Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Journal of Archaeological Science
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jas
Environment and collapse: Eastern Anatolian obsidians at Urkesh (Tell
Mozan, Syria) and the third-millennium Mesopotamian urban crisis
Ellery Frahm a, *, Joshua M. Feinberg b, c
a
Department of Archaeology, The University of Sheffield, Northgate House, West Street, Sheffield S1 4ET, United Kingdom
Institute for Rock Magnetism, University of Minnesota, 310 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States
c
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Minnesota, 310 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States
b
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 9 September 2012
Received in revised form
20 November 2012
Accepted 20 November 2012
The Early to Middle Bronze Age transition in Northern Mesopotamia has received great attention for the
apparent concurrence of aridification, deurbanisation, and the end of the Akkadian empire around
2200 BCE. Our understanding of the “crisis” has been almost exclusively shaped by ceramics, demography, and subsistence. Exchange and the associated social networks have been largely neglected. Here
we report our sourcing results for 97 obsidian artefacts from Urkesh, a large urban settlement inhabited
throughout the crisis. Before the crisis, six obsidian sources located in Eastern Anatolia are represented
among the artefacts. Such a diversity of Eastern Anatolian obsidians at one site is hitherto unknown in
Mesopotamia. It implies Urkesh was a cosmopolitan city with diverse visitors or visitors with diverse
itineraries. During this crisis, however, obsidians came from only two of the closest sources. Two to three
centuries passed before varied obsidians reappeared. Even when an obsidian source reappears, the raw
material seems to have come from a different collection spot. We discuss the likely exchange mechanisms and related social networks responsible for the arrival of obsidians at Urkesh and how they might
have changed in response to climatic perturbations and regional government collapse.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Obsidian
Exchange
Bronze Age
Northern Mesopotamia
Third-millennium urban crisis
Deurbanisation
Climate change
Social networks
1. Introduction
The transition from the Early Bronze Age (EBA) to Middle Bronze
Age (MBA) in Northern Mesopotamia (2200e2000 BCE) has
received considerable archaeological attention for the apparent
concurrence of (1) aridification, (2) deurbanisation, and (3) the end
of the Akkadian empire around 2200 BCE. Collectively, these
phenomena are known as the late-third-millennium collapse
(Weiss, 2000), aridity crisis (Fiorentino et al., 2008), or urban crisis
(Akkermans and Schwartz, 2003) as well as the 4.2-ka event
(Staubwasser and Weiss, 2006). The phenomena were first reported
by Weiss et al. (1993) at Tell Leilan in Syria’s Upper Khabur Basin
(UKB; Figs. 1 and 2). The tenets of this “crisis” e aridity and urban
decline in the late-third-millennium UKB e have withstood scrutiny, but the scale, timing, causality, and social effects remain
unclear. It is no exaggeration when Ur (2010) states: “Almost all
aspects of this transition are debated” (412). The topic has generated considerable debate (e.g., Dalfes et al., 1997; Weiss, 2000;
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ44 74 0299 0202.
E-mail addresses: elleryfrahm@gmail.com, e.frahm@sheffield.ac.uk (E. Frahm),
feinberg@umn.edu (J.M. Feinberg).
0305-4403/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2012.11.026
lu, 2007; Schwartz, 2007;
Coombes and Barber, 2005; Kuzucuog
Schwartz and Miller, 2007; Wossink, 2009; Yoffee, 2010; Butzer,
2012) and attention due to the current interest in climate change
and the “collapse” of complex societies (e.g., McIntosh et al., 2000;
deMenocal, 2001; Schwartz and Nichols, 2006; McAnany and
Yoffee, 2009; Mainwaring et al., 2010; Diamond, 2011; Sheets and
Cooper, 2012).
Data from numerous climate proxies have been amassed during
the last two decades (see the review by Staubwasser and Weiss,
2006). Whether due to climate changes, regional weather
patterns, and/or soil degradation after intensive agriculture, some
degree of UKB aridification seems beyond a reasonable doubt.
Simply documenting decreased rainfall, though, is insufficient
because, as argued by McIntosh et al. (2000), “an environmental
crisis is primarily a matter of the social realm... rather than
a breakdown in the environment itself” (7).
Research into the social effects has largely focused on two
approaches. First, archaeologists have examined material culture
(dis)continuities (ceramic chronologies) and demography (inhabited area) (e.g., Weiss et al., 1993; Weiss and Courty, 1993; Courty
and Weiss, 1997; Weiss, 2000; Ristvet and Weiss, 2005). This
approach has led to criticisms that the “crisis” may be merely
a contrivance of incomplete archaeological surveys and ceramic
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
1867
Fig. 1. Near Eastern obsidian sources and Tell Mozan (ancient Urkesh). Sources of the obsidian artefacts at Tell Mozan are marked by full black circles and labelled.
topology issues (e.g., Porter, 2007: 107). Second, various archaeobotanical and geoarchaeological proxies have shown agricultural
changes, including differences in the crops and management
practices (e.g., Deckers and Riehl, 2007; Riehl and Bryson, 2007;
Riehl et al., 2008; Riehl, 2008, 2010). Thus, our understanding of
this period has been largely informed by ceramic chronologies,
demography, and farming practices.
Here we discuss our sourcing results for 97 obsidian artefacts
from Tell Mozan (Urkesh), an urban centre inhabited during the
proposed UKB crisis. The artefacts were excavated from Bronze-Age
strata before and after 2200 BCE, permitting a diachronic
perspective. Our results reveal that, before 2200 BCE, six Eastern
Anatolian obsidian sources are represented among the artefacts.
Such a variety of Eastern Anatolian obsidians at one Mesopotamian
site is hitherto unknown. This implies Urkesh was a cosmopolitan
city with diverse visitors or visitors with diverse itineraries. After
about 2200 BCE, obsidians came from two of the closest sources.
The other four sources disappear. Two to three centuries passed
before diverse obsidians reappeared at the city, consistent with the
proposed crisis duration. Our results also indicate that, even when
an obsidian source reappears at Urkesh, the raw material was likely
collected from different quarries. Although this study alone cannot
resolve the nature, causality, or severity of UKB aridification and
deurbanisation, we discuss new evidence regarding concurrent
shifts in exchange networks and quarrying practices.
2. Background: third-millennium Northern Mesopotamia
Fig. 2. Upper Khabur Basin (UKB) and Middle Khabur Basin (MKB) archaeological sites
with prior obsidian sourcing results; see Table 1. The annual migration route of an
Alikan nomadic group, as mapped by Beşikçi (1969) and redrawn in Cribb (1991), is
also shown.
In Northern Mesopotamia, the middle of the third millennium,
starting 2600e2500 BCE, was a period of increased urbanisation
and societal complexity. This “urban revolution” is attributed, at
least in part, to the production of agricultural surpluses that
enabled labour mobilisation and craft specialisation. UKB urban
centres grew markedly during this time. Tell Leilan and Tell
Hamoukar expanded from 15 to 90 ha or more (Weiss and Courty,
1993; Ur, 2002). Wilkinson and colleagues devised a model
encompassing population, subsistence, and environment to explain
this process (e.g., Wilkinson, 1994, 1997, 2000; Wilkinson et al.,
2007). The model predicts that, if a city drew on satellite agricultural settlements, its population could reach 12,000e14,000 across
1868
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
70e110 ha. At such sizes, however, the model predicts that rain
shortfalls would threaten sustainability.
The formation of the Akkadian empire soon followed. Centred in
Southern Mesopotamia, it reached an apex circa 2300e2200 BCE
after purported conquests in the north. Akkadian influence, at
least in the south, apparently involved the imposition of an imperial administrative level above city-states’ existing governments.
Their influence and interests in Northern Mesopotamia remain
unclear. Some researchers argue that the Akkadians subjugated
UKB cities and controlled agriculture (Weiss and Courty, 1993),
while others conclude that the empire instead exerted influence
over trade routes (Nissen, 1988; Michalowski, 1993; Marcus, 1998;
Van De Mieroop, 2004).
About 2200 BCE, many UKB settlements were abandoned or
dwindled in population, and the Akkadian empire declined.
Akkermans and Schwartz (2003) describe the situation:
In the final centuries of the third millennium, the urban societies of Syria exhibit conspicuous evidence of stress or even
collapse. In the Khabur region, numerous sites were abandoned
at a point roughly synchronous or just subsequent to the period
of the Akkadian presence in Syria. By c. 2200 BC, Leilan and the
sites in its vicinity, Chuera, Beydar, Abu Hgaira, and all the
excavated middle Khabur sites were deserted. Only Brak and
Mozan survived. (282e283)
This idea of extreme regional depopulation has been moderated
by subsequent discoveries of post-Akkadian habitation at some
UKB sites (e.g., Chagar Bazar, McMahon and Quenet, 2007; Tell
Barri, Orsi, 2008, 2010; Tell Hamoukar, Colantoni and Ur, 2011; Tell
Leilan, Weiss, 2011; Tell Mohammed Diyab, Nicolle, 2006). Hence,
while the “crisis” was widespread, the degree of deurbanisation
was variable, and scattered settlements survived, albeit often
reduced in size. Based on a survey of 1900 km2, about three-fourths
of sites were abandoned, and surviving sites shrank by two-thirds
(Ristvet and Weiss, 2005:1). Ur (2010) notes that depopulation
occurred “within the span of a single ceramic phase” and that,
when a settlement reappears at a site, typically “it represents
a clean break from the third millennium levels” (412). These effects
were also uneven. It was three centuries before UKB states
reformed, but only a century passed in the Middle Euphrates
(Cooper, 2006a).
As noted in the Introduction, this period has been given various
names, which highlight the uncertainties. Some authors argue that
“collapse” implies failure rather than adaptation to changing
circumstances (e.g., McAnany and Yoffee, 2009). Others contend
that the terms “event” and “crisis” imply a singular cause or abrupt
change. While we acknowledge the problems with these terms, we
do not wish to devise yet another. When we use the term “crisis”
here, we consider it shorthand for a thick description like “variable
disintegration of urban-based societies.”
