Society for Arabian Studies Monographs No.

7
Series editors D. Kennet & St J. Simpson

Intercultural Relations between

South and Southwest Asia
Studies in commemoration of
E.C.L. During Caspers (1934-1996)
Edited by

Eric Olijdam
Richard H. Spoor

BAR International Series 1826

2008

This title published by

Archaeopress
Publishers of British Archaeological Reports
Gordon House
276 Banbury Road
Oxford OX2 7ED
England
bar@archaeopress.com
www.archaeopress.com

BAR S1826
Society for Arabian Studies Monographs No. 7

Intercultural Relations between South and Southwest Asia: Studies in commemoration of E.C.L.
During Caspers (1934-1996)

the individual authors 2008

ISBN 978 1 4073 0312 3

Cover illustration by J.M. Kenoyer (Kenoyer and Meadow, Fig. 5.3)

Printed in England by Alden HenDi, Oxfordshire

All BAR titles are available from:
Hadrian Books Ltd
122 Banbury Road
Oxford
OX2 7BP
England
bar@hadrianbooks.co.uk

The current BAR catalogue with details of all titles in print, prices and means of payment is available
free from Hadrian Books or may be downloaded from www.archaeopress.com

INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS BETWEEN SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST ASIA.

STUDIES IN COMMEMORATION OF E.C.L. DURING CASPERS (1934-1996)
E. Olijdam & R.H. Spoor (eds)
BAR International Series 1826 (2008): 236-252

Some Thoughts on Iconographic Relations between the Arabian Gulf

and Syria-Mesopotamia during the Middle Bronze Age
Luca Peyronel

bifacial seals), which were directly influenced by Mesopotamian glyptic (Peyronel 1997; Denton 1997).4
The most recent effort in Arabian Gulf archaeology is
devoted to problems of relative chronology, pottery types
and re-assessment of stratigraphy, trying to substantiate
the links between the Mesopotamian alluvium, the Oman
Peninsula, the Iranian Plateau and the Indus Valley
through a more refined periodisation.5
In this respect, how should we consider the seals iconography and stylistic analysis? First of all, when we look
at the figurative patterns of Dilmun glyptic we have to
face the problem of correctly reading the motifs engraved
on the circular stone disc. Lacking a horizontal alignment
of the scene as with the cylinder seals it is necessary
to define a specific methodology so that confusion in the
overall interpretation can be avoided. A useful approach
might be based on three differentiated and hierarchical
analytical steps:

The indigenous character of Dilmun glyptic has been

underlined ever since the first seals were found at Failaka
and Bahrain at the end of the 1950s (Glob 1954: Fig. 5;
Bibby 1957: Fig. 13a-c; 1958). The Danish archaeological
investigations in the Arabian Gulf allowed the identification of the provenance of some enigmatic seals from
Woolleys excavations at Ur (Gadd 1932; cf. also Mitchell
1986; Peyronel 2000: 190-199), relating them to a new
cultural group (Glob 1959: 238). The stamp seal impressions on a cuneiform tablet from the Yale Collection dating from the reign of Gungunum of Larsa (Hallo & Buchanan 1965; Buchanan 1967) provided the first absolute
date for the glyptic material discovered in the Gulf area.
At the same time, it also established an unquestionable
link between the land of Dilmun and the cities of the
Mesopotamian alluvium, matching the textual evidence
for the development of maritime commerce during the
Ur III and Isin-Larsa periods (Oppenheim 1954; Leemans
1960; 1968).
The complex pattern of interrelations that can be inferred from the seals iconography, which was only briefly
pointed out by Buchanan (Hallo & Buchanan 1965: 207208), has been discussed by Porada (1971) in a seminal
article presented in the occasion of the Third International
Conference on Asian Archaeology, and, several years later, by
Kjrum (1986), during the Bahrain Historical Conference,
held in Manama in 1983.

A) decomposition of the figurative pattern into

separate elements;
B) identification of the relationships between single
elements;
C) definition of a scene and eventually separation of
filling motifs.
More than one hundred single motifs can be identified on
Dilmun seals from Failaka and Bahrain. They are related
to three main categories with six possible schemes of
relationship:

The origin of the Arabian Gulf glyptic at the end of the

3rd millennium B.C. is now quite well understood: stamp
seals from stratified layers at Qalaat al-Bahrain Excavation 520 (or North Wall Sounding) show an evolution of
distinctive typologies, which culminates at the beginning
of the 2nd millennium B.C. with the classic Early Dilmun
seal (Kjrum 1994).1 The presence of an archaic type
(Arabian Gulf type) and the identification of a transitional group (proto-Dilmun type) from Qalaat level IIa
(ca. 2100-1950 B.C.) allows us to reconstruct the first steps
of the Dilmunite glyptic tradition.2 It is more difficult to
establish the lower chronological limit of Dilmun seals,
which appeared during Qalaat period IIb-c (ca. 1950-1800
B.C.) and were in use at Failaka also during the Old Babylonian (Failaka 3A) and, perhaps, the Early Kassite periods
(Failaka 3B-4A).3 Finally, during the later phases (late
Early Dilmun and Middle Dilmun periods) new styles and
types were introduced (i.e. Kjrums styles II-III, and

categories: human and divine figures; animals; objects and

symbols;
relationships: figure/figure; figure/animal; figure/object;
animal/animal; animal/object; object/object.
Thus, the concept of relationship concerns either a direct human/divine/animal action towards an object or
towards another figure (i.e. a man holding a drinking
tube, a bull-man holding a standard, a man killing an
antelope, a lion attacking a gazelle), or physical contact
between elements (an object placed on a podium, an animal above an altar, a figure standing on an animal, etc.).
Steps B) to C) are critical, and in several cases it is quite
hard to distinguish if an element could be considered a
mere filling motif or if it has some direct (or indirect)
236

relation with another element. Additionally, several seals

show differently orientated figures, which testifies to an
absence of a main axis of reading. In fact, four basic patterns of representation can be distinguished:

tition of a unique scheme of representation; they could

not use it to create the variety of images that was necessary to distinguish each seal from another. The limited
surface of the stamp (with a diameter usually of less than
3 cm) calls for a high number of figurative motifs to create distinct scenes, necessary to distinguish groups/
categories of people or individuals.
The major changes that can be observed between Arabian Gulf stamps and proper Dilmun seals are surely the
development of the human/divine sphere, which becomes the protagonist of many scenes; and the more
explicit articulation of the relationships between figures
on the Dilmun stamp seals. Arabian Gulf iconography is
centred around animals and symbols, arranged to cover
the stamp surface; specimens engraved with human figures are very rare (Kjrum 1994: 341-344). This situation
is linked to the strong influence of Harappan glyptic during the end of the 3rd millennium B.C. in Bahrain and in
the Arabian Gulf, witnessed by circular stone seals with
Harappan inscriptions, cubical weights, painted pottery,
etc. The distribution pattern of square and circular seals
with Harappan inscriptions in the Gulf, or the Iranian
plateau, and in the Mesopotamian alluvium seems to
reveal different stages of cultural and commercial interrelations between Mesopotamia and the East, during the
period immediately before the beginning of the 2nd millennium B.C. (Parpola 1994; Collon 1996; Peyronel 2000).
When Dilmunites became the direct referents of the
Mesopotamian seafaring merchants, the maritime contacts changed and the flow of goods was controlled by
settlements on Bahrain and Tarut, and by their outposts
on Failaka at the head of the Gulf.8

1) single orientation for primary axis;

2) multiple orientation for main axis and secondary
axis;
3) multiple orientation for equal axes;
4) circular or radial composition.
The transmission of iconographies originating in another
cultural sphere can be observed at all the levels mentioned above, with single motifs, peculiar relationships
between figures, and scenes adopted and elaborated
again in the Dilmun glyptic repertoire.
Trying to reconstruct ways and routes of these contacts
is certainly only one aspect of the study of Dilmunite
iconography and iconology. Understanding the meanings
of the figures within the Dilmunite cultural sphere is
more important, but also more difficult. It is not a problem of differentiation between foreign and local: the
focus is on building up a framework of the Dilmunite
artistic expression, in which to place the significance of
the iconographic transmission.
The high or classic glyptic of the Early Dilmun period
shows the predominance of Mesopotamian iconography:
the kaunakes skirts, the horned headdress of the gods, the
supernatural beings such as the bull-men, the erotic and
symposia scenes, standards and astral symbols, peculiar
animals as the monkey and the lion, and the harp with
bull-shaped sound-box, represent only the most common
features of an artistic world surely influenced by the
Mesopotamian one.
However, during the late Ur III and Isin-Larsa periods
(ca. 2000-1800 B.C.) the situation is totally different: the
presentation scene and the introduction scene which
dominate Mesopotamian iconography during these periods, are not attested on the Dilmun seals.6 In more general terms this means that if we did not know the Early
Dynastic and Akkadian glyptics we would consider Dilmunite and Mesopotamian sphragistic productions as
two separate and almost totally different entities on both
iconographic and stylistic grounds. A more detailed
analysis reveals that relationships with the Early Old
Babylonian seals (some standards and symbols, the
square hatched-podium) do exist, but these are rather
marginal.7 In this respect we should consider Mesopotamian iconography in a wider perspective, both from a
synchronic and a diachronic point of view. On the one
hand, we have to take other broad artistic categories into
consideration, e.g. the clay figurines and plaques; and, on
the other hand, we must take into account that the Mesopotamian repertoire which passed into the Arabian Gulf
area during the last centuries of the 3rd millennium B.C.
subsequently underwent a local transformation.
The evolution towards the presentation/introduction
scene, which reflected Mesopotamian practice, did not
find the right background in Arabian Gulf culture. The
Dilmunites were not interested in the monotonous repe-

