DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Transcripts Expressed in Theatres of Cruelty: the Royal Graves at Ur in Mesopotamia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Transcripts Expressed in Theatres of Cruelty: the Royal Graves at Ur in Mesopotamia Royal Graves at Ur in Mesopotamia Public Transcripts Expressed in Theatres of Cruelty: the Royal Graves at Ur in Mesopotamia D. Bruce Dickson The interpretation of the Royal Graves at Ur, Mesopotamia, by their excavator, Sir Leonard Woolley, has long been accepted. Woolley implies that the people sacrificed along with the dynasts went willingly to their deaths out of loyalty, devotion, and faith in the dead mon‑ archs; but other interpretations are plausible. One is that these graves are the remains of dramas portraying a ‘public transcript’ played out in a public theatre of cruelty staged by rulers claiming divine status. State power united with supernatural authority can create extraordinarily powerful ‘sacred or divine kingdoms’; but ‘sacred’ or ‘divine’ kings need continuous contact with the supernatural and affirmation of their divinity. They are obliged to practise acts of public mystification, of which the Royal Graves appear to be examples. Ur’s kings may indeed have been strong and their subJects loyal, but it is equally likely that they were weak and vulnerable and that they practised ritual sacrifice to terrorize a restive citizenry and convince themselves and others of their right to rule. Other examples of public transcripts made manifest in state‑sponsored theatres of cruelty confirm that the Royal Graves at Ur are not unique but represent a phenomenon of wider historical generality. ‘All élites buress their rule with theatre’ the kingship that had ‘been sent down from on high’ (Colley 1992, 177) (Woolley 1934, 41). Woolley was both an accomplished field archae‑ Any roster of the world’s most siGnificant archaeoloGi‑ ologist and a prolific and talented prose stylist. Not cal sites invariably includes the 16 ‘Royal Tombs’ and only did he produce a comprehensive multi‑volume ‘Royal Death Pits’ datinG to c. 2500 BC that were found technical report of the work at Ur, but he also wove in the great cemetery at Ur, the ancient Sumerian city his archaeological data into some of the most artful on the flood plain of the Euphrates River in Mesopota‑ and widely quoted interpretations of ancient life in the mia. There are many reasons for this but chief among literature of archaeology (Woolley 1929; 1953; 1954). them is the rich provisioning of these graves and the His vivid and compelling writing successfully made large number of human sacrifices that accompanied the case that the royal graves are ‘snapshots’ of the the interments (Pollock 1991, 171). The number of past as it was lived at ancient Ur. The sense of sheer sacrificial burials in these tombs and death pits is actuality given these snapshots in his prose leads us quite extraordinary. In the view of their excavator, readily to the conclusion that the royal graves are Sir Leonard Woolley, human sacrifice is the preroga‑ witness to a society where people went willingly to tive of the godhead, and sacrifice on the scale seen at their deaths out of loyalty, devotion and faith in their Ur is clear indication of the deification of royalty. It monarch. Of course, this interpretation may be correct. was his view that the royal graves held the remains It is the argument of this article, however, that we can of ‘sacred or divine kings’ who were regarded, in the by no means be certain. What is certain is that the royal words of the Sumerian King List, as having assumed Graves are not neutral snapshots at all. Rather, they are Cambridge Archaeological Journal 16:2, 123–44 © 2006 McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research doi:10.1017/S0959774306000084 Printed in the United Kingdom. 