DOCSLIB.ORG

The Elamite Cylinder Seal Corpus, C.3500 – 1000 BC

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Elamite Cylinder Seal Corpus, C.3500 – 1000 BC The Elamite Cylinder Seal Corpus, c.3500 – 1000 BC Volume I, Part III K. J. Roach Doctor of Philosophy, (Near Eastern) Archaeology 2008 The University of Sydney Chapter 5 – Summary of Style Distribution across the Elamite Sites The purpose of this chapter is to detail and outline the specific glyptic style distribution at each site included in the Corpus. This survey has two main objectives. The first is the summation and discussion of the Elamite styles from each site, and thereby the revision and reassessment of the ‘glyptic material’ survey presented for each site in the initial site survey section (Chapter 2), by detailing the site glyptic material in the terms of the new Elamite stylistic paradigm here presented. The second intention is to provide some of the background information and data, be it contextual, stylistic and chronological, regarding the function of various glyptic items at each site and across Elam, thereby enabling the following discussion on glyptic function (Chapter 6). The style distribution (how many styles and in what proportions) of each site will be presented, and thereby the basic chronological distribution of the glyptic material, with any necessary discussion where this information strongly contradicts the established chronological periodisation of a site, will be outlined. The glyptic material types (seals/sealings) and the specific materials will be presented, as will any information regarding seal function from provenance (that is, grave or temple context etc.) or type (sealing type especially). For the most part, this information may be presented and detailed in graphs, figures and tables. 5.1 Susa As already mentioned and explained, Susa has contributed by far the most items to the Corpus. Table and Graph 5.1 illustrate the distribution of the two thousand seven hundred and fifty-five Susian items across the Elamite styles. As is evidenced, and as has already been mentioned in regards to the articulation of the styles, the only true style not represented at Susa is the ‘Anshanite Style’ (AS) (the ‘Not Illustrated’ classification is also not represented at Susa, though this is more a publication phenomenon, than a question of stylistic distribution). The absence of the AS style at Susa is indicative, and indeed characteristic, of the style, and aids in its definition as ‘Anshanite’ rather than generally Susian or Elamite. Susa is the only site in the Corpus that was continuously occupied throughout the entire span of this study (see Chapter 2 for details). This archaeological reality concurs with the glyptic style distribution, as all periods are represented in the styles of Susa. A comparison between Graph 5.1 and summary Graph 4.81 indicates that the Susian glyptic style proportions generally accord with the total Corpus proportions (the most notable ECS Corpus, Volume I, Part III 577 exception being the EME style, the total large number of which may be accounted for by the extraordinary contribution of Haft Tepe to that particular corpus), both as one may expect from the majority contributing site of Susa, and as indicates the central role of Susa in the Elamite Corpus. Style Distribution STS 375 PEU 156 JNRS 252 OBRS 88 CPE 296 PEO 43 GS 255 EME 46 AGD 283 KRS 13 STF 284 LME 35 SF 109 LPS 44 LSF 20 LGD 34 ARS 145 No Image 21 PEA 75 Miscellaneous 8 UTRS 116 Unclassifiable 57 2755 Table 5.1. Susa style distribution. 380 360 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 S S S O E e PE GS TF SF EA RS us ST C S LSF ARS P PEU BR PE EME K LM LPS LGD JNRS AGD UTR O mag neo o I la N el isc M Graph 5.1. Susa style distribution. Table and Graph 5.2 indicate the glyptic type (seal/sealing) proportions of the Susian corpus. The supremacy of seals over sealings (seals accounts for over 57% of the Susian corpus) again almost exactly replicates the seal/sealing division for the ECS Corpus, Volume I, Part III 578 entire Corpus (see Graph 4.84), indicating the general dominance of Susa within the Corpus. Glyptic Type Seals 1574 Sealings 1181 Table 5.2. Susa glyptic types. Seals Sealings Graph 5.2. Susa glyptic types. Table 5.3 lists the material types of the Susian Corpus and Graph 5.3 illustrates the proportions of the significant material type contributors (those with five or more items). The fact that <undifferentiated sealings> represents the largest single group of Susian glyptic materials concurs both with the distribution pattern of the wider Elamite Corpus (Graph 4.83), and with the general age and quality