Mesopotamia as a crucial, well-defined locus of research; for example, early farming
at Tell Hassuna, the cultural sequence at Nineveh. But it was not until the 1970 s, with
excavations at Tell Leilan and Tell Brak, that the third millennium BCoccupation came
into sharper focus. Even then, that focus remained on the large mounds of the Upper
Khabur. By then, the history of Mesopotamia had been written, with a southern and
textual emphasis. The independent fourth millennium BCurbanism of northern
Mesopotamia is beginning to emerge from the long shadow thrown by Uruk, but its
third millennium BCdescendant remains underappreciated.
The best-known ancient Mesopotamian term for the north, Subartu (Sumerian
Shubir), was first recorded in the mid-third millennium BCin a literary text from Ebla
and a historical inscription of Eanatum of Lagash (Michalowski 1999 ; Sallaberger
2007 ). And the boundaries of Subartu were diffuse and changeable. Subartu may begin
as the geographic equivalent of later Assyria or the Upper Tigris and expanded to
encompass the Upper Khabur only under the Akkadian kings (Steinkeller 1998 ). Its
southern frontier presumably lay somewhere between Babylon and Ashur. But was this
frontier a thin line or a wide band, was it porous and flexible or impermeable and fixed?
Traditionally Subartu’s western edge is the Euphrates, but ceramic and other cultural
assemblages imply it should perhaps lie on the Balikh.
CHRONOLOGY AND CULTURAL LABELS
The history-derived labels of Sumer are inappropriate for northern Mesopotamia, but
there is not yet consensus on an alternate system. Early excavators developed a hybrid
that used some northern developments but borrowed from the south at points of
influence. Since the 1990 s, the ‘Early Jezirah’ sequence, based in ceramic assemblages
from key sites, has undergone several iterations and amendments. As with most
chronological sequences, transitions are problematic and correlation of levels at specific
sites is debated. (See Table 24. 1 and Kolinski 2007 ; Lebeau 2000 ; Pfälzner 1998 ; and
Pruβ 2004 for versions of this scheme.)
–– North Mesopotamia ––Table24.1Current approximate chronological label equivalencies, Sumer and NorthSouth Traditional N Mesopotamian N Mesopotamian Traditional
Mesopotamian labels Dates BC traditional labels new labels Dates BCJemdet Nasr 3000 – 2900 Ninevite 5 Early Jezirah 0 3000 – 2900
Early Dynastic I 2900 – 2600 Ninevite 5 Early Jezirah I 2900 – 2600
Early Dynastic II 2600 – 2500 Ninevite 5 Early Jezirah II 2600 – 2500
Early Dynastic III 2500 – 2334 Ninevite 5 /late Early Jezirah IIIa
(including A and B) Early Dynastic Early Jezirah IIIb 2500 – 2300
Akkadian 2334 – 2154 Northern Early Jezirah IV 2300 – 2150
Akkadian
Gutian 2192 – 2101 Post-Akkadian Early Jezirah IV–V
Ur III 2112 – 2004 Post-Akkadian/ Early Jezirah V 2150 – 2000
Ur III
Isin-Larsa 2017 – 1763 Post-Akkadian/ Old Jezirah I 2000 – 1850
Old Assyrian