Spheres of interest: Hollow clay balls at the dawn of ancient Near Eastern history
Abstract
5
Full text
Spheres of interest: Hollow clay balls at the dawn of ancient Near Eastern history Petr Charvát University of West Bohemia, Plzeň ABSTRACT: This paper discusses hollow clay spheres containing clay symbols (“tokens”) from sites of the prehistoric and early historic Near East. Alist of them is provided, and an interpretation as information conveyors to sites with central functions is suggested. The hollow clay balls (HCB) represent an important source for the administration of the socially engineered flow of goods in the preliterate societies of Western Asia, and they do constitute apredecessor of writing. KEYWORDS: prehistory; archaeology of the ancient Near East; reciprocity; redistribution; tokens of clay; writing The beginnings of literacy in the ancient Near East have received considerable attention, and remarkable progress has been achieved in terms of our knowledge of the cuneiform script, one of the earliest manifestations of writing culture in the history of mankind. In recent times, attempts have been made to elucidate the emergence of cuneiform signs with the aid of the small clay objects of geometrical shapes, “tokens”, which have turned up in anumber of excavations of Near Eastern sites (see, for instance, Schmandt-Besserat 1980 and most recently MacGinnis— Monroe— Wicke— Matney 2014; for acritical stance, see Bennison-Chapman 2019). Such “tokens” have frequently appeared within hollow clay balls or spheres (henceforth HCB), the surface of which bears impressions of either stamp or cylinder seals, and which contain small clay objects of geometrical shapes, the so-called tokens. These complex objects constitute the target of my present study, as one of the first efforts to create acomprehensive system of visual and tangible symbols used for the communication of commonly acknowledged semantic units. The HCB have recently been the theme of athorough and inventive review by R.Dittmann (Dittmann 2012). Thanks to him, we now know that chronologically speaking, the HCB belong to the Late Chalcolithic phases 3 to early 5 (op. cit.73–74), and that they appeared over an extensive area of the ancient Near East delimited by the sites of Hacınebi in SE Anatolia, Hamoukar in NE Syria, Chogha Mish in SW Iran and Uruk/Warka in SMesopotamia (op. cit.72). Afairly instructive picture of HCB chronology follows from the recent excavations at Susa Acropole I.At this site, evidence for cylinder-seal use first turned up in layer 20, followed by the first occurrence of an HCB in layer 19 and their persistence in layer 18 (see also Boehmer 1999: 119). In the latter layer, HCB were found with round tablets bearing numerical signs and OPEN ACCESS
6 CHATREŠŠAR 2/2019 cylinder-seal impressions. From layer 16, only rectangular tablets bearing signs of writing and cylinder-seal impressions remained in use (Amiet 1994: 90–91; Dittmann 2012: Fig. 4 on p.71; on the stratigraphy, see also Dahl— Petrie— Potts 2013: 354–357). As to the iconography of cylinder seals impressed on HCB (Dittmann 2012: 75–80), the lion motif (see op. cit.77 Fig. 8 for the distribution of such icons at Jebel Aruda) has recently received an important supplement from the Late Chalcolithic Tell Brak (McMahon 2009). Seal impressions from Tell Majnuna, dated to Late Chalcolithic 2–3, articulate in compositions depicting afight between alion and anaked hero, and lions confined in cages and/or nets, the ideas of conflict with, victory over, and control of powerful nonhuman forces by the paragons of human civilization. Dittmann further observes that in known cases, the HCB appeared in domestic structures (Dittmann 2012: 78–80— Chogha Mish, Gebel Aruda; on the Susa context, see now Dahl— Petrie— Potts 2013: 356). Though natural-history analyses have been very rare up to now (but see below), Ithink that we will agree with Dittmann’s proposal that in most cases, local clays probably served for the formation of the HCB (Dittmann 2012: 80–81); the fragility of HCB has been noted by the excavators of Chogha Mish (Delougaz— Kantor— Alizadeh 1996/I: 121). However, we shall much appreciate athorough analysis of the clay of the HCB, similar to that performed on the sealings of Tepe Gawra (Rothman— Blackman 1990). There are exceptions, e.g. analysis of the Tepe Yahya HCB has shown that its clay is of nonlocal origin (SchmandtBesserat 1980: 363 n. 28). The HCB bear impressions of cylinder seals, and occasionally also of stamp seals (Dittmann 2012: 80). As to the tokens enclosed within the HCB, alist has been supplied in 1980 (Schmandt-Besserat 1980: 368, 369 Fig. 6). Since then, areview of the Uruk situation has been published (Boehmer 