∗ eevd etme 07 cetd 7Nvme 07 eie:2 eray2008 February 29 Revised: 2007; November 27 Accepted: 2007; September 6 Received: falbttelretstsi hsrgo,teacetIda-maras ancient the region, abandonment this virtual in the sites Triangle, largest Habur (Meijer the predict Western but would all the all theory in extent, curve of place Similarly, rank-size central in that 2005). convex lattices 100ha markedly Ristvet hexagonal a 1990; and the produces in 20 This result other. not between does each and from sites 15km Eastern seven analytical than the uncovered less spatial In to located 157-61). has two use 2002: often survey the (Banning for most Triangle, societies archaeologists of , Habur state-level that predictions north-eastern – of theory patterns the of place settlement to central Plains analyse and Habur correspond rule rank-size the not – of do techniques societies 2) complex (Figure Archaeological 2005). the example, Weiss & from (Ristvet foundered data have survey area this economic of the geography early delineate political from to and efforts evidence 1), epigraphic (Figure Mesopotamia and northern archaeological BC in second-millennium increase recent enormous the Despite Introduction the from patterns insights settlement These surveyed cities. Keywords: of and interpretation land arable the on with for as authorities, implications well everywhere. intersecting important as of pasture have number of East a tracts Near major to cuneiform on relate archaeological of hold by actually aid found a Mesopotamia settlements the the northern With how in employed. shows author anciently survey the strategies Syria, political Leilan, Tell or owing from work, use documents always land not may particular it However the ground. to the on involving settlements survey, different-sized archaeological of of goal mapping primary the a is hierarchies settlement and territories Defining Ristvet Lauren Mesopotamia in northern BC millennium second the of territories archaeological and Legal uefr et ugs htteacetraiywsfrmr ope Edm20:257). 2000: (Eidem complex more far the was but reality borders, ancient contiguous the that with suggest states texts territorial cuneiform were kingdoms Mesopotamian ancient BC. millennium organisational second geo-political the basic during 2002). the polities understand Wilkinson Mesopotamian yet 1997; ancient not of 1996; do principles (Lyonnet we ones that large indicate complex than any exercises of Such sites system small settlement more the that contains posit society both which technique, either of predictions antiquity n ftebscasmtoso rhelgsssuyn h oiia adcp sthat is landscape political the studying archaeologists of assumptions basic the of One eateto itr,GogaSaeUiest,AlnaG 00,UA(mi:[email protected]) (Email: USA 30302, GA Atlanta University, State Georgia History, of Department 2(08:585–599 (2008): 82 eooai,scn ilnimB,stlmn akn,survey ranking, settlement BC, millennium second Mesopotamia, ∗ 585 ¸ osntcrepn othe to correspond not does ,

Research Legal and archaeological territories of the second millennium BC in northern Mesopotamia

Figure 1. Cities and towns in northern Mesopotamia, c. 1800-1500 BC. Analysing the actual spatial configuration of these ancient city-states is fundamental to our interpretation of survey data and our wider understanding of Mesopotamian economic, social and political realities. To this end, I will explore the interplay between political, economic and religious strategies in the demarcation of two north Mesopotamian kingdoms, Kahat, centred on modern Tell Barri, Syria, and , centred on modern , Syria (ancient Sehna/ˇ Subat-Enlil,ˇ Figures 1 and 2). Specifically, I will analyse both the de jure limits of these kingdoms as described in a mutual defence treaty, as well as their de facto limits as they emerge from the letters and administrative texts. I will then compare the results of this documentary study to the settlement data collected between 1984 and 2002 by the Tell Leilan Regional Survey. This will both refine our understanding of the social history and conceptual archaeology of northern Mesopotamia during the early second millennium BC, and raise questions about how documentary and archaeological territories may be matched.

Demarcating Apum and Kahat in documentary records: the Sehnaˇ archives In 1987, 600 complete tablets and 400 tablet fragments and seals were discovered during the excavation of a palace in the Leilan Lower Town (Figures 3a and 3b). The 1985 and 1987 excavations of the palace revealed 25 rooms surrounding two paved courtyards,