There are two main hypotheses that explain the origin

of a large part of the Dilmunite iconographic repertoire:
A. Mesopotamian provenance The frequent commercial contact between the Arabian Gulf and the
Mesopotamian alluvium attested during the second
half of the 3rd millennium B.C. caused the transmission of certain glyptic representations during a
timeframe spanning the Early Dynastic II-III and
the late Akkadian period.9
B. Syrian and Cappadocian provenance The classic
Near Eastern iconographies came from the Syrian
regions and were elaborated and assimilated in
Dilmun, reflecting a strong ethnic presence of
Amorites in the Gulf.10
What is clear is certainly the progressive retreat of
Harappan sphragistics,11 which relates to the new role
undertaken by the Dilmun civilisation in the Arabian Gulf
and, at the same time, to the crisis and changes in the
Indus Valley during the first centuries of the 2nd millennium B.C.
This is not the place for an exhaustive iconographic
analysis of the Dilmun repertoire, but it can be quite instructive to discuss some peculiar motifs to test the
strength of the abovementioned hypotheses.

237

Fig. 1: Dilmun seals with gods. A) al-Sindi 1994: no. 17; B) al-Sindi 1994: no. 18; C) al-Sindi 1994: no. 19; D) Kjrum 1983: no. 185; E)
Kjrum 1983: no. 186; F) al-Sindi 1994: no. 23.

The god and the bull-man

albeit sometimes a double crown is attested (Kjrum

1983: no. 185; al-Sindi 1994: no. 19) [Fig. 1c-d].
Gods are attested on seven seals from Failaka (Kjrum
1983: nos. 81, 185-186, 193, 212, 274; Pic 1990: no. 19) and
on nine seals from Bahrain (al-Sindi 1994: nos. 17-20, 2324, 56-58), indicating a balanced situation between the
two seal corpora. Finally, among the handful of Dilmunite
seals found outside the Gulf, one from Ur depicts a scene
with a seated garbed god with a bull and two bull-men
(Gadd 1932: no. 14; Mitchell 1986: no. 10; Peyronel 2000:

The most evident cultural traits linking Dilmun glyptic

with Syria and Mesopotamia are the supernatural beings
and divine figures: the bull-man and the god with horned
headdress appear in several stamps from Failaka and
Bahrain interacting with humans, animals and cultic
objects such as standards and hatched podia.
We can distinguish the god only by the horned tiara,
usually of simple type with one pair of curved horns,
238

Fig. 2: Dilmun seals with gods. A) al-Sindi 1994: no. 24; B) al-Sindi 1994: no. 57; C) Kjrum 1983: no. 212; D) Kjrum 1983:
no. 81; E) Kjrum 1983: no. 274; F) Kjrum 1983: no. 193.

no. 4.14).
The divine figure is always depicted en profile with a
horned crown and a sort of pigtail hanging over his
shoulders, dressed in a kaunakes skirt, seated on a throne
(a square plain or hatched seat), involved in some ritual
acts or associated with animals. The god is the main
person-age of the representation and only in two seals
does he appear twice (Kjrum 1983: no. 81; al-Sindi 1994:
no. 17). Naked male figures, bulls and gazelles, symbols
and standards, and drinking tubes with jars are motifs

that recur with deities.

The god interacts with humans, animals and objects:
Relation with humans:
direct/indirect: god with a naked or garbed attendant
behind or before [Figs. 1c-f, 2e-f]12
direct/indirect: god with bull-men as attendants (Peyronel 2000: no. 4.14) [Fig. 3a]
direct: god holding/touching a kneeling figure (Pic
1990: no. 19)
239

and Mature Old Syrian glyptic usually show a couple of

personages holding a cup on both sides of a loaded table,
or figures approaching a seated person with a bowl in his
hand, relating the banquet to the kingship and possibly to
the funerary ritual of royal ancestors (cf. Matthiae, Pinnock & Scandone Matthiae 1995: nos. 254, 290-291, 470).
However, several cylinder seals are engraved with persons drinking through tubes, witnessing the survival of
the iconographic theme during the 2nd millennium B.C.
(de Graeve 1982: 20-23).20
The presence of drinking scenes on Arabian Gulf type
seals firmly points to a transmission from Mesopotamia
during the late Akkadian period and suggests an original
elaboration during the first centuries of the 2nd millennium B.C. Moreover, the success of the motif in the mature Dilmun glyptic is testified by the theme adopted as a
whole (pairs of drinking personages) and, additionally by
the motif matched with other iconographic relationships.
The god drinking through a tube seems to be a strong
clue for direct Mesopotamian influence, albeit drinking
gods are quite uncommon in Mesopotamia proper during
the Akkadian period (de Graeve 1982: 19-20). What is
certainly interesting to note is the similar process of
adaptation which happened in Syria and in the Arabian
Gulf during the Middle Bronze Age, revealing a common
cultural behaviour.

Relation with animals:

direct: god grasping/touching a gazelle [Fig. 2c-d]13
indirect: god seated on a stool/throne above a bull
[Fig. 1d-e]14
Relation with objects:
direct: god drinking through a tube leading to a jar; god
holding a cup [Fig. 1a-f]15
direct: god holding/touching a crescent-standard (Peyronel 2000: no. 4.14) [Fig. 3a]
indirect: god seated on a stool/throne16
When we look at the composition as a whole, two different scenes can be recognised in which gods are possibly
involved:
A) god drinking with a tube symposia scene;
B) god stressing his powerful supremacy over the
animals master of animals scene.
Generally speaking, the gods who are attested on less
than 5% of Dilmun seals can be related to specific iconographic themes, which do not exclusively belong to the
divine sphere but are also common to what appear to be
human figures. In the first case, seals with a drinking
scene the so-called symposia scene constitute a rather
substantial group on Failaka and Bahrain.17 The introduction of this motif probably happened during the end of
the 3rd millennium B.C., as revealed by some Arabian Gulf
and proto-Dilmun seals (Kjrum 1994: 343; al-Sindi 1994:
nos. 10-11, 13-15, 26-27 from Saar, Hamad Town and
Charnel House). The specimens show pairs of human
figures drinking through short straws from a common
jar; in the field above the vessel a symbol (crescent, star,
schematic footprint, small animal) is usually placed, in
the same way as later Dilmun seals.
The first appearance of figures drinking through a
straw from a vessel placed on the ground or on a table
can be recognised in Mesopotamia during the Early Dynastic II, as testified by a gypsum plaque from the Inanna
Temple VII at Nippur. The general theme of the banquet
was quite popular during the Early Dynastic III and Akkadian period, when we find male and female figures
related to drinking tubes or holding cups, in a scene
summarising a banquet probably connected to different
ritual or ceremonial occasions (Selz 1983; Pinnock 1994).
At the end of the 3rd millennium B.C. such a representation became uncommon and, at the beginning of the 2nd
millennium B.C., it was probably connected only to representations of sexual intercourse. Terracotta figurines and
moulded clay plaques depict a man and a woman performing a sexual act whereby the female figure bends
down from the waist sometimes drinking from a jar
through a tube and the naked standing man is shown
penetrating her from behind (cf. Pinnock 1996).18 It is
interesting to underline that these examples of erotic
art find exact parallels in a very limited amount of stamp
seals from the Gulf, without doubt directly influenced by
the Old Babylonian clay plaques.19
Contrary to Southern Mesopotamia, the banquet motif
was preserved in the Syrian, Syro-Cappadocian and Anatolian glyptics of the Middle Bronze Age. Old Syrian relief

The iconography of the god as ruler of the animal world

is also very common in the Dilmun repertoire. It is certainly linked to the peculiar role of the bull/gazelle/
antelope in the ritual performances and also by the
strong links between other animals and cultic symbols
or presumed altars/podia attested on several Dilmun
seals but also in Arabian Gulf specimens. Therefore, relationships between different personages and animals are a
constant trait of Dilmun sphragistic, raising the problem
of a correct interpretation of these figures: are they humans or gods? This is particularly difficult to establish for
the master of animals scenes, where we can observe very
similar compositions adopted for horned deities and nonhorned figures.
We consider this theme to be a local elaboration reflecting Dilmunite religious belief, almost totally unrelated to the contemporary Syro-Mesopotamian spheres.
The roots can be identified in the Mesopotamian and
Iranian glyptic of the 4th and 3rd millennia B.C. (Amiet
1986), but the evolution should be better reconstructed
within the context of Arabian Gulf cultures. Human figures (naked or with flounced skirts) only frequently appear in the proto-Dilmun and Dilmun seals introducing a
new kind of representation, where relations and actions
became the focus of what can be now called a scene. The
animalistic repertoire (elaborated during the previous
period) now interacts with the human sphere giving birth
to several figurative schemes. One of the most popular is
the master of animals, the conceptual sublimation of human predominance over nature, often translated on a
ritual level. If humans at the high level of the social hierarchy with the ruler in primis answer for the cosmic order
on earth, as in the Mesopotamian world, the two spheres
overlap in the master of animals scene, obscuring any
240