1999, see below). In this brief survey, Ihave decided to operate on the “functionalist” line, attempting to characterize the Sitz im Leben of the HCB according to the archaeological evidence available. Iam concentrating on the HCB, and do not take into account the solid, mostly elongated “bullae” (= tags), or any other solid clay objects including pot lids. Iwish to add one more note here. Most students of the ancient Near East work on the assumption that cylinder and stamp seals constituted personal markers of individual human agents. This remains to be proved. Ihave pointed out the fact that with the onset of the Late Uruk period, seals vanished from graves and appeared among the suppelectilia of the foci of social life instead (Charvát 1992: 281–282; Charvát 2005b: 395–396). Acase in point is Chogha Mish itself, where asmall hoard contained beads and acylinder seal (Delougaz— Kantor— Alizadeh 1996/I: 110). When Late Uruk graves are found, they contain stamp seals only; Tell Kof Tello, Lagaš, for instance, has yielded Uruk-age burials with stone vessels and stamp seals (Huh 2008: 270–271). Similarly, out of the 370 interments of the “Jamdat Nasr Cemetery” at Ur from the end of this period, only two contained cylinder seals (Legrain 1951: 12 No.73, 13 No.88, on the cemetery, see Sürenhagen 1999: 109–143). Ithus operate under the assumption that while cylinder seals constituted institutional signs of office, stamp seals represented ensigns of human individuals. OPEN ACCESS
PETR CHARváT 7 1. TELL SABI ABYAD, SYRIA This is the earliest find known to date, from the turn of 7th and 6th pre-Christian millennium (6050–6020 cal. B.C., Akkermans et al. 2012: 309). The find is so unusual that it seems advisable to follow closely the words of the publication (Akkermans et al. 2012). It appears that sometime between 6050 and 6020 BC, ayoung woman died at Tell Sabi Abyad. Her body was laid to rest on the floor of aT-shaped building, designated V6 by the excavators, with one half of amace head placed in her hand, and covered with soil (op. cit.313 Fig. 6). The building in question consisted of three parallel rows of small rooms, with along but narrow room (divided into two smaller compartments) at aright angle in front of them (op. cit.307, 312 Fig. 5). By the time of the woman’s burial, the building did not contain many artifacts. Following the internment, the building was set on fire, which burnt the walls throughout and accumulated thick deposits of ash and burnt debris. The roof of the building was still in place, but it gradually collapsed as aresult of the intense fire. Alarge number of objects found their way into the building either prior to or during the burning event. All material categories, such as ground-stone tools, bone tools, clay objects, administrative objects, pottery containers, objects of personal adornment, and so on, are represented (Akkermans et al. 2012: 321). The burnt debris also yielded large numbers of animal bones (op. cit.322, n. 7). The artifacts from this locus included 36 sealings from Rooms 1 (n = 8), 3 (n = 8) and 5 (n = 20). All sealings showed stamp-seal impressions and/or fingerprints. Their fragmentary state indicates that the originally sealed objects had been opened. Among the sealings, there were also four bullae (= HCB, pch) with the impressions of tokens inside them found in rooms 3 (n = 3) and 5 (n = 1). Small clay tokens— counters for administrative purposes— occurred in spherical, oval and conical shapes (Akkermans et al. 2012: 316). When the fire died out, all the objects were left inside the building, and no attempt was made to restore the house to ahabitable condition. Although new architecture was erected around it, the building, it seems, remained in its final state of destruction, barred from any possible future practical use for dwelling or storage. The excavators believe that the “deliberate, violent destruction of the building by fire had an important symbolic meaning to the villagers” (Akkermans et al. 2012: 322). 2. DEĞIRMENTEPE, TURKEY? One of the very early instances in which the HCB might have turned up concerns the Eastern Anatolian site of Değirmentepe (Helwing 2003: 71–74 with refs.; Gurdil 2010). Layer 7 of this small site, submerged now under the waters of the Karakaya dam, displays several tripartite buildings with large central halls and rows of small rectangular rooms adhering to their longer sides. This phase of the settlement was protected by abrick rampart, and the major architecture bears traces of 3–4 rebuilding phases (Esin 1985: 253–254; Esin 1994: 59). Some of the tripartite buildings showed, in their interiors, painted images of the sun and trees on the whitewashed walls of their cenOPEN ACCESS
8 CHATREŠŠAR 2/2019 tral halls (Helwing 2003: 71). In addition, such halls contained ovens, and neonates (and, in one instance, adog) found their last resting places by these ovens. Pits filled in by burnt animal bone, pottery sherds, and slag, seal and sealing finds frequently accompanied such kilns. One of the podia erected in these halls showed traces of pigment (now colored orange) in cavities on its surface (op. cit.71–72). Excavations of layer 7 at Değirmentepe brought to light some 450 sealings (Esin 1994: 66). Most of these came from mobile containers— pots, bales, sacks and the like. Sealings, including “bullae”, occurred in quantity in an area characterized by workshop refuse (Helwing 2003: 73). Yet it may be questioned how far the term “bullae” has been used by the excavator to denote sealed objects falling under the HCB category. Ufuk Esin does refer to “real bullae” (Esin 1985: 255b; cf. Esin 1994: 69 “bullae”), but the example she cites (Esin 1985: 261 Pl. 3 : 1, republished in Esin 1994: 67 Fig.7 : 1) displays the form of aflat clay disc bearing aseal (?) impression. It thus rather resembles the sealing category later referred to as “test strips”. Nevertheless, only apart of the Değirmentepe sealings has been published as yet, and we cannot exclude that HCB remains will surface among the finds from this site in the future. 2A. TELL MASAIKH IN NORTHERN MESOPOTAMIA? New excavations at this polycultural site on the Euphrates River by Terqa yielded aclay artifact with seven impressions of the same Halafian-style seal impressions with alinear pattern (Poli 2015: 348, Sounding D). It is not clear whether this artifact may be considered abulla fragment, but it must be registered for completeness of the source base. 3. CHOGHA MISH, IRAN This Protoliterate city, probably falling into aperiod close to Susa, Acropole I, 17 (Delougaz— Kantor— Alizadeh 1996/I: 102), has yielded asizeable group of HCB (ibid.: 120–121, 125–133; Delougaz— Kantor— Alizadeh 1996/II: Pls. 34–40). Dittmann’s mapping of these finds (Dittmann 2012: Fig. 10 on p.81) shows that in the West and East areas, the local HCB were mutually exclusive with “lock” sealings (“0 sealed bullae”). If this were so, and upon the assumption that the “lock” sealings document redistribution of the produce of the relevant institution (Charvát 1992: 281–283; Charvát 2005b: 395–396), the HCB would thus have marked property transactions crossing competence boundaries and coming in from outside of the property sphere of the institution in question. In fact, the HCB appeared throughout both sectors, and also under the High Mound. — Within the East area, they turned up in R17:212 (Delougaz— Kantor— Alizadeh 1996/II: Pls. 34, 39, 264: 6 items), R17:408 (ibid.: Pls. 37, 264: 1 item), R18:312 (ibid.: Pls. 35, 36, 39, 264: 19 items), R21:509 (ibid.: Pls. 37, 260: 1 item) and north of Q18:308 (ibid.: Pls. 38, 264: 3 items), for atotal of 30 items. OPEN ACCESS
PETR CHARváT 9 — Within the West area, they appeared at H14:304 (Delougaz— Kantor— Alizadeh 1996/II: Pl. 34, 265: 2 items), Trench VI (ibid.: Pl. 34, 260: 2 items), H14, Sounding C (ibid.: Pls. 34, 260: 2 items), Sounding C South (ibid.: Pls. 37, 260: 4 items), H14, Trench IX (ibid.: Pls. 34, 260: 3 items), J14:305 (ibid.: Pls. 38, 265: 2 items) and H14:310 (ibid.: Pls.38, 265: 2 items), for atotal of 17 items. — The High-Mound finds appeared in asounding situated on its slope, and thus presumably documenting finds thrown into rubbish as no longer necessary: N9:302 (ibid.: Pls. 36, 260: 4 items). Most of the Chogha Mish finds come from domestic architecture and pits (Dittmann 2012: 80), more particularly from pits and pottery deposits (Delougaz— Kantor— Alizadeh 1996/I: 126, “100% of the bullae”). They repeatedly occurred in groups. One case comprises four items on afloor near awall at the western edge of R17:212 (op. cit.120). The excavators reaped amuch richer harvest with agroup of 21 complete or fragmentary HCB, found “in ahole that had been scooped out anciently immediately below the bottom course of the almost completely eroded east wall of room R18:312” (op. cit.120–121). Were these actually “records on file”, or are we dealing with (evidence for) afoundation deposit? In the 24 HCB from R18:312, at least 15 different seals marked the “equators”, and none of them impressed the “poles” of the deposit HCB. Over half of these designs occurred on one HCB only. In four instances, single seals impressed two balls each in “equatorial” positions (op. cit.131). These four HCB also bear imprints of one single “polar” seal. If there was more than one design on asingle HCB, no “equatorial” seal marked the “polar” positions, and vice versa (op. cit.132). Moreover, when HCB occurred