Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| the_late_uruk_period [2008/10/05 23:44] – englund | the_late_uruk_period [2016/01/05 21:28] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| The most prominent archaeological site of the Late Uruk period is the ancient city of Uruk, today a vast landscape of ruins in southern Babylonia. Since early in the twentieth century, German archaeologists have been carrying out excavations at regular intervals at the site (with interruptions during the two world wars and regional conflicts), which was continuously occupied from the fifth millennium B.C. until its abandonment in the fifth century A.D. For the time before 2000 B.C., eighteen archaic layers, counting from top to bottom, were identified within Eanna, the central, sacred precinct of the city. Those layers numbered VIII to IV were ascribed to the Late Uruk period, layer III to the Jemdet Nasr period. Layer I with its subphases dates to the Early Dynastic period (layer II turned out to have been an erroneous designation and has therefore been excluded from current terminology).The extensive buildings of the Uruk III levels were erected on great terraces after the older buildings had been razed and their grounds leveled. Thus, surface pits and holes were filled with cultural waste, consisting of weathered and broken mud-bricks as well as ash, animal remains, pottery sherds, and the like. | The most prominent archaeological site of the Late Uruk period is the ancient city of Uruk, today a vast landscape of ruins in southern Babylonia. Since early in the twentieth century, German archaeologists have been carrying out excavations at regular intervals at the site (with interruptions during the two world wars and regional conflicts), which was continuously occupied from the fifth millennium B.C. until its abandonment in the fifth century A.D. For the time before 2000 B.C., eighteen archaic layers, counting from top to bottom, were identified within Eanna, the central, sacred precinct of the city. Those layers numbered VIII to IV were ascribed to the Late Uruk period, layer III to the Jemdet Nasr period. Layer I with its subphases dates to the Early Dynastic period (layer II turned out to have been an erroneous designation and has therefore been excluded from current terminology).The extensive buildings of the Uruk III levels were erected on great terraces after the older buildings had been razed and their grounds leveled. Thus, surface pits and holes were filled with cultural waste, consisting of weathered and broken mud-bricks as well as ash, animal remains, pottery sherds, and the like. | ||
| - | {{: | + | {{ : |
| This debris had apparently been taken from large waste deposits located elsewhere, which seemingly had been left by the great storage facilities from the lower levels whenever they were cleared of refuse. In this manner, large amounts of various kinds of once sealed objects found their way into the debris. After authorized individuals had broken sealed stoppers or collars in order to gain access to the stored contents of containers, the fragmented sealings may have been kept somewhere for control purposes but then lost their purpose and were consequently disposed of.Written documents were unquestionably treated in the same way. They served to carry out future checks on, for example, the amounts of barley delivered to a particular granary on a specified day or to keep track of the amounts of barley or beer distributed to named laborers. After a certain time had lapsed, this information was no longer useful. Consequently, | This debris had apparently been taken from large waste deposits located elsewhere, which seemingly had been left by the