Climate perturbations, particularly drought or aridification, are
the most frequently proposed crisis trigger. Varied paleoclimatic
proxies establish some kind of environmental change during this
time, but the spatiotemporal scale is still debated. Some proxies
suggest that it was a supra-regional trend with feedback loops that
increased the severity in marginal regions like Northern Mesopotamia. Others suggest there were localised multi-year or -decade
droughts and that the droughts debilitated agriculture. Regardless
of the cause, archaeobotanical, stable isotopic, and soil micromorphological evidence attest to diminished water (Riehl et al., 2008;
Riehl, 2009), suggesting rainfall decreased by as much as a third
(Ristvet and Weiss, 2005). A related explanation ties deurbanisation to agricultural maximisation (e.g., Wilkinson, 1994, 1997). For
cities, agricultural production reached sustainability limits and was
prone to crisis during droughts. Centralised agriculture maximised
food production in the short run, but it also increased the potential
for crop failures or shortfalls.
Other researchers attribute the crisis to political and/or
economic disruptions in the wake of the Akkadian regime. In this
scenario, the Akkadians disrupted the regional authorities and
power structures, leaving a void when their empire disintegrated.
Such proposals are sometimes combined with climate or sustainability. Peltenburg (2000) claims that the Akkadians “ruined the
indigenous political and economic infrastructure” and “created
a political vacuum that left communities ill-equipped to deal with
declining agricultural productivity and competition for reduced
high-yield lands” (200). Hence, it could have been a regional
government collapse combined with aridification that meant cities’
food needs could not be met.
Reflecting social relations among groups, exchange would be
expected to change under social stresses. One of the few
researchers to focus on exchange networks during the crisis is
Butzer (1997, 2012). Butzer views exchange as “energy flows”
between nodes in a system and suggests Akkadian imperialisation
was the prime mover of deurbanisation. Specifically, he claims
there was “imperial unrest, which ended with disintegration of an
internetworked world-economy, once extending from the Aegean
to the Indus Valley” (2012: 1). The Akkadians’ aim was interjecting
themselves into this “world-economy,” and their “relentless
expansion... destroyed the entrepot role of Syria at the nexus of this
economic system” (1). As evidence, Butzer cites his own network
model of the Early Bronze Age “world-economy” (1997). His model,
however, attributes more importance to sporadic contact between
Iberia and Greece than the direct interactions between Northern
Mesopotamia and Eastern Anatolia, which is absent from his
proposed exchange network centred around Syria. Ultimately, if
one finds Butzer’s ideas compelling (e.g., Cooper, 2006b: 263), his
heuristic model remains in need of additional archaeological data.
3. The people and site: Hurrians and Tell Mozan
Tell Mozan was inhabited by the Halaf period (6200e5300 BCE),
grew to 130 ha in the mid-third millennium, and was abandoned
about 1300 BCE. During the second and third millennia, the city
was inhabited and ruled, primarily at least, by Hurrians, a minority
in many Bronze-Age UKB settlements. Knowledge of thirdmillennium Hurrians was largely restricted to epigraphic sources
and linguistic studies until 1995, when Tell Mozan was identified as
Urkesh, known from texts as a Hurrian political and religious
centre. Over the last three decades, excavations have uncovered
a third-millennium palace (A in Fig. 3), a contemporaneous temple
(B) on a 30-m-tall terrace linked to a plaza (J), and later third- and
second-millennium habitation phases atop them.
The site lies near the terminus of the Mardin pass into the Taurus
mountains’ front range, the Tur Abdin. Akkermans and Schwartz
(2003) suggest the location “may indicate control of the route to
the copper mines of eastern Anatolia e and perhaps an entry point
for Hurrian individuals” from the north (285). Mallowan (1947)
wrote that, through this pass, “many a hillman must have set out
on his way to the Khabur; warriors, traders, birds of passage, and
settlers, all of them seeking their fortunes” (11). This may be reflected in a Hurrian myth about a young god, Silver, who lives in the
mountains (Hoffner, 1990). His father is the god Kumarbi, the
“father” of Urkesh, and Silver travels there in search of his father.
This myth implies kinship with Hurrians in the highlands, concerns
the arrival of mountain resources (i.e., silver), and raises the
possibility of pilgrimages.
Tell Mozan has been a focus of ecological research due to its
continued habitation during the EBAeMBA transition. Pfälzner
(2010) summarises the environmental conditions at Tell Mozan
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
1869
Fig. 3. Excavation units of sourced artefacts relative to the palace excavations (left) and Areas A, B, and J on the tell (right). Compiled and redrawn from various Urkesh
expedition maps.
and in the UKB based on the studies of Riehl (2010), Deckers
(2010a,b), and their colleagues. Deckers and Riehl (2007) propose
that, after 2500 BCE, a nearby river slowed as a result of drier
conditions or intensifying agriculture. Deckers and Pessin (2010)
document vegetation changes using charcoal fragments from Tell
Mozan. During 2200e2000 BCE, there was a decrease in woodland
vegetation, indicating a shift towards steppe ecology or agricultural
intensification. Riehl et al. (2008) conclude that the stable carbon
isotopes of Tell Mozan archaeobotanical remains show increased
water stress in the early MBA. During the EBAeMBA transition,
Riehl (2009) found that, except at Tell Mozan and Tell Brak, emmer
wheat nearly disappears from the UKB. Ultimately, Riehl (2012)
argues the archaeobotanical remains attest to decreased rainfall
circa 2200 BCE. Hence, we have highly local information that the
Urkesh inhabitants experienced environmental changes.
From 1984 to 2010, this site was excavated by the International
Institute for Mesopotamian Area Studies (IIMAS). Artefacts from the
IIMAS excavations have the spatial contexts encoded in their labels.
For example, the obsidian flake and blade core in Fig. 4a is A14 q566
f216 k14, so it came from Area A, Unit 14, Locus 14, Feature 216, Lot
566. Such information, when used with the Urkesh Global Record
(UGR), an online excavation database, allows us to reconstruct
contexts and explore chronological trends. This core, for instance,
was found on a pisé floor with a grindstone, a hearth, and sherds
dated to Phase 3b (2100 BCE). A bladelet (Fig. 4b) was lying on an
adjacent floor with jar and cups sherds, grindstones, and a quern.
Thus, we have a core on a working surface and a bladelet on
a concurrent floor with grain-processing implements.
4. Methods and materials: artefacts and analyses
After a survey of the lithic assemblage at Tell Mozan, we
compared 97 obsidian artefacts to hundreds of obsidian specimens
using two geochemical techniques and rock magnetic analyses.
4.1. Obsidian assemblage and reference collection
This study focused on obsidian artefacts from the late EBA III to
Late Bronze Age IIA (circa 2300e1300 BCE; Table 2). The IIMAS
excavations have found over 820 obsidian artefacts from this period
(32% of lithics by number and 6% by mass). Prismatic blades (Fig. 4c)
and ad hoc flake tools dominate the assemblage. After an on-site
Fig. 4. Example obsidian artefacts from Tell Mozan. (a) Mixed blade and flake core, A14 q566 f216 k14. (b) Bladelet, A14 q712 f278 k4. (c) Prismatic blade, A12 q901 f382 k27.
1870
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
Table 1
Published obsidian sourcing results for sites within the Upper Khabur Basin (UKB) and Middle Khabur Basin (MKB); see Fig. 2. Sourced obsidian artefacts from known
Bronze-Age levels are highlighted.
Site (west to east)
Period (if known)
Reference
Artefacts
Source assignments
n
n
Source
2
2
1
1
4
4
4
1
4
2
1
1
4
1
4
3
1
4
18
2
2
9
1
16
27
2
2
1
11
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Meydan Dag
Bingöl B?
Undetermined
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Bingöl B
Bingöl A (?)
Nemrut Dag
Bingöl A (?)
Undetermined
Bingöl A/Nemrut
?
Meydan Dag
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Bingöl B?
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Bingöl B
Meydan Dag
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Meydan Dag
Bingöl B?
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Undetermined
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Bingöl B
Undetermined
Meydan Dag
Bingöl A/Nemrut
Tell Halaf
Surface finds
Francaviglia and Palmieri, 1998
6
Tell Kashkashok
Late Neolithic
Gratuze et al., 1993
8
Tell Gudeda
Tell Mulla Matar
Tell ‘Atij
Early Bronze Age
Early Bronze Age
Early Bronze Age
Chabot et al., 2001
Pernicka et al., 1997
Chabot et al., 2001
4
1
6
Chagar Bazar
Chalcolithic
Late Neolithic
Surface finds
Cann and Renfrew, 1964
Cann and Renfrew, 1964
Francaviglia and Palmieri, 1998
1
1
5
Late Chalcolithic
Khalidi et al., 2009
8
Tell Barri
Records lost
Surface finds
Forster and Grave, 2012
Francaviglia and Palmieri, 1998
4
22
Tell Hamoukar
Surface finds
Hall and Shackley, 1994
10
Surface finds
Late Chalcolithic
Francaviglia and Palmieri, 1998
Khalidi et al., 2009
16
32
Surface finds
Hall and Shackley, 1994
11
Tell Brak
Hirbet Tueris
lithics survey, 97 obsidian artefacts, all chip debris, were approved
for export and non-destructive studies by Syria’s Directorate
General of Antiquities and Museums. Their spatiotemporal range
reflects the IIMAS excavations: 81 artefacts from Area A, 3 from B,
and 13 from J (Fig. 3). These artefacts are documented in Frahm
(2010: 518e576), and the labels enable their contexts to be reconstructed using the UGR. The artefacts’ compositions were compared
to more than 900 geological specimens from 200 sampling loci in
Anatolia and the Caucasus (Frahm, 2010: 257e269).
4.2. Geochemical analyses: source identification
These artefacts and geological specimens were geochemically
analysed with two analytical techniques: electron microprobe
analysis (EMPA) and portable X-ray fluorescence (pXRF). While not
used as frequently as X-ray fluorescence (XRF) or neutron activation
analysis (NAA), EMPA is an established technique for obsidian
sourcing (e.g., Merrick and Brown, 1984; Weisler and Clague,
1998; Tykot, 1995; Tykot and Chia, 1997; Rosen et al., 2005;
Le Bourdonnec et al., 2005, 2010; Wada et al., 2003; Wada, 2009;
Sanna et al., 2010). Our calibration and analytical procedures are
Table 2
Site phases linked to approximate dates and regional chronologies.
