North Syria as a Cultural Link in the Ancient World

Author(s): Leonard Woolley

Source: The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Vol.
72, No. 1/2 (1942), pp. 9-18
Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2844452
Accessed: 18/10/2010 02:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rai.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland.

http://www.jstor.org

NORTH SYRIA AS A CULTURAL
The Huxley Memorial Lecturefor 1942
By MAJOR SIR LEONARD WOOLLEY, M.A.,
INTRODUCTION
I am deeply conscious of the honour which the
Council of the Royal Anthropological Institute
have done me in asking me to deliver the Huxley
Memorial Lecture. If, as I know will be the case,
I am found to have done far less than justice to the
occasion, I can only urge in my excuse not, indeed,
that the subject is too slight or in any way alien to
the interestsof this Institute,but that, apart frommy
natural shortcomings,the exigencies of work in the
War Officehave for three years cut me offfrom all
archaeologicalstudy.
I have chosen as my subject the role played by
north-westernSyria in the firstand second millenia
before Christ as a connecting link between the
civilisationsof the Near and Middle East.
GE,OGRAPHY
"North-westernSyria," I shouldexplain,is hereused
in an archkeologicalsense for the country extending
from Latakia northwards to the Anti-Taurus and
fromthe Mediterraneaneastwards to Aleppo; politi-
cally speaking,it is the Turkishprovinceof the Hatay,
together with the Syrian territories immediately
adjoining it on the south and east. Obviously this
area was likely to have been a nodal point for the
cultures of the ancient world. To the south and
south-eastlay the commercialkingdomsof Syria and
the Phoenician harbours. Beyond these was Egypt,
whose imperialauthorityextended in prosperousdays
to the Land of the Two Rivers. Eastwards, the wide
plateau of Aleppo and northern Mesopotaniia was
the home of the Amoritesand of the Khurri; beyond
them was Nineveh. The Euphrates led straight to
Babylon. To the north-east,the open countrypast
Diarbekr gave access to the Urartu Kingdom of
Lake Van; through the northern passes of the
Anti-Taurus one could reach the Halys basin,
Cappadocia, and the Konia plain, linked up with the
Ionian coast and the Bosphorus. Lastly, to the
west stretched the Mediterranean, with Cyprus
actually in sight from the top of Mount Casius and
9
LINK IN THE ANCIENT WORLD
D.LITT., LL.D.
with Crete and Greece beyond. Cities in this area,
lying upon trade routes or possessed of harbours,
would, geographically, be well suited to be the
channels throughwhich the cultures of those various
centres might be brought into contact and exercise
their influenceone upon another.
EXCAVATIONS
Before the War three excavations were in progress
which have already thrown much light upon this
subject.
At Ras Shamra, just north of Latakia and just
south of the Amanus mountain range which bars
North Syria from the Mediterranean coast, Dr.
C. Schaefferhas unearthed the ancient royal city of
Ugarit, togetherwith its harbour of Leukos Hormos
the Mina-t-al Beida of to-day.
In the Hatay I selected two sites as being more
likely than others to yield evidence of intercourse
between East and West. At El Mina, at the mouth
of the Orontes,we have excavated what is left of the
little trading-portof Poseideion, and furtherinland,
where the Antioch pass debouches on the great Amk
plain, we have dug part of the Atchana mound
standing above the Orontesriver,which was the royal
town of Alalakh.
Close to Alalakh, the Oriental Institute of Chicago
has excavated the Syro-Hittite palace on Tal
Tayanat, and furtherto the east, where the ground
begins to rise to the Aleppo plateau, has worked on
Tal Judaidah, one of the hundred and more mounds
which are dotted over the Amk plain.
ALALAKH (1780-1187 B.C.)
I trust that I shall bp excused if in this lecture I
deal almost entirelywith our own excavations. This
is not because I underrate the importance of the
results obtained by other excavations, but because
our own work is familiar to me, whereas the right
appraisementof the others would require more study
than I have been able in these war days to give, and
also because the foundationupon whichmy arguments
10 LEONARD WOOLLEY

must rest has been laid for me. In a very brilliant potsherd, and it is true that such evidence must be
monograph, entitled " Alalakh and Chronology," circumspectly used. The existence of a celadon
ProfessorSidney Smith has proposed fixed dates for bowl set in an Elizabethan silver mount does not
prove any direct contact between England and China
levels of the Atchana site.
the successive archweological
Partly on the strengthof historical allusions in the in the sixteenthcentury; the bowl mighthave passed
cuneiformtexts discoveredthere,partlyby associating through the hands of many middlemen (the bowl I
the vicissitudesto which the ruins bear witness with have in mind did, in fact,so pass) beforeits wanderings
historical events known from other sources, he has brought it across the English Channel. Similarly,
produced a chronological frameworkwhich, even if Minoan vases mighthave reached Ugarit by a devious
it should later on have to be modifiedin some of its route-for instance, by way of Egypt, since the
details, can be thankfullyaccepted as the basis for Pharaohs of Egypt of the Xllth Dynasty were over-
comparing the civilisation of Alalakh with that of lords of Ugarit, and in Egypt a number of vessels of
other states whose chronologyis relativelyassured. the same 'Kamares' ware have come to light.
