papers of the 29 rencontre assyriologique internationale, london, 5-9 july 1982 || cultural...

Cultural Parallels in the Metalwork of Sumer and North Mesopotamia in the ThirdMillennium B.C.Author(s): Trevor WatkinsSource: Iraq, Vol. 45, No. 1, Papers of the 29 Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, London,5-9 July 1982 (Spring, 1983), pp. 18-23Published by: British Institute for the Study of IraqStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4200172 .

Accessed: 05/10/2013 20:57

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

British Institute for the Study of Iraq is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toIraq.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 129.82.28.124 on Sat, 5 Oct 2013 20:57:41 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bisi

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4200172?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


?8

CULTURAL PARALLELS IN THE METALWORK OF

SUMER AND NORTH MESOPOTAMIA IN

THE THIRD MILLENNIUM B.C.

By TREVOR WATKINS

This paper contributes in small part to the re-examination of the assumed

relationship between Sumer and the surrounding areas. It is concerned with metals,

metal-working and metal goods, and more particularly with the weapons which

begin to appear in some profusion during the third millennium both in Sumer and in other areas round about. The thesis proposed here is in two parts. On the one

hand, it will be argued that between Sumer in the ED III period and north-west

Mesopotamia there are striking parallels in the use of materials, the techniques of manufacture and the objects produced, parallels which suggest that the developments were simultaneous in both areas. On the other hand, it will be suggested that the northern products were not derivative or simply produced in tandem with those of Sumer, but that they show evidence of originality and equal participation in the process of innovation and development.

In view of the need for brevity this paper concentrates on a segment of the

evidence, the weapons from the group of sites around Carchemish (Tell Kara

Hassan, Serr?n, Amarna and Hammam) whence Woolley obtained grave-groups by purchase in the early years of this century (Woolley, 1914; for more detailed information on the similar recovery of first millennium grave-groups from Deve

H?y?k see Moorey, 1980: 1-4), from Carchemish itself (Woolley and Barnett,

1952 : 218-26), and the metal objects from the hypogeum at Til Barsib (Thureau- Dangin and Dunand, 1936), the metal grave-goods from Woolley's excavations in the Royal Cemetery at Ur (Woolley, 1932) and the finds from the " A "

cemetery at Kish (Mackay, 1925; Hrouda and Karstens, 1967; Moorey, 1978). A very recent paper in this journal by Mr. Jonathan Tubb bears closely on the subject of this paper since he argues for a date in Syrian terms of EB III for crescentic axeheads such as that from Amarna (Tubb, 1982 : 9) and by implication for the other objects from Amarna found with it. In terms of the southern Mesopotamian chronology such a date would be parallel to the ED II and ED Ilia periods. For the other

early type of crescentic axe fixed with rivets, of which a key example occurs in the Til Barsib hypogeum assemblage, Tubb (1982 : 4-8) argues a slightly later date of late EB III to early EB IV, in terms of Sumerian chronology ED Illb and perhaps the first half century of the Akkadian period. From the point of view of this contribution it is of significance to remark that Tubb's entirely consonant

chronological conclusions concerning the Amarna assemblage and the Til Barsib

hypogeum were reached by routes different from those followed here. In another

respect also the present author is not pursuing an original course, since Mallowan

(1937) long ago noted the close resemblance and implied synchronism discussed here,

although between times conventional wisdom has separated the Sumerian examples from the north Syrian parallels by several centuries.

Let us start with the Sumerian material, whose date has been scarcely in doubt.



