Bi blical June 1995
Vol.58 No.2
Perspectiveson the Ancient Worldfrom Mesopotamiato the Mediterranean
OLO
4W4-
4t 4jk NU' '?& 'V u 1%,
~
.A~
T
~h""~B
4ora
Aoi
?~A"
O.-W"
244b rr
-i,
lw1
Nf
--0 I-trls
t,
i 41b
"
I
)w_._~341
o
Arcaeo Biblical
Perspectives on the Ancient Worldfrom Mesopotamiato the Mediterranean A Publicationof the American Schools of OrientalResearch 62
Volume58 Number2 June 1995
A Tributeto Peter Neve RonaldL. Gorny
AP
63
FortyYearsin the Capitalof the Hittites
JiirgenSeeher
-ML; -e?iwz
In a century of excavations at the Hittite capital, Bogazkby, no one has played a more active role than Peter Neve. His retirement in 1994 coincides with his fortieth year at the site, including three decades as director.These years produced a long list of stupendous discoveries and won Neve an ever widening circle of friends.
via. 68
Plants and People in Ancient Anatolia
MarkNesbitt
Archaeobotany in the Near East has scored numerous advances, and excavations in Turkeyplayed an especially significant role in spurring recognition that agriculture and diet are integral to an understanding of the past. Though still a youngster in the field, archaeobotany offers insight into every period of the human past.
page 63
82
HittitePotteryandPotters
RobertC.Henrickson
That's the way the cooking pot crumbles! How a vessel breaks provides evidence for how it was made. A technological analysis of pottery from recently renewed excavations at Late Bronze Age Gordion demonstrates strong connections to the Hittite ceramic tradition.
91
A Hittite Seal from Megiddo
ItamarSinger
A tiny seal unearthed by the excavators of Megiddo in the 1930sbelonged to Anu-ziti. Its inscription states his profession: "charioteer."This title, borne by official diplomats of Hatti and vassal states, offers further witness to the importance of this station on the diplomatic route between the Hittite and the Egyptian royal courts.
94
An Urartian Ozymandias
PaulZimansky
Make room on the roster of great builders of the Iron Age Near East-from Solomon to Sargon-for a forgotten potentate who ruled a Urartian kingdom in the highland region around Lakes Van and Urmia. Though he inspired no legends and left a meager impression on the written record, Rusa II, the last great king of Urartu, may have been the Iron Age's most energetic instigator of building projects.
s page 68
101
Swords, Armor,and Figurines
K.Asihan Yener
Metal mining and manufacture were critical high technologies in the ancient world: metal provided the standard of value, medium of exchange, and the raw material of tool and weapon industries. Analysis of the "fingerprints"of ores and artifacts has begun to display the complex tableau of ancient metal industries. Lead-isotope analysis clarifies the dynamics of provisioning metal in the Late Bronze Age Hittite empire.
108
Oil in HittiteTexts HarryA. Hoffner,Jr Hittite literature urges: Give bread to the hungry, water to the thirsty,clothes to the naked, and to the desiccated, give oil. Oil was one of the minimal essentials in ancient Anatolia, as in the rest of the Near East. Sleuthing the various Hittite words for oils, lard, grease, and fat, philologist Hoffner discovers the basic Hittite word for oil, and catalogs its multifarious uses.
115
Arti-Facts Desparately Seeking Faustus (Lamps). DIGMASTER.Flood Damage at Thebes. News from TelcEinZippori and Sepphoris. Plus reviews of Anatoliaand theBalkans,and Anatolia: Land,Men,and Godsin Asia Minor
page 82
On the cover:Bogazk6y,150km east of the Turkish of capitalof Ankara.Excavations the ancient Hittitecapitalhave been underwayfor over a century,conductedby the GermanInstituteof Archaeology.
From
the
Editor
To anyone possessing only a cursory acquaintance with Anatolian archaeology, the name of Peter Neve may elicit little more than recognition. I hope that this issue of BiblicalArchaeologist dedicated to Neve by his colleagues that. brief Seeher's appreciation of Neve's accomplishments at changes Jiirgen of the ancient Hittites, could easily have extended to fill the capital Bogazk6y, entire magazine. Ron Gorny' more personal tribute nicely portrays the multifarious talents of this preeminent archaeologist. Peter Neve is well given the honorific appellation: "Royal Architect of Hattu'a." Even as Neve retires,Anatolian archaeology gains a growing audience within the world of Near Eastern archaeology: witness the recently organized ASOR Symposium on Ancient Anatolia. This issue offers a good introduction to the exciting archaeological discoveries taking place in Turkey.Archaeobotanical work continues to probe the dawn of agriculture in an area where indigenous wild einkorn wheat and chickpea made crucial contributions to the early pantry. Sophisticated metallurgical analysis uses lead isotope ratios to trace the path of metals from highland mines and smelting camps to lowland centers of political power. Technological analysis of the pottery industry helps to portray the ceramic tradition and its place in larger dynamic social and economic institutions. Foundations in the dust testify about the resourcefulness and energy of an Iron Age royal figure whose accomplishments appear to stand in inverse proportion to his sparse literary reputation. Philological advances make available more fully the Hittite literary legacy with each new entry into the Chicago HittiteDictionary. Readers will find a "new entry" in this issue of BAas well. The final feature of the magazine ("News, Notes, and Reviews") has been re-designed and retitled to offer a more integrated appearance. The new feature, 'Arti-Facts"(actually a title revived from an erstwhile column on ASOR Centers), will continue to carry book reviews ably edited by Jim Moyers. More emphasis will be given to a variety of current materials relating to the practice and conceptualization of archaeology in Egypt, the Near East, and Eastern Mediterranean. I am delighted that Bruce and Carolyn Routledge will serve the first term as editors of this feature. They are both nearing the completion of their doctoral work at the University of Torontoin Syro-Palestinian Archaeology and Ancient Egyptian Language and Literature respectively. They have excavated in Canada, Israel, Jordan,and Syria and currently serve as director and assistant director of excavations at Khirbe Medeinet CAlyiain Jordan. Among the "arti-facts"the new editors hope to include: news from fieldwork on important finds, broadly relevant interpretive conclusions, and appeals for collaboration or comparative material. They would welcome announcements of collaborative projects, calls for papers, and major appointments. Descriptions of innovative approaches to fieldwork, analysis, and interpretation would serve to disseminate newer research methods more rapidly. Bruce and Carolyn also invite the submission of commentary on issues facing archaeological practice. Materials offered for publication should be submitted to the Routledges in care of the BA editorial office in Washington, DC. Bruce and Carolyn can be contacted at 295 Dale Cres. #307,Waterloo,Ontario, Canada N2J 3Y5.Their e-mail address is:
[email protected].
Biblical
Archaeologist
on theAncientWorldfrom Perspectives to theMediterranean Mesopotamia
Editor David C. Hopkins Art Director Bucky Edgett,LuckyProductions Book Review Editor James C. Moyer Arti-FactsEditors Bruce and Carolyn Routledge EditorialAssistant Mary PatrinaBoyd
Editorial Committee JefferyA. Blakely Douglas A. Knight Elizabeth Bloch-Smith Mary Joan Leith Gloria London Betsy M. Bryan Jodi Magness J.P Dressel Gerald L. Mattingly Ernest S. Frerichs Ronald S. Hendel Gaetano Palimbo Paul Zimansky RichardS. Hess Kenneth G. Hoglund Subscriptions Annual subscription rates are $35 for individuals and $45 for institutions.There is a special annual rate of $28 for those over 65, physically challenged,or unemployed. Biblical is also availableas part of the beneArchaeologist fits of some ASOR membership categories. Postage for Canadian and other international addresses is an additional $5.Payments should be sent to ASOR Membership/Subscriber Services,PO. Box 15399,Atlanta,GA 30333-0399 (ph: 404-727-2345;Bitnet:SCHOLARS@ EMORYUI).VISA/Mastercardorders can be phoned in. Back issues Backissues can be obtained by calling SP Customer Services at 800-437-6692or writing SP Customer Services,PO.Box 6996, Alpharetta,GA 30239-6996. Postmaster Send address changes to Biblical ASOR Membership/Subscriber Archaeologist, Services,P.O.Box 15399,Atlanta,GA 30333-0399. Second-class postage paid at Atlanta,GA and additional offices. Copyright ? 1995by the American Schools of Oriental Research. Correspondence All editorial correspondence should be addressed to Biblical 4500 Archaeologist, MassachusettsAvenue NW,Washington,DC 20016-5690(ph: 202-885-8699;fax:202-885-8605). Books for review should be sent to Dr.JamesC. Moyer,Department of Religious Studies, Southwest Missouri State University,901South National, Box 167,Springfield,MO 65804-0095. Advertising Correspondenceshould be addressed to LeighAnderson, ScholarsPress,PO. Box 15399,Atlanta,GA 30333-0399(ph:404-7272327;fax:404-727-2348).Ads for the sale of antiquities will not be accepted. Biblical (ISSN 0006-0895)is published Archaeologist quarterly(March,June,September,December) by Scholars Press,819Houston Mill Road NE, Atlanta,GA 30329,for the American Schools of Oriental Research(ASOR),3301North Charles Street,Baltimore,MD 21218.Printed by Cadmus JournalServices,Baltimore,MD. W IOF
SIP
A
Tribute to
Peter
Neve
studies in particular.Not only are his contributionsmonumental in scope ARCHAEOLOGIST OFBIBLICAL HISISSUE (e.g.,his detailed study of the Hittite Die Bauwerke, is the second devoted to the citadel,Biiyiikkale: 1982), but as the and culture of magnificentlyillustrated archaeology ancient Anatolia. The initial issue summary of his work in AntikeWelt em(1992)shows, they are incrediblyrich 52:2-3,1989) (BiblicalArchaeologist and varied.The decision to dedicate Hittites. This the role of the phasized this issue to Peteris a heartfeltresponse, issue is once again weighted heavily not only for the many contributionshe in favor of the Hittites, but also deals has made in the field,but for the inspiwith other aspects of this ancient rationand personal kindnesses he has land. I feel very fortunate once again shown to me over the years. to have had the privilege of working with a very distinguished group of My first contactwith Petercame as the result of a letter I wrote to him in of whom deserve scholars, each in 1982 the thanks for their efforts making requesting a place on the with the current issue possible. Along Bogazk6y team.That position never materialized,but the correspondence newly established ASOR symposium led to furtherconversationsand a on Ancient Anatolia, this collection of number of visits to the Hittite Capital. articles reflects ASOR'scontinuing interest in the archaeology of AnatoThen, Petervisited the United States in the Januaryof 1988and lectured in a lia. I'd like to thank both ASOR and seminar class I was helping to organize editorial comthe BiblicalArchaeologist at the OrientalInstitute.While excitedly mittee for making this venture possible. There is more to this issue, viewing the pottery from AligarHbyiik with me, Peterinstilled in me the sense however, than first meets the eye. of Aligar'simportanceand encouraged Although the current issue of Biblime to follow up on my preliminary has been in the works calArchaeologist interestsin Aligar.He also inspired me for about two years,it was only after to pursue the possibility of reopening spending several days at Bogazkoy in the OrientalInstitute'searlierexcavathe summer of 1993that I proposed tions at the site. In fact,Peter,more than dedicating it to PeterNeve, the retiring directorof the Bogazkoy-Hattusa excaanyone else, encouragedme to tackle the great challenge of Aligarand was vations.After wandering over the the first person to visit us afterwe grounds at Bogazk6y for several days and reviewing endless boxes of Hittite began work there in 1993. PeterNeve will be remembered,of pottery,I began to sense the immense void that Peter'sretirementwould leave course,as one of the world'spremier archaeologists,but he is a man of many amongst his colleagues.It seemed only interests.Architecturewas Peter'sfirst fitting at that point that this issue love and one of the reasons for the should be dedicated to the person who, more than anyone,has given new life to bond that developed between us is a common interest in architecture.It was the Hittite capital. a great pleasure,in fact,to visit the As Directorof the Germanexcavafamous architecturallandmarksof tions at Bogazkay,PeterNeve has worked tirelessly-from 1954when he Chicagowith Peterduring his freezing arrivedas a student until his final seacold (-15?F) Januaryvisit. His love of son as directorin 1993-to resurrectthe jazz, however,manifests a very personal side to a man that many know Hittite Empire'sforemostcity.During that time,Neve has added a wealth of only throughhis long-termeffortsat Bogazky. In fact,one of my lasting knowledge to Near Easternstudies in memories of Peterwill be the smile that generaland to Hittite and Anatolian
By Ronald L. Gorny,guest Editor
62
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
registered on his face as we sat on crowded wooden benches and listened to the live sounds of Chicago'sfamous CheckerboardClub. Besides being one of the world's most dedicated archaeologists,Peter Neve has also been one of its most perceptive.He certainlybrought abundant energy and a criticaleye for architecturalform and detail to his work in the field, but his instincts more than anything else made possible the revelation of the imperial capitaland laid the groundworkfor future research.His ability in the field was, however,only one reason for his success as a director. He also possessed the ability to engage the local population in his work and to instill within them a sense of pride and a feeling that they were part of something very special. Moreover,Peter Neve has also been an inspirationto a younger generationof archaeologists from many countries.Thus,his work transcendsnot only nations and cultures,but time itself.This tributeto PeterNeve is a small way of saying thanks,not just for the years spent laboring in the field, but for being the special person who made us all feel as if we had a home in Hattusa. The Hittites were great builders who stressed the need to erect their structures"foreternity"(KUB31.100. obv.10).Hattu'a, however,survived longer than they probablyever could have hoped. The city owes its survival not only to the meticulous work of Hittite artisans and craftspeople,but also to the work and vision of Peter Neve. He has labored tirelessly to immortalize Hattuia and has in the process immortalized himself. Under his direction,the Hittite capitalhas begun to rise again,and I think the Hittites would have been pleased to know their city'srenaissancehad been entrusted into such competent hands. I think it is safe to say that PeterNeve's work has justly earned him the title "RoyalArchitectof Hattuga."
Dedicated to Peter Neve
Forty Years in the Capital of the Hittites Excavations PeterNeve retiresfromhis positionas Directorof the Hattu'a-Bogazkoy By JiirgenSeeher WHEN A CENTURY AGO TWAS JUST
:•!:!i
?•i: '
} ;ii:?i. . .
?.....i ....
._
•....
Peter Neve: Director of the Hattura-Bo azk6y Excavations, 1963-1994.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
Ernest Chantre began excavation of the Hittite capital at HattuhaBogazk6y in 1893-94 by opening several trial trenches. The first systematic excavations were carried out from 1906 to 1912under the leadership of Theodor Makridi, Hugo Winkler,and Otto Puchstein. Successive campaigns, resumed under the direction of Kurt Bittel in 1931,have continued to the present, save for an interruption of several years (19401951)during and following the Second World War.Yet in this extensive project, no one has played a more active role than Bittel'ssuccessor Peter Neve. His retirement in 1994 coincides with his fortieth year of spry and spirited participation at the site. Neve first arrived at the site in 1954 as a twenty-five-year-old student of architecture.He reached the site over a brand-new road of stabilized earth linking the village with nearby Sungurlu, a town on the Ankara-Samsun route. Much progress had been made since the first excavations at the turn of the century, when travel from Ankara to Bogazk6y had meant an exhausting five-day journey by horse and carriage.The year Peter Neve arrived, Professor Bittel (1954:3)noted the difference, commenting on the increase in visitors: "The number of travellers interested in ruins and excavations has risen a lot. Whereas living and working at Bogazk6y before the war took place in nearly complete seclusion, this season nearly 80 visitors have stopped by during our presence here." It may have been only a spirit of 58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
63
adventure that led Peter Neve to Bogazk6y, but his heart was soon captured by the site and the surrounding countryside. His first experience 'digging' was on Biiyfikkaya, the plateau across the gorge from the royal citadel Biiyiikkale, but in the following years work again concentrated on Biiyfikkale itself and the area of the Great Temple.Neve's first report, an article on the work in the Lower City, appeared in 1958,and-thanks to Kurt Bittel'spolicy of delegating the immediate publication of certain areas and topics to staff membersnumerous articles by Neve on various parts of the site quickly followed (Seeher 1993:3). In 1963,Peter Neve was appointed field director at Bogazk6y; Bittel, who continued as general director of the excavations,had become President of the German Institute of Archaeology and was-quite understandably-compelled to reduce his presence at the site. The excavations had by now moved further into the limelight. "Bogazk6y today,"Bittel commented, "is on good roads within a few hours reach of the capital of the TurkishRepublic. During the three months of the 1963 campaign alone far more than 2000 visitors have come to see the ruins." The following years saw Neve at work in various parts of the site, although primarily in the area of the Lower City and the Great Temple.In terms of its extent, the work there represented the second large-scale project of the excavations at the Hittite capital, the first having been the investigation of the Royal Citadel on Bilyfikkale during the 1930s and 1950s.A myriad of data on the temple and the surrounding structures was recovered, as well as rewarding information about life and living standards in the residential sector. The initiation of the third largescale project coincided with Peter Neve's official appointment as General Director of the Excavations in 1978.Effort was now concentrated on the Upper City of HIattuia,i.e., the 64
BiblicalArchaeologist58:2 (1995)
/ --.s
(
Delikli-
a Buyuk kaya
-00kaya
Temple I
hang
SHausam
Kizlar-
kaya
B~yjk
-
kale
"
Nisantepe
..,
Sarikale
ayo Lions Gate
Yenice-kaLe King's Gate
III Temple d-J Bogazkoy-Hattusa:progressof an excavation.Thismap showsthe state of the art at Bogazk6yHattua in the early1960s.Mapsand photographscourtesyof J. Seeher.
large 13th-century BCEextension of the capital to the south. The highlights of this project, which followed a schedule meticulously prepared in advance, included the substantial work done on Yerkapi(the huge paved earthwork supporting the city wall), the systematic exposure of the temple quarter at Agaq Denizi to the north of Yerkapi,and excavations on
and around Nigantepe. Campaigns at Bogazk6y now lasted six to seven months, often from the very first blossoms heralding the advent of spring to the first white flakes of winter. One important aspect of this rather strict program was the priority it gave to making critical findings of the excavations quickly and easily available to all scholars and students Dedicated to Peter Neve
SGate. ,N i
Gate 0
it
Lower
/
/
fo
"
4,' G
e
Sphi•x r
Upr.
cu
.Te ShnGate`3
A"
-
Sarikale
9~ir
Sphinx Gate0 Bojazkoy-Hattusa:progressof an excavation.Here,the additionsmade duringPeterNeve's directorshipare easilyrecognized:The numeroustemple buildingsin the UpperCityin the south of the site;the HittitebuildingsaroundNisantepe;the quarterof the LowerCitynorthwestof the GreatTemple;and the largefortresswall aroundBOyokkaya acrossthe gorge north of the Citadel on and of Royal Bjyokkale.Maps photographscourtesy J. Seeher.
of archaeology. Since the 1978campaign, annual preliminary reports up to fifty pages in length have appeared with photos and plans in Archiiologischer Anzeiger;reof the Kazi Sonuilan ports yearly Dedicated to Peter Neve
in Ankara presented a TurkToplantisi ish version. This is not to suggest, however, that Neve's publication has been restricted only to annual reports. He has published comprehensive articles on a variety of subjects
ranging from Hittite domestic architecture to the significance of the site in Byzantine times, not to mention his voluminous monograph on the architectural remains of Biiyiikkale throughout the ages. Neve's work in the Upper City of Hattuia has triggered a variety of new interpretations and incentives. To the four temples then known in the area, he has added twenty-six more, and it would seem that there are still others awaiting discovery. This demonstrates that Hattusa was not only the secular capital of the Hittites, but also a cult center of paramount importance. Peter Neve believes that the enlargement of the city to the south was carried out according to a master plan. He suggests that the layout there reflects not only spatial and geometric order,but a spiritual equilibrium bringing symbols of human and divine powerpalaces and temple-into a balanced relationship. To name but a few more of his recent discoveries, we can list the bronze tablet testifying to the treaty between Tudhaliya IV of Hattu'a and Kurunta of Tarhunta''a; the Niaantepe archive with its more than 3300 clay bullae;the Hittite-Hurrian bilinguae;and at the Southern Citadel, the structure known as Chamber 2 with a hieroglyphic text of Suppiluliuma II, and the Sacred Pond related to it. Each of these finds was sensational in itself, and each has served to alter our understanding of the site and its inhabitants. Preservation and restoration of the site has also been one of Neve's foremost principles. Togetherwith a well-trained group of local workmen, he restored lost walls and replaced broken stones, in some instances dismantling and reconstructing endangered structures. His technique of preserving excavated foundations by adding a few courses of stone to the original walls and then filling in the structures to the level of these uppermost courses has become a method common to many other archaeological sites. As well as preserving and BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
65
?7-,:7-7 -
?oe
?S
tvn
Ar 1~YI-?~
c~~~
71
Aerialview of Hattua-Bojazk6y. Duringa centuryof excavation,no one has playeda more productiverolethan PeterNeve.Underhis director ship,work concentratedat first in the area of the LowerCityand GreatTemple.Neve next focused on the UpperCityof Hattua, revealingits breath-takinginvestmentin sacredarchitecture.Recentdiscoverieshave includedthe stupendousbronzetablets recordingthe treaty between Neve'seffortshavetranscendedthe excavative,however;he saw to the protectionof the siteTudhaliyaIVof Hattugaand Kuruntaof Tarhuntagga. WorldHeritageListin 1987-and tended to the reforestationof hillsidesroundabout. it securedmembershipon UNESCO's
protecting the original masonry, this method permits the display of the architectural plans on the surface. Instructive for both scholar and lay visitor, the extensive restoration work at the site has drawn an ever-increasing number of tourists to Bogazk6y; by the end of the 1980s more than thirty tourist buses were visiting the site daily over the summer months. Neve has struggled relentlessly to protect the site. In order to make an archaeological park of the area, he managed to buy some 100 hectares of farmland and incorporated it into what is now a precinct under government protection. A zone extending fifty meters beyond the city walls was encircled by seemingly endless meters of fence, and a village road leading southward from Bogazkale through the ancient ruins has been rerouted outside the precinct to the west. A stone quarrying operation 66
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
near Kayali Bogaz just across the valley from the Kings' Gate had to be halted, and plans for a water reservoir in the same valley were suppressed. Finally in 1987,Hattusa was added to UNESCO's World Heritage List as one of the seven most significant sites in Turkey.Personally more satisfying to Neve himself, however, may be the Nifi Ormani(or 'Neve Forest' as the locals call it),one of his pet projects. With the blessings of the Turkishforestry department, Neve fenced in the large flat rise south of Yerkapi.His aim here was to salvage the landscape from foraging herds of animals, the goats in particular.The project quickly proved successful, and a veritable oak forest now covers the once barren slopes of grass and scrub. Standing upon the Yerkapi fortifications today,one can look out over rustling tree tops and have some impression of what large parts of
Anatolia must have been like in ancient times. As an architect, Peter Neve was not satisfied to serve Bogazk6y only by studying and preserving the Hittite, Phrygian, and Byzantine remains; he also provided a new home for the archaeological staff of the site by designing and supervising the construction of excavation house number three. Number one, Makridi and Winkler'sexcavation house, had been located on the slope above the Great Temple. During the 1930s,Bittel'steam used a complex in the depression south of Bilyiikkale (house number 2). Upon the destruction of this, the post-war team moved into the konak(mansion) of Zia Bey in the village of Bogazkale, provisional housing which is remembered by some with a smile, others with a shiver. Only in 1975was the present excavation house of Neve's ready for Dedicated to Peter Neve
occupation, located conveniently near the museum. The general plan of the house, as well as many of the details, demonstrates the awareness Neve had gained over his many years of excavation life. A most functionalbut at the same time charming and traditional-edifice was the result, well worthy of the praise it has received from both team members and visitors. As a trained carpenter,Neve himself did the woodwork of the roof. During his last season as director in 1993,Neve concentrated his efforts once more on Biiyiikkaya, the scene of his first Bogazkoy experiences. Here he exposed a huge fortress of the Hittite Empire period with three gates and at least three posterns. And now? As is to be expected, Peter Neve is continuing in his typically energetic exertions, directing his efforts toward the final publication of his work at the site. A series of monographs will treat the architectural remains of the various areas excavated, and some ten scholars under Neve's coordination are analyzing the finds, from the cuneiform texts to the small finds and pottery of the different periods. Last,but by no means least, Neve will continue as advisor to the ongoing excavations,sharing with us his wisdom, experience, and fathomless knowledge of the site. By now-Autumn of 1994-the first campaign of the 'post-Neve era' has successfully come to an end. A large part of this success is due to a permanent crew recruited by Peter Neve from the village of Bogazkale. Through 'learning by doing, these people have gained immense experience in field work and documentation of finds, as well as in the restoration of architecture and artifacts.Thus, Neve has guaranteed a continuity of qualified help for further investigations in the Hittite capital. Every archaeologist who has worked on a long-term 'dig' realizes the importance of continuity and teamwork. A team with decades of experience, such as Neve's at Bogazkoy, is not often found. This Dedicated to Peter Neve
"
may be a little-recognized achievement of Neve's, but it is one that will effect the progress of excavation at the site long after his own retirement from active site supervision. It is also an excellent example of his unpretentious and practical approach.This attitude, intrinsic to his character,is one which has gained Peter Neve many friends over the years. Acknowledgement The author wishes to acknowledge with gratitude the assistance of Jean D. Carpenter-Efe for corrections and improvements to the English text of this article.
t r?
..gt ;?1
Bibliography Bittel, K. 1955 Vorliufiger Bericht iiber die Ausgrabungen in Bogazkiy im Jahre 1954.Mitteilungender DeutscheuiOrieutgesellschaft88:1-36. 1965 Vorliufiger Bericht tiber die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen in Bogazkoy in den Jahren 1962und 1963:Einleitung. Mitteil3igender Deutscheni 95:3- 5. Orientgesellsclhaft Seeher, J. 1993 Peter Neve, Schriftenverzeichnis bis 1993,zusammengestellt von Jiirgen Seeher. IstanbulerMitteilngen 43 (Festschrift Neve).
Jiirgen Seeher was appointed successor of Peter Neve as Director of the Bogazkby/Hattu'a Excavations in 1994. Seeher received his Ph.D. from the Freie Universitit Berlin in 1983 with a dissertation on Neolithic, Chalcolithic, and Early Bronze Age pottery from Demircihilyiik. From 1984 to 1988,he worked in Egypt on the publication of the German-Egyptian excavations at predynastic Maadi near Cairo. Dr. Seeher then held a five-year position as assistant at the German Institute of Archaeology in Istanbul (1989-1993), during which time he conducted the excavation of the Bronze Age cemetery at Demircihiiytik-Sanket. He has authored articles and monographs on various topics from the Predynastic period in Egypt and neighboring regions, as well as from prehistoric Anatolia .
Subscribe
To place your subscription to Biblical Archaeologist, with VISAor MasterCard, simply call Scholar's Press at 404/727.2345! VIS4
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
67
Plants and People in Ancient Anatolia By Mark Nesbitt PRODUCTS HAVE ALWAYS
PLANT played a vital role in the Near
East: most importantly as but also as fuel, building matefood, rials, medicines, and for a host of other uses. In the past, the cultivation of crop plants was the major occupation of most of the population, which literally lived or died by its success in food production. Given the status of crop production as the major economic activity in pre-industrial societies, clearly it must form a central part of any study of ancient civilizations. Equally importantly,study of plants in the past will illuminate the daily life of the villagers who formed the great bulk of the people. Until the 1960s archaeologists showed little interest in such topics, in part reflecting the priorities of art history and text-based history in determining the objectives of excavations; in part reflecting practical difficulties in recovering and studying plant and animal remains from archaeological deposits. Major changes in archaeological thinking occurred in the late 1960s-the "New Archaeology"-with two major consequences for archaeological practice. First,there was a shift to thinking about past societies as interlinked processes--"systems"-in which all the elements were important and in which individual sites or historical events could not the studied in isolation. Secondly, the basis of how we recover and interpret the archaeological record became a topic in its own right for questioning and discussion. Agriculture and diet were seen as integral to an understanding of the past, and there was a resulting keen interest in sampling methods for 68
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
biological remains. New techniques of flotation for collecting plant remains and dryscreening for bones were developed and as an ideal, if not in practice, results were integrated with studies of soil, pollen, and landscape history. Archaeologists working on excavations in Turkeywere at the forefront of these developments in archaeological science, and my purpose in this article is to survey what has been achieved after thirty years.
Archaeobotanyin practice archaeobotanist's work falls I into three parts: in the field, in the laboratory and at the computer. In the field, the initial tasks are to build a flotation machine and to supervise the collection of samples from the excavation trenches for flotation. Sampling strategy depends both on the nature of the excavated deposits, and the research questions posed for the site. When not engaged in flotation, the archaeobotanist will be found studying the local flora and talking to villagers about their crops and wild foods. Back in the laboratory,the time-consuming task of sorting the "flots"under a stereoscopic microscope begins. Each sample contains a mixture of different types of plant remains, including seeds and
Te
Archaeobotany in Turkey,Past and Present The study of plant remainsfrom archaeologicalsites is known as archaeobotany more often in NorthAmerica,as palaeoethnobotany (the two words are or, synonyms).The materialsstudied cover a wide range:from wood, seeds, tubers, and other plant parts,to pollen and phytoliths.All these types of remainsrequirea common approach:using techniques based in the biological sciencesto identify and interpretplant remains,but addressingquestions rooted firmlyin an archaeological framework(Greig1989;Hastorfand Popper 1988;Miller1991;Nesbitt 1993a;in press a; van Zeist and Casparie1984).Originally,archaeobotanicalserviceswere often provided by botaniststo archaeologists,but today archaeobotanistsare archaeologists just as much as trench supervisorsor specialistsin ceramicsand are usuallyworking in archaeologyor anthropology departments. The earliest reportson plant remainsfrom Turkey(indeed, one of the earliest anywhere)were publishedin the 1880sby the Berlinbotanist L.Wittmack(1880, 1890, 1896) on crop seeds from HeinrichSchliemann'sexcavationsat Troyand the Koertes' work at B6zh6yOk.Thispioneering effort did not resultin any continuing interest, and few plant remainswere collected until the 1950s,when the dynamicDanisharchaeobotanist, HansHelbaek,began working on Near Easternsites. A streamof reportsfollowed, on sites of every period, which establishedthe frameworkon which all future work has been based. InTurkey,Helbaekworked with JamesMellaartat and Hac lar (Helbaek 1961;1964;1970),and with the BraidBeycesultan,CatalHOyCik, woods on the Amuq plain (Helbaek1960).In the late 1960s,Willemvan Zeistfrom the Netherlandsand GordonHillmanfrom Englandbegan working in Turkey(Hillman 1972;1978;van Zeist 1979/80;van Zeistand Bakker-Heeres1975;1982;van Zeistand Buitenhuis1983).Although interest in archaeobotanyhas been strong since the 1960s, a shortage of trained staff was a majorfactor in limitingthe numberof excavationsat which large-scalesamplingwas carriedout. Eventoday,as archaeobotanybecomes better integrated into universitycoursesin archaeology,fewer than twenty archaeobotanistswork in the Near Eastas a whole.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
The Raw Materialsof Archaeobotany 1
,eC,i ~?. -~SC'??YB'? ?1;.~L .i ~''.."' ,? ?i~ ?ce ?, 'Ii"
I rr 'Z.
JI
Ash heap outside a current-dayhouse near LakeVan,easternTurkey. Suchmiddensare often found outside excavatedhouses.Resulting fromthe accumulationof dumpingashes,bones, and brokenpots over manyyears,these are a valuablearchaeologicalresource.All photographsby MarkNesbittexcept as noted. Plantremainsfall into two classes.Macroremainsare large enough to be visibleto the naked eye and include seeds and wood remains.Microremainsmust be viewed with a microscopeand include pollen and phytoliths.The two classes enter the archaeological record in quite different ways and are sampled and interpreted differently.
this in turn will affect samplingstrategies. In burnt destruction levels the contents of pots, silos, and other stores will be burnt in situ often well preservedby an overburdenof fallen roof material.These primarydeposits will be easilyfound in excavationof the debris resultingfrom the fire, and samplingsimplyinvolvesrecordingtheir location and bagging the seeds. Householdrefuse is more complicated. As every household had at least one fireplace,the center for all cooking and heating activities,very large amounts of plant remains became charredand were incorporatedinto the archaeological record.Although ovens and hearths usuallydo contain some ashes, they were often cleaned out and their contents deposited elsewhere-in pits, in alleyways,or on the edge of settlements. As middens accumulated,ashes and other refuse became mixed with soil and decayed mudbrick.When excavated,this type of deposit often gives the misleadingimpressionof sterile earth which does not contain plant remains.Here,flotation is essentialto release charredplant remainsfrom the soil matrix.Priorto the development of flotation techniques in the 1960s,it was often thought that plant remainsdid not surviveexcept in destruction levels. A wide range of plant materialscan be preservedby charring, includingseeds, chaff, tubers, straw,and wood.
Microremains Macroremains Intruly arid areas,such as the Egyptiandesert, plant remainswill often surviveintact in archaeologicaldeposits. However,in most of the Near East,includingTurkey,winters are wet, and any plant materialswill soon be consumed by animalsor fall victimto rot. Tosurvive, botanical remainsmust be in a biologicallyinert form that is not susceptibleto decay.Charringis one of the most important routes to preservation.Seeds, wood, or other plant partsthat come into contact with fire will often burnto ash, but much will not burn completely and ends up charred-black, but retainingmuch of its originaldimensionsand appearance.Although largelycomposed of carbon, other organic materialdoes survivewithin, and lipidsand DNAhave both been successfullyextractedfrom charredseeds (Brown,Allabyand Brown 1994;Brownet al 1993;Hillmanet al 1993; McLaren,Evansand Hillman1991).Residuesof food and other organic substancescan also be charred,and chemicalanalysisshows promisefor identifyingthese (Heronand Evershed1993;Millsand White 1989). Contactwith fire can occur in two ways:when houses burn down (a relativelycommon event in prehistory),or through the everydaydisposal of household refuse into hearths and ovens, and the eventual disposal of their cindersinto middens and pits-the garbage cans of antiquity.Obviously,there is a big difference in the type of samplesthat will be preservedby each of these routes, and Dedicated to Peter Neve
Pollengrainsare tiny spores that fertilizethe female part of the flower and are often distributedby wind or insects.The outer coat or exine of pollen is resistantto decay in anaerobicconditions such as in lake beds and bogs. Differencein the appearanceof pollen grainsallows their identification,usuallyto familyor genus level. By examiningthe changing proportionsof different pollen grainsin cores from lake beds, changes in vegetation through time can be identified. Pollenanalysisis an importanttool for looking at vegetaand Kra1993;Bintliffand van tion on a regional scale (Bar-Yosef Zeist 1982;van Zeistand Bottema 1991).Pollengrainssurvivepoorly in typical archaeologicaldeposits in the Near Eastand are therefore not usuallysampled from archaeologicalcontexts (Bottema 1975). Phytolithsare silica bodies that form within certain plant cells. After plants die and decay,phytolithsare deposited in archaeological soils, from which they can be extracted in the laboratory.Phytolith analysisis a young field, but first resultssuggest this will be a useful tool once identificationtechniques are furtherdeveloped (Mulholland,Rappand Gifford1982;Rappand Mulholland1992; Rosen 1987;1989;1991).Possibleuses of phytolithanalysisinclude the identificationof plants under-representedin charredplant remains and, in conjunctionwith studies of soil micromorphology,studying the detailed historiesof archaeologicaldeposits (Matthews and Postgate 1994).