Phase Approx dates
Bronze Age
Jezirah period
Mesopotamian
period
2
3
4
5
6
7
EBA III
EBA IV
MBA I
MBA IIA
MBA IIB & IIC
LBA I & IIA
Early Jezirah IV
Early Jezirah IV
Early Jezirah V
Old Jezirah IeII
Old Jezirah III
e
Early Akkadian
Late Akkadian
Ur III/Post-Akkadian
Old Babylonian
Middle Babylonian
Mitannian/Middle
Assyrian
2300e2200
2200e2100
2100e2000
2000e1800
1800e1500
1500e1300
BCE
BCE
BCE
BCE
BCE
BCE
Dag
Dag
Dag
Dag
Dag
Dag
Dag
Dag
Dag
Dag
Dag
discussed in Frahm (2010: 302e364; 2012a). Evaluations of accuracy and precision (repeatability and reproducibility) were based
on reference standards (e.g., VG-568), analytical “round robin”
specimens, and XRF and NAA data from the University of Missouri’s
Research Reactor (MURR) for matched specimens (Frahm, 2010:
365e484, 2012a). Source attributions are based on three- to sevendimensional Euclidean distance (ED) matrices of similarity coefficients (Frahm, 2010: 469e482, 2012a).
Handheld pXRF has recently become an established technique
for obsidian sourcing around the world: the Near East (Frahm, 2007,
2013; Forster and Grave, 2012), East Asia (Jia et al., 2010), Mesoamerica (Nazaroff et al., 2010; Millhauser et al., 2011), South
America (Craig et al., 2010), the North American Great Basin
(Goodale et al., 2012), the Western Mediterranean (Tykot, 2010;
Tykot et al., 2011), and Oceania (Burley et al., 2011; McCoy et al.,
2011; Sheppard et al., 2011). Of the 97 artefacts, 52 were analysed
using pXRF to corroborate artefacts’ source identifications and
evaluate its potential for future on-site analyses (Frahm, 2013).
These measurements were calibrated using 18 Anatolian obsidian
specimens analysed with NAA and XRF at MURR. Our source
assignment procedures were identical to those for the EMPA data.
4.3. Magnetic analyses: subsource identification
Different parts of an obsidian flow experience different
temperature ranges, viscosities, and oxidation conditions as they
cool. The morphologies, distributions, and chemistries of microscopic minerals in all obsidians reflect the localised cooling histories. The variations affect the obsidians’ magnetic properties.
McDougall (1978) first demonstrated the potential of obsidian
sourcing using magnetic parameters, and additional magnetic
studies followed but with mixed success (Frahm and Feinberg, 2013
and the references within). These studies sought to distinguish
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
1871
obsidian sources, but variability of the magnetic properties within
individual flows complicated their efforts. In contrast, we use
thermal-dependent (and thus spatial-dependent) magnetic properties of obsidian to identify different locations (i.e., quarrying sites,
subsources) on a flow. Some of the variations that impede interflow differentiation are the same mechanisms that enable intraflow differentiation. Magnetic hysteresis parameters e saturation
magnetisation (Ms), saturation remanence (Mrs), coercivity (Hc),
and coercivity of remanence (Hcr) e have proven most useful for
spatial information. A publication on our magnetic techniques is
currently in preparation (Frahm and Feinberg, in preparation).
5. Results
Based on established models of Near East obsidian distribution
(e.g., Cauvin and Chataigner, 1998; Chataigner, 1998; Chataigner
et al., 1998), we anticipated that obsidians would have originated
from the Eastern Anatolian sources. Indeed, 94 of the 97 artefacts
came from these sources and are considered here. Three Phase 2b
artefacts from Central Anatolia reflect a discrete phenomenon and
are discussed elsewhere (Frahm and Feinberg, 2013).
5.1. Eastern Anatolian obsidians at Tell Mozan
Figs. 5 and 6 are scatterplots of the Eastern Anatolian artefacts
and geological specimens analysed using EMPA and pXRF. Six
Eastern Anatolian sources are identified among the artefacts
, Bingöl A, Bingöl B, Muş, Meydan Dag
, and
(Fig. 2): Nemrut Dag
. EMPA results were the primary means of source
Tendürek Dag
identification, and the findings were corroborated with pXRF. In the
case of Muş, pXRF resolved an ambiguous distinction between that
source and Pasinler (i.e., six artefacts, using the EMPA data, plotted
closest to Muş and also near Pasinler due to weathering, but the
pXRF data were unaffected). Fig. 7 shows the distinction between
and Bingöl A obsidians. A supplementary table
Nemrut Dag
includes the relevant geochemical data (i.e., the eight elements
used in the ED calculations) for the Eastern Anatolian artefacts and
their sources (Table S1). The full dataset and ED similarity coefficients are available in Frahm (2010: 852e1019).
Fig. 5. Scatterplot of EMPA data for the artefacts (filled circles) and geological specimens (open grey circles); only the Eastern Anatolian obsidians are shown for clarity.
Measurements are in weight percent (wt %). Colour codes are consistent with Fig. 8.
(For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is
referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 6. Scatterplot of pXRF data of the artefacts (filled circles) and geological specimens
(open grey circles); only the Eastern Anatolian obsidians are shown for clarity.
Measurements are in parts per million (ppm). The pXRF data were calibrated using
a set of 18 Anatolian obsidian specimens analysed using NAA and XRF at the University
of Missouri’s Research Reactor. Colour codes are consistent with Fig. 8. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web
version of this article.)
Such a diversity of Eastern Anatolian sources is previously
unknown in Mesopotamia. The majority of these 94 artefacts (85%)
came from the three most prominent Eastern Anatolian sources:
, Bingöl A, and Bingöl B. The only other Eastern Anatolian
Nemrut Dag
(Table 1), where 2% of Tell
source known in the UKB is Meydan Dag
obsidians
Mozan artefacts originated. Use of Muş and Tendürek Dag
is, to our knowledge, previously unknown in Mesopotamia. Recently,
Carter et al. (2013) report the first clear archaeological use of Muş
obsidian: one artefact from Körtik Tepe in Turkey. The six artefacts
from Tell Mozan corroborate that Muş must be considered an
important source. It should be noted 3.5% of sourced Mesopotamian
obsidian artefacts have unidentified sources, and in the UKB, this
proportion rises to 4.5% (Frahm, 2010: 590e629).
Fig. 7. Scatterplot of EMPA data for the peralkaline Tell Mozan obsidian artefacts (black
(darker circles) and Bingöl A
circles) and the geological specimens from Nemrut Dag
(lighter circles). Colour codes are consistent with Fig. 8. The artefacts from these
sources fall into discrete populations, attesting to their different origins. The middle
cluster corresponds to what is commonly called “Nemrut Caldea” or
Nemrut Dag
“Nemrut I/II” in the literature. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
1872
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
100%
75%
Nemrut Da
Mu
Meydan Da
50%
25%
Overall (n=94)
2 (n=17)
3 (n=17)
4 (n=4)
4/5 (n=22)
5 (n=5)
6 (n=16)
7+ (n=13)
Phase and Number of Sourced Artefacts
Fig. 8. Volcanic origins of the 94 artefacts from Eastern Anatolian obsidian sources (left) and a chronological breakdown (right). The site phases for Tell Mozan are described in
Table 2. Of the Phase 2 artefacts, those most securely dated are ascribed only to Phase 2a. The remainder is ascribed to Phase 2 in general (i.e., none specifically to Phase 2b). The
Phase 4/5 artefacts are thought to be principally, if not entirely, Phase 5; however, late Phase 4 attributions cannot be completely ruled out based on presently available
chronostratigraphic data.
5.2. Geochemical inter-source chronology
Changes in obsidian use between Phases 2 and 3 are dramatic
(Fig. 8 and Table 2). Phase 2 (2300e2200 BCE) obsidians are from
six sources, and no source represents over 30%. In contrast, Phase 3
(2200e2100 BCE) obsidians came from only two of the closest
(88%) and Bingöl B (12%). This trend apparsources: Nemrut Dag
(75%)
ently continues into Phase 4 (2100e2000 BCE): Nemrut Dag
and Bingöl B (25%). During Phase 5 (2000e1800 BCE), diverse
obsidians reappear, but half of the artefacts (52%) are Nemrut Dag
obsidians (in Phases 4/5 and 5). Phases 6 (1800e1500 BCE) and 7
(1500e1300 BCE) might represent a second change between (1) the
obsidnearest three sources with a predominance of Nemrut Dag
ians and (2) followed by greater diversity.
sampling
There are small differences among the four Tendürek Dag
loci, and the Phase 5c matches these geological specimens. The only
Phase 2a artefact is distinct, as are the four artefacts from inter obsidian found at Tell
mediate phases. Like Muş, the Tendürek Dag
Mozan was collected from distinct loci in different periods, indicating the acquisition mechanisms may have changed. These
magnetic results also suggest that there are additional quarrying
.
areas on the slopes of Tendürek Dag
5.3. Magnetic intra-source chronologies
obsidians is essentially
Given that use of Muş and Tendürek Dag
unknown, the results of our magnetic analyses for these sources are
especially interesting. Specifically, we found different parts of the
sources were utilised over time. Consider Muş first. Obsidian
outcrops from a lava dome on the Muş plains, and a secondary
deposit lies downstream along the Murat River (Ercan et al., 1995;
Bigazzi et al., 1997). The Muş artefacts and specimens comprise one
chemical cluster, but magnetic analyses reveal discrete populations
(Fig. 9). Obsidian from the west-central part of the dome matches
the river-transported specimens. The artefacts most closely match
these specimens. Thus, people may have collected obsidian from
these outcrops or river deposits. One artefact is distinct from those
in earlier and later phases, and it may have come from a different
area, likely close to the southwestern edge of the dome. Thus, the
initial reappearance of Muş obsidian at Tell Mozan might represent
a distinct mode of raw-material acquisition at the source itself.
and
Obsidian occurs on the northern slopes of Tendürek Dag
likely elsewhere on the volcano (Yılmaz et al., 1998). The Tendürek
specimens and artefacts also fall into a single geochemical
Dag
cluster, but magnetic analyses reveal discrete populations (Fig. 10).
