Tools and Crafts, the Terminology of Textile Manufacturing in 1St-Millennium BC Babylonia Louise Quillien Université Paris 1 Panthéon- Sorbonne
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Centre for Textile Research Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD 2017 Tools and Crafts, the Terminology of Textile Manufacturing in 1st-Millennium BC Babylonia Louise Quillien Université Paris 1 Panthéon- Sorbonne Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/texterm Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, Art and Materials Conservation Commons, Classical Archaeology and Art History Commons, Classical Literature and Philology Commons, Fiber, Textile, and Weaving Arts Commons, Indo-European Linguistics and Philology Commons, Jewish Studies Commons, Museum Studies Commons, Near Eastern Languages and Societies Commons, and the Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Quillien, Louise, "Tools and Crafts, the eT rminology of Textile Manufacturing in 1st-Millennium BC Babylonia" (2017). Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD. 2. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/texterm/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Centre for Textile Research at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Tools and Crafts, the Terminology of Textile Manufacturing in 1st- Millennium BC Babylonia Louise Quillien, Université Paris 1 Panthéon- Sorbonne In Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD, ed. Salvatore Gaspa, Cécile Michel, & Marie-Louise Nosch (Lincoln, NE: Zea Books, 2017), pp. 91-106. doi:10.13014/K2416V6Z Copyright © 2017 Salvatore Gaspa, Cécile Michel, & Marie-Louise Nosch. Photographs copyright as noted. 4 Tools and Crafts, the Terminology of Textile Manufacturing in 1st-Millennium BC Babylonia Louise Quillien hat did sheep shears in the 1st millennium changes in the textile craft that are visible through an BC Babylonia look like? We are not sure. analysis of the vocabulary. W Many cuneiform texts were written about Textile tools were objects of everyday life, they textile work in Babylonia, but it was largely about were handled manually to transform the raw materials administration or accounting. There were hardly any into finished woven products. They included all the descriptions of the actual tools and processes. In this implements used at different stages of fibre prepara- article we go back over the words, the iconography, tion, spinning, and weaving, as well as dyeing, wash- and the archaeology in an attempt to find these miss- ing, decorating and the repair of fabrics. An approach ing descriptions. This study is limited to Babylonia that combines the study of vocabulary of tools with during the 1st millennium BC, and this period cor- the study of action verbs related to textile manufactur- respond to a state of the Akkadian language, called ing can bring information about the techniques known Neo-Babylonian. At these times, major evolution took in 1st millennium BC. place. Mesopotamia entered in the Iron Age at the In Babylonia, during the 1st millennium BC, the end of the 2nd millennium BC. Empires were built textile craft was well-developed. Textiles were widely (Neo-Assyrian 911-610 BC, Neo-Babylonian 610-539 used in transportation, in home furnishing as well as BC BC, Achaemenid 539-330 and Hellenistic 330-64 for clothing. Common domestic production and lux- BC). Most of the cuneiform documentation of that ury production both existed with the former being period discovered by the archaeological excavations much less documented than the latter. Luxury pro- is dated from the “long 6th century BC”.2 At these duction was organized by the temples, and probably times, Babylonia enjoyed an economic growth, long- also by the palaces.4 Wool was the most commonly distance trade developed, and the temples has an im- used raw material.5 Flax was rare but present, and portant economic weight.3 All these factors induce cotton appeared at these times in Babylonia.6 Special 1. I deeply thank Elizabeth Payne and Michael Jursa for sharing with me transliterations of unpublished texts from the Yale Babylo- nian Collection, and Walter Farber for providing permission to reproduce the image of the amulets of the Lamaštu. I also warmly thank Marie-Louise Nosch, Cécile Michel, Salvatore Gaspa, Ariel Rosenblum and Arch Naylor for their help in improving my pa- per. Responsibility for any errors lies with me. 2. Jursa 2010, 7. A synthesis of the Neo-Babylonian cuneiform documentation can be found in Jursa 2005. 3. See Jursa 2010 for the evolution of the economy of Mesopotamia in 1st millennium BC. 4. About the use of textiles in the temples during the Neo-Babylonian period see Zawadzki 2006 and 2013; Beaulieu 2003. The Neo- Babylonian and Achaemenid textile production in the palaces is poorly documented, but if we compare with the situation in Mari or in the Neo-Assyrian period, one can hypothesis that the Babylonian palaces were important centres of a luxury textile production. 