288 UR
HiULHKiKAPIIY
Aldred. Cyril. AMhtihitfn, I'h.tnwH of Lgypi: A Seir Study. London,
Rierhner. Si L '/V       .Vnr Kingdom in tgyT<- & 1100-664 AC* «4
in n, juxk^I jnJ ( *fii»>fcv»«-*' Imnligatum WannmMct. 1975 Bit 1 '. 1 II. Ancient KaiwJi of Hgypl tlittonsal Diwumtnit Innn
tht /.I-.'..' /.■'(..■ r.'.,/'./■..... (.'(Hk/u,'i(. 5 vol*.1 '.l.u .1,' ■ 1906-1907
t'lTin . |.ii..%L'.   AhxWMI im /■:>■■.■:...:   I • mdon i9s2.
Ccmy. Jaroalav. .4 <ii*n*tMiry »>< ITurfaw* ji Ikeba m /*< R/wiudr
r.    ; Cairo. 1973. BdfMBBf William I'. "'Irie Government ami ihc Governed in ihc
i ■; 1 1 ir. Kmnn  " .' .<rru/ i1/ .Vftir tits urn Studies 6 (1947): i5j-
Ito.
Gardiner. AUn II.. rd Tht W u'Nur Pdpvnu. 4 voh l^ndon. 1941. Hayes. William (I. /V Sitptet \<f ligypi: .1 /Uungmund fur tht Study of
the IxYpiiaii Antiquum in tht Aff/mpc/iun .Museum W /ft. Vol. 2
New York. 1959 Hoffman. Michael A H*yp< ftoWr tkt Plvmokj. New York. 1979. Ki JI        Donald H  llmory and (hrtmotogy      Ik liifhtttnth livtuisty
of Zyjvpl. Tortinm. 1967
/ami IIawas\
UR (Ar., Tell cl-Muqayyar), site located in southern Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) along a former branch of the Euphrates River (30*56' *4, 46*08' E). The site «M idennfied as Ur in ihe 1850s by ihc British consul at Basra, J. I.:. Taylor, who was employed by the British Museum to investigate a number of southern Mcsopotamian sites, aboul which almost noihing was known at the time. He dug at ihe comers of ihc /iggurat mound ai the siie, uncovering a number of baked clay cylinders inscribed in cuneiform. The inscriptions detail the history of tlie building of the /iggurat and named the city as Ur, which for many people implied an identification with the biblical city of Ur of the Chaldccs, the birthplace of Abraham (On. 11:28—31).
Following Taylor's work, the site was left untouched until nearly the end of the century, when a leum from the University of Pennsylvania excavated there briefly. Immediately following World War I. R. Uampbcll Thompson and H. R. Hall tried their luck. It is C. I.conard Woollcy. however, director of twelve held seasons at the site (1922-1934), who is credited with most of the archaeological work ai Ur.
The Woollcy expedition was jointly sponsored by the University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania and the Bntish Museum. It was a model for its rime in terms of the quality of much of the field work and the timeliness and thoroughness with which the work was published Woollcy's engaging and prolific popular prose, his flair for publicity, the spectacular nature of some of his hnds, and the connections he drew between Ur and the Bible all combined to produce strong public interest in his work, rivaling that elicited by King Tuiankhamun's lomb in Egypt. Since 1934, work at ihe site has been limited to that associated with the restoration of the /.iggurat by Iraqi archaeologists.
I j u.is occupied Ini approximate!) foul ihOUMnd ycaft,
from the Ubaid (fifth millennium) to the Nco-Babyl (mid-first millennium bct.) periods. However, us 1« im ably the case on large, deeply stratified Near mounds, the earlier phases of occupation have been far! extensively investigated because of their inaccessibility. I long history has also played a role in limiting access 10J past. The city reached its zenith in the Ur III nenod 2IO0-2O0O MX), when it was the capital of an emp«. its kings undertook extensive building programs, ohsci earlier structures. Woolley's predilection for excavating) the so-called Tcmcnos area of the siie—the location, very early in Ur's history, of maior temple* and other orate buildings—also contributes 10 a picture of life all ihat is heavily, albeit not exclusively, centered aroi community's religious and civic core.