great storage facilities from the lower levels whenever they were cleared of refuse. In this manner, large amounts of various kinds of once sealed objects found their way into the debris. After authorized individuals had broken sealed stoppers or collars in order to gain access to the stored contents of containers, the fragmented sealings may have been kept somewhere for control purposes but then lost their purpose and were consequently disposed of.Written documents were unquestionably treated in the same way. They served to carry out future checks on, for example, the amounts of barley delivered to a particular granary on a specified day or to keep track of the amounts of barley or beer distributed to named laborers. After a certain time had lapsed, this information was no longer useful. Consequently, | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| The tablets from Uruk, however, are not the only archaic documents known from this period. Similar tablets have been found in the northern Babylonian site of Jemdet Nasr, and some few originate from the sites of Khafaji and Tell Uqair, likewise situated in the northern part of Babylonia. Further, regular and irregular excavations conducted during the 1990s have resulted in the discovery of ca. 400 more archaic texts. These tablets appear to have come from the ancient cities of Umma, Adab and possibly Kish. Although their overall number is small in comparison to the corpus from Uruk, they share a great advantage for our research efforts. Whereas all of the Uruk tablets, found in dumps where they had been discarded after they were no longer of use, were as a rule in a fragmentary state, the tablets from the other sites were often fully preserved, presenting us with their complete original information. Since we are faced with the problem of describing texts of an unknown language, most arguments about their contents have to be derived from the internal context of the tablets themselves. Textual analysis thus depends on information as complete as possible. The number of completely preserved tablets available to us has been considerably augmented recently. Toward the end of 1988, a group of 82 archaic tablets, formerly part of the Swiss Erlenmeyer Collection in Basel, was auctioned off in London. Although their existence had been known since their purchase by the Erlenmeyers in the late 1950s, these tablets had not been subjected to detailed study. The example below demonstrates the extraordinary level of preservation in this 5000+ year old artifact. | The tablets from Uruk, however, are not the only archaic documents known from this period. Similar tablets have been found in the northern Babylonian site of Jemdet Nasr, and some few originate from the sites of Khafaji and Tell Uqair, likewise situated in the northern part of Babylonia. Further, regular and irregular excavations conducted during the 1990s have resulted in the discovery of ca. 400 more archaic texts. These tablets appear to have come from the ancient cities of Umma, Adab and possibly Kish. Although their overall number is small in comparison to the corpus from Uruk, they share a great advantage for our research efforts. Whereas all of the Uruk tablets, found in dumps where they had been discarded after they were no longer of use, were as a rule in a fragmentary state, the tablets from the other sites were often fully preserved, presenting us with their complete original information. Since we are faced with the problem of describing texts of an unknown language, most arguments about their contents have to be derived from the internal context of the tablets themselves. Textual analysis thus depends on information as complete as possible. The number of completely preserved tablets available to us has been considerably augmented recently. Toward the end of 1988, a group of 82 archaic tablets, formerly part of the Swiss Erlenmeyer Collection in Basel, was auctioned off in London. Although their existence had been known since their purchase by the Erlenmeyers in the late 1950s, these tablets had not been subjected to detailed study. The example below demonstrates the extraordinary level of preservation in this 5000+ year old artifact. | ||
