第 XLIV 巻

2023

チャルモ（ジャルモ）先史時代遺跡2022年度調査概要（英文）常木晃，渡部展也，安間齋藤了，サーリ・ジャンモ，

有，サーベル・アハメド・サーベル

青銅器時代の角型容器と化粧品：トルクメニスタン南西部スンバル渓谷
パルカイ II 遺跡出土の円錐形石製品の新たな認識（英文）セント・ジョン・シンプソン

古代都市アガデの所在地探査：先行研究の再考と課題抽出及びアガデ探査のための新方法論の構築（英文）川上直彦

メソポタミアにおけるカエル型遺物の研究（英文）常木麻衣

国士舘大学21世紀アジア学部附属
イラク古代文化研究所

© 2023 The Institute for Cultural Studies of Ancient Iraq in the School of Asia 21,
Kokushikan University, Tokyo
ISSN 0285–4406
Published by the Institute for Cultural Studies of Ancient Iraq in the School of Asia 21,
Kokushikan University, 1-1-1 Hirohakama, Machida, Tokyo, 195–8550, Japan
Printed in Japanby Letterpress Co., Ltd., Hiroshima

第 XLIV 巻
目

2023

次

CONTENTSPRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO)
PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022
Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO,Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER………

1

BRONZE AGE HORN-SHAPED CONTAINERS AND COSMETICS:
A NEW IDENTIFICATION FOR A CONICAL STONE OBJECT EXCAVATED
AT PARKHAI-II, SUMBAR VALLEY, SOUTH-WEST TURKMENISTANSt John SIMPSON………

35

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE:REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES FORFORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE Naohiko KAWAKAMI………

45

A STUDY OF FROG-SHAPED ARTEFACTS IN MESOPOTAMIA

69

国士舘大学21世紀アジア学部附属
イラク古代文化研究所

Mai TSUNEKI………

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC
AL-RĀFIDĀNINVESTIGATIONS,
Vol. XLIV 2023
2022

1

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO)
PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022
Akira TSUNEKI*, Nobuya WATANABE**, Ryo ANMA***, Sari JAMMO****,
Yu SAITOH***** and Saber Ahmed SABER******

1.

Introduction

The archaeological mission from the University of Tsukuba began to investigate the Neolithic
sites in the Iraqi-Kurdistan region in 2014. The purpose of our investigations was to reconsider
the issue of Neolithization in Iraqi-Kurdistan, where research began in the 1940s and 50s and wasstalled by political issues starting in the 1960s. With the full support of the Directorate Generalof Cultural Heritage of the Ministry of Culture of the Kurdistan Regional Government and the
Slemani Department of Cultural Heritage, we first began our research at the Qalat Said Ahmadansite, located in the Pshdar Plain. We were able to identify the cultural deposits of the end of the
Pre-Pottery Neolithic period, those of the Hassuna, Samarra, Halaf, Ubaid, and Iron Age, and haveclarified the nature of the Neolithic site located at the edge of the fan deposits [Tsuneki et al. 2015,2016, 2019].
In 2016, we began research in the Chamchamal area, which was the starting point for
Neolithization research not only in the Iraqi-Kurdistan but also in the world. The mission of the
University of Chicago, led by Professor Robert Braidwood, conducted the Jarmo Prehistoric Projectfrom 1948 to 1955 there [Braidwood et al. 1972, 1983]. They left a significant mark on the studyof Neolithization by investigating sites in the Chamchamal area. We had a strong desire to address
the issue of Neolithization from a new perspective, using a variety of modern research methods inthe same area.
Jarmo was then called Charmo, which means “white” hill in Kurdish. In order to keep as close
as possible to the local point of view, Jarmo is referred to here as Charmo. However, in a context
where academic history is at issue, it may also be called Jarmo.
To develop a more complete scheme of the Neolithization process, we must understand thelong cultural sequence from the Epi-Paleolithic to the Pottery Neolithic period. The University of
Chicago team discovered a series of prehistoric sites—Charmo, Turkaka, and Karim Shahir—9–11
km east of Chamchamal and 6–8 km southwest of Takia that are located in the hills on both sides of
the winding Cham Gawra, one of the rivers flowing from the Zagros Mountains in a southwesterly
direction (Figs. 1 and 2). Although these sites were investigated by the Chicago team—and theninvestigated more recently at Charmo by UCL [Fuller 2015] and at Karim Shahir by the Universityof Liverpool [Asouti et al. 2020]— we believe that renewed investigations of these sites andlandscapes with new perspectives and technologies will further our understanding of these sites and,in turn, the Neolithization process.
*
**
***
****
*****
******

Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Tsukuba
Professor, International Digital Earth Applied Science Research Center, Chubu University
Professor, Graduate School of Technology, Industrial and Social Sciences, Tokushima University
Researcher, Research Center for West Asian Civilization, University of Tsukuba
Associate Professor, Graduate School of Technology, Industrial and Social Sciences, Tokushima University
Researcher, Directorate of Slemani Antiquities and Heritage, KRG, Iraq

2 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Fig. 1 Three prehistoric sites along the Cham Gawra.

Fig. 2

Charmo, Turkaka, and Karim Shahir with the Zagros Mountains in the background.

Therefore, the operations of the investigations that we planned at Charmo and nearby sites are
as follows, and these operations have gradually advanced since 2016.
1) Small-scale sounding excavations to establish the long cultural sequence and chronology for
the Neolithization with a clear series of 14C dating.
2) Making complete topographic maps and 3D images around Charmo using UAV (Fig. 3).
3) Positing the Charmo site within the surrounding topography and geology (Figs. 4 and 5).
4) Conducting geophysical prospecting (GPR and magnetometric surveys) to detect the complete
extent of Charmo village.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

Fig. 3 Topographic map and orthographic image of Charmo (by N. Watanabe).

45E

46E

36N

Charmo35N
Quaternary

Paleocene to Eocene

Middle Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous

Pliocene

Upper Cretaceous

Middle Jurassic

U.Miocene to Pliocene

Lower to Upper Cretaceous

Jurassic undifferentiatedUpper Miocene

Lower Cretaceous

Middle Miocene

Cretaceous undifferentiatedFig. 4

Ophiolites

Geological map of the Slemani region (after Spaargaren 1987, modified by R. Anma).

3

4 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Fig. 5 Geological structure of the Charmo (by R. Anma).

5)Natural environmental surveys to reconstruct the Neolithic landscape.

In 2017, we conducted a trial sounding at Turkaka, an Epi-Paleolithic site. Based on our
research, it is concluded that the Turkaka site was a place for the production of chipped stones,
especially the blade and micro-blade industry during the Zarzian period, dating between 18,500 –
16,500 BC [Tsuneki 2019; Tsuneki et al. 2019]. The Charmo-Turkaka-Karim Shahir area isextremely rich in both water resources and chert for the lithic industry. These circumstances
provided the important motivation for people to make a chipped stone workshop at Turkaka during
the Zarzian period.
2.

Our Previous Work at Charmo

Thanks to the kind permission of the Department of Antiquity and Heritage of the KRG, we
executed a measurement survey at Charmo in the summer of 2016.
In 2017, we executed more extensive GPS and UAV surveys and made a detailed map covering
Turkaka and Charmo. All orthographic and measurement maps were made by Nobuya Watanabe,
and this detailed map gave us much information as to why the prehistoric people chose Charmo
for their early farming village. With the geological information collected by Ryo Amma, we cameto understand that Charmo was located on one of the areas extremely prosperous in water, where
many springs gushed out of the gap of the underflow water formed by sandstone and marlstone.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

5

We were convinced that this environment certainly affected the formation of early farming villages
in this area.
We believe that this work can contribute to a further understanding of Charmo and is
indispensable for future archaeological investigation at Charmo. Therefore, in the 2018 season, we
continued our measurement survey at Charmo on a larger scale, especially regarding the locationof a series of springs. In addition to the measurement survey, we executed remote sensing using
GPR to detect the cultural layer. We made small shallow soundings (two 2 × 2 m and one 1 ×
2.5 m) in three locations (G-10 Grid, Test pit W and J-II north trench) at Charmo to detect thecultural conditions for further investigations. These investigations led us to recognize that Charmo
was managed under extremely fruitful natural conditions. The results suggest that the landscapeat Charmo was entirely different 9,000 years ago from today. It is certain, therefore, that thesettlement of Charmo extended further to the northwest, and the relative height from the riverbed tothe hilltop was lower. It seems quite difficult for people to use water from the river for daily lifeand farming in modern conditions. However, water sources should have been far more accessible
when Charmo was utilized for daily life and farming.
In considering the available water resources, attention was paid not only to Cham Gawra but
also to a large number of springs gushing from the sandstone and marlstone cracks in the local
cuesta topography. To the south of Charmo, the underflow water from the Zagros Mountains gushes
out dozens or even several hundreds of meters. A series of kani (‘a spring’ in Kurdish) is ranged
along a few lines at a gentle slope, and they seem to irrigate the gentle slope land naturally toward
the southwest from the northeast.
Thus, it is necessary to reconsider the preconception of primitive farming in the Zagros
region as “simple rain-fed farming along
the hilly flanks,” as proposed by Robert
Braidwood [Braidwood 1967]. We may get
more fruitful results if we investigate a seriesof archaeological sites in the Chamchamalarea while adding to new perspectives and theconcept of “more complicated farming using
springs in the water reservoir area” [Tsuneki etal. 2019].
Based on these previous investigations, wewere convinced that Neolithic Charmo people
had used the hill area just south of Charmosite because this southern field is now used
for wheat and barley farming, and is wateredby many springs. In addition, we collected
Neolithic materials around some of the springs.
Therefore, we spent a week executing surface
collection in the southern field in the 2019
field season. The number of archaeologicalmaterials is very small, as we could collectjust 30 objects, and did not collect objects
besides Neolithic and Islamic/modern objects.
The distribution of the Neolithic objects is
Fig. 6 Map of the Charmo site and southern
shown in the red circle in Fig. 6. These results
field. Red circles show the distribution ofindicate that the southern field was used only
Neolithic material. The blue square indicatesin the Neolithic and Islamic/modern periods.
the excavated area of the farming field.

6 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Neolithic objects were collected from the neighboring place, that is, low hills on the north sideof the line linking Kanis 11 and 4. We expected to find the sickle elements and stone hoes forprehistoric farming, but there were no such objects. Therefore, we searched for evidence ofprehistoric farming fields by excavation. We fixed a 10 × 10 m trial grid north of the wadi between
Kanis 11 and 4 (blue area in the map of Fig. 6), and dug 0.5 m deep. We chose this area becauseof the high support for plants by spring water in the early spring. The surface layer is used bymodern farmers to grow wheat and barley. Under this modern soil, we found another agricultural
field showing a similar direction of furrows (Fig. 7-1). It seems that these fields were used only
in recent years. On this level, about − 20 to − 30 cm from the surface, the magnetometric surveys
were executed by Yuki Tatsumi (Fig. 7-2). Though we obtained reflections of different directions
and widths of furrows, they were a quest structure of sandstone and marlstone. We obtained a landsnail just above the quest structure rocks, that we brought back to Japan and sent for 14C dating.
The 14C age of the snail is 1510 ± 20 BP, which corrected to calibrated age (1SD) is 541 – 586 AD(TKA-22138). Thus, even if this location was farming land, it would have been in the SasanianPersian period. However, it is almost certain that these southern fields were used as farming land
during the Neolithic period, and we thus would like to find evidence of Neolithic farming land in
the southern fields.
In the 2019 season, we also continued ourwork to extend the topographic map around
Charmo using magnetometric surveys andsounding excavations. A new sounding step
trench named J-II south (2 × 5 m), which was
located southwest of Braidwood’s Operation
J-II, was dug down about 1.8 m below thesurface in the southwestern step and another
0.9 m deep in the northeastern step. Over 1,200
potsherds were discovered from all layers. In
Fig. 7-1 Trial grid in the south field showing theparticular, Layers 5 – 6 of the J-II south trenchsame direction of furrows as modern ones
produced a large number of potsherds. The( − 20–30 cm).
number of potsherds drastically decreased in
Layers 7 – 9. Many large fragments of potsherds
were included among the pottery from Layers
5 – 6 (Fig. 8). It is interesting to note that someof the large potsherds were heavily covered

Fig. 7-2 Magnetic gradient map of the trial grid in
the south field.

Fig. 8

J-II south trench, showing the potsherd
distribution in Layers 5–6.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

Fig. 97

Potsherds heavily covered with carbide.

with carbide (Fig. 9). 14C samples for Layers 5 – 6 date most of the layers to around 7,000 cal BC,
and these layers can be dated to the beginning of the Pottery Neolithic period. However, many of
the carbides on the pottery are dated DEAD, to much over 40,000 years BP. The shape and C /Nratio of the thick carbides and the dating results strongly suggest that they are of bitumen origin.
The pottery is attributed to “later manifestation” by McC. Adams study in a report of Jarmo. Ifthey are of bitumen origin, it is highly probable that these pottery vessels were used to warm
the bitumen. These pottery vessels undoubtedly date to the first half of the 7th millennium BC.
Therefore, it is highly probable that these early vessels were used not only for heating or processing
food, but also for making utensils, such as warming bitumen.
For the 2020 and 2021 seasons, the Slemani Department of Heritage commissioned sounding
excavations for a week or so each due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The exploratory excavation
was conducted in a 1 × 2 m trench on the northeast side of J-II south trench. The results of eachseason’s exploratory sounding reinforced the results of the J-II south trench sounding in 2019.
3.

Excavations at Charmo, 2022 Season

The 2022 season excavations had two main objectives: First was to establish the chronology of theCharmo site both relatively and absolutely. It is clear that the Charmo site has cultural deposits
dating from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic to the Pottery Neolithic period. According to the investigations
conducted by the University of Chicago, potsherds were discovered at some locations and not atothers in each of the trenches (operations) all over the site. These two kinds of trenches exist in amess throughout the site. Thus, it is not clear whether the transition from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic
to the Pottery Neolithic occurred throughout the entire village or whether pottery was accidentally
introduced only in a portion of the Charmo village. In other words, the appearance of pottery
cannot be clearly explained at Charmo. The pottery of Charmo still seems to be among the oldest
in the Zagros region. Establishing the first pottery in Charmo is thus nothing less than exploring the
beginning of the Pottery Neolithic in the Zagros region. Therefore, we want to capture how pottery
emerged in Charmo. The University of Chicago study indicated a transition from more elaborate“earlier manifestation” pottery, such as small amounts of painted pottery, to more coarse ones called“later manifestation” pottery. We would like to confirm whether such a transition really occurred
at Charmo.
Excavations by the University of Chicago were conducted in the late 1940s and early 50s, whenbeta ray dating of 14C had just begun. Of course, state-of-the art dating at the time was carriedout, but unfortunately the results were quite variable given today’s knowledge. Therefore, withthe latest 14C measurement by the AMS method, we would like to determine the absolute ages ofCharmo settlement. We have already made sounding excavations beside the Braidwood’s Operation

8 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Fig. 10-1

Locations of the excavated squares at Charmo.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 20229

(excavation square) J-II (J-II north and J-II south trenches in 2018 and 2019, respectively), andobtained a good series of calibrated 14C ages between 7296 – 6651 cal BC from the J-II northtrench [Tsuneki et al. 2019] and 7289– 6689 cal BC from the J-II south trench [Miyata, Itahashi
and Tsuneki 2021]. The cultural layers investigated in these two trenches can be considered tocorrespond roughly to the level 5 –level 1 building layers in Operation J-II of Braidwood, and canbe dated from the end of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period to the early Pottery Neolithic period. In
the 2022 excavations, we would like to increase the amount of 14C data from before and after thesecultural layers.
Second, as we have excavated only very small trenches so far, it was hoped that a wider
excavation would reveal various aspects of the Charmo Neolithic way of life, particularly in theearly Charmo village. As mentioned above, we assumed that Charmo farming was complicatedby combining rainwater and spring water, so it is possible that village life at Charmo was not very
simple but formed a rather complex society. We thought that it would be possible to pursue suchaspects of village life by more intensive excavations.
In accordance with the above two main objectives, a 5 × 10 m excavation square (named JT
square) was set up west of Braidwood’s Operation J-II and a 10 × 10 m excavation square (J-II
central square) almost within the Operation J-II area. The locations of these two excavation squares
are shown in Fig. 10. JT square was set at the highest elevation at the Charmo site in order tolook for the final stage of Neolithic deposits as well as to trace the longest continuous stratigraphic
sequence possible. Contrariwise, J-II central square aimed to trace the earlier Charmo Neolithic
deposits. Neolithic deposits excavated to virgin soil at Charmo include Step Trench J-A andOperation J-I, both in the north scarp of the mound cut by Cham Gawra. Only a very small area ofvirgin soil was reached in Step Trench J-A, while at least nine architectural levels were identified in
Operation J-1, with virgin soil below them. To excavate earlier Neolithic deposits, it may be betterto investigate the north scarp of the mound being cut at Cham Gawra, as in the two Braidwood’s
Operations. However, the digging was somewhat hazardous on the slope side and there were fears
that the deposits had already been scraped away. Therefore, we decided to dig in a 10 × 10 m
excavation square within the Operation J-II, where Braidwood’s team had already excavated over
3 m of later Neolithic deposits. As Braidwood’s team had found good architectural remains in thelower levels of this Operation, we thought that continued excavation of this area might yield more
information about the early farming village of Charmo.

Fig. 10-2

JT and J-II central squares.

(Akira Tsuneki)

10 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

3-1 JT Square (Figs. 11 and 12)
JT excavation square falls 50–60 m northwest on the G line from the southwest corner of the G24
Grid of Braidwood’s excavation (our benchmark of the Charmo site), and 15 – 20 m northeast fromthat point. The aim of this excavation square was to establish the chronology of the Pre-Pottery
Neolithic to the final period when the village of Charmo was inhabited. The uppermost layer of the
excavation, excluding the Braidwood’s excavation pile of waste soil, is 731.2 m above sea level,
close to the highest point of Charmo village, and appears to be the final end of the settlement.
It falls in an area where not many structure remains have been expected, based on informationfrom the trial sounding pits dug by Braidwood. As expected, nothing resembling structures wasfound in the upper 2m-plus deposit, apart from a couple of stone concentrations (Structures 1 – 3).
Rather than splendid structural remains being detected, a very large number of potsherds wererecovered, together with lithic tools and animal bones (Table 1). These potsherds consisted ofmany heavily chaff-tempered coarse ware and a few burnished fine ware. The carinated bowls with
opposing longitudinal handles shallow bowls and generally thick pottery with rare decoration are thecharacteristics of coarse ware. On the other hand, burnished fine ware was scarce and consisted onlyof small fragments. No pottery that could be described as Hassuna- or Sammara-type pottery has
been found at all, and it is also very different from the so-called Pre-Hassuna. Some of the elements,
such as applique decoration, are somewhat similar to proto-Hassuna pottery; however, coarse ware
are the very pottery vessels that Robert McC. Adams called “Later manifestation” in the Jarmo
final report [Braidwood et al. 1983]. Thus, for the moment, the final settlement at Charmo cameto an end roughly in tandem with or
732 m
before the proto-Hassuna period. In
14this sense, the central C date we
Surface Deposits
obtained from the J-II north trench,
Braidwood
Layer 1
excavations
731 m
7296–6651 BC, can be considered
Layer 2730 m

Layer 3Layer 4729 m
Layer 5
0

2m

728 m

Fig. 11

3D image of JT square.
Table 1

Fig. 12

North section of JT square.

Number of potsherds discovered from JT square

Layer

Total numberof sherds

Surface
Layer 1
Layer 2
Layer 3Layer 4Layer 5
Total

42
1,562
3,191
783
29
1
5,608

Number ofcoarse ware sherds(rim sherds)
40
1,502 (81)3,073 (218)695 (28)29
15,340 (327)

Number offine ware sherds(rim sherds)
2
60 (22)118 (19)
88 (30)00268 (71)

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 202211

the final age of the Charmo settlement. The samples obtained from JT square will also undergo 14C
dating, which should confirm this prospect. In Layer 4 of JT square, there is a sharp decline in
the number of potsherds and very few are excavated. Near the eastern wall of the trench between
Layers 4 and 5, a carbonized area was uncovered. This area was not revealed completely because
it continued off the excavation area. However, continuous traces of black color were visible on
the east and north section walls of Layer 4 and continued to Layer 5. At Layer 5, only one small
potsherd was excavated. We are now almost in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic cultural layers. Instead offewer artifacts, Layer 5 yielded a fragment of what appears to be a tannor and two human infantskulls from nearby. Horns of an animal and many animal bones were also recovered in Layer 5.
The absolute elevation of this Layer 5 is 728 – 729 m asl, which is almost the same as the elevationof Layer 5 of our J-II central square (meaning Level 5 of Braidwood’s Operation J-II).
(Sari Jammo)
3-2 J-II Central Square
The aim of the investigation in this excavation square, in contrast to JT square, is to explore theolder cultural layers of Charmo. As mentioned above, Braidwood’s research shows that the oldest
cultural layers of Charmo were only detected in a small part of Step Trench A and in the bottomof Operation J-I at the north scarp of the mound. This leaves it ambiguous as to when and how
the first settlement in Charmo began to operate. Therefore, we decided to dig further by cleaning
the J-II operation, which is the widest and reaches the most extensive and relatively earlier culturallayer excavated by Braidwood and his colleagues. As with the establishment of JT square, a 10 m
× 10 m excavation square was set up (almost entirely within the Braidwood’s Operation J-II area),using our benchmark as a starting point, and hitting a point 50 – 60 m to the northwest and 30 – 40
m to the northeast, we cleaned and dug down.
Braidwood excavated the northeastern half of Operation J-II up to what Braidwood calls Level
6 (our renamed Layer 6) and the southwestern half up to Level 5 (Layer 5). Many structures weredetected by his excavations; however, unfortunately almost 70 years after the excavations, few
structures remained. During this season, we excavated the architectural remnants of Layer 5 andnew architecture of Layer 6, so the main structures were detected in the southwestern half of J-II
central square, because the structures of Layer 5 in the northeastern half of the excavation square
had already been removed by Braidwood to excavate the lower Layer 6 structures.
3-2-1 Structures in Layer 5 (Fig. 13)
As for the structures of Layer 5, the southwestern half of the J-II central unearthed structures ofthe stone row (Str. 4) from the southeast corner of the excavated area, and from the middle of theborder with the northeastern half of the J-II central, a tannor (Str. 11) was detected. A few other
Layer 5 structures remained in the unexcavated area by Braidwood. One of the most interesting
structures is Str. 8, which appears to have been a cache of tools and materials for manufacturing
chipped stones and stone vessels (Fig. 14). The structure contains a primary chert core with cortex
roughly stripped, hammer stones, and anvil stones. It also contains rough marble stones thatwere the material for stone vessels. Grinding stones might have been used for marble shaping.
Preparation flakes and other items were discovered in clusters from immediately to the north of thisstructure, too.
Along the southern limit of J-II central square, an ash pit (Str. 9, Fig. 15) was detected in
the lower level, but this pit was dug down from Layer 5. In this pit, a broken marble bowl and abeautiful marble spoon, which was broken in two but joined and complete, were discovered (Fig.
16). It is most probable that the marble bowl and spoon formed a set that was discarded in this ash
pit after being used for some special ceremony.

12 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

X50

X51

X53

X54

X55

X56

X57

X58

X59

X60

Y30

SK2

Y31

Str. 7 (Ash pit)

Y32

Str. 8Str. 8 north

Y33

Y34

Str. 11 (tannor)

Y35

Y36

Braidwood level 6 excavation range

Str. 9 (Ash pit)
Y37

Y38

Y39

Str. 4 (Corner ofthe building)N

Y40

StonesPise wall

Ash with burnt trace

Fig. 13

Fig. 14-1

Mud plaster with small pebles (Tannor)

Plaster

Human bones

J-II central, Layer 5 structures.

Str. 8, a cache of tools and materials
for manufacturing chipped stones andstone vessels discovered in Layer 5 ofJ-II central.

Fig. 14-2 Tools and materials for manufacturing
chipped stones and stone vessels.