or approach of the majority Susian publications (that is, before the importance, and indeed the methods, of sealing type recognition were known). It is anticipated that with further (physical) study, many of these items may be identified as jar sealings, door lock sealings and so on, and thereby fill the general void of these items in the Susian corpus. The significant number of <sealed tablets> at Susa (the second largest group) also conforms with the general Corpus pattern, and indicates that seals were regularly used to seal tablets at Susa. The significant number of <bullae> at Susa should also be noted, and illustrates a glyptic administrative function associated with these items (in at least the earlier periods) at Susa, a point returned to below (Chapter 6). The reduced (but still relatively large body) of <faience> seals at Susa in comparison with the wider Corpus is of note (faience forms the largest seal material group in the Corpus, while it is only the fourth largest seal group at Susa, after <limestone>, <bitumen aggregate>, and <glazed steatite>). The general dominance of <faience> in the Corpus may be attributed to the extraordinarily large faience corpora ECS Corpus, Volume I, Part III 579 of Choga Zanbil and Surkh Dum-i-Luri (both further detailed below). It is of note that this ‘artificial’ material is in great dominance at two sites that shared a specific, and exceptional, votive function only (for the glyptic corpora), as will be returned to below in the function discussion (Chapter 6). In this regard it is also pertinent to note the total absence of any <glass> seals at Susa (in light of their significant numbers at Choga Zanbil, thus indicating that glass may be a specific Choga Zanbil, or votive [or both] material). The general dominance of <limestone> accords with the overall material distribution of the Corpus. The material <bitumen aggregate> is the second largest seal material in the Susian corpus, and as demonstrated by Graph 4.83, the third largest material in the total Corpus. The significant contribution of the total <bitumen aggregate> corpus is in fact Susian (Susa contributes nearly 95% of the total <bitumen aggregate> corpus, or 259/274 items). Thus more (or perhaps, less) than being a uniquely Elamite material, <bitumen aggregate> may be described as essentially Susian (this concurs with the above cited <bitumen aggregate> study [Connan & Deschesne 1996] and the discussion of this still elusive material [Chapter 1]). Aside from these standout materials, the general variability in the Susian material corpus (indeed, the greatest variability of any of the sites under discussion here) reflects the great size of the data set, and concurs with what one might expect of such a large group. Glyptic Materials Limestone 303 Aragonite 18 Terra cotta 97 Marble 60 Heulandite 31 Bone 1 Sandstone 4 Hematite 53 Shell 113 Lapis lazuli 22 Serpentine 34 Copper 3 Basalt 8 Schist 50 Bitumen aggregate 259 Steatite 82 Black stone 1 Faience 121 Rock crystal 4 Black rock 2 Glazed steatite 149 Carnelian 2 Brown stone 1 Unknown cylinder 58 Milky quartz 2 Green stone 1 Ball of clay 1 Flint 1 Grey rock 1 Sealed bulla(e) 213 Amethyst 1 Grey stone 7 Sealing(s) 588 Chalcedony 1 Greyish stone 1 Door lock sealing 3 Agate 2 Green volcanic rock 1 Jar sealing 50 Jasper 22 White stone 4 Wall lock sealing 3 Sealed envelope 2 Alabaster/gypsum 45 Clay cylinder 9 Sealed tablet(s) 320 Table 5.3. Susa glyptic materials. ECS Corpus, Volume I, Part III 580 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Limestone Marble Lapis lazuli Several different functionalBasal interpretat Steatite other glyptic corpora, on the basis both of Jasper above (Chapter 1), and laterGraph returned 5.3.Alab Susa to ainglypticster/ greater gmaterialsypsu detailm (with (Chapter five or 6), more two examples). glyptic functions may be identified through pr Aragonite Heulandite Provenance in a tomb or grave context provi Hematite provenance in a temple (or other cult installation) allows for a votive functionSerpen ttoine be attributed to a seal. It shoul Schist votive, excludes the possibility that the se Grey stone Clay cylinder administrative function. The details of Terra cotta discerning such dual (or more) functional seals, Shell In terms of type, a sealing of Bitumen aggregate tablet, pure undifferentiated sea provenancetions andmay type. be seenAs already in the outlinedSusianFaience and Glazed steatite to make the impression had an administrative d be noted that neither of th Unknown cylinder so used also had a more ethereal, symbo Sealed bulla(e) ovenance or archaeological context. depositional function cannot similarly be disc Sealing(s) according to participation in a writing-centred des a funerary interpretation for a seal; Jar sealing Sealed tablet(s) ECS Corpus, Volume I, Part III any type (jar sealing, door al originally held a more traditional lings and so on) providesthis evidence discussion, that the and seal used ese two functions, funerary nor will be returned to below (Chapter 6).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2 the Assyrian Empire, the Conquest of Israel, and the Colonization of Judah 37 I
