EARLY BRONZE AGE DAGGERS IN CENTRAL ... - Bilkent University

Although, the duration of the cemetery is more or less accepted as lasting
from Ed III A to the beginning of Ur III period, the internal chronology of the
cemetery is problematic due to its location on a refuse heap (Pollock, 1985: 129).
Woolley, the early excavator of the site, devised a scheme of dating the graves by
utilizing sequences of different superimposed graves. The result was a division of the
graves as Predynastic, Second Dynasty, and Sargonid (Pollock, 1985: 129). Nissen, in
turn, using the same technique, had divided the graves into seven phases (Pollock,
1985: 130). On the other hand, Pollock (1985) used a different technique, the seriation
of ceramics by using “nonmetric multidimensional scaling”, and divided 241 graves
into six temporal periods. The chronological information from these graves was used
as a guide to date the rest of the graves (Pollock, 1985: 130.141). Pollock’s list of the
graves dated by this method provides a useful tool in cross referencing Anatolian
material which claimed to have cultural connections with Ur, or Mesopotamia.
3.4 Chronological Labels
For the last fifty years, most scholars choose between the main High, Middle,
and Low chronologies (Reade, 2001: 9). There is 120 years difference between the
traditional High and Low chronologies. Many of the studies and reports do not
indicate what chronological framework was used, if the main purpose of the study is
not resolving chronological arguments. Rather chronological labels are used or
statements such as second half of the third millennium, last quarter of the third
millennium are used. By this practice, cultural materials from different sites can be
related without absolute dates.
18