Str. 11 was detected almost in the center of J-II central square. For the northern portion, it was
lowered to excavate the Layer 6 by Braidwood and colleagues, so only the southern half remained.
It was an oval planned tannor measuring about 1.0 m in diameter, and small river pebbles were laid
under the blackened plaster floor. As this tannor was constructed from the upper levels, the wall at
the north corner of Building Str. 10 of the Layer 6, discussed below, was scraped away.
In the northeastern half area of J-II central square, only about 1.0 m along the west side ofPRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

Fig. 15Structure 9 (ash pit) in Layer 5.

Fig. 16-2

Marble spoon.

Fig. 16-1

13

Marble bowl and spoon discovered in
Structure 9.

Fig. 16-3

Marble bowl.

the square was unexcavated by Braidwood. From there, ash pits and pisé walls have been found infragments. These structures extend further west outside of the excavation square.
3-2-2 Structures in Layer 6 (Fig. 17)
After removing the remnants of Layer 5 structures, we found a square-planned pisé building
structure in the topmost of Layer 6 (Str. 10, Fig. 18). The building measures 4.9 m × 4.6 m with
pisé walls 0.34–0.45 m in thickness. A large limestone hollow stone was found outside, west of thesouthern corner of this square building (Fig. 19), and was likely to have been used as a door pivot.
If so, there was an entrance/exit at this corner.
Detection of the Structure 10 pisé wall and floors reveals that it had been re-stacked several
times, partly with foundation stones in between. This square building seems to have been built fromthe time of Layer 6 almost in the same place, and at least two or more floor surfaces have been
detected (Fig. 20). Fragments of matting have been found here and there inside and outside thissquare building. They are probably remnants of rugs that were laid on the floor and other surfaces
in the period of the upper level of Layer 6. The condition of the surviving mats is not good, but asthey have been recorded in 3D images, there is a good chance we will identify the material and how
it was woven. Materials seem to have been made of reeds and other herbaceous plants, and weremade by alternately crossing several flattened bundles of materials, or by arranging the bundles as
they were (Fig. 21).

14 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER
X50

X51

Y30

X52

X53

X54

X55

X56

X57

X58

X59

X60

Str. 10 Tannor

Y31

Y32

Door pivot?

Y33

Y34

Str. 11(Layer 5)

Y35

Y36

Y37
Sk3

Str. 10
Building structure

Structure of Layer 7(unexcavated in 2022)

Y38

Y39

N

Y40
StonesPise wall

Clay

Fig. 17

Fig. 18

Plaster

Mat floor

AshTannorHuman bones

J-II central, Layer 6 structures.

Building Structure 10 in Layer 6 upper.

Fig. 19-1

Fig. 19-2 A hollow stone as a door pivot.

Stone door pivot.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

Fig. 20

Str. 10 building with several floors in
Layer 6.

Fig. 21-1

Mat on the clay found east of Str. 10.

Str. 21-2 Mat on the clay discovered inside Str. 10.

Str. 21-3

Mat on the clay around Str. 10.

15

16 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Fig. 22

Strs. 10 and 12 in Layer 6 lower.

Fig. 23 Square clay structure on the second floorof Str. 10.

At the time of Layer 6 lower, this Str. 10
pisé wall survived at more than 0.5 m in height(Fig. 22). In several places inside the building
Str. 10, partial floor surfaces remained.
One of the most interesting discoveries ison the part of such a matting floor, which wasa part of the lower floor of the Str. 10 building.
It was a 30 cm × 30 cm square clay structure,
partially surrounded by stones. Three animal
clay figurines were discovered around thisstructure (Fig. 23). All these animal figurines
Fig. 24 Three clay animal figurines discoveredlack head and toes (Fig. 24). We can imagine
around a small clay square structure onthat people gathered around this small square
the older floor of the Str. 10 building.
structure and performed some kind of ritualwith the animal clay figurines.
An unbaked clay female figurine was also
discovered outside west of the Str. 10 building(Fig. 25). Although small and tiny, it should be
noted that four clay figurines have been discoveredin association with this building.
It should also be noted that a very goodpreserved tannor (Str. 12) has been detected
externally on the west wall of Str. 10. The floor
surface of the tannor is made of a very beautiful

Fig. 25-1 Clay female figurine discovered
west of Str. 10 building.

Fig. 25-2

Clay female figurine.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 202217

blackened mud plaster, with a hole laid on the northern side for smoke exhaust or air vents (Fig. 26).
Braidwood also discovered a similar structure, and tannors of this construction are characteristic ofCharmo. At the discovered level, this tannor appears to have been attached to the western wall ofStr. 10 during Layer 6 lower.
For the northeastern half of J-II central square, almost the entire area had been excavated to
Level 6 (our Layer 6) by Braidwood and his team, except along the western wall of the square.
Therefore, few remains were detected. However, in the middle of this half, a structure that appears
to be pisé walls was found, and it is assumed to be either a remnant of the structures of Level 6 or
the topmost surface of the Level 7 structures. We have not excavated these structures this season.
Although a relatively large area was excavated in J-II central square, with the context ofcleaning, very few small potsherds were recovered from Layers 5 – 6 (Table 2). This aspect issimilar to Levels 5 and 6 at the time of the Braidwood’s excavations, and it is assumed that theselayers are already Pre-Pottery Neolithic cultural layers. Dating of carbon samples recovered fromthese layers is currently underway.
There is almost no pottery found, but a large number of chipped stone tools and animal bones
were unearthed. The main materials of chipped stones are chert and obsidian. 321 chert chippedstones and 288 obsidian chipped stones were excavated. Among the former, the main stone
implements are blades, including sickle elements, while micro-blades are mainly prominent among
the latter. The high percentage of obsidian tools is characteristic of Charmo, but the aspect of thestone implements also indicate that Layers 5 – 6 belong to the terminal Pre-Pottery Neolithic period.
Instead of pottery vessels, a total of 20 stone vessels were recovered from J-II central. Noneof the vessels are complete, but include a good marble stone vessel. Many others are made oflimestone or sandstone. Fig. 27 shows a sandstone animal figurine from Layer 6. Fig. 28 is amarble ornament also excavated from Layer 6. Other ground stone objects such as hammerstones
and grinding stones are also prominent in the excavation.

Fig. 26

Tannor (Str. 12) discovered on the western wall of the Str. 10 building.
Table 2Layercleaning
Layer 5Layer 6 upper
Layer 6 lower

Number of potsherds discovered from J-II central
Total number of
sherds12402Number of
Number ofcoarse ware sherds fine ware sherds
11
1
2
2
0
0
2
0

(The two pieces from Layer 6 lower may be intrusive because they werediscovered during the cleaning of the layer)

18 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Fig. 27

Sandstone animal figurine
discovered in Layer 6.

Fig. 28 Marble ornament discoveredin Layer 6.

Animal bones are being analyzed by Dr. Hitomi Hongo, who has reported that domesticatedsheep and goats dominate the animal bones excavated from the J-II north and south trenches.
(Akira Tsuneki)
4.

Measurement and Survey to Evaluate the Erosion Surface around Charmo

4-1. Evaluation of geomorphological features around the Charmo archaeological site
The Charmo archaeological site is cut by a deep valley made by the flow of Cham Gawra, which
implies an occurrence of massive erosion since the time of habitation in the Neolithic Period. It
is worth reconstructing the paleo topography, which can help in considering the land use and early
farming by providing a tangible spatial structure. Reconstruction of past topography is a challenging
task that requires various information from different study fields. Geomorphological feature is oneof them, which is directly related with the spatial structure and its shape of the terrain surface.
Thus, information about the overview of the topographic characteristics, detection of remaining
surface, and the strength of on-going erosion/deposition should provide a good starting point for the
preliminary reconstruction of the land. An analysis by DEM, observation of the erosion nowadaysof the northern cliff of Charmo, and a survey around Charmo were conducted to fulfill this aim.
4-2. Evaluation of the topography and erosion based on Charmo DEM
GIS analysis was employed to evaluate the characteristics of the topography and to roughly estimate
the past topography. Generation of a summit level map and ridge map were attempted using AW3D
DEM (50 cm resolution). The summit level map was calculated from a contour derived from theequispaced points containing the highest elevation values within certain extent1). As a result, thecalculation will smooth out the topography and fill the small-scale valleys2), which is expected toroughly represent the topography before erosion. Intensity of erosion was indicated by subtracting
the summit level map from the original DEM (Fig. 29 left). The ridge detection map, in contrast,
1)

2)

Distance (extent) parameter changes the scale of the valley to be smoothed. Thus, the amount of erosion (which is decided bydistance parameter) represents the time scale at the same time. In this study, a parameter that smoothed small valleys and left thechannel of the Cham Gawra visible, was selected by comparing several results from different parameters.
The wider the extent, the smoother the result. Appropriate values for the extent are decided from a graph depicting the relation
between the heights from the selected main summits and the distances from the summits.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 202219

is expected to extract the remaining surface. The MRVBF module in the QGIS (SAGA plugin) isused to calculate the MRRTF index3). The ridge-shaped surface was extracted by setting a thresholdto the calculated indexes (Fig. 29 right).
The result shows that erosion to the north of Charmo is significant, while Charmo itself ischaracterized by its comparatively connected area of ridges. Actually, there are several areas
where ridged areas are connected more widely. These areas tend to be far from the river channels,
which is not surprising when considering the process of erosion. However, these areas may not be
advantageous for habitation, given their access to water could be more difficult. Thus, a ridged areathat is close to the river channel may have priority when conducting a survey.
4-3. 3D measurement of the valley surface of Charmo and detection of the change
A comparison between the 3D measurement results of the northern valley of Charmo in 2019 and2022 was conducted. The difference within this three years is visualized by subtracting the point
clouds of 2019 and 2022 (Fig. 31).
The calculation result shows the erosion in the upper part of the gouged slope, and thedeposition in the bottom as a result of the erosion. The slight erosion observed widely in theupper area is due to the different condition of the grass, while the deposition is of the soil dug out
in the excavation. The result shows an active erosion deposition process today, which implies theFig. 29 left: Intensity of the erosion (subtraction of
the summit level map from original DEM).

Fig. 29

right: Extracted ridge-shaped terrain basedon MRRTF.

Fig. 30

Fig. 30

right: Extracted ridge shape terrain around
Charmo.

3)

left: Intensity of the erosion around
Charmo.

MRVBF (Multi Resolution Valley Bottom Flatness) is a function and index to distinguish a valley bottom from a hillslope, while
MRRTF (Multi Resolution Ridge Top Flatness) is used to distinguish the ridge [Gallant and Dowling, 2003].

20 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Fig. 31 Difference between 2019 and 2022 (dotted line show eroded
area while white line shows deposited area).

occurrence of a significant change in terrain and landscape around Charmo within the past several
thousand years.
4-4. Survey around Charmo
The land where archaeological sites are found can be an area with less erosion than others. Thus,
grasping the distribution of archaeological sites can be helpful in understanding the erosion and theoriginal landscape at the time. From this perspective, a survey around Charmo was conducted in
2022. A track-log and representative points of artifacts found were recorded by a handheld GPS
device. Mapping of both track-log and points will indicate not only the places where artifacts were
found but also the places where artifacts were not found4) (Fig. 32). It is expected to provide a
basic idea of the land surface when it was less eroded. The distribution of stone tools, which isrelict from the older time and closer to our interest, was an area of particular focus (Fig. 33).
The result shows a cluster of points with a comparatively large number of stone tools to thenorthwest of Charmo, while stone tools are almost absent on the southern bank of Charmo (Fig. 33),
perhaps due to the comparatively strong erosion that can be observed in Fig. 30 (left). The clusteredpoints in the northwest area imply intense human activity, but the fact that tools made of obsidian
can only be found at Charmo makes it difficult to think of these areas and Charmo as forming one
united area.
4-5. Attempt at preliminary surface reconstruction
Interpolation using the elevation values of the points where stone tools were found (which weregard as less eroded area) around Charmo was conducted (points within the white box in Fig.
34 were used). This is another preliminary attempt to estimate an old terrain surface, which is adifferent approach from the summit level map in Section 4-2. This surface is expected to show thehighest possible surface around Charmo5).
4-6. Summary
The results from the above observations can be summarized as follows: 1) Charmo is located in
an area where erosion is comparatively strong within the Cham Gawra Basin, 2) stone tools were
4)

5)

Of course, there is a great difference between “surveyed but nothing found” and “not surveyed, so no symbols of artifact area” inthe map. Attempt was made to avoid survey bias; by including different landscapes and filling the area as equally as possible, whenselecting the survey routes.
Further evaluation and screening of the possibility of the artifacts flowing in from other places, and unevenness of habitation should
be taken into account.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

Fig. 32

Sites recorded by the survey in 2022.

Fig. 33

Fig. 34

Numbers of stone tools found.

right: Interpolated DEM from points where stone tools were found.

21

22 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

mainly detected in an area that is ridged and near a river channel, 3) the erosion/deposition process
remains active (at least strongly enough to be detectable over a few years) around Charmo, and 4)
points where stone tools were found are scattered more to the northwest of Charmo. Preliminary
information and visualization were employed as a basis of paleo terrain reconstruction.
(Nobuya Watanabe)
5.

Obsidian Stratigraphy of Charmo JT and J-II Central Squares and Stratigraphic
Correlations between the Previous Trenches (Figs. 35 –39)

Aiming to construct an obsidian stratigraphy of the Charmo site, obsidian tools excavated from JT
and J-II central squares in the summer of 2022 were subjected to chemical composition analysis
using a portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometer (pXRF). We used an Olympus VANTA VCRCCC (Rh target, 4W X-ray tube) for the measurements and allocated 30 seconds to Beam 1 (atan accelerating voltage of 40 kV to measure the concentrations of Ti, V, Cr, Mn, and 23 elements
heavier than Fe), and 60 seconds to Beam 2 (concentration measurement of Mg, Al, Si, P, S,
K, Ca, Ti, and Mn at an acceleration voltage of 10 kV) X-ray irradiations. The reliability ofthe measurements was evaluated by measuring a set of standard rock-slab samples with known
concentrations of each element.
We analyzed 508 obsidian stone tools excavated from JT and J-II central (J-IIC) squares during
the 2022 field season. In order to suppress the influence of changes in the analytical values due
to surface conditions (surface irregularity, roughness, etc.), the analytical values were evaluated for
368 obsidian pieces where LE (the total amount of elements lighter than Na) fell within the rangeof 50% ± 5%. Al, Si, P, K, Ca, Ti, Mn, Fe, Cu, Zn, Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, Pb, and Th concentrations wereused for the further analyses, which were determined to be reliable as a result of repeated analysisof the rock-slab standards.
A principal component analysis was performed using the concentration of elements as variables
after applying a centered log-ratio transformation to each concentration [Aitchison 1986; Kucera
and Malmgren 1998]. In the case of zero concentration values, we substituted the value with one

Fig. 35

Results of the principal component analysis for the chemical compositions of the obsidian stone tools
excavated from the JT and J-IIC trenches of the Charmo site. By taking PC3 into consideration, theobsidian tools could be further divided into 5 or 6 groups.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

Fig. 36

Fig. 37

Rb/Sr-Fe/Mn plot for the obsidian tools
excavated from the JT and J-IIC trenches.

Fig. 39

Stratigraphic correlation with the W, G10,
and J-II north trenches.

Sr-Zr plot for the obsidian tools excavatedfrom the JT and J-IIC trenches.

Fig. 38 A standard obsidian stratigraphy of theCharmo site established using the samedata set.

23

tenth of the minimum concentration of the corresponding element. As a result, 80% of all data arerepresented by the first three principal components. Obsidian samples are divided into two clusters
by the first principal component (PC1), which has a particularly high contribution (55%). In theZr and Sr plots, which have large loadings on the PC1, the measured obsidian tools can be broadly
divided into two groups: Group I with Zr concentrations of 200 to 300 ppm and Sr concentrationsof approximately 50 ppm, and Group II with Zr concentrations of over 1,000 ppm and almost no
Sr. Group II obsidians could further be divided into group II-1 with Rb /Sr ratios below 0.19 andgroup II-2 with Rb/Sr ratios above 0.19 by taking the Rb /Sr and Fe /Mn ratios associated withsecond principal component (PC2) as axes. Thus, the obsidian excavated from JT and J-IIC squaresof Charmo can be divided into three composition groups, except for one outlier excavated fromthe deepest layer. In comparison with previous studies [Maeda 2009; Frahm 2012; Chataigner and
Gratuze 2014a, b; Campbell and Healey 2016], Group I obsidian was most likely sourced at Bingöl
B obsidian site, whereas Group II-1 and Group II-2 obsidians can be correlated with the Nemrut

24 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Dağ and Bingöl A obsidian sites, respectively.
To establish a standard obsidian stratigraphy that represents the Charmo site based on thegeochemistry of the obsidian tools, frequency of occurrences of these obsidian groups were analyzed
for each stratigraphic horizon of JT square, that is, Layer 1 to Layer 5 described in the previous
chapters. For this analysis, geochemical data of obsidian tools excavated from the J-II central
Layer 6 upper were merged into JT Layer 5 data based on our stratigraphic correlation, andtogether described as Layer 5 in Fig. 38. Similarly, those of J-II central Layer 5 were merged into
JT Layer 4, and together described as Layer 4. Those from the J-II central Layer 6 lower weresolely treated as Layer 6. The frequency of the obsidian groups indicates that Group II-1 obsidian
was mostly used in upper Layer 1 to Layer 3, while in the lower Layer 5 and Layer 6 horizons,Group I and Group II-2 obsidians were dominant. The large transition occurred during the Layer
4 period. Thus, in the Layer 6 period, which corresponds to Pre-Pottery Neolithic according tofield observation, obsidians seemed to have been used from various producers, including an outlier
obsidian, but nearly half was provided by Bingöl B (Group I obsidian) producer. As time passed,
but still during the PPN period, the Bingöl A (Group II-2 obsidian) producer won the position of the
primary producer, but its glory did not last long. Their prominence quickly moved to the NemrutDağ (Group II-1 obsidian) producer by the period of Layer 3, that is, the Pottery Neolithic, and it
continued until the abandonment of the Charmo site.
The suggested obsidian stratigraphy could be applied to the other trenches of the neighboringareas excavated previously. By comparing the obsidian stratigraphy with the frequency of theobsidian groups, we suggest that obsidian-yielding strata of the J-II north (J-II-N) trench corresponds
to Layer 5 (PPN) of the JT square, whereas the obsidian-yielding strata of the G10 trench belong toLayer 4 (PPN /PN transition), and those of the W trench to Layer 2 (Pottery Neolithic).
The obsidian frequency from the surface layer, which is basically debris from the previous
excavations, provides an interesting addendum to the suggested obsidian stratigraphy of the Charmosite. Unlike the Layers 1–3 obsidian frequency, the surface layer is rather abundant in Group
II-2 obsidian tools and depleted in Group II-1 obsidian tools. Considering Group I and Group
II-2 frequency and their ratio, the previous excavation obviously reached to the level of our Layer
5. Depletion of Group II-1 obsidian tools from the surface layer suggests that the pioneering
excavators collected the Group II-1 obsidian tools selectively, and removed them from the ground.
This hypothesis could easily be tested by measuring the chemical compositions of the obsidian tools
from the Charmo site now stored in the museums.
(Ryo Anma and Yu Saitoh)
6.

Searching for Charmo’s Burials

Investigations in the previous 2018 and 2019 seasons focused on reconstructing the ancient landscapeduring the time of the Neolithic village and understanding the complex chronology of the site
[Tsuneki et al. 2019]. Excavation in this season also aimed to gain a further understanding of thechronology of the site, in addition to detecting the ancient village and search for Charmo’s burials.
6-1. Neolithic burials in Zagros area
The western wing of the Fertile Crescent (Levant and Anatolia) has long been the focal region forstudying Neolithization, and the large number of burials uncovered from various sites provides insights
into the Neolithic mortuary variability [Kenyon 1981; Rollefson 2000; Stordeur and Khawam 2007;
Goring-Morris and Horwitz 2007; Akkermans 2008; Croucher 2012; Haddow and Knüsel 2017;
Tsuneki et al. 2022]. The study of the burials helps us understand and estimate funerary practices
and compare these results with those for other sites to understand the prevalent regional rituals andPRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

25

compare them with neighboring regions. Recently, the eastern wing of the Fertile Crescent has
become a core area for investigating the Neolithic transition. In Iraqi Kurdistan, excavation of theCharmo site by Braidwood in the 1940s – 1950s long dominated the investigation of early farming
settlement in the Zagros region. However, recent investigations in a number of sites in the eastern
and western ends of the Zagros such as in Iraqi Kurdistan, including at Bestansur, Shahrizor Plainand Charmo [Matthews et al. 2019; Tsuneki et al. 2019; Odaka et al. 2020], and west Iran at
Sheikh-e Abad and Jani [Matthews et al. 2013], have yielded new insights into the Neolithizationand formation of the early villages and architectures in this region.
A large number of burials were uncovered at a number of sites in the western and eastern endsof the Zagros. Excavations at Ganj Dareh in west Iran, revealed remains of 41 individuals fromall levels [Smith et al. 1972; Smith 1974]. One adolescent burial was adorned with an elaborate
necklace of 71 shell and stone beads [Smith 1974]. Genetic evidence from a few individuals
revealed that the Ganj Dareh population was more closely connected to hunter-gatherers of the
Caucasus region than Anatolian populations, suggesting autonomous expansion of agriculture in
the Zagros [Riel-Salvatore et al. 2021]. Burials were also uncovered from Ali Kosh [13 burials;
Sołtysiak and Darabi 2017] and Sheikh-e Abad [9 burials; Cole 2013]. The burials were in someinstances associated with specific areas bearing ritual significance, containing animal skulls andhorn cores. These specific evidence were uncovered from other sites in west Iran, such as Sheikh-e
Abad, Ganj Dareh, and Ali Kosh [Darabi et al. 2017].
The study of Neolithic burial customs in the western Zagros is relatively inadequate. Burials
uncovered from this region in the past and from ongoing excavations are limited. However, recent
excavations in Bestansur have unearthed a large number of burials that shed light on the complexityof funerary practices in this region. Remains of 67 burials were uncovered from different interment
contexts in Bestansur [Walsh 2020]. Many burials were uncovered in so-called Space 50 inbuilding 5 and were accumulated in three phases. It is suggested that this building was used for
ritual purposes and treatment of the dead [Richardson et al. 2020]. This deposit comprises intact
and disarticulated human remains, including detached crania and skulls, demonstrating that the deadwere subjected to multi-stage postmortem treatment [Walsh 2020].
The assemblage of burials in building 5 in Bestansur somehow resembles the special purpose
and ritually significant buildings that were excavated widely during the Neolithic period in thewestern wing of the Fertile Crescent. These buildings served various functions, some related tosuccessive ritual practices such as the “Charnel House” at Abu Hureyra [Moore et al. 2000], or
specifically used for burials, and a large number of individuals were uncovered inside them, such as“House of the Dead” at Dja’de el-Mughara [Coqueugniot 1998]. Several non-residential structures
were uncovered in Central and Southeastern Anatolia, such as the storage of human remains at
PPNA-PPNB Çayönü “Skull Building” [Özdoğan 1999], the Early MPPNB “temple” of Nevalı Çori[Hauptmann 1993]. Burials were missing from non-domestic buildings, or they were buried after
the building lost its original function, such as Tell Qaramel [Mazuroweski et al. 2012], Nevalı Çori[Hauptmann 1993], Beidha [Makarewicz and Finlayson 2018], and ʿAin Ghazal [Rollefson 2000],
but present in the domestic buildings. These new pieces of evidence will enrich our understandingof the characteristics, social structure, and common funerary practices of the Neolithic societies
during the transition into the settled farming way of life in different regions of the Fertile Crescent.
6-2. Burials at Jarmo
The excavation of Jarmo in the late 1940s and early 1950s by Robert J. Braidwood of the Universityof Chicago revealed a small number of burials. Despite a sounding pit covering a large area ofthe site, skeletal remains were scarce. Therefore, it was difficult to understand life in the farming
village of Charmo from the perspective of burials and funerary practices.

