DOCSLIB.ORG

ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN CHRONOLOGY MESOPOTAMIA (South) MESOPOTAMIA (North) [RAN LEVANT ANATOLIA EGYPT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN CHRONOLOGY MESOPOTAMIA (South) MESOPOTAMIA (North) [RAN LEVANT ANATOLIA EGYPT ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN CHRONOLOGY MESOPOTAMIA (South) MESOPOTAMIA (North) [RAN LEVANT ANATOLIA EGYPT 3500 B.c. Late Uruk period Proto-urban period Chalcolithic period Troy I 3500-3100 Susa II Jemdet Nasr period 3100-2900 Archaic period Early Dynastic period Proto-Elamite period 3000 B.C. c. 3000-2575 2900-2334 Susa III Sumero-Elamite period Early Bronze Age Troy II SUA IV Old Kingdom 2575-2134 Akkadian period Akkadian rule 2334-2154 in Susa Alaca Höyük royal Neo-Sumerian period tombs Gudea of Lagash ca. 2100 First Inrermediate Third Dynasty of Ur period 2112-2004 2134-2040 2000 B.c. Isin-Larsa period Middle Bronze Age Middle Kingdom 2017-176} Old Assyrian period Old Elamite period Assyrian Colony 2040-1640 1920-1750 1900-1500 period 1920-1750 Old Babylonian period 1894- 1595 Old Hirtite period Hammurabi 1650-1400 Second Intermediate period (Hyksos) 1792-1750 1640-1532 Kassite period Mitannian period Late Bronze Age Hittite Empire period New Kingdom 1595-1157 1500-1350 1400-1200 1550-1070 Middle Assyrian Middle Elamire period Second Dynasty of Isin Iron Age Neo-Hirtite and Third Intermediate 1000 B.c. period 1350-1000 period 1070-712 1156-1025 Hasanlu V-IV Kingdoms of Aramaean states Neo-Assyrian period Iron Age I-II Israel and Judah Urartian period 883-612 1500-800 850-600 Phoenician city states Late Dynastic period Neo-Eiamite period Phrygian period 712-332 Neo-Babylonian 775-690 period 625-539 Median period Iron Age III \chaemenid dynasty 550-331 Achaemenid rule Achaemenid rule Achaemenid rule 525-404;343-332 Alexander the Great 331-323 Capture of Tyre by Alexander the Great Capture of Babylon Burning of Persepolis Alexander the Grear crosses rhe Hellespont Alexander the Great by the Greeks 331 331 332 334 Macedonian period Seleucid dynasty Seleucid dynasry Seleucid dynasty 332-304 31 2- 129 B.c. (end of rule in Iran) B.C. /A.D. Orontid, Artaxiad and Ptolemaic dynasty Arsacid dynasties 304-30 B.C. Parth ian period Arsacid dynasty in Armenia 247 B.C.-A.D. 224 400 B.C -A.D. 428 Roman period Sasan ian dynasty AD 224-651 Roman period Roman period A.D. 500 Byzantine period Byzantine period Sasanian occupation A.D. 619 L _L Arai Sett Syr Darya • Maikop BUtck Sta GREECE Caucasus Mountains Htttys River Akra Höyük • Caíl'hm Sta Horoz •Troy Ankara- ^ AmmUm QxtU Rnvr (Atan Darya) Gord.on- • Bogazkoy AD„irKTTA TURKMENISTAN ARMENIA • Kulrepe uk, \¡,„ ANATOLIA •Acemhäyük T¡. River Haolar» lureng lepe BACTRIA -CacalHöyük Tel|Bmk. Marl.k- • • Yiinm Tepc THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART Euphrates Rim , • " Hasanlu Hindu Kmh Mountains „,. Mosul" »ZJwiye • Tepe Hissar Et • Ra• s íShamr? a , «Nimrud _. , _ -Tehran . Assur- Diyala River Art of the CYPRUS Dura-kuropos • Kabul Palmyra» • Hamadan .w. «¡alk Mediterranean Sea Byblus . SYRIA Man' -™1 Asi™ c-1 . r-, • Baghdad Zaem Mowttaim bidon • • Damascus ° b Tyre. MESOPOTAMIA LUR1STAN IDi^T „ , «Ctesiphon 1KAN liefauindRiver Ancient ISRAEL Babylon. -JSl&lSlasi JUDAH •Jerusalem Isin.'. »Susa-.... Nippur. Lagash ELAM Kuh. Khwaja • Uruk • . Larsa India Rmr D Ur- Cairo • • Petra Near East c. • Persepolis EGYPT Sh,ra2 ARABIA Permanent Galleries Ancient Near Eastern Art The Raymond and Beverly Sackler Gallery for Assyrian Art contains stone relief sculptures, ivory carvings, and small objects excavated at Nimrud in northern Mesopotamia, as well as later relief fragments from the sites of Khorsabad and Nineveh. The adjacent galleries of ancient Near Eastern art are arranged according to geographical regions from chrono­ logical periods. The objects displayed there come from Meso­ potamia, Anatolia, Syria, Iran, the Armenian plateau, the region of the Caucasus Mountains, and