Fig. 9. Magnetic hysteresis parameters of Muş artefacts and specimens. Artefacts are
the black shapes. Geological collection areas are represented by circles with different
patterns/colours. Obsidian from the west-central part of the lava dome (facing the
river; the top-shaded circle) matches the river-transported specimens (bottom-shaded
circles). One artefact (square) has distinct magnetic properties than those from earlier
and later phases (upward and downward triangles). This artefact may have been
collected from a different location, most likely near the southwestern edge of the dome
(right-shaded circle). The other circles (left- and quarter-shaded circles) represent
other parts of the dome (east-centre and north-centre, respectively). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web
version of this article.)
1873
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
From Tell Mulla Matar, Pernicka et al. (1997) sourced only one
rather than compositionally
artefact and attributed it to Nemrut Dag
similar Bingöl A. Using their technique (Pernicka, 1992), Bingöl A
was distinguished from the three major geochemical types of
obsidian, often called Nemrut Caldera, Nemrut Lake,
Nemrut Dag
and Nemrut South (e.g., Bressy et al., 2005) or Nemrut I/II, III, and IV
(e.g., Blackman, 1984). Specifically, Pernicka et al. (1997) identified
this artefact as “Nemrut Caldera” or “Nemrut I/II” obsidian. This is
obsidian found at Tell Mozan (Fig. 7) as
the same type of Nemrut Dag
well as numerous sites in the Euphrates Basin (e.g., Hassek Höyük,
Pernicka, 1992; Dja’de, Halula, and Mureybet, Pernicka et al., 1997).
Just 10 obsidian artefacts were recovered at Tell Gudeda and 19
at Tell ’Atij (700 m apart on the Khabur River; Chabot et al., 2001).
Collectively, the lithic assemblages are only 0.4% obsidian. To
and Bingöl A obsidians, Chabot et al.
differentiate Nemrut Dag
(2001) follow Poidevin’s (1998) approach and use a geochemical
plot (i.e., a CNK/A vs. NK/A from Shand, 1943). Poidevin (1998),
though, knew only of the “Nemrut Lake” and “Nemrut South”
obsidian types. Bressy et al. (2005) apparently first added “Nemrut
Caldera” obsidian to such a graph, and this third obsidian type
plots very near Bingöl A obsidian, casting prior identifications into
doubt.
Chabot et al. (2001) determined that four artefacts from each
site fell into the intermediate geochemical range between “Nemrut
Lake” and “Nemrut South,” so they attributed the artefacts to Bingöl
A. Like Poidevin (1998), they were only aware of two Nemrut Dag
obsidian types, so these artefacts may be misattributed to Bingöl A.
Instead, “Nemrut Caldera” obsidian, like that found at nearby Tell
Mulla Matar, may be correct. Without geological specimens for
comparison (cf., Fig. 7), the source remains uncertain. Their data,
though, plot as one cluster, so it is unlikely that there is a mix of
and Bingöl A at the two MKB sites. Additionally, two
Nemrut Dag
other artefacts from Tell ’Atij had sources unidentified by Chabot
et al. (2001).
Clearly there are considerable differences between the obsidians
represented at a large UKB city and small riverside MKB villages in
the EBA. Comparisons, however, are limited by the small sample
sizes and uncertainties in source identification. Unfortunately, for
Khabur sites with over 10 sourced obsidian artefacts (Fig. 11), the
artefacts and specimens.
Fig. 10. Magnetic hysteresis parameters of Tendürek Dag
Artefacts are the solid black shapes. Geological collection areas are represented by
circles with different patterns/colours. Only the one Phase 5c artefact (square) matches
specimens collected from the outcrops (half-shaded circles). A Phase 2a artefact (circle)
is distinct from the geological sampling areas, as are the four artefacts from intermediate phases (triangles). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
5.4. Comparison to previous studies
Earlier obsidian sourcing studies provide little for comparison.
To our knowledge, there are 135 sourced Eastern Anatolian
obsidian artefacts from ten Khabur sites in published studies
(Table 1). Over half (n ¼ 74; 55%) have no spatiotemporal context.
Just 11 artefacts (8%) were excavated from Bronze-Age strata at
three sites. Tell Malla Matar, Tell Gudeda, and Tell ’Atij are small
(1 ha) riverside villages within 4 km of one another in the Middle
Khabur Basin (MKB; Fig. 2). These three EBA sites were abandoned
roughly synchronous with EBAeMBA transition and, thus, cannot
provide a diachronic perspective.
Tell Mozan (overall, n = 94)
Tell Brak
F & G 2012 (unknown, n = 4)
F & P 1998 (unknown, n = 5)
K et al. 2009 (Late Ch, n = 7)
Nemrut Da
Tell Barri
Mu
Meydan Da
F & P 1998 (unknown, n = 22)
Undetermined
Tell Hamoukar
H & S 1994 (unknown, n = 10)
F & P 1998 (unknown, n = 16)
K et al. 2009* (Late Ch, n = 32)
Hirbet Tueris
H & S 1994 (unknown, n = 11)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Fig. 11. Khabur archaeological sites with more than ten sourced obsidian artefacts. The asterisk denotes an adjustment of the source proportions based on statements by Khalidi
and Bingöl A are combined because the other studies could not distinguish these
et al. (2009) regarding their non-representative sample of sourced artefacts. Nemrut Dag
chemically similar sources.
1874
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
found at Göbekli Tepe during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Period
(Carter et al., 2012), and the variety is interpreted as evidence of
pilgrimages by different groups. Thus, diverse obsidians at Devils
Tower and Göbekli Tepe represent a convergence of travellers at
a landmark.
Thus, diverse Phase 2 obsidians suggest that Urkesh was
a cosmopolitan centre with diverse visitors or visitors with diverse
itineraries. Urkesh was the largest city near the Mardin Pass, and its
temple atop a 30-m-tall terrace, rivalling the Ziggurat of Ur, was
a conspicuous landmark across the plains. There were likely
pilgrimages or religious festivals attended by travellers. Crawford
(1978) suggests obsidian trade occurred at bazaars, like those
held outside Damascus, where “long-distance travellers... distribute
the surplus of the goods thus acquired” to sedentary peoples (131).
Wilkinson (2000) contends large UKB cities, like Urkesh, arose in
locations suited to participation in exchange networks that incorporate sedentary, nomadic, and valuable goods.
Small MKB villages did not exhibit such centripetal effects. Low
obsidian diversity, plus its scarcity, suggests fewer travellers
reached the villages. The MKB pattern also implies the obsidians
reaching Urkesh were not simply re-radiated throughout the basin.
Perhaps their exchange involved distinct mechanisms. Nemrut Dag
and Bingöl B obsidians might have been moved via mechanisms
that persisted and enabled them to reach Southern Mesopotamia
(Fig. 12). Other obsidians may have reached the city via exchange
mechanisms that did not continue, explaining their limited longdistance exchange. This mechanism may also have been “pulled”
to Urkesh by a centripetal effect, which might have diminished in
strength under societal and climatic stress.
artefacts are older or have no spatiotemporal context, and Bingöl A
obsidians could not be discerned. These prior
and Nemrut Dag
studies, however, establish the diversity (or lack thereof) of
obsidians represented at other UKB sites.
6. Discussion
The transition between Phases 2 and 3 is roughly concurrent
with the “crisis” onset. Phase 2 obsidians come from six Eastern
Anatolian sources, but Phase 3 obsidians are from only two of the
closest sources. Diverse obsidians seem to reappear during Phase 5,
consistent with proposals that the effects lasted two to three
centuries in the UKB. Determining the nature of the thirdmillennium crisis at Urkesh is, of course, a heavy burden to put
on these 94 obsidian artefacts. This study alone cannot resolve the
nature of the crisis. Our results, however, provide tangible evidence
for changes in exchange at Urkesh and in quarrying at sources.
Hence we consider potential mechanisms for obsidian artefacts’
arrival and source-use changes in light of hypotheses regarding the
crisis. We stress that the exchange of obsidian should not necessarily be conceptualised as obsidian-driven. It should be understood
as a phenomenon in which obsidian was embedded in a primary or
secondary role. The movement of obsidian may instead reflect the
exchange of other goods (e.g., metals), the movement of people
(e.g., migration, pilgrimages), or other phenomena.
6.1. Centripetal forces: Urkesh as a landmark
The Phase 2 obsidian mélange implies Urkesh residents did not
practice direct procurement. Khalidi et al. (2009) claim that
obsidian diversity in the Chalcolithic UKB is a metric of directness:
one predominant source is an indicator of direct access while varied
obsidians imply indirect access and procurement associated with
other goods. We agree, in general, with this postulate, particularly
in light of previous studies that identified highly diverse obsidians
at a site. Consider Molyneaux’s (2002) discovery of diverse obsidians at Devils Tower in Wyoming. He suggests that Devils Tower
exhibited “a centripetal effect, as it drew e and continues to draw e
travellers from all directions to its sides” (136) and that travellers
simply carried varied obsidians. In Turkey, diverse obsidians are
6.2. Exchange, networks, and economy
To explain the differential occurrence of Central and Eastern
Anatolian obsidians at Urkesh, we suggested two mechanisms for
their arrival at the city (Frahm and Feinberg, 2013). We proposed
Central Anatolian obsidian artefacts arrived via an established longdistance exchange network (the Anatolian Trade Network, 2500e
lu, 2005), which linked Central Anatolian polities
2100 BCE, Şahog
to the Aegean in the west and Middle Euphrates in the east. In
contrast, drawing on ethnohistorical accounts from the region, we
Tell Mozan - All (n = 94)
Tell Mozan - Ph 2 (n = 17)
Tell Mozan - Ph 3 (n = 17)
Upper Khabur Basin - EBA
Tell Gudeda (n = 4)
Nemrut Da
Mu
Meydan Da
Tell Mulla Matar (n = 1)
Undetermined
Southern Mesopotamia - EBA
EBA Uruk (n = 11)
Southern Mesopotamia - MBA
MBA Larsa (n = 3)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Fig. 12. Our results for Tell Mozan, the results for the three EBA MKB sites, and the published obsidian sourcing results for known EBA and MBA contexts at Southern Mesopotamian
and Bingöl A are combined because the other studies (except for Pernicka et al., 1997) could not distinguish these chemically similar sources.
sites. Nemrut Dag
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
considered the possible roles of nomadic and semi-nomadic groups
in distributing Eastern Anatolian obsidians. For example, Cribb
(1991) documented the migrations of Alikan tribes across southeastern Turkey. The different groups’ routes crossed, often at cities
where goods could be traded, creating an intersecting de facto
exchange network. Transhumance is perhaps the most discussed
mechanism of obsidian distribution in Eastern Anatolia (e.g.,
Hole, 1968; Wright, 1969; Williams-Thorpe, 1995; Cauvin, 1996;
Chataigner, 1998; Chataigner et al., 1998).
