Yeki Bud, Yeki Nabud

Essays on the Archaeology of Iran

In honor of William M. Sumner
Naomi F. Miller and Kamyar Abdi, eds.
The Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA
2003

CHAPTER 21

THE HASANLU GOLD "BOWL"

A Viewfrom Transcaucasia
KAREN S. RUBINSON

N
THE COUR5E OF EXCAVATION, precious

are occasionally

found that stimulate

objects

silver piece belonging

extensive discus-

on this problem

sion and study by virtue of their special, even unique,

nature.

Such

Hasanlu,

is the so-called

Iran in 1958 (Barrelet

liam Sumner's

career in Iranian

own, began at Hasanlu.

Gold

Bowl excavated

1984; Winter

1989).

archaeology,

This discussion

from

Iran and the silver goblet

at
Wil-

relationship

hoofed

and while even the chinless

caricatures

short-bearded

at

She further
Trialeti

suggested

goblet

Gold

the

the end of the

millennium
Since

or the beginning
these

earlier

sphere

the image is

by at least five hundred

years,

of this shared imagery

does not seem to be native to

but rather borrowed

particularly

from Anatolia,

in the Anatolian-style

example,

of this imagery

is a reflection

phenomenon

imagery

seals of the

known

to the Trialeti

of an economic
in other

times

the West Asian imagery,

cultural

exchange,

and places,

particularly

as, for

Sasanian,

found in Tang China (Vollmer et al. 1983:46--47,65,7073). But given the lack of contemporaneity

of the first (Winter

discoveries,

1992:39 [where

and

silver vessels and the Hasanlu

Bowl are separated

recorded

BCE.

the Gold Bowl is later, made either toward

1996:66; Shahnazarian

Assyrian colony period (Rubinson 1977:243, N.D.). It is likely

since the goblet was found in a burial dat1977:243) and

1989:90-92).

N.D.: 16; Tiratsian

Transcaucasia

by Hasanlu"

of the second millennium

the Karashamb

in both areas? The imagery

less accomplished."

1995:238; Rubinson

second

and San trot

that the transfer

(Miron and Orthmann

and

with

on them)

In addition,

what might explain the occurrence

We now know that the Tria1eti goblet is earlier than the

ing to the first few centuries

beardless.

Since the Transcaucasian

(Porada 1959:22).
Hasan1u "bowl,"

to their garments

(in this case with objects

in space, an image also found on the Hasanlu

Mkrtchian
reverscdj)

men seem like

influenced

in

1996:65-

animal feet, as well as figures with a similar kind of

suspended

in the bowl,

that the artists who produced

may "have been

stands

bowl (Pilipossian

of the ethnic type found on the bowl, the style

of the Caucasus vessel is stiffer, cruder,

at Karashamb

goblet has, in the third register, a group of daggers or swords

suggest some

as reflected

It is a goblet exca-

Kurgan

1992; Pilipossian and Santrot

stylized face, although

between the piece

and the hull's feet of the throne

with Hasaniu customs

available.

North

has human figures with tails attached

Ti-ialeti, in what is today the Republic of Georgia (figures

21.1-21.4). Porada (1959:22) remarked, "While certain details of costume and furniture such as the tail-like tassels of
the garments

(Oganesian

offering

by Edith

[rom the excavations

has become

the Grand

67). Like the other two vessels, the goblet from Karashamb

my

as well as

from

Armenia

is offered in recol-

lection of those days.

When the Gold Bowl was first published
Porada, she noted a few comparisons

vated

to the Trialeti culture that sheds light

culture

a further

and

manufacture,

237

the

Gold

economic

Bowl,

regardless

interchange

of the Tnaleti
of its date
cannot

of

be the

21.1

Detail of Hasanlu Gold "Bowl" showing offering table/altar.

Photograph courtesy"of the University

of PennsylsxmioMuseuui (neg. #835-78114:31)

21.2

Detail of Thaleti silver goblet showing offering table/altar. Photograph bX KS. Rubinson, with

permission

0/ the National

Museum cf Oecrgia
238

Karen

S.