26 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

During Braidwood’s excavations, burials from different age groups were uncovered, although
the estimated age and sex are not precise (Table 3). In general, there was no clear evidence of gravepits, except for one case (J2 –S3); there were no grave preparations or grave goods accompanying
the dead; and the burials lacked uniformity. The human remains uncovered at the site were “hardly
burials” [Braidwood et al. 1983: 427], and failed to provide sufficient information about life anddeath from the perspective of burials. Given the limited number of burials compared to the large
number of test pits covering the surface of the mound, it is suggested that the Charmo people madetheir burials off-site [Braidwood et al. 1983].
Excavations in the Fertile Crescent have so far revealed no off-site cemetery, either in the
Early Neolithic period or in the transitional period between the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) andPottery Neolithic (PN) periods; rather, most of the burials were at the site. Crowded cemeteries
located adjacent to the residential area were discovered in the Northern Levant at Tell el-Kerkh
and Tell Sabi Abyad [Tsuneki et al. 2022; Akkermans 2008]. Though no off-site cemetery was
uncovered in the Pottery/ Late Neolithic period, we pondered where the Charmo people buried theirdead. Thus, we decided to carry out test excavations at the far edges of the mound, and we started
with JW1 square.
Table 3
SquareYear

Skeletonno.

Layer/Skeleton
location

S1

In cleaning theupper most meterof deposit

InfantLying upon thethird floor in one
corner of a portionof tauf walling

Adult?

In cleaning the firstfloor of J-II

Recentskeleton

S2
J-I

1948

Excavated burials at Jarmo between 1948 and 1955 [Braidwood et al. 1983]

S3
S4
S5
S6
S1

Age

Sex

Burialtype

Position
Flexedpositions

Body axis
direction

Face direction
Facing opposite
direcctions

Neither the sex nor the age(beyond the fact that theindividuals were adults) could
be ascertained.

Accidental death

Partial andfragmented remains

S2

J-II

1950

Second floor of J-II

S4

M20

1955

Fragments of a rightarm, some ribs anda few bits of skull
and jaw and partly
overlying J2-S4

Young adult

S3

S5

Remarks

Adult
In clearing of thesecond floor in J-II

Teen

0.75 m in depth,
near one face ofthe two-metersquare M20

Adult

Male

Prone

FemaleSupineflexedWest6-3. JW1 square
JW1 is a 2 × 2 meters square located at the westernmost side of the site along the N2 60-meter line
near the end of the slope overlooking the valley of an ancient riverbed. No excavations or survey
were carried out in this part of the site. The purpose of excavation at this square is to:① Reveal the distribution of the archaeological features of this part of the mound.
② Verify Braidwood’s suggestion of the existence of an off-mound cemetery.
In the 2018 and 2019 seasons, geophysical prospecting (GPR and magnetometric surveys)
was undertaken on the southwestern slope of the mound (Fig. 10-1). The results indicate that the
Neolithic village extended into the southern slope of the mound (Tsuneki et al. 2019). In 2019,
another magnetometric survey was undertaken on the lower slope of the mound. The survey

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

27

results show that there are no magnetic anomalies except for very subtle anomalies caused by thegeographical slope. This demonstrates that there are no archaeological features directly beneath thesurface such as that identified at the upper slope around W trench [Tatsumi’s field report 2019].
JW1 was set up about 25 meters to the west of the 2019 magnetometric survey area. Thereappear to be fewer archaeological features on the west slope than at the top of the mound, which
could be a place for burials adjacent to the Neolithic village (Fig. 10-1). We dug approximately
0.8 m below the surface; however, no remains or objects of any kind were uncovered (Fig. 40).
Therefore, excavation was suspended in this square and in this part of the site, and the excavation
pit was filled in. We then wondered whether the Charmo people really buried their dead that far
away, or even off the mound. The ancient natural landscape in the Chamchamal region could help
reveal the answer. Charmo, like other sites in this region, is situated on the top of a hill surroundedby steep slopes formed over thousands of years from intensive erosion by a river. As mentioned
above, Watanabe indicated that the relative height from the riverbed to the hilltop was lower 9,000
years ago, and water sources should have been more accessible at that time. Therefore, if thesettlement of Charmo was surrounded by rivers, subsidiary rivers, and streams, it would meanthat the mound was surrounded by natural terrains that would have made it difficult to transfer acorpse from one site to another, not to mention
the difficulty in transferring a corpse off-site
during the rainy seasons, when the level ofrivers and streams is high. Therefore, it seems
that the dead were buried in the village, as
commonly known in the Neolithic era, between
and beneath the floors of buildings or adjacentto the village.
Meanwhile, excavations were continued
in two different parts of the site in JT and
J-II central squares, and fragments of humanremains have been excavated: one or two in JT
Fig. 40 Square JW1.
and two in J-II central.
6-4.

Burials at Charmo

SK1
This find comprises fragmented human bones belonging to a young individual discovered at
a depth of approximately 3 meters in layer 5 at JT square (Fig. 41). Primary analyses of thebones in situ indicate that they might belong
to an infant. This individual is represented
partially by a fragment of skull, a few longbones and ribs (Fig. 42). The human bones
are dispersed over a space covering about 1.5
meters long, and they do not form a skeleton
in its normal anatomical position. The humanremains were mixed with animal bones andsmall stones. Near this accumulation at thecorner of the excavation square, a tannor likestructure of compact orange-colored soil was
discovered. At the same level to the northeast
of SK1, animal bones including a large animal
Fig. 41 An overview of the SK1 deposit.

28 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Fig. 42

SK1 skull and other bone fragments.

horn were found (Fig. 43). Near the horn,other fragments of human bones, probably ofa skull that might have belonged to an infant,were discovered (Fig. 44). There is no clear
evidence of a grave pit or grave preparation,
so it is barely a grave. The discovery of thetannor and the human-animal bones in this area
may indicate human activities bearing symbolicor ritual significance. Further investigation
will be conducted in this area in the following
excavation season.
SK2
This is a fragment of a skull discovered in layer
5 in the western wall of J-II central square(Fig. 45). Initially, a portion of the skull was
visible in the wall section, and other parts wererevealed after removing the upper layers of thewall. It was a fragmented skull that might havebelonged to an infant. The skull fragments
were solo, and no other skeletal elements were
uncovered in situ. The skull was discovered
in a thick charred layer of soil that extended
over a wide area and continued out of the
excavation area. However, the skull fragments
show no traces of fire, which indicates that itwas not initially buried in this location. Like
SK1, there is no clear evidence of a grave pit
or grave preparation.

Fig. 43 Animal horn.

Fig. 44

Fragment of a skull of a probable infant
near the animal horn.

SK3
This is another fragment of a skull discovered on the floor of J-II central pit to the north of astructure building (Str. 10). The skull fragment is small and probably belonged to an infant. Thereis no clear evidence for a grave pit, and it is difficult to determine how this fragment ended up at

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

Fig. 45

Fragment of an infant skull from the west wall of J-II Central.

this location and whether it is associated with the structured building.
7.

29(Sari Jammo)

Conclusion

After a two-season hiatus due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we resumed our investigations at
Charmo this season. Through this investigation, we aimed to determine the final date of existenceof the Neolithic village at Charmo and to shed some light on the reality of its village life. We
slightly expanded the excavation area, which had been limited to a very small trial soundings informer seasons.
For the first objective, i.e., determining the final date of the Neolithic village, a new JT square
was established at the highest elevation of the Charmo site. Hence, it is likely that the oldest Pottery
Neolithic cultural deposits in Zagros, even older than the Proto-Hassuna period, were the terminal
stage of the Neolithic Charmo village. The 14C-dating of the charcoal samples collected this season
is underway; however, the dating of most of the samples collected from the J-II south trench, east of
JT square excavated in 2019, indicates the beginning of the 7th millennium BC, making it extremely
probable that the Neolithic village at Charmo came to an end in the early 7th millennium BC.
Regarding the second objective, i.e., the elucidation of the specific living conditions in Charmo,
the excavations in J-II central square yielded several fruitful discoveries. A cache of tools andmaterials for manufacturing chipped stones and stone vessels, a set of beautiful marble bowl andspoon, and a square planned pisé building with several floors, which were covered with a mat
made of woven plant fibers, were discovered. In the building, a small clay platform was placedon the lower floor, surrounded by three broken animal figurines. These findings suggest that ritual
practices were frequently performed during everyday life. To understand the realities of Charmo’s
people, careful excavation will be necessary to recover a more concrete context.
The topography and environment around the Neolithic Charmo village must have been quite
different from that of today, which we have been trying to reconstruct. Nobuya Watanabe used
the SfM to make 3D measurements of Charmo in 2019 and 2022 to determine the topographic
changes over these three years due to erosion. In addition, he surveyed the off-sites around
Charmo to determine the distribution of lithics, potsherds, and other artifacts. Based on these
data, he reconstructed a preliminary paleo-environment around the Neolithic Charmo village. His
reconstruction plan shows a very gently sloping topography with very little erosion around Cham
Gawra, which will be very useful data for us to reconstruct the livelihood and social life of the30 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Charmo people.
Reconstructing the paleo-landscape around the Charmo site, Ryo Amma collected samples
for the Terrestrial Cosmogenic Nuclides (TCN) dating on the geomorphological surface aroundthe site. His dating research is currently underway and will soon produce a paleo-environmental
reconstruction map of Charmo. In addition, Ryo Amma also conducted chemical composition
analyses of 508 obsidian lithic artifacts excavated from JT and J-II central squares, using a portable
X-ray fluorescence spectrometer (pXRF) and summarized the characteristics of each layer. Reliable
Al, Si, P, K, Ca, Ti, Mn, Fe, Cu, Zn, Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, Pb, and Th concentrations of each element
were used in the analysis and it was determined that the obsidian group could be divided into threecompositional groups, except for one sample. These were compared to the previous studies. He
concluded that Group 1 was Bingöl B, Group II-1 was Nemrut Dağ, and Group II-2 was Bingöl
A obsidian. Looking at the usage frequency of these obsidian groups by excavation layers, Group
II-1 obsidian was used in the upper Layers 1 to 3, while Group I and Group II-2 obsidian werepredominant in the lower Layers 5 and 6. The change of major obsidian resources occurredin Layer 4. Since Layer 4 corresponded to the transition period from PPN to PN, it is highlysuggestive that the obsidian origin was changing during this transitional period. Whether similarchanges are present in other artifacts is worthy of further studies.
A study of the Charmo villagers must be made from excavated human bones. However, wehave not yet encountered good-condition burials at Charmo. Sari Jammo tried to discover the burial
field outside the village and made a trial trench at JW 1 square. Unfortunately, he did not find any
cultural deposits, including burials. Instead, one or two child burials were found in JT square andtwo in J-II central square. The condition of these human bones was poor and no definite burial
posture or other information was known. At present, it is believed that adults, semi-adults, andjuveniles were mainly buried outside the village, and infants and small juveniles were buried near
their homes. However, future research may uncover adult burials within the village.
This season’s work at Charmo has advanced our understanding of the Charmo Neolithic
society. We hope to continue these efforts to further our understanding of the Charmo site, which
is of great scholarly and historical importance, and further the study of Neolithization in the eastern
wing of the Fertile Crescent.
(Akira Tsuneki and Saber Ahmed Saber)
Acknowledgements
For the execution of the archaeological research campaign in Slemani of Kurdistan, we are deeply
grateful to the Department of Antiquities, Ministry of Municipality and Tourism, Kurdistan Regional
Government – Iraq. We express our special gratitude to Mr. Kaifi Mustafa Ali, General Directorof Antiquities and Heritage, KRG, for his kind permission for our investigations at Charmo, oneof the most important prehistoric sites in Kurdistan. We are deeply grateful to Mr. Hussein Hama
Gharib Hussein, Director of Slemani Antiquities and Heritage Directorate, for encouraging us to
execute prehistoric investigations at Charmo. We extend our sincere appreciation to Mr. Kamal
Rasheed Rahim, former Director of Slemani Antiquities and Heritage, who provided us with every
convenience for our archaeological work and our stay in Slemani. We express our special thanks
to Mr. Hassim Hama Abdulla, Director of the Slemani Museum, for his greatest consideration of
our work and his hospitality. We are also grateful to Mr. Nawshirwan Aziz Mohammed, Directorof Archaeological Excavation of Slemani Antiquities Directorate, for his consistent support. Our
special thanks to Mr. Saber Ahmed Saber, a staff member of the Slemani Antiquities Directorate forhis kind instruction and accompaniment in the field as a representative from the Slemani Antiquities
Directorate. Mr. Sami Jamil Aziz supported us at the beginning of the investigations. Mr. Bahzad
Mohammad Taib supported our investigations as a driver sent by the Directorate. We express ourPRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

31

thanks to the entire staff of the Slemani Antiquities Directorate and Slemani Museum, especially,
Mrs. Niyan Nasir Hama Hassan and Mr. Akam Omar. Dr. Dalshad Marf Zamua, assistant professorof Sulemani University, was interested in our Charmo investigations and helped us introduce the site
to the public. At Chamchamal, Mr. Abdelrahman Saber Mohammad, a keeper of the Antiquities at
Takia, gave us every convenience for the field work at Charmo. We also wish to express our special
thanks to the people of Takia town and Kani Sard village near Charmo for their inestimable support
in our research, as workers, and for their hospitality.
The field expedition at Charmo was executed from July 23 to September 15, followed bysupplemental work in the field and material studies until September 27, 2022. Financial support forthis research came from grants from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), Grantin-Aid for Scientific Research (A) “Reconsideration of Jarmo: Neolithization in the Eastern Wingof the Fertile Crescent”.
Bibliography
Akkermans, P.M.M.G.
2008
Burying the dead in Late Neolithic Syria. In: J.M. Cordoba, M. Molist, C. Perez, I. Rubio and Martinez S.
(eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Madrid,
April 3 –8, 2006: 621 – 645. Universidad Autónoma of Madrid, Madrid.
Aitchison, J.
1986
The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data. Chapman and Hall, London.
Asouti, E., Baird, D., Kabukcu, C., Swinson, K., Martin, L., García-Suárez, A., Jenkins, E. and Rasheed, K.
2020
The Zagros Epipalaeolithic revisited: New excavations and 14C dates from Palegawra cave in Iraqi Kuridistan,
ProsOne 15(9): e0239564. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239564
Braidwood, L.S., Braidwood, R.J., Howe, B., Reed, C.A. and Watson, P.J.
1983
Prehistoric Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks. Oriental Institute Publications 105. University of Chicago,
Chicago.
Braidwood, R.J.
1967
Prehistoric Men (Seventh Eedition), Scott, Foresman and Company, Glenview.
Braidwood, R.J. and Howe, B. (eds.)
1972
Prehistoric Investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization, No. 31. The Oriental
Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago.
Campbell, S. and Healey, H.
2016
Multiple sources: The pXRF analysis of obsidian from Kenan Tepe, S.E. Turkey, Journal of Archaeological
Science, Reports 10: 377 – 389.
Chataigner, C. and Gratuze, B.
2014a
New data on the exploitation of obsidian in the southern Caucasus (Armenia, Georgia) and eastern Turkey,
part 1: Source characterization, Archaeometry 56: 25–47.
2014b
New data on the exploitation of obsidian in the southern Caucasus (Armenia, Georgia) and eastern Turkey,
part 2: Obsidian procurement from the Upper Palaeolithic to the Late Bronze Age, Archaeometry 56: 48–69.
Cole, G.
2013

Human Burials. In R. Matthews, W. Matthews, and Y. Mohammadifar (eds.), The Earliest Neolithic of Iran:2008 Excavations at Sheikh-e Abad and Jani: Central Zagos Archaeological Project, Volume 1. Vol. 4: 163–174. Oxbow Books, Oxford.

Coqueugniot, E.
1998
Dja’de el Mughara (moyen-euphrate), un village néolithique dans son environnement naturel à la veille de ladomestication. In M. Fortin and Aurenche O. (eds.), Espace naturel, espace habité, en Syrie du Nord (10e2e millénaires av. J.- C.): 109 – 114. Canadian Society for Mesopotamian Studies (Bulletin 33) Travaux de la
Maison de l’Orient Méditerranéen. Vol. 28, Toronto and Lyon.

32 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Croucher, K.
2012
Death and Dying in the Neolithic Near East. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Darabi, H., Bahramiyan, S., Mostafapour, S., Khademi, Bami, M. and Yari, A.
2017
Re-excavation at Tapeh Ali Kosh, Deh Luran Plain, Iran. Neo-Lithics 2: 15–18.
Frahm, E.
2012
Distinguishing Nemrut Dağ and Bingöl obsidians: Geochemical and landscape differences and the archaeologicalimplications, Journal of Archaeological Science 39: 1436–1444.
Fuller, D.
2015
Jarmo, In Kapanias, K. MacGinnis, J. and Ur, J. (eds) Archaeological Projects in the Kurdistan Region in
Iraq: 23, The Directorate of Antiquities of Kurdistan.
Gallant, J. C. and Dowling, T. I.
2003
A multi-resolution index of valley bottom flatness for mapping depositional areas, Water Resources Research
39(12): 4 – 13 DOI: 10.1029 /2002WR001426
Goring-Morris, N. and Horwitz, L.K.
2007
Funerals and feasts during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B of the Near East. Antiquity 81(314): 902–919.
Haddow, S.D. and Knüsel, C.J.
2017
Skull retrieval and secondary burial practices in the Neolithic Near East: recent insights from Çatalhöyük,
Turkey. Bioarchaeology International 1: 52–71.
Hauptmann, H.
1993
Ein Kultgebäude in Nevali Çori. In A. Palmieri, M. Frangipane, H. Hauptmann, and Liverani M. (eds.),
Between the Rivers and over the Mountains: Archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotamica: 37 –69. Alba Palmiera
Dedicata, Rome.
Kenyon, K.M.
1981
Excavations at Jericho. Vol. 3. The Architecture and Stratigraphy of the Tell 3. British School of Archaeology
in Jerusalem, London.
Kucera, M. and Malmgren, B.A.
1998
Logratio transformation of compositional data — a resolution of the constant sum constraint. Mar.
Micropaleontol 34: 117 – 120.
Maeda, O.
2009
The Materiality of Obsidian and the Practice of Obsidian Use in the Neolithic Near East. PhD thesis.
University of Manchester.
Makarewicz, C.A. and Finlayson, B.
2018
Constructing community in the Neolithic of southern Jordan: quotidian practice in communal architecture.
ProsOne 13(6): 1 – 20.
Matthews, R., Matthews, W., Richardson, A. and Raheem, K.R.
2020
The Neolithic transition in the Eastern Fertile Crescent: project themes, aims and objectives. In R. Matthews,
W. Matthews, K.R. Raheem, and A. Richardson (eds.), The Early Neolithic of the Eastern Fertile Crescent:Excavations at Bestansur and Shimshara, Iraqi Kurdistan: 1–18. Oxbow Books, Oxford.
Matthews, R., Matthews, W., Richardson, A., Walsh, S., Iversen, I., Mudd, D., Rasheed, K., Raeuf, K., Bendrey, R.,
Whitlam, J., Charles, M., Bogaard, A. and Elliott, S.
2019
The Early Neolithic of Iraqi Kurdistan: current research at Bestansur, Shahrizor Plain. Paléorient 45 – 2:
13 – 32.
Matthews, R., Matthews, W. and Mohammadifar, Y. (eds.)
2013
The Earliest Neolithic of Iran: 2008 excavations at Sheikh-e Abad and Jani. Oxford: Oxbow Books (British
Institute of Persian Studies Archaeological Monograph 4).
Mazuroweski, R.F., Białowarczuk, M. and Januszek, K.
2012
Architecture. In R.F. Mazuriwski and Y. Kanjou (eds.), Tell Qaramel 1999–2007 Protoneolithic and Early
Pre-Pottery Neolithic Settlement in Northern Syria: 34–59. PCMA Excavation Series 2. Polish Center ofPRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO) PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022

33

Mediterranean Archaeology, Warsaw.
Miyata, K., Itahashi, Y. and Tsuneki, A.
2022
Preliminary observations on carbide attached pottery excavated from the Charmo site. In Yamada, S. (ed.) The
Essence of Urban Civilization: An Interdisciplinary Study of the Origin and Transformation of Ancient West
Asian Cities, Reports of Survey Results for FY2021: 17–28. (in Japanese)
Moore, A.M.T. and Molleson, T.I.
2000
Disposal of the dead. In A.M.T. Moore, G.C. Hillman and A.J. Legge (eds.), Village on the Euphrates from
Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra: 276–299. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Özdoğan, A.
1999Çayönü. In M. Özdoğan and N. Başgelen (eds.), Neolithic in Turkey: The Cradle of Civilization: 35–63.
Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları, Istanbul.
Odaka, T., Maeda, O., Shimogama, K., Hayakawa, Y.S., Nishiaki, Y., Mohammed, N.A. and Rasheed, K.
2020
Late Neolithic in the Shahrizor Plain, Iraqi Kurdistan, new excavations at Shakar Tepe. Neo-Lithics: 53–57.
Richardson, A., Matthews, R., Matthews, W., Walsh, S., Raeuf, Aziz K. and Stone, A.
2020
Excavations and contextual analyses: Bestansur. In R. Matthews, W. Matthews, K. R. Raheem, and A.
Richardson (eds.), The Early Neolithic of the Eastern Fertile Crescent: Excavations at Bestansur andShimshara, Iraqi Kurdistan: 115 – 175. Oxbow Books, Oxford.
Riel-Salvatore, J., Lythe, A. and Albornoz, A.U.
2021
New insights into the spatial organization, stratigraphy and human occupations of the Aceramic Neolithic at
Ganj Dareh, Iran. ProsOne 16(8): e0251318.
Rollefson, G.O.
2000
Ritual and social structure at Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal. In I. Kuijt. (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities:
Social Organization, Identity, and Differentiation. Kluwer Academic. 163–188, New York.
Smith, P.E.L., Bivar, A.D.H., Fehervari, G., Burney, C., Ghirshman, R., Weiss, H., et al.
1972
Survey of excavations in Iran during 1970–1971. Iran 10: 165–186.
Smith, P.E.L.
1974
Ganj Dareh Tepe. Paléorient 2(1): 207–209.
Sołtysiak, A. and Darabi, H.
2017
Human remains from Ali Kosh, Iran, 2017. Bioarchaeology of the Near East 11: 76–83.
Stordeur, D. and Khawam, R.
2007
Les crânes surmodelés de Tell Aswad (PPNB, Syrie). Premier regard sur l’ensemble, premières réflexions.
Syria 84: 5 – 32.
Tsuneki, A., Rasheed K., Saber S.A., Nishiyama S., Anma R., Ismail B.B., Hasegawa A., Tatsumi Y., Miyauchi Y., Jammo
S., Makino M. and Kudo, Y.
2015
Excavations at Qalat Said Ahmadan, Slemani, Iraq-Kurdistan: first interim report (2014 season), Al-Rāfidān
36: 1 – 50. The Institute for Cultural Studies of Ancient Iraq, Kokushikan University, Tokyo.
Tsuneki, A., Rasheed, K., Saber, S.A., Nishiyama, S., Watanabe, N., Greenfield, T., Ismail, B.B., Tatsumi, Y. and Minami,
M.
2016
Excavations at Qalat Said Ahmadan, Qaladizah, Iraq-Kurdistan: second interim report (2015 season),
Al-Rāfidān 37: 89 – 142. The Institute for Cultural Studies of Ancient Iraq, Kokushikan University, Tokyo.
Tsuneki, A., Watanabe, N., Anma, R., Tatsumi, Y., Jammo, S. and Karim, R.
2020
Neolithization in eastern part of the Fertile Crescent: investigatnions at Charmo, Slemani, Iraqi-Kurdistan(2019), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of Excavations in West Asia: Japanese Society for West Asian
Archaeology (in Japanese).
Tsuneki, A., Hironaga, N. and Jammo, S. (eds.)
2022
The Neolithic Cemetery at Tell el-Kerkh. Al-Shark 5: University of Tuskuba, Studies for West Asian
Archaeology, Excavation Reports of Tell el-Kerkh, Northwestern Syria 2. Oxford: Archaeopress Publishing
LTD. ISBN 978-1-80327-026-5, ISBN 978-1-80327-027-2 (e-Pdf)

34 Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO, Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER

Tsuneki, A., Rasheed, K., Watanabe, N., Anma, R., Tatsumi, Y. and Minami, M.
2019Landscape and early farming at Neolithic sites in Slemani, Iraqi Kurdistan: a case study of Jarmo and Qalat
Said Ahmadan. Paléorient 45(2): 33 –51.
Walsh, S.
2020

Human remains from Bestansur: demography, diet and health. In R. Matthews, W. Matthews, K.R. Raheem,
and A. Richardson (eds.), The Early Neolithic of The Eastern Fertile Crescent: Excavations at Bestansur andShimshara, Iraqi Kurdistan: 429 – 459. Oxbow Books, Oxford.