Shared material culture also attests to networks linking
Northern Mesopotamia and Eastern Anatolia. Specifically, the Early
Transcaucasian or KuraeAraxes complex (circa 3400e2000 BCE)
spanned from the Caucasus to southeastern Anatolia. Obsidian,
either as a raw material or finished tools, likely spread through the
region via similar mechanisms as the material culture (e.g., the redand-black burnished ware). At Urkesh, red-and-black burnished
sherds occur in mid- and late-third-millennium levels of the palace
and temple, roughly concurrent with the diverse Phase 2 obsidians.
The disappearance of Early Transcaucasian sherds appears
synchronous with the reduced diversity of obsidians. This is
consistent with Edens’ (1995) contention that the EBAeMBA transition in Eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus ended in “more fragmented regional cultures” (53). A disintegration of regional social
networks may have ended the arrival of Early Transcaucasian
ceramics (or peoples) and the diverse obsidians that disappeared
from Urkesh. The causality of such a change, including any link to
the “crisis” in Northern Mesopotamia, remains unknown.
Another possibility is that the diverse Phase 2 obsidian pattern
reflects Akkadian influence at the city. Empires are known to
extend their influence beyond regional borders to access a variety
of resources (Barfield, 2001; Sinopoli, 2001). While most scholars
hold that their influence in Northern Mesopotamia “fell decisively
short of full imperial control” (Adams, 1966: 159), the Akkadians
may have sought control over distribution routes for natural
resources, especially highland resources like metals (Nissen, 1988;
Michalowski, 1993; Marcus, 1998; Van De Mieroop, 2004). Additionally, trade under the Akkadians is thought to have been statecontrolled, later becoming a private endeavour in the Old
Assyrian system (1950e1750 BCE; Veenhof, 1997). Hence, it is
possible that, either directly or indirectly, Akkadian influence
altered the Urkesh economy in Phase 2. The local economy might
have intensified its focus on resources from the north (and this
could also have occurred for various reasons). For example, copper
metallurgy, using ores from the north, could have increased due to
demand from the south. With climatic shifts and the end of the
empire, the Urkesh economy might then have refocused on local
production and consumption in Phase 3.
Pastoral nomads’ habitat-tracking perhaps also changed during
this era, and migration shifts would also change the resulting
network. Palynological, geochemical, and isotopic climate signals
preserved in Lake Van sediments suggest environmental shifts in
Eastern Anatolia as well. Lemcke and Sturm (1997) report
“decreasing humidity (temperature) and a significant shift of
precipitation” after 2190 BCE (673), and Wick et al. (2003) noted
decreasing woodlands after 2100 BCE, replaced by an open landscape. Migration routes may have shifted, and if resource shortfalls
occurred, there might have been changes in trade, territoriality, or
other resource-control strategies. Not all groups would have to be
affected because, as a network, shifts in the routes of only one
group could affect how obsidians were distributed. Consequently,
climate could have disrupted their de facto network and also
effected the disappearance of four obsidians from Urkesh.
We should also consider the possibility that exchange
embedded in complex networks might not be the mechanism to
explain differential distribution of these obsidians. Perhaps
1875
a “simple” mechanism, such as multiple reciprocal exchange
(“down-the-line” trade) among groups, could account for Nemrut
and Bingöl B obsidians reaching crisis-era Urkesh as well as
Dag
MKB villages and Southern Mesopotamian cities in small quantities.
Ultimately, much more data are needed to connect the patterns
and processes. Tell Mozan is the only UKB site with sourced
obsidian covering the EBAeMBA transition. One priority should be
identifying similarities and differences in obsidian source-histories
throughout the UKB. Different settlements might have reacted
differently to climatic/societal stresses and had different
approaches mitigating the effects. In prior studies of Khabur sites,
more than half of the sourced artefacts have no context (Hall and
Shackley, 1994; Francaviglia and Palmieri, 1998). It is no longer
sufficient to source obsidian from a deeply stratified tell by collecting ten artefacts from the surface and ignore the ultimate
spatiotemporal contexts of the analysed artefacts.
and Bingöl B obsidAn important question is why Nemrut Dag
ians might be different. Why would those specific obsidians not
only persist through the crisis at Urkesh but also reach Southern
is proposed by
Mesopotamia? One possible answer for Nemrut Dag
Frahm (2012b): this volcano simultaneously exhibited a centripetal
force, drawing in travellers from all around, and a centrifugal force,
radiating obsidian outward across the Near East. Thus, we must also
consider source-centric (i.e., centrifugal) mechanisms and interpretations for the observed shifts.
6.3. Centrifugal forces: sources, landscape, and environment
Our magnetic results suggest that past peoples collected
obsidian at locations other than those sampled for the reference
collection. Thus, at present, most of the artefacts cannot be
“sourced” to a particular quarry. At this point, however, these
results indicate changes in some aspect of human behaviour at the
sources. Apparently there were shifts in quarry use for some reason.
Perhaps, for example, changes in extraction techniques might have
altered which quarries were considered “economically viable.”
Ethnographic and archaeological studies indicate that quarries can
have cultural meanings that also affect their selection and use
(Taçon, 1989, 1991; Saunders, 2001).
Given the apparent environment shifts (e.g., disappearing
woodlands around Lake Van; Wick et al., 2003), one centrifugal (i.e.,
source-centric, materials radiating outward) perspective that must
be considered is changing landscape and quarry accessibility.
Obsidian forms only under particular conditions: when viscous lava
oozes onto the surface and produces a lava dome (Fig. 7 in Frahm,
2012b). The inner shell of high-quality obsidian is deeply buried
across most of the lava dome, and obsidian can be collected where
this inner shell is exposed by slope processes, which are controlled
by landscape-climate interactions. As a landscape shifts in response
to climate, the locations where obsidian is accessible may also
change. Some outcrops may be buried, whereas others are exposed.
Consider, for example, how rain affects erosion and deposition.
With high rainfall, streams can cut channels into a lava dome,
exposing obsidian for people to collect. When rain decreases,
sediment may accumulate in the channels and cover the obsidian,
removing it from circulation and requiring people to seek new
exposures. Thus, an accessibility signal may be preserved in
obsidian artefacts. Models of changing mobility and exchange must,
of course, be studied alongside those of changing accessibility
because the stimulus (e.g., environmental change) could yield
multiple responses (e.g., shifts in mobility or exchange networks)
with potential equifinality.
At present, we can only state that the initial reappearance of
obsidians at Tell Mozan seems to involve
Muş and Tendürek Dag
different collection loci. Therefore, there were discontinuities at the
1876
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
sources, not just at Urkesh. Regardless of impetus, the changes are
tangible, and magnetic analyses enable identification of quarryscale changes in sources’ use-histories.
7. Conclusions
The “crisis” in Northern Mesopotamia during the last centuries
of the third millennium BCE is one of the most discussed and
debated times of societal and climatic change. This shift was likely
not an undifferentiated process explainable by a single primum
movens. Instead, as Schwartz (2007) contends, “there were
numerous crises in different regions at different chronological
junctures from ca. 2300 to 1900 B.C., not a single catastrophic
event” (62). Our study ultimately involves changes at only one UKB
urban centre. Thus, our results are not poised to resolve what
occurred throughout the region at this time. Instead, we report
tangible evidence in the material culture of changes at this city and
at some raw-material sources. We consider potential interpretations of these findings, all of which require further evidence and
testing, in light of the proposed crisis.
To summarise, apparently concurrent with UKB aridification
and deurbanisation as well as the decline of the Akkadian empire,
there was a dramatic change in the obsidians arriving at Urkesh.
Before this time, during Phase 2, six obsidian sources in Eastern
Anatolia are represented among the artefacts. Such a variety of
Eastern Anatolian obsidians at one Mesopotamian site is previously
unknown. This finding implies that Urkesh was a cosmopolitan city
and that its visitors carried diverse obsidians with them. During
Phase 3, however, obsidians came from only two of the closest
sources. The reduced diversity of obsidians is also synchronous
with the disappearance of Early Transcaucasian ceramics at Urkesh.
The reappearance of varied obsidians is roughly consistent with
the proposed crisis duration in the UKB. Even when an obsidian
source reappears, the raw material apparently came from different
collection spots, implying discontinuities at the quarries, perhaps
due to accessibility issues on a changing landscape. Although the
precise mechanisms remain unclear, it may be that obsidians from
different sources arrived at Urkesh via distinct networks and that
one (or more) did not persist through the crisis.
Here we report evidence, geochemical and magnetic signals in
obsidian artefacts discovered at Tell Mozan, for changes in
exchange networks and quarrying practices concurrent with a time
of societal and environmental stress. With a diachronic perspective
on obsidian source-use from only one site, our findings are,
at present, neutral regarding the degree of deurbanisation
and whether the causes included climate shifts, unsustainable
urban growth and subsistence practices, governmental collapse,
economic forces, or societal fragmentation. The data do not yet
support a particular model of the crisis, but our results suggest that
it is not merely a contrivance of ceramic topology problems or
incomplete surface surveys. As future work elucidates the changes
in climate and society near the end of the third millennium BCE,
there might be considerable implications regarding the roles that
exchange and associated social networks play under societal and
environmental stresses, how they change in response, and how
they eventually recover or adapt.
