Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-mggfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-27T09:23:21.156Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

CHAPTER XVI - THE EARLY DYNASTIC PERIOD IN MESOPOTAMIA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

By
Sir Max E. L. Mallowan
Edited by
I. E. S. Edwards ,
C. J. Gadd  and
N. G. L. Hammond
Sir Max E. L. Mallowan
Affiliation:
Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, and Emeritus Professor of Western Asiatic Archaeology in the University of London
Get access

Summary

BABYLONIA: ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT

An earlier chapter (XIII) has described the historical development of the cities in Babylonia and their cultural background. Here we must concentrate on the archaeological evidence, for this is by far the richest source for the study of man's development in the Early Dynastic period. Indeed, when we come to discuss developments in Assyria and Mesopotamia proper, historical records are so scarce that the archaeological evidence becomes our primary source of reference.

The Early Dynastic period of Babylonia has been divided into three parts and the archaeological development has been traced through an exhaustive analysis of stratified objects. At present the most satisfactory ground for this study is the Diyālā valley, where extensive excavations have provided a detailed and continuous relationship between buildings and the small finds associated with them. The principal objects were cylinder seals, pottery, sculpture and metal. Each category was subjected to stylistic examination and compared with similar material from sites outside the Diyālā valley. In the Diyālā district itself no mound proved more rewarding than Khafājī, where the long sequence of ‘Sin Temples’ could be related to many other less complete sequences of religious and domestic buildings discovered there and elsewhere.

