Dancing at the Dawn of Agriculture

dancing at the dawn of agriculture

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

yosef garfinkel

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

University of Texas Press, Austin

The research was supported by grants from the Robert H. and Clarice Smith Center of Art History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Copyright © 2003 by the University of Texas Press All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America First edition, 2003 Requests for permission to reproduce material from this work should be sent to Permissions, University of Texas Press, P.O. Box 7819, Austin, TX 78713-7819. ' The paper used in this book meets the minimum requirements of ansi/niso z39.48-1992 (r1997) (Permanence of Paper). library of congress cataloging-in-publication data Garfinkel, Yosef. Dancing at the dawn of agriculture / Yosef Garfinkel. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 0-292-72845-x (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Art, Prehistoric—Mediterranean Region. 2. Art, Prehistoric—Middle East. 3. Dance in art. 4. Dance, Prehistoric—Mediterranean Region. 5. Dance, Prehistoric—Middle East. 6. Agriculture, Prehistoric—Mediterranean Region. 7. Agriculture, Prehistoric—Middle East. 8. Mediterranean Region—Antiquities. 9. Middle East—Antiquities. I. Title. gn848 .g37 2003 709´.01´12091822—dc21 2002009359

To Tal

figure 0.1 Dance shadows, Tel Miqne-Eqron Excavations 1996 Photo by Irene Pletka.

Contents

List of Figures ix List of Tables xv Acknowledgments

xvii

Part I

The D ance Analysis 1

chapter 1

Introduction

chapter 2

Structural Analysis of the Dance 27

chapter 3

Functional Analysis of the Dance

chapter 4

Cognitive Analysis of the Dancing Scenes 85

chapter 5

Conclusions

Part II

The D ata 103

chapter 6

General Remarks Concerning the Data 105

chapter 7

Neolithic Near East 111

chapter 8

Halafian and Samarra Cultures 125

chapter 9

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

chapter 10

Neolithic Southeast Europe

chapter 11

Predynastic Egypt 233

chapter 12

Later Examples from the Near East 269

chapter 13

Appendix: The Figures with “Turned-Upwards Legs” 291 Bibliography Index

319

3 65

99

297

161

205

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

List of Figures

figure 0.1

Dance shadows, Tel Miqne-Eqron Excavations 1996.

figure 2.1

Basic variations of arm positions in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.2

Basic variations of leg positions in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.3

Basic combinations of arm and leg positions in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.4

Frequencies of the basic body positions in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.5

Hair arrangement in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.6

Head covering in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.7

Masks in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.8

Dress and shoes in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.9

Accompanying objects in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.10

Animals in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.11

Basic variations of figure compositions.

figure 2.12

Clockwise and counter-clockwise movement of dancing scenes.

figure 2.13

Direct gender characteristics of male figures.

figure 2.14

Direct gender characteristics of female figures.

48

figure 2.15

Indirect gender characteristics of male figures.

49

figure 2.16

Indirect gender characteristics of female figures.

figure 2.17

Presentations of both sexes in the same scene.

figure 2.18

Various features in the vicinity of dancers.

figure 2.19

Wall paintings with hunting scenes from Çatal Höyük.

figure 3.1

Correlation between social organization, social stratification, and the appearance of dancing scenes in early village communities. 80

figure 4.1

The cognitive map as a filter between the community rituals and the dancing scenes. 86

figure 7.1

Near Eastern Neolithic sites mentioned in the text.

figure 7.2

Engraved limestone bowl from Nevali Çori.

vi 29 30 33

35

35

36 37 38

39 43 45

48

50 53

55 61

112

113

figure 7.3

Engraved objects from Nevali Çori and Tepe Giyan.

figure 7.4

Painted plaster floor from Tell Halula.

113

figure 7.5

Engraved stone slabs from Dhuweila and Çatal Höyük.

115 117

32

figure 7.6

Engraved stone slabs from Dhuweila and Çatal Höyük.

117

figure 7.7

Applied pottery from Köçcsk Höyük and Tepecik.

figure 7.8

Applied and incised pottery and white ware vessels from Umm Dabaghiyah, Tell Sotto, El Kowm 2, and Kuruçay Höyük. 120

figure 7.9

Applied pottery from Kuruçay Höyük and Hacilar; a wall painting from Kalavasos-Tenta. 122

figure 7.10

Painted pottery from Hacilar.

figure 8.1

Major Halafian, Samarra, and related sites mentioned in the text.

figure 8.2

Different techniques used to depict dancing figures on Halafian, Samarra, and Iranian pottery. 126

figure 8.3

Painted and incised pottery from: Tell Halaf, Yarim Tepe II, Yunus, Sakje Gözu, Tepe Gawra, Tell Sabi Abyad, and Chagar Bazar. 127

figure 8.4

Painted pottery from Samarra.

figure 8.5

Painted pottery in the linear style from the survey of J. Oates at various Mesopotamian sites. 129

figure 8.6

Basic variations in depictions of human figures in the linear style.

figure 8.7

Basic variations in depictions of human figures in the geometric style. 130

figure 8.8

The different painted styles used in Halafian, Samarra, and Iranian sites. 132

figure 8.9

Painted pottery from Tell Halaf, Nineveh, Tell Halula, and Khirbet Garsour. 134

figure 8.10

Painted pottery from Tell Halaf, Arpachiyah, Khirbet esh-Shenef, and Tell Kosak Shamali. 135

figure 8.11

Painted pottery from Tell Halaf.

135

figure 8.12

Painted pottery from Tell Halaf.

136

figure 8.13

Painted pottery from Tell Damishliyya, Tell Brak, Arpachiyah, Chagar Bazar, Tell Mounbateh, Tell Aajar, Tell Judaidah, Sakje Gözu, and Hama. 138

figure 8.14

Painted pottery from Tell Sabi Abyad.

139

figure 8.15

Painted pottery from Tell Sabi Abyad.

139

figure 8.16

Painted pottery from Tell Sabi Abyad.

140

figure 8.17

Painted pottery from Tell Sabi Abyad, Chagar Bazar, Tell Kurdu, Tell Brak, Yarim Tepe II, Tell Mounbateh, Khirbet esh-Shenef, and Kazane Höyük. 141

figure 8.18

Incised pottery from Sakje Gözu.

figure 8.19

Painted pottery from Samarra.

146

figure 8.20

Painted pottery from Samarra.

147

figure 8.21

Painted pottery from Samarra and Tell es-Sawwan.

118

123 126

128

143

148

129

figure 8.22

Painted pottery from Samarra and Baghouz.

149

figure 8.23

Painted pottery from Baghouz.

figure 8.24

Painted pottery from Tell es-Sawwan.

151

figure 8.25

Painted pottery from Tell es-Sawwan.

152

figure 8.26

Painted pottery from Shimshara, Serik, Matarrah, Choga Mami, Chagha Sefid, Tell Sabi Abyad, and Shams ed-Din Tannira. 153

figure 8.27

Painted pottery from Choga Mami.

figure 8.28

Pottery with applied figures from ‘Ein el-Jarba.

figure 8.29

Pottery with applied figures from Korucutepe and ‘Ein el-Jarba.

figure 8.30

Pottery with applied figures from Tülintepe, Norçcsuntepe, Imiris Gora, and Arukhlo. 158

figure 9.1

Iranian sites mentioned in the text.

162

figure 9.2

Painted pottery from Chagha Sefid.

162

figure 9.3

Painted pottery from Chagha Sefid, Farukhabad, and Tell Sabi Abyad.

figure 9.4

Painted pottery from Tepe Sabz.

figure 9.5

Painted pottery from Khazineh, Tepe Sabz, and Kozagaran.

figure 9.6

Painted pottery from Tepe Sabz, Tepe Musiyan, dl-22, dl-28, dl-31, and Chagha Sefid. 166

figure 9.7

Painted pottery from dk-41, Tepe Sabz, Tepe Musiyan, and dl-22.

figure 9.8

Painted pottery from Khazineh.

figure 9.9

Painted pottery from Tepe Musiyan.

figure 9.10

Painted pottery from Chogha Mish, Tepe Musiyan, Do Tulune, Kozagaran, Tul-i Bawa Muhammad, and Tepe Giyan. 171

figure 9.11

Painted pottery from Tepe Musiyan.

172

figure 9.12

Painted pottery from Tepe Musiyan.

172

figure 9.13

Painted pottery from Khazineh, Tell Damishliyya, and Tepe Musiyan.

figure 9.14

Painted pottery from dk-41.

figure 9.15

Painted pottery from Djaffarabad, Choga Mami, Tepe Sialk, and Tepe Gawra. 176

figure 9.16

Painted pottery from Djaffarabad.

figure 9.17

Painted pottery from Djaffarabad, Tepe Djowi, Ismailabad, and Chogha Mish. 178

figure 9.18

Painted pottery from Djaffarabad and Chogha Mish.

figure 9.19

Painted pottery from Chigha Sabz, Tepe Sabz, Mehrgarh, Surab region, Chogha Mish, and of unknown origin. 182

figure 9.20

Painted pottery from Chogha Mish.

183

figure 9.21

Painted pottery from Chogha Mish.

183

figure 9.22

Painted pottery from Chigha Sabz.

150

154 156 157

163

164 165

167

169 170

174

177

185

179

173

figure 9.23

Painted pottery from Kozagaran.

186

figure 9.24

Painted pottery from Tepe Bendebal, Tall-i Gap, Tall-i Jari A, Malamir, and Tepe Giyan. 187

figure 9.25

Painted pottery from Tchechme Ali, Qabrestan, and Tepe Sialk.

figure 9.26

Painted pottery from Tepe Sialk.

190

figure 9.27

Painted pottery from Tepe Sialk.

190

figure 9.28

Painted pottery from Tchechme Ali.

figure 9.29

Painted pottery from Qal‘eh Rostam, Tepe Hissar, and Tall-i Jari A.

figure 9.30

Painted pottery from Tall-i Bakun A and Chogha Mish.

figure 9.31

Painted pottery from Tall-i Bakun A.

figure 9.32

Painted pottery from Tall-i Bakun A, Do Tulan, and Tall-i Regi.

figure 9.33

Painted pottery from Tall-i Gap.

figure 9.34

Painted pottery from Tell Halaf, Tall-i Bakun A, Tall-i Skau, Tall-i Siah, Kanakan D, Tall-i Nokhodi, Tall-i Regi, and Tepe Yahya. 198

figure 9.35

Painted pottery from Chogha Cheshmeh, Sham‘un, Khoveyyes, Tall-i Gap, and Tell-i Iblis. 199

189

190 192

194

195 196

197

figure 9.36

Painted pottery from Tall-i Gap.

200

figure 9.37

Painted pottery from Tall-i Gap.

200

figure 9.38

Painted pottery from Tall-i Skau and Tall-i Siah.

201

figure 10.1

Southeast European sites mentioned in the text.

206

figure 10.2

Applied pottery from Szegvár-Tüzköves, Gumelniçcta, and Gomolava. 207

figure 10.3

Applied pottery from Dumesti and Scinteia.

figure 10.4

Applied pottery from Szajol-Felsofold and Truçcseçcsti.

figure 10.5

Incised pottery from Strelice and Litomerice.

figure 10.6

Pottery “reel vessel” from Bereçcsti.

figure 10.7

Pottery “reel vessel” from Frumuçcsica.

figure 10.8

Pottery “reel vessel” from Larga Jijia, Luka-Vrublevetskaya, Traian, and Truçcseçcsti. 210

figure 10.9

Applied and incised pottery from Grades˘nitsa, Nova Ves, and Kolesovice. 213

figure 10.10

Applied pottery from Turdaçcs, Sarvas, Vinc˘a, and Tîrpeçcsti.

figure 10.11

Applied pottery from Villanykovesd, Scinteia, Holasovice, Truçcseçcsti, and Ghelaesti. 215

figure 10.12

Applied pottery from Turdaçcs and Kotacpart.

figure 10.13

Applied pottery from Pefkakia, Turdaçcs, Borsod, Tel Azmak, and Prag-Bubenec. 217

207 208

208

209 209

214

216

figure 10.14

Painted and applied pottery from Argissa-Magula, Tell Azmak, Kotacpart, Turdaçcs, and Tiszavasvari. 218

figure 10.15

Painted and applied pottery from the Thessaly region, SzegvárTüzköves, Dudeçcsti, and Hodoni. 219

figure 10.16

Applied pottery from Turdaçcs and Nea Nikomedia.

figure 10.17

Applied pottery from Slatina, Va˘dastra, Birlaleçcsti, and Traian.

figure 10.18

Applied pottery from Tel Azmak, Hagykoru, Vinc˘a, Szentes-Jaksorpart, and Turdaçcs. 229

figure 11.1

Predynastic Egyptian sites mentioned in the text.

figure 11.2

Applied and painted pottery from Naqada.

figure 11.3

Applied, incised, and painted pottery from Mostagedda, Naqada, Umm el Qaab, Matmar, and of unknown origin. 236

figure 11.4

Painted pottery of unknown origin from the collection of Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, London, and Umm el Qaab.

figure 11.5

Painted pottery of unknown origin from the collection of Institut Royal du Patrimoine Artistique in Brussels. 238

figure 11.6

Painted pottery from Umm el Qaab and of unknown origin.

figure 11.7

Painted pottery from Naqada.

241

figure 11.8

Painted pottery from Naqada.

242

figure 11.9

Painted pottery from Abadiyeh, Hemamieh, and Naqada.

figure 11.10

Incised pottery from Naqada.

figure 11.11

Painted pottery from El ‘Amrah.

figure 11.12

Painted pottery from El ‘Adaima, El ‘Amrah, and Abydos.

figure 11.13

Painted pottery from El ‘Adaima.

figure 11.14

Painted pottery from Semaineh.

figure 11.15

Painted pottery from Semaineh, Harageh, and of unknown origin. 255

figure 11.16

Painted pottery of unknown origin from the collection of the British Museum. 257

figure 11.17

Painted pottery of unknown origin from the collection of the Ashmolean Museum. 257

figure 11.18

Painted figures of unknown origin from various collections.

figure 11.19

Painted pottery from Semaineh and of unknown origin.

figure 11.20

Painted pottery of unknown origin from various collections.

figure 11.21

Painted pottery of unknown origin from the collection of Medelhavsmuseet in Stockholm. 261

figure 11.22

Painted pottery of unknown origin from North American collections. 262

221 222

234

235

237

239

243

244 250 251

252 254

258

259 260

figure 11.23

Painted pottery from Abydos and of unknown origin.

263

figure 11.24

Rock carvings from the Eastern Egyptian Desert.

figure 11.25

A painted linen from Gebelein.

figure 11.26

A painted linen from Gebelein and a clay model from Abadiyeh.

figure 11.27

Incised pottery from Naqada and Tel Erani and a wall painting from Hierakonpolis. 267

figure 12.1

Near Eastern sites of the fourth–third millennia bc mentioned in the text. 270

figure 12.2

Stamp seals from Tepe Giyan, Telul eth-Thalathat, and Tepe Gawra. 272

figure 12.3

Stamp seal from Telul eth-Thalathat.

figure 12.4

Stamp seals from Tepe Giyan.

figure 12.5

Cylinder seals from Chagar Bazar, Nippur, Ur, Susa, Nineveh, and of unknown origin. 276

figure 12.6

Cylinder seals from Chogha Mish, Tell Brak, and Fara.

figure 12.7

Reconstructed wall paintings from Teleilat Ghassul.

figure 12.8

Incised stone slab from Megiddo.

figure 12.9

Incised stone slabs from Megiddo.

figure 12.10

Painted pottery from Bab edh-Dhra’.

figure 12.11

Pottery with cylinder seal impression from Rosh ha-Niqra.

figure 12.12

Pottery with cylinder seal impressions from Rosh ha-Niqra, Beth Yerah, ‘Ain Kuniyeh, Bab edh-Dhra’, Hama, Byblos, and of unknown origin. 287

figure 12.13

Pottery with cylinder seal impression from ‘Ain Kuniyeh.

figure 12.14

Pottery with cylinder seal impressions from El-Karm, Bab edh-Dhra’, and Kabri. 289

figure 12.15

Pottery with cylinder seal impression from Hama.

figure 13.1

Distribution of Near Eastern Neolithic sites of figures with “turnedupwards legs.” 292

figure 13.2

Plastered wall reliefs with anthropomorphic figures from Çatal Höyük. 293

figure 13.3

Figures with “turned-upwards legs” from Köçcsk Höyük, Hacilar, Tülintepe and Khirokitia. 294

264

266 266

272

274

279

281

283 284 284 286

288

290

List of Tables

table 2.1

Direction of movement in the dancing scenes according to the different geographical-chronological units. 45

table 2.2

Gender analysis of the dancing figures according to the different geographical-chronological units. More than one figure preserved on the objects. 51

table 2.3

Gender analysis of the dancing figures according to the different geographical-chronological units. Only one figure preserved on the object. 51

table 2.4

Gender analysis of the dancing figures according to the different geographical-chronological units. One or a few figures preserved on the object. 51

table 6.1

The distribution of the dancing scenes in the various figures according to the six chronological-geographical units. 107

table 6.2

The distribution of the dancing motif in the six chronologicalgeographical units according to the materials used. 107

table 6.3

The decorative techniques used on the pottery vessels. 108

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Acknowledgments

Numerous archaeologists and museum curators allowed me to study and document materials at their collections: F. Hole of Yale University, J. Spencer and C. Walker of the British Museum, A. Caubet of the Musée du Louvre, R. B. Wartke of the Vorderasiatisches Museum in Berlin, H. J. Nissen of the Free University of Berlin, and P. R. S. Moorey of the Ashmolean Museum. Special thanks are due to Prof. Vladimir Zbenovich of the Israel Antiquities Authority for his many useful comments on the southeast European depictions presented in this work and for his kind permission to use his extensive private library. Numerous scholars discussed various aspects of the dancing scenes with me: Prof. A. Hetz of the Jerusalem Rubin Academy of Music and Dance, Prof. W. Hallo of Yale University, Prof. H. Hauptmann of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut in Istanbul, Dr. A. Sherratt of the Ashmolean Museum, Prof. O. Bar-Yosef of Harvard University, Prof. D. Schmandt-Besserat of University of Texas, B. Adams of University College London, A. Marshack, and J. N. Wilford of New York City. Professors C. Renfrew, G. O. Rollefson, and F. Hole commented on earlier drafts of the manuscript. L. Taylor-Guthartz and S. Gorodetsky consulted on various aspects of the text and style. During the years I received technical help from various graphic artists: M. Sarig, S. Halbrich, and R. Bonfil at the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University; A. Wilkins at the Institute of Archaeology of Oxford University; Z. Peleg-Hartley, H. Pots, and G. Hivroni. D. Ladiray prepared the final illustrations. The photographs presented here were kindly supplied by various scholars and institutions. In alphabetic order, they are as follows: P. M. M. G. Akkermans in Leiden, A. Alizadeh of the Iranian Prehistoric Project at the Oriental Institute in Chicago, Y. Barschak of the Israel Antiquities Authority, M. Borla of the Egyptian Museum in Turin, A. Caubet of the Musée du Louvre in Paris, V. Curtis and C. Walker of the Department of Ancient Near East at the British Museum in London, G. Dollfus of the CNRS/DAFI in Paris, G. Dreyer of the German Institute of Archaeology in Cairo, H. Hauptmann of the German Institute of Archaeology in Istanbul, F. Hole of Yale University in New Haven, C. C. Hosein of the Oriental Institute in Chicago, R. B. Janson of the Brooklyn Museum in New York City, H. Kilmister of the Petrie

xviii

D ancing at the D awn of A griculture

Museum of Egyptian Archaeology at University College London, L. Masschelein-Kleiner of the Institut Royal du Patrimoine Artistique in Brussels, G. Metz of Medelhavsmuseet in Stockholm, Y. Nishaki of the University Museum of the University of Tokyo, I. Pletka, Jerusalem, E. Sullivan of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, A. J. Spencer of the Egyptian Department of the British Museum in London, R. B. Wartke of the Vorderasiatisches Museum in Berlin, T. Wismann of the National Museum of Denmark in Copenhagen, and H. Whitehouse of the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford and the Museum of Anatolian Civilization in Ankara. The specific credit of each photograph is given with the captions. Special thanks go to the director and staff of the University of Texas Press, who took it upon themselves to publish this work. My warmest appreciation goes to J. Burr and L. Chapman, who faithfully followed the manuscript from the beginning until the final production of the book. N. Moore carried out the final editing of the manuscript, greatly improving its style and contents. The research was supported by grants from the Robert H. and Clarice Smith Center of Art History and by the Faculty of Humanities of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Finally, I would like to thank Irene Pletka. Her photographs of dancing shadows inspired this study.

dancing at the dawn of agriculture

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

part 1

The D ance A nalysis

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Introduction

chapter 1

In this book I deal with a subject that has never been investigated before: dance at the beginning of agriculture. At first glimpse it seems that nothing can be said on such an elusive subject and that it lies beyond the boundaries of knowledgability. However, as we shall see below, the earliest art scenes in the ancient Near East and southeast Europe depict dancing. In the eighth to the fourth millennia bc this subject appears in many variations, covering a vast geographical expanse: the Levant, Mesopotamia, Iran, Anatolia, the Balkans, Greece, the Danube basin, and Egypt. There is plenty of evidence for this activity, almost four hundred depictions of dance are relevant to our study. Thus, dancing is the oldest and one of the most persistent themes in Near Eastern prehistoric art, and this theme spreads with agriculture into surrounding regions of Europe and Africa. Dance, beside being a subject of enquiry in its own right, is used here also as a medium that sheds light on other interesting topics: the beginning of artistic scenes in the ancient Near East and southeast Europe, public calendrical rituals of early farmers, and various cognitive aspects concerning the dancing motif. The principal strategies used to promote the bonding of individuals into communities, and of individual households into villages, were public assemblies for the purpose of religious ceremonies. The archaeological examples discussed in this work are pictorial displays of this activity and shed light on it. The importance of these ceremonies is also borne out by ethnographic observations of modern pre-state communities, in which dance is indeed the most important component in religious ceremonies. In periods before schools and writing, community rituals, symbolized by dance, were the basic mechanisms for conveying education and knowledge to the adult members of the community and from one generation to the next. The lengthy duration of dance depiction as a dominant artistic motif, together with its dispersion across broad geographical expanses (from west Pakistan to the Danube basin), testifies to the efficiency of the dancing motif as one of the most powerful symbols in the evolution of human societies. Dance has been defined as a complex form of communication that combines the visual, kinesthetic, and aesthetic aspects of human movement with (usually) the aural

4

The D ance A nalysis

dimension of musical sounds and sometimes poetry. Dance is created out of culturally understood symbols within social and religious contexts, and it conveys information and meaning as ritual, ceremony, and entertainment. For dance to communicate, its audience must understand the cultural conventions that deal with human movement in time and space (Kaeppler 1992:196).

Dancing is an activity that is not limited to human behavior. As a means of communication, it has been observed in insects (the bee dance), birds, and various mammals’ courtship interactions (von Frisch 1967; Wilson 1975:176–241, 314–335). However, as observed by McNeill (1995:13): Community dancing occurs only among humans, if by that phrase we mean a form of group behavior whereby an indefinite number of individuals start to move their muscles rhythmically, establish a regular beat, and continue doing so for long enough to arouse euphoric excitement shared by all participants, and (more faintly) by onlookers as well. . . . Indeed, community dancing, together with marching and singing or shouting rhythmically is, like language, a capability that marks human off from all other forms of life. . . . Learning to move and give voice in this fashion, and the strengthened emotional bonds associated with that sort of behavior, were critical prerequisites for the emergence of humanity.

In human society, dance is a cross-cultural phenomenon that has been observed all over the world (Sachs 1952; Kraus 1969; Lange 1976; Bland 1976; Blacking and Kealinohomoku 1979; Clarke and Clement 1981; Cass 1993; S. J. Cohen 1998). It has been suggested that dance, as a medium of nonverbal communication, was already practiced during the Paleolithic era (Louis 1955; Blacking 1976; McNeill 1995:13–35). Pictorial sources such as rock art and portable items display dancing in past nonliterate societies. The earliest examples of these have been reported from Paleolithic European art, such the cave at Cala dei Genovesi on the island of Levanzo near Sicily and in Addaura Cave, near Palermo in Sicily (LeroiGourhan 1967:381–382, Fig. 710; Holloway 1991:2–4, Figs. 4–5). Archaic rock-art depictions of dance, whose dating is not always clear, have been reported from various parts of the world, such as Italy, Turkey, Israel, Azerbaijan, and India (Anati 1955, 1964, 1994; Peschlow-Bindokat 1995; Dzhafarzade 1973; Brooks and Wakankar 1976:18–19; Malaiya 1989, 1992; Neumayer 1997). More recently, rock art depicting dancing scenes has been produced by Australian aboriginals (Godden 1982, Figs. 25–27; Walsh 1988, Figs. 83, 111) and San Bushmen of Southern Africa (Vinnicombe 1976:307–319; Lewis-Williams and Dowson 1989, Figs. 14–18; Lewis-Williams 1999). Historical texts and depictions inform us about dancing in the great civilizations of Mesopotamia (Matous˘ová 1970, 1993; Collon 1987:151–153), Egypt (Lexová 1935; Brunner-Traut 1958, 1985; Wild 1963; Baldacci 1987; Saleh 1998), Biblical Israel (Gruber 1981; Mulder

5

Introduction

1992), early Aegean (Evans 1930:66–80; Lawler 1964:40–57; Iakovidis 1966; Dothan 1982:237–249; Goodison 1989; Lefèvre-Novaro 2001), classical Greece (Lawler 1964; Prudhommeau 1965), Rome (Kraus 1969:40– 45), and the Middle Ages (Molé 1963; Kraus 1969:46–62). Dancing appears now in every form of human organization: urban, rural, pastoral, or hunter-gatherer communities (S. J. Cohen 1998; Reed 1998). In this study I will limit discussion to the evidence for dancing activities in a specific chronological, geographical, and socioeconomic milieu, that is, the village communities of the Near East and southeast Europe, from ca. the eighth to the fourth millennia bc (calibrated). All the dates used in this work are calibrated bc, based on 14c radiometric datings. The term “village communities” refers to what is commonly called the Natufian, Neolithic, and Chalcolithic periods. At this stage of human history the Paleolithic way of life based on small bands of nomadic hunter-gatherers disappeared, while cities and states, which emerged during the second half of the fourth millennium bc in Mesopotamia, had not yet developed. This period is the subject of many studies, both of the Near East and of southeast Europe (see, for example, Braidwood and Braidwood 1953; Mellaart 1975; Redman 1978; Nissen 1988; Bar-Yosef and Belfer-Cohen 1989; Maisels 1991, 1993; Tringham 1971; Hodder 1990). The village communities lasted some nine thousand years (from ca. 12,000 to 3,000 bc) in the Near East, and during this time, rapid changes took place in almost every area of human existence: Permanent village-type settlements developed (Flannery 1972a). Population growth and agglomeration of large communities took place (M. N. Cohen 1975; Hassan 1981). Food production was initiated, with an increasing number of domesticated plants and animals (Bender 1975; Zohary and Hopf 1988; Flannery 1973; Davis 1987:126–154; Buitenhuis and Clason 1993). Technological innovations, which included an increased use of pyrotechnology, were developed, initially for the production of plaster (Gourding and Kingery 1975; Kingery et al. 1988) and later for pottery and metals as well. Social developments produced stratification and the emergence of political institutions (Flannery 1972b; Redman 1978). Finally, mythology and basic concepts of religion were established (Amiran 1962; Margalit 1983; Garfinkel 1994). Material culture and subsistence are usually easier to examine and analyze than social organization, religion, and ideology. The dancing scenes discovered in the early village communities are related to the second group and thus shed light on issues that are difficult to investigate. The Beginning of Artistic Scenes in the Ancient Near East

Using the term “art” nowadays seems to need semantic, as well as conceptual, clarification. There is a tendency by some scholars to reject the

6

The D ance A nalysis

term when dealing with prehistoric images and to introduce other phrases, including “symbolic expressions,” “imagery,” and the like. Soffer and Conkey wrote, “Long-standing debates about the definition(s) of ‘art’ conclude that aesthetic function is something that we cannot assume to have been the case in Prehistory. In fact, ethnographic data from nonwestern cultures clearly show us otherwise” (1997). There is a disturbing point regarding the rhetoric of that statement, as if the opinion of the authors should be considered as a “conclusion.” Indeed, this ethnocentric, narrow-minded approach, as if only the western civilization has “art” while other human societies have “imagery,” is rightly rejected by many archaeologists and anthropologists. As summarized by Morphy (1989:1): Researchers have tried to solve the problem by changing the name; by switching from “art object” to “image” or “representation” or “information system” on the grounds that these are more neutral, less value-laden terms. Yet the replacement terms do not really help the situation. They are often more narrow in their definition than “art” itself which, because of all the argument over what it is, can have the advantage of being broadly conceived, whereas “representation,” for example, may apply to only one aspect of an object.

The same approach has been expressed by ethnographers: “Art from non-Western cultures is not essentially different from our own, in that it is produced by individual, talented, imaginative artists, who ought to be accorded the same degree of recognition as western artists” (Price 1989). On the matter of aesthetic, Gell specifically noted: There is no sense in developing one “theory of art” for our own art, and another, distinctively different theory, for the art of those cultures who happened, once upon a time, to fall under the sway of colonialism. If Western (aesthetic) theories of art apply to “our” art, then they apply to everybody’s art, and should be so applied (Gell 1998:1).

Language is a means of communication, but it can also become a means of miscommunication. The developing of a highly specialized jargon in a discipline may cause a better understanding among the members of the discipline, but it will be a barrier to the people outside. “Art,” however, is understandable to every layperson. It is an easy communication devise between the archaeologist and the general public. By using terms such as “imagery,” we immediately disconnect ourselves from the general public. Indeed, even the above-cited words of Conkey and Soffer were published in a book ingeniously called Beyond Art: Pleistocene Image and Symbol. In this way, the rejected term “art” was incorporated into the book’s title. After clarifying the legitimacy of the term “art,” I move on to examine the context of the depictions of dance within the development of art

7

Introduction

history. The nomadic hunter-gatherer societies of the Upper Paleolithic and Epi-Paleolithic periods in the Near East hardly produced artistic expressions at all, and only isolated art objects have been reported from this region. With the establishment of sedentary settlements in the ancient Near East, this situation altered completely. The earliest permanent villages were built in the Natufian culture of the Levant, dated to as early as the twelfth millennium bc. Natufian sites are characterized by rich symbolic artwork, falling into the following groups: Anthropomorphic Figures. Small figurines made of bone or stone have been reported from el-Wad Cave and Eynan (Perrot 1979, Fig. 17; 1966, Fig. 23:1–2). Zoomorphic Figures. Small figures made of bone or stone, sometimes forming the decorated handle of a larger tool, have been reported from el-Wad and Kebara Cave, Nahal Oren, and Wadi Hammeh (Perrot 1979, Figs. 10, 12, 15; Noy 1991, Figs. 5, 6:1–4; Stekelis and Yizraely 1963, Pl. 4:a–d; Edwards 1991, Fig. 9:2). Geometric Engravings. Geometric patterns, including meanders, were engraved on various stone vessels, stone slabs, or bone tools. These have been reported from Eynan, Nahal Oren, Hayonim Cave, Wadi Hammeh, and Shukba Cave (Perrot 1966:467, Figs. 15:9–10, 23:4; Noy 1991, Figs. 2:5–6, 3, 4:1; Belfer-Cohen 1991, Fig. 3:6; Edwards 1991, Figs. 6:7–8, 8, 10). Body Ornaments. Large quantities of necklaces, bracelets, and belts, made of dentalium shells and various animal bones or teeth, have been unearthed in graves, in situ on the skeletons. Examples of these have been reported from el-Wad Cave, Eynan, and Hayonim Cave (Garrod and Bates 1933, Pls. VI:1–2, VII; Perrot and Ladiray 1988, Figs. 14, 15, 18, 22; Belfer-Cohen 1988:302). Varia. One item made of a river pebble depicts a couple in the act of sexual intercourse. However, Boyd and Cook (1993) questioned the object’s Natufian context. This figurine, if indeed Natufian, is the earliest depiction of a scene in the ancient Near East. In any case, since no similar object has been discovered anywhere, it is an isolated phenomenon without any influence on Natufian or Neolithic art.

In the early ninth millennium bc, the period commonly designated Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (ppna), the corpus of symbolic depictions unearthed includes the following groups: Anthropomorphic Figurines. Figurines of clay or stone have been reported from Gilgal I, Netiv Hagdud, Salabiya IX, and Nahal Oren (Noy 1989, Fig. 5:2–5; Bar-Yosef 1980; Bar-Yosef et al. 1991, Fig. 13; Stekelis and Yizraely 1963, Pl. 2:F–H). Zoomorphic Figurines. At Pre-Pottery Neolithic A sites the zoomorphic figures are birds: Mureybet Layer III, Gilgal I, Nemrik 9, and Hallan

8

The D ance A nalysis

Çemi Tepesi (Pichon 1985; Noy 1989, Fig. 5:1; Kozlowski 1997; Rosenberg 1994, Fig. 12:1). No definite cattle figurines have been reported from this period. Incised Stone Bowls. A zoomorphic figure and geometric patterns engraved on stone bowls have been reported from Hallan Çemi Tepesi (Rosenberg and Davis 1992, Fig. 8:1–13). Incised Stone Tools. Geometric and meanderlike patterns were engraved on various ground stone tools. Meander patterns have been reported from Netiv Hagdud, Mureybet, and Jerf al Ahmar and a net pattern from Gilgal I (Bar-Yosef et al. 1991, Fig. 12; Cauvin 1985, Fig. 2:1; Stordeur 1998; Noy 1989, Fig. 4:1). These motifs seem to continue the Natufian tradition described above. In addition, an item decorated with zoomorphic figures has been reported recently from Jerf al Ahmar (Stordeur 1998, Fig. 9:1). Architectural Decoration. A totally new area of symbolic expression in the beginning of the Neolithic period has recently come to light. In two sites of the northern Levant, excavators unearthed decoration from buildings. In Göbekli Tepe the decoration includes incisions of zoomorphic figures and geometric patterns. These were executed on large limestone T-shape pillars (Beile-Bohn et al. 1988; K. Schmidt 1998). In Jerf al Ahmar a mudbrick bench was decorated with a geometric pattern in relief (Stordeur et al. 2001, Fig. 8).

In the next chronological stage, the late ninth and the eighth millennia bc, the period commonly designated Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (ppnb), there is a rapid growth of symbolic expression. Examples now include the following: Anthropomorphic Figurines. These are reported from sites all over the Near East and usually include female figures and much less frequently also male figures: Jericho, Beidha, Nahal Hemar Cave, ‘Ain Ghazal, Munhata, Tell Aswad, Cafer Höyük, Nevali Çori, Jarmo, Sarab, and Çayönü (Kenyon and Holland 1982, Fig. 224:2; Kirkbride 1966, Fig. 4:1; BarYosef and Alon 1988, Pl. IX; Rollefson 1983; Garfinkel 1995, Figs. 13–14; de Contenson 1983, Fig. 7; Cauvin 1989, Fig. 11; Hauptmann 1991–2:32, Fig. 27; Broman Morales 1983, 1990). Zoomorphic Figurines. At this stage, cattle make their first appearance, replacing the bird figurines of the previous period. They have been discovered in sites all over the Near East: Jericho, ‘Ain Ghazal, Abu Ghosh, Munhata, Tell Ramad, Jarmo, Sarab, and Çayönü (Kenyon and Holland 1982, Fig. 224:6–9; Rollefson 1983; Lechevallier 1978, Fig. 35:1–2; Garfinkel 1995; de Contenson 1981; Broman Morales 1983, 1990). These figures are so schematic that it is not always clear if they indeed represent cattle or rather other four-legged animals such as sheep or dogs. Other types of zoomorphic figures were also found, including an ibex at Beidha, a rodent at Nahal Hemar Cave, and pigs at Munhata, Jarmo,

9

Introduction

and Sarab (Kirkbride 1966, Fig. 4:2; Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988, Pl. XII:1; Garfinkel 1995, Fig. 17:5; Broman Morales 1983, Fig. 155:6, 1990, Pl. 2). Engraved Slabs. Small stone slabs decorated with incisions portraying various animals have been reported from the desert campsite of Dhuweila (Betts 1987). Remodeled Skulls. Human skulls plastered or covered with bitumen have been reported from the Levant: Jericho, Tell Ramad, Beisamoun, ‘Ain Ghazal, Nahal Hemar Cave, and Kfar Hahoresh (Kenyon 1957, Figs. 19– 20, 22; 1981, Pls. VIII:b–d, IX; de Contenson 1967:20–21; Lechevallier 1978:150; Rollefson 1983; Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988, Pl. XXIII; GoringMorris 2000, Fig. 3). Anthropomorphic Statues. Two different groups can be subsumed under this category: statues made of clay and of plaster, 40–90 cm in height, discovered at Jericho, Tell Ramad, ‘Ain Ghazal, and Nahal Hemar Cave (Garstang et al. 1935:166; de Contenson 1967:20–21; Rollefson 1983; BarYosef and Alon 1988, Pl. VIII); statues made of elongated limestone monoliths, 40–100 cm in height, were discovered at Nevali Çori in the northern Levant (Hauptmann 1993). Masks. Life-sized limestone masks have been excavated in the southern Levant: Nahal Hemar Cave and Basta. A few such masks with no clear archaeological contexts have also been reported (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988, Pl. X; Nissen et al. 1987, Fig. 16:1; Perrot 1979, Figs. 20, 26; Noy 1999:123–133). Decoration of Architectural Components. Three different groups can be distinguished here: painted plaster floors, discovered at ‘Ain Ghazal and Tell Halula (Rollefson 1990; Molist 1998); painted walls of Bouqras (Akkermans et al. 1983); and monumental stone pillars engraved with anthropomorphic figures in a cultic structure at Nevali Çori (Hauptmann 1993). Dancing Scenes. The first appearance of scenes in the art of the ancient Near East took place at this stage. These have been reported from three Pre-Pottery Neolithic B sites in the Levant: Nevali Çori, Tell Halula and Dhuwila (Figs. 7.3:a, 7.4, 7.6:a). All three have a common subject—they depict dancing figures.

Rollefson suggested subdividing the art objects from ‘Ain Ghazal into two groups based on their size (1983, 1986). This idea can be applied to objects from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period in general. In the first group there are small anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines, usually smaller than 10 cm. These were used by individuals and reflect household cults. In the second group there are the large anthropomorphic statues, plastered skulls, and masks, usually larger than 20 cm. These were used on more public occasions and reflect rituals performed on the community level. The objects of both groups, however, are isolated art and cult items. Even when found in large numbers together, such as the plastered skulls or the anthropomorphic statues, they do not

10

The D ance A nalysis

represent any scene, and no interdependence between the objects in any given concentration can be observed. Following Rollefson and adding to his original observations, I suggest a three-stage development. First, small art objects were manufactured and these were used on the family level. Second, larger art objects were produced, and these were used on the community level. The third stage is marked by the appearance of the first scenes. This is a most dramatic change as the scenes described a few people acting together. They have the capacity of storing and transmitting much more information than any single art object. Thus, the scenes represent a big step towards writing. The importance of scenes was summarized by Renfrew and Bahn (1991:368): Painting, drawing, or carving on a flat surface in order to represent the world offers much more scope than the representation in three dimensions of a single figure. For it offers the possibility of showing relationships between symbols, between objects in the cognitive map. In the first place, this allows us to investigate how the artist conceived of space itself, as well as the way in which events at different times might be shown. It also allows analysis of the manner or style in which the artist depicted the animals, humans, and other aspects of the real world.

Scenes, as opposed to figurines, are rather rare in the protohistoric Near East and southeast Europe. They can be classified in three main categories: Wall Painting. The most well known of these are the Çatal Höyük wall paintings and reliefs, a unique assemblage (see, for example, Mellaart 1967; de Jesus 1985; Hodder 1987; Forest 1993). Another example of a wall painting depicting a scene has been reported from Umm Dabaghiyah (Kirkbride 1975, Fig. 7a). Scenes Displaying Dancing Figures. This is the largest category in terms of chronological duration, geographical distribution, and the number of examples reported (Garfinkel 1998). It is therefore rather surprising to see that these dancing figures have never been the subject of a comprehensive analysis, and only some aspects of them have been discussed (Herzfeld 1941:29–42; Mesnil du Buisson 1948:23; Parrot 1960:44–46; Gulder 1960–1962; Vanden Berghe 1968; Nitu 1970; Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a; Meyerhof and Mozel 1981; Yakar 1991:314; Esin 1993; Mantu 1993; Matous˘ová 1970, 1993). Nondancing Scenes. These are known on pottery vessels depicting human figures together with animals or architectural elements. This rare category has been reported from only a few sites. The most interesting examples come from Tell Halaf, Arpachiyah, Tepe Gawra, and a vessel of unknown provenance from Iran (von Oppenheim 1943, Fig. LX; Hijara 1978; Ippolitoni-Strika 1990; Breniquet 1992a; Tobler 1950, Pl. LXXVIII:a–b; Amiet 1979, Fig. 15–17).

11

This study is devoted to the second category, the dancing scenes. The three main subjects to be dealt with here are the dancing performance (Chapter 2), the social context of the dance (Chapter 3), and cognitive aspects of the dancing scenes (Chapter 4). Research Objectives

Introduction

Nine different research objectives, all related to the subject of dance and dancing scenes, are presented below. Although I may not address all the relevant questions, nor provide all the possible answers, I hope that drawing attention to this neglected topic will provoke further inquiry and discussion.

1. relevant data The Neolithic and Chalcolithic dancing scenes from the Near East and southeast Europe have never been previously collected or presented together. The evidence is dispersed over hundreds of publications, many of them obscure excavation reports. Therefore, the first aim of this work is to acquaint the reader with the different sites and the relevant finds unearthed in each of them. Most of the items are also presented here in drawings. In some cases the text refers to additional identical items that were discovered at the same site in large quantities and are thus not included in the illustrations. All this data is presented in Part II of this work. The distribution of the motif dictates the chronological and geographical boundaries of my study. Chronologically the earliest dancing scenes appeared in the eighth millennium bc, and they continue to dominate the artistic record, at least in one region—the Levant—until the third millennium bc. The geographical range of the phenomenon includes the Levant, Mesopotamia, Iran, western Pakistan, Anatolia, the Balkans, Greece, the Danube basin of southeast Europe, and Egypt. The motif does not appear in all the areas at the same time. Thus the presentation of the data follows six major chronological-geographical units: Neolithic Near East; Halafian and Samarra cultures; Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran; Neolithic southeast Europe; Predynastic Egypt; and later examples from the Near East. All together, some 170 sites and nearly 400 items are included. In an appendix, other possible examples of dancing figures in the Neolithic Near East are examined in the light of previous reconstructions. The dancing scenes, it should be emphasized, were a most popular, indeed almost the only, subject used to describe interaction between people in the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods. The present study of dancing scenes is derived from my general understanding of the current state of art historical research. This research in ancient Europe and the Near East has usually been classified accord-

12

The D ance A nalysis

ing to the following fields of specialization: on the one hand, the art of Paleolithic Europe, which represents the symbolic expressions of hunters and gatherers; on the other hand, the various art traditions of Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece, and Rome, each type representing the symbolic expressions of states and empires. Art historical research on early village communities in the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods, which lies between the two fields mentioned above, has not been extensively developed. Only very seldomly has a specific monograph on the art of the Neolithic or Chalcolithic periods been published (Goff 1963a; Cauvin 1972, 1994; Dumitrescu 1974; Gimbutas 1982, 1989; von Wickede 1990). The leading authorities on ancient Near Eastern art have not paid much attention to the Neolithic period. The concepts that prevailed in the 1950s and 1960s concerning the art and cult of this period can be found in the works of eminent authorities. Henry Frankfort wrote: “The prehistoric clay figurines of men and animals do not differ in character from similar artless objects found throughout Asia and Europe. A history of art may ignore them, since they cannot be considered the ancestors of Sumerian sculpture” (Frankfort 1955:2). Edith Porada wrote: “For this early period [the eighth millennium bc] we cannot assume the existence of concepts of anthropomorphic deities similar to those later known in the cultures of the ancient Near East” (Porada 1965:21). In various books and catalogues on the art of the ancient Near East, the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods usually occupy a brief chapter between the introduction and Sumerian art. However, over the years, Neolithic art objects from various excavations have gradually accumulated. Nowadays there is no justification for an approach that ignores the art of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods, since in the last decade, archaeologists have unearthed and published art objects from dozens of Neolithic sites, of previously unknown quality and quantity. Thus, another objective of this research is to draw scholarly attention to the possibility that art historical research of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods can now be developed into an independent field of art history, that of early village communities.

2. a methodological framework for the depiction of dance To analyze displays of dance, a methodological framework is required. Since, to the best of my knowledge, this topic has not been subject to systematic methodological consideration, it is necessary to propose one here. The next section of this chapter raises and discusses thirteen methodological aspects of the depiction of dance.

3. structural analysis of dance Analyzing the form and style of the performance carried out in the early village communities contributes to the field of dance history, which,

13

when dealing with the evidence from antiquity, usually concentrates on Greek vases. To obtain the maximum amount of information, I have defined detailed categories of analysis, and the different items are analyzed in accordance with these categories. Not all the scenes previously defined as dance fit these categories, and thus the interpretation of some wall paintings from Çatal Höyük as a “dance of the hunters” is rejected below.

4. emphasis on the cultic nature of dancing Introduction

The study of the cult and religion of ancient societies has lately attracted considerable attention. The dancing scenes can contribute to our understanding of public religious ceremonies in the early village communities in the Near East and southeast Europe. This matter also takes into consideration linguistic aspects and ethnographic observations.

5. clarification of linguistic aspects associated with dance It has been previously noted that dancing terms in West Semitic languages are loaded with more than one meaning (Mandelkern 1896:369; Loewenstamm 1965; Wensinck 1986). The dancing scenes add a new dimension to the linguistic context of the following terms: dance, festival, going in a circle, mourning, and pilgrimage.

6. functional analysis of dance The dancing scenes should be understood against the background of their social context, that is, the village communities of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods. Ethnographic observations are used to gain a wider view of dancing in pre-state societies. Many observations by modern anthropologists of traditional societies are devoted to dance. There is a vast literature on specific case studies, as well as works devoted to the anthropology of dance within a wider theoretical framework for investigating the significance of dance (see, for example, Rust 1969; Lange 1976; Royce 1977; McNeill 1995). As dancing is a universal phenomenon, and as the significance of dance has been investigated by dance scholars, the basic question discussed here is not why people dance but rather why dancing was used as a motif in the art of early village communities. In other words, it seems unlikely that the people in the early village communities were dancing many more hours per week than hunter-gatherers or city dwellers of the ancient Near East, even though they emphasized dancing activities in their symbolic expressions. Of special interest to my study are observations on the San Bushmen of Southern Africa, since there exists abundant documentation of both the dancing activities and artistic symbolic expressions of this people. In Bushmen societies, dance activities are extremely important in daily life (Marshall 1969; Katz 1982; Biesele 1978). Nevertheless, dance is not a

14

The D ance Analysis

major motif at all in artistic expressions (Vinnicombe 1976:307–319; Lewis-Williams 1981:19; Lewis-Williams and Dowson 1989; but see Lewis-Williams 1999; Garfinkel 1999b). This example demonstrates that there is no direct correlation between the role of dance in daily life and the appearance of dance in symbolic expressions. Two questions are relevant here: (1) why were dancing scenes the most popular, indeed almost the only, subject used to describe interaction between people in the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods? and (2) why do dancing scenes lose their prominent position with the rise of urban societies in the Near East? To answer these questions, Chapter 3 deals with social developments in the eighth to fourth millennia bc in the Near East and southeast Europe.

7. replacement of the dancing motif The objective of this section is to identify a widely distributed motif in the ancient urban Near East, which expresses social interaction between people and thus replaces the dance motif.

8. cognitive aspects of the dancing scenes In a programmatic statement in the introduction to the first volume of the Cambridge Archaeological Journal, Scarre declared that “human cognition is one of the key areas of archaeological thinking at the present day, encapsulating a wide range of those activities which give the human species its unique character and separate us most clearly from our near relatives the non-human primates: art, symbolism, mensuration, religion and language” (Scarre 1991). As dancing activity is closely associated with public religious ceremonies, dancing opens a window onto the cognitive map of the early village communities’ rituals. There is a growing archaeological literature on issues such as ritual and cultic performance. These works deal mainly with the analysis of cult objects and temples, that is, the material remains of ritual activities. Marcus and Flannery, for example, combined three methodological approaches when dealing with ancient Zapotec ritual and religion: (1) the direct historical approach, (2) the analysis of public space and religious architecture, and (3) the contextual analysis of religious paraphernalia (Marcus and Flannery 1994:55). The nature of the evidence concerning dancing, however, is totally different from the source material of Marcus and Flannery, since we do not have direct remains of the activity. “Direct remains” of dance in the archaeological record could theoretically be footprints or an arrangement of skeletons trapped during dance activity. The suggestion that circular platforms of carefully constructed ashlar masonry stones discovered at Knossos were used for circle dances (Warren 1984) is problematic, since the platforms may have been used for other purposes.

15

Introduction

What we do have in hand from the past are depictions of dance that are not “objective” photographs but the results of cognitive processes that function as filters, eliminating the less important aspects of an event and emphasizing its essence. Depictions of dance may give rise to all kinds of theoretical or methodological issues, since they are not direct material remains of performance and ritual. This is where cognitive analysis comes in, focusing on the process that transfers reality into depiction. The importance of pictorial relationships has been summarized by Renfrew and Bahn as follows (1991:363): We can obtain the greatest insight into the cognitive map of an individual or a community by representation in material form of that map, or at least a part of it. . . . But the more general case is that of depiction, where the world, or some aspect of it, is represented so that it appears to the seeing eye very much as it is conceived in the “mind’s eye.”

Dancing scenes are clearly suitable for the application of the approach labeled “Cognitive-Processual Archaeology” (Renfrew and Bahn 1991:431–432, and see discussion there), as the subject of dance implies the following points: 1. As ethnographers have noted, dance is a cross-cultural phenomenon in human behavior and has been observed the world over. It appears in every form of social organization: urban, rural, pastoral, and hunter-gatherer. 2. From a structural point of view there are biological limits to the movements of the human body, which dictate possible body gestures (Laban 1971; Fitt 1988). 3. From a functional point of view there are similarities in the way traditional human societies use dance: it is associated with public religious activities.

9. communicative aspects of the dancing scenes This research objective concerns not the dancing activity but the function of the objects on which the dancing scenes were depicted. Pottery vessels, which are the most common objects decorated with dancing scenes, are examined as a means of information exchange. Methodological Remarks on the D isplay of D ance

Prehistoric displays of dance raise all kinds of methodological problems, some of which are specifically derived from the subject of dance, while others are related to a more general level of analyzing archaeological material. Identifying a scene as dance activity is not always self-evident. Some items that are interpreted here as dancing scenes have previously been understood differently. For example:

16

The D ance Analysis

1. The depiction presented in Figure 7.6:b has been described as “a couple of deities . . . shown in embrace,” “copulation,” and “a mother holding a child” (Mellaart 1963:148; Todd 1976:93). 2. The item presented in Figure 9.29:b has been described as “bird design at various stages of conventionalization” (E. F. Schmidt 1933, Pl. 88). 3. Many of the items presented in Figures 10.11–10.14 have been described as representations of “the great goddess” (Gimbutas 1982, 1989). 4. The item presented in Figure 10.10:c, and other similar items, have been described as “birth-giving goddess” (Gimbutas 1982:176). 5. The depictions presented in Figures 11.3:e and 11.6:a have been described as “a combat” or “victory scene” (Petrie 1920:16; Williams 1988; Hendrickx 1996; Dreyer et al. 1998). 6. The item presented in Figure 11.26:b has been described as a “town wall with sentries” (Hoffman 1979:148).

By contrast, some scenes from Çatal Höyük that have been previously described as representing dance are rejected here (Fig. 2.19; see discussion below). Decoding meaning from art objects is a basic problem one faces when dealing with items from the past. Scholars from the discipline of art history have written volumes on this subject (see, for example, Panofsky 1955; Gombrich 1972; Bryson 1983). The main working tool at our disposal for this purpose is iconography, which is a branch of art history that concerns itself with the subject depicted in works of art (Panofsky 1955:26). As most of the works by art historians deal with items from historical periods, where religion and mythology are well documented, their methodology is not very helpful when prehistoric material is considered. Nevertheless, the following warning is no doubt relevant to all: One methodological rule, at any rate, should stand out in this game of unriddling the mysteries of the past. However daring we may be in our conjectures—and who would want to restrain the bold?—no such conjectures should ever be used as a stepping stone for yet another, still bolder hypothesis. We should always ask the iconologist to return to base from every one of his individual flights, and to tell us whether programs of the kind he has enjoyed reconstructing can be documented from primary sources or only from the works of his fellow iconologists. Otherwise we are in danger of building a mythical mode of symbolism, much as the Renaissance built up a fictitious science of hieroglyphics that was based on a fundamental misconception of the nature of the Egyptian script (Gombrich 1972:21).

Dance experts argue about reliable methods for identifying dance versus other possible bodily activities (Hanna 1979). If there are problems with recognizing dance when it is actually in progress, problems with recognizing depictions of dance are even more complicated. Can

17

Introduction

one suggest objective criteria for the identification of dancing scenes? This issue should be tackled on both the theoretical and the practical levels: The theoretical level. As already noted above, dance is created out of culturally understood symbols within social and religious contexts. Are we capable today, after thousands of years, of recognizing and understanding all the cases in which dance is expressed in art scenes? The practical level. The talent and ability of the individual artist to express the motif, the objects’ state of preservation, as well as the style and raw material used affect our ability to identify a depiction as representing dance.

To overcome these and other problems, the following thirteen methodological remarks are in order.

1. dance, dancing scenes, and the decorated items The first point, which needs to be clarified methodologically, is that three totally different aspects are implied in this study: The dance. Dance is a cross-cultural phenomenon, which has been observed in every human organization. In traditional communities it bears various social and religious functions. The dancing scenes. This is an artistic motif, which displays the activity of dance. In some periods, dancing scenes were very popular, while in others they were neglected. As can be seen from the San Bushmen of southern Africa, there is no direct correlation between the importance of dance in daily life and the importance of the dance motif in the symbolic expression of the same communities (see below, Chapter 3). The decorated items. An object decorated with a dancing motif had a function of its own, over and above the dance and the dancing scene. Moreover, alongside the items decorated with depictions of dance, identical items appear in the archaeological record, which are decorated with other motifs or left undecorated. Thus the specific lifespan of items decorated with dancing scenes deserves a close look, which Kopytoff (1986:66–67) describes: In doing the biography of a thing, one would ask questions similar to those one asks about people: What, sociologically, are the biographical possibilities inherent in its “status” and in the period and culture, and how are these possibilities realized? Where does the thing come from and who made it? What has been its career so far, and what do people consider to be an ideal career for such things? What are the recognized “age” or periods in the thing’s “life” and what are the cultural markers for them? How does the thing’s use change with its age, and what happens to it when it reaches the end of its usefulness?

18

The D ance Analysis

Most of the items decorated with dancing scenes are elaborate objects: fine pottery vessels, stamp seals, and cylinder seals. These were commodities manufactured by specialized potters or seal-cutters. Kopytoff (1986:64) has suggested an approach to them: From a cultural perspective, the production of commodities is also a cultural and cognitive process: commodities must be not only produced materially as things, but also culturally marked as being a certain kind of thing. Out of the total range of things available in a society, only some of them are considered appropriate for marking as commodities. Moreover, the same thing may be treated as a commodity at one time and not at another. And finally, the same thing may, at the same time, be seen as a commodity by one person and as something else by another.

Therefore there should be a clear division between the items decorated with dancing scenes, the dancing scenes, and the dance itself; each subject has to be analyzed separately. The structure and function of dancing activity are analyzed in Chapters 2 and 3. The aspects related to the depiction of the scenes and to the objects on which the motif was depicted are presented in Chapter 4.

2. depiction of movement in a static medium When dealing with the depiction of dance in painting, plastic representation, or carving, a fundamental difficulty arising from the subject itself should be taken into account: Dancing is, in and of itself, a dynamic activity performed at a certain time and place, while painting and carving are, by their very nature, static. How can one document movement in a static artistic medium (Bellugue 1963; Arnheim 1974:403–409; Watts 1977:76–86; Gombrich 1982)? Documenting dance is a difficult task: “An adequate system of dance notation, which is one kind of permanent record, must deal successfully with three different elements: movement through space, movement through time, and the stylistic variations and idiosyncrasies that comprise what we may call ‘performance’” (Royce 1977:39). These difficulties exist today, even with the development of modern choreography (Hutchinson 1954, 1984, 1989; Eshkol and Wachmann 1958) and the use of advanced filming techniques (see, for example, Royce 1977:54–55; V. L. Brooks 1984; Morphy 1994). These difficulties were much more severe when the techniques available were painting pottery vessels or engraving stone objects. There was no intention of notating dance at all, and it seems that the aim of a dancing scene was to provide a memoryaid for those who already knew the style and sequence of the movement. Indeed, in many of the items presented below, no attempt was made to represent dancing situations realistically. On the contrary, the artists pursued a minimalist approach, using the three stylistic categories defined below as naturalistic, linear, or geometric. All three approaches

19

Introduction

concentrate on expressing a small number of characteristics that represent dance: The circle. In the archaeological documents there is a clear preference for choosing round objects for portraying dancing scenes. Pottery vessels and cylinder seals constitute ca. 93 percent of the sample presented in the figures (see Table 6.1). Only in a very few cases were other objects used, such as rocks, stone slabs, floors, walls, stamp seals, or a linen shroud (Figs. 7.3:a, 7.6, 7.9:c, 11.24, 11.26:a, 12.2, 12.5, 12.9). On pottery vessels and cylinder seals, the figures were arranged around the perimeter in one line, parallel to the rim, not at random or freely all over the surface. Whether dozens of figures are represented, as on vessels from Tell Halaf or Samarra, or only two are present, as in the examples from ‘Ein el-Jarba and Ismailabad, they are organized in a circle around the vessel (Figs. 8.10:a, 8.22:a, 8.30:a, 9.17:e). Arranging the figures in this way creates a symmetrical pattern, usually described as an “endless motif.” When the components are geometric, zoomorphic, or floral, the arrangement is merely decorative (von Wickede 1986). However, when the “endless motif ” is composed of human figures presented in a dynamic posture or holding hands, it cannot be considered as merely decorative any longer but represents a circle of dancing figures. Moreover, sometimes the dancing figures were drawn on the inner rim of jars, where they are not easily visible. Other figurative motifs were never drawn at this location. These cases emphasize that the dancing figures convey a more complex message than the zoomorphic or floral endless decoration. Direction of movement. In the archaeological documents, the movement of the dancers in each scene is always uniform, and all figures always turn in the same direction, thus strictly regulating the direction of movement. Rhythm. Rhythm, so essential to dance, is achieved in each scene by the arrangement of the figures at constant distances from each other. Body position. In many examples of the naturalistic and geometric styles, the dancers’ bodies are represented with the limbs bent, first horizontally and the further limb part vertically, with the arms turned upwards and the legs downwards (see discussion below, Fig. 2.4). This is not a static standing or sitting position but rather a dynamic one requiring great effort. In addition, despite the schematic representation of the figures, fingers were depicted as well in some cases. Hand and finger movements constitute an important component in various forms of dance, and this may be the reason for their inclusion in the dancing scenes, despite the usual absence of fingers in schematic depictions of human figures.

3. depicting the richness of dance in restricted media Dance is usually characterized by a plethora of details: the position of the body and limbs, various articles of dress such as hats or coiffures,

20

The D ance Analysis

ribbons at the back of the neck, belts, and special shoes. Some figures appear to be wearing masks. The drawing or carving of such details, particularly when executed on a miniature scale, are inevitably limited. How can one document the richness of dance with extremely limited means of expression? The artistic solution in this case, as can be seen from the examples analyzed in this work, was to select only one or two elements for a specific scene. Many details have been deliberately omitted, so that only a segment of the entire dance activity and dance decoration is expressed in the depictions. In sum, despite the difficulties inherent in representing dance, an artistic concept developed in the ancient Near East that succeeded in conveying a complex message through minimal means of expression.

4. stylistic analysis In this work I do not undertake a thorough stylistic analysis, as is usual for art historians. However, sometimes the representation of dancing is so schematic that a stylistic analysis is necessary to clarify the depiction (Chapter 8). The painted items from the ancient Near East are classified here into three basic styles: naturalistic, linear, and geometric. There is a gradual transition from one style to another, so that it is not always possible to relate an item to a specific style. The graphic solution to this problem is given in Figure 8.8, where the different styles are represented in a circle. The basic approach adopted for understanding the schematic styles is to follow the gradual transition from items depicted in a more realistic way to items depicted in a linear or geometric style. To maintain a convincing interpretation, it is important to find both realistic and schematic items at the same site. When both styles are discovered together they create a smooth interpretation, as one can contribute toward the better understanding of the other (Garfinkel 1993:125); the naturalistic depictions help us understand the schematic, linear, and geometric items, while the schematic items indicate which details in the naturalistic depictions are more important than others. These more important details have survived through the process of schematization, while the less important details have disappeared. A hierarchy of details (symbols) can be obtained by comparing naturalistic with linear and geometric items.

5. graphic presentation When the depiction of dance was executed on a flat surface, such as a wall, a floor, or a stone slab, it can be easily drawn on a piece of paper. But when the dance was depicted on a round object, such as a pottery jar or a cylinder seal, it is a much more complicated situation. Technically, to draw the three-dimensional rounded item on two-dimensional paper, we need to break the circle and to make a decision about where to

21

Introduction

start the scene. Such a decision, however, is not only technical but has direct influence on the understanding and interpretation of the scene (Garfinkel 2001b). Most of our examples were made on pottery vessels and cylinder seals, and on the practical level, the rendering of it on paper could be a real problem. However, usually the dancing scenes are symmetrical, and thus their drawing can be taken from any point on the item’s circumference, without making a difference to the result. But when the scene is not symmetrical, different drawings can be made. In this study this problem is relevant to a number of items, all from Predynastic Egypt. Two different presentations have been offered to a vessel from Umm el-Qaab (cf. Fig. 11.6:a with Dreyer et al. 1998, Fig. 13) and three different arrangements to the depiction on the vessel from Brussels (cf. Fig. 11.6:b with Baumgartel 1947, Fig. 14 and with Williams 1988, Fig. 35).

6. the technique and materials Dancing scenes were depicted on a large variety of materials using various techniques: engravings on stone vessels or stone slabs, applied decoration on pottery vessels, incision on pottery vessels, painting on pottery vessels, painting on walls, and engraving on stamp or cylinder seals. The material on which the scene was depicted affected the final product. Painting on pottery vessels is a delicate technique, which enables clear expressions of the dancing scenes. Usually, naturalistic painted pottery items have been identified by the archaeologist who unearthed them as representing dance. The situation is different with scenes engraved on stone or produced by applied decoration on pottery vessels. Most of the nondancing interpretations mentioned above (“copulation,” “a mother holding a child,” “the great goddess,” “birth-giving goddess,” and “town wall with sentries”) are related to such objects. The type of material used has social implications. In the earlier periods, most of the scenes appear on pottery vessels that are the products of rather popular craftsmanship. In later examples from the Near East, large numbers of scenes come from cylinder seals that were manufactured by professional seal cutters.

7. state of preservation When dealing with items nine thousand to five thousand years old made on breakable materials such as pottery vessels, we do not usually have complete objects at our disposal. In many cases only fragments have been preserved. Since this study concentrates on dancing scenes, a single dancing figure on a pottery sherd raises a problem, as it may imply two different situations. On the one hand, these items could come from vessels bearing several such figures and could thus be fragments of a larger dance scene. On the other hand, these items could come from vessels on which only one figure was depicted and would thus not be

22

The D ance Analysis

fragments of a dance scene. Items of the first type may be included in the assemblage, while items of the second type would not normally be included. However, almost all examples of complete vessels or large sherds that have been preserved show two or more identical dancing figures (see, for example, Figs. 7.10, 8.4:a, 8.10:a, 8.29:b, 9.29:d). Very few complete vessels depict a single dancing figure, and in most of them the other side of the vessel is not shown in the publications, so that it is not clear whether additional figures were depicted on them (Figs. 10.9:b; 10.13:e; 10.18:e; 11.3:b). Because of the ratio between examples where several figures are depicted on a vessel and the few cases where only one dancing figure is depicted, I have decided to include sherds with a single dancing figure in this study. Thus, all relevant data on early dance is included here, creating a complete picture. In addition, the examples of complete pottery vessels with a single dancing figure on them are also presented here, since they are so few.

8. the relevance of the dance displays to the study of dance Unlike ritual paraphernalia, which is a direct product of rituals and religious ceremonies, dancing activities do not leave direct evidence in the archaeological record. The dancing scenes we have in hand are an artistic transformation of reality into depiction. This situation has been described by Longstreet with regard to other periods, but the principle applies equally to the early items of this study: The artist is always looking for the one set of lines, the proper curves to bring to life the lightness of the spirit that animates a body of solid bone and muscle as it moves to music. In the dance the body takes on a rigid discipline, a controlled series of lessons that must match those of a partner or even a roomful of dancers. The skill of the eye and fingers of the artist does not merely try to capture reality—for reality is far from the purpose of the dance—but the impression, the fleeting stop-motion of an intricate spin or turn. . . . The dance becomes the memory of a line, a form, a color; and a drawing an impression, an expression, usually abstract (Longstreet 1968).

Thus, are we allowed to see the dancing scenes as presenting some sort of reality, or is the entire depiction nothing but artistic convention, an aesthetic approach (on the aspect of aesthetics, see Taylor et al. 1994), or the result of cognitive processes? In a similar fashion, the student of Greek dance is faced with certain restrictions when evaluating the material. As Lawler has discussed: Archaeological sources are of prime importance to the student, and serve to render the dance strikingly vivid. But, on the other hand, no sources

23

Introduction

are so capable of serious misinterpretation. In the first place, they usually have come down in a more or less damaged condition. In the second place, the student must never forget for a moment that Greek art is often deliberately unrealistic, and is concerned with ideal beauty, design, balance, rhythm, linear schemes, and stylization, rather than with an exact portrayal of what the artist saw in life. In the third place, the observer must understand and allow for technical limitations, especially in the work of a primitive artist, and for artistic conventions found in each of the arts, throughout the whole span of Greek civilization. These are not easy facts for the amateur to grasp, and a great many amazing errors have been made by writers on the dance who have tried to interpret representations in Greek art without knowing how to do so. The results are sometimes as absurd as would be similar attempts to interpret modern art realistically (Lawler 1964:17–19).

Taking into account these limitations, it is clear that not every question concerning dance can be answered. Only a rough general outline can be reconstructed, while the small details are not retrievable. To verify the relationship of the dancing scenes to the study of dance, it is important to see who produced the items decorated with depictions of dance and who was the intended audience for these scenes. Most of the items in the early village communities were pottery vessels made by local potters to be used by members of the same communities. For the dancing scenes to communicate a message, they should have delivered a meaningful image, that is, be understandable to the inhabitants of the early villages. This means that the dancing scenes were comprehensible representations of dance activity. They are therefore more authentic than photographs of dance taken by modern western anthropologists in traditional societies. Since the dancing scenes reflect inside knowledge, they may be considered reliable representations of their time. Unlike ritual paraphernalia and although they are not a direct product of rituals, it is justifiable to consider the dancing scenes as authentic documentation of dance activity. Undoubtedly, only a small part of the richness of movement and decoration is recorded in them, but a fragmentary picture is the basic quality of any subject investigated by archaeologists and historians.

9. categories of dance analysis Dance activity is composed of individuals who are acting together. Thus there are two levels of analysis: the individual and the community. The analysis should begin on the individual level, which is the basic unit producing dance, and examine two aspects: The position of the body. The arms and legs in particular indicate the dance gesture. Dance decoration. The paraphernalia accompanying the dancers may include different body ornaments or supplementary objects.

24

The D ance Analysis

The analysis should continue on the community level. Analysis on the community level takes into account aspects related to the interactions created during dance: Dance form. The figures’ interaction with the space creates the three basic dance forms: circle dance, line dance, and couples dance. This aspect can be retrieved from the location of the figures on the vessel. Dancers’ interaction with each other. This aspect examined the figures’ interaction with each other within the dance form. The basic compositions are freestanding, holding hands, shoulder to shoulder, and embracing. Direction of movement. This aspect can usually be determined when the figures are presented in profile. Two basic directions of circling are possible: clockwise movement and counter-clockwise movement. Gender. Gender analysis adds another dimension to the community organization by demonstrating who dances with whom. There are three basic situations: male dance, female dance, and a common dance of males and females together. Place of performance. Sometimes some information is given concerning the location of the dance. These depictions include architectural or other elements in whose vicinity the dancing takes place. Time of performance. This section examines if there are any indications that the dance was carried out during the daytime or during the night.

The analysis of dancing scenes can be supported by the discipline of dance research as an independent field of study. There are dance academies, departments of dance in many universities, scientific journals for the study of dance, as well as hundreds of monographs on the subject. Beside numerous case studies, there are specific works that have been devoted to a more general level of dance analysis (see, for example, Sachs 1952; Rust 1969; Lange 1976; Royce 1977). This rich reservoir of resources should be integrated in any study that deals with depictions of dance. However, one has to be aware of the specific socioeconomic milieu when analyzing depictions of dance with the help of modern dance research.

