re-modeling political economy in early 3rd millennium bc mesopotamia patterns of socio-economic...

7/25/2019 Re-modeling Political Economy in Early 3rd Millennium BC Mesopotamia Patterns of Socio-Economic Organization i

1/37

1.Introduction1

1.1. Te ormation o primary states during the 4thmillennium BC(or Uruk period) is a key time or orga-nizational change in southern Mesopotamia. Te onseto the 3rd millennium BC offers evidence o differentsocio-economic dynamics that, however, remain largelyunknown (c. Marchetti in Marchesi & Marchetti 2011:211-214). Empirical evidence or these events is impres-sive, while theoretical and comparative works lag behinddue to the dearth o social and cultural analysis. Althoughmore heterogeneous trajectories or ancient societies havebeen recently brought to the ore (Adams 2001; Fein-man & Marcus 1998; van der Leeuw & McGlade 1997;Padgham 2014; Stein 1994, 1998, 2001; Warburton2009; Wilkinson, Gibson & Widell 2013; Yoffee 2005;Zettler 2003), 3rd millennium Mesopotamia remains de

actounder-conceptualized.2

1.2.Te site o ell al-Muqayyar, ancient Ur, in south-ern Iraq (Di Giacomo & Scardozzi 2012: g. 2), is bestknown or its late Early Dynastic Royal Cemetery (ca.2500-2350 B.C.; Woolley 1934) but it was already a po-litical center at the onset o the 3rd millennium (EarlyDynastic I period, ca. 2900-2700 BC). Due to the richarchaeological evidence at our disposal, Ur is an ideal testcase or an intra-site analysis o urban organization orthis specic time period (c. Wright 1969). Tis articleaddresses the internal political organization o archaicUr and how it changed over time, based on a resh anal-ysis o the data excavated by C. L. Woolley. In this paper,emphasis is placed upon the interplay between economicand socio-cultural actions, analyzed on the basis o threemain lines o evidence: archaeology, written sources andanthropological rameworks (c. Smith 2004: 77-78).3

1.3.Practical knowledge about the lives o inhabitantso ancient Ur can be gained rom excavated data. Mosto the archaeological inormation dating rom the early

Cuneiorm Digital Library Journal 2015:2 Cuneiorm Digital Library Initiative

ISSN 1540-8779Version: 1 October 2015

Re-modeling Political Economy in Early 3rdMillennium BCMesopotamia: Patterns of Socio-Economic Organization

in Archaic Ur (ell al-Muqayyar, Iraq)

Giacomo BenatiDepartment o History and Cultures, University o Bologna

Cuneiorm Digital Library Journal 2015:2 page 1of 37

AbstractPolitical economies o early Mesopotamia are traditionally modeled upon text-oriented research and unilinear schemes. Tese approach-es are awed in many ways and ofen over-emphasize the agency o elite groups. An integrated strategy combining archaeology, textual

sources and anthropological theories is used here to draw a more nuanced picture o social arrangements in early 3rdmillennium BCUr. Te aim o this paper is to shed light on the changes o political organization and on the maniold economic strategies put in place by

political powers in an early urban system in southern Mesopotamia.

1 Work on this paper began while conducting doctoral re-search on Early Dynastic Ur at the University o urin(Italy). Some o the results o this work have already ap-

peared in print (Benati 2013, 2014, 2015), and a mono-graph is currently being prepared by the author at theUniversity o Bologna.

2 On early Mesopotamian political history, see Richardson2014; G. Marchesi in Marchetti & Marchesi 2011: 97-128; Marchesi 2015.

3 A resh examination o the cuneiorm texts rom the early3rdmillennium BChas been carried out by C. Lecompte(2013), with whom I am currently collaborating on theembedded nature o texts in archaeological contexts(Benati & Lecompte orthcoming a, b).


2/37

3rd millennium BC, comes rom outdoor middens.4Al-though requently overlooked in scholarship, reuse is so-cially meaningul and can be used to reconstruct house-hold consumption and discard patterns (Gifford-Gonza-lez 2014; Beck & Hill Jr. 2004). Among the discards, clay

sealings bearing seal-impressions, and cune-iorm tablets are the most telltale items andcan provide rst-hand inormation about theeconomic decision-making o a bureaucraticcore (Dittmann 1986; Foster 1986; Fran-gipane 2007, 2010; Pittman 1994; Wright1969).

1.4. Te goals o this study are two-old.Te rst is to propose a new narrative o or-mation processes or early 3rd millenniumBClayers excavated at Ur. Te second is thato sketching a bottom-up model o organi-zational dynamics in an early Mesopotamianurban system. A middle-range theoreticalramework (or empirical theory) is tailoredin this essay to bridge the gap between ar-chaeological data and social and culturalprocesses in order to better understand an-

cient urban dynamics (c. Smith 2011: 167-173).

1.5. Te article is divided into two mainparts: the rst three sections (2-4) dealwith site ormation processes and adminis-trative decision-making; the ollowing three(5-7) explore urban dynamics and politicaleconomy.

2. Background to Analysis: Te Archaeo-logical Landscape of Early 3rdMillenniumUr in a New Light2.1.At Ur, the excavators encounteredcontexts dating rom the onset o the 3rdmillennium BC in the southeastern cornero the area encompassed by the wall o the

neo-Babylonian temenos, in the so-called Royal Cem-etery Area (c. gure 2). Here, horizontal and verticaldigging exposed structural remains, productive areas andreuse heaps.

2.2. Building remains were identied in three excava-

tion areas: Pit F, Pit G, and in the strip comprised be-tween Pit G and the southeastern limit o the RC Area.In Pit Flocated to the back o the Royal Cemetery (inthe ollowing RC) areaa pottery production area withkilns, in use during the late 4thmillennium, was convert-ed into a dwelling area at the turn o the 3rdmillennium(c. Woolley 1956: pl. 73). Te oor assemblages indicatethat Levels I and K in Pit F consisted o mud-brick com-pounds engaged in storage and transormation o ood.Administrative activities involving the use o glyptic ma-

page 2of 37 Cuneiorm Digital Library Journal 2015:2

Figure 1Map showing main watercourses and settlements in 3rdmillenniumBCMesopo-tamia. Te red line encompasses the area surveyed by H. Wright (1981; based on

Lecompte 2013: pl. 2, and Sallaberger & Schrakamp 2015: Map 2).

4 For a general discussion o the Mesopotamian 3rdmillen-nium absolute chronology, see Wright 1980. Te datasetrom the Inanna temple in Nippur allows us to place theEarly Dynastic I period roughly between 2900 and 2600BC. Recent samples rom Konar Sandal South, south-eastern Iran, afford additional evidence or this period.Charred materials rom rench XI produced a rangecomprised between 2880 and 2580 BC(Pittman 2012:80, able 1). On the basis o associated glyptic (a CitySeal impression, c. ibid., g. 1), this phase is equated tothe Mesopotamian ED I period by the excavators.


3/37

terials are also documented here (Woolley 1956: 64-68).

2.3.Further evidence o domestic activities comes romthe reuse dump excavated in Pit G. Here layers o wasteyielded pottery sherds, tools and administrative devices(Woolley 1956: 69-70, pls. 1, 72; Charvt 2014). Techronological horizon gleaned rom these materialsmatches the one rom Level I-K o Pit F. In Pit G, thedebris layers were covered by mud-brick structures. Largemud-brick compounds lying at about 10m above sea level(in the ollowing asl) in both Pit F and Pit G, suggest thatthis part o the mound was an urban area with courtyardhouses, alleyways and a thick boundary wall during therst quarter o the 3rdmillennium (c. Benati 2014).

2.4.Evidence rom these soundings indicates that hous-es were ofen reurbished, and at intervals rebuilt ollow-ing similar layouts. Te structures o Pit G were equippedwith xed installations, perhaps hearths (c. Woolley1956: pl. 72). Although the levels o Pit F produced lit-tle associated material culture, the domestic unction othese contexts seems assured.5

2.5.Additional inormation on the urban planningo this area comes rom the structures uncovered in the

strip located to the south o Pit G (c. gure 3). Here theexcavators ound structural remains that, at least in twospots, could be interpreted as multi-room mud-brickscompounds.

2.6.Te extensive clearance o this area produced evi-dence o structures arranged over a surace gently slop-ing downwards. o the side o the Death Pit PG1237,a small trench intercepted the remains o a room (namedhere Compound 3 or Ancient Room), with a largegroup o tablets lying on a clay pavement with ash and de-graded mud-brick materials, in turn sealed by an ashy lland a later pavement (Benati & Lecompte orthcoming a).Similar inormation was gathered below PG1050, whereour rooms (Compound 1) produced in situtablets, seal-

ings, pottery and installations (Woolley 1934: 96-97, g.14). Te same stratigraphic eatures were observed nearPG789 and beneath PG580, where empty rooms per-taining to a large compound (Compound 2) were cleared(c. Woolley 1956: 70-71, g. 12). In the area o Pit D andPG1332, brickwork was detected above a layer o charredremains used as in-ll, suggesting new housing construc-tion also here (c. Woolley 1956: pl. 83, column D).

2.7.Tis spatial analysis indicates a major landscapingepisode consisting o the expansion o the built-up area othe town through the construction o new house lots in

an open area seemingly located at the brink o the settle-ment. Conversely, the strip comprised between Pits Z-Yand Woccupied by steeply sloping rubbish heapsre-mained in use as a midden or a long period. As indicatedby the stratigraphy o the houses, the rst building phasewas destroyed by a re and rebuilt shortly aferwards. Itis possible that at this point the dump area was urtherexpanded to the South, as indicated by the rubbish tipdetected in Pit X (c. Woolley 1956: 79, pl. 78).

able 1Chrono-stratigraphic synopsis o the late 4th-early 3rdmillenniaBClayers excavated at Ur and discussed in the paper.


5 Te multi-room compounds investigated in Pit F offer

evidence o domestic storage, with some rooms packedwith jars suitable or storage (Levels H and E: c. Woolley1956: pl. 75; Benati 2014: g. 2). Activity areas are sel-dom recognizable and little evidence o crafs comes romthese loci. Tese trends probably reect depletion activi-ties that hinder our reconstruction o household assem-blages (c. LaMotta & Schiffer 1999). Te same appliesor the building remains covering the debris in Pit G, de-

void o artiacts. Te sampling program carried out in thedomestic compounds at Abu Salabikh demonstrated thatrooms within households were thoroughly swept clean(Matthews & Postgate 1994: 172-176).

