Marilyn Kelly-Buccellati

     Landscape archaeology represents one of recent, new frontiers of archaeological studies in the ancient Near East. This papers analyses patterns of urban organization and the role of landscape for ancient Urkesh.
     As stressed at the beginning, “questions we have asked ourselves over the years relate to the nature of the original settlement and the reason why the city was founded on this spot” (p. 149). Indeed, “the answer to the question about the choice of this particular location must include positive environmental factors such as a good water supply with a wadi running near it and plentiful rainfall for agriculture, since it is well above the 400mm isohyet. [...] In antiquity the site was in a savannah type area with a wide variety of animals. Additionally, the site is located close to stone sources in nearby foothills, as well as other natural resources in the mountains such as wood and especially copper from the Ergani area. Notably it was important to be near but not too near the Mardin Pass” (p. 149). This strategic position of Tell Mozan represents one of its key-points in the relationships with both the Northern (Anatolian and Transcaucasian) and the Southern (Mesopotamian) milieus. The ancient mound “stands out more distinctly because there is a space between it and the mountains; it does not appear as part of the foothills but is a mountain onto itself!” (p. 149).
     Furthermore, this geographic space also shaped human thought and ancient space organization: “Such clearly defined settings as mountains and mountain passes have a profound effect on the human mind” (p. 149). Moreover, the mythological background related to Urkesh guarantees a clear meaning of the site as a cultic place and as an ancestral land (the city of the god Kumarbi). Both the High Mound (with its wide Plaza) and the Outer City (surveyed by J. Thompson-Miragliuolo) are described in the following section, underlining the central topic of this contribution: “ These introductory remarks will help to place in its proper focus the central theme of my paper, namely the interaction between the spatial organization of the urban built environment on the one hand, and on the other the landscape within which this organization takes place” (p. 151).
     The shape and the extent of the city in the fourth millennium are then described, with glimpses also on the Chalcolithic period [cf. Kelly-Buccellati 2010]; as for the High Mound, “Monumental constructions, such as our Temple Terrace, created within a unique landscape can take on qualities of the landscape, resulting in complex linkages to the wider region. [...] This very high monument must have been a point of reference for all the surrounding area, both for local residents as well as long distance travellers” (p. 155), an importance that is also underlined in the textual documentation.
     The shape and development of the city is further investigated during the EDIII period, when new urban initiatives grow up: possibly, an earlier structure belonging to the later Royal Place of Tupkish, the city wall (end of EDII-beginning of EDIII), the Temple Terrace, with its Plaza JP, the monumental access J2 and the apron, which “may have been used by spectators watching ritual performances taking place in the Plaza below or alternatively the spectacles might have been taking place on this apron with the viewers positioned in the Plaza” and, of course, the ābi. The Temple BA is then described as for both its structure and function (possibly, a place where sacrifices were performed, as shown by seal A15.270, for which see Kelly-Buccellati 2005); the Plaza JP is described, together with the Outer City, where the archaeologists uncovered “what appears to be part of an Early Dynastic III administrative area (labeled OH2)” (p. 164).
     In conclusion, “the creation of a dramatic ritual landscape in Mozan, highlighted here for the fourth and third millennia, we can imagine would have had a profound effect on the inhabitants of the city itself, its visitors and passing travelers. The idea of the re-creation of the surrounding landscape for ritual purposes seems to have originated in the fourth millennium” (p. 164); the author focuses on “the ancient's perception of this built environment they created: [...] how did the ancients perceive the ritual context from within the city?” (p. 165). In sum, the author's idea is that of retracing the paths of a 'broken traditions'. A final appendix (by E. Taylor) provides C14 determinations for seeds associated with LC3 structure.

[M. De Pietri – November 2019]