Content deleted Content added
Ploversegg (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 35:
}}
The term "Uruk period" was coined at a conference in [[Baghdad]] in 1930, along with the preceding [[Ubaid period]] and following [[Jemdet Nasr period]].<ref name=matthews2002>{{citation |title=Secrets of the dark mound: Jemdet Nasr 1926–1928 |last=Matthews |first=Roger |year=2002 |publisher=BSAI |location=Warminster |isbn=0-85668-735-9 |series=Iraq Archaeological Reports |volume=6 }}</ref> The chronology of the Uruk period is highly debated and still very uncertain. It is known that it covered most of the 4th millennium BC. But there is no agreement on the date when it began or ended and the major breaks within the period are difficult to determine. This is due primarily to the fact that the original stratigraphy of the central quarter of Uruk is ancient and very unclear and the excavations of it were conducted in the 1930s, before many modern dating techniques existed. These problems are largely linked to the difficulty specialists have had establishing synchronisms between the different archaeological sites and a relative chronology, which would enable the development of a more reliable absolute chronology.
The traditional chronology is very imprecise and is based on some key [[Sondage|sondages]] in the [[Eanna]] quarter at Uruk.<ref>{{harvsp|id=BUT|Butterlin|2003|pp=286–297}}</ref> The most ancient levels of these sondages (XIX–XIII) belong to the end of the Ubaid period (Ubaid V, 4200–3900 or 3700 BC); pottery characteristic of the Uruk period begins to appear in levels XIV/XIII.
Line 44:
===Jemdet Nasr period===
This phase of "Late Uruk" is followed by another phase (level III of Eanna) in which the Uruk civilization declined and a number of distinct local cultures developed throughout the Near East. This is generally known as the [[Jemdet Nasr period]], after the archaeological site of that name.<ref>U. Finkbeiner and W. Röllig, (ed.), ''Jamdat Nasr: period or regional style ?'', Wiesbaden, 1986</ref><ref name="matthews-55/4-196-203" /> Its exact nature is highly debated, and it is difficult to clearly distinguish its traits from those of the Uruk culture, so some scholars refer to it as the "Final Uruk" period instead. It lasted from around 3000 to
{{multiple image|perrow=2|total_width=300|caption_align=center
Line 95:
</gallery>
The function of these buildings, which are unparalleled in their size and the fact that they are gathered in monumental groups, is debated. The excavators of the site wanted to see them as 'temples', influenced by the fact that in the historic period, the Eanna was the area dedicated to the goddess [[Inanna]] and the other sector was dedicated to the god An. This conformed to the theory of the 'temple-city' which was in vogue during the
=== Other sites in Lower Mesopotamia ===
Line 117:
The region around [[Susa]] in the southwest of modern [[Iran]], is located right next to lower Mesopotamia, which exercised a powerful influence on it from the 5th millennium BC, and might be considered to have been part of the Uruk culture in the second half of the 4th millennium BC, either as a result of conquest or a more gradual acculturation, but it did retain its own unique characteristics.<ref>M.-J. Stève, F. Vallat, H. Gasche, C. Jullien et F. Jullien, "Suse," ''Supplément au Dictionnaire de la Bible'' fasc. 73, 2002, col. 409–413</ref> The Uruk period levels at Susa are called Susa I (c. 4000–3700 BC) and Susa II (c. 3700–3100 BC), during which the site became an urban settlement. Susa I saw the beginning of monumental architecture on the site, with the construction of a 'High Terrace', which was increased during Susa II to measure roughly 60 x 45 metres. The most interesting aspect of this site is the objects discovered there, which are the most important evidence available to us for the art of the Uruk period and the beginning of administration and writing. The [[cylinder seal]]s of Susa I and Susa II have a very rich iconography, uniquely emphasising scenes of everyday life, although there is also some kind of local potentate which P. Amiet sees as a 'proto-royal figure,' preceding the 'priest-kings' of Late Uruk.