Petr Charvát - Mesopotamia Before History (2008, Routledge)

The uruk culture 121

vanish in layer VIb2 and their production is illuminated by rare finds of flint nuclei, present among finds from layers VIII–VIcl. Obsidian tools get rarer in layers VIc2–VIa, disappearing afterwards. Layer VIa is also the last instance when both raw alabaster lumps and stone vessels, which re-appeared in layer IX, are registered among the finds.

Cylinder seals are likely to have been invented and introduced in Uruk VII (Vértesalji 1988, 26; on Uruk cylinder seals recently see Rova 1994) and the invention of inventions, writing, could have appeared in Uruk VI (Vértesalji 1988, 26). The overall impression is one of a slow but steady growth of what had originally been a modest-sized rural centre into prosperity and social prominence. Early Uruk obviously launched the site into a reasonably affluent period at which imports of stone and metal constituted no particular luxury. The availability of chipped stone nevertheless did not lead to the abandonment of the age-old baked sickles which existed for a time together with stone tools. In some instances the community of this period deliberately chose to procure particular materials from afar (alabaster). A degree of social complexity seems to be signalled by the first occurrence of mosaic cones as a vehicle of embellishment of some architectural creations. The subsequent Middle Uruk period brought these trends to a further development but, surprisingly, seems to have extended the line of technological accomplishment into the area of such cheap materials as clay instead of more widespread expansion or social articulation. The emphasis appears to have been on communal, corporate behaviour patterns, as is indicated by the first appearance of cylinder seals and writing, both consequences of the emergence of a large-scale reciprocity-redistribution pattern of exchange activities (see pp. 146–150), by the end of this period. A remarkable feature of early Uruk is the absence of seals or sealings within these strata (von Wickede 1990, 212–214; a single jar sealing from layer XII: ibid. pp. 213–2l4, Table 482).

Things changed fundamentally when, in the period of layer VI, Uruk rose to the status of a supraregional centre (Nissen 1972). The grandeur of these early times was incarnated at first in two extraordinary structures. The ‘Steinstifttempel’, or stone-cone temple, was built in layer VI on a terrace sunk into a foundation trench, on what had probably been a standard central-hall plan with a T-shaped central hall. Its walls were cast in layers of concrete tempered with crushed brick (‘Gips mit Ziegelsplitt’) and oblong tiles with rounded perforated ends, perhaps for anchoring mural decoration, were set in horizontal rows in them. They carried mosaic ornamentation composed of pegs of red sandstone, alabaster and grey to black bituminous limestone. Its enclosure wall, whitewashed outside, bore a rich decoration of blue and green-yellow stone mosaics inside. The inner areas of this structure were covered by a layer containing Late Uruk pottery and tokens (Heinrich 1982, 45–46, 70–72, Figs 104, 106; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 13–14). A most difficult problem is represented by the huge ‘Steingebäude’, facing An’s ziggurat but later than the inception of its building and belonging to the earlier segment of Late Uruk (Schmidt 1970, 71—Uruk VI; see also Strommenger 1980a, 487; Heinrich 1982, 67–68). Before the establishment of this structure a foundation pit was sunk into the underlying Ubaid culture strata. The building rests on a layer of limestone boulders joined with mortar and laid on the bottom of the foundation pit and consists of a central chamber and two corridors forming an oblong plan, delimited by three massive sets of rectangular walls c.3.5 m high, built of limestone and mould-cast concrete blocks. Pits in the corners and in the centres of the shorter walls as well as paired cavities in the longer walls may have once held posts or other construction elements. The central cella contained a