586 h oreo ilmc Edm19a 91;19c 08 sal19;Vincente 1991; Ismail 2008; 1991c; in 1991b; made 1991a; expenditures (Eidem outlining diplomacy including 1992). texts texts, of diplomatic administrative course of archives and consisted of discrete the third administration correspondence Three the the while than (including state 1991). bakery), affairs Weiss treaties, less and palace & cellars internal comprising wine to (Akkermans royal related probably palace the two first original workspaces; the the found, and of were kitchens cent per suite, 10 reception a including Western 3) survey; Syria north-eastern 2) Survey; Regional 1900-1600 Leilan from Tell toponyms) 1) survey. ancient paper. Beydar Tell and this 4) modern in survey; both Triangle by discussed Habur (indicated surveys sites modern Syria, and north-eastern Plains, BC Habur The 2. Figure hatn oml htwrstetopriso h iecneune fbekn h ray a treaty, the breaking of consequences dire Till-abn the conditions: of its parties up sums two passage the broken warns that formula hatn [ am-ri-im n ddo aa;tejxaoiino h w tr osmydlmttecommon the delimit may gods storm Arrapha two of the Adad are of localities juxtaposition particular the with Halab; connected of gods Adad two the and of international first these beginning The which the in meet. at worlds the position actors of their organisation localities, politico-spatial the particular emphasises to treaty connected are them of several ah-hu altL- Fgr ) raybtenKn Till-abn King between treaty a 4), (Figure LT-3 Tablet T 3bgn ihals ftegd h ilesr opinewt t odtos As conditions. its with compliance ensure will who gods the of list a with begins LT-3 fKht stebs rsre fteLia rais meitl eoetecurse the before Immediately treaties. Leilan the of preserved best the is Kahat, of u ilb hrceie ybohrod iiayassac n oat i:1-4 Akk. 12-14, (iv: loyalty and assistance military brotherhood, by characterised be will u ˆ ˆ ] -tum ,Edm2008). Eidem ], , til-lu- [ u... . tum. /[ ]/ a-wa-t ] -mdam-qa-t i-im arnRistvet Lauren 587 wasta i eainhpwt Jams with relationship his that swears u ˆ [ im ...]/[ fAu n igJams King and Apum of u ˆ at ]- wa-am ˇ ali sa - i [ -ii ga- b-bi-im ¸ ¸ i- i-

Research Legal and archaeological territories of the second millennium BC in northern Mesopotamia

Figure 3. a) Topographic map of Tell Leilan, Syria with excavations of second-millennium BC levels marked; b) plan of the Leilan Eastern Lower Town palace.

588 rpoue ypriso fHre Weiss). Harvey of permission by (reproduced iue4 T3 h raybetween treaty the LT-3, 4. Figure me evns,hsedr,hssn,[n]tewoeo h ado Hana’ of land the of whole the their sons,/[and] exploring his and elders, designations, Till- his describes territorial servants], treaty legal The organisation. as territorial abn of served perceptions treaty, unearth can the connotations in times several hatn otte u sa motn oiia n eiiu gr nteltes(ie 08 Letters 2008: (Eidem letters the in figure religious and political important an is but title, no fAu n h ado aa aall haei aitet rf,wihcalls which draft, treaty Mari a (M.6435 in H[ana]’ phrase of a l[and] parallels the Hana’ and Mari of of land ‘king the Zimri-Lim and Apum of as-di-n nuha amlk h les i os i evns i ros i onr,hstws/b they be towns,/ his country, his troops, his servants, his sons/ his elders, the Ea-malik, hatn ab-nu- ma- uttekn ftevlaesadtwsepeo pm hn ei lokn fthe of king follows: also as territory is and king Kahat’s he describes treaty then, The identity. Apum, ethnic and of history townspeople and villagers the of nomads. king the just nam-la me an stegnrcwr o atrlnmd(uad19;20) Till-abn 2004). 1992; (Durand nomad pastoral for word generic Till-abn that the population is the of ha-na segment nomadic the denotes ´ T 3ue ifrn e haefrKht hc a eettekndmsdifferent kingdom’s the reflect may which Kahat, for phrase set different a uses LT-3 ˇ ˇ s-< s- n h ado pmas Apum of land the and u [ ˆ /sno siNhm igo aa/tect fKht h ig h r i brothers,/ his are who kings the Kahat, of city the Kahat/ of king Asdi-Nehim, of son u/ ,Khtskn,btas o‘h ig h r i rtes,adt amlk h has who Ea-malik, to and brothers’, his are who kings ‘the to also but king, Kahat’s u, ˆ ˇ -th a-at su/ ˆ ˇ i n i igo/fo aa oNawar’ to Nawar from kingdom/ his and si, ˇ su u/ ´ e-hi-im ´ - [  dumu-me > uma ` [dumu ka-ti- ] a-na- ]- ˇ su lugal -th-aka- ha-na a-at  me da / i ] ˇ -un-aa -ina-wa-ar a-di na-wa-ar s-tu ˇ Drn 96 1-,M.6435 112-5, 1986: (Durand s r e -ri ˇ ka-ha-at s- ˇ su / - ` ır-di- pu-uh ki hhaadKahat and Shehna ˇ /  ˇ us su a-na lu ‘Till-abn lugal  ¸ a - ˇ su - uru bi )Ti einto fTill-abn of designation This .) aaa a-p ma-a-at - arnRistvet Lauren ˇ uma su /sno ar-ph igo h ado Apum,/[his of land the of king Da]ri-Epuh, of u/[son ka ˆ - ha 589 - - ti at ki - hs e ecitos hc r repeated are which descriptions, set These agreement. this enacting are Apum who of Kahat and kings the of domains the describe 1). (Figure treaty parties this the to Kahat, and Apum of cities main four the do they as polities representing two specifically, the for and Plains Habur of wider Adad B¯ gods, Kahat, B¯ four of Adad next Nawali, Letters The 2008: 23). 1-4, (Eidem various affairs in approval in diplomatic his used seek term and acknowledged superior, an a for East father’, Near ancient ‘my the as Halab of of kings the which in correspondence, this by city illustrated that which oversight exercisedoveraffairsintheHaburregionas the to may refer Halab of also Adad of inclusion The amia. Mesopot- northern of horizon geographical ˇ su i:28 Akk. 2-8, (ii: .Till-abn ). lugal-me ltAi,aesgicn ohi the in both significant are elet-Apim, ´ ı/ T 3ue w itntstprssto phrases set distinct two uses LT-3 uru-ki-h [ ` ır- + .97 56) h ado Hana of land The 25-6.). M.8987: d ] u ˇ s -me ssern o utt Jams to just not swearing is u ˆ ah a- ´ hharfrt to refer Shehna ˇ su ˇ - oen:i h aitexts Mari the in governs: u ˆ hi ˇ I s- + / ia-am-s ˇ su - ˇ 6 k.lugal Akk. 26, : si-a-al ˇ su l / u- i 02,Akk. 20-22, (i: s‘igo h land the of ‘king as u ´ ˆ ´ ı d ¸ ˇ su-gi-me ´ ı-ha-at-nu- ´ e - -  a PI - ma ltNgrand elet-Nagar  - inu-ha- ri - lik ˇ s- ˇ su ˇ ilIior sialPIri u ´ uisnot l ˆ ma-ri u- /dumu ´ dumu- ‘Jams ˇ su-gi- I ti-la- ˇ si ki ¸ ¸ i- i- u u ` `