<ref>P. Amiet, "Glyptique susienne archaïque," ''Revue Assyriologique'' 51, 1957, p. 127</ref> These cylinder seals, as well as [[bulla (seal)|bulla]]e and clay tokens, indicate the rise of administration and of accounting techniques at Susa during the second half of the 4th millennium BC. Susa has also yielded some of the most ancient writing tablets, making it a key site for our understanding of the origins of writing. Other sites in Susiana also have archaeological levels belonging to this period, like [[Jafarabad, Alborz|Jaffarabad]] and [[Chogha Mish]].<ref>G. Johnson and H. Wright, "Regional Perspectives on Southwest Iranian State development," ''Paléorient'' 11/2, 1985, pp. 25–30</ref>
Further north, in the [[Zagros]], the site of [[Godin Tepe]] in the [[Kangavar]] valley is particularly important. Level V of this site belongs to the Uruk period. Remains have been uncovered of an ovoid wall, enclosing several buildings organised around a central court, with a large structure to the north which might be a public building. The material culture has some traits which are shared with that of Late Uruk and Susa II. Level V of Godin Tepe could be interpreted as an establishment of merchants from Susa and/or lower Mesopotamia, interested in the location of the site on commercial routes, especially those linked to the [[tin]] and [[lapis lazuli]] mines on the [[Iranian Plateau]] and in [[Afghanistan]].<ref>H. Weiss and T. Cuyler Young Jr., "Merchants of Susa: Godin V and plateau-lowland relations in the late Fourth Millennium B.C.," ''Iran'' 10 (1975) pp. 1–17</ref> Further east, the key site of [[Tepe Sialk]], near [[Kashan]], shows no clear evidence of links with the Uruk culture in its Level III, but [[beveled rim bowl]]s are found all the way out to Tepe Ghabristan in the [[Elbourz]]<ref>Y. Majidzadeh, "Sialk III and the Pottery Sequence at Tepe Ghabristan: The Coherence of the Cultures of the Central Iranian Plateau," ''Iran'' 19 (1981) p. 146</ref> and at
In this region, the retreat of the Uruk culture resulted in a particular phenomenon, the [[Proto-Elamite]] civilization, which seems to have been centred on the region of [[Anshan (Persia)|Tell-e Malyan]] and Susiana and seems to have taken over the Uruk culture's links with the Iranian plateau.<ref name=butiran>{{harvsp|id=BUT|Butterlin|2003|pp=139–150}}</ref><ref>P. Amiet, ''L'âge des échanges inter-iraniens, 3500–1700 av. J.-C.'', Réunion des musées nationaux, Paris, 1986.</ref>
Line 127:
The best known site is [[Habuba Kabira]], a fortified port on the right bank of the river in Syria. The city covered around 22 hectares, surrounded by a defensive wall, roughly 10 percent of which has been uncovered. Study of the buildings on this site shows that it was a planned settlement, which would have required significant means. The archaeological material from the site is identical to that of Uruk, consisting of pottery, cylinder-seals, bullae, accounting ''calculi'', and numerical tablets from the end of the period. Thus this new city has every appearance of being an Urukian colony. Around 20 residences of various sorts have been excavated. They have a tripartite plan, arranged around a reception hall with a foyer opening onto an internal courtyard, with additional rooms arranged around it. In the south of the site is a hill, Tell Qanas, which has a monumental group of several structures identified speculatively as 'temples' on an artificial terrace. The site was abandoned at the end of the 4th millennium BC, apparently without violence, during the period when the Uruk culture retreated.<ref name="strommenger" />
Habuba Kabira is similar in many ways to the nearby site of
==== Tell Brak ====
Line 148:
[[File:Uruk expansion.svg|thumb|upright=1.8|The 'Uruk expansion': sites representing the 'centre' and 'periphery'. Tell Sheikh Hassan settlement can be seen on this map to the upper left.]]
