The Elamite cities, as stated in Chapter 2, were great rivals to Southern Mesopotamian cities. Susa became an important royal residence in the Achaemenid period, but long before this it was a chief capital within Elam. During the Middle Elamite period (ca. 1500–1100 BCE), Anshan became united with Susa, and Anshan reached a size of nearly 200 hectares (Sumner 1976; Carter and Deaver 1996). Additionally, in the fourteenth and thirteenth centuries BCE throughout the Near East, a new spate of royal cities, including Dur-Kurigalzu (Baqir 1946), Amarna (ancient Akhetaten, discussed below), Kar-Tikulti-Ninurta (Eickhoff 1985**)** and Elamite Dur-Untash, were built. Most of these cities were either abandoned or lost their significance after the death of the founding ruler. As much of Dur-Untash was built in a single period, the extensive remains allow one to see what much of the city was like.

Perhaps like the other royal cities in the Late Bronze Age, Dur-Untash ('the city of Untash', modern Choga Zanbil) may have served as a new power base established for the religious and political establishment during the reign of Untash-Napirisha (late fourteenth century BCE). Although the reasons for the construction of the city remain unclear, its remains show the large-scale establishment of a new city of over 100 hectares, at a time when the Elamite state was united and Elam was considered one of the great powers of the Near East (Carter and Stolper 1984: 37). After the reign of Untash-Napirisha, the royal capital appears to have moved back to Susa, which was continuously occupied until the seventh century BCE, when the Assyrians sacked it. The best-known structure in Dur-Untash is the largest known ziggurat in the ancient Near East, dedicated to the city's main deity Inshushinak (Figure 5.5). Features in the city include a large inner temple district surrounded by a wall, a royal quarter to the east of the ziggurat, and a large palace with burial chambers (Hypogeum Palace; Ghirshman 1966, 1968). What is evident at Dur-Untash is that it was a form of ceremonial city; this ceremonial city is distinct among Elamite cities; however, the architecture (e.g., ziggurat and temenos) and material culture do not show a syncretistic pattern or mixing with distant surrounding cultures. This city symbolic of Elamite power showed clear Elamite or Southern Mesopotamian cultural influences. In the Achaemenid period, a very different type of royal and ceremonial city developed, which began to import and incorporate various cultural elements and people. While it is hard to determine who may have occupied Dur-Untash, and whether the city was fully utilized as an urban centre or served strictly ceremonial functions, cultural elements generally resemble those found in the immediate surrounding area. In effect, as it was a symbol of the Elamite state, its cultural representations were mostly local.

**Figure 5.5** The ziggurat in Choga Zanbil (Dur-Untash), demonstrating localized architectural elements (after Nováková 2014)

## 5.1.6 Hattusha

In the second millennium BCE, the Hittites either emerged as a new ethnic group or developed from the local third-millennium BCE cultures. During the Late Bronze Age, Hattusha became a major city and was the most dominant in all of Anatolia by the late second millennium BCE. In fact, the growth of Boğazköy, the modern name of the site, is not only remarkably evident but also was rapid during the mid- and late second millennium BCE. The site may have spanned 180 hectares during the New Kingdom phase, with a lower city and an administrative acropolis, known today as Büyükkale, separated from the rest of the city by a wall (Bittel 1970; Neve 1996). As might be expected, the scale of palaces and living areas expanded as the success of the Hittite state increased. This, in part, can be attributed to the fact that more goods and resources could now be brought to the capital than in earlier periods, when the site was far smaller. Despite the success of the Hittites, major cities did not expand beyond the 400/500 hectare limit seen in Uruk and Babylon during the third and second millennia BCE. Sites such as Boğazköy and other major capitals in the pre-AoE were not able to surpass this limit even though they often expanded rapidly in periods of social, political and economic growth. Near Hattusha is found the significant Hittite shrine of Yazılıkaya, which famously depicts a procession of more than 90 deities and beings that represent Hittite, Hattic, Hurrian and Mesopotamian gods and figures (Seeher 2011; Figure 5.6). The shrine shows that the Hittites syncretized their neighbouring cultures' gods with their own beliefs. Even this

**Figure 5.6** Relief of the storm god Teshub and goddess Hebat, who are of Hurrian origin, at Yazılıkaya (after Gagnon 2014)

syncretism, however, was regionally limited compared with that which occurred in the AoE, as the figures displayed at Yazılıkaya were mostly those found in Anatolia, Syria and Mesopotamia.

## 5.1.7 Hazor and Southern Levant cities

During the Middle Bronze Age, 2000–1550 BCE, the Southern Levant witnessed a great urban expansion during which several large rival towns and cities emerged. In this city-states period, well-fortified sites with monumental gates appeared (Figure 5.7). Among the largest sites was Hazor, of nearly 80 hectares including its lower town and a monumental city wall, a moat, a revetment and a gate system (Yadin, Aharoni, Amiran *et al*. 1989; Ussishkin 1992). Like other major cities, Hazor developed important temple and palace complexes in the Middle Bronze Age. Throughout the Middle Bronze Age, sites including Tel Dan, Megiddo, Gezer and Shechem acquired large city walls with glacis and moats, presumably as intense city-state competition and local warfare developed (Burke 2008). Such urban patterns emerged during a period of conflicts between small states, during which large centres, often found near each other, became common. Not only were these cities fortified, but also their walls became symbols of their strength. Urban characteristics reflect the defensive traits spawned by conflict and competition between neighbouring small states. Cities such as Hazor, in their size, material culture

**Figure 5.7** City gate from Tel Dan's Middle Bronze Age (after Nimi 2011)

and display of fortifications, reflected the fragmented nature of politics in the period, which was similar to that of other Near East regions during the Middle Bronze Age.

#### 5.1.8 Amarna

A good example of a newly established major capital in the Late Bronze Age period is Amarna, known as Akhetaten in ancient Egyptian, which became the chief seat of government of Akhenaten (ca. 1353–1334 BCE) and the centre of diplomatic correspondence between states during his time (Kemp 2013). The city was large and extended into several areas along the east bank of the Nile, covering over 380 hectares (Kemp and Garfi 1993; Lacovara 1997: 82). Amarna was largely abandoned shortly after Akhenaten's death, perhaps because he was viewed as a heretic for his focus on Aten or monolatristic worship. The main districts were the north city and the central city, which included important palaces, temples to Aten and houses, and the main suburbs to the south, where the private houses of important nobles were located (Kemp 2013). The outer parts of the city were marked by boundary stelae describing the city and its foundation by Akhenaten; tombs of the city's nobles were also located in these outer areas.

The city was a large urban area founded by a specific king, and because there was little activity at the site after its abandonment the preservation is good. While Amarna gives us an idea of urbanism in ancient Egypt because it is extensively preserved, it also has the characteristics of a monumental city associated with a particular ruler, and the city did not remain politically significant beyond the ruler's reign. This is similar to Dur-Untash, discussed earlier, and other Late Bronze Age cities. Newly established cities such as Amarna may have been attempts to unify kingdoms around new ideas or political agendas. Furthermore, while the diplomatic correspondence centred on the city may imply that foreign dignitaries would periodically visit or be based in the city, there is no evidence that a large number of foreigners migrated to Amarna or to any of the other newly built centres. The new religion established by Akhenaten, with its cult and worship focused on the god Aten, was intended solely for the Egyptians and not universal. In contrast, the later monotheistic and universal faiths were intended to incorporate all people: the intention was greater social and cultural unity across different ethnic groups (Montserrat 2000). The tombs and other material culture from the site suggest it was a city built for the local Egyptian elite. While the city of Amarna was a new city, it was distinctively Egyptian at a time when Egypt controlled vast areas outside of Egypt, including some

**Figure 5.8** Although Akhenaten introduced new religious ideas to Egypt, including representation of the Aten as in this example, representation, incorporation and display of foreign influences and foreigners were not common (after Ollermann 2008)

in Nubia and the Levant. Few attempts seem to have been made to integrate the religion, the art or other cultural elements of conquered areas within the larger empire (Figure 5.8). As an example, rulers in the other major Near East states during the Late Bronze Age and in regions administered by Egypt could not marry Egyptian princesses, even though such marriages may have helped with diplomacy (Robins 1993: 32). Although foreigners may have been well respected privately, and were even potential allies, royal display and propaganda did not show foreign populations as equals or with the high regard afforded to Egyptians (Kemp 2006). While foreign populations had already begun living in Egypt long before the construction of Amarna, reflections of their cultures had not become prominent in the common material culture of Egypt even by the New Kingdom period. This would change in the AoE, particularly as more foreigners began to live in Egypt and as they blended and integrated their ideas with those of the Egyptians.

## 5.2 AoE cities

Many of the larger cities in the AoE continued to have the characteristics apparent in the pre-AoE. These include large temple districts, large palaces, city walls, gates, manufacturing areas and large residential districts. However, some important changes happened during the AoE; these were driven, at least in part, by the population movement discussed in the previous chapter that made cities noticeably different from their pre-AoE predecessors. Evidence of greater wealth and displays of power became more evident in the AoE. Not only were there much larger chief cities with far larger monumental structures and districts, but also large neighbourhoods of foreign populations began to be found. The records show that towns and cities had multiple temples dedicated to gods from distant regions. A large number of languages were spoken within cities, even as common languages developed to facilitate communication between populations. Material culture reflected not only the influence of local cultures but also that of much more distant cultures. As populations began to mix, new cultural trends, which included syncretism in art and ideas, including knowledge and philosophy, emerged. Below are descriptions of some cities that demonstrate key changes from pre-AoE cities.

### 5.2.1 Kalhu, Dur-Sharrukin and Nineveh

In the ninth century BCE a new type of ceremonial and capital city emerged in Northern Mesopotamia (Figure 5.9). The first of this type was Kalhu/Calah, or modern Nimrud, where the main citadel mound has been extensively investigated by Western and Iraqi archaeologists. The city was approximately 360 hectares, the main citadel being about 20 hectares (Oates and Oates 2001). In Northern Mesopotamia in the pre-AoE, it was rare for cities to be much larger than 100 hectares. The Neo-Assyrian capital cities far surpassed this limit. Furthermore, beginning at Nimrud, a new level of wealth emerged. Vast quantities of ivory, probably the greatest amount in the ancient world from a single site, have been found in the city, while the palace reliefs from the site are world-renowned. This wealth reflected the ability of the Neo-Assyrian Empire to exact or receive tribute from distant regions, that wealth being sent to the royal capitals. The royal treasures of the Assyrian queens have also been found; their splendid tombs represent a level of wealth previously unseen in royal graves in Northern Mesopotamia. These treasures indicate the reach of royal power that brought such wealth to the capital from distant regions. Furthermore, the Assyrians developed the skills to manufacture some of these luxury objects, as skills and workers from conquered territories were acquired and brought to their capitals (Oates and Oates 2001; Herrmann, Coffey and Laidlaw 2004; Hussein, Altaweel and Gibson 2016).

**Figure 5.9** The Assyrian royal cities of (a) Nimrud, (b) Dur-Sharrukin and (c) Nineveh. Temple, palaces and arsenals indicated (Kertai 2015; after Zunkir 2015a, 2015b; Fredarch 2016)

This pattern of wealth and grandeur continued with the later royal Assyrian cities of Dur-Sharrukin and Nineveh. Although Dur-Sharrukin was largely abandoned soon after its establishment, as Sargon II, the founder, was killed in battle, its wealth and position as a great capital are clear. The sheer size of the site, over 300 hectares, and major palaces and temples suggest a royal city that easily eclipsed most Bronze Age cities outside of Southern Mesopotamia (Loud and Altman 1938). The reliefs, such as the winged bulls (*lamassu*), from the site are among the largest Neo-Assyrian types. Dur-Sharrukin was eclipsed in its turn by Nineveh, which reached an unprecedented 800 hectares (Altaweel 2008). Within the city, Ashurbanipal created a royal library where scholars from Babylonia resided; the acquisition of scholarship from foreign lands, including Babylonia and Egypt, became a focus for Assyrian kings (Parpola 2007; Radner 2009). Workers, including artisans, from different areas of the empire became resident in the royal cities as they served in the construction and maintenance of some of the major monuments, including large irrigation projects and artworks (Oded 1979; Zaccagnini 1983). Although all the royal cities were very large, some of the space was taken up by new gardens that formed displays of the power and wealth of Assyrian royalty. The royal palaces, key media for wealth and power, were used to indicate Assyria's might to Assyrians and foreigners alike (Kertai 2015). The presence of arsenals in the royal cities also made the new Assyrian capitals important armouries and bases for the Assyrian army (Reade 2011). Direct and long-distance roads – 'royal roads' – were longer than Bronze Age roads and helped to connect regions to the Assyrian capitals. Movement to the Assyrian capitals from distant regions became direct, and probably more rapid, as the use of horses developed (Kessler 1997; Altaweel 2008; Radner 2014a). The key characteristics noticeable in Neo-Assyrian royal cities were their wealth, the presence of foreigners, including those brought to the cities, displays of power, the aggregation of knowledge, the use of long-distance roads and sizes that demonstrated a level that began to differentiate AoE cities from the pre-AoE. By expanding into regions far beyond their homeland, the Assyrians brought both physical objects and people to their royal cities, creating the conditions for the intermixing of populations and cultural ideas.