BiblicalArchaeologist58:2 (1995)
69
The flotation revolution Flotationworks on a simple principle:soil particlessink,charredplant remainsfloat. The idea of immersingarchaeological soil in water and floating off the plant remainsinto a sieve was pioneered in the mid-1960sin NorthAmericaand by HansHelbaek(1969)at Ali Koshin Iran. Howeverthis flotation was carriedout ' ?. --?4 on a small-scalewith buckets,and had a limited impacton the quantityof plant remainsrecovered.Inthe late 1960sthe flotation machinewas devised, by which large quantitiesof soil-up to Flotationat Asvan Kale,easternTurkeyin 1000 liters-can be processed each day. the early1970s.One of the firstflotation Originallya cumbersomedevice that machines,its bulkydesign has been replaced requiredseveraloperators (French1971), a versionof this based on a 40-gallon oil by morecompactflotation tanksthat can drum (ubiquitousin the Near East)is easilybe operated by one or two people. Photo courtesyof GordonHillman. now widely used (Nesbitt n.d. b; Williams1973). Water is pumped through a valve halfway down the tank. Once the tank is full of water, soil from an archaeological deposit is poured gently into the tank. As the lumps of soil disaggregate, silt drops to the bottom of the tank and plant remainsfloat to the top and are carried by the water flow through a spout and into 1 mm and 0.3 mm sieves. The flot from each sample is wrapped in cloth and gently dried in the shade before bagging up for future study.A 1 millimeterplastic mesh (widely sold in Turkey as mosquito screen) lines the top half of the tank, and catches heavy items as they sink. Thisheavy residue will contain a range of bones and artifactsand offers an excellent check on their recoveryfrom the site. At early or coastal sites the ability of the flotation machine to recovertiny bones from fish and wild animalsand small artifacts such as microlithsand beads is just as important as its role in collecting plant remains.The contents of the heavy residue are also a good indicator as to whether any of the plant remainsare sinking- a particularproblem with dense seeds such as nuts and pulses. The large capacity of the flotation machine means that a wide range of deposits can be sampled without slowing down excavation.It is important that enough soil is processed from a deposit, as the density of plant remainsis often low. .. Soil volumes for a sample might range from 50 litersat a typical Bronzeor Iron Age settlement mound to 500 or 1000 liters at a Palaeolithicor Neolithic site, where seed densities are much lower. The 't a key ability of the flotation machine is that it achieves a good yield of materialfrom virtuallyall sites. Furthermore,it is cheap Charredseeds and charcoalflow out of (about $200 for the machine) and flexible. If water is in short supply,a recyclingtank the flotation tank into two sieves.Disagof soil in can be used. If electricity is not available,a water gregation archaeological ensuresthat as littleas possibleof the petrol pump can be used. Any blacksmith is charred material can build a flotation machine, and they are damaged fragile the during recoveryprocess. long-lasting.
*I*.iEIum
70
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
charcoal, and these must be separated into categories and identified. Identification works on the simple principle of comparing ancient, unknown seeds to modern, known seeds collected from carefully classified modern plants. The "seed reference collection," often numbering several thousand specimens, is the core of an archaeobotanical laboratory. Once the seeds have been named, counted, and the results entered onto a computer scoresheet, interpretation can finally begin. It is this step, when we move from the "laundry list" of names and numbers to what they mean about human behaviour in the past, that is the most exciting and most challenging part of our work. What mean these seeds?
of plantremains Interpretation
from a burnt destruction level is relatively straightforward.Such deposits often come from crops cleaned for storage: for example, a silo of wheat grains or a jar of lentils (Jones et al. 1986).Interpretation hinges on accurate recording of each deposit, sometimes a tricky procedure in the tangle of ashes and collapsed roofs typical of a burnt level. For example, a single room burnt at Sardis by invading Persians in the mid-sixth century BCEwas found to contain seven deposits of barley,two of bread wheat, one of chickpeas, and one of lentils. In some cases the seeds were found in their original jar,but most were probably stored in sacks which have not survived burning, leaving heaps of seeds on the floor.A group of garlic cloves was found at the base of a wall; it may have fallen from a hanging shelf. Overall the finds suggest a diet in which barley was most important, and a relatively small number of crops formed the staple foods. However such a deposit is only a snapshot of what was found in one room on one day. In contrast, flotation samples from hearths, middens, pits, and other such contexts offer a much broader picture Dedicated to Peter Neve
Ethnoarchaeology How do we bridge the gap between .%A. identifying seed assemblages from ar: and what chaeological samples deciding these mean in terms of human behavior? Archaeobotanists are fortunate in being able to visit villages where traditional farming is still practiced, and where we tM can directly observe agriculturalactivities IV -i-1x?rr and their resulting effects on the material world. It is the focus on material culture *C'~VTt. L: that separates ethnoarchaeology from social anthropology: we cannot interview our prehistoric subjects, and we must therefore enable their material remains to speak for them (Jones 1983). In the early 1970sGordon Hillman spent four excavation seasons at the village of Aqvan in southeast Turkey,destined to be submerged by the Keban Currentday farmersare a valuablesourceof information.Thesevillagersin the Ponticmountains dam in 1974.By observing farming activihaveexcellentrecallof agricultural practicesfromthe daysbeforetractorsand chemicalfertilizers. ties, collecting samples of crops during processing, and talking to villagers, he was able to show that the composition of seed assemblages was r U~c a of the that farmers had undertaken ?e ; iv (Hilldiagnostic processing r' v ~Yfa~,~ ii~i :,;;Ck man 1973; 1981; 1984a; 1984b; 1985). These processes are comkVL :? btr i:j ?, `"\? a,: r .. u\l? r +? ?: 'Z r: plex, ranging from husbandry activities such as irrigation and ( ,? ~~? -?:? ~ ?.S:-~'?-L'"' of to the which the ?? Zc, '`'' sequence crop processing by weeding, ?? -3; ~ ... .?, c I r)L t~~~~b,?r-plants growing in the field are harvested and prepared for r.~?:?~'?sir. The for cereals such wheat nro as ?? cooking. crop-processing sequence .r r . ?. and barley is a multi-phase process, involving threshing to break ~2s~ f~`\?L'~ 'Z ?? .r <. r, _~C1C~ .-~-L I Zi ? X up the ears, winnowing, and a series of sievings. Each of these r. Y r. " 1C' a distinctive waste as steps generates by-product assemblage well as the main crop component destined to pass to the next I ;e of ??\Z r phase processing. A failure to appreciate the effects of crop-processing can ?. lead to major misinterpretations. A simple example is the pres~?~,~;??_??' i r` .?' ,.....,.,,,._~_. ._.......,, ence of weed seeds in a sample. Processing of a single sheaf of wheat would result in a final end-product--clean wheat in progress.A seten is used to removethe branfrom grains-but also by-products composed of light weed seeds and Bulgur-making chaff from winnowing; large, heavy weed seeds and chaff from boiled wheat grains.The pressureof the verticalmillstoneon moistened graincausesthe branto slide off. We stillknow all too little about sieving with a large mesh; and small weed seeds and chaff from fine sieving. It would be a mistake to interpret the lack of weed food preparationin antiquity.As food rarelyentersthe archaeological seeds in the end-product as meaning the original crop had no record,we mustrelyon interpretingfood-relatedartifacts. weed infestation, while it would also be wrong to regard the mixture of weed seeds and chaff in a sieving by-product to be with implications for how we interpret changes in agricultural typical of ancient diet. Archaeobotanists are using the ethnoarchaeological results practices in the archaeological record. Wild plants are still an from Hillman'swork and that of later projects in Greece and appreciated food supplement, and their use can give insights into the diet of pre-agrarian hunter-gatherers, as well as farmers' elsewhere, combined with statistical techniques, to establish the nature of each of their samples before tackling wider questions use of gathered plants as supplemental foods. of interpretation. Ethnoarchaeology has been used to look at Rurallife is changing fast in the Near East, and there is an other aspects of daily life such as the use of stone grinding tools urgent need for more ethnoarchaeological work while tradiand the functions of different types of ovens. Decision-making tional crops and techniques are still in use. in traditional agriculture is another important line of enquiry, f
Dedicated to Peter Neve
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
71
of plant use. This is because the ashes in these deposits usually accumulated from a number of activities. Sardis is a good example of how flotation samples from redeposited seed assemblages can give different but complementary results to seeds from burnt levels. Flotation of a series of unburnt floor levels adjacent to the burnt level showed that barley was present in all the samples, while bread wheat was present in sixty percent of samples. Compared to the burnt level, these results confirm the importance of barley but suggest bread wheat was under-represented in the burnt room. A further five crops were found in the flotation samples that were absent from the burnt level: millet, grass pea, bitter vetch, grape, almond, and flax. Additionally, weed seeds and chaff were present-highly informative classes of plant remains totally lacking from the cleaned storage samples. It is significant that garlic was not found in the flotation samples-herbs and spices rarely enter the archaeological record because they are used in small, carefully husbanded quantities. Such plant products most often found in burnt levels and other exceptional contexts, such as shipwrecks (Haldane 1990;1991;1993). Unlike a potsherd or coin, plant remains carry no obvious indication of their age and must be dated using evidence from careful stratigraphic excavation.The recent development of Accelerator Radiocarbon-Dating has allowed individual seeds weighing a hundredth of a gram to be radiocarbon dated-a valuable check, especially with contentious early material (Harris 1986). The origins of agriculture
One of the great successes
of
archaeobotany has been unravelling the early history of farming. The development of agriculture is a critical turning point in the development of human society (Harlan 1995;Harris and Hillman 72
BiblicalArchaeologist58:2 (1995)
is:?
::Rel
Is
t:.
I-: :
-UPI'
Thesesolidarchitectural Excavationof a typicalroundhouse at Hallan(emi, southeastTurkey. remains,combinedwith a richmaterialcultureand biologicalevidence,pointto year-round villagesby foragerseating a wide rangeof wild plantsand occupationof these pre-agrarian animals.
1989).After the origin of agriculture, there is a rapid increase in population and spread of farming villages, and later on agriculture underpins the development of the first literate civilizations in the early cities of Mesopotamia. Yet,until recently,there was little hard evidence which could be used to explain this remarkable human invention. Plant remains or bones had hardly been collected from pre-agrarian or early agricultural sites. Interdisciplinary,integrated research projects have been essential in understanding the dynamics of early agriculture and the preceding hunter-gatherer cultures. Botanists have demonstrated that the wild ancestors of crop plants such as wheat, barley, lentils, and chickpeas grow only in the Near East, showing that they must have been taken into domestication in this region (Zohary and Hopf 1993).Excavators, using radiocarbon dating, have shown that the earliest Neolithic villages-settlements based on farming--occur in the Near East, at about 10,000years ago. As one moves
away from the Near East, the earliest farming settlements are later in date-consistent with the spread of farming from its central area of origin. Archaeobotanists have shown that Near Eastern sites dating more recently than 10,000years ago have domesticated crops, while earlier sites only have remains of gathered, wild plants (Miller 1992;van Zeist 1980).
-
--`-. ?-;??--: r-;"-';"??-~~-~?( :,:~;??'C ~~rr ???:r .::??-~.n ?:I
c,-~-~X :h'-.t:"?:: ? 'P? I.~ .~??`:' :PI 'i( :~~~biit?.Cjtl?~Jr~.?; J,' v? -;?
Fieldsof wild cerealsin oak woodland,near Thesedense HazarLakein southeastTurkey. standsof wild einkorn,wild emmer,and wild barleymay resemblethe landscapeexploited priorto the beginningof by hunter-gatherers agriculture10,000yearsago. Dedicated to Peter Neve
4 30oo
?
O ,7
S
Dere
Abu Hureyra A Wild 0
Einkorn
3
0 Ali
Jericho
Emmer 3Wild
Kosh
J
0
200 mi
Earlysites and the distributionof selected wild ancestorsof crops.Squaresindicatepre-agrarian sites;circlesindicateearlyfarmingvillages.The arcof low mountainsthat stretchesfromthe Levant,throughsouthernTurkeyand northernSyriato Iranis richin the wild ancestorsof crops, and the originsof agriculturecertainlylie in this area.
In outline the picture is reasonably clear.In the upper Palaeolithic humans gathered the wild plants and hunted the wild animals of their environment. At a site in oak forest, such as Hallan (emi on a tributary of the Tigris in southeast Turkey,the diet included wild almonds and Pistacia nuts, wild pulses, and the seeds of riverside plants such as club-rushes (Scirpusmaritimus)and knotweed A thick layer of charred (Polygonum). a fruits of tumbleweed (Gundelia was also found, perhaps tournefortii) the remains of an unsuccessful attempt at extracting the oily fatty seeds (Rosenberg and Davis 1992; Rosenberg, Nesbitt, and Redding in press). At sites such as Abu Hureyra and M'lefaat farther to the south, in the steppe woodland of northern Syria and Iraq,fewer forest plants were used (Hillman, Colledge, and Harris 1989).Large quantities of wild cereals, wild pulses, and terebinth nuts (Pistacia)were collected, as well as an extremely diverse range of other plants-at Abu Hureyra from about 130 different species. Some of these hunter-gatherer villages contained well-built houses and were probably Dedicated to Peter Neve
occupied year round. About 10,000years ago, somewhere within the "fertilecrescent" that is so rich in these wild ancestors of crops, foragersbegan to collect and sow the seeds of wild plants they had previously simply gathered. During harvesting the first farmers unconsciously imposed selection pressures on wild plants that led to domestication. Most importantly, crops lost their ability to disperse their seed without human intervention. Cereal ears, for example, remained intact at maturity rather than shattering and scattering the seeds. The advantage of such changes to farmers is obvious-seeds stay on the ear during harvesting, rather than falling to the ground (Hillman and Davies 1990;1992). It is still unclear exactly where in the Near East the first steps to agriculture were taken. Some of the wild ancestors of the "founder package" of crops that appears at most Neolithic sites grow all over the hilly flanks of the "fertile crescent;" some are more restricted. Wild barley,lentils, and peas are widespread all over the fertile crescent. Wild emmer wheat
grows widely but is much more abundant in the Levant; wild einkorn wheat mainly grows in southern Turkeyand adjacent areas; chickpea is restricted to a narrow region of southeast Turkey.Most likely,we will never know exactly where or over how wide an area of the Near East agriculture originated, as farming techniques probably spread very quickly, and crops would have been domesticated in different areas, quickly merging to form a founder "package"of Neolithic crops. It is also likely that the distribution of wild ancestors has changed with time. However, in view of the evidence for early settlement and its wealth of wild ancestors of crop plants, it is likely that Turkeyplayed a crucial role in the origins of agriculture. Why hunter-gatherers began farming is a topic of hot debate. In the 2000 years before farming began, global environmental changes occurred as the ice age came to an end. Pollen diagrams show that a wetter and warmer climate in the Near East led to the spread of forest into the steppic interior of Anatolia and other large land masses (van Zeist and Bottema 1991).It seems likely that these changes caused instability in existing hunter-gatherer life, perhaps leading to increased population, and that increased demand for food led to the first experiments in agriculture. A major barrier to a better understanding of this period is the paucity of known early sites. These are often low mounds that are difficult to locate by archaeological surveys. At present only two such sites from the period immediately preceding the Neolithic have been excavated in the interior of Anatolia: Pinarbagl and Hallan (emi. The situation is similar for the earliest Neolithic: a few more sites are known, but plant remains have been published from only one early farming village, (Caydnti, dating between 7500-6000 BCE (van Zeist and de Roller 1991/1992). Further advances in studying agricultural origins will hinge on finding more early sites and on ensuring that BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
73
Iv.s.z. excavators undertake the full recovery of plant and animal remains.
Vs;
Changingcrops, changing cultures
How
the shouldwe interpret
waning and waxing fortunes of different crop species? Even on the broad scale of Turkeyas a whole, major changes through time are apparent (Hubbard 1980).Are these simply chance variations, or can we relate these changes to wider economic patterns? Observation of farmers' decision making, whether in a Near Eastern village or on the North American prairies, shows that decisions on what is grown and how it is grown are directly linked to market forces-whether these are responses to consumers, or imposed by central government. Choice of crops is not a matter of chance, and it would not have been in the past. But how can we apply this insight to archaeological plant remains? Einkorn wheat and emmer wheat make a good case study. These archaic cereals are distinct from most other wheats in having seeds enclosed by a tough husk, the glumes (Charles 1984;Harlan 1967;Samuel 1989;1993).This characteristicmeans that vigorous pounding is required to release the seeds, but it also protects them from pest damage while in storage.Emmer and einkom were among the Neolithic founder species, appearing at the earliest farming sites, and spreading west as far as the British Isles and east to India and beyond. Today these wheats are on the verge of extinction, their cultivation restricted to remote mountainous areas scattered across Europe, southwest Asia, India, and Ethiopia. Archaeobotanical evidence from Turkishsites shows that up to about 3000 BCEthey are grown alongside other cereals such as macaroni and bread wheats and barley.However, at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age, about 3000 BCE,both emmer and einkom wheat abruptly disappear from the archaeological record in southeast Turkey,never to reappear 74
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
Wildpea. A wide rangeof wild pulsesare found at pre-agrarian sites,only a few of whichwere domesticated.The beginningof agriculturesaw a narrowingof the food base from a hundred or morewild speciesto lessthan ten crops.Photocourtesyof Ann Butler.
(van Zeist and Bakker-Heeres 1975; author's unpublished data from Aqvan).
Whydid thishappen? Fortunatelyemmer and einkomrn still grow in a few villages in the lush Pontic mountains of northern Turkey. I was able to travel to the Pontic mountains with Dr. Delwen Samuel, a specialist in the history and use of emmer wheat from Cambridge University, and to talk to farmers with first-hand knowledge of these archaic crops. We found that emmer and einkorn are still grown because they are uniquely resistant to fungal diseases such as stem rust that flourish in the wet, warm summers of the Pontic mountains. Emmer and einkorn are also prized because of their high quality as chicken feed and, for human food, as bulgur, a popular cracked wheat food. However today their area of cultivation is in steep decline, often restricted to one field in a village. Are there any parallels between this steep decline now and that of the Early Bronze Age? Farmers told us that there were two main reasons why cultivation of bread wheat was increasing at the expense of emmer and einkom. Firstly,government subsidized fertilizers were available and bread wheat responded better to these. Secondly, grain merchants would buy bread wheat, but were not
interested in minority crops such as emmer and einkorn. Thus, even though bread wheat is susceptible to disease and fared poorly in their fields, it was better integrated into the modem cash economy. Returning to the Early Bronze Age, in southeast Turkeythis period is characterized by a large increase in settlement density and a shift from a landscape of small villages to a more hierarchical system with villages centered on large towns (Whallon 1979).A plausible hypothesis is that increasing demand from a larger, more urban population encouraged farmers to shift production to crops that responded better to increased manuring and which were easier to process once harvested, such as bread wheat and macaroni wheat. Ways of testing this idea are currently being explored, including experimental cultivation of different wheats under different manuring conditions, analysis of weed seeds as indicators of changed husbandry practices, and a search for parallel evidence of intensification in animal husbandry. Similar large scale changes in settlement patterns and economies over the Near East as a whole may account for the sudden appearance of fruits such as grape and fig as perennial crops at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age (Rivera Nunez and Walker 1989;Runnels and Hansen Dedicated to Peter Neve
BOTANICAL NAMES CEREALS
Einkornwheat Emmerwheat
Triticum monococcum Triticum dicoccum
Macaroni wheat Bread wheat Hulled barley
Triticumdurum Triticumaestivum Hordeum distichum/vulgare
Naked barley Rye Oats Millets Rice
H. vulgarevar.nudum Secale cereale Avenasativa Panicummiliaceum/Setaria italica Oryzasativa
? --?
PULSES Lentil Pea Chickpea
Lens culinaris Pisum sativum Cicer arietinum
Bittervetch Grasspea Commonvetch
Viciaervilia Lathyrussativus Viciasativa
CROPS OILANDFIBER Linum usitatissimum
Flax
Hemp Cotton Poppy Sesame
-, ?I ? I
FRUITAND VEGETABLES Olive
?
Olea europaea Vitis vinifera Ficus carica
Grape Fig
Pistachio Apple Cherry Watermelon Melon Garlic Onion
I ? I
8
6
Yearsin thousands
4
Cannabissativa Gossypiumarboreum/herbaceum Papaversomniferum Sesamumindicum
2
2
0
BCE
Pistaciavera Maluspumila Prunusaviumlcerasus Citrulluslanatus Cucumismelo Alliumsativum Alliumcepa
CE
Thicklinesindicateperiodsof widespreadcultivation;thin linesrepresentcultivationlimitedto smallareas. Timechartof majorcropsin Turkey. indicate marks Question likelyperiodsof introduction.It is likelythat cultivationof some cropsbegan in the Classicalor Byzantineperiods,but this cannot be documentedowing to lackof archaeobotanicaldata for these periods.
1986;Stager 1985).For later periods, the sporadic recovery of archaeobotanical material means that patterns are less clear cut. However we have enough data to hint at major changes in agrarian practice: the introduction of summer season crops such as millets in the Iron Age (Nesbitt and Summers 1988);the possible arrival of fruits from further east such as cherry and peach in the classical period; the still unresolved question Dedicated to Peter Neve
of whether such major crops as cotton, rice, and opium poppy were cultivated in Anatolia prior to the Islamic period (Canard 1959;Faroqhi 1979;Watson 1983),and the postColumbian diffusion of Mesoamerican crops (Andrews 1993).Linking changes in crop species and crop husbandry techniques to the major long-term changes in settlement patterns that can be identified by detailed archaeological surveys (e.g.
Whallon 1979;Wilkinson 1988) is a major opportunity and challenge for archaeobotany. The great range of topography in Anatolia makes for wide diversity in farming systems, ranging from the classic Mediterranean olive and vine cultivation of the coast, to the wheat and barley fields growing high on the Anatolian plateau (Erin? and Tun?dilek 1952).Much of our archaeobotanical evidence comes from central BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
75
and eastern Turkeybecause that is where most prehistoric excavations have been carried out. As we learn more about ancient farming in western Turkey,with its Aegean contacts, and in regions at lower altitudes, the more diversity in ancient agriculture we can expect to find. Similar changes have occurred in dietary preferences.Barley is overall the most common cereal in archaeobotanical deposits from Turkey.Today, we think of barley as an animal feed or for malt (Sams 1977),but there is good archaeological evidence for its role as human food. At Sardis and Gordion, pots of barley husks were found amongst the ashes of catastrophicallyburnt rooms dating to the mid-first millennium BCE. These are the by-product of making pearl barley by stripping off the grain'ssilicaceous, inedible husks. This tedious dehusking is not necessary for animal feed and must represent preparation of barley for human food. Allied with evidence from classical texts for the importance of barley as a human food, it is likely that ancient barley remains represent human food just as much as ancient wheat.
--
i::-
:i
:
:
i:
i-
::~:-:: :: .-:. f
i l-:
-
r
i
~i?
..........
ii
i-:i- i ~i
-i '
''
i -! i i --iiii i ai :ii ii:i~-i~i-i:i-:: --is:. i
i
:;.:.::_ i: I: i Y.i. SWNm i!•_:iiii iii iii iiii :ii :i-ii !•• iii!•!iiii iii i-iiiii:iiiii •!iiiii ciiiiii!!!i
i-i-i-...........i-~
A PonticMountainvillage,near Kastamonu.A typicallandscapeof northernTurkey, with village housesconstructedof wood. Emmerand einkornwheats are grown here on an ever decreasing scale.
Barley is sporadically noted as a food in Turkeyin the present, but it is unclear when it ceased to be an important food for humans. The pulse group offers two further cases: bitter vetch and grass pea. Both are widely grown today in Turkeyas fodder
crops and, as their seeds contain toxins, they are not obvious human foods. Nonetheless, both are abundant in archaeobotanical samples from the Neolithic period onwards and have been found in kitchen contexts. It is highly likely that both were used for food. Provided they are adequately cooked and eaten as part of a mixed diet, both make good foodstuffs (van Zeist 1988).Clearly we must be careful not to project modem ideas of foodstuffs into the past in an uncritical manner. Fuel
Fuel
and for poppy Opiumpoppy.Stillwidelygrown for morphinearoundAfyon,in westernTurkey, seeds all overTurkey. It is stillunclearwhetherthis crop plantwas grown in Turkeybeforethe Medievalperiod,although it is commonin the Aegean LateBronzeAge. 76
BiblicalArchaeologist58:2 (1995)
is an essential commodity for cooking and for heat during the long winter of the Anatolian plateau. Given the role of fire in preserving plant remains, it is not surprising that fuel remains make up a large part of most archaeobotanical samples. A wide range of plant products is still used as fuel in villages today.Where wood is available it is, naturally,the favored fuel (Horne 1982).Strict laws protect Turkey's forests, but brushwood can still be collected, and large areas of eastern Turkeyare covered by enerjiorman Dedicated to Peter Neve
'oo
14,N~`
I
?L
;I~rpr~p~~
i~~~~~ g F[l~~~~r:CC~~ ~3~Y~I~U~~ ,L~7L7IN
F4 ?)
't o 4?
.? ?
~c
."eZ-V
Vit
PO
77"BL~.-1 7~
dI?
to
-,A
-7 s
44
qr'p.
Pilesof dung cakes,on the shoresof LakeVanin easternTurkeyTheselargestacksare an essentialstoreof fuel for the winter.Archaeobotanical samplesfrom excavationnearthe villageshow that dung was in use here in the EarlyBronzeAge-an indicatorof deforestation.
("energy forest"),woodland of oaks coppiced for fuel. Small bushes and other woody plants, such as the tragacanth (Astragalus)in the Taurus mountains, are also collected. However, in large areas of Turkey cutting and grazing have led to extensive deforestation, particularly in areas such as the central Anatolian plateau, where climatic conditions are rigorous (McNeill 1992;Willcox 1974; 1992).In these areas animal dung (Turkish:tezek)is an important source of fuel. Dung of domestic animals is collected from stables and fields and buried in pits for several months. Over this time the dung becomes dry and odorless. When it is dug up, it is mixed with water and straw and molded into cakes that can be stacked up for use through the winter months. Dung cakes burn well and cleanly and are a favored fuel. Today,the use of dung as fuel correlates closely with lack of woodland, and the presence of dung in archaeobotanical samples is therefore a useful indicator of ancient deforDedicated to Peter Neve
estation (Miller 1984;1985;1990; Miller and Smart 1984).Identification of dung in ancient samples is also important because seeds of grazed plants pass through the animal, end up in the dung and enter the archaeological record as charred seeds. This can contribute a significant number of seeds to archaeobotanical samples and results in a very different seed assemblage from that which is derived from crops and crop-cleaning. Archaeology and texts: the case of
HittiteZIZ
ere is a tendency for archaeologists working in historical periLods, for which texts survive, to assume that the written sources already contain all the information they need. This has led to a real neglect of archaeobotanical or zooarchaeological recovery from sites in the Late Bronze Age onwards. Unfortunately, not only do the documents rarely contain the type of information we need for understanding the dy-
namics of farming economies, but translation of terms for crops is highly problematic. For example, in the Hittite period many tens of thousands of tablets have been excavated at Bogazk6y, the Hittite capital. Almost all of these deal with diplomacy, law, religion, or myth. Even if we had perfect understanding of these texts, they would offer us virtually no quantitative information on Hittite agriculture. In any case, translation of the Hittite crop terms has proved almost impossible. Philologists have, however, assumed that Sumerian words used as shorthand by Hittite scribes bore the same meaning as in Mesopotamia. One of the most frequently used term for a crop is ZIZ, generally translated as emmer wheat in its original Mesopotamian context and assumed to mean the same in the Hittite texts (Gurney 1990;MacQueen 1986).Some years ago Hoffner (1974: 68-69) suggested that archaeobotanical data for the decline of emmer BiblicalArchaeologist58:2 (1995)
77
wheat before the Late Bronze Age meant that ZIZ must either refer to bread wheat or be a general term for wheat. Recent archaeobotanical analysis of samples from Kaman Kaleh6ytik, a Hittite town, confirms that emmer is present only in tiny amounts. Bread wheat is by far the most common wheat, supporting Hoffner's identification (Nesbitt 1993b). While the Hittite texts do contain some interesting data on crop plants and agricultural techniques, they are best used in combination with archaeobotanical data. Exactly the same point applies to the Classical and Medieval periods (Humphreys 1991:284-308;Sallares 1991;Watson 1983).It is certain that new crops entered Turkeyand major agricultural changes occurred, yet these are poorly documented in the historical texts. Only with the inception of the TurkishRepublic in 1924can documentary sources and ethnography be said to replace archaeobotanical data. Conclusions
researchin Archaeobotanical Turkeyand the rest of the Near East is at an early stage. The small but ever increasing number of scholars in the field is still working on basic techniques of seed identification and questions of interpretation; few major assemblages of seeds have been recovered and even fewer published. Large-scale recovery programs for plant and animal remains are taking place at a mere seven or eight of the dozens of current excavations in Turkey. The early stages in the development of a discipline are an exciting time; every fresh bag of plant remains from an excavation is likely to hold important new finds. I have tried to show how archaeobotany can illuminate every period of the human past; whether in prehistory,at the dawn of agriculture, or during the literate civilizations since the development of writing. Successful archaeobotanical analyses depend on a 78
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
The large-scaleof the famous "cellvillagein southeastTurkey. (ay6nji, an earlyagricultural is a of much indicator plan"buildings good higherproductivityof agriculturecomparedto Photo of Gordon Hillman. courtesy foraging.
wide range of techniques: making decisions about sampling in the field; understanding the modem flora; identifying seeds under the microscope; and carrying out ethnographic work with current day farmers. Most of all, the future of archaeobotany hinges on the use of its ability to address major archaeological questions, as one of a range of techniques on a modern, integrated project. Bibliography Andrews, J. 1993 Diffusion of Mesoamerican Food Complex to Southeastern Europe. Review83:194-204. Geographical Bar-Yosef,0. and Kra, R. S., eds. 1993 LateQuaternaryChronologyand Paleoclimatesof theEasternMediterranean. Tucson, AZ: Radiocarbon. Bintliff,J. L. and van Zeist, W, eds. and Palaeoenvironments 1982 Palaeoclimates, in theEastern HumanCommunities Mediterranean Regionin LaterPrehistory. BAR International Series 133.Oxford: British Archaeology Reports. Bottema, S. 1975 The Interpretation of Pollen Spectra from Prehistoric Settlements (with Special Attention to Liguliflorae). Palaeohistoria 17:17-35.
Brown, T A., Allaby, R. G., and Brown, K. A. 1994 DNA in Wheat Seeds from European Archaeological Sites. Pp. 37-45 in Conservationof Plant GenesII: Utilization of Ancientand ModernDNA. Edited by R. P Adams, J. S. Miller, E. M. Golenberg, and J. E. Adams. Monographs in Systematic Botany 48. St. Louis, MO: Missouri Botanical Garden. Brown, T.A., Allaby, R. G, Brown, K. A., and Jones, M. K. 1993 Biomolecular Archaeology of Wheat: Past, Present and Future. WorldArchaeology25:64-73. Canard, M. 1959 Le riz dans le proche orient aux premiers si&clesde l'Islam. Arabica 6:113-131. Charles, M. P. 1984 Introductory Remarks on the Cereals. Bulletinon SumerianAgriculture1:17-31. Ering, S. and Tunqdilek,N. 1952 The Agricultural Regions of Turkey. Review42:179-203. Geographical Faroqhi, S. 1979 Notes on the Production of Cotton and Cotton Cloths in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Anatolia. Journal of EuropeanEconomicHistory8:405-417 French, D. H. 1971 An Experiment in Water Sieving. AnatolianStudies21:59-64.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
300
420
ie
*
City eMajor
e a.Archaeological Istanbu•.•
•
Kaim ~~~Kastamonu. -
...
!:
C3Aelip,
...................." ...... ..... ........ ......y u .......Ido Bozh6yuk Gordion.
Troy...
:••
Mor ta"
Mamarapontic An
-i
i
/a
?Afyon Beycesultan
Aras
v.•Y __ If
...-....
r / -- .. ...... .. ...... .. ...i * ",.40......... .. . -
--
40 ,
___.
KaBom askny
**Kaman
.'.*Sardis *Izmir
Site
ate
Asv 1Malatya
r
Van Coi
Korucutepe .
I ~ ]
Beysehir s Erbaba'>
. SHacilar
7aurus
"
atal Hfyuy a• "
kCoi
Ebaa CanHasan
"-.
Medite anean
0
Cyprus0
(emi
Hallan,
MoU'ntainf ,
Sea
c nGirikihaciyan
Tel " Tel iidah al-Ju. .-.36. .da. 100
• i?•
....... 3~~~.... .... ................3
200 km
100
200r
Sites with archaeobotanicalreportsthat are mentionedin the text; note the concentrationsof sites on the centralplateauand southeastTurkey. Thesereflect biasesin fieldwork,and complicateany attempt at comparingregionalpatterns. Greig, J. 1989 Archaeobotany. Handbooks for Archaeologists 4. Strasbourg: European Science Foundation. Gurney, O. R. 1990. TheHittites.London: Penguin. Haldane, C. A. W 1990 Shipwrecked Plant Remains. Biblical Archaeologist53:55-60. 1991 Recovery and Analysis of Plant Remains from Some Mediterranean Shipwreck Sites. Pp. 213-223 in New Lighton AncientFarming.Edited by J. M. Renfrew. Edinburgh: University Press. 1993 Direct Evidence for Organic Cargoes in the Late Bronze Age. WorldArchaeology 24:348-360. Harlan, J. R. 1967 A Wild Wheat Harvest in Turkey. Archaeology20:197-201. 1995 The LivingFields:OurAgricultural Heritage.Cambridge: University Press. Harris, D. R. 1986 Plant and Animal Domestication and the Origins of Agriculture: the Contribution of Radiocarbon Accelerator Dating. Pp. 5-21 in Archaeological Resultsfrom AcceleratorDating.Edited
Dedicated to Peter Neve
by J.A. J. Gowlett and R. E. M. Hedges. Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 11. Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology. Harris, D. R. and Hillman, G. C. 1989 Foragingand Farming:The Evolutionof Plant Exploitation. London: Unwin Hyman. Hastorf, C. A. and Popper,V S.,eds. 1988 CurrentPaleoethnobotany: Analytical Methodsand CulturalInterpretations of PlantRemains.Chicago: Archaeological University of Chicago. Helbaek, H. 1960 Appendix II. Cereals and Grasses in Phase A (Hassuna period). Pp. 540543 in Excavationsin thePlainof Antioch I. Edited by R. J. Braidwood and L. Braidwood. Oriental Institute Publications 56. Chicago: University Press. 1961 Late Bronze Age and Byzantine Crops at Beycesultan in Anatolia. Anatolian Studies11:77-97 1964 First Impressions of the (atal Hbyiik Plant Husbandry. AnatolianStudies 14:121-123. 1969 Appendix I. Plant Collecting, DryFarming, and Irrigation Agriculture in Prehistoric Deh Luran. Pp. 383-426,
pl. 40-41 in Prehistoryand Human Ecologyof theDeh LuranPlain.An Early VillageSequencefrom Khuzistan,Iran. Edited by E Hole, K. V Flannery, and J.A. Neely. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology 1. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan. 1970. The Plant Husbandry of Hacilar. Pp. 189-244 in Excavationsat Hacliar. Edited by J. Mellaart. Edinburgh: University Press. Heron, C. and Evershed, R. P 1993 The Analysis of Organic Residues and the Study of Pottery Use. Pp. 247284 in Archaeological Methodand Theory 5. Edited by M. B. Schiffer.Tucson,AZ: University of Arizona. Hillman, G. C. 1972 The Plant Remains. Pp. 182-188 in Papersin EconomicPrehistory.Edited by E. S. Higgs. Cambridge: University Press. 1973 Agricultural Resources and Settlement in the Aqvan Region. Anatolian Studies23:217-240. 1978 On the Origins of Domestic RyeSecalecereale:The Finds from Aceramic Can Hasan III in Turkey.Anatolian Studies28:157-174. 1981 Reconstructing Crop Husbandry Practices from Charred Remains of
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
79
Crops. Pp. 123-162 in FarmingPractice in BritishPrehistory. Edited by R. Mercer.Edinburgh: University Press. 1984 Interpretation of Archaeological Plant Remains: The Application of Ethnographic Models from Turkey.Pp. 1-41 in PlantsandAncientMan.Edited by W. van Zeist and W A. Casparie. Rotterdam: Balkema. 1984 TraditionalHusbandry and Processing of Archaic Cereals in Modern Times: Part I, the Glume-Wheats. Bulletinon SumerianAgriculture 1:114-152. 1985 Traditional Husbandry and Processing of Archaic Cereals in Modem Times: Part II, the Free-Threshing Cereals. Bulletinon SumerianAgriculture 2:1-31. Hillman, G. C., Colledge, S. M., and Harris, D. R. 1989 Plant Food Economy during the Epipalaeolithic Period at TellAbu Hureyra, Syria: Dietary Diversity, Seasonality, and Modes of Exploitation. Pp. 240-268 in Foragingand Farming: the Evolutionof Plant Exploitation. Edited by D. R. Harris and G. C. Hillman. London: Unwin and Hyman. Hillman, G. C. and Davies, M. S. 1990 Measured Domestication Rates in Wild Wheats and Barley under Primitive Cultivation, and their Archaeological Implications. Journalof World Prehistory4:157-222. 1992 Domestication Rate in Wild Wheats and Barley under Primitive Cultivation: Preliminary Results and Archaeological Implications of Field Measurements of Selection Coefficient. Pp. 113-158in Pr histoirede nouvellesapprochesexperiragriculture: Edited by P mentaleset ethnographiques. C. Anderson. Monographie du Centre de Recherches Archeologiques 6. Paris: Editions du CNRS. Hillman, G. C, Wales, S.,McLaren, E S.,Evans, J.,and Butler,A. 1993 Identifying Problematic Remains of Ancient Plant Foods: A Comparison of the Role of Chemical, Histological and Morphological Criteria. World Archaeology25:94-121. Hoffner, H. A. FoodProductionin 1974 AlimentaHethaeorum: HittiteAsia Minor.American Oriental Series 55. New Haven, Conn.: American Oriental Society. Home, L. 1982 Fuel for the Metal Worker.Expedition 25:6-13.