He has furthersketched the political history of the, The Ugarit sherds,therefore,are evidence for,but in
city; and it is against this invaluable background so far as they are isolated they are not proofof, direct
that I would set whatever I can deduce of its cultural contact between the Syrian harbour town and the
relationswith other lands. Aegean island. In view of the later history of
The excavations carried out so far at Alalakh have Ugarit, it is more probable that the contact to which
given us seven archaxologicalstrata or levels, illus- the fragmentsbear witness was direct, and that the
trated by extensive buildingremainsmore or less well two countries were in touch as early as the Middle
preserved. In addition, trial pits sunk below Level 7 Minoan II period; but I think that I am right in
floorshave proved the existence of three more levels saying that the Ugarit culture of that time shows no
regarding which our knowledge is at present very trace of Cretan influence; if Knossos was exporting
limited. Deeper yet there are other strata of which its finestceramicsto Syria, they were not in sufficient
we know nothing. bulk, or they were not enough appreciated, to modify
the artistic ideas of the Syrians. It is not until
Level 7 (1780-1730 B.C.) nearly two centuries later that we find deliberate
Level 7 is representedby a massive and imposing imitation of Cretan originals.
city gate and by a great palace, now completely Level 7 at Alalakh has not produced a single
excavated, which, as is proved by the cuneiform example of Middle Minoan II Cretan ware. It is
tablets found in its ruins, was used, and presumably unwise to insist too much on negative evidence, but
built, by Yarim Lim, King of Aleppo and overlord the area excavated is considerable,and since we are
of Alalakh. Yarim Lim was a contemporary of dealing with a royal palace and foreignpotteryof that
Khammurabi of Babylon; Sidney Smith, therefore, delicate and decorative type might naturally have
who has in the light of our discoveries revised the been looked for on a palace site, its total absence is
date of the first Babylonian dynasty, makes the significant; it implies that such goods were not a
Level 7 period begin about the year 1780 B.C., and regular article of trade, and did not findtheirway up
last for perhaps half a century; thus it begins with country.
the fall of the XIIth Dynasty of Egypt and is A fairamount of potterywas foundin Yarim Lim's
contemporary with the struggle between Babylon palace, and the decorated ware, of which alone we
and Larsa for the kingshipof Sumer and Akkad, and can speak with assurance, is definitelyAsiatic. The
with the Middle Minoan II pediod in Crete. bulk of it is 'Khabur' ware, with monochrome
In 1935 Dr. Schaefferdiscovered at Ugarit Cretan designs in red or black paint on a light ground: the
potsherds of the Middle Minoan II period; for the motives are geometrical (hatched triangles are
firsttime there was forthcomingconcrete evidence of particularly common),,but birds, animals and plants
a possible eastward expansion of Minoan culture to are introduced,most often singly,but occasionally in
the mainland of Asia. regular composition. This ware is commonlyfound
Archweologists have often been accused of basing a on sites in the Khabur valley 230 miles east of
whole theory of internationalrelations on a broken Alalakh; it occurs 170 miles furthereastward still
 NorthSyria as a CulturalLink in theAncient World 11

at Tal Billa beyond the Tigris. This is the country at Ugarit, this does not necessarily mean that Crete
of the Amorites,and since the Khabur ware is found owed nothingto North Syria.
throughoutthe whole area, it must be the product of Yarim Lim's great palace has.walls of brick and
that people. At Alalakh the earliest example comes half-timberconstructionrestingupon polished stone
from Level 9; it occurs freelyin Level 7, is most orthostats. There is a lavish use of cementforfloors.
common in Level 6, and in Level 5 it is fallingout of A feature of the main rooms is that their length is
fashion and disappears altogether with the close of divided into two unequal parts by a pair of wooden
that period, dated by Sidney Smith to 1483 B.C. columns resting on a stone or cement sill and set
Thereforewe can say that from 1800 to 1500 B.C. between wall buttresses. The building was of two
Alalakh was, on the evidence of its pottery, pre- or more storeys; the state rooms were on the first
dominantlyAmorite. floor,the piano nobile, reached by straight or newel
A seal-impressionfound in the Yarim Lim palace flightsof stairs; they mightbe lit by wide loggia-like
proves that Egyptian control had under the XIIth windows with frames and central column of stone,
Dynasty been extendedto these extremenorthconfines and they were decorated with frescoes. How early
of Syria: the scene shows an Egyptian god being this type of building originated we cannot yet say,
worshipped by a member of the royal house. On but that it was thoroughlyat home in North Syria is
other seal-impressionsEgyptian decoration and sym- proved by the similaritybetween Yarim Lim's palace
bols are introduced. But in this the seal-impressions of the eighteenthcenturyand the palace of Niqme-Pa
are peculiar, and nothingelse found in Level 7 shows in the fifteenthcentury,also at Alalakh.
