Tell Hadidi: One Bronze Age Site among Many in the Tabqa Dam Salvage Area
Rudolph H. Dornemann
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 270, Ancient Syria. (May, 1988), pp.
13-42.
Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-097X%28198805%290%3A270%3C13%3ATHOBAS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Z
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research is currently published by The American Schools of Oriental Research.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/journals/asor.html.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic
journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,
and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take
advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
http://www.jstor.org
Mon Jan 21 16:34:01 2008
Tell Hadidi: One Bronze Age 

Site Among Many in the 

Tabqa Dam Salvage Area 

RUDOLPHH. DORNEMANN
Milwaukee Public Museum 

Milwaukee, WI 53233 

This articlepresents the results of the excavations at Tell Hadidi in Syria between
1974 and 1978. It concentrates on the Bronze Age remains, in particular the Early
Bronze Age sequence not presented in detail in previous reports. It is now possible
not only to elucidate a complete sequence of the periods at Tell Hadidi but also to
fill in the basic outline with significant detail in many chronological phases. The
sequence at the beginning of the Bronze Age provides a particularly important
bridge between earlier Protoliterate remains and the beginning of the Early Bronze
Age tradition. Stratified diagnostic sherds define the EB I and EB II phases and
provide solid links to other excavated sequences. A large corpus of tomb pottery
fills out the basic stratified sequence for EB III through EB IV and provides
significant material with which to refine a rich ceramic inventory. Limited but
valuable evidence for parallels with different regional traditions are noted. The
Middle and Late Bronze Age sequences, reported previously, are reviewed only
briefly.
T
his article reviews the Bronze Age remains contrast to earlier building techniques at neighfrom
the Milwaukee Public Museum's boring sites, which used riemchen bricks, larger
excavations at Tell Hadidi in the context rectangular mud bricks were used in the construcof
the neighboring sites excavated in the salvage tion here. The location of the buildings shifted over
projects necessitated by the construction of the time so that the area excavated initially was inside
Tabqa Dam and the resulting Lake Assad. As the a room, while in Level 4 the exposure was prilake
water rose, many villages had to be relocated marily outside. The building entrance was flanked
(Bounni 1979),including the village of Hadidi and by two buttresses and two small benches (fig. 2).
our original base of operations (fig. 1). The site of Early Bronze 11, 111, and IV remains were badly
Hadidi has been more fortunate than others, since destroyed by Middle Bronze Age intrusions, and
only a small area on the south has been flooded. by Islamic pits and walls that came down directly
Life continues on the side away from the river as on Early Bronze I features. Final analyses of the
it was before the waters rose, but the major ferry loci and associated finds have yielded a good
crossing at Hadidi no longer exists. More than 19 separation of artifacts. The only stratified EB I1
Bronze Age sites have been surveyed or excavated and EB I11 loci on the site came from Stratum 2 in
in the northern part of the lake area, within a 20- this area. The Stratum 3 wall segment from EB IV,
mile radius of Tell Hadidi (Dornemann 1985). shown in fig. 3, was all that remained of that period
The earliest stratigraphic sequence was encoun- in Area RII, although that stratum is well docutered
during the last season of excavations in the mented elsewhere on the site.
south-central area of the high tell in Area RII. The early pottery from Area RII and the lowest
Here the site's first stratum was defined in nine fills elsewhere on the site are particularly signifiarchitectural
phases within four distinct levels. In cant. The occupation of the extensive site of
14 RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270
Fig. 1. Generalview of 1974-75 head-
quartersbuildingandexpeditioncompound,
partially submerged in 1976.
Fig. 2. The highestStratum 1
EB I structure in Area RII on
the south side of the high
tell, photographed from the
southeast.
Hadidi began at this point as a major new urban
undertaking, continuing the extraordinary tradition
of the nearby Protoliterate sites. Dominating
the horizon southwest of Hadidi is the high point
of Jebel Aruda, where Dutch archaeologists van
Driel and van Driel-Murray (1979; 1983) excavated
an impressivetemple precinct and associated
residences. Farther south, the German expeditions
(Heinrich, et al. 1969; 1970; 1971; 1973; 1974;
Strommenger 1979)and Belgian expeditions(Finet
1979)excavated portions of a well-fortified city at
Habuba Kabire-Tell Qanas. The architectural remains,
pottery, and small finds are related to the
Mesopotamian tradition, well known in particular
at .Warkaand Susa (Perkins 1949).
It is difficult not to use the term Protoliterate
when referring to the remains from Habuba and
Jebel Aruda because of the close parallels with the
southern Mesopotamian materials; but in doing so
we are extending the use of this terminology to a
very distinct area. The problem of period definition
is even more acute for the Tabqa Dam area than
for a wider Syrian context. Phase F in the Amuq
has long been seen as contemporary with Protoliterate
A and B of Mesopotamia (Watson 1965:
73-75, 82), but it also represents an assemblage
that stands in a long continuum of local traditions.
Enough characteristic features exist to tie it firmly
to other areas, but those foreign features do not
dominate the local components of the assemblage.
The quite sophisticated ceramic assemblage of the
Tabqa Dam area (Siirenhagen 1978), in contrast,
shows a decided domination by features that have
a Mesopotamian orientation, while it is difficult to
1988 TELL HADIDI 15
articulate fully the local components which, for
lack of striking continuity with the past, seem to be
secondary.
Amuq G, placed opposite the Protoliterate C
and D horizon, represents a developed Syrian
ceramictradition that basically has left behind the
chaff-faced simple ware productions of the beginning
of Amuq F, and developed as its basis the
grit-tempered simple wares that continue through
the third millennium B.C. Again there is a contrast
with the Tabqa Dam area that this time goes in
the opposite direction of the previous phase. In
the Euphrates River Valley, the Mesopotamian
features continue at first but gradually disappear
as a local repertoire of far more limited forms
becomes dominant. Regional variations between
the Euphrates Valley and the coast are clear but
we are inclined to see in.the Tabqa Dam area
materials confirmation of the Braidwoods' observations
in their division of site levels between
Phases F and G (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960).
The question of whether or not the Mesopotamian
features, like the beveled-rim bowls, indeed begin
toward the end of Phase F and continue into the
beginning of Phase G, highlights a critical problem.
Should a change be made, for instance, by
attributing Levels 20-18 at Tell Judeideh to
Phase F rather than to Phase G (Algaze, in press)?
Fig. 3. A segment of a wall
foundation, oriented eastwest,
and patches of associated
floors preserved in the
center of the plot, Area RII,
photographedfromthewest.
These later pits and foundations
left little evidence of
EB Il-IV occupationlevels.
We are inclined to accept the original proposal,
with beveled-rim bowls continuing into Phase G.
In Mesopotamia, beveled-rim bowls continue
through Eanna Level IV at Warka, but not
through Level 111, and they are said to continue
later at Nippur and elsewhere but not in the same
quantities as earlier (Hansen 1965: 202-7). The
Uruk sequence seems to parallel the situation in
Amuq G, and at Habuba, Aruda, Hadidi Stratum
1, and Phases A-F in sounding IIA at Tell
Sweyhat in the Tabqa Dam area.
Given the predominant local character of the
Amuq materials, it is appropriate to use the Early
Bronze Age I terminology, which is basically consistent
with the terminology used north and south
of Amuq. The same terminologyis appropriate for
the assemblagecharacteristic of Hadidi Stratum 1,
SweyhatA-F, Halawa Tell B, and elsewhere(to be
discussed below), but not for the earlier materials
from Habuba Kabire and Aruda. Protoliterate
terminology can be applied to the earlier phase,
since Strommenger's assessment of 'the HabubaAruda
materials (Strommenger 1980: 485-86) fits
well with the Protoliterate A and B parallels and
seems to deinonstrate a strong break with the
previous traditions.
We cannot downplay the Mesopotamian influences
but can we be certain that here indeed is
16 RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270
the manifestation of an expansive intrusion from
Mesopotamia, reaching up into Anatolia along the
Euphrates River? The existence of Mesopotamian
colonies cannot be accepted until more is known of
the dynamic impact that the spread of new technologies,
methods of communication, and urbanism
had on the settlements and cities of the Tabqa
Dam area. The immediately preceding phase is not
yet well defined, and was not encountered in the
excavations in the Tabqa Dam area. The contrast
between the latest material from Shams ed-Din
Tannira (Seeden 1981) and Habuba Kabire South
is striking, but it may be misleading because we
lack evidence for intermediate materials. Does the
Protoliterate assemblage totally dominate and alter
the local assemblage, or has it been recast as the
local expression of that culture? What stamp does
it leave on subsequent cultural phases? Do traditions
resume that were temporarily submerged in
the Protoliterate period? Does the Hadidi Stratum
1assemblage overlap to any significant degree
with what was present at Habuba and Aruda?
The limited material from Stratum 1 in Area
RII and Tell Hadidi presents, throughout the four
building phases, a strong component (about 40
percent) of beveled-rim bowl sherds (figs. 4:1-6,
10-13, 39-44; 5:l-4, 27-30), as well as sherds
with incised cross-hatching, reserved slip, and redburnished
decoration (fig. 10:7-10, 18-20), and a
few specific jar rim forms that continue the previous
tradition (figs. 4:7, 26 and 6:7-9). The small
round-bottomed bowl forms (figs. 4:15-18, 36;
and 5:6-9, 31-34), the simple cups and bowls with
slight out-turned rims (figs. 4:24, 37; 510, 11, 35,
37), and the variety of simple, neckless, shortrimmed
jar forms (figs. 4:25, 27, 28, 38; 5:13-16,
19, 24, 36; 6:l-6, 13) provide the ceramic component
that continues into Stratum 2. A specific
style of comb-incised bands seems to be a characteristic
surface treatment of this phase (figs. 4:9
and 10:26-31). If the beveled-rim bowls and the
forms related to the earlier tradition are removed,
the assemblage is the same as that at Sweyhat in
phases A-F of Sounding IIA (Holland 1976: figs.
4, 5), at Tell B at Halawa (Orthmann 1981:44-48,
plates 56, 57), at Mumbaqat in Level 4 of Steinbau
I (Orthmann and Kuhne 1974: Abb. 4-6) and
probably at Tawi, El Qatar, Tell el Hajj, and
Selenkahiye. Only Mureybit, and possibly Tawi
and Shams ed-Din Tannira, provide materials
contemporary with those at Habuba and Aruda.
Area R, unfortunately, represents only part of
the repertoire of the earliest materials from Hadidi.
These must be augmented by finds from elsewhere
on the site but unfortunately none were found
associated in situ with contemporary architectural
remains. In Area H sherds of this phase were
found in a small sounding beneath the lowest floor
level; in Area B some were in similar context but
more were in the fill layers of the Middle and Late
Bronze Age defense system (fig. 21). The same was
true in Area J on the river side of the tell, while in
Areas M and 0 the artifacts were disturbed by
recent tomb robbing.
Many areas of the site provide additions to the
collection of beveled-rim bowl sherds (fig. 10:l-5)
but Area B adds a clay cone (fig. 10:13) and
Area M contained the fragment of a bent spout
(fig. 10:6). Those discoveries raise the question of
possible earlier materials at Hadidi but the Amuq
F-G model is more likely. From Areas B, J, M,
and 0 came characteristic sherds of multiple-brush
painted decoration (fig. 10:14, 15, 17, 22, 24),
which occurs in Amuq G and H (Braidwood and
Braidwood 1960: figs. 222-26, 275-79), and a
sherd with wedge and circle incised decoration (fig.
10:25), also similar to decorated sherds found in
the Amuq (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960: figs.
220, 221, 274). Smeared wash is present in those
areas (fig. 10:8-10) but one sherd, along with one
from Area RII, would have to be considered grain
wash (fig. 10:11, 12; Amiran 1969:41-42). Combincised
bands, which decorate jars with rims similar
to that of fig. 4:7(= 10:23), are found in
Period VI at Kurban Huyuk (Algaze, in press:
plate 2:L, M; 4:B), with other forms present in
Hadidi Level 1. A considerable number of other
rims, pierced triangular-lug handles, bent spouts,
and other features characteristic of the HabubaAruda
assemblage were found in Kurban Huyuk
Period IV as well.
If, as indicated, the distinctive sherds of Hadidi 1
that relate to the Protoliterate A and B assemblage
are removed, the repertoire of forms found at other
nearby sites remains. In that context there seems to
be no reason to suppose that an earlier settlement
ever existed at Hadidi. Given the size of the
Stratum 1 settlement at Hadidi, it is difficult to
conceive that many of the sites in the immediate
vicinity could have been contemporary. Clearly
Jebel Aruda does not continue later, Habuba and
Qanas are significantly reduced in size; and Hadidi,
Sweyhat, Halawa, Mumbaqat, El Hajj, El Qatar,
and Selenkahiye continue as major sites through
significant portions of the Bronze Age. A valid
reconstruction of the area's settlement sequence
1988 TELL HADIDI 17 