#### 5.2.2 Babylon

Babylon, which was already a great city by the second millennium BCE, perhaps as large as 500 hectares (Gibson 1972), reached nearly 1000 hectares during the Neo-Babylonian period, by the sixth century BCE (Figure 5.10). The city probably extended far beyond its city walls. Similarly to that of the Neo-Assyrian cities, the scale of the ceremonial, religious and palatial areas became far larger than in earlier periods. The temple of Ésagila and its enclosure alone, dedicated to the chief Babylonian god Marduk, occupy approximately 15 hectares. Babylon became the ceremonial, economic and political capital, reflecting not just its power but its central role in the Babylonian state and society (Koldewey 1914; Unger 1970; Jursa 2009; Seymour 2014: 9). Even after the fall of the Neo-Babylonian state, the city's importance continued for some time, until the Hellenistic period after the fourth century BCE, after it had served as one of the Achaemenid capitals. The presence of foreigners in Babylon and throughout Babylonia was already prominent in the Neo-Babylonian period, when Elamites, Egyptians, West Semites, Arabs and probably others from around the Neo-Babylonian Empire's territory, became evident in textual sources (Zadok 1979, 1981; Moukarzel 2014: 144). People either came to Babylon voluntarily or were brought forcibly. The exile of the Jews, mentioned in the Bible, brought another foreign element to Babylon, and much of this community remained in Iraq until the early 1950s CE. By the Achaemenid period, the Jewish community was

**Figure 5.10** Babylon's inner city indicating major structures and temples. The Greek theatre and the large temple of Ésagila are indicated (after Micro 2006)

thriving; it contributed to the rise of prominent banking and landholding corporations such as the Murashu, who were able to conduct business in various Babylonian cities (Stolper 1985).

As Babylon became very large, not only did it become an increasingly ethnically diverse city, but also the various cultural groups had opportunities to thrive socially. In the pre-AoE, Babylon incorporated foreigners such as Amorites and Kassites; however, in the AoE the diversity was probably greater or from more widespread regions, and there were opportunities for these groups to express their ethnic makeup. In the Seleucid period a Greek community was established, adding further ethnic diversity to the already diverse population. The presence in the city of a Greek theatre and gymnasium, among other structures, shows foreign and distant influences on Babylon (van der Spek 2009). Cultures expressed at Babylon did not simply reflect Babylonian elements, as they may have done in the Bronze Age, but the presence of various Near Eastern elements and, later, Greek elements began to be reflected in the city's architecture and material remains.

#### 5.2.3 Persepolis

The trend towards ceremonial capitals, seen in the Late Bronze Age, appears again in the Achaemenid period with the construction of Persepolis in the late sixth century BCE (Figure 5.11). While it is not clear how large the city was, several characteristics that contrast with those Bronze Age centres are evident. A remarkable aspect of Persepolis is the multiple iconographic and architectural elements incorporated within the central royal district and its key structures (Figure 5.12; Root 1979). Within 100 years of the collapse of the Neo-Assyrians, the multi-ethnic character of the Persian Empire had become evident, as we see in its remains today. Specific structures, such as the Apadana, demonstrate the incorporation of various populations which were paying homage to the Persian kings. Egyptian-style gateways, Hellenistic-style flowing robes and Assyrian-style winged human-headed bulls (*lamassu*) are among the artistic and architectural elements. In fact, Persepolis is not portrayed as having been founded only by Ahuramazda, the Persian god, but 'all' the gods are stated in the foundation inscription from the city to have participated (Schmidt 1953; Mousavi 2012; Babaie and Grigor 2015). It was not intended to be a city just for the Persians, but a place that represented the varied populations within the empire of the Achaemenids. Paradise, as envisioned by the Achaemenids, was embodied in the architecture and gardens of their royal cities (Boucharlat 2001). Included in this ideal were the multitudes and diverse populations found in their realm.

Persepolis began to represent the idea of universalism, in which people from different regions were symbolically united through the representation and presence of their gods in the metaphysical sense, but also in an earthly way through the architecture and art of the city. The architectural intent may have been to demonstrate a type of 'voluntary' subordination, as Khatchadourian (2016: 114) suggests, but the message was to display the diversity found in the city. This contrasted greatly with earlier Bronze Age and Iron Age cities and their iconography, in which the triumphant king was generally shown as being superior to his vanquished foes. The emphasis in pre-AoE cities was on the local, chief gods, while at Persepolis the inclusion of 'all' the gods represented the Achaemenids' different view, which incorporated others in their triumph rather than displaying them as victims. In Persepolis'

newgenrtpdf

reliefs, foreigners are not shown as inferior or vanquished but as individuals who supported and praised the Achaemenid king: they provide gifts to the court rather than having those items forcibly taken from them (Figure 5.13). Although the art at Persepolis certainly reflected official propaganda, where content foreigners came from different parts of the Achaemenid Empire (Dandamaev, Lukonin, Kohl and Dadson 2004: 293), the emphasis on inclusion of, rather than triumph over, foreigners indicates that the official message had begun to shift. Real policy implications became evident at places such as Persepolis. Foreigners are attested to have been based at Persepolis, including by texts from the Persepolis Fortification Archive (PFA). These foreigners included Arabs,

**Figure 5.12** Reliefs from Persepolis found in the Palace of Darius ((a) Kawiyati 2007) and the Gate of All Nations ((b) Farshied86 2006). Numbers 1–3 indicate Egyptian, Hellenistic and Assyrian influences

**Figure 5.13** Depiction in the Apadana of foreigners bringing wine to the Achaemenid court (Maiwald 2008)

Cappadocians, Indians, Babylonians, Bactrians, Egyptians and others who were civil servants or professionals who may have stayed temporarily, or lived permanently, in Persepolis and other royal cities, such as Susa. Languages in the PFA include Greek, Phrygian, Aramaic, Elamite, Persian and Babylonian (Stolper 1984; Dandamaev *et al*. 2004: 293). The population diversity at Persepolis may have been foreshadowed at Pasargadae under Cyrus, where foreign influences are evident. Evidence from Pasargadae suggests that foreigners, including Babylonians and Lydians, were incorporated into the population, and stylistic syncretism is evident in the art (Stronach 1997; Briant 2002: 77–8).

The very strategy of Achaemenid kingship, emphasizing the integration of foreign populations under the unifying power of the Achaemenids, was symbolized by Persepolis. Darius, Xerxes and some of their successors even use the title 'king of lands (or nations) containing all sorts of men' to show this diversity (G. Cameron 1973; Stolper 1984). At Persepolis, it is the foreign influences in the art and architecture and the incorporation of varied populations and their gods within the city that differentiate it from its pre-AoE predecessor ceremonial cities such as Dur-Untash and Amarna.

#### 5.2.4 Ctesiphon

At one time perhaps the largest city, or more accurately urban zone, anywhere, ancient Ctesiphon (Figure 5.14), about 35 km south of modern Baghdad's centre, served as one of the great capitals of the Parthian (Arsacid) and Sasanian states (ca. 247 BCE–651 CE). By the late Sasanian period, the cities in this urban zone were Aspanbur, Veh-Ardashir, Hanbu Shapur, Darzanidan, Veh Jondiu-Khosrow, Nawinabad and Kardakadh. However, it is likely that only four or five of these districts had large populations; some of the names may refer to the same place (Morony 2009; Davaran 2010: 59). Ctesiphon is best known for its famous archway, the largest freestanding vault until the last century, which is a remnant of a monumental Sasanian palace compound. The exact dimensions of the city are difficult to determine with certainty, and it is possible some of the site is missing because of erosion by the Tigris, but the city seems to have merged with Seleucia, the Seleucid capital, which was located nearby. Some of the districts and cities were created, in part, by deported populations; together they formed the area known as al-*Madāʾen* (Invernizzi 1976; Negro Ponzi 2005). This made Ctesiphon and its urban region part of a heavily populated urban zone that may have contained a population in the hundreds of thousands (Ṭabarī 1989). Although the walled area of

**Figure 5.14** Map of Ctesiphon and its urban region (after Lencer 2007; Negro Ponzi 2005: 167)

Ctesiphon is about 550 hectares, an estimated 1500 hectares is a reasonable estimate for the maximum extent of Ctesiphon and its urban environs. Given the effects of erosion, of the multiple urban districts, and of the site, or more accurately sites, not having been fully surveyed, this estimate is plausible (Lee 2006: 157).

Relevantly for demonstrating how such large cities came into being during the AoE, the population consisted of various ethnic groups, including Greeks, Persians, Jews, Assyrians, Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Syrians, Romans and probably others. In the Sasanian period, religions represented within the city included Judaism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism, while other cults existed, at various periods, of other gods that were associated with the various population groups (Ṭabarī 1989). The population therefore reflected the type of primate city the AoE helped to produce: it was a disproportionally large population made up of various ethnic groups, some of which had migrated or been brought to Southern Mesopotamia from distant regions; they included people who had arrived during earlier periods or in the lifespan of the city. Religion in the city represented the wide diversity of the population rather than just the local or regional beliefs. Large-scale manufacturing, dependent on foreign products from more distant parts, was increasingly important in the Sasanian period to large cities, where glass making and other production thrived, as it became possible to obtain resources from distant regions (Simpson 2014: 204). Great wealth flowed to Ctesiphon through long-distance trade, and the position of the city on the Silk Road routes allowed products from China and Europe to come to the city (Wagstaff 1985). Access to the Tigris and canals would have enabled it to benefit from seaborne trade from the Arabian Sea. Long-distance connections, easy movement and connections to international trade helped the surrounding countryside thrive economically and increase in population and population diversity, while the urban region itself developed into a major political and economic centre.

#### 5.2.5 Antioch

One of the great cities founded at the end of the fourth century BCE was Antioch on the Orontes (Figure 5.15). The city was established in a Hellenistic grid layout by Seleucus I. Much of the city is now underneath modern buildings or buried by sediment; however, it has been partially reconstructed from ruins and from historical texts. From its beginning, the city had a diverse population composed of people from the surrounding region in the Northern Levant, but also of Jews, Macedonians and Greeks (Malalas 1986). Antioch appears to have been founded as one city in a tetrapolis of Seleucid cities in Syria, the others being Laodicea, Apamea and Seleucia Pieria. It became a capital in the Seleucid period. By the Roman period, it dominated the Eastern Mediterranean coast

**Figure 5.15** Conjectural representation of Antioch (after Cristiano64 2010; Downey 1974: Fig. 11)

economically and culturally, far surpassing its nearby rivals in size and economic weight (Sandwell and Huskinson 2004).

Although the exact population is unknown, it is clear that the city was very large and had a diverse population in the Roman period. A reasonable estimate of the population is in the order of several hundred thousand; the city became one of the primate cities that greatly surpassed other Mediterranean cities (De Giorgi 2016: 180). The area of the city may have been only about 200–300 hectares during the Seleucid period, but it was far larger in the Roman/Byzantine period (Aperghis 2004: 93; Cohen 2006: 93). This growth probably contributed to its rise as an early seat of Christianity and a major centre for Judaism, which probably further diversified the already diverse population. Within the Christian community in the city, for instance, were missions from Armenia, Greece and Latin-speaking regions. The universal faiths began to use large and diverse cities such as Antioch as new bases, even though those cities had little to do with the origins of those faiths. Additionally, many temples to Greco-Roman gods, including Jupiter and Artemis, were found (Downey 2015). Large cities such as Antioch had influence that stretched over three continents. In the Roman period, although primary texts from Antioch itself are scarce, texts from other regions indicate the existence of individuals who identified themselves as having come from or lived in Antioch and its region. These include people from North Africa, southeast Europe and the Near East (De Giorgi 2016: 175). People were migrating to and emigrating from the city across many regions, and commerce from other cities throughout the Mediterranean and elsewhere became directly linked to the city.

#### 5.2.6 Alexandria

The best-known city founded by Alexander after his conquest of Egypt ca. 331 BCE is Alexandria. While the city's Jewish, Greek and Egyptian populations are well known, during the Ptolemaic period Syrians, Medes, Persians and other Asian populations also lived in the city. By the Roman period, if not earlier, various populations from different parts of Europe were intermixed with the already cosmopolitan population (Vrettos 2001: 7). In the first century BCE, the city was perhaps the second largest in the Roman Empire and served, through its great harbours, as the commercial entrepôt for the Eastern Mediterranean (Strabo 1967: book 17.1.31; Haas 1993: 234). Throughout its history in the AoE, Alexandria was an astounding mix of cultural ideas, ethnic groups and religions (Hinge and Krasilnikoff 2009). The intermixture of so many population groups made the city not only cosmopolitan but also a great example of how universalism transformed the urban makeup of primate centres in which a variety of cultural expressions and syncretism in art and ideas were found together. Whereas in the pre-AoE Egyptian thought and culture dominated, as in Amarna, in the AoE the cultural landscape became much more varied, even in respect of common material culture. Syncretism is expressed through the variety of artistic, theological, philosophical and religious ideas prevalent in the city, such as the worship of the Greco-Egyptian god Serapis (Figure 5.16) or the philosophy of Philo. Greco-Roman and Egyptian art and architecture commonly became fused (Vrettos 2001; McKenzie 2010). Such variety in ideas and material culture reflected the mixtures of cultures that were prevalent and the fact that they were able to intermix freely as they resided together.