any spread of Egyptian art or culture. It must be It is impossible not to recognise the astonishing
rememberedthat at this period in the Middle East resemblance between this palace and the palace of
political control, or even an inter-State affiance, Minos at Knossos. Long ago Sir Arthur Evans
almost inevitably entailed a formalobservance of the pointed out the similaritybetween the Cretan building
religion of the other party. The most familiar and the (much later) Hittite palaces of Sin9irliand
illustration of this is of the building by Solomon at Boghazkeui, and, realising that the style was not
Jerusalemofan Egyptian templebecause he was a vas- likely to have been endemic in Crete, had suggested
sal of Egypt, and of a templeto Astartebecause he was as the probable explanation a migration of Asiatic
an ally ofHiram of Tyre. But with that observance people to the island (Palace of Minos, ii, 269). Now
there need not go any wider cultural relation. We at Alalakh we have a buildingwhich offerseven closer
findexactly the same thingat Ugarit. The Egyptian parallels and dates fromthe Middle Minoan II period,
statuettesof the time of SenusretII and the Amenem- and is thereforeas old as or older than the Cretan
hat III sphinx found there were made in Egypt, and palace in its most characteristicform.
were imported from Egypt as cult objects because The resemblanceis not confinedto plan and methods
Ugarit was subject to the pharaohs of the Xllth of construction; it extends also to detail.
Dynasty; but Egypt does not seem to have exercised Of the Alalakh frescoesvery little remains, and it
any stylisticinfluenceon the local art of that period. has not yet been possible to clean and set in orderthe
The 7th Level at Alalakh shows a vigorous fragments,but somethingat least can be said about
native culture which,although it witnesses former them. One large fragmentgives us part of an olive
Egyptian political influence,is itselfaffiliatedonly to tree. Against a deep red ground the general contour
the East. The use of the cuneiformscript bespeaks of the foliage is reserved and painted a uniformpale
the long connectionofNorth Syria withMesopotamian green, and on this, in darker colour, the individual
centres,a connectionfullyborne out by the discovery leaves are drawn in outline. This is precisely the
in a very early level at Tal Judaidah of bronze figures convention used at Knossos in the Middle Minoan
of Sumerian style and origin,which tie up the Amk IIIB 'miniature' fresco of 'the Sacred Grove and
plain with Mesopotamia through the intermediacy Dance.' On another fragmentthe horn of a bull-
of such a State as Ma'er. Of western cultural influ- isolated, alas !-suggests that one of the favourite
ences we find at Alalakh no trace at all. But if motives of the Minoan painter had its counterpartat
North Syria in the eighteenthcenturyowed to Crete Alalakh. It will be noted that these Alalakh paintings
nothingmore than the stray importsof potteryfound are at least a century older than their parallels at
12 LEONARD
Knossos, so that there can be little doubt as to the
originating centre. There might be such doubt
regardingan even more strikingparallel given by a
wall-paintingin a private house of later date. Here
the design is architectural,reproducingthe supposed
wall construction. At the base of the wall the basalt
orthostats are represented by rectangles of dark
mottled grey with pale yellow lines for the cement
joints; above them a plain red band gives the
wooden bedding-beam; then the creamy white
plastered wall surface, and then, a metre above the
floor,the square ends of the cross ties supportingthe
second horizontal beam, painted red with wavy,
purplish-blackgraining. Precisely the same design,
the same in almost every detail, recurs twice at
Knossos. The Alalakh house is of the 4th level,
i.e;, of the fifteenthcentury B.C.; of the Cretan
parallels one, in the East Palace Border, is of the
Middle Minoan III period, i.e., of the sixteenth cen-
tury, and one is in the West Porch of the Late
Minoan II palace, of the fourteenthcentury. I am
not prepared to argue that 'architectural' decoration
of wall surfacesis necessarilyAsiatic by originon the
strengthof the remarkablefourthmilleniumpaintings
recently discovered at Tal 'Uqair, near Baghdad,
where the altar frontis made to resemble a temple
fagade inlaid with mosaics in the style of the great
columned hall at Warka: the motif is fairlyobvious
and can be adopted independentlyat any time, as,
for example, with the painted imitations of wooden
panelling in English houses of the sixteenth century.
But in the case of Alalakh and Knossos, the resem-
blance is so close as to mean deliberate copying,and
the analogy of the 'miniature' frescoesjustifiesus in
regardingthe Cretan architecturaldesigns as derived
fromSyria.
As I have said already, a single small object may
travel far afield, and the implications of its casual
appearance in a strange context must not be over-
stressed. But the case is very differentwhere we
have to deal with such things as buildings and wall-
paintings. At a time when architecturaldescriptions
were not written and neither architecturaldrawings
nor illustrated pattern-books were available, close
similarity could result only from direct cultural
contact. This may mean no more than the employ-
ment of a wandering artist or of a band of builders
like the peripatetic mason-architects of mediaeval
WOOLLEY
Lombardy. But since the similarities,in the frescoes
at least, occur at differentdates we are, I think,
justified in supposing that there was between Crete
and the Syrian mainland a closer cultural relation
than would be implied by one stray visit. The
relation was close and sustained, and it was also
one-sided. Whereas Crete was not yet so culturally
developed as to influenceto any appreciable extent
the older and more advanced civilisation of the
mainland, North Syria was helping to build up in
Crete that remarkable Minoan civilisation which was
later to have its repercussionson Asia.