can realistically be attempted only when all the
relevant materials have been published.
Stratum 2 at Hadidi is even more poorly represented
than Stratum 1. It is, however, of equal
significance when analyzed in connection with
Halawa and other sites. Only the first layer associated
with this stratum did not contain forms that
became common in EB I11 and IV (figs. 6:21-38,
7:l-22). The later layers (figs. 7:23-9:25) provide
our earliest examples of out-rolled bowl, cup, and
jar rims (figs. 7:23,24,26; 8:2,3,29,30,39,40; 9:8,
10, 19) but continue the earlier tradition of cups
and bowls (fig. 8:17-26), and jars (figs. 7:31, 34;
9:3-5; 9). This seems to provide a transition from
the EB 1-11 materials to the EB 111-IV materials,
but the amount of material that has been studied in
detail is small so that this assertion remains
tentative.
The presence of fine, low, ring bases as a unique
feature (fig. 6:35, 36 = fig. 10:32, 34) is significant
and provides concrete parallels elsewhere as the
beveled-rim bowls did earlier. In Amuq H, where
such bases occur, they are found on "cyma recta
profile" cups (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960:fig.
269: 9-12). This profile had been noted at Tell
Chagar Bazar in Level 5 (Watson 1965:77) and has
a similar small ring base. It occurs also in Level V
at Kurban Huyuk (Algaze, in press: pls. 7:B, C;
8:H, L), in the Karababa Dam area on the
Euphrates in southeastern Turkey. At Qalat el
Mundiq (Apamea) in the Orontes Valley such
bases occur on similar cups and also onjars (Balty
1981: fig. 18:12, 13, 15, 16). At Hadidi two bases
are found, and angular or more upright versions of
the characteristic rim forms (fig. 6:22, 23, 33, 34).
In one case the base and rim may belong to the
same cup (fig. 6:23, 35). At Hadidi this form is a
development of the out-turned cup form, like fig.
6:30-32, where the vessel side has been straightened
and flared out slightly. The similarities of
profile and base are clear enough, however, to
place the beginning of Hadidi 2 opposite Amuq
Phase H.
On the same horizon in the Tabqa Dam area is
the material from Tell B at Halawa (Orthmann
1981: 44-48). Though this material is similar to
that at Hadidi 1 and Sweyhat A-F, it has form
variations characteristic of the development into
Hadidi 2. The "cyma profile" is present (Orthmann
1981: plate 56:16, 18, 19, 22, 23) but not the ring
base. The selection of sherds published so far is
small. Included among this material is a red-brick
burnished ware bowl, equally characteristic of a
phase subsequent to Hadidi 1 (Orthmann 1981:
plate 56:7). This bowl strengthens the link with the
Amuq H horizon as an example of the Amuq "redblack
burnished ware" category. Though no complete
forms of such ware are found at Hadidi,
scattered red-burnished, straw-tempered sherds
with dark gray or black cores are found (fig. 11:l-
3; 6-8), as well as a few heavily burnished black
sherds with black cores (fig. 11:9, 10). It is quite
possible that these represent a phase that once was
better represented at Hadidi but was virtually
removed by later building operations. Probably
related to the same ceramic tradition are the large
storage vessels with gray or black burnish on the
outside and gray to pink to orange on the inside,
from Hadidi (fig. 11:4, 5, 11-14). Such vessels
clearly represent cultural continuity with an area
that stretches to the west and east, and date at the
earliest to the end of Amuq Phase H. They may be
considered a component of the beginning of the
EB I11 tradition, post Hadidi Stratum 2, Level 1,
rather than earlier. Parallels are well known from
many sites, including Tell Khuera; and the comparative
literature is cited by Kuhne (Kuhne 1976:
99-103, Abb. 383-89, plate 38).
The comparison of pottery forms between Hadidi
and Halawa indicates a continuous tradition
like that of Amuq Phase G to H. Looking for
parallels at other Syrian sites, it is essential to
reexamine the Hama K materials that have been,
and still are, difficult to interpret satisfactorily
without considering the levels a mixture. From
Level 6 through 1,beveled-rim bowls exist together
with red-black burnished ware forms (Fugmann
1958: figs. 46, 49, 54). Elsewhere in Syria the redblack
burnished ware follows use of beveled-rim
bowls by a considerable period, so that contemporary
use of such vessels should not be expected.
Clearly they belong in the Amuq G-H, Hadidi 1-
2, and Halawa Tell B horizons, though greater
precision is difficult. Publication of the ceramics
from beneath Palace G (Mardikh IIBl), discovered
on the acropolis at Tell Mardikh, will greatly
clarify the picture. The field sorting contained
beveled-rim bowl sherds, cup forms, and sherds
decorated with comb-incised bands characteristic
of Hadidi. Only a small selection of sherds,
assigned to Mardikh IIA, has been published so
far (Mazzoni 1985: fig. 7). Ras Ibn Hani provided
materials of the Hadidi 1-2:l horizon and the
small selection of published sherds includes characteristic
profiles. The body sherd with combincised
decoration indicates that it is contemporary
18 RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270
F=---=== &2
1
k----l
T=z
4
5
-I,
 6 