Rubinson

21.3 Detailof Hasanlu Gold "Bowl"showing"hero" with aruma!tails suspended fromhis garment.
Photograph courtesy of the University of Pennsylvania Museum (neg. #535- 78113:0)
explanation in this case. Is it possible to suggest another
plausible explanation for how, as Burney (Burney and Lang
1972:95) puts it, the Trialeti culture imagery is "echoed"
in the Gold Bowl?
The ethnolinguistic and cultural context of the silver
vessels of the Trlalcti culture is not certain, since we have
no written documents from the area (Dzhaparidze 1995 :87).
The excavator made the case that the Karashamb goblet
displays tales of an Indo-European tradition, with the boar
hunt as the essential element, also found in myths of the
Greeks, Ger-mans, Scandinavians, Celts and others
(Oganesian 1992 :97-99). The boar hunt, however, is a subsidiary motif on this piece, much smaller than the two
central registers, and seems to me not visually significant
enough to support Oganesian's argument for the centrality
of the boar hunt to the myth depicted on the vessel. Additionally, the imagery on the Trialeti goblet has often been
compared to that found in Hittite art, from the original
publication by Kuftin (1941:89-92), where he compared
the standing human figures to those at Yazrhkayawho wear
similar garments, to recent exhibition catalogues where
general comparisons of gift-bearing processionals are made
(Miron and Ortlunann 1995:238), sometimes with efforts

to draw ethnolinguistic interpretations (Kuftin 1941:9091, 163). These visual parallels are indeed quite striking,
but imagery in Hittite art has Hurrian influence and is not
strictly Indo-European (Archi 1995:2373-2374; Kohlmeyer
1995:2649; Wilhelm 1995:1250).
The Hasanlu Gold Bowl is also found in an archaeological milieu without texts, and the ethnolinguistic context of
its manufacture has also been long-discussed (Barrelet
1984:57). Even with some images corresponding closely to
known Hurrian myth, Winter (1989: 104) concludes only
that "the identification of Hurrian components on the
bowl... has been strengthened" by the investigation of herself and others. How much more difficult the situation is
for the identification of the ethnolinguistic/cultural origin
of the Trialeti culture goblets, where no known story can
be clearly seen in the silver images. Nevertheless, there are
arguments to be made for a Hun-ian-related population in
Transcaucasia in the early second millennium, based on the
relationship between the Hurrian and Urartian languages
(Wilhelm 1989:4-6, 1995:1244), and even earlier if one
accepts that the Early Transcaucasian culture was Hun-ianspeaking. Both arguments rely on the evidence for the late
third-millennium appearance of Hurrian names and words
239

HE HASANLU GOLD "BOWl:'

21.4

Detail of the Trialeti silver goblet showing walking figures with animal tails suspended from their garments.

Photograph by KS Rubinson, with permission of the National Museum of Georgia

at the northeastern

borders

of Mesopotamia,

an east Anatolian-Transcaucasian

and assume

dagger "floats" in the field behind an offering scene cen-

tered on a hoofed table, recalling the daggers behind the

kneeling figure before the hoofed table on the Gold Bowl.
The hoofed table on the Hasanlu bowl recalls the of-

origin for the Hurrian-

speaking population (Burney and Lang 1972:49).

In looking at the silver vessels, there is nothing in the
overall narrative that

links

the imagery to the Gold Bowl.

fering

tables/altars

seen

on both

the

Trialeti

and

Rather, it is the small details noted by Porada, as well as the

Karashamb

weapons placed in the field on the more recently found

Karashamb goblet, also seen on the bowl. Of those, amy
one image, the weapons in the field, may possibly suggest a

table has nothing

different hoofed tables on the Karashamb goblet, both of

tie to known Hurrian

(Shahnazarian

myth. The Hurrian

connection

goblets.

which support

is

by Winter (1989:95) and need not be repeated

Like that on the bowl, the Trialeti

placed on the surface,

vessels and other objects

and Mkrtchian

N.D.:

unlike the two

on the surface

16; Tiratsian

1992:39).

The forms and scale of the offering

tables are not the

here. It is true that on the Karashamb goblet the weapons

same, although

tables is very simi-

are grouped

lar to that depicted

summarized

fighting

with shields and bounded

(Pilipossian

and

Santrot

by scenes of men
1996:66;

Tiratsian

examples

symbolic figure or concept.

on the Trialeti goblet. Again, other

of the hoofed

table

are

found

on several

Anatolian-style seals from Kiiltepe Kanesh (OzgU<; 1965:PI.

IV:Ila, PI. XXIV:73, PI. XXV:75b). Also from the early

1992:39). But it might be possible to read the images on

more than one level, both literally and as reference

one of the Karashamb

to a

centuries

On the other hand, perhaps

of the second

millennium,

hoofed

offering

the weapons in the field of the Gold Bowl are a shorthand

tables/altars

reference

1980c:388, Figs. 448, 450). Amiet (1980c:164) has noted

the affinity of the Anatolian-style seals with the Ebla ba-

goblet.

to the expanded
It may prove

Anatolian-style
Assyrian trading

battle seen on the Karashamb

to be instructive

seals bearing weapons

colony period

to collect

the

in the field of the

for comparison.

are shown on the cult basins from Ebla (Amiet

sins in style; perhaps there is also some affinity of meaning.