But Crete was not the only foreignfieldinto which
the arts of Northern Syria expanded. Sir Arthur
Evans compared Knossos with the later Hittite
buildings, but it is now clear that both alike find
their prototype in Alalakh, in its palace and in its
city gate. That is not surprisingin the case of the
late Syro-Hittitebuildings of NorthernSyria such as
Singirhi,Sakje-Geuzi, and Carchemish, since they
belong geographicallyto the Mitanni-Amoritecultural
area, and would thereforebe likely to inherit the
local architecturaltradition exemplifiedat an early
date by Alalakh. But Boghazkeui, in the Halys
basin in central Anatolia, is a far cry fromNorthern
Syria, and the recurrencethere of an architectural
and constructionalstyle which seems more properly
at home in the Amorite countrysouth of the Taurus
calls for an explanation not unlike that supplied by
Sir ArthurEvans in the case of Crete. The Anatolian
' Hittites' were not aborigines,but a mixed amalgam
of invading elements. The fact that Boghazkeui was
the thirdcityto become the capital of the Confederacy
and that the older capitals lay furtherto the south,
the centre of power shiftingnorthwardsonly gradu-
ally, may imply that the path of invasion taken by
some one element at least was not fromEast to West
but fromSouth to North; that, in fact, some of the
invaders came from Northern Syria, and these may
have taken with them and imposed upon their sub-
jects and allies the architectural styles of the
Amorites. That therewas a close cultural connection
between the mixed Hittites of the Halys and the
people of North Syria is proved by the recrudescence
in the latter country of a Syro-Hittite culture after
the fall of Boghazkeui, a thing which would scarcely
have been possible had not Hittite and Syrian
traditionshad somethingin common.
 NorthSyria as a CulturalLink in theAncient World 13

Levels 6 and 5 (1730 (?)-1595-1483 B.C.) Alalakh, either on the palace site overlyingthat of
This then is the picture which Level 7 gives us of Yarim Lim, or in the houses of the 6th and 5th levels;
eighteenthcenturyAlalakh. In the next two levels the and on the Alalakh vessels there are ornamental
architecturalremains are but poorly preserved, the motives which do not occur on the Tal el Yahudiyeh
more importantbuildings having been razed to their jugs. The two wares, then, are not identical,
foundations; but the pottery, which is abundant, though it is impossible not to recognisetheir affinity:
enables us to trace certain new features in the we may, perhaps, assume that they are respectively
civilisation of North Syria. Politically, the main the northernand the southernbranches of a common
change was the disappearance as a suzerain power stock. We do not yet know where this pottery
of Egypt, now itselfdominatedby the Asiatic Hyksos. originated. In Level 7 therewere foundtwo examples
Alalakh was still subject to the ' Great King ' of of incised ware with all the characteristicmotives
Aleppo. To the north-east the Khurri states were of ornament but a body clay of coarse drab fabric
coming under the control of an Indo-Aryan aris- instead of the burnished black which comes into use
tocracy. In the north,in Anatolia, the Hittites were only,in Level 6. Those two may have been copies of
becoming an organised power. It was a Hittite an imported black original, or they may mark the
invasion of North Syria, the raid conducted by beginningsof a local development; but in the latter
Mursil I in 1595 B.C., that broughtto an end the local case we have still to learn whence the Alalakh potter
phase representedby our Level 6; but the destruc- derived his knowledge of the technique of the
tion of the buildingsof the town does not seem to have smother-kiln. That technique is by its nature the
involved any great change in the culture of its product of a wooded ratherthan of a steppe country.
people, and only when, in 1483, Alalakh had to submit A few fragmentsof grey incised ware from Alalakh
to the victoriousarms of Thutmose III of Egypt was (they occur in Levels 5 or 6; precise attributionis
there any marked break in its continuity. Up till hazardous) resemble both in shape and in ornament
then, Alalakh was still within the orbit of a culture sherdsfoundin Troy 7. Those sherds are not of local
almost exclusivelyAsiatic and Syrian. Trojan fabric. We cannot argue to any direct
The Amorite 'Khabur' pottery continuesin Level connectionbetween Alalakh and Troy: the distribut-
6, and to a diminishingextent in Level 5, to carryon ing centremust have been elsewhere,perhaps between
the ceramic traditionof Yarim Lim's time. But side the two, and we do not know where it was. If the
by side with this we find a new ware, black or grey Alalakh fragmentsbelonged to Level 5 ratherthan to
ware, produced in a smother-kiln,burnished, and Level 6, i.e., were later than 1595 B.C., it would-be
having incised white-filleddecoration. The common- temptingto associate their appearance there with the
est shapes are the beaker and the krater: the opening-up of communications resulting from or
decoration, which is elaborate and may cover the exemplified by the Mursil raid, which might also
greaterpart of the vessel's surface,consistsof hatched account for the non-appearance of the Tal el Yahu-
triangles, spirals, running circles, rosettes, stars, diyeh jugs at Alalakh, whereas they are found at a
lozenges, etc. (the rosettes and circles are sometimes North Syrian site like Ugarit which was not affected
stamped instead of being incised); bird and animal by the Hittite incursion. But that is in the realm of
motives are lacking. This ware, again, is definitely conjecture.
