3 a Typology of Sumerian Copular Clauses36

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

3 a Typology of Sumerian Copular Clauses36 3 A Typology of Sumerian Copular Clauses36 3.1 Introduction CCs may be classified according to a number of characteristics. Jagersma (2010, pp. 687-705) gives a detailed description of Sumerian CCs arranged according to the types of constituents that may function as S or PC. Jagersma’s description is the most detailed one ever written about CCs in Sumerian, and particularly, the parts on clauses with a non-finite verbal form as the PC are extremely insightful. Linguistic studies on CCs, however, discuss the kind of constituents in CCs only in connection with another kind of classification which appears to be more relevant to the description of CCs. This classification is based on the semantic properties of CCs, which in turn have a profound influence on their grammatical and pragmatic properties. In this chapter I will give a description of CCs based mainly on the work of Renaat Declerck (1988) (which itself owes much to Higgins [1979]), and Mikkelsen (2005). My description will also take into account the information structure of CCs. Information structure is understood as “a phenomenon of information packaging that responds to the immediate communicative needs of interlocutors” (Krifka, 2007, p. 13). CCs appear to be ideal for studying the role information packaging plays in Sumerian grammar. Their morphology and structure are much simpler than the morphology and structure of clauses with a non-copular finite verb, and there is a more transparent connection between their pragmatic characteristics and their structure. 3.2 The Classification of Copular Clauses in Linguistics CCs can be divided into three main types on the basis of their meaning: predicational, specificational, and equative. First, I will describe the properties of the predicational and specificational clauses, as they are often discussed together, contrasting their features. Equatives, a minor type, will be discussed at the end of this subsection. In predicational CCs, the PC predicates a property about a referential S. This prop- erty can be a characteristic, a role or a class membership. Typically the S of predica- tional clauses is a definite, referential NP, while its complement is an adjective or a non-referential NP: 36 An abbreviated version of this chapter was published as Zólyomi (2012). © 2014 Gábor Zólyomi This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License. 28 A Typology of Sumerian Copular Clauses (49) Susan is nice. (50) John is a teacher. A specificational clause does not predicate a property of the S. It does something fun- damentally different; it identifies the referent of a description by naming it. In more technical language, it specifies the value of a variable. The specificational clause in (51) below specifies the value “John Thomas” for the variable “the X who is the bank robber”, i.e., it tells us that the referent characterized here as “the bank robber” is nobody else but “John Thomas”. (51) The bank robber is John Thomas. Specificational clauses may also be thought of as lists (an idea of Higgins [1979]): the S functions as the heading of the list, while the predicate specifies what makes up the list. Stefan Huber’s (2000) less metaphoric reformulation of this characterization is paraphrased by Katalin É. Kiss as follows: “... in specificational sentences the subject denotes a set, which the predicate characterizes through another set, by listing the individuals that make it up. A specificational predicate implies that its specification of the individuals that make up the set denoted by the subject is exhaus- tive, that is, other alternatives are excluded. The subject of predication is associated with an existential presupposition – because only the content of an existing set can be listed.” (É. Kiss, 2006, p. 181) The S of English specificational clauses is characterized variously as “weakly” refe- rential (Declerck, 1983, pp. 217-218), attributive (Donnellan, 1975), or non-referential (Mikkelsen, É. Kiss, etc.). Mikkelsen’s characterization is based on the idea that definite NPs may have dif- ferent interpretations depending on the properties of the clause in which they are used (2005, pp. 53-54). A definite NP may be interpreted as referential, then it denotes an individual; or it may be interpreted as predicative, then it denotes a set of individu- als. The difference between these interpretations can be demonstrated with sentence- pairs like (52) and (53) below. In (52) the NP “the tallest girl in the class” refers to an individual. In (53), however, the same NP is interpreted as a property, namely the set of individuals that have the property of being “the tallest girl in the class”. Her main argument comes from pronominalization. In particular, she argues that in (52) and (53) “the use of it indicates that the subject is not referential, but rather denotes a property, whereas the use of she indicates that the