The Early History of the Ancient Near East (9000-2000 BC)

by Hans J Nissen

  In all cases, it was supposed to prevent unauthorized people from gaining access to what had been sealed. If the seal used bore an unambiguous representation by which anyone could recognize its owner, it is clear that there was a direct connection between the act of sealing and a particular person. If this person was the one in charge of the particular economic sphere in question, then by virtue of the authority of the seal, any tampering with what had been sealed could be ruled out.

  Cylinder seals were better suited to this type of sealing than the commonly used, earlier stamp seals because they could ensure the inviolability of a much greater surface area. In fact, the bands of cylinder impressions are often so close to one another on the clay that there is not a single piece of the sealed object that does not bear an impression. Seals, then, were instruments of economic control that could be used effectively to guarantee the supervision of proceedings, even more when the amount of information exceeded what a single individual was capable of surveying, or remembering. Representations on cylinder seals therefore served two purposes. First, they had to fill up the field so that after the seal was used every part of the surface would contain recognizable traces of the original. Second, they had to permit the identification of the person who, by the act of sealing, wanted to be sure that something would remain intact.

  Figure 27. Photo and graphic reconstruction of a fragmentary jar cover, from Uruk. Courtesy, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Abteilung Baghdad. (Cf. Uruk Vorbericht 15 [1959], pls. 28a and 30a).

  Figure 28. Cylinder seal and impression from the abstract group. Height 2.4 cm. Collection of the Seminar für Vorderasiatische Altertumskunde, Freie Universität, Berlin. Photo M. Nissen. (See U. Moortgat-Correns, “Die ehem. Rollsiegel-Sammlung E. Oppenländer,” Baghd. Mitt. 4 [1968], no. 14.)

  By looking at the types of representations found on earlier cylinder seals, we can go on beyond the general observation that seals had an economic function. The fact that the representation on a seal also served to identify the seal’s owner means that the breadth of variation in seal designs had to be great enough to ensure that every seal owner could be unmistakably identified by a particular design. In fact, we find that the majority of seals have designs that allow for a large amount of variation. These are mainly figurative representations composed of various human and animal forms engaged in a variety of activities (see, for example, figure 27). The fine elaboration of detail also served to increase the number of possibilities for variation (fig. 26a–c). The number of major themes—worshipping at a temple, processions of boats, prisoners before a ruler, the feeding of animals, rows of animals, and battles between wild and domestic animals—seems to have been limited. But by a change in just one detail an unmistakable original was created for each individual case.

  There is, however, a large group of contemporary cylinder seals whose representations do not fit into this pattern (fig. 26d–f). These seals differ from those mentioned above in a number of ways. They are predominantly much smaller and have different proportions, and the ratio of the length of the cylinder to its diameter is 1:1, whereas for the former group this relationship is for the most part close to 2:1. More important, however, is the fact that these seals feature almost unrecognizably abstract symbols or geometric patterns, so that the seal impressions are so alike that it is very hard to imagine identifying the seal’s owner on the basis of the pattern alone.

  A further fundamental difference between the two groups of seals has to do with their manufacture. Whereas the representations in the figurative group were carved with extreme attention to detail, from clothing and jewelry to finely defined aspects of physique and hairstyle that could only be achieved with the finest tools, the “abstract” patterns were made exclusively with mechanical tools such as drills or cutting wheels. These are only capable of producing rough shapes—semispherical indentations and straight lines—that produce barely distinguishable patterns.

  Cylinder seals from this “abstract” group could be made in a fraction of the time it would take to prepare a “figurative” seal. To attribute the differences between the two groups of seals merely to differences in the owners’ social status is not an entirely satisfactory explanation, however, particularly since it is difficult to understand why lower-level administrators would not also need some means of identification.

  Perhaps the answer lies in a slightly different direction and can be expressed in terms of “individual seals” versus “collective seals.” To put it more clearly, we may assume a difference in the use to which the seals were put. In the one case, the kind of business needed the responsibility for its transaction, respectively a guarantee, to be ascribable to an individual. In the other case, responsibility was assumed exclusively by the administration or a branch thereof. The act of sealing could thus have been undertaken by any number of representatives of that administrative unit. An unusual archaeological situation could fit in with this assumption. Numerous clay fragments with “figurative” impressions on them (more than two thousand from the excavations in the so-called archaic levels at Uruk alone) have been found, but hardly any original seals. On the other hand, many original “abstract” seals have been found, but very few remains of sealings. Whatever the explanation may be, the two types of seals were evidently used in different ways and in different places. Unfortunately, almost all our sealings and original seals come from rubble levels, so that it is impossible to assign them to particular spheres of activity.

