See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/339079526

URUK, Urban Structures in Magnetic and Satellite Images

Chapter · January 2020

CITATIONS READS

4 1,798

3 authors:

Helmut Becker Margarete van Ess

47 PUBLICATIONS 543 CITATIONS

Deutsches Archäologisches Institut
21 PUBLICATIONS 67 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Jörg W. E. Fassbinder
Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich
382 PUBLICATIONS 1,962 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jörg W. E. Fassbinder on 30 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 62
URUK
Urban Structures in Magnetic and Satellite Images
Helmut Becker, Margarete van Ess, and Jörg Fassbinder
[Gilgamesh, who] saw the Deep, the foundation of the country,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
He built the wall of Uruk-the-Sheepfold
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Go up on to the wall of Uruk and walk around,
survey the foundation platform, inspect the brickwork!
(See) if its brickwork is not kiln-fired brick,
and if the Seven Sages did not lay out its foundations!
[One shar is] city, [one shar] date-grove, one shar is clay-pit, half a
shar the temple of Ishtar:
[three shar] and a half (is) Uruk, (its) measurement. 1
Uruk is one of the largest ancient sites in Mesopotamia. At the time
the famous city wall was built, at the beginning of the third millen-
nium bc , a city area of 5.5 square kilometers needed to be encom-
passed, so the city wall was roughly 9 kilometers long—a gigantic
undertaking. Excavations in Uruk have as yet concentrated on the
city center, especially the large temple districts of the Eanna and
FIGURE 62.1 IKONOS satellite image of the city of Uruk from 2001 and locations of
the geophysical measurements
R esearch in and a bout U ru k
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
the Anu Ziggurat, as well as, in smaller endeavors, other temples
(Eshgal, Gareus Temple), the palace of the king Sin-kashid, and a
few residential districts. The overall extent of the investigated area
is an impressive 24.3 hectares, but represents less than 5 percent of
the city area. In the center of the city, as we know from excavations,
some thirty-five layers of building from more than 4,500 years lie
on top of one another to a depth of 25 meters. If one were to take
into account the many different cultural phases and calculate how
long one would have to dig to completely understand the city—
even if the layers are not of equal thickness in every part of the city
area—the ancient levels so far investigated amount to a tenth of
one percent.
It would not be sensible, either scientifically or from the point
of view of international standards for the preservation of archae-
ological heritage, to excavate the entire city. All the more impor­
tant, then, are the prospecting methods repeatedly refined in the
past few decades, with which—without even touching a spade—
it is possible to gain information about the city that would other-
wise have been possible only from decades of excavation.
A range of geophysical prospecting methods are available that
have already been successfully applied in the search for archaeolog-
ical structures.
335
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
 62
URUK
Urban Structures in Magnetic and Satellite Images
Helmut Becker, Margarete van Ess, and Jörg Fassbinder
[Gilgamesh, who] saw the Deep, the foundation of the country,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
He built the wall of Uruk-the-Sheepfold
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Go up on to the wall of Uruk and walk around,
survey the foundation platform, inspect the brickwork!
(See) if its brickwork is not kiln-fired brick,
and if the Seven Sages did not lay out its foundations!
[One shar is] city, [one shar] date-grove, one shar is clay-pit, half a
shar the temple of Ishtar:
[three shar] and a half (is) Uruk, (its) measurement. 1
Uruk is one of the largest ancient sites in Mesopotamia. At the time
the famous city wall was built, at the beginning of the third millen-
nium bc , a city area of 5.5 square kilometers needed to be encom-
passed, so the city wall was roughly 9 kilometers long—a gigantic
undertaking. Excavations in Uruk have as yet concentrated on the
city center, especially the large temple districts of the Eanna and
FIGURE 62.1 IKONOS satellite image of the city of Uruk from 2001 and locations of
the geophysical measurements
R esearch in and a bout U ru k
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
the Anu Ziggurat, as well as, in smaller endeavors, other temples
(Eshgal, Gareus Temple), the palace of the king Sin-kashid, and a
few residential districts. The overall extent of the investigated area
is an impressive 24.3 hectares, but represents less than 5 percent of
the city area. In the center of the city, as we know from excavations,
some thirty-five layers of building from more than 4,500 years lie
on top of one another to a depth of 25 meters. If one were to take
into account the many different cultural phases and calculate how
long one would have to dig to completely understand the city—
even if the layers are not of equal thickness in every part of the city
area—the ancient levels so far investigated amount to a tenth of
one percent.
It would not be sensible, either scientifically or from the point
of view of international standards for the preservation of archae-
ological heritage, to excavate the entire city. All the more impor­
tant, then, are the prospecting methods repeatedly refined in the