in common contexts with other types of sealings like the “locks”, the HCB seals never marked the other sealed materials (Delougaz— Kantor— Alizadeh 1996/I, 131). The majority of HCB were obviously broken open in antiquity (op. cit.121). The excavators of Chogha Mish also discuss the sequence of closing the HCB (Delougaz— Kantor— Alizadeh 1996/I, 125). After inclusion of the clay tokens, the ball received an “equatorial” cylinder-seal impression along its greatest circumference, with one to two “polar” sealings in the spaces left untouched by the first rolling. Sometimes just one matrix produced both the “equatorial” and the “polar” sealing. One such item displays an image of rampaging lions and ahuman figure (op. cit.125); on this, see above for the new seal evidence from Tell Brak. In other cases, just one seal marked both “polar” positions of an HCB. With more than two “polar” sealings, the upper and lower poles do not share designs. Singular HCB bore impressions of up to three cylinder seals, and up to three stamp seals. Areview of the iconography of the Chogha Mish HBC seals has been provided by R.Dittmann (Dittmann 2012: 85). The local situation at Chogha Mish thus allows the following observations. 1. The spatial distributions of finds of HCB and “lock” sealings are in direct proportion to each other: the more “locks”, the more HCB at the particular subsites (next to none at High Mound, more in the West area, most in the East area, according to Dittmann 2012: Fig. 10, p.81). This implies that the HCB belong to the same catOPEN ACCESS
10 CHATREŠŠAR 2/2019 egory as the “locks”— namely, to the sphere of redistribution of (presumably) material goods of which Chogha Mish represented one of the period’s foci. 2. However, the seals that marked the “locks” and the HCB differ, and thus the HCB initiators must have come from outside Chogha Mish. Clearly, two goods-delivery modes may be seen: those coming in from the estates belonging to the local elites sub sigillo (= mobile-container sealings), and those delivered in accordance with agenerally acknowledged information-treatment procedure producing the HCB, sub signo (= HCB). 3. The fact that the HCB bear predominantly cylinder-seal impressions probably indicates that the HCB reflect the activities of institutions. 4. Such institutions, delivering commodities sub signo, probably displayed at least two mutually exclusive competence spheres: “equatorial” sealings never mark the “polar” positions, and vice versa. 5. The presence of stamp-seal impressions on HCB probably visualizes the participation of human individuals (co-signing or counter-signing? see Pittman 2001: 422). 4. SUSA, IRAN The Susa finds of HCB have been commented on extensively by R.Dittmann (Dittmann 2012 with refs.; see also Schmandt-Besserat 1980: 359–361, and n. 12 on pp.361–362 for alist of them). In this part of my paper, Ishall return to the results of my short-term study of the Susa sealings which Icarried out in the Louvre Museum in 1985, with the kind consent of M.Pierre Amiet, then Director of the Département des Antiquités Orientales du Musée du Louvre, who also suggested to me the idea of studying impressions of the same seal on different carriers. Iacknowledge my debt of gratitude to him for his friendly help, and for the kind consent to publish my findings. The Susa HCB, of which some fifty items have been accumulated in the course of archaeological activities lasting over almost acentury, first entered the archaeological record in 1907 (Amiet 1986: 75), but were first published only in 1921–1923. The excavators noted that at least in one instance, the finds rested along the base of awall (Schmandt-Besserat 1986: 94, 108). The de Mecquenem expedition found “numerous envelopes (= HCB, pch) and tablets in what appears to have been alarge lens about 30 cm deep, which may represent adump of archival material” at the depth of 17,50 m in their Sondage 2 at the southern end of the Acropole tell. The architecture of this context has apisé character with large cones, divided into small compartments about 2 m “in size” (op. cit. 96). The HCB finds seem to be confined to the southern part of the Acropole tell, with next to none occurring in its northern half (op. cit.106). Modern excavations in 1969–1978 contributed an assemblage of administrative material including HCB (for its chronology, see above) from abuilding also located in the tell’s southern part. The architectural unit from which they came, rebuilt several times over the period of the levels 18, 17A and 17B, displayed amarked absence of any rubbish layers, which points to the possibility that these were not standard living quarters. Five consecutive floors yielded aquantity of archival material, scattered on large surfaces of the floors; D.Schmandt-Besserat sees this as evidence for an adOPEN ACCESS