10. assemblage analysis The focus of analysis should be the assemblage of dancing scenes rather than individual objects. Each of the isolated scenes, when examined alone, cannot produce much information because of the abovementioned problems of expressing the richness of dance by minimal schematic means of expression. Only the combination of all the relevant data together, when bits and pieces are placed alongside each other, can produce a meaningful analysis. A critical mass is needed to produce a multiple effect.

25

Introduction

A major problem here is how to define the assemblage. Our case study considers dancing scenes from western Pakistan in the east to the Danube basin in the west, with a chronological duration of some five thousand years, presented together. The following points justify this presentation: There is a geographical continuity in the distribution of the dancing scenes. There is a chronological continuity in the duration of the dancing motifs. The human societies within these chronological and spatial boundaries were undergoing similar socioeconomic processes of adopting an agricultural way of life and agglomerating large communities into villages. My work is thus dedicated to the study and analysis of dancing scenes in the context of early village communities. The social context is the major justification for the boundaries of this case study. It would be equally legitimate to investigate the evidence of dance scenes in huntergatherer societies or the depiction of dance in urban social organizations. The motif spreads from a core area, the Levant of the eighth millennium bc, to neighboring regions: northern Mesopotamia and Anatolia. To the east the motif spreads to southern Mesopotamia, Iran, and western Pakistan. To the west the motif spreads to the Balkans, Greece, and the Danube basin of southeast Europe. The motif may have developed simultaneously in different regions. However, since we have chronological and geographical continuity, diffusion is the better explanation. From a practical point of view, when more dancing scenes are unearthed during fieldwork, it will be possible to subdivide the analysis into smaller regions. Each one of the six major chronological-geographical units discussed here could become an assemblage in its own right. It would be of interest to compare these units and to trace processes of continuity versus change over time and space in them. At this stage of research, however, each unit is statistically too small to maintain an independent assemblage (excluding Predynastic Egypt in a few regards).

11. quantitative analysis Statistics should be applied when possible as the chief research tool with which to analyze an assemblage composed of a large number of individual items. The quantitative dimension helps clarify what is more important and what should be considered as marginal in the dancing scenes. On the practical level, however, there are various problems when applying statistics to our dancing scenes. Many items are broken, and so much data is missing. In addition, some of the variants, such as body gesture, direction of movement, and gender, are not clear-cut categories, and so subjective judgment is involved. Nevertheless, some important trends emerge from the numbers in Tables 2.1–2.4, of which otherwise we would not be aware.

26

12. contextual analysis Another way of understanding dancing as well as the dancing scenes is the contexts with which the depiction of dance are associated. The two most relevant contexts are the following:

The D ance Analysis

Type of object. This context examines the object on which the dancing scene was depicted. As we shall see below, in most of the cases, there were pottery vessels, small and medium-sized tableware used for serving food. Place of discovery. This context can contribute to our understanding of dancing as well as the function of the vessels that were decorated with dancing scenes. Items decorated with dancing scenes were found both in domestic contexts (dwellings units and garbage pits) and in ritual contexts (public buildings and grave goods). Information concerning the place of discovery is not always available. In fact, in most of the preliminary excavation reports and in a large number of final publications, this information is missing. However, in some cases it is possible to see differences between dancing scenes discovered in graves and dancing scenes discovered in settlements elsewhere.

13. boundaries of interpretation While dealing with the structure of the dancing performance and with the social function of dance activity in this work, I will not try to interpret the content of the dance. From ethnographic observations, the following occasions for dance have been noted: medicine dances (healing), fertility dances, initiation dances, marriage dances, funeral and scalp dances, war dances, and astral (moon, sun, rain) dances (Sachs 1952:62–77, 124–131). Ackerman suggested that the depiction in Figure 9.5:a represents a lunar dance (Ackerman 1967). Various scenes from Predynastic Egypt have been connected to “great fertility-goddess,” “fertility rites,” “sacred marriages,” and a “cow-dance” (Baumgartel 1960:144–147). Alexander Marshack suggested to me that some scenes, in which the figures hold branches, describe agricultural rites (personal communication). It is probably possible to raise other suggestions as well. In this study some observations have been made concerning depictions unearthed in graves and their relationship to mourning dances (Chapter 2). However, my current impression regarding this type of enquiry, labeled here “content analysis,” is that one cannot achieve a reasonable level of certainty. Maybe in the future, with the development of a proper methodology, this type of analysis will bring more fruitful results.

Structural Analysis of the D ance

chapter 2

Analysis of the form and style of the dancing scenes contributed to the field of dance history, which, in studies of antiquity, usually concentrates on Greek vases. The history of dance has attracted the attention of scholars, both on a general level and for specific time periods. (On the first category, see, for example, Sachs 1952; Kraus 1969; Menil 1980; Clarke and Clement 1981; Anderson 1986; McNeill 1995. On the second, see, for example, Dolmetsch 1949, 1954; Brunner-Traut 1958; Lawler 1964; Wood 1964; Prudhommeau 1965; Gruber 1981; Goodison 1989; Forrest 1999.) In her study on the history of dance research, Anya Peterson Royce gave the following description: Two perspectives are basic to the anthropology of dance. They underlie all the research that has been done in the past, and they provide the foundations for two of the directions that the field will follow in the future. Structure views dance from the perspective of form, function from the perspective of context and contribution to context. In the past one could see a preference for structural studies in Europe and for functional studies in the United States. In Europe dance scholars with tested systems of notation at their disposal were collecting dance data and collecting it almost exclusively, whereas in the United States anthropologists with little or no dance background or collecting techniques gathered dance information along with data on every other aspect of culture. It is no surprise that the Europeans emphasized form and the Americans function. . . . Structure and function represent perspectives which produce very different kinds of information, hence their utility in studies with a specific focus. Structural studies of dance traditionally have been concerned with producing “grammars” of dance styles. Functional studies, on the other hand, have concerned themselves with determining the contribution of dance to the continued well-being of a society or culture (Royce 1977:64–65).

In the present work the dancing of the early village communities of the Near East and southeast Europe is examined from both aspects: structural and functional. In this chapter the archaeological documents

28

The D ance

presented in Part II (Chapters 7–12) are juxtaposed with various elements that characterize dance structure, such as body positions, dance decoration, spatial organization, direction of movement, place of performance, and time of performance. In other words, the form and style of the dancing activities are investigated. In the next chapter the data are evaluated in accordance with the function of dance in pre-state societies. I use the stimulating work of Roderyk Lange (1976) in his book—The Nature of Dance, An Anthropological Perspective—to evaluate the archaeological data. Relevant quotations from his work are incorporated in the text to demonstrate the point under discussion.

Analysis

The Individual Level

The large number of objects presented here allow an analysis of various aspects associated with the form of dance in the early village communities. We can look at common characteristics of the individuals depicted in these objects, all of whom are members of a community consisting of two or more individuals. Aspects of each individual performance include body position and decoration. Aspects of the integrated performance of the entire community include spatial organization, direction of movement, gender composition, place, and time of performance.

body positions Basic dance structures are universal among all human beings. As Lange observed, the instrument of the dance is the dancer’s body itself, and the structure of the dance is limited by the anatomical possibilities of the human body. “The main movement units employed are steps, jumps, turns, and arm, leg, and trunk gestures. Many transitional states are possible, such as the partial supporting of the body, where only part of the body weight is used. Also gliding movements may appear as a complementary feature” (Lange 1976:78). The functional structure of the body moving in space instantly projects congruous shapes. The dancer, however, enriches these shapes with his or her own range of abilities, used in many different ways. Thus, the first step in analyzing the structure of dance is to examine the body movement of individual human figures. The fundamental body parts in this case are the arms and legs. In our dancing scenes there are nine basic arm positions and five basic leg positions, as follows:

Arm position The arms play an important role in the dancing scenes since they appear in almost all documents, while the legs are not always portrayed. At least nine different arm positions appear throughout the assemblage (Fig. 2.1).

29

Structural Analysis of the D ance

figure 2.1 Basic variations of arm positions in the dancing scenes.

1. The arms are raised as high as possible (Fig. 2.1:a1), and in a number of cases the hands touch the head (Fig. 2.1:a2). This pose apparently was a formalized body gesture for female dancers in Predynastic Egypt, as it appears on almost all the depictions from the various phases of this period: Badarian, Naqada I, Naqada II, and Naqada III (Figs. 11.2–11.26). 2. The arms are bent at a right angle, first positioned horizontally at the height of the shoulder and then raised vertically (Fig. 2.1:b). 3. The arms are raised diagonally, creating a straight line, not rounded, as in position A (Fig. 2.1:c). 4. The arms are bent at a right angle but not symmetrically: one arm is raised upwards, and the other points downwards (Fig. 2.1:d). Of a sample of fourteen cases, the left arm turns upwards in nine examples (Figs. 7.7:c–d, 7.19:c, 10.18:a–d, f–g), and the right arm in five cases (Figs. 7.7:b, 9.32:e, 10.4:a, 10.18:e, 12.6:g). In a small number of cases the arm extended downwards touches the waist (Fig. 7.7:b, d), and in one case the raised arm touches the head (Fig. 9.32:e). 5. Two arms are raised more or less horizontally at shoulder level (Fig. 2.1:e). 6. The arms are bent at a right angle, but both turn downwards (Fig. 2.1:f). 7. The arms are bent, first downwards and then upwards away from the body. In this situation, each arm is usually raised in a different direction (Fig. 2.1:g), but there is one example in which both arms are raised together in front of the face (Fig. 9.29:a). 8. The arms are first bent downwards and then rise inwards towards the body (Fig. 2.1:h). 9. Both arms extend diagonally downwards (Fig. 2.1:i).

30

The D ance Analysis

In each scene, all the figures hold their arms in exactly the same position. This indicates formalized body movements performed by all participants in the dance. The hands are of great significance in several dancing traditions as well: The hand acts, and acting, speaks. This speaking can be literal as a word which represents something, or it can simply be like a sound, a pure vocal dynamic. . . . Due to the complexity of the hand’s anatomical structure and of its articulation possibilities, there are, in the movements of the fingers alone, infinite possible modifications of form and behaviour. Due to its communicative qualities, the hand has been exploited not only theatrically: many people, fascinated by the hand’s potential, have, at various times, attempted to create a universal language, developing an artificial codification of daily gestures (Barba and Savarese 1991:130–132).

Indeed, fingers are also depicted on quite a number of items, including some extremly schematic depictions (Figs. 7.3, 7.9, 8.4, 8.29, 8.30, 10.4, 10.9, 10.10, 10.12, 10.13, 10.15).

Leg position The legs are represented in a number of positions (Fig. 2.2). 1. The legs are straight, parallel, and close together (Fig. 2.2:a). Sometimes they are shown frontally and sometimes in profile (see, for example, Figs. 8.3:b, 8.4:a–c). 2. The legs are depicted extending diagonally (Fig. 2.2:b). 3. The legs are partly bent (Fig. 2.2:c). 4. The legs are bent at a right angle, first horizontally at the height of the pelvis and then vertically downwards (Fig. 2.2:d). 5. The legs are bent upwards with the lower leg raised above the knee (Fig. 2.2:e). This position is impossible from an anatomical point of view and seems to be an artistic convention expressing a dynamic posture. See the appendix for a further discussion of this phenomenon.

As in the case of the arms, all the participants in each scene execute the same movement with their legs, with very few exceptions (Fig. 12.12:g).

figure 2.2 Basic variations of leg positions in the dancing scenes.

31

Composition of the hands and legs When the arm and leg positions are juxtaposed, a body position or posture results, which expresses a frozen dance movement. In Laban’s words:

Structural Analysis of the D ance

Movement has always been used for two distinct aims: the attainment of tangible values in all kinds of work, and the approach to intangible values in prayer and worship. The same bodily movements occur in both work and worship, but their significance differs. In order to achieve the practical purpose of work, the stretching out of an arm and the gripping and handling of an object have to be made in a logical order. Not so in worship. Here gestures follow one another in an entirely irrational sequence, though each of the gestures used in worship might also be part of a working action (Laban 1971:4).

Thus when a dancing scene was depicted, it was necessary to represent a dance movement that could not be confused with everyday activities. As we will see below, specific body postures were chosen for this purpose. The sample yielded 116 items in which both upper and lower body parts are visible. No items drawn in the linear style are included, since the degree of schematization is often too great to allow a realistic analysis. Predynastic Egypt is also excluded, since one basic composition appears in most of the depictions from there. Twenty-four clear combinations were used (Fig. 2.3), described below according to their relative representation in the sample (Fig. 2.4). Figure 2.3 is a graphic presentation that also shows those possible combinations that are not recorded in the archaeological documents. 1. Arms bent at right angles upwards, legs bent at right angles downwards (combination Bd, ca. 27%). 2. Arms bent in a V-shape, legs straight (combination Ga, ca. 11–12%). 3. Arms extending diagonally downwards, legs straight (combination Ia, ca. 11–12%). This position is represented in most examples of the linear style, not included in this sample (Figs. 8.16–8.26). 4. Arms bent at right angles upwards, legs straight (combination Ba, ca. 3–5%). 5. Arms raised as high as possible, legs straight (combination Aa, ca. 3–5%). 6. Arms bent in a V-shape, legs bent (combination Gc, ca. 3–5%). 7. Arms bent upwards at right angles, legs extending diagonally downwards (combination Bb, ca. 3–5%). 8. Arms bent at right angles downwards, legs straight (combination Fa, ca. 3–5%). 9. Arms extending diagonally upwards, legs extending diagonally downwards (combination Cb, ca. 3–5%). 10. Arms bent at right angles downwards, legs extending diagonally (combination Fb, ca. 3–5%).

32

The D ance Analysis

figure 2.3 Basic combinations of arm and leg positions in the dancing scenes.

11. Arms bent upwards at right angles, legs bent (combination Bc, ca. 1–2.5%). 12. One arm bent at a right angle upwards and the other at a right angle downwards, legs straight (combination Da, ca. 1–2.5%). 13. Arms extending horizontally at shoulder level, legs extended diagonally (combination Eb, ca. 1–2.5%). 14. Arms and legs bent at right angles downwards (combination Fd, ca. 1–2.5%). 15. Arms bent in a V-shape, legs bent upwards (combination Ge, ca. 1–2.5%). 16. Arms bent in a V-shape, legs bent at right angles downwards (combination Gd, ca. 1–2.5%). 17. One arm bent at a right angle upwards and the other at a right angle downwards, legs extending diagonally (combination Db, ca. 1–2.5%).

figure 2.4 Frequencies of the basic body positions in the dancing scenes.

18. Arms bent first downwards and then raised inwards towards the body, legs straight (combination Ha, ca. 1–2.5%). 19. Arms extending diagonally down, legs bent (combination Ic, ca. 1–2.5%). 20.Arms raised as high as possible, legs extending diagonally (combination Ab, ca. 1–2.5%). 21. Arms extended horizontally at shoulder level, legs bent (combination Ec, ca. 1–2.5%). 22.One arm bent at a right angle upwards and the other at a right angle downwards, legs bent at right angles downwards (combination Dd, ca. 1–2.5%). 23. One arm bent at a right angle upwards and the other at a right angle downwards, legs bent upwards (combination De, ca. 1–2.5%). 24.Arms extending diagonally upwards, legs straight (combination Ca, ca. 1–2.5%).

Of the twenty-four different body positions, there is a clear preference for the posture with the arms bent at right angles upwards and the legs bent at right angles downwards (above, no. 1), including about a quarter of all cases. It seems to be a conventional gesture representing a dancing figure not only in the early village communities of the ancient Near East and southeast Europe but all over the world. Similar representations of human figures have been reported, for example, from the Zuojiang river valley in China, Australia, the Valcamonica valley in north Italy, and Sardinia (Zao Fu 1992; Walsh 1988, Fig. 111; Anati 1964, Pl. 9; Gimbutas 1989, Fig. 424). Some scholars have interpreted this body position as indicating adoration or prayer (Hauptmann 1976:87; Zao Fu 1992), but

34

the position of the legs would be too uncomfortable to maintain for long. It is a dynamic posture maintained for short intervals while dancing. This extraordinary posture, which cannot be ascribed to ordinary human activity, thus becomes a code symbol for dance. This form has further graphic characteristics: the left side and the right side of the figure are symmetrical, as are the upper and lower parts of the figure. The human shape is thus abstracted to the level of a pictographic sign.

dance decoration The D ance Analysis

Most of the dancing scenes concentrate on an abstract human figure, without any details. However, in a small number of cases, mainly in examples of the naturalistic style, some information is given concerning decoration or additional objects that accompany the dancers. In each scene where such additional objects are portrayed, the decorative details appear on all the figures without exception. The uniformity of the figures thus includes not only the posture but the dance decoration as well. It is possible to observe on examining the paraphernalia accompanying the dancers, the following eight features:

1. Coiffure Sometimes the arrangement of the dancer’s hair is represented (Fig. 2.5). Usually women, so identified by other gender characteristics, are shown as having long flowing hair, descending to the neck. Sometimes ribbons flow from the head to the back of the neck. In Predynastic Egypt, twigs or long feathers are stuck into the dancer’s hair (Figs. 11.6:b, 11.12:b).

2. Head covering Some figures appear with elongated heads without any hair texture (Fig. 2.6). These seem to indicate that head covers were used during some dancing ceremonies.

3. Masks In several cases, the head resembles an animal rather than a human head (Fig. 2.7). These cases and others like them have been interpreted as human figures disguised as animals or as mythical figures of demons (Barnett 1966; Porada 1965:32; van der Osten-Sacken 1992). Taking into consideration the following points, the anthropomorphic dancing figures with animals’ heads should be interpreted as humans wearing masks: A. Masks are now known in the archaeological record of the eighth millennium bc (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988, Pl. X; Nissen et al. 1987, Fig.16:1; Noy 1999:123–133). Depictions of masks can be found on pottery vessels from Khazineh, Tepe Djowi, and Chogha Mish in western Iran, dated to the sixth millennium bc (Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figs. 172–173; Le

figure 2.5 Hair arrangement in the dancing scenes.

figure 2.6 Head covering in the dancing scenes.

36

The D ance Analysis

Breton 1947, Fig. 30:15; Delougaz and Kantor 1996:191–192, Pls. 58:a, 176:s, u). B. Masks are an extremely important component in many dances and festivals the world over (Sachs 1952:131–138; Napier 1987; S. J. Cohen 1998, Vol. 4:286–306). The unique contribution of masks to public ceremonies has been described by Napier (1987:211). He noted that masks are the most expressive sign of the festival and bear an especially complex and important symbolic value. They signal by their mere presence that a representation is being held and a symbolic message is being conveyed. On the one hand, masks hide the identity of the person wearing them, and on the other hand, they disclose another persona instead. The mask brings to the outside what in daily life is an invisible entity, a hidden double personality or a secret dream.

It is thus possible that masks are depicted not only in cases in which human figures are disguised as animals but also in cases in which the head is grotesquely emphasized (Fig. 2.7:1–2, 10).

figure 2.7 Masks in the dancing scenes.

37

Structural Analysis of the D ance

figure 2.8 Dress and shoes in the dancing scenes.

The uses of masks seem to have a gender dimension. Usually it is male figures that are depicted with masks (Fig. 2.7:3–10). There is only one case in which a female figure is clearly shown as wearing a mask (Fig. 2.7:2).

4. Dress Different types of dress are visible in the dancing scenes: A. In some Halafian examples the figures wear a loincloth round the waist (Fig. 2.8:1–3). Figures in similar dress made of leopard skins are depicted in the wall paintings of Çatal Höyük (see below, Fig. 2.19). B. In one case, the torsos of the figures are covered with spots (Fig. 2.8:9). This may be an indication that they are wearing leopard skins. The leopard appears in Near Eastern protohistoric art: in the wall reliefs of Çatal Höyük, on painted Halafian pottery sherds, in Iran, and on figures constructed of stone slabs in a cult structure at Uvda (Mellaart 1967, Pl. 18, VI, 21; Mallowan and Rose 1935, Fig. 77.1; Mallowan 1936, Fig. 27:1–2; Vanden Berghe 1968:21; Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 176:R; Yogev 1983). The leopard obviously played an important symbolic role in this period. C. In some artifacts, human figures are depicted with “three legs” (Figs. 8.22, 8.24:c–g, 11.3:a). This situation differs from those examples in which

38

The D ance Analysis

figure 2.9 Accompanying objects in the dancing scenes.

a protrusion between the legs represents the male sex organ (Fig. 2.13). It has been suggested that these figures, as well as some later figures of this type on cylinder seals, represent a human figure wearing an animal skin with a tail (Kaplan 1969:18; Ben-Tor 1978:85). This suggestion seems quite plausible, since one of the most characteristic traditional dancemime productions consists of imitations of animal movements (Laban 1971:11). D. In some examples, the figure has a belt or a loincloth round the waist (Fig. 2.8:4–8). This loincloth is stylistically different from that mentioned above as part of Halafian dress. E. In some examples, the figures are robed in a kind of skirt (Fig. 2.8:10).

5. Footwear One cylinder seal shows a row of figures wearing boots, with the toes curving upwards (Fig. 2.8:12). Similar footwear is known from the iconography of the ancient Near East from the Halafian culture onwards in various cultic contexts (Barnett 1966; Amiet 1979; Ippolitoni-Strika 1990:152–156; van der Osten-Sacken 1992, Pl. XVII).

6. Accompanying objects Sometimes the figures hold various objects in their hands. These objects are long and narrow and seem to be branches (Fig. 2.9:1–3) or sticks

39

Structural Analysis of the D ance

(Fig. 2.9:4–5). Figures holding branches are often portrayed in Mesopotamian iconography of the historical periods, usually when the scene depicts the feeding of the holy herd (Amiet 1961, Nos. 636–641). In Predynastic Egypt some figures hold two short objects in one of their hands (Figs. 11.11, 11.14:c). These have been interpreted as “castanets” (Randall-MacIver and Mace 1902:42; Baumgartel 1960:145). If this interpretation is correct, this is the only example of musical instruments accompanying the dancing.

7. Animals With the exception of scenes from Predynastic Egypt (discussed below), the depiction of animals together with dancing figures is rare and rather schematic. It is not always possible to suggest an exact zoomorphic identification (Figs. 2.10:1, 8.4). Of the five examples, one is a scorpion (Fig. 8.4); two animals seem to be birds, as they are depicted with only two legs (Figs. 2.10:2–3, 9.15:d, 9.25:d); the two other animals have four legs and seem to be sheep or goats (Figs. 2.10:4–5, 7.3:b, 12.12:e). The birds and the sheep/goats may be sacrificial offerings. The sheep/goats may indicate that the dance was associated with a herd fertility cult. The late appearance of the sheep/goats motif may indicate a growth in the importance of animal husbandry in the economy of the protohistoric Near East over time. In the Naqada II phase of Predynastic Egypt of the fourth millennium bc, water birds and antelopes appear in most of the dancing scenes (Figs. 11.9–11.22). In this phase, dancing was integrated into the Egyptian landscape, either into Nilotic scenery (boats and aquatic fauna) or less frequently into a desert environment. However, the depicted animals seem to be an integral part of the landscape and are not associated with the dancing activity directly. In fact, depictions of dancing figures with Nilotic or desert landscapes are less common than depictions bearing just this landscape(see, for example, Petrie and Quibell 1896; Petrie 1920; Crowfoot Payne 1993).

8. Nudity Sometimes the total absence of any accompanying dress is stressed, when the dancers are depicted in the nude (Figs. 7.7:a–b, 9.15:b, 9.29:d). The use of masks, special coiffures, head coverings, special clothing, and shoes indicates that dancing was sometimes accompanied by dressing

figure 2.10 Animals in the dancing scenes.

40

The D ance Analysis

up, testifying to the dramatic element involved. Lange described the relationship between drama and dance as the incorporation of dramatic material into ritualistic dances to transmit the accumulating mythology of gods, demons, and heroes. Dance drama performed in temples and shrines probably combined this mythology with motifs of victory of life over death and with honoring the dead. Dance drama was used primarily to interpret and transmit epic content. Detailed human features were gradually ascribed to the gods, and the performers who represented them originally expressed all the god’s characteristics by movement only, dance being the basic element in these rituals (Lange 1976:67–68).

As the plots of dance rituals gained further complexity, they could no longer be conveyed only by dance, and the narrative content had to be clarified by the addition of mime and speech. In Lange’s view, this was the origin of the ritualistic dance drama of ancient civilizations, which formed the beginning of theater after its eventual secularization (Lange 1976:67–68; for further opinions, see Kirstein 1935). Another approach that emphasizes the connection between dance and drama can be found in Schechner’s work: Phenomena called “performance,” “theater,” “dance,” “drama,” “dance drama,” or “dance theater” occur among all the world’s peoples and date back at least to Paleolithic times. The terms themselves can be confusing because they vary according to who is using them. Performance is an inclusive term meaning the activities of actors, dancers, musicians, and their spectators and audiences. Theater, dance, and music are equivalent terms, each referring to a specific genre of performance. Theater emphasizes narrative, dance emphasizes movement, and music emphasizes sound. Drama is written narrative dialogue. Dancing, singing, wearing masks and costumes, impersonating other people, animals, or supernaturals (or being possessed by these others); acting stories, retelling the hunt; presenting time one at time two; rehearsing and preparing special places and time for these presentations— all are coexistent with the human condition (Schechner 1987:436; for further opinions, see Beeman 1993:385).

Archaeological artifacts testify to the integration of dramatic elements in the dance of the early village communities of the Near East and southeast Europe. These are the earliest roots of the more complicated Mesopotamian cult dramas of the third millennium bc, described by Jacobsen (1987:464) as follows: The communal cult of the gods was of two kinds, celebrating the appropriate festivals of the various gods at appropriate times and providing daily services such as would be required by any high human dignitary.

41

The earlier of these are undoubtedly the festivals, most of which are best understood as communal magic rites for prosperity developed into cult dramas performed by community representatives. There is evidence for various types of such dramas: the Sacred Marriage, the Death Drama, the Journey Drama, and the Plowing Drama. Others may have existed. The Community Level

Structural Analysis of the D ance

We turn now to an examination of dance form at the group level. Unlike dancing at the individual level, at the community level, dancers relate to each other.

spatial organization The form and relationship between the dancers (figure composition) reflect the spatial organization of the community at the time of the dance performance. Dance form refers to the community’s interaction with the space in which the dance is performed, while figure composition is concerned with the spatial interaction between individuals.

Dance form We can see three different types of use of space by the community: the circle dance, line dance, and couples dance. Technically, the depiction of a circle dance is easy to execute on a rounded object, such as a pottery vessel or a cylinder seal, but very complicated on a flat surface. The opposite is the case when a line dance is depicted, as it is easier to present it on a flat surface than on a rounded vessel (on this problem, see Kechagia 1995). The potters and artists of the ancient Near East and southeast Europe found various ways to overcome this problem, as elaborated upon below.

ci rcle dance The basic spatial organization of dancing seen on archaeological artifacts is that of a circle. There are many advantages to this form, since all the dancers are on equal terms in relation to the center of the circle and to each other. Each dancer is at the same distance from the center and has a partner on the right and left, or in front and behind, promoting unified mood and action. The participants sometimes progress individually, without holding other dancers. However, different ways in which dancers hold each other may strengthen the closed character of a circle. Within the movement of the circle, each dancer applies his or her own movement abilities to an interpretation that is conditioned by the dance’s structure. The dancers must be very aware of the focus of the center of the circle to fit into the structure. All the action is applied to it, and centrifugal force often enables the dancers to go around more easily and enhances the feeling of unity and elation.

42

The D ance Analysis

Most circle dances are connected with magical and social activities. The external world is excluded by the closed circle, which prevents alien forces from penetrating it. The unification of the dancers’ intentions and actions takes the group out of the surrounding environment in a highly organized manner (Lange 1976:83–84). Another aspect of the dance, usually associated with rhythmic movement in a circle, is the transformation of the mind into various stages of trance and ecstasy. This can be achieved by the use of drugs or by long periods of fasting (often in conjunction with different rites), leading to exhaustion and hallucinations. However, one of the main means employed to transform the mind into trance, throughout history and all over the world, has been dance. Dance has a physiological effect on the brain of the performer and thus promotes transcendence. Hyperventilation, exhausting, whirling, turning, and circular, rotational movements all affect the sense of balance and equilibrium and eventually cause dizziness. The trancelike properties of dance, if performed in particular circumstances and as a largely pleasurable experience leading to autohypnosis and ecstasy, must have been discovered very early on (Lange 1976:66–67).

li ne da nce Line dance may be represented in two different groups of painted objects. 1. If we depict a horizontal line on a rounded object, we will automatically get a circle on the circumference of the item. Thus, a deliberate effect is needed to depict a different geometric form. In a few pottery vessels from western Iran—Khazineh, Tepe Musiyan, DK 41, Tepe Sabz, Tepe Giyan, and Chogha Mish (Figs. 9.4–9.10)—the figures were arranged in vertical lines from the rim to the base and not horizontally, as in most cases. This spatial organization is completely different from that of a circle and seems more suitable for portraying a line dance (Garfinkel 2000). 2. The dances are performed in front of structures and do not form a closed circle. Such objects have been reported from southern Mesopotamia and Iran: Choga Mami, Djaffarabad, Tepe Sialk, and Tepe Gawra (Fig. 9.15). There are other examples of horizontal lines of figures that do not close into a circle (Fig. 9.17:d, f–g). The question in these cases is whether the scenes represent a line dance or whether the introduction of the structure created technical difficulties for the depiction of a complete circle.

The opening of the circle to form a line dance creates an entirely different atmosphere, in which nothing is excluded from the circle or protected inside it. The stress is on progression rather than on dancing around a focal point. Forms such as the spiral and the serpentine result when the furthest dancer leads the group out of the strict circle formation. The leader also enables the group to move to different places. The result of this is the processional type of dancing, which is entirely con-

43

Structural Analysis of the D ance

cerned with progression over the dance surface and in which the side step of the open circle or chain is replaced by the forward step (Lange 1976:85).

co u p l e s d a n c e This is the rarest type of dance in the archaeological inventory. I am suggesting that the engraved plaque from Çatal Höyük (Fig. 7.6:b) should be interpreted as representing two couples in a dance, and there are other representations of couples from southeast Europe (Figs. 10.3, 10.4:b). The partners of a couple as a dance unit move around or alongside their common axis as a separate microformation in itself. In some instances they form a world of their own, concerned solely with their own interaction. However, the most common movement is rotation around the common axis of the partners, on the spot or while whirling on a circle line. This double rotation gives a new facet to the dance activities. “If there are many couples joining the dance in this way, the integrity of the whole group comes alive, still leaving room for the integrity of the couple as the smallest unit” (Lange 1976:85). Figure composition The spatial relationship of the dancing figures to each other can be divided into five categories based on the space between them (Fig. 2.11). Intimacy increases as we move from one category to the next.

figure 2.11 Basic variations of figure compositions.

1. The figures stand next to each other but do not touch (Fig. 2.11:a). 2. Each figure holds hands both with its neighbor on the right and with its neighbor on the left (Fig. 2.11:b). 3. Each figure touches the shoulders of the figure in front of it and is similarly touched by the figure behind (Fig. 2.11:c). 4. The figures stand shoulder to shoulder. The hands are not represented but are probably clasping one another from behind (Fig. 2.11:d). 5. The figures embrace. This is a rare situation, and only one definite example is known from Çatal Höyük, in a couples dance (Fig. 2.11:e).

44

The D ance Analysis

Various degrees of bodily contact are evident in these five positions. There is a growing degree of intimacy from one position to the next. Figures standing parallel to each other, not touching, tend to appear with elaborate coiffure, head coverings, and clothing of various sorts (Figs. 8.3, 9.17:a, c), whereas figures appearing in the nude (an intimate pose in itself ) touch each other: they hold hands (Fig. 7.7:a), touch one another on the shoulder (Fig. 9.29:d), or stand shoulder to shoulder (Fig. 9.15:b). Another aspect of figure composition is that the figures are equally distributed over the object. In each scene, all the figures are depicted at the same distance from one another. This characteristic probably reflects the rhythmical aspect of the dance, for how else could this rhythm be expressed on a static art object? The importance of rhythm has been described as lying in its property of organizing the flow of movement in different ways; a rhythmic pattern may be established by the units of a certain length of time that recur in movement (Lange 1976:31). Lange saw rhythm as a coordinating factor in human group activities, whether in dance or in working actions, pointing to the fact that all over the world, groups execute their work to the accompaniment of songs or to the beat of musical instruments such as drums or clappers (Lange 1976:37). In his view, the dance activity of a group can be completely unified only by a common movement theme. The rhythmic background has to be externalized by clapping, beating of drums or other means so that every dancer can follow the same dance idea and the same time timing (Lange 1976:82).

direction of movement It is possible to circle in two directions, clockwise and counterclockwise. In many cultures, it is “right” to dance in one way or the other, and in some cases, the “wrong” direction may even be considered dangerous. This is how traditions crystallize over time. In other cultures, the direction of circling is entirely without significance (Lange 1976:84). What can be learned from the archaeological artifacts concerning the direction of dancing in the early village communities? When the figures are shown frontally, one cannot know in which direction the dancers are proceeding. This is the case in the earliest items from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B of the eighth millennium bc, most of the examples from the seventh millennium bc, and all the objects from Neolithic Europe. However, from the seventh millennium bc onwards, some figures are presented in profile, only in a few instances at first, but later on with more examples. The data on this are presented in Table 2.1. In these cases, the direction of the dance, either counter-clockwise or clockwise, can be deduced. Two variables are decisive here: the location of the scene on the vessel (interior or exterior) and the direction of the dancer’s profile to the right or the left. Fig. 2.12 sums up the various possibilities.

ta b l e 2 . 1

Direction of movement in the dancing scenes according to the different geographical-chronological units. (Figures depicted in profile on rounded objects.) Counter-clockwise No. %

No.

Clockwise %

Total No.

Neolithic Near East Halafian and Samarra Cultures Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran Neolithic Southeast Europe Predynastic Egypt Near East, Later Examples

1 13 14 2 10 5

50 93 86 50 83 30

1 1 2 2 2 12

50 7 13 50 17 70

2 14 16 4 12 17

Total

45

70

20

30

65

figure 2.12 Clockwise and counter-clockwise movement of dancing scenes.

Clockwise movement is indicated when figures shown on the exterior face left, and figures on the interior face right. Counter-clockwise movement is indicated when figures on the exterior face right, and figures on the interior face left. Decoration of dancers in profile on the interior, however, is very rare and appears on a few examples only (Figs. 8.4, 9.29:d).

Counter-clockwise movement The earliest example of figures arranged in a counter-clockwise direction have been reported from Köçcsk Höyük (Fig. 7.7:d). In the Halafian culture there are ten examples of figures presented in profile, and they all move counter-clockwise (Figs. 8.3, 8.12). The figures from Samarra with

46

The D ance Analysis

flowing hair face forwards, but their hair flows to the right (Fig. 8.4:a– c), indicating that the movement is to the left—in this case, counterclockwise. In Iran, figures were depicted in counter-clockwise movement at Qal‘eh Rostam (Fig. 9.29:a) and at the sites on the plateau (Fig. 9.25). In Neolithic southeast Europe, there are only four examples of figures presented in profile, and two are represented in counter-clockwise movement (Figs. 10.12:c, 10.14:a). In Predynastic Egypt, most of the figures depicted on jars are facing right, indicating counter-clockwise movement. In later examples from the Near East, some of the figures appear dancing counter-clockwise (Fig. 12.5:b, d, f, h–i), but this tendency is not dominant as in earlier periods (only ca. 30%).

Clockwise movement This direction of movement has a limited distribution. In the earlier periods it was extremely rare, though it became more popular in the Near East later on (see Table 2.1). The context in which many of these examples have been unearthed is of special importance. Two such objects have been reported from sites dating to the sixth and early fifth millennia bc: the holemouth jar from ‘Ein el-Jarba and a fenestrated pedestal bowl from Tall-i Jari A (Figs. 8.29:b, 9.29:d). Both objects are grave goods, associated with burials. The depictions of clockwise movement from Egypt were also found in burial contexts. It seems that most of the scenes with clockwise movement came from burials. This indicates that vessels decorated by such scenes were deliberately chosen to be deposited with the deceased during funeral rites. Is it possible that in mourning rituals, as opposed to festive occasions, the movement was deliberately carried out in a clockwise direction, thus differentiating between happy and sad occasions? A similar practice is described in the postbiblical tradition of the Mishnah, in its description of the pilgrimage to the Second Temple in Jerusalem, dated to the turn of the era: “Whosoever it was that entered the Temple Mount came in on the right and went round and came out on the left, save any whom aught befell, for he went round to the left. ‘What aileth thee that thou goest to the left?’ ‘Because I am a mourner’” (Middoth 2:2, translation: Danby 1938). While the regular direction of movement around the Temple was from right to left in a counter-clockwise movement, mourners used to move in the opposite direction. In the examples presented from Halafian, Samarra, and Iranian sites, the direction is counter-clockwise in 90 percent of the thirty cases in which the direction of dancing is known. In Predynastic Egypt, the direction is counter-clockwise in 83 percent of the cases in which the direction is known. In the entire assemblage, the direction is counterclockwise in 70 percent of the sixty-five cases in which the direction of dancing is known. Thus in the early village communities of the ancient Near East there was a clear preference for circular movement in a

47

Structural Analysis of the D ance

counter-clockwise direction. Classical works on dance did not usually assign any special importance to the direction of movement. A rather romantic approach can be found in the following old quotation, which is not acceptable any more: The preference for one side of the body as a problem of culture history was first observed and discussed by Bachofen: the left side of the body is given preference over the right in the cultures in which women occupy an important position—in matriarchies, earth and moon religions, and agricultural societies. On the other hand, the right side is favored over the left in the cultures in which males have the more important place— in patriarchies, sky and sun religions, and among hunters and nobles (Sachs 1952:170).

The data from the early village communities, which were clearly agricultural societies, indicate that they preferred to dance in a counterclockwise direction, thus moving to the right. Moreover, Amos Hetz of the Jerusalem Rubin Academy of Music and Dance informs me that from his observations on circle dances the world over, the movement is usually counter-clockwise. He suggests that this is because in walking, people begin with the dominant leg, which is usually the right leg. This would result in a circle in a counter-clockwise direction. The archaeological artifacts from the ancient Near East add a historical dimension to this observation, emphasizing the preference for counter-clockwise movement in the circle.

gender analysis Gender analysis of the archaeological data cannot deal with the same topics as those applied to modern dance (Hanna 1988; Burt 1995) but offers another dimension for understanding interaction on the community level (Gero and Conkey 1991). Identification of the dancers’ sex allows for the understanding of who is dancing with whom. Addressing the question about the status of men and women in dance in general, Sachs made the following comment: Men’s dance far exceed women’s dance in number. Men alone execute hunting, war, and sun dances, and nearly always the animal, spirit, and boy’s initiation dance. Besides, they have the rain and medicine dances in those shamanistic cultures in which the shamanism is in the hands of the men. . . . Like the men, the women also have dances from which the other sex is excluded. A male who trespasses may be punished. . . . The territory of the mixed dance has no hard and fast boundaries. In general we may say that the mixed dance is not found in basic cultures and is not common in the tribal cultures that are predominantly masculine. . . . It is found principally in the predominantly feminine planter and later in the peasant and noble cultures up to the high cultures (Sachs 1952:172–174).

48

The D ance Analysis

figure 2.13 Direct gender characteristics of male figures. figure 2.14 Direct gender characteristics of female figures.

To apply gender analysis, the sex of the dancing figures must be identified. This can be done on a few levels of certainty: 1. The sex is clearly differentiated by a display of the male genitals and the female genitals or breasts (Figs. 2.13, 2.14). 2. The sex can be identified by other indicators: a muscular body for males (Fig. 2.15) as opposed to an enlarged pelvis for females (Fig. 2.16). In the

49

Structural Analysis of the D ance

figure 2.15 Indirect gender characteristics of male figures.

Halafian and Samarra cultures, in addition to the physical characteristics, males may have been represented with loincloths (Fig. 8.3:a, c–e), while women were depicted with long hair and ribbons (Figs. 8.3:f, 8.4:a–c). Where men and women are shown in the same scene, they are contrasted in body proportions. With the exception of Predynastic Egypt, men are usually portrayed as tall and thin, and women as short and rounded. Such examples have been reported from Nevali Çori and Tepe Giyan (Fig. 2.17:5–6). On the objects from Nevali Çori and Tepe Giyan, the female figures have been interpreted as quadrupeds, turtles, and frogs (Barnett 1966:262; Bienert and Fritz 1989; van der Osten-Sacken 1992:226). In Predynastic Egypt, however, the female figures were drawn bigger than the accompanying male figures. This concept is repeated on almost all the painted jars. 3. Disputed figures. The gender of three depictions from the Naqada I phase of Predynastic Egypt have been the subject of repeated dispute (Figs. 11.3:e, 11.6). These scenes present a combination of tall and short figures, and it has been argued that they are either all male or all female, that the tall figures are male and the short are female, or that the tall figures are female and the short are male (Garfinkel 2001b). However, in

50

The D ance Analysis

figure 2.16 Indirect gender characteristics of female figures.

Predynastic Egypt, figurines and various other forms of art depict tall figures with raised arms and incurved hands as females. 4. Figures with no sexual identity. These include all the figures painted in a linear style, some of the figures painted in a geometric, and some of the figures engraved on stone objects.

Objects suitable for analysis of social interaction between the sexes should have the following features: more than one figure should be preserved on the object, and the figures should bear direct or indirect gender characteristics. Using these criteria I could classify, sometimes without a high degree of certainty, 110 relevant objects (see Table 2.2). More information is given concerning the dancers’ gender in Tables 2.3 and 2.4. In the discussion below, I do not cite data from Table 2.3 because only one figure is preserved on the objects. The following combinations were identified:

ta b l e 2.2

Gender analysis of the dancing figures according to the different geographicalchronological units. More than one figure preserved on the objects. Male No. %

Female Male & Female No. % No. %

Subtotal Unclear Total

Neolithic Near East 1 Halafian and Samarra Cultures 6 Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran 14 Neolithic Southeast Europe 3 Predynastic Egypt 4 Near East, Later Examples 19

20 46 48 38 13 79

3 6 15 3 5 3

60 46 52 38 16 13

1 1 — 2 22 2

20 8 — 25 71 8

5 13 29 8 31 24

2 83 67 9 — 14

7 96 96 17 31 38

47

43

35

32

28

25

110

175

285

Total

table 2.3

Gender analysis of the dancing figures according to the different geographicalchronological units. Only one figure preserved on the object. Male No. %

Female No. %

Neolithic Near East Halafian and Samarra Cultures Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran Neolithic Southeast Europe Predynastic Egypt Near East, Later Examples

2 6 2 16 — 2

25 75 40 64 0 100

6 2 3 9 14 —

75 25 60 36 100 0

8 8 5 25 14 2

5 1 15 25 2 1

13 9 20 50 16 3

Subtotal

28

45.2

34

54.8

62

49

111

table 2.4

Unclear Total

Gender analysis of the dancing figures according to the different geographical-chronological units. One or a few figures preserved on the object. (Tables 2.2 and 2.3 combined.) Male No. %

Female No. %

Neolithic Near East Halafian and Samarra Cultures Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran Neolithic Southeast Europe Predynastic Egypt Near East, Later Examples

3 12 16 19 4 21

25 60 47 61 17 87

9 8 18 12 19 3

Subtotal

75

52

69

Total %

Subtotal

18.9

Subtotal

Male & Female

Unclear

75 40 53 39 83 13

12 20 34 31 23 24

1 1 — 2 22 2

7 84 82 34 2 15

48

144 (100%) 7.1

56.6

17.4

Total 20 105 116 67 47 41

100.0

52

The D ance Analysis

Only male dancers: See, for example, Figs. 8.3:a–b, 8.12, 8.29:a, 9.5:a, 9.25:e, 9.29:b–d, 9.30:f, 10.2:b–c, 10.5:a, 12.2, 12.5:a–c, e–f, 12.6:a–c, 12.9, 12.12:e–f. When the entire assemblage is taken into consideration, male dance constitutes 18.9 percent of all cases (but note that on 56.6% of the depictions, the sex is not clear). When we consider only the clear-cut cases, in which more than one figure is preserved and the gender is identifiable, male dance comprises ca. 43 percent (Table 2.2); it rises to 52 percent (Table 2.4) when we combine all the scenes in which the gender is identifiable. Only female dancers: See, for example, Figs. 7.3:c, 7.7:a, 8.3:f, 8.4:a–c, 9.17:e, 9.19:a–b, 9.25:a–d, f–g, 11.3:c, 11.9:d, 11.23:d, 12.6:d, f. When the entire assemblage is taken into consideration, female dance constitutes ca. 17.4 percent of all dancers. When only the clear-cut cases are considered, female dance comprises 32 percent (Table 2.2) or 48 percent (Table 2.4). Both male and female dancers: Fig. 2.17. In the entire assemblage, mixed dance constitutes ca. 7.1 percent of all cases. When only the clear-cut cases are considered, the mixed dance comprises 25 percent (Table 2.2). Depictions of males and females dancing together are known mainly from Predynastic Egypt, where of the twenty-eight examples of a mixed dance, twenty-two are from Egypt.

Four observations related to the gender composition of the dancing scenes deserve closer examination: 1. In 56.6 percent of the examples, the gender of the participants has not been indicated (Table 2.4). It seems that the ancient painter usually did not pay much attention to the dancers’ sex when depicting dancing scenes. 2. The dance of male and female together in the same location is usually rare. Excluding Predynastic Egypt, this combination is known from only six examples (Fig. 2.17:1–6). On two objects engraved on stone, the row of dancers is composed of three figures. In these cases the woman was placed in the center, flanked by a man on either side (Fig. 7.3:a–b). In the two depictions from southeast Europe, only two figures are presented, and they are standing near each other (Fig. 10.13). One painted sherd presenting men and women alternately in a row (Fig. 9.15:b) and on one cylinder seal impression there are one female figure and three males (Fig. 12.12:g). Sometimes the figures are clearly naked, with their sex organs exposed, and they are touching each other. A more intimate atmosphere is apparent in these objects. In other cases the figures are not naked, and they are not touching each other. They express a more formal atmosphere. 3. The various geographical-chronological units do not present a homogeneous picture, but substantial differences can be observed between areas

53

Structural Analysis of the D ance

figure 2.17 Presentations of both sexes in the same scene.

and over time (Table 2.4). A clear two-stage pattern can be seen in the development of the dancing scenes. In the earliest depictions, female figures appear in most of the examples. Over the millennia, the representation of male figures increased, and the representation of female figures decreased, to the point where female representations dropped to 13 percent in the latest period. What are the implications of these changes, as they correspond to the transition from village to urban life? It seems that women actually play major roles in dancing activities and rituals of the early phases of the agricultural revolution, but later their position was taken over by men. A. In the early Neolithic period of the Near East, female figures played the dominant role in dancing, and they comprise 75 percent of the depictions. In Predynastic Egypt, a similar, very high proportion of female figures appears in the dancing scenes (ca. 83%). B. Later, the female figures are still important, as they comprise 40 percent of the dancing figures in the Halafian and Samarra cultures, 53 percent in Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran, and 39 percent in Neolithic southeast Europe. However, they clearly decrease in proportion. C. In the later examples from the Near East, with the rise of urban societies, female figures constitute only 13 percent of the dancing figures.

54

The D ance Analysis

4. The dance depictions from Predynastic Egypt present a very different approach to gender than the other geographical/chronological units in a number of ways. The female figure played a special role in the ritual activities: A. The dance of males and females together was very common and appears on almost all depictions in which more than one figure is portrayed. B. The female figure is almost always represented with the same body gesture, with her arms uplifted and her hands curved in, as almost touching her head. This arm pose is also depicted on many contemporaneous female clay and stone figurines. C. Physically the female figure is depicted as much larger than the male figures around her. D. When only one dancer is depicted on a vessel, it is always a female figure.

place of performance Information is sometimes given in the dancing scenes about the place of the ceremony (Fig. 2.18).

Dance in the vicinity of architectural components In a small number of cases, there is a geometric-shaped area, sometimes net-covered, which is larger than the human figures. Based on similar later features (see, for example, Ben-Tor 1978:84, Fig. 23), this should be interpreted as a cult structure, possibly a temple. Examples include: 1. Net-covered rectangles from Tell Halaf, Tepe Musiyan, Chogha Mish, and Khazineh (Fig. 2.18:1–4). 2. A net-covered frame from Teleilat Ghassul (Fig. 2.18:5). 3. Net-covered triangles from Tepe Sialk and Tepe Gawra (Fig. 2.18:6–7). 4. Frames of straight parallel lines from Djaffarabad and Choga Mami (Fig. 2.18:8–9). 5. A clay model fragment from Abadiya, clearly indicating that the performance is taking place inside a built enclosure (Fig. 11.26:b). 6. A horizontal band covered by a net pattern on which the figures stand. Examples have been reported from Qabrestan, Tepe Hissar, Bab edhDhra’, and Rosh Ha-Niqra (Fig. 2.18:10–13). This pattern on Levantine cylinder seals from the third millennium bc is usually interpreted as representing a temple in, by, or on which the figures are dancing (BenTor 1978:57–61; Lapp 1989). 7. On a cylinder seal from Tell Brak, dated to the third millennium bc, it is clear that the figures are dancing inside the structure and on its roof (Figs. 2.18:14, 12.6:g).

figure 2.18 Various features in the vicinity of dancers.

Architectural features are not present in the early examples, dated to the eighth and seventh millennia bc. They begin to appear only in the sixth millennium bc, in relatively small quantities, and become more frequent towards the end of the period under discussion, on the cylinder seals of the third-millennium bc Levant. This is probably the result of the formalization of ritual, with dancing one of the components of ritual, being brought under the auspices of temples.

56

The D ance Analysis

Dance in the vicinity of trees The performance sometimes took place near freestanding vegetation, which clearly differs from the branches held by the dancers as accompanying objects (see above). Trees have been reported from a Tepe Gawra bowl (between the two triangles), on some Egyptian vessels, and on a jar from Bab edh-Dhra’ (Figs. 2.18:7, 17–20). The role of tree symbols in various traditional societies has been examined recently (Rival 1998:3). Tree symbols revolve around two essential qualities: vitality and self-regenerative power. The biological cycle makes trees amenable to life-reaffirming and death-denying cultural representations. The trees depicted in the dancing scenes are among the earliest representations of trees as life affirming in the iconography of the ancient Near East.

“Circles” Two circles are drawn next to the dancing figures on two objects from Khazineh (Fig. 2.18:15–16). The same enigmatic circles appear on other painted vessels from Tepe Musiyan and Chogha Mish (Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figs. 187, 199; Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 59:gg). In the dancing scenes, each circle is the same size as the human figures. It has been suggested that the circles represent the solar disk or the moon and that the dance was performed in adoration of the heavenly bodies (Gautier and Lampre 1905:116, 134; Ackerman 1967). But the protrusions on the sides of the circles should be noted, which make it unlikely that they represent the sun or the moon. They could equally represent a specific place or perhaps a large bonfire around which the dance was performed.

Hidden location On a large number of examples from Tell es-Sawwan and various Halafian sites, dated to the sixth and the beginning of the fifth millennia bc, the dancing scene appears on the interior of a closed vessel. This is a hidden position, and the scene would not have been visible. Perhaps it symbolizes secret dances, which are sometimes performed as part of initiation rites.

Boats In Predynastic Egypt many of the dancing scenes are associated with boats (Figs. 11.7–11.20). At first glimpse, it seems that the boats, together with the water birds and antelopes, are part of the Nilotic landscape. However, this depiction is not restricted only to objects originating in the Nile Valley but is found also on rock carvings from the eastern Egyptian desert (Fig. 11.24). Perhaps the dancing itself was performed on boats.

57

“Mountains” In a small number of depictions from Predynastic Egypt the dancing figures are presented near a horizontal row of black triangles (Fig. 11.23:a–b, d). In these scenes the typical Nilotic features, of boats and water birds, are absent. The basic components, besides the dancing figures, are antelopes and black triangles, commonly interpreted as mountains or lines of hills (Crowfoot Payne 1993). It is possible that the dance in these examples was carried out outside the Nile Valley, in the Egyptian desert.

Structural Analysis of the D ance

time of performance Time is another dimension of dancing activity. As summarized by Hanna (1979:27): Dance can be viewed within several time perspectives. There is the duration of the performance itself; the duration of the interval during which the audience perceives, understands, or reacts to the dance; and the interval actually portrayed in the dance itself, which is based on the choreographer’s conceptions of time.

All these elements are not retrievable from the depicted dance scenes. However, there is one fact that may be relevant to the time of performance: the figures are usually represented as black silhouettes. This type of representation is not necessarily due to artistic conventions or technical limitations, since other contemporary human and animal representations include color and internal details (see, for example, Mellaart 1967, Pls. VI, VII, XI, XIII; von Oppenheim 1943, Pl. LVII:10). Could this be an indication that the dance was performed at night? In the light of a fire or the moon, humans would look like shadows, with no internal details. “Frequently, the dance is nothing more than a reflection of shadowy silhouettes projected by the smoke and flickering light of a campfire” (Royce 1977:198). Perhaps this experience is conveyed in the representation of the figures. Ethnographic observations, as presented in the next chapter, also emphasize that dance in pre-state societies is usually preformed after sunset, during the night. For further discussion of dance at night, and on the use of the moon as a calendrical device, see below in Chapter 3. Cultic Aspects

Ethnographic observations on ritual and religious activities of pre-state societies emphasize the importance of speech, singing, and dancing. Bloch (1989:21) wrote of this situation: “I very much doubt that an event observed by an anthropologist which did not contain these three elements would ever be described by him as a ritual. In other words these phenomena have been implicitly taken as the distinguishing marks of

58

The D ance Analysis

ritual.” In the case of prehistoric pre-state societies, speech and singing are lost forever, but some evidence of dancing has survived through art objects. In our case study there are a few hundred pictorial expressions of dance. However, can they be specifically connected with religious activity? It seems to me that the structure of the scenes is of relevance to this question. The depiction of dancing demands strict adherence to discipline, dictating the form of the performance. The posture of all the figures is the same. All figures are dressed identically, or they are all nude. When holding objects, such as sticks, all the figures hold identical objects. All figures turn in the same direction. The distance between one figure and the next is uniform. In Predynastic Egypt the dancing motif was executed differently than in the other geographical regions, and the specific figures in each depiction were not necessarily organized according to common convention. Thus one can find in one depiction figures that are not identical to each other in gender, size, body postures, dance decoration, or direction of movement. Nevertheless, Egyptian depictions present a very formalized pattern, with a large female figure always depicted with the same arm pose and with smaller male figures. Such requirements are typical of religious rituals, which demand a strict repetition of verbal pronouncements, movements, costumes, time, and place of performance. Such requirements are often described in ethnographic observations of rituals, as noted by Bloch (1989:37–38): There is some sense in saying that bodily movements are a kind of language and that symbolic signals are communicated through a variety of movements from one person to another. There is also much evidence that the combination of bodily signs and their order is used to convey more complex messages. In this way there is a sense in which the control of the body is “language,” albeit a rather poor one in comparison to the language of speech. The restrictions on this language in traditional authority situations exactly parallels the formalization of speech and indeed usually accompanies it. The restriction of the free use of the bodily language in such situations is actually even more strictly enforced. Again, as with language, we find that these restrictions are also present, and in a more systematic manner, in religious rituals. Messages carried by the language of the body also become ossified, predictable and repeated from one action to the next, rather than recombined as in everyday situations when they can convey a great variety of messages. As with speech, the formalization of body movement implies ever-growing control of choice of sequences of movement, and when this has occurred completely we have dance. We therefore find dance, as well as formalized body movements, typical of religion. The implications of this transformation from ordinary bodily control to dance are the same as they are for language: argument and bargaining with bodily movements are replaced by fixed, repeated, fused messages. The acceptance of this code implies compul-

59

sion. Communication has stopped being a dialectic and has become a matter of repeating correctly.

Other scholars do not place so much emphasis on the repetitive elements of the ritual, though the importance of dance in the process is not overlooked, as expressed for example by V. N. Turner (1984:25):

Structural Analysis of the D ance

Ritual, in tribal society, represents not an obsessional concern with repetitive acts but an immense orchestration of genres in all available sensory codes: speech, music, singing, the presentation of elaborately worked objects, such as masks; wall paintings, body paintings; sculptured forms; complex, multi-tiered shrines; costumes; dance forms with complex grammars and vocabularies of body movements; gestures, and facial expressions. Ritual also contains plastic and labile phases and episodes, as well as fixed and formal ones.

In any case, the dancing motif does not reflect simple pastime but rather religious rituals. The major role of the dance in rituals has been explained in the Encyclopedia of Religion as follows: The power of dance in religious practice lies in its multisensory, emotional, and symbolic capacity to communicate. It can create moods and a sense of situation in attention-riveting patterns by framing, prolonging, or discontinuing communication. Dance is a vehicle that incorporates inchoate ideas in visible human form and modifies inner experience as well as social action (Hanna 1987:203).

Elsewhere the various multisensory aspects have been described as follows: The dance medium has communicative efficacy as a multidimensional phenomenon codifying experience and directed toward the sensory modalities—the sight of performers moving in time and space, the sounds of physical movement, the smell of physical exertion, the feeling of kinesthetic activity or empathy, the touch of body to body or to performing area, and the proxemic sense—has the unique potential of going beyond many other audio-visual media of persuasion (Hanna 1979:24).

The dance experience is therefore a religious experience, in which the individual expresses his or her worship, adoration, and respect towards the supernatural powers. This activity releases inner tensions, restores vitality, refreshes the whole person, and prevailing deep satisfaction. Its effect was evident in the behavior of people after a ceremony was over (Moore 1979:308).

With the introduction of various stages of trance (see below, Chapter 4), the participants in the ceremonies feel that the supernatural powers actually participate in the dance. The “other” world and this world are thus combined in the dancing circle. We do not know which religious rituals are expressed in the dancing scenes unearthed from the early

60

The D ance Analysis

village communities, but from ethnographic observations, one can observe that dancing activity is attested in a variety of contexts, including ad hoc occasions, such as medicine dances (healing), fertility dances, initiation dances, marriage dances, funeral and scalp dances, war dances, and astral (moon, sun, rain) dances (Sachs 1952:62–77, 124-131), and also calendrical rituals. With the increase of social complexity, the ad hoc rituals were transferred to the household or the family level, while on the community level, calendrical ceremonies were emphasized (Rappaport 1971; Flannery 1972b:401–412). Such extensive use of dance was not integrated into the official religious ceremonies of western civilization. Laban, for one, has argued that “the European has lost the habit and capacity to pray with movement” (Laban 1971:5). He observes that spoken prayer and singing came to replace communal dancing, which once was the main tool of worshiping. At this point, some wall paintings from Çatal Höyük, which have been described as “a ritual leopard dance” and “dance of the hunters,” should be reexamined. In some of them, human figures are seen skipping around an exceptionally large animal (Fig. 2.19; Mellaart 1962, Pl. XIV–XV, 1966, Pl. LI–LXI, 1967:174–175; Garfinkel 1999b). The way the figures are shown differs from the other figures discussed so far, in the following ways: 1. There is no uniformity in the presentation of the figures. They are not portrayed in identical sizes. 2. The body motions are not uniform. Some of the figures are presented in a dynamic position, indicating running or jumping; others stand or lie down. 3. The dress is not uniform. While most of the figures are wearing a loincloth, as in later Halafian dancing figures (Fig. 8.3:a, c–e), some are not. 4. There is no uniform direction of movement, and the figures are not arranged in circles. The figures face various directions simultaneously. 5. There is no attempt to express rhythm, for example, by placing the figures at uniform distances from each other.

In these scenes there is no strict coordination of posture nor of the direction of movement. There is none of the formalization so typical of rituals. These paintings thus probably represent hunting scenes— another type of interaction between people. The subject in this case emphasizes virility and not religious ceremonies. Linguistic Aspects

The circle is the basic dance structure that appears in the dancing scenes of the ancient Near East. Dancing is a typical cultic activity, and in some Semitic languages of this geographical region there exist words that include circular and other ceremonial activities:

61

Structural Analysis of the D ance

figure 2.19 Wall paintings with hunting scenes from Çatal Höyük (after Mellaart 1962, Pl. XIV; Mellaart 1966, Pl. LIV).

hebrew In Hebrew the word hag covers the following meanings: (1) “Festival.” In the Old Testament the term hag is restricted to the festivals associated with the pilgrimages. In association with the Temple in Jerusalem the term hag is used for Tabernacles, Passover, and Pentecost (Loewestamm 1965). The term hag is also mentioned in relation to other pilgrimage centers: Shiloh, where it is associated with dancing activities, and Beth El (Judges 21:19–21; 1 Kings 12:32–33). (2) “Go in circle, creating a circle.” The concepts of festival and creation of a cycle are covered by the same semantic field. Two roots are involved here, hwg and hgg, both morphologically and functionally close. It has already been suggested that this linguistic situation indicates that in early times the festival was celebrated by circle dances (Mandelkern 1896:369; Loewenstamm 1965). The archaeological finds presented in this work support the linguistic

62

The D ance Analysis

observation. In this case the language preserves an ancient stratum of the concept. The festival day is the day of dance, when all the community gathers together in a common circle. Furthermore, it should be noted that the three festivals designated hag in the Old Testament are calendrical rituals associated with the most basic agricultural activities: Tabernacles is the gathering-in festival (hag ha-assif), the end of the fruit harvest as well as the time for plowing and sowing for the next agricultural cycle; Passover is associated with the beginning of the barley harvest; and Pentecost, with the beginning of the wheat harvest. This is a strong link to agriculture in general and to two cereals (wheat and barley) in particular. In the context of Judaism these festivals were also given historical significance, but the agricultural background fits well into the simple Neolithic agricultural context, rather than urban or pastoral contexts.

aramaic In Aramaic, as in Hebrew, the word hinga means both “circles” and “festivals” (Jastrow 1903:458).

arabic In Arabic the term hadjdj is used to describe a man who goes on a pilgrimage to Mecca. What is the origin of this word? The Encyclopedia of Islam suggests that the root hwg, which in north as well as south Semitic languages means “to go around in a circle,” is probably connected with hadjdj (Wensinck 1986). The special activity carried out by the pilgrims in Mecca is the encircling of the Ka‘aba and its holy stone seven times. Since the entire pilgrimage seems to be named after this encircling activity, this must be the most central part of the ritual. It thus seems that the semantic uniqueness of the word hag both in biblical Hebrew and in Arabic reflects ancient traditions that combined pilgrimages to holy places and cultic dances performed there. The same semantic concept is found in Tibet, where the Tibetan term for pilgrimage, gnas-skor, means “circumambulation of sacred places” (Bernbaum 1987).

syriac In Hebrew the root rqd is used to describe dancing activity, but in Syriac it is used to describe the activity of mourning (J. Greenfield, personal communication). The common semantic field demonstrates that in the ancient Semitic milieu, funeral services included dancing. This is not a unique phenomenon. Ethnographers have observed mourning dances in a number of societies (see, for example, Sachs 1952:74–75; Morphy 1994) and were depicted on ancient art objects. In ancient Egypt, mourning dances appear on wall paintings in graves (Brunner-Traut 1958:61). In the Mycenaean and Philistine cultures in the second half of the second millennium bc, mourning female figurines were attached to the rims of

63

Structural Analysis of the D ance

round clay vessels (Iakovidis 1966; Dothan 1982:237–245). A few such figures were applied around the edge of each vessel, indicating that the ceremony was carried out in the form of a circle dance. These objects originated in graves (Iakovidis 1966). The archaeological finds presented in this work also include a number of objects discovered in graves that depict dancing ceremonies: a holemouth jar from ‘Ein el-Jarba and a fenestrated pedestal bowl from Tall-i Jari A (Figs. 8.29:b, 9.29:d). The context of these objects may indicate that these dances are mourning rituals. In these objects the figures move in a clockwise direction, which is opposed to the conventional direction used in other dancing scenes (see above). Mourning customs are described in Hebrew by the root spd. The two roots rqd and spd appear next to each other as opposites in Ecclesiastes 3:4: “A time to mourn (spd ) and a time to dance (rqd ).” D iscussion

The large number of objects decorated with dancing figures opens a window onto the dancing traditions of the early village communities in the final phase of the prehistoric era. Most dancing scenes were depicted around the circumferences of clay vessels or cylinder seals. Objects that are not round, such as stone slabs, wall paintings, or stamp seals, were only rarely chosen for decoration with dancing figures. This is a clear example of how the nature of the depicted motif (dancing in circles) dictated a preference for the specific substrate shape (round objects). The dominant type of dance is the circle dance. Only in very few cases are there examples of line dances or couples dances. To create a circle even of a modest diameter of two meters, a minimum number of individuals is required. Thus circle dancing is a communal rather than an individual activity. All the participants in a given scene appear in uniform dress, uniform posture, and the same direction of movement, thus testifying to a code incumbent on all who participate. This makes dancing into a ritual, a religious activity performed on the community level. Encircling is an important component in religious rituals and has magical connotations. Sometimes the number of encirclings is significant. Thus, for example, Biblical Jericho was encircled seven times before it was conquered. In the pilgrimage to Mecca the Ka‘aba is encircled seven times. In Jewish wedding ceremonies the bride encircles the bridegroom seven times. The direction of movement is also of importance, and there was a clear preference for counter-clockwise movement in dances that were not connected with mourning. The opposite situation is evident in mourning dances, where a clockwise direction was chosen. The whirling movement (torsion) is a central experience for the dancer and still appears in most folk dances. Movement in a circle has

64

The D ance Analysis

an ecstatic element and at a great speed may lead to dizziness and exhilaration. Rhythmic movement can alter the state of consciousness and impel the mind into various stages of trance. One of the implications of the linguistic examples mentioned above is the connection between encircling, festivals, and pilgrimages. Indeed in many pilgrimage centers the circumambulation of the holy place is well attested. These included, as mentioned above, the encircling of the Ka‘aba in Mecca seven times and the Temple of Jerusalem. In Buddhism, worship includes the circumambulation of the stupa, usually three times, while chanting verses in praise of the Buddha (Akira 1987:95). In Hinduism, depending upon the size of the temple, the pilgrim will circumambulate either the entire complex or merely the inner courts before approaching the deity (Eck 1987). In Christian worship, there is a lesser emphasis on encircling, but some examples do exist, such as that of Saint Patrick’s Purgatory on an islet in Lough Derg in Ireland, where pilgrims walk around the basilica four times (Eck 1987). As summarized by Edith Turner (1987:328), “The experience of pilgrimage has the classic three-stage form of a rite of passage: (1) separation (the start of the journey), (2) the liminal stage (the journey itself, the sojourn at the shrine, and the encounter with the sacred), and (3) reaggregation (the homecoming).” The various ethnographic examples clearly demonstrate that at the focal point of the pilgrimage (such as a structure, stone, statue, grave or relic of a saint, spring, or tree), at the specific geographical place where the encounter with the sacred actually takes place, the movement in a circle is the chief component of the activity. Why did circular movement become such an important part of so many rituals? It must be the circle’s effect on the human mind, introducing various stages of trance, creating metaphysical encounters with the sacred, and climaxing the religious experience. Agricultural village societies in protohistoric times could not produce a food surplus on a large scale. They were thus linked in a direct bond to the forces of nature, and their awareness of nature’s cycle was heightened. The uniform rhythmic movement of the figures in a circle, all dressed alike and all making the same movements, repeats itself many times. Structurally, this is an imitation of the most basic processes of nature: the lunar cycle, the seasonal cycle, and the growth and death cycle of plants.

Functional Analysis of the D ance

chapter 3

While the previous chapter discussed the structure of dance, the main concern here is the function of dance. When discussing the meaning and purpose of dance, Kraus noted that it is a mistake to assume that all forms of dance have a common core or purpose or meaning. Instead, dance may have many functions, but these vary according to the society, the class, the age or sex, the religious structure, and the characteristics of those who dance. He gave a list that summarized the various purposes for dance (Kraus 1969:11–12): 1. It is a form of social affirmation, a means of expressing national or tribal loyalty and strength. 2. It is a means of religious worship, as a form of ritual and direct means of communicating with the gods. 3. It is an art form, an outlet for self-expressiveness and personal creativity. 4. It may be a form of popular entertainment, appealing to a broader audience than when it represents an art form with a high level of aesthetic worth. 5. Dance may serve as a means of expressing physical exuberance, strength, and agility. 6. It offers an important social and recreational outlet, as a means both of restoring oneself physically and of finding social acceptance through group participation. 7. It provides a medium through which courtship can be carried on and attraction expressed between the sexes. 8. Dance serves as a means of education, in the sense that it is taught to achieve the specific purposes of education within a given society, just as art, music, or theater are taught as cultural forms. 9. Dance serves as an occupation; in increasing numbers, it offers a means of livelihood to performers and teachers. 10. Finally, dance serves as therapy; for many, it offers a form of physical and emotional release and rehabilitation; thus it is provided, along with other therapies, in many treatment centers.