past few decades, with which—without even touching a spade—
it is possible to gain information about the city that would other-
wise have been possible only from decades of excavation.
A range of geophysical prospecting methods are available that
have already been successfully applied in the search for archaeolog-
ical structures.
335
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
 However, geophysical methods that are able to cover large areas
with high sensitivity and high spatial resolution are limited to mag-
nometer resistivity and electromagnetic and radar prospecting. With
respect to the different physical and magnetic properties of the Uruk
site, magnetic prospecting would be one of the fastest and cheap-
est methods to obtain detailed maps of the archaeological struc-
tures beneath the ground. From prospection experiences at Qantir/
Pi-Ramesse, the capital of Egypt at the time of Ramses II (the thir-
teenth century bc ), carried out between 1996 and 2003, where some
2.2 square kilometers were measured, we know that it was possi-
ble to differentiate mud-brick structures from the adjacent mud
through tiny differences in magnetic susceptibility. At Pi-Ramesse, as
well as in Uruk, most construction was of air-dried mud bricks. The
other geophysical prospecting methods are especially suited for the
prospection of stone architecture. Stone constructions, however,
are rare in both Pi-Ramesse and Uruk. As experiments with radar at
Pi-Ramesse showed in 2007, this method is also unsuited for mud-
brick architecture because of the plain’s high groundwater level and
the high salinity of upper soil levels from the capillary migration of
salts to the surface. 2
In the use of magnetic prospection the choice of sensors and
sensor configuration is of great importance. In Uruk in 2000 and
2002 the cesium-magnetometer Smartmag SM4G-G was employed
336 R esearch in and a bout U ru k
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
in a so-called duo-sensor configuration for the measurement of the
total geomagnetic field (fig. 62.2). This not only doubled the measur-
ing speed but also provided maximal sensitivity and thus also infor-
mation from deeper parts of the soil. This was demonstrated also in
the magnetic prospection of tomb chambers—that is, vaults of fired
bricks—in Ashur (Iraq), where a sounding dig verified the calculated
depth of 5 meters below the surface. 3
Also essential to the prospecting of such large city complexes
is the analysis of historical aerial photographs. For Uruk there exist
pictures of extremely high resolution from a flyover by the Royal Air
Force in the year 1935, and from a greater height, from another fly-
over in 1961. New insights were provided by high-resolution images
from the IKONOS satellites from 2001 and 2005, which revealed a
large number of features of the settlement area and the city struc-
ture. Multispectral, panchromatically sharpened photographs
have proven to be especially helpful; even architectural features of
fired bricks are visible on the surface from their reddish coloring.
Moreover, in the IKONOS photographs the system of canals and irri-
gation ditches can largely be seen, for which reason they, combined
with the highly detailed magnetograms, serve as a superb basis for
further study of Uruk’s city structure. High-resolution radar images
from the Terra SAR-X satellite have provided additional informa-
tion about the top 20 to 25 centimeters of soil. Evaluation of LIDAR
4
FIGURE 62.2
Geophysical mea-
surements were
done in Uruk with a
cesium magneto­meter
Smartmag with dual
sensors.
(Light-Detection and Ranging) data would also be interesting. For
the recording and visualization of Uruk’s relief surface, terrestrial
laser scanning could also be profitable.
Given the difficult political situations in today’s Near Eastern
countries, it is not always possible to employ all of the available
methods. In Iraq, for example, it was for many years impossible for
ordinary citizens and foreigners to procure precise topographical
maps, and the methods by which they might be produced—by way
of remote reconnaissance data, for example—were forbidden.
In the 1980s long-standing good relations between the
Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (DAI), scientific institutions, and
the Department of Antiquities in Iraq nevertheless made possible
the creation of a new, digitally recorded topographical map of Uruk,
and in the years 2001 and 2002 geophysical measurements were
made in parts of the city (fig. 62.1). The latter, undertaken as a col-
laborative project of the DAI and the Department of Archaeological
Prospection and Aerial Archaeology of the Bayerisches Landesamt
für Denkmalpflege (Bavarian State Department of Monuments and
Sites), were stopped by the Second Gulf War in the spring of 2003.
In this period of political upheaval, which has drastically destabi-
lized the entire country, especially southern Iraq, for several years
there was an almost unimaginable amount of illicit excavation.5 In
order to discover its extent, identify the sites involved, and deter-
mine from the kind of sites targeted what the looters and the art
market were most interested in, several projects were initiated to
monitor the condition of Iraqi archaeological sites by means of
high-resolution satellite imagery. One such project focused on
Uruk and its surroundings. The goal was to develop methods for
6
the semiautomatic comparison of older and newer satellite images
so as to detect changes in the landscape.7 As an archaeological
by-product, in addition to the historical aerial photographs and
