In the first place, most of the surface remains, are, as elsewhere,
pottery sherds. These should tell us their date by their appearance.
It must be said, however, that our experience on the subject of the
development of Mesopotamian pottery is limited. Owing to the
attention of Assyriologists having been so long focussed on the study
of the cuneiform records, to the neglect of general archaeology, we
have nothing like the knowledge of these things that we have in Egypt
or in Greece. Such minutiae of information as our common knowledge of
ceramic development in Egypt or in Greece gives us with regard to
these countries, enabling us to date sites with great accuracy, are
not vet available for Mesopotamia. And if for this reason all
possible information as to the objects found on archaeological sites
is desirable, it is also impossible yet to give the visitor any
absolute guide to the distinctive appearance of pottery at every
period. The main periods are known. The 'prehistoric', the Sumerian,
the late Babylonian, and the Parthian styles are easily
distinguishable. If a visitor is able to tell us that such-and-such a
mound is prehistoric or is Parthian, or that settlements of both
periods existed on it, this is what we want. One of the most general
of criteria with regard to pottery is whether it is glazed or not. If
glazed, it is, generally speaking, late. Other things besides pottery
are of course found, and the presence or the absence of metal, and
the occurrence of stone implements, are important. But it must be
remembered that stone was used long into the 'Bronze' Age, and
contemporaneously with copper. There is no sudden break between the
two periods. Fragments of shell and mother-of-pearl, often with
incised designs, are very characteristic of the earliest period.
Coins are of late date; a tell with coins on it is certain to contain
buildings as late as the fourth or third century B.C. (though it may