Fig. 3: Dilmun seals with bull-men. A) Peyronel 2000: no. 4.14; B) Kjrum 1983: no. 208; C) Kjrum 1983: no. 121; D) Kjrum 1983:
no. 122; E) al-Sindi 1994: no. 254; F) Kjrum 1983: no. 274.

help to identify specific gods.21 In this respect it seems

more probable that Dilmun people prefer to represent
ritual or cultic acts through these religious elements
rather than referring to specific deities.
We know from Mesopotamian cuneiform sources the
connection between the land of Dilmun and the god Inzak
with his spouse Meskilak/Ninsikila (Alster 1983; Nashef
1984). Inscriptions from Failaka and Bahrain on stamp
seals, cylinder seals and steatite objects (Nashef 1984;

precise distinction. It is equally possible that the horned

god only represents a deity with a Mesopotamian connection or the main god of the local pantheon. Moreover, we
can think of symbolic representation of deities through
standards, astral symbols, altars, etc., which are widespread elements in Dilmunite seals but appear to lack a
direct relationship with certain recurrent figures. A
marked difference between Dilmun and MesopotamiaSyria is in fact the absence of divine attributes which can
241

Glassner 1984) report the names of Enki, Inzak and

PA.NI.PA and attest the presence of sacred buildings in
Dilmun.22 In Nashefs opinion, Inzak and Ninsikila might
be considered the Dilmunite identification of the Mesopotamian pair Enki and Dagmalnuna, according to a syncretism process (Nashef 1984: 6-7). Moreover, Inzak of Dilmun (and/or Agarum) should have been worshipped as
the god of the date-palm23 and, consequently, the schematic plant as well as the more realistic date-palm attested on stamp seals should be regarded as Inzaks symbols. However when we turn to the glyptic evidence, out
of more than a hundred examples that depict schematic
vegetable elements only two seals show a direct relation
between gods and plants [Fig. 2e-f]:24 the first shows a
deity and a garbed figure each holding a branch in their
raised hands (Kjrum 1983: no. 193), the second has a
seated deity stretching out his arms towards a naked
attendant holding a branch (Kjrum 1983: no. 274).25
Finally, it is interesting to point out that the only seal
which attests a relation between bull-men and gods was
found at Ur: the scene represents a garbed deity wearing
a horned tiara, who is seated on a hatched stool apparently placed on the back of a bull, between two bull-men.
Each of these holds a crescent standard, while one is also
grasped by the god. Relationships between bull-man/
god, bull-man/crescent-standard, and god/crescent-standard never occur on Failaka and Bahrain, pointing to a
stronger link for this seal with Mesopotamia: we are
tempted to identify the owner as an alik Tilmun, who
marked his seafaring commercial activity with an object
that recalls specific Mesopotamian iconography.

Relationship with objects:

direct: bull-man holding/touching a ritual object or a
branch [Figs. 3a, 4b, f, 5a-f]29
indirect: bull-man standing on a hatched podium (Kjrum 1983: no. 93) [Fig. 4a]
When we look at the composition as a whole we can
distinguish three main groups of scenes:
a) a pair of bull-men or a single bull-man with a
human figure placed on both sides of ritual elements (standards, schematic gates, offering tables, podia) or animals simple worshipping
scene30
b) bull-men related to ritual elements or animals
together with other figures involved in different
relationships complex worshipping scene31
c) bull-man as centre of the representation worshipped (?) bull-mans scene32
It seems that bull-men participate quite exclusively in
ritual scenes, not only because of their own religious
connotations but also because they always occur together
with peculiar cultic equipment. The relationship between
bull-men and superimposed bulls or bull and gazelle
(Kjrum 1983: nos. 247-249) [Fig. 4c-d] again suggests the
complex pattern of ideological meanings which hides
behind the animal repertoire in Dilmun stamp seals.33
Two crossed bull-men with raised hands stand across a
net podium on a unique seal from Failaka (Kjrum 1983:
no. 261) [Fig. 4e], according to a figurative scheme especially known for antelopes and gazelles (Kjrum 1983:
nos. 256-260; al-Sindi 1994: nos. 195-197) and possibly
related to the Syro-Anatolian milieu where crossed figures (also bull-men) are quite common (cf. zg 1991:
Fig. 31; Teissier 1994: nos. 157-165, 312, 341, 387-389).

Bull-men occur in 31 Dilmun seals, of which 26 come

from Failaka, only 4 from Bahrain and one from Ur as
mentioned above.26 Single figures are attested on ten
seals, couples on 21 seals. Generally speaking, depictions
of the bull-man occur from the Early Dynastic II onwards,
with a human torso, bulls legs and tail, human face with
bulls ears and horns (in profile or full-face), sometimes
ithyphallic (cf. Black & Green 1992: 48-49). However, the
Dilmunite bull-man is always represented in profile, apparently beardless with horns that resemble those of the
gods crown. Kjrum has pointed out the existence of two
different styles of execution, reflecting a chronological
evolution: the stamp seals found in the lower levels at
Failaka (style IA) bear taller figures with a peculiar sacklike body, while seals related to style IB show more linear
figures with slender bodies (Kjrum 1980: 46).

Another meaningful seal is engraved with a schematic

shrine or door with symbols inside (hatched podium, sunring, hatched lentoid, net podium), flanked by a bull-man
and a garbed man grasping the door-frame (Kjrum 1983:
no. 51) [Fig. 4f]. Rectangular structures appear on 9 seals
(Kjrum 1983: nos. 51-54, 126; al-Sindi 1994: nos. 202-203,
205, 263): they have symbols or human figures within and
they can be considered schematic gates or chapels/
shrines, without doubt linked with peculiar ritual functions, as revealed also by astral symbols, mythological
figures (serpent monsters or bull-men) and worshippers
on their sides.34 In Mesopotamia we find a winged shrine
placed on the back of a bull during the Old Akkadian period (Boehmer 1965: 105-109, nos. 589-619) and a representation of a gate with heroes, bull-men or deities as
guardians, through which the sun-god Shamash emerges
at his rising from the mountains (van Buren 1947; Boehmer 1965: nos. 392-428). An original elaboration of the
first theme can be recognised in the Old Syrian culture,
where it occurs, sometimes winged and/or placed on
bulls, together with the nude goddess flanked by bullmen (cf. Amiet 1960: 224-227; Matthiae 1987: 476-480).35
Therefore we can argue for a transmission of the sacred

The bull-man interacts with humans, animals and objects:

Relationship with humans:
direct: bull-man grasping/touching a naked male figure
(Beyer 1986: no. 170)
direct: bull-man grasped/touched by a naked male figure (Kjrum 1983: no. 208) [Fig. 3b]
Relationship with animals:
direct: bull-man grasping an animal [Figs. 3b-f, 4a, c-d]27
indirect: bull-man standing above an animal [Figs. 3d,
5c-d]28
242

Fig. 4: Dilmun seals with bull-men. A) Kjrum 1983: no. 93; B) Kjrum 1983: no. 70; C) Kjrum 1983: no. 248; D) Kjrum
1983: no. 249; E) Kjrum 1983: no. 261; F) Kjrum 1983: no. 51.

gate or chapel from Mesopotamia from the Akkadian

period onwards, although we cannot exclude a link with
the Old Syrian milieu.

transmission of the motif from the Syro-Mesopotamian

regions, albeit we cannot also exclude a socio-economic
reason which may link a specific group of Dilmunites
residing at Failaka with the bull-mans iconography. Since
the foundation levels at Failaka roughly correspond to
Qalaat IIb-c, we can conclude that the first appearance of
the motif in Dilmun dates at the latest from the middle
Isin-Larsa period, at the end of the 20th century B.C. In
this case the Failaka settlement should be contemporary
to late Qalaat IIb (cf. Hjlund 1987: 157-158, fig. 707).

The balanced presence of divine figures on seals from

Failaka and Bahrain cannot be matched with that of the
bull-man. Only four seals from Bahrain attest the knowledge of this iconography in the Dilmunite heartland,
whereas only a few examples were found at Failaka F3
and F6. This difference might be ascribed to a later
243

Fig. 5: Dilmun seals with bull-men. A) al-Sindi 1994: no. 115; B) al-Sindi 1994: no. 116; C) al-Sindi 1994: no. 117; D) Kjrum 1983:
no. 115; E) Kjrum 1983: no. 116; F) Kjrum 1983: no. 141.