Fig. 4. Profiles (including major selections of beveled rim bowl sherds) from RII, Stratum 1, Level 1: 1-9; stratified EB I 

bowl and jar forms, Level 3A: 10-31; Level 38: 32-34; Level 4A: 35-38; Level 48: 39--44. 

1988 TELL HADIDI 19 

L
T - r Y
0 10 20 C M
Fig. 5. Stratified EB I bowl and jar profiles from RII, Stratum I , Level 4B 1-26, Level 40 27 -40
20 RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270 

Fig. 6. Stratified bowl and jar profiles from RII, Stratum 1, Level 4D: 1-20; the most diagnostic EB II profiles from
Stratum 2, Level 1: 21-38.
TELL HADIDI 

Fig. 7. EB II bowl and jar profiles from RII, Stratum 2, Level 1: 1-22; early EB Ill profiles from Stratum 2, Level 2A: 23-34.
RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270 

Fig. 8. Diagnostic early EB Ill bowl, cup, and jar profiles from RII, Stratum 2, and Level 2B.16-40.
TELL HADIDI 

h 2
Fig. 10. Stratum 1 potteryof EB 1-11 fromvariousareasof Tell Hadidi.Area B:5,7-11,13,14,17,19,25; Area F:4; Area H:1-3,31; Area J: 24; Area M: .I
0
6,22; Area 0:15,30; Area R: 12, 16, 18,20,21,23,26-29,32-34.
Fig. 11. Early Bronze11-111 red-burnishedsherds,from si
gray-black burnishedstoragevessels with triangular lug
~rfaceof lowtell: 1-3,6-8; black-burnishedsherdsfrom Area 8:9;Area L: 10;sherdsfrom
handles,from Area 8: 14;Area L:5.13; Area M:4.11.12.
26 RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270
Fig. 12. Remains of the initial
phase of a multiroom early
Bronze Age building, constructed
on virgin gravel in
Area B, photographed from
the west. The floors were constructed
beneath the levels of
the base of the wall foundations
and are better preserved
than the remains of the walls.
at least with Hadidi 1 (Bounni et al. 1979: fig. 2).
Clearly much more exists of that critical phase in
the history of ancient Syria but very little has been
exposed in archaeologicalexcavation.
Publication of the Leilan and Braq sequences
should help to refine the pottery sequence of
northeastern Syria (Weiss: 1984; 1985a; 198%;
Oates 1982; 1985). The continuing excavations at
Tell Khuera have not yet reached such early levels
so we cannot say how far east across the Jezireh
the Tabqa Dam area assemblage may have extended.
The "cyma profile" cups of Chagar Bazar 5
provide one indicator, but the "Ninevite 5" ware is
the major ceramic indicator of the developing
Early Bronze assemblages of that area. As in the
west, the Mesopotamian beveled-rim bowl was a
hallmark of the previous assemblage in the horizon
from Nineveh 3 and 4, Nuzi IX-VIII, Grai
Resh IV-11, Leilan IV, and the Braq Eye Temples;
but the exact positioning of that horizon in
relation to the phases of the Protoliterate is still
difficult. The Leilan sequence and the recent Braq
excavations (Fielden 1981; Oates 1982) will help
to refine that period in the eastern Khabur and
Assyrian areas and in their connectionsto the west.
The Dutch excavations of Hamman et-Turkman
on the Balikh River are beginning to close the gap
between the Khabur area and sites to the west
(van Loon 1983; 1985). Oates has indicated two
Uruk phases at Braq. The earlier was contemporary
with the Proliterate A and B horizons and
with the Jebel Aruda-Habuba materials; the second
was a late Uruk, Proliterate C and D horizon that
would be contemporary with "Jemdet Nasr" and
Hadidi 1.
In the next chronological horizon, in all other
areas where virgin gravel was reached the architectural
remains dated to Early Bronze 111or IV.
At Hadidi a longer though very shallow sequence
was encountered on the low eastern portion of the
tell, while a late Early Bronze111-Early Bronze IV
building in Area B represented the major exposure
on the northern edge of the high tell (fig. 12). In
Area B the latest layers of the Early Bronze Age
sequencewere removed with materials dated to the
Middle Bronze Age. In that level were found
impressive stone-built tombs and simpler tombs
cut into virgin gravel; the artifactual groups found
there contained complete forms that augmented
the finds from the Early Bronze Age stratified
sequences (Dornemann 1979: figs. 7-15). Almost
all of the tombs had been robbed, and it has been a
long, arduous task to recover as much as possible
of the original inventory of each tomb.
Tomb I from Area L (Dornemann 1979: fig. 10)
contained the largest inventory and had obviously
been used and reused over a long period. As the
reconstruction of the pottery vessels progressed, it
became evident that there was a greater range of
pottery types than we expected. Between the ex-
1988 TELL HADIDI 27 

