§ VI Jewellery and the Industrial Arts
One of the most sensational discoveries effected by the French Mission in Susa was that of January 22, 1904, when a gold and a silver statuette were found in perfect preservation and original in style (fig. 252). That they were votive offerings is shown by their having been found under the pavement of the Temple of Shushinak with other offerings of less surpassing interest, among which was a small diorite staff with the head of a lion in gold filigree, executed with marvellous delicacy. As it is necessary to make a selection in order to keep within limits, I must content myself with describing the gold statuette. It is 2½ in. in height, not including the bronze pedestal on which it is placed. It was worked over with the burin and punch after being cast, and, as in the case of the bronze statuettes, the figure recalls the products of Chaldæan art (compare, for example, fig. 27, p. 40). It represents a man standing dressed in a garment delicately fringed round the lower edge, below which the feet are partly visible. His right arm is raised, the hand outstretched in the attitude of prayer; with the left he is holding a young bird to his breast, an offering to the god whose protection he is imploring; again the usual subject of the bronze statuettes. He has a long beard, his nose is straight and prominent, his eyes disproportionately large, and the chin is retreating. His abundant hair is expressed by fine reticulated lines, and on his immense head there is a tiara, which resembles in form a twisted piece of material. The dress on the front of the body is sprinkled with small stars; round his waist is a girdle, and the skirt of his robe is dotted with small holes made with a punch, which no doubt represent embroideries or gems worked into the material.
The silver statuette found with the gold figure is almost exactly like it, and is also in perfect preservation. Both are probably figures of the king who was founder of the temple, and supreme pontiff; he is bringing to the god the victim to be sacrificed on the occasion of laying the first stone. We might dwell at length on the want of proportion in the different parts of these statuettes; the head is too large, the ears badly placed, the chin too low on the chest. They are nevertheless exquisite examples of goldsmith’s work, of unusual size, and essential as illustrating the history of Elamite art.
There is another piece, that would be even more important than these statuettes had it reached us in a better state of preservation (fig. 253). This is a silver mask in repoussé work, and one hand of the same metal, which formed part of a statue probably of wood, the nude parts, the face and hands, being of silver. Numerous silver studs which remain riveted in position must have been intended to fix the metal to the wood. The wood has decomposed, and only the oxidised metal remains. The statue must have been one-third of life-size.
Judging from the features, the head represents a woman of Semitic type; it may perhaps have been an image of the goddess Nana. The two hands were closed, holding some objects which have now disappeared, the large eyes were made of carved ivory, and the pupil, which has also disappeared, was probably made of some glittering gem. At the same time that the silver mask was recovered, two head-dresses of glazed sandstone were found (fig. 254). One of these is in the form of a wig divided into two parts, one covering the head, the other falling over the neck. The front of the headpiece is decorated with a projecting gold button in the centre, and there are also thirty-five gold studs arranged in front; the back and sides are decorated with silver and brass studs.
The second of these head-dresses is also in glazed sandstone, and is a kind of cap or turban, shaped like the knob of a stick, and decorated over the whole surface with nine rows of bronze disks held in place by nails of the same metal arranged quincunx fashion.112 This kind of cap was usual among the Chaldæans, and we find examples both on bas-reliefs and cylinders.
There are numerous objects in ivory which date back to the primitive period of the history of Elam. These consist of engraved plaques, figures of animals, statuettes, and small implements. Of this series we must call attention to a delightful ivory figure 4¼ in. high, of which unfortunately the head is missing (fig. 255). It represents a woman standing, her hands crossed on her breast, as in the Tello statues. Her costume consists of a long dress reaching to the ankles made in one piece with only a trimming of braid round the bottom, and a different pattern of braid on the bosom. It covers the shoulders like a cape, leaving the fore-arms bare. The modelling of the arm has been studied with elaborate care. A fringed shawl in narrow pleats is thrown over the right shoulder above the dress, and falls over the back and the front as low as the knee. A hole pierced in the neck shows that the head must have been separate and fixed on; possibly it was of gold, and a deep groove on the border of the cape at the neck and over the elbow indicates that it also was of gold.