  In the next phase, the Jamdet Nasr period, the visible differences between the two types of seal are less apparent, in that the figurative seals, formerly so detailed, were now made with the help of mechanical tools, making the reproduction of detail less and less possible (fig. 26g). However, the basic distinction remains. It is only in the following phase, the Early Dynastic I period, that new criteria come into play. The representation of one theme of the figurative seals—rows of animals—becomes, under the influence exercised on design by the cutting wheel, a highly decorative basket-weave, which fills the whole surface of the seal in a most ingenious manner (fig. 29d), though in these “brocade” seals we find none of the breadth of variation that distinguished earlier representations of this theme. Whereas “abstract” seals still remained in use (fig. 29a; fig. 26d–f, h), a new group of “figurative” seals arose at this time, which, although they almost exclusively represent the theme of “fighting animals” in a new style, maintain the desired range of variation, thanks to a great delight in detail (fig. 29b).

  Figure 29. Seals of the Early Dynastic I period, from Babylonia. From (a) H. Frankfort, Stratified Cylinder Seals from the Diyala Region, OIP 72 (Chicago, 1955), no. 448. Courtesy, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago; (d) no. 236; (c) after L. Legrain, “Archaic Seal-Impressions,” Ur Excavations III (London, 1936), no. 431. Courtesy, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago; (b) E. Heinrich, Fara (Berlin, 1931), pl. 54c.

  For the sake of completeness, yet another group of seals from the Early Dynastic I period should be mentioned here, even though it cannot be included in the above development. This group, which will be discussed later, is known to us only from seal impressions. The actual seals were apparently very large and had, as their sole decorative motif, rows of artistically rendered cuneiform signs spelling out the names of a varying number of Babylonian cities (fig. 29c). These seals must certainly be attributed to a third functional category.

  In addition to the examples already mentioned, we have further evidence leading us to the assumption that the highly developed economic organization during the period of early high civilization required not only abstract methods of control but also other organizational aids. Given a highly developed division of labor and a well-defined hierarchy in the administration, the professions, and the political leadership, the stage of the village economy had been abandoned long before. In addition to the seals already referred to, further examples of this high level of development are provided both by one of the oldest pieces of written evidence an
d by the site of a former workshop area in the city of Uruk.

  Figure 30. Cylinder seal and impression of the linear style group. Height 1.5 cm. Collection of the Seminar für Vorderasiatische Altertumskunde, Freie Universität, Berlin. Photo M. Nissen. (Cf. U. Moortgat-Correns, “Die ehem. Rollsiegel-Sammlung E. Oppenländer,” Baghd. Mitt. 4 [1968], no. 5.)

  Among the most ancient written documents, which appear at the end of the Lake Uruk period, we find a fragment of a text known in its more complete form from many copies made during the next phase (fig. 31). From then on, up to the period of the Akkad Dynasty, this text was so carefully and repeatedly copied that we have an unbroken text tradition spanning more than seven hundred years. The text takes the form of a list, and is a collection of groups of signs that, as far as we know, represent the titles of officials and names of professions. Although, for the time being, we do not understand all the entries, the principles behind the arrangement emerge clearly. First come the signs of the holders of the highest offices, followed by those of officials, priests, and the specialist professions; not until the end is there a series of symbols for simple occupations. If this sequence clearly points to a hierarchical way of thinking, in which there seems to have been considerable consciousness of a fixed division of duties and offices according to rank, this impression is only further underlined by the fact that there is evidence for internal subdivision within the individual offices and professions. Three or four different ranks can be defined for one and the same description of a particular office or profession, where the top rank is, in every case, referred to as “Head X.” Hence, not only are the different offices arranged in a specific order with regard to one another; there are also clearly separate ranks within each of the offices and professions.

  The second example can be found in the site of a manufactory excavated in Uruk (fig. 32). On a gently sloping, smooth area of ground whose surface has been baked to a gritty, brick-red, consistency by high temperatures, U-shaped channels with a cross section of about twenty by twenty centimeters have been dug out parallel to the gradient. Along the sides of the channels are rows of oval holes, eighty by forty centimeters in area and about fifty centimeters deep, whose walls have also been subjected to high temperatures. Like the channels, these holes were found to be filled with the remains of ashes when excavated.

  Figure 31. Copies of the Standard Professions List A: (a) dating to the Jamdet Nasr period, from Uruk; (b) dating to the end of the Early Dynastic II period, from Shuruppak. From (a) author’s original, and (b) A. Deimel, “Schultexte aus Fara,” Wiss. Veröff., der Deutschen Or. Ges. 43 (1923): 71.

  The remarkable thing is that these fire holes, which are spaced in two or three concentric rows around the channels, are staggered in the direction of the channels. This means that there was unimpeded access to a part of the channel from each fire hole. Unfortunately, the excavations provided no direct indication as to what was produced or processed there. The only thing that is unambiguously clear is that the work involved very high temperatures. This is also suggested by the greasy black ash, which proved to be the burnt-out residue of bitumen, which lay around everywhere as cakes of fuel in the open areas that were part of the layout.

