This system, whose “stones,” already in earlier times—especially in Babylonia where there were no stones—had been made of clay and could thus easily be made into different shapes, was refined by having “stones” of different shapes represent different counting units: something numerous finds attest to. A further step was taken by shaping some of the pieces of clay to help one to recognize what was being counted. If such pieces of clay were kept together in containers, it was possible to carry out something like the simplest form of bookkeeping, although this clearly still meant going without a record of all the other important information involved.
The next step, shown by the material we have found, combined this token method and the system of cylinder seals, which had been set up in the meantime. The precise number of clay pieces collected together for a specific operation were now encased in a lump of clay that was moulded into a ball, the outside of which was then covered with impressions, mostly from only one seal (fig. 34b). In this way, two important further aspects could be recorded: (a) since it was possible to identify the seal of a particular person, it became possible to name those who took part in or were responsible for an operation; and (b) here, for the first time, there was a protection against manipulation. It must, however, be conceded that this method was exceedingly laborious, which meant that it was scarcely of use for all the operations involved in economic administration.
Figure 34. Examples of the early development of writing, from Uruk: (a) tablets with numerical signs; (b) and (c) sealed clay bullae and clay tokens; (d) subdivided tablet with numercial signs; (e) simple and (f) complex economic tablets of Late Uruk date (stage IV); (g) complex economic tablet of Jamdet Nasr date (stage III); (h) differently shaped styli and their marks; and (i) their influence on the shape of the signs. Author’s original.
However, there is a direct line of development from here on, insofar as in some cases there are oblong impressions on the outside of such balls that represent numbers, to judge from further developments, and that were intended to make visible on the outside the numbers encased within the ball.
The next development is linked with this one because now, for the first time, we see the emergence of flat clay slabs with the oblong signs for numbers on their surfaces, which may be completely covered by impressions of cylinder seals (fig. 34a). The same matters could now be dealt with in a much simpler way than with the use of the sealed balls. And there was an added advantage, which would later be one of the most important preconditions for the formulation of lengthier texts—with the help of simple incised lines such clay tablets could be subdivided into compartments, each of which could hold a different number (fig. 34d). This meant that several operations could be recorded on one tablet. Obviously, what was actually being counted and the time, place, and so forth still had either to be retained in the memory or distinguished by the use of particular storage places for the tablets.
After so many attempts to expand, in so many directions, the extent of what could be recorded—and there were certainly many others of which we know nothing because they have left no traces—it seems an almost logical conclusion that finally a universal means of control—writing—should have been invented, with the help of which everything could be recorded that seemed worth recording. Thus it was not only possible to record numbers and what was being counted, as well as place, time, and the persons involved. It was now also possible to describe processes that had previously evaded a uniform treatment, either because of the complexity of what was being counted, the greater numbers of people or things involved, or differing aims.
The length of this phase of preliminary testing, which leads us to the conclusion that the inadequacy of the earlier methods must have been very directly felt, certainly led to a situation where, after the idea of writing arose somewhere in the administration, its value was immediately recognized and it was developed into a functional instrument in the shortest time possible.
Figure 35. Complex economic texts dating from (a) stage IV and (b) stage III in Uruk. The number on the reverse results from adding up all the numbers on the obverse (round impressions = 10, elongated impressions = 1). Courtesy, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Abteilung Baghdad.
In fact, writing, in so far as it is identifiable, appears in our finds to be well developed from the outset (fig. 34e–f). Theories that the earliest writing we know of must have had more primitive predecessors can only lead to error if one searches for more primitive signs on, for example, less durable material. As we have seen, there were in fact precursors of writing, but on a different level.
This is also the case if one wishes to pursue the theory that the written sign was merely the two-dimensional transcription of pieces of clay given the shapes of the objects being counted. It may be assumed that some of these forms were taken over in writing. An example of this process of transcription is the reproduction of a container for rations as part of the symbol for “to eat.” However, these tokens should in no way be seen as a sort of early form of writing.
It is not only the existence of writing that bears witness to the complex structure of economic administration. The texts themselves that describe almost exclusively economic processes also come to our aid. We are not yet able to understand these completely; but, even without knowing the contents in every case, we can make some assertions on the basis of the organization of the tablets. Thus, we find numerous tablets where the information is clearly separated into different units. On the obverse we find many different entries in the shape of numbers, together with written symbols that may stand for what was being counted, but might also be personal names. In a second section, the same entries are grouped according to specific criteria, recognizable by the partial addition of individual numbers. In the example illustrated in figure 34g, the total (8) is written in the lefthand column of the tablet. In a third section, usually on the back of the tablet, the subtotals are added up to make a final total. Here, too, we see a strict bookkeeping mentality, and there is no difficulty in matching this to the examples already quoted.