Asiatic. It has been found,with the same formsand A range of painted pottery decorated with simple
the same decorative motives, as far to the East as bands of red,borderedwith black, perhaps a derivative
Nuzu, near Kirkuk. It is certainlyto be connected from the Khabur ware, brings North Syria at the
with the Tal el Yahudiyeh pottery which occurs in time of our 6th level into cultural relation with
Egypt shortlybefore and during the Hyksos period, Southern Syria, Palestine and Egypt, in all of which
in Palestine between 1850 and 1600 B.C., and else- countries a similar ware occurs in the seventeenth
where in Syria at a somewhat later date, e.g., at century B.C.; this accurately reflects the political
Ugarit towards th.eclose of the sixteenthcentury. It conditions resultingfrom the Hyksos domination of
is curious,however,that the most characteristicform Egypt. Another problem altogetheris raised by the
of Tal el Yahudiyeh ware, the small jug, which is appearance in Level 6 of 'Cyprus Bronze Age'
found at Ugarit, has not made its appearance at pottery,in the shape of the characteristic' milk-bowl'
14 LEONARD
of white slip ware. None of this pottery had
appeared in Level 7, but underneaththe cement floor
of Yarim Lim's palace there were found sherds
painted with hachures, etc., in black on a bluish-
white slip ground closely resemblingthe 'milk-bowl'
style and fabric. These sherds cannot have been
imported fromCyprus, because the ware only makes
its appearance in the island at a date much later than
that to which we must assign the 8th level at Alalakh
(whichis before1780 B.C.); they must be more or less
local, i.e., a mainland product. If they be regarded
as the ancestors of the milk-bowl type, then the
absence of the milk-bowlfrom the 7th level palace
must be explained as accidental; but even if they be
disregarded, the undoubted milk-bowls of the 6th
level, i.e., of the seventeenth century,can be classed
as imports from Cyprus only if we modify very
considerably the accepted dating of the Cypriote
Bronze Age. The difficulty is not diminishedby the
evidence of Level 4.
Level4 (1483-1370B.C.)
Level 4, starting from the Egyptian campaign of
1483 B.C., comprises,in so far as its principalbuilding
is concerned, three phases which take us down to
about 1370, when the Hittite King Suppiluliuma
invaded North Syria and, having put an end to the
Mitanni Kingdom, installed his own son as king of
Aleppo and its dependencies. The level has given us
a whole range of private houses and the great palace,
enlarged, probably, by Niqme-Pa about 1450, and
again by his son, Ilim-Ilimma, and it has given us a
mass of material wherebyto assess the culture of the
time.
Niqme-Pa's palace gave, one example of Late
Minoan II pottery, and another, with the familiar
octopus pattern, came from a private house of the
same level. Examples of granulated gold work
found in the palace were typically Aegean in
character. Contacts with the Aegean there were,
therefore,but they were relativelyfew. With Egypt,
on the other hand, they were closer than they had
ever been, thanks to the relationsbetweenthe kingsof
Mitanni, Niqme-Pa's suzerains, and Thutmose IV of
Egypt; ivory carvings found in the palace are not,
indeed, of Egyptian workmanship,but are deliber-
ately copied from Egyptian models. It is usual to
class such Egyptianising ivories as Phoenician, the
Phoeniciansbeing famous fortheir work in ivory and
WOOLLEY
notorious as plagiarists of Egyptian art. But the
Syrian ivory-workerwas not less capable, and the
Alalakh examples may well be local. In Yarim Lim's
eighteenth-centurypalace a whole collection of
elephant tusks was found in a store-room,and 'a
complete elephant's skull lay in the ruins of Niqme-
Pa's palace; the tusks may have been intended for
export, but just as probably were they meant foruse
upon the spot, since much of the wooden furniture
of Niqme-Pa's palace was encrustedwith ivory in the
style of modernDamascus furniture.
The outstanding feature of the pottery of the 4th
level is the prevalence of the Cypriote Bronze Age
type. The old Khabur ware has disappeared. The
incised black and grey ware has gone too. The
better local wares are either plain burnished red, or
have simple bands of colour; all these are rather
coarse and heavy, and most of them are relatively
large in size, bowls and flatplates predominating,and
the latter, with their concentricbands of red paint,
have a distinctly Cypriote appearance. But the
smaller and finer vessels are all of Cypriote type:
milk-bowls,brown slip-ware jugs, zoomorphic vases
with white paint on the slate-coloured body clay;
these are found in enormous numbers and, so far as
'table ware' is concerned, almost to the exclusion
of anything in any other style. It should be noted
that these vessels are not containers: if they were
imported, they were imported empty, for their own
sake; and although the sea passage from Cyprus is
neitherlong nor difficult,the cost of transportingsuch
thin and fragilevases must have been considerable-
enough, one would have thought, to make them
objects of luxury; and yet they are as common in
private houses as in the royal palace, and in a country
where the local potter was not at all unskilled they
enjoyed a virtual monopoly of use. Occasionally we
find what one is tempted to call imitations-for
example, milk-bowlsof conventional form,but of a
fabric not known in Cyprus, evidence that imports
were not really necessary,and that the Syrian makers
could have met all demands. Indeed, trade fromthe
island on such a wholesale scale seems illogical.