However it is equally reasonable to argue that the iconography was first introduced at Failaka and never became a
figurative theme of the Bahrain seals, except for a few
specimens (apparently three of style IA and one of style
IB). It is certainly adopted at Failaka on mature Dilmun
seals during periods 2 and 3, until the beginning of Kassite period, and occurs also on style II seals.36
Bull-men are attested in Mesopotamian glyptic from
the Early Dynastic II onwards (Karg 1984: 42-44). The
iconographic elaboration probably happened at the end

of the 4th or at the beginning of the 3rd millennium B.C.

in the Iranian milieu, where stamp and cylinder seals
show hybrid creatures with mixed human and animal
features since the prehistoric periods (cf. Amiet 1972: nos.
219-220, 1013-1017; 1986: 16-30).
Bull-men were represented during the Early Dynastic
period only in contest scenes together with rampant
animals, the naked hero and the human-headed bull. A
lenghty discussion on these figures has involved Near
Eastern scholars, some proposing to identify Enkidu and
244

Gilgamesh with the bull-man and the hero with long hair
with curls (cf. Afanesyeva 1971), others preferring to
recognise in these figures different aspects of the god
Dumuzi (Moortgat 1949). More recently a simplistic correlation between Early Dynastic supernatural beings and
those known from mythological tales was submitted to a
strong criticism (Lambert 1987), despite the unequivocal
connection with the religious sphere.37 It is now widely
accepted that the nude hero must be considered a protective and beneficent deity, in later periods associated
with Enki (Akkadian period) or Marduk (from the 2nd
millennium B.C.), known by the name Lahmu (Black &
Green 1992: 115).
During the Akkadian period bull-men occur again in
contest scenes, albeit some rare cylinders show the figure
in relation to the sun-god Utu/Shamash (Collon 1987: no.
765; Amiet 1980: 39; Matthiae 1987: 481-482). A new elaboration of iconographic features and scenes in which bullmen were involved can be placed at the end of the 3rd
millennium B.C., during the Ur III and Isin-Larsa periods.
A true horned tiara became the bull-mans headdress
and the figure is now shown also grasping standards,
gate-posts, spears and carrying animal offerings.38
In the Syro-Anatolian regions, bull-men are frequently
depicted involved in ritual scenes, often as standardbearers, suggesting a more striking connection with the
Arabian Gulf evidence (zg 1965: 70-71; 1991: 308-309).
The corpus of seal impressions from Kltepe karum II (ca.
1920-1850 B.C.) verifies the occurrence in the Anatolian,
Syro-Cappadocian, Old Syrian, and Old Assyrian styles
(zg 1965; 1989; Leinwand 1992; Teissier 1994). The
figure appears in the Old Babylonian group only in contest scenes and in the Old Assyrian group as a terminal
element in introduction or supplication scenes, sometimes grasping a spear, or with both hands joined at the
waist.39 A unique occurrence is a seal with a row of
bearded bull-men in full-face holding a kind of crescent
standard, apparently linked to the Assyrian style (Teissier
1994: no. 148). In the Anatolian group we quite frequently
see bull-men (single or pairs) as standard-bearers, holding a flowing vase, struggling with animals, or carrying a
bull.40 It is striking that the bull-man was adopted during
the Old Anatolian period also in the local stamp seals, so
far known especially from Kltepe, Karahyk, Acemhyk, Boghazky and Alishar (Alp 1968; zg 1980; von
der Osten 1937: 210-229; Boehmer & Gterbock 1987: 1956).41 The quite heterogeneous Syro-Cappadocian (Syrian
Colony) group often shows bull-men in different attitudes, pointing to the importance of the motif in the Old
Syrian milieu (Pinnock 2000: 1402). They usually hold
standards or spears, although they can also be placed on
each sides of the nude goddess who is unveiling herself.42
Finally, this mythological being occurs in the mature Old
Syrian glyptic from North Syrian workshops, mainly connected to the royal style of the Yamkhad-kingdom dating
to the 18th century B.C.43 Moreover, the bull-man appears
also in Old Syrian sculpture and relief, as testified by
Ishtars stele, and is carved on basins and ritual bases
from Tell Mardikh-Ebla dating from the Middle Bronze IIIA (ca. 2000-1700 B.C). The bas-reliefs show bull-men in
full-face as apotropaic figures and, in the case of the stele

from Sanctuary G3, as guardians of Ishtars winged shrine

placed on a bull (see Matthiae 1989: Pls. 121, 134-135;
Matthiae, Pinnock & Scandone Matthiae 1995: nos. 291,
236, 238).
Summing up, the bull-mans role in Dilmun seals seems
to be mainly ritual or cultic. He was related to sacred
paraphernalia such as standards, podia and altars, or to
animals with a symbolic meaning such as the snake.
Moreover, he has a weaker direct relationship with human figures. The main subjects of seals with bull-men are
the worshipped symbols or animals. A similar iconographic adaptation is never attested in Mesopotamia and
infrequently in Syro-Anatolian regions; in the latter area
we find bull-men with standards, albeit often as secondary elements in ceremonial scenes with enthroned
deities or kings. Generally speaking, it seems that there is
a probable link with the Syro-Cappadocian evidence,
which points out to a common cultural sensibility towards specific artistic expression, rejecting the contest
scenes use in favour of new religious functions. According to the distribution of seals with bull-men, we have
seen that this theme was adopted, probably later in Dilmun, with respect to the iconography of gods and drinking figures.
The offering table with bull hooves
We would like to conclude this brief contribution with a
discussion on what is certainly the most striking similarity between Dilmunite and Syro-Cappadocian glyptic. In a
small group of stamp seals from Failaka a peculiar offering table with curved legs and bulls hooves is visible
(Kjrum 1983: nos. 163-168; Pic 1990: nos. 12-13?). All the
specimens come from Failaka, where the motif is also
attested in one seal of style II (Kjrum 1983: no. 43),
probably dating from the Old Babylonian period.
The table is formed by a slightly concave top, a central
straight column, in one case moulded (Pic 1990: no. 12),
and two legs with terminal bull hooves. Different kinds of
symbols or objects are apparently placed on the table,
and seated/standing garbed/naked figures or bull-men
appear at its sides.
Relationship with humans:
direct: table grasped/touched by bull-men or humans
(Kjrum 1983: no. 166; Pic 1990: no. 12) [Fig. 6c]
Relationship with animals:
direct: table grasped/touched by monkeys (Kjrum
1983: no. 168) [Fig. 6e]
Relationship with objects:
direct/indirect: symbols/objects apparently placed on
the table [Fig. 6a-e]44
direct/indirect: table apparently placed on a podium
(Kjrum 1983: nos. 163, 166) [Fig. 6a, c]
The overall representation often includes other symbols
and animals (monkey, snake, plant, star and crescent, net
podium), suggesting a ritual character of the main scene,
centred around the offering table. The figurative scheme
with two bull-men or seated men flanking the table is
245

certainly linked with ceremonial activity in which the

furniture fulfils a specific, pivotal role. We can distinguish
between a ceremonial banquet with loaded tables, when
the human figures hold cups, and a worship scene, when
the figures touch the table or raise arms toward it.
Moreover, a seal from F3 (Kjrum 1983: no. 169) shows
a naked standing man holding a table with the same
shape of the offering tables but with human legs, repeating a figurative composition identical to the erotic scenes:
it is a meaningful example of ritual elements combined
together revealing a complex local ideology, often difficult to understand on the basis of the iconographic evidence.
As correctly pointed out by Kjrum (1986: 272) this
table resembles furniture which is very common in SyroAnatolian regions during the Middle Bronze Age, and
known especially from cylinder seals but also from ivory
objects, bas-reliefs and sculptures.45
The bottom of a basalt offering table was recently
found at Tell Mardikh-Ebla, reused as a well-curb near
the Temple P2 in the Sacred Ishtar Area (Matthiae 1994:
173-177, Figs. 3-4). It has established without doubt the
existence of cultic furniture in temples of the Old Syrian
period and the tripod shape of the equipment. The same
furniture occurs on many cylinder seals in Syrian, SyroCappadocian and Anatolian styles,46 whereas it is virtually
unknown from contemporary Mesopotamian glyptic.47 It
must, therefore, belong to the Syrian milieu where it was
used in ceremonial activities involving banquets and
cultic libations. Several variants can be recognised from
the glyptic evidence (Matthiae 1994: 175-176): the basic
shape has a plain top, a central column diverging into two
legs with bulls hooves, and lateral supports connecting
the legs with the top. The Eblaite basalt table demonstrates that the furniture may also have a solid base,
which is lacking in the more schematic seals representation.
The existence of similar tables in Dilmunite stamp seals
testifies to a direct link to the Syrian region, albeit the
iconography is different in the concave top and the lack
of lateral supports. They are more similar to the motif
known from classic Old Syrian cylinder seals (ca. 18501720 B.C.),48 although it does not necessarily mean a
later transmission. It seems more probable that in the
Gulf area an autonomous elaboration occurred during the
19th-18th centuries B.C., which could have been parallel
to that of the Syrian milieu where this kind of offering
table disappears at the end of the 18th century B.C.
Dilmunite seal designs with offering tables might testify not only to the iconographic knowledge but also to a
circulation of that type of ceremonial furnishing between
Western Syria and Arabian Gulf, i.e. as real imports. From
an artistic point of view the land of Dilmun again shows
the trend to assimilate themes and figurative motifs pertaining to the Amorite Western and Northern Syrian
milieu dating from the very beginning of the 2nd millennium till the end of the 17th century B.C.

E
Fig. 6: Dilmun seals with offering tables. A) Kjrum 1983: no. 163; B)

Concluding Remarks

Kjrum 1983: no. 165; C) Kjrum 1983: no. 166; D) Kjrum 1983:
no. 167; E) Kjrum 1983: no. 168.

