The Threshold in Ancient Assyria

In 1978  the scholar Pauline Albenda published ‘Assyrian Carpets in Stone’, in JANES [the
Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University], vol10,  which reviews the surviving representations of carpet designs in stone reliefs. Not much attention has been paid to these slabs, but they offer the possibility of insight into the significance of the use of similar motifs in other contexts, most notably of the sacred tree.

We know that ‘decorated threshold slabs are not known to have existed in Assyria before the second half of the 8th century BCE, and then only sporadically. Previous to this period important entrances in the royal residences, as well as temples were often covered with plain limestone or alabaster slabs’. *1 

Stone pavements and portal thresholds in the 9th and 8th centuries were commonly inscribed with royal inscriptions, such as those in the palace of Ashurnasirpal II (883-859 BCE) and the Ninurta temple at Nimrud*2 and ‘in various chambers at Fort Shalmaneser’*3 and the palace of Sargon II at Khorsabad *4. 

Albenda expands on the significance of the threshold, saying that ‘where entranceways containing threshold inscriptions are also flanked by door guardians and decorated further with wall reliefs, the resultant effect is to instill divine protection whose meaning
is expanded in specific terms *5. ‘Thus, the substitution of carved decorated thresholds for the inscriptions at important entranceways…. makes it certain that the floor decorations served a significant role, similar to that performed by the door guardians and wall reliefs’*6. Upon which I shall expand later.

She suggests that ‘the sudden interest in displaying stone versions of rugs and carpets at important entrances after the middle of the 8th century was spurred by the development of pile carpets. This is, as she says, ‘speculation’, but it is supported by a similar judgement by R.S. Young for ‘the apparent invention of the art of floor mosaic-making in Phrygia, which occurred at about the same time .*7 However it does suggest that there was some factor at work which prompted the architects of the time to incorporate representations of carpet designs in stone in important buildings. ‘The origin of this innovative technique of carpet production is unknown, although pictorial evidence suggests that one area of manufacture is to be sought in some region west of Assyria, whence the method was transmitted east to the royal workshops’. As evidence for this, Albenda refers to three graphical representations which are dated to the reign of Shalmaneser III (858-824 BCE) and which ‘illustrate among processions of tribute-bearers carpets of substantial size and weight, rolled and hung over poles carried by two attendants. In each instance the fabrics are presented by the inhabitants of some locality to the west of Assyria’*8.

Albenda points out that woven floor coverings do appear in several second millennium BCE representations, but in general these are rare. One of these is on an orthostat from Alac Hϋyϋk in Anatolia, dated approximately to the 14 cent BCE, ‘which depicts a rectangular fabric, one end possessing fringes grouped into three curved clusters, placed on the ground beneath the throne of the deity.’ Another is from a Egyptian wall painting dating to the time of Akhenaten, where ‘a large red carpet with rows of yellow and blue diamonds in its field is spread under the feet of the pharaoh... and his family’. She notes that ‘the carpet is fringed with a lotus and bud garland, which here seems to be an attachment. This painting may provide the clue to the origin of the border garland designs that formed part of the rugs in later Assyrian periods.’ 

Indeed it may, but not in the sense of the borrowing of a design, as we shall see.

The elaborate tassels could initially, she suggests, be attached after the rug was woven ‘in order to enrich the appearance of the fabric’. However, ‘by the Late Assyrian period ornamental attachments were no longer utilized and in their stead similar motifs were incorporated into the carpet pattern, as suggested by the Assyrian carved threshold pavements’. Albenda expands on this, and says that, on the basis of the designs on the stone threshold slabs,

Assyrian carpet designs differed from those used to embellish contemporary garment textiles which generally combined figural and floral elements, and occasionally emblems that can be readily identified with specific deities. This group of textile decoration was favored particularly in the 9th century BCE., while a second group, limited to floral decoration and geometric patterns, was applied less frequently.*9 In the course of the 8th and 7th centuries BCE, however, as a survey of the Assyrian wall reliefs demonstrates, the second group of textile designs took precedence. The grid pattern showing concentric squares was popular during the reign of Tiglath Pileser III (745-727 BCE), and this was gradually superseded in the reign of Sargon II (721-705 BCE.) by the use of an overall pattern of rosettes and concentric circles. Still later, during the period of Ashurbanipal (668-627 BCE.), a rich array of emblematic, floral and geometric elements was selected to decorate garment textiles.