PETR CHARváT 11 ministrative discard (Schmandt-Besserat 1986: 107–108; see also Schmandt-Besserat 1980: 378). The Susa HCB contained predominantly cylinderand sphere-shaped clay tokens (Schmandt-Besserat 1986: 108) and bore markings of up to four seals (Schmandt-Besserat 1986: 112; alist in Schmandt-Besserat 1980: 367 n. 40). At least some of the HCB were fired at low temperatures (Amiet 1986: 85). The iconography of the Susa HCB, and its differences from the Chogha Mish répertoire, again received the attention of R.Dittmann (Dittmann 2012: 78, 85). He pointed to the fact that unlike Chogha Mish, where the themes depicted frequently pertain to the economic and production sphere, sealings of the Susa HCB include scenes likely to be drawn from the symbolic world. Individual cases clearly delineate the differences between the Susa and Chogha Mish HCB sealings. 1. Astamp seal showing asquatting figure and rectangular figures in front of afacade with “flag” (Amiet 1972: No.456 p.66, Pls 4 and 60) impressed three HCB fragments (Sb 1948, Sb 1974 and Sb 5355). On find No. Sb 1948, the icon is combined with a“storage unit” scene (Dittmann 2012: 85). The inner surface of Sb 5535 bears unclear impressions of two triangular (?) and two round tokens. 2. Another stamp seal showing acattle-copulation scene (Amiet 1972: No.458 p.66 Pls. 4 and 61) marked two items: Sb 5306, showing on the reverse an even surface tied over with cords or laces, and Sb 6944, from an HCB with areverse impression of acord passing through alug excised in the thickness of the HCB’s wall. This shows that the Susa HCB were meant to be carried around, possibly before the final official control procedure, after which they were simply discarded. Another possibility is that of astring bearing tokens and passing through the clay of the HCB (see for instance bulla No.4523 of the Schøyen collection: http://www.schoyencollection.com/mathematics-collection/pre-literate-counting/bulla-string-tokens-ms-4523 [accessed 25.11.2019]). Fine perforations are visible on other Susa HCB (Schmandt-Besserat 1980: 363). 3. Acylinder seal depicting a“master of snakes” and aheraldic composition (Amiet 1972: No.482, p.86, Pls. 5 and 63) also sealed two items: Sb 1975, an HCB fragment with smooth inner surface bearing fingerprints, and Sb 2178, the reverse of which is illegible. 4. Another cylinder seal showing aguilloche of snakes between birds (?) (Amiet 1972: No.486 p.86, Pls. 6 and 63) marked two HCB, Sb 1930 and Sb 1956. The former item is still closed and rattles upon shaking; the latter displays asmooth inner surface. 5. Acylinder seal depicting aherd of cattle with aladder-like device frequently symbolizing textiles (Amiet 1972: No.552 p.92, Pl. 10) impressed two items, Sb 1928 and Sb 1968. Sb 1928 is aclosed and rattling HCB with small round dimples in its surface. The reverse of Sb 1968 is quite even and bears possible traces of acord impression. 6. In layer Susa Acropole I, 18, one single seal marked an HCB, aclay tablet, and an elongated oval-shaped clay tag (Boehmer 1999: 119, 136 Abb. 116c, 144 Abb. 128C and 128D). OPEN ACCESS
12 CHATREŠŠAR 2/2019 The Susa HCB thus show situations more complex than the Chogha Mish evidence. First and foremost, there is one identical feature: both at Chogha Mish and at Susa, HCB seals never mark doors (pace Amiet 1994: 91). At Susa and Chogha Mish, the sub sigillo and sub signo circulation spheres were thus clearly separated. The excavators of that site do not explicitly state whether the Chogha Mish HCB seals impressed mobile containers or not; but if such cases occurred, Ibelieve that they would have noticed. The Susa HCB thus (demonstrably) belonged to the sphere external to the site itself. However, in Susa, at least in three cases, singular stamp and cylinder seals marked both HCB and mobile containers (see above sub No.2 and 5). This happened as early as the stamp-seal use period, and, at least in one instance, continued into the cylinderseal use period. The fact that the two delivery modes (sub sigillo and sub signo) commingled together there may be interpreted in various ways. Either the whole sealing sphere lay outside Susa, and the singular external supplying agencies provided their contributions to the center in accordance with these two delivery modes (an analogy being the two-tiered hierarchy of the Chogha Mish HCB sealings?). Or the reason somehow concerns proceedings at the very site of Susa, the elites of which might have used “travelling seals”. Their owners, based at Susa and using their personal ensigns (also) to mark the HCB, might have sent them out to mark