    ISRAEL AND EMPIRE ii ISRAEL AND EMPIRE A Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism Leo G. Perdue and Warren Carter Edited by Coleman A. Baker LONDON • NEW DELHI • NEW YORK • SYDNEY 1 Bloomsbury T&T Clark An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc Imprint previously known as T&T Clark 50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway London New York WC1B 3DP NY 10018 UK USA www.bloomsbury.com Bloomsbury, T&T Clark and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published 2015 © Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker, 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker have asserted their rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Authors of this work. No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury or the authors. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: HB: 978-0-56705-409-8 PB: 978-0-56724-328-7 ePDF: 978-0-56728-051-0 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Typeset by Forthcoming Publications (www.forthpub.com) 1 Contents Abbreviations vii Preface ix Introduction: Empires, Colonies, and Postcolonial Interpretation 1 I.
    [Show full text]
  • The Depiction of the Arsacid Dynasty in Medieval Armenian Historiography 207
    Azat Bozoyan The Depiction of the ArsacidDynasty in Medieval Armenian Historiography Introduction The Arsacid, or Parthian, dynasty was foundedinthe 250s bce,detaching large ter- ritories from the Seleucid Kingdom which had been formed after the conquests of Alexander the Great.This dynasty ruled Persia for about half amillennium, until 226 ce,when Ardashir the Sasanian removed them from power.Under the Arsacid dynasty,Persia became Rome’smain rival in the East.Arsacid kingsset up theirrel- ativesinpositions of power in neighbouringstates, thus making them allies. After the fall of the Artaxiad dynasty in Armenia in 66 ce,Vologases IofParthia, in agree- ment with the RomanEmpire and the Armenian royal court,proclaimed his brother Tiridates king of Armenia. His dynasty ruled Armenia until 428 ce.Armenian histor- iographical sources, beginning in the fifth century,always reserved aspecial place for that dynasty. MovsēsXorenacʽi(Moses of Xoren), the ‘Father of Armenian historiography,’ at- tributed the origin of the Arsacids to the Artaxiad kingswho had ruled Armenia be- forehand. EarlyArmenian historiographic sources provide us with anumber of tes- timoniesregarding various representativesofthe Arsacid dynasty and their role in the spread of Christianity in Armenia. In Armenian, as well as in some Syriac histor- ical works,the origin of the Arsacids is related to King AbgarVof Edessa, known as the first king to officiallyadopt Christianity.Armenian and Byzantine historiograph- ical sources associate the adoption of Christianity as the state religion in Armenia with the Arsacid King Tiridates III. Gregory the Illuminator,who playedamajor role in the adoption of Christianity as Armenia’sstate religion and who even became widelyknown as the founder of the Armenian Church, belongstoanother branch of the samefamily.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Interactions Between Prehistoric Societies of the Central
    Herausgeber*innenkollektiv, eds. 2021. Pearls, Politics and Pistachios. Essays in Anthropology and Memories on the Occasion of Susan Pollock’s 65th Birthday: 239–57. DOI: 10.11588/propylaeum.837.c10747. Cultural Interactions between Prehistoric Societies of the Central Iranian Plateau with Residents of the Central Zagros, Fars, and Southwestern Iran during the 5th Millennium BCE HASSAN FAZELI NASHLI,* PARISA NEKOUEI** & ROUHOLLAH YOUSEFI ZOSHK*** The North Central plateau and mountains in eastern Iran, and by the hot and Central Zagros regions during dry Dasht-e-Lut and Dasht-e-Kavir regions the 5th millennium BCE to the south (Badiei 1994, 93). This area, through the Shamshirbor Pass northeast of The North Central Iranian Plateau (see Bastam, includes all of the Gorgan plain, and Fig. 1) is a vast area, with an average some of the southern parts of Turkmenistan elevation of 1200 meters above sea level, and northeastern Iran (Malek-Shahmirzadi which was inhabited by modern humans from 2003, 317). Numerous plains are enclosed ca. 7200 BCE onwards. It is bounded to the by the southern limits of the Alborz, each of north by the Alborz Mountains, the Zagros which has its own cultural history; among the Mountains to the west, at its eastern limit by most important plains are the Tehran, Qazvin, Fig. 1. Map showing the locations of the most important 5th millennium BCE sites mentioned in the text. Map by the authors. * University of Tehran, Tehran (Iran) ** University of Tehran, Tehran (Iran) *** Islamic Azad University of Varamin, Varamin (Iran) Hassan Fazeli Nashli, Parisa Nekouei & Rouhollah Yousefi Zoshk Qom, and Kashan plains.