However, as she points out, ‘on the thresholds the motifs are limited to geometric and floral patterns arranged in predetermined compositions. The persistence of a select number of design elements on the threshold slabs makes it likely that such floor displays were the prerogative of the royal family . As she points out earlier in her article, ‘textual evidence indicates that thrones were set upon a carpet’.*10 ‘While the carpet compositions remain decorative in appearance, an analytical study may reveal that symbolic significance underlies one or more of the motifs’*11

This is almost certainly the case, but Albenda is thinking in terms of symbolism of particular gods of the Assyrian religion, and suggests that:

…the six-rayed star pattern may actually be a variant of the Ishtar emblem and the floral quatrefoil, if reduced to its simplest form, can be likened to the Maltese cross with central boss and oblique ray lines, generally associated with the god Shamash.

From the second half of the 8th century onwards,

 the positioning of stone blocks for important doorways became standardised and consisted of two main sections: the portal threshold, a single stone which covered the entrance area and which projected slightly beyond the side walls, and the inner threshold, consisting of three slabs together belonging functionally to the threshold*12. As a unit, the inner threshold extends beyond the width of the portal, a distance sufficient to include pivot stones which support the door leaves. The two end slabs therefore have cuts through which the pivots extend. The circular cuts are oftentimes edged with a double or triple raised band. The central block contains a rectangular slot centered near the edge adjacent to the portal threshold, into which the bolt was dropped when the doors were closed and locked.*13 

Apparently the three slab inner threshold design ‘underwent some modification during
Ashurbanipal’s reign in the 7th century BCE., when a single block was used
occasionally for smaller entrances’. Albenda illustrates these in plates 19 & 20.

There is an illustration in the article of a threshold slab from Nimrud which dates to the reign of Tiglath Pileser III, *14 which seems to be the earliest example of carved decoration applied to pavement blocks. This drawing shows the left slab of an inner threshold in the Central Palace; but ‘unfortunately its exact findspot was not recorded. The drawing shows that the entire surface was decorated with floral motifs arranged in horizontal rows and, based upon later examples, the design must have extended to the other two slabs which formed originally part of the inner threshold’.

Other finds were made by Layard in the North-West Palace at Nimrud, *15 in the Burnt Palace at Nimrud a carved threshold slab was discovered ‘in a level which the excavators have assigned to the reign of Sargon II’*16. Albenda notes that the grid-pattern on the slab has parallels with those found in one of the residences at Khorsabad.’*17; two separate groups of carved, patterned pavement slabs were discovered also in Khorsabad, ‘in
what may have been residences reserved for members of the royal family’, which she suggests may be ‘a further indication that this novel form of applied decoration was used more frequently during Sargon’s reign’, although no examples were found in the king’s palace at Khorsabad. 

Portal pavements were found in Residence K at Khorsabad, where three portals connected ‘one side of the great hall to a long chamber. The portal pavements were decorated with the same motifs: the center field was filled with quatrefoils and rosettes, surrounded on all sides by a lotus-and cone garland band’*18; Residence L (also Khorsabad) ‘had three portals … aligned to form a connecting link between the central court and two chambers, each succeeding the other. The pavement blocks set in the entrances were carved with an overall pattern of small squares, each inscribed with a rosette*19. Near the center of the stone was a seven line inscription which identified the owner of the residence as Sinahuser, Sargon’s full brother and vizier’*20

By the time we get to the reign of Sennacherib (704-681 BCE), ‘elaborate carved pavements were used extensively for important entrances of the South-West Palace at Nineveh’*21. 