Even if we are still unable to read them in their entirety, many texts can be categorized according to their contents. Thus, for example, we can distinguish between texts concerned with the allotment of sustenance and lists of sacrifices, with the partition of fields and the keeping of herds of animals, and—of special importance to us—with the organization of metal and textile manufacture. The latter texts have a role to play when we come to deal with the commercial links between Babylonia and the surrounding countries.
Until the texts of this period have been completely analyzed, it is not possible to say very much more about economic conditions during the following two phases of the era of early high civilization, the Jamdet Nasr period and the Early Dynastic I period. As far as we can tell, there was a tendency to simplification and acceleration of operations in every sphere. For example, as already mentioned, time-saving mechanical tools such as drills and the grinding or cutting wheel were now increasingly being used in the production of figurative cylinder seals (fig. 26g).
This can also be discerned in a similar way in the production of pottery, where first the technical and then the organizational requirements were satisfied in order to facilitate mass production on the potter’s wheel. It is true that the potter’s wheel was already known in the Uruk period, and that in fact a great deal of the pottery of this period was produced on the wheel. However, in essence, the process involved meant that the amount of clay necessary for each vessel had to be thrown upon the wheel, after which the vessel was completed and then cut away from the clay remaining on the wheel. Then, for the next pot, a new clump of clay had to be thrown. True, there was a need for mass-produced pottery already in the Late Uruk period, but the process described above was evidently too slow. This is the reason why the vessels mass-produced in the Late Uruk period, the “bevel-rimmed bowls,” were produced in molds and not on the potter’s wheel.
The next innovation took place at the beginning
of the second phase of the era of early high civilization, the Jamdet Nasr period. A much larger amount of clay was thrown onto the wheel and formed into a cone, and the individual vessel was produced only from the top part of the cone, so that a shape like an hourglass appeared on the wheel. After the top part of the cone had been cut off just below the narrowest section of the “hourglass,” the production of the next pot could begin at once. We can draw this conclusion from the fact that from now on in many cases, and especially in the case of the so-called “flower pots” (fig. 36f), the base of the pot—formed from the tip of the lower part of the “hourglass”—is slightly extended to make a flat surface on which the pot can stand.
This technique made possible such an acceleration in the production process that the type of pots that succeeded the “bevel-rimmed bowls,” the abovementioned “flower pots,” could now be produced on the wheel. These new, mass-produced pots were so similar to the “bevel-rimmed bowls” in size of vessel, numbers produced, and in every other respect except for method of production that one must assume that they also fulfilled the same function.
This new way of working clay, especially the swift drawing out of the vessel from a rotating cone, demanded an intimate knowledge of the properties of clay. It was only through the creation of a special consistency in the clay that it was possible to avoid any cracking occurring during the process. This different method of preparing the clay was obviously now used to provide the basic material for all the other sorts of pottery as well, and this meant that all the pottery of this period acquired an appearance that distinguishes it from the pottery of the previous period.
In the case of writing as well, this tendency to simplification can be recognized, in that it was changed within a very short space of time so that it became much easier to use. This was achieved more than anything else through a change in writing techniques. The signs that made up the first stage of writing, from the end of the Late Uruk period, which were in part still highly pictorial, had been incised into the surface of clay tablets with a pointed stylus. In a few isolated cases, short, straight lines were impressed on the clay within the sign by holding the stylus faced at an angle. Making impressions of this sort with a stylus faced with a triangular point now became the main writing technique, which of course made it much faster to write than was possible by the old technique of incising (figs. 34h, 53).
Figure 36. Pottery vessels of the Late Uruk (a, c–e) and the Jamdet Nasr periods (b, f); (e) is a bevel-rimmed bowl, (f) a conical cup. Author’s original; (b) after E. Mackay, Report on Excavations at Jamdet Nasr, Iraq (Chicago, 1931), pl. 78, 1.
Although the same symbols were used, and certainly the same language was being reproduced by them, many of the symbols were completely changed in their form because of the new writing technique, since not only were all superfluous details now omitted, but the fact that this kind of impression allowed only for straight lines also led to all the lines that had previously been rounded being replaced by short, straight lines (figs. 34i, 53). In addition, this new method of making slanting impressions in the clay meant that these straight lines now received a “head,” which was more deeply impressed and therefore wider. Thus, the lines developed a wedge shape that was to give this type of writing its name, “cuneiform script” (fig. 53). As a parallel development, writing was also made easier by the fact that a whole series of complicated symbols were eliminated.
