Back to top: The Revetment Wall
Introduction
Following the early excavations (1984-89) of the Temple, a long trench was excavated (1999-2001), by a German team, with the purpose of linking the Temple with a new excavation area to the south. This trench brought to light a small portion of the Terrace wall and of the staircase. The excavations of 2003-10 exposed more fully both the Terrace wall and the staircase. We will focus here on these excavations of the wall and of the Plaza in front of it.
|
to replace
|
to replace
|
The revetment wall served as a face for the glacis that sloped up to the Temple. The definition revetment wall is given for the function of covering the outer side of the terrace core, so that standing in the plaza the wall appears as a vertical barrier.
Back to top: The Revetment Wall
The articulation
The revetment wall defines the western, southern and eastern edges of the terrace core/mound. It has been exposed for about 70 metres in an east-west direction.
The various sections of the wall have not been excavated to the same extent. The southern section wall6 has been fully exposed along its upper courses and partially excavated at its base, reaching a maximum preserved height of 3.05 m (in J1). In contrast, only limited portions of the western side wall13 and the eastern side wall1 have been uncovered.
|
The westernmost exposed portion of the revetment wall is represented by wall13, located beneath stair4. From this point, the wall curves gently toward the southeast over a distance of approximately 9 m. The configuration of JP^wall13 at this bend remains uncertain because it is overlaid by wall10, a later repair of JP^wall13, as well as by a substantial accumulation that obliterates the wall. Approximately 4 m farther east, the base of the revetment wall reappears as wall8, which is preserved to two courses beneath JP^wall6. This wall continues eastward from wall10 without interruption for 53 m, terminating at apron1.
|
western side of revetment wall
|
|
The revetment wall is interrupted for a distance of 10 m by the monumental staircase. East of the staircase, it continues as two separate walls. The southern wall3, follows the same alignment as JP^wall6, while the northern wall, wall1, is situated approximately 4.90 m farther north and runs parallel to it. wall1 begins immediately north of the flank wall2 of stair2 and extends eastward for 8.10 m before curving to the north. After a further 6.50 m, it disappears beneath the unexcavated deposits.
|
eastern side of revetment wall
|
Although the revetment wall was originally interpreted as forming an oval enclosure, the excavations demonstrate that the Temple Terrace is instead defined by a polygonal wall. This is particularly evident at the southwestern corner, where the wall changes direction sharply toward the north. The northern and northeastern sides of the Temple Terrace have not yet been investigated through excavation. Nevertheless, geophysical survey reveals a continuous anomaly surrounding the terrace in these areas, strongly suggesting that the revetment wall originally extended around the entire terrace magnetometry 2006.
Throughout the excavated western and southern sections, the top of the wall is consistently preserved at an elevation between approximately 90.00 and 91.00 m, indicating a remarkably uniform degree of preservation across the exposed portions.
Back to top: The Revetment Wall
The foundation
The revetment wall is built on top of an uneven ground. This is due to the previous situation of the ground before construction, and to the presence of other structures, on top of which the wall is built. The wall has no foundations or footings. The base of the wall is visible in two portions. Firstly in Unit J5, where the first course of JP^wall6 rests on top of a previous wall8 and in uniti J1, where the bottom of the wall was exposed.
reconstruction of the revetment wall
The table below shows the measures of the revetment wall:
|
wall
|
unit
|
width
|
height
|
bottom
|
top
|
drawing
|
|
wall13
|
J5
|
1.60 m
|
2 m
|
8800 m (no real bottom)
|
8990 m
|
|
|
wall6
|
J5
|
~ 2 m
|
2.30 m
|
8740 m (real bottom)
|
8956 m
|
|
|
wall6
|
J1
|
~ 2 m
|
3.10 m
|
8650 m (real bottom)
|
8970 m
|
|
|
wall6
|
J3
|
~ 2 m
|
3 m
|
8826 m (no real bottom)
|
9100 m
|
|
|
wall6
|
J2
|
~ 1.60 m
|
3 m
|
8817 m (no real bottom)
|
9100 m
|
|
|
wall1
|
J6
|
~ 2 m
|
2.70 m
|
9050 m (real bottom)
|
9320 m
|
|
### The construction
|
The width of the wall can be determined in the central part of JP^wall6, in Unit J3, where a sounding behind the wall revealed how it was constructed. Here, the top reaches a maximum width of three large stones, which is about 1.80m.
|
 wall width in J3
|
Central large stone.
Piling up in triangular fashion.
#### The inner plaster {#plaster TO=""}
TEXT TO BE WRITTEN
It was important to find out how the glacis was built, and how it interface with the inside of the revetment wall.
In J3 we found that the original surface of the glacis was well preserved: it was made of a very hard and compact red clay layer, with large white calcite nodule.
This material is known locally as baqaya. It is literally the “remainder” of the virgin soil after it has been quarried for stones and pebbles.
The baqaya layer served as the support for a layer of mudbricks that coated the top surface of the glacis (either entirely or in part).
#### The outer look {#outer TO=""}
TEXT TO BE WRITTEN
#### Triangular motif: typology {#triangular TO=""}
Ways of identifying it -- refer to images-triangular.
Contrast with alignment of horizontal faces in AP.
#### Triangular motif: meaning {#triangular-meaning TO=""}
Logogram AND ethnography.
#### Stylistic mannerisms {#stylistic TO=""}
Diamond patterns.
#### Preservation {#preservation TO=""}
Fully preserved top to bottom.
### The Mittani “memory stones”
When the sediments above the Plaza reached the top of the revetment wall, (in the latter part of the Mittani period), there was no attempt at raising the wall itself. This may be indicative either of a lack of resources to undertake a major renovation project, or of the fact that raising the wall would have lessened the visual impact of the slope leading up to the Temple, or of course both. Whatever the case, the flat surface of the Plaza came at one point to coincide with the base of the slope of the glacis. At this juncture, individual stones were placed in a loose row just within the perimeter of the revetment wall, to mark the boundary between the flat area and the slope, as if a symbolic hinge that retained the ideological, if not the structural, valence of the boundary between the two spheres. These we have called “memory stones” (Figs. 8-10), referring to the memory of the ancient revetment wall.
### Chronicle
The second main objective for J1 is to reach the third millennium floor of the Plaza. To accomplish this, we had to widen the total area of excavation in order to have sufficient space to open an area of about 5 x 10 meters to the base of the wall (Fig. 2).
This expanded the excavation area to such an extent that in the end we were not able to reach the desired depth. Another important reason for the delay was the fact that as we reached the earlier second millennium levels, the accumulations became more significant. While in the later periods (Mittani) we have primarily a series of sediments that have washed down from the built up areas surrounding the Plaza, in the earlier periods (Khabur or Old Babylonian) we have a more distinct cultural buildup of the strata, with better defined floor surfaces and heavier concentrations of sherds and animal bones. Fig. 4 shows details of such surfaces in the late Khabur period.
### Articles
The Great Temple Terrace at Urkesh and
the Lions of Tish-atal
|
The revetment wall in J1 and J3
|
A detailed analysis of the two soundings where the base and the top of the revetment wall have been exposed. |
An Architectural Logogram at Urkesh?
| Persistence of Tradition at Urkesh. The Temple Terrace from Protoliterate to Mittani
### The Monumental Temple Terrace
Back to top: The Revetment Wall
|