The analysis of style is, however, complicated by the fact that development did not proceed pari passu everywhere. Thus solid-footed clay goblets which were used in the Uruk-Jamdat Nasr period at Warka, Ur and Nippur did not appear before Early Dynastic I on the Diyālā the same observation applies to reserved slip ware. Archaic seals frequently occur in contexts much later than those to which they originally belonged.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Ancient History
, pp. 238 - 314
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abu al-Suf, B. ‘A Study of Uruk pottery, its origins and distribution.’ Doctoral thesis submitted to the University of Cambridge (1966).Google Scholar
Agrawal, D. P. ‘Harappa Culture: new evidence for a shorter chronology.’ In Science 143 (1964) ff.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Agrawal, D. P. ‘Banas Culture and the Aryans.’ In Current Science, 35 (1966) ff.Google Scholar
Agrawal, D. P. and Kusumgar, S. In Current Science, 34 (1965) ff.
Andrae, W. Die Archaischen Ischtar-Tempel in Assur. Leipzig, 1922.Google Scholar
Andrae, W. Das wiedererstandene Assur. Leipzig, 1938.Google Scholar
Banks, E. J. Bismya or the Lost City of Adab. New York, 1912.Google Scholar
Barrelet, M.-Th. ‘Une “Construction Enigmatique” à Tello.’ In Iraq, 27 (1965) ff.Google Scholar
Biggs, R. D. ‘The Abū Salābīkh Tablets: A Preliminary Survey.’ In Journal of Cuneiform Studies XX (1966) ff.Google Scholar
Buchanan, B. Catalogue of Ancient Near Eastern Seals in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, I. Oxford, 1966.Google Scholar
Buren, E. D. . Review of H. Frankfort, Stratified Cylinder Seals from the Diyala Region (Oriental Institute Publications 72). In Archiv f¨ Orientforschung. 17 (1956) ff.Google Scholar
Buren, E. D. . ‘Places of sacrifice (Opferstätten).’ In Iraq, 14 (1962) ff.Google Scholar
Contenau, G. Manuel d'archéologie orientate, I-IV. Paris, 1927-47.Google Scholar
De Genouillac, H. and others. Fouilles de Telloh, l, Époques Présargoniques. Paris, 1934.Google Scholar
De Genouillac, H. Premières Recherches Archéologiques à Kich, I and II. Paris, 1924–5.Google Scholar
De Vaumas, E. ‘L'écoulement des eaux en Mésopotamie et la provenance des eaux de Tello.’ In Iraq, 27 (1965) ff.Google Scholar
Deimel, A. Schultexte aus Fara (Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 43). Leipzig, 1923.Google Scholar
Deimel, A. Šumerische Tempelwirtschaft zur Zeit Urukaginas und seiner Vorgänger (Analecta Orientalia. 2). Rome, 1931.Google Scholar
Deimel, A. Wirtschaftstexte aus Fara (Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 45). Leipzig, 1924.Google Scholar
Delougaz, P. Pottery from the Diyala Region (Oriental Institute Publications 63). Chicago, 1952.Google Scholar
Delougaz, P. The Temple Oval at Khafajah (Oriental Institute Publications 53). Chicago, 1940.Google Scholar
Delougaz, P. and Lloyd, S. Pre-Sargonid Temples in the Diyala Region (Oriental Institute Publications 58). Chicago, 1942.Google Scholar
Delougaz, P. ‘A Short Investigation of the Temple at Al-'Ubaid.’ In Iraq, 5 (1938) ff.Google Scholar
Dossin, G. ‘XVe Campagne de Fouilles de Mari.’ In C.-R. Ac. Inscr. B.-L. 1965. Paris, 1966.Google Scholar
Edzard, D. O. ‘Enmebaragesi von Kiš.’ In Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie 53 (1959) ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emery, W. B. Archaic Egypt. London, 1961.Google Scholar
Enrich, R. W. (ed.). Chronologies in Old World Archaeology. Chicago, 1965.Google Scholar
Field, H. ‘Steatite Vases from Kish.’ In Antiq. VII (1933) ff.Google Scholar
Frankfort, H. Cylinder Seals. London, 1939.Google Scholar
Frankfort, H. The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient. Harmondsworth, 1954.Google Scholar
Frankfort, H. More Sculpture from the Diyala Region (Oriental Institute Publications 60). Chicago, 1943.Google Scholar
Frankfort, H. Sculpture of the Third Millennium B.C. from Tell Asmar and Khafajah (Oriental Institute Publications 44). Chicago, 1939.Google Scholar
