DOI article:
Ellison, Rosemary: The agriculture of Mesopotamia c. 3000-600 B.C.
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49001#0184
176
R. ELLISON
for the shaduf in Mesopotamia comes from
an Akkadian cylinder seal which shows what
appears to be a single vertical support for the
counter-weighted bar. The bucket seems to
be suspended by a rope and the whole struc-
ture is operated by one man. The cutting of
the seal is rather schematic with much use
made of the drill. The only other recognis-
able dlustration of a shaduf comes from the
Neo-Assyrian period on a relief from
Sennacherib’s reigns (704-681 B.C.). In this
two shadufs are placed by a river bank and
men are shown in the act of drawing water.
The main theme of the relief is the transport
of bull colossi. References in texts to the
shaduf are rare but in the Old Babylonian
period ‘men of the shaduf were involved in a
dispute in the Kish area, and some fields at
Dilbat were irrigated by shaduf (Kupper
1959, 37; Laessoe 1953, 14). There is less
evidence for the use of the waterwheel. Two
Old Babylonian letters refer to some sort of
‘machine’ which was erected for raising the
water level, but it is not clear what type of
‘machine’ is involved. (Laessoe 1953, 22-26,
for a full discussion of waterwheels).
The importance of free-flow irrigation and
the construction and repair of canals can be
seen from the frequent references in the
cuneiform texts. There, references appear in
letters, year-names, historical inscriptions
etc., and emphasise the important part play-
ed by irrigation. But it is difficult to judge
the actual extent of the irrigation system
from the texts alone. It was politically useful
for the king or local ruler to stress the way in
which he cared for the irrigation system and
so the economic well-being of his subjects. It
is also difficult to distinguish whether new
canals are being built, or whether repairs are
being done.
Surface surveys carried out to established
settlement patterns can give an indication of
the probable irrigation system. Once the
sites have been dated, they are plotted ac-
cording to date, and it is assumed that they
lie along major water-courses. The impres-
sion given by the surveys is that the settle-
ments followed a dendritic drainage pattern
which was probably the one followed by the
rivers and that there is little evidence for
large-scale constructions of canals going
against this natural pattern, especially in the
third millennium. A study of the surveys
(Adams 1965; Adams and Nissen 1972; Gib-
son 1972; Jacobsen 1969) shows that there
were many changes in the numbers and pat-
tern of the settlements. One of the possible
causes of these changes is the abandonment
of farmland and the bringing under cultiva-
tion of new areas, either because the land
previously cultivated had become less fertile,
perhaps because of salinity, or because it was
increasingly difficult for the water to reach
the fields because of the build-up of sedi-
ment at the head of the canals caused by
years of irrigation. Smaller canals which run
along fields cannot be distinguished in sur-
face surveys but details of them are known
from studies of texts (see e.g. Sauren 1966).
Work done on the main watercourses was
probably restricted to cleaning out the beds,
strengthening the banks and perhaps
straightening the line of sections.
Administrative texts and letters from the
second millennium are full of references to
maintenance work on canals (e.g. Walters
1970, Nos. 3, 14, 102 & 103; ARMT III
Nos. 1, 4, 2, 77, 79; ARMT VI Nos. 1, 2, 3,
4, 5, 6, 7, 8). From these we learn that
landowners had to make a contribution of
barley towards the wages of canal workers
for the upkeep of the canals in proportion to
the amount of land they owned. One major
task was to keep the canals clear of water-
plants and reeds which could easily choke
them. Breaches in canals were fixed with
reeds. However these did not stop oc-
R. ELLISON
for the shaduf in Mesopotamia comes from
an Akkadian cylinder seal which shows what
appears to be a single vertical support for the
counter-weighted bar. The bucket seems to
be suspended by a rope and the whole struc-
ture is operated by one man. The cutting of
the seal is rather schematic with much use
made of the drill. The only other recognis-
able dlustration of a shaduf comes from the
Neo-Assyrian period on a relief from
Sennacherib’s reigns (704-681 B.C.). In this
two shadufs are placed by a river bank and
men are shown in the act of drawing water.
The main theme of the relief is the transport
of bull colossi. References in texts to the
shaduf are rare but in the Old Babylonian
period ‘men of the shaduf were involved in a
dispute in the Kish area, and some fields at
Dilbat were irrigated by shaduf (Kupper
1959, 37; Laessoe 1953, 14). There is less
evidence for the use of the waterwheel. Two
Old Babylonian letters refer to some sort of
‘machine’ which was erected for raising the
water level, but it is not clear what type of
‘machine’ is involved. (Laessoe 1953, 22-26,
for a full discussion of waterwheels).
The importance of free-flow irrigation and
the construction and repair of canals can be
seen from the frequent references in the
cuneiform texts. There, references appear in
letters, year-names, historical inscriptions
etc., and emphasise the important part play-
ed by irrigation. But it is difficult to judge
the actual extent of the irrigation system
from the texts alone. It was politically useful
for the king or local ruler to stress the way in
which he cared for the irrigation system and
so the economic well-being of his subjects. It
is also difficult to distinguish whether new
canals are being built, or whether repairs are
being done.
Surface surveys carried out to established
settlement patterns can give an indication of
the probable irrigation system. Once the
sites have been dated, they are plotted ac-
cording to date, and it is assumed that they
lie along major water-courses. The impres-
sion given by the surveys is that the settle-
ments followed a dendritic drainage pattern
which was probably the one followed by the
rivers and that there is little evidence for
large-scale constructions of canals going
against this natural pattern, especially in the
third millennium. A study of the surveys
(Adams 1965; Adams and Nissen 1972; Gib-
son 1972; Jacobsen 1969) shows that there
were many changes in the numbers and pat-
tern of the settlements. One of the possible
causes of these changes is the abandonment
of farmland and the bringing under cultiva-
tion of new areas, either because the land
previously cultivated had become less fertile,
perhaps because of salinity, or because it was
increasingly difficult for the water to reach
the fields because of the build-up of sedi-
ment at the head of the canals caused by
years of irrigation. Smaller canals which run
along fields cannot be distinguished in sur-
face surveys but details of them are known
from studies of texts (see e.g. Sauren 1966).
Work done on the main watercourses was
probably restricted to cleaning out the beds,
strengthening the banks and perhaps
straightening the line of sections.
Administrative texts and letters from the
second millennium are full of references to
maintenance work on canals (e.g. Walters
1970, Nos. 3, 14, 102 & 103; ARMT III
Nos. 1, 4, 2, 77, 79; ARMT VI Nos. 1, 2, 3,
4, 5, 6, 7, 8). From these we learn that
landowners had to make a contribution of
barley towards the wages of canal workers
for the upkeep of the canals in proportion to
the amount of land they owned. One major
task was to keep the canals clear of water-
plants and reeds which could easily choke
them. Breaches in canals were fixed with
reeds. However these did not stop oc-