| - | |||
| ===== The work of the project Archaic Texts from Uruk ===== | ===== The work of the project Archaic Texts from Uruk ===== | ||
| Line 34: | Line 33: | ||
| H. Nissen (adapted from Archaic Bookkeeping, | H. Nissen (adapted from Archaic Bookkeeping, | ||
| - | |||
| ===== Bibliography ===== | ===== Bibliography ===== | ||
| * Adams, R., Heartland of Cities: Surveys of Ancient Settlement and Land Use on the Central Foodplain of the Euphrates (Chicago 1981) | * Adams, R., Heartland of Cities: Surveys of Ancient Settlement and Land Use on the Central Foodplain of the Euphrates (Chicago 1981) | ||
| Line 134: | Line 132: | ||
| * Eichmann, R., Uruk: Die Architektur I, Von den Anfängen bis zur frühdynasitischer Zeit (=AUWE 14; Mainz 2008? | * Eichmann, R., Uruk: Die Architektur I, Von den Anfängen bis zur frühdynasitischer Zeit (=AUWE 14; Mainz 2008? | ||
| * Ellison, R., "Diet in Mesopotamia: | * Ellison, R., "Diet in Mesopotamia: | ||
| - | id., "Some Thoughts on the Diet of Mesopotamia from c. 3000 - 600 B.C.," Iraq 45 (1983) 146-150 | + | * id., "Some Thoughts on the Diet of Mesopotamia from c. 3000 - 600 B.C.," Iraq 45 (1983) 146-150 |
| * Englund, R., " | * Englund, R., " | ||
| * Englund, R., Verwaltung und Organisation der Ur III-Fischerei (=BBVO 10; Berlin) 1990 | * Englund, R., Verwaltung und Organisation der Ur III-Fischerei (=BBVO 10; Berlin) 1990 | ||
| Line 287: | Line 285: | ||
| * Nissen, H., Katalog der Archaischen Texte aus Uruk, ATU 4, Berlin forthcoming | * Nissen, H., Katalog der Archaischen Texte aus Uruk, ATU 4, Berlin forthcoming | ||
| * Nissen, H., Damerow, P., Englund, R., Frühe Schrift und Techniken der Wirtschaftsverwaltung im alten Vorderen Orient, Berlin 21991 | * Nissen, H., Damerow, P., Englund, R., Frühe Schrift und Techniken der Wirtschaftsverwaltung im alten Vorderen Orient, Berlin 21991 | ||
| - | id., Archaic Bookkeeping: | + | * id., Archaic Bookkeeping: |
| * Noegel, S., An Asymmetrical Janus Parallelism in the Gilgamesh Flood Story, ASJ 16, 306-308 | * Noegel, S., An Asymmetrical Janus Parallelism in the Gilgamesh Flood Story, ASJ 16, 306-308 | ||
| * Nöldecke, A., et al., Vierter vorläufiger Bericht ... Uruk-Warka ..., Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, | * Nöldecke, A., et al., Vierter vorläufiger Bericht ... Uruk-Warka ..., Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, | ||
| - | id., Funfter vorläufiger Bericht ..., APAW 1933, Nr. 5, Berlin 1934 | + | * id., Funfter vorläufiger Bericht ..., APAW 1933, Nr. 5, Berlin 1934 |
| - | id., Siebenter vorläufiger Bericht ..., APAW 1935, Nr. 4, Berlin 1936 | + | |
| - | id., Achter vorläufiger Bericht ..., APAW 1936, Nr. 13, Berlin 1937 | + | |
| - | id., Neunter vorläufiger Bericht ..., APAW 1937, Nr. 11, Berlin 1938 | + | |
| - | id., Zehnter vorläufiger Bericht ..., APAW 1939, Nr. 2, Berlin 1939 | + | |
| - | id., Elfter vorläufiger Bericht ..., APAW 1940, Nr. 3, Berlin 1940 | + | |
| * North, R., Status of the Warka Excavation, Or. 13, 1957, 185-255 | * North, R., Status of the Warka Excavation, Or. 13, 1957, 185-255 | ||
| * Oates, D., J., The Rise of Civilization, | * Oates, D., J., The Rise of Civilization, | ||