Mesopotamia before history 122

podium-like construction, the base of which was constituted by reed matting. This bore a layer of limestone pieces poured over with bitumen and a superimposed coating of fine lime mortar showing a layout of five small cavities disposed like a figure-of-five on dice. The surviving traces of internal furnishings included shallow conduits in the middleoblong walls and tanks suggesting libation rites, implied also by the presence of vessels composed of parallel stone tubes cemented together and leading into a common container. In addition to these and to pottery fragments, the ‘Steingebäude’ contained only a roughly carved statuette of a prisoner with bound hands. The whole structure was buried under an enormous load of stones alternating with clay strata but has subsequently been opened at least once, poured over with mortar and backfilled (Schmidt 1970, 60–75; Strommenger 1980a, 487; Szarzyńska 1981; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 17). In addition to the ingenious interpretation of a ‘gueule d’enfer’, proposed by K. Szarzyńska (1981), this situation reminds me of Enuma elish 1:6, where, at the beginning of the world, ‘gipara la kissuru susa la she’u’. The semantic field of the somewhat enigmatic ‘giparu’ includes a) residence of the enu/entu, b) part of a private house, c) pasture or meadow and d) taboo (CAD G 83–84). This evidence could become transparent if we assume that the word originally meant a reed mat spread on earth as a nuptial bed of the master and mistress of a house and, in a wider sense, a source of fertility, affluence and abundance of the house itself and of all those who lived in it. This original sememe could well develop into the directions of ‘shrine, residence of cultically potent persons, privy chambers, taboo’ and ‘pasture, meadow, fertile plant-giving land’. The position of the matting below the figure-of-five ensign, which clearly represents the civilized human world (see p. 156), could well reproduce the likeness and function of some archetypal structure connected with fertility and infusing life into the human-dominated sphere of existence. The idea of the pontifical couple, EN and NIN, discharging universal fertility by the NA2 ceremony (Charvát 1997, 41–70, esp. pp. 57–58, and 84–85) seems to be of relevance here. Does the ‘Steingebäude’ mat represent the first giparu, ‘tied together, plaited’ (kissuru) at the beginning of the world and followed by the creation of humanity? However that may be, the ‘Steingebäude’ clearly represents the incarnation of an elaborate mythical concept. In connection with the extensive use of stone in these Uruk structures, references to Uruk and Eridu buildings erected of ‘mountain stones’ fetched by inhabitants of the mountain state of Aratta may be of relevance (J.Börker-Klähn, in Heinrich 1982, 52, n. 76).

In layer V, these two impressive architectures were followed by the ‘Kalksteintempel’, or Limestone Temple. It lies on a bed of trampled clay covered by layers of stone blocks. Though its state of preservation is lamentable, the temple does seem to represent an example of an architecture with aT-shaped central hall and to repeat thus the lesson learnt at the ‘Steinstifttempel’. The dimensions of the ‘Kalksteintempel’ are respectable—it is 62 m long and 11.30 m wide—the flanking subsidiary chambers were accessed by doors both from outside the temple and from the central hall (in contrast with Ubaid culture central-hall buildings which regularly possess a single entrance only) and a staircase ramp at the end of one of the lateral wings once gave access to the roof of the building. The south-west shorter wall of its central hall bears two niches (Heinrich 1982, 46, 74, Fig. 114).

Within layer IV the chronology of individual buildings is complicated and has been rearranged several times (see Eichmann 1989). Individual structures may, in consequence

The uruk culture 123

of this fact, be dated differently in the future. There is, first and foremost, evidence of reorientations of the spiritual world resulting in ceremonial burial of disused cultic inventory. The ‘Riemchengebäude’, or building of strap-shaped bricks, is now being dated into layer IVc or IVb (Heinrich 1982, 72–73, Figs 106, 110 and 111; Limper 1988; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 14; Becker and Heinz 1993). A huge pit sunk for its foundations into the ruins of the north corner of the ‘Steinstifttempel’ received pavement with stones laid in bitumen. Upon this pavement was erected a structure consisting of an innermost rectangular chamber surrounded on all four sides by corridors with an extra room added on its south-east side. A fire kindled with wood of either a fruit (nut?) tree or a coniferous tree (Heinrich 1982, 73) and burning within the central chamber stained its north-west and north-east walls red. Objects recovered from this cella comprise vessels of pottery and stone, animal bones and small but stout pegs as well as obsidian blades and cores; they were poured over with bitumen. The richest array of objects, however, turned up in the four wings of the surrounding corridor, filled up to the height of 75 cm from the floor. Among these finds the reports refer to storage jars, textile remains (some deposited in chests), animal bones (a ram skull with horn), copper vessels, wooden objects inlaid with coloured (black and white, for instance) mosaics including possibly furniture items (Becker and Heinz 1993, 18–23), stone (alabaster) vessels, vestiges of a more-than-life- size female(?) sculpture of ‘artificial stone’ (gypsum and sand, see Becker and Heinz 1993, 75, No. 940, and Wrede 1995 who identifies it as an image of a male ruler), personal ornaments (a golden earring, a copper mirror?), weapons