If we dealt only with Level 4, we might suppose
that Cypriote potters were settled in North Syria or
Syrian potters in Cyprus, explaining thus the com-
plete similarityof the pottery in the two centres;
but we should still have the discrepancy in date to
explain; the Cypriote Bronze Age pottery was in
 NorthSyria as a CulturalLink in theAncient Wf'orld
everyday use at Alalakh beforeit became common in
Cyprus. In the palace and elsewhere in Level 4
there were found curious long-stemmed libation-
pourers of highly burnished red clay: identical
libation-pourershave been found in Cyprus,and were
recognised as being Syrian; here, then, is evidence
that some pottery,at any rate, was exported fromthe
mainland to the island. And when we turn back
again to what are called typically 'Cypriote' wares,
we must remember that at Alalakh the milk-bowl
occurs as early as Level 6, i.e., in the seventeenth
century, which is much too early for the accepted
chronologyof Cyprus. If the sherdsfoundin Level 8
really representthe genesis of the 'Cypriote' white-
slip ware, then we are tempted to conclude that
Cypriote Bronze Age pottery was evolved on the
mainland, and was still being manufacturedby local
craftsmenthere after it had become the standard
product of the island kilns. When it does appear in
the island, it appears suddenly; there is no evidence
for any local developmentof this very individual and
highly standardised style, whereas in Level 8, at
Alalakh, we have a recognisable antecedent for it.
Therefore, the sum of evidence certainly tends to
show that the Bronze Age potteryof Cyprus,which in
the island appears fully developed, and with no
recognisable antecedents,had its originin Asia.
Level3 (1370-1285B.C.)
The buildingsof Level 3 are scantyand ill-preserved.
The period begins with Suppiluliuma's conquest of
NorthernSyria in 1370 and lasts till about 1285 B.C.,
and throughoutit Alalakh was under the control of
the Anatolian Hittites. This fact accounts for the
extraordinarydifferencebetween the characterof this
city and that of Ugarit, which, although not fifty
miles away, did not fall into Hittite hands. As
Dr. Schaeffer's excavations have made clear, the
influx of Aegean settlers,merchant princes, made of
the Syrian coast town an outpost of Late Minoan II
civilisation. The massive defences of the citadel,
resembling those of Mycenae, the vaulted chamber
tombs, the pottery, the weapons, stone vases, the
remarkable ivory, jewellery, and even examples of
the Cretan script show how close was the connection
between Knossos and Ugarit: the latter was, indeed,
the gateway between East and West, and the more
vigorous and original culture of the Minoan island
impressed itself in no uncertain manner on the
15
Syrians. A curious fact which Dr. Schaeffer has
remarkedis that the Aegean colonists of Ugarit were
more conservative of tradition than were their
kinsmenat home: so much so that on Syrian soil we
find at a late period a survival, or more probably a
revival, of Minoan art styles which had long been
demoded in Crete. Such a revival may help to
explain similarities between Syrian and Cretan art
products which would otherwisebe puzzling because
of their seeming incompatability of date, as, for
instance, between the ivories of Arslan Tash and the
much earlier faience plaques of the Knossos palace.
At Alalakh, ifwe can judge safelyfromsuch remains
as survive, the Aegean influencewas limited to the
import of- objects, and there was nothing in the
nature of a Cretan settlement: the Ras Shamra
tombs certainly have no parallel on our mound.
Even the examples of Aegean pottery are few and
far between. One object, however, is of prime
importance. At the very bottom of a rubbish-pit
belonging to a house of Level 2 (as was proved by
findinghigh up in the pit a potsherd which actually
fittedon to one found on the house floor)we found a
stone lamp which, having been broken and thrown
away early in the Level 2 period, could be confidently
assigned to Level 3, i.e., to the fourteenthcentury.
It is a standard lamp of red porphyryin the finest
Late Minoan II style,identical in formand decoration
with the best lamps of the Cretan palace. Owing to
the exigencies of war, the stone has not yet been
submittedto the judgment of experts,but I believe it
to be the porphyryof the Amanus mountains,which
is not foundin Crete. At the least, therefore,we have
here an importfromKnossos; otherwise,we have an
object of the purest Knossos style made in Syria out
of local stone by a craftsmanwho, if not a Cretan
himself,was thoroughlysteeped in Cretan art tradi-
tions. Therefore,we find, predominantlyat Ugarit
but in a measure at Alalakh also, evidence that
Cretanart in the fourteenthcenturywas reactingupon
that of the mainland, just as in the seventeenth
centuryit had itselfbeen stronglyinfluencedby the
art of Asia.