PARALLELS IN THE METAL WORK OF SUMER AND NORTH MESOPOTAMIA 19

At both Ur and the Kish "

A " cemetery there were numbers of graves which

contained weapons, some of them works of singular craftsmanship. The most

popular weapons were socketed battle-axes and daggers, but there were also some

spears and a handful of arrowheads. In the earlier part of the Ur cemetery's long life the battle-axes were handsome, competently cast, socketed weapons, equipped with a characteristic lobate blade with a curved lower edge (cf. Woolley, 1932 :

Types A 1-9, PI. 223). Whatever the fine materials used for the daggers, and

however elaborate the hilt or the sheath, their basic shape was simple, and the

means of hafting the blade to the hilt equally simple (Woolley, 1932 : Types 6-9, PI. 228). In the most common form there is a tang which is narrow and flat with

one, two or three rivets or fixing pins axially disposed in it. Sometimes there are

no pins or rivets at all, and sometimes, when there are three, they are arranged in

a triangular layout. The tang often expands in a smooth concave curve to meet the

comparatively broad, convex blade of the dagger at the shoulder, which is frequently

angular and sharply articulated. At the same period there were two kinds of

spearhead (Woolley, 1932 : Types 1-2, PI. 227), the one consisting of three elements, a leaf-shaped blade, distinct butt and separate tang, and the other the simple,

square-sectioned Vierkantspitz or " poker "-spear. The method of attachment of all

these spearheads to their wooden shafts was by means of a simple square-sectioned

tang set in the shaft, which was presumably bound to hold the two parts of the

spear firmly together. The shaft of the metal spearhead was thickened at the top of the tang, but there was no well-formed stop-ridge. One detail of the hafting deserves to be noticed : the tang, which was usually square in section at its beginning, often became flattened in one dimension at its extremity so as to resemble a chisel.

Weapons similar in type to those from the Ur cemetery's ED III and earliest

Akkadian graves can be found in the Kish " A " Cemetery, which Moorey (1978 :

63-6) has argued forcefully (contra Hrouda and Karstens, 1967) to be of short

duration and broadly of the same date as the earlier part of the Ur Royal Cemetery,

namely ED III, more particularly the latter part of that period and just into

Akkadian times. To emphasize the widespread use of the weapon-types we know

from the Ur and Kish graves, there are, on contemporary stelae and tiny shell

inlays, several well-known depictions of spears and axes. Since the Ur cemetery continued in use for several centuries beyond the beginning of the Akkadian period, we may observe that the socketed battle-axe series was replaced, and spearheads of

the forms which we have seen likewise practically disappeared. Referring to the

tables in Nissen's study of the chronology of the Ur Royal Cemetery (Nissen, 1966 :

Tafeln 15-16) we can readily see that Woolley's fairly common types of socketed

axes, Types A 1-3, are more or less confined to the early period of the cemetery, while the simpler forged axes of the S type-series are likewise restricted to the later

period ; similarly spearheads of Woolley's Types 1 and 2 appear only in the early

part of the chronological range. The dagger was retained, but we may incidentally note that the very distinctive group of pins with a spherical head, bent upper shank

and small perforation in the square-sectioned mid-shank (Woolley, 1932 : Type 7, PI. 231) also practically disappeared after the beginning of the Akkadian period. It would seem that if these particular types were to have been copied outside Sumer, or if similar types were to have been developed in tandem elsewhere, daggers apart,



20 TREVOR WATKINS

the period when this copying or parallel development would have taken place would have been essentially before 2300 b.c.

Looking to north Mesopotamia now, we find examples of these same types at a

number of sites, ranging from Tepe Gawra in the east to the Sajur valley sites,

Carchemish, Til Barsib and new sites on the bend of the Euphrates a little further

south, but for the purposes of this paper let us concentrate on the Sajur valley sites, Carchemish and Til Barsib. Among the Sajur valley sites Tubb singled out Amarna

for its crescentic axe (Tubb, 1982 : 9 and Fig. 1), which he dates to Syrian EB III.