BRONZE AGE HORN-SHAPED CONTAINERS AND COSMETICS: A NEW IDENTIFICATION FOR A CONICAL STONEOBJECT EXCAVATED AT PARKHAI-II, SUMBAR VALLEY, SOUTH-WEST
AL-RĀFIDĀNTURKMENISTAN
Vol. XLIV 2023

35

BRONZE AGE HORN-SHAPED CONTAINERS AND COSMETICS:
A NEW IDENTIFICATION FOR A CONICAL STONE OBJECT EXCAVATED
AT PARKHAI-II, SUMBAR VALLEY, SOUTH-WEST TURKMENISTANSt John SIMPSON*

This paper re-examines an object found in the 3rd millennium BC cemetery of Parkhai II in the
Sumbar valley of south-west Turkmenistan (Fig. 1). This site is one of several near the modern
village of Kara-Kala in the Kopet Dagh region, where the Sumbar river rises before flowing to join
the Atrek river and draining west into the Caspian, like the Gorgan river to the south (Figs 2 – 3).
The cemetery of Parkhai-II was discovered in 1977 and excavated up until 1991 by the
Sumbar Archaeological Expedition of the Institute of Archaeology (Russian Academy of Sciences)in Leningrad, and directed by the late I.N. Khlopin (1930 – 1994). The site consists of a natural hillwhich had been used as an ancient cemetery, with 292 eneolithic burials covering an area of over
4500 sq m, and a small number of later burials added in the early medieval period (Fig. 4). The
associated settlement was discovered nearby in 1983 when the surrounding area was bulldozed tomake a vineyard, and brief excavations carried out the following year proved it to cover an areaof some six hectares and with four metres of accumulated stratigraphy [Khlopin 2002, 10]. In thecase of the cemetery, each of the eneolithic tombs had been used repeatedly for successive burials
until they became mini-catacombs, presumably restricted to use for family members, with the earlier
disarticulated remains carefully moved and re-arranged with subsequent interments. Pottery was thecommonest type of grave-good but there were also beads, copper studs found in the mouths, andshort pins with double spiral or wing-like heads. Whereas the pottery belongs to a local tradition,
the pins have close parallels from further afield, including Tepe Hissar in north-east Iran, and the
excavator regularly emphasised that the position and orientation of this micro-region of the Kopet
Dagh meant it was culturally closer to Iran than to Central Asia [Khlopin 1997; 2002].
In one case – Grave 19 – an apparently unique object was discovered, which is the subjectof this brief paper. It is a hollow truncated cone, described as alabaster, although it is more likely

Figure 1. Location of Parkhai-II (based on Google Earth)*

Department of the Middle East, The British Museum, Great Russell Street, London WC1B 3DG, England;
ssimpson@britishmuseum.org

36

St John SIMPSON

Figure 2. General plan of the site (after Khlopin 1997, 6, fig. 2)

Figure 3. Satellite view of Parkhai-II (based on Google Earth)gypsum or calcite, and measuring 70 mm high and 32 mm across. It was found near the head ofthe latest adult to be placed in the tomb, the other grave-goods consisting of a pointed copper pin(or applicator as it is bent and rounded at one end), copper ring, beads, copper studs and pottery(Figs 5–6). Its function was not described in the report [Khlopin 1997, 69 – 70, 162, pl. 68.2], but
its significance has been re-analysed by the author in a paper submitted in honour of the excavatorand published in Russian [Simpson 2020], expanded here and published for the first time in English.
This object belongs to a category which, like the pins, has distant connections. Similar objects
were excavated at Mundigak in Afghanistan (Fig. 7), where they were interpreted as the handles
used to stabilise and hold vertical bow drills used to make beads, while a string wound aroundthe shaft gave the necessary rotation to perforate the beads held securely in wooden tablets [Casal
1961, vol. I, 234, 236, vol. II, figs 134: 25, 135: 11, 11b] (Fig. 8). This interpretation was followed
for examples excavated at Shahr-i Sokhta, where some of the wooden bead-making tablets were
found, albeit not in association [Tosi 1969, 373, figs 41a– d, r – t, 237, 254 – 256]. Others have

BRONZE AGE HORN-SHAPED CONTAINERS AND COSMETICS: A NEW IDENTIFICATION FOR A CONICAL STONEOBJECT EXCAVATED AT PARKHAI-II, SUMBAR VALLEY, SOUTH-WEST TURKMENISTAN

Figure 4. Plan of the eneolithic cemetery of Parkhai-II, marking the position of Grave 19(after Khlopin 1997, 8–9, figs 3–4)

Figure 6. Plan of Grave 19 and thecosmetic container (after
Khlopin 1997, pl. 68)

Figure 5. Plan of Grave 19 with its finds (after
Khlopin 1997, pl. 68)

Figure 7. Horn-shaped cosmetic containers
from Mundigak (after Casal
1961, vol. II, fig. 135)

37

38

St John SIMPSON

Figure 8. Objects and reconstruction drawings showing drilling (after Pottier 1984, fig. 17)

Figure 9. Cosmetic containers from Altyndepe (after Kircho 1992, fig. 20.1)

been found at Farkhor and Kanturttut-2 in southern
Tajikistan [Vinogradova and Kutimov 2018, 113, 122,
figs 5.5, 15 – 16], Altyn depe [Masson 1988, pl. XLI;Kircho 1992, fig. 20.1], Takhirbai 3 [Sarianidi 1990,
pl. XXVII.13 = Trench 11] and Gonur depe andTogolok-21, where the excavator described them as
phallic symbols [Sarianidi 1990, pls LXXX, LXXXII;
2006: 278, fig. 126]. They are sometimes found ingraves, such as burials 728 and 884 in levels 4 and9 in excavation area 5 at Altyn depe, but others were
found in courtyard or other contexts in the same area
[Masson 1988] (Fig. 9). At Shahr-i Sokhta they were
found in both male and female graves [Sajjadi 2003,
81 – 85, fig. 40, table 8] (Fig. 10). They have also
been reported from looted cemeteries in the Jiroft
region of the Halil Rud [Madjidzadeh 2003, 146, 205].
They may be related to a series of copper versions

BRONZE AGE HORN-SHAPED CONTAINERS AND COSMETICS: A NEW IDENTIFICATION FOR A CONICAL STONEOBJECT EXCAVATED AT PARKHAI-II, SUMBAR VALLEY, SOUTH-WEST TURKMENISTAN

39

Figure 10. Cosmetic containers from Shah-I Sokhta (after Sajjadi 2003, fig. 40)

excavated at Tepe Hissar, where they were described as ‘odd, thick stemmed ‘nails’ with broadconcave heads’ [Schmidt 1933, 377, pl. CIVa]. The discovery of yet another at the 5th millennium
BC Iranian site of Tepe Zagheh, and which still contained dark residue in the top, implies that thistype has a long history [Gnoli et al. 2001, 26, cat. 33].
Their function has led to different hypotheses. Pottier reports seeing four on sale in the Kabul
bazaar (Fig. 11), and how all contained a greasy black residue [Pottier 1984, 38 – 39, 98, fig. 37,
pl. XXXI, nos 261 – 64]. Two were acquired by the
Louvre, and the contents described as a fine black
powder [Amiet 1977, 99 – 101, fig. 9]. Similar remains
were noted inside examples excavated at Mundigak
and Shahr-i Sokhta, and scientific analysis indicatedthis to be lead-based [Pottier 1984, 39]. However,despite this, they have usually been interpreted as
candle-holders, following another suggestion by V.I.
Sarianidi who demonstrated how the perforated lids
might have held vertical wicks [Sarianidi 1986, pl. 49](Fig. 12). Moreover, others report that some of theexamples excavated at Shahr-i Sokhta even contained‘the wick ... inside the cavity’, therefore speculated on
the role of fire and light in the beliefs of early IranianFigure 11. Cosmetic containers from the
populations, and described them as ‘carved in marble,
Afghan art market (after Pottier
have a cylindrical tapering form with a small cavity
1984, fig. 37)

40

St John SIMPSON

Figure 12. Cosmetic containers with lids
interpreted as lamps (after
Sarianidi 1986, pl. 49)

for containing oil closed by a perforated lid’ (Jarrigeand Hassan 1989, 160). However, Franke observedthat it ‘can be argued, however, that without support
they topple easily and that no traces of use and wear
are visible on the rim or body’ (Franke 2008, 35)(Fig. 13), a feature also true of others seized fromthe antiquities market and repatriated to the National
Museum of Afghanistan in Kabul (Figs 14 – 15).
These hypotheses can now be dismissed. These
objects were simply another form of cosmetic flask
used alongside more elaborate copper alloy anddecorated chlorite containers found at sites in thesame region; the dark residue represents make-up; andthe aperture in the lid was to facilitate inserting anapplicator. The same conclusion was made in a reporton Shahr-i Sokhta where the excavator described them

Figure 13. Cosmetic containers from Herat (after Franke 2008, fig. 65)

Figure 14. Cosmetic containers from Afghanistan, seized in the UK andrepatriated to Afghanistan (HMRC 98.1-6)

BRONZE AGE HORN-SHAPED CONTAINERS AND COSMETICS: A NEW IDENTIFICATION FOR A CONICAL STONEOBJECT EXCAVATED AT PARKHAI-II, SUMBAR VALLEY, SOUTH-WEST TURKMENISTAN41

as ‘flagons’, but concluded that ‘they are too small’ tohave served as lamps and instead ‘they certainly served
as containers for cosmetic substances’ [Sajjadi 2003,81]. In short, a wide variety of cast copper, plain calcite
and decorated chlorite cosmetic flasks were used acrosseastern Iran, south-west Central Asia and Afghanistan
during the late 3rd and early 2nd millennia BC. Theirsize, capacity and style vary. Some are plain, others aredecorated. Some have close-fitting caps and the aperturein these lids must have been to facilitate inserting anapplicator. Those that did not must have had a cap ofsome sort, otherwise the oils in the pigment would havedried and contracted – like shoe polish left with the lid
open – and so those were probably made of horn orcontrasting wood which have not survived.
What does this all mean? It is important to remember
Figure 15. Cosmetic containers fromthat people, whether past or present, are essentially theAfghanistan, seized in the UK
same, regardless of nationality, language or culture, andand repatriated to Afghanistan(HMRC 150.1-2)
share the same basic emotions and needs. The use ofeye-liner by men and women alike in Central Asia andNear East goes back to the 3rd millennium BC, and cosmetics were also widely used from thisperiod onwards [Simpson 2021]. Yet this is the only evidence for either practice at Parkhai-II
where the range of grave-goods was otherwise quite restricted. Was this person, buried near theedge of the cemetery, therefore an outsider? Was he or she someone who engaged directly with
distant communities and acquired this through these contacts? Were the inhabitants simply very
conservative in what they placed in the grave? Or were objects such as this more commonly madeof horn, as the shape suggests, and therefore do not survive?
With these questions in mind, the following modern ethnographic analogy of a horn cosmetic
container and applicator from Morocco raises yet another as it demonstrates that not all applicators
have swollen ends (Fig. 16a–b). Were this modern analogy found without its container, it would

Figure 16. Contemporary horn cosmetic container and applicator from Morocco (private collection)

42

St John SIMPSON

undoubtedly have been identified as a pin. Its short length recalls metal examples found near theheads of many other skeletons at Parkai-II [e.g., Khlopin 2002, 161; cf. Alyokshin 2020]: weresome of these therefore also applicators used with horn containers which did not survive? Rather
than being a unique form of cosmetic container, that from Grave 19 may simply be unusual as it
was carved from stone, thus survived, whereas those made of horn did not. As ever, our viewsof the material culture of the past is heavily prejudiced on the basis of what is preserved, and weshould be attentive to the clues offered by the shapes and types of objects which are more typicalof organic materials [Simpson 2022].
Bibliography
Alyokshin, V.A.
2020
Cultural contacts of southwestern Turkmenistan, northeastern Iran and southeastern Turkmenistan in the
SWT-II period (according to the results of Igor’ N. Khlopin’s excavations at the Parkhay II burial ground,
Drevniye i srednevekovyye kul’tury Sredney Azii (stanovleniye, razvitiye i vzaimodeystviye urbanizirovannykh
i skotovodcheskikh obshchestv). Materialy mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 100-letiyu sodnya rozhdeniya doktora istoricheskikh nauk Anatoliya Mikhaylovicha Mandel’shtama i 90-letiyu so dnya
rozhdeniya doktora istoricheskikh nauk Igorya Nikolayevicha Khlopina / Ancient and Medieval Culturesof Central Asia (the formation, development and interaction of urbanized and cattle-breeding societies).
Proceedings of the international conference dedicated to the 100th birth anniversary of Doktor Nauk in
Historical Sciences Anatolii M. Mandelshtam and the 90th birth anniversary of Doktor Nauk in Historical
Sciences Igor’ N. Khlopin, 10 – 12 November 2020, St. Petersburg: 33–37.
Amiet, P.
1977

La Bactriane proto-historique, Syria 54 (1977): 89–121, pls III–VI.

Casal, J.-M.
1961
Fouilles de Mundigak (Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Afghanistan 17). Paris: C.
Klincksieck.
Franke, U.
2008
Prehistory: Beyond Alexander the Great, in U. Franke (ed.) National Museum Herat – Areia Antiqua ThroughTime: 28 – 37. Berlin: Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Eurasien-Abteilung.
Gnoli, G. et al.
2001
Antica Persia. I tesori del Museo Nazionale di Tehran e la ricerca italiana in Iran. Rome: De Luca.
Jarrige, J.-F. and Hassan, M.U.
1989
Funerary Complexes in Baluchistan at the end of the Third Millennium in the Light of recent Discoveries at
Mehrgarh and Quetta, South Asian Archaeology 1985: Papers from the Eighth International Conference ofSouth Asian Archaeologists: 150 – 166. Riverdale: Curzon.
Khlopin, I.N.
1997
Eneolit yugo-zapadnogo Turkmenistana [Neolithic of south-west Turkmenistan] (Trudy YuzhnoTurkmenistanskoi arkheologicheskoi kompleksnoi ekspeditsii, 20). St. Petersburg: Evropeiskii Dom.
2002
Epokha bronzii yugo-zapadnogo Turkmenistana [Bronze Age of south-west Turkmenistan]. (Trudy YuzhnoTurkmenistanskoi arkheologicheskoi kompleksnoi ekspeditsii, 21). St. Petersburg: Evropeiskii Dom.
Kircho, L.
1992
The Local Roots of Namazga V Culture, South Asian Archaeology 1989: Papers from the Tenth International
Conference of South Asian Archaeologists: 161–66. Madison [WI]: Prehistory Press.
Madjidzadeh, Y.
2003
Jiroft. The Earliest Oriental Civilisation. Tehran: Iranian Cultural Heritage Organization.
Masson, M.E.
1988
Altyn-depe. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.

BRONZE AGE HORN-SHAPED CONTAINERS AND COSMETICS: A NEW IDENTIFICATION FOR A CONICAL STONEOBJECT EXCAVATED AT PARKHAI-II, SUMBAR VALLEY, SOUTH-WEST TURKMENISTAN

43

Pottier, M.-H.
1984
Matériel funéraire de la Bactriane méridional de l’Age du Bronze. Paris: Editions Recherche sur lescivilisations.
Sajjadi, S.M.S.
2003
Excavations at Shahr-i Sokhta. First Preliminary Report on the Excavations of the Graveyard 1997–2000, Iran
41 (2003): 21 – 97.
Sarianidi, V.I.
1986
Die Kunst des alten Afghanistan. Leipzig: E.A. Seemann.
1990
Drevnosti Stranyi Margush. Ashkhabad: Ylim.
2006
A Tsar’s Necropolis in the Kara Kum Desert, in J. van Krieken-Pieters (ed.) Art and Archaeology ofAfghanistan: 95 – 101. Leiden and Boston: Brill.
Schmidt, E.F.
1933
Tepe Hissar Excavations 1931, The Museum Journal 23 (1933): 323–483, pls LXXII –CLXXI.
Simpson, St J.
2020
Novaya identifikatsiya kamennogo konicheskogo sosuda iz raskopok I.N.Khlopina v Parkhai II (Pogrebeniye 19),
Drevniye i srednevekovyye kul’tury Sredney Azii (stanovleniye, razvitiye i vzaimodeystviye urbanizirovannykh
i skotovodcheskikh obshchestv). Materialy mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 100-letiyu sodnya rozhdeniya doktora istoricheskikh nauk Anatoliya Mikhaylovicha Mandel’shtama i 90-letiyu so dnya
rozhdeniya doktora istoricheskikh nauk Igorya Nikolayevicha Khlopina / Ancient and Medieval Culturesof Central Asia (the formation, development and interaction of urbanized and cattle-breeding societies).
Proceedings of the international conference dedicated to the 100th birth anniversary of Doktor Nauk in
Historical Sciences Anatolii M. Mandelshtam and the 90th birth anniversary of Doktor Nauk in Historical
Sciences Igor’ N. Khlopin, 10– 12 November 2020, St. Petersburg: 103–105. St Petersburg: Russian Academyof Sciences.
2021
Heavy metal and the beauty industry: an unexpected connection from ancient Afghanistan, Academia letters
Article 352: 1 – 6. https: do1.org /10.20935/AL352
2022
Of Boxes in the Bronze Age: Exotic Imports, Skeuomorphs and Local Crafts from Central Asia to Sumer,
Al-Rafidan 43: 53 – 64.
Tosi, M.
1969

Excavations at Shahr-i Sokhta. Preliminary Report on the Second Campaign, September–December 1968,
East and West 19 (1969): 283 –386.

Vinogradova, N.M. and Kutimov, Yu.G.
2018
Pogrebal’nyye pamyatniki epokhi bronzy v Yuzhnom Tadzhikistane (mogil’niki Gelota i Darnaychi). Moscow:
Russian Academy of Sciences.

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGYALFOR-RĀFIDĀN
SEARCHING
Vol. XLIVAKKADE
2023

45

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE:REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES FORFORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE
Naohiko KAWAKAMI*

Abstract
Around 2300 BCE, the Dynasty of Akkad founded by King Sargon established its hegemony over ancient
Mesopotamia and the city of Akkade was founded as its capital. The precise whereabouts of Akkade havebeen sought by many scholars for over 140 years. Despite these efforts, it has still not been found. In thevery early days of Assyriology, at the end of the 19th century, a tentative theory was put forward that for the
first time proposed equated the two cities of Akkade and Sippar-ša-Anunītu. In association with this theory
Akkade was identified with the site of Tell ed-Dēr. However, another tentative theory was put forward, that
Akkade was simply another name for Babylon. From this view, Akkade was identified with Ishan Mizyard.
However, various pieces of counter-evidence have emerged that undercut these proposals. Using written
sources containing a range of topographical information on Akkade, it was suggested that Akkade may have
had a close geographical connection with the Tigris. Three specific regions have been proposed for thelocation of the ancient city of Akkade, namely, the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala and the Adheim
and the region near the modern town of Samarra. However, no suitable candidate sites for the ancient site
of Akkade has been found in these regions. This regrettable outcome may have been caused by the lackof proper and effective use of the topographical information contained in written sources that indicate theregional location of Akkade. This paper proposes a specialized methodology for identifying the ancient siteof the ancient city of Akkade.

I.

Introduction

From approximately 2300 BCE, the Dynasty of Akkad, founded by King Sargon, had hegemony
over ancient Mesopotamia. Arguably it was history’s first empire, and its capital, founded by
Sargon was the ancient city of Akkade according to the Sumerian King List. This list was probably
composed during the following Ur III Dynasty period and thus is the source that is closest in timeto the founding. The precise whereabouts of Akkade have been sought by scholars for over 140
years. Various locations have been presented as candidates, several have been definitively refuted,
and others have been judged unlikely or to be supported by inconclusive evidence. As a result,
Akkade’s location has still not been identified, despite the efforts of many scholars. In this article,
over 140 years of previous studies on the location of Akkade will be investigated, and then we
will attempt to clarify with which specific regions and ancient sites, locations of the ancient cityof Akkade have been deduced by previous scholars. We will also identify the nature of various
written evidence that scholars used to identify the location of Akkade. We will analyze all relevant
past theories one by one to identify problems in them that have led to their failure to identify thelocation of Akkade to this date. From this work, a new specific methodology for identifying thelocation of Akkade will be formulated.

*

Senior Assistant Professor, Nagasaki International University, Nagasaki, Japan; Special Researcher, the Institute forCultural Studies of Ancient Iraq in the School of Asia 21, Kokushikan University, Tokyo, Japan

46

II.

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

Identification of Akkade with Sippar-ša-Anunītu or Tell ed-Dēr1)

During the very early days of Assyriology, M. J. Ménant [1875, 96; 1883, 71 – 72] first proposed theidentification of Akkade with Sippar-ša-Anunītu and was followed by F. Delitzsch [1881, 209 –212]
and F. Hommel [1926, 400–410]. One factor above all seems to have led them to propose thishypothesis, namely, the presence of the Eulmaš temple in Sippar-ša-Anunītu and the descriptionof such a temple in Akkade. Anunītu (earlier Annunītum) was a Babylonian goddess who shared
several attributes with the goddess Inanna/Ištar [Ebeling 1932, 110 – 111; Black and Green 1992,
34–35]. These scholars deduced that the Eulmaš temple of Anunītu at Sippar-ša-Anunītu and theEulmaš temple of Ištar at Akkade were identical. Sippar-ša-Anunītu was known from cuneiform
sources that were already available at that time but cannot be specified today to be adjacent to
Sippar-ša-Šamaš, leading to the conclusion that Akkade was another name for Sippar-ša-Anunītu
and was to be found beside Sippar-ša-Šamaš.
However, as E. Unger [1932, 62] noted, in his inscriptions, Nabonidus refers separately to the
Eulmaš temple of Ištar at Akkade and the Eulmaš temple of Anunītu at Sippar-ša-Anunītu [Langdon
1912, 246–247]. S. Langdon [1915 –1916, 114, fn. 3] also noted that in his inscription, Nabonidus
refers to Kassite King Šagaragti-Šuriaš’s claim to have restored the Eulmaš temple of Anunītu at
Sippar-ša-Anunītu, but his name is absent from the same inscription that gives Nabonidus’s list ofkings who sought the Eulmaš temple of Ištar at Akkade2). If Sippar-ša-Anunītu and Akkade wereidentical, Šagaragti-Šuriaš should appear in this list3). These two factors allow us to argue that theEulmaš temple of Anunītu at Sippar-ša-Anunītu and the Eulmaš temple of Ištar at Akkade wereseparate entities.
As to why the same name was used for temples of the same goddess at the two locations of
Akkade and Sippar-ša-Anunītu, Unger and Langdon indicated different views. Unger [1932, 62]thought that Sippar-ša-Anunītu was built on the ruins of the ancient city of Akkade, and Langdon[1915 – 1916, 114, fn. 3] thought that the Eulmaš temple of Anunītu at Sippar-ša-Anunītu wasbuilt on a new foundation in the vicinity of Sippar-ša-Šamaš ( = Abu Habbah) by the Kassite
King Šagaragti-Šuriaš, replacing the lost Eulmaš temple of Ištar at Akkade. Langdon noted that
unspecified inscriptions indicate that Akkade was located near Sippar-ša-Šamaš ( = Abu Habbah).
Thus, he proposed that Tell ed-Dēr was Akkade because of its location beside Sippar-ša-Šamaš.
Langdon [1924, 7–8, fn. 1] also observed that the impressive structures of Tell ed-Dēr and its
advantageous geographical setting would suit a powerful ruler like Sargon as a place to plan a newcapital.
The ancient name of Tell ed-Dēr has not yet been definitively determined, although this has
been a subject of debate for a long time [Edzard 1970, 18 – 26; Harris 1975, 11, 14; Groneberg 1980,
208; Black 1987, 18, fn. 1]4). Although this paper does not pursue this identification, a crucial factmust be mentioned here. Many excavations have been undertaken at Tell ed-Dēr, of which the firstwas conducted by H. Rassam and E. A. Wallis Budge [Pallis 1956, 363 – 364]. Later excavations
undertaken by T. Baqir and M. A. Mustafa [1945, 37] produced materials from the Akkadian period,
but none of these yielded any evidence that would lead us to assign Akkade’s location to Tell
1)
2)
3)
4)

The locations of the ancient sites that scholars have proposed as candidates for Akkade and well-known locations of other toponyms
referred to in association with these are shown on the maps given as Figs. 1 – 4.
For the content of the relevant royal inscription of Nabonidus, see [Langdon 1912, 242 – 252; Weiershäuser and Novotny 2020,
Nabonidus 27].
It is possible that Nabonidus was unaware of this or simply did not know of the inscription of Šagaragti-Šuriaš recording therestoration work at Akkade.
J. A. Black identified Tell ed-Dēr with Sippar-Amnānum and disputes that it was Sippar-Yaḫrurum. He stated that this debate would
be resolved with a final discussion to be published in a subsequent volume of the journal, Akkadica, but this publication has notbeen traced.