Date B.C.Uncalibrated

Historical Period Excavation AreasPit F Pit G RC Area Ziqqurat Terrace

2700 ca.

2900 ca.

3100 ca.

ED ILate E

FGH

5-9 (?)

-Pit X rubbish tip (?)-Adminis trative quarter-F.1011-SIS 5/4

Archaic II (?)

Archaic III -IV

Middle SIS 7/6SIS 8

JN Cemetery(Pits W, X, Y -Z)

Early

JemdetNasr

Late IK 1-4Middle

EarlyKilnsUruk Late


4/37

2.8.Tis short-lived quarter was then abandoned (the

upper building phase was depleted all over), as was thewhole slope. During the second half of the 3rdmillenni-um, the area was turned into a burial ground (i.e. Roy-al Cemetery or RC), with the graves cut into the thicklayers of waste. Overall, household remains denote thor-ough depletion patterns, and oor assemblages are spo-radic. Critical information on household consumptioncan be extracted from the layers of solid waste interceptedin the RC Area.

3. Archaeology of Garbage Disposal and Non-Archi-tectural Spaces in Early Ur

3.1.Good samples of domestic and above-domestic con-sumption come from outdoor garbage deposits at Ur. Tefocus of this section is therefore the undeveloped spacebetween buildings (cf. Hayden & Cannon 1983; Hutsonet al., 2007). In particular, the majority of the adminis-trative artifacts at Ur have been recovered in waste layers

at the outskirts ofthe settlement (i.e.Seal-ImpressionStrata or SIS).6If studied with asound method-ology, material

culture from trashareas represents amajor source of in-formation on be-havioral patterns(Gifford-Gonza-lez 2014; Rathje &Murphy 2001).

3.2.In order toproceed from siteformation to con-

sumption patterns,it is necessary, inthe rst place, toreconstruct theformation process-es of each assem-blage (LeeDecker1994; Schiffer1972, 1985). Herefollows a brief de-scription of the

SIS as a sequence of discrete discard activities.

3.3.Te debris excavated in the Royal Cemetery Areawere seemingly cast out from an upper terrace lying atca. 10m asl, into a low-lying area used as burial groundsince the late 4thmillennium (the so-called Jemdet NasrCemetery). Te debris of SIS 8-4 formed a slope follow-ing a northwest/southeast direction, suggesting that thethrows originated from the area lying immediately to theback of Pit Z (cf. gure 3).7Te repeated episodes of gar-

Ziqqurat Areaexcavation limit

Archaic I phasewall remains

Neo-BabylonianTemenos wall

Pit F

Pit X

Royal CemeteryArea excavation limit

Pit G

Pit WPitsZ-Y

0 500 m

N

0 100 m

N


Figure 2Map showing the location o the excavation areas that yielded 4thand 3rdmillennia material culture at Ur(based on Woolley 1932: pl. 63; Woolley 1956: pl. 1).

6 Te SIS layers can be considered as extramural heaps onthe basis of these pieces of evidence: 1) Te low lying areaat the foot of the rubbish tips was occupied by a large

burial ground, in use between the end of the 4

th

and theearly 3rdmillennium; 2) Te area later on occupied by theadministrative quarter was tested with deep pits thatdid not produce evidence of architecture pre-dating thequarter.

7 Studies of discard practices in agrarian communitiesdemonstrate that least-cost principles are generally ap-

plied in selecting the location for discards (cf. Beck & HillJr. 2004: 308-309, 327-328; Hayden & Cannon 1983).People tend to use the middens located closest to theirhousehold, and in general, they tend not to carry theirgarbage too far from the area of production.


5/37

bage deposition gradually lledthe gap between the terrace andthe lower ground and formeda rubbish heap in the area com-prised between Pits Z-Y, W andX (cf. Zettler 1989: 370-372).

3.4.Refuse layers were also ex-cavated in Pit G, farther northalong the slope. Tese layersyielded pottery shards, miniatureware, complete vessels, ints,tools, ca. 20 sealings broken offjars and door pegs, some cunei-form documents, and a cylinderseal, all predating the SIS hori-zon (see 5.2 below).

3.5.Te lowest Seal-Impression

Stratum (SIS 8), was excavatedin Pit Z.8 SIS 8 was formed bythree discrete dumping events:a black deposit of ash and char-coal with pottery shards, toolsand stone artifacts, sandwichedbetween two bricky layers withseal impressions and one tabletfragment. According to the in-ter-annual variation patterns ofdomestic activities observed byH. Wright (Wright, Miller &Redding 1980; Wright, Redding& Pollock 1986), one may sug-gest that the SIS 8 deposit accu-mulated over a short time-span.Te two brick-earth lls can beinterpreted as by-products of construction/demolitionactivities carried out during the hot season, and the ashlayer as a by-product of domestic tasks performed duringthe winter, when heating is required.9Bowls, millstones

and solid-footed goblets discarded alongside clay g-urines and charred remains point to everyday domesticconsumption. Te sealings from SIS 8 were mostly bro-ken off closed-shape pottery specimens, and to a lesserextent door pegs and reed-matting containers. Te ca. 30sealings from SIS 8 were impressed with 20 individual


Figure 3Plan showing some o the archaeological eatures excavated within the Royal Cemetery Area

(based on Karstens 1987: g. 2; Nissen 1966: pl. 41; Zimmerman 1998: g. 53).

8

Te cemetery has been identied between the areas of PitsZ, Y, W and X for a total excavated surface of ca. 700m2,producing ca. 400 burials (cf. Woolley 1956: 103-157).Although gradually covered by debris, the area remainedin use as burial ground and the graves were dug into therubbish tips. Terefore, some of the graves are to be con-sidered contemporary to the SIS artifacts (cf. Forest 1983;Kolbus 1983; Moorey 1994: 43-44).

9 Ethno-archaeological research on mud architecture in-forms us that houses made of mud (pis) can last between10 and 15 years, with semi-annual re-plastering of thehouse (Wright 1969: 18). Mud-brick compounds can

last 30 to 40 years (Kamp 2000: 91). Roong and ttingsare made of palm logs and reeds. In addition, cane andreed mats are traditionally used to build huts (mudhif).Te lifespan of these structures will not exceed 10 years.Plant remains excavated at Sakheri (Wright 1969: 89)demonstrate that tamarisk and poplar wood was used forarchitectural elements. Te burned remains, degradedmud-brick material and lime forming the SIS layers are tobe considered the discarded by-products of similar con-struction works (cf. also Ochsenschlager 2004: 95-110;Friesem, et al., 2014a, 2014b).


6/37

seals, mostly bearing abstract and geometric imagery.

3.6.SIS 8 was then covered by other sloping layers oftrash, labeled SIS 7. Tis feature was distinguished in PitZ and Pit W. SIS 7 had a black matrix and was composedof mixed charred remains, seal impressions, and few cu-neiform tablet fragments, perhaps still the discards of

productive activities. Directly above SIS 7, a belt of whit-ish color, seemingly composed of lime, pottery shardsand seal impressions, was distinguished (SIS 6). SIS 6could be the by-product of building activities, such aslime/gypsum burning for wall plastering and oor coat-ing (cf. Blackman 1982), or perhaps the result of a ercere (P. Butterlin, personal communication). Te tips ofthe two layers were encountered in Pit W but the ndswere not collected separately (cf. gure 4). Te SIS 7/6glyptic horizon is composed of some 37 sealings, half of

which were broken-off door pegs, and half used on jarsand containers. By analogy with SIS 8, most of the sealsreconstructed from seal impressions (25 individual seals)bear geometric and abstract designs. In particular, doorpegs were almost exclusively sealed with abstract seals.Alongside sealings, in Pit W, SIS 7/6 produced copperitems (pins, sh-hooks), implements (beads, lids, clay

tools), and pottery shards (Woolley 1956: 76).

3.7.SIS 7/6 were then covered by a stratication con-sisting of reddish sediments with seal impressions andpottery (not collected), a layer of dark matter (probablycharcoal and ash) sandwiched between two layers of lightearth, then a gray belt with lime, dark soil and a band oflight inll (gure 4).

3.8.SIS 5/4 layers, composed of burned construction


Neo-BabylonianTemenos wall

Modern surace level

PG1648

Staircase

Royal Cemetery stratication

PG1332 shaf

F.1011

Jemdet Nasr CemeteryJemdet Nasr Cemetery

Ubaidperiodlayers

Flood deposit

SIS 7/6

SIS 5/4]

]

0Sea level

5m

5m

10m 15m

10m

15m

Figure 4Prole drawing o Pit W (modied om Woolley 1956: pl. 77).


7/37

materials, degraded mud-brick, and a huge quantity oadministrative devices, were excavated in Pits Z-Y and W.3.9.According to this reconstruction, it seems that SIS8 and SIS 7/6 accumulated over a short time-rame, whileSIS 5/4another snapshotwere separated rom themby a sizable time-rame. SIS 5/4 were characterized byan exceptional artiact density, yielding more than 200

sealings, ca. 20 ragments o cuneiorm tablets, potteryshards, clay artiacts, and tools, most o which were recov-ered rom Pit W. SIS 5/4 can be dened as the by-prod-uct o construction/demolition, crafs, and large-scalepackaging o containers and offi cial bookkeeping.

3.10.Te southeastern oot o this rubbish tip, locatedalong the limit o Pit W, was covered by a thin patch osoot, charred materials, basket-loads o pottery shardsand discarded administrative artiacts, running airly atover a surace o ca. 100m2(here called Locus F.1011; c.gure 4 and Woolley 1956: 55). Here, the dig o Pit D

and the clearance o the area around grave PG1332 pro-duced ca. 40 cuneiorm tablets ragments and almost 50sealings (Benati & Lecompte orthcoming b). Tese in-cinerated remains were thrown into an area marked by aslight depression, with the aim o leveling the surace orconstruction. In this case, waste was reused as ll material,indicating practical site management. Tis is conrmedby the act that superimposed layers o brickwork coveredthe charred remains, attesting that buildings were erectedhere on top o the waste in-ll (c. Woolley 1956: pl. 83).