southern Arabia. Funds for this installation were given by The Hagop Kevorkian Fund, James N. Spear, The Dillon Fund, and the National Endowment for the Arts. Mesopotamia (cover) clad in a long sheepskin skirt with tufted border, a typical The Early Periods. Mesopotamia, a land crossed by two great form of Sumerian dress. rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, and bordered by mountain The Sumerians were skilled metalworkers. The cult stand ranges in the north and east, was first settled during the seventh (fig. 1) with the figure of an ibex made of an alloy of copper and millennium B.C. The material cultures of the earliest farming arsenic is cast over a ceramic core in the lost-wax process. communities are chiefly known through pottery, * which varies in Jewelry* made of gold, silver, lapis lazuli, and carnelian was ISLAMIC ART style of decorarion and in technical quality. By the mid-fourth discovered by Sir Leonard Woolley in royal and noble tombs 14 millennium an urban civilization based on irrigated cultivation constructed around 2500 B.C. at Ur. The contents of these rich ARABIA SECOND FLOOR emerged in Sumer, in rhe south. Evidence of monumental archi­ graves are further evidence of the sophisticated metal technology ISLAMIC ART- tecture, craft specialization, and the first system of writing have of the period as well as the high level of prosperity and testify to IRAN been found at the site of Uruk. The earliest pictographic signs Achaemenid the existence of an extensive trading network, which supplied the Parthian gradually evolved into a wedge-shaped script called cuneiform. rare and precious marerials. Sasanian ANCIENT NEAR Cylindrical seal stones engraved with figurai and geometric images EASTERN ART — With the reign of Sargon (ca. 2334-2279 B.C.) Semitic first appear in the mid-fourth millennium; they were impressed Akkadians came to power in Mesopotamia. The few monumental 13 on clay tablets and on sealings for jars and doors to confirm agree­ works that survive indicare that the arts flourished during this GREAT HALL ments and to safeguard property. period. On a smaller scale many cylinder seals were finely carved The naturalism of the art of the Uruk and Jemdet Nasr with narrative and mythological scenes (fig. 2). Akkadian rule LURISTAN periods (ca. 3500-2900 B.C.) is apparent in a clay ram's head* was brought to an end by nomadic invaders from the Zagros similar to examples found at Uruk. A high degree of skill is dis­ Mountains to the east. In the ensuing political vacuum certain played in the carving of various stones, most of which were Sumerian city states reestablished their independence. Gudea and IRAN imported into southern Mesopotamia, a region poor in natural his son Ur-Ningirsu (ca. 2100; 2089 B.c.), governors of Lagash, N 2 5th-1st resources. Many human- and animal-shaped stamp seals* and commemorated their achievements and piety by commissioning millennium carved vessels* exist from these periods. B.C. a series of statues, many in diorite. On the skirt of a statue of the Third Millennium B.C. In the subsequent Early Dynastic seated Gudea (fig. 3) is an inscription listing various temples he 10 • period (ca. 2900-2334 B.C.) contacts with neighboring lands, erected. The Sumerian renaissance continued during the Third Dynasty of Ur (ca. 2112-2004 B.C.), particularly under Ur- GALLERIES Anatolia, Syria, Iran and Cenrral Asia, increased. A system of Nammu and his son Shulgi. They were prodigious builders who OF kingship gradually developed in the Sumerian city states. Ulti­ mately, control of man's destiny was believed to lie with the gods. restored ancient Sumerian sanctuaries and erected monumental 9 8 ANCIENT ANATOLIA Each major urban cenrer was the home of a different divinity, ziggurats, high stepped platforms with shrines on rop. A Sumer­ NEAR EASTERN SYRIA although other gods were worshiped as well. Nippur, the most ian tradition of placing copper-allow figurines* in the