    [Show full text]
  • Purim Part 1: ● the Authorship of This Book Is Unknown
    Purim Part 1: ● The authorship of this book is unknown. It must have been obviously written after the death of Ahasuerus (the Xerxes of the Greeks), which took place B.C. 465. The minute and particular account also given of many historical details makes it probable that the writer was contemporary with Mordecai and Esther. Hence we may conclude that the book was written probably about B.C. 444-434, and that the author was one of the Jews of the dispersion. This book is more purely historical than any other book of Scripture; and it has this remarkable peculiarity that the name of God does not occur in it from first to last in any form. It has, however, been well observed that "though the name of God be not in it, his finger is." The book wonderfully exhibits the providential government of God. By: M.G. Easton M.A., D.D., Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Third Edition ● Since Purim is a national holiday and is not listed as a holy day in Leviticus 23 or elsewhere, it is not a biblically required observation for those in the Church of God. As Esther 9:27-28 points out it was a Jewish invention for Jews. 1. Esther 1 ● Verses 1-2=At this time you have Israelites scattered from India to Sub-Saharan Africa. Ahasuerus--It is now generally agreed among learned men that the Ahasuerus mentioned in this episode is the Xerxes who figures in Grecian history.) ;[Šušān; Greek: Σοῦσα [ˈsuːsa שׁוּ ָשׁן :Susa (/ˈsuːsə/; Persian: Šuš; [ʃuʃ]; Hebrew ● Syriac: ܫܘܫ Šuš; Middle Persian: Sūš, Šūs; Old Persian: ςρ Çūšā) ​ was an ancient city of the Proto-Elamite, Elamite, First Persian Empire, Seleucid, Parthian, and Sasanian empires of Iran, and one of the most important cities of the Ancient Near East.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Collection Survey on Tourism and Cultural Heritage in the Islamic Republic of Iran Final Report
    THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN IRANIAN CULTURAL HERITAGE, HANDICRAFTS AND TOURISM ORGANIZATION (ICHTO) DATA COLLECTION SURVEY ON TOURISM AND CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN FINAL REPORT FEBRUARY 2018 JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY (JICA) HOKKAIDO UNIVERSITY JTB CORPORATE SALES INC. INGÉROSEC CORPORATION RECS INTERNATIONAL INC. 7R JR 18-006 JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY (JICA) DATA COLLECTION SURVEY ON TOURISM AND CULTURAL HERITAGE IN THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN FINAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................ v Maps ........................................................................................................................................ vi Photos (The 1st Field Survey) ................................................................................................. vii Photos (The 2nd Field Survey) ............................................................................................... viii Photos (The 3rd Field Survey) .................................................................................................. ix List of Figures and Tables ........................................................................................................ x 1. Outline of the Survey ....................................................................................................... 1 (1) Background and Objectives .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State