At the end of our 1939 season at Atchana we
unearthed the ruins of a temple of Level 1, which
contained a quantity of stone sculpture and other
objects. The temple itselfhad been re-modelled,and
was built over the ruins of earlier temples. The
sculptures were all re-used; none were in their
16 LEONARD
original setting; some had been broken beforebeing
set up in the Level 1 building; one carved slab had
been turned face downWardsand used as a step in a
flightof stairs. It is certainthat these objects do not
belong to Level 1; it is unlikelythat they belong to
Level 2; an inscribed statue is apparently as old as
the Level 4 period, and the remainingobjects must be
assigned at least to Level 3. Of the sculpture,apart
from the royal statue in the round, there are four
basalt lions partly in the round, and a large slab
carved in low relief: they are typically ' Hittite,' the
direct forerunnersof the lions of early type at
Carchemish and of the Water-gate reliefs from the
same city. They resemble those ninth- or eighth-
century ' Syro-Hittite' works far more closely than
they do the Anatolian Hittite sculptures, especially
the Yasilikaya reliefs; but so far from being con-
temporarywith them they belong to the fourteenth
century,to the hey-day of the Boghazkeui empire.
There has been much argument of late tending
to weaken the connection between the Anatolian
Hittites, who disappear after 1200 B.C., and the Syro-
Hittite revival in the ninth century. Sidney Smith
sums up this view by saying: " This revived art and
material civilisationare Hittite only in the sense that
they are north Syrian of the eighth and seventh
centuries; they are not immediately derived from
the Anatolian Hittites of the Hittite Empire which
ceased to exist four hundred years earlier, but from
the barbaric civilisation of the tenth century which
has left monuments at Tall Halaf, Sin9irli, and
elsewhere." He- attributesthe revival to the resurg-
ence of a suppressed (Khurri) element in Syria which
was closely associated with another northernelement
in the population, the hieroglyph-writi\ng people
driven out of central and southern Asia Minor. In
so far as I believe that one or more elements of the
Anatolian Hittite confederacywere racially akin to
one element of the North Syrian population and,
indeed, had enteredAnatolia via North Syria, I agree
withthis view. But the Alalakh sculptures,by carry-
ing back the artistictraditionof the Syro-Hittitesto
the fourteenth century, seem to bridge the gap
between them and the Hittites proper, and they
certainly obviate the necessity of regarding that
tradition as originatingin the barbarous civilisation
of a provincial town such as Tal Halaf. As if to
clinch the argument, the Alalakh temple produced
also a bronzedaggerthe blade of whichis supportedby
WOOLLEY
lions cast in the round; it is a ritual object certainly,
probably it is a 'cult object-the symbol of the War
God; and it is an almost exact parallel to the 'Dagger
God' represented in the Yasilikaya rock carvings.
Here, therefore,we have a peculiarly Anatolian cult
associated with the prototypes of Syro-Hittite art.
It is an extremelyimportant point to have gained,
and it should explain many things. At Carchemish,
in a seventh-centuryburial, there were found a
number of amulets, minute figurescarved in steatite
and lapis lazuli set in gold, which reproduce with
carefulexactitude the rock-cutreliefsof Yasilikaya;
there is now no need to regard these as heirlooms
originallyimported fromAnatolia and handed down
through five centuries or more. They are Syro-
Hittite, and they only confirmthe continiuityof a
tradition that survived the upheaval in which
Boghazkeui perished to flourishagain in North Syria.
Level2 (1275-1220P.C.)
Level 2 is dated fromabout 1275 to 1220 B.C. Its
most interestingfeature,from the point of view of
foreign connections, is the emergence of a type of
painted potterywhich we have called Atchana ware.
It is a local developmentof the Nuzu pottery. This
Nuzu potteryis a ware peculiar in that it is decorated
with designs executed in white paint on a brown or
black ground, instead of in dark paint on a light
ground, which is otherwise the inv'ariable rule. It
has been found freelyon many sites fartherto the
east, in the Khabur valley and at Nuzu, near Kirkuk,
where it was firstput on record,and it is definitelya
Syrian (Mitanni) ware; it firstspreads in the second
half of the fifteenthcentury, and it continues in
vogue until the second half of the twelfth. At
Alalakh, Nuzu pottery firstappears in Level 4, and
since in the early examples the elementsof design are
exclusively linear or geometric,and reproduce those
employed forthe burnishedblack potterywith white-
filled incised ornament,which had fallen out of use
immediately before, it is tempting to regard it as
being a cheap substitutefor what had been a rather
laboriouslyproduced ware. With time its decoration
becomes more ornate, and animal and bird formsare
introduced; but the most common ornament con-
sists of bold rosettes in white on the dark ground,
which mightwell owe somethingto Cretan art of the
Middle MiAioan II period. This rosette pattern is
widely spread. But the most peculiar development
 NorthSyriaas a CulturalLink in theAncientWorld 17

seems to be confinedto the Alalakh area: here, in River, where the Antioch pass throughthe Amanus
Level 2, we find, constantly repeated, an all-over mountains gives easy access to the Amk plain.