The lists of objects of all kinds found up to the present time, with the fine works of art we have been considering, have already filled several volumes: This means that these industrial objects almost enable us to evoke the daily life of the ancient inhabitants of Elam. There are cylinders, some in glazed pottery, others in ivory, hæmatite, chalcedony, and jasper, which were employed to seal their contracts; alabaster vases of various shapes; an immense number of small gold, silver, and bronze rings, and also flat disks in these metals, which may have been used for money; a dove in lapis-lazuli, studded with gold; magnificent gold bracelets and others of silver and bronze, often worked with great delicacy, pins, fibulæ, pendants, beads in glass, alabaster, lapis-lazuli, and pottery, sometimes incised with geometric designs: domestic utensils, heads of staves or sceptres, axes, knives, and various weapons: there is nothing missing of the ordinary outfit of the subjects of Shutruk-Nakhunta, king of Elam, the great conqueror and builder.
Two horns made of alabaster, bearing inscriptions in the name of this prince, must have belonged to an enormous bull’s head.113 There are numbers of objects of a votive character, which appear to have been thrown in quantities into the foundations of the temple of Shushinak. Griffins’ heads in gold, animals’ heads in pottery, lions carved in agate in the round, bulls’ heads in lapis, pendants in carnelian mounted in gold, sheets of gold with Anzanite inscriptions. There is ample space in this new field of archæology for studying these objects, for classifying and comparing them, and drawing from them all the information that can be afforded by their examination.
Want of space forbids our dwelling longer on this subject, and for the same reason we will say nothing about the numerous monuments of the period of the Persian Achæmenids, nor with yet stronger reason, of the time of the Parthians, Arsacids, and Sassanians, which does not enter into the scheme of our present volume. And yet, in bringing this rapid sketch to a conclusion, we will remark that, of all the discoveries made by M. de Morgan, that which is perhaps most admired by the public is the gold jewellery, set with precious stones, which came from the tomb of a woman of the period of the Persian Achæmenids. It is advisable to compare it from a technical point of view with the more ancient jewellery of the Elamite period.
These bracelets, pendants, and gold beads, these multiple rows of the richest necklaces, bear witness to the extraordinary luxury of the courts of Darius and Xerxes, and may well dazzle us. Noticeable among these treasures are pendants formed of minute gold curls, in imitation of the curled and wavy manes of lions. Here I believe we find an artistic innovation of striking originality in a form of art bound by conventions and traditions.
The setting of the gems in gold mounts of marvellous delicacy has not in any civilisation attained a higher level than in Achæmenian Susa. It is necessary to use a magnifying glass to examine this minute and delicate work. Here is the perfection of the goldsmith’s art, and these Persian jewels of the fifth century B.C. now form a preponderant and essential factor in the question round which so much controversy rages, of the origin of cloisonné jewellery.
Notes
1 The authority of a syllabary and a bilingual text enables us to correct the pronunciation of this name to Lagas. See Pinches in Babylonian and Oriental Record, vol. iii., p. 24. [Translator’s note.]
2 Genesis xi. 3.
3 Nahum iii. 14.
4 Herodotus i. 179.
5 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. xv., p. 406.
6 Travels and Researches in Chaldæa and Susiana, p. 175.
7 Découvertes en Chaldée, p. 62.
8 See Heuzey, Un palais chaldéen, pp. 37-58.
9 E. de Sarzec, Découvertes en Chaldée, pp. 34, 35.
10 See, however, Garstang, The Third Egyptian Dynasty, Constable, 1904, pp. 28-29, plates, v., xiv.
11 Strabo xvi. I, 5.
12 E. de Sarzec, op. cit., p. 37.
13 E. de Sarzec, op. cit., p. 59.
14 Loftus, Travels and Researches, pp. 187-189.
15 E. de Sarzec, op. cit., p. 60.
16 M. Babelon’s statement that the cylinder of Sagasaltias was found by modern explorers with that of Nabonidus is unfortunately inaccurate. Only the records of Nabonidus were discovered. See Taylor, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. xv.
17 Heuzey, Gazette Arch., 1884, p. 195.
18 E. de Sarzec, Découvertes, p. 61.
19 L. Heuzey, Un palais chaldéen, pp. 59-117.
20 See the translation which I have given of it in Lenormant and Babelon, Histoire ancienne de l’Orient, vol. v., p. 84.
21 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., vol. ii., p. 192 f. [Eng. ed.]