founda­ ART importanr religious center in Sumer, was the city of Enlil, head of tions of temple structures was continued. The Neo-Sumerian the Sumerian pantheon. Excavations in the sacred precinct at period ended with the sack of Ur by Elamites from southwestern Nippur revealed a temple complex dedicated to Inanna, the Iran. Sumerian goddess of love and war. Sculpture and votive objects* Second Millennium B.C. After the collapse of Ur, the MESOPOTAMIA from this temple were received by the Museum in return for par­ 5th-1st 3 southern city states, especially Isin and Larsa, vied for control millennium B.C. ticipation in two excavation of southern Mesopotamia. 1 seasons by the Joint Expedition Early in the nineteenth century to Nippur of the Baghdad B.C. an Amorite dynasty was School of the American Schools founded in the south of Baby­ of Oriental Research and the lon, and by the reign of Ham­ Oriental Institute of the Uni­ murabi (ca. 1792-1750 B.C.) GREEK AND ROMAN ART versity of Chicago. At Tell the First Dynasty of Babylon Asmar in the Diyala River ruled much of Mesopotamia. Nimrud M valley, the expedition of the Fine examples of jewelry from 5 ivories Orienral Institute uncovered the first half of the second mil­ RAYMOND AND a series of temple strucrures. lennium are elements from gold Arslan Tash BEVERLY SACKLER A hoard of statues, carefully ivories GALLERY FOR Assyrian reliefs necklaces, including pendants in 8th-7th deposited in the Square Tem­ the form of divine symbols, ASSYRIAN ART century B c. ple, included a male worshiper some with minute granulation. Assyrian reliefs from the Nimrud Around 1595 B.C. the Palace of Assurnasirpal II 'Objects in the collection. The First Dynasty of Babylon was Nimrud, 9th century B.c. location of the illustrated objects is T indicated by number on the gallery Great Hall balcony plan at left. destroyed by an invasion of Hittites from Anatolia. During the Syria Early in the second millennium, wrirten records in the form sixteenth century the Kassites, a people of non-Mesopotamian In Syria agricultural villages were settled in the eighth millen­ of clay tablets found at Kiiltepe (ancient Kanesh) in central Ana­ origin, established their rule at Babylon, remaining in power for nium B.C., in the Neolithic period (ca.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On Writing the History of Southern Mesopotamia* by Eva Von
    On Writing the History of Southern Mesopotamia* by Eva von Dassow — Colorado State University In his book Babylonia 689-627 B.C., G. Frame provides a maximally detailed his- tory of a specific region during a closely delimited time period, based on all available sources produced during that period or bearing on it. This review article critiques the methods used to derive the history from the sources and the conceptual framework used to apprehend the subject of the history. Babylonia 689-627 B. C , the revised version of Grant Frame's doc- toral dissertation, covers one of the most turbulent and exciting periods of Babylonian history, a time during which Babylon succes- sively experienced destruction and revival at Assyria's hands, then suf- fered rebellion and siege, and lastly awaited the opportunity to over- throw Assyria and inherit most of Assyria's empire. Although, as usual, the preserved textual sources cover these years unevenly, and often are insufficiently varied in type and origin (e.g., royal or non- royal, Babylonian or Assyrian), the years from Sennacherib's destruc- tion of Babylon in 689 to the eve of Nabopolassar's accession in 626 are also a richly documented period. Frame's work is an attempt to digest all of the available sources, including archaeological evidence as well as texts, in order to produce a maximally detailed history. Sur- rounding the book's core, chapters 5-9, which proceed reign by reign through this history, are chapters focussing on the sources (ch. 2), chronology (ch. 3), the composition of Babylonia's population (ch.