4. Micro-Economic Patterns and Information ech-nologies4.1.Hierarchies of Information Processing4.1.1.Te study o administrative technologies canprovide the baseline to discuss the hierarchy o inorma-tion processing used to mobilize goods and labor withinthe Ur social body (Wright & Johnson 1975: 271; andc. the extensive Frangipane 2007). Household and su-pra-household organization is examined here as ows oactivities and patterns o consumption (c. Earle 2002:13; Wilk & Netting 1984).

4.1.2. At Ur, sealing practices and cuneiorm recordswere part o a bureaucratic apparatus developed to keeptrack o economic transers (c. Dittman 1986). Writ-ing, sealing and weighing were the main control mech-anisms within this ramework (c. Rahmstor 2012). P.Steinkeller (2004) hypothesized a two-tiered operationalchain in the administration process: 1) rst order tasks:sealing/unsealing o storage areas and packages (and ac-counting/sorting out inventories); 2) second order task:bookkeeping through written records.

4.1.3.Having established a ner-grained sequenceo discard operations, the patterning o clay sealings iscombined with a resh survey o the written records inorder to retrieve new qualitative and quantitative inor-mation.10Tis analysis provides the backdrop or recon-structing the chains o transormation related to packag-

ing, marking, bookkeeping, exchange and consumptiono valuables.

4.1.4. Patterns o consumption ollow social patternso access and ideology that reect the political nature othe society under study (Earle 2002: 13). A back-to-backanalysis o these bodies o evidence can afford inorma-tion on both basic and non-basic needs o the Ur popula-tion (c. Padgham 2014: 2-3, g. 1.1). Te goal o this op-eration is thereore that o understanding the economic,social and political use o valuables and subsistence goodsin archaic Ur (Earle 2002: 23).

4.2.Branding and Commodication Strategies4.2.1.According to I. Kopytoff (1986: 69), sealable andexchangeable products can be dened as commodities.Earle (2002: 42) added that commodities are alienablegoods that tend to be standardized in orm and executionin order to be easily recognizable. Commodity brandingpractices are used to mark products in relation to storage,distribution and consumption o perishables (id.; Winter2008). Since sealing practices are used to secure and mon-itor the movement o commodities, they can be denedas commodity branding practices (c. Rothman 2000).

4.2.2.Te concept o commodity branding has beenused in recent analyses by D. Wengrow (2008, 2010) withthe aim o highlighting the social aspects o packaging


10 Approximately 390 sealings rom stratied contexts havebeen examined by the author. O them, 232 offer cleartraces o use on the reverses and bases. Some 200 seal-ings are assigned by the excavators to the SIS 5/4 layers,although no inormation on the exact nd-spots is pro-

vided. 160 sealings allegedly retrieved near Post A, and54 rom Pit X, are also assigned to the SIS 5/4 horizon

in the reports, but they probably belong to later discards.Given that urther study is required to shed more light onthe stratigraphy o Pit X, the nds rom this sounding arenot analyzed here. I we accept that also these problem-atic sealings are somehow connected to the bureaucraticstructure that produced the SIS 5/4 artiacts, we have toconclude that more than 700 sealings were discarded inthe same dump area over a short time-rame. Te sampleo ca. 290 sealings rom secure contexts linked to SIS5/4 is a slice o this horizon and can reect the generalunctioning o the bureaucratic apparatus that issued thedocuments.


8/37

and marking practices in the ancient Near East. Accord-ing to Wengrow, the standardization o packaging marksthe transormation o subsistence goods into commod-ities characterized by homogeneous content, measure-ment and quality checks. Tis process was instrumentalto the creation o a tightly regulated ows o resources.

4.2.3.Within this ramework, seal impressionsan im-age-based system o distinctionunctioned as proxies

or identiying the source o com-modities traded and consumedar rom the point o production(c. Wengrow 2010: 18; Fiandra1981). Tis suggests long chainso production, distribution andconsumption, with goods re-

moved rom their initial socialcontext and made available orcirculation (Sherratt 2004: 102),as also indicated by the act thatthe clay sealings have been re-moved rom the closures oncecompletely dry (thereore afer atleast a ew days o storage/circu-lation). Tis description ts withthe denition o atomized eco-nomic transactions, i.e., transerso goods outside kin-based social

networks (Granovetter 1985).

4.2.4.Following A. Sherratt,systems o marking and notationswere used not only to monitor thequality o manuactured goodsbut also to enhance the value othe product through specializedprocedures o packaging (Sher-ratt 2004: 96). Sealing practices,thereore, may have unctionednot only as trackers or mobilizedgoods, but also as quality stampsor the packaged goods (c. alsoStein 1999: 88-89). Tese con-siderations seem to be supportedby textual evidence and patternso exchange.

4.2.5.As to the inormationtechnologies, the visual-basedsignaling system o the seal-im-pressions guaranteed a symmet-

rical spread o inormation be-tween actors. wo categories o marking systems standout o this visual circuit: sealings characterized by incisedsymbols (script?), and the so-called City-Seals impres-sions. Both types o artiacts carry complex visual-lan-guage meaning rather than image signaling, and conveyspecic textual inormation that is still ill-dened (butsee Matthews 1993). A language-based code suggeststhat literate operators were at both ends o the transerprocess and thereore the goods sealed through these de-


Figure 5Sample o seal impressions om debris layers excavated within the Royal Cemetery Area at Urwith reconstructions o the sealed artiacts (a. comes om Pit GPhase 1; b. and c. om PitWSIS 5/4; d. om Pit ZSIS 7; drawings by the author, photo o a. reproduced by courtesyo the rustees o the British Museum).


9/37


vices were exchanged in a hyper-bureaucratic ramework,i.e., the same environment that was capable o producingwritten records.

4.2.6.Te patterning o the traces o unction preservedon the reverses o the broken off clay sealings makes itpossible to reconstruct the types o sealed commodities

and to shed light on the pathways o economic circula-tion o perishables in early Ur (c. gure 5).11Te unc-tional dataset rom the sealings demonstrates that medi-um-sized jars and door closures are the most recurrentlysealed commodities within the sample. Reed containers,wickerwork baskets, and wooden boxes are also attested,although in smaller quantities. In case o duplicate seal-impressions, the same seal was ofen used to mark bothdoors and container sealings. Tis may suggest that theseal-bearer had control over goods stocked into a stor-age area and sealed in bulk (c. Fiandra 1981: 174). As awhole, one may assume that ceramic containers dominat-

ed the short-term storage and transport o comestibles.

4.2.7.Te creation o managerial systems dealing withstandardized goods kept in controlled warehouses, andlarge-scale exchange o commodied comestibles, pointto institutionalized exchange patterns, and perhaps to ascale economy.

4.3.Record-Keeping4.3.1.Te archaic texts rom Ur provide a wealth o dataon the management o economics (c. Chambon 2003;Sallaberger & Schrakamp 2015: 56-60). Sixty-ve here-toore unpublished texts have been recently edited by C.Lecompte (2013) in Nisaba25. Tis not only added tothe available documentation on this important piece oevidence, but also offers us the means to check and up-date the body o work published by E. Burrows in UE2.

4.3.2.A resh look at these documents can provide in-ormation on both the atomized decision-making o theactors mentioned in the texts, and the broader socialcontext in which they operated. Nevertheless, one mustkeep in mind that only the transactions o a subset o Ur

society are represented in the records. Some sectors othe populationcommoners, independent craf special-ists, nomads, villagers, etc.are under-represented in thetexts, i mentioned at all (c. Stein 2005).

4.3.3.Te record keeping mostly concerns the coordi-nation o basic agricultural tasks (c. also Wright 1969:22). According to the resh analysis o the texts carriedout by C. Lecompte (personal communication) the eco-nomics dealt with in the tablets concern:

a) Exchange and distribution o staple products (120 tab-lets)

b) Administration and allotments o cultivated land (80tablets)

c) Organization o labor: lists o workers (35 tablets)d) Animal husbandry (15-20 tablets)

Tis summary makes it clear that the most registered eco-nomics are exchanges o packaged oodstuffs, mirroringthe situation sketched on the basis o the analysis o com-modication strategies. In this light, one may suggest thatstaples and cultivated land were the main commoditiesmobilized by the institutional spheres in archaic Ur.

4.3.4.As to accounting, the numerical and metrolog-ical systems used in the texts share common traits withLate Uruk bookkeeping practices (c. Lecompte 2013:15-20; Chambon 2003). Te land measure system in par-ticular is similar to that o the Uruk period, though is-sues arise rom the reconstruction o the capacity system(Lecompte 2013: 19 n. 59). In addition, J. Cale Johnson(2015: 37-38 n. 73) has suggested that a distributive sys-tem attested in some archaic tablets (UE2, 10, 40, 65,108, 112, 364+368) derives rom a proposed Late Urukelite salary system (his IAa1/UKKINasystem), again

pointing to institutional rameworks o distribution.

4.4.Bureaucratic and Political Frameworks4.4.1.Given the elliptical nature o the written recordsand the lack o political inormation, the institutionalstructure o archaic Ur remains largely unknown (c. Sal-laberger & Schrakamp 2015: 59). Te evidence at handindicates a large bureaucratic machinery with well-de-ned roles and cadres o managers engaged in perorm-ing economic tasks. Context attestations can provideelements or inerring administrative responsibilities osome o the actors recorded in the texts.

4.4.2.itles such as ensi2/xand lugal, and the mentiono an e2-gal, have led scholars to speculate about the exis-tence o kingship in archaic Ur (c. Marchetti in Marchesi& Marchetti 2011: 212; Sallaberger & Schrakamp 2015:59). Te meaning o the title ensi2here written PA.SI(or in the shortened orm PA)has been much debatedby scholars (c. Bauer 1987; Lecompte 2014b: Marchesi& Marchetti 2011: 109, 212 n. 6; Marchesi 2015: 139n. 7). According to Marchesi (in Marchesi & Marchetti

11 My own approach in studying the original seal-impres-sions on clay kept in museum collections has been struc-tured on methodologies advocated by R. Matthews(1991, 1993), R. Zettler (1989), and in particular by M.Frangipane (2007), as appropriate or understanding seal-ing technologies.