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

47

ed-Dēr. More recent efforts to excavate Tell ed-Dēr, such as by a Belgian team headed by L. de
Meyer [with Gasche and Paepe, 1971; 1978; 1980; 1984] produced the same result, namely, that noevidence was unearthed that Sargon’s capital was recovered from Tell ed-Dēr.
Thus, it has not been proven either that Akkade is Sippar-ša-Anunītu or that the latter was
built over Akkade. Langdon’s identification of Akkade with Tell ed-Dēr has also not been proven.
Even if further excavation is undertaken in this location, it seems unlikely that any new indicationof Akkade will be unearthed at Tell ed-Dēr5).
III. Akkade is the Cover Name of Babylon
B. Landsberger [1965, 38–57] first proposed that Akkade (written URUAk-kad) was Babylon, based
partly on his study of the archives of Mār-Ištar, who was the ambassador of the Neo-Assyrian
King Esarhaddon and partly on his study of the archives of Aqqulānu, the Assyrian high-astrologer.
He argued that the references to Akkade in these archives were to be understood as references toBabylon, stemming from the scribal fantasy of Mār-Ištar and the earlier one of Aqqulānu. Therefore,
he considered Akkade to be only an alternate or cover name for Babylon6).
However, Landsberger gave no concrete reasoning or evidence to support his theory, andwe cannot reconstruct its development. S. Parpola [1983, XXV, 263] concluded that Landsberger
probably proposed his interpretation to account for the fact that several substitute kings were
enthroned in Akkade instead of Babylon: Esarhaddon and other Neo-Assyrian kings held thekingship of Babylon, and there was a special rite that was occasioned by eclipses and that required
the repetition of the enthronement of substitute kings in Nineveh for Assyria and in Babylon for
Babylonia. Landsberger likely sensed a contradiction in the fact that Akkade was treated as the siteof this ritual in the archives of Mār-Ištar and Aqqulānu.
Parpola considered that the repetition of the enthronement of substitute kings was in reality
performed in Akkade and that it was not caused by a scribal fantasy of Mār-Ištar and Aqqulānu.
He thought that Babylon had been abandoned from the time of the reign of Esarhaddon, so therepetition of the enthronement of substitute kings could not be performed there. Instead, the ancientimperial capital of the empire of Akkad was chosen as the site worthy for such rites. Additional
pieces of evidence discredit Landsberger’s equation of Akkade and Babylon. As Parpola [1970a,
nos. 280–281; 1983, 263] indicated, Mār-Ištar frequently used the names of Akkade and Babylon
together in his letters. Both names also occur together in other contemporaneous documents andin the inscriptions of Aššurbanipal. Furthermore, the name Babylon even appears side-by-side with
5)

6)

Although Akkade was not concretely identified with either Sippar-ša-Anunītu or Tell ed-Dēr, W. H. Lane [1923, 83 – 85] alsopresumed that Akkade was located near Sippar ( = Abu Habbah). Pliny’s Natural History, Book VI, ch. 30, records this about
Mesopotamia; it mentions a very large city called Agranis present at the point where the river that the Assyrians called Narmalcha( = royal river), divides its waters. Lane assumed that Narmalcha is synonymous with the Nahr Malcha. It was known to him that
the Nahr Malcha branched off at Hipparenum, which he equated with Sippar ( = Abu Habbah), and then flowed eastward toward
Seleucia on the Tigris. Accordingly, he assumed that Agranis would form the Greek rendering for the ancient city of Akkade.
Thus, it was located at the same point as Hipparenum ( = Sippar = Abu Habbah).
Furthermore, the Roman history of Ammianus Marcellinus, Book 24, ch. 2 records that the troops of the Emperor Julian
advanced to the village of Macepracta, where a branch of the river known as Nahamalca ( = river of kings) passed by Ctesiphon.
Thus, Lane thought that Macepracta would refer to Sippar. He also argued that Macepracta could be phonetically identifiablewith both Sippar and Akkade, if both names are said together as [Ma]Sippar-Akkade. Thus, he accordingly located Akkade in thevicinity of Sippar ( = Abu Habbah).
However, no other evidence supports these name-based theories. Lane also proposed Qadisiyeh as a potential site of Akkade.
His alternative theory is discussed in the section V. 3.
J. A. Brinkman [1968, 145, fn. 874] also made cautious mention of Landsberger’s theory, indicating that if his theory is correct, theAkkade referred to in two kudurrus of the Kassite period, BBSt. Nos. 3– 4 may have been a synonym for Babylon [McEwan 1982,
12]. As noted below, later H. Weiss [1975, 434 – 453], partly agreeing with Landsberger’s theory, developed his own conception of
the location of Akkade.

48

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

that of Akkade in the letters AOAT 5/1, 280 and 281 of Mār-Ištar. Thus, it is unlikely that Akkade
was considered a synonym for Babylon by Mār-Ištar and Aqqulānu.
In the Neo-Babylonian Chronicle 1, the Esarhaddon Chronicle, and the letter AOAT 5 /1, 275of Mār-Ištar, the city of Akkade was associated with the return of the Ištar of Akkade from Elam.
Therefore, G. J. P. McEwan [1982, 12] and Parpola [1970a, no. 275; 1983, 262 –263] argued that
there would have been, obviously, no need for the writers of the Chronicles and Mār-Ištar to use analias for Babylon in this case7).
Furthermore, McEwan [1982, 12] and Parpola [1983, 263] indicated that a later building
inscription of Nabonidus confirmed Esarhaddon’s work of restoration on the Eulmaš temple in
Akkade, but no temple named Eulmaš has been found in the numerous building inscriptions of
Esarhaddon relating to Babylon8).
There is evidence that the Ištar of Akkade was worshiped at Babylon in the Emašdari temple,
but McEwan [1982, 15, fn. 55] asserted that this could not be taken to support the identification of
Akkade as Babylon because it was not unusual for local deities to be worshiped both in the capitaland in their own cult centers. This is confirmed by BRM 4, 25 ( = SBH VII), which presentsa schedule for the worship of various local deities in Babylon. Other texts show that Ištar of
Akkade was worshiped in Aššur, Bīt-Bēlti, Bīt-Ḫabban, Mari, and Sippar [McEwan 1982, 15, fn.
56]. Therefore, this cultic connection is not an appropriate foundation for identifying Akkade withBabylon.
Parpola [1970a, no. 278; 1983, 268] advanced another reason for Landsberger’s conclusion.
In Mār-Ištar’s letter, AOAT 5/2, 278, Akkade was mentioned in connection with two well-attested
seats of astronomical schools, Borsippa and Nippur, which regularly sent astrological reports to the
Sargonid kings. Both of these sites were commonly linked with third major astronomical school,that of Babylon, which is always listed first9). Therefore, in this context, we should expect to see
Babylon on this list, not Akkade. Parpola argued that this may have been the evidence that led
Landsberger to create his theory. However, nothing in this passage suggests that astronomical
observations were regularly taken in Akkade, and it may be, according to Parpola, that the city was
simply mentioned here because it was where Mār-Ištar himself watched the eclipse. The lettersof Mār-Ištar themselves make it clear that he did not spend all of his time in Akkade but wasconstantly on the move, supervising all of the reconstruction work being done in Babylonia during
his time in office10).
It is clear, therefore, that the references to the city of Akkade found in the archives of Mār-Ištar
during the Esarhaddon’s time and in the archives of Aqqulānu were to a place quite distinct from
Babylon. At this time, furthermore, a city called Akkade really did exist and was separate from theBabylon of the Neo-Assyrian period.
IV. Akkade is Ishan Mizyad
Weiss [1975, 434–453] identified Akkade with Ishan Mizyad. This conclusion was based on threefundamental considerations. The first was his disagreement regarding the identification and locationof Akkade with Sippar-ša-Anunītu or Tell ed-Dēr in the vicinity of Sippar-ša-Šamaš. He disagreed
with this idea because he believed that the Akkadian capital could not have been located at the
7)
8)
9)

10)

For the Neo-Babylonian Chronicle 1 and the Esarhaddon Chronicle, see [Grayson 1975, 84, 126].
For the building inscription of Nabonidus, see [Langdon 1912, 246 – 249; George 1993, 155]. For the inscriptions of Esarhaddon,see [Leichty 2011].
With the exception of the report of AOAT 5 / 2, 278, reports were sent from Babylon, Borsippa, Cutha, Dilbat, and Uruk. Pliny andStrabo also referred to Babylon, Sippar, and Uruk as the seats of astrological schools. Observatories in Babylon, Nippur, Uruk, andBorsippa, were also mentioned, see [Parpola 1983, 268, fn. 481].
The archives of Mār-Ištar, see [Parpola 1970a, 218 – 253].

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

49

fringe of the Early Dynastic and Akkadian settlement area but must have been located in the heartof southern Mesopotamia.
The second consideration is related to Landsberger’s theory of the Neo-Assyrian equation of
Akkade with Babylon. He considered that Neo-Assyrian usage of the word Akkade could involvea type of symbolism, suggesting that the ruins of Akkade were near to Babylon. He seems to havebelieved that Akkade was no longer permanently occupied in the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian
periods. He adduced several records from the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian excavations
that implied that Akkade was abandoned during these periods. For example, the inscriptions ofNabonidus indicate that Kurigalzu, Esarhaddon, Aššurbanipal, and Nebuchadnezzar II performed
intensive excavations at Akkade as part of their fruitless search for the temmēnnu ( = foundation
document) of earlier kings regarding the Eulmaš temple. Nabonidus’s inscriptions further tellthat he eventually found the temmēnnu in a pit that was made by a heavy rain following three
years of excavations along the trenches of Nebuchadnezzar II11). The Neo-Babylonian epigrapherarchaeologist Nabu-zer-lišir also left records of excavations at Akkade detailing the discovery of aroyal inscription of Šar-kali-šarrī [Weiss 1975, 447, fn. 43]. These records make it obvious thatthose kings of the Kassite, Neo-Assyrian, and Neo-Babylonian periods shared feelings of awe
for the kings of the Dynasty of Akkad. In addition, the records also indicate that Akkade was
frequently excavated by the kings of the Kassite, Neo-Assyrian, and Neo-Babylonian periods.
Therefore, examining these records in isolation might give the impression that Akkade was alreadyabandoned and completely ruined at the periods in question and was located not far from the royalresidence of these kings at Babylon. This may have led Weiss to conclude that the name Akkade
was substituted for Babylon in these periods, in a type of figure of speech.
Finally, the third consideration of Weiss’s theory was developed from examination of threefurther written sources: the Neo-Assyrian version of the Omen of Sargon, the Weidner Chronicle,
and the Chronicle of Early Kings [Weiss 1975, 447 – 448]12). All of these mention Sargon’sconstruction of the city of Babylon near Akkade. Weiss credited the historicity of these sources,
perhaps due to their composition at a time when the location of Akkade was still well known, andreference to it had symbolic and suggestive associations for the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babyloniankings.
From the aforementioned three considerations of his theory, Weiss identified the ancient city of
Akkade with a relatively large tell called Ishan Mizyad, located 15 km east-northeast of Babylon.
However, his identification of Akkade with Ishan Mizyad cannot be supported for the following
two reasons. The first reason is that, as referred to in the section III above, both the names Akkade
and Babylon occur in the letters of Mār-Ištar, other contemporaneous documents, the inscriptionsof Aššurbanipal, the Neo-Babylonian Chronicle 1, and the Esarhaddon Chronicle. Furthermore, in
AOAT 5/1, 275 of Mār-Ištar, it is written that Esarhaddon caused Akkade to be inhabited again[Parpola 1970a, no. 275; Frame 1993, 44]. Therefore, at least from the reign of Esarhaddon onward,
during the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian periods, Akkade was not abandoned and ruined but
was occupied. Thus, there would have been no need to adopt any symbolic or suggestive meaning
for references to the city of Akkade standing for references to the city of Babylon in these periods.
The second reason that Weiss’s identification is not supportable is that there is an obvious riskin crediting accounts of the Neo-Assyrian version of the Omen of Sargon, the Weidner Chronicle,
11)

12)

For the inscriptions of Nabonidus, see [Langdon 1912, 246 – 249; 1915 – 1916, 114, fn. 3; Goosens 1948, 149 – 159; Weiershäuser
and Novotny 2020, Nabonidus 27]. For the meaning of the Akkadian word temmennu, see [Gelb, Landsberger, and Oppenheim
2006, 337– 339].
For the Neo-Assyrian version of the Omen of Sargon, see [King 1907, 28: 7 – 11], for the Weidner Chronicle, see [Grayson 1975,
149: 50–51; Glassner 2004, 266 – 267], and for the Chronicle of Early Kings, see [Grayson 1975, 153: 18 – 19; Glassner 2004,
268–271].

50

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

Fig. 1 – Locations of Candidate Sites for Akkade and Relevant Ancient Sites of Chs. II, III, and IV.

and the Chronicle of Early Kings regarding the construction of Babylon near Akkade. There isno evidence from the Sargonic period to indicate that Babylon was near Akkade. Therefore, lateraccounts alone cannot be treated as sufficiently historical to provide this location for Akkade. The
Chronicle of Early Kings refers to the construction of a replica of Babylon near Akkade as sacrilege.
From this, Parpola [1983, 516] argued that all three references to the construction of Babylon near
Akkade ought to be understood in the same way.
According to B. R. Foster [1993, 172], the Iraqi excavations at Ishan Mizyad that were
undertaken in the hope of identifying Akkade only unearthed a few modest remains and a few
administrative tablets from the Ur III period. Furthermore, the epigraphic finds here did not include
references to the toponym Akkade but instead to Bab-Ea. The Iraqi archaeologists decided that
Ishan Mizyad could not be identified with Akkade13).
V. Akkade along the Banks of the Tigris in the North of Southern Mesopotamia
V. 1. Akkade near the Confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala
McEwan [1982, 8–15] first argued that Akkade was located near the confluence of the Tigris with
the Diyala. He based his analysis on four pieces of written evidence that contained topographicalinformation on Akkade. The first was UET 8, 14, a list of ensis from either the Akkadian or Ur
III periods, which indicated a close geographical relationship between Akkade and the Tigris.
The second written evidence was V R 35, a clay barrel inscription by Cyrus the Great, King of
the Achaemenid Persian Empire, enumerating toponyms located east of the Tigris, as seen from13)

For the excavation report, see [Rashid 1983, 183 – 214].

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

51

Babylon. The list includes Akkade. The third written evidence is 4 R 36, a list of toponyms
considered to have been located along the Tigris in the Diyala region, among which is Akkade. The
last evidence is the Sumerian Temple Hymns composed by Enḫeduanna, Sargon’s daughter. Here,
Akkade is registered with a group of toponyms that are considered to have been located near Sippar,along the course of the Tigris. From these four pieces of written evidence, McEwan concluded that
Akkade was located in the region around the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala.
Parpola [1983, 515–516] expressed a similar view. In a royal inscription of the Elamite KingŠutruk-Naḫḫunte, EKI 28C I, six toponyms, including Akkade, are referred to as places where thespoils and tribute were taken. The locations of three of those toponyms, namely, Dūr-Kurigalzu,
Sippar, and Ešnunna, are known to us. All three are found within 40 km from the confluence of
the Tigris with the Diyala. Thus, Parpola assigned Akkade in the same region.
In addition to this evidence, C. Wall-Romana [1990, 205 – 245] found more written evidence
containing topographical information on the location of Akkade and initiated more detailed study
to identify the location of Akkade. Using all available pieces of written evidence from that time
containing topographical information on Akkade, he deduced a list of eight possible locations of
Akkade as listed below.
The first was based on topographical information contained in following three pieces of written
evidence: the aforementioned list of ensis, UET 8, 14, the Curse of Akkade written either in the Ur
III or Isin-Larsa periods, and a royal inscription of the King of Uruk, Utu-ḫegal, RIME 2, E2.13.6.4[Wall-Romana 1990, 209 – 213, fig. 1]. This evidence shows a close geographical relationshipbetween Akkade and the Tigris. Therefore, Wall-Romana concluded that Akkade was locatedsomewhere on the banks of the Tigris.
Wall-Romana [1990, 213–216, fig. 2] proposed a second regional location of Akkade derived
from the topographical information contained in the prologue to the Code of Ḫammurapi and twoarchives of Mār-Ištar, the ambassador of the Neo-Assyrian King Esarhaddon: AOAT 5, 279 ( = SAA
10, 351) and 294 ( = SAA 10, 361). From these, he tentatively placed Akkade somewhere on a line
connecting from Ešnunna to Aššur along the Tigris. In the prologue to the Code of Ḫammurapi,
the principal twenty-seven cities of the Old Babylonian period are enumerated, including Akkade.
From the known locations of these cities, Akkade’s regional location was deduced. AOAT 5, 279( = SAA 10, 351) records that an itinerary took five days from Nineveh to Akkade. AOAT 294 ( =SAA 10, 361) lists three post stations located on an itinerary route that linked Nineveh to Akkade.
Thus, from the travel time and assumed locations of the three post stations, Wall-Roman tentatively
located Akkade somewhere on a line linking Ešnunna to Aššur along the Tigris14).
The third region identified by Wall-Roman [1990, 216 – 217, fig. 3] was drawn from theaforementioned clay barrel inscription of Cyrus. Similar to McEwan, he located Akkade somewhereto the east of the Tigris when seen from Babylon.
The fourth location was to the north of Sippar-ša-Šamaš ( = Abu Habbah) drawing on
topographical information contained in the Sumerian Temple Hymns of Enḫeduanna, which, as
discussed above, McEwan used to locate Akkade to the north of Sippar along the Tigris, and an
unspecified piece of written evidence noted by Unger [1932, 62] in the early days of Assyriology[Wall-Romana 1990, 219, 227–228, fig. 4]. Like McEwan, Wall-Roman considered that Akkade
could be placed to the north of Sippar, based on the account of the Sumerian Temple Hymns ofEnḫeduanna. According to Unger, the latter piece of written evidence contained topographicalinformation on a canal called Nār Akkade that separated the city of Sippar-ša-Šamaš from the city
14)

L. Marti [2014, 207 – 209] attempted to deduce the location of Akkade only with topographical information contained in the NeoAssyrian written sources. Marti found out that AOAT 5, 279 ( = SAA 10, 351) is the only written source containing topographicalinformation of Akkade. However, this archive only records that five days were necessary to travel from Nineveh to Akkade. Thus,
Marti concluded that it was impossible to locate Akkade using this topographical information alone.

52

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

of Sippar-ša-Anunītu. It is known that a canal named Nār Sippar flowed from Sippar to the south.
Accordingly, the same logic is applicable for Nār Akkade, flowing southward toward Sippar-šaŠamaš from the north. Thus, Wall-Romana concluded that Akkade may be located somewhere northof Sippar-ša-Šamaš.
For the fifth regional location, Wall-Romana [1990, 218 – 221, fig. 5] used topographicalinformation contained in three pieces of written evidence. The first is the aforementioned listof toponyms 4 R 36, which McEwan first drew attention to, as according to it, Akkade can beplaced somewhere on the banks of the Tigris in the Diyala region. The second piece is played by
the Sumerian Temple Hymns of Enḫeduanna again. The final piece is the aforementioned royal
inscription of Šutruk-Naḫḫunte, EKI 28C I, which Parpola first drew attention to as Akkade canbe placed together with Dūr-Kurigalzu, Sippar, and Ešnunna within 40 km from the confluence of
the Tigris with the Diyala. Wall-Roman analyzed the positional relation of the order of toponyms
registered in these three pieces of written evidence and concluded that the location of Akkade could
be north of a line drawn between Sippar and Ešnunna.
The topographical information used by Wall-Romana [1990, 221 – 224, fig. 6] regarding thesixth regional location is contained in the kudurru of the Middle Babylonian period, MDP 2,
99–111, in which Akkade appears with a canal named Nār Šarri and two Kassite houses, called
Bīt-Piri) Amurru and Bīt-Tunamissaḫ. He analyzed the locations of the canal and two houses inrelation to the other topographical information contained in three other kudurrus, BBSt. no. 4, MDP
6, 39–41, and BBSt. no. 5, and then assumed that Akkade could be placed in a region around theconfluence of the Tigris with the Diyala.
The seventh regional location assigned by Wall-Romana [1990, 223 –226, fig. 7] was takenfrom the aforementioned royal inscription of Šutruk-Naḫḫunte, EKI 28C I. The locations of three ofthe six toponyms are certain, and their order is as follows: Dūr-Kurigalzu (first), Sippar (second),and Ešnunna (sixth). Wall-Romana analyzed the locational relationship of these three toponyms andhypothesized that Šutruk-Naḫḫunte would have traveled among six toponyms in counterclockwisemanner. Akkade is registered third, so he deduced that it was located in the region south of DūrKurigalzu, east of Sippar, and west of Ešnunna.
The final, eighth, regional location deduced by Wall-Romana [1990, 228 – 230, fig. 8] wasdrawn from the topographical information contained in three pieces of written evidence: theaforementioned royal inscription of Šutruk-Naḫḫunte, EKI 28C I, a fragment of a list of cities, PBS
5, 157, and the aforementioned list of ensis, UET 8, 14. In these, Akkade appears with Akšak ( =Upi). In EKI 28C I, Akšak ( = Upi) appears fourth after Akkade (third). If Šutruk-Naḫḫunte reallyvisited six toponyms in counterclockwise order as discussed above, Akšak ( = Upi) can be placedeast of Akkade and southwest of Ešnunna. In PBS 5, 157, Adab, Akšak ( = Upi), and Akkade
appear in this order. In UET 8, 14, Akšak ( = Upi) appears before Akkade, and with the latter
the Tigris is associated. Wall-Romana deduced that the order of toponyms in PBS 5, 157 would
indicate their relative locations, running from south to north, indicating the possibility that Akšak’s( = Upi) close locational relation with Akkade would also imply its close geographical relation
relative to the Tigris. At that time, Akšak ( = Upi) was considered to be identified with one of six
ancient sites by R. McC. Adams [1965, 173 – 174]. Those sites all are located on the eastern bankof the ancient course of the Tigris, which Adams [1965, 152, 156 – 157, 160, fig. 3] reconstructed
as lying to the east of the present course of the Tigris, running from the north of Baghdad as far as
the diverting point of the Gharrāf Canal from the present course of the Tigris. These sites, locatedfrom north to south, are site nos. 414, 558, 568, 590, 685, and 851. Thus, Wall-Roman deduced
that Akkade could be placed somewhere north of the southernmost location of site no. 851, along
the ancient course of the Tigris.
Eventually, Wall-Romana [1990, 232 – 238, figs. 9 – 12] superimposed the aforementioned