Figure 5.4 Ubaid or Uruk age spindle whorls from Uruk (after Kohlmeyer and Hauser 1994)

such as arrowheads, maces, knives and spears, parts of architectural decoration (terracotta pegs, gold foil, nails with gilt heads) and/or ceremonial objects (?, copper mounts of wooden rods at least 1.8 m long). Some of these treasures left their impressions in the wall plaster which must have been fresh at the time of deposition. The objects were covered with matting and all the intervening space filled in with ruins of the temple(?), save for the south-east room which was whitewashed, its floor covered with bitumen and

Mesopotamia before history 124

matting and its interior filled in with clean earth. The ‘Riemchengebäude’'s external façade might have borne paintings displaying both geometric and figural motifs (Nunn 1985). The whole area was then covered by another layer of temple ruins with a few objects in secondary positions (tokens; see Lenzen 1958; Frankfort 1968, 14; Lenzen 1974, 127–128; Heinrich 1982, 72–73, Figs 106, 110, 111; SchmandtBesserat 1988a, 14). It has been suggested that this structure may represent the ceremonial disposal of the cultic inventory no longer needed after the abandonment of the ‘Steinstifttempel’ (Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 14).

The early phase of layer IV (IVd–IVb) witnessed the erection of an impressive series of brick temples. This is the time of introduction of the standardized ‘Riemchen’ brick, prevailing in the course of Uruk layers IV and III (Finkbeiner 1986, 47–48). The excavators of Uruk note that very few pottery items were found in any of the three stages of phase IV (Heinrich 1982, 72). First and foremost, let us refer to the ‘Stiftmosaikgebäude’ (Lenzen 1974, 116–119; Heinrich 1982, 46, 75–76, Figs 117, 119), an architectural group involving temples A (on the north-south terrace) and B, of a ‘typical Sumerian tripartite’ character (Frankfort 1968, 7). By the north-south terrace was a large courtyard with a spacious portico consisting of a double row of four massive pillars bearing cone-mosaic decoration. This portico could be entered from at least one door at one of the portico’s ends between the pillar rows, as well as from the courtyard by means of a ramp bearing a double staircase (a reconstruction can be found in Mallowan 1965, 38, Ill. 25). The courtyard walls bore a cone-mosaic decoration in red, white and black; the round pillars displayed white and black colours, and the same kind of ornament (but in black only) embellished the façade of the stair ramp. In the same period Temple C, apparently with a transversal ‘transept’ close to one of its ends, followed by a suite of minor chambers between the ‘transept’ and the north-west façade, was built. This T- shaped arrangement, an elaboration on the architectural antecedents applied also in the case of Temple B, has been described by H.Frankfort as a ‘combination of two tripartite temples set at right angles’ (Frankfort 1968, 8). A number of hearths uncovered in the five layers of the temple’s whitewashed floors did not yield any ash traces but the last floor layer bore burnt remains of a timber roof (Lenzen 1974, 123–129). Building E, referred to as a ‘palace’, was of a square plan with a large central courtyard enclosed by corridors opening onto it through a portico consisting of a double row of pillars. Its walls displayed no cone-mosaic decoration but were painted in a colour that today has a light orange hue (Lenzen 1974, 121–122, Pl. XVI on p. 113; Heinrich 1982, 77–78, Fig. 118; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 10, 16). Another impressive architectural creation consisted of the three structures F, G and H, displaying the now standardized plan of a T-shaped central hall flanked by suites of subsidiary chambers on three sides and disposed at right angles around a courtyard (Lenzen 1974, 119–121; Heinrich 1982, 46, 74–75, Fig. 116; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 10, 14–15). Room I by building H yielded a hoard of twentyfive clay tokens in a ‘frying-pan shaped’ hearth (ibid., a most interesting parallel to Tell Madhhur, see 56–57). Unfortunately, this group of structures has not been excavated in full and this pertains more or less to all structures of level IV. Though their plans clearly develop the Ubaid culture tradition of the central-hall buildings, including such mundane features as staircase ramps, frequently doubled now, differences are visible. In addition to the T-shaped ground plan of the central hall, the Uruk culture structures display quite different circulation patterns as they stood open to visitors streaming in through the

