We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 August 2014
Some years ago at the request of Dr. R. D. Barnett, then Keeper of Western Asiatic Antiquities, Mrs. Diane Gurney prepared drawings of unpublished sealings from Ur in the British Museum for a supplementary volume in the Ur Excavation Series. At the same time she also did revised drawings of a few sealings already published by Legrain in Ur Excavations III: Archaic Seal-Impressions (London, 1936). As the proposed supplementary volume has been cancelled, Mrs. Gurney's careful drawings are published here with a revision of the short catalogue and commentary which I originally wrote to accompany them. The complexity of the task facing Legrain was formidable and must never be forgotten. Criticism of his impressionistic, often idiosyncratic, renderings of these designs is all too easy. The decipherment of details is often hard enough; but it is the restoration of complete designs that is so testing of eye, hand and judgement. Those compositions combining geometric motifs or cuneiform signs, sometimes both, with representations of men, animals and objects are particularly hard to unravel. Sometimes not only the exact frame of a design, but even its orientation, is in doubt. Nor yet have we actual cylinders carved with the most intricate of such designs to guide us.
In preparing her drawings Mrs. Gurney first produced a provisional pencil sketch. After independent study of the sealing, I discussed this initial copy with her, resolving as far as possible any points at issue. Then the drawings were completed in ink, with any details which remained obscure rendered in broken line. Since the drawings best speak for themselves, catalogue descriptions have been reduced to a minimum. As far as possible cross-reference has been made to Legrain's pioneer study. His introductory remarks and his analysis of decorative motifs are as relevant to the sealings here as to his selection. This supplement adds nothing of substance; but it offers an opportunity for students to contrast another hand and eye to Legrain's in one of the most important groups of sealings yet found in Iraq.
1 Woolley, C. L., in Ur Excavations (hereafter UE) III, pp. VII–VIIIGoogle Scholar; UE IV, 34 ffGoogle Scholar.
2 Nissen, H. J., Zur Datierung des Königsfriedhofes von Ur (Bonn, 1966), 107 ff.Google Scholar; cf. UE II, Pl. 270: the placing of SIS 3 is less certain than 1–2, which contained sealings of the First Dynasty of Ur.
3 OIC 20 (1936)Google Scholar, on the chronological table at the end; JRAS, 1937, 337Google Scholar; Cylinder Seals (London, 1939), 41, n.1Google Scholar; Stratified Cylinder Seals from the Diyala Region (Chicago, 1955), 26, n. 53Google Scholar.
4 La glyptique mésopotamienne archaïque (Paris, 1961), 48 ffGoogle Scholar.
5 In Mitten, D. G. (ed.), Studies presented to George M. A. Hanfmann (Mainz, 1971), 46 ff.Google Scholar; earlier, with slightly different conclusions, JNES 22 (1963), 156, n. 54Google Scholar; AJA 72 (1968), 303–4Google Scholar; see also the evidence of the glyptic from Tell Fara summarized by Martin, H. P. in Le Temple et le Culte (Istanbul, 1975), 173 ff.Google Scholar; the Uruk evidence is still extremely meagre: Nöldeke, A. and Schott, E., UVB 5 (1934), Pl. 27c: W.11456Google Scholar.
6 Iraq 29 (1967), 138 ffGoogle ScholarPubMed.
7 Pottery from the Diyala Region (Chicago, 1952), 138Google Scholar.
8 UE IV, Pls. 77–8; see Perkins, A. L., The Comparative Archaeology of Mesopotamia (Chicago, 1949), 142Google Scholar for comment on the earliest sealings.
9 H. J. Nissen, op. cit., 107 ff.; Hallo, W. W., Orientalia 42 (1973), 228–238Google Scholar.
10 P. Delougaz, op. cit., 141–2.
11 Moorey, P. R. S., Iraq 28 (1966), 40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
12 This is only available so far in summaries; see Hansen, D. P., Archaeology 15 (1962), 75 ff.Google Scholar; JNES 22 (1963) 153, n. 42Google Scholar; in Ehrich, R. W., Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (Chicago, 1965), 201 ff.Google Scholar, and in Studies … Hanfmann (see n. 5 above), 46 ff.
13 Burrows, E. T., Ur Excavations: Texts III, Pl. XLV. 1, 2, with Pl. XLV. 3 (?post-Fara) and Pl. XLV. 4 (?pre-Fara) from stratum “B”Google Scholar; and from stratum “A”; Pl. XLV. 5 (?post-Fara).
14 For the JN (Jamdat Nasr) series see UE IV, 24 ff., Pls. 57–64Google Scholar; for the RC series (Royal Cemetery) see UE II, 387 ffGoogle Scholar. and H. J. Nissen, op. cit., 69 ff.; for an important supplementary consideration of Early Dynastic I ceramics in the Ur region, see Wright, H. T., The Administration of Rural Production in an Early Mesopotamian Town (Ann Arbor, 1969), 61 ffGoogle Scholar.
15 UE V, 1 ffGoogle Scholar.
16 H. J. Nissen, op. cit., 88.
17 Most recently in Boese, J., Altmesopotamische Weihplatten (Berlin, 1971)Google Scholar; see particularly the comments of Pelzel, S. M., JAOS 97 (1977), 67 ffGoogle Scholar.
18 Biggs, R. D., Orientalia 42 (1973), 39–46Google Scholar.
19 Implied by Amiet's treatment (see n. 4 above); explicitly for the later Early Dynastic period: Boehmer, R. M., ZA 59 (N. F. 25) (1969), 261 ffGoogle Scholar; see also Farkas, A., Bi.Or. 21 (1964), 196 ffGoogle Scholar.
20 No comprehensive published survey; but see material assembled in Moortgat, A., The Art of Ancient Mesopotamia (London 1969), 18 ff.Google Scholar; Hansen, D. P., in Orthmann, W., Der Alte Orient (Propyläen, Berlin, 1975), 158 ff.Google Scholar; Braun-Holzinger, E. A., Frühdynastiche Beterstatuetten (Berlin, 1977)Google Scholar.
21 P. Delougaz, op. cit., 135 ff.; where comparanda for the Diyala repertory are considered.
22 See for comments and up-to-date bibliography: Wilson, R. R., Genealogy and History in the Biblical World (New Haven, 1977), 73 ff.Google Scholar; contrast for example the historical reconstructions of Hallo, W. W. and Gadd, C. J.: Hallo, W. W. and Simpson, W. Kelly, The Ancient Near East: A History (New York, 1971), 27 ff.Google Scholar; Cambridge Ancient History I/2 (1971), 93 ffGoogle Scholar.