From the same site come three daggers (Woolley, 1914: PI. XXIV, lower) which

could easily pass for the less common Ur Type 4 in Woolley's classification, and a

handsome bent-shank toggle-pin (Woolley, 1914: PI. XXIV, lower) indistinguish- able from those from the Kish

" A " cemetery and the Ur graves. From Serr?n

come more slender spearheads with chisel-ended tangs, which are not illustrated by

Woolley. Hammam Tomb-group III includes an elegant, chisel-tanged spearhead, another bent-shank toggle-pin and a socketed battle-axe which is remarkably similar in most regards to the Sumerian examples (Woolley, 1914: PI. XXI, c). From Tell Kara Hassan comes a group of spearheads including four Vierkantspitze and two spearheads with leaf-shaped blade and chisel-ended tang (Woolley, 1914: PI. XIX, c; the two latter spearheads are also illustrated in Watkins, 1974). In

the same group is a beautiful little bent-shank toggle-pin executed in silver, its head

modelled in the form of a snake's head (illustrated upside-down in Woolley, 1914 :

PI. XIX, c). On the mound of Carchemish itself were found a number of stone-built cist-graves

containing single burials accompanied by beads and pins, which the body had

about its person, pots and on occasion weapons and flat axes (Woolley and Barnett,

1952 : 218-25 and Pis. 60-62). The weapons are now entirely familiar to us. There

is a profusion of Vierkantspitze or " poker "-spears, some of them with chisel-ended

tangs. There are also several spearheads of tripartite design with leaf-shaped blade, butt and tang : KCG.i has a neat pair closely matched by another pair in KCG.15.

Only four of the cist-graves had daggers, and they do not present close typological

parallels with common Ur or Kish types. Among the many pins are quite a number

of ball-headed toggle-pins with bent upper shank. There are no socketed axes

from the Carchemish cist-graves, their place apparently being taken in this

assemblage by simple flat axes.

From the hypogeum at Til Barsib (Thureau-Dangin and Dunand, 1936: Pis. XXVIII-XXXI) one may note similar close parallels with Sumerian patterns. A series of flat daggers with sharp shoulders, flat narrow tang and one or two rivets

could have been classified by Woolley as Ur Type 7 and its sub-variants. Among the battle-axes there are at least two which are very close to Woolley's less common

ED III types. The bent-shank toggle-pin also figures once again. In addition there

is a fine example of the ornate rein-rings familiar to us from Sumerian contexts.

And there is at least one narrow, elegant spearhead with leaf-shaped blade and

long square-sectioned tang. Until very recently it seemed that the mid-third millennium represented a

renaissance of industrial metallurgy in Sumer. Ekholm and Friedman (1979: 47) have described this phenomenon as a technical and industrial explosion, but Moorey



PARALLELS IN THE METALWORK OF SUMER AND NORTH MESOPOTAMIA 21

(1982 : 32) has questioned this view on the grounds that it over-emphasizes the

impact of tin in the technology. The value of arsenic-copper alloys and the casting of complex forms were widely known in the Near East in the mid-fourth millennium, but now we begin to see with increasing clarity that our vision of third millennium Sumerian metallurgy has been too dramatically coloured by the atypical riches of the Royal Cemetery at Ur contrasted with the paucity of evidence from the earlier

phases of the ED period. Weaponry is attested together with copper tools in the ED I period at Kheit Qassem (Forest, 1979), and now there is the even more recently noted discovery at Arslantepe (Malatya) of a large group of weapons in a good, well-sealed archaeological context, dated by associated finds and by a series of

consistent radiocarbon dates (Palmieri, 1981 : Table 1, p. 102). Three of the six

spearheads found (Palmieri, 1981 : Fig. 4) bear a striking resemblance to the Tell Kara Hassan group discussed here. They were associated with material of Uruk IV

date and the radiocarbon series, corrected into true calendar years, places the

context in the last centuries of the fourth millennium b.c. To judge from their

description and the illustrations these spearheads were manufactured as castings in

compound moulds. It therefore seems that the knowledge of alloys and complicated

casting techniques in compound moulds, first attested in the fourth millennium,

may have been employed continuously from that date, and that the use of this

technical knowledge to manufacture weapons may have a long history. There were, however, two changes in the mid-third millennium which occurred

both in Sumer and in north-west Mesopotamia ; they link the two areas together and, considered alongside the typological parallels already described, they suggest that

developments were broadly contemporary in the two areas. On the one hand, there

is the relative frequency of occurrence of metal goods, especially weapons, in graves, both in north Syria and in Sumer. At Ur especially the profligate use of copper as well as other