Research Legal and archaeological territories of the second millennium BC in northern Mesopotamia

Figure 5. Hypothetical extent of the kingdoms of Kahat and Apum, c. 1750 BC.

19-20, 28-32, 99, 150, 152, 200, 207). The dichotomies associated with this kingdom are not between sown and settled but between towns described as ‘ˇsialPIiri’ or ‘nuhaˇsi’, neither of which can be satisfactorily translated, but which may be Hurrian ethnic terms harking back to this area’s Hurrian identity in the late third millennium BC (Eidem 2008). Finally, the kingdom is delimited by a doubled toponym; it is described as being ‘from Nawar to Nawar’, a phrase that has complex religious and historical significance. Nawar is the name of an important regional goddess, the Hurrian name for Belet-Nagar,¯ the goddess of ancient Nagar (Guichard 1997). Simultaneously, Nawar names a divine geographical entity, the land where the goddess lives, and perhaps the land which was known as the kingdom of Urkiˇs and Nawar a few centuries earlier, a territory which was probably along the Jaghjagh river. ‘Nawar to Nawar’, therefore, may refer to the tour of the surrounding countryside that this goddess made each year (Guichard 1994; 1997). A text from Tell Leilan, an admonitory letter written by Ea-malik to prompt donations to Belet-¯ Nagar from Till-abnu,ˆ provides some support for this theory by connecting the goddess’ journey to the marking of boundaries: ‘From this day – 15 days hence – the goddess will leave her house and the boundary markers will be rearranged’ (Eidem 1991b: 125). This sentence may imply that the Lady of Nagar, who could probably grant sovereignty over the Habur basin to kings, could also define their territories. ‘From Nawar to Nawar’ could also refer to two towns with similar sounding names, Nawali (modern Girnavvaz), near the mouth of the Jaghjagh river, and Nagar (modern ), near where it joins the Radd (Donbaz 1988; Eidem & Warburton 1996). The two ‘Nawars’ may have delimited Kahat’s territory, the towns on both sides of the Jaghjagh, for most of its length (Figures 2 and 5). The

590 me ftecutyo pm i os i evns i toos i esnlcm n i kingdom’ his and camp seasonal his [tro]ops, his of servants/ his text sons, the Akk. his in Apum, (ii:3-5, reads: of twice title, country repeated entire people the the is the of reconstruct which emphasise to terminology treaties us descriptive these allowing and LT-4, singularity, normative Apum religious kingdoms The for their BC Apum. phase stressing second-millennium of stock these or dividing different at lands, formally two a written than into use were Rather years, which partners. LT-4), 40 LT-2, treaty (LT-1, approximately its treaties over Leilan itself other Leilan Tell Three Kahat. in diplomatic this written to Nawali of Adad god religious the the connect of may knowledge tablet Given act. our this 128). Text and making, 1991: texts, treaty (Ismail for two festival basis these religious between a connection for the Nawali that chronological records to the text travelled second king The the 115). first Text day 1991: The (Ismail next silver texts. 12, of administrative 10, quantities large other 8, with Texts two there Till-abn 1991: from (Ismail that evidence Nawali records the in is text priests intriguing from more wine Even This 139). of negotiations. possibly deliveries Three, treaty Nawali. record the and Apum in texts between participated activity four, diplomatic and in increase Kahat marked of a saw kingdom year the of part was Nawali . northern in mountain Sinjar the of south adm u nta irrec te cosamuti rarvr hr r w city-states two are There river. a at or names mountain identical Raz a given across called not other were each in cities mirror two cited instead Nawars, but Mesopotamia also the random, toponymy’ northern Like is ‘mirror for 2003). Nawali established (Charpin of period well of practice this is Adad in which the names) and from identical treaty comes cities different this support (giving of More LT-2. beginning treaty, the Leilan B¯ at another centres, support cited cultic could both important ‘Nawar’ are are term Nawali the Nawali of and and Nagar cities Both theory. two these this of significance religious and historic aia n ue hi ertre ndfeetwy.Khtsiflec n rsiewas prestige and influence social Kahat’s of ways. forms different different in on administrative drew territories had and countries their and letters two territory ruled the treaties, more and that the controlled appears capital clearly of It Apum power. content reversed. military the is more to situation the inquiry however, our texts, extend we When ate fAu.Tedpoai agnue nteltesbtenKhtadApum and Kahat between letters the in used Jams jargon since theory, diplomatic this supports The Apum. of seasonal partner their during princes groups the the pastoral Kahat, agreement: and of this troops towns by military the affected urban migrations. administrators, of actually the royal identities people ones between Apum, the ethnic dichotomy the name of two a than Leilan the establishes at operational or written that more Apum, treaties phrase of and a territories formal using pastoral less replaces of and kingdom’ is Instead and LT-3. designation camp in This ‘seasonal used Hana’. and ‘elders’ of replace land ‘troops’ LT-3: ‘the in used those for h e hae htw aeaaye eeol cu nL-,wihwsprobably was which LT-3, in occur only here analysed have we that phrases set The of city the that suggest enacted was LT-3 that year the from texts administrative The rmteeaoaedsrpietriooyi T3aoe aa per sa equal an as appears Kahat alone, LT-3 in terminology descriptive elaborate the From ˇ s- ˇ su /[ ¸ s m,frisac,Raz instance, for ama, ˆ a ]- ti-la-ab-nu- bi- ˇ una-wi- su u ´ ˇ rvle oKhtt nc hstet n opeetofficials present to and treaty this enact to Kahat to travelled u su ˆ dumu nam-la-ka-ti- u ` ¸ i-hatn m fJsa n Raz and Jassan of ama ˆ da-ri-e-pu-uh drse Till-abn addresses u ˆ arnRistvet Lauren 591 ˇ su .Ti haesbtttscranelements certain substitutes phrase This ). [lugal] / m fJmta,lctdnrhand north located Jamutbal, of ama ˆ aa a-p ma-at ‘Till-abn shsbohradhneequal. hence and brother his as u ˆ o fDr-ph [king] Dari-epuh/ of son u ˆ ´ ı-im ltNgradAa of Adad and elet-Nagar dumu-me ˇ s- ˇ su ` ır- du -

Research Legal and archaeological territories of the second millennium BC in northern Mesopotamia religious and historical, while Apum’s was military and political. Kahat’s importance in north Mesopotamia emerged from its probable role as the heir to the ancient kingdom of UrkiˇsandNawarandtheguardianoftwomajorshrines.Ontheotherhand,Kahat did not have the military or political clout of the land of Apum or of the other major players in the region, like , , or Razamaˆ of Jassan. Instead, Kahat stood apart from the various military confrontations described in the letters. A stipulation in LT-3 (iii: 21-6) allows Apum to have limited control over former Kahat vassal states, indicating that Apum may have had de facto control over several areas that supposedly belonged to Kahat (Figure 5). Similarly, two administrative texts from Leilan, dated to the same year as the treaty, record rations issued to people of Kahat, in Kahat, thus implying that Apum had assumed some political responsibility for this kingdom (Ismail 1991: Text 97, 133). A letter about grazing rights dating to the reign of Till-abnu’sˆ predecessor shows that Apum’s sheep not only regularly grazed along the Jaghjagh in areas that were probably nominally part of the kingdom of Kahat but that the kings of Apum could even extend these grazing rights to foreign kings (Eidem 2008: Letter 10). An administrative text written six months after the treaty was concluded records another journey of Till-abnuˆ to Kahat, in order to administer the pastoral segment of Apum’s economy (Ismail 1991: Text 129). During this trip, Till-abnuˆ receives ‘Amurru-sheep’ from the elders or rulers of several towns in Kahat, perhaps tribute to Apum’s king. Another factor that complicates the concept of geographical borders in early second- millennium BC northern Mesopotamia is Apum’s control of Ilan-s¸ura. During the period in question, Till-abnu’sˆ brother and successor, Jakun-aˇsar, governed this city which seems to have been either the western limit of the land of Apum or a dependant city (Eidem 2008: 27-8). Yet the letters from Ilan-s¸ura suggest that it was located west of the Jaghjagh, probably near Chagar Bazar (Figure 5) as Jakun-aˇsar writes in support of a man from Till-ˇsannim, a toponym that occurs frequently in the Chagar Bazar texts but nowhere else. Till-ˇsannim may have even been the ancient name of Chagar Bazar (Talon 1997: 6). Previous research in historical geography has situated Ilan-s¸ura, one of the most important kingdoms in the Ida-maras¸, both east and west of the Jaghjagh (Wafler¨ 1995; 2000; 2003; Guichard 1997). The evidence from Leilan may confirm a western location. This implies that Apum had political control of a non-contiguous region during this period (Figure 5). In another Leilan letter, the king of Eluhut tells Till-abnuthathewillgranthimatowninˆ his kingdom west of Kahat (Eidem 2000: 258; 2008: Letter 89). Towns east and west of Kahat were thus subject to the kings of Apum and sent agricultural and manufactured goods to Leilan. The complications of this situation suggest that we should not infer that second- millennium BC kingdoms had set borders or were dependent only upon their immediate countryside. The picture that emerges from the texts is one of an astonishingly fluid political landscape with often ambiguous borders (Lafont 1999; Eidem 2008: Letter 89). In the Mari and Leilan documentation, kingdoms are a collection of people initially, and of places secondarily. We would do well to remember the stock phrase used to describe north Mesopotamian kingdoms in LT-1, LT-2 and LT-4, which lists groups of actors, sedentary and nomadic. The ephemeral nature of political power and territorial control during the early second millennium BC may explain why the role of religion in defining places is so pronounced.