Although it is not well preserved today and has been built over in many places by the modern city, our knowledge about Alexandria has been preserved in historical works. There were several unique structures during the history of this city, such as the lighthouse in Pharus. One of the best-known structures was the library of Alexandria, which functioned as part of Alexandria's *Musaeum*, an institution devoted to scholarly activity (Stephens 2010). The library epitomized the spread of knowledge

**Figure 5.16** The god Serapis (above), a syncretized Greco-Egyptian god, was worshipped in the Serapaeum, or temple to Serapis, at Alexandria (Nguyen 2009)

and information as travel and movement encompassed greater distances and became more direct during the AoE. Galen speaks of ships having to unload their written works to the library for copying. From what scholars can reconstruct, the library contained not only Greek and Egyptian knowledge but also knowledge originating from Babylonia. Although earlier cities, such as Nineveh, had established libraries, to which knowledge and scholars were brought from different regions, the knowledge held at Alexandria originated from even more diverse places and came to be collected in a central repository (MacLeod 2004; Potts 2004a; Barnes 2004). Alexandria's library showed that knowledge and learning became more mobile in the AoE.

#### 5.2.7 Dura Europos

The town of Dura Europos (Figure 5.17), which has a Hellenistic-style grid layout, is found along the Euphrates in southeast Syria near the border with Iraq. The town was founded ca. 300 BCE and lasted until ca. 256/257 CE, the year in which it was destroyed by Shapur I (Matheson 1982). The site is small in comparison with the larger cities of the AoE, such as Alexandria and Antioch, as the city walls enclosed an area of only 75 hectares. At this time, as stated earlier, many of the great cities of the region were to be found along coastal areas or along major waterways, particularly in Southern Mesopotamia. Nonetheless, Dura Europos had many of the characteristics of a cosmopolitan city similar to the major urban centres that became more international. It contained places of worship for Jewish, Christian and polytheistic religions originating from Greco-Roman, Near Eastern and Indo-Aryan regions. Places of worship also contained temples dedicated to syncretized Greco-Near Eastern gods. The languages spoken and written in Dura Europos during the Roman period reflected the ethnic diversity found in the town: they included Aramaic (including Palmyrenean, Hatrean and Syriac), Hebrew, Parthian, Persian, Arabic, Greek and Latin (Kaizer 2009: 235). The famous art known from the town, including tempera wall paintings in the well-known synagogue (Figure 5.18) and church, indicates a mixture of local Semitic/Near Eastern and Greco-Roman stylistic influences, including dress and iconographic symbols from these varied cultures (Perkins 1973; J. Baird 2014). In short, the mixture of languages, cultural symbolism, religions and art styles reflects how people and ideas from distant regions came to characterize smaller towns such as Dura Europos and not simply large cities.

**Figure 5.17** Site plan of Dura Europos showing areas excavated (shaded). Areas uncovered include important religious structures from various religions and dedicated to Christian, Jewish, Roman, Near Eastern, Indo-Aryan and syncretized Greco-Near Eastern gods (after Marsyas 2016a; Gelin 1997)

## 5.3 Spaces in between: the ruralization of the countryside

Although most of this chapter focuses on major urban centres from the pre-AoE and the AoE, another transformation may have affected smallscale sites, that is, those sites that are less than a few hectares. Chapter 4 showed that in some areas new, dispersed and small sites were increasingly found in places where in the pre-AoE there would have been larger

**Figure 5.18**Examples of tempera wall paintings from the synagogue found at Dura Europos. Scenes a–d are: (a) from the Book of Esther (Duraeuropa 2016; (b) Moses being pulled from the Nile (Becklectic 2016a); (c) David anointed by Samuel (Marsyas 2016b); (d) the Exodus (Becklectic 2016b) sites, and a greater diversity of different-sized sites, including secondary and tertiary towns in a relatively small area. More proportional representation of varied settlement sizes was evident for different periods within the pre-AoE according to the rank-size curves shown in that chapter, including the Khabur Triangle region. There we also explained that small settlements were likely to become prevalent as movement became easier. The examples demonstrated that as populations were concentrated into fewer larger cities, some areas developed a greater proportion of small sites that had little area differentiation from each other. While ease of movement may explain how such patterns emerged in the AoE, it does not explain what exactly these small settlements were during the AoE.

As most archaeological excavations focus on larger sites in many periods, very small sites are often neglected or poorly understood. Archaeological surveys, although they often document small sites, generally do not adequately explain their functionality. Where there have been excavations or other investigations of small sites, large and isolated structures with relatively wealthy finds have been evident. This suggests that at least some of these sites may have been more than simple farming villages, hamlets or fortifications.

Examples of such small sites are Tell Boueid (Al-Maqdissi 1995) and Bir el-Haddad (Rouault and Masetti-Rouault 2014), both in eastern Syria, Tell es-Sa'idiyeh (Pritchard 1985) in the Southern Levant, and the 'palazzetto' at Tell Mardikh in western Syria (Mazzoni 1990; Figure 5.19a–d). Other sites, such as Khirbet al-Qasr (Altaweel 2006: 164–5) in the northern Jazirah of Iraq, are sub-hectare, singleperiod occupations that appear to have been newly established in the Iron Age or later (Figure 5.19e). Very small, sub-hectare sites such as Khirbet al-Qasr are often only noticed in areas surveyed intensively. Many other small or sub-hectare sites do not have any easily noticeable mounding, which makes them nearly invisible to archaeologists. The excavated sites mentioned above (Figure 5.19a–d) have isolated buildings that generally do not appear to abut or incorporate other buildings, although Bir el-Haddad's structure seems to abut a long wall that may be contemporary with the structure itself. The sites' structures are large, or larger than common houses, and have central courtyards. There is evidence of expensive goods (for example at Tell Boueid), such as wellmade incense burners and stone figurines. They could, in some cases, be fortifications, but evidence of common burials (e.g., at Tell Boueid) and a lack of large, wide walls and military installations (e.g., at Bir el-Haddad and Tell Mardikh) suggest they were more probably residential, civilian or administrative in nature. Administrative devices are not found in large

**Figure 5.19** Some examples of villas or large residences. These include (a) Tell Boueid (after Al-Maqdissi 1995: Fig. 8), (b) Bir el-Haddad (after Rouault and Masetti-Rouault 2014: Fig. 8), (c) Tell es-Sa'idiyeh (after Pritchard 1985: Fig. 185), (d) Tell Mardikh '*palazzetto*' (after Mazzoni 1990: Fig. 2) and (e) Khirbet al-Qasr (circled; after Altaweel 2006: Fig. 12). Figures are all reprinted with permission

quantities, although Bir el-Haddad had a cuneiform administrative text. The sites mentioned here all date to the late Neo-Assyrian and/or the Achaemenid period (that is, to about the eighth to fourth centuries BCE). Other structures, similar to those described above, often relatively isolated farmsteads, have been found from between the eighth and second centuries BCE, such as Tirat Yehuda, in the Levant (Faust 2006).

Historical data may support the idea that at least some parts of the landscape had villas or wealthy estates by at least the Neo-Assyrian and Achaemenid periods. In the Neo-Assyrian period, texts indicate royal land grants and estates given to individuals as a reward for their service to the Assyrian state (Fales 1990). The Assyrian/Akkadian word *kapru* is used, which suggests something comparable to a farmstead or large country villa. In the Achaemenid period, land tenure texts indicate that the royal family and the nobility owned large estates or wealthy agricultural holdings in some of the interior regions of the Near East, which larger Bronze Age centres once occupied (Sartre 1989). Types of agricultural estates similar to those of the Neo-Assyrian period seem to have continued into the Achaemenid period.

The settlement surveys referred to in Chapter 4, along with textual sources, suggest that some small sites could have developed into wealthy farming estates by the early AoE. Small sites show that as the larger settlements of the interior of the Near East were abandoned, for example in eastern Syria (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003: 391), the Jazirah in Iraq and parts of the Levant, small-scale settlements became common. This may mean that the countryside was transforming into a region where reduced violence and increased socio-political integration facilitated the rise of country estates for the wealthy. While, admittedly, this is an under-researched area in Near Eastern archaeology, such a process would be similar to that observed for the Roman Empire, where *villa rustica* sites, or country villas, appeared in areas of greater safety and integration into the Roman economy and political system (Garnsey and Saller 2014: 221). Using Roman villas in Gaul as examples, we show that these types of settlements became associated with the export of agricultural products to urban regions as the presence of Rome became more pronounced (King 1990). Villas in the Roman Empire may have been acquired as 'rewarded' estates given by the central government, in a process similar to that seen in the Neo-Assyrian and Achaemenid periods (Roymans 2011). In the case of Rome, the giving or awarding of land to foreign, non-Roman troops may have helped to Romanize the empire. Similar reasons for rewarding officials or military personnel may have occurred for the AoE states, where rewarded land may have been used to create greater loyalty to the central state, including from individuals from different ethnic or social backgrounds who served the state. This does, in fact, seem to be the case in the Neo-Assyrian and Achaemenid periods. Villas in the Near East may have become a type of settlement that reflected increased economic or even political integration of the countryside with the larger states in the AoE.

There is further archaeological and historical evidence of villas in different parts of the Near East and Egypt in Late Antiquity. In Egypt, texts from Oxyrhynchus demonstrate that the town had wealthy, large estates nearby that were operated by the Apion family, who leased land for profit and whose business activities resembled in many ways those of the Murashu family in the Achaemenid period (Sarris 2009: 85). Archaeological remains of villa architecture have also been found in the region of Caesarea, where the production of wine or oil would have been important to the local economy (Hirschfeld 1997: 46). Similar well-built and wealthy examples appear to have existed in northern Syria and in the region of Antioch at about the same time (Sarris 2009). This is not unexpected, as the Roman and Byzantine periods are well known for such remains. However, these estates, in the Near East, resemble structures that were found earlier in the AoE; the Roman or Late Antiquity villas were also large, isolated in cases, and indicated greater relative wealth. The model of large country estates run by wealthy families was an important economic component when the conditions of large empires permitted their widespread existence. Such settlements could spread in areas of the countryside that became pacified, and migration to larger cities may have depopulated, or at least deurbanized, some of the older settlements and regions, opening up more countryside for new owners or types of settlements. As larger cities developed in some regions, demand for agricultural goods would have required the rural regions to produce a greater supply for the more distant cities. In summary, the *villa rustica* model prevalent in Europe in the Roman period may be applicable to how Near Eastern rural places functioned early in the AoE, through their economic contribution and type of settlement, as larger empires emerged in the Neo-Assyrian period.

## 5.4 Conclusion

Contrasts between large urban centres in the pre-AoE and the AoE are evident. The largest sites in the pre-AoE became even larger in the AoE, particularly along or near the Mediterranean shore and major rivers such as the Tigris and the Euphrates. Whereas Uruk and Babylon were perhaps the largest pre-AoE cities, at 400–500 hectares, in the AoE the largest cities reached 1000–1500 hectares, Babylon, Antioch, Alexandria and the Ctesiphon conurbation being among the largest. Cities along international trade routes on the Mediterranean, the Tigris and the Euphrates now reached far greater sizes than in the pre-AoE.

However, it is not just size that differentiated AoE cities from their pre-AoE predecessors. This chapter demonstrates that in urban centres in the AoE, populations became far more international, not only coming from distant regions, as shown by their ethnicity, but also expressing their diversity through their religions, languages, art and ideas. This is what would be expected if movement had become a major driver of population shifts for cities. Neo-Assyrian, Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid cities demonstrate that diverse populations had already characterized various cities in the Near East before the arrival of more Greek populations after Alexander's conquests. While natural population increase could accelerate the growth of some urban areas, it was the arrival of new populations from different areas that drove growth in many of the AoE's larger cities. Often it is not clear when such populations arrived, as some foreign populations may have migrated earlier than they were mentioned in texts, but for our purposes evidence shows that it became more common for people from geographically distributed origins to move or be moved to cities. Although migration is evident in the pre-AoE, for example the migration of Amorites or Kassites in the Near East, it is the scale and geographic spread that differentiates the AoE movements from earlier periods. Additionally, cultural expression, for example through architecture, art and religion, became more diversified and accepted: Greek, Egyptian, Roman, Indian and Near Eastern influences were found in major Near East cities in different periods. In contrast, major Bronze Age cities were more localized in architectural, artistic and religious expression, and imports of ideas and material goods were evident mostly in luxury objects. The major centres in the pre-AoE did not display foreign cultural influences as prominently as the AoE cities.