While Kraus’s list is relevant, as he maintains, to varied kinds of societies, past and present, traditional and modern, the data discussed here are specifically related to the early village communities of the Near East and southeast Europe. These communities were socially organized as

66

The D ance Analysis

tribes and chiefdoms, with a simple agricultural economic base. Pre-state societies still exist today, thus providing another point of reference for archaeological data. Many scholars have addressed the function of dance within its social context in traditional communities. Evans-Pritchard, for example (1928:446), stressed that dance is essentially a joint and not an individual activity and that we must therefore explain it in terms of social function; that is to say, we must determine its social value. P. Spencer, in his essay on dance in anthropology, wrote that dance is not an entity in itself, but belongs rightfully to the wider analysis of ritual action, and it is in this context that one can approach it analytically and grant it the attention it demands. Society creates the dance, and it is to society that we must turn to understand it (P. Spencer 1985:38). Thus, traditional societies seem to share a common core or purpose for their dance activities: a strong social context. This aspect has been investigated in many works (see, for example, Rust 1969:9–17; Lange 1976; Royce 1977; P. Spencer 1985). However, trying to understand the contribution of dance to the social structure of prehistoric communities is totally different from the study of this subject in contemporary communities. The archaeological objects are generally fragmented pieces and cannot be compared with the wealth of information that can be gathered by anthropologists who observe recent events. Thus, like many other archaeological phenomena, the social context of the dance can be examined on only a rather general level. D ance in Pre-State Societies: Ethnographic Observations

The term “pre-state society” used here includes band, tribal, or chiefdom organizations, according to Service’s terminology (1962). Another term commonly used to describe the same social structures is “nonliterate societies” (Royce 1977:154). The importance of dance as a means of social interaction among such communities has been stressed by two of the most influential anthropologists of the twentieth century: RadcliffeBrown (1922, republished with additions 1948:246–256) and EvansPritchard (1928). According to Lange, the degree to which social bonds are maintained affects the significance of dance in human culture. These bonds are usually strongest in self-sufficient localities that are isolated from the outside world and often lack class divisions. In such communities the pace of life allows sufficient time for impressions to be processed. Lange pointed out that in the old type of village life, dance was an essential and organic part of the group’s functioning, not an optional adornment or staged performance. “In group dance, a community primarily gains the feeling of togetherness. . . . Indeed, for some peoples dance is the main means of organization” (Lange 1976:90–91).

67

Functional Analysis of the D ance

Beyond these general conclusions, some specific ethnographic observations concerning dancing in pre-state societies are quoted here. These will introduce the reader to the atmosphere of dancing activity, thus enabling a better understanding of the archaeological documents of the early village communities. In almost every such observation one finds rich information concerning dancing. Of the vast literature on this subject, I have taken examples from three different geographical areas: southern Africa, North America, and Papua New Guinea. These were deliberately chosen from three different parts of the globe in order to show that despite the huge geographical and cultural distance dance activity is a basic tool in social interaction. The reader should be aware that these studies were carried out by scholars of western civilization, who sometimes had a fanciful approach to the indigenous people they observed. Moreover, as only a few extracts from each work are cited here, they obviously represent a small part of a larger picture.

san bushmen of southern africa The San is a hunting and gathering society living in the Kalahari Desert of southern Africa, in Botswana, Namibia, and southern Angola. Subgroups are called !Kung and that is the term used in the following ethnographic observations. The main focus of their religious life is the ritual of the healing dance. More than one third of the adults routinely and without drugs alter their state of consciousness, thereby releasing healing energy to the entire community. This activity is more than curing, and it seeks to establish healing and growth on physical, psychological, social, and spiritual levels. It involves work on the individual, the group, the surrounding environment, and the cosmos (Katz 1982:3, 34). Several different descriptions of San (Bushmen) healing dances are presented here. Although they summarize the same basic dance tradition, each scholar has his own point of view. The first description, by Lorna Marshall, concerns the !Kung dance and constitutes one of the first systematic studies of their activity (carried out during the 1960s): The medicine dance is one activity in !Kung life that draws people together in groups that are of considerable size and are not shaped by family, band, or close friendship. Nothing but a medicine dance assembles all the people into a concerted activity. . . . A medicine dance usually begins in early evening. . . . Usually a fire is built. Gradually the women, whose role it is to provide the music by singing and clapping, seat themselves around the fire and form the singing circle for the dance proper; and as the women begin the singing and clapping, the men gather to dance around the circle. After an hour or two the medicine men begin to go into trance and to perform their curing rite over the people, going to all who are assembled, laying on

68

The D ance Analysis

their hands to draw out known or unknown ills, and casting them away with the formalized and awesome groans, wails, and piercing shrieks of the rite. Almost all !Kung men are medicine men, and at any dance there usually comes a time when several men at once are in trance and are curing. . . . When a dance is in progress, every person in the vicinity must be present. If some old people or others, for any reason, are not going to dance or sing, they must still come to sit near the dance circle. . . . The motif throughout is the circle: The women’s circle, the circle that the dancing men imprint in the sand, the circle of firelight, and the circles around the little fires. One is strongly aware also, in that flat, desert land, of the circle of the horizon, and, as one sits through the night, of the circling stars. Humans, earth, and stars appear in like arrangement. . . . Medicine men in trance, lurching and staggering about, often fall into the fire, and they deliberately throw burning brands, walk in the fire, and set fire to their hair. Other medicine men, and women who are sitting near, are alert to pull them away and steady them before they burn themselves severely (Marshall 1969:357–358).

Observations of the healing dance of the !Kung were carried out by Richard Katz in Botswana during the 1970s. He emphasized that the core event of dancing is the !kia, an enhanced state of consciousness, a trance state of mind: The primary structure for the occurrence of !kia is a dance, which usually lasts from dusk to dawn and may occur once or twice a week. The entire village comes to such dances, including children and old persons. The women gather around the fire, singing !kia songs and rhythmically clapping their hands. The men dance in a circle around the women, some working themselves into a !kia state. !Kia, and its setting of the !kia dance, serves many functions. It is the !Kung’s primary expression of a religious existence and a cosmological perspective. It provides healing and protection, being a magicomedical mode of coping with illnesses and misfortune. The !kia at the dance also increases social cohesion and solidarity. It allows for individual and communal release of hostility. Finally, the dance alters the consciousness of many members of this community. As individuals go into !kia, others at the dance, participating in various ways and to various degrees, themselves experience an alteration in their state of consciousness. An atmosphere develops at a dance whereby individual experiences of !kia can have a contagious effect on others (Katz 1976:286; for a more detailed study, see Katz 1982).

Observations of Bushman ritual and folklore were carried out in the late 1960s by Megan Biesele in the Dobe area of Botswana:

69

Functional Analysis of the D ance

The curing dance, which facilitates contact between the human world and the divine, is substantially the same among different Bushman groups today. The central focus of religious life for all groups that still live in anything like the ancient way is the dance with its attendant trance medicine. Apparently the dance was important in the past as well: there are striking rock paintings, from Rhodesia to the Cape Province, which bear testimony to its flourishing existence in prehistoric times. . . . Usually the women sit on the ground beside a fire and clap and sing while the men dance. There are, however, groups in which female curers are as numerous as male, and in some places special women’s dances have developed. But mainly the music of the dance comes from the partsinging and complex clapping of women. . . . The trance dance is thus not only an art form in which all can participate, but a concerted effort of the entire community to banish misfortune. The fact that all members of a group participate personally in this effort accounts for much of its psychic and emotional efficacy. The dance is perhaps the central unifying force in Bushman life, binding people together in very deep ways which we do not fully understand (Biesele 1978:165–169).

native north americans The Eskimo tribes in Alaska, North America, occupy a totally different ecological zone than the San Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert. The economy and social organization are more developed, but they still represent a pre-state hunter and gatherer society. Their way of life has been changed quite drastically during the twentieth century. However, the two observations presented here were taken quite early, during the end of the nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries, thus still presenting traditional habits. The following observations were made by George Thornton Emmons, who carried out his ethnographical investigations of the Tlingit tribes primarily during the 1880s and 1890s, when he was assigned to U.S. naval vessels in southeastern Alaska. The territory of the Tlingit comprises the narrow coastal strip of the continental shore, extending northward from Portland Canal for six hundred miles to the Copper River delta. Europeans discovered this area in 1741. Emmons described in detail various aspects of their lifestyle including dancing ceremonies: The love of music is a strongly marked feature of the Tlingit. Music is characteristic of all their ceremonies. Their feasts, dance, cremations, gambling—all are marked by singing and rhythmic motion. The legends, family traditions, in fact their history is transmitted in song, and knowledge of the clan songs—for each clan has its own songs—is a matter of common general education, and a want of this knowledge would be a sign of gross ignorance, and a public disgrace. . . .

70

The D ance Analysis

In dancing, the men jumped up and down in place with stiff legs and a spasmodic movement of the body. The women, standing in place, swayed from side to side. . . . Amusement dance (is) generally connected with animals in which they use whole skin and represent very exactly the movements and actions of the animal. These were not for slain animals, but represented the crest animal of the clan dance (Emmons 1991:292–294). The dance itself consists in a very eager spring, in executing which the dancers scarcely remove at all from one spot. They are all barefooted, and wear a single garment only, commonly the woolen carter’s frock mentioned above. One of the dancers seems, as it were, to lead the rest, carrying in his hand a thick sort of staff ornamented with the teeth of seaotters; with this he strikes upon the ground to mark the measure. All, without exception, hold in their hands either the tail or wing of the white-headed eagle, or a piece of ermine. The latter is valued by them very highly as an article of luxury; they not only ornament their heads with it, and hold it in their hands, but sew it about their garments. The women sit upon the ground at the distance of some paces from the dancers, and sing a not inharmonious melody, which supplies the place of music (Emmons 1991:301).

The following observations by Kaj Birket-Smith date from 1933, when the first Danish-American Alaska Expedition set out to gather ethnological information among the Chugach Eskimo. The research area was Prince William Sound, the easternmost region inhabited by Eskimo on the southern coast of Alaska. The principal ingredients of any feasts consisted in singing, dancing and—not least, of course—extravagant eating. Some feasts were also combined with a distribution of gifts as the Indian potlatches, and in some cases masks were worn. Lisianski describes the dance of the men as torsions of the body; everyone except the chief carried a paddle in his hand, and the hair was powdered with down. Drums and rattles were the sole musical instruments except, perhaps, for a whistle. . . . Masks were worn on several occasions, for instance at certain feasts and shamanistic performances. They were carved in wood, sometimes in animal shape, and painted. Some had a queer or comical look, with only one eye and a crooked mouth, while others had a knife or a bone carved in the mouth. Eagle down (or feathers?) might be glued around the edge. Fingermasks were not known. Women had their own masks and rattles, which the men took care of as well as their own. . . . In the winter people might arrange a dance at any time simply for amusement. The men danced first, afterwards the women, the latter having their own songs (Birket-Smith 1953:108–114).

71

papua new guinea While the previous examples have been taken from pre-state societies that are still engaged in a hunter-and-gatherer economy, in this section agricultural societies from Papua New Guinea are presented. These examples are better from a methodological point of view as their economic base and social organization are more similar to that of the Neolithic communities discussed in this book. Two different observations are included here, both made by Harvey Whitehouse during the early 1990s. The first describes initiation rites of the Baining tribe:

Functional Analysis of the D ance

Initiation rites were preformed as part of the most dramatic ceremonial complex of the Mali Baining, know as the mendas. Many types of masks and head-dresses were constructed for the mendas, and preparations began months in advance of the public performance. A large shelter was constructed by men at a secret location in the bush, at which the various materials for costume production were gradually accumulated. Approximately two weeks before the celebration, all uninitiated boys from the area, aged between about 10 and 17, were brought to the shelter and shown the masks in a state of near completion . . . The mendas itself began at dawn, accompanied by the beating of slitgongs by the women, with the dance of a particular male costumed figure. . . . This dance was followed by a specific sequence of other dancers. . . . The daytime celebrations culminated in a dance by the female novices, who were described as ‘cooling down’ the ground. This was followed, some hours later, by a night dance, to the sounds of a male orchestra (singing accompanied by the rhythmic beating of lengths of bamboo), illuminated by a huge fire in the centre of the dancing ground (Whitehouse 1995:18–20).

The Uramot population live in close proximity to the Mali Baining people of Papua New Guinea, who were described in the previous section. They live in small villages, and their economy is based on agriculture. The most spectacular ceremony conducted by the Uramot is the fire dance, which is described by Whitehouse as follows: I attended several fire dances, which were indeed very spectacular occasions. They begin at dusk, with the lighting of a massive bonfire in the centre of the dancing ground. Some twenty yards from the fire is a male choir, equipped with lengths of bamboo and seated in rows among planks of wild palm, upon which they beat a succession of rhythms. Singing occurs intermittently during the first few hours of the evening, while anybody who feels like it (but mostly children) dance aimlessly around the fire, pausing occasionally to pile on additional fuel. Later, perhaps after midnight, the volume of the singing increases. Elaborate costumed figures suddenly appear, one by one, in the dancing arena, which is now enclosed by a ring of excited onlookers. These figures are

72

The D ance Analysis

invariably of three main types, arriving in the following order. First, there is a series of dancers described as the lingan. They are identified by conical head-dresses constructed of bark and painted red. Second to appear are the kavat, whose head pieces consist of large masks with protruding, open mouths and large, staring eyes… The last figures are always of the vungvung type, a huge, rectangular frame also decorated with red and black designs. Inside the frame, a man blows on a large, barkclothcovered bamboo trumpet, producing an effect like a distant foghorn. Kavat are the most vigorous dancers, occasionally veering threateningly towards spectators and even lashing out at them with sticks. They also intermittently run into the fire, with result that the legs of kavat dancers may be severely burned. . . . Occasionally, women bring their sick babies to the vungvung and thrust them inside its mask. The trumpet is sounded and the child may be expected to recover. The dancing and singing continues until dawn, amidst much drunkenness and sometimes violence (Whitehouse 1995:21–22).

implications for the archaeological data Some common characteristics can be observed from the ethnographic examples. Most of these points seem to be reflected in the archaeological data: 1. In the ethnographic observations, dancing is an activity done on the community level and reflects interaction between people. In the archaeological depictions, the scenes emphasize dancing as a community action. The focus of the event is the circle of identical figures, without any indication of individual persons. 2. In the ethnographic observations, dancing is performed in an open space, not inside any structure. According to the archaeological depictions, dancing is not performed inside buildings. In the few cases where some architectural elements are visible, the activity is carried out outside them (Figs. 9.5, 9.15:b–d, 12.12:a–d). 3. The ethnographers observed that the dance activity involves men and women in close proximity, though they do not mix in the same row or circle. Analysis of the gender of the dancers in archaeological depictions indicates that there are usually circles of men or circles of women alone (Tables 2.2–2.4). This is the usual pattern of dance, with the exception noted above for Predynastic Egypt. 4. According to the ethnographic observations, the dancing is often performed with special decorative elements: coiffure, head coverings, masks, body paintings, and dress. On archaeological objects, a variety of elements of dance decoration are portrayed in the dancing scenes: coiffure, head coverings, masks, dress, and boots (Figs 2.5–2.8). 5. In the ethnographic observations, dancing is usually performed at night, not during the daytime. On the archaeological objects, as most of the

73

Functional Analysis of the D ance

dancing figures appear as silhouettes, it is possible that this phenomenon reflects a nocturnal visual experience. (This is the place to integrate the linguistic aspect discussed above. Most of the festivals called ‘hag’ in the Old Testament are celebrated exactly at mid-month according to the lunar calendar, when there is a full moon in the sky. Lacking sophisticated calendars, ancient civilizations frequently used the moon as a chronological guide (Cohen 1993:3–20). To ensure that a ritual is performed at the right time, when the moon is full, the ceremony has to be carried out after sunset. 6. Dancing in the ethnographic observations is connected with music: singing, clapping hands, or the use of musical instruments such as drums or rattles. However, in the archaeological depictions, there is no evidence for musical instruments, clapping hands, or singing. This is rather surprising, since dancing is strongly associated with music. Is it possible that music and musical instruments were not used by the early village communities at the beginning of farming? 7. According to the ethnographic observations, dance is an ecstatic event that the participants consider a deep spiritual experience. The very wide geographical and chronological distribution of the dancing motif in archaeology emphasizes that dance is a deeply spiritual experience, functioning on a very basic level of human emotions. D ancing Scenes in San Bushman Rock Art

Ethnographic observations contribute to a better understanding of various aspects of dance activities in pre-state societies. The case of the San Bushmen of southern Africa is of special interest to our study, since in addition to the very detailed anthropological documentation of their dancing activities there is also detailed archaeological documentation of dancing scenes in their rock paintings. The Bushmen are considered a good example of a hunter-gatherer, nomadic, band society, with an egalitarian social organization. The dancing activities of the San, as discussed above, are a most important aspect of their social interaction. However, when observing Bushman rock art (see, for example, Vinnicombe 1976; Lewis-Williams 1981; Lewis-Williams and Dowson 1989), and comparing it to the art of the early village communities of the Near East and southeast Europe, two points relevant to the dancing scenes become apparent. The first of these concerns uniformity of figures. In San dancing scenes there is no uniformity of the figures, either in shape or in function. Sometimes wall paintings represent complex cultic scenes, which include figures of different sizes performing different tasks (see, for example, Vinnicombe 1976:307–319; Lewis-Williams and Dowson 1989, Figs. 14–15, 17–18). A large number of the scenes focus on the activity of the shaman rather than of the community:

74

The D ance Analysis

When assessing the importance of “dance” in San rock art, it is far too restrictive to limit the concept “dance” to groups of human figures performing stylized movements. In addition to such apparently (though intuitively) “obvious” groups of dancing figures, there are what I call “fragments of the dance.” These may be single images that by ethnographically verifiable postures, gestures or accoutrements, refer to the San shamanic dance (Lewis-Williams 1999:281).

This situation is in total contrast to the depictions of dance in the ancient Near East and southeast Europe, in which usually all the figures in a given scene are identical to each other. The second point concerns the subjects depicted. Various forms of interaction between people are depicted in San art. A quantitative analysis from two different localities in the Drakensberg region of Natal, South Africa, produces the following results: 1. Out of 4,530 documented scenes, Patricia Vinnicombe (1976:363, Table 2) noted the following activities: hunting (8%), dancing (5%), fighting (3%), other (5%), and uncertain (79%). When only the recognized scenes are taken into account, the dancing scenes comprise about 20 percent. 2. David Lewis-Williams (1981:19) provided the following information from his study of other localities in the Drakensberg region: In all the samples so far available from the South Eastern Group there is a clear but not overwhelming emphasis on human figures and social activities. At Giant’s Castle 59.8% of the total sample of 1,335 representations are of human beings (this figure includes therianthropes); at Barkly East, 53.9% of the representations are of human beings. Most of these human figures are depicted in social groups, walking, running, sitting, dancing, fighting and hunting; the lone human figure is comparatively rare.

Consistent with my comments, Lewis-Williams argued that on these depictions on the San rock art the dancing motif plays a bigger role in the San rock art than has been previously recognized: When Vinnicombe and I established the iconographic categories that we were to count, we knew little about the meaning or functions of San images. We hoped that our quantitative analysis would lead on to understanding. What happened was that our categories were defined by preconceived but tacit notions about “art,” and San rock art in particular. Our numerical results inevitably reflect these presuppositions, most fundamental of which was the notion that San rock art was largely a record of daily life and that a variety of mundane activities could, in addition to clearly “religious” motifs, be discerned.

75

Functional Analysis of the D ance

Today we acknowledge that “interpretation” necessarily precedes the compilation of numerical inventories. . . . We now find that many of what we took to be quotidian “scenes” have elements, unknown to us in the 1960s and early 1970s, that suggest that they are taking place in the spiritual, not the material, realm or that they are implicated in attempts to reach that realm. They are therefore related in some way to human contact with the supernatural world. Now, if “dance” is the principal way of traveling to that world—which it is—we must allow that many of the painted “scenes,” even if they appear to depict, say, hunting, are in fact in some way related to “dance” (Lewis-Williams 1999:281).

Lewis-Williams offered a new interpretation of the San rock art, finding it to be more closely related to dance than heretofore supposed. His interpretation, however, is not acceptable to everybody studying San rock art, and various aspects of his approach have been criticized recently by Solomon (1998:268). She questioned Lewis-Williams’s methodology, which combined recent ethnographic observations and current oral traditions in the interpretation of old rock art. Nevertheless, even if we follow the approach of Lewis-Williams, San rock art displays a marked contrast to that of the ancient Near East and southeast Europe in two aspects: (a) While the depictions of dance in San art concentrates on shaman activity, and some Bushmen even claim that the wall paintings themselves were drawn by shamans (LewisWilliams and Dowson 1989:30–36), the Near Eastern and European depictions concentrate on the entire community and not on selected chosen individuals who bear unique powers. (b) San rock art sometimes displays “groups of human figures in stylized postures,” like the dancing scenes discussed in this book, but it is just one motif among many others in their symbolic expression. It is by no means the dominant one, as in the case of the early village communities (Garfinkel 1999b). Thus we have, on the one hand, an example of an egalitarian society where equality is not expressed on art objects (the San of southern Africa), and on the other hand, communities that were undergoing a rapid process of increasing social stratification, while their symbolic expression, in contrast, emphasized egalitarianism (Neolithic Near East). This clearly indicates that we should examine not only the social context of the dance but also the social context of the dancing scenes. Social D evelopments in the Eighth to Fourth Millennia bc

Why were dancing scenes the most popular, indeed almost the only, subject used to describe interaction between people in protohistoric periods? Why did they lose their prominent position with the rise of urban societies? There seems no doubt that people went on performing

76

The D ance Analysis

ritual dances, and artistic representations from the Bronze and Iron Ages still show the occasional dancing scene, although these are very rare. Both in the Near East and southeast Europe the dancing motif predominated in a period in which large village communities, whose existence was based on food production, were developing. Archaeological evidence shows that this was a period when concentrations of population of unprecedented size emerged, creating social stratification. It became necessary to create leadership and decision-making apparatuses, and at the same time it was essential to tie the community together and strengthen the individuals’ sense of belonging, so that the community would not disintegrate. Two books published in 1988 and 1990 respectively—The Domestication of the Human Species (Wilson 1988) and The Domestication of Europe (Hodder 1990)—deal with the process of sedentism and the beginning of agriculture. They emphasize the importance of the house, each from a different point of view. The main arguments that are relevant to our subject in Wilson’s approach are summarized in the following citations: One of the most striking, and visible, differences between the open societies of hunter/gatherers and all other human societies is that the latter live in an architecturally modified environment. Hunter/gatherers create for themselves only the flimsiest architectural context, and only the faintest line divides their living space from nature. . . . Given this visible, substantial difference of architecture between open hunter/gatherer societies and the rest, we may wonder what other fundamental changes arise from (or may be correlated with) the transition from open to domesticated society? What aspects of human behavior, and especially what aspects of the ordering of human behavior and activity, have evolved directly from the adoption of the house and the village as the primary context of social life? (Wilson 1988:57). Thus the development of domestication “meant,” among other things, the construction of a technology that simultaneously enhanced the opportunities for concentration by erecting physical barriers against intrusion and interruption; reduced the chances of distraction; and hindered the free-flow capacity of people to pay attention to one another as an undifferentiated feature of the routine of everyday life. . . . The unexpected negative drawbacks of such privacy added complicating factors to human interrelationships and communication (Wilson 1988:176). Privacy, made universally possible with dwellings, provides both protection and concealment for people, their actions, attitudes, intentions, and property. In so doing it provides a foundation for ambivalence and suspicion among neighbors. With the aid of privacy neighbors have the opportunity to evade the attention of one another, attention that serves to keep people fully informed about one another (Wilson 1988:99).

77

Functional Analysis of the D ance

The regulation and adjudication of problems that arise from these privacy conditions form much of the task of the political, legal, and religious apparatus of the Neolithic community. This intrinsic, structural fact of domesticated life—the division between the public and the private—is not, of course, as clear-cut in emphasis in every Neolithic society. It is, I suggest, a permanent theme developed more in some than in others. But it suggests an inherent weakness in such societies that could be self-defeating. Houses and settlements are by nature more permanent than camps and hearth sites. They offer their inhabitants the chance to live with each other in more stable and cooperative groups, and domestication presents the opportunity of a greater and more reliable food supply. But the separateness and privacy of the household is a source of aggravation, stress, and divisiveness. Can this inherent “contradiction” in domesticated society be countered? (Wilson 1988:167–168)

Wilson stresses that social problems arose from the transition to sedentism and the construction of permanent buildings for dwelling. Hodder, on the other hand, ignores the tension between individual houses and society: The household is a production unit and it is through that production that the larger social unit is to be constructed. But it is also a conceptual unit opposed to the wild, the dangerous and the unsocial. By linking the matter and ideal of the house to the matter and ideal of social reproduction, the social desire for aggregations and intensification was channelled. . . . The wider social unit had its roots in the internalized desire for the control of individualistic, unsocial, “wild” behaviour. The domus provided a way of thinking about the control of the wild and thus for the larger oppositions between culture and nature, social and unsocial. . . . Any social conflict, whether between men and women, old and young, local group and local group, could be negotiated in terms of the need better to control “the wild” by bringing it within the control of “the domus” (Hodder 1990:38–39).

It is not clear to me how the dwelling units, that is, the activity areas of individuals, were developed into symbols of the “domestication of the society.” Hodder discusses the house/domus as an isolated phenomenon, but houses do not stand alone. They are organized together in villages. The village stands for the community, while the house stands for the individual. The omission of the term “village” from the index in Hodder’s book, and the omission of Flannery’s classic article on the village in the Near East and Mesoamerica (1972a) from the bibliography, no doubt best symbolizes Hodder’s weakest link. The house is the individual’s territory within the village. The walls not only symbolize the individual but actually separate him or her from the community. By

78

The D ance Analysis

closing the door, the individual physically disconnects himself or herself from the rest of the village. Increasing individuality is a process that has been reflected in architecture: 1. Some earliest campsites represent a “bee-hive” (communal) pattern of settlement, such as the Natufian settlement at Hayonim Cave (tenth– eleventh millennium bc) or Pre-Pottery Neolithic B desert campsites such as Wadi Tbeiq and Nahal Issaron (Bar-Yosef 1991, Fig. 1; Bar-Yosef 1982; Goring-Morris and Gopher 1983). There were still hunter-andgatherer populations who occupied the sites seasonally and not all year round. 2. The early village settlements of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (ninth millennium bc) are characterized by individual round household structures (Flannery 1972a). 3. With the development of a more complex economy and social organization in the Mediterranean Pre-Pottery Neolithic B villages (eighth millennium bc), the individual house became more and more elaborate in shape, size, and building materials. Its round shape was replaced by a rectangular outline (Flannery 1972a). Its size increased from ca. 20–30 sq. m. in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A to 60–100 sq. m. in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B. Lime plaster become an important component of PrePottery Neolithic B building material, regardless of its complex production process and redistribution (Garfinkel 1987; Kingery et al. 1988; Rollefson 1990).

The development of the private dwelling was not a process that took place in isolation. It was part of a larger development that was ignored by Wilson but which could be the motive for the individual’s focus on his private abode. The most remarkable social process in the Natufian and Neolithic periods is the concentration of large groups of people together on an unprecedented scale. In the Upper Palaeolithic and the Epipalaeolithic periods in the ancient Near East (40,000–13,000 bc), we are familiar with hunter-and-gatherer sites whose size does not exceed several hundred square meters. In the Natufian period we find for the first time campsites of several thousand square meters. In the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A period, sites whose size exceeds ten thousand square meters appear, such as Jericho (25,000 sq. m.), Netiv Hagdud (18,000 sq. m.), and Gilgal (10,000 sq. m.). In the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period, sites larger than a hundred thousand square meters are known, such as ‘Ain Ghazal and Basta. A steep growth in the size of the human groups dwelling together at the same site can be observed. Population growth supersedes the intimacy found in small-scale communities. Society becomes more formalized. Alienation, as well as competition and suspicion, is felt by many individuals. They react to this situation by focusing on the personal dwelling, in which one may find a means of escape from society at large.

79

In contrast to segregation tendencies at the individual level, two different types of activities showing community-level cohesion can be distinguished in the archaeological record of the early village communities.

construction of public buildings

Functional Analysis of the D ance

The best examples of such building activities are the tower and walls at Jericho, the cult structures at Göbekli Tepe, and the wall and Building 8 at Beidha (Kenyon 1981, Pls. 203–206; Schmidt 1998; Kirkbride 1968; Byrd 1994, Fig. 7).

public religious ceremonies A sharp increase in energy-consuming rituals clearly indicates intensification of community-level activities. These are reflected in various finds that make their first appearance in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period of the eighth millennium bc: 1. Large art and cult objects, as described in detail in the introduction, including plaster and limestone anthropomorphic statues, masks, and plastered skulls. 2. Transformation of burial customs from the individual level to the community level. In the first stages of the early village communities, care for the dead was part of the household’s duties, and burial took place near or under the floors of dwelling units. Later on, in the eighth millennium bc, this duty became part of the community’s responsibilities. This can be observed with the appearance of the Skull House at Çayönü and the concentration of burials at Kfar Hahoresh (Ozbeck 1988, Goring-Morris 2000). Further developments of formal cemeteries located outside villages too place later, during the fifth millennium bc. 3. Dancing scenes are visual expressions of religions ceremonies. While dancing, holding hands and moving in a circle, the individual is physically fused into the group, which becomes one entity.

The greater attention paid to the individual level, reflected in the dwelling units, is paralleled by increasing attention to the community level, as seen in public religious ceremonies. The peak of the process occurred in the eighth millennium bc, when dwelling structures became extremely elaborate with rectangular plans, large dimensions, and plastered floors. This is exactly contemporary with the formative period during which the basic cultic and religious concepts of the ancient Near East were crystallized (Garfinkel 1994). While band societies are characterized by ad hoc rituals, consisting primarily of rites of passage such as successful hunting and healing ceremonies, calendrical rituals are performed in the more complex social organizations of tribes and chiefdoms (Flannery 1972b:411–412, Fig. 1). It seems that the appearance of large cult objects such as anthropomorphic statues, masks, and plas-

80

The D ance Analysis

tered skulls at Pre-Pottery Neolithic B sites was not only associated with public rituals (Rollefson 1983, 1986) but was more specifically connected with calendrical rituals. Dancing, an activity performed at the community level, was emphasized during these developments and became a common artistic motif. Since dancing is a public activity, carried out at the community rather than the individual level, various aspects need to be coordinated: • Time: The community must gather at a time that is acceptable to all. • Space: The community must select an acceptable location. • Dance decoration: All participants are required to equip themselves with uniform dress and accessories. In this way, the community achieves equality of appearance of all its members. • Posture: All are obliged to perform the same combination of bodily signs in the same order. • Direction of movement: All the participants are obliged to move in the same direction, whether counter-clockwise or clockwise. • Rhythm: All are obliged to move at the same tempo.

These are all part of a carefully planned event. Dance is thus an activity through which society instills collective discipline in its members. The participant in the dance accepts the rules of the community. This provided a means of internalizing discipline in a period with no police, army, or prisons. Internalization was thus obtained not through fear but through bodily activity, a form of group therapy. The tremendous energy created together during the dance was a tool for unity and the creation of ethnic identification. The efforts put into dance are not economic, as are hunting, gathering, or food production.

figure 3.1 Correlation between social organization, social stratification, and the appearance of dancing scenes in early village communities.

81

Functional Analysis of the D ance

It is thus a dramatic and ecstatic experience, sometimes heightened by the use of special dress and face coverings. The message conveyed is “group”—or “community”—rather than “individual.” This situation has been described by Rappaport (1971:38): The virtue of regulation through religious ritual is that the activities of large numbers of people may be governed in accordance with sanctified conventions in the absence of powerful authorities or even of discrete human authorities of any sort. As such, it is plausible to argue that religious ritual played an important role in social and ecological regulation during a time in human history when the arbitrariness of social conventions was increasing but it was not yet possible for authorities, if they existed at all, to enforce compliance.

It thus seems that dancing scenes appeared in the ancient Near East at a time of tribal social organization. These scenes gradually fell out of use with the development of the state (Fig. 3.1). D ance in the Context of Early Agricultural Economy

Thus far we examined the function of dance in the social context of the early village communities. Another aspect that needs further consideration is the function of dance in the context of early agricultural economy. Hunter-and-gatherer subsistence can be considered as “ad hoc economy.” The energy spent in these activities produces immediate results. Agriculture, on the other hand, is of a totally different nature. The benefits from work done at a certain time will materialize only after a few months, or even after a few years, creating a “delayed-reward economy.” Before the harvest there are various tasks to accomplish: land clearance, seeding, and tending the fields. Thus, the beginnings of agriculture involved a cognitive revolution concerning the relationships between work investment and its final product. When agriculture is well established, and practiced as the basic way of life, this delayed reward is self-evident. But in the beginning of agriculture, in its transitional phase, it became an essential part of the process to instill in community members awareness of the new development. One of the crucial points in practicing agriculture, especially in the Mediterranean climatic zone, is the need to do specific works at specific periods of the year. Rain falls only in winter, and irrigation systems had yet to be developed. Thus, land clearing must be carried out at the end of summer and sowing of cereals and legumes in autumn. If these preparations last into the winter, the plants will not have time to ripen and bring forth seed, and with nothing to harvest, the farmers will be left empty handed. Successful agriculture required the perfect coordination with the climatic cycle of the four seasons. Disobeying these eco-

82

The D ance Analysis

logical regulations meant famine, decrease of pregnancies, and a high mortality rate. Agricultural communities that fail to harvest will face extermination. The wider perspective, suggested by McNeill on the role of dance in human evolution, is specifically relevant to the context of early farming economy (1995:34). Festivals and ceremonies are a way of transferring messages to the community and the various individual families. The congregation of the entire society; the elaborate dress and body decorations, which include masks, music, and song; and the rhythmic movement in the circle that alters the state of consciousness and propels the mind into hallucinations and various stages of trance, all these together attract maximum awareness and attention among members of the community. The high supernatural powers also become involved in the process, as the circle of dance is the actual place where contact is made between this and the other world. The involvement of the sacred has two relevant aspects. On the one hand, encounters with the supernatural ensure a successful agricultural season. On the other hand, each member of the community becomes fully aware that time has come to do some specific tasks. Thus, on the practical level, calendrical rituals inform everybody that it is time to clear the land, to sow, or to harvest. The Replacement of the D ancing Motif

With the foundation of states at the end of the fourth millennium bc, art was integrated into the lifestyle of the elite and was used as a tool for enhancing authority, political propaganda, and economic interests (Winter 1987; Porada 1986; Larsen 1979:297–390). Dance, which was no longer the main tool for promoting community cohesion, was removed from the agenda of the upper classes and almost disappeared from the artistic record. The processes of social and economic change that affect dance were described by Lange in relation to the modern world and may be applied to the social developments of the ancient Near East that were sparked by the rise of the first states: Dance forms an integral part of the self-contained type of life patterns found among peasants and “primitive” peoples, while urban patterns of life do not. As soon as the cultural integrity of a human group splits, the traditional dance becomes lost, because it ceases to retain its vital social significance. The urbanized type of life requires new media, and the intruding new elements cannot be absorbed quickly enough (Lange 1976:111).

The new topics depicted in ancient Near Eastern art of the fourth millennium bc include sexual relations, food consumption, war, communal labor, boat transportation, and shepherds with herds (Legrain 1936; Tobler 1950; Amiet 1972; Delougaz and Kantor 1996). Is it possible

83

Functional Analysis of the D ance

to point out one widely distributed motif in the ancient Near East, which expresses social interaction between people and thus replaces the dance motif? The motif should not be associated with economic activity, propaganda or mythology but rather should represent comradeship between human beings at times of leisure in a relaxed atmosphere. It appears that the motif answering all these criteria is that of the banquet, in which people are depicted eating and drinking together. This claim rests on the following points: The banquet expresses a positive interaction between people. It is widespread both geographically and chronologically. The consumption of alcoholic beverages, like wine and beer, is a main banquet activity. It is clearly attested in the written documents, iconography, and archaeological data of the ancient Near East (see, for example, Maeir and Garfinkel 1992; Sherratt 1995; Joffe 1998). Like the dancing activity that has the capacity to alter the state of consciousness, wine and beer have similar psychoactive effects as mindaltering properties. Music is another main component that can be found in both activities. Many of the banquet depictions from the ancient Near East clearly present musicians. The banquet motif does indeed represent social interaction between people of the higher echelons of society in the Near East. At the banquet, people sit and eat together, though this “togetherness” naturally excludes people of lower social status, since the banquet takes place in closed aristocratic circles. Not everyone eats with everyone else. Eating together is an important and selective sociological and anthropological concept. A banquet requires special preparation, including exotic dishes, spices and herbs, well-trained cooks, cooking and preparation on a grand scale, special serving vessels, and waiters. The banquet is accompanied by music played by trained musicians, singers, and dancers. All this requires great expenditure and professional training and is thus a clear indication of a stratified society. The distribution of the banquet scene is wide and most diverse, all over the ancient Near East from the third to the first millennium bc. It is depicted on stamp and cylinder seals, where figures are seen sitting together eating or drinking from a common jar, on carved stone slabs, ivories, steles, painted pottery vessels, and metal vessels (Tobler 1950, Pls. CLXXXX: 91; Selz 1983; Amiet 1961, Nos. 1154–1225; Pritchard 1954, Nos. 332, 631, 633, 637; Pritchard 1969, Nos. 820, 849; Maleki 1969; Barnett 1985). These are no longer simple pottery vessels but rather luxury goods made of exotic raw material, of high artistic quality. There is no pretence of egalitarianism in these scenes: the king is depicted larger than the other, less significant participants. The concept of dance being a proper activity for the lower classes, just as banquets are for the elite, seems to appear in the biblical historiography of the first kings of the house of David. David, the founder of the dynasty, was a shepherd and thus sprang from the lower classes. In

84

The D ance Analysis

the religious ceremony in which the Ark of the Covenant was transported to Jerusalem, he is described as dancing with all the people, with no physical separation (2 Sam. 6:14–16, and see discussion in Seow 1989). His wife, the previous king’s daughter, of an aristocratic family, feels contempt for him. On the other hand a new element is present in the description of the royal activities of Solomon, David’s son—the king’s table, with a detailed list of dishes and delicacies served thereon (1 Kings 5.2–3). David, the shepherd king, is the only monarch described in the Bible as dancing with the people in an egalitarian scene. Finally, does such a concept persist to this day? Often when visits of heads of state to other countries are reported, the following pattern can be discerned in television and newspaper features: When the visit is to an exotic place, African countries, for example, the reception concentrates on tribal dances. When the visit is to a European or North American country, the receptions focus on elaborate banquets in expensive hotels.

Cognitive Analysis of the D ancing scenes

chapter 4

Cognitive archaeology is the study of past ways of thought from material remains (Renfrew et al. 1993; Renfrew and Zubrow 1994; Zubrow 1994). The basic assumptions of this approach have been summarized by Renfrew and Bahn as follows: As a first concrete step it is useful to assume that there exists in each human mind a perspective of the world, an interpretive framework, a cognitive map—an idea akin to the mental map that geographers discuss, but not restricted to the representation of spatial relationships only. . . . Communities of people who live together and share the same culture, and speak the same language often share the same world view or “mind set.” To the extent that this is so we can speak of a common cognitive map, although individuals differ, as do special interest groups. This idea of a cognitive map is a useful one precisely because we can in practice use some of the relevant artifacts . . . to give us insights into the shared cognitive map of a given group. We can hope to gain insight into the way the group used symbols, and sometimes (e.g. in depictions of scenes) the relationships between the individuals making up the group (Renfrew and Bahn 1991:340–341).

The analysis of the dancing scenes in Chapters 2 and 3 emphasized that they depict public religious ceremonies. It thus opens a window to the cognitive map of the early village communities concerning their rituals. Lately, the basic components of ritual performance have been given an archaeologically oriented summary by Renfrew and Bahn, as follows: Religious ritual involves the performance of expressive acts of worship towards the deity or transcendent being. In this there are generally at least four main components: 1. Focusing of attention. The act of worship both demands and induces a state of heightened awareness or religious excitement in the human celebrant. In communal acts of worship, this invariably requires a range of attention-focusing devices, including the use of a sacred location, architecture (e.g. temples), light, sounds, and smell to ensure that all eyes are directed to the crucial ritual acts.

86

The D ance Analysis

2. Boundary zone between this world and the next. The focus of ritual activity is the boundary area between this world and the Other World. It is a special and mysterious region with hidden dangers. There are risks of pollution and of failing to comply with the appropriate procedures: ritual washing and cleanliness are therefore emphasized. 3. Presence of the deity. For effective ritual, the deity or transcendent force must in some sense be present, or be induced to be present. It is the divine as well as human attention that needs to be heightened. In most societies, the deity is symbolized by some material form or image. 4. Participation and offering. Worship makes demands on the celebrant. These include not only words and gestures of prayer and respect, but often active participation involving movement, perhaps eating and drinking. Frequently, it involves also the offering of material things to the deity, both by sacrifice and gift (Renfrew and Bahn 1991:359).

Some of these components are relevant to rituals carried out by the early village communities. Cultic public structures (temples) appear in the archaeological record as early as the ninth–eighth millennium bc, including those at Göbekli Tepe, Nevali Çori, and the Skull House at Çayönü, all in Turkey. At the same time, the presence of deities is indicated by large anthropomorphic statues, made of plaster and stone (Garstang et al. 1935; Rollefson 1983; Hauptmann 1993), and the remodeled skulls that represent the transcendent force of the ancestors (Kenyon 1981, Pls. VIII–IX; Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988, Pl. XXIII). It is quite possible that other ritual elements were also observed, such as ritual bathing and cleanliness, eating and drinking, and the presentation of offerings. However, the scenes discovered in the early village communities concentrate almost exclusively on one activity: “active participation involving movement,” that is, dancing. Why was dance chosen from all the various ritual components for depiction as an artistic motif? It is important to remember that dancing scenes are not “objective” photographs of ancient rituals. They are the results of cognitive processes that functioned as filters, eliminating the less important aspects of an event and emphasizing its essence (Fig. 4.1). From this point of view, dance symbolized rituals in the cognitive map of the early village communities of the Near East and southeast Europe. The religious experience was achieved by the ecstatic, high-energy activity of dancing. Furthermore, the most commonly depicted elements of figure 4.1 The cognitive map as a filter between the community rituals and the dancing scenes.

87

the dance are not related to costumes or body positions but rather to the arrangement of the figures around the circumference of rounds objects (pottery vessels and cylinder seals) and the identical appearance of the figures in a scene. These two points should thus be the focus of a cognitive analysis of the dancing scenes from the early village communities. The Circle

Cognitive Analysis of the D ancing scenes

The importance of the circle in dancing has been emphasized throughout this study: 1. Most of the scenes were depicted around the circumference of round items, such as pottery vessels or cylinder seals. This type of “endless motif ” creates a circle of dancing figures. 2. The identity of dancing circles with religious ceremonies is apparent from linguistic evidence. As mentioned above, the term hag covered two meanings in some Semitic languages: “festival” and “going in a circle.” This aspect is of special importance, as it provides independent support for the analysis of the art objects. 3. The ethnographic observations mentioned above, in Chapter 3, emphasize the importance of dancing in pre-state societies. In such societies dancing is usually carried out in circles.

All these points clearly demonstrate that in the cognitive map of the early village communities, the most important aspect of the religious experience, the core of the ceremonies, was the dance circle. The circle could be interpreted on different levels:

The individual level Each participant builds the circle with his or her own body. By performing in the circle, each individual expresses the worship, respect, and adoration of the supernatural powers to whom the ritual is dedicated. The torsion—rhythmical and ecstatic movement—is the contribution of each individual to the religious ceremony. This behavior is the equivalent of prayers that appear later in complex societies.

The community level The circle is created by the arrangement of people at the same time and place, moving in the same direction. The circle thus symbolizes the community. Beyond the realm of symbols, the circle is also the community itself at the time of its congregation.

The cosmological level Cosmological components tend to have a cyclic appearance, such as the four seasons, the moon, sowing time, and harvesting. The circular movement imitates these cyclic events.

88

The circle is a powerful structure and has the potential to fulfill all the four main components of ritual seen by Renfrew and Bahn and summarized above. We can show the connections as follows:

Focusing of attention

The D ance Analysis

In the circle, dancers are arranged around the circumference, and all face the center. Lange pointed out that this natural point of attention, of which the dancers are so aware, is often “the site of the symbol around which the dance takes place, e.g. a fire, killed animal, offering, altar, newly-wed couple, maypole, etc.” (Lange 1976:84). The circle, like a temple temenos, delineates a territory, and the participants are disconnected from the outer world, focusing solely on the religious ceremony. This point is especially relevant for the early village communities, which had not yet constructed large cultic buildings as did later civilizations.

Boundary zone between this world and the next The rhythmic movement in the circle can alter the state of consciousness and propel the mind into various stages of trance (Ludwig 1969:11; Lange 1976:66–67). The effects of this are alterations in thinking, disturbed time sense, loss of control, change in emotional expression, change in body image, perceptual distortions, change in meaning or significance, sense of the ineffable, feelings of rejuvenation, and hypersuggestibility (Ludwig 1969:13–17). The implications of trance for dance have been described above. Thus trance is a metaphysical situation, a mystic experience, both for the persons in trance and the observers around them. From a cognitive point of view, it may be understood as an actual contact between this world and the other. The widespread nature of this phenomenon has been studied by Bourguignon (1973:9–11). Of a sample of 488 societies, in all parts of the world, she found that 437 (90 percent) had one or more institutionalized, culturally patterned forms of altered states of consciousness. She concluded that trance is a psychobiological capacity available to all societies, and that, indeed, the vast majority of societies have used it in their own particular ways, and have done so primarily in a sacred context.

Presence of the deity The circle can be organized around sacred items, such as divine symbols, holy trees, or any other cultic objects.

Participation and offering The circle is the “activity area” where the ritual is actually performed. Taking into account all the examples presented above, it is clear that dancing in circles constituted the most important part of religious ceremonies in the ancient Near East and southeast Europe from the eighth

89

to fourth millennia bc. The circle is the central feature of most of the dancing scenes presented in our data. It is not surprising that in the cognitive map of the early village communities, the circle of human figures was identified and used as the symbol of public ritual. Uniformity of the Figures

Cognitive Analysis of the D ancing scenes

Another phenomenon repeated in the dancing scenes is that all the figures in each scene are uniform, excluding rare cases in which males and females are portrayed together and the differences are gender-related (Fig. 2.17). Both social and functional aspects are involved here.

the social context The uniformity of the dancers in both dress and posture creates equality between all members of the community. There are no individual features. No figure is emphasized over and against another. This conception is crystallized in the Halafian and Samarra painted linear style (Figs. 8.10–8.27), in which the individuals are so schematic that the main emphasis is on the circle itself. This approach differs from artistic expressions in state societies, where the king or priest is depicted larger than other figures surrounding him. On the other hand, the southern African Bushmen, one of the best examples of an egalitarian society, also produced dancing scenes in which not all the participants are uniform in size, dress, or posture (see above). The characteristic of uniformity, apparent in early village community dancing scenes, is thus outstanding and unique to early village community dancing scenes. The protohistoric dancing scenes of the ancient Near East and southeast Europe express an ideology of equality between all members of the community. Practically, however, this was a period in which revolutionary changes took place in the social organization of human societies, with increased stratification. The final results of these processes were the establishment of states, with formalized kingship, aristocracy, priesthood, bureaucracy, army, and police, supported by a sophisticated system of documentation made possible by the invention of writing. Both hunter-gatherer societies and early urban societies maintained a relatively static relationship between different segments of the community. However, in the millennia in which social organization developed from egalitarian to state-type, there were dynamic relationships, with an acceleration of inequalities among members of society. It is exactly at this stage, no earlier and no later, that the participants in the dance scenes are always shown as being ideologically equal (Fig. 3.1). From the dancing scenes of the early village communities of the Near East and southeast Europe, we perceive that the ideology reflected in cult and art is the reverse of the social processes occurring simultaneously. There exists a polarity between reality and the ideology reflected in the art objects. How should this situation be explained?

90

The D ance Analysis

Marxist archaeology offered the following interpretation of such situations: In determinate social situations, where social control and exploitation are a regularised feature of life resulting in the differential restriction of lifechances for the majority of social agents, the production and maintenance of this control is likely to be both ineffective and unstable in the long run if the only resort to bolster control is by means of physical force or the threat of the use of such force in the form of coercive sanctions. The social order must be legitimized and the principles upon which control is based justified. One of the most powerful means of achieving this is the active production of a normative consensus naturalising and misrepresenting the extant nature of asymmetrical social relations so that they appear to be other than they really are (Miller and Tilley 1984:7).

According to this definition, the dancing scenes of the early village communities, which create equality between all members of the community, are the screening and masking of the growing social stratification. In the Levant, in contrast to Mesopotamia and Egypt, only smaller city-state units emerged in the Early Bronze Age in the third millennium bc. Urbanization in this region is not accompanied by the construction of public structures on the scale known from Mesopotamia, writing, monumental art, or extremely rich tombs like the royal cemetery at Ur or the pyramids of Egypt. Perhaps for this reason, although other scenes are added, such as mythological scenes or scenes of plowing (Loud 1948, Pls. 273:5, 7, 275:9–10; Amiran 1972; Ben-Tor 1992; Eisenberg 1992), the dancing motif continues to dominate the art scene in this region as the main representative of interaction between people (Figs. 12.10–12.15).

the ceremonial context The uniformity of the dancers in size, dress, body position, direction of movement, and accompanying objects suggests uniformity in the function of the participants in the ceremony. All fulfill exactly the same function, and none can be pointed out as having a special role. The differences, if they exist, result from differences in gender. In this the dancing scenes of early farming communities differ from all the following examples, derived from social contexts far apart from each other: Urban societies in the Near East: Cultic scenes from Mesopotamia from the third millennium bc present examples of cultic ceremonies in which different participants perform different tasks (Amiet 1961, Pls. 17:282,102:1353–55). Hunter-and-gatherer societies in southern Africa: As mentioned above, wall paintings made by the San Bushmen sometimes represent complex cultic scenes that include figures of different sizes performing different tasks (Lewis-Williams and Dowson 1989, Figs. 14–15, 17–18). Based on ethnographic information, these pictures are interpreted as describing religious

91

Cognitive

ceremonies with a shaman officiating (Lewis-Williams and Dowson 1989:30–36).

From the cognitive point of view, the functional uniformity of all the participants in each scene indicates the equality of their contribution to the ritual process. Each individual is on the same level of importance, with no indication of the existence of priests, shamans, or other such persons in the ceremony. Perhaps the uniformity of the dancing scenes illustrates the theological concept that all members of the community are equal in the eyes of the gods.

Analysis of the D ancing scenes

Communication Aspects

Another cognitive-related aspect of the dancing scenes is their communicative value, that is, their function as a means of information exchange. This aspect concerns not the dancing activity but the function of the objects on which the dancing motif was depicted. In statistical terms, the 396 items presented in the figures were depicted on the following type of objects (Table 6.1): pottery vessels (86.1%), cylinder seals (6.8%), stamp seals (1.5%), stone slabs (1.3%), wall or floor paintings (1.3%), rock carvings (2.3%), linen (0.3%), and other objects (0.5%). There is thus a clear preference for pottery vessels. The function of pottery decoration as a means of information exchange has attracted much scholarly attention (see, for example, Wobst 1977; Pollock 1983; David et al. 1988; Conkey and Hastorf 1988; Braun 1991). In analyzing the communicative value of the dancing scenes, the basic biographic questions to be asked are, Who drew these scenes? and Who were the intended audiences? The limitations of archaeological data prevent a direct answer to these questions. However, we can examine some relevant aspects: The type of vessels. The vessels chosen for decoration with dancing scenes are usually small or medium sized: cups, small bowls, pedestal bowls, and medium-sized jars. These are fine and delicate “table-ware” vessels, not outstanding cultic items. The pottery assemblages at the sites where these items were found also included large quantities of coarse, undecorated vessels, which likely served for cooking and storage. The context. In most cases, the vessels were unearthed in domestic activity areas and not in places connected with ritual such as public structures. Outside Egypt, only a few items were discovered in graves (at ‘Ein elJarba and Tall-i Jari A), and they constitute less than 1 percent of the total 341 ceramic items discovered (Table 6.1). Furthermore, when the items decorated with dancing scenes went out of use, probably when broken, they were discarded at the site. Such items were never found associated with religious structures or intentionally buried, like cultic items of these periods (Garfinkel 1994). Thus the vessels did not serve

92

The D ance Analysis

as containers for gifts presented to supernatural powers in religious ceremonies. Geographical distribution. The dancing scenes have a wide geographical and chronological distribution and dominate the scenes that describe interaction between people. Quantitative considerations. Pottery vessels decorated with dancing figures are a rare find at each specific site. In Halafian sites, for example, most of the pottery decoration is geometric. Thus some scholars who analyzed the Halafian painted style overlooked the dancing scenes (Le Blanc and Watson 1973; von Wickede 1986). The vessels were not produced on a large scale.

What can be deduced from these four points about the vessels decorated with dancing scenes as a communication medium? Delicate, small, and medium-size vessels, which were not produced on large scale, were obviously not for daily use. It thus seems that these vessels were used on special occasions, but since they are found in domestic contexts, they may have served for meals associated with religious ceremonies. The vessels could have been manufactured before the main calendrical rituals as part of the preparations for them. They were used as a means of increasing the awareness of the community. During the ceremonies it is possible that specific foods or drinks were served in these vessels. In southeast Europe some of the dancing scenes were found on large pithoi rather than on delicate vessels for individual use. These containers are communal rather than private and may have been used to serve food to the entire community participating in the ceremonies. In cognitive terms, these vessels were intended to emphasize for the members of the community the importance of the dance and the activities associated with it: congregation and public ceremonies. As summarized by Royce (1977:154), dancing in nonliterate societies fulfills the functions of writing, including transmission of information, teaching, and documentation. Thus, the dancing activities, as well as the vessels decorated with dancing scenes, functioned as a means of enhancing social structures in early village communities. An alternative Marxist interpretation could suggest that the dancing scenes constituted a weapon in a social struggle between different segments of society. The manufacture of the decorated vessels could have been controlled by the elite, emphasizing equality and egalitarianism, and thus screening the ever-increasing social stratification. The Subject D epicted

Some scholars have interpreted the dancing scenes as representing mythological figures of gods and goddesses. The most elaborate example of this approach is that of Marija Gimbutas, who created a female pan-

93

Cognitive Analysis of the D ancing scenes

theon, understanding the dancing figures as a birth-giving goddess, another birth-giving goddess in the shape of a toad, a bee goddess, a bird goddess, and a snake goddess (1982, 1989). In the same way, Predynastic Egyptian scenes have been associated with fertility cults involving various gods (Baumgartel 1960:144–148). Another common interpretation of some of the dancing figures is that they represent demons (Herzfeld 1941:30; Baumgartel 1947:80; Porada 1965:32; von der Osten-Sacken 1992). However, according to the present analysis, all the figures functioned simply as ordinary human beings and not as supernatural powers. From a cognitive point of view, this means that in the eighth to fourth millennia bc, the community chose itself as the main art subject, a clear “communo-centric” situation. Art focused on the community’s main public activity. Thus the subjects chosen for depiction were realistic situations of daily life and not imaginary mythological stories. Mythological scenes apparently appear only later, beginning with the more complex social organization of fourth millennium bc Mesopotamia. The dance motif, depicting the community’s main public activity, is another point that contradicts Hodder’s conception of the house as the focus of the domestication of society (above, Chapter 3). Hodder claimed that the ideology of the domus guaranteed social life against the wild (Hodder 1990:53). Clay house-models appear in the archaeological record for the first time in the eighth millennium bc at Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Jericho, Jarmo, Çayönü and later (Garstang et al. 1936:71; Broman Morales 1983:390, Figs. 9–11; 1990:69–70; Bretschneider 1991; Gimbutas 1982:67–70; Bolger and Peltenburg 1991). If Hodder’s interpretation is correct, these models must have been tremendously important in their time. However, they have an extremely limited distribution in Near Eastern sites. In southeastern European sites such objects are also very rare. Thus, clay models of structures cannot be considered as a major symbolic expression of the early village communities. On the other hand, dancing scenes, depicting interaction between people on the community level, appear much more often and over a wider geographical area. Moreover, architectural features appear only as clay models, while dancing figures appear in most of the contemporary artistic means available (see Table 6.1). I therefore conclude that the basic cognitive means of “domesticating” individuals in early village communities was the dancing ceremony. The circle of dancers symbolized the community. The formalized body positions and the strictly regulated direction of movement symbolized the acceptance of the social order by the individual. D uration of the motif

One of the amazing things about the depiction of dance in early village communities is that it maintained its importance as the dominant motif for describing interaction between people for almost five thousand years,

94

The D ance Analysis

from the eighth to the fourth millennia bc. In the Levant this dominance lasted some six thousand years, until the third millennium bc. The dimension of time in the context of cognitive archaeology has been recently discussed by Zubrow (1994:189): Psychologists have argued that short-term memory, unlike sensory memory, has a very small capacity. New items quickly displace the old ones. One function of the development of art, counting, measurements and writing, as well as other symbolic systems, is to increase the length of time that information may be maintained in short-term memory, and to increase the length of time that it can be accessed and brought from long-term into short-term memory. . . . For such studies the questions of symbolic meaning need to be supplemented with questions regarding symbolic duration, symbolic penetration and symbolic efficiency. For example, are some symbols more effective than others in increasing the length of time that the knowledge may be accessed? If so, is there a selection process by which less effective symbols are replaced by more effective symbols? Archaeologists should ask . . . questions about long-term memory, the permanent memory store. If its capacity is virtually unlimited, and forgetting from long-term memory is not so much a loss of information as retrieval failure, then the development of human culture is the development of mechanisms to reduce this “retrieval failure.” Yet, archaeologists find over and over again that long-term memory does not last very long—even with the reinforcement of language, story telling, art, symbol systems, etc.

Mechanisms used for processing and storage of information, and for decision-making, were discussed by Flannery as follows (1972b:411–412). He noted that one of the main trends in the evolution of bands into tribes, chiefdoms, and states must be a gradual increase in capacity for information processing, storage, and analysis. Among bands, much of the data handling is done by informal headmen, who collect and distribute knowledge about natural resources. With agriculture comes a need to control additional information, such as the allocation of land, timing of planting and harvest, and collaboration on land clearance. In chiefdoms, where the number of institutions is far higher, population often very large, warfare frequent, agriculture often complex, crafts more highly developed, and exchange intense, the information processing is done by sanctified hereditary chiefs and their retainers, to whom some of the responsibility is delegated. In states, “the managerial superstructure becomes still more elaborate, multilevel, and centralized; and the royal bureaucracies process data for hundreds of thousands of souls.” Flannery’s presentation clarifies the unique situation of early village communities. On the one hand, unlike state social organizations, they

95

Cognitive Analysis of the D ancing scenes

had not yet developed a writing system for efficient information storage. On the other hand, they did have to process much more data and knowledge than hunter-gatherers. It seems to me that dancing activity is relevant here. As observed by Snyder, “Dance functions in some cultures, the non-literate cultures, with as broad a spectrum of functions as the written word includes for others. . . . Dance, in the ritual setting is a literature of the non-literate cultures” (Snyder in Royce 1977:154). In other words, the public rituals, symbolized by the dance, were a practical way of educating and transferring knowledge. Calendrical rites, like those dedicated to the seasons of plowing, sowing, harvesting, and reaping took place during crucial stages of the agricultural cycle. The ceremony actually coordinates everybody in the community towards the specific work that was to be carried out in the next weeks. The long duration of the dancing motif is not an isolated phenomenon. The same long duration, which sometimes lasted even longer than the depiction of dancing scenes, has been observed for other symbolic expressions that developed in the early village communities. Now with the accumulation of data it becomes increasingly clear that the PrePottery Neolithic B period, of the eighth millennium bc, was a formative era for the art and cult of the ancient Near East. A survey of religious and symbolic components that appeared in this period and continued to be used thousands of years later includes the following (Garfinkel 1994): 1. Anthropomorphic statues may be related to the myths of the creation of man in the Sumerian and biblical traditions (Amiran 1962). 2. Plastered skulls and the depiction of death with plaster on the skull and tooth removal are reminiscent of the Canaanite Poem of Aqht from late Bronze Ugarit, second millennium bc (Margalit 1983). 3. The deliberate burial of cultic objects is well attested by the caches of anthropomorphic statues and plastered skulls discovered in pits at Jericho and ‘Ain Ghazal (Garfinkel 1994). 4. The earliest appearance of cult structures (temples?) has been reported from Gübekli Tepe and Nevali Çori. The Çayönü Skull House should be understood as a public ceremonial building as well. 5. The earliest appearance of building models (temples?) has been reported from Jericho and Çayönü. 6. The use of standing stones, the biblical masseboth, is known from Jericho. 7. The earliest appearance of masks has been reported from Nahal Hemar Cave and Basta. 8. The earliest appearance of monumental art objects, such as anthropomorphic statues, is at Jericho, ‘Ain Ghazal, and Nevali Çori. 9. The earliest appearance of cattle figurines has been reported from sites such as Jericho, Munhata, and ‘Ain Ghazal.

96

The D ance Analysis

10. So-called “coffee bean” eyes are a well-known artistic motif on anthropomorphic figures in the protohistoric Near East. It appears in Jericho on a plastered skull and on an anthropomorphic statue (Garfinkel 1999c:93; Noy 1999:46). 11. Dancing motifs, as discussed in this work. 12. The first appearance of seals, a very characteristic example of the ancient Near Eastern artistic tradition, was at Jericho, Ugarit, and Bouqras (von Wickede 1990:40–49). 13. To complete the picture, it should be mentioned that it is very popular to suggest continuity from the Neolithic period onwards of the cult of fertility and the “Great Mother Goddess” worship. This approach seems too general, since on one hand, every female figurine can be associated with this concept, and on the other hand, female figurines appear in the archaeological record earlier than the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period. But there is an iconographic attribute related to fertility/sexuality that does begin in this period—a female figure supporting her breasts with her hands.

The appearance of all these motifs together in the eighth millennium bc clarifies that we are looking at a cognitive system in which the dancing motif is not an isolated phenomenon. The main mechanism of this system was congregational ceremonies in which entire communities actively participated in dancing. Throughout millennia, the symbolic duration, symbolic penetration, and symbolic efficiency of each of the above-mentioned themes varied from period to period and from place to place. The complicated nature of such a process was described by Jacobsen in relation to written religious documents from Mesopotamia, and it seems relevant to the earlier periods as well (1976:19–20): It is not only that older elements disappear and are replaced with new; often the old elements are retained and exist side by side with the new; and often too, these older elements, though seemingly unchanged, have in fact come to mean something quite different, have been reinterpreted to fit into a new system of meanings. . . . In approaching ancient Mesopotamian materials, it should be kept in mind that the older elements of culture survive, and that they may be reinterpreted over and over; for we find among these materials religious documents, myths, epics, laments, which have been handed down almost unchanged in copy after copy for as much as a thousand or fifteen hundred years, and it is often difficult to say with certainty whether a document originated in the period from which it seems to come, or whether it was in fact from earlier times.

Why does the eighth millennium bc (the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B) appear to be the formative era, not an earlier or a later period? Unlike the ninth millennium bc (the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A), which was still a

97

Cognitive Analysis of the D ancing scenes

period of “trial and error,” in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B one witnesses well-established villages with rectangular architecture (Flannery 1972a; Redman 1978:142–176). The village communities continued to be the basic type of settlement in the Near East for some four thousand years (Redman 1978:177–213; Nissen 1988:39–64). Only in the second half of the fourth millennium bc did urban societies and state-level communities start to develop in Mesopotamia. This process, popularly designated “the urban revolution” in the fourth millennium bc depended heavily upon food-production economy and the social organization founded in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period (Redman 1978:213). As the symbolic expressions were formulated in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B together with the agricultural village communities’ socioeconomic structure, the successful survival of that system protected some of the original cult and art of the eighth millennium bc. Indeed, temples, and not palaces and kings, were the main power in coordinating the early Sumerian cities (Kramer 1963:73–77; Redman 1978:251–260; Nissen 1988:83) and maybe earlier (Makkay 1983). The same phenomenon has been suggested for the Levant in the fourth millennium bc, where temples are the only public buildings of the period (Mazar 1992:68). In periods without formal schools and writing the community rituals, symbolized by dance, were the basic mechanism for distributing education and knowledge to the adult members of the community and from one generation to the other, thus reducing “retrieval failure” of longterm memory. The long duration of the depiction of dance as a dominant artistic motif, together with its penetration into wide geographical areas (from west Pakistan to the Danube basin) testifies to the efficiency of the dancing motif as one of the most powerful symbols in the evolution of human societies.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Conclusions

chapter 5

In this work I have discussed so far the available information on dancing activity in early village communities of the Near East and southeast Europe. This material has never previously been gathered together on such a scale. Part II will present the archaeological data, site by site, period by period, for the observations drawn in Part I. The dancing motif throws light on aspects of the forms of dancing practiced in the prehistoric Near East and southeast Europe. This adds a new dimension to the study of dance history, in the following ways: 1. The dances documented are mainly circle dances. In addition, row dances and couples dances are also recorded. 2. The direction of the dance is usually counter-clockwise. Some, though largely insufficient, evidence suggests that dances were performed in the other direction in mourning ceremonies. 3. The contact between the dancers was on several levels: dancing with no contact, hand-holding, shoulder to shoulder, and embracing. 4. The dance could be performed in the nude but also with elaborate dress, hair arrangements, head coverings, and other accessories. 5. The use of masks and fancy dress may suggest the incorporation of dramatic elements in the dance. 6. The dance is highly formalized: body movements, dress, and direction are all uniform, suggesting a cultic function. 7. Men and women usually danced separately; excluding Predynastic Egypt, rarely do we find mixed dancing. Egypt presents a totally different picture: male and female figures dance together in most of the depictions. 8. Dancing was performed in the open. Sometimes it took place in the vicinity of a building, perhaps a temple, or a tree. 9. Dancing seems to have been performed mainly at night.

Since the dance motif portrays human interaction, it allows for some social reconstruction of the period. The motif shows human interaction in a cultic context. It thus portrays religion on a community level. It represents an egalitarian situation at a time of growing social stratification. Thus dance was, on one hand, a tool promoting bonding within protohistoric communities of the ancient Near East and, on the other hand, was used for screening the process of stratification. It seems that

100

The D ance Analysis

the dance motif appears in the ancient Near East during a time of tribal social organization, according to Service’s terminology, and continued to be used during the period of chiefdom social organization (Fig. 3.1). Dancing was performed before and after this stage, but at this stage it became a central artistic motif. From the cognitive point of view, the following points were raised. Our analysis shows that there was a cognitive dimension to dance. The art is communo-centric; the community is depicting itself (depictions of mythical scenes are not yet known). The decorated vessels serve as a means of communication, stressing the importance of dance. Ancient villagers conceived of dance as the most significant cultic activity, whose essence as a religious experience was expressed by the circle of dancers. The uniformity of the figures in the circle gives ideological expression to the equality of the members of the community. Moreover, all the figures have the same role in the ceremony. Even if other people such as shamans or priests were present at the ceremony, they are not more important in cognitive terms. These elements appear, nevertheless, precisely in the period that witnessed an acceleration in the process of social stratification. A dichotomy arises between ideology and reality, since we have both the expression of equality and the development of social stratification. To sum up, the major strategies used by the early farmers of the Near East and southeast Europe from the eighth to the fourth millennia bc to promote the bonding of individuals into communities, and of individual households into villages, were public assemblies for religious ceremonies. These were probably calendrical rituals celebrated during the crucial points of the agricultural cycle. The archaeological evidence presented above is the pictorial expression of this activity and sheds light on it. The importance of these ceremonies is also borne out by ethnographic observations of pre-state communities, in which dance is indeed the most important component in religious ceremonies. Dancing together creates unity, provides education, and transmits cultural messages from one generation to the next. In the context of early agricultural systems, with the transition from ad hoc hunter-and-gatherer subsistence to “delayed-reward economy,” a cognitive revolution with regard to work investment and its final product took place. Successful agriculture required harmony with the climatic cycle of the four seasons. The extravagant, multidimensional rituals (elaborate dress, body decorations, masks, music, rhythmic movement, trance), preformed in accordance with the agricultural calendar, were the main tools in this period for coordinating the cultivation of land and thus ensuring the successful survival of the early farmer communities.