It seems that iconographic relationships with Syria and

246

Mesopotamia might be investigated by taking into account chronological differences and/or regional distinctions between material from Failaka and Bahrain. Some
motifs strongly suggest an earlier transmission and
original elaboration in the Gulf area, others point to
later developments and, possibly, peculiar preferences
of Dilmunites residing at Failaka. The inner articulation
of the land of Dilmun certainly deserves more rigorous
investigation, trying to reach a better understanding of
socio-economic dynamics among the Failaka settlement,
the coastal area from Kuwait to Tarut, and the Bahraini
sites. The complex iconography of Dilmun seals might be
analysed by looking for cultural links with the SyroMesopotamian world, but also for local elaboration related to highly specific ritual and ceremonial meanings.
We have reviewed some of the most striking evidence
of cultural Near Eastern connections, without exhausting
the subject, which appears diversified and stratified and
begs an analytical and systematic study. We have omitted
other iconographic elements, such as the whorl and radial composition of animals necks (cf. Porada 1971: 335,
Boehmer 1986), the standards and podia, abstractions and
pars pro toto (Kjrum 1986: 273), pointed out by several
scholars, and instead focused on gods and bull-men to
show that Dilmun imagery deals with these classic
Mesopotamian figures according to an original ideology,
probably influenced by Western and North Syrian prototypes, according to a common spiritual sensibility.

3.

4.

Notes
1. The corpus of Dilmun seals from Failaka and Bahrain
comprises of several hundred specimens from temples, domestic structures, graves and public buildings
(Kjrum 1983; Beyer 1986; 1989; Pic 1990; al-Sindi
1994). The typologic and stylistic criteria used for seal
classification were singled out by Kjrum (1980), albeit not discussed in detail in the Failaka catalogue of
glyptic materials from the Danish excavations (Kjrum 1983).
2. The presence of two different series was first recognized by Porada, who spoke of an Earlier group for
circular monofacial seals with a high button boss divided by one (exceptionally two or three) grooves,
and a Later group for circular monofacial seals with
a broad domed boss divided as a rule by three thin
parallel lines and four dot-in-circles (Porada 1971:
331-332, Figs. A-B); therefore the shape of the back is
the feature adopted to classify the stamp seals, with
more or less varied terminology: Potts (1990: 161, n.
57) introduced the terms Persian Gulf for the earlier
series and Dilmun for the later series, finally
changed to Arabian Gulf type and Dilmun type by
Kjrum (1994: 319). A transitional group (protoDilmun type) can be also identified on iconographic/
stylistic grounds, with motifs characteristic of the
Mature Dilmun glyptic and the style of the engraving
still related to the Arabian Gulf series; some scholars
have pointed out the unusual back of these seals,
with shape and decoration not yet standardized (i.e.
Beyer 1989: 137; Potts 1990: 168). However, Kjrum

5.

6.
7.

247

has recently shown that no less than 57% of the

proto-Dilmun stamps had the reverse ornament
identical to the later group, the only definite criterion being the stylistic one (1994: 345).
The archaeological context of most of the seals from
the Danish excavations at Failaka F3 and F6 is quite
difficult to establish on the base of the absolute level
and square/trench references. In some cases it is possible to use the information given in the pottery publication (Hjlund 1987: 130-137) but the results seem
to be uncertain and debatable; however, in general,
the distribution of Dilmun stamp seals in relation to
the absolute level shows their continuity till Period
4A (i.e. the specimens from F3 Trench D above level
7.00: Kjrum 1983: nos. 18, 94, 175, 189, 230, 257). For
an updated evaluation of the Failaka sequence see
now Hjlund & Andersen 1994: 173, 197; cf. also Hjlund 1989: Fig. 1.
The date of these productions is still controversial:
Denton has suggested, starting from the evidence
from cemeteries at al-Maqsha, al-Hajjar and Hamad
Town, a possible initial dating for the Style III seals
to the middle/late Old Babylonian period, trying also
to reduce the presumed gap between Qalaat period
IIc and IIIa (Denton 1997; 1999); Kjrum seems to
connect this style with Failaka 3A-B periods (Kjrum
1994: 348, Fig. 1758); the writer prefers to date this
group to 1650/1600-1400/1350 BC (Failaka 3B-4A),
exploring a direct Kassite influence in cultural and
artistic meanings of glyptic representation; during
the late Old Babylonian period this was instead elaborated into the style II type, related to monofacial
and bifacial specimens with a characteristic drilled
style (Peyronel 1997).
As regards Mesopotamian periodisation, the work of
Gasche proposing a revision of the traditional middle chronology with dates ca. one hundred years
lower has recently raised new questions on the effectiveness of Near Eastern conventional chronological framework (Gasche et al. 1998).
On the introduction/presentation scene see Franke
1977; Winter 1986; Haussperger 1991.
A sort of introduction scene could perhaps be identified on one or two seals from Failaka (Kjrum 1983:
nos. 96, 132), completely emptied of Mesopotamian
canonical figurative parameters; several specimens
show crescent or sun-crescent standards with bullmen or human figures apparently worshipping
these symbols (holding or stretching the arms towards the standard). Similar standards are known in
the Mesopotamian glyptic of the Isin-Larsa and Old
Babylonian periods, albeit never attested in the same
kind of relations with human or divine personages
(cf. Collon 1986: nos. 110, 143, 279-280, 284, 314-315,
556, 623). On the contrary more direct parallels can
be drawn for style II and especially for style III seals,
which show i.e. worshippers, suppliant goddess, bald
priests, cuneiform signs or pseudo-writing symbols,
standards, with an almost complete dominance of the
human/divine world (in the style III) in a changed
way of artistic/cultural communication (Peyronel

1997).
8. However, it must be remembered that the zenith of
Indus Civilisation should be dated to 2400-2000 B.C.,
whereas the phenomenon of a sharp localisation during the first centuries of the 2nd millennium B.C.
drastically reduced the trade relations towards the
West and across the Indian Ocean (cf. Kenoyer 1991;
Shaffer 1992; Jansen 1993).
9. The wide web of intercultural contacts during the
second half of the 3rd millennium B.C. is well attested, for example, by the distribution of chlorite carved
vessels (Lamberg-Karlovsky 1988) and by imports or
objects with Harappan influence in Mesopotamia (i.e.
square or circular stamp seals, etched carnelian
beads, weights, clay figurines, dice, kidney-shaped
inlays) (Possehl 1996). If it is very likely that some
people from Melua had settled in the alluvium
(Brunswig, Parpola & Parpola 1977), but it is much
more difficult to establish the presence of Mesopotamians in the Indus Valley on the basis of presumed
Near Eastern cultural traits in a handful of objects
from Harappan cities (see, however, During Caspers
1971; 1972; 1979; 1982).
10. Some scholars have suggested that the Amorite ethnic element was a key factor in the rise of the Dilmun
State at the beginning of the 2nd millennium B.C.
(Hjlund 1989; 1993). Direct contact with the Syrian
kingdoms are still elusive: the only evidence so far
comes from Mari, where some cuneiform texts attest
to diplomatic contact between Mari, Shubat-Enlil
and Dilmun during the reign of Shamshi-Adad
(Groneberg 1992; Eidem & Hjlund 1993: 442-444; van
Koppen 1997).
11. The Harappan roots of the Dilmunite glyptic can still
be recognised in the multiple parallel lines of the
animals necks, and in the fact that the bull is usually
placed in the lower part of the seal, and in the motif
of the water-carrier which probably derived from an
Indus sign.
12. Male naked figure: Kjrum 1983: nos. 185-186, 274; alSindi 1994: nos. 19, 23; Male garbed figure: al-Sindi
1994: nos. 18, 20.
13. Kjrum 1983: nos. 81, 212; al-Sindi 1994: nos. 24, 5758. On Kjrum 1983: no. 81, two peculiar gods are
holding the forelegs of a double gazelle with jointed
backs.
14. Kjrum 1983: nos. 185-186; al-Sindi 1994: nos. 17-18,
23, 57-58.
15. Kjrum 1983: nos. 185-186; al-Sindi 1994: nos. 17-20.
On al-Sindi 1994: no. 23, the god is depicted holding a
cup in his raised hand.
16. All the specimens except for Kjrum 1983: no. 212
[Fig. 2c], where the god is standing and holds two opposed gazelles from the neck.
17. Drinking figures are attested on more than 40 stamp
seals: they are naked or garbed, sitting or standing,
and drink from separate or common jars with long
straight or sometimes curved straws. We can single
out a true symposium scene or drinking iconography as part of a more articulated figurative pattern.
See Kjrum 1983: nos. 95, 100, 158, 170-179, 181, 182,

18.
19.

20.

21.

22.
23.

24.