Antioch in the AoE had individuals from afar come to it, but, as well, people from Antioch began to spread and were found in a wider area, which reflects the city's influence. Knowledge became mobile, Alexandria's library probably collecting knowledge from Greek, Egyptian and Babylonian cultures. Religious worship became more diverse in the AoE, even in smaller cities such as Dura Europos. In contrast, major cities in the pre-AoE, such as Mari, appear to have more local or regional gods. Art influences in paintings, and new street or urban patterns, from Greece are introduced in the AoE in more parts of the Near East, as seen in Dur Europos, Antioch and Alexandria. Resources from distant regions made possible manufacturing areas, such as the ones at Ctesiphon, that created new types of goods, including types of glass, while international trade routes through AoE cities connected eastern Asia and Europe. Greater wealth from more distant areas was brought into large capitals in the Neo-Assyrian period, as demonstrated at Nineveh and Kalhu, where some of this wealth was extracted by force.

At Persepolis, the claim that 'all the gods' were important to the foundation of the city, rather than just the national or patron god of the Achaemenids, is evident. The ceremonial capital of the Achaemenids showed itself as giving a stake in the city to different populations through their representative gods. Foreigners from various places within the empire and beyond came to the city and were employed for their labour. The city itself developed architectural and artistic styles that integrated elements from various parts of the empire. Foreigners are shown bringing tribute and not simply as vanquished foes. Although forced migrations existed in the Achaemenid Empire, large population movements may have become increasingly voluntary as individuals recognized opportunities. Along with art, architecture, religions and diverse population groups, the foundation of new cities such as Alexandria, Antioch and Persepolis shows that blended cultures and various types of syncretism had become the norm. In the pre-AoE, the foundation of ceremonial cities such as Dur-Untash or Amarna glorified local chief gods, and local art displayed their greatness. In the AoE, the evident diversity and scale of change reflected population movement and influences from distant places that began to transform the social makeup and characteristics of cities in the wider Near East; multiple cultural groups now found expression as part of a larger whole.

The phenomenon of villas or large estates that developed in the countryside may be another factor that demonstrates increased movement and the socio-political and economic integration of the countryside. Although some of the cities of the pre-AoE became depopulated during the AoE, that urban landscape was being replaced with small sites in places. Where some small AoE sites have been excavated, structures that resemble Roman villas have emerged. It is possible that these types of compounds became of interest when the countryside became more pacified or perhaps more integrated into the economy and politics of the larger states in the AoE, similarly to regions such as Gaul in the Roman Empire. There are historical references to agriculturally based estates or farmsteads in the Neo-Assyrian and Achaemenid periods that seem to resemble country villas, as parts of the countryside were owned by wealthy individuals and those obtaining land gifts from royalty. The transition to small, villa-like sites in parts of the Near East, just as very large, primate cities began to emerge, shows that larger states and empires became the political norm.

## 6 Long-distance trade and economy before and during the age of empires

This chapter explores how long-distance trade was affected during the AoE. Similarly to earlier chapters, this is done by comparing patterns before and during the AoE. We use trade patterns based on the distribution of specific trade goods for different periods. The key result demonstrated is how trade networks enlarged under the AoE to an extent that was less possible during the Bronze and Early Iron Ages, as empires enabled easier access to goods and facilitated faster movement over longer distances. Thus, as a result of large-scale empires, the movement of people to cities increased and long-distance trade itself began to transform as the movement of goods became easier.

## 6.1 Long-distance trade in the pre-AoE

Both textual and archaeological evidence indicate that long-distance trade networks were a fundamental component of pre-AoE economies in the Near East. Various communities and city-states of Central Asia, the Indus Valley, Iran, South Arabia, Mesopotamia, the Levant and the Eastern Mediterranean were interconnected in the exchange of both finished objects and raw materials (T. C. Wilkinson 2014). In most cases, finished objects included highly prized items, such as beads, amulets and stone vessels, used by wealthy individuals and elites who boasted of their status in funerary or royal contexts; precious metals such as gold also travelled long distances to meet the demand of the Near Eastern elite. More utilitarian metals, such as copper and tin, were exchanged across a wide area and were essential for the development of bronze items (Figure 6.1). Bronze Age long-distance trade also permitted the development of skilled craftsmanship, which facilitated the production of

**Figure 6.1** Map showing the main sites and regions involved in Bronze Age long-distance trade, and the materials exchanged, in their regions of origin finished items, as witnessed by several artisanal quarters established in cities across the Near East (Steel 2013: 157–90).

In the third millennium BCE, semi-precious stones were among the most common items traded across long distances. These were lapis, carnelian, chlorite and steatite, whose geological sources were located in an area encompassing Afghanistan, eastern Iran and the Indus Valley (Moorey 1994: 77–103). These stones were traded as raw materials or were used to make beads, seals, amulets and small vessels which were distributed across Central Asia, Iran, Mesopotamia, the Levant, Egypt and, more sporadically, the Balkans (T. C. Wilkinson 2014: 125–37, 262–3, 282–3). In many cases, such objects were buried in royal tombs, the best example being the Royal Cemetery of Ur (Woolley 1934). Various commercial routes connected distant areas, some overland across Iran, and others via the Persian Gulf, which connected Arabia and the Indus region (Tosi 1974); as is often the case, trade contacts also entailed the transmission of ideas on styles. The spread of the so-called intercultural style chlorite vessels from Central Asia to Mesopotamia and the Gulf (Amiet 1986) is a good example of such a transmission of design ideas (Figure 6.2). Another example comes from double spiral-headed pins (Huot 2009), which are possible indicators of similar clothing styles spreading from Central Asia to Anatolia and

**Figure 6.2** Chlorite vessel of the so-called intercultural style showing a musical procession. Found at Bismaya (ancient Adab, Southern Mesopotamia) and dating to the Early Dynastic period (2700–2500 BCE; Oriental Institute Museum, University of Chicago; Daderot 2014)

the Balkans during the second millennium BCE and indicating that large trade networks had spanned these regions.

The Arabian Peninsula was included in this long-distance trade network, copper being particularly prized. According to Sumerian texts from the third millennium BCE, copper was sourced from Magan (corresponding to modern Oman), but in the early second millennium BCE other sources located in Northern Mesopotamia and Anatolia began to be exploited, and continued to be so at least until the eighteenth century BCE, when Cyprus became the main source of this metal for most of the Near East (Moorey 1994: 245–6). Copper was essential to meet the high demand of Mesopotamian and Syrian palaces for the production of bronze tools and weapons (Weeks 2004). In the early second millennium BCE, textual evidence from Kültepe (ancient Kanesh) in Central Anatolia informs us about donkey caravans departing from Ashur in Northern Mesopotamia, loaded with textiles from Babylon and tin (probably from Iran), that eventually reached Kanesh, where these products were exchanged for silver and gold (Veenhof 1969; Larsen 2015). Another important source of information about Bronze Age long-distance trade is the fourteenth-century BCE archive of Amarna, Egypt, whose tablets, written in Akkadian, cast light on an intricate gift-exchange network involving Egypt, the Aegean, the Levant and Mesopotamia, where precious metals and various objects bestowed with high value were exchanged (Cochavi-Rainey and Lilyquist 1999). Another product traded across long distances was amber, which was sourced in the Baltic area and reached the Levant through the Aegean, as witnessed by small amber objects found at Thebes in Tutankhamun's tomb and in the Royal Tomb of Qatna (Syria) in the fourteenth century BCE (Mukherjee, Roßberger, James *et al*. 2008). On the other hand, from what is observable so far, amber does not appear to reach areas east of the Levant, that is, Mesopotamia and Central Asia. Finally, relics found off the Eastern Mediterranean coast, for example near Uluburun and Cape Gelidonya, yielded a high quantity of ceramics, metal ingots and other luxury objects which were exchanged among different political entities of the Levant and the Eastern Mediterranean (Bass 1967; Pulak 1998).

The Bronze Age long-distance network encompassed an area stretching from Central Asia to the Eastern Mediterranean, including the Indus Valley and South Arabia, but beyond these limits trade for items was far more sporadic, and few items are found outside these areas. It is difficult to say how such a network was controlled or functioned, although it probably consisted of a set of overlapping trade routes that various parties organically developed, maintained and participated in because they had some stake in or benefit from the trade. Royal palaces and temples appear to have had a fundamental role in long-distance trade, in that they organized expeditions of emissaries or traders to foreign lands, thus framing the trade into political and diplomatic relations (Lipiński 1979). However, such evidence might be biased, since the archives of palaces and temples are the major sources of recorded information known to us and represent a limited view. The written evidence from Kanesh, on the contrary, indicates the existence of business and trade controlled by private families, with state intervention limited to the collection of taxes and participation through private families (Michel 2001). If we can assume that the Kanesh trade network was a typical example of long-distance trade in the Bronze Age, then such trade appears to have been a composite of both public and private spheres working together or independently. The Kanesh archive also informs us of the existence of an enclave of Assyrian merchants living in this city and managing their businesses there (Larsen 2015); it is possible that this was not an isolated case in the Bronze Age and that other communities of merchants lived far from their place of origin. One example comes from Late Bronze Age Ugarit, where tablets inform us of merchants from the Levantine coast, namely from Arwad, Byblos, Beirut, Tyre, Akko and Ashdod, who were stationed in Ugarit to run their businesses (Wachsmann 2009: 40).

It is noteworthy that the Bronze Age long-distance trade network depended heavily on the changing political landscape. In many instances, political turmoil, dynastic squabbles, conquests and population movements affecting one end of the network caused much of the trade system to break down or be disrupted. For example, at the end of the third millennium and the beginning of the second millennium BCE, trade connections between Mesopotamia, Central Asia and the Gulf appear to be drastically reduced; the causes of this phenomenon seem to vary, but the collapse of the complex societies in the Indus may have played a role (Moorey 1994: 245–6). The Hittite conquests of the late eighteenth century BCE possibly brought about the end of the Kanesh– Ashur trade system; the arrival of the Sea Peoples on the Levantine coasts at the start of the Iron Age (about 1200 BCE) coupled with the weakening and disruption of most Levantine palace economies caused the end of the Late Bronze Age political and long-distance trade system (Yasur-Landau 2010: 102; Van De Mieroop 2016). It seems that the Bronze Age long-distance and intercultural trade was far-reaching, but it was also heavily affected by political changes that occurred cyclically in the pre-AoE. Though this observation may be biased by the nature of our sources, which are often sporadic, the breakdown of long-distance trade suggests that these systems were fragile, and that political fragmentation could affect the trade networks that were active in the Bronze Age. What this demonstrates is that trade systems were dependent, to a great extent, on larger political systems. When political systems were relatively stable, as they were in periods of the Late Bronze Age, we see trade thriving. On the other hand, with so many different political entities, a major change in one area could have far-reaching repercussions for the overall trade system.

## 6.2 Long-distance trade during the AoE

During the AoE, long-distance trade changed, reflecting greater and more far-reaching movement. Some developments played decisive roles, such as the domestication of the camel, which opened up new routes across the Arabian desert (Sapir-Hen and Ben-Yosef 2013); similarly, improvements in astronomy, perhaps made by the Babylonians, and in navigation techniques, often attributed to the Phoenicians, in the first millennium BCE greatly improved long-distance and open-sea navigation (Wachsmann 2009: 299–300). Evidence of advanced technology, which could be used to improve navigation, comes from the so-called Antikythera mechanism dated to the third or second century BCE, which was a mechanical device that could predict astronomical positions (Carman and Evans 2014). Furthermore, the discovery of the monsoon wind in the Hellenistic period contributed to the intensification of maritime contacts with India (McLaughlin 2010: 41). Beyond the means of transport, an important innovation in the AoE was the introduction of coinage for trade transactions, which made them quicker and safer and meant that they were backed by government institutions. Although these innovations had a fundamental role in shaping long-distance trade during the AoE, large empires also, in our opinion, permitted the establishment of wider, longerlasting and faster connections between distant places than in previous eras. With fewer political entities over long distances, and hence fewer political actors, there were fewer political disruptions, and so transactions became simpler, at least politically. The movement of products to more distant locations and at greater intensities suggests that movement had become easier in general. Such trade acts as a possible proxy, along with the urban patterns discussed in Chapter 4, for the fact that populations could move more easily to more distant regions. To show how movement of products changed during the AoE, our analysis will focus on the trade of frankincense, myrrh and pepper, and coin distribution.

## 6.2.1 The frankincense and myrrh trade

Frankincense (*Boswellia*) and myrrh (*Commiphora*) trees grow only in Oman and Yemen and on the Somalian coasts. Their resins, if burnt, generate intense aromas, which were appreciated in many cultures for cultic and funerary rituals; they were also used for domestic, cosmetic and medical purposes (Groom 2002; C. Singer 2007: 6–8). In the Bronze Age, the frankincense used in Egypt was sourced from a region the Egyptians called the 'Land of Punt', whose identity is not clear, but it may have been northern Somalia (C. Singer 2007: 5). It is, however, only in the Iron Age, when camels became omnipresent in records, that caravans from Arabia loaded with frankincense and myrrh reached the Levant, where the merchants sold these products to a wide clientele. Assyrian written sources first mention Arabian caravans active in Syria, in the area of Damascus, during the reign of Shalmaneser III (858–824 BCE), and such activities became increasingly recorded in the Assyrian annals (Byrne 2003: 12; Potts 2010: 128–9; Zadok 1981).