123 D. Bruce Dickson Figure 1. Map of Mesopotamia showing the location of Ur on the Euphrates River. the remains of carefully staged and choreographed of such state theatres of cruelty staGed in the pursuit of political dramas that portray only the official or ‘public power and legitimacy. The Royal Graves at Ur appear transcript’ of the rulers of that city‑state. The graves to be but one such example. themselves are part of the effort made by Ur’s rulers to We can never know whether or not the rulers establish the legitimacy of their governance by dem‑ of Ur successfully transcended these limitations. Ur’s onstratinG their sacred, holy and non‑ordinary status. kinGs may, in fact, have been as stronG and stable and This alliance between state power and supernatural their subjects as loyal and devoted as the ordered ar‑ authority created the ‘sacred or divine kingdoms’ of rays of bodies in the death pits are meant to suGGest. history, extraordinarily powerful forms of ancient With equal justification, however, we miGht conclude Governance that Lewis Mumford (1967) prefers to call that Ur’s leaders were weak and vulnerable and that ‘Mega‑machines’. Yet, mighty as they were, sacred or their practice of ritual sacrifice on a profliGate scale was divine kingdoms had deep structural weaknesses or meant at once to terrorize a restive citizenry and to con‑ limitations; their god‑kings needed both continuous vince themselves and others of their riGht to rule. contact with the supernatural and constant affirma‑ tion of their divinity. These requirements obliGed their Ur’s Royal Cemetery rulers ceaselessly to practise theatrical rites of public mystification, includinG acts of calculated cruelty. His‑ Woolley’s excavations were undertaken as part of an tory presents us with numerous instances worldwide expedition to Ur sponsored jointly by the British Mu‑ 124 Royal Graves at Ur in Mesopotamia Figure 2. Map of the Royal Cemetery at Ur (Woolley 1934, pl. 273). seum and the University of Pennsylvania Museum of theless, it was his opinion that these six Death Pits had ArchaeoloGy & AnthropoloGy. Woolley directed this also oriGinally contained tombs that Grave robbers had project over fully twelve field seasons (FiG. 1). DurinG destroyed lonG aGo. He presents lille direct evidence, five seasons, between 1926 to 1932, he concentrated however, to support this view. work in the cemetery (Woolley 1934, 6–8). AlthouGh this The ten remaininG tombs each contained — or had fieldwork resulted in the excavation of a total of 1850, 16 once contained — the remains of a central or primary ‘royal’ Graves found in the earliest portion of the cem‑ individual who had lain within the tomb chamber. The etery stood out from all the rest (FiG. 2). Woolley (1934, remains of one or more additional skeletons within 33) insists that their uniqueness is not simply due to most of these tombs indicated that the principal indi‑ their riches; fourteen of the sixteen had been plundered vidual had not been interred alone but that sacrificial in antiquity so ‘their wealth must be taken on credit’. victims had been placed in the tomb at the same time. Rather, it is the peculiarities of their structures and the Additional individuals were buried in the unroofed, Grim rituals that must have accompanied the burials sunken courtyard that either surrounded the tomb or that distinGuishes these Graves from all the others. Ten was built adjacent to it.1 Skeletal remains were also of the sixteen contain larGe, substantially built stone found in the shans leadinG down to some of the tombs, and, or, brick tombs with one or more chambers. It was suGGestinG that sacrifices continued to be made as the these ten that Sir Leonard labelled the ‘Royal Tombs.’ tomb and death‑pit complex was refilled. The six other Graves lacked tombs so he referred to Almost from the outset of the discovery, Woolley these simply as the ‘Royal Death Pits’ (FiG. 3). None‑ appears to have reGarded the sixteen tombs and death 125 D. Bruce Dickson skeletal remains of at least 86 human beings. PG 789 Only fragments of the bones of the principal occupant of the tomb in grave PG 789 were recovered. The bulk of the skeleton was missinG. This absence, coupled with the disorder evident inside the tomb, suGGests that the body had been removed and the associated Grave Goods plundered at some time in antiquity. Woolley believes that the robbery most likely took place during construction of the second tomb next to it in grave PG 800. Looted or not, the tomb in grave PG 789 still yielded valuable objets d’art. Recovered within the structure was the celebrated ‘Silver Boat’, a model of a water cran not unlike the modern Iraqi taradas (Bahrani 1995, 1637), a wooden statue covered with Gold leaf, shell and lapis lazuli which Woolley named ‘The Ram in the Thicket’ and connected to the Bibli‑ cal story of Abraham and Isaac, and a number of other, equally extraordi‑ nary artefacts. In the huGe five‑by‑ten metre death pit adjacent to the tomb Figure 3. General plan of the cemetery area at Ur containing the Royal were recovered the skeletal remains of Graves. The Royal Tombs are represented with solid, the