.Act</GREEN 1992, BOEHMER
—-—
snnui
4 i 9 1 Q
~:-~:<A:-~:-:-:- ., 1984, BOLT/GREEN in press, BONATZ/NovAt</Oarrrzr eds. in press, CAMPBELLI
GREEN eds. 1995, Cums 1989, DITTMANN 1990, HALLER 1954, HAUSER n.d.,
21 ;Ei§&%;E1f'?2iéE,§ &¥z€; Mas1.4,i“ Q .-i4n,” 1} as HAUSLEITER 1996; 1997, Janos-Rosr 1962, KLENGEL—BRAND'l‘ et al. 1996; 1997;
is
%-73"!
:-:1.:;-§:5:;:- -11:’~: and
'-1"?
Q4 1998, KOSSACK 1987, LARSEN in preparation, NICGOVERN/MICHEL 1996, MEYER
0 R3 Objects
1998, MIGLUS 1996, MILLS 1989, Mono: NASRABADI 1996; 1999, Muscmatta
"‘ 1984, Penna 1999, Peoeasén 1989; 1992; 1997; 1998, Psnotase 1995, Potnocx
6 7 ‘ 1985, Posroara 1980, Paeussea 1954, Resorts 1997, SURENHAGEN/RENGER 1982,
Vessels ‘B 9 10 H 13 $3 14 TSUKIMOTO 1985; WILKINSON/TUCKER 1995.

Fig. 14: Graves with pottery and other objects

Conclusion '
Reexamination of stratigraphy and findspot, together with an evaluation of the
associated objects has brought some progress towards a better understanding of the
chronological setting and the composition of associated objects of the Neo~Assyrian
graves at Assur.
The closer examination of some 93 undisturbed Neo-Assyrian individuai burials
at Assur containing pottery vessels provides us with many detailed data on the
assemblages of ‘funerary gifts‘ and thus allows us to study some aspects of burial
customs at this site. As regards the grave goods made of pottery, a quite
differentiated picture emerges, although the existence of a number of graves
without any evident items of pottery gifts should be remembered.
As the quantity of pottery is concerned, the presence of at least two or three
vessels can be considered as the necessary standard minimum ‘burial gift’ within
individual graves. More than a third part of the individual graves here under
discussion, however, had no objects other than pottery.“
As far as the occurrence of "other" objects is concerned, only a relationship
between the increasing number of pottery vessels and the presence of weapons and
1.
jewellery could be observed. Most of the other precious objects as seals, fibulae and
~

63
Cf, Monet Nasn/react 1999, 7 134,
W
Tab. 89, with the observation that almost two thirds
(61.7%) of the studied single inhurnations contained two sorts of vessels (bowl and jar). 64 ct. Beawascn this volume, p. 159.

'?';.._;;I_.f.

1 . E .' = I ; ’ i 1 I; E i . ,
_____‘_____ , .. ,. I .. . . ., ...,...._...._,.,..,__,,,,_,,.,___¢.,....,,.,..,......__............@~ _,,‘v‘. .._ _.. - ......,.

Part II

The Khabur Valley

§
1

§
E

_ 1
1 V V Y ; }_YY
-2' 4- 7 W 7 777777 V7 I l‘:<--1§.'
H :"§=2. 7
_ _ ‘ _ *1_Im 7 ——————— — .,.‘. ........“H
v _ _ , 2 _ i :. . .. . ..._ .. I E 2 : ; _ 1 ,: E I
> . _ t 5 . : , . , . I i 5 > ; ‘ _
..4..._.._-,._,_..._._.._ _ 7 _ _ __ _ _ _ ........... ...,..._._~. M. .... . ,_,_ Y

An Empire and its Sherds

l REINHARD BERNBECK
Binghamton

\
P
Introduction
I
Of all periods of the ancient Near East, the Neo-Assyrian is one of the best known.
A large number of royal inscriptions, an extensive political correspondence,
-.
monumental inscriptions on reliefs all describe the deeds of the Assyrian kings and
their army. An extensive corpus of written and iconographic material depicts the
l
king and his entourage, battle scenes, war technology, the taking of booty and
prisoners of war by the Assyrian army. In this situation, what could archaeological
data such as ceramics be other than a superfluous reflection of the much finer-
>
grained written and iconographic sources?
I I argue here that there are several reasons which render an in-depth study of
Iron Age ceramics not only useful but urgent. History does not solely consist of
‘events’ of the deeds of kings or other outstanding historical figures. Ever since
t Brandeis monumental work on the history of the Mediterranean, it has become
clear that long~term trends in history are at least as important as single events. This
insight leads to a fundamental consequence. Since long-term trends are mostly
hidden from the eyes of contemporary witnesses who produced written and
iconographic material, a solely herrneneutical approach to history is not warranted.
History should not be written only from "within", which in this case means with the
eyes of the Assyrian scribes, sculptors and their superiors. Instead, an outsiders
I
1
view must complement such an approach. I will try to show that archaeological
’a data, especially ceramics, combined with art historical and philological
information, can document elements of a history that are unrecoverable for those
philologists or art historians who work solely with texts, iconographic sources or
results from excavations at Assyrian capitals.
Long-term history is characteristically less concerned with political than
economic and social processes (BURKE 1990; SHERRATT 1992).‘ Furthermore, it
, works on a relatively broad regional scale. Such a history includes, in particular,
lower class social groups and their relations. If mentioned at all in Neo-Assyrian

l textual and iconographic documents, such groups are treated in a very normative
and unrealistic way. However, these groups certainly left archaeologically
recognizable traces. As shown for southern Mesopotamia and many other regions
0(YJ§3NhflK9§!A¢(|P»c4J' KIh\n4-;i~')¥h

l of the world (WILLEY 1953; P/xnsons 1971; ADAMS/NISSEN 1972; ADAMS 1981),
one of the most important remains in this respect are settlement patterns. In this
paper, I use such settlement data to outline two dimensions of longaerm history
that are of importance to complement traditional histories of Assyria (for example,
GRAYSON 1982; 1991):
lM¢-=.t»=r,-.~—:=-, a) demographic information, for which diachronic data are essential;
»._ _. ._ c»
4 %
~ 2

l However, for a political history of the Neo-Assyrian empire with a long-term perspective
l
4
see LAMPRICHS 1995.
1

l------—“--"~ — — " --.- AA , l .

. - » —----, W
I E - : i §“"
r E ‘ ' -
 l52 The Khabur Valley
b) a synchronous dimension which aims at a close analysis of political and
economic forces responsible for the structure of a region within the empire.
The remarks are meant to provide guidelines for future survey research and for
the careful resurvey of areas already investigated? Where appropriate, I include
references to and further elaborations of a survey which was conducted by Peter
Pfalzner and me in the Wadi Ajij in the Iazira of eastern Syria (BERNBECK 1993).
The general region with which I am concerned is northern Mesopotamia. By this, I
\
mean the plains of Assyria and the Jazira of northern Iraq and Syria.
Standard Regional Surveys and Long-Term History
Settlement patterns can only be reconstructed if surface surveys recover information
-_
about the date and size of sites. It is especially important that sites are dated within
relatively short chronological periods. Also, settlement size may vary at different
time periods for one and the same site. Usually the best chronological indicator for
the dating of a site are ceramics found on the surface. Therefore, the first and
crucial step for a long-term history is the establishment of a precise ceramic
I
<
chronology.
r l
It is traditional archaeological practice to begin any analysis of ceramics with a
I
typology that includes chronological evidence derived from stratigraphy. For the
l Neo~Assyrian period, a fine-grained chronology of stratified ceramics is lacking,
i even though this volume should be a step towards such a goal. So far, we are mostly
unable to assign archaeological contexts from the first half of the first millennium
1
B.C.E. to a single century, not to speak of the reign of a king. Excavated contexts
where written sources provide a relatively precise terminus post quem are, of
course, exceptions. I do not know of many sites where absolute dating methods
i were used to assess chronological position, even though with more refined methods
of analysis, this must be kept in mind as a line of future research (for example,
.,.., .tc.< DYSON/MUSCARELLA 1989 for Hasanlu in Iran).
§ How can we construct a comparative ceramic chronology of the Iron Age in
northern Mesopotamia? it goes without saying that such a chronology must be
Z
t based on similarities of artifacts in different contexts. Experiences from large and
f 1
small scale excavations suggest a high degree of regional ceramic variability for
some types within Assyria.3 On the other hand, many of the more common types,
I . such as bowl and pot rims, have a wide distribution and along life span.
Such a situation seems to warrant an approach based on presenceebsence data
(DEMPSEY/BAUMHOFF 1963). It is therefore tempting to try to establish a relative
chronology with the rare, regionally limited shapes which allow more exact dates
than the long—lived, more common types. However, the problem with such an
»v.-\=/_‘~si.$/Wa.<)sa~. approach is that the estimation of life spans of rare shapes through presence-
absence data involves a large margin of error. This is due to the fact that such types
may not occur in all those strata which date to their period of use. The problem is
. i.
_ -.__.
i 2 This paper is only concerned with surveys of settlements, not of "non-site" shcrd scatters
in a landscape. For a very insightful work on "non-sites" which can augment results from
-
é f
I
standard settlement surveys, see W1LKtNs0N/TUCKER I995; WILKINSON 1995b.
3 This is especially true for decorated ceramics such as painted "palace ware" (Rnwsorv
é
1954: 169~l70; BERNBECK 1993: 98) and "Shech Hamad-ware" (Bunnnccn 1993: I13).
)
i _
1 An Empire and its Shards I53
exacerbated when ceramic assemblages from two sites are compared with each
other.
Therefore, it seems better to use the concept of the assemblage as a unit
l composed of types with specified percentages of all types (CLARKE 1968: 245~246).
Strata from different sites can be easily compared through the use of quantified
similarity coefficients such as the Brainerd-Robinson coefficient (ROBINSON 1951).
A precondition for such chronologies is the use of quantified methods to document
the assemblages. This should by now be standard, but it is only slowly intruding
l into the realm of Near Eastern excavations that deal with historical periods.
It proves difficult to use the concept of ceramic assemblage for surface surveys.
How can we be sure that a surface collection is as much a "contemporaneous" unit
as an excavated assemblage from a single stratigraphic context?‘
7
>
Northern Mesopotamia in Neo-Assyrian times is a particularly favorable case
for the precise dating of surface material. This is so because a large number of
small, short lived sites were identified on several surveys (BERNBECK 1993;
WILKINSON l995a; ‘WILKINSON/TUCKER 1995; MORANDI BONACOSSI 1996). The
influence of two factors mustbe assessed before surface material from such sites
.1‘? can be considered an assemblage similar to those from excavated contexts. First,
sites must be shallow, indicating that there was no sequential accumulation of
layers of habitation over a substantial period of time. Second, it must be established
whether post-depositional processes had an appreciable effect on the site. Erosional
I processes, especially deflation, may remove the bricky material and other sediment
A
of a tell and leave only the heavier, less easily decomposed sherds and other
artifacts. Sedimentation may cover substantial parts of a former landscape, so that
only small, shallow parts of a larger settlement remain visible on the present land
surface. _
Once these two factors are accounted for, sites identified as shoroiived should
be separated from those used for longer periods. The material of the former can be
classified and seriated, with the material from each site surface being treated in the
same way as the ceramic assemblage from an excavated context. The chronological
sequence must be established through the use of seriation (see COWGILL 1972)
instead of stratigraphic evidence.
Such an approach was used’ for the Iron Age sites from the Wadi Ajij
(BERNBECK i993: ll0-112). The basis for the seriation was the totality of sampled
diagnostics, whether from standardized collection units or from much larger
topographically delimited collection units. The material from the latter was not
l collected in its entirety and therefore represents a non-random sample. This is not
an ideal situation for a seriation and should be improved in future work? However,
the results of the seriation find some corroboration in excavated contexts and are
therefore taken to he reliable (BERNBECK I993: ll3-119).
i
4
Archaeological contemporaneity should be understood as a relative terrn. All vessels found
within one context may not have been used at exactly the same time but within a time range
of 40, 50, 100 years or in many cases even more.
l 5 Standardized sampling squares had a size of 4 x 4 m. The number of these squares from
Ajij sites is too low to fem the basis of a seriation. We could not lay out enough squares
because of time constraints.
v_ nnnqnnfifrrrrr"'
l Z I l Q l
 _ 1“ . ___._..__ 2 __-_ _ M- 1» -~ ~ ~

154 The Khabur Valley An Empire and its Shards 155

It is useful to include a number of seriated short~lived sites into one "phase",
instead of leaving them in a fictive sequence generated by the seriation, where no
two sites are contemporary. An exceptionally low similarity coefficient for two
consecutive sites in the seriation can be used to establish points where two phases
should be separated. For the Wadi Ajij data, a three phase development without any
settlement hiatus could be established. According to parallels with excavated
material, the earliest phase A was dated to the 9th century B.C.E., the second phase
B roughly to the 8th, and phase C to the 7th century B.C.E. (BERNBECK 1993: 117-
120). .
In a second step of survey evaluation, sites used for longer periods of time
should be analyzed. In this respect, the Ajij data are unproblematic. The number of
~_
tell sites is very small. With the exception of Tell Umrn Aqrubba (site 15), tell sites
do not seem to have been occupied for long periods. In more fertile regions of the
Near East, however, tell sites occur much more often. The analysis of their surface
I
material is more complicated than for the shallow settlements. Various methods of
dating and establishing site size during successive periods are mentioned in the
1e
Keban reservoir survey (WHALLON 1979: l4-16). One of the most effective is the
"gridded strip method", the placement of 10 ml (or smaller, depending on general
sherd density and site size) units along transects across tell sites.“
l
A
?
'0. .0‘
2
from above through erosional processes, or, especially in the case of steep slopes,
two or more major strata may run across one such square. Only a careful analysis of
each square, its topographical situation, and a comparison of material gathered
from neighbouring squares can help to identify those processes responsible for the
formation of a surface assemblage. When a short time range for a square can be
established through comparison with other excavated or seriated assemblages, this
unit can be inserted into the seriation of shallow sites. Finally, the more
problematic squares with either mixed material or several strata present may be left
out of further analysis. An examination of surface collections of long inhabited sites
should aim to identify site sizes in each phase of the Assyrian period. The phases
should correspond to those identified through the analysis of short lived sites.
What do survey data reveal about economic and political conditions in the past?
interpretations are currently based on two standard methods. One is central place
theory, the other rank-size analysis (see I-IAGGET1‘ l965: 101; 118-£25). Neither of
these should be based on site sizes (as is especially often done with central place
models). For rank size graphs, the use of population figures instead of site sizes is
obligatory because the rank size-rule is an empirically derived regularity of
demographic character (RIC!-LARDSON 1973), It is important to keep in mind that
site sizes should not necessarily be transformed in a linear fashion into population
figures. A standard factor of 100, l50, 200, or 500 people/ha may be inadequate.
Depending on historical period, population densities in villages may be lower than
in larger cities, or the other way around. Ethnographic data give only a general hint
and vary a lot (KRAMER 1982: 162-163). it is also of no help to work with minimal

and maximal figures because their great variability renders interpretations ~~

2t. understood as working hypotheses -- impossible.
l|t
al
ii
I:
Q‘-1"$*!$Z,Q. Data for the assessment of historically specific population densities are
architectural plans from large scale excavations from villages, towns and cities
from the same time period. Similar data may be acquired through "scraping" or
“imam-<
remote sensing (see Posroaru £983; MATTHEWS/POSTGATE 1987; Marnuvl
ALGAZE 1995; STUMRBL 1995). Again, such data are very rare for the Neo~Assyrian
period, especially for villages and small towns. Another factor which could be
taken into account in the estimation of population sizes is the density of artifacts on
a site surface. Differential densities in different parts of a site may indicate
diverging intensity of former habitations under the present surface (PARSONS/MARY
Fig. 1: Model of a tell site with five transects 1971: 21-22). In historical periods __su.ch as the Neo-Assyrian, censuses and other
written sources can provide evidence for population densities in different kinds of
Naturally, one would suppose that the latest sherds on a site such as the one sites. Only if these factors are taken into account can we achieve reasonable
depicted in Pig. 1 occur in the squares on the highest part of the site. However, this estimates of the demographic size of surveyed sites.
is not necessarily the case. As shown by the many tells in southeastern Turkey and Another difficult question which is rarely dealt with is how a meaningful
ii northern Syria that are inhabited today, houses may be perched on the edge of the settlement system can be geographically delimited. Many archaeologists seem to
El
tell, whereas the upper parts are not used. Therefore, close analysis of the collected consider the region for which they have a survey permit to be an ancient settlement
material from each collection square from such a site is necessary. It should not be unit throughout the millennia. Such an assumption is, of course, entirely
assumed that a square contains only contemporaneous material. Rather, a number unwarranted. Apart from the rare cases where the geographical limits of a survey
of different periods may be represented in one square. Material can be washed in unit correspond by chance to those of an ancient settlement system, three situations
ms.-,uH»e—~.=~T'r.=:-a1:.'
occur regularly. Either the surveyed region is smaller than the economic and
~ l4
political unit, ancient settlement system borders run across the surveyed region, or
6 According to BARTL (I995: 209), the Keban survey dating of underlying settlement strata the region encompasses several ancient systems. Particularly problematic are the
through surface material was not successful in all cases.
1

2
ii ,,.(-7.W~-------————~~_—' _ _ __ r W an-|_ :_w|u__ _ _
-I t, t. ,.
.-
._¢a.___-¢..._-.----».~.~ - '- : - - g__ m‘ *i7Ti .'i.7:;;1ii' i’ ' ' 77777 7'7 — 7 7 ‘ T ""* """" 7 _ 7

156 The Khabur Valley An Empire and its Shards l57

first two cases because one cannot interpret the data without additional information
from adjacent areas. Such information is rarely available, and often differs in
quality: chronological periods may be differently categorized (compare BERNBECK
1993; WILKINSON/TUCKER 1995; MORANDI BONACOSSI 1996), and all too often the
material on which dating was based is not published (see BERNBECK 1997/98). Only
when a region is large and suspected of containing several settlement systems can
meaningful units be extracted from the data through the use of nearest neighbor
analysis or gravity models (for example, KIMES/HASELGROVE/HODDER 1982;
SCHACHTF 1987). The same problem obtains for the rank size rule (JOHNSON 'l98l).
Rank size curves cannot be interpreted without considering the limits of the
research region. If it is either too small or too large, this may severely distort the
graph and its interpretation.
In the reconstruction of the demographic history of the Wadi Ajij, I relied
primarily on Assyrian census data (FALES 1975; 1990) and secondarily on
l ethnographic evidence (KRAMER 1982; SUMNER 1989) to estimate population
<
density of small villages at 55 persons/ha and of larger, longer occupied towns at
l| 160 persons/ha (BERNBECK 1993: 132). As will be shown below, geographical
limits of the system are not easily determined.
A calculation of the total population per phase reveals a continuous and strong
Aw
e population increase throughout these phases (Table l). At the same time, the
number of settlements increases dramatically in the transition from phase A to B.
| The increase from B to C is marked, but less abrupt. Two observations lead me to
believe that the basic demographic structure in phase B and C was similar, whereas
phase A shows the structure of an earlier period. First, the average number of
l inhabitants per settlement in phases B and C is similar, but much lower than in the
ti
earlier phase A. Second, the ratio of large vs. small settlements is similar in phases
it B and C, but much higher in phase A (Table t).’ .
!lll
1° H A S E
Itll
ll
. _________ sou,....._- A ......................._l.3___u.,.,.
number of settlements 3 12
total population 2160 2750
i-|
average pop./site 720 230
i ratio center: small sites I :2 1 : ll
Table 1: Demographic developments in phases A to C, Wadi Ajij
2'->
Peter Pfalzner analyzed the Middle Assyrian material from the Ajij region and
»_-<l.xs.t~r-=>1:\xm»?>~w.9r;cA- came to the conclusion that only one site was inhabited during that period. This is
éi
the site of Umm ‘Aqrebe (site 4), the one major inhabited place of phase A (Early
wine;
Iron Age) which was obviously of importance as a relay on a route between Assur
It
on the Tigris and Shech I-larnad/Qur-katlirnrnu on the Khabur (PFALZNER 1993; see
also KUHNB 1995). In the Middle and earliest Neo-Assyrian period (phase A), this
.w-»~\v>?4.s:\r?:
It ‘F
s I 7 I
Contrary to the original publication (BERNBECK i993: Abb. 13), a reanalysis of phase C
leads me to a reconstruction of this settlement system with two large centers, sites I5 and 1
(see below).
settlement was the sole major site in the region. It had no settled hinterland of any
size. The situation changes radically with the transition to phase B, when we find a
multitude of small sites around the newly founded center of Umrn Aqrubba (site
\
15). In this and the succeeding phase C, the population is much less concentrated
in a single site, and there is a considerable population increase.
As I pointed out elsewhere (BERNBECK 1993: 135-l36), this increase in a rural
population may be related to Neo-Assyrian politics of mass deportation which are
, documented in many of the royal annals. The Saba’a stela, which was erected by
l
the governor Palil»Eresh under Adad Nirari III, was found in the south of the Ajij
region (‘WEIPPERT i992). This stela gives an account of a campaign against the
western periphery of the Assyrian empire. Another stela from Tell Rimah, from the
same governor, mentions not only a campaign against the west, but also the
foundation of new settlements in the steppe which are supposed to have been settled
by deponees (PAGE 1968: 152). Since deportations are known to be a general
means of Assyrian domination, it is quite possible that the settlements in the Ajij
region, but also those around Tell al I-Iawa, are the result of such politics
(WILKINSON/TUCKER 1995: 61).
The rank size rule can be used to test. this proposition because it is able to
indicate the degree of state control in a region. However, rank size-relationships
could be skewed in the case of the Wadi Ajij data because the eastern limit of the
survey area is the modern Iraqi border, an arbitrary dividing line drawn by
colonialist powers of the 20th century. On the other hand, this problem may not he
so severe. The geographic position of the large site 1 (phase C) on a route towards
the west indicates an orientation of the whole system towards the nearest available
perennial flowing water, the river Khalaur.
For phase B, one obtains a primate rank-size curve (BERNBBCK 1993: Tab. 69).‘
This indicates a high level of administrative interference, which should be the case
if the sites are the remains of forced settlements for deportees. In phase C, the
pattern is much nearer to a "normal" distribution (BERNBECK 1993: Tab. 69), which
C, traditionally is explained as a system that has grown over time and been subjected
19 to numerous stochastic economic processes. However, if one suspects that the Wadi
3989 Ajij region is part of a larger system (see KUHNE 1994) and includesin these curves
210 the nearest major site, Shech I-Iamad on the Khabur, one obtains for both phases
l :9 primate curves indicating outside interference. In this case, the inclusion of the
larger region than the actual survey limits is necessary for a meaningful
interpretation. l -1
Why could the Assyrians have had an interest in settling people down in this
area? The Wadi Ajij today is extremely dry and devoid of settlements. Yearly
rainfall is around 150mm/year, clearly insufficient for rainfed agriculture.
However, it must have been possible to cultivate grain -- maybe only in wadi
l
bottoms with relatively high moisture ~~ in this marginal region in the first
mllleniurn B.C.E. Grain tax from the steppe from the province Rasappa, and to
which the Ajij region belonged, is mentioned in PINCHES (1885/86). It seems
therefore that the Assyrians could have obtained a small agricultural surplus from
8 For phase A, rank-size curves cannot be constructed because of the extremely small
number of sites inhabited.

Er,l

it —'-* .""‘ ‘L 7 ’ 7
. ____,_,.__ , .%__ ,,,,__ ,,_,,__,_,__ ,,,,_ ,, __ .......

158 The Khabur Valley An Empire and its Sherds E59

the Iazira. This region would have been attractive for its nearness to the capital. On
the other hand, in the Eong run, the region's ecological potential was scarcely
sufficient for independent economic survival and may have been a small, slightly
more fertile enclave in a larger dry environment. Forced settlement of deportees
could have been organized to prevent them from escaping and causing further
trouble. Control as well as scarcity of resources are indicated by two observations.
A comparison of settlement locations in phases B and C shows a clear shift of the
"\
whole system towards the north, upstream on wadi edges (see BERNBECK 1993:
Abb. 12- and 13). Continuous use of quickly exhausted soils as well as problems of
salinization may have been the reasons for this shift. However, if we take fragments
of grinding stones as correlates for agriculture and fragments ofjuss as correlates
~_
for herding (fuss is a gypsiferous material which is often used for the coating of
l
4 drinking troughs for animals), we find an increase in agriculture and a decrease in
herding in the transition from phase B to C (Table 2).
l
Phase B Phase C
Sites with No. % of all sites No. _,,_%_,of all sites
Basalt fragments 5 42 % 11 59 %
Juss fragments 5 42 % 6 32 %
' r
i
l Table 2: Herding and agriculture in the Ajij region, phases B and C
i rely on ceramics for this purpose. Stylistic classifications of vessels often do not
This seems to contradict the notion of a degraded environment in phase C unless
peasant production is controlled by political forces. There is indeed a clear
grouping of two kinds of settlements (apart from those which contain none of the
subsistence-related small finds). Along the Wadi Umm Aqrubba, there are a
number of settlements where only basalt fragments were found. Here, agriculture
seems to have been the sole focus in the peasant economy. On the other hand, any
settlement in the Wadi Anaiat and further west that contains grinding stone
fragments has also remains of juss. Here, herding and agriculture are related as
complementary parts of a subsistence economy. Zn an environment where one has
to expect a high frequency of droughts, a high variability in means of subsistence,
especially the keeping of herds, is essential for independent survival of a village.
Herded animals can serve as “banks of meat", a resource tapped in times of need
(ADAMS 1974). The apparent absence of herding in the large number of hamlets
along the Wadi Umm Aqrubba indicates a much larger economic system which is
able to furnish basic subsistence needs to these villages in case of insufficient
harvests.
This very brief account of long-term demographic trends in the Ajij region
provides in several ways an important corrective to the one-sided Neo-Assyrian
ft
I/NkX.‘Y~ ‘<"
accounts of individual kings.
First, the phases identified through a seriation of short-lived sites always
encompass the reigns of several kings. This refocuses historical analysis on the
administrative institutions of the empire as a decisionmmaking body and away from
**
4
L
the king as the dominating agent. Change or continuity in Neo~Assyrian politics is
not just a lonely decision of a single king, independent of a larger institutional
4
i setting.
. ‘i
1
Second, the almost yearly campaigns against peripheral powers which play such
a prominent role in the written documents can be seen in a larger, non-military
context. It is not just the military element of the Assyrian state which has a key
role. The empire would not have survived long, had the political elite not taken into
account economic and political considerations. Deportation and surplus production
even in marginal areas were an essential part of imperial politics.
Third, rank-size graphs can be used to investigate the degree of planning in the
empire. Again, written documents do not provide insights into the degree of state
interference in the natural growth of cities, towns and villages. However, settlement
patterns, whether in the Wadi Ajij, the Tell al-Haws region in Northern Iraq
(Wrumsoiv/"Fuentes 1995), or along the Middle and Lower Khabur (KUI-[NE 1995;
MORANDI BONACOSSI 1996), reveal a regularity which can only be due to a high
degree of administrative control of the rural areas (see also LIVERANI 1994: 379-
380).
Fourth, the effects of human use of the natural environment can be analyzed.
For the Ajij region, it became aparent that resources in the more southerly parts
were depleted in the course oflthe first half of the lst millennium B.C.E., so that a
shift towards the north in the 7th and 6th centuries B.C.E. became necessary.
Finally, it would be potentially possible to formulate hypotheses about the origin
of the inhabitants of the newly established settlements in such peripheral regions as
the Wadi Ajij or the Tell al-Hawa region. For two reasons, however, one should not
show clear regional boundaries of "ceramic provinces". I consider such provinces to
be in most cases "arcbaeofacts", that is, reifications of an idea of the archaeologist.
Ethnographic evidence shows that people use different items to demarcate different
kinds of social boundaries. Objects of daily use, such as ceramics, are seldom used
for such purposes (HODDER 1977). We find much more often clothing, pins,
brooches and fibulae as markers of the origin of new settlers. In the case of the Ajij
region, one type of fibulae was found on the surface of two sites. This type
(Stronach type IlII.3, see STRONACH 1959: 195; Pl. L, 6) occurs at Tell Mardikh and
Tell Afis in Western Syria (MAZZONI 1992c: 235-236). This parallel corroborates
the proposition, based on the inscription on the Rimah stela, of a western origin of
the deportees of the two sites and probably of the whole region.
The Relationship between Functional and Demographic Site Size: Data from
the Ajij Region ‘-1
Central place theory is often used to reconstruct regional economies. It is tempting
to apply this theory also to the Wadi Ajij region, as I did in the original publication
of that survey. However, ceramic and other data from the survey permit a
‘modification of this kind of analysis. Central place theory is concerned with the
functional size of settlements, not with their demographic size. Functional size in
modern contexts is measured in terms of the diversity of economic and
administrative functions of settlements (BERNBECK ‘1997: 169-170). Archaeologists
almost invariably assume that demographic and functional sizes of a settlement are
linked so closely that the demographic size can be taken as a direct correlate of
functional size (EOHNSON 1977: 495; 1980: 239-240). SMITH (1976: 30) mentions
that one should analyze these two kinds of size separately. It is therefore necessary

c
ii
 I60 The Khabur Valley An Empire and its Shards l6'l

to develop archaeological correlates for the functional size of sites and rest, rather bad preservation of many pottery fragments which did not always permit a secure
than assume, a correlation with demographic size. assignment of single sherds to a type. Second, the restricted sample size of small
I see two ways to establish functional sizes of sites with the available data from finds could influence the outcome, in which case one should rely more heavily on
standard surveys such as the one in the Wadi Ajij. First, measurements of the \
the ceramic richness.
richness” of small finds can provide an indication of functional size (BERNBECK Since it is difficult to identify which of these factors is of greater influence, l
1993: 138-I39). Second, richness of ceramic types of surface assemblages can be will analyze the two measures of functional size independently from each other. I
"\
used. These two measurements should then be compared. It is to be expected that begin with the richness of small finds. This data set was already used in the
they will be correlated, that is, a high richness of small finds from a site should l
primary publication. However, demographic size was measured in terms of
correlate with a high richness of ceramics. hectares, whereas it should have been converted into population figures (BERNBECK
For the Iron Age of the Wadi Ajij, the ceramic finds, classified into 149 types, 1993: Tab. '72).
were used (see BERNBECK 1993: 100-108).“) Small finds from the surface of Ajij
-
sites consist of such items as grinding stones, seal and fibula fragments, or pieces of
]bl.S‘S. 2000 -»,
I will here reanalyze the data from the late phase C of the Ajij Iron Age. When 1 x
l ceramic richness is plotted against the richness of small finds, a low positive 1750 a l
correlation appears (Fig. 2). The low correlation may be due to two major factors.
First, the typology of the ceramics could be inadequate. This can he the effect of the ZQ 1500 —

W T250 —
6...
steS
0 l
_‘4f\(Fl\7 1000 ~ l
5-» O
750 -
- x
Q
demographc 500 r.
f;l
nds
I”:
i5 2507; g, X
3+ 0 0' 0 0 X
,.
l|. roisma * I l I 1 I

ll 2» 0 0 0 O ""'7-fix Mug 4 5 . 6
ii

i functional site size (basis =

l numbe

l
1 1.
i>5s
1» 0000 richness of small finds)

O * . . .. =__.__.._____‘_7_;,__,<‘_,,~'77,,’~.<—~—_'~—~——~» . ..—.-:~.—:<~:. Fig. 3: Relationship between demographic and functional size of sites in the
*'*"' " 1 ' i ' i ' I ‘ | '7 ' 1 ' |
Y ‘-1 Ajij region

l
1O 20 30 4O 50 6O 70 80
number of vessel types Obviously, no connection between demographic and functional site size can be
posited from these data (Fig. 3). Furthermore, a histogram of small find richness
Fig. 2: Correlation of two measurements of functional site size (richness of does not produce clearly separable groups of functional sizes (Fig. 4). If this kind of
vessel types and richness of small finds) functional size measurement is to work, it cannot be used without further grouping
of the raw data.
9 Richness, a measure derived from ecology, is the number of classes or types present in an
assemblage (MACARTHUR 1972: 197; see also Kimlon I984). Richness of small finds is not
v.
It
§
F concerned with the number of items within a certain category, but only with the number of
l
different categories.
T! ‘
1° This classification may be somewhat overdifferentiated because it was primarily produced
for the dating of sites, not for an assessment of their function.

w»-»~'»>w~e<.n-\sV,»/_t~<nr>a.(1u’_\»“‘
l
i
E

b*****
 162 The K/tabur Valley An Empire and its Shards 163

The centrai part of the settlement region is concentrated in the area around one of
the very few tell sites, Umm Aqruhha (site 15). This site (CC, the "center of the
core") is in the middle of a large cluster of short~lived sites (PC, the "periphery of
the core"). In the periphery of the settlement system, two major sites are defined as
4..
"centers of the periphery" (CP, sites I and 36). A few smaller sites constitute the
"periphery of the periphery" (PP).
\ -

-i‘ 2000 '

3.‘
' oo
»_
1800 i
1600 -
/*\

M00 *
(mean
i200 *
S28
-
i9
i000 *

mm
CS

ML 800 1
El
number of functions of a site 41
ll

demograph 600 -ii

'1
Fig. 4: Histogram of functional sizes (basis = smail find richness)
400 r
€ When sites are additionally classified according to their iocation and iongevity in OP
r
the settlement system, a meaningful link between functional and demographic size 200 -
measurements can be demonstrated. Groupings were achieved through an . PC PP
independent consideration of locationai and historical factors. A basic locational
separation into two groups was estabiished through inspection of the map (Fig. 13). 0 1"""""W | W | - k e ~1 WW1 - |**"T" g . V 7 it 7;

ii A core with dense settlement can be distinguished from a western periphery with 1 1.5 2 ’ » 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
.1 ,
sparser sites. The second factor, length of use of sites was measured in terms of functional site size (mean; basis =
i total height and, for site 1, a consideration of its ceramic repertoire (Table 3).“ 1 richness of smali finds)
___, Location T Fig. 5: Reiationship between demographic and functional size
Period of Use Core Periphery_______ g CC: center of thecore; CF’: center of the periphery; PC: periphery of the core; PP:
long (CC) 15 (CP) 1,36 periphery of the periphery. All values are means of settlement classes.
i
‘I
.
I
z short (PC) 5,6,7,8,910,11,l3,t6,i8,2(),23,25 (PP) 37,3839 Mean demographic and mean functional sizes were calculated for these [our groups
I
of sites (CC, CP, PC, PP) and plotted against each other (Fig. S). The result of this
‘F.
Table 3: Sites grouped according to general location and longevity comparison of grouped data suggests that the relationship between demographic
t
.2 F i
and functionai settlement size in the case of the Wadi Ajij is a non-linear one. This
st .=
“ Site 2 seems to have continued to be occupied after penlod C: it is the latest site in the becomes clear when one plots the demographic grouped data on a logarithmic
L. seriation (BERNBECK 1993: Abb. E54-I55) and has some parallels to Khirbet Khatuniyeh
t
(CURTIS/GREEN 1997).
I
i

, ****"
. . _ . , .; f = _ ; :
. . - .,_....'..,._ I. . I-.» -. - '
.As__..-¢_,_......_.__...__... - § ~ W __ ___ _
I‘

164 The Khabur Valley An Empire and its Shards 165

scale. In that case, a linear relationship with a high positive correlation (ram .949)
2000-
emerges (see Fig. 6).
How should this result be interpreted? Simply put, the rate of increase in sire
< v
1750-
functions is slower than the rate of population increase. Therefore, in the case of
the Wadi Ajij, demographic size is not the best archaeological correlate for a
1500-
central place analysis. Functional size should be used instead. Furthermore, it is
interesting that functional as well as demographic size of the peripheral sites in the
K
periphery (group PP) is greater than that of peripheral sites in the center (group
-~ 250- _-§

C826
PC). This may be due to mean distance from the center(s) in the periphery (CP) to
the peripheral sites in the periphery (PP). This distance is much larger than the
'” 0o0~ -L

mean distance from the center of the core to the peripheral sites of the core (CC to 750-
PC).
demograph ‘ V
500-
i1
250- I
3.4» _ - 1' I ' ' v

3.2» . Q:
0 T is _ if l
/~\
10 2O 30 4O * 50 6O 70 8O
3...
.-
richness of types
l (mean
ze
1-
l
S.
i“5°
000: I 'a Fig. 7: Functional and demographic site sizes (functional site size based on
ceramic richness)

2000
1a0o '53
2- 0 PP
1000
demof
og(x)
ograpnc Nl\>
- 1» beix:is
I! E? 1400
1 .6 "1**** '¢""T""'-"”T’ - \ - i———~———- -e (msze
ean) 1200
1 1 .5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
it smati find richness (mean)
'- 1000
800
te
apnc
s
Fig. 6: Same data as in fig. 5; scale for demographic size logarithmic 600
CC= center of the core; CP= center of the periphery; PC: periphery of the core; PPw
periphery of the periphery. demogr 400 " CP
p
200 PP
5 The second proposed measurement of functional site size is ceramic richness. 1
l Again, a plot of the ceramic richness of each site against demographic size does not 1- PC
0 - I - 1 - e I ~ -e "i'—'—*—"———r'———1—fi - ’r*"=*'" I - t
reveal a recognizable correlation (Fig. 7). 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
When one ‘groups the settlements into the four classes CC, CP, PC, and PP, a
richness vessels
non-linear relationship between demographic and functional site size emerges
4
- which is roughly similar to the one obtained through the use of small find richness.
Fig. 8: Functional and demographic site sizes (grouped data; functional site
(compare Figs. 5 and 8). However, here, functional sizes of peripheral sites in the
size based on ceramic richness)
core and the periphery hardly differ. CC: center of the core; CP= center of the periphery; PC: periphery of the core; PP:
‘7-‘>:'.\a<-:
periphery of the periphery. All values are means of settlement classes.

!
i
.. - 1.
 166 The Khabur Valley An Empire and its Shards 167

When ceramic richness is plotted against log-transformed demographic size, a 4.5 -

linear relationship is evident with a high positive correlation (rZ= .935; Fig. 9), only
slightly lower than that obtained for functional size based on small finds. Both sets 4~ ocx;
of data lead therefore to the same conclusion, namely, that demographic site size
increases exponentially in relation to functional site size.
The similarity of results from these two ways to measure functional size of sites ._ 3.5 ~

"\
can also be assessed through a correlation of vessel richness and small find richness
per site group. While their connection is clear, the coefficient is only moderately fnsmads 3-

high (r= I783; Fig. 10). The same two problems mentioned at the outset - an
overdifferentiated ceramic typology or an inadequate sample size of small finds - 2.5 ~ 0
may contribute to this relatively low correlation coefficient. . PP C-P
-.

..
fcof
hness 2- 0

i 1.5.
3.4-
h- '
-PC
> 9° N1 f 11-1-1-t-1-|-t-I-|-|
~ 35 40 45 50 55, 60 65 70 75 80
§

;
(mean) 3.-
riohness of vessels
sze N OJ T
Fig. 10: Correlation between richness of vessels and richness of small finds in
t
-Q Ace grouped sites
v
§

i “.
i.-. !‘°E‘
E“ O3N-I>~-° 4? y

v
demof
ograpnc l‘ PP
t-42,4!
L;
; I
/-\ T0
X t ‘ -
\¢
ii‘
. 6, t
21.8, ‘PC
.- 3'“ ‘ 7’

i 1.6 1 - | 1 l I | -' "'r"'Y'"r”1’"r”- r~——*~—~1——————————WI ‘ I

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
richness vessels

Fig. 9: Same data as in fig. 8; scale for demographic size logarithmic

CC: center of the core; CP= center of the periphery; 21°C: periphery of the core; PP:
periphery of the periphery.
l.
i If the general observation of a non-linear relationship between demographic and
functional site size holds for other surveys, and not only for the specific case of the
» .;m=s>=~.
Wadi Ajij, it would have one immediate consequence.” Demographic size classes, h- h ‘Q.\\\t
t, §\\ \ \ \§
1
overwhelmingly used for the reconstruction of central place systems, are probably
overdifferentiated. The slower increase of functional size in relation to
s s&\W 45$ sh 6G 7O 80
types per site
demographic size may put two demographic size classes into one single functional

‘Z JOHNSON (1977: 495) cites several modern examples where the same relationship was Fig. 11: Histogram of functional size classes, based on richness of vessels
observed. per site

F
it-1 W . i,_ 1,;-5,5 ,1 i ——————————————a 1» We'-
._...~._.-.W..._-._-.-,-.--».-_-W-. Q him» — '—— 7" — ~ 7,, 7 W ~77. ___, .. ___ M,

168 The Khabur Valley An Empire and its Shards 169

class. Furthermore, attributions of sites to demographic size classes may be more
independent from functional size than we suspect so far.”
As already shown for the small finds, the smaller increments of functional sizes
do not lead to easily distinguishable functional types of settlements. In this respect,
ceramic richness produces better results. A histogram based on the richness of types
per site reveals four groups. The smallest group contains between 10 and 35 types,
the next class between 36 and 51 types, followed by a class with 57-60 types; the
two functionally largest sites contain between 70 and 80 types (Fig. ll).
These four classes can be plotted on the base map of the region. The resulting
settlement pattern is different from the one I obtained with the traditional
warped ceramics, and pieces of basalt) occur also on site 20.“ Site 36, the last site
oi second rank, is a low tell site at the edge of the Hbera-depression (see Fig. 13).
To analyze the settlement pattern, E use a multiscalar approach. On a large
scale, comprising the whole region, distances between all sites of first and second
rank were investigated to delimit enclaves. They are between ll.5 and 24.8 km
apart, with one exception (Fig. l2). The "functional complex" 20/23 is only 6.9 km
27.5 -
25 - Q

histogram based on untransformed demographic data.“ Originally, a three-tiered 22.5 -

pattern had been devised, with one large site at the top and two smaller ones in the ,__
next rank. The third rank consists of all the remaining sites. In the four-tiered 20-
kn"
functional size measurement developed here (Table 4) two sites fall into the _. >1U1
uppermost rank, three in the second, and six in the third rank. ce(n
15-l

large towns i small towns villages hamlets d'stan.4.M .5 J

-l
2022, 36 731325 3'7 as 5691011131639 10 -l
7.5-l
Table 4: Sites by functional size class (numbers are site numbers, see Fig. 13) 5" _ /V 0 o
i
K _ distance
These will be briefly discussed by rank (see also Fig. 13). I call sites of the largest 2_5 _ 15 to 20/23
two functional sizes large and small towns, sites of third rank villages and the
s
§ remainder hamlets. Sites l and 15 are large towns. There is no single functional
r distance between towns distances in small site-enclave
apex in this settlement pattern. The size of site 1 can probably be accounted for by
i -distance: town and villages
ei
I
‘.1
its location on a route to the Khabur and Shech Hainad, the next major Assyrian 1
7,: settlement to the west. The site may have been a special-function site along a route
which already existed in Middle Assyrian times (PFiit.ZNER 1993).” The second Fig. 12: Distance analysis on three scales '
rank is made up by sites 20, 23 and 36. This is unexpected since two sites of large
functional size (20 and 23) are only 1.2 km apart. Here, l suspect that a favorable away from site l5. I conclude that this complex does not form a center of its own
t:
ecological situation is responsible for the nearness of two functionally important but falls into the orbit of the main site Umm Aqrubba (15). Sites 15 and 36 are
sites: on both sites, indications for ceramic production were found. Since fuel is centers of settlement enclaves of quite different size and complexity, whereas site 1
£
t very scarce in the Ajij region, ceramic production was probably located in places has no dependent settlements. This may be due to its special function as a relay on
ill where such material was available with a minimum of energy expense. I consider a route. _.
-z
these two sites as one "functional complex“, not as separate entities. A further On a smaller scale, the two enclaves dominated by sites 15 and 36 were
\w1<4¢zt~»_-. reason for this is that all three kinds of small finds that were found on site 23 (juss, analyzed. Around Umm Aqrubba (I5), there are 4 villages or complexes which
basically have all the same distance from this center (5.2 » 7.2 km, sites 7, 8, 18
and 20/23). Site 36 has three dependent sites, of which two are villages (sites 37
13
and 38). In this enclave, regularity of town-village distance cannot be observed due
“<7;-,se.R~<-— JOHNSON (1975: 319-324) had already hinted at this when he mentioned that even to small sample size.
particularly small sites of late fourth millennium occupation in Mesopotamia could have On the smallest scale, the dense cluster of two villages and hamlets north of
wall cones, which he used as indicators for a public building. ADAMS (1981) makes similar Umm Aqrubba (15) again shows very regular distances within the cluster (Fig. 12).
arguments.
'4 One could theoretically use log-transformed demographic data instead of vessel richness As mentioned, their distance from the center Umm Aqruhba, in a small strip
between two wadis could be due to deteriorating environmental conditions further
l for the identification of functional size classes. In that case, one obtains four size classes,
where the two largest classes consist of one site each.
*5 Site 1 lies on the Middle Assyrian route but has no Middle Assyrian settlement
component. '6 On site 20, in addition to these categories, a fragment of a fibula and lithics were found.
v

l
l
s
. ~-1-1;
1+ tn.
.,.;_,___
t
t
i
_s.__¢..a...._.._.____...__.......,._... -V '- ,,. .....,...... .._,, ,, ..,,,,,,. V-F‘?-~~ “""'”"”""" " " ’ r r

170 The Khabur Valley An Empire and its Shards 1'71

south after overexploitation of the region's weak ecological potential (BERNBECK

_,
w. cmmsz ‘M , .. s _ _
I
0 1993: 136-137). The functionally larger sites 7 and 8 lie at the western and eastern
edges of this cluster. This situation contradicts expectations of central place theory.
The location of functionally large sites may in the case of this small cluster not only
\_\ g
\ I
2
be determined by economic forces, but also by political control. These findings
s Kl “ corroborate the interpretation of the distribution of agriculture and herding (see
X 5 “Q8 i /I
‘loxll
\
\l
above).
I

\I
I \
Settlements of lesser rank in the orbit of the small town 36 show a different
. /___'_‘,'\_¢
\
constellation than those under direct control of site 15. The ratio of villages to
l
“I
hamlets here is 2 2 I, whereas in the case of the Umm Aqrubba enclave it is l : l.
c /-~-st‘ Thus, small sites in the periphery, to which the region around site 36 belongs,
-.
E
: M) I "" ‘*2~
0-_\ is X’2 ' /*- -/_\,\. __ ,,_‘

my />’g
/-_{$54
_____L»,-"' ,/ ,,I/'il are on the whole functionally larger than those near the large, centrally located
as4(\'“\-_
I rr J ’1'/ town Umm Aqrubba (15). This is to be expected because procurement (with
1 " )1‘
ll‘
D/
"\ Ir
_4%%°,
\ materials and tools) in such marginal settlements is more time-consuming. It
$-
\\=.
\~¢
\\ ,\ should be mentioned that we are dealing here with a real boundary phenomenon, a
1*we
,/,/
n ><<o'/ 1:5 \*
HBERA xi»
/.
-.'/--1-
__._
;€\J,¢
/_._____~“
,_ -._1‘,-"-_M
,"NW“
’."~aaaucv
.-’-/
\'\/qxn -.~\\__.
periphery that is not, as in so many instances, created by the limits of a survey
‘m
'-‘“"’»'Q;;I permit.
I36 I _
“bx-‘
,_1\\ In sum, we find that in the settlement system in the Wadi Ajij there is a clear
‘\

S "1 hierarchy of sites only with regard to demographic site size (BERNBECK 1993: Tali.
37 -.
fl‘ fie 4. \-\___:_\:_ 70). The explanation of functional size categories is more complex. Factors which
-_. Q influence functional site size are transport routes, control over local populations,
\\‘;."/
ecological conditions and productive acitiviiies in the subsistence and craft sector,
\
\_\ and general site location in a core or peripheral area.
I-
Xno /F-II Conclusion
L» on.w ,_ GVM~_\
rm_
.250
W\
\
=::/,:f:\ _\ In a larger context, this reevaluation of data from the Wadi Ajij points towards the
2;‘ -._§\
importance of ceramics to gain new insights about the structure of the Neo-
m‘,--J Assyrian empire. I am convinced that it is not possible to isolate any ethnic group
I’-
'~‘“-=s..- within the empire or the limits of the empire itself through an analysis of ceramics.
J
/',- \
\.
l. \
\
I “'~ At least for this region and period, stylistic attributes do not correlate with political
\r'l \____
.4 r ._,. \. _ _, qt? or economic constellations. We can nevertheless use ceramics for political analyses.
la ‘"§ For evidence from surveys, archaeologists need to add to a documentation of site
(vi.4'~ \
éa
location, size and dating systematically collected, quantifiable pottery and small
» if -- __ "" t\9}) WADI AJIJ, EASTERN SYRIA i find data. Stratified excavated assemblages as» well as functional typologies are, as I
‘\\ \
hope to have made clear, the basisfor any analysis of settlement systems. These
an - '_ _h lhleowhssysian Phase @
data reveal quite different thingsuabout long-term trends in the Neo-Assyrian
. Large Town
., _. ?. r~c_. empire than any royal res gestae. From an historians point of view, ceramics are
¢ -- I Small Town better sources than texts and palace reliefs because ugly pots were not produced
'_~ ___“ N Village with the intent of leaving an ideologically skewed image for posterity. Instead, they
O 5 10 km -- --~ XO Hamlet were part of people's means to survive in often harsh conditions, and neither potters
nor users of pots had posterity in mind when they produced, used, broke and
discarded them.
Fig. 13: Settlement pattern, Neo-Assyrian Phase C, Wadi Ajij
Acknowledgements
n .
x
Thanks are due Arnulf Hausleiter and Uwe Muller for inviting me to contribute to
the Heidelberg "table ronde" on Iron Age Pottery in 1995. I thank Susan Pollock
and Sarah Kielt for reading and critically commenting on a draft of this paper.

*'---——---——--------—* e * ***************' r *
 172 The Khabur Valley

References cited Prospection Archéologique du Haut-Khabur occidentale (Syrie du N.E.)

ADAMS 1974; 1981, ADAMS/NlSSEN 1972, BARTI. 1995, BERNBECK 1993; 1997;
£997/98, BURKE 1990, CLARKE 1968, COWGILL 1972, CURTI$/GREEN 1997.
DEMPSEY/BAUMHOFF 1963, DYSON/MUSCARELLA 1989, Fates 1975; 1990, Gnnvson
1982; 1991, HAGGET1" 1965, 1-loooaa 1977, Johnson 1975; 1977; 1980; 1981, K1MBs/
Ilnsntonovnjflooonn 1982, KINTIGH 1984, KRAMER E982, KUHNE 1994; 1995.
K L,o,MPR1(jH$ 1995, LIVERANI 1994, MACARTHUR 1972, MATNEYIALGAZE 1995,
1\/Lwraews/Posronre 1987, Mnzzotn 1992c, MORANDI BONACOSSI 1996, PAGE 1968,
P/\RsoNs 1971, PARSONS/MARY 1971, PPALZNER 1993, PINCHF5 1885/86, POSTGATE.
1983, Rnwson 195$, RICHARDSON 1973, Rosmsow 1951, SC!-IACHT 1987, SHERRATT
-. 1992, SMITH 1976, STRONACH 1959, STUMPEL 1995, SUMNER 1989, WEIPPERT 1992,
Wmxtton 1979, W1Lz<1NsoN 1995a; 1995b, ‘vVILK[NSON/TUCKER 1995, W11.1.nv 1953.
1
1
1
1 modern towns of Ras al-'Ain (NW), a1~Kamishly (NE) and al-Hassake (S), in which
l.
ii
:5
12
. lg
Preliminary information on the pottery of the Iron Age‘
STEFANO ANASTASIO
Heidelberg
In 1989 Bertille Lyonnet (CNRS) started a project of intensive survey in the Syrian
basin of the Upper Khabur, whose official name is Prospection Archéologique du
Ham-Khabur (Syrie du N.E.).’
The collecting of the sherds has been carried out between 1989 and 1990; after
these two campaigns the ceramic and lithic materials have been stored in the
modern town of al-Kamishly, and they have been catalogued and studied during
other seven campaigns, until the spring of 1997.3
The aim of the project is to draw back the history of the region of the entire
Upper Khabur basin. However, either for practical and financial irnpossibiiities to
survey such a large area, and because of the existence of surveys which had been
previously carried out in some zones of the area,‘ it was decided to limit the
research at the western part of the basin, i.e. the triangle whose vertices are the
our information about the chronological frame and the settlement patterns of the
various periods is still extremely limited. V
The landscape of this area is a rather flat plain, covered by many seasonal
wadis, which flow into the main Khabur river. Within this area there are hundreds
of tells, of various sizes and heights, generally near the river or the wadis. As it was
impossible to make a systematic survey of all them, it was decided to confine the
research to 64 sites, making the choice on a French military map drawn in the
l930s. The types and the positions of these tells allow to consider the survey
homogeneous and representative of the entire area.’ The sherds were picked up on
a "random" basis, with a final amount of ca. 15 tons of ceramic and lithic materials
collected.
All this material was stored, in ’al—KarnishEy, in a building of the Schlumberger
Company, and first organized by Lyonnet in a" systematic typology. In this way, the

l
This article deals with one of the subjects of the doctoral dissertation that I shall discuss at
the lnstitut fiir Ur— und Friihgeschichte of the University of Heidelberg, and whose title is
Die Wcstjazira zwischen dern X111. und IV. Jh. v. Chr. A preliminary information on this
E study has been given by the author in Orient Express 1997/1, 20»2l.
2 Information about the preliminary results of the project can be found in LYONNET 1996.
3 I participated only in the works of the 1996 campaign, for analysing the materials of the
‘ii final Late Bronze and early Iron Age. A first approach to these materials had been done by
1
Xavier Faivre (Paris), who is now specializing in the pottery of the Khabur and Mitannian
periods.
1»
4 Published reports on previous surveys in the Upper Khabur area can be found in: VAN
LIERE/LAUFFRAY E954-55; MALLOWAN 1936; 1937; Mensa 1986; MERPERT/MUNCHAEV
i
1984; MONCHAMBERT 1984; POIDEBARD 1930; S1‘ElN/WATTENMAKER 1990.
i
5 For a general map of the surveyed area see LYONNET 1996, 367, Fig. 1.

1
34
F
£.

>7* 7 7 ; 1, __ W; _ '_ , ._,_ .;.. —' - mum

_ ._ , z ., .§! _;:., .,.;
,| . ...'5 5. ..! E _: 3 H », ~;,'.-
E — - ' 15 ._ v z .Y ,v
"""""b""'“"‘* i '_*”"" ’ ’ ’ "‘
1'74 The Khabur Valley
amount of the ceramic material was reduced to less than l0 tons, and the sherds
were divided in ca. 2.00 "series", following a typology based on the differences in
shape and fabric, independently from the chronology. This typology allowed a
systematic approach to the material, which has been studied in detail by several
collaborators who are specialists in the productions of the different periods.
As for the pottery of the Nee» and so called Post-Assyrian“ periods, the analysis
has been carried out by the author, considering first the material according to the
series of this first typology. However it was clear that, even though differences
between- the Assyrian productions of the different centuries surely exist, there is
also a real continuity within them, and with the productions of other periods.
Unfortunately, the published reports of these periods are still few, so that references
and comparisons are not often possible.’ For this reason, I decided to consider
within the Middle and Neo-Assyrian types only a reduced amount of sure and
significant fragments and to organize them in a specific typology of my own,
pointing out separately all those fragments which are possibly Neo~ or Post~
Assyrian, but that have no sure comparisons in the material coming from
excavationsf‘
All the catalogued Iron Age sherds have been described following a code, in
which the main entries are those related to the ware, the typology of the shapes, the
surface treatment, the fabric, the manufacture and any decoration. This report gives
a short description of the preliminary results of the pottery analysis for each one of
these entries.
Ware.” Most of the pottery has been described as belonging to a "standard ware",
which is generally buff in colour, even though with different gradations (Fig. ila);
however these differences in colours have no means of characterising fabrics, and
they may be due to firing or posbdepositional conditions. In some cases an
incomplete oxidation lead to a bichrome effect, with grey or black cores and orange
6 By "Post-Assyrian" I mean the period between the fall of the Assyrian empire and the end
of the Achaemenid one, i.e. between end of the Vll and the IV centuries B.C.; cf. GREEN,
this volume, p. 94 with n. 18.
7 This obstacle has been partially overcome thanks to the possibility I have had to see
materials collected in various museums. l wish to thank especially Dr. J. Curtis and Dr. E.
Klengel for the possibility they gave me to see the Assyrian pottery stored respectively inThe
British Museum and in theVordcrasiatisches Museum zu Berlin. A special thank is due to
Dr. P. Del Francis, who let me catalogue the materials from the Kilizu excavation stored in
the Museo Archeologico di Firenze.
8 The total amount of catalogued diagnostic fragments from the survey, belonging to the
Middle~, Neo- and Post-Assyrian periods, is 1107. Within them, I have considered 358 as
sure Middle-Assyrian, 657 as sure Neo-Assyrian, and only 18 as sure Post—Assyrian, while
the remainig 74 are possibly spanning between the three periods.
9 I think that the use of term "ware" for describing groupings in pottery can be problematic
and misleading ("...‘Ware’ is probably the most common generic term, but seems to have
almost as many meanings as there are archaeologists", in OR"roN/Tvens/Vince 1993, 75),
and it should be probably better to confine the description to the fabn'c~types. However, the
use of ‘ware types’ is common in our field, and l preferred to leave this entry in the code, at
least to make the comparisons easier with the materials from other repertories.
.;. V-I
—_——— —— —; — — —7 I - _ _
n - ».
r w»iii=»-vv-,rr»~»v _.... .. .. .W..w._ ,.,_.
Prospection archéologique du Haut~Khabur 175
or reddish surfaces. This "orange ware"’° is frequent especially in vessels of
medium oribig dimensions, independently from the shapes (Flg. lla). Beyond these
two wares it must be noticed the presence of a "burnished ware", characterized by
red or redbrownish surfaces and typical mainly in the open vessels (Fig. 3d-f; fig;
lib). With reference to the terminology of the ware types, that are well known in
the Iron Age repertories of the other Upper Mesopotamian excavations, it must be
pointed out that only a possible fragment of "palace ware" has been found (from
site no. .19, Tell Mohammad), as well as only one possible "red-slip ware" fragment
(from site no. 35, Tell Avguir Faouqani). More frequent are fragments of the so-
called "Tell Sheikh Hamad ware“ (Fig. 7a-d).
Typology of the shapes. The pottery has been described following different
typologies for the general shape of the vessels, for the rims and for the bases. It is
not possible to give here the complete list of all these types and discuss about their
chronology, but figs. l-8 illustrate some typical and frequent examples.
Among the open vessels, it must be noted that the carinated bowls, typical of the
Middle-Assyrian period, seemto disappear, while the most frequent Neo~Assyrian
types are the shallow bowls with variously thickened rims (Fig. la-e), as well as the
small, carinated bowls with flaring rims (Fig. 2d). Among the deep bowls, the
eiiamples with grooved rrrns may belong to the Post-Assyrian period (Fig. 3b-c). In
Fig. 4a~c some fragments of decorated open vessels are represented, whose types
are really rare, but that seem to belong to the early Iron Age.
Among the closed vessels, the jars without necks and ribbon, grooved rims (Fig.
5b-c) are typical of the Post-Assyrian period. A huge variety of types exists among
the _]Z1I‘S and jugs with necks, some examples of which are illustrated in Fig. 6a~i. In
Fig. 7a-b some examples of decorated closed vessels are illustrated; each one of the
r
latter is represented by a single example in the repertory of the survey, but they can
be dated to the early Iron Age with no doubt.
In Fig. tla-e some examples of stands and bases are illustrated. The stand in Fig.
8b has incisions on the external surface, probably made with fingernails. Among
the bases, obviously normal fiat and ring bases exist, but it is really hard to set apart
the Iron Age ones in a survey repertory. Here some types which are typical of the
Neo-Assyrian period are represented (Fig. 8c-e), which do not exist in the previous
Middle-Assyrian one. ,; '
Surface Treatment. Most of the Neo-Assyrian pottery is simply smoothed, with
holes due to the burnt out vegetable inclusions still visible on the surfaces.
Sometimes there are light slips. It is not always possible, analysing the sherds with
naked eye, to besure about the differences between real slips and so»~ca1led pseud0~
slips. Besides this simple treatment, it is possible to find burnishing, especially in
vessels of small dimensions. No one sure glazed fragment has been found, clearly
belonging to the Iron Age.
Fbb_ric. The matrix of the Iron Age pottery is mainly tempered with vegetable and
lithic inclusions. In comparison with the pottery of the Middle-Assyrian period, the
Neo»Assyr1an one iS tempered with more lithic inclusions, even though the
i
to l have used this term following the terminology ‘used in my analysis of the Middle-
Assyrian pottery of Tell Barri (Syria). The same ware IS noticed in many repertories of Late
Bronze and Iron Ages, with different names.
W
_.._.._.-...a......,,..._. _ » . - F._ - .. ,. _.__.7__..__.____ __ i__ i
176 The Khabur Valley
vegetable ones remain predominant. in the cases of small, ‘luxury’ vessels the
fabric can be tempered only with sand, or without any visible inclusions. Recently,
It has been possible to submit a small sample of sherds to the Centre di Restauro
Archeologico di Firenze, in order to have thin-sections and make specific
analyses.“ On the whole, this study has revealed a strong similarity of all the
analyzed fragments as to their compositional characteristics. The matrix is
generally made of a marl clay, tempered with inclusions that mainly consist in
R
limestone and to a smaller extent in quartz and mica. The use of vegetable
inclusions is manifest for the traces left after their oxidation. It is extremely
interesting to note, that the fabrics are almost the same either in Middle- and in
Neo-Assyrian sherds. The only one clear change is in the frequency and size of the
-_
inclusions, that are generally higher in the Neo~Assyrian period.
Manufacture. Most of the pottery is made with fast turning wheel. Some large
1
vessels may be completely or partially handmade, sometimes corrected on the fast
turning wheel.
l
Decoration. It is well known that painted pottery was produced during the Neo-
L
Assyrian period. However, in a really few cases it has been possible to recognize
l sherds of this type in the survey repertory. it happens either for the difficulty to
I
t,. distinguish painted Assyrian sherds from those belonging to other earlier or later
productions, and probably for a true scarcity of painted vessels in these Assyrian
productions. Incised decorations are more frequent, with a rich range of motifs and
*1
l.- variants (mainly rosettes, lines and other geometries).
As illustrated in Fig. t0, sherds of the Iron Age have been collected in most of the
sites that are regularly dispatched within the surveyed area.“ However, it must be
l noted that the more interesting sites seem to be located in the northeastern part of
5..
5 the area. Above all, sites no. 45 (Tell Ahmar), no. 76 (fell Badan) and no. 38 (Ain
s.3. .
f. el~Qerd) have given good amounts of Iron Age sherds.“
l
Tell Ahrnar, not far from al~Kamishly, is a medium size tell (rough diameter
250 m, and ca. 25 rn high on the country level), with a strong presence of Uruk and
third millennium sherds. Especially in the northern and north-eastern parts of the
tell many sherds of the Iron Age have been collected. My impression is that this is
one of the most interesting sites, for I have found traces of a strong and continuous
1 presence during the Neo- and Post-Assyrian periods. Tell Badan is located on the
r
~
Syro-Turkish border and possibly corresponds to the site of the ancient Nasibina (it
r has been not possible to carry out the survey beyond the Turkish border). Frorn
literary sources we know that Nasibina was an important center, especially during
the IX and VIII centuries, when it was capital of a province. The sherds
demonstrate that it has really been an important center during the Neo-Assyrian
period, but the impression I have is that an important settlement existed especially
s during the so-called Post-Assyrian period, even though the difference between the
ll
The analyses have been made by Dr. Pasquino Pallecchi.
'2 Nco- and Post~Assyria.n sherds have been collected in 56 of the 64 surveyed sites (see
4 Figs. 9 and 10).
\<
‘3 It must be noted that these indications are based only on the amounts of iron Age sherds,
not considering yet their percentage related to the total amounts of sherds collected in each
l
site. According to B. Lyonnet, their percentage is small to very small.
I
|
Prospection archéologique du Haut-Khabur 177
ceramic productions of these two periods is often not possible, especially by
studying surface collected materials.“ Ain el-Qerd is a small size tell (ca. 230 n1 x
llllilflll 03- 29 In high), with lower town. Apart from the Iron Age, the site seems
to ave‘ had good prehistoric (Hassuna, Ubaid) and especially Middle~Assyrian
occupation. _
Qn the whole, the distribution ‘of the pottery demonstrates a general settlement
<if3mlnullY With 1119 Middle-Assyrian period, but with a larger amount of settled
sites, well dispatched all overthe area, in the Neo~Assyrian time. This settlement
Qdllfifils seems to be quite similar to those of neighbouring regions, like the Iraqi
g3Z1f8 ‘ and the Lower Khabur_basrn.‘° The preliminary stage of the study prevents
rom giving here a more detailed exposure about the distribution of the sherds.
Hopefully the completion or the analysis will permit to have finally a good picture
of the settlement distribution in this important region of the Neo-Assyrian empire
References cited
Kunua 1994, VAN LIERE/LAIJFFRAY 1954-55, Lrounnr 1996, Mnttowan 1936'
I937, MEIJER 1986, MERPERT/MUNCHAEV -1984, MONCHAMBERT 1934 QRTON}
Trans/Vrncn 1993, POIDEBARD 1930, STEIN/WATYENMAKER 1990 WlLKlNSON/
Tuctosn 1995. '
Catalogue
The scale of the pottery drawings on Figs. l-8 is c. l:3.
Fig. I *
3 8516-‘ 16; type: bowl with thickened out, grooved rim; ware: standard were surf
treatment: smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic inclusions.
b Kile-' 53; type.’ bowl with thiclcened out, grooved rim; ware: standard ware; surf.
treatment: smoothed; fabric: lithic inclusions, with some straws.
9 We-' 53; type.‘ bowl with thickened out, grooved rim; ware: standard ware; surf
trearmemt: roughly smoothed; f£IbflC.‘ straws, with some lithic inclusions.
d site: Sl; type: howl with. thickened inpand out, rim; ware: standard ware; Smf treatment‘.
$m00ll1fi<l;f€1br:c.' Ilthic inclusions, with some straws.
e sire: 25; WPEF large bflwl, With thickenedin and out, rim; ware: standard ware; surf
treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric: lithic inclusions, with some straws.
Fig.2
a site: 45; type: carinatedibowl with ‘thickened out rim; ware." standard ware; surf
_ treatment. smoothed; fabric: straws, with a few lime inclusions.
h site: 3}; type: carinated bowl with thickened out rim; ware: standard ware‘ surf
treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic inclusions.
14
Note that only one sherd from Tell Badan has been described as sure Post-Assyrian
piecause only one of the few‘typica1 shapes of that period has been found from this site.
However, the general picture is that one of a collection with many ‘late’ fragments.
l WILKINSON/FUCKER 1995.
° KUHNE 1994.
_..,._.__,___......_.._....._ . .. W *r~~ r re ew ...t W iirmii ii _ “

1'78 The Khabur Valley Prospection archéologique du Haut-Khabur 179

c site: 70; type: small carinated bowl, with thickened in and out rim; ware: standard ware; d site:
warms 45; ttype .' 11221/tth
' ‘ ‘ ,
and thickened ~ and out um,
in - , ware: standard ware; surf
surf treatment.‘ well smoothed; fabric: sand and lime inclusions. "~ 11100 6 .f¢Iltrt¢- Straws, wtthafew lime inclusions.
d site: 63; type: small carinated bowi, with simple rim; ware: standard ware; surf. e site:
mu hl70; 50'?’ fllilgwigl ' - '
and thickened - . ware., orange ware; surf rreatmem.
out rim,
treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric: lithic inclusions, with some straws. f 8 Y "1 0 6 ,fct rte. lithtc inclusions, with some straws,
e site: 38; type: small carinated bowl, with thickened in and out rim; ware: orange ware; site.‘ 38; ,- ' ' - ,
surf treatment: smoothed; fabric: sand and lime inclusions. treatme
I n.1-0:06
moolhrdwtl find.inclusions,
e ,fa rzc. lithic elongated with
fioded Hm‘
some Ware" Standard ware? surf
straw;

Fig. 3 g we-' O75 TYPE-‘ Jar with small neck and thickened out rim; ware: standard ware: surf
h treattzertt: smoothed; fabric: lithic inclusions, with some straws.
a site: 35; type: deep bowl with thickened in and out rim; ware: standard ware; surf i
Isite.‘I 3; type jar with
‘ neck andI '~
th1cl<_ened_ - , ware: orange ware; surf
out, moulded rim,
treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric: lithic inclusions, with some straws. _ rea rtggrtt. roughly smoothed; fabric: lithic inclusions, with some straws.
b site: O2; type: deep bowl, with thickened out, grooved rim; Ware-' Standard Ware; Surf i Isite:I ; ttype : _l<tl'
'- with
' neck and ribbon,
' - _ ware._ standard ware; surf
grooved ntn,
treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric: straws, with a few lime inclusions. rea men . roughly smoothed; fabric: lithic inclusions, with some straws.
c site: 13; type: deep bowl, with thickened out, moulded rim; ware: standard ware; surf
treatment: smoothed; fabric: straws, with a few lime inclusions. Fig. 7
d site: 18; type: bowl with thickened out, grooved rim; ware: burnished ware; surf a ste
't : 4i; type : closed large vessel, with
~ thickened
- out, grooved rim
. and lnglggd
. .
treatment: burnished; fabric: sand and other grits. decoration"r ware‘~ Tell Sheikh Hamad ware‘. surf. trmtm e t.- hl - - _
e site: 41; type: catinated bowl with thickened out rim; ware: -burnished ware; surf Straws, with a few lime inclusions. n mug y smoothed’ fabrm
treatment: burnished; fabric: sand and other grits. sI
b site: 70; : ' - - - . . .
f site: 38; type: deep bow}, with thickened out rim; ware: burnished ware; surf treatment: _. . _ < I e1 g amad ware; surf treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric:
straws. with some lithic inclusions.
burnished; fabric: lithic inclusions, with some straws.
c st.-70;: ' -. . ..
Fig. 4 Cl1€:i0I‘&il0l1'yl'I:/ftI‘(£f'l?':Z€ljSlllaI:%(?l
_,h - _ . ‘ en I Essa}, wlth surf
arnad ware, {hmkencd Gm’ grooved
treatment: mm and fabric:
roughly smoothed; mused
a site: 07; type: deep bowi with simple, grooved rim and incised decoration; ware: orange SIFHWS. wit some ltthic inclusions.
t
ware; surf treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic inclusions. d decoratiéntygjmtioiegafgrgve
site: 02' .- ~ - thickened
vessei, with - . and 1{1(;g$gd
out, grooved r1m , _
b site: 02; type: deep bowi with thickened in and out, flat rim and incised decoration; f I 3 -_ arc. surf treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric: straws, with
ware: standard ware; surf treatment: smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic a ewltmetnclusions.
inclusions.
Fig.8 .
c site: 42; type: deep bowl, with thickened, moulded rim and incised decoration; ware: ‘i
I a site: 45;
_ type .- s tand,- ware.< orange ware,- surf treatment., smoothed,_ fabric:
. straws, with
,
orange ware; surf treatment: smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic inclusions.
some lzthic inclusions.
Fig. 5 b site: 25'. type'. stand . _with incised decoration. ware-' orange ware; surf treatment:
a site: 4i; type: jar with ribbon, flat rim; ware: standard ware; surf treatment: roughly roughly smoothed; f61brtC.' straws.
smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic inchasions. c site:
b _ 20;!
_ Y1"? .' bilfififl bi!-$6_0f’be_<tkcr.
~ ‘ A - ware.. burnished
- ware,_ surf, treatment: burnished;
.
b site: ()1; lype: jar with ribbon, grooved rim; ware: standard ware; surf treatment:
l fa rte. straws,w1th some ltthic tnciusions.
roughly smoothed; fabric: straws, with a few time inclusions. ci site: 42' type: button base‘ ware standard were sur
and other‘ grits‘
' r - ; g f. trea tmen t: smoothed,r fabric.
‘ - sand
c site: 34; type: jar with ribbon, grooved rim; ware: standard ware; surf treatment:
roughly smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic inclusions. e site: 70; t Je: 1 A - - . .
Smo th'd_ ylb _ button, base-Iware. standard ware. surf treatment.‘ roughly
d site: 59; type: jar with simple rim, with a knobbcd decoration; ware: standard ware;
surf treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric: straws, with a few lime inclusions. I1 Fig. 9
0 c ,fa rte. tthicinclustons, with some straws.

e site: 63; type: jar with simple rim, with incised decoration; ware: standard ware; surf Map of the sun/eyed area with the indicntio f th ~'t ‘ '- -
treatment: roughly smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic inclusions. fragments have been collected. n 0 e SI es in whmh New/Pcstassynan
Fig. 6 Fig. 10
a site: 31; type: Jar with neck and thickened out rim; ware: standard ware; surf treatment: Distribution of the Middle-, Neo- and Post—Assyrian pottery fragments
roughly smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic inclusions.
h site: 02; type: small jar with neck and thickened in and out rim; ware: standard ware; Fig. 11
surf treatment: smoothed; fabric: straws, with a few lime inclusions. a Fragments of "standard ware" (E-4) and "Orange ware-. (5).
.,v-.
\ c site: 02; type: smaii jar with neck and thickened out rim; ware: standard ware; surf. b Fragments of "burnished ware".
treatment: well smoothed; fabric: straws, with some lithic inclusions.
M.~M._~s ,
i.
z
%
t
is
l

» t
. I
- Y - 2 .

\
.....¢.........._....-- M MN

181
l 80 The Khabur Valley Prospection archéologique du Ham-Khabur

Appendix: List of the surveyed Sites (numerical order)

Tell Rommane Tell l~la1-mal Abou Hfour 4

Tell Oum Ourhafa Tell Aracle Tell Talah
Tell Tawll Tell Dabaash Tell Mjarjah
Tell Oumal al~Assafir Tell ech-Chour Gharbl Tell Ghezal Takhtanl
Tell Asnane Faouqzmi Tell Hasselc Tell Boughaz
’\ 'l‘ell Fekheriyeh Tell Assouarl Takhtani Tell Kurdiss
Tell Qattine Tell Berguil Bouz _ Tell Guire Zil Kebir
Tell-‘Majdel Tell Dibak Tell Dibe
Tell Chamrane
\DO ~—-10\Lh-PL»Ji-)*' Tell Kdieh Tell Nourek
Takhtani Tell Hanoua Tell Chi} Virhane \
\
2
3

10 Tell Tawila Tell Aazach Tell Doukri

ll Tell Jhash Tell Avguir Faouqanl Tell Jhash
12 Tell Ashane Sharqi Tell Fatme Tell Tcholama .. _.__....v_ V, WW_ 7___
1
13 Aln el-Aabad Tell Bali Takhtani <~‘-I
l4 Tell Djamilo Ain al~Qerd Tell Ghara
15 Tell Beidar Tell Khaneke - "Fell Khailae
\ ‘ 1 D
16 Tell Khatoun Tell Qattine Abou l-ljiera 3
l7 Tell Effendi Tell Baqar - not surveyed »
18 Tell el-Ouarcl Sharqi Tell Arbid ~ not surveyed -
19 Tell Mohammad Tell Farho - not surveyed -
20 Tell Jamous Tell Gui: Diwan - not surveyed ~ l

23 Tell Barair Kebir Tell Ahmar ~ not surveyed - \ 1/

22 Tell Daoudiye - wlthoui name ~ ~ noi surveyed ~

23 Tell Aalouq Sharqi Abou Hfour 3 Tell Badan
\
C
\ /

_____ _________‘ W7 V V

1 ,. l xii‘
. 1 :-I/‘
\ _ 4.
\ >4’ d

1 '1 - _ . A Ix ~l'.“-“:-'-"1-'>_':';.
‘ \ ' F * plill“
"W’~.=;»;‘-E-_:-41;-<.~igé»'<-i\{1,~>;Ig§'1j.g@§,5.‘
Y "*1 e

llflllliiili

Fig. 1

V I . 2 ; ;\..,.- E I
_ _. _ . 4 |
 182 The Khabur l/qllgy ; Prospection archéologique du Ham-Khabur 183

I l‘ -| J k

l \
l

\ \ 1 B
I

\ . 3
' l- ~ —~ ~ < .
_ I
\ ’ ' '

) 'v"_:\._-1:1"

<5?" '
T-:‘=.;fa"_

~ I \ . 5;‘ o
§ J

\
~ 7
b e ~ ~ ~~—— -_ fl;

‘ ~
\ a
\ ~ "

. ,, . _.__:. '

. ._ _~,';.

\ v g ~

. ' l :71".-j~':'.*"" l . .‘ ::'.';- ,

; -. ~'g:_",-:11-“ 4 , s >,»~m4;-.|_=|'|(-;J4\_¢_
L ~ d ’ 3
\‘ d

‘ v l41:-1.--:::.-;,e:»1-la;.x;s!:m;g;gv{
l 1 '1'.’-j':"'=?‘*.~'_~?_iyi;';:»j:
1 ;~:..»,;-l
I We _.____,,4... ‘

-:; »_x’-/.5]-f_E;_i"'
r _ _ __,-I \‘ I B

\‘ 6
. . ._ 1" ._~ll.:,.;...._..=._;;;.-,-;@:;;;4;\);;;;'
.- .-.--.»-~-;-1..-.....a-4.»...;»N.->.-..».....;~\-ms--M;
. ...-...l-M-=-..-.,-.:._.,-,--=-,‘.,..,\>fi..l:-,.,.,.. ' "
: 1 .4,,,,,,..;,._.;/,~;¢.l~-,‘.;;»;».;L=»é| \»'l-;n'»u,‘4,,:.~'~‘
, ijzil-:1 ‘ . *'~-r-re":'1‘f‘3fi\'f:-f:“'f*'2!'f§'f§1f'-I'§?I,'.

jjlilfl

Fig. 2 l Fie 3

~—-- ------- e . l - e r- , **********~

I
_ .. -

\
 . ,____,_____,__,,>;______ . . ,_ W»/* -- N .. ,-..__.____._____..,W.=.. .,_ ,..__.. / < , Vs4(

|
l

184 The Khabur Valley l Prospection archéologique du Haut-Khabur l85

7*" ""\l‘ 7*? " "

v# ___ A _l__ l__(_Z_(

' 1 ' , I \ a
\ \ I 8

I \ \
~. :=-,3,“-_,,$
=.--'¢,:';,/:='
' ' -1-’ I l -.-:=-.-.-;,;‘_-1
- . 0 :“‘:Il~§
, \ b
~ :1 iv IE.‘ 1
. 6

_ _________________________W ,_
1‘-"wer'f;::;e;-1;=;1;;1»‘e;-ls
. ,1 1-. >
-:,,~1_'. .‘
..,\.'_.*‘~. ,.:.--,. $41.‘; -_»Y>._

_.l.,...v-.--~~:::::=:<m::-miiT / \ C
.,_l.....-.¢-.~.....~_~.......l»--~Ml3-L‘

if I b

“'1 l‘.‘|r\'|~\'r“!‘I“:;2'
l
. ‘._t.$.,_;:\-;.(‘:_;,; ‘,~:,.<. '4
, , A ;. .‘ ’ \ ¢

~' _ --J-7%»
.12
Ob‘K 6I Q‘?
1?'
befi -,°‘§1%
§- =vQ
l3$=‘l,l‘>¢'.‘,’~§~'=3-*-*"""'-‘_
I
1:-‘.12! 1:'.‘+§:.".'=l;':-51-'3"*'*7*-':\._. _
I ' I - ‘ ... 1'. - 'e>.':.:.' 1:1‘ \ e

$211

*1.

Fig‘ 4 l Fig. 5

,1

i I ~——: » , - . - __ , Y . . . ._

. . >, . .. ..,.. .'. I

.» _. .. ¢

\
._4..,....._..,=_,-.._.... ___...‘ .. . ,. 1... .._ I-'_......l,-.,....,,._.,.......“i..,.,-M.

186 The Khabur Valley Prospection archéologique du Ham-Khabur

-; . 3.: ,5 .,-_. W » Ur.

, "\ a
I
\
‘ -. \ a
r ~'.
~- -5 -,~=l~.'v'.~§-._~.*~'>,<_'»;¢.'<;-Wis
‘ '
l =-~-»q;=;>/;ér51=ajlJ,§4I .
.:...;...,.\;.,.:,;.j..'..1,.',_
\-... 4 ,,,_:.;<é»"

. I -..=_¢'.-2-L.>il@¢'v'¢~='o-‘§~u§~a-x
" / I "'I
~ " ' ' " ~"'.".-'--:_"r_='i‘.\;-*_1‘...
- -‘ I '-l\-'==-l?r»:»'Ir=>'='=-'.“
I
. ,,...‘.__” .1 _ J: _ l

1‘ "I C

_. |~. >5 ,- -_ ‘-,‘__‘,- 4

-*-‘.¥=?Il’-' 4’.-'1-'ff’f'f
- , . .’~>.'~I.|'>>\,:~:|~:,i.
~'-‘-mi-‘.4>!‘~'.'.-_r;.~5:-.:._»_-.'.;-
<=<‘~s~u+i1£~:Herl,l '
. _/9
"':_": r:-~=-. \.-
if 5
_.‘ . ‘.;-'r_- _?.- :. _

' H ~::~_-3.’-; \ I '..

-L4 d
1 | ' I
. . , ,},.»;_-,,>.= ;_._:~,-,>,_;_;;';.\{§5.',~,;';.g=_;l:l§;;g;;{§3:.§,1§§+;§§J§.i§§;K_ ' ‘
I \ e
I
. . _ , ~ ’._'_‘_:.j.‘1

‘ "-’~“\ c

-~ » 1=.-‘b~.*.-1:-mi ..v ‘A , ,..':‘.-,.q

] I

" » \|\ , ~<:'1:‘7,': I;1:‘-‘_:"L(4{,;

I
‘ : ; -:_§1 , \ 9
‘ \ ~ -" =21: 1 T I
1

-' ‘ »
- ‘. =
l l ‘E ' 1
V -, . = -,¢l_\:=_.--_; .-1;, v=-.»;1;1{_=_~=~l>3:Qr,'=;- \ § ' J\
_">>:.>-._;: h
I l ‘ ~ . ~
- . , _ , _ , , 1,5,-jl;.',.'.‘,‘-‘.1,-;~;';‘11;‘::-"r§4»'»~_'¢-'*
"~ ~* -’ ~~""-
. ..:.-..;\;.;...l.:.a;.l;u£~,.=-121.:-:.A|lz4¢vlv;
..‘..-M.‘-.l.....l..,.-.....,,.._.<.,..;..,. _
-ml-;,;-l~.:=u:;.:.'.-:.—..='::v:-::.*,::£L-.‘.
I.’
. , \
I
-wvh-Z:-;'\1‘.>‘:,;Jlu';I%I'>v:§Iv5=1i:;{l'
, M._fi;l€5§;;l}:.€<M
.

» .\| (iii
»

' T Fig. 6 Fig. 7

-l
.1
:5

\
 p I_ V8 V\
_ W __v"vv? _M W

1 8 TM K Mb u r W H W PF W C _wH M éO 0g MA H e dM HM KM IDM 1 89
_
8 t Gr l
E M’

\
_M
_ _>J_H'“H_%_“'_"m I‘FI‘.
“oi‘_Vn_gwH
K/\/\/S |__ _
u AM:
“L L, EmmaA_ 1_

Ifly’_‘__ WUs
“M
5“
5?)
2&5§
Egg_
mam
HkN_a£I%_»B82_%N_2
D%§_~QM“_mDg§_h$;pm_Qw§<_ HumgOm _\>‘E_\_/>fi’__\E ~\o‘j__“ \

_ \_E'_ _V ENcg
D _ _
M)
W
U’I _
_h_v___dH ‘fin
'v_ hwA‘vi _M,_ _fig“
_\ _\_
_h"_>;mnu
3
R
‘\_

_\F’.___\I_I_.

“
~
._v‘____ Q“ Q b_ “Hi _mF_ ii:_
‘K__
W A“

_ fin“H H’vi‘v_ mi M_
qwQ0f
_‘ ‘
{M ”"?mH_ €____"| f_E‘ I figw
My
__

_ Q___ H___;H:AW \_at_>_ ¢M’

‘__Q_ ‘’

I1’

’l‘\‘_m ___u__ I1. 38%

If
Z

4’ RO2‘
‘I, “M
_8Q:
Q5 __ __ ___
8_ WEvan
A“ _ §_§_:fl
Swif
"\__
'9
_\3‘‘Q_'w
\
M
Q
y
tOm mu
‘I’
Q‘
‘E

OI \\ 0
I \V_Il m_“j
&_
M
Q
M_I___”
‘xx ~I

_\ W_3!\
‘ ___‘U
3_
\_ a‘__
|\
“__;\_‘ ”m_WW’

_ __ \_ >
‘H '0 figm
_ 6 _|_ _ _ t_
’
\‘_\
‘Q
m 6‘
_2‘
yfigdi

fl*

I _
\e
_

‘H.
t LY:
>\j \ QmgON|§3
0:
_\_
"Q
0.
‘
5*
E<_A_ _N

___ 5
_

_ °__.\_\
N

_‘_1
F_‘
8

__
C

Fha 8 F '1aw 9

We ’
_W _]

a ‘
-* .,.__-._+...._-..__..,. ulnar . »*///I iw...~....~....._

190 The Khabur Valley Prospectiori archéologique du Ham-Khabur 191

:1:r>»,~<~»:r::.¢x¢*~' .,,....,_ 1 \:.-A>.1>_ .:.i.i,...-.i-.-1:;--1:.<..‘ " ./’ ' ’1‘.1¥i‘>";¢7:l'><;l:?;£§'l.i';.i£§¢§{%g;"i¢-=3!-€E¥¥'§Z‘v'*~?7',.ZKi;'”LY¢i€*’-M"w§‘£'$t‘,£»:§ ,..'-. ;.i,,i ‘ '!-
fl‘.';:'-"#25 ’;-‘i§'1¢=-> ii;€;=:.::::.':;‘;’;s'1:;1;'_ ‘ av,
£3111 »‘-‘=‘I‘ii S ' "“l’§"£7-‘£51’1‘;§Z?Z£=§§'l§§§~?7§‘E7'*33i»-’5f353';35~$V5511?-fifili;f§Q'2='§?§?%7&?'¥iK$g‘§3§iffi$ "‘w'e§<'*‘»’¥“>'§§-"H§§x“ fir‘fig
, U'»"»"“ ~ ,~_,1j»;{§<-1=-1:1’we:1were:a¢?;:;:;§:&¢¢we<&=;@¢.i
‘. <,<_ V,» 4¢~»»’ />-4II> t .~~»...~- xI%::;1:e§>e:;:;<:1~m;"i§£;&léliééggli1-ggggqggzienzm:~:::sl%§:a:z§n;w::1;::2.mc2.=
W e IIIVI ,._,."W_W 2" M » /fi\¢:»4 W, M v~<~»,~¢7i(wQi W. N,¢
DESTRIBUTION oi= THE MIDDLE-, NEO- AND POSTASSYRIAN FRAGMENTS .,
:’=;:»;; $159 T. r:;:av;e\~:;§¢z>$a;ww-£ -» I . Q’/'.:l§-‘.‘Z-<-‘Z‘:"’i41"f‘“E'1*'~3’17’x*;}\'§§?~'§§5>,_~E\r/'4'»$~i'l"" §:~’1Z3£~»-i$ if»/“»i>%‘5e
-'X~*1’(;5{%5A‘\r$-- .A.-

A Middle-Assyrian “ ‘ ” . -»;--;;.;;:1»-.j»'rI_.*§§:§~vfi"‘~“ .<-,i,@5@‘>K§<?¥*‘"i=';*'~~»;-' ‘*!;f—“,4.i,“%"-

B Neo- and Post-Assyrian ~ *4,
,5:
. 2:}£'.§.ii3~ l “'~»¥,_, »-elevl-:5;1=.>;>»;.s;=>i,-tie’ '§§s S, '¢%¢‘§?§;;,“?=»§~:
1" W ,. _~ _;,,_,.t ,5; , ‘;i‘,:i\>¢%_, @:.+<,M_
:;-;¢:i;@:;;i;;;l:.; .**1_‘,:<R§§;£9'~,7-;:Q»'1'k\!!4'33/-"335.-:' ‘fie " k‘§'9*:ll‘::‘!'I'!‘i"§‘k7fi“‘l":/“"{" ~-1» e"~?a£* 2* -'~' llii :.-=.€t"l'v~»i ..>-~\-wwii-4 -‘ 1:1‘-L ' *<‘»»¢‘*"?».~:
~ ' 4‘/-‘""' 4-wt : * ii. ‘ . *1 1*; if i=-lweiiltiileli ‘;‘~.=iZ<=~,.
I between 1 and 10 collected sherds -;':::::;;“’:xw"i;-/-*/-=*»\~'
;.'s .:_;_.t\1 ~4\\§;X*'!<£* ~ W -.~
ll:-I -- ?-'- l H“-¢'. ~~\‘3§2‘-*1 P2.
‘.’.‘.'.?C¢J"t‘ I2k‘ '"».- *3‘ -Z1 e11v .-§~'Z“‘¢$*"!§f'*
.r/Kai ¢“i§' ‘yfié
*1‘
ih‘»l-'>"»‘IY/97 .'-.'-.' --:..a%"“f1i\*:.~‘“'\_-'¢.‘=-1~{
Q.l. Er:,." }' ‘ l ‘. .--Mac. -z‘~i:¢\ » -<~}:1~=s
1i.T2i‘~\£\"/5--r-r' l’»-71'!-‘*1
~»¢:~>-2: ':;:~=r>~* -1: _i,=,-'i~1;:-vi“-1*-':';=.~=f'c"‘°‘3“ “ .‘ ‘H. > < ,, 4 ,3. "‘» » *1” we '1 M». --i,'.=‘.~;-;~t'-=. ’~r">"i
QC between 11 and 20 collected sherds ” - . i.>=e<zI'i§%?l"£..=~
UGO between 21 and 30 collected she-rds i ~ "¢v:»c;' *»1-11:». M-“7“'Y-‘-=“*' i'~;‘1‘i 18* ‘ ' i I
"»f~z~"*=¢<=¢=1" ~~‘ ~Ii ‘ ~~e:~.,.’,.\.
we- ,..av-?==»Imi-.~1i%='
'.7',~" ‘. >itip"-2":-et.;uz‘rfi<¢2"
:». "éfi-‘Ki
OIOO more than 30 collected sherds . “ ‘r-:'~-<1;-;;>.-:v
*"~“>“1'1€»%g~~ - ~ “P/-' ‘
"‘- !:;'i""z‘Ii'I‘(~‘
“--“~l‘i§3'~ "
.' “ ‘“‘~:'.--<"‘- ‘,~:.-'.:i- it w
»‘ ’ '- rd’: I
. 1 .¢ .- ~>.'.f ~I
. ff§§§§‘{€‘i.
,.
~ "Wt"-;
"":§‘?_l\:"¢‘(‘i'\;U_F7IE
l "1-cM:2*" """'~T§»\~'-~»<‘z-ii»-~i
#"-3" ‘l5‘~’»'i-‘I-"iv ‘;:\;i1I"5"‘.‘ r-1.1“ K. t . W.“-\“§¢'§i
»~ma~
l ~=; '1-»'w-212$‘ ¢.=5?—;5?~.:'ia~‘:‘.= ‘¢@'=‘f3‘.'
-». <¢1{;§lZiI1';i:§:T;T,=?' » 1“-~~» »¢i 3; ea"-"%
‘ii T
Sitel
A 0
Site 2
A °
Site 3
A ~
Site 4
A '
Site 5
A —
Site 6
A °
Site 7
A "
Site 8
A '
Site 9
A -
Site 10
A ...
‘"~r:::'::-2':-'v§Ii~:r“=i"‘w *~ ‘“*
3 ‘.=i;;>-'::::>:iw_::=:e<:,-e i.-fig“;
"""',=¢1¥‘=?::'¢-=gvtm9*‘~ " i
.
. it
"F
%fT.»»§~§'; *4» ~
*<";—.\ ~ "' "‘ M ‘ =5?...-...5::-;.=;;..;§.-.>.;>.;<;;;=<@i,
§4‘;“A'<5\’§}f).2‘\\i,;~(d’
i ~i‘
:=_=\:-Sr»
‘
~°‘ .
M‘
-::;'1-' *~:~:1~*l.=- »T'r;».':...tJr',-.v.'?..f5='€‘
.-.-:.:-

-
‘ 9:§§“_§’§_f,Iv3
_;,~;\’ -.\._;":.:-.5Z_,,_lE=.w_,;$/_._:1?'
’
'>"“~" . ‘§
'>.~:>1;;T3;;%:i=;<:.v:.--:Y&:i:;F?5<1i 13.‘! .
,,gri
'1-hr. i
~'¥~“§1-‘=¥; Q.-?~',-,2?-illl.

‘leit
-‘ii
., . ye
r._f§‘"w-W ~1><~¢~~'w-:1/m
‘*2svz1:*'.="-'-v>:‘W>:-1*~"~¢i':2¢'rI¢d"

1.xf,;“¢3‘:=' ::Z.L'::'i&'-'{",‘.‘~'i'55?‘-<~"“*‘§JS1h?'iT}'LI"*_::F,."
2'K)5t ~*5~.\.~;n~.-sn\>'.:.li;1*» $43-\..§;>:'
.. :$.“.>,'sév-aw, {"*‘£;¢'fil'~i;‘~g»"5~:‘]"""‘\"J:Z\:“‘“§~ .»-~ <=-'»'<>w,“1:=1::>:r:mmie->..*:-,..
B 0 B00 BI Bu Bu B0 BOO B ' B ' B 0 M"-;;v"~':::i:::;:;;<;
\ P , ,.
.<:'.~>;=i, W
~;,, e xi-~;'“*"~*i¢s
-.
e,
'1.5 ‘ $4“-*5’-‘i-¢@'<"-'.*1-“~‘;1¥i";~>‘"~*
=1»
- :~"?‘$$‘ ..\ .,,;.,~. 1"\\‘W > *~-‘M1
wee‘ ,< >1“-"YQ* --
", M w» “ »1»'~m.\‘--<=-*1=1»<w-
'r~.¥:;:'";n

,>->3(v§}£7>:<‘.‘.‘.:Q13;->.?;€Il‘¥I’?:§$i%:%t!i&2i,;i':; _}S".i:':’i9‘£..%£'~;"‘.f§%',>:‘?:>‘2W':("r§"-"¢:§_’}V‘~. ~~,,» "1.,_- » ":g_,;..-V3'T§&fL»¢:e§<:=§;$:§ey=v:e~a:}j”v:E%"¢"”-gr“

Eli~l .
Site 11 Site ‘l2 Site 13 Site 14 Site 15 Site 16 Site 17 Site' I8 Site 19 SEEG 20 ill
I:1an5::m<;:12:1s:&e:<v<>?e;i;e>;mii::;¢iv;:=m.»¢.¢»-we~-\=%»~e»<~~;¢§
q ~_ '\ 2 "xi *~ ..d$1;;;L£':4’;L‘,.,?i,7;2‘t§Z¥{“§{:;€‘§it;:‘;3§§,§’ -~~~-~~~~~ 1W%§we%i»»><$~»g,%'r<ik;1:~‘=;5&,\».‘t~<;g;-i‘§‘§§;K
. i - --~'~<§~,‘Z-5"%£‘~‘+§§£§5iv-1?L'$§<§3v-5($ '<< ‘駒I/¢!-=
A isle, x, ,=-$3 ~“1'
' .
1;’,-Q--.-1-.n:<"3r‘c:;&w.::=:::;»:= -‘€";;$.*"'3'¢.'x;m2 ~..r;~;<w,l€».-,-.- "§1¢¢%<’i‘~1‘;_’*‘$*;§i<;<I>;, fi?5*;>?§1ir5=¢;' 21‘:;=I?“.rrz@***-Ail “ Y "K we """ ,2...
A 0
A' A' A‘ A‘ A‘ A~ A' A y >-Q5. . '
A 0
U i\» X 1 J I Y 2};
B 0 B O B 0 B I B 00 B 0 B 0 B Q0 B 0 B 0 -~/~$<~~1i....m.i:.e<W.,>.;~=::@1t1¢i-»:;%~ ~12,»:¢¢<:?1-':;a'_e%’l;; =-1:: .2'vl‘§.-lZ27§i1Z:C.‘.3;f.'.§<‘§:fi.Q':‘::';b'»Z35!';‘§:‘i;;:F§‘-::£‘T)i-5-’l<:1’i3'?‘74"'9i’!;‘””‘;;'<'§Q"§w$‘? A" J M
:?é,;<;'=3

Sit02l Silé 22 Site 23 Site 24 Sité 25 Silt? 26 Site 27 Site 23 Site 29 Site 30 Fig. 11a A
A 0 > 0 > > 3 > S > 0 > 0 > 3 > 0
B 0 B0 Bo B000 8000 B00 B0 B0 W UJ> no

Site 31 Site 32 Sité 33 Site 34 Site 35 Siié 36 Sitfi 37 Site 38 Silt‘-2 39 Sitfi 40
A on A000 A00 A0 A0 A 0 A .. A Q
'"" “‘\f-x$“ I Wu“ "M ire?1;:;i;>=?5:l€%£§§£¢lE§Zfi*3§¥?9"§EEF5 " " ;;;;-,amyi::11.51:11-zz15firii‘W1ii?§?$§$>:;I-v}?i'§§%;FF‘~1>§§?'*4*§§5~"‘§'4‘7*‘°§'4§~'
flue Bu Bo Bo ’~ ~» ’ < ‘ '“' ~ Y-i335?-131751*~?¢fii?}1i47I?'$¥i1‘Y!.9‘=;6f1$;;i§_“3"='*‘€"i*‘4\ K - ~'7'*'7-"J54:-"'73~'l'7~"=‘3‘~'§3>?T;T7K§§*‘Z§J§'$§?§}‘~f1?¢5§.’,'!f}{$:2§li’~:°.§§.~Fi§if:"Q§'F/3:5!‘ T‘ E
B 000 U3 =0 03> 00 B B 0 B 0
»"‘ \.- ~/‘W~ , * X A '5'1'1,:1;:wtfr":1>‘w:a>1:z:.e;:.afi;';:£i>;€r5~‘*:eia:<::l}i£PEs§l‘...“
, ..l.-;-,=,-;;;;.;-<1;;-/5;Kw1%w.i=»»-~,~1m.>..=.»\;.;1.>;,.~.»l=;.;;;;~_
7:=2L}IIiU§}1§;ELS!.L,';&!¢f";?4‘t,',';‘;;,é§4*"4‘€§;,;;‘n:"'§:;;;g,¢\5;:§~<:?*\'1-'\ f4=>4=‘F-*5*1?vwfiitzcfix:rat:ex:;=zi;ml:@u:;zl::a€iF<.:»;:¢e
-‘--~-\":-'--1-':3\~i¢513)$55{U3b§\$¥‘ »$J'fiLl25Y.‘>¢.."$NZ";:;'l(#g;;1=v=1@$;;!;;;;g~§¢3\<>~¢<i§'§1~y'
> H»:;=>;;:.51:;-_:::.:;:.:=;Q»=33Qat$3S2¢&“i;==x.2_-zsielq;-$;wl~r=@;;-~,t.,3;;<¢i:i<11r>~*£"§=$5’%i:2i::~'-=5.
’
~* v ~
’ * '
< “‘ ‘M
>.