The uruk culture 125

numerous entrances piercing their walls (see, for instance, the Uruk temples B and C, in Parrot 1960, 66, Fig. 83A, B). This contrasts sharply with the Ubaid culture tradition when the norm was one single entrance through a vestibule (Forest 1983b, 7–8). The enormous difference in size strikes the eye but, on the other hand, it may be significant that the south-east shorter wall of the central hall of Uruk temple C displays two niches conforming with the binary tradition of Tepe Gawra XV–XII (see p. 50). The double niche is also borne by the shorter walls of the central halls of temples G, F and perhaps also H (Heinrich 1982, 75, Fig. 116). Among these three temples the earliest one seems to have been temple G, followed in due course by the other two structures.

All this huge construction was almost totally obliterated at the end of Uruk IVb with the sole exception of temple C, which remained in use (Heinrich 1982, 46–47, 50–51, 78–83, Figs 120 and 124; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 10). Building E, as well as temples B and F, had its walls pulled down to the height of 2–3 brick courses and the ruins were levelled with debris. New structures erected at that time included the ‘Hallenbau’ (hall building) and the ‘Pfeilerhalle’, or pillar hall, both decorated with cone mosaics. Contemporary architects must have prided themselves on such a magnificent creation as Temple D, the largest structure of Eanna, again on the standard plan of aT-shaped central hall flanked by alignments of subsidiary chambers, the external façades of which were visually articulated by alternating series of niches and engaged columns. This building had a much more complex circulation pattern than its predecessors. Of the two perfectly symmetrical staircases, the ramps of which survived in the plan (Parrot 1960, 66, Fig. 83C), one could be entered only from outside, and the other one only from inside. The north-east shorter wall of its central hall displayed, flanked by two multiple and two single recesses, one central niche, in contrast to the two apparent in a similar position in temple C of the earlier sublayer. Another building added at this stage was the bath, consisting of a numerous series of rooms, the floors and lower parts of walls of which (up to the height of 40 cm) were waterproofed with bitumen. Though round soakage pits were provided for the used water, frequent rebuilding documented in this complex indicates that the solidity of the construction was affected by the purpose to which the building was put. This period also saw the erection of the ‘Red Temple’, now believed to have played an administrative role. This building, situated on a terrace and rather imperfectly preserved, bore on its walls a coating of red paint. Among other finds, its vicinity yielded cone mosaics and fragments of a clay frieze with rosettes, rampant animals and bundles of reeds, as well as 120 inscribed tablets, found along one of its walls, and a number of broken jar sealings (Heinrich 1982, 83; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 12; Englund 1994, esp. pp. 13–16). A most conspicuous component of the Uruk IVa architectural layout is the Great Courtyard, in reality another enormous pit, whose sides were revetted by masonry built of burnt and bitumen-coated bricks, making up two concentric squares of benches. The upper part of the retaining wall bore cone mosaics. The courtyard was provided with at least one staircase and with a cistern supplied by a vaulted conduit, but no other device for the evacuation of rain water from inside has been discovered. R.M.Boehmer (1991, 468) has suggested that it might well have served as a garden. The debris and levelling layers of the Great Courtyard yielded a quantity of inscribed tablets and sealings (Lenzen 1962, 7–8 and 1974, 127; Heinrich 1982, 47; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 15–16). The entire architectural group of Uruk IVa underwent total destruction, perhaps as a consequence of violent action, at the end of this period, and

Mesopotamia before history 126

the following layer III manifests considerably different planning (see pp. 160–161; Lenzen 1962, 11; Lenzen 1964, 11; Finkbeiner 1986, 46; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 10– 11).