80
BiblicalArchaeologist58:2 (1995)
Hubbard, R. N. L. B. 1980 Development of Agriculture in Europe and the Near East: Evidence from Quantitative Studies. Economic Botany34:51-67 Humphreys, R. S. 1991 IslamicHistory:A Framework for Inquiry. London: I.B.Tauris.
by W.van Zeist, K. Wasylikowa, and K.-E. Behre. Rotterdam: Balkema. 1992 The Origins of Plant Cultivation in the Near East. Pp. 39-58 in TheOrigins An International of Agriculture: Perspective.Edited by C.W.Cowan and P.J.Watson. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian.
Jones, G. 1983 The Ethnoarchaeology of Crop Processing: Seeds of a Middle-Range Review Methodology. Archaeological 2:17-24. from Cambridge
Miller, N. E and Smart, T L. 1984 Intentional Burning of Dung as Fuel: A Mechanism for the Incorporation of Charred Seeds into the Archaeological Record. Journalof Ethnobiology 4:15-28.
Jones, G.,Wardle,K. A., Halstead, P.,and Wardle, D. 1986 Crop Storage at Assiros. Scientific American254(3):84-91.
Mills, J. and White, R. 1989 The Identity of the Resins from the Late Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu 31:37-44. Burun (Ka_).Archaeometry
McLaren, E S.,Evans, J.,and Hillman, G. C. 1991 Identification of Charred Seeds from S.W.Asia. Pp. 797-806 in Archaeometry '90: Proceedings of the26thInternational Heidelberg Symposiumon Archaeometry, 1990 Edited by E. Pernicka and G. Wagner.Basel: Birkhiuser.
Mulholland, S. C., Rapp,G., and Gifford,J.A. 1982 Phytoliths. Pp. 117-137in Troy:The Archaeological Geology.Edited by G. E A. and Gifford. SupplemenJ. Rapp tary Monograph 4. Princeton: University Press.
McNeill, J.R. 1992 TheMountainsof theMediterranean World:An Environmental History.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Macqueen, J.G. in 1986 TheHittitesand theirContemporaries Asia Minor.London: Thames and Hudson. Matthews, W and Postgate, J.N. with Payne, S., Charles, M. P, and Dobney, K. 1994 The Imprint of Living in an Early Mesoptamian City: Questions and Answers. Pp. 171-212 in WhitherEnviEdited by R. ronmentalArchaeology? Luff and P.Rowley-Conwy. Oxford: Oxbow. Miller, N. E 1984 The Use of Dung as Fuel: An Ethnographic Example and an Archaeological Application. Pallorient10:71-79. 1985 Paleoethnobotanical Evidence for Deforestation in Ancient Iran:A Case Study of Urban Malyan. Journalof 5:1-19. Ethnobiology 1990 Clearing Land for Farmland and Fuel: Archaeobotanical Studies of the Ancient Near East. Pp. 71-78 in Economy and Settlementin theNear East: AnalysesofAncient SitesandMaterials. Edited by N. E Miller. Masca Research Papers in Science and Archaeology, Supplement to Volume 7 Philadelphia, PA:University Museum. 1991 The Near East. Pp.133-160 in Progress Edited in Old WorldPalaeoethnobotany.
Nesbitt, M. 1993a The Archaeobotany of Turkey:A Review. Pp. 329-350 in Proceedings of Istanbul theFifthOPTIMAConference, 1986.Edited by H. Demiriz and D. Phitos. Istanbul: Istanbul University. 1993b Ancient Crop Husbandry at KamanKaleh6yiik: 1991Archaeobotanical Report. Pp. 75-97 in Essayson Anatolian Edited by T.Mikasa. Archaeology. Bulletin of the Middle Eastern Culture Center in Japan 7 Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. n.d. a Archaeobotany in TheArchaeologyof Edited by K. Anatolia:An Encyclopedia. Sams. Garland Publishing. In press. n.d. b Recovery of Archaeological Plant Remains at Kaman-Kalehbyiik. Bulletinof theMiddleEasternCulture Centerin Japan8. In press. Nesbitt, M and Summers, G. D. 1988. Some Recent Discoveries of Millet (PanicummiliaceumL. and Setariaitalica [L.] P.Beauv.) at Excavations in Turkey and Iran. AnatolianStudies38:85-97 Rapp,G. and Mulholland, S.C. eds. 1992 PhytolithSystematics:EmergingIssues. New York:Plenum. Rivera Nunez, D. and Walker,M. J. 1989 A Review of Palaeobotanical Findings of Early Vitisin the Mediterranean and of the Origins of Cultivated Grape-Vines, with Special Reference to New Pointers to Prehistoric Exploitation in the Western Mediterand ranean. Reviewof Palaeobotany
Dedicated to Peter Neve
61:205-237 Pahtnlogy, Rosen, A. M. 1987 Phytolith Studies at Shiqmim. Pp. 243-249, pl.8.1-8.3 in Shiqtint hI:Studies Societiesiii the ConcerningChalcolithic NortlhernNteev Desert.Edited by T E. Levy. BAR International Series 356. Oxford: British Archaeology Reports. 1989 Microbotanical Evidence for Cereals in Neolithic levels at TelTeo and Yiftahel in the Galilee, Israel. Mitekufat Haeven(Journalof the IsraelPrehistoric Society)22:68-77 1991 Phytoliths as Indicators of Ancient Irrigation Farming. Pp. 281-287 in
lPr;histoiht del'agricultufre: nouvel'les
et approciihes exphrinlienitales chiigrapliiqtus.Edited by P C. Anderson. Monographie du Centre de Recherches Arch6ologiques 6. Paris: Editions du CNRS. Rosenberg, M. and Davis, M. 1992 Hallan (emi Tepesi, an Early Aceramic Neolithic site in Eastern Anatolia: Some Preliminary Observations Concerning Material Culture. Aiinatolica18:1-18. Rosenberg, M., Nesbitt, M., and Redding, R. n.d. Hallan (emi, Pig Husbandry, and Post-Pleistocene Adaptations along the Taurus-Zagros Arc. Pahlorient. In press. Runnels, C. N. and Hansen, J. M. 1986 The Olive in the Prehistoric Aegean: The Evidence for Domestication in the Early Bronze Age. OxfordJournalof 5:299-308. Arclhaeology Sallares, J. R. 1991 The EcologIof tiheAncientGreekWorld. London: Duckworth. Sams, G. K. 1977 Beer in the City of Midas. Archaeolohg 30:108-115. Samuel, D. J. 1989 Their Staff of Life: Initial Investigations on Ancient Egyptian Bread Baking. Pp. 253-290 in Amanm Reports V. Edited by B.J. Kemp. London: Egypt Exploration Society. 1993 Ancient Egyptian Cereal Processing: Beyond the Artistic Record. Cambridge Archaeologicaloturnal3:276-283. Stager,L. E. 1985. The First Fruits of Civilisation. Pp. 172-88 in Palestinein the Bronzeand 'Iron Ages:Papersin of OlgaTufnell. Hotnour Edited by J. N. Tubb.Occasional Publication 11.London: Institute of Archaeology.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
Watson, A. M. 1983 AgriculturalInnovationin the Early IslamicWorld:The Diffusionof Cropsand 700-1100.CamFarmiilg7T'chniqzies, bridge: University Press. Whallon, R. 1979 AnlArchaeological Surveyof the Keban Areac East CentralTwrkey. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan 11.Ann Arbor: Museum of Anthropology. Wilkinson, T.J. 1990 Towinand Countryin Southeastern Anatolia. >blmie I. Settlementand LandUse at KurbanHiiyiikand OtherSitesin the LowerKarababa Basin.Oriental Institute Publications Volume 109.Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Willcox, G. H. 1974 A History of Deforestation as Indicated by Charcoal Analysis of Four Sites in Eastern Anatolia. Anatoliani Studies24:117-133. 1992 Timber and Trees:Ancient Exploitation in the Middle East: Evidence from Plant Remains. Bulletinon Suinerian Agriculture6:1-31. Williams, D. 1973 Flotation at Siraf.Antiquity43:288-292.
Ni Mark Nesbitt is a research assistant and Ph.D. candidate at the Institute of Archaeology, University College London. After receiving an M.Sc. in Bioarchaeology from the Institute of Archaeology in 1984,he spent five years in Ankara as a Research Fellow of the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara. Nesbitt has worked as an archaeobotanist at sites in Turkey,Iraq, Bahrain, and Turkmenistan. His research interests include early agricultural and preagrarian use of plants, the ethnoarchaeology of wild and cultivated foods, and the study of long-term agricultural change in the Near East.
Wittmack, L. 1880 Antike Samen aus Trojaund Peru. Koructtepe,FinalReport,Vohlme1. Edited zur Befbirderung by M. N. van Loon. Amsterdam: Monatsschriftdes Vereines des GartLenbanes iii den Kbiniglichi North Holland. Preussischen StaateLn und der Gesellschafttier van Zeist, W.and Bottema, S. GartenfreuideBerlins23:120-121. 1890 Samen aus den Ruinen von Hissarlik. 1991 LateQutaternary of the Near Vegetatioli East.Beihefte zum Tubinger Atlas, fiir Ethnologie22:614-620. Zeitschrift 1896 Untitled. [Prehistoric seeds from Reihe A, 18.Thbingen: Reichert. tder BMzhiyiik]. Sitzingslbericht van Zeist, W and Buitenhuis, H. GescllschaftNaturforschender FreTndezui Berlin3:27-30. 1983 A Palaeobotanical Study of Neolithic Erbaba,Turkey.Ainatolica10:47-89. van Zeist, W. van Zeist, W and Casparie, W.A., eds. 1979/80 Plant Remains from Girikihacl yan, 1984 PlantsandiAncientMan: Studiesin Turkey.Anatolica7:75-89. 1980 Apercu sur la diffusion des v6getaux Rotterdam: Balkema. Palaeocthinobotaniy. cultives dans la region mediterranevan Zeist, W and de Roller,G. J. enne. Pp. 129-145 in La mIiseenlplace, ie laflore et 1991/92 The Plant Husbandry of Aceramic I'evolutionet la caractdrisation de lavILgL;tatiol (ay6nii, SE Turkey.Palaeohistoria circu))idieiterranLellnne. Naturalia Monspeliensia, Hors Serie. 33/34:65-96. Montpellier: Colloque de la Fondation L.Emberger,. Zohary, D. and Hopf, M. 1993 Domesticationof Plantsin the Old World. 1988 Some Aspects of Early Neolithic Plant Second Edition. Oxford: Clarendon Husbandry in the Near East. Anatolica Press. 15:49-67. van Zeist, W and Bakker-Heeres,J.A. H. 1975 Prehistoric and Early Historic Plant Husbandry in the AltminovaPlain, Southeast Turkey.Pp. 221-257 in
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
81
Hittite
Pottery and Potters: The Late
View
from
Bronze
Age
Gordion
By RobertC.Henrickson IN ITTITE POTTERY VARIES WIDELY
quality,with publication usually directingmore attentionto the finertypes.Late BronzeAge Gordionin westerncentralAnatoliahas recentlyyielded severalprobablepieces of Hittite pottery.The most strikingwas a zoomorphicvessel,a barrelrhyton, found on the floorof a LateBronze Age structure.Its distinctivemicaceous reddishcolorand well-burnished finishsuggestthatit was Side,front,and interiorviews of zoomorphic vesselfrom LateBronzeAge (YHSS8) Gordion probablyan import.Otherpossible Bothtemper, (Fieldnumber[Fn]YH88-153). importsincludeda jarrim and jar shoulderswith stampseal impresfinish,and form markthis rhytonas an imsmall settlement. All to the sions,althoughthe recoveryof a clay port photographs
stamp seal indicatessome localuse. The greatmajorityof Hittitepottery however,is plain warewith simple, standardizedshapes,cursoryfinishes, and no decoration.'Studyof vessel and rim shapes and stylistic analysisof finerpieces document links amongsites,thus delineating the broaddistributionof HittiteLate BronzeAge pottery,includingGordion. Pottery,eitheras vessels or more commonlyas innumerablesherds,is probablythe most commonartifact recoveredin excavations.Pottery vessels arenot just objects;they are the end-productof the interactionsof raw materials,culture,and technology.Shape,size, formingand finishing methods,organizationof production,and propertiesof the raw materialsareall interrelated.A technologicalapproachto the seemingly unpromisingplain warepotterycan yield a wide rangeof information which the much rarerfine ceramics may not. Muchof the ancientpotter's craftcanbe reconstructed,even without recoveringactualworkshopsor tools,thus providinginformationon the ancienteconomy. The long-termGermanexcavations at the Hittitecapitalat HattugaBogazk6y,directeduntil recentlyby P.Neve,have providedcopiousdata from the Hittiteheartlandand shed light on many aspectsof the Hittite materialculture.Excavationsat other sites in centralAnatolia,such as MapatHiiyiik and AlacaH6yiik, have furtherdocumentedthe ceramicassemblage.2Stylisticanalysis of the shapes has shown that the pottery tradition extends over a remarkably broad area in the Late Bronze Age, including such sites in western central Anatolia as Gordion (Mellink 1956;Gunter 1991;Henrickson 1993,1994)and Yanarlar(Emre 1978),Porsuk in the south (Dupr6 1983),and Korucutepe (Van Loon 1980) and Norquntepe (Korbel1985) to the southeast. Here I would like to take a hinterland perspective on this widespread
by LauraFoos. 82
Biblical 58:2(1995) Archaeologist
Dedicatedto PeterNeve
ceramic tradition, examining the Hittite impact on the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1400-1200 BCE)ceramic assemblage at Gordion, then a small settlement on the edge of the empire. My approach will emphasize technology, since reconstructing the ancient potter's craft not only provides insight into the local economy but also better defines the strength of the Hittite impact on the local material culture. Sherds, Vessels, and the Ancient Potter'sCraft
IP r
?P V -I ?*~
r
?T
,?1 I: ?1C;.
r;5s;~?:
otterysherdsand vessels retain many residual traces which permit reconstruction of the ancient potter's craft, including the forming and finishing sequences for individual vessel types and sizes. Each forming and finishing method leaves characteristic residual traces, both within the fabric and on the surfaces., Studies of traditional potters and replication experiments have established correlations between such residual traces and original forming and finishing methods. Combined with technical approaches from materials science, forming and finishing sequences for individual types and sizes of vessels can be reconstructed.4 Although each stage of manufacture may obscure or obliterate evidence left by previous ones, this does not always happen. In addition, each stage tends to have somewhat more superficial effects than the previous one. Secondary forming may add, alter,or replace traces left by primary forming both in the fabric and on the surfaces. Finishing, such as smoothing, tends to leave marks on surfaces. Thus, although residual traces may result from any stage of production, most on surfaces will come from later,finishing rather than forming stages, while those within the fabric will tend to derive more from primary forming, perhaps later altered by secondary working. Choice of forming methods is dependent on both vessel form and size, as well as materials and local Dedicated to Peter Neve
Stampseal impressionwith a hieroglyphicHittiteinscriptionon the rimof a largejaror vat from Late BronzeAge (YHSS8) Gordion(Fn YH88-157).The largecontainerwas probablymade locally-as its ware and neutronactivationanalysissuggest-and thus, locallystampedas well. Bywhom is not known:the seal'spersonalname is unintelligible
technology. Making any vessel usually involves combinations of various forming and finishing methods.5 How a vessel breaks provides evidence for how it was made, since the characteristics of the breaks themselves, and their overall patterning on the entire vessel, are related to specific forming methods. For example, leaves a oana potter'whiteel throwitng internal ("wheelspiraling ridge marks" or "throwing marks") and consistent diagonal orientations of inclusions ("temper") within the clay fabric.Breaks tend to spiral upward and outward from the base. Mitlti-
such as coil miethods, piececonLstruction or slab building, leave weaknesses where separate pieces of clay joined. Breaks therefore tend to follow construction joins, since these are not as strong as the clay body itself. A periodic spacing of horizontalbreaks suggests coiling. Indeed, surfaces of the individual coils are often recognizable in the horizontal and vertical cross-sections left by breaks. In the clay fabric itself, patterning of texture (such as orientation of tempering particles) provides information as to specific forming techniques used. For example, repetitive circular
BasicTermsof Pottery Production Primaryforminginvolvesthe creation of the basicvesselshape. Secondaryformingmodifiesa basicform producedby primaryforming.Finishing subsumesthe final modificationsto details of shape or surfacetreatment (smoothingand decoration).A potter's wheel is used to throwpottery,usingthe centrifugalforce generated by rotation of the wheel to help raisethe wallsof the vessel.Wheelmaderefersto pottery which is thrownon a potter's wheel. In contrast,a turntableor tournette, often calleda "slowwheel," is a supporton
which the vessel being formed may be turned slowlyto regularizeshape and to finish.Usingthe slow rotationof a turntablefor shape modificationor finishingyieldsa wheel-finishedvessel. Surfacetracesleft by wheel-finishing may be mistakenas evidencefor throwing on a potter'swheel (Henrickson 1991).Coilinginvolvesusing stripsor 'snakes'of clayto buildthe vessel;slabs of claymay be used insteadof coils. Moldinginvolvesshapingclayeither into or over a form (femalevs. male mold; Shepard1968;Rye1981).
58:2 (1995) BiblicalAtchaeologist
83
i-1A
Gordion Late Bronze Age (YHSS9-8) Pottery Industry
e Gordion LateBronze Age
- ---....-.
:......
.14i
...............
• ::•
•.: .....
~ ~...~..i: ~ ..
: -<•:•:.
GordionLateBronzeAge remains:YHSS8 'basement'and pitsdug into YHSS9 wash and trasi strata(viewto south).Thoughits overallextent and naturehave not yet been discovered,Gor dion appearsto be a villageor smalltown site.Whileits few importedwaresand administrative artifactssuggest Hittiteconnections,analysisof the formingtechniquesof its plainware speaks more unequivocallyabout the extent of Hittiteinfluenceas well as the natureof the localeccnomy.
patterning within vertical section of the vessel wall indicates coiling (Rye 1981;Vandiver 1987:App. III;Henrickson 1991). The complexity of production organization varies widely. Characteristics of the assemblage-the number of types of vessels, their variability or standardization, and methods of forming and finishingoffer clues to the organization of production. Specialist potters tend to use potter's wheels, among other tools, producing large numbers of relatively standardized simple shapes and sizes; common wares tend to have simple finishes (Peacock 1982:12-51; Van der Leeuw 1977;Rice 1991;Costin 1991). Technological analysis of pottery, focusing on methods of production, thus opens new areas of study: reconstruction of an ancient craft, recognition of culturally distinctive "technologies,"assessment of technological sophistication, and nature and degree of technological transfer or acculturation between ceramic traditions. These afford insights into the ancient economy and society, such as identification of organization of production and specialist craftspeople.
84
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
Late Bronze Age Gordion
Youngdugsmallsoundings
into the Bronze Age levels on Gordion'smain mound and Mellink excavated part of a Hittite cemetery (Young 1966,Mellink 1956;see also Gunter 1991).Building on these earlier excavations,the recent Yasslh6yiik StratigraphicSequence (YHSS) excavations,directedt by M. M. Voigt in 1988-89,have enhanced our understanding of Late Bronze Age Gordion. The Late Bronte Age strata (phases YHSS 9-8) consisted of trash strata covered with a meter thick layer of clay derived from decayed mudbrick (YHSS 9) into which large storage pits and a cellar more than a meter deep were cut (YHSS 8). On the soft ashy floor were masses of broken pottery (Voigt1994). Parallels to Bogazk6y and other Hittite sites (see below) indicate that YHSS 9-8 date to ca. 1400-1200 BCE (Henrickson 1993,1994;Voigt 1994; Gunter 1991).Although its size and nature are unknown, Gordion was likely a rather small settlement-a village or small town-as were all other known Late Bronze Age sites in the region (Voigt1994;Sams and Voigt 1989).
e
assemblage is notable for its I standardization and overall simplicity. Standardization is pronounced in the distinctive repetition of production sequences for individual vessel types and sizes and in the clustering of vessel sizes. The simplicity and limited number of vessel forms, rim profiles, and generally rather cursory finishing all suggest that ease and speed of production were important considerations. Three broad ware (fabric) categories may be distinguished. Variation among them primarily involves differences in clay preparation and methods of manufacture and finishing. Color ranges from creamy-white through tan or buff to reddish-orange to brown. Commonware(87-90% of all sherds recovered) has a rather dense paste with variable amounts of medium grit temper (usually <0.2 mm in diameter). Fineware(1-5%) has no visible temper. Cookingware (5%)has a less dense paste with large amounts of medium grit and voids from burnt-out chaff temper. Red slip or paint is found on 3-4% of the common and fine wares. The Late Bronze Age potters used the potter's wheel, turntable, and a variety of hand-forming methods, in varied combinations. Production sequences for individual vessel types varied with vessel size. Most vessels thrown on a potter's wheel, aside from shallow rounded bowls, tended to be small, with a maximum diameter 20 cm. Forming larger vessels usually involved various combinations of hand-building techniques, often coiling. Secondary forming, mostly on a turntable,was common. The bodies of medium and large vessels were altered, such as by scraping, then regularized and smoothed on a turntable. Rim forming and finishing were simple. Bowl rims were usually simply rounded and smoothed. Jar and pot rims were formed either by Dedicated to Peter Neve
evertingand foldingdown the lip or by addingsome clay to thickenand strengthenit.The base of most small and mediumbowls and jarswas roundedby trimming,probablyon a turntable. Overallfinishingusuallyconsisted of simple smoothing;few true slips are identifiable.Most of the "slips"are actually"self-slips"resulting fromwet-smoothingwhich concentratesfine clayparticleson the surface.Decorationusuallyconsists of red slip or paintedbands.Some jarshave ratherinconspicuous,isolated verticalburnishstrokes. The commonand fine ware potterywas well-fired,yielding a hard fabricwhich tends to fracturealong sharplinearbreaks.Experimental refiringof YHSS8 sherdsindicate thatthe commonand fine buff wares were firedat 800-10000C,a temperaturehigh enoughto imply use of kilns.Cookingwarewas firedat a lowertemperature(<7000C),perhaps in the open (Rye1981:96-122). FormingSequencesforIndividual VesselTypes"
Let
no completeexamplesof the medium to largetypes were recovered,pieces were adequateto determinemethods of manufacture.All have parallelsat Hittitesites. Small tarenols In YHSS8, finee bowls small shallow with a rounded bottomand slightlycarinatedor roundedprofilewere thrownon a potter'swheel using a fine paste. the exteriorof the When leather-hard, base was shavedand smoothed to yield a roundedbottomand uniform wall thickness.Saggingor flexingdue to thin walls oftenresultedin slightly irregularshapes.Manyhave a rim diameterof 17+_1 cm,standardwithin the marginof errorfor measuring diametersfromsherds.Parallels, which seem to havebeen thrownbut may not be as fine in ware,arefound at MagatH6ytikand Bogazkdy. 'WeltBowlsK Smallfine oware In YHSS 9,fragmentsof at least severalsmall roundedbowls embodieda unique method of decoration.Smallcylindrical pellets (diameter2-3 mm) of clay were forcedinto the sides of the bowl fromthe exterior.On the interior,
us nowturntohowsomeof the
commonvessel types were made and what this information has to offer.Although
?~
these pelletsproducedbumps or welts,while on the exteriortheirflat ends were concealedby smoothing. Smallconical Small,shallow bvols conicalbowls with flat bases were thrownusing a commonwarepaste. The base retainsmarksleft by the string used to free the bowl fromthe potter'swheel. Mediumbowlsowith rounded base.The formingsequencefor medium-sized shallow,roundedbowls (diameter 26-32 cm, with diameterstendingto clusterat 26 and 32 cm) is similarto thatfor fine ware.Eachwas thrown, dried to leather-hardness, inverted, and the base trimmedon a turntable to yield a roundedexteriorprofile. Carefulexaminationof the exterior surfaceusuallyidentifiesresidual scrapingscarsin the basal area,although finalsmoothinghas usually removedmost;near the rim ridges left by throwingsurvive.Breakstend to spiraloutwardfrom the centerto the rim,suggestingthrowingon the potter'swheel. Rim formstend to become even simplerfromYHSS8 to YHSS9. Alternativeformingmethods were occasionallyused. Distinctively differentpatternsof breakage indicatethatone roundedbase bowl made with a slightlycoarserfabric than usual was molded and the rim finishedby the addition of a single strip or coil of clay its perimeter.
0
~
centimeters
10
-
.,
.
Cacheof GordionLateBronzeAge (YHSS8) pottery. Clockwisefromthe front left: Smallshallowfine ware bowl (Fn YH88-103); Mediumbowl with flat base (Fn YH88-102);Beaker(FnYH88-108); Smalldeep bowl with rimpinchedto oval outline (Fn YH88-152); Mediumshallowbowl (FnYH88-151).
Dedicatedto PeterNeve
Biblical 58:2(1995) Archaeologist
85
I. I
c
with pointed base,usually have strong"throwingmarks"on their '' Q 5` r;? .~n--t?,, interior.They were,however,built 'v~c.~?.7'-' . 1 ?I * (.?r. from at least threeseparatecompo`?,? -I ..5 C nents: 1) rim/neck/upper shoulder; ~I?r ~: ~???..,,.3c~i:i .?~~. ?r 15 ?X3iI ?r' ns~, !J r .. Cr main 2) ~~t?-Jr~ body;and 3) lowerbody and r? ?F * ?~51 ,?'5 ?. C? r ,? 1. t;~ ; 1 13-?.?.r; ,.? r?? '? I' c? base. The r ?, rA.??ri~I .e generalformingsequence ~?ti:n\ ?~~7?. 5 ?i "' ?i I 5 -4 -.~ `" ' '? /.t is clear.Patternsof breaks ,r? reasonably ' '~i~ ?E' r s'~'i-~+?,rrr -? - ~:? n ~C?.~.? -C` 1F?l ~. -??iand texturevariationsand voids in 0 centimeters 5 the fabricdemonstratethe use of . ...c. .. coiling or piecemealconstruction,on a turntable,forprimaryformingof SmallFineWarebowl with "welt decoration" 0 rs 5 the walls of the main and lowerbody. rs (Fn YH89-62; YHSS9). Potters accomplished this Parallelbreakscorrespondto joins uniquemethod of decorationby insertingsmall between clayelementsin the wall. pelletsinto the externalsidesof the bowl.Theythen concealed The uppershoulder/neck piece was the pellets,smoothingovertheirends and creating"welts"on the insideof the bowl. perhapsformedseparatelyand attachedto the main body,or built onto Mediumconicalbowlswithflat bases. on the interiorof the neck resulting the upperedge of body.The shoulder the same size and from shoulder the to was consolidatedand the neck diamAlthough general constricting than the form the neck. Their overall thinness eter reduced on a turntable,leaving only slightlydeeper previous type,medium sized conical "wheelmarks"inside the shoulder yields relativelysmallpieces,with bowls (diameter26-32 cm) were lowerbodies and roundedbases and compressionridgesinside the handbuiltratherthanthrown.Reladifficultto identifyand reconstruct. neck,and the handle added finally. thick were sides butted a onto The tively largetaperedcylindricaljars Bringingthe base to a point must slab coils or base; heavy adding strips of claywhich were drawnthem upwardand outwardcompletedthe sides.The rim,entireinterior,and upperexteriorwere smoothed,probably on a turntable.The base exterior remainedpoorlyfinished,sometimes retaininggrit or chaffimpressions fromthe surfaceon which it had rested.These flat-basebowls were thus notsimply roundedprofile bowls whose bases had not been trimmedbut ratherthe productof entirelydifferentforming approach. JarsJarshavenarrow , necks,heavy roundedor slightlytriangularfoldedrims, roundedslopingshoulders,and handlesattachedat the neck and shoulder.Twotypes are commonat Gordion:1) thin-walledjarsof small to moderatesize and 2) largerjars 0 centimeters 10 with taperedcylindricalbodies and pointedbases. The small to medium size thinwalledjarswere probablythrownon Gordionpottersassembled largecylindrical('torpedo')jarsas three distinctcomponents: a potter'swheel,judgingfromthe rim/neck/uppershoulder;mainbody;and lower body and base.Theyemployedcoilingtechthin walls,throwingridgeson the niqueson a turntableto formthe mainand lower bodies. Patternsof fractureshow this clearly. interiorof the shoulder,and someThe parallelbreaksin the lower body of this vessel(YHSS8; Fn YH23834.1)correspondto joins times diagonalcompressionridges between clayelements in the wall. Drawingby RobertHenrickson. ;Irt,,
., . ?,.~?,~c~c.
;?;P ~:
"'*;
/...
'-d
86
Biblical 58:2(1995) Archaeologist
Dedicatedto PeterNeve
have been one of the very last steps in the entire vessel production sequence. Two techniques seem to have been used. Verticalridges left by compression indicate that squeezing or "choking"brought the bottom of the jar to a point. The absence of any evidence for smoothing over the interior compression ridges indicates pointing the base was a very late stage in production. A second forming technique, also used for somewhat more rounded bases, involved successive additions of small strips or coils of clay to gradually close the open base. Cookingpots.Cooking pots were rather baggy wide-mouthed handmade vessels with rounded bases, slightly enlarged rounded rims, and vertical loop handles. The fabric was noticeably coarser and somewhat more friable than for other vessels, due to use of much greater amounts of chaff temper.The lower body may be been formed in a mold, but the sides were built by coiling. As might be expected with a cooking pot, the interior surface is better smoothed than the outer,probably on a turntable.
"Vats" andlargestorage vessels.Given the relatively small size of sherds recovered relative to vessel size, the overall shapes remain uncertain. The long, parallel, horizontal breaks, and joins visible in broken edges of sherds, demonstrate that coiling was the primary forming method. Surface marks again suggest secondary forming and finishing on a turntable.The base of a large jar clearly shows the construction method using layers or slabs of clay. The Potter'sCraftat Gordion
Although
the limited area of Late
Bronze Age architecture excavated is modest, the pottery assemblage does suggest some economic complexity at Gordion. Simple profiles, limited number of vessel types, tight clustering of sizes, cursory finish, and general simplicity of most attributes-in short, its stanDedicated to Peter Neve
420
k* Bla
Bca
\,
.
........
. •-asa........ Boask .
Gordion .:.
1Arasi
/
.
..
.
Kyaman Sardis
Tuz
-Gd-
L.f_'an -
7
-
0
Medit 4ranean
Cyprs
00
1
6li
"
i
100 100200 km 2 360
Gordionlies at the western peripheryof the Hittiteempire,yet its ceramictraditionsfelt the decided impactof its powerful,though distant,neighbor.
dardization-all suggest large-scale production by specialist potters. Two jars had "potter'smarks" incised on their shoulders before firing, although their meaning remains unclear (cf. Gunter 1991:pl.26.493, 28.517-521). Neutron activation analysis of both Gordion Late Bronze Age pottery samples and clays from the Sakarya River banks adjacent to the site has demonstrated that most have very similar chemical compositions. Therefore,much of the Late Bronze Age pottery must have been made at or near Gordion; it clearly is not imported from another area (Henrickson and Blackman n.d.). Since the nature of the assemblage suggests professional potters and relatively large-scale production, output would have far exceeded the modest needs of the small Late Bronze Age settlement at Gordion. Contemporary settlements in the area were also small, so the potters must have been supplying at least several of them as well. Pottery thus provides the best evidence for some regional economic complexity at present; the limited area of Late Bronze Age strata excavated at Gordion have yet to yield much other evidence for local economic complexity (Voigt1994).The
pottery suggests the presence of at least one group of specialist craftspeople. In such an economy, other specialists might be expected. Pottery provides information we otherwise lack, or have yet to recognize. Closer study of other types of data may well yield similar results.
Gordionandthe Hittites
e Hittitesdominatedcentral Anatolia; Gordion lay on or near the imperial periphery. The basic types of vessels in the Late Bronze Age assemblage at Gordion are well-known from imperial Hittite sites (see above; Henrickson 1993, 1994;Gunter 1991).Gordion'sassemblage seems to be a simplified version of the basic Hittite assemblage. All major vessel types found at Gordion are known at Hattuga, but Hattuia has others not found at Gordion. More important, the production sequences at Gordion are similar, if not identical, to those at the Hittite capital of Hattu'a (Mfiller-Karpe1988: Abb. 2-6). This is noteworthy since all of the vessel shapes involved could easily be produced using other combinations of methods. The replication of not only shapes but also forming methods demonBiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
87
attheplainpottery Looking
,-,r "%..•
lbl
.-.,,
All
4~;
Two additionalLateBronzeAge (YHSS9) stamped impressionson jarshoulders(Fn'sYH89-530 [star]and 531 ['signeroyale']and a bakedclaystampseal (FnYH89-563)pointto localstamping. Whilethese artifactssuggest officiallocaladministrative activities(i.e, stampingof containers), furtherresearchis needed to establishthe probabilityof a Hittiteofficialat Gordion.
stratesthatGordionhad strongconnectionsto the Hittiteceramictradition,since a potter'scraftmethods are less likelyto changeunderoutside influencethanthe vessel shapesproduced.Forexample,duringthe Persian and Hellenisticperiodsat Gordion,localpottersvery carefully copied the shapeand all of the details of importedGreekBlackGlazed vessels but used theirown, distinctly differentlocalformingand finishing methodsto do so (Henrickson1993, 1994). The broadstylisticand technological connectionsbetween Gordion commonwarepotteryand Hittite heartlandassemblagestracedabove find furthersupportin the several probableHittiteimports.Alaca Hiiyiik providesthe best parallelfor the zoomorphicrhyton,but fragmentsfromBogazk6yprovide furtherparallels,as do LateBronze Age Porsukand Ihca.7The stampseal 88
Biblical 58:2(1995) Archaeologist
impressionwith an unintelligible personalname in hieroglyphicHittite on a storagevessel rim implies at least contact." The two jarshoulders with stamp seal impressions,particularlythe one with the "signeroyale," also have parallelsat Bogazkdy.The day stampseal with the "signe royale"motif allows forlocalstamping, but it is not enoughto establish the presenceof a Hittiteofficialat Gordion.Furtherinvestigationis needed.
and its underlyingtechnology both has clarifiedGordion'sHittiteconnectionsand shown thatthe rhytonand stampsealingson jarsare one aspectof a much more pervasive phenomenon. Vesselshapesand rim forms have long providedstylisticevidence fora connectionbetween Gordionand the Hittites.The technologicalsimilaritiesin production methods and sequencesimply a stronger,morefundamentalcraft relationship.The technologicalapproachto the potteryassemblagehas yielded both a reconstructionof the LateBronzeAge potter'scraftat Gordion and shed lighton the natureof the local economy. Acknowledgments The GordionExcavationProjectis sponsoredby the Universityof PennsylvaniaMuseum.During1988-1991, the projectreceiveda grantfrom the NationalEndowmentfor the Humanities.The NationalGeographic Societysupportedthe 1988season.In 1988-89,my workat Gordionwas funded by the Committeefor Field Archaeologyof the RoyalOntario Museum (Toronto). Commentsfrom M. M.Voigt,M.J.Mellink,E.E Henrickson,and R.Gornyhave improved the text;I am solely responsiblefor errorsand mattersof interpretation. Notes SSeein particularMiiller-Karpe 1988but also Fischer1963;Orthmann1963;1984;Ozgiiq1978; 1982. 2For Hattuga/ Bogazkbysee Fischer1963;
ConcludingRemarks
G
ordionwasapparently a small
settlementnear the periphery of the Hittiteempirein the LateBronzeAge.Eventhere,however, the Hittiteshad a dramaticimpacton pottery,a basiclocal industry.The methods and probablescale of pottery productionsuggesta regional distributionnetworkfor pottery.
Miller-Karpe1988;Orthmann1963;Seidl1972. ForMagatHiiyiiksee Ozgiit 1978,1982 and for Alaca Hbyiik see Koray and Akok 1944,1951,
3 Noble1965;Shepard1968;Rye1981;Vandiver Henrickson HI;VanAs 1984,1989; 1987:App. 1991 4 Forstudiesof traditionalpottersand replica-
tion experimentssee Hampeand Winter1962, 1965;Matson1974;Rye and Evans1976;Rye 1981;Kramer1985;see Longacre1991for
Dedicatedto PeterNeve
bibliography.For technical approaches from materials science see Matson 1974;Kingery 1981;Kingery and Vandiver 1988;Kramer 1985; Vandiver 1988.