Acknowledgements
Giorgio Buccellati and Marilyn Kelly-Buccellati are the directors
of the Urkesh excavations under the auspices of the International
Institute for Mesopotamian Area Studies (IIMAS). Export of the Tell
Mozan artefacts was approved by the Directorate General of
Antiquities and Museums, the Ministry of Culture, Syrian Arab
Republic. EMPA was conducted with a JEOL 8900 SuperProbe in the
Department of Earth Sciences’ Electron Microprobe Laboratory at
the University of Minnesota. Our magnetic analyses were conducted at the Institute for Rock Magnetism at the University of
Minnesota, and we are grateful for the research assistance of
Charissa Johnson (supported by the University of Minnesota’s
Undergraduate Research Opportunity Program and a Sigma Xi
award) and Amy Hillis (supported by the National Science Foundation’s Research Experience for Undergraduates program).
Thermo Fisher is thanked for the loan of the NITON handheld pXRF
instrument. Michael Glascock is thanked for NAA and XRF data that
aided in accuracy assessment of the EMPA data and calibration of
the pXRF data. Most of the Anatolian geological specimens were
originally collected by George “Rip” Rapp, University of Minnesota
and the late Tuncay Ercan, Directorate of Mineral Research and
Exploration of Turkey. Additional specimens came from the
collections of M. James Blackman, Robert L. Smith, and James F.
Luhr. This research was supported by the Department of Archaeology of the University of Sheffield, the Departments of Earth
Sciences and Anthropology of the University of Minnesota, and
Marie Curie Network FP7-PEOPLE-2010-ITN: New Archaeological
Research Network for Integrating Approaches to Ancient Material
Studies (NARNIA). Two anonymous reviewers and the editor are
thanked for their comments that improved the clarity of this paper.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2012.11.026.
References
Adams, R.McC., 1966. The Evolution of Urban Society. Aldine Transaction, Chicago.
Akkermans, P.M.M.G., Schwartz, G.M., 2003. The Archaeology of Syria: From
Complex HuntereGatherers to Early Urban Societies (c.16,000e300 BC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Barfield, T., 2001. The shadow empires: imperial state formation along the ChineseNomad Frontier. In: Alcock, S.E., D’Altroy, T.N., Morrison, K.D., Sinopoli, C.M.
(Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History. Cambridge
University Press, pp. 10e41.
Beşikçi, I., 1969. Gocebe Alikan Aşiret. Dogan Yayinevi, Ankara.
ingil, Z., Ercan, T., Oddone, M., Özdogan, M., 1997. Age determination
Bigazzi, G., Yeg
of obsidian bearing volcanics in Eastern Anatolia using the fission track dating
method. Geological Bulletin of Turkey 40 (2), 57e73.
Blackman, M., 1984. Provenance studies of middle eastern obsidian from sites in
highland Iran. In: Lambert, J.B. (Ed.), Archaeological Chemistry III, pp. 19e50.
Bressy, C., Poupeau, G., Yener, K., 2005. Cultural interactions during the Ubaid and
Halaf periods: Tell Kurdu (Amuq Valley, Turkey) obsidian sourcing. Journal of
Archaeological Science 32, 1560e1565.
Burley, D., Sheppard, P., Simonin, M., 2011. Tongan and Samoan volcanic glass: pXRF
analysis and implications for constructs of ancestral Polynesian society. Journal
of Archaeological Science 38, 2625e2632.
Butzer, K., 1997. Sociopolitical discontinuity in the near east c. 2200 BCE: scenarios
from Palestine and Egypt. In: Dalfes, H., Kukla, G., Weiss, H. (Eds.), Third Millennium BC Climate Change and Old World Collapse. Springer, Berlin, pp. 245e296.
Butzer, K., 2012. Collapse, environment, and society. PNAS 109, 3632e3639.
Cann, J.R., Renfrew, C., 1964. The characterization of obsidian and its application to
the Mediterranean Region. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 30, 111e133.
Carter, T., Le Bourdonnec, F.-X., Poupeau, G., Schmidt, K., 2012. Towards an
archaeology of pilgrimage: sourcing obsidian from the PPN temple complex of
Göbekli Tepe. In: 7th International Conference on the Chipped and Ground
Stone Industries of the Pre-pottery Neolithic. 14e17 February 2012. Centre
d’Estudis i Recursos Culturals, Barcelona, Spain.
Carter, T., Grant, S., Kartal, M., Coşkun, A., Özkaya, V., 2013. Networks and Neolithisation: sourcing obsidian from Körtik Tepe (SE Anatolia). Journal of
Archaeological Science 40, 556e569.
Cauvin, M.C., 1996. L’obsidienne dans le Proche-Orient prehistorique: etat des
recherches en 1996. Anatolica 22, 1e31.
Cauvin, M.C., Chataigner, C., 1998. Distribution de l’obsidienne dans les sites
archéologiques du Proche et du Moyen Orient (par phase chronologique). In:
Cauvin, M.C., Gourgaud, A., Gratuze, B., Arnaud, N., Poupeau, G., Poidevin, J.L.,
Chataigner, C. (Eds.), L’obsidienne au Proche et Moyen-Orient: Du Volcan à
l’Outil. BAR, Oxford, pp. 325e350.
Chabot, J., Poidevin, J.L., Chataigner, C., Fortin, M., 2001. Caracterisation et provenance des artefacts en obsidienne de Tell ’Atij et de Tell Gudeda (III millenaire,
Syrie). Cahiers d’Acheologie du CELAT 10, 241e256.
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
Chataigner, C., 1998. Sources des artefacts du Proche Orient d’aprés leur caractérisation géochimique. In: Cauvin, M.C., Gourgaud, A., Gratuze, B., Arnaud, N.,
Poupeau, G., Poidevin, J.L., Chataigner, C. (Eds.), L’obsidienne au Proche et
Moyen-Orient: Du Volcan à l’Outil. BAR, Oxford, pp. 273e324.
Chataigner, C., Poidevin, J.L., Arnaud, N.O., 1998. Turkish occurrences of obsidian and
use by prehistoric peoples in the near east from 14,000 to 6000 BP. Journal of
Volcanology and Geothermal Research 85, 517e537.
Colantoni, C., Ur, J., 2011. The architecture and pottery of a late third-millennium
residential quarter at Tell Hamoukar, north-eastern Syria. Iraq 73, 21e69.
Coombes, P., Barber, K., 2005. Environmental determinism in Holocene research:
causality or coincidence? Area 37.3, 303e311.
Cooper, L., 2006a. The demise and regeneration of Bronze Age urban centers in the
Euphrates Valley of Syria. In: Schwartz, G.M., Nichols, J.J. (Eds.), After Collapse:
the Regeneration of Complex Societies. University of Arizona Press, pp. 18e37.
Cooper, L., 2006b. Early Urbanism on the Syrian Euphrates. Routledge, London.
Courty, M.-A., Weiss, H., 1997. The scenario of environmental degradation in the Tell
Leilan region during the late third millennium abrupt climate change. In:
Dalfes, H., Kukla, G., Weiss, H. (Eds.), Third Millennium BC Climate Change and
Old World Collapse, pp. 107e147. Berlin, Heidelberg.
Craig, N., Speakman, R., Popelka-Filcoff, R., Aldenderfer, M., Blanco, L., Vega, M.,
Glascock, M., Stanish, C., 2010. Macusani obsidian from southern Peru: a characterization of its elemental composition with a demonstration of its ancient
use. Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 569e576.
Crawford, H., 1978. The mechanics of the obsidian trade: a suggestion. Antiquity 52,
129e132.
Cribb, R., 1991. Nomads in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Dalfes, H., Kukla, G., Weiss, H. (Eds.), 1997. Third Millennium BC Climate Change and
Old World Collapse. Springer, Berlin.
Deckers, K., 2010a. Anthracological research at the early to middle Bronze Age
settlement of Tell Mozan. In: Deckers, K., Doll, M., Pfälzner, P., Riehl, S. (Eds.),
The Development of the Environment, Subsistence, and Settlement of the City
of Urkes and Its Region. Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, pp. 159e190.
Deckers, K., 2010b. Archaeological sites of the Upper Khabur Basin in their fluvial
geomorphological context. In: Deckers, K., Doll, M., Pfälzner, P., Riehl, S. (Eds.),
The Development of the Environment, Subsistence, and Settlement of the City
of Urkes and its Region. Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, pp. 361e377.
Deckers, K., Pessin, H., 2010. Vegetation development in the Middle Euphrates and
Upper Jazirah (Syria/Turkey) during the Bronze Age. Quaternary Research 74,
216e226.
Deckers, K., Riehl, S., 2007. Fluvial environmental contexts for archaeological sites in
the Upper Khabur basin (northeastern Syria). Quaternary Research 67, 337e348.
deMenocal, P.B., 2001. Cultural responses to climate change during the late Holocene. Science 292, 667e673.
Diamond, J., 2011. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive: How Societies
Choose to Fail or Succeed, revised ed. Penguin Books.
Edens, C., 1995. Transcaucasia at the end of the early Bronze Age. BASOR 299/300,
53e64.
_ 1995. Features of obsidian beds formed by the activity
lu, F., Kuşçu, I.,
Ercan, T., Şarog
of the volcanoes in Anatolia since 25 million years B.P. In: The Proceedings of
the 29th International Symposium on Archaeometry, 1994 May 9e14, Ankara,
Turkey, pp. 505e513.
Fiorentino, G., Caracuta, V., Calcagnile, L., D’Elia, M., Matthiae, P., Mavelli, F.,
Quarta, G., 2008. Third millennium B.C. climate change in Syria highlighted by
carbon stable isotope analysis of 14C-AMS dated plant remains from Ebla.
Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 266, 51e58.
Forster, N., Grave, P., 2012. Non-destructive PXRF analysis of museum-curated
obsidian from the Near East. Journal of Archaeological Science 39, 728e736.
Frahm, E., 2007. An evaluation of portable X-ray fluorescence for artifact sourcing in
the field: can a handheld device differentiate Anatolian obsidian sources?. In:
Geological Society of America Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado, 28e31 October
2007 Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, vol. 39, No. 6, p. 29.
Frahm, E., 2010. The Bronze-Age Obsidian Industry at Tell Mozan (Ancient Urkesh),
Syria. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Minnesota.