older satellite images of the CORONA mission, there are now the
new, very-high-resolution images of the IKONOS satellites, which—
cross-referenced with the topographical data and compared with
geophysical prospection data—provide an unprecedented abun-
dance of information about the structure of the city (fig. 62.1).
This information can be related to data from archaeological find-
ings gathered during a surface survey of the entire city area in the
years 1982–84.8
Already the first topographical map (fig. 12.5) and the historical
aerial photographs had made it clear that the city was not simply a
single settlement mound, but comprised a number of districts with
different uses represented by many settlement mounds. Cuneiform
texts mention canals, gardens, temples, residential districts, and
production areas within the city.9 However, before analysis of the
findings from the survey in the 1980s these had only rarely been
identified and placed in context by archaeological means. From the
satellite images now available, and especially the magnetograms,
it becomes clear that from early in its history Uruk was threaded
with canals that both transported water into the city and served as
a means of transport. They separated the different city quarters and
led water to garden areas where vegetables, fruit trees, and date
palms grew. In the southern part of the city extensive details of the
field or garden irrigation were still visible, fed from a somewhat
larger canal flowing around the field (fig. 19.3). Remote reconnais-
sance data and geophysical prospecting do not themselves provide
finds useful for dating; but by registering recognizable overlaps or
date-specific architectural forms such images can indicate whether
different structures were in use simultaneously or in different peri-
ods. Some of the magnetograms reveal changing, even overlap-
ping canal courses or—differentiated by the level of contrast—later
changes to older canals. The same is true of the settlement districts:
for example, magnetograms of the southwest part of the city clearly
show different, overlapping layers of buildings (fig. 62.3). In some
cases the ground plans of buildings are so clearly visible that their
function and, by way of their typology, even a rough dating can be
determined. Through the archaeological survey, we know that this
area was settled, especially during the third millennium bc , in some
parts even earlier. Only a few remains from the beginning of the
second millennium bc were present; evidently erosion had already
largely destroyed these layers, and only particularly durable archi-
tecture from this time was left in situ. One structure (especially dark
FIGURE 62.3 Detail of a magnetogram. Recognizable on the right is the north–
south canal and on the left of it residential areas with several levels of building.
U ru k U r ban S tructures in M agnetic and S atellite I mages 337
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
 However, geophysical methods that are able to cover large areas
with high sensitivity and high spatial resolution are limited to mag-
nometer resistivity and electromagnetic and radar prospecting. With
respect to the different physical and magnetic properties of the Uruk
site, magnetic prospecting would be one of the fastest and cheap-
est methods to obtain detailed maps of the archaeological struc-
tures beneath the ground. From prospection experiences at Qantir/
Pi-Ramesse, the capital of Egypt at the time of Ramses II (the thir-
teenth century bc ), carried out between 1996 and 2003, where some
2.2 square kilometers were measured, we know that it was possi-
ble to differentiate mud-brick structures from the adjacent mud
through tiny differences in magnetic susceptibility. At Pi-Ramesse, as
well as in Uruk, most construction was of air-dried mud bricks. The
other geophysical prospecting methods are especially suited for the
prospection of stone architecture. Stone constructions, however,
are rare in both Pi-Ramesse and Uruk. As experiments with radar at
Pi-Ramesse showed in 2007, this method is also unsuited for mud-
brick architecture because of the plain’s high groundwater level and
the high salinity of upper soil levels from the capillary migration of
salts to the surface. 2
In the use of magnetic prospection the choice of sensors and
sensor configuration is of great importance. In Uruk in 2000 and
2002 the cesium-magnetometer Smartmag SM4G-G was employed
336 R esearch in and a bout U ru k
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
in a so-called duo-sensor configuration for the measurement of the
total geomagnetic field (fig. 62.2). This not only doubled the measur-
ing speed but also provided maximal sensitivity and thus also infor-
mation from deeper parts of the soil. This was demonstrated also in
the magnetic prospection of tomb chambers—that is, vaults of fired
bricks—in Ashur (Iraq), where a sounding dig verified the calculated
depth of 5 meters below the surface. 3
Also essential to the prospecting of such large city complexes
is the analysis of historical aerial photographs. For Uruk there exist
pictures of extremely high resolution from a flyover by the Royal Air
Force in the year 1935, and from a greater height, from another fly-
over in 1961. New insights were provided by high-resolution images
from the IKONOS satellites from 2001 and 2005, which revealed a
large number of features of the settlement area and the city struc-
ture. Multispectral, panchromatically sharpened photographs
have proven to be especially helpful; even architectural features of