248

184-186, 188-189, 199, 207; Beyer 1986: nos. 167-168

(Failaka); al-Sindi 1994: nos. 9, 12, 18-22, 222; Crawford & Woodburn 1994: Fig. 19 (Bahrain); Peyronel
2000: nos. 4.13, 4.15 (Ur).
Barrelet 1968: Pls. 50 no. 527, 63 no. 675, 71 no. 744;
Opificius 1961: 166-168, nos. 604-614.
Kjrum 1983: nos. 269-270; al-Sindi 1994: nos. 221226; Crawford & Matthews 1995: 57 no. 20. Seals depicting a sexual act are quite rare in Dilmun (two examples from Failaka and seven from Bahrain); we can
also include in this group two interesting specimens
(from Ur and from the Erlenmeyer collection) with
the female figure represented in the same posture as
the erotic scenes (Peyronel 2000: no. 4.13; Erlenmeyer
& Erlenmeyer 1966: Figs. 17-18). We can distinguish
two basic figurative patterns: the first with the
women bent down with the body parallel to the
ground line and with the phallic man behind her,
representing coitus a tergo (Kjrum 1983: no. 269; cf.
also Peyronel 2000: no. 4.13); the second more common with the usually nude (in one case garbed)
phallic man standing in front of the woman, who has
widely spread legs and hands on feet. The last motif
appears less realistic but it gives a better lay-out on
the stamp seals, where the womens bodies form a
triangular space delimited by arms and legs opposed
to the axiality of the male figures. In Kjrums opinion (1994: 331) it represents a coitus with the woman
in a superior position, but this hypothesis seems to be
contradict by the fact that the man is standing on a
podium in the Qalaat example (as Kjrum himself
pointed out correctly) and by men holding gatesymbols, which again suggest a free-standing posture. We would like to emphasise that the findspot of
3 out of the 9 specimens can be related to sacred
buildings (Barbar, Saar Temple, Failaka F3), like most
of the clay moulded plaques from the Old Babylonian
period in Mesopotamia, suggesting a possible link
with ritual involving sacred prostitution (see Pinnock
1996: 2528-2529).
Buchanan 1966: nos. 841-843; 1981: no. 1175; Teissier
1984: nos. 352-359; 1994: nos. 322-327, 517-520. It
must be underlined that on these seals only one personage is drinking and that the straw is always of the
curved-type.
A differentiated pantheon can be singled out in artistic production from the very end of the Early Dynastic III period and during the Akkadian period (cf.
Amiet 1980; Boehmer 1986; Lambert 1997; for the
previous periods see Amiet 1986). For deities in the
Old Babylonian glyptic see now Braun-Holzinger
1996.
Several temples are identified on Bahrain (Barbar,
Diraz, Saar) and Failaka (F3 and F6) (cf. Hjlund 1992;
Peyronel 2003).
Nashef 1984: 7-8. On the controversial location of
Agarum and the relation between Dilmun and Agarum see Glassner 1984: 47-48; Nashef 1984: 1, 11, nn.
4-4a.
Another seal (Kjrum 1983: no. 54, cf. infra) shows a
naked figure and a branch within a rectangular

25.

26.

27.

28.
29.

30.
31.
32.
33.

34.

shrine, surmounted by a sun-crescent and flanked

by horned dragons and garbed seated figures. This
peculiar religious scene could suggest a divine character of the personage inside the temple-niche and,
therefore, a link between a Dilmunite god and the
schematic plant.
It is possible that one of Inzaks symbols could have
been a date-palm branch, but there is no sure proof
of this sense. The only piece of evidence is the socalled Durand stone from Bahrain engraved with the
inscription palace of Rimum, servant of Inzak of Agarum close to a incised schematic branch (Butz 1983).
Nashefs claim of a seal with a legend bearing a dedication to Enki together with a date-palm branch
(Kjrum 1983: no. 350) was rejected by J-J. Glassner,
who read the cuneiform signs a-na dPA-NI-PA (Nashef
1984: no. 16, contra Glassner 1984: no. 5).
Failaka: Kjrum 1983: nos. 51, 70, 93, 115-119, 121122, 133, 141-142, 166-167, 208, 247-249, 261, 273, 276,
282; Beyer 1986: nos. 170, 173; Pic 1990: no. 14; Bahrain: al-Sindi 1994: nos. 115-117, 254; Ur: Peyronel
2000: no. 4.14.
Gazelle: Kjrum 1983: nos. 121, 276; bull: Kjrum 1983:
no. 249; al-Sindi 1994: no. 254; bucranium: Kjrum
1983: no. 93; snake: Kjrum 1983: no. 122; Beyer 1986:
no. 173; composite animal: Kjrum 1983: no. 273.
Antelope: Kjrum 1983: no. 261; al-Sindi 1994: no. 116;
bull: Kjrum 1983: nos. 115, 122.
Hatched podium: Kjrum 1983: nos. 70, 248; gate with
symbols: Kjrum 1983: no. 51; standards: Kjrum 1983:
nos. 115-118, 141; Beyer 1986: no. 170; Pic 1990: no. 14;
al-Sindi 1994: nos. 115-117; offering table: Kjrum
1983: no. 166; branch: Kjrum 1983: nos. 142, 167.
Kjrum 1983: nos. 51, 115-119, 121-122, 141-142, 166,
167, 273, 276; Beyer 1986: no. 170; Pic 1990: no. 14; alSindi 1994: nos. 115-117.
Kjrum 1983: nos. 70, 133, 247-249, Beyer 1986: no.
173; Peyronel 2000: no. 4.14; al-Sindi 1994: no. 254.
Kjrum 1983: nos. 93, 208, 261.
Several elements underline this ritual function: animals placed on altars/podia or at each sides of standards, animals touched/grasped by gods, animals
surmounted by astral symbols. Moreover, the bucranium, which occur on more than 30 seals (Kjrum
1983: nos. 13, 68-69, 72, 75, 86, 93, 117, 150, 154, 174,
176, 184, 206, 258, 296), has certainly a symbolic value
linked with local cult (Kjrum 1986: 273). The motif
has no parallel in Mesopotamian glyptic and resembles only in a general way the bull-heads from Cappadocian and Old Syrian glyptic (cf. Otto 2000: 264).
Kjrum (1994: 333-334) considers the shield-like
object (visible on more than 50 stamp seals from
Failaka and Bahrain) as a symbol of the schematic sacred gate: this assumption is based on two seals
where it is represented on both sides of a standing
garbed man or placed standing on an element of the
same shape (Kjrum 1983: nos. 66-67). Other scholars
maintain the shield-hypothesis (Hallo & Buchanan
1965: 205, n. 16; Porada 1971: 337; Beyer 1989: 147,
150), especially in the case of objects which are taller
and plain (called by Kjrum notched podia; cf. Kj-

35.

36.

37.
38.

39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.

45.

46.

47.

249

rum 1983: nos. 75-76; al-Sindi 1994: nos. 209-210). In

our opinion the earlier glyptic material from Bahrain
seems to confirm the latter claim, although it is quite
reasonable to consider the object as ritual/ceremonial equipment released from any war-like connotation.
Another god which appears inside a sacred structure
is Enki/Ea, identified by streams of water around his
shrine or enthroned and flanked by nude heroes
holding gate-posts (Boehmer 1965: nos. 488-489, 500501, 518-520, 522-523; Barrelet 1970). Since Enkis cult
might be attested to in Dilmun, we cannot exclude a
connection between the deity of the Abzu and the
presumed shrines of stamp seals.
Kjrum 1983: nos. 43, 44, 120, 143-144, 304, 307; Pic
1990: no. 21. Finally, an Old Babylonian cylinder seal
with a contest scene formed by three pair of figures,
among which is a bull-man fighting against a rampant lion, represents direct evidence for the transmission of the iconography to the land of Dilmun
(Kjrum 1983: no. 374).
See the still enlightening discussion on the problem
in Frankfort 1939: 62-67.
See i.e. Porada 1947: nos. 370, 384, 421; Collon 1986:
41, nos. 21, 89, 144, 152, 155, 379, 460. For similar subjects on terracotta plaques cf. Opificius 1961: nos. 402420.
Cf. Teissier 1994: nos. 136-139, 145-147, 156, 190 (Old
Assyrian), 586, 615, 632, 636-639, 641, 643 (Old Babylonian).
Cf. zg 1965: Pls. I.1, II.7, XV.46, XIX.56, XX.61,
XXI.63, XXVI.78; Teissier 1994: nos. 330-331, 335, 342,
349.
Cf. in particular von der Osten 1937: Fig. 250.d745
(Alishar); zg 1980: 75, Fig. III.41 (Acemhyk).
Cf. Teissier 1994: nos. 467, 478-481, 496-500, 502-503,
508, 525, 529b, 531, 541-542, 546-547, 550, 551-554,
564-566.
See i.e. Collon 1981: nos. 12-13, 21; Buchanan 1981:
nos. 1202, 1239; Teissier 1984: no. 543.
Simple dots: Kjrum 1983: no. 163; flat breads and fish:
Kjrum no. 165; bird: Kjrum no. 166; astral symbols:
Kjrum nos. 167, 169; low hatched podium?: Pic 1990:
no. 12.
The evidence from carved reliefs includes two stelae
from Hama and Furayjah (Pinnock 1992: 110-112),
two ritual basins from temples B1 and D at Ebla (Matthiae, Pinnock & Scandone Matthiae 1995: nos. 290291), and the so-called ivory talisman from the
Tomb of the Lord of the Goats at Ebla (Matthiae,
Pinnock, Scandone Matthiae 1995: no. 470).
Cf. Teissier 1984: nos. 350-353, 359, 361 (Archaic Old
Syrian), 400, 416, 417, 418, 427 (Syro-Cappadocian),
459, 462, 464 (Mature Old Syrian); 1994: nos. 96, 192,
209, 219, 241, 269 (Old Assyrian group), 290, 291, 305,
320-322, 328, 331, 336, 347-348 (Anatolian), 466, 491,
515, 518, 541, 551 (Syro-Cappadocian), 586, 593-594,
626 (Babylonian Provincial).
Kjrum (1986: 272, n. 27) has pointed out a unique
tablet in the Yale Babylonian Collection with a seal
impression belonging to Akalla, ensi of Umma under

ology and Early History of Bahrain. (BBVO 2). Berlin.