Available online at University of Minnesota’s Digital Conservancy. http://purl.
umn.edu/99753.
Frahm, E., 2012a. Non-destructive sourcing of Bronze-Age near Eastern obsidian
artefacts: redeveloping and reassessing electron microprobe analysis for
obsidian sourcing. Archaeometry 54, 623e642.
and Bingöl A obsidians: geochemical
Frahm, E., 2012b. Distinguishing Nemrut Dag
and landscape differences and the archaeological implications. Journal of
Archaeological Science 39, 1435e1444.
Frahm, E., 2013. Validity of “off-the-shelf” handheld portable XRF for sourcing near
eastern obsidian chip debris. Journal of Archaeological Science 40, 1080e1092.
Frahm, E., Feinberg, J.M., 2013. Empires and Resources: Central Anatolian Obsidian
at Urkesh (Tell Mozan, Syria) during the Akkadian Period. Journal of Archaeological Science 40, 1122e1135.
Frahm, E., Feinberg, J., in preparation. From Flow to Quarry: Magnetic Properties of
Obsidian and the Changing Scales of Archaeological Sourcing, in preparation.
Francaviglia, V., Palmieri, A., 1998. Analisi di ossidiane dell’area del Habur (Giazira
Settentrionale). In: Pecorella, P.E. (Ed.), Tell Barri/Kahat 2: Relazione Sulle
Campagne 1980e1993 a Tell Barri/Kahat, nel Bacino del Habur (Siria). Università degli studi di Firenze, pp. 335e344.
Goodale, N., Bailey, D., Jones, G., Prescott, C., Scholz, E., Stagliano, N., Lewis, C., 2012.
pXRF: a study of inter-instrument performance. Journal of Archaeological
Science 39, 875e883.
1877
Gratuze, B., Barrandon, J., Al Isa, K., Cauvin, M.C., 1993. Non-destructive analysis of
obsidian artefacts using nuclear techniques: investigation of provenance of
Near Eastern artefacts. Archaeometry 35, 11e21.
Hall, M.E., Shackley, M.S., 1994. An energy dispersive x-ray fluorescence study of
some Near Eastern Obsidians. Al-Rafidan 15, 25e32.
Hoffner, H., 1990. Hurrians Myths. Writings from the Ancient World 2. Scholars
Press, Atlanta.
Hole, F., 1968. Evidence of social organization from western Iran. In: Binford, S.,
Binford, L. (Eds.), New Perspectives in Archaeology. Aldine, Chicago, pp. 245e265.
Jia, P., Doelman, T., Chen, C., Zhao, H., Lin, S., Torrence, R., Glascock, M., 2010. Moving
sources: a preliminary study of volcanic glass artifact distributions in northeast
China using PXRF. Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 1670e1677.
Khalidi, L., Gratuze, B., Boucetta, S., 2009. Provenance of obsidian excavated from
Late Chalcolithic levels at the sites of Tell Hamoukar and Tell Brak, Syria.
Archaeometry 51, 879e893.
lu, C., 2007. Climate and environmental trends during the third millenKuzucuog
lu, C. (Eds.), Sociétés
nium B.C. in Upper Mesopotamia. In: Marro, C., Kuzucuog
humaines et changement climatique à la fin due troisième millénaire: Une crise
a-t-elle eu lieu en Haute Mésopotamie? Actes du Colloque de Lyon, 5e8
décembre 2005. De Boccard, Paris, pp. 459e480.
Le Bourdonnec, F.-X., Lugliè, C., Dubernet, S., Bohn, M., Poupeau, G., 2005. Monte
Arci (Sardinia) obsidians: new geochemical data from electron microprobe and
ion beam analysis. In: Proceedings of the Third Meeting on the Monte Arci
Obsidian in the Mediterranean, Pau, Italy, 25e26 September 2004, pp. 129e140.
Le Bourdonnec, F.-X., Poupeau, G., Lugliè, C., 2010. The Monte Arci (Sardinia,
western Mediterranean) obsidians: characterization by multivariate analysis
from SEMeEDS, EMPeWDS and PIXE elemental compositions. In: L’ossidiana
del Monte Arci nel Mediterraneo, Pau, Italy, 27e29 June 2008, pp. 13e28.
Lemcke, G., Sturm, M., 1997. d18O and trace element measurements as proxy for the
reconstruction of climate changes at Lake Van (Turkey): preliminary results. In:
Dalfes, H., Kukla, G., Weiss, H. (Eds.), Third Millennium BC Climate Change and
Old World Collapse. Springer, Berlin, pp. 653e678.
Mainwaring, A.B., Giegengack, R., Vita-Finzi, C., 2010. Climate Crises in Human
History. American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia.
Mallowan, M.E.L., 1947. Excavations at Brak and Chagar Bazar. Iraq 9, 1e259.
Marcus, J., 1998. The peaks and valleys of ancient states. In: Feinman, G.M.,
Marcus, J. (Eds.), Archaic States. SARP, Santa Fe, pp. 59e94.
McAnany, P., Yoffee, N. (Eds.), 2009. Questioning Collapse: Human Resilience,
Ecological Vulnerability, and the Aftermath of Empire. Cambridge University
Press.
McCoy, M., Mills, P., Lundblad, S., Rieth, T., Kahn, J., Gard, R., 2011. A cost surface
model of volcanic glass quarrying and exchange in Hawai’i. Journal of Archaeological Science 38, 2547e2560.
McDougall, J., 1978. An Analytical Study of Obsidian from Europe and the Near East
by Examination of Magnetic Parameters. M.A. dissertation, Bradford University.
McIntosh, R.J., Tainter, J.A., McIntosh, S.K., 2000. The Way the Wind Blows: Climate
Change, History, and Human Action. Columbia University Press.
McMahon, A., Quenet, P., 2007. A late third millennium BC pottery assemblage from
Chagar Bazar (Area D, phase II). In: Tunca, Ö., McMahon, A., Baghdo, A.-M.
(Eds.), Chagar Bazar (Syrie) II: Les vestiges ‘post-akkadiens’ du chantier D et
etudes diverses. Peeters, Leuven, pp. 69e242.
Merrick, H., Brown, F., 1984. Rapid chemical characterization of obsidian artifacts by
electron microprobe analysis. Archaeometry 26 (2), 230e236.
Michalowski, P., 1993. Memory and deed: historiography of the political expansion
of the Akkad state. In: Liverani, M. (Ed.), Akkad: the First World Empire. Sargon,
Padua, pp. 69e90.
Millhauser, J., Rodríguez-Alegría, E., Glascock, M., 2011. Testing the accuracy of
portable X-ray fluorescence to study Aztec and Colonial obsidian supply at
Xaltocan, Mexico. Journal of Archaeological Science 38, 3141e3152.
Molyneaux, B.L., 2002. Exploring the landscapes of long-distance exchange:
evidence from obsidian Cliffs and Devils Tower, Wyoming. In: Glascock, M.D.
(Ed.), Geochemical Evidence for Long-distance Exchange. Bergin and Garvey,
Westport, Connecticut, pp. 133e152.
Nazaroff, A., Prufer, K., Drake, B., 2010. Assessing the applicability of portable X-ray
fluorescence spectrometry for obsidian provenance research in the Maya
lowlands. Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 885e895.
Nicolle, C., 2006. Tell Mohammed Diyab 3. Travaux de 1992e2000 sur les buttes A
et B. Paris. In: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations.
Nissen, H.J., 1988. The Early History of the Ancient Near East: 9000e2000 B.C.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Orsi, V., 2008. Between continuity and transformation: the late 3rd millennium BC
ceramic sequence from Tell Barri (Syria). In: Córdoba, J., Molist.,, M., Pérez, M.C.,
Rubio, I., Martínez, S., Sergio, I. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International
Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, vol. 2. UAM Ediciones,
Madrid, pp. 699e714.
Orsi, V., 2010. The passage from the early Bronze to the middle Bronze Age in
Jezirah: a parallel between Tell Mozan and Tell Barri ceramic sequences. In:
Matthiae, P., Pinnock, F., Nigro, L., Marchetti, N. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th
International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, vol. 1.
Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp. 863e881.
Peltenburg, E., 2000. From nucleation to dispersal. Late third millennium BC
settlement pattern transformation in the near east and Aegean. In: Rouault, O.,
Wäfler, M. (Eds.), La Djéziré et l’Euphrate syriens de la prehistoire à la fin du
second millénaire av. J.-C. Tendances dans l’interpretation histori- que des
donnes nouvelles, Subartu VII, Turnhout, Brepols, pp. 183e206.
1878
E. Frahm, J.M. Feinberg / Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 1866e1878
Pernicka, E., 1992. Herkunftsbestimmung späturukzeitlicher obsidianfunde vom
Hassek Höyük. Istanbuler Forschungen 38, 124e131.
Pernicka, E., Keller, J., Cauvin, M.C., 1997. Obsidian from Anatolian sources in the
Neolithic of the Middle Euphrates region (Syria). Paléorient 23, 113e122.
Pfälzner, P., 2010. Introduction and synthesis: urban development and ecology at
Tell Mozan. In: Deckers, K., Doll, M., Pfälzner, P., Riehl, S. (Eds.), The Development of the Environment, Subsistence, and Settlement of the City of Urkes and
Its Region. Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, pp. 1e12.
Poidevin, J.-L., 1998. Les gisements d’obsidienne de Turquie et de Transcaucasie:
géologie, géochimie et chronométrie. In: Cauvin, M.-C., Gourgaud, A.,
Gratuze, B., Arnaud, N., Poupeau, G., Poidevin, J.L., Chataigner, C. (Eds.), L’obsidienne au Proche et Moyen-Orient: Du Volcan à l’Outil. BAR International
Series, pp. 105e167.
Porter, A., 2007. You say potato, I say.typology, chronology and the origin of the
Amorites. In: Marro, C., Kuzucuoglu, C. (Eds.), Sociétés humaines et changement
climatique à la fin du troisième millénaire: une crise a-t-elle eu lieu en HauteMésopotamie? De Boccard, Paris, pp. 69e115.