fired bricks are visible on the surface from their reddish coloring.
Moreover, in the IKONOS photographs the system of canals and irri-
gation ditches can largely be seen, for which reason they, combined
with the highly detailed magnetograms, serve as a superb basis for
further study of Uruk’s city structure. High-resolution radar images
from the Terra SAR-X satellite have provided additional informa-
tion about the top 20 to 25 centimeters of soil. Evaluation of LIDAR
4
FIGURE 62.2
Geophysical mea-
surements were
done in Uruk with a
cesium magneto­meter
Smartmag with dual
sensors.
(Light-Detection and Ranging) data would also be interesting. For
the recording and visualization of Uruk’s relief surface, terrestrial
laser scanning could also be profitable.
Given the difficult political situations in today’s Near Eastern
countries, it is not always possible to employ all of the available
methods. In Iraq, for example, it was for many years impossible for
ordinary citizens and foreigners to procure precise topographical
maps, and the methods by which they might be produced—by way
of remote reconnaissance data, for example—were forbidden.
In the 1980s long-standing good relations between the
Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (DAI), scientific institutions, and
the Department of Antiquities in Iraq nevertheless made possible
the creation of a new, digitally recorded topographical map of Uruk,
and in the years 2001 and 2002 geophysical measurements were
made in parts of the city (fig. 62.1). The latter, undertaken as a col-
laborative project of the DAI and the Department of Archaeological
Prospection and Aerial Archaeology of the Bayerisches Landesamt
für Denkmalpflege (Bavarian State Department of Monuments and
Sites), were stopped by the Second Gulf War in the spring of 2003.
In this period of political upheaval, which has drastically destabi-
lized the entire country, especially southern Iraq, for several years
there was an almost unimaginable amount of illicit excavation.5 In
order to discover its extent, identify the sites involved, and deter-
mine from the kind of sites targeted what the looters and the art
market were most interested in, several projects were initiated to
monitor the condition of Iraqi archaeological sites by means of
high-resolution satellite imagery. One such project focused on
Uruk and its surroundings. The goal was to develop methods for
6
the semiautomatic comparison of older and newer satellite images
so as to detect changes in the landscape.7 As an archaeological
by-product, in addition to the historical aerial photographs and
older satellite images of the CORONA mission, there are now the
new, very-high-resolution images of the IKONOS satellites, which—
cross-referenced with the topographical data and compared with
geophysical prospection data—provide an unprecedented abun-
dance of information about the structure of the city (fig. 62.1).
This information can be related to data from archaeological find-
ings gathered during a surface survey of the entire city area in the
years 1982–84.8
Already the first topographical map (fig. 12.5) and the historical
aerial photographs had made it clear that the city was not simply a
single settlement mound, but comprised a number of districts with
different uses represented by many settlement mounds. Cuneiform
texts mention canals, gardens, temples, residential districts, and
production areas within the city.9 However, before analysis of the
findings from the survey in the 1980s these had only rarely been
identified and placed in context by archaeological means. From the
satellite images now available, and especially the magnetograms,
it becomes clear that from early in its history Uruk was threaded
with canals that both transported water into the city and served as
a means of transport. They separated the different city quarters and
led water to garden areas where vegetables, fruit trees, and date
palms grew. In the southern part of the city extensive details of the
field or garden irrigation were still visible, fed from a somewhat
larger canal flowing around the field (fig. 19.3). Remote reconnais-
sance data and geophysical prospecting do not themselves provide
finds useful for dating; but by registering recognizable overlaps or
date-specific architectural forms such images can indicate whether
different structures were in use simultaneously or in different peri-
ods. Some of the magnetograms reveal changing, even overlap-
ping canal courses or—differentiated by the level of contrast—later
changes to older canals. The same is true of the settlement districts:
for example, magnetograms of the southwest part of the city clearly
show different, overlapping layers of buildings (fig. 62.3). In some
cases the ground plans of buildings are so clearly visible that their
function and, by way of their typology, even a rough dating can be
determined. Through the archaeological survey, we know that this
area was settled, especially during the third millennium bc , in some
parts even earlier. Only a few remains from the beginning of the
second millennium bc were present; evidently erosion had already
largely destroyed these layers, and only particularly durable archi-
tecture from this time was left in situ. One structure (especially dark
FIGURE 62.3 Detail of a magnetogram. Recognizable on the right is the north–
south canal and on the left of it residential areas with several levels of building.
U ru k U r ban S tructures in M agnetic and S atellite I mages 337
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5