cavated tombs and stratified layers on the tell, it
seems that the Early Bronze Age sequence at Tell
Hadidi is fairly complete. We have yet to determine
how long the EB I11 sequence extends and to
define a complex of materials for the end of EB IV.
Using mostly materials from the LI tomb (figs.
13-18) we can pick up the sequence with EB I11
forms. Simple cups (fig. 15:24, 25) that continue
the EB I tradition are well represented. Similar
cups are well documented from the western Khabur
area in Kuhne's publication of pottery from Tell
Khuera (Kuhne 1976).Equally characteristic of the
period are the globular, round-bottomed teapots
(fig. 18:9, 10, 12),well illustrated from the tombs at
Selenkahiye and Halawa (Orthmann 1981: plates
59:19,22; 62:35,71:7). Kuhne's definition of a class
of Early Bronze Age wares as "metallic ware"
(Kuhne 1976:33-72) takes on new meaning in light
of the Tomb LI materials. The broad "metallic
ware," as defined by Kuhne, can be subdivided into
four distinct groups. None of those "metallic ware"
subdivisions can be associated with the well-known
EB 11-IV metallic wares of the coastal areas and
Palestine (Kantor 1965: 15-16) and designated
Abydos ware (see Amiran 1970: 59-66). Only
occasional examples of such wares occur at Hadidi
and neighboring sites, and they are imports. A first
subdivision of "metallic ware" consists of fine-at
times bordering on egg-shell thin-jars, chalices,
bowls, and cups, and somewhat heavier ringburnished
bowls (figs. 13:1-15; 21-24; 14:1-6, 9,
10). A second subdivision is the red, narrow-linepainted
jars and chalices, represented in greater
quantity at this point at Hadidi than at any other
site (fig. 14:16-20; Dornemann 1979: fig. 13:l-5,
11-14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 24-26, 29, 30). Gray-black
burnished bottles and jars are part of a third
subdivision, represented by a wide variety of forms
at Hadidi (fig. 15: 1-19); many of them have
parallels at Mari (Parrot 1956: figs. 100, 101). A
fourth subdivision consists of a group of globular
burnished jars with a dramatic change of color
from black to red-orange or dark gray-black to
tan, from the top to the bottom of the vessel (fig.
14:11-13). Suchjars are also found at Mari (Parrot
1956: fig. 106:877). Red, narrow-line-painted jars
are also found at Mari (Perrot 1956: fig. 107:1548,
1549) and at Terqa (Kelly-Buccellati and Shelby
1977: figs. 24:TPR4 60; 25:TPR4 62, TPR4 63).
North of Hadidi, the Hypogaeum tomb at Ti1
Barsib, which has been known for many years
(Thureau-Dangin and Dunand 1936:96-1 19,plates
20-31), shows the continuity of the pottery tradition
north along the Euphrates as well as to the
south.The primary distinction of Kuhne's "metallic
ware" defines a geographical area that includes this
stretch of the Euphrates at least as far as Carchemish,
but then extending north and east to Haran
and at least to the western portion of the Khabur
triangle (Kuhne 1976: maps 1, 2,4).
Parallels to the simple ware cups from the LI
tomb (fig. 15:20-25) are well represented in the
Amuq repertoire (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960:
figs. 313:1-7; 1153-6; 1-3; 339:18-24). Corrugated
goblets (fig. 13:14,15) have parallels at other Euphrates
Valley sites. The goblets, of course, have
been used as a point of contact with Palestine but
this form and its variations, so well known at
Hama (Fugmann 1958: figs. 62, 64, 65, 74, 75,
85,93), Amuq (Braidwood and Braidwood 1960:
figs. 313:8-12; 3385-11, 15, 16; 339:25-36) and
Mardikh (Matthiae 1981: fig. 16), span at least
seven centuries. The surface finds from Mardikh
represent the hallmark shape and decoration for
cups at the end of the sequence (Matthiae 1981:
fig. 21), also well represented at the end of Hama
J (J5-J1;Fugmann 1958: figs. 74, 85, 93, 98, 103,
106) and in Amuq Phase J (Braidwood and Braidwood
1960: figs. 324:4-6; 344:9-11, 13-16), but
are not well represented in the Euphrates Valley.
Diagnostic imports occur in EB 111-IV contexts
at various Euphrates Valley sites but are extremely
rare. The Hadidi LI tomb does contain a variety
of other late Early Bronze forms, illustrated by
imported vessels with tall, narrow spouts (fig.
14:7, 8) paralleled in form at Hama (Fugmann
1958: figs. 74, 85, 98) but in wares common to the
coast. Other characteristic late forms of the Early
Bronze sequence are represented in the Hadidi
tombs, including form variations of the red, narrowline-painted
jars (fig. 13:17, 18), other teapot or
spouted jar forms (fig. 18:13-16), and multipleribbed
rims on bowls (fig. 16:18, 19, 23) and jars
(figs. 14:l-7, 11:13; 16:26; 18:5-8, 14).
Another late EB 111-EB IV tomb group from
Hadidi (figs. 19, 20) contains variations of the
normal forms for Hadidi cups (fig. 20:14, 19, 21)
and jars (figs. 19:23; 20:16, 17, 20). They may
represent variations that were of short duration in
the Hadidi tradition; or they may come from a
related tradition in one of the neighboring cultural
areas, as represented in the materials from
Mardikh II B 2 (Matthiae 1981: fig. 16; Mazzoni
1985: fig. 3:2, 4, 5, 11). Only four vessels with the
RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270 

Fig. 13. Profiles of EB Ill-IV metallic ware bowls, cups, chalices, and jars from Tomb LI
TELL HADIDI 

Fig. 14. Profiles of EB Ill-IV metallic ware jars, teapots, jug, and "red-black" jars from Tomb LI.
RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270 

Fig. 15. Profiles of EB Ill-IV metallic ware vessels and simple ware cups and bowls from Tomb LI.
TELL HADIDI 

0 10 2 0 ' C M 

Fig. 16. Profiles of EB Ill-IV simple ware bowls, strainers, chalices, lids, and jar from Tomb LI. 

RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270 

Fig. 17. Profiles of EB II I I V simple ware jars from Tomb LI. 

TELL HADIDI 

Fig. 18. Profiles of EB Ill-IV simple ware jars and teapots from Tomb LI.
RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270 

Fig. 19. Profiles of EB Ill-IV simple ware cup, bowl and jar forms from Tomb El.
1988 TELL HADIDI
Figure 19. Simple wares from Tell Hadidi Tomb El
Color Ware color Interior color Inclusions and concentration
Very pale Medium conc, very fine sand and mica.
Light brown Light conc. very fine mica and heavy conc. very fine
White sand.
Pinkish white Light conc. very fine mica and light conc. fine sand.
Pink
Reddish Light conc. very fine mica and heavy conc. very fine
Yellow sand.
White Heavy conc. medium sand.
Wh~te Light conc, medium mica, heavy conc. medium sand,
Very pale brown and light conc. coarse limestone.
Very pale brown Heavy conc. very fine sand, light conc. very fine mica.
Very pale brown Light conc. very fine mica, light conc. coarse stone.
light conc, medium sand, heavy conc. fine sand.
White Heavy conc. fine sand, light conc. coarse sand.
Pinkish gray Light conc. very fine sand.
Pinkish white
Light gray Heavy conc. very fine sand.
Gray
Very pale brown Light conc. very fine mica, light conc. coarse sand
and medium conc. very fine sand.
White
White Light conc. fine sand.
Very pale brown Light conc. medium sand, heavy conc. fine sand.
Pink Light conc. fine mica, heavy conc. very fine sand, light
Pinkish gray conc. medium limestone.
Very pale brown Light conc. medium sand, medium conc. coarse sand.
White Light conc. medium mica heavy conc. very fine sand.
Light brown
White Light conc. fine straw, heavy conc. very fine sand,
Pale yellow light conc. medium sand, light conc. coarse stone.
Very pale brown Medium conc. very fine mica, light conc. coarse limestone,
medium conc. fine sand.
Very pale brown Light conc. very fine mica, heavy conc. very fine sand.
White Light conc. medium sand, heavy conc. very fine sand. 

Very pale brown light conc. fine mica. 

Very pale brown Heavy conc. medium sand. 

Very pale brown Light conc, very fine mica, light conc. very fine lime- 

Pink stone, light conc, very fine sand. 

White Medium conc. very fine sand. 

Pink Light conc. very fine mica, heavy conc. very fine sand. 

Very pale brown Heavy conc. very fine sand. 

Very pale brown Heavy conc. medium sand, light conc. medium mica. 

White 5YR614 5YR7/4 Light conc, fine mica, heavy conc. very fine sand, light 

Very pale brown 7.5YR714 5YR716 conc. coarse limestone. 

5YR7/6
White 10YR7/3 2.5Y8/2 Heavy conc., medium sand, light conc, medium mica.
Very pale brown 10YR7/3 light conc. coarse stone.
Pale yellow 10YR7/3 10YR8/3 Heavy conc. very fine sand, light conc. coarse sand.
White 5YR616 5YR6/6 Heavy conc. very fine sand, light conc. medium sand.
Very pale brown 5YR8/4
Pale yellow 2.5Y7/4 2.5Y812 Medium conc. very fine sand.
Pale yellow
White 10YR713 10YR8/2 Heavy conc. very fine sand. medium conc, coarse
stone.
White 2.5Y7/2 5Y813 Medium conc. very fine sand.
2.5Y814
36 RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270 