Site 41 Site 42 Site 43 Site 44 Site 45 Site 46 Site 47 Site 48 Site 49 Sité 50 ~
_
‘ .-4%‘?
4'? ii
;? 9:?-.~e>
’lviéiile*5l‘ll.Q1@"~'@l¥’@*‘§§°*’-"i%“'JF‘=%"-=r'r,r"
:2’ ‘l"¥7$~t Wr-u=w1*;__,; :3il"‘v" *Ll
1
V
A ' A»
B ..
Bouo
A- A- A-» A- A- A» A-
B0 B0 B00080 B0 B B
A 0
8 no
- ,1’. i ~- -~ .
ii. ‘1 »:' .1:
E'E<::<-:;>*~‘=3;';’=;.‘j*~l~E 1.;-:='3—5;»<.la@~:-11- ‘»».
‘Z? Tm; >.:>¢» i¢<‘12;:2:'*>¥;'Z~fJ~:;~: We‘i¢;5i<;::i<‘<:;iJi;;v.:l¥L@;,~(_ii3-E;1::; ‘; -w.1;m';2=.'::'.$ws:»~3i“;=c,w;~:5=*i$
-.= '- »1‘>-~'H,=»‘-;’
..,t,->'.<,e.1~~.=W»</Mar ’- ...~‘z§-H’--I->
.'."»5-<»/¢l-5}-11$‘/§EW¥7.?5?L*’§§ -. ~ ‘>‘~.O- ~*'f."% - ..»-l~.,.;1a~.¢>. 1-»:*»» e¢~\»<<~~ai_~>.=-l “,»@§§=‘.3»t>§:'*
ii!E$h\w»v,"i>WQ'1iLij’€z¢**16'"f;@\‘5l$~'$"5'\§¥%%;~“,)i.ei"€""*""*? iv 1.»/\ . Eiklwaw»
,-1 4. 4 H "¢M> mi ”i$<*»\ V ~>
' ‘ .-"fi»*.~:i'>+'».-*.v\=';;;{t:<.~»;:. ?.',"@?.‘.'.‘:;’F::;=;'r:;:;r=‘;‘:¥i?5‘i"
4/:‘&;>r‘i:_‘1ll“i';i‘:4'L’
'"3 § z" ‘‘ . Q '2:-:=;,&»:1
M ‘ >~=~1~'.-lkllg, %$."f'?A;’~*{l;~“"i1\.‘b4%:;F“i']\‘?‘ Amie:r:;:;¢:2:2::2:::>¢ee;a~.§<§,v‘
inelm;;:i<:i;i:=::::::¢?;-ii, ;,\‘ ix»: -‘ 1: ',» .1 ~=r: ,1-rr
:;;;»_=.;,.=<;i,‘
Site 51 Site 52 Site 53 Site 54 Site 55 Site 56 Site 57' Site 58 Site 59 Site 60 e t ~ >‘ v ~»=>:r.:~»c>=!e*zYE',"‘.,~1z~ez-em;~*1:W¢;§i.§e===l=>@#=&:*1‘YQ%~
~ ~» -»;>><e1‘;=t<t~;\:i ~:.~\# ' »~‘» ~ '~ ‘5-“‘¢‘l;;;1>,i;§,'»1‘.;'1}%»§"<‘l->4
~~P" '-~ ¢'-¢':9'%:~""'x:'"~r~m:s~.=%%:~;ii.€:1?$4§"§3<1=~{l
A 0 ) 0 3> 0 3> 3 > > . 0 A - A -
B 00 B- B» B“ B‘ B~ U3} ~ B - B ' CU> 00 -\.» ~ ».* *>/k’?i..<3R13???Z3Lif.fi.?Ti.2f4§2;‘;g‘§?:"":‘f52'!iliglfi :1 L1.‘1"3“.. 1" if
< , =;1:r.i:'.“,.Y::zii1i'z:2$::'-':"‘mli‘>:z*:.*e3l ~ ll~El-’&'m;ii"1’§= ‘;‘;?¢'»’@~”“*‘~‘%=~>§"=' ~C>» >*5?»"-5»’»"~'¥<"-'"¢‘§;'

1;-,>5»jj=’-tg::»;r>rzjgrqa»K:in;zw<::i~,::-;e:y:;e:<=wa;eii:==;e=~<;e*§;£i<>»la,z=2:»:-.;=;<-.;eZ;<-Qrgieyiv
>3,-¢‘§\1§I$C’?§I.»1lki*1"2:n’I‘1“4K~<\f-/>'“~)*->~§-'-<>*g W,-» ‘4‘0~¥"¢;k"‘<M'S*"»*|*l*\r1,1 ~"‘"’
M ~$3§‘wl"'\~»-.‘¢§lf~1‘<!»;§;l’€i~w=~4<.,»-m,;#€t1:>~
'-~l~>~- -- ,- W r@Y~l-~"~’-»l;5~’>‘§-
» ~~~~ -“M ‘A'\;§’1'~‘ Wwr §$a:/*"»e*::w»-.41
I
Site 61 Site 62 Site 63 sites 64-69: not surveyed Site 70 *1 "l~“¢=“~?“?~'e='~I”8“"{<%@%»i(:':i'::<-*:(;£)"T" we ‘WfieF”?
5
». , l ,_ , ‘iv _i$~e‘.“:a-+'=§ K
A 0 A- Av A i1).'.. 5‘f.i.’¥l',§)“.l<7,1‘}‘-L.l;..i
,,..,__,..l~.t-. Wm
:'1;,¢¢§;3;;{;§Y;==;>-"vwb
».~.>...,$fi*.*
, M...
. ,; .,.. t ,._ ,e
,.t . . . ,-.,‘..
. """"-'*'1¢v:=rv1
>
i\i:i»wr,...,_ i (l(*§‘.:rli
<'*""i."#:'.r~r-mi-i1‘-;=1;i
uvét4 .m1fi,,,~;é.>,1
)‘ . WA . - 1* J -.i-W). :$i.\.>.~l,
,i i . -= - 1; , '-:.==.=:~.- i i ‘>‘I\L'.=£*1\:3:“u47l*?“.4~
- ,,.‘ i-£4" ;1-14:¢*h1,¢. ,_'~.~ 1 3“"ii§f‘\‘i:1‘7li‘E21"'i-ifiu‘T':L‘5§iTN:'l=
A 1‘
,““.:i‘::i‘b:“i““‘-\.:"l'iJ;:‘_;£‘ml“‘Q'Vlii" ‘: '~‘= 1-‘ '" :\'~-== ="i~:-‘.=.=;~'
2-‘-‘»:‘E?“’~
- . ..:-.§ »~Rzi
|_,¢&_.
hm.W ~>*£
1;?‘
~e,;¢:=-t>;_~,»»_<‘,,\¥_Y;=;m_.; "-'<‘~;—--=:- '»--~=rm»i@.',e$1,; +f'2 K
8 .. B~ B» Mr“: "1zi::':*.41*§<‘~»' 3 i i -efiiltilY%*1‘*':d51-%*\=Iwil'~:zi ' .-?::‘=f»‘ J:iT;Z.‘»:::lZ' I ';‘:;‘ 1.-<1‘
“’==r“<1i"l‘=*‘.*.;~,‘~l‘:l.‘.‘..-
-S‘-.> =.‘;‘-= ‘i "<I':i7'-W‘-‘§‘~'i*". V v:"\V§5
15:“-J» \- ‘ " ‘-‘T 11%‘--=1‘ 2
-In “T17I elk
.: | .
Y W» t t ..§%'
4/I ~> "’1'-1- €'>4:|\“4"“*!EI '»-vi 'V'<‘-‘ - ‘E ‘l7‘l'\l'l‘ t , ,>¢>m»el.~>~ %" 5: i~?1:.=;.*.ii.'<‘.:~.-~ii ¢i:,i-».-:~~.~...- \‘ s*,~~e~‘~'-‘-~-i—1. ‘~=.-'i‘;¢~ -> -~ ' 'xiv‘“
e. ll” W~*-,~»:=.*‘=i.=*#Wi"=" 2‘-i:f<1r:~%1’=%~ i- $“%‘\<T-J'1f>-ii -"éi‘1:"§mv:§§ilY§-:i‘[4'i€-‘i -T"Q;-¥l'iL!‘"i"'i:i! §=‘§3,Et*15i‘:" ‘i'l'* " ', M

=ia- i»'~,<;1,Mii;l;i»~~‘i;ii.-=»*' ~ ii *3‘ i ‘re,I i 4

_fi,‘§‘_<(?;§'_3,‘~,f-;'~f§f/'§?;‘;'fif-_2§>{§t‘%§5;'iY5&*Qm‘1“l%.‘*t£3’:m-1':li§'f';$'l2';§'§§§:f;I‘:‘*£Q'5§;'{&E:1:l"\3;Z-‘%i§.k§§?fl”§§/Ti}?§“=§l"S77 =55"-3' .¢~>‘»*~: ' ‘,~,~<;y;;, , Pi ~‘,.~,¢ g 4'“
1.5 l‘
‘ §~;§3i~?‘'-Ml‘
s vii» 1 -. ,_9§'4r X .-
.%~
$21?-§?3§‘?L}‘m;‘c/{WM3;§' :5*yiZi:*¢g3.§55§l§‘<1r§:*;§,‘§w§¢;;:%.¢<4§’:€.::~.:§T§a?;’,w"\'
:;,~,:_x;-“=15,@f3¢~<-;?;;q§¢‘¢';_g vi:-;>':.*.»1m->N,m;;<tv.~:.mm :17: $‘“-5’"3"5”<W?5‘%§5?=*%d’;‘»5?$&?€~, -~":,@" » 1 I.
i ¥‘l1 ‘. ' .~#~v,'%
._ _ -. i 1 A
. =»“.~
f,_..~_. H’ .< ¢_ ~-» *)|",M'1\\' 4;/i~M::~,., . , 1'»; ~ ~ , 4
< ,. *- . . ~ W-e l
. 1‘ 3%‘t ‘§‘?§:%4?h-°*“‘%)"‘l¥ .

Fig. 10 Fig. 11b

.f ..]

_..__T.._____‘»_ K _._....-_»»__-;%_._... _w.___:Y_,_:._. ___. ~_- id»-

—q— _ _~’~'<"1--"*1--1--"*"" " ~ W A;

1
I
__,.___._....._.__..l...,.....,... ....._...K...v,-,,__,____,_,_,,_._,._.,,,____,_.,,,,, ,. . M---.........,...w~..,.......,”W,M,,..__

Die eisenzeitliche Keramik der TAVO-Geléindebegehung

des Unteren Ij5bfir~Gebiets‘

DANIELE MORANDI BONACGSSI

Udine
\

1. Einleitung
Das hicr vorgclegte Material stammt zum grofien Tail von der Geléndebegchung
-.
des Tiibinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients (TAVO), die H. Kiihne und W. Rfillig
1975 and 1977 cntlang dam Unteren I;léb1'1r (Syrian) untemahmen (KUHNE 1974/77
und E978/79), und, zu einem kleincren Tcii, von einer im Jahr 1991 vorn Verfasser
durchgefiihrten Nachuntersuchung? Wéihrend der Geléindcbcgehungen wurden in
den 83 cisenzeitiichen Fundortegn des Tales ca. 1800 diagnostische Scherben dieser
Periods gesammclt. Bin repriisgmtativer Tail davon soil hier dargestellt warden.’
Eine chronologischc Einordnung cisenzeitlichen Oberfiéichenmaterials in
Nordmcsopotamien wird durch mehrere Faktoren erschwert. Zurn einen ist die
Anzahi ergrabener Orte aus diese: Zeit, insbesondere der Eisenzeit I, der ersten
Héilfte der Eisenzeit Ii und der Eisenzeit IIIB, sehr gering.‘ Zum anderen ist die
Mange an publizierter Keramik relativ lirnitiert. Weiterhin liegen Bearbeitungen,
die sowohl die Qualitéit als auch die Quantitiit der Keramik beriicksichtigen nur aus
wenigen Orten vor. Es handclt sich hierbei im wesentlichen um den in Westsyricn
gelegenen Tall Abu Danne und die One Qagsrig Cliff und ljirbet Qa§rig in der
Mosul-Region. -
Aus den G1-abungen im I;Iéibfir-Gebiet liegi: bislang noch wenig eisenzeitiiche
Keramik vor. Material aus dieser Zeit fand sich in grtiiierexn Umfang in Tall $613
Hamad (KUBNE 1984b; 1989~90). Weitere eisenzeitliche Keramik vom Unteren
Ijfibflr stammt aus Tali ‘Agaga (MAHMOUD ct al. 1988). Aus dem Hébfir-Dreieck

l Dieser Aufsatz stellt die abgekiirztq und fiberarbeitcte Fassung eines sich im Dmck
befindiichen Artikels dar (KULEMANN-OssENlM0Rmo1Bomcossx im Dmck). S. Kulemann-
Osscn, die mir die Veréffentlichung des Materialsin diesem Aufsatz iiberlieB, sci einmal
mehr auch fiir die jahrelange fruchtbam Ztfiammenarbeit herzlich gedankt.
2 Besondercn Dank schulde ich H. Kiihne, der mich mit dem Auftrag das eisenzeitliche
Material der TAVO-Geléindebegehung fiir rneine Dissertation zu bearbeiten, betraut und die
Nachuntersuchung von 1991 ermiiglicht hat. Fiir die mit diesem Oberfiéichenmazerial
verbundene Untersuchung vgl. MORANDI Bomcossr 1996.
3 Dabei handelt es sich um die Gesamtheit der bestimmten Warcntypen und ca. 50% der
definierten Formtypen. Es wurden jedcch die am hiiufigsten vertretenen Formtypen
vorgelegt. Fiir cine vollstéindige Diskussion dcs Materials s. Anm. 1.
4 In Anschlufi an M. LEBEAU (1983: Fig. 6 und S. 21 ff.) wird hier die Eisenzeit I mit dem
Zeicraurn 1200-1000 v. Chr., die Eisenzeit H mit dem Zeitraum 1000-700 v. Chr. und die
Eisenzeit III mit dem Zeitraum 700-330 v. Chr. gleichgesetzt, wobei letztere in die
In
~ I Subperioden A und B unterteilt wird. Subperiode A léuft bis zum Ends der
neubabylonischcn Zeit, Subperiode B entspricht der Perserzeit. Anders Einteilungen der
Eisenzeit werden z. B. von AMIRAN 1970, AVI-YONAH ed. 1975 und MOOREY 1980
vorgeschlagen.
-1-_-- -M *\_ Inf ——*'~“-"~'-'~,~7 W..-_-.-..----7--9-s-....~._-_~.=......_____..,,,_,_,,,_,_ ,,,,,.m_,,___,_,__,__,.,_,__.,___._ .,. ,. . _ .. _ ,.........._........_.._,-vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv_-._~.. ~-—-¢---r-‘*'

194 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unreren Hfibt?r»Gebiets 195

und aus dern Ijabizr-Queligebiet ist Material dieser Zeitspanne aus Tail ljlarnidiya Keramik zu Fort Salmanassar. Aufgrund der Tatsache, dafi sich die Keramik aus
(Ercrmen/WAFLER/\NAnBnRr0n 1990), Tail Feigigeriye (KANTOR 1958) und Tail Qasrig Cliff eindeutig von der aus Ijirbet Qasrig unterscheidet, meint CURTIS
Halaf (HROUDA 1962) bekannt. Die stratigraphische und chronologische (1989: 17), die Keramjk ans Qasrig Cliff “could in theory date from anywhere
Zugehérigkeit des Materiais aus Halaf und Felgigeriye ist aber weitgehend between the ninth and seventh centuries B.C.". Er tendiert aber zu einer Einstufung
problematisch. Die eisenzeitliche Keramik aus Tall Hamicliya stammt aus
der Assemblage ins 8. Jh. v. Chr. Bin frtiherer Datierungsansatz wird von Curtis
stratifizierten Fundkontexten. Eine genauere chronologisehe Einordnung des (ibid.: 18) aufgrund des Vorkommens eines Eisenfragmentes fiir
eisenzeitlichen Materials ist jecioch bislang nicht megiich. Der einzige Hinwers auf unwahrscheinlicher gehaiten. Dies scheint allerdings als Datierungskriterium sehr
eine Datierung ist ein Fragment eines in situ gefundenen elfenbeinernen Paneels, unzureichend (vgl. GREEN in diesem Band, S. 91426).
das auigrund von Parailelen mit Nimrud in das 9. Jh. eingestuft wurde Ferner ist eisenzeitliche Keramik ven der Euphrat-Insel Qa1‘at ‘Ana bekannt.
(Elcrmen/WAPLER/WARBURTON 1990: 258). Als chronologischer Rahmen ftir das altere Material wird der Zeitraum zwischen
Wichtige Vergleichskomplexe fiir das hier zu behanclelnde Oberflachenrnaterial dem ausgehenden 9. und der ersten Hiilfte des 8. Ih. angegeben (KILLECK 1988: 57
ff.) Diese Datierung basiert zum einen ant‘ Vergleichen mit der gréilfitenteils
stellen die bislang weitgehendst unpublizierten Assemblagen aus Tall 8613 Hamad
nnstratifizierten Keramik aus Tall Haiaf. Zurn ancieren wird dieses Material
und Tall ‘Agéga clar, die dem Verfasser zur Verftigung standen. Insbesondere das
anhand von Inschriften aus einer anderen Grabungsstelle datiert. Diese
Material von 8613. Ijlamad ist von grolfier Wichtigkeit, da seine Datierung in das 7.
Schriftfunde belegen zwar, dal3 die Insei in diesern Zeitraum besiedelt gewesen sein
und 6. J11. durch Schriftfunde gesichert ist (KUHNE 1984b; l9_89*90; 1991: 32). Da
muff», sind jedoch ftir eine Datierung des Materials aus Killicks Grabungen nicht
eine endgiiltige Bearbeitung der Keramik noch nicht vorliegt, kann aber auch
dieses Material hier nur in begrenztem MaBe herangezogen werden.
brauchbar. Das jiingere Keramikcorpus aus Qal'at ‘Ana wird hauptsachlich
Weiterhin haben die Geliindebegehungen ties westlichen Teils des I;Iabtir-
aufgrund von Vergleichen mit noch unvereffentlichtem Material aus Sur Jnr‘eh in
Dreiecks (LYONNBT 1996; ANASTASIO in diesern Band, S. 173-191) und der Steppe
den Zeitraurn von der Mitte bis znm Ende des 8. Jh. datiert (ibid.: 65).
Die von LLOYD/G(§K¢E (1953: fig. '7) aus dem am Oberen Balih gelegenen
des Wadi ‘Agrg (BERNBECK 1993) wichtige eisenzeitiiche Kerannk-Assemblagen
geliefert. Dabei handeit es sich jedoch um Oberfiéichenmaterial, das ans
Sultantepe vorgestellte Keramik gehtirt der Periode der assyrischen Akropolis ties
Ortes an. Der Beginn dieser Periode wird aufgrund eines Tontefelfundes um 648 v.
methodologischen Grtinden nicht ftir die Datierung der Keramik der TAVO~
C111: angesetzt. Das Ende der assyrischen Akropolis wird rnit der Zersterung von
Gelandebegehung als Referenz dienen kann.
Harran, 610 v. C1112, gieiehgesetzt (ibid.: 41).
Insgesamt ltiBt sich fiir das Iglabfir-Gebiet feststellen, dafi die bisiang ergrabene
Umfangreiches Referenzmaterial fiir die eisenzeitliche Oberfliichenkeramik
eisenzeitliche Keramik fiir eine Einhangung des Oberfiiichenrnaterials nur bedingt
vom lglabflr-Survey iiefen der in Westsyrien geiegene Tali Abu Danne. Obwohi der
herangezogen werden kann. Daher treten bei ciem Vergleich mit dem
Hiigel nicht im naheren geographisehen Umfeld des assyrischen Kerniandes Iiegt,
Oberflachenrnaterial Orte aus benachbarten Regionen in den Vordergrund. Als
weist das hier ergrabene Materiai zahlreiche Vergleiche zum I;labEur~
erstes ist das assyrische Kernland rnit den Orten Assur, Kér7Tukuiti~Ninurta,
Oberflachenmaterial auf. Die chr0no-stratigraphische Einhangung der Keramik aus
Nirnnici, Ninive, Qasrig Cliff und I;Iirbe1Qasrig zu nennen. _
Tali Abu Danne ist alierdings mit einigen Unsicherheiten iaehaftet.
Keramik der alteren Grabungen von Assur, Kar-'l‘uku}tI~Ninurta und Ninive zst
Der Ausgraber R. TEFNIN (1980: 35) schlagt eine Datierung der eisenzeitlichen
nur in sehr geringem Umfang pubiiziert bzw. unvertiffentiicht (I-IALLER 1954). Aus
Schichten IId und Ilc in die Eisenzeit II (600-550 v. Chr.) respektive in die
Assur und Kar~Tukulti»Ninurta erbrachten jedoch die neuen Grabungen R.
Eisenzeit III (500400 v. Chr.) vor. M. LEBEAU (1983: 24f.), der riie Keramik dieser
Dittmanns (DYITMANN et al. 1988; DITTMANN 1990; im Druck a-e und SCHMIDT in
Schichten bearbeitet hat, kommt hingegen zu dern Ergebnis, daifi die Schicht Ild in
diesem Band, S. 61~90) stratifiziertes eisenzeitliches Material. die Zeit von 875 bis ea. 750/700 v_. Clirl und die Schicht IIc in die von 750/700 bis
Die bisher nur in Ausschnitten pubiizierte Keramik aus Nimrfid gehtirt der 600 v. Chr. einzustufen ist.
spaten- und der nachassyrisehen Zeit an. Die spatassyrisehe Keramik stammt zam Unsicherheiten bestehen vor ailem darin, dali in die eisenzeitlichen Schichten
einen aus dem durch Tontafeln in die Zeitspanne 666-616 v. Chr. datierten Raum Abu Dannes eine gréifiere Anzahl spiiterer Gruben eingetieft wurden (s. auch
19 (LENES 1954: 164) im Bereich der Wohnhauser, die sich entlang der iistlichen Architekturplane 'I‘EFN1N 1980: Abb. 7 und 8). Dieses fiihrte wahrscheinlich zu
Stadtmauer der Zitadelle erstrecken und zurn anrieren ans Fort Saimanassar. Dre Tefnins Interpretation, dal3 die ,,persisci1en Reiter“ schon ab Schicht {Id ansetzen,
Keramik aus Fort Salmanassar umfafit eine Zeitspanne von ca. 50 Jahren, die mit fiir die er aber eine vor-perserzeitliche Datierung angibt (s. ibid.: Abb. 18).
der Zerstéirung Nimrflcls um 612 v. Chr. beginnt (OATES, J. 1959: 130; OATES, D. Weiterhin wtiren nach Tefnin ebenfalls die hellenistischen lampes moulées bereits
1968a: 58-9; vgi. HAUSLEITER in diesem Band, S. 17-60). ab Schicht Ild beiegt (ibid.).
Das aus einer Grube stammende Materia} von Qasrié Cliff Wifd in (185 3- 111- \'~ Trotz dieser stratigraphischen Ungewifiheiten soil hier ein neuer
Chr. eingestuft, wéihrend die Kerarnik ans dem einphasigen Ort Iglirbet Qasrig in Datierungsvorschiag fiir die eisenzeitlichen Horizonte Tall Ahu Dannes eriirtert
die post-assyrische Zeit datiert wird (CURTIS 1989). Die chronologische werden. In diesem Zusammenhang sind die Orte Tall Afis und Ras el Bassit von
Einordnung letzteren Ortes basiert vor allern auf den engen Paralleien in der Bedeutung. Die Keramjk aus dem Eisenzeitlich I-Kontext aus dem Areal El in Tall

rrrrW ' ______Wj7fiWfim*WW ' V :_____>_““i ‘I ______;___7777 7 7 I I _____7/777777 7 _

..;.,....._. ... .4. » '.

.,____,,*______,,_,,_‘_.,____, N ,,. ,., ... _ 77
196 The Khabur Valley
Afis weist aufféillig enge Parallelen zur Kerarnik aus Abn Danne lid auff’ Ein
wichtiger Unterschied besteht allerdings im Fehlen der rot-engobierten Ware in
Tall Afis, die andererseits in Tall Aim Danne haufig belegt ist. Wegen der
ralumlichen Néihe dieser beiden Orte zueinander scheint uns cine chronologische
Differenz zwischen den R€p01101I‘6S von Abu Danne und Afis wabrscheinlich. Falls
die Annahmen von BRAEMER (1986: 222) und MAZZONI (1992b: 162) zutreffen,
dafi die rot-engobierte Ware an der Levantekiiste friiher auftritt als in Irinersyrien,
und die rote Ware erst ab der zweiten Halfte des 9. Jh. in Innersyrien vorkommt,
wtirde sich fiir die Schicht Abu Danne Ild ein Terminus ante quem non ergeben.
Lebeaus Datierungsvorschiag ftir diese Sehicht wiirde sich somjt um ca. 50 Jahre
nach unten verschieben. Dieser hoher Ansatz Lebeaus ftir den Beginn der Schicht
Hd wurde aul3er von Tefnin auch an anderer Stelle in Frage gestellt: DITTMANN (im
Druck c: 17, Anm. 33) sehlagt eine Datierung ab Anfang des 8. Jh. vor. Aufgrund
dieser Uberlegungen kann eine Datierung von Abu Danne Ild ab dem Ende des 9.-
Anfang des 8. Ih. in Erwagung gezogen werden.
Uber das Ende der Schicht {Id und den Beginn der Schicht Ilc gibt alienfalis
das Einsetzen von Gefafitypen (wie z.B. Schnabelrandschalen s. LBBEAU 1983,:
Typen BL 5, 5, BL 27, 3»~5), die typisch fiir das assyrische Kernland sind, einen
Anhaltspunkt. Das Aufitommen solcher Keramik kiinnte mit der verstarkten
Einflufinahme der Assyrer in den westlichen Gebieten, aiso ab 740-720 v. Chr.,
einhergehen. Dafiir wiirde auch einerseits das zu dieser Zeit erstmaiige Auftreten
neuassyrischer Stempelglyptik in Amuq O0 sprechen (persdnliche Mitteilung J.-W.
Meyer). Ferner kommt auch Lebeau fiber Keramikvergleiche mit syru-
palastinensischen Fundorten zu einem ahnliehen Datierungsergebnis.
Zusammenfassend ialit sich daher sagen, daii anhand von diesen - wenngleich
anch nur vagen Anhaltspunkten ~ eine Einstufung der Schicht Ild zwischen dem
Ende des 9. und der Mitte/Ende des 8. Jh. und ftir die Schicht He eine Laufzeit bis
zum Ende ties 7. Jh. in Frage kornrnen.
2. Die eisenzeitliche Keramik der TAVO-Gelfindebegehung
2.1. Der War-enbestand
Der Warenbestand der eisenzeitiiehen Oberflachenkeramik besteht aus 36 Warren.‘
Mit wenigen Ausnahmen handelt es sich urn Scheibenwaren. Die Art der
Herstellungstechnik wird bei nicht scheibengedrehten Stiicken anfgefiihrt. Die
rneisten Scherben stammen von hart gebrannten Gefafien, nur wenige Stiicke sind
sehr hart. Dementsprechend ist nur in solehen Ausnahmeféillen die Brandharte
vermerkt. Auffallig ist der sehr grofle Anteil an Haekselwaren unter der
5 lnsbesondere zwei Gefiifitypen zeigen dies deutlieh. Zum einen die Vorratsgefalie
(MAZZONI 1992b: Figg. 15-18; LEBEAU 1983: Typen JP 7,2-JP 8,3) und zum anderen die
Henkelflaschen (MAZZON1 1992b: Fig. 8:1; LEBEAU 1983: Typ ABC 56, 3).
6 Die Warenbestimmung iichtet sich nach der in Tall Selg Hamad erarbeiteten
Warentypologie (cf. PFALZNER I995). Eine Ware wird durch die Art der Magerung, ihrem
1
4
prozentualen Anteil und der Komgrtifle der Magerungsanteile definiert. Weitere Attribute,
wie Farbe, Oberfléichenbeliandlung, Oberfliichenbeschaffenheit und Herstellungstechnik
kennen innerhalb einer Ware variieren. Deshalb werden sie hier nur als sekundare Kriterien
ftir die Beschaffenheit einer Ware benutzt.
....... L... . - :4.
-M----=--7_ - ..... .. w
Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren Hébfir-Gebiets 197
aufgesammelten eisenzeitlichen Oberflaehenkeramik. Einen grofien Anteil machen
ferner die Sandwaren aus, die allerdings nur halb so haufig in den
Oberfléiciienkollektionen auftreten wie die Hackselwaren. In nur geringer Anzahl
sind solche Waren vertreten, die vorwiegend mit Kalk/Kalkspat Oder schwarzem
Mineral gemagert sind.
Anzurnerken ist, daB Waren mil geringer Variationsbreite (wie z.B. die Waren
0.6 und 0.7) in der Warenbesehaffenheit nicht, wie es scheint, homogen sind,
sondern vielmehr konnten diesen Waren nur wenige Scherben zugeordnet werden.
2.1.1. Die vorwiegend mit Hiicksel gemagerten Waren
Ware 0.2
Hauptmagerung: meistens mitteifeiner, seltener feiner oder grober Hacksel,
Nebenmagerung: meistens feiner, seltener mittelfeiner Sand.
Oberjldchenbehandlung inner: und aufien: meistens tongrundig und verstrichen, seltener
beidseitig verstrichener Uberzug oder unbehandelte innere Obertlache und verstrichener
Uberzug an der iiufleren Oberfiache.
Matrixfarbe: rdtlich (SYRS/6), orange (7.5YR6/6), braun (10YR4/1), gran (10YR5Il), beige
(IOYR7/2). Kernfarbe: dunkeibeige (IOYR6/3), rdtlich-gran (7.5YR6/2), gelb»griin
(2.5Y8/2), rdtlich-braun (7.5YR5/4).
Farbe irmen: braun (IOYRS/2), riitlich-braun (7.5YR6/4), orange (7.5YR6/6), gelb
(2.5Y8/4), grau (SY7/1), beige (IOYR7/2).
Farbe aufien: riitlich (2.5YR6/'4), gelb (2.5Y8/2), gran (EOYRS/1), beige (IOYR7/2).
Ware 0.3
Hauptmagerr/mg: mitteifeiner Hécksel, Nebenmagerung: mittelfeiner Kalk.
Oberfldchenbehandlung inner: and aufienz meistens tongrundig und verstrichen, in einem
Fall beiciseitig verstrichener Uberzug.
Marrixfarbe: riitlich (SYRS/6, SYR6/6), rtitlich-braun (7.5YR6/4) rnit braunem (i0YR4/1)
Kern.
Farbe innen: rtitlich-beige (7.5YR7/4), hellbeige (l0YR8/3), beige (IOYR7/3).
Farbe aufien: r0tlich~beige (SYR7/4), hellbeige (i0YR8/3), beige (l0YR7/3).
Ware 0.4
Hauptmagerurrg: meistens mittelfeiner, seitener feiner oder grober Héicksel,
Nebenmagerung: meistens feiner, seltener mittelfeiner oder grober Sand und feiner
Kalk. ' ~
Obeiffliichenbehandlung inrzent verstrichener Uberzug, tongrundig und verstrichen oder
tongrundig und unbehandelt, in einefn Fall verstrichener Bitumen.
Oberfliichenbehandlung aujienz meistens tongruridig und verstrichen, seltener verstriehener
Uberzug oder geglatteter Uberzug.
Auffaliig ist, dall ein Groliteil der Scherben eine von der Matrix abweichende Kernfarbe
aufweist. Matrixfarbe: riivtlich (2.5YR5/6), rtitlich-beige (7.5YR7/4), riitlich-braun
' (7.5YR6/4), orange (7.5YR6/6), grau (7.5YR4/0), 01ivgriin(2.5Y6/4), beige (10YR7/3).
Kernfarbe: rdtlich-braun (7.5YR6/4), rtitlich-beige (7.5YR7/4), gran (7.5YR4/0).
Farbe innen und aufien: rtitlich (2.5YR6/6), orange (5YR5/8), beige (IOYR7/'2), gran
(5YR5/1), gelb (2.5Y8/4).
Ware 0.5
Hauprmagerung: feiner bis mitzelfeiner, seltener grober Hacksel, Nebenmagemng: Sand,
Kalk und Glimmer fein bis mittelfein.
Oberfldchenbehandlung irmen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen.
» '. -
 _.._...........W.... . .._.. . , __ , V _ .2.1.

198 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren flribzir-Gebiets i99 l
Matriicfarbe: rtitlich (5YR6/8) mit grau-braunem (SYR4/1) Kern, rotlieh-braun (7.5YR5/4) Ware 1.6
rnit dunkelgrauem (7.5YR3/0) Kern, braun (EOYR4/4) mit dunkelbeigem (IOYR3/1) Hauptmagerung: feiner oder mittelfeiner Hiicksel, Nebenmagerung: sciiwarzes Mineral,
Kern, orange (7.5YR5/6) oder dunl-ales Glivgriin (2.5Y3f2). Sand, Kalk und Glimmer fein oder mittelfein.
Farbe mmm: orange (7.5YR8/6), braun (l0YR5/2), beige (IOYR7/3) oder dunkeibeige Obeigflfiichenbehandlung innen und attfien: tongrundig verstrichen.
(IOYR6/3). Matrixfarbe: rbtlich (SYRS/6) mit brzlunem (l0YR5/2) Kern Oder clunkelbeigem (IOYR6/3)
Farbe aufien: rotlich-braun (7.5YR6/4), beige (IOYR7/3), dunkelbeige (IOYR6/3) oder Kern, rétlichwbeige (7.5YR7/4) mit rijtlichern (SYR6/6) Kern, dunkelbeige (l0YR6/3
griin-»grau (2.5Y7l2). und IOYR6/4), dunkelgelb (2.5Y7/4) oder orange (7.5YR6/6).
Farbe inrzen: r6tlich»braun (SYR6/4, 7.SYR6/4), orange (SYR7/6, 7.5YR6/6), beige
Ware 0.6 (IOYR7/3) oder dunkelbeige (l0YR6/3).
Hauptmagerung: feiner Hiicksel, Nebenmagerung: grober Kies. Farbe aufien: rtitlich (SYR6/6), riitlich-braun (7.5YR6/4), beige (IOYR7/3), dunkelbeige
Oberfliichenbehanrllung inner: und aufien: tongrundig und verstriehen. (l0YR6/3), gelb (2.5Y8/4) oder gelb-grim (2.5Y8/2).
Matrixfarbe: orange (7.5YR6/6).
Farbe innen: rotlich-beige (7.5YR7/4). Ware 1.7
Farbe aufien: beige (7.5YR7/3). Hauptmagerung: meistens feiner, seltener mittelfeiner oder grober Héieksel,
Nebenmagerung: Sand, Kalk und schwarzes Mineral, meistens fein oder mittel.
Ware 0.7 (rot-engobierte Ware) Brandhéirre: hart, nur ein Stllick ist sehr hart gebrannt.
Hauptmagerung: mittelfeiner Héicksel, Nebenmagerung: rnittelfeiner Kalk. Oberfldchenbehandlung irmen und aufien: rneistens tongnlndig verstrichen, sehr selten
Oberfléichenbehandlung irmen und auflen: geglatteter Farbtiberzug. ' tongruntlig verstrichene innere Oberflache und mit verstrichenem Uberzug versehene
Marrixfarbe: riitlieh (SYR6/6) mit rbtiich-beigem (SYR7/4) Kern. auliere Oberfiache, ode: tongrundig unbebandelte irmere Oberflache und tongrundig
Farbiiberzug innen: rtitlich (2.5YR5/6). " verstrichene auliere Oberfléiche. '
Farbiiberzug auflen: rbtlich (5YR6/6). Zwei Stiicke sind handgemaeht, die iibrigen scheibengedreht.
Ein Groliteil der Sciierben weist eine von der Matrix abweichende Kernfarbe auf.
Ware 1.2 Marrixfarbe: rotiicll (2.5YR5/6), orange (7.SYR5l6), clunkeibeige (IOYR6/3), griimgrau
Haugtrggzgerung: feiner oder rnittelfeiner Hiicksel, Nebenmagerung: mittelfelner oder grober (2.5Y5/2). Kernfarbe: riitiich-braun (7.5YR6/4), rotlich-grau (7.5YR6/2), grau
a spat. (7.5YR4/0), braun (i0YR5/2).
Oberfltichenbehandlung innen und au/Jen: tongrundig verstrichen. Farbe innen und aufien: rotlich (2.5YR5/6, 5YR6l6), orange (7.5YR6/6), beige (EOYR7/2.),
Matrixfarbe: orange (7 .5YR7/6) mit dunkeibeigem (10YR'7l4) Kern, orange (7.5YR6/6) mit gelb-griin (2.5Y8/2).
~ grauem (7.5YR6l0) Kern oder beige (IOYR7/3).
Farbe irmen: orange (SYR7/6) ocier rbtlich-beige (7.5YR7/4). Ware 1.8 ’
Fwlw rwfienl Orange (5YR'//6). s@=11>~ar@in (2.SY8/2), Oder dnnkelgelb (2.5Y7/4). ‘ Hauptmagerung: feiner oder mittelfeiner Hacksel, Nebertmagerung: Sand und sciiwarzes
Mineral, fein oder rnittelfein.
Ware 1.3 Oberfliicherzbehandlung inner: und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen.
Hauptmagertmg: feiner oder mittelfeiner Haclcsel. Nebenmagerung: feiner, mittelfeiner oder Matrixfarbe: orange (7.5YR6/6), dunkelbeige (IOYR7/4) ocler gelb~gn'3n (2.5Y8/2).
grober Kalkspat und schwarzes Mineral. Farbe innen: rtitlicb-braun (SYR6/4) ocier gelb-griin (2.5Y8/2).
Oberjfléichenbehandlung irmen und aufien: tongrundig verstriehen. Farbe aufien: rtitlich (2.5YR6/4), heilbeige (l0YR8/4) oder gelb»griin (2.5Y8/2).
Marrixfarbe: rt5tlich~braun (7.5YR6/4) oder grtin-grau (2.5Y'7/2, 5Y5/2).
Farbe hmen: beige (i0YR'I/3), gn'in-gran (2.5Y’7/2) oder dunlcelgelb (2.5Y7/4).
Farbe aufien: rotlich-braun (7.5YR6/4) ode: gelb-grtin (2.5Y8/2). 2.1.2. Die vorwiegend mit Sand geznagerten Waren
Ware 2.0 "'
Ware 1.4 Magerung: feiner bis znittelfeiner Sand.
Hauprmagerung: feiner bis grober llacksel, Nebenmagerung: feines bis mittelfeines Oberfliichenbehandlung innen and aufien: tongrundig verstrichen, in einern Fall iiberzogene
schwarzes Mineral. und verstrichene aullere Oberflache.
Oberfléichenbehandlung innen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen. Marrixfarbe: rtitlich-braun (SYR6/4), rbtlich-beige (5YR7/4), beige (l0YR7/2), gelb-
Matrixfarbe: rotlich-braun (SYR6/4, 7.5YR4/6, 7.5YR5/4), rbtlich-gran (SYRS/2) oder . grtinlich (2.5Y8/2) oder gran (IOYRS/2).
dunkelbeige (IOYR6/4). Farbe irmen: rotlich-beige (SYR7/3, 7.5YR7/4), beige (10YR7/3), hellgrau-beige (10YR7/1)
Farbe innen: riitlich-braun ('7.5YR6/4), riitlich-gran (7.5YR7/2), riitlieh-beige (’7.5YR7/4) oder hellbeige (IOYR8/3).
oder beige (l0YR/'73). Farbe aufien: rdtlich-beige (7.5YR7/4), beige (IOYR7/2), heilbeige (10YR8/3) oder gelb~
Farbe aufien: rbtlich-braun (SYR6/4, 7.5YR6/4), rotlich-beige (SYR7/3) oder beige grtinlich (2.5Y8/2).
(IOYR7/3).
it
->.
Fr Ware 2.1
Magerung: feiner Sand.
Oberfliichenbehandlrmg irmen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen.

.d--.a....-_“.. . . - -
g 7 7 7777 ffififf. j ," _ - * 7 V g .. r 7
o.......“..__......_,._.. .....M...-.»-»»-»-.-_--------»»- - -‘""'--ly~'""" ""“‘“*"“'“'”“' "" M“

200 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren Hfibfir-Gebiets 201

Marrixfarbe: d1mke1gelb(2.5Y'I/4), geib-griinlich (2.5Y8/2) oder IOYRS/E (grau). Ware 2.7

Farbe irmen: beige (IOYR7/2, IOYR7/3) oder geib (2.5Y8l4). Hauptmagerimg: feiner Oder mittelfeiner Sand, Nebenmagemng: feines oder mittelfeines
Farbe aufien: beige (IOYR7/) ocler gelb (2.5Y8/4). schwarzes Mineral.
Oberfléichenbehandlung innen und aufien: tongrnnriig verstrichen.
Ware 2.2 Matrixfarbe: orange (7.5YR6/6) mit dunkel-oiivgriinem Kern (2.5Y3/2), braun (IOYRS/2,
Hauprmagerimg: feiner oder mitteifeiner Sand, Nebenmagerung: feiner oder mittelfeiner IOYRS/4) oder beige (EOYR7/3).
Hacksel. Farbe innen: rijtiich-braun (SYR6/4), beige (IOYR7/3) oder dunkeigelb (2.5Y’7/4).
\ Oberfldcherlbehandlung innen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen ode! tongrunciig Farbe aufien: rotiich-braun (SYR6/4), beige (IOYR7/3) oder gelb-griin (2.5Y8/2).
unbehandelt.
Matrixfafbe: rotiich (5YR6l6), braun (IOYR4/3), dunkelbeige (IOYR6/3), geib (2.5Y8/4). Ware 3.2
Farbe innen und auflen: riitlich-beige (7.5YR7/4), beige (IOYR7/3), geIb~g1'iin (2.5Y8/2), Hauptmagerung: feiner oder mitaelfeiner Sand, Nebemnagerung: Hacksel, Kalk, schwarzes
griimgrau (2.5Y7/2). Mineral, fein oder mitteifein.
u-.
Obedkichenbehandlung inner: und aufien: {ongrundig verstrichen.
Ware 2.3 Matrixfarbe: rotlich (SYR6/6), rétlich-braun (7.5YR5/4) oder rotiich-braun (SYR6/4) mit
Haupzmagerung: meistens mitteifeiner, seitener feiner Sand, Nebenmagerung: meistens etwas hellerem Kern (7 .5YR6/4).
miuelfeiner, seltener feiner Kaik. Farbe innen: rotiich-beige (7.5YR'7/4), rotlich-braun (7.5YR6/4) oder dunicelbeige
Obeiffléichenbehandlung innen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen, _se1tener verstrichener (IOYR6/3).
Uberzug. Farbe aufien: riitiich-beige (7.5YR7/4), rotlich-braun (7.5YR6/4) oder dunkelbeige
Marrixfarbe: rdtlich (2.5YR6/4) mit rotlich~grauem Kern (SYRS/2), orange (’7.5YR6/6) mit (IOYR6/3). ._
riitiich-braunem Kern (7.5YR6/4), beige (i0YR7/3), oiivgriin (SY6/3).
Farbe irmen: riitlich-beige (7.5YR7/4), beige (IOYR7/3), oiivgriin (SY6/3). Zusatzware 6.7
Farbe aufien: ri§tlich~iaeige (7.5YR7/4), beige (ZOYR7/3), gelb (2.5Y8/4). Hauptmagerung: feiner Sand, Nebenmagemng: feiner Kalk und mitteifeines schwarzes
Minerai.
Ware 2.4 Oberflfiichenbéhandlung inner: und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen.
Haupimagemngz feiner oder mitteifeiner Sand, Nebenmagerung: feiner oder mitteifeiner Man-ixfarbe: r6£iich~braun (SYR6/4).
Hacksei unci Kalk. Farbe irmen: riiiiich-beige ('7.5YR7/4). .
Brandhdrre: hart, nur in einem Fall sehr hart. Farbe auflen: rotiich-beige ('l.5YR7/4).
Oberfldchenbehandlung innen und aufien: zongrundig verstrichen, in einem Fail
verstrichener Uberzug an cier inneren Oberfliiche und tongmndig verstrichen auflen, oder
iongrundig unbehandelt innen und verstrichene: Uberzug auflen.
2.1.3. Die vorwiegend mit Kalk gemagerten Waren
r Aufféillig ist bei dieser Ware der hohe Anteil an Scherben, die eine von der Matrix Ware 4.1
n
.r
abweichende Kernfarbe aufweisen. Matrixfarbe: riitlich (2.5YR5/6, SYR6/6), orange Hauptmageflmg: feiner oder mittelfeiner Kaik, Nebenmagerung feiner ocier mittelfeiner
(7.5YR5/6). beige (EOYR7/3), geib-griin (SY8/3), grau (1()YR5/I). Kemfaxbe: orange I-iacksel undloder Sand.
(7.5YR6/6), grau (7.5YR5/O, EOYRS/1). Oberflachenbehandlungz innen und aufien tongmndig verstrichen, bei einem Stiick innen
Farbe innen: rotlicb (2.5YR6/4), orange (7.5YR7/6), beige (IOYR7/3), geib-griin (2.5Y8/2), tongrundig verstrichen, aufien verstrichener iiberzug.
griinagrau (2.5Y7/2). Matrixfarbe: rotiich (2.5YR6/4), orange (7.5YR5/6), braun (EOYR4/2), beige (IOYR7/3),
Farbe aufien: rotiich (2.5YR6/4), orange (SYR7/6), beige (IOYR7/3), geib (2.5Y8/4). griin-gran (2.5Y5/2). Kernfarbe: rétiich-braun {'7.5YR6/4), beige {IOYRT/3), braun
(1OYR5/2), grau (7.5YR4l0). . ’
Ware 2.5 Farbe inner: und aufien: riitiich (2.5YR6/4), orange (5YR'7l6), beige (IOYR7/3), geib
Hauptmagerung: feiner Sand, Nebenmagemng: feiner Glimmer. (2.5Y8/4), gelb-griin (2.5Y8/2). "
Oberfléichenbehandlung innen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen.
Matrixfarbe: rotiich-braun (IOR4/4) mit riitlich-grauem (SYRS/2) Kern, dunkelbeige Ware 4.2
(10YR6/3), oder griin-gran (2.5Y7/2). Hauptmagerung: mitteifeiner Kaik, Nebenmagerung mittelfeiner Glimmer.
Farbe irmen: rétlich-beige (SYR7/4, '7.SYR7/4) Oder dunkeibeige (iOYR6/2). Matrixfarbe: riitiich (2.5 YR 6/6) mi: dunkelbeigem (10 YR 6/3) Kern.
Farbe aufien: rotlich (2.5YR6/4), riitiich-grau ('7.5YR6/2) Oder beige (IO l0YR7/3). Farbe irmen: rotiich (2.5 YR 6/6).
Farbe aufien: rétlich (2.5 YR 6/4).
Ware 2.6 Oberjidchenbehandlung innen und aufien tongrundig verstrichen.
Hauptmagerung: feiner Sand, Nebenmagerung: mittelfeines rotiichcs Mineral.
Obezfliichenbehandlung innen und aufien: tongrundig versuichen. Ware 4.3
.5
$4
'
| Matrbcfarbe: rotlich-grau (7.5YR7/6). Hauptmagerung mittelfeiner Kaik, Nebenmagerung mittelfeines schwarzes Minerai.
Farbe innen: r6tlich—grau (7.5YR'7/2). Oberfliichenbehandlung irmen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen.
Farbe aufien: beige (IOYR7/2). Matrixfarbe: rotlich~braun (5YR6/4).

- - .,;,,.. .,.._ _.. . .-,.

................»~...'..w = .. .. ‘T-» -- -- Vf ., -»_

202 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unreren Hzib12r~Gebiets 203

Farbe inner: and aufien: dunicelbeige (IOYR6/3). Ware 5.2

Hauptmagerung: rnittelfeines schwarzes Minerai, Nebenmagerimg: feiner Glimmer.
Ware 4.4 Oberfléichenbehandlung irmen und auflen: tongrundig verse-ichen.
Haupmiagerung: mitteifeiner Kaikspal, Nebenmagerung: feiner oder mitteifeiner Sand und Matrixfarbe: beige (10 YR 7/3) mit rotiich-braunern (5 YR 6/4) Kern.
Hiicksel. Farbe irmeri: beige (10 YR 7/3).
Oberfléichenbehandlung irmen und aufien: iongrundig verstrichen. Farbe aufien: r6t1ich—beige (5 YR 7/4).
Matrixfarbe: riitlich-braun (7.5YR6/4).
Farbe ii/men: rétlich-beige (7.5YR7/4). Ware 5.3
Farbe aufien: gelb-griin (2.5Y8/2). Hauptmagerung: mittelfeines oder feines schwarzes Mineral, Nebenmagemng: mitteifeiner
oder feiner Glimmer, Kaik und Hacksei.
Ware 4.6 Oberfliichenbehandlung inner: und au_/Jen: tongrundig verstrichen.
Hauptmagemng: mitteifeiner Kalkspai, Nebenmagerrmg: feiner Glimmer. Matrixfarbe: rfitlich (5 YR 5/6), riitlich-braun (7.5 YR 6/4) oder riitiich-grau (7.5 YR 5/2).
Oberfléiehenbehandlung inrien und aufien: tongrundig versirichen Oder innen tongrundig Farbe innen: riitlich-beige (7.5 YR 7/4) oder gran (10 YR 5/1).
verstrichen und aufien verstrichener Uberzug. Farbe aufien: riitlich (2.5 YR 5/6), riitiich-beige (7.5 YR 7/4) ode: r6tlich~braun (7.5 YR
Matrixfarbe: braun (10 YR 4/ I). 6/4).
Far/be innen: riitiich (2.5 YR 6/6) oder rijtiich-gran (7.5 YR 6/2).
Farbe aufien: riitlich (2.5 YR 6/6) oder beige (10 YR 7/2). Zusatzware 1.3
Hauptmagerung: mittelfeines odergrobes schwarzes Mineral, Nebenmagerung: feiner Sand
Ware 4.7 und Kaik.
Hauptmagerung: grober Kaikspat, Nebenmagerung: grobes schwarzes Mineral. Oberflfiichenbehandlung irmen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen.
Oberflrfic/ienbehancilung innen und aufien: tongrunciig verstrichen. Mairixfarbez riitlich (5 YR 5/6) mit rfiitlich-braunem (7.5 YR 4/2) Kern, rétlich (5 YR 5/6)
Matrixfarbe: riitlich (2.5 YR 5/6). mit dnnkeibeigem (10 YR 6/3) Kern, oder riitlich-braun (7.5 YR 5/4).
Farbe innen: riitlich-braun (5 YR 6/4). Farbe innen: riiilich (5 YR 6/6), beige (10 YR 7/3) ode: dunkelbeige (10 YR 6/3).
Farbe aufien: ri§t1i<:h~braun (5 YR 6/4). Farbe aufien: rbtlich-braun (5 YR 6/4, 7.5 YR 6/4) oder dunkelbeige (10 YR 6/3).

Ware 4.8 Zusatzware 1.6 .

Hauptmagemng: grober Kaikspat, Nebenmagerimg: miitelfeines schwarzes Mineral und Hauptmagerimg: mittelfeines schwarzes Minerai, Nebenmagerung: rnittelfeiner oder feiner
Kalk. Sand.
Oberflcichenbehandlung innen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen. Oberfléichenbehandlung inner: and zzufien: tongrundig verstrichen, bei einem Stiick innen
Marrixfarbe: orange (7.5 YR 7/6) mit dunkelgrauem (2.5 Y 3/O) Kern. tongrundig geglaitet, aufien tongrundig verstrichen.
Farbe innen: riitiich (5 YR 6/6). Matrixfarbe: riitlich (5 YR 6/6), r6tiich~braun (5 YR 6/4) mit rbtlich-braunem (5 YR 6/3)
I
:- Farbe aufien: riitlich-braun (7 .5 YR 6/4). Kern oder orange (7.5 YR 6/6) mit rfiitlich-grauem (7.5 YR 6/2) Kern.
Farbe innen: rbtlich-braun (5 YR 6/4, 7.5 YR 6/4).
Zusatzware 1.1 Farbe cmfien: r6tli<:h~beige (5 YR 7/4, 7.5 YR 7/4) oder rtirlich-braun (5 YR 6/4).
Hauprmagerimg: mitteifeiner Kalic. Nebenmagerung: mittelfeiner Hiicksei und schwarzes
Mineral. Zusatzware 1.7
Oberfléichenbeharidlung irmen und aufien: tongrundig vers£richen. Hauptmagerung: mitlelfeines schwarzjes Minerai, Nebenmagenmg: feiner Kalkspat und
Mairixfarbe: riiilieh (2.5 YR 5/6) mit retlich-braunezn (5 YR 6/4) Kern. Sand. ’
Farbe irmen: riitlich (5 YR 6/6). Obergflcichenbehandlung innen: t0ngrundi‘g"g'eg1attet, auBen: tongrundig verstrichen.
Far/9e aufien: riitlich-braun (5 YR 6/4). Matrixfarbe: riitiich-braun (7.5 YR 6/4) init rotiichem (5 YR 5/6) Kern.
Farbe innen: riitiicivbraun (7.5 YR 5/4).
Far/2e aufien: dunkelbeige (10 YR 6/3).
2.1.4. Die vorwiegend mit schwarzem Mineral gemagerten Waren
Ware 5.0
Hauptmagerung: mittelfeines schwarzes Mineral, Nebenmagerung: mittelfeiner Hacksel.
Obeijléichenbehandlung irmen und aufien: tongrundig verstrichen.
Matrixfarbe: r6tlich~braun (7.5 YR 4/2, 7.5 YR 6/4) oder rtitiich (5 YR 6/6) mit r6tiich-
braunem (7.5 YR 6/4) Kern.
1.
Far/Je irmen: r6tlich»braun (5 YR 6/4, 7.5 YR 6/4) Oder braun (10 YR 6/2).
~ Farbe aufieri: riitlich-beige (7.5 YR 7/4) oder braun (10 YR 5/2).

I
l
3
i

_ ..v .-,!;.'.;..v
.__........._._.
204 The Khabur Valley
2.2. Der Forrnenhestand
Zum Forrnenbestand der eisenzeitlichen Oberfléichenkeramik zahlen fiinf
Formtypen, die nach groben funktionalen Kategorien definiert warden:
Schaien/Schiisseln, Napfe, Tiipfe, Flaschen und Becher.’ Zudem sind eine Anzahi
von Bdden vorhanden, die fiir die neuassyrische Zeit sehr charakteristisch sind.
'\
Schalen/Schiisselng
Unterlyp 12.1.; knickwandige Schaien/Schiisselng
Variante 2 (Abb. la): Rand beidseirig verdickt und leicht eingezogen, Lippe abgerundet,
Einkehlung unterhalb des Randes.
Variante 4 (Abb. lb): Rand beidseiiig verdicki und leieht eingezogen, Lippe abgerundet,
scharfer Knick.
Variante 5 (Abb. ic): mit Ausnahme der Einkehlung, die innen abgerundet ist, wie Variante
4.
Variante 7 (Abb. Id): Rand beidseitg verdickt und leicht eingezogen, Lippe abgerunclei, in
Einkehlung umlaufender Wulst. ' abgerundet.
Variante 10 (Abb. Ie): Rand senkreeht gesteilt, beidseitig verdicki, Lippe abgerundet.
einfaehe Binkehiung.
Variante I2 (Abb. It): Rand senkrecht gestellt und aufien verdickt, geriefte Lippe, nur
leichte Einkehlung nnternalb des Randes.
Variante I3 (Abb. 2a): Rand aufien iibergerollt und innen eingezogen, Lippe abgerundet,
umlanfende Riefung in Lippe, Wandung nur ieicht geknickt.
Variante 14 (Abb. Zb): Rand senkrecht gestellt und nacli aufien heruntergezogen, Lippe
abgerundet, langgezogene Einkehiung, die an Unterkante in scharfem Knick endet.
Variante 16 (Abb. 2c): Rand beidseitig verdickt und stark eingezogen, Lippe abgerundet, nur
ieichter Wandungsknick.
Variante 18: (Abb. 2d): Rand vertiical gestelit und nach aufien henintergezogen, am unieren
Ende spitz zulaufend, ¥.ippe abgerundet, Einkehlung unterhalb des Randes.
Variante 2i (Abb. 2e): sehr stark eingezogener, auiien verdickier Rand, abgerundete Lippe,
gewellte Einkehlung unterhalb des Randes, an die scharfer Wandungsknick anscbiiefiz.
/-
I Variante 24 (Abb. 2t): ieicht nach innen eingezogener Rand, aufien ecicige, nicht voiistandig
umiaufende Randleiste, Ieichter Knick.
Variante 25 (Abb. 2g): eckige Randleiste, direkt unterhaib des Randes rnarkanie Einkehiung
mit scharfer Umbruchstelle.
Variante 27 (Abb. 3a): beidseitig verdickter Rand, gewellte Lippe, sehr ieichter Knick.
1
Variante 28 (Abb. 3b): beidseitig verdickter, kugeiférmiger Rand, abgerundete Lippe, direki
unterhalb des Randes Einkehlung, Vi/andung schwingt unierhaib der Binkehiung
rundiich ein.
Variante 30 (Abb. 3c): nach auflen geroliter Rand, abgeruridete Lippe, senr scharfer
Wandungsknick.
7 Innerhalb der F0l'm£yp6n ergeben sich Untertypen, die durch den Verlauf der
Gefafiwzmdung definiert werden sowie Varianten, die durch die Merkmale des Randes und
der Lippe bestimmbar sind.
8 Aufgrund der starken Scherbenfragmentierung des Oberflachenmaterials ktinnen
Hiihenmafle meistens nicht geliefert werden. Aus diesern Grund ist die Zuweisung eines
4 Randstiickes zu einer Schaie oder einer Schiissel haufig nicht moglich. Darum wurde auf
eine solche Unterscheidung verzichzet.
9 Da dieser Aufsatz die abgekiirzte Version des in Anm. 1 angefiihrien Aztikels ist, werden
die Varianzen nicht durchlaufend numeriert.
Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren Hfibzir-Gebiets 205
Variante 33 (Abb. 3d): naeh aufien gezogener und innen abgeschragter Rand, abgerundere
Lippe, langezogene Einkehiung.
Variante 35 (Abb. 3e): nach aufien gezogener, abgeschragter Rand, innen leicht verdickt,
abgerundete Lippe, Ieichze Einicehlung.
Untertyp B.2.: geradwandige Schalen/Schiisseln
Variante 2 (Abb. 3i): nach aufien gezogener Rand mi: doppelz geweiiier Lippe.
Untertyp B.3.: rundwandige Schalen/Schiisseln
Variante I (Abb. 3g): Rand vertikal gesteilt, aufien verdickt, abgerundete Lippe.
Variante 3 (Abb. 421): leicht eingezogener bzw. innen verdickter und auflen iibergeroilter
Rand, abgerundete Lippe, Riefungen unterhalb des Randes.
Varianie 4 (Abb. 4b): leicht eingezogener, beidseitig verdickter Rand, abgemndete Lippe,
Riefungen unterhalb des Randes.
Variante 6 (Abb. 4e): Rand beidseirig stiirker verdicict und starker eingezogen ais bei
vorhergehenden Varianten, abgerundete Lippe.
Variante 8 (Abb. 4d): Rand auBen iibergerollt und nacn innen ieicht eingezogen, Lippe
_
Variante 11 (Abb. 4e): Rand eingezogen, unterbrochene, im Profii runde Randieisze, Lippe
abgerundet. .
Variante 12 (Abb. 4i): irn Profil dreieckiger, vertikal stehender Rand, mit abgesetzier
rundiicher Randleiste, Lippe gewellt.
Variante 13 (Abb. 4g): sehr stark ausgepragte Randleiste, abgerundete Lippe. ‘
Variante 17 (Abb. 4h): im Profil dreieckiger Rand, leicht nach innen eingezogen,
abgerundete Lippe.
Variante 19 (Abb. Sa): Rand waagerecht nach aui$en gezogen, Lippe abgerundet.
Variante 21 (Abb. Sb): Rand beidseitig verdickt, Lippe sehrag nach aufien abgeschnitten und
ieicht gewelit.
Variante 23 (Abb. Sc): Rand‘ innen und auflen verdickt, Lippe nach aufien schrag
abgeschnitten, doppelte Einkehlung unierhalb des Randes.
Variante 26 (Abb. 5d): Rand aufien verdickt, Lippe schrag nach aufien gewiilbt.
Untertyp B.-4.: erichterwandige Schalen/Schiisseln
Variante i (Abb. Se): stark trichierwandige Schale/Schiissel, Rand nur ieicha auflen
akzentuiert, Lippe abgerundet.
Variante 4 (Abb. Sf): Rand beidseitig stark verdickt, Lippe schriig nach anlien abgeschnitten.
Variante 5 (Abb. 5g): beidseitig verdickter Rand, abgerundete Lippe.
Variante 7 (Abb. Sh): extrem trichterfbrmige Wandung, Rand beidseitig verdickt, Lippe
abgerundet. ,_ _. -
Variante 9 (Abb. 6a): im Profii dreieckiger Rand, nach aufien schrag abgeschnittene Lippe,
umlaufende Riefung unrerhalb des Randes.
Variante ll (Abb. 6b): nach aufien umgeschlagener Rand, Lippe abgerundet, uinlaufende
Riefung in Wandnng.
Variante 12 (Abb. 6c): Trichterwand starker ausgepragt als bei Varizmren 9 und 11, Rand
' vertikal stehend, nach auflen umgeschlagen, abgerundete, geriefte Lippe.
Variante 14 (Abb. 6d): nach innen stark eingezogener Rand, Lippe doppelr gewelit.
Niipfe
Untertyp C.1.: icnickwandige Napfe
Variante 1 (Abb. 6e): senkrecht szehender Rand, abgerundete Lippe, Wandung unterhalb des
Knickes trichterfijrmig.
....,__-..__-.._.__._...,.... -- ...._.,...,_,.._-.M:.~..-1... .»»=.
T

206 The Khabur Valley
Variante 3 (Abb. 61): Rand nacn auficn gezogen, inncn leicht cingezogen, ieichter
Wandungsknick, Wandung schwingt nnzerhalb des Knickes rundlich ein.
Untertyp C.2.: rundwandige Napfe
Vafiante 3 (Abb. 6g): unakzentuierter Rand, abgerundetc Lippe.
Variante 4 (Abb. 721): aufien heruntergezogener Rand, Lippe abgerundel.
\ Untertyp C.3.: trichtcrwandige Néipfe
Variante I (Abb. '7b): beidseitig verdickter, schréig geszellter Rand, nach aufien schrag
abgeschnittene Lippe.
Variante 2 (Abb. 70): beidseitig vcrdickter, waagcrcchtcr Rand, abgerundctc Lippe.
-\
Tiipfe
Untertyp D.I.: Tépfe mit geradcr Wandung.
Variante 1 (Abb. 7d): nach aufien umgeschlagener Rand und nach aufien schrag
abgeschnittcne Lippe.
Variante 2 (Abb. 7c): aufien iibcrgeroliter Rand, nach innen Ieicht eingezogen, abgerundcte
Lippe.
Variante 5 (Abb. 78: nach aufien umgeschlagencr und nach innen stark eingczngencr Rand,
abgerundete Lippe.
Variante 6 (Abb. 7g): beidseitig verdickter Rand, Lippe mehrfach gewellt.
Untertyp D.2.: rundwandige Tijpfe.
Varianie 1 {Abb. 7h): nach innen schrag abgeschnittene, eckige Lippe; “hole mouth”-Topf.
Variante 2 (Abb. 821): Lippe schréiger abgeschnittcn ais bei Variante 1; “hole mouth”/1‘0;>f.
Varianté 5 (Abb. Sb): ansiadender, nach aul3cn umgeschlagener Rand, abgerundete Lippe.
Variante 7 (Abb. 8c): Hats zur Miindung hin schmaier werdend, Rand nach aulien
umgeschlagcn, abgerundete Lippe.
Variante 10 (Abb. 8d): gerader Hais, schrag nach auiien abgeschnittene Lippe.
:"..
Variante 12 {Abb. 8e): Rand nach aufien langer nmgeschiagen als bei vorhergehender
Variante, Lippe abgerundet.
.1. Variante I4 (Abb. Sf): Rand bcidseizig vcrdickt, Lippc abgerundez.
1" Variante 17 (Abb. 8g): gexader I-Ials, waagerecht nach aufien gezogener Rand, abgerundete
Lippe.
Variante 20 (Abb. 921): waagerccht nach aulien gezogener, im Profil dreicckiger Rand, Lippe
abgerundet.
Variante 22 (Abb. 9b): Rand nach aufien gezogen, Lippe nach innen abgeschriigt, Absatz
1
bzw. umlaufcndc Leiste am Geféiifikdrper.
Variante 24 (Abb. 9c): Rand nach aufien gezogen, im Profil dreieckig (iihnlich Variante 20),
Lippe abgerundet, am Gefafikdrper umlaufende, im Profil runde Leiste.
Variante 25 (Abb. 9d): Vorratsgefafiz beidscizig verdickier Rand, abgerundetc Lippe,
umlaufende, im Profil runde Leiste, darunter Riefungen.
Variante 26 (Abb. 10a): senkrecht stehender Hals, unakzentuierter Rand, abgerundete
Lippe, Absatz zwischen Hals und Kiirper.
Flaschen
Untertyp E.1.: Fiaschen mit geradem Hals.
Variante 4 (Abb. 101)): Rand vertikai stehend und nach aufien umgeschlagen, Lippe schrég
" |
nach au8en abgeschnitten.
* 5 Variante 5 (Abb. 100): Rand nach innen cingezogen, nach aufien umgeschiagen, Lippe
1.
schrag nach auficn abgeschnitten, an Randinnenseite leichze Einkehlung.
Variante 7 (Abb. 10d): Rand lang nach auflcn urngcschlagcn, Lippe gewellt.
Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren [;ldba2r~Gebiers 207 1
Variante 8 (Abb. 10¢): Rand nach anflen gerollt, Lippe abgcrundet.
Variante E0 (Abb. 10%): Rand waagerecht nach aufien gezogen, Lippe eckig, Rand innen
Ieicht verdickt, umlaufende, im Profil runde Leisce an Wandung.
Untenjyp 12.2.: Flaschen mit gcschwungenem Hals
Variante 3 (Abb. 1121): Rand vertikal stehend, Lippe abgcrundet.
Variante 6 (Abb. 1 lb): Rand lcicht ansladend, Lippe schrag nach innen abgeschnitten.
Variante 7 (Abb. 11¢): Rand nach auBen gero11t,Lippe abgerundet.
Variante 10 (Abb. 11d): Rand auficn iibergerolit, Lippe schrag nach aufien abgeschnitten,
Einkehlung an Innenseite des Randes.
Variante 12 (Abb. 11c): Rand waagcrecht nach auBen gezogen, im Profil dreicckig, Lippe
abgerundet.
Variante 14 (Abb. 111?): Rand Ieicht ausladcnd und nach aulfien gcrollt, Lippc abgerundct,
am Hals und auf Schulter umlaufende, im Profil runde Leisten.
Variante 16 (Abb. 12a): Rand ausladend, Lippe gerade nach unten abgeschnittcn.
Variante 21 (Abb. 12b): Rand leicht ausladend und nach auBen iibergcrollt, Lippe schrag
nach aufien abgcschnizzen und ieicht gewellt.
Variante 23 (Abb. 12c): Rand l_eicht ausladend und nach aufien iibergeroiit, Lippe
abgcrundet.
1 Variante 25 (Abb. 12d): Rand aualadend und nach aufien iibergcrollt, Lippe schréig nach
innen abgeschnittcn.
Untertyp E.3.: Flaschen mit trichierftirmigem Hais
Variante 1 (Abb. 12e): nach aulfien gerolher Rand, gerade abgeschnittene Lippe, eckige
Randieiste.
Variance 4 (Abb. 121): auflen Libergerollter Rand, nach aufien schréig abgeschnittenc Lippe.
Variante 6 (Abb. 12g): au§3cn umgeschiagener Rand, Lippe nach inncn schriig abgeschnitten,
eckigc Randleiste. ‘
Variante 7 (Abb. E211): vertikal stchcnder, aufien iibergerollter Rand, Lippe gewellt.
Variante 8 (Abb. 13a): anBen iibergeroliter Rand, Lippc gewellt.
Variante 9 (Abb. 13%)): aufien iibergeroiitcr Rand, Lippe schréig nach innen abgeschnitten.
Variante 11 (Abb. 13c): auBen iibcrgeroiiter Rand, Lippe nach aufien schriig abgenmdet.
1 Variante 12 (Abb. 13d): Rand nach aufien gezogen, Lippe schrag nach aufien abgeschniltcn,
eckigc Randleiste.
Variante. 13 (Abb. 13e): Rand waiter waagcrecht nach aufien gezogen, ais bei Variante 12,
Lippe gerade ahgeschnittcn, eckige Randleisze.
I
Becher
Untartyp H. 1.: Bechcr mit gerader Wand_u_ng'
Vanantc 2 (Abb. 13f): Rand unakzentuierz, Lippe abgerundet, umlaufende
Riefungen/Riiiungen.
Untertyp H.2.: Becher mi: gerundeaer Wandung
Variante 1 (Abb. 13g): geschwungener Hals, nach auflen gezogener Rand, abgerundete
Lippe, leichter Schultcrknick.
! Variante 2 (Abb. 14a): Hals nur leicht geschwungcn, Randeinschniirung, Lippe abgcrundet.
Untfartyp H.3.: Becher mit trichterfiinniger Wandung
Vanante 1 (Abb. 14b): Rand unakzcntuiert, Lippc an Innenwandung schréig abgeschnitten.
l

1 . _ = - I 5 T ' ‘ ’ E
_M.,,_,,.. .. . F -- -....M...~w....~.—...-._..._.:.—. . ._....____,..._...,__.__.. ... _ _ fir‘

208 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren Hdbfir-Gebiets 209
1

Biiden Den feinen Waren gehdren nur die Sandwaren 2.0 und 2.1 an. Far die Ware 2.1
sind nur diinnwandige Becher belegt, wahrend das Formenrepertoire der Ware 2.0
Bei den Bdden werden fiinf Untertypen umerschieden:
». ans Schalen, Tdpfen und Flaschen besteht.
Umfertyp G. I. (Abb. 140): Knopfbdden I
Untertyp G.2. (Abb. 14d): Spitzbiiden
3. Die Datierung der eisenzeitlichen Oberfliichenkeramik
Untertyp G.3. (Abb. l4e): Wackelbiiden
Untertyp G.-4. (Abb. 14f): Flachbdden 3.1. Periodisierung
‘\
Untertyp (2.5. (Abb. 14g): abgesetzte Flachbdden. Die Datierung der eisenzeitlichen Oberflachenkeramik wird mangels
quantifizierten Vergieichsmaterials erschwert. Die Auswertung rnufite daher so
2.3. Die Dekortypen erfolgen, daB pro Formtyp in den Referenzorten Vergleiche gesucht wurden, die es
Nur wenige Scherben des eisenzeitiichen Oberfléichenmaterials sind verzierz. Dabei ermdgiichten Laufzeiten festzulegen. Nach dam Feststelien von Einzelvergleichen
-».
handelt es sich entweder um plastische oder eingedriickte Dekore. b@1T1a1i¢ wurden zusatzlich die Kleramikassemblagen der Referenzorte mit den
Scherben sind nicht belegt. Ein Fragment weist auf der Schulter nebeneinander Oberfléichenassemblagen der Survey-Orte gegeniibergestellt. Durch den Vergleich
angeordnete, ovale und runde Stempeleindriicke mit abwechselnd geomemschen solcher Vergesellschaftungen wird die Unsicherheit von Einzelvergleichen
(kreuzfdrmigen) und pflanzlicnen (Zweigen) Motiven Iauf (Formtyp Eé2_.14-. Adh- verringert.
llf). Identische Stempeimotive sind haufig auf“GefaBen_ ans Tall e13 fgxmlad Diese Vorgehensweise erlaubte es, drei chxonologisch aufeinanderfolgende
1
beiegt/° Ncbeneinander angeordnete F1ngernagc1_eindn1c!<e finder: sic aim I
Keramikgruppen festzulegen, ngimlich die Gruppen A, D und F, wobei Gruppe D
Halsbereich der Fiasche 8.1.10. (Abb. 10f). Auch iiir diese Verzierungsart sind sich in zwei Subgruppen untergliedert. 1
zahlreiche Parallelen ans Tall §éh I-Iamad bekannt. Zwei Schalenfragmentfib Keramikgruppe A bezeichnet solche Forrntypen, die nur in den Fundkontexten
(B124. und 13.3.11.) weisen im Randbeieich nicht voiistandig umifluffinde Lflislflfl 1
1
Abu Danne {Id (Periode A6) und Qal‘at ‘iina Bereiche R4 7C/D Phasen 9~6 und
auf. I-Iaufiger treten vollstandig umiaufende Wiilste oder Leisten. gewellte Riinder Q3 6B Phasen 5-4 vertreten sind.
und geritzte oder geriefte urniaufende Linien auf. Keramikgruppe D1 wird durch solche Keramik definiert, die ausschiiefilich in
Qaarigfg Cliff auftritt, w0hingegen‘Kerami1<gruppe D2 Material umfaifit, das seinen
2.4. Die Warenzusammenfassung friihesten Beleg in Qaarig Cliff hat, sich aber auch noeh in spateren Fundkontexten
Fiir die eisenzeitliche Oberfléichenkeramik lassen sich vier Warengruppen bzv_v. von Assur, Nimriid, Kfil’—TllkUlIT-Nilluftfi, Tall Sélg Hamad, Tall ijialaf, Felgneriye,
Waren unterscheiden. Es handelt sich hierbei um die fiirifflfiihfin Wafcfli 51¢ Suitantepe, Abu Danna {Io (Periods A5) und Qal‘at ‘Ana Bereich R4 7C/D Phase 5
I
Kochtopfwaren, die feinen Waren und die rot-engobiene Ware ‘(WEN 9-7)- findet.
Die grdfite Gfuppe bilden die einfachen Warenf‘. D1656 Gruppe wurde Keramikgruppe F umfafit Formtypen, die auf die nachassyrischen Fundkontexze
zusammengefafit, weii sich keine Konzentration bes£1mmter_F0rmtypen auf von Nimrfid/Fort Saimanassar und Ijirbe£ Qaarig beschrankz sind.
einzelne Waren abzeicnnete. In dieser Warengruppc sind alie Gefalitynen vertreten, Drei weitere Gruppen (B, C und E) weisen hingegen iangere Laufzeiten auf und
aufféillig ist dabei der hohe Anteil an Schalen und Schiisseln. Eine ahnliche kdnnen somit innerhalb der Eisenzeit nicht naher eingegrenzt werden.
Beobachtung wurde auch fiir andere eisenzeitliche Fundorte gemacht. Mit wenigen Die chronoiogische Einordnung der einzeinen Formtypen ist im Anhang
Ausnahmen sind die einfachen Waren sowohl pflanzlich als auch minfirfliiwh tabellarisch znsammengefafit Worden." - A
gemagert.
Der Gruppe der Kochtopfwaren werden sieben Warcn zugerechnfli. D38 *K”ei'amikgru1;1;e F "" *7 -Vii DDDDDiaufzeitx rrrrW M
1 Formenspektruin der Waren 4.6, 4.7, 4.8 und ZuS&iZWflI¢ 1-7. bfifiehi W A Enaé*9./Anfnigé.-M1116 3. J1i.v. cm.
ausschliefilich ans Kochtdpfen. Die Waren 0.4, 1.7 und 5.0 weisen hingegen neben B Fade 9./Anfjang 8.-Ende 7. J11. v. cm.
Kochtépfen eine Vielzahl an Formen auf, die mit den fiinfiwhfill Warm 35301516“ _c Ende 9./Atnfang 8.-Mine 6. Jh. v. cm. 1
sind.
"Di _ 13;. Jh. v. chi. (Qaarig cam
if D2 . I Mitte 8.~I-Ende 7. Jh. v. cm.
i Mitte 8.»Mitte 6 Jh. yl (in. D
"’ Auf der sog. "§é13 Hamad Ware"; pers. Mitteiiung H. Kiihne; ¢f- <ii¢ 56111586 Von j F 1 Ende '7.fMit£e 6. Jh. vfchr. 11111*1
ANASTASIO (S. 173-191) und Rnxcniz (S. 231-259) in diesem Band. 1
~.
-. “ Foigende Waren warden dieser Gruppe zugeordnet: Ware 0.2, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1 Tab. 1: Zusammenfassung der Periodisierung
1.6 1.7, 1.8, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 3.2, Zusatzware 0.7, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, Zusatzware
1.1: 5.0, 5.2, 5.3, Zusatzwarc 1.3, Zusatzware 1.6 und Zusatzware 1.7. Die Waren 0.4, 1.7 1
und 5.0 sind zusatziich bei den Kochtijpfen vertreten.
2

2 i i ‘ ‘ I I ‘ ‘ t .: I > I iii)‘: _ H H ff
_4._.__._-,_..._...._.._. - 1- -- - , ,_-. ...>~......2' ——~ ,, — _ T »--—~~-—-~»--=-»-~~ -~=-~-

210 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren [idbflr-Gebiets 211

Anhang: Die Datierung der eisenzeitlichen Formtypen 41” 13.3.12 . 11116161 ‘11R6=]nA 1962 ‘‘‘‘" ‘ Taf. 56:23
E_.-
361; 116.6166 161111616 191146 Abb. 67:2
‘ Nimrud/For: 0ATES,]. 1959 Pi. 35:15
I. Die einfachen Waren ' 1 Sa1rnanassar_ 1
Abb.W7_1{orn1_ _, Vergleichsort __Iii_§eratu_r_ _ W‘ "1§bbi1dp,ng ,_ ‘Grugpel I L4-g *B.3.13 . ‘ H11661Qa6r1gf 1 CuRTisi9139 _I=1g. 30.115 F 5‘
(16 13.1.2. 1-111661661116 .cu1ms19s9 P12-24125.......- . 1.1”” 1 4h B317. _Abu Danne LEBEAU 19383 BL 33,5 /451220 A D2
_1b B.1.4f H[Q6666 can culéié 1989
1 HALLER 1954
Fig. 7:5 __D1_________ 521 13.3.19. Abu Danne 1.1-1611.16 1933 c1> 24,4 A6-411 1* C
\ 1C 1 13.1.5. Assur Taf. 6ba Qa1‘a1 ‘Ana K11.uci< 1988 Fig. 28: 18
Nimrud LINES 1954 1 P1. 37:5 S61; 11111111116 s1/91791v/18/4612 unpubi.
1;1irbea Qagarig Cums 1989 Fig- ?f‘*;Z51 32145___________.. 1 1;11rb61 Q_a§rig Cums 1989 WFig. 23:6
1d 13.1.7. Qaarié Cliff CURTIS 1989 1 Fig.l:4_V D1 , V51» B.3.21. Abu Danne I..1§B13AU 193813" 13540.4 11612112 A7
__ 1 1e 13.1.10. Kér-Tukul'r.i~ I)m"MA1~11~1 im Abb.15:7 +243 F.--
Ninurta Dmck c 56 ,,!1’1s.3.23:__,, 1411661 666516 ,,_c_?n1&1s19ss1'1 P15251545
Ijirbet Qaarig CURTIS 1989 Fig. 24:25 _______ ____________
Tab. 4: Verglei che fiir die rundwandigen Schalen/Schiisseln der einfachen Wa
"11 3.1.12. Abu D6666 LEBEAU 1933 j131.5,213I6T533 __A,,,,,,,,,H 1 1131!

*2. 1 8.1.13. Nimrud/Fort OATES, J. 1959 Pl. 35:25 02

Salmanassar (@111
1026 13.1.14. H Hirbet Qa$ri§ CURTIS 1989 Fig. 251561" T rrrrrrrrrr "\ F 1
E ___‘ B_.4.1. A Vergleigbsort Dbriteraturflw
Q_a_1‘at . Ana ~ K1LL1CKl1988
A 4 Ififiild
""8 71 ”””"
_i :;_1=1g.2s¢6 GT "
7 @9299 ‘
_2c 13.13.16. Halaf 116661» 1962 Taf. 611152 ____ 51 9.4.4. Q1666 c1111 1 cums 1989 Fig, 16136 R R R ** R R R "D2
A ___

24- 3 13.1.18. 1;iir!2.<2I Qasrié CUR13§V1'g89V Z Fig.25:50 F _, .5g ___ $611 Hamad ,,,,W . s1/91771v/46/44 1666661.
"26 8.1.217 "*A;_§,a{;6 114/3537/5977112793 I unpubl. 114.5. i1;11r661Q.1.g.ng .CUR'l“I.§ 19119 Fig. 2563154. *1‘
Hirber Q9993. CURTIS 1989 Fig. 26:57, 62 _ _ 291100
21 1 “E124. 11616111111 Hnouna 1962 (T61. 611157 “D62” , A 5}? 1
3_-4<7- $i11_£antepe_ LLOYD/GDRD131953 171901.174 7 ‘Bi 7
V ;_g_": 13.1.25. 1Q6$ng_c_1_1nW ,Cun"rIs1989 _‘__Fig.7:9 W_W1>1;éQ 6a 18.4.9. .A66 11:16.66 19621611983 “13L44,2*A6J23o; 5 "1;
1 321 13.1.27. Abu Danna _1:§15jEAU1983 QT 7,4/16-579 A BL 44,3 A6-484
36 , 11.1.22. 1 1;1a1111[_ M1 11116615111962 f1"a1.6i;147 1 D2 1 ....2 -. ....... 19@L=..I;1am.a<1 181/9177Iv/26/:7 1 6.16661. 1

3c 13.1.3_Q._" Assur __HA|.i.BR_1_9_54_ 5 Taf. _6av D2

166 ,B_-4.11. 1111,66: Q6616 “c,u1ms1989 1=1'g.26¢59 1
; 36 1 1.1.1.33. Nimrnd/Fort OA'1‘5S,J.1959 P1. 36133 F V 76¢ 1 13.4.12. NimrudfFort 0A1~6s,1;*T959 7151.35;14, 25” W
‘ . Salmanassar ' A 1 , Saimanassar , , -2 1 ,,,,__ ,______
, , ,,,,,,,,,,,,_, 1 16111661966113 1 C9§;T1S1989 Pia 14521,, 1 ‘ if 6d A‘ 13.4.14.
VVVVV*7 W A Abu Danna 1266161983 BL 27,4 A5-233 152
F 3e ____7___1§1.3,5. , Eirbet Q_a§ri@__ CURT1.S”1V989 Fig. 24207 F .4. .....2. -,_ 2- __. _ ‘ +23,4_, _
Tab. 5: Vergieiche fiir die trichterwandigen Schaien/Schiissein der einfachen Wanan
Tab. 2: Vergleiche fiir die knickwandigen Schalen/Schiisseln der einfachen Waren

1 : : 11»
Forbiw VVVV Verglreiebygdrt_ ijitferatuxf W VVVVW fiyfljifiuna 1 DDDD Grunééi
Abb. _If9;ni __1VergleicbS0rt Literaigg_______ _ I Abbildung________________._ . @GI'=1E;&_1
. 1 3f "___ 13.2.2. __1f§1iV_Danr_ie_ 1LE13EAu1983 7,4 A6-579 A ___ 69 <3-1-I irialaf 11116661 1962 Taf.61:150
4--- A3691
S . ~ Clxff
. 11/121.66 1954 “ _ Taf. 666,
Tab. 3: Vergieiche fiir die geradwandigen Schaien/Schiissein der einfachen Waren 61* C.I.3. 1 Qarig CURTIS 11989 7 W "Fig. 10:26]?” 1 WD1 71
Tab. 6: Vergleiche fiir die knickwandigen Niipfe der einfachen Warenw 71
1 Abb. _]j‘0rm Vergleichsort Litegatur 1 Abbiidizng ___ Grugpe
3g 13.3.1. l Abu Danne 1.1;-:21-zAu 1983 BL 44,3 A6434; 1 B 1 _Abb. 1Form V Vergleichsnrt _,Lit’<=.iFatur 1 Llgbbilliijng G,-ummi
W ___, 31. 30,2 A5-254
i 4a , 13.3.3. 1”§@§11g can,,,,,W 1 CuRT1s 1989 __V Fig, 7:4 ‘ D1 6g L021. ‘
Nimrud Lmas 1954 P1.”37:6 13 7
. 741;" 13.3.4. ,Q6§11,g_c111f CURT1S1989 1 Fig.8:1l 1;_1_,_,,,, Nimrud/Fort 0A"ras, J. 1959 P1. 35;]
Salmanassar
' "46 1 19.3.6. Sultantepe LLOYD/GOKCE 1953 Nr. 16 E 7a C.2.4. Nimrud/Fort QATEE, 31.111959 W "151. 35=5 7
1 1 ,,,,,,,__A__HirbetQasriQ___,_CURTIS1939 ‘ Fig-}§;54.29=105.__. Saimanassar
1 4d 13.3.8. Abu Danne LEBBAU 1983 BL 27,6 A6-469 C
J 1 Hi,bc,Qas,ig (:UR'1-[S1989 ;=,g_26;62 I HiYb9rQa§r'" CvRT1sI989_ Fig 23-9 __
1 . Z46 1 B.3.11'.W Abu Danna LEBEAU1983 BL 3,4 A6-658 Tab. 7: Vergleiche fiir die rundwandigen Niipfe der einfachen Waren
.-__. 1tl@L19f--.. , HROUDA 1962 Taf. 68: 155

_ _____ _ , ;5i.§Jif:IJ~.- _
_.____._______,,.... , y__,.... H _.._$. . _._-_.._.______.__,,,__,_,_2._.__......._.. ,.._.._1__3..3....._.. _ 2

212 The Khabm‘ Valley Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unreren Hfibfir-Gebiers 213
'''''''*** "W" bB'§1*&"' " " ;G:*' T **********~ —~ if ............. W3 ,,,,,,, I E __.
Abb. _1___1?_qr1111 ‘ Y.¢_rgleichs0rt__..._é Liteljgf-}1r .. A W13_____________________ .1‘fl12P@ A 1 10c 5.1.8. Nimrud/Fort 0;,{,e_s_ 1, 1959 A p1_ 3g;9g
7b Qagrié Cliff CURT§__193_9__ 1318- 19331____________________ _ D3 . Salmanassar
1 7c C.3.2. Aim Danae ‘ LEBEAU 1933 A BL 7,5 A6-234 1 A ___ 1 . .S9_1§ar1te;1e ___, LLOYD/GC>K(;1z195§ Nr. 8
D3333 Lé§EAU WW 7
W ........... .. 1 9 ...__- ____ , _ _____ , __ _-___ D2
Tab. 8: Vefgifliche ml‘ die trichmfwandigell N5Pf¢ der fiinfadlen Warm Tab. I1: Vergleiche fiir die geradwandigen Fiaschen der einfachen Waren

~ 1 Abb. Form 1Ver leichsort WW Litenlatur

W" _C”””””””W Abbl'ld1.}ng __ Q1‘!-IQQB WI;*;0rm ‘Var l¢’i¢]'i§6;1; 1 _.
Lgtegfl, I‘""""W ___. Agbild ung
C ”””W 1 "'3
__ W1("}rugpe
7d D. 1 .1. P113131 Ij1a111gg1_ __7 81/9177“//46/36_ 91191191» 1 D..3_.....1 Ila E.2._3, Abu Dar1ne__( 13E1sEAu 1983 ABC35,1A5-165 ‘ D2
ye 13.1.2. W "Q5$r1gc11ff 7 CUR‘I‘1SW1C§i'§QWV _ ______W Fig. 11:55 ___________(__(_(D(iH ( 11b 15.2.6. WWAbuDa11ne LEBEAU 1983 CABC 36,6A6¥133” c C”
7f 1 D.1.5. 77,1111 15211111111-{"3 LEBEAU 1983 BL 27,3 A5-260; 1 E - 1 - 131111331 Qagrig CURTIS 1989 F1g. 4():2_6Q iiwr
131.2"/,4 A5-233 11¢ ?,??£7.?.g.'1. gi;|;@tQa$f{§ CuRT1s_1_989 Fig. 361218
+234 11¢-1’ 3.2.10. 1<a1-'1"u1<u1£iZ DITTMANN ct al. Abb. 2214 “Z152 C
11111131 Qa§r1§§ 1, CuR'r1s1989 ......, Fig.29r9'/ ____._ ______7Nin1l1rta 1988
*lgj :3 ?1;_1_6_ ”A1,.,1Y13,;,,¢”' fi1_;B1=,,w 1§§3_________”1(cf1"9,1A5-239 D2 __ 3 11¢ 1 E.2.l2. AbuD2u1ne LEBEAU 1983 ABC 20,3 A6-567; 1 B
Tab. 9: Vergleiche fiir die geradwandigen Tiipfe der einfachen Waren ABC 20,2 A5-380
+119; ABC 50,2
__........ . O 3... _, ii’, K K _ G A5;192_
Abb. F0rn1___H_ Ygggleachsort ‘L1te1lat11_r _ ‘Abb1_1d1111g___ ___ rugpe W111 13.2.14. Abu Danna Lsmu 198.3 ABC 30,3 A6-583; c
8b 1 D.2.5. Abu Danna 1 13511131111 1983 ABC 8,1 A6638; A MM 11,1 A6—269
ABQ 35,1 A6-217 351,1 Ijlamad 81/9I77IV/46/27,91 unpubl.
8c "1§'.'2'."'I. C Abu Danne LEBEAU 1983 I130 35,1 A5-I65; D2 Sultantepe
S .
L1.0Y1>/G€)1<<;1=;1953 , Nr. 2
ABC 48,8 A5-202 I.1irb¢t Qaxlé CURT1S 1989 1 Fig. 321155
1811 "711D.2.16f’ Abu Dannc L71;1§13EAu 1983 ABC 20,3 A5-211 D2 125 13.2.16. ,Qa1‘at‘Ana . Kr1.L1<:1< 1988 Fig. 29:22 1 C
83 19.2. 1:2 WQ11§rifg 01111 Cuxms 1989 Fig. 11155 C 1 I;Iirbe£Qz15rig cuRr1s1;>3g ,Fig.32:157 ????*7
* Ijlirbct Qagzrigfg Cums 1989 Fig. 33:16.3, 180- 12b 1 13.2.21. AbuDa1111é LEBEAU 19133 ' Asc 47,233A1s»200 1 132"";
1 181 __7__ +1 _11+199+2G6
8f j 112.34. é I;IirbetQa§ri§ 1 Cmms 1989 Fig. 319323136; F 12:: E.2.23. Ijirbet Qagrig - C_u1z'ns 1989 Fig. 3'/:228 F
,1
1».
1
1
391252 12d 115.2125. 1 Abu Danné Lmmu 1983” ABC 36,6 A6233" ...-.A
8,; "1>.2.1"1. Abubanne C Lrznrsnu 1983 1113c 20,2 A5-£80 15517
+119; CT 7,3 A5- Tab. 12: Vergieiche fiir die rundwandigen Flaschex1 c1¢ze;einfachen Waren
.M“>§,.- .144
9a D.2.20. Abu Danna 131313151111 1983 cir 11,4 A5-122 Di Abb. Form 777777__ Yergleichsort . Literatur WWCAbl1'iidung _ ZZZZZZZ_ Grugpe
C 1 1 1W
‘9b"11 1 1 15.2.22. 1AbuDannc C7 KLEBEAU I983 CT 13 A5-228; D2 12¢ E.3.1. ; A1911 Danae 1 LEBEAU 1983 ABC 23.3 A5428; D2 1
JR 12,4 A5-99
ABC 26,8 A5-130
W95 13.2.24. 1;111~1>¢1 Qa§£*§§j ‘C
1 CURT1Sl989"1:ii iW Fig. 35:20? ._§.............. 12311313333 1 13.3.4. Abu Danni: LEBEAU 1983 ABC 36,5 A6-24; 1ACCCCCW
’ 9&1CC C 1 13.2.25. ‘ AbuDan11e LEBEAU 1983 CT‘ 3,3 A51} 15+l 17 1 D2 ABC 36,2 A6-322
10a 13.2.2117"1;1irb¢1ga$r1g_ ‘ CURTIS 1989 Fig. 39:258;__41:2'79 F +461
Tab. 10: Vergleiche fiir die rundwandigen Tiipfe der einfachen Waren
12$ E.3.6. Abu Danna LEBEAU 1983 ABC 8,2 A6-128;
ABC 35,2 A5-1'72
+111 _._.. B__
Abb. §11;r1'1'W V7erg§:11:11$o1ft Literatur .________ Abbi!¢l1iHg_........_...GI‘llEP¢ 1 "1211 15.3.7. Ab111)"§1.11ne LBBEAU 1983 ABc3$3f4-5 A6
' A 10b 13.1.4 A Abu Danne LEBEAU 1983 ABC 38,1 A6-639; B
2’J'+226-1342
ABC 36,5 A6-24 I<L11.1.1c1< 1988
- Q6231 $11.3 Fig. 31149 _..l}_. ________
$31; Ham:-1d 81/9177IV/46/36 unpub1._ A Ba Fig. 37;23"1liz32
135 E_3_9_ - _HiFb.¢F.QE$L1é
13.3.8. CuR'r1§ 191339
10¢ 13.1.5 Abu Danne L131£11Au 1923 A A13C 411,6 A6-558 13 Abu Danna 1312131211-.11 1983 ABC 29,2 A6-129 173 C3 C
1 1 K51-Tukultb DITTMANN em al. Abb. 28:4
ABC 36,5 A6»24
Ninurta 991988 iiiiiii~ ***********~ - "W __________ Hirbet Qasrifi, CURTIS 1989 Fig. 33: 173
1 1 1 ma11 1 "§11>1*. ‘ Ijirbet Qagnig Cu1zT1s1989 Fig. 31229-232, 1 F 13¢] ~~—E_3'H_ l2ér_,mk1ui-E; 1 DITTMANN ea al. 1 Abb. 31 :7 132'
1 iiiiiW
K 9 ~——~~ 239 ———— ~ 1 ~ * * ********—** V_ ______________ __,_ N1n11a 1938.....-

’" _ ""' r ._ ____ _ _> — ‘_ _____,__w__,, , _ , _

..»........ .-. 1 .3.