FIGURE 62.4 Detail of a satellite image in the area of the geophysically inves-
tigated northern area. The resolution is too low to be able to recognize
details.
FIGURE 62.5 Detail of a historical aerial photograph of the area of the
­ eophysically investigated northern area. Many building details are visible
g
even without excavation.
in the picture and with a different orientation) could be interpreted
as a temple constructed of fired bricks from the time of the Third
Dynasty of Ur or the Old Babylonian period (twenty-first to eigh-
teenth century bc ).
Geophysical prospecting so far has provided the most detailed
archaeological information about underground structures in Uruk.
Since the city is so large it will take a long time before it will be fully
investigated by this method. There will also be areas—especially
in the center of the city, with its great number of building levels—
where the interpretation of geophysical data will be difficult. For
the present, however, comparison of the remote sensing data and
findings on the ground provides the most reliable information. The
potential of the various methods can be seen from the example of
an area lying north of the palace of Sin-kashid.
The satellite image (fig. 62.1, gray-shaded area upper left; see
figs. 62.4–62.7) very clearly shows here the course of a large canal
that has a tributary canal entering the city from the west and lead-
ing to an inner-city harbor area. To the left of the canal the foun-
dations of large buildings can be detected; on the basis of the
archaeological survey most of these features can be dated to the
period of the Third Dynasty of Ur (twenty-first century bc ). At the
left edge of the picture one can recognize the course of the city
wall. Except for the palace of Sin-kashid (see map, front endpaper)
and an excavation area identified as “I 13,” none of the visible struc-
tures have been excavated. Yet in the multispectral satellite images
additional structures of fired brick (red coloring) can be seen. If
one zooms into the picture further (fig. 62.4), the limits of the sat-
ellite image, with its 1-meter resolution, quickly become apparent.
Architectural details—the division into rooms, for example—cannot
be verified. The aerial photo from 1935 captures such details rather
more clearly, for here the brick rubble indicates the lines of the
walls (fig. 62.5). The magnetogram (fig. 62.6), as yet picturing only
a part of this area, provides several further details. It clearly shows
the structures’ divisions into rooms and even their doors. From the
degree of sharpness of the anomalies of the magnetogram even
their depth beneath the surface can be estimated. At the right edge
one can see the inner-city canal, to the left of it three buildings with
the same orientation and a north–south street roughly 3 meters
wide running between them and black dot-shaped structures
arranged in clusters (strong positive anomalies with a distinct mag-
netic shadow). At the left edge of the picture two darker bands indi-
cate the course of the city wall. The canal was obviously bordered
by a path, probably atop its embankment. Approaches lead to a
large building that, at nearly 1,650 square meters, approaches the
size of a palace. It is set apart from two buildings lying to the north
in the same orientation, probably by a wall. To the west of the street
are two more buildings with the same orientation that, because of
their fainter lines, must lie farther beneath the surface. The room
structure and inner passages of the larger building are so clearly
recognizable that they can be mapped (fig. 62.7). Its ground plan
is typical of the beginning of the second millennium bc in south-
ern Mesopotamia. The strong contrast shows that the building
was constructed of fired bricks. From data collected in the archae-
ological survey the building can be dated with some probability
to the time of the Third Dynasty of Ur (fig. 62.8). To judge from the