" precious

" materials is very impressive ; this may not be obvious

in Woolley's publication, but detailed analysis of the cemetery grave by grave in

Woolley's field records reveals the true wealth of this extraordinary cemetery. On

the other hand, there is the sporadic appearance of tin, which was apparently used

very sparingly in a small minority of objects (Moorey and Schweizer, 1972 : 185; Moorey, 1982 : 25). The important point in the context of the present enquiry is that tin-bronze was also in occasional use in north Syria (Moorey and Schweizer,

1972: 188, together with Watkins, 1974: 191 and 192). This additional evidence is introduced to support the typological parallels and reinforce the parallelism between north Syria and Sumer : not only were the metal products similar, but

they come down to us from both areas because of a similar habit of depositing them in graves ; they mark a parallel symbolism of respected warrior status in their

respective societies (cf. Watkins, forthcoming) ; they were made at least sometimes from the " new "

alloy, tin-bronze, requiring its own expert knowledge ; and they were apparently made in profusion.

Alongside the complex of traits shared in the middle of the third millennium by Sumer and north Syria it deserves to be noted that the Syrian material shows clear

signs of independence and innovation. In Syria we find the hooked tang applied to both the familiar types of spearhead as a device for improving the stability of the spearhead in the shaft. The hooked tang was widely used for a while from the



22 TREVOR WATKINS

Aegean islands in the west to Tepe Hissar in the east through Anatolia, Cyprus, west Syria and Palestine, but it was never adopted in Sumer. Another feature

present at Til Barsib but not found in Sumer is the slotted spearhead blade ; other

examples of this extra means of stabilizing the spearhead in the shaft are known

from Anatolia (conveniently illustrated in Stronach, 1957 : Fig. 5) and the Aegean (cf. Renfrew, 1969: 323 and Fig. 16.5). Among the battle-axes are examples from Til Barsib of typically Syrian blade design with parallel sides, and one example of the very typical, wickedly pointed battle-axe blade. We also see the use of

sophisticated cast-in decoration on battle-axes. A socketed battle-axe from Hammam

(Woolley, 1914 : PI. XXL?) has a blade reminiscent of Sumerian examples in its curved outline, but the angular cut-away socket is not Sumerian ; it does, however, find precise parallels at nearby Til Barsib. And once again we should not forget that, as Tubb (1982) has recently shown, the great majority of crescentic and " anchor

" axes are Levantine, while only a very small number of them claim

Sumerian contexts. The daggers from Amarna and Serrin, while they likewise find echoes in Sumer, feel more at home in west Syria, Cilicia and Cyprus with their

triangular blades, triangular heels, and triangular setting of rivet-holes. And at the

Euphrates sites there are toggle-pin types which look westwards rather than south- east to Sumer.

To summarize, then, I have tried to suggest that a group of Sumerian metal

types current during ED III and largely defunct by Akkadian times find close

parallels at sites in north Syria. It has been argued that these same types must also have been current in north-west Mesopotamia before 2300 b.c. in the Syrian periods EB III and EB IVA. The similarities are so many and so detailed, and they extend over such a variety of types that it seems impossible to believe that the Syrian finds

are products of a period after the Sumerian objects ceased to be made, as is implied when the Til Barsib hypogeum, Carchemish and the Sajur valley sites are dated to

the end of the third millennium. Even if some of the Syrian material to which

attention has been drawn here may prove to date to or just after 2300 b.c., its

existence at that date would imply the prior existence of parent material in Syria, and it cannot be much later than 2300 b.c. because in Syria as in Sumer new types, new fashions and new design details appear in the last two centuries of the third

millennium (in Syria, for example, the socketed spearhead and the fenestrated axe). Of course the old types do not all disappear at once, but what is significant is that

not one example of the new types, which belong to the last quarter of the third

millennium, is represented among the fairly numerous Syrian assemblages cited.