Frankfort, H. Iraq Excavations of the Oriental Institute 1932/33. Third Preliminary Report of the Iraq Expedition (Oriental Institute Communications 17). Chicago, 1934.Google Scholar
Frankfort, H. Stratified Cylinder Seals from the Diyala Region (Oriental Institute Publications 72). Chicago, 1955.Google Scholar
Frankfort, H. and Jacobsen, T. Oriental Institute Discoveries in Iraq, 1933/34. Fourth Preliminary Report of the Iraq Expedition (Oriental Institute Communications 19). Chicago, 1935.Google Scholar
Frankfort, H., Lloyd, S. and Jacobsen, T. The Gimilsin Temple and the Palace of the Rulers at Tell Asmar (Oriental Institute Publications 43). Chicago, 1940.Google Scholar
Gadd, C. J. History and Monuments of Ur. London, 1929.Google Scholar
Gadd, C. J. ‘Tablets from Chagar Bazar, 1936.’ In Iraq, 4 (1937) ff.Google Scholar
Haines, R. C. ‘Further excavations at the Temple of Inanna.… at Nippur…’ In Ill. Ldn News, 6 Sept. 1958 ff.Google Scholar
Hall, H. R. and Woolley, C. L. Al-' Ubaid (Ur Excavations 1). London and Philadelphia, 1927.Google Scholar
Hansen, D. P. ‘New votive plaques from Nippur.’ In Journal of Near Eastern Studies 22 (1963) ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinrich, E. Fara. Berlin, 1931.Google Scholar
Hrozný, B. Ancient History of Western Asia, India and Crete. Prague, 1951.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, T. ‘La Géographie et les Voies de Communication du Pays de Sumer.’ In Revue d'Assyriologie et d' ArchMogie orientale 52 (1958) ff.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, T. ‘Summary of Report by the Diyala Basin Archaeological Project, 1 June 1957 to 1 June 1958.’ In Sumer, 14 (1958) ff.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, T. ‘The Waters of Ur.’ In Iraq, 22 (1960) ff.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, T. The Sumerian King List. Chicago, 1939.Google Scholar
Jordan, J., Lenzen, H. and others. ‘Vorläufige Berichte über die … in UrukWarka … Ausgrabungen’ (Uruk: vorläufiger Bericht), beginning in Abhandlungen der Preussichen (Bayerischen, etc.) Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil-hist. Klasse, 1930.Google Scholar
Kramer, S. N. Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta. Philadelphia, 1952.Google Scholar
Kramer, S. N. From the Tablets of Sumer. Colorado, 1956.Google Scholar
Kramer, S. N. Sumerian Mythology. Philadelphia, 1944.Google Scholar
Kramer, S. N. ‘The Death of Gilgamesh.’ In Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 94 (1944) ff.Google Scholar
Lal, B. B. ‘A Picture Emerges: an assessment of the Carbon 14 datings of the proto-historic cultures of the Indo-Pakistan sub-continent.’ In Ancient India, 18, 19 (1963) ff.Google Scholar
Le Breton, L. ‘The Early Periods at Susa: Mesopotamian Relations.’ In Iraq, 19 (1957) ff.Google Scholar
Lloyd, S. The Art of the Ancient Near East. London, 1961.Google Scholar
Mackay, E. Further Excavations at Mohenjo Daro. 2 vols. Delhi, 1937.Google Scholar
Mackay, E. A Sumerian Palace and the ‘A’ Cemetery at Kish, Mesopotamia. Chicago, 1929.Google Scholar
Madhlum, T. A. ‘The Excavations at Tell al-Wilayah.’ In Sumer, 16 (1960) ff. (Arabic section).Google Scholar
Mallowan, M. E. L. Early Mesopotamia and Iran. London, 1965.Google Scholar
Mallowan, M. E. L. ‘A Cylinder Seal in the Uruk-Jamdat Nasr style.’ In Baghdader Mitteilungen, 3 (1964) ff.Google Scholar
Mallowan, M. E. L. ‘Noah's Flood Reconsidered.’ In Iraq, 26 (1964) ff.Google Scholar
Mallowan, M. E. L. ‘Excavations at Brak and Chagar Bazar.’ In Iraq, 9 (1947) ff.Google Scholar
Mallowan, M. E. L. ‘The Excavations at Tall Chagar Bazar, and an Archaeological Survey of the Ḫabur Region, 1934–5.’ In Iraq, 3 (1936) ff.Google Scholar
Mallowan, M. E. L. ‘The Excavations at Tall Chagar Bazar and an Archaeological Survey of the Ḫabur Region. Second Campaign, 1936.’ In Iraq, 4 (1937) ff.Google Scholar
Mallowan, M. E. L. ‘The Mechanics of Ancient Trade in Western Asia.’ In Iran, III (1965), I ff.Google Scholar
Mallowan, M. E. L. ‘Ninevite 5.’ In Vorderasiatische Archäologie, Studien und Aufsätze, Festschrift Moortgat ff. Berlin, 1964.Google Scholar