    Cambridge University Press 0521563585 - The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State D. T. Potts Frontmatter More information The Archaeology of Elam Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State From the middle of the third millennium bc until the coming of Cyrus the Great, southwestern Iran was referred to in Mesopotamian sources as the land of Elam. A heterogenous collection of regions, Elam was home to a variety of groups, alternately the object of Mesopotamian aggres- sion, and aggressors themselves; an ethnic group seemingly swallowed up by the vast Achaemenid Persian empire, yet a force strong enough to attack Babylonia in the last centuries bc. The Elamite language is attested as late as the Medieval era, and the name Elam as late as 1300 in the records of the Nestorian church. This book examines the formation and transforma- tion of Elam’s many identities through both archaeological and written evidence, and brings to life one of the most important regions of Western Asia, re-evaluates its significance, and places it in the context of the most recent archaeological and historical scholarship. d. t. potts is Edwin Cuthbert Hall Professor in Middle Eastern Archaeology at the University of Sydney. He is the author of The Arabian Gulf in Antiquity, 2 vols. (1990), Mesopotamian Civilization (1997), and numerous articles in scholarly journals. © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 0521563585 - The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State D. T. Potts Frontmatter More information cambridge world archaeology Series editor NORMAN YOFFEE, University of Michigan Editorial board SUSAN ALCOCK, University of Michigan TOM DILLEHAY, University of Kentucky CHRIS GOSDEN, University of Oxford CARLA SINOPOLI, University of Michigan The Cambridge World Archaeology series is addressed to students and professional archaeologists, and to academics in related disciplines.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Morality in Antiquity
    Orientalische Religionen in der Antike Ägypten, Israel, Alter Orient Oriental Religions in Antiquity Egypt, Israel, Ancient Near East (ORA) Herausgegeben von / Edited by Angelika Berlejung (Leipzig) Joachim Friedrich Quack (Heidelberg) Annette Zgoll (Göttingen) 29 Teaching Morality in Antiquity Wisdom Texts, Oral Traditions, and Images Edited by T. M. Oshima with Susanne Kohlhaas Mohr Siebeck T. M. OSHIMA, born 1967; PhD in Assyriology from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel; 2008–10 Alexander-von-Humboldt fellow at the University of Leipzig in Germany; 2010–13 re- search fellow at the Friedrich-Schiller University in Jena (project of the German Research Founda- tion [DFG]); since 2015 DFG project at the University of Leipzig. SUSANNE KOHLHAAS, born 1986; 2016 MA in Assyriology from Leipzig University; 2011–15 research assistant at the Institute for ancient Near Eastern Studies at Leipzig University; 2016–18 research assistant at DFG project “Teaching Morality in Antiquity”. ISBN 978-3-16-156480-2 / eISBN 978-3-16-156481-9 DOI 10.1628/978-3-16-156481-9 ISSN 1869-0513 / eISSN 2568-7492 (Orientalische Religionen in der Antike) The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2018 Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed on non-aging paper by Gulde Druck in Tübingen, and bound by Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Chogha-Zanbil Brochure
    Foreword by the Director-General of UNESCO Chogha Zanbil, the great Elamite holy city, was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1979, making it one of the first cultural sites to be so recognized. Being such an exceptional site, it is particularly regrettable that it has been affected by serious conservation problems resulting both from the inher- ent fragility of its earthen constructions and from years of warfare. Rising to the challenge of safeguarding Chogha Zanbil, the UNESCO Division of Cultural Heritage sent a first team of experts to Iran in 1995 with a view to making recommenda- tions to ensure the sustainable conservation of the site. The resulting Project for the Conservation of Chogha Zanbil – the first major international cultural initiative since the Iranian Revolution – was subsequently launched thanks to generous donations from the Japanese and Iranian Governments, and the close collaboration between the Iranian Cultural Heritage Organization (ICHO) and UNESCO. I am very pleased to see that the project’s first phase, carried out from 1999 to 2002, has been successful. In addi- tion to implementing urgently needed restoration work, draw- ing up a General Plan for Conservation and developing training and research activities, the project has paved the way for future international and bilateral projects in Iran and else- where in Central Asia, a region particularly rich in earthen architecture. In the upcoming second phase, we look forward to contin- uing fruitful cooperation between UNESCO, ICHO, and the Governments of Japan and Iran, whose efforts to ensure the conservation of Chogha Zanbil will undoubtedly earn the grati- tude of future generations.