Royal Death Pits some 63 adults as well as two wheeled with hatched lines (Woolley 1934, pl. 274). vehicles, complete with the bones of the dran animals that had drawn them pits as the Graves of royalty, and much of what he later (Woolley 1934, 62–5). Woolley concludes that all of these wrote of Ur was predicated on this premise. Nonethe‑ individuals had been sacrificed and interred — alonG less, to this day the identities of the putative dynasts in with the rich Grave Goods, vessels, food, clothinG and the so‑called royal Graves remain an open question. musical instruments — at the time that the primary interment was placed in the tomb (FiG. 5). Were these Interments in graves PG 789 and PG 800 people killed elsewhere and then brouGht to the tomb for burial? Probably not: a careful comparative and Of all the Royal Graves, Woolley seems to have been functional analysis of the stone, metal and ceramic particularly impressed by PG 789 and PG 800.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Les Tombes Royales D'ur
    Les tombes royales d'Ur Lorsque l'archéologue britannique Léonard Woolley découvre, en 1927, ce qu'il appela les « tombes royales d'Ur », en basse Mésopotamie, il est conscient d'avoir mis au jour un ensemble exceptionnel qui reste encore aujourd'hui une source de documentation fondamentale sur la période des dynasties archaïques. Situation de la ville d'Ur Historique des fouilles et de la découverte d'Ur Description et histoire de la cité Le cimetière d'Ur Un mobiliers luxueux et un rite funéraire unique L'architecture des tombes les plus importantes Le poignard d'Akalamdug La perruque d'apparat de Meskalamdug La tombe de la reine Puabi L'étendard d'Ur Conclusion Ur, les tombes royales 1 Situation de la ville d'Ur Ur (ou Our), une des grandes cités-États du pays de Sumer, se trouve dans la plaine alluviale de basse Mésopotamie qui a vu naître il y a plus de 5000 an la première civilisation urbaine et l'écriture. À cette époque, les eaux du Golfe Persique remontaient à plus de 200 km à l'intérieur des terres. Ur en « Chaldée » est également un nom mentionné dans la bible : Terah engendra Abram, Nahor et Aram […] Haran mourut en présence de son père Terah dans son pays natal, Ur des chaldéens […] Terah prit son fils Abram, son petit-fils Lot et sa bru Saraï […] Il les fit sortir d'Ur des chaldéens pour aller au pays de canaan […] Ur, les tombes royales 2 Historique des fouilles et de la découverte d'Ur À partir d'inscriptions que Taylor y avait trouvées, le site a été identifié par Henry Rawlinson comme étant la cité antique d'Ur, rapidement perçue comme étant « Ur de Chaldée », lieu d'origine d'Abraham selon la Bible.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lagash-Umma Border Conflict 9
    CHAPTER I Introduction: Early Civilization and Political Organization in Babylonia' The earliest large urban agglomoration in Mesopotamia was the city known as Uruk in later texts. There, around 3000 B.C., certain distinctive features of historic Mesopotamian civilization emerged: the cylinder seal, a system of writing that soon became cuneiform, a repertoire of religious symbolism, and various artistic and architectural motifs and conven- tions.' Another feature of Mesopotamian civilization in the early historic periods, the con- stellation of more or less independent city-states resistant to the establishment of a strong central political force, was probably characteristic of this proto-historic period as well. Uruk, by virtue of its size, must have played a dominant role in southern Babylonia, and the city of Kish probably played a similar role in the north. From the period that archaeologists call Early Dynastic I1 (ED 11), beginning about 2700 B.c.,~the appearance of walls around Babylonian cities suggests that inter-city warfare had become institutionalized. The earliest royal inscriptions, which date to this period, belong to kings of Kish, a northern Babylonian city, but were found in the Diyala region, at Nippur, at Adab and at Girsu. Those at Adab and Girsu are from the later part of ED I1 and are in the name of Mesalim, king of Kish, accompanied by the names of the respective local ruler^.^ The king of Kish thus exercised hegemony far beyond the walls of his own city, and the memory of this particular king survived in native historical traditions for centuries: the Lagash-Umma border was represented in the inscriptions from Lagash as having been determined by the god Enlil, but actually drawn by Mesalim, king of Kish (IV.1).