Collon, D. 1981. The Aleppo Workshop. Ugarit-Forschungen 13: 3343.
. 1982. Catalogue of the Western Asiatic Seals in the British
Museum. Cylinder Seals II: Akkad, Post-Akkadian and Ur III Periods.
London.
. 1986. Catalogue of the Western Asiatic Seals in the British
Museum. Cylinder Seals III: Isin-Larsa and Old Babylonian Periods.
London.
. 1987. First Impressions. Cylinder Seals in the Ancient Near East.
London.
Crawford, H. & R. Matthews. 1995. Seals and Sealings: Fragments
of Art and Administration. Pp. 47-58 in H. Crawford, R. Killick
& J. Moon (eds) The Dilmun Temple at Saar. Bahrain and its Archaeological Inheritance. London.
Crawford, H. & M. Woodburn. 1994. London-Bahrain Archaeological Expedition: 1991-2 Excavations at Saar. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 5: 89-105.
Denton, B.E. 1994. Pottery, Cylinder Seals, and Stone Vessels
from the Cemeteries of al-Hajjar, al-Maqsha and Hamad
Town. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 5: 121-151.
. 1997. Style III Seals from Bahrain. Arabian Archaeology
and Epigraphy 8: 174-189.
. 1999. More Pottery, Seals and a face-pendant from
Cemeteries on Bahrain. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 10:
134-160.
During Caspers, E.C.L. 1971. New Archaeological Evidence for
Maritime Trade in the Persian Gulf during the Late Protoliterate Period. East and West 21: 21-44.
. 1972. Harappan Trade in the Arabian Gulf in the Third
Mill. B.C. Mesopotamia VII: 167-191.
. 1979. Sumer, Coastal Arabia and the Indus Valley in the
Protoliterate and Early Dynastic Eras. Journal of Economic and
Social History of the Orient XXII: 121-135.
. 1982. Sumerian Trade and Businessmen Residing in the
Indus Valley Cities: A Critical Assessment of the Archaeological Evidence. Annali dIstituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli 42:
337-380.
Erlenmeyer, H. & M.-L. Erlenmeyer. 1966. ber Beziehungen des
Alten Orients zu den Frhindischen Stadtkulturen. Archiv fr
Orientforschung 21: 21-31.
Eidem, J. & F. Hjlund. 1993. Trade or Diplomacy? Assyria and
Dilmun in the Eighteenth Century B.C. World Archaeology 24:
441-448.
Franke, J.A. 1977. Presentation Seals of the Ur III/Isin-Larsa
Period. Pp. 15-23 in R.D. Biggs & McG. Gibson (eds) Seals and
Sealing in the Ancient Near East. (BiMes 7). Malibu.
Gadd, C.J. 1932. Seals of Ancient Indian Style Found at Ur. Proceedings of the British Academy XVIII: 191-210.
Gasche, H., J.A. Armstrong, S. Cole & V. Gurzadyan. 1998. Dating
the Fall of Babylon. A Reappraisal of Second-Millennium Chronology.
(MHEM 4). Ghent & Chicago.
Glassner, J-J. 1984. Inscriptions cuniformes de Failaka. Pp. 31-50
in J.-F. Salles (ed) Failaka. Fouilles Franaises 1983. (TMO 9). Lyon.
. 1996. Dilmun, Magan and Meluhha: Some Observations on
Language, Toponymy, Anthroponymy and Theonymy. Pp.
235-248 in J. Reade (ed) The Indian Ocean in Antiquity. London.
Glob, P.V. 1954. Bahrain, Island of the Hundred Thousand Burial
Mounds. Kuml 1954: 92-105.
. 1959. Archaeological Investigations in Four Arab States.
Kuml 1959: 238-239.
de Graeve, M.-C. 1982. A Drinking Scene on a Late Akkadian Seal.
Pp. 17-24 in J. Quaegebeur (ed) Studia Paulo Naster Oblata II: Orientalia Antiqua. (OLA 13). Leuven.
Groneberg, B. 1992. Mari et le Golfe Arabico-Persique. Pp. 69-80
in J.-M. Durand (ed) Florilegium Marianum. Recueil dtudes en
l'honneur de Michel Fleury. (Mmoires de N.A.B.U. 1). Paris.
Hallo, W.W. & B. Buchanan. 1965. A Persian Gulf Seal on an Old

the reign of Ibbi-Sin of Ur (Buchanan 1981: no. 652).

We can add one Elamite sealing from the same collection (Buchanan 1981: no. 1093A) and three postAkkadian/Ur III seals from the British Museum (Collon 1982: nos. 299, 415, 428).
48. Cf. Otto 2000: 265 and for some examples Porada 1948:
nos. 913, 915, 944; Buchanan 1966: no. 856; Teissier
1984: nos. 459, 464.
References
Afanasyeva, V.K. 1971. Gilgame and Enkidu in Glyptic Art and in
the Epic. Klio 53: 60-75.
Alp, S. 1968. Zylinder und Stempelsiegel aus Karahyk bei Konya.
Ankara.
Alster, B. 1983. Dilmun, Bahrain and the Alleged Paradise in
Sumerian Myth and Literature. Pp. 39-74 in D.T. Potts (ed)
Dilmun. New Studies in the Archaeology and Early History of Bahrain. (BBVO 2). Berlin.
Amiet, P. 1960. Notes sur le rpertoire iconographique de Mari
lpoque du palais. Syria 37: 215-232.
. 1972. Glyptique Susienne. Des origines lpoque des Perses
Achmnides. (MDAI 43). Paris.
. 1980. The Mythological Repertoire in Cylinder Seals of
the Agade Period. Pp. 35-60 in E. Porada (ed) Ancient Art in
Seals. Princeton.
. 1986. Le problme de liconographie divine en Msopotamie dans la glyptique antrieure lpoque dAgad. Contributi
e Materiali di Archeologia Orientale 1: 1-66.
Barrelet, M.T. 1954. Figurines et reliefs en terre cuite de la Msopotamie antique. Paris.
. 1970. Etude de glyptique akkadienne. Limagination figurative et le cycle dEa. Orientalia 39: 213-251.
Beyer, D. 1986. Les sceaux. Pp. 89-103 in Y. Calvet & J.-F. Salles
(eds) Failaka. Fouilles Franaises 1984-1985. (TMO 12). Lyon.
. 1989. The Bahrein Seals (Early Dilmun Period to Tylos
Period). Pp. 135-166 in P. Lombard & M. Kervran (eds) National
Museum Archaeological Collections. Vol. 1: A Selection of Pre-Islamic
Antiquities from the Excavations 1954-1975. Manama.
Bibby, T.G. 1957. The Hundred-Metre Section. Kuml 1957: 128-163.
. 1958. The Ancient Indian Style Seals from Bahrain.
Antiquity 32: 243-244.
Boehmer, R.M. 1965. Die Entwicklung der Glyptik whrend der Akkad-Zeit. (UAVA 4). Berlin.
. 1986. Einflsse der Golfglyptik auf die Anatolische Stempelglyptik zur Zeit der Assyrischen Handelniederlassungen.
Bagdhader Mitteilungen 17: 292-298.
Boehmer, R.M. & H. Gterbock. 1987. Die Glyptik von Bazky. Vol.
2: Die Glyptik aus dem Stadtgebiet von Boazky 1931-1939, 19521978. Berlin.
Braun-Holzinger, E.A. 1996. Altbabylonischen Gtter und ihre
Symbole Benennung mit Hilfe der Siegellegenden. Baghdader
Mitteilungen 27: 235-362.
Brunswig, R.H., S. Parpola & A. Parpola. 1977. The Melua
Village: Evidence of Acculturation of Harappan Traders in
Late Third Millennium Mesopotamia? Journal of Economic and
Social History of the Orient XX: 129-165.
Buchanan, B. 1966. Catalogue of the Ancient Near Eastern Seals in the
Ashmolean Museum. Vol. I: Cylinder Seals. Oxford.
. 1967. A Dated Seal Impression Connecting Babylonia and
Ancient India. Archaeology 20: 104-107.
. 1981. Early Near Eastern Seals in the Yale Babylonian Collection. New Haven.
van Buren, E.D. 1947. The Guardians of the Gate in the Akkadian
Period. Orientalia 16: 312-332.
Butz, K. 1983. Zwei kleine Inschriften zur Geschichte Dilmuns.
Pp. 117-126 in D.T. Potts (ed) Dilmun. New Studies in the Archae-