  The idea that there was a metal smelting works here must unfortunately remain pure conjecture. A highly restrictive disadvantage of that period—the fact that only very small quantities of metal could be smelted at one time—could have been circumvented by pouring many such small quantities into the previously heated runoff channels, thus combining them to cast larger objects. This would fit in quite well with the fact that a whole series of Uruk texts from the period of early high civilization deal with metals and metal objects.

  Figure 32. Fire troughs and fire pits of a workshop area in Uruk, dating to the Late Uruk period. Author’s original. (See H. J. Nissen, “Grabung in den Quadraten K/L XII in Uruk-Warka,” Baghd. Mitt. 5 (1970), pl. 6).

  Even if we consider this interpretation too daring, there were quite clearly a number of people here doing the same job with a common aim. What we have here, therefore, is a classic case of intensification of labor, characteristic of a highly structured division of labor in the society in question.

  On the basis of these two examples, it seems valid to speculate that the economic units of the Late Uruk period were rigidly structured; notwithstanding that for the present we have almost no direct evidence about what must surely have been the largest components of such units—that is, about agriculture and animal husbandry. However, it must be remembered that all of our examples come from the center of Uruk, and here, too, only from the central area of the sanctuary of Eanna, because hardly any other levels of this period have been reached. If we continue with the above train of thought and assume that these economic units must have been of a considerable size, or even that they were central to a city’s economic activity, we must still concede that in the countryside there may well have been totally different forms of organization, of which we are ignorant only because no research has been done in that area. For the time being, therefore, this is no subject for generalizations.

  In Uruk itself, it was clearly the very large economic unit of Eanna (fig. 38) that controlled not only agriculture, animal husbandry, and the crafts, but also trade, and that was responsible for delivering raw materials to this land that was so poor in them. Clearly, it was also responsible for the building and maintenance of the temple complex, as well as for the organization of religious festivals and the supervision of sacrifices. We find evidence for this in the numerous lists of allowances for festivals and sacrifices found among the texts of this period.

  The size of the economic units is also substantiated by another type of find, which, at the same time, allows further advances in our knowledge of the character of economic organization in Uruk. Isolated examples of ceramic bowls differing considerably from other pottery of the same period had already been found in levels from the Early Uruk period. The bowls in question have a sloping edge and were made out of some very coarse, and therefore extremely porous, material. Among archaeologists, they are known as “bevel-rimmed bowls” (figs. 33, 36e). Some consideration of how these vessels must have been produced led to the observation that, unlike all the other pottery of this period, they were molded. These vessels appear in such large quantities from the beginning of the Late Uruk period onward that sometimes more than three quarters of the total amount of pottery found on any one site is of this type.

  Apart from occasional larger and smaller versions, the majority of these bowls are all of the same size, with little variation. This type of bowl is, therefore, clearly so special, given the properties we have mentioned above, that we are forced to assume that it had a rather specialized function. Cheap and rapid mass production of millions of bowls of uniform size suitable only for use as containers for solid matter immediately leads us to think of a characteristic of economic organization that is not, however, actually shown to have existed until over six hundred years later.

  We know from written texts of later periods that the enormous armies of workers in large economic units were paid in kind—that is, in daily rations. The major part of these rations was made up of grain. Unfortunately, at the moment we still do not know whether this kind of payment was also customary in the Late Uruk period, and if this were the case we would still have no precise knowledge about the method of distribution.

  Nevertheless, not only do all the special characteristics of these bowls point to their being containers for the distribution of the grain ration, but the capacity of one of these vessels corresponds almost exactly to what we know to have been a laborer’s daily ration. In addition, this is supported by the theory that the symbol for “to eat” in the most ancient texts is made up of the pictorial reproduction of a human head and a bowl that has the same shape as the “bevel-rimmed bowl” (fig. 33). Consequently, these bowls not only provide direct evidence of one aspect of economic organization, but are also indirect proof that units of measurement
were already fixed some time before the period when standardization of units of measurement, which must certainly have also existed in other fields, can be included unequivocally among the methods of economic control (a development that can be irrefutably confirmed with the aid of the earliest written documents).

  Figure 33. Bevel-rimmed bowl and the stage IV and III forms of the sign for “to eat.” Author’s original.

  It seems almost incredible that what was obviously already a very complex administration should have managed to survive for long using simple methods of control we have been dealing with up to now. Hence we can well imagine that an attempt would have been made to expand the system of methods available to facilitate control.

  In fact, during the Late Uruk period, we see the emergence of several different methods of this kind, until finally, at the end of this era, writing appears in its first form. In this case, too, the relevant discoveries are almost exclusively from the excavations of Uruk, although they all come, unfortunately, from old rubbish heaps in the central area of the city.

  Tally stones are one ancient method of aiding the memory while counting (fig. 34c). While a herd of animals was being counted, for example, a stone was thrown on a pile or dropped into a container for every tenth or xth animal. By this method only the number can be fixed, and this only for as long as the stones or tokens are kept together. Every other aspect of the process, such as the kind of animals, the place, the time, or the people involved, must be obtained by recourse to the memory of the people taking part.