Fig. 20. Profiles of EB Ill-IV simple ware teapot, "red-black" jar, lamp, cooking pot, gray metallic ware, special fine
simple ware forms, and metallic ware from Tomb El.
38 RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN BASOR 270
smeared black-painted decoration were found at
Hadidi. Two of them are from this tomb (fig.
20:16, 17) and have parallels at Khuera (Kuhne
1956: plates 33-35) as well as Mardikh.
The repertoire of Tomb EI is as rich as that of
Tomb LI. The cups (fig. 19:1-7) and bowls (fig.
19:8-21) are all found there but represent the
latest material, typologically, in LI. The same is
true of the jar (fig. 19:22, 24-34); teapot (fig.
20:1); "red-black" jar (fig. 20:2); cooking pot ware
vessels (fig. 20:3,4, 9), including several lamp fragments
and teapots (not illustrated); gray "metallic
ware" (fig. 20:5-8); fine, red narrow-line-painted
"metallic ware" vessels (fig. 20:22, 34-38), including
two of the largest such vessels found at Hadidi;
and other "metallic ware" vessels (fig. 20: 15, 18,
19, 21, 23-33), including some of the finest "egg
shell" examples from Hadidi. A few high-fired,
simple ware sherds uncharacteristic of Hadidi in
ware, shape, color and decorations are also found
(fig. 20:14-17, 20). This selection of Tomb EI
ceramics represents wares typical of what was
found in most of the tombs, as well as the
variations present only in EI. The full descriptions
should provide a firmer basis upon which parallels
from other sites may be drawn until the final report
is available.
A variety of other artifacts fill out the EB IIIIV
assemblage at Hadidi but the hand-made
figurines form a very common and typologically
distinctive class, which, though found over a wide
area through Mesopotamia and Syria, provide
basic chronological and geographical indicators
(Dornemann 1979: fig. 6; van Loon 1979: figs. 5,
6, 10; Heinrich, et al. 1973: 62-63). All Euphrates
Valley Bronze Age sites (Badri. 1980: 266-360)
provide ample representations of what was apparently
a poor man's version of the much rarer
stone sculptures from Khuera and Selenkahiye
(van Loon 1979: 107) that provide a reflection of
the rich artistic tradition so well known from
Mari, Ashur, and many Mesopotamian sites.
Much remains to be done to place these archaeological
assemblages in the context provided by
the famous palace archives of Ebla, which are
contemporary with the middle of our sequence
(Matthiae 1981). The mention of an Azu on the
Euphrates, which in at least one occurrence
(Pettinato 1981: 223) probably refers to the city at
Hadidi, provides the hope that written and artifact
records can be brought together to develop
the historical framework for the assemblages of
our area.
The sequence at Hadidi continues in Stratum 4,
although the size of the site is drastically reduced
in that stratum. Stratum 4 finds, along with materials
from Sweyhat (Holland 1977: figs. 2:7-20; 3;
5:1; 615; 7; 9) and Halawa (Orthmann 1981: 9-
38), help us to document the transition from the
Early Bronze to the Middle Bronze (Dornemann,
in press). The Middle Bronze sequence at Hadidi
is documented in greater stratigraphic detail than
the Early Bronze Age sequence, with the major
exposure in Area B (Dornemann 1979: 132, 137-
41; figs. 21-23; Dornemann, in press). Area B also
includes the major exposure of the fortification
system at Hadidi. The rebuildings of the upper
fortification system are not uniformly preserved.
Nonetheless, an excellent sequence of pottery from
the fills associated with various phases of the fortification
system supplement the typological sequence
from the occupation layers inside the walls
(fig. 21). Exposures on the west of the tell in Areas
A, H, and N provide preserved portions of the
Middle Bronze Age wall.
The basic features of the MB I1 phases were
outlined at the Mari symposiums in Chicago and
Deir ez-Zor (Dornemann, in press). A ceramic
sequence is becoming evident from early, tentative
MB IIA pottery shapes to well documented MB JIB
variations that have close parallels at Halawa
(Orthmann 1981:26-3 1;plates 44-49), Mumbaqat
(Orthmann and Kuhne 1974:Abb. 21,40,41), and
Habuba Kabire north. Those sites, all dominated
by the commanding promentory of Jebel Aruba,
obviously played an important role with Hadidi in
the Middle Bronze Age. McClellan's continuing
work at El Qatar for the University of Melbourne
(Australia) and the University of Chicago provides
another major Middle Bronze sequence from the
northern extremity of Lake Assad (Culican and
McClellan 1983-1984).
The continuing close connection between Mari
and Hadidi is evident from the available pottery
illustrations for MB IIB. It is also emphasized by
other items, such as the small clay, mold-impressed
plaque from Hadidi, which has very close stylistic
parallels with the famous mural of the investiture
scene from the palace at Mari (Dornemann 1978:
25; in press: fig. 21). A diagnostic feature of the
MB I1 assemblages of the Amuq and Khabur areas
in the style of painted pottery (Dornemann 1987;
in press). At Hadidi and other Euphrates Valley
sites, painted pottery of the period is extremely
rare. Most of the painted sherds from Hadidi are
best paralleled at Ugarit. The undecorated vessel
1988 TELL HADIDI 39
forms of the end of the Middle Bronze Age and the
beginning of the Late Bronze Age in the Amuq are
present, as well, in the 16th century B.C. sequence
at Hadidi. Those features, which are characteristic
of the coastal areas and Palestine, seem to intrude
for a short time into the Euphrates Valley. In fact,
the similarities between Hadidi and the ceramic
traditions to the south and along the coast are
made even more evident by the presence at Hadidi
of characteristic chocolate-on-cream ware and
gray-burnished vessels. The painted ware and
gray-burnished pottery represents the only decorated
pottery in the Hadidi assemblagethroughout
its history. The layers immediately beneath and
outside the 15th century B.C. Late Bronze Age
building in Area H, and cut by its foundations,
provide the major documentation for this phase in
the Euphrates Valley (Dornemann 1981:41-45).
The assemblage of the remainder of Stratum 6,
the Late Bronze Age, is well represented on at least
ten sites in the Lake Assad area. The typologically
earliest phase is represented by the final Bronze
Age occupation at Hadidi. The inventory of the
"tablet building" has been published with its range
of cooking pots, store jars, mugs, crude statues,
and tablets (Dornemann 1979; 1981).The adjacent
Dutch building, which closely parallels the tablet
building in plan and inventory, contains materials
that are later stratigraphically. Only scattered
architectural and artifact remains supplement this
last phase of occupation at Hadidi and tie it with
the inventories from Qatar, Mumbaqat, Meskene,
Fig. 21. Deposits of fill, almost
4 m thick, sectioned by
excavations on the Middle
and Late Bronze Age fortification
systems on the north
side of the tell in Area B,
photographedfrom the east.
The fortification cut was expandedto
the west in 1976to
reveal thick fills over scanty
remains of the base of the
stone fortification wall lining
the southern (inner) side of a
fosse or moat. To the south
(left), a gravel glacis of the
final Late Bronze fortification
covers patches of Early
Bronze walls and floors
and issurmountedby superimposed
Middle and Late
Bronze remains.
Faquos and Frey. Even the building plan at Hadidi
is repeated at Frey (Bounni and Matthiae 1974: 39).
At El Qatar (Snell 1983-1984), Frey (Bounni and
Matthiae 1974: 34) and Meskene (Arnaud 1975;
1982) tablets from the Hittite domination of the
area have been found.
The most dramatic remains so far-temple and
domestic architecture and the largest collection of
texts-have comefrom Meskene, the ancient Emar
(Beyer 1982). The well known materials from the
palace of Ugarit provide some of the historical
context for this final Bronze Age assemblagein this
area of the Euphrates Valley. The thrusts of the
middle Assyrian rulers at the end of the 13th and
the beginning of the 12th century B.c., and the
dramatic changes in the political history of Syria,
are reflected in a dramatic end of virtually all
urban settlement in the area. Only extremely
meager remains of the Iron Age have been encountered
in this portion of the Euphrates River
Valley. Not until the Hellenistic and Early Roman
periods does its occupation show a marked increase
once more.
NOTE
This article was presented in its original form as a
paper in a specialsessionon the archaeologyof Syria,at
the annualmeeting of the American Schoolsof Oriental
Research in Chicagoin 1984.
RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN 	 BASOR 270 