FIGURE 62.6 Magnetogram of the

northern area. The wall structures are
visible in great detail. On the right is
the canal.

FIGURE 62.8 During an

FIGURE 62.7 The ground plans of the
buildings can be interpreted from the
magnetogram.
archaeological survey the
approximate dating of set-
tlement structures visible
in the magnetograms
could be determined on
the basis of pottery sherds.

338 R esearch in and a bout U ru k U ru k U r ban S tructures in M agnetic and S atellite I mages 339

PROOF 1 2 3 4 5 PROOF 1 2 3 4 5

FIGURE 62.4 Detail of a satellite image in the area of the geophysically inves-
tigated northern area. The resolution is too low to be able to recognize
details.
FIGURE 62.5 Detail of a historical aerial photograph of the area of the
­ eophysically investigated northern area. Many building details are visible
g
even without excavation.
in the picture and with a different orientation) could be interpreted
as a temple constructed of fired bricks from the time of the Third
Dynasty of Ur or the Old Babylonian period (twenty-first to eigh-
teenth century bc ).
Geophysical prospecting so far has provided the most detailed
archaeological information about underground structures in Uruk.
Since the city is so large it will take a long time before it will be fully
investigated by this method. There will also be areas—especially
in the center of the city, with its great number of building levels—
where the interpretation of geophysical data will be difficult. For
the present, however, comparison of the remote sensing data and
findings on the ground provides the most reliable information. The
potential of the various methods can be seen from the example of
an area lying north of the palace of Sin-kashid.
The satellite image (fig. 62.1, gray-shaded area upper left; see
figs. 62.4–62.7) very clearly shows here the course of a large canal
that has a tributary canal entering the city from the west and lead-
ing to an inner-city harbor area. To the left of the canal the foun-
dations of large buildings can be detected; on the basis of the
archaeological survey most of these features can be dated to the
period of the Third Dynasty of Ur (twenty-first century bc ). At the
left edge of the picture one can recognize the course of the city
wall. Except for the palace of Sin-kashid (see map, front endpaper)
and an excavation area identified as “I 13,” none of the visible struc-
tures have been excavated. Yet in the multispectral satellite images
additional structures of fired brick (red coloring) can be seen. If
one zooms into the picture further (fig. 62.4), the limits of the sat-
ellite image, with its 1-meter resolution, quickly become apparent.
Architectural details—the division into rooms, for example—cannot
be verified. The aerial photo from 1935 captures such details rather
more clearly, for here the brick rubble indicates the lines of the
walls (fig. 62.5). The magnetogram (fig. 62.6), as yet picturing only
a part of this area, provides several further details. It clearly shows
the structures’ divisions into rooms and even their doors. From the
degree of sharpness of the anomalies of the magnetogram even
their depth beneath the surface can be estimated. At the right edge
one can see the inner-city canal, to the left of it three buildings with
the same orientation and a north–south street roughly 3 meters
wide running between them and black dot-shaped structures
arranged in clusters (strong positive anomalies with a distinct mag-
netic shadow). At the left edge of the picture two darker bands indi-
cate the course of the city wall. The canal was obviously bordered
by a path, probably atop its embankment. Approaches lead to a
large building that, at nearly 1,650 square meters, approaches the
size of a palace. It is set apart from two buildings lying to the north
in the same orientation, probably by a wall. To the west of the street
are two more buildings with the same orientation that, because of
their fainter lines, must lie farther beneath the surface. The room
structure and inner passages of the larger building are so clearly
recognizable that they can be mapped (fig. 62.7). Its ground plan
is typical of the beginning of the second millennium bc in south-
ern Mesopotamia. The strong contrast shows that the building
was constructed of fired bricks. From data collected in the archae-
ological survey the building can be dated with some probability
to the time of the Third Dynasty of Ur (fig. 62.8). To judge from the

FIGURE 62.6 Magnetogram of the

northern area. The wall structures are
visible in great detail. On the right is
the canal.

FIGURE 62.8 During an

FIGURE 62.7 The ground plans of the
buildings can be interpreted from the
magnetogram.
archaeological survey the
approximate dating of set-
tlement structures visible
in the magnetograms
could be determined on
the basis of pottery sherds.