Dupre, S. 1983 PorsukI: La Ceramiquede l'Agede Bronze et de l'Agedu Fer.Paris: Editions Recherches sur les Civilisations.
5 E.g.,Giiner 1988;Hampe and Winter 1962, 1965;Rye and Evans 1976;Reina and Hill 1978; Kramer 1985;Longacre 1991;Henrickson 1991.
Emre, K. 1978 Yanarlar: Afyon YbresindeBirHitit Mezarligi/ A HittiteCemeteryNear Afyon.TiirkTarih Kurumu Yaymlarl VI. Dizi-Sa. 22. Ankara: Tiirk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi.
6Additional material on the forming sequences for individual vessel types can be found in the following sources. For small finewarebowlssee Gunter 1991:fig.12.212,17352; Mellink 1956:pl.15d-1,30a-b. For Magat H6yiik see Ozgiiu 1982:pl.46.1,6 and for Bogazk6y see Miiller-Karpe 1988:Taf.40; Fischer 1963:Taf.102. 802, 803, 823-828, 835. For smallfineware"Welt Bowls"cf. Gunter 1991:pl.25414.For smallconical bowlssee Miiller-Karpe 1988:96,Abb. 6. Bogazk6y provides parallels, see MiillerKarpe 1988:Taf.41.Nla. For mediumbowlswithrounded basecf. Miiller-Karpe 1988:Taf.32-36; Fischer 1963:Taf.95-96; Ozgiiq 1978:pl.45.1,3,4; Ozgiiq 1982:pl.46.2-4; fig. A.1-4, 37-42. For medium conicalbowlswithflat basescf. Miiller-Karpe 1988:Taf29S1d. For jarscf. Miiller-Karpe 1988:Taf.5-7, for forming methods of jars, cf. Miiller-Karpe 1988:32, Abb. 3; for parallels ibid. taf. 3; for pointing of bases cf. Mfiller-Karpe 1988:32,Abb. 3. For forming of cookingpots,cf. Miiller-Karpe 1988:51,Abb. 4 (for parallels Taf. 9-11); Ozgiiq 1982:fig.D.25,E1-2. For vatscf. Miiller-Karpe 1988:Taf.12-17,27; 63 Abb.5. 7For Alaca Hiiyiik see Kogay and Akok 1973:80;pl. XXXIX,Al n. 102;cf. also pl. XXXVIII,Al n.90. For Bogazk6y see Fischer For Porsuk see 1963:Taf.133.1278,138.1335. Abadie-Reynal et al. 1991:Resim8. For Ihca see Orthmann 1967:pl.16. 8 Giiterbock
personal communication to M. Voigt; cf. Giiterbock 1980:Fig. 4 and Gunter 1991:pl.24.381and 29.532.Seals are also found on jar shoulders. Cf Seidl 1972.
Bibliography Abadie-Reynal, C., Pelon, 0. and Tibet, A. 1991/89 Porsuk (ali*mari. Kazi Sonuglari Toplantisi12(1):443-454. Bittel, K. et al. 1958 Die HethitischenGrabfunde von Osmankayasi.WVDOG 71. Berlin: G. Mann. 1967 1969 BogazkbyIV: Fundeaus Grabungen un 1968.Berlin: G. Mann. Costin, C. L. 1991 Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting, and Explaining the Organization of Production. Pp. Methodand 1-56. in Archaeological Theory3. Edited by M. B. Schiffer. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
Fischer, E 1963 Die HethitischeKeramikvon Bogazkby. (WVDOG 75) Berlin. Hampe, R. and Winter,A. 1962 Bei Tbpfernund Tipferinnenin Kreta, Messenien,und Zypern.R6mischGermanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz. Bonn: Rudolf Habelt. 1965 Bei Tbpfernund Zieglernin Siiditalien Sizilienund Griechenland. R6mischGermanisches Zentralmuseum zu Mainz. Bonn: Rudolf Habelt. Giiner, Gungor 1988 Anadolu'da Yasamakta Olan Ilkel(omlekgilik.Istanbul: Akbank'n Bir Kultur Hizmeti. Gunter,A. C. 1991 The BronzeAge.The Gordion Excavations Final Reports III.University Museum Monograph 73. Philadelphia: University Museum. Giiterbock, H. G. 1980 Seals and Sealings in Hittite Lands. Pp. 51-63 in FromAthensto Gordion. Edited by K. DeVries. University Museum Papers,1. Philadelphia: University Museum. Hampe, R. and Winter,A. 1962 Bei T6pfernundTipferinnenin Kreta, Messenien,und Zypern.R6mischGermanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz. Bonn: Rudolf Habelt. 1965 Bei Tbpfernund Zieglernin Siiditalien Sizilienund Griechenland. R6mischGermanisches Zentralmuseum zu Mainz. Bonn: Rudolf Habelt. Henrickson, Robert C. 1991 Wheelmade or Wheel-Finished? Interpretation of 'Wheelmarks' on Pottery.Pp. 523-541 in MaterialsIssues in Art andArchaeologyII. Edited by P.B. Vandiver,J.R. Druzik, and G. Wheeler. Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings 185.Pittsburgh: Materials Research Society. 1993 Politics, Economics, and Ceramic Continuity at Gordion in the Late Second and First Millennia B.C. Pp. 89-176 in Socialand CulturalContextsof
New CeramicTechnologies. Edited by W D. Kingery. Ceramics and Civilization VI. Westerville, OH: American Ceramic Society. 1994 Continuity and Discontinuity in the Ceramic Tradition at Gordion during the Iron Age. Pp. 95-129 in Anatolian IronAges 3. Proceedings of the Third International Anatolian Iron Age Symposium in Van,Turkey6-12 August 1990.Edited by D. French and A. ?ilingiroglu. Monograph 16. London: British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara. Henrickson, R. C. and Blackman, M. J. n.d. Mass-Production of Pottery at Gordion: Comparison of the Late Bronze and Early Phrygian Industries. For volume edited by R. H. Tykot and G. D. Purcell, proposed for publication in MASCAResearchPapersin Scienceand Archaeology.In press. Kingery,W.D. 1981 Plausible Inferences from Ceramic Artifacts. Journalof FieldArchaeology 8:457 ff. Kingery,W D. and Vandiver,P B. 1988 CeramicMasterpieces.New York:Free Press. Korbel, G. 1985 Die Spditbronzezeitliche Keramikvon Norsuntepe.Institut fiir Bauen und Planen in Entwicklungslindern, Mitteilungen Nr. 4. Hannover. Kogay,H. Z. and Akok, M. 1944 Ausgrabungen von AlacaHbyiik,Vorbericht... 1936.TuirkTarih Kurumu Yayinlarindan V.Seri Sa. 2A. Ankara: TiirkTarihKurumu Basimevi. 1951 LesFouillesd'AlacaH6yiik:Rapport Prdliminaire 1937-1939.Tirk TarihKurumu YayinlarindanV.Seri Sa. 5. Ankara: TuirkTarihKurumu Basimevi. 1973 Alaca H6yiik Kazisi:1963-1967Calismalarive Kesiflereait ilkRapor/Alaca Reporton Preliminary Hdyiik Excavations: Researchand Discoveries1963-1967.Tiirk TarihKurumu YayinlarindanV Seri Sa. 28. Ankara: TuirkTarihKurumu Baslmevi. Kramer,C. 1985 Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology. Annual ReviewofAnthropology 14:77-102. Longacre,W A. 1991 CeramicEthnoarchaeology. Tucson: University of Arizona.
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
89
Matson, E R.
0 Shepard.Edited by Bishop, R. L.,and
1974 The Archaeological Present: Near Eastern Village Potters at Work.Anmerican Journalof Archaeology78:345-347 Mellink, M. J. 1956 A HittiteCenmetern at Gordion.University Museum Monograph. Philadelphia: University Museum. Miuller-Karpe,A. 1988 HethitischeTbjfe'reider Oberstadtvon Hathlsa:EimBeitragzur KenntnisspiitKeramikund Tbpferbegrossreichzeitlicher treibe.Marburger Studien zur Vor-und Frihgeschichte, 10.Marburg: Hitzeroth Verlag. Noble, J.V 1965 TheTechniques of Attic PaintedPottery. New York:Watson-Guptill. Orthmann, W. 1963 FriiheKeramikaus Bogazkiy.WVDOG 74. Berlin: G. Mann. 1967 Das Graberfeld bei Ilica.Wiesbaden: E Steiner. 1984 Keramik aus den altesten Schichten von Biiyiikkale. Pp. 9-62 in Bogazk6iy VI. Edited by K. Bittel et al. Berlin: G. Mann. Ozgii, T. 1978 Masat HoiyiikKazilarive evresindeki Arastrmnalar / Excavationsat Masat in Its Vicinity. Hiyiik and Investigations TUrkTarihKurumu YayinlariV.Dizi, Sa. 38. Ankara: TUirkTarihKurumu Basimevi. 1982 Masat Hiyiik II: Bogazktiy'iin KuzeydogtsundaBirHititMerkezi/A HittiteCenterNortheastof Bogazkiy. TUrkTarihKurumu YayinlariV.Dizi, Sa. 38a. Ankara: TUrkTarih Kurumu Basimevi. 1988 Inandtktepe: EskiHitit CagirndaOnenili BirKiilt Merkezi(An hnportantCult Centerin the Old HittiteFtriod).Tilrk TarihKurumu YayinlartV.Dizi, Sa. 43. Ankara: Tirk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi. Peacock, D. S. 1982 Potteryin the RomanWorld:An Ethnoarchaeological Approach.London: Longman. Reina, Reuben E.,and Hill, Robert M., II 1978 TheTraditional Potteryof Guatemala. Austin: University of Texas. Rice, P M. 1991 Specialization, Standardization, and Diversity: A Retrospective. Pp. 257-279 in The CeramicLegacyof Anna
90
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
Lange, E L. Niwot CO: University Press of Colorado. Rye, O. S. 1981 PotteryTecluology:Principlesand Recoznstruction.Washington: Taraxacum. Rye, O. S. and Evans, C. 1976 Traditional PotteryTechniques of Pakistan: Fieldand Laboratory Studies.Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology 21. Washington: Smithsonian Institution. Sams, G. K. and Voigt, M. M. 1989 Work at Gordion in 1988.Kazi SonutilarToplantisiXI(2):77-105. Seidl, U. 1972 Gefiissilarkenvon Bogazkby.WVDOG 88. Berlin: G. Mann. Shepard, A. O. 1968 Ceramicsfor theArchaeologist. Publication 609.Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington. Van As, A. 1984 Reconstructing the Potters Craft. Pp. 129-160 in TheMany Dimensionsof and Pottery:Ceramicsin Archaeolqog Edited by S. E. van der Anthropolongy Leeuw and A. C. Pritchard.Cingvla VII. Albert Egges van Giffen Instituut voor Praeen Protohistorie. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam. 1989 Some Techniques Used by the Potters of Tell Hadidi during the Second Millennium B.C.Pp. 41-79 in Pottery IdeasandApproaches.Edited Technology: by G. Bronitsky.Boulder: Westview Press. Van der Leeuw, S. E. 1977 Towards a Study of the Economics of Pottery Making. Pp 68-76 in Ex Horreo,edited by B. L. van Beek, R. W Brandt and, W.Groenman-van Wateringe. Cingula IV Albert Egges van Giffen Instituut voor Parae-en Protohistorie, Universiteit van Amsterdam. Van Loon, M. N., ed. 1980 Kormcutepe III:FinalReporton the Excavationsof the Universitiesof Chicago, California(LosAngeles),andAmsterdamin the KebanReservoifr EasternAnatolia 1968-1970Amsterdam: North Holland. Vandiver,P B. 1987 Sequential Slab Construction: A Conservative Southwest Asiatic Ceramic Tradition ca. 7000-3000 B.C. Paldorient13(2):9-35. 1988 Reconstructing and Interpreting the
Robert C. Henrickson is currently Senior Archaeologist in charge of the ceramics, Gordion Excavations Project (1988-present), working on Late Bronze through Roman pottery from recent and ongoing excavation. His recent research has concentrated on various approaches to reconstructing ancient pottery craft and technology in the Near East in the Bronze and Iron Ages, including work at the Conservation Analytical Laboratory at the Smithsonian Institution. His previous field work has been in Iran, Iraq,Turkey,and Greece. Dr. Henrickson received his B.A. in Latin from Vanderbilt University (1973),and his M.A. (1976) and Ph.D. (1984) in West Asian Archaeology from the Department of Near Eastern Studies at the University of Toronto.
Technologies of Ancient Ceramics. Pp. 89-102 in MaterialsIssuesii Art and Archaeotgy.Edited by E.V Sayre, P B. Vandiver,J. Druzik and C. Stevenson. Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings 123.Pittsburgh. Voigt, Mary M. 1994 Excavations at Gordion 1988-89: The Yasslhoyiik Stratigraphic Sequence. Pp. 265-293 in A•tatolianIronlAges 3. Proceedings of the Third International Anatolian Iron Age Symposium in Van,Turkey 6-12 August 1990, edited by D. French and A. Qilingiroglu. British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, Monograph 16. Young, R. S. 1966 The Gordion Campaign of 1965. AmericanJourll of Archaeology 70:267-278.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
A
7'
Hittite
Seal from Megiddo
... ........
4. dp? .t7.
TaA'
01
By Itamar Singer P
A.
?A
ETER NEVE'S EXCAVATIONS IN
Hattuga enriched us with thousands of new seal impressions which will open new vistas in the study of Hittite glyptics (Neve 1993:52-58).I have re-published one seal in this modest contribution in honor of a much admired friend and colleague. This seal has hardly any importance per se, except for its place of discovery-Megiddo, a town with other connections to the Hittite world. The seal was found in the excavations of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago in the late thirties.1 It comes from Area CC, Locus 1829,Stratum VII B (Loud 1948:156) which is dated to the thirteenth century BCE.The area is residential, and the structure in which the seal was found has nothing particular to distinguish it from other neighboring houses (Loud 1948:fig.409).The biconvex seal is made of steatite and measures nineteen mm maximum in diameter, eleven mm in thickness. The perforation runs perpendicular to the inscription on face B. Both faces of the seal are framed by a circular border.This type of Hittite seal is dated to the thirteenth century BCE (Gorny 1993:191).A photograph of the seal was published in MegiddoII (Loud 1948:pl.162:7)together with a short comment by I. J.Gelb.2 Clelia Mora'scorpus of Hittite seals includes a sketch drawing based on this photograph and a tentative reading.3 Collation of the original seal in the Oriental Institute Museum (A 20551)4 provides, I believe, an improved reading of the name. Face A depicts a somewhat illDedicated to Peter Neve
Megiddo (Tellel-Mutesellim)was situated immediatelyon the best communicationavenue between the Egyptianand Hittitespheresof influenceafter their mid-thirteenthcenturypeace treaty.The charioteer'sseal joinsother data, includingan akkadianletter uncoveredin Bocazk6y that mentionsthe town and a Hittiteivoryplaque,pointingto the significanceof Megiddo on the politicalmap of the LateBronzeAge. Photographcourtesyof R.Cleave.
designed animal, probably a lion, striding to the right (on the impression). Its long, curving tail is similar to that of lions depicted on other seals and the very schematic head seems to represent the open mouth of a roaring lion (so also Mora 1987, but Gelb, above n., thought the animal was a dog). Above the animal there is a large "filler"which resembles the floral motif L 152s(rather than a bird, as tentatively suggested by Mora).An additional large "filler"is between the animal's legs, and there is a smaller one in front of his chest. Face B has the name of the seal owner running from top to bottom, his title on the left, and the combination "WELL-BEING"and "MAN" on the right. It reads: L 450-395-312-376; 289; 370; 386 = A-nu-VIRzlAURIGA; BONUS; VIR Anu-ziti; Charioteer; Well-being; Man. Two small "fillers"are on each side of the zi. The first V-shaped sign (L 450) usually has its "arms"more closed (see e.g., Gonnet 1991:450),but it seems that the seal carver had diffi-
culties in reproducing accurate signs.6 The "a"vocalism is more often expressed on Anatolian seals with a (L 209) or i (L 19),but it is quite common on the Hittite seals from Meskene/Emar, especially in initial position.7 The second sign has only seven strokes, one of them very poorly carved. Nevertheless, its identification with nit (L 395) is very probable. Quite often this sign appears with less than the "required" nine strokes, with eight or even with seven (Dinqol and Dinqol 1980:24,no. 8 with further refs.; Dinqol 1983:Taf. XXIII/23 A). AURIGA (L 289) is represented with a large rhomboid attached to two instead of the usual three vertical lines (representing the reins of a chariot). In short, both the inscription and the drawing seem to have been performed by a somewhat inexperienced seal engraver. The name Anu-ziti is so far unattested, but both its elements are attested in Anatolian names (Laroche 1966:34,324f.).The main interest of the seal is in the title or profession of the owner, "charioteer,"which corresponds to cuneiform kartappa 58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
91
*'I
r
century.Perhapsthe renewed excavationsat Megiddowill provide furtherevidencefor the role of this city in the PaxHethitica-Egyptiaca.
,
Hittiteseal from Megiddoand impressionsin clay(top).The diminutiveseal bearsa naturalisticdesign on one face and an inscriptionon the other.It is made of steatite (soapstone),an easilycarved silicatecommonlyused for seals and other smallobjects.
SThe
j4
?
As I triedto show (Laroche1956:29ff.). in a prosopographyof Takuhlinuof the titlewas Ugarit(Singer1983:9ff.), bornby officialdiplomatsof Hatti and of vassalstates.The officewas originallyconnectedwith horses and chariots(hencethe hieroglyphicsign representingreins).Some of the kartapprimentionedin textsfrom Hattula and fromUgaritfunctioned as special deputiesof theirrulersin complicateddiplomaticmissions.For example,Zuzzu was involvedin the negotiationsprecedingthe royal marriagebetween RamessesIIand a Hittiteprincess.8Diplomaticenvoys were particularlyactivein the new bond between Hattiand Egyptafter the signing of the PeaceTreatyin 1258 BCE.
Megiddowas an important
?? ? ..
r
? ?? ? ???? ?? ?.?. ?~I ??Z ? ?r ... ??? ???i? ?.. ?..??? ??
stationon the diplomaticroute between the two royalcourts.A fragmentaryAkkadianletterfrom Bogazkoydemonstratesthis with its two-foldmentionof the town Makkitta(KBo28.86;Singer1988). The contextleavesno doubt thatthis is Megiddoin the JezreelValley, frequentedby Egyptianand Hittite messengerstravelingbetween their respectivecourts.The textpreserves the name of one Hittitemessenger only partly,but it can plausiblybe restoredas Ti[li-Tetub],who is explicitlydesignatedin an Ugaritic textas "themessengerwho was sent to Egypt."Fromothertextswe learn that the Hittiteand the Egyptian diplomaticmissionsconsistedeach of severalenvoys,probablyof different rankand qualification.9 The best known Hittiteconnectionwith Megiddois the exquisiteHittiteivory plaquefound in the "treasury"of the palacein AreaAA, now in the OrientalInstituteMuseum.10Stylistic and historicalconsiderationspoint to a late imperialdate for the plaque, coincidingwith the heydayof Egyptian-Hittitecooperationin the second half of the thirteenthcentury BCE.11Anu-ziti's seal joins this
The 19x 11mmHittiteseal was a biconvex designwith a center perforation.
92
Biblical 58:2(1995) Archaeologist
constellationof indicatorsof the significanceof Megiddoon the politicalmap of the thirteenth
SThisis,so far,the only Hittitestampseal foundin a controlledexcavationin Israel.Two silverringseals werefoundat Tellel-Farah (Petrie1930:pl.XXXVI;Macdonald,et al.1932: 58,65 and p.30) and one of bronze pl. LXXIII: at TelNami (Singer1994).In addition,a Hittite bulla was foundat TelAphek(Singer1977). 2"Itbelongsto the classof perforatedbutton seals.One side is occupiedby the name of the ownerwrittenin Hittitehieroglyphiccharacters,the otherby a pictureof a dog (or panther, accordingto Bossert)and a few symbols.The formof the seal, the signs,and the pictorial are typicallyHittite.The seal representations most probablydatesfromthe time of the NeoHittiteEmpire(i.e., ca.1400-1200B.C.)." 3Mora1987:266, XI3.4.:x?-ma/ i? - VIR?ZI AURIGA 4I am indebtedto Dr.EmilyTeeterand Dr. RaymondTindelof the OrientalInstitute Museumforfacilitatingmy study of thisseal and forprovidingme photographsand impressions,and to Ms.KateSartherforthe drawing. 5 L + numberrefersto the enumerationof hieroglyphicsigns in Laroche1960. 6
Thereis a slightresemblancebetweenthis sign and the firstsign on AnkaraMuseum8 B, identifiedby the publishersas L447,Na5 Taf.VIII),whichis (DinColand DinCol1980:24, also followedby nu,but on our seal the first sign lacksthe two "thorns"at the bottom. Gonnet1991:212; 7Laroche1981:10; Singer, forthcoming(A-pa-n6 ;A -pi-la-lu).
8KUB21:38 obv.22; Helck1963:89.See now Edel1994II:147ff.,325,335 forfurtheroccurrencesof Zuzzu in the Hittite-Egyptian correspondence. Forsome of the Hittitemissionsto Egypt,see Singer1977:187n. 18. 10 Loud1939:10 ft.,pl.11.Forartisticevaluations see in particularBarnett1982:28,34 and fig.12 and Alexander1991.Forthe cultural-political contextsee Singer1988-89,whereI suggested an Egyptianownershipof this extraordinarily richcollectionof objetsd'art.(I haveto correct now my statementin 1988-89:105, thatthe two figuresat the head of the plaqueareHittite kings.Gilterbock1993has convincingly demonstratedthatthe imagetoppedby a winged disk can only representthe Sun-godof Heaven;see also Alexander, 1991:164).
Dedicatedto PeterNeve
Artist'srenderingof the design of side A shows an animalprobablya poorly executedstridinglionwith a long curvingtail and open, roaringmouth. The opposite side bearsthe name of the seal owner-Anu-ziti-as well as histitle, "charioteer," and the words "well-being,"and "man."Thetitle, "charioteer," markedAnu-zitias a Hittitediplomaticenvoy.
"1 For the late imperial imagery see Alexander,
1991:172ff. Still unaware of my article (1988-89),Alexander (p. 182) mentions the possibility that the Hittite plaque reached Megiddo after the fall of the Hittite Empire. I consider this possibility as most unlikely.
Bibliography Alexander, R. L. 1991 ?auSga and the Hittite Ivory from Megiddo. Journalof Near EasternStudies 50:161-182.
Dingol,A. M.
Tarih Porada,T.Ozgtiq. Ankara: T'irk Kurumu Basimevi. KBo aus Boghazkdi 1916-23,Keilschrifttext 1954 Wissenschaftliche Ver6ffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 30/36/68-70/72-. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs. KUB 1921- Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazkii Staatlich Museen zu Berlin, Voderasiatische Abteilung. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. L Hieroglyphic sign in Laroche 1960.
Professor Itamar Singer is Associate Professor of Hittitology and Ancient Near Eastern Cultures at Tel Aviv University. He received his doctoral degree in 1978after studies at the Hebrew University,Tel Aviv University,and the University of Marburg. Dr. Singer has written widely on various aspects of Hittite religion, history, and culture as well as on other aspects of ancient Near Eastern history. He has been visiting scholar in many countries and recently was a guest of the Hittite Dictionary Project in Chicago.
1983 Hethitische Hieroglyphensiegel in Laroche, E. den Museen zu Adana, Hatay und 1956 Noms de dignitaires. Revuehittiteet Istanbul. AnadolhAraptimalari/Jahrbuch asianiqueXIV/58:26-32. fiir Kleinasiatische Forschung9:173-249, 1960 Leshieroglypheshittites.Paris:Editions Taf.1-35. du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Dinqol, A. M. and Dinlol, B. 1966 Les nomsdes Hittites.Paris: LibrairieC. 1980 HethitischeHieroglyphensiegel im Museum Klincksieck. Anatolische Zivilisationen. Ankara fiir 1981 Les hieroglyphes de Meskene-Emar Turizmi, Eskieserleri ve Miizeleri et le style "syro-hittite'.'Akkadica Sevenler Dernegi Yaymlari10. 22:5-14. Edel, E. Loud, G. 1994 Die figyptisch-hethitische Korrespondenz 1939 TheMegiddoIvories.Oriental Institute aus Boghazkbyin babylonischer und Publications 52. Chicago: The UniverhethitischerSprache.Band I-II. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. sity of Chicago Press. 1948 MegiddoII: Seasonsof 1935-39.Oriental Institute Publicatons 62. Chicago: The Gonnet, H. 1991 Legendes des empreintes hieroUniversity of Chicago Press. glyphiques anatoliennes. Pp. 198-214, Macdonald, E.,Starkey,J. L.,and Harding, L. pl. I-VII in Textessyriensde l'Agedu 1932 Beth-peletII (TellFaraO London: British BronzeRecent(Aula Orientalis-SuppleSchool of Archaeology in Egypt. mnentaEdited by D. Arnaud. Barcelona:AUSA. Mora, C. 1987 LaglitticaAnatolicadel II millennioA.C: Gorny, R. I. I sigillia ClassficazioneTipologica. 1993 The Biconvex Seals of Alisar H6yiuk. iscrizionegeroglifica. Pavia: Gianni AnatolianStudies43:163-191. Iuculano Editore. Gilterbock, H. G. Neve, P. 1993 Sungod or King? Pp. 225-226 in 1993 HIattuea: Stadtder GbtteriindTempel. Anatolia Aspectsof Art and Iconography: Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. and its Neighbor& Studiesin Honorof NimetOzgii(. Edited by M. Mellink, E.
Singer, I. 1977 A Hittite Hieroglyphic Seal Impression from TelAphek. TelAviv 4:178190. 1983 Takuhlinu and Haya: Two Governors in the Ugarit Letter from TelAphek. TelAviv 10:3-25. 1988 Megiddo Mentioned in a Letter from Bogazk6y. Pp. 327-332 in Documentum Asiae MinorisAntiquae(Festschrift HeinrichOttenW Edited by E. Neu and Ch. Riister.Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. 1988-89 The Political Status of Megiddo VII A. TelAviv 15-16:101-112. 1994 A Hittite Signet Ring from Tel Nami. Pp. 189-193 in kinattfitu9a diarati (RaphaelKutscherMemorialVolume= Edited by A. Rainey. TelAviv: Tel Aviv University, Institute of Archaeology. n.d. The Hittite Seals. In Cuneiformn Tablets in the Collectionof the BibleLandsMuVol.I: The EmarTablets. seumJerusalem, In press.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
Petrie,W. M. E 1930 Beth-PeletI (TellFaralLondon: British School of Archaeology in Egypt.
93
1 01
rf 4~'1
~
~
?
v .s' is
I
I
I
?'s
A'7 it
'r -.1.,
K4,'W
pp-:
~3
It lio v W&NJ
i
?
rv%. r,
3k
By Paul Zimansky
NO
middledistanceat left center.Thecitadelwas the initial VanCitadelwith Toprakkale(Rusahinili) centerof the empire.RusaIIset up histhrone at the newlyfounded Rusahinili.
"HALF SHATTERED SUNK,
visage" reminiscent of Shelley' Ozymandias has yet been found in the highland region around Lakes Van and Urmia,1 but a forgotten potentate who could have commanded the mighty to look on his works and despair, is emerging from mists of Anatolian history.A series of independent archaeological discoveries, some old and some quite recent, reveals that the most energetic instigator of building projects in the Iron Age Near East was a ruler who inspired no legends and about whom the written record tells us very little-Rusa II, the last great king of Urartu.The reputations of better known figures such as Solomon, Nebuchadnezzar, and the kings of Assyria rest on the enrichment of pre-existing sites or at best the foundation of a single capital. Rusa, however,built new fortress cities all over his realm, each instance involving 94
..:3%"! .7i
r
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
manpower, technical skill, and mat6riel on a scale that the better known figures would be hard pressed to match. The kingdom that Rusa controlled in the second quarter of the seventh century BCEstretched across the mountainous terrain of eastern Anatolia approximately eight hundred miles from east to west and five hundred from north to south (Kleiss and Hauptmann 1976).Much of this territory was sparsely populated and best suited for pasturage. Urartian settlement was concentrated in pockets beside the lake shores and in isolated locations where river valleys broadened sufficiently to permit intensive cultivation of the alluvium through irrigation.A highly integrated network of fortresses and roads bound these focal points together (Zimansky 1985). By the time Rusa came to the
throne, Urartu had weathered the repeated attacks of the powerful Assyrian Empire for a century and a half. Its artisans had generated their own distinctive style which can be seen on thousands of surviving bronze and stone artifacts.Its rulers had set up hundreds of monuments bearing cuneiform inscriptions in the Urartian language. Urartian kings waged annual military campaigns, rounding up booty and captives by the thousands from neighboring populations. They ordained sacrifices of countless animals to a populous pantheon, presided over by a god, Haldi, who seems closely identified with the state. (Piotrovsky 1969; Wartke1993).Much construction had also been undertaken: in addition to fortresses, roads, irrigation projects, their dedicatory inscriptions speak of temples, cult sites, storehouses, and specialized structures whose Dedicated to Peter Neve
function is not understood. While the creative accomplishments of Urartian civilization have been recognized since the nineteenth century, we would have no conception of the personal importance of Rusa II without the testimony of recent archaeological excavations. In fact, other sources of evidence consigned him to obscurity. The dynamics of Urartian history have generally been interpreted through the written record, much of which comes from biased Assyrian reports.The Assyrians are most informative about Urartu in the late ninth and eighth centuries, but singularly laconic in the seventh. The texts of the Urartians themselves, particularly building inscriptions, have nearly the same temporal distribution. Taken together, these historical sources point to 714 BCEas a time of crisis and shift in Urartu'sfortunes. In that year, Sargon II of Assyria invaded Urartu, sending his armies through five Urartian provinces on a mission of destruction. This is the best documented campaign in Assyrian history, thanks to a poetic and lengthy "letter"to the god Assur, now the pride of the tablet collection of the Louvre (Thureau-Dangin 1912). Here Sargon reported on his actions, apparently quite soon after his return. Although he makes no mention of it in the letter,Sargon'sattack appears to have been undertaken when Urartu was reeling from another defeat that was probably even more devastating: the warlike Cimmerians made their first appearance in history by routing Urartian forces and killing a large number of governors in the process. We learn of this not from any public claim, but from letters transmitting intelligence gathered by spies along the Assyrian/Urartian border to Sargon'scourt. The sense that the Urartu suffered serious damage at this time is reinforced by Urartian records themselves-not so much in what they say,but by a sharp drop in the number of inscriptions. Most of the documents that survive from Urartu Dedicated to Peter Neve
are not clay tablets,but display inscriptions carved in stone, virtually all of which were royally commissioned. They are generally stylized and repetitive. The majority are building inscriptions on blocks that were set into the architecture of structures such as temples, storehouses, and fortresses. Others were written on living rock to record victories in a specific campaign. The latter are particularly useful in gauging the extent of the empire and understanding something of its historical geography. In essence, Urartian texts appear to act as something of a barometer of royal fortunes. Around 714 BCE,the barometer fell. Thus, to earlier generations of scholars, it appeared that Urartu'sera of greatness was the eighth century, after which the kingdom was more or less in eclipse. Tobe sure, there are enough seventh-century Urartian inscriptions to make it clear that Urartu survived. Argi'ti II, the immediate predecessor of Rusa II, actually left monuments farther to the east than any other king. Roughly a dozen inscriptions of Rusa II were found. Post-dating these, several isolated royal display inscriptions were carved in the name of third, rather obscure Rusa, who calls himself the son of Erimena. This is a modest corpus compared to the scores of inscriptions associated with each eighth century ruler,and there are no elaborate annals, such as those of Argisti I or Sarduri II, recording military campaigns. Archaeological evidence, however, rescues the reputation of Rusa II and dramatically counters the notion that Urartu slipped into an irreversible decline after Sargon'sattack.The discoveries came so gradually that their overall import has hardly attracted comment along the way, but it is now clear that Rusa II brought Urartu to a level of architectural magnificence that none of his predecessors attained. Some of the clues to his importance have been known for decades; others are still coming from
Fragmentof stele inscribedwith the Annalsof SarduriII,VanMuseum.RusaII left no annalscomparableto his eighthcenturypredecessors.Allphotographscourtesy of PaulZimansky
the ground. The key fact is that there are now five sites founded by Rusa II, each one of major significance. Rusa seems to have done as much building as all of the other Urartian kings put together. Toprakkale/Rusahinili first of Rusa'senclaves to become known archaeologically was Toprakkale,a fortress on the outskirts of modem Van and the first Urartian site ever excavated. In this case, the issue was not the importance of the site, but the identity of its founder. Urartian inscriptions are generally clear on who built what, giving both the name of the king and his patronymic. Here, however, the evidence is circumstantial. The citadel rock at Van,which lies some five kilometers to the west of Toprakkale, was the original center of the empire, and beside it stood the capital city of Tu'pa. Toprakkaleis a more defensible site, and it was long believed that the reverses of the late eighth century caused the Urartians to build there to give their empire a more secure center of government. The ancient name of Toprakkale, Rusahinili, indicates that it had been
The
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
95
Bastamfromthe south. The mainfortressis on the ridge in the centerof the photograph,to the rightof which,below the saddleconnectingit to the next ridge,structuresof the settlementare visible.
..~i built by a king Rusa, and the logic of this argument was that this should refer to Rusa I, Sargon'sopponent and the grandfather of Rusa II.A broken inscription found at site of Keqi*G61, which mentioned an irrigation project to provide water to Tu'pa and Rusahinili, was for a long time attributed to Rusa I, but only because it was erroneously assumed to join another block, which bore the name of that king. This identification has now been rejected. New inscriptions have emerged which demonstrate that Rusa II both set up his throne in Rusahinili and moved the god Haldi there, so it seems almost certain that he was also the founder of this Rusahinili. None of the many artifacts found at Toprakkalecan be dated to the eighth century (Zimansky 1985:77-78),but several bear inscriptions of Rusa II and other seventh century kings.
96
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
KarmirBlur/Cityof Teisheba e "City of Teisheba"was a second major site created by 1Rusa II, securely identified by a building inscription found in situ. Located at modern Karmir Blur,on the outskirts of Erevan, in the Armenian Republic, this is the kind of site archaeologists dream about: violently destroyed and rich in wellpreserved remains. Although most of its inhabitants seem to have been spared when the fortress was put to the torch, the collapsing walls created a level of debris meters thick. These nearly anaerobic conditions enabled biological materials as well as luxury goods to survive. The complete ground plan of the citadel has been unearthed and the functions of the 150 rooms can be determined by their inventories. There were eight wine magazines, each with scores of pithoi large enough for a person to crawl
::s::~~: 5~:5
_li-i--: , ": i?
Bullafrom Bastamwith inscriptionmentioning RusaII'sbuildingactivitiesat Rusahinili. Thetext reads:"Thesame year Rusa,the son of Arghisti,set up the throne in Rusahinili. Fromthe landof Qilbani,boardsand carpenthe landof ters xx-ed. Rusa(i)-URU.TUR, Alaa'ni."
into. The excavatorestimates the total storage capacity at 9000 gallons of wine and 750 tons of grain (Piotrovsky 1969:133).There is also an associated town containing houses of both Dedicated to Peter Neve
EFMX
:,j?
Pi'l
N.,
?,p
'Ut
-Ow
rooms, only a few of which were cleared by the time the Iranian revolution brought the excavations to a close. The stone foundations of the walls, which are still visible from miles away,are grounded on special footings carved into the bedrock, which must have required thousands of human-years of labor to prepare. The small finds at Bastam are not particularly rich, probably because those who conquered the site had the good sense to wait until after they had pillaged it before setting it ablaze. Nevertheless, excavatorsunearthed more administrative tablets,as well as countless bullae bearing the royal seal of Rusa II (Kleiss 1979,1988). Kef Kalesi
Basaltpylonsin palaceof Rusaat KefKalesi.
Bastam/Rusai-URU.TUR
an roundtheturnof thecentury,
Reliefof gate-protectingdeity fromAdilcevaz.VanMuseum.