Frankincense and myrrh were burnt in burners, also called censers, made of different materials, including metal, pottery, limestone and chalk (Figure 6.3); during the Late Iron Age and Achaemenid periods, such burners can be found in Arabia, the Southern Levant, Persia and Mesopotamia (Shea 1983; Millard 1984; Invernizzi 1997a; Hassell 2005). The Nabateans played a crucial role in controlling the aromatics trade from Arabia to the Levant, in particular between the first and third centuries CE (Erickson-Gini and Israel 2013). Some evidence suggests that by the Achaemenid period frankincense may have reached

**Figure 6.3** Relief from the 'Treasury' at Persepolis. The Great King Darius I (ca. 550–486 BCE) is shown on the throne with two incense burners (circled) on tall stands before him (after Davey 2010)

Central Asia, as indicated by textiles from the Pazyryk burials in the Altai Mountains between Khazakhstan and Mongolia, on which Persian-style censers are represented (Rubinson 1990).

In the first century CE, during the Parthian era, some censers were also found among the grave goods of Tappeh Hemat Salaleh in Azerbaijan (Curtis 2000: Fig. 8). During this period, the first indication of frankincense traded to China is found in written sources (Kauz 2010:131), and some incense burners have been recovered in China (Bulling 1972). This is also the period in which diplomatic contacts between Rome and China were established, which favoured trade exchange in several products along with silk; the trade routes were later called the Silk Road (J. Hill 2009; McLaughlin 2010).

Along these trade routes, many important caravan cities flourished. In the Near East, the most famous of these were Palmyra (in Syria), Hatra (Northern Mesopotamia) and Charax (Southern Mesopotamia; Frye 1992). The Parthian Empire, thanks to its location between the Mediterranean and Central Asia, had a crucial role in controlling these roads. *The Parthian Stations* (Isidore of Charax 1914), dated to the first century CE, describes the main land routes from Central Mesopotamia, where the main cities of Babylon, Seleucia and Ctesiphon (see Chapter 5) were located, to Central Asia. These roads passed to Iran, through Kermanshah, Hamadan and Tehran, then east towards the Parthian capital of Hecatompylos. From here, they continued through Khorasan to Herat, where they split into two branches, the northern branch leading to Merv and Sogdiana or northeast to Bactria and then China, the southern branch to north India (Frye 1992). Along these roads, the cities of Begram (in modern Afghanistan) and Taxila (in modern Pakistan) have yielded large quantities of Roman and Parthian material along with Indian and Chinese items (Tomber 2008: 122–4), which bear witness to the richness of commercial exchanges along the Silk Road. Under the Sasanian Empire, trade exchanges along the Silk Road continued, demonstrating an important economic dimension of the Empire (Daryaee 2013: 136–8). In fact, even as empires fell and were replaced, the Silk Road continued to thrive, with occasional disruptions, and it was only after the economic changes brought about by improved seaborne navigation, the discovery of the New World, and European repositioning in trade links in the fifteenth century CE and later that the Silk Road diminished in importance (Tucker 2015: 216).

The Silk Road, thus, was critical in the trade of aromatics, and these products became some of the most desired foreign products in many states and empires in the Old World. The popularity of frankincense and myrrh was especially great in the westernmost parts of the Old World; in the Roman Empire (C. Singer 2007: 7) one can trace evidence of their presence as far away as Britain. Chemical analyses of resins found in late Roman tombs confirm that these resins were indeed frankincense from South Arabian sources (Brettell, Schotsmans, Rogers *et al*. 2015).

In summary, the aromatics from Arabia demonstrate that these products became truly global by spanning the extent of the Old World, something not seen in earlier pre-AoE trade (Figure 6.4). The trade network in aromatics and other products connected distant regions stretching from China to Western Europe. This trade seems to have started as early as the Iron Age, and it continued and expanded throughout the AoE, reaching a zenith perhaps from the second century BCE to the second century CE, although heavy trade activity along international routes continued well after this period (C. Singer 2007: 7). It is noteworthy, however, that between the second century BCE and the second century CE, there were three or at most four large empires that spanned the area between Europe and China (i.e., the Roman, Parthian, Kushana and Han Empires). Merchants could therefore cover long distances yet cross few political borders, which may explain why trade activity throughout the Old World reached a high point. Also, travellers crossing such long distances could make themselves understood by people of different ethnic origins by use a small number of international languages. For example, Greek could be used throughout much of the Mediterranean, and Aramaic across the Near East to Central Asia (see Chapter 9). Moreover, the stability of the large empires granted this network long periods of activity. Even when the imperial political system changed (for example, from the Parthian to the Sasanian Empire, and from the Roman to the Byzantine Empire), the overall trade system was not impacted to the point where there was extensive disruption of trade contacts lasting for long periods, as was the case during the Bronze Age. The situation in Western Europe after the collapse of the Roman Empire in the fifth century CE may have caused a long-term partial disruption of trade in the Old World; however, trade connections between the Byzantine Empire and Western Europe continued despite the establishment of the Germanic kingdoms within the territory of the former Western Roman Empire (Drauschke 2007).

#### 6.2.2 Pepper and the Indian Ocean trade

Pepper was a sought-after spice in the AoE (see, e.g., Pliny 2006: book 12.14). It came from India and reached the Mediterranean via maritime routes along the Near Eastern and Egyptian coasts. In India, two species of pepper were available, black pepper (*Piper nigrum*) and long pepper (*Piper longum*; Tomber 2008: 55). Pepper, and other spices such as cinnamon and cassia (the former from west India, the latter from Sri Lanka, Southeast Asia and China; see Tomber 2008: 54), are also mentioned in the *Periplus Maris Erythraei*, a first-century CE text written by a merchant from Alexandria, Egypt, that provides first-hand information about the intense exchange of products from India via the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea. The trade accounts mention important ports and trade winds (Casson 1989). In the Far East, pepper eventually reached China during Late Antiquity, becoming part of culinary practice in that country (Adshead 1995: 93).

Archaeologically, trade between India and the Mediterranean is evidenced by the ports excavated along the Egyptian coast of the Red Sea, such as Myos Hormos (first to third centuries CE) and Berenike (third century BCE to the sixth century CE; Tomber 2008: 58–65; Sidebotham 2011). Remains from Berenike, in particular, are evidence of intense trade activities at this port, with imports from India, the Mediterranean and Arabia, including pots for pepper, and precious and semi-precious stones such as carnelian (Tomber 2008: 71). Of particular interest is a bead from Java recovered at this site, which indicates the extension of the trade network as far as Southeast Asia (Francis 2007). On the other side of the Red Sea, the ports of Clysma (modern Suez), Aila (modern Aqaba) and Leuke Kome also had important roles in longdistance exchange up to the fourth and fifth centuries CE (Tomber 2008: 66–70). Further east, in the Persian Gulf, ports were involved in the Indian Ocean trade, under the control of the Parthian and later the Sasanian Empires (Whitehouse and Williamson 1973). For example, the site of Ed Dur (first century BCE to early second century CE), located in the Oman Peninsula, yielded material such as coins and glass of Roman, Nabatean, Parthian and Indian origins; glass beads from Sri Lanka and Tanzania were also found (Haerinck 1998).

Finally, the Indian Ocean trade also brought Roman and Near Eastern materials to India and Sri Lanka. Here, Roman and Parthian/ Sasanian pottery, and other material from both the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia (e.g., glass, bullae), were recovered (Tomber 2008: 117–51; Frye 1992). This material spans the period from the first century BCE to the sixth century CE, with some short chronological gaps and changes in the distribution patterns across the region through time (Figure 6.4).

#### 6.2.3 Coinage

During the AoE, trade was increasingly conducted on a monetary basis. Coins were probably introduced in the mid-seventh century BCE in Lydia (west Anatolia) and quickly spread across the Near East and beyond, where several cities struck coins (Manning 2013: 2). Although it appears that coins were initially introduced to make the payment of mercenaries easier (Manning 2013: 2), they became more and more common in all economic transactions through time. Thanks to their great spread, coins also became a vehicle of imperial political propaganda.

Coin distribution can act as a proxy for the extension of trade exchanges during the AoE, though it should be borne in mind that coins, especially those made of precious metals, could circulate as valuable items rather than as a means of transactions (Figure 6.4). Within the Achaemenid Empire, coins appear to have been predominantly used for trade transactions with Greeks along the Levantine coasts, which would also explain why Persian coins are generally found towards the west, outside the reach of the Achaemenid Empire, in Italy, Macedonia and Greece (Alram 1994). Towards the east, Persian coins appear to have been used less frequently, though a hoard containing Greek, Persian and Indian coins was found near Khabul (Afghanistan) in 1933 which indicated that, albeit more sporadically, Persian coins too had travelled to Central Asia (Schlumberger 1953). It was during the Seleucid Empire that coins spread considerably across the Near East, because the Seleucids incentivized coin payments for their military, and therefore needed to collect taxes in coins. Many mints were established across their empire to guarantee coin supply, and, consequently, more coins were used in markets for everyday economic transactions (Aperghis 2004: 29–32). In the following periods this trend continued, reaching its peak under the Sasanian Empire. Sasanian coins were used for trade as far away as China, reaching the River Volga in Russia, and the Baltic Sea (Frye 1992; Thierry 1993). They were also found in Japan along with other Sasanian objects (Sugimura 2008), and along the coasts of the Persian Gulf and in India (Whitehouse and Williamson 1973; Potts 2010: 65–82). Sasanian merchants also engaged in trade with the rival Romans (and later Byzantines); in some cases international treaties were implemented to regulate exchange (Daryaee 2013:140; Drijvers 2009: 449). Sasanian coins in Britain, although rarely found, seem to indicate the wide scope of Sasanian–Roman trade relations (Herepath 2002). Finally, coin distribution gives us a glimpse into the wide reach of Roman commercial links, as witnessed by Roman and later Byzantine coins found in China, in Indonesia, and as far afield as Japan; Chinese texts that refer to trade relations with the Romans also suggest that coins should be expected this far east (Young 2001; J. Hill 2009; Kyodo 2016).

## 6.3 Private corporations during the AoE

Our information about private companies directly involved in longdistance trade and the economy increases with the AoE. The economy of the Achaemenid Empire has long been recognized as a mixture of the royal, temple and private sectors, the latter particularly attested on the Levantine coasts where Phoenician cities produced and traded mainly textile dye and glass (Dandamaev 1989). Important evidence for the private sector in the economy under the Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid Empires comes from the private archives of families actively involved in different economic sectors and trade. Examples are the Egibi family of Babylon, the Ea-iluta-bani of Borsippa, and the fifth-century BCE Murashu family of Nippur (Nemet-Nejat 1998: 226). The tablets found in the Murashu archive indicate that this family was involved in a wide range of economic activities, including land management, money lending, the keeping of deposits, trade and tax collection (the last on behalf of the state); this family acted as a firm, hired agents, and stipulated agreements with several individuals, thus representing one of the first forms of a banking system that included not just one location or a branch but was found in many areas throughout Southern Mesopotamia and into Elam (Dandamayev 1988).

Information about the private sector in the economy and trade is again scarce during the Seleucid and Parthian periods; this is mostly because the number of documents that have survived is minute. Under the Sasanian Empire, however, we learn from written sources (e.g., Syriac law books) that trade was mainly under the control of private families and of companies regulated by state and religious laws (Frye 1992). Moreover, although in Persia itself merchants did not seem to be of high status, in Central Asia written texts reveal that merchants were at the top of the social ladder, particularly in areas such as Bukhara and Samarkand, where private initiative was essential to the construction of canals and other infrastructure with an economic purpose (Frye 1992). An interesting feature of the AoE economy is the importance of religious communities, in particular Christian ones, involved in longdistance exchange. The spread of universal religions under empires (see Chapter 10) appears to have allowed the creation of trusted links between distant communities and increased cohesion between different ethnic groups who shared the same religious beliefs, and helped to facilitate and set the conditions for international trade on a global scale (Dark 2007). This is evidenced by, for example, fifth- and sixth-century CE texts that indicate direct or indirect involvement of Christian churches and clergy in the trade with India (Tomber 2008: 168–9).

### 6.4 Merchant colonies

Some evidence regarding the intensification of population movement in the AoE comes from merchant colonies. In section 6.2 we saw that during the AoE the international trade network reached an unprecedented extent; hence one could wonder whether this phenomenon was mainly due to the movement of traded objects 'down the line', that is, through many intermediate passages, or via merchants who established colonies far from their homeland. In section 6.1 we spoke about the stable presence of Assyrian merchants in Kanesh, in Central Anatolia, located about 1000 km away from Assur, and their trade activities, dated to the early second millennium BCE. During the Late Bronze Age, evidence of the presence of merchant colonies comes from Ugarit, from where texts indicate the stable presence of merchants from Akko, Ashdod and Ashkelon (Vidal 2006). Canaanite merchants are attested as a stable presence in Crete (at Kommos) and Cyprus (at Hala Sultan Tekke), as are Assyrian merchants in Sidon and other cities on the Levantine coasts, for the trade of textiles (Aubet 2000).