This concern  for providing elegant approaches continued into the period of Ashurbanipal, for not only were the grand portals leading into rooms I and M of the North Palace embellished with carved pavements (pls 23, 25), but also other doorways leading out of these and other chambers (pls. 17, 18, 20). From the archaeological evidence available, one must conclude that the desire to enhance important entrances grew in importance in the course of the late 8th and early centuries.*22

It can be argued that this embellishment of entrances is a design issue, or simply a matter of taste, as Albenda appears to be suggesting, though she has referenced what would have been understood as a more practical function by the Assyrians, earlier in her article, when she suggested that  the 'substitution of carved decorated thresholds for the inscriptions at important entranceways…. makes it certain that the floor decorations served a significant role, similar to that performed by the door guardians and wall reliefs’

There are three types of garland borders which are found on Assyrian carved threshold slabs: lotus and bud, lotus and cone, and palmette. The contention of this chapter is that boundaries had an especial philosophical/theological and symbolic significance to the Assyrians in particular, as well as to wider Mesopotamia and Asia, and that the details of
the border decorations are tied into this symbolism. The garland borders are associated in terms of design with the sacred tree, discussed in Being, Kabbalah, and the Assyrian Sacred Tree (in The Sacred History of Being). And philosophically the concept of the boundary is one with the concept which the sacred tree enshrines – an object which represents transformation, transcendence, a point of departure, of coming forth and also of passing away. The boundary of anything is the point at which these transformations can occur, and something of the properties of the boundary – particularly the fact that it must be described essentially in negative terms – seems to have been understood as facilitating transformation. Therefore boundaries would be understood of themselves as of great importance.

In consideration of the significance of details of the design of the garland border, Albenda argues, on grounds of practical design, that ‘when planning for the rhythmical aspect of the garland around two or more sides, the corners must have been of prime importance since in every instance each corner contains a large open lotus or a palmette, depending upon the garland type. Additionally, the corner garland stems are compressed to form double straight lines.’ Looking at the question of this detail from a different point of view, in which the garland is a graphical way – a formal way - of reinforcing, of redoubling, of multiplying the power of the threshold, it is likely that the border design represents, as already suggested, an unfurled sacred tree, alternating bud and blossom, and where the borders meet at right angles, so that two boundaries meet, with the corollary that the quality of limit which that meeting represents is doubled, the formal marking at that point is similarly enhanced. The sacred tree design is often found in corners, for the same
philosophical reason, rather than, as most Assyriologists would have it, functioning as a mere‘filler’ motif.

The chronology of the garland types begins with the lotus and bud [Albenda, p6]. ‘It appears on the inner threshold found in the Central Palace at Nimrud, where the motif is repeated twice among horizontal rows of rosettes separated by plain stripes [illustr pl 1]. The flowers are connected by scalloped-shaped stems supported by a base ring. A plain triple arch defines the calyx of the closed and open lotuses. The open flower displays nine petals, while the petals of the closed bud are indicated by a double line drawn down its center. 

This lotus and bud design appears again in the reign of Sennacherib (illustr. pl 15), but the design is subtly modified in its details. Similar garlands appear in thresholds dating to Ashurbanipal’s reign, again having undergone subtle modifications.* 23 During the 8th
century BCE, the cone garland was replaced by the lotus and cone. The lotus and cone garlands are found at Khorsabad [Residence K – illustr. Pl 3 Albenda] –

 the plants are supported by a triple base ring, over which the terminals of the scalloped shaped stems project. The cone appears small and has a narrow body. Its scales are rendered by linear cross-hatchings. This garland type recurs in the next period, at which time the cone seems to be broader, particularly at the base (pls8-9). The base ring may be either plain or banded. The stem terminals emerge over the base ring and curve either down or out. 

The lotus and cone design is found frequently on threshold slabs dating to the reign of Sennacherib [illustr pls. 11-13], but, curiously, never found on the thresholds used in the time of Ashurbanipal. As for the palmette garland motif, it ‘appears for the first time on the portal thresholds from Ashurbanipal’s reign, where it is applied third in a series of decorated bands, following the lotus-and-bud and rosettes (pls 22-23). In the one example of its use on an inner threshold, it occupies the side of the slab that was originally adjacent to the entrance (pls. 17-18). The palmette consists of nine petals of graduating size that radiate from an arched center. Rising over the base ring which supports the flower, the stem terminals divide into four: an outer pair that terminate in upward-curled volutes, below which is an inner pair with downward-curled volutes.’ * 24