__.____.__,__..,..... .._......_.._ _ - .._--.....-.._.__._____~._._..... .-_~___r...__.._.. -3 ‘-

234 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeirliche Keramik des Unreren fifibfir-Gebiets 215

13d B312. Abu Danna LEBEAU 1983 ABC 43,5 A6-359; A 3. Die feinen Waren"
} _ ‘MMUJA6269
1
Die Bechcrtypen der feinen Waren (H.2.1., H.3.1.), die Schaie B113. und die
13¢ 2.3.13. Abu Danna LEBEAU 1933 ‘ ABC 26,8 A5430; 02 Tiipfe D.'l .1. und 13.2.10. sind ausnahmslos mit Fundkontexten der Keramikgruppe
ABC 10.5 A5-100 _ J
E D2 assoziicrt. Paralielen fiir die iibrigen Formtypen dieser Warcngruppe, die
Tab. 13: Vergleiche fiir die trichterwandigen Flaschen der einfachen Waren Flaschcn 8.2.14. und E.3.9., finden sich vom ausgehenden 9. bis zur Mittc des 6.
IE1. v. Chr., d.h. sic sind mit der Keramikgruppe C gleichzusetzen.
lAbb. |F0rm 1Vergleich§0}irrrrrrTl:iWtié;$;{0r }Abi;i3a0;1g '''''''''''W |Grup_;§_ i
Wz_3_r_ 11.2.2. fFeb.1;erIye j1<.AmoR195s__******”j1>1.39;92 L02 1 4. Die rot-engobierte Ware
Tab. 14: Vergleiche fiir die geraclwandigen Becher der einfachen W21-en Verg£ei<:he ffir das Einzeistiick der rovengobierten Ware (B.3.26., Abb. 5d) vom
nérdiichen Abschnitt des Unteren Ijébfir findcn sich in Tali §€-:13 Ijlamad
(81/917'/IV/46/50, 51 unpubliziert) und in Tall Abu Danne (LEBEAU 1983 BL 44,2
9 Abb. 1 Form Vgériéiérhsort Literatur A H A6~230), d.h. in der Keramikgruppe B. Das Vergleichstiick aus Tall Abu Danna
13g {H.2.1. [ASSUI HALLERi954 Taf. 41; 5a * [>2 stimmt allerdings nur formentypologisch mit der Scherbe vom I;I5bf1r~Survey
14a H.2.2. Fciggcrzyc KANTOR 1958 Pl. 31:53; 32:63 ‘ E
Liberein.
¢URTF$1939,., "T55-31=117 "___... . _ ,
Tab. 15: Vergleiche fiir die rundwandigen Becher der einfachen Waren
Zitierte Literatur -
Ahb Form Verg}¢_:_ichs0}j§_____1__Lit§{z3§911 _,_Abbild_q!;g_ §,G1f};g3ge ._ ",-\. ANHRAN 1970, AVI-YONAH ed. 1975, BERNBECK 1993, BRAEMBR 1986, CURTIS
14.3.1. Qa§;ri§ Cliff cu1ms19é9 *3 9 Fig.10:32~33 E 1:2 1989, DITFMANN 1990; im Druck a; im Druck b; im Druck c, DITTMANN em ai. 1988,
§é13 Hamad 81/9i77IV/46/44 _ EICHLER/WAFLER/WARBURTON 1990, HALLER 1954, HROUDA 1962, KANTOR 1958,
Tab. Z6: Vergleiche fiir die trichterwandigen Becher der einfachen Waren K11.1.1c1< 1988, Kfiuwa 1974/77; 1978/79; 1984b; 1989/90; 1991, KULEMANN-
1. GSSEN/MORAND! 3ONACOSSl im Druck, LEBEAU 1983, LINES 1954, LLOYD/GOKCE
Ab Form Vergiéizzhsori Literatur 1 Abtgidligg777777777777 7C7ru7}3pe
1953, LYONNBT 1996, MAHMOUD ct al. 1988, MVAZZONI 19921), Mommy 1980,
c Assur HALLER 1954 Taf. 3aq; 5r E MORANDE Bomcossz 1996, GATES, D. 1968a, Omxzs, 3. 1959, PFALZNER 1995,
Nimrud/Fort OATES, J. 1959 PE. 37:80 TBFNIN1989.
Salmanassar i
_ Nimfild ____ $63 _ ___," vH?},1b1;.,.._,.,.,.,,.,,....,____ E”
e Assur HALLER 1954 Taf. 30 Abb. 1~l4 auf S. 216-229.
Hirbet Qa$rig Cuzms 1989 Fig. 4 3 :3Q§_ _____if
.$Qagrig
éh.H@m.Cliff
@<@.. . .-. .8_1/amlv/46/4.9 . !Fig.
%¥1r>Hb1- ._ --
1

1 7 WW
__ Ijirbct
__ _ Qa '
. ..$T1.8.
CLiR'l‘£S 1989
CLLQIXS 1939
.._ _
14:98
Fig ‘ 43'31'1
' 31% ......... ____,
1
1
Tab. 17: Vergleiche fiir die Biiden der einfachen Waren

1
2. Die Kochtopfwaren 1

.,MNW,. _<-AM.~ Bei cien Gcf£iBen der Kochtopfwarcn handclt es sich ausschliefilich urn hole-mouth
Ttipfe. Es Warden zwei Formvarianten unterschieden (Abb. 7h-8a, D.2.1. und
D.2.2.). Vergleiche fiir die erste Variante finden sich nur in Abu Danne Ild
(Gruppe A, vgl. LEBEAU 1983: MM5, 4 A6-12), wfihrend die zweite Variante cine
liingerc Laufzeit zu haben scheint (Gruppe E, vgl. LEBEAU 1983: MM4, 1 A5-54
und CURTIS 1989: Fig. 41:288).

s
1
*2 Die Vergieiche zu den Formtypen der fcinen Waren werden ebenso in den Tabeilen zu
l den einfachen Waren vorgeiegt.
1

' * * 1 IUQ . __. __ A

..,=_._-,....,_,.,._____._._.. -w.___,. ._ ,_ . .. .....,.._,_... .,___,__________,____,,_. .. ., .. _ ....

216 The Khabur Valley Eisenzéitliche Keramik des Unteren filiibilr-Gebiets 217
1
¢|:m 22 ******9 "1 .. .. A ?
i. \
\ i / a

I V \H K 1 iii.-:=_1:-'1-"*-'1"’
" a
\ \ 1

¢ cm 24.4
1
// *****" § \\

2 \

// ~
Q5 cm36
<1 .
1; If-”
/

/
b
1.
9. 5 >,
. 2
_1
\ ; / C
\
\

.\ . ,., 99 1 ' 8

/‘
_1 ?}._. I

.w-.¢“§7.~¢.;
-
‘
\
1
-"~ 1£‘».?.~j.:_:!-;
"""’=-Q-I
/ 8 .fi
<9.
gI_,';":;,-I ;>j:.‘=}j-1-§_§] 1;-I-2-‘-‘:5 1

I 2 \/, I / f
» -I’
\
‘
(Q

F013 Inventaxnr. Formtyp Ware ()F»Besc11affen¥1eitu. Behand1.,in.+auB.

97 607/6 B. I .2. 1.4 tongr. + versun; tongr. + verstr Invcntamr. Formtyp Ware OF-Bcschaffcnhcit u. Behand1., in. + auB.
O\& 397/1 13.2.4. 2.1 OF verwittert; tongr. + verstr. 487/8 B.l.l3. 2.0 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr.
£05 623/9 B. 1.5. 1.6 tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr 4 12/I9 13.1.14. 1.7 tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr.
72 470/19 B. 1.7. 0.4 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr : 474/26 B.1.l6. 0.4 tongr. + verszn; iiberzogen + verstr.
I 88 581/7 13.1.10. 2.4 tongr. + verstnz; tongr. + verstr 623/7 13.1.18. 2.2 tongr. + verstr.; iiberzogen + verstr.
$1.0O'
“HO fl> 105 623/2 15.1.12. 2.2 vcrsinten; tongr. + verstr 229/20 13.1.21. 0.4 tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr.
605/6 13.1.24. 0.2 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr.
c
'3 Die Pundort-Nummern bcziehen sich auf Kiihne 1978/79, Abb. 1. 462/8 13.1.25. 0.3 iibcrzogen + verstr.; iiberzogen + verstr.
* Alla Zeichnungen sind in Maflstab 1:3. 1 0’Q"1'>0Q-0U"I\>

Abb. 1 Abb. 2

§?§_;?§_.1. _
§ ——
 ...... .._.....___‘p____.“.._._ _-..

The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren Zjdbzlr-Gebiers

\\ I /a \ . .
Q. , -2, 1
i1 A ..-.»-.\:>.--'. ‘.~.'. -.'.~ 1.
““"‘“"‘ -~w>

‘ 2 _ ’ C

¢ cm 37.2

i / d
I

\
\ 1 / d

\ . .
\ /
I

(7%. \ I /
/D e
..€. . _;.. 1,. _é___‘_7,_‘_g,!;.,‘_.,;.;,;.:

| "
\,/\M
1

Q r

Z <./<1
r /
/

:. ».=,.,<"'
Br‘-.-1. .
1;
'%i§=e;%:1;E

Invcntarnr. Formtyp Ware OF~Beschaffenheit u. Behandi , m + aufi

Invcntarnr. Formtyp Ware OF-Beschaffenheit u. Behanc1l., in. + auB.
13.3.3. tongr. tongr
600/21 B.l.27 tongr. tongr.
B.3.4. tongr . + verstn; tongr
503/12 13.1.28 tongr . + verstn; tongr
13.3.6. tongr . + verstn; tong!"
271/33 13.1.30. tongr . + verstr.; tongr.
8.3.8. tongr . + verstr.; tong!‘
607/1 B.1.33 tongr . + verstr.; tongr.
13.3.11 tongr tongr
4 13.1.35 tongr . + verstn; tongr.
13.3.12. tongr. + verstr.; tongr
618/5 13.2.2. tongr . + verstr.; tongr . -1- verstr
B.3.l3 tongr tongr
(IQ" >OQ-O "N 470/65 13.3.1. tongr . + vcrstr.; tongr . + verstr
5"0O"'=<'P¢3-0C'9~> B.3.l7 tongr tongr

Abb- 3 Abb. 4

— — —
» = ! / 5 i 5 E : : 1 I . .: , E 2 - : : I ; 2 :
1
.,,,.-_,,__..-,-,_;_.,_'.._,,_._._... _ - __ .. .-»..=~.-W-..~.-_--vww-_ ,.., . ... ..... __ _. ._

220 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitliche Kerami/c dev Unreren (;{ébr]r~Gebiets

Q Y .\
7 77777777 7 7 ‘7777777 7 77 .;7.7.’I7_7,7:§§7,7.-17317.-77 "4

(Q
~
\
\

A —————————————~—
‘
'.’:"
Z

\\ I
P
' a

7 ‘ 1 ’ D . ;. ,-;¢"_'=E>'

\ \ f / C \ \ ‘i 77 777777 7777777 / b

\ \ 1
/
d ‘
® \\ ;
1.‘. :3 1 .-'::?1I;'-

I)
C

/ ¢cm31
ifflr }7=
‘at \
\\ t
(D 1 - V -.7r~'."7,"-'7.-7.-Y‘

1 ‘ >=.t=.=5'.-F.‘:.-I-I
l.._ .,;i~'.1.'-.-fl
_,:_.:._‘?.:, __,:';.~\Aw,‘.7.'_|:,.'.‘.:;-’:_'._¢; ,
/\ ---_,'.-=,--1 7’7

(
‘ 1 ’ C1

1 \ 1 | 1 f 7 777 77

\ t r e \'

. @\ 1 >

E 8. . i,
\’€i'\ ‘1 fiw 1/ g 77 "W " |'_:i_Ev;;.:_'.;'_. "'"'

$5 cm 34 \ 1 -'
*7 77 I ‘I >_ I

' 6%??? I '‘ , h @:\ I - //Q

F0 Invcntarnr. Formtyp Ware OF-Beschaffenheit u. Behandi., in. + aufi.

105 623/21 B.3. 19. 2.3 iiberzogen + verstr.; iiberzogcn + verstr. F0 Inventarnr. Formtyp Ware OF-Beschaffenhcitu.Bchand1.,1n +auB
75 484/20 B.3.21 . 2.4 tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr. '71 464/7 13.4.9. 32 tongr. + verstn; tongr. + V6I'SH'
tongr. 4» verstr.; tongr. + verstr. 38 270/14 B.4.1l tongr. + vcrstn; tongr. + VSFSIY
1 76 3 13.3.23. 2.4
Farbiiber. + vcrstr.; tongr. + verstr. 94 600/22 13.4.12. tongr. + verstn; tongr. + V6fS111‘
63 374/4 13.3.26. 0.7
tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr. 76 487/12 B.4. 14 tongr. + vcrsnn; tongr. + V61‘SL1"
72 475/34 B .4. 1. 2.4
102 617/13 B.4.4. 0.2 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr. 77 504/10 C.1.i. tongr . + verstn; tongr + V61‘S11‘
tongr. + vcrstr.; tongr. + verstr. 38 271/2 C. 1 .3. tongr . 4» verstn; tongr . + verstr
. DJ ~=l 261/47 B.4.5. 2.4
J Q B‘UO"fiOD-fiO‘N 60 362/11 B.4."/. 0.2 tongr. + vcrstn; tongr. + verstr. 0Q"'*=®C1-06"!” 63 374/12 C.2. I. tongr + verstr.; tongr. *1" VCYSH‘

|, Abb. 5 Abb. 6

., .. .. 2
.~M....~......... .-. ....._...._.,__.._,._,____,,....._.....,......,.......,,_.___............._..._.._____,.______,;______ _,___,_,__,___, M _A__
H _ >>>WWNMMNMW _

222 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitlic/ze Keramik des Unteren Hizbfir~Gebie1‘s 223

Q. I
fi‘
"“fiiHB9lI"'

/1 4% 1 \
\\ ; / b

§
34. 1 ’/ I \b

i k

i
l | 1 i
1 —
E \\\
1/

_ _
I

_________
\d

:
I
x
“*“i‘;~
I

ll
#». H I ?‘e

‘W | '9
\
/'
I
.
E
/ ( Invcntarnr.
475/44
Formtyp
C.2.4.
Ware
1.7
\~
OF-Beschaffenheit u. BehandI., in.+a\iB.
tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr.
<@
1

Inventarnr.
@ @.
Formtyp Ware OF-Beschaffenheit u. Behand1., in. + auB.
488/24 C.3.l. 2.3 tongr + vcrstn; tongr. + verstr 424/13 13.2.2. tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr.
227/5 (13.2. 0.5 tongr + verstr.; tongr. + verstr 617/28 13.2.5. tongr. 4» verstn; tongr. + verstr.
617/9'7 D1 .1 . 2.0 tongr . + versuz; tongr. + vcrstr. 582/3 D.2.7. tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr
600/I 2 D.1.2 . 0.4 tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr. 490/5 D.2.10. tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr
462/5 D.1.5 . 0.4 tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr. 356/1 13.2.12. tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr.
466/23 D.1.6 . 1.4 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr. 466/14 I12. I4. tongr. + verstn; tongr. ~4~ verstr
'-. D'OQ"'>0D-QU'fi> 308/ 15 D.2.l . 1.7 tongr. + gegléittet; tongr. -4» verstr. UQ"'>€bQ.('>U'Q> 642/1 2 D2. 17. tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr

Abb. 7 Abb. 8
_._._._.-__ _ _-_.., -_ -__,__, ______N_ _____ _ M _

224 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren filiibfir-Gebiets

- . . 5. \\\\\‘ -\_.n .
'-‘=;.-I37.‘-.2;;-i-3:;.:5;£.-.’.1:;=;§:.z;,1.1r-{=1
:\\\
21 »-*-1
\_.-" C
/ /
| ‘C

:\\\\\\‘ : | d
¢ cm 36.-I
// I ~. ~//1 2

./
'.
1 1..1.-.=.‘.:.~:-:.=;-4:411"-;¢4=§__~=;=1
Z\\\\\ § I e

;;",;_-5 5;’; .-I. ._.;._ . ..-

. ;-_-. ...;,. 1.‘.-..‘,.;;. .~_.-4...’.-..;5 .;;..;_;.
;'»;::.‘. J 1'. 11 ; -.1 ;.I:._-5 2 1.-:;>__2..‘-; '

/
/ I

I, 1 ‘d
Inventarnr. Formtyp Ware ()F~Bcschaffenheit u. Behandl., 1n +auB
654/la D.2.26. tongr. + V€l‘S{!.‘.; tongr .+ verstr
F0 Inventarnr. Formtyp Ware OF»Bcschaffenheit u. Behand1., in. + auB. 462/13 E. 1.4. tong: + vcrsuz; tongr. + vcrstr
I05 623/1 1 D.2.20. 2.3 tongr. + vcrstn; tongr. + vcrstr. 356/3 E. 1.5. tong: + verstr.; tongr. + vcrstr
466/2 D.2.22. 1.6 tongr. + verst.r.; tongr. + verstr. 642/14 13.1.7. tongr. + verstr.; tong: + verstr
34 229/26 D.2.24. 0.4 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr. 607/8 E.l.8. tongr. + verstr.; tongr + verstr
s
\
Q-DUN 34 225/28 D.2.25. 1.2 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr. *"h(‘iO.CU‘!> 487/1 15.1.10. tongr. + vcrStr.; tongr. + verstr

Abb. 9 Abb. 10
.,..._._,...,;,..._...____. __ _ _>_ ..,..7. . ___ _., __ ._ ......................._.._._....,....--.._..i...._._.._..W.... ~ _ -....._?,_...“-----W ..

226 The Khabur Valley Eisenzeirliche Keramik des Unteren fjiibeir-Gebiets 227

q \

II
.
; \ b
, I
‘I, a
=, b

(
1’ I \d 3@
312$

2. . 2
1
1
'1--:~-=.-E-»~:+I 1.»:-'1-'5' *'..'.
in f
Q Q7
1
\\.\\'\\‘ ! ..
1 / Q

/
/ 1
\ —-L
- \ f Q.\ , I / h

F0 Inventarnr. Formtyp Ware OP-Beschaffenheit u.Behandl., in.+auB.

F0 Inventarnr. Formtyp W51"? OF'B°5°haff@“h°1@ 11- Behaml-= i"~ “'“ 3113- 102 616/9 13.2.16. 1.7 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr.
102 616/13 13.2.3. 0.4 t0ngr.+verstr.; 101131-‘*"¢F$"‘ 112 651/4 13.2.21. 2.4 tongr.+verstr.; t0ngr.+vcrstr.
\lu: 484/10 E.2.6. 0.4 t0ngr.+verstr.; iib¢rZ<>2¢n+v@r$*r- ' 102 61"//29 5.2.23. 3.2 tongr.+verst.r.; tongr.+verst.r.
38 271/2.2 13.2.7. 2-4 iib@rz<>2<=v+ versrr-: wnsn + versw Q-QCTF9 "/5 484/22 12.2.25. 0.4 tongr.+verstr.; tongr. +verstr.
38 2'70/12 15.2.10. 0.4 tongr. + verstn; l°I18F- + V¢1'$tf- - 113 654/7 E.3.1. 2.2 tongr. + unbehand.; tongr. + unbehand.
102 616/22 131.2. 12. 0.2 tongr. + versn-.; ¢°"81'~ + V°1"$tT- 111 647/7 8.3.4. 0.4 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr.
4 . -~a>cz.0cre> 60 338/1 E.2.14. 2.0 tongr. + verstn; t°"g*'- 1“ "°r$“- 94 600/18 E.3.6. 0.2 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. -+ verstr.
¢.
1 :!"€fCi"'*>@ 97 607/17 E.3.7. 0.4 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr.
Abb. 11
G Abb. 12
i1 i
:'i

_
._;H‘__h_ _._ V.“ _ v_ I . I > _ __ .2 _ .._ v_ I. .. .‘. I . . . 1.2.
~"r' ' ’ ""“""" ""”“‘—“""‘ " ""‘“""“""" " " """'“" "““"*"" """"""""""""" "“"'“-Iu|§“""“"‘ “ "' ""‘ ‘“""?i

228 The K/“lbw” Valle)’ Eisenzeitliche Keramik des Unteren fifibair-Gebiets

3% - "'
; = 3
\ ‘ E ! a

’
.-..~.>~_~..
.
\ I

\ '

\ I

.
§4‘
~>~“
'1

:
QQKQQ‘
1 ' 1
‘.......1' . 1
\ I

\I

l| | ‘lg

Inventarnr. Formtyp Ware OF-Beschaffenheitu.Behanc11.,in.+auB.

F0 Invenmrnr. Formtyp Ware OF~Beschaffenheitu. Bchand1., in. + aufi. 653/10 H.2.2. 2. 1 tongr. + verstr.; tongr. + verstr.
102 617/21 13.3.8. tongr + verstr.; tongr. + VGTSUZ 386/21 H.3.1 2. 1 tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr.
111 646/1 E.3.9. tongr + verstn; tongr. + V€1'S[1‘ 607/8 G.l. 1 .7 tongr. + unbehand.; tongr. + verstr.
58 403/6 15.3.11. tongr. + verstr.; tongr + verstr. 487/21 G.2. 2.7 tongr. 4» verstr.; tongr. + verstr.
!-J 648/23 E3. 12. tongr. + verstr.; tongr + verstr. 261/42 G3. 0.4 tongr. + verstn; tongr. + verstr.
77 502/8 13.3.13. tongr. + verstr.; tongr + verstr. 48"//20 (1.4. 4. 1 tongr. + versLr.; tongr. + verstr.
64 392/8 I-E. 1.2. tongr. + verst.r.; tongr + verstr. 0="'>0 Q.<'_>o"n> 648/1 1 (3.5. 0.2 tongr. + versLr.; tongr. + verstr.
ClQ"‘hG‘Q.('20"N >-A b
\Q |—\ 600/14 H.2.l. tongr. + V61‘Slf.; tongr + verstr.

Ab*>- 13 Abb. 14

_. .V — Wffifi:VVVVVVVVV
""""""""""""""" " if"""*7 _ _ . __ _ _ V _ , . V . _ V _ ,_. _ _V V_ _ _ __ V _ , . ——' ~

_____ __ _ __‘_ . V, . ._ . V. _V V
. . y_______,__‘ _. . , .. ...,..,._......e_-2....~---..~"-.- - ~ -—--»-—-—---\-
-- -"-- -~~~~--~~-~—--~\-—--——---~--—~—-~---—~—~-\~~ """""“'“'ii'“"“'““'""' w

Iron Age pottery from Tell Rad Shaqrah (North-East Syria)

ANDRZEJ REZCHE
Warsaw‘

The Site
Tell Rad Shaqrah is a smal1~sizecl mound on the east bank of the Khabur river,
lying some 15 krn south-east of I-Iassake and about 6 km south of the volcanic hill
of Kaul-cab.‘ The mound itself is oval-shaped, c. 8 rn high and measures c.110 x
120 m at the foot. On the east and south sides the site is surrounded by a modern
village of the same name. Also, several modern houses have been built on its top.
The upper part of the Tell has been disturbed considerably by erosion and human
activity. Dozens of lslarnic burials have been dug all over the site and recently some
building development has added to the destruction. The slopes of the site have been
cut by modern water channels supplying water from the river and by a road bull-
dozed on the eastern slope. Consequently, Early Bronze Age structures could be
observed in several places on the modern surface (especially in sectors A and B).
The occupation of the site began at least in the Early Bronze Age,’ in the so-
called Early Dynastic III period, and continued into the Akkadian period. After a
long interval, the tell was occupied again in the Iron Age.
The Iron Age layers, if preserved, must lie under the central part of the site
which is some 1.5 in higher than the surrounding area open to excavation. Modern
housing development on this part of the tell has made the area inaccessible to
archaeological investigations. Iron Age sherds were found scattered all over the
F

'1
site, though at low density, on the surface and in the sub-surface level. Only in
t three places were concentrations of Iron Age potsherds discovered (sectors A, C
1
.._.Ai._ ._ and D), each time in a different context.

Sector A. In the southern part of trench A-3 (square 232), a fragment of a large pit
l
t filled with Iron Age sherds was identified (B1Et.R<IsKI 1994: 154). It yielded some
120 characteristic pieces. Lying about 1 m below the modern surface (at 303.90 in
l
above datum), the pit was covered by an amorphous layer of earth, which was cut
by Islamic graves. The pit was c. ._l‘".5' m deep with the bottom 302.49 In above
datum. Although the fill of the pit (Fig. lb) was made up of several layers separated
by thin bands of clay, the pottery fragments, which were found throughout but
predominantly in the upper and middle sections, constituted a homogeneous
assemblage. Bowl fragments were particularly numerous, followed by jar
fragments, and even a piece of a "palace ware" beaker with dimple decoration (Fig.
8a). Also noteworthy were two pot fragments of the characteristically decorated, so-

* National Museum Warsaw, Ancient Art Collections.

\ ; 1 The site was excavated in 1991-1995 by an expedition from the Polish Centre of
~
l Mediterranean Archaeology (Warsaw University) directed by Dr Piotr Bieliriski. Preliminary
reports have been published successively since 1992 in PAM, the Centrc’s bulletin.
2 There were some Halal period sherds found in a secondary context.
i

it

l ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,, ,,__,_____ __ _ _
t = i . 1 = 3 E

232 The Khabur Valley
called "Sheikh Hamad ware". One of them (Figs. 2b & 7c) was found in the upper
part of the fill and the other one (Figs. 2a & 7a) at the bottom of the pit. No sherds
of cooking ware were recovered.
Joining»sherds have been observed in different layers of the pit indicating that it
might have been filled up over a relatively short period of time. The reason for
digging the pit in the first place remains unknown; its shape was quite irregular
and it seems that it was not a silo.
Sector G. A second concentration of Iron Age sherds was found in the north-east
extension of trench C (squares 286/287). The uppermost layer yielded a fragment of
a metre-wide stone foundation wall lying c. 20 cm below the modern surface and
running along a N-S axis (the top at 303.34 m above datum). ED layers were
preserved just below this structure. No further architecture remains have been
observed; had there been any, it must have lain to the east of the trench, in the area
under modern housing. This is the only place where sherds (labels C/136, C/140,
C/192) have been found in association with other remnants of the Iron Age level
(B1Et.1Ns1<l 1996: 164: Neo-Assyrian). The only complete vessel profile also comes
from this spot (Fig. 5a). Individual Iron Age sherds were found in the remaining
part of this sector, with the exception of a srnall pit dug into an Early Bronze Age
layer, the fill of which contained a dozen Iron Age sherds (labels C/21, C/23).
Sector I). A third concentration of Iron Age sherds was found in a reserved place
in the southernmost trench of sector D (southern part of square 249). The sherds
(labels D/159, D163 and D/164) were accumulated in an approximately 50 cm-
thicl-: erosion layer (leveling 304.05-303.55 m) lying immediately on top of the
Early Bronze Age levels. The dominant feature of this assemblage was a large
number of individual, highly fragmented pieces, typical of eroded material.
:“T04
One should emphasise that in all the cases described above the layers containing
Iron Age material were either directly superimposed or intrusive into the Early
Bronze Age levels. This feature and the fact that during five seasons of work no
Late Bronze Age sherds were discovered permit the assumption that there was no
Late Bronze Age occupation on Tell Rad Shaqrah itself.’ Hence, the question of the
localisation of the Middle Assyrian Adalishn remains open (cf. MORANDI
BONACOSSI 1996: 215).
The total quantity of Iron Age sherds found at the site is not very numerous.
While this could be due to extensive site erosion, it testifies most probably to the
small size of the village existing here, a village which may have consisted of just a
few houses and may, moreover, have been rather short-lived (one or two
generations). The precipitous slopes of the tell offered limited space for settlement
3 The assumption that Tell Rad Shaqrah was settled in the Middle Assyrian period was
based on the fact that a few Late Bronze sherds were found during a survey made for the
Tilibinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients (Rnicnn 1997: 358, n. 38; Monmor BONACOSSl 1996:
~
rt 2E5); also a survey by MONCHAMBERT 1984: 7, n. 32, identified the site as Early and Late
Bronze. The absence of a Middle Assyrian level was mentioned by Rntcnn 1997: 358 and
Kormsni 1996: 67. How to interpret the presence of these Late Bronze Age sherds remains
an unanswered question.
I
\- - 2i
,_'.- ; 9‘-i;~.,;_.,
z. -‘
I-~'h' ——
...,.........u.,...... .. _.
Tell Rad Shaqrah 233
on the top - a mere 0.6 hectares. The tell owes its regular shape and steep slopes to
the huge ED III enclosure wall made of stones and mudbrick (c. 7 in high and 4 m
wide) protected by a glacis faced with quarried basalt stones (BlELl1<IsKl 1992 and
1995).
The pottery
Only some 250 diagnostic fragments have been collected from the site as a whole
(136 of them are shown in figures 242). The bulk of them (117 pieces) was found
in the pit in trench A»»3. All of them were recorded according to their technological
features: fabric colour and temper (or inclusions), surface colour and treatment.
The colour descriptions follow the Munsell Soil Colour Charts. Non-diagnostic
body sherds were neither counted nor described.
Surface colours and treatment
The dominating surface colour is buff (61%) [SYR7/4, SYR7/6, SYR8/3;
7.5YR7/2, 7.5YR7/4, 7.5YR'8/2, 7.SYR8/4; IOYRS/2, IOYRS/3, l0YR8/4,
IOYR7/3}, followed by yellowish (27%) [2.5Y8/2, 2.5Y8/4, 2.5Y8/8, 2.5Y7/6;
5Y8/1, 5Y8/2, SY8/3], pinkish-white (9%) ISYRS/1, SYR8/2] and red (3%)
[2.5YR6/2, 2.5YR6/4, 2.5YR6/6]. There was an extensive group of sherds covered
with a "white surface skin" [2.5Y8/2; 5Y8/1] on brown to pink clay ware, often
mistakenly termed a "slip" (MATSON 1971: 68). The same phenomenon was
observed during the examination of ceramics from Qasrij Cliff and Khirbet Qasrij
(FREESTOME/I~IUGPIES 1989:"/’3). This kind of "self-slip" appears in the 800-950°C
temperature zone on the surface of lime-rich, iron-bearing clays containing soluble
salts fired in a reducing atmosphere (MATSON 1971: 66-69). Most of the fragments
have been smoothed ~ (S1); some are very smooth indeed (Sla). There is one
category with smoothed body and burnished rim top (S2). A few examples of body
burnishing (horizontal and vertical) (S3) and polishing (S4) have been found.
Fabric colours
The various fabric colours identified according to the Munsell Soil Colour Charts
have been gathered into four groups describedby conventional colour names, that
is, red (12%) [IOR6/6; 2.SYR5/6, .'Z.5YR518; SYR5/4], buff (48%) {SYRS/6,
SYR6/3, SYR6/4, SYR6/6, 5YR'7_/4,~- SYR7/6; 7.5YR5/4, 7.5YR6/4; IOYRS/2,
l0YR6l2, IOYR6/4, 10YR7/3, 10YR7/4], yellowlgreen (31%) [2.5Y5/4, 2.5Y5/6,
2.5Y8/2; 5Y6/2, SY6/3, 5Y6/4, 5Y7/3, 5Y7/4] and grey (9%) [l0YR4/1, IOYR7/2;
2.5Y'//2; 5Y7/2}. To faciliate better comparison, I followed the four colour groups
distinguished in the description of the Khirbet Khatuniyeh pottery (CURTIS/GREEN
1997: 81). A rather large quantity of fragments revealed colours in the fabric
section in an aba sequence, with a being a thin frame-line along the inner and
outer edge (mainly red) and b standing for the colour of the core (mostly buff or
grey). The surface of these sherds was always covered with a "self-slip" as
mentioned above. It is a characteristic technological feature observed for the Tell
Rad Shaqrah ceramics.
Bilkent University
Library
. . __,,., ............L........___.._.,______.____._..__.-,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, .___w?_,__.. _-

234 The Khabur ‘Valley Tell Rad Shaqrah 235

Fabric temper High carirtated bowls with inverted and thickened rim (Figs. 4; 5a-g)
This type of bowi has many variations in the form of the rim but all combine a
In describing the temper I have not distinguished between naturally occurring and
carinated body shape with a slightly inverted rim. Similar carinated bowls but with
artificially added material. The fragments were divided into four general groups
an everted rim are said to be the most typical Late Assyrian form, being attested at
with some subgroups: F1 - vegetai temper (small and medium) and Fla a very fine
all major Late Assyrian sites (CURTIS/GREEN 1997: 89 and Fig. 36:l43).
one; F2 - principally vegetal temper with dense white (calcareous) particles, F221 -
principally vegetal temper with sparse calcareous particles and F21) - principally
Bowls with everted thickened rim and a very high carination (Fig. Sh-l)
\ very fine vegetal temper with very fine white particles; F3 - fine vegetal and
This type is rare in the published material. There is one analogy from Khirbet
mineral (sandy) temper, F321 - fine vegetal temper and sparse black mineral Qasrij (CURTTS 1989: Fig. 26:60). This group of pottery has a characteristic
particlesfl F4 - fine (sandy) mineral temper, F4a - fine mineral temper with white mineral-tempered fabric with addition of white calcareous and sparse black mineral
(calcareous) particles added, F4b - tine mineral temper with addition of white particles.
-\ (calcareous) and sparse black mineral particles, F4c - fine mineral temper with
sparse black mineral particles, F4d - sparse small gravel; F5 - no visible temper. Pots
Most of the sherds examined fall into the general F1 and F2 groups (with
subdivisions). Potfragments of the so-called "Sheikh Hamad ware" (Fig. 2a-b; Fig. 7a-d, f?)
The proportions between vegetal- and mineral-tempered fabrics might be of This kind of pottery was distinguished because of its decoration: very fine incised
chronological importance. For the first time such a distinction was recognised in wavy lines, dots or fingernail incisions on the rim and on the exterior body (KUHNE
the case of the Late Assyrian ceramics of Qasrij Cliff and the probably post~ 1989/90: 318, Abb. 137). It has been named and discussed by Bernbeck in his
Assyrian ceramics of Khirbet Qasrij (CURTIS 1989: l6; 46). In the second case, "a exhaustive work on the Wadi Ajij survey material (BERNBECK 1993: 113-114; Abb.
similar distinction is clear at Khirbet Khatuniyeh between the pottery from the Late l08f—i; 109a-f; 1l2c, g, k; 114a-f; 115a-c; 116e-h; ll7d; 119i; 122i; l25q; 12711).
Assyrian Level 4 and the probably post-Assyrian Level 3, despite close similarities The "Sheikh I-Iarnad ware“ decorative style has been so far found in a rather
in vessel form" (CURTIS/GREEN 1997: 83). restricted area in the Khabur region: Tell Sheikh Hamad, the Wadi Ajij area, Tell
Abu Hafur (unpublished), Tell Rad Shaqrah, and some sites checked during the
Form description Archaeological Survey of the Western Upper Khabur Region (ANASTASIO, this
volume, p. 175). Outside of that region single fragments have been found at Tell
The collection consists of numerous rim fragments from open forms (bowls 32%, Ahrnar (JAMIESON this volume, p. 290).“ It should be stressed that this type of
pots ‘iO.8%) and a somewhat smaller number of rim fragments from closed forms pottery decoration does not appear on Late Assyrian or Post~Assyrian sites in the
(jars 22.8%). There is also a small group of beaker fragments (rims, bases and body eastern Jazira (Khirbet Qasrij, Khirbet Khatuniyeh, Tell Hawa).
sherds). Base fragments are not as numerous (15.6%) as the rim sherds and it is From the data in BERNBECK 1993: 112-114, tables 52»54, one can conclude that
usually difficult to attribute them to a jar, bowl or pot. Not a single fragment of a examples of this decorative style were present in all the three chronological phases
cooking pot has been found. (A, B, C) that were distinguished from the Wadi Ajij~area material, which gives a
rather broad dating range from "the 9th-8th to the 7th century BC and probably
Bowls later" (ibid; 115-120). This would mean that a local type of decoration had been in
l Bowls with ribbed rims (Pig. 3a-d) existence for approxirnatively 250 years. On the basis of the Tell Sheikh Hamad
l
These bowls are characterised by a pronounced rib on the outside of the rim. The material, H. Ktihne suggested a rather restricted date-range for this pottery: “Die
rim itself may be of differing shape and it can also at times be grooved. This type ’Schech Hamad Ware‘ ist nach den" jtingszen Beobachturigen als eine spéite
was widespread from the end of the 7th to the middle of the 6th century BC, in Late Erscheimmg der nenassyrischeni Zéit (2. Héilfte 7. Jh. und des 6. J'h.), der
Assyrian and so-called Post-Assyrian levels at North Mesopotamian sites in Iraq neubabylonischen Besiedlung von Schech Harnad, einzuschc‘1'tzen".5 The author
and Syria, such as Nimrud (OATES, J. 1959: Pl. XXXV,13-14, 25), Ashur (HALLER prefers this limited dating also for the Rad Shaqrah material.
1954: Taf. 6al<), Khirbet Qasrij (CURTIS 1989: Fig. 27:67-73), Khirbet Khatuniyeh
(CURTIS/GREEN 1997: Fig. 55:349), Tell Sheikh Hamad, Unterstadt II (KUHNE
1984b: Abb. 67:l~3), the Ajij~region (BERNBECK 1993: Form 6901-3, 6007), Tell
Beydar, Unterstadt (Bnnrscnnnionn 1995: 229, Taf. II: 1, 3, 6~11), Degirmentepe
((§Ksn 1988: Abb. 8334383). Bowls with this type of rim were also found on sites in
western Syria and Lebanon (LI-ZHMANN 1996: Form 99 and its distribution). 4
\
It
E A comparison from Khirbet ed-Diniye cited by BERNBECK 1993: 113 is an error because
the pot mentioned was found in a level 3B context dated E700-1665 BC (KEPINSKI/LECOMTE
1985: 52, see also JOANNES/KEPINSKI/LECOMTE 1983: 132~33, Figs. 4, 6~7).
5 In a letter to the autor dated 23rd April 1996

. 1 _- .- 1_ tI -T. i. . -- »; 1
. W... ‘..__ [.. . I-, » ' .»
___,__,,_, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._., W- _, ._. - . . . ..
236 The Khabur Valley
Beakers (Fig. 8)
A "Palace Ware” beakerfragment (Fig. 82:)
Small numbers of fragments of different beaker types have been found. The most
distinctive Late Assyrian type was a fragment of "palace ware" beaker with
shoulder and dimple decoration.“ However, this extremely thin~walled vessel with
polished surface was deformed in the firing process. It was a very popular vessel
type in Late Assyrian pottery assemblages: Ashur (HALLER 1954: Taf. 5s; u);
Nimrod (OATES, J. 1959: Pl. XXXVll,60-6'7), Khirbet Qasrij (CURTIS 1989: Fig.
312132-I34), Tell Sheilch Hamad, Urtterstadt II (KUHNE 1984b: Abb. 67:6), Tell
Beydar, Unrerstadt (BRETSCHNBIDER 1997: 229, Taf. lII:4, 6), Khirbet Khatuniyeh
levels 6 and 4 (CURTIS/GREEN I997: Fig. 32:75; Fig. 51:26"/-268); see also the
distribution chart of this type in LEHMANN 1996: Taf. 54, Form 29.
Globular beakers (or vases) with incised comb decoration (Fig. 8b~e)
An important group is constituted by globular beakers (or small vases) decorated
with fine comb incisions on the shoulders. They have parallels at Khirbet Qasrij
(Cunrts 1989: Fig. 33:17'7).
Jars (Figs. 9-1 l)
Most of the rim fragments have been preserved as small fragments, providing data
only about the jar mouth diameter, but scarcely anything about the vessel shape
itself. A few larger surviving fragments have a short neck and rounded shoulders
passing into straight walls. There are also a few fragments with a longer neck, but
the shoulder is not preserved. One can therefore make a comparison of the rim
shapes, but not of the jars they belonged to.
Everted and club-shapedjar rims (Figs. 9a~g; 10a-d, n~s)
There is a large variation of rim shapes but the majority of them fall into a broad
category of jars with everted and club~shaped rims that might be triangular,
rounded or square in section. This category is well attested at Khirbet Qasrij
(CURTIS 1989: 48; Figs. 32-362147-226). Similar rim shapes have also been found
in Late Assyrian pottery assemblages from other sites in North Mesopotamia.
Foldedjar rims (Fig. l()e-l)
There are also examples of folded jar rims comparable with a group of finds from
Khirbet Qasrij (CURTIS 1989: Fig. 3"/:22’?-240; for a discussion ibid.: 48-49).
Bases (Figs. 8f, h, j; 12)
Fragments of four base types have been found. There were numerous ring bases
(17), some fiat bases (8), a few rounded knob~shaped bases (3) and one pointed
base.
6 For "palace ware" see RAWSON 1954; OHTSU 1991.
g 1 '"'"" 7 Q
' ' _- :_
' '
Tell Rad Shaqrah 237
Rounded knob-shaped bases (Fig. 12b-cl)
This type of rounded base is characteristic at Late Assyrian sites. At Khirbet
Khatuniyeh level 4, there were tall straight-sided jars with this type of base
(CURTIS/GREEN l997: Fig. 421188-I89) but it was not theionly vessel shape with
such a base.
Pointed base (Fig. 8f)
Similar pointed bases are found in Late Assyrian pottery assemblages at Nimrud
(Oates, J. 1959: P1. XXXVL49) and Tell Beydar (Bnnrscnuntonn 1997: 230, Tf.
II{:7).
Miniature ring bases (Fig. Sh, j)
The two examples of miniature ring bases belonged most probably to beakers.
Similar bases are attested at some Late Assyrian sites: Khirbet Khatuniyeh level 4
(CURTIS/GREEN 1997: Figs. 511274-275; 53:325).
Dating ‘
The pottery fragments from Tell Rad Shaqr-ah find good parallels in the ceramic
assemblages from Late and post~Assyrian sites: Qasrij Cliff, Khirbet Qasrij, Kl-lirbet
Khatuniyeh, Ashur, Kar-Tul<ulti»Ninurta, Nimrod, Sheikh Hamad (Unterstadt II),
Tell Beydar (Unterstadt). A continuity of shapes from the Late Assyrian period into
the post-Assyrian period in North Mesopotamia was observed for the first time at
Nimrud (OATES, J. 1959) and was confirmed by examination of the Qasrij Cliff and
Kliirbet Qasrij material (CURTIS i989: 47~49; 51-54) as well as that from Khirbet
Khatuniyeh (CURTIS/GREEN I997: 91). For a general discussion of this problem see
also l~IAusLe1"rsR 1997 and Gnnnu, this volume, pp. 114~l15.
Parallels for the potsherds from Tell Rad Shaqrah can be found in both Late and
post-Assyrian ceramic assemblages. As regards the fabric, there is a predominance
of vegetal temper, possibly indicative of a Late Assyrian date (cf. above p. 234).
The presence of the "Sheil<h Hamad ware"-fragments (cf. above p. 235) might
provide grounds for a more precise determination of the chronology of the Tell Rad
Shaqrah Iron Age pottery, placing it at the end of the Late Assyrian period. In
absolute terms, this would mean, the last quarter of the 7th century BC.
Nonetheless, a date somewhere in the beginning of the 6th century BC cannot be
excluded. 9
References cited
BERNBECK 1993, BIELINSKI 1992c; 1994; 1996, Banrscnnntoan 1995, Cutms
1989, CURTIS/GREEN 1997, FREE-zsroun/Hu0t~tes 1989, HALLER 1954, Hnustnmza
1997, IOANNES/KEPINSIG/LECOMTB 1983, Knrmsro/Lncomrn 1985, KOLINSKI 1996,
KUHNE 1984b; 1989/90, LEHMANN 1996, Mnrsou 1971, Moucnmmnnnr 1984,
Mon/nvnt BONACOSSI 1996, Onnas, J. 1959, Onrsu 1991, RAWSON 1954, Rntcnn
I997.
Figs. 1-12 and pottery catalogue on pp. 238~259.
._ l T T 7"
-.I :t .: .i .1" " a j
I .,.,... . --,.< .}. . .a,' ' ' . ‘
 238 The Khabur Valley T6” Rad Shaqmh 239

TELL RAD SHAQRAII

l’()l.iSliCENTEROFMEDITERRANEAN ARCHAEO.l0(_|‘:
"' H A ’ _ A A A
EX¢»wA'1"l0N$ W91-1995 - 1~
\'“ ' _m\.-
<1.1=t ’.4.:...\. ....,...,:l t ‘ ‘ In {L I J7‘ '4.
-V .- ‘ 5- \-‘ ,1M. :\‘=__‘,_..21,$,§[;‘4C1::fQ,;£-t£.£I~'~“@=:
...,~,:-.\,~,-_,-‘~-\-;-.;--v,,:1;-‘ y-..-»~_,,',~ ..~v.(1v: ',‘w~e-,w~~>""
-‘J -- *

“Q95 ' 1 ~=@g?*T;<.;,=~’

.,»_ vv.=~<, 1‘:-.,; .;‘,_._y x=’Q;-,1’:_f.=~?')'-,;*'~i.'E?”g;"aflgii
+7 _' ,‘__’=_y‘ .5 V‘ .=\\ ;- ' .\ 4.a_ w

~ A\/", "“arfif’
1013
—- ’\
I .-‘-‘..‘.L~;,L. ‘-'1},<.;;,,,.:\:;=.,9=- :.;/-.1~iv;r$r_','\,'._\.»'"t\:t.‘\:;1}:::a;~>’ftry2~“,‘§\;q§:~‘

.~~" ..__ ..; -2, .~; '» ~-.~»-,~_= ;-':;;:\;._;--N. .1;‘1.-Q;¢§a;;§\g¢‘¢;;¢,;;~§;.:51;»:'§,¢qq.';‘;___;

4, JV
.» 7 " ”%
* 3- \ “T”-~ *‘ 4 t. =~~-~;~ ~"“;~'*i‘*~'-.»,‘w;*:~,.;_;
e~ -
'~.-<-s'.~~'(.g._ ,1»--W--. H;-‘;‘_.., )\§4:"5‘A\<"‘_‘T_‘_‘QM““f{\"‘_"
, “::.-}3,&,;, %'-I~‘;‘~v~*= 11%?E5£*}rl:7”§>Im1¥:t:§<¢=g-f- ~‘:-7;\i@.\z~..- _\‘-‘-’g;1:=.»‘;==..<‘ ";1‘-'=:~'
" / . W-j--,.\rT-<. -'i::§fi.;<;:.uYt1=€‘~w1:~w:§n ~‘.‘=:~.*§;">‘r~<;-.'=e‘=‘,;-1"’

,‘
\
t. "’ '
W5
» 301‘: '>‘5-5§;{-' 6!? "
.%G“=“-£1-r;‘»32r=,*?l‘{>*'
>-<-¢->=»- .»\= ‘-‘s~r$iwiwzsm-m‘-¢_.
1» {7 "\“i'“'i*.:¢2=¢‘ ='~»*4‘$'\,=;Y‘ ~
‘t ___
»..‘..-_,-_.
>,-:-'¢;'~'-' " I, f.~)»w‘\‘ _' :¢.»\\,
~‘ : .. .
~, .:-f-1 .- .. '
‘ ~ , . _ - ~t;.;<1“{?r¢§,‘-S. .,.‘ w;\,Mz‘=¢-;./+<",;.
Z"/:3 M(}i)hRN i!()ilS[-.S \;¢L »
\ “ . .~.~.,@~§~1~=-~¢»~ .
.
w lRONAGl'll‘0'l"’]“ERY 5 F ffiI*fll*I“
c:<>~(rrm'rmrr10~s '1. ® =V
-_,,_.--I-"""
1
<
I ED II! ENCLosuxm WALL A
~_»- _ -/‘"~
' " ;\ m m an 1.0 -11 i
Fig. 2a. Pot fragment decorated in "Shaikh Hamad ware" styie. {R§ A-3/64) Photo Z. Dolinski

Fig. la. Tel! Rad Sharp-ah. Contour map. Drawing by A. Schneider/D. Lawecka
4. __
+ +
\ i» 1% J‘/“Mu” 7%’?-305.00
I t

\ GRAVE I .-“'"§§‘§.> 1% * ‘
\ \ ~ ~_ _. _. .~ - » , / ‘ 1 » t<':-~,:e::=.::; M »
‘- '“' '-‘L‘=éi:¥;z\»?Y4§i<‘5\’<~€‘w»\71l§L>'
.~m.v».»~~» =“=,1@.~‘i31-§..»¢r<};1§;_
»= ' <@*t5: 1: /~¢»~
Vt‘ . ~ \¢ . )1 .:-
A>§:1,:<,:s;=-1mm>u"~,Jw;i’;<;-‘*:%=»’¢~»-.1s<*‘ ~‘>‘~»¢, ‘Ix- Y- .
@ ’
3= Q '€v:*4= :*=».@»t@’~.-M A 1%‘-l~‘ » ,
t ';\.\:<.=‘=t;:';~,v==-‘s<1=*¢:@£w;§~=s¢¢:1»:1@¥s§;-. ' » ‘A
% q 5
‘
@@ . = ’ ~ ¥~ -$11
Hcigif.
V
%.
»-w..§*:¢- *2¢‘=:'~.»°‘*~71-v"
3-\
1. 5},» M5»
'
’*t.wal .';‘??*‘:
-.~"@»~~,
J*~
4 -4;
‘Sta—:
.
-

/
M £49 9@
~»-~ -- ‘if ? M "1”»-51¢‘-=.‘g';%¢¢.~??'-3'
‘ ‘*‘1‘,;s':‘»‘¢-$4
“=-~-=#,. ~-*;:<:~>~_~.> tt: -T I-'-"*,_,;;"=
,‘uw_-*~f*'§'.‘:..=-PA’-,;?"’". 1
.=~?’? '; ';§§-:i§gr1’-’\~,1‘"¢~“:$: ':‘Z'4§*;’£"~~tt ~. -
UNLXCAVATEI)
BO
».'-P) Pg ' )=;;,;,‘
’I§.e -
'- 11¢ '
:» '

nu
_ \\
_\ -i
C ceramics ‘*'~.... ~. @~\\\__ \ " ta‘:itt;$w=§v=r~§r%*s!4?@
,*»u:»,<>iq;=%+@:=2::_:2
B bricks :____/. ‘ I s
A I-l‘-""'n.;1:}‘ A"-_-~C‘“ 1.
.i\ :=w.-:"¢-§~;\.-' /.= =»1-~=-':\-I-2%‘,
\~ H1" A, .;-=Ie,».<=+}.-15 1¢'-v ."z'\WTw;1=~‘;
‘ ‘t~W¥{i>i7?',\14m"$?i*-*'»‘\#W%*;7?‘ ~
'-=2-v=:1:‘
'1 GD £57m ,s03.n0
\
_ _.:..--_,-<17 - __. 7’ ' £5 ‘*‘ ’§§~'*
jl
.-.
\"___y " aw. '
1 S stones “' 1;,
-_‘_,_(_~_‘:=~|¢.‘;.m-_>,-;_=,,. j 4- -W.--4
—-\ -mm-~"u‘. ~ -—- ,_ M
—:;
® ;Q
P plzzstcl" ~>.\a\'m“~M;1'-‘.=__-—-----‘-I

_,_ _ .__._ _ : _ ___‘ M ~ as I 316

S-11:afivno.
spsaqs
I9358!» 1;
['Z5.'fl clay g lg! P‘ -j§“I”:) Fig. 211. Pot fragment decorated in "Shaikh Hamad ware" style. {R§ A-3/16) Photo Z. Dolinski
\ ashes 1.-:|>:|awm.|. \ .1.-.115’
, I B If Hu2_m,
\
'1,
1’ »- ‘ -H -\;‘~_v_.v-~.
EAST .-,\ - BE§_f t‘w1as'r
>

Fig. lb. Tell RadSl1uqral1 I993. Trench A3, sq. 232, seuthern profile. Drawing by K. Meyza

‘ |
I
¢

t
 The Khabur ‘Valley I‘ell Rad Shaqrah

Fig 3 Tell Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (bowl types) ~------~ “LL W —
Context Daam.
CIR
Surface iFabr1c Fabric
,~1<2E~2@¥r T7 , ,7 YT T7
Remarks

ribbed & grooved rim,

iegg
27 7 .5YR7/4
carination _
19 a: 2.5YR5/4 ribbed rim; burnished MWZZJMM
_%b1 5YR7/4
20 s1 F321 SYR6/4 ribbed rim, groove below
1 7.5YR8/2 _ffffff _ _(_ the rib ________ _
21 Sla F4 7 .5YR5/4 xibbeci rim, groove below i _ ___ _ M - we

29.6 ””§1’tttttH W it E15 i2.5*YR6/6

1»; 7.5YR7/6 :
the Ilb, carmation
smoothed, carinated <e—%
"{5}? a: 2.5YR5/8 gooved & ribbed rim
b: l0YR5/4 _______________________________________ (_
10.6 S1 a: SYR7/6 grooved 82: ribbed rim
b: SYR6/1
14.8 it ZQSY5/(41 grooved & ribbed rim

13.4 S1 SYR7/6

19

20
IOYR7/4

7.5YR'7l4 smoothed, burnished rim

“€:i
2? i0YR6/2 .._............-.-- _.,.._~...____..........-.. ... -------———

C/129 27 S1 F2 5YR6/6 i thin ribinstead of

M36 5Y¥28/2 1 v ' i_i__i_______Z_g:g.rinEet£9!7‘,,,,e,_W,e
' _

%I:l“%

v re: 1
Fig 3 Rad Shaqrah common ware Hm fragments (bowl types) |

""" 7' ‘W!’ ~

..,..................,~..,,,,_ r. -- V '._.-...._MwWm1-.~.--V — -.--. ~_.-~_ ._.. . ......,..,..¢..»_..=....,¢....w........~.-.,»_¢..... . ,,___

2-42 The Khabur Valley Tell Rad Shaqrah 243

Fig. 4 Tell Rad Shaqrah common were rim fragments (bowi types) A; *W """* r ~
No. § Conii-:WiiWtWW WWSurface
Fabric WW1?5i}?i£iiiiiii W WW Remarks { } U
1 a
cm
WC/136 WW W 264* S2 W
1 {:_0lour_r__
SY6/2 5
_ 7 7____7
carinarion .
1 b C
11
$
svs/2 1 _ __ _ _________________W _ _ ,'

‘ W1-5“ c/136 20 s2 iiiiiiiiiiiWF2 at 2.5YR5/8 \ carination

I
I 1 W_W_7__;___'7.5YR_%_?»_/_Z__‘_ aba 11; 5YR5/6 _ _
c C/136 27 s1 F3 a ;‘a :5YR'?/6 slight carination
1 . _________ 215Y8/2 aba b: 7.5YR4{§ _ 1
d W 1)/171 25 ‘ S1 Fl WWWWWWe§W§.5YR6/6 carination WWMWWWWWW WW—WWWWWWWWW
____ V‘ ————W
2.5YR6/6 Elbe, b: 2.$YR6lO (((((((((((((W ( ( 1 -~~-~
I 6 1 o/159 30.4 so””””” F2 a: 2.511125/6 1 carination d 0 I‘
W __ 5Y_R7/4 ba b: SYR6/6 ___ __
1
W r A-3/11 24 s2 F2 a: 10115/6W ‘WW carination -
1 svm/4 abamv _b_
: i0YB_
_ 6/3 __
g A 3/21 19 s2 F2 a: 2.5YR5/6 carination
_1__W+371 ,,,,,,,, 5YR7/4 __<1_baW ,l2i10YR5/4 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,N
11 A-3/18 ‘ 21 s1 F1 ‘ a: 5YR'7/6 carination
! _ 7.5YR8[¢}'q ab? b: IOYR6/2 \ ******"
i surface 18.5 S2 * F4 a: 2.5YR5l6 grdévéétna 1111 below rim
i IOYR8/3 aba 1»; 511125/6 1 ~
j c/34 28 SI 1 F2 5YR6/4 W W
1 2.5Y8/2
1< WWCWiW1W££6 W W W21 Sla F1 W W W W W 5YWiW§W7/4 WW W 1 W
1 2-5YB§_/2,
A~3/37 24! S1 1=1 1 7.5YR5/4 j
?????__ 1 svm/4 _ 1
m W1i>Wi1W63 23 s2 1 r=1W a: 2.5YR5/6 grooved rim __._.._____._..~e_...........1-‘
» 7.5YR8/4 abaw Wb: $YR5/1 1 __ _____________T;
i
3

i h

Z ' 1 R
WI

4 Q_f*__w..11|l )
Fig. 4. Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (bowl types) , ‘“

T”
 .....,o~ .. ..

244 The Khabur Valley Tell Rad Shaqrah 245

Fig. 5 Tell Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (bowl types)
‘No. Context Diam. Surface Fab:-icW Fabric Remarks
cm 1 colour I
f

a A~3/3'7 23 A s1 F1 511125/<5 carination

1225138/31111W1111111111112, 3
*1» A-3/37WW;WWWWWWlW7WW s1 Fl a:5YR7/6 WWWWWWWEW;1Pi1W1WéW1i<W>W11 W
1 SYR7/6 aba b:7.5YR7/6 1
c A-3/33 22 i Sl Fl a: SYR7/8 carination ’ Q
+37 +l39ll_____ 10YR8/3 aha 1»; svnv/4 on W 3

1:? "WA-3/:19‘ 1"; s1 F1 21: 2T5*<iR671§W carination

1
Wr A-3/43 13
WQWW A-3/37 1
A1375? 12.6 s1
2.5YR8/4 aba
1W”13IWW W aW:WW5YR7/6
1011121‘;/3 aba H 1 b: 2.5111121/4
sz
§2.5Y8/2
F1 a:2.5Y8/2
aba 1»; 2.SY5l2
“s1 W W F1 ac 10115/6
********** 7.51028/2 aba 1); 2.5Y8/2
b: 7.5‘_{R8/4
carination

ce€iWi W1i1ioW1W1WW W W WWW W

carination
1 rr“W*>
n ‘Z173’/*3W3W 44.3 s1 1 F4 a: 10R5/6 groove below rim 1
1 ‘ 2.5vs/2 aba b: 2.5Y6/2
i A»3./39 21.4 Sla F41) =a:5YR7/6 <:arinatiWoWnWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
cl
1 ffffffV 3 7.5YR8/2 :’__ ba _b: l[)YR7/2 rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrW ____
{W1 A-3l39 213* s1 F4b 1 7.5YR6/6 carination
1]'_1§YR8/4 ooooooo 1 ,,,,_, _ "
* 1< A3/33 W;WWWWWW21‘ s1 F4b ‘ 7.5YR7/6 carination
______ _ 5YR7/4 ______ ____ _
l
1 list/W23 24 ‘ s1 F4b 1.; 'iI5Y1i7/W4
1 )_ syn";/4_)_a_1;a)__) 11; l0YR7l3 G

i
1
g ; <% 1
7
|I ' -
l

1*?
i

_ I1
j 1

4<—-—e )‘
2

Fig. 5. Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (bowl types) o»

..~... -1.. ... . .¢, » '.

--1------..-_-_ V Y. ...W,W2,..w,.,,.-»_ ._+.~._._-_._._..._.,_. __ _ ----

246 The Khabwr Valley L Tell Rad Shaqrah 247

Fig. 6 Tell Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (bowl types) ~' '- - W
No. Context Diam. Surface Fabric Fabric Remarks
_ cm .16.. __ colour ___ __ __ _
a A~3/17 28 WWWWsW1WW =1: IOYR7/3 1
g__ 27 +34 '7.5YR8/4 be b: 5YR6/8 W ___ _ __________
2. 1"W1;>W o/171 126.8 W W s1 F4 a: 2.5YRs/W§
1

-
!
1
1 SYR8/3 aha 1»; 2.5YR5/0
WWEW. 1)/1"11WW"1W2oW S1 Fl a: 1UYR5/4 grooved 8: ribbed below
2
1<>YR,§/2 aha
P1
b: SYR7/4
a: 7.5YR6/6 1
rim ______________H
8
<1 1 11-3/16 29.2 S1 ' erased decoration
1 . ___ 10YR7/3 aha g6
1»; 7.5YR4/_
-.
e D/171 26.8 Sla F1 a: 2.512116/6 WWWWribbe<i W
IOYR8/2 abI55
cba b:_5YR8/4
1 1 c/as W23 a: 2.5YR5/8
aba, b: SYR4/3

1
T _,,._F,l
g 1 $121.1. 26 S1 5YR6l4 ‘ rib, groove, carination
10YR83
, 7,, ...
1

c
'.
. ______.

1. ,_2._

5 u

I "11. .. .. .- _. ..,....=+;w¢s2*-era-1
M--~ _ - 11¢“1e;u»v.'-1.-.*~c¢=

» 1
1
2
e

1 _

I f
\
l

'1 .
* . , 1
g 2.
1 1

Fig 6. Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (bowl WPQ8) “

——— e. —_—.'—W __,_.__._____ W7__ _ ‘,1 __

__‘,,‘_<, ,_ , . ,_,.,,.,,~,_._,..,W,._.... .-...-._._,.._........__.__.,_.....\_,,___._..,.,,_..._._.__......~._..¢.......,,.__._-..v..._._.i................~...~.....i..i..~.»:.. W.,~

248 The Khabur Valley [ T8” Rad Shaqrah 249

Fig. 7 Toll Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (pot and bowl types)
No. Context Diam. Surface Fabric: Fabric Remarks ‘ ‘A - "L" "W"=*'*"~***““**-*» “*-*~"“-—"1'—'"=f-j;*_'j' “'”""""‘“"":______Q_f"'"“*"' _;

a A-3/64
cm
14
????????
Sld F4b IOYR7/2
_ "Shaikh Hamad ware"
I W »,. /*4“
‘
IOYRS/3 W_Vinois¢d_Q§C0raticg1"WW; , “
.~,.'»‘_~..>i-._".;_'.>'.:_:>_‘:§ I

b C/136 W218”* s1 F4b 7.5YR7/4 ‘ if "Shaikh Hamad ware" -\--.--.-W-1 ‘l'<\4

\\_<:-_¢;~_,;_,._ i~.;.:;5>;; b

IOYR8/2 incised decoration

E ("inc/136 s1 Pi £i£i*5?i'i7/6? i *"Sheii<h Hamad W3.l‘6" 0) , 1
5YL%?l§_____\ _a_ba b:(_10YR8/§_ incised decoration l air" ' 1'."“
an A»3/16 16.6 S1 F4” in a: 2.5YR5/8 “Shaikh Hamad ware" *i » - _ - -M
7.5YR7/4 aba b: IOYR6/4 inC18 7 _ _
‘id decoration \ ¢
‘ e A-3/37 T512 Siia W F2 a: SYR5/4 grooved body \

‘ f A-3/26 38 ii
i 511118/3
S la
_ aba
F40
b:5YR7/6
SYRS/4
1 7 ooooooooooooooooooW
fingernail impressions on
+58 __7.5YR7/4 _ the carination ~
g A-3/2’6’ E36 S1 F1 '1.5Yii5/4“ in carinarivn . - .i
SYR7/4 -MM: MM‘ ~"‘ I
"Cl Z 36 22.8 S1 Fl((((( SYR6/4
vé:".': MM V"*WW'l........Y‘
IOYR8/4
‘ f WV‘
i C/136 56
i Si a: 7.5YR7/6 j grooved rim -'
; 7.5YR8!4 aba b: 2.5Y4/0 ____ '3 c
3 13/78 1 W26 i s1 F3 2:: ZORS/8
2.5YR6/6 abcba b: 7.5YR6/6 i K ’’’’" L4‘Jl l §l@Il4Lll§l§All l 4QIlfl4l£ <....__.____.M._ ” ““““'"'
0: ‘7.5YR6/0 '— ~ 1 i» /3 i_ .. , . _.{,?.¢
k A~3/46fm28.8 Sla F2a at EOYRS/3 a hole pierced below the "M ‘$6,’ “ G A {>
IOYRS/3 aba b: 2.5YR6/6 rim \"~~\
i r

7“"w'_l I
Q—%
i -~»~W-M»»--*@ Y

[ ,
% M P
Fig. 7. Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (pot and bowl types) ="

U . . _._._~,~.»~.~<_—; ;_ ——_'_—_T____ _ — *

o
MW VP: V A Q ‘ ""'“"““"""""""""'“""'m"""" "M i iW ” s,__,_,.,________ _
l?

250 The Khabur Valley 1

Tell Rad Shaqrah 251
l

Fig. 8 Tell Rad Shaqrah "fine ware” rim, body and bottom fragments
(beaker types)
1.
“___
No. Context ‘Diana.

a
b
A3/727
c/{:36
cm
-
]
Surface
E4
2.5Y8/2
Sla
1UYR8/2
Fabric
F5

F2b
h
Fabric
colour
(overflred)

'7' .5YR7/4
Wiiflemarlrs

"palace ware" (deformed);

dimple decoration; shoulder
fine grooves 611 shoulders
X
'1'.‘-I-'=,'-i '.¢$§!'1-":'-

=1 b
_/
c '

id
C/136

A3/1] -
Sic
5YR8l1
7” KS3
F15’
F2b
SYR7/6

2.5YR5/8 o
fine grooves on shoulders

fine grooves on shoulders;

1

\/
QM
€
\____N i , WYR8/3 . ____,_ , _ Smoqlhsd
e \ A3/37 i Sla F4 "/.5YR"r/Z1 ‘ fine grooves on shoulders
2.5Y7/6
Slaw r*rz

@
i f A3/43 ~ IOYR6/4 pointed bottom
7.5YR'l/4
_,_,
g * A3/37 i 11 F221 5Y7/2
____ v"__'27._§'1’8/2
* W5” A3/16 16. ss F4 5Y6/2 burnished horizontally;
__ s__ _W§Ys/2 ring base; bitumen inside. f
i HA3/52 1 11.6 s4 i 114"" I a: 2.5YR6/6 burnished verticaiiy;
2.5YR6/6 aba b: 7.5YR6/4 E

3' Y c/13 ‘mifit i Sla Fla ‘ 2.5YR5f6 ring base; fine grooves; i

i
I 5Y8/2 . __ ‘ smalijoutton in the_midler__ _ ___ _
/*
E
i A3/$9 W 9 Sla F4?) 1 'i.5Y§fi/4
< 10YR8/3 h
‘:12
1..
if 1 A3/37 V - ii Sla F2!) i‘ 5Y7/2
is A‘ ______ SYR8/1”: VVVVW
%"£'~r A3/12 14 s2 Fla . a: SYR7/6 s
.,__ ._-_ 1QYR8/3 aba J ?>I_1sQ_YR5/2 __ _________W
i

B Sam
1.
1: |-(

c 4'-\w_c=¢:'$v,nr~m7-."rv:.'*a;:mW. sw“'
F4 I
T:
i R1
:1
rs‘
ii
Fig. 8. Rad Shaqrah "fine ware" rim, body & bottom fragments (beaker types)

-- ,.,_..__v _ ............
_,,_ __,___,__, , ___ _...a___ _, _, ,_ _

252 The Khabur Valley Tell Rad Shaqrah 253 |

Fig. 9 Tell Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (jar types) _§f§1IfjIfI""""”'“”“ M M i" ‘ i
No. Context 1Diam. Surface Fabric Fabric Reeserr r r r r r r r r or W ,
(I111 1 _¢<>1<29£__
a y c/136 11.2 S1 F1” * a: SYR7/8 grooves below the neck

‘ b A-3! 13.2
lOYR8/2
Sla
£9 1»; IOYR7/4
Fl IOYR7/3
/ 2|
~»
K 18+33 IOYR8/3
+37+39 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,W, 1 —--~-- - -—------ ~~---
l C c/s4+3§" "'11; i s1 i i i "F3 a: SYR6/6 groove below the neck y '
1 IOYR8/3 aba b: IOYRS/3
<1 A~3/33 "i"9”."2 i 1 s1 F2 IOYR7/2
10YR8/2
e 1 A-3736 i 23 s1 F1 7.5YR6/4
‘ IOYR7/3
tic/140 M 17 Sla F4 a: 5YR6l6 C

__ ________ 2.5‘./8/4 orbs _b_:_ l_OYR7/2

‘ g ‘ c/140 20 “rs: F2 a: 2.5YR5/8
2.5Y7/6 aba b: 2.5Y7/2
h D/159 18.8 Sla F2 a: IOYR7/3 riscd band below the neck 2
T

1
IUYR8/2 ba b: SYR7/4
B/3218 s1 Fl at 10R5/6 grooved rim
Q/s
1
3
1
A~3/37 20.6
1 SYR8/3
Sib/c
_______- ‘IQYR3/3.
abs
Fi
aha
b: SYR5/6
j a: 5YR'7l4
bi 5YR5/1
Wfine grooves below the neck"
__
id ll
/~
r 1)/159 29 s1 i "F4 IOR6/6 ribbed neck
. y 2.5YR6/2
1 ‘ c/136 1 14 i Sla Pia SYR7/4 plastic rib £10»;the neck ' ’ "'”“““""' “"""'"'"“""""""""*_ Q
1 rams/2
1 m. it ciiéfis s1 F1 5Y6/4"]
‘ 5Y8/1 ___§i___ ‘ In
‘ n i A~3/18 11 ii s1 a: 7,5YR7/4

\
lOYR8l2 aha b: 1OYR7l3 ”€':'i*' W
0 surface 19.2 Si F1 5Y6]4 W!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii"1 A ]”‘I,'fI“f1.@fT'"“f"
Av“*“'>\7J
‘1. 4“L
rs U.
V» 5. 1-— —
‘L .i
.,_....,~=.-—-:~.-%-=-._-.-_—_—_—-__
.-ii ;i 1;
5Y8/3
1 J

Qingaq.-E::i-1>,i1‘.:~1>>:f1;~7r;-¢»éPr-.:a;\=cn ms-~in1_'I,j-"-‘=ii\)'»' '

-".-'1' :'1'-,':"r.';»~.- w<.-,- =;-,-¢-- 1-W-V»,--1+‘-~_~;--_-:.-v j,

immii i in P
I
-».

Fig. 9. Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (jar types) "

1
 --~.---- we WV.’ W — " =1.

254 The Khabur Valley Tell Rad Shaqrah 255

Fig. 10 Tell Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (jar types)
NS Context Diam. Surface Fabric; Fabricfwii Remarksir W
cm 1 colour
ii c/136 y 8,6 ‘ s1 F2 SYR6/4
****__ 1 IOYR8/4
b A-3/37 9,6 S1 Fl 5YR5/4 I 11
________ SYR8/3 _______________l___
C A-3/33 10,4 S1 F4¢ IOYR7/4 grooved rim _\_ *”"”“"“
-1 _ V 2.5Y8/2 e~~-~----~--
lid A»3/3'7 10.6 ‘ s1 1=4¢ 7.5YR6/4 *~---
f 7.5YR7/4 yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy_y
C c/23 11 Sla F1 5Y6/3
1 5Y8/2 C
1*? A-3/34 12 s1 F2 2.5YR5/6 “
)_ 7.5YR8l8
‘ s C136 I0 S1 F2 5Y5/3
. 5Y7/2
h A-3/39 12,5 s1 F2 5Y7/3 1
_.___-.,._.._....§Y§/Z 1________,_ ,
i A-3/34 10 S} F2 1 2..5YR5/6 traces of red paint(?) 011 the
'7.5YR8/6
j A-3/6i J 16”” 1 if rsizi W F1 W *"16ii;ii*"

1
1
i"Pi""A43/37 1 11,4
A-3/40
1 10YR8/3
s1
1. .,,,_.,__,.__2_-iY,8/2 1 2
11 s1
2.5Y8/2
F1
Fl 3 a: 2.5Y7/4
aba b: 2.5YR6/4
$Y’I/4 1
_ _______ 1 r r new
£1 ‘;}&l’3I/757” (S371 W Pi”? 2.5178/2 WWW
3 2.51’?/6
n

P
A»3/3'7 1

C1136
‘
A-3/6477777 ib
11,6

10
S1
IOYRB/4
S13

Sla
2.5Y8/2
F1

1 F2
SY8/3 .__________
r Fl
7.5YR6/4

7.5Y7/6 1
; 511121;/4
1 . 1M elrirrrrr sijfr
I Q A-31'1 6 12 S1 F3 a: 2.5YR5/8

1 r

S
_______
A~3/43
1 1
111-3/43
6
_V SYR8/2
1 S1a
__i 1QY_R8/3
10,6
aba
F4c
b: 10YR7/2
7.5YR8/4 i

sis"r"“""1;§"1*a=zsirssz"“"";>16rss1swareneck
7.5YR8/2 aba __b:5YR'L/§___
$1“: Fiii!
s
'3 r

Fig. 10. Rad Shaqrah common ware rim fragments (jar types) ‘“.
.A,.._.__.-,_,._,........__....... =.., _ _ _____ '~ 7 _ —|_gp’ ~ .. ..-

256 The Khabur Valley Tell Rad Shaqrah 257

Fig. 11 ‘Tell Rad Shaqrah common ware rim and neck fragments {iar types)
. Diam. Surface Fabric Fabric
CH1
__fi,,,,,, _, £919}?! ,
1 a A-3/37 71:2 2.5Y7/2
2.5Y8/2
b A-3/3'7 12 S1a 71174 5 YR6/3 rib & groove below the
'2 1 _ (choke_)_§i_l*Q}*(R8/2 ___” ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,W __”neck; H(ofI a 13,,
' r or bottle) W ""~"*' '”“““"”“““ " "Qj ‘ M 0;" " 7' ' '
c Cl i 36 1 9,5 S1a F2 2.5Y5/6 groove outside the rim 1 I t r S I (
5 YR8/2
d 7A§7:7§}2i 177677 77S77la F1 7 7 7 I77777777
l()YR4/ rib on the neck c 6
1oYRs/3 I3

1 A-3/40 "1 11

<;:11f1
6 S121 F1 7.5Y6/6
SYR7/4
"F c/136 79 S2 Fl a: SYR6/6 1 "7"
2.5YR6/2 abcba b: 5Y8/3
,,;___i5,{_ c: SYR6/4
8 77 77771517176737 151757777 s1 a: IOR4/8
2.5YR6/4 aba b: 2.5YR6/6
117 77 A6/I6 14,4 ; SIa Fl a: 2.5Y6/8
1, ___.__ab,*,‘_
iii" 2¢5,Y§L‘i_
b: 5Y7/3
i D/167 S la F40 IOYRS/2
IOYRS/2__,,
,,,,,,
J 77771571717657 1 11.6 2.5YR5/8
10‘./R 8/2

T
7777A7-737/733
77 1)/162 122
10,2 A S1
2.5Y8/4
S1 a
F2

F4c SYR7/4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . be
jsmoothed
£2?
IGYR8/4
m D/163 10 F177 2.5YR6/4
2.5Y8/2
1'1 A~3/3977 *7s7717£777 SYR6/6
10YR8/3 ""1
O A-3/33 17,2 S1a F4c a: IOYRSI3
+37 IOYRS/3 aha b: SYR6/6
A-3f3 ; '18 S3 F4 a: l0R4/6 groove, burnished -~—-~ M"
TSYR8/2 be b: SYR6/4 horizqsoiiyb 1 ' ~ % I
q A-3/4 101 isi? F1 SYR7/6 m n
'7.5Y8/4
1' A-3/33 13.4 7 S1 7 77777771751 777717oY7R67/2 black patches inside and
_ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZN 10YR8/2%,” outside ““""" “""'"“"? W7‘

9 P

x
4
<r*1f*I
Fig. fl. Rad Shaqrah common Ware rim and neck fragments (jar types). ‘"7
.,_1*._.,__,=...-....._..._\.,,......'.....=. , 7777 "T7" __ ....,» 7 __ _ V “*7 -= ~~=--»-~ ~ VJ»-» wwwww~.

258 The Khabur Valley Tell Rad Shaqrah 259

Fig. 12 Tell Rad Shaqrah common ware bottom fragments (bowls, pom, jars) ;;;;;;;;l;Ҥ::'
(Cf. Fig. Sf, 11,1.) \<‘ ;j:f"_-:_
em. Context \ fiiéiiiiww
Surface d Fabric Fabric Remarks
\
CIT! §}Z19l"'
a d B/23 9,6 S1 F2a d TQYRV/2 W flat base ‘ a b
10YR8l3 _,,F2 __
b B/22 8,4 Si d ”5Yi€6i3” d d rounded base
SY8/3 ,fi__,__
c Cl 140 7 S121 SYRS/4 rounded base
7.5YR7/2
<1 A-3/37 dd \4d <31? F4 l0YR¢7i-}‘dld d rounded base
if lOYR6/I
@ 1 A~3/64 Sla 154%: 5Y6/4 ring base
2.5Y8/2
f A-3/26 1 2,4 Miss 1=( a: 7.5YR5/4 ring base
1OYR8/3 ba b: 7.5YR4/2
g A-3??? 9,4 F2 5 YR7/4 ring base
10YR8/27? if smoothed
h A-3/33 6Y2 S la 7.5YR7/4 ring base
10YR8/2
1 7 "Alia/33 ff s
J A»3/24 Z0
1 OYR 8/2
S3
FT d
by
Fl
a: 7.5YR8/4
b: SYR7/4
a: SYR7/3
ring base

deg base
xggg 1:44
\ 2.5Y8l4 ba bi 7.5YR7/4
1< A-3/37 1? ****“E3 F4 a: 2.5YR6/6 ring base
,, SYR7/4
_, ,Sg_,_ ba b: 7.5YR6/6
1 A A~3/43 F411 10YR7/4 ring base
EOYR7/3

\__J_\_l
c : I
é
E
Fig. 12. Rad Shaqrah common ware bottom fragments (bowis, pots, jars) “

77777, <7 W7 7 V ——————— —————f————|-__|f, ff;——————————————————’*fi*"”iv___ — —__

______,,_.,_i_‘,__,_‘_______,____., _ _ _A_ _ .__i__ V _. we _ __ _ ,..... W M

v-.

Part III

On the Euphrates and to the West

|- 7——4~ ffiw — W _ _ **************************'1''''''''' ''' ''' ' *' '***" _ --W __ _ I

._..__.__..___....._._.. ,_ - WTIA""""""""""~ 77 ~~ —*~~'~ ' " """“’”“'““"““ ' “ " '

Iron Age Pottery from Tille Hoytik, South»-Eastern Turkey

STUART R. BLAYLOCK
Ankara

The site
Tillc Hoyiik was a medium-sized mound on the west bank of the River Euphrates in
the province of Adiyaman, South-eastern Turkey, c. 50km upstream of Samsat, and
l30krn from the Syrian-Turkish border at Carchemish. The site was excavated by
the British institute of Archaeology at Ankara between 1980 and E990, under the
direction of Dr D.H. French; it was drowned by the filling of the Ataturk Dam in
1991. Of the eleven seasons spent in the excavation of the mound at Tilic, Iron Age
levels were examined in all or parts of seasons from 19824989. Final publication
of the site is proceeding; to date the first and fourth volumes of a projected series of
four have appeared, covering the Medieval period and the Late Bronze Age
respectively. ‘ The Iron Age levels will be the subject of the third volume in the
series. 2
The strategy in excavation was to examine architecture over as great an area as
possible, by clearance of the whole of the top of the mound, and to recover (it was
hoped) sufficient ceramic material in situ for a reliable sequence of pottery to be
built up. Very little pottery was known from this area of eastern Anatolia prior to
the rescue excavations of the 1970s and 80s, and excavations began with a minimal
knowledge of the range of material likely to be encountered, and a very limited
ability to recognise intrusive or residual material in any given collection. In view of
these limitations it was considered of crucial importance, in building a ceramic
sequence for the site (and thereby for the region), to admit only reliable material,
and to recognise that sherd material has the potential to mislead if it is accepted as
primary evidence. Thus the pottery has been assessed according to two categories:
the reliable collection of complete, or near complete, vessels from floors, sealed
rubbish pits and other deposits of demonstrably reliable context; and a parallel,
supporting collection of sherd material which serves to extend the range of shapes
and types of vessel, and which is valuable in illustrating types“ not represented in
the whole pottery, but which is notinecessarily wholly reliable in its stratigraphic
context.

The Iron Age stratigraphic sequence

There were ten major surviving structural levels in the sequence, numbered I to X
from the bottom. Within levels there may be subdivision into phases in the course
of the life of a structure, or series of structures. Dating is dependant on: 1).
dendrochronological dating of the underlying Late Bronze Age structures, whose
latest phase of rebuilding, prior to a tire, took place c. the end of the 12th century
c
\ 1
Mootuz 1993; SUMMERS 1993a.
2 BLAYIDCK forthcoming; for a summary of the site, including an overview of the Iron Age
levels, see BLAYLOCK I998.

v
_._..._____.__.._.___ _ if-_... . ___________________ ~ __ 7 7, %‘
264 On the Euphrates and to the West
B.C.;3 2). the dating by coins of the second of three overlying Hellenistic levels to
the early 3rd century, and thus the probability that the first of those levels belongs
to the late 4th century?‘ 3). the probability, from architectural affinities, and the
general character of the pottery and other finds, that the large and well-planned
building level here called VIII had its origin in the period after the annexation of
the Neo~l~littite kingdom of Kurnmuh into the Assyrian empire by Sargon II in 708
B.C.; its construction thus lies at the very end of the 8th century, or in the early 7th
century, and the buildings were occupied through several phases of rebuilding in
the 7th century. 4). the Achaemenid character of the architecture of Level X; with
an appreciable interval of time intervening between the final destruction of level
VIII, for the construction and occupation of level IX (itself a massive, though
poorly preserved structure). (Level X itself was separated from the earliest
Hellenistic level by a phase of unassociated pits); 5). the relative dating of the
seven levels intervening between the LBA and the turn of the seventh century: for
which we are dependant on estimates of the life of structures, degree of alteration
etc., but which might, for the purpose of an outline scheme, be assigned
approximately 50 years apiece. Thus levels I-III should be dated in the llth/10th
centuries; levels IV-V form the core of the occupation of the Neo-Hittite period,
falling in the l0th('?)/9th centuries, and conceivably extending into the Sth century.
Levels VI and VII represent '?9th/8th century occupation, although they are poorly
preserved; and level VII is certainly to be placed in the 8th century, on the grounds
of Assyrian elements amongst the finds (pottery, a fibula, etc). Level VIIl is
assigned broadly to the 7th century. Level IX could belong to the late 7th century,
but in view of the length of occupation in the preceding level is more likely to be
belong to the 6th century; and level X is dated to the later 6th or early Sth century
on the grounds of Achaemenid architectural affinities and the limited pottery (see
below). r amongst 0thers.5 At the end of the LBA structural sequence was a massive building
The pottery
General character of the Tille pottery
The policy, outlined above, of basing the ceramic sequence on reliably stratified
whole pottery requires such pottery in some quantity if it is to be more than a series
of isolated vessels. The collection from Tille amounts to 326 vessels in all
(including pithoi and some groups of large sherds from reliable contexts). The
supporting sherd material selected for publication in the final report amounts to
approximately 1000 further sherds (including occasional poorly-stratified whole
vessels). The two collections will be drawn on here, but only a small fraction of this
total can be illustrated or specifically described. Buildings of levels I, IV/V and X
had reasonable numbers of whole pots associated with construction, occupation, or
destruction levels; but much the largest assemblages came from burnt destruction
deposits in two successive phases of level VIII (133 vessels; 41% of the whole).
Thus there is an imbalance in the whole pottery (reflected in that illustrated here),
because half of the collection was retrieved from the three latest levels (VIII to X:
167 vessels, or 51% of the whole); although the imbalance is mitigated in part by
3 Kunn-totm et al. in Summnns 1993a, 179; Kuntuotm 1995.
“ Frznncn 1985. 6; 19861», 214.
s , , _ _ W _
~ 1» - - -.
run Héiyrik 265
distinctive and reliable sherd material from the early levels. The collection provides
the means to examine the nature of the pottery at fixed points in the early, middle
and later parts of the Iron Age sequence; the chosen levels have the best-preserved
architecture, and thus the best chance of reliable association.
The Iron Age pottery of Tille, viewed as a whole, shows certain general
characteristics which can usefully be described at this point: grey wares are very
unusual; nearly all of the material is red or buff in colour (some of the cooking pot
wares are grey, brown or black). A painted ware is frequent in the earliest levels (I-
lll), but otherwise painted pottery is very uncommon, amounting to no more than
22 sherds (Fig. 4, 1; Fig. ll, 9-I3), and one whole vessel (Fig. I0, I4). Small
quantities of red-slipped pottery occurred in the middle Iron Age levels (IV and V;
Fig. ll, 14-16), but these are fewer than ten sherds in all, and the majority of red-
slippcd pottery (found only as sherds) came from the later levels (VIII-X; Fig. ll,
1'7-23). Levels IV and V show the distinctive ‘Ribbed Ware‘ in some quantity,
which is known from the rescue excavations in the Keban region to the north of the
Taurus Mountains, as well as from further afield (below and Fig. 3); this represents
a rare connection to the north. Otherwise, where parallels can be found for the
pottery, the complexion is overwhelmingly North Syrian, North Mesopotamian,
and occasionally Levantine in complexion. There are relatively few connections
with known pottery of the areas to the north (i.e. Urartu; Central and Western
Anatolia {at least until the very latest Iron Age levels when some few imported
sherds are recognised]); and very little material that could be certainly identified as
Cypriot, Cilician, or otherwise East—l\/Iediterranean.
The Late Bronze Age background: The Late Bronze Age levels at Tille displayed
several distinctive types of pottery: a combed/incised ware, and a painted ware,
level of which a perimeter wall and a defended gateway were exposed by
excavation; this had been destroyed by fire after a long period of occupation and
alterations, thelatest of which was dated by dendrochronology to the late 12th
century.“ If the dating is correct, this structure would have spanned the transition,
in conventional dating, to the Iron Age at c. 1200 B.C., or slightly later. This
supports the dating of level I of the Iron Age sequence well into the period of the
so-called ‘dark ages‘. There is demonstrable continuity, in both the stratigraphic
sequence and the ceramics, between the LBA and the earliest Iron Age levels.
Whatever the precise point and details of the transition, at Title there was
disruption, development and rebuilding, but no hiatus in occupation. The LBA
painted ware is easily distinguished by-fonn, fabric, and decorative technique from
that of the early Iron Age (below), but common motifs also suggest an element of
continuity and survival of potting tradition. There is also continuity in the coarse
chaff-tempered and gritty ['drab'] wares, which appear in bowl, jug and
occasionally in plate forms in Iron Age levels I~III.
5 SUMMERS 1993a, 43-46; a single sherd of a Mycenacan stirrup jar was also found (LH Ill
A/B of ?c.t300; ibid. 45).
° Above; Kuntuouvr ct al. in SuMr~/teas 1993a, 179.
I —;__ , _ ————
__1..._,.__.,._ _. ,. _ _ ~ _ A __ _ »_...
266 On the Euphrates and to the West
Level I: A pair of large stone buildings and associated exterior pebbled surfaces
were cut into the burnt remains of the last LBA building.” The stratigraphic
evidence suggested a fairly rapid succession, and, above all, a continuous structural
sequence through this transition. These buildings were themselves destroyed by
fire, and contained a group of c.25 vessels (shown in part in Figs 1-2). Amongst the
coarse wares, crude wares predominate in a wide variety of forms (those
representing continuity of fabrics with the LBA ‘drab ware’, cf. above): especially in
plates; trefoibmouthed jugs (Fig. 2, 940); round~»bottomed jugs; spouted juglets
(Fig. 2, 5~6); lentoid flasks; bowls (Fig. 2, 'l~4). Fabrics are characterised by chaff
tempering but also by very coarse grit; there is a tendency for cores to be dark grey,
reduced, but surfaces to be buff-red, oxidised, with a sharp transition. But the most
distinctive and characteristic pottery of this level is a painted ware (Fig. l); whole
vessels of this are "few, but sherds are plentiful, and sufficiently distinctive to be
reliable. Forms appear to be largely jars and jugs. There are wide variations in
surface treatment and colour; paint colour ranges from black to yellow, through
purple, brown, orange, and red. Few examples are definitely slipped. Motifs include
hatched triangles (Fig. l, 1,2,6,9,l2,l4,l6, 17); radial rim lines (4,6,7); pendant
semicircles (6,7); wavy lines (5,l2,14); circles and dots (8,l0); random-line designs
(13,15). Plain linear registers lie below the patterned areas, and normally at the
widest point of the vessels. Handles have wavy lines or ladder patterns (Fig. I,
12,17). As a class the material is distinctive and clearly different from the
similarly-decorated LBA wares at Tillc (both in its variability, and in texture and
quality of paint). bevel I should date to a later, rather than an earlier, point in the
llth century, since there are poorlypreservecl traces of other structures intervening
between the LBA and this level.
Parallels for EIA painted ware: There are sporadic instances of this early Iron Age
painted pottery at quite a number of sites in North Syria, although none has yet
been recognised from another site in Turkey. A number of vessels from the
cemeteries at Hama offer close parallels for the Tille material, both in form and
decoration. The large carinated, handled jars (such as Fig. 1, I7) appear? amongst
examples of zig-zag and wavy lines? tiers of open and hatched triangles;‘° double
and triple zig-zag lines (cf. Fig. I, 2-3);“ and combinations of painted bands and
dots, wavy lines, etc.” Some further sherd material published from Hama, extends
the range of painted motifs.“ No other site has produced anything like so much
material. Some shcrds published from ‘Iron Age I‘ levels at Tell Afis display similar
motifs and may be related.“ Tell Afis also provides a noteworthy comparison with
Tille in the ‘strong internal continuity with the LB traditions‘ in pottery at this
’ Btxvtocr 1990, 6; FRENCH 1991, Fig. 2.
8 R11s1948,Fig.58.
" ibid., Figs 12s-9.
*° lbid., Figs 1236; z>1. l0a.
“ lbid., Figs 29, 123.
12 lbid., Fig. 63; on a one-handled jug form.
*3 Rus/Bum. 1990, Figs 64, 67, and 8i.
*4 MAZZONI 1992b, Fig. 10, no's 3 and s; Fig. 11, l'10'S 6, 9, i0.
Mom.
Tille Hdyiik 267
site." Some of the sherds from Tell Rifa‘at could also be of this ware.“ Lastly
painted pottery from new excavations at Tell Gindaris, reported on at the
Heidelberg Table Ronda, was very similar to the Tille material, and may represent
the same ware;” it will be interesting to see if this similarity is sustained with
further work.
The whole pottery of levels II and III comprised a continuation of the forms and
fabrics established in level I; although the collection was not large or distinctive
enough to enable the progress or development of material to be charted. What is
clear, however, is that the character of the pottery is uniform and homogeneous in
levels I to III, and there is a sharp change in the make up of the assemblage which
comes at the transition from level III to level IV.
Levels IV and V: Extensive buildings of village-type character were well-preserved
as continuous plans.“ In these plans houses are arranged around enclosed, paved,
courtyards, in which crude stylobates of limestone blocks are a recurrent feature,
presumably to support overhanging upper storeys; the individual units are divided
by/approached by streets. The collection of pottery from these levels comprised a
disparate group of 19 vessels, and a further 68 fragments from several sealed pit
groups, which serve to enlarge and enhance the collection of characteristic
material. This, as before, is backed up by a substantial selection of sherd material.
These levels are to be placed, approximately, in the ‘?IOth or 9th centuries, but
probably not as late as the 8th century. A marked change in forms and fabrics
occurs in the transition from level Ill to level IV. Some things continue: e.g.
general chaffltempered coarse wares, but new wares are introduced and dominate
the picture in levels IV and V.
The immediately striking element in the collection is the incidence of the hand~
made burnished cooking pots, with ribbed or incised ornament on rims and
shoulders (Fig. 3), which is well-known from the Keban region to the north, and
the fringes of north Syria to the south, e.g. Tell Halaf.” At Title there is no doubt
that this ware appears well up in the Iron Age sequence, predominantly in level IV,
probably also in level V. Only one whole vessel was found (in level IV), but the
incidence of sherds (which, at least as far as its lower limit, is reliable for this
distinctive and easily~rccognised ware) shows that Ribbed Ware does not appear in
the early Iron Age levels (I»IIl). Ribbed Ware forms are mainly jars, plus some
associated forrns: hole—rnouth jars are the norm, generally with two handles, and
often with a spout on the rim (Figt 3, 2); splayed rims occur, and small jars grade
imperceptibly into bowls (Fig. 3, 5-8,11,13,17). Decoration is mostly in the form of
incised lines, closely spaced on the shoulder or rim, and giving the ribbed effect.
Variation in the spacing of the lines is sometimes used to decorative effect (6,l6);
and there is occasional applied and/or more complex incised decoration (9,l4-16).
A grit tempered fabric, often with distinctive white grits and a ‘blushed’ surface
(pink/red on buff) is the second typical fabric of the middle Iron Age levels at Tille.
‘S Ibid.,166»7.
“’ SETON Wrtuams 1961, Pl. 39, nos l6~l9.
'7 DIETRICH SURENHAGEN and Uwe MULLER, personal communication.
*3 Sumvinns 1989, Figs 2»3.
*9 sum. 1995, 203, and map p. 212.
_-.__1-._-- ~_- ~ — ——~—'——r—————'—r——r—~ r - -- - —-——- -- - -
268 On the Euphrates and to the West
Typical vessels are simple round-bottomed cups (Fig. 4, 2-4), flat platters/‘bowls (5-
6), splayed-rim cups ('7-l2), and bowls with tripod looped bases (14-16). These
were coupled with some fine buff wares, and a very occasional painted sherd;
including one bichrome jar neck (Fig. 4, 1). Additionally plain brown wares
characteristic of this group include some of the same forms, plus large carinated»
profile jars (not illustrated). These all accompany the ‘ribbed ware‘ in level IV, and
continue in Level V, although the emphasis in the latter level is on tripod-based
bowls, splayed-rim cups, and a number of carinated jars. A finer fabric in bowl
forms with a distinctive profile and burnished surfaces, is a significant smaller
group, which may have a rather later emphasis, although this is unclear as the
fabric is represented only in the sherd material (Fig. 4, l7~»19). The succeeding two
levels (VI and VII) are poorly preserved and discontinuous, much of these levels
was destroyed by terracing for the construction of level VIII, but they are shown to
have been reasonably long-lived by large numbers of pits and traces of structures
and surfaces belonging to both levels. The ceramics which can be associated with
the remains of structures show both elements of continuity with the preceding
(Neo-Hittite) levels, and similarities with those of level VIII, which imply Assyrian
connections in level VIE at least. Indeed if the ‘Assyrian’ levels at Tille (VIII and
later) did not begin until the turn of the 7th century and levels VI and VIZ belong to
the 8th century, then an Assyrian influence on the ceramics prior to that date is
entirely to be expected.
Parallels for the middle Iran Age ceramics: Few parallels for the plain wares are
available. The tripod-looped bases are perhaps the most distinctive trait in this
collection, and these are fairly widespread (if sparsely published) in collections of
iron Age pottery from North Syria and the Levant. The feature appears on jars and
craters from the cremation cemeteries of Carchemish;2° for bowls with such bases
there are isolated examples at Tell Fakhariyah and Tell Halal,“ and further
examples from sites further south, such as Megiddo.” There are isolated examples
of splayed-rim cups from other sites in North Syria; including some from Tell Jurn
Kabir.” But the Ribbed Ware is the only type to be widely recognised and reported.
This material, as has been said above, has been found quite widely in the rescue
excavations of the Keban and Karakaya regions, further north on the Euphrates in
Turkey; and related material is claimed for a wide area of eastern Anatolia and
north-western Iran.” Its occurence in quantity at Tille, and at Lidar Hoyuk
downstream,” begins to show a more southerly bias to its distribution, and makes
the examples from Tell Halaf less surprising.“
This material has been widely attributed to the Early iron Age elsewhere, but at
Tille it clearly belongs to an intermediate point in the sequence. Two conclusions
2° Woottuv 1939, PIS 9-10, 13.
1‘ Kmvrok 1958, 26 and P1. 39. no. 90; I-{Room 19s2,t>1. 62 no. 192.
Z2 LAMON/SHIPTON 1939, 169; Pl. 25.
23 EXDEM/ACKERMANN, this volume, pp. 321, Fig. 6, 1-3.
” E.g. Suvm 1991, 95-6; Bum. 1991212.
*5 or. Mutter, this volume, pp. 403-434.
26 These were played down by BARTL (1995, 208) as being remote and peripheral from the
main areas of distribution of the pottery.
__¢ *--‘“""">
Tille Hdyzik 269
are possible from this: l. For the Tille area at least, two different ceramic horizons
are detectable in the sequence of levels I-V; the ceramics familiar from elsewhere
and dubbed ‘Early Iron Age‘, belong to the later of the two. 2. Attempts to relate
this sequence to the chronology must mean that, at least at Tille, the Ribbed Ware
must be dated to the ?l0th or 9th centuries, or thercabouts; the stratigraphic
sequence excludes the possibility of it being any earlier. This need not entail a great
shift in the proposed dating of the ware elsewhere, but it might imply that there is
more of an interruption at some other sites than has been recognised hitherto. The
Ribbed Ware is certainly exceptional, amongst the Tille pottery, for its pronounced
northern distribution; representing virtually the only evidence of a northward, or
Anatolian, focus in the pre-Classical Iron Age. The exception hints at a blending of
traditions, with various elements playing a part (a Mesopotamian versus an
Anatolian influence; a regional contrast, i.e. the Turkish lower Euphrates versus
the trans-Taurus region; and local tradition relating to wider contacts). It should
also be acknowledged that the difference could be ‘spatial; and that each site gives
a sequence that is (doubtless) only a partial picture.
Level VIII: The character of the site changes at the construction of level VIII, from
one of (largely) domestic buildings, to a well-planned complex of structures within
a defensive perimeter wall. The main building complex was built on the highest
part of the mound, centred on a courtyard of pebble paving in chequerboard
design.” The site was bisected by a street, to the north of which were complexes of
domestic buildings, built around three paved courtyards. These buildings contained
the largest groups of iron Age pottery from Tille,rsome 133 vessels, in two burnt
destruction deposits (96 from the earlier phase Villa; and 37 from the later, Vlllb);
in addition to much supporting sherd material (cf. the breakdown given above).
Although they are separated by a major phase of rebuilding the two groups are
nearly identical in composition, and both groups probably fall within the 7th
century.
The material presented here represents a selection of the whole pottery as found
room by room from levels Villa and Vlllb, mounted by form (Figs. 5-10); with
some supporting sherd material (in Figs 5 and ll). The Assyrian pottery of Tille is
characterised as follows: Finewares are dominated by the round-bottomed drinking
cup (Fig. 10, 1-6); dimpled cups and beakers (7-10),” small jars (ll-12,19), two-
handled, button-based jars (23,24), and various bottle forms (13-15,18) also occur.
There are bowls of two classes,rth‘ose with an S-curved rim profile (Fig. 5, SW8),
which are largely grit tempered in a relatively fine fabric, and those with a
thickened, and inturned rim (l-2), which are mostly chaff tempered. There are
many variants on these basic bowl forms, including some in fine wares with highly
burnished surfaces (Fig. 5, l2,15,20,22); and the sherd collection displays an
immense variety of bowl forms, some with quite developed and extravagant rim
forms (Fig. 5, 10-22). Jars with rilled or ribbed shoulders occur in the same grit»-
” FRENCH 19862, s~6; 1988a, ms; 19881:, Fig. 1.
28 The term ‘Palace Ware‘ is here reserved for only the finest of the iineware vessels, with
ultra-thin, buff or greenish, and 'clinky' fabric (cf. RAWSON 1954, 169 and OATES, J. 1959,
136); most of the vessels are rather thicker than this, and buff to red in colour, although they
still have very fine fabric, without visible tempering, and are thin-walled, and well thrown.
 p}} }
1 2'70 On the Euphrates and to the West
tempered fabrics as the S-rimmed bowls and these can be seen as the product of the
same technique, applied variously to jar and bowl forms (Fig. 6, 2,3,6); there are
also jar forms in the fine and burnished fabric (Fig. 6, '1). Coarse vessels abound:
typical are the two- or, occasionally, four-handled jars (Fig. 7, 5); like the bowls
there is a wide variety of rim forms, including some quite exaggerated forms (6).
Cooking pots are wheel made, in two broad classes: one displays distinctive everted
rim forms related to the S-rimmed bowls and jars, and handles placed on the
\
shoulder (cf. Fig. 7, 2,4); the second class is more diverse, coarser, and tends to
have handles from rim to shoulder (Fig. 7, 1,3). Especially numerous are round-
bottomed jugs and jars (the same form with and without a trefoil spout), which are
found in a variety of sizes, but invariably with the same details: a bar rirn, raised
ribs on the neck and shoulder, and incised line(s) lower on the shoulder, near the
base of the handle (Fig. 8, 1-6). There are small, pointed-based amphorae (Fig. 9,
5-8); larger amphorae (1-3) and storage jars (9,10); and potstands (Fig. 7, 7).
Amongst the finewares there are a small number of sherds of glazed vessels, some
with polychrome banding in white, yellow, and pale blue or green (Fig. 11, 1-3); a
single small glazed faience vessel (4); and a number of sherds decorated with
rosette stamps (6-8), as well as a variety of fine vessel forms in the same fabric as
the dirnpled goblets and carinated drinking cups (Fig. 10). A varied collection of
goblets or-chalices should also be mentioned (Fig. 10, 20-22; although there are no
1 istikans at Tille), as should lamps (Fig. 10, l6,l'7), stands, and various crude
l
1
handmade and miniature vessels. Painted pottery is extremely scarce in this level
and, aside from the bichrome cosmetic bottle (Fig. 10, 13), is confined to sherds
(Fig. 11, 9~l3).
Parallels for Assyrian pottery at Tille: There is a good deal of recognisable parallel
material for the finewares and some of the larger vessels (arnphorae, bowls, etc),
amongst excavated Assyrian sites in both Northern Iraq, and in Syria and the
Levant; with a preference for collections belonging to the very end of the Assyrian
empire.” In this respect the collections published from Nimrod are fundamental,
for examples of the range of bowls, fineware jars and drinking cups, dimpled
beakers, bottles and stands;3° as well as for amphorae, fine bowl forms, bottles and
rosette stamped <lecoration.3‘ These are supplemented by material from Assur
1 (dirnpled wares, bottles, bowls, stands)?’ and by useful collections from two
smaller sites excavated more recently in Assyria: Khirbet Qasrij and Khirbet
Khatuniyeh.” Khirbet Qasrij, is dated tentatively to the first half of the sixth
century,” and this might be supported by certain aspects of the Tille collection,”
29 Although it must be acknowledged that details of earlier 7th century pottery are much less
well known. ‘ glazed faience miniature jars very similar to Fig. 11, no. 4 (ibid., Pl. 7 a & c), and the neck
3° GATES, J. 1959, Pls 35939 passim.
3' Lmus 1954, Pl. 37 & 39; HELEN MCDONALD, personal communication; HAUSLEITBR this
volume, p. 24.
3’ Huron 1954, Pls 3-6.
s
3’ The former especially for bowls, jars and fine wares: Cunrrs i9s9, Figs 23-40; the latter
~.
especially for globular bottles, amphorae (both pointed based and more cylindrical forms),
and jars: CURTIS/GREEN I997, 90 and Figs. 39-48.
3‘ CURTIS 1989, 52.
V V N N v miéirw I i
Title Hiiyiik
although in other respects the similarities are more general than specific. Closer at
27:
hand, the pottery published from Sultantepe provides, in a single page, a very
useful overview of bowl and jar forms, plus a range of basalt bowls (which were
also found in large numbers at Tille).36 Uther sites in the region provide occasional
parallel material, but these have often been of greater use for the identification and
comparison of objects than of pottery: Zincirli, Tell Halaf, and Tarsus.” It is less
easy to find comparable material for other elements in the Tille collection: the jugs,
jars and cooking pots have a much more restricted distribution; indeed certain
features, especially the widespread incidence of handles, mark these vessels out as
belonging to a different, non-Assyrian, and presumably more local, pottery
tradition. For these there are limited connections with the pottery from
Sultantepe,” and the material from Tell Ahmar which has many points in common
with the Tille collection: in addition to showing a broadly similar range of Assyrian
vessel shapes, it also has very similar larger jar, jug and cooking pot forms, which
are otherwise unparalleled.” Tell Sheikh Hassan is also helpful in this respect with
similar ranges of handled jars and jugs.“
Level X: This, the latest building level, also contained the best-preserved
architecture on the site, with walls preserved to a height of up to 2m in places.“
The building was kept and left clean, only two vessels were found in the rooms
(Figs 12, 5; 13, 7); and a group of l6 vessels was recovered from a construction
deposit in one of the small south-eastern rooms (sealed between the construction
surface and the floor; Pig. 12, l-4). The pottery has few diagnostic aspects (Figs 12»
13); the most distinctive are perhaps amphorae which have similarities with later,
Hellenistic, amphorae from the site (Fig. 12, 4-5). Otherwise the whole pottery is
very much in the traditions established in previous levels and, apparently,
continuing here. Small numbers of sherds were recovered from contexts associated
with the level X building, and these do display some distinctive qualities and
suggest some intriguing parallels (although, as poorly associated sherds, they are
not individually reliable; cumulatively, and with due caution, they acquire some
significance). Whilst there is none of the pottery considered to be classic
Achaemenid types (triangle ware, for instance), there are forms amongst these
sherds which could be Achaemenid in shape, principally in the bowl sherds with
flaring or splaying rims.“ Jar and arnphora necks with folded rims also appear in
35
Such as the few sherds of jars with folded rims (identified as one of the key post-Assyrian
forms: ibid., 48-9 and 5 l; cf. also below) from levels IX and X.
36 LLOYD/GOKQE 1953, Fig. 6. Amongst other useful material from Sultantepe is a pair of
of a jug with rosette Stamps (Goings/Lnovo 1953, Fig. 13).
3’ von LUSCHAN 1943; I-[Room 1962, Pls 56-62; and GOLDMAN 1963 respectively.
3“ LLOYD/GOK¢£ 19ss,r1g. 6.
39 JAMIESON, this volume, pp. 301 and 303, Figs 3 and 5.
4° SCHNEIDER, this volume, pp. 342-345, Figs l2~15.
4* unseen 1987, Fig. 1.
‘*2 Compare the shapes presented here, Fig. 13, s~16, with those published by Sulunnn 19ss,
Figs. 1 and 2; and the collection from Abu Qubur, GASCHE et al. 1989, P1. 8.
W , V
._¢__..__-,i..__...__._._....,...... ,.... T -4 _ .._ _._.._ __ .__ __ _ ___ _ _________ ___" _ ..».~.............,...., ..,.,W,m., .. »-----“M--WW... . mu»

2'72 On the Euphrates and to the West Tille Hifiyiik 2'73

the sherd material of levels IX and X, this too could be a late characteristic (Fig. the meetings in Heidelberg and Nieborow. For extensive discussion of Iron Age
13, 1-6).“ pottery I am grateful to all the participants of the two meetings. For especially
useful advice and specific discussion I would like to thank Uwe Muller; David
Some exotics: Amongst the sherd material there are elements representing classes French, Nicholas Postgate, and Marie-Henriette Gates. Ben Claas Coockson and
of rarer and (at least in part) imported material: bichrome painted shercls from Goniil Evsever did most of the drawings; Shirley Blaylock has given indispensable
various middle and late levels; and miscellaneous painted sherds, some burnished. assistance with the processing and study of the pottery from Tille, as well as with
These show mostly band~paintcd decoration, i.e. they show no distinctive painted many other aspects of post-excavation work.
K
motifs; all are small and none is individually identifiable. There are a number of
red-slipped vessels from middle (Fig. ll, 14-16) and late levels (17-23); and some
sherds of black gloss bowls (from predominantly later levels [IX and X]; Fig. ll, References cited
24-31), which help to define a date in the 6th century for level X. One sherd of BARTL 1995, BLAYLOCK 1990; 1998; forthcoming, Cuirris 1989, CURTIS/GREEN
-.
Lydian Marbled Ware was identified. 1997, FRENCH 1985; 1986a; 19861); 1987; 1988a; 1988b; 1991, GASCHE et al. 1989,
GOLDMAN 1963, Gongs/Ltovo 1953, HALLER 1954, I-IROUDA 1962, KANTOR 1958,
Conclusion: Only the barest outline of material has been possible in the space KUNIHOLM 1995, LAMON/SHIPTON 1939, LINES 1954, LLOYDIGOKCE 1953, von
available. This offers a 'SI1&pSh0ll' of four fixed points in the sequence of ten iron LUSCHAN 3943, MAZZONI 1992b, Moons 1993, DATES, I. 1959, Rmvson 1954,
Age building levels; at which the material is reasonably plentiful, and for which Rus 1948, Rns/Burn. 1990, Snron VVILLIAMS 1961, Ssvnv 1991, SUMMERS E989;
some parallel material can be identified. There is much more material, and greater 1993a, SUMNER 1986, WooLI_,1~:Y 1939.
detail and refinement of analysis will be attempted in the final publication.“ It is
hoped that the internal sequence, based on whole vessels associated with
architecture, is reliable. Figs. 1-13 on pp. 274-286.
The Assyrian pottery, necessarily, dominates; if there has been an undue
emphasis in the text on the earlier half of the sequence, levels I-V (/‘?VI), this is
because it seems to me that the ceramics from Tille in the later period, the 8th/7th
centuries and onwards conform to the ceramic mainstream, and that the illustrated
material (Figs 5-11) speaks for itself; but that the material of earlier levels is
different, and represent periods which were not well represented, or had not been
recognised, elsewhere. There is certainly some uncertainty and disagreement as to
1 what represents pottery of the earliest Iron Age in the Turkish Euphrates, and that
even where material does occur in common, there is no one simple interpretation. It
is to be hoped that, with more material being discovered and published, a clearer
picture, that is reliable on a regional basis, will be established in due course. There
remain problems in finding parallels for material in the early and middle levels
(although there are encouraging signs in work in progress at a number of sites in
1
Syria and South-eastern Turkey); and in achieving absolute, as opposed to relative,
dating.