:t
d :-
the lower strata of society and the elite (Piotrovski 1969:177-78).Like Toprakkale,Karmir Blur offered cuneiform tablets which show that it was directly administered by the Urartian king (Zimansky 1985:80-84). No excavation in Urartu has provided a richer yield of small finds or better architectural preservation. Dedicated to Peter Neve
inscription in which Rusa II claimed to have built a place called "Rusa'sSmall City" (RusaiURU.TUR) was found in a secondary context, built into a bridge in the village of Kasyan, in northwest Iran. In 1968,Wolfram Kleiss of the German Archaeological Institute in Teheran discovered the site to which this referred beside the nearby village of Bastam. Despite its name, RusaiURU.TUR is one of the largest Urartian enclaves.known (Kleiss 1983:283-84). "Rusa'sSmall City" was constructed on a steep spur of rock that controls access to a plain watered by the Aq Chay.The entire eminence was fortified from plain level to summit, the difference in elevation being such that each day it took the German excavation teams half an hour to climb to their trenches from their base camp near the Urartian settlement below. The lower settlement was an extensive city which stretched out for nearly a kilometer along a wadi. Everywhere, the remains speak of architecturalmagnificence. Again, there are enormous areas of the site given over to store-
fourth site of unusual prominence was discovered near the north shore of Lake Van in the 1950s and excavated by a Turkish team led by Emin Bilgiq and Baki Og"in (1964).Once again, an inscription in its secondary context provided the key to recognizing the site's prominence. Surveyors found the stone near the village of Adilcevaz in a retaining wall that had slipped into Lake Van (Burney and Lawson 1958). The Adilcevaz inscription mentioned that Rusa had imported captives from the west and settled them here. On the high ground well back from the lake, Charles Burney identified a major citadel at Kef Kalesi, and the Turkishexcavators later uncovered a palace and fortress complex. Sculpted pylons, some of which bear inscriptions of Rusa II, make it clear that this was the site from which the Adilcevaz inscription originated, along with some of the fine pieces of Urartian relief sculpture which were found with it. Ayanis/Rusahinili Ithough recent turmoil has curtailed archaeological work in Urartu, evidence for Rusa'simportance continues to emerge. Altan (ilingiroglu of Ege 58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
97
University in Izmir has begun excavations at Ayanis, on the shore of Lake Van thirty km to the northwest of Van itself. Once again, this citadel was founded by a king and suffered a violent destruction. The biggest surprise is the name of the site-an inscription of Rusa II establishes that like the fortress at Toprakkale,it, too, was called Rusahinili. The inscription makes a distinction between the two Rusahinilis with an epithet. In sum, Rusa II gave his name to three fortress complexes-Bastam, Toprakkale,and Ayanis-and founded at least two others of significant size-Kef Kalesi near Adilcevaz and Karmir Blur.These are among the largest and richest Urartian sites. No other Urartian king is known to have created more than one enclave on this scale, and none named more than one site after himself. Something extraordinary was going on during Rusa'sreign. If Rusa was the commanding figure his architectural works suggest, why did he make so little impression on posterity? We know nothing about his personality: there is no portrait,no anecdotal material, no reference to him in Greek historiography or the Bible.Two factors may help to explain this paradox. In the first place, none of the great works of Rusa survived very long after his reign. Secondly, the Urartian empire itself was structured in such a way that its culture was ephemeral and its legacy unlikely to be transmitted to posterity. Both of these hypotheses require some elaboration, and both are dependent upon recently won archaeological evidence. Let us first consider the question of how long the kingdom lasted after Rusa. Until quite recently,the standard answer was that a biblical reference (Jer51:27) and Neo-Babylonian chronicles proved Urartu was still a power until around 590 BCE. Greek historians record that the Medes were in control of eastern Anatolia by 585 BCE,so there is no possibility of an Urartian kingdom after that. 98
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
Stephan Kroll (1984) has recently challenged this sixth century date on the basis of several strands of evidence, the most compelling of which come from excavations at Bastam. There, in several rooms, excavators found the bones of thousands of animals in association with bullae impressed with the seal of Rusa II.A few other sealings with names that sound royal-names that others have argued belonged to late Urartian kings-also came from the same context, but they constitute only a small percentage of the evidence. These sealings were peculiar in that they all had the same iconography,which differed from a royal seal. The owners were given a title, IA.NIN-li, which may mean "prince,"but certainly does not mean "king."Kroll
has interpreted the bone assemblages as meat storage of some form, and since there is little likelihood that meat would be kept for decades, the citadel had to have been destroyed in the reign of Rusa II (Kroll 1984:157). Since there is no evidence that the other persons named on the bullae :'?
T
/t i; i
t:, ?~d:\ r r
???~.~'
:4
Royalbullawith the seal of RusaIIfrom bone roomsat Bastamhelp with determiningthe durationof the Urartiankingdom.Thousandsof animalbones were found in associationwith bullaebearingRusaII'sseal. Similarmysteriouscollectionsof bones were found at Toprakkale and KarmirBlur.Whatevertheirgenesis,the bones at Bastamwere clearlydeposited in RusaII's time and not added to by any subsequentUrartianroyalty.Thusthe destructionof the city occurredduringRusaII'sreign.Allowingabout a decade for two obscuresuccessors,the kingdom of Urartuprobablydissipatedby ca. 640 BCE.
Urartian King Rusa II's Major Enclaves
Black
Russia Georgia
Sea Armenia
Azerbijian
)(
SLaipr,' SKamir CIAas< Ad
,or
Turkey Turkey A Ai
,
raz
*Aya is ' Bastam
Glii Toprakale
Iran " Lriai
0 0
0
100
100 200'm 200km
100
Iraq
Syria
200 mi
Principalsites knownto have been founded by RusaII.Thisvolumeof constructionmakesRusaII one of the ancient NearEast'sgreatestbuilders. Dedicated to Peter Neve
A.",4
,L
??
*
f. X6,.~?
I
~7;e
~?- ..c?..
iEIiv
Entranceto staircasecut into livingrockon citadelat Toprakkale.
ever ruled, most of these putative later kings now appear simply to have been members of Rusa II'sroyal family. Kroll dismissed the other evidence for a prolonged existence of Urartu: the references in Neo-Babylonian chronicles of 609 and 608 BCE were to a geographical region, not a kingdom, and Jeremiah contains many other anachronisms, quite incompatible with its ostensible date of 594 BCE(Kroll 1984:165-168).Allowing for the existence of two obscure Urartian kings after Rusa-Rusa son of Erimena and a Sarduri,who is mentioned by AssurbanipalToprakkaleand Karmir may have outlasted Bastam by a decade or so, but the kingdom of Urartu was essentially gone by around 640 BCE (Kroll 1984:170). Having taken part in the excavation of the bones at Bastam myself, I cannot agree with Kroll'sinterpretation of these as meat storage rooms. The bones were simply too fragmentary,too closely packed, too burned, and too disarticulated to have had flesh upon them when the citadel was destroyed. I believe that the bones themselves were being kept, perhaps because leftovers from the Dedicated to Peter Neve
king's meals were tabooed in some way (Zimansky 1988). In any case, neither the evidence nor my interpretation of it invalidates Kroll'sbasic point about chronology. Whatever the reason the bones were in these rooms, they were put there in the time of Rusa II and no other king either added to them or removed them. The royal activity that created these assemblages was clearly practiced on a grand scale in Rusa'stime. Similar rooms full of bones were found at both Toprakkaleand Karmir Blur.If, as seems likely, they were associated with an essential Urartian institution or ideology, one would expect later kings to be represented as well. Although this does not constrict the time frame as tightly as the meat storage hypothesis, Rusa II was in all probability the last ruler of any consequence at Bastam. The Urartian kingdom was thoroughly destroyed, not simply taken over. None of the great foundations of Rusa II were reoccupied and their toppled mud brick walls soon decayed into amorphous mounds of soil. In the absence of historical records, the agents of Urartu'sdemise cannot be identified with certainty. The traditional date would implicate
the Medes, whereas the earlier one would give a larger role to the Scythians-a non-sedentary people whose reputation in Asia Minor is rather like that of the Cimmerians. If the Medes inherited the territory after a hiatus of some decades, there was little possibility of any direct transmission of institutions and historical memories. We know almost nothing about the Median empire, except what Greek historians like Herodotus tell us. Their presumption that it had the same sort of structure as the later Achaemenid Empire-which might well have co-opted Urartian administrative mechanisms-is highly suspect (Sancisi-Weerdenburg1988). When Xenophon passed through Urartian territory in 401 BCE,ethnic groups such as the Kurds and the Armenians were prominent, and there was little to remind him of Urartu or its greatest builder. Another reason that Rusa was so quickly forgotten has to do with the nature of the Urartian cultural tradition. What we really see in the Urartian assemblage is a set of styles, artifacts,and features that pertain to a military elite, rather than to a broad spectrum of the population. The best known Urartian sites are fortresses, and the most characteristic artifacts are bronzes, particularly pieces of royally dedicated equipment. The Urartian religion appears to be a state religion (Salvini 1989),and the god Haldi, who stood at the head of the pantheon, vanishes with the Urartian state. Urartian writing, as noted above, is almost entirely royal. There obviously was a popular culture, or perhaps a variety of popular cultures within the state. Somebody spoke Urartian, obviously, but there was plenty of room in the interstices of this society for other groups like the Manneans, Kurds, and Armenians to have their own traditions. When the elite government was swept away,presumably by the Scythian invaders in the late seventh century, no unity persisted underneath. So "nothing beside remains."The BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
99
memory of Rusa perished, lost not in "lone and level sands,"but in the folded terrain around Mt. Ararat. Posterity,at least in the West, has been more impressed by the works of Oriental potentates whose construction projects are more imagined than real, such as those of Semiramis, Ramses, and Solomon. Sargon will be remembered as founder of Khorsabad, even though he never finished it and his efforts at that single site were no greater than Rusa'sat Bastam alone. When it comes to creating legends by architectural accomplishment in a land of mud brick and stone, the written word is clearly mightier than the trowel. The imprint of Rusa'smajesty and the grandeur of the kingdom he commanded in its latter days survive nevertheless in the soil. It is to archaeologists that he must entrust the restoration of his reputation. 1Shelley's poem ends: "And on the pedestal these words appear:/'My name is Ozymandias, king of kings;/ Look on my works, ye mighty and despair,'/ Nothing beside remains. /Round the decay/Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,/The lone and level sands stretch far away."
Bibliography Azarpay, G. 1968 UrartianArt andArtifacts:A Chronological Study.Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California. Barnett, R. D. 1950 The Excavation of the British Museum at ToprakKale, near Van. Iraq 12:1-43 Bilgiq,E. and Ogiin, B. 1964 1964 Adilcevaz Kef Kalesi Kazilarl [Excavations at Kef Kalesi of Adilcevaz, 1964].Anadolu(Anatolia) 8:65-120. Burney,C. A. 1957 Urartian Fortresses and Towns in the Van Region. AnatolianStudies7:37-53. Burney,C. A. and Lang, D. M. 1971 The Peoplesof theHills:AncientArarat and Caucasus.London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson. Burney,C. A. and Lawson, G. R. 1958 Urartian Reliefs at Adllcevaz on Lake Van, and a Rock Relief from the
100
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
Karasu near Birecik. AnatolianStudies 8:211-218. Diakonoff, I. M. 1984 The Pre-Historyof theArmenianPeople. Translated by L. Jennings. Delmar, NY: Caravan Books.
~~I
Haas, V, ed. 1986 Das ReichUrartu:Ein altortientalische Symposien.Xenia: Konstanzer althistorische VortrAgeund Forschungen 17 Konstanz: Universititsverlag Konstanz. Kleiss, W 1983 Gr6Benvergleiche urartiischer Bergen und Siedlungen. Pp. 283-290 in Kleinasiens: BeitriigezurAltertumnskunde fiir KurtBittel,vol. 1. Edited Festschrift by R. M. Boehmer and H. Hauptmann. Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern. 1988 BastamII. TeheranerForschungen 5. Berlin: Mann. Kleiss, W.,Hauptmann, H. et al. 1976 Topographische Kartevon Urartu. Archdiologische Mitteilungen aus Iran Ergdinzungsband3. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer. K6nig, E W. 1955-57 Handbuchder chaldischenInschriften.2 vols. Archiv fturOrientforschung 8. Graz: E. Weidner. Kroll, S. 1976 Keramikurartdischer Festungenin Iran. Archdiologische Mitteilungen aus Iran, Ergdinzungsband2. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag. 1984 Urartus Untergang in anderer Sicht. IstanbulerMitteilungen34:151-170.
Paul Zimansky received his Ph.D. from the University of Chicago in 1980and since 1983has taught in the Department of Archaeology at Boston University where he is an Associate Professor. He has excavated at Nippur (Ira),Bastam (Iran),and 'Ain Dara (Syria). Most recently he has directed excavations at Tell Hamide in northern Iraq and served as co-director of the TellAbu Duwari project in southern Iraq. He is the editor of Mar Shipri,the newsletter of ASOR'sCommittee on Mesopotamian Civilization, and author of Ecologyand Empire:TheStructureof the UrartianState. E. J. Brill. Sevin, Veli 1988 The Oldest Highway; Between the Two Regions of Van and Elazig. Antiquity62/236:547-551.
van Loon, M. N. 1966 UrartianArt: Its DistinctiveTraitsin the Lightof New Excavations.Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut.
Thureau-Dangin, E 1912 Une relationde la huitibnecampagnede Sargon,Textes cuneformes du Louvre 3. Paris: Paul Geuthner.
Melikisvili, G. A. 1960 Urartskieklinoobraznye nadpisi.Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.
Wartke,R.-B. 1993 Urartu:Das Reicham Ararat.Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 59. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.
Piotrovsky, B. B. 1969 TheAncientCivilizationof Urartu.Translated by J.Hogarth. Geneva: Nagel. Salvini, M. 1989 Le panth6on de l'Urartu et le fondement de I'6tat. Studiepigraficie liguistici sul VicinoOrienteantico6:79-89. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, H. 1988 Was There Ever a Median Empire. Pp. 197-212 in AchaemenidHistoryIII. Methodand Theory.Edited by A. Kuhrt and H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg. Lieden:
Zimansky, P 1985 Ecologyand Empire:The Structureof the UrartianState.Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization. Chicago: Oriental Institute. 1988 MB2/OB5 Excavations and the Problem of Urartian Bone Rooms. Pp. 107-124 in BastamII. Edited by W Kleiss. TeheranerForschungen 5. Berlin: Mann.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
Swords, Armor, and
Figurines
By K. Ashhan Yener
NEVE ISTOBECONGRATULATED
PETER for contributing vastly to the
archaeological knowledge of the Hittite empire. This article in his honor collects observations on the nature of metal industries in Anatolia, with special reference to the Hittites. Along with this, I make some suggestions for sourcing the ores which were exploited from the Chalcolithic period to the Late Bronze Age in the south-central Taurus mountains. This provides some insights into the resource strategies of the Hittite and earlier cultures by illuminating a highland industry which is often missing in the archaeological record. One of the more puzzling aspects of Hittite imperial geography has been the location of the Hittite capital, Bo";azk6y (Hattu'a), in north central Turkey.A large number of the excavated documents reflect imperial political and economic interests in bellicose southern regions, such as Carchemish, Aleppo, and Alalakh. Yet the Hittites chose to manage their empire from the mountainous region in the north-an area which was sometimes politically troublesome. Powerful military forays descended into the southern Syro-Anatolian bread basket, a place which had fluctuating allegiances with Egypt. This arena of great conflict between Egypt and HIattihad yet another important asset: rich mineral resources and metallurgical technology. Recent archaeometallurgical studies in the Taurus and Amanus ranges make this wealth evident. The same holds true for north central Turkeywhich has mineral resources that are easily accessible in the Pontic Mountains. As a result, exceedingly complex relationships emerge between the Hittite imperial center and its resource-rich frontiers. Of particular interest is the nature Dedicated to Peter Neve
AMetaliLferou Vie fomth Ceta
i
Tuu
Ic-wr?4~: ?---a ~ _~rCQVA ~ -~
Silverrhyton,a stag vessel with frieze, exemplifiesthe highlydeveloped state of metallurgy among the Hittites.MetropolitanMuseumof Art;all photographscourtesyof AshilanYener.
and impact of metal manufacture on the producers of metals when urban demands from imperial centers such as Hattu'a increased. The attempt to control access to needed highland resources was the strategic rationale for a number of third and second millennium legends involving the military intervention of various lowland armies. The magnitude of that intrusion has been largely unknown since the archaeological history of the highland industrialists has been understood only recently. Excavations at Hattuia, the capital of the Hittite empire, revealed a people with considerable engineering skills and distinct organizational strategies. The Hittites were able to integrate the mountainous terrain of
their empire with their building technologies. They were heirs to a metal technology which had unparalleled development in Anatolia since the eighth millennium BCE(Maddin 1988).The Sungurlu area in north central Turkey around the highland capital, Bogazk6y, is fertile in agricultural potential, and even more significantly,it has an environment rich in metals, minerals, and wood. These resources abound in the Pontic Mountains to the north and the Taurus range to the south. Thus, Hittite industries had some strategic advantages over the lowland empires by their immediate access to metalliferous deposits, forest supplies, and abundant game. Clearly a large number of areas to the south such as BiblicalArchaeologist58:2 (1995)
101
Kizzuwatna, elusive TarhuntaS'a,and the "SilverMountain" Taurus and Amanus ranges were quickly integrated into the empire. This suggests that resource procurement was important. By commanding priority rights over these resources, the Hittites had an economic risk strategy that provided insurance in times of imperial financial difficulties. Finally,it is worth reiterating the obvious point that exchange networks tapping into the resource areas were established in the periods prior to Hittite ascendancy (Marfoe 1987). These exchange networks were at least maintained and possibly strengthened during the Hittite period. This paper deals with only a small portion of the Hittite metal industry sketching the implications of source characterizationby lead isotope analysis published earlier (e.g, Yener et al. 1991).Over the last decade this analysis has provided some insight into the nature of metal exploitation patterns. Some Aspects of Hittite Metallurgy
t has long been acknowledged that the highland regions of Anatolia, rich in natural resources, were among the earliest places where metallurgy developed. In this region, metallurgy advanced in the Near East and from here metallurgical technologies spread to neighboring Mesopotamia and Syria. Styles and traditions of metalworking exhibit great inventiveness here. The products of these techniques-the metal objects themselves--display a virtuosity that often outshines other aspects of technology as a whole. The most striking feature of this metallurgical tradition is its precociousness. From the earliest occurrences of metal objects in the aceramic Neolithic (eighth millennium BCE) through the discovery of iron metallurgy, this innovative characteristic never altered. It encompassed the very early recognition of the ductility of copper as well as the late fourth millenium BCEdiscovery of the 102
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
strength, range, and colors of functional alloys. This knowledge was put to use in both decorative and utilitarian objects. Current understanding of Hittite metallurgy comes from metal assemblages excavated from several Late Bronze Age sites such as Bogazk6y, Magat,and Alaca H6yiik. A partial list of these assemblages includes metal armor,weapons, pins, tools, wagons, figurines, seals, and treaties. Several examples of bull and deershaped rhytons of silver, such as the stag vessel with frieze (Muscarella 1974),and the fist-shaped vessel in Boston'sMuseum of Fine Arts (Giiterbock and Kendall 1995) reflect the developed nature of their craft (Giiterbock 1983).A recent hoard found near Kastamonu produced other examples of ritual iconography in metal: plates engraved with hieroglyphic inscriptions and decorated with registers in relief of griffins; trees of life, combat scenes with lions and bulls; lions and lions; and hunting scenes (Emre and (marog'lu 1993).Moreover a fragment of an oxhide ingot of copper excavated at Bogazk6y (Miiller-Karpe1980) links this seemingly landlocked empire with a circum-Mediterranean maritime commerce. This network moved tons of copper and tin during the Late Bronze Age and was revealed in the spectacular results of the underwater excavations at Uluburun Ka and Cape Gelidonya (Bass et al. 1989; Maddin 1989). The quantities of metal objects with ritual significance began early, as the findings at Troy and Alaca Hiyiik demonstrate. Weapons are prominent members of this grouping. Two examples from the Middle Bronze Age are a bronze spearhead engraved with inscriptions of Anitta the King and a sword dedicated to the god Nergal (Giiterbock 1964). Engraving inscriptions onto metal continued into the Hittite period. A sword with an Akkadian inscription celebrates Tuthaliya II'svictory over the western Assuwa-land (1430 BCE). The inscription dedicated the sword
to the storm god (Ertekin and Ediz 1993,Unal 1993).Another example of a numinous weapon is a spearhead inscribed walwaziti,"Greatscribe," probably dating to the reign of Hattusili III and Queen Puduhepa (Bilgi and Dincol 1989).Swords and axes were decorated with humans, animals, and fantastic divine creatures. These weapons have a smooth background from which figures stand out in relief.Their forms are reflected in the Hittite relief depicting the Dagger God at Yazlihkaya,which may have been based on a metal prototype. Its hilt is shaped like a god's head framed by four lions (Bittel et al. 1941).In addition to weapons, treaties were cast in metal. Recent excavations at Bogazk6y revealed a bronze tablet inscribed with a treaty between Tuthaliya IV and Kurunta, King of Tarhunta'Aa(Otten 1988;Houwink ten Cate 1992). Aside from the expected metal tools, weapons, and jewelry, the variety of metal artifacts manifest the tremendous extent to which metal was used in shaping objects (Boehmer 1972,1979;Waldbaum 1978). A whole range of shaping techniques (Maxwell-Hyslop 1971)exists in the artifacts of non-ferrous fabrication: chasing, cloisonnd, filigree, granulation, drawing of wire, and various methods of gilding and repouss&. Tools,weapons, ornaments, figurines, and toilet articles were cast and hammered. Sheet metal was crafted and a number of fittings were cast and riveted (for techniques see Moorey 1985;Moorey and Fleming 1979,1984). Textsby the hundreds exacavated at Bogazkoy refer often to objects made of metal. A number of the texts mention ceremonial artifacts that are multi-media and polychrome: decorated with tin, gold, silver,rock crystal, ivory,alabaster,and lapis lazuli (Giiterbock 1983).A valuable dagger is described as "its front shimmering, its tail and pommel of rock crystal" (Kodak1982),while another text speaks of a votive gold bow (Giiterbock 1989).Writing boards are described as equipped with writing Dedicated to Peter Neve
42*
3o0
Black
Sea
366"
Kastamonu ~ Alaca k SHoyu
.om
Masat
Trabzon
'
C
Gl1tepe
QviKestel
Acemh6yok
Bolkarda
Ta urus *OMersinX ,
9-
S
Uiuburun-Kas-
& Ca0
Meditrranean
G
*
.Alada 0 C
Mntns
*carchemish
Tel **Judeidah 0
e idon
a
Medtraea
1ea
implements of gold. There are iron ritual objects such as the animal attributes of the major deities, specifically lions and bulls, as well as animal shaped rhytons and human statues cast of iron or made of wood and inlaid with gold, silver, and tin. Inventory texts enumerate metal chariots, axes, horse bits, arrows, sickles, and maces. Other utilitarian objects such as weapons and tools are described as being made of iron (Kodak1985;Muhly et al. 1985).Textual references conjure up a whole arsenal of metal weapons. Inventory lists of luxury items witness to the extent of moveable and storable wealth in the Hittite empire. These include silver pyxis, gold and silver necklaces, pins, copper bathtubs, cymbals, and other musical instruments. Garments were lavishly decorated with gold and silver appliques, gold pendants, and beads. An iron throne was given to the earlier Middle Bronze Age monarch, Anitta the King of Kanesh, while iron blooms, lumps, and iron smelting (?) hearths are mentioned in Hittite texts.A tub, small figurines, and ornamental jewelry are also mentioned as being made of iron. Textsmade the distinction between meteoric iron (referred to as black iron of heaven) and terrestrial (smelted) iron; copper Dedicated to Peter Neve
3?
al-Rimah'
Tell el el-Qitar Raqa'l
ala
0
nAleppo 20km 1
km 100200
and iron can be qualified by "good" or "not good." The provenance of various metals is sometimes listed. Most relevant to this discussion is the state of Kizzuwatna (Cilicia) which supplied the Hittite center with silver, copper, and tin. The amounts of metal from tribute lists are noteworthy as well: 42 minas; 16 minas 30 shekels; 134 minas. From another text, 56 iron blades for daggers, 8 blades for use in the kitchen, 16 maces of black iron, two thousand blades, and over 2,200 other metal objects are listed as tribute. At times copper is listed as ingots from 2 to 40 minas. Weights in larger scale, talents, are also mentioned. Silver ingots averaged about 1.5 to 2 minas.
Productionin the IndustrialHighlands
dramaticeconomicthresholdwas crossed in the variety, quality, and quantity of metals manufactured. Metal was a critical high technology in a number of ways. It was the standard of value, medium of exchange, and the raw material of tool and weapon industries. Often metal was a vehicle for complex reciprocal gift exchanges. Yetreconstruction of these processes and economies often neglects the technologically
advanced mining and smelting operations that were the backbone of the industry. The dynamics of provisioning metal to lowland centers and the impact of this industry upon different subsystems of Anatolian society are much more complex than the Hittite artifacts found in excavations lead us to believe. Thus, while the metal objects from Late Bronze Age sites highlight sophisticated metallurgical skills, their very existence at this level points to a hidden production technology which operated at industrial strength in the mountain source areas. What emerges from behind the inventory lists and excavated metal artifacts is the existence of a many tiered, complex production industry. The first tier was the extraction and smelting sites in the mountains. The manufacture of metal at the mines and smelting sites (de Jesus 1980)is the least-studied major aspect of early states. Information from specialized function sites in the resource zones has been comparatively scarce, leading to an understanding of metallurgical techniques skewed toward the end users. Yet the primary industrial phase took place in the mountain zones and consisted of extraction,mining, smelting, and refining. It is this industry that is mostly missing in the archaeological record for the Hittites, though such industrial operations were already in operation in the Early Bronze Age as evidenced by the metal processing site, Kiultepe,and the tin mine, Kestel (Yenerand Vandiver 1993). Workshop production centers found at urban lowland sites constitute the second tier of the metal industry. The technological aspects of the urban workshops can be gleaned from the artifacts,as well as from the specialized craft assemblages unearthed at Bogazkoy (Neve 1992, Bachmann 1984) and the Assyrian Colony period at Goltepe (Ozgii< 1955,1986).Urban workshops executed alloying, casting, inlaying, shaping, and other refinements. Hittite ritual texts and functionally imBiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
103
portant objects make clear the strategic and economic ramifications of this multi-faceted industry. Arsenical copper is the majority alloy represented. Nickel, tin, and lead alloys are present in late Hittite artifacts (Bachmann 1984).The diversity of metals and the technologies of their production presuppose some form of relationship with special function industrial sites in the mountains. Whether the Hittites engaged in reciprocal exchange with the polities controlling the mines or whether they directly controlled the production by politically integrating the source areas, hardly alters the impressiveness of the still mute industrial system as a whole. The South-CentralTaurusMetal Sources e identification of exotic materials and products is one of the 1functions to which archaeology is best suited. Tradebetween the metal-rich highlands and urban centers held significance as a social force, if only as the link between mining production and consumption of metal commodities. Highland metalliferous zones supplied pre-state societies in Anatolia from the Chalcolithic period or earlier.This dynamic continued for the later Hittite imperial periods as well. Recent anthropological research demonstrates that demands for metal and its trade increased with the emergence of a hierarchy in administration (Rowlands, Larsen, and Kristiansen 1987). This traffic in metals may partly be definable by the use of lead isotope analysis. The use of isotope ratios of lead to characterize sources and objects depends upon the fact that the lead ores occurring in different mining regions differ from one another in their isotopic compositions. These can then be used as "fingerprints" with which to compare isotopic ratios derived from artifact samples (Gale et al. 1985).Isotopic ratios can also be derived for ores containing other 104
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
0.845
0.843-Taurus
22o
0.841-4q 0.840 0.837S0.836-A
A0.835 0.834-
*4
x
ATaurus3s
Taunts5
0437x
0.833-ATaurus4 t0.832-
.
0.831-x 0.8307 0.824 0.8270.824
2,05
2.08
2.07
2.06 Pb
208
/ Pb
2.09
206
Artifactsof Syrianand Anatolianoriginfit well withinthe ellipsesof severalTaurusmountainore fields. Sourcingis based upon the lead isotope fingerprintsof the ores,the ratioof the various naturallyoccurringisotopesof the metal lead. Leadfrequentlyaccompaniesother metalsin ore bearingdeposits.
metals besides lead; many ore bodies are polymetallic and, therefore,are potentially capable of being analyzed using this technique. The methodology and data handling aspects of the research have been published elsewhere (Yeneret al. 1991;Sayre et al. 1992).The implications are given below. Since the selection and processing of ores are directly reflected in the lead isotope ratios, this analysis will help assess the possibility that various Anatolian sources were exploited in the formative years of metallurgy and that some form of local and nonlocal exchange has taken place. The central Taurus range in Turkeyhas been well defined isotopically.A number of Syrian and Anatolian artifacts have isotopic ratios that suggest that they were derived from ores in this region. In addition a number of artifacts from the southern frontier of the Hittites, such as Cilicia and the Amuq, ranging from Chalcolithic to Late Bronze Age, have been analyzed. Their isotopic ratios assign nine of them to recentlydefined ore fields. The probability of
llA~"7b"j ~~113~
Thist-shaped pedant fromthe late Chalcolithic/EBI levelof TellJudeidahin southcentral Turkeywas probablymade from metal extractedfromthe Taurusore fields. Morethan a 1000yearsbeforethe Hittitesestablished their industrialoperations,minerswere alreadyat work in these same richdeposits. Earlyartifactscome from disparatelocations-Tarsus,TellRaqaci,and TellJudeidahsuggestingthat a numberof sites exploited the same ore.
their best fit is in the Taurus.This suggests that these industrial areas were already in operation for more Dedicated to Peter Neve
Isotopicanalysisof a fragmentfromthe silver/goldhelmet on this nude male statuette fromTellJudeidahshowed that it originatedin the same miningsectoras the tin of its predominatetin-bronzealloy.At one time holdinga club and long spear in his I diminutivefighands,this Chalcolithic/EB urinerepresentsone of the earliestexamples of tin alloys.
than a millennia before the Hittites made use of them. The same thing can be said of the Pontic Black Sea sources (Yeneret al. n.d.). The Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age
Artifacts
numberof Chalcolithic andEarly Bronze Age artifacts from the Amuq in southcentral Turkey correlate well with the ore groups of the Taurus.These include two samples taken from TellJudeidah, which is situated on a well traveled eastwest route approximately 250 kilometers to the southeast of the mines at Bolkardag. Dated to late Chalcolithic/EB I (level G), a copper-nickel blade, a t-shaped pendant, and a copper pin (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960:fig.85:5; fig. 371:4;fig. 239:7) show strong probability of Dedicated to Peter Neve
coming from the Taurus ore fields. Included in this group are a specimen from a Chalcolithic lead object from Tarsus and a lead coil dated to the Early Bronze Age (Goldman 1959:435:no.3).The excavations at Tell Raqa'i in Syria yielded a copper pin and slag dated to the third millennium BCEwhich are consistent with Taurus ores. A matching set of artifacts suggests that a number of sites exploited the same ore source from the Taurus range, at Aladag (Sayre et al. 1992). The earliest artifact samples come from TellJudeidah. A fragment from the silver/gold helmet on a nude male statuette holding a club and long spear in his hands derives from level G (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960:315,fig. 241,pl. 58). Another specimen taken from the torque on the female figurine in the same hoard is also consistent with this group. These two objects from TellJudeidah had previously been analyzed spectrographically (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960:fig. 245,315) to measure the trace element composition of the metal. Both the helmet and the torque had silver, copper and gold reported as major elements and bismuth, chromium, lead, silica, and tin as minor. The statuettes themselves are tin bronze (Braidwood, Burke, and Nachtrieb 1951).Fragments of other tin bronzes (containing 779% and 10%tin respectively) and fragments of slag (5% tin) in crucibles were excavated in secure level G contexts at Judeidah, making these some of the earliest examples of tin alloys (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960:300-315;Braidwood, Burke,and Nachtrieb 1951). By the mid-third millennium BCE, relatively good tin bronzes are found in most areas of Anatolia and at sites along the Mediterranean coast. Tarsus Early Bronze II levels revealed copper-based artifacts of which 24% are tin bronzes and in TarsusEarly Bronze III,good tin bronzes are present as well (Esin 1969:131-133).These bronzes have up to 6% tin. There are high grade tin bronzes in the coeval
Phases H and I in the Amuq as well. The discovery of an Early Bronze Age tin mine at Kestel (Moorey 1994:300-301)makes these early alloys all the more important technologically. The isotope ratios indicate that the silver from the statuettes was from the very same mining district from which the tin of the bronze may have come. Kestel Mine, however, went out of production at the end of the third millennium BCE.
MiddleBronzeAgeandLateBronze Age Artifacts
More
relevantto theHittitesis
the exploitation of the Taurus source in the Middle and Late Bronze Age. A silver specimen from a Middle Bronze Age silver hoard at Acemh6ytik and a fragment from a Late Bronze Age silver hoard from Tell el-Qitar in Syria correlate strongly with the Taurus ore from Aladag. The southern Hittite frontier, Kizzuwatna, is represented by the sourcing of a copper pin from Mersin level IXb.A lead pin from Tell alRimah in Syria dated to 1500 BCEand a lead block from AsSur in northern Mesopotamia, dated to 1300 BCE, point to Anatolian interaction with urban centers in the southern frontier,an area of great conflict during the Hittite period. Several specimens of lead net sinkers and a tin flask1from the shipwreck at Uluburun Ka* also correlate with the Taurus mountains. Interestingly, an unpublished Late Bronze Age armor plate (T97) from Tayinatin the Amuq also belongs to the Taurus groups. Larger quantities of similar armor plates were recently found at Bogazkdy (Neve 1992:Ab. 65). The Black Sea sources are also quite active throughout the periods noted above as suggested by new analyses from the Pontic mining districts (Yeneret al. n.d.). Correlations with a number of artifacts from Late Bronze Age sites and Trabzon ores suggest that both the Taurus and the Pontic mines were potentially exploited for critical raw materials. 58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
105
gots, and the urban centers which
subsequentlyrefined,crafted,and
LateBronzeAge armorplate:Unearthedat Tayinatin the Amuq,this element of warriors' garb also hailsfrom a Taurusmountainsource. Similarexamplesof this armorhave recently turned up at Bojazk6y.
This research leads to the conclusion that several contemporary production operations were utilized in the mountainous regions to the north and south of the Hittite capital. Conclusions
he development of metallurgy
in Anatolia was an exceedingly complex process. The results of lead isotope research suggest an intricate traffic of metals-at least for lead, silver, and lead containing copper based artifacts.Isotope ratios of the central Taurus region have shown that many metals were extracted from its resources. A much clearer picture of the history of the resource zones is beginning to emerge than was heretofore possible. It is now evident that neither the development of lowland prestate societies nor the emergence of complex urban centers can be understood in isolation. Rather,throughout most of their history,the lowlands and highlands were interconnected and intertwoven by traders.Recent investigations of the mining districts have that revealed a regional procurement strategy had already developed in the Early Bronze Age and tied together the mountain sources with the lowland markets. A two-tiered production system existed consisting of the sites which extracted ores and did the rough smelting and casting into in106
BiblicalArchaeologist58:2 (1995)
manufactured idiosyncratic metal items in workshops. Work done on the highland regions has gone a long way towards couching intelligent questions regarding the context and organization of metal production in the region. By closing a significant gap in the understanding of metal production at a site within a strategic metal zone, research in the source zones has become central to future efforts seeking to assemble and interpret the growing corpus of metals from urban centers. These efforts will illuminate the metallurgical development of a little known region that was of fundamental importance to the entire ancient Near East. 1Yeneret al. 1991.Specimen no. AAN809 is mislabeled and should read "tin flask, excavation number KW 1085,Late Bronze Age."