These cases indicate that merchant colonies existed during the pre-AoE, though during the AoE the evidence increases and the phenomenon seems to spread to a larger area. In the first millennium BCE the phenomenon of Phoenician colonization greatly expanded the presence of Phoenician merchants across the Mediterranean (Aubet 2001), which allowed the Phoenician cities on the mainland to grow economically, thus becoming over time the target of Assyrian indirect or direct control; Greek merchants too were widely present across the Mediterranean: Greek emporia were founded in Egypt (for example at Naukratis), and a stable presence of Greek merchants can also be inferred in some Levantine cities, for example Al Mina (Fantalkin 2006; see also Chapter 7). This trend increases during the Hellenistic period, under the Seleucid Empire, when we discover many Greek cities being founded, across the Near East as far as Central Asia, in which elements of Greek and local Near Eastern cultures blend together (see Chapter 7). This trend continues under the Sasanian Empire, with Sasanian merchant colonies attested in the Persian Gulf, Sri Lanka and Malaysia, and as far as China (Daryaee 2013: 139; 2009: 64). Similarly, Roman, Jewish and Christian settlers from the Roman Empire are attested in India between the second and fifth centuries CE as being involved in commercial affairs (Curtin 1984: 90–109; see also above).

This evidence suggests that the phenomenon of merchant colonies, though not new in the AoE, greatly increased during this period, following the expansion of the trade network. This phenomenon should be framed within the establishment of the large empires of the AoE, which created more favourable conditions for merchants to move across wider areas and settle far from their homelands.

## 6.5 Speed of travel

Another difference between pre-AoE and AoE trade connections is the speed of travel. Evidence about the speed at which people travelled before and during the AoE comes from different sources, some dealing with long-distance trade and others (more numerous) with state correspondence and military campaigns. The Old Assyrian caravan trade connecting Assur to Kanesh in the second millennium BCE (see above) covered a distance of about 1100 km in 42 days (see Barjamovic 2011: 15; Larsen 2015: 175–6), which corresponds to about 26 km a day. About 30 km a day is the average distance travelled by pack donkeys in antiquity (Moorey 1994: 12).

The Old Assyrian caravan trade can be compared with later evidence regarding speed of travel during the AoE. In the Neo-Assyrian Empire (ca. 900–612 BCE), a system of relay was introduced to deliver letters. Estimates indicate that this system could cover a distance of about 700 km, from Que (in the modern Adana region) to the Assyrian heartland (northern Iraq), in about five days (Radner 2014b: 74), which corresponds to 140 km a day. Furthermore, it was mentioned earlier that long-distance routes were direct or relatively straight as they connected distant key cities with the Assyrian capitals (Altaweel 2008: Plates 16–17), while routes in the pre-AoE, such as the Assyrian trade route from Ashur, may have taken less direct routes (Larsen 2015: 179). The less direct Assyrian trade routes could have avoided taxation or even conflict in cities along the way. In fact, imagery showing remnants of ancient roads in the Jazira and Khabur Triangle regions of Northern Mesopotamia largely shows short or nearest-neighbour route connections between sites (Ur 2003). For other AoE cities, the trend towards trade routes that are direct and long-distance is evident from satellite imagery for sites such as Hatra (Altaweel and Hauser 2004: 64). In effect, trade, or movement of goods in general, in the AoE began to show physical evidence of being not only long-distance but also more direct than in earlier periods.

In the Achaemenid Empire, mounted couriers of the postal service, the Angarium, riding along the Royal Road from Susa to Sardis, could travel about 2700 km in seven days, according to Herodotus (Kia 2016: 127). This indicates an impressive speed of nearly 386 km a day. Colburn (2013) revised Herodotus' affirmation and calculated that the Angarium would probably take around 12 days to cover such a distance based on the parallel with the more modern Pony Express service. This gives 225 km a day, a value which, while not as high as Herodotus' figure, clearly indicates a swift connection between the cities.

Such high figures for travel speed in the Neo-Assyrian and Achaemenid Empires were due to different factors. First, the material transported by means of these very quick connections was essentially diplomatic, so it was crucial that it was transmitted as fast as possible; on the other hand, trade connections may have been slower. According to Herodotus, for example, the journey from Susa to Sardis took 90 days for a normal traveller, which is about 30 km a day, similar to the Old Assyrian caravans. Xenophon, however, informs us that the same distance could be covered in half the time by a normal traveller (which is 60 km a day; Colburn 2013: 42). After the Achaemenid Empire, information about travel speed comes from the rapidity with which the news of the king's or emperor's death spread. From an Idumaean ostracon bearing a date in the first year of the reign of Philip III (17 June 323 BCE), it can be inferred that the news of Alexander's death reached Idumaea (modern Negev, south Israel) from Babylon after one week (Colburn 2013: 42), covering about 1000 km in a straight line, that is, about 140 km a day. Such a high figure might be comparable with the speedy communication witnessed during the Neo-Assyrian Empire.

In the Roman Empire, it took 30 days to communicate the emperor's death from Italy to Egypt in summer when the sea was navigable, that is, about 62 km per day, which is slower than the postal service of the Achaemenid Empire (Colburn 2013: 47–8). On land, communication within the Roman Empire travelled at about 75 km per day, which meant that it could take about 17.5 days to travel from Rome to Colchester in Roman Britain (about 1300 km; Colburn 2013: 47–8). The figures for the Roman Empire's speed of travel are not as high as those of the Achaemenid Empire, which is probably due to the different geographies of the two empires, but they are still greater than the average Old Assyrian caravan trade speed of the second millennium BCE.

Chinese sources of the first and second centuries CE are also useful for inferences about speed travel. When referring to the Parthian Empire, they report that the route from Hecatompylos, in Parthia, to Chaldea was about 3580 km long and could be covered in about 60 days, giving 60 km a day (Hirth 1885: 36–40). This figure is close to that given by Xenophon for the Achaemenid Empire and those available for the Roman Empire.

While, clearly, horses would have made travel in the AoE far faster than the donkey-based caravan travel of the pre-AoE, differences in the route systems also made a difference. In the pre-AoE, routes were not direct and travel sometimes had to bypass particular areas. In the AoE, both maritime and land travel became direct. This was due both to technical changes, in navigation and the greater use of horses, and to the possibility of covering vast distances without encountering disruption from the fact that there were many states and political entities.

## 6.6 Conclusion: the factors that distinguish pre-AoE and AoE trade

In the previous sections, it was shown that exchange of goods across long distances is not an invention of the AoE; however, AoE trade shows globalized traits, in that goods moved through much of the known world, trade was run by private enterprise and government support, and the speed of trade probably increased. The scale of trade during the AoE became far larger than in previous periods, with trade connections crossing Eurasia, including South Asia, from west to east. Both land and maritime routes developed, and exchanges across these routes peaked during the AoE. The establishment of these long-distance trade corridors appears to be a more stable phenomenon, suffering only marginally from the collapses of empires and their replacement by other empires. As an example, both the Silk Road and the Indian Ocean trade routes remained active well beyond the AoE, into the modern era, when the discovery of the Americas, among other factors, drastically changed the trade scenario and opened up new opportunities for Western European countries in the form of long-distance trade across the Atlantic Ocean. What this shows is that movement in general probably became easier during the AoE, rarely being interrupted during this period. As the circulation of objects became easier, we should expect that population movement would also be easier. In effect, the movement of rare objects over geater distances shows that movement generally became easier as the political landscape favoured larger states. As Chapters 4 and 5 discussed, evidence of new urban settlement patterns and of foreign populations intermixing in cities demonstrates that there was probably movement of population. If such movement occurred, it is likely that objects, too, moved more easily along trade routes. This is exactly what one sees throughout the AoE, in places where political disruption did not have long-term effects on movement.

Although evidence about the speed of travel and trade is not abundant, where information is primarily derived from sources dealing mainly with couriers one can conclude that AoE states were able not only to move items to more distant areas, but also to send them more rapidly, probably because of the protection and stability that empires offered such transactions. One could conclude that, compared with the 30 km a day of the Old Assyrian caravans, under the AoE a speed of 60 km a day may have been more common, with very high peaks for the Achaemenid postal system; the transmission of very important information (e.g., the king's death) may have been even swifter. One of the main reasons we see higher communication speed was that large empires built roads and infrastructure (see, e.g., Altaweel 2008; Waters 2014: 111), and facilitated the movement of people across different regions by removing political borders. In the pre-AoE, political boundaries created more obstacles to extending the distance over which trade could take place, and made trade more vulnerable to political vicissitudes. As acknowledged by other scholars, quick connections across long distances were an essential part of an empire's communication strategy and internal cohesion (Radner 2014b: 1; Colburn 2013: 30). The benefit of these connections is that they helped create infrastructure that allowed trade to move more quickly and over greater distances.

The keys to the success of the AoE's long-distance trade, including its great scope and stability, are to be found in the effect of the imperial systems the Near East fostered. Incentives to trade were created for more individuals to participate in these systems as they became increasingly integrated into diverse societies. People from a variety of ethnic backgrounds now lived far from their original homelands, allowing trade connections to develop at more distant locations. More importantly, the political climate made movement not only possible but also easier, and allowed people to participate in trade interactions that were probably influenced by private individuals as well as government bodies. Movement of people and their concentration in larger cities created large markets that demanded staples as well as luxury products. Despite the consequent creation of more sparsely populated areas in parts of the Near East (see Chapter 4), empires facilitated rapid contacts over long distances by means of road systems and postal systems, and by drastically reducing or removing social barriers across the Near East. In Chapter 9, we will see that language, another barrier, became less of a factor in the AoE. Overall, these social possibilities and some technical innovation permitted movement of goods that reached a wider clientele, in more distant areas, much faster than in earlier periods. Thus, the basis of a globalized and intercultural trade was laid down during the AoE. Although the empires of the AoE were concerned with their economies and trade, and exercised firm control over coinage and taxation, private families organized themselves into firms that greatly developed during the AoE and laid the basis of a modern banking and financial system. The emergence of universal religions during the AoE probably facilitated the establishment and maintenance of long-distance, intercultural trade contacts by creating common faiths that could be shared and used for business.

## 7 Material culture hybridization

## 7.1 Background

This chapter focuses on the phenomenon of material culture hybridization or syncretism – that is, the blending of artistic styles that developed in different geographic areas and cultural spheres – comparing the pre-AoE with the AoE. It is worth briefly explaining what is intended by 'material culture hybridization'. In the literature on stylistic aspects of material culture, there is a great debate about how to define 'style' and what characterizes an 'international', 'intercultural' or 'hybrid' style as opposed to a 'regional' or 'local' one (e.g., Crowley 1989; Caubet 1998; Perrot and Madjidzadeh 2005; Fischer and Wicke 2011; Pfälzner 2015; Feldman 2015; Stockhammer 2013). 'Hybrid style' is defined here as the combination of local motifs and motifs borrowed from foreign cultural milieus (similar to Feldman 2006: 'international style', or Pfälzner 2015: 'hybrid regional style'), including reinterpretations and adaptations.

Material culture hybridization can be the consequence of different factors. For example, objects traded across long distances can inspire artisans to incorporate stylistic features that originated far away. There are cases, however, in which hybrid styles can be linked to the actual movement and mixing of populations, in particular of artisans from distant regions. In the archaeological literature, migrations, invasions and deportations have sometimes been connected to the emergence of hybrid styles (see, e.g., Chapman and Hamerow 1997; Burmeister 2000; Ben-Shlomo 2011; Knapp 2008), though it is often difficult to infer the transfer of craft skills from stylistic elements alone, without supporting texts. Pre-AoE texts mention artisans who travelled across the Eastern Mediterranean, the Levant and Mesopotamia. Some examples can be found in the texts from the palace of Mari of the second millennium BCE and the Amarna letters of the fourteenth century BCE (Zaccagnini 1983). These texts show that the movement of artisans was regulated mainly by royal administration, meaning that travelling craftsmen were dependent on the largesse of palaces and moved from one royal house to another, in a framework very similar to the exchange of gifts among royal houses (Zaccagnini 1983: 243–54). Evidence of the voluntary movement of skilled craftsmen across different regions and of their permanent residence in a foreign country can scarcely be found in pre-AoE written sources, though a few hints do exist (Bevan and Bloxam 2016; Zaccagnini 1983: 256–7).

The pattern of craftsman mobility continued throughout the AoE, as evidenced by contemporary written sources. Skilled artisans from Syria, Babylonia and Phoenicia are mentioned in the Neo-Assyrian texts as workers living in Kalhu (modern Nimrud) and Nineveh, among other foreigners (Luckenbill 1924: 73; Kinnier Wilson 1972; Radner 2007: 190–1). They were probably deported during the military campaigns, but some hints suggest that skilled craftsmen voluntarily moved to Assyria for job opportunities (Zaccagnini 1983: 260). Similarly, the Achaemenid texts mention Egyptian, Lydian, Ionian, Sardian, Babylonian, Median and other craftsmen recruited to build the capital cities of Susa and Persepolis, where a mix of Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Iranian and Greek styles is indeed visible in the architecture and architectural elements (Nylander 1972; Roaf 1983; see also Chapter 5). In the Hellenistic period, the availability of foreign (especially Greek) artisans across Egypt, the Near East and Central Asia as far as the River Oxus greatly increased because of the establishment in these areas of many Greek-Macedonian communities following Alexander the Great's conquests (see Chapter 2). At this point, the Hellenistic style merges more frequently with local styles in western and Central Asia in almost all categories of material culture, including common and non-elite crafts, as demonstrated below. Later, even during periods of state conflict there is greater evidence of craftsmen moving freely across empires and states. Despite the rivalry between the Byzantines and the Sasanians, for instance, texts inform us of the presence of Byzantine artisans at the Sasanian court, producing works of art that show Byzantine influences (Shahbazi 1990).