Acknowledgments
?
The Tille excavations were funded principally by the British Institute of
Archaeology at Ankara and the British Academy. I would like to thank David
French, the director of the Institute and of the Tille excavations for involving me in
the work, and for help and encouragement in subsequent years. I also owe the
2
Institute a debt of thanks for the award of small grants which enabled me to attend

\
4 "3 Cf. the examples from Khirbet Qasrij quoted already as a possible element of the early
6th century (CURTIS 1989, 48-9, and Fig. 37; where they are described as ‘comparatively late
~» form‘).
4‘ BLAYLOCK, forthcoming.
I
!
!

ll *******************- 7* - rr- . _7- _ 1- - __ -‘___ .. --------------- -1...... - _.._ _ 7

w,,,,____,,_,,,_,,....<..,, .‘ K X _. .- _ _ ......,,,....._.._.,.,___.,,_____,___,___.,_.,.... .... .._ ,. . .,....,.,,...,,.i..__._.~....~.~.

274 On the Euphrates and to the West Tille Hiiyiik 2.75

l . .‘ I:-——,—]--~— 1 '\£| k
\_ * ii 77777777’ 7iiiiiiiiiiiiiii 777 , WW" I . ,--»»-.
l
\ p‘ ._ in \
~ -_ ' '1 ‘I \ 1 l
\ .~_,_-:._-_~ 00' -, ._ .._
I"01:
I \'“‘

A\\ V2 vp I l
-
. 1', . *
2 ~
1' ' /I *“o"s \
\ ‘Q’: '?~'0‘l:\‘-1*. - KK KK K K K K KKK K KK K 4 AAAAA

' Ex *' ' K A ‘Q ""_—_i

* fm
@l l §”¥*~\ 3
\ ZKQ
4 '3 ‘ ,0

01
.-._,;

p l ::":.. _. ”“
t
K K K K K K K K K K K K KK QT-_,~ - '.1 01
,\_. i,
, I2 5
.
@

-Q
|
0':
. s k I

K~ '\ l
‘ks \ 0 " /Z? l
\ ‘ ~ ,.~ 1'’‘
sf»
1"’: g
Q T .110‘ fl ‘k Q
r-.

II\. \_
5:-.
:¢:v,.
\\\‘:
-;\\\“
.s\\:§\
mg‘_~ 15fr
I,
-9
»0'"\Q, J 8':-’:I*-.
C~,‘\\\
\ \ ‘ s.
\OO,
-~90,xx.,‘ 0.
p4,
poo, ‘ "\.
K» O '11.‘ /4 "’ '0,
> ..~."._’‘gal, . l
A
l
‘'‘5'90\-r,
""9‘9,’
o.
L 4 1-". 1 J
‘ __ - -- I16 '1
' 1. — “"7 \
\§ 0 10 20 cm -.- 1 _
~
‘ ‘wI*v'/‘lgl 9
i5l!
-.\»~ W_. K.l
Q 8 »»:»:.\ .
A r \
l W“
Q

5
Q
~f.*:'I\ - ‘J;
10 C51". J‘ “
J4 ~_..
QQ\
0
0\
3'.‘
§‘r O
\0 ‘4 ‘‘0.
\v
'\>n\
O\0
;"n'
O’
-'
~\! l
.:
""
1:\ $
11 W
ll
W
7
Q 1:0 20 cm
ll
Fig. 1 Tille Hiiyiik, early Iron Age, levels I-III: painted pottery -
Fig. 2 Tille Hiiyiik, early Iron Age, levels I-III: plain pottery

% »~wml»v ~wl»M<m =-w»l.‘m§- ~=.-»<~:

KKKKKKKKKK K K KK .K
 WwM~ ..w,....“...“...“...“...“...............,,...W,.\.,, . nfifi _.

276 On the Euphrates and to the West Tille Héyiik 277

O
_ . H

A p WK ;% ‘p Q
Q 2 \\ KKKK —"" p

\ /gw//*% _Vm_M__ & '

K Q mm |l|m
_______m___W“_

J’K
D ' {i 10 5 I Hi,,,,,,,,,W ,KK_,, ,

wt; T\ l
, “I _ ¢%

, I

W%
IT“ to

,_"""l

KKK?
-

V
.
ll
13 L
16
4
20 cm

@- § W J
r
\,\_/ 5 K~»p.11--‘~

,1
11

‘B ______, K_ _ K

| V ‘ KK
\/
__
15 "'\
12

0 10 20 cm

A la:2 19
I 17 .

6 ~ Fig. 4 Tille Hliyiik, middle Iron Age, levels lV»V: miscellaneous fabrics (simple
‘ - nm
' alps,
‘ cooking pots, bowls, tripod bowls)
Fig. 3 Tille Hiiyiik, middle Iron Age, levels IV-V: Ribbed Wa re cups, splayed

-V KK ’-if K _ K~~ '"" . _v i _ —————~ “.1. _____ _ i___

-_..._._...._..........___.-...... - T..._.-...=_..i_._._....-...-...~.-.Wl,,W._--_.-H--~—~-~-~--<--~ --- ________ K7 _ _
l

I
l
278 On the Euphrates and to the Wes: |
Tille Hzfiyiik 279

- 7——————————————— —~~———————'—~ — — '—' :""" " _ _

1
iiiiiiiiiiiW 10

\ ‘ '

~ _____../
2 2
§

-
1

i€ £7
1

: 4

i
_ _7 Q“

/@
16

2 ,,m.__.
’”””””””":11?-74;l------;~;lW_’:’:'_:'_""HH ""W ’ _
6 L ‘ ‘I
i8 -*1

|-i|nu|n||nnuunnnunnfl—nIh—I—— ,____:M__ _

¢
Q' '**"*:'**'*' ' W ";,KM%===%_'f
ii, '7 ____ ' i i
>I

TCZT 7
3
20 cm 0 10 20 cm
-.
~
6

Fig. 6 Tille Hiiyiik, Assyrian pottery, level VIII: fine anci rilled»shouldered jars
Fig. 5 Tille Hiiyiik, Assyrian pottery, level VIII: bowl forms

-I *******W * W , — 1: ~—~—v
 5

280 On the Euphrates and to the Wes: Tille H§y1j}¢

/»__ / Q '
, \\“
“ ‘fie
' %
,——»
1
' 1
\~
\
Quin-q-mam
§\
g

\ 1

W
K 1

\
KO
0|
___.’

\
” W ——— — ‘ ~@
“'~
"'\ 5
,¢_

wmmmmm===d

\\ /_»
\ xl - 3

----.._~._..... g ,W 1
. l
_\ ¥~AJi:iiiiii|% k

E
e '~- -~-I 21 --_=.___-,
>
i
....._.__......M 3

l
Z

Q 6
y 0 10
‘,‘ é
20 cm , = o 10 20 cm
‘ e“l 1 ‘ V 4 bm;z

Fig_ 7 Tine Assyrian p0tte;-y, leygl cooking pots and jars 8 Assyrian pottery, ‘eve! i‘0liI1(l»-b0tt0m€d jugs
 ___________ _- _ w

282 On the Euphrates and to the West Tille Héiyiik

“\
an __ \
A|iil|l<
-» __ l
l
l
\

llllllill

I 3
FHl ~,..,.,...,,

..__,

Z
_ _,. _., _ _

l
1
i
_‘, _-M.- _- ~_

2 O /
8
\ :
l \ ; IT

R 3
‘$1
l

1
1 9
I3 3 2?:
W?

14 /'
I/>1/1 »*
,
s'
4
"_____M I0
0 C

-----.~.-:5

Q,
1
*"-'1\\mwn

1 _.“—'"
l

5 5 4 I?
1,...
QQD"~ .
= |
I
5
l n

\
15

‘ <~»--~——~iK=.KKK-;r-—~ l1
- L
v
l

6 .
! 12 ‘ 20
l
“-~_. 2 'iq1—*'~*" @ e
l
% \" " "'-" " " "
i lm"'“"" / ’( ,@
J! . I
I “- _._,___
l
1
1
l \‘ A 1
E

\ 9 o 10 20 cm
\
, ., _
MM
10 “K
2:4 l o
?

Fig 9 Tine H5}/fik, Assyrian pottery, level VIII: amphm-ae Fig. 10 Tille Hiiyiik, Assyrian pottery, level VIII: finewares
NJ}. this page is at half scale

__W__" __ __ K _. '*"*’ =
 - W /W" M.._~.‘___,..._._ ~ -

284 On the Euphrates and to the West Tille Hawk

1
—l
I1
-i 2
W‘
illlllmilll
W15 T W “__“_ W

\\\i//JMIWI l?
Ill!
Illll ___... K ilil l
o

\Q’
4i Z ow"-' /1

%\
-i-__
i ,,,, ,
----111- 1---------'
i
a ‘_‘"""‘ -»~» --___-M -*—-—--~“-~*l
/‘
K Fl I
YT?! /\

ii
A ‘ " I *<i| __
l 16

/‘Q7 \ \
_ __ \ 25 *\

, ——__ JM¢!»Y _ _

3;—~“"'"“_"§° O

3
"14
l
Q;**** gg
*7 0%? 20 cm
-- E

Fig. 11 Tille Hoyiik, Assyrian and miscellaneous pottery miscellaneous glazed, fine,
Fig 12 Tille Hoyuk, pottery from level X, the Achaemenid building selection of
painted, red slipped and blaek gloss sherds whole vesseis
...,............-.....__ ___ .,. - ---:=--»»=-wd?--=---—~"""=-"'-"'"'- """"-"*""_*"‘—'"/""""""""'**—"""""**—"""_'""'**_””""“M"'“'%““ ““““' "W V W77 7

286 On the Euphrates and to the West

Neo-Assyrian Pottery from Tell Ahmar

ANDREW S. IAMIESON
Melbourne

Introduction
A significant corpus of Neo-Assyrian pottery has been recovered from the renewed
excavations at Tell Ahmar (BUNNENS 1989; 1991a/b; 1992; 199421/h; 1997a/b;
10 BUNNEN5 ed. 1990).‘ The bulk of this ceramic material was excavated between
4-
1989 and 1996 from the large horizontal exposures in Area C, situated in the
middle city terrace, west of the Acropolis. Smaller samples of Iron Age pottery also
come from several contexts in different areas of the site, all of which are located in
,,1
i 11 . the lower city, known as Area D (IAMIESON forthcoming/a), Area E, and Arca F.
l Although broad similarities exist in the ceramic rcpertoires from these areas an
1 important number of differences are also apparent in the presence, quantity and
V‘ s distribution of specific wares and types. Some of these variations undoubtedly
12
reflect chronological manifestations, however, other factors such as intra-site
variability and social hierarchy must also be considered in interpreting the data.

Area C - Stratigraphy and Chronology

13
6 0 $0 20 Om The following discussion will concentrate on the Area C corpus since it is the best
""""" preserved, consisting of mahy complete and reconstructed pots (fig. 1»8), and has
been the focus of the most detailed investigation. The Area C pottery comes
I predominantly from a series of building complexes, the residential nature of which
reinforces the domestic function for most of this ceramic assemblage.’ The
presence of local and foreign wares supplies some concept of the nature and
intensity of interaction with external cultural and regional traditions. The majority
of the Area C pottery may be chronologically related to the end of the iron Age
period. Close parallels are foundwith Noo-Assyrian pottezy from other sites, in
particular Fort Shalmaneser at Nimrud, generally dated on textual evidence to
14
around 612 B.C. (OATES, J. 1959).’ - _
":"
l
5 This article is a revised text of the péiper presented at the First International Table Ronde
on lron Age Pottery convened in Heidelberg, 1995. The present writer is undertaking a
detailed study of the Neo-Assyrian ceramics, primarily from Area C at Tell Ahmar, for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy, under the supervision of Dr Guy Bunnens, from the
Department of Classics and Archaeology, at the University of Melbourne. The counsel and
assistance of Guy Bunnens and Arlctte Roobaert, who have supervised the author's research,
is gratefully acknowledged.
2 For a plan of the architecture from Area C sci: BUNNENS 199722, 102, fig. 4.
3 In northern Syria our understanding of the period, and for that matter the pottery, from the
end of the Assyrian empire to that of the Persian conquest is still poorly understood. The
u
-. dating of post-Assyrian pottery is particularly problematic (GATES, D. 1957, 38). As J. Curtis
1 I6 observes, a compounding problem is the fact that sites like "... Nimrod, where Late Assyrian
pottery occurs in abundance, the majority of material has been found in late seventh-century
contexts, although, some of it may be substantially earlier." (CURTIS 1989, I8)
>
Fig. 13 Tille Hiiyiik, pottery associated with level X: jar and bowl form

3. :'
. 3;-i ivy
— _ *"'** *Iprj"""' " 1::****":v V ifs?" _ ~77K —

. 3 I -I T ‘ ' ’ Z I
 288 On the Euphrates and to the West
Preliminary findings suggest that at least three main phases are stratigraphically
represented in Area C (BUNNENS 1997a). These levels span a relatively brief period
in the history of settlement at the site. The internal stratigraphic sequence,
associated inscribed material and other related artefact evidence implies that the
buildings were in use for a period of no more than fifty years.‘ Clay tablets,
inscribed in cuneiform, found on the floor of one house have provided a date of
approximately 650-630 BC; the earliest is 683 B.C.5 The homogeneous nature of
the pottery confirms this restricted temporal range. At present there is no indication
that the pottery is earlier than the 7th Century B.C., and the absence of any
Achaemenid, or later Hellenistic, ceramic indicators suggest that the assemblage is
earlier than these subsequent cultural horizons, although, this possibility can not be
entirely ruled out. Based on the available evidence it appears that the bulk of the
Area C assemblage may be chronologically located somewhere in the last half of
the seventh century B.C. (i.e. Iron Age If/III), or in terms of absolute dates,
approximately between c. 650 and 600 B.C.
Area C - Ceramic Assemblage
Grit tempered, wheel-made, pinkish-buff Common Ware is the most profuse fabric
type in Area C (fig. l~»4). Typical open shapes are bowls with carinated rims (fig.
l:l-2), bowls with out~turned rims (fig. l:l2,l4-15), bowls with in-turned rims (fig.
1:3-4), bowls with grooved rims (fig. l:5) and bowls with projecting and carinated
rims (fig. 1:6-7,9,1 l). The most frequently occurring type is one with a folded, in-
turned rim with ring base made in a wide range of sizes and appearing in all Area
C strata (fig. l:8,l0,l3). Common Ware jars include a series of small vessels with
restricted necks, out-turned rims and pointed bases (fig. 213,5), or small flat bases
(fig. 2:1-2), and medium to large jars with wide apertures, compressed rims and
loop handles (fig. 3:1-2). The most recurrent jar type has an externally thickened
out~turned rim, restricted concave neck, often with, or without, applied handles
(flg. 1:4). Other rnultitudinous Common Ware types are kraters (fig. 4:16), cups or
istikans (fig. 4:l~5), pot stands (fig. 4: 15), saucer lamps (fig. 4:10), bottles (fig. 4:6-
8), gobiets (fig. 4:12), juglets (fig. 449,13), and spouted vessels (fig. 4:14). Many of
these shapes have parallels with the Neo-Assyrian types found at Nimrud (LINES
1954; Onras, J. 1959; CURTIS/READE eds. 1995; HAUSLEITER this volume, pp. 17-
60 .
)Cooking Pot Ware occurs regularly and is the only exclusively hand-made
fabric (fig. 5 & 10); possibly manufactured by individual households on a localised
basis (JAMIE-ISON 1993/94).“ Cooking pots are generally coarse in texture,‘ tempered
4 For colour pictures of some of the other artefact categories found at Tell Ahmar in Area C
and for a general overview on the site see Znccnoumr 1995. See also Buuuens 1997c and
Roosaenr 1996.
5 For translation and interpretation of the Neo-Assyrian tablets from Area C see DALLEY
1996/97, 66-99. On related inscribed material see BORDREUIL/BRIQUEL-CHATONNET
1996/97, I00-I07; and HAWKINS 1996/97, £08-117. A description of the context of this data
may be found in BUNNENS I996/97, 61-65. _ _
6 Several hand-made lamps (fig. 4:11) are also made of a coarse cooking pot like-ware. In
addition, a series of large storage jars, or pirhoi, are manufactured by hand from a coarse,
1& ' ""‘ T r: r
. - L 2 ' ' = -
' L.....
.'.. . ... » '.
Tell Ahmar 289
with organic and grit inclusions, and have globular bodies with two handles; rims
are either in-turned and rounded (fig. 5:1) or slightly thickened (fig. 5:2). Some are
decorated with simple patterns of incised designs (fig. 5:3~4).
Red Slip, Palace, Fine, and Grey Wares (fig. 6) are each distinguished by their
specialised methods of manufacture, firing techniques and surface treatment. These
wares occur consistently throughout the assemblage, but in notably minimal
quantities and may represent imported luxury items.
Two varieties of Red Slip Ware appear; wheelaburnished and hand-burnished.
Both are used almost exclusively for bowls. Typical ring-burnished shapes are
bowls with externally thickened, carinated rims (fig. 613,5,"/'). Hand-burnished Red
Slip is less common. With an irregular polished surface, often with heavy
concentrations of chaff temper, it is unrepeatedly found on bowls with plain,
sometimes tapering, rims (fig. 6:2). The origin of Red Slip ceramics is uncertain.
The clay of both varieties resembles the pinkish-buff Common Ware. Ring-
Burnished Red Slip pottery has a long tradition in parts of inland and coastal Syria
and is closely related to similar types originating in Palestine where it was in use
from the tenth to the sixth centuries B.C. (AMIRAN 1970).
Palace Ware is characterised by an extremely fine texture and pale green or grey
colour; and should not be confused with Eggshell Ware, which is chronologically
later (FLEMING 1989). Produced from a non-iron rich clay in an oxidising kiln, it is
seldom found. The only shapes to be made in this ware are fragmentary small
wheel-made goblets with dimple impressions (fig. 6:9,i3), commonly regarded to
be imitating metal prototypes (RAWSON 1954; HAMILTON 1966); or alternatively,
ostrich eggs. Most sites with documented occurrences of Palace Ware are
concentrated in northern Mesopotamia (OHTSU 1991). Palace Ware is related to
Fine Ware, although the latter is generally more buff with fine grit inclusions and
slightly thicker walls. The most distinctive Fine Ware shape is a shallow bowl with
round base and carinated out-turned rim (fig. 6: i,4,6). Similar examples have been
reported at Khirbet Qasrij (CURTIS 1989) in northern Iraq.
Grey Ware appears intermittently and is distinguished by its dense texture and
medium to dark grey colour, a feature resulting from controlled reduction firing.
This wheel-made and wheel-burnished ware is only used for bowls with plain round
rims with internal incised grooves,('fig. 6:8) and bowls with projecting rims (fig.
6: 10-12.). Some of the latter type have raised bands around the outer edge of the rim
(fig. 6:11-12) that are broken at equal intervals at opposite sides of the rim;
otherwise known as bar handles. Grey Ware bowl fragments have also been found
with tripod feet (fig. 6:14). Given these stylistic features it is probable this ware
imitates equivalent shapes carved in basalt.’ The best parallels for Grey Ware
bowls come from Nirnmd (OATES, I. 1959).
. A limited number of wares embody specialised forms of surface decoration.
These include wheel-made carrot-shaped jars coated in turquoise glaze (fig. 7:5);
usually the vitreous coating is heavily crazed. Other Glazed Ware examples are jar
fragments with elaborate poly-chrome patterns. One example, although poorly
chaff tempered, variant of the Common Ware, many of which bear cordon decoration (for
examples see fig. 9).
7 A number of similar stone basalt vessels have been found in contemporary Area C contexts
at Tell Ahmar.
5*?‘ ' ' f '7; , 7777777777777 C ' Y fibwf
E
-
 290 On the Euphrates and to the West
._- . _-.~$¢=.-as.
preserved, is decorated with a register of three bands containing alternating
diamond and triangle motifs (fig. 7:2). Similar glazed pottery is found in the graves
at Assur (HALLER 1954) and is also a feature of the Nlrnrud (OATES, 3. 1959),
Qasrij Cliff (CURTIS 1989), and Sch I-lamad (KUHNE 1984b) pottery. Other
decorative techniques are jars with stamped patterns.‘ Typical motifs are rosettes
1
and stylised oval shapes (fig. '7: l) and analogous stamped pottery has been reported
s at Nimrud (OA'rEs, J. 1959). A small number of sherds are decorated with bands of
K
incised wavy lines (fig. 7:4). A similar decorated buff coloured ware is found in
greater quantities in the Habur at Dur-katlimrnu where it is known as "Sch Hamad
i Ware". A limited collection of sherds bear linear painted designs, most often in a
i brown, maroon, or black slip (fig. 713,6-8). The decoration usually consists of
-».
bands around the rim and panels of wavy or cross-hatched lines contained in a
frieze on the body. Comparable painted pottery has been found at Carchemish
(WOOLLEY 1939), Deve Hoyuk (Moonnr 1980), and Hama (FUGMANN 1958).
A small multifarious group of fabrics, consisting mostly of fragments, clearly
represent imported products. Pieces of Cypriot pottery have been found which
appear to come from a spherical flask with elongated neck when reconstructed. The
2;. fine orange fabric is decorated with geometric brown concentric circles and
Z intersecting bands (fig. 8:5). This style of pottery is known as Cypriot White
Painted Ware IV and is dated to the 7th Century B.C. (GJBRSTAD 1948). Other
decorated Cypriot sherds are less fine in texture (fig. 8:2). Another small collection
I
of different types are thought to come from the Phoenician coast (AMIRAN 1970)
and include a jug decorated with red bands (fig. 8:‘l), the neck of a finely made
bottle (fig. 8:3), and fragments of "Bi-chrome Ware" (fig. 8:4). This latter fabric
type is particularly Phoenician in character (ANDERSON 1987; EPS'l‘ElN 1966;
ARTZY E973; ARTZY et ai. 1978) and is a distinctive ceramic indicator of Iron Age
coastal sites (BRIESE 1985). One group of sherds is made of a hard crisp, pale
brown to grey clay, possibly originating from Palestine.“ These sherds all come
from the upper section of a jar with sharply carinated shoulder, two handles and
long cylindrical body (fig. 8:6). Storage vessels made of this ware were produced in
standardised sizes and traded for their contents, first appearing in the 9th Century
B.C. and continuing in use until the end of the Iron Age in the 7th century B.C.
(GEVA 1982). A unique wheel- made jar, thought to he an imported product, is
.1 decorated with brownislnblack bands and is made of a fine ware, not dissimilar in
colour and texture to that of ?aIace Ware (fig. 8:7).
1:
\u->v1¢@'>/
Area C - Ceramic and Stratigraphic Correlations
i
Comparative ceramic evidence in the Tishrin flood zone is limited. Only Jurn
i
Kabir, a small site on the west bank, downstream from Tell Ahmar, has produced
any contemporary Iron Age II/III pottery [“Late Group"] (EIDEMJPUTT 1994; 1995;
\ »~‘>¢;~\—s‘~ » »~r>
wt
4 .,_»<.-at 3 A clay stamp with rosette designs for decorating vessels was found at Tell iurn Kabir
(Eronm/Acxnam/mu, this volume, 312).
9 At Sarepta (Sarafand) a hard crisp ware is described in the manufacture of a series of
5
similar store jars (ANDERSON 1988).
i
i
i
. - e em e __ e _
Tell Ahmar 291
EIDEM/ACKERMANN this volume, pp. 309-324).“’ Further down-stream, the
assemblage from Tell Sheikh Hassan (SCHNEIDER this volume, pp. 325-346)
contains some comparative material.“ In the opposite direction, some similarities
in the Common and Painted Wares from Carchernish [Yunus Cemetery] (WOOLLEY
1939), Deve Hoytik [Graves] (MOOREY 1980) and Sultantepe [Acropolis]
(LLOYD/GOKCE 1953; LLOYD 1954) may be identified. Continuing up-stream, some
parallels are found with the south-east Anatolian site of Lidar [Level 6] (MULLLER,
this volume, pp. 403-434), however, a far greater intensity of correlations may be
observed within the corpus from Tille Hoytik [Level Villa/b] (BLAYLOCK this
volume, pp. 263~286).'2 Further afield, the pottery from Tarsus [Middle IA]
(GOLDMAN 1963) shares broad trends mainly restricted to Common Ware types. In
the Habur at Tell Seh I-lamad a Neo~Assyrian assemblage has been found which
contains a high number of parallels with Tell Ahmar (KUHNE 1984a/b; 1994a;
1997), as do the sites of Nimrud [Fort Shalmaneser/Area TW] (LINES 1954; OATES,
J. 1959; HAUSLEITER this volume, pp. 17560), Assur [Graber/Grtifte] (HALLER
1954), and Tell Fakhariyah [Sounding I, IA, IX] (KANTOR 1958). All seemingly
belong to the same regional tradition. Concurrent developments also exist with the
sites of Qasrij Cliff, Khirbet Qasrij and Khirbet Khatuniyeh (CURTIS 1989; I992;
CURTIS/GREEN 1997) from the Saddam Dam (cf. GREEN this volume, pp. 9l»i26).
The inland north Syrian sites of Tell Mardikh [Area E, Levels 3-6/Area G,
Level l], Tell Afis [Area EL Level 5-3] and Tell Tuqan [Sector D, Levels 4-6] have
assemblages belonging to different regional and cultural traditions (MAZZONI ed.
1992; OGGlANO 1997). This patterning also applies to the ceramics from I-lama
[Périocle E/gatiment IV/‘Cemetery IV] (FUGMANN 1958) and Tell Abu Danné
(Leeann 1983). On the coast, Sarepta (Pnrrcrmnn i975; Annnnsou £988),
Beirut“, Tell Sukas [Periods I-i & G] (BURL 1983), and Al Mina [Phases 8~5l (DU
Pl..A'l‘ TAYLOR 1959) have yielded sequences which have some points of contact,
however, these sites are dominated by foreign ceramic horizons. In the south the
number and intensity of correlations are weaker. Connections are mainly within the
Common Ware category where broad similarities can be noted with the some of the
pottery from Samaria [Period VII] (Cnownoor/Caownoor/Knnvou 1957), Beth
Shan (JAMES 1966), ll/legiddo [l°eriod/Strata II/III] (LOUD 1948), liazor [Area B,
Stratum IV] (YADIN et al. 1960), Taanach [Period IV» L. 36,37,38a 9SW 4-'70 &
Period V L. 16 (SW 5-6)} (RAST 1978), Gezer [Strata VA/VB] (GITIN 1990), and
Tell el-Far‘ah [Niveau I-II} (CHAM_B.0N i984), to mention only a few.
I
£0
Most notably pottery types from the Jurn Kabir "late group" (in EIDEM/ACKERMANN, this
1 volume, pp. 320~321, Figs. 5»~6.
“ In particular, the Common Ware, Cooking Pot Ware, and Fine Ware types illustrated in
SCHNEIDER, this volume, 334-346, Pigs. 4-16.
'2 Compare for example the Level VIII types (figs. 5-ll of BLAYLOCK, this volume. 278-
284).
*3 During 1996 the author had the opportunity to study a corpus of Iron Age pottery from the
urban salvage excavations in the central district of Beirut. The first millennium B.C. Beirut
ceramic horizon is dominated by the presence of local Bi-chrome wares and a smaller
component of imported Cypriot products.
V I p I _ _v ._.- 1
.1 ' ’ : .1 .' ' vii .'
,_,,_,,,,,,,,,_,,_,.,,.,,\_ __ ,,,,_,__,.,,______,_____,.,_,._._...,._._ .....__.....___._..._....__...._,_____________........ ......,, ,_'MQ¢Q W.“

292 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell Ahmar 293

Area C - Discussion
Despite the fact that no pottery kilns or workshops have been found at Tell Ahmar
a body of evidence exists to suggest that pottery oi’ the Common Ware category at
least, was manufactured locally. A considerable number of wasters have been found
which may be the misfired products of a local pottery industry, and two basalt
tournettes discovered are thought to be the bearings used for potters' wheels."
Experiments with local clays also indicate the abundant availability of raw
materials (IAMIESON i992). During the Neo-Assyrian period the site underwent a
period of expansion with occupation extending into the lower city. Increases in
settlement size and population would have also necessitated a greater demand for
material resources, including pottery, making the importation of large quantities of
vessels extremely unlikely, not to mention impractical.
Although his evidence supports a theory of localised production, innumerable
shapes, particularly in Common Ware, are evidently inspired by types originating
in Assyria with some identical to those found at Nimrud. The high incidence of
typically Assyrian types may be the result of itinerant workers and historical texts
record the movement of craftsmen to and from the Assyrian capital (BENNETT
i982; OATES, J. 1991; POSTGATE l9"/'9; 1992). Theories such as these are difficult
to substantiate with archaeological material and a more likely explanation is that
the Assyrian impact on the region was so influential, that the local industries
adopted new stylistic features into their existing repertoire.”
The Area C assemblage predominantly comes from several distinct architectural
units. Textual evidence identifies one residence associated with a man named
l-lanni (DALLEY l996/97). While this appellation provides no clues to his ethnic
identity, it is apparent, based on the range and quality of materials found, that this
individual attained a position of considerable social precedence. The artefacts and
pottery provide evidence for the consideration of behavioural issues dealing with
reconstructions of socio~econornic, geo~political and cultural interpretations of the
region during this period. It is difficult to be precise about the mechanisms of
transmission and influences represented in the Area C pottery, however, the total
assemblage communicates a degree of cultural exchange, if not one of cultural
domination.
Future research at Tell Ahmar will investigate the horizontal and vertical
patterning of the different ceramic wares and types from the multicellular buildings
in Area C. Preliminary findings indicate that notable patterns exist in the spatial
distribution of particular shape and ware attributes (fig. 9-10). The aim of this
study will be to examine the contiguity of particular ceramic categories and the
interface between their architectural and stratigraphic context. It is anticipated that
an integrated study of this nature combined with the traditional technical and
morphological analyses summarised above will provide a more informed
knowledge 01’ the ancient pottery. Understanding the relationship of the ceramics,
architecture and stratigraphy will enable a casual link between the temporal
association of ceramic form and function with that of behavioural patterns and
social customs within a given structural complex to be established (JAMIESON,
forthcoming/b).
References cited
AMIRAN 1970, ANDERSON 1987; 1988, ARTZY I973, ARTZY et a1. 1978, Bennurr
1982, Bononnut/Baiounc-Cnxrouunr 1996/97, Btuese 1985, Burn. 1983,
Bunnuns 1989; 1991a; 1991b; 1992; 1994a; 1994b; 1996/97; 1997a; l997t>; 1997c,
Buununs ed. 1990, CHAMBON 1984, CROWFOOT/CROWFOOT/KENYON 1957, CURTIS
1989; 1992, CURTIS/GREEN 1997, CURTIS/RBADE eds. 1995, DALLEY 1996/97, Du
PLAT TAYLOR 1959, EIDEM/_PU'l‘T 1994; 1995, BPSTEIN 1966, FLEMING 1989,
FUGMANN 1958, Gnva 1982, Gmu 1990, GJERSTAD 1948, GOLDMAN I963, Harman
1954, HAMILTON 1966, l'lAWi(ll\lS 1996/9'7, imvlas 1966, IAMnzsor~t 1992; 1993/94;
forthcoming/a; forthcominglb, KANTOR i958, KUHNB l984a; 1984b; l994a; l997,
Lueuau 1983, LINES 1954, LLOYD 1954, Ltovn/Gouge 1953, Loon 1948,
MAZZONI ed. 1992, Mooney 1980, Ones, D. 1957, Oxrns, 3. 1959; 1991,
OGGIANO 1997, Oirrsu 1991, POSTGATB 1979; E992, Patron/mo 1975, RAS'1‘l978,
Rxwson 1954, Rooexnur 1996, Rooeum"/TRQKAY 1990, WOOLLEY £939, YADIN
ct al. £960, ZACCAGNINI E995.
Pottery catalogue and figures on pp. 294-308.

“‘ One of these basalt wheels has been published in ROOBAERT/TROKAY 1990, 123424, fig.
58.
'5 The Area C ceramic evidence suggests that the local ceramic industry was significantly
influenced by the Assyrian impact and subsequent period of cultural domination in the
middle and upper Euphrates valley region. The extent of this interaction can be measured
quantitatively by the high incidence of typically Neo~Assyrian pottery types which are found
\
'1 represented within the common wares. One interpretation of this impact is that Assyrian
elites may have actively employed craftsmen to symbolically help display and reinforce an
Assyrian ideology, through the material culture, to legitimate their presence in the north
Syrian environment (JAMIESON, forthcoming/b).

' 1 V ; -. i = :
. ' 1 -: j ' 1
_.,...__..__........ _._ .- V .......,-A-~._....-...._”._._ ...._q.’_,,_ , ... , ,....,,....i.,,,.,. ~~~;V/(*9//////0\lhlQl _

294 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell /lhmar 295

Catalogue - Ne0—Assyrian Pottery Types Area C Tell Ahmar Figure 3:1-2 Common Ware (CW) Jar Types

Figure 1:1-15 Common Ware (CW) Bowl Types No. Fabric Shape Context TextureIColour Technique
1. CW Jar 93 C48 1237 .7 1 30.} medium/light wheel-made/self~
No. Fabric Shape Context Texture/Colour Technique brown slipped
1. CW Bowl 9l C31 282.34l8.2 medium/light wheel»~made/self- 2. CW lat 93 C39 843.7853.1 medium/light wheel-made/self~
brown slipped brown slipped
2. CW Bowl 9i C29 36432531 medium/buffi Wll68l—Il'l3(l8/SClf-
brown slipped & smoothed
3. CW‘ Bowl 91 C17 3l2.2555.l medium/pink-buff wheel-made/self- Figure 4:1-16 Common Ware (CW) Specialised Types
slipped
4. CW Bowl 91 C8 267.2705.l medium/light wheel~made/self- No. Fabric Shape Context Tex ture/Colour Technique
brown slipped 1. CW Cup 91 C9 127.6601 medium/pinlobuff wheel»madelself~
5. CW Bowl 89 Cll 96567.11 medium/light wheel-made/self» slipped & smoothed
brown slipped 2. CW Cup 93 C48 1287.7172.1 medium/pink-buff wheel-made/sell?
6. CW Bowl 91 C30 466.43S4.1 mediumfbuff-green whee1—made/se1f- slipped & smoothed
Slipped 3. CW Cup 96 C89 21 .24.1 medium/light wheel-made/selfi
7. CW Bowl 91 C30 498.4136.1 medium/buff wl1ee1~made/se1f- brown slipped
slipped & smoothed 4. CW Cup 93 C38 s22.7757.1 medium/buff wheel-made/selfi
8. CW Bowl 91 C17 331.2562.l medium/pink-buff wheel-made/selfl slipped
Slipped 5. CW Cup 93 C39 856.7849} mediumjlight wheel-made/sell?
9. CW Bowl 91 C31 387.3454.l medium/light whee1-macie/se1f- brown slipped
brown slipped 6. CW Bottle 93 C51 '79l.7638l fine/light brown Wl1(i€3l-lI"lEl(l€iI'S€if-
10. CW Bowl 9} C31 3873440.} medium/pink-buff wheel-made/selfl slipped & smoothed
slipped 7. CW Bottle 90 C3-6 128.704.} fine/light brown wheel-made/sell?
1 1. CW Bowl 91 C28 290.3l6.l medium/buff wheel-made/self» slipped & smoothed
slipped A 8. CW Bottle 93 C39 747.4960.1 medium/buff wheel-made/self»
12. CW Bowl 91 Cl4 351.2831.1/2 mediumllight wheel-made/selfi slipped
brown slipped 9. CW luglet 93 C39 743.7824.1 medium/buff-green wheel-made/sel§~
l3. CW Bowl 91 C24 464.3832.l medium/pink-buff wheel-madelselfi slipped
slipped ll). CW Lamp 9l C30 4664364.} medium/buff- whee1—made/self-
14. CW Bowl 91 C17 2662530.! medium/brown wheelqnade/self~ brown slipped
slipped ll. CW Lamp 93 C50 8977624.} coarse/brown-red haiud-made/wee
15. CW Bowl 91 C28 3l5.316’7.l medium/brown wheel-made/selfi smoothed
slipped 12. CW Goblet 95 C89 l.5.1 medium/pinlc-buff wheebmade/self~
slipped
l3. CW Juglet 91 C30 466.4353} medium/pink-buff wheel-made/selfl
Figure 2:1-5 Common Ware (CW) Jar Types slipped
14. CW Vessel 93 C481237.7188.l medium/light wheel-made/selli
No. Fabric Shape Context Texture/Colour Technique brown slipped &
1. CW Jar 91 C18 330.3529.l medium/pink-buff wheel-made/selfl smoothed/spout
slipped joined to upper body
2. CW Jar 93 C51 765.7633.l medium/light wheel~made/self- 15. CW Stand 93 C481237.7191.l medium/li ght wheel-made/selfl
brown slipped brown slipped incised lines
3. CW Jar 93 C48 l220.7lO2.l medium/buff-green wl1eel-made/self- on the middle body
slipped 16. CW Kraler 90 C3-6 128.6851 medium/buff-green wheel-made/selfi
4. CW Jar 95 C86 3.12.1 medium./buff- wheel-made/selfi slipped
brown slipped
5. CW Jar 93 C39 743.7822.l mediumfbufll wheel~made/self-
brown slipped

; s 5 i .
. - L
4 ' '-
 296 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell Ahmar 297

Figure S:1~4 Cooking l’ot Ware (CPW) Types l2. GW Bowl 96 C89 2.15.2 fine-medium/grey wheel~made/self-
slipped &
No. Fabric Shape Context Texture/Colour Technique smoothed/wheel~
E. CPW Pot 93 C39 752.495l.i coarse/brown hand-made/web burnished
smoothed 13. PW Goblet 91 C28 29031031 fine/pale green wheel-made/self
2. CPW Pot 91 C28 3lS.3165.3 coarse/brown hand-made/wen slipped &
smoothed smoothed/dimple
i , 3. CPW Pot 90 C3-6 l28.685.l coarsefbrown hand-made/web impressions on body
s smoothed impressed l4. GW Bowl 91 C24 448.3820.5 fine~medium/grey wheel-made/self»
pattern slipped &
4, CPW Pot 89 C P2625 coarse/brown hand-made/web smoothed/wheei
smoothed impressed burnished
pattern

Figure 7:1-8 Stamped (STMW), Glazed (GLZW), Painted (PATW), and lncised
Figure 6:1-14 Red Slip (RSW), Grey (OW), Palace (PW), and Pine (FW) Ware Types (INCW) Ware Types

No. Fabric Shape Context Texture/Colour ' Technique No. Fabric Shape Contexl Texture/Colour Technique
1. PW Bowl 92 C41 646.4507.l fine/light brown whee1~made/self- 1. STMW Jar 89 C2_~§4 388.P2659 medium/buffi wheel-made/stamped
slipped & smoothed brown designs upper body
i=
ii
2. RSW Bowl 91 C29 364.3276.l medium/pinl-c-buff wheclwmacle/red~ Olli
'9
'! slipped & hand- 2. GLZW Sherd 95 C64 3.13.1 porous/buff-yellow wheel-
ii
burnishlslip rim & in made/polychrome
ii wheel-made/red glazed decoration
i
3. RSW Bowl 91 C35 408.2946.l medium/pink-buff
2» slipped & ring- white/yellow/lilac
burnish/slip rim & in 3. PATW Sherd 91 C13 533.1053.1 fnie-medium/buffi wheel-made/dark
4. PW Bowl 91 C14 312.25l6.l fine/light brown wheel-made/selfl brown brown-black painted
slipped & smoothed decoration
5. RSW Bowl 91 C33 455.3742.1 medium/pinlc-buff whee1~made/red» 4. INCW Shard 92 CE9 596.4543.E rnedium/buff- wheei~made/self»
slipped 8: ring- brown slipped
burnish/slip rim & in incised/combed
6. FW Bowl 9} C29 306.320-4.1 finellight brown wheel-made/selfi decoration horizontal
& wavy lines
slipped 8: smoothed
'2. RSW Bowl 93 C38 691.770l .1 medium/pinl<»buff wheel-made/red- 5. GLZW Botsle 93 C51 791 .7644.l porous/buff-yellow wheel-
slipped 8: ring- made/turquoise glaze
ii (faded) in & out
bumish/slip rim & in
s. ow Bowl 96 C89 2.15.1 fine»mediumlgrey wheel-made/selfi 6. PATW Jar 91 C32 474.3666.l medium/bufii wlieel-made/dark
slipped & brown brown-maroon
smoothecl/whee? painted decoration
1
burnished rim & upper body
9. PW Goblet 91 C30 466/$365.1 fine/pale green wheel-made/self~ out
slipped & 7. PATW Shercl 9i C28 471.4Ul8.2 medium/buffl wheel-made/black
smoothed/dimple brown painted decoration
impressions on body out
~ 10. GW Bowl 91 C30 498.4136.5 fine-medium/grey wheel-made/selfl 8. PATW Sherd 9i C17 31825543 medium/buffl wheel-made/dark
1
slipped & brown brown~n-iaroon
smoothed/wheeb painted decoration
l
burnished
1 ll. GW Bowl 91 C30 498/$136.1 fine-medium/grey wheel-made/selfl
slipped &
smoothed/wheeb
i"$¢“?~+‘nIl<:'»?
burnished

l
l

gk_' ... .2, _- 7 — — _v V _ v ___- II!!! 1 _ r 1 '"‘|— '_--___.'_

|
 298 On the Euphrates and to the Wes: Tell Ahmar 299

Figure 8:1-'7 Cypriot (CYPW), Phoenician (PHOW), Bi-chrome (BICW), Plain Crisp
(PCW), and imported Fine (IFW) Ware Types

Fabric Shape Context Texture/Coiour Technique

l. PHOW Jug 95 C81 1459.1 medium/pink wheel-made/selfl
orange slipped red painted
decoration of 7
horizontal bands
2. CYPW Jar 96 C64 32.li9.1 coarse-mediumj wheel-made/cream
light brown slip outwith brown
rim band & 2
3 .
horizontal lines &
remains of 3 groups
of concentric circles
3. PHOW Bottle 95 C66 2092.1 fine/pinlvbuff wheel-madd
smoothed red 8:
black lines on the i 6
rim & neck
4. BICW Sherd 92 C37 639.4704} medium/pink-buff wheehmade/red
hand boarded on
either side by 2 finer
painted black bands
5. CYPW Fiask 91 C35 4}0.2937.1 fine/light brown- wheel-madd
orange smoothed orange
dark brown linear &
circular geometric
mechanically painted
design
6. PCW Jar 95 C74 l871.74.‘i9;i coarse-medium! whee1~made/self-
grey~brown-yellow slipped
7. [FW Jar 93 C39 7443801.} fine/pale green» wheel~made/self»
grey siipped & smoothed I 11
dark brown-black
painted horizontal
bands on the rim &
upper body
10

V 12

i t
15
c
\
13

Figure 1:1-15 Common Ware (CW) Bowl Types

@__“ W —— _ ——— _ ———~

 M _ _ T --..
i
iI

300 On the Euphrates and to the West I Tell Ahmar 301

_ ___ _ _ ___‘ ________0_ ___,,~ V. J'~\1)"4VIBvl/ix! . ___

:1: ls-__
. ! i‘-

. \
1 \‘

2 \‘\\
.. ”“””““““"““““"“”‘ WM" W \\

}
\_e ,
3

=».._..,.__,(.._..-._.».._,_._.,~.i,

I 5

l
i

I Ii.
A‘ 5 X,e_,..;_v_.,_.. .. .. .4
4

'7 ’ o 10 nur
\
\ _ |

Figure 2:1~5 Common Ware (CW) Jar Types

Figure 3:1-2 Common Ware (CW) Jar Types

|
l .
—:———.———,:; _ _ __, _vjf __
 c >4} _r ss

302 On the Euphrates and :0 the West Tell Ahmar 303

on s
» ‘““““"'“l_""""" M" Te. W MW’ _ / ’

-v'—~ - 9 ‘ 1

so
12 - "--~W~~---~--
‘Q > >>-2>2>>>.>>>>x>>>i>

13 14
V .- e ..,...W_
2

‘Kiwi? _ y-fl$1nM\:M‘:-*yII\‘fIM/4Kv41('OY)\!INY','§,
3
,.»q-.-»,-v-my-W.-7....,._~..........,. _.... .. ~//vwVv\U~A4#'~4A)* "“'i—i"‘-'“
-~'-=w_~4=<.—.v——~"......,..w---'r“““*
-_- W“"""""*“‘*
i
| E3f3€)®@€?@7£1-9 £9
I

16
I
1

15 Q IO 20 Cm 4
-. ac Cu
\<

Figure 421-16 Common Ware (CW) Specialised Types

Figure 5:1-4 Cooking Pot Ware (CPW) Types
1

l W” W — ‘ WW ti‘ — _ =— "1,
WV — s
e._,_-- ,, ~___s_. *““"~ -____?__.,__~ —-*“ ""' - “M *"-'. W W

304 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell Ahmar 395 I

.. V H _ V I H Y A V {H :._|:\‘-l‘. ,»r‘::::‘\\

w I , 131- " I M M W - 3"’ ' ' ‘J: E

1 .....~m1-era. »~-~—- -,-2,,-W-_.‘-_-£-_<»_~;--;,¢~¢,\~-<

2 e e e
_ k y V |’
I
H W." A“
I _f'f;'7‘""‘ Hrimm-77 7 V '7' '“"'"“‘“ ' L" ;/{_V_;;;'.v:"'T‘
\ ._.-_

-»-’
- -- -- - -- -MM» ' ~~'*'~<'~*' -.W.'.'::..'";':
-....~..-rm»-....i,.,,. -U--_~
---"~°"-*1-.~'--'--~.-*:'t;-‘ ‘J
.1“-~~*-'*:?.‘7.T.'.7.2‘? \‘-»..t\
"'!\;,‘§L"I415l$'~'.....--‘\<i A»-~
Jr ».<->-r...,.».,-.___,,.
»-s:~".~1- rr"
4

, ,__ V ,.~_ _ :;;1’<:';;.‘r;;’"=':~~:,~;:;;*;n:'»<~....v_-

»....~....\.~.i._...,..--.--~ V‘,I\I|'\V'T'Z\V-TbI'**W';}';z1:‘€;‘
~"~ "' - "::;..‘"'~.---*.'-*-~;~_*~;:~_-::s::c:m
,_‘ """“““, ‘ .'%.L'Ex-;_.~--ffs“~_='?_-..--»---.~—--
. _,...,..*.....h....,
q»ris-,,~¢94o;a.-$9-~ws1'w""""_j
-?"4-fl"")‘“."""‘
,4, A-1Eilynbi-:~4<‘H§":v4lQefiJ;§|4'I['Y‘1':
* ' " lF~----“f-‘H-"ri2'"-{"Z“"i1?‘f,Ej'7'
,c..<¢1<e~:-,~».~<~'~i»¢~» '-z—— _-
;.'.-.-'.,,..-nr-H...-‘¢ -_-».~;I»~.~-:,
‘@¢.<..-».v,.--1,‘-.»~'>-'3-1 --4_"-

gf_-:§_-‘;=-<<-m-»--
6 7
7 1
-""i_;".;:
";;t:"'"""""
..- i _

'0
.,,_ ___ ( -
$3 4 .V \ ,-._-9;. ,»;¢§Z;a;._ W ~
8 — -:;. ‘ _
"""-" -
am?’
a -'..i:"’-'--
,1-. ‘~.-*.'., -,1. . ‘ -\- -" “Name
_ ,v .'::t:x.'.,,'.;.,:...,’.r; " -"" .4
$7 r

,
| l " '""'—-.--.-.-_-.--.
--------’~..:=;::.’.~;.=-————————— ‘

‘.14 ' W !
1 _v ...mvvvvvvv ;— ,--i,lv;i~,._A _ .7

- ' 1
31
i
I ._ ’
-. """M’_‘~ i i I ‘ w---w+~¢-»--»v:»--»~~-~»-»»--»<w~~v~-w-~-~~/a<-
.>,J 1
1 -‘ C _____________*

9 -_.m_.“1TTITTf;;:.i1. i *
.i“'.”:; =1-' ~W
. ‘HLK.-~ , I
1
I Q. J12 6
".1417-= .W. ,

X ‘ g ,j;>..,.¢...',¢v,.',._<.,..., ..,,,v..,_,,,,,,,..1-...2: ’ ' 5

i%' E
---I" I “ W
14 " ' ""*"\\ r A ‘
...a‘W
Q.
4

l
lee
0

Figure 6:1-M Red Slip (RSW), Grey (GW), Palace (PW). mi Fine WW) Ware Types
r \0
| 1
:0 cm

-
:;1';~;.;:.-
''

Figure "/=1-s
_
"'

7 W

Stamped (snvrw), Glazed (oezw), Painted (PATW),

and incised (INCW) Ware Types
_
a

¢1-1- _*_ r . _ . .V _ V ' —"'4.~=_h.‘."1!!"'I '7" "' — *

_ _'.‘.~.~ . . I
 T
306 On the Euphrates and to the West 1 Tell Ahmar 307

.-1-W“ , 0’ I \ A l
$12!? l 7' ‘/¥ V

-‘ '" l 1 ' E '"“*W"“"“**"r""

/ > >z >. z>
!_'jM~:,:~-’ ~~.~-72'I-'. _)
‘
-;,".
»,.
I'
. z<> »
;...,- , _ |

®l@
1
\ J k
" ‘¢
I i
1:2:-~¢‘: '-* —. ><:<5_»‘<?_i;=..\‘

414¢4.

.;\ l.l§§=5E‘*‘---._--,=..f
.':‘ $4;-,2-‘ “'*%

“'£an*\,
‘=~:~:.z.-¢» ' »
“C-15
' 1
__ z
"M
Q
4
\
@one" nu..-__-
“ ..
U‘

U’
. A

.. <. ~‘ 1'
x
" ~ ,'
I rii 1 >
ell, 1» '
.-.>,' ' I :1 I‘ ""."'
" 1
A(not
P
Boto
nmarsanafwcalwtznerse)
_..:
_V__‘ 1 a
05
'‘
4 :
“'
“I ’.¢ tilt“.L _ fhb(CW)
aby
in
nurof
Sd-£rmio0arnomdge }a.rs
r J,-',_;'_. , v \ X, i Ii ' ‘
..1
. I A ‘, -~-»-___;-,
It
8‘
;i
.;|—!.-I
'|\
I sh
‘~
Hz;
1"‘ '»
YA’
,.--' y '
, HI
F '
I, I,‘
ll . l I:-

i ' 5 t
‘ti’
iin! ‘M *5:3.‘~¢
‘l J .9 qlttiii
._-:= ."mall:
H [I1 IIT’ 1 Q1 i "l
“'1 -I"!
‘:3i1.:
5 -“ _; j
2.
it"
.~1.. /_-
| A 1.“ ‘Q9 N}'I|g iillg illllip |
/ ;= ' 0"’ - r» A: '. “I'll uil| I1]2 mi 1;! ‘I I |l » fig
l /
'
Ii 5'9: ‘fig!’
Hill.‘

in
1; 5|“: - liq: |,iii"
glint,‘ 3'
U.. l| ' ‘P I;

-
1 Ii] t ‘ I, in ; | {U
,,, I
.
(
A 7 _ .».=' _’ ..::tI$,|*" ll
" glii. In‘
1 ‘Iiij
ypl J ofe BuiCE
Exampl
the
cfst AreaC,Te
lding 9398
fsit"I£i > 3E ' "I
inZ ,._. we
1"’
fit
ii
r- is
la _-”
""tlhk.
1
|\‘.“
' y~
r .
" ; llt1| -‘lib sf i ‘ .
':".:".. . .uiii[| slit, ,|
M
‘J
£35‘ “"
#2.-._:-“* " 'i l : u[iiiinj
9
“~~~ »-~'~ —-~~— ~ 1-
_\ 1 |_...._.__.._...,'
Km '1 ~ -=§ O /-<—--.—' -»»~~v
i.-'1 t % “‘ _'
0 *»~- / Figure9
i\ 3 ly
\v I
‘ \/

r |

\\
,I,
1 Q
» , 1 §,
‘;
;.
1
1
.
/
), 6 0 ,0 20¢". -E 1; =I GBRTCRS
F : .
-i _~i :-'
\ ¢’ ‘ i
-:
i.
I
1
Figure 8:1-7 Cypriot (CYPW), Phoenician (PHOW), Bi-chrome (BICW), Plain Crisp
(PCW), and imported Fine (IFW) Ware Types

l
-
g______ - - _,~ - W ~ "W _ 7 ~ 7 _ ___ ’T"*** _ _ , """"*f' Iv ""'"* efieefii v_v_ V _ ,_. ___ “___ -

1
_,-_ . -- -,_v _,_,...._.._.. ,,.. ~-~-=-.....-.i.i_W.~.,.~.=».»..»--»---» -- ——— .. pm. , __ _.. -

303 On the Euphrates and to the West

The Iron Age Ceramics from Tell Jurn Kabir‘

,5 2° ]ES?E.R ElDEM/ RAHEL ACKERMANN

G 5 10
/.._‘ .~ I K
*7
IA
Copenhagen / Basel

V nu‘-‘min.-5 "' i_ ._ = Introduction

15 l t
Since 1993 a Danish expedition has carried out excavations at two Iron Age sites in
if
I i will
ilg |' ll‘\| I. cs 3 5‘:11.V
‘1"l‘};lg‘5‘ the Tishrin Dam Salvage Area on the Upper Euphrates in Syria. The most
\~,-. I VI II i ;
I
filly‘ ‘\ I Q 1 _l9."i-N2:! .. extensive exposures have been made at the site of Tell Iurn Kabir, located on the
. . Q ‘Q ‘E ff f*4 rib-‘:1-=_
'=!<:1:,-===»’

D 9 I'll: “"1; ."'|rt|i‘li! west bank of the river, some 2.5 Rms south of the famous medieval castle of Qal‘at
\ . V _p ‘Wei. Najm, while soundings have been made at the site of Tell Qadahiye, located also on
i
F.)
|-. It
1
i
‘
‘db _l'§;':
.2‘: 1
M9‘-‘§‘:_ liq
.
i the west bank some 5 lrms north of Qal‘at Najrn.‘
' ' 1 I F‘-"" A main reason for the expedition to investigate these two sites was the existence
1 C‘ ' \ /E‘ W " ' - here of readily accessible Iron Age levels, and hence material from an important,
/i -F-';:i' ' --+2” -9’ '1; '--:1 ,--/~"~~/~--—-—
. 1 Q Q ;" '" CY but still poorly known period in. central Syria. Earlier excavations in this region, at
./,R~/---'" ~\ I
’ %l / it-'7=*—_—"5:
é
.-‘>;"—':'k I -5
‘$- major sites like Ierablus/Karkemish, Tell Ahmar/Til Barsip, and Arslan
~..___)‘
Tash/Hadatu, focused heavily on the retrieval of monumental art and architecture,
I i\_
/ _
'0 V
,.~"‘i?' _-
15- -___ —"-F‘
,,,-F
'
5 ,.~.~_%é:..:;‘
#_5‘ "=- '1‘!
_* . and since then little Iron Age material have come to light in central Syria. The new
‘ix. s -;—_. ...-F .-=' ‘re.
‘=_-' “*"-'._ '
___ -» .7. '~$=_ .-" p 3 ._ . I
. E
excavations at Tell Ahmarf as well as other efforts within the framework of the
- — I" -~ -— .:. -.1. E Tishrin Projectf‘ including those of the Danish expediton, will serve to improve
’3s _'. _ ' 5
;: Ci"-'»='
5-" ..-F 2 " '1
-- ‘ this situation substantially. In the context of the present volume we want to present
“'-
W_ W,_ _o._ .l , ___
' ‘fir.’ '=
‘
a preliminary assessment of the Iron Age ceramics retrieved at Tell Jnrn Kabir. The
-- 1..-, .£.-"'= ----~ ,_. ...J L-. ’
-4s_‘__ _
‘J. "'1 youngest material from the site is well-represented elsewhere in 7th~6th century
... ..__...,._r
.-;/\ ‘=— flp
'.*<r~ ~. B.C. levels, but the older materiai, which we think cover a good deal of the period
.’ $3“
\
~11-———*-‘“‘-" ,. .__, between the llth and 8th centuries, is hitherto poorly represented by excavated or

r’! l ' The authors could unfortunately not attend the meeting in Nieboréw, where instead a
\
T\ E t
K
1
'\
\
4 //d‘-“-_’_.

1/
‘*'t..<T?‘t1/
summary of the present article was made available to the participants.
The Danish Excavations in the Tishrin Dam Salvage Area have been financed by the
Carlsberg Foundation (Copenhagen), and the project is based at the Carsten Niebuhr
Institute of Near Eastern Studies at the University of Copenhagen. We would like to record
our gratitude to the Antiquities authorities of the Syrian Arab Republic for permission to
excavate at Tell Jurn Kabir and Tell Qadahiye, and for their kind and efficient help and
Figure I0 Example of the distribution of hand-made cooking pots (CPW) by room support in all matters. 9 71
in Buildings Cl & C2, Tell Ahmar (not to scale). Plan after BUNNENS
The plan presented here (Fig. 2) was prepared by the project architect, Karin Putt
1998, fig. 2
(Aachen), the photos are due to Arn Gyldenholm (Aarhus), the figures with ceramic profiles
were prepared by Aase Fosdal (based on drawings by herself, Rikke Andersen, and Rahel
Ackermann).
' Information on the Iron Age ceramics from Tell Ahmar, Tell Sheikh Hassan, Lidar
I-loytik, and Tille Hoyitlc referred to occasionally below, was kindly provided by participants
in the Tables Rondes on Iron Age ceramics.
I For short notes on the excavations see EIDEM/PUTT 1994; 1995; in press. A final report is
scheduled to appear in 1999.
u.
4 2 See JAMIESON this volume, pp. 287-305.
i 3 Within the Tishrin project Iron Age levels are also reported from Tell Amama (cf. TUNCA
1993), Tell Shioukh Faouqani (cf. BACHELOT et al. I997), and Tell Kharnis, excavated by a
Spanish expedition.

l
i.
Iv _

~ ..._:,,,...,,,__..,... W, Y, ,, C, ~ W: __ . _ A W
. . , .. . . . _v__,_Y____,,n,_ V M ,, M,,,,,,,,,,, _,, ,.,_,., , _, ,, .., _ , ._ _ _. .____._; _ _ .. w.........=..._...
310 On the Euphrates and to the West
published evidence, and should be of considerable interest for comparative
purposes. Various surface surveys have covered most of the Syrian Euphrates
Valley, but failed to find more than a small handful of sites occupied in the Iron
Age.‘ This situation is hardly a realistic reflection of ancient settlement, but rather
due to the lack of excavated material from this period in central Syria, which could
have made more positive identifications of Iron Age sites possible.
Tell Jurn Kabir: Stratigraphic summary
The site is much eroded and its ancient borders not preserved, but extant remains
cover an area of some 2-3 hectares. The oldest Level IV is only present on the
higher part of the site, and consists of some very eroded and flimsy remains. The
few sherds found in this level are largely similar to the material from the
subsequent Level Ill, which covers the whole site. The main feature of the Level III
settlement is an oval enclosure wall measuring some 50 x 40 metres surrounding
the summit of the site. The outer wall of this enclosure is 2-3 metres wide and
supplied with casemate rooms on its exterior trace. The investigated interior part
consists of small rooms/spaces divided by small mudbrick walls, and surrounding a
central open space. Outside the enclosure eroded portions of at least one substantial
house, and several more modest structures have been investigated, but no complete
plans recovered.
Although structural changes within Level Ill can be observed, the occupation
does not seem to have lasted very long. The site was abandoned, and considerable
denudation of the ruins preceded the next occupation, Level II. The founders of this
level initiated what is certainly the most ambitious building scheme applied at the
site. Using the Level HI enclosure wall on the high part of the mound as foundation
a new stone-footed enclosure was built. in the northwestern corner of this enclosure
stone foundations for Building II were constructed, while to the south of this a
-1._ . gW. large, presumably residential building (Building Z) was erected. These structures,
shown in plan in Fig. 2, have an interesting and rather complicated history. First of
all it seems certain that the original building programme was interrupted and never
completed. The stone foundations of Building ll have no trace of superstructures,
and the building site was instead covered with a thick deposit of rubbish,
containing masses of broken pottery and animal bones, laid down as foundation for
flimsy structures erected above. Equally several rooms in Building I were found to
have no real living floors at foundation level, and had been partially backfilled with
irregularly laid mudbrick or mudbrick debris. The construction phase, which we
label Level II.B, therefore appears as a "phantom" level, followed by the evidently
poorer Level II.A, in which Building I, with various changes and modifications,
I was reused, while the site of Building II was used for new, modest structures.
4 The intensive fieldwork done prior to completion of the Tabqa Dam produced material of
this period only at Tell Sheilth Hassan; a survey of the Euphrates from Masicane down to
Deir ez-Zor seems to have recorded only a small handful of Iron Age sites (KOHLMEYER
1984: 1 l3; I986: 5'7f.); finally a French survey of the river down to the Iraqi border reports 5
¢<
it (possibly 9) sites within this time range (GEYER/MONCHAMBERT I987: 339ff.). In contrast to
the archaeological evidence written sources from the 1. mill. B. C. list dozens of seemingly
important towns or fortresses on or near the Euphrates within the ancient Aramean states of
Bit-Adini and Bit-Agusi (see SADER 1987).
. --~~ .....¢....i .....
Tell Jam Kabir 311
l
This situation has consequences for several levels of analysis. Foremost it partly
obscures the original "intended" architectural scheme of Level II.B. In extant shape
Building II seems most likely to have been intended as agate house placed in the
l. corner of the citadel enclosure, while Building I is best related to North Syrian
residences of the Biz hilani type. Some unexpected features, however, include the
system of mudbrick platforms and connecting ramps in or near the central Room 5.
On a different level, and more relevant in the present context, the situation is
helpful for analysis of the ceramic material. The rubbish deposit covering Building
l II contained nearly I0 % of all diagnostic sherds found at the site to date, and since
the deposit is well sealed between a "phantom" Level ILB and Level ILA it must
logically stem from Level III contexts. indeed this help is more significant than
immediately apparent. Since excavated Level III contexts have proved to contain
little material, it was only when we began to remove larger portions of the rubbish
deposit in Building II in i996, that we were able to gain a clearer profile of the
oldest material at the site.
The subsequent Level l can be dealt with more quickly. Well-preserved remains
of this are only found on the highest part of the site. Here the enclosure was rebuilt,
and a fort-like structure with'3 meter thick walls of mudbrick erected on the site of
the old Building II, while on the site of Building I remains are almost completely
lost to erosion. Inside the "Fort" two main phases, Level I.B and i.A can be
distinguished, the latter being only preserved on the very highest part of the mound.
This latest extant phase of occupation would seem to be contemporary with a series
I of large pits dug outside the citadel and containing large quantities of late Neo~
Assyrian material. Traces of still later activity, until pre-modern and modern times,
are few? A few Roman/Byzantine sherds have emerged in topsoil, but settlement of
that period is widespread in thciregion, and if Jurn was occupied after the Iron Age,
it was hardly the site of much more than a farmstead.
We will not in this context provide any details on the evidence from the second
site investigated by us, Tell Qadahiye, but preliminary studies of the ceramic
material shows that the Iron Age sequence here is closely parallel to that of Jurn
Kabir.
The Ceramic Evidence
Several, but apparently leisured abandonments left few small finds in situ through
the levels at Jurn Kabir, except for very common household utensils like basalt and
5 limestone containers and tools, clay spool weights, and polished bone spatulae and
other tools. Both spool weights and bone spatulae, items traditionally related to
textile production, place the site squarely in the Iron Age, but are of little use for
more precise dates. For this reason the ceramic evidence much be bracketed within
fairly wide margins. At the present stage of analysis we can distinguish three main
l I groups of material as follows:
i
|
A) An "old" group represented by the material from the rubbish deposit in
t
Building II supplemented with material from Level III contexts.
X
5 The site is surrounded, and its edges partly covered, by the village of Jurn Kabir, founded
some I00 years ago, and recent activities have caused numerous disturbances at the site.
_.M.»_-%.i _. _
-_..._i...-._=._..... . 9, ~ - ..,__.....=i..-an-s .. -- .,_...-.=.~---.-<-... .-_-<-F . .-------.-»--- - —--—~~'
3 l2 On the Euphrates and to the West
B) A "middle" group, represented by in situ material from Levels II.A and I.B,
and associated contexts.
C) A "late" group established mainly on the basis of material from the series of
pits mentioned above, and with matching material from sub-surface debris in
several excavation areas.
Especially group B) may no doubt be further divided as analysis proceeds, but it
\
must also be noted that a good deal of shapes are found in all three groups. In spite
of considerable overlap, however, each group displays unique or characteristic
features, which we have tried to illustrate with the selection of sherds presented
here. Group C), which is associated with much eroded and some entirely lost
w.
structures, has many clear parallels in late Neo-Assyrian material from other sites,
and can be placed in the 7th cent. B.C. Group B), which cover a fairly long period,
may then be placed in the 9th to 8th centuries, and group A) in the llth to l0th
r centuries. We shall return to the issue of chronology below, but first make some
comments on the material, and the examples illustrated here. .
No kiln or other ceramic production facilities have been excavated, but various
evidence confirms local ceramic production. This evidence includes a few wasters,
a clay seal with rosette design for decorating vessels,“ and a hoard of broken,
unlired sherds together with lumps of prepared clayf’ Except for cooking pots and
large storage vessels all ceramics were wheel-made. Mineral temper is predominant
in all three groups, but there is a clear tendency for coarser tempering in the oldest
group, where organic temper and inclusions of large black or white grits are much
more frequent. Many of these coarser sherds in group A) have black cores
indicating firing in a reducing atmosphere.
?ainted ware is rare in all three groups. Apart from a few relatively complete
vessels, only some 100 shards, mostly small pieces, of a total of some 45.000 sherds
excavated, have painted decoration. Most examples from group A) and C) are
pieces with simple bands in red or black paint, while group B), which also has the
W.)/A., _ . _. , largest number of painted shards, includes slighty more elaborate designs. A
number of fragments are similar to the small dish illustrated in Fig. 3a, and which
is decorated on the interior with two concentric bands and perpendicular series of
stripes extending to the rim. Most conspicuously this group also includes a
, _
fragmentary jar painted in the Cypro-phoenician Bichrome tradition, and found on
a floor in Level I.B (Fig. 3b). This piece, a type which is broadly dated to the 10-
9th centuries B.C.,“ is clearly imported, as is a small fragment from a Red-on-black
X
5.
aryballos? Interestingly two small sherds are crude examples of Red-on-Black, no
l2 doubt local imitations. » includes a characteristic reddish-orange ware, particularly common with two
l
l Grey Ware is a rare, but typical feature of Group C) (Fig. 9, 3-4), almost
exclusively bowls with externally thickened rims, several pieces with the ledged
i I
6 The clay stamp was found in topsoil; three small sherds with stamped rosette decoration
come from various sub-surface contexts. The stamp is very similar to those discussed in
WARBURTON/WARBURTON I991.
It 7 Analyses of this local clay and various groups of fired ceramics from the excavations are
s
under way at the National Museum (Copenhagen).
B BRIESE 1985.
9 Similar to GJERSTAD 1948: Fig. XXV, 9~l0 and Pig. XXXVIII, 9.
g ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggW
e e ’ ’” ’
Tell Jurn Kabir 313
2 .5
rim also found frequently on Common Ware shards from this group.‘° A few sherds
of older Grey Ware, however, have been found; again they come from bowls, but of
different shapes (Fig. 9, 'l~2). While several of the Grey Ware sherds in group C)
l\ have dull surfaces, the older examples are polished or burnished to a shiny finish
on the exterior.
Red~slip Ware hardly occurs in the material. From group C) we have a few
pieces, among them a sherd from a bowl with red wash applied to the rim and
\
I
interior, and from group B) a single sherd from a carinated bowl with polished red
slip applied to the entire surface. The virtual complete absence of this type of
decoration at Tell Iurn Kabir (and Tell Qadahiye) is an interesting feature in view
of its wide distribution in the Levant in the 9th and 8th centuries B.C. At Tell Afis
in western Syria it seems that red slip is more common on the acropolis than in the
| lower town, and this is explained by its higher quality. However that may be, it
seems that red slip is common in fairly modest Iron Age structures excavated at
Tell Abou Dunne some 50 kms west of the Euphrates," and also occurs in fairly
large quantities in similar contexts at Lidar Hoytik on the Upper Euphrates. Since
red slip also seems rare or absent at Tell Shcilch Hassan," some 30 kms
I
downstream from Jurn Kabir, it may be assumed that the Syrian Euphrates lay
outside its main area of distribution.
Turning to the more frequent types of ceramics some distinctive features in each
of the three groups may be noted. Distinct cooking ware is present in all three
2'1 groups, but both the ware itself, becoming less coarsely tempered through time, and
the shapes of the vessels differ. The dominant shapes in group C) (Fig. 9, 19-20),
with in-turned, thickened rims, occasionally with a decorated ridge below the rim,
are paralleled at many sites with late Iron Age material. Examples of this shape are
also found in group B), but both here and in group A) we find particular shapes not
i represented in C), and unparalleled at, e.g., Tell Abou Danne. Thus a frequent type
in group B) is fairly thin-walled vessels, with in-turned rim flattened to form a
small internal ledge (Fig. 7, 17), while in A) most cooking pots have externally
thickened rims (Fig. 5, 25-26).
Beakers and cups of Fine Ware are found in all three groups, but only in group
C) do we have a few examples of actual "Palace Ware" (Fig. 8, 1). As mentioned
above the Common Ware becomes generally less coarsely tempered through time.
In all three groups sherds very conunonly have a brown or reddish core and lighter
surfaces, and include an increasingnumber of high~quality examples where this
difference is due to the application of a true slip. While the majority of the
Common Ware has the usual variety of light to dark brown colours, group A)
groups of vessels. The first is Fine Ware beakers and cups (Fig. 4, l), in some cases
finely burnished to a shiny smooth finish (Fig. 4, 3; no. 4 is an example of a coarser
variety with organic temper, some times crudely burnished). The other group is a
whole series of very distinct dishes and shallow bowls with one or two grooves
‘O The bowls with ledged rim is a frequently used marker for the Iron Age. The evidence
from Jurn confirms that it is a late feature. Group A) includes similar, but much less
l pronounced examples (Fig. 4, ll; Fig. 4, 15).
' Luunxu 1983.
l
" Scuwurosn this volume, pp. 325-346.
. . 7'” W” — 1 — r r W
 . iv ., . _ _- _.___,, _ __
3l4 On the Euphrates and to the West
below the rim, which is apparently unique to Level Ill, where we have recorded
several hundred pieces (Fig. 4, 8-1 l). Sherds from these vessels have a variety of
temper, shape, size, and finish. Larger examples tend to be heavily tempered with
organic material, while many of the smaller and finer examples are crudely
burnished on the exterior. Few complete profiles have been recovered, but examples
(like Fig. 4, 8) show that some of these vessels had distinctive ridged ring~bases, of
which a number of fragments have been found. Dishes and shallow bowls with
simple rims and without grooves occur in large number in group B) (Fig. 6, 7), but
are very rare in group C).
To end this brief review of the material we may mention two rarer types of
vessels, both found predominantly in group A), continuing into B), and then
apparently absent. The first is the askos, a type, also found elsewhere at Iron Age
sites in Syria, like at Hanna, and nearer to Iurn, at Karlcemish/3 Apart from the
near-complete profile shown in Fig. 9, 5, we have some 60 fragments. If only
smaller fragments of this type are found it may evidently be hard to identify, and it
seems likely that it was more common in Syria than published examples reflect.
The other type is bowls with tripod looped bases, which occur in a number of sizes.
At Tille Hoyiik such bases seem to be particularly common in Levels IV and V (ca.
l0th»~9th centuries l3.C.).l“
Historical Context
Returning at this point to the question of chronology and the historical context of
the material from Tell Iurn Kabir, it may first of all be noted that the most
characteristic items from especially group A) have few clear parallels in published
evidence from other sites. A good deal of the examples from group B) can be
paralleled at Tell Abou Danae, Tell Afis, or Hama, and C), as stated above, has
many parallels in 7th century contexts elsewhere, in particular, of course at Tell
Ahmar." The logical assumption is that group A) should be earlier than the
material from Tell Abou Danae, dated by Lebeau to ca. 850-600. Equally it has
little in common with the latest Bronze Age material excavated at nearby sites on
the Euphrates like Hadidi and Tell Bazi.“ A more closely related assemblage
would seem to be the late Middle Assyrian pottery recently published by P.
Pfalzner. Our group A) includes, for instance, examples of his "starke
Knickwandsehalen", but not the most typical Middle Assyrian bowls." In sum our
provisional dating of this group, and the foundation of Level Ill at Iurn, to the llth
to 10th centuries B.C. seems reasonable, but the margins must necessarily remain
fairly wide for the moment.
*3 Rns 1948167.
“‘ BLAYLOCK this volume, pp. 261268.
'5 See .lAMlESON this volume, pp. 287-308. It should be mentioned that some types from
Area C at Ahmar are not found at Jurn, most noticeably the small cups or isrikans. Complete
analyses and publication will probably allow a more precise assessment. and for the moment
we can just state that the latest material from Jurn should be very close in time to the mid-
~
It to-late 7th century material from Ahmar, but might extend into the 6th century.
‘6 For Tell Hadidi see Donunmmu E98}. For Tell Bazi see EINWAG/Konuvisvnn/Orro
1995.
” Ppxtznen 1995; Taf. 140, and compare here Fig. 4, 7.
— —— - - ~.. .—
_..~--
_ ,.-_,_i._.._.._......,....
E. Tell Jurn Kabir 3l5
If this is broadly correct, however, we find ourselves in a period which is
virtually undocumented historically. The most likely founders of the first settlement
at Jurn might seem to be the Aramcan groups which established themselves in the
l region at the beginning of the Iron Age. Then from the mid-9th century B.C. until
the late 7th century the Neo-Assyrian empire controlled the upper Syrian
Euphrates, and the latest occupation at Iurn belongs to that period. It is known,
however, that the Assyrians had previously established themselves, if briefly, on the
west bank of the river. Although the west border of the Middle Assyrian empire
seem to have been the Balih valley,” the Assyrians may have exercised, at least
interrnittenly, some influence further west, and recently Middle Assyrian ceramics
have been reported from the site of Sandaliye Maqbara on the west bank of the
Euphrates some 10 km south of Jurn Kabir.“ In the 9th century Shalmaneser III
claimed reconquest of the Assyrian strongholds Mutkinu and Pitru, on the east and
west bank respectively, which had been held by Tiglath-pileser in the llth century,
but lost by Assur-rabi II in the 10th century.” Although lurn Kabir clearly cannot
be Pitru itself, which should be sought further north, it is entirely plausible that
Tiglath-pileser could have founded other strongholds on the Euphrates than the
pair incidentally mentioned by a successor, and the possibility that the new Iron
Age settlements at both Jurn Kabir and Qadahiye could fit into such a pattern
should at least be kept in mind. Level II at Eurn, on the other hand, seems
unmistakably to be a local north Syrian settlement, which would leave us Level I to
cover the period ca. 850-600.
It is evidently dangerous to attempt to fit the history of small settlements into an
international framework on the present, very limited evidence, and the discussion
here should clearly be regarded as tentative indications only. Continuation of our
own work and evidence from other ongoing excavations in the region may
hopefully clarify the situation substantially in the near future, and make for a better
understanding of developments in central Syria during the earlier part of the Iron
Age.
References cited
AKKERMANS 1997, BACHELOT etal. 1997, Btunsn 1985, Donunmnuu 1981,
ElDEMfPUT'l" 1994; i995; in press, . EINWAG/KOHLMEYER/{)T’l"O 1995,
GEYER/MONCHAMBERT 1987, (jinnsrno 1948, K01-ILMEYER 1984; 1986,
LAMPRlCl-IS 1995, Lneuxu 1983, PFALZNER 1995, Rus 1948, SABER 1987, TUNCA
1993, W/xnaunrou/Waauunrou 1991.
Figs. 1-9 on pp. 316-324.
Scale of Figs. 4-9 is 1:4.
I
*8 AKKERMANS 1997, with further literature.
'9 EINWAG/KOHLMEYER/OTTO 1995: 105.
1° LAMPRICI-$1995: sat.
i
l
in rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr~ ~ -
..,....__....¢.....~._..... ‘ V. V V -

316 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell Jurn Kabir 317
E5}-,l
' f ‘I JWNK‘ \ \f E \ \ ' ‘. \‘

t. \ \ “E”
.1:
_;_‘_:
1
5
L* M~...H"
+~H7...»-@......J T--::..~...

,_.
/ ,/
\_WM V
K4’//’
\.
.m..l~ ‘_.,,.- W.‘-.$,,\.,.,,.. *.,;.. W Q _-
" ‘-7 *~$'!u -,~. W »\ * @_.. » w ,1-_»~».
W “.3'€";":*=:1.'"~ ‘ ~.*='
,, \ \ »,,.-» , ‘» "*?' \'
"“ @ '
-\£*3'$':“*7T:&;f ~:I<-~-“WIFE”-..¢3" ‘i 5(“€)'3‘.~/¢..<s
M” "
-
.
*’.§_
‘W
*1" "n 1&>'
W<m~‘»-#é1'»‘»‘l,§\?¥;“P~n={:1dQi;¥>,1%Y>~?J1§=:
‘T »-‘;1"==~~~¢=
‘
"..-"ifiI 5<'
e.._ -
' ' 2n “~>>'~‘=.1Y§*5§i=;¥’.§~'~'»<!';g-i;$7:::¢
r'5’\ *>..,,=.=-M-.e,~:-.»-K-’
W;/¢-§ ,.-1L¢“5:{';g~ 21.. .1<- <‘/'¢*¢‘ ,1 3-~ \
‘ ~ » "-= .,+.,4~~:
*9”w & 2 » I . -

' ~ ' W.
. .§ ;“-;
&“ ' ‘z“~.*2@' }m~§*.'%'7§r:§". >1-5., .—-‘ - "Yvi »-
.~:~" ~ 1 0 ‘ Q
‘ii?