22 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., vol. ii., p. 195, fig. 106.
23 E. de Sarzec, Découvertes, p. 61.
24 Revue archéologique, 1883 (3e série, t. ii.) pl. xx.
25 Les figurines antiques du Musée du Louvre, p. 1 ff.
26 Revue archéol., mai-juin, 1887.
27 See especially J. Menant, La Glyptique orientale, t. i., and L. de Clercq, Catalogue de sa collection, fasc. 1-3.
28 Heuzey, Un palais chaldéen, p. 91.
29 History of Art in Assyria and Chaldæa, vol. i., p. 228 f. [Eng Ed.]
30 Lenormant and Babelon, Hist. Anc. de l’Orient, vol. iv., p. 411.
31 xvi., 1, 5.
32 Lenormant and Babelon, Hist. anc. de l’Orient, v. iv., p. 412.
33 What Aristotle really says is: “It is not a wall that makes a city, for the Peloponnese might be enclosed within a wall. Babylon, perhaps, is a city of such sort, and so is any other, the walls of which enclose a nation rather than a city. They say that when Babylon had been taken for three days part of the inhabitants were unaware of the fact.”—Pol. i. 3.
34 Exp. en Mésopotamie, t. i., p. 194 ff.
35 Cun. Inscr. and the O.T., vol. i., p. 79.
36 Heuzey, Un Palais Chaldéen, p. 81.
37 Menant, Remarques sur les portraits des rois assyro-chaldéens, 1882.
38 Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, vol. i., pl. 26, and passim.
39 Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Chaldæa and Assyria, vol. i., p. 257.
40 Herod. ii. 106
41 Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Chaldæa and Assyria, vol. ii., p. 294 ff.
42 Cf. Ezekiel xxiii. 14.
43 L. Heuzey, Les Figurines de terre cuite du Musée du Louvre, p. 1.
44 Nineveh and Babylon, p. 358.
45 Heuzey, op. cit., p. 2.
46 History of Art in Chaldæa and Assyria, vol. ii., p. 217.
47 Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art, vol. ii., p. 143.
48 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., vol. ii., p. 319 ff.
49 Wrongly called Sennacherib by M. Babelon.
50 E. Müntz, La Tapisserie, p. 22.
51 See especially J. Menant, La Glyptique Orientale, t. ii.
52 For the recent discoveries at Susa and discussion of Elamite remains, see Chapter IX. of this volume.
53 Heuzey, in the Revue politique et littéraire, 1886, p. 661.
54 L’art antique de la Perse, t. i., p. 8.
55 L’art antique de la Perse, t. ii., p. 37.
56 Dieulafoy, op. cit., t. ii., p. 80.
57 Pendentives are generally held to have been introduced into architecture several centuries after our era, and to have first appeared in a perfect form in the Church of St. Sophia at Constantinople, the dome of which, as Procopius says (De Ædificiis, Bk. I., c. i.) seems to hang by a golden chain from the sky.
58 Revue politique et littéraire, 1886, p. 661.
59 Op. cit., t. iii., p. 186.
60 Lenormant and Babelon, Hist. anc. de l’Orient, t. vi., p. 18, f.
61 The existence of a supreme god, Ilu, among the Assyrian deities is not proved, though assumed by M. Babelon, who supposes that the winged figure on the Assyrian bas-reliefs is Ilu.
62 Coste and Flandin, La Perse ancienne, pl. 164.
63 Dieulafoy, L’art antique de la Perse, t. iv., p. 79.
64 Compare Flandin and Coste, Perse ancienne, pl. 152.
65 See especially W. Wright, The Empire of the Hittites, 8vo, 2nd ed., London, 1886; Perrot and Chipiez, Hist. de l’art dans l’antiquité, t. iv., pp. 483 to 812; O. Hirschfeld, Die Felsen-reliefs in Kleinasien und das Volk der Hittiter (Abhandlungen der Berliner Akademie, 1886).
66 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., t. iv., p. 547.
67 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., t. iv., p. 549.