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

53

eight regional locations of Akkade and confirmed that the region of their overlap is confined toan area just north of the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala15). Using the sizes and dates ofancient sites lying in the confined regional location of Akkade, he reached the conclusion that Tell
Mohammad (site no. 414) was the most plausible candidate site for the ancient city of Akkade.
Unfortunately, the identity of this ancient site has not yet been firmly established. Adams[1965, 152] observed that the Akkadian occupied area in Tell Mohammad was very small, less than
4 ha. This is obviously too small for the central city of the Dynasty of Akkad. Moreover, S. Smith[1946, 19–21] and B. Groneberg [1980, 54] earlier identified Tell Mohammad as Diniktu. Adams[1965, 152] argued that the remains of the Akkadian period were found on the remnants of its
surface. The Iraqi State Antiquities Organization commenced excavations at the site in 1978, but nomaterial from the Akkadian period was located. The earliest traces found at the site date to the IsinLarsa period. Excavations thus revealed a substantial Old Babylonian town16). Clearly, these results
do not harmonize with what is known of Akkade’s later history [McEwan 1982, 8]. Some economic
texts were discovered, but they have not been published. According to G. Frame [1993, 21 – 22,
fn. 3], Iman Yamil Al-Ubaid studied a number of these texts for her unpublished M.A. thesis, but
none mentioned Akkade, the Eulmaš temple of Akkade, or Diniktu. Wall-Romana’s extensive studyof the location of Akkade made a great deal of unknown pieces of written evidence on Akkade’s
location available for scholars and advanced the state of research on its location. However, due tothe results of excavations in Tell Mohammad, we cannot support Wall-Romana’s identification of itas the site of Akkade.
Following McEwan, Parpola, and Wall-Roman’s theories on the location of Akkade, D. R.
Frayne [2004, 103–116] proposed to locate it near the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala.
In particular, he identified Akkade with a specific ancient site named Tell Seraij (site no. 571)17).
Concurring with Wall-Romana’s localization of Akkade in the region of the confluence of the Tigris
and the Diyala, he identified the locations of toponyms that were registered before a toponym of
Entry 92 from the Early Dynastic List of Geographical Names, in the same region. Regarding
the registered toponym of Entry 92, he tentatively restored to read a-┌gada(?)┐.KI and located in
the same region as well. Furthermore, he followed the suggestion of Kh. Al-Adami [1982, 122],
identifying Dūr-Šarrukīn, which was registered on a Middle Babylonian kudurru, IM 90585 of
the reign of Marduk-nādin-aḫḫē found in Tulūl Mujaili( (site no. 590), with Akkade. Al-Adami
15)

16)

17)

Topographical information on the location of Akkade contained in the aforementioned written evidence was used by Wall-Romana
to deduce eight possible regional locations of Akkade. In addition to these, he also drew attention to three other pieces of written
evidence containing topographical information on the location of Akkade and attempted to deduce its regional locations using them
[Wall-Romana 1990, 227 – 233]. The evidence was drawn from the Babylonian Chronicle 25, an inscription of the Etemenanki
cylinder from the Neo-Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar II, and an Old Akkadian tablet published in 1957 by I. J. Gelb. However,
the topographical information contained in these pieces has very high circumstantiality. Therefore, Wall-Roman did not use themto support any of the eight locations discussed above.
V. Scheil [1900, 125] and Langdon [1912, 146] published the inscription of the Etemenanki cylinder. However, the nameof a toponym appearing just before Akkade was unclear. Likewise, the name of a toponym following Akkade was damaged
and unreadable. Later, R. Da Riva [2008, 12, 19 – 22] published the Eurmeiminanki cylinder, BM42667 II 10’ and collated theEtemenanki cylinder with it to restore these two toponyms. Thus, it is identified that the toponym before Akkade is Dēr, andafter Akkade is Dur-Šarrukīn [Pirngruber 2014, 214 – 215]. Wall-Romana was only able to use Scheil and Langdon’s publishedinscription. Therefore, he wrongly developed his view for a regional location of Akkade using topographical information of thisinscription.
Furthermore, Wall-Romana also incorrectly understood and interpreted certain aspects of the Old Akkadian tablet published in1957 by Gelb. As A. Westenholz [1999, 32, fn. 76] indicated, no topographical information on the location of Akkade is containedin the tablet.
For reports of the excavations in Tell Mohammad, see [Wall-Romana 1990, 243 – 244, fn. 152; Postgate and Watson 1979, 156;
Roaf and Postgate 1981, 184; Killick and Roaf 1983, 216; Al-Khayyat 1984, 146 – 154; Black and Killick 1985, 223; Matab et al.
1990, 127– 159].
The focus of Frayne’s argument was especially on pp. 112 – 113. For the applied site nos. here and below, see [Adams 1965,
135–136].

54

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

recalled that Dūr-Šarrukīn means fortress of Sargon, and this toponym cannot be linked to the later
Neo-Assyrian capital of the same name that was founded by Sargon II as this kudurru predates
his reign. Therefore, he argued that Dūr-Šarrukīn could be interpreted to be a later changed nameof the city of Akkade and suggested that Dūr-Šarrukīn be equated with Akkade18). Frayne [2004,
112–113] noted the following to support this equation. In Neo-Assyrian times, this Babylonian
Dūr-Šarrukīn is mentioned several times as the capital of an Assyrian province, and its name also
appears alongside the province of Laḫīru, thought to be situated in the Diyala region [Brinkman
1968, 178, fn. 1093; Parpola 1970b, 112 – 14; 1983, 299; Zadok 1985, 208; Parpola and Porter
2001, map 10 D2, 12, Laḫīru (1); Bagg 2017, 360 – 362]. Moreover, a Neo-Assyrian letter that was
found in Kuyunjik reports the location of Dūr-Šarrukīn as being on or near the Turnu ( = Diyala)river [Fuchs and Parpola 2001, 106–107, no. 156]. Frayne considered that the name of Tell Seraij,
located in the region of the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala, contained a reflection of thename Dūr-Šarrukīn. Accordingly, he identified the alias name of Dūr-Šarrukīn with Akkade and inturn with Tell Seraij.
Frayne’s identification was denied by L. Marti and R. Pirngruber19). Marti [2014, 208] drewattention to a reference in a letter from the Neo-Assyrian period, SAA 18, 9, which was addressedfrom Akkade to Esarhaddon. In this letter, Akkade and a toponym written as Dûr-Šarrukku arereferred to side-by-side within the very broken context of an itinerary. By itself, this testifies
that the two toponyms cannot refer to the same plot. Likewise, Pirngruber [2014, 214] expressed
skepticism regarding the possibility of equating Akkade with Dūr-Šarrukīn. He indicated that in
the Etemenanki cylinder of Nebuchadnezzar II, Akkade is registered before Dūr-Šarrukīn and alongwith other toponyms20). This is also strong evidence against Frayne’s argument.
A. R. George [2007, 35] used an unpublished Old Babylonian letter, A. 3193, found in Mari,
to identify the location of Akkade in a region near to the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala.
This text records an itinerary from Sippar to Ešnunna via Tutub. The name of another toponym
is also registered between Sippar and Tuttub ( = Khafajah), but the name is partially broken andnot clearly readable. George argued that the broken name can be restored to Akkade ([a-kà]-dèki).
Noting the well-known locations of Sippar and Tutub, he suggested that Akkade could be placed
between them, near the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala.
As George himself noted, D. Charpin [with Joannès, Lackenbacher, and Lafont 1988, 150,
fn. 68] had restored the relevant toponym as [ú]-pi5ki. However, George considered that Charpin’s
restoration was orthographically improbable for the given period, during which the toponym Upi ( =Greek Opis) was written ú-pí-(i)ki. Frame [2011, 133] supported George’s restoration. On the other
hand, Sommerfeld [2014, 154, fn. 2] and N. Ziegler [2014, 180, fn. 23] indicated that George’s
restoration rested on a misunderstanding of the unpublished A. 3193, and they supported Charpin’s
original restoration. Therefore, unfortunately, George’s localization of Akkade must be considered
inconclusive due to the remaining uncertainty regarding the restoration of the relevant part of the
toponym in this letter.
Ziegler [2014, 179 and 185–186, fn. 45] also considered that Akkade was to be sought near
the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala, based on topographical information that is presented
in following six pieces of written evidence from the Old Babylonian period. The first piece of thisevidence is a letter from Šamši-Adad I, ARM I 36 ( = LAPO 14, 447): 4 – 13 found in the archives
18)
19)

20)

Al-Adami also argued that the findspot of this kudurru, Tulūl Mujaili( can be identified with Dūr-Šarrukīn ( = Akkade), although
without providing a clear reason.
W. Sommerfeld [2011, 90, fn. 17; 2014, 156 – 157] rejected the possibility that Entry 92 could be read as a-┌gada(?)┐.KI. He
also criticized Frayne’s method of equating an ancient toponym with a modern place name based on an apparent similarity of thenames. He considered that if a settlement had been abandoned for a long period even before the Sassanid and Islamic periods, it
was unlikely that its name would have been preserved to modern times.
Regarding the Etemenanki cylinder, see fn. 15 above.

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

55

Fig. 2 – Locations of Candidate Sites for Akkade and Relevant Ancient Sites of Section V. 1.

of Mari, sent to his son Yasmah-Addu, the viceroy of Mari. It describes that the planned journeyof Šamši-Adad I upriver to return to Aššur from Akkade. The second and third pieces are a text,
OBTI 138, found from Nērebtum ( = Tell Ishchali/Iščāli), and a text found from Šaduppûm ( = TellḤarmal)21). Both sites are located near the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala. These texts
refer to the presence of groups of Akkadian people. The fourth piece of written evidence is anarchive of Mari, ARM 27, 135 that indicates that Akkade was under the political influence of both
Ešnunna and Babylon. The fifth and sixth pieces are two Mari archives, A. 362 and A. 3917 ( =FM IX, 71). Both indicate the location of Akkade somewhere west of and not far from Ešnunnaand east of Suḫûm. Suḫûm has not been precisely located, but it is almost certainly in the Middle
Euphrates region, east of Mari [Groneberg 1980, 210; Nashef 1982, 235 – 236; Zadok 1985, 274;
Marín 2001, 242; Parpola and Porter 2001, map 9, 16, Sūḫu; Beaulieu 2011 – 2013, 259 – 260; Bagg
2017, 541–542; Ziegler and Langlois 2017, 310 – 312]. From topographical information containedin these six pieces of Old Babylonian written evidence, Ziegler inferred that Akkade was locatedapproximately 20 km north of Baghdad on the banks of the ancient course of the Tigris.
Finally, Pirngruber [2014, 211–215] sought to find a clue for the location of Akkade in two
written sources from Babylonia dated to the 1st millennium BCE. He reached the same conclusion
as other scholars, tentatively locating Akkade near the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala.
The first piece of evidence cited is Nebuchadnezzar II’s inscription of the Etemenanki cylinder,
where Akkade is referred to together with other toponyms under his rule. Dēr, which is identified
with Tell (Aqar, is listed before Akkade [Edzard and Farber 1974, 22 – 23, 30; Edzard, Farbar, andSollberger 1977, 22, 30; Groneberg 1980, 50, 55; Nashef 1982, 79 – 80; Zadock 1985, 117– 18;
21)

The text found from Tell Ḥarmal, see [Ellis 1972, 50]. Regarding the identification of Nērebtum, see [Groneberg 1980, 176 – 177;
Miglus 1998 – 2001, 211 – 214]. As for the identification of Šaduppûm, see [Groneberg 1980, 215 – 216; von Koppen 2006 – 2008,
488–491; Miglus 2006 – 2008, 491 – 495].

56

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

Fig. 3 – Locations of Candidate Sites for Akkade and Relevant Ancient Sites of Section V. 1 around Baghdad.

Parpola and Porter 2001, map 11 A3, 8, Dēru]. After Akkade, Dūr-Šarrukīn appears, but its locationis unknown. The following toponym is the land of Arrapḫa, which has been identified with Karkūk[Edzard and Farber 1974, 16; Groneberg 1980, 21-22; Nashef 1982, 38-39; 1991, 13; Zadok 1985,
29-30; Vallat 1993, 19; Parpola and Porter 2001, map 10 D1, 6, Arrapḫa; Marín 2001, 36; Bagg
2017, 65-68]. Taking into account the known locations of Dēr and Arrapḫa, Pirngruber observedthat toponyms of the Etemenanki cylinder would have run from south to north. Thus, he tentatively
located Akkade near the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala.
For the second piece of written evidence, like McEwan and Wall-Romana, Pirngruber drewattention to a clay barrel inscription of Cyrus the Great, King of the Achaemenid Persian Empire, V
R 35. In this inscription, Akkade is mentioned together with toponyms that were certainly locatedeast of the Tigris when seen from Babylon. In addition, Ešnunna, Zamban, and Mê-Turran are listed
after Akkade. Ešnunna’s location is certainly to the east of the Diyala. Zamban’s location is notcertain, but in general, it is located in the same region, near the foothills of the Zagros Mountains[Nashef 1982, 279–280; Zadock 1985, 332; Frayne 2009 – 2011, 510 – 511; Anonymous 2016 – 2018,202]. Mê-Turran is identified with Tell Ḥaddād, also located to the east of the Diyala as well
[Nashef 1982, 195; Zadock 1985, 228; Rollig, 1993 – 1997, 150; Parpola and Porter 2001, maps 10,
D2 and 13, Mēturna]. Akkade is referred to first, before these three toponyms, so Pirngruber argued
that this would indicate the location of Akkade nearest to Babylon, at the confluence of the Tigris
with the Diyala22).

22)

R. Zadok [2000, 6] suggested that a textual mention of Akkade might be found as written ’kd in the 13th century CE. The text tellsthat a bishop went from Ctesiphon to ’kd to celebrate a baptism there. Without giving a reason, Zadok tentatively argued that thelocation of Akkade can be sought in the general region of Baghdad-Ctesiphon, near the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala.

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

57

V. 2. Akkade near the Confluence of the Tigris with the Adheim
Westenholz [1999, 32, fns. 77–78; 2002, 25, fig. 1, 38, 41, fn. 56] reviewed Wall-Romana’s proposal.
To locate Akkade, he drew on the code of Hammurapi, which Wall-Romana first cited in the processof locating Akkade, considering it to contain the most important topographical information, as it
enumerates toponyms in their geographical order and places Akkade somewhere on a line linking
between Ešnunna and Aššur23). Thus, he suggested that Akkade may be among many large tells in
the region of the confluence of the Tigris with the Adheim. In particular, he noted that the most
likely region for the location of Akkade is the northwest of their present confluence24).
S. Paulus [2014b, 199–206] attempted to deduce the location of Akkade from topographicalinformation contained in a kudurru of the Middle Babylonian period, MŠ 1 ( = MDP 2, 99 – 111),
which, as shown above, Wall-Romana first drew attention to in locating Akkade25). She consideredthat the location of Akkade could be deduced in relation to the tentative localization of a canalcalled Nār Šarri and a Kassite house called Bīt-Piri) Amurru, which are referred to together
with Akkade in this kudurru. She also used topographical information obtained from two otherkudurrus, MŠ 2 ( = BBSt. no. 4) and MAI I 5 ( = MDP 6, 39 – 41), which Wall-Romana first drewattention to, along with two more kudurrus, MŠ 5 ( = MDP 2, 112) and MAE 1. She analyzed the
topographical information of these pieces and concluded that the location of Akkade can be deduced
to be somewhere near the confluence of Nār Šarri with the ancient name of the Adheim, Radānu.
In addition to these kudurrus of the Middle Babylonian period, Paulus also used the topographicalinformation contained in another kudurru from the same period, MAI I 9, which tells that following
the victory in a battle in the upper reaches of the Lower Zab, the Kassite King, Marduk-aplaiddina I, received five hundred decapitated heads of enemy soldiers as proof of victory in Akkade.
Marduk-apla-iddina I received a report about the results of the battle, not in any of royal palaces
present in Nippur, Babylon, or Dūr-Kurigalz, but in Akkade. Therefore, Paulus also considered that
Akkade would have been situated somewhere strategically very important for the battle, in the upper
reaches of the Lower Zab. She deduced that the site must have been to the east of the Tigris26).
Paulus did not specify any precise location of Akkade, as the location of Nār Šarri was not
23)
24)

25)
26)

S. Brumfield [2013, 28 – 30] particularly concurred with Westenholz’s view.
Westenholz’s view was taken up by W. Sallaberger [2007, 424 – 425, fn. 43, fig. 1] and with I. Schrakamp [2015, 90, maps],
although he placed Akkade to the northeast of the present confluence of the Tigris with the Adheim without stating any reason forthis localization.
Westenholz did not refer to a particular ancient site as a likely candidate for the ancient site of Akkade in the region to thenorthwest of the present confluence of the Tigris with the Adheim. Instead, Ziegler [2014, 149] placed the ancient site of Khara’idGhḍairife within the same area on a map that was used for a supplement to the discussion of the localization of Akkade. The site
was at first reported to be from an Islamic period, but it was later claimed that a royal inscription of Maništūšu was found at thesite in the 1930s. The inscription records the construction of a temple of Ninhursaga in a city whose name is written as ḪA.A.
Thus, F. N. H. Al-Rawi and Black [1993, 147 – 148] identified Khara’id Ghḍairife with ḪA.A [Frayne 1993, 80 – 81]. Furthermore,in addition to this site, two other ancient sites, named Tell al-Dhuhūbe and Tell ‘Uṣaimī, are lain [Directorate General of Antiquities,
Republic of Iraq 1976, map 21, site nos. 2 – 4]. Al-Rawi and Black argued that these sites may be a part of Khara’id Ghḍairife andmight form one continuous site. This may be a site that Westenholz considered to be a candidate for Akkade.
However, P. Steinkeller [1995, 275 – 281] later disagreed, doubting the reliability of the provenance of the royal inscription, as
he considered that the ancient city of ḪA.A referred to in this inscription could not have been located in this region but could be
farther south [Sommerfeld 2014, 155]. If Steinkeller is correct, there would have been no Akkadian occupation at this site.
The exact locations of Khara’id Ghḍairife (site no. 2 of map 21), Tell al-Dhuhūbe (site no. 3 of map 21), and Tell ‘Uṣaimī
(site no. 4 of map 21) are indicated on a map shown in Fig. 4. Ziegler placed Khara’id Ghḍairife approximately 10 km northwest
from the mouth of the Adheim. However, it is in actuality located further north, approximately 17 km north from the mouth of theAdheim on the western bank, with its exact location measured using Geographical Information System. Tell al-Dhuhūbe is located
8 km west from Khara’id Ghḍairife. Tell ‘Uṣaimī is located 4 km southwest from Khara’id Ghḍairife on its western bank of theAdheim. The three sites are located relatively far from each other. Therefore, by contrast to Al-Rawi and Black’s beliefs, it appears
that these sites are not parts of one larger, continuous site.
Considering abbreviations, MŠ, MAI I, and MAE, which Paulus used, see [Paulus 2014a].
W. G. Lambert [2011, 18] first published the kudurru, MAI I 9. However, he did not read a relevant toponym as Akkade.
Therefore, it is not certain whether the relevant toponym can be read as Akkade.

58

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

known. However, Radānu has been considered as the ancient name of the Adheim. Therefore,
she likely considered that Akkade could be circumstantially placed in association with the Adheim,
which flows naturally to the east of the Tigris.
G. Giannelli and S. Mazzarino [1962, 469 – 471], and later A. Cavigneaux [2020, 84] proposed
a location of Akkade in the region around the confluence of the Tigris with the Adheim. Book III,28, of the Historia Nova of Zosimus, the Greek historian, written at the beginning of the 6th century
CE, refers to an account of the retreat of Roman Emperor Julian’s army as it abandoned Ctesiphon,crossed the Diyala, and ascended the eastern bank of the Tigris in 363 CE. During this, the army
halted in the town Akkete. This site can be located roughly between Baghdad and Samarra andnorth of the town Symbra, which has been tentatively equated with Hucumbra from Ammianus
Marcellinus’s Roman History 25: 1, 4, and ‘Ukbarā of the later Islamic period [Paschoud 1979, 48
and map 3]. Giannelli and Mazzarino, and Cavigneaux suggested the possibility of equating Akkete
with Akkade. It is uncertain whether Hucumbra is the same as ‘Ukbarā. The former suggested that
Akkade/Akkete was located somewhere along the eastern bank of the Tigris north of Hucumbra,
but the latter argued that Akkade/Akkete was located somewhere along the eastern bank of theancient course of the Tigris, north of ‘Ukbarā, in a region around the confluence of the Tigris with
the Adheim.
V. 3. Akkade near the Modern Town of Samarra
In addition to his identification of Akkade with Greek Agranis ( = Roman Macepracta), Lane [1923,
78–79, 129, map 2] also proposed Qadisiyeh as a potential site, located 13 km south-southeast
from the modern town of Samarra. This identification is based on the account of a clay barrel
inscription from Cyrus the Great, King of the Achaemenid Persian Empire, V R 35, in which
Akkade is mentioned together with Zamban. Accordingly, Lane assumed that Akkade was in fact
near Zamban. However, he incorrectly identified Zamban with Samarra and then the latter withSambana. Thus, he equated Carrhae, described as a camp site that is visited before Sambana while
ascending the Tigris by Alexander the Great in Quintus Curtius Rufus’s History of the Life andReign of Alexander the Great, vol. 10, ch. 4, with Akkade and then Qadisiyeh located in the lower
reaches of Samarra. Zamban ( = Simurrum) is located in the Diyala region; thus, this identification
is inaccurate and cannot be supported [Frayne 2009 – 2011, 510 – 511; Anonymous 2016 – 2018, 202].
J. Reade [2002, 262–269] also considered that the ancient site of Akkade would be foundnear Qadisiyeh. However, unlike other scholars, he did not rest on the use of topographicalinformation contained in written sources to make this identification. Instead, this claim is based on
the discovery of the largest statue of its kind known in Mesopotamia, bearing an Akkadian or postAkkadian date, in Qadisiyeh. He drew the conclusion that any site that produces a 3rd millennium
statue of imported stone and is the largest of this kind found so far in Iraq, merits closer inspection
as a candidate for assignment as the ancient site of Akkade. However, it is not yet known whether
this statue originated in situ or was brought from somewhere else for secondary use at some later
period, and no topographical information has provided to suggest that Akkade had its location near
Qadisiyeh. Therefore, this view must be considered circumstantial and inconclusive and cannot be
supported.
Sommerfeld [2014, 151–175] identified the location of Akkade in the region around the town
currently known as Samarra using written sources from the Akkadian period. Although certain
names of Akkade are indeed found in these written sources, they do not contain any geographicalinformation to specify the location of Akkade. He comprehensively analyzed the descriptions ofthese written sources and speculated that Tutub and Gasur were important strategic cities subordinate
to the Dynasty of Akkad that had close ties to the city of Akkade [Sommerfeld 2004, 285 – 292;
2014, 164–170]. He likewise considered that the geographically most suitable place for governing

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

59

Fig. 4 – Locations of Candidate Sites for Akkade and Relevant Ancient Sites of Sections V. 2 and V. 3.

these two important cities would have been in the Samarra region because it is located halfway
between them. Therefore, he deduced that Akkade must have been located in this region. Thisview, however, was not founded on any concrete geographical information that specifies Akkade’s
location. Hence, it is circumstantial and cannot easily be supported.
V. 4. Summary
We have discussed various theories for the location of Akkade in the northern part of southern
Mesopotamia. First, McEwan first indicated the possibility that Akkade could be located near
the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala. Then, similar views were also indicated by Parpola,
Wall-Romana, Frayne, George, Ziegler, and Pirngruber. Only Wall-Romana and Frayne attempted
to identify Akkade with specific ancient sites, using textual material. The former concluded that
Tell Mohammad was the most plausible ancient site for Akkade. However, excavations thatwere undertaken before any such proposal of this identification was made did not produce anyarchaeological or written pieces of evidence to indicate that Tell Mohammad was indeed the ancient
city of Akkade. Therefore, taking this into account, it is difficult to support this theory. The latter
identified Akkade with Dūr-Šarrukīn and accordingly with Tell Seraij. However, this theory waslater refuted by the presence of certain pieces of written evidence. For George’s theory, locating
Akkade near to the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala, a registered relevant toponym in atext is damaged. Therefore, it is not certain whether this could really be read as Akkade. For thisreason, his theory should be considered inconclusive, and it cannot be supported with certainty.
Other scholars only deduced a location for Akkade near the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala
without proposing any identification with a specific ancient site. Ultimately, no location for theancient city of Akkade has been identified in this region.