10/37

2011: 109, n. 118), the title ensi2traditionally inter-preted as ruler or governorseems to have originallydenoted an offi cial who was responsible or superintend-ing agricultural work. Tis unction is also probably sug-gested by another title, ensi2-gal chie steward (UE2,35), an offi cial o lower rank than the ensi2who is attest-ed in connection with maintenance works o canals and

other water acilities. In the context o the archaic texts,Lecompte (2013: 22 n. 72) noted that the ensi2o Ur (en-six[PA.SI] uri5) has no hierarchic prominence since he israrely attested in the nal clauses o the tablets (c. UE2, 86, 88, 177, 222). As remarked by Wright (1969: 107,112-113), however, sanga/umbisag and ensi2 are men-tioned in tablets regarding the allotment o large quan-tities o grain, which may be connected to the harvest orthe storing o the harvested grain (c. also Burrows 1935:17).

4.4.3.Bauer (1987: 5-6) and Lecompte (2014b) noted

that ve places are mentioned in connection with the titleensix: [UE2, sign list =] S. 161b+KI, Dugin2, BU.MA(c. also Sallaberger & Schrakamp 2015: 59 n. 72), Larsaand Ur itsel, all seemingly corresponding to places lo-cated near Ur. In this regard, one tablet (Nisaba25, 63)mentions some o these ensixoffi cials within the rame-work o agricultural works (plowed eld, distributed seedgrain) or perhaps the payment o taxes (Lecompte 2013:157). From these data, it seems that the ensi2was indeedinvolved in important agricultural tasks (c. Lecompte2013: 21-22 n. 72), but since the title is used in connec-tion with toponyms, it may well indicate political agencyover one territory/community (G. Marchesi, personalcommunication).

4.4.4.Te title lugal, on the other hand, is attested al-most uniquely as part o personal names and in this caseit has theophoric meaning. Te unction o the e2-galmentioned in the texts is also unclear and thereore thepresence o palace administration remains speculative(Lecompte 2013: 20). One lugal o Lagash is, however,mentioned in a ragmentary tablet (UE 2, 205b), in-dicating that other cities in southern Mesopotamia may

have been ruled by kingly gures already at this time (c.Marchesi in Marchesi & Marchetti 2011: 100 n. 27; Sal-laberger & Schrakamp 2015: 58).

4.4.5.High-level offi cials and oremen such as kingal,sanga/umbisag, nu-banda3, and nameda, are also at-tested in the texts. Although no clear agency can be at-tributed to the nameda12, the title seems to be that o

a high-ranking offi cial ( Johnson 2015: 37-38 n. 71; Selz2010: 8; c. also Glassner 2000: 45). nu-banda3is a des-ignation o overseers o agricultural activities (Wright1969: 107), and notably o an overseer o the e2-gal (UE2, 112). Te kingal is mentioned in the clause o a tabletin connection with ood (cuts o meat) and land allot-ments, and thereore he was seemingly a high-ranking ad-

ministrator (UE2, 68b, 108+153, 112, 340;Nisaba25,64).13Other offi cials mentioned are ugula, overseeratask-oriented role, sagi, cupbearer (Nisaba25, 52),and kindagal, chie barber/inspector (Nisaba25, 50).

4.4.6.On the other hand, there are clear hints at therole o a sacred household, probably the Nanna sanctu-ary (e3), that administered large-scale economic activi-ties, a sizable eld estate (GAN2nannax; c. UE2, 73,127, 227, 358), personnel, and seemingly slaves or ser-vants (c. UE2, 50 ii; Burrows 1935: 13 L; Steinkeller2015: 6-9). Te titles related to the temple administrative

sphere indicate an articulate internal structure, with atleast two layers: a bureaucratic body and a series o rolesinvolved in the cultic activities. Te highest administra-tive offi ce o this institution was perhaps the sanga, prob-ably to be read umbisag in this period (Burrows 1935: 13L; 17 66; Lecompte 2013: 20-23).14According to Visi-cato (2000: 16-18) the title dub-sar scribe is also attest-ed (UE2, 93, 297) and perorms tasks similar to that othe sanga, although the precise relationship between thetwo titles is hard to grasp.

4.4.7. Cultic personnel, perhaps attached to this insti-tution, are also mentioned: nunnuzi-priestesses, gal-narchie singer, gal-balag chie musician, abgal sage/priest, etc. (c. Nisaba25, 16, 56, 64; Lecompte 2013:


12 Both G. Selz and P. Charvt report the presence o the

title nameda on a sealing rom SIS 5/4Pit W (Selz2010: 8 n. 11; Charvt 2012). A resh analysis o the orig-inal sealing kept in the Penn Museum (U 18397; 33-35-293), however, raises issues on this reading (G. Marchesi,

personal communication).13 According to Johnson (2015), the allotments o meat and

land in two texts mentioning the kingal (UE 2, 108,

364+368), may resemble the prebend system attested inlater periods. As stressed by Steinkeller (2015: 26-27),high-ranking offi cials were in act remunerated with landallotments. Te proessional title kingal (GAL.UKKIN),is generally interpreted as leader o the assembly(Visicato & Westenholz 2005: 64: Glassner 2000: 43),but as noted by G. Marchesi (in Marchesi & Marchetti2011: 103 n. 53), GAL.UKKIN in late ED records maydesignate a military offi cial.

14 As underscored by Visicato (2000: 18 n. 17), ve sanga/umbisag and a sanga-GARare mentioned in UE2 tab-lets.


11/37


10-11, 173-174; Steinkeller 1999: 121, n. 60). Hints atestivitiesperhaps temple-sponsoredare also presentin the texts (Burrows 1935: 18 N;Nisaba25, 50, 52, 54).

4.4.8.Notably, since some elds are labeled as ENGAN2 eld o the EN in the tablets (UE 2, 143,147bis, 160, 184, 227; c. Friberg 1997-1998: 20 n. 37,and Steinkeller 1999: 108, n. 15), one may assume therewere other landholding institutions in archaic Ur. Tisdesignation in act surely points to a domain differentrom the GAN2 nannax administered by the main citytemple, but the institution (perhaps secular) in charge

o these elds cannot be identied with certainty (seethe hypotheses offered by Englund 1998: 209; Pettinato1999: 106).

4.4.9.Te system portrayed in the tablets is mostly lo-cal and there seem to be no clues or reconstructing thesettlement pattern or the hydrology around Ur (Burrows1935: 13 K; Lecompte 2013: 20). Some documents,however, can be used to broaden our understanding oextra-site contacts that Ur may have entertained in this

phase (c. Bauer 1987; Burrows 1935: 21 P; Lecompte2013: 12-15; Lecompte 2014b).

4.4.10. wo recently published tablets shed light onactivities connected to travels or envoys o conscriptedworkers.Nisaba25, 61, lists quantities o beer entrustedto offi cials (one kas4messenger or courier) or travel ordelivery, and may be considered a orerunner o the Ur IIImessenger texts. In this light, Selz (2013, 2014) recentlyargued that such texts can be connected to long-distancetravel o a commercial, military or religious nature. Telatter tablet (Nisaba 25, 62) lists individuals (certainly

more than 200 and possibly up to 400 men) sent rom Urto an institution (e2-nun-gal) located at Uruk, affordingevidence o strong integration between these two cities.Te individuals mentioned in the tablet are interpretedby Lecompte (2013: 150-153) as a task-oriented group oworkers, perhaps conscripted, sent to Uruk.15One may

15 G. Marchesi, however, inorms me that the e2-nun-galmay have been a detention acility. On prisons and deten-tion structures in the cuneiorm sources c. Civil 1993.

able 2Synopsis o the contextual and unctional data available or the sealings and tablets om secure stratied deposits om archaic Ur.

Date Phase Layer No. sealings Sealed items No. tabletsJN 1 Pit F K 5 2 reed matting

container-

Pit G 21 5 door pegs, 5jars

3

ED I(rst half)

2 Pit Z SIS 8 30 3 door pegs,7 jars, 1 reed

mattingcontainer

1

Pit Z SIS 7/6 22 4 door pegs, 3jars, 1 reedcontainer

2

Pit W SIS 7/6 15 8 door pegs, 5jars, 1 reedcontainer

-

Pit F Level H 2 2 jars -

ED I(second half)

3 Pits Z -Y SIS(6-)5-4

22 5 door pegs, 4jars, , 1 sack, 1package

3

Pit W SIS 5/4 207 88 door pegs, 48jars, 11

containers (woodor reed), 9 tags

19

Pit D+PG1332 49 5 door pegs, 8jars, 1 reedcontainer

41

Ancient Room +Houses

4 1 woodencontainer

213

Pit F Level E 2 1 pot -

3b Pit X 48 33 door pegs, 8jars

33


12/37page 12

of 37

Cuneiorm Digital Library Journal2015:2

thereore speculate whether these people were recruitedor corve labor by a powerul institution in the city oUruk (c. Steinkeller 2015: 17).

4.4.11.Tis brie overview makes clear that an articu-late political structure with high offi ces and political ti-tles was rmly established by this time, but the presence

o monarchic institutions in archaic Ur cannot be ascer-tained. Ur certainly had economic, political and culturalties with towns located in southern Mesopotamia. Withsome o them, there may have been cooperation andcoordination o activities; while some others, probablythose such as Lagash and Uruk that were ruled by kings,may have been paramount in the region and may havehad the power to conscript laborers rom other towns (N.Marchetti and G. Marchesi, personal communication; c.n. 22 here). Further evidence o inter-city cooperation isafforded by the City Seals impressions (see 6.6 below).

5. Pathways to Complexity: Urban Dynamics andSocial Geometries5.1.owards a New Narrative of Archaic Ur Settle-ment Patterns5.1.1.Excavated data provide the baseline to iner thechange o socio-economic organizations in early Ur.Change in practicein this case household and su-pra-household organizational patternsis analyzed herewith the aim o highlighting systemic change. Field ev-idence rom the region is also used to discover relation-ships between settlement patterns and land use. Archae-ological data allows us to identiy three organizationalphases or this settlement:

Phase 1: the debris o Pit G (1-5), Pit F householdremains (Levels K-I), and part o the Jemdet Nasr cem-etery burials.

