Page 203 - The Art & Architecture of the Ancient Orient_Neat

PART TWO:
the peripheral regions
In front of this portico stood a base for
a statue or an altar of polychrome glazed
bricks,35 with rosettes, guillochcs, and other geometric designs in green, yellow, and
white. In addition, one or more large basalt images of birds seem to have stood on the
terrace (Plate 157B).
of2® ^lte^ative-‘ba5eofa statue or altar’, marks our inability to define the character
of tins building ; the all-inclusive designation ‘Temple Palace’ of the excavators further
stresses our embarrassment. It is certainly true, as they state, that nowhere else in the
Citadel was a setting appropriate to the great official celebrations of victories, the bring­
ing of public sacrifices, the reception of ambassadors, or the issue of proclamations.
Moreover, a large building, presumably a residential palace, was found in the north-cast
comer of the Citadel. In so far as the ruins allow one to judge, this lacks a bit-hilani and
resembles Assyrian rather than north Syrian palaces, although the ‘reception suite*,
customary in those (p. 7S above) is absent. On the other hand, the ‘Temple Palace*
seems to lack a shrine; and since the inscriptions on the carriers of the architrave (see
below, p. 257, note 44) explicitly call it the ‘ palace of Kaparu*, we refer to it as such.
The main room, behind the portico, contained a movable hearth, like those found in the
1
Upper Palace at Zin^irli; and the masonry on the west of the portico (die two entrances
shown in the plan are conjectural) would have supported the staircase. Near the Palace
were funerary vaults for the rulers, and a little farther to the north a large dwelling, re­
calling (in function, not in plan) die Vizier’s residence in the Citadel of Khorsabad.
Under the Assyrian occupation - from 808 b.c. onward - a temple was built in the town
which conforms in all respects with those found at Khorsabad.36 The buildings we have
just described then fell into disuse.
If we consider the distinctive features of north Syrian architecture, wliich are all con­
nected with the bit-hilani, it shows a character all its own. The buildings do not in die
least resemble the huge palaces of Mesopotamia, mazes of rooms arranged round courts.
There is little or no resemblance, either, to Hittite architecture. It is true that the employ-
ment of natural features for the purposes of defence, which we observe in the Citadels
of Zin^irli and Tell Halaf, recalls the fortifications of Boghazkcuy, but the advantages
thus gained are obvious and are exploited by all hill-dwellers. In details, such as the forti­
fied gates, there is a difference; the north Syrian town gates resemble those of Assyria
rather than Anatolia.37 There is, moreover, no north Syrian equivalent to the irregular
large-windowed temples of the Hittites. The bit-hilani, in spite of its porticoed facade,
is a severely closed block compared with the Hittite temples. It resembles rather the
Greek megaron in being a self-contained unit wliich can neither be combined with others
into a single structure nor expanded by the addition of rooms beyond a very narrow
limit.38 The palace at Tell Tayanat (Plate 154A)39 is more complex than most; at Zin-
cirli the need for a large number of rooms was met, in both the Upper and the ower
Palace (Figures 80 and 82), by grouping separate units of the bit-hilani type roun one

174