From what the texts tell us, material culture hybridization can depend on many factors, one of which is certainly the movement of skilled craftsmen trained in different cultural spheres. Texts suggest that this phenomenon occurred during both the pre-AoE and the AoE; however, here we show that in the AoE the geographical and chronological diffusion, as well as the pervasiveness across social strata of material culture hybridization, reached a much higher level than ever before. As empires facilitated and boosted the movement and blending of people from various cultural backgrounds, artisans moved at a much greater rate, which permitted an increasing blending of stylistic features and the emergence of hybrid styles. The sheer number of artisans moving, and the frequency with which they moved, also made it possible for very mundane objects to use new hybrid styles.

The following sections describe some examples of material culture hybridization, comparing the pre-AoE with the AoE. Particular attention will be given to more common, non-elite expressions of material culture, such as terracotta figurines and house architecture, as more mundane remains can tell us how pervasive the intermixing of styles was across society.

## 7.2 Material culture hybridization in the pre-AoE

During the Bronze and Early Iron Ages, from the Mediterranean to the Indus, various material culture styles developed in architecture, painting, sculpture and object design, including Minoan, Egyptian, Levantine, Mesopotamian, Elamite and Harappan. At this time, there was interregional borrowing of motifs and themes. Sumerian stylistic features that had developed in Southern Mesopotamia during the Early Bronze Age (the Proto-Dynastic period) expanded into Central and Northern Mesopotamia, as well as into north and west Syria, Anatolia and Iran (Matthiae 1981; Frankfort 1996: 83, 242). This is evident in statuary, architecture, glyptic art and portable objects such as chlorite vessels (Kohl 1974; Perrot and Madjidzadeh 2005: Fig. 6.1). Moving towards the Levantine coast, Cyprus and the Aegean, Egyptian motifs and stylistic features became predominant during the Middle and Late Bronze Ages (Figure 7.1). This is shown by finds from Megiddo, Byblos, Ras Shamra-Ugarit, Qatna and Enkomi, to name but a few sites (Markoe 1990; Frankfort 1996: 243–4; Moorey 2001; Feldman 2006; Pfälzner 2015). The prominent political and commercial role that Egypt had during this period in the Mediterranean and the Near East favoured the spread of Egyptian styles beyond Egypt's borders. Egyptian style, however, was not the only influence seen in the Levant and the Aegean. By this time patterns of stylistic influences formed an intricate network, reflecting the interconnected nature of political relations among the royal houses of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Near East. Aegean stylistic features also made their way into the Levant (Niemeier 1991; Hitchcock 2005; see also Figure 7.2) and into Egypt, where the best example is the Minoan

**Figure 7.1** Schematic map showing the spread of the main styles from the pre-AoE (Bronze Age) outside their places of origin

**Figure 7.2** Ivory lid from Minet el-Beidha (near Ugarit, northern Syria) showing the so-called 'mistress of animals', ca. 1250 BCE. This object merges a common Levantine and Mesopotamian iconographic theme with the Mycenaean-style dress of the mistress, who sits on an Aegean-style chair (see Caubet 1998; Rama 2016)

frescos of Tell el-Daba (ancient Avaris) (Cline 1998). Similarly, Syrian stylistic features can be recognized on some of the objects found in Tutankhamun's tomb in Thebes (Feldman 2006: Pl. 2).

This intense exchange of stylistic features brought about hybrid styles; however, it is difficult to say whether these hybrid styles were the result of the movement of populations (including artisans) across the regions or of cultural influences which spread across these areas through, for example, traded objects. As mentioned above, pre-AoE texts mention cases in which craftsmen worked in areas which were different from those of their origin. However, as highlighted, the long-term presence in cities of foreign artisans was often due more to the temporary lending of skilled labour by one royal house to another than to artisans travelling across the Near East and the Eastern Mediterranean (Zaccagnini 1983; Niemeier 1991; Muhly 2005; Hitchcock 2005).

It is possible to highlight some characteristics of the pre-AoE hybrid styles that mark a difference from the AoE. Firstly, the objects manufactured in a hybrid style during the pre-AoE retained a very local stylistic imprint (Pfälzner 2015); they were probably the products of local artisans incorporating foreign stimuli into their works. Secondly, hybridstyle objects circulated in most cases within elite circles, as the elites found that the exotic nature of these objects highlighted their prominent social status (Feldman 2006; T. C. Wilkinson 2014: 219). Additionally, hybridized architectural forms appear to have been mainly intended for the elites (Hitchcock 2005: 142). Only a limited part of society was influenced by such syncretism. The phenomenon of hybrid styles does not seem to have achieved a considerable geographic spread during the pre-AoE. Furthermore, it does not seem to reflect a major movement of artisans from one region to another. To demonstrate this better, we will focus on non-elite expressions of material culture, of which few examples of hybrid styles from the pre-AoE have been found.

Early and Middle Bronze Age terracotta figurines, for example, show a great stylistic diversity from the Aegean (the Cyclades) to the Indus, passing through Anatolia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Iran and Central Asia (T. C. Wilkinson 2014: Fig. 6.27, bibliography; Figure 7.3). These objects' stylistic details (e.g., body shape, body parts, eye decoration, hairstyle) allow one to pinpoint their regional origin with confidence, as each of the areas mentioned above produced its own stylistically distinctive figurine type. Limited stylistic borrowing from one region to another is observed in this non-elite class of objects.

Another area of non-elite material culture expression is domestic architecture, which reveals a strong regionalism during the pre-AoE. In Bronze Age Syria and Mesopotamia, the most common house type is the so-called courtyard house, usually found in dense agglomerations of houses separated by narrow streets (Akkermans and Schwartz 2003: 269). In the contemporary Southern Levant, various house types, showing regional differences between the Negev and the Mediterranean area, have been found that reflect regional social development and complexity (Miroschedji 2014). In Bronze Age west Anatolia, house plans similar to the 'megaron' houses typical of contemporary Greece appear alongside two- or three-room houses in the local style, which differ from those found in much of the rest of the Near East (Steadman 2011: 236). Moving eastwards, the Mesopotamian-style courtyard house is also found in Elam (Potts 2004b: 257–8), whereas in eastern Iran house plans show a different arrangement from the typical Mesopotamian style (for example at Shahr-i Sokhta; Tosi 1983).

**Figure 7.3** Some examples of terracotta figurines of the pre-AoE. Each area produced a stylistically distinctive figurine type, with very few stylistic borrowings from one region to another (Metropolitan Museum 2017: MET:31\_11\_3; MET\_74\_51\_1535; MET\_59\_125; MET\_ an64\_130\_R; MET\_59\_41\_20; MET\_1\_2250\_011; MET\_2001\_306)

In effect, there is not enough evidence for the pre-AoE to determine whether the hybrid styles that are visible in portable objects and some architecture were mainly due to interregional movement of artisans and people. Syncretized styles of the pre-AoE characterized mainly luxury objects and elite architecture, whereas they are virtually absent on common forms of material culture, including terracotta figurines and domestic architecture. This suggests that the dynamics of indirect cultural influences (e.g., through traded objects) and intercultural elite emulation were the main causes of material culture hybridization in the pre-AoE. This does not exclude the possibility that a few travelling artisans were present, but their input into the creation of hybrid styles did not leave a significant mark in the archaeological record.

## 7.3 Material culture hybridization during the AoE

#### 7.3.1 The Iron Age and the Persian periods

Material culture hybridization and the interregional borrowing of stylistic features increased throughout the first millennium BCE. The Late Bronze Age patterns of material culture hybridization continued into the Iron Age I–II (roughly the twelfth to eighth centuries BCE), despite the crisis that struck many political entities at the end of the Bronze Age (Markoe 1990). By this time, the Phoenicians had become a major factor in the spread of hybrid styles across the Mediterranean, especially following the establishment of Phoenician colonies along the Mediterranean coasts. Blending Levantine, Egyptian and Aegean styles, the Phoenician artisans created finely made items such as pieces of jewellery, glasswork and metal bowls, which were disseminated across the Mediterranean (Markoe 2000). This led to the addition of orientalizing motifs to objects from Greece, Etruria and Spain (Burkert 1992; Aubet 2001; Figure. 7.4). The movement of Phoenician merchants, settlers and artisans across the Mediterranean (López Castro 2006) was greatly encouraged by Neo-Assyrian rulers, who saw the economic benefit of the Phoenician trade networks in the Mediterranean (Aubet 2001).

The Phoenicians are not the only example of how the Neo-Assyrian Empire facilitated cross-cultural contacts and population movement. Following their military campaigns in the Levant, the Assyrians often made use of mass deportations not only to break local resistance but also to repopulate specific areas for political and economic purposes

**Figure 7.4** A Corinthian orientalizing jug, ca. 620 BCE. Note the two sphinxes on the top, which derive from a blend of Levantine and Egyptian motifs, whereas the rest of the depictions are in a Greek style (Unknown 2007)

(Oded 1979; Na'aman 1993). This inevitably caused a mixing of population in several areas of the empire. Moreover, Levantine craftsmen enjoyed greater possibility of movement across the Near East as much of the region became pacified by the Assyrians in the eighth and seventh centuries BCE (Zaccagnini 1983). In some cases, artisans were forcibly brought to Assyria to participate in the development of the royal cities such as Kalhu (Nimrud), Nineveh and Dur-Sharrukin, as indicated in Chapter 5.

The increased movement of people and craftsmen across the Neo-Assyrian Empire, either forced or voluntary, may have been one factor in the increased mixture of stylistic elements in material culture. Pottery traditions, for example, which had been regionally defined in the tenth to early eighth centuries BCE, began to merge, so that typical Syrian coastal types are even found inland and Assyrian and Assyrianizing pottery is found all over the Levant (Lehmann 1998). Typical Mesopotamian burial customs appear now in the Levant (Amiran 1959), and Syrian figurative arts acquire motifs and styles from Assyrian art and vice versa (I. Winter 2010).

This trend of material culture hybridization based on increased population movement becomes still more visible during the Achaemenid period. The generally tolerant policy of the Achaemenids towards multiple ethnic groups (see Chapter 8) allowed cultural influences to thrive and spread. The construction of long-distance road systems and the resettlement of people in parts of their empire for military purposes probably resulted in craftsmen from different cultures spreading to various areas (Stein 2014; Waters 2014: 100–7). The increased spread of a lingua franca (see Chapter 9), in the form of Aramaic, facilitated communication across their empire and made the voluntary movement of craftsmen much easier. All the while, as shown in Chapter 4, population concentration along the coastal regions and larger riverine urban areas led to increasingly multi-ethnic regions. Under these conditions, material culture showing syncretistic qualities began to be found all over the Achaemenid Empire, where development was not confined to one region or elite goods. For example, pottery, burial customs and the architecture of public buildings began to combine a variety of elements from distant regions (Lehmann 1998: 23–59; Wolff 2001; Akkermans and Schwartz 2003: 390–8).

The increase in syncretistic qualities probably related to population movement and increased intermixing of populations from different cultural backgrounds across the Achaemenid Empire. On the Levantine coast, Greek and local pottery types were common along with Cypriot figurines; Phoenician objects as well as Egyptian and Egyptianizing amulets and figurines were also typical (Nunn 2000; Betlyon 2005). The presence of graffiti in Greek, Phoenician and Aramaic strongly supports the existence of a multicultural population (Waldbaum 1997). A new type of hybrid material culture in the Levant was Phoenician sarcophagi (Figure 7.5), which blended the Egyptian custom of using sarcophagi with Greek elements in their decoration. The cultic statues from the Temple of Amrit, on the Lebanese coast, represented local gods in a Greek style, while the architecture of the temple itself merges Egyptian and local stimuli (Renan 1864). Burial customs point to the existence of mixed Levantine, Mesopotamian and Iranian populations in the Levant and other parts of the Near East (Stein 2014). Object design shows Persian influences all over the empire, from the Southern Levant, Anatolia and the Caucasus to Central Asia. In particular, Iranian-style weapons, metal and stone vases, metal plaques and rhyta (decorated

**Figure 7.5** Detail of a sarcophagus from Antarados, northern Lebanon, ca. fifth century BCE. The use of a sarcophagus is in the Egyptian tradition, but the decorative style is clearly Greek (McLeod 2007)

containers suitable for pouring liquids) were now found in the Levant (Ivantchik and Licheli 2007; Baumer 2012: 172–269; Betlyon 2005; Squitieri 2017). Style hybridization, as stated in Chapter 5, also reached the core of the Achaemenid Empire; Greek, Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Iranian figurative and architectural elements were employed in the construction of Persepolis by craftsmen who came from various regions (Roaf 1983; Nylander 1972).