Phase 2: SIS 8-6 debris, Pit F household remains (Lev-els H-G), part o the JN cemetery burials.

Phase 3a: the assemblages rom SIS 5/4 and connectedwaste layers, the administrative quarter and Pit Fhousehold remains in Levels F-E (c. gure 4).

5.2.Phase 1 (Jemdet Nasr Period)

5.2.1.Settlement patterns are hard to read or this phase,due to the act that sites are deeply buried by silt in the al-luvial plain and also because Adams and Wright were notable to establish reliable ceramic markers or the JN pe-riod (Wright 1981: 327). Nevertheless, a trend to ewerand larger settlements, seemingly concentrated in the Urarea, has been noted or the inception o the 3rd millen-nium (Wright 1981: gs. 18-19; c. also Wilkinson, Ur& Hritz 2013: 44-48; Pournelle 2013: 24-26). A canalbranching off the Euphrates and running rom Uruk to-

ward Eridu, dug, according to Wright (1981: 327), dur-ing the late 4thmillennium, was probably the main sourceo water or the area. Some sites located along this chan-nel produced late 4th-early 3rdmillennia surace materialculture (Ishan Khaiber, Sakheri Kabir, Rejibah).

5.2.2.Wright (1981: 327) suggested that Ur underwent

urban growth in this period, visible in the transorma-tion o an open craf areai.e., the pottery kilns in Pit F(Woolley 1956: 65-68, pls. 3c-d, 4a, 75)into a dwellingarea and thereore expanding the built-up surace o thetown to ca 15ha. At the same time, a low-lying area locat-ed downslope rom the area o Pit F was used as a burialground, the so-called Jemdet Nasr Cemetery (Woolley1956: 104-126, pls. 54-55; Forest 1983; Kolbus 1983;Korbel & Youzan 1979).

5.2.3. Te domestic remains in Pit F, and the debrisexcavated in Pit G, yielded a remarkably homogeneous

range o nds. Consequently, the area o reuse-produc-ing activity (i.e., midden catchment; see Boone 1987:337) or the trash o Pit G can be associated with houselots similar to those identied in Pit F (K/I levels). Teseloci provided evidence o: a) small-scale specialized pro-ductions: pottery making, stone chipping, and perhapsmat-making, basketry, rope-making; b) nished productsdiscarded afer use: pottery, stone vessels, beads, sickleblades, spindle-whorls, pegs, nails; c) tools used in agri-cultural activities, stone working, and spinning; d) stor-age o comestibles; e) ood procurement.16Pottery romthese loci is mostly painted (polychrome/monochrome;Frankort in Woolley 1929: 342-348, pl. XL), matchingthe ceramic horizon o the Jemdet Nasr period (c. Mat-thews 2002: 20-21).

5.2.4. As to inormation technologies, Pits F and Gyielded some 25 sealings, 3 seals (two cylinders, onestamp), two cuneiorm documents and what is describedas a numerical tablet (UE 2, 232-233; U 12776h).17One o these (UE2, 232) seems to be a tag bearing anoffi cial title, gal-nesag, perhaps a school exercise, whilethe tablet UE2, 233, characterized by archaic ductus,

bears the impression o a cylinder seal on the back andcan be compared to the tablets retrieved at Jemdet Nasr

16 Since house-oor assemblages rom Pit F (K-I) and wastelayers rom Pit G (1-4) display a similar composition, it issae to assume that the house remains in Pit F, Levels K-I,did not suffer much depletion activity, and thereore thementioned assemblage may reect normal use patterns.

17 For the numerical tablet (U 12776; 31-17-351H), see thephoto posted at .


13/37

Cuneiorm Digital Library Journal2015:2 page 13

of 37

(Englund & Gregoire 1991; Matthews 1993). Te pres-ence o seals and sealings within domestic contexts in-dicates localized sealing operations. Te seal-bearers canthereore be associated with the householders.

5.2.5. Tis dataset demonstrates that Ur had alreadydeveloped ull-edged administrative templates or pro-

cessing inormation related with storage and allocation oresources through sealing, accounting and writing tech-nologies at the onset o the 3rd millennium (contra Mat-thews 1997: 113). Overall, administrative bureaucracies,ormalized systems o (re)distribution, socio-economicdifferentiation, and craf economy combining householdproduction and small-scale specialization are attested orthis phase. Te imagery rom glyptics in particular indi-cates contacts with the lower Diyala basin, the rans-i-gridian corridor and lowland Khuzistan (c. Pittman1992, 1994; Marchetti 1996).

5.3.Phase 2 (First Half of the ED I Period)5.3.1. In this phase, population seemingly nucleatedaround Ur. Although Wright argued that the branchchannel passing by Eridu was probably abandoned(1969: 37, g. 4), a sounding dug in the North Moundrevealed ED I materials (Saar, Mustaa & Lloyd 1981:g 158: levels IV-V) indicating that at least this moundwas occupied in this phase. Furthermore, J. Pournelle(2013: 24) identied a site (ES 156) in the Eridu basincharacterized by JN-ED I surace material culture (to thissite ES 142 can perhaps be added; c. Wright 1981: 327).Notably, satellite images seem to suggest an environmentdominated by marshlands, dendritic channels and leveecultivation, with sparse small settlements or this area(Pournelle 2013: g. 1.6).

5.3.2. A branch canal o the Euphrates coming romnortheast and curving around the southwest side o theUr mound (c. Di Giacomo & Scardozzi 2012: gs. 12-13) was perhaps the main source o water or the areaduring the early 3rd millennium (Wright 1981: g. 19).Up the Euphrates channel, the site o Sakheri Kabir cov-ered 8ha and in between Ur and Sakheri other small vil-

lages (


14/37page 14

of 37


and burials (Jemdet Nasr Cemetery, ell al-Ubaid cem-etery), indicate large-scale distribution o mass-producedserving ceramics. Tis in turn suggests a high-level de-mand or beverages, pointing to intense easting. In ad-dition, the ceramic repertoire o this phase marks a shifrom painted to undecorated assemblages (c. Costin1991: 37-38). aken together, these data suggest a change

in production and technological patterns and a centralrole or commensal politics in this phase (c. Jennings etal., 2005; Pollock 2002).19

5.3.6.Communal drinking practices had probably bothceremonial and practical unctions, possibly embodyingthe scheme o estive labor, a voluntary short-term la-bor-mobilization strategy via the distribution o oodand drink, as well as an economic conversion mechanism(Dietler & Herbich 2001). During work bottlenecks(seeding, harvesting, storage, etc.), group labor may havebeen organized ollowing the beer arming scheme, with

alcoholic beverages as the key element to mobilize labor(c. Stone, Netting & Stone 1990: 9-15, 18-19). In thislight, beer can be considered an exchange valuable (Earle2002: 20) and it was seemingly distributed using careullypackaged and branded jars.20

5.3.7.urning now to the mortuary record, the gravesrom this phase (mostly pre-dating the SIS 5/4 phase)display kinship patterns but little investment in symbol-ism or inequality (c. Forest 1983).21On the other hand,

the presence o both sealed commodities and cuneiormdocuments indicates the existence o managing institu-tions with high-level offi cials (titles such as gal-sukkalchie secretary, are attested, c. UE2, 306 iii).

5.3.8.Tese data strands may show two decision-mak-ing levels: an offi cial level where institutional powers

administered (and perhaps centralized?) land and re-sources; and a householdlevel characterized by domesticstorage o staples and multiorm authority patterns overstoring and packaging o commodities. A broad networko easts patronage, horizontal labor mobilization strate-gies, and, judging rom the unerary record, no markedelite system, can also be inerred rom the evidence at ourdisposal. Tese patterns may suggest exible power rela-tions in social and power organization (Crumley 1995,2001), and an overall incipient political economy (Hirth1996: 222).

5.4.Phase 3 (Second Half of the ED I Period)5.4.1. Variations in the regional settlement pattern orthis phase are not discernible in the coarse-grained data-sets at our disposal, and thereore the situation depictedor Phase 2 must be considered valid also or Phase 3.

5.4.2.Te archaeological evidence rom the RC Area atUr demonstrates that the phase during which the SIS 5/4dump ormed and the administrative quarter was built,represents a period o ongoing urban remodeling andeconomic takeoff. According to H. Wright (1981: 327),Ur may have covered about 21ha at this point.22

5.4.3.Tese efforts were seemingly coordinated bypolitical powers (emergent elites) who lef traces in thewritten and archaeological record. A centralized manage-ment o resources, labor and land is strongly suggested bythe prolieration o bureaucratic control mechanisms andby records dealing with eld estates, collected and storedin one architectural context (i.e., the Ancient Room;Benati & Lecompte, orthcoming a) perhaps pertainingto a religious household. Hundreds o sealings (possiblyas many as 700) and more than 300 ragments o cunei-

orm tablets were in act retrieved rom trash areas and

19 Solid-ooted gobletsa kind o chalice suitable or drink-ingare ound in large quantities in central and southernMesopotamian sites and are considered the ceramic hall-mark o the ED I period (e.g. Delougaz & Lloyd 1942:166, g. 125).

20 Dietler & Herbich (2001: 246) stressed that collectivework events and work eastsa common eature oagrarian societiesact as an exchange mechanism andcan be used to convert symbolic and economic capital(i.e. low-value grain into prestige items such as alcohol-ic beverages and ood). By instituting work easts, thehosts are able to use symbolic capital to harness the laboro others to acquire urther capital and at the same time

augment their own prestige (247-248). Ritualized com-munal working events revolve around the need or short-term supra-household labor that, according to Martn &Herrera (2014: 69), is more ofen detected where house-holds are largely sel-suffi cient.

21 Similar indications come rom the bulk o graves datedto the rst part o the 3rd millennium at ell al-Ubaid,roughly contemporaneous with the JN cemetery at Ur(Martin 1982). Although internal variations in graveurnishings are noticeable, no evidence o social differ-entiation has been detected (Wright 1969: 87). It mustbe noted here that the development o hereditary rank-

ing has not been properly conronted by Mesopotamianarchaeologists (see the overview by Brereton 2013).

