DOCSLIB.ORG

Uruk Colonies and Anatolian Communities: an Interim Report on the 1992-1993 Excavations at Hacinebi, Turkey Gil J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Uruk Colonies and Anatolian Communities: an Interim Report on the 1992-1993 Excavations at Hacinebi, Turkey Gil J University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology Papers and Anthropology 4-1996 Uruk Colonies and Anatolian Communities: An Interim Report on the 1992-1993 Excavations at Hacinebi, Turkey Gil J. Stein Reinhard Bernbeck Cheryl Coursey Augusta McMahon Naomi F. Miller University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.upenn.edu/penn_museum_papers Recommended Citation Stein, G. J., Bernbeck, R., Coursey, C., McMahon, A., Miller, N. F., Misir, A., Nicola, J., Pittman, H., Pollock, S., & Wright, H. (1996). Uruk Colonies and Anatolian Communities: An Interim Report on the 1992-1993 Excavations at Hacinebi, Turkey. American Journal of Archaeology, 100 (2), 205-260. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/506903 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. http://repository.upenn.edu/penn_museum_papers/35 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Uruk Colonies and Anatolian Communities: An Interim Report on the 1992-1993 Excavations at Hacinebi, Turkey Abstract The first Mesopotamian city-states in the Uruk period (ca. 3800-3100 B. C.) pursued a strategy of commercial expansion into neighboring areas of the Zagros Mountains, Syria, and southeastern Anatolia. Recent research in these areas has located several Uruk outposts, in what is apparently the world's earliest-known colonial system. Although some Uruk "colonies" have been excavated, virtually nothing is known about either the operation of this system or its role in the development of local polities in Anatolia. Excavations at the site of Hacinebi, on the Euphrates River trade route, investigate the effects of the "Uruk Expansion" on the social, economic, and political organization of southeastern Anatolia during the fourth millennium B. C. Hacinebi has two main Late Chalcolithic occupations - a pre-contact phase A and a later contact phase B with high concentrations of Uruk ceramics, administrative artifacts, and other Mesopotamian forms of material culture. The aH cinebi excavations thus provide a rare opportunity to investigate the relationship between the Uruk colonies and the local populations with whom they traded, while clarifying the role of long-distance exchange in the development of complex societies in Anatolia. Several lines of evidence suggest that the period of contact with Mesopotamia began in the Middle Uruk period, earlier than the larger colonies at sites such as Habuba Kabira-South and Jebel Aruda in Syria. The oncc entrations of Uruk material culture and the patterns of food consumption in the northeastern corner of the Local Late Chalcolithic settlement are consistent with the interpretation that a small group of Mesopotamian colonists lived as a socially distinct enclave among the local inhabitants of Hacinebi. There is no evidence for either Uruk colonial domination or warfare between the colonists and the native inhabitants of Hacinebi. Instead, the presence of both Anatolian and Mesopotamian seal impressions at the site best fits a ap ttern of peaceful exchange between the two groups. The ve idence for an essential parity in long-term social and economic relations between the Mesopotamian merchants and local inhabitants of Hacinebi suggests that the organization of prehistoric Mesopotamian colonies differed markedly from that of the better-known 16th-20th century European colonial systems in Africa, Asia, and the Americas. Author(s) Gil J. Stein, Reinhard Bernbeck, Cheryl Coursey, Augusta McMahon, Naomi F. Miller, Adnan Misir, Jeffrey