    [Show full text]
  • Early Sumerian Cities
    Y 28 NEAR EASTERN, EGYPTIAN, AND AEGEAN CITIES enjoyed more starus, privileges, and possesions than orhers. Evenrually hierarchy would prevail- CHAPTER 2 Managemenr of food sources seems ro have been responsible for rhis, with excess production, which en be stored and sold or traded, providing accumulared wealch and power for some. Religion may have offered an ideological justification For such inequaliry. These periods were Early Sumerian cities marked in addi¡ion by innovations in technology (wheelmade pottery, sheer meral), rrans- ponarion (boats wirh sails), and agriculture (tree crops). Trade neworks conrinued, as rhe broad distribution of Hdaf and Ubaid pottery indicates, from Medirerrmean Turkey to Inn. Litrle by linle rhe rechnologiel, commerciel, and social wo¡ld of rhe Ancienr Near Easr wæ preparing irself for rhe rise of full-fledged ciries. The Sumerians (firsr period of dominarion): Ubaid period: a. 5000-3500 Bc Proroliterare (Uruk) period: ca.3500-2900 ¡c Early Dynasric period: ca. 2900-2350r;c The Êrs¡ ciries in the Near Easr-Mediletranean basin appeared in souchern Mesoponmia, or Sumer, rhe crearion of a people we call rhe Sumerians (Figure 2.1). \Ve have seen that environrnental changes in south-west fuia during rhe previous 5,000 years led to human control over food production; with this masrery came major social changes, including Êxed setdemen¡s. The socio-economic developmenr of these towns and villages is marked by the gradual appearance ofthe ten criteria proposed by Childe as a mark of rhe rrue ciry. AII ten factors finally emerge in Sumer during the later fourth millennium Bc. This chapter will explore early Sumerian ciries.
    [Show full text]
  • Compte Rendu
    PUBLICATIONS DE L’INSTITUT NÉERLANDAIS POUR LE PROCHE-ORIENT À LEIDEN / UITGAVEN VAN HET NEDERLANDS INSTITUUT • 1 VOOR HET NABIJE OOSTEN TE LEIDEN Compte Rendu de la troisième Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale organisée à Leiden du 28 juin au 4 juillet 1952 par le Nederlandsch Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten Leiden 1954 COMPTE RENDU DE LA TROISIÈME RENCONTRE ASSYRIOLOGIQUE INTERNATIONALE Publié avec le concours du Ministère de l'Instruction nationale, des Beaux-Arts et des Sciences .::;? -~ co C'l COMPTE RENDU DE LA TROISIÈME RENCONTRE ASSYRIOLOGIQUE INTERNATIONALE ORGANISÉE À LEIDEN DU 28 JUIN AU 4 JUILLET 1952 PAR LE NEDERLANDSCH INSTITUUT VOOR HET NABI JE OOSTEN LEIDEN NEDERLANDSCH INS'TITUUT VOOR HET NABIJE OOS'TEN 1954 Copyright I954 by Stichting Nederlandsch Archaeologisch-Philologisch Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, Leiden, Netherlands All rights reserved PRINT:E:D IN THE NETHERLANDS BY E. J. BRILL To the memory of HENRI FRANKFORT the famous Dutch excavator and field-director 1897-1954 Ont pris part à la TROISIÈME RENCONTRE ASSYRIOLOGIQUE INTERNATIONALE: Mmes ou Mlles BARRELET, BATAULT, BOAS, CoQUERILLAT, DAVID, HASPELs, VAN BEEK-VAN BEEK, HERDNER, LAROCHE, MooRTGAT, MoREAU-NERET, RAY, RuTTEN, SPYCKET, ZADOKs-JosEPHus }ITTA, et MM. AMIET, AzouLAY, BAILLET, BARNETT, BEER, BIROT, BLEEKER, DE LIAGRE BêiHL, BoNGAERTs, BoRGER, BoTTÉRo, BRuiNS, BusiNK, CAVAIGNAC, CAZELLES, CROSSLAND, DAVID, I)EROY, DHORME, DoMBROWSKI, DossiN, DRONKERT, DuPONT-SoMMER, DuRAND, EDZARD, FALKENSTEIN, FINET,
    [Show full text]
  • Routledge Worlds : Sumerian World
    THE SUMERIANᇹᇺᇻ WORLD The Sumerian World explores the archaeology, history and art of southern Mesopotamia and its relationships with its neighbours from c.3000 to 2000BC. Including material hitherto unpublished from recent excavations, the articles are organised thematically using evidence from archaeology, texts and the natural sciences. This broad treatment will also make the volume of interest to students looking for comparative data in allied subjects such as ancient literature and early religions. Providing an authoritative, comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the Sumerian period written by some of the best-qualified scholars in the field, The Sumerian World will satisfy students, researchers, academics and the knowledgeable layperson wishing to understand the world of southern Mesopotamia in the third millennium. Harriet Crawford is Reader Emerita at UCL’s Institute of Archaeology and a senior fellow at the McDonald Institute, Cambridge. She is a specialist in the archaeology of the Sumerians and has worked widely in Iraq and the Gulf. She is the author of Sumer and the Sumerians (second edition, 2004). THE ROUTLEDGE WORLDS THE REFORMATION WORLD THE ROMAN WORLD Edited by Andrew Pettegree Edited by John Wacher THE MEDIEVAL WORLD THE HINDU WORLD Edited by Peter Linehan, Janet L. Nelson Edited by Sushil Mittal and Gene Thursby THE BYZANTINE WORLD THE WORLD OF THE Edited by Paul Stephenson AMERICAN WEST Edited by Gordon Morris Bakken THE VIKING WORLD Edited by Stefan Brink in collaboration THE ELIZABETHAN WORLD with Neil Price Edited by Susan Doran and Norman Jones THE BABYLONIAN WORLD THE OTTOMAN WORLD Edited by Gwendolyn Leick Edited by Christine Woodhead THE EGYPTIAN WORLD THE VICTORIAN WORLD Edited by Toby Wilkinson Edited by Marin Hewitt THE ISLAMIC WORLD THE ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN Edited by Andrew Rippin WORLD Edited by Augustine Casiday THE WORLD OF POMPEI Edited by Pedar W.
