REVIEWS

60 feet to the alluvial bottom of the land of Sumer. On still marshy ground the first
settlers had made a sort of platform of reeds, laid criss-cross in regular strata, to dwell
on. Above the reed bed, 5 m. thick, the walls of the shaft bristle with relics, providing
a concrete summary of Mesopotamian prehistory from the first moment the land was
habitable till its inhabitants had accumulated the wealth and leisure to erect monumental
temples and devise a system of writing and numeral notation. The pottery from the
shaft is here described very fully by von Haller.
At the bottom lay the fine painted ware already familiar from a1 ’Ubaid, including
the same sauce-boat type and associated already with imported obsidian. Already,
however, in the second stratum (but the excavators numbered their strata from the top
downwards, I being Archaic Sumerian) appear sherds of new fabrics first identified in
Mesopotamia at this site ; the new fabrics oust the painted ware altogether by stratum 6
(XIII). The fabrics in question are monochrome and owe their aesthetic effect to surface
treatment, slips and burnish. One is red, others grey. Among the latter two varieties
must probably be distinguished though the distinction is not made in the present
publication. One fabric with a burnished black slip reminds one of Yortan pottery and
is presumably a carboniferous ware, owing its colour to carbon ; the other is more
probably ferruginous and grey because of the reduction of the iron oxides in the clay
by the process described classically by Forsdyke in connexion with the Minyan ware of
Greece. Analysis would be desirable to settle the point. The red and grey wares seem
to denote a break with the normal Mesopotamian tradition and might according to Frank-
fort have been introduced by Armenoids from the north. Moreover they are common
to Mesopotamia, India and Anau and may belong to a complex to which the potter’s
wheel and oven and presumably also wheeled vehicles may also belong. None of these
speculations find place in the report, whereas Heinrich emphasizes the general continuity
throughout the prehistoric periods. In any case the red and grey wares are relatively
rare, the bulk of the pottery found with them being coarse and pale but related in form
to that of the lower levels.
The ‘ foreign wares ’ last sporadically into stratum 14(v), but are virtually absent
in 16 (II/III) which should correspond to the Jemdet Nasr period as known from Ur
and Kish. The appropriate polychrome pottery is, however, practically unrepresented,
and the layer is so dated because of the form of the bricks and of the script.
The excavations at Erech are memorable not only because they have revealed a
completely new phase of Babylonian civilization and the first stages in the development
of Sumerian writing and religious architecture, but also because the excavators after each
campaign have promptly issued a perfectly objective but thoroughly adequate account
of their discoveries illustrated by a sufficiency of figures and plans which suffer if anything
from excess of detail. Their results are thus available for the assistance of, and analysis
by, other excavators and researchers. Is it too much to demand that this practice,
initiated long ago by Sir Arthur Evans in Crete, should be imposed upon other excavators
in the Near East? Without it progress must be slow, synthesis is impossible and
valuable evidence may be ignored and destroyed. V. GORDON CHILDE.
TARA: a pagan sanctuary of ancient Ireland. By R. A. S. MACALISTER. Charles
Scribner’s Sons, 1931. pp. 208,and 16illustrations. 3 dolZars.
Professor Macalister’s previous study of Tara was published in the Proceedings of
the Royal Irish Academyfor 1919. T o the archaeological material there is unfortunately
little to add, though aerial photography, while apparently leading to no new discoveries,
 ANTIQUITY
now provides several clear and useful plans. Moreover, the account is entirely rewritten,
with some additional material and certain speculations omitted, and is made accessible
to a wider public.
There is little enough about the Hill of Tara today to indicate its fame in early
Ireland, but its grassy mounds have this in common with so many prehistoric sites ;
they command extensive views over the surrounding plains, and the word Tara, in its
Irish form, is said to mean ‘ a place which commands a prospect ’. In chapter I, which
occupies nearly half the book, we have descriptions of the extant remains and topography
of the hill, following the guidance of Dindshenchas, a compilation of folklore in which the
relevant material must have been written, in the opinion of Dr Macalister, at Tara. The
chapter includes a photograph and descriptions of some remarkable rock-cut trenches
discovered during the disastrous search for the Ark of the Covenant conducted some
years ago by misguided followers of a certain religious faith. The remaining five chapters
are concerned with the historical and legendary accounts of Tara in its origin, splendour
and decline. The author claims a Bronze Age foundation for the site, and though it
must be admitted that the evidence is not conclusive, many archaeologists will be inclined
to agree, and all to hope that proof will be established by excavation. Much of the
substance of these chapters is ethnographical in character and some of Dr Macalister’s
interpretations must be considered conjectural. He has correlated incidents in
Irish legend with the myths of primitive man in many parts of the world, and has
performed a valuable service in giving new life to names and tales that constant repetition
had made frankly tedious to the inquirer into the evolution of early Ireland. With the
decline of paganism Tara soon lost its religious importance, and it was little more than
a name when, in the 9th century, the Northmen founded Dublin not far away, in the same
‘ metropolitan ’ region of the island. Throughout, the author’s v i d e style and reasoned
descriptions compel attention to a somewhat difficult subject. E. ESTYNEVANS.
DIE BECHERKULTUR I N DEN NIEDERLANDEN. By DR F. C . BURSCH,
Leiden : E . J. Brill, 1933. pp. 85, 41 figures and 6 plates. Price not stated.
In this work, which represents a doctoral dissertation at Marburg, we have a welcome
account of the Beaker-culture in the Netherlands enriched by the author’s own researches,
If there is one fault that we have to find it is the entire absence of any map. This
omission is especially serious for the many foreigners who will certainly wish to read the
book. We do not wish to imply that the author should have treated his subject differently,
but we feel that his arguments would in some cases have made a more direct appeal if
illustrated by maps. In any case a key-map to sites is essential in a work of such general
interest. In other respects the work is well produced, the barrow plans and sections
being especially clear.
The first section of the book is devoted to a description of the different forms of
grave associated with the Beaker people in the Netherlands, illustrated by the author’s
excavations carried out for the most part in Gelderland. Bursch rightlystresses the
importance of this line of enquiry and deplores its relative backwardness in other lands,
though without making due allowance for the favourable soil conditions of his own
country. Fundamentally he distinguishes two types of barrow with wooden structure :
(I) the barrows with circular palisades or lines of posts (palisaden- or pfostenhiigel),
and (2) cupola barrows (Kuppelgrab) with a circular chamber built up of horizontally
disposed logs, a type from which he does not distinguish separately the bee-hive
(bienenkorb) type of some authors. In the northern province van Giffen’s excavations