comparison with Palace ‘A’ at Kish. The plan of this building is not known in its
entirety, and its functions are not fully understood: if the unit stretching behind the
west side of the open space really had a ceremonial function, there would be a further
similarity in the position, but not in the shape, of the main reception unit. These
similarities, of course, do not concern the basic concept of the two palaces, which are
completely different, but only some element of the general layout (Matthiae 1982 : 113 ).
Nowadays, more exact comparisons were recently proposed by P. Matthiae with the
palaces of Tell Khuera and of Tell Bi’a/Tuttul (Strommenger and Kohlmeyer 2000 :
Beilage I; Matthiae 2010 a: 77 – 78 , 2010 c), the wide open courts are missing, but small
inner courts were identified. Probable ceremonial suites open onto these courts, and
they look quite similar to the Eblaic sector pivoting on the inner court of the
Administrative Quarter. There are also parallels for the presence of small rooms
communicating with the presumed throne rooms. Moreover, the court of the Tuttul
palace, of which only a small stretch is preserved, also features the shallow furrow in
the floor, which in the Eblaic palace marks the outer edge of the porch, and probably
hosted a light balustrade.
THE REMAINS OF THE EARLY SYRIAN TOWNIn the Northern Lower Town was found a large part of a building devoted to handicraft
production and food processing, contemporary with Palace G, and possibly related to
–– E b l a ––Figure 28.8
Reconstruction of the
maliktum’s standard,
from the Royal
Palace G, Early
Bronze IVA
(© Missione
Archeologica Italiana
in Siria)