60

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

Other candidate regions for the location of Akkade have been proposed. Westenholz and Paulus
deduced that it was located somewhere near the confluence of the Tigris with the Adheim. BothGiannelli and Mazzarino on the one hand and Cavigneaux on the other also suggested possibilityof the equation of Akkete with Akkade and its location somewhere to the north of Hucumbra and‘Ukbarā, in a region somewhere south of the confluence of the Tigris with the Adheim. Thesescholars only deduced the region without proposing to identify any specific ancient site. Inevitably
the ancient city of Akkade has not yet been located in this region.
Lane, Reade, and Sommerfeld located Akkade in a region near the modern town of Samarra.
The former two, in particular, suggested that Akkade could be located in Qadisiyeh. However,Lane’s identification was based on an incorrect identification of Zamban with Samarra. Therefore,
we determined that his identification of Akkade is incorrect and could not be supported. Reade’s
argument was in fact based only on the discovery of the largest statue of its kind known in
Mesopotamia with an Akkadian or post-Akkadian date but without any additional topographicalinformation contained in written sources indicating this site as the location of Akkade. Furthermore,
it is not known whether the statue was found in its original siting or had been brought fromsomewhere else for secondary use at a later time. Thus, it must be concluded that Reade’s viewis circumstantial, and it can find little support. Sommerfeld assumed the location of Akkade to be
in a region near to the modern town of Samarra. However, again, his assumption was made in theabsence of any topographical information contained in written sources that concretely indicated thelocation of Akkade in this region. Therefore, his argument is circumstantial, and it also cannot be
supported.
The author of this paper likewise sought to deduce the location of Akkade [Kawakami 2004,
37–129]. The author analyzed and verified the accuracy and credibility of every available piece of
topographical information to which Wall-Romana drew attention to identify the location of Akkade
and then classified them into three categories. It was identified that a total of six pieces of written
evidence contain the most reliable and accurate topographical information available that indicate
the location of Akkade. These six pieces of written evidence are the following: the prologue to theCode of Ḫammurapi; a clay barrel inscription of Cyrus the Great, King of the Achaemenid Persian
Empire, V R 35; the Sumerian Temple Hymns of Enḫeduanna; a list of ensis of either the Akkadianor Ur III periods, UET 8, 14; the Curse of Akkade; and royal inscriptions of the Elamite King,Šutruk-Naḫḫunte, EKI 22–24b and 28C I. The topographical information contained in these piecesof written evidence were interpreted by the author in an objective way to the maximum extent
possible, and it was concluded that Akkade must have been located on either of the banks of the
Tigris, running from the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala toward Aššur. Thus, the author
considered that the confluence of the Tigris with the Diyala and the Adheim and a region near themodern town of Samarra are the possible candidate regions for the location of Akkade. However,as yet, Akkade has not been identified with any specific ancient site27).
VI.

Conclusion and Formulation of the Specific Methodology for Identifying Akkade

In the early days of Assyriology, Akkade had been identified with Sippar-ša-Anunītu, Tell ed-Dēr,
Greek Agranis ( = Roman Macepracta), and Babylon. Later, the identification of Akkade with Ishan
Mizyad in a suburb of Babylon, was proposed. However, all of these proposals have either been
directly refuted or judged substantially unlikely.
An important common factor can be observed, namely, that following McEwan’s proposal in27)

In addition to the aforementioned scholars, W. Pethe [2014, 191 – 197] sought a clue to the location of Akkade from Middle
Assyrian written sources but concluded that no informative topographical information can be found from this period to help locate
Akkade.

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

61

1982, all subsequent proposals have concluded that Akkade was most likely located somewhere
near the course of the Tigris, and indeed in regions around the confluence of the Tigris with the
Diyala and the Adheim, as well as near the modern town of Samarra. However, specific candidate
sites for Akkade have not been found by scholars in these regions. Wall-Romana, Frayne, andLane are the only ones who have proposed specific ancient sites, namely, Tell Mohammad, Tell
Seraij, and Qadisiyeh, respectively, for the location of the ancient site of Akkade. However, their
proposals have been refuted, judged considerably unlikely, and/or considered inconclusive. Upon
reviewing all previous attempts to identify the location of Akkade and verifying the nature of all
the topographical information that is contained in the written documents used for building andsupporting these tentative identifications, it has become evident that the unfortunate failure to
identify the ancient site of Akkade is largely owing to two main factors.
First, with the notable exceptions of Wall-Romana, Ziegler, and Cavigneaux, every scholar
to date has overlooked the significant impact of the changing course of the Tigris on locating theancient site of Akkade; only these three researchers have attempted to locate it in relation to theancient course of the Tigris. Second, the different types of topographical information that relate to
the location of Akkade are contained in written documents that have not been appropriately andeffectively utilized. The accuracy and credibility of every piece of topographical information on
the location of Akkade are not consistent. Only a few pieces of topographical information give
relatively accurate and reliable topographical information, although they are not absolute and do
not pinpoint its precise location. Most other pieces of topographical information contain uncertain,
circumstantial, and secondary elements for locating Akkade. Some scholars have attempted todevelop subjective and hypothetical interpretations from both the accurate and reliable pieces andthe uncertain, circumstantial, and secondary pieces of topographical information for locating Akkade.
This has ultimately distorted the true nature of the topographical information on the locationof Akkade. Other scholars incorporated and gave equal value to every piece of topographicalinformation, including the accurate and reliable; the uncertain, circumstantial, and secondary; andthe subjectively and hypothetically interpreted types. This method has also led to misinterpretationsof the location of Akkade.
These two factors are clearly the main reasons for the failure to find the location of Akkade.
Wall-Romana was the only scholar who classified every available piece of topographical informationon the location of Akkade into two types, namely, definite and tentative evidence, to search its
location. However, he valued both types of topographical information equally and integrated themto reach a conclusion, thus failing to find an appropriate candidate site for Akkade. To addressthese issues, we need to determine appropriate logical methods for searching the ancient city of
Akkade. The written sources that indicate the regional location of Akkade are of varying types. To
harmonize the diversity of written sources indicating different regions for Akkade and to obtain themost accurate and reliable topographical information, the written sources are classified into three
types and a separate cartographic analysis is conducted for each type.
The first class of evidence consists of those items that have Primary Topographical
Information. Such items directly indicate the location of Akkade in an objective way and arethus likely to be reliable. For example, the geographical information contained in a certain written
document indicates that Akkade was located adjacent to ancient city A. Then, if ancient city A isalready identified with a specific ancient site and its location is known, the regional location of
Akkade can be determined with certainty as being in the vicinity or adjacent to ancient city A. We
have organized and evaluated all known pieces of written evidence that scholars have hitherto relied
upon to identify the location of Akkade. Broadly speaking, four kinds of topographical information
deserve the label of Primary Topographical Information.
The second class is Supportive Secondary Topographical Information. While this does not

62

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

directly indicate the location of Akkade in an objective way and cannot stand alone as evidence
for its location, in conjunction with Primary Topographical Information it can circumstantiallystrengthen the reliability of that information. For example, the geographical information containedin a certain written document indicates that Akkade was in an area located 5 days away from ancient
city B. Even if ancient city B is identified with a specific ancient site and its location is known,
this information alone is indefinite to presume the regional location of Akkade. However, from thePrimary Topographical Information, it is known that Akkade was located adjacent to ancient city A,
whose location is well known. Therefore, if ancient city A can be reached from ancient city B in
approximately 5 days on horseback, on foot, or by boat, this Supportive Secondary Topographical
Information strengthens the reliability of Akkade’s location in the area adjacent to ancient city A.
Using these two types of evidence, a Core Regional Location for Akkade can be establishedfrom the superimposition of all locations relating to the Primary Topographical Information. In thisway, every piece of Primary Topographical Information can be harmonized and given appropriate
weight.
Subsequently, possible candidate sites for Akkade are investigated within the Core Regional
Location for Akkade. Adams’s [1972, 182 – 208, maps 1A-1F; 1965, maps] distribution maps forancient sites, made in his Akkad and Land Behind Baghdad Surveys, are incorporated into the Core
Regional Location for Akkade, and the ancient sites lying in this region are then assessed based on
their sizes and dates to select possible candidate sites for Akkade. We believe that one of theseselected ancient sites should be identified as the ancient site of Akkade.
The possible candidate sites for Akkade are further assessed in relation to a third class ofevidence, namely, Secondary Topographical Information. This can indicate a regional locationof Akkade but its analysis may lead to erroneous conclusions because such information can only be
extracted in secondary, circumstantial, hypothetical, subjective, and/or indirect ways. For example,
the geographical information contained in a certain written document indicates that Akkade was
located adjacent to ancient city C. However, if the location of ancient city C has not yet been
identified with a certain ancient site and its location is unknown, the regional location of Akkade
can only be assumed after a tentative identification of the location of ancient city C. Then, theregional location of Akkade can indirectly be assumed to be in the vicinity or adjacent to theassumed location of ancient city C. Alternatively, if the assumed location of ancient city C isincorrect, the assumed location of Akkade is accordingly wrong. Most written sources containing
topographical information on the regional location of Akkade should be classified as this type. It
was found out that since McEwan’s proposal of the location of Akkade, all subsequent proposals
have reached the conclusion that Akkade was most likely located near the course of the Tigris.
Three pieces of written evidence containing topographical information of this type, pertain to therelationship of Akkade with the course of the Tigris. However, as the course of the river haschanged over time, written sources with topographical information on the location of Akkade
relative to the Tigris have to be classified as Secondary Topographical Information. If the ancient
course of the Tigris is accurately reconstructed and we identify that its ancient course used to flowin the Core Regional Location of Akkade, the location of Akkade can be identified among qualified
possible candidate sites for Akkade lying in the Core Regional Location of Akkade. Therefore, theaccurate reconstruction of the ancient course of the Tigris is most crucial for identifying the locationof Akkade. In addition, all available pieces of Supportive Secondary Topographical Information tothis date, pertaining to the relationship of Akkade with the course of the Tigris, have to be also usedas they enable us to support and strengthen the reliability of the presence of the close topographicalrelationship between Akkade and the ancient course of the Tigris.
The author of this paper has put this method into practice in searching the location of Akkade.
The author was able to reach a conclusion that was different from those of the aforementioned

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

63

previous studies [Kawakami 2022, 101– 135]. In that paper, it was concluded that Tell Sinker andperhaps ‘Ukbarā, located halfway between Baghdad and Samarra on the eastern bank of the ancient
course of the Tigris, which used to flow west of the present course of the Tigris, are the mostplausible candidate sites for the ancient city of Akkade.
Bibliography
Adams, R. McC.
1965
Land Behind Baghdad. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
1972
APPENDIX V. Settlement and Irrigation Patterns in Ancient Akkad, in McG. Gibson (ed.), The City and Areaof Kish, 182 – 208 and Maps 1A-1F. Miami: Field Research Projects.
Al-Adami, Kh.
1982
A New Kudurru of Marduk Nadin-Ahh in the Iraq Museum; IM. 90585, Sumer 38, 121–133.
Al-Khayyat, A. A.
1984
A Study of a Number of Terracottas from Tell Muhammad (in Arabic), Sumer 43, 146–154.
Al-Rawi, F. N. H. and Black, J. A.
1993
A Drediscovered Akkadian City, Iraq 55, 147–148.
Anonymous
2016 – 2018 Zamban, in E. Ebeling and B. Meissner (Hrsg.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen
Archäologie 15, 202. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
Bagg, A. M.
2017
Die Orts- und gewässernamen der neuassyrischen Zeit, Teil 2: Zentralassyrien und benachbarte Gebiete,Ägypten und die arabische Halbinsel, Répertoire Géographique des Textes Cunéiformes 7/2–2, Wiesbaden:
Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
Baqir, T. and Mustafa, M. A.
1945
Iraq Government Sounding at Der, Sumer 1, 37–54.
Beaulieu, P. A.
2011 – 2013 Sūḫi /u, in E. Ebeling and B. Meissner (Hrsg.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie
13, 259 – 262. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
Black, J. A.
1987
Babylonian Textual Evidence, in L. De Meyer and H. Gasche (eds.), ḤABL AṢ-ṢAḪR 1983–85: Nebuchadnezzar
II’s Cross-Country Wall North of Sippar, Northern Akkad Project Reports, vol. 1, 15 –20. Ghent: University of
Ghent.
Black, J. A. and Green, A.
1992
Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia, An Illustrated Dictionary. Austin: University of Texas
Press.
Black, J. A. and Killick, R.
1985
Excavations in Iraq 1983 – 84, Iraq 47, 215–239.
Brinkman, J. A.
1968
A Political History of Post-Kassite Babylonia, Analecta Orientalia 43. Roma: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum.
Brumfield, S.
2013
Imperial Methods: Using Text Mining and Social Network Analysis to Detect Regional Strategies in the
Akkadian Empire (PhD Dissertation). Los Angeles: The University of California, Los Angeles.
Cavigneaux, A.
202036) Akkete polis, Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2020, 84.
Charpin, D., Joannès, F., Lackenbacher, S. and Lafont, B.
1988
Archives épistolaires de Mari I/2 ( = Archives Royales de Mari 26/2). Paris: Editions Recherche sur les

64

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

Civilisations.
Da Riva, R.
2008
The Neo-Babylonian Royal Inscriptions An Introduction, Guides to the Mesopotamian Textual Record 4.
Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.
Delitzsch, F.
1881
Wo Lag Das Paradies?: eine biblisch-aasyriologische Studie : mit Zahlreichen assytiolo-Beiträgen zur
biblischen Länder- und Völkerkunde und einer karte babyloniens. Leipzig: Hinrichs.
Directorate General of Antiquities, Ministry of Information, Republic of Iraq
1976
Atlas of the Archaeological Sites in Iraq. Baghdad: Al-Huria Printing House, Al-Jumhuriya Press.
Ebeling, E.
1932
Anunnitu, in E. Ebeling and B. Meissner (Hrsg.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen
Archäologie 1, 110 – 111. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
Edzard, D. O.
1970
Altbabylonische Rechts- und Wirtschaftsurkunden aus Tell ed-Der im Iraq Museum, Baghdad. München: Verlag
der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften; in Kommission bei der C. H. Beck’schen Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Edzard, D. O. and Farber, G.
1974
Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der Zeit der 3. Dynastie von Ur, Répertoire Géographique des Textes
Cunéiformes 2, Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
Edzard, D. O., Farber, G. and Sollberger, E.
1977
Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der präsargonischen und sargonischen Zeit, Répertoire Géographique desTextes Cunéiformes 1, Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
Ellis, M. de J.
1972
Old Babylonian Economic Texts and Letters from Tell Harmal, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 24, 43–69.
Foster, B. R.
1993
Select Bibliography of the Sargonic Period, in M. Liverani, (ed.), Akkad: The First World Empire, Structure,
Ideology, Traditions, History of the Ancient Near East. Studies 5, 171–182. Padpva: Sargon.
Frame, G.
1993
Nabonidus and the History of the Eulmaš Temple at Akkad, Mesopotamia 28, 21–50.
2011
VI Assyrian Royal Inscriptions, in A.R. George (ed.), Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions and Related Texts in the
Schøyen Collection, Cornel University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 17, 127–152. Bethesda: CDL
Press.
Frayne, D. R.
1993
Sargonic and Gutian Periods (2334 – 2113 BC), the Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia, Early Periods 2.
Toronto, Buffalo, and London: University of Toronto Press.
2004
Geographical Notes on the Land of Akkad, in G. Frame (ed.), From the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea, Studies
on the History of Assyria and Babylonia in Honour of A. K. Grayson, 103–116. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut
Voor Het Naije Oosten.
2009 – 2011 Simurrum, in E. Ebeling and B. Meissner (Hrsg.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen
Archäologie 12, 510 – 511. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
Fuchs, A. and Parpola, S. (eds.)
2001
The Correspondence of Sargon II, Part 3: Letters from Babylonia and the Eastern Provinces, State Archivesof Assyria 15. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.
Gelb, I. J., Landsberger, A. and Oppenheim, A. L.
2006
The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, vol. 18. Chicago and Glückstadt:
The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
George, A. R.
1993
House Most High: The Temples of Ancient Mesopotamia. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.
2007
Babylonian and Assyrian: A history of Akkadian, in J. N. Postgate (ed.), Languages of Iraq, Ancient andTHE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

65

Modern, 31 – 71. London: British School of Archaeology in Iraq.
Giannelli, G. and Mazzarino, S.
1962
Trattato di storia romana, volume second, L’Impero romano a cura de S. Mazzarino, seconda edizione. Roma:
Tumminelli.
Glassner, J-J., edited by Foster, B. R.
2004
Mesopotamian Chronicles, Society of Biblical Literature, Writings from the Ancient World 19. Atlanta:
Society of Biblical Literature.
Goosens, G.
1948
Les recherches historiques a l’époque neo-Babylonienne, Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie Orientale 42,
149 – 159.
Grayson, A. K.
1975
Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, Texts from Cuneiform Sources 5. New York: Locust Valley.
Groneberg, B.
1980
Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der altbabylonischen Zeit, Répertoire Géographique des Textes Cunéiformes 3.
Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
Harris, R.
1975
Ancient Sippar: A Demographic Study of an Old-Babylonian City. Leiden: Nederlands HistorischArchaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul.
Hommel, F.
1926
Ethnologie Und Geographie Des Altes Orients. München: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Kawakami, N.
2004
The Northwestern Territorial Extent of Sargon’s Empire of Akkad: Studies on the Royal Inscriptions and theHistorical Literary Texts on the Horizons of the Historical Geography (PhD Dissertation). Liverpool: The
University of Liverpool.
2022
Searching for the Location of the Ancient City of Akkade in Relation to the Ancient Course of the Tigris
Using Historical Geographical and GIS Analyses, Akkadica 143, 101–135.
Killick, R. and Roaf, M.
1983
Excavations in Iraq 1981 – 82, Iraq 45, 199–224.
King, L. W.
1907
Chronicles Concerning Early Babylonian Kings: including records of the early history of the Kassites and thecountry of the sea, vol. 2. London: Luzac.
von Koppen, E.
2006 – 2008 Šaduppûm A, in E. Ebeling and B. Meissner (Hrsg.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen
Archäologie 11, 488 – 491. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
Lambert, W. G.
2011
Another Boundary Stone of Merodachbaladan I, Archiv für Orientforschung 52, 15–21.
Landsberger, B.
1965
Brief des Bischofs von Esagila an König Asarhaddon. Amsterdam: Noord Hollandsche Uitg. Maatschappij.
Lane, W. H.
1923
Babylonian Problems. London: Murray.
Langdon, S.
1912
Die neubabylonischen Königsinschriften. Leipzig: Hinrichs.
1915 – 1916 New Inscriptions of Nabuna’id, The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 32, 102–117.
1924
Excavations at Kish, vol. 1. Paris: Geuthner.
Leichty, E.
2011
The Royal Inscriptions of Esarhaddon, King of Assyria (680–669 BC), the Royal Inscriptions of the NeoAssyrian Period 4. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.

66

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

Marín, J. A. B.
2001
Die Orts- und gewässernamen der Texte aus Syrien im 2 Jt. v. Chr., Répertoire Géographique des Textes
Cunéiformes 12 /2, Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
Marti, L.
2014

Akkad à l’époque néo-assyrienne, in N. Ziegler and E. Cancik-Kirschbaum (Hrsg.), Entre les fleuves – II,
D’Aššur à Mari et au-delà, Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 24, 207–209. Gladbeck: PeWe-Verlag.

Matab, A., Hamza, H. A., Rashid, M. and Shaker, S.
1990
Excavations of Tell Muhammad (in Arabic), Sumer 46, 127–159.
McEwan, G. J. P.
1982
Agade after the Gutian Destruction: the Afterlife of the Mesopotamian City, in Rencontre AssyriologiqueInternationale in Wien, 6 – 10. Juli 1981, Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 19, 8 –15. Horn: Verlag Ferdinand
Berger & Söhne.
Ménant, M. J.
1875
Babylone et la Chaldée. Paris: Maisonneuve & ce.
1883
Les Pierres Gravées de la Haute-Asie, Recherches sur la Glyptique Orientale, Première Partie, Cylindres dela Chaldée. Paris: Maisonneuve et cie.
de Meyer, L.
1978
Tell ed- Dēr. 2: Progress reports (first series). Leuven: Éditions Peeters.
1980
Tell ed- Dēr. 3: Sounding at Abū Ḥabbah (Sippar). Leuven: Éditions Peeters.
1984
Tell ed- Dēr. 4: Progress reports (second series). Leuven: Éditions Peeters.
de Meyer, L., Gasche, H. and Paepe, R.
1971
Tell ed-Dēr. 1: Rapport préliminaire sur la premi ere campagne (février 1970). Leuven: Éditions Peeters.
Miglus, P. A.
1998 – 2001 Nērebtum, in E. Ebeling and B. Meissner (Hrsg.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen
Archäologie 9, 211 – 214. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
2006 – 2008 Šaduppûm B, in E. Ebeling and B. Meissner (Hrsg.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen
Archäologie 11, 491 – 495. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
Nashef, K.
1982
Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der mittelbabylonischen und mittelassyrischen Zeit, Répertoire Géographiquedes Textes Cunéiformes 5, Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
1991
Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der altassyrischen Zeit, Répertoire Géographique des Textes Cunéiformes 4,
Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
Pallis, S. A.
1956
The Antiquity of Iraq, a handbook of Assyriology. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard.
Parpola, S.
1970aLetters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal Part I: Texts, Alter Orient undAltes Testament 5 /1, Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker.
1970b
Neo-Assyrian Toponyms, Alter Orient und Altes Testament 6, Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker.
1983
Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal Part II: Commentary andAppendices, Alter Orient und Altes Testament 5/2. Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker.
Parpola, S. and Porter, M. (eds.)
2001
The Helsinki Atlas of the Near East in the Neo-Assyrian Period, Helsinki: Casco Bay Assyriological Institute;
Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project 2001.
Paschoud, F. (éd.)
1979
ZOSIME, Histoire nouvelle, tome II, 1re partie (livre III). Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
Paulus, S.
2014a
Die babylonischen Kudurru-Inschriften von der kassitischen bis zur frühneubabylonischen Zeit: untersucht
unter besonderer Berücksichtigung gesellschafts- und rechtshistorischer Fragestellungen, Alter Orient undAltes Testament 51. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.

THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE: REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF
ISSUES FOR FORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE

2014b

67

Akkade in mittelbabylonischer Zeit, in N. Ziegler and E. Cancik-Kirschbaum (Hrsg.), Entre les fleuves – II,
D’Aššur à Mari et au-delà, Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 24, 199–206. Gladbeck: PeWe-Verlag.

Pethe, W.
2014
Akkade in der mittelassyrischen Textdokumentation, in N. Ziegler and E. Cancik-Kirschbaum (Hrsg.), Entre
les fleuves – II, D’Aššur à Mari et au-delà, Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 24, 191–197. Gladbeck:
PeWe-Verlag.
Pirngruber, R.
2014
Die Stadt Akkad in den babylonischen Quellen des 1. Jahrtasusends v. Chr., in N. Ziegler and E. CancikKirschbaum (Hrsg.), Entre les fleuves – II, D’Aššur à Mari et au-delà, Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient
24, 211 – 215. Gladbeck: PeWe-Verlag.
Postgate, J. N. and Watson, P. J.
1979
Excavations in Iraq 1977 – 78, Iraq 41, 141–181.
Rashid, F.
1983
Akkad or Bab Aya (Arabic), Sumer 43, 183–214.
Reade, J.
2002

Early monuments in Gulf stone at the British Museum, with observations on some Gudea statues and thelocation of Agade, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie 92, 258–295.

Roaf, M. and Postgate, J. N.
1981
Excavations in Iraq 1979 – 80, Iraq 43, 167–198.
Röllig, W.
1993 – 97 Mê-Turran, Mê-Turnat, in E. Ebeling and B. Meissner (Hrsg.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie undVorderasiatischen Archäologie 8, 150. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
Sallaberger, W.
2007
From Urban Culture to Nomadism: A History, in C. Kuzucuoğlu, et C. Marro (éds.), Sociétés humaines etchangement climatique à la fin du troisième millénaire: une crise a-t-elle eu lieu en haute mésopotamie?
Actes du Colloque de Lyon (5 – 8 décembre 2005), 417–456. Istanbul: Institut français d’études anatoliennesGeorges-Dumézil.
Sallaberger, W. and Schrakamp, I.
2015
Part I: Philological Data for a Historical Chronology of Mesopotamia in the 3rd Millennium, in W. Sallaberger
and I. Schrakamp (eds.), History & Philology, Associated Regional Chronologies for the Ancient Near Eastand the East Mediterranean 3, 1 – 112. Turnhout: Brepols.
Scheil, V.
1900
Textes élamites-sémitiques, preière série, Mémories de la Délégation en Perse (Paris) Fortsetzung: Mémories
de la Mission Archéologique en Iran. Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Smith, S.
1946

Excavations at Tell Harmal, Sumer 2, 19–21.