-J" J.
-.~'.\1*",.-

“ 1 ,>
’ mm»*/ “» éi"+“kg» ffikfi‘iii:
> ‘-=~¢.-,- -;-1.-=~..:.~»:W."-»,1
-_ ._ _ _\
' —---~‘"*W""""*r
_-V‘-‘\\\\
1. - *'*“"“"“"“""'~"""*'"~ ~..>:>’.
'Q}
.-'°i
.'
»~

/
ii: 3~@'/.’»‘f".‘»~.§?:»:,e?»'51::<.‘1;§=»;.\ “'5 / _ /___
_ -:'~‘v:§5;E.¥‘+‘.;‘:-‘-‘:.=£$*:.. " ~1§"@’};»~§~??(»‘>:¢§?¢§K%?£~.z=‘e§%; .A {~._ n f
3“;
I/
E.7 /
Pfl. 1 v51
< \-..@¢' £v=¢¢'¥-»»>i’=>.!~;~\’\:- \ _* "'¢‘
‘. az;§;9~,$>.*~'-;;;~=‘i;'*12».\¢,;.g~w>;;-%:;$;'w1ya‘-Ff‘ 61%’
1;; ‘fZ
J’?“,5
,."- »-'__, ri - A M _ -*w~ w*3 \ , 1.~ *1 ; W;.~; "**-m*g:3z:
‘$1
R \ ;
-szm 2
.,~=~<, "/5
~ ,_ \ ‘\
'3.
1*"'1-.
»"§w*2<m-‘ »‘. _f
“i"' -.-,..,1&»:.».~4' .~ . .' r‘VJ"3 ‘Q1-\;»<;>=<l v. _'»<§-/5%-,1/' *’vr-1\f*~‘1\< Au .u"‘-.a=%:.
>..~ ~ .,, ..~."33 " °“ .. f"~ -
“~-~ >1::».=-
- v\w.,~ svtwm ,. . -‘ya W .i<, ¢»-'M 4» . n’
"'~.>- \<.§°53’=P”
...>( .¢ ,. < _ 4- "?§. 5Z"~;~»
, -Q7‘1~ . .M V4» ~~
. ~.A~.a
I'M .-,;_
m1<.¢»~ - ‘ ~1. . .>‘,¥§\\.-
~13 “~44
-1»

'" 1*?
. ‘ %$$%-
\. -»:=‘..":-.‘.=uY»'=

~*->"i‘
“W. *~.:.u
.4. :=-F-':1~..-"-=12%‘.--~.'§~
\ \=..‘;_.:;.-‘-.:'=A
1%?’-v2-} J2 jg;lk\~‘' §».'¢-..=:-2~.4¢:'i,¢‘:Y¢¢:;<‘\.;'_-.~.,,_€
13-
~—r.'>w >,@,..~\
‘ “ir,-'
‘F5’e~.\-
‘3“f'§‘.
\~~-4»;
-'1 ~:‘"'$*
‘-5 3~‘3£4:<~<*%*.
W“ ’ Ki!" ' ’*"*’*,_
T...""*.‘;
‘. .>-.: --M-.
-»~.f~¥~
;;<~»,¢,~ ‘gfl_.
V
‘f-'i2“-a *__, s .y mg,»
V
{_
§1£‘%§
,
~ ~
~>v§,. §— V w ~~V wt;-
55., " (_ 4"-1 Q
,~,3‘~"=w:,
~_~ = - .
m,,:1_.3F¢m:»~ - 4
1 ‘“ W»
~
1» 3§@%.
» ‘ .. """“‘3\
~24
-
1:.$7 j,;;"‘“3§¢‘“‘
Q weyr ~ , :-

>/
,
. ~ I44
‘ _1
%"*£Z> ,. “‘ " Q“J \<‘»
M
- ."
“N,
‘i 3“
*
r W;
é.
" -~~ ~~..1’i‘9»'- >=~m~
<W* : > ; .
' :
w
M»
.~‘

V
-
*§ E-"%‘1§“§Z‘
1,.=
1 J» ..
'1'Q“.- >
‘ A . - . ¢_ A , ‘HQ \\ ‘
\\ \ \
1
ié
7
Wéiz .~W§*-1'" * ~ . " ' ‘ ' . \
-M¥§§* -'%-§;v ‘ " 5“" "‘ ‘$15 , *~:\:*z~\
1- . ~ 7 - . > 4-Réiéi’ ' {$1
"-51M»?~*~¢i”g5~sI
Y 5%
' rs§"R:}/ -:-.1: __ °' \\ \
2:52- #0 <¢\
*:;r' R» $4
‘@..~»&§_%4
.-» J’ 12$ . ‘Y:>i¥.
' “'3
Q
Wu,
-

"~“",*’Z§<»
! : . f =

$2-. ;\;w§
elf‘
a~. \.
~
T
1* 3$5?‘ W"
Y'l>“"‘
*5?
$2:>£52 A u “ J?" -$3 "\ --—-
“=~=~»
/ '[..§i"§"g‘!‘
/-+ ‘ \1 \ \ +-\\ \\.>= : la.- \a
7.‘ — . \ \
cs <£\"¢§fl:'*3""
.. %<$
$1. %-“figiv’ ?"‘r
.
xi.
:..>¢-:1»?-:K;\;#rv"P’v,»=*5§~‘<z»
‘I -Y
“”"“>’*
.'f;fi]*<_F? *
2%
5.“ %
%%§
*
;,§.,q~
. Ffififww
. W...1.7 g__,
'“¢5§*m*w:%>\>;‘Y’“£~5eu:~z§£m'
1. . ~'-»$9‘_¥._,-a
.":'-. ~ ' \,.¢ . vg
.. *~.:'~§f£¢2:f*“IQ"Q
-1 "\"* " X? '- .= 1. ‘- ‘: =
'» X . "4 ="¢‘*¢.'
~y.,}4
‘<73 ' ._='>l= *’§ ~--,%v<
)1’ X-‘ 2
.;.
.
./.~,_.,..,
.~ Y‘< ._ ~.':<
" 1» .“<.:=v=
<:.a:_-.
'
1
-
-
--%.y . E?-2»L ==~w'~<= H10014!
-T .
v ' V \
\ \ \\ \\ \

' ~; ' \-»\\\

\ 1‘ .
8 {$53
1 ‘~ 'x:e-1-"r2a,%-.2.<?' , :11“; ' ‘““ fa”;
§ ‘Q’:
1:: ‘ '
§
?I:"".\'-'9'?‘ ‘= :i- l"§tv'<:V Bk-.
.r>--‘;‘;>_*-¢;:v:<<s%<.*‘~,~.>r.;~ Wz- ,-r~ ~ » V" ., wm -;;,;;;
~11 »<.¢'x v '”<".£9:‘,;'s;;,"w&;§';r#$fim“¥1S.2é€$;1¥:§:h?:E~§1z51I>?’"%2£zv2L'!:l‘?‘32-1z5:‘LvI:l$:m;§$3¢'§.$5\-'ARK'*:€?*§?;::1<1$im$;=';s>r:<fi;1:"
~ .~m< 4" Y 1YY4-'v 7‘>‘\\ - \-\_»_ . < \.~ \ ~ >~~. -N ~.. » .. v ~ " \ .
, ,¢~§;./h \
ifi

~&.‘M zwvzs *-+9 zwwg, 1-,v,~.>/:.v~:m':.~<~

:E}‘FL’
-», ._ 1,. . ~- :_;-~.. '53‘ 5:1‘ ..‘{ ;~ ~ ;;,><-4:/' . . ' ~_ - * W“ 1‘. 1
v»~,~Z.<.,;:m#a§;.~¢-@mv.;
*5 1* 'P~'*‘:’=f".-== ‘fa =..=1:~?.~;;.,w=;§»=1~»-'
-1 ;>¢..=@:~¢ <,\;<;~~~,~.;, 1.3- .;.“.z~»5~*;3t¢;Jv;@;\‘“ ;.‘;:_./ =e;v===a=¢=~:¢<.\ .= ={ -'
1-.f:Y%:.‘.v.~at(-1;; ‘3$*¢$
r"
~ “"§fi€<;"“4-§.\:':¢.<.;§’;:) LI.-»’ ‘ -'§5€l5z»:@r¢%E§;?"<:3.131‘§-::5ili§§L:..§v<l£ V
.. ‘\ / ' ~
. . ' "\,
1-M!‘ '3" \
$351
‘.m” ~» ,~
‘ “'4” ° “M2 "'”"“"I‘¢!‘*’ 5”" '1‘' "‘*" ’§"“ “*5;-':'.~§'~':m:‘=~;:§§:§§§;<x§$22-:
~..,\~:'"..$.\-.:/A:~,,. - ~~ . ‘gs;xzntzsrwgrr§§;>g:;:<e'*:~wr11;#1:1:2v:§§§::,:;:;:::;:;;<;:<1>:::m;3:3:-;;§::r?:~;=;:Y?“-"‘ '* Q" '_ \1 H,‘ _ vu|!zi4)w|| "'°°"
.. . . .W...»._w V"... \ .\\.,\\A;.~\ ‘*<~'*‘1 _. 1'. ::~-';"~r@~-:~~=~": ..<.. H -2
‘
'">:ar:*'w‘:1:;: ..5‘.? ’:0
> “~~‘1¢i"1-*‘\~<fi2:->‘::<~s'\w:1>~ cw *::"":&"‘r‘"" ‘v*-""~\"\:'-1'*:'*:<%:"~~':=v':w:;as . -- _ ' =' " W‘ -£1-‘ -.
2" ;..;;.=,.§Af:¢5;\;§;_g;\,‘ ';§_‘§‘f:"““".§25* "§‘<;¢3,'*,1.;---;;,é.¢=;..--4; 1. 8-.
?=1;-1'
.-->.
>~~-,J..= :I‘f.‘ *1 \ =1 ~
'.;;......—;.~~._= _~...<;:.::.;.<-;\<_..;.;¢>...;,.'*1,’-2 1.;;..¢;1,.\,.<>-.;\;,..=;;s;..~. ; >_ ‘
. ,_ '
0. ' ,,--
, Y’ '-vi‘:--* ;;1‘::E::l-;:‘;?.-;’.=~.=.6-Z:»£ 55:5: 52%;-;/-::2r..:r1::*-"* \
\OOI/I
I- 3;? YIre»;$2mm!mi:;;atsaw:2&9"“£?:“3mw‘%‘r§:?f»!I:§.‘4',1;‘z§£i~£>E?%’Iz2=~:;."-;»s1:,<':s::>::~;7¢z $(':?ic-7 v -r;';i¢2:'.=:'i;:1'-I;'=rL“»1';:1>':,&'->.':*.’x1:';;::=>;z;:i;1=:;';i7:52:>z2£c.tm::;w;-u::t¢¢x::.:::;-1!?M,=;:a;im=: ;=-:z1= - d_» ' ~'\ -k \\
==-1~<- '~'-'-'§3I.77i175353€52$3¥!i$Z~>'\1§2Q$»€§§%Y}‘4‘(%1>"’>'X¢"’i§$:§1ZZ\¢i‘,L2"’fix}?!$‘i2Q€I:¢)37iZ§§53‘<‘$5I
14‘ml;$11»:ervzqgfiéaa%;m:¢;z;:*&€r::;:a:zw1zwwmzgr¢=; .;<=-rem _§=Z\I:\'~Z 3';1?3T177}'1i?$7¥IF357‘3*iE'T{‘-ii’\'$§$*%'§§'5E3'Li‘i§551IIi51¢ZZ§§L)'if&Zl?§¢§?i‘$i\}f1?@iZ}§€5Mf3ZEZ{2{iIl.vE37?§’f»=43$iI>I.$EI§
::a:,=1=t:;a=:::>1525:;;4z::21»;a2za::::::%:;w;::w:u»m<=;2c;¢»m;wm;>¢=-;>:§~='w¢£:;;:s:;¢v;=; ;- . '
-I,Z»Q.:3'3§'-§_}§'?‘iq‘§/Z14"
»,.4._,.&.»‘:,,, ;.- . 4%
-rm» 3.3: .m‘“* 1\5;;=~,~<,,.;-<\;;;;;;,~%~,».;-<v;/‘>_»§P.;
"§1,":&w;><:6r£1‘%¢:fi§s,$1'*r:$2=Z§'a::,.!:.;;~:::;»1r- :1-z,=:;/1
,- -q;r;€§;¢.~.v,.;~;;~ ~;r¢,::=:;>:;:@;;::;;;;-¢:;;;;;;;~~v -=~‘~-
4.. ;.»:.~.;~::::;2.=_¢;_1_~.;;;,;-.1:;;,:- \
.~.¢.->1-_-»::=.~ ~-.3,‘vi.11‘ :zs:;,»,->~,=:=r.~_1=-;,;;.'
~2;:-:;».'.-.~<..'.»,:.. ; _v 9“-J. _.— ‘\ menu .;'-'0-‘I’-5-.‘
'X. .~;»f_;->,,*~,¢,..>'..._-,_¢¢ -._~, ..,W»¢_,_
¢;;.,P;; » -79-,;>4Z\;|:;.::s;e:j:.;&K~s,;4;....m,».?:g/,,...,,
_ .'~..=.;=- ,_ ~k, g\ _ ..
22;‘,/,:._ ‘ _, . . .> . -.'x.'.'?2$¢5;'Z-I?\?‘»‘~".*313.555’
,, ; = \‘
J _ ~. ‘a _>,4*<. 2,, kg‘._/ , .- .- v -=-w< ‘ ’ T“?
4‘,-’z%§‘;$¢__§&‘%‘
_ A
1 5i=~--fig‘ - --
-\_ _, Jy;;v::.~‘~¢f,»,,@g¢3‘<~_,
_. =-
’ =' .
~’
' » ~~*'=-{%=l{=3=s¢-' >1;-‘W-:1:‘:<W.‘
;~..\ -..~';. . .A,;,H....
-.\._=.
4H.‘u?_vf!;‘1:;wE~I'.‘. _~_~.;.> .,, :i “'1>1<._‘. < »
< .. ' *
u‘ aw‘ ‘
>\ \ \\
3:!" $5».
», ..\
*‘* ~'\"~*.»+
%
\
>
~.,;»;_'~»1I
Aw
,¢~ ~.~@'" E3
Y **
~ . -»
' "?~2> * ‘ * *:~.'.T-L‘ *-
_.~~>~-
@ Qfi
f,:>»1=1::<.:¢-====»'=,a<-rm -'.~=~- “*~§H
Q ' . *1:as \ \ 1 ~.Y '
.
" J ‘f ~ \ ,
10:»-| -.L.”_ .//
> w :_--~££uI"Z$Z‘;"?=‘?**’&iL=:w, ."‘»='\ "" '5:~ ‘isflif ' > F,"» J‘
1/
\,
A*~1
/
;" /j~ ‘<1>°- - 1 - .-=~_'. 1‘
I" .' ‘ \
i. .,_;§
$333 @~ -
\ 4,
1;,‘
" E _ _.
"' ‘ r»‘
,.. _-,. L3,. . .,, -N
»/' Q2
. _':;. ~\ < ,. ”‘v"‘;2';;.".<*“"<‘>':;¢;;;"“"*" ‘W -»w“<,;~ " ;"§b~§*;w' , .»,'g '8‘ {,1-».:v"~v*;;;€"'“:»'~.:;W' ~";'.
‘;_._
. VUni
\
,3 nu, , ¢.»,m.,.-.
_Mw.=__ ;,.,>.".;.{:._g,».~_;;'*¢
. M-|,‘§\"' * ' Ag‘ ."~;:§;.-1-2.-;.-_. v"/“"§~I
~ ’,\_N_,;;}_;a€{~‘~
‘-<-='~' ~-\~
4* , ~+.I
~. ‘K
K_ ‘E1,
‘,
U /
2
\
/_fl-/ / ,._ ////I
J-'__ /I, <, <_.-%:=;_I_:7:_n-°5,'*‘:?:_v
~ ‘Q-~. ._ -
'°°“*=. "\ --1' “'- _ - .*.="'.-*.-1-.-'
_ ~. -,1’_._-_.,-
f '7' 5!
-~=‘~‘»-.'-'1"-*4‘ .J ‘
a§‘E|»u‘?."‘f§ '._ \
- \ '\
1
' ,5‘ ,>.— =?:>*»*»‘5*.\~ '~ ~= fa ~:?==_ CW" V " '% r‘**‘""*""@-"‘-§\\'**~"*-¥‘~" ¢$~‘?¥=‘.'* A.;’>%g'?' ./.1-..:»2=':
.= » -* .
,.. /¢
»" §
._."““
..s. “___ ....“‘ :00-4 Q . _ ~ '\\ ‘\
X" ._,M,M,~__
'"’ "‘>"'*'*‘__1"“
f-" - ~? N
)?.,--
_ .\w .._.$,..4'.,.
. W ‘*7?-wT‘"
‘4 W-.., ..___
__~r ‘Wyn ___ .;~ _ V -.4»,-) . /
7<. “P,.~.,__m%..l=__ _‘ -»7“
l MM, _V Wm
.“$15?
-<4. ...< .. ‘ . ....,,,:,.;_m§,,m_$i,,!;,.
, ‘gig ~_‘ .H_:__'_ . ?¢1§'A:\§’A*y . . .,..,;~,,.:..
\

Q'*
4.. Q“ Q, (>5,‘M.- x $3. . ‘. é .( _ “ 1M
\\_ nous A ' 1!-=4‘-2-?t;-"
-'¢| ,4‘ ,.~~_'.‘.'~"_ ' . \ ‘ _=

l_" ._I._‘~v_~,_'._’-_‘~_‘:_'._'-~{‘_§E:f;;;'i<,;L»\‘ 5*’ ~ \ /'

{J
*’»“‘°* .~~ ..~'i1.,..;,.\ f v :-w <¢¢~- '1 -,-. ,- »-=--~..,.
-I-”~?'*> =.1.-'4'» -» -;-- .. ..
“ 11-\' 1-"~»1:‘IZ$‘2"“!'?1:§{¢:i>$J£<#s=¢\rl~£3"T‘$1;?r='?€ff5’§;*"<>P‘9’>"“>1§!11’l!\4r-rfg»,.,$'E$¥§?>’/'l5"¥§§$'¥5H“:"~}' -,9’ New " . € "4
\.‘_J§__ , )9.)-; ‘
\ we-1 \\ \‘ F
\ , \ _
/'
"/,//
,. J
..»..,,.,,:3:7,.N5.33%.,,.;;‘i;§;:-3=k@35;;@;k;;§%?:£¢§;$;1;;¢..§;==..>.§<;;,¢=;;@5@<Q:..;£,§figfiay§.x,<u>x$;qr§§*§:}g,;<.::i,3g{;¢»,»:r=_*,,,3,;,;$;z>;.m_>¢~ :5, jar at ; “ , \ \ V <

///,,+ ////
' ‘-715 -"373:-§‘»'.‘T¢’ ;z'€<;w;"I;; ‘§"‘vI~'-""=’ 3"*:_.1¥"<*‘>‘Y- ~">’E':’c~';'< ' \‘-"""'““
Y . .__ .. 15i.;,;;.®,;;;
:'.-i:-=.-.-1-I‘?--1Y5-‘>$=‘~£‘<$§Y§I¥¢¥'I1é§;¢-E? < .'= -~ v~.- 1-
‘, \ \ \ ./
” .:~;""';1-_;»»"~ .‘ J.»~¢~*'&l;_~':‘;{€‘z~zi'.,‘,;¢\g;,;;.;2-r*’*<,,.;,.~;‘
,. ~. __;.¢..,~,,, .v.. .,4.~:a;..‘,., ‘§§..<;)m!»x§
W.~..'a%§,*;_'.-";,/W
x1:5*"~ - ..V -~ -‘ Q~
'?k‘4"~‘ Y» v“ " k ¢.u~3;*.‘§r§‘~.v ' N ~:
:"."=m:.,;;m
~" ,3;
.- '-=2:
e "P
//
I
A
K __,--
;[Ii
>
if
Y
. \..g~.-
511:? <w=rno
,y

/x<<?
'1.,¢.,.=M,==:c,.,=m».-4.,u,;<;=2_:&2§1%‘3‘,,> . wgq‘.2:W, -= 3 _~,...~';~,4?£ K-'~-<3‘-;'=w>;--.=~-V,-;.,-
.
I 1.
jff
/. " ~:;31?." ' F‘.
/
“‘ ,. ,. }A\ » ‘(Q W, .$v\(v \P'4;\'u >7, . =,~ ~\ - ‘A vv > ~,. -(J; /~f‘?"*~"‘I1~";"
\'»""E.?'$.
-,,§:°§.W'§§v7 .'¢/ Q "“"“ - ’* - ‘ 9, ' _-~\
0 . -= ’\ \ \ .4 -* » ‘
‘xv+- KI \\
‘L

v< -<1.
;'._= ».- -.»:1:.-;11-.=\ :’:§;‘>:==::E:-.=%:fa&:;:§;?@‘PM
1*»-’; =». =.»=~ ~11 >»-~;¢~ ».»;.-.: f-1 ;-*>;‘.~.-.‘.-=;;'f:l::?:: .;.».=~..» ~~.<_».E.<;¢.’s'~'.<.» -:”’f='-' _- "“§r" \ \~.. \ I). .~ a:.'.__::Ffi 1§'C(*

ll/
J /_“.:'§K’/..~§;.“',I‘$'£l!Q7}‘Z1f7.)l\$1‘;I$,§':Qf}§§§:;§'fi?$&ZZ§7;1?‘§R{5A:}E:I7§&.‘{1~73m,"'(,,.,Z1fi1];:;.§Y~.(:(:§v.§:.\r-‘v\1.‘{»‘$~7‘Q71:§-ta.‘/~r»Tv~Zr~/QC:-11€.:._;~,:f..i;} -.;;;4,
,5‘?v,:;;.::;;;»w;;¢v;:=.:m<>.-my-,~.;;<,~w.
\ \ -£2» - L_.1
é
//
0I
~. a-:.!.;..f v‘.'."'¢fi?_:;:2¢:;¢:?f_;:L?§§:T3¢5;'51*4i;$L:;:‘;I1i$i€!j>':'l€&IT1‘§;::12i>;;£2.73;»,-?>?1%a<t;:Qf;e11133Z1Lx;>:l;fL‘=q;:§£¢¢5f¢’~€.1Z.I{.~'22‘Q-1;:3§?\§'i‘§*.:ii1:3?L‘-13£3IKi}Z:Z1524};figs§2%L’%‘!;‘1Q,:’ZT\;Z.2.Y;¢Z!&;rf."3ié:&Z€I;|L2£»;$fi§‘ \ \
1 P‘

Q;1
J - \ . ’
.
-
..
~ '
_ .<._.::,\¢: .. ,".._.,,...\_r.%.*:»..m_>.*r: ;,».§¢
-- *._-.1:-1.,-1,::;:;'.s1~.-. .. »;-\ };.':.~:E‘E--§l.;;.:-.,;g-xr:,ar:::¢w$>Mr". ,!.‘»::"»21
..;,<.:'x_...r_,?'.5...._....~1- ,\;§,._ .
¥x:;1."~>‘;r; \
\\»- - \ l
...\_
*1‘; X

/.\
-~___

‘\\
--_____v_‘
Fig. 1 Tell Jum Kabir (Oct. 1994). The summit of the site is capped by the modern
water tower -F \ Jr . -9
h

1URN KABER
1. E v 5 1. 2 /K
\//\\\\ »-.~_\_M./-_-WM-;§*,./-»?
\-\‘_,/
:W
.
//

/1
///

~'
““Z“ 4?-j_;'j:.W...*—-\~._,~/'”'“ +,;..._.____-~-—~
~§<§k¢\><=§-@;::~M»/iI»~W»@~
f:'.¢@
Fig. 2 Te1lJurn Kflbil‘, structures of Level II.B~A

,1 ___ ___ _ ___M__w___ __ _ v__v W; f ,“__,,,,,,,,_,_,_,_____,________Z,,,,,,,,,“,,,,,,V ‘_ _ ___ ,_ ___

- : - ‘ - | = > ' ; ' . -
'

~
 _ _ '_ _ _...... ....._._,.~_.___..___,......,.__.._...... __

318 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell Jurn Kabir 319 ;
vii

Z _-‘nu-___ 2
1

-».
. .. u
3

U)
U~|_,_,._ _

Fig. 3a Painted dish (grail? B). (V ' WN /

9

' 10-
... H ’

a
\

Fig. 3b Fragmentary, imported jar in Bichrome ware (from group B). 12

Fig. 4 Selected profiles from Group A

k %W " — , — , _ ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,___
-..-.-__.._-¢.-_...~_.._.._<.. . V _ W __ ___ _ ___________ *___'__W _*

320 On the Euphrates and to the West 3 Tell Jam Kabir 321
fl

K TL I
‘\
3 M} 7 K K L
'~ 15
)
18 F1
ii! 573:3 g7 <57
§.
s
:
w21 /W
fig \
22 l
7
24 , V

25 ¢ 9

Fig. 6 Selected profiles from Group B

Fig. 5 Selected profiles from Group A

Ir __ _ — ’;f:"’.’T:""T’?’."'”’?W’_'""r”'"."'""'T.....' * ~- v , 7’
-.~....-_..».-._-....‘..._._.. ». ‘ V»-._,., ¢____............:_______ . . __- _______-. - -- -~ __

On the Euphrates and to the West T611 IMF" Kabir 323

12
E7
11
\

-.
._W__4____ -‘

13
14
vi 2 %7 2
--- % ( @$
l .

1
I.

2
E

I ___??__

5 11.
I Q
l
3
16

12 1 I
M 15

Ii 13
Q.

17 5 16
Fig. 7 Selected profiies from Group B ‘ Fig. 8 Selected profiles from Group C (1-16)

hr "" _,f:~—.——*T~:, ,,__ '"* _t-In _ *’** _ 7""""""""""T""""’|IIIIlII| V 'j' "

............._........~...,_. ,» .4“.-¢...,...~..=_ V -__7'—_':__t __ V V I _,__ —— —— — — ' — W“ ”” “""

324 On the Euphrates and to the West

Die eisenzeitliche Keramik von Tel} Shaikh Hassan (Syrien)

ELLEN SCHNEIDER
Neunkirchen
‘I7 18

'\
Einfiihrung

/§19§
Bei dem unter seinem modernen Narnen ,,Tell Shaikh Hassan“ bekannten Hiigei
handelt es sich um cine jener nordsyrischen, im Bereich des Euphratbogens
--.
geiegenen antiken Stfitten, die dutch den Bau eines Dammes bei Tabqa von
Uberschwemmung bedroht sind bzw. schon Liberflutet wurden. Der urspriinglich
am Ostufer, etwa auf halbem Wege zwischen Tawi und Murnbaqat, gelegene Tell
ist inzwischen zu einer Insel innerhaib des dutch die Aufstauung entstandenen
.1;-:o:<>";<>1'o:-»i<>..<‘».oz_$1'o*.=1-:o:¢:<>; \ Lake Assad geworden.
Der Hiigel besafi urspriinglich einen Durchmesser von fiber 250 m, der hfiichste
Punkt lag ca. 14 m iiber dem damaiigen Wasserspiegel des Fiusses; die heutige,
Fig. 9a Seiected profiles from Group C (17-20) fiber 500 In vom Ufer entfemt gelegene Insel urnfafit dagegen nur noch ein Areal
von etwa 80 x 60 m.
Erste Ausgrabungen fanden unter syrischer Leitung in den Iahren 1973 und
1974 statt; dabei wurde u.a. am Fufi des Htigels eine Basilika des 4.-5. Jh. n. Chr.
freigelegt. Im Jahre 1976 besuchte I. Cauvinhach AbschiuB seiner Arbeiten in

i iii(( *1 K l 1 Mureibix den I-Iiigel. Er stelite unterhaib der westiichen Abbruchkante

urnfangreiche Reste eincr akeramisch neolithischen Siedlung fest. W. Orthmann,
der den Tell 1981 besichiigte, fiihrte noch irn Herbst desseiben Jahres eine Sondage
dutch und identifizierte mehrere Schichten der Urukzeit. Daraufhin wurde die

%3tt t t t t t 1 itt t.2

9
Ausgrabung des gesamten Hiigeis als franz6sisch—deutsches Gemeinschaftsprojekt
beschlossen, das seit 1984 von J. Boese geleitet wird. Y
Bei dieser ersten Kampagne erwies sich, daB bier unterhalb eines isiamiséhen
Friedhofs byzantinische, rtimische, hellenistische und eisenzeitliche Siedlungsreste
cine Reihe von Schichten einer urukzeitlichen Siedlung iiberlagern. Die
eisenzeitiichen Befunde (Schicht 3) sind durch spiitere Bauten, vor allem durch
§ zwei grofie hellenistische Gebéiude mit ihreri Installationen, aber auch dutch viele
1 é2 Gruben aus riimischer Zeit, sehr stark gestért. Trotzdem war es miiglich, mehrere
i offizieile Gebiiude sowie Teile einer¢Befestigungsrnauer, die urspriinglich etwa cine
; Fliiche von 120 x 100 m umschlbfi, freizulegen. Diese Mauer ist aus fiachen
5 /
i
¢\“ quadratischen bzw. rechteckigen Lehmziegeln fiber einem Steinfundament
eirichtet. Die Héiuser innerhalb des Mauerrings sind auf gleiche Weise gebaut.
Offensichtlich verlief an manchen Stelien eine schmale Strafie zwischen ihnen und
dem Befestigungsring.
Das wichtigste eisenzeitliche Gebiiude ist der ,,Bau A“ (Abb. 1), ein Komplex,
der als ,,Hilani“ identifiziert werden konnte. Eine Freitreppe fiihrte dutch einen
breiten Eingang in der Fassade in eincn breitgelagerten Vorraum; der
dahinterliegende Hauptraurn weist mittig einen breiten Pflasterstreifen aus
J 5 Kalksteinplatten und ein wohl als Feuersteile anzusprechendes Podium auf.
Fig. 9b Grey ware bowls (1-4), askos (5)
‘ B05515 1995.

_ "___ _ ___, ____7:7777_ Iv _l" efillll 7 —

__;,__ , __,___ _ Q, ,., W M... * ... ...... _--.~.--W-J. . . . . - ____7_7__ . ------—---- - -
326 On the Euphrates and to the West
installationen wie Ziegelpfiaster und Abfiufirinnen ermiigiichen es, den
siidéistiichen Eckraum als eine Art Badezimmer zu identifizieren.
Das Gebaude wurde vor Errichtung der heiienistiscnen Bauten planiert und mit
Schutt aufgeftillt bzw. mit Lehrnziegeln zugesetzt. Trotz dieser sekundiiren
Baurnafinahme liefien sich noch mindestens drei urspriingliche Bauphasen
nachweisen; die zugehdrigen Begehungsflachen konnten allerdings nur teilweise
freigelegt werden.
Vor der Planierung und Auffiillung war das ,,Hi1ani“ offensichtlich leergeraumt
worden- Die Kleinfunde sowie der gr6Bte Tcil der meist nur in Fragmenten
erhaltenen Keramik stamrnen fast ausschliefiiich ans der Auffiillmasse; einige
wenige wurden jedoch auch unmittelbar auf den Fulfibodenresten an den
Mauerfiifien geborgen. Erste I-Iinweise auf eine Datierung des Gebiiudes gaben
dabei Kleinfunde wie z.B. zwei spéitbabyionische Stempelsiegel and der Abdruck
eines solchen auf einem Krughenkel, anthropomorphe und lheriomorphe
Terrakotten der neubabyionischen und achéimenidischen Zeit, eine bronzene
Dreiecksbogenfibel und kleine, ans Basalt hergestellte Opfertische mit
Stierprotomen (vgl. Abb. 2).
Nur ein geringer Anteil der Keramik stammt aus sichet stratiflziertem Kontext.
Dies gilt 2.13. fiir eine Terrine, die in den altesten von drei iibereinanderliegen den
Boden eingelassen und von einern Scherbenpflaster umgeben war (Abb. 3, 1). Ein
kraterartiges Geféili und ein Pithos wurden in Fundamentschichten unterhalb dieses
Bodens gefunden (Abb. 3, 3 und 4). Ein kleiner, mit horizontalen Riefen verzierter
Bechcr wurde innerhalb des Fundaments geborgen (Abb. 3, 2).
Vieie der hier vorgesteliten Geféifie stammen ans einem weiteren, groffien, aber
nur zu geringen Teilen erhaltenen Ban (,,B“) im Westen des Tells. Von diesem
Komplex konnten lediglich einige breite Steinmauern sowie quadratische,
mdglicherweise als Saulenbasen zu deutende Steinsetzungen freigelegt warden;
unter einem fragmentarisch erhaltenen Steinpfiaster wurde cine Abfolge von -
leider ebenfalis stark gestérten - Ful3b6den festgestellt, die belegen, dafi das
Gebaude fiber mehrere, allerdings nicht klar voneinander zu trennende Phasen
hinweg in Benutzung war?
Bin eisenzeitliches Gebiiude mit sicher zu differenzierenden Schichten trat erst
wéihrencl der Ausgrabung von 1994 im Osten des Tells zutage. Hier wurde, nahe
der Stadtmaner, die Ecke eines Hauses mit zwei deutlich trennbaren
Schuttablagerungen freigelegtf‘
Die Keramik
I-Ierstellung
Bei der eisenzeitlichen Keramik aus Tell Sheikh Hassan handeit es sich
Liberwiegend um einfache, unvetzierte Ware. Der Ton ist im Bruch meist
orangebraun, seltener auch gelbbraun. Normalcrweise ist er mit Sand gemagert,
2 Boast: 1995; 28.
3 BOESE 1995: 236f. Die Publikation der gesamten eisenzeitlichen Keramik erfolgt im
zweiten Band der ,,Ausgrabungen in Tell Sheikh Hassan“, der voraussichtlich im Iahr 1999
erscheinen wird. Ich danke L Boese fiir die Erlaubnis zur Bearbeitung und Verdffentlichung
dleser Fundgrnppe.
u--1 Y at _, *1: **********"
H """" ”'--~ . VVI~---_-—--_-------—-- -----. --5
Tell Shaikh Hassan 327
seiten, aufier natiirlich bei grober Ware, kommt organische Magerung (Hacksel)
vor. Recht hiiufig finden sich auch Kalkstiickchen und/Oder Glimmer. Die Gefafie
sind gewiihnlich hart gebrannt. Die Oberfléiche ist vielfacn von gleicher Fatbe wie
der Bruch, meistens tragen die Gefafie jedoch einen Uberzug von etwas hellerer
Tiinung (,,Self Slip“). In der Mehrzahl der Falle weiscn Gefafie aus orange-
braunem Ton einen gelb-braunen Uberzug auf. Farbiiberzfige (z.B. rdtlich-braune)
erscheinen nur vereinzeit. Die meisten Gefaffloberflachen sind verstrichen bzw.
mehr oder weniger flfichtig geglattet, einige sind in unregelmafiigen, diagonalen
oder meist horizontalen Strichen poliert (Streifenpoiitur). Die plastische
Verzierung beschrankt sich auf Riefen- und Kammstrichdekor oder schmaie
aufgelegte Bieinder.
Formen
Das Repertoire der Formen macht einen konstanten Eindrnck.“ Unter den
fiihrenden Formen findet sich cine welt ausladende, flache Schale mit einfachem,
leicht abgeruncietem Rand (Abb. 4, Typ 1). I-Iler gibt es anscheinend norrniette
Formate von jeweils 20-23 crn, 28-30 cm bzw. 34-38 cm Durchmesser. Bei
manchen Beispielen ist die Wandung schwach konvex gekriimmt. Bin Boden hat
sich nur bei einigen kleineren Stiicken erhalten; er weist cine leichte Rundung nach
unten auf (Typ 1.4).
Offene Gefézfie
Bei Schalen mit nach aufien verdicktem Rand (sog. ,,Hammerrand“) verlauft die
Wandung gerade oder auch leicht konvex gerundet~(Abb. 4, Typ 2). Sie zieht zum
Rand hin ieicht ein. Die Durchmesserformate konzentrieren sich in den Bereichen
um 20, 34 oder 38 cm, manchmal erreichen sie sogar 40 cm.
Schaien mit auBen und innen verdicktem Rand (Abb. 5, Typ 3) biiden eine da
von klar zu unterscheidende Gruppe. Diese ,,T—Rand“-Schalen treten sch: haufig
auf. Manche Stiicke weisen einen Wandungsknick auf. Besonders auffaliend ist die
extreme Ausforrnung des Randes beim Typ 3.3 (Abb. 5).
Ferner sind Schalen mit ,,¥’*‘aI£rand“ (Abb. 5, Typ 4) signifikant. Ihre
Durchrnesser schwanken zwischen 29 und 33 cm.
Bei Schaien mit horizontal nach aufien ausladendern Rand (Abb. 5, Typ 5)
verliiuft die Wandung gewdhnlich ieicht gerundet, zuweiiennuch durch einen
Knick unterbrochen. Ein ahnlicher ‘Typ (Abb. 5, Typ 6) weist einen einfachen
flachen Boden auf. 9 ‘-1
Kalottenschalen (Taf. 3, Typ 7) besitzen gerade abgeschnittene (Typ 7.1-2) Oder
gerundete (Typ 7.3-4) Rander. Die Grtifien konnen dabei stark variieren.
Das gleiche gilt fiir Schalen mit nach innen eingezogenem Rand (Abb. 6, Typ
8). Der Rand einer Variante dieses 'i§'ps (Typ 8.2) biegt scharf, fast winklig, urn.
Selten begegnen kleine flache Schalen, deren Wandungsverlauf ein Altemieren
von Einziehung und Ausladung zeigt (Abb. 6, Typ 9).
Gefiifie mit Wandungsknick (Abb. 6, Typ 10) weisen sowohl in der Grtifie als
auch in der Randausformung gr0Be Unterschiede auf.
" Ich danke F. Knauli ffir seine Vorarbeiten, welche die Grundlage fiir die Ausfiihrungen zu
den offenen Formen bilden.
_ I-J 1 n --“___ 7
_»~...,_..-,_,....__..._._.. ,. ...,.......,......__..,._,_ ___... ,___W_.__ _ ...~.......,.,._.__..._i...._,...__._._..__...........~...... .
328 On the Euphrates and to the West
Vergleichsweise héiufig treten spezifische kleine Schalen auf, die oft recht
diinnwandig sein konnen (Abb. 7, Typ 11); sic zeigen ein charakteristisches
Spektrum: Der obere Teil ist immer klar vom unteren getrennt, bei dem die
Wandung winkiig ode: gerundet veriéiuft. Die ,,Trenn1inie“ zwischen beiden wird
durch feine Riefen oder schmale plastische Binder betont. Der Durchmesser dieser
Schalen bewegt sich zwischen 14 und 16 cm.’
Durch eine éhnlich scharfe Absetzung des oberen Teils vorn unteren sind auch
‘Q
drei jeweils nur in Einzelstiicken beieg£e~ Bechertypen charakterisiert (Abb. 7, Typ
12).
Geschlossene Geffzfie
-.
Die geschlossenen Geféifie zeichnen sich gegentiber den Schalen und Schiisseln
durch cine gr6Bere typologische Variationsbreite aus. Es gibt in Teli Sheikh Hassan
sehr viele unterschiediiche Formen von Tépfen, vasenéihnlichen Gefiifien und
Fiaschen.
Bei einigen T6pfen(Abb. 8, Typ 13) ist ein hoher, leicht einziehender oberer
Teii deutlich von einem auslacienden Bauchteil abgesetzt. Die Wandung einiger
anderer Geféifie verléiuft dagegcn gerundet (Abb. 8, Typ 14).
,,C0oking Pots“ (Abb. 9, Typ 15) weisen héiufig einen zugespitzten Rand auf
(Typ 15.1); es kommen abet auch ausiadende Réinde1'('i'yp 15.2-3) vor.
Kréiftig iiberhiingende Rfinder treten bei Tiipfen auf (Abb. 9, Typ 16), deren
Wandung vielleicht - éihniich wie bei den ,,C00king Pots“ - fast kugelftirmig
gerundet War.
Héiufiger sind Tiipfe mit zum Rand hin konvergierender Wandung (Abb. 10,
Typ 17). Die Réinder laden wicder nacia auBen aus (Typ 17.1) und sind oft noch
zuséitziich kréiftig verdickt (Typ 17.2~3).
Bei einigen Ttipfen tritt cine vom Ktiper mehr oder weniger stark abgesetzte
Haispartie auf (Abb. 10, Typ 18).
1.< Tiipfe mit einer im Verhéltnis zum Kiirperdurchmesser engen Qffnung (Abb.
.1
'i
10-11, Typ 19) zeichnen sich dutch sehr unterschiedlich ausgeformte Render aus.
Bei einigen (Typ 19.7) léidt die Randpartie ieicht aus.
Vor aliem Vorratsgeféifie sind aus grober Ware gefertigt (Abb. 12, Typ 21). Bei
ihnen sind die oberen Partien meist mit Riefen oder piastischen Béindern mit
1
Fingerabdrficken (,,Seilrnuster“) verziert. Einige (Typ 21.2) sind mit Henkeln
1
versehen. F1aschen- oder kannenartige Geftifie (Abb. 13-15) zeigen ein grofies
Variationsspektrum vor allem in I-Iinsicht auf ihren Rand. Bei einigen Typen (Abb.
E
13, Typ 22) gent der Rand nahtios in die Bauchpartie fiber. Bei vasenartigen
3
Geféiffien (Abb. 13, Typ 23) ist cine mehr oder weniger hohe, ausladende Randpartie
dutch eine ausgepréigte Einziehung vom Kijrper abgesetzt. ,,Kleeb1attkannen“ (Abb.
13, Typ 24) sind recht héiufig. Bei einer Gruppe dieser Gattung, die sich dutch viele
Varianten auszeichnet (Abb. 14, Typ 25) ist ein relativ enger und hoher ,,Ha1s“
deutlich vom Kiirper getrennt. Besonders kennzeichnend sind dort verdickte
Riinder (Abb. 14, Typ 25.13-15), profilierle (Abb. 14, Typ 25. 8-11) und vor a11em
~<
5 Vgl. hierzu den Beitrag der Verf. ,,‘Assyrische’ Schalen aus Tell Sheikh Hassan (Syrien)
und ihre Stellung innerhalb der Kerarnik des assylischen Einflufigebietes“ in diesem Banci,
I
S. 347675.
_ l '"""' —— "'" +-E T'””f"
... ....M..W..,.,. _ww.. W1 ~ .,.,-~,~..M...»~.. ... . ............. . ., ....~_
Tell Shaikh Hassan 329
bandartig verstiirkte Réinder (Abb. 14, Typ 25.5~6). Die Randdurchmesser aller
ciieser Fiaschen variieren Iediglich zwischen 9-11 cm, in der weit aus
iiberwiegenden Mehrzahi der Féiile betragen sic sugar genau 10 cm.
,,Kriige“, d.h. flaschenartige Geffifie mit jeweils einem I-Ienkel (Abb. 15, Typ
26), zeigen z.T. mit den vorgenannten Typen identische Riinder. Dies iegt die
Annahme nahe, dafi es sich bei einigen der oben aufgeziihiten ,,F1aschen“ in
Wirklichkeit ebenfails um Kriige handelt.
Sonderformen
Innerhaib des Geféiflrepertoires (Abb. 16 oben) begegnen nur wenige Beispicle von
Sonderformen, so 2.13. Siebgefiifie (Typ 29). Mehrfach kommen Néipfe mil
Durchbohrungen (Typ 27) vor. Bei einem Tiipfchen mit halbkreisformigen,
rotelleniihnlichen Handhaben ('1) (Typ 28) handeit es sich um ein Einzelstiick.
Feine Keramik
)5\uBerst feine Keramik lritt nu: selten auf, beispieisweise Becher (Abb. 7, Typ 12),
Knickwandschalen (Abb. 7, Typ 11.5»~6) Oder auch einfache Schiilchen (Typ 30).
Nur in sehr geringcr Zahl sinfl kieine Schaien oder Teller mit spezifischem, sehr
flash ausiadendem Rand (Typ 31) nachgewiesen.
Vollstéindig erhaltene Geffii/36
Von der eisenzeitlichen Kexamik vom Tell Shaikh Hassan haben sich nur sehr
wenige volistéindige Geffifie erhalten. Die Bodenfragmente (Abb. 16 unten, Typ 32)
ktinnen Iediglich in Einzelfiillen bestimmten Formtypen zugeordnet werden.
Ringbitiden (Typ 32.1) scheinen im Ailgemeinen héufiger ais einfache Fiachbéden
(Typ 32.2) zu sein. Ein gerundeter Boden mit henkeiariigen Schiaufen (Typ 32.3)
kommt nur zweimal vor. Grofie Mengen von spitz zulaufenden oder abgefiachten
Btiden (Typ 32.4) zeigen, dafi - vieileicht ,,amphorenartige“ - Vorratsgefiifie sehr
héiufig waren.
Schiufifeigerungen
Die Keramikfunde aus Teii Sheikh Hassan ermiigiichen die Rekonstruktion eines in
sich ziemiich konstanten und durch, Normiemng festgelegten Repertoires. Einige
Formtypen, wie einfache flache Schaien, Schalen mit einziehendem Rand, Schalen
mit ,,Harnmer“- und ,,'I‘-Réindern“,_ Knickwandschiiichen, Tiipfe mit verdicktem
Rand und die Flaschen mit den drei‘ beschriebenen, vorherrschenden Randfonnen
erscheinen regclméifiig innerhalb vieler eisenzeitiicher Fundstelien und dort in
ziemiich grofien Mengen. Einige Typen sind weniger héiufig, scheinen aber sehr
signifikant, so z.B. Schaien mit scharf einziehendem Rand, Schéiichen mit
abwechselnci einziehender und ausladender Wandung sowie verschiedene Typen
von Schalen mit Wandungsknick; das gleiche giit fiir Tépfe, bei clenen cine Ieicht
einziehende obere Partie von einem ausladenden Bauch deutiich abgesetzt ist, und
fiir vasenartige Geféifie.
Die aus feiner Ware gefertigten Gefafie, wie ricfenverzierte Becher und
1 Knickwandschiilchen, sind von besonderem Interesse. Zusammen mit den anderen
Forrnen, insbesondere solchen aus klarer stratifizierten Kontexten, werden sic es
ermfiiglichen, das gesamte Material aus der eisenzeitlichen Siedlung von Tell
4
_ 5 , * '" iiii” --ee ~— *—~
__‘_W__ M __ _...._.......,....,.._______,.._...___,_,.._-_-w_...<,_._.._._-.-J---.W.....“..,. ..,.W...__...__.._,,..._.._....._~._.__.__.._......_i______.....»_~........ . ....~..........,~....~.__.,_ > ,__._... ...._...i..._...,......_,___._.w_... -

330 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell Shaikh Hassan 331

. . . . . I I 1 L..’4L.... I M, _ / 1_ ,1 I 1 E I 1
Sheikh Hassan auch in einen fasten chronologischen Rahmen emzuordnen. 1 1 3 1 1/ 1 1 1 1

/1
Voriéiufig léifit sich feststeilen, (1213 wohi eine durchgehende Sequenz vom 8. I11. - ‘..__.

8/, 1\
oder vielieicht auch friiher - bis zum 5. Jh. v. Chr. v0r1iegt.° 377"" \7 ‘WV '4' 1 inwwi Z Z l/~"‘;""“@‘\\ 1

Zitierte Literatur _ K
1
_,‘_, _, /
/
1 .
—-—
1
i
\\\‘
+
1%? x\\
1
3
_ __ . W‘-<
1
f\
B0esB1995. _. § /V
‘\
B
.24
1 . 2
/ \
Die Abbiltiungen eind wenn nieht anders gekennzeichnet, im Mafistab 1:4 1 , ‘ \ \
M wiedergegeben. 8 j \ H \\‘\ A \
*\ /-~‘1\‘\._._ ,_ ,_1
V’/
1 ‘x
1 - '\
71222.... :>‘/ \\\\\
" ~ )\
=~'=='. H
. "§“1__/,/'1”‘~~1"~-
---‘1——~—~%
\1.‘
.
\\i;i; \1\2;-
\
;L__

’/ 1/7/7/7/7 ‘ 1 \ \\ K
| 7/as

5.
1 ///
-2 . . . . / /Z
:».2

75
71/)1,

.\ 1 ;/ 7
1 /
:\<=w c'\>=-+
5 .
5
L 1/

5 "1-1-t"h+f'/" /2 _ ...... W...-.— -—-- ._-1-H-.-.— 1 _

6 Fiir Paralleien im Formenrepertoire vgl. die Beitréige zu Tell Ahmar, Tille Héyiik und Jurn
Kabir in diesem Band. So stimmen foigende Gefiifie aypologisch iiberein:
Qfl /5 ‘i\\<. /5 1
Tet] Shaikh Hassan Jurn Kabir Title Hfiyiik
\\\\§;. ..1/ 4’ 1 \ \
_2_.-...\l1"'/.
’ 1
,-......._./11
/ 1
F .........1 22.2.2
1
E; Ty): EIDEM/ACKERMANN BLAYLOCK \\\‘/
\ ‘ ‘
:7 j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j __Ei_g.*4,1,8~9;3,7 Fig. 2, 2;4, 5»6 1 ‘em...
1
2 Fig. 4, 10- 12 (angeféihr auch Fig. 4, 1'1) ‘
\1 _ 2;
.a\ A;
~ »1
,1‘/ ’
_...3...2_.W
1
1222.2.
'
/
. .2..W,.._.1._ \ /,7,
1,
1
1
1

J’

12.1 Fig. 8.1 _,__W__,_,__,_ W, Z 1

_13.3 »__(ungef.‘ihr Fig. 7, 16) ‘
17__ Fig. 5, 23; 4, 15 Fig. 11. 10-12; 1'1-19 1I i 1. \ 1 11; / / ‘_/ ’
18 Fig. 92. :7-18 1 _.___._.\ . T 1 1/ .....22
_Z2_15_,_ ._ _, Fig '7, 12 1 X ‘Z ,/’/
23 1 Fig. 5, 21 é ijimrijim _V__V_ii ______ i__\ :_i_____ _ {A1, ____11./ ____ 1
25.3 Fig.8, 1 1516171819 20 2122 23 24 25 2s 27 2s 29 so 3
25.5 Fig. 5, I9; 7, E3
25.14 ___ Fig.7,12 ______________
2 Fiir weitere Paralielen vgl. den Beitrag der Verf. zu ,,assyrischen" Schalen in diesem Band
ZOO m 300 H1
1
F4
(s. Anm. 5). Zur Datierung der Schichten mit Paralleifunden in Tille I-Ifiyiik vgl. BLAYLOCK Abb. 1
in diesem Band, S. 272, 269, 267 bzw. der Gmppen von Iurn Kabir EIDEM/ACKBRMANN in
diesem Band, S. 312.

2.:
"- §.::
. g.;':
 . .(,,_,,____,_,__,.,,.,_,___,_____,,__.,..,.,__.._.,,_,.Y H _ _ _,._ , ___,..,, ._,_....__.____.,.____ _ __

332 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell 5/‘lei/Ch H08-F61" 333

_‘:’.~L- ‘ -‘Y-L‘
»- % \ '
*/{L WM -——~
-
»"“**. .
5-,___‘___:_>__ K.
..
f ~ "' ~ “?~@*
!‘..%e;}'i»_»r?§;5
<5-;k‘-/1:: TA ‘__.\,~
1%"
,vg.'.;.;,=.
ii‘
IIIIIIIIII
~ - -¢Fv-Q-_~,H'_=
' if 1';
\&‘:.'=‘§':1t“\
é22*"¢?3_i___1»1j’;2~. --;‘_13:"-F.--"=~._‘- Y‘:
_;..- :_;':. F:“~->:-.:' "'-"'-H.-.'‘.:-1
" ’

1 2

w_
l 2
¢ 1
I e I
"y-Jr | ””~ ‘ up‘ s = '< __.4
~_ .:::§L'?;?_\;;.
H _
4~f‘ 4.?‘-T ‘\- 2%: $1:-.<»’ - .1‘
. ‘ ,,__ _

s
@~~§ 0 .- ,
:-
'€I-5 :53
~-11:» '"' ; ;_. 1-“.
gag. r-- ~~ 1-,_~
' -v.\
@'¥~4-fig.<9 Qgi
$§§
F I-'
-; -
3._ ,5 -2-
-1'». _ 5 ’ 5»:.f -r

‘kw
=
s
. i ' -- PT?‘ ‘i=": '.'-' -_ 7'
=1 22:5 ;,-,.;._/
:,_’-.,;_‘,
éga
Qqfgs
"._
x é "' I:‘5:€' ‘
:~-' ..1~.’" :=Z--. :“~‘-Yr
'. -:1? E ‘Tit; *‘§F -
;=:'.'=:‘-I=. '»1 1;='@* "av »
- .~.=.=‘:' ’ 'v#'>- ' ,
H ‘\ I’

/~,-»-==~r¢=-:~". 5, ' 1:-r"--. -,_ '2;\='}"===-I .,.> _ ' ’ " '”””""

_"~§.- -. .-~: '
. -I 1" .. Q
5 ‘.3.’
5'
-'..,_-“I _.'.’ .1 -
"'‘
'
\-;r~?'€'"'“'”3§$'§-':¢;;'..
"\.\-'~v~:.;; 1‘-_= .-;-,-J-;_.'S.-2:.-1-f:‘*€_,.,
i-———_---
Q’ '=--
1’_-1 7. .--1 "-'-
-.
"D .2» A =;.
mg$1 ‘ ", -‘fling-.'_
J *--‘:9 - .'
-§;.'.'.'§ »- * . -_ - -,, A '-i .'~*-'~
,_ = -'--
- ->'¢.r~='
I-_. ~a .-..4.._.
'*';!-»=‘=: ‘-
- ;2- A -r,-'~:-=_man:,;1.'_: _' e.-‘aw. .' ' . -._ ,."-- —_.,'.....= - '.
\1
. $3-.‘a
.--,. 1 '.-735?";
-:;§= :--a ' '-11 .‘ -.-‘.3 "' -»~ -' ~ ~ - i$’=,;.- 4:"
‘ - ',‘ .=- ’
_ "..'__ ’.' - ‘ - _-u -, ‘ ' .,.. ..
'2 ~&- _ ..-¢- 4 ~ ' -5 5-1“:-1> - .1 v‘- -fé -_'..:~_. *‘ '\ I fr“ - \ ._\
_
¢' *9'“
.51I .- ’ '\.~ ~;_> ‘X ,.
.‘
.2":
T-». < ~ -~---~ -3.§-1F~5"‘
-H . '-“‘:4- ..\,.
":2.
.-. - ..-.-'-
‘.'."~i1:,‘-,4’2,0
‘:».»=~*
._~
7 ~ “Q-'-."_-‘_3., , <
-a .+ .4’:-,*.'
$2.“. -=.'~'-.-.. "V\'
u‘-,=-.-rm-..
'T>
‘ -"1
\1 : 1 ". -
5:v
-,. _.j
- ~‘v.
‘J->1 5_'_‘_,_.\_¢_.H
av“
>-'3
.,\_‘
-\ _ Y. I,‘-I,‘
*2 .v=_.;"-'-.';5:::{;.- _-5:“; ' “w:=~‘$‘ v}:;:\*i';i:,‘;w;".='-’.-E;-.1:
,_3 1 riyfiz-:~;'_;j~;_~_,;_:::_,_“:»,
" * V . -.'. - 1.-r-1“ r- ~‘...>"-"r.'<'-' _.»-"
. .5¢..‘;, ‘1~36154»
___, _
31’ ‘;’-'.' .
_4
___: . ‘~..'_1A.._‘. .
‘ .1». _- W .,,,
T;-'"‘.,"-!-x»; -u -§¢-5‘-3;‘-,-3'/I
1:;-_.",-A¢:’;T1
_;.‘--.=.-':-
I q,_ -} Kr".
+ ‘:5 Y
._
._
1

' C“ E-“ ' "'>-‘I-“-$2‘”'\l'. '

- 'l.?§;_.;r1

5
i lull "’i"f,___;r"" 1___ "'1" '4 1 4
f :
‘I

'. "M1! _ is? Bilkent University

. fibmv
1 "7" * . .v V _ .,
* 7 '*:<*********'**.. ,v _—v <"""""*T’*’ " V -I :r"**-I******1****** " ——
I z _ , . . _ . .,>, ...
-,;...>.... ... . -

\
 . . - -,.V,_-. . ..-.<..-__-..__... .. . . ___ ,, __ ___ . ( .'hwMM~44 lhl l"~»IMMhfl M0 .,

334 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell Sheikh H0880-H 335

1%
(( & 1
\ / 3 .
O

\
1

2
-.

% 3 / 3
(
2

? 4
4

2 l -
,1 Z1 ’ (I
l
5
L? { { ( W
1

[ /
$\ L

x ' 6
3

~.

4 1

Abb. 5
Abb. 4

Ii. a W n~’"": an **** " x _ 77 _

"""""""""’ \ ~~ """””’ W , ' . .v V _ """""""" 'v

__ __ h _v _ , ._ z, z»
"“"""*"*-* '* *'''*''*' "'* " " "W " " " ~

336 On the Euphrates and to the West ’ Tell Sheikh Hassan 337

/1 1 1
7 ll

__ ,’

- f

‘ 1 2

3 4 .

8 ee 1 7%
K I ./ 5 6
\ iv E
1 .

___........,-—--;

. 1 ‘ ’

” 1
2 \% 1 b.7
4
. ? Abb. 6
I' s:
i ~.
I. 2.1.
~ ?
E §*
' i
Z1

\
 V - -... .. ._.-,---.----.~.—~-~-- .. ..~¢-V ,,,,,, ., “.“...._____.__.._.m...¢......

\
338

13

IllOn the Euphrates and to the West

____ ___, 7 MVW

I

15
Tell Sheikh Hassan

v-.

i l

1 , ‘
__ 3 I

Q 2
|
J
ix
3

Ii

I , 3 ‘\
5J
I , '
2 16

I ______
,1

}
3
14 3 l

A’ ______ I i \

~ l 2

Abb. 8 Abb. 9
!
5
2
2
2
l

‘bun-um-u-i---a-1--— """"""""" K W -—-I {I e ; ,- "*"r fwfir******i" '71;-”

 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell Sheikh Hassan 341

» ‘\ \

\ 3 4

f%WM\
5 6
/
A
3 \
t\
\\

rfii W
18 V 7

->v~»4>-\_m<
1
1 , \\ '

T
n 2 \ \

l 2

ii
w
3
ii
.
1‘

\ l9
I
§
I

\ I
V, 1 _V ._ 2 .
~ \ 3 4
Abb. 11
Abb. 10

ii
W _ — __ — * * ** _ _V V _ V _ V V V Vi-_V_ VVV__ _*****‘| — V *i:T *:<:.:"*
..-W...» F . ‘..,._,..--._.._-.-,-.--w.---- - M10" M ....._....,........ __

342 Oh the Euphrates and to the West 5 Tell Sheikh Hassan 343

2l

£\,
E
i
|
||
i
|
E

F11 W
‘ 1
:
i
ETC 3 4

mme__--~._~_LmE

5 ' 6 ‘‘

. 1 2

3 r

\
3,? 7. 3
i I 7, 4

4
\
\

2O

*
J
\
\
5

Abb. 12
3 |
M We 1 2

Abb.13
2 2‘

**************W’ i * **:’1"'*""' "’""""""" "j""""i"i*ij":""""'""'"1"*"""*T"""""i""**ir'"=-:»+'- -V-<-":::"'KW _

. ‘V 5 V V .
 -- _-1_---W-_=_.___._.___._____________________..w~_~m____~_..m..~.1.. . . . .1 :-fl-w~~v “M _
Z l‘

344 On the Euphrates and to the West Tell Shaikh Hassan 345

25 26

| x

1 k 2 1 2

3 4
3
5:1? 4

.-‘~»m.¢_- 1:.-_
5 T’ 37' \ \
\

,I 5 1 @111 5
_. .

6
\.

.'/
1

,8\f‘ 9‘ ‘ION
, \\

: ‘I
’ 12 " '

\
\
fij 5::%_*(

I
%;V2T
14 N
3
_ 9
“(:3

10
1

" 16 '3'

~ 1
flit Abb. 14
-
l8
-- 1 11
1‘-*>*>~ 15

l i 7 '77” 7' 7 . 1 ~.
. ~.I=l~i '
_ , . = . .. 7" , *7’"""""""""""""""1******"Y*****5** *****"~11 rfsrv-"_1:*<:_W __~
 _ -1

!
346 Oh the Euphrates and to the West

27 28 ,,Assyrische“ Schalen ans Te}! Shaikh Hassan (Syrian) und ihre

Stellung innerhalb der Keramik des assyrischen Einflufigebietes

ELLEN SCHNEIDER
1
Neunkirchen
I

1
Innerhalb des eisccnzeitlichen Keramikrepcrtoires aus Tell Shaikh Hassan treten
29 einige Gefaffic auf, die offensichtiich von assyrischen Vorbikdern heeinfluBt sind.‘
1
OQOOOOQ
.> ...
.¢.¢°,.--36. 1’
3O<*1”“'t"'t7 Da sic sich in ihrer Hersteliungstechnik Liberwiegend nicht vom Ilibrigen Repertoire
abheben, darf man annehmen, daB es sich - auch bei den Stticken, die mit den
assyrischen Vorbildern identisch sind - um lokale Nachahmungen handelt.

Die Gefiifitypen
Von den sechs verschicdencn Formtypcn, bei dencn cine assyrische Beeinflussung
sicher oder zumindest sehr wahrscheinlich ist, sind die sog. ,,Knickwandschaien“
besonders signifikant. Diese warden hie: a1s'Typen Aa~Ac bezeichnet (Abb. 1 und
2)? Bei den meist eher klcinen Gefaiifien ist cine mehr Oder wcniger hohe,
senkrechte octet ~ iifter ~ ausladende Halspartie dutch cinen ausgepatéigten Umbruch
1 2 von einem Kfirpcr mit gerundeter Oder winklig geknicktcr Wandung abgesetzt.
Dicser Typ wird in der Literatur als Trinkgefaifi angesprochen; er imiiiert
Metallvorbilder, wie sic mehrfach auch im Original crhalten sind?
In Tell Sheikh Hassan gibt es folgencie Varianten: sine tiefe Form mit
bauchigem Kérper und schwach ausiadendcr Randpartie (Typ Aa), eine fiachere
. 32 Form mit mehr odcr weniger gedrungenem Kifirper und starker ausiadender
Randpartie (Typ Ab) und cine mit dieser verwandte Form mit winkligem

i Ich danke A. Hausieiter fiir den frcundlich gewfihrten Einbfick in seine noch
unverfiiffenzlichte Dissertation Chronologische und typologische Untersuchungen zur
neuassyrischeh Keramik im Kemgebiet Assyriens (Miinchen 1996). Zum eisenzeitlichen
Repertoire von Teli Shaikh Hassan insgesamt vgi. den Beitrag der Verf. ,,Die eisenzeitliche
Keramik von Tell Shaikh Hassan (Syrieh)“ in diesem Band S. 325-346.und BOESE 1995: 25,
54f., 60, 91, 110, I13, 117, 132, 160. V
2 Die hier bcsprochenen Schalentypem sind z.T. identisch mit Gcffififormen, die schon im
ersten Beitrag der Verf. (s. Anm. 1) vorgestellt wurden. So entsprechen einander folgcnde
Formen:
Vorliegender Beitrag iVEV1fs§Ver BVeiVtVrVagV VV V
TX? Aa131(5t2P-,11_1_____ 1 T3/P 3 L5 (AW 7)
TX]? Ab 2 (Abb. 1) TX}; 11.6 (Abb. 7)
Tip AC 3 (Abb. 2) Txp 11.3 (Abb. '1') __
(TY? A9 31(1A1bb-?),_,,____1 _T¥E_11f*lAbb~ 7l___
1 1, Typ AC 10 (Abb. Z) Typ 11.2 (Abb. 7)

,1 ‘*%J‘e4"u
Typ Ad 5 (Abb._3V) V V V 'VI‘VypV 7) V
lxpg 4 (Abb. 5) Typ 10.1 (Abb. 6)
Typ E (Abb. 5) E Typ 2.1 (Abb. 4) _
TYP F (/’\bb- @171 1 it TYP 4: ?(A1*>F*‘ 5),”,
i Abb. 16 3 Vgl. 2:.B. HAMILTON 1966; 221

-| -W _ it e~—:=— K — W — " * V" , ; _- ’*F'"-"";'—'I —— *— "I

.._._.__ ........ . I w. ., ....,,iM..»».»».».~-r,z»M-.-.-W--~----W--~_--,-V .-._. . __ .- ~ iiw-M____~_
1 >3,
348 On the Euphrates and to the West
Wandungsverlauf (Typ Ac). Dieser letzte Typ ist besonders haufig. Typ Ab tritt
dagegen sehr selten emf; er scheint eine Zwischenstellung zwischen Typ Aa und Ac
einzunehmen. Die besonders charakteristische Form Ab 1 ist sogar nur einrnal
vertreten; auch ihre Riefenverzierung ist singular.
l
Besonders interessant ist das Vorkommen von Gefafien, die zwar in der Form wie
l
auch in Griilie und Wandungsstiirke von den Knickwandschalen des Typs Aa~Ac
abweichen, jedoch ganz offensichtlich von ihnen beeinflufit sind (Typ Ad: Abb. 2
und 3). S0 stehen die Typen Ad 1 und Ad 2 (Abb. 2) in deutlicher Beziehung zum
Typ Ac.
Sehr vie] seitener belegt als die Knickwandschaien sind die néichsten beiden
assyrisch beeinflufiten GefaBtypen. Alle in Tell Sheikh Hassan geborgenen
Exempiare sind abgebildet. Insgesamt nur in drei Beispielen nachgewiesen ist eine
g1'0Be Schale mit ausgepréigter Lippe, die vom leicht einziehenden Rand aus schrég
1
nach unten absinkt; eine umlaufende Einziehung zwischen Rand und Lippe
unterstreicht die Giiederung (Typ B: Abb. 4). Vqn diesen, hier als
,,Riefenrandschaien“ bezeichneten Gefeifien kommt die Variante B 1 dem
assyrischen Vorbild am nachsten, B 2 und B 3 weichcn schon stéirker von diesem
ab.
Einc grofie Variabilitéit zeigen Schalen mit einem unterhalb des Randes
umlaufenden, kréiftigen Grat, hier als ,,Gratrandschalen“ bezeichnet (Typ C: Abb.
4). Hie: scheint das Gefafi C 3 den Stiicken aus assyrischen Fundorten am
ahniichsten.
Identisch mit assyrischen Exemplaren ist eine Schaie mit verdicktem, leicht
i I, ausladenden Rand und darunter umlaufender Kehle (Typ D 1: Abb. 5). Von ihr
scheinen die jeweils als Einzeisiiicke auftretenden Gefafie D 2-6 in der Fonngebung
beeinflufit. '
Bei den Eetzten beiden bier zu besprechenden Formen ist assyrischer Binflufi
zumindest sehr wahrscheinlich. Die recht dickwandigen Schalen des Typs E weisen
einen kraftig verdickten Rand auf; darunter zieht sich die Wandung his zu einem
mehr oder weniger ausgepriigten Knick hin leicht ein (Abb. 5). Dieser Typ ist in
Tell Sheikh Hassan in mehreren Beispieien vertreten. Die Durchrnesser variieren
zwischen 35 und 38 cm, ausnahmsweise begegnet sugar ein Durchmesser von 44
cm.
Mi: Abstand am héiufigsten kommen die sog. ,,Faltrandschaien“ vor (Typ F: Abb.
6-7). Dieser Typ weist hinsichtiich der Ausbildung des Randes eine Vielzahl von
Varianten auf. Das Spektrum reicht von deutlich abgesetzten Faltrandern fiber
solche, bei denen der iiberhangende Rand nur noch sehr diinn ist, bis hin zu
solchen, die kaum noch unterschnitten sind. Besonders auffailend sind die
Exemplare mit einer Kehle unterhalb des Randes (Abb. 6.3-4). Der Durchmesser
l bewegt sich meist zwischen 30 und 35 cm, nur sehr selten erreicht er 40 cm.
Vereinzeit treten kleinere, aber in der Forrngebung ganz iibereinstimmende Gefaifie
auf.
,,Assyrische“ Schalen aus TeZlShe1'kh Hassan 349
Die Herstellungsweise
Alle Gefaiffie - auBer den feineren Knickwandschalen - fiigen sich ganz in das Biid
der eisenzeitlichen Keramik von ‘Tell Sheikh Hassan ein. Der Ton ist mittelfein,
meist sandgemagert und recht hart gebrannt. Orangebraune Féirbung des Tons naeh
dem Brand iiberwiegt, dabei tragen die rneisten Gefafie einen heller orangebraunen,
bis ins gelblichbraune spielenden ,,Self Slip“.
Die diinnwandigen Knickwandschalen zeichnen sich durch einen sehr reinen,
meist nur mit Sand, selten noch zuséitzlich mit wenigen feinen Kalkpartikeln
gemagerten Ton aus. Der Ton ist im Vergleich zu den andcren Schalentypen éfter
heiler orangebraun oder gelbbraun geféirbt; bei einigen zeigt auch die Oberllache
heliere Nuancen.
Wéihrend die Oberfiiiche der gréfieren und grdberen Schalentypen meist einfach
verstrichen ist, zeigen die feinen Knickwandschalen héiufiger cine mehr oder
weniger sorgfaltige Glattung; in einigen Fallen lragt die Oberfléiche cine - meist
unregelméifiig horizontal verlaufende - Strichpoiitur. Bemerkenswert ist die mit
braunen Streifen bemalte Scha-ie vom Typ Ac (Abb. 2.5), und dies umso mehr, als
in Tell Sheikh Hassan bemalte Keramik der Eisenzeit iiberhaupl sehr selten
vorkommt. Daher ist es auch schwer zu beiirteiien, ob eine solche Bemalung eine
lokale Eigenheit darstellt.
Ansonsten hebt sich nur die kieine Gratrandschaie C 3 von den anderen ab; ihr
feiner Ton ist intensiv orangefarben und tragt einen Uberzug in noch etwas
kraftigerem Orange; zudem zeichnet sie sich durch eine hochgléinzende Politur aus.
Der Fundkontext
Einige der vorgestellten Gefalfie stammen aus stratigraphisch gcsichertem
Fundkontext. S0 kommen Faitrandschaien des Typs F 1 aus einem eisenzeitlichen
Hans nahe der Stadtmauer im Osten des Tells. Sie fanden sich dort fiber einem
Steinpfiaster in einer durch jiingere Schuttschichten versiegelten Fundstelle.“
Die Knickwandschalen Ac 1 und Ad 3 starnmen aus dam Auffiillschuit
zwischen der éiltesten Begehungsfléiche des Hilani und der Unterkante des
I Fundamems. Sie lagen in der Nordosiecke des Raums III auf dam Fufiboden. Dieser
Funcikontext iegt die Annahme _nahe, daffi diese Geféilie bei der Auffiillung
zumindest nicht allzuweit vorn ursptiingiichen Aufbewahrungsort entfernt wurden.
Einige Geféifie fanden sich auch an Stellen, we Rests von Begehungsflachen
I
I Oder sogar Teile von originalen‘Installationen erhalten waren, wie etwa die
Pflasterung und die Wasserrinne in Raum V7
S0 lag ein Exemplar des Schalentyps E unterhalb der Wasserrinne; die
Fundstelle ist nach unten hin dutch eine urukzeitliche Begehungsfléiche begrenzt.
i Die Knickwandschale Ad 10 fand sich zwischen einer éilteren eisenzeitlichen
Begehungsfléiciie und einer ebenfalls eisenzeitlichen Installation unbekannter
Funktion. Die Faltrandschale F 3 kommt aus einer Fundstelle unterhalb einer
jiingeren Begehungsfiéiche in Raum IV, im Bereich des Durchgangs zu Raum V.
“ Vgl. B0555 1995; 2351*.
E
i
3 Vgl. B0555 1995; 133.
I
. _A_A____‘ A . , r,_,_,_,.. _ . __ ___ _ _ __ ___._ ___. --___”-~..¢.._______._.¢..1...._...

l
351) On the Euphrates and to the West ,,Assyrische“ Schalen aux Tell Shaikh Hassan 351

Mehr ais die Héilfte der hier vorgestellten Keramik stammt jedoeh aus Die Knickwandschalen des Typs Ac:
Zusammenhéingen, die keinen geschlossenen baulichen Befunden zuzuweisen bzw. Kllirbet Qasrij “_____1_______ CURTIS 1989:7i=ig, 31-140 L ____ W 1
stark gestort sind. Die meisten Gefaffie wurden in dern Schuttmaterial gefunden, mit Tell Halaf finoum 1962; Taf. 61.168 ____ _____________Z1
dem das Hiiani aufgeftillt wurde.° Tail Tu an 12"""" MAZZON1 199221: 153, Fig. 25. 9 Livello 7
2
Einige Stiicke sind zwar nicht siratifizien, kommen abet aus Fundstcllen mit rein l Tell Anti“ _11{1.{\2ZoN1 199211: 175, Fig. 8.? 7 W Livello 2 ”
eisenzeitliciiem Material. Da die eisenzeitlichen Schichten in Tell Sheikh Hassan *Z111¢11>1i A l _\_1g1~iLuscuk11~r88189*43i* Taf. 24a, 1< *7
Haniagw FUGMANN 1958; Fig. 1ss.sB414 2” "1§?{11i%1Eii1*i”"
unmittelbar solche der Urukzeit tiberlagern, sind daneben auch Gefiifie aus
Fundstellen von Bedeutung, bei denen die eisenzeitliche mit urukzeitlicher
Tall Damkks 8 OLDENBURG/R01-IWEDER 1981: Fig. 31. 209
Karalioyiik ozcuc/ozcuc 1949: Lev. XXXIL22; Lev. Z
Keramjk vermischt ist. Beispiele hierfiir sind die Knickwandschalen Ac 2, Ac 10, 1 1.xx.1v.1s
Ad 1, Ad 2, Ad 3 und Ad 6, die Riefenrandschalc B 1, die Gratrandschalen C 1 N<>5§_9_nI1l@.9@ HAUPTMANN 1969/70: Abb. 22. 6
und C 2, einige Schalen des Typs E und die Faltrandschalen F 5 und F 7. Tarsus A115 GOLDMAN 1963: Fig. 131.909; ,,MldcHe1ron Age“
Fig. 138.1244; ,,Sixth Century"
Fig. 131.879; "Middle lron Age"
Die Vergleichsfunde Fig.
' 143 . 1322 ______ ____________ "Sixth Century“
Die Identifikation der Geféifitypen aus Tell Sheikh Hassan als assyrisch - bzw. der . Ti11§l1‘?Ylil€ FRENCH l9881>;.R@4- 5-.4-6. . ___
Sarnariam CROWFOOTICROWFOOT/KBNYON 1957:
Nachweis einer assyrischen Beeinflussung - ermoglicht der typologische Vergleich Fig. 10.10; Period V1
mit Stiicken ans gesichert assyrischem Fundkontext. Daher stehen bei der Fig. 11.23; Period VII
folgenden tabellarischen Aufzéihiung Orte, in denen ein solcher Kontext gegeben Aa5 Fig. 10.9; Period VI 1
ist, jeweils am Anfang.7 Paralleien im Fonnenrepertoire des syrischen Raums Fig. 12.14; Period VIII
RE1sNeRlF1s1 YON 19247;?I_=15."156.(
________..__._1ER_/I~_._____ _ 721721-c 7
finden sich selten; dies ist aber wohl weitgehend dutch die Porschungslage Tell Gazer" *1 G1'!‘iN 1990: Pl. 45.20; "Iron 11“
bedingt.8 Mit unserem Materiai iibereinstimmende Gef2iBtypen flnden sich A92______ 3 Pl. 27.20-21 Stratum VA
auiierdem in Fundorten, die fiber einen sehr weiten geographischen Bereich Tel} en~Nasbeh Aa 2 §cARso:~1 WAMPLER 1947; H. 53.1166;
verstreut sind, von Siidostanatolien fiber Nordmesopotamien und Iran bis nach Aa 5 1P1. 53.1163 1191 _
Jerusalem“ A113 FRANKEN/S:1'E1NER 1990: Figr ’2.~21B.149; 6- ’15l1:.§$e'2 8
Paiastina? ja sogar bis zum persischen Golf. Mehr oder minder abgewandelte, abea" 46 R .
sichtlich noch eng verwandte Fonnen treten im urartéiischen Kulturraum auf. Dali an-<;1as1“’ WAH Aa2&6 STERNl982:Fig.1161inl<s *8?’””:2: 7 8
sich einige der Gefaifitypen ~ in entwickeiter Form - aucii noch bis weit fiber die . G635_____________________._ PETRIE 1928: P1. LXV.1~2
neuassyrische Zeit hinaus fortsetzen, belegen Funds aus aciiamenidenzeitlichen V HorvatQi1mitm A BEIT-ARIEH 1991: Fig. 15.2-4
Zusammenhangen. A .1 fUmm
e11.¢1-Iel»‘Ala
<11e1e1f¢h2‘ . PRATICO 1993; Pl. 26.6-s WW
Das proportionaie Ubergewicht der Vergieichsfunde in ?a1éistir1a erklan sich LINDNER eta}. 1990: Fig. E2.4 __,___ ___
daraus, dafl dori; eine sehr hohe Anzabl eisenzeitiicher Siedlungen, vor aiiern 1 Heshbon LUGENBEAL/SAUER 1972: 1>1.v.26a-270,213
grofierer Stiidte, erforscht ist; dabei bieten insbesondere die jiingeren Grabungen Tflwilan? ______,, B':3NNE’1‘I‘ 1984: Fig. 3.803
Baba 3211123 Aafi c1o1=1= 1985: Fig. 2.50-5; W. j
gute Anhaltspunkte fiir die chronoiogische Einordnung. Durch die Verbindung mit
datierbaren Funden aus anderen Orten, insbesondere innerhaib des assyrischen
ll
Gebiets selbst, 1éiBt sich der Zeiiraum der Verbreitnng unserer "fypen anger Vgl. CURTIS 1989: 48; zur Datierung von Khirbet Qasrij allgernein ibid.: 51f. und
e1ngrenzen.‘° BERNBECK 1993: 117.
I2 Vgi. MAZZON1 1992211 I08, 115.
. '1‘ Vgl. MAzz0N1 19922»; 157a, 166. 1 *1
'4 Vgl. Tabelie bei FUGMANN 1958: 278: 849-845 v. Chr.
'5 Das Geffifi weist auch Merkmale des Typs Ab auf.
K’ Zur Datierung von Samaria vgl. TAPPY 1992: 253 (Tabeile); er datiert Periode 6 732»
722/1 v. C1111, Periods 7 722/1-700 v. Chr. und Periode 8 700~650 v. Chr.; FORSBERG 1995:
‘49 stellt allerdings die vom Zerstomngshoiizont von 722/1 v. Chr. abhiingige Datierung in
Frags; er 112111 cine Datierung der Periods V1 noch bis 670 v. Chr. fiir moglich.
6 Vgl. BOESE 1995: 218, Abb. 4; zur vorléiufigen Datierung des Hilani ibid.: 90, 112, 117. ” Iron 11c, 1.-6. Jh. v. cm.
7 In der folgenden Tabeile sind enge Farallelen kursiv, entferntere (in Klammem) gesetzt; ‘B Vg1.FRANK.EN/STEINER 1990: 24.
bei Ahnlichkeil mit einer bestimmten Typvariante ist dlese hinter dem Fundort eigens *9 Vgl. smm 1982; 95; 6.4. 111. v. cm.
-. angegeben. 2“ Vgl. B1211-Ameu 1991; 1061.; 41¢ Keramik datiert ins 7. und 6. Jh. v. cm.
~.
8 Vg1.BOEsE 1995153. 2‘ Vgl. Pmmco 1993; 50; die Keramik datiert bier ins s.-6.111. v. cm.
9 Vgi. Wezwear 1988: 647f. 22 Diese Gefafi steht stellvertretend fiir die in diesem Gebiet recht hfiufig vorkommenden
'° Vg1.LE}~1MANN 1998, 28, Fig. 14. bemalten Knickwandschalen.

—' * _ A _ _ Qua _ __ V _. 1 1 V '?—~

-1
. ........._.,..~..»...~_-F....,.-_.._....__.__....__._.....-......_..___..._...._. _ _ ...

352 on the Euphrates and to the West ,,Assyrische" Schalen aus Tell Shaikh Hassan 353

Pasargadae S'1"RONACi1,D. 1978: Fig. 106.1-3, 6-8; Die Mischform zwischen den Typen Ab und Ac”
;Aa5 Fig. E067; "r1-=1,11"111111r_ I Haoum 1962; Taf.§_1.__169 V
‘A113 Fig. 106.9.- LUNDQUIST 1983; Fig.6.2-3 iiiiiiiiiiiiiW M __ 1 __ _W_
Fig. 106.10 1T9ilQ9r<11g?________ Q
Bmirain“ HQJLUND/ANDERSEN ‘£994: u.a. Fig. 1159 Period 1Vd 1 Tabara el-Akrad ‘ __________V__1-100151959:Fig._1_1_.26 ' __ _
Aa 5 ‘Fig. 1021; Period We "1~a,S,,s3"5 Ab 2/Ac 1 001091411 1963; Fig. 120.312; .,Early Iron Age“
Aa 4 Fig. 'i022»1023; Period We A133/Ac 1 Fig. 131.987; "Middle Iron Age“ ‘
Aa 2 Fig. 1027; Period We I Ab 3lAc 1 Fig. 138.1259; ..Sixth Century“ ‘
Fig. 1020 _____ . Period We __ .F1g. 143.1350 _ _ ,_____________ ..Sixth Century“ l
Hw,,,$9 Ab 3/A01 11411114 @1111. 1961;1>1.ccv111.30 smlruagix fiwi
Die Knickwandschalen des Typs Ab 1211 144141113’ I 1 BRIEND/HvMBERT19%9= PL 37-11 *8
111199"
-1.411¢1.14...a11_1_4,;?_F __ ___ CHAMBON 198410-61-11______________ _______,_ V119
Ninive I CAMPBELL THOMPSON/MAILOWAN 1 Tag en-Nasbeh I Ab 1__ _, , ___ _CARs0N WAMPLER 1947: Pl. 54.1 196 _____ V ___ _, _,
1
1933: Pi. 1.x_x1/1.16 ’.1erus_z?1lerr1V Z FRANKEN/S]‘EIl\I§1f\V19r90Z fig. 6-57.11 I ______
Nimrod 11151531954: Pl. Xxx11.2”;1>1. xxxv11.74af‘f ’'7
l ‘ Tell Y0qne‘:u'n39 \ BEN-TORIPORTUGALI/AVISSAR 1983: Pig. \ Stratum 9 \
Zincirli W 8 von LUSCHAN 1943: 1211. 2511-1 10.3
Siaparz-I _fi 1512,11/11991-:11 ed. 19s0{P1{ iijii” Lachishw i ”””””””" ;ru1=~E11. 1953; 14.31.92 *1.<1¢111~.100:1 , ,
Mzllatya _______ Ab__1_ & 2 PECORELLA 1975; Fig. 3.23 92110.45?, I , ,,,1 991111990:P1117-53,), ._,_ _ M9119“ ‘
Till_*1_IfIi_i_)_'m<___ __ __ _ _ 51>} N c11I988b : Res,. 64 .7rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrriii is Teliel-Kheleifeh ,1 PRATIC01993:Pl.26.18 ., ___
Karahoyiik (§zo0g10z011<;1949: 114. X.XXV.9 ‘ .1-Iirbeiei-1;;@‘_ WOR$CHECH1990I A9031 _ __________________________ __
Samarian CROWFOOT/CROWFOOT/KENYON 1957: Fah1i;,:n'42' ‘ ATARA81TL[71“1O7RI'U1SHI 19632 P1. X)/1.1m i
Fig. 11.15, 17; Period VI
lI..urista.n *****is W SCHMIDT/VANLOON/CURvEii§1,989: P1. 1360.1
Fig. 13.10; E 207
‘ Ab2 Fig. 32.3; Period VII _______. _q . -_ _-.--.._
Fig. 18.9; E 207 9.1.1.4119 ,,,,,,,,,,,is ]H9§_wM>/ANDERSEN19941191951.026, Peflodlvc .
1 ___ _1f_ig. 32.4 Period V11
.4 rre11e1_1=a,-ah<1\1)*T Ab 3 01411196111984;1>1.61.1_2,9-10 VIIB

1;
,.TeIIen~Nasbeli
s.1¢1;4~a° 7 is ,41;_1______
>9»? 19614304419 we
c4aso11WKM1>1.sR194"/;1>1.53.115<s
9 . 1 Gem 22,. . Perm 2928: P1. LXV.3 I 5;;
ii
. Teil ei-Kheleifeh Piomco 1993{1>iI”2s.9-i2. 14-17; 91.5714-5.
' 1 _ ___ 11

. ," . _ 3 888888888888W Srkomcn.

. D. 1978: Fig’._:1;0'§_._1’2~i3.’ 16"" *****if
.ga1,m,n Ab2 H1aJ1.UN1>/AN1>1eRsENI994:F1g. 10l9;Fig. Period IVd
1160;
1 A133 Fig.1150-1257 Period!)/d ”

ii
1
991-1.9991991?’ WW1» 191*=119;§ij j"* 7 33 Bei Gefiifien aus mehreren Fundorzen ist eirie ,,\/ermischung“ von Nierkmalen des Typs
Ab mit solchen des Typs Ac noch deutlicher. Daher werden diese Beispiele bier unter einer
eigenen Rubrik erfafit.
l 3" \/gl.LUNDQU1S‘1' 1983: 276f.-, vgl. LE’-IHMANN 1996: Taf. 18, Form 94/3; er datiert die Form
1.l 1.1 Vgi.GoF1= 1985: 5; die Keramik datiert wohi ins 6. oder 5. ih. v. Chr. in den Zeitraum der Assernblagen 1~3, d.h. ca. 8. bis Mitte 7. Ih. v. Chrx, vgl. auch die Liste
1° Vgl. HIZHLUND/ANDERSEN E994: 229; Period We ist aciifimenidisch, 1Vd weiterer Paralielen, vor aiiem aus ”I'e1_E,Afis ibid.: 378, wobei aiierdings einige schon eher
spiitachiimenidisch; vgi. ibid.: 297, Fig. 1712 (chronologische Tabelle) und ibid.: 214, wo unserem Typ Ac bzw. sogar dem 'I‘yp‘Ad entsprechen.
HQULUND Vergleichsfunde aus achiimenidischer und postachiimenidiseher Zeit, aber auch die 35 Zur Probiematik der fiir die Datierung entscheidend wichtigen ,,Zerst6rungsschich£" vgl.
Geféilie des 7. Jh. v. Chr. aus Nimrud und aus Fort Shalmaneser aus der Zeit um 600 v. Chr. Foasseao 1995: 5Iff.; vgl. auch LEHMANN 1996: 262. Die Damierung des ,,Assyrian Level“
erwiihnt. wird durch ihn alierdings bestdiigt; das Material ist zeitgieich mit seinen Assembiagen 3-4,
1% 75 Um 700 v. Chr.: der Typ sol] jedoch bis ca. 750 v. Chr. zuriiclcgehen. datiert also zwischen 650 und 580 v. Chr.
1 2° Sargonzeitlich. ' 36 Vgi. TAPPY 1992; 253; ca. 925-sao v. cm.
27 Das Gefiifi ist ein Beispiel fiir die in Mesopotarnien abgewandelien Fonnen. 3’ Vgl. Hu~111m19s1¢ Fig. 1: kurz vor 700 v. cm.
1 28 Vgl. Anm. 23. Die Fundstelie E 207 datiert nach FORSBERG 1995, 49 wohi in die Zeit 3*‘ Vg1.CHAMBON1934I 12 (Tabel1e): 7.111. v. C111.
1 nach 722 v. Chr., Period VII 1autTAP1>Y I992: 253 etwa 722/1~700 v. Chr. 3° Spiites s. bis 7.111. v. Chi‘.
29 Vg1.C1~IAMBON1984Z 12 (Tabelle): 7.111. v. Chr. “° Vgl. Es1~1e1./PRAG eds. 1995; 58¢ 710-640 v. cm.
3° 8.-7. Jh. v. cm. 4' Das Gefiifi ist wahrscheiniich rnit Standfufl zu erganzen; 7.~6. Ih. v. Chr.
3‘ Vgi. HQJLUND/ANDERSEN 1994: Fig. 1712: spazachamenidisch. 42 Die Verwandschaft mit den fiir dieses Gebiet typischen Tricbterrandschaien ist
i 32 An diesem Gefafi zeigen sich — ebenso wie bei den letztgenannien aus Bahrein - auch
Merkmale des Typs Ac.
offensichtlich.
4’ Vgl.HoJLUND/AND£RsEN1994: Fig. 1712; achtimenidisch.

ill ' W "D 7 W" 1 .;

M...-...~e-“,...,..,...... - ',,“¢_.,~. . . _,. .._._......_._.._.__._.___. 7“ _-9...,......................_,.......e.._M....~...M.....

354 On the Euphrates and 1'0 the West ,,/issyrische “ Schalen aus Tell Sheikh Hassan 355

Die Knickwancischalen des Typs Ac“ vcrwandt.” Ein Beispiel emspricht unsercm Typ Ab 1,5“ zwei weitere
korrespondieren mit unserem Typ Ab 3.“ Bin zmderes Eihnelt dem Typ Ac.“
("Fell H616? ,1 A _______Q ( ( ( 7” (moves 1962; 11111. 61110 ”””‘A (((”
jiorsun Tfi_p_¢_________ _ H»§_u1*rMA1~r1~1 1969/70: Abbfii.4 1 ((((((((" Nach Mooney erscheinen Knickwandschalen wie die bier beschriebenen sait
_1Y£=1l==I>'==1 Ac 8 & IQ 1 §?g<;0RE1»£KT§v5: Pig. 3.20-22 is 7:17“ A _ Tigiatpiieser III. (745-727 v. Chr.);59 im 7. Ih. gehfiiren sic zum Standardrepertoire
2
<
. Imamoéiu _____ __ 7 777777W OKSE1992: Abb._3.$3-85 der Keramik. Mit diesen vergleichbare Stiicke finden sich auch in Persepolis;
1 Twsus _ _. GQLDMAN 1963;_1=_1_g. 120j§”1‘i""” ‘,,Ear_ly Iron Ag6*’*""* éihniichc Geféiffie sind auf den Apadana-Reliefs abgcbildet. Achéimcnidenzeitiich
(151q;_<_>;f ‘ _ mom et =11. 1961; 1>1. 1.11/.7 A Stratum 1?” sind auch Bronzeschalen mit horizontalen Ricfen, einer Verzierung, wie sie
\ Jeneho“ _ _( ( 1 KENYONeta1. 1965¢*1?1g.* 256.17 656 WH1 ****** 9’ vergleichbar an einem Tongefeifi des Typs Ab aus Tali Shaikh I-Iassan aufiritt (Abb.
1 AS6666“ DOTHAN/PORATH 1982; Fig. 26."1;§”"'7 Stratum 7 6”" 1.1).
H0w=11Qi1mi1 _1 Ac 2 _ , B1an~A1>.11§1iiEi§?; Fig. 15.1 W 7 77 Bronzeschalen, die unserem Typ Aa entsprechen, wurden in
Zemkm-i 48 if ijléom-.1611 1967; 580, Abb. s/4 is 7” "
1 §1lvim=w 1 ________W achéimenidenzeitlichen Gréibern gefunden, so z.B. in Khan Ibsan oder Sichem.‘"
1
-. I Godin Togo“ __ ( cumez YOUNG 1969; Fig. 44.18 ”””””" Eventueli sogar aus der Zeit nach Alexander stamrnen GeffiBe aus T011 el-
50%!_____.__ 1 ______._1‘_J.r2 M1R0sc111a1:>11 1999778: Fig. 55.i1’m"’”” 7 Mashkuta, von dencn eines ebenfalls unserem Typ Aa éihneit.“
Paisargadaesu *__ Srxenfiéi, 1). 1978: Fig. 106.1749 ‘‘‘‘‘‘‘" Genuin assyrischc Formcn, mit denen unserc Typen Ab 2 bzw. Ab 3
_I<:pe Yahya“ A Ac 92 8559 A LAMBER6-KARLOVSKY 19'70:WFig. 813””””””””” “W iibereinstimmen, finderi sich auch unter Vergleichsstiicken, die R.W. Hamilton in
(705359? A W i __ _l§ROLL’l 976} T’;/5 Ti i i W """""""
Verahram _ __ rrrrrrrr 1q{dLff976; Abb_6_35 ii" ” ’ seiner Besprechung einer Siiberschale aus dam Ashmoican Museum hcranzieht.”
oifushvn ._ .__._;§gv&8 T-\RHAN1995i,;_Fig__. 103.2% " is (((((" _ ****is Bin unseren Typen Ab 2 bzw. Ac 1 éihnelndes Br0nzegeffiB stammt aus einem Grab
im Nordwestpalast von Nimfud, das in die Zeit Sargons II. datiert.“ Laut Hamilton
Vergleichsbeispiele fzir die Knickwandschaien des Typs Aa-Ac aus Metal! waren Formen wie diese im 2. und 3. Viertci des 1. Iahrtausends v. Chi". héiufig,
ihre Verbreitung reicht von Anatolian bis Persian. in Assyrian sind sic vor aiiem
Zu einigen der in Tell Shaikh Hassan vertretenen Knickwandschalen des Typs Aa-
im ietzten Jahrhundert des Reiches belegt. Bin sehr fihniiches Stiick wurde in
Ac haben sich auch entsprcchende Vorbiicier in Metal} erhalten. Basonders guts:
Zincirli entdeckt.“
Paraiielcn kommen aus dem Gréiberfcid von Deve I-Itiyiik.” S0 gicichen dort einige
Bin diesen beidcn entsprcchendes Geféifi aus Ton wurde in Nimrud zusammen
Gefaifie unserem Typ Aa 5,“ ein weiteres erscheint zumindest mit diesem
mit anderen Formen der sog. ,,Palace Ware“ in einer Aschcschicht gefunden, die
nach Hamilton von der Zerstbrung des Jahres 614 v. Chr. herriihrt.“ Auf Reliefs
aus dem Paiast Assurbanipais in Ninivc ist cine ganz éihniiche Form abgebildet.“
4“ Zwei Knickwandschafien des Typs Ac sind bei LEHMANN E996: Taf. 1'7, Form 89c2 Ftir die bier besprochenen Geféifie nimmt Hamiiton cine Entstehung im
(=unser Typ Ac 2) und Form 8903 (»Ac 10) erfafit. Er éatiert beide in die Zeit der Zeitraum ,,zwischen der Regierung Sargons II. und dam Bade Ninives“ an.“
Assemblagen 1-3, d.h. 8. Jh.~650 v. Chi‘. (mit Maaerial der Assemblage 8. 360-330 v. Chr.,
vermischt). Form 8901, aus T1211 Rifa‘at, datiert in die Zeit der Assembiagen 1~2, (1.11. wohl Ftir die Verbreitung von mit unsemm Typ Ab vcrwandten Bronzeschalen aufierhalb
ins 8. Jh. v. Chr. Bin Verglcichsstiick aus T611 Cudeyde datiert in die Zeit der Assemblagen des assyrischen Gebiets soilen Beispieie aus Ras Shamra und Nippur stehenz“ das
6~7, d.h. ca. 540-360 v. Ch1'.; vgl. ibid.: 377; 87, Tab. 4.9 und schiiefilich Anm. 71 in diesem ietzte Geféifi entspricht sogar ziemiich genau nnsercm Typ Ab 3.69
Beitrag (s.u.).
ll
It Z Vg1.TAPPY 1992: 253: 765-732 v. Chr.
1 47 Vg1.Esm~3L/PRAGeds. 1995: 62, Table 9: 698-ca. 650 v. Chr. 55 Meow 19s0¢z=1g.6.101.
i
‘11: Vgl. DO'1‘HAN/PORAT1-I 1982: 153: evemueii vor 640 v. Chr. 5‘ 1\/10011611 1980: Fig. 6.110.
135
‘ii
11‘. 43 Parallalen existieren in Ziwiye und Nimrud: vgl. die viei schiirfer profilierten Formcn aus I
5” Meow 1930: Fig. 6.1027103. , ~,
1| Ziwiye (Bowman 1967: 580. Abb. 8 B-G oder CUYLER Your~1(1 1965: Fig. 3~I1): das hier 5*‘ MOOREY 1980; Fig. 6.89. A
%lJfg€fi.ihI‘[6 Beispici datiert in die Zeit zwischen 720 und 700 v. Chr. 5” Vgl. M00111-;Y 1980; 31.
P Dag Material datiert in die Zcit von der Mine des 8. Jh. v. Chr. bis in die achéimenidische 6° AM:RAr~1 1972; STERN 1980 nennt Paralleien aus Til Barsip, aus persischen Gnibern, die
1 eno c. unter Bautcn vom Ends des 4. Jh. v. Chr. liegen.
if snzonion, 1). 1918: Fig. 106.18-19 sind bcmalt; wohl 66611 280 v. Cm. 6‘ DUMBR1-ILL 1971: Fig. 4.
1. Die achéimenidische "Cream-Bowl“ wird in Periods II (Mitts bis spines l. Jt. v. Chr.) ‘*2 HAMILTON 1966.
eingeordnet. 6“ Hinmen 1966; 2, Fig. 11>.
52 Mit Schwerpunkt im 8. Jh. v. Chr.; Paralleien findcn sich auch u.a. in Nirnrud und 6“ HAMILTON 1996: 3, Fig. 2a; vgl. vow LUSCHAN 1943: Taf. 566: ,,aus der Zeit vor 670 v.
Norsun Tape. C1112“
4
53 Mommy 1980; KLENGEL—BRANDT 1990: 134 datiert Gréberfeld I in die Zeit zwischen 750 1
6’ 11/11/111161»: 1966; 3, Fig. 36 (vgi. MALLOWAN 1966; 50, Fig. 13)
6
und 550 v. Chr., Griiberfeid H in die Zen zwischcn 550 und 330 v. Chr.; diesem letzteren 66 HAMILTON 1966: 4, Anm. 11; ibid.: 5, Fig. Sc Zeigt ein Gefaifi von einem Relief
ordnct sic clie Bronzeschaien zu. Tiglatpilesers III. in Nimrud, Fig. 56 éihnliche Beispielc aus Persepoiis.
5“ Meow 1980; Fig. 6.104-:06. 103. 67 HAMILTON 1966: 7.

1
f
 356 on the Euph,-mes and to the Wes; ,,Assyrische" Schalen aus Tell Sheik/1 Hassan
357

Die Km}:/cwandschalen des Typs Ad 7Eg§9BO;;§3* WKL1WW1WWWL£?ZWW.'2 §sc111§4W11W)'r :9W5W7W§W151W.W1§W9IW8 WWWW rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrWW W
1 1:611 '{‘g}qg|';7U j Ad 1 &"li” . MA2z01~11 199211; 153, Fig. 25.1; Livello 7 menu“ A118 11<1¥<>1iJi*§76:Typ 131 7********WW" 1 WW W W
_ 1 119, Fig. 23.6 ____,_,_ ___N , _ _ 11161166,, Sangar 116611 1976:/11>1».3.s TWWWWWW W 99999999 1
_'l"g_b_z1ra e1-Akrad ‘ Ari_5 856 H001) 1951 ' 11 . 29
. __7__7__:_F1g. _____ W
61-Minna ___ Ad5&6 __DUPLATTAYLOR_§959:¥<'ig.6.36
r
lg, 7134 i_ B1160 19711; P1. x1v.1W1""* WStratum {V Die Riefenrandschalen (Typ B)
Alisa: A63 & 4 vow nizngsraw 1937: Pig.'45l.39 1_ W Tell ¢.1:11;66 B 1 __ 137111/'I“_LW1W<§_W1<§§W/W1i§1W<1%¥SW€5t~1W1W93W9WrW WIW’WiWéW§W?<’>W-13 _1 _ __1
Wl\7EW:1Wl§itya _ _ W A09 _”1__PE(Lj_QRELLA 1975:7_l¢igV.V3_.;_lr4 WWWWWW ___ _ NW Nimrud/F011 B 1 OATES, J. 1959: Pl. XXXVJ2
1 i2§gim1gn[gpg72 ‘ Ad 3 & 4 GKSE 19881 Nr. 7l6 1 $116-191911.993’ . -- . ..
1 11,11 1<Big5”,”,73” W_7§e719*s Bnirgwo/Hub/1BEW1§‘I‘1980:VPl. 28.3;29j121"W ‘N11/ea11*4 Suitantfipfi ____7 Ltoyo7§e1§e519s3;Fig...6"<=-71.22
Megiddo _ 1/169 1__I._7§.11_/101§1/WSWWi11Pr01~11939r§§g.26W§58 s1;;1m}i1‘W1v-111 Akm iqmim 1B1 ALGAZE/BREUNINGERIKNUDSTADT I994: Fig.
Teiifiezeyfi WWWWAdI&2 0171111990; Pl.22.7; 291 _
. P1.22.8 Nip_pur ____ 1 (M66661/ni=~Es11*9671;*165161117) ___,,1_____ , WWWWWWWWWWWWW
‘Ten en-Nasbeli 3 Ad 4W CARs0NWW}5.M1>1Ea19<17:W1>l.W§§.W1l64; W Megiddo W (LX15101~1/S11t1*r0N191£9;_P1.23-8) , ,1,_§§r51!3;nIlI~IWWWWWWWWWW
A1110 P1. 53.1162
;¢,,,$a;,.,,,,'5_7 Ad1&2 B94131/PRA6Weds. 1,995;1=1g.4W[3 Cavei Die Grarranclschalen (Typ C)
Asliggtlifi Ad1&2 D0"I‘t1»\r~:fP9R»~'r1119823WWFi:.26.4-5 WWWWW W Km-Tulgil 11 - “W WWWWDlTTl\71Al~lWt~lWetWW0lW.WlWQ8: Abb. 7; 1.751
1
1q,;,b,,1.,1-M§a§"W A08 W F1111-z71§*.»zWm1iis”iZ119s.};r61.164.7»s”””WW}" ..15ooA§W<£W11" Ninumt
1 K6666; 18 Adl&2 M/tZAR1995:Fig. 13.11 WWWWWW Assur 1 HALLER 1954: Taf. 66:1-ac; ak; Miows 1987:
Marjumeh J
1761,11 ,,;-;»;|,e|&;;,,;,"@‘_ A118 1 PRATICO 1993: Pl. 27.15-17; ______ 1 ,,411§=1»_:1:/Ass. 11191195.“ .........
1 C3 HROUDA 1962: Taf. 61.156, (154)
Pl. 211.199 __ .Ag,g_Geb,,,11 W1 C4 BfiRNBE,C](19Q31Abb_€l£t1,WlWW 7 ssssss mo
;Tiran. .....___,
en-Nggib __ 1WlWAWiOR$C1g.3t3l-I1W9W9()WW:WAW1)l>.9.45 _ WWWWWWW WWWW1WW,,1§isenzeizlIB-C“
1f'asargz1ciae fifi_;WAd7WVW ‘ST1§QNA§1lr,DiWWl978:135,106.20 WW WW §§1_1_§h¢i1<111»1;1|11=1d g_777777777777 W1iW1W'11i1~:£W1W9W:3WZ115§WW/\W671,3
1;WE>W. _____________________________ 1
q~@i1_A;,,. ;>m,,,e9 T 1.69.6101 1983; P1. 14.3, Pl. 105.1 Asaigge
A1-M1116” 1 .DvPLA'§E»9T1<9R‘195§W=WWF’i§lW5l9WWWWWWWWW
‘S SCI-iAf.-3i=FER 1935: Fig. 7, no. 6238; MCCOWN/HAINES 1967: PI. 56.5. 11,2091 , c :1 ‘YADEN 6161. 19ss=1>1.1.x111.11; Stratum V
69 Fiir weitere Beispiele, auch aus Paitistina, vgl. LE1-IMANN 1996: 457f. und Taf. 91; seine . c2 ‘YADIN 61111. 1960; 9:. xcv11§.2s; Stratum IV
Formen 488 und 492 entsprechen etwa unserem Typ A21, Form 486 unserem Typ Ab. Die ‘ C2&5 YADEN et al. 1958: Pl. I..XXvlI.22; Stratum 111
Formen 488 und 492 sind zur Zeit der Assemblagen 6-7 bekegt, also ca. 540-360 v. Chr., die ; C5 ‘Ymtu et al. 1961: Pl. CCXXX2; Stratum V A
Form 486 zur Zeit der Assembiagen 3-6, d.h. ca. .700-440 v. Chr. Zur Entstehung der 1 YADIN 6161. 1958: P1. 1.1v.14-15 Stratum V
1
Knickwandbronzeschalen allgemein aus Vorléufern des 2. Jt. »v. Chr. vgl. Howfis SMITH
1986; der dort Fig. 3 abgebilclete Typ 2 E-I, der mit unserem Typ Ab/Ac verwandt ist, und 8" Vor 280 v. Chr.
der Typ 2 F-I, der eher unset-em Typ A21 entspricht, ktinnte in Syi-ien entwickelt worclen sein 2“ ,,P0st-achaemeriian“? Hier handelt es sich wiederum um die charakteristische tiefere und
(ibid.: 55). Der ,,assyrische“ Typ 2 H, der genau unserem Typ Ab 2/3 entspricht, erscheint Schfirfer profilierte Form.
ab dem Ende des 8. Jh. v. Chr. (ibid; 49). Zu den Nachfolgern der ZiCl11i1'I16I11(.l1SCl1€:11 Zeit 82 Schwerpunkt im 8. Jh. v. Chr.
vgl. AB1<A’I—KHA\/ARI 1988. 33 Squatter occupation; vgl. LEHMANN 1996: Taf. 9, Form 56/2, aus der Zeit der Assemblage
’° Vg1.MA7.ZONl 199211; 103, 115. 4, d.h. ca. 650-580 v. Chr. .
" Ca. 760-740 v.Cl1r.; vgl. auch 1.11111/1711111 1996; 269; 66$ Beispiei 66$ Tyros ist 661 ihm @116 84 Vgl. L}3l'£MANN 1996: Taf. 9, Form 56/1; ftir weitere Belege, die aiierciings nur z.T. mit
Form 92/ 1 erfa13t, vgl. ibid.: 3771‘. und Taf. 18; Form 92/3, aus Tell Afis, datiert in die Zeit unserem Typ iibereinstimmen, vgl. ibid.:.369.
der Assemblage I, also ins 8. 3h. v. Chr. Das gleiche gilt fiir die weitercn dort aufgefiihrten *5 Flir 616 Eintréige 616566 Funclorts vgll-nun C.SC1~lM£D1‘ in diesem Band, s. 6690.
Parztllelen aus Tell Afis, Qatzilhiiyiik, Tell Cudeyde, Tell Mastuma und Tell Tuqan. Der 8° Das Gefiifi wird fiber Vcrgleichsstiicke aus den spiitassyrischen Grébern eingeordnet.
ebenfalls abgebiidete Typ 94/3, aus Tell Qarqur, cntspricht dagegen eher unserem Typ Ac. 87 Der Fundort, das sog. ,,assyrische Hans“, datieri nach LEHMANN 1996: 147 in die Zeit der
Wiederum mit unserem Typ Ad verwanclt - insbesondere mit den Typen Ad 1 und Ad 2 - ist Assemblage 4, d.h. ca. 650-580 v. Chr.
die bei ihm als Form 108/1 erfaBte Schale aus Tell Rifa‘at (vgl. ibid; 380 und Taf. 20, aus *8 Vgl. BERNBECK 2993; 112.7216. 52; 120; s. und 7.1670111. _ I
der Zeit der Assemblage 1). 8" Die Beispiele sind 661 11311011111 1996: Taf. 19 61$ Formen 9972 und 99/4 6116111; vgl. 1616.;
72 Vgl. CKSE 1988: 291., 1 17-119; aus einem Grab wohl assyrischen Typs. 99; sic werden in die Zeit der Assemblage 1 datiert, d.h. wohl ms 8. Jh. v. Chr. (vermischt
.1 9 Vgl. HuMBt31z'r 1981; Fig. 11 1. 1-161116 7.111. v.Chr. mit Material der Assernblagen 2-3 und sogar 6~8). I _ _
1 1“ Vgl.G1TlN 1990; 198: letztcs Vicrtel des s. .111. v. cm. 9° Das Geféili ist bei LEHMANN 1996: Taf. 19 als Form als 99/ 1 erfaBt; vgl. lb1(.1.I 99; es wird
9 Vgl. Esme/P116 66$. 1995; 62, Table 9; 1. 1461116 7. 11>. v. cm. in die Zeit der Assemblagen 2-3 datiert, 11.11. ca. 720 - Mitre des 7. J11. v. Chr. Die ftir Form
-1
7“ 7.111.‘/.c111». 99 allgemein angefiihrte Parallels aus Hazor datiert in die Zeit tier Assemblagen 3-4, d.h.
5. 7’ Vgl. FR11"z/Kempmsiu 1983: 129 700-580 v. Chr.
1 7* Unter 1\/16161161661 Zeit um 722 v. cm. 9' Stratum V wird von TA1>;>Y 1992: 253 in die Zeit von 765 bis 732 v. Chr. datiert, Stratum
"'° Vgl. P166166 199:1; 43. IV 722/1-650 v. Chr. und Stratum 111 650-587 v. Chr.

1 ___ i _ _ if f if i firm iiffim I If t _,__, ___ _4...

 358 On the Euphrates and to the West ,,Assyrische “ Schalen aus Tell Shaikh Hassan 359

Megigdo” C2 LAMON/SHKPTON 1939: Pl. 23.6, 9 Stratum III-1 -Anaim W1. KIL1.1c1<
. 19811 : Fig . E99
8.1 6 . R4 76:71) P11.w¢969
' 99 9 9
V VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV§V3W&5V _ 7 7KEME_’jNSKl I989: Anhang Taf. B 1 _ ___________________________________________ 9A1<m§ i-Earabe 1 ALcAi1*]1£§1li§1Y5:E91:L€i1!K1~1U|>9
******9 s1"»\1t>1" 1994: Fig9 19
2.9 L
A1;,n;ep¢m SUMMERS 1993b; Fig. 5.11 5 99999 9
Dretfuflschalen mit dhnlicher Randbildunggg
;re11.§n-Nasbeh 1cARsps9vY§1»111.sR 19419151. 85.1324; 13391 19 9 99 999999999999999999999999999
1<11.1..Qa.111??..| 999999___1cuRm1989.Pi9i@@5Jm11"15s 5. .5 1em§.;@...{94 jjjjW 19319911916618. 199:.1=1g?15:1f1*v:"19>ss s s
Nimrud/F011 1 |OA'rzs, I. 1959; P1. xxxv.15-16 Ram 11.11.5110‘ 99 **********999}&11»111o1::1964;1**1g.17.6 ‘Stratum VA 99 999
, Shzflmaneser
Die Falrrandschalen (Typ F)'°6
; Die Schalerz mil‘ verdicktem Rand und Kehle (Typ D) Te1i99a]~1-Iaxiaa 1 F 4 & F 12 91%}1i;£JT£ié91<91§11/w1L1<1~so1~1 1929; Fig. 215. 15-
91193511-1 <:1111=‘” 991951 cums1989:1991-4;Pig.8.1569999 9999****99 . 16
1D5 Fig.7.8; 991<111@1;;_Q;1_=1ij@ 777777777777777777777777 gfgkrls15§991*i§.928.93-96 99 99 99 H (
" ______ 19.... Fig. 1.5-1 9 Nimrud/‘F011 F4 O/1'rss.J. 1959. Pl. XXXVI. 35
. Khggpgq(((( H ._§yRT1s 1989rFig-25-43914.46 ,,,,,,,,,,W1. . _,.,.._____.., Shalmanes er ,N H rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrif i
1 AM 1DI §999991?§5= T==f-.61». W9. Kar»9Tu1<ulli- Dr1"1"1/111111: et al. 1983; Abb. 7; 1.691 1
; 91511591-.Hawa ‘__ __________1BAufruc1<2R/w1u<1Ns0N1989:5926-4 .91”,______ Ninurra
f1"¢11 Fecherijegs D Q_____________W 19>-NFOR 195181311? 39-47" 77777777777777777777777777777777"_ ‘Sultantepems 999999991l1.oYn/09<5i<9<§é91953: Fig (=1): 1446. 18.9 9999999999999999999999999999999
20
1 Tell 11111111 _ 01 1HROUDA 1962; Taf. 61.1111 _ 1 ~;.,111;..1¢,f*<*’ 91~1Rou1>11 1962; Taf. 53.10 99999999
. 1,>.g;g-(;e1,ie§’1 1: 1 BERNBECK 1993: Abb. 9991959 9 99 Phase 9 ‘
5 1 D2&3 Abb. 94:1; Phase C T611 ‘Agagfll "’ MAIIMOUD 91 al. 1923: Abb. 6a
( ; 1) 5 _____.__._ Abb. 91;: _______W Phase A 'Agig-(}@1;1e1m BBRNBECK 1993: Abb. 95a-e, m, 0; Phase C
1611 Am?“ 7 1596 _? *1_f1g;A1.1»1»\1=~ 1919311. 46-20 9 9 ._g9*I919...Phas¢6 Abb. 965-11; Phase B & c
N(){§1_1|1 "igpe HAUPTMANN 1976:Vf11;1;. §(6.3 ( _,_______ 1 .4911. 961; Phase B
. :1f;{§;1;§M W 1 ____gQ1_1)MAN 19631Fig_ 133,764 _,_,_1§/fiddle Iron Age" _ Abb. 991-n ________________________________ Phase A _____7_ _
Akeas Harabe D959 9 9 3 ALGAZE/BREUMNGER/KNUDSTADT 19999l¥:9991=91g. 9*****9 Tell 11%;‘ *2
___” , 1 PFKLZNER
1 1990; Abb.______________________________________
H __________,___ 29, =1 bzw. f-g __ 9 9
___ __
%29K __ q~,,11.1_hma,'T3 i y1{1¢.1~1ww.11199o;1=1g.52.12
1 $1QP1.??W((( DEMEYERH1-19801 P1, 911.5-1 _ ‘ T611 Abu pawl“ LEBEAU1983: P1.XX11:BL 27 A6&A5

_ Die Schalen mit verdicktem Rand und Wandungsknick {Typ E) 101

Hier ergeben sich Hinweise auf einen vieileicht schon spiitbronzezeitlichcn Beginn
~,.<.-M
1‘ Tei19&LiIi19.19};:19999999 9 9””””99 99l§Iq~119,919;/9’9§11¢919<121</w11.1§1_1§1_s_Q1~;_1989;Fig. 26. 10********999999”””””””””””””””””99 dieser Form.
Kar-Tu1§g1:i- Dl'l'1‘MANNeIal. 1988: Abb.l4: 1.101; 16: "'2 Vgi. KILLICK 1988: 55: 9. bis Mine 8.111. v. Chr.
._1\I_i_r_11_1rga W _____W 1-1111 bZW- 331 1-1131 _______________T,,,,,,,,,,,, '03 ,,Ac1'1aemenid“.
QQu¢jq.(j@{)i¢;]9m 1v1».~mms 1511. 1(9s_1;1=1g. 2:29.19iiiiiiiW 1 1°‘ Vgi. ESHEL/PRAG eds. 1995: 62, Tabie 9: erstc Hiilfte des 7. J11. v. Chr.
‘"5 Vgl. Esusz./PRA6 eds. 1995; 62, Table 9; 597-586 v. cm».
“)6 Faitrancischalen sind nicht nur sehr weit verbreitet, sondern auch in <Een einzelnen
Fundorten iiberaus hiiufig. Daher kann bei der bier foigenden Aufziihlung noch wcniger als
92
LAMON/SHIPTON 1939: P1. 23.12 zeigt cine bcmaite Variante. bei den anderen Typen Vollstéindigkeiterreicht warden.
93 Eng mit den Gratrancischalen verwandt sinci Gefific mit fast gieichartig ausgebildetem 1°’ Nach Cumxs 1929; 47 erscheint der Typ in Nimrud im spiiten 7.111. 111111 friiher, 519:1
1 Rand, die jcdoch statt einer Standfiéichc oder eines Standrings drei F1131: aufweisen. Diescr auch in postassyrischer Zeit; aus Suitantcpe kommen spéitassyrischc Parallclen. Vcrwancice
1 Typ ist bei LEHMANN 1996: Taf. 31 als Form 187 erfafit; vgl. ibid.: 395; die unten Formen siehz er auch in Sfidmesopotaxhien in spfitbabyionischer und achiimcnidischer Zeit,
1 aufgefiihrten Beispiele datiert Lehmzmn in die Zeit der Assemblage 4, d.h. ca. 650-580 v. so 2.13. in Der, Nippur und Uruk. Die Fortsetzung der Typen in achéimenidischer Zeit zeige
Chr., weitere bei ihm erwiihntc Paralleien in die Zeit der Assemblagen 2 und 3, d.h. 720- sich dariiber hinaus in persischen Fundorten wie Nus-i Jan (,,Median Level“), Baba Jan und
650 v. Chr. Hasanlu; vgl. auch LEHMANN 1996: Taf. 10, Form 59/14.
1“ Vg1.CUR'1‘IS1989:48. “)3 Vgl. LEHMANN 1996: 369. Hier existieren neben vergleichbaren Gefiifien auch soiche, die
. 95 Vgl.CuR'r1s1989: 17. von unseren Typen abweichcn.
96 Das Geffifi ist schwarz poliert. '09 Das Geffifi ist vergleichswcise stark abgewandelt.
99' VgI.BERN13ECK 1993: 112; Phase A wird ins 9. Jh., Phase B ins 8. 311. und Phase C ins 7. "° Das Beispiel weicht wieder etwas .-11>.
Jh. v. Chr. bzw. cianach datiert. ‘“ Aus cien Phasen A-C, also 9.-7. Jh. v. cm. bzw. danach; wieder zeig{ $1011 das Phiinomen
1 9* Vg1.LEHMANN 1996: 55: 9.1115 Mitts 8.111. v. cm. des Nebeneinanders sehr fihnlicher und stark abweichender Typen.
1 1 99 Das Beispiel wirci in die spéitbabylonische Zeit daticrt. Es steht hier stellvertretend fiir die “Z Die Geféific rcpréisenticren eng verwandte and von unseren verschiedene Typen.
~
Geféifie aus Mesopotamian, bei denen sich zumindest noch Nachwirkungen unseres Typs D "3 Bei w1<;1~11~1v1,111 1990 sind Fig. 52 und 51 vertauscht.
zeigen;Para11e1entretenin Ur, Uruk und Nippur auf. 1“ Vgl. auch LEI-{MANN 1996; Taf. 9, Form 59/2 aus der 2611561 Assemblage 5 (ca. 5110-540
“)0 Die Keramik wurde hier fiber Formen aus der ,,squatter occupation“ von Nimrud datiert. v. Chr.), sowie ibid; Taf. 10, Form 59/6 aus der Zeit der Assemblagen 6-7 (ca. 540-360 v.

_
- . ________ _ _______ _, _ _ a‘ ,,._,_,,.._,,,_> __ _ V _ " l’ _ _
1
.1; 1 ——— V _—————_—_:—_— > — _ _____ _ _
 ill

.- _. , .,-=,

360 On the Euphrates and to the West .,Assyrische “ Schalen aus Tell Sheikh Hassan 361

12.11.1211 9999999999999999999999999999999 vow sea 05919999919957E99Ff§I9li5i5i?ii1%999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 9j£;}119g{-;{j91§11{”‘99999 999999999999999999999 12011121196101-.<15.199s;Feg.14.1,4-6.70-15. Cave!

11§6m1;;sy1i1< __ __ 02c;U¢lO21GU¢1949:Lev.LXX1V.2 . _____________________._ ___ __ 17-M12522 __________________________________________________________________
Nor,-,,,n 1696115 3 HAUPTMANN 1969/70; Abb. 21.2; 22.1 Mesad m NAVEH I962: Fig.4.15; (Fig. 4.11-13)
26117952166121999999991 99
IW1i§1£119so1~1991990;9Fig9.91§209,99Nr9.9299 9 9999999999 99999999999999 999 I-lashavyahu
> TNSUSH6 GQLDMAN 1963; Fig_12()_2']0; 9999* 9999999999999999999999999999999* 1 Tiffli Yfihllfiifl §9/01 Fi9g. 419-20 77999999999999999 99
__ __ Fig,122_413.4i9_4g0 ,,1v11<1<11e1m Age“ ‘R;.m=.1R;1h¢1‘” Amazon: 1962E91=19g9.9921§922-27 9 9 9999
Sammam (NQRTHEDGEIFALKNER 1937; pig 913) ‘ ‘ _ 1 AHARONI 1964:_Fig. 16.37-40 Stratum VA _________
Siam 555*55"15bE1(I5E§,ER ed’ 19%, PL mm 1 Khlrbexzzébu et- MAZAR 1982: Fig. 13.1-3
\
Nippur 9999999“i\?1EE6i171?:71l1X191l1i§91996iY91519i89.91319979918 9 9 ..?7W9i9. . . .
. I , ,,,,,,’__ GEBSON et 211. 1978: Fig. 65.7-8, I4 Khirbe: no 911219/1.2719119 i9999S9i99F9i§.9919£9§9.929i99 9 9 9 99 99999999999999 99 9
I1};{,}911*9 999999999 Ymm 61111. 1958:1>1.1.111.16;1>1.1.x111.7, 12 1/1611111111.-=11
P1. 1.xv1.16 Stratum v uchishm 'I'UFNELL 1953; P1. 80.73; 101.626, 636, 644 9 999999999
1 mam et 61. 1960; P1. xc11.19 Stratum VA 21111-1091 1990; Fig. 4.16-18, 21
1 1 ___ _X§Qf_Ij1_1=j_§~l_;__l__9__¢§_i_I__§’_l;_§_C_3_>Q§?<_-679/____ ....-.9mwmy...............,__ T9119-Hesi 99 9999 9 1Pmre1891:P¢. v1.14
Megiddo LAMON/SHIPTON 1939: Pl.25.64 Szratum IV-I 1336, S 1.3611592 99 Al-1ARON1©d.197' 3 ;P1.590.99,9i29.91§91&9999 ‘195511111111 999
....Tm. __.. _ H 7_7____ 1<x~:giP11~:sK1 1989: Anhang Taf. B13-14 10.-06aai91§295555555 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9991=1£1?29/1<991;-919v?1>11~I£:91& 19s3TTE11.99196i1§,9192112199999999 55;;i;a.mge11-- 1
1 135111 Shag JAMES 1966' Fi 68 9-11 Level IV Tel] e1_1<1,,.,1e;f.,-1,153?" P1011100 1993; P1. 34.7-8; P1. 35.1, =1-5
1 1 gammqam 999999997§§i§1~11afii§§r19.121z/LYo1§i919921i£91519.154.18
CR0\vF00T/C;z0111'1=00T/KENYQN 1957; Fig.
551911 5
.D“"T“
5 9 TUSHINGHAM
5 55 55Fig. 5L62-64
19721 5 95 9 9 5 5
GQd1nTep3 .35_ . ___ _ Cumaa YOUNG/LEV1NEI969:F1g.44.5
Q 1

W___ 11,2, 4, 6 1 Stratum VII

‘
Sh]-LQT1 _ BU1{§J1\I1EL3gN1969;P1_ 19153 0 99 9 99 §_§l1§:i,_-1,9???“ _,$?I¥?9NAC11- 3- 1,9731 1*9ig.-.6-9- 11,13 __ 1
Baba Jan GOFF 1985: Fig. 2.1-1, 26‘, 4.10 I
Be1he9i9m9 9 1 5KEi-$0_1_9f§_1_If1_-f3-%'{-’___ _, ___ ‘ 1,1mm,‘310 W if 10101.1. 19"/6; Typ 32 & 35
jgyighgm KENYON/HOLLAND 298i:99I9=9i9g99i9999599.939()9 1 9
i i et 1965; f31g._Q.§6.l4 ______ Grab WH 1 ,.11;.%%B§}??......... i i i i i i i i i i iBMRE 1969: Hg. 8 W
j T51] Ggzgfud ‘ GITIN I990: Pl. 24.5; Pl. 27.24 0.... 1 s615;65515992z51¢1gi521i21>2;*5555555 5555555555555555555555555555555555555
‘Fell en-Nasbeh ‘ cmzsou WAMPLER1947: P1. 52.1919299999999999 9 TushP;f“° 9 TARHAN 1994: Fig. 19.4
1
Wf1j§;1,¢1-p1,1”5
Pl. 57.1310-1311. 1317191. 53.1321, 1344
. S11~:c1.A1R919§49»?5&91519.9 29.15, 9,9517) i&20, 22”;___________________________________W
.B@9§9ifi 1.I1992§9999§<S9&1.%%= P19 911-915;’ P99<><"‘/11
E25
Chr.), Form 59/10 aus der Zeit der Assemblage 3 (ca. 700-650 v. Chr.) und Form 59/11, Vgl. ESHEL/PRAG ecis. 1995: 62; Table 9: 597-586 v. Chr.
wieder aus der Zeit der Assembiage 5; die Form 59 wirci allgemein in die Zeit der '25 Vgl. ESHEL/PRAG eds. 1995: 62, Tabie 9: 1. Hiilfte des 7. Jh. v. Chr.; vgi. auch
Assembiagen 1-4, aiso vom 8. Jh. bis 650 v. Chr. datiert, ist abet ,,im '7. Jh. besonders FRANKEN/STEINER 1990: Fig. 6-16.1-3 und 6-57.34, 36-37.
hiiufig“. Zur Diskrepanz der Daten fiir die Phasen Abu Dannes zwischen Lebeau und Tefnin '27 VgI.Esl~1EL/PRAG eds. E995: 62, Table 9: 639-605 v. Chr.
vgl. LEHMANN 1996: 99 sowie MORAND1 BONACOSSI in diesem Band S. 195-I96. Formen '1“ Vgl. A1-1A.RON1 1962; 41 unci AHARONI 1964; 120 sowie E5119./P1010 eds. 1995; 62, Tabie
59/9 und 59/12 sind Beispiele aus Tel] Afis, aus der Zeit der Assemblagen 1-3; vgl. aach 9: 597-586 v. Chr.
z.T. die ibid; 369 zitierten Gef%iBe; LEHMANN datiert ein Beispiei aus Tell Shaikh Hassan in ‘*9 Vgi. 1/1.129111 1982; 103. .
die Zeit der Assembiagen 1-3, also 8. Eh.-650 v. Chr. (vermischt mit Material der 13° Vg1.MAzAR 1995: 101: 8.Jh.,eventue11722 v.C11r.
1 Assemblage 8). 13' Vgi. ZIMHONI 1990: 9: dieser Typ ist vor allem in Schicht III verbreitct, also im 8. Jh. v.
/
» “S Dzis Beispiel weicht wieder etwas stéirker ab. Chr.
‘*5 Aufier GOLDMAN 1963: Fig. 122.420 sind die Gefiifie im Vergleich zu unseren 1” Vgl. 1-1101110111 ed. 1923; 106; 201 0.152111. 26191091.
abgewancieh. 133 I-lier existieren nur stéirker abweichénde Varianten.
1
1
"7 Das Gefiifl ist mit unserem Typ zumindesr verwandt. Die zugehiirige Keramik wird d0IE 134 Die Schalen werden in die Zeit von der Mitre des 9. Jh. bis kurz nach 600 v. Chr. daiiert.
11 mit ciem ,,we1l dated corpus of the end of the seventh century“ aus Nimrud verglichen. Sic siehen stellvertretend fiir andere Gefé8e aus Fundorten in Jordanien, die ebenfa11s
i "8 Vgl. "1"».1>1>v 1992; 255; 265-732 v. cm; 01161; 11161 existieren daneben stiirker sfalrker v09n unseren Typen abweichen.
abweichende Formen, z.B. YADIN ct a1. 1958: P1. LXX1II.30-31; P1. LXXV3 und YADIN ex al. ‘$5 Die folgenden Gefiifie sind exempiarisch fiir die - ebenfalls nur allgemein mit unseren
1960: P1. LXXXL25, 28, aus Stratum VA. Das gieiche Phéiomen tritt auch bei den meisten Typen verwandten - Schalen aus Fundorten in Iran.
anderen Fundorten Paléstinas auf. '36 Die Keramik datiert hier vielleicht noch ins spéte 7., vor allem aber ins 6. und 5. Jh. v.
H9 Vg1.G1TIN 1990: 168: drittes Viertel des 8. Jh. v. Chr. Chr.
”° Vg1.TAPPY 1992; 253; nach 722/1 v. cm. *3’ M11 Schwerpunkt im 2. Jh. v. cm; vgl. 110011 10601.1 19"/6; Abb. 3.12, 18 aus Sangar und
"1 Vgl. B111-11../N1ELsBN 1969; 55; vergieichbar mit Lachish 111, 66.1 701 v. cm. 6111161. ibid; Abb. 6.10, 12, I5, 17-18 aus Verahram sowie das Geféifi aus Bastam K.R01.L 1979: 211,
'22 Vgl. auch die abgewandelten Formen bei KELSO 1968: P1. 62.4, 6. Abb. 6.1: Ende 7.111. v.Chr.
"'3 Vgl. KENYON/HOLLAND 1982: 469 und Esl-n21./PRAO eds. 1995: 62, Table 9: erste Héiifte ‘*8 Vgl. 116611 su~11/ms 1993; Fig. 5.10; ,,a<:haemenid“.
7. Jh. v. Chr. *3’ "1. 111. v. cm.
"9 Spéites 8.1513 6.111. v. Chr.; vgl. emu 1990; 163. W] Vgl.TAm-111.61 1993: 281f.: 7.111. v. Chr.

.., I-~ ' 5 9 99: 90'1"“? ;"

. .. _,___ ___ _
~'.1~.‘A&%H
362 On the Euphrates and to the West
Zusammenfassung
Die aufgeftihrten Vergieichsbeispiele ermoglichen es nicht nur, die in Tell Sheikh
Hassan vorkommenden Typen ,,assyrischer“ bzw. assyrisierender Schalen
chronologisch néiher einzuordnen. Dariiber hinaus ergeben sich allein schon bei der
Betrachtung der Verbreitung der unterschiedlichen Typen einige interessante
Aspekte - unabhangig vom regional sehr unterschiedlichen Forschungsstand.
Formen
S0 faiilt etwa bei den Knickwandschalen die weite Verbreitung des in Tell Sheikh
1-Iassan nur in wenigen Stiicken vertretenen Typs Aa auf. Dieser tritt an mehreren
Fundorten Syriens, Stidostanatoliens, Paléstinas und Irans wie auch in Bahrein auf,
-a‘.-T
in eigentlich assyrischem Gebiet jedoch nur einmal. Dieses Phanomen konnte
allerdings mit seiner moglicherweise relativ spiiten Zeitstellung zusammenhéngen.
Dagegen kommt der Typ Ab aiiein in Nimrod mehrfach vor; von diesem gibt es
in Tell Sheikh Hassan iiberhaupt nur drei Exernplare. Auch S0n$£ scheint der Typ
in Syrien sehr selten, hiiufiger ist er in Anatolien und besonders in Paliistina. In
Syrien ofter vertreten ist ciagegen die ,,Mischfonn“ zwischen den Typen Ab und
Ac, die in Tell Sheikh Hassan in dieser Gestalt gar nicht erscheint. Sie ist abet
El ebenfalis in Nimrud belegt. Vor aiiem verbreitet ist; sie wiederum in Palastina.
Auch an iranischen Fundorten ist ihr Vorkommen zu verzeichnen. Zusammen
mit dem Typ Ab ist diese ,,Misc11form“ mit Abstand am hiiufigsten. Hier zeigt also
der Befund von Tell Sheikh I-Iassan eine gewisse Abweichung.
Besonders auffallig ist das haufige Vorkommen des Typs Ac in Tell Shaikh
Hassan. Er scheint auch sonst in Syrien, wie in Anatolien, héiufig aufzutreten. Auch
im Iran ist er mehrfach beiegt. In Palestine ist er jedoch - vor allem im Vergleich
mit den vorangehenden Typen - seitener. An assyrischen Fundorten fehlt der Typ,
soweit his jetzt festzustellen, sogar ganz. ' iibernommen, um wenigstens cine ungeféihre Orientierung zu ermoglichen. Eine
ll
Geféiifie des Typs Ad sind in fast allen Gebieten verbreitet, aber auch sie
I scheinen an assyrischen Fundorien weitgeiiend zu fehlen.
Die Riefenrandschale (Typ B) ist, nach ihrer Verbreitung zu urteilen, dagegen ein
gennin assyrischer Typ. Bis jetzt erscheint sie néirnlich fast ausschliefilich in
assyrischen bzw. zuminclest stark assyrisch beeinflufiten Orten.
lll Die Gratrandschale (Typ C) ist for assyrische, aber auch » vielleicht mehr noch? -
fiir syrische Fundorte kennzeichnend; sehr hiiufig tritt sie auch in Paléistina auf, so
etwa mehrfach in Hazor.
Die Schale mit verdicktem Rand und Kehie (Typ D) ist in assyrischem Gebiet
mehrmals sicher belegi. In Syrien kommt sie in fast identischer, aber auch in
v
abgewandelter Fonn vor. Vielleicht ist hier der Befund von Tell Sheikh Hassan
repriisentativ. Sonst findet sie sich nur noch in Anatolien.
Die Schale mit verdicktern Rand und Wandungsknick (Typ E) kommt auf
assyrischem Gebiet offenbar nur in Kar—Tukulti-Ninurta vor, W0 der Befuncl, vor
allem die Datierung, nicht ganz eindeutig erscheintm Auch der Beleg auf
“" Vgl. nelnnnn/Avnmnn 1994: Fig. 1112; s.-7. Jh. v. cm.-, die Parallelen aus Nippur
datieren vom 8. bis ins frtihe 6. Jh. v. Chr.
“'2 Vgl. nun die neuen Datierungsvorschliige von C. SCHMlD‘1‘in diesem Band S. 69-70.
e —————————————— * " " * * *
M .. .. ‘A
,,A.s'syrische " Schalen aus Tell Shaikh Hasszm 363
syrischem Gebiet ist nicht ganz gesichert. In Palestine gibt es vor allem
ahgewandelte Formen. Mit den Beispielen aus Tell Sheikh I-Iassan wirklich
tibereinstirnmende Paralielen findet man nur vereinzeit, wie die Stiicke aus Aktae
I-Iarabe und Altzntepe. Damit ergibt sich bis jeizt kein eindeutiges Bild.
Die Faltrandschalen (Typ F) sind in assyrischen Fundorten gut belegt. Auch in den
anderen Gebieten kommen sie mehrfach vor. Besonders oft scheinen sie jedoch, vor
allern im Vergleich zu den anderen Geféifitypen, in Syrien vertreten zu sein. Am
héufigsten sind sie allerdings in Palastina, und dies mit einem so grolien Abstand,
dafi dieses Phiinomen wohl nicht nur auf den dort besseren Forschungsstand
zzlriickgeftihrt werden kann.
Diese Zusammenstellung zeigt, daB an keinem der hier aufgefiihrten Fundorte alle
in Tell Sheikh Hassan repréisentierten Formen vorkommen; soweit bis jetzt
feststellbar, weisen insbesonclere Tell Halaf und Tarsus ein vergleichbares
Spektrum auf. Mehrere Parallelen stammen aus Nirnrud und dem Surveygebiet um
Tell el-Hawa. Von den syrischen Fundorten kommt sonst noch Tell Afis dem
Befund von Tell Sheilch Hassan am néichsten. Unter den Funclorten Paléistinas failt
besonders Tell en—Nasbeh mit seiner Vielzahl von vergleichbaren Stiicken auf.
Ubereinstimmungen zeigen sich aber aueh ~ in geringerem Malfie - mit dem
Repertoire Hazors und Ierusalerns. Die Funde von Bahrein belegen, dali sich diese
Region ~ zurnindest in dem bier behandelten Zusammenhang - offensichtlich an die
nfiher an Assyrien gelegenen Gebiete anschliefien léilit.
Chronologie .
Die Vergleichsfunde geben klare Aufschliisse iiber den Zeitraum, in ciem die
vorgenannten Formen verbreitet waren. Die Zeitangaben in den jeweiligen
Publikationen werden hier, obwohl sie nicht unumstritten sind, zuniichsi
genauere Datierung wie auch Interpretation der Funde in Zusammenhang mit den
regional unterschiedlich ablaufenden historischen Prozessen ist in hohem Mafle
von der imrner noch ausstehenden, detaillierten Bearbeitung vor allem des
I
Materials aus dem syrischen Raum abhéingig. .
Anhaltspunkte fiir die chronologische Stellung der Knickwandschalen des Typs An
bietet z.B. das Stock aus Khirbet Qasrij; es gehort zu jenem Keramikmaterial, das
sich spéitestens in die erste Hiilfte d_e_s~6., vielleicht aber auch noch ins '7. Ih. v. Chr.
einordnen léifit. Das Exemplar aus'Tell Afis stammt aus einer Schicht, die in die
zweite Héilfte des 8. Jh. v. Chr. datiert wird; das Belegstiick aus Hama kommt sogar
aus elem in die Zeit ,,zwis<:hen 859 und 845 v. Chr.“ datierten Batiment I.
Vergieichsbeispiele aus Tarsus werden in die Mittlere Eisenzeit bzw. ins 6. Jh. v.
Chr. datiert.
Bei den Geféilfien aus Samaria liegt eine Datierung zwischen dem Ende des 8.
Jh. und vielleicht dem Anfang des 6. Jh. v. Chr. nahe. Die unserem Typ Aa
entsprechenden Geféilfie aus Gezer werden dort in die Eisenzeit II C, also ins 7. und
6. Jh. v. Chr. datiert. In Jerusalem erscheinen iihnliche Formen in der Zeit um 800
\
v. Chr. Formen wie die von en~Gedi werden ins 6. bis 4. Jh. v. Chr. datiert. Die
Knickwandschale aus Horvat Qitmit findet sich in Zusammenhang mit Keramik
D H. —\ M ._v ‘L T . .:< ._ -v——-—‘ — ~

ii
364 On the Euphrates and to the West
des 7. und 6. Jh. v. Chr. Auch die Paraiielen aus jordanischen Fundorten weisen
auf eine Datierung vom 8. bis ins 6. Jh. v. Chr. bin.
Die Beispieie aus iranisehem Gebiet datieren rneist spater, so etwa das Sttick
aus Baba Jan, das zusammen mit Keramik vor allem aus der Zeit nach dem 7. Jh.
1 v. Chr. gefunden wurde; besonders auffailend ist jedoch die Ubereinstimmung mit
unserem Typ bei einem Stilck aus Pasargadae. In acharnenidische Zeit datieren
7
i4
auch die engen Paralielen aus Bahrein.
Knickwandschalen des Typs Aa scheinen dernzufoige im 8. Jh. v. Chr. entstanden
I zu sein; die Hinweise auf eine Entstehungszeit vielieieht schon gegen Ende des 9.
Jh. v. Chr. sind eher vage. Offensichtlich haben diese Schaien jedoch ihren
Schwerpunkt im 7. Jh.; auch noon im 6. Jh. v. Chr. scheinen sie hiiufig aufzutreten.
l Unseren Gefafien am ahnlichsten sind allerdings solche aus achamenidischer Zeit;
i
|
dies konnte ietztlich auf eine entsprechend spate Datierung der Geftifie aus Tell
Sheikh Hassan binweisen.
Knickwandschalen des Typs Ab werden im assyrischen Kerniand ins 7. Jh. v. Chr.
sowie in nachassyrische Zeit eingeordnet. Beispiele aus Samaria werden in die Zeit
i
von 722 bis 700 v. Chr. bzw. bis 670 v. Chr. datiert. Auch die z.T. sehr ahniichen
l
i
Stticke aus Tell ei~Far‘ai1 (N) stammen vom Ende des 8. Jh. v. Chr. In Teii ei~
Kheieifeh scheinen sie noch im 6. Jh. v. Chr. verbreitet gewesen zu sein. Noch
sichtiioh verwandt sind jecloch auch die Beispieie aus Pasargadae und die
i aclsamenidenzeitiichen Schalen aus Bahrein.
Die ,,Mischform“ zwischen den Typen Ab und Ac wird in Tell Qarqur vom 8. bis
zur Mitte des '7. Jh. v. Chi‘ datiert. Vergleichbare Gefafie kommen in Tarsus sowohl
aus friih- und mitteieisenzeitiichen Zusammenhtingen, aus dem sog. ,,Destruction
Level“ als auch ans Schichten des 6. Jh. v. Chr.
Das Beispiel aus I-Iazor, for das cine Datierung schon um 900 v. Chr. naheiiegt,
ist nur entfernt verwandt. Deutiicher zeigt sich die Verwandtschaft bei Stiicken aus
Tell Keisan aus der Zeit kurz vor 700 v. Chr., Teii ei-Far‘ah (N) aus dem 7. Jh.,
und '§‘ell Yoqne‘arn, wo die Form innerhalb des Fundmateriais aus dem spaten 8.
und 7. Jh. v. Chr. auftritt. In Lachish datiert der Typ wohl zwischen 710 und 640 v.
Chr.
I
Offenbar sind also auch diese Geféilie friihestens gegen Ende des 8., vor aliem
aber im 7. Jh. v. Chr. verbreitet. Wieder sind die Hinweise auf ein noch frtiheres
Datum eher ungewili. Wie schon beim vorangehenden Typ, so zeigen auch bier die
Beispieie aus iranischem Gebiet und ans Bahrein, daB in spaterer Zeit
wahrscheinlich noch cine Weiterentwickiung stattfand.
i
i
Die Knickwandschalen des Typs Ac treten - nach Lehmann - in Syrien
offensichtiich im 8. Jh. v. Chr. auf. Sie scheinen abet noch im 6., eventuell sogar
bis ins 4. Jh. v. Chr. vorzukommen. Wieder besteht der einzige Hinweis auf eine
Entstehung in éilterer Zeit in einem Beispiei aus Tarsus, das aiierdings auch nur
entfernt verwandt ist.
DaB der Typ im 8. Jh. v. Chr. bereits auch in Paltistina verbreitet war, beiegt das
Sttick aus Hazor, das aus dem dritten Viertei des Jahrhunderts stammt. Ein weiteres
Exemplar aus Iericho gehort wohl der ersten Hétlfte des 7. Jh. v. Chr. an. Vielleicht
zwisohen 720 und 700 v. Chr. ciatiert das unserem Typ sehr iihnliche Beispiei vom
Zendan-i Suleiman. Noah einmal beiegen zudem Gefafie aus dem iranisohen Raum
- ».
'—v
,,Assyrische “ Schalen aus Tell Shaikh Hassan 365
die Fortsetzung noch nahe verwandter Formen bis in achamenidische Zeit,
vieiieicht sogar noch dariiber hinaus. Paralleien ftir Typ Ac linden sich nicht
zuietzt auch irn urartaischen Kulturkreis, wo sie vor aiiem im 8. Jh. v. Chr.
verbreitet sind. Tushpa bietet einen Beieg fiir ein Vorkommen auch noch im 7. lib.
v. Chr. Alles in allem zeichnet sich hier ein Schwerpunkt der Verbreitung gegen
Ende des 8.311. und im 7. Jh. v. Chr. ab.
Beispiele fttr Metallvorbilder, die mit unseren Knickwandschaien verwandt sind,
haben sich - nach Ausweis der Befunde in Deve Hiiyiik und der
achalmenidenzeitlichen Bestattungen - vor aliem aus spaterer Zeit erhalten. Moorey
wie auoh Hamilton gehen jedoch von einer Entstehung des Typs bereits im 8. Jh.
aus; die von letzterem angeftihrten Beispiele aus Nimrud, darunter auoh solche aus
Ton, datieren ans Ende des 8. und vor ailem ins 7. Jh. v. Chi“.
Die von Lehmann genannten Beispiele, welche unserem Typ Ab entsprechen,
sind vom 7. Jh. v. Chr. bis in aoharneniclische Zeit verbreitet, diejenigen, die sich
mit dem Typ Aa vergleichen iassen, begegnen vom 6. bis weit ins 4. Jh. v. Chr. Der
bei Howes Smith so bezeichnete ,,assyrische Typ“ erscheint seit dem Ende des 8.
Jh. v. Chr. Letztlich zeichnen sich also atich hier I-Iinweise darattf ab, claB der
flachere Typ friiher datiert als der tiefere, toner zumindest, deli die tiefere Form
(unser Typ Aa) eher - und haufiger - in jtingerer Zeit verbreitet war.
Die Knickwandschalen des Typs Ad datieren nach Ausweis der Funde aus Tell
Tuqan und anderen syrischen Fundorten sowie auoh aus Tyros ins 8. Jh. v. Chr.
Das Beispiei aus Gezer stammt aus dem letzten Viertel des Iahrhunderts, das Stiick
aus Khirbet Marjameh aus der Zeit um 722 v. Chr. In Tell Keisan und Jerusalem
sind die entsprechenden Formen im 7. Jh. v. Chr. beiegt. Auch diese Typen
kommen jedoch noch in achamenidischer Zeit vor. Die urarttiischen Beispieie
haben dagegen ihren Schwerpunkt wiederum im 8. Jh. v. Chr.
Der Typ Ad erscheint also schon recht friih, er entwickeit sich offensichtlich
parallel zu den Knickwandschaien des Typs Aa-Ac. Dies konnte als ein Hinweis
darauf gewertet Werden, daB die Formgebung des Typs Ad, der ja wie von den
anderen Typen ,,abgeieitet“ erscheint, schon von Anfang an sehr stark von diesen
beeinfiufit wurde. Vielleicht ist dieses Nebeneinander ,,echter“ und abgewandelter
Knickwandschaien aber auch daciurch crklarbar, dafi sich beide Varianten aus
einem gemeinsarnen ?rototyp entwiokelt haben. In diesem Zusammenhang ist die
Verbreitung des Typs aufschiuBreich. Die Losung auch dieser Frage mulfi jedoch
l
wohl bis zu einer breiteren Vorlage des Materials und einer differenzierteren
zeitlichen Einordnung der einzeinen Typen und Varianten zuriickgestellt Worden.
Riefenrandschaien (Typ B) scheinen, nach den wenigen erhaitenen ~ bzw.
pubiizierten ~ Beispielen zu schliefien, vor allem in der Zeit zwischen der Mitte des
7. Jh. und dem ersten Vierlei des 6. Jh. v. Chr. verbreitet gewesen zu sein.
I
Gratrandschaien (Typ C) waren dagegen, nach Ausweis etwa der Beispiele aus dem
‘Agig-Gebiet, sowohl im 8. als auch im 7. Jh. v. Chr. relativ haufig. Die bei
Lehmann erwahnten Beispieie sind bis zum beginnenden 6. Jh. verbreitet. In Hazor
gehoren sie in die Zeit ,,zwischen 765 und 587 v. Chr.“. Die in der Gestaitung des
Randes sehr iihniichen Dreifulischalen datieren ins '7. und in den Anfang des 6. Jh.
 366 On the Euphrates and to the West ,,Assyrische“ Schalen aus Tell Sheikh Hassan 367

v. Chr. Nacb ailem scheint auch ciiese Form vor ailem gegen Ende des 8. Jh. und Ubernahme der Form seitens der Assyrer durchaus denkbar. Vieileioht gilt
im 7. Jh. v. Chr. vertreten zu sein. ahniiches auch fiir die Schaie mit verdicktem Rand und Karinierung, bei der sich
aiierciings aufgrund der geringen Anzahl von Belegstiicken in Tell Sheikh Hassan
Sohalen mit verdicktem Rand und Kehie (Typ D) komrnen irn ‘Agfgfiebiet im 8. und an anderen Fundorten kaum weitere verbindliche Aussagen machen iassen.
Jh., aber auch bereits im 9. Jh. v. Chr. vor; auf eine iihnlich frijhe Datierung konnte Aber sogar bei dem besonders kennzeichnenden und haufig belegten Typ der
auch das Beispiel aus Tell Arqa deuten. Die Belege aus Khirbet Qasrij weisen auf Kriickwandschaie erweist sich die Situation als nioht ganz eindeutig; bei dieser
iz eine Verbreitung im 7., eventueli auch noch zu Anfang des 6. Jh. v. Chr. hin.
Q Geféiliform ist, wie sich im Faiie der metailenen Vorbilder zeigte, eine Entwicklung
Schalen mit verdicktem Rand und Wandungsknick (Typ E) scheinen sohon recht aus einem gemeinsamen, bereits im zweiten vorchristiichen Jabrtausend
frtih entstanden zu sein, vieileicht sogar noch vor der Eisenzeit; der Zeitraum der entwickeiten Prototyp sehr wahrsoheiniich. For eine mogliche Bntstebung und/oder
groliten Verbreitung umfafit aber wohl auch hier das 8. und vor allem das 7. Jh. v. Weiterentwicklung des Typs, bzw. zumindest bestimmter Varianten, aulierbaib des
Chr. Die Beispiele aus Ramat Rahel reichen wohl noch bis in den Anfang des 6. Jh. assyrischen Kernlancls bietet die Verbreitung des Typs Ac wie anon die des mit ihm
v. Chr., ein Stiick aus Altintepe datiert vielieicht in achamenidische Zeit. verwandten Typs Ad einen WCl[61‘CI‘l Anhaitspunkt.
,,Faltrandschalen“ (Typ F) sind im ‘A,<§i{;»Gebiet schon irn 9. Jh. v. Chr. belegt; in Abschlieiiend iéiBt sich nur noch einmal feststellen, daB sich die hie: aufgeworfenen
l Sultantepe datieren sie dagegen in die zweite Héilfte des '7. Jh. Die vieien Fundorte Fragen mit einiger Sicherheit wohi erst nach umfassenderen Bearbeitungen der
i Paliistinas zeigen, dalfi sie dort am starksten im 8. und 7. Jh. v. Chr. verbreitet sind. assyrischen sowie der von dieser beeinfluliten syrischen Keramik beantworten
Ins 8. Jh. datieren etwa die Stiicke in Hazor, Lachish und Beer Sheba; in Beth Shan lassen werden.“” _
ist die Form inn dritten Viertei des Jahrhunderts beiegt, in Khirbet Marjameh in
einem Zeithorizont um 722 v. Chr. und in Samaria in der Zeit unmitteibar danach.
Beiege fiir die Verbreitung irn 7. Jh. v. Chr. bieten etwa Jericho und lerusaiem; in Zitierte Literatur
1
1
Mesad Hashavyahu erscheint die unseren Typen sehr ahnliche Form in der Zeit ABKA'I~KHAVARI 1988, AI-IARONI 1962; 1964, AHARONI ed. 1973; ALGAZE/
zwischen 639 und 605 v. Chr. Dali sich der Typ wohl bis ins 6. Jh. hinein fortsetzt, BREUNINGER/KNUDSTAD 1994, AMIRAN 1972, ATARASHI/HORIUCHI 1963, BALM
zeigt Teii ei-Fui. Wahrend die urartblischen Fundorte, wie z.B. Tushpa, eine TUCKER/WILKINSON 1989, BEi'i‘~ARIEI-1 1991, Banner: 1984, BEN-TOW
Verbreitung wahrend des 7. Jh. belegen, geben iranische Fundorte wie Baba Jan PORTUGALI/AVISSAR 1983, BERNBECK 1993, Bnon 1978, BOEHMER 1967, Boese
Hinweise auf ein Vorkoinmen auch noch im 6. oder eventueil sogar im 5. 3'11. v. 1995, BRlEND/HUMBERT 1980, BUHL/NIELSEN 1969, CAMPBELL Tt~1oM1>so:~1/
Chr.; das Beispiel aus Aitintepe scheint ebenfalis aus achamenidischer Zeit zu MALLOWAN 1933, CARSON WAMPLER 1947, Cl-IAMBON 1984, CROWFOOTI
stammen. Einen weiteren Beieg fiir ein spines Anftreten des Typs bietet letztiich Cnoweoor/Kenyon 1957, Cotms 1989, CUYLER Youno 1965, CUYLER Yotmol
it auch das Stiick aus Bahrein. ‘ LEVINE 1969, DE MEYER ed. 1980, De MIROSCHEDJI 1978, Di'l“FMANN et al. 1988,
Fiir sarntliche in Tell Sheikh Hassan belegten, assyrisch beeinfiuE3ten Gefaiiformen DOTHAN/PORATH 1982, DUMBRELL. 1971, Du PLAT TAYLOR 1959, EMRE 1969.
zeichnet sich nach alidem ab, dafi eine Datierung bereits ins 8. Jh. durchaus ESHIEL/PRAG eds. 1995, FORSBERG 1995, FRANKEN/STEENER 1990, Fnencn 1988b.
mogiich ist, der Schwerpunkt der Verbreitung jedoch wohl erst irn 7. Jh. v. Chr. Fnirz/Kememsxi 1983, FUGMANN 1958, Gnsson et al. I978, GITIN 1990, Gone
liegt. Lediglich ftir die Kniokwandschalen des Typs Aa gibt es dann Hinweise auf 1985, GOLDMAN 1963, HALLBR 1954, HAMILTON 1966, HAUPTMANN 1969/70;
eine Datierung in noch spiitere, wohl acbamenidische Zeit. Die besonders hanfig 1976, Heiaunn/Anonasnn 1994, Hooo 1951, Howns Srvnrn 1986, HROUDA 1962,
auftretenden Kriickwandschaien des Typs Ac datieren dagegen mit groiiter
Wahrscheinliohkeit ins 7. Jh. v. Chr. Fiir die - bisher allerdings nur in wenigen £43 In Tell Ahrnar, Tille Hoyiik undfliurn Kabir existieren Parallelen auch zn den
Exemplaren nacbgewiesenen - Riefenrandschaien (Typ B) gibt es Hinweise auf eine ,,assyrischen“ Typen aus "Fell Shelkh Hassan. So Stimmen 2. B. foigende Gefafie iiberein:
l Datiernng in die zweite Hallie des 7. und ins 6. Jh. v. Chr. Auch bei den tibrigen
l
Tell Shaikh Hassan I Janiiinliiir W'I'ell Ahmar 41
verbieibenden Former; gibt es Anzeichen for ein Fortleben bis ins 6. Jh. v. Chr. TYJZ. .3l1?ElL!/_{\CK'€l3MANN BLAWOCK 1*\MiE$°l‘
hinein. Aa, insbesondere i~2 Fig. 3.3 Fig. 10.2-4 Fig. 6.1
Ab ______7____ ______7_7_7__ _ Fig.6.4,6
Die von assyrischen Typen initiierten oder von ihnen abhangigen Formen laufen an AC , , Fig-,fl-2_,___,___________________l_Fig~418
|
mehreren Fundorten bis fiber das Ende des assyrischen Reiches hinweg weiter. Dalfi _Ag_3f.____ Fig. 4.4 1
sie sich weiterentwickeln, wie die Beispieie aus achamenidischer Zeit zeigen, belegt Ad 5-6 Fig. 4.3 I Fig. 13.8
1 die Sttirke des einstigen assyrischen Einflusses. Q... . .. l. _ Pia 5~_1____
Dabei ist jedoch einschrankend anzutnerl-ten, daB nicht bei alien bier
1= lFig.8.6,8, 1: Fig.5.:-2 I Fi g .l.8,10, 13
It besprochenen Typen eine Entstehung in Assyrien selbst restios gesichert ist. Zur Datierung der Befnnde von Tell Ahmar vgl. Jameson in diesem Band, S. 288,
Fraglich ist dies vor aliem bei den Faitrandschaien; angesichts ihrer Verbreitung derjenigen von Tille Hoytik (Schichten IV-V, VIII bzw. X) vgl. BLAYLOCK in diesem Band,
ware zumindest eine Gegenseitigkeit des Einfiusses, vielleioht sogar erst eine S. 267, 269, 272, sowie derjenigen von Iurn Kabir (Gruppen A und C) vgl.
EIDEM/ACKERMANN in diesem Band, S. 311-312.
-.+:-.W1_—.-r—,-pv.1e—-r

if;
--.1»;
,_,,___,,,_____,_M.,,,_,,,____ , . . . . . ,_..........»._..4.A.-.A...-

368 On the Euphrates and to the West ,,/lssyrische “ Schalen aus Tell Shaikh Hassan 369

, Fill
HUMBERT 1981, JAMES 1966, Kmtron 1958, Katso 1968, KEMPINSKI 1989,
KENYON et al. 1965, KI:-INYON/HOLLAND 1982, KJLLICK 1988, KLENGEL-BRANDT
1990, Know. 1976; 1979, Komre 1984b, LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY 1970, LAMONI
SHIPTON 1939, Lesa/10 1983, LEHMANN 1996; 1998, LINDNER et al. 1990, LINES
1954, LLOYD/GOKCJE. 1953, Luoanneat/Swen 1972, Lonoouzsr 1983, vow
LUSCHAN 1943, MAHMOUD et al. 1988, MALLOWAN 1966, MATTHERS ed. 1981,
MAZAR 1982; 1995, Mnzzom 1992a; 19926, MCCOWN/I-IAINES 1967, MIGLUS
'\
1987, Moonm’ 1980, NAVEI-I 1962, NORTHEDGE/FALKNER 1987, Ones, 1. 1959,
O1<s1~: 1988; 1992, Czooo/Ozone 1949, Otoeneuac/Ronweonn 1981, von DER
OSTEN 1937, PECORELLA 1975, Penna 1891; 1928, PFALZNER 1990, P-RATICO
1993, RE{SNER/FISCHER/l..YON 1924, SCHAEFFER 1935, SCHMIDT 1957,
SCHMIDT/VAN Loon/Cunvans 1989, Sevm 1994, SINCLAIR 1954-55, STERN 1980;
1982, STRONACH, D. 1978, STRONACH, R. 1978, SUMMERS 1993b, TAPPY 1992,
TARHAN 1993; 1994, THALMANN 19"/8, TOOMBS/VVRIGHT 1963, Tut-watt 1953,
TUSHINGHAM 1972, WEIPPERT 1988, WHITCOMB 1984, WIGHTMAN 1990,
;l llghl
WILKINSON 1990, WORSCllECH 1990, YADIN et a1. l958;.1960; 1961, YElVlN/ 3 4
EDELSTEIN 1970, ZIMHONI 1990.

$1 l:l*7

~ Ab

2
1117 3

Abb. 1

_"~—--_ D 2 _ . __ . _ 1 — —
,____m__~_______________=,»,___ . ,,.,,..W.,.,.*
YY .. - _ ___. Y M .. u_... _ .... _ _,

‘ z 370 On the Euphrates and to the West AE ,,Assyrische” Schalen aus Tell Shaikh Hassan 371

3 4

5 .‘ 6

7 8

E4 J
1 2 i Abb. 3
Abb. 2

VE 5
5
.1.

’ ~ W , 1 *?ii~. Y » ..
**********" — ~
 372 O” the E"Phmte5 and to me W951 ,,Assyrische“ Schalen aus Tell Sheik/z Hassan

B D ___..._~.. —.

Y1 I
\

i ~~ 2
4%;
1' 2 3
1
€“*T7 ?a A
<€3 2 % A ~ 72 ’ /
\ 1

\ »

Abb_ 4 Abb. 5

.4
_§
3-"3
V ~._;.;_
.
L... vvvvvvvvvvvW W i _******W
......w__.._~.~_.._.~,v )_ . __ , ;y/////110*/(1
_._W_ -

374 On the Euphrates and to the West ,,/issyrische “ Schalen aus Tell Sheikh Hassan 375

F F

Im‘ \ <—~—1 1
( "M 7
2 __ .,_(

J /1 M“ flu M? {U
V
1
131*! 9
,» Y

1
4
ll
\
1
‘ ,,___ _

~
g ‘T“r% I W” 12

Abb‘ 6 Abb. 7

1
!

I
¢§€
!. 'T??h
, _" :_-:-'~§_ ...

;_mmWWWW.MMm1 Mm,WWW_ _ _”1fi,- ?@@§%§____,_+_<_?_¢< f fwfw

_____ -wW _
 Cataloguisticsz The Experience at Tell Afis, Syria

IDA OGGIANO
Pisa

A. INTRODUCTION
The creation of a computerised card to catalogue the pottery from Tell Afis is part
of a broader project involving the computerisation of all the records of the
excavations and survey.
The aim of this paper is not to describe a new cataloguing method, but to
present a reasoned elaboration of research instruments that are only partly
formulated. In fact the draft for the computerised card is the synthetic present result
of an internal discussion on research methodologies for the study of pottery among
the members of the field team at Afis. This discussion has concerned very complex
t
| issues, such as those related to the approach to cataloguing, the definition of the
concepts of class and type, as well as more general interpretative problems.
The creation of the catalogue card has thus provided the team with the
opportunity to determine a common orientation in the research. This is part of the
broader and continuing discussion on the information potentials of pottery and on
possible recording instruments for the study of this material class.

B. PRESENTATION OF THE CARD

=2
In preparing the card for the data collection on the pottery ~ large quantities of
I
1 potsherds from the excavations - we have defined the basic questions on which any
cataloguing is founded.
Firstly we considered what kind of material we wanted to catalogue, secondly
what was the purpose of the record, and finally which was the most appropriate
instrument to achieve the aims that we had defined. in brief, we wondered what to
catalogue, why to catalogue it, and how. -

1
What to catalogue T ' .
The material to be catalogued is the pottery deriving from the excavations. It
1. represents a large quantity of sherdsfrorn vessels whose original form can seldom
( be reassembled. As it comes from very different stratigraphic contexts and
(
1 chronological horizons, the corpus of pottery is remarkably heterogeneous.
Moreover, it relates to a site where communities with different cultures and
l different socio-economical organisations have settled in succession.
l
."g it
Why cataloguing

OE t

l
About 80-90% of the material evidence from an excavation consists of pottery.1
This fact alone should highlight the importance of making optimal effort in the
5 description of this material. The quantitative factor is not the only one to make this
t
1 CHANG 1967: 4, quoted by Kcam 1982 and LEONARD]/PRACCHIA/VIDALE 1989: 84.

4.
..f'
Vi
.1
,l

L {{{{{{{{{{{{{ -- - mt
_,,.........._M..._..... .. ~ M '-—- V -m"-~**~-V-V-*'~W """""'
378 On the Euphrates and to the West
area of recording so important. Research over the years has proved the multiple
recording potentials of pottery, though differences are noticed within the various
approaches in the interpretation. In the past, studies were almost uniquely aimed at
stylistic and morphological analysis of the pots, with the purpose of building large-
scale chronological and cultural sequences? Nowadays, more and more studies
focus on varying aspects: physical aspects, related to the manufacturing
environment of the pottery; technological aspects, as indicators of the development
level of the producing societies; economical aspects, by which pottery distribution
is an= indicator of regional interrelations; and social aspects, or the way of
production as an indicator of social articulation.
In implementing this basic instrument for cataloguing the pottery from an
<-.
excavation we have considered all these potential areas of investigation.
How to catalogue
After defining the general area to be analysed, we have determined the various
fields of archaeology which could be investigated through the study of pottery. We
have then proceeded to consider the instruments to be used in collection of data.
In establishing the cataloguing project we have drawn a distinction between two
phases, namely the development of the data collection draft ("the card“), and the
acquisition of the data.
Development of the card: drafting stagefor data c0llection3
This first stage of research, involving the choice of the data that will characterise
the objects to be analysed, plays an essential role. Indeed, the selection of attributes
is closely connected with the aims of the study. Even ‘so, the need for good
i
fonnalisation of data has been often underestimated in lf3.(Illl0ll3.l research, as well
35 as in the most recent quantitative analysis .4
Choice of the attributes
It is well known that the first step in the implementation of a computerised archive
is the choice of the attributes that will define any type of mat61"i&l- 01166 I316
material to register and the purposes of the registration have been identified, it is
necessary to define which attributes of the material are needed to achieve the
i defined aim. In doing so, one has to employ the recording potentials of the
registered object - in this case the pottery - at their optimum, agong with the
technological potentials of the instrument in use — here the computer.
For the Tell Afis pottery we have chosen a rather wide range of attributes. They
have been divided in two basic kinds: intrinsic attributes, connected to the material
2 RICE 1987: 286 and LEONARDI/PRACCHLA/VIDALE 1989.
3 The part of the card pertaining to fabric was developed by Lucia Bozza, referring to
"Normal Instructions (Normativa Manufatti Lapidei) CNR~ICR 1983. NORMAL 12/83.
CNR, Roma". For the realisation of some items we refer to Norme 1934, 35, 5l—64 and
PAPALDO et al. 1988: For an example of the description of fabric cf. ARIAS/BOSCHLAN i996.
\
v. “ cf. Moscarr 19961579-590.
5 According to MOSCATI I996: 587 the quality of a quantitative application does not depend
on the degree of sophistication of the applied techniques, but on the approach phase to the
research.
Y 1'
L.
' I I 7 W777 7 7
l
Cataloguistics." Tell Afis 379
in its morphological, compositional aspects, etc.; and extrinsic attributes, defining
the relationship between the material and its original context or its chronological
classification, etc. In other words, the chosen markers can be defined as markers of
cultural order (chronology, type, shape, decoration, etc.) and physical markers,
empirically observed (such as fabric, temper, surface treatment).6
The dictionaries
Once the attributes have been organised so as to allow a computerised data
processing, we also organised the information content of the attributes. Whenever
possible, the latter has been formalised by means of controlled dictionaries.
The need to make records uniform in their contents and homogeneous in their
terminology has become a necessity that cannot be avoided when working with
large quantities of data. What are exactly the controlled dictionaries? They are lists
of chosen terms ("preferred terms") whose use is warranted by one or more sources
("authorities"). To these terms variants are referred in a synthetic structure -
orthographical, regional, synchronical or diachronical. When the terms are also
connected in a hierarchical or, associative relationship, the controlled dictionaries
ll are called thesanri. The controlled dictionaries, also known as indexing language,
I
2 are the means to match the vocabulary of the card compiler with that of the
li researcher. Different card compilers will not have the chance to use different terms
1
for the same subject, as it is possible to check synonyms. Moreover, the dictionaries
s
4
make data retrieval easier by highlighting the correlation between terms so as to
broaden or tighten the research.
é
l The dictionaries can be "closed" (i.e., once composed unalterable) or "open".
I
The latter can be constantly updated according to a careful terminological selection
made by the team accorded this duty.
The definition of a terminological dictionary of classes, forms, coatings,
decorations, etc, has been one of the most important aspects of the research.
Moreover, standardised language is greatly needed also at an international level. In
l this respect the use of the Internet facilitates the transmission of data and fast
connection for discussion of the various issues .involved.7
Use of the card: data collection stage
l
l The card proposed for Tell Afis is a flexible card for which various formats have
been conceived depending on the type.-of classificatory process that one chooses.
Depending on the type of material to catalogue and on the purpose that one
identifies for the use of the data base, the card can be created with fields or groups
of fields that one fills in a standardised way.
In fact, the large number of chosen attributes is intended to relate to the
cataloguing phase a further selection of attributes. The selection in this case is not
Ez
1'
6
On the use of the terms "intrinsic" and "extrinsic" see GARDIN i980: 65-68; TAYLOR 1948
divided types into empirical and cultural ones; cf. Kutin 1982, particularly pp. 88-89. In my
4
I article I use the term "fabric" as an equivalent to "paste" (cf. Sunmao i956, passim; see also
table 3a on p. 390).
7 Cf. Louurvuoal I996 on “the new era of archaeological communications" with particular
reference to the East Mediterranean.
K
l
t
l,
'.
I
380 On the Euphrates and to the West
to be executed by the card designer, but by the card user, and it will aim at
identifying more specific ranges of problems.“
For instance, in cataloguing a totally new classification of pottery from a given
chronological period or archaeological context - which presupposes the analysis of
classes, forms, manufacturing techniques, fabric, etc. - use of all the cataloguing
terms will be essential. In contrast, in cataloguing material already supplied with a
known classification, it will be enough to choose only those fields of the card that
can provide additional information for updating and completing the classification.
These two procedures have been defined by Rice with the terms categorisation
(creating groupings for a previously unclassified set of objects) and identification
(assigning objects to existing classes).9
After introducing the "classification", another stage of the study can be
considered, namely the processing of the collected data.
C. AN EXAMPLE OF THE USE OF THE TELL AFIS DATABASE: THE
IRON AGE POTTERY FROM A BUILDING AT TELL A"FIS
The method has for the first time been tested for its reliability on the batch of Iron
Age pottery coming from the Lower City (sector D, 1986-i987). This pottery comes
from one building which provides evidence of different phases of settlement and
constitutes a closed stratigraphical sequence. It has thus been possible to
reconstruct a good succession of phases and a reliable chronological scriatio for the
D Building at Tell Afis.'°
For this batch of material we have tried to integrate different cataloguing
approaches. We have used a variety of cataloguing methods in order to analyse the
widest possible range of data, so as to enhance the interpretative possibilities in
cultural terms. We are convinced that the material must be classified in all ways
that produce for us useful information.“
The initial target of the research has been the definition of the Tell Afis Iron
Age pottery horizon through the identification of the production of pottery in use at
the site. We have already stressed the broad area nowadays covered by the study of
pottery production. In the case of Tell Afis, the project is only just beginning. It will
be expanded with the study of pottery coming from other contemporary buildings gf
the old town, as well as those corresponding to other periods in the life of the site.
As for the method, we have first established a rneans of creating a descriptive
classification, followed by another devoted to the creation of an interpretative
classification. In the first phase we have dealt with the typological and
8 Attributes can also be defined as essential and inessential (CLARKE 1968171).
9 RICE 198"/1 275.
‘° MAZZONI 1987.
" On classification problems and typology in archaeological studies see KLEJN E982.
particularly pp. 72441; cf. RICE 1987: 2834284.
2 The method of investigation presented in this contribution has to be tested further‘ by
means of diversified studies on "closed" contexts as well as analysis of stratigraphical
soundings related to the Chalcolithic Period (D. Giannessi), Early Broze Age (E. Merluzzi),
Middle Bronze Age (C. Felli) and Late Bronze Age (F. Venturi). For the Iron Age, the study
will be extended with the comparative analysis of pottery from the acropolis and the Lower
City of Tell Afis (I. Oggiano).
Cataloguiszics.- Tell Afis 381
morphological analysis of the material, then we have dealt with a first classification
of the pottery on the basis of fabric and shapes. In other words, we have used the
concept of "type" as defined by certain attributes inherent in a data set that
archaeologists can discover through statistical correlation techniques.“ In the
second phase we have analysed single ranges of problems, such as contexts,
chronology and manufacturing procedures, by using a type of classification which
favours the interpretative aspect, i.e. using techniques of associative analyses.
Creation of the descriptive classes: the categories of fabric
The classification work on the fabric has been arranged in three different steps. The
first pertains to the classification of the fabric by means of information collected
during the phase of using the card. The second step pertains to the selection of the
fabric samples classified beforehand and intended to be chemically and physically
analysed. The third step, resulting from the two previous ones, pertains to the
definition of the concept of "Afis Ware" as the principle of the descriptive
classification. .
Macroscopical examination
As we have a ‘statistically considerable quantity of material, we have processed the
data by means of simple and multivaried statistical operations, so as to identify the
classes of fabric at a rnacroscopical level. The attributes chosen for this type of
classification are found on the card under the term "Fabric".
Simple statistical analyses have made possible a distinction between the
important variables and those features that have no ‘significance in the elaboration
of the groups, since they are shared by all the material analysed.
il
Common characteristics and selection of variables
The variables have been selected after recognising a sequence of characteristics
i shared by all the analysed samples. As far as the mass of material is concerned we
l have noticed a constant colour, which makes the whole pottery batch quite
i homogeneous, although the colour may vary with respect to a single pottery shape.
The prevailing colour seems to be light red, with the 2.5 YR 6/6 and 2.5 YR 6/8
variants for the whole piece (when the colour is homogeneous) or for the main
fabric (when the colour is not homogeneous). The central core is‘ often light brown
(7.5 YR 5/4, 7.5 YR 6/4), whilst the.out'er surface is often very pale brown (10 YR
l 7/4).
' As for the inclusions, we have noticed the common presence of mainly white
and grey grits, and occasionally the presence of red and black grits. Almost
ubiquitous are organic remains of differing shapes.
The significant variables and the categories offabric
By identifying such significant variables as appearance, fabric grain size and
concentration, we have been able to divide the sherds by fabric into three groups:
‘3 On whether types are "real" or "artificial" see RICE 1987: 283-286; cf. in general KLEIN
1982.
_ __w,______ . '__ ---.__,,. _.____.?-~-w-~- .. _ _..:————————— ___. —
382 On the Euphrates and to the West
FABRIC l Appearance from coarse to fine; medium/fine grain size, mediumllow
concentration
FABRIC 2 Fabric from coarse to semi-fine, averagely purified. The grain size is
not regular, as some pieces show a mediurnlhigh grain size and some
a medium/fine one with coarse inclusions.
FABRIC 3 Coarse fabric showing large inclusions along with medium and fine
ones.
Chernieal andphysical analyses of thefabric
After defineing the fabric classes, we selected the samples representing the different
groups for chemical and physical analyses. The microscopical analysis has
confirmed the existence of a pottery class locally produced by using the local clay.“
The general structural appearance of the sections studied is very homogeneous. The
raw clay contains illites and is very rich in limestone. Different degrees of porosity
have been identified, linked probably with the different phases of manufacturing.
Pores are mainly of an elongated shape in parallel series, typical of wheel
manufacture (all the pottery is wheelmade).
The macroscopical and microscopical analyses demonstrated also the great
uniformity in the composition of the sandy fabric of this pottery. In fact, all the
samples have the same mineralogical composition, characterised by fragments of
carbonatic rocks, quartz, calcite, chert and opaque minerals.
As far as the manufacture is concerned it has been shown that raw clay was
probably purified from organic and inorganic compounds. This purification does
not seem to be entirely effective as it allowed the preservation of a rather copious
sandy fabric. It seems that we have to discard the hypothesis of artificial additions
of mineral temper to the sandy fabric of this material. This is also demonstrated by
a mostly unirnodal distribution of inclusions. The presence of larninations (like~
orientated elongated minerals and pores) seen in thin sections and sometimes with
the naked eye, points out the wheelmalting of clay.
As to the firing temperatures of the pottery, data on the mineralogical
composition (the presence of calcite, usually well-preserved) and thermal
differentiation analyses (initial temperature of calcite at the point of dissociation
reactions) indicate the ranges of temperatures between 600-700 °C. These
temperatures are considered normal for fictile products of this historical period.
The definition of Tell Afis Ware
After proving the existence of a local pottery production at Tell Afis on the basis of
the macroscopical and microscopical analyses, we decided to introduce the concept
of "ware". Such a concept makes it possible to group items sharing similar
characteristics of firing, method of construction and composition. The concept in
this case is based on a very concrete element. Tell /lfis Ware is a pottery type
produced at the Afis site by one or more workshops using the local clay.”
». *4 Lnzznnnuet al. 1994; FALCONE/LAZZARINI/GALB'I'l‘l 1995.
\
*5 A similar concept has been proposed by Monet. 1982: 22: "Nous appelons classe dc
céramique un ensemble de vases produit par un atelier ou un group d'ateliers". Cf. RICCI
1985 on the use of the concept of class as a group of objects with similar function being
ggggg- - _ gee,
'::=:=;;~_-:-
Cataloguisrics: Tell Afis 383
By using a hierarchical classification »» a "type~variety system“ - we could
then identify two subclasses - inclusive classes - distinguished by the presence or
absence of a coating, and called Red Slip and Simple Ware. The first class is a
pottery with a red slip, common in many areas of the Near East and Western
Mediterranean, which is at Tell Afis a local production.
Creation of the descriptive forms: vessel form
A first level of classification has thus been based on fabric analysis as the basic
element for the grouping of subjects. Whilst we were implementing this
classification, we have defined the vessels classification on the basis of their
shapes.”
The form classification of the Tell Afis pottery is based, when possible, on the
full or reassembled shape; otherwise on the kind of rim and on the profile of the
vase (Tab. 2, Figs. 1-10).“
The analysis of the shapes has been completed with the traditional method of
comparisons, which has enabled the Tell Afis productions to be placed within a
well-defined geographical and chronological horizon.”
Creation of interpretative forms: the isssue of function
"Who would not find it more interesting to sort sherds into such groups as cook
pots, water jugs, food bowls, paint jars and incense burners than to classify them
as hemispheres, cylinders, simple~silh0uette and c0mp0site~silh0uette vessels?”.2°
So Shepard summed up the legitimate wish of every pottery specialist to try to
determine the original function of the vessel forms coming from an excavation.
This seems also to highlight the point of transition in the classifying process
between a merely descriptive and an interpretative approach.
Nevertheless, the issue of identifying the original function of vessels is complex.
In fact, many vessel have various use: for instance, the same vessel may be
employed for carrying water and storing it, for preparing food and eating it.
Moreover, it is hard to choose among the various data available the most
.1§’IY5Il is suitable ones to provide information on a vessel's primary function?‘
The problem of understanding vessel function is also related to the definitions
used by archaeologists, which are often ambiguous. v
In the case of Tell Afis we have tried to impose a standard of form definition
which would derive from the examination of the available data and from their
i interpretation according to the combined results of various attributes (correlation
produced at a single production centre.
6 RICE 1987: 286.
l 11“ The importance of a diversified classification of fabric and vessel shape is discussed by
MORBL 1982: 23-24.
‘B On descriptive standards of vessel shape see SHEPARD 1956: 224-248; GARDlN 1976,
Mount. 1982: 28-32 and RICE 1987: 212-222.
'9 Comparanda and data related to cultural history are presented by OGGiANO I997; on the
use of the "comparative method“ cf. AZZENA 1990.
5I 2° SHEPARD 1956; 224.
i 2' cf. RICE 198?; 20s~212, 232~242 on elements that may or may not provide evidence on
the function of ceramic vessels.
2 V“ _ ~ -_--
~....“.._-.-._-.i..i_...,. .=
4 in level)
e l
,,. -l-< -- — —— _ V _
384 On the Euphrates and to the West
matrixes). Among the attributes chosen are shape (e.g., dimensions, size of
opening), composition, surface treatment, context of findspot, distribution of forms
etc. The following presents and discusses some of the results so far.
Association of the variables fabric/shape (shape made offabric)
FABRIC I + shape
This is a fabric used to make bowls (CA, CBC, CC, CE, CF, CH, CI, CN, CO, CQ,
CR, CS, CT, CV, CSS), kraters CSS, plates (PC, CD, PE), jugs BR and some kinds
of jars'(GA, GB, GD, GE). In the latter case the use depends on the size of the
container and on the thickness of its walls. The fabric is averagely to well purified.
Evidently the pureness depends on the type of shape; the small CA and CG bowls,
both because of their size and to the thickness of their walls, related to their final
function, feature a very purified fabric. Nevertheless even these shapes with fine
fabric sometimes show large isolated inclusions. The microscopical examinations
have proved that these inclusions are residues of detritical fraction of the clay
matrix. It is thus apparent that the clay matrix was not perfectly purified even in
this finer pottery.
FABRIC 2 + Shape -
This fabric is typical of plates (PA and PB are never fine), jars (GA and GB), which
may sometimes have a fine fabric, i.e. fabric 1) and bowls (CD, CBA, CBB, CBD,
CL).
FABRIC 3 + shape
This is a fabric which is mainly found in the pithoi where inclusions are
homogeneously distributed along the vessel walls. They are gathered in high
t. concentration in thick cores in the region of the rim and base. This distribution is
}!\'74Frw.9.l,-I>:\1'P.,~1<f-§Q4.-
evidently defined by the type of manufacture and formation of the vessel.
I. Fabric 3 has been used also for different kinds of pots, as well as jars GC and
bowls CBA, CBB and CK.
Association of the variables shape-fa.bric/locus (shape made offabric and placed
in locus)
In some loci are found certain specific shapes, namely plates and bowls. It is
3. apparent that they were stores for kitchenware. Moreover it is interesting to notice
2.
how the different shapes are homogeneously distributed within the individual loci.
This suggests that the same types were produced at the same time, and therefore
that the functional specialisations of each shape cannot be identified from the
association with other shapes. Besides, with the sole exception of the bowls with
triangular rim and the imported ware, there is a lack of diachronic distribution of
types within the different levels.
v
Association of the variables shape/fabric/level (shape made offabric and placed
The distribution of shapes within the levels provides us with twofold information.
r Firstly, it informs us on the placement of a given fabric class and shape within the
V ——~— _ _ _ _ _ _
Cataloguistics: Tell Afis 385
chronological scheme of the site. Secondly it informs us on the function of the
excavated building, which can also be inferred from the class types and from the
vessel shapes found in it.
It is thus essential to realise that the fabric classes and the shapes are found
almost without exception in all levels, showing a very conservative repertoire. This
evaluation has also been made possible thanks to the shape-shape association.
As for the matter of chronology, very few data allow a connection between
specific shapes and a precise and exclusive dating of the building.
Much information can be inferred from the thorough examination of the data
mentioned above, namely those related to the manufacturing techniques,
chronological distribution of shapes and fabrics, etc.” As for the possibility of
identifying functional classes, we stress the difficulty in positively defining the
l
original function of some shapes. This applies to the so-called bowls, which could
have been used both for making and serving food, and to some jars, which could
have been used both for preserving and transporting food. On the other hand, for
other shapes the constant association of shape, fabric and context has allowed the
l
identification of some groupings, and thus the definition of the so~called functional
classes, involving the correlation of data on function and shape.”
The DA and DB shapes, featuring large sizes and coarse fabric, were placed
inside the rooms and were used for several generations; they can be therefore
attributed to the "Long-term storage" class (called pithoi). In a similar way the PE
shape, featuring FABRIC 3 and traces of burning, has been found in rooms used for
food production and can thus be called a cooking pot and included in the functional
class "Processing with heat". As for the bowls made of FABRIC 1, such as shapes
CA, CI, CE, CR, etc., which have a medium-shallow depth, more or less thin walls
I and a limited capacity, they must have been used for serving liquids. The shapes
made of FABRIC 2, such as shape CL and CO, are generally deeper and of greater
capacity and must have been used for processing. It is also possible that some of
them, such as shape CL, were used for serving food.
The plates may have had differing functions, even if they were used mainly for
serving food. Some of them, such as shapes PC and PD, have surtely been used
exclusively for serving food. ,
The fabric (fine or semi-fine), the shape (the neck and the restricted mouth),
and the dimensions of jars GA and QB suggest that they might have been used for
l
keeping liquids. “-1
Referring to Rice’s categories of vessel use we identify three classes:
Storage Ware
Transformation or Processing Ware
' Transfer or Transport Ware -
i
As identifying a unitary function for some vessels is quite an issue (only the long»
term storage and the kitchen ware are functions that can be more easily identified,
as they call for more specific fabric types, shapes and vessels), we have preferred to
add a "Various Use" term to the functional classification.
22 Ooomuo I997.
23 See note 2}.
.
 386 On the Euphrates and to the West Catal0guistics.' Tell Afis 387
\

Integration of the descriptive and interpretative ciassifications
We have finally been able to correlate three hierarchies: namely fabrics, shapes and
functions.
The correlation could only be made by a progressive change in the cataloguing
concept used within the various levels of the hierarchy. At the highest levels the
classification has been based on the descriptive observation of the material. At the
lowest levels the data association procedure used - formalism entity-relation - is
\
space and time, such as the contexts and their chronology, has made it possible to
identify a functionai cataloguing principle, at least for some shapes.
In conclusion, we might remark that in the Tell Afis pottery study we have tried
to overcome the problems of the description and classification of data and have
come to study the methods connected to their interpretation. In this respect the final
hierarchy should be regarded less as a cataloguing instrument - which is replaced
by the above mentioned descriptive hierarchies - than a formalised illustration of

intended to interpret the object instead of just describing it.“ the interpretative processes used in the study of the Iron II pottery from Tell Afis.25

3 TELL AFlS WARE References cited

ARIAS/BOSCHIAN 1996, AZZENA 1990, CHANG 1967, CLARKE 1968, GARDIN 1976;
i Hierarchy of fabrics and shapes I980; 1996, KLEIN 1982, LAZZARINI ct al. 1994, Fatconsl LAZZARINI/GALLE'ITl
I995, LEONARDI/PRACCHIA/VIDALE 1989, LOUHIVUORI 1996, MAZZONI 1987,
MOREL 1982, MOSCAT1 1996, Norms 1984, OGGIANO 1997, PAPALDO et al. 1988,
RICCI 1985, Rica 1987, SHEPARD 1956, TAYLOR 1948, TRlGGER 1998.
RED SUP SIMPLE WARE r

//\\
Tables 1-3 and Figs. 1-10 on pp. 388-402.

Pnocassznc SERVING stormee VARIOUS use

(TRANSPORT!
sromes)
r
z
Association V 1

shape, fabric, contest

E
t
Cooking Pot Bowis CA Pithoi Jars GA GB
Bowl CK CBA

.1
Within a single level of hierarchy the selected criterion is unambiguous. The
.» ,.~_ M-.»,v ~-.'
stability of the hierarchy at the highest levels, being derived from the more
manageable analysis of intrinsic aspects, guarantees a sound hierarchical
classification. At the iowest levels the hierarchy is quite uncertain, as the
vi
organisation of the data is strongly linked to the variability of the interpretative
ii data.
One of the main features of this kind of hierarchy is to be dynamic instead of i

static. For instance, the hierarchy of fabric in itself is static as well as that of shape.
The correlation of shapes and fabrics, along with further categories of information
on other compositional aspects, such as the addition of coating, and aspects of
~<
25 A general review of problems of formalisation in "archaeological informatics" is offered
by Moscnrr 1996 (referring to studies of I.C. Gardin and C. Peebles, C. Renfrew and E.
2“ Tnroonn 1998: 23. Zubrow, J. Hodder, F. Djindjian); cf. GARDIN 1996 and TRIGGER I998.

".-3‘:§§§3£}%1efit‘P§2fi;IiE5 '5 1
 __ __ 7* W /'”~' m.4.W.

On the Euphrates and to the West Cataloguistics: Tell Afis

‘ Codece I cm
. wnu THIKCENED ourwmzu mm
CA one? msm mm ALMOST
*i""“"‘ MR5"-RTE!) IJPRIGHT WALLS
PA wmz NATURAL mm
WITH ENFLATEU
DAT DI Anr\0_ ’iLoccIs€a' f Sellore i flflodrulo Lwelio Locus Pcrrodo RIM

CB WITH OUTWARD SQUARE!) RIM

WITH OUTWARD RIM AND LESS DEEP BASIN
vs ‘ ‘ WITH CONCAVE OUTLINE
5 C h C <1 O R GS IGINO 7 Fologmfm
7 Dnseqno
i Rmevo Dnsegno Lucwdo P wrm soumzuo RIM '
I
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 7
‘ PC ‘....._.___.__1 cc can
‘ WITH OUTWARE) \ wma TRIANGULAR am smu. wmz
FLARING RIM 0u'rwARO sqwuzen am
mo WALLS‘S mxsm
@105” NQ F'Q(|-nq NC Precssezrone T190 Tecmco id: lovorozione IIC
CD
OGGETFO ‘M if MA MC MS TL TV M m WITH ENWARD RIM
‘ PD AND BASIN WITH
WITH "ramzmc CDNCAVE OUTLINE.
swo 01 ¢~m»=*=s5- FASI sum
CONSERVAZIONE ufl-_ secowome CE
SMALL WITH
GA SQUARED RIM
DOUBLE-RI M
IMPASTO
CF
A in cE ' ' c ' NC GB
cmmzflnsncne mnsasme ;°° :— —— °°'5’ — *'¥33“—e SHAPEG COLLAR ED JAR DOUBLE RIM

MASSA DI $[yu{[u(q |~1(; Color»: Or-nogenco Coiore Dnsomoganeo 1 GC CO

I‘ ourwmm rum
WITH NATURAL RIM
rem:-0 cw. 7’ _ I
Znflu 7

QQHELEIRO 7 7 A;$¢Iuns:rr\enlo Grqnulomeinu Dustrsbuzuoh; Bmclusil 7 flfiij °'9°"'°' ______________ CH

COLLA RIiD RIM

DA
WITH ENFLATED RIM ~ CI
wrm OUTWARD-SQIJARED RIM
AND BASIN'S OUTLINE CONC/IVE
____ _ _ 7 , ,, SHAPED MORE STRESSED
DB
W ITII OU TW ARI)
ENFLA TED RIM CK
}-RATfAMEN1Q Posuzlona Forte fifi i Naluro ifi i Cf1Ier§ VERY DEEP
WITH ENFEJITED RIM
SUPERFICIE 5 9 U, m0 iji

CL
WITH
ARCUATED 8A$IN'$
DECORAHONK foamone Pam: i Tocrucn i H CoIore i_ OUTLIN E

inlerno W” L I _ »»-»»------~ cM
PEA WITH VERTICAL RIM
_ ___", ____*_ , flfi W _ W ITH EDGE-RIM
MOTNO _*’:=§'%'9"P_ ___ __ _!’2'_*= __ “°“F2__ 7 "“"°“"'°"' CN
Eslemo WITH INWA RI)-SWOLLEN
RIM
|nIerno __
' SHAPE PE 1
I co
?£ BI PEB2 ..__-_._....._......-. wxm 0U1WAR£)~SW0l..LEN
SIMPLE MORE. STRESS ED mm

CP
cxmna WITH OUTW/IRD RIM
{ CARENATED WITH
we I /IND CONCAV8 BASSIN'S
OUTL [NB
ENFLATED RIM
CR
ca-we-u=nr.s|~\n W ITII NATURAL RIM
I AND AIICUATEIII WALLS

Table 1 Table 1

i Wi * L i ii" unnnnnnnl ..__ __ I % _ _ L _ ff ....- _ __W_,.,,, ___,

. I
(
I
 398 On the Euphrates and to the West Cgmlggm'S;1¢_;»_- T6-11Af;s 391

TELL AFIS I’()’l"l‘I¢1RY CARI)

EXCAVATION l)A'I'A GROWVDMASS

Com’: ' I 3Tp,u(7r[mn (J unuoqmaous Omrmaoammoxrs

I)A'l‘I-‘. ___ ___ __ ___ ARFA
O vonous
smzrcrmxn lmrrmocr-rum-rv Q ¢M<_-;q;|;
SQII/\R¥~Z __ _ ll"-‘/1'1 -.......... I-05313 .".....,.“...._. O POROUS AND CRACKED

K) B.l ECT P°m“"Y O vmv i>l)R0iI3 Q nor vmw ronous O com’/xzrr

M"
5IIAPE
COI/OUR
SPECIFIC SHAPE
O uomoarrmous O |m'rP.R<><3ImE0l|s IIOLIOGKNIIOUS
I MANIII‘-‘/IC'1'URB~IG ’I]£CNOUJGY
Q IIAND-MADE O cozlnvlmn.
O con. Q 11/IND-MAlJr=J\m:1az|. IIEIIZROGWEOUS
() warm. mos O HAn11~uA|aP/vnzrzm,
O MOULD
O comosrr Fl)RM'l‘NG MITTIIODB (.’FN‘I“KR lN3IDI.I PART INSIIJII OUIBUJE
V ___

mr/mu1uz.s' “mm. __ ,______._________________, RIM TIIICKNILQS

DMMEFPR WALL TI{IC.!(N[B!¥

'L
CARI}4A1‘IONIJIAME'I‘!€R BASH 'l'il1CI€NE$3
I’
—¢_—__7_—__—_+_—_+< _ _—;_—_—_:i:—_TTTT _‘
I zmmmnnmmms _ _ _ _ F001‘II1I1GII‘I' -~»~-~-~~~-~~~ I swwrozv
‘L
r — — ~ :—_—;:: :———————7—— ————:———:————_—;—:—— _—_— _ DIMTIY OIIKIH Oumwu OIBW Owmllmwau Quanmmww Oumw.-::um.uu2
colvnmozv I f I
alum arm 0 co/uma 0 coaxsrmwe
armmmz. 0 waow O mnmuv ancouroama 0 mcwm-MY I O mzmuu O rmawmmza
0 mm: O comsmumrmuxaua
PART O co/msmxmxw 0 no-r vmmc/Iauz
L

::<>lm;N0 O WELLSORTED O Mmnm soars) O POORLY :1onT|m O NOT vmmmam

_ Inn hlnlnllul W’ "'7 "

I PASTE I§?2Ii£RICl'I'Y ROUNIJNILIIS DIBTRIBIITION

GENERAL CIMRACTERISHC O man O mcumn ummm O nonossmzoua

” "W " ' ' ' O Mmnm O £~R.|B/\N(‘.;1.!I)\RE[.D.{EX~l'1‘<I. O mnmzocxmawus
i‘ Ayp;;ARA}q(;;; O co/\n:n3 0 smzrma 0 mm 0 izxmmmnr mm: I O ww O ROIlNDEI)fl.EMI-TLNIS 0 NOT vmlmnm
O Norvmmmzlz Q aumzounnm !=,l,mmrI8
m;|o-N O Vi-IR‘! mane O snows O CRUMBLY ‘ O WT Vmmmw
COLOUR
gqmup, O HOMOGENEZOUS O llmmocmmous mum-[M-ION O YE‘! Ono O nv DOMINAM

IIOMOCIIQIEOUS COLOR HEI1ZI\0GENEI'I'Y D0 T0 smommy

mocmsxs Q YE‘! Q "0 0 "V
,__,,__,,,__,_,,,_“_,,,,,“,, O mama OINCLUSIONS ()i’iIRIN(9ANDIM<.'L[§5IONs SPOMDICAL
__ ,,_,_ H ,, , , , _ __ ___,__________ ORGANICINCLUSIONS O YB-‘I ONO ORV
I

-V\
1,

I Table 3a Table 3b

I
‘r ' **~~-, _ _ 7, _ __ I - * _ _ """"""i:"""j;"""""" fifiififififi 7 ~~' ~- .., ‘

\
...,......,.._,.__.....~._.._.... . . VI;-.W‘v.‘/vs‘%»¥r'¥"~I- .. ~-~-w,--.-- .. . . . . . --»--,-- --. ~--- 7" I» -~~~-~~~»\-~_-~--~~\—--.»»
' ‘ " " """"""'“""'"'*_'“ “““"

392 On the Euphrates and to the West Catal0guistics.' Tell Afis 393

r 7 7 ________ _
2
SURF/ICIZ IRE4 TMENT 1

0 msmrz O msmmxrmmn
cm Omsms-: (jlwsluwommns vosmon
Q otmimn.
I mam OOIYISIUE

PART PART

.25’ ;*~==~ _
'fy|>[-j -—-—~------—----—-~~-<~-M--~-- ma EJEII 1%..
I II W

- L
(391911 A COLOR

eeee
I I \
be
UECORA TTON
3 __
~-fins
444* , \\ 6 7
]>Q5fl1(jN
am O
ENSIDlZ!OU13I1)1£ POSITION
OINBIDE
OOH-mum
OiN$1I11’J0"'l'8">E
\
\
\
\
p,\p,1* P/\R'\" .................__.__..-.“._____. \
‘ \

< \ 1
1 1vm=, TYPE
3 , ,,,,,,,,,_
X
IiP 4 — ~ ———_::_—_, _, , , 11*’
If
Z5
I
DECO-RA ITVE MOITH?

90511103:
O YNQEITIS
0 om-553;;
Q I'N.‘I!DEJ'OUI'3'|DE
POSITION
O mime
Q 00131338
Qmsmwomsma I '7
4 4 I I 5
- =&\
......'. nun nun nnol m.-.~»...~. I4iLlO4\I Idlbl mm.-~----»-4--I - --M
‘ ma": --M~~~~~~~~~—-——----~---~~--- mm:
8
L ..__ . ....

POSTI)E?OSI'I'IONAL PROCESSES
a
CO'NC'I\.I?I'!0'N1'NG-CRUB'ITN(! Q BIOIDGICAI. O MINERAL Qfi.
\\\
,,
\‘°a
Q SCALING
O I>UI.VElJ%‘£'ION
»W<~,¢1‘»t§-~¢\<>/6-.?=,—.~Tw-PrIte wmnmamo O WWLWWN
- I ad WM
~»>- .\~v I}

9 CHRONOLOGY
9

PERIOD OR FIHATIGRAFHICAL P11-/IEIE O ' 10 296711

I
ft
Fig. 1: 1 - Cilician bowl. 2 ~ Red slipped glass. 3 - Cilician White Painted. 4 ~ Phrygian
Table 3c 1
Handle. 5-8 - Lamps‘ 9 - Jug. I0 ~ Potstand

_ W _ r W :__- ___ V
H

I
,,_,__,,_‘_ ......__............._..._,,,.,.,,_____.,_,_.,,...,.._.,_.___,_._,.._.,_,_,,_.,_,.»_,.....~.~_..-.»..._~...............».....»M.=...<..,.., . . V _ _ __ :7" ............ _ ___. ._........_ ._.__.___

394 On the Euphrates and to the West Cataloguistics: Tell Afis 395

\I \M>I 1

2 z
he I Q
M It”

I\

/
e
< \_[: I <”I.j /IW e e e e I
I
I-I

x:
§Z
<;@1/ fie ,1
2
I
\\>I I I
I I.

I
I §._ I

I an ‘I2 K’ 13' 7

I
L

II
TT7 mm
7 7 ggem
0 10 20 cm
m§ag5 Fig. 3: 1-6 - Shape CA. 7~8 e Shape CD. 9-10 - Shape CI. I1-I3 - Shape CE
Fig. 2: 1~2 ~ Shape PA. 3~4 ~ Shape PB. 5~6 »~ Shape PC. '7-8 - Shape PD. 9 - Shape CK 14-E5 - Shape CR
I
I

. s
.I13
I1

I _,_................................__ I M_ -
=».-,.-.~».-.,,..,..»..._.. -V . fir -_.._- -. . > V 7 -- 7

$3 g w/Q???
396 On the Euphrates and to the Wes: . Caralogumicst. Te” Afis 397

OO é
. A “W”"“"'"‘_ "W" my ‘mW“W:§?[:
I

E T M E @119

* *5 C..-
i Cg? 7
2 0 10 20¢.“
F U1 0
W 4.-M» » x
__ 13
53 Z l ;
20 cm
-Y‘
Fig 5 1-5 - Shape CG. 6~7 - Shape CN. 8-11 - Shape CC. E2-I3 - Shape CF.
Fig 4 1 2 Shape CP 3 4 Shape CL. 5»6 ~ shape CO. '7 - shape CM £4 15 Shape CH

1 1‘;
i if
“.1~¢\>11
_ iiiiiiiiiiW
 :

398 On the Euphrates and to the West Caralogulstics: Tell Afis 399

“T
\ _.._._......._

2 ---..._W
\ ._......w. I
\

“<3
“J

AT
T CW?“ A’M“M<? CI“ . .;:? 2.
-:

-: . to
}.
I

‘>.

23
3.1
\ K

4
I

-4"“-_f\ 4 .

=:£
TQ. E

§f1 <@ 1: .3 24%

*%~M~w7
X-CW. 8

‘ i "“
W018 W ‘W
M 1'-"1*"-...

1. ‘/G
1‘
I

M. ,__ ' ' ~\, \,. \‘ '

3 \\} 12
7/ > 15 W
% i rrrr W t ‘
./~"*\.
‘T. A.» 3
‘-1 ‘" \_‘
> \ /‘ '
.._._..,.......,
j" - ;
,
2
|
.
\
§ K3 13
5 \ ‘{ V I ""1
1 \
\\
16 3 21 22 23

20 0 10 20cm
O ‘O °'" g m:i
E .
Fig. 6= 1-6 - Shape cs/\. 7 9 Shape CBB 20 16 Shape cac \ F1g- 7= 140* Shape GB 11-10 - Shape 61*» 21 23 Shape BR

.!'

,..
~ ~..|
zs ___:___:_____W _ W
-. 2-.» | -
 W, __ _ . . _, ..,,..,.,._.__e__..___.,_,__e.. ..
¢

400 On the Euphrates and to the West Cataloguistics: Tell Afis

i 1 M.

/ mm I 4* t ¢ e a 1: r --3
1
/
S
.
F ‘*3 3

2
K
''

vh \
I
3

I Kw
4

‘ ‘ "' '" "

“‘ “°’"-.-‘$’?~‘=?¢“ =l

an——- ca

WWW“-_
- - -»-»~-- - --
, """'""""" "‘" -
s . 8

' -= ,‘.‘,.‘..__._,-mm . _. . . . - - . - 7

‘ -A;_'~.; s 9
A .‘,: Y ‘

i
5 6 7
¢
E 0 20 cm *0
2 i" I""'j‘»
3 ‘ 0E ‘IO 20 cm
E mm__5;;;___.-..:_,
Fig. 9: 1-4 - Pithoi (single shapes). 5-6 - Shape GC. 7-8 ~ Pithoi (bases)
;, Fig. 8: 1-4 - Shape DA. 5-8 - Shape DB 9-E0 - Ring bases

%
L - *****C C C*" _ *
 --.~.

402 On the Euphrates and to the West

I

Die eisenzeitliche Keramik des Lidar Hiiyiik

1
I
UWE MULLER
Heidelberg

3 U i\\ "Y? z

i
Der Lidax I-Iiiyiik lag nordwestlich der siiclosttiirkischen Provinzhauptstadt
$anl1urfa am Ostufer des Euphrats. Im Vorfeid der Errichtung des Atatiirk-
Staudammes und der daraus resultierenden Uberflutung des Fundortes fanden von
1979 bis 1987 Rettungsgrabungen unter der Leitung von H. Hauptmann statz. Ziel
der Ausgrabung auf dem etwa 30 in hohen Hiigel war die Erforschung einer
mijglichst langen Siedlungsstratigraphie und die Entwicl-clung einer zuverléissigen
Chronologie fiir die damais archéologisch noch weitgehend unbekannte Region des

Fm
mittleren Euphrats. Anhand eines Stufenschnittes und mehrerer grofiiiéichiger
,0 Schnitte konnte eine Nutzung des Lidar Hiiyiik von der Friihen Bronzezeit bis in
die Friihe Neuzeit nachgevviesen werden. Streufunde zeigen, dafi die
Siedlungsgeschichte des Ones mindestens bis ins Chalkolithikum zuriickreicht.
Eisenzeitliche Befunde der Srihicht <6> kamen an rnehreren Stellen des Hiigels
zutage (Abb. ‘I: Die Fiiiehen mit eisenzeitlichen Schichtbefunden sind geschwéirzt).
Da in der zur Verfiigung stehenden Zeit nur ein Teil des Hiigels ergraben werden
5
konnte, blieb die Gesamtausdehhung der eisenzeitlichen Siedlung unbekannt.
Schon wéihrend der Ausgrabung wurde aber cieutlieh, dafi bier eine iange und
-' Iv kontinuierliche Schichtenabfoige erforscht werden konnte.’

l FEE9:i“""”Q
T
Bauphasen '
Die als Schicht <6> bezeichneten eisenzeitlichen Befunde bestehen aus neun gut
unterscheidbaren Bauphasen, die ihrerseits dutch kleinere Baumafinahmen, wie
Fufibodenemeuerungen, weiter zu unterteiien sind. Innerhalb dieser Abfolge des i.
Iahrtausends sind keine Zerstijrungshorizonte feststeiibar. Die Unterschiede zu der
Architektur der darunter liegenden Schicht <'7> sind betrfichtiich. -Wfihrend die
Eetzte Phase der Schicht <7> durchp eine diehte, offenbar ohne iibergeordnete
___ \5
\ \
Q Pianung gewaehsene Bebauung gekennzeichnet ist, warden von Beginn der Schicht
Q <6> an einige Grundziige sichtbai, die fiber einen langen Zeitraum den
Siedlungsplan bestimmen. Trotz dieserflgrundlegenden Erneuerung der Siediung
gibt es keine Hinweise auf einen griifseren, gewaltsamen Zerstérungshorizont oder
einen Hiatus zwischen den Schichten <'i> und <6>. Die Bebauung der Eisenzeit
\
10
wird in alien Phasen durch ein terrassenartiges Ansteigen von der dem Euphrat
i:
zugewandten Seite des Hiigels und dutch eine raciiale Anordnung der Grundstiicke
gekennzeichnet. Erst in der letzten Phase <6a> wird dieser Siedlungsplan
i aufgegeben. Statt einer Bebauung dérflichen Charakters fincien sich hier, von
0 10 20 cm

11
9 Fig. 10= 1-2 - Shape PEA. 3-4. Shape PEB. 5~6 ~ Shape PEB1. 1-9 - Shape PEB2. ' Der hier vorgestelite Text stelit eine knappe Zusammenfassung einiger der Ergebnisse der
£0-12 - Cooking Pots (single shapes) Dissertation des Verf. dar, die 1996 abgeschiossen wurde. Die Arbeit wird in der Reihe
Archaeologica Euphraiica, voraussichtlich 2001, erscheinen.

iiiiiiii fiiiiiiii '-1i""'"":""l"" ___ _ ff’ _ ______>__:::: p ...... ..