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis Submitted in Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
    SURESHKUMAR MUTHUKUMARAN AN ECOLOGY OF TRADE: TROPICAL ASIAN CULTIVARS IN THE ANCIENT MIDDLE EAST AND THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN SURESHKUMAR MUTHUKUMARAN Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History, University College London 2016 SUPERVISORS: K. RADNER D. FULLER 1 SURESHKUMAR MUTHUKUMARAN DECLARATION I, Sureshkumar Muthukumaran, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. __________________________________________________________ 2 SURESHKUMAR MUTHUKUMARAN ABSTRACT This thesis offers an ecological reading of long distance trade in the ancient world by investigating the anthropogenic movement of tropical Asian crops from South Asia to the Middle East and the Mediterranean. The crops under consideration include rice, cotton, citrus species, cucumbers, luffas, melons, lotus, taro and sissoo. ἦhἷΝ ‘ὈὄὁpiἵaliὅaὈiὁὀ’Ν ὁἸΝ εiἶἶlἷΝ EaὅὈἷὄὀΝ aὀἶΝ εἷἶiὈἷὄὄaὀἷaὀΝ aἹὄiἵὉlὈὉre was a sluggish process but one that had a significant impact on the agricultural landscapes, production patterns, dietary habits and cultural identities of peoples across the Middle East and the Mediterranean by the end of the 1st millennium BCE. This process substantially predates the so-called tropical crop-ἶὄivἷὀΝ ‘χἹὄiἵὉlὈὉὄalΝ ἤἷvὁlὉὈiὁὀ’Ν ὁἸΝ ὈhἷΝ ἷaὄlyΝ ἙὅlamiἵΝ pἷὄiὁἶΝ pὁὅiὈἷἶΝ ἴyΝ ὈhἷΝ hiὅὈὁὄiaὀΝ χὀἶὄἷwΝ WaὈὅὁὀΝ (1974-1983). The existing literature has, in fact, largely failed to appreciate the lengthy time-scale of this phenomenon whose origins lie in the Late Bronze Age. In order to contextualise the spread of tropical Asian crops to the Middle East and beyond, the history of crop movements is prefaced by a survey of long distance connectivity across maritime (Indian Ocean) and overland (Iranian plateau) routes from its prehistoric beginnings to the end of the 1st millennium BCE.
