Nimrud ivories

Nimrud ivories
Nimrud ivories
	An ivory plaque which depicts a lion eating a man, from Nimrud in the British Museum. The plaque still has much of its original gold leaf and paint.
Material	Elephant ivory
Created	9th to 7th centuries BC
Period/culture	Neo-Assyrian
Place	Nimrud
Present location	British Museum, London, National Museum of Iraq, Baghdad, and elsewhere
Identification	1954,0508.1

The Nimrud ivories are a large group of small carved ivory plaques and figures dating from the 9th to the 7th centuries BC that were excavated from the Assyrian city of Nimrud (in modern Ninawa in Iraq) during the 19th and 20th centuries. The ivories mostly originated outside Mesopotamia and are thought to have been made in the Levant and Egypt, and have frequently been attributed to the Phoenicians due to a number of the ivories containing Phoenician inscriptions.^[2] They are foundational artefacts in the study of Phoenician art, together with the Phoenician metal bowls, which were discovered at the same time but identified as Phoenician a few years earlier. However, both the bowls and the ivories pose a significant challenge as no examples of either – or any other artefacts with equivalent features – have been found in Phoenicia or other major colonies (e.g. Carthage, Malta, Sicily).^[3]

Most are fragments of the original forms; there are over 1,000 significant pieces, and many more very small fragments. They are carved with motifs typical of those regions and were used to decorate a variety of high-status objects, including pieces of furniture, chariots and horse-trappings, weapons, and small portable objects of various kinds. Many of the ivories would have originally been decorated with gold leaf or semi-precious stones, which were stripped from them at some point before their final burial. A large group were found in what was apparently a palace storeroom for unused furniture. Many were found at the bottom of wells, having apparently been dumped there when the city was sacked during the poorly-recorded collapse of the Assyrian Empire between 616 BC and 599 BC.^[4]

Many of the ivories were taken to the United Kingdom and were deposited in (though not owned by) the British Museum. In 2011, the Museum acquired most of the British-held ivories through a donation and purchase and is to put a selection on view.^[5] It is intended that the remainder will be returned to Iraq. A significant number of ivories were already held by Iraqi institutions but many have been lost or damaged through war and looting. Other museums around the world have groups of pieces.

^ "Nimrud Ivories". British Museum. 21 February 2011. Retrieved 15 March 2011.
^ Richard David Barnett. “The Nimrud Ivories and the Art of the Phoenicians” Iraq, vol. 2, no. 2, British Institute for the Study of Iraq, 1935, pp. 179–210, https://doi.org/10.2307/4241579. “The Nationality of the NW. Palace Ivories: That the group of ivories was not Assyrian was concluded on their discovery from their Egyptian appearance. Francois Lenormant, in the Bulletin archéologique de l'Athenaeum français, No. 6, June 1856, asserted that his father, Charles, had been the first to recognize that the pseudo-Egyptian workmanship was in reality Phoenician, whereas Dr. Birch of the British Museum, the ivories' first publisher, had held them for Egyptian work executed in Assyria, or copied there. Posterity, a few dissentients apart, has followed Lenormant, and some wilder misattributions might have been avoided had it been noticed, as stated above, that in Layard's group seven pieces bore a letter of the Phoenician alphabet, and in that of Loftus were two inscriptions apparently also Phoenician. (There seem to be weaker reasons for describing them as Aramaic.) Modern work has only enhanced the plausibility of Lenormant's view. Other ivories of similar type have been found at Samaria, the capital of Ahab, whose connexions with Tyre were notorious. Again, those found at Arslan Tash in North Syria, according to a fragment among them which bore an inscription in what is either Phoenician or Aramaic, were seemingly made and presented by some Phoenician tributaries of Damascus to their overlord. To these points we may add the internal evidence of the religious scenes themselves, which in Part II of this paper are shown to be just such as would be expected in the art of a country so situated as Phoenicia. A concluding point of internal detail, in striking confirmation, is that the loggia windows represented on the panels of the 'Woman at the Window' illustrate what is in the Talmud called 'the Tyrian window', 'through which one can put one's head', i.e. παρακπύτειν, in contrast to the Egyptian type, through which one could not.”
^ Martin, S. Rebecca (2017). The Art of Contact: Comparative Approaches to Greek and Phoenician Art. University of Pennsylvania Press, Incorporated. pp. 28, 89. ISBN 978-0-8122-9394-4. The two greatest challenges of Phoenician art history are thus highlighted by these critical early discoveries: none of the metal bowls and hardly any ivories were found in Phoenicia, and the portable objects that we assign to Phoenician manufacture do not necessarily share stylistic or iconographic features with one another or with material excavated in Phoenicia. Yet it is almost universally believed that these two genres, metal bowls and carved ivories, mark the inception of Phoenician fine art… While it is tempting to ascribe to lack of excavation the problem of discovering the "true" Phoenician origins of worked ivory and metal bowls, the idea is probably fantastical. We have very little direct evidence of metal working or ivory working on the mainland. Published areas of the well-excavated Sarepta (Sarafand, Lebanon) yielded fewer than ten ivory objects, only three of which are figurative, and not even one scrap of a "Phoenician" metal bowl. And, as Hans Niemeyer and others point out, neither bowls nor ivories appear in the main colonies, not at Carthage, Malta, Sicily, or elsewhere. Even Markoe, the foremost expert on "Phoenician" metal bowls, admitted regarding those from Assyria, "we simply do not know where these vessels were produced."
^ Metropolitan note
^ British Museum Collection