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Algaze, G.
In press 	 Kurban Hiiyiik and the Late Chalcolithic Period
in the Northwest Mesopotamian Periphery:
A Preliminary Assessment. Anatolica.
Amiran, R.
1970 Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. Rutgers,
NJ: Rutgers University.
Arnaud, D.
1975 Les textes d'Emar et la chronologie de la fin
du Bronze Rkcent. Syria 52: 87-92.
1982 	 Les textes sumero-accadiens: un florilege.
Pp. 43-52 in MeskPnC-Emar: Dix ans de
travaux 1972-1982, ed. D. Beyer. Paris: ~ d i tions
Recherche sur les civilizations.
Badrk, L.
1980 	 Lesfigurines anthropomorphes en terre cuite
a l'cige du bronze en Syrie. Institut Franqais
d'archkologie du Proche Orient. Bibliothkque
archkologique et historique 103. Paris: Paul
Geuthner.
Balty, J. C.
1981 Guide d'AmpamPe. Brussels: Muskes royaux
d'art et d'histoire.
Beyer, D., ed.
1982 	 Meskkne-Emar: dix ans de travaux 1972-
1982. Editions Rkcherche sur les civilizations.
Paris: Mission archkologique de Meskknk-
Emar.
Bounni, A.
1979 	 Campaign and Exhibition from the Euphrates
in Syria. Pp. 1-7 in Excavation Reportsfrom
the Tabqa Dam Project-Euphrates Valley
Syria, ed. D. N. Freedman. Annual of the
American Schools of Oriental Research 44.
Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental
Research.
Bounni, A,, and Matthiae, P.
1974 	 Tell Fray 1973. Pp. 33-41 in Antiquities de
I'Euphrate, ed. A. Bounni. Aleppo: Directorate
General of Antiquities and Museums of
Syria.
Bounni, A.; Lagarce, J.; Lagarce, E.; Saliby, N.; and
Badrk, L.
1979 Rapport Prkliminaire sur la troisitme campagne
de fouilles (1977) a Ibn Hani (Syrie).
Syria 56: 217-94.
Braidwood, R. J., and Braidwood, L.
1960 	 Excavations in the Plain of Antioch. I. Oriental
Institute Publications 61. Chicago: University
of Chicago.
Culican, W., and McClellan, T. L.
1983- EI-~itar:First Season of Excavations, 1982-
1984 83. Abr-Nahrain 22: 29-63.
Dornemann, R. H.
1978 Tell Hadidi: A Bronze Age City on the
Euphrates. Archaeology 31: 20-26.
1979 Tell Hadidi: A Millennium of Bronze City
Occupation. Pp. 113-51 in Excavation
Reports from the Tabqa Dam ProjectEuphrates
Syria, ed. D. N. Freedman. Annual
of the American Schools of Oriental
Research 44. Cambridge, MA: American
Schools of Oriental Research.
1981 The Late Bronze Age Pottery Tradition at
Tell Hadidi, Syria. Bulletin of the American
Schools of Oriental Research 241: 29-47, 49.
1981- Tall Hadidi. Pp. 219-23 in Ausgrabungsta-
1982 tigkeit in Syrien, ed. H. Kiihne. Archiv fur
Orientforschung 28.
1985 Salvage Excavations at Tell Hadidi in the
Euphrates River Valley. Biblical Archaeologist
48: 49-59.
1987 Early Second Millennium Ceramic Parallels
Between Tell Hadidi-Azu and Mari. In
Mari at 50: Studies in Honor of the 50th
Anniversary of the Discovery of Tell HaririMari,
ed. G. W. Young. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns.
In press The Syrian Euphrates as a Bronze Age
Cultural Unit Seen from the Point of View
of Mari and Tell Hadidi. Annales arch&ologiques
arabes syriennes.
Fielden, K.
1981 A Late Uruk Pottery Group from Tell Braq,
1978. Iraq 43: 157-66.
Finet, A.
1972 	 Aperqu sur les fouilles Belges du Tell Kannes.
Annales archPologiques arabes syriennes 22:
63-74.
1979 	 Bilan provisoire des fouilles Belges du Tell
Kannas. Pp. 79-95 in Excavation Reports
from the Tabqa Dam Project-Euphrates
Valley Syria, ed. D. N. Freedman. Annual of
the American Schools of Oriental Research
44. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of
Oriental Research.
Fugmann, E.
1958 	 Hama, Fouilles et Recherches de la Foundation
Carlsberg 1931-1983, L'architecture des
periodespri- Hellenistiques 11.1. Copenhagen:
National Museum.
Hansen, D. P.
1965 	 The Relative Chronology of Mesopotamia.
Part 2. The Pottery Sequence at Nippur from
the Middle Uruk to the End of the Old Babylonian
Period (3400-1600 B.c.). Pp. 201-13 in
1988 TELL HADIDI 	 41 

Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, ed.
R. W. Ehrich. Chicago: Chicago Press.
Heinrich, E.
1982 Die Tempe1und Heiligtiimer im Alten Mesopotamia,
2 vols. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Heinrich, E. et al.
1969 Bericht iiber die von der Deutschen OrientGesellschaft
mit Stiftung Volkswagenwerk
im Euphrattal bei Aleppo begonnenen archaologischen
Untersuchungen. Mitteilungen der
Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 101: 27-49.
1970 Zweiter vorlaufiger Bericht iiber die von der
Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft mit Mitteln
der Stiftung Volkswagenwerk in Habuba
Kabira und in Mumbaqat unternommenen
archaologischen Untersuchungen (Herbstkampagne
1969). Mitteilungen der Deutschen
Orient-Gesellschaft 102: 27-78.
1971 Dritter vorlaufiger Bericht iiber die von der
Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft mit der Stiftung
Volkswagenwerk in Habuba Kabira
und in Mumbaqat unternommenen archaologischen
Untersuchungen (Herbstkampagne
1970). Mitteilungen der Deutschen OrientGesellschaft
103: 5-58.
1973 Vierter vorlaufiger Bericht iiber die von der
Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft mit Mitteln
der Stiftung Volkswagenwerk in Habuba
Kabira (Habuba Kabira, Herbstkampagnen
1971 und 1972 sowie Testgrabung Friihjahr
1973) und in Mumbaqat (Tall Munbaqa,
Herbstkampagne 1971) unternommenen archaologischen
Untersuchungen. Mitteilungen
der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 105: 5-52.
1974 Vierter vorlaufiger Bericht iiber die von der
Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft mit Mitteln
der Stiftung Volkswagen werk in Habuba
Kabira (Habuba Kabira, Herbstkampagnen
1971 und 1972 sowie Testgrabung Friihjahr
1973) und in Mumbaqat (Tall Munbaqa,
Herbstkampagne 1971)unternommenen archaologischen
Untersuchungen (Fortsetsung).
Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft
106: 53-97.
Heusch, J. C.
1978 	 Tall Habuba Kabira im 3. und 2. Jahrtausenddie
Entwicklung der Baustruktur. Ktema 5:
159-78.
Holland, T. A.
1976 Preliminary Report on Excavations at Tell
Es-Sweyhat, Syria 1973-74. Levant 8: 36-70.
1977 Preliminary Report on Excavations at Tell
Es-Sweyhat, Syria, 1975. Levant 9: 36-65.
Kampschulte, I., and Orthmann, W.
1984 	 Graber des 3. Jahrtausends in Syrischen
Euphrattal. I. Ausgrabungen bie Tawi 1975
und 1978. Saarbriickner Beitrbe zur Altertumskunde
38. Bonn: Rudolph Habelt.
Kantor, H. J.
1965 The Relative Chronology of Egypt and Its
Foreign Correlations before the Late Bronze
Age. Pp. 1-46 in Chronologies in Old World
Archaeology, ed. R. W. Ehrich. Chicago:
University of Chicago.
Kelly-Buccellati, M., and Shelby, W. R.
1977 	 A Typology of Ceramic Vessels of the Third
and Second Millennia from the First Two
Seasons. Syro-Mesopotamian Studies 1: 4.
Malibu, CA: Undena.
Krause, C., Schuler, K., and Stucky, R.
1972 	 Tell el HUJJin Syrien: Erster vorlaufiger Bericht
Grabungskampagne 1971. Bern: Archaologisches
Seminar der Universitat von
Bern.
Kiihne, H.
1976 	 Die Keramik von Tell Chuera. Vorderasiatische
Forschungen der Max Freiherr von
Oppenheim-Stiftung 1. Berlin: Gebr. Mann.
Margueron, J. C1.
1975 Quatre campagnes de fouilles a Emar (1972-
1974): un bilan provisoire. Syria 52: 53-85.
1982 Aux marches de l'empire Hittite: une campagne
de fouille a Tell Faq'ous (Syrie), citadelle
du pays d'Astata. Pp. 47-66 in La Syrie
au Bronze RCcent: Cinquantenaire dlOugaritRas
Shamra, ed. M. Yon. Paris: ~ditions
Recherche sur les civilisations.
Margueron, J. Cl., ed.
1978 Le moyen Euphrate: Zone de contacts et
d'kchanges. Ktema 5. Strasbourg: Universiti.
des Sciences Humaines de Strasbourg.
Matthiae, M. P.
1980 Two Princely Tombs at Tell Mardikh-Ebla.
Archaeology 33: 8-17.
1981 Ebla, An Empire Rediscovered. Garden City:
Doubleday.
1984 New Discoveries at Ebla: The Excavation of
the Western Palace and the Royal Necropolis
of the Amorite Period. Biblical Archaeologist
47: 18-32.
Mazzoni, S.
1985 	 Elements of the Ceramic Culture of the
Early Syrian Ebla in Comparison with SyroPalestinian
EB IV. Bulletin of the American
Schools of Oriental Research 257: 1-18.
Oates, J.
1982 Some Late Early Dynastic 111 Pottery from
Tell Brak. Iraq 44: 205-19.
1985 Tell Brak: Uruk Pottery from the 1984 Season.
Iraq 47: 175-86.
Orthmann, W.
1981 	 Halawa 1977-1979. Saarbriickner Beitrage
zur Altertumskunde 31. Bonn: Rudolph
Habelt.
42 RUDOLPH H. DORNEMANN 	 BASOR 270
1984 Tall Halawa. Archiv fur Orientforschung 31:
142-46.
Orthmann, W., and Kuhne, H.
1974 	 Mumbaqat 1973,Vorlaufiger Bericht uber die
von der Deutschen Orient Gesellschaft mit
Mitteln der Stiftung Volkswagenwerk unternommenen
Augrabungen. Mitteilungen der
Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 106: 53-97.
Parrot, A.
1956 	 Mission archiologique de Mari, I: Le Temples
d'lshtar. Institute d'archkologie de Beyrouth.
Bibliothtque archkologique et historique 65.
Paris: Geuthner.
1959a 	 Mission archkologique de Mari, 11: Le Palais,
peintures murales. Institut d'archkologie de
Beyrouth. Bibliotheque archkologique et historique
69. Paris: Geuthner.
1959b 	 Mission archiologique de Mari 11: Le Palais,
documents et monuments. Institut d'archeologie
de Beyrouth. Bibliotheque archkologique
et historique 70. Paris: Geuthner.
Pecorella, P. E., and Salvini, M.
1984 Tall Barri/ Kaljat. Archivfur Orientforschung
28: 208-10.
Perkins, A. L.
1949 The Comparative Archeology of Early Mesopotamia.
Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization
25. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Pettinato, G.
1981 The Archives of Ebla. Garden City, NY:
Doubleday.
Seeden, H.
1981 A Stone Age Village on the Euphrates IIIV.
Berytus 29: 4-182.
Snell, D.
1983-84 The Cuneiform Text from el-Qitar. AbrNahrain
22: 159-70.
Strommenger, E.
1979 	 Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft
in Habuba Kabira. Pp. 63-78 in Excavation
Reports from the Tabqa Dam
Projects-Euphrates Valley Syria, ed. D. N.
Freedman. Annual of the American Schools
of Oriental Research 44. Cambridge, MA:
American Schools of Oriental Research.
1980 	 The Chronological Division of the Archaic
Levels of Uruk-Eanna VI to 111111: Past and
Present. American Journal of Archaeology
84: 479-87.
Surenhagen, D.
1978 Keramik produktion in Habiiba Kabira-Sud.
Berlin: Bruno Hessling.
Thureau-Dangin, F., and Dunand, M.
1936 	 Til-Barsip.Institut d'archkologie de Beyrouth.
Bibliothtque archeologique et historique 23.
Paris: Geuthner.
van Driel, G.
1983 Seals and Sealings from Jebel Aruda 1974-
1978. Akkadica 33: 34-62.
van Driel, G., and van Driel-Murray, C.
1979 Jebel Aruda 1977-1978. Akkadica 12: 2-8.
1983 Jebel Aruda 1982, A Preliminary Report.
Akkadica 33: 1-26.
van Loon, M.
1968 	 First Results of the 1967 Excavations at Tell
Selenkahiye. Annales archkologiques arabes
syriennes 18: 21-36.
1973 	 First Results of the 1972 Excavations at Tell
Selenkahiye. Annales archiologiques arabes
syriennes 23: 145-59.
1979 	 1974 and 1975 Preliminary Results of the
Excavations at Selenkahiye near Meskene,
Syria. Pp. 97-1 12 in Excavation Reports
from the Tabqa Dam Project-Euphrates
Valley Syria, ed. D. N. Freedman. Annual of
the American Schools of Oriental Research
44. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of
Oriental Research.
1982 	 H a m m h et-Turkmkn on the Balikh: Background
and First Results of the University of
Amsterdam's 1981 Excavations. Akkadica
27: 30-45.
1983 	 Hammkm et-Turkmkn on the Balikh: First
Results of the University of Amsterdam's
1982 Excavations. Akkadica 35: 1-23.
1985 	 Hammkn et-Turkmh on the Balikh: First
Results of the University of Amsterdam's
1984 Excavations. Akkadica 44: 21-40.
Watson, P. J.
1965 	 The Chronology of North Syria and North
Mesopotamia from 10,000 B.C. to 2000 B.C.
Pp. 61-100 in Chronologies in Old World
Archaeology, ed. R. W. Ehrich. Chicago:
University of Chicago.
Weiss, H.
1981- Tall Leilan. Pp. 226-29 in Ausgrabungstatig-
1982 keit in Syrien, ed. H. Kuhne. Archiv fur
Orientforschung 28: 226-29.
1983 	 Excavations at Leilan and the Origins of
North Mesopotamian Cities in the Third
Millennium B.C. Paliorient 912: 39-52.
1984 	 History from Bits of Clay: A Further Probe
in Northern Syria. Yale 47: 22-26.
1985a Tell Leilan on the Habur Plains of Syria.
Biblical Archaeologist 48: 5-32.
1985b Ebla to Damascus, H. Weiss, ed. Washington:
Smithsonian Institution.
In press The Origins of Cities in Dry-Farming Syria
and Mesopotamia in the Third Millennium
B.C. Winona Lake, IN: American Schools of
Oriental Research.
Wisemann, J. D.
1953 The Alalakh Tablets. London: British Institute
of Archaeology at Ankara.
Woolley, L.
1955 Alalakh. Oxford, England: Oxford University.