    [Show full text]
  • An In-Depth Study of the Tell Brak Eye Idols in the 4Th Millennium BCE: with a Primary Focus on Function and Meaning
    1 The Eyes Have It An In-Depth Study of the Tell Brak Eye Idols in the 4th Millennium BCE: with a primary focus on function and meaning Honours Thesis Department of Archaeology The University of Sydney Arabella Cooper 430145722 Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in the Department of Archaeology at the University of Sydney, Australia, 2016. 2 “In the present state of our knowledge there are very few archaeological discoveries which can be described as unique, but one class of objects from Brak is unique-the eye-idols or images which turned up in thousands in the grey brick stratum of the earlier Eye-Temple" M.E.L Mallowan, 1947, Excavations at Brak and Chagar Bazar, 33. Cover Image: Figures 1-5. M.E.L Mallowan, 1947, Excavations at Brak and Chagar Bazar, 33. 3 Statement of Authorship The research described in this thesis, except where referenced, is the original work of the author and was a discrete project supervised by Dr Alison Betts. This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any other tertiary institution. No other individual’s work has been used without accurate referencing and acknowledgement in the main text of the thesis. Arabella Cooper, November 2016 4 Acknowledgments As with any major study or work, you do not toil in isolation and the writing of this thesis is no different. I first would like to thank my supervisor Professor Alison Betts, and even more so the wonderful staff at the Nicholson Museum Candace Richards and Karen Alexander for their patience and advise.
    [Show full text]
  • The Last Empire of Iran by Michael R.J
    The Last Empire of Iran By Michael R.J. Bonner In 330 BCE, Alexander the Great destroyed the Persian imperial capital at Persepolis. This was the end of the world’s first great international empire. The ancient imperial traditions of the Near East had culminated in the rule of the Persian king Cyrus the Great. He and his successors united nearly all the civilised people of western Eurasia into a single state stretching, at its height, from Egypt to India. This state perished in the flames of Persepolis, but the dream of world empire never died. The Macedonian conquerors were gradually overthrown and replaced by a loose assemblage of Iranian kingdoms. The so-called Parthian Empire was a decentralised and disorderly state, but it bound together much of the sedentary Near East for about 500 years. When this empire fell in its turn, Iran got a new leader and new empire with a vengeance. The third and last pre-Islamic Iranian empire was ruled by the Sasanian dynasty from the 220s to 651 CE. Map of the Sasanian Empire. Silver coin of Ardashir I, struck at the Hamadan mint. (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Silver_coin_of_Ardashir_I,_struck_at_the_Hamadan _mint.jpg) The Last Empire of Iran. This period was arguably the heyday of ancient Iran – a time when Iranian military power nearly conquered the eastern Roman Empire, and when Persian culture reached its apogee before the coming of Islam. The founder of the Sasamian dynasty was Ardashir I who claimed descent from a mysterious ancestor called Sasan. Ardashir was the governor of Fars, a province in southern Iran, in the twilight days of the Parthian Empire.
    [Show full text]
  • Ur III Studies: Bibliography 1997–2014
    UR III STUDIES: BIBLIOGRAPHY 1997–2014 Agnès Garcia-Ventura La Sapienza Università di Roma Two bibliographical lists of texts from Ur III Mesopotamia (c.2112–2004 BC) have been published so far.1 The first, compiled by Marcel Sigrist and Tohru Gomi, appeared in 1991 in a volume entitled The Comprehensive Catalogue of Published Ur III Tablets, and it included all publications until 1990. The second was published in 1999 by Walther Sallaberger as the final chapter of his work on the Ur III period in the volume Mesopotamien: Akkade-Zeit und Ur III-Zeit (Sallaberger 1999: 351–363). This second list fills in the gaps of the previous one and presents works published until 1997. Since then, no other Ur III bibliographies have been published. Even though it is much easier to access texts and publications today than it was in the past, these lists nonetheless remain useful.2 In this paper I present an updated list of Ur III publications covering the years 1997–2014. Like Sallaberger 1999, I have also added a few references to the years covered in the previous bibliographical list (in this case, 1994–1997). But unlike the previous lists, the one presented here includes not only publications of tablets and texts, but also studies referring to the Ur III period and Ur III sources in general. My hope is that the list will be of use both to Assyriologists working with Ur III texts and to scholars interested in the art history and archaeology of the period, as well as those carrying out comparative studies with other periods.