Bibliography Bachmann, H. G. 1984 Diisenrohre und Gebliset6pfe: Keramikfunde aus Metallverarbeitungs-Werkstitten. Pp. 107-115in bis Bogazkiy V Fundeaus den Grabungen 1979Ausgrabungen des Deutschen Archiologischen Institute. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag. Bass, G. E, Pulak, C., Collon, D., and Weinstein, J. 1989 The Bronze Age Shipwreck at Ulu Burun: 1986Campaign. American Journalof Archaeology93:1-29. Bilgi, 0. and DinCol,A.M. 1989 A Unique Spearhead from Sadberk Harum Museum. Pp. 29-31 in Anatolia and theAncientNear East:Studiesin Honorof TahsinOzgiiC.Edited by Kutlu Emre, Barthel Hrouda, Machteld Mellink, and Nimet Ozgiiq. Ankara: TiirkTarih Kurumu Basimevi. Bittel, K., Naumann, R., and Otto, H. 1941 Yazzlzkaya. Felsbilder Inschriften Architektur und Kleinfunde.Leipzig: Wissenschaftliche Ver6ffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft. Boehmer, R. M. 1972 Die Kleinfundevon Bogazkiiyaus den 1931-1939und Grabungskampagnen 1952-1969.Wissenschaftliche Ver6ffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-
Gesellschaft 87: Bogazk6y-Hattuga Berlin: Gebr.Man Verlag. 1979 Die Kleifunde aus der Unterstadtvon 1970-1978. BogazkoyGrabungskampagnen Bogazk6y-Hattuga 10.Berlin: Gebr. Man Verlag. Braidwood, R. J. and Braidwood, L. S 1960 Excavationsin thePlainof Antioch. University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications 61.Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Braidwood, R. J.Burke,J. E.,and Nachtrieb, N. H. 1951 Ancient Syrian Coppers and Bronzes. Journalof ChemicalEducation28:87-96. Emre, Kutlu and (maroglu, Aykut 1993 A Group of Metal Hittite Vessels from Kmuk-Kastamonu.Pp. 675-713 in Anatolia Aspectsof Art and Iconography: and its Neighbors.Studiesin Honorof Nimet OzgiiC.Edited by Machteld J. Mellink, Edith Porada,and Tahsin Ozgfig. Ankara: TiirkTarihKurumu Basimevi. Ertekin, Ahmet and Ediz, Ismet 1993 The Unique Sword from Bogazk6y/Hattusa. Pp. 719-26 in Anatolia AspectsofArt and Iconography: and its Neighbors.Studiesin Honorof Nimet OzgiiC.Edited by Machteld J. Mellink, Edith Porada,and Tahsin Ozgiiu. Ankara: TiirkTarihKurumu Basimevi. Gale, N. H., Stos-Gale, Z. A., and Gilmore, G. R. 1985 Alloy Types and Copper Sources of Anatolian Copper Alloy Artifacts. AnatolianStudies35:143-173. Giiterbock, H. G. 1965 A Votive Sword with Old Assyrian Inscription. Pp. 197f.in Studiesin Honor on his 75thBirthday, of BennoLandsberger April21,1965Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1983 Hethitische G6tterbilder und Kultobjekte. Pp. 203-217 in BeitriigezurAltertumskundeKleinasiens, FestschriftfiirKurt Bittel.Edited by Rainer Michael Boehmer and Harald Hauptmann. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. 1989 Hittite Kursa Hunting Bag. In Essays in AncientCivilizationPresentedto Helene J Kantor.Edited by A. Leonard and B. Williams. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 47 Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Giuterbock,H. G. and Kendall, T. 1995 A Hittite Silver Vessel in the Form of a Fist. Pp. 45-60in TheAges of Homer: A Tributeto EmilyTownsendVermeule Edited by J. B. Carter and S. P.Morris. Austin: University of Texas Press. Dedicated to Peter Neve
Houwink ten Cate, Philo H. J. 1992 The Bronze Tabletof Tudhaliyas IV and its Geographical and Historical Relations. ZeitschriftfiirAssyriologie 82/2:233-270. Kodak,S. 1982 HittiteInventoryTexts(CTH 241-50) Heidelberg: Carl Winter Verlag,Texte der Hethiter 10. A 1985 The Gospel of Iron. In Kanigguwar: tributeto HG. Giiterbockon his 75th Birthday.Chicago: University Press. Maddin, R. ed. 1988 The Beginningof the Use of Metalsand Alloys.Papersfrom the SecondInternaon the Beginningof the tionalConference Use of MetalsandAlloys,Zhengzhou, China,11-26 October1986.Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. 1989 The Copper and Tin Ingots from the Ka? Shipwreck. Pp. 99-106 in Old WorldArchaeometallurgy. Edited by A. Hauptmann, E. Pernicka, G. A. Wagner. Bochum: Deutschen BergbauMuseums. Marfoe, L. 1987 Cedar Forest to Silver Mountain: Social Change and the Development of Long-distance Tradein Early Near Eastern Societies. Pp. 25-35 in Centre and Peripheryin theAncientWorld. Edited by M. Rowlands, M. Larsen, and K. Kristiansen. Cambridge: University Press. Maxwell-Hyslop, R. 1971 WesternAsiaticJewellery, c. 3000-612 BC. London: Methuen. Moorey, P R. S. in Ancient 1985 Materialsand Manufacture The Evidenceof ArchaeolMesopotamia: ogy andArt,Metalsand Metalwork, GlazedMaterialsand Glass.BAR International Series 237.Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. 1994 AncientMesopotamian Materialsand IndustriesTheArchaeological Evidence. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Moorey, P.R. S. and Fleming, S. 1979 Re-appraisal of a Syro-Palestinian Bronze Female Figurine. MASCA Journal1:73-75. 1984 Problems in the Study of the Anthropomorphic Metal Statuary from SyroPalestine before 330 B.C.Levant 16:57-90. Muhly, J. D., Maddin, R., Stech, T, and Ozgen, E. 1985 Iron in Anatolia and the Nature of the Hittite Iron Industry. AnatolianStudies 35:65-84.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
Miiller-Karpe, M. 1980 Die Funde. Archiiologischer Anzeiger 3:303-307 Muscarella, O.W 1974 AncientArt.TheNorbertShimmelCollection.Mainz: P Von Zabern. Neve, P. 1992 Hattu'a-Stadt der G6tter und Tempel: Neue Ausgrabungen in der Hauptstadt der Hethiter. AntikeWelt 23/Sondernummer (Kurt Bittel zum Gedenken):2-88. Otten, H. aus Bogazkiy:Ein 1988 Die Bronzetafel IV. Studien zu Tudhalijas Staatsvertrag den Bogazk6y Texten,Beiheft 1.Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Ozguiq.T. 1955 Report on a Workshop Belonging to the Late Phase of the Colony Period Ib. Belleten73:77-80. 1978 Excavationsat Maat Hbyiik,and Investigationsin its Vicinity.Series V no. 38. Ankara: TurkTarihKurumu Yaymlarl. 1982 MagatHiyiik, II,A HittiteCenterNortheast of Bogazkby.Series V.no. 38a. Ankara: TurkTarihKurumu Yaymlarl II.Eskiyakzndogu'nun 1986 Kiiltepe-Kani?, New ticaretmerkezinde yeni aragtzrmalar Researchesat theTradingCenterof the AncientNear East.TiirkTarihKurumu Yaymlarl,V/41. Ankara: TiirkTarih Kurumu Basimevi. Sayre, E. V.,Yener,K. A, Joel, E. C., and Barnes, I. L. 1992 Statistical Evaluation of the Presently Accumulated Lead Isotope Data from Anatolia and Surrounding Regions. 34:73-105. Archaeometry Tylecote,R. 1987 The EarlyHistoryof Metallurgyin Europe. London: Longman Unal, Ahmet. 1993 Bogazkoy Klllcmni Uzerindeki Akadca Adak Yazisi Hakkmda Yeni Gozlemler. Pp. 727-30 in Aspectsof Art and Iconography: Anatoliaand its Neighbors Studiesin Honorof Nimet Ozgiil. Edited by Machteld J.Mellink, Edith Porada, and Tahsin Ozgii4. Ankara: TuirkTarihKurumu Baslmevi. Waldbaum, J. C. 1978 FromBronzeto Iron.TheTransition from the BronzeAge to theIronAge in the EasternMediterranean. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 54. Goteborg: Paul Astrom Verlag. Yener,K. A., Ozbal, H., Kaptan, E.,Pehlivan, A.
--.I-..'"v "-',
A -4
F~ CToF-1?x' C;C;a~~~~L~" ~ LC~la~rhit,~ r~.X~r AN:
will
K. Ashhan Yeneris Assistant Professor of Anatolian Archaeology at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago and is the director of the G61tepe and Kestel mine excavations. She has directed archaeometallurgy surveys as part of a lead isotope analysis characterization project throughout Turkeysince 1981. She has excavated at Erbaba,Ikiztepe and Kurban H6yiik since 1974. Dr.Yenerreceived her Ph.D. from the Art History and Archaeology Department of Columbia University She taught archaeology and archaeometry at Bo0aziqi University in Istanbul and the Anthropology Department of Hunter College, New York from 1980-1988.She has been a John Paul Getty fellow at the MetropoJitanMuseum of Art and a visiting scientist and postdoctoral fellow in Materials Science in the Archaeometry Division of the Conservation Analytical Laboratoryof the Smithsonian Institution from 1987-1993.
N., and Goodway, M. 1989 Kestel: An Early Bronze Age Source of Tin Ore in the Taurus Mountains, Turkey.Science244:200-203. Yener,K. A., Sayre,E.V.,Joel, E.,and Ozbal, H. n.d. Stable Lead Isotope Studies of the Pontic Ore Sources and Related Artifacts from Eastern Mediterranean Chalcolithic and Bronze Age Sites: in preparation. Yener,K. A., Sayre, E. V, Joel, E.,Ozbal, H., Barnes,I.L., and Brill, R. H. 1991 Stable Lead Isotope Studies of Central Taurus Ore Sources and Related Artifacts from Eastern Mediterranean Chalcolithic and Bronze Age Sites. Science Journalof Archaeological 18:541-577 Yener,K. A. and Vandiver,P. B. 1993 Tin Processing at G61tepe,an Early Bronze Age Site in Anatolia. American Journalof Archaeology97:207-237
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
107
,?:r;t
r3 iti!
?''''~'' .E; ?r* ;c-~~v i ?IL?,iL?epL~t~:;St~1?~ ~t:)C; ':?E?`_iry ,I? crrir V?-? ?: '' ?~?-~~.~???... iT31:17 ??i.l?Y: :LI;iij??t~ lL.:?'? "~s~?. ~:a"i?l~ L~I. -p~-r:??? (' "ir ?,r ' '' -( ?. ..??.:. ?: ???-?~ t ~? ~ z . ? ..?? .,? ?~ .. '' '' )?; ?~' ;-.?1 -?: 1; r*; . c ... .; ?`~: , -tj.? r? i1_5. .. .1'.. 1] ~ if??j ?~-^-?;?:~ ~--1 3) ~~ ~ ??r ~-1~V,?I. 1~C ;t;c~?qf!C4i4:ii:~~:=H ,-r. cr. ~
?\ ~L? y*(~(.?fTr?~? I.v?~-r;; ??? -?rrr :~? *:i:-? r; '' L'.'' i-c, r FL)~r~ .sS: .? 'i .?? -? r.r'"' I*~ r?:' i? .L ~t ~ ?~ "" ..'?lfi ~z ,?L ?I.*? .,:...
'?
--
"'~'": .? F: "-~L?
?-?
?I ::... .~ '' ;I ,B
:~?~-!-.~ ~t~C: c? J rir ;i;
I; ;P ~
1-?
:? ??
-1 r -?
?'?r". :1 ~? ??
r=
?'
By Harry A. Hoffner, Jr. Anatolia is a vast country with varied climatic, geomorphical and soil conditions-from Mediterranean regions growing olives, vines and citrus, through the semi-arid zones of the central anatolian plateau which yields grains, to the mountainous regions in the east and the north which serve mainly as pasture lands (Singer 1987). In parallel to Itamar Singer'sgeographical observation, Hittite texts reveal a rich variety of food plants utilized by the inhabitants of this region in the Late Bronze Age (Hoffner 1974,ch. 4). Of these, oilbearing plants certainly numbered among the most significant. Singer's article,"Oil in Anatolia according to Hittite Texts,"only represents a summarizing of the work of others, yet he has given a clear picture of the main lines of what the Hittite texts reveal about the use of oil. Previous Research
Gfiterbockoffers(1968)theonly
systematic discussion of oil and oil-bearing plants in Hittite Anatolia. Giiterbock'sprimary contribution was to demonstrate that which had been supposed GISGamama, by many Hittitologists to be the word for "sesame,"was in fact a variety of 108
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
nut, and that the most probable candidate for "sesame" was ?apsama.But along the way Giiterbock also signaled other words for oil-producing plants-the Akkadogram GISSERDU "olive"and GISleti.Hoffner's 1974study mentioned oil, especially olive oil, but did not exploit the textual evidence. Wordsfor "Oil,""Fat,"and Similar Products
Philologistsdealingwitha dead
language are at the mercy of their documentation and the limitations of their writing systems. In the case of Hittite, they are also often at the mercy of Sumerian terminology. Since in most cases Hittite words for "oil,""fat,""lard,""tallow," or "grease"are concealed behind logograms derived from the Sumerian language, philologists cannot be sure that the Hittites themselves used the same word or linguistically related words in their own language to designate types of oil, fat, or grease. Recently it was my good fortune to discover the Hittite reading of one of the primary terms in the Hittite texts for oil or fat.1It is the neuter Its occurrences noun ?agan/?agna-. indicate that it can represent either "oil"proper,i.e., a more fluid substance which in the case of an animal source would be the product of rendering its fat, and solid "fat"or adipose tissue. Two other syllabically
Excavatorsunearthedthe voluminous archivesof the Hittitesat locationsscattered throughouttheircapitalcity:BuildingA, picturedhere, in the fortressarea Buyukale offered the best preservedclaytablets.Hittitologists remainoccupiedwith readingand interpretingthis vast legacy:recentlythe authordiscoveredone of the primaryHittite termsfor oil or fat. Photographfromthe Beegle Collection.
written Hittite words, UZUappuzzi,2 and (uzu)kuzzaniyant-,3 have been suggested as the equivalent of the Sumerogram UZU.I and as designations of solid animal fat. Of the Sumerian words used as ideograms or logograms, the most common is simple I. It seems to have been the broadest designation, capable of indicating either oil or fat, products of either vegetable or animal source. Vegetable oils of all kinds could also be indicated by the compound Sumerogram I.GIS,literally "wood/tree oil."Olive oil is indicated by the compound I GCISERDUMand possibly also by simple I.GIS.Sweet (i.e., perfumed?) oil was I.DUG.GA, and butter (or ghee) was I.NUN.4 The succession of signs UZU + I can be read either UzuI, with the first sign as a determinative, or UZU.I. In either case the initial component UZU "flesh"probably indicates that the substance was more solid than liquid. In at least one passage UZU.I clearly denotes human flesh (KBo 16.29 [+] KUB 31.104ii 19-20).This meaning is clear also in HT1 iii 32-35, the ritual of AShella (Din
noted in connection with ancient Israel,but it is also true in Hittite Anatolia. That being the case, oil is included among the elementary needs of the poor which compassionate people are enjoined to meet. Several texts whose composition goes back to the Old Hittite period mention this (Archi 1979:40-44): to the hungry give bread, to the thirsty water, to the naked clothes (TUG),to the dried out/desiccated ([ha-tli-e"?a-an-ti)5give oil (I-an = ?agnan).The same situation is reflected in a passage from the new Hurro-Hittite bilingual, where the god Teshub is poor and must be helped by his fellow deities. They give food to the hungry god, clothes to the naked god, and oil to the hurtant-god.6 Sources of Oil among the Hittites
il in Hittitetextscan be froman animal or a vegetable source. Oil from plants includes olive oil, sesame oil, cypress (or juniper) oil/resin, and oil extracted from nuts. Oil from animals includes lard (i.e., oil/fat from pigs) and sheep fat.7
AnimalFatandIts ValueandUses Swine Fat = Lard That animal fat was valuable is clearly indicated by ?90 of the Hittite law code which specifies that, if a dog eats lard (I SAH "oil/fat of a pig"), the owner of the lard is justified in killing the animal and retrieving the lard from the dog's stomach. This same law also proves that I SAH was solid and durable enough to have value even after having been subjected to partial digestion in the stomach of a dog. Furthermore, according to the wording of the law, the dog does not lap up (Hittite laplipa-)the lard, but eats or devours (karap-)it. In an instructions text in Old Hittite handwriting, "high-quality lard" (I SAH DUG.GA) is mentioned at the head of a list of foodstuffs: cheeses, rennet, wheat flour, and bread.8Lard was considered a tasty dish even for gods and humans as can be seen from its Dedicated to Peter Neve
inclusion alongside of honey, cheese, rennet, sweet milk, and other foodstuffs in two other Old Hittite rituals specifying offerings to the gods.9
Sheep Fat or Tallow
Sheep fat or tallow,10is placed in or on a KU?kuria-,which has been interpreted as either a "hunting bag" or a "fleece,"which in turn is suspended from an evergreen eya-tree as a symbol of the prosperity given by the gods.11 That I.UDU was a solid substance is also clear from the fact that it is used alongside wax (DUH.LAL) to make magic figurines (Goetze 1938:8i 49-50,12 ii 14-15).The purpose of making the figurines out of wax and sheep tallow is that they will represent evil and will be destroyed in the course of the subsequent ritual. The exact manner of destroying the symbols is unclear. The verb in the ritual text is arha?allanu-,which probably means "to melt down" (Goetze 1938:74).
Butter/Ghee
Butter or ghee (I.NUN) was used in the analogical speeches in the Old Hittite incantations: "As(this) honey is sweet, as (this) butter is soft/mild, so may the
A pottery boar'shead rhyton(ca. 6.5 cm high) from G61tepe,dating a centuryor two priorto the developmentof the Hittitestate. The Hittitesdistinguishedpig'slardfrom sheep'sfat. Lardwas a valuablecommodity and a tasty dish,offered up even to the gods. Sheep'sfat was used alongsidewax to make figurinesthat could be destroyed,probably melted, in apotropaicrituals.
mind of Telipinu likewise be sweet and mild!" (KUB1710i 25-27; Hoffner 1990).Therelative price of butter or ghee is considered below under "Fine Oil;" while its use is noted under "Anointing/Rubbing Horses" and "Burning Oil."
Oil-bearingPlants iiterbock enumerated the
variousoil-bearing plants
known to the Hittites, which included the olive, sesame, and several plants which are probably nuts.12
Olive Oil
Olive oil did not need to be imported, since a Middle Hittite land grant text mentions vineyards, olive trees, and fig trees on the estate of a man named Purlisari in the town of Sayanuwanda (Riemschneider 1958). Another text describes a certain area in Kizzuwatna as containing thirty IKU of fields, two vineyards, and three hundred olive trees (KUB40.2 Much obv. 36; Hoffner 1974:116-118). earlier in an Old Hittite incantation, there is an appeal to the analogy of the olive holding oil in its heart, the grape holding wine in its heart, and the god holding goodness in his heart toward the king and his land (KUB 1710ii 19-21; Hoffner 1990). Olives, figs, and grapes (or raisins) are often mentioned together among materials for rituals. Olive oil (I GI8SERDUM)is sometimes described as pittalwan(e.g. KBo5.2 i 12, ii 8) which Goetze (1962:33; CHD s.v pittalwa-,pittalwant)determined to mean "plain,"that is, without additives. The same adjective "plain,without additive" is used to describe bread, stew (TU7),meat, and hay.13i(GCI)SERDUMpit-tal-wa-an is therefore "plain (i.e.,virgin) olive oil"(KBo5.2 i 12, ii 8). Olives were trodden or crushed with a large stone and the pulp transferred to wicker baskets and shaken. The baskets acted as strainers,and the oil was collected in jars.The top layer,skimmed off, was called "pure" or "beaten"oil. Pittalwanolive oil is most likely this first, cold extraction, 58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
109
which is lighter,of higher quality. The first extraction is unlike the second and third extractions,which routinely require additives such as salt. For this reason it is called "plain"or "unadulterated."The Hebrew and Ugaritic expression for this first extraction was ?mnktt usually translated as "beaten oil."Today "virgin olive oil" is the highest quality and draws the highest price. When olive oil is mentioned alongside breads on lists, the latter are "thin breads" (i.e, pita; e.g. KBo 9.115+obv. 10).In some passages a sample (anahi)of "thin bread"is dipped in olive oil and placed on the hearth (KUB45.47i 48-50).The same verb (guniya-)for "dipping"the bread in olive oil is used in the Hurro-Hittite bilingual in a passage about a dog who steals a freshly baked loaf of bread from an oven, dips it in oil, sits down, and eats it (Hoffner 1994).In a prayer of Muwatalli II, the cult officiant breaks successively three loaves for the Sun goddess of Arinna, for the Storm god pihaSggaii,for Hebat, and for the Storm god of the Sky,dips them in honey and I.DUG.GA, and places them on the offering table of the respective deity (KUB6.46 i 40-56; cf. Pritchard1969 and Lebrun 1980).When used in rituals, olive oil is associated with "fine/good oil" (I.DUG.GA) and honey (KBo5.2 i 12).
Sesame Oil
Sesame oil is written either with the Hittite word gapgamaor logographically as SE.GIS.Ior I SAAM-SA-AM-MI,but not, as has been recently claimed, also with I.GIS.14
Cypressoil/resin
Cypress (or juniper) oil/resin (I is an ingredient in a GIQSU.OR.MIN) medical ritual to cure someone who has been seized by the demon DIM.NUN.ME (KBo21.20i 18;Burde 1974:42-46).Since the demon, the treatment, and the Hurrian words pronounced as a spell point to Syria or Northern Mesopotamia, the particular type of oil/resin may have been chosen for this purpose.
110
BiblicalArchaeologist58:2 (1995)
"FineOil"(i.DiG.GA) is logogram has generally been taken to represent "fine oil,"in Ithe sense of sweet-smelling oil or perfume (Friedrich1952:277;accepted by Rfisteret al. 1989).In general,this interpretationis well supported by references to the cosmetic use of I.DUG.GA.In the myth "Song of Hedammu," the goddess ISTAR bathes,
.
Ile,
=•i
.I -,
,
j,
The Olivetree flourishesin centralAnatolia; hence the Hittiteswere not burdened,like the Egyptians,with the need to importthis crucialcommodity.Textsmentionolive orchardsin propertyinventories,and olivesare mentionedin ritualprescriptions.
anoints herself with I.DOG.GA,and then goes to meet and seduce Hedammu (IBoT2.135obv. 5-10; Siegelovi 1971).In the price lists of the Old Hittite laws (laws ?291) one zipattaniof L.DUG.GAcosts two shekels of silver,while the same amount of I SAH or I.NUN costs one shekel. This obviously establishes I.DUG.GA as the most expensive of the oils. Two shekels of silver was also the price of two sheep, six goats,or one unweaned calf. Singer 1987notes that in the same
law (?181)one zipattaniof fine oil was equivalent in price to eight minas (= 320 shekels) of copper. In the new Hurro-Hittite bilingual text, the Hurrian hasariis "translated" in the Hittite column by both I and I.DUG.GA (Neu 1988:18).The latter translates hagariin the passage where Tegub,in dire need, is aided by fellow gods who give him I.DUG.GA (KBo32.15ii 14-15). In some rituals wine and I.DUG.GA are mixed together (KBo 21.34ii 55-56). Since the Hittite word for "wine" (wiyana-,Sumerogram GESTIN) sometimes denotes a cheap wine or vinegar, we can compare the combination of vinegar and oil even today in the seasoning of salads. One ritual text informs us that It menI.DUG.GA was kept in hornms. tions six small ox horns of I.DUG.GA, three belonging to the king and three to the queen (KUB 42.94 i 9-10). Two interesting uses of I.DUG.GA are found in the funerary ritual for deceased royalty (Otten 1958:67ff.; Gurney 1977 and Singer 1987).After the deceased's body was burned on the funeral pyre, his bones were collected and placed to soak in a large silver vessel filled with fine oil (I.DUG.GA).After they had soaked in the oil, the bones were removed, wrapped in a fine linen cloth, and placed on a chair or stool. There follow various rites, including animal sacrifices, and then the bones are brought to the mausoleum (called the "Stone House"). It is here that we see the second interesting use of the oil. The text reads: "In the inner room of the mausoleum they spread bedding, take the bones from the chair, and put them on the spread bedding. They place a lamp [weighing ...] shekels, filled with fine oil (I.DUG.GA) in front of the bones." This is a rare example of I.DIJG.GA used as fuel for a lamp. If it is "perfumed oil," the odor might have been considered appropriate,as would incense, in a funerary setting.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
form of Hittiteimperialart. Libationsbeing pouredout for the gods on a basaltorthostatfrom Malatya.Rockreliefsare the mostcharacteristic The representationof the kingoffering libationsis a common motif.Oil mayor maynot have been involvedin these libations,but it certainly a god's path,while anothermentionsa found manifoldritualapplications.Oilattractsand appeasesthe gods: one text speaksof "sprinkling" with and to the mountain Cult statues were with libation anointed oil as were, presumably, the elite memoil, honey,bread, journey mollify gods. bersof the royalestablishment.The ritualof royalsuccessioninvolvedanointing,and the hornsof animalswere apparentlyanointedwith oil prior to sacrifice.PhotographsfromErkenAkurkal,TheArt of the Hittites.
Anointingwith Oil Anointing People The toilet of the upper classes must be reflected in the treatment of the cult statues of the deities. One text tells how eight representations of the Sun goddess of Arinna-three statues and five solar disks-were bathed and then anointed with oil (KUB 25.14i,15-16).In a letter of the Hittite king to his mother, he complains that he has no I.DUG.GA for anointing himself (KBo18.2rev. 6-7, Hagenbuchner 1989:204f.).In the text of a legal deposition, a man named mdISTAR-LU gives testimony in which he mentions that a woman gave him oil and instructed him to anoint himself with it when he worshipped the deity.15In a letter from the Pharaoh to the King of Arzawa, written in Hittite, the Egyptian monarch speaks of having his servant anoint with oil the head of the woman chosen to become a wife of the king (VBoT1 obv. 14). The Hittite king was also anointed with oil as part of the ritual Dedicated to Peter Neve
of accession to the throne and the priesthood of the Sun goddess of Arinna (Pontifex Maximus) (KUB 36.90:15-18;see also Goetze 1957:90; Gurney 1979;Gtiterbock 1954:17).This custom is also reflected in the rite of the substitute king, who consequently is anointed with the "oil of kingship" (I.DUG.GA LUGALUTTI;KUB 24.5 obv. 19 + KUB 9.13 obv. 7; Kfimmel 1967:10f.,28). Singer (1987) also quotes an Akkadian letter written by Hattu'ili III to the Assyrian king in which Hattu'ili complains that the Assyrian monarch failed to send him the traditional coronation gifts, which included ceremonial garments and fine oil for anointing (Goetze 1940:27ff.). An entry in a tablet catalogue describes a ritual performed by a woman physician named Azzari. On the occasion when a commander was going to lead troops into battle, the physician consecrated I.DUG.GA by pronouncing a spell over it and then used it to anoint the commander, his horses, his chariot(s), and all his
weapons (KUB30.42 i 8-14; Laroche 1971:162). In an oracle inquiry, it was determined that the deity was angry because the temple personnel had neglected or omitted to give to the deity I.GIS and I.DUG.GA E.GAL huhha! "L.DUG.GAof the palace of the grandfather" (KBo24.122:20-21). Anointing/RubbingHorses In the first tablet of the Kikkuli horse-training manual, trainers are described as anointing/rubbing (the verb is i~k(iya)-)horses with I.NUN (butter,ghee) on the fifth day, after four days of daily washing (KUB1.13+ iii 4-9, Kammenhuber 1961).The use of "butter"or "ghee"for this purpose seems strange. Anointing Horns In the "Song of Ullikummi," a myth of the Kumarbi cycle, oil (I.DUG.GA) is used to anoint the horns of the bulls which draw the cart of the god Teihub (KUB36.12iii 3-4,19-20; Guiterbock1952and Hoffner 1990).Apparently the horns of male animals were also anointed BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
111
with oil prior to sacrificing the animals. This practice is clearly documented in the case of goats (KBo11.32 obv. 22-24) and rams (KBo14.21i 28-31).
AnointingObjects Similarly,in a ritual text, oil is brought to the deity so that he may lubricate his chariot with it (HT 1 ii 34-38). In a purification ritual, animal-shaped vesselsl are overturned in the river and washed, then oil is dripped into the river,and finally the washed vessels are anointed (iAk-) with oil (KUB30.38 i 22-27). Applying oil to the vessels after they have been washed is analogous to the practice of humans anointing themselves after bathing. In another text, oil is smeared on a door (KUB9.31ii 36). Oil in Daily Life
BurningOil
One of the principal uses of oil in ancient times was as a fuel for lamps or torches. The texts,however, offer little evidence for this. Only recently, with the discovery of the syllabic writing of the principal Hittite word for "oil,"gagn-,has it become possible to recognize that the meaning of the adjective gakuwant-frequently modiis "oilfying torches (GIgzuppari) soaked" (Hoffner 1994).The construction of a Hittite torch is unclear.It might have consisted of a stick with the upper end wrapped in cloth, in which case the cloth would have been soaked in oil as fuel. Lamps were called (DUG)?asanna-, Friedrich (Ehelolf 1936:190-194; 1952:188),written also with the loand gograms DUGIZI.GAR It is possible that the (DUG)NURU. wick was called lappina-(Giterbock and Hoffner 1989).Only two passages give any indication of lamp fuel: 2 NAMMANTU I.NUN ga-ga-an-na-ag "two measuring vessels of butter/ghee for lamps" (KUB44.4 obv. 3; KUB46.30:11),and Sahanna[n?...] / [...] GIN ISTU I.DUG.GA hastiyaspirantiyanzi(KUB 30.15+ 39.19+ 39.11obv. 49-50, Otten 1958:68ff.See above, p. 110)"Theyset out in front of the bones a lamp[...] 112
58:2 (1995) BiblicalArchaeologist
of [x] shekels (filled) with fine oil." There are other references to the burning of oil. A mixture of honey and oil was burned to produce a pleasant odor for the gods which by smelling the same they could be said to eat and drink (Otten and Souqek 1969:ii7-13). Another ritual text also mentions burning cedar,I.NUN, honey, and other materials to produce a sweet odor (KBo11.14i 17-19; Unal 1994).In still another passage, honey and olive oil are poured into a clay cup and a tiny chip of wood (GCISwaaman) floating on the surface is ignited and burns, perhaps absorbing the oil in which it floats like a wick (KUB32.8 iii 20-23).
Oilin the Preparationof Food Oil was used in the preparation of many foods, especially the breads and pastries (see Hoffner 1974ch. 4). Among these foods we may mention NINDA.I and NINDA.I.E.DE.A. The latter was a special delicacy made from a wide spectrum of sweet and oily ingredients: oil, sheep fat, milk, butter,and honey. It has been compared to Turkishhelva.A stew or thick soup flavored with oil (TU7.1 = ?agnas pargur,see now Hoffner 1994)was considered a particular delicacy and was often served to the king. Olive oil and honey were also poured on top of roasted mutton as a kind of sauce (KBo2.3 i 51-55, translated in Pritchard1969:351).Singer (1987) thinks this was done to make it tender.
OilAttractsandAppeasesthe Gods In a prayer of King Mursili II, the king asks that the sweet cedar oil may "call"or "summon"the god Telipinu (KUB24.1i 11-12).As part of this concept that the gods were attracted or "lured"by sweet oil, the rituals sometimes mention sprinkling "paths"of sweet oil (I.DUG.GA) to attract the deities: "See, I have sprinkled your paths, O Telipinu,with sweet oil. So set out, O Telipinu,on the path which has been sprinkled with sweet oil!" (KUB1710 ii 28-30). In another ritual, the "seertakes oil, honey, exorcist" (LJUHAL) thick bread, and libation and goes to
appease the mountain gods (KUB 30.36 ii 1-2).
Oil Usedas a Payment In a "wisdom" text originating in Babylonia and translated into Hittite, we read of a prostitute who wears a borrowed garment and anoints herself with oil taken as a wage (KUB4.3 + KBo12.20ii 30-31; Laroche in Schaeffer 1968:273ff.,779ff.).As part of a vow to a deity, a Hittite queen gave three hargiyalli-vessels(large storage vessels, pithoi)containing respectively oil, honey, and fruit (KUB15.1iii 14-16; de Roos 1984). In the "Song of Hedammu," another myth of the Kumarbi cycle, a fragmentary passage describing the creation and raising of the monster Hedammu seems to say: "They place him/it in oil ... they place him/it in water."7Perhaps this is a method for rendering him invulnerable. One is reminded of the Greek legend of Achilles' heel.
Otherusesfor Oil Oil, fat, or grease may also have been used to seal the interstices of baskets to make them waterproof. In the famous story of the Queen of Kanesh who set her seventy infant sons adrift in baskets to float down the river to the Black Sea, where they were recovered by the gods and raised, the queen first prepares the baskets by "filling"them, i.e, their interstices, with oil/grease (?a-gdn-da) (Otten 1973:6f.,16-18).Students of the Bible will recall the waterproofing of the basket in which the baby Moses was placed in the shallow water of the Nile according to the story in chapter one of the Book of Exodus.•8 Moses' mother smeared the basket with bitumen. Oil or grease (Akkadian Samnu)are used to caulk boats (see CAD S s.v. Samnu).Since until recently it was not known that the crucial word Sa-gdn-dacould be interpreted other than a form of Sakkar "dung,"the passage was thought either 1) to attest the use of dung in waterproofing the baskets (a very implausible procedure), 2) a filling of the baskets with dung as a cushioning bed for the infants, or 3) as a symDedicated to Peter Neve
bolic action implying that the Queen of Kanesh was undoing a curse upon herself manifested by her ominous birth of seventy boys. None of these options seems now as plausible as the possible interpretation given above. Oil, grease, or perhaps even resin (sagn-) was used to caulk the baskets and prevent them from sinking before they could carry their human cargos down the river to their divinely intended destination. This understanding also fits the parallels in the other ancient Near Eastern stories much more closely. Conclusion The documentation for vegetable and animal fats from primary textual sources, even when limited to the Hittites, is so voluminous that a treatment such as I have been able to give here hardly scratches the surface. Not until the dictionary articles on all the logograms containing I have been published will there be a truly comprehensive presentation of the textual evidence. But the recent discovery of the Hittite syllabic equivalent of I, namely sagn-, has opened new possibilities for interpretation.And when the syllabically written vocabulary related to *9ag-(in ?aguwant-)and ?agn-are added to the Akkadograms and Sumerograms, it is possible to see new and important uses.
Note
Peter Neve has made many impressive contributions to Hittitology and the archaeology of ancient Anatolia. This new survey of the evidence for oil among the Hittites is affectionately dedicated to him. 1Hoffner 1994.The word's form in the oblique cases is Sakn-,but its exact form in the nominative-accusative is uncertain. It could be either *Saknanor *Sakan. 2 For this term, see the two dictionaries: Puhvel 1984- and Friedrich and Kammenhuber 1975-1984. 3 Singer 1983:73n. 45. 4 For a listing of Sumerograms beginning with i see Riusterand Neu 1989:325f.In addition to the words I have cited the list includes: I.SAG (DIG.GA), i.GAB, i.GAB SE,UzUI.GU4 ("Rinderfett,""beef drippings"). The authors include the element "Schmalz" ("grease")in their translations of many of these terms, e.g., I.NUN is "Butterschmalz."I.GAB is included
Dedicated to Peter Neve
with neither translation nor text citation. 51 would restore KUB 35.157:4this way. It is
transliterated without restoration in Archi 1979:43,whose French translation is "gerce" ("chapped"). 6 Perhaps one should emend har (or hur)-ta-anza ("cursed"?)to har-ga!-an-za"ruined"in the sense of dried out or dessicated? 7 Olive oil is normally written I GI?SERDUM. Sesame oil is SE.GIS.I,with the Hittite reading perhaps gapgama(Giiterbock 1968).Again see Giuterbock1968 on oil extraction from nuts. The word for pig fat I SAH occurs for the first time in the Hittite laws ?90. Sheepfat, I.UDU, is extremely common in the texts. 8 KBo 22.1 obv. 11-12, (Archi 1979,and see notes in Marazzi 1988).I SAH DUG.GA also occurs in KUB 25.31+ 1142/z obv. 10. 9 KUB 291 iv 4-7, ritual, OH/NS; KUB 2.2+ iv 2, OH/NS. 10Usually written I.UDU, but at least once "resolved"as UDU-as I-an. 11KUB1710iv 29 Telipinu myth, translation Hoffner 1990. 12 Written with an Akkadogram GIS?ERDUM, the West Semitic word for olive was *zayt-, reflected in Ugaritic zt and Biblical Hebrew zyt. Although the ChicagoAssyrianDictionary(s.v. samaSSammti) prefers the translation "flax" rather than sesame, the recent discovery of sesame seeds in Urartu and in 18th Dynasty Egypt together with the impressive arguments of Civil, Powell, and others in favor of the latter translation (Powell 1991)persuade me to retain the translation "sesame" here. One of the words for oil-bearing plants is Hittite GI ?amama. Giiterbock (1968) concluded that gamamawas not the Hittite reading of SE.GI8.i "sesame,"but instead a term for a nut. Along with other reasons, he maintained that the determinative GIS "wood" was more appropriate for a fruit encased in a woody shell than for a seed in a pod. 13E.g. bread: KBo5.2 i 27-29; stew: KUB 56.45 ii 13-14; meat: UZU pit-tal-ui-[an]ABoT 32 ii 8,9; and hay: KBo3.5 i 63. 14 See KBo13.248:27:[...] I.GI I SA-AM-SAAM-MI I [...]. This juxtaposition casts serious doubt on the proposal that I.GI8 is "(Sesam)61ol" (Riister et al. 1989:127sign no. 72). 15KUB 54.1i 58-59: Somewhat problematic is the force of EGIR-anda"afterwards"(??),here. If it bears its usual force, the anointing with oil would take place after worshipping the deity, which seems strange. 16The term is the Akkadogram BIBRU,often translated "rhyton."On the inappropriateness of this translation, see Gtiterbock 1983. 17Siegelova 1971:40f.and Hoffner 1990.Pecchioli, Daddi, and Polvani (1990:138)mention this as assisting the serpent in some way by bathing it in oil and water. On the various ancient Near Eastern stories 18s of famous persons set adrift as babies, surviving, and later achieving fame, see Lewis 1980.