338 R esearch in and a bout U ru k U ru k U r ban S tructures in M agnetic and S atellite I mages 339

PROOF 1 2 3 4 5 PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
 FIGURE 62.9 In the south of
the city the city wall was inves-
tigated by geophysical mea-
surement. Its construction is
more sophisticated than had
been previously determined by
archaeology. Very dark anoma-
lies show that parts of the wall
were built of fired bricks.
FIGURE 62.10 Magnetogram of the
southwest Area 1 with the southwest
gate, through which Uruk’s main
canal exited the city; also shown is a
large fired-brick structure.
archaeological data and their structure, the two smaller buildings,
still quite large at roughly 630 square meters, were probably built at
the same time. The archaeological survey data help us to interpret
the clusters of black round structures to the west of them as the
remains of ceramic kilns from the second half of the second millen-
nium bc . Since the kilns produced a lot of smoke, they were estab-
lished at some distance from the settled part of the city, near the
city wall, after settlement there had been abandoned.
The city wall itself is clearly badly eroded at this spot. It is far
more visible in a magnetogram from the city’s southern district
(fig. 62.9). There its course and even the bastions known from exca-
vations are quite visible. The image moreover shows that parts of
the wall on its inner and outer faces were constructed of fired bricks.
For long stretches these have collapsed, indicated by negative
anomalies or lighter lines. It is also apparent that the wall was made
up of more separate lines than were previously known, and that the
canal that circled the city ran just outside it. The entire wall complex
340 R esearch in and a bout U ru k
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
was nearly 40 meters wide. The wall itself, with its inner and outer
shells of fired bricks, is some 9 meters thick, an observation that cor-
responds to the excavation findings.
Further details about Uruk’s structure are provided by the mag-
netogram of the southwest gate of Area 1 (fig. 62.10), which at nearly
15 meters wide can be interpreted as a floodgate where the inner
city’s large west and central canals flowed out through the wall. On
the outside the gate was flanked by towers and strengthened with
fired brick. Drill coring here encountered the base of the canal at a
depth of roughly 5 meters. Fragments of fired bricks from the coring
confirm the gate’s construction. Directly in front of the gate, this
canal intersected with the one running outside the wall. Access to
the city by land was not possible.
The main canal flowing southward outside the city wall is carved
into an abandoned arm of the river (positive magnetization con-
trast). Outside the city limit lies a necropolis from the second half
of the second millennium bc with burials in large vessels, whose
magnetic dipole anomalies are clearly visible in the magnetogram. Notes
1 Epic of Gilgamesh, Tablet I, lines 3, 11, 18–23, in George 2003, 1:539.
Some of the graves consisted of two storage jars placed together,
2 See Seren 2007.
as can be inferred from the doubled dipole anomalies (see fig. 35.7).
3 See Becker 1991; Fassbinder 2015; and Fassbinder 2016.
In front of the floodgate at a distance of 240 meters a small side
4 See Linck, Fassbinder, Buckreuss, and Seren 2012.
canal branches off to the southeast, expanding roughly midway
5 See Stone 2008.
in front of a large building of fired bricks into a small harbor struc- 6 Carried out in collaboration between the German Archaeological Institute;
ture. The building, measuring an extraordinary 54 × 43 meters, could the German Aerospace Center, Oberpfaffenhofen; the working unit
be Uruk’s second New Year Festival House. Relief bricks, proba- Geophysical Prospection of the Bavarian State Department of Monuments
bly from the second half of the second millennium bc , along with and Sites; and the company Definiens, generously supported by the German
Federal Foreign Office and the European Space Imaging company. See
bricks bearing the building inscription of Nabonid (556–539 bc ) and
Becker, van Ess, Fassbinder, Kiefl, Lingenfelder, Schreier, and Zevenbergen
pottery from the Seleucid period (third/second century bc ), were
2006.
picked up on the structure’s surface. Remnants of a thick mud-brick 7 Since satellite imagery is for budgetary reasons rarely available to
wall around the building visible in the magnetogram could belong archaeologists, but is provided with greater regularity and more frequent
to an older structure. From the magnetogram one can speculate updating to security units of a state, the idea was to provide the Iraqi security
on the processional route of a ritual boat from the large temples in authorities with this facility. If and when serious changes to an ancient
site are observed, the antiquities authorities should be informed by the
the center of Uruk by way of the canals to this festival house. Such a
local security authorities. This approach has so far failed, owing to frequent
boat is pictured on a seal from the end of the fourth millennium bc
administrative changes and resulting changes in the offices’ personnel.
(see fig. 39.1).
8 See Finkbeiner 1991.
In some parts of the magnetograms considerable flood damage 9 See Falkenstein 1941; and Cocquerillat 1968.
can be recognized, for example, in the area of the southwest gate
or inside the city along the west canal (fig. 62.3). In the middle area
large portions of the residential architecture have been washed
away. These inundations are also readily visible in the satellite image.
They provide some idea of the problems involved in controlling
the water flow of the canals. At the end of the fifth millennium bc
Uruk had been founded in the water, in a landscape similar to
the marshes at the delta of the Euphrates and Tigris in present-
day Iraq (see fig. 3.3). However, as the city grew, and at the latest
after the building of the city wall, the water had to be regulated con-
stantly. This seems to have been accomplished by building a large
number of canals, even inside the city. To judge from the magneto-
grams, streets are only encountered in the higher settlement areas.
The city wall must have been interrupted by several gates exclu-
sively for water; however, in addition, one street gate is known from
archaeology.
The combination of satellite images and magnetograms has
proven to be ideal for prospecting in large city complexes like Uruk.
To be sure, it can hardly be used in the city center, which has been
greatly disturbed by archaeological excavation and presents too
many archaeological levels to be distinguished by geophysical pros-
pecting alone. In the city’s outer districts, however, and along the
city wall with its gates, magnetic prospecting promises to consider-
ably expand our knowledge of the city.
U ru k U r ban S tructures in M agnetic and S atellite I mages 341
PROOF 1 2 3 4 5
 FIGURE 62.9 In the south of magnetic dipole anomalies are clearly visible in the magnetogram. Notes
the city the city wall was inves- 1 Epic of Gilgamesh, Tablet I, lines 3, 11, 18–23, in George 2003, 1:539.
Some of the graves consisted of two storage jars placed together,
tigated by geophysical mea-
2 See Seren 2007.
surement. Its construction is as can be inferred from the doubled dipole anomalies (see fig. 35.7).
more sophisticated than had 3 See Becker 1991; Fassbinder 2015; and Fassbinder 2016.
In front of the floodgate at a distance of 240 meters a small side
been previously determined by 4 See Linck, Fassbinder, Buckreuss, and Seren 2012.
archaeology. Very dark anoma-
canal branches off to the southeast, expanding roughly midway
5 See Stone 2008.
lies show that parts of the wall in front of a large building of fired bricks into a small harbor struc- 6 Carried out in collaboration between the German Archaeological Institute;
were built of fired bricks. ture. The building, measuring an extraordinary 54 × 43 meters, could the German Aerospace Center, Oberpfaffenhofen; the working unit
be Uruk’s second New Year Festival House. Relief bricks, proba- Geophysical Prospection of the Bavarian State Department of Monuments