101

D irections for Further Investigation

In this section, I would like to suggest further directions for investigating dance in the past, whether prehistoric or historic, cultures.

detailed analysis of specific scenes

Conclusions

In this book I give a general overview of the dancing scenes in six geographical/historical units. In no case do I go into elaborate detail about a specific scene, as I have elsewhere. I analyzed the Khazineh painted style of western Iran, represented here in Figures 9.4–9.10 (Garfinkel 2000). I also devoted a study to the three dancing scenes of the Naqada I period, represented here in Figures 11.3:e–11.6 (Garfinkel 2001b). Many of the depictions presented here deserve such an in-depth analysis, and I hope to carry them out in the future. Hopefully other scholars will also take upon themselves such tasks. It is always worthwhile to conduct repeated examinations of the original material, in storage rooms or museums, as it usually reveals new insights that cannot be gleaned from the old publications. In some cases, unpublished materials can also be found in storage.

contextual analysis The context in which the archaeological items are found is the key tool at our disposal for understanding their function and use during their use period. Thus, contextual analysis can potentially reveal further information on the items decorated with dancing scenes. In old excavations this data has often been lost, but in new excavations, this can be a most fruitful and innovative area of investigation.

other evidence for dance In this study I focus on the evidence of dance in artistic expressions. One should find other evidence of dance activity in past societies. Probably the first direction for such evidence should be dance paraphernalia, that is, items manufactured and used during dance ceremonies. These can be either items put on the dancer’s body (such as masks) or items held by the participants. This sort of analysis has been pursued recently for the unique assemblage of worked bones discovered at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B site of Nahal Hemar Cave (Bar-Yosef 2001).

dancing scenes in their social setting Depictions of dance are not an isolated phenomenon but are part of a larger social context. In the same way that I examine the social setting of the dancing scenes at the beginning of farming, similar studies can be carried out on the depiction of dance in other regions and periods. There are examples of dancing figures produced by hunters and gatherers in Paleolithic Europe, and dancing scenes from the ancient urban

102

civilizations of Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, Rome, and others. Dancing scenes from other regions such as the Far East, Africa, Australia, and North and South America are awaiting a similar treatment. Besides undertaking studies that concentrate on the description of such scenes, scholars should attempt a more elaborate analysis.

the archaeology of dance

The D ance Analysis

The accumulation of all the data and interpretations mentioned here, as well as the methodological remarks in the introduction of this book, opens a new horizon for the study of dance in past societies. Study of ancient dance in various parts of the world should basically apply the same methodology. Thus this field of inquiry should be considered as the “archaeology of dance.”

the archaeology of performance Dance is part of a larger phenomenon, which can be subsumed under the term “performance.” In different stages of human evolution, different types of performances took place. Hunter-and-gatherer societies are characterized by ad hoc rituals, mainly rites of passage, dictating a set of actions. Calendrical ritual, which became dominant in agricultural societies, has a different set of priorities and thus is represented by different types of performances. In urban societies, with a complex hierarchy and sharp specialization, new types of performances developed, such as theater and sophisticated music. In this broad context, dance is just one aspect of performance.

part 1i

The D ata

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

General Remarks Concerning the D ata

chapter 6

The Presentation

Dancing scenes from some 170 sites are discussed in this part of the work. Some sites produced more than one item, and altogether, 396 depictions are presented in the drawings. Table 6.1 presents the distribution of the dancing motif in the six chronological-geographical units according to their arrangement in the figures. Table 6.2 presents the distribution of the motif according to the materials used: pottery vessels, wall and floor paintings, stone slabs, rock carvings, linen, stamp seals, cylinder seals, a stone vessel, and a clay model. In the text the items are arranged according to the six chronological-geographical units. Each site is presented independently, sometimes at length and sometimes briefly, depending on the quality of the data published. Special discussions focus on items that have not been previously identified as representing dance. In the figures, the items are organized mainly according to typological similarities. This method was chosen since many objects were found broken, and their juxtaposition next to betterpreserved examples can help clarify their original appearance. The information relevant to each specific figure is given in the captions and includes the object’s place of discovery, its size in centimeters, and publication references. The items were drawn from either a figure or a photograph, depending on the publication at my disposal. Since this work was done without my being able to examine many of the original objects, sometimes not all the details could be deciphered. Every effort has been made to include all the relevant items in the assemblage. However, the reader should be aware that certain limitations prevented the gathering and presentation of a complete corpus. These include the occurrence of political conflicts in various parts of the Near East; the publication of some of the material only in preliminary reports, some of which were issued decades ago; and the difficulty of accessing publications dealing with southeast Europe. Nevertheless, the items that have been located present a rather large assemblage, 396 depictions of dance from some 170 sites, creating a reliable database for the subject under discussion. The following characteristics of the depictions are relevant to the dance performance, which I examine in detail:

106

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

The placement of the figures on the vessel. The presentation of the figures, whether frontal or in profile. The position of the body, especially the arms and legs. The presence of costumes, objects, and animals that accompany the dancers. Gender characteristics. The direction of movement, clockwise or counter-clockwise. The relationship of the figures to each other. Architectural or other elements depicted in the dancing scene.

The D ata

The Motif’s Origin and D istribution

One can summarize the main features relevant to the origin and distribution of the dancing motif in the ancient Near East and southeast Europe as follows (Tables 6.1 and 6.2):

the eighth millennium bc At this stage the earliest evidence for the dancing motif comes to light at three sites in the Levant: carved in limestone on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic scenes from Nevali Çori, painted on a plaster floor at Tell Halula, and incised on a basalt slab at Dhuweila.

the first half of the seventh millennium bc The dancing motif becomes common throughout a broader geographical expanse, including northern Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and Cyprus. At most sites where the motif is present (Tell Sotto, Umm Dabaghiyah, Köçcsk Höyük, Kuruçay Höyük, and Hacilar), it appears as an applied plastic decoration on pottery vessels. In addition, the motif appears carved on a stone slab at Çatal Höyük, on a painted fresco at KalavasosTenta, and on a painted bowl from Hacilar.

the end of the seventh millennium and the sixth millennium bc At this stage the distribution of the motif expands considerably. It is evident in most of the Halafian and Samarra sites in northern and central Mesopotamia. In western Iran the motif is found on the Deh Luran plain and the Susiana plain of Khuzistan. The motif is also found in the northern regions of the Near East, in Anatolia, and in Armenia. Further to the north and west, these items have been discovered in Greece, the Balkans, and southeast Europe. We can note various decorative styles. In Mesopotamia and Iran the motif is presented through the technique of painting on pottery. Three basic styles of painting appear simultaneously: naturalistic, linear, and geometric. In contrast to the painting technique that was preferred in

ta b l e 6 . 1 Figures

The distribution of the dancing scenes in the various figures according to the six chronological-geographical units. Neolithic Near East

Halaf & Samarra

1 19

83 8 8 3 1 1 1 105

7.3 7.4–7.10 8.3–8.25 8.26 8.29–8.30 9.3 9.5–9.12 9.13 9.15 9.17–9.33 9.34 9.35 10.2–10.18 11.3–11.26 11.27 12.2–12.14 Total

20

ta b l e 6 . 2

Iran

Southeast Europe

1 5 29 6 2 57 8 8 116

Predynastic Near East, Egypt Later Examples

67 67

1 1 1 38 41

45 2 47

The distribution of the dancing motif in the six chronological-geographical units according to the materials used. Pottery Wall/Floor Stone Rock Linen Vessels Paintings Slabs Carvings

Neolithic Near East 15

Stamp Cylinder Others Total Seals Seals

2

2

-

-

-

-

1*

20

Halaf and Samarra

105

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

105

Iran

116

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

116

Southeast Europe

67

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

67

Predynastic Egypt

35

1

-

9

1

-

-

1**

47

Near East, Later Examples

3

2

3

-

-

6

27

-

41

Total

341

5

5

9

1

6

27

2

396

%

86.1

1.3

1.3

2.3

.3

1.5

6.8

0.5

*Stone vessel

**Clay model

100.1

ta b l e 6 . 3

The decorative techniques used on the pottery vessels. Painting No. %

Application No. %

Incision No. %

Total No. %

Neolithic Near East

1

6.7

13

86.7

1

6.7

15

100.0

Halaf and Samarra

96

91.4

8

7.6

1

1.0

105

100.0

Iran

116

100.0

-

0.0

-

0.0

116

100.0

Southeast Europe

3

4.5

55

82.1

9

13.4

67

100.0

Predynastic Egypt

30

85.7

3

8.6

2

5.7

35

100.0

Near East, Later Examples

2

66.7

0

0.0

1

33.3

3

100.1

Total

248

72.7

79

23.2

14

4.1

341

100.0

the east, relief representations were often used in the west, from the Levant to Anatolia and Armenia, as seen in ‘Ein al-Jarba, Korucutepe, Tülintepe, Norçcsuntepe, Imiris Gora, and Arukhlo. In Mesopotamia and western Iran several local linear and geometric styles developed, of which the most common are as follows: 1. In the Halafian culture, the common linear style depicts the human figure with a triangular head, two or three vertical lines representing the body and two diagonal lines marking the arms (Fig. 8.6:2–5). 2. At sites of the Samarra culture, especially the “Chogha Mami transitional,” a more abstract linear style is common in which the head is totally absent and the human figure is composed of a number of vertical lines representing the body, while diagonal lines represent the arms (Fig. 8.6:7–9). 3. On the Susiana plain, the body of the human figure is represented by one exceptionally thick line (Fig. 8.6:10–11), which sometimes splits into two at the legs and the head (Fig. 8.6:12). 4. On the Deh Luran plain, the human figure is represented with the lower part of the body shown in the form of a ladder (Fig. 9.13:c–g). 5. In western Iran, the human figure is represented in geometric style in the form of a triangle, set in vertical rows (Figs. 9.4–9.10).

the end of the sixth millennium and the first half of the fifth millennium bc In Iran the motif spreads northwards and eastwards and appears at various sites of the Iranian plateau, Fars, and Kerman; the easternmost item comes from Mehrgarh in Pakistan. Local styles became common in Iran, of which the most unique features are as follows:

109

General Remarks Concerning the D ata

1. A naturalistic style, common in sites from the Iranian plateau (Tepe Sialk, Tchechme Ali, and Qabrestan), which includes a row of tall figures in profile, very carefully delineated (Fig. 9.25). 2. A geometric style, found in the Susiana plain, Fars, and Kerman, which includes a row of rhombuses covered by a net pattern (Figs. 9.34:c–i; 9.35:a–g). 3. A “cubist” style, found at the site of Tall-i Bakun A (Figs. 9.30–9.31).

In Mesopotamia and Iran, with the appearance of stamp seals that depict scenes—as opposed to the earlier seals that were decorated mainly with geometric designs—the dance motif has been reported from Tepe Gawra, Tepe Giyan, and Telul eth-Thalathat (Fig. 12.2). In the Balkans and the Danube basin, dancing scenes on pottery vessels were still produced with relief or incised techniques. At this point the motif reaches its widest geographic distribution, but in the center, that is, Mesopotamia, there is already evidence of a wane in its popularity.

the second half of the fifth and the first half of the fourth millennium bc In Mesopotamia, Iran, and Anatolia the motif becomes less widespread in both scope and quantity, appearing more rarely in archaeological assemblages. It is found on a small number of cylinder seals and their impressions, mainly from Ur, Chagar Bazar, Nippur, Nineveh, and Susa. At the same time, many scenes are now depicted on art objects concentrating on different topics altogether, such as war, animal herds, people at work, and cultic rituals. In the Levant, dancing scenes are known from wall paintings at Teleilat Ghassul. In Egypt, while the depictions of dance were very rare during the fifth millennium bc, now they become popular and appear on quite a number of jars. In the beginning, the applied technique was used; later, they were painted on pottery vessels. There is one example of a painted textile.

the second half of the fourth millennium and the third millennium bc The dancing motif is confined to sites in the Levant and is found mainly on cylinder seals. In the third millennium bc, a regional style develops that spreads from Rosh ha-Niqra in the north to Bab edh-Dhra’ in the south (Ben-Tor 1978). In sum, displays first appeared in the Levant in the eighth millennium bc. Throughout the seventh and sixth millennia BC it spread eastwards to Mesopotamia and Iran, as far as Mehrgarh in western Pakistan. Simultaneously it spread to the west and to the north—to Anatolia, Armenia, Greece, the Balkans, and southeast Europe. In the sixth millennium BC the dancing motif reached its zenith both geographically

110

The D ata

and quantitatively. In the fifth millennium BC the motif made its appearance in Egypt but lost its dominance in Mesopotamia and Iran. From this point on its popularity declined, until in the third millennium bc the Levant was the only area still using it as a major motif for the depiction of interaction between people. At its peak, the motif was represented in almost every form of artistic expression in use in the protohistoric periods in the Near East. By the third millennium bc the dancing motif was depicted mainly on cylinder seals. Although it goes beyond the chronological boundaries of this study, it is interesting to note that the dancing motif is quite common in the second half of the second millennium, the Late Bronze Age in the Mitannian Kingdom of northern Mesopotamia. Dancing figures were found on many cylinder seals from Nuzi, the capital city of that kingdom (Porada 1947). Probably under the influence of the Mitanni style of cylinder-seal engraving, the motif is also found on cylinder seals unearthed at various sites in the southern Levant: Lachish, Megiddo, Beth Shean, and Tel Halif (Porada 1958; Guy 1938, Fig. 152:5; James and McGovern 1993, Pl. 58:g; Seger 1992). A dancing figure on a clay plaque has been reported from Tel Dan (Biran 1986). It seems that dancing became important again in this period. This phenomenon is worth a further study.

Neolithic Near East

chapter 7

Dancing figures from twelve Neolithic Near Eastern sites are presented in this study (Sites 1–12). These were discovered in the Levant, northern Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and Cyprus (Fig. 7.1) and are dated to the eighth and seventh millennia bc. They are presented below in chronological order. The dancing scenes were depicted on a variety of objects, using different techniques: Engraving. The earliest scenes, dated to the eighth millennium bc, appear before the introduction of pottery and were engraved on stone vessels and slabs (Figs. 7.3:a, 7.6:a–b). This technique almost completely disappeared during the seventh and sixth millennia bc but was revived in the early fourth millennium bc when dancing scenes were adopted by seal cutters. Applied Plastic Relief. With the introduction of pottery in the early seventh millennium bc, dancing scenes begin to appear on clay vessels. With this technique the potter modeled strips of clay in the form of the human body and applied them to the vessel’s exterior. Sometimes other details, such as fingers and toes, were emphasized by incisions. Most of the items from the Neolithic Near East were made by applied plastic relief (Figs. 7.7, 7.8:a–b, d–e, 7.9:a–b). Painting. Painting was quite rare at this early stage. One example of a painted plaster floor, one painted plastered wall, and one pottery vessel have been reported (Figs. 7.4, 7.9:c, 10.10:a). Incision. In this technique the dancing figure was incised on the surface of the pottery vessel before firing. One such example has been reported from the Neolithic Near East (Fig. 7.8:c).

1. nevali çori This site is located in the middle Euphrates region in southeast Turkey. A large Pre-Pottery Neolithic B village, dated to the eighth millennium bc, was unearthed, revealing a rich assemblage of art objects. One outstanding find was a large public structure with benches, two monumental pillars, and a niche. A collection of life-sized anthropomorphic stone statues was unearthed inside it. This building is one of the earliest examples of a temple in the ancient Near East. An object of special interest from this site is an engraved fragment of a rounded stone basin (Figs. 7.2, 7.3:a; Bienert and Fritz 1989; Yakar

figure 7.1 Near Eastern Neolithic sites mentioned in the text.

1991:315; Hauptmann 1993, Fig. 27). It bears a scene depicting three complete figures presented frontally in line. At the broken edges, traces of additional figures can be seen, but their nature remains unclear. The two outer figures are clearly human. They resemble one another, and both are larger than the figure in the center. Many details of the human body are shown: head, face, two hands, fingers, torso, legs, and toes. The arms are bent upwards, and the hands clearly end in fingers. The legs are

113

figure 7.2 Engraved limestone bowl from Nevali Çori. Courtesy of Harald Hauptmann, German Archaeological Institute, Istanbul. figure 7.3 Engraved objects from the Near East: a. Nevali Çori, limestone fragment, ca. 19 x 13 cm (after Hauptmann 1993, Figure 27). b. Tepe Giyan, stamp seal, ca. 4 x 2.5 cm (after Herzfeld 1933, Figure 25).

114

the D ata

separate, also shown partly horizontally and partly vertically, and end in feet and toes. This is a very dynamic representation of the human body, clearly expressing a dancing position. The character of the central figure is less clear, since it was schematically engraved. The head is shaped like a rhombus with two eyes. The body is rounded in a very exaggerated way. Two arms rise diagonally, and two short legs extend diagonally downwards. When published, this figure was identified as a turtle. However, it has no tail or chequered shell. Alternative interpretations are that the scene represents a family celebrating a new birth (Uzunoglu 1993:43, Item A-43) or a tortoiselike pregnant figure (Yakar 1991:315). Thus it seems that the central figure should rather be understood as a woman. Similar depictions of the female body can be found at the site of Köçcsk Höyük in Anatolia, dated to the seventh millennium bc (Fig. 7.7). A scene of two dancing men flanking a woman also appears on a later stamp seal from Tepe Giyan (Fig. 7.3:b; Herzfeld 1933, Fig. 25; Barnett 1966, Fig. 1:16, Pl. XXIII:2). A rounded body was used as a gender characteristic signifying a female figure (see below, Figs. 2.14, 2.16) and does not necessarily indicate pregnancy, as suggested by Uzunoglu. The Nevali Çori basin fragment is one of the earliest art objects in the Neolithic Near East depicting a scene that represents men and women dancing together (Figs. 7.2, 7.3:a).

2. tell halula This is a multilayered site located in the Euphrates Valley in Syria. The excavation uncovered part of a Pre-Pottery Neolithic B settlement of the eighth millennium bc, with the typical architectural features of the period: rectangle houses and plastered floors. In one of the houses the plaster floor was painted with a dancing scene. The preliminary report described the scene as “twenty-three female figures represented around a square symbol that contains red lines” and claimed that “they witness the special role of the female figure in the symbolism of the first agricultural societies from the Mediterranean Near East” (Fig. 7.4; Molist 1998). Some parts of the painting are badly preserved, but the following components can be seen: There are clearly twenty-three figures (nos. 1–23) and possibly the outlines of another one (no. 24). The figures are drawn from three different perspectives; thus it is not clear how one should approach the scene. In the interpretation offered here, some of the figures are presented on their side (nos. 17–24) and others upside down (nos. 1–3). On the left side of the scene the human figures are presented in profile (nos. 1–16, 24), and on the right side the figures appear frontally (nos. 17–23). In the center of the scene there is a squareshaped element, covered with a set of parallel lines. The figures in profile

figure 7.4 Painted plaster floor from Tell Halula (ca. 80 cm length, after Molist 1998, Figure 4).

are organized into six groups. In one group there are four figures (nos. 4–7), in two groups there are three figures (nos. 1–3, 10–12), and in three groups there are two figures (nos. 8–9, 13–14, 15–16). In each group the figures are standing in a line, one behind the other, with their hands lifted horizontally to shoulder level. A badly preserved figure (no. 24) is

116

the D ata

also presented in profile, near the square-shaped element. The pelvic area of the figures is exaggerated, thus indicating that they are female. The seven figures presented frontally, on the right side of the scene, may also be organized in three groups: one group of three figures (nos. 21–23) and two groups of two figures (nos. 17–18, 19–20). In one of these groups the figures are bigger then the others (nos. 17–18). The figures presented frontally are standing near each other, and like the figures in profile, their hands are lifted more or less to shoulder level. To judge from the enlarged pelvises, these are female figures as well. This scene is clearly lacking the common visual perception of a single point of view. Is it possible to understand it as an attempt to represent a circle dance on a flat surface? This explanation would set the various components into one meaningful arrangement: human figures around a geometric element in the center.

3. dhuweila This is a small campsite located in the Eastern Desert of Jordan. Some rock carvings were found in a Pre-Pottery Neolithic B layer, dating to the eighth millennium bc. The carving was visible on stone slabs unearthed in the archaeological sediment. Most of the carvings depict animals, but one basalt slab displays a row of four human figures presented frontally, standing in a line and holding hands (Fig. 7.5:a, 7.6:a; Betts 1987, 1998, Fig. 7.1). The bodies are relatively thin and tall with elongated necks, quite similar to each other. No specific gender characteristics are shown, but the general impression is that they are all male. Each figure’s head is portrayed somewhat differently. The head of the figure on the left is elongated like an animal head. The head of the second figure from the left seems to have a hat or a coiffure. The third has a very small head, and the head of the fourth figure has unfortunately been broken off. The heads are very small in proportion and give a general nonhuman impression. Configurations of human bodies with nonhuman heads in the art of the protohistoric Near East have been described as demons, demons with ibex horns, masked persons, and birdheaded men (Herzfeld 1941:30; Porada 1965:32; Barnett 1966; Kaplan 1969; Fukai et al. 1974:51). It seems to me that rather than being mythological demons, the figures at Dhuweila represent masked individuals. As mentioned above, masks have been discovered in contemporary PrePottery Neolithic B sites in the Levant.

4. köç csk höyük This site is located in eastern Anatolia and has been dated to the late seventh millennium bc. (Silistreli 1989; Yakar 1991:190–194) The pottery assemblage includes sherds with plastic decoration of human and animal figures that were attached to the vessels’ exteriors. The site’s excavators reported different types of dancing figures:

figure 7.5 Incised stone slabs from the Neolithic Near East: a. Basalt slab from Dhuweila. Courtesy of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Item 1987.113). b. Çatal Höyük. Courtesy of the Museum of Anatolian Civilization, Ankara. figure 7.6 Engraved stone slabs from the Neolithic Near East: a. Dhuweila, ca. 9 x 7 cm (after Betts et al. 1998, Figure 7:1). b. Çatal Höyük, ca. 11.5 x 11.5 cm (after Temizer 1981, Figure 22; and Mellaart 1963, Figure 27).

a

b

118

the D ata

figure 7.7 Applied pottery from the Neolithic Near East:

a. Köçcsk Höyük, ca. 16 x 11 cm (after Silistreli 1989, Figure III:1). b. Köçcsk Höyük, ca. 33 x 27 cm (after Silistreli 1989, Figure II:2). c. Köçcsk Höyük, ca. 19 x 11 cm (after Silistreli 1989, Figure II:1). d. Köçcsk Höyük, ca. 17 x 14 cm (after Silistreli 1989, Figure III:4). e. Köçcsk Höyük, ca. 18 x 16 cm (after Silistreli 1989, Figure XII:2). f. Köçcsk Höyük, ca. 23 x 18 cm (after Silisterli 1989, Figure I:1). g. Tepecik, ca. 7 x 5 cm (after Biçakçi 2001, Figure 12).

119

Neolithic Near East

1. Figures holding hands. One preserved object includes the lower part of two identical figures represented frontally, holding hands (Fig. 7.7:a; Silistreli 1989; Yakar 1991:190–194, 1994:46–49). The breasts, the emphasized pelvis, and the folds of fat indicate that only women participated in this dance. The figures are arranged in a horizontal line on the shoulder of a closed vessel. 2. A single figure represented with one arm bent upwards and the other bent downwards. Two of the three figures in this category are female, represented frontally (Fig. 7.7:b–c), and the third is a male, represented in profile, facing left (Fig. 7.7:d). He is depicted with a head covering and an elongated object in his hand. 3. A single figure shown with both arms extended upwards. This category includes two items, both females represented frontally (Fig. 7.7:e–f ). One of them has an elongated head, probably depicting a head covering or a hair arrangement.

Five of the six objects presented here depict female figures, and one depicts a male figure. While the females are represented frontally, the male is portrayed in profile, facing left. He is the only one holding an object in his hand. None of these figures is engaged in any form of work such as hunting, farming, or preparing food. On the contrary, with both arms raised upwards, or with one arm bent upwards and the other bent downwards, they are performing a ceremony. The arm positions indicate a dynamic dancing pose, which is clearly emphasized in the first example in which two figures are holding each other. A special elongated head covering further emphasizes the ceremonial context of the events.

5. tepecik This site is located in eastern Anatolia, near Köçcsk Höyük, and is dated to the seventh millennium bc. Its pottery assemblage includes sherds with plastic decoration of human and animal figures. One of these is a rim fragment with two human figures, partly preserved, represented frontally and holding hands (Fig. 7.7:g; Biçakçi 2001, Fig. 12). The figure to the right is in a better state of preservation and has rounded arms, neck, torso, two outstretched hands, and the upper part of two legs. The right leg seems to be raised, as it is not facing downward but toward the side. The left figure is badly preserved, with only its right hand still intact. On the sherd there is a clear scar, indicating that an applied part, a part of the torso, fell off.

6. tell sotto This site is located in the Sinjar plain in northern Iraq. A rim fragment of a pottery vessel, decorated with an applied human figure, has been published from the lower levels of the site, dated to the first half of the seventh millennium bc. The preserved part includes a human figure

120

figure 7.8 Applied and incised pottery and white ware vessels from the Neolithic Near East:

a. Umm Dabaghiyah, ca. 6 x 7 cm (after Kirkbride 1973, Pl. III:1). b. Tell Sotto, ca. 9 x 7 cm (after Bader 1993, Figure 3.6). c. El Kowm 2, ca. 12 x 18 cm (after Cauvin 1994, Figure 64:2). d. Umm Dabaghiyah, ca. 7 x 7 cm (after Kirkbride 1973, Pl. III:3). e. Kuruçay Höyük , ca. 4.5 x 5.5 cm (after Duru 1988, Figure 14:1).

121

represented frontally, with an elongated combined head and neck, schematic torso, and arms raised. The left arm is bent at the elbow, in a dynamic position. The remnant of the other arm seems to indicate that it was raised in the same position (Fig. 7.8:b; Bader 1993, Fig. 3.6; Merpert et al. 1977, Pl. 30).

7. umm dabaghiyah

Neolithic Near East

This site is located in northern Mesopotamia. It is dated to the first half of the seventh millennium bc. About ten rim fragments of pottery vessels with applied plastic decoration of human and animal figures have been published from the site. These include: 1. A sherd with the upper part of a human figure similar to the item from Tell Sotto, with an elongated combined head and neck and one arm raised. The arm is partly horizontal and partly vertical (Fig. 7.8:a; Kirkbride 1973). 2. A sherd with a depiction of a human figure, with the arms horizontal, at the same level as the shoulders (Fig. 7.8:d).

8. el kowm 2 This site is located in the Syrian desert and is dated to the first half of the seventh millennium bc. It has yielded a rim fragment of a vessel made of plaster (“white ware”). It bears an incision showing a very schematic anthropomorphic figure represented frontally. The arms are bent upwards, and the legs are bent downwards. The line of the torso protudes down between the legs and seems to indicate the male sex organ (Fig. 7.8:c; Cauvin 1994:238, Fig. 64:2; Stordeur et al. 1991). This is the earliest example in the assemblage displaying such a degree of abstraction of the human body. The tendency towards abstract figures becomes stronger in later chronological stages (see, for example, Figs. 8.10–8.27, 9.18, 10.10:f–g, 10.11, 10.12, 10.14).

9. çatal höyük This site is one of the most famous Neolithic settlements in the ancient Near East, located on the Konya plain in Anatolia. Very rich assemblages of art and cult objects were discovered at the site. From Layer VI, dated to the seventh millennium bc, an engraved plaque has been published. It was restored from four broken pieces (Figs. 7.5:b, 7.6:b; Mellaart 1963, Fig. 27, Pl. XXI:d, 1967, Pl. 83; Temizer 1981, Fig. 22; Uzunoglu 1993, A-25). Mellaart described the object as a unique greenish-gray schist plaque from shrine vi.a30 with four figures in bold relief. On the left a couple of deities are shown in embrace; on the right a mother holding a child, whose head is unfortunately lost. It is possible, if not probable, that the two scenes relate a succession of events;

figure 7.9 Applied pottery and a wall painting from the Neolithic Near East: a. Kuruçay Höyük, ca. 6 x 7 cm (after Duru 1980, Figure 44:4). b. Hacilar, ca. 5 x 4.5 cm (after Mellaart 1970, Figure 57:4). c. Kalavasos-Tenta, ca. 120 x 60 cm (after Todd 1987, Figure 39).

the union of the couple on the left and the intended result on the right. The goddess remains the same, the male appears either as husband or as son (Mellaart 1963:148, Pl. 83).

However, these four figures are rather similar to each other and bear no gender characteristics. It is impossible to decide whether these are males or females, which makes Mellaart’s interpretation open to argument. The two couples are clearly represented in a dynamic position, embracing and with bent legs. The pelvises are at the two extreme ends of each composition rather than touching one another. This is not necessarily a “union” or “copulation” (Mellaart 1963:148; Todd 1976:93) but could be interpreted as a dancing posture. I therefore suggest that the plaque depicts the performance of a couples dance. Further analysis of items from Çatal Höyük are presented in the discussion and the appendix below.

123

10. kuruçay höyük This site is located in central Anatolia, near Hacilar, and is dated to the seventh millennium bc. Two sherds, depicting anthropomorphic figures applied as plastic decoration, have been reported from the site:

Neolithic Near East

1. The better-preserved item has been described as a woman shown with arms raised and legs apart. Round head, very fat body. Fingers depicted (Fig. 7.9:a; Uzunoglu 1993:58, Item A54; Duru 1980, Pls. 44:4, 45:3; Yakar 1991:166–172). This figure, like the dancing figures at Nevali Çori, is represented with bent arms raised, and they clearly end in fingers. The legs are separate and are also bent. 2. A small sherd with the left half of an applied anthropomorphic figure. This fragment preserves one arm raised straight upwards and one straight leg (Fig. 7.8:e; Duru 1988, Fig. 14:1).

11. hacilar This site is located in central Anatolia. A few examples of dancing figures have been reported from Hacilar: 1. In Layer VI, dated to the first half of the seventh millennium bc, a few pottery sherds decorated with applied relief were reported. One of them was described as a bird (Fig. 7.9:b; Mellaart 1970, Fig. 57:4; Yakar 1991:151–166). This figure, however, looks more like a bent arm, with the hand’s fingers. This type of depiction of human arms is very common in dancing figures, as can be seen in examples from the nearby site of Kuruçay Höyük and in many other examples (Figs. 7.3:a, 7.9:a, c, 8.4:b– c, 8.29:b, 8.30:a–b, 9.5:c–f, 9.24:a). It thus seems that this sherd shows a dancing human figure. 2. A carinated bowl is related to the site, but it was not found in an excavated context. The published photograph does not show the entire scene, but the supplementary text clarifies that the inner side of the bowl is divided into quarters, and each includes a stylized human figure in abstract rectilinear form. Two of the figures, on opposite sides of the scene,

figure 7.10 Painted pottery from Hacilar (ca. 10 x 33 cm, after Uzunoglu 1993:67, Item a-73).

124

the D ata

have heads in the shape of inverted triangles, with rings, probably representing hair, hanging from the points. Eyes are round in shape. The heads of these figures are grotesquely emphasized. The upper arms are thick, and the forearms curl inwards in a spiral. The hips are triangular in shape, and the legs are shown with cross bands. The two other figures have similar heads, but their arms are not shown. These figures resemble women (Fig. 7.10; Uzunoglu 1993:67, Item a-73).

Stylized representations of human figures shown frontally, with triangular heads, arranged in circles, inside bowls or other vessels, became a common motif in the Halafian and Samarra (Figs. 8.9–8.25) cultures. To judge from these later examples (see below), it seems that this bowl represents a dancing scene.

12. kalavasos-tenta This aceramic Neolithic village site is located in Cyprus and is dated to the seventh millennium bc. In one of the houses a wall painting in a fragmentary state of preservation was unearthed (Fig. 7.9:c; Todd 1987:47). The detailed account in the final excavation report gives the following description (Todd 1987:47): Although the whole painting should be considered as a single composition, it consists of two major parts separated by a small area which was totally devoid of paint. . . . In the southern half of the pier, a single human figure with an approximately square head is shown with arms upraised. . . . The head, upon which no facial details are indicated, is placed on top of a long narrow neck, and each arm ends in five clear fingers. . . . The few remaining traces of paint suggest that the legs may have been depicted spread apart with their upper part horizontal and their lower part vertical. On analogy with the southern figure, the northern part of the painting may also be interpreted as a human figure of generally similar nature.

He notes, however, that the fragmentary state . . . makes the identification uncertain. But the figures in this wall painting share basic similarities with figures discovered in a number of protohistoric sites in the Near East: Nevali Çori, ‘Ein el-Jarba, and Tall-i Bakun A (Figs. 7.3:a, 8.29:b, 9.30). In all these parallels the figures were depicted in the same frontal position; the arms are bent upwards, partly horizontal and partly vertical; the arms end in fingers; the legs are spread apart, their upper part horizontal and their lower part vertical; an identical figure is depicted by the side of the first one. Thus, despite its fragmentary state of preservation, the object from Kalavasos-Tenta presents dancing figures.

Halafian and Samarra Cultures

chapter 8

In this chapter dancing figures from thirty-five sites are presented (Sites 13–47). These examples were discovered in Mesopotamia, Anatolia, the Levant, and Armenia (Fig. 8.1). While some dating problems exist concerning Halafian and Samarra cultures in general and each site in particular, in general, excavators have reliably dated the sites to the sixth millennium bc (Watson 1983; Watkins and Campbell 1987; Akkermans 1991; Porada et al. 1992). Stylistic Analysis

All the objects are pottery vessels, decorated in one of three techniques: painting, applied plastic relief, and incision (Fig. 8.2). Painting. This is the most common technique with which to depict dancing scenes in the Halafian and Samarra cultures. Plastic Decoration. As specified above, ribbons of clay were applied to pottery vessels in this technique. Incised Decoration. On one pottery vessel the pattern was created by incisions (Fig. 8.3:d). In this technique the potter used a sharp instrument to scratch the outer surface of the vessel before firing.

Three main styles of painting can be distinguished. This division is also relevant to the Iranian examples, which are presented in the next chapter.

the naturalistic style This term is used for cases in which an effort was made to produce a natural depiction of the human body (Figs. 8.3, 8.4). The figures are always presented in silhouette, without internal details, giving only the general outline of the body. Although this is a schematic representation, it is the most realistic in comparison to the other styles.

the linear style This style has usually been recognized as representing dancing figures in an abstract form (Herzfeld 1941:40–42; Mesnil du Buisson 1948:23; Parrot 1960:46), though some scholars differ (Braidwood et al. 1944). The style includes very schematic human figures, represented frontally in a

figure 8.1 Major Halafian, Samarra, and related sites mentioned in the text.

figure 8.2 Different techniques used to depict dancing figures on Halafian, Samarra, and Iranian pottery.

127

halafian and samarra cultures

figure 8.3 Painted pottery from Mesopotamia:

a. Tell Halaf, ca. 9 x 6 cm (after von Oppenheim 1943, Pl. LX:2). b. Yarim Tepe II, ca. 4 x 5 cm (after Merpert and Munchaev 1987, Figure 21:7). c. Yunus, no scale published (after Woolley 1934, Pl. XX:d). d. Sakje Gözu, ca. 6 x 9 cm (after Garstang et al. 1937, Pl. XXV:15). e. Tepe Gawra, ca. 10 cm high (after Tobler 1950, Pl. LXXV:a–b). f. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 9 x 6 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.43:349). g. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 16 x 24 cm (after Akkermans and Le Miere 1992, Figure 21:40). h. Chagar Bazar, ca. 3 x 2.5 cm (after Mallowan 1936, Figure 27:21). i. Chagar Bazar, ca. 4.5 x 5 cm (after Mallowan 1936, Figure 27:22).

128

figure 8.4 Painted pottery from Samarra:

a. Ca. 15 x 8 cm (after Herzfeld 1930, Pl. III; Braidwood et al. 1944, Figure 292). b. Ca. 5 x 5 cm (after Herzfeld 1941, Figure 36). c. Ca. 6 x 5 cm (after Herzfeld 1930, Figure 1). d. Ca. 14 x 8 cm (after Herzfeld 1930, Pl. IV; Braidwood et al. 1944, Figure 291).

129

figure 8.5 Painted pottery in the linear style from surveys at various Mesopotamian sites. Courtesy of Joan Oates, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge. figure 8.6 Basic variations in depictions of human figures in the linear style.

130

the data

figure 8.7 Basic variations in depictions of human figures in the geometric style.

horizontal row, holding hands (Fig. 8.5). On classical Halafian objects, each figure is represented by a triangular head, by one to three vertical lines for the torso and legs, and by two diagonal lines for the arms. In some of the Samarra and western Iranian sites the triangular heads were not portrayed at all. Figure 8.6 shows the basic variations used in the linear style to portray the human body: 1. Black painted triangular head. The torso and legs are represented by a single thick vertical line. 2–3. Black painted triangular head. The torso is represented by a single vertical line and the legs by two or three vertical lines. 4–5. Black painted triangular head. The torso and legs are represented by two or three vertical lines.

131

halafian and samarra cultures

6. Unpainted triangular head. The torso and legs are represented by a few vertical lines. 7–10. No heads are portrayed. The torso and legs are represented by two, three, four, or more than four vertical lines (up to eleven in one case, Fig. 8:26:e). 11. No heads are portrayed. The torso and legs are represented by three vertical lines. Unlike all the other examples, here the arms are not portrayed as diagonal lines, but are horizontal. 12. One thick line represents the head, torso, and legs. This and the next two variants seem to appear mainly in sites located on the Susiana plain, in Khuzistan, and in western Iran. 13. One thick line represents the head and torso. Its lower part becomes thicker, representing the pelvis and legs. 14. The head and legs are represented by two parallel lines. The torso is represented by one thick line.

In a few cases the areas between the triangular heads and the diagonal arms are filled by a dot (Fig. 8.17). Sometimes the motif becomes so schematic that it seems to have lost its original meaning (Fig. 8.13). The figures in the linear style were always drawn on the inner part of the rim, a somewhat hidden location when dealing with closed vessels.

the geometric style This style is another schematic representation of dancing figures, in which the human body was abstracted to a geometric form, such as a triangle, rectangle, or rhombus (Figs. 9.13:c–g, 9.34:a, c–i). Sometimes a net pattern covered the geometric form. This is a very rare style in the Halafian and Samarra cultures and is mainly reported from Iranian sites. Figure 8.7 shows the basic variations used to portray the human body in the geometric style: 1. A net-covered triangle with a small rounded head and two downturned diagonal arms. 2–3. A wide or a narrow, net-covered rectangle with a small rounded head and two raised arms. 4. An elongated, ladderlike rectangle with a small rounded head and two raised arms. 5–6. A net-covered rhombus with bent or straight arms and legs. 7. A black square with bent arms and legs. 8–10. Various sizes of black, elongated triangles with raised bent arms depicted with three fingers. A detailed discussion is presented for the items from the site of Khazineh (below, Site 51). 11. A black triangle with raised bent arms depicted with five winglike fingers. 12. A black rhombus with raised bent arms depicted with three fingers.

132

When dealing with objects depicted in the “naturalistic style,” the dancing scene is quite clear. However, when taking into account figures in the other two categories—the “linear” and the “geometric” styles— the dancing scenes are not always so clear; and indeed, in some cases, depictions in these categories have been interpreted differently or simply ignored altogether. Renfrew and Bahn have described a similar problem (1991:339–341):

the data

figure 8.8 The different painted styles used in Halafian, Samarra, and Iranian sites.

It is usually impossible to infer the meaning of a symbol within a given culture from the symbolic form of the image or object alone. At the very least we have to see how that form is used, and see it in the context of other symbols. Cognitive archaeology has therefore to be very careful about specific contexts of discovery: it is the assemblage, the ensemble, that matters, not the individual object in isolation.

133

halafian and samarra cultures

Thus, when dealing with the symbol of dance one has to look at its entire iconographic variability, its geographical and chronological distribution, and the appearance of naturalistic and schematic depictions together, at the same sites. In summary, two points should be emphasized concerning the painting styles: 1. All three styles coexisted chronologically. The assemblage from Tell Halaf includes objects drawn in the naturalistic style (Fig. 8.3:a), the linear style (Figs. 8.9:a–c, 8.10:a), and the geometric style (Fig. 9.34:a). Very often the naturalistic and the linear styles were found at the same sites, as at Samarra (cf. Fig. 8.4 with Fig. 8.22:a–b), Tell Sabi Abyad (cf. Fig. 8.3:f–g with Fig. 8.16), Yarim Tepe (cf. Fig. 8.3:b with Fig. 8.17:e), and Chagar Bazar (cf. Fig. 8.3:h–i with Fig. 8.13:e). 2. The division between the styles is not very sharp. Some items classified as naturalistic in style already bear some characteristics typical of the linear style (Fig. 8.3:g, i) or display features of the geometric style (Figs. 9.19– 9.24). Figure 8.8 presents examples of the three distinct styles, together with “intermediate/transitional” style.

The Assemblage

The assemblage includes twenty-eight sites of the Halafian and Samarra cultures (Sites 13–41), four sites that are not Halafian but are located on the western fringes of this culture’s sphere of influence (Sites 42–45), and two chronologically parallel sites at the northern boundary of the Near East (Sites 46–47).

13. tell halaf This site, from which the term “Halafian culture” is derived, is located in the Khabur Valley of northeastern Syria. All three painted styles depicting dancing figures are represented here (von Oppenheim 1943): The naturalistic style: A painted sherd has the upper part of four identical figures in profile, standing in a row, with bent arms (Fig. 8.3:a). They face right, creating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel. The figures are characterized by elongated heads and a special loincloth around the waist. Figures with a similar costume have been reported from other Halafian sites: Yunus, Sakje Gözu, Tell Sabi Abyad, and Tepe Gawra Stratum XVII (Figs. 8.3–8.5; Akkermans 1989, Fig. IV.43:350). Similar costumes can be seen in hunting scenes from Çatal Höyük wall paintings, where they have been described as “skins of leopards worn stiffly round the waist” (Fig. 2.19; Mellaart 1962:64, Pl. XVIII; 1967, Pl. XIII). The linear style: A number of decorated objects depicting this motif have been reported (Figs. 8.9:a–c, 8.10:a, d, 8.11). The most important is the

134

the data

figure 8.9 Painted pottery from Mesopotamia:

a. Tell Halaf, ca. 4 x 4 cm (after von Oppenheim 1943, Pl. XC:16). b. Tell Halaf, ca. 5 x 6.5 cm (after von Oppenheim 1943, Pl. XC:14). c. Tell Halaf, ca. 7.5 x 5 cm (after von Oppenheim 1943, Pl. XC:15). d. Nineveh, ca. 8 x 3 cm (after Gut 1995, Pl. 40:592). e. Nineveh, ca. 3 x 3 cm (after Gut 1995, Pl. 40:593). f. Nineveh, ca. 3 x 3 cm (after Mallowan 1933, Pl. XXXVIII:5). g. Nineveh, ca. 4 x 4 cm (after Gut 1995, Pl. 40:594). h. Tell Halula, schematic drawing without scale (after Molist 1996, Figure 3:4.23). i. Khirbet Garsour, ca. 5 x 7 cm (after Campbell 1998, Figure 3:3). j. Khirbet Garsour, ca. 5 x 5 cm (after Campbell 1998, Figure 4:2).

135

figure 8.10 Painted pottery from Mesopotamia:

figure 8.11 Painted pottery from Tell Halaf. Courtesy of the Vorderasiatisches Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Item 12441).

a. Tell Halaf, ca. 16 x 5 cm (after von Oppenheim 1943, Pl. LXIX:5). b. Arpachiyah, ca. 15 x 11 cm (after Mallowan and Rose 1935, Figure 58:4). c. Khirbet esh-Shenef, ca. 17 x 10 cm (after Akkermans 1993, Figure 3.29:4). d. Tell Halaf, ca. 9 x 4.5 cm. (Previously unpublished; courtesy of the Vorderasiatisches Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin.) e. Tell Kosak Shamali, ca. 7 x 2 cm (after Nishaki et al. 1999, Figure 10:1).

136

the data

complete bowl with some forty schematic figures drawn around its rim. Two oblique white lines inside the triangular head of each figure seem to represent the eyes. The complete circle created by the human figures on this bowl is not unique; on the contrary, whenever complete objects that show figures on them have been preserved (Figs. 8.13:a–b, 8.16:a–b, 8.17:a, 8.22:a), the figures surrounding the vessel are clearly arranged in a circle. The geometric style: A bowl rim fragment decorated on its inner face with a row of figures holding hands. Three complete figures have been preserved, each composed of a small rounded head, a net-covered triangular body, and two diagonal lines symbolizing the arms (see below, Fig. 9.34:a).

Also relevant is a deep decorated bowl, partly broken, reported from Tell Halaf (Fig. 8.12; von Oppenheim 1943, Textabb. 6, Pls. X:7, LX:3–4). Unlike the usual, highly elaborate Halafian pottery, this vessel has thick walls and a rough surface, and the artistic representation is of poor quality. It suggests popular art, manufactured by an untrained person.

figure 8.12 A painted bowl from Tell Halaf, ca. 9 cm high (after von Oppenheim 1943, Textabb 6, Pls. X:7, LX:4).

137

halafian and samarra cultures

A composite scene is depicted on the outer face of the bowl, but since the details are not shown well in the original publication, it has not proved possible to make further sense of it. However, on one part of the bowl there are two almost identical human figures, standing in line and facing left, making a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel. The upper bodies of the two figures are well preserved, and it is clear that their arms are bent upwards. The lower parts, however, are badly damaged. To judge from the traces of the second figure, it seems that it was dressed in a loincloth around the waist and that the legs were partly bent. A similar complete figure has been reported from Tepe Gawra (Fig. 8.3:e). In addition to these two dancing figures there is a single human figure on another part of the bowl, with arms in a similar position. Between the figures are some rectangular areas covered by a net pattern. These seem to represent architectural features, like those known from Djaffarabad, Choga Mami, Tepe Sialk, and Tepe Gawra (Fig. 2.18:1–13). Despite the poor quality of this object, it represents an attempt to describe a complicated event in which dancing was performed in front of a structure.

14. chagar bazar This site is located in the Khabur Valley of northeastern Syria. Four sherds painted in two distinct styles have been reported (Mallowan 1936, Fig. 27:22–24): The naturalistic style: One sherd depicts a row of three human figures in profile, and another sherd represents a human head with an elaborate coiffure (Fig. 8.3:h–i). Dancing figures with similar hairstyles have been reported from a number of sites: Tell Sabi Abyad, Samarra, and Djaffarabad (Figs. 8.3:f, 8.4, 9.17:a–c). Based on these examples, I suggest including the item from Chagar Bazar in the dancing category. The figures in these sherds face right, creating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel. The linear style: Two objects decorated with a simple row of schematic figures represent this style (Figs. 8.13:e, 8.17:b).

15. tell brak This site is located in the Khabur Valley of northeastern Syria. Two Halafian sherds painted in the linear style were published from this site’s excavations (Figs. 8.13:c, 8.17:d; Mallowan 1947).

16. tell sabi abyad This site is located in the Balikh Valley of northern Syria. Painted pottery sherds depicting human figures were found in large quantities in an early Halafian phase (Akkermans 1989, 1993, 1996). These can be classified as follows:

138

the data

figure 8.13 Painted Halafian pottery from various sites in Mesopotamia and the Levant:

a. Tell Damishliyya, ca. 16 x 7 cm (after Akkermans 1988, Figure 16:127). b. Tell Damishliyya, ca. 21 x 6 cm (after Akkermans 1988, Figure 15:116). c. Tell Brak, ca. 5 x 2.2 cm (after Mallowan 1947, Pl. LXXX:2). d. Arpachiyah, schematic drawing without scale (after Mallowan and Rose 1935, Figure 77:19). e. Chagar Bazar, ca. 3 x 4.5 cm (after Mallowan 1936, Figure 27:23). f. Tell Mounbateh, ca. 4 x 3 cm (after Copeland 1979, Figure 8:4). g. Tell Mounbateh, ca. 4 x 4 cm (after Copeland 1979, Figure 8:5). h. Tell Aajar, ca. 4 x 4 cm (after Matthers et al. 1978, Figure 5:55). i. Tell Judaidah, ca. 4.5 x 4.5 cm (after Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, Figure 87:7). j. Sakje Gözu, ca. 3 x 3 cm (after Garstang et al. 1937, Pl. XXV:1). k. Hama, ca. 4 x 4 cm (after Thuesen 1988, Pl. LXXII:12).

139

The naturalistic style: One sherd shows the upper part of three identical figures presented in profile, standing in a row, facing right, creating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel (Fig. 8.3:f ). Their arms are bent, and the fingers can be seen in some of the figures. Each figure has an elongated head with five braids falling backwards. A similar kind of coiffure appears on female figures, both dancing (Figs. 8.4, 9.17:a, c) and stationary (Ippolitoni-Strika 1990).

halafian and samarra cultures

Another sherd portrays two complete human figures represented with bent arms and legs and elongated coiffures (Fig. 8.3:g; Akkermans 1993, Fig. 3.21:40). They are shown in profile, standing in a row, facing right, and creating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel. The linear style: Painted vessels in this style were found in large quantities. Most of them were drawn in typical Halafian/Samarra style, and the human figures are composed of a triangular head, two diagonal lines for the arms, and a few vertical lines for the torso and legs (Figs. 8.14–8.16). On a few depictions, black dots were added in the space created between the heads and arms of the figures (Figs. 8.15, 8.17:a).

A few objects, however, were painted in the “Choga Mami transitional” style (see below), which was common in southern Mesopotamia and western Iran (Dollfus 1986, Fig. 2; Oates 1968, Pl. X:3, XII:2). In

a

b

c

d

figure 8.14 Painted pottery from Tell Sabi Abyad. Courtesy of Peter Akkermans, Leiden.

figure 8.15 Painted pottery from Tell Sabi Abyad. Courtesy of Peter Akkermans, Leiden.

a

b

140

figure 8.16 Painted pottery from Tell Sabi Abyad:

a. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 30 x 16.5 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.28:204). b. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 24 x 7 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.26:195). c. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 4.5 x 4.5 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.39:302). d. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 9 x 12 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.26:199). e. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 6 x 7.5 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.32:234). f. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 7.5 x 5.5 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.24:174). g. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 13.5 x 6 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.30:216). h. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 6 x 5.5 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.32:230). i. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 15 x 3.5 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.32:232).

141

figure 8.17 Painted pottery from Mesopotamia and the Levant:

a. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 30 x 10 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.27:203). b. Chagar Bazar, ca. 5 x 3 cm (after Mallowan 1936, Figure 27:24). c. Tell Kurdu, ca. 5.5 x 2 cm (after Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, Figure 128:5). d. Tell Brak, ca. 3 x 3 cm (after Mallowan 1947, Pl. LXXX:1). e. Yarim Tepe II, ca. 4 x 5 cm (after Munchaev and Merpert 1971, Figure 9.1). f. Tell Mounbateh, ca. 5.5 x 3.5 cm (after Copeland 1979, Figure 8:2). g. Tell Mounbateh, ca. 10 x 5.5 cm (after Copeland 1979, Figure 8:3). h. Khirbet esh-Shenef, ca. 6 x 4 cm (after Akkermans 1993, Figure 3.36:68). i. Tell Kazane Höyük, ca. 4 x 6 cm (Bernbeck et al. 1999, Figure 10:a).

142

these examples the triangle heads were not depicted (Figs. 8.26:g–h, 9.3:f–h).

17. tell damishliyya This site is located in the Balikh Valley of northern Syria. A few painted sherds decorated with dancing figures were discovered in the Halafian settlement (Akkermans 1988):

the data

1. A neck of a deep vessel whose outer face was painted with a row of very schematic human figures, represented frontally, raising their arms upwards (see below, Fig. 9.13:b). Some thirty-six such figures would be necessary to encircle the entire vessel. This item differs from all other linear style items in many aspects: the heads are not triangular, the arms are not presented diagonally, the figures are not holding hands, and the scene was not drawn on the inner part of the rim. However, similar representations of dancing figures from Khazineh and Tepe Musiyan (Fig. 9.13:a, c, e) have convinced me that this unique Halafian decoration also represents dancing figures. 2. Two other items are the necks of closed vessels, decorated on the interior in the linear style. At least thirty-two figures were drawn on one object and at least forty figures on the other (Fig. 8.13:a–b).

18. khirbet esh-shenef This site is located in the Balikh Valley of northern Syria, between Tell Sabi Abyad and Tell Damishliyya. Two painted sherds decorated with schematic dancing figures in the linear style were dated to the late Halafian settlement (Figs. 8.10:c, 8.17:h; Akkermans 1993, Figs. 3.29:4, 3.36:68).

19. tell mounbateh This site is located in the Balikh Valley in northern Syria. Surface finds collected during a survey included four painted sherds decorated with dancing figures in the linear style (Figs. 8.13:f–g, 8.17:f–g; Copeland 1979).

20. yunus This site is located in northern Syria near the ancient city of Carchemish. Excavators discovered a small Halafian sherd depicting the lower part of a human figure in the naturalistic style. Woolley described it thus: “The figure is boldly and freely rendered, the swelling of the calf and arm muscles not unnatural, the smallness of the waist is exaggerated and recalls Minoan conventions” (Fig. 8.3:c; Woolley 1934:156). This figure resembles the human figures reported from Tell Halaf, Sakje Gözu, and Tepe Gawra (Fig. 8.3:a, d–e); it faces right, creating a counterclockwise movement around the vessel, and is dressed in a loincloth.

143

The legs are portrayed as very muscular, as opposed to the broad hips that sometimes appear in dancing figures. This can be used as a gender characteristic: male figures were shown with muscular legs, while female figures were depicted with broad hips (cf. Fig. 8.3:c–d with Figs. 7.7:a–c, 7.9:a).

21. sakje gözu This is a Halafian site in southeast Turkey, from which dancing figures in two styles have been reported (Garstang et al. 1937; Yakar 1991:87–88): halafian and samarra cultures

figure 8.18 Incised pottery from Sakje Gözu. Courtesy of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Item 2001.93).

The naturalistic style: One sherd bears an incised human figure (Figs. 8.3:d, 8.18), similar to the figure on the above-mentioned sherd from Yunus. This is the only incised object in the entire Halafian, Samarra, and Iranian assemblages. The linear style: One sherd (Fig. 8.13:j).

144

22. tell kazane höyük This site is located in the Harran Plain near the city of cçSanliurfa in southeastern Turkey. Excavators reported a small assemblage of Halafian pottery, including a painted sherd with the motif of dancing figures in the linear style. In this example the area between the triangular heads and the diagonal arms was filled by a dot (Fig. 8.17:i; Bernbeck et al. 1999, Fig. 10:a).

23. tell halula the data

This is a multilayered site (above, Site 2), located in the Euphrates Valley in Syria. Excavators reported a small assemblage of Halafian pottery, which included the motif of dancing figures in the linear style (Fig. 8.9:h; Molist 1996).

24. tell kosak shamali This site is located in the upper Euphrates Valley of Syria. Excavators reported a small assemblage of Halafian pottery, which included a painted sherd with the motif of dancing figures in the linear style (Fig. 8.10:e; Nishaki et al. 1999, Fig. 10:2).

25. shams ed-din tannir This site is located in the Euphrates Valley of Syria. Excavators reported a large assemblage of Halafian pottery, which included a painted sherd with the motif of dancing figures in the linear style. No heads are portrayed, but the torsos on two examples are composed of four parallel vertical lines, and each arm is represented by four parallel diagonal lines (Fig. 8.26:i; Gustavson-Gaube 1981:149, Fig. 405).

26. tell kurdu This site is located in the northern Levant on the ‘Amuq Plain in Syria. Excavators reported a small painted sherd from Phase D, described as a pattern consisting of a frieze of lines pendent from dot-filled diamonds (Fig. 8.17:c; Braidwood and Braidwood 1960:163, Fig. 128:5). This pattern was painted on the inner face of the rim and clearly belongs to the linear style of dancing figures reported from many Halafian sites. The so-called dot-filled diamonds are the open areas between the heads and the arms of the figures in which a dot was painted.

27. tell judaidah This site is located in the northern Levant on the ‘Amuq Plain in Syria. Excavators reported a small Halafian painted sherd dated to the “first mixed range.” This is a rim fragment, decorated on the inner face with a row of schematic dancing figures painted in the linear style (Fig. 8.13:i; Braidwood and Braidwood 1960, Fig. 87:7).

145

28. tell aajar This site is located in the northern Levant near Aleppo, Syria. Excavators collected a small Halafian sherd painted in the linear style from the surface during a survey (Fig. 8.13:h; Matthers et al. 1978).

29. hama

halafian and samarra cultures

This site is located in the northern Levant, in Syria. Excavators published a small Halafian sherd painted with three figures from Layer L. This object is not drawn in typical linear style. However, the depiction is included here since the figures resemble identical humans standing in a row and in dynamic postures (Fig. 8.13:k; Thuesen 1988, Pl. LXVII:12).

30. yarim tepe ii This site is located in the Sinjar Plain in northern Iraq. Excavators found sherds of two types there: The naturalistic style. A painted sherd portraying four identical figures standing in a row, in profile, facing right. They have elongated heads (hats?), and their torsos are covered by a dot pattern (Fig. 8.3:b; Merpert and Munchaev 1987, Fig. 21:7). Similar representations have been interpreted as a costume made of leopard skin (Ippolitoni-Strika 1983:18). Elongated heads were also found on a sherd from Tell Halaf (Fig. 8.3:a). The linear style. One sherd from the IV living level includes the remains of two human figures, holding hands (Fig. 8.17:e; Munchaev and Merpert 1971, Pl. VII, Fig. 9:1). The torsos of the figures are rectangular. It is not clear from the publication whether they were covered with a net pattern (as presented by Stucki 1984, Pl. XLI:989h) or painted black (as presented here, Fig. 8.17:e).

31. arpachiyah This site is located in the Mosul area of northern Iraq. Excavators reported two sherds in the linear style from it. Mallowan and Rose described the decoration of one sherd as “a geometric pattern composed of solid triangles and lines, giving a design which resembles human beings with linked arms” (Fig. 8.13:d; Mallowan and Rose 1935:170). The decoration of the other sherd is more schematic, as the heads are not shown at all (Fig. 8.10:b).

32. nineveh This site is located in the Mosul area of northern Iraq. Excavators reported a few sherds in the linear style from a deep test pit, in Level 2 of the Halafian culture. Gut publishes five objects, decorated in the linear style, and relates them to the Samarra culture (Fig. 8.9:d–f; Mallowan 1933; Gut 1995, Figs. 40: 592a–595, 43:636).

146

33. khirbet garsour This site is located in northwest Iraq, to the north of the Jebel Sinjar and west of the Tigris. Excavators reported two Halafian objects, decorated in the linear style (Fig. 8.9:i–j; Campbell 1998).

34. tepe gawra

the data

This site is located in the Mosul area of northern Iraq. Excavators reported, from Layer XVII, related to the Halafian culture, a fragmented bowl decorated with a painted human figure (Fig. 8.3:e; Tobler 1950:135, Pl. LXXV:a–b). The excavation report described it as follows: The scene is undoubtedly magical or religious, and may be intended to portray a ritual dance. However, the significance of the vertical line at the right towards which the man is advancing, with arms upraised, is obscure, nor is it clear whether the series of impaled circles to the right of the vertical line is symbolic or a mere field-divider. . . . The drawing of the human figure is crude, with the head barely depicted by a short, oblique stroke, but the artist’s purpose was apparently to suggest motion, and in this he succeeded by showing the figure with knees bent, and with the ends of the skirt away from the body.

figure 8.19 Painted pottery in the naturalistic style from Samarra. Courtesy of the Vorderasiatisches Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Item 13396).

Tobler noted that because the vessel is incomplete, we do not know for certainty that there was a similar human figure on the opposite side. This bowl is unique among Halafian objects for the following reasons: (1) The drawing was done when the bowl was upside down, (2) the figure occupies most of the area between the rim and the base and is not limited to the upper part of the vessel, and (3) additional geometric items are shown in front of the figure.

35. samarra This site, from which the term “Samarra culture” derives, is located in central Mesopotamia, near the bank of the Tigris. The painted pottery from Samarra includes two types: The naturalistic style: Objects belonging to this group depict four, five, or six identical large standing human figures in the interiors of bowls. The figures are represented frontally, with long flowing hair, bent arms, fingers, and broad hips (Figs. 8.4:a–c; 8.19; Herzfeld 1930). On one object the human figures have almost completely vanished, and only their hair is still depicted in the center of the scene (Figs. 8.4:d; 8.20).

Herzfeld emphasized the long neck and the absence of a clear head and designated these figures “demons” (1941:30. However, there is no need to regard the figures as supernatural. The long hair and the broad hips could be considered gender characteristics, indicating female figures. The Samarra bowls are of great importance to the understanding

147

figure 8.20 Painted pottery in the naturalistic style from Samarra. Courtesy of the Vorderasiatisches Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Item 13398).

of the dancing motif, for two reasons: (1) almost complete items have been preserved, indicating that the figures were arranged around the vessel in a circle, separated by regular intervals, and (2) the flowing hair and bent arms indicate movement. By combining these features, a clear torsion is represented on the Samarra bowls. The direction of the hair to the left of the heads indicates that the figures are moving counter-clockwise. The linear style: Excavators published at least nine such objects from Samarra. The best example is a bowl with thirteen schematic figures painted on the one preserved half, so that twenty-six such figures must have been painted around the entire rim (Figs. 8.21:a–c, 8.22:a–b; Herzfeld 1930, Figs. 57–59, 119–121, 161, 226, 256).

36. baghouz This site is located in central Mesopotamia near the banks of the Euphrates and is related to the Samarra culture. Excavators reported decorated sherds in the linear style from various types of open and closed vessels. A selection of six items is presented here: bowls (Figs. 8.22:c, 8.23:b; Braidwood et al. 1944; Mesnil du Buisson 1948; Nieuwenhuyse 1999), a bowl on a high pedestal (Fig. 8.22:d), and jars (Figs. 8.22:e–f ). The pedestal bowl is a rare type of vessel, considered to have ritual significance (see, for example, Amiran 1969:302–303). Six such items, decorated with dancing figures, can be found in our assemblage (Figs. 8.22:d, 8.24:b, 8.26:d, 9.17:e, g, 9.29:d). In addition to the vessels and sherds, Mesnil du Buisson presents a schematized plate with various combinations of dancing figures in the linear style (Fig. 8.23:c–k).

148

figure 8.21 Painted pottery in the linear style: a–c. Samarra. Courtesy of the Vorderasiatisches Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Items 13429, 13463, and 13527). d. Tell es-Sawwan. Courtesy of Musée du Louvre. Département des Antiquités Orientales (Item DAO 11f ). Photo by C. Larrieu.

a

c

b

d

37. tell es-sawwan This site is located in central Mesopotamia near the banks of the Tigris and is related to the Samarra culture. Due to the extensive excavations of the site, excavators found a very large assemblage of painted pottery vessels in the linear style. The figures were always drawn on the inner face of the rim on both open and closed vessels (Figs. 8.21:d, 8.24–8.25; Ippolitoni 1971, Figs. I:12, M:2, U:3–4, 6, 8, 14–15, T:2, 10, 13, V:1, 4, 6, 9–11, 15, W:1, 17, 20, X:2–3; El-Wailly 1965, Fig. 1; Al-A’dami 1968, Pls. XIV, XV; Breniquet 1992b, Figs. L:1, 3, M:2). One exceptional item is a pedestal bowl on which the dancing figures were drawn near the base of the bowl and not near the rim (Fig. 8.24:b).

38. choga mami This site is located in central Mesopotamia. Excavators reported a few items painted with dancing figures: The naturalistic style. In the wadi west of the site, in the so-called transitional Samarra sherd deposit, excavators found a fragment of a small bowl (Figs. 8.27:a, 9.15:b; Oates 1969:149, Pl. XXXI:b). This is a painted sherd with a row of four figures represented frontally, touching one another with their shoulders. From right to left they can be recognized as female, male, female, and male (the last one is broken, but the shape of

149

figure 8.22 Painted pottery from Mesopotamia:

a. Samarra, ca. 11 x 2.5 cm (after Herzfeld 1930, Figure 57). b. Samarra, ca. 4 x 4 cm (after Herzfeld 1930, Figure 59). c. Baghouz, ca. 24 x 10 cm (after Mesnil du Buisson 1948, Pl. XXI:E). d. Baghouz, ca. 15 x 9 cm (after Mesnil du Buisson 1948, Pl. XXII:2). e. Baghouz, ca. 11 x 11 cm (after Mesnil du Buisson 1948, Pl. XXI:S). f. Baghouz, ca. 12 x 12 cm (after Mesnil du Buisson 1948, Pl. XXII:11).

150

the data

figure 8.23 Painted pottery from Baghouz:

a. Ca. 11 x 5 cm (after Mesnil du Buisson 1948, Pl. XXIX). b. Ca. 10 x 4 cm (after Mesnil du Buisson 1948, Pl. XXIX). c–k. Schematic drawing, without scale (after Mesnil du Buisson 1948, Pl. XXXI:8–16).

151

figure 8.24 Painted pottery from Tell es-Sawwan (no scale published):

a. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure M:2. b. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure O:4. c. Ca. 13 x 5 cm (after Breniquet 1992b, Figure L:1). d. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure V:10. e. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure J:8. f. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure V:15. g. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure I:12.

152

figure 8.25 Painted pottery from Tell es-Sawwan (no scale published):

a. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure W:1. b. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure V:4. c. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure U:3. d. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure T:2. e. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure V:6. f. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure W:20. g. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure X:2. h. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure T:10. i. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure U:4. j. After Ippolitoni 1971, Figure W:17.

153

figure 8.26 Painted pottery from Mesopotamia:

a. Shimshara, ca. 12 x 9 cm (after Mortensen 1970, Figure 76:g). b. Serik, ca. 6 x 6 cm (after Oates 1968, Pl. X:3). c. Matarrah, ca. 6 x 6.5 cm (after Braidwood et al. 1952, Figure 13:10). d. Choga Mami, ca. 15 x 5.5 cm (after Oates 1969, Pl. XXXII:6) e. Choga Mami, ca. 7 x 6.5 cm (after Oates 1968, Pl. XII:2). f. Chagha Sefid, ca. 25 x 5 cm (after Hole 1977, Figure 50:f ). g. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 10 x 4 cm (after Akkermans 1996, Figure 3.34:11). h. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 4 x 4.5 cm (after Akkermans 1989, Figure IV.24:175). i. Shams ed-Din Tannira, ca. 5 x 7 cm (after Gustavson-Gaube 1981, Figure 405).

154

the data

a figure 8.27 Painted pottery from Choga Mami. Courtesy of Joan Oates, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge.

b the legs indicates a male). The figures are enclosed by a pattern of parallel zigzag lines. In light of later, similar components, this item can be interpreted as an architectural element. The linear style. Two items can be assigned to this category: one is a pedestal bowl, and the other is a rim fragment of an open vessel (Figs. 8.26:d– e, 8.27:b; Oates 1969). It seems that the second item is also a pedestal bowl, since it displays the same profile and the same decoration as the better-preserved vessel. They are related to the late Samarra or the transitional Samarra phases. A row of schematized human figures in the linear style was painted on the interior of the vessels. On one of these depictions we can count eleven vertical parallel lines, representing the body, with five lines for each arm. On the other depiction six vertical parallel lines were used to represent the body, with three lines for each arm. In these examples the heads were not portrayed at all. Similar representations of the human figure (Choga Mami transitional style) have been reported from Baghouz, Tell Sabi Abyad, Serik, Chagha Sefid, and Chogha Mish (Figs. 8.23, 8.26, 9.3).

39. serik This site is located in central Mesopotamia, one kilometer from Choga Mami. It has yielded a rim fragment with a schematic human figure in the linear style. Oates related the object to “Al ‘Ubaid 3–4” (Fig. 8.26:b; Oates 1968:10, Pl. X:3). However, considering the wide distribution of this motif in the Samarra culture and the similar depictions from Choga Mami, it seems more appropriate to attribute this item to the Samarra culture too.

40. matarrah This site is located in northeastern Mesopotamia and is related to the Samarra culture. Excavations yielded a rim fragment of a small bowl decorated on the interior with a row of schematic human figures in the linear style (Fig. 8.26:c; Braidwood et al. 1952, Fig. 45:3).

155

41. shimshara This site is located in northeastern Mesopotamia and is related to the Samarra culture. Excavators published a rim fragment of a small bowl decorated on the interior. Mortensen described this motif as a double zigzag pattern with triple fringes suspended where the joints of the zigzags join one another (Fig. 8.26:a; Mortensen 1970:92). However, this is clearly another variant of schematized dancing figures in the linear style. Like other items from Tell Mounbateh and Baghouz, the inner parts of the triangular heads were left unpainted (Figs. 8.13:f, 8.23:g).

halafian and samarra cultures

42. ‘ein el-jarba This site is located in the Jezreel Valley of northern Israel. It is related to the Wadi Rabah culture, generally dated to the sixth millennium bc, parallel to the Halafian culture (Garfinkel 1992:89–90, 1999a:104–152). A complete holemouth jar associated with a grave was discovered at the site (Figs. 8.28, 8.29:b; Kaplan 1969:16; Meyerhof and Mozel 1981:114; Garfinkel 1999a, Photo 62). Two large identical human figures were applied on both sides of the upper part of the jar. The heads are represented in profile and facing left, thus indicating clockwise movement around the jar. The bodies are represented frontally. Each figure has an animal head (perhaps a mask?). The arms are stretched upwards, partly horizontal and partly vertical, and end in fingers. The legs are separated, also partly horizontal and partly vertical, and end in toes. The excavator interpreted the projection between the loins as indicating the male member (Kaplan 1969:16). Kaplan understood the jar as representing a dancing figure. Meyerhof and Mozel (1981) emphasized the body position: “The posture of upraised arms and separated legs . . . is always connected either to funeral rites or to regeneration.” Other interpretations suggest that this is the figure of a goddess at childbirth or an animal relief (cf. text with caption to figure in Bar-Yosef 1992:39). I accept Kaplan’s original interpretation based on the following points: First, the dynamic body position of the figures indicates dancing activity similar to the many examples presented here (Figs. 7.3:a, 7.8:c, 7.9:a, 9.30:a–b, 10.2:c, 10.3:a, 10.11:a–f ). Second, the positions of the two figures on the vessel create a circle, a most important feature of dancing. This point has been overlooked in the different interpretations of this jar. Third, the figures are identical, a typical feature of the dancing motif. To conclude, the object under discussion presents a circle of male figures dancing clockwise, wearing masks. The ‘Ein el-Jarba jar, together with a few other objects, from Samarra, Ismailabad, and Tall-i Jari A, are complete vessels, which indicates that the dancing figures were arranged in a circle around the vessel (Figs. 8.4:a, 9.17:e, 9.29:d). This important characteristic cannot definitely be proven from the fragmented sherds usually found in excavations of settlement layers.

