Back to top: Objects from Unit A16
Ceramics
Back to top: Objects from Unit A16
Methodology
The ceramics from this unit, excavated in 2 seasons (2001 and 2002) have all been analyzed in the field. This means that the ceramics from all contexts are included in this database. All body sherds were analyzed based on our site-wide descriptions of the wares found on the site. If these sherds are decorated then they are described according to codes established for decoration technique and design elements. The shapes are categorized through comparison with a basic shape catalog containing 150 types (and a number of variations) covering all the major shapes made during the time periods the site was in use. When only the rim is found and the vessel shape cannot be determined from it, then these rims are categorized through a catalog of rim types; the same is true for bases. While we have very few handles in the time periods represented at the site, we do have a catalog of handle types also.
Back to top: Objects from Unit A16
Chronological implications
It is important that these analysis categories are site-wide and, even more importantly, that they cover all chronological periods since depositional factors effect both the primary and secondary emplacement? of the ceramics. So for instance, earlier sherds are brought up into later strata through a variety of factors including the digging of pits, burials, drainage systems, etc. and production activities such as the construction of kilns and holding tanks associated with pottery making. It has become clear in the last few years that two other important factors are influential in this regard also. Ceramics from earlier periods can be retained out of an “antiquarian” interest in the past. While this is not an important factor statistically its occurrence may skew thinking about the chronological position of specific features. Another influential factor, more prevalent statistically, is the imitation of previously made pottery that had already gone out of style. The imitation can include both wares and shapes.
Back to top: Objects from Unit A16
Wares and function
If we turn from questions concerning chronology and focus on questions of function, some interesting patterns can be noted. Looking specifically at all the ceramics from A16 it is clear that the most prevalent ware is the one called in our system CH for chaff tempered. This is a relatively coarse ware and represents 34% of the total (within unit A16). If we compare this with an earlier sample from strata in the palace area AA then we can see that there even higher percentages of CH ware are represented, ranging from 39% to 57%.
Fine chaff (FC) ware is made out of the same clay as CH but the vessels produced are smaller and thinner walled. In the A16 sample FC is 16% while in the AA area it ranges from 20% to 11%. In the later strata the types of vessels previously produced in CH are now produced in RC, a ware made from an iron rich clay with many calcite inclusions. In area A16 this represents 26% when all the sub-types are added together.
Pebble tempered ware (P) is the main cooking ware represented in the excavations. In A16 9% of the sherds come from this ware; in area AA from 8% to 3% of the sherds are made in this type of ceramic.
An interesting sub-type of P ware is FP. This is a category of small vessels with thinner walls but made in the same basic shape as the larger P ware cooking pots. These are heavily secondarily burned as are the larger examples of P ware. As is usual a few earlier sherds are mixed in with this sample. In comparing them to the AA area sherd data we can see that basically they are quite similar and represent a standard cross section of the normal, every day vessels in use in these time periods.
None of the wares represented in the data are especially fine wares that could be associated with a context where elite status could be reinforced by the use of fine ceramics. This is interesting in that some of the A16 sample came from a paved stone courtyard of the palace. It appears that the activities taking place in the court did not warrant fine ceramics. It should be noted that the ceramics from the temple BA were heavily weighted toward fine ceramics both for serving and for short term storage.
Back to top: Objects from Unit A16
Shapes and function
This general impression is further emphasized in looking at the shapes in the A16 sample. Jars and jar shoulders are the largest part of the sample at 52%. This appears to indicate that short and medium term storage was more important in the contexts represented by this data than serving and eating of food which would be generally represented by bowls (23%) and drinking cups (5%). As we have seen above cooking was represented in the sample but not heavily.
Among the jars the most common are necked jars at 20%. Since the jars are made of clay which is heavily tempered, they are heavy to hold even when empty. But their necked shape makes them easier to pour; while they are usually of a size that they need to be held with both hands, one hand would be at the base while the other could hold the neck and more easily guide the outflow of the contents.
Hole mouth jars tend to be larger and represent 12% of the A16 sample. However few are so large that they could not, with some difficulty, be moved when empty.
In looking more closely at the bowls, the deep bowls are 9% of the sample; these too must be used for short and medium term storage; many of the straight sided bowls (3%) could also be used for storage.