Thus it may be concluded that these Syrian finds are products of a school of local

craftsmanship of the period 2600-2300.

Technically and in terms of the use of the " advanced "

alloy tin-bronze the

Syrian smiths of the mid-third millennium were running parallel with their Sumerian

counterparts. In cultural terms the customs of conspicuous consumption of metals

through burial with the dead as well as the precise parallel of warrior-status signified in burial by weapons also link the two areas. And we have seen that in a number of

ways the Syrian metal-working school was certainly not copying slavishly or

accepting some dilute version of the Sumerian repertory, but was vigorous and

original, devising its own types (like the crescentic axe), its own preferred versions



PARALLELS IN THE METALWORK OF SUMER AND NORTH MESOPOTAMIA 23

of general types (as with the socketed battle-axes), and its own technical solutions to functional problems (like the hooked tang).

Bibliography Ekholm, ?., and Friedman, J., 1979. In ?. T. Larsen (ed.), Power and Propaganda (Mesopotamia 7).

Copenhagen. Forest, J. D., 1979. Preliminary report on the first season at Kheit Qasim, Hamrin, Iraq. Sumer

25 (1979)? 502-497. Hrouda, B., and Karstens, ?., 1967. Zur inneren Chronologie des Friedhofes " A " in Ingharra/

Chursagkalama bei Ki5. ?A 58 (1967), 256-67. Mackay, E., 1925. Report on the Excavations of the " A "

Cemetery at Kish, Mesopotamia, Part I (Field Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Memoirs I). Chicago.

Mallowan, M. E. L., 1937. The Syrian City of Til-Barsib. Antiquity 11 (1937), 328-39. Moorey, P. R. S., 1978. Kish Excavations 1923-1933. Oxford.

Moorey, P. R. S., 1980. Cemeteries of the First Millennium B.C. at Deve H?y?k, near Carchemish, salvaged by T. E. Lawrence and C. L. Woolley in 1913. (Brit. Archaeol. Reports, International Series 8y.) Oxford.

Moorey, P. R. S., 1982. The archaeological evidence for metallurgy and related technologies in

Mesopotamia, c. 5500-2100 b.c. Iraq 44 (1982), 13-38. Moorey, P. R. S., and Schweizer, F., 1972. Copper and copper alloys in ancient Iraq, Syria and

Palestine: some new analyses. Archaeometry 14 (1972), 177-98. Nissen, H. J., 1966. Zur Datierung des K?nigsfriedhofes von Ur. Bonn. Palmieri, ?., 1981. Excavations at Arslantepe ( Malatya). An. St. 31 ( 1981 ), ? o 1 -19. Renfrew, A. C, 1969. The Emergence of Civilization. London. Stronach, D. B., 1957. The Development and Diffusion of Metal Types in Early Bronze Age

Anatolia. An. St. 7 (1957), 89-125. Thureau-Dangin, F., and Dunand, M., 1936. Til Barsib. Paris. Tubb, J. N., 1982. A crescentic axehead from Amarna (Syria) and an examination of similar axe-

heads from the Near East. Iraq 44 (1982), 1-12. Watkins, T., 1974. Two unfinished spearheads in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. Levant 6

(1974), 188-92. Watkins, T. (forthcoming). Sumerian weapons, warfare and warriors. Sumer. Woolley, C. L., 1914. Hittite Burial Customs. LAAA 6 (1914), 87-98. Woolley, C. L., 1932. Ur Excavations, Volume II: The Royal Cemetery. London.

Woolley, C. L., and Barnett, R. D., 1952. Carchemish, Part HI. London.



papers of the 29 rencontre assyriologique internationale, london, 5-9 july 1982 || cultural...

Documents