Riehl, S., 2008. Climate and agriculture in the ancient near east: a synthesis of the
archaeobotanical and stable carbon isotope evidence. Vegetation History and
Archaeobotany 17, 43e51.
Riehl, S., 2009. Archaeobotanical evidence for the interrelationship of agricultural
decision-making and climate change in the ancient near east. Quaternary
International 197, 93e114.
Riehl, S., 2010. Plant production in a changing environment e the archaeobotanical
remains from Tell Mozan. In: Deckers, K., Doll, M., Pfälzner, P., Riehl, S. (Eds.),
The Development of the Environment, Subsistence, and Settlement of the City
of Urkes and its Region. Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, pp. 13e158.
Riehl, S., 2012. Variability in ancient Near Eastern environmental and agricultural
development. Journal of Arid Environments 86, 113e121.
Riehl, S., Bryson, R.A., 2007. Variability in human adaptation to changing environmental conditions in Upper Mesopotamia during the Early to Middle Bronze
Age transition. In: Marro, C., Kuzucuoglu, C. (Eds.), Sociétés humaines et
changement climatique à la fin du troisième millénaire: une crise a-t-elle eu
lieu en Haute-Mésopotamie? De Boccard, Paris, pp. 523e548.
Riehl, S., Pustovoytov, K.E., Hotchkiss, S., Bryson, R.A., 2008. Local Holocene environmental indicators in Upper Mesopotamia: pedogenic carbonate record vs.
archaeobotanical data and archaeoclimatological models. Quaternary International 209, 154e163.
b u
r region in the late third and early second
Ristvet, L., Weiss, H., 2005. The Ha
millennium BC. In: Orthmann, W. (Ed.), The History and Archaeology of Syria.
Verlag, Saarbrucken.
Rosen, S., Tykot, R., Gottesman, M., 2005. Long distance trinket trade: early Bronze
Age obsidian from the Negev. Journal of Archaeological Science 32, 775e784.
lu, V., 2005. The Anatolian trade network and the Izmir region during the
Şahog
early Bronze age. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 24, 339e361.
Sanna, I., Le Bourdonnec, F.-X., Poupeau, G., Luglie, C., 2010. Ossidiane non sarde in
Sardegna. Analisi di un rinvenimento subacqueo nel Porto di Cagliari. In: L’ossidiana del Monte Arci nel Mediterraneo, Pau, Italy, 27e29 June 2008, pp. 99e
119.
Saunders, N., 2001. A dark light: reflections on obsidian in Mesoamerica. World
Archaeology 33, 220e236.
Schwartz, G.M., 2007. Taking the long view of collapse: a Syrian perspective. In:
lu, C. (Eds.), Sociétés humaines et changement climatique à
Marro, C., Kuzucuog
la fin due troisième millénaire: Une crise a-t-elle eu lieu en Haute Mésopotamie?
Actes du Colloque de Lyon, 5e8 décembre 2005. De Boccard, Paris, pp. 45e67.
Schwartz, G.M., Miller, N.F., 2007. The “Crisis” of the late third millennium B.C.:
ecofactual and artifactual evidence from Umm el-Marra and the Jabbul plain.
lu, C. (Eds.), Sociétés humaines et changement climaIn: Marro, C., Kuzucuog
tique à la fin due troisième millénaire: Une crise a-t-elle eu lieu en Haute
Mésopotamie? Actes du Colloque de Lyon, 5e8 décembre 2005. De Boccard,
Paris, pp. 179e204.
Schwartz, G.M., Nichols, J.J., 2006. After Collapse: the Regeneration of Complex
Societies. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Shand, S., 1943. The Eruptive Rocks, second ed. John Wiley, New York.
Sheets, P., Cooper, J. (Eds.), 2012. Surviving Sudden Environmental Change: Answers
from Archaeology. University of Colorado Press.
Sheppard, P., Irwin, G., Lin, S., McCaffrey, C., 2011. Characterization of New Zealand
obsidian using PXRF. Journal of Archaeological Science 38, 45e56.
Sinopoli, C., 2001. The shadow empires: imperial state formation along the ChineseNomad Frontier. In: Alcock, S.E., D’Altroy, T.N., Morrison, K.D., Sinopoli, C.M.
(Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History. Cambridge
University Press, pp. 195e200.
Staubwasser, M., Weiss, H., 2006. Holocene climate and cultural evolution in late
prehistoric-early historic West Asia. Quaternary Research 66 (3), 372e387.
Taçon, P.S.C., 1989. From Rainbow Snakes to ‘X-Ray’ Fish: the Nature of the Recent
Rock Painting Tradition of Western Arnhem Land. Australian National University, Australia.
Taçon, P.S.C., 1991. The power of stone: symbolic aspects of stone use and tool
development in western Arnhem Land, Australia. Antiquity 65, 192e207.
Tykot, R., 1995. Prehistoric Trade in the Western Mediterranean: the Sources and
Distribution of Sardinian Obsidian. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Harvard University.
Tykot, R., 2010. Sourcing of Sardinian obsidian collections in the Museo PreistoricoEtnografico “Luigi Pigorini” using non-destructive portable XRF. In: L’ossidiana
del Monte Arci nel Mediterraneo, Pau, Italy, 27e29 June 2008, pp. 85e97.
Tykot, R., Chia, S., 1997. Long-distance obsidian trade in Indonesia. In: Vandiver, P.,
Druzik, J., Merkel, J., Stewart, J. (Eds.), Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology V.
Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, pp. 175e180.
Tykot, R., Lai, L., Tozzi, C., 2011. Intra-site obsidian subsource patterns at Contraguda,
Sardinia (Italy). In: Turbanti-Memmi, I. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 37th International Symposium on Archaeometry. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 321e328.
Ur, J., 2002. Surface collection and offsite studies at Tell Hamoukar, 1999. Iraq 64,
15e43.
Ur, J., 2010. Cycles of civilization in Northern Mesopotamia, 4400e2000 BC. Journal
of Archaeological Research 18, 387e431.
Van De Mieroop, M., 2004. A History of the Ancient Near East, ca. 3000e323 BC.
Willey-Blackwell, New York.
Veenhof, K., 1997. “Modern” features in old Assyrian trade. Journal of the Economic
and Social History of the Orient 40, 336e366.
Wada, K., 2009. Petrologic model of Shirataki obsidian, northern Hokkaido, Japan:
its structure, composition and the origin. In: Geological Society of America
Abstracts with Programs, vol. 41. Geological Society of America, Portland,
Oregon, p. 553.
Wada, K., Mukai, M., Takeda, O., 2003. Chemical Compositions of Obsidian Glasses
Determined by EPMA: the Origin of Obsidians from the Remains at the Mouth
of Tokoro River, Eastern Hokkaido. Reports of Taisetsuzan Institute of Science,
Hokkaido University of Education 37, pp. 59e70.
Weisler, M.I., Clague, D.A., 1998. Characterisation of archaeological volcanic glass
from Oceania: the utility of three techniques. In: Shackley, M.S. (Ed.), Archaeological Obsidian Studies: Method and Theory. Society for Archaeological
Sciences, pp. 103e128.
Weiss, H., 2000. Causality and chance: late third millennium collapse in Southwest
Asia. In: Rouault, O., Wäfler, M. (Eds.), La Djéziré et l’Euphrate syriens de la
protohistoire a la fin du IIe millenaire av. J.C. Tendances dans l’interprétation
historique des données nouvelles. Brepols, Belgium, pp. 207e217.
Weiss, H., 2011. Altered trajectories: the intermediate Bronze Age in Syria and
Lebanon 2200e1900 BCE. In: Killebrew, A.E., Steiner, M. (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of the Levant. Oxford University Press.
Weiss, H., Courty, M.-A., 1993. The genesis and collapse of the Akkadian empire: the
accidental refraction of historical law. In: Liverani, M. (Ed.), Akkad: the First
World Empire. Sargon, Padua, pp. 131e155.
Weiss, H., Courty, M.-A., Wetterstrom, W., Guichard, F., Senior, L., Meadow, R.,
Curnow, A., 1993. The genesis and collapse of third millennium north Mesopotamian civilization. Science 261 (5124), 995e1004.
Wick, L., Lemcke, G., Sturm, M., 2003. Evidence of Lateglacial and Holocene climatic
change and human impact in eastern Anatolia: high-resolution pollen, charcoal,
isotopic and geochemical records from the laminated sediments of Lake Van,
Turkey. The Holocene 13, 665e675.
Wilkinson, T.J., 1994. The structure and dynamics of dry-farming states in Upper
Mesopotamia. Current Anthropology 35 (5), 483e520.
Wilkinson, T.J., 1997. Environmental fluctuations, agricultural production and
collapse: a view from Bronze Age Upper Mesopotamia. In: Dalfes, H., Kukla, G.,
Weiss, H. (Eds.), Third Millennium BC Climate Change and Old World Collapse.
Springer, Berlin, pp. 67e106.
Wilkinson, T.J., 2000. Regional approaches to Mesopotamian archaeology: the
contribution of archaeological surveys. Journal of Archaeological Research 8,
219e267.
Wilkinson, T.J., Christiansen, J., Ur, J., Widell, M., Altaweel, M., 2007. Urbanization
within a dynamic environment: modeling Bronze Age communities in Upper
Mesopotamia. American Anthropologist 109, 52e68.
Williams-Thorpe, O., 1995. Obsidian in the Mediterranean and the near east:
a provenancing success story. Archaeometry 37, 217e248.
Wossink, A., 2009. Challenging Climate Change: Competition and Cooperation
Among Pastoralists. Sidestone Press.
Wright, G., 1969. Obsidian Analyses and Prehistoric Near Eastern Trade: 7500 to
3500 B.C. Anthropological Papers. Museum of Anthropology, University of
Michigan.
Yoffee, N., 2010. Collapse in ancient Mesopotamia: what happened and what didn’t.
In: McAnany, P.A., Yoffee, N. (Eds.), Questioning Collapse. Human Resilience,
Ecological Vulnerability, and the Aftermath of Empire. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, pp. 176e206.
lu, F., 1998. Geology of the Quaternary volcanic centres of
Yılmaz, Y., Güner, Y., Şarog
the east Anatolia. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 85 (1e4),
173e210.