To explore the early occupations of Ur, Woollcy strucicd his workmen to sink several deep lest pits. U« ihc fourth-millennium occupational layers (see below) 1 encountered a thick, culturally sterile layer thought to I been deposited by the action of waicr This was dubbed ihe "Flood Stratum" and interpreted as the nants of the biblical Mood In fact, the deposit may wind-borne dune or, if watcr-bomc. a product of fu*i of many floods that were common occurrences in potamia prior to modem damming of ihc rivers
Bekrn the stcnle "Flood" deposit were ihc remains Ubaid occupation. Ur may have reached a size of 10 ha 1 acres) in the Ubaid period, making n one of a num larger towns amid a landscape of predominantly small lages. However, ihc remains thai Woolley excavated a picture of ordinary domestic life. No intact archiu was recognized, bin hits of mud brick and remnants of 1 and-mud constructions were recovered, mixed with 1 nc debns including pottery with simple painted stone tools for a variety of cutting, pounding, and gni tasks; sickles made of highly fired clay; and spindle wl
In addition lo the domestic remains, the excavations 1 countered a small number of Ubaid graves. Individuals' interred on their back, accompanied by u few pot*, sionally clay figurines, and more rarely beads or bones. There are few differences in the ways these uals were treated ai death, apart from distinctions at able to age and sex.
I "be scanty excavated remains from the Uruk and J< Nasr periods (c. 3900-2900 net) arc nevertheless sul to suggest that Ur remained a town of some impot Excavations around the later /iggurat revealed an Uruk-nod icmplc platform, consisting of a terrace wall buih characteristically Uruk Rumnfu-n bricks (square in cross 1 tion) and a floor strewn wuh thousands of the clay cones favored for decorating the facades of public buildings of ins penod Elsewhere on the site pottery kilns accompanied bjr masses of pottery were uncovered. A portion of an extensive cemetery was also excavated Woollcy attributed ihe graves
UR 2K9
ID ihc Jcmdet Nasr period, but recent reevaluations assign them to the Uruk through Early Dynastic II periods. Bodies by on their side in a crouched position, frequently accompanied by clay pots, stone vesscb, and beads, and levs often by meiul (copper or lead) vessels or other small copper tons.
In the succeeding Early Dynastic period (c. 2900-2350 BCf), the temple platform, already prominent in the Uruk and Jim.lit Nasr periods, was rebuilt at least twice. Kitchens, storerooms, and a sencs of rooms interpreted by Wool-ley a* shrines were found on top of it. The temple that was presumably the principal building .hi this platform is not directly attested, having been buried beneath the massive ziggurat built by the Ur III king Ur-Nammu.
Not far from the temple platform was a rubbish dump, known as the seal-impression strata (SIS). The dump included burnt mud-brick debris, pottery, clay tablets, and the many clay sealings from which the strata take their name. Based on its location as well as its contents, the rubbish probably derives from temple or civic buildings of the Early Dynastic period. The seal impressions include th.>sc known u the city seal impressions because of their protocunciform symbol*, which are thought to stand for city names. The sealings had been used to close doors, presumably of storerooms, as well as jars and other containers. The relative frequency with which certain city names co-occur may relate lo the strength of economic connections between cities.
Dug into this rubbish dump were the graves of the Royal Cemetery. The cemetery was used as a burial place from the Earl) Dynastic III through the Post-Akkadian periods (c. 2600-2100 net:) and contained approximately two thousand graves (although many badly disturbed ones were unreported). The cemetery derives its name from sixteen of the graves, all of which date to the earliest portion of its use. Unlike the hundreds of other graves, these sixteen, known as the Royal Tombs, contained brick and/or stone chambers in which the dead were placed. All of the tombs contained multiple burials of individuals apparcnUy placed in the grave to accompany the principal deceased person ("human sacrifice")- Where subsequent disturbance did not remove the evidence, the tombs included great riches of precious metal and semiprecious stone jewelry, containers, weaponry, musical instruments, scab, and furniture. However, as Wooltey himself pointed out. a number of the so-called private graves also contained similar types and quantities of riches. What best distinguished the "royal" tombs were their construction and seeming evidence of human sacrifice.
On the basis of the treatment of the deceased and the discovery in several of the tombs of inscribed artifacts naming a person as "king" or "queen," Wixilley argued that these were the tombs of royalty. However, none of the inscribed artifacts were found directly associated with the principal deceased individual, and they may have been gifts from others, rather than possessions of the dead person. Al-
though it cannot be stated with certainty who was buried in the Royal Cemetery graves, a consideration of the full range of interments and comparison with bunal practices at contemporary sites suggest that the Royal Cemetery includes personnel from both religious and civic institutions
Apart from die continuing use of the Royal Cemetery for bunal. there is little direct evidence of the .Akkadian period at Ur. although contemporary texts indicate that it remained an important city. An alabaster disk showing a ritual act of libation has an inscribed dedication from Enheduanna. who was a daughter of Sargon, the founder of the Akkadian dynasty. Enheduanna served as en-priestess (high priestess) of Nan nil, the patron god of Ur Enheduanna's installation in the jiosi of en-priestess at Ur may represent one means by which Sargon sought to cloak his rule of the many city-states of Sumer and Akkad in a mantle of traditional legitimacy.