| * Oates, J., et al., The Sea-faring Merchants of Ur?, Antiquity 51, 1977, 221-234 | * Oates, J., et al., The Sea-faring Merchants of Ur?, Antiquity 51, 1977, 221-234 | ||
| * Oppenheim, A. L., On an Operational Device in Mesopotamian Bureaucracy, | * Oppenheim, A. L., On an Operational Device in Mesopotamian Bureaucracy, | ||
| - | id., Ancient Mesopotamia: | + | * id., Ancient Mesopotamia: |
| * Orthmann, W., Der alte Orient, Propyläen Kunstgeschichte 14, Frankfurt-Berlin-Vienna 1975 | * Orthmann, W., Der alte Orient, Propyläen Kunstgeschichte 14, Frankfurt-Berlin-Vienna 1975 | ||
| * Parpola, S., Transliterations of Sumerian: Problems and Prospects, in Karki, I. (ed.), Studia Orientalia 46, Fs. A. Salonen, Helsinki 1975, 239-257 | * Parpola, S., Transliterations of Sumerian: Problems and Prospects, in Karki, I. (ed.), Studia Orientalia 46, Fs. A. Salonen, Helsinki 1975, 239-257 | ||
| * Parrot, A., RA 30, 1933, 175. XXX unvollstaendig | * Parrot, A., RA 30, 1933, 175. XXX unvollstaendig | ||
| - | id., Tello. Vingt campagnes de fouilles (1877-1933), | + | * id., Tello. Vingt campagnes de fouilles (1877-1933), |
| - | id., Les fouilles de Mari. Quatorzième campagne, printemps 1964, Syria 42, 1965, 12 | + | |
| * Payne, S., Partial Recovery and Sample Bias: The Results of Some Sieving Experiments, | * Payne, S., Partial Recovery and Sample Bias: The Results of Some Sieving Experiments, | ||
| - | id., in Clason, A. (ed.), Archaeozoological Studies, Amsterdam-Oxford 1975, p. 13. XXX unvollstaendig | + | * id., in Clason, A. (ed.), Archaeozoological Studies, Amsterdam-Oxford 1975, p. 13. XXX unvollstaendig |
| * Pettinato, G., L' | * Pettinato, G., L' | ||
| - | id., Testi lessicali monolingui della Biblioteca L. 2769, MEE 3, Naples 1981 | + | * id., Testi lessicali monolingui della Biblioteca L. 2769, MEE 3, Naples 1981 |
| - | id., Liste presargoniche di uccelli nella documentazione di Fara ed Ebla, OrAnt. 17, 1978, 165-178 + plts. 14-16 | + | |
| * Pomponio, F., The Fara Lists of Proper Names, JAOS 104, 1984, 553-558 | * Pomponio, F., The Fara Lists of Proper Names, JAOS 104, 1984, 553-558 | ||
| * Porada, E., Iranian Art and Archaeology: | * Porada, E., Iranian Art and Archaeology: | ||
| * Postgate, J. N., Excavations at Abu Salabikh, 1975, Iraq 38, 1976, 133-161 | * Postgate, J. N., Excavations at Abu Salabikh, 1975, Iraq 38, 1976, 133-161 | ||
| - | id., Early Dynastic Burial Customs at Abu Salabikh, Sumer 36, 1980, 65-82 | + | * id., Early Dynastic Burial Customs at Abu Salabikh, Sumer 36, 1980, 65-82 |
| * Postgate, J. N., Moorey, P. R. S., Excavations at Abu Salabikh, 1975, Iraq 38, 1976, 133-169 | * Postgate, J. N., Moorey, P. R. S., Excavations at Abu Salabikh, 1975, Iraq 38, 1976, 133-169 | ||
| * Potts, D., On Salt and Salt Gathering in Ancient Mesopotamia, | * Potts, D., On Salt and Salt Gathering in Ancient Mesopotamia, | ||
| * Powell, M., Sumerian Area Measures and the Alleged Decimal Substratum, ZA 62, 1972, 165-221 | * Powell, M., Sumerian Area Measures and the Alleged Decimal Substratum, ZA 62, 1972, 165-221 | ||
| - | id., Three Problems in the History of Cuneiform Writing: Origins, Direction of Script, Literacy, Visible Language 15, 1981, 419-440 | + | * id., Three Problems in the History of Cuneiform Writing: Origins, Direction of Script, Literacy, Visible Language 15, 1981, 419-440 |
| - | id., Salt, Seed, and Yields in Sumerian Agriculture. A Critique of the Theory of Progressive Salinization, | + | |
| * Qualls, C., Early shipping in Mesopotamia, | * Qualls, C., Early shipping in Mesopotamia, | ||
| * Reade, J., An Early Warka Tablet, in Hrouda, B., Kroll, S., Spanos, P. (ed.), Von Uruk nach | * Reade, J., An Early Warka Tablet, in Hrouda, B., Kroll, S., Spanos, P. (ed.), Von Uruk nach | ||