592 igoslk nai oteSkamho aaa lm nls hnacnuytecentral the E century from a Samsi- than shifted less from region In this wealth . nearby faraway in accumulated of from power Sukkalmah the ranged the as aggressors to Andarig The well like invasions. as kingdoms foreign region, continuous independent. this encouraged became Leilan/Apum sway, of time Tell Addu’s its land from under and agricultural been governed previously control rich land had the The of which both amount cities, however, nearby The power, as weakened. decreased to area centrally came this was Mari of area of this integration Zimri-Lim Samsi-Addu, Mesopotamia Once of northern of reign 2001). most embraced the (Villard that economy During larger Plains. a into Habur integrated and organisation the managed early basic of the the in cities of shifts the systems dramatic document of economic letters and Mari The political BC. dynamic millennium the second incorporate must pastoral analyses and survey agricultural the complex of a nature created dual that the alliances second, political and economy. dynamic geography importance the political the first, fluid points, emphasise: and two BC texts incorporate second-millennium the of must which realities models of twentieth the our early to Rather Europe or Western Mesopotamia. nineteenth or northern late States the United the in for developed century models geographical apply cannot We governed catchment often entities true historical the many to so close territories. like anything non-contiguous which represent cities, surveys BC not Eastern second-millennium do Near of result, and areas a restricted, As regionally be sheep. too their could true far Leilan/Apum pasture situation from are to is kilometres the kilometres few which of This a hundreds after lived another. travel who decade, villagers could of a one economically: part for true into also be kingdom is might former blend It Leilan/Apum reversed. the instead from than texts 30km but rather and latter The Barri/Kahat systems the from surveys? closed 10km town not archaeological a and kingdoms are politically: The Eastern narrow. kingdoms period too Near is this surveys non-contiguous and of excavations of borders, most analysis of perspective fractured the the that these emphasise for of nomads implications migrating the are What pattern settlement archaeological the Interpreting cultural and stability expanding provided and goddess the contracting of their tour the unity. and and kings shrines of the presence of the territories, alliances shifting constantly the Despite hsae a lassrnl nertdit ertra mie ae nteeiec of evidence the on based empire, territorial a that into assumed integrated previously strongly had always Meijer was levels 1997). area low (Savage this indicates integration in probably and resulted which organisation survey distribution system a Syria not of graph, north-eastern do rank-size data his convex archaeological of unexpectedly where analysis during an Meijer’s cases Mesopotamia explain Diederik northern help expected. also for as can behave evidence It historical BC. millennium term second long the with correlates and state 2003). Ziegler & (Charpin nodrt rvd nacrt nih nonrhMsptma eteetsystems, settlement Mesopotamian north into insight accurate an provide to order In contextual. similarly are that models for need our emphasises understanding political This h mrigpcuefisaln ihsvrlcnrsbte hnawl-nertdterritorial well-integrated a than better centres several with land a fits picture emerging The ˇ nna to snunna, arnRistvet Lauren 593 Sehna/ ˇ ua-ni tef oMr,t Halab to Mari, to itself, Subat-Enlil ˇ

Research Legal and archaeological territories of the second millennium BC in northern Mesopotamia

Samsi-Addu’s reign (Meijer 1990). A rank- size plot of the Leilan survey shows a similarly convex distribution (Figure 6). Such a distribution generally occurs when centres of equivalent economic function are of comparable size (Falconer & Savage 1995). This analysis suggests that the borders of these Mesopotamian surveys did not coincide with bounded and stable king- doms centred on one city, as often assumed for small-scale surveys. Instead, the distri- bution may reflect the semi-independent status of most of the cities of this region and their alternating experiences of provincial integration and regional segregation.

The importance Figure 6. Rank-size graph for Tell Leilan Regional Survey, of the pastoral element Period I (1900-1700 BC). Although the texts dichotomise the desert and the town, they also depict a culturally unified realm. This is not simply Rowton’s dimorphic system, where dual enrichment and impoverishment cycles encourage the poorest and richest nomads to settle (Rowton 1974). Instead, contemporary texts emphasise that each city, town and village has a tribal identity (Charpin & Durand 1986; Fleming 2004). In the Leilan survey region, this tribal element might explain the large number and small size of villages during this period around Tell Leilan. The preceding period saw the least number of sites, while this period, Period I (corresponding to the early second millennium BC) has the largest number recorded by the Tell Leilan Regional Survey (Figures 7 and 8). This survey catalogued 157 settlements dating to Period I and identified an occupied extent of 767ha, more than 10 times that of the previous period. Most of this settlement occurred in villages. Excluding the two largest sites, the mean site size is only 2.25ha. The small size of these villages may be correlated with herding groups or nomadic lineages (Eidem & Warburton 1996; Ristvet & Weiss 2005). 79 per cent of settlements during this period were founded on previously settled mounds. This settlement pattern resembles the early twentieth-century resettlement of the Jezireh, when following centuries of nomadism, people established settlements atop or beside archaeological sites (Montagne 1932: 58; Velud 2000: 76-9). Combining survey data with information about pasture from the Leilan texts therefore allows us to render notoriously invisible nomads visible. The letters suggest that the majority of Apum’s pasture lay along the Jaghjagh, the Middle Habur and around the Sinjar; outside the traditional confines of the kingdom (Eidem 2008: 55, 84, 99). Other documents mention Apum sheep or sheep from foreign locales grazing within the land of Apum (Ristvet 2005), particularly in the east and south, suggesting that the countryside was a patchwork of land used for agriculture and pasture (Figure 9). The basaltic eastern plateau beyond Mohammed