22 An estimated surace o ca. 21ha would point to an as-sumed population o between 2,000 and 4,000 inhabit-ants or Ur at the end o the ED I period, which, accord-ing to Adams three-tier hierarchy, would identiy Ur as asecond-tier settlement (c. Wilkinson, Ur & Hritz 2013:46 n. 6).


15/37


of 37

building remains located within the RC Area. Given therelationship observed between residence patterns andmidden use (Beck & Hill Jr. 2004: 320, 325), the changein discard behaviors, and a probable increase o settle-ment density, apparently reect changes in site struc-ture and social organization. Te evidence rom SIS 5/4dumps points to clusters o compounds involved in large-

scale bureaucratic activities (and specialized produc-tion?) as sources o the reuse, rather than daily domesticproduction (as or the earlier SIS). Tis interpretationis supported by the spatial analysis o structural remainspertaining to the administrative quarter, and in particu-lar by the nds o the Ancient Room.

5.4.4.Te combined study o texts and sealings demon-strates that a group o offi cials administered a system ocommodity production, storage and distribution. With-in this landscape, the temple o Nanna was probably oneo the major power nodes, with a capacity to control a

large eld estate and attached personnel.

5.4.5.Te study o the sealings rom SIS 5/4 indicatesa large-scale ow o containers and intense warehousing.Te reconstruction o the container proles demonstratesthat utilitarian vesselsmiddle-size jars with a at basewere used to store and move staple products. extual evi-dence suggests that containers, grain, beer and bread werethe main mobilized commodities (c. Lecompte 2013:10), probably used as exchange valuables.

5.4.6. Sealing techniques display a marked improve-ment with respect to the earlier specimens. Clay sealingsare not only placed at the base o the vessels necks, butlarge clay stoppers are also used to make the jars airtightand better preserve their contents, and thereore or mak-ing the jars suitable or the transport o goods (Brereton2013: 241; Jennings et al., 2005: 277). Te predominanceo door sealings (ca. 60% o the sample rom the SIS 5/4horizon) points to substantial warehousing o goods, and,given the ratio o duplicate impressions, to a large num-ber o offi cials in charge o warehouses.

5.4.7.Compound sealing practices were also developed(c. Zettler 2007: 351-358). Not only were cylinder sealsrolled on the surace o the sealings, but stamp seals andthe butt o cylinder seals were also used to counter-markthe sealings. In most cases, the sealings bear multipleimpressions. In addition, a broad series o jar stoppersand door sealings display incised patterns, probably cu-neiorm symbols, instead o seal impressions (Zettler2007: g. 5). Compound practices may point to the in-volvement o more than one seal-bearer (or a seal-bearer

equipped with multiple seals) or each sealing operation,and perhaps to the direct involvement o literate opera-tors in sealing commodities. Among the administrativetools, the so-called City Seals impressionsglypticsbearing a complex set o proto-cuneiorm symbols, inmany cases representing toponymscan be singled-out(Matthews 1993, 2013). Although no consensus has

been reached on the exact meaning o this imagery (c.Steinkeller 2002a, 2002b), it seems clear that the circula-tion o these devices attests to some kind o regional co-operation (see 6.6 below).

5.4.8.Te quantity and requency o sealing operations,as well as the number o people involved, may point to anincreased distribution o oodstuffs rom central places.It is possible that the stimulus or specialized packagingcame rom the need to mobilize consumables valued asexchange media, and to sustain an increasing number osalaried workers (Bevan 2014: 405; Earle 2002: 22). Te

disappearance o mass-produced serving vessels (solid-ooted goblets), ubiquitous in the ormer phase, maypoint to changes in consumption patterns that may berelated to changes in labor mobilization strategies.

5.4.9.Te growth o commodity exchange boosted theproduction o standardized items such as containers (ce-ramics, basketry, skins, textiles, matting, wooden boxes),leather and cloth or covers, cords (i.e. lengthened chainso transormation; Sherratt 2004), and seals.23 Tesecraf productions were probably harvested by managinginstitutions although not completely controlled.

5.4.10. Te handling o large eld estates and the re-distribution o ood allotments by managing institutionssuch as the Nanna temple point to a large-scale economicintegration (c. Earle 2002: 82-84). Tis in turn suggestsincreased centralization and a reorganization o labor,depriving a percentage o the population o direct ac-cess to resources and land (c. McCorriston 1997: 532).A general reorganization o land tenure patterns, withthe creation o estate economies holding large portionso cultivated land, can be hypothesized rom these lines

23 Little direct inormation on the seals is available. Te onlyseals retrieved in primary deposition come rom the late4thmillennium domestic layers o Pit F (Level I), wherecylinders and stamp seals have been ound alongside sealimpressions on clay. A steatite cylinder seal was also oundin the debris layer o Pit G. One baked clay cylinder sealcarved with abstract patterns comes rom the SIS 5/4horizon. Tis evidence allows us to assume that at leasta portion o the seals in use at Ur may have been made oclay.


16/37page 16

of 37


o evidence. Te loss o productive autonomy is, ac-cording to Stanish (2004: 18), one o the social costso organized labor. Altogether, changes in storage andconsumption patterns may indicate a shif in the deni-tion o prestige systems, and perhaps a tendency o townelites toward manipulating power networks by control-ling highly desired products, such as beer and agricultural

produce, critical to sustain the non-basic network and toorganize easts (c. Costin & Earle 1989).

5.4.11.Unequal access to land and resources also trig-gers changes in the societal structure, overcoming kin-ship relations (c. McCorriston 1997: 532). Te evidencerom this phase indicates permanent agencies or coordi-nation: a class o bureaucrats with different levels o re-sponsibility, possibly attached to centralized institutions(c. Frangipane 2000: 228), and most likely removedrom subsistence activities (Earle 2002: 83, 94). Further-more, the presence o school texts among the tablets, and

the use o the offi cial title dub-sar (UE2, 93), leave littledoubt as to the existence o ormal scribal training (Visi-cato 2000: 4-5, 17-18; aylor 2013: 298).24Writing andliteracy are key tools or inormation control, and prob-ably evolved alongside economic integration. Authorityover scribal systems probably now assumed a central placein the institutional ramework, as postulated by Visicato(2000: 18). In this light, labor organization, commoditi-zation phenomena, landholding patterns, commensalitymanipulation, and control over inormation processing,may be regarded as pivotal sources o power in the archaicUr political economy.

6. Remodeling the Political Economy of Archaic Ur6.1.Finance and Sources of Power in Archaic Ur6.1.1.Drawing on the oregoing analysis, I now sketchsome o the economic strategies put in place by politicalactors to maintain polities and socio-cultural institutionsat Ur, as seen archaeologically (Feinmain & Nicholas2004; Rothman and Peasnall 1999: 103). Phase 3 o theprocess described above indicates a landscape populatedby households and large institutions unctioning as socialand economic hubs in the site o Ur. Finance systems

were developed in order to enhance the arming outputnecessary to sustain the non-basic workorce, and per-haps to create marketable commodities.

6.1.2.Since all economies are embedded in their socialcontext (c. Granovetter 1985), economic behaviors and

social relations are mutually structuring. Te economicboost had in act also socio-cultural implications contrib-uting to shape social structures (and vice-versa). New lev-els o decision-making, dynamics o competition, man-agement and control can be considered as by-products othis cycle o growth (c. Earle 2002: 43-45). Institutionalpowers developed strategies to meet the needs o produc-

tion, and to service, exchange, and control resource-accu-mulation (Hirth 1996: 224). An overview o production,distribution and consumption dynamics is proposed herewith the aim o understanding the type o nance, andthe sources o power in archaic Ur (c. Costin 1991; Earle2002: 15-17).

6.2.Production-Oriented Strategies6.2.1.Te Archaic Ur economy seems to reect the sta-ple nance scheme (c. DAltroy & Earle 1985). A largenumber o individuals engaged in basic production andagriculture surely constituted most o the workorce (c.

Padgham 2014: 101). It is impossible at the moment toestimate the scale o production at Ur, but substantialinormation into the decision-making on allocating re-sources can be obtained.

6.2.2. Te manuacture o organic consumables is aundamental underpinning o early urban societies andunderscores production intensication, investments inspecialized production, secondary processing and relat-ed techniques (Sherratt 2004: 97, 101). In early complexsocieties, political economies are built upon subsistenceeconomies and thereore resource control equals politi-cal control (Earle 2002; Frangipane 2010). Within thisramework, staples are not accumulated, but mobilizedto create prestige and power. In this case, there is no starkdistinction between the valuables used in political andcommercial transactions (Frangipane 2010).

6.2.3. Staples are ofen invisible in the archaeologicalrecord, but rom the study o sealing practices we canglean that a process o commodication, seemingly or-chestrated by managing institutions, modied both pro-duction and exchange patterns o organic consumables in

archaic Ur (c. Wengrow 2010: 23). Further, investmentin standardized systems o product packaging and label-ing aimed to rationalize the exchange and maximize theoutput o trade (Bevan 2010: 39; and c. Fanselow 1990).Since agricultural products are substitutable goods, tradein oodstuffs involves heterogeneous commodities anduncertainties or the buyer/receiver. Standardization canbalance this asymmetry between buyer and seller. Stan-dardized packaging eliminates the process o weighingand measuring the product rom the transaction. Tis

24 Small tablets with ew cuneiorm signs are traditionallyinterpreted as school exercises; c.Nisaba25, 66; UE2,43, 275.


17/37


of 37

also has the advantage o preventing adulteration or ma-nipulation o the quantity o the product.

6.2.4.Branding, on the other hand, is used to provideinormation on the provenience and characteristics othe goods. Standardized goods are sold by number, notby weight or volume.25Tis reduces the skill required to

veriy quantity (Fanselow 1990: 252-254). Te establish-ment o a complex system o weights and measures canthereore be considered part o the process (Sherratt2004: 101; c. also Chambon 2003; Lecompte 2013: 15-20).