bly from the second half of the second millennium bc , along with
bricks bearing the building inscription of Nabonid (556–539 bc ) and
pottery from the Seleucid period (third/second century bc ), were
picked up on the structure’s surface. Remnants of a thick mud-brick
wall around the building visible in the magnetogram could belong
to an older structure. From the magnetogram one can speculate
on the processional route of a ritual boat from the large temples in
the center of Uruk by way of the canals to this festival house. Such a
boat is pictured on a seal from the end of the fourth millennium bc
(see fig. 39.1).
In some parts of the magnetograms considerable flood damage
and Sites; and the company Definiens, generously supported by the German
Federal Foreign Office and the European Space Imaging company. See
Becker, van Ess, Fassbinder, Kiefl, Lingenfelder, Schreier, and Zevenbergen
2006.
7 Since satellite imagery is for budgetary reasons rarely available to
archaeologists, but is provided with greater regularity and more frequent
updating to security units of a state, the idea was to provide the Iraqi security
authorities with this facility. If and when serious changes to an ancient
site are observed, the antiquities authorities should be informed by the
local security authorities. This approach has so far failed, owing to frequent
administrative changes and resulting changes in the offices’ personnel.
8 See Finkbeiner 1991.
9 See Falkenstein 1941; and Cocquerillat 1968.

FIGURE 62.10 Magnetogram of the

southwest Area 1 with the southwest
gate, through which Uruk’s main
canal exited the city; also shown is a
large fired-brick structure.
archaeological data and their structure, the two smaller buildings,
still quite large at roughly 630 square meters, were probably built at
the same time. The archaeological survey data help us to interpret
the clusters of black round structures to the west of them as the
remains of ceramic kilns from the second half of the second millen-
nium bc . Since the kilns produced a lot of smoke, they were estab-
lished at some distance from the settled part of the city, near the
city wall, after settlement there had been abandoned.
The city wall itself is clearly badly eroded at this spot. It is far
more visible in a magnetogram from the city’s southern district
(fig. 62.9). There its course and even the bastions known from exca-
vations are quite visible. The image moreover shows that parts of
the wall on its inner and outer faces were constructed of fired bricks.
For long stretches these have collapsed, indicated by negative
anomalies or lighter lines. It is also apparent that the wall was made
up of more separate lines than were previously known, and that the
canal that circled the city ran just outside it. The entire wall complex
was nearly 40 meters wide. The wall itself, with its inner and outer
shells of fired bricks, is some 9 meters thick, an observation that cor-
responds to the excavation findings.
Further details about Uruk’s structure are provided by the mag-
netogram of the southwest gate of Area 1 (fig. 62.10), which at nearly
15 meters wide can be interpreted as a floodgate where the inner
city’s large west and central canals flowed out through the wall. On
the outside the gate was flanked by towers and strengthened with
fired brick. Drill coring here encountered the base of the canal at a
depth of roughly 5 meters. Fragments of fired bricks from the coring
confirm the gate’s construction. Directly in front of the gate, this
canal intersected with the one running outside the wall. Access to
the city by land was not possible.
The main canal flowing southward outside the city wall is carved
into an abandoned arm of the river (positive magnetization con-
trast). Outside the city limit lies a necropolis from the second half
of the second millennium bc with burials in large vessels, whose
can be recognized, for example, in the area of the southwest gate
or inside the city along the west canal (fig. 62.3). In the middle area
large portions of the residential architecture have been washed
away. These inundations are also readily visible in the satellite image.
They provide some idea of the problems involved in controlling
the water flow of the canals. At the end of the fifth millennium bc
Uruk had been founded in the water, in a landscape similar to
the marshes at the delta of the Euphrates and Tigris in present-
day Iraq (see fig. 3.3). However, as the city grew, and at the latest
after the building of the city wall, the water had to be regulated con-
stantly. This seems to have been accomplished by building a large
number of canals, even inside the city. To judge from the magneto-
grams, streets are only encountered in the higher settlement areas.
The city wall must have been interrupted by several gates exclu-
sively for water; however, in addition, one street gate is known from
archaeology.
The combination of satellite images and magnetograms has
proven to be ideal for prospecting in large city complexes like Uruk.
To be sure, it can hardly be used in the city center, which has been
greatly disturbed by archaeological excavation and presents too
many archaeological levels to be distinguished by geophysical pros-
pecting alone. In the city’s outer districts, however, and along the
city wall with its gates, magnetic prospecting promises to consider-
ably expand our knowledge of the city.

340 R esearch in and a bout U ru k U ru k U r ban S tructures in M agnetic and S atellite I mages 341

PROOF 1 2 View
3 4publication
5 stats PROOF 1 2 3 4 5