“Power and Identity Construction in ancient Urkesh,”
in P. Ciafardoni and D. Giannessi (eds.), From the Treasures of Syria, Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, pp. 111-130.
Identity is one of the most difficult themes to be detected and investigated in any archaeological research: the link of this topic with political power is indeed much more struggling to be defined.
This paper tries to reconstruct both the ancient political and personal identities of Urkesh and its inhabitants, analysing both an ‘urban’ and a ‘personal’ identity: “The unique combination of the Urkesh archaeological record and the monumental architecture excavated at the site in addition to the iconographic and textual evidence provides a rare vantage point for research on expressions of power and the construction of personal and social identity in this early city. […] The article analyzes the personal identity construction of king Tupkish, queen Uqnitum and court servants connected with her through both iconography and seal inscriptions” (p. 111, abstract).
The introduction (paragraph 1) defines the topic and the definition of the concept of ‘identity’: “The question is how effective were certain patterns of behavior in helping to create personal and social identity within any early city, the villages in its hinterland and beyond. This depends to a large extent on social and political purposes, because the negotiation of identity and power are intertwined at a fundamental level” (p. 111).
Identity is here perceived as both ‘relational’ and ‘contextual‘, features that can be outlined thanks to Urkesh evidence: “The unique archaeological, iconographic and textual record discovered in ancient Urkesh provides a rare vantage point for this type of research because of the richness of detail and the coherence of the visual vocabulary displayed” (p. 112).
The topic of this paper is openly declared by the author: “Here I will focus on two lines of evidence: the fourth millennium religious monumental architecture/b> recently excavated at the site and the Akkadian period secular seal impressions stratified in the royal palace at Urkesh” (p. 112).
The shaping and determination of identity by the royal court “were carried out and advanced through pictorial imagery connected with textually specific messages”, considering that “the designs have social, political and ideological value, that they reflect the subjective narratives of identity” (p. 112). They purpose of the royal court was that of defining a ‘multi-generational’ message, strengthening its political endeavours and legitimacy. But the author goes further, presenting the following question: “Who is Uqnitum? What could be her self-definition, her mental model of herself?” such an approach clearly involves personal thoughts and self-perception of identity.
Furthermore, the practice of ‘multiple sealings’ attested at Urkesh is a clue for identity definition: “Officials did not seal in their own name or with their own seal but rather they were important enough to be authorized to use a seal belonging to the queen, Uqnitum, as attested in the seal inscriptions” (p. 113).
In the following paragraphs (nos. 2 and 3), the author further discusses the concepts of ‘civic’ and ‘personal’ identity, respectively. The transition between LC and ED period is seen as a key-point in this phaenomenon: “The reason we can speak about urban identity in this early period in Urkesh is that the very height of the temple terrace made it a beacon within the surrounding landscape” (p. 115). Shaping landscape also means to shape urban personal identity: “The impact of a high temple terrace not only was felt by travelers, but also by neighbors” (p. 116).
Moreover, the realism displayed in Urkesh’s glyptic also helped in defining personal identity: “If we utilize the definition of identity as a set of self-understandings applied to the social sphere, then it is clear that the court in Urkesh was self-consciously producing their own politically charged and secular images with the explicit intent to communicate identity. The Urkesh secular scenes have a tangible immediacy, scenes rendered in a vivid and realistic manner” (p. 117).
The purpose was indeed not referential, since “the visual messages were not intended only for a restricted palace audience” (p. 118). Sub-paragraphs 3.1-3.4 apply this concept to the analysis of sealings from Urkesh, belonging to Tupkish, Uqnitum and their courtiers (Zamena and Tuli and Innin-shadū, stressing similarities and differences in ways of identity definition (the formers much closer to Urkesh, while the latter, Innin-shadū, was more linked to Southern traditions). Sub-paragraph 3.5 describes the importance of crafts and craft traditions at Urkesh, explaining how the local crafting traditions (also portrayed on some sealings) can also contribute in shaping identity through the communication of local crafting habits (sometimes also imitating, on purpose, older ceramic styles in later periods).
In conclusion: “The city of Urkesh, at an early stage in the city’s development achieved an identity status as a major religious focal point in the region, the only one for which we know the ancient name of the worshipped deity. The fact that the city continued to maintain and use such an impressive temple terrace is a strong indication of the felt importance of this religious identity within the city itself and its surrounding hinterland. The identity communication to a wider social audience was important to the city itself and dependant villages. […] In other words the emphasis in the city of Urkesh was on factors that included the creation of an integrated social unit” (pp. 127-128).
Back to top: Marilyn Kelly-Buccellati 2015