shares in the mobile output of various economic agencies, apportioned to them by common consent (on such “travelling seals”, see Charvát 1992: 282). Much as at Chogha Mish, we shall do well to keep in mind the archival functions of the HCB. They contained devices facilitating transport of the documents to their users (see above sub No.2). If the early reference to de Morgan’s excavations is credible, we may even have an indication that the HCB were ranged on shelves along the walls. However, after the extinction of their information value the Susa HCB found their way into rubbish accumulations. At any rate, the Susa situation shows agreater complexity of local social practice, attesting thus to an exceptional status of the capital of southwestern Iran. 5. URUK, IRAQ In Uruk, we know of at least one hoard find of 26 HCB which came to light within ahole in awall of “Riemchen” brickwork. M.Brandes has proposed adate between the end of Uruk Vand end of Uruk IVa, probably before Uruk IVa and Uruk IVb. R.Eichmann believes that the HCB were deposited here intentionally (Boehmer 1999: 104; see also Schmandt-Besserat 1988: 13, 21–22). The Uruk HCB bear impressions of up to three cylinder seals, and also of stamp seals; the stamp seals were impressed over the cylinder-seal mark (No. 51; Boehmer 1999: 105, Taf. 51; for alist, see Schmandt-Besserat 1980: 367 n. 40). At least one cylinder sealed two HCB (Nos. 45A and 45B: Boehmer 1999: 109), and another cylinder sealed three HCB (Schmandt-Besserat 1988: 22 n. 150). It seems also that “equatorialzone” cylinders did not seal in “polar-zone” positions, as at Chogha Mish (Boehmer 1999: 110–111). Arecent examination of the clay matrix of the Uruk HCB showed this OPEN ACCESS
PETR CHARváT 13 to have come from the site itself, or from southern Mesopotamia in general (Daszkiewicz— Van Ess— Schneider 2012: 97). On the clay tokens enclosed in the Uruk HCB, see Schmandt-Besserat 1988; Boehmer 1999: 112 with Tafeln 102 and 103. P.Damerow and H.P.Meinzer believe that most of the hitherto identified HCB come not from the proto-cuneiform, but the Proto-Elamite sphere (apud Boehmer 1999: 115). That may be true for the seals impressed in them, but before examination of the origin of their clay matrix, the origin of the Uruk HCB must remain open. The Uruk evidence shows that there as well, the HCB are slightly earlier than tablets with writing (Amiet 1994: 87 with refs.). R. M.Boehmer gives an overview of symbols (“tokens”) contained within the Uruk HCB (Boehmer 1999: 160–163): Warka excavation number Contents W 20987, 18 Imprints of 1 ball, 2 bigger balls and 1 disc? W 20987, 9 4 discs W 20987, 15 Kept with 3 small balls and 1 disc W 20987, 12 5 discs W 20987, 16 5 small balls among the fragments W 20987, 13 3 small balls W 20987, 11 2 large balls, 1 small ball, 2 discs W 20987, 7 Kept with 7 ovoids with incised circular (“ringförmiger”) markings W 20987, 8 Kept with 5 small tetrahedrons and 2 discs W 20987, 17 Kept with 1 large cone, 1 disc, 2 lentil shapes, 4 small balls and 1 bolt (“Stift”) W 20987, 3 1 small ball, 1 lentil shape, 1 cube 6. TEPE GAWRA, IRAQ Two bullae (= HCB?), impressed with figural compositions came to light in layer XI, and one in layer X (Rothman 1994: table on p.116). D.Schmandt-Besserat notes that “cups” similar to those of Tappeh Sharafabad (see below) also appeared at Tepe Gawra (Schmandt-Besserat 1980: 364 n. 31). How far such “cups” find their antecedents in asealing of asmall gabbro-stone bowl from Tell Sabi Abyad (Duistermaat 1996: 348, figs. 5.14, Nos. 1–1a on p.393 and 5.19, No.1 on p.398; Akkermans— Duistermaat 1997: 21, fig. 6 on p.27) must be elucidated by further research. 7. TELL SHEIKH HASSAN, SYRIA This multilayer site on the middle course of the Euphrates River has yielded aMiddle Uruk settlement enclosed by afortification wall. Adeep sounding revealed atower or gateway structure, and asmall temple and parts of other buildings came to light in OPEN ACCESS
20 CHATREŠŠAR 2/2019 Finally, it should be stated that the information-storage and information-flow system of the HCB represents adistinct predecessor of true writing. The HCB have been fittingly characterized thus: “Die versiegelten Tonkugeln dienten demnach offenbar der fälschungssicheren Verwahrung bestimmter Kombinationen von Tonsymbolen und damit der Beurkundung bestimmter Informationen” (P.Damerow— H.P.Meinzer, apud Boehmer 1999: 112). While it is true that the cuneiform script was invented and introduced over acomparatively short period of time, the social function which it fulfilled preceded its emergence by more than two millennia. REFERENCES Akkermans, P.M.M.G.— Brüning, M.— Hammers, N.— Huigens, H.— Kruijer, L.— Meens, A.— Nieuwenhuyse, O.— Raat, A.