156

a

figure 8.28 (a-d): Four views of an applied and painted jar from ‘Ein el-Jarba. Courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

c

b

d

157

43. tülintepe This site is located in the central Euphrates Valley in eastern Turkey and is now covered by the waters of the Keban Dam project. Applied dancing figures were found on two pottery sherds in a settlement layer, together with Halafian pottery:

halafian and samarra cultures

figure 8.29 Applied pottery from sites contemporaneous to the Halaf and Samarra cultures: a. Korucutepe, ca. 23 x 10 cm (after Brandt 1978, Pl. 108:B). b. ‘Ein el-Jarba, ca. 27 x 23 cm (after Kaplan 1969, Figure 7:1a–b).

1. On one item a figure is represented frontally with upraised arms. Excavators described this body position as an adoration position (Fig. 8.30:a; Esin 1976, 993:114; Yakar 1991:112–113). 2. The other object is less clear. Excavators described it as a snake motif in relief (Fig. 8.30:d; Esin 1993:113, Fig. 6). However, as can be seen from the published photograph, most of the applied elements on this sherd have fallen off. The area that was once covered is now rough, unlike the painted and burnished area surrounding it. If the “snake” and the rough area are considered together, the contour of the left part of a human figure can be seen. According to this suggestion, the so-called snake is actually an arm, portrayed partly horizontally and turning downwards. A similar body position appears on a number of items from Greece, the Balkans, and southeast Europe (Figs. 10.14:a–e, 10.15:a–d).

158

the data

figure 8.30 Applied pottery from sites contemporaneous to the Halaf and Samarra cultures:

a. Tülintepe, ca. 16 x 15 cm (after Esin 1976, Pl. 84). b. Norçcsuntepe, ca. 6.5 x 6.5 cm (after Hauptmann 1976, Figure 48:6). c. Imiris Gora, ca. 7 x 5 cm (after Masson et al. 1982, Figure XXXIX:17). d. Tülintepe, ca. 20 x 22 cm (after Esin 1993, Figure 6). e. Arukhlo, ca. 12 x 10 cm (after Chataigner 1995, Pl. 33:13). f. Arukhlo, ca. 12 x 12 cm (after Chataigner 1995, Pl. 33:14).

159

halafian and samarra cultures

44. norçcsuntepe This site is located in the central Euphrates Valley in eastern Turkey and is now covered by the waters of the Keban Dam project. From here a sherd with an applied human figure was reported, dated to the late Chalcolithic period of the fourth millennium bc. However, Esin suggested that this object was redeposited from an earlier stage, thus dating it to the sixth millennium bc. The sherd includes only the upper part of the figure: a rounded head, schematic torso, and arms. The arms are bent upwards and end in fingers. Scholars described this body position as adoration (Fig. 8.30:b; Hauptmann 1976:87; Esin 1993:113–114).

45. korucutepe This site is located in the central Euphrates Valley in eastern Turkey and is now covered by the waters of the Keban Dam project. The excavators divided an assemblage of forty-four sherds typologically, though not stratigraphically, into early Chalcolithic and late Chalcolithic. Brandt assigned a sherd with applied human figures to the late Chalcolithic period (Fig. 8.29:a; Brandt 1978). This date does not seem appropriate, since the applied tradition is well documented in the early Chalcolithic period in this region (Esin 1993:113–114). This object should thus be assigned to the early assemblage and dated to the late sixth millennium bc. The sherd includes a slightly damaged figure with arms raised diagonally and the legs extending downwards, also in a diagonal line. The leg of another similar figure appears near the edge of the sherd, indicating that several figures were applied to the complete vessel.

46. imiris gora This site is located at the northern boundary of the Near East, in Armenia. The excavators dated it radiometrically to the late sixth millennium bc. Excavations have yielded a rim fragment bearing a human figure represented frontally, with bent upraised arms. The lower part of this figure is broken off (Fig. 8.30:c; Masson et al. 1982:102; Mellaart 1975:195–205).

47. arukhlo This site is located at the northern boundary of the Near East, in Armenia. Like the site of Imiris Gora, it is dated to the late sixth millennium bc. Excavators reported two examples of pottery sherds, each decorated with an applied human figure. The figures are represented frontally, one with bent, upraised arms and the other with his arm raised diagonally (Fig. 8.30:e–f; Chataigner 1995, Pl. 33:13–14).

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

chapter 9

In this chapter dancing figures from forty-two sites are presented. These were discovered in different regions of Iran (Fig. 9.1): the Deh Luran Plain, Luristan, and Khuzistan in western Iran (twenty-three sites, nos. 48–70), the Iranian Plateau and northern Iran (five sites, nos. 71–75), Fars (ten sites, nos. 76–85), and Kerman (two sites, nos. 86–87). Two sites are located in Baluchistan in western Pakistan (nos. 88–89). A detailed chronological correlation of protohistoric sites in the various geographical regions of Iran is beyond the scope of this study (see, for example, Vanden Berghe 1966; Dollfus 1983b:168; Hole 1987:29–78; Voigt and Dyson 1992). However, these sites can be generally dated to different stages in the sixth and fifth millennia bc. Stylistic Analysis

Dancing figures were depicted on Iranian pottery by painting. No examples of applied or incised items have been found in the assemblage. The same terminology used to describe the Halafian and Samarra painted styles is used here. The Assemblage

48. chagha sefid This site is located in southern Mesopotamia, on the Deh Luran Plain of western Iran. Dancing figures of two types were reported here: The Linear Style. In a pre-Sabz phase, dated to the mid-sixth millennium bc, the interior rims of bowls and jars were decorated with schematic dancing human figures (Figs. 9.2, 9.3:a–d, 8.26:f; Hole 1977). A similar style has been reported from other sites, mainly of the Choga Mami transitional phase (Fig. 8.26:b–e, g; Dollfus 1986, Fig. 2) but also from the Halafian site of Tell Sabi Abyad (Figs. 8.26:h, 9.3:f–h). The Geometric Style. One bowl fragment unearthed at the site is decorated in the Khazineh painted style, as defined below in Site 51 (Fig. 9.6:i).

figure 9.1 Iranian sites mentioned in the text. figure 9.2 Painted pottery from Chagha Sefid. Courtesy of Frank Hole, Department of Anthropology, Yale University. Photo by Y. Garfinkel.

163

figure 9.3 Painted pottery from Halafian culture and Iran:

a. Chagha Sefid, ca. 20 x 12 cm (after Hole 1977, Pl. 51:a). b. Chagha Sefid, ca. 3 x 4 cm (after Hole 1977, Figure 53:g). c. Chagha Sefid, ca. 4.5 x 5 cm (after Hole 1977, Figure 52:h). d. Chagha Sefid, ca. 6 x 6 cm (after Hole 1977, Pl. 43:b). e. Farukhabad, ca. 4 x 4 cm (after Wright 1981, Figure 11:b). f. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 9 x 9 cm (after Akkermans 1993, Figure 3.22:49). g. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 14 x 6 cm (after Akkermans 1993, Figure 3.17:5). h. Tell Sabi Abyad, ca. 12 x 8 cm (after Akkermans 1993, Figure 3.22:47).

164

49. farukhabad This site is located in southern Mesopotamia, on the Deh Luran Plain of western Iran. The excavations concentrated mainly on the upper layers of the site but published a few earlier sherds of the sixth millennium bc as well. One of them is decorated in the schematic linear style (Fig. 9.3:e; Wright 1981, Fig. 11:b). The depiction on another small sherd bears a fragment of a dancing rhombus (Wright 1981, Fig. 17:d), in the style discussed below (Site 61).

The D ata

50. tepe sabz This site is located in southern Mesopotamia, on the Deh Luran Plain of western Iran. It is dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc. Excavators unearthed dancing figures of two types:

figure 9.4 Painted pottery from Tepe Sabz. Courtesy of Frank Hole, Department of Anthropology, Yale University. Photo by Y. Garfinkel.

1. Some forty sherds decorated in the Khazineh painted style (below, Site 51). Two, the best-preserved examples, were published in the excavation report, and later I published additional sherds in my discussion on this type of decoration (Figs. 9.4, 9.5:d, 9.6:a, d–e, 9.7:b, d, f–g; Hole et al. 1969, Pl. 25:a–b; Garfinkel 2000). It is possible that some of these figures are holding branches in their hands (Fig. 9.7:d, f–g). Naturalistic depictions of figures holding branches have been unearthed at other sites (Figs. 9.15:d, 9.32:a–b, d). 2. The Mehmeh phase, dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc, has yielded a painted sherd depicting dancing figures. It displays a row of three human figures represented frontally, holding hands. The shape of the lower part of the figures seems to indicate that they are wearing some kind of skirt (Fig. 9.19:c).

b

a

c

165

figure 9.5 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. Khazineh, ca. 6.5 x 6.5 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 254). b. Khazineh, ca. 4.5 x 6.5 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 262). c. Khazineh, ca. 3.5 x 7 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 263). d. Tepe Sabz, ca. 20 x 12 cm (after Hole et al. 1969, Figure 62:c). e. Kozagaran, ca. 9 x 7.5 cm (after Stein 1940, Pl. VIII:25). f. Khazineh, ca. 14.5 x 8 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 264).

166

The D ata

figure 9.6 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. Tepe Sabz, ca. 13.5 x 12.3 cm (after Hole et al. 1969, Pl. 28:k). b. Tepe Musiyan, ca. 7.2 x 3.8 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 6:1). c. Tepe Musiyan, ca. 6 x 4.4 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 9:2). d. Tepe Sabz, ca. 3.8 x 7.2 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 4:6). e. Tepe Sabz, ca. 4.8 x 4.5 cm (after Hole et al. 1969, Pl. 28:j). f. dl-22, ca. 5 x 4.3 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 4:7). g. dl-28, ca. 4.2 x 3.8 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 4:9). h. dl-31, ca. 7.1 x 5.5 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 4:10). i. Chagha Sefid, ca. 10.6 x 8.8 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 6:5).

167

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

figure 9.7 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. dk-41, ca. 4.3 x 5.8 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 8:2). b. Tepe Sabz, ca. 12.3 x 8.8 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 6:4). c. Tepe Musiyan, ca. 7.1 x 5.2 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 9:1). d. Tepe Sabz, ca. 3.1 x 2.3 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 7:2). e. dl-22, ca. 5.3 x 3.3 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 7:4). f. Tepe Sabz, ca. 3.7 x 5 cm (after Garfinkel 2000, Figure 7:6). g. Tepe Sabz, ca. 4.8 x 5.8 cm (after Hole et al. 1969, Pl. 28:n).

168

51. khazineh This site is located in southern Mesopotamia, on the Deh Luran Plain of western Iran and is dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc. Gautier and Lampre excavated it at the beginning of the twentieth century (Gautier and Lampre 1905). At Khazineh and the nearby site of Tepe Musiyan, excavators unearthed some of the first examples of dancing figures known to modern research. The important assemblage of dancing figures includes:

The D ata

Naturalistic Style. One of the items is a painted rim fragment representing a row of nine human figures frontally, holding hands at the level of the shoulders, with arms bent. Three large round elements appear below the figures. Similar round features appear on another painted item discovered at the site (Fig. 9.5:a–b). Another painted sherd depicts a row of three human figures facing frontally, raising their arms above their heads (Figs. 9.13:a). Khazineh Painted Style. A few sherds painted in a geometric style display figures with no clear heads. The bodies are portrayed as triangles, arranged in a vertical line (not the usual horizontal row adjacent to the rim), and their arms are bent and display three fingers (Figs. 9.5:b–c, f, 9.8). A complete bowl with this type of decoration was reported from Chogha Mish (Fig. 9.10:a).

I dedicated a detailed study to this type of decoration, designating it as the “Khazineh Painted Style” (Garfinkel 2000). The basic unit in this style is a human figure represented by a triangular torso and bent arms. This unit can be multiplied in two different dimensions: Horizontally. One (Fig. 9.6:a), two (Fig. 9.5:b), three (Fig. 9.5:c–d, f ), four (Fig. 9.7:b), or six (Fig. 9.7:c) such units can be placed together horizontally. When more than one figure appears, only the arms of the outer ones are portrayed (Figs. 9.5–9.7). This gives the impression that the figures are standing shoulder to shoulder, a position clearly depicted on some items drawn in the naturalistic style (Fig. 9.15:b–c). Vertically. The horizontal type of composition is also multiplied vertically, one on top of the other (Figs. 9.5–9.7, 9.10). Some scholars have interpreted this situation literally, as “a motif which shows stylized human dancers standing on each others’ shoulders” (Hole et al. 1969:157). However, the examples in which four (Fig. 9.10:a), five (Fig. 9.5:b), or six (Fig. 9.10:b) such units appear one on top of the other clearly indicate that a realistic interpretation is impossible. It seems that this is a highly stylized representation of figures standing in a row, from a sort of “bird’s-eye view.”

Since there is no concept of a circular arrangement around the rim in these depictions, it is possible that another form of dance is shown here:

169

a line dance. The combination of horizontal and vertical dimensions may indicate an arrangement of couples dancing (Fig. 9.5:b) and even of groups of three individuals dancing in a row (Fig. 9.5:c–d, f ).

52. tepe musiyan

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

This site is located in southern Mesopotamia, on the Deh Luran Plain of western Iran and is dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc. It was first excavated in 1903 together with the previous site, and in 1963 the Deh Luran Plain expedition carried out a small test excavation. Various types of dancing figures were reported from both expeditions (Gautier and Lampre 1905; Hole et al. 1969:65–72):

a

figure 9.8 Painted pottery from Khazineh. Courtesy of Musée du Louvre, Département des Antiquités Orientales. Photo by Y. Garfinkel.

b

d

c

170

The D ata

1. Sherds decorated with the above-mentioned Khazineh painted style. In the Frank Hole collection of the Department of Anthropology at Yale University there are eleven such sherds, some of which are presented here (Figs. 9.6:b–c, 9.7:c). On the preserved part of one of these sherds there are two vertical rows, each composed of six schematic anthropomorphic figures (Figs. 9.7:c, 9.9). 2. A number of sherds are painted in a geometric style (Figs. 9.11, 9.12, 9.13c–g). The painted motif consists of a row of identical figures, each characterized by an elliptical head, two arms protruding upwards, and a rectangular-shaped body. The body is covered with horizontal lines, ladderlike lines, or a net pattern.

Similar sherds were reported from Tepe Sabz, Kozagaran, and Chogha Mish (Hole et al. 1969, Fig. 63:K; Stein 1940, Pl. VIII:7–8; Kantor 1976, Fig. 8). However, no anthropomorphic components can be distinguished in these examples, and the motif was usually described by the excavators as representing bucrania. 3. One of the above-mentioned sherds is decorated with geometric netcovered human figures facing a net-covered rectangular element (Fig. 9.13:g). Unlike the dividing lines that appear in some Iranian examples (Fig. 9.17:a–c, e), this net-covered element is much more dominant in the composition and seems to have its own significance. Net-covered elements associated with dancing human figures have been interpreted as architectural components on later seals (Epstein 1972; Ben-Tor 1978:57– 61; Lapp 1989). Since the dancing figures were understood by Epstein, Ben-Tor, and Lapp as a cultic procession, the structures in these seals were interpreted as representing various parts of a temple: fence, facade, or roof.

The Deh Luran Plain expedition reported: “Included in the Blackon-buff pottery were common Mehmeh phase designs like rows of wild goats and dancing men” (Hole et al. 1969:68).

figure 9.9 Painted pottery from Tepe Musiyan. Courtesy of Frank Hole, Department of Anthropology, Yale University. Photo by Y. Garfinkel.

171

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

figure 9.10 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. Chogha Mish, no scale published (after Kantor 1976, Figure 6). b. Tepe Musiyan, ca. 4.5 x 5 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 261). c. Do Tulune, ca. 9 x 5 cm (after Dittmann 1984, Figure 10:1). d. Kozagaran, ca. 6 x 6 cm (after Stein 1940, Pl. VIII:23). e. Kozagaran, ca. 10 x 6 cm (after Stein 1940, Pl. VIII:21). f. Tul-i Bawa Muhammad, ca. 4.5 x 6 cm (after Stein 1940, Pl. III:20). g. Tepe Giyan, no scale published (after Contenau and Ghirshman 1935, Pl. 43).

figure 9.11 Painted pottery from Tepe Musiyan. Courtesy of Musée du Louvre, Département des Antiquités Orientales. Photo by Y. Garfinkel.

figure 9.12 Painted pottery from Tepe Musiyan. Courtesy of Musée du Louvre, Département des Antiquités Orientales. Photo by Y. Garfinkel.

a b

c

d

g f

e

h

173

figure 9.13 Painted pottery from Iran and Mesopotamia:

a. Khazineh, ca. 3 x 2.5 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 255). b. Tell Damishliyya, ca. 12 x 6 cm (after Akkermans 1988, Pl. 15:114). c. Tepe Musiyan, ca. 4.5 x 6 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 260). d. Tepe Musiyan, ca. 4 x 6 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 259). e. Tepe Musiyan, ca. 3 x 3 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 256). f. Tepe Musiyan, ca. 4.5 x 5 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 258). g. Tepe Musiyan, ca. 6 x 5.5 cm (after Gautier and Lampre 1905, Figure 257).

174

53. dl-22 This site is located in southern Mesopotamia, on the Deh Luran Plain of western Iran. Hole discovered it during a survey. Two sherds collected on the site surface are decorated in the above-mentioned Khazineh painted style (Figs. 9.6:f, 9.7:e; Garfinkel 2000). They are thus dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc.

54. dl-28 The D ata

This site is located in southern Mesopotamia, on the Deh Luran Plain of western Iran. Hole discovered it during a survey. Two sherds collected on the site surface are decorated in the above-mentioned Khazineh painted style (Fig. 9.6:g; Garfinkel 2000). They are thus dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc.

55. dl-31 This site is located in southern Mesopotamia, on the Deh Luran Plain of western Iran. Hole discovered it during a survey. One sherd collected on the site surface is decorated in the above-mentioned Khazineh painted style (Fig. 9.6:h; Garfinkel 2000). It is thus dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc.

56. dk-41 This site is located in southern Mesopotamia, between the Deh Luran Plain and Luristan, western Iran. Hole discovered it during a survey. One sherd collected on the site surface is decorated in the abovementioned Khazineh painted style (Figs 9.14, 9.7:a; Garfinkel 2000). It is thus dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc.

figure 9.14 Painted pottery from site dk-41. Courtesy of Frank Hole, Department of Anthropology, Yale University. Photo by Y. Garfinkel.

175

57. djaffarabad This site is located on the Susiana plain, Khuzistan, western Iran, and dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc. Decorated sherds depicting human figures were discovered at this site, first in the 1930s excavations and later in the 1969–1974 excavations (Le Breton 1947; Dollfus 1971, 1975). Dancing figures of two styles have been unearthed: The Naturalistic Style. Three different examples of this style have been reported, painted on deep bowls near the rims:

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

1. A row of three human figures represented frontally (Fig. 9.15:a). The figures are holding hands, and their legs are bent, thus creating a dynamic representation of movement. The figures are bordered by a frame of parallel lines at the sides and above them. This could represent an architectural element in front of which the dancing is being performed. 2. Two large sherds of the same bowl, which together depict a row of nine human figures, each one isolated from the other by a frame (Figs. 9.16:a, 9.17:a). The figures are identical to one another, depicting the upper part of the body in a naturalistic style and the lower part of the body in linear style. They are represented frontally, with an elongated coiffure, and the arms are bent upwards. A similar hairstyle has been found on other dancing figures from Tell Sabi Abyad and Samarra (Figs. 8.3:f, 8.4). The legs end in a pointed element protruding upwards. This element may represent pointed shoes, like those reported on other dancing figures (Fig. 12.5:c), as well as in other types of finds (Barnett 1966, Pl. XX:1; Amiet 1979, Figs. 15–17, 19; Ippolitoni-Strika 1990:151–156). 3. A sherd depicting one human figure inside a frame (Figs. 9.16:b, 9.17:c). It is represented frontally, with an elongated coiffure. The left arm is bent and ends in fingers. The legs are also portrayed in a bent position, with the lower part turned upwards. This dynamic posture gives the impression of jumping. The Linear Style. This style is known from four sherds depicting a row of schematic human figures in a line, holding hands (Figs. 9.16:c, 9.18:a–c, e). Some differences between these depictions and the Halafian/Samarra examples presented above (Figs. 8.9–8.10, 8.13–8.17) are evident: the head is rectangular (unlike the triangular heads in the Mesopotamian examples), the body is represented by one thick line (unlike the two or three lines in most of the Mesopotamian examples), and the scene was drawn on the exterior of the vessel (unlike the interior drawing on the Mesopotamian specimens).

176

The D ata

figure 9.15 Painted pottery from Iran and Mesopotamia:

a. Djaffarabad, ca. 24 x 9 cm (after Dollfus 1971, Figure 9:1). b. Choga Mami, ca. 8 x 6 cm (after Ippolitoni-Strika 1990, Figure P; Oates 1969, Pl. XXXI:b). c. Tepe Sialk, ca. 10 x 9 cm (after Ghirshman 1938, Pl. LXXXd:10). d. Tepe Gawra, ca. 9 x 9 cm (after Tobler 1950, Pl. CXLV:398).

177

58. tepe djowi This site is located on the Susiana Plain, Khuzistan, western Iran, and is dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc. Two examples of dancing figures in the naturalistic style have been reported:

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

1. A sherd depicting two partly preserved human figures (Fig. 9.17:b; Le Breton 1947). Each figure is isolated within its own frame, like the two examples reported from Djaffarabad (Fig. 9.17:a, c). Part of the elongated coiffure and a bent arm can be seen on the left figure. 2. A rim fragment decorated with a row of at least three human figures (Fig. 9.17:d; Dollfus 1983a). They are represented frontally, touching one another with their shoulders, and the individual with the free arm at the edge of the row raises his hand. The figures are bordered by a frame of a single line at the side and above them.

a

figure 9.16 Painted pottery from Djaffarabad. Courtesy of Geneviève Dollfus, CNRS/ DAFI, Paris.

b

c

178

The D ata

figure 9.17 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. Djaffarabad, ca. 21 x 21 cm (after Dollfus 1975, Figure 26.1–2). b. Tepe Djowi, ca. 7 x 7 cm (after Le Breton 1947, Figure 30:17). c. Djaffarabad, ca. 20 x 20 cm (after Dollfus 1975, Figure F.6). d. Tepe Djowi, ca. 3.5 x 6 cm (after Dollfus 1983a, Figure 31:18). e. Ismailabad, ca. 22.5 cm diameter (after Maleki 1968, Figure 58; Mellaart 1975, Figure 119:n). f. Chogha Mish, ca. 4 x 7 cm (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 176:t). g. Chogha Mish, ca. 4 x 6 cm (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 217:i). h. Chogha Mish, ca. 3 x 3 cm (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 163:aa).

179

figure 9.18 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. Djaffarabad, ca. 7 x 5.5 cm (after Le Breton 1947, Figure 12:8). b. Djaffarabad, ca. 20 x 11 cm (after Dollfus 1975, Figure 25:1). c. Djaffarabad, ca. 11 x 6 cm (after Dollfus 1975, Figure 25:4). d. Chogha Mish, no scale published (after Kantor 1985, Figure 6). e. Djaffarabad, ca. 6 x 5.5 cm (after Le Breton 1947, Figure 12:9). f. Chogha Mish, ca. 6 x 5 cm (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 209:c). g. Chogha Mish, ca. 18 x 11 cm (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 209:e). h. Chogha Mish, ca. 4 x 4 cm (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 208:f). i. Chogha Mish, ca. 20 x 5 cm (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 207:j).

180

59. tepe bendebal This site is located on the Susiana Plain, Khuzistan, western Iran, and is dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc. Decorated sherds depicting human figures were discovered at this site first in the 1930s excavations and later in the 1970s excavations. A few examples of dancing figures in two different styles have been reported:

The D ata

1. Figures represented frontally, with a triangular torso and with arms in a bent position, first downwards and then rising upwards away from the body. Three rather fragmentary sherds have been preserved; only the upper part of a single figure has been preserved on each (Fig. 9.24:a–c; Le Breton 1947, Fig. 41:6–7; Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 61:11). 2. Figures represented frontally, with a rectangular torso and the bent arms raised upwards. Three such identical figures, holding hands, appear near the rim of an open vessel (Fig. 9.24:g; Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 87:6).

60. chogha mish This site is located on the Susiana Plain, Khuzistan, western Iran. Largescale excavations were conducted at the site, producing one of the largest assemblages of dancing figures from the ancient Near East. In addition to the material already published, a few previously unpublished sherds are presented here in Figure 9.20, through the courtesy of Abbas Alizadeh, the director of the Iranian Prehistoric Project, the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. The dancing scenes from Chogha Mish are painted on fine-ware bowls or small cups in a variety of styles, though unfortunately they were not recognized in the publication as dancing scenes. The earliest items (Nos. 1–3 below) are dated to the Archaic Susiana phase of the mid-sixth millennium bc, while the rest are later and date to the Middle Susiana phase of the late sixth or early fifth millennia bc. These include: 1. A fragment of a pedestal bowl without clear context but typologically related to the Archaic Susiana phase. The center of the bowl is painted with eight women closely knotted into a group by a single set of shared triangular legs and thighs (Fig. 9.17:g; Delougaz and Kantor 1996:236, Pl. 217:I). More specifically we have here two opposed rows, the lower one depicted symmetrically upside down. A similar arrangement has been found at the site of Truçcseçcsti (Fig. 10.4:b). Each row is composed of four figures, represented frontally, standing shoulder to shoulder, with triangular torsos. Only the outer arms in each row are represented: the left arm of the figure at the left edge and the right arm of the figure at the right edge. The arms are represented in a bent position, first downwards and then rising upwards away from the body. There is a white hole in the lower part of each figure. Similar holes appear in other examples

181

2.

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

from southern Mesopotamia and western Iran, where it has been understood as a female gender characteristic (Figs. 9.15:b, 9.17:c, g). A few sherds painted in the linear style, in which two thick vertical lines represent the head and torso, and the arms are portrayed as diagonal lines. A preliminary report mentions that the motif has been interpreted by some archaeologists as dancers, while the final report gives a more technical description: “The resulting frieze of bilateral elements can be, with some imagination, visualized as a row of human figures holding hands” (Fig. 9.18:d, f–g; Kantor 1985:34; Delougaz and Kantor 1996:233, Pl. 209:c–e). A few items in the linear style, in which only three vertical lines and the arms portray the human figure by single horizontal lines. In the excavation report this motif was described as groups of three or four straight vertical lines, usually linked by cross strokes (Fig. 9.18:h–i; Delougaz and Kantor 1996:232, Pl. 207:j, 208:c, f). It seems that Chogha Mish marks the eastern distribution border of this motif, which is more common in central Mesopotamian Choga Mami transitional sites. A Middle Susiana small sherd decorated with a row of identical small figures. On the preserved part there are three complete figures and the lower part of a fourth one. It is not clear whether they are depicted frontally or in profile facing left. The figures are represented with arms lifted horizontally at shoulder level, touching each other (Fig. 9.17:h; Delougaz and Kantor 1996:180, Pl. 163:aa). A sherd that was described as an “enigmatic straight-sided chip of pottery with paint on all sides”; however, the drawing represents two small fragments decorated with three human figures. Only the upper parts have been preserved, indicating a row of identical figures, holding hands (Fig. 9.19:h; Delougaz and Kantor 1996:186, Pl. 171:c). A fragment decorated with six rows of human figures. In the publication three figures were reconstructed for each row, but since the sherd is broken, the exact number is unknown. The figures are represented frontally, with their arms lifted horizontally at shoulder level, touching one another (Figs. 9.17:f, 9.20; Delougaz and Kantor 1996:191, Pl. 176:t) A few sherds decorated in the Khazineh painted style (above, Site 51). The pattern was described in a preliminary report as “abstract tiered designs,” while in the final excavation report it was described as “comparable in structure to the tiered bucrania, but the elements here seem to be superimposed human torsos” (Figs. 9.10:a, 9.21; Kantor 1976:189, Fig. 7; Delougaz and Kantor 1996:186, Pl. 171:d). A sherd related to the Late Middle Susiana, decorated in the typical “cubist” style of Tall-i Bakun A (below, Site 77; Fig. 9.30:g; Delougaz and Kantor 1996:186, Pl. 171:g). This local style of southern Iran (the Fars) is characterized by the depiction of human body parts as geometric shapes.

182

figure 9.19 Painted pottery from Iran and Pakistan:

a. Chigha Sabz, ca. 10 x 12 cm (after Schmidt et al. 1989, Pl. 67:a). b. Chigha Sabz, ca. 3 x 3.5 cm (after Schmidt et al. 1989, Pl. 69:j). c. Tepe Sabz, ca. 2 x 3.5 cm (after Hole et al. 1969, Figure 63:n). d. Mehrgarh, ca. 6 x 5 cm (after Samzun and Sellier 1983, Figure 1). e. Surab region, no scale published (after Dani 1988, Figure 11). f. Chogha Mish, ca. 6 x 2 cm (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 171:c). g. Iran, unknown provenance, ca. 27 cm high (after Simpson 1972, Figure 39).

figure 9.20 Painted pottery in the naturalistic style from Chogha Mish. Courtesy of Abbas Alizadeh, Iranian Prehistoric Project, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. figure 9.21 Painted pottery from Chogha Mish. Courtesy of Abbas Alizadeh, Iranian Prehistoric Project, Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.

184

The D ata

61. sham ‘ un This site is located on the Susiana Plain, Khuzistan, western Iran. A sherd collected during a survey, and dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc, depicts a line of net-covered rhombuses with bent arms and legs (Fig. 9.35:b; Alizadeh 1992, Site No. g25-i, Fig. 30:f). This pattern has been found at eleven other sites, most of them in southern Iran: Farukhabad, Khoveyyes, Chogha Cheshmeh, Tall-i Siah, Tall-i Skau, Tall-i Regi, Kanakan D, Tall-i Nokhodi, Tall-i Gap, Tepe Yahya, and Tell-i Iblis (Figs. 9.34–9.35). When Stein first discovered this motif at five sites he surveyed in Fars, he described it as “a hachured square developed by appended hooks or loops into a kind of frog shape” (Stein 1936:186). A similar depiction from Tepe Yahya was described as “a theriomorphic lozenge-with-legs” (Lamberg-Karlovsky and Beale 1986:61). I suggest that these net-covered rhombuses represent dancing figures in an abstract geometric style. They share the following characteristics: 1. A row of identical figures encircling the vessel near the rim. 2. The so-called hooks are actually bent arms and legs representing a dynamic position of the human body. 3. A rhombus consisting of the human torso can be found in some figures from Tall-i Bakun A (Fig. 9.34:b). In these figures other parts of the human body are clearly represented: head, eyes, arms, fingers, legs, and toes. 4. A net-covered pattern appears in all the other human figures depicted in the geometric style from Khazineh and Tell Halaf (Figs. 9.13:c–g, 9.34:a).

62. khoveyyes This site is located on the Susiana Plain, Khuzistan, western Iran. A sherd collected during a survey, and dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc, depicts a line of net-covered rhombuses with bent arms and legs (Fig. 9.35:c; Alizadeh 1992, Site No. g176, Fig. 73:n). This geometric style has been discussed above (Site 61).

63. chogha cheshmeh This site is located on the Susiana Plain, Khuzistan, western Iran. A sherd collected during a survey, and dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc, depicts a line of net-covered rhombuses with bent arms and legs (Fig. 9.35:a; Alizadeh 1992, Site No. G86-II, Fig. 57:g). This geometric style has been discussed above (Site 61).

64. qal ‘ eh rostam This site is located in the Bakhtiari mountains, Khuzistan, western Iran. In Phase I, dated to the mid-sixth millennium bc, excavators reported a sherd of a deep open bowl. This is a painted rim fragment depicting a

figure 9.22 Painted pottery from Chigha Sabz. Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.

row of five human figures standing in profile. They face right, creating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel. The arms are bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically, in front of each figure and not to the sides as is more usual (Fig. 9.29:a; Zagarell 1982:20–22; Nissen and Zagarell 1976:180, Fig. 3:1; Bernbeck 1989:168 and Fig. 29:c).

65. malamir This site is located in the Bakhtiari mountains, Khuzistan, western Iran. It is generally dated to the late sixth millennium bc. One sherd depicts a human figure with bent arms, a typical position of dancing figures (Fig. 9.24:f; Stein 1940:135).

66. tul-i bawa muhammad This site is located in the Bakhtiari mountains, Khuzistan, western Iran, near Malamir. It is generally dated to the late sixth millennium bc. Three painted human figures in a vertical row were preserved on a sherd. Their torsos are triangular and either their arms are bent or their hands hold branches (Fig. 9.10:f; Stein 1940:136). Similar items have been reported from Kozagaran, Chogha Mish, Do Tulune, and Tepe Giyan (Fig. 9.10).

186

The D ata

67. chigha sabz This site is located in Luristan, western Iran. Two similar examples of dancing figures, in the naturalistic style, have been published from the middle of the Chalcolithic period, dated to the late sixth millennium bc. A relatively well-preserved object is a base of a small cup with the scene drawn near its base and not, as usual, near the rim. At least nine identical human figures can be seen in the published photograph. They are standing in a row, frontally, holding hands. The most prominent part of the figures is the broad hips, probably indicating the female gender. The horizontal row surrounds the vessel and creates a circle (Figs. 9.19:a–b, 9.22; Schmidt et al. 1989).

68. iran, unknown site A deep pottery bowl decorated with a red burnished surface and a black painted design. This item was bought on the antiquities market and is now in the Boston Fine Arts Museum (Fig. 9.19:g; Simpson 1972:238). The dancing scene is composed of twelve figures standing in a row, frontally, holding hands. The horizontal row surrounds the vessel near the rim and creates a circle. The most prominent part of the figures is the broad hips, probably indicating the female gender. Similar figures have been found at the site of Chigha Sabz (Fig. 9.19:a–b). Between the figures are circles with a central dot. The ware and style of decoration indicate that the vessel originated in Iran.

69. kozagaran This site is located in Luristan, western Iran. It is generally dated to the late sixth millennium bc. The small assemblage of sherds collected at the site includes examples of the typical geometric style (Figs. 9.10:d–e, 9.23; Stein 1940:198–205, Pl. VIII:13–14, 20–21, 23) that has been described above from Khazineh and Tepe Musiyan. In addition, the human figures are rhomboid in shape on some sherds (Fig. 9.5:e).

figure 9.23 Painted pottery from Kozagaran. © The British Museum.

187

figure 9.24 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. Tepe Bendebal, ca. 6 x 7.5 cm (after Dollfus 1983b, Figure 61:11). b. Tepe Bendebal, ca. 4.5 x 5.5 cm (after Breton 1947, Figure 41:6). c. Tepe Bendebal, ca. 6 x 5 cm (after Breton 1947, Figure 41:7). d. Tall-i Gap, ca. 3.5 x 5.5 cm (after Egami and Sono 1962, Pl. 36b:1). e. Tall-i Jari A, ca. 12 x 8 cm (after Egami et al. 1977, Pl. III:5). f. Malamir, ca. 10 x 8 cm (after Stein 1940, Pl. II:2). g. Tepe Bendebal, ca. 8 x 7 cm (after Dollfus 1983b, Figure 87:6). h. Tall-i Gap, ca. 3 x 1.5 cm (after Egami and Sono 1962, Pl. 36b:5). i. Tepe Giyan, ca. 11 x 11 cm (after Contenau and Ghirshman 1935, Pl. 64).

188

70. tepe giyan This site is located in Luristan, western Iran (Contenau and Ghirshman 1935). A deep sounding, ca. 20 meters below topsoil, was dug in the early 1930s, and two items with dancing figures have been published from its lower part, generally dated to the sixth millennium bc:

The D ata

1. A sherd, discovered ca. 19 meters below topsoil. On the preserved part one can see a vertical row of at least four schematic human figures, painted in the geometric style, as described from the site of Khazineh (Fig. 9.10:g; Contenau and Ghirshman 1935, Pl. 43). 2. A well-preserved bowl, discovered ca. 15 meters below topsoil, published in a schematic drawing. A painted human figure appears near the rim, in a very dynamic posture: upraised arms, partly horizontal and then vertical, and the legs separated, with their upper part horizontal and their lower part vertical (Fig. 9.24:i; Contenau and Ghirshman 1935, Pl. 64).

71. tepe sialk This site is located in the central Iranian Plateau. Seven painted sherds with dancing figures were published from Layer III, dated to the midfifth millennium bc. All the sherds are painted rim fragments depicting tall dancing human figures in the naturalistic style (Figs. 9.25:c–h, 9.26; Ghirshman 1938, Pls. LXXV, LXXX.c). In most examples they depict a row of broad-hipped figures holding hands, represented in profile. They face right, indicating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel. In one case figures with narrow hips are represented frontally (Fig. 9.25:e). In all these examples the figures hold their hands level with the lower part of the body. On each sherd, all the figures are identical to one another. The hips seem to be used as a gender characteristic, so that the figures with broad hips are female, while those with narrow hips are male. A different scene on another sherd depicts a row of three human figures in front of three net-covered triangular elements (Fig. 9.15:c). The figures are shown frontally, touching one another with their shoulders.

72. tchechme ali (rayy) This site is located in the central Iranian Plateau, near Teheran. It is generally dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc. Dancing figures were reported on one sherd, which was uncovered when the site was briefly examined in the 1920s. A row of five identical tall human figures is depicted on the preserved part. Each figure is presented in profile, facing right, with an elongated head and broad hips; they hold hands level with the lower part of the body. These are female figures dancing in a counterclockwise circle (Figs. 9.25:a, 9.28; Mecquenem 1928:118; Huot 1965, Fig. 133).

189

figure 9.25 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. Tchechme Ali, ca. 11 x 8 cm (after Mecquenem 1928, Figure 24:1). b. Qabrestan, no scale published (after Negahban 1976, Figure 21). c. Tepe Sialk, ca. 6 x 5 cm (after Ghirshman 1938, Pl. LXXV:2). d. Tepe Sialk, ca. 7.5 x 4.5 cm (after Ghirshman 1938, Pl. LXXV:1). e. Tepe Sialk, ca. 6.5 x 6 cm (after Ghirshman 1938, Pl. LXXV:4). f. Tepe Sialk, ca. 6 x 7 cm (after Ghirshman 1938, Pl. LXXX.c:6). g. Tepe Sialk, ca. 6 x 4 cm (after Ghirshman 1938, Pl. LXXX.c:7). h. Tepe Sialk, ca. 6 x 4 cm (after Ghirshman 1938, Pl. LXXX.c:8).

a figure 9:26 Painted pottery (a and b) from Tepe Sialk. Courtesy of Musée du Louvre, Département des Antiquités Orientales (Items AO 17811, 19461). figure 9.27 Painted pottery from Tepe Sialk. Courtesy of Musée du Louvre, Département des Antiquités (Item 18169). Photo by C. Larrieu. figure 9.28 Painted pottery from Tchechme Ali. Courtesy of Musée du Louvre, Département des Antiquités Orientales (Item 10935). Photo by P. and M. Chuzeville.

b

191

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

73. ismailabad This site is located in the central Iranian plateau and has been dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc. Two expeditions worked at the site, and intensive grave looting went on as well, but very little data has been published so far. A complete pedestal bowl in the Teheran Museum has been published, without any information concerning its original findspot at the site (Fig. 9.17:e; Talai 1983:59; Maleki 1968). The interior part of the bowl is painted. The space is divided into four equal quarters by two perpendicular lines. Two opposed quarters remain empty, while a human figure was drawn in each of the two other opposed quarters. Each figure is represented frontally, with arms bent upwards, including fingers. The broad hips seem to indicate that they are female figures. The feet face to left, thus indicating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel. Framed dancing figures were found at other Iranian sites: Djaffarabad and Tepe Djowi (Fig. 9.17:a, c–d).

74. qabrestan This small site is located on the Qazvin Plain in the Iranian Plateau, dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc. One painted sherd was reported with “dancing human figures similar to those found in Sialk.” This sherd represents three human figures in profile, holding hands. They are facing right, indicating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel. The figures are standing on top of an area covered by a net pattern, which was preserved only in one corner (Fig. 9.25:b; Negahban 1976:251–252, Fig. 21).

75. tepe hissar This site is located in Khurasan, northeast Iran. Depictions described as “bird design at various stages of conventionalization” have been published from Layer I (Schmidt 1933, Pl. 88), dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc. Some of the items published in the plate are birds, but two sherds differ from the others, since they depict human figures: 1. Two complete figures and the remains of an additional five can be seen on a sherd (Fig. 9.29:b). Each figure is represented partly frontally and partly in profile. They are standing close together in a row, shoulder to shoulder, with bent legs. They stand on top of an area covered by a net pattern, like the items from Qabrestan (Fig. 9.25:b). 2. The lower part of seven human figures can be seen on the sherd (Fig. 9.29:c). Like the previous depiction, they are standing close together in a row, on top of an area that is covered by a net pattern.

In these two sherds the human figures are muscular, probably indicating that they are male. The bent legs and the crowded row of figures indicate that they are dancing.

192

The D ata

figure 9.29 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. Qal‘eh Rostam, ca. 4.5 x 6.5 cm (after Bernbeck 1989, Figure 29:c). b. Tepe Hissar, ca. 7.5 x 7.5 cm (after Schmidt 1933, Pl. LXXXVIII: Hd23). c. Tepe Hissar, ca. 5 x 6 cm (after Schmidt 1933, Pl. LXXXVIII: Ha78). d. Tall-i Jari A, ca. 19 cm diameter (after Vanden Berghe 1966, Pls. 50, 52a).

193

76. do tulune This site is located near Behbehan in western Iran. A survey yielded one painted sherd, decorated with a vertical row of schematic human figures (Fig. 9.10:c; Dittmann 1984:11–12, Fig. 10:1). They are depicted in the geometric style previously described for the site of Khazineh (Site 51) and apparently dated to the late sixth millennium bc.

77. tall-i bakun a Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

This site is located near Persepolis in Fars, Iran, and is dated to the first half of the fifth millennium bc. Various expeditions have worked at the site, and large quantities of painted pottery with an amazing wealth of designs have been unearthed. The local style is characterized by the depiction of specific human body parts as geometric shapes (Figs. 9.30, 9.31, 9.34:b). This creates a kind of “cubist” impression and differs drastically from the geometric style, where the entire figure acquires a geometric shape (Fig. 8.7). Dancing is a relatively common motif, and about thirty painted sherds in different styles have been published so far (Herzfeld 1929, 1932; Langsdorff and McCown 1942; Alizadeh 1988). The figures can be divided into the following categories, according to the dancing positions shown: 1. A row of identical figures with linked arms and legs (Fig. 9.30:a, d, f ). Each individual is represented frontally, with his arms upraised, partly horizontally and partly vertically. The legs are separated, with their upper part horizontal and their lower part vertical. The grotesquely emphasized head and eyes of these, and some of the next, examples give the impression that the figures are wearing masks (Fig. 9.30:b–d). 2. A row of identical human figures in the same position but not holding hands (Fig. 9.30:b, e). In some examples fingers and toes are also visible (Fig. 9.30:e–f ). 3. A row of identical human figures with pointed, animal-like heads and an elongated coiffure (Fig. 9.32:a–b). They are holding hands, and at the same time, each pair holds an elongated item that looks like a branch. Figures holding branches are known on other artifacts as well (Fig. 9.15:d). 4. In one small sherd only the upper part of the torso and neck of two human figures have been preserved (Fig. 9.32:c). They seem quite similar to the previous example, but they do not hold branches. 5. A painted bowl reported from the earliest investigation at the site and now at the collection of the British Museum (Fig. 9.31:c; Herzfeld 1932; Curtis 1989:8, Fig. 2). The decoration was done in the black on buff tradition, showing three identical dancing figures on the object’s circumference. The areas between the figures were decorated with a geometric pattern resembling a Maltese cross. Each of the figures was portrayed with a small, birdlike head, in the style known on later Near Eastern

194

The D ata

figure 9.30 Painted pottery from Iran:

Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 12 x 10 cm (after Langsdorff and McCown 1942, Pl. 68:1). Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 12 x 8 cm (after Langsdorff and McCown 1942, Pl. 69:1). Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 6 x 7.5 cm (after Langsdorff and McCown 1942, Pl. 69:2). Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 12 x 6 cm (after Langsdorff and McCown 1942, Pl. 68:4). Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 7.5 x 5 cm (after Langsdorff and McCown 1942, Pl. 69:3). Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 12 x 13.5 cm (after Langsdorff and McCown 1942, Pl. 67:13). g. Chogha Mish, ca. 8 x 8 cm (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 171:d).

a. b. c. d. e. f.

195

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

a

b

figure 9.31 Painted pottery from Tall-i Bakun A. a–b. Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. c. The British Museum.

c

196

The D ata

figure 9.32 Painted pottery from Iran:

seals (Fig. 12.2:b, d), which is facing right, indicating a clockwise movement around the vessel. The body is composed of a prominent triangle torso, wide pelvis, and rather short legs. The hands are the most dominant part of the figure, and the palm with the fingers are much larger then the entire head. When examining the original bowl at the British Museum, it became apparent that some parts, including most of the base, were missing and are now reconstructed. Two of the figures are represented with their left feet facing left and the right feet facing right (Fig. 9.31:c). One figure was reconstructed differently, with both feet facing right (Curtis 1989:8, Fig. 2). This last figure was reconstructed differently, since the available space did not allow the left foot to face left. However, it seems to me that mending the sherds to create a complete object caused some deformation, while originally this figure could have depicted identically to the other two. There is no detailed report of the Herzfeld excavation at Tall-i Bakun; thus the exact context of the bowl is unknown. However, this is not a small sherd, as is usually found in the excavations of settlements, but a nearly complete object, as typical of grave goods. If so, this is another example of a clockwise movement originated from a burial.

a. Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 7.5 x 6 cm (after Herzfeld 1932, Figure 1). b. Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 8 cm height (after Alizadeh 1988, Figure 6:i, and personal communication). c. Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 4.5 x 4.5 cm (after Langsdorff and McCown 1942, Pl. 67:5). d. Do Tulan, ca. 7 x 6 cm (after Stein 1936, Pl. XXVIII:39). e. Tall-i Regi, ca. 5 x 8 cm (after Stein 1936, Pl. XXV:19).

figure 9.33 Painted pottery from Tall-i Gap. Courtesy of The Institute of Oriental Culture/The University Museum, The University of Tokyo.

78. tall–i gap This site is located near Persepolis in Fars, Iran. It is dated to the first half of the fifth millennium bc. Two painted sherds depicting dancing figures have been reported: 1. One bowl rim fragment includes a large part of a human figure represented with the body frontal and the head in profile, facing left. The two arms are bent, first downwards and then upwards, away from the body. Fingers can be seen on the surviving hand. The contour of the lower part of this figure seems to indicate that it is robed in a kind of skirt. The report does not specify whether the decoration is on the inner or outer face of the sherd. However, from the photograph it seems that the figure is drawn on the interior, thus creating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel (Figs. 9.24:d, 9.33, Egami and Sono 1962, Pl. 36b:1). 2. A small sherd with the upper part of one human figure represented frontally, with the arms raised, partly horizontally and then vertically (Fig. 9.24:h). 3. Two decorated vessels, a cup and a bowl (Figs. 9.35:d, g, 9.36), depict rhombuses with bent arms and legs. This geometric style has been discussed above (Site 61). 4. A rim fragment decorated in the geometric style. It depicts a black square with bent arms and legs, a dynamic limb position known on quite a number of rhombus figures in Iranian sites. This figure is located to the left of a net-covered square (Figs. 9.35:h, 9.37). This net-covered motif probably represents the structurelike element of the Khazineh painted style (Figs. 9.4–9.6).

198

The D ata

figure 9.34 Painted pottery from Iran and Mesopotamia:

Tell Halaf, ca. 6 x 5 cm (after von Oppenheim 1943, Pl. XCI:1). Tall-i Bakun A, ca. 12 x 13 cm (after Langsdorff and McCown 1942, Pl. 67:13). Tall-i Skau, ca. 12 x 10 cm (after Stein 1936, Pl. XXIV:5). Tall-i Siah, ca. 8 x 7 cm (after Stein 1936, Pl. XXII:17). Kanakan D, ca. 11 x 10 cm (after Stein 1936, Pl. XXI:41). Tall-i Nokhodi, ca. 6 x 6 cm (after Goff 1963b, Figure 13:15). Tall-i Regi, ca. 20 x 12 cm (after Stein 1936, Pl. XXVI:2). Tepe Yahya, ca. 7.5 x 7.5 cm (after Lamberg-Karlovsky and Beale 1986, Figure 4.21:c). i. Tepe Yahya, ca. 8 x 7.5 cm (after Lamberg-Karlovsky and Beale 1986, Figure 4.20:x).

a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h.

199

figure 9.35 Painted pottery from Iran:

a. Chogha Cheshmeh, ca. 5.5 x 5.5 cm (after Alizadeh 1992, Figure 57:g). b. Sham‘un, ca. 3.5 x 3 cm (after Alizadeh 1992, Figure 30:f). c. Khoveyyes, ca. 7.5 x 6.5 cm (after Alizadeh 1992, Figure 73:n). d. Tall-i Gap, ca. 12 cm high (after Egami and Sono 1962, Figure 12:6). e. Tell-i Iblis, ca. 6 x 4.5 cm (after Sarraf 1981, Figure 7:95). f. Tell-i Iblis, ca. 4.5 x 5 cm (after Sarraf 1981, Figure 7:95). g. Tall-i Gap, ca. 4.5 x 6.5 cm (after Egami and Sono 1962, Figure 20:12). h. Tall-i Gap, ca. 13 x 8 cm (after Egami and Sono 1962, Figure XXXIIb:1).

200

The D ata

figure 9.36 Painted pottery in the geometric style from Tall-i Gap. Courtesy of The Institute of Oriental Culture/The University Museum, The University of Tokyo. figure 9.37 Painted pottery in the geometric style from Tall-i Gap. Courtesy of The Institute of Oriental Culture/The University Museum, The University of Tokyo.

figure 9.38 Painted pottery from (a) Tall-i Skau and (b) Tall-i Siah. © The British Museum.

b a

79. tall-i jari a This site is located near Persepolis in Fars, Iran. Dancing figures, dated to the first half of the fifth millennium bc, have been reported by two different expeditions that worked at the site: 1. A bowl with a tall fenestrated pedestal, which was discovered in a grave (Fig. 9.29:d; Vanden Berghe 1952). The interior of the bowl was decorated with a circle of dancing figures in the naturalistic style. On the preserved part there are thirteen identical naked, bent male figures in profile, each one touching the shoulders of the figure in front of him with both hands. The gender is clearly emphasized by the sex organ, muscular legs, narrow hips, and bearded faces. The complete scene consisted of a chain of fifteen figures in a clockwise circle. The movement is clearly indicated by the bent stance of the figures. The state of preservation and the quality of the painting make this depiction the best example of a dancing scene from the protohistoric Near East. 2. A rim fragment of a bowl discovered in the upper level at the settlement (Fig. 9.24:e; Egami et al. 1977). It bears one complete figure represented frontally, with bent arms. The upper ends of the hands are depicted somewhat strangely, probably indicating fingers. To the left of this figure the hands of another similar figure can be seen, indicating that more than one person was painted on the vessel.

80. do tulan This site is located near Pasargadae, in Fars, Iran. A small painted sherd, published upside down, displays remains of two human figures standing next to each other, holding an elongated object that looks like a branch (Fig. 9.32:d; Stein 1936:218–220, Pl. XXVIII:39). The same motif has been reported on a few items from Tall-i Bakun A (Fig. 9.32:a–c). It should therefore be dated to the first half of the fifth millennium bc.

202

81. tall-i nokhodi This site is located near Pasargadae, in Fars, Iran. An example of dancing rhombuses has been reported (Fig. 9.34:f; Goff 1963b). This geometric style has been discussed above (Site 61). The date of this item falls in the first half of the fifth millennium bc.

82. tall-i siah The D ata

This site is located near Madavan in Fars, Iran. A sherd collected during a survey depicts a line of net-covered rhombuses with bent arms and legs (Fig. 9.34:d; Stein 1936:182–186). In Figure 9.38:b, another similar depiction from the site is presented. This geometric style has been discussed above (Site 61). As can be seen from the two examples from Tepe Yahya (below, Site 86, Fig. 9.34:h–i), this style was prevalent during the midor late fifth millennium bc.

83. tall-i skau This site is located near Madavan in Fars, Iran. An example of dancing rhombuses has been reported (Figs. 9:38.a, 9.34:c; Stein 1936:187–190). This geometric style has been discussed above (Site 61). This item is dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc.

84. tall-i regi This site is located near Khusu in Fars, Iran, and is generally dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc. Dancing figures of two styles have been reported: 1. A small sherd painted in the naturalistic style (Fig. 9.32:e; Stein 1936:201– 202). The item includes the upper part of two human figures with elongated heads standing in a row, facing left. Their arms are bent, one upwards and touching the face and the other downwards. A different position for each arm is not common in Near Eastern dancing scenes, but some examples have been reported from southeast Europe (Figs. 10.4:a, 10.18). 2. An example of dancing rhombuses (Fig. 9.34:g). This geometric style has been discussed above (Site 61).

85. kanakan d This site is located in Fars, Iran. An example of dancing rhombuses has been reported (Fig. 9.29:e; Stein 1936:150). This geometric style has been discussed above (Site 61). This item dates from the mid-fifth millennium bc.

86. tepe yahya This site is located in Kerman province in southeast Iran, some 500 kilometers from Fars. Two sherds with dancing rhombuses, in the style

203

mentioned above, have been reported: one from Layer Va-b, dated to the end of the fifth millennium bc (Fig. 9.34:i; Lamberg-Karlovsky and Beale 1986:61), and the other from Layer Vc, dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc (Fig. 9.34:h). These figures were described by the excavators as “a theriomorphic lozenge-with-legs.”

87. tell-i iblis

Neolithic and Chalcolithic Iran

This site is located in Kerman Province in southeast Iran. Decorated fragments of two bowls have been reported, depicting net-covered rhombuses with bent arms and legs (Fig. 9.35:e–f; Sarraf 1981, Fig. 7:95– 96). This geometric style has been discussed above and dates to the midfifth millennium bc.

88. surab region The Surab Region lies in central Baluchistan, in western Pakistan. Dani, without reporting the exact findspot, published a painted pottery sherd with a dancing motif (Fig. 9.19:e; Dani 1988:22–23, Fig. 11), similar to the item from Mehrgarh (Fig. 9.19:d). It should therefore be dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc. It shows the lower part of three identical human figures holding hands. Each figure’s body is represented frontally, while the feet are depicted in profile and facing right. If the scene were located on the exterior of the vessel, it would express a counter-clockwise movement. The shape of the lower part of the figures seems to indicate that they are robed in a kind of skirt.

89. mehrgarh This site is located in Baluchistan, in western Pakistan, and is the most eastern example presented in this work. A decorated rim fragment of a bowl was found in a Chalcolithic cemetery of period III of the site, dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc. It depicts a row of dancing human figures (Fig. 9.19:d; Samzun and Sellier 1983; Samzun 1991:69). The three identical figures are represented frontally, holding hands. The shape of the lower part of the figures seems to indicate that they are robed in a kind of skirt. The painting was done in a naturalistic style, similar to an item discovered at Tepe Sabz (Fig. 9.19:c).

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Neolithic Southeast Europe

chapter 10

This group represents the western and northern extremes of the distribution area of the dancing motif (Fig. 10.1). The sites are discussed in the following geographical order: Greece (four sites, nos. 90–93; for further examples, see Sampson 1992:80–83), Bulgaria and the former Yugoslavia (five sites, nos. 94–98), Romania and the Dniester Basin (seventeen sites, nos. 99–115), and Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic (fourteen sites, nos. 116–129). This is the geographical area commonly designated in the archaeological literature as “southeast Europe” (Tringham 1971; Hodder 1990) and dubbed “Old Europe” by Gimbutas (1982:17–35). The regions of central Europe (Bogucki and Crygiel 1993) are not included in this study, since dancing figures are not a characteristic feature in sites from that area (though for some extremely rare examples, see Nitu 1970, Fig. 5:3; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pls. 199:G, 222:6–7, 223:1; Von Rimute 1994, Fig. 41, Pl. 52:1–2). Stylistic Analysis

The early agricultural communities of southeast Europe in the sixth, fifth, and fourth millennia bc produced large quantities of art and cult objects: figurines, statues, anthropomorphic and zoomorphic jars, architectural models, and decorated pottery vessels (Dumitrescu 1974; Gimbutas 1982, 1989, 1992; Lazarovici 1981; Coleman 1992; Ehrich and Bankoff 1992). Dancing figures are a common motif on decorated pottery vessels and have been reported from quite a number of sites (Gulder 1960–1962; Müller-Karpe 1968:307; Nitu 1970; Dumitrescu 1974; Marinescu-Bilcu 1974a; Mantu 1993). From a technical point of view, most of the items from southeast Europe were decorated with plastic applications (see Table 6.2). Only a few items were incised (Figs. 10.5:a– b; 10.9:b–c; 10.13:c, f; 10.18:b–c), and still fewer, painted (Figs. 79:1, 80:1–2). Usually excavators have reported broken sherds with only one figure. However, the complete vessels that have been discovered bear the following characteristics (Figs. 10.2–10.8): 1. More than one figure is depicted on the item’s perimeter. 2. The figures on a particular vessel are usually identical.

figure 10.1 Southeast European sites mentioned in the text.

3. The figures are portrayed in a dynamic posture, usually with bent arms and legs. 4. No other scenes depicting interaction between people have been reported.

These features suggest that a single anthropomorphic figure on a sherd should be interpreted as part of a dancing scene, with several identical figures originally depicted around the vessel. The scenes represent ordinary human beings in dancing positions and not supernatural powers, as scholars sometimes suggest, for example, “male gods,” “the great

207

figure 10.2 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe: a. Szegvár-Tüzköves, ca. 6 x 3.5 cm (after Korek 1987, Figure 24). b. Gumelniçcta, ca. 37 x 26 cm (after Ionescu 1974, Figure 1:1). c. Gomolava, no scale published (after Gimbutas 1982, Pl. 172). figure 10.3 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe: a. Dumesti, ca. 10 cm high of figures (after Maxim-Alaiba 1987, Figure 13). b. Scinteia, ca. 86 cm high (after Mantu 1993, Figs 2-3).

208

figure 10.4 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe: a. Szajol-Felsofold, ca. 72 cm high (after Gimbutas 1989, Figure 27). b. Truçcseçcsti, ca. 65 cm (after MüllerKarpe 1968, Pl. 172:1–1a). figure 10.5 Incised pottery from Southeast Europe: a. Strelice, ca. 38 cm high (after Gimbutas 1989, Figure 489; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 207:16; Mellink and Filip 1974, Figure 301). b. Litomerice, no scale published (after Pleiner 1978, Figure 54:1).

209

figure 10.6 Pottery “reel vessel” from Bereçcsti, ca. 18 cm high (after Dragomir 1987, Figure 1). figure 10.7 Pottery “reel vessel” from Frumuçcsica, ca. 28 cm high (after Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Figure 3:1a–b; Condurachi and Daicoviciu 1971, Figure 24).

210

the data

figure 10.8 Pottery “reel vessel” from Southeast Europe:

a. Larga Jijia, ca. 7 cm high (reconstructed) (after Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Figure1:1a–b). b. Luka-Vrublevetskaya, no scale published (after Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Figure 5:1). c. Traian, ca. 12 cm high (reconstructed) (after Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Figure 4). d. Truçcseçcsti, ca. 7 cm high (reconstructed) (after Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Figure 1:2a). e. Truçcseçcsti, ca. 10 cm high (reconstructed) (after Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Figure 2). f. Truçcseçcsti, ca. 12 cm high (reconstructed) (after Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Figure 3:2a).

211

neolithic southeast europe

goddess” (Kalicz 1970:52, Pl. 52; Mantu 1992:315), or the female pantheon created by Gimbutas, with her “birth-giving goddess,” “birthgiving goddess in the shape of a toad,” “bee goddess,” “bird goddess,” and “snake goddess” (Gimbutas 1982, 1989, 1992). Close connections existed between the Near Eastern and the European artistic traditions, as Nitu already emphasized (1970): The dancing figures appear in the part of Europe closest to Anatolia. This motif appears in the fifth millennium bc in both the Near East and Europe. In this period both regions underwent a similar socioeconomic development—the process of “neolithization,” that is, the adoption of subsistence strategies for food production and the agglomeration of large communities into village-type settlements. In stylistic terms, many of the European figures appear in the same dynamic postures that appear in the Near East, and in cases where large parts of the vessels have been preserved, more than one figure appears. On the basis of these points, it seems that the dancing motif should be interpreted similarly both in the Near East and in Europe. During the process of “neolithization,” some Near Eastern myths and religious practices were adopted by European communities, such as the deliberate burial of cultic objects, building models, cattle figurines, and “coffee bean” eyes on anthropomorphic figurines (Garfinkel 1994). The dancing-figures motif is one aspect of this complicated and protracted development. The Assemblage

90. nea nikomedia This site is located in Macedonia, Greece, and is dated to the early sixth millennium bc. Excavators reported plastic decoration depicting a human figure on a monochrome vessel. The sherd displays the lower part of a human figure depicted frontally with bent legs, partly vertical and then horizontal. Rodden and Rodden described this position as recalling the birth-giving goddesses of Çatal Höyük (Fig. 10.16:c; Rodden and Rodden 1964, Fig. 3). However, it seems to indicate a dynamic posture of the human body, similar to body positions from Anatolia and Cyprus, described below in the appendix.

91. argissa magula This site is located in Thessaly, Greece. A painted rim fragment depicts a human figure; it is dated to the Proto-Sesklo culture of the early sixth millennium bc. This is a highly stylized figure represented frontally with arms bent downwards, and legs bent partly downwards and partly upwards. Gimbutas described this figure as a bee goddess (Fig. 10.14:a; Theocharis 1973, Pl. XVIII:1; Gimbutas 1982:184, Fig. 142).

212

92. thessaly region A painted bowl sherd depicting two human figures has been assigned to the Neolithic period in Greece, but no data of its exact place of discovery has been given. One figure is almost complete, while only a small portion of the other’s leg has been preserved. The figure is represented frontally in a dynamic posture with the arms bent downwards, first horizontally at shoulder level and then vertically (Fig. 10.15:a; Theocharis 1973, Pl. XVIII:2).

the data

93. pefkakia This site is located in Thessaly, Greece. Excavators reported an applied human figure, dated to the late Neolithic. The figure is represented frontally, with its two arms raised above the head. The legs are portrayed straight (Fig. 10.13:a; Theocharis 1973, Pl. XVIII:207).

94. tell azmak This site is a multilayered settlement in southern Bulgaria. Excavators reported human figures on pottery vessels from different strata: 1. Two items related to the Karanovo I phase, dated to the early sixth millennium bc, are mentioned by Gimbutas (1989, Fig. 28:1–2). Only the outline of the human figures has been published, with no information on the sherds. These engraved items include the upper part of the body, represented frontally, with one arm turned upwards and the other downwards (Fig. 10.18:b–c). A similar body position has been reported on other southeast European specimens (Fig. 10.18). 2. The upper layers of the Neolithic period, dated to the fifth millennium bc, have yielded a pottery sherd with an applied human figure. It is represented frontally, with the arms and legs bent downwards. A protruding element between the legs seems to be the male organ (Fig. 10.14:b; Georgive 1965). 3. On a pottery sherd an applied human figure is depicted frontally, with one arm bent upwards and the other downwards. Both legs are represented bent slightly downwards, partly horizontally and then vertically. A protruding element between the legs seems to indicate the male organ (Fig. 10.18:a; Bouiukliev et al. 1965, Pl. 16; Raduncheva 1973, Fig. 66). 4. An applied human figure represented frontally, with the arms raised upwards, partly horizontal and partly vertical, and the legs turned downwards, partly horizontal and partly vertical. This single figure appears in the inner part of a complete shallow pottery bowl, 12 centimeters, in diameter and 3 centimeters, high, which has a thumb-impressed rim. This is a rare case of a complete pottery vessel that depicts only one figure (Fig. 10.13:e; Bouiukliev et al. 1965, Pl. 17; Raduncheva 1973, Fig. 64).

213

neolithic southeast europe

95. grades˘ nitsa This site is located in northwestern Bulgaria and is related to the Starc˘evo II–Karanovo I of the early sixth millennium bc. Archaeologists reported an applied human figure on a pottery sherd below the handle. The figure is represented frontally, with a triangular head, arms outstretched at shoulder level, a rounded feature on the central part of the torso, diagonally extended legs and a protrusion (male organ) between the legs. Both hands end in fingers, and both legs in toes. The shape of this figure is quite exceptional in southeast Europe (Fig. 10.9:a; Raduncheva 1973, Fig. 65).

96. sarvas This site is located in the north of the former Yugoslavia. Excavators unearthed a sherd with an applied female figure in the lowest level of the Starc˘evo culture, dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc. The figure is represented frontally, with arms bent upwards, partly horizontally and then vertically. The sex organs are clearly exposed, indicating masculinity. The legs are bent downwards, also partly horizontally and then vertically. Gimbutas described this as a birth-giving goddess (Fig. 10.10:c; Gimbutas 1982:176, Fig. 128). The position with arms bent upwards and legs bent downwards, partly horizontally and then vertically, is very common in southeast Europe (Figs. 10.10, 10.11).

97. vinc˘a This site, which gave its name to the Vinc˘a culture, is located near Belgrade in the former Yugoslavia and dates to the second half of the sixth and the first half of the fifth millennia bc (Lazarovici 1981). Excavators reported a few objects with human figures: 1. A pottery sherd with the upper part of a human figure represented frontally. The arms are bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically (Fig. 10:10:d; Müller-Karpe 1968:462–463, Pl. 144:4).

figure 10.9 Applied and incised pottery from Southeast Europe:

a. Grades˘nitsa, ca. 17 x 18 cm (after Raduncheva 1973, Figure 65). b. Nova Ves, no scale published (after Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 200:e-2). c. Kolesovice, ca. 16 x 12 cm (after Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 196:a).

214

figure 10.10 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe:

a. Turdaçcs, ca. 9 x 14 cm (after Condurachi and Daicoviciu 1971, Figure 4). b. Turdaçcs, ca. 9 x 12 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:7; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:2). c. Sarvas, ca. 9 x 13 cm (after Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 143:1). d. Vinc˘a, ca. 6.5 x 8.5 cm (after Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 144:4). e. Turdaçcs, ca. 7 x 5 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:9; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:18). f. Tîrpeçcsti, ca. 7.5 x 4.5 cm (after Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974b, Figure 84:2). g. Turdaçcs, no scale published (after Dumitrescu 1974, Figure 190:8).

215

figure 10.11 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe:

a. Villanykovesd, ca. 6.5 x 10.7 cm (after Kalicz 1970, Pl. 52). b. Scinteia, ca. 11 x 11 cm (after Mantu 1992, Figure 1:2). c. Holasovice, no scale published (after Gimbutas 1982, Figure 143). d. Truçcseçcsti, no scale published (after Gimbutas 1982, Figure 144). e. Truçcseçcsti, ca. 7.5 x 6.5 cm (after Nitu 1968, Figure 1:1). f. Ghelaesti, ca. 10 x 10 cm (after Nitu 1971, Figure 1:1).

216

2. A jar with a single human figure shown frontally, with one arm bent upwards and the other downwards. It was not clear from the available publication whether there was another similar figure on the other side (Fig. 10.18:e; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 144:1).

98. gomolava

the data

This site is located in the north of the former Yugoslavia. A large fragment of a bowl with two human figures has been reported from a midVinc˘a context, dated to the early fifth millennium bc. The figures are represented frontally, in a dynamic posture with arms bent upwards and legs downwards. Gimbutas interpreted the elongated features that accompany the figures as snakes. However, these could be ribbons held by the dancers (Fig. 10.2:c; Gimbutas 1982, Pl. 172).

99. turdaçcs This site is located in Transylvania, Romania, and is dated to the early Vinc˘a settlement of the late sixth millennium bc. Excavators have reported a large number of fragmented applied anthropomorphic figures on vessels (Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI; Müller-Karpe 1968:474, Pl. 181:1–9, 18–19; Nitu 1970; Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 190). The better-preserved items, which yield some information about body positions, are presented here: 1. A human figure shown frontally. The arms are raised, partly horizontally and then partly vertically, and end in fingers. The legs are straight and end in toes (Fig. 10:11:a; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:6; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:1; for an excellent photograph, see Condurachi and Daicoviciu 1971, Fig. 4). 2. A human figure depicted frontally, with diagonally extended legs. The arms are raised diagonally and end in fingers (Fig. 10.10:b; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:7; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:2).

figure 10.12 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe:

a. Turdaçcs, ca. 7 x 9 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:14; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:7). b. Turdaçcs, ca. 9 x 7 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:15). c. Kotacpart, ca. 10 x 10 cm (after Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 183:a6).