    [Show full text]
  • 141-155, 2011 Issn 1816-9112
    141 Research Journal of Fisheries and Hydrobiology, 6(3): 141-155, 2011 ISSN 1816-9112 ORIGINAL ARTICLES The Probability of Karun River and Khozestan City Environmental Pollution Due to Seismic Response of Karun-4 Dam Zaniar Tokmechi Department of Civil Engineering, Mahabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mahabad, Iran ABSTRACT The Karun-4 dam is a hydroelectric dam on the Karun River in the province of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari, Iran. The Karun has the highest discharge of Iran's rivers. The objectives of the construction of Karun-4 dam and hydroelectric power plant are electric power supply and flood control. Historically Khuzestan is what historians refer to as ancient Elam, whose capital was in Susa. The Achaemenid Old Persian term for Elam was Hujiya, which is present in the modern name. Khuzistan, meaning the Land of the Khuzi refers to the original inhabitants of this province, the Susian people, Old Persian Huza or Huja (as in the inscription at the tomb of King Darius I at Naqsh-e Rostam, (the Shushan of the Hebrew sources) where it is recorded as inscription as Hauja or Huja. This is in conformity with the same evolutionary process where the Old Persian changed the name Sindh into Hind /Hindustan. In Middle Persian the term evolves into Khuz and Kuzi The pre- Islamic Partho-Sassanid Inscriptions gives the name of the province as Khwuzestan. In this paper, the probability of environmental pollution due to heavy metals caused by KARUN-4 dam failure is studied. Finite Element and ZENGAR methods are used to analyze the probability of pollution at dam downstream.
    [Show full text]
  • Urnamma of Ur in Sumerian Literary Tradition
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 1999 Urnamma of Ur in Sumerian Literary Tradition Flückiger-Hawker, Esther Abstract: This book presents new standard editions of all the hitherto known hymns of Urnamma, the founder of the Third Dynasty of Ur (fl. 2100 B.C.), and adds new perspectives to the compositions and development of the genre of Sumerian royal hymns in general. The first chapter (I) is introductory in nature (historical background, the reading of the name Urnamma, Sumerian royal hymns). The second chapter (II) presents a general survey of Urnamma’s hymnic corpus, including arguments for a broader definition of Sumerian royal hymns and an attempt at classifying the non-standard orthography found in Urnamma’s hymns. The third chapter (III) deals with correlations of Urnamma’s hymns with other textual sources pertaining to him. A fourth chapter (IV) is devoted to aspects of continuity and change in royal hymnography by analyzing the Urnamma hymns in relation to other royal hymns and related genres. A discussion of topoi of legitimation and kingship and narrative materials in different text types during different periods of time and other findings concerning statues, stelas and royal hymns addnew perspectives to the ongoing discussion of the original setting of royal hymns. Also, reasons are given why a version of the Sumerian King List may well be dated to Urnamma and the thesis advanced that Išmēdagan of Isin was not only an imitator of Šulgi but also of Urnamma. The final of the chapter IV shows that Urnamma A, also known as Urnamma’s Death, uses the language of lamentation literature and Curse of Agade which describe the destruction of cities, and applies it to the death of a king.
