Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-21T22:50:27.184Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Excavations at Tall Chagar Bazar and An Archaeological Survey of the Ḫabur Region. Second Campaign, 1936

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

M. E. L. Mallowan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Archaeological Expedition to the Ḫabur region of N. Syria, under the auspices of the British Museum and of the British School of Archaeology in Iraq, undertook a second campaign in the spring of 1936.

The Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, and the Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Cambridge, again provided generous grants, and we are indebted to the authorities of all the institutions concerned for their continued help and encouragement. The civil and military authorities in Syria gave us a cordial welcome on our return, and Monsieur H. Seyrig, the Director of Antiquities for Syria, gave his friendly co-operation in granting us all possible facilities for the continuance of our work. General Jacquot, in Der-ez-Zor, took a friendly interest in our activities, and we are much indebted to the practical help and kindness shown by his officers in Ḥasaka and Kamichlie.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , Autumn 1937 , pp. 91 - 154
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1937

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

page 93 note 1 Cf. p. 178 ff. Gadd, C. J., Tablets from Chagar Bazar, 1936 Google Scholar.

page 94 note 1 It is important to call attention to the fact that the evidence forthcoming from the second campaign at Chagar Bazar suggests that the admittedly provisional dating proposed for levels 1 and 2 at the end of the first campaign was too low. There is little doubt now that the bulk of the material discovered in level 1 is not much later than 1700 B.C. and much of it is contemporary with the First Dynasty of Babylon. Similarly much of the material in level 2 is not later than the Third Dynasty of Ur. Cf. also Appendix on p. 154.

page 94 note 2 Cf. Gadd, C. J., Tablets from Chagar Bazar, 1936, pp. 178–83Google Scholar.

page 94 note 3 Cf. Iraq, vol. III, pt. 1, Fig. 27, no. 20.

page 96 note 1 Cf. also Berytus II, 1935 Google Scholar, Souran et Tell Masin, pl. L, nos. 81, 112, by Du Mesnil du Buisson.

page 96 note 2 Cf. Catalogue, fig. 9, no. 18, p. 128 and footnote note 1 on the same page for analogous figures from Ashur and Gawra.

page 98 note 1 Cf. J. De Morgan, op. cit., Fig. 212, p. 213, Epingles, Bronze III, Veri, Lenkoran.

page 100 note 1 Cf. Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache, XXXVI. 126–9Google Scholar, for the Amarna Stele.

page 100 note 2 G. Contenau et R. Ghirshman, Fouilles du Tepe Giyan, pl. 35, from stratum 3. Cf. J.E.A. XII. 22 Google Scholar.

page 100 note 3 A.A.A. VII, pl. XXII, no. 26, for the example from Deve Huyuk.

page 103 note 1 It is important to note that one good example of the painted Habur ware, very similar in type to the painted examples shown on fig. 21, has been found at Nuzi, east of Tigris, apparently in the Human city. Cf. Starr, R. F. S., Nuzi, vol. 2 Google Scholar, pl. 70 b. The Nuzi specimen is presumably approximately contemporary with the late phase of Chagar Bazar level 1.

page 103 note 2 The Illustrated London News, 10 9, 1937, p. 605 Google Scholar, fig. 4.

page 115 note 1 Cf. Gadd, C. J., Tablets from Chagar Bazar, 1936, pp. 178 ffGoogle Scholar.

page 115 note 2 Cf. pl. XX, no. 4.

page 127 note 1 Cf. also p. 128, n. 1, for reference to an analogous figure from Gawra stratum VI.

page 128 note 1 Another important parallel occurs in stratum 6 at Tepe Gawra, op. cit. pl. LXXVI, no. 1, and p. 159, an anthropomorphic figure, shaped into a bowl with tripod base, again approximately contemporary with the Germayir figure.

page 132 note 1 Cf. Lamb, W. Miss, in Archaeologia, vol. 86, p. 40 Google Scholar, fig. 18, for an example from Kusura, in Phrygia, 3rd millenium B.C. For an analogous specimen from Alishar, stratum 1, cf. E. F. Schmidt, op. cit., pt. 1, fig. 69, b 512.

page 137 note 1 G. Contenau, La Glyptique Syro-Hittite, pl. X, nos. 40–5, for illustrations of certain parallels on Cappadocian seals, e.g. the high hat and the warrior brandishing a club.

page 140 note 1 A second specimen, almost identical with no. 5, was found in B.D. G.139 level 1, intermediate. This form of bowl can also be closely matched by specimens from Nuzi. Cf. Starr, R. F. S., Nuzi, vol. 2 Google Scholar, pls. 86–91, and therefore also has good parallels in the 2nd millennium B.C.

page 145 note 1 The earliest specimens were probably introduced into the Ḫabur between 1900 and 2000 B.c., but only a few were found in the early phase of level 1 and the majority of the specimens illustrated here are therefore likely to be a century or two later than 1900 B.C.

page 146 note 1 N.B.—On fig. 21, no. 13, the top three painted bands on the shoulder are raised by a thickness of about 2 mm. from the body of the vase, thus giving the appearance of ribbing.

page 147 note 1 Cf. also pl. XIX, no. 3.

page 151 note 1 N.B.—Although the bulla was found in level 2 I think it more probable that it belonged originally to level 3 and that it indicates a period transitional between the two levels.