594 02.Telretlsi h ot uthv entefmu iiso Ida-maras of cities famous the been Wilkinson have 1996; must (Lyonnet north pastoralism the dominant Plains in Habur of tells Western model large the different in The a sites 2002). order to (Lyonnet lower survey due of Beydar probably the lack is and the survey Indeed, Triangle 2002). elsewhere Habur Western Wilkinson identified the 1996; been that in also camps Plains have pastoralist Habur camps’ glorified the ‘pastoral represent in Similar dry- may Habur occupied. and for of seasonally sites, marginal evidence only surveyed sparse also were have most is areas to Halaba) these contrast in lake in sites (ancient ware, Several swamp grazing. The for Radd 1990). adequate the (Weiss but near farming, dry-farming Leilan than of pasture south to area better-suited is Azamhul?) (ancient Diyab 30km- a covered survey Leilan Tell The 1650km comprising BC). borders (2200-1900 Iraqi IIc and Turkish Period the (1984-2002), between Survey transect wide Regional Leilan Tell 7. Figure lyapoietrl nteMr ouetto,cte htwr uruddb plains dichotomy. by urban/rural emphasise surrounded an and were than landscape rather this that reconceptualise dichotomy must cities urban/pastoral We nomads. the documentation, of Mari full but the farmers of in empty role prominent a play mgr,lclifrat n akn uvyaogtowds ufc aeilwscletdacrigt ietopography. site to according collected was material Surface wadis. two along survey walking a and informants local imagery, arnRistvet Lauren 595 2 ie eelctdfo as PTadLandsat and SPOT maps, from located were Sites . ¸ which ,

Research Legal and archaeological territories of the second millennium BC in northern Mesopotamia

Figure 8. Tell Leilan Regional Survey, Period I (1900-1700 BC).

Conclusion The second-millennium BC cuneiform texts from Tell Leilan provide Near Eastern archaeologists with a new framework for analysing survey data, one that can explain trends that do not fit the assumptions of modern spatial analytic techniques, like central place theory and rank-size distributions. Analysis of both the legal and functional limits of two northern Mesopotamian kingdoms reveal that pre-modern political and economic organisation does not always respond as modern geographical analysis assumes. The political instability of this area should prevent us from assuming that ancient polities had stable borders. Similarly, the importance of pastoralism in the Near East means that survey archaeologists must expand their geographic perspective and consider much larger catchment areas. Although these specific conclusions are applicable to the Near East, they raise general concerns about survey design and analysis for all archaeologists. One of the arguments in favour of full coverage survey is that it allows archaeologists to infer spatial organisation

596 iue9 rbbeaeso atr nteLia uvyae,bsdo vdnefo et,sedsatr n olresources soil and scatters sherd texts, from evidence on based area, survey Leilan the 1966). FAO in 1964; pasture Liere of (van areas Probable 9. Figure nlsn o epeudrto n rae hi oiia n iullnsae a be can landscapes understanding ritual Although documentary records, and archaeological 41-2). and political textual 2008: the their that in (Kantner gaps created concern the archaeology given and a difficult regional understood correlates, enable of people spatial not how analyses its analysing does or recent organisation alone in economic survey emerged and has coverage & political full (Fish identify data evidence, created to settlement us historical thus contextualising without and activities that archaeological economic suggests study using and case political this Yet the 1990). Kowalewsi understand better hence and arnRistvet Lauren 597

Research Legal and archaeological territories of the second millennium BC in northern Mesopotamia of local land use can provide a useful starting point for modelling ancient political territories that do not conform to standard spatial analyses.

Acknowledgements Different versions of this paper were presented at BANEA in 2003 and 2006, and at the Assyriology Colloquium at Yale University in 2005. I thank Michele Reid, Cassandra White, Steve Rapp, Erin Ruel, Joe Perry, Nicholas Postgate and Harvey Weiss for reading drafts of this paper. I also thank Harvey Weiss for allowing me access to the Leilan material.