For approximately a century', from about 2100 to 2000 bcx, Ur was the capital of an empire known today as Ur III. During this time, as well as during the subsequent two centuries, Ur was an important port of trudc linking Mesopotamia with the lands along the Gulf and beyond. The empire is also well known for its elaborate bureaucracy, as attested by the large number of tablets dealing with accounting matters that have been recovered from sites of this period. The city itself attained a si/e of at least 50 ha (124 acres).
The first king of the dynasty. Ur-Nammu, began an ambitious program of building at Ur; what is known of this construction is conlincd primarily to the central religious area. Many of the buildings were finished or elaborated by King Shulgi, Ur-Nammu s son Although the destruction of Ur by the Elamitcs at the end of the Ur III dynasty resulted in the razing of most of these buildings, the foundations provide an idea of the layout of the core of the city.
A large raised area, dubbed the Temenos by Woollcy, was dedicated to the moon god. Nanna. and his wife, Ningal. as indicated by insenbed foundation deposits. Prominent within the Temenos was the ziggurat built by Ur-Nammu, on top of which the main temple probably st<x>d, although no trace of it remains. The other buildings on the ziggurat terrace were badly destroyed at the end of the Ur III period but are thought to have served similar functions to those of the Early Dynastic period. The use of the Great Court of Nanna. a sunken court immediately in front of the ziggurat terrace, is unclear Woollcy's interpretation of it as a storage building for offerings brought to the temples has been challenged: it may have served as a place where the people of the city could approach the deities and the sacred symbols of them. Other huilding* within the Temenos include the Ehursag. possibly a palace; the Ganunmah (called I nun makh by Woolley), which included a bank of storage chambers; and the Giparu. built over liarly Dynastic remains of a similar building and serving as the dwelling of the cn-pnestesscs as well as their bunal place. Although there is little archaeological evidence for the l'r III city outside the
290 UK
Tcmcnos, there are indications thai n was enclosed by a wall and surrounded by river channels or canals on all but ils southern side.
The caned monument known as the stela of Ur-Nammu was found in pieces scattered around the /iggurat terrace (see figure I). Large portions of it were not recovered, but the remaining fragments show scenes of Ur-Nammu receiving orders to build Nanna's temple and illustrations of ani-mul sacrifice und musicians thai may represent a celebration following the completion of the building project. The inscriptions on ihe stela include a list of canals buill by order of Ur-Nammu.
Although much ui least of the city's central area was dc-
I'K. Figure I Sielc rrn icJ by t 'r-\\immu. I >aicd to UK third dynasty. (Courtesy ASOK Archive*)
stroyed in about 2000 bo:, presumably by urn Miami (cs, the city was soon rebuilt by the kings of the near city of Isin, who claimed to be ihc legitimate heirs of the) III state. Although Ur no longer served as the political 1 ital. it functioned as an important religious and coi center during the lsin-1 Jirsa period (c. 2000-1760 net).' city reached its maximum areal extent of al least 60 ha (L acres), and settlement in the immediately surrounding region seems 10 have peaked
Kxcavations in the Tcmcnm area provide testimony to the rebuilding of muny structures within it. In various excavations around the city outside the Tcmcnos. Woolley's woi revealed residential quarters, Mxtcnsivc exposure! mesne buildings were made in two central locations; thei known as MM. close to the southwestern edge of the Te mcn^s. and the Al I area, somewhat farther to the soul Numerous clay tablets found in the houses have been prcted as indicating thai the MM area was inhabited primarily by temple officials, whereas the occupants of the AH houses were more diverse. Both residential areas arc cota-poscd of densely packed buildings separated by narrow, winding streets. The houses are typically built around an open central courtyard onto which most of the remaining rooms opened. Woollcy argued thai the houses contained two stories, a contention that has been challenged. Nearly half of the houses contain a room that appears, on the I of its internal features, to have been used as a chjpcl. functions of Mha rooms are more difficult to specify cause of the mfreuuency of features or lack of info on where in the buildings artifacts were found. None the size, shape, and positioning of rooms shows conut consistency umong houses. Interestingly, fewer than tO| cent of the houses contain a clearly identifiable kitchc dicating that cooking and baking must often have place outside the home.