The other religious centre of early Uruk, shrine of the sky god An, contains a series of structures the dates of which have caused a certain degree of controversy (Frankfort 1968, 13; Strommenger 1980b, 486; Schmandt-Besserat 1988a, 16–17). E.Heinrich (1982, 39, 61) insists on its dating in the Uruk period, corroborated by the fact that the foundation trench of the

Figure 5.5 Late Uruk fishing hooks of copper from Habuba Kabira (after Strommenger 1980a, 53, Fig. 40)

‘Steingebäude’ was sunk into debris strata belonging probably to this structure (ibid. 67). An’s ziggurat consists of a massive early core and a series of successive enlargements and rebuildings making up the total of fourteen phases of this structure, numbered from L or X (the early core) to the most recent A3 phase. From earliest times the building stood on a terrace of an irregular ground plan accessible by a ramp of which ten chronological phases have been identified (from L to B). Phase E ushered in a series of changes. First and foremost, the top part of the terrace walls bore from now on up to the B phase a frieze consisting of three strips of terracotta rings protruding from the masonry. Second, from this phase the terrace was accessible by a paired ramp and staircase, accompanied by a conduit for the disposal of rainwater. Finally, the first ground plan of very regular centralhall buildings with flanking wings of subsidiary chambers in the south-west part of the terrace has been documented in this phase. The door sill of this structure, coated with bitumen, bore a decoration of three wide copper belts. The road leaving the door for the ramp-cum-staircase was paved with flat slabs of limestone and a pair of bitumen-coated post-holes, likely to have accommodated erect shafts (symbols? standards?), came to light at both sides of the entrance. Layer D, immediately above E, contained a ground plan of a structure most similar to the E-phase temple. Phase C saw the transfer of building activities to the north-west part of the terrace. Here a small subsidiary terrace

The uruk culture 127

accommodated a rectangular building with two entrances in the centres of the east and west walls, built of palm trunks set in bitumen-coated post-holes. This structure was followed by another one of its kind and then by another subsidiary terrace (still within phase C), on which the contemporary architects outlined in red a plan of another regular central-hall building, subsequently erected on the spot. One of the floors of this phase bore, among other small finds, impressions of cylinder seals (Heinrich 1982, Fig. 85a–c). Finally, Phase B’s popularity has been assured by the famous ‘White Temple’, built on a bitumen-coated pedestal again in the south-west part of the terrace. Its floors consisted of clay coatings of a brick layer resting on the bitumen surface; an exception is a pit left out in the east corner containing an offering of animal bones. The floors and walls bore a white gypsum coating. The other, north, west and east corner chambers of the building contained staircases, unfinished in the case of the north end. Both chambers in the midst of the north-east room suite might have been equipped with shelves of coniferous-tree wood anchored in the walls and displayed cavities for setting in pivot stones which imply more solid door construction. The north end of the central hall was occupied by a podium accessible by means of a small staircase and its middle part by an ‘altar’ with a firestained upper surface. In its central part, the terrace area outside the White Temple contained a huge fire-stained pit (2.2×2.7 m) and a massive loop hewn out of a stone boulder by the access ramp, as well as a system of shallow bitumen-coated conduits issuing from the terrace edges south-east and south-west of the temple, entering through its south-east and south-west doors and meeting in the midst of the central hall where the liquids collected in them flowed into a soakage pit. After the extinction of its functions the doors of the White Temple were immured and the whole area covered and infilled by large bricks, probably belonging to the Al phase of the whole layout. This phase also yielded, among other finds, cylinder-seal impressions (Heinrich 1982, 35, 38–39, 61–66, Figs 78–80). It is not clear to which phase of the structure the gypsum tablets referred to by Robert Englund belong (1994, 18–19, Figs 8–9).

Stylistic analysis has led to the dating of some exquisite pieces of statuary found at Uruk to the time of the Uruk culture, though stratigraphic data are by no means decisive enough (see Becker and Heinz 1993). A sculpture of a female head, justly famous under the name of ‘Lady of Uruk’, was discovered in a pit sealed by a layer which yielded tablets of late Uruk III type (ibid. 77, No. 952). The lion-hunt stele turned up in the ruins of the Uruk-III temple but clearly in a secondary position. Finally, one of the male statuettes was deposited in a pot covered by a ‘Blumentopf’. The lifespan of such pottery products has been estimated as Uruk IX–III/II (see Strommenger 1980b, 482 on the whole problem).