subject is referential” (Mikkelsen, 2005, p. 64). (52) The tallest girl in the class is Swedish, isn’t {she / *it }? (predicational) A Typology of Sumerian Copular Clauses 29 (53) The tallest girl in the class is Molly, isn’t {it / *she }? (specificational) If the subject NP of English specificational clauses denotes properties, i.e. has a pre- dicative interpretation, then it is plausible to assume that specificational clauses are a kind of predicate inversion in which the subject NP denotes a property (cf. Mikkelsen, 2005, pp. 133-161). By contrast, it is the PC that denotes a property in predicational clauses. There exist languages in which this assumption is supported by the agree- ment pattern in specificational sentences. As the sentence pair (54) and (55) show, the predicate and the S are inverted in Italian specificational clauses, but the copula does not agree with the preposed predicate but with the now postcopular S (examples adapted from Moro, 1997, p. 28, ex. 33). A similar pattern characterizes specificational clauses in Russian (Geist, 2003, pp. 95-99), and, anticipating the results of the next subsection, in Sumerian. (54) The pictures of the wall {*was / were} the cause of the riot. (predicational) Le foto del muro {*fu/ furono} la causa della rivolta. (predicational) (55) The cause of the riot {was / *were} the pictures of the wall. (specifiational) La cause della rivolta {*fu / furono} le foto del muro. (specifiational) There is an important difference between predicational and specificational CCs in terms of information structure which is highly relevant for the description of Sume- rian CCs. Specificational clauses have a fixed information structure: the value NP always functions as the identificational focus of the clause, while the variable part is its presupposition. In this work the term focus will always be understood as identificational focus,37 unless otherwise qualified: “An identificational focus represents a subset of the set of contextually or situationally given elements for which the predicate phrase can potentially hold; it is identified as the exhaustive subset of this set for which the predicate phrase actually holds” (É. Kiss, 1998, p. 245) Or, in other words, “[i]t indicates that the focus denotation is the only one that leads to a true proposition” (Krifka, 2007, p. 33). As a corollary of their fixed information structure, specificational clauses may always be paraphrased as it-clefts in English: (56) It is John Thomas who is the bank robber. 37 Other terms in use are narrow focus, argument focus (Lambrecht, 1994) and exhaustive focus ( Krifka, 2007). 30 A Typology of Sumerian Copular Clauses In predicational clauses, however, either the S or the predicate may be the focus (pitch accent is marked here with small capitals), or neither of them (cf. ex. [50] above). (57) John is a teacher (, and not a butcher). (58) John is a teacher (, and not Mark). The third type of CCs is the equative. An equative CC asserts that two NPs have the same referent. Both NPs refer to an individual. Equative clauses do not have fixed information structure either. (59) She is Laura. (60) Mark Twain is Samuel Clemens. 3.3 Copular Clauses in Sumerian Languages of the world may use syntactic (e.g., word order), morphological or pro- sodic means, or some combination of these, to mark the information structure of clauses. In the case of a dead language without native speakers, preserved only in written sources, one has limited opportunities to recover and reconstruct its informa- tion structure. The following discussion relies solely on features that are observable in our written texts, aided with the findings of linguistic research.38 A basic assumption of this work is that Sumerian is a language in which word order is determined by information structure. Sumerian is a verb-final language, and the order of the other constituents shows a great degree of variation with some fre- quent patterns. Since word order is a feature that is clear and unambiguous in most of our texts, it will be the most important characteristic of CCs used for the reconstruc- tion of their information structure. A common syntactic device that involves a variation in word order is left-dislo- cation of possessors in Sumerian.39 In this construction the possessor of a genitive construction is left-dislocated. The left-dislocated possessor occupies a position at the beginning of the clause and is as a rule in the genitive case; a resumptive enclitic 38 See also Christian Huber’s (2000, pp. 96-100) remarks about the problems involved in recovering the information structure of Sumerian. His results are in agreement with the findings of the present work. 39 See Zólyomi (2005) for a description of left-dislocated possessors in Sumerian. Left-dislocation of the possessor is referred to as the “anticipatory genitive” in Assyriology. A Typology of Sumerian Copular Clauses 31 possessive pronoun is attached to the possessum which agrees in gender, person, and number with the possessor.