    [Show full text]
  • The Journal of the Asian Arts Society of Australia Ancient Iran
    VOLUME 19 NO. 3 SEPTEMBER 2010 the journal of the asian arts society of australia TAASA Review ancient iran C o n t E n t s Volume 19 No. 3 September 2010 3 Editorial taasa rEVIEW Tobin Hartnell and Josefa Green THE ASIAN ARTS SOCIETY OF AUSTRALIA INC. ABN 64093697537 • Vol. 19 No. 3, September 2010 ISSN 1037.6674 4 ChEshmEh ali WarE: a PaintEd CEramiC tradition in thE iranian CEntral PlatEau Registered by Australia Post. Publication No. NBQ 4134 Edna Wong EditorIAL • email: [email protected] 7 ElamitE art General editor, Josefa Green Javier Álvarez-Món PubliCations Committee 10 the KazaKly-yatKan Wall Paintings: New PErspectivEs on the Art of the AnCiEnt Iranian World Josefa Green (convenor) • Tina Burge Melanie Eastburn • Sandra Forbes • Ann MacArthur Fiona Kidd Jim Masselos • Ann Proctor • Susan Scollay Sabrina Snow • Christina Sumner 12 PErsepolis in the WEstErn imagination dEsign/layout Tobin Hartnell Ingo Voss, VossDesign Printing 15 love Thy Neighbour: The Intimate Art of DiPlomaCy in PErsepolis Processional SculPturEs John Fisher Printing Stephanie Reed Published by The Asian Arts Society of Australia inc. 18 sasanian roCK rEliEf PanEls PO Box 996 Potts Point NSw 2011 www.taasa.org.au Ali Asadi Enquiries: [email protected] 21 in the PubliC domain: A Persian ShAhnama FoliO from ThE NGV TAASA Review is published quarterly and is distributed to members Susan Scollay of The Asian Arts Society of Australia inc. TAASA Review welcomes submissions of articles, notes and reviews on Asian visual and performing arts. All articles are refereed. Additional copies and 22 silKs of sasanian PErsia subscription to TAASA Review are available on request.
    [Show full text]
  • Arta 2019.002
    Arta 2019.002 http://www.achemenet.com/pdf/arta/ARTA_2019.002_Wicks.pdf Yasmina Wicks - The University of Sydney Between Highlands and Lowlands. The Ram Hormuz Plain in the Neo-Elamite and Early Achaemenid Periods, and Comments on Five Burials from the Fort Mound at Tal-i Ghazir Abstract The plain of Ram Hormuz was a strategically important area of southwest Iran connecting the Susiana lowlands with the Zagros highlands, and undoubtedly a critical zone of Elamite and Iranian interaction in the centuries leading up to the emergence of the Persian Empire. Its archaeological remains must therefore be regarded as a vital key to our comprehension of the processes of acculturation that gave rise to the Elamo-Persian culture of the early Achaemenid period. While the plain has been extensively surveyed, its only excavated site remains Tal-i Ghazir where just two seasons of excavation were conducted in 1948/49 by Donald E. McCown under the auspices of the Oriental Institute. McCown worked in three separate mounds— Mounds A and B, and the so-called Fort Mound—but he never published his results. Almost half a century later, Elizabeth Carter (1994) published a series of burials in the Fort Mound from his field notes, and another two decades later, Abbas Alizadeh (2014) published the complete records of the Tal-i Ghazir excavations. The purpose of this paper is to outline the evidence for the Neo-Elamite (ca. 1000-525 BCE) and Achaemenid periods (ca. 525-330 BCE) collected during the surveys across the Ram Hormuz plain and the excavations at Tal-i Ghazir, with special attention to the burials in the Fort Mound.
    [Show full text]