Among the more open shapes, carinated bowls (8%) and round sided bowls (5%) are the most common. They are well adapted for serving and eating.
Bases of both jars and bowls are generally flat (30% including all categories of flat base) while the remaining are distributed in the categories of ring and disk bases; only 8 sherds of rounded bases were found.
Since the bases are essentially flat there is no functional need for stands which are very few in the A16 data base.
Back to top: Objects from Unit A16
Glyptics
Back to top: Objects from Unit A16
The sealings as objects
A small number of seal impressions were found in A16 and all of them came from secondary depositions, more than likely brought up into the later strata by later pit digging activities. The original seals were used to seal containers as is shown by the impressions on the reverse which contain impressions of cord, a peg, and in some cases impressions of cloth or leather. The containers were usually jars, baskets, boxes and sacks, and some door sealings. The opening of the container was first covered with either cloth or leather; this was then tied on with cord; the knot of the cord was in turn covered with mud and a cylinder seal was rolled on it. The seal design was originally carved in the negative and this is why we find the impressions in the positive. From the excavations we have the mud sealing that remained after the opening of the containers. This mud sealing was no longer important and could be discarded. That is why the impressions we find are so often incomplete.
Back to top: Objects from Unit A16
Iconography
All the A16 sealings have unusual design elements for this period. In fact it should be stressed that creative inventiveness in design is one of the characteristics of the Urkesh seals from all excavation units. Two of the scenes from A16 are animal contest scenes, very common in this time period (i117, i834). In each case an unusual element is added at the end of the scene; in i117 it is a palm tree. Palm trees are not common in the landscape of northeastern Syria today nevertheless we know from our paleozoological studies that the environment in our area contained many more trees in antiquity. Palm trees are one of the symbols of the goddess Ishtar in our seal impressions, reflecting her connection with the idea of fruitfulness and plenty. The second contest scene (i834) contains a reversed animal behind the main hero with a long dagger. This animal may be placed there to separate the two humans. On the other hand, we may interpret it as connected with the hero with the dagger. If this is indeed the case, he then would be fighting two animals at once. In the Early Dynastic period this type of scene does occur but it had gone out of fashion by Akkadian times. This possibility points up another characteristic of the style of the Urkesh seal impressions; the seal carvers could deliberately pick a style or design elements from earlier periods (sometimes hundreds of years earlier) to incorporate into their compositions.
Atypical also is the seal impression with two registers (i136). The upper register contains a banquet scene where the principal figure is seated before a banquet table with a standing attendant beyond. While banquet scenes of this type were common in the Early Dynastic period, again they had gone out of fashion by our period. The seal cutter to “update,” as it were, the scene added a lower register with a very well organized row of birds and flowers. The use of the double register composition to stack up figures in the scene is found in the Kultepe seal impressions in Anatolia but these seal designs are usually not carved in this style where the figures are few and evenly spaced as if they were single elements in a border ancillary to the message of the main scene.
The scene in i108 is extraordinary. The sun god is seated on the right. We can identify him because of the sunrays coming out of his shoulder. Since he is one of the main gods in the Mesopotamian pantheon we have a large number of seal impressions representing him in Urkesh. In all of his scenes either a subordinate deity or a human attendant stands facing him. What is unheard of is a figure placed in front of him with his back to him! In this case the figure turning his back is a minor deity. We can only conclude that the scene this deity is participating in (which unfortunately we don’t have preserved in our seal impression) was even more important than serving our sun god Shamash!
Back to top: Objects from Unit A16
Storage – by G. Buccellati
Objects that do not have museographic value, including sherds, as well as samples, are stored as organized collections in the Expedition House.
More than 300 A16 items are found there (excluding sherds).
Some of the objects are marked as missing in the record. This is unfortunately frequent in the case of A16, because the excavation precedes the final establishment fo the Collections. As explained elsewhere, this does not necessarily mean that the items in question have been lost, but only that they have not yet been cataloged, or that they have been misplaced, or that they have been discarded.
We have retained a reference to these objects even though they have no documentary value (see, e.g., A16q275.2). otehr than simply attesting the existence of a given piece. This is done in deference to our principle of full transparency.
Back to top: Objects from Unit A16