Nicola, Holly Pittman, Susan Pollock, and Henry Wright This journal article is available at ScholarlyCommons: http://repository.upenn.edu/penn_museum_papers/35 Uruk Colonies and Anatolian Communities: An Interim Report on the 1992-1993 Excavations at Hacinebi, Turkey GIL J. STEIN, REINHARD BERNBECK, CHERYL COURSEY, AUGUSTA McMAHON, NAOMI E MILLER, ADNAN MISIR, JEFFREY NICOLA, HOLLY PITTMAN, SUSAN POLLOCK, AND HENRY WRIGHT Abstract long-distance exchange in the development of complex societies in Anatolia. The first Mesopotamian city-states in the Uruk period Several lines of evidence suggest that the period of (ca. 3800-3100 B.C.) pursued a strategy of commercial contact with Mesopotamia began in the Middle Uruk expansion into neighboring areas of the Zagros Moun- period, earlier than the larger colonies at sites such as tains, Syria, and southeastern Anatolia. Recent research Habuba Kabira-South andJebel Aruda in Syria. The con- in these areas has located several Uruk outposts, in what centrations of Uruk material culture and the patterns is apparently the world's earliest-known colonial system. Although some Uruk "colonies" have been excavated, of food consumption in the northeastern corner of the Local Late Chalcolithic settlement are consistent with virtually nothing is known about either the operation of this system or its role in the development of local the interpretation that a small group of Mesopotamian colonists lived as a socially distinct enclave among the polities in Anatolia. local inhabitants of Hacmebi. There is no evidence for Excavations at the site of Hacmebi, on the Euphrates either Uruk colonial domination or warfare between River trade route, investigate the effects of the "Uruk the colonists and the native inhabitants of Hacinebi. In- Expansion" on the social, economic, and political or- ganization of southeastern Anatolia during the fourth stead, the presence of both Anatolian and Mesopotamian millennium B.C. Hacmebi has two main Late Chalcolithic seal impressions at the site best fits a pattern of peace- occupations - a pre-contact phase A and a later contact ful exchange between the two groups. The evidence for phase B with high concentrations of Uruk ceramics, ad- an essential parity in long-term social and economic rela- ministrative artifacts, and other Mesopotamian forms tions between the Mesopotamian merchants and local of material culture. The Hacinebi excavations thus pro- inhabitants of Hacmebi suggests that the organization vide a rare opportunity to investigate the relationship of prehistoric Mesopotamian colonies differed markedly between the Uruk colonies and the local populations from that of the better-known 16th-20th century Euro- with whom they traded, while clarifying the role of pean colonial systems in Africa, Asia, and the Americas.* * The 1992 and 1993 field seasons of the Joint $anliurfa sylvania), Jeffrey Nicola (Northwestern University), Susan Museum-Northwestern University salvage excavations at Pollock (State University of New York at Binghamton), Mar- Hacinebi Tepe, Turkey were codirected by Gil Stein (North- garet Reid (Guilford Technical Community College), Lewis western University) and Adnan Misir ($anliurfa Museum). Somers (GeoScan Research),Jill Weber (University of Penn- The excavations were funded with support from the Na- sylvania), and Henry Wright (University of Michigan). tional Endowment for the Humanities, National Geo- Illustrations used in this report were drawn or inked by graphic Society, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, North- Cheryl Coursey, Bethann Croft, Barbara Foster, Amy Lueker, western University, and generous private donors. Alan Lupton, Kristen Morrison, Susan Pollock, Margaret We wish to express our appreciation to Engin Ozgen, Reid, Gil Stein, Carlene Togul-Friedman, Jill