_mM_M_._,. .. ___. ___ " ' ' ’ """“' ‘

404 On the Euphrates and to the West Lidar Hdyiik 405

spiiteren Gruben fast bis zur Unkenntiichkeit gestsrt, die Reste eines grofien Arbeitsweise
Gebiiudes mit sehr starken Mauern.’ Die Keramik der eisenzeitiichen Schichten wurde vollstéindig geborgen und alle
diagnostischen Scherben (Render, Boden, I-Eenkel, Tiiiien und verzierte
Absolute Chronologie Wandstiicke, insgesamt etwa 5.500 Stiicke) gezeichnet und beschrieben. Anhand
Die absolute Datierung der Schicht <6> beruht vor ailem auf zwei Siegelabdriicken dieser Datenbasis Wurden unabhéngig voneinander eine Waren- und eine
des Kuzi~Te§up, eines Konigs von Kargamisf die in einer Brandschicht am Ende Formtypologie ersteilt. Fiir die chronoiogische Auswertung wurden nur Stiicke aus
der Schicht <7>, aber nicht in deren obersten Abhiiben gefiinden wurdenf‘ Tai1ni~ gut stratifizierien Befunden (auf oder unter Fufiboden) verwendet, nicht aber
Tesup, der Vater Kuzi-Tesups war Zeitgenosse von Suppiluliuma II. und Keramik aus Gruben oder Mauern. Bei Betrachtung der Warenverteilung in den
Hammiirzipi von Ugarit. Dies bedeutet, daB der iiblichcrweise um oder ethvas mach Bauphasen fie! auf, dal3 héickselgernagerte Keramik in den jiingeren Phasen
1200 v. Chr. mit dem Zerfali des hethitischen Grofireiches angesetzte Ubergang deutlieh seltener auftritt. Der Verdacht, daB es sich dabei urn iiitereisenzeitliches
von der Spiiten Bronze- zur Friihen Eisenzeit innerhaib der Schicht <7> und nicht Altmaterial in jiingereisenzeitlichen Befunden handeln konnte, wurde durch die
an deren Ende liegt, und sich im arch?-iologischen Befund nicht nachnveisen 15131. Auswertung der Formtypoiogie bestiitigt. Typen, die in éiiteren Phasen héiufig
Der Beginn der Schicht <6> und die damit einhergehende Neuemchtung der auftreten, in zwei oder mehreren Phasen nieht beiegt sind und dann in jiingeren
Siedlung diirften daher mit den von Tiglat-Pilesar I. geschilderten Ereignissen in Phasen vereinzelt vorkommen, warden in diesen jiingeren Schichten als
Zusammenhang stehenf‘ Hierzu pafit auch der in der Keramik fafibare Einflufi aus Aitmaterial gewertet. Dadurch verringerte sich die beiegte Anzahl einiger Waren in
dem Norden (s. u.). Die engen Verbindungen der Keramik aus den Dauphaseig den jiingeren Schichten weiter, so dafi aiie Scherben dieser Waren in jungen
<6blb> und <6b1a> zu den chronoiogisch fixierten Funden aus T11 Barsip Befunden als Aitmaterial identifiziert werden konnten. Einige der Formtypen
datieren diese Schichten des Lidar Hiiyiik in das 7. Jh. v. Chr. ' _ kommen in geniigender Anzahl in mehreren‘?hasen vor, sind aber in einer der
Am Ende der eisenzeitiichen Abfoige steht eine reiche Grablege in einer dazwischen Iiegenden Phasen nicht vertreten. Die Laufzeit diese? Typen wurde
Bronzewanne, die in die Bebauung der Phase <6a> eingetieft ist. Die Beigaben dann vom éiitesten his zum jiingsten Auftreten gerechnet (auf den Abbildungen ist
datieren diese Bestattung in das 5. Jh. v. Chr.;7 somit diirfte die Bauphase <6a> in dieser Fail mit "Typ XY in dieser Phase nicht belegt" vermerkt). Trotz des rigiden
etwa den Zeitraum des 6. Jh. v. Chr. eingenommen haben. Durch die nach unten Ausschiufiverfahrens zur identifikation von Aitrnaterial biieben fiir jede Bauphase
und oben einzugrenzende Zeitspanne ergeben sich absolute Datierungsanséitze fiir geniigend eindeutig zugehorige Stiicke fibrig (minimai 91 Stiicke in <6b1b>,
die einzeinen Bauphasen, die selbstverstéindiich nur als Néiherungswerte zu maximal 284 Stiicke in <6d>), um auch statistische Ahssagen zuzulassen.
'3
verstehen sind:
§
§ Warentypologie -
E|=
Endphase der Schicht <7>: ca. 1200-1100 v.Chr. Der Begriff Ware wird hier ausschlieffiiich in einem streng definierten Sinn
Bauphase <6e2>: ca. 1100-1075 v.Chr. verstanden und beschreibt Gruppen technoiogisch einheitlicher i§eramik.8 Zur
Bauphase <6e1>: ca. 1075-1000 v.Chr. Definition warden alle makroskopisch beobachtbaren Merkmale des Scherbens
Bauphase <6d>: ca. 1000-900 v.Chr. herangezogen, die durch das Rohmaterial und seine Aufbereitung bedingt sind,
sowie Merkmaie, die dureh die verschiedenen Arbeizsvorgeinge bei der Hersteliung
Bauphase <6c2>: ca. 900-850 v.Chr.
entstanden sind. Vermischungen von Waren und Formtypoiogie ("Pithosware") und
»wvn4V\¢r!WNRfl/—“-@~£‘\$),§L_—4'-;v7= Bauphase <6c1>: ca. 850-800 v.Chr. Definitionen aufgrund von Benutzungsspuren, die nach der Hersteilung entstanden,
Bauphase <6b2>: ca. 800-725 v.Chr. ("Koehtopfware") wurden verrnieden, de hierbei die Gefahr von Zirkeischliissen
Bauphase <6b1b>: ca. 725-650 v.Chr. immanent ist. Nach der Definition defWaren anhand technologischer Kriterien
Bauphase <6b1a>: ca. 650-600 v.Chr. zeigte sich, daB Waren unterschiedlicher Hersteiiung das gleiehe oder ein sehr
Bauphase <6a>: ca. 600-500 v.Chr. iihnliches Obertiéchenfarbspektrum haben konnen und die Farbe allein somit kein
sinnvolies Kriterium zur Warendefinition ist. Insgesamt wurden aufgrund ihrer
Magerungsbestandteiie ffinf Warengruppen unterschieden, die sich anhand von
s
Feinheit und Oberfléichenbehandiung weiter in Warentypen einteilen Lassen.’
3

2 Einige schematische Pliine der Architektur wurden bei MULLER 1999 abgebildet.
3 SURENHAGEN I986. 3 SCHNEIDER etai. E989.
“ LITE'AUER/CROUWEL/HAUPTMANN 1991. 9 Eine ausfiihrliche Bcschreibung der einzelnen Warentypen wird in der abschiieflenden
i Publikation der eisenzeitlichen Keramik von Lidar Hoyfik erscheinen. Besondcrer Wert wird
~
s
1 5 Lucieessm 1926, § 221, 74.
6 BUNNENS 1991a; 1992; 199712. Jmvmzsow 1992. Vergi. den Beitrag von A. Jamieson in dort auf die Angabe der Magemngsgriificn und -mengen in absolnten Zahlen und nicht in
diesem Band. reiativen Werten (etwa: "weniger oder mehr als bei Ware XY”) gelegt, um eine
7 HAUVFMANN 1987. Vergleichbarkeit mit dem Keramikmateriai andcrer Fundorte zu gewfihrleistcn.

1
 V , ___,B ,B ,_U
406 On the Euphrates and to the West
Warengruppe E umfaflt Scherben, die mit Sand, Kalk und verschieden groiien
Anteiien an Hacksel gemagert wurden. Aufier einer sehr groben, zusatzlich mit
Kalk gemagerten Ware, die fast ausschliefilich fiir Pithoi verwendet wurde, liefjen
sich keine eindeutigen Korrelationen zwischen Waren der Gruppe 1 und einzelnen
Fonngruppen feststelien. Auch im Fall der Pithoi ist der UmkehrschluB nicht
statthaft, denn solche Gefafie kommen auch in anderen, oft auch feingemagerten
Waren vor. Allen Waren der Gruppe 1 ist gemeinsam, daB sie zu Beginn der
‘\
2
Eisenzeit ihren hiichsten Anteii am Gesamtmateriai haben (insgesamt fiber 50%
5
|
|' der eindeutig schichtbestimmten Stiicke). Sie nehmen in den folgenden Phasen in
i ihrer prozentualen I-Iéiufigkeit stiindig ab und ihre Laufzeit iiberschreitet in keinem
3.
Z Fall die Phase <6c2>. Héickselmagerung wurde in Lidar Héyiik ab der Mitte des 9.
Jh. v. Chr. nicht mehr verwendet.
K
Die Gefafie der Warengruppe 2 wurden nur mit Sand und Kalk gemagert. Eine
z Ware mit aufféillig hohem Kalkanteil in der Magerung wurde vor allem fiir die
i<
Herstellung von Flaschen und Kriigen genutzt. Andere Warentypen mit streifiger
Oberfliichenpolitur wurden bevorzugt fiir offene Geféifie, wie Teller und Schalen,
seltener auch fiir Tiipfe verwendet. Keine der Waren der Gruppe 2 lf.iBt sich in ihrer
Laufzeit eingrenzen, iediglich ihr prozentualer Anteil am Gesamtmaterial steigt
mit dem zunehmenden Verschwinden der Héickselwaren.
,. Die Warengruppe 3 wird durch ihre Magemng aus scharflcantigen, silbrig
gléinzenden Partikeln definiert. Es handelt sich dabei mit groifier
?"3“m._-“~'."’£<*=‘>"-'w
Wahrscheinlichkeii um Z6I'l<l6i1'!61‘[€-I1 Feidspat, megiicherweise auch um Glimmer
oder Quarz.'° Eine Variante weist zusiitzlich eine Magerung mit Hacksei auf.
Waren der Gruppe 3 wurden vorwiegend zur Hersteilung von Geféii3en verwendet,
die fiir eine Verwendung auf offenem Feuer vorgesehen waren, Es handelt sich
dabei keineswegs nur um Kochttipfe, denn es gibt auch einige flache Schalen in
dieser Ware, die ebenfalis sekundiire Brandspuren aufweisen. Obwohi Waren der
~.-= —- Gruppe 3 mit iiberwiegender Mehrheit fiir Kochgefafie benutzt wurden, ist auch
hier der Umkehrschlufi nicht zutreffend, denn Kochtiipfe sind auch in Waren der
Gruppen 1 und 2 nachzuweisen. Die Varianten der Warengruppe 3 mit organischer
».~- ¢<~:-+evwri
Magerung sind, wie die anderen Hackselwaren, nur bis in die Bauphase <6c2>
belegt, die rein mineralisch gemagerten Warentypen lassen sich innerhalb der
Eisenzeit nicht eingrenzcn.
1
Warengruppe 4 umschreibt eine vergleichsweise geringe Anzahl von Scherben
i
1
aus sorgféiltig ausgeschlammtem Ton ohne Oder mit nur sehr wenigen Magerangs-
Oder Verunreinigungspartikeln. Politur oder Gléittung sind, im Gegensatz zu den
Warengruppen 1, 2 und 3, héiufig zu beobachten. Das Farbspektmm von zumeist
kréiftigen Brauntfiinen unterscheidet diese Ware deutlieh von der sogenannten
assyrischen Palastware.“ Einige Formen, die aus dieser Ware hergestellt wurden,
ahneln jedoch assyrischen Typen, so daB man sie als lokale Imitatienen bezeichnen
kann. Geffifie ohne oder mit sehr feiner Magerung lassen sich in jeweils wenigen
Exemplaren in allen eisenzeitiichen Phasen des Lidar I-Iiiyiilc nachweisen.
4 '3 Diese Information wird D. Siirenhagen verclanlct, der bei dem Treffen 1995 in Heidelberg
~<
‘° Pers. Mitt. D. Lutz.
ll Vgl. die Beitriige von I. Eidem und R. Aclccrmann, sowie von E. Schneider in diesem
Band.
$ ;._
L.-- * D Wieiififi * W We ***************j*
, _ .. 4.
_
Lidar Héiyiik 407
Die Waren der Gruppe 5 warden, wie die der Gruppe 2, ausschiieillich mit Sand
und zuweilen mit etwas Kalk gemagert. Die Magerungspartikei sind nicht
notwendigerweise feiner, jedoch ist der Anteil der Magerung deutlich geringer als
bei Warengruppe 2. Die Bruchfarben von kraftigem riitlichem Braun sind meist
dunkier als bei den anderen Warengruppen, was auf ein anderes Rohmaterial oder
anciere Brennvorgange schliefien lafit. Das deutlichste Merkmal der Waren dieser
Gruppe ist ein kréiftig roter Uberzug, der auf der gesamten, oder auf einem Teii der
Oberflache angebracht wurde. Warengruppe 5 setzt ohne Vorlaufer in der
Bauphase <6b1b> ein, also gegen Ende des 8. ode; zu Anfang des 7. Jh. v. Chr.,
und ist bis <6a> naclizuweisen. Eine Variante, bei welcher der flachige Uberzug zu
einem Streifen rater Bemalung am Rand reduziert ist, erscheint erst ab <6b1a> mit
wenigen Exemplaren und wird dann in <:6a> haufiger. Das Formenspektrum
besteht fast ausschliefilich aus Schalen, nur einige wenige geschlossene Gefiifie
warden mit roter Randbemalung versehen. Die Warengruppe 5 von Lida: Hiiiyiik
entspricht der scheibenpolierten und mineralisch gemagerten Ware mit totem
Uberzug aus Til Barsip.” Dagegen sind die Unterschiede zu den handpolierten und
organisch gemagerten Warenfmit braunrotem Uherzug, die in Westsyrien und der
Levante schon friih auftreten; erheb1ich.‘3
Formtypologie
Die Keramik wurde zunaehst nach Formgruppen unterteiit. S0 wurden offene
Gefafie als Formgruppe A and innerhalb dieser fiache Teller mit gerader Wandung
als Form AA, Schalen als Form AB bezeichnet. Formgruppe B umfafit kugelige
Tepfe (BA mit umgeschlagenem Rand, BB mit einfach abgeruncietem Rand), CA
Tifipfe, CB Tepfe mit deutlicher Hals/Schulterbildung, D Fiaschen, Kannen und
Krtige und E grofie Vorratsgefiilie und ?ithoi. Diese Formgruppen sind funktional
bedingt und haben daher keine chronologische Relevanz. Bntsprechend zeigte sich,
dali in aiien Bauphasen ein annahernd gleiches prozentuales Verhaltnis zwischen
den Formgruppen besteht, da iihniich strukturierte Gemeinschaften offenbar einen
ahniichen Bedarf an verschiedenen Kerarnikformen haiten. Lediglich in Bauphase
<6a>, in der die Reste von Groiflarchitektur eine geiinderte Nutzung zeigen, konnte
ein starkes Uberwiegen von iliaschen und Pithoi festgesteilt warden, wéhrend
offene Formen (Formgruppe A) deutlich zuriicktreten. Dies liifit auf eine teilweise
Nutzung des, in dieser Phase ergtahenen, grofien Gebéiudes als Magazin schiiefien.
Die nicht fanktional bedingten Varianten innerhalb der Fonnen wurden als Typen
bezeichnet. Diese sind chronologisch empfindiich und konnten mit Sicherheit einer
oder mehreren Bauphasen zugewiesen werden (s. Abschnitt Arbeitsweise).
Auf den Abbildungen wird ein miiiglichst vollstandiges Typenspektrum der
einzelnen Bauphasen vorgestellt. Nur sehr grofie Gefafie (Pithoi und grofie,
wannenartige Schalen), die sich aber zeitlich nur schwer eingrenzen Iassen,
'2 Ich danke Harm G. Burznens und den Mitarbeitern der Ausgrabung in Tell Ahrnar, die
mir 1996 grofiziigigerweise Einblick in das unpublizierte Material gewiihrten.
Keramik aus seiner Ausgrabung in Tell Gindaros, am syrischcn Oberlauf des Afiin,
vorstellte. Die Publikation der eisenzeitlichen Keramik von Tell Gindaros durch den Verf.
befindet sich in Vorbereitung.
i:"*"'j__*f'**"'""f1|r"*j*-qguu""""'"' " _ V_1»__ V V V llululllwllulllmulluuli --- ~-- --r: i
:,,_,____,,V__,M__‘,._.‘,_V,v‘_,__ , , V _. _.._.......,.._.._....__.._,.._____.,,_.,.,__._____._,........_~._______..W_.M..,.~.~..._.._-__....9.
408 On the Euphrates and to the West
konnten aus Platzgriinden nicht dargestellt werden. Alle Abbildungen von Keramik
sind in Mafistab 1:6 gehalten.
Das Typenspektrum der jtingsten Phase der Schicht <7> (Abb. 2 und 3)
entspricht vollstiindig dem der vorangegangenen hethitischen Grofireichszeit.
Neinen der durch die Siegelabdnicke von Lidar Hdyiik nachgewiesenen politischen
und dynastischen Kontinuitat“ ist somit auch eine nngebrochene Fortdauer der
materiellen Knltur vorn 13. in das 12. Jh. v. Chr. zu belegen.
Die Keramik der Bauphase <6e2> (Abb. 4 - 6) zeigt ein teiiweises Weiterleben
der hethitischen Traditionen. Einige Telier- und Schalentypen werden unveriindert
iibernommen oder nur wenig verandert hergestellt. Ahnliches gilt fiir die
geschlossenen Formen, bei denen abet aueh einige neue Typen auftreten. Die
auffalligste Neuerung stellt das Auftreten der Tdpfe der Form BB (Abb. 5) dar.
Neben den ungegliederten Formen, der Verzierung durch horizontale Rillen am
oberen Gefafiteil und den einfach abgerundeten Randern unterscheiden sich diese
Tiipfe dutch ihre Hersteilungstechnik grundlegend
Kerarnikproduktion in Lidar Hdyiik. Sie wurden in der iibecwiegenden Mehrheit
frei von Hand aufgebaut, wahrend sonst ausschliefilich scheibengedrehte Keramjk
..1¢ vorkommt. Sie gehdren zu der sog. "Rillenkeramik" oder “ribbed ware", die im
Gebiet des Kebanstausees und der gesamten Nordostttirkei die Leitfonn der Friihen
Eisenzeit darstellt.” Ihre Verbreitung nach Stiden ist, neben Lida: I-Idytik, in Tille
|
Heyiik“ und bis naeh Tell Halaf" nachzuweisen. Die Gefiilie aus Lidar Heyiik
weisen fast ausnahmslos sekundare Brandspuren auf, and ein betriiehtiicher Teil
wurde in den Waren der Gruppe 3 hergestellt, die bevorzugt fiir Kochgefafle
l
verwendet wurden. Daher lassen sich alle Exemplare der Ri1len1<e1'amii< aus Lidar
Hdytik als Kochtepfe bezeichnen. Schalen oder napféihniiche Typen und
fiaschenartige Gefaiie, wie sie im Kebangebiet und auch in Tille Heyiik belegt sind,
kommen in Lida: I-Ieytik nicht vor. Da Waren der Gruppe 3 im
Hauptverbreitungsgebiet der Rillenkeramik nur extrem seiten nachzuweisen sind,“
muI3 man, trotz der Fremdartigkeit dieser Gefiifie im Keramikmaterial von Lidar
Heyiik, von einer Eokaken Produktion ausgehen. In Phase <6e2> wurden somit
gleichzeitig Kochtdpfe rein spatbronzezeitlicher Art (BA 02 und BA 03), deren
Weiterentwickiungen (BC 01 und BC 02), sowie Kochtiipfe einer fremden, von
Norden beeinflussten, Art produziert und verwendet. Das Typenspektrum der
Bauphasen <6e1> (Abb. '7-9) und <6d> (Abb. 1042) unterscheidet sich nur wenig
vOn dem der vorangegangenen Phase. Bei den Schalen~ und Topftypen liiflt sich
eine Tendenz zu schéirferer Profiiierung und massiverer Randgestaltung feststellen.
Rillenkeramik ist weiterhin belegt, wahrend die "spéitbronzezeit1ichen"
Kochtopftypen BA 02 und BA 03 schon ab Phase <6el> nicht mehr vorkommen.
In der Phase <6d> sind einige Exemplare der Rillenkeramjk scheibengedreht und
die Verzierung wurde teilweise mit einem feinen Kamm angebracht.
“‘ HAWKINS 1983.
*5 mm 1995, Dulzu 1979, HAUPYMANN 1969/70; 1976, Sz~:\/IN 1991, VAN Loowl
\ GUTERBOCK 1971; 1972, WINN 1980.
~
'6 BLAYLOCK 1990, 1998. SUMMERS 1993a.
” BARTL1939.
‘8 Die Eisenzeit von Norsuntepe. U. Miiller, in Vorbereitung.
.............._.............
Lidar Héiyiik 409
i
Mit der Phase <6c2> (Abb. 13 und 14) andert sich, mit der Ende der Laufzeit
von 25 Typen und dem Neuauftreten von 6 Typen, das Keramikrepertoire
erheblicia. In dieser Phase ist unter anderem Rein Typ der Riilenkeramik mehr
I
nachzuweisen. Das Fermenrepertoire iindert sich somit schon zu Beginn dieser
Phase, wiihrend das Warenspektrum erst am Ende, mit dem Abbrechen der
Verwendung von organischer Magerung, eine einschneidende Anderung erfahrt.
Hier ist wiederum eine erhebliche Kontinuitat zwischen den Formtypen der Piiasen
I <6c2> und <6c1> (Abb. 15 und 16) festzustellen.
I
In der Bauphase <6b2> endet die Laufzeit von 13 Typen, wahrend 9 neue
Typen auftreten (Abb. 1'7 und 18). Der Unterschieci zu der vorangegangenen Zeit
ist daher betréichtlich. In dieser Phase lafit sich der letzte Typ von Tellern (AA 06)
nachweisen, die in der Folgezeit durch Schalen ersetzt werden. Aueh zu der
I folgenden Phase <6b1b> (Abb. 19 und 20) bestehen cleutliche Untersehiede im
Formenrepertoire, da vor allem einige neue Schalentypen auftreten, wobei
von der tibrigen gleichzeitig die rot iiberzogenen Waren der Gruppe 5 eingefiihrt werden. Diese
bieiben auch wahrend der folgenden Phase <6bla> (Abb. 21 und 22) die
auffalligste Erscheinung im Keramikmaterial. Die letzte eisenzeitliche*Phase <6a>
1' (Abb. 23 und 24) ist vor allem (lurch eine \_/erarmung des nachweisbaren Waren
und Typenspektrums gekennzeichnet, was aber meglicherweise mit der geanderten
Nutzung des ergrabenen Teils der Siedlung zu erkiaren ist.
Zusammenfassung
1,
Die Ausgrabungen auf dem Lidar Heytik erbrachten eine ununterbrochene
Stratigraphic vom 3. bis in die Mitte des 1. Jahrtausends v. Chr. Die Voriage der
Keramik aus dieser Schichtenabfolge bietei ein chronoiogisches Gertist fiir weitere
Forschungen. Die hist0r.ische,n Impiikationen, die sich gerade aus den Ergebnissen
I
der Keramikbearbeitung der eisenzeitlicnen Schichten ergeben, soilen an dieser
Stelle nicnt eingehend besprochen werden. Festzuhaiten ist, dafi die dutch die
Siegeiabdriicke des Kuzi-Tesup erwiesene politische und dynastische Kontinuitai
aueh in einem ungebrochenen Weiterleben der materieiien Kuitur der hethitischen
|’ Grolfireichszeit his gegen Ende des 12. In. v. Chr. wide:-gespiegelt wird. Das
Auftreten der Rillenkeramik lafit auf einen bedeutenden Einfiufi noch ungeklarter
Art aus dem Norden schliefien, der dutch die schriftlichen Quellen bisher kaum zu
fassen war. Die Diskrepanz in den absoluten Datierungen der Stratigraphien von
Lidar Hdytik und Tiile Hdyiikw _bedarf noch einer Klarung, abet allein die
Tatsache, da£5 der Euphrat, vor allem in der frlihen Eisenzeit offenbar eine
kulturelle Grenze darstellte, ist ein wichtiges Ergebnis. Es bleibt zu hoffen, da13 die
Diskussion in der gleichen, offenen und konstruktiven Atmosphare fortgesetzt
werden kann, die den "Table Ronde" auszeiehnete. Allen Teilnehmern, die ieh
1995 in Heidelberg begriifien durfte, gilt mein aufrichtiger Dank fiir die wertvollen
Informationen, die zu einem grofien Teil zu den hier kurz vorgestellten
Ergehnissen beitrugen.
I
*9 Vergi. den Beitrag von S. Blaylock in diesem Band.
:,,,,,,,,,,,_,,,,_,,__.‘,_. ___. _ . .. . ._ _, .. ,_,,_._. 9 ....._.._,~.~....W.,._.

410 On the Euphrates and to the West Lidar Héyrilc

Zitierte Literatur
Bum. 1989; 1995, BLAYLOCK 1990; 1998, BUNNENS 1991a; 1992; 1997b, Dun
I979, HAUPTMANN 1969/70; 1976; 1987, HAWKINS 1988, IAMIESON 199 2» , l} _§°|°i€§FL‘=[H_1rIiW1(lTlM"u3e’li5'0§n
ml . V slrluivinwix
K,,. ,,. . . __
LITTAUER/CROUWEL/HAUPTMANN 1991, LUCKENBILL 1926, SCHNEIDER et ai. 198 9, 1 5:.‘ V ~<-2 ~ *
V vb Q2 - ’ \" . 5!. l
SEVIN 1991, SURENHAGEN 1986, SUMMERS 1993a, VAN LOON/GUTERBOCK 197 1; E" 3 . “- S]
1972,W11~1N 1980. _§i"'/) /,.t. T '”“‘=;—/”""\\-\\'“'“
527
5 , ’/X ‘N
. 15‘ ’\
1/ -1 /1 F“
{
5@"r/ ,1
i-rn‘ 5 \'/
1-i“Mt =1 r;/
s

A
I: /
/
9/ //’ /

~
/ .39
/<\/ 1:1;--*- 1391‘1
J‘
La l 0:
,, 1 tu-l_l
___)
LB!‘

47‘ ' 5 / 0 M 1.1‘

1 VV s .
L6 as 1

| - . .1 ‘ * "‘““
/*5
@ ...m. . ....-
L _.-.:»*.:-:<—:~:;»:‘ -.-. -
. ,
1.,-.~I“"_"‘l17 :$:_V_?§:_$_:_:_=_:Vm_g
"1-. $3 v'(-".13"-..
#51
F22}
N |.__
=h§=$:'<1$-,1:-'.~..
-’§.’-: ,1-:?»=<*>=-f<-"*
,....../N ‘ Tr
~'-3'.';i;.*. .-.~.;.».-.-.-. . ‘-‘-‘¢\"“""g
“mu >
T F” . ."~""""""='-7"" ~._-._~..
, ~. .¢*~"'r -1-:--’-~=-M-1 -;11 -
11 £3 1 /'
§____ 1 t»$?$';wi11~1$~1'-111:1-»’>'§ "' -
1 :w,r~:=:-:~.'=->.r:-:=-5~!-*“ - I
l1l:Fr" u‘:'LUn;gS5~,/
H . 3 -' ' 1’;2\).-I-.-2-_,-<-45'» ','_
F
‘_ :
1
ii
1
=1
1.0

' "’ \
é
"
£1-'=:~$:~: J . /
“X” ./
F‘s~:~O-Cmw

~»--a
1, 1" \ - \
A 1»;
- l e
~ F511,
l I . . -I‘ H i'x-:21’,

\\'-.1 1/ 1
u _‘_/ 1 ,1 ‘Hm,/-.

1.)!!!‘-\
OI-J
/'
s
2
. ._.’-e .. \-
..
‘
I_
_.Q
.7 ~ ..‘,_.;
. \__,,, 1212}
5:3;-/'
'-‘ ‘:1 ’
/V__\ _ (Z __-us_ _ _» ~......__ \
1
‘F \
=*:1:I:!-I-.-:1:-'
‘ 35:! .
-.».-_2-2;, \_ .
- ""‘*~—-—--"
ill’s l1 I $99. ,
i Z -.
ii
it
ill
_.1 ,1 V
ll
1555' "‘ _'"' -
' 1" A
3'5
5E

\ 1 1i1W‘
(B
4 5
2-.--" '5-
J . *5? 4 Mm 7
. 71'
EL.-:+:5 ’_-<1“:-~.r>: “D
e' .1‘‘£12?
-R
5;-5.0:?-:~:~:§.<‘I5.>¢ -. -;
.
.4 12s
'§:-$~;#.>~»~%--'-

lei
£519__e_ iC'D'\\\\\V
;€l%l
*::1z )\V\§\)\;1f,.£;V?
__4___L __1_ l1'11
Vi
“'-Q “<5 Y ‘-1 ‘D Z e
T5 E‘ l"—'-r Z‘ 6
,
RSTUVWX|1
1 T?‘I
.

LIIJAR H 0 Y 0 K 9?
m<?t%1979~86 ""'. t-re rm

.~>;-_r=9<sx_r>#mu,Ha_1v=\>-'_ _ ?;2_=.s~,-‘.91
1987
‘1
li
Abb. 1
s
\

l
1

l
,_,__,_,,_,_,____M,~____ V‘ ,_, _. ,............ ...~

On the Euphrates and to the West Lidar Hfiyiik 413

K’? §\ M TF7
AA 01 1111 oz ' FR mm
HA ()1 DB 01

1
s
\ +997’
K TDM7 '\\ TMM7 AB 03
5> A802
i.

s.

BA O3 DB 93 '
AB04

l.

x 1 / // A W
l-1'
1.

V,
;..

7 K 5 CA O1 DB O4

AEO1

¢‘$:-52;/4-1"‘ CB 01 DB O5
<%;=§T;

AF O2

1 Abb. 2 - Keramik der letzten Phase der Schicht <7) Abb. 3 - Keramik der ietzten Phase deg-_ Schicht <7>

@-
, V 2 _ V. 1 .V V_ V; _.»_- .V V;_ .,.V ., I. V .
wat.,._1..t_.... - -_ ___ _ _)_________ _) ________V_

414 On the Euphrates and to the West Lidar Hiiyiik

Q 2 ii l ; AB 10
AA 01

BB 01

C} " ”

,\O
<1 e e e e /M 1111 AA04

1
B802

BB 03

\ 1/ l:i‘”‘"—V1:V2 BB04

‘ l A BB 05

E l 11 7%

1
BC O1

Q A ‘ : " Q60 -
A1305 G 0 1
BCG2
_ AP 01
A307
'2 c.-101.2

1ii % )—~—@ M CD

fig i \ CA03

A ' 1 ‘W Tl; @411/as CA04

~
Abb_ 4 _ Kefamik ‘hr Bauphase <6e2> Abb. S ~ Keramik der Bauphase <6e2>

_ ———————_———:~— _ _ 1: V - _ _ _
V V3. .

.. .. -.- »
 1 ................................................................................_, 91 ...._ ,. .,M......,W..-.,,

. I2

416 On the Euphrates and to the West Lida?’ H5Wk 417

\
3'

57
27*”? M
CA O5

Q
N 9 AA O3

\\ /AA04
l
.. CA 07

9»-_.,~.<- CB 02
s
L.
Q.‘ 2”’, V,’ "WW A803

<»~<e~= y¢-m
Xv _
DA Oi AB04

=2»:-1<‘._~'w<.»1-,\.~<-+».1

ll
K AB 05
1,l'~.
1 .1. DB O3
1-’ - AB 07 in dicser Phase nicht belcgz
DA 0?.
l

'4 DB O4 DB O5 kl : AB08
E
CD V V111»
1:. .
i
1
1;
l / \ DBO’?
K““‘::7 11,;
\\ WW7
DB06
1

1"? D1303
ill? DBO9 l l l l l l 2‘

s ‘ F Abb. 6 - Keramik der Bauphase <6e2> Abb. '7 -- Keramik der Bauphase <6e1>
:44 K

;_- ~— .......__.....__.___

4.
 ~w ~. .-..,,..._._.‘i_._....\,

418 On the Euphrates and to the West Lidar H5751/< 419

ix
vifj

?‘
“
AB 14

FQ
— —_ > \ BC01

* K DA OI

AB 15 DA (J2

: AC 02

W 7?‘
( '7 AE02
DB 03

BC O3 “Mi? DB O4

lllill AE03

AE04
/4 y

p'——A”—_ \
BC O4

\ CA O2

CA 03
C3
Wifi
M-
@\ DB O5

DB ()6

AF01
’§/ L
DB 07

‘ BB OI
CA 05
Vi? DB08

//
1 CA06
BBO2 T D309

BB 04 in dicscr Phase nicht belegt

B8 O3
P— CAQ8 lbw DB ll

%}§j‘@
fl'—"Fl\ c.»\o9

BB OS D312

BB 06 CB O2

\
~ Abb. 8 - Keramik der Bauphase <6e1> Abb. 9 - Keramik der Bauphase <6e1>

..'|

V s
 %% K "<'V‘;;;;; V :7‘. =‘ ~"--~“-*---i?~- ~"~

¢ ,

420 On the Euphrates and to the West Lidar Hdyiik

;.
ii
i§_'I % AA 01
<X~ ([=;M§; fl@“MF:3l BB02
{El

x wig? AB I6

BB O3

\§{{‘“MWZ7
: AA03 £1 5 AB 18 I n-*———~l'~'—'“*—‘\
BB O4

\ /
m~:<=¢*_-.<~4=;.-_~M»*y< w»*, w~;'»

w""*t:::3 mm
BB 05

$
.R5 i‘
' 4T““W”Ffi§%§\ BB 06

\K #05
@5?“*T*“"\
1
¥_
iii
12?
3; : A807
ii \;V

R
1? ABO8
Y'r"“? / B808
»
H.
M:
V.

E 3 AB O9
|.E
I-E
BC 01
:1.
wi-
W AB 10 in dieser Phase nichl bclegl

if ((
V __ V ""7, 7777 7 ‘ BCOQ
ii
g AB11
it
ll mm jTfif~?;;;;\
BCG3
f”% AB ,2
1*,
BC04
5 I ; AB l4

E
.2!

§
as K I” BC 05

\
Abb. 10 - Keramik der Bauphase <6d> Abb. 11 - Keramik der Bauphase <6d>
5
é
iv
2'1
H
1%
1?;

__.m_M._ ?_= ‘ iiiii ' % if ,% _ _ I ,- W».-__ __

.,_,,_,__,__,,__;_,_,,_______>___._ , __ .. ..,..,.,._,,,,,,,‘.‘,___,..,,,_.=.,~._,...,,,,..,_.,..,(=.==.,..,,...,__.__.. ...,<..‘,...,,,,_,.._,__,.,.,,,,,................................................................................. . ......?_ _.......__,i>.... ._... .............— ...... -u

On the Euphrates and to the Wes: Lidar Hfiyiik 423

<12?‘
CA O3 Vii AAO6 W M
av { { {" CA 04
<§ F1‘;/7 mg \“]“'—] ACO2
CA O5
CD

a
2
(PW 7? CA O6
{\\ W /‘ AB IO
AC 03

@\-< >»@:.<~_=:»m+
$7 CAO7

<\1" W
AE 03 in diescr Phase nichl bciegl

W _
L
§7*_'E"i”'F?~ CA09
V I { { {T
'6

~—v-=1
i7““'1i'? CA 10 1 1

K j AB 12

L
Q57 1 i CA ll

__ * ms
1;
1
CA12

CB U2 in dicser Phase nichl beicgt AB £5

CB 03

\
» W"? AB 17
BC 01

‘ can
W‘T_“\
OW DA O1
DA 02
AB 18

>3 . 1
BC O2

F
r
r
DB04
37 DB 05 g AQ.l9
BC 03

CD
X?
DB06
WW0 1
Fé AB 20
BC 05

~
n
‘I Abb. 12 ~ Keramik der Bauphase <6d>
S5 DB l0 // i
Abb. 13 - Keramik der Bauphase <6c2>
W3
5
§
1
§
2

ER,
,__,,,,__,__,‘_M.h____, H >__,__,__ ’ ,,,,,,,,,,,,__,.,=_.,..._....._._‘__,,_.,_,_,_,..=.,__________.........__,_.,,.,.,,.,____,__,_____,..,, ,,,....,. _ .......__v ......., ,=:. .. .4. /W M.“ . .,~.-.~..M.-....

424 On the Euphrates and to the West Lidar Héiyiik 425

:2 I \ CA 05 II” DA 02
‘?“”F“?7 IMW ‘¥l“I:§? mm
7‘“I"_—\ CA06 1° Z AC 02

9/ %=iI WW
I

DB OS

AB}! J MAM I M303

F' CA09
Ag 12 AD 02

Ts
I*I*I D806

14 I””7\w
$
4
I
I

é5
zei 5
III Z
=

II:,= =
CA l0
I~I_I DBO’?
, K'*I::9 AB 19 _V H V W H

. AH 03

I
II K
lfi I

CA 12 in dieser Phase nicht bclegl

\ CA ii

I I§**”F§§;3 Am0@%wm%%# 4 Rmm

"I:
W’ _ I DB I0
_.._.
<7 I I'—-=-—————?-'- - -**- A505

I
CB O2 , Q I j AB 21

17751
In

I K
I I CB O3
f I \ BC01
DB11
A322

/at I \ CB O4 —— ———————~ é I \ scoz

~_=\ <1

/9— CB 05 A823
2 I \ acoz

n
Abb. 14 - Keramik der Bauphase <6cl> Abb. 15 ~ Keramik der Bauphase <6c1>
v. I

I~.

- cf
21
P:
I. gs;
I.
I?
If
 - _ I I I I I I I I I I I UV ........................4 ___,

I 426 On the Euphrates and to the West Lidar Hdyiik 427

- AC O2 in dieser Phase nick: bclcgl

I AA O6
s

é \ BCO5 I ' C804

i
Ir

‘ CA O7
CB 05 Q T444; TI I—~—-~r
I T2224 cA0<.>

I
I
I; \ CA !0
C806 l 1

fi
r
I ‘ Q I 2 AD04
D806 A323
CAH 5

3p__”_; ” I DBO’?
I AB 24 I A504
I

CA 13
3 Q : AB 25 /I I \ ac 01
3 ,
E 1;
****

333??
0
I
CAM DB1}

s\\ I—%1mI "J ‘ I \ acne

I Asia
CA 15

DB I2
/§ \ BC 04
Q
x
$7137 DB 14 AB 27 BC 05 in dicser Phase nicht bcicgt

CA 16
\
c
Abb. 16 ~ Keramik der Bzmphase <6cl> _) Abb. 17 - Keramik der Ballphase <6b2>

‘ ffffffffffffffffif I
i 7 77 .. >1 5 .1 »_;_1-H,__.__.__..__:;__ » E 1, , _ _.1 . ', 1.. . . . 1‘. ._ .} l.. ;.; ,. i _____ii V 2 M:;i“~"u."wW* 5

...-.......... ._ ,4. » -
~.~...v._~_.-......._.._. . . . . . ». . _t......_.__ , »... ,

428 On the Euphrates and to the West Lida? H5)’I3k 429

CAO9
i AB12

m CA 10 DB06

5, .3-, =
'. ‘rig?’ B24
2 \ CA ll ‘ " --_=: “"1. A
;
CD
I CA 12 in dieser Phase nichl belegt
\»\~<¢_>
: I!“ I DBO? 31' I ' "“_’:'e~‘2=.".-‘::';"
T '11 £1» ‘-""“3';'_;<Ié.5?°'- AB 25

/ CA 13
4.»

z
2z I

5’
*2
3 DB 10
s CA 14 in dicscr Phase nichl bclcgt \ AB 26
.4
II I 1
ii.
CA 15 in diesel‘ Phase nicht bclegt
I AB 27 in dicscr Phase nicht belegi
3
II1:
12"
,\ ox 16 <I DBII
.\~¢w=-:
1;:-.
1;‘ I S |"“"' ; AB28
IE Tfijik CA :1

Ir
5%
II

41:
V.
/ Z CA as
C)

DB l5
.

I
I; 5 AB 29

AC 02

I;
IE ' W AC 04.
C302

h I‘ '“ E _ AI) 04 in ciicscr Phase nicht bcicgt

DB K5 ‘ .. .-'
CB94 I .

W2? C805

DB K7 A1304

C306
4
w
Abb. i8 ~ Keramik der Bauphase <6b2> I Abb. 19 - Keramik der Bauphase <6b1b>

;.
z.

1
I W —' '—|-1 I-inn **********"J" —
, .I"::£_i . ¢'
-. - -. ¢
 é:I

. 430 On the Euphrates and to the West K

Lidar Hdytik 431
I
t
<

it DA03
; I 2 AB 12
AB 34
BC Ol

»<~> 9@~‘r', =“:-" '

~ . DBO6 ..
¥
;;Z:;_,§-,:11-'
O I \ BCU2 ;;\
a #7" ‘_:_,; t AB 24 ,-\§\7@ ...:.
AB 35

II
I
CD ***I .(?é<:l-*~'.:55l*-
.2
'-.
It DBO’! ’
< " :_' !\‘_'¢;<-‘-"F:-7-1-;1~ ,<":- £-
~.'-I - 1:. ~'1};:‘{=§'?'§=§{:3-s1?;;{;* AC02
IE
IL‘t 5
I
”l*= ~ I AB25
I
I

I“
— I BC OS 'a;I\;‘~ .t - . M. A. -._
-.>_,~; :~.=-.._-.:-_'§‘.'é
D811 AC04
CA I! in dicser Phase nichl bclegl

V II
I
3/ I I CA 12 94% DB15
AC 05
II
x
1 I
A:
Th CA 14
/QTW DB I6
I AB 27

er"
2 CA 15
I 3 ~,; _ > :1’;-._'_.' ,- .-:.-_--it
E 2 _ ; -‘ .- » ,__t, ,-, .51» .-{-,;‘?@‘t-?f‘-
DB i7
It CA l6
AB 28

§7”#"'IiI §I'"I:"€‘
t

I CA 17
DB 18
K ‘ J AB 29
AE04
9 -;;';;;: -> ~ .
.. *_._t_>I,_f,_ _-. ,
.\..‘.» .»-,A-,-9,,‘
vv,“ .u->.- >.: ..,. .\,-.-
..:- -- -t I ~ —~ ~- ~-
CA 18 I ‘~»'-'t\,*§’‘:=§~' -.‘:I-;>{-. it-' =
.'1i?)=;.§._'\-,¢_-"-_:»~. "31- ..,;.
»»m-~m_-___-
' ,-- >4? .-tn: >.:.-: '
DB 19
1.
' AB 30
, I I BC OI

CB02 am
.-1 >'4i§=é::-ii
'31"! DB 20
AB3l
i
_
BCU2
CBO-4
C‘“"_TI~'3:3 DB 2!
CB 05 in diescr Hzasc nicht bclegl I AB 32

(I II I I II I AB as BC 05
CB06
x
,_ 1
P/. Abb. 20 - Keramik der Bauphase <6b1b> Abb. 21 - Keramik der Bauphase <6b1a>
1
I

I.
I

.1
gt

. . 1 .

\
.,_,,_,_,,_,‘____W______ - _ .............._,._.,,m_______i%_,_. M)? .t.....~........,W».-....~..~...~.......M.~.=t... t--2.-24W¢K)/¢IWflO#fi<tVll0/I~0*)i#fi--Q, ...,.,m.fl,.,, .. ....w»..<-..»..,~.,..~,¢.~s~.\....._,___,_

_T~».¢,.»

432 On the Euphrates and to the West 3 Lidar Hiiytik 433

c:>
/I I \ CA11
DA O3 in dieser Phase nichl beiegl
WWW CA12 XIV”? DA (J?-

<:>
‘Q
DB06 fIIIIImIr”f‘"":?\III CA .5 DB O6

/E \ CAI2

IT‘? DB U7

I
I
I
//IIIIIIIIILIIII .. IIMTI DB 0'7

/TI? DB 15

t
DB 14

III?
'
DB 15in diescr Phase: nichi bclegl
1 CA I8 DB 16

WQ
77 I L4-4ll4< CA . . DB 16
W W. WMMWW i CA £9
W DB 3'7

‘VIII DB 17

I DB I8
I

ITIZI DB I8
3]‘

<I*“@
I CA 21

CBO’? II.‘
DB 19
1
2 I \ CA 19 I

)\ ca 05
%T1 DB 19 CB03 IT? DB 20

DB 20 in dimt Phase nichl bclcgl DB 2}

C809
I
1‘"aw.
é‘=5:-54
I
DB 21 DB 22
33 cs 07 I I CB I0

- Abb. 22 - Keramik der Bauphase <6bla> A135, 3,3 - Kerafnik 11¢; Bauphase <6»

‘-2)..-;. . . l.ll:_.'~;: T_;i';ive_-rsi

'-;‘:~.t."-".-';i-,* _ ' Library
n """"""""""W’ 4 4 4 I 1 ** _ 4 ----_--1V...-.............“..,..‘...__.__.-._,-4......»..
V»-‘.=
.».:‘
.1.
 - - -~ V.. . . AMA .................,. _

434 On the Euphrates and to the West

31? j jj 3 X“ AC 02

; i AB 27
W*% AC05

‘Ii-‘Q7’?-F AB29 X **** ‘

K 3| AE O4 Appendices

AEO6

air? ? ? ? ? ?” " Wwr AE O7

AB 33

<:;><?7 i \
; AB 34
BC 01

Q i j A AB 35
); | \ BC 02

_ C)

&I‘””“7 AB 36
I BC 05 \

\\
Abb. 24 - Keramik der Bauphase <6a>
 ‘ , , ,is --“—-_?— @—i<—~4>
,.y.

4.

Bibliography
Abbreviations
AA Archéologischer Anzeiger, Berlin/New York.
AAA Liverpool University. Annals of Archaeoiogy and
Anthropology, Liverpool.
AA(A)S Les Annales Archéologiques (Arabes) de Syrie
(Syriennes), Damascus.
AASOR Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research,
>
5l New Haven/Cambridge/Winona Lake.
it
Abr-Nahrain Abr-Nahrain, Leuven.
36
AfO Archiv fiir Orientforschung, Wien/Graz/Horn.
Z
I
i AIA American Journal of Archaeology, Cambridge/Boston.
Akkadica Akkadica. Bériodique bimestriel tie la Fondation
assyrioiogiqee Georges Dossin, Brussels.
<
i
Al-Réfidén A1~R%ifidén. Journal of Western Asiatic Studies, Tokyo.
i
American Antiquity American Antiquity, New York. '
AMI NF Archiioiogisehe Mitteilungen aus Iran Neue Folge,
Berlin.
Anatolica Anatolica, Leiden.
AnSt Anatolian Studies. Journai of the British Institute of
Archaeology at Ankara, London.
AOAT Alter Orient und Aites Testament. Veroffentlichungen
zur Kuitur und Geschichte des Alien Orients und des
Alten Testaments, Neukirchen-Vluyn./Keveiaer.
Archeologia e Caicoiatori Archeologia e Caicoiatori, Milan.
‘Atiqot ‘Atiqot. English Series, Jerusalem.
AVO Altertumsknnde des Vorderen Orients. Archéioiogisciie
Stuciien zur Kultur und Geschichte des Alten Orients,
Munster.
BaF Baghdader Forschungen, Mainz. _
BaM Baghéader Mitteilungen, Berlin/Mainz.
BAR IS British Archeeoiogical Reports International Series,
Oxford. _
BASOR Belletinofithe American Schools of Oriental Research,
Winona Lake.
BATSH Berichte der Ansgrabung Tall §él3 Ijlamad/Dun
Katlimmu, Berlin.
BBVO Berliner Beitriige zum Vorderen Orient, Berlin.
1 Berytus Berytus, Beirut.
BIV Berliner Iahrbucher zur Vor- und Friihgeschichte,
Berlin.
, BMECCJ Bulletin of the Middie Eastern Culture Centre of Japan,
Wiesbaden.
I CAH2 BOARDMAN, I. et al., eds, The Cambridge Ancient
History, Second Edition, Cambridge etc.
CTN Cuneiform Texts from Nimrud, London.

1-1 --
 ___» '

438 Bibliography Bibliography 439

Damaszener Mitteilungen, Mainz. References cited

DaM
ET Etudes et Travaux/Stuciia i Prace, Warsaw. ,_ ‘Aenti, A.N.
IE} Israel Exploration Journal, Jerusalem. 1987 "The Excavations of Mosul University at Imsefna" {in Arabic},
Iran Iran. Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies, in SOAH ed. 1987, 133*-155*.
London. ABKA'l—K.HAVARI, M.
IrAnt Iranica Antique, Gent. 19 as " Die achamenidischen Metallschalen", AMI NF 21, 91-137.
Iraq Iraq, London. ADAMS, R.McC
IstM lstanbuler Mitteilungen, Berlin. 1974 "The Mesopotamian Social Landscape: A View from the
KST Kaz: Sonuclan TOplEtI'l[1SI, Ankara. Frontier", in MOORE, C.B. ed, Reconstructing Complex
Levant Levant, London. Societies. An Archaeological Colloquium {April 29-30, 1972],
Mar Sipri Mar Sipri, Boston. Chicago, 1-12 (=B/lSOR Suppl. 20).
MDOG Mitteilungen der Deutscben Orient-Gesellschaft zu 1981 Heartland ofthe Cities, Chicago.
Berlin, Berlin. ADAMS, R.McC ./NISSEN I'll.
NAPR Northern Akkad Project Reports, Gent. 1972 The Uruk Countryside, Chicago.
OBO Orbis Bihlicus et Orientalis, Frihourg/Gottingen. AHARONI, Y.
OBO Ser.A. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis, Series Archaeologica, 1962 Excavations at Ramat Rahel Seasons 1959 and 1960, Rome.
Fribourgl Gottingen. 1964 Excavations. at Ramat Rahel Seasons 1961 and 1962, Rome.
OIP The University of Chicago. Oriental Institute Armnont, Y. ed.
Publications, Chicago. 1973 Beer-Sheba 1. Excavations at Tel Beer-Sheba, Seasons 1969-
Orient Express Orient Express, Paris. 71, Tel Aviv.
PAM Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean, Warsaw. Amoamms, P.
PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly, London. 1997 "Excavations at Tell Sabi Abyad, 1996", Orient Express 1997/2,
PIHANS Publications dc Flnstitut historique et archéologique 3840.
néerlandais de Stamboul, Leiden. A1.-Soon, B. Ann ‘
RA Revue dassyrioiogie et darchéologie orientale, Paris. 1987 “Intensive Salvage Excavations in the Saddam Dam Area" [in
RlA Rcallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatisehen Arabic], in SOAH ed. 1987, 8*~9*.
Archaologie, Berlin/New York. ALGAZE, G./Bneunmoen, R./Knuosrnn, J.
SAAB State Archive of Assyria. Bulletin, Patina. 1994 "The Tigi-is~Buphrates Arehaeologicai Reconnaissance Project:
Sumer Sumer, Baghdad. Final Report of the Birecik and Carchemish Darn Survey
Syria Syria, Revue cl‘art oriental et darchéologie, Areas", Anarolica 20, I-96.
Paris/Beirut. AMIRAN, R.
Tel Aviv Tel Aviv. Journal of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel 1970 Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land, from its Begtnnigs in the
Aviv University, Tel Aviv. Neolithic Periodrto the End of the Iron Age, Jerusalem/New
World Archaeology World Archaeology, London. Brunswick. ‘
WVDOG Wissenschaftliche Veroffentlichungen der Deutschen 1972 "Achaemenian Bronze Objects from a Tomb at Khan Ibsan in
Orient*Gesellschaft zu Berlin, Leipzig/Berlin. Lower Galilee", Levant 4, 135438.
ZA Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische ANDERSON, W.?.
Archtiologie, Berlin/New York. 1987 "The Kilns and Workshops of Sarepta (Sarafand), Lebanon",
Berytus 35, 41-66.
>1» marks Arabic pagination ' 1988 Sarepta I. The Late Bronze and Iron Age Strata of Area II, Y,
Beirut.
ANDRAE, W.
1913 Die Festungswerke von Assur, Berlin (=Wl/DOG 23).
1923 Farbige Keramik aus Assur und ihre Vorstufen in altassyrischen
\
\ Wandmalereien, Berlin.
1925 Coloured Ceramicsfrom Assur, London.
..........,_..._.-._...._.._ . -.,,~,,_»,.-~.,»~».----.»---1»--~-w---»-.--i. . .--.-.».-.-t-,.-,-,-,--,--- -----------.-.-.-.=-.<-- . . -,_- »»----r------»-----V-~~-fie--e-~-~w~-~--\»-------------~<- . . I . '_~-~~-~~--~~W “M _ _ ______ ___. ___ ___ , .. x.

tiIi
440 Bibliography g Bibliography 441 Ii1:
l‘e
I977 Dos wiedererstandene Assur, 2nd edition, ed. HROUDA, B., Salvage Project, 1985~»86, vol. l: Excavation Reports,
Miinchen. Warminster (=Iraq Archaeological Reports).
ARIAS, C./BOSCHIAN, G. " in preparation Ancient Settlement in the Zammar Region. Excavations by the lil
1996 "Scheda descrittiva degli impasti ceramici e sea British Archaeological Expedition to Iraq in the Saddam Dam . »<_:

infonnatizzazione“, in Le Scienze della Terra e l’/ircheometria. Salvage Project, 1985-86, vol. 3: Pottery, Warminster (zlraq
3“ giornata, Savona, E9-22 (=Quaderni clel Civico Museo Archaeological Reports).
Storico-Archeologico, vol. 1). BALL, W./BLACK, J. eds.
‘ ARTZY, M. 1987 "Excavations in Iraq, 1985-86". Iraq 49, 231~25l.
1973 = "The Origin of the ‘Palestinian’ Bichrome Ware", Journal of the BALL, W./PAGAN, M. <.s-,r_~ .-\_,~. \_

American Oriental Society 93, 446461. in press "Tell Shelgiyya", in BALL ed. in press. i

ARTZY, M. et al. BALL, W./Tucnnn, D./WILKINSON, T.3.

“ 1978 "Imported and Local Bichrome Ware in Megiddo", Levant 10, 1989 "The Tell al-Hawa Project. Archaeological Investigations in the
99-111. North Jazira 1986»87", with an appendix of J.A. BLACK, Iraq 5
2
ATARASE-ll, K./HORIUCHI, K. 51,1-66. 5

1963 Fahlian 1. The Excavation at Tape Suruvan, 1959, Tokio. BARNETT, R.D.
AVl—YONAH, M. Gd. '~ - - 1976 Sculptures from the North Palace of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh,
1975 Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, London. I
vol. I, London. BARTL, K.
AZZENA, G. 1989 "Zur Datierung der aitmonochromen Ware von Tell Haiaf, in .<,.¥\. 1~,.-_\!

1990 Verso 'un modello della realtfi‘ archeologico, in MOSCATI, P. ed., HAEX, O.M.lCURVERs, H.H./AKKERMANS, P.M.M.G., To the
Trattamento di dati negli studi archeologici e storici, Rome, 5 8- Euphrates and Beyond. Archaeological studies in honour of
60. Maurits N. van Loon, R0tterdam1TBrookfle1d, 257-2'74.
1995 "Some Remarks on Early Iron Age in Eastern Anatolia",
l
BACHELOT, L. ct at Anatolica 21, 205-12. - ir‘
1997 l'La 4e campagne do fouilles E1 Tell Shioukh Faouqani (Syria-:)", BASTERT, K. l
Orient Express I996/3, 79~85. 1994 Der sogenannte Tell O in Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta, Ergebnisse der
BAIRD, D./CAMPBELL, S./WATK1NS,T. eds. t Ausgrabung des Jahres 1989 (unpublished MA Thesis, Free
1995 Excavations at Kharabeh Shattani, 2, Edinburgh (=University University of Berlin).
of Edinburgh Department of Archaeology Occasional Papers BECKER, H.
15). 1991 "Zur magnetischen Prospektion in Assur, Testmessung 1989",
BAKER, H. MDOG 123, I23-131.
1995 "Neo»Babylonian Burials Revisited", in CAM?BELL/GREEN eds. BB1’?-ARIEH, I.
1995, 209-22t). 1991 "The Edomite Shrine at I-iorvat Qitmit in the fudaean Negev.
BALL, W. Preliminary Excavation Report", Tel Aviv 18, 9-3-118.
1987 "British Excavations in the Abe Dhahir Area 1985/86", in BENNETT, CM.
SOAH ed. 1987, '78-81. 1982 "Neo-Assyrian Influence in Transjordan", in HADIDI, A. ed.,
1989 "Soundings at Seh Qubba. A Roman Frontier Station on the Studies in History and Archaeology of Jordan I, Amman, l8l-
Tigris in Iraq", in FRENCH, D.H./L1onT1=0o'r, C.S. eds, The 187.
Eastern Frontier of the Roman Empire. Proceedings of a 1984 "Excavations at Tawilan in Southern Jordan, 1982", Levant 16,
Colloquium held at Ankara in September 1988, vol. 1, Oxford, l~23.
'7-18 (BAR IS 553). BEN“-TOR, A./PORTUGALI, Y./AWSSAR, M.
1997 "Tell Shelgiyya: an Early Uruk ‘Sprig Ware‘ Manufacturing and 1983 "The third and fourth Seasons of Excavations at Tell Y0qne'am,
Exporting Centre on the Tigris", Al»REfidan 18, 93-101. 1979 and 1981. Preliminary Report", IEJ 33, 30~54.
BALL, W. ed. BERGAMINI, G.
_~ in press Ancient Settlement in the Zammar Region. Excavations by the 1995 "Preliminary Report on the 198’! Season of Excavations at
British Archaeological Expedition to Iraq in the Saddam Dam Babylon, Iraq", Sumer 47, 30.-34.

._,...,._..,.._,.,._.,.... H... or _ r ;"~"____

 442 Bibliography Bibliography 443
|

BERNBECK, R. 1984 "A§§ur~Tak1ak, ein 'Stadtaufseher‘ von Assur unter Sargon II

1993 Steppe als Kulturlanclschaft. Dos 'A§'i§~Gel_>iet Ostsyriens vom oder Sanherib", Ball/1' 15, 253-260.
Neolithiknm bis zur islamischen Zeit, Berlin (mBBl/'0 I 1988 "Kerarnik der mittelbabylonischen Zeit aus den Grabungen in
Ausgrabungen 1). Eanna, dem Gareus-Bezirk und dem Irigal zu Uruk", BaM 19,
1997 Theorien in derArchiiol0gie, Tiibingen. 465-467.
1997/98 Review on WILKINSON/TUCKER 1995, AfO 44/45, 457-467. BOBHMER, R.M./DAMMER, I-I-W.
Bletmsio, P. 1985 Tell Imlihiye, Tell Zitbeidi, Tell Abbas, Mainz (=BaF 7).
1978 “Dcux cylindres assyriens des fouillcs polonaises a Nirnrud“, Bonrzmzn, R.M./PEDDI-3, F./Same, B.
EtTr 10, 63-68. 1995 Urnk. Die Graber, Mainz (rriusgrabitngen Uriilc-Warka
1987a "Tell Raffaan and Tell Rijim 1984-85. Preliminary Report on Endberichte 10).
two Seasons of Polish Excavations in the Saddam's Darn Project Boese, J.
Area", in SOAI-I ed. 1987, 13-19. 1995 Vorltiufige Berichte iiber die Grabungskampagnen 1984-1990
1987b "Preliminary on the third Season of Polish Excavations on Tell und 1992-1994. Aiisgrabnngen in Tell Sheikh Hassan I,
Rijirn Omar Dalle, Saddam's Dam Project Area", in SOAH ed. Saarbriicl-zen (=Schriften znr Vorderasiotischen Archéiologie 5).
1987, 24-32. Born, D./Gwen, A.
1992a "Tell Raffaan and Tell Rijim — first - Season of Polish in press "The Burial of the Dead", in Wfilss, H. ed., The Origins of
Excavations in the Eski Mosul Region - Iraq", EtTr 16, 273- North Mesopotamian Civilization: Ninevite 5 Chronology,
277. Economy, Society, New Haven.
1992b "Tell Rijim and Tell Raffaan 1985 — two Campaigns of Polish BONATZ, D./NOVAK, M./OE.‘I“1"E1., A. eds.
Excavations in Northern Iraq", EtTr 16, 279-288. in press Totenritiial und Jenseitskonzeptionen. Methodische Ansiitze zur
1992c "The first Campaign of Excavations on Tell Rad Shaqrah Analyse von Grabbefiinden. 1. Interdisziplinéirer Workshop,
(Hasake Southern Dam Basin)", Warsaw, 77-85 (=PAM III abhegalten am Samstag, den 21. und Sonntag, den 22. Marz
Reports I991). 1998, Berlin (=Altorientalische Forschungen).
1994 "Tell Rad Shaqrah. Excavations 1993", Warsaw, “E62-172 BORDRBULL, P./BRIQUEL-CHATONNET, P. ‘
(=PAM V Reports 1993). £996/97 "Aramaic Documents from Til Barsib", Abr-Nahrain 34, 100-
1996 "Tell Rad Shaqrah. Excavations 1995“, Warsaw, 160-1'70 107. -
(=PAM VII Reports 1995). 1 BRETSCI-INEIDER, I.
BIKAL P.M. I995 "Die Unterstadt (Fold J)", in LEBEAU, M. ct al., Tell Beydar
1978 The Pottery of Tyre, Warminster. (1992-1994), Turnhout, 209-230 (=Subartu HI).
BLACK, 3.A BRAEIVIER, F.
1997 "I-Ielicnistic Cuneiform Writing from Assyria: The Tablet from | 1986 "La eéramique at engobe rouge de Page on fer a Bassit", Syria
I
Tell Fisna", Al-Rtifidtin 18, 229-239. 63, 221-246. ‘
BLACK,'].A.lGRi£EN, A. BRIEND, J./Humennr, 3.-B.
1992 Gods, Demons, and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia. An 1980 Tell Keisan (1971-1976). Una cite’ phénicienne en Galilée,
Illustrated Dictionary, London. Fribourg/Gottingen» (=0B0 Ser.A. I).
BLAYLOCK, S.R I BRIESE, C.
1990 "Tille Hoyiik", in ‘The Year's Work’, AnSt 40, S-8. 1985 "Frtihcisenzeitliche bemalte phonizische Kannen von
1998 "Rescue Excavations by the BIAA at Tille Hoytik, on the Fundplatzen der Levantenkiiste", Hamburger Beitréige zur
Euphrates, 19794990", in MATTHEWS, R3. ed., Ancient Archaologie 22, '7-118.
Anatolia. Fifty Year’s Work by the British Institute of
1
BROWN, 3.6
Archaeology at Ankara, London, 1 1 1-126. 1981 "Dam", The New Encycloptedia Britannica, 15th edition,
forthcoming Tille Hoyiik 3: The Iron Age, London (=BritiSh Institute of Macroptedia vol. 5, Chicago, 440-447.
Archaeology at Ankara Monograph). BUHL, M.-L.
BOEHMER, RM. 1983 Snkas V11. The Near Eastern Pottery and Objects of other
s 1967 "Grabung am Zencian i»Suleiman (Aserbeidschan)", AA, 537- Materials from the Upper Strata, Copenhagen.
Q4

585.

It -V

. . . Vi. ..
- - a
'
f 1,7; __,_,_, .,,,,,,,,,,,,, . ,1.......s.................,_ , - _

444 Bibliography
Bibliography 445

BU1-i1.,M.-L./NIELSEN, S.H. CAMPBELL, S./GREEN, A. eds.

1995 The Archaeology of Death in the Ancient Near East, Oxford.
1969 Shiloh. The Danish Excavations at Tall Sailun, Palestine in
I926, I929, I932 and 1963. The Prehellenistic Remains,
CARSON WAMPLER J.
Copenhagen. 1947 Tell en-Nasbeh H. The Pottery, Berkeley/‘New Haven.
BUNNENS, G. CHAMBON, A.
1989 "Tell Ahmar on the Euphrates: A New Research Project of the
I984 Tell el Far'ah 1. L’ age dufer, Paris.
University of Melbourne", Akkadica 63, 1-11.
CHANG, K.G.
1991a "Melbourne University Excavations at Tell Ahmar: 1988
I967 Rethinking Archaeology, New York.
Ctaam, D.L.
Season", in Mesopotamie et Elam. Acres de la XXXV1éme
1968 Analytical Archaeology, London.
Recontre Assyriologique Internationale, Gand, 10-14 juillet
Cowo1u., G. L.
I989, Gent, 163-170 (=Mes0p0tamian History and
1972 "Models, Methods, and Techniques for Seriation", in CLARKE,
Environment, Occasional Publications I).
D.L. ed., Models in Archaeology, London, 381-424.
1991b "Ahmar", in WEISS, H. ed., "Archaeology in Syria", AJA 95,
372-734.
CROWFOOT. J.W./CROWFOOT, G.M./KENYON, KM.
1957 Samaria-Sebaste III. The Objects from Samaria (Reports of the
1992 "Melbourne University Excavations at Tell Ahmar on the
Works of the Joint Expedition in 1931-1933 and of the British
Euphrates: Short Report on the 1989-92 Seasons", Alckadica,
Expedition in I935, N0. 3), London.
79/80, 1-13.
"Tall AhmarlTi1 Barsip", in KUHNE ed. 1994, 221-225.
CURTIS, J. -1
1994a
"Ahmar", in WEISS, H. ed., "Archaeology in Syria", AJA 98,
1979 An Examination of Late Assyrian Metalwork with Special
19941)
Reference to Material from Nimrud (Ph.D. Dissertation,
149-£51.
University of London).
1 996/97 "The Archaeoiogical Context", Abr-Nahrain, 34, 61-65.
1989 Excavations at Qasrij Cliffand Khirbet Qasrij, London.
1997a "Ah1'nar", in WEISS, H. ed, "Archaeology in Syria", AJA, 101,
1992 "Recent British Museum Excavations in Assyria", Journal of the
100-104.
Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 3rd Series 2,
1997b "Til Barsib under Assyrian Domination: A Brief Account of the
147-165.
University of Melbourne Excavations at Tell Ahmar", in 1995 “Vases and Vessels", in CURTIS/READE eds. 1995, 133-160.
PARPOLAIWHYFING eds. 1997, 1'7-28. Curms, I./GREEN, A.
19970 "Carved Ivories from ‘I11 }3arsib",/1]/1 101, 435-450.
1997 Excavations at Khirbet Khattmiyeh, London.
BUNNENS, G. ed.
in press Excavations at Tell Deir Situn and Grai Darki, London.
1990 Tell Ahmar I988 Season, Leuven (=Abr-Nahrain Supplement
Cuarts, J./Couion, D./GREEN, A.
Series 2). 1993
BURKE, P.
"British Museum Excavations at Nirnrud and Balawat in 1989",
Iraq 55, 1-37. .
1990 The French Historical Revolution. The Annales School, 1929-
CURTIS, J. ed.
89, Cambridge. I982 Fifty Years of Mesopotamian Discovery - The Work of the
British School ofmfchaeology in Iraq, 1932-1982, London.
. CALMEYER,
Coasts, J./Rama, J.E. eds. ~ 1'
I 1965 "Eine westiranische Bronzewerkstatt des 10./9. Jahrhunderts v.
1995 Art and Empire: Treasures from Assyria in the British Museum,
Chr. zwischen Zalu Ab und dem Gebiet der Kakavand - I“, BJV
London/New York.
5, 1-65.
CUYLER Youno, T.
1966 "Eine westiranische Bronzewerkstatt des 10./9. Jahrhunderts v.
1965 "A Comparative Ceramic Chronology for Western Iran, 1500-
Chr. zwischen Zalu Ab und dem Gebiet tier Kakavand - II", B]V
500 B.C.", Iran 3, 53-83.
6, 55-70.
CUYLER Youno, T./LEVINE, L.D.
CAI\;lg1;I;LL THOMPSS;ihe
,R./H
EXLl"12;(\I’:i§\j)Sn(ZN0n
,R.W.
the Tempie of Nam at Nineveh", 1969 galcijgittons
. of the Godzn
. Pt‘O]8Cl.'
. first Progress Report,

Archaeologia 79, 103-148. '

CAMPBELL THOMPSON, RC./MALLOWAN, M.E.L.
1933 "The British Museum Excavations at Niniveh, 1931-1932",
,.
AAA 20, 71-186.

----v---»—~»—-——~-»~-—:- ~ ------ - - - ' W "**' _ V _ H ~ filfw _ff:fjj_j.._,, __ _, , "> - . -

.. .. A
 _.._.. . .....e.__..--_._ ___......... ................................-._____...__._.______._............. . ... .. . ........... -

446 Bibliography Bibliography 447

DMLEY, S_ DU PLAT TAYLOR, .1.

1990 "Cuneiform and Assyria after c. 620 B.C.", in AERTS, 1959 gglg-:2Cypriot and Syrian Pottery from Al Mina, Syria", Iraq 21,
E£.lK.LENG£L, H. eds, The town as Regional Economic Centre in
the Ancient Near East. Proceedings of the 10th International DUMBRELL, WJ.
Economic History Congress, Leuven, August 1990, Leuven, 74- 1971 "The Tell e1-Mashkuta bowls and the ‘Kingdom’ of Qedar in the
84 (:Studies in Social and Economic History 20). Persian Period", BASOR 203, 33-44.
1993 "Nineveh after 612 B.C.", Altorientalische Forschungen 20, DURU, R.
\
134~147. 1979 Keban Project Degirmentepe Excavations I973, Ankara
1996l97 "Neo-Assyrian Tablets from Til Barsib", Abr-Nahrain 34, 66- (ell/fiddle East Technical University, Keban Project
99. Publications, Series III, No. 2).
DAME-IRJ1, M.S. Dvson, R. H./MUSCARELLA, O. W.
w.
1977 "Introduction". Suiner 33, 3-8. 1989 "Constructing the Chronology and Historical Implications of
1984 "Text of Dr. Muayad Sa'id Demjrjfs Speech", Sumer 40, 82. Hasanlu 1V", Iran 27, 1~27.
1999 Gréiber assyrischer Koniginnen aus Nimrutl, Mainz.
DAMERJI, M.S. 6C1. E1CH1_.ER, S./WAFLER, M./WARBURTON, D.
1986 Special Issue. Researches on the Antiquities of al-Qadissiya 1990 Tall Al-Hamidiya 2, Freiburg/Gottingen (=OBO Ser./1. 6).
Dam and Ashur in the two International Syrnposiums. 2/ta’ and EICKHOFF, T.,
3rd held in I979 and 1981 , Mosul (=Sumer 42). 1985 "Kat Tukulti Ninurta, Eine mittelassyrische Ku1t- und
De Meme, L. ed. Residenzstadt", Berlin (=Abhandlungen der Deutschen Orient-
1980 Tell ed~Dér. Sounding at Abu Habbah (Sippar), Leuven (=Tell Gesellschaft 21).
ed-Dér III). EIDEM, J./PUT1", K.
DE MIROSCHBIDJI, P. 1994 "An Iron Age Site on the Euphrates: The first Season of
1978 "Stratigraphic de la période néo-élamite a Suse", Paléorient 4, §);C21V3.11OIl atTe11 Iurn Kabir (Syria)", Orient-Express 1994/1,
213-228. »
Dnmesnr, P./BAUMHOFF, M. ' 1995 Tell Jurn Kabir (Syria), 1994", Orient-Express E995/2, 39-40.
1963 "The Statistical Use of Artifact Distributions to Establish in press "Tell Jurn K_abir", in Proceedings of the “Symposium on the
Chronological Sequence", American Antiquity 28, 496-509. Archaeology of the Upper Syrian Euphrates (The Tishrin
r DITTMANN, R. Area) ”, Barcelona, January 1998.
1990 "Ausgrabungen der Freien UniversitfitBer1in in Assur und Kar- EENWAG, B./KOHLMEYER, K./Orro, A.
Tukuiti-Ninurta in den Jahren 1986-89", MDOG 122, 155-171. I995 "’Fa1lBazi - Vorbericht fiber die Untersucnungen 1993", DaM 8,
1992 “Aséur and Kat-Tulculti-Ninurta", in NASHEF, K. ec1., 95-124.
"Archaeology in Iraq", AJA 96, 307-312. EMRE K.
in press a "Felclforschungen in Kat-Tukulti-Ninurta and Assur (Iraq). 1969 "The Urartian Pottery from Altintepe", Belleten 33 (131), 291-
Ergebnisse der Jahre 1986 und 1988", Sumer. 301. ’
in press b "Bericht fiber die 1988 in Assur durchgefiihrten Arbeiten“, Eesrnm, C.
Sumer. 1966 Palestinian Bichrome Ware, Leiden.
in press c "Bericht iiber die 1989 von der FU-Berlin in Assut und Kar- ESHEL, I./PRAG, K. eds.
Tukulti-Ninurta durchgeftlhrten Arbeiten", Sumer. 1995 Excavations by KM. Kenyon in Jerusalem 1961-67. IV. The
DITTMANN, R. ct. al Iron Age Cave Deposits on the South East Hill and Isolated
1988 "Untersuchungen in Kat-Tukulti~Ninurta (Tulul at-‘Aqar) Burials and Cemeteries, Jerusalem.
1986". MDOG 120, 97-138.
1989/90 "Kar Tukulti Ninurta/A1-‘Aqar 1986", Sumer 46, 86-97. l FALCONE, R./LAZZARINI, L./GALETTI, G.
DORNEMANN, R. 1995 “Archeometric Study of Pre- and Protohistoric Pottery from Tell
| 1981 "The Late Bronze Age Pottery tradition at Tell I-Iadidi, Syria", Afis (Syria)", in Euroceramic Society. Fourth Conference, vol.
\ BASOR 241, 29-48. 14, Faenza, 89400.
s
Dorntm, M./PORATH, Y.
1982 Ashdod IV. Excavation ofArea M, ‘Atiqot 15. .

-----77 _ . .v _i *""1|pnp , _—-7- ..,..._.__ ......__»_,_

 448 Blbl1081'6111/1)’ Bibliography 449

FALES, M. FRITZ, V./KEMPINSKI, A.

1975 "Popolazionc servile e programmazione padronale in tarda eta 1983 Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen auf der Hirbet el-Msas (Tel
Neo-Assira", Oriens Antiquus 14, 325360. Masos) 1972-75, Wiesbaden.
1990 "The Rural Landscape of the Neo~Assyrian Empire: A Survey", FUGMANN, E.
SAAB 4, 81-142. 1958 Hama. Fouilles et recherches 1931-1938. 11,1. L'architecture
1993 "Territorial and Historical Background", in Wi1.HBLlv1/ des périodes pré-hellénistiques, Copenhagen.
ZACCAGNINI 1993, 1-11. FUJII, H. et al.
‘ Fates, F.M./PosroA'1*n,1.N. 1987a "Working Report on the first Season of laponese Archaeological
1992 . Imperial Administrative Records, part I: Palace and Temple Excavation in Saddam Darn Salvage Project", in SOAH ed.
Administration, Helsinki (=State Archives ofAssyria 7). 1987, 33-61.
FIORINA, P. 19871) "Working Report on the second Season of Iaponese
“ 1997 "Khirbet Hatara - La stratigrafia", in F1ORINA ct al. 1997, 7-7 1. Archaeological Excavation in Saddam Darn Salvage Project",
1998 “Scavi italiani a Nimrud", Paper delivered to the lst SOAH ed. 1987, 62-67.
International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near 1989/90 "Preliminary Report on the Excavations at Tell Thuwaij, Tell
East, Universita degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza", Rome 18- Jessary (second Season), and Qasr Banat", Sumer 46, 38-59.
23 May, 1998. .
FIORINA, P. El 211. GARD1N,.l.C.
1997 "Rapporto di scavo a KhirbetHata1'a, Saddam Darn, Eski Mosul, 1976 Code ale poltr l’analyse desformes de poteries, Paris.
Iraq, n. 18", Mesopotamia 32, 5-270. 1980 Archaeological Construct: An Aspect of Theoretical
FLEMING, D. Archaeology, Cambridge.
1989 "Eggshell Ware Pottery in Achaernenid Mesopotamia", Iraq 51, 1996 "La revolution cognitive et 1’archéologie", Archeologia e
165-185. Calcolatori 7, 1221-1230.
Fonnnn, E. GASCHE, H. et a1.
1921 Die Provinzeinteilung des assyrisches Reiches, Leipzig. 1989 "Abe Qubtir 1987-£988, Chantier F, la residence acheménide",
FORSBERG, S., NAPR 4, 3-68.
1995 Near Eastern Destruction Datings as Sources for Greek and GA'1‘T1, M.A.
Near Eastern Iran Age Chronology. Archaeological and 1987 La ceramica ne0~assira (X—VII sec. ): tipologie e dtffusione
Historical Studies. The Cases ofSamaria (722 B. C. ) and Tarsus (unpubiished tesi di laurea, University of Patina)
(696 B. C. ), Uppsaia. GERBER, C.
FRANKEN, H.J./Srninnn, M.L. 1997/98 "Der Beitrag Ninives zur nordmesopotamischen Chronoiogie",
1990 Excavations in Jerusalem 1961-1967, I1. The Iron Age AfO 44/45, 226-235.
Extramural Quarter on the South East Hill, Jerusalem. Gnvn, S.
FRANKFORT, H. 1982 "Archaeological Evidence for trade between Israel and Tyre?",
g 1952 "The Origin of the bit hilani", Iraq 14, 12043 E. BASOR 248, 69-72. -
Fnensrom-2, I.C./HUGHES, M.J. GEYER, B.lMONCHAMBER'l", I.-Y. .. »
1989 "Examination of Ceramics from Qasrij Cliff and Khirbet 1987 "Prospection de'"1a rnoycnne valiée dc l'Euphrate: Rapport
Qasrij", in CURTIS 1989, 61-67. préliminairez 19824985", Mari. Annales ale Recherches
FRENCH D.H. lnterdisciplinaires (M.A.R.I.) 5, 293-344.
1985 "Tille 1984", AnSt 35, 5-6. Grnson, McG. et al.
1986a “Tille 1985", AnSt 36, 5-6. . 1978 Excavations at Nippur. Twelfth Season, Chicago (=Oriental
1986b "Tille 1984", VII. KST, 211-215. Institute Communications 23).
1987 "Tille" 11985], VIII. KST, 205-212. Grrm, S.
1988a "Tille" [I987],/1nSt 38, 6-8. 1990 Gezer I11. A Ceramic typology of the Late Iron II, Persian and
1988b "1986 Tille Arkeoloji Kazisi", IX. KST (1), 335-444. Hellenistic Periods at Tell Gezer, Jerusalem.
1991 "Tille Hoyiik 1989", X11. KST, 311-323.

_ — 7 ’"7 *T.it." '=--~-"' --~»

.. - ».
 450 Bibliography Bibliography 451

Gtnnsmn, E. Hnusnn, S.R.

1948 The Swedish Cyprus Expedition, Vol. IV, Pt. 2, The Cypre- in preparation Status and Ritual: Die Sozialstrukturen Assurs im Spiegel der
Geornetric, Cypro-Archaic and Cypro-Classical Periods, Grciber der nenassyrischen Zeit (Hahilitation Thesis, Free
Stockholm. University of Berlin).
GQKCE, N./LLOYD, S. HAUSLEITER, A.,
1953 "195l Ytltnda Milli Egitirn Bal<anl1§1 ve lngiliz Arkeoloji 1992 Nettassyrische Keramik, Poster presented at the XXXIXe
Enstitiisii Taraftndztn Yap1lan Suitantepe (Urfa) Kaz1s1", Ankara Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Heidelberg.
Universitesi Dil ve Tarih-Cografya Faktiltesi Dergisi ll (cilt 1), 1995 "Neo-Assyrian Pottery from Assur and Kat-Tukulti»Ninurta",
109-23. Unpublished Summary of paper delivered to the table ronde
GOFF, C. "Keramik der Eisenzeit - Iron Age Pottery", 24th - 261111
~ 1985 "Excavations at Baha Jan: The Architecture and Pottery of Level February, 1995, lnstitut fiir Vor~ und Friihgeschichte und
1", Iran 23, 1-20. Vorderasiatische Archaologie, Heidelberg.
GOLDMAN, H. 1996 Chronologische und typologische Untersiichungen zur
1963 Excavations at Gozlti Kule, Tarsas, III. The Iron Age, Princeton, neuassyrischen Kerarnik irn Kerngebiet Assyriens (Ph.D.
New Jersey. Dissertation, University of Munich, Microfiche Edition).
GRAYSON, A. K. 1997 "Neuassyrische Keramik - Aspekte der Erforschung", in
1982 "Assyria: Ashur-dan II to Ashur-Nirari V (934-745 B.C.)”, WAETZOLD/1IAUPT‘MANN eds. 1997, 271-278.
CAI-12, Vol. III (1). The Prehistory and the Balkans. the Middle 1998 Review on MORANDE BONACOSSI 1996, Z/1 88, 152-157.
East and the Aegean World, tenth to eighth Centuries B. C., HAWKINS, J.D.
238-281. 1988 "Kazi-Tesub and the ‘Great Kings‘ of Karkamis", AnSt 38, 99-
1991 “Assyria: Tiglavpileser III to Sargon II (744-705 B.C.); 108
Scnnacherib and Essarhaddon (704-669 B.C.; Assyria 668 - 635 1996/97 "A 1\Iew £uwian Inscription of Hamiyatas, King of Masuwari“,
B.C.: the Reign of Ashurbanipai", CAH2 Vol. III (2). The Abr-Nahrain-34, 108-1 17.
Assyrian and Babylonian Empires and Other States of the Near HEINRICH, E.
East, from the eighth to the sixth Centuries B. C., 71-161. 1984 Palitste im Atten Mesopotamien, Ber1in/New York (=Denl<mttler
GREEN, A., Antiker Architelctur XV).
1986 "The Lion-demon in the Art of Mesopotamia and Neighbouring HERBORDT, S.
Regions. Materials towards the Encyciopaedia of Mesopotamian . 1992 Netiassyrische Glyptik ties 8.-7. Jh. v. Chr. unter besonderer
Religious Iconography, I/1“, BaM 1'7, 141-254. Beriiclcsiehtigung der Siegeittngen auf Tafeln und
in press "Khirbet Siiireena", in BALL ed. in press. Tonverschliissen, Helsinki (=State Archives of Assyria Studies
in preparation Excavations at Nimrod: The Fonndation Figurines, London. 1).
HERRMANN, G./CURTIS, .1. ~
tlnoonrr, P., 1998 "Reflections on the Four-winged Genie: A Pottery Jar and an
1965 Locational Analysis in Human Geography, London. Ivory Panel from Nimrod", IrAnt 33, 107-134.
HALLER, A. Hooontt, I.
1954 Die Graber and Gritfte von Assur, Berlin (=W1/DOG 65). 1977 "The Distribution of Material Culture Items in the Baringo
HAMILTON, R.W., District, Western Konia“, Man '12, 239-269.
1966 "A Silver Bowl in the Ashmolean Museum", Iraq 28, 1-17. Hotwno, F./Awnnasnn, I-1.H.
1-IAUPTMANN, 1-1., 1994 Qala'at Bahrain 1. The Northern City Wall and the Islamic
1969/70 "Norsun Tepe. Historische Geographic und Ergcbnisse der Fortress, Aarhus.
Grabungen 1968-69", IstM 19/20, 21-78. HOOD, S.

1976 "Die Grabungen auf dem N0rsun~Tepe 1972", in Keban Project 1951 “Excavations at Tabara el Akrztd, l948»1949",AnSt 1, 113-147
1972 Activities, 71-90 (=Middle East Technical University Howns SMITH, P.H.G.
Keban Project Publications, Series I, N0. 5). 1986 "A Study of the 9th-'lth Century Metal Bowls from Western
_‘ 1987-90 "Lidar Hoyiikf’, RIA vol. 7, 15-16. Asia", IrAnt 21, 1-88.
HROUDA, B.
1962 Tell HaiafBa'. IV. Die Kieinfimde aus Historischer Zeit, Berlin.
 _ ,,,,,,,,,_. -
W H -- --- -~- -- -- -- -. - ~ - — — I _-,,, .1 A ~ MI:a~...:t..1,,2...;-~,e...;.a......;~.-:14;';~;n't-"" “"-"

!-

452 Bibliography Bibliography 453

1991 "Vorlaufiger Bericht fiber ole neuen Ausgrahungen in Asstir 1981 "Monitoring Complex System Integration and Boundary
Friihjahr 1990", MDOG 123, 95-109. Phenomena with Settlement Size Data", in VAN DER LEEUW,
1992 "Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen in Isiu 1973-£989 und von SE. ed., Archaeological Approaches to the Study of
Assur 1990", Rome, 273~299 (wContribati e Materiali di Complexity, Amsterdam, 144-189.
Archeologia Orientale 4).
HUMBERT, J.-B. KAIM, B.
1981 "Récents travaux at Tell Keisan (1979-1980)", Revue Biblique 1995 "The Post-Assyrian Graves on Tell Rijirn Omar Dalle", EtTr 17,
88, 373-398. 36-41.
Hussnm, M.G. KANTOR, Ii].
1987 "Excavations at Tell Sha’bu" [in Arabic], in SOAH ed. 1987, E958 "The Pottery", in MCEWAN, C. et al. eds., Soundings at Tell
110*-116*. Fakhariya, Chicago 1958, 21-41 (mOIP 79).
KELSO, I.L. i
ISMAIL, B.K. 1968 The Excavation of Bethel (1934-1960), Cambridge (QAASOR t

1989 "Two Neo-Assyrian Tablets", SAAB 3, 61-64. 39).

KEMPINSKI, A.
JAKOB—ROST, L. 1989 Megiddo. A City State and Royal Centre in North Israel,
1962 "Zuni Ohrschmuck der Assyrer", Forschangen and Berichte 5, Munich. _
34-$9. KENYON, K.M. et £11.
JAMES, F.W., 1965 Excavations at Jericho II. The tombs Excavated in 1955-1958,
1966 The Iron Age at Beth Shari. A Study of Levels Vl-IV, London. E
Philadelphia. ;
KENYON, K.M./HOLLAND, T.A.
JAMIESON, A., 1982 Excavations at Jericho IV. The Pottery type Series and other i.
1992 "Current Research on the Ancient and Modern Pottery from Tell Finds, Jerusalem. Z.
Ahrnar, Northern Syria", in BANESTER, M. eci., Ceramics: Kerinsio, C./Lecotvma, O. ‘ II
1-.
Adding the Value, Vol. 1, Melbourne, 58-63. 1985 "Une fortcresse sur l’Euphrate", Archéologia 205, 46-55. ii
2':
1993/94 Observations on a Village Potter from the Euphrates Valley", KILLICK, R. l.I.
.,,
Newsletter, Department of Pottery Technology, University of 1988 “Pottery from the Neo~Assyrian to the Early Sasanian Periods",
Leiden E1/‘I2, 75-82. . in NORTPIBDGE/BAMBER/ROAP eds. 1988, 54-75.
forthcoming a "Area D Pottery", in BUNNENS, G. ed., Abr-Nahrain Supplement 199621 "Haditha Region", in TURNER ed. 1996, vol. 14, 21-22. =<-~.»
Series, Leuven. 1996b "Hamrin Region", in TURNER eci. 1996, vol. 14, 128-"I29.
forthcoming b Neo-Assyrian Pottery from Tell Ahmar: Towards Integrating KILLICK, R.lBLACI{, I. 6dS.
trajectories of Ceramic Analysis (Ph.D. Dissertation, University 1985 "Excavations in Iraq, I983-84", Iraq 47, 215-239.’ I
of Melbourne). K1LL.ICK, R./ROAF, M. BdS. 8 .
Jonmms, F./KEPINSKI, C./LECOMTE, O. 1983 "Excavations in Iraq, 198 E-82", Iraq 45, 199-224.
1983 "Présence babyionienne dans Ie pays do Suhu au XVIIe siecle Knvtes, ‘E./Hnsetonovn, C./Honor-211. .1.» " ’ »F.-—.¢+->.~—-
av. I.-C.: L’exarnp1e de Khirbet ed-Diniye (Irak)”, RA 77, 119- 1982 "A Method for the Identification of the Location of Regional
142. Cultural Boundaries", Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
I01-INSON, G.A. 1, 113-131.
1975 "Locational Analysis and the Investigation of Uruk Local KINTIGH, K.W.
Exchange Systems", in SABLOFF, JJLAMBERG-KARLOVSKY, ' 1984 "Measuring Archaeological Diversity by Comparison with
\v§“I49'(\7"€93h‘*<\

C.C. eds., Ancient Civilization and trade, Albuquerque, 285»
339.
I977 "Aspects of Regional Analysis in Archaeology", Annual Review
ofArchaeology 6, 479-508.
\
1980 "Spatial Organization of Early Uruk Settlement Systems“, in
BARRELET, M.»TI—I. ed., L’archéol0gie de l’Iraq du debut de
l ‘époque néolithiqiie a 333 avant rzotre ere, Paris, 233-263
I Simulated Assemblages", American Antiquity 49, 44-54.
KLEIN, L.S.,
1982 Archaeological Typology, Oxford (=BAR IS 153).
K.LENGEL—BRANDT, E,
1990 "Kleinfunde aus Deve Hiiyiik“, in MATTHIAE, P./VAN LOON,
MJWEISS, H. eds. Resurrecting the Past. A Joint tribute to
Adnan Bounni, Leiden (ePIHANS 67).

--
9%
.....__._..-...;_.»...... .. -- -v\ -.-----. ......--.-.--.-_ . ..,---- ._ --- - V I V _._......... ... ... .......... ,_,

454 Bibliography Bibliography 455

KLENGEL-BRANDT, E. et al. 1991 "Die rezente Urnwelt von Tall Set; Hamad und Daten zur
1
I
1996 "Vorlaufiger Bericht iiber die Ausgrabungen des Umweitrekonstruktion der assyrischen Stadt Dur-katiimmu. Die
Vorderasiatischen Museums auf Tall Knedig/NO-Syrien. Prob1ernstei1ung", in KUHNE ed. 1991, 21-33.
|
i
Ergebnisse der Kampagnen 1993 und 1994", MDOG 128, 33- 1993 "Vier spatbabylonische Tontafein aus Tall Seh Hamad, Ost~
67. Syrien", SAAB 7, 75-107
1997 "Vorléiufiger Bericht tiber die Ausgrabungen des 1993/94 "Tall Sol; ljiarnad/Dur-Katlimmu 1988-1990", in KUHNE, H. ed,
Vorderasiatischen Museums auf Tall Knedig/NO-Syrien. "Archao1ogische Forschungen in Syrien (5)", AfO 40/41, 267-
Ergebnisse der Kampagnen 1995 und 1996", mit Beitragen von 272.
I
I—I.~G. K. Gebel und E. Vila, MDOG 129, 39-87. 1994 "The Urbanization of the Assyrian Provinces", in S. MAZZONI
1998 "Vorléiufiger Bericht fiber die Ausgrabungen des ed. 1994,55-84.
Vorderasiatischen Museums auf Tall Knédi"s/NO-S y rien - 1995 "The Assyrians on the Middle Euphrates and the Habur", in
1.
ii Zusammenfassung der Ergebnisse 1993-1997", MDOG 130, 73- LIVER/\NIed. 1995, 69-85.
82. 1998 "Tall S613 Harnad - the Assyrian City of Dfir-Katlimmu: a
KOHLMEYER, K. Historic»-geographical Approach", in MIKASA, T. ed., Essays on
1984 "Euphrat-Survey", MDOG 116, 95-118. Ancient Anatolia in the second Millennium B.C., 279-307
1986 "Euph.rat-Survey 1984", MDOG 118, 51-65.- (:BMECCI X).
Kouusro, R. Kenna, H. ed.
1996 "Tell Rad Shaqrah 1991-1995", Orient Express 1996/3, 67-69. 1991 Die rezerlte Urnwelt von Tall S5]; Hamacl und Daren zur
Kossncrc, G. Umweltrekonstruktion der assyrischen Stadt Dtlr-katlirnrnu,
i 1987 "Fibeln aus Uruk", BaM 18, 199*-217. Berlin (=BATSH 1).
Koztowsro, S. ed. KULEMANN-OSSEN S./MORANDI BONACOSS1 D.
1990 Nemrik 9. Pre-Pottery Neolithic Sire in Iraq [vol.1} (General in press "Die eisenzeitiiche Keramii<", in KUHNE, H./W. ROL.L1G, W. eds.
Report - Seasons 1985-1986), Warsaw. Die archiiologische Gelandebegehung am Unteren Khabur. Tell
1992 Nemrik 9. Pre-Pottery Neolithic Site in Iraq, vol. 2: House No I: Der niirdliche Abschnitt bis zum Wadi Raml, Wiesbaden
I/IA/IB, Warsaw. (=T12binger Atlas des Vorderen Orients Beihefie, Reihe B 76).
KRANIER, C. i(uN1i~1oLM, P.I.
1982 Village Ethnoarchaeology: Rural /ran in Archaeological 1995 "1993 Wiggie-matching Results for the Long Bronze Age/Iron
Perspective, New York. Age Chronology", Aegean Dendrochronology Project
Knots, S. December I995 Progress Report, New York.
1976 Keramik urartaischer Festungen im Iran, Berlin (=AMI KWASMAN, T.
Erganzungsband 2). 1988 Neo-Assyrian Legal Documents in the Kouyanjik Collection of
1 979 "Die urartaische Kerainilc aus Bastam", in W. KLEISS ed., the British Museum, Rome (wStudia Pohl 14). >
Bastam 1. Ausgrabungen in den urartaischen Anlagen 1972-75,
Berlin, 203-220 (rTeheraner Forschttngen 4). LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY, C.C. '
KUHNE, H. 1970 Excavations at_Tepe Yahya, Iran, 1967-69. Progress Report I,
1 974/77 "Zur historischen Geographic am Untcren Khabur. Vorlaufiger Cambridge. ‘
Bericht tiber eine archaologische Gelandebegehung", AfO 25, Lntvtou, RS./SHIPTON, GM.
249-255. 1939 Megiddo I: Seasons of I925-1934, Strata I-V, Chicago (=0IP
1978/79 "Zur historischen Geographic am Unteren Khabur. Zweiter 42).
Vorlaufiger Bericht iiber eine archaologische Gelande- -LAMPRICHS, R.
begehung", AfO 26, 181-195. 1 1995 Die Westexpansion des neuassyrischen Reiches. Eine
1984a "Tall S613 Ijlamad/Du:-katlimmu 1981-1983", in KUHNE, H. ed., Strulctaranolyse, Neukirchen-Vluyn/Keveiaer (=AOAT 239).
"Ausgrabuugstatig1<eit in Syrien (3)", AfO 31, 160-170 LARSEN, P.
1984b "Tall Self) 1j1amadfDErr-katlimrnu 1984", in KUHNE, H. ed., in preparation "Die Stratigraphic und Architekturbefunde von Assur. Bericht
s
4 "Ausgrabungstatigkeit in Syrien (3)", AfO 31, 170-178 tiber die Abiagerungssequenzen in den Schichten III und II mach
1989/90 "Tall S623 ljlamadlD1Z1r-katlimmu 1985-87", in KUHNE, H. ed., den von der Frcien Universitat Berlin durchgeftihrten
"Ausgrabungstiitigl<eit in Syrien (4)", AfO 36/37, 308-327
..a__.....-i_..s..»....... ....... E,‘ - --—----—- 7 — --- ---- —---- ---—;T__ ._______ __. ,,,, V _ _ __ V_ V ..__ ...._»..,_.,,..._,..___ ___.._._._.,____.____..____.........

456 Bibliography Bibliography 457

Grabungen (Stand Mai 1995)", in Endpublikatiori der Loun, G./ALTMAN, (3.13.

Grabimgen der FU Berlin in Assur 1988-89. 1938 Khorsaboa’ Port II - The Citadel and the town, Chicago (=OIP
. LAZZARINI, L. et a1 40).
' 1994 "Caratterizzazione chiniico~fisica di ceramiche dei3’etfi del LOUHIVUORI, M.
Ferro da Tell Afis (Siria)", in Proceedings of the first European 1996 "The East Mediterranean Pottery Project. Exchange of
l Workshop on Archaeological Ceramics, Roma 1991, Rome, Specialized Data on the Information Superhighway",
269-280. Archeologia e Calcolatori 7, 9974002.
LEBEAU, M LUCKENBILL, DI).
1983 . La céramique do Paige du Fér II-III a Tell Abou Daririé et ses 1926 Ancient Records ofAssyria and Babylonia, ‘l , Chicago 1926.
rapports avec la céramique contemporaine en Syrie, Paris. LUGENBEAL, EN./SAUER, J.A.
LEHMANN, G. 1972 "Seventh-sixth Century B.C. Pottery from Area B at I-Ieshbon",
1996 Untersuchungen znr spaten Eisenzeit in Syrian and Libanon. Andrews University Seminary Studies 10, 21~69.
Stratigraphie and Keramifiormen zwischen ca. 720 bis 300 v. LUMSDEN. S.
Chr., Miinster (wA V0 5). 1991 "Urban Nineveh: Investigations within the Lower town of the
1998 "Trends in the Local Pottery Development of the Late Iron Age Last Assyrian Capital", Mar Sipri 4/1, 1-3.
and Persian Period in Syria and Lebanon, c. 700 to 300 B.C.", in press "On Sennacheritfs Nineveh", Paper delivered to the Ist
BASOR 311, 7-37. International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near
LEONARD}, G./PRACCHIA, S./VIDALE, M. East, Universitfi degli Smdi di Roma "La Sapienza", Rome 18-
1989 "L’indicatore ceramico nei percorsi archeologici", in Dottriria e 23 May, 1998. '
metodoiogia della ricerca preistorica (Atti delta XXVI! LUNDQUIST, J.M.
Riimiorze Scientifica), Ferrara, 85-104. 1983 "Tell Qarqur. The 1983 Season", AAAS 33/2, 2'72-288.
LINDNER, M. et al. LYONNET B.
1990 "Es Sadeh - A Lithic~Early Bronze-Iron II (Edomite) Nabatean * 1996 "La prospection archéologique de ia partie occidentale du Haut
1
Site in Southern Jordan. Report on the seconci Exploratory Khabur (Syrie du Nord-Est): méthodes, résultats et questions
|
Campaign, 1988", Annual of the Department of Antiquities of auteur dc i'occupation aux IIIe at IIe/millénaires av. n. e.", in
Jordan 34, 193-237. DURAND, 3.-M. eC1., Amurru. Mari, Ebla et les Hourrites, dix
LINES, J. ans do travaux. Ie partie. Acres du coiioque international
1954 "Late Assyrian Pottery from Nimrud", Iraq 16, 164-167. (Paris, mai 1993), Paris, 363-376.
LITTAUER, M.A./Cnouwnt, J.H,/HAUPTMANN, H.
1991 ~ spétbronzezeitliches Speichenrad vom Lida: i-Ioytik in oer
"Bin MACARTHUR, R.H.
Siidost-'I‘iirkei", AA, 349-358. I972 Geographic Ecology: Patterns in the Distribution of Species,
LIVERANI, M. New York. _
1 1994 "ldeologia delle nuove fondazioni urbane in ete. neoassira", in l\/IADHLOOM, T.A.
MAZZON1 ed. 1994, 375-384. 1968 "Nineveh: The 1967-1968 Campaign", Samer 24, 45-51.
LIVERANI, M. ed. 1969 "Nineveh: The 1968-1969 Campaign", Samar 25, 43-49.
1995 Neo-Assyrian Geography, Rome (=Qiiaa'erni di geografio MAHMOUD,A.6tal. .
storica 5). 1988 "Die Ausgrabungen auf dem Tell ‘Agéga/Sadikanni, 1982",
LLOYD, S. DaM3,141-184.
‘ "I954 "Sultantepe, part II", AnSt 4, I01-110. MAISLER, B.
LLOYD, S./GOKCE, N. 1952 "Yurza. The identification of Tell Jernmeh“, PEQ 1952, 48~51.
1953 "Sultantepe: Anglo-Turkish Joint Excavations, 1952", AnSt 3, (
v MALLOWAN, M.E.L.
27-51. 1936 "Excavations at Chagar Bazar, and an Archaeological Survey of
LOW, U. the Habur Region of North Syria, 1934-35", Iraq 3, 1 W86.
. 1998 Figiiriich verzierte Metailgefafie aus Nord- and N0rdwest»Iran, 1937 "Excavations at Chagar Bazar, and an Archaeological Survey
1 of the Habur Region, second Campaign, 1936", Iraq 4, 91-177.
~
\ 1 Miinster (=A V0 6).
1 Loun, G. ’ 1950 “Excavations at Nitnrud. 1949-1950“, Iraq 12, 147-183.
1. 1948 Megiddo II. Seasons of 1935-1939, Chicago (wO1P 62). 1952 "The Excavations at Nimrud (Kaihu), 1951", Iraq 14, l-23.
 1 I

458 Bibliography Bibliography 459

"The Excavations at Nimrud (Kallgu), 1952“, Iraq 15, 1-42.