The changes in the way writing was used may also well have had their basis in the increased need an expanding economy must have had of scribes. Analogous further developments extending into the Early Dynastic I period also suggest indirectly that for this period, too, there must have been further developments in the field of administration. However, we have no direct evidence of this because there is a gap in the research that has been done.
The discovery of the introduction of a new building material in the Early Dynastic I period brings us to a further chapter in the changes in the socioeconomic sphere. On account of its cake-shaped, domed upper surface, this technically rather strange building material is called the “plano-convex brick” (fig. 37). This form of brick remained the standard Babylonian building material for every kind of building for almost five hundred years. The introduction of this type of brick, which is specially suitable neither for laying in normal flat courses nor for bonding, is really most curious, especially since flat bricks that were, to some extent, suitable for bonding had already been in use for thousands of years. The Late Uruk period in particular had developed, in the so-called Riemchen, a long, thin brick that was almost square in cross section, a building material that not only served to construct very stable walls but also made possible the multitude of patterns on the facades of public buildings that were so greatly favored during this period.
Figure 37. Shape and employment of the plano-convex bricks of the Early Dynastic period. After P. P. Delougaz, “Plano-convex Bricks and the Methods of Their Employment,” Stud. in Anc. Or. Civ. 7 (1933), fig. 23.
One clue as to a possible explanation for the development of this new form of brick arises from the ways in which it was used, which, like the brick itself, diverge completely from the norm. Whereas the structurally important parts of a building, such as the corners or the door frames, were built up in columns made up of flat layers with the aid of a lot of mortar to fill the gaps, the sections of wall in between were constructed with the bricks set at an angle, resulting in courses that were less stable, but much quicker to construct. The bricks were laid at alternating angles. The overall impression produced by this sort of building technique is the characteristic herringbone pattern. The one convex side, which offers only a thin area of contact to the flat underside of the next brick makes it possible—because of this curved shape—to correct the direction of the brick at any point in the construction. The height of the layer of bricks can also be corrected, so that normally this type of bricklaying can be carried out very quickly and completely without attention to detail. The fact that a greater amount of mortar is necessary and that this can easily be smeared into any hollow spaces makes the speed of construction of these portions of wall even greater. This restriction of major effort to the building of the structurally important parts fits in completely with the picture sketched above. If, in addition, it is assumed that this technique made it possible for experienced and inexperienced people to work hand in hand, we would have yet another example of an expansion in the division of labor.
Although detailed evidence about economic conditions is not yet available, the examples mentioned provide a very good general impression of the state of development. Unfortunately, our information about the social sphere is far more limited. Here again, we can only exploit the previously mentioned examples, which support our assumption of a rigidly stratified society. Thus, the idea that extended families or clans no longer played a decisive role, as they must probably have done in earlier periods, is an attractive one. A wish to show this in detail, or any attempt to define individual groups or classes within the population, would place far too heavy a burden on our material.
Living quarters from this period, which could tell us something about daily life, have not yet been excavated, and the texts from this, the earliest stage in the development of writing, which would most likely tell of the functions and offices held by members of the upper class, are still not completely comprehensible to us. The only thing that is definitely clear from the examples we have mentioned is that an upper class must have existed.
Naturally, one possible way to arrive at a more exact classification of the different social strata would be to attempt to apply the social relationships we know of from a later period to this society. Here, however, we must take warning from a few instances in which, although clearly the same title is used in the early period as in the later one, its meaning is obviously different. There are also examples where we have evidence to show that different titles were used for the same office. So, for example, the titles “en-priest” and “lu
gal” do appear in the early texts, and both can later be used to designate the highest representatives of a city-state or a state, but they appear in isolated cases and in situations where, according to the context, they can only mean a functionary among other functionaires. In addition, in one case they both appear on the same tablet, although they later appear to be mutually exclusive as titles.
On the other hand, the aforementioned list of names of professionals and officials (fig. 31) begins with a title—not yet completely decipherable—which, in a word list of a very much later date is translated by the word for “king.” Hence the titles of the higher offices were probably subject to certain changes during the period between the earliest texts and the later historical texts, which we cannot yet define because of our lack of material. Probably it was not merely the titles that changed, but above all the offices themselves. Here we must take special note of the fact that in the professions list a title appears among the highest functionaries that, at a later date, means “leader of the council.” If this also applies to the period of early high civilization, what function would the council have had, and who belonged to it? These are all questions that we are unable to answer for the time being.
We have noted that the need to resolve social conflicts produced by living together in close proximity in towns and cities triggered further developments in the way the life of a community was regulated. Such conflicts must naturally be expected on a large scale, especially in a developing, stratified society that was at the same time subject to cramped forms of communal life. But it is equally self-evident that we can expect to know very little about this development.
The Early History of the Ancient Near East (9000-2000 BC) Page 11