    [Show full text]
  • National Geographic History 1 Executive Editor Amy E
    Needlepoint kit from the Victoria and Albert Museum YUZEN PINES 16.5” x 16.5”. 42cm x 42cm. 12 holes to the inch canvas. The kit uses Ehrman wools. $125.00 This wonderful design is adapted from a pattern found on a 19th century kimono in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London. The V&A is the world’s leading museum of art and design with collections unrivalled in their scope and diversity. Stitching is a great way to relax and the kit comes complete with everything you need: the 100% cotton canvas printed in full color, all the wools required (100% pure new wool), a needle and color chart along with an easy to follow guide to get you underway. hr n Toll Free Order Line: 888 826 8600 www.ehrmantapestry.com FROM THE EDITOR Alexander Hamilton is having a moment. He has taken center stage in the American consciousness, thanks to two men: Ron Chernow, Pulitzer Prize–winning author and historian, and Lin- Manuel Miranda, Tony-winning playwright, composer, and performer. The two came together to create a Broadway musical about the “ten- dollar Founding Father” that brilliantly combines hip-hop with history. At the heart of the show is the question of who tells a person’s story after death. Chernow and Miranda owe a debt of gratitude to both Alexander and Eliza Hamilton for ensuring that Hamilton’s story endures. Alexander’s prolific writings left behind a massive record of his adult life: his thoughts, beliefs, and actions. Eliza curated and preserved this material after his death, a massive undertaking that took decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Vorderasiati E
    Vorderasiati e BegrOndet von E. Ebeling und B. Meissner fortgefOhrt von E. Weidner, W. von Soden und D. O. Edzard herausgegeben von M. P. Streck unter Mitwirkung von G. Frantz-Szab6 . M. Krebernik . D. Morandi Bonacossi J. N. Postgate . U. Seidl· M. Stol . G. Wilhelm Redaktion S. Ecklin . S. Pfaffinger Band 13 . 3./4. Lieferung Steuer. E - Susa. B 2012 Sonderdruck ~ ________________D_e __ G_ru_y_te_r _________________! SUMER, GESCHICHTE 297 Soldt 2005, 316-332. - Sallaberger W. 1997: southern Babylonia was excavated at Tall Nippur als religioses Zentrum Mesopotamiens h im historischen Wandel, in: G. Wilhelm (ed.), Die al-'UwailI" and was dated to the i milL orientalische Stadt: Kontinuitat, Wandel, Bruch in its lowest levels. Older settled life in this (= CDOG 1),147-168. - van Soldt W. H. (ed.) part of Mesopotamia could have been cov­ 20°5: Ethnicity in ancient Mesopotamia (= ered by alluvium, or was perhaps almost CRRAI 48 = PIHANS 102). - Steiner G. 2005: Gibt es ein vor-sumerisches Substrat im sudlichen nonexistent due to difficult environmental Mesopotamien?, in: van Soldt 20°5, 340-355.­ conditions. Tall al-'UwaiII belonged to the Streck M. P. 1998: The tense systems in the so-called 'Ubaid period (ih to 4th mill.), Sumerian-Akkadian linguistic area, AS] 20, 181- also attested, e. g., at Tall al-'Ubaid *, Ur" 199. - Tuna O. N. :1990: Sumer ve Turk dilleri­ nin tarihi ilgisi ile Turk dili'nin ya§l meselesi (= and Eridu". Urbanization and agriculture Turk Dil Kurumu Yaymlan 56:1). - Whittaker significantly developed during its second G. 2005: The Sumerian Question: reviewing the phase, when an expansion - perhaps of issues, in: van Soldt 2005, 409-429.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Human Sacrifice in Different Rituals Has Featured Largely in Many Cultures for Thousands of Years
    Introduction The use of human sacrifice in different rituals has featured largely in many cultures for thousands of years. To better understand this one must first consider and define what is actually meant by the term ‘ritual’. According to The Oxford English Dictionary, ritual is described as ‘the series of actions used in a religious or other rite’. Renfrew and Bahn (1991, 408-9) indicate that ritual activity can be identified by the observation of four contributing components, such as the focusing of attention on the location, a sacred place; the presence of a possible liminal boundary between ‘this world and the next’; evidence for the worship of a deity and the participation and offerings made by individuals. The term ‘sacrifice’ as defined by The Oxford Concise Dictionary of Archaeology (Darvill, 2003, p371) as the slaughter of an animal or person or the surrendering of possessions to a deity. It goes on to say, Although seen as ceremonial in context, sacrifice may have a functional ends institutionalized in the practice itself, for example the regulation of a population and the creation of an instrument of political terror. Ancient Egypt Kings of the first 2 dynasties (3100-2686BC) were not buried alone. Since death was regarded as a mirror image of life in Ancient Egypt their graves needed to contain all that they had needed when alive. This included members of their household, their servants and their slaves. When the tomb of King Wadji (c. 2980BC) (Wilkinson, 1999) was excavated 455 bodies were discovered. Members of the king’s personal household numbered 338 (Shaw, 2000, p68).