250

Babylonian Mercantile Agreement. Pp. 199-209 in H.G. Gterbock & T. Jacobsen (eds) Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger
on his Seventy-Fifth Birthday April 21, 1965. (AS 16). Chicago.
Haussperger, M. 1991. Die Einfhrungsszene. Entwicklung eines
mesopotamischen Motivs von der altakkadischen bis zum Ende der
altbabylonischen Zeit. (Mnschener Vorderasiatische Studien
XI). Munich & Vienna.
Hjlund, F. 1987. Failaka/Dilmun: the Second Millenium Settlements.
Vol. 2: The Bronze Age Pottery. (JASP XXVII:2). Munskgaard.
. 1989a. The Formation of the Dilmun State and the Amorite Tribes. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 19: 4564.
. 1989b. Some New Evidence of Harappan Influence in the
Arabian Gulf. Pp. 49-53 in K. Frifelt & P. Srensen (eds) South
Asian Archaeology 1985. (SIAS OP 4). London.
. 1992. Holy Architecture in Bronze Age Bahrain. Dilmun 15:
73-79.
. 1993. The Ethnic Composition of the Population of Dilmun. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 23: 45-53.
Hjlund, F. & H.H. Andersen (eds). 1994. Qalaat al-Bahrain. Vol. 1:
The Northern City Wall and the Islamic Fortress. (JASP XXX:1).
Munskgaard.
Jansen, M. 1993. Pre-, Proto-, Early-, Mature-, Urban-, Late-,
Post-Harappan: Linearity, Multi-Linearity: Babylonian Language Confusion or Ideological Dispute? Pp. 135-148 in A.J.
Gail & G.J.R. Mevissen (eds) South Asian Archaeology 1991. Stuttgart.
Karg, N. 1984. Untersuchungen zur lteren frhdynastichen Glyptik
Babyloniens. Mainz.
Kenoyer, J.M. 1991. The Indus Valley Tradition of Pakistan and
Western India. Journal of World Prehistory 5: 331-385.
Kjrum, P. 1980. Seals of Dilmun-Type from Failaka, Kuwait.
Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 10: 45-54.
. 1983. Failaka/Dilmun. The Second Millennium Settlements. Vol.
1: The Stamp and Cylinder Seals. (JASP XXVII:1). Munskgaard.
. 1986. The Dilmun Seals as Evidence of Long-Distance
Relations in the Early Second Millennium B.C. Pp. 269-277 in
Shaikha H.A. Al-Khalifa & M. Rice (eds) Bahrain through the
Ages: The Archaeology. London.
. 1994. Stamp-seals. Pp. 319-350 in F. Hjlund & H.H. Andersen (eds) Qalaat al-Bahrain. Vol. 1: The Northern City Wall and
the Islamic Fortress. (JASP XXX:1). Munskgaard.
van Koppen, F. 1997. Lexpdition Tilmun et la rvolte des
bdouins. M.A.R.I. 8: 417-429.
Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C. 1988. The Intercultural Style Carved
Vessels. Iranica Antiqua 23: 45-73.
Lambert, W.G. 1987. Gilgamesh in Literature and Art: The Second and First Millennia. Pp. 37-52 in A.E. Farkas (ed) Monsters
and Demons in the Ancient and Medieval Worlds. Papers Presented
in Honor of Edith Porada. Mainz am Rhein.
. 1997. Sumerian Gods: Combining the Evidence of Texts
and Art. Pp. 1-10 in I.L. Finkel & M.J. Geller (eds) Sumerian Gods
and their Representations. (Cuneiform Monographs, 7). Groningen.
Leemans, W.F. 1960. Foreign Trade in Old-Babylonian Period. Leiden.
. 1968. Old Babylonian Letters and Economic History. Journal for the Economic and Social History of the Orient XI: 171-226.
Leinwand, N. 1992. Regional Characteristics in the Styles and
Iconography of the Seal Impressions of Liv. II at Kultepe. Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society XXI: 141-172.
Matthiae, P. 1987. Una stele paleosiriana arcaica da Ebla e la
cultura figurativa della Siria attorno al 1800 a.C. Sienze
dellAntichit 1: 447-495.
. 1989. Ebla. Un impero ritrovato. Dai primi scavi alle ultime
scoperte. Turin.
. 1994. Old Syrian Basalt Furniture from Ebla Palaces and
Temples. Pp. 167-177 in P. Calmeyer, K. Hecker, L. Jakob-Rost
& C.B.F. Walker (eds) Beitrge zur Altorientalischen Archologie
und Altertumskunde. Festschrift fr Barthel Hrouda zum 65. Geburt-

stag. Wiesbaden.
Matthiae, P., F. Pinnock & G. Scandone Matthiae (eds) 1995. Ebla.
Alle origini della civilt urbana. Trenta anni di scavi in Siria
dellUniversit di Roma La Sapienza. Milan.
Moortgat, A. 1940. Tammuz: der Unsterblichkeitsglaube in der altorientalischen Bildkunst. Berlin.
Nashef, K. 1984. The Deities of Dilmun. Akkadica 38: 1-33.
Opificius, R. 1961. Das altbabylonische Terrakottarelief. (UAVA 2).
Berlin.
Oppenheim, A.L. 1954. The Seafaring Merchants of Ur. Journal of
the American Oriental Society 74: 6-17.
von der Osten, H.H. 1937. The Alishar Hyk. Season of 1930-32. Part
III. (OIP 28) Chicago.
Otto, A. 2000. Die Entstehung und Entwicklung der Klassisch-Syrische
Glyptik. (UAVA 8). Berlin & New York.
zg, N. 1965. The Anatolian Group of Cylinder Impressions from
Kltepe. (Trk Tarh Kurumu, Series V/22). Ankara.
. 1968. Seal and Seal Impressions of Level Ib from Karum Kanish
(Trk Tarh Kurumu, Series V/25). Ankara.
. 1980. Seal Impressions from the Palaces at Acemhyk.
Pp. 61-100 in E. Porada (ed) Ancient Art and Seals. Princeton.
. 1991. The Composite Creatures in Anatolian Art During
the Period of Assyrian Trading Colonies. Pp. 293-317 in M.
Mori, H. Ogawa & M. Yoshikawa (eds) Near Eastern Studies Dedicated to H.I.H. Prince Takahito Mikasa on the Occasion of His Seventy-Fifth Birthday. Wiesbaden.
Parpola, A. 1994. Harappan Inscriptions. Pp. 304-315 in F.
Hjlund & H.H. Andersen (eds) Qalaat al-Bahrain. Vol. 1: The
Northern City Wall and the Islamic Fortress. (JASP XXX:1). Munskgaard.
Peyronel, L. 1997. La glittica a stampo dilmunita in et paleobabilonese classica e cassita. Contributi e Materiali di Archeologia
Orientale 7: 407-435.
. 2000. Sigilli harappani e dilmuniti dalla Mesopotamia e
dalla Susiana. Note sul commercio nel Golfo Arabo-Persico tra
III e II Mill. a.C. Vicino Oriente 12: 175-240.
. 2003. Larchitettura sacra del Paese di Dilmun. I luoghi di
culto nel Golfo Arabo-Persico dellEt del Bronzo. Contributi e
Materiali di Archeologia Orientale 9: 269-338.
Pic, M. 1990. Quelques lments de glyptique. Pp. 125-140 in Y.
Calvet & J. Gachet (eds) Failaka. Fouilles Franaises 1986-1988.
(TMO 18). Lyon.
Pinnock, F. 1992. Una riconsiderazione della stele di Hama
6B599. Contributi e Materiali di Archeologia Orientale 4: 101-121.
. 1994. Consideration on the Banquet Theme in the Figurative Art of Mesopotamia and Syria. Pp. 15-26 in L. Milano
(ed) Drinking in Ancient Societies. History and Culture of Drinks in
the Ancient Near East. Padua.
. 1996. Erotic Art in the Near East. Pp. 2521-2531 in J.M.
Sasson (ed) Civilizations of the Ancient Near East (4 volumes).
New York.
. 2000. Some Thoughts about the Transmission of Iconographies between North Syria and Cappadocia, End of the
Third-Beginning of the Second Millennium B.C. Pp. 1397-1416
in P. Matthiae, A. Enea, L. Peyronel & F. Pinnock (eds) Proceedings of the First International Congress on the Archaeology of
the Ancient Near East. Rome.
Porada, E. 1948. Corpus of Ancient Near Eastern Seals in North American Collection. Vol. 1: The Collection of the Pierpont Morgan Library.
(Bollinger Series 14). Washington.
. 1971. Remarks on Seals Found in the Gulf States. Artibus
Asiae 33: 331-338.
Possehl, G.L. 1996. Meluhha. Pp. 133-208 in J. Reade (ed) The
Indian Ocean in Antiquity. London.
Potts, D.T. 1990. The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity. Vol. I: From Prehistory
to the Fall of the Achaemenid Empire. Oxford.
Selz, G. 1983. Die Bankettszene. Entwicklung eines berzeitlichen
Bildmotifs in Mesopotamien von der frhdynastischen bis zur Akkad-Zeit. (Freiburger altorientalische Studien, Bd. 11). Wies-

251

baden.
Shaffer, J.G. 1992. The Indus Valley, Baluchistan and Helmand
Traditions: Neolithic Through Bronze Age. Pp. 441-464 in R.
Ehrich (ed) Chronologies in Old World Archaeology. Third edition.
Chicago.
al-Sindi, K.M. 1994. The Dilmun Seals in the Bahrain National Museum [in Arabic]. Manama.
Teissier, B. 1984. Ancient Near Eastern Cylinder Seals from the Marcopoli Collection. Los Angeles.
. 1994. Sealing and Seals on Texts from Kltepe karum Level 2.
(PIHANS 70). Leiden & Istanbul.
Winter, I.J. 1986. The King and the Cup: Iconography of the
Royal Presentation Scene on Ur III Seals. Pp. 253-268 in M.
Kelly-Buccellati, P. Matthiae & M. Van Loon (eds) Insight
through Images. Studies in Honor of Edith Porada. (BiMes 21).
Malibu.

L. PEYRONEL,
Italian Archaeological Mission to Ebla,
Via Palestro 63,
I-00185 Rome,
Italy.
luca.peyronel@iulm.it

252