Possible earthquake history of Burnt House at tell Arpachiyeh,
Iraq; or did Agatha crack a prehistoric case?
Eric R. Force
The excavation and description by Mallowan and Rose (1935)
of the little mound of Arpachiyeh (near Mosul and Ninevah) first established
the sequence of prehistoric cultural artifacts of Halaf and Ubaid
assemblages. Particularly rich
were Halaf remains of the
so-called Burnt House at level six from the top (TT6), where diverse remains
were preserved under a fallen burnt roof.
This horizon is thought (Campbell 2000, p. 1) to be about 5800 B.C.
The destruction and preservation of Burnt House is ascribed
by Mallowan and Rose (1935) to invasion, the invaders’ scattering of artifacts,
and fire set by them. This genetic
model follows description of only three paragraphs within a single page (p. 17),
which with further comments on p. 106 remains all we know of the destruction
itself. I suggest that Mallowan’s
genetic model (delivered in first-person singular) should not be taken for
granted (as suggested also by other authors below), and propose here that
earthquake damage is more probable.
Indeed the published journal of a photographer/conservator of
the expedition (Christie 1977, p. 449) noted that preservation of the
assemblage was due not only to fallen roof but also to fallen walls. We now know the latter is an indicator
of earthquake damage, though it can have other origins. On one hand, this was not a critical
point to Christie and we perhaps should not give it too much weight. On the other hand, none doubt that she
was a keen observer, and since she mentions fallen roof and fallen walls
separately, she knew the difference.
Other authors such as Campbell (2000; see also Campbell and
Fletcher 2000) also look askance at the invasion model. Campbell conducted an extensive
inventory of artifacts from the Burnt House (TT6) wherever accessible. Campbell’s
body of information includes many intriguing relationships otherwise
unclear. His frustration with
Mallowan and Rose shows as: “Little is known of the exact distribution of the
objects in the Burnt House. Insufficient information is available on the nature
of the burning” (Campbell’s p. 4) and “Unfortunately it is now impossible to
reconstruct the original location of more than a few of the objects.” (his p.
7). Campbell suggested a
ritual aspect to the destruction of Burnt House. I find no additional information in Hjjara et al. 1980 that
add pertinent data on this subject to those of Campbell.
I briefly suggested (Force 2017) that damage at Burnt House
could plausibly have resulted from earthquake followed by fire, and in the same
paper proposed criteria for earthquake damage as opposed to other causes in
mud-brick structures with flammable roofs. There is no doubt that fire can follow earthquakes where
flammable roofs collapse into rooms where fires were lit.
Four of my earthquake criteria (in table 2 of Force 2017)
are, first, that unburnt debris should underlie burnt debris, some of the
former resting directly on the floor; second, that only the upper margins of
the fallen debris should be burnt; thirdly, that fallen debris (and mortality
if any) should extend well beyond evidence of fire; and last, that fallen walls
suggest seismic activity.
Admittedly in this case the evidence is tenuous for this last criterion,
though I consider it suggestive, and it inspired this re-examination of the
overall logic.
Let us look more closely at the other lines of evidence at
Burnt House:
1. Mallowan and Rose (1935, plate XXI b with caption)
present a photo of complete though probably fractured bases of pots “found on
the floor of the potter’s shop in the burnt house TT6”. Campbell (2000 pp. 7, 10) notes that
this unique photograph, apparently from near the center of the room, is
puzzling but suggests in situ damage, in this case directly on the floor. That is, damage preceded fire.
2. Campbell (2000) describes artifacts burnt only on one
side, suggesting to him their projection from unburnt debris at an angle (p. 12
and fig. 8, #2 and #3). He wonders
“Was the Burnt House in some disarray before the fire took place?” He notes also many restored artifacts
“where conjoining sherds have been burnt to radically different temperature and
in different atmosphere,” (as noted by Mallowan and Rose 1935, p. 106 and plate
XIX) suggesting to me different positions in the debris as well as the
scattering proposed by Mallowan and Rose (1935, p. 17, 106). That
is, the ceramics were fragmented and incorporated in debris before the room was
burnt.