Recommended publications
  • 1 Inanna Research Script
    INANNA RESEARCH SCRIPT (to be cut and shaped for performance) By Peggy Firestone Based on Translations of Clay Tablets from Sumer By Samuel Noah Kramer 1 [email protected] (773) 384-5802 © 2008 CAST OF CHARACTERS In order of appearance Narrators ………………………………… Storytellers & Timekeepers Inanna …………………………………… Queen of Heaven and Earth, Goddess, Immortal Enki ……………………………………… Creator & Organizer of Earth’s Living Things, Manager of the Gods & Goddesses, Trickster God, Inanna’s Grandfather An ………………………………………. The Sky God Ki ………………………………………. The Earth Goddess (also known as Ninhursag) Enlil …………………………………….. The Air God, inventor of all things useful in the Universe Nanna-Sin ………………………………. The Moon God, Immortal, Father of Inanna Ningal …………………………………... The Moon Goddess, Immortal, Mother of Inanna Lilith ……………………………………. Demon of Desolation, Protector of Freedom Anzu Bird ………………………………. An Unholy (Holy) Trinity … Demon bird, Protector of Cattle Snake that has no Grace ………………. Tyrant Protector Snake Gilgamesh ……………………………….. Hero, Mortal, Inanna’s first cousin, Demi-God of Uruk Isimud ………………………………….. Enki’s Janus-faced messenger Ninshubur ……………………………… Inanna’s lieutenant, Goddess of the Rising Sun, Queen of the East Lahamma Enkums ………………………………… Monster Guardians of Enki’s Shrine House Giants of Eridu Utu ……………………………………… Sun God, Inanna’s Brother Dumuzi …………………………………. Shepherd King of Uruk, Inanna’s husband, Enki’s son by Situr, the Sheep Goddess Neti ……………………………………… Gatekeeper to the Nether World Ereshkigal ……………………………. Queen of the
    [Show full text]
  • Namzitara FS Kilmer
    Offprint from STRINGS AND THREADS A Celebration of the Work of Anne Draffkorn Kilmer Edited by WOLFGANG HEIMPEL and GABRIELLA FRANTZ - SZABÓ Winona Lake, Indiana EISENBRAUNS 2011 © 2011 by Eisenbrauns Inc. All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America www.eisenbrauns.com Drawing on the cover and beneath the title on p. iii by Cornelia Wolff, Munich, after C. L. Wooley, Ur Excavations 2 (1934), 105. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Strings and threads : a celebration of the work of Anne Draffkorn Kilmer / edited by Wolfgang Heimpel and Gabriella Frantz-Szabó. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-57506-227-3 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Kilmer, Anne Draffkorn. 2. Music—Middle East—History and criticism. 3. Music archaeology— Middle East. I. Kilmer, Anne Draffkorn. II. Heimpel, Wolfgang. III. Frantz-Szabó, Gabriella. ML55.K55S77 2011 780.9—dc22 2011036676 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. †Ê Contents Preface .............................................................. vii Abbreviations ......................................................... ix GUITTY AZARPAY The Imagery of the Manichean ‘Call’ on a Sogdian Funerary Relief from China ................ 1 DOMINIQUE COLLON Chinless Wonders ................................ 19 JERROLD S. COOPER Puns and Prebends: The Tale of Enlil and Namzitara. 39 RICHARD L. CROCKER No Polyphony before A.D. 900! ...................... 45 DANIEL A. FOXVOG Aspects of Name-Giving in Presargonic Lagash ........ 59 JOHN CURTIS FRANKLIN “Sweet Psalmist of Israel”: The Kinnôr and Royal Ideology in the United Monarchy .............. 99 ELLEN HICKMANN Music Archaeology as a Field of Interdisciplinary Research ........................
