southern Mesopotamia, as evidenced by the fragments of a carved stele from the temple
in antisat Halawa Tell A, whose layout in registers and images of animal motifs and
human worshippers compares favourably with the established canon of sculptural
representation from Early Dynastic Sumer (Orthmann 1985 : 471 ). Nevertheless, subtle
differences in the Syrian compositions – for example, the Halawa stele presents a female
animal bearer, not a male, the standard representation in southern Mesopotamia – may
indicate somewhat different beliefs about the roles and responsibilities of gods, men and
women in the sphere of religion and sacred ritual (Orthmann 1985 : 470 – 471 ; Cooper
2006 : 154 ).
c) Funerary traditions and social structures. The distinctive funerary practices of the
Euphrates River Valley during the Early Bronze Age reflect a somewhat divergent
system of beliefs about death and the afterlife. They also refer to different modes of
social organisation among the living compared to that which existed among the
Sumerians of southern Mesopotamia. The striking presence of monumental shaft and
chamber tombs in the Syrian Euphrates Valley and at Umm al-Marra is another
notable feature not seen in Sumer, these often located in prominent intramural
locations in settlements, and partially or wholly visible, drawing attention to their
importance even among the living members of the community (Peltenburg 1999 :
427 – 428 ). As already discussed, such funerary monuments probably served as the focal
points for the veneration of ancestors, another phenomenon that has been traditionally
linked to tribally organised pastoral societies, with their emphasis on kin-based descent
groups (Stein 2004 : 72 ). It is clear that such funerary traditions, which appear to reflect
the persistence of more corporate, lineage-based forms of social organisation in the
Euphrates Valley, stand in marked contrast to Sumerian society, which, during the
Early Dynastic period, saw many individuals in society increasingly removed from their
traditional family or kinship ties as they joined the workforces of the larger socio-
economic households – namely the palaces and temples – of their city-states (Pollock
1999 : 117 – 118 ).
d) Kingship. The evidence for corporate forms of social organisation in western Syria
and the middle Euphrates, and the dissemination of authority and decision-making
across a number of groups or individuals in a community rather than being
concentrated in the hands of one individual or a single authoritative group or class,
leads naturally to questions about the presence and nature of kingship. The Ebla texts
of the twenty-fourth century BCprovide good support for the presence of city rulers
and their royal lineage at that city, not to mention the physical presence of a royal
complex, grandiose Palace G, which served as the dwelling place of the Ebla king and
his royal household. The Ebla texts’ mention of still other cities and states in western
Syria and the middle Euphrates Valley which had kings does seem to indicate that
powerful individuals with some form of political authority over their territories existed,
at least during part of the third millennium BC. At the same time, we must be cautious
not to place too much confidence in the words of Ebla officials and scribes, who may
have had a different understanding of the political and social organisation of groups
distant from their own city-state (Cooper 2006 : 65 ).
Archaeologically, the discovery of elite contexts, especially monumental, richly
furnished tombs, suggests that certain individuals or families were able to amass
considerable wealth and resources for themselves within their communities and that
such affluence may have translated into political authority as well. On the other hand,
–– Lisa Cooper ––