After the discovery in Syria of the sites at [[Habuba Kabira]] (see above) and
Tell Sheikh Hassan was located on the left (eastern) bank of the river, and it was founded during the Middle Uruk period. Later, during the earlier part of the Late Uruk period, Jebel Aruda, and Habuba Kabira-South, together with Tell Qanas right next to it, were founded on the opposite bank of the river.<ref>Sheikh Hassan is now partly submerged; the other 3 sites are completely submerged as a result of the modern dam construction. Three of these sites can be seen on the map in this section of the article.</ref> Together the last three comprised a much larger urban enclave (about 20–40 ha in extent) compared to Sheikh Hassan.<ref>{{cite book|editor1-last=Crawford|editor1-first= Harriet|editor-link=Harriet Crawford|last=Algaze|first=Guillermo|title=The Sumerian World|chapter=The End of Prehistory and The Uruk Period|year=2013|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4SKYAAAAQBAJ&pg=PT125|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-136-21912-2}} p.125</ref>
Line 260:
==== Urbanisation ====
[[File:Priest-king from Uruk, Mesopotamia, Iraq, c. 3000 BCE. The Iraq Museum.jpg|thumb|Sumerian dignitary, Uruk, circa 3300-3000 BCE. [[National Museum of Iraq]].<ref>{{cite book |title=Art of the first cities : the third millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus. |page=[https://archive.org/details/ArtOfTheFirstCitiesTheThirdMillenniumB.C.FromTheMediterraneanToTheIndusEditedByJ/page/n513 25] |url=https://archive.org/details/ArtOfTheFirstCitiesTheThirdMillenniumB.C.FromTheMediterraneanToTheIndusEditedByJ |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=The Looting Of The Iraq Museum Baghdad The Lost Legacy Of Ancient Mesopotamia |date=2005 |page=viii |url=https://archive.org/details/TheLootingOfTheIraqMuseumBaghdadTheLostLegacyOfAncientMesopotamia/page/n7/mode/2up}}</ref>]]
The Uruk period saw some settlements achieve a new importance and population density, as well as the development of monumental civic architecture. They reached a level where they can properly be called cities. This was accompanied by a number of social changes resulting in what can fairly be called an 'urban' society as distinct from the 'rural' society which provided food for the growing portion of the population that did not feed itself, although the relationship between the two groups and the views of the people of the time about this distinction remain difficult to discern.<ref>G. Emberling, "Urban Social Transformations and the Problem of the 'First City': New Research from Mesopotamia," M. L. Smith (ed.), ''The Social Construction of Ancient Cities'', Washington and London (2003), pp. 254–268</ref> This phenomenon was characterised by [[Gordon Childe]] at the beginning of the 1950s as an 'urban revolution', linked to the
In the Late Uruk period, the urban site of Uruk far exceeded all others. Its surface area, the scale of its monuments and the importance of the administrative tools unearthed there indicate that it was a key centre of power. It is often therefore referred to as the 'first city', but it was the outcome of a process that began many centuries earlier and is largely attested outside Lower Mesopotamia (aside from the monumental aspect of Eridu). The emergence of important proto-urban centres began at the beginning of the 4th millennium BC in southwest Iran ([[Chogha Mish]], Susa), and especially in the [[Upper Mesopotamia|Jazirah]] (Tell Brak, Hamoukar, Tell al-Hawa, Grai Resh). Excavations in the latter region tend to contradict the idea that urbanisation began in Mesopotamia and then spread to neighbouring regions; the appearance of an urban centre at Tell Brak appears to have resulted from a local process with the progressive aggregation of village communities that had previously lived separately, and without the influence of any strong central power (unlike what seems to have been the case at Uruk). Early urbanisation should therefore be thought of as a phenomenon which took place simultaneously in several regions of the Near East in the 4th millennium BC, though further research and excavation is still required in order to make this process clearer to us.<ref name=brakurb/><ref name=buturb/><ref>{{harvsp|id=ALG|Algaze|2008|pp=117–122}} foregrounds the fact that the model of urbanism in northern Mesopotamia proved less durable than that of the south, since it declined at the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC.</ref>
Line 314:
==End of the Uruk period==
Near the end of the
Some blame the collapse on the [[Piora Oscillation]], which was characterized by [[Climate change|decreased temperatures and increased rainfall]]<ref name=":0">Lamb, p. 128.</ref> <ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Radner |first=Karen |title=The Oxford History of the Ancient Near East: Volume I: From the Beginnings to Old Kingdom Egypt and the Dynasty of Akkad |last2=Moeller |first2=Nadine |last3=Potts |first3=D.T. |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2020 |isbn=9780197521014 |pages=163}}</ref>.Others blame it on the intrusion of [[Kish civilization|East Semitic tribes]].<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=g9F9NAaBquMC&pg=PA120|title= Approaching Chaos: Could an Ancient Archetype Save C21st Civilization?|author=Lucy Wyatt|page= 120|isbn= 9781846942556|date= 2010-01-16|publisher= John Hunt}}</ref>
Regardless, Uruk's legacy was preserved through the development of [[cuneiform]], which improved on Uruk writing systems, and the popularization of myths such as the [[Epic of Gilgamesh]]<ref name=":1" /> and the [[Genesis flood narrative|Great Flood]].
==See also==
| |||