    [Show full text]
  • The Sumerian King List the Sumerian King List (SKL) Dates from Around 2100 BCE—Near the Time When Abram Was in Ur
    BcResources Genesis The Sumerian King List The Sumerian King List (SKL) dates from around 2100 BCE—near the time when Abram was in Ur. Most ANE scholars (following Jacobsen) attribute the original form of the SKL to Utu-hejel, king of Uruk, and his desire to legiti- mize his reign after his defeat of the Gutians. Later versions included a reference or Long Chronology), 1646 (Middle to the Great Flood and prefaced the Chronology), or 1582 (Low or Short list of postdiluvian kings with a rela- Chronology). The following chart uses tively short list of what appear to be the Middle Chronology. extremely long-reigning antediluvian Text. The SKL text for the following kings. One explanation: transcription chart was originally in a narrative form or translation errors resulting from and consisted of a composite of several confusion of the Sumerian base-60 versions (see Black, J.A., Cunningham, and the Akkadian base-10 systems G., Fluckiger-Hawker, E, Robson, E., of numbering. Dividing each ante- and Zólyomi, G., The Electronic Text diluvian figure by 60 returns reigns Corpus of Sumerian Literature (http:// in harmony with Biblical norms (the www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk/), Oxford bracketed figures in the antediluvian 1998-). The text was modified by the portion of the chart). elimination of manuscript references Final versions of the SKL extended and by the addition of alternative the list to include kings up to the reign name spellings, clarifying notes, and of Damiq-ilicu, king of Isin (c. 1816- historical dates (typically in paren- 1794 BCE). thesis or brackets). The narrative was Dates.
    [Show full text]
  • ANIMAL SACRIFICE in ANCIENT MESOPOTAMIAN RELIGION The
    CHAPTER FOURTEEN ANIMAL SACRIFICE IN ANCIENT MESOPOTAMIAN RELIGION JOANN SCURLOCK The relationship between men and gods in ancient Mesopotamia was cemented by regular offerings and occasional sacrifices of ani­ mals. In addition, there were divinatory sacrifices, treaty sacrifices, and even "covenant" sacrifices. The dead, too, were entitled to a form of sacrifice. What follows is intended as a broad survey of ancient Mesopotamian practices across the spectrum, not as an essay on the developments that must have occurred over the course of several millennia of history, nor as a comparative study of regional differences. REGULAR OFFERINGS I Ancient Mesopotamian deities expected to be fed twice a day with­ out fail by their human worshipers.2 As befitted divine rulers, they also expected a steady diet of meat. Nebuchadnezzar II boasts that he increased the offerings for his gods to new levels of conspicuous consumption. Under his new scheme, Marduk and $arpanitum were to receive on their table "every day" one fattened ungelded bull, fine long fleeced sheep (which they shared with the other gods of Baby1on),3 fish, birds,4 bandicoot rats (Englund 1995: 37-55; cf. I On sacrifices in general, see especially Dhorme (1910: 264-77) and Saggs (1962: 335-38). 2 So too the god of the Israelites (Anderson 1992: 878). For specific biblical refer­ ences to offerings as "food" for God, see Blome (1934: 13). To the term tamid, used of this daily offering in Rabbinic sources, compare the ancient Mesopotamian offering term gimi "continual." 3 Note that, in the case of gods living in the same temple, this sharing could be literal.
    [Show full text]
  • Miscellaneous Babylonian Inscriptions
    MISCELLANEOUS BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS BY GEORGE A. BARTON PROFESSOR IN BRYN MAWR COLLEGE ttCI.f~ -VIb NEW HAVEN YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON HUMPHREY MILFORD OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS MDCCCCXVIII COPYRIGHT 1918 BY YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS First published, August, 191 8. TO HAROLD PEIRCE GENEROUS AND EFFICIENT HELPER IN GOOD WORKS PART I SUMERIAN RELIGIOUS TEXTS INTRODUCTORY NOTE The texts in this volume have been copied from tablets in the University Museum, Philadelphia, and edited in moments snatched from many other exacting duties. They present considerable variety. No. i is an incantation copied from a foundation cylinder of the time of the dynasty of Agade. It is the oldest known religious text from Babylonia, and perhaps the oldest in the world. No. 8 contains a new account of the creation of man and the development of agriculture and city life. No. 9 is an oracle of Ishbiurra, founder of the dynasty of Nisin, and throws an interesting light upon his career. It need hardly be added that the first interpretation of any unilingual Sumerian text is necessarily, in the present state of our knowledge, largely tentative. Every one familiar with the language knows that every text presents many possi- bilities of translation and interpretation. The first interpreter cannot hope to have thought of all of these, or to have decided every delicate point in a way that will commend itself to all his colleagues. The writer is indebted to Professor Albert T. Clay, to Professor Morris Jastrow, Jr., and to Dr. Stephen Langdon for many helpful criticisms and suggestions. Their wide knowl- edge of the religious texts of Babylonia, generously placed at the writer's service, has been most helpful.