— Rogmans, E.F.— Slappendel, C.— Taipale, S.— Tews, S.— Visser, E. (2012) Burning down the house: the burnt building V6 at Late Neolithic Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria, in: Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 43/44, 307–324. Akkermans, P.M.M.G.— Duistermaat, K. (1997) Of storage and nomads: the sealings from late Neolithic Sabi Abyad, Syria, in: Paléorient 22/2, 17–44. Amiet, P. (1972) Glyptique susienne, des origines à l’époque des Perses Achéménides, Paris: Geuthner. — (1986) L’âge des échanges inter-iraniens, 3500–1700 avant J.C. [Notes et documents des Musées de France 11], Paris: Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication, Editions de la Réunion des musées nationaux. — (1994) Sceaux et administration à Suse àl’époque d’Uruk, in: P.Ferioli et al. (eds.), 87–94. Bennison-Chapman, Lucy E. (2019): Reconsidering „tokens“: the neolithic origins of accounting or multifunctional, utilitarian tools? in: Cambridge Archaeological Journal 29/2, 233–259. Boehmer, R.M. (1999) Uruk. Früheste Siegelabrollungen [Ausgrabungen in UrukWarka, Endberichte 24], Mainz: von Zabern. Butterlin, P. (2003) Les temps proto-urbains de Mésopotamie: contacts et acculturation à l’époque d’Uruk au Moyen-Orient, Paris: CNRS Éditions. Charvát, P. (1992) The token of the covenant: stamp seals of the ancient Near East, in: Archiv Orientální 60, 279–285. — (2005a) The Iconography of Pristine Statehood: Painted Pottery and Seal Impressions from Susa, Southwestern Iran, Prague: Karolinum Press. — (2005b) The backs of some sealings from Nineveh 5, in: Iraq LXVII/1 (= Papers of the XLIXe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, London, 7–11 July 2003, Part Two), 391–397. Dahl, J.L.— Petrie, C.A.— Potts, D.T. (2013) Chronological parameters of the earliest writing system in Iran, in: C.A.Petrie (ed.): Ancient Iran and its Neighbours: Local Developments and Long-Range Interactions in the Fourth Millennium BC [Archaeological Monographs Series III], Oxford— Oakville: British Institute of Persian Studies and Oxbow Books, 353–378. Daszkiewicz, M.— Van Ess, M.— Schneider, G. (2012) Pottery and clay from Uruk, Southern Iraq: laboratory analysis of pottery fabrics from the Late Uruk to the Seleucid period, in: Zeitschrift für Orient-Archäologie 5, 90–102. Delougaz, P.— Kantor, H.— Alizadeh, A. (1996) Chogha Mish I, the First Five Seasons of Excavations: 1961–1971 [OIP 101/1–2], Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Dittmann, R. (2012) Multiple sealed hollow balls: afresh look at the Uruk System almost thirty years later, in: H.Baker— K.Kaniuth— A.Otto (eds.): Stories of Long Ago: Festschrift für Michael D.Roaf [AOAT 397], Münster: Ugarit Verlag, 69–89. OPEN ACCESS
PETR CHARváT 21 Duistermaat, K. (1996) The seals and sealings, in: P.M.M.G.Akkermans (ed.), Tell Sabi Abyad: The Late Neolithic Settlement. Report on the Excavations of the University of Amsterdam (1988) and the National Museum of Antiquities Leiden (1991–1993) in Syria [PIHANS 76], Istanbul: Nederlands HistorischArchaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 339–401. Esin, U. (1985) Some small finds from the Chalcolithic occupation at Değirmentepe (Malatya) in eastern Turkey, in: M.Liverani— A.Palmieri— R.Peroni (eds.): Studie di paletnologia in onore di Salvatore M.Puglisi, Roma: Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, Dipartimento di Scienze storiche, archeologiche e antropologiche dell’Antichità, 253–263. — (1994) The functional evidence of seals and sealings of Değirmentepe, in: P.Ferioli et al. (eds.), 59–81. Ferioli, P.— Fiandra, E.— Fissore, G.G.— Frangipane, M. (eds.) (1994) Archives before Writing: Proceedings of the International Colloquium Oriolo Romano, October 23–25, 1991, Roma: Ministero per ibeni culturali e ambientali, Ufficio centrale per ibeni archivistici. Gurdil, B. (2010) Exploring social organizational aspects of the Ubaid communities: acase study of Değirmentepe in eastern Turkey, in: R.A.Carter— G.Philip (eds.): Beyond the Ubaid— Transformation and Integration in the Late Prehistoric Societies of the Middle East. Papers from “The Ubaid Expansion? Cultural Meaning, Identity and the Lead-up to Urbanism” International Workshop held at Grey College, University of Durham, 20–22 April 2006 [SAOC 63], Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 361–375. Helwing, B. (2003) Feasts as asocial dynamic in prehistoric Western Asia: three case studies from Syria and Anatolia, in: Paléorient 29/2, 63–85. Huh, S.K. (2008) Studien zur Region Lagaš von der Ubaid-Zeit bis zur altbabylonischen Zeit [AOAT 345], Münster: Ugarit-Verlag. Legrain, L. (1951) Ur Excavations. Vol. X: Seal Cylinders, London— Philadelphia— New York: The Trustees of the Two Museums (The British Museum and The University Museum), by the aid of agrant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Lupton, A. (1996) Stability and Change: SocioPolitical Development in North Mesopotamia and South-East Anatolia 4000— 2700 B.C. [BAR International Series 627], Oxford: Tempus Reparatum. MacGinnis, J.