5. The volume of Breniquet & Michel 2014 has demonstrated the importance of wool in Mesopotamia’s economy since the 4th mil- lennium BC. 6. About flax, see Quillien 2014 and about cotton, see Zawadzki 2006, 25-29 and Muthukumaran 2016, 98-105. 91 92 Louise Quillien in Textile Terminologies (2017) products like Egyptian flax, purple wool or special specific tasks (to spin, to weave, to decorate, to dye, dyes, especially destined for luxury production, were to wash, to repair) and finished products delivered to imported through long distance trade.7 Manufactur- the temples by craftsmen. These texts were written by ing techniques were complex: the luxury textiles were temple scribes to control the quality and quantity of adorned with metal appliqué, tassels, and embroi- textiles made by the craftsmen and to managed their dery.8 The vocabulary of tools and action verbs deal- work.11 However, these texts do not describe specif- ing with textile production gives some information ics of workers tasks, and most of the time craftsmen about the different tasks accomplished by the textile used their own tools. What was common was not craftsmen, and about the techniques they mastered. written down, for instance the clay tools like loom Important works about textile tools in Mesopota- weights were not recorded in the texts. Therefore, mia include the book by Catherine Breniquet Essai with the exception of some metal objects, the descrip- sur le tissage en Mesopotamie and the articles by Eva tive vocabulary of textile tools themselves remains Andersson Strand, Agnete Wisti Lassen, and Caroline scarce throughout these cuneiform tablets. The ac- Sauvage.9 Using the context of these previous works tion verbs of textile work are more frequent because supported by the Neo-Babylonian documentation, the texts sometimes mention which task has to be per- question is how studying tool terminology and action formed by the craftsmen with the material given to verbs can improve our understanding of the function them. These verbs reveal some of the stages of the of the textile production in 1st-millennium BC Meso- chaîne opératoire and show the specialisation of the potamia. Does textile terminology reveal evolutions craftsmen in one or several tasks. This temple admin- at this late period of Mesopotamian history? istrative documentation is complemented by some rit- ual texts and lexical lists where the terminology of The sources textile tools is mentioned. Private archives of rich ur- ban families sometimes mention textile work, for in- The cuneiform sources from Babylonia dealing with stance in letters. They come from a greater number of textiles and dated from the 1st millennium BC mostly cities: Uruk, Sippar, Babylon, Ur, Nippur, Borsippa. comes from the temples of Uruk and Sippar. They are Although the textual records are the primary sources administrative documents, written by scribes whose that elucidate the meaning of this vocabulary, some- purpose was to organize and control the production of times it is possible to compare these terms with the the textiles made especially for the clothing of gods’ iconographical representations and with the archae- statues and for the cult. In the temples, the garments ological remains. of deities were regularly renewed, and the statues’ at- tires were changed several times a year during cere- From fibre to thread monies called lubuštu (dressing).10 This regular need for clean or new items was an important factor for The collection of the fibres the growing production of luxury textiles in the Neo- Babylonian temples. Cuneiform texts do not describe the processes of pre- The texts from Babylonian temple archives deal- paring fibres for spinning. Indeed, these steps were ing with textile production mostly date to the “long very commonly performed and there was no need to 6th century BC”. They record materials given to put them down in writing. Only shearing is well doc- craftsmen by the temple’s administration to perform umented in texts dealing with the managing of the 7. Graslin 2009, Quillien 2015. 8. These different techniques can be seen, for the Neo-Assyrian period, on the palaces’ bas-reliefs and the paintings. We will see that they were also known by Neo-Babylonian craftsmen. 9. Breniquet 2008; Andersson 2010; Wisti Lassen 2010; Sauvage 2015. 10. About the lubuštu ceremony and the garments of the gods see Matsushima 1994 and 1998, Beaulieu 2003, Zawadzki 2006. 11. Zawadzki 2006 explains in detail this organization for the temple of Sippar. 4. Tools and Crafts in 1st-Millennium BC Babylonia 93 temples’ large flocks.12 The tool used for shearing is the tools after the completion of their tasks, proba- named sirpu in Akkadian. The Chicago Assyrian Dic- bly at the end of the season.17 Sometimes, the Ebab- tionary (CAD) translates it as ‘shears, scissors’.13 We bar temple of Sippar did not have enough sirpu and do not know if this tool had one or two blades.