3. Both Mallowan and Rose (1935, p. 106) and Campbell (2000,
pp. 8, 10) note that debris at the north end of the main room contains unburnt
and little-burnt artifacts. The
fire must have been more local than debris fall.
Thus three of my criteria for earthquake damage are
handsomely met in the Burnt House horizon. Earthquakes there of course are consonant with the region’s
historic seismic activity and current seismic risk. In contrast to these criteria consistent with earthquake
damage, I consider the evidence for invasion per se as very weak (also based on
criteria of Force 2007, table 2). No evidence of weaponry or related
mortality is presented by Mallowan and Rose (1935).
Musings about blind spots of Mallowan
Mallowan’s many writings suggest an intent to be thorough
and an open-minded attitude, so his leap to an invasion theory for damage at Burnt
House is puzzling to me. Of
course, genetic models based on incomplete descriptions are a common failing of
early and less-exacting work in many disciplines, and would be rejected today. Mallowan was tutored by early
archaeologists who had no formal training in their field, and who in addition
had preconceived ideas of what aspects of their excavations were of
importance—Biblical in the case of Woolley and epigraphic in the case of
Campbell-Thompson.
Mallowan (1977) in the course of his career attributed at
least six destructive horizons with or without fire to invaders (p. 113, 138,
153, 157, 160, 253) without mention of possible earthquakes, even though the
last-listed was first described as earthquake damage by others of Mallowan’s
staff at Nimrud (Oates and Reid, 1956), acknowledged by him in 1966 but not
mentioned in 1977. Several of the six
sites (e.g. Brak) are in locations where damaging earthquakes are to be
expected in sequences representing more than 500 years, as is Arpachiyeh
itself. Indeed, for Mallowan’s
sites in the upper Balikh valley the expected seismic intervals are
considerably shorter than I thought in Force (2017; see note below and my
posting of 11/13/18).
It’s simplest I think to assume that Mallowan was
uninterested in earthquakes, even though he knew something of earthquake damage
(Mallowan 1977, p. 108). Other
authors such as Kenyon and Schaeffer were suggesting earthquake damage at sites
to the east, but not in northern Mesopotamia proper, a situation that has
continued to the present day.
Note: For Force (2017), I was blissfully unaware that the seismic history recorded by
Ambraseys (2009) for Edessa should be added to that for Urfa/Sanliurfa, as
these are alternate names for the same place under different regimes. In my fig . 3 of that paper, therefore,
the seismic recurrence interval shown at latitude 37-37.5 degrees in the Balikh
valley should be about 250 years rather than 500 years.
REFERENCES
Ambraseys, N., 2009, Earthquakes in the Mediterranean
and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900: Cambridge
Campbell, S., 2000, The Burnt House
at Arpachiyeh: a reexamination:
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research v. 318, p. 1-40
Campbell, S. and Fletcher, A.,
2000, Questioning the Halaf-Ubaid transition, p. 69-85 in Beyond the Ubaid, R. A. Carter and G.
Phillip, eds: Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations #63, University of
Chicago.
Christie, A., 1977, An Autobiography: Dodd, Mead/Collins (New York/London)
Force, E. R., 2017, Seismic
environments of prehistoric settlements in northern Mesopotamia: a review of
current knowledge: Bulletin of the
American Schools of Oriental Research v, 378, p. 55-69.
Hijara, I., , Watson, J. P. M., and
Hubbard, R. N., L. B., 1980, Arpachiyeh 1976: Iraq v. 42, p. 131-154.
Mallowan, Max, 1977, Mallowan’s
Memoirs: Dodd and Mead, New York
Mallowan, M. E. L., 1966, Nimrud
and its Remains: Dodd and
Mead/Collins, London
Mallowan, M. E. L., and Rose, J.
C., 1935, Excavations at Tell Arpachiyeh 1933: Iraq v. 2, p. 1-178.
Oates,
D., and Reid, J. H., 1956, The Burnt Palace and the Nabu Temple, Nimrud
Excavations 1955,: Iraq 18, p. 22-39.