217

neolithic southeast europe

figure 10.13 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe:

a. Pefkakia, ca. 7 x 9.5 cm (after Theocharis 1973, Pl. XVIII:207). b. Turdaçcs, ca. 6 x 9 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:13; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:8). c. Borsod, ca. 10 x 10 cm (after Gulder 1960–1962, Figure 39:11). d. Turdaçcs, ca. 9 x 5 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:16, Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:6). e. Tell Azmak, ca. 12 cm in diameter (after Raduncheva 1973, Figure 64). f. Prag-Bubenec, ca. 9 cm high (after Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 200:e-1).

218

the data

figure 10.14 Painted and applied pottery from Southeast Europe:

a. Argissa Magula, ca. 4 x 4 cm (after Theocharis 1973, Pl. XVIII:1; MüllerKarpe 1968, Pl. 126:B3). b. Tell Azmak, ca. 16 x 8 cm (after Georgive 1965, Pl. 6:d). c. Kotacpart, ca. 17 x 9 cm (after Kalicz 1970, Pl. 10). d. Turdaçcs, ca. 6 x 9 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:2; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:3). e. Tiszavasvari, ca. 13.5 x 18 cm (after Kalicz 1970, Pl. 18). f. Turdaçcs, ca. 12 x 10 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:6; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:9).

219

neolithic southeast europe

figure 10.15 Painted and applied pottery from Southeast Europe:

a. Thessaly region, no scale published (after Theocharis 1973, Pl. XVIII:2). b. Szegvár-Tüzköves, ca. 10 x 11 cm (after Korek 1987, Figure 22). c. Dudeçcsti, no scale published (after Romanilor 1980, Figure 15). d. Hodoni, ca. 24.5 x 22.6 cm (after Gimbutas 1989, Figure 269).

220

the data

3. The upper part of a human figure represented frontally. One arm is raised in a diagonal line, the other turned downwards. The hands end in fingers. This is a rare example of the arms not being depicted symmetrically (Fig. 10.18:g; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:11; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:4). 4. The upper part of a human figure represented frontally, with diagonally extended legs. The arms are partly broken, but it is clear that they were raised diagonally (Fig. 10.12:a; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:14; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:7). 5. The upper part of a human figure shown frontally. The arms are raised, partly horizontally and partly vertically-diagonally, and end in fingers (Fig. 10.13:d; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:16; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:6). 6. A figure with an elongated, animallike head and downturned arms (Fig. 10.14:f; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:12; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:9). This arm position is only known from Europe. 7. The upper part of a human figure shown frontally. The arms are raised, partly horizontally and partly vertically-diagonally, and end in fingers (Fig. 10.10:e; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:9; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:18). 8. The lower part of a human figure. The legs are shown in a bent position, indicating a dynamic situation (Fig. 10.16:b; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:3; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:19). 9. The lower part of a human figure, with diagonally extended legs (Fig. 10.16:a; Nitu 1970, Fig. 5:5). 10. The upper part of a schematic human figure shown frontally. The preserved left arm is upraised, partly horizontally and partly vertically, and ends in fingers (Fig. 10.10:g; Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 190:8). 11. A humanlike figure shown frontally, with diagonally extended legs. The arms are turned downwards, partly horizontally and partly vertically, and end in fingers (Fig. 10.14:d; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:2; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:3). 12. The lower part of a human figure. Only one leg has been preserved, and it is shown in a bent position, indicating a dynamic situation (Fig. 10.16:d; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:10). 13. The upper part of a human figure shown frontally. Only one arm has been preserved, touching the head (Fig. 10.13:b; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:13; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:8). 14. The upper part of a very schematic human figure represented frontally, with diagonally extended arms (Fig. 10.12:b; Roska 1941, Fig. CXLI:15).

100. dudeçcs ti This site is located near Bucharest, Romania. A Criçcs-Starc˘evo settlement, dated to the mid-sixth millennium bc, yielded a sherd with an applied anthropomorphic figure. This is a female figure, as indicated by the breasts. She is portrayed with the arms bent downwards and with emphasized fingers. The head and legs are broken (Fig. 10.15:c;

221

Romanilor 1980:57, Fig. 15; Müller-Karpe 1968:470). A similar figure has been reported from Hodoni (below, Site 105, Fig. 10.15:d).

101. bereçcs ti

neolithic southeast europe

figure 10.16 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe:

This site is located in eastern Romania and is related to the Cucuteni a3 culture of the late fifth millennium bc. Excavators reported a fenestrated pottery stand, with five identical schematic anthropomorphic figures around its circumference. Dragomir presented this item with a comprehensive discussion of dancing figures (Fig. 10.6; Dragomir 1987, Fig. 1; Mantu 1993, Fig. 3:2). This object belongs to a specific typological category, designated “vessels of the reel type” (Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Figs. 1–3; Mantu 1993:131–132). They are cylindrical objects completely open at the top and bottom. These are either stands or high pedestal bowls, with a series of openings in the lower or middle parts of their bodies. The areas between the openings are identical to each other and vary in number, usually from four to six. They were designed in the shape of a schematic anthropomorphic torso and emphasized buttocks, as seen from the back

a. Turdaçcs, no scale published (after Nitu 1970, Figure 5:5). b. Turdaçcs, ca. 8.5 x 10 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:3; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:19). c. Nea Nikomedia, no scale published (after Nitu 1970, Figure 16:5). d. Turdaçcs, ca. 7 x 9 cm (after Roska 1941, Figure CXLI:10; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:19).

222

(Figs. 10.6–10.8). The heads, arms, and sometimes the legs are not portrayed. These items concentrate on the circle of dancers rather than on the specific individuals. Mantu (1993:131–132) offers additional discussion of the various interpretations suggested for this vessel type. Hereafter, the term “reel-type vessel” is used to describe these items.

102. slatina

the data

This site is located in southwestern Romania and is dated to the fifth millennium bc. An applied anthropomorphic figure is represented frontally on a rim fragment. The arms, which are small compared to the body, are bent downwards. The legs are straight and adjoin each other. The enlarged pelvis can be interpreted as a female gender characteristic (Fig. 10.17:a; Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 201:7).

103. va˘ dastra This site, which gave its name to the Va˘dastra culture, is located in southwest Romania, and dates to the early fifth millennium bc. Part of a pottery sherd bears the lower part of an anthropomorphic figure repre-

figure 10.17 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe:

a. b. c. d.

Slatina, no scale published (after Dumitrescu 1974, Figure 201:7). Va˘dastra, no scale published (after Dumitrescu 1974, Figure 201:6). Birlaleçcsti, ca. 21.5 x 20 cm (after Nitu 1968, Figure 3:1). Traian, ca. no scale published (after Dumitrescu 1974, Figure 232:1; Nitu 1970, Figure 10:1).

223

sented frontally. The enlarged pelvis can be interpreted as a female gender characteristic (Fig. 10.17:b; Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 201:6; MüllerKarpe 1968:474–475). A figure depicted in the same style has been discovered at Slatina (Fig. 10.17:a).

104. gumelniç ct a

neolithic southeast europe

This site is located in Romania and is dated to the late fifth millennium bc. A rim fragment discovered here depicts two human figures shown frontally, with their arms bent upwards. The figures were made by a combination of two techniques: applied plastic relief and delicate incisions (Fig. 10.2:b; Ionescu 1974; for a photograph, see Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 265).

105. hodoni This site is located in western Romania and is dated to the Tisza culture of the late fifth millennium bc. Excavators have published a few items with applied anthropomorphic figures: 1. A red painted sherd with anthropomorphic figures depicted frontally. This is a female figure standing with straight legs and arms bent downwards. A special coiffure or a mask projects from both sides of the head. Gimbutas interpreted this as a snake goddess (Fig. 10.15:d; Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 198; Gimbutas 1989:170, Fig. 269). 2. Another badly preserved item, not included in our drawings, is a sherd with a partly preserved human figure, including the head, torso, and the left arm. The arm is raised upwards, first horizontally and then vertically (Romanilor 1980, Fig. 66).

106. tîrpeç cs ti This site is located in Moldavia, Romania. In a Pre-Cucuteni III settlement, dated to the early fifth millennium bc, excavators reported dancing anthropomorphic figures of two different types: 1. The upper part of a schematic human figure depicted frontally. The preserved left arm is upraised, partly horizontally and then vertically. Two knobs were applied on either side of the torso, below the arms (Fig. 10.10:f; Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974b, Fig. 84:2; Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 232:2). The purpose of these knobs is not clear, but similar knobs in a similar location are found on an object from Tulintepe (Fig. 8.30:a). 2. Three fragments belong to the vessels of the reel-type category. The bestpreserved items of this category come from Bereçcsti and Frumuçcsica (Figs. 10.6–10.7). The items at Tîrpeçcsti are in the shape of female silhouettes viewed from the back. On one vessel, four such figures were originally molded, and the others bear six figures (Fig. 10.8:d–f; Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Figs. 1–3).

224

107. traian This site is located in Moldavia, Romania. In the Pre-Cucuteni settlement, dated to the early fifth millennium bc, excavators reported two objects of interest for our subject:

the data

1. A sherd with an applied high-relief female figure with raised hands. Like the figures of the reel-type vessels, it is depicted from the rear, with emphasized buttocks (Fig. 10.17:d; Nitu 1970, Fig. 10:1; Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 232:1; Müller-Karpe 1968:473). 2. A fragment of a fenestrated stand from a reel-type vessel. This item is reconstructed as depicting six identical anthropomorphic figures in relief around its circumference (Fig. 10.8:c; Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Fig. 4).

108. larga jijia This site is located in northeastern Moldavia, Romania. The PreCucuteni III settlement, dated to the early fifth millennium bc, has yielded a fragment of a fenestrated stand from a reel-type vessel. This item has been reconstructed as depicting six identical anthropomorphic figures in relief around its circumference (Fig. 10.8:a; Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Fig. 1:1a–b).

109. frumuçcs ica This site is located in Moldavia, Romania. A classical Cucuteni settlement, dated to the second half of the fifth millennium bc, has yielded a fenestrated stand from a reel-type vessel. This item, which is relatively well preserved, has been reconstructed as depicting six identical anthropomorphic figures in relief around its circumference (Fig. 10.7; Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Fig. 3:1a–b; for photographs, see Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 239; Romanilor 1980, Fig. 99; Gimbutas 1989, Fig. 492).

110. birlaleç cs ti This site is located in northern Moldavia, Romania, and is related to the classical Cucuteni culture of the second half of the fifth millennium bc. Excavators discovered a few objects decorated with applied human figures. The best-preserved object is shown here (Fig. 10.17:c; for a photograph, see Nitu 1970, Fig. 11:1; Nitu 1968, Fig. 3:1; Mantu 1993:129, Fig. 1:2–4). It depicts a stylized female figure with raised arms and joined legs. The upper part of the head spreads out to the right and left, and Mantu (1993:129) suggested that this is a goddess with a vessel on her head. However, this may represent an elaborate coiffure, as on the figures from Samarra and Tell Sabi Abyad (Figs. 8.3:f, 8.4). Like the figures from the reel-type vessels, it is shown from the rear with emphasized buttocks.

225

111. truçcs eç cs ti This site is located in northern Moldavia, Romania, and is related to the classical Cucuteni culture of the second half of the fifth millennium bc. Excavators published a few objects decorated with applied human figures:

neolithic southeast europe

1. A large vessel decorated with five anthropomorphic figures. Each of these figures is a combination of two humans, one the right way up and the other upside down, with a shared body. This combination seems to represent a couples dance, with a circle of five couples around the vessel (Fig. 10.4:b; Petrescu-Dimbovita 1963, Fig. 10a–b; Dumitrescu 1974, Fig. 234; Müller-Karpe 1968:473–474). 2. An object described as a potsherd with a relief portraying a figure with upraised arms and outspread legs flanking a triangular protuberance. Gimbutas designated this figure a bee goddess (Fig. 10.11:d; Gimbutas 1982:184, 279, Fig. 144). However, the protuberance is the male sex organ and is commonly found on applied human figures over a large geographical area: the Levant, Anatolia, and southeast Europe (Fig. 2.13). 3. An anthropomorphic figure depicted frontally, similar to the abovementioned object. The arms turn upwards, partly horizontally and then vertically. The legs turn downwards in a mirror image, with an elongated protrusion between them (Fig. 10.11:e; Nitu 1968, Fig. 1:1).

112. ghelaesti This site is located in northeastern Romania and related to the Cucuteni A culture of the second half of the fifth millennium bc. A fragment of a big pithos was discovered here, bearing plastic decoration of a schematic anthropomorphic figure. The figure is shown frontally, in a dynamic posture with raised bent arms and bent legs. The male organ is represented by a protuberance between the legs (Fig. 10.11:f; Nitu 1971).

113. scinteia This site is located in Moldavia, Romania, and is dated to the Cucuteni phase a2–3 culture of the late fifth millennium bc. Excavators published a few sherds with applied human figures: 1. Two small sherds, each decorated with one applied human figure. The better-preserved item is shown here. Mantu described it as follows: “The image of a feminine silhouette, with raised arms and the legs in a crammed position.” However, like many other figures, the protrusion between the legs seems to suggest the male sex organ (Fig. 10.11:b; Mantu 1992:114, Fig. 1:1–2). 2. A large pithos with two applied human figures. Mantu described the composition as follows: “Those two human representations were moulded at the level of the second row of lugs. The central, feminine repre-

226

the data

sentation is bigger, and the masculine one is a little smaller. The manner of moulding of those two anthropomorphous silhouettes denotes realism. . . . The masculine personage presents more anatomical and decorative details. He wears a scarf with three incisions round the neck, and above the hips he has a belt with zigzag incisions. Those two anthropomorphous representations on the pithos of Scinteia offer a new hypothesis of the plastic representations in relief from Cucuteni culture. On the vessel are represented for the first time clearly two personages seen frontally—the great goddess and her acolyte or the divine couple: ‘hieros gamos’” (Fig. 10.3:b; Mantu 1992:315).

However, it is quite possible that, like so many other examples, the figures on this vessel represent a circle of dancing figures. What is unusual in this case is the combination of both male and female figures, which is found only rarely (Fig. 2.17). For a similar representation of female and male figures, see the assemblage of twelve figurines, six female and six male, from Dumesti. These were buried together inside one jar and have been interpreted as representing a cultic dance (MaximAlaiba 1987, Figs. 1–12).

114. dumesti This site is located in Moldavia, Romania. It is related to the Cucuteni a3 culture and dated to the late fifth millennium bc. Excavators discovered a fragment of a large pithos here, bearing a plastic decoration of two human figures depicted frontally. The publication consists of a very dark photograph, so the details are unclear. The figure on the left is shown from the rear, with raised arms, straight legs, and a prominent rounded pelvis. The figure on the right is depicted frontally, with arms bent at right angles upwards and legs bent at right angles downwards. The torso does not vary in width. These figures have been interpreted as two goddesses, one of them in a birth-giving position (Fig. 10.3:a; Maxim-Alaiba 1987:270). However, the dynamic postures of these figures indicate that they are dancing. In addition, the differences between the figures can be understood as gender related: a female with a prominent rounded pelvis and a male with a relatively narrow torso. Another pithos with both a male and a female has been reported from Scinteia, a Cucuteni a3 site in Moldavia (Fig. 10.3:b; Mantu 1993, Figs. 2–3). Three more points in this composition need attention: (1) The figures are placed very close to each other; (2) no other figures are depicted immediately to their right or left; (3) one figure is represented frontally and the other from the rear. Is it possible that they are performing a couples dance? In addition to this pithos, an assemblage of twelve figurines was found at Dumesti, buried inside a jar. Six of the figurines are females, and the other six are males. They are depicted in dynamic postures, and

227

Maxim-Alaiba (1987:270) interpreted them as dancing figures. It is interesting to see that the shape of these female figurines is similar to the female figure on the pithos from Scinteia and that the shape of these male figurines resembles that of the male figure on the same pithos (Fig. 10.3:b).

115. luka-vrublevetskaya

neolithic southeast europe

This site is located in the upper Dniester basin, in the Ukraine. It is dated to the Pre-Cucuteni III culture of the early fifth millennium bc. Excavators reported a fenestrated high-pedestaled bowl from a reel-type vessel. Four identical anthropomorphic figures, depicting only the torso, are located around the object’s circumference (Fig. 10.8:b; Nitu 1970, Fig. 14:1; Marinescu-Bîlcu 1974a, Fig. 5:1).

116. tiszavasvari This site is located in eastern Hungary. A sherd of a large vessel with an applied human figure, of the Alfold Linear Pottery culture, has been dated to the early fifth millennium bc. The human figure is shown frontally, with the arms bent downwards, partly horizontally and then vertically (Fig. 10.14:e; Kalicz 1970, Pl. 18; Kalicz and Makkay 1977, Fig. 186:21, Pl. 83:4b).

117. kotacpart This site is located in southeastern Hungary and has been related to the Koros culture and dated to the late sixth millennium bc. Excavators reported a few objects decorated with human figures: 1. A sherd from a large vessel with an applied human figure shown frontally, its arms bent downwards, partly horizontally and then vertically. It has occasionally been published upside down, but the position suggested by Gulder and Kalicz is adopted here. Gimbutas described the figure as a bee goddess (Fig. 10.14:c; Müller-Karpe 1968:477, Pl. 183:a4; Gimbutas 1982:189, Fig. 180; Gulder 1960–62, Fig. 41:2; Kalicz 1970, Pl. 10). 2. A sherd with the upper part of an applied anthropomorphic figure. The head, which is animallike, is represented in profile and facing right, thus indicating a counter-clockwise movement around the vessel. The rest of the body is depicted frontally, with arms raised first horizontally and then vertically, ending in fingers (Fig. 10.12:c; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 183:a6).

118. villanykovesd This site is located in northeastern Hungary. A rim fragment sherd of the Lengyel culture, dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc, is decorated with an applied human figure. The arms are bent upwards and the legs downwards. As on many other objects, a protrusion between the legs seems to represent the male organ. The publication of this item included

228

the note that “this is evidence for the fact that male gods were worshipped in the Lengyel culture” (Fig. 10.11:a; Kalicz 1970, Pl. 52; Titov 1980, Fig. 245:1).

119. borsod

the data

This site is located in northern Hungary. An engraved pottery sherd with human figures has been related to the Bukk culture, dated to the early sixth millennium bc. The arms are bent upwards at right angles and the legs bent downwards at right angles. Kalicz commented, “The strange positioning of the legs suggests the figure is seated.” Gimbutas described this as a schematized birth-giving goddess. However, this body position appears in many other examples presented in this work, and in all of them, it has been analyzed as the expression of a dynamic dance, not birth or a static sitting posture (Fig. 10.13:c; Gulder 1960-1962, Fig. 39:11; Kalicz 1970:33, Pl. 19; Kalicz and Makkay 1977, Fig. 186:24, Pl. 107:2; Gimbutas 1982:177, Fig. 130).

120. szegvár-tüzköves This site is located in southeast Hungary. A late Neolithic context, dating from the late fifth millennium bc, has yielded two objects with dancing figures: 1. A pottery sherd with applied decoration of two identical human figures depicted frontally, with raised arms. The lower part of the bodies has not been preserved (Fig. 10.2:a; Korek 1987). 2. A painted pottery sherd showing the upper part of a human figure, depicted frontally, with the arms bent downwards (Fig. 10.15:b).

121. szajol-felsofold This site is located in southeast Hungary. Excavators reported a complete pithos of the Starc˘evo culture, dated to the second half of the sixth millennium bc. Two identical human figures were applied to the vessel on both sides. The figures are displayed with one arm bent upwards and the other downwards. The dynamic posture of the human body and the existence of two such figures seem to represent a circle of dancing figures (Fig. 10.4:a; Gimbutas 1989, Fig. 27).

122. hagykoru This site is located in Hungary, but its exact location is not specified in the publication at my disposal. It is related to the Criçcs culture of the late sixth millennium bc. An applied human figure on a pottery sherd is depicted in an extremely dynamic position. The left hand is bent upwards, partly horizontally and then vertically. The right arm is bent downwards, partly horizontally and then vertically. The legs are bent upwards, with the feet raised higher than the knees. This is an excep-

229

neolithic southeast europe

figure 10.18 Applied pottery from Southeast Europe:

a. b. c. d. e. f. g.

Tell Azmak, ca. 20 x 17 cm (after Raduncheva 1973, Figure 65). Tell Azmak, no scale published (after Gimbutas 1989, Figure 28:2). Tell Azmak, no scale published (after Gimbutas 1989, Figure 28:1). Hagykoru, no scale published (after Titov 1980:102, Figure 50) Vinc˘a, no scale published (after Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 144:1). Szentes-Jaksorpart, ca. 9 x 7 cm (after Gulder 1960–1962, Figure 41:1). Turdaçcs, ca. 5 x 5 cm (after Dumitrescu 1974, Figure 190:6; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 181:4).

230

tional body posture that does not appear on any other objects in the assemblage (Fig. 10.18:d; Titov 1980:102, Pl. 50).

123. szentes-jaksorpart This site lies in Hungary. Excavators reported a rim fragment with an applied human figure here. The figure appears with one arm upraised, partly horizontally and then vertically. The other arm turns downwards, first horizontally and then vertically (Fig. 10.18:f; Gulder 1960–1962, Fig. 41:1; Müller-Karpe 1968, Pl. 183:B1). the data

124. strelice This site is located in Moravia, the Czech Republic. It is related to the Lengyel culture and dated to the mid-fifth millennium bc. Excavators found a complete jar with elaborate decoration here (Fig. 10.5:a; MüllerKarpe 1968:487, Pl. 207:16; Gimbutas 1989:309). The decoration was done in various techniques: black paint and burnish, applied elements and puncturing. From top to bottom, the following elements are found in symmetrical order around the object: four applied dogs near the rim, four large human figures with V-shaped arms represented frontally, four lozenges with double spirals, and four applied feet. The decoration on the jar is rich in iconography, but the four human figures are much larger than the rest and dominate the composition. This object is one of the best-preserved examples of the dancing scenes that are so common in southeast Europe.

125. kolesovice This site is located in Bohemia, the Czech Republic. An anthropomorphic figure incised on the base of a dish is related to the early Lengyel culture of the early sixth millennium bc. The figure is shown frontally, with the head facing left. The arms are bent upwards and end in fingers. The legs are bent downwards and end in toes. A rounded feature appears on the central part of the torso. Gimbutas understood the feature as a sign of pregnancy, and so she described the figure as a birth-giving goddess in the shape of a toad (Fig. 10.9:c; Müller-Karpe 1968:484, Pl. 196:a; Gimbutas 1982:177, Fig. 131). However, similar rounded features have been reported from two other southeastern European sites: Grades˘nitsa and Nova Ves (Fig. 10.9:a–b). In these two examples a protrusion between the legs indicates male gender. Thus this figure, to judge from its dynamic posture, is probably another example of a dancing figure.

126. litomerice This site is located in Bohemia, the Czech Republic. A decorated bowl is related to the Lengyel culture and dated to the first half of the fifth millennium bc. It is decorated in a puncture technique with abstract an-

231

thropomorphic figures, with arms upraised diagonally and legs extending diagonally. Three such identical figures appear in a row on the object (Fig. 10.5:b; Pleiner 1978:228–229, Fig. 54:1).

127. nova ves

neolithic southeast europe

This site is located in Bohemia, the Czech Republic. An engraved anthropomorphic figure is shown frontally, with the arms bent downwards and ending in fingers. The legs extend downwards diagonally and end in toes. A protrusion between the legs is probably the male organ (Fig. 10.9:b; Müller-Karpe 1968:485, Pl. 200:E2). The rounded feature on the torso is similar to other such depictions from southeast Europe (Fig. 10.9:a, c).

128. prag-bubenec This site is located in Bohemia, the Czech Republic. A schematic anthropomorphic figure is engraved on a jar. It is shown frontally, with the arms bent upwards. The legs are bent downwards, but the knees rise higher than the pelvis (Fig. 10.13:f; Müller-Karpe 1968:486, Pl. 200:E1).

129. holasovice This site is located in former Czechoslovakia, but its exact location was not specified in the publication at my disposal. It is related to the Linear Danubian culture and dated to the fifth millennium bc. Excavators reported a pottery sherd with an applied schematic anthropomorphic figure here. The figure is composed of an elongated vertical central line, with two raised bent arms and diagonal legs. Gimbutas described it as a bee goddess (Fig. 10.11:c; Gimbutas 1982:184, 279, Fig. 143).

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Predynastic Egypt

chapter 11

The major works on the dance of ancient Egypt tend to deal with the historical periods, only after the rise of the Pharaonic state around 3100 bc (Brunner-Traut 1958, 1985; Wild 1963; Saleh 1998). For Predynastic Egypt, dated to the fifth and fourth millennia bc, no systematic research on its dance has been carried out (Kantor 1992). However, as we shall see in this chapter, the evolution of symbolic expression in Egypt is quite similar to that of the other geographical areas described above, and dance was the major artistic motif at the beginning of agriculture. Dancing figures from twelve sites in the Nile Valley and six sites in the Eastern Egyptian Desert are presented here (Fig. 11.1). All of them are located in Upper Egypt. In addition, numerous Egyptian vessels were bought from antiquities dealers and are of unknown origin. These are included in the figures or photographs but without further description. Most of the Egyptian depictions are on pottery vessels, decorated by paint, applied plastic relief, or incisions. Another group of dancing scenes is known from rock carvings. In addition, there is one example each of a linen shroud, a clay model, and a wall painting. Stylistic Analysis

Four stylistic and chronological stages can be recognized in the evolution of the dancing scenes in Predynastic Egypt: 1. Depicting the dance motif on pottery vessels by plastic application or incisions (Badarian and early Naqada I phases). The earliest known examples have been reported from the Badarian phase of Predynastic Egypt, of the fifth millennium bc (Figs. 11.2, 11.3:a–b, d). This date is much later than the earliest dancing scenes from the Near East or southeast Europe. Nevertheless, like in these regions, the earliest depictions were applied or incised and not painted. Already at this early stage a typical body gesture was formulated for the expression of dancing: the arms are lifted upwards with incurving hands in a very non-utilitarian pose. This gesture is typical of ritual in Predynastic Egypt and is found on many clay female figurines (Kantor 1944, Fig. 6; Murray 1956:92; Ucko 1968, Egyptian figurines 72–73, Figs. 47–48; Needler 1984:205–206, 336–341; Crowfoot Payne 1993, Fig. 7). It is well known through the

figure 11.1 Predynastic Egyptian sites mentioned in the text.

235

Predynastic Egypt

figure 11.2 Applied and painted Egyptian pottery from Naqada. Courtesy of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Item 1895.1220).

various phases of Predynastic Egypt: the Badarian, Naqada I, Naqada II, and Naqada III. A number of scholars have suggested that this arms pose imitates bovine horns and that the female figure represents the goddess Hathor (Murray 1956:92; Baumgartel 1960:144–146; Crowfoot Payne 1993:34). 2. Painted pottery vessels in the white cross-lined style (Naqada I phase of the early fourth millennium bc). Three examples are known, representing a coherent style and iconography (Figs. 11.3:e, 11.4-11.6). These scenes have been understood as depicting either warfare or dance. The warfare interpretation is very problematic, as it is deduced from later Pharaonic iconography and does not take into account the objects’ Predynastic setting (Garfinkel 2001b). War scenes are important components of ancient Near Eastern art, from the end of the fourth millennium bc onward. This motif characterizes urban societies with a strong centralized government. They appear in both Egypt (Quibell and Green 1902, Pl. LXXVI; Yadin 1963:116, 124) and Mesopotamia (Amiet 1980, Figs. 659–661). The warfare scenes are characterized by three basic iconographic elements: weapons (bow, spear, mace, dagger); aggressive body gestures (usually with the hand holding a weapon); and a defeated group (the enemy is described in a helpless situation: dead, tied, or begging for mercy). The scenes painted in the white cross-lined style do not, however, depict any weapons, any aggressive body gestures, or any figure in a helpless situation. Thus they are more likely representing scenes of dance. 3. Dancing and landscape (Naqada II phase). Towards the mid-fourth millennium bc the dancing motif reached its peak in Predynastic art, and a relatively large number of elaborate painted vessels is known, as well as incised rock drawings of the Eastern Egyptian Desert. In this phase the motif has been integrated into the Egyptian landscape. Dancing is now associated either with a Nilotic landscape (boats and aquatic fauna) or less frequently with a desert environment. The boats are portrayed with twenty to thirty oars, two cabins, a standard, and a branch. In early research, some scholars considered these scenes to be fortified villages (see, for example, Read 1917). The scene is dominated by a tall female figure represented with uplifted arms and incurving hands. These scenes have been recognized long ago as dancing scenes (Capart 1905:119; Petrie 1909:57, Fig. 66; Lexová 1935; Vandier 1952:349–355; Baumgartel 1960:144–146). 4. The decline of the dancing motif (Naqada III phase). By the second half of the fourth millennium bc the dancing scenes lost their importance and became a rare subject in Egyptian iconography. This situation is best demonstrated on the famous Hierakonpolis wall painting (partly shown in Fig. 11.27:c). Various subjects are depicted on this wall, including five boats, dancing, fighting, and animal hunting. Dancing is by no means the center of the representation, but there is a faint echo of its important role in the symbolic expression of Predynastic Egypt.

236

figure 11.3 Egyptian pottery decorated by plastic applications, incisions and paint:

a. Mostagedda, ca. 15 x 15 cm (after Brunton 1937, Pls. XVIII:41, XIV:802). b. Naqada, 42 cm high (after Crowfoot Payne 1993, Figure 22:105). c. Umm el Qaab, 20 cm high (after Dreyer et al. 1998, Figure 12:4). d. Matmar, 11 cm high (after Brunton 1948, Pl. XXII:1). e. Unknown provenance, ca. 33 cm high (after Petrie 1921, Pl. XXV:100).

237

Predynastic Egypt

a

figure 11.4 Egyptian painted pottery, unknown origin: a. © The Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, University College London uc15339. b–d. Umm el Qaab, Abydos. Courtesy Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Cairo.

c

b

d

238

The D ata

figure 11.5 Egyptian painted pottery of unknown origin from the collection of the Institut Royal du Patrimoine Artistique. © IRPA-KIK, Brussels (Item e.3002).

a

b

c

d

239

Predynastic Egypt

figure 11.6 Egyptian painted pottery: a. Umm el Qaab, 20 cm high (after Dreyer et al. 1998, Figure 13). b. Unknown provenance, 29 cm high (after Baumgartel 1947, Figure 14).

The representation of the dance in Predynastic Egypt is quite different in various aspects from the other geographical regions dealt with here: 1. In most of the cases, the dancing figures in a given scene are not identical to each other, and a difference of sex, and sometimes age, can be suggested. 2. In the Naqada II phase, dancing is part of the surrounding landscape. This includes, in many cases, a Nilotic environment with boats and aquatic fauna, in which the dance took place. The dancing figures are a relatively small component of the scenes. 3. Mainly complete vessels are known and not broken sherds. That is due to the special nature of archaeological research in Predynastic Egypt, which concentrates more on excavation of cemeteries and less on systematic investigations of settlement sites. 4. A large number of objects come from the antiquities market. This is the result of the intensive plundering of Egyptian Predynastic cemeteries.

240

The Assemblage

130. mostagedda

The D ata

This site is located in Upper Egypt, near Badari on the east bank of the Nile near the modern city of Asyut (Bard 1999:161–164). An anthropomorphic figure applied to the interior of a bowl has been related to the Badarian culture of the second half of the fifth millennium bc (Fig. 11.2:a; Brunton 1937, Pls. XIV:802, XVIII:41). This is one of those rare examples in which the decoration was applied to the interior of a vessel, like the location of painted figures in the Halafian and Samarra linear style. The figure is depicted frontally, with the arms turned upwards, first horizontally at shoulder level and then vertically. The lower part of the body is composed of what looks like three legs. Based on later artistic depictions, Kaplan suggested that this represents a human figure wearing an animal skin (Kaplan 1969:18). Ben-Tor suggested the same interpretation for other three-legged figures, from a later period (Ben-Tor 1978:85).

131. matmar This site is located in Upper Egypt, near Badari on the east bank of the Nile near the modern city of Asyut (Bard 1999:161–164). It is dated to the Badarian culture of the fifth millennium bc. An anthropomorphic figure incised on a pottery vessel, after the firing, has been reported from Grave 2617 (Fig. 11.2:d; Brunton 1948, Pl. XXII:1). The schematic figure is presented frontally, with the arms lifted upwards and ending in fingers. The legs are depicted extending diagonally.

132. naqada The Naqada region is on the west bank of the Nile midway between Luxor and Dendera (Bard 1999:555–557). Petrie and Quibell excavated a few thousand graves here during the 1890s. Objects from various stages of Predynastic Egypt have been found. They are presented here in chronological order, from the early to the late. 1. A tall beaker from Grave 1449 with burnished red slip on its body and burnished black slip near the rim (black-topped ware), probably dated to the Naqada I phase of the early fourth millennium bc. It depicts an applied female figure, which Crowfoot Payne described as “human face with horns of bovid and arms holding breasts” (Fig. 11.2; Crowfoot Payne 1993, No. 105). However, the so-called horns are attached to the shoulders of the figure, not the top of the head; thus they represent the arms. Another set of arms(?) seems to appear on the vessel, with the hands resting on the figure’s breasts. These are not related to any specific figure. In the context of Predynastic Egypt this figure is depicted in the most typical female gesture representation that is well known from numerous clay figurines and painted pottery vessels.

241

Predynastic Egypt

figure 11.7 Painted pottery from Naqada. Courtesy of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Item 1895.584).

2. A jar from Grave 454 painted with a boat scene in the typical style of the Naqada II phase (Figs. 11.7, 11.9:d; Petrie and Quibell 1896, Pl. LXVII:14; Crowfoot Payne 1993, No. 865). The scene includes two boats, numerous water birds, a palm tree, animal skins, hills, and two dancing female figures. The figures are not associated with the boats, as usually depicted in Nilotic scene, but are represented on each side of the palm tree. The figures are identical to each other in size and body gesture: both are presented frontally, with the arms lifted upwards and the hands turned inwards, as though touching the head. The feet are facing left, maybe indicating a clockwise direction of movement around the tree. 3. A painted jar with dancing figures, discovered in Tomb 60, dated to the Naqada II phase (Figs. 11.8, 11.9:c; Petrie and Quibell 1896, Pl. XXXV:77; Petrie 1920, Pl. XXXVII:77; Baumgartel 1970:80; Crowfoot Payne 1993:112, No. 916). Petrie published a complete jar, but later, only a few fragments of it could be found at the Ashmolean Museum. The jar was standing upside down when it was drawn. Petrie described the scene briefly as “a row of men, painted with their arms raised up” (Petrie 1920:21). From the drawing it seems that six identical human figures encircled the jar. They are depicted in profile, on top of schematic boats, moving clockwise. Their arms are raised as high as possible, and they are

242

not touching one another. Their legs are extended diagonally, representing a walking posture. The sex organs clearly indicate that these are male figures. The heads, as published by Petrie, seem rather schematic, but were described in detail by Baumgartel. One is the head of a bird fixed to a long, curved neck, the other that of a feline, or perhaps a monkey. Since I cannot recognize with certainty any of the animal-headed gods of Egypt in these figures, I call them demons for want of a better expression. . . . It has been suggested to me that these are men wearing masks; this can neither be proven nor disproved (Baumgartel 1947:80).

The D ata

figure 11.8 Painted pottery from Naqada. Courtesy of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Item 1895.819).

However, Baumgartel did not explain why she preferred the demon explanation, which is equally impossible to prove or disprove. Crowfoot Payne described the scene as a “procession of men with arms raised, probably wearing masks, of which one bird and one animal remain” (1993:112). The interpretation of the masked men is adopted here, since masked dances are a common feature in ethnographic observations (Sachs 1952:131–138; Napier 1987). Furthermore, masks are now known from various Neolithic and Chalcolithic contexts, as discussed above in the section on dance decoration. Recently, in the excavations of the Predynastic cemetery in Hierakonpolis, two clay masks were found (Adams 1999:31).

a

b

243

Predynastic Egypt

figure 11.9 Egyptian painted pottery vessels:

a. Abadiyeh, ca. 10.5 cm (after Petrie 1901, Pl. XX:11; Crowfoot Payne 1993, Figure 43:867). b. Hemamieh, ca. 5 x 5 cm (after Brunton and Caton-Thompson 1928, Pl. LXX:6). c. Naqada, 18 cm high (after Petrie 1921, Pl. XXXVII:77; Crowfoot Payne 1993, Figure 48:916). d. Naqada, 25 cm high (after Petrie and Quibell 1896, Pl. LXVII:14; Crowfoot Payne 1993, Figure 42:865).

244

The D ata

figure 11.10 Incised pottery from Naqada. Courtesy of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Item 1895.683).

The depiction from Naqada bears some similarities to the scenes from ‘Ein el-Jarba and Tall-i Jari A (Figs. 8.29:b, 9.29:d). All three objects were found in graves. All depict naked men. The figures encircle the vessels in a clockwise movement. This is a rare direction in the dancing scenes. The ‘Ein el-Jarba and Naqada figures have nonhuman heads, indicating the use of masks. 4. A jar from Tomb 1906, dated to the Naqada III phase (Figs. 11.10, 11.27:a; Petrie and Quibell 1896, Pl. LI:1; Amiran 1972, Pl. 16; Crowfoot Payne 1993, No. 673). A single human figure was engraved near the rim of a large jar. It is described by Crowfoot Payne as an incised potmark, a term she uses to indicate incisions made on clay vessels after firing (1993:79). The figure is depicted with the head facing left and the shoulders frontal.

245

The arms are bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically, and end in five emphasized fingers. The lower part of the body is rather schematic, combining the torso with the upper legs. The lower legs are bent backwards, and end in feet. The figure is facing left in a clockwise movement. The position of the arms as well as the bent legs indicates a dynamic dancing posture.

133. umm el qaab, abydos Predynastic Egypt

Umm el Qaab is one of the Predynastic cemeteries in the vicinity of Abydos (Bard 1999:109–114). Recent excavations at Cemetery U unearthed two vessels decorated with dancing scenes, dated to the Naqada I phase of the early fourth millennium bc: 1. A deep bowl from Grave U-502, decorated with eight applied female figurines attached to the top of the rim and raised considerably above the vessel (Fig. 11.2:c; Dreyer et al. 1998, Fig. 12:4, Pl. 6:c). The figures are facing inside, holding each other’s hand and creating a circle. This is one of the rare cases in Predynastic Egypt in which female figures are not represented with the arms lifted upwards. 2. A tall beaker from Grave U-239 (Figs. 11.4:b–d, 11.6:a; Dreyer et al. 1998:112–114, Figs. 12:1, 13, Pl. 6:d–f ). The vessel is covered with black slip on which a scene is depicted with white paint. The scene was interpreted as presenting a conflict, warfare between two groups. The depiction on this vessel is one of the most sophisticated scenes preserved from the ancient Near East, and it also sheds light on two other similar objects: one is now in London, and the other is in Brussels. (Figs. 11.3:e, 11.6:b). Thus a longer description and structural analysis is in order here, and I have already devoted a special study to this object (Garfinkel 2001b).

On the vessel seventeen anthropomorphic images were arranged in two rows: twelve in the upper row below the rim, and five (the left one is depicted only with schematic torso and two legs) in the lower row near the base. The images in the upper row occupy the entire perimeter of the vessel, creating a circle. The images are represented in a standing position, in profile, facing right. This creates a counter-clockwise circular movement around the vessel. The images in the upper row are bigger and are portrayed in a more realistic way, while those in the lower row are smaller and depicted more schematically. As the images in the upper row were portrayed in relatively more realistic fashion than the images in the lower row, I will start the analysis from the upper row. The twelve images in the upper row are arranged in four groups, each composed of one tall and two small images. Various differences can be seen between the tall and the small anthropomorphic figures:

246

The D ata

1. Only the four tall images have hornlike elements protruding from their heads. These can be understood as horns or hairdos (cf. Fig. 11.6:b). 2. Each one of the four tall images is represented with both hands, while the hands of the small images are not always depicted. 3. The four tall figures are dressed in a loincloth, a beltlike element with additions falling behind. The small figures are presented without any indication of clothing. 4. The four tall images in the upper row have an emphasized belly. It is possible to understand this element as a female gender characteristic (perhaps pregnancy?). The small figures, on the other hand, have no emphasized bellies, but some of them bear a protruding male sex organ. 5. The four tall figures are represented with their legs apart. Since the figures are represented in profile, this point can be taken as indication of a dynamic body gesture or movement and not a stable standing position. 6. The four tall images display their feet. The feet are facing right, indicating the direction of movement. The faces, the standards, and the clothing also indicate that the persons are facing right. 7. The four tall images are at least twice as tall as the small images.

It seems that two, somewhat similar, groups can be recognized in the lower row. The scene seems to represent a hierarchical order of three levels: The Leading Person. This figure in the group at the far upper right in Figure 11.6:a is represented with its two arms lifted up, the hands folded inward, with a clear indication of the fingers. This body gesture is well known in Predynastic Egypt and appears on a number of clay figurines and on painted jars, as already discussed above. The Other Tall Persons. These figures have an impressive appearance, with an elaborated head decoration, a standard, and clothing. Eleven Small Figures. Most of them are in pairs around one of the tall figures. In many cases they hold hands with each other and one of them holds hands with a tall figure.

How should one explain the outstanding differences in height of the various images? It represents either two age groups or the greater importance of the larger figures, who were thus depicted bigger, while the other figures are less important and thus represented smaller in size. It seems to me that the differences in the depiction of the images in our case are best explained as both: age and importance. When gender is introduced into this hierarchy, the tall, elaborately dressed figures are females, while the small, naked images are male. Thus we have a scene involving adult women and young boys. The last observation of the Umm el Qaab scene is related to the possibility that it is an attempt to represent a sequence of movement. The composition of three images, one tall and two small, repeated four times

247

Predynastic Egypt

in the upper row, may represent a sequence of events, which were all performed by the same three individuals. From right to left in Figure 11.6:a, we can see the following performance: a. The woman lifts her arms upwards. The two boys stand nearby, each by himself. b. The woman is holding a standard in her left hand. In the same hand she is holding the right hand of a boy. That boy holds the other boy by his right hand. In this case the three figures are standing in a row, with the woman at the right side. c. The woman is holding a standard in her right hand. In the left hand she is holding the right hand of a boy. That boy holds the other boy by the hand. In this case the three figures are standing in a row, with the woman at the left side. d. The woman is holding a standard, with a tripod base, in her right hand. In her left hand she is holding the right hand of a boy. That boy holds the other boy by the hand. As in the previous situation, the three figures are standing in a row, with the woman at the left side.

If this interpretation is correct, this is the only attempt to present choreography in our data.

134. items of the naqada i phase of unknown origin Two items of unknown origin are presented here; one is now in Brussels, and the other is in London.

The Brussels vessel This is a tall beaker from the collections of the Institut Royal du Patrimoine Artistique at Brussels. It was bought in Luxor in Upper Egypt in the year 1909 but was published only twenty years later (Figs. 11.5, 11.6:b; Scharff 1928:268–269, Pl. XXVIII; Hendrickx 1996, 1998, Figs. 5–6). The shape and the style of decoration date it to the Naqada I phase of Predynastic Egypt. In the first publication no explanation was suggested for the scene, but all the figures have been understood as males. In 1947 the scene was drawn and systematically analyzed by Baumgartel, who understood it as two tall men and six shorter women dancing together. Another detailed study of this object suggests that it depicts a victory scene. Williams suggested a new graphic arrangement for the scenes (Williams 1988:47–51, 93). Further discussion of this object, as well as a new drawing, has been published by Hendrickx (1996, 1998). Since its publication, this scene has been a subject of debate regarding a variety of aspects:

248

The D ata

1. The depicted subject—fighting (Williams 1988; Hendrickx 1996) or dancing (Baumgartel 1947:64–65; Vandier 1952:287; Garfinkel 1998, 2001b). 2. The gender of the various figures. There are not many depictions from the protohistoric Near East that have raised so many different opinions concerning the gender of the figures. The following have been suggested concerning the elongated element in the pelvis area of the tall figures: male organ or phallus-sheath (Petrie 1920; Scharff 1928; Baumgartel 1947) or a mace hanging behind the waist (Williams 1988); the element has also been ignored when the figure has been understood as a female. Now, based on the new scene just discussed from Umm el Qaab, it seems to be a loincloth. 3. The graphic presentation. Based on the object from Umm el Qaab, which depicts the same ceremony but with more information, a better graphic presentation of the scene can be offered. In order to draw the threedimensional jar on two-dimensional paper, we need to discuss where to break the circle. It seems to me that the structural analysis employed above for the Umm el Qaab vessel should be applied to this object as well. Thus the scene is composed of two basic units: a tall figure accompanied by two short figures and another tall figure accompanied by four short figures. The previous drawings (Baumgartel 1947, Fig. 14; Williams 1988, Fig. 35) distorted the first unit by splitting its components into two. In Figure 11.6:b the scene is placed in accordance with the new suggested structure. Now we can see that the components of each unit are placed together. A tall figure with upraised arms appears at the beginning, leading the group in a counterclockwise movement around the vessel. The two additional objects in the scene, the tree and the object hanging from above (whose significance I fail to comprehend), are located between the two units and serve as a divider.

The London vessel This is a tall beaker from the collections of Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, University College London (Figs. 11.3:e, 11.4:a; Petrie 1909:55, Fig. 65). It was bought on the antiquities market and is dated to the Naqada I phase, based on its shape and style of decoration, the white cross-lined ware. Petrie described the scene painted on it (1920:16) as a combat of long- and short-haired men. The long-haired man is probably of the usual prehistoric people, wearing the sheath, and having the long hair as often actually found on the bodies. He is successfully attacking the short-haired man, who wears a hanging appendage, perhaps a dagger-sheath. Neither figure seems to have any other clothing.

However, nothing that characterizes warfare scenes is depicted here: no weapons, no aggressive body gestures, and no defeated enemy. On the other hand, the tall figure is represented in the typical Egyptian dancing scene.

249

Since its early publication, this object has been understood as depicting either fighting (Petrie 1909, 1920; Galassi 1955:45; Williams 1988; Hendrickx 1996) or dancing (Baumgartel 1947:64–65; Vandier 1952:287; Murray 1956:92; Garfinkel 1998). This object belongs to the same group as the two objects discussed above, those from Umm el Qaab and Brussels. Thus it depicts the same dancing ceremony, conducted by a tall female figure with upraised arms, accompanied by a young boy. In this case the performance took place near freestanding branches, like those depicted on a jar from Bab edh-Dhra’ (Fig. 12.10).

Predynastic

135. el ‘amrah

Egypt

This is a Predynastic cemetery situated on the west bank of the Nile, 8 kiometers south of Abydos (Bard 1999:104–106). One of the first scientifically excavated examples of a dancing scene was published at the beginning of the twentieth century (Figs. 11.11, 11.12:b; Randall-MacIver and Mace 1902; Lexovà 1935; Baumgartel 1960, Pl. XIII:4–5; Aksamit 1992, Fig. 1; J. A. Spencer 1993, Fig. 22). This object is now in the collection of the British Museum. Randall-MacIver and Mace offer only a brief comment on the vessel: “In the present case the persons depicted seem to be dancing and playing the castanets.” If we understand the short sticks held by one of the figures as castanets, also known on other Egyptian vessels (Figs. 11.15:d, 11.16), these will be the only examples of musical instruments that accompany the dancing performance in any of the scenes discussed in this study. A detailed description of the El ‘Amrah scene was published by Baumgartel (1960:145): The vase has two boats, one carrying the standard with the two concentric curved objects which I take to be the horns and arms of the cowgoddess, and above, a group of two men and a woman. The figure in the middle is an ithyphallic man with curly hair and two feathers or twigs stuck in it. He has a pair of castanets in one hand. On his right a woman dances the cow-dance with her arms raised and her hands nearly touching her head; on his left is a smaller man, also with castanets. The woman is the tallest figure and has a huge, perfectly round head. On the other boat, which carries the standard of the mountains, the same woman with a small man who lays a hand on her shoulder stands on one cabin, and on the second cabin of this boat another man plays the castanets.

136. el ‘adaima This site is situated on the west bank of the Nile, about 8 kilometers south of Esna. One of the best examples of a Naqada II dancing scene was discovered here as early as 1909 (Figs. 11.12:a, 11.13; Needler 1984:205– 206; Bard 1999:114–115). This object is now in the collection of the Brooklyn Museum. Needler described the human figures on it as follows:

250

The D ata

figure 11.11 Painted pottery from El ‘Amrah. © The British Museum (Item 35502).

A female figure with raised arms and fingers touching her voluminous hair dominates each boat. Twice she is accompanied by two smaller male figures that touch her arm or shoulder. On the poorly preserved side, where her figure is partly lost, she was perhaps shown with a single male figure. This lady appears frequently, in the same stance, on other examples of the ware, usually in association with boats and often with subsidiary male figures. The pose suggests a dancer, and the usually dominant scale suggests the supernatural, but one may only conclude from her repeated and distinctive appearance on these vessels that she belonged to a common folk tradition, probably related to the enigmatic terra-cotta figures.

251

figure 11.12 Egyptian painted pottery:

a. El ‘Adaima, 18 cm high (after Needler 1984, Pl. 16). b. El ‘Amrah, 30 cm high (after Aksamit 1992, Figure 1). c. Abydos, 31 cm high (after de Morgan 1896, Pl. X).

252

The D ata

a

figure 11.13 Egyptian painted pottery from El ‘Adaima. Courtesy of the Brooklyn Museum of Art, Museum Collection Fund (Item 09.889.400).

b

253

137. abadiyeh One of the cemeteries excavated by Petrie was near the Graeco-Roman city of Diospolis Parva in Upper Egypt (Bard 1999:374–377). Excavators unearthed two objects with dancing scenes:

Predynastic Egypt

1. A small jar decorated with a boat scene and dancing figures (Fig. 11.9:a; Petrie 1901, Pl. XX:11; Crowfoot Payne 1993, No. 867). The Nilotic scene includes two boats, water birds, two antelopes, and three human figures. Two of them, a female and a male, are represented on one boat, holding each other with one hand while the other hand rests on their pelvis. The third figure is a male represented alone on the other boat. 2. A fragment of a clay model, discovered in Grave B-83, which Petrie described as follows: “The grave was broken up, and the clay toys scattered in the filling; the most remarkable is the model of the town wall, with men looking over it” (Fig. 11.26:b; Petrie 1901:32, Pl. VI). Other scholars accept this interpretation (Crowfoot Payne 1993:17; Hoffman 1979:148); however, there are no walled cities at Egypt at that time.

This object shares several characteristics with many of the objects discussed above: the figures are identical in size and body posture, both facing left (a counter-clockwise movement); they are placed around the circumference of a round vessel; and their arms are raised. The projected heads visible only from the outside add a dramatic dimension to the scene. Are these masks? These figures are not engaged in any specific daily task. If they are sentries, why are they not portrayed with weapons? It thus seems to me that the object represents a circle dance performed inside an enclosure.

138. hemamieh This site is a Predynastic settlement located near Mostagedda in Upper Egypt and was occupied during a few difference phases (Bard 1999:161– 164). A small painted pottery sherd from the upper part of the sequence (Level 0-1, Naqada II phase) bears the heads and torsos of two identical human figures depicted frontally. The heads are round, the bodies triangular, and the figures hold hands. The excavators described the item as “an interesting fragment, showing a pair of human figures” (Fig. 11.9:b; Brunton and Caton-Thompson 1928:78). Baumgartel later suggested that this composition should be interpreted as a dancing scene, on the basis of similar items from Iran (1947:80).

139. semaineh One of the cemeteries excavated by Petrie near the Graeco-Roman city of Diospolis Parva in Upper Egypt (Bard 1999:374–377). Three items are related to this site, some of them where bought on the antiquities market, and so their provenance is not absolutely certain. Two jars are now

254

The D ata

a

b

figure 11.14 Egyptian painted pottery from Semaineh. © The British Museum (a–b: Item 49570; c: Item 50751).

c

255

figure 11.15 Egyptian painted pottery:

a. Unknown origin, ca. 18 cm high (after Bourriau 1981, Figure 33). b. Unknown origin, ca. 30 cm high (after Shaw and Nicholson 1995:196). c. Semaineh, ca. 30 cm high (after Smith 1993, Figure 1:a). d. Semaineh, ca. 13 cm high (after Aksamit 1992, Figure 3:a–d). e. Harageh, ca. 20 cm high (after Engelbach 1923, Figure XXIX:2).

a

b

c

d

257

in the collection of the British Museum (Figs. 11.14, 11.15:c–d; Shaw and Nicholson 1995:196; Smith 1993, Fig. 1:a; Aksamit 1992, Fig. 3:a–d). Another vessel is now in the collection of the Ashmolean Museum (Fig. 11.19:b; Crowfoot Payne 1993, No. 861). Each one of these jars bears dancing figures on boats in the conventional artistic tradition of the Naqada II period, as discussed in the section on stylistic analysis at the beginning of this chapter.

140. abydos Predynastic Egypt

Abydos is located in Upper Egypt, on the west bank of the Nile (Shaw and Nicholson 1995:13; Bard 1999:104–106). A number of Predynastic cemeteries, with thousand of graves, have been excavated here by various scholars and by looters as well. A few jars of the typical Naqada II painted style have been reported. 1. One of the first Predynastic dancing scene published from Egypt is attributed to Abydos, but no further information is given on its origin (Fig. 11.12:c; de Morgan 1896, Pl. X). The elaborate depiction includes two boats, water birds, and antelopes. On one boat there are four figures: two tall females and two short males. Three figures appear on the other boat. 2. This item is a rare example in which the dancing performance takes place in an arid landscape, not within the typical Nilotic environment (Fig. 11.23:c; Crowfoot Payne 1993, No. 873). There are three other such scenes, all of unknown origin, as they came from the antiquities market (Fig. 11.23).

141. harageh figure 11.16 (opposite page, top) Egyptian painted pottery of unknown origin from the collection of the British Museum. © The British Museum (a–b: Item 26635; c– d. Item 36327).

This site is located near Abusir el-Meleq, on the west bank of the Nile, near the entrance to Fayum (Bard 1999:91). A typical jar of the Naqada II phase decorated with a painted dancing scene has been discovered in a grave (Fig. 11.15:e; Engelbach 1923, Fig. XXIX:2). The jar is broken exactly at the area of the human figures, yet it is clear that this is a typical boat scene with a large female figure accompanied by smaller male figures.

figure 11.17 (opposite page, bottom) Egyptian painted pottery of unknown origin. Courtesy of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Item 1895.345).

The intensive looting of antiquities in the Nile Valley affects every aspect of Egyptian archaeology, including our subject. Authentic items are without context, and so nothing is known concerning their original setting. Modern fakes penetrate various collections, distorting the archaeological record (Brunton 1934; Crowfoot Payne et al. 1977). Therefore, only a brief presentation is provided here for these items, arranged in accordance to their current location.

142. boat scenes of the naqada ii phase of unknown origin

258

figure 11.18 Egyptian painted pottery vessels of unknown origin:

a. Ca. 8 cm high (after Scharff 1931:149, Figure 55). b. Ca. 28 cm high (after Torr 1898, Figure 3). c. Ca. 30 cm high (after Baumgartel 1960, Pl. XIII:1-3).

259

figure 11.19 Egyptian painted pottery:

a. Unknown origin, ca. 8 cm high (after Crowfoot Payne 1993, Figure 41:862). b. Semaineh, ca. 14 cm high (after Crowfoot Payne 1993, Figure 40:861). c. Unknown origin, no scale published (after Ziegler 1990:16). d. Unknown origin, ca. 21 cm high (after George 1975: 96–97). e. Unknown origin, ca. 11 cm high (after von Bissing 1934, Figure 2:9). f. Unknown origin, no scale published (after Priese 1989, Figure 26).

260

The D ata

1. British Museum, London: Two painted jars (Figs. 11.15:b, 11.16, 11.18:b; Torr 1898, Fig. 3; Budge 1902:75). 2. Ashmolean Museum, Oxford: two painted jars (Figs. 11.19:a. 11.23:a; Crowfoot Payne 1993, Nos. 862, 871). 3. Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge: one painted jar (Fig. 11.15:a; Bourriau 1981, Fig. 33). 4. Ägyptische Museum, Berlin: two painted jars (Figs. 11.18:a, 11.19:f; Scharff 1931, Nos. 334, 328; Priese 1989, Fig. 26). 5. Staatliche Sammlung, Munich: one painted jar (Fig. 11.19:e; von Bissing 1934, Fig. 2:9). 6. Musée du Louvre, Paris: one painted jar (Fig. 11.19:c; Ziegler 1990:16). 7. Musée des Antiquités nationales, Saint-Germain-en-laye (Paris): a painted sherd with two figures (Fig. 11.20:a; Vandier 1973, Fig. 19). I was informed by B. Adams (personal communication) that this object probably originated from Silsileh, but I could not find more information on its provenance. 8. Medelhavsmuseet, Stockholm: two painted jars (Figs. 11.19:d, 11.21, 11.23:d; George 1975). 9. Oriental Institute, Chicago: one painted jar (Figs. 11.20:b, 11.22:a). 10. Metropolitan Museum, New York City: a deep open bowl and a very elaborate painted jar (Figs. 11.18:c, 11.22:b–e; Hayes 1990, Fig. 14; Baumgartel 1960:145–146, Pl. XIII:1–3). The jar is of special interest as in addition to the conventional dancing figures on the boats, there is a row of four dancing female figures on the side.

143. wadi ‘abad This and the next five sites have depictions of dancing figures on rock carvings. In the Egyptian deserts many such engravings have been noticed over the years (see, for example, Weigall 1909; Winkler 1937, 1938;

figure 11.20 Egyptian painted pottery of unknown origin: a. Ca. 12 cm high (after Vandier 1973, Figure 19). b. Ca. 13 cm high (after Mellink and Filip 1974, Figure 202).

a

figure 11.21 Egyptian painted pottery of unknown origin. © The Museum of Mediterranean and Near Eastern Antiquities. Photo by Ove Kaneberg/Margareta Sjöblom, Stockholm (Items mm10310, mm10306).

b

c

d

Berger 1992). The dating of rock art is usually problematic, as the carvings themselves bear no datable material. The nine examples in Figure 11.24 are related to the Naqada II phase of Predynastic Egypt, based on stylistic analysis: in all of them there is a boat and a tall figure with uplifted arms. The combination of these two motifs cannot be dated to any other period in the archaeology of Egypt. The site of Wadi ‘Abad is located in the Eastern Egyptian Desert, 5 miles above Edfu. Weigall visited it at the beginning of the 1900s, and four of the items he recorded are presented here (Fig. 11.24:a, c–d, f; Weigall 1909, Figs. XXIX–XXX). In the first depiction there are three figures on a boat and an additional figure outside the boat. All the four figures are represented frontally, with uplifted arms. Only one human figure is depicted in each of the three other carvings from this site, and that figure is always found inside the boat.

262

The D ata

a

c

b

d

e figure 11.22 Egyptian painted pottery of unknown origin in North American collections:

a. Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (Item 10581). b. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1912 (Item 12.182.41). c–e. Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1920 (Item 20.2.10).

263

Predynastic Egypt

figure 11.23 Egyptian painted pottery vessels:

144. wadi abu wasil Winkler described this location, Site 26 in his survey of the Eastern Egyptian Desert, as a “large wadi running east to west with good vegetation, bordered with sandstone cliffs, walls and shelters.” He found a relatively sophisticated scene with five figures on a boat (Fig. 11.24:b; Winkler 1938:8). Two identical figures are taller than the others, and elongated feathers or twigs are stuck in their heads, as known from other Egyptian depictions (Figs. 11.6, 11.12:b). Their arms are horizontal, on shoulder level, and the hands bend down, holding an elongated item. They are wearing an elongated dress, which covers most of their body, and only the lower parts of their legs remain exposed. These two figures are standing between three smaller figures.

a. Egypt, unknown origin, 16 cm high (after Crowfoot Payne 1993, Figure 44:871). b. Egypt, unknown origin, 24 cm high (after Hayes 1990, Figure 14). c. Abydos, 25 cm high (after Crowfoot Payne 1993, Figure 44:873). d. Egypt, unknown origin, 18 cm high (after George 1975:102–103).

264

The D ata

figure 11.24 Rock drawings from the Eastern Egyptian Desert:

a. Wadi ‘Abad, rock drawing, no scale published (after Weigall 1909, Figure XXX:8). b. Wadi Abu Wasil (Site 26), rock drawing, no scale published (after Winkler 1938, Figure XXXVII:51). c. Wadi ‘Abad, rock drawing, no scale published (after Weigall 1909, Figure XXX:1). d. Wadi ‘Abad, rock drawing, no scale published (after Weigall 1909, Figure XXX:5). e. Mouth of Wadi Abu Kue’ (Site 5), rock drawing, no scale published (after Winkler 1938, Figure XXXIII:8). f. Wadi ‘Abad, rock drawing, no scale published (after Weigall 1909, Figure XXIX:4). g. Wadi Menih (Site D), rock drawing, no scale published (after Winkler 1938, Figure XXXV:30). h. Qena-Qoser Road (Site 2), rock drawing, no scale published (after Winkler 1938, Figure XXXVI:42). i. Wadi Gash (Site 18), rock drawing, no scale published (after Winkler 1938, Figure XXXV:31).

265

145. mouth of wadi abu kue’ Winkler described this location, Site 5 in his survey of the Eastern Egyptian Desert, as “walls with good afternoon shadow.” He discovered a depiction of a Predynastic boat with many oars, a cabin, and an anthropomorphic figure with uplifted arms (Fig. 11.24:e; Winkler 1938:4).

146. wadi menih Predynastic Egypt

This site is located in the Eastern Egyptian Desert. A rock carving depicts a boat and a human figure with uplifted arms (Fig. 11.24:g; Winkler 1937, Fig. 4). In this case the body gesture is exactly like that of the figures painted on the pottery vessels, with the hands turned inward.

147. qena-qoser road This is Site 2 in Winkler’s survey of the Eastern Egyptian Desert, and he described it as “shelters in the slope of the hill, north of the road.” He reported a depiction of a Predynastic boat and anthropomorphic figure with uplifted arms (Fig. 11.24:h; Winkler 1938:4).

148. wadi gash Winkler described this location, Site 18 in his survey of the Eastern Egyptian Desert, as “piled boulders forming a natural cave on the west side of a wadi coming from the north-west. The place is situated halfway between two wells, and is extremely rich in drawings from earlier to modern times.” He reported a depiction of Predynastic boat and anthropomorphic figure with uplifted arms (Fig. 11.24:i; Winkler 1938:6).

149. gebelein This site is located 29 kilometers to the south of Thebes, on the west bank of the Nile, and it was systematically excavated by the Egyptian Museum of Turin (Bard 1999:338–339). A unique discovery made in the Predynastic cemetery is the fragments of a painted linen shroud. This is the only item made on perishable material in this corpus of dancing scenes. Only the part with the dancing scene is presented here (Figs. 11.25, 11.26:a; Galassi 1955, Figs. 1–4; Baldacci 1987; Williams and Logan 1987, Fig. 15). Baldacci (1987:238) described the depiction as follows: The representation which can be reconstructed from the fragments, show Nilotic scenes (hippopotamus hunting and sailing on the river) and a group of dancers. Between two female figures, clothed in tunics, are three parallel rows of men: those of the first row hold both arms aloft, those in the second hold only one arm aloft, and those in the third hold each other’s hands (so their arms are not raised).

On the one hand, the scene from Gebelein shares similarities with the conventional Predynastic depictions of dance, as appearing on numerous

266

figure 11.25 An Egyptian painted linen cloth from Gebelein (Farina excavation [1930] at Gebelein, Inv. Suppl. 17138 MBAC Egyptian Museum, Turin, Italy). figure 11.26 Egyptian painted linen and a clay model: a. Gebelein, painted linen, no scale published (after Galassi 1955, Fig .2). b. Abadiyeh, clay model, 10 cm high (after Crowfoot Payne 1993, Figure 6:27).

figure 11.27 Egyptian pottery with incised figures and a wall painting: a. Naqada, ca. 40 cm high (after Amiran 1972, Pl. 16). b. Tel Erani, ca. 20 cm high (after Brandl 1989, Figure 11). c. Hierakonpolis, ca. 120 cm (after Quibell and Green 1902, Pl. LXXVI).

painted pottery vessels. The dance is associated with a Nilotic environment, and there are a few tall figures (females?) and a larger number of smaller figures (males?). On the other hand, there are some differences. The tall figures are not represented with their arms uplifted, while the smaller figures are depicted with three different arms gestures, one of them with uplifted arms, a typical female pose. These observations put into question the gender analysis presented by Baldacci, but due to the fragmentary state of this object, not much more can be said about it.

150. hierakonpolis This site is located on the west bank of the Nile, 17 kilometers northwest of Edfu. Its Greek name was Hierakonpolis, and the modern name is Kom el-Ahmar (Bard 1999:371–374). Settlements and cemeteries from various phases of Predynastic Egypt have been found here. Of special interest is the most famous wall painting from Grave 100, dated to the Naqada III phase. The depiction is composed of various activities, including five boats, warfare, and animal hunting. On one of the boats there are two dancing figures (Fig. 11.27:c; Quibell and Green 1902, Pl. LXXVI). The dancing is by no means the center of the representation, but remains an echo of its important role in the symbolic expression of Predynastic Egypt.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Later Examples from the Near East

chapter 12

Dancing figures from twenty-two sites are presented in this section, as well as two items of unknown origin. They are generally dated to the fourth and third millennia bc. These specimens were discovered in different regions of the Near East (Fig. 12.1): Mesopotamia and western Iran (eleven known sites, nos. 151–162) and the Levant (eleven known sites, nos. 163–174). Stylistic Analysis

An important development of this period was that the dancing motif lost its prominence. In Mesopotamia and Iran many other motifs depicting interaction between people appear from the late fifth and the fourth millennia bc onwards (Legrain 1936; Tobler 1950; Amiet 1961, 1972; Delogaz and Kantor 1996). These include communal works of a public or commercial nature, communal feasts, sexual intercourse, war, boat transportation, and religious ceremonies. Simple rows of dancing figures vanish almost completely. Only in the Levant did the dancing motif maintain a dominant position among scenes depicting interaction between people (Ben-Tor 1977, 1978:58–61). Unlike most of the objects in the previous four sections, which were either painted or applied to pottery vessels, many of the specimens in this section are engraved stamp or cylinder seals (Table 6.1). The motif is upgraded from the potter’s art to a more elaborate technique of the highly specialized miniature seal engraver. Various changes can be seen concerning the dance. In this group, males constitute up to 83 percent of the depicted figures—a high proportion never reached in any other region or period (Tables 2.2–2.4). The direction of movement is another aspect that drastically changes. In the later Near Eastern examples, most of the figures are depicted in a clockwise direction of movement around cylinder seals (Table 2.1). Some of the depictions on cylinder seals seem to present a more static body gesture, commonly interpreted as processions of porters and offering bearers connected with temples (see, for example, Fig. 12.6:d; Delogaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:c). No matter what their interpretation, these processions are a direct evolution from the dancing of the earlier periods and fulfill the same cultic functions.

figure 12.1 Near Eastern sites of the fourth–third millennia bc mentioned in the text.

The Assemblage

151. tepe gawra This site is located in the Mosul area of Iraq (above, Site 30). Dancing figures were found on several objects: 1. An impression of a square stamp seal discovered in Stratum XIII, dated to the late fifth millennium bc. Tobler described the impressions as “three bird-headed men, facing and advancing right with joined hands. . . . Dancers would seem to be represented” (Fig. 12.2:d; Tobler 1950:184, No. 92). In addition, many stamp seals from Tepe Gawra depict a single human figure in a dancing position, sometimes accompanied by horned animals. These are not presented here, since they do not depict interaction between people (Tobler 1950, Pls. CLXII:77–80, CLXIV:94–102). 2. An impression of a round stamp seal discovered in Stratum XII, dated to the late fifth millennium bc. Tobler described the impression as “another instance of bird-headed men with arms upraised; above each figure is a star.” The dynamic posture of these figures indicates dancing activity (Fig. 12.2:c; Tobler 1950:184, No. 90).

271

Later Examples from the Near East

3. An impression of a square stamp seal discovered in Stratum XI–A, close to a temple, dated to the fourth millennium bc (Fig. 12.2:e; Tobler 1950:184, No. 93). Tobler described the impression in the publication as no less than four human figures advancing in a procession to the right; possibly another human was shown in that portion of the impression now missing. Each of the men appears to be carrying a sack on his back, but the clay has not furnished an impression clear enough for positive identification. Underneath the procession are two discs, and what may be the tips of two triangles as well as part of a rectangular object. Discs, triangles, and square altars, all closely associated, have been encountered on other impressions . . . suggest[ing] that the missing part contained these sacred symbols, and that the procession of men on the present specimen represents either captives with their hands bound behind their backs, or worshippers carrying offerings or sacrifices to a temple or shrine.