    [Show full text]
  • SUMERIAN LITERATURE and SUMERIAN IDENTITY My Title Puts
    CNI Publicati ons 43 SUMERIAN LITERATURE AND SUMERIAN IDENTITY JERROLD S. COOPER PROBLEMS OF C..\NONlCl'TY AND IDENTITY FORMATION IN A NCIENT EGYPT AND MESOPOTAMIA There is evidence of a regional identity in early Babylonia, but it does not seem to be of the Sumerian ethno-lingusitic sort. Sumerian Edited by identity as such appears only as an artifact of the scribal literary KIM RYHOLT curriculum once the Sumerian language had to be acquired through GOJKO B AR .I AMOVIC educati on rather than as a mother tongue. By the late second millennium, it appears there was no notion that a separate Sumerian ethno-lingui stic population had ever existed. My title puts Sumerian literature before Sumerian identity, and in so doing anticipates my conclusion, which will be that there was little or no Sumerian identity as such - in the sense of "We are all Sumerians!" ­ outside of Sumerian literature and the scribal milieu that composed and transmitted it. By "Sumerian literature," I mean the corpus of compositions in Sumerian known from manuscripts that date primarily 1 to the first half of the 18 h century BC. With a few notable exceptions, the compositions themselves originated in the preceding three centuries, that is, in what Assyriologists call the Ur III and Isin-Larsa (or Early Old Babylonian) periods. I purposely eschew the too fraught and contested term "canon," preferring the very neutral "corpus" instead, while recognizing that because nearly all of our manuscripts were produced by students, the term "curriculum" is apt as well. 1 The geographic designation "Babylonia" is used here for the region to the south of present day Baghdad, the territory the ancients would have called "Sumer and Akkad." I will argue that there is indeed evidence for a 3rd millennium pan-Babylonian regional identity, but little or no evidence that it was bound to a Sumerian mother-tongue community.
    [Show full text]
  • Questions for History of Ancient Mesopotamia by Alexis Castor
    www.YoYoBrain.com - Accelerators for Memory and Learning Questions for History of Ancient Mesopotamia by Alexis Castor Category: Rise of Civilization - Part 1 - (26 questions) Indentify Uruk Vase - oldest known depiction of gods and humans. 3000 B.C. What 2 mountain ranges frame Mesopotamia Zagros Mountains to the east Taurus Mountains to the north When was writing developed in ancient late 4th millenium B.C. Mesopotamia Identify creature: lamassu - Assyrian mythical creature During the 3rd and 2nd millenium B.C. what north - Akkad were the 2 major regions of north and south south - Sumer Mesopotamia called? When did Hammurabi the law giver reign? 1792 - 1750 B.C. What work of fiction did Ctesias, 4th century account of fictional ruler called B.C. Greek, invent about Mesopotamia Sardanapalus, whose empire collapsed due to self-indulgence What does painting refer to: Death of Sardanapalus by Eugene Delacroix in 1827 refers to mythical ruler of Mesopotamia that 4th Century Greek Ctesias invented to show moral rot of rulers from there Who was: Semiramis written about by Diodorus of Greece in 1st century B.C. queen of Assyria and built Bablyon different lover every night that she killed next day mythical Identify ruins: Nineveh of Assyria Identify: 5th century B.C. inscription of Darius I carved in mountainside at Behistun in Iran Identify: Ishtar Gate from Babylon now located in Berlin Identify the ruin: city of Ur in southern Mesopotamia Define: surface survey where archeologist map physical presence of settlements over an area Define: stratigraphy study of different layers of soil in archeology Define: tell (in archaeology) a mound that build up over a period of human settlement Type of pottery: Halaf - salmon colored clay, painted in red and black, geometric and animal designs When was wine first available to upper around 3100 B.C.
    [Show full text]
  • A Neo-Assyrian Legal Document from Tell Sitak
    Offprint from At the Dawn of History Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of J. N. Postgate Volume 1 edited by YAğmUR HEFFRON, ADAM STONE, and MARTIN WORTHINGTON Winona Lake, Indiana EISENBRAUNS 2017 Copyright © 2017 Eisenbrauns Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. www.eisenbrauns.com Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Heffron, Yağmur, editor. | Stone, Adam, 1981– editor. | Worthington, Martin, editor. | Postgate, J. N., honoree. Title: At the Dawn of History : Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of J.N. Postgate / edited by Yağmur Heffron, Adam Stone, and Martin Worthington. Description: Winona Lake, Indiana : Eisenbrauns, 2017. | Includes bibliographical references. | Description based on print version record and CIP data provided by publisher; resource not viewed. Identifiers: LCCN 2016049835 (print) | LCCN 2016049136 (ebook) | ISBN 9781575064741 (ePDF 2-volume set) | ISBN 9781575064710 (cloth, set 2 volumes : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781575064727 (volume 1 : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781575064734 (volume 2 : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Iraq—Civilization—To 634. | Iraq—History—To 634. | Iraq— Antiquities. | Civilization, Assyro-Babylonian. | Akkadian language—Texts. Classification: LCC DS69.5 (print) | LCC DS69.5 .A86 2017 (ebook) | DDC 935—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016049835 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.♾™ Contents Volume 1 Editors’ Preface . ix Nicholas Postgate’s Publications . xiii A Fragment of a Stele from Umma . 1 LAMIA AL-GAILANI WERR In the Shade of the Assyrian Orchards . 7 MARIE-FRANÇOISE BESNIER The Šu-Suen Year 9 sa2-du11 ku5-ra2 Flour Dossier from Puzriš-Dagan .