References – 2000. Northern Jezira in the 18th century BC: aspects kkermans, eiss. of geo-political patterns, in O. Rouault & M. A P.M.M.G. & H. W 1991. Tell Leilan Wafler¨ (ed.) La Dj´ezir´e et l’Euphrate Syriens: de la 1987, Operation 3: a preliminary report on the protohistoire alafinduII` e mill´enaire av. J.-C. Lower Town palace. Annales arch´eologiques Arabes Tendances dans l’interpr´etation historique des donn´ees Syriennes 37/38: 91-109. nouvelles: 255-64. Turnhout: Brepols. Banning , E.B. 2002. Archaeological survey. New York: –2008. The royal archives from Tell Leilan 1: Old Kluwer. Babylonian letters and treaties from the Lower Town Charpin, D. 2003. La ‘toponymie en miroir’ dans le palace. London & New Haven (CT): Yale Proche-Orient amorrite. Revue d’Assyriologie et University Press. d’Arch´eologie orientale 97: 3-34. Eidem, J. & D. Warburton. 1996. In the land of Charpin, D. & J.-M. Durand. 1986. Fils de Sim’al: les Nagar: a survey around Tell Brak. Iraq 58: origines tribales des rois de Mari. Revue 51-64. d’Assyriologie et d’Arch´eologie orientale 80: 141-83. Falconer, S.E. & S.H. Savage. 1995. Heartlands Charpin, D. & N. Ziegler. 2003. Florilegium and hinterlands – alternative trajectories of marianum V: Mari et le Proche-Orient al’` ´epoque early urbanization in Mesopotamia and the amorrite: essai d’histoire politique.Paris:Societ´ epour´ southern . American Antiquity 60: l’Etude du Proche-Orient ancien. 37-58. Donbaz, V. 1988. Some neo-Assyrian contracts from FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), United Girnavaz and vicinity. State Archives of Nations. 1966. Etude des ressources en eaux Bulletin 2: 3-30. souterraines de la Jezireh syrienne. Rome: Fonds Durand, J.-M. 1986. Fragments rejoints pour une special´ des Nations Unies; Organisation de histoireElamite,inL.deMeyer,H.Gasche&F. l’alimentation et de l’agriculture des Nations Vallat (ed.) Fragmenta Historiae Elamicae: m´elanges Unies. offerts a` M.J. Steve: 111-28. Paris: Recherche sur les Fish, S.K. & S.A. Kowalewski. 1990. The archaeology Civilisations. of regions: the case for full-coverage survey. – 1992. Uniteetdiversit´ es´ al’` epoque´ amorrite, in D. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. Charpin & F. Joannes` (ed.) La circulation des biens, Fleming, D.A. 2004. Democracy’s ancient ancestors: des personnes et des id´ees dans le Proche-Orient ancien: Mari and early collective governance. Cambridge: 97-128. Paris: Recherche sur les Civilisations. Cambridge University Press. – 2004. Peuplement et societ´ es´ al’` epoque´ amorrite (I): Guichard, M. 1994. Au pays de la Dame de Nagar, in les clans bensim’alites, in C. Nicolle (ed.) Amurru 3: D. Charpin & J.-M. Durand (ed.) Florilegium nomades et s´edentaires dans le Proche-Orient ancien: Marianum II: recueil d’´etudes alam` ´emoire de 111-98. Paris: Recherche sur les Civilisations. Maurice Birot: 235-72. Paris: Recherche sur les Eidem, J. 1991a. An Old Assyrian treaty from Tell Civilisations. Leilan, in D. Charpin & F. Joannes` (ed.) – 1997. Zimri-Lim a` Nagar. Mari: annales de recherches Marchands, diplomates et empereurs: ´etudes sur la interdisciplinaires 8: 329-37. civilisation m´esopotamienne offertes a` Paul Garelli: Ismail, F. 1991. Altbabylonische Wirtschaftsurkunden 185-208. Paris: Recherche sur les Civilisations. aus Tall Leilan (Syrien). Unpublished PhD – 1991b. The Tell Leilan archives 1987. Revue dissertation, Eberhard-Karls-Universitat,¨ Tubingen.¨ d’Assyriologie et d’Arch´eologie orientale 85: 109-35. Kantner, J. 2008. The archaeology of regions: from – 1991c. Tell Leilan tablets 1987: a preliminary report. discrete analytical toolkit to ubiquitous spatial Annales arch´eologiques Arabes Syriennes 37/38: perspective. Journal of Archaeological Research 16: 110-27. 37-81.