    [Show full text]
  • Gilgamesh Sung in Ancient Sumerian Gilgamesh and the Ancient Near East
    Gilgamesh sung in ancient Sumerian Gilgamesh and the Ancient Near East Dr. Le4cia R. Rodriguez 20.09.2017 ì The Ancient Near East Cuneiform cuneus = wedge Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesi, Ankara Babylonian deed of sale. ca. 1750 BCE. Tablet of Sargon of Akkad, Assyrian Tablet with love poem, Sumerian, 2037-2029 BCE 19th-18th centuries BCE *Gilgamesh was an historic figure, King of Uruk, in Sumeria, ca. 2800/2700 BCE (?), and great builder of temples and ci4es. *Stories about Gilgamesh, oral poems, were eventually wriXen down. *The Babylonian epic of Gilgamesh compiled from 73 tablets in various languages. *Tablets discovered in the mid-19th century and con4nue to be translated. Hero overpowering a lion, relief from the citadel of Sargon II, Dur Sharrukin (modern Khorsabad), Iraq, ca. 721–705 BCE The Flood Tablet, 11th tablet of the Epic of Gilgamesh, Library of Ashurbanipal Neo-Assyrian, 7th century BCE, The Bri4sh Museum American Dad Gilgamesh and Enkidu flank the fleeing Humbaba, cylinder seal Neo-Assyrian ca. 8th century BCE, 2.8cm x 1.3cm, The Bri4sh Museum DOUBLING/TWINS BROMANCE *Role of divinity in everyday life. *Relaonship between divine and ruler. *Ruler’s asser4on of dominance and quest for ‘immortality’. StatuePes of two worshipers from Abu Temple at Eshnunna (modern Tell Asmar), Iraq, ca. 2700 BCE. Gypsum inlaid with shell and black limestone, male figure 2’ 6” high. Iraq Museum, Baghdad. URUK (WARKA) Remains of the White Temple on its ziggurat. Uruk (Warka), Iraq, ca. 3500–3000 BCE. Plan and ReconstrucVon drawing of the White Temple and ziggurat, Uruk (Warka), Iraq, ca.
    [Show full text]
  • NINAZU, the PERSONAL DEITY of GUDEA Toshiko KOBAYASHI*
    NINAZU, THE PERSONAL DEITY OF GUDEA -The Continuity of Personal Deity of Rulers on the Royal Inscriptions of Lagash- Toshiko KOBAYASHI* I. Introduction 1. Historical materials from later periods For many years, I have examined the personal deities of rulers in Pre- Sargonic Lagash.(1) There are not many historical materials about the personal deities from Pre-Sargonic times. In as much as the materials are limited chiefly to the personal deities recorded in the royal inscriptions, not all aspects of personal deities are clear. In my paper "On Ninazu, as Seen in the Economic Texts of the Early Dynastic Lagas (1)" in Orient XXVIII, I discussed Ninazu, who appears in the administrative-economic texts of Pre-Sargonic Lagash. Ninazu appears only in the offering-lists in the reign of Uruinimgina, the last ruler of Pre-Sargonic Lagash. Based only on an analysis of the offering-lists, I argued that Ninazu was the personal deity of a close relative of Uruinimgina. In my investigation thus far of the extant historical materials from Pre-Sargonic Lagash, I have not found any royal inscriptions and administrative-economic texts that refer to Ninazu as dingir-ra-ni ("his deity"), that is, as his personal deity. However, in later historical materials two texts refer to Ninazu as "his deity."(2) One of the texts is FLP 2641,(3) a royal inscription by Gudea, engraved on a clay cone. The text states, "For his deity Ninazu, Gudea, ensi of Lagash, built his temple in Girsu." Gudea is one of the rulers belonging to prosperous Lagash in the Pre-Ur III period; that is, when the Akkad dynasty was in decline, after having been raided by Gutium.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lost Book of Enki.Pdf
    L0ST BOOK °f6NK1 ZECHARIA SITCHIN author of The 12th Planet • . FICTION/MYTHOLOGY $24.00 TH6 LOST BOOK OF 6NK! Will the past become our future? Is humankind destined to repeat the events that occurred on another planet, far away from Earth? Zecharia Sitchin’s bestselling series, The Earth Chronicles, provided humanity’s side of the story—as recorded on ancient clay tablets and other Sumerian artifacts—concerning our origins at the hands of the Anunnaki, “those who from heaven to earth came.” In The Lost Book of Enki, we can view this saga from a dif- ferent perspective through this richly con- ceived autobiographical account