Sommerfeld, W.
2004
Die inschriftliche Überlieferung des 3. Jahrtausends aus Tutub, in H. Waetzoldr (Hrsg.), Von Sumer nach Ebla
und zwrück, Festschrift Giovanni Pettinato zum 27. September 1999 gewidmet von Freunden, Kollegen undSchülern, Heidelberger Studien zum Alten Orient 9, 285–292. Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag.
2011
Geschichte des Dihala-Gebietes in der Akkade-Zeit, in P. A. Miglus and S. Mühl (eds.), Between the Cultures,
the Central Tigris region from the 3rd to the 1st Millennium BC, 85–96. Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag.
2014
Die Lage von Akkade und die Dokumentation des 3. Jahrtausends, in N. Ziegler and E. Cancik-Kirschbaum(Hrsg.), Entre les fleuves – II, D’Aššur à Mari et au-delà, Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 24, 151 –175. Gladbeck: PeWe-Verlag.
Steinkeller, P.
1995
A Rediscovered Akkdian City?, Acta Ssumerologica 17, 275–281.

68

Naohiko KAWAKAMI

Unger, E.
1932
Akkad, in E. Ebeling and B. Meissner (Hrsg.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie
1, 62. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
Vallat, F.
1993
Les noms géographique des sources suso-élamites, Répertoire Géographique des Textes Cunéiformes 11,
Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
Wall-Romana, C.
1990
An Areal Location of Agade, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 49, 205–245.
Weiershäuser, F. and Novotny, J.
2020
The Royal Inscriptions of Amēl-Marduck (561–560BC), Neriglissar (559– 556 BC), and Nabonidus (555–
539 BC), Kings of Babylon, the Royal Inscriptions of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, vol. 2.: Pennsylvania:
Eisenbrauns.
Weiss, H.
1975
Kish, Akkad and Agade, Journal of the American Oriental Society 95, 434–453.
Westenholz, A.
1999
Old-Akkdian Period. History and Culture, in W. Sallaberger and A. Westenholz, Mesopotamien: Akkade-Zeit
und Ur III-Zeit, Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 160/3, 17–117. Freiburg, Schweiz Göttingen: Universitätsverlag;
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
2002
The Sumerian City-State, in M. H. Hansen (ed.), A Comparative Study of Six City-State Cultures: An
Investigation Conducted by the Copenhagen Polis Center, 23 – 42. Copenhagen: Det Kongelige Danske
Videnskabernes Selskab, commission agent, C.A. Reitzels Forlag.
Zadok, R.
1985
Geographical Names According to New- and Late-Babylonian Texts, Répertoire Géographique des Textes
Cunéiformes 8, Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
20003) Notes on Babylonian geography, Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2000, 3–8.
Ziegler, N.
2014
Akkade à l’époque paléo-babylonienne, in N. Ziegler and E. Cancik-Kirschbaum (Hrsg.), Entre les fleuves –II, D’Aššur à Mari et au-delà, Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 24, 177–190. Gladbeck: PeWe-Verlag.
Ziegler, N. and Langlois, A-I.
2017
Les toponymes paléo-babyloniens de la Haute Mésopotamie, Matériaux pour l’étude de la toponymie et de la
topographie I: La Haute-Mésopotamie au IIe millénaire av. J.-C. Antony: SEPOA.

A STUDY OF FROG-SHAPED ARTEFACTS
AL-RĀFIDĀN
IN Vol.
MESOPOTAMIAXLIV 2023

69

A STUDY OF FROG-SHAPED ARTEFACTS IN MESOPOTAMIAMai TSUNEKI*
Introduction
In the ancient Near East, animals are characteristically depicted in reliefs and on pottery. Amongthem, vultures, foxes and other animal figures were carved in relief on stone columns at Göbekli
Tepe in South-East Anatolia from the Neolithic period, while the wall paintings at Çatal Höyük inSouth Anatolia depicted giant bulls, lions and other animals [Department of Ancient Near Eastern
Art in The Metropolitan Museum of Art 2014]. Then, in the Uruk period, lion and bull designs
were used as symbols of power [ibid.]. Furthermore, animals were sacrificed and often depicted on
temple implements. In particular, during the Hittite period, earthenware and metal vessels began to
be made with rhytons in the shape of animals and animal heads, which are believed to have beenused in temple rituals [ibid.].
Similarly, many artefacts in the form of small animals such as frogs have been found. Frogshaped artefacts have been found at the ‘Usiyeh in the second millennium BC.1) However, their use
has not yet been determined, as they were either ‘weights’ or ‘amulets’. Examples of frog-shaped
artefacts have also been found from Kültepe in Central Anatolia [Kulakoğlu 2017: p. 348]. Thus,
frog motifs are frequently used, particularly in Mesopotamia, but why was it necessary for them to
be in the shape of a frog? This study therefore considers the meaning of the frog motif and its uses.
Meaning of Frogs
To begin with, frogs were a symbol of life and fertility in the early dynasties of Egypt around3000 BC, when the flooding of the Nile produced millions of frogs [Cowie 2018]. As a result, in
Egyptian mythology, the goddess ‘Heket’ and the male god ‘Kuku’ were depicted as frogs [ibid.].
The goddess Heket, who is also the goddess of water and the symbol of the midwife responsible forconception and childbirth, is represented by a frog head [Wanner 1999]. For this reason, Egyptian
women often wore metal amulets in the shape of frogs to favor her [Wanner 1999; Page 2018].
In addition, the flooding of the Nile was an important event for agriculture, which supplied
water to the fields, and was considered a symbol of abundance, along with the subsequent appearanceof frogs in large numbers [Wanner 1999]. Furthermore, the frog became a symbol for the number‘hefnu’, meaning ‘100,000’ or ‘huge number’ [ibid.]. In this regard, Wanner [1999] notes that theamazing fertility of frogs and their association with water, which is so important to human life, may
have led humans to view frogs as a powerful and positive symbol.
In ancient Mesopotamia, settlement sites can also be found around the Tigris and Euphrates
rivers, where the people living there established a centralised society [Page 2018]. And the peopleof that time also attached great importance to the rivers here, treating the frogs there as symbols of
fertility and life [ibid.]. In the Sumerian poem Inanna and Enki, the first creature that the goddess
Inanna tricked the water god Enki into giving the gods an order to send some water creatures for
Enki to retrieve it was a frog [Cowie 2018]. Therefore it seems that frogs came to be depicted
in reliefs, sculptures and objects as a symbol of life-giving water [Page 2018]. Furthermore,*
1)

Special Researcher, the Institute for Cultural Studies of Ancient Iraq in the School of Asia 21, Kokushikan University,
Tokyo, Japan
Assistant Professor, Economics and Informatics Department, Tsukuba Gakuin University, Tsukuba, Japan
Similar motifs often unearthed include ducks rarely lion and boar heads in Mesopotamia [Melein 2018: p. 32].

70

Mai TSUNEKI

focusing on the life cycle of frogs, they are known to take on a completely different shape when
they transform from juvenile to adult. Ancient peoples revered their shape as a symbol of rebirth[Cowie 2018].
However, the frog has not always been interpreted in a positive light as a symbol of fertility.
For example, the second plague of Egypt described in Exodus 8:6 was the work of frogs, and in
the New Testament, frogs are associated with unclean spirits in Revelation 16:13 [ibid.]. Thus, thesocial and symbolic importance of frogs has been preserved in many documents since antiquity[Page 2018], and it is clear that frogs were also familiar in ancient Mesopotamia.
Frog-shaped Artefacts
Examples of frog-shaped artefacts from the Mesopotamian region are given from museum sources.
One of the examples, the British Museum has a collection of frog-shaped artefacts made of lapis
lazuli. Among them are a frog-shaped artefact from Larsa, measuring 2.2 × 1.2 cm [The British
Museum: Museum No. 122106], and a frog-shaped artefact from Ur, measuring 1.67 × 1.87 cm[The British Museum: Museum No. 120650]. Furthermore, a reddish-brown frog-shaped artefact
from Mesopotamia, dating back to the third millennium BC, measures 2.06 cm in length [TheWalters Art Museum: Access No. 42.1462]. In the 2nd millennium BC, a hematite frog-shaped
artefact (0.7 × 0.9 × 1.3 cm) has been excavated from ‘Usiyeh [Oguchi and Tsuneki 2022: No.
19, List of figs. 1, 2 and 3 on p. 43]. These all have in common that they are made of stone andare 1–2 cm in size.
Other examples may have been used as weights. One frog-shaped artefact in the British
Museum, made of striped agate with a hole in the centre to allow it to be threaded onto a cord,
dates from the Akkadian, ca 2400 BC to 2200 BC, measuring 2 × 2.7 cm and weighing 8.761
g [The British Museum: Museum No. 123555]. As one shekel, a unit of weight at the time, isapproximately 8.3 g [Dercksen 1996: p. 251], the museum representative is of the opinion that if
the artefact had been used as a weight, it would have been used as a unit of one shekel [The British
Museum: Museum No. 123555]. The Metropolitan Museum of Art also has a collection of diorite
or andesite frog-shaped weights from the Old Babylonian period, dating from around 2000 BC to1600 BC [The Metropolitan Museum of Art: Accession No. 1988.301]. It measures 12.3 × 21.8
cm, and on the frog’s throat is an Akkadian inscription that reads “a frog [weighing] 10 minas, alegitimate weight of the god Shamash, belonging to Iddin-Nergal, son of Arkat-ili- damqa.” [ibid.].
The inscription suggests that the frog weighs about 5 kg, considering that one mina weighs about
500 g [Dercksen 1996: p. 251]. These two examples also correspond to the standards of weight at
the time, and it is very likely that they served as weights.
Conclusions
This section discusses the meaning of frogs and their uses. In general, frogs have long beenstrongly associated with rivers. This is partly because frogs lived in the water as juveniles during
their development, and because it was essential for them to live around bodies of water even after
they had reached adulthood. Moreover, because frogs were prolific, they were treated as a symbolof fertility and life, and are often mentioned in mythology. The use of relics in the shape of frogs
seems to have varied according to the size of the relic. For example, small relics with a diameterof 1–2 cm were used as amulets to be worn. In addition, artefacts excavated from Mesopotamia
indicate that some objects larger than 2 cm were evidently used as weights. Thus, it is clear thatfrogs were a familiar part of people’s lives and were closely related to them.

A STUDY OF FROG-SHAPED ARTEFACTS IN MESOPOTAMIA

71

Acknowledgment
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Number JP22H04014.
Bibliography
Cowie, A.
2018
An Ambiguous Amphibian: The Everchanging Frog Symbol in World Myth (online), https://www.ancientorigins.net / myths-legends-europe / ambiguous-amphibian-everchanging-frog-symbol-world-myth-009560(browsing date: 1 /2 /2023).
Dercksen, J. G.
1996
The Old Assyrian Copper Trade in Anatolia, Nederlands Histoyisch-Archaeologisch Instituut, Istanbul.
Kulakoğlu, F.
2017
Balance Stone Weights and Scale-Pans from Kültepe Kanesh: On one of the Basic Elements of the Old
Assyrian Trading System, Culture and History of the Ancient Near East, Vol. 90: Overturning Certaint in Near
Eastern Archaeology, A Festschrift in Honor of K Aslthan Yener, pp. 341–402. Brill, Leiden and Boston.
Malein, M. M.
2018
Iron Oxide Rock Artefacts in Mesopotamia c.2600–1200 BC, An interdisciplinary study of hematite, goethiteand magnetite objects, Archaeopress Archaeology, Archaeopress Publishing Ltd, Oxford.
Oguchi, K. and Tsuneki, M.
2022
Stone Balance Weights from Area A of ‘Usiyeh, al-Rāfidān: Journal of Western Asiatic Studies, Vol. LXIII,
pp. 39 – 51, The Institute for Cultural Studies of Ancient Iraq, Kokushikan University, Tokyo.
Page, H. B.
2018
What is the relationship between frogs and fertility? (online), https: / /blogs.ucl.ac.uk / researchers-inmuseums/2018 /07 /10 /what-is-the-relationship-between-frogs-and-fertility/ (browsing date: 1/2/2023).
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Department of Ancient Near Eastern Art
2014
Animals in Ancient Near Eastern Art (online), https: / /www.metmuseum.org / toah / hd / anan / hd_anan.htm(browsing date: 1 /2 /2023).
Wanner, N.
1999
The Rains Came, the Land was Renewed, and Life Returned: Frogs as Fertility Symbols (online), https://www.exploratorium.edu/frogs /folklore/folklore_4.html (browsing date: 1/2/2023).
【Online Collection】
The British Museum
Explore the Collection (online), https: / /www.britishmuseum.org / collection / object / W_1928-1009-138(Museum No. 120650), https: / /www.britishmuseum.org / collection / object / W_1856-0903-243 (Museum No.
122106), and https: / /www.britishmuseum.org / collection / object / W_1935-0413-1 (Museum No. 123555),(browsing date: 1 /2 /2023).
The Metropolitan Museum of Art
Online Collection (online), https: / /www.metmuseum.org / art / collection / search / 327369 (Accession No.
1988.301), (browsing date: 1 /2 /2023).
The Walters Art Museum
Online Collection (online), https: / /art.thewalters.org / detail / 24675 / frog-amulet / (Access No. 42.1462),(browsing date: 1 /2 /2023).

73『ラーフィダーン』編集方針
本誌は学術の進展に寄与するため，所外の投稿希望者にも広く誌面を開放しています。投稿資格は問いません。年 １ 回の発行を原則とし，原稿の採否と掲載方法については編集委員会が決定します。

投稿規定
１．古代西アジアの研究及び関連諸分野の研究を対象とします。

能な限り電子ファイルで提出すること。
2．原稿の第 １ ページ（表紙）には，論題（タイトル）および著者の住所，氏名，所属だけを記し，日本語原稿の場

2．論文，報告，書評，翻訳，研究ノートなど，原稿の種類と長短を問いません。ただし未発表のものに限ります。
翻訳に関しては，予め原著者との合意を必要とします。
3．用語は日本語または英語を原則とします。他の言語で合には論題の英訳をかならず併記すること。
3．特殊な場合を除き，原稿中の数字は算用数字を用いる。
年号は西暦を原則とする。
4．挿図および表は，可能な限りデータファイルにして提出

投稿を希望する方は編集委員に相談してください。

すること。一図一表ごとに別紙（別ファイル）で提出し，4．投稿原稿はすべて署名原稿としてあつかい，著作権は図，表それぞれに通し番号を付し，かならず見出し文を

当研究所に属するものとします。
5．引用文献，参考文献はかならず明記してください。
6．注および引用は，論旨をすすめる上でどうしても必要なものに限ります。

記すこと。本文欄中にそれぞれの挿入位置を指定すること。刷り上がり寸法を指定する場合は，なるべく本文版
面（約 23.5×１6 cm）の大きさ以内とする。やむをえず折込とする場合は左側が綴じしろになる。

7．投稿原稿は返却しません。
8．他言語のレジュメを同時に掲載する場合は，投稿者において作成の上，原稿とともに送ってください。

5．図原稿はデータファイルにして提出するか，インキングを済ませ，カバーをかけて提出する。図中の文字や記号の貼込みが必要な場合には，確実な方法で指定すること。

9．目次は和欧両言語で掲載しますので，日本語の論題には

6．写真はデータファイルにして提出するか，スライド，紙英訳を，欧文の論題には日本語訳を併せて記載してくだ焼きの場合は充分に鮮明なものを提出すること。カラー

さい。なお、論文の日本語訳が困難な場合は編集委員に写真の掲載を希望する場合には，編集者と相談すること。

一任してください。

7．注記は本文と切りはなして番号順に一括し，その番号を１0．掲載となっても原稿料はさしあげません。刊行後に本誌2 部と PDF 版の別刷を無料でお送りします。 １ 原稿の執筆者が複数の場合，本誌は各人に 2 部ずつとします。
１１．投稿は随時受け付けますが，その年の巻の締切は前年の１0月末日とします。

8．本文中に引用文献を指示するときは，大括弧の中に，著者名，刊行年次，引用ページの順序で記載する。
例）〔松井 １960: 30 – １35〕
〔大岡 １987: fig. １2; Naharagha １98１: 45ff.〕

１2．原稿の送付先，連絡先は次のとおりです。
〒１95-8550

本文中の該当箇所に明示する。

東京都町田市広袴１-１-１

ただし同一著者による同年刊行物が複数ある場合は，年次にアルファベットを付して区別すること。

国士舘大学21世紀アジア学部附属9．引用文献の記載要領は下記のとおり。

イラク古代文化研究所（１）文献の配列は，著者名のアルファベット順とし，日本「ラーフィダーン」編集委員会
電話：042－736－2343
F a x : 042－736－5482
Mail : iraq_jimu@kokushikan.ac.jp

人やアラブ人などの名もラテン字で表記したと仮定して順序を決める。
（2）文献の記載は著者名，年号，論題，誌名，巻，号，発行者（地）の順，もしくは著者名，年号，書名，発行者の順で配列する。書名，雑誌名はイタリック体を用いて執筆要項
１．原稿は横書きとし，原稿用紙に青または黒のペン書き，もしくはワープロ印字とする。本文ほか文字原稿は，可明示すること。
１0．原稿の印刷に関しては，原則として初校のみを著者校正
とする。

74

“AL-RĀFIDĀN” EDITORIAL POLICY
Guideline to writing

This journal is of an annual issue, designed to covervarious studies of ancient Western Asia. It is an institute1.

journal, but any external contributor will be welcome.
The adoption of article shall be left to the discretion of theeditorial board. The deadline for submission is the end of

The manuscript should be typed on one side only of
A-4 size paper. To be accompanied with digital files isstrongly preferable.

2.

October.

On the front page, to the exclusion of the text, thetitle of article should be written as well as the name,address and position of author(s).

Notes to contributors
1.

2.

3.

The papers handled include unpublished theses, re-tables as Digital Files in the computer disc, or on sepa-

ports, book reviews, translations, brief notes, etc. All

rate papers one by one (less than 23.5×16.0 cm eacharticles must be written in either Japanese or English inin size of completion of printing), with explanations andprinciple.

consecutive numbers respectively, and compile themaside from the text. In addition, designate, in the text,

For translated articles, the contributor should makewhere each one should be inserted.

themselves responsible for completing necessary procedures, such as copyright and permission to translate,3.

4.

covered by a tracing paper. Photo typesetting of letters,

editorial board.

numbers, etc. in illustrations can be done by the editorial
board.

Contributors should clarify the literature cited in the5.

They shall also require explanations, consecutive numbers, etc. mentioned in item 3.

Any manuscript, together with photos, maps,
figures, etc., submitted to the editorial board shall not

6.

7.

the relevant sentence in the text.

If a resume in any language needs to be printed,
please send it with manuscript.

7.

pages are arranged in order, enclosed in brackets:

papers with the title translated into Japanese, otherwise[Childe 1956: 30 – 32]

please trust it to the editorial board.

[Annahar 1943: 123; Agha 1946: pl. 15]

No payment shall be made for your manuscript.

If those of the same writer are published in the same

Two original copies of the journal and a PDF version ofyear, classify them by additional alphabet to the publication year.

an offprint shall be distributed free of charge. In caseof a joint article, two original copies, as well as a PDF

8.

Put all the references that have been quoted in the
text and notes, and write them as follows: (1) The

offprint, shall be distributed to each author.
9.

In the text, specify the literature for reference as
below; writer’s name, publication year, and quoted

Tables of contents will be presented in both Japaneseand English. Contributors are required to submit the8.

Explanator y notes should be written on separate
papers, each with a consecutive number to be given to

be returned.
6.

As for photograph, digital file is preferable. Positive
films and clearly printed photo-papers are acceptable.

Notes and quotations should be limited to thoseindispensable to the discussion.

5.

The drawings which were inked over should bewith the original author before their submission to thearticle.
4.

Please be sure to prepare necessar y drawings andwriters’ names are to be listed in alphabetical order.

The following is the address of the editorial board for

The names of Japanese, Arabs, etc. must be arranged

correspondence:AL-RĀFIDĀN Editorial Board,among the European names based on the supposition of

The Institute for Cultural Studies of Ancient Iraq in thetheir having been rewritten in Latin. (2) The writer’s

School of Asia 21, Kokushikan University,

name, issue year, title, volume name, volume number,

1-1-1 Hirohakama, Machida, Tokyo, 195-8550 JAPANissue number and publisher’s name (place) are to be

T e l : JAPAN (+81) 42-736-2343

filled in the references in regular sequence. The title ofF a x : JAPAN (+81) 42-736-5482

journals or independent publications should be specified,in Italic letters.

Mail: iraq_jim@kokushikan.ac.jp
9.

As a rule, the first proofreading shall be done by theoriginal author.

[News]From April 2022, the Institute for Cultural Studies of Ancient Iraq
became an affiliated research institute of the School of Asia 21. The
official name of the institute became the "Institute for Cultural Studies
of Ancient Iraq in the School of Asia 21, Kokushikan University". The
School of Asia 21 is one of the seven faculties of Kokushikan
University and was established in April 2002. The institute wasestablished in 1976 with the late Emeritus Professor Hideo Fujii as its
first director, and the 46-year history of the institute came to an end as
an independent research institute. Although the institute will start in a
new form due to organizational changes, its role as an archaeologicalinstitute centered on Iraq and education will not change.
Excavations at Umm Qais began in 2005 as a training site for Iraqi
researchers by JICA and for students of Kokushikan University.
Although many research results were obtained, due to the absence ofthe current researcher in charge, the project was forced to besuspended at the end of March 2023.
From 2022, with the cooperation of the Digital Archive Center of
Kokushikan University and the Kokushikan Historical Reference
Room, plans are underway to digitize the vast amount of photographic
films, drawings, etc. of the institute. Some or them will be released in
the spring of 2025, so please look forward to it.
Mr. Futoshi Matsumoto, Ambassador of Japan to Iraq, visited oursite Kish in Februar y 2023. We hope that the situation will improve
and we will be able to excavate again.

[Postscript]
There were four contributions in this issue. The Charmo (Jarmo)
excavation report by six authors, including Professor Emeritus Akira
Tsuneki of the University of Tsukuba, is extremely interesting because
it reveals unique objects that give us an idea of life and religion in the
Neolithic period. I think the other three contributions are also
appropriate for this journal, al-Rāfidān. I would like to thank all theauthors. Also, I would like to thank Ms. Ayano Takasaka, who is incharge of Letterpress, who always responds to various requests, and
Ms. Tomoe Hazeyama, who supports me with administrative
procedures.
（K. Oguchi）

ラーフィダーン

第 XLIV 巻

2023

2023年（令和 5 年） 3 月31日発行
編集
発行

国士舘大学21世紀アジア学部附属
イラク古代文化研究所
東京都町田市広袴 1-1-1

印刷
製本

レタープレス株式会社

広島市安佐北区上深川町 809-5

VOLUME XLIV

2023

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE CHARMO (JARMO)
PREHISTORIC INVESTIGATIONS, 2022
by Akira TSUNEKI, Nobuya WATANABE, Ryo ANMA, Sari JAMMO,Yu SAITOH and Saber Ahmed SABER
BRONZE AGE HORN-SHAPED CONTAINERS AND COSMETICS:
A NEW IDENTIFICATION FOR A CONICAL STONE OBJECT EXCAVATED
AT PARKHAI-II, SUMBAR VALLEY, SOUTH-WEST TURKMENISTAN
by St John SIMPSON
THE LOCATION OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF AKKADE:REVIEW OF PAST THEORIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES FORFORMULATING A SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY FOR SEARCHING AKKADE
by Naohiko KAWAKAMIA STUDY OF FROG-SHAPED ARTEFACTS IN MESOPOTAMIA
by Mai TSUNEKI

THE INSTITUTE FOR CULTURAL STUDIES OF ANCIENT IRAQ
IN THE SCHOOL OF ASIA 21, KOKUSHIKAN UNIVERSITY
TOKYO