598 L W. Liere. van L M 97 usin u ’rgn e otusd osen pots de porteurs des l’origine sur Questions 1997. – M R R R yonnet, afont, istvet, istvet, owton, eijer, ontagne, ’cuainaxIII aux l’occupation ateocdnaed atKau Sred N.E.): du m (Syrie Haut- du occidentale partie Organisation. Research Sugar Organisation/World Agriculture and Food Rome: 1997 July nin erEs.Ppr rsne oteXLIV internationale the Assyriologique to rencontre presented Papers East. the Near in ancient horizons and (ed.) frontiers Lanfranchi territories, G.B. Landscapes: & Fales F.M. Martino, De S. fronti sans monde un amorrites: oeasmtosadies nS ihe,M. Eichler, S. W in ideas, and assumptions some lrlgu ainm3 eui d’ recueil 3: Marianum Florilegium mill Haute-M Civilisations. les sur Recherche 363-76. Paris: 1993): Mai Paris, international, colloque orie,dxasd rvu,1 travaux, de ans dix Hourrites, (ed.) Durand J.-M. el Haute-Djezir la de Universit Freiburg: 31-45. ’ntttFranc l’Institut Soci m Cambridge. of University dissertation, BC. PhD Unpublished 3000-1000 Syria, region, Leilan Tell the itr n rhelg fSraVlm 1. Volume Saarbr Syria of archaeology (ed.) and Orthmann History W. in & BC, Al-Maqdisi millennium M. second Matthiae, P. early and third late the h cnmcadSca itr fteOrient the of 1-30. History Social and Economic the ´ mied Marie-Th de emoire toe,r ethodes, ´ flr&D abro (ed.) Warburton D. & afler ¨ nie nD hri .M uad(ed.) Durand J.-M. & Charpin D. in enaire, ´ et ´ .19.A rhelgclsraesurvey: surface archaeological An 1990. D. .19.L Proche-Orient Le 1999. B. .20.Stlmn,eooyadsceyin society and economy Settlement, 2005. L. .&H W H. & L. orlEued rceOin ancien. Proche-Orient du l’Etude pour e ´ ce:Saarbr ucken: ..17.Ecoe nomadism. Enclosed 1974. M.B. ¨ .19.L rseto arch prospection La 1996. B. .13.Qeqe set upeuplement du aspects Quelques 1932. R. sptme uVI du esopotamie, ´ 95.Pdv:Sargon. Padova: 49-55. : 1964. slase usin uorde autour questions et esultats ´ asd Damas de ¸ais eiss. olmp fSra15 000. 1:50 Syria of maps Soil e. ´ e mru ai bae les et Mari, Amurru: ce rcee Verlag. & Druckerei ucker ¨ ultndEue retlsde Orientales d’Etudes Bulletin ´ er tII et 05 h au einin region Habur The 2005. ` s Barrellet ese e tvra Freiburg. atsverlag ¨ mill II:53-66. e umle uII du milieu au nie v n. av. enaires ´ ` alal-Hamidiya Tall ere rs,i .Milano, L. in eres?, ` al’ ` partie ´ etudes 3-4 Paris: 133-44. : pqedsrois des epoque ´ ooiu ela de eologique ´ , eei,7 Venezia, Atsdu (Actes ora of Journal ala ` . in e., ` e 17: arnRistvet Lauren 2: - 11 599 W W theoretische Geographie: Historische 2000. – W¨ V V V 2003. – T S avage, alon, incente, illard, elud, afler, ilkinson, eiss, Publications. birthday 75th in his Oates of David honour to presented of Syria, history and and Mesopotamia archaeology the on (ed.) papers Reade plans: J. & Oates J. McMahon, in Khabur, western L.Al-GailaniWerr,J.Curtis,H.Martin,A. the in BC millennium second Universit Universit Freiburg: 21). Archaeologica Series und Mari von Archive Shubat-enil/Shehna der Zeit zur Idamaras von W Dj M. La & Rouault O. in Perspektiven, 25-7. br assyriologiques Nouvelles University. PhD Yale Unpublished dissertation, Habil-kinu. of Limmu the by esetv rmTl eln nS ihe M. & Eichler S. W in Leilan, Tell from perspective Civilisations. travaux de Charpin D. (ed.) & Durand J.-M. in Yasmah-Addu, Press. University East Cambridge Arab the in society nomadic (ed.) Musallam. B. in steppe, Dossin. Bazar. 1-7 unot Brepols. Turnhout: 317-37. l’interpr alafinduIIemill rhelgclScience Archaeological rule. rank-size the in log-normality ` flr(ed.) afler ¨ .19.Tidmlenu raiain a urbanization: millennium Third 1990. H. .1997. P. .20.Fec adt oiyi h Syrian the in policy mandate French 2000. C. ela-aiia3 u itrshnGeographie historischen zur 3: al-Hamidiya Tell ..19.Assigdprue from departures Assessing 1997. S.H. mru2 ai bae e orie,dxans dix Hourrites, les et Ebla Mari, 2: Amurru .19.Kht T Kahat, 1995. M. ´ ezir .20.Lsamnsrtusd l’ de administrateurs Les 2001. P. rxle:FnainAsrooiu Georges Assyriologique Fondation Bruxelles: .19.Te18 elLia alt dated tablets Leilan Tell 1987 The 1992. C. ´ tto itrqedsdonn des historique etation ..20.Testlmn rniino the of transition settlement The 2002. T.J. tvra Freiburg. atsverlag Freiburg. atsverlag ¨ ¨ ´ tlEprt yin:d aprotohistoire la de Syriens: l’Euphrate et e -4.Prs ehrh u les sur Recherche Paris: 9-140. : ela-aiia2 al-Hamidiya Tell l ayoinTxsfo Chagar from Texts Babylonian Old ´ niea.J-.Tnacsdans Tendances J.-C. av. enaire ObsBbise Orientalis et Biblius (Orbis 4 233-44. 24: dmudIlansura. und adum ˆ ` vse utilitaires et eves 6-2 odn Nabu London: 361-72. : h rnfrainof transformation The 38.Cambridge: 63-81. : 5-6 Freiburg: 159-66. : ´ e nouvelles ees ora of Journal flr(ed.) afler fpt and pots Of ¨ pqede epoque ´ 31: :

Research