Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:44:08.267Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Glass Inlays and the Classification and Dating of Ivories from the Ninth-Eighth Centuries B.C.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

D. Barag
D. Barag
Affiliation:
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The extensive use of glass inlays on ivories and as separate inlays together with ivories, presumably on the same furniture, is one of the features characteristic of Western Asiatic ivories dating from the ninth and eighth centuries B.C. Their introduction marked a clear departure from second millennium B.C. traditions of ivory carving and their disappearance after the eighth century B.C. coincided with the end of the Golden Age of Western Asiatic ivory carving.

In this discussion I intend to call attention to some phenomena connected with the use of glass inlays on and together with ivories from the ninth and eighth centuries B.C. rather than presenting a full review of the subject — a project beyond the scope of the present study. It will be shown that the distinction between non-inlaid and inlaid groups of ivories in Phoenician style has a bearing on their attribution to different workshops and possibly also on their chronology.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anatolian Studies , Volume 33 , December 1983 , pp. 163 - 167
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute at Ankara 1983

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

1 Layard, A. H., Nineveh and Its Remains, London, 1849, II, pp. 420–1Google Scholar.

2 Barnett, R. D., A Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivories… in the British Museum, London, 1957, p. 156Google Scholar (Henceforth CNI. A revised and enlarged 2nd edition was published in 1975).

3 Poulsen, F., Der Orient und die frühgriechische Kunst, Leipzig, 1912, pp. 38–53Google Scholar.

4 Barnett, R. D., “The Nimrud Ivories and the Art of the Phoenicians”, Iraq II (1935), pp. 179–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, “Phoenician and Syrian Ivory Carving”, PEQ lxxi (1939), pp. 4–19; CNI, pp. 44–52, 63–110; idem, Ancient Ivories in the Middle East, Jerusalem, 1982 (=Qedem xiv; henceforth Qedem), pp. 43–6.

5 CNI, pp. 46 f.; idem, “Hamath and Nimrud”, Iraq xxv (1963), pp. 81–5.

6 Winter, I. J.. “Carved Ivory Panels from Nimrud: A Coherent Subgroup of the North Syrian Style”, Metropolitan Museum Journal xi (1976), pp. 25–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Barnett, , Qedem, p. 46Google Scholar.

7 Winter, I. J., “Is There a South Syrian Style of Ivory Carving in the Early First Millennium B.C.?”, Iraq xlviii (1981) pp. 101–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Brown, W. L., PEQ XC (1958), pp. 66–8Google Scholar (review of CNI).

9 Barnett, Qedem, pls. 6c–d, 23b, 25g, 28a, 42.

10 B.M. 38183, see CNI, p. 156. This seems to be a rare forerunner of the inlaid ivories from the early first millennium B.C.

11 Egyptian Museum, Cairo, 61477, Carter, nos. 540 and 551. For this, often illustrated piece see e.g. Edwards, E. S., Treasures of Tutankhamun, New York, 1976Google Scholar, no. 51, pls. 32–3; cf. also Barnett, , Qedem, p. 20, pl. 9Google Scholar.

12 CNI, pp. 156–7 and Qedem, pp. 14, 44.

13 Barnett, , Qedem, p. 14 (f)Google Scholar. Winter, op. cit. n. 7, p. 110 refers to this kind as the “silhouette”-inlay group.

14 Thureau-Dangin, F. et al. , Arslan-Tash, Paris, 1931, p. 131Google Scholar, pl. xlvii, 113–4, 116–7; Thimme, J., Phönizische Elfenbeine, Möbelverzierungen des 9. Jahrhunderts v. Chr., (Bildhefte des badischen Landesmuseums), Karlsruhe, 1973, p. xviiGoogle Scholar, figs. G and 36. Muscarella, O. White (ed.), Ladders to Heaven, Art Treasures from Lands of the Bible, Toronto, 1979, p. 285Google Scholar, no. 264, pl. xxii. The glass inlays used on and together with ninth—eighth centuries B.C. ivories require a separate study. For a short review see my forthcoming Catalogue of Western Asiatic Glass in the British Museum, ch. 2 and nos. 53–9.

15 Crowfoot, J. W. and Crowfoot, G. M., Early Ivories from Samaria, London, 1938, pp. 44Google Scholar, no. 5, 45, no. 10, 46, nos. 8–10, pl. xxiv, 2, a–c, e, g, 8–10. von Saldern, A. in Mallowan, M. E. L., Nimrud and Its Remains, London, 1966, pp. 632 f.Google Scholar, fig. 593; idem in A. L. Oppenheim, R. H. Brill, D. Barag, A. von Saldern, Glass and Glassmaking in Ancient Mesopotamia, Corning, 1970, pp. 209, 224, no. 39, fig. 36c. A single, opaque light blue, square inlay piece (32 × 31 mm., 3 mm. thick), decorated with a white six petalled rosette was discovered at Megiddo (Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, no. 15945, unpublished). This single inlay piece is perhaps all that survived at Megiddo from ivory inlaid furniture of the Arslan-Tash type.

16 Thimme, op. cit., n. 14, fig. 14; Muscarella, op. cit., n. 14, no. 252 and with the glass inlays not preserved, Thureau-Dangin, op. cit., n. 14, pls. xxxv, 52–54, xxxvi, 56–59.

17 Crowfoot, op. cit., n. 15, pp. 1–55; Barnett, , CNI, pp. 124 f.Google Scholar, Qedem, p. 49; Winter, op. cit., n. 7, pp. 109–15, 123–7.

18 Barnett, , CNI, pp. 126 f.Google Scholar, Qedem, pp. 48 f.; Winter, op. cit. n. 7, pp. 103–9, 121–3. See also Puech, E., “L'ivoire inscrit d'Arslan-Tash et les rois de Damas”, Revue Biblique lxxxviii (1981), pp. 544–62 and pp. 561 fGoogle Scholar. in particular.

19 Muscarella, O. White, The Catalogue of Ivories from Hasanlu, Iran (University Museum Monograph 40), Philadelphia, 1980, nos. 222, 226–8, 229, 231, 234, 235A, 267, 276–8Google Scholar (Syrian style), nos. 125, 126, 211 (local style).

20 Ibid., p. 220.

21 Crowfoot, op. cit., n. 15, appendix ii, pp. 56–9.

22 Barag, D., “Cosmetic Glass Palettes from the eighth—seventh centuries B.C.”, Journal of Glass Studies xxiv (1982), pp. 16–18Google Scholar.