A more mundane but historically important source is represented by the settlement site WS 312, excavated in 1960–1961 some 4 km north-east of Eanna. Unlike the following time period, the earliest phase of this site, dating to the very end of the Uruk culture period (D) displayed no traces of professional specialization but exclusively average habitation structures. After desertion, its ruins were levelled to make room for the later structures (Vértesalji 1988), much as in the case of Eanna buildings. Late Uruk period habitation structures came to light in a test trench in squares O 11/12 (Finkbeiner 1991, 193), while a large area with traces of pyrotechnical activities was observed in the northwest quarter of the city (ibid. 194).

Mesopotamia before history 128

The overall settled area of Late Uruk period Uruk amounted to about 250 hectares, equalling thus the Greek polis of Athens around 500 BC (ibid.). On the site in general see also Boehmer 1997.

Finally, we must mention the extraordinary proliferation of rural settlement surrounding the Uruk culture centre. No less than approximately 100 sites of the Late Uruk period have been registered in its vicinity. In the northern part of this ‘Greater Uruk’, the rural sites turned up in clusters, avoiding, however, the closest proximity of the city (Nissen 1972), where the existence of fields may reasonably be expected (see Ball et al. 1989, 11–12). A similar phenomenon, albeit on a much more limited scale, has been registered for the Uruk period site of Tell Brak, Syria (Weiss 1983, 42).

Khafajeh—Sin ‘temple’

A site some 35 km east of Baghdad excavated by a US mission directed by H.Frankfort within the Diyala Basin Project lasting from 1930 to 1938. Of all the sites elucidated by these excavations the Sin ‘temple’ at Khafajeh represents the earliest structure, established, as it seems, within the Uruk culture period. For this reason I have decided to include here the description of its four earliest phases, though they undoubtedly lasted until after the end of Uruk culture, Phase V with its solid-footed goblets being assignable to the end of Jemdet Nasr or to the very beginning of the ED period.

Throughout the first four phases of its existence, the Sin ‘temple’ retained its standardized plan, clearly relying on the Ubaid culture prototype of central-hall buildings, that of a longitudinal central hall flanked along its longer sides by suites of subsidiary rooms. The earliest structure was established on a settlement layer yielding such remains as red burnished and grey-black pottery wares, bevelled-rim bowls and mosaic cones, indicating a foundation date within the Uruk culture period. The earliest phase, Sin I, did not contain numerous finds but those retrieved mostly from subsidiary rooms (as was customary in the preceding, Ubaid culture period) clearly point to the habitational character of the structure: a storage jar and a group of utility pottery in room Q 42:47 (Delougaz and Lloyd 1942, 14, Fig. 8), chipped flint tools with traces of bitumen hafting and a boat model, the position of which is ambiguous (ibid. 136). On the other hand, the two pendants in the shape of twin bird heads separated by vertical chequered bands of white and dark rhomboid fields (ibid. 12 and Fig. 6 on p. 13) certainly belong to nonaverage artifacts. Let us note that for the first time, a podium (‘altar’) is built on the north end of the central hall, establishing a tradition lasting until the final, X layer of the structure, almost half a millennium later. From Sin II, room Q 42:41 yielded two splendid cylinder seals bearing classical Uruk-style scenes with herds of animals and reed huts, provided with suspension loops of silver and, in one case, with the upper end displaying a belt of decoration consisting of triangular fields of mother-of-pearl and jasper. Sin III had two floors, the upper one being some 25 cm above the lower, again pointing to a profane character of the structure in which domestic rubbish was allowed to accumulate at such a

The uruk culture 129

Figure 5.6 Amulets and pendants worn in the Late Uruk age. Such trinkets, imbued with the personalities of their bearers, were frequently left in the temples, presumably as tokens of veneration of the local divinities and of the worshippers’ loyalty to them.

rate (on élite and non-élite rubbish disposal see Gibbon 1984, 160–161). The finds concentrated in room Q 42:26 do nevertheless show some élite functions of this building. A bird-shaped pottery vessel and a stone vase with mother-of-pearl and jasper incrustations are accompanied here by a lunate ornament of gold and by a multitude of amulets in the shapes of most diverse animals, birds, reptiles or insects (Figure 5.6). However, a saw blade is also present among the finds of this phase (Delougaz and Lloyd 1942, 143). A small room abutting the enclosure wall of this phase contained a shelf with miniature vessels of pottery and stone. Finally, Sin IV is the first local case of a terrace building, the older structure having been torn down to a height of about 1 m and the inner space having been filled in by clay. In this manner the foundation for the fourth phase of the building was prepared. The court of Sin IV, Q 42:21, contained two large kilns rebuilt several times. As to finds, they now tend to turn up in the central hall rather than in the subsidiary rooms and are similar in character to those of Sin III. Again there are vessels and receptacles of pottery and stone, including a bull-shaped vase and a grey conical stone vessel with geometrical inlays. Ceremonial objects are represented by a fragment of a geometrical composition of stone, shells and beads set into clay, by the ‘eye idols’ and by a female statuette. Besides the amulets and pendants two categories of cylinder seals are present: long and thin ones of glazed steatite with geometrical patterns and smaller

Mesopotamia before history 130

examples of limestone with summarily executed images of animals and a building (Delougaz and Lloyd 1942, 8–31; Hansen 1997a).

Grai Resh

A tell 4 miles east of Sinjar, an Anglo-Iraqi excavation of 1939 headed by S.Lloyd. Two soundings in the tell exposed, in one case, a stratigraphy of six layers (four Ubaid, IX–VI, and two of the Ubaid-Uruk transition, V–IV), and in the other a sequence of three phases belonging to the Uruk culture (layers III and II) and to the beginning of the ED period (layer I). C-14 dates: 3893 +/−88 BC (Hassan and Robinson 1987, 127); 3890–3635 cal. BC (Annex 712), 4135–3785 cal. BC (ibid.). The Uruk culture house of layer III was clearly bonded into a massive brickwork construction 5 m thick, possibly a town wall. The most interesting contribution of this operation, however, is another Uruk culture house in the overlying layer II, showing a standard central-hall layout. The builders of the house used large rectangular bricks and roofed their construction with timber baulks, reed matting and coatings of clay. The central hall received a whitewash and its shorter north wall was articulated by a pair of symmetrical niches starting at a height of 50 cm above the floor. Most of the unusually numerous finds were concentrated in the central hall and in the two rooms flanking it on the north side. The north-west room offered most instructive insights into the daily chores of the inhabitants. The housewife who worked here had at her disposal a series of pottery vessels standing on brick banks lining the north and west walls. Jars for the storage of provisions contained a mixture of wheat and barley (this one was sunk into the floor) as well as meat, attested by the presence of bones. The same room also contained chipped stone items of flint and obsidian such as two large points, two scrapers and a chert blade core, a small celt of polished stone and also a copper point. The north-east room was also provided with storage jars covered by the remains of the collapsed roof. A burial of an infant protected by two pottery vessels enclosing the body was concealed below the floor of one of the rooms.

The house contained an abundance of objects of which most lack exact data as to their find-spots, the only indication being that a majority of them turned up in the central hall and in the north-east room. In addition to animal bones which may represent domestic herds (bones and horns of sheep and goats, horns of water-buffalo) the inhabitants used eating implements of bone, sometimes highly polished. Clay served first and foremost for the production of classical Uruk culture pottery (the standard assemblage: D.Sürenhagen in Rothman 1990, 132f.). Moreover, there were two figurines of unidentifiable animals, a clay female statuette with a concave base, decorated spindle whorls, egg-shaped items usually interpreted as slingshot and pendants. An ‘eye idol’ is accompanied by a seal impression on clay with an image of a human figure, the closest parallel to which, I believe, comes from Tepe Gawra layer XII (von Wickede 1990, Table 267). Metal was freely available to the locals: in addition to the above-mentioned point they left a copper drill head lying on the site. As usual, stone finds turned up widely. Obsidian was used for the production of chipped industry (blades, simple flakes) and beads; most of it appears to have been fresh with very few weathered pieces. Chert served for the production of blades, in many cases for sickles (sometimes with traces of bitumen hafting) and flakes; there is a chert core. Ground stone items include a number of basalt querns and grinding stones, two hammer-axes bored through and a pear-shaped macehead of purple-coloured