design in which the motives are running water, Herodotus records the founding of the colony; a
elaborately stylised lotus plants, and the double axe. legend preserved by John Malalas shows that its
The connection of this very beautiful and highly purpose was to establish relations with the people
sophisticated design with Cretan art of Middle of the Amk. About 800 B.C., Greek traders from
Minoan III is indisputable. Consideringthe differ- Corinthor Argos, and perhaps fromthe islands, took
ence of date, we must see in it a furtherexample of the over from the Cypriotes, and Poseideion became a
'deferred inspiration' of Knossos which Ugarit link, the only direct link, between Syria and the
illustratesin otherbranches of art. Greek mainland. In about 520 Athens stepped in
and secured a monopoly of the trade with Persia
Level1 (1220-1187B.C.) which persisted throughoutthe whole period of the
With the breakdownof Hittite rule about 1220 B.C., Persian wars, and up to the time of Alexander the
Alalakh was more exposed to Aegean influences. We Great.
may assume that closer relations were now possible I do not propose to deal at length with the results
with Ugarit, and the northerntown could profitmore of our El Mina excavations, partlybecause my lecture
from the import trade of its southern neighbour. has reached its allotted span, more especially because
Certainly nearly every grave of Level 1 contains a Professor Sidney Smith has already, in a very able
Mycenaean vase, and Ugarit would be the natural monograph, dealt with the political history of the
channel throughwhich they came. This general use site and emphasised the importance of the cultural
of imported vessels scarcely supports the conclusion contacts which it made possible. In particular, he
at which Sidney Smith arrives on the strengthof the points out the advantages of a northernharbour, in
re-use of ancient monuments in the temple, namely, that it dispensed with the mediation of the
that Level 1 is " merely barbarous " ; the fact is Phoenicians who controlledthe Southern trade, and
that we have insufficientgrounds for judgment, also tapped markets which were beyond Phcenician
seeing that nearly every building of the period has reach. It had already been recognised by scholars
been denuded to its foundations by centuries of that in the development of early Greek art a certain
agriculture. In any case, the period was short. part was played by Syro-Hittite sculptors, and a
The great movementof the Peoples of the Sea, which larger part by the bronze-workersof the Urartu
about the year 1190 swept down through Anatolia kingdomof Lake Van; but science had been at a loss
and Syria, and was only stopped by Rameses III on to explain how such remoteinfluencescould have been
the borders of Egypt, spread ruin where it passed. brought to bear upon the Greek world. Now that
Ugarit was destroyedonce and for all; it disappears difficultyhas been solved, and, as Sidney Smith says,
from history from that moment. Alalakh was " the trade route fromArmenia to Crete must have
destroyedand its site also was never again inhabited, passed throughAl Mina."
but on a prehistoricmound only a thousand yards
'CONCLUSIONS
away, the Tal Tayanat of the modernArab, therewas
to rise a new town and a palace adorned with Syro- My purpose in writing this lecture, as indeed in
Hittite sculptures. Leukos Hormos no longerexisted starting our North Syrian excavations, was to trace
as a port for trade between North Syria and the the interplayof the differentculturesand civilisations
Aegean. which, from geographical or political reasons, found
here a meeting-place.
EL MINA (1180-320 B.C.) In what I have said I have confinedmyselffor the
But our excavations at El Mina have shown that most part to the resultsof our own work,and it must
the tradition of Leukos Hormos, with its Mycenaean be rememberedthat at Alalakh we have worked for
merchantsettlers,was carriedon in a more northerly only three short seasons. It is thereforenot surpris-
district. Soon after the wave of invasion of the ing that I should have touched only the fringeof mx
Peoples of the Sea had passed by, Cypriotesfoundeda subject, and should have been able to put forward
new commercial port at the mouth of the Orontes evidence rather than conclusive proof of the various
(4200) C
18 LEONARD WOOLLEY
conclusions at which I have been tempted to arrive.
We have sure grounds, as Professor Sidney Smith
has shown, for recasting the early chronology of
Nearer Asia. WTehave evidence for direct contact
with the Asiatic mainland influencingin or beforethe
eighteenth century the development of Cretan
civilisation; evidence for the presence in the
Anatolian Hittite Confederacy of an important
element culturally if not racially akin to the
Amoritepopulation of NorthernSyria; evidence of a
possible Asiatic origin of the Cyprus Bronze Age
culture; evidence forEgyptian controlover Northern
Syria under the XJJth Dynasty and, later, of a
relation between the Hyksos culture and that of the
Amk plain. We have actual proof of the influence
exerted on Northern Syria by the Late Minoan II
and III civilisation of Crete. We see signs of the
development of ' Syro-Hittite' art in NorthernSyria
long beforethe beginningof the Syro-Hittitepolitical
period, and of its- kinship with the Hittite art of
Anatolia. Finally we can trace in fairlyclose detail
the commercial and economic intercourse of early
Greece and classical Athens with the great civilisa-
tions of hitherAsia.
Largely tentative though these results may still be,
their interestand their value must be obvious; and
just because they are still tentative it is the more to
be desired that a line of research so fruitfulin its
early stages should be furtherdeveloped. We look
forward,therefore,to resumingafterthe war our work
at Alalakh, the concessionforwhichhas, I am thankful
to say, been generously extended by the Turkish
Government. It is a work which,in that it illustrates
so well the ' give and take ' betweenthe peoples of the
ancient world which has been the secret of cultural
progress, is directly in the tradition of the great
scientist in whose memory this Lectureship was
founded.