    [Show full text]
  • Sumer (From Akkadian Šumeru; Sumerian Ki-En-Ĝir15
    Sumer Sumer (from Akkadian Šumeru; Sumerian ��� ki-en-ĝir15, approximately "land of the civilized kings" or "native land"[note 1])[1] was an ancient civilization and historical region in southern Mesopotamia, modern Iraq, during the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age. Although the earliest historical records in the region do not go back much fur- ther than ca. 2900 BC, modern historians have asserted that Sumer was first settled between ca. 4500 and 4000 BC by a non-Semitic people who may or may not have spoken the Sumerian language (pointing to the names of cities, rivers, basic occupations, etc. as evidence).[2] These conjectured, prehistoric people are now called "proto- Euphrateans" or "Ubaidians",[3] and are theorized to have evolved from the Samarra culture of northern Mesopotamia (Assyria).[4][5][6][7] The Ubaidians were the first civilizing force in Sumer, draining the marshes for agriculture, developing trade, and establishing industries, including weaving, leatherwork, metalwork, masonry, and pottery.[3] However, some scholars such as Piotr Michalowski and Gerd Steiner, contest the idea of a Proto- Euphratean language or one substrate language. Sumerian civilization took form in the Uruk period (4th millennium BC), continuing into the Jemdat Nasr and Early Dy- nastic periods. During the third millennium BC, a close cultural symbiosis developed between the Sumerians (who spoke a Language Isolate) and the Semitic Akkadian speakers, which included widespreadbilingualism.[8] The influ- ence of Sumerian on Akkadian (and vice versa) is evident in all areas, from lexical borrowing on a massive scale, to syntactic, morphological, and phonological convergence.[8] This has prompted scholars to refer to Sumerian and Akkadian in the third millennium as a sprachbund.[8] Sumer was conquered by the Semitic-speaking kings of the Akkadian Empire around 2270 BC (short chronology), but Sumerian continued as a sacred language.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sumerians
    THE SUMERIANS THE SUMERIANS THEIR HISTORY, CULTURE, AND CHARACTER Samuel Noah Kramer THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS Chicago & London THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS, CHICAGO 60637 The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London © 1963 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved Published 1963 Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 0-226-45237-9 (clothbound); 0-226-45238-7 (paperbound) Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 63-11398 89 1011 12 To the UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA and its UNIVERSITY MUSEUM PREFACE The year 1956 saw the publication of my book From the Tablets of Sumer, since revised, reprinted, and translated into numerous languages under the title History Begins at Sumer. It consisted of twenty-odd disparate essays united by a common theme—"firsts" in man s recorded history and culture. The book did not treat the political history of the Sumerian people or the nature of their social and economic institutions, nor did it give the reader any idea of the manner and method by which the Sumerians and their language were discovered and "resurrected/' It is primarily to fill these gaps that the present book was conceived and composed. The first chapter is introductory in character; it sketches briefly the archeological and scholarly efforts which led to the decipher­ ment of the cuneiform script, with special reference to the Sumerians and their language, and does so in a way which, it is hoped, the interested layman can follow with understanding and insight. The second chapter deals with the history of Sumer from the prehistoric days of the fifth millennium to the early second millennium B.C., when the Sumerians ceased to exist as a political entity.
    [Show full text]
  • Download The
    FROM ACCOUNTING TO WRITING The world’s first writing – cuneiform – (fig. 1) traces its beginnings back to an ancient system of accounting. This method of accounting used small geometrically shaped clay tokens to keep track of goods such as livestock and grain produced in the early farming communities of the ancient Near East. Writing, however, did not spring full blown from clay tokens. Surprisingly, it took the Mesopotamian belief in an afterlife to transform a dry and dusty accounting system into what we recognize as writing. Fig. 1. Clay tablet written in the cuneiform Script. Courtesy Denise Schmandt-Besserat. The Mesopotamians believed that to secure eternal life their names had to be kept alive by being spoken after their death. To insure the eternal vitality of their names and their ghosts, the Mesopotamians repurposed the old accounting symbols into phonetic signs “spelling” out a person’s name. Individuals’ names were inscribed on funerary offerings and served, in effect, as perpetual utterances of a name. Over time, the phonetic name inscriptions evolved into phonetic sentences appealing to the gods for eternal life. These impassioned supplications were the final stage of transition from the clay tokens of old into the first writing. BEFORE WRITING: ACCOUNTING WITH TOKENS – CA. 7500-3350 BC Early farmers of the Near East invented a system of small tokens to count and account for the goods they produced. (fig. 2) The token shapes represented various kinds of merchandise prevalent in the farming economy of the time. For example, a cone stood for a small measure of barley, a sphere for a larger measure of barley and a disc for sheep.
    [Show full text]