— Monroe, M.W.— Wicke, D.— Matney, T. (2014) Artefacts of cognition: the use of clay tokens in aNeo-Assyrian Provincial Administration, in: Cambridge Archaeological Journal 24/2, 289–306. McMahon, A. (2009) The lion, the king and the cage: Late Chalcolithic iconography and ideology in northern Mesopotamia, in: Iraq 71, 115–124. Monaco, S. (2014) Archaic Bullae and Tablets in the Cornell University Collections [Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 21], Bethesda, MD: CDL Press. Pittman, H. (2001) 11.Mesopotamian intraregional relations reflected through glyptic evidence in the Late Chalcolithic 1–5 Periods, in: M.S.Rothman (ed.), Uruk Mesopotamia & Its Neighbors: Cross-Cultural Interactions in the Era of State Formation, Santa Fe— Oxford: School of American Research Press and James Currey, 403–444. Poli, Paola (2015): Imateriali provenienti da Terqa [Cantiere F], da Tell Masaikh [Cantieri D, E nord, G] e dal sondaggio di Tell Marwaniye durante la campagna di scavo 2006, in Jean-Claude Margueron, Olivier Rouault, Pascal Butterlin, Pierre Lombard (edd.): Akh Purattim 3, Lyon: Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée, Ministère des affaires étrangères 2015, 345–356. Pollock, S. (2008) Rubbish, routines, and practice: chipped stone blades from UrukPeriod Sharafabad, Iran, in: Iran 46, 43–68. Reichel, C. (2002) Administrative complexity in Syria during the 4th millennium B.C.: the seals and sealings from Tell Hamoukar, in: Akkadica 123/1, 35–56. Rothman, M. (1994) Seal and sealing findspot, design, audience, and function: monitoring OPEN ACCESS
22 CHATREŠŠAR 2/2019 changes in administrative oversight and structure at Tepe Gawra during the fourth millennium B.C., in: P.Ferioli et al. (eds.), 97–119. Rothman, M.S.— Blackman, J.M. (1990) Monitoring administrative spheres of action in late prehistoric Northern Mesopotamia with the aid of chemical characterization (INAA) of sealing clays, in: N.F.Miller (ed.), Economy and Settlement in the Near East, Philadelphia: University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 19–45. Schmandt-Besserat, D. (1980) The envelopes that bear the first writing, in: Technology and Culture 21/3, 357–385. — (1986) Tokens at Susa, in: Oriens Antiquus 25/1–2, 93–125. — (1988) Tokens at Uruk, in: Baghdader Mitteilungen 19, 1–175. — (2007) From tokens to writing: the pursuit of abstraction, in: Bulletin of the Georgian National Academy of Sciences 175/3, 162–167. Stein, G.J. (1998) World Systems theory and alternative modes of interaction in the archaeology of culture contact, in: J.G.Cusick (ed.), Studies in Culture Contact: Interaction, Culture Change, and Archaeology [Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper 25], Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 220–255. — (2000) Material culture and social identity: the evidence for a4th millennium BC Mesopotamian colony at Hacınebi, Turkey, in: Paléorient 25/1, 11–22. — (2001) Indigenous social complexity at Hacınebi (Turkey) and the organization of Uruk colonial contact, in: M.S.Rothman (ed.): Uruk Mesopotamia & Its Neighbors: Cross-Cultural Interactions in the Era of State Formation, Santa Fe— Oxford: School of American Research Press and James Currey, 265–306. Strommenger, E. (1980) Habuba Kabira: Eine Stadt vor 5000 Jahren, Mainz: von Zabern. Sürenhagen, D. (1999) Untersuchungen zur relativen Chronologie Babyloniens und angrenzender Gebiete von der ausgehenden ‘Ubaidzeit bis zum Beginn der Frühdynastisch II-Zeit 1. Studien zur Chronostratigraphie der südbabylonischen Stadtruinen von Uruk und Ur, Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag. Wright H.T.— Miller, N.— Redding, R. (1980) Time and process in an Uruk rural center, in : L’archéologie de l’Iraq du début de l’époque néolithique à 333 avant notre ère. Perspectives et limites de l’interprétation anthropologique des documents, Paris 13–15 juin 1978 [Colloques internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 580], Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 265–282 (discussion 283–284). Wright, H.T.— Redding, R.— Pollock, S.M. (1989) Monitoring interannual variability: an example from the period of early state development in southwestern Iran, in: P.Halstead— J.O’Shea (eds.), Bad Year Economics: Cultural Responses to Risk and Uncertainty, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 106–113. OPEN ACCESS