Ancient Mesopotamian Materials and Industries: the Archaeological Evidence by P
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Our Past Matters: Materials and Industries of the Ancient Near East Ancient Mesopotamian Materials and Industries: The Archaeological Evidence by P. R. S. Moorey Review by: C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 117, No. 1 (Jan. - Mar., 1997), pp. 87-102 Published by: American Oriental Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/605624 . Accessed: 15/12/2011 01:40 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the American Oriental Society. http://www.jstor.org REVIEW ARTICLES OUR PAST MATTERS: MATERIALS AND INDUSTRIES OF THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST* C. C. LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY HARVARDUNIVERSITY The volumeunder review contains a muchneeded synthesis of the majorindustries and technolo- gies of the ancientNear East. Although the geographicalemphasis is on Mesopotamia,the author's rangeextends from Anatolia to the IndusValley and from central Asia to the ArabianPeninsula. The chronologicalfocus is on the Bronzeand Iron Ages withinthe aboveregions. The book is an indis- pensableguide to the archaeologicaldiscoveries, physico-chemical analysis, and textualreferences pertainingto the craftsof pottery,metal, glass, faience,and stone working, and to the role of bricks, mortar,and plaster in architecturalconstruction. The created world is but a small parenthesis in eternity. Sir ThomasBrowne ARCHAEOLOGISTSAREPREDISPOSED TODIGGING things ivory, and so on analyzed, as well as botanical and zoo- up. In the early days of the discipline, success was reck- logical remains. oned by how many excavated objects were worthy of Ancient Mesopotamian Materials and Industries: The museum display. When Near Eastern archaeology was Archaeological Evidence is an indispensable guide to the young, written texts and artifacts pertaining to the Bible technological skills and industrialproducts of the ancient were given a privileged place. At a later time objects Near East. It is a work of exceptional breadth and ex- were deemed especially significant if they contributed emplary scholarship. Although the technological base of to the reconstructionof regional chronologies, diffusion- the majority of materials discussed is firmly embedded ary concerns, and typological classification. Later still in Mesopotamia, the author frequently discusses materi- the artifact was to play its fundamental role in the re- als recovered from Palestine, Anatolia, the Iranian Pla- construction of cultural history and the search for cul- teau, central Asia, and the Indus Valley. This book, like tural processes. Only in recent years have archaeologists Alfred Lucas' Ancient Egyptian Materials and Indus- turned to material scientists in an effort to understand tries (1962), will long endure as a fundamentalreference and reconstructthe propertiesand technologies that form work for the study of ancient Near Eastern technologies. the foundation of the object the archaeologist digs up. It The richness of detail and comprehensive coverage is possible to point out, as Roger Moorey does in the call for a brief review of what is included within each book under review that Sir Austen Henry Layard in the chapter.I shall then comment upon various aspects that I mid-nineteenth century had already analyzed the glazed found of particular interest ("discussion"). It is impor- bricks he had recovered from Borsippa. Such examples tant to note that within each chapter, when detailing a remained rare, even idiosyncratic, undertakingsuntil the specific material and/or technology, the author covers a middle of this century.It is only in the past three decades chronological range that traces the first (prehistoric) use that a significant number of archaeologists have made a of the material and/or technology through to its later systematic effort to have their metals, ceramics, glass, methods of manufacturein the Late Iron Age. A brief introduction reviews evidence for * This is a review article of: Ancient Materi- (pp. 1-19) Mesopotamian "the foundations."In this the author als and Industries: The Archaeological Evidence: By P. R. S. agricultural chapter touches the evidence for the earliest uses of MOOREY.Oxford: CLARENDONPRESS, 1994. Pp. xxiii + 414, upon irriga- 8 plates.$98, CDN$162.50. tion, the plough and the seeder, the use of the shadoof 87 88 Journal of the American Oriental Society 117.1 (1997) and the digging of wells, and the importance of storage while the immediate periphery remained illiterate for facilities. In discussing Mesopotamia's need to procure millennia. And etched carnelian beads appearto have re- distant resources, the author outlines his theoretical po- mained a product of only the craftspeople of the Harap- sition, one which recurs throughoutthe work: pan civilization. Additional examples for the restricted geographicaldistribution of specific materials,their tech- In the ancientNear East, differences in technologywere niques of production, and their slow diffusion could be relativelysmall and the problems of long-distancetravel cited (Hodges 1964). Indeed technologies such as the unaidedby waterwere so greatthat significant economic production of carbon steel in Luristantoward the end of differentiationand exploitation were relatively rare. But, the second millennium appear to have been invented whenthey existed, their importance was proportionately and then become extinct (Smith 1971). That some tech- greater.The contrast between Mesopotamia and her high- nologies may have been held as the secret knowledge of land neighborswas not just one of unequalaccess to their producers is indicated by a colophon found in raw materials,but also of unequaldegrees of socio- second-millennium texts: "Let the initiate show the ini- economicorganization and complexity. The urban crafts tiate, the non-initiate shall not see it. It belongs to the ta- andindustries of Mesopotamiawere as dependenton the booed things of the greatgods" (cited in Saggs 1962:471). highly organizedlabor of those who producedbut did In Mesopotamia occupational skill in the craft, mili- notparticipate in theconsumption of whatwas tradedas tary, and scribal (administrative) spheres offered the in- theywere on sustainedaccess to foreignmaterials. (p. 5) dividual social mobility. It is not unlikely that closely held technological knowledge would enhance one's po- In considering productionand consumption, within the sition, if not one's wealth. Clearly "technology," like its context of exchange, the author correctly considers re- parent the "economy," is embedded in society; techno- ciprocal, redistributive,and commercial structuresas co- logical systems and economic structuresare given defini- existing systems within the Mesopotamian economy; to tion by the specific structuralcharacteristics of the social which might be added tribute and warfare. Fundamental order.Nevertheless, the origins of a technology may dif- to a consideration of Mesopotamian resource procure- fer fundamentally from its later practice. Summarizing ment is an understandingof land and water routes as well the views of Sasson (1968), discussing the "later prac- as the means of transportand the role of nomads. The au- tice" of the artisansof Mari, Moorey writes: "They were thor discusses each of these in turn, including the role assessed for their technical rather than their imagina- played by the camel and the horse. tive skills .... Their work was not assessed for its artistic The introduction concludes with a consideration of worth, but for the quality of its production, for its utili- "Crafts and Industry: Methods of Study." One of the tarian and functional adequacy or inadequacy" (p. 15). great strengths of this volume is the interplay of ar- Yet, these conditions were in direct contrast to the man- chaeological and textual data. Where relevant the author ner in which the crafts in Mesopotamia originated. Al- mines a wealth of textual information to shed light on though Moorey does not consider the influential views of specific aspects of distinctive technologies, geography, the late Cyril Smith (1981), his own beliefs appear to be and social institutions. He buttresses the archaeological in accord with them. Smith believed that technologies and textual evidence for reconstructingpast technologies were born from "play";artisans, initially attractedby the by bringing to bear ethnographic analogies, experimen- varying propertiesof materials, began to transformthem tal archaeology, and scientific techniques for identifying in their desire to produce "aesthetic"items. Thus, behind and fingerprintingmaterials in order to determine their the products of an evolved material science, e.g., metal- point of origin and/or manner of manufacture. lurgy, rests the initial motivation of an artisan attempt- Discussion. Moorey would appearto agree with Kohl's ing to manipulate a material (stone/ore) in an effort to recent statement (1989: 234) that "Bronze Age technol- transform it into an aesthetic ARTifact: "The message ogies could not be monopolized but quickly diffused is simple: