Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |||
| proto-elamite_writing_phases [2012/10/28 08:49] – dahl | proto-elamite_writing_phases [2022/02/16 17:07] (current) – dahl | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| Numero-ideographic tablets from Iran can be distinguished from Mesopotamian ones only by the order of the numerical signs and non numerical signs; in Iran the numerical signs follow the object they qualify, whereas the reverse order is found in texts from Mesopotamia. There is no apparent difference between Mesopotamian and Iranian objects from the first two groups (i.e. tokens and bullae, and numerical tablets). | Numero-ideographic tablets from Iran can be distinguished from Mesopotamian ones only by the order of the numerical signs and non numerical signs; in Iran the numerical signs follow the object they qualify, whereas the reverse order is found in texts from Mesopotamia. There is no apparent difference between Mesopotamian and Iranian objects from the first two groups (i.e. tokens and bullae, and numerical tablets). | ||
| + | |||
| + | The date of the loan of writing from Babylonia into Iran is hard to pinpoint but contact is likely to be broken during or at the end of the Uruk IVa period (see Englund 2004: 124-127). | ||
| Proto-Elamite tablets, both early and late, can be distingiushed in a number of ways, based on an analysis of structure and content. The later controlled excavations produced some stratigraphic information for both middle and late proto-Elamite tablets as well as tokens and bullae, and Uruk style tablets. Unfortunately, | Proto-Elamite tablets, both early and late, can be distingiushed in a number of ways, based on an analysis of structure and content. The later controlled excavations produced some stratigraphic information for both middle and late proto-Elamite tablets as well as tokens and bullae, and Uruk style tablets. Unfortunately, | ||