    [Show full text]
  • Monuments, Materiality, and Meaning in the Classical Archaeology of Anatolia
    MONUMENTS, MATERIALITY, AND MEANING IN THE CLASSICAL ARCHAEOLOGY OF ANATOLIA by Daniel David Shoup A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Classical Art and Archaeology) in The University of Michigan 2008 Doctoral Committee: Professor Elaine K. Gazda, Co-Chair Professor John F. Cherry, Co-Chair, Brown University Professor Fatma Müge Göçek Professor Christopher John Ratté Professor Norman Yoffee Acknowledgments Athena may have sprung from Zeus’ brow alone, but dissertations never have a solitary birth: especially this one, which is largely made up of the voices of others. I have been fortunate to have the support of many friends, colleagues, and mentors, whose ideas and suggestions have fundamentally shaped this work. I would also like to thank the dozens of people who agreed to be interviewed, whose ideas and voices animate this text and the sites where they work. I offer this dissertation in hope that it contributes, in some small way, to a bright future for archaeology in Turkey. My committee members have been unstinting in their support of what has proved to be an unconventional project. John Cherry’s able teaching and broad perspective on archaeology formed the matrix in which the ideas for this dissertation grew; Elaine Gazda’s support, guidance, and advocacy of the project was indispensible to its completion. Norman Yoffee provided ideas and support from the first draft of a very different prospectus – including very necessary encouragement to go out on a limb. Chris Ratté has been a generous host at the site of Aphrodisias and helpful commentator during the writing process.
    [Show full text]
  • The Limits of Middle Babylonian Archives1
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by OpenstarTs The Limits of Middle Babylonian Archives1 susanne paulus Middle Babylonian Archives Archives and archival records are one of the most important sources for the un- derstanding of the Babylonian culture.2 The definition of “archive” used for this article is the one proposed by Pedersén: «The term “archive” here, as in some other studies, refers to a collection of texts, each text documenting a message or a statement, for example, letters, legal, economic, and administrative documents. In an archive there is usually just one copy of each text, although occasionally a few copies may exist.»3 The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the archives of the Middle Babylonian Period (ca. 1500-1000 BC),4 which are often 1 All kudurrus are quoted according to Paulus 2012a. For a quick reference on the texts see the list of kudurrus in table 1. 2 For an introduction into Babylonian archives see Veenhof 1986b; for an overview of differ- ent archives of different periods see Veenhof 1986a and Brosius 2003a. 3 Pedersén 1998; problems connected to this definition are shown by Brosius 2003b, 4-13. 4 This includes the time of the Kassite dynasty (ca. 1499-1150) and the following Isin-II-pe- riod (ca. 1157-1026). All following dates are BC, the chronology follows – willingly ignoring all linked problems – Gasche et. al. 1998. the limits of middle babylonian archives 87 left out in general studies,5 highlighting changes in respect to the preceding Old Babylonian period and problems linked with the material.