Individuals of all ages were buried beneath the Hoars the houses, in simple pits, clay coffins, pots, or brick 1 accompanied by a range of pottery and jewelry, incK beads, bracelets, linger rings, and earrings. Some individuals received greater wealth in grave offerings than others.
With the nsc of Babylon in the eighteenth century bce and continuing environmental degradation in southern Sumer, Ur's fortunes, as well as those of the other southern cruet, began to decline. The city wall of Ur and many of the major public buildings were once again razed, this time following a maior rebellion by the southern cities against Babylon's ovcriordship in about 1740 bck. Nonetheless, the city remained occupied, and there is no indication of substantial destruction in the residential areas excavated. Dunng the next few centuries people repaired and reused standing houses, rather than build new ones, and continued the practice of burying their dead beneath house floors. In abool 1400 BCE. the Kassite king Kungal/u restored many of the religious buildings in the Tcmcnos area. Accompanying the
URARTU 291
renewed building in ihe ciry was a proliferation of rural sct-demcni.
Although ihc city remained occupied for another millennium, it seems not to have regained its curlier glory. A SCV-cnth-century i«:r governor undciiotik restoration and some new building activities in the Tcmcnoa area, and ihe Nco-Babylonian kings Nebuchadrezzar (604-562 hce) and Na-idus (555-539 i" i had the ziggurat. Temeno* wall, and seme residential area* rebuilt. However, not long after, in 400 i" 1 the city was abandoned I.V.- oho Isin; Ijirsa; Mesopotamia, .inij, on Ancient Mesopotamia, llbaid; and Uruk-Warkal
BIBLIOGRAPHY
John A. "Ur 'The Kannilc 1'criod and ihc I'cnod of the Atsynan Kins* "' (Mmia/w j8 (1969): 310-54k. Although meant a* i book ri- * k .1, this piece remains in important1  * i si i. ei of the Utc Kcond- and ti:»i - millennium Bd remains at Ur. Qavpin. IX«nimguc It drrge J'l'r au n...'. xl'lfammumt*. Geneva, 19b6 Fsaminaiion oi ihc dency at Ur in ihc early second millennium ■a. hosed on the anal vw of text* found in ihc residential quarters. Hicomhinaimti ssiih archaeological evidence < !!i u \ 1; 1 ahotraceslife Mitohnol individual! and households. Kolnus, Sn/aiinc. "/ur Chronologic des sog (',.,■,,.,■ Na*r-l-ricdhoh> in Ur." /rua 4%i (1983): 7-17. Reexamination of ihc to-called Jcm-del Natl cemetery ai Ur. ihiwnj; that it» use spans a greater lime period than Woollcy initially tlkHighi Lob), lidward "Social Vjruiion in Ancient Mesopotamia: An Architectural and Mortuary Analyst* of Ur m the I art) Second Millennium B.C " Pti l> dr» , State Univcrury of Nev* York. Slony Brouk. 1990 Systematic examination of the early second millennium m mideniwl quarters at Ur. including analysis of the architectural patterns and graves, laihy alio include* previously unpublished data on the house*, retrieved (torn an examination of Woollcy's field notcv Matthews. R.J. Ctiiti, Senb.onJ Iťníiw Anhuu Stal ImprrnúiHifnm JrmJtl Katr anJ I'r Maicnalien /u den (rulicn Schritizcugnissen act Yordcrcn Orient*, vol ; Berlin. 1 99 i A rrxonsidcnilion of the use and meamnf of the city scalřngv taking accouni of recent rean-aryies of ihe eartmt cuneiform »nang system m -■;. . P. R. S   \» (Mi IX. Wc Knovs About ihe People Buried m the Royal Cemctcry>" Hxf*Jit*m 20 t (1977): 24-40 Succiner and highly readable examination of ihc Royal Tombs, in which Moorey shows lhal Woollcy s argument that they represent ihc burial place* of royally can be challenged. Moorey, P. K. S "Where Did They Bury ihc Kings of the IHrd Dynamy of Ur>" Iran 46 1 (1984! l—it*- Addresses the question of the uses of the mausolea usually attributed to the kings of the Ur 111 dynasty Moorey shows that although these must hase been the tombs of imponanl people, they were not necessarily the places where rulers were ml erred Ntsscn, Ham I /ur / • u• mug Ja k,-tuy !•>..■ tvm I • Boon. 1966 Maior rcanalvsrs of the Royal Cemetery graves in an attempt 10 refine and reassess Iheir chronological ascription. Pollock, Sutan "Chronology of the Royal Cemetery of Ur." /ma 47 (19h5): u9-IfK. A more rccenl reassessment of ihc chronology of the Royal Cemetery graces, employing a different sei of mclhods than those used by Nnsen (above). PoDock. Susan "Of 1'ncstcs.ses. I'rmccs, and IsW Relation*: The Dead in the Royal Cemetery of Ur." < u.   In » *    v al í--".^-' 1
(1991)' 171-1*9 Keccni attempt at identifying ihc people buncd m
the Royal Cemetery, using a different approach than Moorey'» (above).