The human figures in this scene indeed look like shackled prisoners, but when interpreting this seal, it should be remembered that war scenes appear only later in Mesopotamian art (Amiet 1961, Pl. 47:661). This body gesture is also known from some later cylinder seals, where the bent dancers resemble the figures in our example (Fig. 12.5:b, 12.5:e). In addition, this impression was unearthed near a temple and bears sacred symbols. It thus seems to me that the seal from Tepe Gawra, as well as cylinder seals from Ur and Nippur, depict dancing scenes (see below, Fig. 12.5). 4. A painted pottery bowl (beaker) discovered in Stratum X or IX, dated to the fourth millennium bc (Fig. 9.15:d). Tobler described the scene as follows: Three men are depicted, all with arms upraised. Two men hold branches or palms; unfortunately that portion of the beaker bearing the upper part of the figure of the third human is missing, but it may be assumed that he likewise held a similar branch or palm, especially since he is shown, like the others, with arms upraised. Filling in the spaces between these human figures are two curious bipeds or birds. The portion of the design just described occupies but half of the beaker surface; the remaining half bears two triangles filled with crosshatching, between which is another branch or palm. This scene may have a religious meaning; it may portray a religious procession, or may have a more obscure symbolism (Tobler 1950:157).

152. telul eth-thalathat v This site is located in southern Mesopotamia. A small square stamp seal was reported from Layer 2, dated to the late fifth or early fourth millennium bc. It was described thus: “One of the wide faces has an engraving

figure 12.2 Stamp seals from Mesopotamia:

figure 12.3 Stamp seal from Telul eth-Thalathat V. Courtesy of The Institute of Oriental Culture/The University Museum, The University of Tokyo.

a. Tepe Giyan, ca. 2.5 x 2.5 cm (after Contenau and Ghirshman 1935, Pl. 38:22). b. Telul eth-Thalathat V, ca. 2 x 1 cm (after Fukai et al. 1974, Pl. LX:10). c. Tepe Gawra, ca. 2 x 2 cm (after Tobler 1950, Pl. CLXIII:90). d. Tepe Gawra, ca. 2.5 x 2.3 cm (after Tobler 1950, Pl. CLXIII:92). e. Tepe Gawra, ca. 4 x 3 cm (after Tobler 1950, Pl. CLXIV:93).

273

of two standing human figures. They look like so-called ‘bird-headed men’ with their heads represented by slanting lines. The body part is in inverted triangular form and the inside of the triangle is hollowed” (Figs. 12.2:b, 12.3; Fukai et al. 1974:51). The scene is similar to that on the above-mentioned seal from Tepe Gawra.

153. tepe giyan This site is located in Luristan, western Iran (above, Site 70). Excavators reported two seals dated to the late fifth or early fourth millennium bc: Later Examples from the Near East

A Rectangle Stamp Seal The seal bears a symmetrical scene of five figures on a panel (Figs. 7.3:b, 12.4:a–b; Herzfeld 1933; Amiet 1961, No. 147; Barnett 1966, Pl. XXIII:2; van der Osten-Sacken 1992:225–226, No. 35): 1. Two four-legged zoomorphic figures, one at each edge of the panel. They are shown on their sides, probably indicating that they are standing on their rear legs. 2. Two tall human figures, one next to each of the preceding figures. They are shown with bent arms and legs in a dynamic posture, which represents dancing. Their elongated heads have been interpreted as bearing masks of ibexes and sheep (Barnett 1966:262), while these other similar figures have been interpreted as demons with ibex horns (Porada 1965:32; van der Osten-Sacken 1992:226). 3. In the center of the panel is a most obscure figure. It is shorter than the other figures, and the head is rhombus-shaped. The body is round; the arms and legs are bent. Like the two figures at the panel’s edges, this figure has been interpreted as a quadruped or as a frog (Barnett 1966:262; van der Osten-Sacken 1992:226). However, the difference between the representation of this figure and that of the two “more human” figures can be understood as a result of gender differentiation: a female figure in the center is flanked by two males.

A similar composition of three dancing anthropomorphic figures has been discovered at Nevali Çori (Fig. 7.3:a). In this example, as in the example from Tepe Giyan, the central female figure is portrayed as shorter with a rounded body, while the two male figures at her sides are taller. Moreover, at Nevali Çori there are unclear broken figures at each side of the scene. It is possible that these are animals too, as on the seal from Tepe Giyan. Amiet described the scene on the seal from Tepe Giyan as a mythological subject (1961:147); however, it seems that the scene represents men and women dancing together. The two animals at the outer edges of the panel either may represent sacrificial animals brought to a temple or may symbolize the subject of the dance, which may be the fertility of the herds.

274

The D ata

a

b

figure 12.4 Stamp seals from Tepe Giyan: a–b. A seal and its modern impression. © The British Museum. c. A rounded seal. Courtesy of the Musée du Louvre, Département des Antiquités Orientales.

c

275

A Round Stamp Seal On this object there are two human figures standing shoulder to shoulder with bent legs (Figs. 12.2:a, 12.4:b; Contenau and Ghirshman 1935, Pl. 38:22; Amiet 1961, Pl. 4:88). The figures have long necks, small heads, and triangular torsos. This type of elongated proportions characterizes male figures.

154. chagar bazar Later Examples from the Near East

This site is located in the Khabur valley of northeastern Syria (above, Site 14). A cylindrical seal depicting four identical schematic human figures has been published from Layer 7, the last Halafian settlement at the site. This date is very problematic, as no other cylinder seal has been published from such an early period. There is therefore a general consensus that the seal is an intrusive element from a much later period. It is possible that the item came from Layer 6, immediately above Layer 7, and is thus related to the Nineveh V phase of the fourth millennium bc. The engraving is of rather poor quality. It depicts four human figures standing in a row, in profile, facing left. Each holds one arm outstretched in front and the other arm bent downwards behind the back. The legs are shown separately (Fig. 12.5:a; Mallowan 1936:193, Fig. 2; Frankfort 1939:228; Perkins 1949:34; Amiet 1961:16).

155. nippur This site is located in southern Mesopotamia. A cylinder seal with a similar scene to that from Chagar Bazar has been published dated to the Predynastic period of the late fourth millennium bc. It depicts four human figures standing in a row, in profile, facing right. Each holds one arm outstretched in front and the other bent downwards behind the back. The legs are shown separately (Fig. 12.5:b; Amiet 1961, Pl. 18:298).

156. iran, unknown provenance This is a cylinder seal of unknown provenance, generally dated to the fourth millennium bc (Fig. 12.5:c; Herzfeld 1941, Pl. XVII; Amiet 1979, Fig. 18; van der Osten-Sacken 1992:254, No. 84). The seal depicts a row of three identical human figures, facing left. The figures have relatively small heads, arms bent downwards touching the torso, and they are wearing a special kind of pointed boot. This type of boot occasionally appears in ancient Near Eastern art on other objects: a painted Halafian bowl from Arpachiyah, seals, a metal statue, and a clay model from Tell Brak. In these, as well as in other cases, the pointed boots seem to be connected with a mythological tradition (Hijara 1978; van der OstenSacken 1992, Pl. XVII; Barnett 1966; Mallowan 1947, Pl. LII:19; Ippolitoni-Strika 1990:152–156).

276

figure 12.5 Cylinder seals from Mesopotamia and Iran:

a. Chagar Bazar, ca. 3 x 1.5 cm (after Herzfeld 1941, Figure 142). b. Nippur, ca. 3 x 1.5 cm (after Amiet 1961, Pl. 18:298). c. Iran, unknown provenance, ca. 5 x 3 cm (after Amiet 1979, Figure 18). d. Ur, ca. 3 x 2 cm (after Legrain 1936, No. 327). e. Ur, ca. 6 x 2.5 cm (after Legrain 1936, No. 329). f. Ur, ca. 5 x 2.5 cm (after Legrain 1936, No. 328). g. Ur, ca. 2.5 x 2.5 cm (after Legrain 1936, No. 15). h. Susa, ca. 6 x 3 cm (after Amiet 1972, Pl. 17:678). i. Nineveh, ca. 5 x 2 cm (after Collon and Reade 1983, Figure 6).

277

157. susa

Later Examples

The site of Susa is located in the Susiana Plain, Khuzistan, western Iran. A large number of cylinder seal impressions have been published from Layer Ca-b, dated to the fourth millennium bc. Scenes depicting interaction between people mainly show human groups engaged in various activities. One object depicts a row of four identical standing human figures, facing right, in a counter-clockwise movement, with their arms bent upwards and rectangular objects above their heads (Fig. 12.5:h; Amiet 1972). These figures are not occupied in any specific activity. The general shape of the body is also unique when compared to the usual human figures on seals from Susa. Amiet noticed the special character of this scene and described it as “personages grotesques” (1972:105), but he did not suggest any explanation for it. However, it seems that this seal depicts a row of female figures performing a dance. Its “grotesque” nature is apparently the result of an attempt to create a dynamic representation. A similar composition has been found at Chogha Mish (Fig. 12.6:e); however, the figures on that seal are male, and they are facing left.

from the Near East

158. chogha mish This site is located in Khuzistan, western Iran (Site 56). A large number of cylinder seal impressions, dated to the fourth millennium bc, have been published. Six of them seem to depict dancing activity. 1. A row of male figures in profile, facing right. Delougaz and Kantor gave the following description in their excavation report: “Rustic design with file of men, arms lifted above their heads, appearing in front of net or tree background” (Fig. 12.6:a; Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 144:d). 2. A row of male figures in profile, facing right. Delougaz and Kantor described it as an “equatorial impression showing a file of men, their right arms extended freely in front of them and their left arms bent at the elbow and touching their bodies” (Fig. 12.6:b; Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:b). 3. A row of male figures in profile, facing to the right. Delougaz and Kantor described it as a “progression of human figures with arms half raised, following a leading person with a staff” (Fig. 12.6:c; Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:a). This is a rare example, in which one figure is holding an object that is not in the position of the other participants. However, one should note the poor state of preservation of this item, and that the reconstruction of the “staff” is based on very little information, if any. 4. A row of male figures in profile, facing right. Delougaz and Kantor described it as “a file of porters carrying rectangular boxes or bales on their heads” (Fig. 12.6:e; Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pls. 133:b, 152:f). A very similar scene is known from Susa, with female figures, facing right in an emphasized dynamic body pose (Fig. 12.5:h).

278

5. A row of female figures in profile, facing right. Delougaz and Kantor described it as a procession of women (Fig. 12.6:d; Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:c). 6. A row of female figures in profile, facing right. Delougaz and Kantor described it as “a file of women carrying staves” (Fig. 12.6:f; Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:g).

159. ur The D ata

A collection of archaic cylinder seal impressions from Ur, dated to the fourth millennium bc, includes a few impressions that seem to represent dancing figures: 1. On the preserved part of this impression, there is a row of six identical human figures, depicted in profile, facing right. They are muscular, probably suggesting males. Each one is touching the shoulders of the figure in front of him (Fig. 12.5:f; Legrain 1936, No: 328). Similar arms positions have been reported from Tall-i Jari A (Fig. 9.29:d). This item was classified by Amiet under the category “banquets et festivités diverses” (1961, Pl. 62). 2. On the preserved part of this impression there is a row of three identical human figures, depicted in profile, facing left (Fig. 12.5:e; Legrain 1936, No: 329). They are muscular, probably suggesting male. Each one is bent forward, with one arm extending, while the other arm remains behind the back. They seem to be holding each other. 3. The preserved part of this impression bears a line of eight identical human figures. They are not holding hands, but all stand the same distance apart. Each person is depicted frontally and dressed. The head is shown in profile, facing right, and the arms are bent downwards, towards the body (Fig. 12.5:d; Legrain 1936, No. 327). 4. A rather badly damaged impression depicting a human figure frontally, with the arms bent upwards, partly horizontally and then vertically (Fig. 12.5:g; Legrain 1936, No: 15). Only the very tops of the legs have been preserved, indicating that they were bent horizontally. This body position is very common and appears on many other cylinder seals. The remains of another human figure in the same posture can be observed on the left, indicating a row of identical figures of this type.

160. nineveh This site is located in northern Iraq (above, Site 32). A cylinder seal impression on an unbaked clay sealing has been dated to the early third millennium bc (Fig. 12.5:i; Collon and Reade 1983:40). Collon and Reade described the depiction as follows: The design shows a row of at least three figures, stooping, holding hands, and moving to the right: it looks like a movement from a traditional dabcha dance practiced by different communities of northern Iraq (and doubtless elsewhere), with a ring of men slowly revolving. Our figures

figure 12.6 Cylinder seals from Iran and Mesopotamia:

a. Chogha Mish, 4 cm high (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 144:D). b. Chogha Mish, 3 cm high (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:B). c. Chogha Mish, 3.5 cm high (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:A). d. Chogha Mish, 2 cm high (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:C). e. Chogha Mish, 3 cm high (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:F). f. Chogha Mish, 2 cm high (after Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 152:G). g. Tell Brak, ca. 5 x 3 cm (after Mallowan 1947, Pl. 23:8). h. Fara, ca. 4.5 x 2.5 cm (after Herzfeld 1933, Pl. 42).

280

have kilts reaching to the knee, with an open robe hanging further down behind. Gaps in the design are filled by oval shapes.

161. fara

The D ata

This site is located in southern Mesopotamia. A cylinder seal divided into two registers has been published, though without clear information about its context (Fig. 12.6:h; Herzfeld 1933, Pl. 42:6278). However, the style of the heads seems to indicate the third millennium bc. In the lower register there is a dance scene with a row of identical figures depicted in profile, facing left, with one arm bent in front. In the upper register there is a typical banquet scene with figures seating and drinking from jars.

162. tell brak This site is located in northern Iraq (above, Site 15). A cylinder seal impression has been published from an early third millennium bc context (Fig. 12.6:g; Mallowan 1947, Pl. XXIII:8; Amiet 1961, Pl. 102:1351; BenTor 1978:80). It depicts a structure with two rows of human figures, one on the ground floor and the other on the roof. The figures in the upper row are represented frontally, with one arm raised and the other arm lowered. The lower part of the body is not shown. The figures in the lower row are depicted in profile, with no arms, and are kneeling with each leg in a different position. Amiet understood this and similar scenes as representing praying figures (1961, Pl. 102:1352–4). However, all the figures in each row are identical to one another, and a dynamic body posture is shown on both the upper and the lower rows. It thus seems that the figures are probably dancing, rather than engaging in a static activity such as prayer.

163. teleilat ghassul This site, from which the term Ghassulian culture derives, is located on the Dead Sea Plain, in Jordan. The site was excavated on a large scale in the 1930s and the 1970s (Hennessy 1989). Fragments of wall paintings, dated to the second half of the fifth and first half of the fourth millennia bc, represent dancing activities: 1. Large fragments of a wall painting were discovered by the later expedition (Fig. 12.7:b; Cameron 1981:13, Fig. 14; Bienkowski 1991:6, Fig. 4). These have been reconstructed as three masked human figures standing in a row, facing left, looking towards a net-covered geometric element. The first figure from the left is taller than the others and holds an elongated object. The lower part of its clothing is net-covered, in contrast to the texture of the upper part of the dress and to the clothing of the other two figures. The two remaining figures in the scene are quite similar to one another. They are shown with bent arms, with no objects in their hands.

281

Later Examples from the Near East

figure 12.7 Reconstructed wall paintings from Teleilat Ghassul: a. No scale published (after Vincent 1935, Figure 17). b. No scale published (after Bienkowski 1991:6).

When analyzing the scene, it should be remembered that the painting was reconstructed out of fragments, which makes the current combination somewhat tentative. The following points are worth noting: All the three figures are facing left. The three figures are clearly wearing masks on their heads, and all three masks are of the same type. The three figures are shown in the same posture, with bent arms. Only the first figure holds an elongated item in its hands. Unlike the usual dancing scenes, excluding Predynastic Egypt, at Teleilat Ghassul the figures are not identical; the first figure is taller and wears different clothes on the lower part of its body. The reconstruction of the fragments seems to be incorrect in two main aspects: the height of the figures, and the association of the area with the net pattern with the first figure rather than with a structure. Elsewhere, net patterns are used in dancing scenes to represent architectural units (Fig. 9.15:c–d).

282

The D ata

2. The early expedition reported at least five masked heads (Mallon et al. 1934, Pl. 67), similar to those discovered in the above-mentioned item. This group of similar masked heads may well have formed part of a dancing scene. 3. With the discovery of the more recent wall painting, it is worth looking again at one of the older paintings published many years ago (Mallon et al. 1934, Pl. 66; Cameron 1981:4, Fig. 1). Only the lower part of this item has been preserved, including a row of feet. This wall painting too probably depicts a row of dancing figures. A fanciful reconstruction was suggested shortly after the discovery, which can now be viewed as an amusing episode (Fig. 12.7:a; Vincent 1935:101, Fig. 17). It seems that at least in three different locations at Teleilat Ghassul, wall paintings, each depicting a row of masked persons, were found. Even if the figures are not in a dynamic body gesture, with bent limbs, they are wearing identical masks, which clearly indicate an elaborate ceremonial event. This event, as we can see in the new wall painting, took place near a structure.

164. megiddo This site is located in the Jezreel Valley, Israel. A temple complex was unearthed in Stratum XIX, dated to the late fourth millennium bc. The courtyard was partly paved with flagstones, some of which bore “scratched and incised drawings of human figures and animals with a great many designs which were either pure fancy or possibly signs and letters now undecipherable” (Kempinski 1989:170; Loud 1948, Pls. 271– 282). These rather clumsy incisions, many of which are superimposed, are the work of untrained persons, an example of spontaneous popular art. Human figures in dynamic body postures can be seen, including the following three examples, which seem to depict dancing scenes: 1. Three or four figures in a row. The figure on the right is similar to the figure on the left; both are depicted in profile, facing right, with bearded faces and belts. The figures in the center are blurred and unclear (Figs. 12.8, 12.9:b; Loud 1948, Pl. 271:1). 2. Two figures in a line, depicted in profile, facing right. Each figure has an elongated hat and a belt. The figure to the right is taller and depicted with arms bent upwards. The figure to the left is shorter and shown with one arm bent upwards and the other arm bent downwards (Fig. 12.9:a; Loud 1948, Pl. 276:6). 3. This scene was incised on a slab with twenty-six small circular indentations at its perimeter; and the intervening area is covered by a net pattern. It may have been used as a game board. Superimposed on this background are four human figures in different sizes, presented in profile, facing right. Each figure has a torso, two muscular legs, and sometimes bent arms. The heads were not portrayed (Fig. 12.9:c; Loud 1948, Pl. 272).

283

Later Examples from the Near East

figure 12.8 Incised limestone slab from Megiddo. Courtesy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.

Despite the poor quality of the depictions the figures are depicted in dynamic postures, all facing right, wearing belts and sometimes a head covering. These three items probably represent dancing ceremonies that took place in a temple courtyard. Another incised slab from this paving bears the depiction of a woman playing a lyre (Loud 1948, Pl. 273:5). This is a clear example where dance and music are closely associated; however, they are depicted on separate slabs.

284

The D ata

figure 12.9 Incised stone slabs from Megiddo: a. Ca. 15 x 20 cm (after Loud 1948, Pl. 273:6). b. Ca. 20 x 22 cm (after Loud 1948, Pl. 271:1). c. Ca. 38 x 22 cm (after Loud 1948, Pl. 272). figure 12.10 Painted pottery from Bab edh-Dhra’, ca. 12 cm high (after Saller 1965, Figure 18:5).

285

165. bab edh-dhra’ This site is located on the Dead Sea Plain, Jordan. Excavators reported a few items depicting dancing activities:

Later Examples from the Near East

1. A small jar decorated with four identical human figures depicted in a linear style, reported from the looted cemetery. It is probably dated to the second half of the fourth millennium bc. The figures include the torso, head, and two arms that bend upwards, first horizontally at the level of the shoulders and then vertically. The lower part of the body is not depicted. They resemble dancing figures on cylinder seals of this period in the southern Levant, in which the lower part of the human body is missing. The figures are not arranged in a circle around the vessel’s circumference but in two vertical columns, like some of the objects described above from western Iran. Two figures are shown in each column, one on top of the other. There are some twigs, or perhaps palm leaves, between the two columns and around the jar (Fig. 12.10; Saller 1965:166–169; Amiran 1972, Fig. 1). 2. A sherd bearing a cylinder seal impression, dated to the first half of the third millennium bc, was unearthed in a temple courtyard. Lapp described it as figures with arms raised standing above or behind a netpatterned wall that may depict the mud facade of a cultic structure. A relatively large part of the impression was preserved, including seven identical human figures depicted frontally and holding hands (Fig. 12.12:d; Lapp 1989:5–6; W. Rast, personal communication). 3. Another sherd, also dated to the third millennium bc, has been described as follows (Fig. 12.14:b; Lapp 1989:7, Fig. 6): The extant part of the impression shows two bird-like figures with raised arms, probably dancing, with a spiral circle design above. . . . The very bottom of the fragment has what may be the feet of the left figure; on the other hand, the small blocks could represent a structure as in the other cultic seal. Unfortunately the sherd is fragmentary. It could be a stamp seal, or even two different stamps or cylinder seals, one above the other, since the circle design with figures on one seal is not otherwise known.

Since there are many examples of anthropomorphic figures with animal heads in Early Bronze Age seals, Ben-Tor has suggested that they are wearing masks (Ben-Tor 1992:38).

166. tel erani This site is located on the southern coastal plain of Israel. Fragments of an Egyptian jar with an incised human figure were unearthed in an Early Bronze Age I context, dated to the second half of the fourth millennium bc (Fig. 11.27:b; Yeivin 1967:45–46; Brandel 1989:370–371, Fig. 11). The figure is presented in profile, facing left. Parts of the torso are

286

missing, but it seems to be in a triangular shape. The arms are bent upwards and end in four fingers. The legs are straight and muscular. A hatched area around the waist indicates a loincloth. The upper part of the torso is bare. Similar loincloths on dancing human figures appear on some of the above-mentioned examples from Megiddo. The dynamic posture and the loincloth place this figure with typical dancing scenes.

167. kabri The D ata

figure 12.11 Pottery with cylinder seal impression from Rosh ha-Niqra. Courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

This site is located in the western Galilee Mountains, northern Israel. Excavators reported a small Early Bronze I sherd bearing a cylinder seal impression, dated to the second half of the fourth millennium bc. Kempinski described it as follows: “The scene depicts a figure (human, with an animal mask?) raising its hands in a prayer gesture, facing a building—probably a temple” (Fig. 12.14:c; Kempinski 1991:5, a further discussion can be found in the Hebrew section of that publication). Human figures placed near a structure are a common motif on cylinder seals of the Early Bronze Age in the southern Levant. In addition, similar examples of human figures, masked with horns and with upraised hands, were reported from Bab edh-Dhra’ and El-Karm (Fig. 12.14:a–b; Ben-Tor 1977, 1978:57–61). Usually a few identical figures were depicted in these scenes. Thus it seems possible that had a complete impression been discovered at Kabri, more than one figure would have been found.

287

Later Examples from the Near East

figure 12.12 Cylinder seal impressions from the Levant:

a. Rosh ha-Niqra, ca. 4.5 x 5.5 cm (after Ben-Tor 1978, Figure 9:60). b. Beth Yerah, ca. 3 x 2.5 cm (after Ben-Tor 1978, Figure 9:61). c. ‘Ain Kuniyeh, ca. 6 x 5 cm (after Ben-Tor 1978, Figure 9:59). d. Bab edh-Dhra’, ca. 8 x 8 cm (after Lapp 1989, Figure 5). e. Hama, ca. 8 x 3.5 cm (after Ben-Tor 1978, Figure 22:1). f. Syria, unknown provenance, ca. 5 x 2 cm (after Ben-Tor 1978, Figure 22:4). g. Byblos, ca. 1.7 x 6 cm (after Dunand 1950:201, Figure 209).

288

168. rosh ha-niqra This site is located on the Mediterranean coastal plain of Israel. Excavators reported a sherd bearing a cylinder seal impression, dated to the first half of the third millennium bc (Figs. 12.11, 12.12:a; (Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959; Ben-Tor 1978, Fig. 9:60). In his comprehensive study of cylinder seals of the southern Levant, Ben-Tor summarized the different aspects of this and the next three items. The scene is composed of two basic elements:

The D ata

1. The upper part of the seal was engraved with a row of dancing human figures holding hands. Ben-Tor described them as follows: “The depiction of human figures is virtually identical; in each instance the group of people is shown in front view. The people are visible from the waist up, and the outline is rather schematic: the body is drawn as a straight stripe whose width does not surpass the width of the stripes serving as the arms. The figures are holding hands, with the palms of their hands not visible and their arms extending downwards in a straight line. Their heads are very wide and elliptical in outline. These groups of people are reminiscent of rows of paper-doll figures” (Ben-Tor 1978:58). 2. A net pattern was engraved on the lower part of the seal. Ben-Tor understood this element as a structure, implying that the dancing is being performed in front of, on top of, or inside a temple (Ben-Tor 1978:57–61; Lapp 1989).

169. beth yerah This site is located near the Sea of Galilee, Israel. Prausnitz reported a sherd bearing a cylinder seal impression, dated to the first half of the

figure 12.13 Pottery with cylinder seal impression from ‘Ain Kuniyeh. Courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

figure 12.14 Cylinder seals from the Levant: a. El-Karm, ca. 6 x 5 cm (after Ben-Tor 1978, Figs. 10:69, 18:7). b. Bab edh-Dhra’, ca. 4.5 x 3 cm (after Lapp 1989, Figure 6). c. Kabri, ca. 6.5 x 4.5 cm (after Kempinski 1991, Figure 16:4).

third millennium bc. Four identical human figures are shown frontally, holding hands, behind or on top of an area covered by a net pattern (Figs. 12.12:b; Prausnitz 1955:139; Ben-Tor 1978, Fig. 9:61).

170. ‘ain kuniyeh This site is located on the Golan Heights, east of the Sea of Galilee. Epstein reported a sherd bearing a cylinder seal impression, dated to the first half of the third millennium bc. On the preserved part three identical human figures are depicted frontally, holding hands, behind or on top of an area covered by net pattern (Figs. 12.12:c, 12.13; Epstein 1972; Ben-Tor 1978, Fig. 9:59).

171. el-karm This site is located on Mount Gilboa, northern Israel. A sherd bearing a cylinder seal impression, dated to the first half of the third millennium bc was collected on the surface. The depiction includes “men and animals with uplifted heads in procession,” and the “upper part of two, possibly more, human figures with upraised arms” (Fig. 12.14:a; Zori 1955:89; Ben-Tor 1978:12, Fig. 10:69). These are probably masked human figures with animal heads, similar to those that have been reported above from Bab edh-Dhra’.

172. byblos This site is located on the Mediterranean coast in Lebanon. Two sherds with impressions of the same cylinder seal are relevant to our study. As can be seen from the photograph (Dunand 1950, Pl. CXXVI:8553), it is a combed sherd typical of the Early Bronze Age II, thus dating to the first half of the third millennium bc. The scene depicts a row of four human figures facing left: three identical figures are depicted with straight legs, and the fourth figure is shown with its legs turned upwards. This is one of those rare cases in which not all the figures in the scene are identical (Fig. 12.12:g; Dunand 1950, Nos. 8553–8554). Gender differentiation may be a possible explanation in this case, as female figures are sometimes depicted in the ancient Near East with their legs turned upwards (Fig. 7.3:b).

figure 12.15 Pottery with cylinder seal impression from Hama. Courtesy of the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Antiquities, National Museum of Denmark (Item 3a665).

173. hama This site is located in Syria (above, Site 29). A cylinder seal impression was reported from Layer J, dated to the late third millennium bc. A row of identical human figures is shown frontally, holding hands. The arms are raised, first horizontally and then vertically. The lower part of the body is also represented, in contrast to the above-mentioned items of the third millennium bc from the southern Levant. Four-legged horned animals are depicted between the human figures (Figs. 12.12:e, 12.15; Inghold 1940:42; Ben-Tor 1978:80).

174. syria, unknown provenance A cylinder seal of unknown provenance probably originated in Syria and is dated to the third millennium bc. Eisen described it in the original publication as “four nude figures clasping one another’s hands as in a ring dance. Between them appear various objects” (Fig. 12.12:f; Eisen 1940:67, No. 195; Ben-Tor 1978:80). All the figures are identical and are shown frontally. The depiction of the lower part of the human body resembles that on the above-mentioned cylinder seals from Hama and Byblos.

The Figures with “Turned-upwards Legs”

appendix

In addition to the objects presented in Chapter 7, examples of Neolithic art of the ancient Near East include an anthropomorphic figure with raised arms and raised legs. The arms are bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically. The legs are separate and are also bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically. Such a posture is physically and anatomically impossible, and so it is unclear how it should be interpreted. Figures of this type have been reported from Çatal Höyük, Khirokitia, Hacilar, Köçcsk Höyük, Tülintepe (Fig. 13.1). These sites are located in Anatolia and Cyprus, a relatively concentrated distribution within the Near East. They are also close to each other chronologically, as they have all been dated to the late seventh and early sixth millennia bc. The Assemblage

1. çatal höyük This site is located in central Anatolia (above, Site 9). One of the most prominent elements present in the Çatal Höyük wall decorations is the plaster relief of large human figures (see, for example, Fig. 13.2:a–c). The arms are usually shown bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically, and the legs are also usually flexed upwards, first horizontally and then vertically. Such single figures have been interpreted as goddesses, or goddesses having given birth to a bull (Mellaart 1967:101–103, 124); when two such figures were found together, they were interpreted as twin goddesses (Mellaart 1967:110–111). Any figure with legs turned upwards was interpreted as indicating a position of childbirth (Mellaart 1967, Pls. 25–26). One object (Fig. 13:c) was described thus: “This goddess is shown with her head and body in profile, her long locks floating behind her in the wind. Arms and legs are outstretched and foreshortened, thus strengthening the impression of swift motion. The goddess appears to be running, dancing or whirling” (Mellaart 1967:116–117, Fig. 29). In most of the cases the figures lack any gender characteristics, and so they cannot be identified as females. Why they should be identified as gods or goddesses is also unclear. To reinterpret these figures, the following points are important:

292

The D aTA

figure 13.1 Distribution of Near Eastern Neolithic sites with “turned-upwards legs” figures.

Body Position. The flexed arms and legs represent movement and a dynamic posture, not a situation of giving birth. Figure Arrangement. Mellaart gave the location of nineteen figures within the different rooms at Çatal Höyük (Mellaart 1967:102–103, Fig. 16). Of these eleven (58%) were found in groups, and eight (42%) were found singly in separate rooms. Of those discovered in groups, four examples (in Rooms VIB.12, VI.14, VII.1, VIIA.8) show two adjacent figures on the same wall (Fig. 13.2:a); in one case, three figures were depicted, each on a different wall (Room VII.31), as though they were encircling the room (Fig. 13:b–c). As only seldom are all four walls of a room preserved intact, it is possible that in those cases where only one figure was found, the other figures were not preserved. The figure arrangement indicates that they were involved in a group activity.

If we consider both the body posture and the figure arrangement, it seems that the anthropomorphic reliefs at Çatal Höyük depict dancing.

293

2. khirokitia This aceramic Neolithic village site is located in Cyprus, and has been dated to the seventh millennium bc. In the recent excavations a stone bowl fragment decorated with an anthropomorphic figure was discovered. The figure is shown with the arms bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically. The legs are also bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically. As the object is broken, it is not clear whether another figure was engraved on the other side (Fig. 13.3:f; Le Brun 1989).

THE FIGURES WITH “TURNED UPWARD S LEGS”

figure 13.2 Plastered wall reliefs with anthropomorphic figures from Çatal Höyük: a. Life size (after Mellaart 1967, Figure 23). b. Life size (after Mellaart 1967, Figure 28). c. Life size (after Mellaart 1967, Figure 29).

figure 13.3 “Turned-upwards legs” figures from various sites in Anatolia and Cyprus:

a. Köçcsk Höyük, ca. 13 x 9 cm (after Silistreli 1989, Figure XII:1). b. Köçcsk Höyük, ca. 27 x 14 cm (after Silistreli 1989, Figure XI:4). c. Hacilar (Layer I), ca. 8 x 6 cm (after Mellaart 1970, Figure 116:13). d. Hacilar (Layer I), ca. 6 x 9 cm (after Mellaart 1970, Figure 116:11). e. Tülintepe, ca. 10 x 6 cm (after Esin 1993, Figure 4). f. Khirokitia, ca. 10 x 6 cm (after Le Brun 1989, Figure 52:9).

295

THE FIGURES WITH “TURNED UPWARD S LEGS”

3. hacilar This site is located in central Anatolia (above, Site 11). Fragments of two decorated pottery bowls, painted with human figures, have been reported from Layer 2 and are dated to the early sixth millennium bc. There is one schematic anthropomorphic figure on the preserved part of each fragment (Fig. 13.3:c–d). Each figure is shown with the arms bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically. The legs are also bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically (Fig. 13.3:c–d; Mellaart 1970, Fig. 116:11, 13). As this posture is similar to that on objects discovered at Çatal Höyük, the excavator also designated them as a figure of a goddess (Mellaart 1970, Fig. 116:11, 13).

4. köç cs k höyük This site is located in eastern Anatolia (above, Site 4) and has been dated to the sixth millennium bc. In addition to the clear examples of dancing figures (Fig. 7.7:a–f ), there is also a bowl with an applied anthropomorphic figure. This is a female figure with the arms and legs bent upwards, first horizontally and then vertically (Fig. 13.3:a–b; Silistreli 1989).

5. tülintepe This site is located in the central Euphrates valley in eastern Turkey (above, Site 43) and has been dated to the late sixth millennium bc. In addition to the examples presented above (Fig. 8.30:a, d), there is another applied figure on a pottery sherd. As the excavator described it, “The legs of other figure, which is probably giving-birth, are stretched obliquely sideward parallel to its arms” (Fig. 13.3:e; Esin 1993:112, Fig. 4:2). D iscussion

The figures with “turned-upwards legs” or “stretched-obliquely legs” discussed here from Çatal Höyük, Khirokitia, Hacilar, Köçcsk Höyük, and Tülintepe are usually interpreted as goddesses and associated with childbirth. Figures in similar postures have been discovered at other sites mentioned above: Tepe Giyan and Byblos (Figs. 7.3:b; 12.12:g). In these two sites the figures with “turned-upwards legs” appeared in dancing scenes together with “regular” anthropomorphic figures. It thus seems that this impossible leg position can be understood as an artistic exaggeration of dynamic dance postures.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Bibliography

Ackerman, P. 1967. Symbol and Myth in Prehistoric Ceramic Ornament. A Survey of Persian Art 14:2914–2929. London and New York: Oxford University. Adams, B. 1999. Unprecedented Discoveries at Hierakonpolis. Egyptian Archaeology 15:29–31. Akira, H. 1987. Stupa Worship. In M. Eliade (ed.). Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 14:92–96. New York: MacMillan. Akkermans, P. A., J. A. K. Boerma, A. T. Clason, S. G. Hill, E. Lohof, C. Meiklejohn, M. Le Mière, G. M. F. Molgat, J. J. Roodenberg, W. Waterbolk-van Rooyen, and W. van Zeist. 1983. Bouqras Revisited: Preliminary Report on a Project in Eastern Syria. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 49:335–372. Akkermans, P. M. M. G. 1988. The Soundings at Tell Damishliyya. In M. N. Van Loon (ed.). Hammam et Turkman I, pp. 19–67. Leiden: Nederlands HistorischArcheologisch Instituut et Istanbul. ———. 1989. Excavations at Tell Sabi Abyad. Oxford: BAR International Series 468. ———. 1991. New Radiocarbon Dates for the Later Neolithic of Northern Syria. Paléorient 17/1:121–125. ———. 1993. Villages in the Steppe: Later Neolithic Settlement and Subsistence in the Balikh Valley, Northern Syria. Ann Arbor: International Monographs in Prehistory, Archaeological Series 5. ———. 1996. Tell Sabi Abyad: The Late Neolithic Settlement. Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut. Aksamit, J. 1992. Petrie’s Type D 46d and Remarks on the Production and Decoration of Predynastic Decorated Pottery. Cahiers de la Céramique Égyptienne 3:17–21. Al-A’dami, K. A. 1968. Excavations at Tell es-Sawwan (Second Season). Sumer 24:57–96. Alizadeh, A. 1988. Socio-Economic Complexity in Southwestern Iran During the Fifth and Fourth Millennia bc: The Evidence from Tall-i Bakun A. Iran 26:17–34. ———. 1992. Prehistoric Settlement Patterns and Cultures in Susiana, Southwestern Iran: The Analysis of the F. G. L. Gremliza Survey Collection. Technical Report 24. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology. Amiet, P. 1961. La glyptique mesopotamienne archaique. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. ———. 1972. Glyptique susienne. Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique en Iran, Vol. 43. Paris: P. Geuthner. ———. 1979. L’iconographie archaique de l’Iran, quelques documents nouveaux. Syria 56:333–352. ———. 1980. Art of the Ancient Near East. New York: H. N. Abrams. Amiran, R. 1962. Myths of the Creation of Man and the Jericho Statues. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 167:23–25. ———. 1969. Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land: From Its Beginnings in the Neolithic Period to the Iron Age. Jerusalem: Massada.

298

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

———. 1972. A Cult Stele from Arad. Israel Exploration Journal 22:86–88. Anati, E. 1955. Una scena di danza nel Negev Centrala. Rivista di Scienze Preistoriche 10:70–75. ———. 1964. Civilta Preistorica della Valcamonica. Milan: Casa Editrice il Saggiatore. Anati, E. 1994. Valcamonica Rock Art. Studi Camuni 13. Capo di Ponte: Edizioni del Centro. Anderson, J. 1986. Ballet and Modern Dance: A Concise History. Princeton: Princeton Book Company. Arnheim, R. 1974. Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. Berkeley: University of California. Bader, N. O. 1993. The Early Agricultural Settlement of Tell Sotto. In N. Yoffee and J. J. Clark (eds.). Early Stages in the Evolution of Mesopotamian Civilization, pp. 41–54. Tucson: University of Arizona. Baldacci, T. 1987. Music, Games and Dance. In A. A. Aonadoni Roveri (ed.). Egyptian Civilization, pp. 232–247. Turin: Egyptian Museum. Barba, E., and N. Savarese. 1991. A Dictionary of Theatre Anthropology. London: Routledge. Bard, K. A. 1999. Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt. London: Routledge. Barnett, R. D. 1966. Homme masqué ou dieu-ibex? Syria 43:259–276. ———. 1985. Assurbanipal’s Feast. Eretz Israel 18:1*–6*. Bar-Yosef, O. 1980. A Human Figurine from a Khiamian Site in the Lower Jordan Valley. Paléorient 6:193–199. ———. 1982. Pre-Pottery Neolithic Sites in Southern Sinai. Biblical Archeologist 45/1:9–12. ———. 1991. The Archaeology of the Natufian Layer at Hayonim Cave. In O. BarYosef and F. Valla (eds.). The Natufian Culture in the Levant, pp. 81–92. Ann Arbor: International Monographs in Prehistory, Archaeological Series 1. ———. 1992. The Neolithic Period. In A. Ben-Tor (ed.). The Archaeology of Ancient Israel, pp. 10–39. New Haven: Yale University. ————. 2001. Tools Bearing Symbolic Value at Nahal Hemar Cave, Judean Desert. An Unpublished Lecture Presented at the Fourth Workshop on PrePottery Neolithic Chipped Lithic Industries. Nig˘de-Turkey, June 2001. Bar-Yosef, O., and D. Alon. 1988. Nahal Hemar Cave. ‘Atiqot 18 (English series). Jerusalem: Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums. Bar-Yosef, O., and A. Belfer-Cohen. 1989. The Origins of Sedentism and Farming Communities in the Levant. Journal of World Prehistory 3:447–498. Bar-Yosef, O., A. Gopher, E. Tchernov, and M. E. Kislev. 1991. Netiv Hagdud: An Early Neolithic Village Site in the Jordan Valley. Journal of Field Archaeology 18:405–424. Baumgartel, E. L. 1947. The Cultures of Prehistoric Egypt. London: Oxford University. ———. 1960. The Cultures of Prehistoric Egypt, Vol. II. London: Oxford University. ———. 1970. Petrie’s Naqada Excavation, A Supplement. London: Bernard Quaritch. Beeman, W. O. 1993. The Anthropology of Theater and Spectacle. Annual Review of Anthropology 22:369–393. Beile-Bohn, M., C. Gerber, M. Morsch, and K. Schmidt. 1998. Neolithische Forschungen in Obermesopotamien Gürcütepe und Göbekli Tepe. Istanbuler Mitteilungen 48:5–78. Belfer-Cohen, A. 1988. The Natufian Graveyard in Hayonim Cave. Paléorient 14(2):297–308.

299

Bibliography

———. 1991. Art Items from Layer B, Hayonim Cave: A Case Study of Art in a Natufian Context. In O. Bar-Yosef and F. Valla (eds.). The Natufian Culture in the Levant, pp. 569–588. Ann Arbor: International Monographs in Prehistory, Archaeological Series 1. Bellugue, P. 1963. A propos d’art de forme et de mouvement. Paris: Librairie Maloine. Bender, B. 1975. Farming in Prehistory: From Hunter-Gatherer to Food Producer. London: John Baker. Ben-Tor, A. 1977. Cult Scenes on Early Bronze Age Seal Impressions from Palestine. Levant 9:90–100. ———. 1978. Cylinder Seals of Third Millennium Palestine. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement Series 22. Cambridge: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. ———. 1992. New Light on Cultic Cylindrical Seal Impressions from the Early Bronze Age in Eretz Israel. Eretz Israel 23:38–44 (Hebrew). Berger, M. A. 1992. Predynastic Animal-Headed Boats from Hierakonpolis and Southern Egypt. In R. Friedman and B. Adams (eds.). The Followers of Horus. Studies Dedicated to Michael Allen Hoffman, pp. 107–120. Oxford: Oxbow. Bernbaum, E. 1987. Tibetan Pilgrimage. In M. Eliade (ed.). Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 11:351–353. New York: MacMillan. Bernbeck, R. 1989. Die neolithische Keramik aus Qale Rostam, Bakhtiyari-Gebiet (Iran): Klassifikation, Produktionsanalyse und Datierungspotential. Serie Altertumswissenschaften Vols. 9 and 10. Rheinfelden: Schäuble. Bernbeck, R., S. Pollock, and C. Coursey. 1999. The Halaf Settlement at Kazane Höyük: Preliminary Report on the 1996 and 1997 Seasons. Anatolica 25:109–147. Betts, A. V. G. 1987. The Hunter’s Perspective: 7th Millennium bc Rock Carvings from Eastern Jordan. World Archaeology 19:214–225. Betts, A. V. G. (ed.). 1998. The Harra and the Hamad: Excavations and Explorations in Eastern Jordan. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. Biçakçi, E. 2001. A New Approach on the Prehistoric Cultures of Central Anatolia in the View of Tepecik/Çiftlik (Nig˘de) Excavations. TUBA-AR (Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Bergisi) 4:25–41 (Turkish). Bienert, H. D. and U. Fritz. 1989. Die alteste Schildkroten-Darstellung: 9000 Jahre alt. Salamandra 25/2:112–114. Bienkowski, P. 1991. Treasures from an Ancient Land: The Art of Jordan. Merseyside: Alan Sutton. Biesele, M. 1978. Religion and Folklore. In P. V. Tobias (ed.). The Bushmen: San Hunters and Herders of Southern Africa, pp. 162–172. Cape Town and Pretoria: Human and Rousseau. Biran, A. 1986. The Dancer from Dan. Israel Exploration Journal 36:168–173. Birket-Smith, K. 1953. The Chugach Eskimo. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseets Publikationsfond. Bissing, W. F. von. 1934. Ägyptische Kunstgeschichte von den ältesten Zeiten bis auf die Eroberung durch die Araber. Berlin: Ägyptologischer Verlag. Blacking, J. 1976. Dance, Conceptual Thought and Production in the Archaeological Record. In G. de G. Sieveking, I. H. Longworth, and K. E. Wilson (eds.). Problems in Economic and Social Archaeology, pp. 3–13. London: Duckworth. Blacking, J., and J. W. Kealinohomoku (eds.). 1979. The Performing Arts: Music and Dance. Hague: Mouton. Bland, A. 1976. A History of Ballet and Dance in the Western World. New York: Praeger. Bloch, M. 1989. Ritual, History and Power. Monographs on Social Anthropology 58. London: London School of Economics.

300

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

Bogucki, P., and R. Crygiel. 1993. The First Farmers of Central Europe: A Survey Article. Journal of Field Archaeology 20:399–426. Bolger, D., and E. Peltenburg. 1991. The Building Model. In E. Peltenburg (ed.). Lemba Archaeological Project II:2: A Ceremonial Area at Kissonerga, Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 70:3, pp. 12–27. Gothenburg: Paul Åströms. Bouiukliev, C., M. Dimitrov, and D. Nicolov. 1965. Musee National Stara Sagora. Sofia: Balgarski Houdojnik. Bourguignon, E. (ed.). 1973. Religion, Altered States of Conciousness, and Social Change. Columbus: Ohio State University. Bourriau, J. 1981. Umm el-Ga’ab: Pottery from the Nile Valley before the Arab Conquest. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Boyd, B., and J. Cook. 1993. A Reconsideration of the “Ain Sakhri” Figurine. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 59:399–405. Braidwood, R. J., and L. S. Braidwood. 1953. The Earliest Village Communities of Southwestern Asia. Journal of World History 1(2):278–310. ———. 1960. Excavations in the Plain of Antioch. The Earlier Assemblages: Phases A–J. Oriental Institute Publications 61. Chicago: University of Chicago. Braidwood, R. J., L. S. Braidwood, E. Tulane, and A. L. Perkins. 1944. New Chalcolithic Material of Samarran Type and Its Implications. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 3:47–72. Braidwood, R. J., L. S. Braidwood, J. G. Smith, and C. Leslie. 1952. Matarrah, A Southern Variant of the Hassunan Assemblage, Excavated in 1948. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 11:1–75. Brandl, B. 1989. Observations on the Early Bronze Age Strata of Tel Erani. In P. de Miroschedji (ed.). L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’Age du Bronze ancien, pp. 357– 387. Oxford: BAR International Series 527. Brandt, R. W. 1978. The Chalcolithic Pottery. In M. N. Van Loon (ed.). Korucutepe, Vol. 2, pp. 57–60. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing. Breniquet, C. 1992a. À propos du vase halafien de la Tombe G2 de Tell Arpachiyah. Iraq 54:69–78. ———. 1992b. Rapport sur deux campagnes de fouilles à Tell es-Sawwan, 1988– 1989. Mesopotamia 27:5–30. Bretschneider, J. 1991. Architekturmodelle in Vorderasien und der ostlichen Agais vom Neolithikum bis in das 1. Jahrtausend. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 229. Kevelaer: Butzon and Bercker and Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag. Broman Morales, V. 1983. Jarmo Figurines and Other Clay Objects. In L. S. Braidwood, R. J. Braidwood, B. Howe, C. A. Reed, and P. J. Watson (eds.). Prehistoric Archaeology along the Zagros Flanks. Oriental Institute Publications 105, pp. 369–423. Chicago: University of Chicago. ———. 1990. Figurines and Other Clay Objects from Sarab and Cayonu. Oriental Institute Communications 25. Chicago: University of Chicago. Brooks, R. R. R., and V. S. Wakankar. 1976. Stone Age Painting in India. New Haven: Yale University. Brooks, V. L. 1984. Why Dance Films Do Not Look Right: A Study in the Nature of the Documentary Movement as Visual Communication. Studies in Visual Communication 10/2:44–67. Brunner-Traut, E. 1958. Der Tanz im Alten Ägypten, Nach bildlichen und inschriftlichen Zeugnissen. Ägyptologische Forschungen Heft 6. Gluckstadt: J. J. Augustin. ———. 1985. Tanz. Lexikon der Ägyptologie, Vol. VI:215–231. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Brunton, G. 1934. Modern Painting on Predynastic Pots. Annales du Service des Antiquités de L’Égypte 34:149–156.

301

Bibliography

————. 1937. Mostagedda and the Tasian Culture. London: Bernard Quaritch. ————. 1948. Matmar: British Museum Expedition to Middle Egypt 1929–1931. London: Bernard Quaritch. Brunton, G., and G. Caton-Thompson. 1928. The Badarian Civilisation and Predynastic Remains near Badari. London: British School of Archaeology in Egypt. Bryson, N. 1983. Vision and Painting. London: MacMillan. Budge, W. E. A. 1902. Egypt in the Neolithic and Archaic Periods. A History of Egypt, Vol. 1. London: Kegan Paul. Buitenhuis, H., and A. T. Clason. 1993. Archaeozoology of the Near East: Proceedings of the First International Symposium on the Archaeozoology of Southwestern Asia and Adjacent Areas. Leiden: Universal Book Services. Burt, R. 1995. The Male Dance: Bodies, Spectacle, Sexualities. London: Routledge. Byrd, B. F. 1994. Public and Private, Domestic and Corporate: The Emergence of the Southwest Asian Village. American Antiquity 59:639–666. Campbell, S. 1998. Problems of Definition: The Origins of the Halaf in North Iraq. Subartu 4:39–52. Cameron, D. O. 1981. The Ghassulian Wall Paintings. London: Kenyon-Deane. Capart, J. 1905. Primitive Art in Egypt. London: H. Grevel. Cass, J. 1993. Dancing through History. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Cauvin, J. 1972. Religions Néolithiques de Syro-Palestine. Paris: Maisonneuve. ———. 1985. Le Néolithique de Cafer Höyük (Turquie): Bilan provisoire après quatre campagnes (1979–1983). Cahiers de l’Euphrate 4:123–133. ———. 1989. La stratigraphie de Cafer Höyük-est (Turquie) et les origines du PPNB du Taurus. Paléorient 15/1:75–86. ———. 1994. Naissance des divinités: naissance de l’agriculture. La révolution des symboles au Néolithique. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique Chataigner, C. 19.95. La Transcaucasie au Néolithique et au Chalcolithique. (BAR International Series 624). Oxford: Tempus Reparatum. Clarke, M., and C. Clement. 1981. The History of Dance. New York: Crown. Cohen, M. N. 1975. The Food Crisis in Prehistory: Overpopulation and the Origins of Agriculture. New Haven: Yale University. Cohen, M. E. 1993. The Cultic Calendars of the Ancient Near East. Bethesda, MD: CDL. Cohen, S. J. (ed.). 1998. International Encyclopedia of Dance. 6 Vols. New York: Oxford University. Coleman, J. E. 1992. Greece, the Aegean, and Cyprus. In R. Ehrich (ed.). Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, 3rd edition, pp. 247–288. Chicago: University of Chicago. Collon, D. 1987. First Impressions: Cylinder Seals in the Ancient Near East. Chicago: University of Chicago. Collon, D., and J. Reade. 1983. Archaic Nineveh. Baghdader Mitteilungen 14:33–41. Condurachi, E., and C. Daicoviciu. 1971. Romania. Archaeologia Mundi. Geneva: Nagel. Conkey, M., and C. Hastorf. 1988. The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Contenau, G., and R. Ghirshman. 1935. Fouilles du Tepe Giyan. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner. Contenson, H. de. 1967. Troisième campagne à Tell Ramad, 1966: Rapport préliminaire. Annales archéologiques arabes syriennes 17:17–24. ———. 1981. L’art du néolithique préceramique en Syrie-Palestine. Bolletino del Centro Camuno di Studi Preistorici 18:53–64.

302

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

———. 1983. Early Agriculture in Western Asia. In T. Young, C., P. E. L. Smith, and P. Mortensen (eds.). The Hilly Flanks and Beyond: Essays on the Prehistory of Southwestern Asia, Presented to R. J. Braidwood, Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 36, pp. 57–74. Chicago: University of Chicago. Copeland, L. 1979. Observations on the Prehistory of the Balikh Valley, Syria, During the 7th–4th Millennia bc. Paléorient 5:251–275. Crowfoot Payne, J. 1993. Catalogue of the Predynastic Egyptian Collection in the Ashmolean Museum. Oxford: Clarendon. Crowfoot Payne, J., A. Kaczmarczky, and J. Fleming. 1977. Forged Decoration on Predynastic Pots. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 63:5–12. Danby, H. 1938. The Mishnah. Oxford: Oxford University. Dani, A. H. 1988. Recent Archaeological Discoveries in Pakistan. Paris: UNESCO, Centre for East Asian Cultural Studies. David, N., J. Sterner, and K. Gavua. 1988. Why Pots Are Decorated. Current Anthropology 29:365–389. Davis, S. J. M. 1987. The Archaeology of Animals. New Haven: Yale University. Delougaz, P., and H. J. Kantor. 1996. Chogha Mish I: The First Five Seasons of Excavations 1961-1971. Oriental Institute Publications 101. Chicaco: Oriental Institute. Dittmann, R. 1984. Eine Randebene der Zagros in der Fruhzeit. Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient 3. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer. Dollfus, G. 1971. Les fouilles à Djaffarabad de 1969 à 1971. Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Iran 1:17–161. ———. 1975. Les fouilles à Djaffarabad de 1972 à 1974, Djaffarabad periodes I et II. Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Iran 5:11–220. ———. 1983a. Tepe Djowi: controle stratigraphique, 1975. Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Iran 13:17–131. ———. 1983b. Tepe Bendebal. Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Iran 13:133–275. ———. 1986. Peut-on parler de “Choga Mami Transitional” dans le sud-ouest de l’Iran? In J.-L. Huot (ed.). Préhistoire de la Mesopotamie, pp. 181–188. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Dolmetsch, M. 1949. Dance of England and France from 1450 to 1600. London: Routledge and K. Paul (2nd edition, New York: Da Capo, 1975). ———. 1954. Dance of Spain and Italy from 1400 to 1600. London: Routledge and K. Paul. Dothan, T. 1982. The Philistines and Their Material Culture. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. Dragomir, I. T. 1987. Un vase-support Cucutenien: “la ronde de Bereçcsti.” In M. Petrescu-Dimbovita (ed.). La civilisation de Cucuteni en contexte européen, pp. 289–299. Iasi: Université “Al. I. Cuza.” Dreyer, G., U. Hartung, T. Hikade, E. C. Köhler, Y. Müller, and F. Pumpenmeier. 1998. Umm el-Qaab. Nachuntersuchungen im frühzeitlichen Königsfriedhof 9./ 10. Vorbericht. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 54:79–167. Dumitrescu, V. 1974. Arta Prehistorica În România. Bucharest: Editura Meridiane. Dunand, M. 1950. Fouilles de Byblos II 1933–38. Paris: Maisonneuve. Duru, R. 1980. Kuruçay Höyüg˘ü Kazilari 1978–79. Anadolu Arastirmalari Ek Yagini 2. Istanbul. ———. 1988. Kuruçay Höyüg˘ü Kazilari 1986–87, Çalismalari Raporu. Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten 203:653–666. Dzhafarzade, I. M. 1973. Gobustan. Baku: Academy of Azerbaijan, Institute of History (Russian).

303

Bibliography

Eck, D. L. 1987. Circumambulation. In M. Eliade (ed.). Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 3:509–514. New York: MacMillan. Edwards, P. 1991. Wadi Hammeh 27: An Early Natufian Site at Pella, Jordan. In O. Bar-Yosef and F. Valla (eds.). The Natufian Culture in the Levant, pp. 123–148. Ann Arbor: International Monographs in Prehistory, Archaeological Series 1. Egami, N., and T. Sono. 1962. Marv-Dasht II, Excavation at Tall-I-Gap 1959. Tokyo University Iraq–Iran Archaeological Expedition Report 3. Tokyo: Yamakawa. Egami, N., S. Masuda, and T. Gotoh. 1977. Tal-i Jarri: A Preliminary Report of the Excavations in Marv Dasht, 1961 and 1971. Orient 13:1–14. Ehrich, R. W., and A. H. Bankoff. 1992. Geographical and Chronological Patterns in East, Central and Southeastern Europe. In R. Ehrich (ed.). Chronologies in Old World Archaeology. 3rd edition, pp. 375–394. Chicago: University of Chicago. Eisen, G. A. 1940. Ancient Oriental Cylinder and Other Seals (with a Description of the Collection of Mrs. William H. Moore). Chicago: University of Chicago. Eisenberg, E. 1992. An Early Bronze I Seal from Tel Kitan. Eretz Israel 23:5–8 (Hebrew). El-Wailly, F. 1965. Foreword. Sumer 22:1–20 (Arabic). Emmons, G. T. 1991. The Tlingit Indians. Seattle: University of Washington. Engelbach, R. 1923. Harageh. London: British School of Archaeology in Egypt. Epstein, C. 1972. Early Bronze Age Seal Impressions from the Golan. Israel Exploration Journal 22:209–217. Eshkol, N., and A. Wachmann. 1958. Movement Notation. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson. Esin, U. 1976. Tulintepe Excavations 1972. Keban Project 1972 Activities, Keban Project Publications, Series 1, No. 5:147172. Ankara: Middle East Technical University. ———. 1993. The Relief Decorations on the Prehistoric Pottery of Tulintepe in Eastern Anatolia. In M. Frangipane, H. Hauptmann, M. Liverani, P. Matthiae, and M. Mellink (eds.). Between the Rivers and over the Mountains, pp. 105–119. Rome: Università di Roma. Evans, A. 1930. The Palace of Minos, Vol. III. London: MacMillan. Evans-Pritchard, E. E. 1928. The Dance. Africa 1:446–462. Fitt, S. S. 1988. Dance Kinesiology. New York: Schirmer. Flannery, K. V. 1972a. The Origins of the Village as a Settlement Type in Mesoamerica and the Near East. In P. J. Ucko, R. Tringham, and G. W. Dimbleby (eds.). Man, Settlement and Urbanism, pp. 23–53. London: Duckworth. ———. 1972b. The Cultural Evolution of Civilizations. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 3:399–426. ———. 1973. The Origins of Agriculture. Annual Review of Anthropology 2:271–310. Forest, J.-D. 1993. Çatal Höyük et son decor: pour le dechiffrement d’un code symbolique. Anatolia Antiqua (Eski Anadolu) 2:1–42. Forrest, J. 1999. The History of Morris Dancing 1458–1750. Cambridge: James Clarke. Frankfort, H. 1939. Cylinder Seals: A Documentary Essay on the Art and Religion of the Ancient Near East. London: Gregg (reprinted 1965). ———. 1955. The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient. Baltimore: Penguin. Frisch, K. von. 1967. The Dance Language and Orientation of Bees. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University. Fukai, S., K. Horiuchi, and T. Matsutani. 1974. Telul eth Thalathat, Vol. III. The Excavation of Tell V. The Tokyo University Iraq-Iran Archaeological Expedition Report 15. Tokyo: Institute of Oriental Culture. Galassi, G. 1955. L’Arte del Più Antico Egitto nel Museo di Torino. Roma: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

304

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

Garfinkel, Y. 1987. Burnt Lime Products and Social Implications in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Villages of the Near East. Paléorient 13/1:68–75. ———. 1992. The Pottery Assemblages of Sha’ar Hagolan and Rabah Stages from Munhata (Israel). Les Cahiers du Centre de Recherche Français de Jerusalem, No. 6. Paris: Association Paléorient. ———. 1993. The Yarmukian Culture in Israel. Paléorient 19/1:115–134. ———. 1994. Ritual Burial of Cultic Objects, The Earliest Evidence. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 4:159–188. ———. 1995. Human and Animal Figurines of Munhata (Israel). Les Cahiers des missions archéologiques Françaises en Israël, No. 8. Paris: Association Paléorient. ———. 1998. Dancing and the Beginning of Art Scenes in the Early Village Communities of the Near East and Southeast Europe. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 8/2:207–237. ———. 1999a. Neolithic and Chalcolithic Pottery of the Southern Levant. Qedem 39. Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology. ———. 1999b. Dance and Representation—A Methodological Remark: Reply to Lewis-Williams. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 9/2:283–285. ———. 1999c. The Yarmukians: Neolithic Art from Sha’ar Hagolan. Jerusalem: Bible Lands Museum. ————. 2000. The Khazineh Painted Style of Western Iran. Iran 38:57–70. ————. 2001a. Dance at the Beginning of Agriculture. Dance Today, The Dance Magazine of Israel 5:86–91 (Hebrew 4–9). ————. 2001b. Dancing or Fighting—A Recently Discovered Predynastic Scene from Abydos, Egypt. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 11:241‒245. Garrod, D. A. E., and D. M. A. Bates. 1933. The Stone Age at Mount Carmel. Oxford: Clarendon. Garstang, J., J. P. Droop, and J. Crowfoot. 1935. Jericho: City and Necropolis (Fifth Report). Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 22:143–173. Garstang, J., I. Ben-Dor, and G. M. Fitzgerald. 1936. Jericho: City and Necropolis (Report for the Sixth and Concluding Season, 1936). Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 23:67–100. Garstang, J., W. J. Phythian-Adams, and V. Seton-Williams. 1937. Third Report on the Excavations at Sakji-Geuzi 1908–1911. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 24:119–140. Gautier, J. E., and G. Lampre. 1905. Fouilles de Moussian. Mémoires de la Délégation archéologique en Perse 8:59–148. Gell, A. 1998. Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Clarendon. George, B. 1975. Frühe Keramik aus Ägypten: Die dekorierte Negade II-Keramik im Medelhavsmuseet. Medelhavsmuseet Bulletin 10. Stockholm: Museum of Mediterranean and Near Eastern Antiquities. Georgive, G. 1965. The Azmak Mound in Southern Bulgaria. Antiquity 39:6–8. Gero, M. J., and W. Conkey. 1991. Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory. Oxford: Blackwell. Ghirshman, R. 1938. Fouilles de Siak, Vol. I. Musée du Louvre—Département des antiquités orientales, Série archéologique, Tome IV. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner. Gimbutas, M. A. 1982. The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe 6500-3500 BC, Myths and Cult Images. Berkeley: University of California. ———. 1989. The Language of the Goddess. London: Thames and Hudson. ———. 1992. Chronologies of Eastern Europe: Neolithic through Early Bronze Age. In R. Ehrich (ed.). Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, 3rd edition, pp. 395–406. Chicago: University of Chicago. Godden, E. 1982. Rock Paintings of Aboriginal Australia. Sydney: Reed.

305

Bibliography

Goff, B. L. 1963a. Symbols of Prehistoric Mesopotamia. New Haven: Yale University. ———. 1963b. Excavations at Tall-i Nokhodi. Iran 1:43–70. Gombrich, E. H. 1972. Introduction: Aims and Limits of Iconology. In Symbolic Images, Studies in the Art of the Renaissance, pp. 1–22. London: Phaidon. ———. 1982. Moment and Movement in Art. In The Image and the Eye, pp. 40–62. London: Phaidon. Goodison, L. 1989. Death, Women and the Sun: Symbolism of Regeneration in Early Aegean Religion. Bulletin Supplement 53. London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies. Goring-Morris, N. 2000. The Quick and the Dead: The Social Context of Aceramic Neolithic Mortuary Practices as Seen from Kfar Hahoresh, pp. 103–136. In I. Kuijt (ed.). Life in Neolithic Farming Communities. Social Organization, Identity, and Differentiation (Fundamental Issues in Archaeology). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Goring-Morris, A. N., and A. Gopher. 1983. Nahal Issaron: A Neolithic Settlement in the Southern Negev. Israel Exploration Journal 33:149–162. Gourdin, W., and W. Kingery. 1975. The Beginnings of Pyrotechnology: Neolithic and Egyptian Lime Plaster. Journal of Field Archaeology 2:133–150. Gruber, N. I. 1981. Ten Dance-Derived Expressions in the Hebrew Bible. Biblica 62:328–346. Gulder, A. 1960–1962. Die urnenfelderzeitliche ‘Frauenkröte’ von Maissau in Niederösterreich und ihr geistesgeschichtlicher Hintergrund. Mitteilungen der prähistorischen Kommission der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 10:1–162. Gustavson-Gaube, C. 1981. Shams ed-Din Tannira: The Halafian Pottery of Area A. Berytus 29:9–182. Gut, R. V. 1995. Das Prähistorische Ninive. Baghdader Forschungen 19. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Guy, P. L. O. 1938. Megiddo Tombs. Oriental Institute Publications 33. Chicago: Chicago University. Hanna, J. L. 1979. Toward a Cross-Cultural Conceptualization of Dance and Some Correlate Considerations. In J. Blacking and J. W. Kealinohomoku (eds.). The Performing Arts: Music and Dance, pp. 17–45. Hague: Mouton. ———. 1987. Dance and Religion. In M. Eliade (ed.). Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 4:203–212. New York: MacMillan. ———. 1988. Dance, Sex and Gender: Signs of Identity, Dominance, Defiance, and Desire. Chicago: Chicago University. Hassan, F. A. 1981. Demographic Archaeology. New York: Academic Press. Hauptmann, H. 1976. Die Grabungen auf dem Norçcsuntepe 1972. Keban Project 1972 Activities. Keban Project Publications, Series 1, No. 5:71–108. Ankara: Middle East Technical University. ———. 1991–1992. Nevali Çori—Eine Siedlung des akeramischen Neolithikums am mittleren Euphrat. Nurenberger Blätter zur Archäologie 8:15–33. ———. 1993. Ein Kultgebäude in Nevali Çori. In M. Frangipane, H. Hauptmann, M. Liverani, P. Matthiae, and M. Mellink (eds.). Between the Rivers and over the Mountains, pp. 37–69. Rome: Università di Roma. Hayes, W. C. 1990. The Scepter of Egypt. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, Revised 5th printing. Hendrickx, S. 1996. Vase Decorated with Victory Scene. In T. Phillips (ed.). Africa: The Art of a Continent, p. 60. London: Royal Academy of Arts. ———. 1998. Peaux d’animaux comme symboles prédynastiques: À propos de quelques représentations sur les vases White Cross-Lined. Chronique d’Égypte 73:203–230.

306

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

Hennessy, J. B. 1989. Ghassul. In D. Homes-Fredericq and J. B. Hennessy (eds.). Archaeology of Jordan II: 1. Akkadica Supplementum VII, pp. 230–241. Leuven: Peeters. Herzfeld, E. 1929. Prehistoric Persia I. Aeneolithic Settlement at Persepolis. Illustrated London News 25 (May 1929) :892–893. ———. 1930. Die vorgeschichtlichen Topfereien von Samarra. Die Ausgrabungen von Samarra, Vol. 5. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer and Ernst Vohsen. ———. 1932. Iranische Denkmäler. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer and Ernst Vohsen. ———. 1933. Aufsatze zur altorientischen Archäologie II: Stempelsiegel. Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 5:49–124. ———. 1941. Iran in the Ancient East. London: Oxford University. Hijara, I. 1978. Three New Graves at Arpachiyah. World Archaeology 10:125–128. Hodder, I. 1987. Contextual Archaeology: An Interpretation of Çatal Hüyük and a Discussion of the Origins of Agriculture. Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology 24:43–56. ———. 1990. The Domestication of Europe. Oxford: Blackwell. Hoffman, A. M. 1979. Egypt before the Pharaohs. New York: A. A. Knopf. Hole, F. 1977. Studies in the Archaeological History of the Deh Luran Plain: The Excavations of Chagha Sefid. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 9. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. ———. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. Hole, F., K. V. Flannery, and J. A. Neely. 1969. Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Deh Luran Plain: An Early Village Sequence from Khuzistan, Iran. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 1. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Holloway, R. R. 1991. The Archaeology of Ancient Sicily. London: Routledge. Huot, J. L. 1965. Persia: From Its Origins to the Achaemenids. Archaeologia Mundi. Geneva: Nagel. Hutchinson, A. 1954. Labanotation. New York: New Directions Books. ———. 1984. Dance Notation: The Process of Recording Movement on Paper. London: Dance Books. ———. 1989. Choreo-Graphics: A Comparison of Dance Notation Systems from the Fifteenth Century to the Present. New York: Gordon and Breach. Iakovidis, S. P. E. 1966. A Mycenaean Mourning Custom. American Journal of Archaeology 70:43–50. Ingholt, H. 1940. Rapport préliminaire sur sept campagnes de fouilles à Hama en Syria (1932–1938). Copenhagen: Munksgaard. Ionescu, B. 1974. Obiecte de cult descoperite la Gumelniçcta. Studii si cercetari de istorie veche si arheologie 25:115–118. Ippolitoni, F. 1971. The Pottery of Tell es-Sawwan—First Season. Mesopotamia 5– 6:105–179. Ippolitoni-Strika, F. 1983. Prehistoric Roots: Continuity in the Image and Rituals of the Great Goddess Cult in the Near East. Rivista degli Studi Orientali 57:1–41. ———. 1990. A Bowl from Arpachiyah and the Tradition of Portable Shrines. Mesopotamia 25:147–174. Jacobsen, T. 1976. The Treasures of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion. New Haven: Yale University. ———. 1987. Mesopotamian Religions. In M. Eliade (ed.). Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 9:447–466. New York: MacMillan. James, F. W., and P. E. McGovern. 1993. The Late Bronze Egyptian Garrison at Beth Shan: A Study of Levels VII and VIII. University Museum Monograph 85. Philadelphia: University Museum.