of Lord Enki, an Anunnaki god, who tells the story of these extraterrestrials’ arrival on Earth from the 12th planet, Nibiru. The object of their colonization: gold to replenish the dying atmosphere of their home planet. Finding this precious metal results in the Anunnaki creation of homo sapiens—the human race—to mine this important resource. In his previous works, Sitchin com- piled the complete story of the Anunnaki ’s impact on human civilization in peacetime and in war from the frag- ments scattered throughout Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Hittite, Egyptian, Canaanite, and Hebrew sources- —the “myths” of all ancient peoples in the old world as well as the new. Missing from these accounts, however, was the perspective of the Anunnaki themselves What was life like on their own planet? What motives propelled them to settle on Earth—and what drove them from their new home? Convinced of the existence of a now lost book that formed the basis of THE lost book of ENKI MFMOHCS XND PKjOPHeCieS OF XN eXTfCXUfCWJTWXL COD 2.6CHXPJA SITCHIN Bear & Company Rochester, Vermont — Bear & Company One Park Street Rochester, Vermont 05767 www.InnerTraditions.com Copyright © 2002 by Zecharia Sitchin All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Sumerian Lexicon, Version 3.0 1 A
    Sumerian Lexicon Version 3.0 by John A. Halloran The following lexicon contains 1,255 Sumerian logogram words and 2,511 Sumerian compound words. A logogram is a reading of a cuneiform sign which represents a word in the spoken language. Sumerian scribes invented the practice of writing in cuneiform on clay tablets sometime around 3400 B.C. in the Uruk/Warka region of southern Iraq. The language that they spoke, Sumerian, is known to us through a large body of texts and through bilingual cuneiform dictionaries of Sumerian and Akkadian, the language of their Semitic successors, to which Sumerian is not related. These bilingual dictionaries date from the Old Babylonian period (1800-1600 B.C.), by which time Sumerian had ceased to be spoken, except by the scribes. The earliest and most important words in Sumerian had their own cuneiform signs, whose origins were pictographic, making an initial repertoire of about a thousand signs or logograms. Beyond these words, two-thirds of this lexicon now consists of words that are transparent compounds of separate logogram words. I have greatly expanded the section containing compounds in this version, but I know that many more compound words could be added. Many cuneiform signs can be pronounced in more than one way and often two or more signs share the same pronunciation, in which case it is necessary to indicate in the transliteration which cuneiform sign is meant; Assyriologists have developed a system whereby the second homophone is marked by an acute accent (´), the third homophone by a grave accent (`), and the remainder by subscript numerals.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Attitudes and Perceptions of Death and Afterlife in Ancient Near Eastern Literature Leah Whitehead Craig Western Kentucky University
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by TopSCHOLAR Western Kentucky University TopSCHOLAR® Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Honors College at WKU Projects Spring 2008 A Journey Into the Land of No Return: Death Attitudes and Perceptions of Death and Afterlife in Ancient Near Eastern Literature Leah Whitehead Craig Western Kentucky University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses Part of the Comparative Methodologies and Theories Commons, History of Religions of Eastern Origins Commons, Other Religion Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Craig, Leah Whitehead, "A Journey Into the Land of No Return: Death Attitudes and Perceptions of Death and Afterlife in Ancient Near Eastern Literature" (2008). Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Projects. Paper 106. http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses/106 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors College Capstone Experience/ Thesis Projects by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Journey Into the Land of No Return: Death Attitudes and Perceptions of Death and Afterlife in Ancient Near Eastern Literature Leah Whitehead Craig Senior Honors Thesis Submitted to the Honors College of Western Kentucky University Spring, 2008 Approved by: _________________________________ _________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Women in the Ancient Near East: a Sourcebook