As for the centre field designs, Albenda points out that the centre field of the thresholds featured motifs restricted to floral and geometric elements. She also notes that these designs were properly though out ‘according to a basic formula which provided for the orderly division of the parts to the total design.’*25


Notes


1 p4 JANES 10.
2 see A. H. Layard’s Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon, London 1853, 359-60.
3 n22 Albenda: Mallowan, ‘Nimrud’, I, 42, pl.9; ibid., II 393, pl 319.
4 n23 Albenda: G. Loud, ‘Khorsabad’, Part I. Excavations in the Palace and at a City Gate, OIP 38 (1936), 122-25
5 n24 Albenda is referring to: Paley, King of the World, 120-121
6 Albenda: JANES 10 p4.
7 Albenda, JANES 10, p1; the suggestion by Young appears in ‘Early Mosaics at Gordion’
Expedition 7 (1965), 12-13.
8 The three examples are: The Black Obelisk, the bronze door bands from Balawat, and those carved on the throne dais excavated at Nimrud. On the Black Obelisk, ‘the carpets which form part of the tribute sent by Marduk-apal-usur of Suhi (a district on the middle Euphrates) possess carefully delineated fringes’; those on the bronze bands from Balawat showing tribute from the cities of Tyre and Sidon show less attention to this detail; ‘and those transported by attendants from the land of Unqi (the Amuq plain in North Syria). The inscriptions on the Black Obelisk and on the throne base describe the carpets as ‘bright-colored (woolen) garments and (linen) garments’. They are not described as carpets.
9 n15 – J.V. Canby, “Decorated Garments in Ashurnasirpal’s sculptures,” Iraq 33 (1971), 31-3. For examples of the second group, see S. M. Paley, King of the World: Ashur-nasir-pal II of Assyria 883-859 B.C. (New York, 1976), pls. 22a, 23c, 25a.
10 n12 – Barrelet, R Asyr 71 (1977), 85. Of related interest, the upper surface of the throne base of Shalmaneser III was decorated with an intricate honeycomb and rosette pattern, which may represent a rug. See A. Moortgat, The Art of Ancient Mesopotamia, (New York, 1969), pl. 269.
11 p3 JANES 10.
12  this arrangement is illustrated in Fig 2
13 a feature also illustrated by Frankfort in The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient – pl 223, p196, ‘The Late Assyrian Period’, where the rectangular slot in a door-sill from Khorsabad can be clearly seen, cut into the rosette border which marks the inner limit of the outer design of lotus blossoms, alternating between open and closed forms.’
14 illustrated in Albenda, plate 1. The slab is no longer in existence.
15 ‘a large pavement “ornamented with flowers and scroll-work”’. Max Mallowan found that
the part of the palace where this pavement was found was the domestic wing during Sargon’s renovation of the building‘ [Mallowan, ‘Nimrud’, I, 112-13]
16 illustrated in plate 7, Albenda, JANES 10
17 Albenda: p5
18 illustrated in plate 3, Albenda, JANES 10
19 illustr. Albenda, pl. 4, JANES 10
20 fn 28 Loud and Altman, ‘Khorsabad, The Citadel and the Town’, OIP 40 1938, 48-49
21 illustrated Albenda JANES 10, pls. 13, 14.15.
22 Albenda, JANES 10, p5.
23 Albenda, p9 states that the garland motif first appears in Assyria “as part of a wall painting decoration in Kar-Tukulti-Ninurta, dated to the 13th century BCE.’ (n 40., Moortgat, Ancient Mesopotamia, 118, fig 89). Later on, in the 9th century BCE, it appears ‘as a textile pattern reproduced in stone’. On the basis of the evidence of the wall reliefs, says Albenda, ‘it was of minor importance in the decorative arts’. But she notes that ‘two main types are known at this time, a cone garland and a floral garland combined from the so-called lily, palmette, and cone. The first type consisted of a series of cones, each decorated with cross-hatching and surmounting a ring base, connected by scalloped stems. [n41 - A. H. Layard, The Monuments of Nineveh. From Drawings Made on the Spot (London, 1849), 11, pl 47.
24 Albenda, p7
25 Albenda, p7