Moorey, P. R. S. ‘A Reconsideration of the Excavations on Tell Ingharra (East Kish), 1923–33.’ In Iraq, 28 (1966) ff.Google Scholar
Moortgat, A. Archäologische Forschungen der Max Freiherr von Oppenheim — Stiftung im Nördlichen Mesopotamien (1956). Köln und Opladen, 1959.Google Scholar
Moortgat, A. Tell Chuëra in Nordost-Syrien:
Moortgat, A. Vorläufiger Bericht über die Grabung 1958. Köln und Opladen, 1960.Google Scholar
Moortgat, A. Vorläufiger Bericht über die zweite Grabungskampagne 1959. Wiesbaden, 1960.Google Scholar
Moortgat, A. Vorläufiger Bericht über die dritte Grabungskampagne 1960. Köln und Opladen, 1962.Google Scholar
Moortgat, A. Vorläufiger Bericht über die vierte Grabungskampagne 1963. Kö ln und Opladen, 1965.Google Scholar
Moortgat, A. Vorläufiger Bericht über die fünfte Grabungskampagne 1964. Wiesbaden, 1967.Google Scholar
Parrot, A. Archéologie mésopotamienne, I, II. Paris, 1946, 1953.Google Scholar
Parrot, A. Sumer. London, 1960.Google Scholar
Parrot, A. Tello: Fingt Campagnes de Fouilles (1871–1933). Paris, 1948.Google Scholar
Parrot, A. ‘Les Fouilles de Mari; première campagne.’ In Syria, 16 (1935) ff.Google Scholar
Parrot, A. ‘Les fouilles de Mari, quatorzième campagne (printemps 1964).’ In Syria, 42 (1965) ff.Google Scholar
Parrot, A. Mission archéologique de Mari, I. Le Temple d'lshtar. Paris, 1965.Google Scholar
Parrot, A. ‘XIVe Campagne de fouilles de Mari.’ In Comptes-Rendus de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. 1964.Google Scholar
Raikes, R. L. ‘The Physical Evidence for Noah's Flood.’ In Iraq, 28 (1966) ff.Google Scholar
Rashid, S. A. ‘Die Ausgrabung von Tell el-Wilayah und die Bedeutung ihrer Rollsiegel.’ In Sumer, 19 (1963) ff.Google Scholar
Roux, G. Ancient Iraq. London, 1964.Google Scholar
Safar, F. ‘Eridu. A Preliminary Report on the Third Season's Excavations, 1948–9.’ In Sumer, 6 (1950) ff.Google Scholar
Saggs, H. W. F. The Greatness that was Babylon. London, 1962.Google Scholar
Sarzec, E. de et Heuzey, L. Découvertes en Chaldée. Paris, 1884–1912.Google Scholar
Smith, S. Early History of Assyria to 1000 B.C. London, 1928.Google Scholar
Speiser, E. A. Excavations at Tepe Gawra, I. Philadelphia, 1935.Google Scholar
Speiser, E. A. ‘The pottery from Tell Billa.’ In Museum Journal, University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia), 23 (1933) ff.Google Scholar
Speiser, E. A. ‘Ethnic Movements in the Near East in the Second Millenuim B. C.’ In Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 13 (1931–32). New Haven, 1933.Google Scholar
Spycket, A. Les statues de culte dans les textes mésopotamiens des origines à la Ire. dynastie de Babylone. Paris, 1968.Google Scholar
Starr, R. F. S. Nuzi, I and II. Cambridge (Mass.), 1939.Google Scholar
Strommenger, E. The Art of Mesopotamia. London, 1964.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. C. and Hamilton, R. W. ‘The British Museum Excavations on the Temple of Ishtar at Nineveh, 1930–1931.’ In Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology (Liverpool). 19 (1932) ff.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. C. and Mallowan, M. E. L. ‘The British Museum Excavations at Nineveh, 1931–1932.’ In Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology (Liverpool). 20 (1933) ff.Google Scholar
Thureau-Dangin, F. Die Sumerischen und akkadischen Königsinschriften. Leipzig, 1907.Google Scholar
Thureau-Dangin, F. Rituels Accadiens. Paris, 1921.Google Scholar
Watelin, L. Ch. Excavations at Kish, IV. Paris, 1934.Google Scholar
Woolley, C. L. The Royal Cemetery (Ur Excavations II). London and Philadelphia, 1934.Google Scholar
Woolley, C. L. The Early Periods (Ur Excavations IV). London and Philadelphia, 1956.Google Scholar
Woolley, C. L. The Ziggurat and its Surroundings (Ur Excavations V). London and Philadelphia, 1939.Google Scholar
Woolley, C. L. ‘Excavations at Ur.’ Preliminary reports in Antiquaries Journal 3 (1923) to 14 (1934).Google Scholar
Woolley, C. L. ‘Hittite Burial Customs.’ In Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology (Liverpool). 6 (1914) ff.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×