Weber, and General Director of the Ministry of Culture's Directorate Henry Wright. of Monuments and Museums, for permission to conduct The senior author (Stein) completed this manuscript this research. We also gratefully acknowledge the assistance with support from a National Endowment for the Human- of Kemal Ipik, the Muhtar of Ugurcuk village, for his ities Resident Scholarship at the School of American Re- hospitality and assistance in conducting excavations at search, Santa Fe. Hacinebi. The following abbreviations are used: In addition to the two codirectors, the 1992-1993 proj- Adams and R. McC. Adams and H. Nissen, The Uruk ect staff consisted of Ahmet Ayhan (Istanbul University), Nissen Countryside (Chicago 1972). Reinhard Bernbeck (Freie Universitait Berlin), Cheryl Algaze 1989 G. Algaze, "The Uruk Expansion: Cross- Coursey (State University of New York at Binghamton), cultural Exchange in Early Meso- Julia Frane (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), potamian Civilization," CurrAnthr 30 Hamza Gillfice ($anliurfa Museum), Kathryn Keith (Uni- (1989) 571-608. versity of Michigan), Nicola Laneri (Universita di Roma), Algaze 1993 G. Algaze, The Uruk World System (Chi- Alan Lupton (Cambridge University), Augusta McMahon cago 1993). (University of Chicago), Naomi E Miller (University of Penn- Deve Hiiyiik P.R.S. Moorey, Cemeteries of the First Mil- American Journal of Archaeology 100 (1996) 205-60 205 206 GIL J. STEIN ET AL. [AJA 100 INTRODUCTION from the site (pp. 233-39) and conclude that the Mesopotamian presence began in the mid-fourth mil- This article represents a collaborative effort to re- construct the chronology and economic organization lennium, significantly earlier than the larger and better-known Uruk colonies at Habuba Kabira-South of the site of Hacinebi in the Late Chalcolithic and Hellenistic periods. The first section, by Gil Stein and Jebel Aruda. Henry Wright and Reinhard and Adnan Misir, presents an overview of Hacinebi's Bernbeck's analysis of the chipped stone artifacts archaeological significance for the study of the Meso- (pp. 239-47)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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 Epic of Gilgamesh Humbaba from His Days Running Wild in the Forest
    Gilgamesh's superiority. They hugged and became best friends. Name Always eager to build a name for himself, Gilgamesh wanted to have an adventure. He wanted to go to the Cedar Forest and slay its guardian demon, Humbaba. Enkidu did not like the idea. He knew The Epic of Gilgamesh Humbaba from his days running wild in the forest. He tried to talk his best friend out of it. But Gilgamesh refused to listen. Reluctantly, By Vickie Chao Enkidu agreed to go with him. A long, long time ago, there After several days of journeying, Gilgamesh and Enkidu at last was a kingdom called Uruk. reached the edge of the Cedar Forest. Their intrusion made Humbaba Its ruler was Gilgamesh. very angry. But thankfully, with the help of the sun god, Shamash, the duo prevailed. They killed Humbaba and cut down the forest. They Gilgamesh, by all accounts, fashioned a raft out of the cedar trees. Together, they set sail along the was not an ordinary person. Euphrates River and made their way back to Uruk. The only shadow He was actually a cast over this victory was Humbaba's curse. Before he was beheaded, superhuman, two-thirds god he shouted, "Of you two, may Enkidu not live the longer, may Enkidu and one-third human. As king, not find any peace in this world!" Gilgamesh was very harsh. His people were scared of him and grew wary over time. They pleaded with the sky god, Anu, for his help. In When Gilgamesh and Enkidu arrived at Uruk, they received a hero's response, Anu asked the goddess Aruru to create a beast-like man welcome.
