Kingship: Its Effects on Urban Form and Architectural Monumentality in Mesopotamia

• extra-terrestrial powers • signs of social hierarchies I. Historical context for most Bronze Age cultures Neolithic: • extra-terrestrial powers • signs of social hierarchies • sedentary living; first signs of urbanism Bronze head of an Akkadian king, 2200 B.C. Kingship (most Bronze-Age cultures): • urbanism (pop. 10,000-50,000) • marked social hierarchy • designation and appropriation of the center by the king/priest • marking of the center through design and architecture • polytheism incl. extraterrestial powers

City plan of Ur, Iraq, state in c. 2000 B.C. II. Kingship and Mesopotamian urbanism City plan of Ur, Iraq, state in c. 2000 B.C. reconstructive rendering

Jericho, Israel, c. 7000 BC (Neolithic), pop. 3000 Ur, Iraq II. A. City walls as boundary: What are two different purposes of city walls? Jericho, Israel, c. 7000 BC (Neolithic), pop. 3000 Ur, Iraq

center – where the extraordinary intersects the ordinary II. B. How is the ideology of kingship embodied within the walls of Mesopotamian cities? center – where the extraordinary intersects the ordinary temenos – a precinct severed from its surroundings and reserved , from the Greek word meaning to cut Ur, Iraq Ur, Iraq

intercardinal – northeast, southeast, southwest, northwest II. B. 1. What are the formal characteristics of the temenos under Mesopotamian kingship? intercardinal – northeast, southeast, southwest, northwest The temenos (royal precincet) at Ur, Iraq

residential: organic, metabolic street pattern II. B. 1. Ur, Iraq residential: organic, metabolic street pattern overall city plan

Ur, Iraq: residential neighborhood II. B. 1. dwellings Ur, Iraq: residential neighborhood

II. B. 1. Ur, Iraq

On top of the ziggurat at Ur, Iraq II. B. 1. On top of the ziggurat at Ur, Iraq

Ziggurat of Ur-Nammu, Ur, Iraq, c. 2113-2006 B.C. III. Monumentality in architecture comes hand in hand with kingship: the example of the artificial mountain Ziggurat of Ur-Nammu, Ur, Iraq, c. 2113-2006 B.C.

ziggurat – towered temple platform in the form of a stepped pyramid III. A. Basics: What is a ziggurat? What stood on top of a ziggurat? ziggurat – towered temple platform in the form of a stepped pyramid Temple temenos at Tepe Gawra, Iraq, 3000 Ziggurat at Warka (“White Temple”) 3500-3000 Ziggurat at Ur, 2000 estimated 12m high (40‘) estimated 21m high (65‘) no ziggurat

Ziggurat at Ur Ziggurat at Warka (“White Temple”) III. A. Ur’s 3rd platform and temple on top are entirely conjectural house (deity’s dwelling) Ziggurat at Warka (“White Temple”) Ziggurat at Ur

Temple on top of ziggurat at Warka III. A. 1. Temple orientation, typology, materials, and furnishings. Tepe Gawra temple Tepe Gawra temple bricks = uniform units = proof of human control aesthetic of the artificial Temple on top of ziggurat at Warka mudbrick temple = house Buttresses where beams and rafters rested Mud-brick masonry plastered, painted, or whitewashed

Temple on top of ziggurat at Warka III. A. 1. Temple on top of ziggurat at Warka offering table niche or platform for god’s appearance

Tepe Gawra temple Lascaux Cave III. A. 1. a. Precedents: what paleolithic monument privileged the interior space? Tepe Gawra temple Lascaux Cave

III. B. Formal Analysis of the Ziggurat at Ur – a III. B. Formal Analysis of the Ziggurat at Ur – a. orientation and building materials 2. Ur, Iraq

Seated Statue of King Gudea w/ Architectural Plan To be discussed in lecture on Friday Stele of King Ur-Nammu Seated Statue of King Gudea w/ Architectural Plan

III. B. a. Ziggurat at Ur + bitumen mortar

superimposed, battered platforms III. B. b. massing (effects of bulk, density, and weight) 3. superimposed, battered platforms Ziggurat at Ur batter – the receding slope of the wall decorative buttresses

III. B. c. optical refinements Ziggurat at Ur

III. C. Ritual and architecture: how does the design consolidate the king’s relationship with the gods? Ziggurat at Ur

Stele of Naram Sim Ziggurat at Ur III. C. 1. Religion/Politics: Who mounts the ziggurat/why? Stele of Naram Sim Ziggurat at Ur

symmetric composition III. C. 2. What formal qualities help the stair ritualize the action of climbing (i.e., transform climbing into ascent)? symmetric composition Ziggurat at Warka, c. 3500-3000 B.C. Ziggurat at Ur, c. 2100 B.C.

symmetric composition III. C. 2. Ziggurat at Ur symmetric composition steps eat into the solid mass

symmetric composition III. C. 2. III. C. 3. Conclusion: Formal properties all focus on a single point symmetric composition steps eat into the solid mass primacy of the center staircase Ziggurat at Ur

Ziggurat at Ur, reconconstruction c. 2000 BC III. D. Power: Monumentality and coercion 1. Monumental space welds the members of society into a “consensus” Ziggurat at Ur, reconconstruction c. 2000 BC Ziggurat at Ur on June 28, 2004

Tower of Babel by Pieter Brueghel the Elder, 1563 II. D. 2. Religious and political realms exchange attributes Ziggurat at Ur Tower of Babel Tower of Babel by Pieter Brueghel the Elder, 1563

F.L.Wright, design for a planetarium, 1924 F.L.Wright, drwg for Guggenheim Museum New York City, 1943, “an inverted ziggurat”