It is interesting

For ex-

ample, OzgU<; (1965:PI. V:15a) illustrates a seal in which a

to note

that in all four areas-c--Ebla,

Ki.iltepe Kanesh, the Trialeti culture,

240

and Hasanlu-c--the

Karen S. Rubinson

hoofed

table

is associated

with

figures

of human

Pl. XX:61). Whether this type of well-known Near Eastern

form

holding goblets or cups. In her analysis, Winter (1989:95)

image was the inspiration

stresses

cannot

the empty top of the piece of furniture

its meaning,

so perhaps

ond millennium

examples,

table is unburdened.
'hoofed

it is not related

a motif

considering

and cauldron

Pis. 30,41,47-48)

and other

and connect

Hurt-ian-related

bronzes,
(Azarpay

a Near

metalwork
Perhaps on

the Trialeti-culture

metalwork,

image was conflated

with a native cultural tradition

figures with attached

Eastern

pictoral
to yield

tails, Again, could this

"Ii-anscaucasian image be inspired

of those illustrated on the Gold Bowl?

Of course, imagery traditions had a long life in the ancient

including

(Merhav

because

by stories related to some

Near East, and were used in many cultures and geographical

areas,

transformed

example,

Winter

in style and even meaning

1980: 11-12). This conservative

in artistic vocabulary

it to its earlier use in a possible

simply

thought.

have

to take the use of this im-

area in Transcaucasia

for the Transcaucasian

but is a tantalizing

from

1968:56-58,

pieces of furniture

It is a stretch

1991:252-253).
age in Urartu

stand

stand

be proven,

human-form

Pl. XXXII: 100), as

well as on the feet of many Urartian

candelabrum

that the

may themselves

seen also on a clay tripod

Kanesh II (Ozgiic; 1965:86,

Kultepe

to the early sec-

of which only the Trialeti goblet

But it is worth

feet of the altar/table/stool

meaning,

as part of

be an accidental

of

Hasanlu

tendency

may be the explanation for what could

similarity

precious

(see, for

between

the Trialeti culture

vessels. But given the probable

and

Hurrian

the relationship of the languages (Zimansky 1995.: 1135-

relationships of the Gold Bowl and the possible Hurrian-

1136), much less extend it to the probably

related context

of the Hasanlu

Gold

Bowl.

However,

Hurrian

texts in the latter two areas, such circumstantial

is worth

context

given the lack of

However,

(1989:84)

tails illustrated

of animal tails

figures on the three precious-metal

on all three

objects

the Hurrians

objects.

northern

Near East. The

are quite different

early Iron Age remains

in Transcaucasia

to help solve this question.

and colleagues will contribute

from the figure's waist to the ground

of a stylized herring-bone
with a specific

extending

The stylization

of the Karasharnb
seal from Kultepe

where

it appears

Surely William Sumner's

grant from the American

students

to this research.

Acknowledgment. Trialeti photographs

in most cases, consist

and Iran will be able

Philosophical

taken through

Society.

that is harder to identify

tails is close to that on an Anatolian-style

Kanesh,

animal.

pattern

where the process

can be traced from the third millennium."

tails, with tufts on the ends, those on the Trialeti goblet

goblet,

on the

Only further excavation and study of the Late Bronze and

those on the Hasanlu Gold Bowl look like lions'

and the tails on the Karashamb

prior to their entry

plain of Syria and Mesopotamia,

of acculturation

in

also participated

look like wolves' tails, with bushy long hair along their whole
length,

goblets what Stein

said of the Hasanlu Gold Bowl, which she wrote

" ... ultimately derived from the same cultural milieu in which
tie is the appearance

this image is rare in the ancient

appearance;

in the Bronze Age, perhaps

we can say of the Trialeti and Karashamb

evidence

noting.

An equally tenuous
on human-form

of Iranscaucasia

on a bull-man

NOTE
1.

In her important study of this object, Winter (1989) identified it as a vessel taller than a bowl.

(Ozgtic; 1965:82,

241

Bibliography
Archi, Alfonso
1995

Hittite and Hurrian

literatures:

An Overview:

edited by J .M. Sasson, J. Baines,

Charles Scribners'

In Cvilizations of the Ancient Near fast, vo. IV,

G. Beckman,

and

K.5. Rubinson ,2367-2387.

New York:

Sons.

Amiet, Pierre
1980c

Art of the Ancient Near fast. New York: Harry N. Abrams.