Mnzzom, S. ed.
1953
1954 "The Excavations at Nimrud (Kaihu), 1953", Iraq 16, 59-163. . 1992 Tell Afis e l'etc‘z del Ferro, Pisa (eSeminari di Orientalisrica 2).
1956 "Excavations at Nimmd (Kamu), 1955") Iraq 13, 1,21_ 1994 Nuave fondazioni nel Vicino Oriente antico. Realm e ideologia,
w-rhe Excavations at 19560’ Iraq 19’ D E Orlénlalisiica 4).
1957
" N, . . AINES, . .
1958 "The Excavations at Nimrud (Kallgu), 1957 , Iraq 20, 101-108. Nippur I. Temple of Enlil, Scribal Quarter and Soundings,
1966 Nimrnd and its Remains, London. 1967 Chicago (=OIP 68).
MALLOWAN, M.E.L./DAVIES, L,.G. MCDONALD, H.
1970 ‘ Ivories in Assyrian Style. lvories from Nimrud (1949-1963), 1995a "Pottery" [catalogue entries], in CUR'l"lS/READE eds. 1995, 153-
Fascicule I1, London. 160.
MATNEY, T./ALGAZE, G. 199511 “Kalhu/Nimrud“, Paper delivered to the table ronde "Keramik
1995 "Urban Development at Mid-Late Early Bronze Age Titris der Eisenzeit - Iron Age Pottery", 24th - 26th February, 1995,
Hoytik in Southeastern Anatolia", BASOR 299/300, 33-52. Institut ftir V0r- und Friihgeschichte und Vorderasiatische
MATSON, RR. Archiiologie, Heidelberg.
1971 “A Study of Temperatures Used in Firing Ancient MCGOVERN, P./Mrctnat, R.H.
Mesopotamian Pottery“, in BRILL, R.H. ed., Science and 1996 "The Analytical and Archaeological Cailenge of Detecting
Archaeology, Cambridge, 65-79. Ancient Wine: Two Case Studies from the Ancient Near East",
MATSUMOTO, K. in MCGOVBRN, PJ FLEMXNG, SJ./KATZ, S.H. eds. The Origins
1991 "Preliminary Report on the Excavations at Kish/Hursagkalama, and Ancient History of Wine, Amsterdam, 57-65.
1988-1989", Al-Rdfiddn 12, 261-307. MCMAHON, A.
MATFEIERS, J. ed. 1998 "The Kuyunjik Gully Sounding, Nineveh, 1989 & "I990
1981 The River Qoueiq, Northern Syria, and its Catchment. Studies Seasons", Al-Rfifiddn 19, 1-32. -1
-,1
Rising from the Tell Rzfaiat Survey 1977-79, Gxford (=BAR IS I\/Lanes D.J.W. l.|
98). 1986 A Survey in Northeastern Syria, Leiden (=PlHAN’S 58).
IV§A'i‘Tl-lEWS, RJ. MERPERT N.Y./MUNCHAEV R.M.
1989 "Excavations at Iemdet Nasr, 1988", Iraq 51, 225-248. 1984 "Archaeological travel in Syria" {in Russian}, Sovjetskaja
1990 "Excavations at Eemdet Nasr, 1989", Iraq 52, 25-39. Archeologija 1, 307-17.
1997 "After the Archive: Eariy Qynastic 1 occupation at Jemdet Nasr, Meuszmsxi, I.
Iraq", Al-Rfifidén 18, 109-117. 1977 Odkrywanie Mezopotarnii, Warsaw.
NIATFHEWS, R.J./POSTGATB, J.N. “Second Preliminary Report on the Polish Excavations at Kalhu
1987 "Excavations at Abu Salabikh, 1935-26", Iraq 49, 91-120. ‘ 1978 {Nimrnd)", ErTr 10, 417-420.
Mxrmews, R3./Wn,1<lNsoN, T. eds.
1991 "Excavations in iraq, 1989-89", Iraq 53, 169.-132. , MEYER’
1998 ~l-*W- Review on T. EICIU-IOFF, Grab und Beigabe, Mtinchen 1.993,
MAZAR, A., Orientalisrische Literaturzeitung 93, 40-47. ’
1982 "Iron Age Fortresses in the Judaean Hills", PEQ 114, 87-109. MEYERS, EM. ed.
1995 "Excavations at the Israelite Town at Khirbet Marjameh in the 1997 The Oxford Encylopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, New
Hills of Ephraim", IEJ 45, 85-115. York/Oxford.
MAZUROWSKI, R.F. MIERZEJEWSKI, AJSOBOLEWSKI, R.
1992 Nemrik 9. Pre~P0ttery Neolithic Site in Iraq, vol. 3: Ground and _ 1980 "Polish Excavations at Nimrud/Kalhu 1974-1976: Some
Pecked Stone Industry in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic of Northern Preliminary Remarks on the New Discovered Neo-Assyrian
Iraq, Warsaw. Constructions and Reliefs", Surner 36, 151-162.
A4AZz0N1,S. Mtotus, P.A.
1987 "Lo scavo de1!’edificio D", Egitro e Vicino Oriente 10, 25-83. 1987 "Assur - vor der Ziqqurat und dem alien Palast", MDOG 119,
1992a "L’eta clel Ferro a Tell Mardikh e nella sua regione", in 135-156.
1
~
x
MAZZON1e(i. 1992, 99-155. 1996 Des Wohngebiet von Assur. Srratigraphie and Architektur,
1992b "Tell Afis e il Ferro I in Siria“, in MAZZONI ed. 1992, 157-196. Berlin (=Wl/DOG 93).
19920 "Fibulae from Tell Mardikh and Tell Afis", in MAZZONI ed.
1992, 231-274.

_ 4.
 r
it
.. _ i "ii. l1E'l'.“..’-':,{5»“1,7K1{,5_'f§XzF'J‘¢‘1u’l'§]1'£21k"~-?iL.4‘._;_Ln;.-~uUn.2x»->'<>.,,‘i»J',vw ' .1, . ' - I
in
i
Il
I.

Bibliography 461
460 Bibliography
NASHEF, K. ed.
MILLS, B. .1983/84 "Ausgrabungen und Geiandebegehungen. lrak“, AfO 29l30,
1989 "Integrating Functional Analyses of Vessel and Sherds through 166-222.
Models of Ceramic Assemblage Formation", World 1987 “Ausgrabnngen und Gelandebegehungen. Irak (ll)", AfO 34, 98-
Archaeology 21, 133-147. 236.
Monet NASRABADI, B. NEGRO, F.
1996 "Zum Problem des Begrabnisplatzes im Wohngebiet von 1997 "Hatara, livello 8. la ceramica neoassira", in PIORINA et al.
Assur", Paper delivered to the annual meeting of the Dentsche 1997, 163-187.
1 Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin (26. April), Berlin. Norme
1999 Untersuchungen zu den Bestattungssitten in Mesopotarniens in 1984 Norme per redazione delle schede di saggio stratigrafico,
der ersten Hiilffte des ersten Jahrtausends v. Chr., Maine (wBaF Rome.
23). Nonrnnnon, A./BAMBER, A./Roma, M.
MONCHAMBERT I .-Y. 1988 Excavations at ‘Ana Qal'a Island, Warminster (fllraq
1984 "Le futur lac du Moyen Khabour: Rapport sur la prospectlon Archaeological Reports 1).
archéologique menée en 1983", Syria 61, 181-218. Nonrnenon, A., FALKNER, R.
Moose, J.P. . 1987 "The 1986 Survey Season at Samana", Iraq 49, 143-173.
1993
Mooney, P.R.S.
Tille Hoyiik 1: The Medieval Period, London. 1 Numoro, I-1.
1988
,
"Excavations at Tell Fisna“ [in-Japanese], Al~Rcifia‘izn 9, 1-72.
1980 Cemeteries of the first Milleniurn BC at Deve Hiiyiik Near 1996 “Excavations at Tell Thuwaij trench C", Al-Rafidan 17, 77-110.
Carchernish, Salvaged by T.E. Lawrence and C.L. Woolley in
1913, Oxford (=13/1R IS 87). OATES, D.
1985 Materials and Manufacture in Ancient Near East: The Evidence 1957 "Ezida: The Temple of Nabu", Iraq 19, 20-39.
of Archaeology and Art. Metals and Metalwork, Glazed 1959 "Fort Shalmaneser - an Interim Report", Iraq 21, 98-129.
Materials and Glass, Oxford (=-BAR IS 237). 1961 “The Excavations at Nirnrud (Kalhu), 1960", Iraq 23, 1-14.
MORANDI BONACOSSI, D. 1963 "The Excavations at Nimrud (Kallgu), 1962", Iraq 25, 6-37.
1996 Tra il fiume e la steppa. Insediarnento e uso del territorio nella 1965 "The Excavations" at Tell al Rimah, 1964 ", Iraq 27, 62-80.
bassa valle del fiume Khabur in epoca neo-assira, Padua 1968a Studies in the Ancient .History of Northern Iraq, London.
(=History of the Ancient Near East/Monographs I). 19681) "The Excavations at Tell al Rimah, 1967", Iraq 30, 115-138.
MOREL, J.P. 1972 "The Excavations at Tell ai Rimah, 1971", Iraq 34, 77-86.
1982 Céramique campanienne. Les Formes, Paris. OATES, D./OATES, J.
MOSCATI, P. 1958 "Nimrud 1957: The Hellenistic Settlement", Iraq 20, 114-157.
1996 “Archeologia quantitative: nascita, svi1uppo e ‘crisi’, OATES, .l. -
Archeologia e Calcolatori 7, 579-590. 1959 "Late Assyrian Pottery from Fort Shalmaneser", Iraq 21, 130-
MULLER, U. 146. ~
1999 "Die eisenzeitliche Stratigraphic von Lidar Hoytik, AnSt 49, in 1991 "The Fall of the Assyrian Empire", CAH2 Vol. III (2). The
press. Assyrian and Babylonian Empires and other States of the Near
MUSCIARELLA, O.W. East, from the eighth to the sixth Centuries B.C., 162-189.
1984 "Fibulae and Chronology, Marlik and Assur", Journal of Field Onsa, T.
Archaeology 11, 413-419. 1988 Mitteleisenzeitliche Kerarnik Zentral-Ostanatoliens mit dem
i Schwerpunkt Karalcaya-Staudarnmgebiet am Euphrat, Berlin
NA'Al\/IAN, N. (=BBl/O 9).
1979 "The Brook of Egypt and Assyrian Policy on the Border of 1992 Imamoglu in der Eisenzeit: Keramik, IstM 42, 31-66.
Egypt", Tel Aviv 6, 68-90.
<'3z.oUc,T./Ozone, N. _
NAVEH, I. 1949 Ausgrabungen in Karahoyiik. Bericht uber die im Auftrage der
1.
- 1962 “The Excavations at Mesad Hashavyahu. Preliminary Report", tiirkischen Geschichtskommission I947 durchgefiihrten
IE] 12, 89-113. Ausgrabungen, Ankara.

...|
:
I

-4 - ' ;
 - _ ._ ,_ ._,, ., _. ___,,.,,,,,.._,,_.,,,,.., _.-,..._. Ix - -.t»:.i’¢;»~_¢1¢>~~ , ,,_.,,..1.._.w.",...,;.-1,.,.; 1..--8...»:-. .».¢.@1-,-la...-i,.....;.~;~,_,,e:.,.-;.,.1-,t;;;:i='Qzziizfi==za~;I;'~»1s£s;:<=<-=-_» --*1

LI-/:

462 Bibliography Bibliography 463

OGGIANO, I. PEDERSEN, O.
1997 "The Pottery of Iron Age II from Tell Afis", Pisa, 188-213 1989 “Die Assur-Texte in ihren archiiologischen Zusarnmenheingen",
(=C0ntributi della Scuola di Specializzazione di Archeologia di MDOG121,153-167.
Pisa I). 1992 "Gréiber und Archive in mesopotamischen Woimheiusern -
OHTSU, T. besonciers Gruft 45 und Archiv des Babu-aha-iddina, in
1991 "Late Assyrian ‘Palace Ware’ - Concerning Dimpled Goblet", in HROUDA, B./Knots, S./SPANOS, P.Z. eds. Von Uruk nach Tuttul,
\
MIKASA, T. ed., Essays on Ancient Anatolian and Syrian Studies eine Festschrift fiir Eva Strommenger, Miinchen/Wien, 163-
in the 2nd and lst Millenium B. C., Wiesbaden, 131-153 169.
(=BMECCJ IV). 1997 “Use of Writing among the Assyrians", in WAETZOl.I)/
OLDENBURG, E./Ronwnnen, J. HAUPTMANN eds. 1997, 139-152.
-.
1981 t
The Excavations at Tall Daruk (Usnu?) and ‘Arab al-Mulk 1 998 Archives and Libraries in the Ancient Near East 1500-300 B.C.,
(Paltos), Copenhagen. Bethesda.
ORTON, C./Tynns, P./VINCE, A. PENGLASE, C.
1993 Pottery in Archaeology, Cambridge. I 995 "Some Concepts of Afterlife in Mesopotamia and Greece", in
CAMPBELL/GREEN eds. 1995, 192-195.
PETRIE,
PAGE, S.
1968 "A Stein of Adad-Nirari III and Nergal-Eres from Tell al 1891 Tell el Hesy ( "Lachish“), London.
Rimah“, Iraq 30, 139-153. 1928 Gerar, London.
PAPALDO, S. et al. PFALZNER, P.
1988 Strutturazione dei dati delle schede di catalogo. Beni ntobili 1990 "Die Keramik vom Tell Ijiwés (Habur-Syrien)", Berytus 38, 137-
archeologici e storico artistici, Rome. £54.
PARKER, B. 1993 "Die Spéitbronzezeit: Tell Umm 'Aqrebe", in BERNBECK 1993,
It
1954 "The Nirnrud Tablets, 1952 - Business Documents", Iraq 16, 70-96. .
29-58. 1995 Mitannische und Mittelassyrische Keramik. Eine
PARKER, B3. chronologische, funktionale und produktionscikonomische
1997 "The Northern Frontier of Assyria: An Archaeological Analyse, Berlin (=BATSH 3).
Perspective", in PARPOLA/Wt-HTING eds. 1997, 21'/-244. PILLET, M.
PARPOLA, S. 1962 Un piormier de l ’Assyri0l0gie: Victor Place, Paris.
1976 Review on KINNIER WILSON, J.V., The Nimrud Wine Lists, PINCHES, T. G.
London 1972 (=CTN 1), Journal 0fSemitic Studies 21, 165-174. '1 885/86 "An Assyrian Record of Receipts of Taxes", Hebraica 2, 221-
PARPOLA, S./WI-IITING, R.M. eds. 22.2. ,
1997 Assyria 1995. Proceedings of the 10th Anniversary Symposium PLACE, V. I
1870 Ninive et l ’/lssyrie, vol. 2., Paris. , l
of the Neo-Assyrian Corpus Project Helsinki, September 7-11,
1995, Helsinki. POIDEBARD A.
PARSONS, I.R. 1930 "Mission archeologique en Hante Djezire (1928), Rapport",
1971 "Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Texcoco Region, Syria ll, 33-42.
Mexico, Ann Arbor (=University of Michigan, Memoirs of the Pontoon, S.
Museum ofAnthropology No. 3). 1985 "Chronology of the Royal Cemetery of Ur", Iraq 47, 129-158.
PARSONS, J.R./MARY, H. PORADA, E.
197
1 II
Site Descriptions", in PARSONS 1971, 21-178 1962 Alt-Iran. Die Kunst in vorislamischer Zeit, Baden-Baden.
PECORBLLA, PE.
1965 Ancient Iran. The Art of Pre-islamic times, London.
1975 Malatya III. Rapporto prelirninare delle campagne 1963-1968. POSTGATE, C./Otmas, D.tOATns, J.
ll livello eteo imperiale e quelli neoetei, Rome. 1997 Excavations at Tell al Rimah. The Pottery, Warminster (alraq
Pnnnn, F. Archaeological Reports 4).
Q4

1999 Vorderasiatische Fibeln. Von der Levante bis Iran (unpublished POSTGATE, J.N.
Ph.D. Dissertation, Free University of Berlin). 1973 The Governor's Palace Archive, London (=CT'N 2).

I . : . I I E

¢.
---~-»---——--»------ -— ‘ -7 ' --- -4 ’ r ' ' . - .. . .. .. .. . 2. . .. . -- v gm, ---- ----_----------H ----- --- --- -- -- -- - --- --.-.-_;;-,-,;,;.,,,-.,;; -. ;. -. ;- , _............ b><'V11"71 2--. ... . ,-..--._.-. ,, ,, ..; A 11<\1’-,4‘ ' >1 I ,‘
;srezaarrw-H-Q>w1e-:;nn=.;aua;q,+e,on=::nn-:manseoae:.:=z-"=2newsnm:2rqra»sm:-%=:&:¢a=eami<a-ram->=mantel:we:¢=:;a1¢:=:rw::-emia=i<ew.::e:>:-v~n¢m=:~ta-mm~=ms>»>¢--1»not-1»-new--<-.1:-var»-‘mitt*¢r:2imtr:~:-2rffil%".1~=~:~.4_

464 Bibliography Bibliography 465'

1974 "Some Remarks on Conditions in the Assyrian Countrysicle". RENGER, l .1\/1.

Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 17, 1997 "Bin Bericht iiber das Assurprojekt der Deutschen Orient-
225-243. Gesellschaft und des Vorclerasiatischen Museums zu Berlin", in
1979 The Economic Structure of the Assyrian Empire", in LARSEN, PARPOLA/WHETZNG eds. 1997, 261-280.
l\/LT. ed., Power and Propaganda: A Symposium on Ancient RICC1, A.
Elmpires, Copenhagen, 193-221. 1985 "Introduzione", in Settefinestre. Vol III. La villa e i suoi reperti,
1980 "Early Dynastic Burial Customs at Abu Saiabikh", Sumer 36, Modena, 11-17.
65-82. RICE, P.M.
1983 ‘ Abu Salabikh. The West Mound Surface Clearance. London. 1987 Pottery Analysis. A Sourcebook, Chicago/London.
1992 "The Land of Assur and the Yoke of Assur", World RICHARDSON, H.W
Archaeology 23/3, 247-263. 1973 "Theory of the Distribution 01’ City Sizes: Review and Prospect",
POS'1'GA'l'E. .l.N./READE, LE. Regional Studies 7, 239-251.
1976-80 "Kall;tu.", Rl/1 vol. V, 303-323. RIIS, P.J.
POSTGATE, .l.N./‘WATSON, 1).]. CClS. 1948 Hama, Fouilles et Recherches 1931-1938, 11.3: Les cirnetieres a
1979 "Excavations in Iraq, 1977-78", Iraq 41, 141-181. crémation, Copenhagen.
Pntmco, G.D. R113, P}./BUl~1L M-L. ,
1993 Nelson C.ilaeclc's 1938-1940 Excavations at Tell el Kheletfeh. A 1990 ’ Homo, Fouilles et Recherches de la Fondation Carlsberg I931-
Reappraisal, Atlanta. 1938, 11.2: Les objets ole la périocle dite Syro Hittite (Age du
PREUSSER, C. Fer), Copenhagen.
1954 Die Wohnhauser in Assur, Berlin (EW1/DOG 64). Roar, M.
PRITCHARD, .l.B. 1983 "A Report on the Work of the British Archaeological Expedition
1975 Sarepta. A Preliminary Report on the Iron Age, Philadelphia. in the Eski Mosul Dam Salvage Project", Sumer 39, 68-94.
1984 "Excavations at Tell Mohainrned ‘Arab in the Eski Mosul Dam
RAWSON, P.S. Salvage Project", Iraq 46, 141-156.
1954 "Palace Wares from Nirnrnd. Technical observations on 1996 "Eski Mosul Region", in TURNER ed. 1996, vol. 10, 506-507.
Selected Examples", Iraq 16, 168-172. 1997a "Eski Mosul Dam Salvage Project", in MEYERS ed. 1997, vol. 2,
RAsT, WE. 265-268.
1978 Taanach I. Studies in the Iron Age Pottery, Cambridge 1997b "Hamrin Dam Salvage Project", in MEYERS ed. 1997, vol. 2,
(-=/lmerican Schools of Oriental Research Excavation Reports). 471-474.
Ruaon, 1.115. ROAF, M./POSTGATE, LN. eds.
1968 "The Palace of Tiglath-pileser1Il", Iraq 30, 69-73. 1981 "Excavations in Iraq, 1979-80", Iraq 43, 167-198.
1978 “Studies in Assyrian Geography. Part 1: Sennacherib and the Ronmsow, W.S.
Waters of Nineveh". RA 72, 47-72; 157-180. 1951 "A Method for Chronologically ordering Archaeological
1930 "The Rassam Obelisk", Iraq 42, 1-22. Deposits", American Anthropologist 16, 293-301.
1998 "Greco-Parthian Nineveh", Iraq 60, 65-83. ROOBAERT, A.
REICHE, A. 1 996 "A Ne0~A$syrianlStatue from Til Barsib“, Iraq 5s, 9-av.
1997 "Tell Abu Hafur ‘East’. Neuassyrische Besiedlnng in der ROOBAERT, A./TROKAY, M.
Umgcbung von Hasake (Nora-Ost-Syrien) in WAETZOLDI 1990 "Surface Finds", in BUNNENS co. 1990, 121-125.
HAUPFMANN eds. 1997, 355-364. RUSSELL, J.M.
REICHEL, C. ~ 1998 The Final Sack ofNineveh, New Haven.
1990 The Town Wall Houses in Nimrud/Kallgu: An Archaeological 1999 "Some Painted Bricks from Nineveh, A Preliminary Report",
and Historical Reconsideration (Report submitted in partial 1rAnt 34, 85- 108.
fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MA in ~l|
Archaeology of the University of London). SADER, H.
.(
REISNER, G.A./FISHER, C.S./LYQN, D.G. 1937 Les états araméens de Syrie depuis leurfondation jusqu'a leur
1924 Harvard Excavations at Samaria 1908-I910, Cambridge. transformation en provinces assyriens, Wiesbaden (=Beiruter
Texte una’ Studien 36).

. .;|

r .,.,
5|
 ix
|.
1
I'-

466 Bibliography Bibliography 467

SALLES, I.-F. Salvage Project, 1985-86, vol. 2: Tell Ahu Dhahir. Excavation
1980 "Le niveau 4", in BRIEND/HUMBERT 1980, 131-156. Report, Wanninster (rlraq Archaeological Reports).
SCHAEFFER, C.F.A. SETON WLI,L1AMS, M.V.
"Les fouilles de Ras Shamra~Ugar1t. Sixiemc Carnpagne 1961 "Preliminary Report on the Excavations atTe1l Rifa'at", Iraq 23,
1935
(Printemps 1934). Rapport Somrnaire", Syria 16, 150-178. 68-87.
SCHACHT, R. SEVIN, V. <

1987 "Early Historic Cultures", in HOLE, F. ed., The Archaeology of 1991 "The Barty Iron Age in the Elazig-region and the Problem of the
Western Iran. Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Mushkians", AnSt 41, 87-99.
Islamic Conquest, Washington, 171-204. 1994 "The Excavations at the Van Castle Mound", in CILINGIROGLU,
SCHMIDT, E.F A./FRENCH, DH. eds., Anatolian Iron Ages 3, The Proceedings
1957 Persepolis II. Contents of the treasury and other Discoveries, of the third Anatolian Iron Ages Colloquium held at Van, 6-12
Chicago (QOIP 69). August I990 , Ankara, 221-228.
SCHMIDT, C. SHEPARD, A.O.
1997 Aufarbeitung der Befunde der Areale A-F in Kar»Tukulti- 1956 Ceramics for the Archaeologist, Washington.
Ninurta, Nord-Irak, Kampagnen 1986-1989 (Magisterarbeit SHERRATI‘, A.
Universitat Mtinster). 1992 "What Can ‘Archaeologists Learn from Annalists?", in KNAPP,
SCHMIDT, E13./V_AN LOON, NLNJCURVERS, H.H. AB. ed., Archaeology, Annals, and Ehnohistory, Cambridge,
1989 The Holmes Expedition to Luristan, Chicago (=OIP 108). 135-142.
SCHNEIDER, G. SINCLMR, L.A.
1994 "Rohstoffe und Brenntechnik von Keramik in 1954-56 An Archaeological Study of Gibeah (Tell el-Fill), New Haven,
Nordrncsopotamien", in WARTKE, R.-B. ed., Hondwerk und 1-52 (flAASOR 34-35).
Technologie im Alien Orient. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der SMITR, C.
Technik irn Altertum. Internationale Tagung Berlin, 12.-15. 1976 "Regional Economic Systems: Linking Geographical Modeis
Marz 1991, Mainz, 99-109. and Socioeconomic Problems", in SMITH, C. cd., Regional
SCHNEIDER, G. et al. Analysis, V01. 1, New York, 3-63.
1989 "Naturwissenschaft1iche Kriterien und Vcrfahren zur SOBOLEWSKI, R.S.
Beschreibung von Keramik, Diskussionsergebnisse der 1974/77 "Ka113u/Nimrod", AfO 25, 230-238.
Projektgruppe Keramik im Arbeitskreis Archaometrie in der 1981 "The Polish Work at Nimrod: Ten Years of Excavation and
Fachgruppe Analytische Chemie der Geselischaft Deutscher Study", ZA 71, 248-273.
Chemi1<er",Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica 21, 9-39. Smnos, P.Z.
SCHWARTZ, GM. 1988 "Ausgrabungen in Tall Durdara (Eski-Mosul~Projekt) und Tall
1.997 "An Overview“, in "Salvage Excavation", in MEYERS ed. 1997, Hamad Age as-Sagir ((*}azira-Projekt), Nordirak, 1986", MDOG
vol. 4, 459-461. 120, 59-92. 1 _
SEARIGHT, A SPEISER, EA.
1997 "Some Notes on the Herpetology", CURTIS/GREEN 1997, 109- 1933 "The Pottery of Tell Biiia. A Preliminary Account", The
111. Museum Journal 23, 249-308.
SEIDL, U. STAATLICHE MUSEEN ZU BERLIN eds.
1989 Die babylonischen Kudurru-Reliefs. Symbole mesopotarnischer 1992 Dos Vorderasiotische Museum, Mainz.
Gottheiten, Fribourg/Gottingen (=OBO 87). SOAH ed. (=STATE ORGANIZATION FOR Atmoumas AND HERITAGE)
SIMPSON, St J. 1981 Archaeological Sites at the Mosul Darn Reservoir [map].
1990 "Iron Age Crop Storage and Ceramic Manufacture in Rural 1987 Researches on the Antiquities of Saddam Dam Basin Salvage
Mesopotamia. A Review of the British Museum Excavations at and other Researches, Baghdad.
Qasrij Cliff and Khirbet Qasrij in Northern Iraq", Institute of STEIN GJVVATTJENMAKER P.
0».
\ Archaeology Bulletin 27, 119-114. 1990 "The 1987 Tell Loilan Regional Survey", Masca Journal 7,
s
in press Ancient Settlement in the Zurnmar Region. Excavations by the St1ppl., 8-18.
British Archaeological Expedition to Iraq in the Saddam Dam STERN, E.
1980 "Achaemenian tombs from Shecbem", Levant 12, 90-111.

, I r
- 4.
__‘ _‘M;__m____‘__ _ 7_’
W.” H i ,. W . . . - H 1 - - - - -- -- -- - -- - - -- - . .. .. .. m__._
3 :._,.,,,,,,,_;n,,,»;,,,L.g,_.,,,:Gmmm
_ .. . . . .. .. ;.,»,y;-,,.-,,;,,-_._;:,.,;;;;,,_m,-eeiy,Way,;,@,=.,;a;;;1m¢<:c,y4=,,,.fl,.,1,2,,,;,;,,%,.,c,...__,,=.¢;o.=;fi.==t..;,~m¢,,¢.=1;....t_.e..,,.......!¢mm-=.m1
. . . .- - - - . - - ;;_.;, _-_,-,_-,-,2-.-_e,...-..-.,,.. ;- ;,..c-...,,,. . ..-. ..-~14-,_;~. ; , ,,-J,-,.-.,~,,; -,-- 1.--~, t.w!lC.L7—<‘m—"!’1-v-‘1-1‘>9J’~>2-.!1~i:L‘i>‘§-Q14‘.v_1~' !~-r»4-l--Av->®'
~ ~ '-."r‘“"1':i,4{3‘-5--£211"?--Ir‘-'~“ ,. ,.-.....,.;.1,.»,~_-1 &_-._.-1- ~, ):‘A;-P",i
»y,!»':];.-I:

"x

468 Bibliography Bibliography 469

1982 Material Culture of the land of the Bible in the Persian Period 1993b "Archaeological Evidence for the Achaemcnid Period in Eastern
538-332 B. C. , Warrninster/Jerusalem. '1'ur1<ey", AnSt 43, 85-108.
STROMME-INGER, E. SUMNER, WM.
1964 “Grabformen in Babylon", BaM 3, 157-173. 1986 "Achaemenicl Settlement in the Persepolis Piain",AJ/1 90, 3-7.
STRONACH, D. 1989 "Anshan in the Kaftari Phase: Patterns of Settlement and Land
1959 "The Development of the Fibula in the Near East", Iraq 21, 181- use", in DE MEYER, L./HAERINCK, E. eds, Archaeologia lranica
206. et Orientalis. Miscellanea in Honorem Louis Vanden Berghe,
‘ 1978 Pasargadae. A Report on the Excavations Conducted by the Gent, 135 -162.
British Institute of Persian Studies from 1961 to I963, Oxford.
1989 "When Assyria Felt: New Light on the Last days of Nineveh", TAPPY, R.E.
Mar Sipri 2/2, 1-2. . 1992 The Archaeology of Israelite Samaria 1. Early Iron Age through
* 1989/90 "Excavations at Nineveh, 1987", Sumer 46, 107-108. the ninth Century B. C.E., Atlanta.
1994 "Village to Metropolis: Nineveh and the Beginnings of TARHAN, M.T.
Urhanism in Northern Mesopotamia", in MAZZONI ed. 1994, 85- 1993 "An Urartian Intramural 'Pithos Burial’ from the Mound of Van
114. Kalcsi", lstM 43, 279-282.
1995 "Notes on the topography of Nineveh", in LIVERANI ed. 1995, 1994 "Recent Research at the Urartian Capital Tushpa", Tel Aviv 21,
161-170. 22-57. .
1997 "Notes on the Fall or'Nineveh", in PARi>01.A/W1-HTING eds. 1997, TAYLOR .iR., W.W.,
307-324. 1948 A Study ofArchaeology, Washington.
STRONACH, D./CODELLA, K. i '1“r~:mv1u, R.
1997 "Nineveh", in MEYERS ed. 1997, vol. 4, 144-148. 1980 "Les niveaux supérieurs du Tell Abou Danae, Chantier A,
STRONACH, D./LUMSDEN, S. 1977/78", Syro-Mesopotamian Studies 3, 1-58.
1992 "U.C. Berkeley's Excavations at Nineveh", Biblical 1966 "Ancient Near Eastern Art", in The Pomerance Collection of
Archaeologist 55, 227-233. Ancient Art. Exhibition Catalogue, The Brooklyn Museum, 14
STRONACH, R. June - 26 Oct. I966, New York, 13-57.
1978 "Median Pottery from the Faiien Floor in the Fort", Iran 16, 11- THALMANN, J.P.
24. ' 1978 "Tell Arqa (Liban Nord). Campagnes I-III (1972-1974)
SrUMi>s1.., H. Chantier 1. Rapport préliminaire", Syria 55, 1-151 .
1995 "Gr->ophysi1<alische Prospcktion", in MULLER-KARPE, A./ TI-IUREAU-DANGIN, F.lDUNAND, M.
SIEGSCHNEIDER, M./STUMPEL, I-1., "Untersuchungen in Kusakli, 1936 Til Barsib, Paris (=Bibliotheque Archéologique et Historique
1992-94", MDOG 127, 30-34. 23). _
SURENHAGEN, D. Torvm Ycsrn, K.
1986 "Ein Konigssiegel aus Kargamis", MDOG E18, 183-190. 1987 "Excavations at Tell Baqaq. Excavations at Tell Baqaq 2" [in
1 987 "Hirbet Aqar Bahira 1985", in SOAH ed. 1987, 129-131. Arabic], in SOAH ed. 1987, 40*-49*. '
SURENI-1AGEN,D./RENGER, J. Toomes, L.E./Wrnol-rr, GE. . ~’
1982 “Datierungsprobleme der Gruft 30 (Ass. 11190) in Assur", 1963 "The fourth Campaign at Balatah (Shechem)", BASOR 169, 1»
MDOG 114, 103-128. 60.
SULEIMAN, A. TRIGGER, B .G.
1971 "The Results of the Excavations of the University of Mosul in 1998 "Archaeology and Epistemology: Dialoguing Across the
the Walls of Nineveh" [in Arabic], Adah al-Rafidain 1 (July Darwinian Chasm", A./A 102, 1-34.
1971), 45*-97*. . Tsuxnvroro, A.
Sumrvrens, G.D. 1985 Untersuchungen zur Totenpflege (kispurn) im alten
1989 "1988 Tille Hoyuk Kazist", KST XL1, 305-16. Mesopotamien, Neukirchen-Vluyn/Kevelaer (WAOAT 216).
1993a Tille Hoyiik 4: The Late Bronze Age and the Iron Age TUCKER, D.
~
1
transition, London (=British Institute ofArchaeology at Ankara 1992 "A Middle Assyrian Hoard from Khirbet Karhasan, Iraq", Iraq
Monograph 15). 54, 157-182.
in press "Khirbet Garhasan", in BALL ed. in press.

.,..

...I-.:.-.:.=»_-1, - ‘L’

' E
. 2
- £1
'~*'—-—--'-1~<=-—-’~----" ~--~-' - - -- ' 1 - ‘ " 1 1 “ ‘ ' ~ ~ ~- -~—-. —--— ~ - -- -— 1 — _ —. — .' —— -——-- -9 --_:— -- — - - - —---- --_ - v -—--- ------- ------ -,----7” -—--------------------V ---------~ 7-->7 777-_'-1;7;_;:;¢-_>';¢,._,;,>_TH;_,,‘_‘> ‘ H H _ “WV Wu ) __“_ M H A _ _.‘ _ . . V. . M,’ ., . ..~v

isI

470 Bibliography Bibliography 471 ii!

TUFNELL, 0. WARTKE, R.-B.

1953 Lachish III. The Iron Age, Oxford. . 1999 Review on CURTIS/GREEN 1997', Orientalia NS 68, 171-173.
'I“oNcA, C). WATK1Ns, T./CAMPBELL, S.
1993 "Rapport préliminaire sur la Zeme campagne de fouilie it Tell 1986 Excavations at Kharabeh Shattani, 1, Edinburgh (=University
Amarna (Syrie)", Akkadica 79-80, 14-46. of Edinburgh Department of Archaeology Occasional Papers
TURNER, G. 14).
‘ 1970 “The State Appartments of Late Assyrian Palaces", Iraq 32, WHALLON, R.
177-213. E979 An Archaeological Survey of the Keban Re-sen/oir Area of East-
TURNER, I. ed. Central Turkey, Ann Arbor (=University of Michigan, Memoirs
1996 The Dictionary ofArt, New York/London. of the Museum of/lnthropology, No. 1 1).
~ Tustx, S. WEIPPERT, H.
1993 "Excavations at Tell Jikan", in WILHELWZACCAGNINI 1993, 1988 Palastina in vorhellenistischer Zeit, Mtinchcn (=Handbuch der
I
257-260. Archaologie, Vorderasien 11,1).
TUSHINGHAM, A.D WE1PPER'r, M.
1972 ‘The Excavations at Dibon (Dhiban) in _Moab. The third 1992 "Die Feldziige Adadnararis III. nach Syrien. Voraussetzungcn,
Campaign 1952-53, Cambridge (=AAsoR 40). Verlauf, Folgen", Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palostina-Vereins
108, 42-67,
VANDEN BERGHE, L.lTOUROVETS, A. WHITCOMB, D.S.
1995 "Excavations in Luristan and Rotations with Mesopotamia", in 1985 Before the Roses and Nightingales. Excavations at Qasr-1' Abu
CURTIS, J. ed., Later Mesopotamia and Iran: Trihes and Nasr, Old Shiraz, New York.
Empires 1600-539 BC, London, 46-53. 1994 "Qasr-i Abu Nasr and the Gulf", in BOUCHARLAT, R./SALLes, I.-
VAN MERE, W.J.lLAUFFRAY J. F. eds., Arable orientale, Mesopotamia er Iran Meridional de 1’
1954-55 "Nouvelle prospection dams la Haute }ezireh syrienne", AAS 4-5, age du fer au debut de la période islamique. Reunion de travail,
129-48. Lyon, 1982, Paris, 331-337.
VAN LooN, M./GUTERBOCK, H.G. WIGHTMAN, G.
1971 "Korucutepe Excavations, 1969. Architecture and General 1996 "Area B. Sounding in the Middle City", in BUNNENS ed. 1990,
Finds; Seal Impressions", Keban Project 1969 Activities, 106-119.
Ankara 1971, 59-69 (=Mia'a'le East Technical University Keban Wru-rem, G./ZAccAcsN1N1, C.
Project Publications, Series I, No. 2). 1993 Tell Karana 3, Tell Jikan Tell Khirbet Salih, Maine (=BaF 15) 1I

1972 "Korucutepe Excavations, 1970", Keban Project I970 WILHELM, G. et al.

Activities, Ankara, 83-85 (=11/Iiddle East Technical University 1987 "German-Itaiian Expedition to Iraq. Preliminary Report on the '2

Keban Project Publications, Series I, No. 3). first Campaign of Excavations within the Saddam Dam E

VON LUSCHAN, F. ed. Reservoir Archaeological Rescue Project (1984)", in SOAH ed.
1943 Ausgrabungen in Serulschirli V. Die Kleinfunde von Senclschirli. 1987, 99-128. “ 1

Herausgabe und Ergcinzungen besorgt von W. Andrae, Berlin. WILKINSON, T.J. i

voN DER OSTEN, H.H. 1990 Town and Country in Southeastern Anatolia 1. Settlement and >
r

1937 The Alisar Hoyuk, Seasons of 1930-32, part H, Chicago (m0IP Land Use at Kurbart Hoyuk and other Sites in the Lower
29). Karababa Basin, Chicago (=OIP 110). 1
1
1995a "Late Assyrian Settlement Geography in Upper I\/Iesopotamia",
VVAETZOLD, H./HAUPTMANN, H. eds. in LIVERANIed. 1995, 139-159, 1:
a
1997 Assyrien irn Wandel der Zeiten, Akten der XXXIXe Rencontre 1995b "The Structure and Dynamics of Dry-farming States in Upper
Assyriologique Internationale, Heidelberg, 5. »9. Juli I992, Mesopotamia", Current Anthropology 35, 483-520.
Heidelberg (=I-Ieidelberger Studien zum /Alten Orient 6). WILKINSON, T..l.llVIA'1"THEWS, R. 6ClS.
, WARBURTON, D./WARBURTON, R. 1989 "Excavations in Iraq, 1987-88", Iraq 51, 249-265.
‘ 1991 "Bin echiimenidischer Topferstempel von Abu Qubur und einige W1u<1NsoN, T. J./TUCKER, D. J.
Vergieichsstiicke aus Mesopotamien", NAPR 5, 41-46. 1995 Settlement Development in the North Jazira, Iraq. A Study of
the Archaeological Landscape, Warmjnster.

i
1.

|
_ ¢.
._._._#,,__,.-....- ..-..__. --- ~ I V -4- _
ll

472 Bibliography

WILLI-BY, GR. Index

1953 Prehistoric Settlement Pattern in the Virii Valley, Peru,
Washington {wBnreau of American Ethnology Bulletin, No. 1. Geographical terms
155). Ajij, WadilRegi0n
Aalouq Sharqi, Tell 180
WENN, MM. Aatach, Tell 180 viii, 115, 151-172, 194, 234, 235,
"‘~~<21:-n:i¢.1-, 1980 "Part VII: Phase K, The Early Iron Age", in VAN LOON, MN.
‘Abta, Tell 118 357, 358,359,365, 366
ed., Korucutepe. Final Report on the Excavation of the
Abu et-Twein, Khirbe1(Hirbet) 361 Ak£:~1$1~larabc 357, 358, 359, 363
Universities of Chicago, California (Los Angeles) and
Abu Danne, Tell Aliear 356, 360
Amsterdam in the Keban Reservoir, Eastern Anatolia 1968-
ix, I93, 195, 196, 209, 210, 211, Al-Mina s. Mina, z1l~
1970, vol. 3, Amsterdam/New York/Oxford, 155-175.
212, 213, 214,215, 291, 313, 314, Altmtepe 359, 361, 363, 366
1 WOOLLEY, C.L.
l 357, 359, 360 Amarna, Tell 309
1939 "The Iron Age Graves of Carchemish", AAA 26, ll-37.
Abu Dhahir, Tell Amuq Region 196
WORSCHBCH, U.
92, 100, 101, 104, 105, 108, 109, ‘Ana, Qal‘at
1990 Die Beziehimgen Moabs zu Israel und /lgypten in der Eisenzeit.
111,113,114,119,120,122-123 92, 195, 209, 211, 213, 359
Siedlungsarchéiologische und siedlungshistorische Unter-
Abu Dhahir floodplain 101 Inscriptions 195
suchimgen im Kernland Moabs (Ard el-Kerak), Wiesbaden.
Abu Hafur, Tell (Abou Hfour) Anaiat, Wadi 158, 170
viii, 180, 235 Anatolia s. also Turkey
YADIN, Y. et at.
Abu Hijera (Abou Hijera) 180 263, 269, 355, 362
1> 1958 Hazor I. An Account of the first Season of Excavations, I955,
Aim Mariya, Tell 94, 118 Central 265
1; 1960
Jerusalem.
Hazor II: An Account of the second Season of Excavations,
Abu Qubur 2'71 Eastern 268
Abu Salabikh, Tell 135 South-East 291, 350, 362
I956, lerusalem.
I-Iazor III-IV. An Account of the third and fourth Seasons, 1957- Acco Plain 111 Western 265
i 1961
Adali§l;u 232 Apqu s. Abu Mariya, Tell
1958, Jerusalem.
Adiyaman 263 Aqar Babira, Khirbet
YEIVIN, S./l3oBLsTEIN, G.
1970 "Excavations at Tirat Yehuda", ‘Aiiqoi 6, 56-69. Afar, Tell s. Telafar 93, 94, 95-96, 120
Afis, Tell Arade, Tell 180
ZACCAGNINI, C.
viii, ix, 159, £95496, 266, 291, ‘Arban 118
313, 314, 351, 353, 356, 360, 363, Arbid, Tell 180
1995 "Sulla collina rossa: Sensazionali scopertc a Tell Ahmar,
l‘antica Til Barsib, capitals cli un potente stato aramaico nella 377-402 Arqa, Tell 358, 366
Slria settentrionale", Archeo 10 (Sept), 24-33.
Lower City, Sector D 380 Arsl an Tash 309
Ahmar, Tell (Euphrates) Arslantepe 352, 354, 356
ZIMHONI, O.
1990 "Two Ceramic Assemblages from Lachish Levels III and I1", Tel
viii, ix, 24, 29, 141, 235, 271, Ashane Sharqi 180
287-308, 309, 314, 330, 355, 359, Ashciod _ 354, 356
Aviv 17, 3-52.
367, 404, 407 A Asnane Faouqani, Tell 180
AreaC 29, 141,287, 288, 289,314 Assouad Takhtani, Tell 180
Area D 287 Assur (Ashur)
Area E 287 viii, 4, 17, 21, 24, 26, 28, 29, 33,
1l 1 Area F 287 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 61, 69, 92,
l21. Inscriptions 288, 292 97,107,110, 111, 112,113,114,
ll2.
Graves 355 118, 127-147, 156, 194, 209, 210,
511 Wall paintings 24 211, 214, 234, 236, 237, 270, 357,
1
'll
Ahmar, Tell (Khabur) 176, 180 358
‘Ain el-Aabad 180 Aulienhaken 139
‘Ain cl-Qerd (al-) 176, 177, 180 Aulfienwall 131
~
‘Ain Zalah, Iebcl 118 Binnenwall 33, 131, 132, 138, 145
Ajaja, Tell 193, 194, 210,359

L _ .-..,- --— _ ,%i~— > _ 2, ; ____________

~+,,~¢-,-_\...%-.—....-... ._ ‘___ - 7. -- V_ ~ _-_ -____-___ __4 -__-............-4_____ _ ,_._....._,._._.. ..__ 7' V __ _ ..

11?} 1
=3:
=11;
ii
l 351
1 E
'1 "'21 474 Index Index 475
»1,= :=
l ,
ill Graves and tombs Beydar, Tell (Beidar) En-Gecli 351, 363 Hatiidi, Tell 314
viii, 26, 29, 33, 34, 36, 111 112, 180, 234, 236, 237 Erbil 118 1-Iaditha 92
»,.<
not, 113, 127-147, 290, 291, 289 Bijan viii Eski—Mosul 94, 102, 118, 119 llaikal, Tell 118
‘:'<'zZ
Inscriptions 127, 133, 137 Billa, Tell 114, 118 Eski-Mosul Proiect/RegionfDam Halaf, Tell
V‘|"'~l‘l

Living quarter 137 Bitussu (7) s. Baqaq 2, Tell viii, 91-126, 193, 291 32, 109, 112, 113, 194, 195, 209,
%=sei'em< Palace 26 Bit-Adini 310 Euphrates 210, 211, 267, 268, 271, 351, 353.
Private houses 131, 132, 133, 139 Biz-Agusi 310 ix, 32, 118, 268, 272, 292, 309, 354, 357,358, 359, 363, 408
=,':i,,.
Rotes Haus 4 Butmah, Jebel 118 310, 313, 315, 325, 403, 409 Hama 266,290, 291, 314, 351, 363
Southern city wall 132 Boughaz, Tell 180 Dam/Lake ix, 325 Hamidiya, Tell 194
Temples of Istar 131 Brak, Tell 118, 119 Lower 269 Hamrin Basin/Iebel 30, 92, 118
1.11
1%,!‘s |
Test trenches 131 Middle (Turkey) 403 Hanigalbat 94
1111111:
l11*a;l alllgl 81 137 Carchemish (Karkernish/Kargamis) Upper 292, 309, 313, 314 Hanoua, Tell 180
1:11;;
Western gate 131 263, 268, 290, 291, 309, 314, 404 Harmal, Tell 180
ii! F I
zglllil
Aswan 92 Castra Maurorum (‘Z’) s. Shirecna, Faida 102, 120 Harran 195
‘$11.3,
lrsl; :1
Hllvl
Atatiirk Dam 263, 403 Khirbet Fahlian 353 Hasanlu 152, 359
fill E Qatalhiiylik - 356 Faicla~Bandwai Canal 102 Hassake ix, 173, 189, 231
,11,1
-1 -111 Atshan, Jebel 118
Iplllfi
l
Z
Avguir Faouqani, Tell 175, 180 Chagat Bazar, Tell 118, 119 Fakhariyah, Tell (Fekheriye) Hassek, Tell 180
F11 1,; Hasselte s. Hassake
Awaij, Wadi 189 Chamrane Takhtani, Tell 180 180, 194, 209,214,268, 291, 358
ill!
11'; " lg Chil Virhane, Tell 180 Paflah, Tell el- 291, 352, 353, 364 Hatara, Khirbet
Babe Jan 351, 359, 361, 364, 366 Chilparat, Tell 118 Farlio, Tell 180 93, 96, 103, 104, 105, 108, 110,
Babira village 96 China 91 Fatme, Tell 180 111,113,120
1.= 1‘ 1
ll 1
"'52;
..l
Babneet 95 Cilicia/Cilician 265 Fisna, Tell 97, 103 Hatra 118
Babylon 92, 109 Chour Gharbi, Tell ech- 180 Inscriptions 97 Ilawa, Tell al-
Babylonia/n 30-31 Cudeycle, Tell 354, 356 Ful, Tell el- 360 _ 118, 119, 157, 159, 235, 357,358,
-1>,tM.,l_',_W
,2 Baden, Tell 176, 177, 180 Cyprus/Cypriot 265, 291 359, 363
Baghdad 92, 93 Garibe, Jebel 1 18 I-lziyal, Tell 118
1 Garibe, Wadi 170 Hazor
ll Bahandawaya s. Bandwai, Wadi Dabaash, Tell 180
Bahrain Daoudiye, Tell 180 Gawra, Tepe 1 19 291, 353, 354, 357, 360, 362, 363,
352, 353, 361, 362, 363, 364, 366 Daruk, Tell (Tall) 351 Gaza 111 364, 365, 366
1, '=;-~.'=;-.=; gt~;m Balad./Balatu s. Eski-Mosu1 Defiirmentepe 69, 234, 356 Gerar s. Jemmeh Hbera 169, 170
1
1,, fl
ls’!
'Balil<h(BaIih) 195, 315 Deir ez-Zor 310 Gezer, Tell Heshbon 351
11 1 Fl I-Iesi, Tell el- , 361
ill Balu‘, Khirbet el- (Hirbet) 353 Der, Tell ed- 359 291, 351, 353, 356, 360, 365
Ghara, Tell 180 Horvat Qitmit 351, 354, 363
1; it Bandwai, Wadi 102 Deve Hliyiik 290, 291, 354, 365
1,,
,,
Baqaq river 96, 97 Ghezal Talchtani, Tell 1 80 1-Iugna, Tell V 1 18
Dlwwaij, Tell 100, 120
Baqaq 2, Tell 94, 97, 103, 104, 120 Dibak, Tell 180 Glntlaris/Gindaros, Tell s. Jincleris Hurnaidat (tomb) 113, 114
1 1‘i Inscriptions 97 Dibe, Tell 180 Girepan 102, 120 I-luwaish, Tell 118
ll, Baqar, Tell 180 Dibon 361 Godin Tepe 354, 361 Hwes, Tell 359
11 1
,]§\\ W
Barair Kebir, Tell 180 Diniye, Khirbet ed- 235 Gohbol 118
Barri, Tell viii, 175 Diyala 92 Grai Qasim 97 Imamoglu 354
Grai Resh 1 19 Imliiiiye, Tell 30
111
1 Bastarn 361 Djamilo, Tell 180
Iraq/i 92, 102, 157, 234, 270, 310
Bali, Tell 180 Doulcri, Tell _ 180 Guir Diwan, Tell 180
1 1 Guire Zil Kebir, Tell 180 North/ern 91, 107, 152, 159, 289
11 , l
$1‘ 1 Bazi, Tell 314 Durdara, Tell 93, 101
Beer Sheba 361, 366 Din"-Katlimmu s. Sheikh Hamacl, Tell Gulf (Persian) 350 Iran 152, 350, 361, 362,364, 366
111:1 :1
Nortlvwestern 268
1511*1 Beirut
Berguil Bouz, Tell
291
180
Dt1r-8arrul<in s. Khorsabad
I-labor s. Khabur Ishkaft, lebel 1 18
~<
1 Beth Shan 291, 360, 366 Effendi, Tell 180 Hadatu s. Arslan Tash
.-_4‘ _‘.., .4,-
G‘ ?§E
Bethe} 360 Egypt 92 Hadhail, Tell 118 Jaghgagh (Jagjag) 118, 189
,,,1 ll,

1
: {1-
15

ii
4 1% A ...-..=.-..~,.-,_._ v_

, . V6,. V
 . <- 1_,
1
>.i
.-

4'76 Indgx Index 477

Jamous, Tell 180 Khabur region/triangle/basin Mari 118 Main mound/Citadel

Jazira 158 157, 193, 194, 235 Marjameh, Khirbet 18-22, 25-27, 29, 39-40, 42,49, 50
Iraq 177 Khaburf valley 356, 361, 365, 366 1949 Building 20
East 92, 235 viii, 118, 156, 157, 168, 189, 231, Mashkuta, Tell el- 355 1950 building 22
North 92, 100, 115, 116, 152 291 Mastuma, Tell 356 Burnt Palace 21
North Jazira Project 119 Lower viii, 159, 177, 193-229 Mediterranean Well 21
\
Eastern Syria 152, 157 Middle 159 East 265, 379 Central Building
Iawan, Jehel 118 Upper viii, 173-191, 235 West 383 18, 23, 25,26, 29, 31, 32, 33, 35,
1erncletNasr 92 Khaike, Tell 180 Megiddo 36, 37, 38, 39,40, 50-51, 52-60
Iemrneh, Tell 111,351,352 Khamis, Tell 309 268, 291, 356, 357, 358, 360 Graves 26, 27
Ierablus 309 Khan lbsan 355 Mesad Hashavyahu 361, 366 Inscriptions 26, 27, 38
Jeribe s. Garibe Khaneke, Tell 180 Meskene (Maskane) 310 Sculptures 25, 26, 27, 39
Jericho 354, 360, 364, 366 Kharabeh Shattani 93 Mesopotamia/n 168, 269, 352, 358 Central Palace 25, 26, 27
Jerusalem Khatoun, Tell 180 North/em Centre Palace 25
351, 353, 356, 359, 361, 363, 365, Khatuniyeh, Khirbet (Khatuniya) ix, 32, 127, 128, 129, 138, 147, Governor's Palace 20~21, 22
366 viii, 4, 25, 38, 66, 91, 93, 94, 95, 152, 153, 175, 193, 234, 236, 237, Graves 20
lhash, Tell (No. ll) 180 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 289, 350 I Inscriptions 20, 21
Jhash, Tell (No. 59) 180 109,11.0,111,112,1l3,114, 115, South/ern 151, 359 Private Houses T.W. 53
Lfikan, Tell (Jigan) 96-97, 103, 120 116, 120, 121, 162, 234, 235, 236, Mina, al- 291, 356, 357 18-19, 22, 2.3, 30, 34, 43-44, 1.10.
Jinderis viii, 267, 407 237, 270, 291 Mj arjah, Tell 180 ‘194, 291 2

Jordan 361, 364 Kheleifeh, Tell el- Mohammad, Tell 175, 180 Inscriptions 19, 194
Jurn Kabir, Tell 351, 352,353,356, 361, 364 Moharnmed Arab, Teil 97, 105, 108 Grave 19
viii, ix, 268, 290, 291, 309-324, Khorsabad 17, 23, 35, 38, 96, 118 Mosul 96, 97, 100, 102, 1'18, 119 North-West Palace 1 ,.
1 ::;_"

330, 367 Residence K 32, 34 Msefna, Tell 94, 104 19-20, 22, 23, 27, 29,32, 33, 355 1.-‘.5
5251*;
Residence M 32 Msas, Khirbet e1- 356, 361 Tombs 17, 355
Kakzu s. Kilizu Khosr 102 Mumbaqat, Tell - 325 Inscriptions 19, 20 l J§i?.i_i
Kallgu s. Nimrud Kilizu ‘ 1'18, 174 Mureybet (Mureibit) 325 Well, room NN 19, 21, 33
1.
Kamira, Tel1 118 Kish 92, 109, 113 Mutkinu 315 South~East-Buildlng/Palace 21
Kamishly, al- s. Qamishly, al- Knedij, Tell 131, 142 Mycenaean 265 Temple of Nabfi (Ezida) 21-22, 110
Karahoytik 351, 352, 360 Kummuh 264 Temple of Ninurta 22
Karakaya 268 Kurban Region 360 Najm, Qal‘at 309 Trench IA50 37
Karhasan, Khirbet Kurdiss, Tell 180 Najma, Iebel 1 18 Trench 0.10 - 37
100, 105,111,113,114, 120,126 Nasbeh, Tell en- Outer/lower town 22-25, 40
Kat-Tukulti-Ninurta Lachish 109, 353, 360, 361, 366 351, 352, 353, 356,359, 360,363 Building of Adadnirari III/PD. 3 25
viii, 61-90, 92, 110, 128, 138, 194, Lebanon 234 Nasibina (?) s. Badan, Tell . Graves 25
209, 210, 212, 213, 237, 357, 358, Leilan, Tell 119 Negev 111 Fort Shalmaneser (ekal ma§arri)
359, 362 Levant/inc Nemrik 9 93 22-24, 27, 29, 30-31, 32,33, 34, 35,
Areas A»? 61, 64, 65, 67 ix, 196, 265,268, 270, 313, 407 Nile 92 36, 37, 38, 39,40,411-48, 109, 112,
Inscriptions 61, 69, 70 Lidar H6)/éik Nimrud 113, 194, 195, 209,210, 211,213,
Nordpalast 61, 70 ix, 268, 291, 309, 313, 403-434 - viii, ix, 4, 17-60, 61, 62, 69, 92, 214, 287, 291, 352, 357, 358, 359
Tell O 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69 Luristan 30, 353 10l,106,107,108,109,110, 111, Inscriptions 22
Karrana 3, Tell 93 112, 113,114, 118,119, 141, 142, PD. 1 35
Kaukab 231 Maghlub, Jebel 118 194, 209, 210, 211, 214, 234, 236, PD. 1-4 25
Kdich, Tell 180 Majdel, Tell 180 237, 270, 287, 288, 289, 290, 292, Graves 25
\ Keban 154, 265, 267, 268, 408 Makhul, Iebel 1 18 352, 354, 355, 358, 360, 362, 363, Pl). 3 s. Building of Adadnirari III
Keisan, Tell 111, 353, 356, 364, 365 Malatya s. Arslantepe 365 Town Wall Palace 24
Keshaf, Tell 118 Mardikh, Tell 159,291

Fir!
"MW “M”"""""' '" — ' ‘ ' 31,,‘':""
_ ' ;*“‘i*;;.=-','"
_-.¢,..-52.2 .,..= ..¢a-L .. . ’»*F*""~9“;1“-Z4'¢=<‘¢=s*‘*~*'<;<=
, _ .- _,,_ 2.,» .._..._...._ .. ,. '*~"-~‘*‘~"'-'-‘M
.9, .. .~_ .1 .4?‘ ' #"*»*~w~“*"-->"‘e"fla=>ra¢~~~¢~s4~r'ee:@>"~1r'-"‘=r'err-@<~r:¢*v~»-wé~~7*<@-~rlv
"km ,1 ,,__,,.<'.v:,;< . ., . . _ , . _,- 'e'..,»:€,
' |

1
478 Index Index 479

Nineveh Qasrij, Khirbet Sandaliye lvlaqbara 315 310, 313, 314, 347, 350, 356, 362,
vii-viii, ix, 3-15, 17, 29, 40, 92, viii, 4, 29-30, 38, 66, 70, 93, 94, Sangar 357, 361 363, 364, 365, 367
94, 95, 102, 103, 104, 106, 110, 95, 103, 104, 105, 106, 108, 109, Sarafand s. Sarepta Central 309, 310, 315
112,113, Il4,118,l19,194, 352, 110,111,112,113,114,115,116, Sarepta 290, 29 '1 Coastal 289
355 120, 138, 193, 194, 195, 209, 210, Sasan, Jebel 1 18 East/ern 152
Aclaci Gate 1 13 211, 212, 213,214, 233, 234, 235, Sawwan, Tell es- 92 Inner 196, 289
Kuyunjik 3, 4, 8 236, 237, 270, 272, 289, 291, 351, Seh Gubba North/crn
Kuyunjik Gully 3, 8 358, 359, 363, 366 101,105,108,110,111,114, 120, 154, 265, 266, 267, 268, 287, 291,
Halzi Gate 3, 8 Qasrij Cliff 125 292, 311, 315, 325
Lower town 3 viii, 4, 35, 38, 40, 66, 69, 70, 71, Sela], Tell 99-100, 104, 120 North-eastern 173, 231
Mashl-:1 Gate/MG 22 viii, 3, 4, 8, 9 93,95, 104, 106, 107, 108, 109, Shilo 360 Western 159, 193,234, 313, 407
Building 3, 4, 9, 10 lll,115,116,120,138,193,194, Sichern 352, 355
North Palace 114, 355 195,209,210, 211,212, 214, 233, Sinjar, (Balad) 118, 119 Taanach 291
Sennacheribs Palace 3, 8 234, 237, 290, 291, 358 Sinjar, Jebel I18 Tabara el-Akrad 353, 356
SH building 112 Qattine, Tell (N0. 7) 180 §abiré§u (7) S. Girepan Tabqa 310, 325
Shamash gate 4, 8 Qattine, Tell (No. 40) 180 $an11urfa - 403 Talah, Tell 180
Nippur 355, 357,358, 359, 360, 362 Qoueiq Region 358 Shanin, Jebel . 118 Tarsus
Nisibin s. Nusaybin Sheikh Harnad, Tell * 271, 291, 351, 353,354, 358, 360,
Norsun Tepe 351, 354, 358, 360, 408 Rad Shaqrah, Tell viii, ix, 231-259 viii, 23, 24, 65, 66, 67, 68, 94, 363, 364
North Tazira/Project s. Jazira Graves (Islamic) 231 1lU,111,ll3,ll4,156,157,163, Taurus 265
Nourek, Tell 180 Radri 118, 189 168, 193, 194, 196, 208, 209, 211, Trans-Taurus 269
Nusaybin 118, 119 Rafan Uliye 97 212, 214, 215, 234, 235, 236, 237, Tawi 325 §..~,.|
Nus-i Jan 359, 361 RarnatRal1el 359, 361, 366 237, 290, 291, 357 Tawil, Tell 180
Ras al-‘Ain 173, 189 Inscriptions 194 Tawila,Tell 180 3.-,.|

Ouarcl Sharqi, Tell el- 180 Ras el-Bassit 195 Sheikh 1-Iassan, Tell Tawilan 351 1 .
Oumal al-Assafir, Tell 180 Ras Shamra 355 viii, ix, 271, 291, 309, 310, "313, Taya, Tell 119
Oum Gurhafa, Tell 180 Rasappa 157 325-346, 347-375 Tcholama Takhtani, Tell 180
Rifa'at, Tell 267, 354, 356 Shell-ch Ibrahim, Jebel 118 '1‘elafar 118, 119
Palestine/ian Rijim, Tell (Rijirn Omar Dalle) Shelgiyya, Tell Tepe Yahya s. Yahya, Tepe 1
ix, 196, 289, 290, 350, 356, 357, viii, 94, 97-99, 103, 104, 120 102, 104,105, 109, 110, 111, 114, Tharthar, Wadi 118
360, 362, 363, 364, 366 Graves 98 119, 125 Tigris 1
Pasargadae 352, 354, 356, 364 Rimah, Tell al- Shireena, Khirbet 25, 91, 92, 93, 95, 96, 97, 100,
Persepolis 355, 357 29, 39, 41, 118, 119, 157, 159 94, 101, 104, 105, 107, 108, 109, 101, 102, 104, 115,118, 120, 156 1
Persia/n 106, 355 Area A 29 120 Upper ‘ viii
|
Phoenicia,/n 290, 298, 306 Area B 29 Shioukh Faouqani, Tell 309 Til Barsip s. Ahmar, Tell r "iI
Pitru 315 Area C 29 Sippar 352, 358, 360 Tille Hoytik
Pusht-1 Kuh 30 Stela 157, 159 Sukas, Tell 291 viii, ix, 263-286, 291, 309, 314,
Rimussa (7) s. Girepan Sultantepe 330, 351, 352, 367, 408, 409
Qadahiye, Tell 309, 311, 313, 315 Rommane, Tell 1 80 195, 209,210, 211,213, 271, 291, Tiran en-Naqib 356

. 1,
Qal‘at Shergat s. Assur Rownak 94, 95, 103, 104, 109, 120 ' 357,359,366 Tirat Yehuda 361
Qal‘at Najm s. Najm, Qal‘at Inscriptions 195 Tishrin ix, 290, 309
Qarnishly, a1- 173, 176, 189 Saba’a (Stela) 157 Sur Jureh 195 Tuqan, Tell (Tukan) .,
".1

Qara Choq, Jebel

Qarqur, Tell 353, 356,
118
364
Sadiya, Tell es- 118 Susa 354 291,351,356, 365
'I“url<ey/'l‘url<ish s. also Anatolia
,1
Samaria Suwaicliya, Wadi 101
Qasr-i Abu Nasr 114, 352 291, 351, 352,360, 363, 364, 366 Syria./n 93, 102, 176, 189, 263, 266, 268, |
.1
1I
Qasrij village/Wadi 95 Sarnarra 360 ix, 91, 93, 102, 173, 175, 176, 269, 272
Samsat 263 189, 193, 196, 234, 263, 270, 272. North-eastern 408

1
‘§'l3'-.51‘-.i
I

_ I ‘ ' “Ti
..,>._.,.....-h¢._.... . . ......., » - _______.__.__ > M _

481
480 Index Index

12th century 30 to end of 7111 209 8111, 6111 to 4th 364

South-eastern 154, 263, 272
to mid of 6th 209 Other
Tushpa 354, 361, 365, 366 Late 265
End of 263-264, 409 End of 9111 to mid of 6111 215 Pre~7tl1 5
Tyre (Tyros) 356, 365
12th century 30 Other
'1 lth century 315 Post-Snalmaneser I11 29, 137, 139 7 t 11 c e n t u r y
Umm... s. also Ourn... viii, ix, 3, 4, 5, 18, '19, 20, 21,22,
Umm ‘Aqrebe 156 Late 266 Post-Shalmanesei" III/8111 century
132 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39,
K Umm ‘Aqrebe, Wadi 170
First Millennium BC Post-9111 century 141 40, 101, 106, 109, 115, 128, 132,
Umm Aqrubba,Te1l 137, 139, ‘141, 154, 264, 268, 269,
154,157,163,169,171 11tl1/ 10111 century 264
8th century 288,290, 312, 314, 352, 353, 358,
Umm Aqrubba, Wadi 158, 170 111111010111 312, 314 360, 361, 363, 364, 365, 366
Umm e1-‘Ala 351 3, 18, 19,21, 23, 29, 33, 35, 37.
Between 11111 and 8111 309 38, 39, 106, 138, 154, 194, 195, Early 264
Ur 112,132,358 10th(‘?)/9th to 8th century 264 lst haif 4, 356,359, 361 364
209, 264, 267, 268, 354, 357, 358,
Urartu 265, 354, 357, 361, 365, 366 ?10t11 or 9111 century 267, 269 Mid 5, 6
Uruk s. Warka 361, 364, 365, 366
10th/9111 century 30 Mid to late 314
1 Uwaynat, Teil (Uweinat) 1 18 Early 138, 196
10th~9t11 century 132, 312, 314 2nd half
1st half 135
10111-8th century ' 109 4, 19, 32,34, 112, 288, 366
Mid 439, 196
Van 361 10111 to 6th century 289 Mid to end of ' 195 Late/r
Verahram 354, 361 10th century 267, 315
Late/r 3,21, 32, 35, 38 21, 22,37, 39, 115, 287, 359,361
End of 128 Last quarter of 237
Wadi Suwaidiya 1 (site name) 2nd half 109, 363
2nd and 3rd quarter 355 End of
s. Shireena, Khirbet Third quarter 360
Last quarter 356, 365 19,20, 69, 133, 196, 360, 361
Warka 30, 358, 359 9th century 7th/6th century 29, 309
Grave 30 End of
3, 18, 22, 37, 39, 106, 131, 138, 4, 19, 40, 196, 264, 356, 364, 365 7th and early 6111 18
E 154, 267, 315, 358,366 7111 and 6111 159, 194, 351, 364
Yahya, Tepe 354 8th/7th century
lst half 38 21,28, 29,107, 272, 366 711110 6111 29, 351, 353, 363
Y0qne‘am, Teil 353, 364 Middle 406 711110 early 6111 366
8111-7111 102, 137
1% Yurza s. Iernmeh, Tell 21111 half 196 8th and 7th 134, 357 Mid 7th to lst quarter of 6111 365
ts: Late/r 38,97, 135, 138 8111 or 7111 39 Late 7111 to early 6111 105
Zab End of 26, 69, 196, 364
8th to mid 7111 353, 364 Late 7th and 6111 366
Greater 118 9th/8th century 38, 40, 107, 133
1; Mid 018111 to end 017111 133, 209 Late 7111 or early 6111 39
Lesser 118 9th and 8211 viii, 176, 313 21111 half of 7111 to 6th 235, 366
Zakho 95, 96, 97 2nd half of 8111 and 7111 109
9111 or 8th 138 Late 8111 to 7111 7th to the middle of 6111 234
Zendand Suleiman viii, 354, 364 911110 mid of 8111 359 End of 7111 to mid of 6111 209, 234
29, 133, 134, 364, 365
Zincirli 271, 351, 352, 355 79111/8th 264 7th...-4th century
Ziwiye 110, 354 Late 8th or eariy 7111 132, 407
(9111-)81h 107 End of 8111 to 7111 5 40 711110 Achaemenid 365
I1. Zubeidi, Tell 30 9111 to 81h 312 1
End of 8111/and 7111 132, 366 End of 7th to 4111 174
Grave 30 Late 9111 to 1st halfof 8111 135, 195 (8111-)7t11 40 Other
Zummar 94,99, 100, 120 End of 9111 to early/mid 8111 209
8th 4th century Post-71h century 364
9th...6th century
8111 to 6th 351, 364
Between 9th and 7th 195 6111 c e 11 t u 1 y
2. Chronological terms 8th to early 6111 362
9111 to the end of 7111 69 Mid of 8111 to mid of 6111 209 264, 272,314,351, 353, 363, 364
2
5
Third and Second Millennia BC 9th to 7th 290, 359 Early
2nd half of 8th to lst half of 6th 30
Mid 9th to late 7th 315 Late 8th to 6th 360 18,39, 106, 237, 363,365,366
Third millennium BC 176, 409 9111/8111 to the 7th 37 8111 to 5111 330 '1 st half 30, 270, 363
~< Second millennium BC 93, 367 and tater 235 Mid of 8111 century 2nd half 106
13th/12th(?) century 30 Late 9th to 7th 29
1311110 12111 century 408 to Achaemenid period 354
End of 9th/early 8111

1
1
- ~‘~ --.-—- .. ».-w'——-
. ,-- 7 .. _ T'TT"'. _ _ '4?-=5-'~-33"
 ' 1:¢
.
<1, .
" 3'») 9 ,2 _
.-=1;-E
me:
eilia
rm?
‘mg.
10%
3§b§ Index 483
, 3 482 Index
;=,i
W

Middie or Nee-Assyrian 128 Assurdan II 128

6th...4th century I1
Middie Assyrian-Mitannian 105 Assurnasirpal I1
da-
111:5
6th Or 5th 352 123-126, 128, 193, 195, 351, 356,
zwan
Middle Bronze 380 22, 26, 27, 38, 40, 133
6th and 5th 361 361, 387
Mitannian 100, 173 Assur-rabi I1 315
6th to 5th? 366 IIB-C 356
Nee-Assyrian./Post-Assyrian Assurtaklak 133
Later 6th or early 5th 264 IIC 351, 353, 363
ix, 95, 103, 1044116, 120, 128, Esarliaddon 22, 27, 39
m .
1‘1,.€ 6th to 4th 351, 363 II/I11 288, 290
=33‘
‘V’:,;>:2.Q:,é<;¢: ¢*.z,A2 179, 190 Hammurapi of Ugarit 404
‘mg III 30, 193, 195
Nee-Babyionian 25,94, 131, 193, 326 Hanni 292
55% 5th century IIIA 193
!&
Barty 264 IIIB 193 Nee-/Late Babylonian 30-31 Kuzi-Teéup 404, 409
5
fm§‘ ,i4
Neo-Eiamite 30 Pallil-Eresh 157
1111118? Earliest 272
§?e%
Early Neo-Hittite 264, 268 Sargon II 133,264, 355
Other
it1 1: *14 Ninevite 5 93, 95, 98, 100 Sennacherib 3, 20, 102
4th century 355 ix, 114, 156, 173, 175, 266, 268,
:"::=@¢
17111-fa Early 96 Shalmaneser III
*5 : :-
.11? Post-Alexander 355 269, 353, 354, 406, 409
1:111? Parthian 62, 68, 70, 96, 97, 100 22, 25, 26, 2'7, 38, 128, 131, 132,
,\, 1%!
11;; gt; Middle
1,551 Parthian/Sasanian 98 133,137, 138,139,315
t1 1 *11
2,51 K
First/Second Millennia AD 265, 267, 268, 351, 353, 358, 360,
Persian , 193, 355 8ama§~§arru-usur 19
11 4th to Sth century 325 363 '
Post-Achaemenid , 352, 357 Shamurtu 112
Pre-classical 269
1
1
17th/18th century 100
Isin II 30 Post-Assyrian éuppnulauma II. 404
"I1 2 Islamic 4, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 61, 69, 70, Ta1mi~Te§up 404
‘dd Names ofperiods
1'11‘
J“ 4, 40,62, 69, 70,96, 100, 231, 325 71, 91, 93, 94, 95, 98, 99, 103, 'i‘ig1athpileser I 64, 315, 404
\»M
ti ~ I1 Abbasid s, Isiamic Abbasid 95 104, 105, 107,108,109, 110, 111, Tiglathpileser III 25, 26, 27, 39, 355
1111 .
1!
'1’! Achaemenid Iikhanid 94 114,115, 116, 128, 174, 1'75, 176, Tukuiti-Ninurta I 61, 65, 6'7, 68, 70
=1 98, 110, 174, 264, 271, 288, 326, 177, 179, 190, 194, 234, 237, 271, Yahaiu 97
tit;
111* Late 93, 101
4! .,;, 350, 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 359, Middle 96 287, 359, 364
11! 361, 364,365, 366 Post~can0nical 19, 133
111 Khabur 98, 99, 100, 107, 173
Late 352 Late Babylonian 94, 326, 35 8, 359 Post-I-Ieilenistic - 98 3. Pottery terms
Akkadian 100, 231 Late Bronze Pre-Iron Age 366 Production pracess
Byzantine 101, 325 ix, 173, 175, 232, 263, 264, 265, Pre~M0dern 4
V1

Chaicoiithic 380, 403 Prc~Parthian (vorparthisch) 128 Availability of raw materiai 292
266, 314, 359, 380, 408
11' Dark ages 265 L[ate1H{el1adic} 1IIA/B 265 Pre-Persian (vorpersisch) 195 Drying 136
+1 Eariy Bronze 23 E, 232, 380, 403 Pie-pottery Neolithic:/akeramisch Firing 136, 407
Late Kassite 30, 115
‘,5 11 ‘Early Dynastic 232 93, 325 Deformation - 236
ti "1 Late Neo-Assyrian]P0st-Assyrian
III 231, 233 Roman 101, 325 Fuei 168
15 1, 24, 30, 107, 128
Halaf 95, 96, 231 Roman/Byzantine 31 1 Firing temperature 382
112 Late/P0st-Assyrian 70, 194
.K‘;_
Hassuna 100, 177 Romano-Parthian 4 Misfiring 292
Median 359
Hellenistic Sargonid 19, 110 Oxidising milieu/oxidation
Medieval 263 28, 176, 266, 289
:1 ; 4, 38, 40, 96, 97, 98, 100, 102, Middle Assyrian Sasanian 94, 101, 114
111.,
1, incomplete oxidation 174
1115', 107,l10,114,115,195, 264,271, 62, 63, 64, 67, 68, 69, 70, 75-76, Sasanian/Byzantine 101
1; ’ 288, 325, 326 Taya 100 Overfiring 28
18 j 82-83, 96, 97, 98, 100, 100, 105,
,"El- - Late 4th century 264 Ubaid 40, 96, 100, 177 Reduced/reduction firing
1111 |
bl wt;
' 2 Early 3rd century 264
107-108, 114, 128, 132, 134, 138,
156, 168, E74, 175, 176, 177, 190, Uruk 96, 100, 176, 325, 350 233, 266,289, 312
1&0?
1 K
éiii Hittite 408, 409 Early 102 Waster 292, 312
1'*_ E . 232, 314, 315
1': =1
Grofireichszeit 408, 409 Late Uruk 98 Handmade
Late Middle Assyrian 65, 66, 68 175, 199, 267, 288, 295, 296, 307,
Ilkahnid s. Islamic Late/Middle-ffiarly Neo-Assyrian
~
1111' Iron Age
I
128, 175, 265, 380
193, 195, 266
67, 98, 128 Personal Names 312, 408
High quality 7, 313
Late Middle/Neo-Assyrian 67 Adadnirari III 20, 22, 25, 157 itinerant workers 292
-1.11-'
, 1- |
at Middle Assyrian and before 64 Assurbanipai 1 14, 355
F21

lit.

' 1
_ .. a.
 ‘i

Index 485
484 Index

Quartz/Quart ‘Blush’ 267

Luxury/vessel 176, 289 270, 289, 290, 291, 296, 304, 313, Burnished/burnishing
62,67, 71, 176, 382, 406
Mass production 5, 28 329, 382, 384, 406 250, 256, 267, 268, 269, 270, 272,
Red mineral 200, 381
Pottery industry 292 Finely/well levigated 4, 30, 406 289, 296,313,314
Sand
Pottery kiln Finely finished 4 Body 233
Grain size 196, 382
115, 116, 176, 197, 198, 199-201,
95, 106, 111, 114, "132, 138, 292, ‘Burnished ware‘ 175
Grey ware 4, 20, 265, 289, 312-313
202, 203, 209, 234, 326, 349, 406,
312 Rim top 233, 240
Burnished 313 407
Pottery production Brownishaed slip 407
Polished 313 Non-iron rich clay 289
4-5, 38, 69, 168, 176, 292, 312, Dimple
Wheel-burnished 289, 296-297 Palace ware
326-327, 349, 378, 382, 404 4, 33, 108, 109, 142, 231, 236, 269,
Grits. Mineral inclusions
4, 6, 17, 19,20, 2'1, 23,24, 28,33,
Pottery production center 3 270, 289, 296, 297
Hdcksel s. Vegetable inclusions 94, 95, 103, 108, 113, 142, 152,
Prepared clay, lumps of 312 Engobe 28
Illites 382 175, 231, 236, 250, 269, 289, 290,
Production process Redfrot-engobierte Ware 1|
Inclusions s. Mineral, Vegetable etc. 296, 297,304, 313, 355,406 §|
28, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 136, 139, 196, 198,208, 215 ;.|

Inorganic 382 Beaker/goblet

196 Glaze/d
6, 19, 20, 142, 231, 236, 289, 296, I

Fitting 114 Iron-bearing clay _ 233

297, 313 . 4, 19, 20, 26, 35, 62, 64, 108, 109- ,1
Turning 34, 35 Kalk s. Mineral inclusions
Bowl , 6 110, 137, 141, 142, 175,270, 283, ii
Well thrown 269 Kitchen ware 21, 384, 385 284, 289-290, 297, 305
\_-;|
1.,

Laminations 382 Dimpied ‘II

Raw material 38, 139, 292, 404,407 impression 24, 208, 296 I

Limestone, clay rich of 233, 382 4, 33, 142, 231, 236, 250, 270,
Repair Fingernail 175, 208, 235, 248
Marl ciay 176 283, 289, 296, 297 I

with bitumen and sherds 29 Incision

Matrix 175476, 197-203, 384 Painted 152 1
Rosette ciay stamp for decorating 24, 28, 176, 208, 235, 248, 250, f

Traces of vegetable inclusions 176 Pores/porosity/porous 382

purpose 312 252, 267, 270, 289, 290, 295
Medium-coarse 29, 36 Salt, soluble 233 1., .=
Standard/standardized 5,290, 329 Comb 34, 236, 265, 297, 305, 327
Medium fine ciay 36, 38, 349 Sandy clay/fabric 29, 382
Surface Paint/ed / painted ware
Semi-fine fabric 382, 385 Straw s. vegetable inclusions ;=i:
Traces of mineral/vegetable 28, 176, 208, 252, 265, 266, 268,
Medium fine to coarse clay 28, 36 Temper s. inclusions " $5:
inciusions/temper 5, 28, 35, 175 270, 272, 274, 284, 290, 291, 297, |
I
Medium fine to fine clay 28 Texture 266, 288~290, 294-298
Unfired sherds 312 305, 312, 349
Iviineral/grit/lithic inclusions/temper Vegetable/chaff inciusionsftemperl 15!
Uti1itarian ware 5 Héicksel Bichrome (s. also ’cultural' terms)
4, 5, 28,29, 38, 67,71, 109, 113, 268, 270, 272, 290, 291, 306, 312
115, 116, 197, 200, 202-203, 208, 4, 28,29, 38, 62, 64,66, 68,71,109, 1|
Fabric Red~on-black 3 12
115,136,138, 175, 176, 196, 197-
Chaff s. vegetable inclusions
234, 235, 265, 266, 267, 269-270,
199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 208, 234, Red r 407 ‘1.1
E-
288,289, 312, 381,382,406, 407
'Clinky' 269 237, 265, 266, 267, 269, 289, 327, Pierced hole 248, 329
Blac1</dark minerai Polished *
Coarse ciay/fabric/ware 405, 406
62, 64, 67, 197, 198, 199, 201. 5, 233, 236, 289, 313, 327, 349,
28, 36, 38, 108, 265, 266, 267, Organic
202-203, 234, 235, 312, 381 358, 406 -.<~».-=_,—»<
270, 288, 327, 382, 385, 406 289,312, 313, 314, 327, 381, 382,
Carbonatic 382 Red 4
‘r

crude 266 407,409 1t

Chert 382
Cooking pot ware Vegetal s. Vegetable Strich-/Streifenpolitur 327, 349, 406 1
Feldspat 406
4, 20, 208, 214, 232, 265, 288, Without inclusions/temper Red-slip/ped ware
Gravel/Kies 198, 234 20, 21, 175, 265, 272, 284, 289,
291, 296, 303, 313, 405 ' 62, 64, 67, 68, 7E, 108
Limestone/calcite/calcareous/Kalk 304, 313, 383, 386, 407, 409
Cooking pot-like ware 288
62, 64, 67, 68, 71, 176, 197, 198, Glass 393
‘Drab’ ware 265, 266 Surface treatment and decoration
199, 200, 201-202, 203, 234, 235, Hand-burnished 289, 296, 407
Eggshell ware 289
327, 349, 382,406, 407 Applied decoration 267 Polished 313
Faience 270, 271 Band/cordon/rib
Mica/Glimmer Ring-burnished 20, 21, 289, 296
Fine clay/fabric/ware
*4
176, 197, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 208,252, 289, 307, 327, 328 Wheel-burnished 289, 407
4, 7, 28,30, 33, 38, 56, 103, 108.
327,406 Bitumen 29, "I97, 250 Rib/bed ornament 267, 269
109, 138, 208, 209, 215, 268, 269,
Opaque 382 Black gloss 272, 284
 - _ v - ' - - 4, ; — — —— ~~:~— - ,1 < -- ' ' "
W~ ' ~j=~~r; , ; ' ";__,¢"_:‘ V ' ' ' ' ' " ' , , . I """""'”" '""<
4 ~ »'_.'If?’.”f‘.’f'-f‘»’.‘_Y‘,.’f€4.“"'»"-""f':"":"""" "r I 4%,
. 5i8 .%@siwin-r;,111i~en$2an£@-7126-42122.223,,.M_._.,,,.,,,..__...,_...__,.____ _, , . ,,

486 Index Index 487

Riefe/geriefl Burmn Bowl Wulstrandschale s. Ribbed rirn
ii 208, 326, 327, 328, 329, 347, 355 30, 33, 68, 97, 137, 138, 179, 208, 5, 19, 23, 27, 28, 29, 30, 37, 39, Bottle
7'"
‘Ribbed ware’ 250,269 52, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 71, 23, 33,62, 65, 66, 67, 68,71, 112,
1
1, 265, 267, 268, 269, 276, 408 Flat/flattened 96, 106, 107, 110-111, 114, 136, 113, 141, 196, 204, 206-207, 209,
ii
1 1? Rilled 269 30, 34, 35, 36, 62, 65, 66, 71, 98, 138,139, 141,146,152, 175,177, 215, 269, 270, 288, 295, 297, 298,
Rillenkeramik 408, 409 110,111,112,113,138,139,141, 204-205, 208, 209, 215, 231, 234- 328, 329
Combed 408 175, 208,258, 288, 236, 329 235, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, Alabastron shaped 142
Self-slip s. skin Foot 31, 32, 36, 37, 63, 66,68 277, 278, 286, 288, 289, 294, 296, Carrot shaped 1 12
Sheikh Hamad ware Knob-shaped s. Rounded 297, 299, 304, 313, 314, 327, 328, Double strap»handled 112
152, 175, 179, 208, 232, 235, 237, Knopflufi, eckig 68 329, 348-350, 351, 353, 354, 361, Small
:11 239, 248, 290 Nipple 6, 30, 33, 94, 97, 99, 113 362-367, 382, 384, 385, 386, 406, 20, 26,109,l11,l12,113,141,142
1 Skin/‘slip’/‘self-slip‘ 407, 408, 409 Chalice 32, 55, 270, 283
ll Pedestal 6, 27, 353
28, 33, 34, 35, 38, 175, 233, 266, Pointed Carinated Closed vessel/forms
290, 294-298, 313, 327, 349 30, 33, 112, 113, 208, 236, 237, 5, 6, 28-29, 62, 6465, 66, 67, 68, 28, 112-114, 175, 179, 234, 328,
E
‘Pseudo-slip’ 175 250, 270, 288, 329 71, 111, 137, 175, 177-178, 204, 407, 408
‘Surface skin’, white 233 Ring ' 210, 235, 240, 242, 244, 288, 289, Container 23, 135
Uberzug 6, 27, 28, 29, 34, 35, 36, 37, 63, 65, 313, 327, 329, 347-348,849, 351- Food and drink 135
197, 199, 200, 201, 202, 327 66, 71, 107, 111, 114, 136, 139, 357, 358-359, 362, 363, 364, 365, Cooking s. food processing
Siip s. skin, s. Red-siip/ped i 175, 236, 237, 250, 258, 314, 329 366, 367 Cooking pot
Smoother}/gegléitter Rounded/Wackelboden Deep/high (s.a. SChiiSS6l) 142, 208, 234, 267, 270, 271, 277,
175, 203, 233, 240, 256, 258, 294- 30, 33, 34, 63, 66, 68, 111, 112, 29, 37, 136, 137, 139, 14}, 175, 280, 288, 312, 313, 328, 385, 386,
298, 327, 349, 406 113, 141, 208, 236, 237, 258, 266, 178, 235 406, 408
verstrichen 268,270, 329 Grooved rim s. Ribbed rim Hole-mouthed 6, 214
198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 327, Storage jar base 6 Inverted/In-turned rim Crater s. krater
349 String-cut 32, 34 5, 6,29, 71, 106, 110, 111, 115, Cup
Wet-smoothed 296 Tripo<i-looped/Dreib££ge£~/ 137, 235, 269, 288, 327', 348, 349, 268, 269, 270, 277, 283, 288, 295,
Sprig-ware 102 schlaufenfufi 359-361, 363, 366 302, 313, 314
Stamp 24, 208, 290, 305 63, 68, 268, 277, 314, 329 Napf(s.a. smaii) Dimpled 269
City wali decoration 24 Tropferzboden 30 62, 65, 66, 67, 68, 204, 205-206, Dish s. plate
Floral motives 24, 208 Wackelboden s. rounded 211-212, 329, 408 Dreischlaufenflrfi s. Base, tripod
Geometric motives 208 Beaker Ribbed rim looped
Oval/round 208, 290, 305 6, 19, 20, 27, 28, 30-32, 53-54, 63, 5, 66,69, 106, 111, 139, 175, 177, Flask ' 290,298
Pomegranate 24 67,71, 94, 98, 99, 109, 112, 138, 196, 204-206, 234, 240, 246, 288, Lentoid 266
Rosette £41, 142, 179, 204, 207, 209, 214, 289, 314, 348, 350, 357, 362, 365, Food consumption 23, 36, 142
4, 24, 176, 270, 271, 290, 305, 312 215, 231, 234, 236, 313, 326, 328, 366 , - Drinking vessel 135, 347
Star 24 329 Schnabelrandschale s. Ribbed rim Food processing
verstrichen s. Smoothed Cylindrical 30, 31, 53, 54 Schtissel (s.a. Deep/high) 34, 36, 142, 383, 385, 386
Coarser fabric 108, 109 63, 65, 66, 204-205, 208, 210-211, Goblet 6, 27, 288, 295, 302
Forms, parts of vessel and use of Dimple/d 108, 109, 269, 270 328 Burton-based 96
pottery ' Knopjbecher (bronze) 30-31 Small (s.a. Napf) Dimpled 270, 289, 296, 297,304
Amphora 270, 271,282, 285, 329 Miniature 30 28, 110, 137, 139, 141, 175, 177, Pedestal 27
Aryballos 312 Nipple/-based beaker 94, 99, 113 327, 329 Grofigefafa’ 63, 66, 68
Askos 314 Pedestai 31, 37, 54 Standard-Knickwandschale Handle
Basalt bowi 271, 289 Small 30,32, 53, 142 (Middle Assyrian) 64, 67, 69 27, 36, 112, 196, 266, 267, 270,
Base Situla-shaped 28, 30-31, 39, 53 Tripod 20, 112, 141, 358,365 271, 283, 285,289, 326, 328, 329
6, 31, 62, 68, 175, 208, 214, 234, U-shaped 138 Grey ware 4, 20, 289, 304
236-237, 314, 327, 329 Bin 39, 40, 95 Red-slipped 20

1
 - 1», » ._t»a.+"¢;*@-_-92,4-'
1 , %;»?-F*"'?»l' ewe“
~ 6 “"-*»‘=‘=e'""~=“e’ T - ~~ ‘~--=-~‘~--~--~-»----~-~ ii 1
1

489
488 Index Index

Handled 328 Ass. 11297 37

Isrikan Vase 113, 236, 328, 329 11373 33
Inscribed 19, 20, 22, 23 Ass.
23, 27, 28, 32, 36, 55, 108, 142, Water 25, 36, 60 135
Miniature version 114 Ass. 11917
270,288,314 Two handled 27, 36, 60 21,133,135
Straight sided 112, 113, 237 Ass 11190
Krater Wide-mouthed 6 137
Storage ware 5, 385 Ass. 11286
36, 114, 288,295, 302, 326,384 lug
Table ware 5 Ass. 11659 145
Jar 175, 265, 266, 270, 271, 281, 285,
\ Teller s. Plate Ass. 11748 29
5-6, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 28, 32, 290,298, 328, 384, 393,407 145
Terrlne 326 Ass 11960
33-36, 37, 39, 56-60, 66, 68, 97, 'I‘refoii-mouthed/Kleeblattkarme 21 , 33
Topf S. Pot Ass. 12054
112,113,114,1l5,l38,139,141, 266, 270, 281, 328-329 128
Transfer/transport ware 385, 386 Ass. 12738
142, 146, 175, 178-179, 231, 234, luglet 288, 295, 302 Ass. 14123 137
Spouted 266, 295 Transformation/processing ware 385
236, 266, 267, 269, 270, 271, 279, Ass 14485 127
Kleeblarrkanne s. Jug, trefoil-mouthed Vase s. Jar
286, 288, 290, 294-295, 297, 298, Ass. 14630 133 r
1
300, 329, 384, 385, 386, 406,407 Lamp Ass. 1911913 26
28, 139, 141, 270, 283, 288, 295, ‘Cultural ' pottery terms
Carrot shaped 289 Ass. 19330 132 1
1
Cylindrical 36 302, 393 . Achaemenici
Double jar, pig-shaped 24 Lampes rnoulées (Hellenistic) 195 Cream-bowl ‘ 354
Nimrud
Flasche Pipe-lamp (Hellenistic) 38 Triangle»ware ’ 271
33,62, 63,65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 206- Saucer lamp 4, 27, 36-37, 60, 288 Bichrome s. Phoenician 7Britisl1 Excavations"
207, 209, 213-214, 329,406, 407 Open vessel/forms . Ciiician white painted bowl 393 ND 1819 21
32 l
Hen/celflasche 196 28, 36, 110-111, 175, 234, 288, Cypriots pottery 290, 291, 298, 306 ND 3119 1
Standard-Flasche (Middle 327-328, 407 White Painted ware 1V N1) 3369 '14
Assyrian) 65 Plate/dish/Teller 290, 298, 306 ND 7316 30
Globular 137 62, 69, 265, 266, 313, 314, 329, Godin I1 ware 4
384, 385,406,407, 408, 409 Foreign influence ix Polish Excavations 5
Handled 266, 267, 271, 288, 329 l
1
Four-handled 270 Pot/Tapf Foreign/imported pottery N-6/74 38 2

Loop handled 288 6,34, 62, 68, 142, 152, 206, 209, 4, 109, 272, 287, 291, 292, 298, N 9/75 32
Two-handled 212, 215, 231, 234, 235,296, 303, 306, 384 N 14/75 30
36, 269, 270, 283, 288, 289, 328, 329, 384, 406, 407, 408 Imitation 406 N 15/75 30 5|
1
l
I
1t
295, 290, 301 Hole-mouth 206 Kassitenflasche 64 N 20/75 31
Hole-mouth Small 34, 141, 142 Lydian rnarbled ware 272 N 23/75 33
Two-handled ancllor spouted 267 Potstand/ring-stand Phoenician pottery 290, 29 8, 306 N 24/75 33
Necked 4,27, 28, 37,60, 63,68, 114, 141, Bichrorne ware 290, 298, 306 N 29/75 28 1
28, 33, 37,56, 139, 141, 142 175, 179, 270, 280, 285, 288, 295, Cypro-Phoenician 312
Ovoid 302, 393 Red-polished 4 TA V0-Survey
33, 34-35, 37, 58-59, 137, 142 Rhython/-shaped 19 Phrygian handle 393 220
3
Wide-necked 34-35, 58-59 Ram-headed 4, 94, 103 Plain crisp ware 290, 298, 306 218
4
Pithos Sieve 62, 329 Sheikh Harnad ware s. surface 224
225/28
264, 288, 326, 384, 385, 386, 406, Special shape 28, 36-37 Treatment 222
227/5
407 Spout 37, 266, 267, 288, 295, 302 227/22 2 19
Small Stand s. pot~stand 229/20 2'17
26, 33-34, 57, 138, 267, 269, 288 Storage 142, 383, 386 4. Field numbers 224
229/26
Squat 27,28, 33-34, 57, 114 Long term/time 36, 385 261/42 229
Assur
Miniature 6 Short term 23, 142 261/47 220
Stirrup 265 Storage jar/vessel Ass. 8897 33
A 270/ 1 2 226
Stone 36 6,19, 20, 22,23, 24, 39, 101, 114, Ass. 10231 29,133,139-141
270/ 14 221
Thin-walled/fine ware 196, 270, 288, 290, 307, 312, 328, Ass. 10648 34, 133
271/2 22 1
28, 33, 37, 56, 139, 270 407 Ass. 10907 135-137
 ' WWW’ ' 7 W -» ;;, , ,,, T '51;~,,§~T~7< LL T -"'7;"'- """—;v»'Z' 5- 1 ~r'~.I' ' "
, ' j~_¥.4~ '— -Mv-, --.»..1~ ».. ~»1, — .,~v~'~;;4..-,v.,1m,— v—1<,\_~<, » 1 7-’, 1-» .,,,.._¢.-,...¢ ;_.1w_ _— ,,,;,;¢;;¢;I-- ;- 1, w -r ,7 ‘I : 77;’:-; 1+ :- ' ;..4'1—
M I ,~. :~ .~-;,,_ .. -_ 7“ _;$;~?422-sa%:=¢:_1_ ..-.%g.sz<<:~'_ :7 . .1,5¢.¢,:~*~» ?"=j 1.,,v 1._

490 Index Index 491

600/18 81/9 1 771V/46/27, 91

27 '1/22
600/21 8 1/9 1 771V/46/36
271/33
600/22 81/917'lIV/46/44
308/ I 5
605/6 81/91'77IV/46/49
338/1
607/ 1 81/9177IV/46/50, 51
356/1
356/3 60”//6
362/1 1 607/8 (site no. 97)
607/8 (site no. 102) 5. Museum Numbers
374/4
374/12 60"//17 British Museum
386/21 616/9 BM WA I988-4-10,8
392/8 616/13 BM WA 1992-3-2,29
397/1 616/22 BM WA 1992-3-2,104
403/6 617/ 13 BM WA 1992~3~2,162
412/19 617/21 BM WA 138319
412/29 617/28
415/ £5 617/29
421/12 617/97
424/13 618/5
462/5 622/1 1
462/8 623/2
462/13 623/7
464/7 623/9
466/2 623/ I 1
466/ 14 623/21
466/23 642/'12
470/19 642/ 14
470/65 646/1
474/26 647/7
r
475/34 648/11 :

475/44 648/23
484/ 10 649/5
484/20 649/6 3

484/22 650/3
1/
487/1 651/4
487/8 653/10 11
1
487/1 2 654/ la 1

487/20
487/21
654/7
1
488/24 Tell Ajaja 1
490/5 84/3537/59/7 2798 F

11
502/8
503/ 12 Tell at-Rimah 1'1?
504/1 0 TR 5014 1; 7
581/7
582/3 Tell Shaikh Hamad
600/12 81/9177IV/18/46/2
600/ 14 81/9l77IV/26/17

Q5-,;3;;,.11 waive rsity

If .

"11 =1:-zcilzl Library