| Line 325: | Line 323: | ||
| * Reimpell, W., Geschichte der babylonischen und assyrischen Kleidung, Berlin 1921 | * Reimpell, W., Geschichte der babylonischen und assyrischen Kleidung, Berlin 1921 | ||
| * Renfrew, J. , Cereals Cultivated in Ancient Iraq, BSA 1, 1984, 32-44 | * Renfrew, J. , Cereals Cultivated in Ancient Iraq, BSA 1, 1984, 32-44 | ||
| - | Rivoyre, D. de, vrais arabes et leurs pays. Bagdad et les villes ignorées de l' | + | * Rivoyre, D. de, Les vrais arabes et leurs pays. Bagdad et les villes ignorées de l' |
| * Roaf, M., Paléorient 2, 1974, 501. XXX unvollstaendig | * Roaf, M., Paléorient 2, 1974, 501. XXX unvollstaendig | ||
| * Robinson, A., The Story of Writing: Alphabets, Hieroglyphs and Pictographs, | * Robinson, A., The Story of Writing: Alphabets, Hieroglyphs and Pictographs, | ||
| Line 333: | Line 331: | ||
| * Safar, F., Mustafa, M. A., Lloyd, S., Eridu, Baghdad 1981 | * Safar, F., Mustafa, M. A., Lloyd, S., Eridu, Baghdad 1981 | ||
| * Salonen, A., Die Wasserfahrzeuge in Babylonien nach sumerisch-akkadischen Quellen (mit besonderer Berucksichtigung der 4. Tafel der Serie öAR-ra= Æubullu). Eine lexikalische und kulturgeschichtliche Untersuchung, | * Salonen, A., Die Wasserfahrzeuge in Babylonien nach sumerisch-akkadischen Quellen (mit besonderer Berucksichtigung der 4. Tafel der Serie öAR-ra= Æubullu). Eine lexikalische und kulturgeschichtliche Untersuchung, | ||
| - | id., Nautica Babyloniaca Eine lexikalische und kulturgeschichtliche Untersuchung, | + | * id., Nautica Babyloniaca Eine lexikalische und kulturgeschichtliche Untersuchung, |
| - | id., Die Fischerei im alten Mesopotamien nach sumerisch-akkadischen Quellen, AASF B166, Helsinki 1970 | + | |
| * Sampson, G., Writing Systems: A Linguistic Introduction, | * Sampson, G., Writing Systems: A Linguistic Introduction, | ||
| - | Scheil, V., Textes élamites-sémitiques, | + | * Scheil, V., Textes élamites-sémitiques, |
| - | id., Documents en écriture proto-élamite, | + | |
| - | id., Tablettes pictographiques, | + | |
| * Schmandt-Besserat, | * Schmandt-Besserat, | ||
| - | id., An Archaic Recording System and the Origin of Writing, Syro-Mesopotamian Studies 1/2, 1977, 31-70 | + | * id., An Archaic Recording System and the Origin of Writing, Syro-Mesopotamian Studies 1/2, 1977, 31-70 |
| - | id., The Envelopes that Bear the First Writing, Technology and Culture 21, 1980, 357-385 | + | |
| - | id., From Tokens to Tablets: A Re-evaluation of the So-called " | + | |
| - | id., Before Numerals, Visible Language 18, 1984, 48-60 | + | |
| - | id., The Origins of Writing: An Archaeologist' | + | |
| - | id., Tokens at Susa, OrAnt. 25, 1986, 93-125 + plts. IV-X | + | |
| - | id., Before Writing, Austin 1992 | + | |
| * Schretter, M., Sumerische Phonologie: Zu Konsonantenverbindungen und Silbenstruktur, | * Schretter, M., Sumerische Phonologie: Zu Konsonantenverbindungen und Silbenstruktur, | ||
| * Selz, G., Review of Hayes, J., A Manual of Sumerian Grammar and Texts, in OLZ 87, 1992, 136-148 | * Selz, G., Review of Hayes, J., A Manual of Sumerian Grammar and Texts, in OLZ 87, 1992, 136-148 | ||
| Line 386: | Line 384: | ||
| * Vaiman, A., Die Zeichen é und L‘L in den proto-sumerischen Texten aus Djemdet-Nasr, | * Vaiman, A., Die Zeichen é und L‘L in den proto-sumerischen Texten aus Djemdet-Nasr, | ||
| * Vallat, F., Les documents épigraphique de l' | * Vallat, F., Les documents épigraphique de l' | ||
| - | id., Le matérial épigraphique des couches 18 ˆ 14 de l' | + | * id., Le matérial épigraphique des couches 18 ˆ 14 de l' |
| * Vanstiphout, | * Vanstiphout, | ||
| * Veenhof, K., SAG.IL2.LA = saggilž, " | * Veenhof, K., SAG.IL2.LA = saggilž, " | ||