6.2.5.As stated earlier, grain, bread and beer seem tobe the most requently packaged and branded goodsin this case study. Vegetable remains rom Ur were notanalyzed, but plant remains rom Sakheri Sughir indicatethat in the early 3rdmillennium, barley (e) was probablythe main crop o the area (Wright 1969: 89-91; c. also

Helbaek 1960: 195 and Powell 1984), alongside emmer(ziz2gaz2; Lecompte 2013: 10). Given the dietary impor-tance o beer in Mesopotamia (Damerow 2012b; Katz &Voigt 1986), a considerable labor input was required orboth daily consumption and sponsored easts (Jenningset al., 2005). In particular, easting events require sur-plus production and labor during the weeks immediatelybeore the event, considering the short shel-lie o beer.Packaging o jars may also have been instrumental to pre-vent the spoilage o such beverages. Beer was seeminglyproduced in two types: ka sag high quality beer andka e barley beer (Lecompte 2013: 10). Te deliveryo ingredients and products (e.g. Nisaba25, 25, 50), set-ting up o acilities, and assembling o the workorce wereperhaps coordinated by sponsoring institutions, whereashousehold-level production is not documented.

6.2.6. In addition, specialized herding strategies aim-ing at maximizing ber, milk and meat production (ex-portable secondary products) may have been put in placeby centralized institutions (c. Stein 2005). Empiricalevidence is regrettably meager or early 3rdmillenniumsouthern Mesopotamia (McCorriston 1997: 526-527).

For Ur, some inormation on animal husbandry can begathered rom the texts (UE2, 3, 16, 24, 47, 186, 231,237, 255; Lecompte 2014a) and the visual media (i.e.,glyptics; c. Legrain 1936). According to H. Wright(1969) animals were kept in large herds, o which 30-35% was eaten every year. Hints at sheep plucking are alsopresent (UE2, 80; on meat consumption, c. Widell et

al., 2013: 94-96). It is, however, hard to tell whether thisproduction was maximization-oriented or not. In thesame vein, the demand or textiles was surely high, butthey are little attested in the sources (e.g. UE 2, 373)and no substantial archaeological evidence about weav-ing (ax/wool) is available (c. R . Wright 2013).26

6.2.7.Faunal and plant remains rom Sakheri Sughir in-dicate sh as a major source o ood, ollowed by sheep,goat and cattle, with sheep and goats outnumberingcattle by 5 to 1 (Wright 1969: 89-92, tables 12, 14).27Te repertoire is completed by wild and domestic ani-mals (onagers, pigs, ducks, doves, water mussels, gazelles,dogs, mongoose, and bandicoot rats). Wild plants such asreeds (club rush), tamarisk, and poplar were used or matmaking and architectural elements, respectively. Poplarin particular is ofen mentioned in the archaic texts (e.g.UE2, 241). Knotweed could have been used or odder.Other cultivations attested in the sources are grapes and

palm (UE2, 209; Nisaba25, 33; Burrows 1935: 9-11D; Postgate 1987: 117).

6.2.8. From these elements one may argue that threemain ecological niches were exploited by these communi-ties: 1) levee irrigation systems or cereal cultivation (le-vee slopes), and ruit (palms) cultivation (levee crests); 2)wetlands and ood basins or reeds, sh, waterowl andgrazing (cattle); 3) steppe-like areas or sheep and goathusbandry (c. Wilkinson, Rayne & Jotheri 2015).

6.3.Labor Mobilization6.3.1. A staple economy requires investment in land-scape. As estimated by H. Wright (1969: 95-97), plowingand seeding were probably the most labor-intensive activ-ities, especially during the months o the harvest (April-August), when 5,000 to 10,000ha o cultivated land mayhave required attention.28o this, the workload required

26 A ew spindle-whorls have been retrieved in domesticcontexts and reuse layers (Benati 2014: g. 6: no. 9).

27 Fish are mentioned in the tablet UE 2, 19, alongside

ducks, and in Nisaba25, 55. On the importance o shor early Mesopotamian economy see Englund 1998:128-143.

28 Wright (1969: 13-17, g. 4), calculated 3,000ha as theagricultural catchment o Ur in this phase. However, i

we estimate that 2.5ha o land would be required to eedone person or one year (Miller 1982), and i we assumethat Ur was populated by 2,000-4,000 people, then theagricultural catchment would be between 5,000 and10,000 ha (50-100 sq km). Recent paleo-climatologicalstudies on the igris-Euphrates hydrological cycles in-dicate that crop cultivation took place during the winter

25 C. or instance UE 2, 22, where bread loaves are ac-counted or by discrete units, not by weight.


18/37page 18

of 37


or water control (c. Hunt 1988; Wilkinson & Hritz2013: 23, 27-28; Wilkinson, Rayne & Jotheri 2015), pre-paring land or cultivation (c. Padgham 2014: 36-38),tending horticulture, and construction works shouldbe added (Widell et al., 2013b: 85-89).29Te decision-making o some o these activities can be reconstructedas ollows.

6.3.2.Te construction activity related to the admin-istrative quarter and the debris o the SIS layers make itclear that large-scale building programs were ongoing atthe time. Tis suggests that institutions and householdswere able to mobilize sizable workorces and raw materi-als. Mud-brick architecture requires low skill levels, butbrick making is a labor-intensive activity (c. Ochsen-schlager 2004: 95-98; Padgham 2014: 75-76). Te pro-essional titles idim, builder, idim-gal, chie builder,and nagar, carpenter, are attested in the corpus (UE2, 65, 152, 180, 186, 243, 366), indicating hierarchy and

well-established roles also in this eld.30 According toethnographic studies, bottlenecks or mud-brick basedconstruction works occur during the hot season.

6.3.3.As to the coordination o agricultural activities,two peaks o workload mark agricultural activity: plow-ing/seeding, and harvesting/crop-processing (Padgham

2014: 12; Wright 1969: 88). For the harvest, Wright(1969: 115) proposes a three-tier decision-making pro-cess, with the armers at the bottom, the ugula as coordi-nators o the workorce, and the umbisag/ensi2at the top.Tree or our levels seem to be attested also or the orga-nization o cultivation with engar, ugula, and nu-banda3coordinating tasks and workorce.31

6.3.4.Allocation o elds also required a high level ocoordination (Wright 1969: 88). Land in the texts seemsto be labeled according to use (type o crop, economicpurpose, cultivation mode), tenure, location, and perhapssoil characteristics (Burrows 1935: 12-23 J.). Land heldby the temple household o Nanna, and by other insti-tutions and households, was allotted to cultivators orsharing crops, in exchange or services or as prebend (at-tached personnel, offi cials, etc.; see Friberg 1997-1998:50-53). Independent armers and agro-pastoralist groupsprobably co-existed with centralized institutions, though

little is attested in the records. Te small-scale excavationsconducted in contemporaneous rural centers do not al-low us to assess the level o integration between the urbancenter and the rural areas in relation to land use; it seems,however, that some sort o coordination between townsin the Ur enclave was organized and probably overseenby offi cials bearing the title ensi2(c. 4.4 and gure 6).Although tentative, Wright (1969: 115) hypothesizedthree-tier decision making or the land allotments, withminor cultivators (engar) receiving 10-15 iku, ugula-rankadministrators receiving 30-180 iku, and nu-banda3-rankoffi cials holding 300-1100 iku o land.32

6.3.5. A nodal point within this system was certainlyrepresented by storing practices (c. in general Paulette2015). Direct evidence o storage is not available, but in-

(Adams 2004: 42; Widell et al., 2013b: 85-97, table 2).On land-use and water management, c. also Hunt 1988:chart 1; Wilkinson & Hritz 2013; Widell et al., 2013:

66-75. On ood sources, cultivation and herding practicesin early Mesopotamia, c. Algaze 2005: 10-12; Paulette2013a, 2013b; Widell 2013. Algaze (2005) and Pournelle(2013) stress the importance o the interaction betweenurban settlements and marshlands, with the ormer har-

vesting wetland resources throughout the 3rdmillennium.29 Cuneiorm and eld evidence or water management

and canal construction is elusive or early Mesopotamia(Widell et al., 2013: 68-70). Recent studies (Wilkinson2013: 43, gs. 2.4a-b; Wilkinson, Rayne & Jotheri 2015)stress that short and steep canals driven down to leveeslopes correspond to traditional southern Mesopotamianagricultural systems, at least rom the 3rd millennium.

Tese would have been manageable by small-scale com-munities and kin groups pointing to heterogeneouspatterns o agricultural activity, encompassing centrallysponsored enterprises (main channels) and independentinrastructures. Notably, a less centralized picture alsoemerges rom the reevaluation o late 3rd millennium

written sources (c. Rost 2011). Note the possible hints atwater management items in some archaic tablets (Burrows1935: 11 E).

30 According to Wright (1969: 104), reed products, wood-en poles, logs, and building materials are accounted or insome tablets (UE2, 23-25, 48, 138, 209, 230, 235).

31 O course, hierarchic relationships between these actorsare not well understood. According to the review car-ried out by Wright (1969: 108-112), cultivated land issurveyed, divided, allotted and sub-allotted in varyingsizes. Notably, the reconstruction o the ancient roominventory indicates an internally coherent archive mainlycomposed o records dealing with cultivated elds. Tisevidence points to the role o the Nanna temple as a majorlandholding institution (Benati & Lecompte orthcom-ing a).

32 Note however that this hypothesis seems to be shapedupon later evidence (i.e. Ur III period organization, c.

Widell 2013: 61, g. 3.4). In general, only two levels odecision-making are clearly discernible in the recordsdealing with eld allocation: 1) the administrative rame-

work allocating resources; 2) the individuals receiving theallotments (ofen mentioned by name, not by title; C.Lecompte personal communication).


19/37


of 37

ormation on the handling o large quantities o cereal byhigh-level offi cials is given by the textual sources (see 4.3;c. Paulette 2013a: 106-108). Also, the clay sealings romthe Phase 3 layer indicate intense warehousing o staples.Successul stockpiling o resources can buffer ood stressand create economic differentiation. Surplus accumula-tion provides the substances or ood allotments to waged

personnel, non-ood producers, and or distribution oseeds to direct cultivators (Wright 1969: 112).

6.3.6. In contrast with these tightly regulated opera-tions, sheep/goat husbandry and plowing/seeding arelittle attested in the records (note the mention o the ti-tle musubxshepherd/herdsman o donkeys,Nisaba25,52). Wright (1969: 116) suggested that these activitiesrequired only two decision-making levels.