    [Show full text]
  • Writing and City Life
    29 THEME2 writing and city life CITY life began in Mesopotamia*, the land between the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers that is now part of the Republic of Iraq. Mesopotamian civilisation is known for its prosperity, city life, its voluminous and rich literature and its mathematics and astronomy. Mesopotamia’s writing system and literature spread to the eastern Mediterranean, northern *The name Syria, and Turkey after 2000 BCE, so that the kingdoms of Mesopotamia is that entire region were writing to one another, and to the derived from the Pharaoh of Egypt, in the language and script of Mesopotamia. Greek words mesos, Here we shall explore the connection between city life and writing, and then look at some outcomes of a sustained meaning middle, tradition of writing. and potamos, In the beginning of recorded history, the land, mainly the meaning river. urbanised south (see discussion below), was called Sumer and Akkad. After 2000 BCE, when Babylon became an important city, the term Babylonia was used for the southern region. From about 1100 BCE, when the Assyrians established their kingdom in the north, the region became known as Assyria. The first known language of the land was Sumerian. It was gradually replaced by Akkadian around 2400 BCE when Akkadian speakers arrived. This language flourished till about Alexander’s time (336-323 BCE), with some regional changes occurring. From 1400 BCE, Aramaic also trickled in. This language, similar to Hebrew, became widely spoken after 1000 BCE. It is still spoken in parts of Iraq. Archaeology in Mesopotamia began in the 1840s. At one or two sites (including Uruk and Mari, which we discuss below), excavations continued for decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Mesopotamia Akkdadian Empire Reading Comprehension
    ANCIENT MESOPOTAMIA AKKDADIAN EMPIRE READING COMPREHENSION *Article *10 Matching Questions *10 True/False Questions *4 Multiple Choice Questions *Key Included Name____________________ ANCIENT MESOPOTAMIA- AKKADIAN EMPIRE The Akkadian Empire was the first Empire to rule all of Mesopotamia. It lasted about 200 years from 2300 BC to 2100 BC. Originally the Sumerians lived in the southern part of Mesopotamia and the Akkadians lived in the northern part. They had similar governments and cultures, but spoke different languages. The governments had individual city-states, where each city had its own ruler that controlled the city and the surrounding area. The city-states were not initially united and often warred with one another. Eventually, the Akkadian rulers started to see the advantage to uniting many of their cities under a single nation and began forming alliances to work together. Sargon the Great rose to power around 2300 BC. According to Sumerian literature, Sargon was born to an Akkadian high priestess and a poor father, maybe a gardener. His mother abandoned him by putting him a reed woven basket and let it float down the river, like Moses a thousand years later. Sargon was rescued and made friends with the goddess Ishtar and was brought up in the king’s court. Sargon built himself a new city at Akkad and made himself the king of it when he grew up. He gradually conquered all the land around it, making the Akkadian Empire. The powerful Sumerian city of Uruk attacked Akkad, but they fought back and eventually conquered Uruk. Sargon went on to conquer all of the Sumerian city-states and united northern and southern Mesopotamia under a single ruler.
    [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]
  • Representations of Plants on the Warka Vase of Early Mesopotamia
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons University of Pennsylvania Museum of University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology Papers Archaeology and Anthropology 2016 Sign and Image: Representations of Plants on the Warka Vase of Early Mesopotamia Naomi F. Miller University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Philip Jones University of Pennsylvania Holly Pittman University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/penn_museum_papers Part of the Ancient, Medieval, Renaissance and Baroque Art and Architecture Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Botany Commons, Near and Middle Eastern Studies Commons, and the Near Eastern Languages and Societies Commons Recommended Citation (OVERRIDE) Miller, Naomi F., Philip Jones, and Holly Pittman. 2016. Sign and image: representations of plants on the Warka Vase of early Mesopotamia. Origini 39: 53–73. University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons, Philadelphia. http://repository.upenn.edu/penn_museum_papers/2 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/penn_museum_papers/2 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Sign and Image: Representations of Plants on the Warka Vase of Early Mesopotamia Abstract The Warka Vase is an iconic artifact of Mesopotamia. In the absence of rigorous botanical study, the plants depicted on the lowest register are usually thought to be flax and grain. This analysis of the image identified as grain argues that its botanical characteristics, iconographical context and similarity to an archaic sign found in proto-writing demonstrates that it should be identified as a date palm sapling. It confirms the identification of flax. The correct identification of the plants furthers our understanding of possible symbolic continuities spanning the centuries that saw the codification of text as a eprr esentation of natural language.