[1] "Nimrud Ivories". British Museum. 21 February 2011. Retrieved 15 March 2011.

[Barnett-2] Richard David Barnett. “The Nimrud Ivories and the Art of the Phoenicians” Iraq, vol. 2, no. 2, British Institute for the Study of Iraq, 1935, pp. 179–210, https://doi.org/10.2307/4241579. “The Nationality of the NW. Palace Ivories: That the group of ivories was not Assyrian was concluded on their discovery from their Egyptian appearance. Francois Lenormant, in the Bulletin archéologique de l'Athenaeum français, No. 6, June 1856, asserted that his father, Charles, had been the first to recognize that the pseudo-Egyptian workmanship was in reality Phoenician, whereas Dr. Birch of the British Museum, the ivories' first publisher, had held them for Egyptian work executed in Assyria, or copied there. Posterity, a few dissentients apart, has followed Lenormant, and some wilder misattributions might have been avoided had it been noticed, as stated above, that in Layard's group seven pieces bore a letter of the Phoenician alphabet, and in that of Loftus were two inscriptions apparently also Phoenician. (There seem to be weaker reasons for describing them as Aramaic.) Modern work has only enhanced the plausibility of Lenormant's view. Other ivories of similar type have been found at Samaria, the capital of Ahab, whose connexions with Tyre were notorious. Again, those found at Arslan Tash in North Syria, according to a fragment among them which bore an inscription in what is either Phoenician or Aramaic, were seemingly made and presented by some Phoenician tributaries of Damascus to their overlord. To these points we may add the internal evidence of the religious scenes themselves, which in Part II of this paper are shown to be just such as would be expected in the art of a country so situated as Phoenicia. A concluding point of internal detail, in striking confirmation, is that the loggia windows represented on the panels of the 'Woman at the Window' illustrate what is in the Talmud called 'the Tyrian window', 'through which one can put one's head', i.e. παρακπύτειν, in contrast to the Egyptian type, through which one could not.”

[3] Martin, S. Rebecca (2017). The Art of Contact: Comparative Approaches to Greek and Phoenician Art. University of Pennsylvania Press, Incorporated. pp. 28, 89. ISBN 978-0-8122-9394-4. The two greatest challenges of Phoenician art history are thus highlighted by these critical early discoveries: none of the metal bowls and hardly any ivories were found in Phoenicia, and the portable objects that we assign to Phoenician manufacture do not necessarily share stylistic or iconographic features with one another or with material excavated in Phoenicia. Yet it is almost universally believed that these two genres, metal bowls and carved ivories, mark the inception of Phoenician fine art… While it is tempting to ascribe to lack of excavation the problem of discovering the "true" Phoenician origins of worked ivory and metal bowls, the idea is probably fantastical. We have very little direct evidence of metal working or ivory working on the mainland. Published areas of the well-excavated Sarepta (Sarafand, Lebanon) yielded fewer than ten ivory objects, only three of which are figurative, and not even one scrap of a "Phoenician" metal bowl. And, as Hans Niemeyer and others point out, neither bowls nor ivories appear in the main colonies, not at Carthage, Malta, Sicily, or elsewhere. Even Markoe, the foremost expert on "Phoenician" metal bowls, admitted regarding those from Assyria, "we simply do not know where these vessels were produced."

[Metropolitan_note-4] Metropolitan note

[5] British Museum Collection

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

Nimrud ivories
An ivory plaque which depicts a lion eating a man, from Nimrud in the British Museum. The plaque still has much of its original gold leaf and paint.
Material	Elephant ivory^[1]
Created	9th to 7th centuries BC
Period/culture	Neo-Assyrian
Place	Nimrud
Present location	British Museum, London, National Museum of Iraq, Baghdad, and elsewhere
Identification	1954,0508.1