    WOMEN IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST Women in the Ancient Near East provides a collection of primary sources that further our understanding of women from Mesopotamian and Near Eastern civiliza- tions, from the earliest historical and literary texts in the third millennium BC to the end of Mesopotamian political autonomy in the sixth century BC. This book is a valuable resource for historians of the Near East and for those studying women in the ancient world. It moves beyond simply identifying women in the Near East to attempting to place them in historical and literary context, follow- ing the latest research. A number of literary genres are represented, including myths and epics, proverbs, medical texts, law collections, letters and treaties, as well as building, dedicatory, and funerary inscriptions. Mark W. Chavalas is Professor of History at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, where he has taught since 1989. Among his publications are the edited Emar: The History, Religion, and Culture of a Syrian Town in the Late Bronze Age (1996), Mesopotamia and the Bible (2002), and The Ancient Near East: Historical Sources in Translation (2006), and he has had research fellowships at Yale, Harvard, Cornell, Cal-Berkeley, and a number of other universities. He has nine seasons of exca- vation at various Bronze Age sites in Syria, including Tell Ashara/Terqa and Tell Mozan/Urkesh. ROUTLEDGE SOURCEBOOKS FOR THE ANCIENT WORLD HISTORIANS OF ANCIENT ROME, THIRD EDITION Ronald Mellor TRIALS FROM CLASSICAL ATHENS, SECOND EDITION Christopher Carey ANCIENT GREECE, THIRD EDITION Matthew Dillon and Lynda Garland READINGS IN LATE ANTIQUITY, SECOND EDITION Michael Maas GREEK AND ROMAN EDUCATION Mark Joyal, J.C.
    [Show full text]
  • A PRELIMINARY STUDY of the SUMERIAN CURRICULAR and LAMENTATIONAL TEXTS from the OLD BABYLONIAN CITY of KISH by Joshua A. Bowen A
    A PRELIMINARY STUDY OF THE SUMERIAN CURRICULAR AND LAMENTATIONAL TEXTS FROM THE OLD BABYLONIAN CITY OF KISH by Joshua A. Bowen A dissertation submitted to the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Baltimore, Maryland February, 2017 © 2017 Joshua A. Bowen All Rights Reserved Abstract The collections of Sumerian and Akkadian tablets that have been excavated at various Old Babylonian sites have been surveyed and subjected to corpus-based analysis, including the tablets from prominent cities such as Nippur, Ur, Sippar, Isin, and Uruk. However, until very recently, attention has not focused on the important northern city of Kiš. Although many of the literary and liturgical duplicates from Kiš have been translated and discussed, neither the curricular nor the lamentational corpora have been treated as a whole. The goal of my dissertation, therefore, is to survey and analyze the entirety of the Old Babylonian (ca. 2000-1600 BCE) curricular and lamentational textual material from Kiš in order to identify local features or traditions that were unique to these genres. The survey of the curricular textual material will seek to accomplish two goals. First, it will identify the curricular compositions that were used in scribal education at Kiš during the OB period. Second, it will determine the ways in which the Kiš scribal curriculum deviated from the curricula that are known from other OB cites, such as Nippur, Ur, and Sippar. The latter investigation will reveal two patterns at Kiš. First, it will demonstrate that, although several curricular duplicates varied from manuscripts found at the major scribal center, Nippur, there is evidence to suggest that there were lines of textual transmission that connected the OB Kiš lexical tradition to those that were found in the MB and the first millennium.
    [Show full text]