Masaryk University Faculty of Arts
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Institute of Archaeology and Museology Department of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East Bachelor’s Diploma Thesis 2013 Barbora Kubíková Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Institute of Archaeology and Museology Department of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East Barbora Kubíková Re-assessment of Objects Referred to as Sling Missiles in the Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East Bachelor’s Diploma Thesis Supervisor: Dr. Phil. Maximilian Wilding Brno 2013 DECLARATION I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography. I agree with storing this work in the library of the Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East at the Masaryk University in Brno and making it accessible for study purposes. Brno 24th of January 2013 .......................................................... Signature ABSTRACT Title: Re-assessment of Objects Referred to as Sling Missiles in the Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East Author: Barbora Kubíková Department / Institute: Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts, Institute of Archaeology and Museology, Department of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East Supervisor of the bachelor thesis: Dr. phil. Maximilian Wilding Abstract: The main aim of this study is to re-assess the objects referred to as sling missiles in the archaeology of the Near East by drawing together and evaluating published sources concerning these controversial artifacts. The focus lies on the description and archaeological context in order to define a possible framework of shapes to improve the identification of the specimen and to guarantee their proper designation amongst other rounded handy-sized clay objects. Various approaches and interpretations of function and production of these objects are presented and subsequently checked on their plausibility using inductive elements coming from the ethnography, contemporary studies and surrounding fields. The intention of this work was most importantly to draft a roadmap for further substantial research into the sling missiles the ancient Near East. Keywords: sling missiles, clay balls, sling stones, ancient weapons, interpretations of objects referred as sling missiles on function and production, ethnographic inductive elements, Near Eastern Neolithic. ANOTACE Název práce: Přehodnocení artefaktů klasifikovaných jako prakové kuličky v Pravěké archeologii Předního východu. Autor: Barbora Kubíková Katedra / Ústav: Masarykova univerzita, Filozofická fakulta, Ústav archeologie a muzeologie, Pravěká archeologie Předního Východu Vedoucí bakalářské práce: Dr. phil. Maximilian Wilding Abstrakt: Hlavním cílem této práce je přehodnotit objekty, které jsou označovány v archeologii Předního Východu jako prakové kuličky za pomoci spojení a vyhodnocování publikovaných zdrojů zabývajících se těmito kontroverzními artefakty. Je zaměřena na popis a archeologický kontext za účelem definování možného rámce tvarů, aby se vylepšila identifikace druhů a zaručila jejich správná klasifikace mezi ostatními malými hliněnými objekty. Různé přístupy a interpretace funkce a produkce těchto objektů jsou presentovány a následně je ověřována jejich pravděpodobnost za použití induktivních prvků pocházejících z etnografie, současných studií a ostatních oborů. Nejdůležitějším úmyslem této práce bylo navržení plánu pro další důkladné zkoumání prakových kuliček na starověkém Předním Východu. Klíčová slova: praková munice, hliněné artefakty, prakové kameny, starověké zbraně, interpretace prakových kuliček s ohledem na funkci, a produkci, etnografické induktivní elementy, Neolit Předního Východu. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Phil. Maximilian Wilding for his guidance, help and his inspiring ideas throughout the creation of this thesis. The most I appreciate is that he made it possible for me to visit the library of the Institut für Vorderasiatische Archäologie der Freie Universität in Berlin, where I have found most of the literature I needed to do this work. I am also greatly indebted to Mgr. Inna Mateiciucová, Ph.D. for her personal and material support in every situation concerning my studies. Of course I would like to pass on my thanks to whole team of Institute of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East for their help in many ways. My thanks for consultations, discussions, expertise, pieces of advice, literature, unpublished information, copies and contacts with specialists go to Prof. emeritus Frank Hole, Ph.D (New Haven), Prof. Dr. Susan Pollock (Berlin), Assoc. Prof. Dr. Halil Tekin (Ankara), Dr. Olivier Nieuwenhuyse (Leiden), Dr. Alain Gaulon (France), Dr. Jörg Becker (Wittenberg), Dr. Hans Georg K. Gebel (Berlin), Dr. Walter Cruells (Barcelona), Maria Bianca D’Anna (Berlin), Kateřina Jenáčková, DiS. (Brno) and Ingmar Franz M.A (Freiburg im Breisgau). Further thanks I owe to Prof. Dr. Dominik Bonatz of the Institut für Vorderasiatische Archäologie der Freie Universität Berlin for the kind reception at the institution. Last but not least I have my family and close friends especially Lucia Miškolciová and Daniela Kleinová to thank for their love and support which also made my studies possible. All the other people who have helped and supported me and which I might unconsciously have forgotten to write down, I like to thank as well. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 1. METHODOLOGY ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12 2. HISTORY OF RESEARCH ------------------------------------------------------------------ 14 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE ROUNDED HANDY- SIZED OBJECTS OF CLAY OR STONE (RHO)------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17 3.1 Shape ..................................................................................................................... 17 3.2 Material, production method and surface treatment ............................................. 24 3.3 Size and weight ..................................................................................................... 27 4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT ---------------------------------------------------------- 28 4.1 Ba'ja ....................................................................................................................... 29 4.2 Tell Kurdu and Tepe Zagheh ................................................................................ 30 4.3 Tell Sabi Abyad ..................................................................................................... 31 4.4 Yarim Tepe III and Umm Dabaghiyah ................................................................. 34 4.5 Çatalhöyük ............................................................................................................ 35 4.6 Tell es-Sweyhat ..................................................................................................... 38 4.7 Tell Hamoukar ...................................................................................................... 38 5. A GROUPING OF EXISTING INTERPRETATIONS ON RHO AND THEIR CRITIQUE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 42 5.1 Spectrum of interpretations on production and use of RHO ................................. 42 5.1.1 Hunting slings ................................................................................................. 43 5.1.2 Cooking stones ................................................................................................ 47 5.1.3 Counters and tokens ....................................................................................... 47 5.1.4 Gaming pieces ................................................................................................ 48 5.1.5 Fighting weapons ........................................................................................... 48 5.1.6 Interstage in production ................................................................................. 51 5.2 Discussions of the existing interpretations on RHO ............................................. 52 6. SPECIFICS AS A FIND CATEGORY AND TENTATIVE RESEARCH STRATEGIES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 61 CONCLUSION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 66 REFERENCES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 68 LIST OF FIGURES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 76 APPENDIX ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 79 INTRODUCTION The subject of this study are small more or less rounded plain objects. They are widely found at many excavations in the Near East. They are often being interpreted as projectiles for slinging, so-called sling missiles. I have decided to tackle the issue of sling missiles which are the only evidence left in the prehistoric archaeological remains. The most prominent piece telling us about slinging is a story about David versus Goliath. The biblical tale by itself suggests; the sling was more a pastoralists' instrument than a weapon for a warrior. However beside what is often thought, in the sublines of narrative there is an admiration of achieving a direct hit exactly in the most vulnerable place of the enemy. It was not expected to strike the warrior; everybody thinks