Van dc Mieroop, Marc. Saotly and1 I'Mtrpnst bt OU Habyimum t V Berliner Bcitragc rum Vorslcrcn Orveni. vol. 12. Berlin. 1993 Maior reexamination of the economic organization of early second millennium Ur. using evidence provided by the texts. Van de Mieroop'* study diffen from Clurpin'i (above) in it* focus on ihe economy.
WcadiH'k. Penelope. '"Ihc (rifuru al Ur." /ruv 37 U975)'- 101-118. A Mn«11. analysis of lln- rarly second-millennium (iipam. ofk-mig an example of the insights gained from a detailed examination of one building
Wmter. Irene j "Women in PuNk The Disk of Faxhcduanna. ihe Beginning of the Office i>l f>»-Pnesiess, and the Waght of Visual Hv-•dence " In laiemmt Ixm It /"ro.*. "    . -.. edited h> Jean-
Maiie Ihirand. pp 1x9-301. I*am. 1987. Through a detailed analysis Of ihc carved disk «>f blnhcduannu found al Ur, Winter argues for a tradition ol pnestoshood (hut extends back at least lo ilie I'airly Dynastic period
Woollcy. C. Leonard, ct al ( r l:\tat*itn>ns and Ur /iicutufMi /rut. 19 vols I .nodon and Itiibdclpha. 1937-1976. Definitive site reports on Wsxilley'i hebhrark. as weO as publication of the tablets and >tl>rr inscribed materials recusercd from his work.
WooAcy. C. Ixooard. Ittfikt CJuUm. Revned by P R S Moorey Ithaca. NY. 19**- A revised sersion of Wi«sflcy's .ifiginal work (1939). presenting an overs tew of hi* twelve seasons at Ur, in a style accessible 10 nompccialntv Moorey lias tudiciously unstated the hook to reflect recent consensu* on such topics as chronology and ihe reading of Siimcrian and Akkadian names
Wnghl. Henry T. ""lln Southern Margins of Sumcr Archaeological Survey ol the Area ol l-'iulu and Ur " In UtanlanJ <•) C.iiui, hy Robert MoCX Adam*, pp. 29*-M$- Chicago. 1981. Wright prcscni* the resuhi of his settlement survey of the area around Ur, placing I'r in its larger regional conical
St HAN inh-LOOt
URARTU. The highland Mate of Urartu stretched from ihc eastern hank of the upper liuphruies River to the western shores of Like Urmia, and from ihc mountain puxscs of northern Iraq to the Caucasus Mountains. The kingdom dominated eastern Anatolia in the eighth and seventh centuries i'i h is noteworthy historically for its rivalry with Assyria and archacologically for its massive fortress architecture and sophisticated metalwork. l-or a time, Urartu was the strongest state in the Near liast. Its distinctive and relatively uniform culture, much of it imposed from above, 10 judge from the royal focus of the surviving documentary and urchucological evidence, permeated this realm. Urartu's glories, however, were relatively short lived and were forgotten soon after the kingdom fell victim to a violent destruction in the late seventh or early sixth century* bli. Even the name of Urartu faded from view: it was transformed into Ararat hy laicr vocalizations imposed on the Hebrew Kible.
Origins. 'I"he word (:r,irtn is taken from Assyrian records, not from those of the Umrtinn people themselves, who culled then kingdom Bianili. When 11 first appears in texts in ihe uSirtccnth<enrury Bet in the variant form Uruatri. the term has geographic rather than political connotations. It designates a land divided among petty kingdoms in the vicinity