307

Bibliography

Jastrow, M. 1903. A Dictionary of the Targumim, The Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature. Republished 1950, New York: Pardes Publishing House. Jesus, S. de 1985. Notes on the Symbolism in the Çatal Hüyük Wall Paintings. In J.-L. Hout, M. Yon, and Y. Calvet (eds.). De l’Indus aux Balkans, Recueil à la mémoire de Jean Deshayes, pp. 127–145. Paris: Recherche sur les Civilisations. Joffe, A. H. 1998. Alcohol and Social Complexity in Ancient Western Asia. Current Anthropology 39:297–322. Kaeppler, A. L. 1992. Dance. In R. Bauman (ed.). Folklore, Cultural Performances, and Popular Entertainments, pp. 196–203. Oxford: Oxford University. Kalicz, N. 1970. Clay Gods: The Neolithic and Copper Age in Hungary. Budapest: Corvina. Kalicz, N., and J. Makkay. 1977. Die Linienbandkeramik in der Grossen ungarischen Tiefebene. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado, Verlag der ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Kantor, H. J. 1944. The Final Phase of Predynastic Culture: Gerzean or Semainean? Journal of Near Eastern Studies 3:110–136. ———. 1976. The Prehistoric Cultures of Chogha Mish and Boneh Fazili. In M. Y. Kiani (ed.). The Memorial Volume to the VIth International Congress of Iranian Art and Archaeology, pp. 177–193. Teheran: Iranian Centre for Archaeological Research. ———. 1985. Chogha Mish. The Oriental Institute 1984–1985 Annual Report, pp. 34–39. Chicago: Chicago University. ———. 1992. The Relative Chronology of Egypt and Its Foreign Correlations before the First Intermediate Period. In R. Ehrich (ed.). Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, 3rd edition, pp. 3–21. Chicago: University of Chicago. Kaplan, J. 1969. ‘Ein El-Jarba: Chalcolithic Remains in the Plain of Esdraelon. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 194:2–39. Katz, R. 1976. Education for Transcendence: !Kia-Healing with the Kalahari !Kung. In R. B. Lee and I. De Vore (eds.). Kalahari Hunter-Gatherers, pp. 281–301. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. ———. 1982. Boiling Energy: Community Healing among the Kalahari !Kung. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Kechagia, H. 1995. The Row and the Circle: Semiotic Perspective of Visual Thinking. Rock Art Research 12/2:109–116. Kempinski, A. 1989. Megiddo: A City-State and Royal Center in North Israel. Materialien zur allgemeinen und vergleichenden Archäologie, Vol. 40. Munich: C. H. Beck. ———. 1991. A Seal Impression KAB4626 from Building 1057. In A. Kempinski and W.-D. Niemeier (eds.). Excavations at Kabri: Preliminary Report of 1990 Season, pp. 4*–5*. Tel Aviv: Tel Kabri Expedition, Tel Aviv University. Kenyon, K. M. 1957. Digging Up Jericho. London: E. Benn. ———. 1981. Excavations at Jericho, Vol. III. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. Kenyon K. M., and T. A. Holland. 1982. Excavations at Jericho, Vol. IV: The Pottery Type Series and Other Finds. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. Kingery, W. D., P. B. Vandiver, and M. Prickett. 1988. Beginnings of Pyrotechnology, Part II: Production and Use of Lime and Gypsum Plaster in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Near East. Journal of Field Archaeology 15:219–244. Kirkbride, D. 1966. Five Seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Village of Beidha in Jordan. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98:8–72. ———. 1968. Beidha 1967: An Interim Report. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 100:90–96.

308

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

———. 1973. Umm Dabaghiyah 1972: A Second Preliminary Report. Iraq 35:1–7. ———. 1975. Umm Dabaghiyah 1974: A Fourth Preliminary Report. Iraq 37:3–10. Kirstein, L. 1935. Dance: A Short History of Classic Theatrical Dancing. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons. Kopytoff, I. 1986. The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditization as Process. In A. Appadurai (ed.). The Social Life of Things, pp. 64–91. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Korek, J. 1987. Szegvár-Tüzköves, A Settlement of the Tisza Culture. In P. Raczky (ed.). The Late Neolithic of the Tisza Region, pp. 47–60. Budapest: Szolnok. Kozlowski, S. K. 1997. The Gods from Nemrik. Al-Rafidan 18:33–43. Kramer, S. N. 1963. The Sumerians. Chicago: University of Chicago. Kraus, R. 1969. History of the Dance in Art and Education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Laban, R. 1971. The Mastery of Movement. 3rd edition. Boston: Plays. Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C., and T. W. Beale. 1986. Excavations at Tepe Yahya, Iran, 1967–1975: The Early Periods. American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 38. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum, Harvard University. Lange, R. 1976. The Nature of Dance: An Anthropological Perspective. New York: International Publications Service. Langsdorff, A., and D. E. McCown. 1942. Tall-I-Bakun A: Season of 1932. University of Chicago, Oriental Institute Publications 59. Chicago: University of Chicago. Lapp, N. L. 1989. Cylinder Seals and Impressions of the Third Millennium bc from the Dead Sea Plain. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 273:1–15. Larsen, M. T. (ed.). 1979. Power and Propaganda: A Symposium on Ancient Empires. Mesopotamia 7. Copenhagen: Akademisk Förlag. Lawler, L. B. 1964. The Dance in Ancient Greece. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University. Lazarovici, G. 1981. Die Periodisierung der Vinc˘a-Kultur in Rumänien. Prähistorische Zeitschrift 56:169–196. Le Blanc, A. S., and P. J. Watson. 1973. A Comparative Statistical Analysis of Painted Pottery from Seven Halafian Sites. Paléorient 1/1:117–133. Le Breton, L. 1947. Note sur la céramique peinte aux environs de Suse et à Suse. Mémoires de la Mission archéologique en Iran 30:120–219. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Le Brun, A. 1989. Fouilles récentes à Khirokitia (Chypre 1983–1986). Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Lechevallier, M. 1978. Abou Gosh et Beisamoun, deux gisements du VIIe millénaire avant l’ère chrétienne en Israël. Mémoires et Travaux du Centre de Recherches Préhistoriques Français de Jérusalem No. 2. Paris: Association Paléorient. Lefèvre-Novaro, D. 2001. Un nouvel examen des modèles réduits trouvés dans la grande tombe de Kamilari. Aegaeum 22:89–98. Legrain, L. 1936. Archaic Seal-Impressions, Ur Excavations Vol. III. Joint Expedition of the British Museum and the University Museum. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1967. Treasures of Prehistoric Art. New York: H. N. Abrams. Lewis-Williams, J. D. 1981. Believing and Seeing: Symbolic Meanings in Southern San Rock Paintings. London: Academic Press. ———. 1999. Dance and Representation. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 9/2:281– 283. Lewis-Williams, J. D., and T. Dowson. 1989. Images of Power: Understanding Bushman Rock Art. Johannesburg: Southern Book. Lexová, M. 1935. Ancient Egyptian Dances. Prague: Oriental Institute.

309

Bibliography

Loewenstamm, S. 1965. Hag. In Encyclopaedia Biblica, Vol. 3:21–23. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute (Hebrew). Longstreet, S. 1968. The Dance in Art. Alhambra, CA: Borden Publishing. Loud, G. 1948. Megiddo II: Seasons of 1935–39. Oriental Institute Publications 62. Chicago: University of Chicago. Louis, M. 1955. Les origines préhistoriques de la danse. Cahiers ligures de prehistoire et d’archaeology 4:3–37. Ludwig, A. M. 1969. Altered States of Consciousness. In C. T. Tart (ed.). Altered States of Consciousness, pp. 9–22. New York: Wiley. Maeir, A. M., and Y. Garfinkel. 1992. Bone and Metal Straw-Tip Beer-Strainers from the Ancient Near East. Levant 24:218–223. Maisels, C. K. 1991. The Emergence of Civilization: From Hunting and Gathering to Agriculture, Cities, and the State in the Near East. London: Routledge. ———. 1993. The Near East Archaeology in the “Cradle of Civilization.” London: Routledge. Makkay, J. 1983. The Origins of the “Temple-Economy” as Seen in the Light of Prehistoric Evidence. Iraq 45:1–6. Malaiya, S. 1989. Dance in the Rock Art of Central India. In H. Morphy (ed.). Animals into Art, pp. 357–368. London: Unwin Hyman. ———. 1992. Hand-in-Hand Dancing in Indian Rock Art and Its Continuities. In M. J. Morwood and D. R. Hobbs (eds.). Rock Art and Ethnography (Occasional AURA Publication No. 5), pp. 61–66. Melbourne: Australian Rock Art Research Association. Maleki, Y. 1968. Abstract Art and Animal Motifs among the Ceramists of the Region of Tehran. Archaeologia Viva 1:43–50. ———. 1969. Situla à scène de banquet. Iranica Antiqua 1:21–41. Mallon, A., R. Koeppel, and R. Neuville. 1934. Teleilat Ghassul I: Compte rendu des fouilles de l’Institut Biblique Pontifical 1929–1932. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute. Mallowan, M. E. L. 1933. The Prehistoric Sondage of Nineveh 1931–1932. Liverpool Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 20:127–181. ———. 1936. Excavations at Tell Chagar Bazar and an Archaeological Survey of the Habur Region, 1934–35. Iraq 3:1–86. ———. 1947. Excavations at Brak and Chagar Bazar. Iraq 9:1–266. Mallowan, M. E. L., and G. J. Rose. 1935. Excavations at Tell Arpachiyah. Iraq 2:1–178. Mandelkern, S. 1896. Veteris Testamenti Concordantiae atque Chaldaicae. Leipzig: Veit et Comp. Mantu, C. M. 1992. Reprezentari antropomorfe pe ceramica asezarii Cucuteni a3 de la Scinteia. Studii si cercetari de istorie veche si arheologie 43:307–315. ———. 1993. Anthropomorphic Representations from the Precucuteni and Cucuteni Cultures. Anatolica 19:129–141. Marcus, J., and K. V. Flannery. 1994. Ancient Zapotec Ritual and Religion: An Application of the Direct Historical Approach. In C. Renfrew and E. B. W. Zubrow (eds.). The Ancient Mind: Elements of Cognitive Archaeology, pp. 55–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Margalit, B. 1983. The “Neolithic Connection” of the Ugarit Poem of Aqht. Paléorient 9/2:93–98. Marinescu-Bîlcu, S. 1974a. “Dansul ritual” in repezentarile plastice neo-eneolitice din Moldova. Studii si cercetari de istorie veche si arheologie 25:167–179. ———. 1974b. Cultura Precucuteni pe Teritoroul României. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republivcii Socialiste România.

310

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

Marshall, L. 1969. The Medicine Dance of the !Kung Bushmen. Africa 39:347–381. Masson, V. M., N. I. Merpert, R. M. Munchaev, and E. K. Cernych. 1982. Eneolit SSSR. Moscow: Nauka (Russian). Matous˘ová, M. 1970. Quelques remarques sur la danse en Mesopotamie. Archiv Orientalni 58:140–147. ———. 1993. Religion, Magie und Tanz. In J. Pavuk (ed.). Actes du XIIe Congrès International des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques, Bratislava, 1991, Vol. 4, pp. 364–369. Bratislava: Institut Archeologique de l’Academie Slovaque des Sciences. Matthers, J., J. Mellaart, P. M. Kenrick, and M. B. Taylor. 1978. Tell Rifa’at 1977: Preliminary Report on an Archaeological Survey. Iraq 40:119–162. Maxim-Alaiba, R. 1987. Le complexe de culte de la phase Cucuteni a3 de Dumesti (dep. de Vaslui). In M. Petrescu-Dimbovita (ed.). La civilisation de Cucuteni en contexte Européen: Session scientifique Iasi-Piatra Neamt 1984, pp. 269–286. Iasi: Universite “Al. I. Cuza.” Mazar, A. 1992. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible 10,000–586 BCE. Anchor Bible Reference Library. New York: Doubleday. McNeill, W. H. 1995. Keeping Together in Time: Dance and Drill in Human History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Mecquenem, R. 1928. Notes sur la ceramique peinte archaique en Perse. Mémoires de la mission archéologique de Perse 20:99–132. Mellaart, J. 1962. Excavations at Çatal Hüyük: First Preliminary Report, 1961. Anatolian Studies 12:41–65. ———. 1963. Excavations at Çatal Hüyük, 1962: Second Preliminary Report. Anatolian Studies 13:43–103. ———. 1966. Excavations at Çatal Hüyük, 1965: Fourth Preliminary Report. Anatolian Studies 16:165–192. ———. 1967. Çatal Hüyük, A Neolithic Town in Anatolia. London: Thames and Hudson. ———. 1970. Excavations at Hacilar. Edinburgh: British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara. ———. 1975. The Neolithic of the Near East. London: Thames and Hudson. Mellink, M. J., and J. Filip. 1974. Frühe Stufen der Kunst. Berlin: Propyläen Verlag. Menil, F. de. 1980. Histoire de la danse À travers les âges. Geneva: Editions Elatkine. Merpert, N. I., R. M. Munchaev, and N. O. Bader. 1977. The Investigations of Soviet Expedition in Iraq 1974. Sumer 33:65–104. Merpert, N. Y., and R. M. Munchaev. 1987. Earliest Levels at Yarim Tepe I and Yarim Tepe II in Northern Iraq. Iraq 49:1–36. Mesnil du Buisson, R. de. 1948. Baghouz, L’ancienne Corsôtê. Leiden: Brill. Meyerhof, E., and I. Mozel. 1981. A New Interpretation of the Applied Figurines on the Jar from Ein el-Jarba, near Tell Abu Zureiq, Israel. Bollettino del Centro Camuno di Studi Preistorici 8:114–116. Miller, D., and C. Tilley. 1984. Ideology, Power and Prehistory. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Molé, M. 1963. La danse extatique en Islam. Les danses sacrées, sources orientales 6:147–279. Paris: Editions du Seuil. Molist, M. M. 1996. Tell Halula (Syria): Un yacimiento neolitico del Valle medio del Eufrates. Campañas de 1991–1992. Madrid: Ministerio de Educacion y Cultura. ———. 1998. Des représentations humaines peintes au IXe millénaire BP sur le site de Tell Halula (Vallée de L’Euphrate, Syrie). Paléorient 24/1:81–87. Moore, J. G. 1979. Music and Dance as Expressions of Religious Worship in Jamaica. In J. Blacking and J. W. Kealinohomoku (eds.). The Performing Arts: Music and Dance, pp. 293–308. Hague: Mouton.

311

Bibliography

Morgan, J. de. 1896. Recherches sur les origines de l’Égypte: L’age de la pierre et les métaux. Paris: Ernest Leroux. Morphy, H. 1989. Introduction. In H. Morphy (ed.). Animals into Art, pp. 1–17. London: Unwin Hyman. ———. 1994. The Interpretation of Ritual: Reflections from Film on Anthropological Practice. Man 29:117–146. Mortensen, P. 1970. Tell Shimshara: The Hassuna Period. Copenhagen: Munksgaard. Mountford, C. P. 1976. Nomads of the Australian Desert. Sydney: Rigby. Mulder, M. J. 1992. raqad (dance). In G. W. Anderson, H. Cazelles, D. N. Freedman, S. Talmom, and G. Wallis.(eds.). Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament, Band VII:665–668. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Müller-Karpe, H. 1968. Handbuch der Vorgeschichte, Jungsteinzeit. Munich: C. H. Beck. Munchaev, R., and N. Merpert. 1971. The Archaeological Research in the Sinjar Valley (1971). Sumer 27:23–32. Murray, A. 1956. Burial Customs and Beliefs in the Hereafter in Predynastic Egypt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 47:86–96. Napier, D. 1987. Festival Masks. In A. Falassi (ed.). Time out of Time: Essays on the Festival, pp. 211–219. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico. Needler, W. 1984. Predynastic and Archaic Egypt in the Brooklyn Museum. New York: Brooklyn Museum. Negahban, E. O. 1976. Preliminary Report of the Excavations of Sagzabad. In M. Y. Kiani (ed.). VIth International Congress of Iranian Art and Archaeology, Oxford, 1972, pp. 247–271. Teheran: Iranian Centre for Archaeological Research. Neumayer, E. 1997. Bodies in Motion. Archaeology 50/1:56–59. Nieuwenhuyse, O. 1999. Tell Baghouz Reconsidered: A Collection of “Classic” Samarra Sherds from the Louvre. Syria 79:1–18. Nishaki, Y., T. Koizumi, M. Le Maire, and T. Oguchi. 1999. Prehistoric Occupations at Tell Kosak Shamali, the Upper Euphrates, Syria. Akkadica 113:13–68. Nissen, H. J. 1988. The Early History of the Ancient Near East 9000–2000 BC. Chicago: University of Chicago. Nissen, H. J., and A. Zagarell. 1976. Expedition to the Zagros Mountains, 1975. In F. Bagherzadeh (ed.). Proceedings of the IVth Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran, pp. 159–189. Teheran: Iranian Centre for Archaeological Research. Nissen, H. J., M. Muheisen and H. G. Gebel. 1987. Report on the First Two Seasons of Excavations at Basta (1986–1987). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 31:79–119, 548–554. Nitu, A. 1968. Reprezentari Antropomorfe in Decorul Plastic al Ceramicii de Stil Cucuteni A. Studii si cercetari de istorie veche 19:549–561. ———. 1970. Reprezentarile feminine dorsale pe ceramica Neo-Eneolitica CarpatoBalcanica. Memoria Antiquitatis 2:75–99. ———. 1971. Noi descoperiri de reprezentari antropomorfe in relief pe ceramica Cucuteni A. Carpica 4:81–88. Noy, T. 1989. Gilgal I: A Pre-Pottery Neolithic Site, Israel, The 1985–1987 Seasons. Paléorient 15/1:11–18. ———. 1991. Art and Decoration of the Natufian at Nahal Oren. In O. Bar-Yosef and F. Valla (eds.). The Natufian Culture in the Levant, pp. 557–568. Ann Arbor: International Monographs in Prehistory, Archaeological Series 1. ———. 1999. The Human Figure in Prehistoric Art in the Land of Israel. Jerusalem: Israel Museum (Hebrew). Oates, J. 1968. Prehistoric Investigations near Mandali, Iraq. Iraq 30:1–20. ———. 1969. Choga Mami, 1967–68: A Preliminary Report. Iraq 31:115–152.

312

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

Oppenheim, M. F. von. 1943. Tell Halaf I: Die prähistorischen Funde. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Osten-Sacken, E. von der. 1992. Der Ziegen—‘Damon.’ Alter Orient und Altes Testament 230. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag. Ozbeck, M. 1988. Culte des crânes humains à Çayönü. Anatolica 15:127–138. Panofsky, E. 1955. Meaning in the Visual Arts. New York: Doubleday. Parrot, A. 1960. Sumer. London: Thames and Hudson. Perkins, A. L. 1949. The Comparative Archeology of Early Mesopotamia. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 25. Chicago: University of Chicago. Perrot, J. 1966. Le gisement natoufien de Mallaha (Eynan), Israel. L’anthropologie 70:437–484. ———. 1979. Syria-Palestine I. Archaeologia Mundi. Geneva: Nagel. Perrot, J., and D. Ladiray. 1988. Les Hommes de Mallaha (Eynan) Israël. Mémoires et travaux du Centre de Recherches Français de Jérusalem No. 7. Paris: Association Paléorient. Peschlow-Bindokat, A. 1995. Ziegenjagd und Kulttanz. Die altesten prähistorischen Felsmalereien in Westkleinasien. Antike Welt 26.2:114–117. Petrescu-Dimbovita, M. 1963. Die wichtigsten Ergebnisse der archäologischen Ausgrabungen in der neolithischen Siedlung von Truçcseçcsti (Moldau). Prähistorische Zeitschrift 41:172–186. Petrie, W. M. F. 1901. Diospolis Parva: The Cemeteries of Abadiyeh and Hu. London: Egypt Exploration Fund. ———. 1909. The Arts and Crafts of Ancient Egypt. London: T. N. Foulis. ———. 1920. Prehistoric Egypt (Vol. I). Republished in 1974, Warminster: Aris and Phillips. ———. 1921. Prehistoric Egypt (Vol. II). Republished in 1974, Warminster: Aris and Phillips. Petrie, W. M. F., and J. E. Quibell. 1896. Naqada and Ballas. Republished in 1974, Warminster: Aris and Phillips. Pichon, J. 1985. À propos d’une figurine aviaire à Mureybet (Phase IIIa) 8000–7700 avant J.C. Cahiers de l’Euphrate 4:261–264. v v Pleiner, R. 1978. Pravéké De jiny Cech. Prague: Academia. Pollock, S. 1983. Style and Information: An Analysis of Susiana Ceramics. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 2:354–390. Porada, E. 1947. Seal Impressions of Nuzi. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 24. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. ———. 1958. Cylinder Seals. In O. Tufnell (ed.). Lachish IV—The Bronze Age, pp. 111–112. London: Oxford University. ———. 1965. Ancient Iran: The Art of Pre-Islamic Times. London: Methuen. ———. 1986. The Uses of Art to Convey Political Meanings in the Ancient Near East. In D. Castriota (ed.). Artistic Strategy and the Rhetoric of Power: Political Uses of Art from Antiquity to the Present, pp. 15–24. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University. Porada, E., D. P. Hansen, S. Dunham, and S. H. Babcock. 1992. The Chronology of Mesopotamia ca. 7000–1600 bc. In R. Ehrich (ed.). Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, 3rd edition, pp. 77–121. Chicago: University of Chicago. Prausnitz, M. 1955. Notes on a Cylinder Seal Impression. ‘Atiqot (English series) 1:139. Price, S. 1989. Primitive Art in Civilized Places. Chicago: Chicago University. Priese, K. H. 1989. Das Ägyptische Museum. Berlin: Ägyptische Museum. Pritchard, J. B. 1954. The Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton: Princeton University.

313

Bibliography

———. 1969. The Ancient Near East: Supplementary Texts and Pictures Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton: Princeton University. Prudhommeau, G. 1965. La danse grecque antique. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Quibell, J. E., and F. W. Green. 1902. Hierakonpolis, Part II. London: Bernard Quaritch. Radcliffe-Brown, A. 1922. The Andaman Islanders. Reprinted with additions in 1948, Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Raduncheva, A. 1973. Prehistoric Culture of Bulgaria. Sofia: Sofia Press (Russian). Randall-MacIver, D., and A. Mace. 1902. El Amrah and Abydos. London: Egypt Exploration Fund. Rappaport, R. A. 1971. The Sacred in Human Evolution. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 2:23–44. Read, F. W. 1917. Boats or Fortified Villages? Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire 13:145–151. Redman, C. L. 1978. The Rise of Civilization: From Early Farmers to Urban Society in the Ancient Near East. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. Reed, S. A. 1998. The Politics and Poetics of Dance. Annual Review of Anthropology 27:503–532. Renfrew, C., and P. Bahn. 1991. Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. London: Thames and Hudson. Renfrew, C., C. S. Peebles, I. Hodder, B. Bender, K. V. Flannery and J. Marcus. 1993. What is Cognitive Archaeology? Cambridge Archaeological Journal 3:247–270. Renfrew, C., and E. B. W. Zubrow. 1994. The Ancient Mind: Elements of Cognitive Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Rimute, R. V. von. 1994. Die Steinzeit in Litauen. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 75:23–147. Rival, L. (ed.). 1988. The Social Life of Trees: Anthropological Perspective on Tree Symbolism. Oxford: Berg. Rodden, R. J., and J. M. Rodden. 1964. A European Link with Çatal Hüyük: Uncovering a 7th Millennium Settlement in Macedonia. Illustrated London News April 1964:564–567, 604–607. Rollefson, G. O. 1983. Ritual and Ceremony at Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal (Jordan). Paléorient 9/2:29–38. ———. 1986. Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal (Jordan): Ritual and Ceremony, II. Paléorient 12/1:45–52. ————. 1990. The Uses of Plaster at Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal, Jordan. Archeomaterials 4:33–54. Romanilor, S. 1980. Preistoria Daciei. Bucharest: Edidura Meridivne. Rosenberg, M. 1994. Hallan Çemi Tepesi: Some Further Observations Concerning Stratigraphy and Material Culture. Anatolica 20:121–140. Rosenberg, M., and M. K. Davis. 1992. Hallan Cemi Tepesi, An Early Aceramic Neolithic Site in Eastern Anatolia: Some Preliminary Observations Concerning Material Culture. Anatolica 18:1–18. Roska, M. 1941. Die Sammlung Zsofia von Torma. Kolozsvar: Minerva Irodalmi es Nyomdai Muintezet. Royce, A. P. 1977. The Anthropology of Dance. Bloomington: Indiana University. Rust, F. 1969. Dance in Society. London: Routledge and K. Paul. Sachs, C. 1952. World History of the Dance. New York: Seven Arts. Saleh, M. 1998. Dance in Ancient Egypt. In S. J. Cohen (ed.). International Encyclopedia of Dance, Vol. 2, pp. 481–486. New York: Oxford University. Saller, S. 1965. Bab Edh-Dhra’. Liber Annuus (Studii Biblici Franciscani) 15:137–219.

314

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

Sampson, A. 1992. Late Neolithic Remains at Tharrounia, Euboea: A Model for the Seasonal Use of Settlements and Caves. Annual of the British School at Athens 87:61–101. Samzun, A. 1991. The Early Chalcolithic: Mehrgarh Period III. In M. Jansen, M. Mulloy, and G. Urban (eds.). Forgotten Cities on the Indus. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Samzun, A., and P. Sellier. 1983. Découverte d’une nécropole chalcolithique à Mehrgarh, Pakistan. Paléorient 9/2:69–79. Sarraf, M. R. 1981. Die Keramik von Tell-i Iblis und ihre zeitliche und raumliche Beziehung zu den anderen iranischen und mesopotamischen Kulturen. Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 7. Berlin: Verlag von Dietrich Reimer. Scarre, C. 1991. The Cambridge Archaeological Journal. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1:2. Scharff, A. 1928. Some Prehistoric Vases in the British Museum and Remarks on Egyptian Prehistory. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 14:261–276. ———. 1931. Die Altertümer der Vor- und Frühzeit Ägyptens. Mitteilungen aus der Ägyptischen Sammlung, Band IV. Berlin: Verlag von K. Curtius. Schechner, R. 1987. Drama—Performance and Ritual. In M. Eliade (ed.). Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 4:436–446. New York: MacMillan. Schmidt, E. F. 1933. Tepe Hissar Excavations 1931. Museum Journal 23:323–483. Schmidt, E. F., M. Van Loom, and H. H. Curvers. 1989. The Holmes Expeditions to Luristan. Oriental Institute Publications 108. Chicago: Chicago University. Schmidt, K. 1998. Frühneolithische Tempel: Ein Forschungsbericht zum präkeramischen Neolithikum Obermesopotamiens. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin 130:17–49. Seger, J. D. 1992. Limping about the Altar. Eretz-Israel 23:120*–127*. Selz, G. 1983. Die Bankettszene. Freiburger Altorientalische Studien 11. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner. Seow, C. L. 1989. Myth, Drama, and the Politics of David’s Dance. Harvard Semitic Monographs 44. Atlanta: Scholars Press. Service, E. R. 1962. Primitive Social Organization. New York: Random House. Shanks, M., and C. Tilley. 1987. Social Theory and Archaeology. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico. Shaw, I., and P. Nicholson. 1995. British Museum Dictionary of Ancient Egypt. London: British Museum. Sherratt, A. 1995. Alcohol and Its Alternatives: Symbol and Substance in Preindustrial Cultures. In J. Goodman, P. Lovejoy, and A. Sherratt (eds.). Consuming Habits: Drugs in History and Anthropology, pp. 11–46. London: Routledge. Silistreli, U. 1989. Köçcsk Höyük’te Bulunan Kabartma Insan ve Hayvan Figurleriyle Bezeli Vazolar. Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten 206:361–374. Simmons, A., A. Boulton, C. R. Butler, Z. Kafafi, and G. Rollefson. 1990. A Plaster Skull from Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal, Jordan. Journal of Field Archaeology 17:107–110. Simpson, W. K. 1972. Recent Museum Acquisitions: Egyptian and Ancient Near Eastern Art in Boston, 1970–71. Burlington Magazine 114 (no. 829):237–242. Smith, A. L. 1993. Identification d’un potier Prédynastique. Archéo-Nil 3:23–33. Soffer, O., and M. W. Conkey. 1997. Studying Ancient Visual Cultures. In M. W. Conkey, O. Soffer, D. Stratmann, and N. G. Jablonski (eds.). 1997. Beyond Art: Pleistocene Image and Symbol, pp. 1–16. San Francisco: California Academy of Sciences. Solomon, A. 1998. Ethnography and Method in Southern African Rock-Art Research. In C. Chippindale and P. S. C. Taçon (eds.). The Archaeology of Rock-Art, pp. 268–284. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

315

Bibliography

Spencer, A. J. 1993. Early Egypt: The Rise of Civilization in the Nile Valley. London: British Museum. Spencer, P. 1985. Introduction: Interpretations of the Dance in Anthropology. In P. Spencer (ed.). Society and the Dance: The Social Anthropology of Process and Performance, pp. 1–46. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Stein, A. 1936. An Archaeological Tour in the Ancient Persia. Iraq 3:111–225. ———. 1940. Old Routes of Western Iran. London: MacMillan. Stekelis, M., and T. Yizraely. 1963. Excavations at Nahal Oren: Preliminary Report. Israel Exploration Journal 13:1–12. Stordeur, D. 1998. Jerf el Ahmar et l’horizon PPNA en Haute Mésopotamie: Xe-IXe millénaire avant J.C. Subartu 4/1:13–29. Stordeur, D., C. Marechal, and M. Molist. 1991. Stratigraphie générale du tell néolithique d’El Kowm-Caracol (Syria). Cahiers de l’Euphrate 5–6:33–45. Stordeur, D., M. Brent, G. der Aprahamian, and J. C. Roux. 2001. Les bâtiments communautaires de Jerf el Ahmar et Mureybet horizon PPNA (Syria). Paléorient 26/1:29–44. Stucki, W. 1984. Unterlagen zur Keramik des Alten Vorderen Orient: Von ihren Anfangen bis zum Ende der Vordynastischen Zeit. Zurich: EA-Verlag. Tadmor, M., and M. Prausnitz. 1959. Excavations at Rosh Hanniqra. ‘Atiqot (English series) 2:72–88. Talai, H. 1983. Stratigraphical Sequence and Architectural Remains at Ismailabad— The Central Plateau of Iran. Archäeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 16:57–68. Taylor, T., M. Vickers, H. Morphy, R. R. R. Smith and C. Renfrew. 1994. Is There a Place for Aesthetics in Archaeology? Cambridge Archaeological Journal 4:249–269. Temizer, R. 1981. Museum of Anatolian Civilizations. Ankara: Donmez. Theocharis, D. R. 1973. Neolithic Greece. Athens: National Bank of Greece. Thuesen, I. 1988. Hama, Fouilles et Recherches 1931–1938: The Pre- and Protohistoric Periods. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet. Titov, V. 1980. Archaeology of Hungary: The Stone Age. Moscow: Nauka (Russian). Tobler, A. J. 1950. Excavations at Tepe Gawra, Vol. II. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. Todd, I. A. 1976. Çatal Hüyük in Perspective. Menlo Park: Cummings . ———. 1987. Excavations at Kalavasos-Tenta, Vol. I. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology Vol. LXXI. Gotherborg: Paul Åströms. Torr, C. 1898. Sur quelques prétendus navires Égyptiens. L’Anthropologie 9:32–35. Tringham, R. 1971. Hunters, Fishers and Farmers of Eastern Europe 6000–3000 BC. London: Hutchinson University Library. Turner, E. 1987. Pilgrimage: An Overview. In M. Eliade (ed.). Encyclopedia Of Religion, Vol. 11:328–330. New York: MacMillan. Turner, V. W. 1984. Liminality and the Performative Genres. In J. J. MacAloon (ed.). Rite, Drama, Festival, Spectacle: Rehearsals toward a Theory of Cultural Performance, pp. 19–41. Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues. Ucko, P. J. 1968. Anthropomorphic Figurines of Predynastic Egypt and Neolithic Crete, with Comparative Material from the Prehistoric Near East and Mainland Greece. Royal Anthropological Institute Occasional Paper No. 4. London: Andrew Szmidla. Uzunoglu, E. 1993. Women in Anatolia from Prehistoric Ages to the Iron Age. In G. Renda (ed.). Woman in Anatolia: 9000 Years of the Anatolian Woman, pp. 16– 24. Istanbul: Turkish Republic Ministry of Culture. Vanden Berghe, L. 1952. Archaeologische opzoekingen in de Marv Dasht vlakte. Jaarbericht Ex Oriente Lux 12:211–220. ———. 1966. Archéologie de l’Iran Ancien. Leiden: Brill.

316

D ancing at the D awn of Agriculture

———. 1968. The Rich Naturalistic Influence in Iranian Painted Pottery. Archaeologia Viva 1:20–22. Vandier, J. 1952. Manuel d’archéologie Égyptienne, Vol. 1, Les époques de formation, la préhistoire. Paris: Editions A. and J. Picard. ————. 1973. L’Egypte avant les Pyramides. Paris: Editions des musées nationaux. Vincent, L. H. 1935. Les fouilles de Teleilat Ghassul. Revue Biblique 44:69–104. Vinnicombe, P. 1976. People of the Eland: Rock Paintings of the Drakensberg Bushmen as a Reflection of Their Life and Thought. Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal. Voigt, M. M., and R. H. Dyson. 1992. The Chronology of Iran, ca. 8000-1200 bc. In R. Ehrich (ed.). Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, 3rd edition, pp. 122– 178. Chicago: University of Chicago. Walsh, G. L. 1988. Australia’s Greatest Rock Art. Bathurst, Australia: Brill/Robert Brown and Associates. Warren, P. 1984. Circular Platforms at Minoan Knossos. Annual of the British School at Athens 79:307–323. Waterbolk, H. T. 1987. Working with Radiocarbon Dates in Southwestern Asia. In O. Aurenche, J. Evin, and F. Hours (eds.). Chronologies in the Near East: Relative Chronologies and Absolute Chronology 16000–4000 BP, pp. 39–59. Oxford: BAR International Series 379. Watkins, T., and S. Campbell. 1987. The Chronology of the Halaf Culture. In O. Aurenche, J. Evin, and F. Hours. (eds.). Chronologies in the Near East: Relative Chronologies and Absolute Chronology 16000–4000 BP, pp. 427–464. Oxford: BAR International Series 379. Watson, P. J. 1983. The Halafian Culture: A Review and Synthesis. In T. C. Young, P. E. L. Smith, and P. Mortensen (eds.). The Hilly Flanks and beyond: Essays on the Prehistory of Southwestern Asia, Presented to R. J. Braidwood, pp. 231–249. Chicago: University of Chicago. Watts, E. 1977. Towards Dance and Art: A Study of Relationships between two Art Forms. London: Lepus. Weigall, A. E. P. 1909. Travels in the Upper Egyptian Desert. London: W. Blackwood. Wensinck, A. J. 1986. HADJDJ. In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, New edition, Vol. III:31–33. Leiden: Brill. Whitehouse, H. 1995. Inside the Cult: Religious Innovation and Transmission in Papua New Guinea. Oxford: Clarendon. Wickede, A. von. 1986. Die Ornamentik der Tell Halaf-Keramik: Ein Beitrag zu ihrer Typologie. Acta Prähistorica et Archaeologica 18:7–32. ———. 1990. Prähistorische Stempelglyptik in Vorderasien. Münchener Vorderasiatische Studien 6. Munich: Profil. Wild, H. 1963. Danse sacrées de l’Égypte ancienne. Les danses sacrées, sources orientales 6:33–118. Paris: Editions du Seuil. Williams, B. 1988. Decorated Pottery and the Art of Naqada III. Münchner Ägyptologische Studien 45. Munich: Münchener Universitätsschriften. Williams, B., and T. J. Logan. 1987. The Metropolitan Museum Knife Handle and Aspects of Pharaonic Imagery before Narmer. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 46:245–285. Wilson, E. O. 1975. Sociobiology, The New Synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University. Wilson, P. J. 1988. The Domestication of the Human Species. New Haven and London: Yale University. Winkler, H. A. 1937. Völker und Völkerbewegungen im vorgeschichtlichen Oberägypten im Lichte neuer Felsbilderfunde. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. ————. 1938. Rock-Drawings of Southern Upper Egypt, Vol. 1. London: Egypt Exploration Society.

317

Bibliography

Winter, I. J. 1987. Legitimation of Authority through Image and Legend: Seals Belonging to Officials in the Administrative Bureaucracy of the Ur III State. In M. Gibson and R. D. Biggs (eds.). The Organization of Power: Aspects of Bureaucracy in the Ancient Near East. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 46, pp. 69–116. Chicago: University of Chicago. Wobst, H. M. 1977. Stylistic Behavior and Information Exchange. In C. E. Cleavland (ed.). For the Director: Research Essays in Honor of J. B. Griffin. University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Anthropological Papers 61, pp. 317– 342. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Wood, M. 1964. Historical Dances (Twelfth to Nineteenth Century): Their Manner of Performance and Their Place in the Social Life of the Time. London: Imperial Society of Teachers of Dancing. Woolley, C. L. 1934. The Prehistoric Pottery of Carchemish. Iraq 1:146–162. Wright, H. T. 1981. An Early Town on the Deh Luran Plain: Excavations at Tepe Farukhabad. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, No. 13. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Yadin, Y. 1963. The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands in Light of Archaeological Discovery. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. Yakar, J. 1991. Prehistoric Anatolia: The Neolithic Transformation and the Early Chalcolithic Period. Monograph Series No. 9. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, Institute of Archaeology. ———. 1994. Prehistoric Anatolia: The Neolithic Transformation and the Early Chalcolithic Period, Supplement No. 1. Monograph Series No. 9a. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, Institute of Archaeology. Yeivin, S. 1967. A New Chalcolithic Culture at Tel ‘Erani and Its Implications for Early Egypto-Canaanite Relations. In Fourth World Congress of Jewish Studies, Vol. 1., pp. 45–48. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies. Yogev, O. 1983. A Fifth Millennium bce Sanctuary in the ‘Uvda Valley. Qadmoniot 16:118–122 (Hebrew). Zagarell, A. 1982. The Prehistory of Northeast Bahtiyari Mountains, Iran: The Rise of a Highland Way of Life. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients, Reihe B, No. 42. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert. Zao Fu, C. 1992. Discovery of Rock Art in China. In M. Lorblanchet (ed.). Rock Art in the Old World, pp. 361–383. New Delhi: Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts. Ziegler, C. 1990. Le Louvre: Les antiquités égyptiennes. Paris: Scala. Zohary, D., and M. Hopf. 1988. Domestication of Plants in the Old World. Oxford: Clarendon. Zori, N. 1955. A Cylinder-Seal Impression from Mount Gilboa. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 87:89–90. Zubrow, E. B. W. 1994. Elements of Cognitive Archaeology. In C. Renfrew, C. and E. B. W. Zubrow (eds.). The Ancient Mind: Elements of Cognitive Archaeology, pp. 187–190. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Index

Abadiyeh, 54, 234, 243, 253 Abu Ghosh, 8 Abydos, 234, 237, 245, 251, 257, 263 Addaura Cave, 4 Aegean (early cultures), Culture 5, 14, 62 Africa, 3, 4, 13, 17, 67, 73, 74, 75, 84, 89, 90, 102 agriculture, 3, 5, 25, 26, 62, 64, 66, 71, 73, 76, 81, 82, 94, 95, 97, 100, 101, 102, 114, 205, 211, 233 ‘Ain Ghazal, 8, 9, 78, 95 ‘Ain Kuniyeh, 270, 287, 288 Alaska, 69–70 Alfold Linear Pottery Culture, 227 altered state of consciousness. See trance ‘Amuq Plain, 144 Anatolia, 3, 11, 25, 106, 108, 109, 111, 114, 116, 119, 121, 123, 125, 211, 225, 291, 294, 295 Angola, 67 animals, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 19, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40, 57, 60, 70, 88, 106, 109, 116, 119, 121, 155, 205, 220, 235, 239, 240, 241, 242, 267, 270, 282, 285, 286, 289, 290; antelope, 39, 56, 57, 253, 257; bee, 4, 78, 93, 211, 225, 227, 231; bird 4, 7, 8, 16, 39, 56, 57, 70, 93, 116, 123, 168, 191, 193, 211, 241, 242, 253, 257, 270, 271, 273, 285; cattle, 8, 26, 95, 211, 235, 240, 249, 291; dog, 8, 230; frog, 49, 184; goat, 39, 170; hippopotamus, 265; ibex, 8, 116; leopard, 37, 60, 133, 145; pig, 8; scorpion, 39, 128, 147; sea-otter, 70; sheep 8, 39; snake, 93, 157, 211, 216, 223; toad, 211, 230; turtle, 49, 114 Arabic, 62 Aramaic, 62 architectural elements, 8, 9, 10, 24, 54– 55, 72, 76–79, 85, 88, 91, 93, 97, 106, 114, 137, 154, 170, 175, 197, 269, 271, 280, 281, 282, 283, 285, 286, 288;

floor, 9, 79, 105, 106, 107, 111, 114, 280, 282; pillar, 8, 9, 111, 124; roof, 54, 170, 280. See also cultic building Argissa-Magula, 206, 211, 218 arm, 19, 23, 28–33, 50, 54, 58, 106, 108, 112, 114, 115, 119, 121, 123, 124, 130, 131, 133, 136, 137, 139, 142, 144, 145, 146, 147, 154, 155, 157, 159, 168, 170, 175, 177, 180, 181, 184, 185, 188, 193, 197, 201, 202, 203, 211, 212, 213, 216, 220, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230, 231, 233, 235, 240, 241, 242, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 253, 261, 265, 267, 270, 271, 275, 277, 278, 280, 281, 282, 285, 286, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 295 Armenia, 106, 108, 109, 125, 159 Arpachiyah, 10, 126, 135, 138, 145, 275 artistic styles: geometric, 18, 19, 20, 50, 106, 108, 109, 126, 130, 131, 132, 133, 136, 161, 170, 184, 186, 188, 193, 197, 200, 202; linear, 18, 20, 31, 50, 89, 106, 108, 125–131, 132, 133, 137, 139, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 154, 155, 161, 164, 175, 181, 240, 285; naturalistic, 18, 19, 20, 21, 34, 106, 108, 109, 125, 126, 132, 133, 137, 139, 142, 143, 146, 148, 164, 168, 175, 177, 183, 186, 188, 201, 202, 203; White Cross-Lined 235, 248 Arukhlo, 108, 126, 158, 159 Australia, 4, 33, 102 Azerbaijan, 4 Bab edh-Dhra’, 54, 56, 109, 249, 270, 284, 285, 286, 287, 289 back, 271, 275, 278 Badari/Badarian culture, 29, 233, 235, 240 Baghous, 126, 147, 149, 150, 154, 155 Baining tribe, 71 Bakhtiari Mountains, 184, 185

320

D ancing at the dawn of agriculture

Balikh Valley, 137, 142 Balkans, 3, 11, 25, 106, 109, 157 Baluchistan, 161, 203 banquet, 69, 70, 83, 84, 269, 278, 280 Basta, 9, 78, 95 beard, 201, 282 Beidha, 8, 79 Beisamoun, 9 belly, 246 belt, 7, 20, 38, 226, 246, 282, 283 Bereçcsti, 206, 209, 221, 223 Beth El, 61 Beth Shean, 110 Beth Yerah, 270, 287, 288–289 Bible. See Old Testament Birlaleçcsti, 206, 222, 224 boat, 39, 56, 57, 235, 239, 241, 249, 250, 253, 257, 260, 261, 263, 264, 265, 267, 269 boot. See shoe Borsod, 206, 217, 228 Botswana, 67, 68 Bouqras, 9, 96 bovine. See animals: cattle boy. See child branch, 26, 38, 39, 56, 164, 193, 201, 235, 249, 271, 285 breast, 48, 96, 119, 220, 240 Buddhism, 64 Bukk culture, 228 Bulgaria, 205, 212, 213 bull. See animals: cattle burial, 7, 26, 46, 60, 63, 64, 79, 90, 91, 95, 155, 191, 196, 201, 211, 226, 239, 240, 241, 242, 245, 249, 253, 257, 265, 267, 285 Bushman. See San Bushman buttocks, 221, 224 Byblos, 270, 287, 289, 290, 295 Cafer Höyük, 8 Cala dei Genovesi Cave, 4 calender/calendrical, 3, 57, 60, 73, 79, 80, 92, 95, 100, 102 castanets, 39, 249 Çatal Höyük, 10, 13, 16, 37, 43, 60, 61, 106, 112, 117, 121, 122, 133, 211, 291– 293, 295 Çayönü, 8, 79, 86, 93, 95 cemetery. See burial Chagar Bazar, 109, 126, 127, 133, 137, 138, 141, 270, 275, 276 Chigha Sabz, 162, 182, 185, 186

child, 71, 72, 121, 246–247, 249 Choga Mami, 42, 54, 108, 126, 137, 139, 148, 153, 154, 161, 176, 181 Chogha Cheshmeh, 162, 184, 199 Chogha Mish, 34, 42, 54, 56, 154, 162, 170, 171, 178, 179, 180–183, 185, 194, 270, 277–278, 279 Chogha Sefid, 153, 154, 161, 162, 163, 166 choreography, 18, 247 Chugach Eskimo, 70 circle/circular, 13, 14, 19, 20, 41–42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 56, 59, 60–64, 67, 68, 72, 79, 82, 87–89, 93, 100, 124, 146, 147, 155, 168, 186, 201, 222, 225, 226, 228, 245, 253, 282, 285, 292 circle dance. See dance forms clothing. See dress cognitive aspects, 3, 10, 11, 14–15, 22, 81, 85–97, 100, 132 coiffure. See hair costume. See dress couple, 7, 16, 43, 121, 122, 225, 226 couple dance. See dance forms cow. See animals: cattle Criçcs culture, 220, 228 Cucuteni (chronological phases), 221, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227 cultic building, 8, 9, 14, 26, 40, 46, 54– 55, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 86, 95, 97, 99, 111, 170 Cyprus, 106, 111, 124, 211, 291, 293, 294 Czech Republic, 205, 230, 231 dance forms: circle dance, 14, 24, 41–42, 63, 99, 116; couple dance, 24, 43, 63, 99, 122, 169, 225, 226; line dance, 24, 42–43, 63, 99, 169 Danube Basin, 3, 11, 25, 97, 109 Dead Sea Plain, 285 Deh Luran Plain, 106, 108, 161, 164, 168, 169, 170, 174 deity. See god demon, 34, 93, 116, 146, 242 Dhuweila, 9, 106, 112, 116, 117 direction of movement: clockwise, 24, 44–47, 63, 80, 99, 106, 155, 196, 201, 241, 244, 245, 269; counter-clockwise, 24, 44–47, 63, 80, 99, 106, 133, 137, 139, 142, 147, 185, 188, 191, 197, 203, 227, 245, 248, 253, 277 divine. See god Djaffarabad, 42, 54, 137, 162, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 191

321

Index

DK-41, 42, 167, 174 DL-22, 166, 167, 174 DL-28, 166, 174 DL-31, 166, 174 Dniester Basin, 205, 227 Do Tulan, 162, 196, 201 Do Tulune, 162, 171, 185, 193 Drakensberg Mountains, 74 drama/dramatic, 40–41, 71, 81, 99, 253 dress, 19, 37–38, 39, 44, 58, 59, 60, 63, 64, 70, 71, 72, 80, 81, 82, 89, 90, 99, 100, 133, 137, 142, 145, 164, 240, 246, 263, 265, 278, 280, 281 Dudeçcsti, 206, 219, 220–221, 226 Dumesti, 206, 207, 226–227 Eastern Egyptian Desert, 233, 234, 235, 261, 263, 264, 265 Egypt, 3, 4, 11, 12, 16, 21, 25, 26, 29, 31, 34, 39, 45, 46, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, 62, 72, 90, 91, 93, 99, 102, 107, 108, 109, 110, 233–267, 281, 285 ‘Ein el-Jarba, 19, 46, 63, 91, 108, 124, 126, 155–157, 244 El ‘Adaima, 234, 249–252 El ‘Amrah, 234, 249, 250, 251 El Karm, 270, 286, 289 El Kowm, 112, 120, 121 El Wad Cave, 7 embrace, 43, 121, 122 Eskimo, 69–70 Euphrates Valley/River, 111, 114, 144, 147, 157, 159, 295 eye, 15, 22, 70, 72, 85, 91, 114, 124, 136, 184, 193, 211 Eynan, 7 face, 29, 59, 112, 185, 201, 202, 240, 246, 282 Fara, 270, 279, 280 farming. See agriculture Fars, 108, 109, 161, 184, 193, 197, 201, 202 Farukabad, 162, 163, 164, 184 fauna. See animals feast. See banquet feather, 34, 70, 249 feet, 114, 191, 196, 228, 230, 241, 245, 246, 285 festival, 13, 36, 40–41, 46, 61, 62, 64, 73, 82, 87, 278 figurine, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 54, 62, 95, 96, 205, 211, 226, 233, 240, 246, 250 finger, 19, 22, 30, 112, 123, 124, 131, 139,

146, 155, 159, 168, 175, 184, 193, 196, 197, 201, 213, 216, 220, 227, 230, 231, 240, 245, 246, 250, 286 fire, 56, 57, 67, 68, 69, 71–72, 88 Frumuçcsica, 206, 209, 223, 224 funeral. See burial Galilee Mountains, 286 Gebelein, 234, 265–267 gender, 24, 25, 28, 34, 47–54, 58, 72, 106, 116, 122, 143, 146, 188, 246, 267, 291; female, 24, 29, 34, 37, 47–54, 58, 62, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 77, 96, 99, 114, 116, 119, 124, 146, 180–181, 186, 188, 211, 220, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 233, 235, 240, 241, 245, 246, 247, 249, 250, 253, 257, 260, 265, 267, 277, 278, 283, 289, 291, 295; male, 24, 37, 38, 47–54, 58, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 77, 99, 114, 116, 119, 122, 154, 155, 188, 191, 201, 212, 213, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230, 241, 242, 244, 246, 247, 249, 250, 253, 257, 265, 267, 269, 270, 271, 273, 275, 277, 278, 289; male and female, 24, 51–54, 72, 89, 99, 114, 148, 188, 226, 289 geometric style. See artistic styles Ghassulian culture, 280 Ghelaesti, 206, 215, 225 Gilgal, 7, 8, 78 Göbekli Tepe, 8, 79, 86, 95 god, 12, 16, 40, 64, 65, 69, 86, 88, 91, 92, 93, 121, 206, 228, 242, 291 goddess, 16, 21, 26, 92–93, 96, 122, 155, 211, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230, 235, 249, 291, 295 Golan Heights, 289 Gomolava, 206, 207, 216 Grade˘snitsa, 206, 213, 230 grave. See burial Greece/Greek, 3, 4, 11, 12, 13, 22–23, 25, 27, 102, 106, 109, 157, 205, 211, 212 Gumelniçcta, 206, 207, 223 Hacilar, 106, 112, 122, 123, 291, 292, 294, 295 Hadjdj, 62 hag, 61–62, 73, 87 Hagykoru, 228, 229, 230 hair, 19, 34, 35, 39, 44, 46, 49, 68, 70, 72, 99, 116, 119, 124, 146, 147, 175, 177, 223, 246, 248, 249, 250, 291 Halafian culture, 11, 37, 38, 45, 46, 49,

322

D ancing at the dawn of agriculture

51, 53, 56, 60, 89, 92, 106, 107, 108, 124, 125–159, 161, 163, 175, 240, 275 Hallan Çemi Tepesi, 7, 8 Hama, 126, 138, 145, 270, 287, 290 hand, 19, 29–30, 38, 39, 43, 50, 54, 68, 70, 73, 96, 112, 115, 116, 119, 123, 130, 136, 164, 168, 175, 177, 181, 185, 196, 197, 202, 213, 220, 224, 228, 233, 235, 241, 245, 246, 247, 249, 253, 263, 265, 271, 280, 281, 285, 286, 288, 289, 290 hand holding, 19, 24, 43–44, 79, 99, 116, 119, 130, 136, 142, 145, 164, 168, 175, 180, 181, 186, 188, 191, 193, 203, 245, 246, 247, 253, 265, 270, 278, 285, 288, 289, 290 Harageh, 234, 255, 257 Harran Plain, 144 hat. See head covering Hayonim Cave, 7, 78 head, 29, 34–36, 54, 72, 108, 112, 116, 121, 123, 124, 130, 131, 133, 136, 139, 142, 144, 145, 146, 147, 154, 155, 159, 168, 170, 175, 181, 184, 188, 193, 196, 197, 201, 212, 213, 220, 222, 223, 224, 227, 240, 241, 242, 244, 246, 249, 253, 263, 270, 273, 275, 277, 278, 280, 281, 282, 285, 288, 289, 291 head covering, 19, 34–35, 39, 44, 71, 72, 99, 116, 119, 145, 282, 283 Hebrew, 61–62, 63, 286 Heirakonpoils, 234, 235, 242, 267 Hemamieh, 234, 253 hips, 124, 143, 146, 186, 188, 191, 201, 226 Hinduism, 64 hinga, 62 Hodoni, 206, 219, 221, 223 Holasovice, 215, 231 horn, 116, 235, 240, 246, 249, 270, 286, 290 Hungary, 205, 227, 228, 230 hunters and gatherers, 5, 12, 13, 15, 25, 67, 71, 73, 76, 78, 81, 89, 90, 95, 100, 101, 102 Imiris Gora, 108, 158, 159 India, 4 initiation, 26, 47, 56, 60, 71 Iran, 3, 10, 11, 25, 34, 37, 42, 45, 46, 51, 53, 101, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 126, 130, 131, 139, 161–203, 269, 273, 275, 276, 277, 279, 285 Iranian Plateau, 108, 109, 188, 191 Iraq, 119, 145, 146, 270, 278, 280

Ireland, 64 Ismailabad, 19, 155, 162, 178, 191 Israel, 4, 155, 282, 285, 286, 288, 289 Italy, 4, 33 Jarmo, 8, 93 Jerf al Ahmar, 8 Jericho, 8, 9, 63, 78, 79, 93, 95, 96 Jerusalem, 46, 61, 64, 84 Jezreel Valley, 155, 282 Jordan, 116, 280, 285 Ka‘aba, 62, 63, 64 Kabri, 270, 286, 289 Kalavasos-Tenta, 106, 122, 124 Kanakan D, 162, 184, 198, 202 Karanovo (chronological stage), 212, 213 Kebara Cave, 7 Kerman, 108, 109, 161, 202, 203 Kfar Hahoresh, 9, 79 Khabur Valley, 137, 275 Khazineh, 34, 42, 54, 56, 101, 131, 142, 162, 165, 168–169, 173, 184, 186, 188, 193 Khazineh painted style, 161, 164, 168, 170, 174, 181, 197 Khirbet esh-Shenef, 126, 135, 141, 142 Khirbet Garsour, 126, 134, 146 Khirokitia, 291–295 Khoveyyes, 162, 184, 199 Khuzistan, 106, 131, 161, 175, 177, 180, 184, 185, 277 kilt. See skirt King David, 83–84 King Solomon, 84 knee, 30, 146, 228, 231, 280 Knossos, 14 Kolesovice, 206, 213, 230 Konya Plain, 121 Koros culture, 227 Korucutepe, 108, 126, 159 Kösk Höyük, 45, 106, 112, 114, 116–119, 291, 292, 294, 295 Kotacpart, 206, 216, 218, 227 Kozagaran, 162, 165, 170, 171, 185, 186 !Kung. See San Bushmen Kuruçay Höyük, 106, 112, 120, 122, 123 Lachish, 110 Larga Jijia, 206, 210, 224 Lebanon, 289 leg, 19, 23, 28, 30–34, 37, 38, 39, 47, 70, 106, 108, 112, 114, 119, 121, 122, 123,

323

Index

124, 130, 131, 137, 139, 143, 154, 155, 159, 175, 180, 184, 188, 191, 193, 196, 197, 201, 202, 203, 211, 212, 213, 216, 220, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230, 231, 240, 242, 245, 246, 263, 275, 278, 280, 282, 286, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295 Lengyel culture, 227, 230 Levant, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 25, 54, 55, 90, 94, 97, 106, 108, 109, 110, 111, 116, 125, 138, 144, 145, 225, 269, 285, 287, 288, 289, 290 Linear Danubian culture, 231 linear style. See artistic styles line dance. See dance forms linen shroud, 19, 91, 105, 107, 233, 265, 266 Litomerice, 206, 208, 230–231 loincloth, 37, 38, 49, 60, 133, 137, 142, 246, 248, 286 Luka-Vrublevetskaya, 206, 210, 227 lunar. See moon Luristan, 161, 174, 186, 188, 273 Macedonia, 211 Malamir, 162, 185, 187 man. See gender: male marriage, 26, 41, 60, 63, 88, 226 Marxist archaeology, 90, 92 mask, 9, 20, 34–37, 39, 40, 59, 70, 71, 72, 79, 82, 95, 99, 100, 101, 116, 155, 193, 223, 242, 253, 280, 281, 282, 285, 286, 289 Matarrah, 126, 153, 154 Matmar, 234, 236, 240 Mecca, 62, 63, 64 Megiddo, 110, 270, 282–284, 286 Mehrgarh, 108, 109, 162, 182, 203 Mesopotamia, 3, 4, 5, 11, 12, 25, 39, 40, 42, 90, 93, 96, 97, 102, 106, 108, 109, 110, 111, 121, 125, 129, 138, 139, 146, 147, 148, 154, 155, 161, 164, 168, 169, 173, 174, 176, 181, 198, 235, 269, 271, 272, 275, 279, 280 Mishnah, 46 Mitannian Kingdom, 110 model, 93, 105, 107, 205, 211, 233, 253, 275 moon, 26, 47, 56, 57, 60, 64, 73, 87 Mostagedda, 234, 236, 240, 253 mourning, 13, 26, 46, 62–63, 99 Munhata, 8, 95 Mureybet, 7, 8

museums, 101; Ägyptische (Berlin), 260; Anatolian Civilization (Ankara), 117; Antiquités national (Saint-Germainen-laye), 260; Ashmolean (Oxford), 117, 143, 235, 241, 242, 244, 257, 260; British Museum (London), 186, 193, 195, 196, 201, 250, 254, 257, 260, 274; Brooklyn (New York), 249, 252; Egyptian (Turin), 265, 266; Fitzwilliam (Cambridge), 260; Institut Royal du Patrimoine Artistique (Brussels), 238, 247–248; Louvres, 148, 169, 172, 190, 260, 274; Medelhavsmuseet (Stockholm), 260, 261; Metropolitan (New York), 260, 262; National Museum of Denmark (Copenhagen), 290; Oriental Institute (Chicago), 180, 183, 185, 195, 260, 262, 283; Petrie Museum (London), 237, 248–249; Staatliche Sammelung (Munich), 260; Teheran, 191; University Museum (Tokyo), 197, 200, 272; Vorderasiatisches (Berlin), 135, 146, 147, 148 music, 4, 39, 40, 44, 47, 59, 65, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 82, 83, 100, 102, 249, 283 Mycenaean. See Aegean Nahal Hemar Cave, 8, 9, 95, 101 Nahal Issaron, 78 Nahal Oren, 7 Namibia, 67 Naqada/Naqada cultures, 29, 39, 49, 101, 233, 234, 235, 236, 239, 240–245, 247, 248, 249, 253, 257, 261, 267 Natal, 74 Natufian culture, 5, 7, 8, 78 naturalistic style. See artistic styles Nea Nikomedia, 206, 211, 221 neck, 20, 34, 116, 119, 121, 124, 142, 242, 275 Nemrik, 7 Netiv Hagdud, 7, 8, 78 Nevali Çori, 8, 9, 49, 86, 95, 106, 111– 114, 123, 124, 273 Nile/Nilotic, 39, 56, 57, 233, 235, 239, 240, 249, 253, 257, 265, 267 Nineveh, 109, 126, 134, 145, 270, 275, 276, 278, 280 Nippur, 109, 270, 271, 275, 276 Norçcsuntepe, 108, 126, 158, 159 Nova Ves, 206, 213, 230, 231

324

nudes, 39, 44, 52, 58, 99, 201, 244, 246, 248, 290 Nuzi, 110 Old Testament, 4, 61, 62, 63, 73, 83–84, 95

D ancing at the dawn of agriculture

Pakistan, 3, 11, 25, 97, 108, 109, 161, 182, 203 Paleolithic, 4, 5, 7, 12, 40, 78, 101 Papua New Guinea, 67, 71–72 Passover, 61–62 Pefkakia, 206, 212, 217 pelvis, 48, 116, 119, 122, 131, 196, 222, 223, 226, 231, 248, 253 Pentecost, 61–62 Philistine culture, 62 pilgrimage, 13, 46, 61–64 Prag-Bubenec, 206, 217, 231 Predynastic Egypt. See Egypt Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA), 7–8, 78, 96 Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB), 8–9, 44, 78–80, 93, 95–97, 101, 106, 111, 114, 116 Qabrestan, 54, 109, 162, 189, 191 Qal‘eh Rostam, 46, 162, 184, 192 Qena-Qoser Road, 264, 265 Reel-Type vessel, 209, 210, 221, 222, 223, 224, 227 rhythm/rhythmic, 4, 19, 42, 44, 60, 64, 68, 69, 71, 80, 82, 87, 88, 100 ribbon, 20, 34, 49, 125, 216 rock art, 4, 19, 56, 69, 73–75, 91, 105, 107, 233, 235, 260–265 Romania, 205, 216, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225 Rome, 5, 12, 102 Rosh Ha-Niqra, 54, 109, 270, 286, 287, 288 row dance. See dance form: line dance rqd (Hebrew root), 62, 63 Sakje Gözu, 126, 127, 133, 138, 142, 143 Salabiya IX, 7 Samarra, 19, 45, 126, 128, 133, 137, 146– 147, 148, 149, 155, 175, 224 Samarra culture, 11, 46, 49, 51, 53, 89, 106, 107, 108, 124, 125–159, 161, 175, 240 San Bushman, 4, 13–14, 17, 67–69, 73– 75, 89

Sarab, 8, 9 Sardinia, 33 Sarvas, 206, 213, 214 scarf, 226 Scinteia, 206, 207, 215, 225–226 sculpture. See statue Sea of Galilee, 288, 289 seals, 18, 170, 196; cylinder seal, 18, 19, 20, 21, 38, 41, 52, 54, 55, 63, 83, 87, 91, 105, 107, 109, 110, 271, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290; stamp seal, 18, 19, 21, 63, 83, 91, 96, 105, 107, 109, 113, 114, 272, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 285 seal impression. See seal secret location, 56, 71 Semaineh, 234, 253–257, 259 Serik, 126, 153, 154 Sesklo (chronological stages), 211 sex organs, 38, 48, 52, 121, 154, 155, 180– 181, 201, 212, 213, 225, 227, 230, 231, 242, 246, 248 sex relations, 7, 16, 21, 82, 121–122 shaman, 70, 75, 90–91, 100 Shams ed-Din Tannira, 144, 153 Sham‘un, 162, 184, 199 Shiloh, 61 Shimshara, 126, 153, 155 shoe, 20, 37, 38, 39, 72, 175, 275 shoulder, 24, 29, 33, 43, 44, 99, 115, 116, 119, 121, 148, 168, 177, 180, 181, 188, 191, 201, 212, 213, 240, 244, 249, 250, 263, 275, 278, 285 shrine. See cultic building Shukba Cave, 7 Sicily, 4 Silsileh, 260 Sinjar (Plain/Jebel), 119, 145, 146 skirt, 38, 146, 164, 197, 203, 280 skull, 9, 79, 86, 95, 96 Slatina, 206, 222, 223 Slovakia, 205 South Africa, 74 spd (Hebrew root), 63 standard, 246, 247, 249 Starc˘evo (chronological stage), 213, 220, 228 statue, 9, 12, 59, 64, 79, 86, 95, 96, 111, 205, 275 step, 43 stick, 38, 58 Strelice, 206, 208, 230

325

Index

stupa, 64 Sumerian culture, 12, 95, 97 sun, 26, 47, 56, 60 Surab Region, 162, 182, 203 Susa, 109, 270, 276, 277 Susiana (chronological phase), 180, 181, 184 Susiana Plain, 106, 108, 109, 131, 175, 177, 180, 277 Syria, 114, 121, 133, 137, 142, 144, 145, 275, 287, 290 Syriac, 62–63 Szajol-Felsofold, 206, 208, 228 Szegvár-Tüzköves, 206, 207, 219, 228 Szentes-Jaksorpart, 206, 229, 230 Tall-i Bakun A, 109, 124, 162, 181, 184, 193–196, 198, 201 Tall-i Gap, 162, 184, 187, 197, 199, 200 Tall-i Jari A, 46, 63, 91, 155, 162, 187, 192, 201, 244, 278 Tall-i Nokhodi, 162, 184, 198, 202 Tall-i Regi, 162, 184, 196, 198, 202 Tall-i Siah, 162, 184, 198, 201, 202 Tall-i Skau, 162, 184, 198, 201, 202 Tchechme Ali, 109, 162, 188, 189, 190 Tebernacles, 61–62 Tel Dan, 110 Teleilat Ghassul, 109, 270, 280–282 Tel Erani, 270, 285–286 Tel Halif, 110 Tell Aajar, 126, 138, 145 Tell Aswad, 8 Tell Azmak, 206, 212, 217, 218, 229 Tell Brak, 54, 126, 137, 138, 141, 270, 275, 279, 280 Tell Damishliyya, 126, 138, 142, 173 Tell es-Sawwan, 56, 126, 151, 148, 152 Tell Halaf, 10, 19, 54, 126, 127, 133–137, 142, 145, 184, 198 Tell Halula, 9, 106, 112, 114–116, 126, 134, 144 Tell-i Iblis, 162, 184, 199, 203 Tell Judaidah, 126, 138, 144 Tell Kazane Höyük, 141, 144 Tell Kosak Shamali, 135, 144 Tell Kurdu, 126, 141, 144 Tell Mounbateh, 126, 138, 141, 142, 155 Tell Ramad, 8, 9 Tell Sabi Abyad, 126, 127, 133, 137–142, 153, 154, 161, 163, 175, 224 Tell Sotto, 106, 112, 119–121, 121 Telul eth-Thalathat, 109, 270, 271–273

temple. See cultic building Tepe Bendebal, 162, 180, 187 Tepecik, 118, 119 Tepe Djowi, 34, 162, 177, 178, 191 Tepe Gawra, 10, 42, 54, 56, 109, 126, 127, 133, 137, 142, 146, 176, 270, 271, 272, 273 Tepe Giyan, 42, 49, 109, 113, 114, 162, 171, 185, 187, 188, 270, 272, 273, 275, 295 Tepe Hissar, 54, 162, 191, 192 Tepe Musiyan, 42, 54, 56, 142, 162, 166, 167, 168, 169–173, 186 Tepe Sabz, 42, 162, 164, 165, 166, 167, 170, 182, 203 Tepe Sialk, 42, 54, 109, 137, 162, 176, 188, 189, 190, 191 Tepe Yahya, 162, 184, 198, 202–203 theater, 40, 65, 102 Thessaly, 211, 212 Tibet, 62 Tigris River, 146, 148 Tîrpeçcsti, 206, 214, 223 Tisza culture, 223 Tiszavasvari, 206, 218 Tlingit tribe, 69–70 toe, 38, 112, 114, 155, 184, 193, 213, 216, 230, 231 tomb. See burial torso, 37, 112, 119, 121, 130, 131, 139, 144, 145, 159, 168, 180, 181, 185, 221, 223, 226, 227, 230, 231, 245, 253, 275, 282, 285, 286 Traian, 206, 210, 222, 224 trance, 42, 59, 64, 67, 68, 69, 82, 83, 88, 100 tree, 56, 64, 88, 99, 241, 248, 277 Truçcseçcsti, 180, 206, 208, 210, 215 Tul-i Bawa Muhammad, 162, 171, 185 Tülintepe, 108, 126, 157, 158, 223, 291, 292, 294, 295 Turdaçcs, 206, 214, 216, 217, 218, 221, 229 Turkey, 4, 86, 111, 143, 144, 157, 159, 295 twig, 34, 249, 263, 285 Ugarit, 95, 96 Umm Dabaghiyah, 10, 106, 112, 120, 121 Umm el-Qaab, 21, 236, 237, 239, 245– 247, 248 Uqraine, 227 Ur, 90, 270, 271, 276, 278 urban, 5, 13, 14, 15, 25, 62, 75, 82, 89, 90, 97, 101, 102 Uvda, 37

326

Va˘dastra, 206, 222 Valcamonica Valley, 33 victory. See war village, 5, 12, 13, 14, 23, 25, 27, 28, 33, 44, 46, 60, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 71, 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 81, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 97, 99, 100, 111, 211 Villanykovesd, 206, 215, 227–228 Vinc˘a/Vinc˘a culture, 206, 213, 214, 216, 229

Wadi Tbeiq, 7 waist, 29, 37, 38, 133, 137, 142, 248, 286, 288 wall painting, 9, 10, 13, 19, 20, 21, 37, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 90, 91, 105, 106, 107, 109, 111, 122, 124, 133, 233, 235, 280– 282 war/warfare, 16, 21, 40, 60, 74, 82, 94, 235, 245, 247, 248, 249, 253, 267, 269, 271 woman. See gender: female

Wadi ‘Abad, 260–261, 264 Wadi Abu Kue’, 264, 265 Wadi Abu Wasil, 263, 264 Wadi Gash, 264, 265 Wadi Hammeh, 7 Wadi Menih, 264, 265 Wadi Rabah Culture, 155

Yarim Tepe, 126, 127, 133, 141, 145 Yugoslavia, 205, 213, 216 Yunus, 126, 127, 133, 142, 143

D ancing at the dawn of agriculture

zoomorphic. See animals Zuojiang River Valley, 33