Machteld J. Mellink

     The author starts with the problem of the existence/not-existence of a mere Hurrian art tradition which was “advocated by some and rejected by others” (p. 514). In the conclusion (p. 518, § 8), Mellink states that “the negation of Hurrian art is unfounded, but the existence of an original, independent tradition of Hurrian art and architecture is improbable for lack of a strong, lasting dynastic center which could have sponsored continuity”.
     The whole paper deals with the following topics:
§ 1: Third millennium evidences;
§ 2: Old Assyrian period;
§ 3: Old Hittite period;
§ 4: Mittanian period;
§ 5: Hittite Empire period;
§ 6: artefacts and influences at Tell Halaf;
§ 7: Urartu and northern Iran;
§ 8: conclusions.
     Urkesh is specifically introduced in § 1 (Third millennium): “Urkiš. The two bronze lion pegs from the temple built by Tišari king of Urkiš are unusual in being truncated as blunt nails; their protomes are lively with a free turn of their snarling heads; for this they may be indebted to Akkadian art. [...] The text of the foundation tablet attests the building of temples by Hurrian kings in the late Akkadian period. Urkiš, the town of Kumarbi, must contain early religious architecture of the Hurrians, cf. the Samarra tablet recording the dedication in Hawilum (Ḫawalum*) of a temple to Nergal by Atalšen, king of Urkiš and Nawar [...]. A lapislazuli cylinder seal of the daughter of Tišadimmuzi, reportedly also from Urkiš, confirms the indebtedness of early Hurrian art to Akkadian artists […]” (p. 515).

[M. De Pietri – July 2019]