Bibliography
Archi, A. 1979 L'humanite des hittites. Pp. 37-48 in Anatolicum.Melangesoffertssa Florilegium EmmanuelLaroche.Edited by E. Masson. Paris: Editions E. de Boccard. Burde, C. 1974 Hethitischemedizinische Texte.Studien zu den Bogazkoy-Texten 19.Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. CAD,ChicagoAssyrianDictionary 1956- The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago: The Oriental Institute. CHD, ChicagoHittiteDictionary. 1989- TheHittiteDictionaryof the Oriental Instituteof the Universityof Chicago. Edited by H. G. Giiterbock and H. A. Hoffner, Jr.Chicago: The Oriental Institute. de Roos, J. 1984 HettitischeGeloften.Een teksteditievan Hettitischegeloftenmet inleiding,vertaling en critischenoten.Ph.D. diss., Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Dinqol,A. M. 1985 Belleten49/193:1-40. Ehelolf, H. 1936 Hethitische-akkadische Wortgleichungen. Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie 44:170ff. Friedrich, J. 1952 HethitischesWMrterbuch. Kurzgefasste kritischeSammlungder DeutungenhethitischerWdrter.Indogermanische Bibliothek. Zweite Reihe: Worterbiicher. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Verlag. 1959 Die hethitischenGesetze.Documenta et Monumenta Orientis Antiqui 7 Leiden: E. J.Brill. Friedrich, J. and Kammenhuber, A. 1975- HethitischesWirterbuch.Zweite,vallig 1984 neubearbeitete Auflage.BandI:A. Indogermanische Bibliothek. Zweite Reihe: Worterbticher.Heidelberg: Carl Winter. Goetze, A. 1933 Die Annalendes Murgilig.Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatisch-Aegyptischen Gesellschaft 38. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs'sche Buchhandlung. 1938 TheHittiteRitualofTunnawi.American Oriental Series 14.New Haven, Conn.: American Oriental Society. 1940 Kizzuwatnaand theProblemof Hittite Yale Oriental Series, ReGeography. searches 22. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1957 K/einasien.Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft. Kulturgeschichte des Alten Orients. Miinchen: C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. O. R. Gumrney, 1977 SomeAspectsof HittiteReligion.London:
BiblicalArchaeologist 58:2 (1995)
113
Oxford Univ. Press. 1979 The Anointing of Tudhaliya. Pp. 213224 in StudiaMediterraInCa Mre i Piewro dicata.Edited by 0. Carruba. Studia Mediterranea. Pavia: Aurora Edizioni. Gfiterbock, H. G. 1952 The Sonl, of Ullikunaiii:RevisedTcvtof thei HittiteVersionYfa Hurrian Millth. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. 1954 Authority and Law in the Hittite Kingdom. Journalof theAmierican OrienltalSociety!Suppl.17:16-24. 1968 Oil Plants in Hittite Anatolia. Jo1urnal of theAmericanOrientalSociety 88:66-71. 1983 Hethitische G6tterbilder und Kultobjekte. Pp. 203-217 in BeitriigezurAlterffir tunskundeKleinasiens:Festschrift KurtBittel.Edited by R. M. Boehmer et al. Mainz-am-Rhein: Philipp von Zabern. Hagenbuchner, A. 1989 Die Korrespoltndenz der Hethiter.Texteder Hethiter 14-16. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universit~tsverlag. Hoffner, H. A., Jr. 1974 Alinenta Hethaeonuni. American Oriental Series 55. New Haven: American Oriental Society. 1990 HittiteMyths.Writings from the Ancient World 2. Atlanta: Scholars Press. 1994 The Hittite Word for 'Oil' and its Derivatives. Historische Spraclforschut•n 107:104-112. n.d. The Hittite Laws. In Mesopotamian Lawn Collections.Edited by M. Roth. Writings from the Ancient World. Atlanta: Scholars Press. Kammenhuber, A. 1961 Hippologialhethitica. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. KBo taus Bogharzkbi. 1916-23,Keilschrifttext 1954 Wissenschaftliche Veriffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 30/36/68-70/72-. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs. KUB 1921- Ke'ilschrifturkuideii aus Boghazktii. Staatlich Museen zu Berlin, Voderasiatische Abteilung. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Kiimmel, H. M. 1967 Ersatzritualehfiir denthethitischen Ki,,.i3. Studien zu den Bogazkhy-Texten Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Laroche, E. hittitesen trinscrip1969 •extesmytho/giytes tioii. Paris:LibrairieC. Klincksieck. 1971 Cataloguedes texhtes hiittihtes. Eitudeset Commentaires. Paris: Klincksieck. Lebrun, R. 1980 Hyines et prii'reshiittites.Homo Religiosus 4. Louvain-la-Neuve: Centre d'histoire des religions.
114
BiblicalAthaeologist 58:2 (1995)
Lewis, B. 1980 The Sagon Legetnd: A Stuly of tiheAkkadiaii TextiandtheTaleof the Hero /lo was Exposedat Birth.American Schools of Oriental Research Dissertation Series 4. Cambridge, Mass.: American Schools of Oriental Research. Marazzi, M. 1988 Note in margine all'editto reale KBo XXii 1. Pp. 119-130in Stdtliti Storiae di a Giovanni filologiaanatolicadediicati Edited by E ImPllglieseCarrIte'lti. parati. Eothen. Studi sulle civilth dell'Oriente antico 1. Firenze: ELITE. Neu, E. 1988 Das Hurritische:Eintealtorientaliscihe iii Licht.Akademie der SirachelWieLeni Wissenschaften und der Literatur, Abhandlungen der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner VerlagWiesbaden GMBH. Otten, H. 1958 HethiitisciheTotecrittiale. Deutsche Akademic der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Institut fur Orientforschung, Ver6ffentlichung Nr. 37 Berlin: Akademie Verlag. 1973 Einetalthethiitischie Erziling int di Stadt Zalpa.Studien zu den BogazkoyTexten17 Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Otten, H. and Soulek, V 1969 Ein althietitischesRitufal fir das Studien zu den Bogazk6yKdiiigspaar. Texten 8. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassow itz. Pecchioli Daddi, E and Polvani, A. M. 1990 La mitohlgiaittita.Testi del Vicino Oriente antico 4.1.Brescia: Paideia Editrice. Powell, M. A., Jr. 1991 Epistemology and Sumerian Agriculture: The Strange Case of Sesame and Linseed. Aula Orieitalis9:155-164. Pritchard,J. B. 1969 Anicielnt Near EasternTextsRelatingto the Old Testament. 3d ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Puhvel, J. 1984- HittiteEtymologicalDictionary.Trends in Linguistics. Documentation. BerlinNew York-Amsterdam:Mouton Publishers. Riemschneider, K. K. 1958 Die hethitischen Landschenkungsurkunden. MitteihIge lides Istituts fiir 6:321-381. Orieiitforschuing Rister, C. and Neu, E. 1989 HethitischesZeiche'ilexikon. lIventtaraid dr Keilsclriftzeichen lnterpretatioii atls dienBofazkiy-Tevt'i. Studien zu den Bogazkiiy-Texten. Beiheft 2. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Schaeffer,C. E A. 1968 UgariticaV. Paris:Imprimerie nationale.
No
my,On I/In'
Harry A. Hoffner,Jr.is Professor of Hittitology at The Oriental Institute of The University of Chicago and Editor of TheHittite Dictionaryof the Oriental Institute, a project funded in part by grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities. He has written extensively over the past thirty years on all aspects of Hittite civilization. Professor Hoffner is currently a member of the Editorial Board of the Society of Biblical Literature'sWritings from the Ancient World Project, a Delegate to the American Research Institute in Turkey,and an active member of the American Oriental Society and the American Schools of Oriental Research. He has traveled and conducted research in Turkeyover ten times during the past twenty years. Siegelovi, J. 1971 Appu-Miirchelnud Hedammii-Mytlus. Studien zu den Bogazk6y-Texten 14. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Singer, I. 1983 The HittiteKI.LAMFestivail. PartOt'e. Studien zu den Bogazkoy-Texten 27 Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. 1987 Oil in Anatolia according to Hittite Texts.Pp. 183-186 in Oliie Oil i Aiitiquity.Israelanmid Neighborig Countriesfom to Edited by Early Neollith Arabperiotd. M. Heltzer,et al. Haifa, Israel:The Culture and Art Division Ministry of Education and Culture. Unal, A. 1994 Stt/ih'siMi Aiciint AnatolitnMagical The Practices. Magic Ritualtof Hantita?,?1u fromtiheCityof AgainstTrowhleHuzrma somne Y'ars. Ankara: TuirkTarihKurumu.
Dedicated to Peter Neve
Arti-Facts
Thelocations inArti-Facts canbefoundon themaponthe of thesitesdiscussed lastpageof thesection.
"•
Desperately Seeking Faustus NIVERSITY OF VIRGINIARESEARCHERS
are shedding light on the career of a Roman lamp maker named Faustus. Interdisciplinary study has shown that this Augustan period craftsman was peripatetic, working at sites throughout the eastern Mediterranean region of the Roman Empire.. Faustus' products are mold made terracotta lamps of Bailey Type A with volute and discus (late first century BCEto early first century CE)and are known from sites in the Roman East: Cyprus, Egypt, Sabratha(Libya),and TelAnafa (Israel) among others. His lamps feature discus reliefs executed with artistic skill and confidence, and a signature in the genitive case, FAVSTI,inscribed (not stamped) into the base. Donald M. Bailey at the British Museum suggested the possibility of a peripatetic career for Faustus based on the observation that Faustus' lamps appear to be made from different clays. John J. Dobbins at the University of Virginia made the same observation during his work with the lamps from the University of Missouri and University of Michigan excavations at TelAnafa. To confirm his hypothesis that Faustus used more than one clay source, Dobbins utilized the assistance of the University of Virginia Research Reactor to subject samples from several visibly different Faustus lamps as well as several other ceramics from Tel Anafa to Neutron Activation Analysis. The results were surprising. Not only was the clay composition of the Faustus lamps consistent, but it was also consistent with the other ceramic products from the site. The next phase of the project involved expanding the NAA analysis to consider Faustus lamps from other sites as well as TelAnafa. The Metropolitan Museum of Art and The British Museum generously provided samples of several
'.47 ?.,•.I
of their Faustus lamps. The second NAA project was able to test lamps from Tel Anafa, Egypt, Cyprus, Petra,and two lamps described as Italian fabric.In addition, several samples of ceramics from Tel Anafa were tested. The second NAA confirmed the preliminary findings of the first and added new dimensions to the study. Again, the TelAnafa Faustus lamps were quite similar compositionally, and equally similar to the other ceramics from Tel Anafa. However, lamps from both Egypt and Cyprus did not have consistent chemical compositions. These sites apparently received lamps made at more than one production site. The results confirm that Faustus used more than one clay source and suggest that potters supplying the site of TelAnafa also utilized one of these sources. A combination of NAA and paleography provides further information about workshop organization. The inscribed signatures showed distinctive variations which represent the hands of workers associated with the Faustus workshop. Results of the NAA showed in two cases that lamps with the same signature type were produced from different clays. This suggests that the signers moved with the shop, and thus argues against simultaneously operating branch workshops. At present we know of eighty-five Faustus lamps. In addition to the results of our specific studies, we would like to publish a catalogue of Faustus' lamps. If you should know the location of any or could suggest scholars to contact, please contact me.
Kathleen M. Lynch McIntire Department of Art University of Virginia, Fayerweather Hall Charlottesville, VA 22903
[email protected].
Nq
Faustus,a peripatetic Romanlamp makerof the Augustanperiod, producedand distributedhis lamps in the Romaneast. These two lampswith preservedsignatureswere found at TelAnafa,Israel,but his lampsare also knownfrom Cyprus,Delos,Egypt, Sabrathaamong other sites.
FAVIN
FVA
,.
FVAI
The signatureson the lampbases vary distinctivelyindicatingthat severalhandswere signingthe Faustusname. Eachtype represents an identifiablehand,and othersmay stillbe identified.NAAevidenceshowsthat the signersmovedwith Faustus'shop.
iizc•
5
/
A
aeol
.
<>
Lahav
...
DIGMASTER
..........
The Lahav DIGMASTERproject involves the development of an Interactive Electronic Technical Manual (I.E.T.M.) as an on-line digital database for the storage and distribution of archaeological data recovered by the Lahav Research Project (LRP) excavations at Tel HIalif (Israel).The project is motivated by two goals: to provide access to, and use of, information and materials recovered during field research; and to demonstrate the viability of presenting archaeological data in an interactive electronic format. The DIGMASTERproject involves authoring database documents for delivery in MOSAIC.When ready,DIGMASTER documents will be accessible on internet connections via MSUinfo, Mississippi State University' World Wide Web link. Persons from anywhere in the world may thus review LRP findings. Current work on DIGMASTERincludes preparation of two initial documents. Document I will feature over 500 Persian and Iron Age figurine fragments recovered from Field IV in 1992 and 1993. This document is conceived as a master catalogue of artifacts,showing each item in digitized color photographs and line drawings, accompanied by detailed descriptive text. In addition, full information on the archaeological context of the objects may be accessed via hyperlinks to related locus summaries, artifact sample
,,
jjj?? ill
So
lists, and special study reports. Field photographs, plans, and sections will be similarly accessible in the database. Document II will featurethe Chalcolithic and EB I period material excavated from Site 101at Halif between 1986 and 1993.This document is conceived in a more conventional form, beginning with text describing the site stratigraphywith hyperlinks to plans, sections, field photos, locus lists, and other materials,including object and pottery drawings, and photographs.Throughthe hyperlinksthe user may move about in a non-linear fashion, pulling to the screen whatever photos, texts, and drawings may be of immediate interest. Paul E Jacobs (Mississippi State) serves as the principal author/coordinator for Document I, with Eleanor Beach (Gustavus Adolphus College) and James Hardin (University of Arizona) as key research associates. The author will direct work on Document II with J.P Dessel as research associate. Presentation of archaeological information in MOSAIC has several major advantages: data can be put on-line at an early stage of processing and thus be made available more rapidly; the user can have access to more, if not all, excavated evidence because the format is not limited by the costs of publishing in print; and the user can "browse,"freely print,
M
1"iw
`
Lahav Igurines DigMasterDcmn .. ....."... ....
cR'o
. . .....
0(D0
download, and otherwise use the files according to individual interest. An added bonus is the possibility of creating mechanisms for dialogue between authors and users via "note systems" or "white pages." It is especially important to note that DIGMASTERdocuments are conceived basically as "databases"and not as final publications. While the ultimate plan for Lahav materials includes printed interpretive reports formed from these database materials, its developers hope that by sharing excavated data early and generously in this way, the overall study and interpretation will be stimulated in formative and constructive ways.
Joe D. Seger
-, -.?% "' ..W.-?:p??
I.
.
I
up
in.
Vil
1 -mo
Flood
Damage
in
Thebes
On November 2,1994, a flash flood struck in the area of the Valley of the Kings (Egypt).A torrent of water up to two meters deep rushed down the road from the Valley carrying away many structures in its path. It is estimated that between 100 and 200 houses were destroyed, the occupants of which lost most of their possessions. Fortunately,there was no loss of life.
A city of tents has been set up in the area of the Sety temple in which those dispossessed are living. A sum of money has apparently been offered by the government to help these people erect new homes, but it (LE 500) would seem inadequate and contrasts with sums recently spent on tourist projects. Many of the tombs in the Valley of the Kings were flooded, but there was no
............ DX111
;~1~
OM
obvious short-term damage. The mortuary temple of Sety I was in the path of the flood, which took away the main (modern) gate and various sections of the thick brick enclosure wall. A stele which stood near the first pylon was knocked flat, and recently excavated areas were filled with mud and partly obliterated. I saw a two meter high water mark in the front court, and the ground was still soft at the end of December. Limestone blocks in the area of the first pylon are showing signs of extreme salinization and are beginning to
. .
. . , ? . .. .. I ,- .. ??????????????????????????????????????I
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
: .?. . . *, ?I . I. ?. ?I.. , '. . ?,. .I I : ,$ 1 ?. II:?:.,].':I,?, ??.I,I,... I.. ;I. .:, ?:-.,..I..".1.:1 .. .. .-.?:.. - . 1.??1,. 1.q ,:?... I .I,.. .... ... I . . I ?,?It?.?,' ., I.:,:? ,I ...:.:, .?? I ,. .,? . , ?. ;, I. ..I I_.m. . : , " ,?,' )-1 ? , ? I v ? , . ..' . . 1. . . ? .. .. , ., , . .. 11. ..I '. ? ?.. . ,1. ?, c', .,. .. ? ?I ..I .. . . . I . ? .. ... . . , .,.. 1? . .% ?.. 11 ..N I?-.??.:...:...,I.I: . I. . .. ?. .:, ??,I:I.:? --- v,..?_? -. ..rI",..'...,.... ??.,_.:1I,e.... I", ,*-': ?,.,il ,11 -.,-e..??. *., ?I.1: ..1.. _1.?.:. ..?. ..?:.i.. ..?, I1.11 .. .I, : ...:?.... .I I . 1. .I. ?I .?I . .II. I. .II. . :.*% ,?.. .,f.., . . .,?, -i, I ? ? , . . . .. ? ? . I ?. "". ?I ? I . . . . . . . . . . ? . . I .. . . , ? , ,?? . . ,." I. . . I...., I..,. .,':I. .?. .?? I II. . .. ? ... . I ,I,?., l ?I1'_. % ; ?.3I? ,%, ,m ?. , - I . .., I. V?_ .-1 ..", .,...... .m". , , ,? .. ,.: ,...I?:? ,, ..., ?:I.,.. ...:I..II.t". -e,t:?;,#, 11. .,./,,'....?..?I?-, .......?.1 . ..q?.,-.. .?:-:?,. . ?? ,k,?A :,:.;. I.?..?'_ .,,,A .. .... . .. .,.?' ,,?",. ,- ,,.".. - II . . . .?e .,-., ... ?I.p -? "...,.," I." -? ?-,:%:,? ??, I?,,?, -I', I. .P 11 . ,.,. .??,kN! ,?,?._?? ....,:,,.-.? ...:.?.?.% ,'..1 ,_V," ??I., ??I?, I,.I. .,. ?..,,, ..-"I......?.; 1. .1. ..?." ??,? *0,? .I II-- 11 I11 ?:: -I. ... .II...?:".. ,. c? ,1. .. ,. ...,:.-:1 I ..pI, .,, . . . . I -,?, ?vF,-..-_6 ?? -??: .?.,. -?, ? . I , !,. I ..: 1. , . -? ?. , .1 I . ,? 71 '. ,_ ?.. . .,? ? .. . .1 ,,, : . . ? i I ? ?? , 11 1, "I , ?.., . , ,,"-`I"- '.??i -,I?" . : ?",,,,,, ,. -, , .,..1... .,,? 11 ,?' ?;,, .,,.,?..,.., r.:?.:i'..?,.:, ,I?I,?? -?, ?:. .? ? I:1.?:.I:. . .II. ? .. .,.I .., _,?I...,..-."I.I11?.'t" ,_,?, , ,I . ... ? I ... ?,.-.?', `.", - , ,,-,,? I,I"" , .., .:_. -iI," ??,N I,. I?Ik,,.,t . -?I " e.,-,e :. .I '. , .. . ? . 1.?. .?i, .,,,.,,?,. , I ,-1...".., . .I. ..Ig-. I ?. ,,..,,.,- .1 .? ...II,-: ,.? ., ;.A ,?, 11? , . . ' ...-.,I.. A\ ,...... . . . . , .-". .11 : t I I .,-,?I,." , , , , 1?,.?, . . ?. I . . , "? ... . . -I , I,.. ,--. , ; " :. . , . .. I., ? , .: : ?, %?,? , ? .:. ?;:,Im .:. ., ; '.. . ? . ". . . .,. . . ? -, ?".?, ,--I,.. .. ..: :,? -?..,?: .,... . I-,-,?.::.:?.? . . . 1. ., .?.?.. ?,?.,lj : ?? : : . -, I ?; . . ? , , II I ': ? I I '. : . I , . . '? I ? ? I . I 1'? ? ? II , , I 14' ,. i?:?. I1? . . I . .1 , , : , , I '% I . . . .. ? . , . . . . ,?, ? .il . , : ";' I? ?? ,I .?,?, ? . ?. .. ,,, .? I . ,. .. ..,.,??,.,. I-II% ?,,....I,? .1 1, ??... .?:,:.: ... :,..I,?.,?,.,.'.,.?,..:". . .,...,. I?...:.:.-I ..... .,-?I.I.-.I"'? ??... .-I ?, ? f11 ,I-?? 11 ..., " 11 -ir; "'. .? ..,.'? .?,-" .,.P?,:1: ,..,?.1,?..:? '41, ?e ,.-. ...,.m .? ?.,, -.:?I, ?,.",I. . I I .. .I- I. % -:.:,,,,, "r:,,?:1: :,*? :" ,'?I??.I,?? ,!,? ",I. Is.?.?:-?., 1. ": "., ?P-o ;-:, "' ?..'..,..,.I.,...11 . . . .. 1. . .?. , ? , I , I , . i . . I., , '. ?; * ? 1. : ?* I , '. ?: , , . . . : . : . , . ? . , ?? .. ? , I , .1 I 1. I " . . . : , :. ? I ? 11o . ? . . . . . . . .. , .. . . . . , . ,. ? , , , . . . . mlx; ?,.-,", ?,, ?,? , .:'... , "??r'.,:,,.,?1, ?.1.,II.?..,..: .: -.-_ I. ,-?. I. ,-,e . : . . I . I. . I.I.' ?,? il ,,I-? ... :?' - :. . ." : .. .,":. . ? ,., . ?.:,I? . ,?. ?, . ,'I,-.: I1?. ?1. ?.,?, ,r?_ ..,", I . 1?': ..1, ... ,,?.. . ,.?1, .,.?..:.-:. ......:?; . . : .m ,?,.?: "?f? ??5,1 ;1 ?i, I .:.. .... I.I?...w I,.:, , ?,,.:,.,.:: ?, ?..-1?.. ...,I,. , ,, : ,.:. .-,-I. '1?-?* -1. ?,?",.,?,??j -.,?-.-,?.11 "I I ..-, ,?,,??, .? , I.I-, '. % ..?. ':,?. -1 I.,,, ., ,I,:.'.,I,-,,?.:. "! ,??%, :,?.,? ?. ,?': . , ?:-1,(,,..I?.:.. ?. ,?? 11 .1? ,-I?;, iI'.?.-'.?,- . :I? ,?. . .. .'. II.: , ,.I?::,.: ?.,I.,:?," -.m ,,.,1: ?, .?,,? :: .? ;m .1.. ?f??,, I,-. I--,`?, i-,,? ...I"?I.I,.-.III I? ...1..I?,..I"eI, . :?I?..,...':..2.-... _.:.. . ??-:. . ?. ,..?..1..1? -"-,,.-,.,?.,,.,,?,.? I ?, ., .I.., , . I ? ,s I ? . .?? .. , .1 . . . . . ?., ? :z , ; ? . . ? " ?,? ? " . : : . : 11:1 ': m: I . . .1 . : : , . -1, ;? ,,* ? _? ..? ..I ?.1:1 .?.?' .",., .:..", I..,.I.'..?I". :?I.. .I,I... ..," ...?: -.I ?,,,,,?: .:,"'. .1 , ??, ? I...i..%. ... Vi , I , ::l .: ? I ? . .1 I ?, . . . . , . . , , ?? ? .., : I . .. .1 .. . . : . , , % ?'_ , , . . . . . . . ? I , , I ??. ? I : .1 : ? ? I . . . ? . . *, " I , ? . ?? . . . . ? I . ,?,? .. m, I 11 ?. , % I .:., ?.I?.. ,?. II I ,?..:.,I ?..,...1.?..I-.I?? .,I ....,I.... ,:.-.I'? . -"-.1 ,... . ..-I .I14 . , ? -.:. : .. . , ;,??ZYA?.. t . .. . ,;? I 'I:,-. . , I ; , _,?,_. . I.. .1 . I ? : . I ,?', , . . , . . . . , ? -1 . , ?? "I ? . . , I :, : . : ;, . ?I?e ? . . , ? I , I s _ ,;,-.?.;,! . ? , , ? . %, ..-:.,i I. ??. ;?, r I . mt , , ? I ? . , .. ? I ., . '.. , ".-, : ? , . . ? . . I . : . . . .! . . , , ?-, ? I I , ., .. , .: . . I . I .. I 7 ,,,,..,. .,:":.1..." ..?,...t:?', I . ; , .. , , : , '. ?r '. . . ?",,-, ? ?t ? : 1 . , .? ?": . ., ., . ,,,?, . ?, I " . , , .1 . , , ? ,?* . ? . .. , , , . : , _x ': :, I ,.,,... ;:,"-,.,?.,.....:,. ,.?,II.. '.IiI-"i.I .?.?:I . . . .-, .I. I ?.-. .?..,.I. I..;'I, ., :-. 'O". ?I,,%; . ,. .?:, ?,? ,'?` II:"I,?.,.I", ?,Z? ,,.,?.? .,?.,. "X ,--.: I.?1%, ,I?,?.,., I-*r m , I" ,.4". -?? `?ri ?,.N? 1, 0y?-,_' C, ,? , ,-?,-?'?,? ,? -: "': "4,-,, --?1. -,, -..,, .I, , , .....,: I:,# .."-'Y ,:--,?.., ?-...;, .,1. ,.'_1 ", -11 ,:?.,,? ?? -,??:-" .I,. I?;I:...I..?I,,.. . ,?.1 ,, , ?:. ?,._I .I.., , ?...e.?. ,-? .v?', , ,i:,v, .-V ,-" .,??; .....,,, ?:.., .,??-.% ,,..,.,:..?1k ..I.., -,,?-?,?,:? .:.. , ..1?? '. ..7II?I,?? ,?,.?'.',,' . , ?', , , , ?? . .? :,?? ? . ,1?' .. r;?.,.,,I-??_ ,.?..?... t ',?-;".. .?7 ,?; ? , , """ ,-,?, . ? , " , 1, I . : : , , . -'n , -.", . . ? . ? -'e . , .: : . -, . .. .. , 1. .;?. ? " ,-.(.,, ., ,-?. ,.,?.,,?,1"?.,_ '.?"m' ."". ?. "??c 11 W ?? ??1 , , .. I'... ?? ,,-,-? ?,.1 ,'..: ..,?,. ?,..?,? ..-,..'. ?I?.. ,. , .':?, ???.,,?,!. -..?I_1 ".,,.?.," .,??.?,"",,, :..-..? ., ...,.; ,? _-?-I .,.''.....:.,.,.,?J ..??.: ?-: ." ?--.'/,.--k 11:11 ,.:: ?, ,,? ,_-, ,,,..?...?.. ,?,. p -im .": ?W?? - ?'.?? .r?,,?.1 ..: , ":, '?, "1, , -I.,?., .w.? .?.-.... ..,; - .?.-, . .I?.- '.I-..,.,,?-.." ?_.??, ,?, ,?,,,,?3 -. .I.?, .?,I,,,-?,? J??.. ?,!'?,,'.. I,.iI?..,.:d,:?. ?,,?,;i ", ?-,. ??? ?.1 ?-.-I,I',?,-?,:? I.? 1..,.1, ,?. 1,'.1. -!.I. , ,% .,.1. I ? ?, i,?? .-,??.Im .1"?,,?-,?? ;.I....I, v. .-111.11.,.,.. `?:,. ...':.:..1? ?'. ,.;_?? -,.I. ,; ?--,".I ?_ ..,.?...., I.?..,.I, ?, .I..?'? ? .?, ?.:,!? ,:??.,-I... I...,.?.II.,'. ,..., ?', .?",..?.T'?. ..::-.:?II I~ -I.I.:% I?` ".? ?,1, 0',"P'.", ?, -. .11 .,?. ??,,?.,I .--I, i," ..?. -?, ;,-"'. -,?,,,?, ,4; ?,.-. ?, . I : , ,i?, ?I???...1, ?,.?, ?,-,?-,?? , " 1. : .. . ? ? . ,I I,? , -?AIi,?: . , ?, . 1, ?,?,? . , , . -? 1? , ? : . . , .-1,'J .. . , ? , . , , , I I ". I ? : " ?, 11 11 .1 . . . i . . ? . . . %. ?; 1. ..1. I ? , , " I I ?? '-.?,???I..; I 1. " . . ': ,: .? . . . . . . . . , ? .". . . . , ?!,?, .:z:" :',*-. I,.: , .:... .I.?. ?.1,-II ....?I .!.1 , .?. -,.i.1 . . ? ke,- ..,. , 1?I, 1? -,. -_ ,..,. ?: . ?,_ . I . ??: 1 . .1 , . . ? I . 1.r F? r: " ? .,, I t .?, -,? t ?,' i: , , .., . , . : . . ? . . . ': ? . , , , I ??", ,'.?..11 I,I% :,: ?? .1, .?'?. .i", ".,...-?---??.?.?.:.,..,:?1?. ??`, f,--. ,, " , : I?-, "?" . I.1. ., ,,??-. I:,',-?, . :,....., '...,.?I1?.'?. ?, .,. ,.. I"" -:.;I.: ,.. ,'.?. I;...,,, -",,.? I, ?;'? ?.,?., ,.I:,?,-:.-.-_?I.??"' .7?1 I,?, . ,,?"..," ;..'.:?-..,-, 01. .11 .,?_ _? ?j .,:. . . .4.-.. .....,.??.?."wl,?? .,-?.e, ,"', ":?,?. I,:. ,,?.` '...I'.,.? ?? 1, `17 .% ....1 :-,I-,.:?.?,,.?,1, .,:? ....:.'? ,',., "" :11? ,.: .1 .,?I. I.'... 1. ,,, ?,??; -.....--?..?I.-,.?.,,."I..I,?I,,,r.. .-.?, 1-1 ?I1?? .:,. .II... ..? ,..' .-?','i', ,,-,, ?..,.:I... "" :,,411 .!,I;,;,1: ,-;,'? t,?x? ,:.. el?. ?? ,1: ;.fI..,-.?: ,41 ?-, , -"?:? :1 ti--." M .--?, ?11 1.z ,. ..:I?...;1, z.f.:..'.,: ..% .I,-..t?;, .?. ; ,?? -.? ,-.I,.-,I,,-? ..? ". ?.,?, ?-,. 11. ." ?-..:J?.. c:. ,??,-1?,.,..-,?". -,."I% , ,-?.? .::..:..:?'.,x.? I,.-,.,? ,,-_,1.,"? ?. ? ?1,.,.I ." I" I ,? '.,,--;_., .,,,"" ?, ;..,? " ".. ?, :,. ,?', ....,.?. . . . .;.? : ?: , , " ? ,; ? ? ? , ? , , ?, " ? ? . ., ',-,," ,,,-;...-??,,,??, , . i.?-: ?, I~ ,,,-,-_ , . . I . , I . ,7 1, ,,,-,_,?, , : :j , ?_,. . . ? . . ? ".1 , I . : ? ". I, ? . ;. , ? I ". ,,?j -,-, ?? ; -, .. . , -, ?:? . :. _ . . . :??:.-?, ,:?. .. . . ? , ?' 1. I 1. %,I. .? ? . , ?: .: ,? . ..I..,:. ..-????m .... , ':,".. .?. -?; 'm_ ":, Z: "-,,:? ??.l ?1 .-,.,j ..1 ...,I....?.1, ?7;g A" 1? ?:... 1,,I-.? '5".J.',?, _. .1 -,. ... -?::?', I-I...-?. ," -.-.?? I,,,? ,,,i?, ?. ..1, ,....,,?..:.I?II;-..1..?I.?.?.". 11 jr :? ,?. ?:I-?_ -.,:??,?--,,? ..II?.,-,.,.1 ?,.-.I";, 1, I, ..:..,I".'" I 1,1, ?: . . ,,, 4:_1 I.., .?.,I.:,; ..? I. . ... " "& " .-I., i'...::.1 :.... ?,:', .-,. ?. ?-. I1%, ?, ".."
Mgngg?
TIMP
R
rR,
'.
Ai
.
'?
1
.
O?w ....... :1., ....... Twostelae in the Setytemple, one of which was knockedflat by the floods and now is restored.
....,?? l!", ,-,.: ..,.". I,:-.-I1, .,.L I't-. ?.,I:.'?, .1, ?1.?, ?,:? ,.1. ..?'.?' .? iI,? ..?, 1? .,.....I........,.'.I.?--I:1'??.'.. ,?"?_ k :..., 'a ..? I'.I .IfAI1-?I..?,? I4? II., ;,.I.1 ,,-'.'..." -1, , - II-..I'ell ??, -'? ,'.?, ..?; I.'.', -I"?,-.??. ,? .1. ,1-1?1 .., ;?,,,-, ,i:.?.'??,; IX I? ... ..., i.I" ?11.,,..' -Ir? -.I~ ,_?' I,.: .-,:,? I:..I,I?.111. .I.-.-?? ??, I..:.. 11 ,I?--:,.?: ,,,.?, ,.T ,1, ,? .1..";,? ,:,. ,...I11. .'. -I,,? ." ." :1T , ,,I.I-.; ..I-.I..: -A ?.11 ,,.I.?' .'.1'. ?.: 1V 1i t', 1. ....'." .? .,:..'. IIT . I I . I I ...?Z ,?, I, .?,,??;_ , ...., I ,?, ", .", . -,.-'..%.,. , I !,,,,, " ,:, . ? .!.',' , ??'; , f, . . , . I I , . i ? . ?, ?:`-y I ? , " . ... . .. 1, '.1 . . 'I., . . ? , ? 1. ? 1'_. ?..,.`? , ? .?. 4*?_,! ., -, .. ? -,.'. _ "., , ., . . _ ?r?,'Iey , ` , .. , ? ". :i-, I "..., ". I ...? .I J. ,, , ?-1? . ? .?? . . , , ? . ..? '. .. ,?.,? , "'. i, .....,"..1 ,?,.?..,-.:... ,r,W 4. , ,,, ....:?I',.?, _?,.,:. ,,M?., "' .,?: ..Ie?, .I11. .1 .,. 1. .I.. ,,, -?_?, . . I..., ? , ?. . . 1? 5 .'. ?? ,': -.7, ?.. . 1 ?_ ?,?,,? "'.1 .. I . ? .11 , -? , ? _.... "I .'?,? .4, ? .? 1. , ?', , ,I' 4 ..' .''..." . . I . ,? . . " -?-g I., . ::: _.. _ , .??:i ,c. -, '?,.:,.. '... 'I, , , .. % ? ., , " , . . ?', . . 1. . I . ,I ,?> M ? ? . ? "_ .?,,, ? -, , , : I 11 1. ,? ,',? _ . , I , " ,,, ?. ? , ?: "4 L. "? ,?, ? ,,, , . . . . . I , ? 11 . . ., I !. I 4?11?, (. ?, . I I I I , ?1.11, .. ., . "-? i a, _ , .1 . : ,:?: . . .! ?? , ? ? ? I ? ? ??,,, ' ,. , , ? . _ , , . . ? .:,?. ?.?_ , .. . '. . ., ?,?, ,? ?-.?l ' I.. ? , 1' ., , lf ? I ". ? I ? ?"??, I?,,-7. ..-?,? .,? :.,1. -?," _c, -?,?,? .1y, ??.l I. II,'-?:?. ". -.?.'. II -, -??,_ _.,:I-.., .Im ,":,.,?I,.-1: ..-.II1:1 ,r??,"Q ,??.i " -" 1.1.1-11 ?'. .,,,I??,:._., z_--? -1?. "',IJ,?': :, "' ?,??I.v ..?' .?......??.:I. :,,....1-. Z'w) ,,?-,-,-?-?,, I41 ?.?: ;.. ?., ,<,r. ,+ ,?,??*,, 'i. . ..6 .11V_ &% I...,??, ?, ?? 1_ ,,?, I1-I" 1K ..(.,,?,,?5,i?M I-II:, ?, w ...11 1, ??' -,?, ..,,? 4t ..?, ?, .._? ,, I......'. ?.I.?"' . ,,, ... ".1,?,,??,. I.': ,!I..?.. 1 ....-I., ?., ?-., . . I., ! :? I .$. ?? , , .", ?-W -,,,??':,?"I,,,?? !,?6!, i -4,.-F -v.,,?: ., -'. . . ; " ,3I 11 1, ., ? .1. .: 1, "! , " I " I' ? I ': . . . " , : . , , " 1.?_? , .. " .I. ... . ?. 11..-?, ".. ,-I IT? ??,? ?, -1 11 , . ??'zv??,, "-,? . . ....'.I... ..,I,..,7 .. ,-r';,"?-1VI I....,.,-..."'_ .,,.:%, ;%"" ? I,, ?.t I., '. I?.? ?,.,.? -,? ..,.?.? :: . . ....?,? g?; ?, `,?'k ,.`--_,?,-,,?7?'?-, ,?? ?, .,'..?.' -1 ,___ : ,,,-,-Q?, i.. Y? I. .., , ?i ?_ ..? -?'. , ,-- ,I.,II,;-.-, , ,4,,,? ,-". ",:..r. t. .m R ?..;:I.11? -..."4, I .1
crumble. Visitors to the other temples in Luxor report similar cases of salt damage. The private tombs of the Nobles have perhaps suffered the most. The Antiquities Organization has opened a number of those lower down in the hills, and these would appear to have been at most risk. One of these tombs suffered the most serious damage I saw as a result of the rains. The tomb of Pairy (no. 139) is built into a stratum of poor quality rock known locally as tafl.When this stone is exposed to water, it first expands and then disintegrates. When the walls of the tomb of Pairy became wet, the base of tafi material expanded and then collapsed, causing two of the three decorated walls in the tomb to fall to the ground. The situation was made worse by the fact that the painted plaster fell into standing water.Accidents like this reinforce the importance of documenting and conserving these tombs. The Antiquities Organization in Luxor now faces a huge task, as damage from this flood continues to manifest itself in the months to come.
i,!,*,??4,??_,,, -,.:? ?, ? ?.: '? Nq?;,?,-_,. ,!?, ??-? --".: ?? - -,--? 1.t,-52,? 4,?-?, ,-?: 1, ??.:??k?-,I,4.1'7, _71 _? -`, Rl?_ R ??,?;?,,??kl.' ? .. ,? 14.,_?? , , --a V 1, ?, "k ??. t.?, ,;?