    [Show full text]
  • Ijah 5(1), S/No 16, January, 2016 164
    IJAH 5(1), S/NO 16, JANUARY, 2016 164 International Journal of Arts and Humanities (IJAH) Bahir Dar- Ethiopia Vol. 5(1), S/No 16, January, 2016:164-173 ISSN: 2225-8590 (Print) ISSN 2227-5452 (Online) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ijah.v5i1.13 On the Origin of Administrative and Management Sciences: A Further Study of Jethro Osai, O. Jason Institute of Foundation Studies (IFS) Rivers State University of Science & Technology P. M. B. 5080, Port Harcourt, Nigeria E-mail: [email protected] Eleanya, L.U.M. School of Arts & Social Sciences Rivers State College of Arts & Sciences PMB 5936, Port Harcourt, NIGERIA Ariaga, Regina C. Faculty of Law, Igbinedion University, Okada & Center for Experiential Learning and Leadership No. 67 Rumuola Road, Port Harcourt, NIGERIA & Ukposi, Patrice O. Ukposi, Ukposi and Associates No. 7 Aba Road, Port Harcourt, NIGERIA Copyright © IAARR 2016: www.afrrevjo.net/ijah Indexed African Journals Online (AJOL) www.ajol.info IJAH 5(1), S/NO 16, JANUARY, 2016 165 Abstract In 2006, we published an article titled “Jethro as the Patriarch of Administration and Management: An Analysis of his Works;” subsequently, we received numerous reactions some of which were laudatory and informative while others challenged our scholarship by demanding further inquiry. However, what had the most profound impact on us was its being utilized as a recommended text in a tertiary institution in the United States of America (US). Following this welcome development, we received an avalanche of feedbacks asking: “where is Midian?” “What society produced the learning and experience that informed such knowledgeable, concise and timeless counsel?” “Jethro was not Jewish and the interface with Moses predates Christianity; so, of what religion was he priest?” Thereafter, the publication of another article that also reviewed the works of Jethro from another perspective and the reactions it also generated gave us the desired impetus to search further.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms
    McDONALD INSTITUTE CONVERSATIONS The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms Edited by Norman Yoffee The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms McDONALD INSTITUTE CONVERSATIONS The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms Edited by Norman Yoffee with contributions from Tom D. Dillehay, Li Min, Patricia A. McAnany, Ellen Morris, Timothy R. Pauketat, Cameron A. Petrie, Peter Robertshaw, Andrea Seri, Miriam T. Stark, Steven A. Wernke & Norman Yoffee Published by: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research University of Cambridge Downing Street Cambridge, UK CB2 3ER (0)(1223) 339327 [email protected] www.mcdonald.cam.ac.uk McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 2019 © 2019 McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. The Evolution of Fragility: Setting the Terms is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 (International) Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ISBN: 978-1-902937-88-5 Cover design by Dora Kemp and Ben Plumridge. Typesetting and layout by Ben Plumridge. Cover image: Ta Prohm temple, Angkor. Photo: Dr Charlotte Minh Ha Pham. Used by permission. Edited for the Institute by James Barrett (Series Editor). Contents Contributors vii Figures viii Tables ix Acknowledgements x Chapter 1 Introducing the Conference: There Are No Innocent Terms 1 Norman Yoffee Mapping the chapters 3 The challenges of fragility 6 Chapter 2 Fragility of Vulnerable Social Institutions in Andean States 9 Tom D. Dillehay & Steven A. Wernke Vulnerability and the fragile state
    [Show full text]
  • Observations on Diplomatics, Tablet Layout and Cultural Evolution of the Early Third Millennium: the Archaic Texts from Ur
    Camille Lecompte Observations on Diplomatics, Tablet Layout and Cultural Evolution of the Early Third Millennium: The Archaic Texts from Ur 1 Introduction The Early Dynastic (ED) I–II period (ca. 2950–2650 BC), although crucial to our under- standing of Mesopotamian history, is poorly documented, since no more than five hundred cuneiform tablets have been discovered as of yet.1 The main textual corpus consists of 403 tablets uncovered by L. Woolley in the Royal Cemetery of Ur;2 around 25 tablets from Uruk, later than the archaic documents and contemporary with the texts from Ur;3 further tablets which may have originated in Umma, Nippur, Kiš or be of unknown provenance;4 and finally, some of the so-called archaic kudurru: these latter may indeed be later than the Late Uruk period, to which they were dated by the authors of ELTS.5 ED I–II texts are characterized by the first clear occurrences of the Sumerian language and by a use of writing similar to that of the Fara scripts.6 On the other hand, these texts still display archaic features, such as the numerical system, which confirm that “they are intermediate in character between the collec- tions of Jemdet Nasr and Fara”.7 Thus, to better estimate the cultural significance of the ED I–II documents, it is helpful to examine not only philological data, but also the “material” features, which are the main topic of this paper. Diplomatics does not merely form an extraneous framework to writing. It is also a part of its essence, notably because any written sentence is embedded in a “material” I would like to express my gratitude to Kamran V.
    [Show full text]