6.3.7.Unskilled or basic labor was perhaps mobilizedthrough communal work events, rotational drafs (Hirth

1996: 211), and in part through waged and corve sys-tems. Low numbers o servants were also probably usedor domestic activities by large households or institutions(Steinkeller 2015: 6-7).

6.3.8.In arming communities, a common way or pool-ing labor is via organizing estive-labor parties, where agroup o men or women works or the benet o a hostwho in exchange provides ood and drinks (Dietler &Herbich 2001; Kennedy 2012; aul 1983). Commu-nal work events are undamental or mobilizing inter-household labor ows during work shortages and orlarge-scale public undertakings. According to Dietler& Herbich (2001), two types o working easts can bedistinguished: the voluntary orm in which participants(usually o equal socio-economic status) are drawn by thehosts reputation; and obligatory easts, or corve labor,where there is institutionalized authority. Notably, cor-ve labor also reects the work east scheme.

6.3.9. Waged labor may represent a third way besidework easts and corve. In this case, workers are paidthrough xed allotments o goods, mainly oodstuffs,

plus daily meals, or several months o the year (c. Stein-keller 2015). People that do not possess the means towork their land, or that do not hold land, usually makethemselves available or waged labor. Ethnographic re-search demonstrates that both systems are ofen attestedsimultaneously (aul 1983). Although most householdswere able to engage in some sort o easting, large-scaleeasts require planning, manpower and a surplus o ag-ricultural produce (Dietler 2001: 80). Hospitality isthereore ofen exploited by the wealthy as a strategy to

build prestige and social inequality. Within centralizedinstitutional rameworks, work may have been mobilizedas waged/corve labor, while at a household level workeasts may have been the main system to mobilize short-term labor.

6.3.10. As demonstrated by aul (1983) cooperative

labor in act tends to be ineffi cient and expensive, bothin terms o immediate costs or provisioning ood, andin terms o uture engagement in other work-party net-works (there is an obligation to reciprocate work). Wagelabor is generally cheaper and more effi cient, but it de-pends on the availability o paid workers. Although bothmodes accrue return o value or sponsors, waged labor ismore affordable or large land-holders, and provides themeans to extract large surpluses.

6.4.Utilitarian and Luxury Goods Production6.4.1.Inormation on production o non-perishable

goods is scarce at Ur. Almost no specialized productionloci or debris have been identied or the layers examinedat Ur, and no specic studies on the products have beencarried out.33 Crafsmen (simug, smith, baar4 pot-ter; c. UE2, 44, 62, 358, etc.), and attached person-nel (non-basic workorce), are identied in the texts, butthere is no clear indication o the type o control eventu-ally exerted by the institutions over their production.

6.4.2.It is possible that, as advocated by G. Stein (1994),a dual circuit was in place, with independent workshopsor the production o utilitarian commodities and crafproduction institutionally controlled and nancedthrough the agricultural surplus (on pottery productionc. Adams 2004: 56; Steinkeller 1996). It is in act like-ly that centralized institutions had no involvement inthe large-scale provisioning o daily items, while wealthproducts and celebratory ood and drink were perhapscentrally sponsored (Stark and Garraty 2010: 44).

6.4.3.Given the scarcity o in situdomestic assemblag-es, it is not possible to investigate the size and organiza-tion o craf or household production patterns (c. Smith

2004: 82-83). Te only possible activity area documentedby Woolley is in a domestic compound (House 1) par-tially exposed in Pit F-Level H, where ragments o a pot-ters wheel were detected alongside potsherds and stoneragments (Benati 2014: 4 n. 8, 13, g. 2: L.41, table 1).Tis may point to the presence o a household potteryatelier (c. osi 1984: 24).

33 According to Woolley (1956: 75-76) spindle-whorls,bored roundels, cones, stone drill-heads and stone bowls


20/37page 20

of 37


6.4.4.Metals and textiles are sporadically cited in thetexts.34 Very little evidence o metalwork productionor stone carving comes rom the analyzed contexts, al-though the present research does not take the mortuaryrecord into close examination. Burials are in act rich innished products, such as stone and metal vessels (c.Moorey 1994: 43-45, 257-258), as well as in personal t-

tings o shell and sof-stone.35Similar burial assemblagesare documented at Khaajah and Susa at the onset o the3rdmillennium (Potts 1994: 160 n. 132), indicating thatsuch items, seemingly not socially restricted, accrued val-ue in unerary display.

6.4.5.Notably, our bull hoovespart o a compositesmall-scale animal statue in tin sheet copper hammeredover a bitumen corewere retrieved in a layer o de-bris accumulated slightly later than SIS 5/4 (Woolley1956: pl. 29: U.14462; Moorey 1994: 259; Marchettiin Marchesi & Marchetti 2011: 54 n. 153). Chemical

analyses conducted on these specimens revealed that onehoo (BM 122731) is made o rather pure copper, whileanother one (IM 8528) is tin-bronze (c. Hauptmann &Pernicka 2004: 71, 136, 1707-1707A). Notably, betweenthe 4th and the 3rdmillennium, arsenical copper seemsto be the metal o choice in Mesopotamia. Pure copperand tin-bronze appear to be extremely rare (D. . Potts1997: 168-170).36Consequently, one can conclude thatthis statue was a very high-status production, implyingexternal procurement o rare raw materials, skilled crafs-men, and complex casting activities in this phase at Ur (c.Moorey 1994: 271, 275).

6.4.6.Te archaeological evidence is backed by the men-

tion o both copper and bronze objects in one o the ar-chaic texts coming rom the Ancient Room (UE2, 373;[kindly recollated by G. Marchesi]; c. Burrows 1935:11; Moorey 1994: 252, 258). Most notably, UE2, 127,demonstrates that metals (in this case, copper) were ex-changed both as nished objects and by weight (ma-na),perhaps in the orm o ingots (c. also Wright 1969: 109-

111). I the inormation on these prestige items providesglimpses into the ceremonial consumption o high-endcommodities by the Ur social bodies, the context andscale o this production remain rather obscure.

6.5.Intra-site Spheres of Exchange6.5.1.Although this type o economy was heavilyproduction-based, one may suggest that economic up-scaling ushered in increased interaction and diversiedmodes o exchange (c. Adams 1992; Algaze 2005; Lie1992; Wilkinson, Gibson & Widell 2013). Recent head-way in understanding ancient economies allows us to

tailor strategies specically to investigate pre-industrialexchange modes (Feinman & Garraty 2010; Garraty &Stark 2010). Inormation on the modes o commod-ity exchange is quite rich or early Ur. Te circulation ooodstuff, raw materials, and craf goods at an intra-sitelevel is the primary ocus o this section (c. in generalMatthiae & Marchetti 2013).

6.5.2.Valuables were mobilized through a series ostrategies cross-cutting production, service, and distribu-tion. Food, land, raw materials, and utilitarian goods werein part distributed internally (top-down) by managinginstitutions, and perhaps in part conveyed into multipleexchange networks. In addition, taxes were collected andunequal exchange (rental o land) was also apparentlypracticed.

6.5.3. Sociological instances can be gleaned rom ar-chaeological evidence. Te lines o evidence related to theow o comestibles, warehousing, weighing/accounting,and rationing suggest tight control over resource alloca-tion and dissemination o goods rom central locations.In this case, packaged staple products were the main mo-

bilized commodities and were likely used to sustain thenon-basic sector o the population and as payments orworkers (wages/salaries/allotments, delivery o ingre-dients). Te change in storage patterns in act suggestssupra-domestic coordination or warehousing and mobi-lization o agricultural resources or nancing elite activ-ities.

6.5.4.As stressed by Stark and Garraty (2010: 35), goodsthat can be reproduced incrementally, such as oodstuffs,

ragments were retrieved within SIS 5/4 in Pit W, perhapsindicating textile processing and stone carving or themidden catchment o SIS 5/4.

34 As noted by Wright (1969: 109-110), UE2, 127, is aparticularly important record enlisting metal containersand quantities o copper alongside animals and land per-taining to the Nanna shrine. Wright proposed to interpretthe tablet as a payment or land rented out by the temple,but we cannot rule out the possibility that the tablet is a

sale document since elds are usually paid in metal in EDMesopotamia (c. Gelb, Steinkeller & Whiting 1991).35 Te analysis o a metal tool rom a grave o the JN ceme-

tery dug in Pit X (JNG 177) revealed arsenic copper (c.Hauptmann & Pernicka 2004: 70, 135, no. 1658).

36 Analyses on some sh-hooks rom the household assem-blage o Pit F (K-I; Hauptmann & Pernicka 2004: nos.1615, 1618, 1620), revealed copper and arsenical cop-

per, in line with the general trend or utilitarian items inBronze Age Mesopotamia (Moorey 1994: 252-253, 258;D. . Potts 1997: 167-168).


21/37


of 37

are usually involved in enlargingspheres o market exchange. In thislight, staple overstock may also havebeen bartered or non-perishable andcraf goods, and thereore channeledoutside the institutional redistribu-tive ramework. Te same goes or

unprocessed products transormedinto ood/beverages. Tis may alsohave been an outlet or convertingstaple products into high-value goodsor elite consumption (Garraty 2010:22, 29; Steinkeller 2015: 28). A largeportion o the population, howev-er, was likely engaged in small-scaleprivate enterprise or provisioningo everyday domestic goods, but thisis hard to trace in the archaeologicalrecord (e.g., the direct barter o spe-

cialized products documented in theHawaiian chiedoms; see Earle 2002:95).

6.5.5.Another important venueor economic transers may havebeen commensal politics. Te textualsources in act mention easts involv-ing the distribution and consumptiono ood and drinks (Burrows 1935: 18 N; Lecompte 2013: 11-12). Feast-ing is also well attested in the archae-ological record and vividly portrayedin early 3rdmillennium imagery (c. Zettler 2011, amongothers). As stressed by Stanish (2004: 9, 16-19) ritualeatures unction as guarantees o the redistribution owealth produced through cooperative labor. Te repe-tition o political rituals involving economic distribu-tion not only ensures the equitable redistribution o thewealth produced, but also produces separation betweenhosts and guests/workers, publicizing rank and power. Inthis light, competitive easting can

re-modeling political economy in early 3rd millennium bc mesopotamia patterns of socio-economic...

Documents