| Notes on items |
2014-03-30 |
rAH |
There are a number of notable things about this figurine that require extended thought. This description will be summary and perhaps will contribute to later discussion about this object. First, it is not clear that the figurine is naked. The figure is, I believe, clothed. The details of the body are schematic, as if covered, although the pubic triangle is clearly indicated. This is not unusual for figurines of the period. Second, as seen in dorsal view, the figurine bends slightly to the left forming a curved arc. This is an unusual detail. Third, the figurine is not clasping its breasts, but rather may be holding an object of some sort. This may account for the " limitation of the hands showed as remove some of the clay before firing," as noted by the excavator. That is, the hand is perhaps grasping some sort of rod, as a scepter, but not cupping a breast. Fourth, the figurine is painted. There may be indistinct remnants of paint on the back of the object, although this is not clear from the photograph. What is clear, are the thick parallel lines drawn horizontally to the vertical axis of the figure on the sides of the object. There appear to be 4 of them. It is not clear whether these lines cross the object to the other side. As the excavator notes, the approximate Munsell value of these lines would appear to resemble Khabur pigment. It does not appear to be made from a slip of the terracotta itself.
To venture further than these observations would be risky. First, the quality of the photography is not adequate for interpretation. Secondly, the form of the figurine is anomalous at Urkesh. It is likely to have been imported. The back of the figurine is particularly striking, resembling for all the world some of the "bed" artifacts from Egypt! Why the articulation of the body through the clothing is rendered in this manner is a mystery. [Input: Y401JW.j] |