68 There is some doubt whether this figure is Hittite at all. It may be of Babylonian origin. (See Perrot and Chipiez, Hist., t. iv., 550 f.) The boots are so slightly turned up at the points that they are more like those worn by Babylonian kings than the characteristic boots of the Hittites. The stela was brought from the castle of Birejik, not from the site of Carchemish, as M. Babelon states.
69 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., t. iv., p. 534.
70 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., t. iv., p. 559.
71 Perrot and Guillaume, Exploration archéol. de la Galatie, etc., pl. lxv.
72 Hist. de l’art dans l’antiquité, t. iv. p. 667.
73 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., t. iv., p. 697.
74 Perrot and Chipiez, op cit., t. iv., p. 713.
75 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., t. iv., p. 750.
76 S. Reinach, Rev. Archéol., 1885 (3 se. t. v.), p. 54, ff.
77 Gazette archéol., 1887 (t. xiii. p. 60).
78 From Wilson and Warren, The Recovery of Jerusalem, p. 298 (1871).
79 M. de Vogüé, Le Temple de Jérusalem, p. 3.
80 M. de Vogüé, Le Temple de Jérusalem, pp. 21 and 22.
81 This name is at present given to a building which has nothing in common with this door of the Temple.—M. de Vogüé, Le Temple de Jérusalem, p. 12, note.
82 a, Ophel.—b, Bridge.—c, Tyropœon.—d, Causeway.—e, Tower of Baris or Antonia.—f, Portico.—g, Court of the Gentiles.—h, Court of the women.—k, Court of Israel.—l, Altar of burnt-offerings.—m, Court of the priests.—n, Solomon’s porch. o, Moat called Birket Israîl. pp, Double gate and triple gate.—q, Golden gate.—r, Kedron valley.
83 M. de Vogüé, Le Temple, p. 56.
84 M. de Vogüé, Le Temple, p. 37.
85 M. de Vogüé, Le Temple, p. 58.
86 1 Kings vii. 49-50.
87 Procopius, De Bello Vandalico, ii., chap. 9; Theophanes, Chronographia, p. 168, and Georg. Cedrenus, Hist. Comp., p. 606 (Ed. Bonn, 1833)
88 M. de Vogüé, Le Temple, p. 34; Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., t. iv. p. 315 ff.
89 Perrot and Chipiez, op. cit., t. iv., p. 463.
90 Renan, Mission de Phénicie pl. 10
91 See Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Phœnicia and its Dependencies, vol. i., p. 193 [Eng. Ed.].
92 Renan, Mission de Phénicie, p. 411.
93 Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Phœnicia, vol. ii., p. 12.
94 See Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Phœnicia, etc., vol. ii., p. 123
95 Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Phœnicia, etc., vol. ii., p. 148 f.
96 Pliny, Hist. Nat., xxxvi. 67.
97 W. Frœhner, La Verrerie Antique, Coll. Charvet, p. 10.
98 Amores, ch. xxvi.
99 L’imagerie phénicienne et la mythologie iconologique chez les Grecs, part i., 1880.
100 See Perrot and Chipiez, History of Art in Phœnicia, etc. vol. ii. p. 404 f.
101 Menant, La Glyptique orientale, t. ii.
102 The figure representing the god Set has not a hawk’s head, as M. Babelon states, following M. Menant. Here, as always, Set has the head of a nondescript animal, somewhat resembling an ass!
103 Revue archéol. t. xxvii. 1868, p. 432 ff.
104 In proportion to the amount of the discoveries, the results are published, and the monuments reproduced and commented on, in the vast publication entitled Délégation en Perse, Mémories publiès sous la direction de M. J. de Morgan, délégué-général (quarto, Leroux, editeur, Paris). Eight volumes have already appeared, the ninth is in the press (November 1905).
105 See pp. 168, 169, 171 (figs. 135, 136, 137).
106 Mémoires de la Mission, vol. i., pl. ix.
107 Mémoires de la Mission, vol. vii., pl. i., fig. A.
108 Mémoires de la Mission, vol. i., pl. xi.
109 Mémoires de la Mission, vol. ii., pl. xxiv.
110 Mémoires de la Mission, vol. ii., pl. xviii., xix.
111 Mémoires, vol. i. (1900), pp. 163-164.
112 Mémoires de la Mission, vol. vii., pl. x.
113 Mémoires de la Mission, vol. xix, p. 90 and pl. iii.