.1 .. - . ...
""I', ?M??,"., .?? -, ,-_ 'i?,. ,,,, ,,,"t .,0,4-:? 1??;?',Evk,,?? '.-g?
Nigel Strudwick
?.?.."?.?"-. IN .r, ., ,I.I.. ?I?,., ,??_?, 11_1 .???11 :.:.;.I...-."?. ,.I-,??K,,,,?.?,,I-,-.,,? ?, e?,,, . I_m. ??: I.Im .? ..?,?? :.,-.., .... I 111V I,,( ,.1, " .,. d :.--,., :.I,I?i",??_ :,? , 1?? "M ?'. -1, ,_ .?.,.I..--.11?.?.:. -.??_ III??!",_ -I .1.,?#,?'..?:C. ?e ei?i-? ,?? ...1? ,,?,,??,?? ?, I.1 ".. , .: , .1??..'?.,,-? _ :?_. I ? , ? . . _ , ? , , ... ?, ].. w _ I "':. I . : -, .. .,?? , 1'1&? I. " . . ? z ? 'I, ,.. I ? 1.11" lk'?11?flil IIq?I,,.".,:1? . 'it . ,I,I1;x ? . , I '? , " , I . ? m I -? I i, -.7., , ?V ,,,-j ?, .?_4 .. :?..?.'??".?.' .:;5, -"', -,??, "tl,?,',-3,1'?, , :-,-,
. -;. ...... - ..?, ...-_... - ..
. -:?.--.,..,-, ,?.?II..?I..._-
?,?,, ,-,. -?,4? ..,I ,?I?,,tk?,
Restoredwall in the tomb chapel of Pairy(no. 139),which originallyhad collapsedfromthe effects of water.The cracksand breaksin the restorationare visible. "
Tel
,?
, I? ,?.
,
?
A
I
.,....I?..,?,.4.:,?...Ins .. I... ??.1 :?:..I1 .I . ...,,1 I1, .;I...II.,:,: ": ..I.. ?? :%: . .I '.II_? ..".-.,,",--,.".?'. ?? II" :-'.,.,-.-.,-?1: ..--,-,.. II.I....?I.... ....? ..:.,I?:.?:..:..I.....?.II,.......I..1I...,rI..I.....?....,..;,I...I,.I.I.,1.I,..'..?!..?... .....I.,-,,:,..,.?.-?.,?; .,? ?.?. . . '..... I..... :I ...11/ .?,I,-..,I.,-?'::._ .. , -,I.7, I,?.I.? I....-m I. ?.: :. :I;._?,,.,...?1 ,? 1?. P: ?. t'..: :: . . , : . . I . I .. . ?.. .. . I.. ?.I. ,?. ?. ?.?.,. . . ... .?. :.,., ,? I.. ,..II.. :.I.I....?? ",..-,..11:I,.:..1 ..... .?,,I., ,:? I?? .i.I,I:,."':.,I..-I1?,I-.,I.II.,?fi ......-?4 :? .?,,, -?; .,....?... ,-.'.., ?:.I,.I ..? ?.:?....?,, 1, . -Z . I . I ?'; . I . . ..I.,?;.: I I I 1 I . .. I . ., .... , ... I . . . . . . . , , .1_???." m .1 I . ?. ?, . . I . . .. . .?k 1. ? . . . . ? . . .1 . , t , :,...:,i,.%. .,??. ... sm,. . 1. x. . ?.I . .. ... ,.:.,I:.... ?,-, .. ?,:?..II.I. I... ., , ,; ?.?'.. . `.?.? ;.I:? . .. I. I. :.?. "?1.. ..:, --b. , I?, ':??.:1 I.:,..?,I'll, ,.: ,,?,' ?-.?-1: ?", .'.". ''I.., ??'.r. I.,?,-. . ,-..-.?,1, .??, ,.? .I... :. ,I" ?4, .., . :.,? .? .P _;,,.::,.I...''. .1. ..I .?:.,II.1 .-,:.?I,?.?_ ,-.-,iI_,% -.,',' '.,::. ,4?,?? ..-? .... '"'?', ... 1; ..,,;,
z-. MO M.w
CEinZippori,
"
...
.
.
.
.,
.i.
" " :' i
•
ii
.
:'.!
•
1994
The 1994 season was the second at Tel CEinZippori, a small tell located three km south of Roman Sepphoris. Situated near a small spring, the site is about four to six
dunams in size and has two tiers. Excavation has proceeded on both tiers as well as in a trench across the western slope of the tell.
•
"' "
;
?
.:~c: n
ov::? ?;te~-
i~a~~
~Biblical?:
i?.
.
..
.
:
Thus far,the earliest remains are from the Late Bronze I. At least thirteen restorable vessels, including several pithoi, were discovered on a beaten earth floor and dated by the presence of bichrome ware. The nature of the building associated
ea?:,,~
..........i
"
:lite
1,7
with these vessels has not yet been determined. For Late Bronze II,however, a large building complex with a courtyard has been identified. Pottery found in situ on its successive beaten earth surfaces includes both LB II and Iron I materials.The building was constructed in the LB II and reused with some modifications in Iron I. The size of the building suggests that it was not the simple household of a peasant farmer,while its date points to continuity between LBIIand Iron I at the site. After a gap of over a century, occupation at Tel(Ein Zippori resumed in the tenth century BCE.On the upper tier of the site is a large, well constructed multiroomed building measuring at least eleven by fifteen meters. With well-hewn stones for door-jambs and extensive burnt mudbrick deposits, this building also appears to have been more than a peasant farmstead. Tenth century remains, including an extensive (eleven m) terrace wall, also were found on the lower tier of the site. Rectangular rooms with domestic assemblages, including three "cup-and-saucer"vessels, were uncovered in this area. Materials from the ninth century were recovered in the trench cut across the western slope. The pottery, domestic in character,was found in the remains of
Sepphoris 1994 The 1994 season at Sepphoris, four miles west of Nazareth, concentrated on three areas of the western summit. The first area, which is close to the citadel, dates largely to the Late Hellenistic period. The nature and dimensions of the large building located in this area are difficult to determine as yet. Its thick walls and the fact that its interior rooms all had access to water may indicate a military function. In a second area of excavation, an extensive building of the Early Roman period was uncovered. Some of its rooms contained evidence (grinding stones,
logis U5` S
:1
15 ,?
-
. ..
Mk," 17
Z7
FM
kk, - kz a,s? ra.
ZA. ?0?.
Ik
k
le-
)k
A Two of the largevessels, datingto LateBronzeI,found on a beaten earthsurfaceon the lower level of TelCEin Zippori.The natureof the associatedbuildinghas not yet been determined. a building consisting of a wall with a stone bench and two upright pillars. Both the LBII-IronI and the tenth century buildings are larger than might be expected in a small rural village. The excavations at TelCEinZippori thus pose interesting questions about rural elites and ethnicity in a site located within the traditional boundaries of the Israelite
tribe of Zebulon. The excavations,part of the Sepphoris Regional Project sponsored by Duke University together with the University of Connecticut, will resume in 1996.Field director is J.P Dessel; project directors are E. Meyers and C. Meyers.
tabun fragments, animal bones) of foodprocessing activities, others contained fresco fragments and well-made plaster floors. Destroyed at the end of the first century BCEor early first century CE,the building was partially occupied in late first century CE.An adjacent building to the south contains uniformly Late Roman ceramics, suggesting that modern disturbances of the site may have removed evidence of a possible Middle to Late Roman occupation in this area. A third area of excavation focused on extending the work of the 1993season, exposing a structure of the late sixth to early seventh centuries CE.Although there was some Early Roman occupation in this area, as evidenced by a miqveh
(ritual bath), the building itself seems to be part of a Byzantine 2 commercial district, destroyed in the mid-seventh century and then partly re-used in the Early Arab period. Careful analysis of the animal bones from each period reveals different faunal profiles. For example, pig bone is virtually absent before the mid-fourth century CE but thereafter appears regularly.At the same time, miqvaothof the Roman period are no longer used in the Byzantine period. These two kinds of data suggest an ethnic reconfiguration following the midfourth century destruction of the western summit (due perhaps to the earth quake of 363 CE).That is, the apparently Jewish inhabitants of this domestic area of the
isi• : • !' ' 7 : •':i • •'•" ;sk',•B • • "• •4• , ,• • •• :• •'•,; x •;L I!•,:4•'i•:o• 9,* •:. •"•,
CarolMeyers
:
"!"'
1
• 41.
4
',• .... %
L •,:* ,
:•
•• ,•
.......~GII .• ,: ,•:•:•,'•
4
a'
:,; : '•,,'•
, "' L:,
MAP kl?
%Ck MAE
n"
MA
Yn
VTI:
Sri
4
axe;
x?4 N 0,
t'
"RNki Sig Uk
r'j If-
MRS1"WTV yI y
0 01
K'.
?V
4W
01;
INS
u34%ps
'TVol
Fop
01. CROPS PLO
101 I'll i'S
"M
Roman period may have been replaced by non-Jews in the Byzantine era. The 1994 season was the second carried out by the Sepphoris Regional Project (SRP)which continues the 1985-89 work of the Joint Sepphoris Project. Sponsored by Duke University with the University of Connecticut, the 1994 excavations were directed by E. Meyers and C. Meyers of Duke University.
W.
Carol Meyers .I .
0AN IA Sk 15t?;' zx.W j. '.4 Qq Wntwo&, low,1R
Overviewof the area 85.3 at Sepphoris, showingthe substantialwallsof a LateHellenisticbuilding,which perhapshad a military function,located nearthe towering citadel that crownsthe uppercity.
.....................
Anatolia
and
the
Balkans
Editedby J.Roodenberg.Special Issue of Anatolica.331pp. Leiden,Holland:NederlandsInstituutvoorhet Nabije Oosten, 1993; HFL 115 (paper).
A review essay by Ronald L. Gorny As the title of this collection of articles suggests, it discusses the question of relations between Anatolia and the Balkans.The scope of the book is limited, however, to postulated prehistoric links between the two geographic entities and the investigation of a proposed EuroAnatolian cultural zone in which intensive human interaction is said to be manifest in the archaeological remains of both regions. The inspiration behind this manuscript was a symposium held in Istanbul during November of 1991.A primary goal of the symposium was to bring together scholars from east and west who shared a common interest in relations between Anatolia and the Balkans,but had labored in separate worlds for decades. Participation was limited to roughly forty scholars who examined Balkan-Anatolian relations between 5,500 and 3,000 BCE.
..
This means that, for all intents and purposes, Anatoliaand theBalkansis written by scholars for scholars. In other words, readers are expected to have some degree of familiarity with the fundamental issues or be willing to spend some time acquainting themselves with the material. The manner in which Anatoliaand the Balkansis published is Spartan in design, being fashioned in the same functional style as Anatolicaitself. While the paperbound volume is devoid of color photographs, it displays an abundance of quality black and white maps, drawings, and photographs. The twenty-five articles included in the volume are written in French, German, and English, making the mastery of several languages necessary for a full appreciation of its contents. Overall, the presentation is readable and well-organized, though a few typographical errors have crept into the narrative. A difficulty for the uninitiated arises in the discrepancy between chronological designations for contemporary periods in Anatoliaand theBalkans(for example, the so-called Middle Neolithic of Europe is contemporary with the Middle-Late
ti~i
.ai
:$B
har-U..~:: i:..:::Biblical
Chalcolithic in Anatolia, see Ozdogan, p. 176 [author and page references are to Anatolia and the Balkans unless otherwise noted]). Further difficulties are encountered in the 'regionalization' of various cultures on the Balkan peninsula (Demoule, 1-17; Jovanovik,pp. 63-74; Pavyik, pp. 231-241;but cf. Ozdogan, pp. 174-176)and the resultant plethora of names which are totally unfamiliar to most students approaching the question from a Near Eastern background. Further confusion can stem from the fact that some authors use uncalibrated dates in their contributions (e.g.,Demoule, Table1, p. 14;Monah), while other do so in calibrated terms (e.g.,Todorova,Thissen). The connections between Anatolia and the Balkans in the prehistoric period are most forcefully laid out by Mehmet Ozdogan's article (pp. 173-193),whose presentation represents his most incisive contribution on a topic he has long championed. The fact that this collection of articles has appeared at all is a credit to Ozdogan, for without his efforts,this whole discussion would have remained on the back-burner for years to come. The true significance of Anatoliaand theBalkans,however, may be lost on the casual observer, for the impulse behind
this volume goes back to the early twenties when Anatolia's apparent connections with the Balkan peninsula were first noted. Such views, however, were ahead of their time and smacked of "diffusionism" which was then under intense attack. The articulate and up-to-date manner with which this volume's articles explore the issue of Euro-Anatolian relations suggests that those who first championed this cause may not have been so far from the truth. While a casual reading might have us believe the "diffusionist" controversy has become a thing of the past, the fact that it is not dead underlies the sensitivity shown by the contributors to the whole question of human movement and relationships in the region. Several of the authors, in deference to proponents of migration and diffusionism, couch their ideas in the more acceptable terminology of a common cultural zone, or as Ozdogan puts it, " 'a common developing zone' interacting within itself."This interaction, while not precluding some population movements (Ozdogan, p. 179) is based on the assumption of internal development rather than external influence. The geographic range of this common cultural zone extends from the Hungarian Plain to the southeastern stretches of Anatolia where it is effectively cut off from contact with Mesopotamia by the Taurus Mountains. Evidence suggests that contacts within this zone took place in two stages. The first,beginning around 5,500 BCE (Thissen, pp. 302-303; Todorova,p. 307), continued until the beginning of the fourth millennium BCE.There is a break in contact at this time, the reason for which remains unclear.Various events may have been responsible including tectonic activity, climatic changes which resulted in higher temperatures, extended periods of drought, erosion, changing sea levels, and nomadic invasions from the north Pontic steppes (Todorova,pp. 307-318; Lichardus-Itten,p.101).The existing social system-so evident in the widespread uniformity of the Balkan Early Neolithic cultural network-collapsed, and the breakdown initiated an
ai77:
:"N
NNW'U
Ao"t
Chalcolithic curvilinearpottery fromAliiarH6yOk:the best evidencefor a commonculturalzone in Anatoliaand the Balkans.Courtesyof the OrientalInstitute. 800-year period of mostly local development (Demoule, p. 10;Makkay,p. 118, Todorova,pp. 307-311).The stabilization of environmental conditions at the end of the fourth millennium led to the development of the so-called "Troja-BadenKulturblok" which witnessed a renewal of cultural interaction taking place in southeast Europe (pp. 315-16).Although Troy and the rest of Anatolia had been pulled increasingly into the Near Eastern sphere of influence by this time (Ozdogan, p. 178),the improving conditions may well have set the stage for far-reaching relations between Anatolia and Europe during the Middle and Late Bronze Ages when an increasing demand for metallurgical expertise probably encouraged further contacts between the two areas. The role played by the sea in developing this common cultural zone figures prominently in several contributions (Demoule, 1-17; Makkay,p. 123;Roodenberg, p. 257;Thissen, p. 303; Wijnen, p. 326: also see Thissen 1993,p. 207,n. 4). Demoule, for example, effectively argues that the Aegean Basin is a unifying feature for the lands around it and that the evolution of a common culture zone is the logical outcome of this type of seaborne interaction.The results are seen in the strong degree of cultural unity at sites scattered across the region. This widespread cultural unity makes it more
certain that the Aegean Basin, the Marmara Sea, and the Black Sea were not the cultural barriers scholars once thought, certainly lesser obstacles than the Taurus mountains which stood as a barrier between Central Anatolia and the Mesopotamian complex for millennia (Ozdogan, p. 180).The increasing evidence of sea contacts during this period makes it all the more reasonable, in fact, that the sea should be viewed, not as a barrier to interaction,but as a means by which an intensification of interaction was able to take place. Agreement regarding the details of this cultural zone is not, however, universal, as Nikolov's article (pp. 167-171) shows. Nikolov posits a "kontaktzone" built during the first stage of relations (ca. 5,500-5,000 BCE.)not on the basis of interaction among its constituent parts, but on cultural influences that originated outside of the region (p. 169).Unlike earlier diffusionist views (Todorova1978)which understood a unidirectional proliferation of contacts and interaction originating in the Balkans, Nikolov (along with Lichardus,p. 93) sees a movement in the opposite direction from Northwest Anatolia into the Balkans.This influence begins during the Karanova II period and reaches its fullest extent with the Karanova IV Suggestions of this sort, of course, fly in the face of the idea of
27
T, Vat~-::::
I
49 eo
so
s?t
Ak.A
9,?
Id~9~~~
:?. :
wI....?"
~~i
-.1
ic~lox
i:
ct s
44'' IN-
a
4l ?"v
sov
IA ~ 49L?L~~aur~a ~ J;_
A single piece of Szakalhatpottery (at top right)fromthe Aligarcollectionat the OrientalInstitute representsthe ceramictraditionof the Hungarianplain.Courtesyof the OrientalInstitute. internal development proposed by Ozdogan. Bringing the idea of diffusion once again into the equation, they compel scholars to see the inadequacies of the traditional posing of the issue, as in Hauptmann's (p. x): ex "Balcania"lux or ex Anatolia lux? There is, perhaps, more potential in researching the development of "alight from within." A primary problem hindering the investigation of the Balkano-Anatolian relationship is that of chronology While the relative sequences in both areas have been fairly well established, absolute chronology is still at issue, and the correlation of the two systems continues to be one of the biggest challenges in Anatolian archaeology (Renfrew 1973;Easton 1976: 146;Yakar1979:51-53).Peter Kuniholm's AegeanandNearEastDendrochronology Projectrises to the challenge of carefully chronicling the correlation of dendrochronological investigations with an everexpanding number of secure carbon-14 dates (cf. Kuniholm 1989,1993).While the final outcome of Kuniholmis ambitious project is still some time off, his initial efforts have often yielded spectacular results. Continued patience and persistence will be needed, however, as investigators search for the "missing links" necessary to harmonize the European and Near Eastern chronologies, especially in the problematic fourth millennium.
..
In lieu of secure carbon-14dates for the region, pottery remains the primary source of evidence for the proposed "common cultural zone," and most of the pertinent comparative materials comes from excavated sites in Europe. The dearth of excavated materials from central Anatolia means that the pertinent date to connect it to such a zone is not always obvious. Several Anatolian sites are critical to the argument: the volume makes prominent mention of Gelveri. Another which was often referred to, but not formally included, is the site of Alipar H6ytik in Yozgat Province of central Turkey (esp. Ozdogan and Parzinger). Needless to say,I noted these comments with great interest because of my own work at Aligar and in the surrounding Kanak Su basin. Excavated in the late 1920s and early 1930sby the Oriental Institute, Aligar was shown to have a long prehistoric sequence, a situation which should shed light on the current topic. However, the lack of secure carbon-14dates for Aligar has made this important sequence questionable, and it remains on the periphery of the discussion. The name is bandied about with little in the way of new data to add as evidence. Clearly,any resolution to the problem of cultural development in central Anatolia during the prehistoric periods will have to take into account the
...
....
role of Aligar.This is a problem that our own excavations at Aligar H6ytik, and now (adir H6yiik, intend to address. While a full analysis of the role these two sites played in prehistory is still forthcoming, it would not seem inappropriate to share a few thoughts which bear directly on what is being discussed so articulately by those who contributed to this volume. As a starting point we can look at the black-polished pottery tradition so abundantly documented at Aligar.This pottery plays a pivotal role throughout this cultural zone as an indicator of the late Chalcolithic in Anatolia or the Late Neolithic in the Balkans (see Jovanovid,p. 69; Makkay p. 119;Ozdogan, pp. 179-181).One of the most striking elements of this style of pottery is the punctuated-incised style of decoration described by von der Osten (1937:57-60,figs. 65-68) and common to other contemporary sites within this zone. Similar black-polished pottery, including fine black-ware vessels, punctuated-incised sherds, bowls with redpolished interiors, and one example with white-painted decoration on the interior surface, was found at (adir H6yiik in 1994.Although our analysis of these new materials is in a preliminary stage, the black-polished pottery of Qadir appears to be very similar to the Diindartepesummit materials described elsewhere by Thissen (1993:213-215). Related to the black-polished pottery tradition is the presence of graphiteslipped pottery at both Aligar and (adir Hbyiik. At Aligar,this ware was found in Level 16-12(von der Osten 1937:57,Fig. 63, nos. 3-4). Additional pieces now reside in both the Oriental Institute collection and the Ankara Museum of Anatolian Civilizations (Thissen 1993:218,n. 27). Graphite-slipped pottery found in sounding 770.900during the 1994 season at Cadir H5yiik is identical to that found at Aligar.The best external connections for central Anatolian graphite-slipped wares are with the KaranovaVI Vinga D cultures, as indicated in this volume by Demoule (pp. 9-10, map 6),Tasic (pp. 286-87, 291),and Thissen (1993:218-219). This Balkan connection provides a date
..~
1ow
3i
A
somewhere between 3000 and 3500 BCE. for the pottery from both Aligar and 9adir (Thissen 1993:218-219). Perhaps the most striking evidence used to argue a common cultural zone in Anatolia and the Balkans is the curvilinear-decorated pottery of Gelveri which is cited in this volume by both Esin (pp. 4756) and Makkay (1993,esp. fig. 3, p. 128). Curvilinear-decorated pottery of the same type was also found at Alisar and is probably earlier than the graphite-slipped pottery, though no levels are noted for the Aligar exemplars. This swirling decoration (the so-called fruchenstich technique; Makkay,p. 121) is also cited in the I volume (written in Japanese Kamankale Japanese, pp. 201-202, fig. 12,nos. 1-24). At Aligar,in fact, there appear to be examples of curvilinear decoration on both punctuated-incised (Gorny 1995)and painted sherds (von der Osten 1937:57,Fig. 64, no. 3; P1.II, no. 3; cf. Omura, Kaman Kale Hdyiik I, p.197,fig. 2). There are seven pieces of the ware in the Oriental Institute collection, the nicest of which is a small black-polished bottle with a swirling spiraloid design (d 2370).1The painted style is paralleled by examples from Yeniyapan (Omura, Kamankale I, p. 210,nos. 1-5). Although there is no provenance for this material at Alipar,it must fall within the range of the pottery from Gelveri (Ozdogan 1994) and Yeniyapan which dates to the KaranovaV and Vinqa C phases (Makkay,p.121) or somewhere between 4000 and 3500 BCE(Thissen 1993: 222). Other pieces may also be significant ?? as one sherd is reminiscent of Szakalhat pottery (von der Osten 1937:60,Fig. 67,no. 3), a site from the Late Neolithic Btikk (Tisza-K6r6s) culture of the Hungarian plain (cf. von der Osten 1937,Fig, 67 no. 3) and another has affinities with the "corded ware" from the same area (von der Osten 1937:58,Fig. 65, no.19). As noted above, a primary goal of Anatoliaand theBalkanswas to familiarize scholars of the west with the nearly unknown work of their colleagues in the east. In this respect, the volume has provided a great service that more than fulfills the editor's stated goals. This unprecedented collaborative effort brings together an intriguing group of scholars 22 2z
Ri
If
8
p?41ql~3
aelogis
.
who, though separated for years by political barriers,nevertheless, address a common interest. The chance to debate common concerns has by no means produced a "popular"book, and some difficulties will exist for the general reader.In spite of this, Anatoliaand the Balkansis a welcomed addition to the literature representing the archaeology of both regions. Overcoming the "scholarly"nature of the book is well worth the effort of those whose interests touch on this part of the ancient world. The most significant contribution of Anatoliaand theBalkansis that it updates the best previous overview, The AncientHistory(1982),and adds Cambridge significant new information about important developments, not the least of which are the Gelveri finds. In the final analysis, the question of cultural exchange in this Balkano-Anatolian zone has yet to be definitively answered, and a variety of issues remain to be addressed. Among these are the precise role of the Marmara area in the transference of cultural influences and the extent to which central Anatolia was drawn into the activities of this network of cultural exchange. This volume represents a significant contribution to these investigations, but as Hauptmann indicates (p. x), Anatoliaand theBalkansis only a preliminary step in the direction of an answer. Continued excavation at sites like Ilipinar,Gelveri, Aligar Hdyiik, and 4adir H6yiik, as well as the development of a complete chronological scheme based on secure carbon-14dates from central Anatolian sites will be required to produce an answer to the questions posed by those who contributed to this valuable collection of articles.
1The piecenoted is markedd 2730but the 1931 recordsshow 2730as being a smallpottery cakefromS 27 on the terraceand not the incised potterysherdthatalmostcertainlyhad to come fromthe deep sounding.As it stands, thereareno depthsor levels listedfor any of the curvilinearpieces whichmay partlyexplain why the sherd(s)wereneverpublished. Apparentlythe misplacedpieces werelost and somehowfell throughthe cracks.
isc 47
Bibliography Kuniholm,E 1993 A Date-Listfor BronzeAge and Iron Age Monumentsbased on Combined and RadiocarDendrochronological bon Evidence.Pp.371-373in Aspectsof ArtandIconography: Anatolia andits StudiesinHonorofNimet Neighbors: Ozgiix.Ankara. 1989 A 677YearTree-RingChronologyfor the MiddleBronzeAge.Pp.279-293in andtheAncientNearEast: Anatolia Studiesin HonorofTahsin Ozgiig, Ankara. Omura,S.et al. 1992 Kamankale I. Tokyo. Osten,von der,H. H. 1937 TheAliiarHiiyiik:Seasonsof1930-32. OrientalInstitutePublications28,part 1.Chicago:Universityof Chicago Press. Ozdogan, M. 1991 An InterimReporton the Excavations and Toptepein Eastat Yarimburgaz 17:59-120. ernThrace.Anatolica 1994 MarmaraBolgesi-Balkanlar-Orta AnadolueArasindaKronolojiSorunun yeni BirYaklasim.Pp.69-79 in I. XLTurk TarihKurumu Kongresi n.d. Pre-Bronze Age Sequenceof Central Anatolia:An AlternativeApproach. BeranFestschrift.In Press. Renfrew,C. New York:Alfred 1973 Before Civilization. Knopf. Thissen,L. 1993 New Insightsin Balkan-Anatolian Connectionsin the LateChalcolithic: Old EvidencefromtheTurkishBlack Studies Sea Littoral.Anatolian 43:207-237 Todorova,H. BARInternain Bulgaria. 1978 TheEneolithic tionalSeries48.Oxford:BritishArchaeologicalReports. Yakar, J. TheLate 1985 TheLaterPrehistory ofAnatolia: andEarlyBronze Chalcolithic Age.BAR InternationalSeries268.Oxford: BritishArchaeologicalReports.
0 444
-~AZ
-el
Anatolia:
Land,
and
Men,
By Stephen Mitchell. VolumeI: The Celts in Anatolia and the Impact of Roman Rule. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993; $69.00.
the
in
4?~
"- "
"
"
-
" ,
•;
I
V.
1
GregoryMcMahon University of New Hampshire
distinguishes the present work from its predecessor. Part One covers the Near East and Greece from the Bronze Age onward: the Old Kingdom to Greco-Roman times for Egypt, ca. 3000 to ca. 500 BCEfor the rest of the Near East, and ca. 500-300 BCEfor Classical Greece. PartTwo covers travel in Roman times and PartThree tourism in Roman times.
World
Ancient
-
1
cogently, and uses inscriptional evidence to argue that much of rural Anatolia did not suffer extensively from the disorders and invasions of the third century. There is no bibliography for the work, despite copious use of secondary studies. The list of abbreviations provides a guide to works used, but there is no indication that it is exhaustive. The location of the footnotes at the bottom of the page is a tremendous boon and deserves special commendation. There is no conclusion to the book, nothing synthesizing the arguments presented throughout. This is presumably postponed to volume II, emphasizing the need to use the two volumes together. Most of the indices are in volume II. This is a very impressive work of scholarship which defines a specific area and era of study and attempts to discuss all aspects of that area'shistory. It succeeds admirably,because of the abundance of evidence and Mitchell's expertise in it. It is written for a reader experienced in the history of Anatolia and Rome and may prove heavy going for the general reader both because of its wealth of detail and the assumptions the author makes about the reader'sknowledge. This is most obvious in the references to Greek and Latin inscriptions on monuments and coins; Mitchell often presents the text of an inscription, but almost never translates. Despite that, this will certainly become a standard work for the history of Hellenistic and Roman Anatolia.
HittiteAsia Minor(New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1974),which would provide background to this discussion. Chapter thirteen, focusing on the chaos period of the third century ce, gives excellent specifics about the local effects of Rome's dynastic troubles during this time. Mitchell critiques the "standard" view of late Roman economics quite
George Allen & Unwin Ltd of London. The text is divided into three parts having a total of nineteen chapters,twenty illustrations, and four maps. The bibliography is interspersed in a sensible manner within the original Notes and in the Addenda to the Notes. This last feature
This edition is a revised and enlarged version of Casson's1974hardcover work of the same title, originally published by
~ ~-:'~-- ,-;•~'1 ~"-"-: ~... ~
Minor
Asia
FoodProduction in Alimenta Hethaeorum:
By Lionel Casson, 391pp. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994; $15.95 (paper).
•,:;
in
Roman division of provinces and client kingdoms. Mitchell handles these diverse areas and groups extremely well, elucidating the differences and continuities among the different regions of Anatolia admirably. Part II focuses on Roman acquisition of Anatolia and the effects this had on local economies, religion, urban centers, and politics. The maps which illustrate urban development, patterns of imperial administration, and the development of the economy are an index of the synthetic nature of this work; Mitchell has done an excellent job of integrating evidence from written sources with information "on the ground," in the archaeology of sites and roads. He uses specific examples from the archaeology of the area, especially architecture,quite well, especially for his arguments about urban development and the rise of the emperor cult. Complementing the maps are a number of illustrations; especially interesting are those of coins, which illustrate the tremendous variation in local politics, culture, and autonomy among the cities of Roman Anatolia. Chapter ten, which focuses on farming and food production, might have benefitted from reference to H. Hoffner,
This is the first of a two volume history of Anatolia in the Hellenistic and Roman eras, covering the period from the arrival of the Celts in Anatolia in the early third century BCEthrough the early Byzantine era. Mitchell chose this era partly because of the immense amount of evidence available. The evidence is indeed copious: dozens of Greek, Bithynian, Galatian, Lycaonian, and Cilician cities, thousands of inscriptions, coin hoards, and numerous literary sources. The great strength of this work is Mitchell'sfamiliarity with and use of this rich body of evidence. He is especially strong in his command of the inscriptions. If Mitchell's very specific use of epigraphic examples to provide a wealth of detail is occasionally overwhelming, his expertise with this very diverse corpus is very impressive indeed. Part I focuses on central Anatolia (Galatia) and the impact of one of the last great migrations of antiquity into Anatolia, that of the Celts. Mitchell discusses both traditional Celtic society, politics, and religion and the relations between the newly arrived Celts and the other inhabitants of Anatolia. This includes a very thorough picture of Hellenistic Anatolia. Before the campaigns of Alexander, Anatolia was a land of many distinct language and culture groups occupying different areas of the peninsula. Much of that diversity was preserved into the Roman era and can be seen in the early
Travel
Gods
-
-
-••?
?
- - 1
8? ,
-
?,:-• ,••:';
• .• •: ?, "
-- - , • '•'
Ii•i ,!i
--
--I' ," "'1. •,
-•
"I
B tiCa aeo 1: v?Biblial Ar
? -
!= ...
r -
--
, ',"-' ""
",
..
.
lOF C0A
C)
oo
EUt 3
tk~ ?
American Schools of Oriental Research
Announcementof
1996-1997 Grants/Fellowships,
The Albright Institute of Archaeological Research(Jerusalem) Annual Professorship National Endowmentfor the HumanitiesFellowships(2) Samuel H. KressFellowship Samuel H. KressJoint Athens/JerusalemFellowship George A. Barton Fellowship *USIAFellowship(Pre-DoctoralJunior) *USIAIslamicStudies Fellowship *USIAResearchand TrainingFellowship *USIASummerScholarin Residence (Senior) HonoraryFellowships(Juniorand Senior)
10/15/95 10/15/95 10/15/95 10/15/95 10/15/95 10/15/95 10/15/95 10/15/95 10/15/95 4/15/96
The American Center of OrientalResearch(Amman) HonoraryAppointments JenniferC.Groot Fellowships *USIAFellowships(Pre-Doctoraland Post-Doctoral) *NMERTP Fellowships(Pre-Doctoraland Post-Doctoral) The RussellTrustTravelGrants
2/1/96 2/1/96 multiple 2/1/96
The CyprusAmericanArchaeological Institute (Nicosia) CharlesU. and Janet C HarrisFellowships HonoraryAppointments *FulbrightResearchFellowships(Pre-DoctoralJuniorand Post-DoctoralSenior) National Endowmentfor the HumanitiesFellowship
2/1/96 8/1/95 1/15/96
The Committee on Mesopotamian Civilization(Baghdad) 2/1/96
Mesopotamian Fellowship
At Large Endowmentfor BiblicalResearchTraveland ResearchAwards *Awardssubjectto the availabilityof funds.
Forinformation and application, write to: American Schools of Oriental Research 3301 North Charles Street Baltimore MD 21218
2/1/96
..
.?,..~~
.a~~~W 4Kt~~t
.
bul 4-4-
.".e :00
-MW
- .,
~
~YI-r ?br ...*
,i ,
.
.
ell I
-7
Al
.
.,
.•-
,5.,
ONIF
I
tA
FI
1
edt t
1
•gca knwego
heHtiec
4Q,
. ..• ' -o,
f
mwm . , ..
• ..
•,....
"
'. 4-
,t,
.-
*
.
-~r~
9
5
i -;2' ..c' .
..,,
r. 4...
";
_If2•,~~ .,:?,g 4.
....
,,
.4
4;•:
4,or
:: ,
..
?
?iie~i-
:-,
. -
•j
• ..•
p•
9 .-, tte..t4r".i5!a!
itetyfv-