Hence, examples of material culture hybridization became more frequent all over the Achaemenid Empire, and elite and imperial arts were not the only art styles affected. Terracotta figurines moulded to express popular religious and other iconography, for example, show increasing signs of hybridization, mixing Levantine, Greek and Egyptian styles (see, e.g., Oggiano 2009; El-Khouri 2011; Figure 7.6). Not only may such styles reflect the presence of increasing numbers of artisans from different regions, but also the objects may have been made to be more appealing to people from different cultural backgrounds.

**Figure 7.6** Persian terracotta figurines from the site of Kharayeb (northeast of Tyre, Lebanon). On the left, two females modelled and dressed in Greek fashion; on the right, the Egyptian god Bes represented in his Egyptian iconography with the naturalist elements of the Greek style (after Oggiano 2009: Figs 3 and 9)

Although, as shown in the Introduction, distinguishing between syncretistic styles due to cultural influences and those due to population movement is not easy, the integration of historical sources with changes in material culture that began in the Neo-Assyrian period and continued through the Achaemenid period suggests that material culture hybridization had increased in association with population movement. Mass deportations, the establishment of colonies, the construction of road systems, craftsmen relocating, merchant mobility (see Chapter 6) and soldier deployment are some of the types of movements documented that suggest that material cultural changes may be linked to some of these historical events. Intensified mixing of population is linked with an increasingly hybridized material culture that spanned all levels of society, in which more common artefacts began to show blended elements. This trend continued and increased in subsequent periods.

#### 7.3.2 The Hellenistic and Roman–Parthian periods

The phenomenon of material culture hybridization reached a peak in the period roughly between the third century BCE and third century CE. During this time, the style that had emerged in Greece became the common denominator of various material expressions of culture, from the Central Mediterranean to India. While this style is often called 'Hellenistic', in the Near East it would be more accurate to say that the style represented syncretistic combinations of local and Greek elements. Hybridized examples in architecture, urban planning, stone sculpture, reliefs, painting, metalworking, coinage, pottery and terracotta figurines are abundantly evident (Schlumberger 1970; Colledge 1987; Baumer 2012: 272–302; Invernizzi 2012). Over this vast area, the Hellenistic style blended with local, pre-existing styles to create new hybrid forms.

The Hellenistic style characterized the royal monumental art of the Hellenistic states in Anatolia (Kosmetatou 2003), the propagandistic art of the Ptolemaic kingdom in Egypt, in which the naturalistic forms of the Hellenistic style blended with the traditional pharaonic art (Figure 7.7), the imperial art of Rome, especially after the Roman conquest of Greece, the Levant and North Africa (Burn 2004), and the royal art and coins of the Seleucids and, after them, the Parthians (Invernizzi 1997b, 2012; Colledge 1977).

**Figure 7.7** Example of Greco-Egyptian style. Engraved ring with portrait in the Greek style of Ptolemy VI Philometor (ca. 186–145 BCE) wearing the traditional pharaonic double crown. Held in the Louvre Museum (PHGCOM 2009)

In the Near East, Egypt and Central Asia, the spread of Hellenism can be linked to the settlement of many Greeks in the multi-ethnic cities of these areas, in which Greek and other communities lived together (see Chapter 5). Among these cities, in which material culture blended local and Greek styles, are Antioch, Alexandria in Egypt, Palmyra, Dura Europos, Seleucia on the Tigris, Babylon and Susa, to name but a few (Figure 7.8). Ai-Khanum, in the Bactria, modern-day Afghanistan, is a vivid example of the penetration of Hellenistic culture as far as Central Asia following the settlement of Greeks. Here, typical Greek material cultural and architectural expressions (e.g., theatre, gymnasium, statues in the Greek style) stand alongside hybrid forms which mix local and Greek stimuli (Figure 7.9; Mairs 2014). Examples of Greco-Iranian style come from the Parthian capital of Nisa, in present-day Turkmenistan, where the architecture in Iranian style shows Greek-style decorative motifs, and some of the objects (e.g., statues, metalwork and rhyta) display a mixed style (Invernizzi 1997b, 2012).

Even further away, the Hellenistic style affected the monumental art of Gandhara, which developed in the Peshawar Plain in modern-day Pakistan, between the first and the third centuries CE, probably under the influence of Greek artisans present in the region (Behrendt 2007; Figure 7.10).

Although the Hellenistic style influenced elite and monumental art, it was also a pervasive phenomenon that affected stylistic expression at all levels of society. In other words, the Hellenistic style was not only the language of power, propaganda and monumentality, it also became an inspiration for the figurative art associated with the more common or lower strata of society. A good example of this is the production of terracotta figurines. From the Central Mediterranean to Bactria, terracotta figurines now show stylistic features that can be clearly connected to the Hellenistic style, such as naturalistic facial and hair details along with a Greekinspired cloth-folding style (Bailey 1983; Invernizzi 1985; Török 1995; Martinez-Sève 2002; Menegazzi 2012; Lo Muzio 2010). Despite some local variation, these figurines were now much more similar across the entire Near East (Figure 7.11), in striking contrast with the more diverse figurines of the pre-AoE (see above). The hybrid style of the Hellenistic terracotta figurines can ultimately be connected to the multicultural milieu that probably accelerated in the Hellenistic period, in which communities with different cultural backgrounds exchanged cultural elements by being in close proximity to each other (Langin-Hooper 2013).

Additionally, house architecture showed less pronounced regionalism, unlike during the pre-AoE. From the Hellenistic era onwards, it

**Figure 7.8** The Temple of Bel in Palmyra (Syria), first century CE. The temple shows a typical Greek-Roman peristyle around the central building, which, in contrast to the Greek-Roman tradition, presents an entrance on the long side as well as decorative merlons on the top, both features recalling Near Eastern traditions (Gagnon 2010)

**Figure 7.9** Silver and gold plaque from Ai-Khanum (Bactria), ca. second century BCE, depicting the goddess Cybele and a scarified scene. The dress of the two figures on the left and the god's face above are Greek in style; the astrologic symbolism at the top references Near Eastern religions; the priestess's robe on the right is in a local style (World Imaging 2006)

is possible to see common features in house plans across the Near East. The typical Hellenistic house plan that developed in Greece (e.g., in Olynthus), with a central courtyard surrounded by columns (a 'peristyle') and a broad room next to it (Winter 2006: 157–235), is evident in the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia alongside local forms (see, e.g., Hopkins 1972; Figure 7.12). From this house plan, the so-called *iwan* evolved in the Parthian period, consisting of a rectangular room open on one side to a courtyard (Colledge 1977). The *iwan* spread across the Near East, and in many cities *iwan* houses coexisted alongside peristyle houses (Hauser 2012). House architecture in the AoE, from the Parthian period onwards, showed the widespread presence of these two designs from the Eastern Mediterranean to Central Asia, in striking contrast with the regionalism in house designs present during the pre-AoE.

**Figure 7.10** Statue of Buddha from Gandhara showing Greek-style cloth folding and naturalistic facial details, ca. second century BCE, held in the Tokyo Museum (World Imaging 2010)

**Figure 7.11** Some examples of terracotta figurines from different areas of the Near East and the Eastern Mediterranean that share a common Hellenistic style, which is visible in the cloth-folding style and the naturalistic facial features. (A, B and C from Metropolitan Museum of Art 2017: inv. numbers: MET\_07\_287\_2; MET\_DP101765; MET\_32\_150\_176; Figure D courtesy of the Museum of Oriental Art 'G. Tucci' of Rome, inv. num. 13153/15644, see also D'Amore 1997)

**Figure 7.12** A house with a Hellenistic peristyle from the Seleucid level of Babylon (Reuther 1926: Fig. 65)

## 7.4 Conclusions

Our discussions have focused on the emergence of hybrid styles in material culture in the pre-AoE and the AoE. Hybrid or syncretized styles can mirror different social phenomena, such as cultural influence, elite emulation, or movement of people (e.g., artisans) across different regions. Hybrid styles clearly existed during the pre-AoE, but evidence of mass migration or the merging of very divergent cultures is difficult to find. In some cases, pre-AoE hybrid styles emerged because of crosscultural influences that spread across different regions through, for example, traded objects. Although this persists in the AoE, it is during this period that greater evidence of movement and more pervasive evidence of hybrid styles are found, particularly for cultural regions that were geographically distant. Larger empires recruited craftsmen from all over their territory and brought them together for public works. These states also created conditions, through either the forced movement created by deportations or voluntary action by migrants, including colonists, that allowed craftsmen from diverse regions to live together. This resulted in the spread of hybrid styles at all levels, from elite goods to more common, non-elite material culture, such as terracotta figurines and house architecture. The intensification of trade is not sufficient to explain the increased presence of hybrid styles, which became the main local style in some places. The movement of artisans is not only suggested by historical sources, but also material culture reflects a new scale of syncretistic developments in styles that suggest greater migration and intermixing of population, a process that increased substantially in the Hellenistic period.

## 8 The development of universal governments

This chapter focuses on governments and governance in pre-AoE and AoE states. The intent is to define how governance began to change during the AoE, as it either facilitated the social integration of multiple populations and ethnic groups or accommodated diverse populations within a state. These changes not only helped to facilitate social change but also enabled larger states to form more easily, and enabled the succession of large states in the AoE. Clearly, governments and policy in any period are complex; the chapter focuses on key trends that show how governing institutions treated their populations in response to facilitated movement. We seek to define emerging trends in approaches to governance as empires became the norm across the Near East. Developments in the AoE help account for the large, multi-ethnic states that began to become the norm and reflect the facts that populations were mobile and ethnic groups were found in places far from their traditional lands.

## 8.1 Pre-AoE governing

While there is little doubt that kingship became the norm with the rise of cities and states, how kings were viewed and how they ruled differed considerably between different states. In Bronze Age Mesopotamia, apart from a few notable exceptions, kings were not thought of as gods, and they often attempted to portray themselves as servants of their gods or even as having been chosen to do the work of their gods. While kings were powerful, their authority could be checked by the fact that they had to fulfil their royal obligations, such as maintaining the temples and being perceived as just (Saggs 2000; Tetlow 2004: 112). Justice, and providing for the oppressed, whereby the king acts as a shepherd of his people, were key characteristics in the official portrayal of kingship. This role included assistance with debts and exemption from taxes, and other decrees (Kraus 1958; Finkelstein 1969). Perhaps it is no surprise, then, that Shamash, the god of justice in Mesopotamia, often became associated with kings (Darling 2013: 23). In Egypt, during the third and second millennia BCE, pharaohs were seen as divine rulers. This may have made ruling easier, as a challenge to their authority could be considered an attack on the state religion. On the other hand, the pharaoh's power was checked by judgement and the concept of *Maat* (Karenga 2004). This means that ethics and trying to be a righteous and just ruler may have helped to check complete or absolute power, similarly to the situation in Mesopotamia. Justice, as a concept, began to emerge and be associated with kingship throughout the Near East and Egypt.

However, justice, for the ruler, was mostly restricted to those who already lived in the lands controlled by the kings or pharaohs. The extension of justice to all people, including those new to the state as it expanded, was rarely evident in the pre-AoE. Foreign lands were something that could be attacked, even ravaged, or fought, to show that the local gods supported the king or other ruler. Governments generally did not perceive it as their duty to help other than their own people; at least, they did not usually indicate that they felt any such duty (Darling 2013: 16). In fact, already by the late fourth millennium BCE, if not earlier, foreigners were forcibly moved as slaves or captives (McIntosh 2005: 167). Larger populations were also being deported, and sometimes the males seem to have been killed (Muscarella 2013: 278). Thus, forced migrations may have begun to reshape pre-AoE populations. However, few records indicate whether these captives retained some cultural identity beyond a single generation. There are few traces of any long-term influence of these populations on their captors. They were probably assimilated into the societies in which they were taken to.

#### 8.1.1 City-states

City-states formed the foundation of political structures throughout much of the Near East in the pre-AoE. This meant that many rulers, including vassals within larger states, were obliged to local constituents, many of whom, at least the members of leading families, the ruler would have known personally. Governing was, in other words, a very personal business. Kings played an important role as intercessors with the gods, and this role required them to perform important religious duties, such as participating in official ceremonies (for example the Akitu (New Year) festival). As conflict had become a near-constant reality for kings, they would have accrued power and their authority may have increased over time (McIntosh 2005: 173). With the rise of cities in the Near East and Mesopotamia, in particular in the third millennium BCE, multicultural populations became more common in urban environments. Texts show that, as new dynasties arose in the urban environments of the Near East, kings often did not emphasize their cultural background when it differed from that of the region they governed. Amorite populations that gained political ascendancy in the Near East in the early second millennium BCE demonstrate this in Mesopotamia. Although the Amorites were a West Semitic population, temples and religious institutions supported by royal authorities in the lands they controlled retained their original structures and gods, and kept East Semitic Akkadian as the primary language (Saggs 2000: 97; Charpin 2012).

#### 8.1.2 Empires