Azarpay, Guitty
1968

Urortian Art and Artifact:

A Chronological

Study. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of

California Press.
Barrelet, Marle-Therese
1984

Problemes concernant

les Hurrites 11. Mernoire 49. Paris.Editions Recherche sur les

Civilisations.
Burney, Charles and David M. Lang
1972

The Peoples of the Hills: Ancient Ararot and Caucasus. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Dzhaparidze,Otar
1995

Die Trialeti-Kultur.
87. Saarbrucken:

Kohlmeyer,
1995

In Unterweqs zum goldenen Vlies, edited by A. Miron and W. Orthmann,

81-

Museum fur Vor- und Fruhgeschichte.

Kay

Anatolian Architectural

Decorations,

Statuary, and Stelae. In Civilizations of the Ancient Near

fast, vol, IV, edited by J.M. Sasson, J. Baines, G. Beckman, and K.S.Rubinson, 2639-2669. New
York: Scribner's.
Kuftin, B.A.
1941

Arkheologicheskiye

Raskopki v Trialeti, I. Tbilisi: Akademii Nauk Gruzinskoi SSR.

Merhav, Rivka
1991

Secular and Cultic Furniture.

In Urortu: A Metalworking

Center in the First Millennium

edited by R. Merhav, 246-271. Jerusalem: The Israel Museum.

Miron, Andrei, and Winfried
1995

Orthmann,

eds.

Unterwegs zum goldenen Vlies. Saarbriicken:

Museum fur Vor- und Fruhgeschichte.

1

B.Cf.,

Oganesian, V.E.
1992

A Silver Goblet from Karashamb. Soviet Anthropology

and Archaeology

30(4):84-102.

Ozguc.Nirnet
1965

The Anatolian
Yaymlanndan

Group of Cylinder Seal Impressions from Kultepe.

turk Tanih Kurumu

V. seri, no. 22. Ankara: Turk Tarih Kururnu Basrmevi.

Pilipossian, Achot P., and Jacques Santrot

1996

a scenes de chasse et de guerre.

34. Goblet

In Armenie: tresors de l'Armenie ancienne des

origines au IVe siecle, edited by J. Santrot, 65-67. Paris: Somogy Editions d'Art.
Porada, Edith
1959

The Hasanlu Bowl. Expedition 1(3):19-22.

Rubinson, Karen S.
1977

The Chronology

of the Middle Bronze Age Kurgans at Trialeti.

Essays in the Archaeology

235-249.

Bibliotheca

of Greater Mesopotamia,

Mesopotamica

In Mountains

and Lowlands:

edited by L.D. Levine and T.e. Young, Jr.,

7. Malibu: Undena.

N.D (2003) Silver Vessels and Cylinder Sealings: Precious Reflections of Economic Exchange in the Early
Second Millennium

B.e. In Archaeology

in the Borderlands:

Investigations

Beyond, edited by A.T. Smith and K.S.Rubinson. Monograph

in Caucasia and

47. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute

Archaeology.
Shahnazarian, Alfred, and Iveta Mkrtchian
N.D.

The State History Museum of Armenia. Watertown,

MA and Yerevan: ALMA.

Stein, Diana
1989

Art and Architecture.

In The Hurrians, by G. Wilhelm,

80-90. Warminster:

Tiratsian, Guevork
1992

Decouvertes

recentes en Armenia. Les dossiers d'orcbeoloqie

Vollmer, John E., Edward J. Keall, E. Nagai-Berthrony

1983

Silk Roads, Chino Ships. Toronto:

Royal Ontario Museum.

177:32-39.

Aris and Phillips.

of

Wilhelm,

Gernot

1989

The Hurrians. Warminster:

Aris and Phillips.

1995

The Kingdom of Mitanni

in Second-Millennium

Upper Mesopotamia.

In Civilizations a/the

Ancient Near East, vol. II, edited by J.M. Sasson, J. Baines, G. Beckman, and K.S. Rubinson, 12431254. New York: Scribner's.
Winter,

Irene J.

1980

A Decorated Breastplate/ram
University

1989

Museum,

Hosonlu, Iran. University

Museum Monograph

39. Philadelphia:

University of Pennsylvania.

The "Hasanlu Gold Bowl": Thirty Years Later. Expedition 31 (2-3):87-106.

Zimansky, Paul E.
1995a

The Kingdom of Urartu in Eastern Anatolia. In Civilizations a/the Ancient Near East, vol. II,
edited by J.M. Sasson.J, Baines, G. Beckman, and KS. Rubinson, 1135-1146.New

York: Scribner's.