    [Show full text]
  • Eblaites - Oxford Reference
    Eblaites - Oxford Reference https://www-oxfordreference-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/view/10.10... The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East Edited by Eric M. Meyers Publisher: Oxford University Press Print Publication Date: 1997 Print ISBN-13: 9780195065121 Published online: 2011 Current Online Version: 2011 eISBN: 9780199892280 Eblaites. Scholars utilize the ethnonym Eblaites to refer to the people of Ebla, a major Bronze Age city-state in northern Syria. Discussions about the identity of peoples, especially in the Near East, typically rely on factors such as the identification of the language utilized and the gods worshiped. Thus, because the eblaite language is Semitic and many of the gods worshiped at Ebla occur elsewhere in the pantheons of other Semitic peoples, it is generally accepted that the Eblaites were a Semitic people. However, a host of problems specific to refining this statement continues to be debated. The classification of the Eblaite language within the Semitic family of languages is the center of a sharp debate. Some scholars view Eblaite as a dialect of Old Akkadian, in which case it would be proper to speak of the Eblaites as a branch of the East Semites (Akkadians, Assyrians, and Babylonians). Other scholars view Eblaite as a branch of West Semitic, with an especially close relationship to other West Semitic languages utilized in Syria (in particular, the roughly contemporary Amorite and the later-attested Aramaic). The majority of the evidence favors the latter opinion. To cite one example, the Eblaite first-person independent pronoun I is 'ana, exactly as in Amorite and Aramaic.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lagash-Umma Border Conflict 9
    CHAPTER I Introduction: Early Civilization and Political Organization in Babylonia' The earliest large urban agglomoration in Mesopotamia was the city known as Uruk in later texts. There, around 3000 B.C., certain distinctive features of historic Mesopotamian civilization emerged: the cylinder seal, a system of writing that soon became cuneiform, a repertoire of religious symbolism, and various artistic and architectural motifs and conven- tions.' Another feature of Mesopotamian civilization in the early historic periods, the con- stellation of more or less independent city-states resistant to the establishment of a strong central political force, was probably characteristic of this proto-historic period as well. Uruk, by virtue of its size, must have played a dominant role in southern Babylonia, and the city of Kish probably played a similar role in the north. From the period that archaeologists call Early Dynastic I1 (ED 11), beginning about 2700 B.c.,~the appearance of walls around Babylonian cities suggests that inter-city warfare had become institutionalized. The earliest royal inscriptions, which date to this period, belong to kings of Kish, a northern Babylonian city, but were found in the Diyala region, at Nippur, at Adab and at Girsu. Those at Adab and Girsu are from the later part of ED I1 and are in the name of Mesalim, king of Kish, accompanied by the names of the respective local ruler^.^ The king of Kish thus exercised hegemony far beyond the walls of his own city, and the memory of this particular king survived in native historical traditions for centuries: the Lagash-Umma border was represented in the inscriptions from Lagash as having been determined by the god Enlil, but actually drawn by Mesalim, king of Kish (IV.1).
    [Show full text]
  • The Appearance of Bricks in Ancient Mesopotamia
    Athens Journal of History - Volume 6, Issue 1, January 2020 – Pages 73-96 The Appearance of Bricks in Ancient Mesopotamia By Kadim Hasson Hnaihen Mesopotamia is a region in the Middle East, situated in a basin between two big rivers- the Tigris and the Euphrates. About 5,500 years ago, much earlier than in Egypt, ancient civilization began, one of the oldest in the world. Continuous development was an important factor of everyday life. A warm climate, fertile soil, mixed with the sediment of flowing rivers and perhaps even the first oak all. A deficit of stone for building shelter was an impediment that the Sumerians faced, but from this shortage they found the perfect solution for their construction-brick. Shelter, homes and other buildings were built from material available in the area, such as clay, cane, soil, mule. Sumerians mastered the art of civic construction perfectly. They raised great buildings, made of bricks (Ziggurats, temples, and palaces) richly decorated with sculptures and mosaics. In this article I will focus on the most interesting time period in my opinion- when brick appeared, I will comment upon the process of production and the types of the brick used in Mesopotamia. It should be noted that the form we know today has been shaped by the cultural and social influences of many peoples who have successively settled these lands, continuing to a large extent the cultural heritage of the former. Introduction The ancient population of Iraq (from the Stone Age, 150,000 BC to 8,000 BC) inhabiting Mesopotamia is one of the oldest civilizations to be discovered.
    [Show full text]
  • " King of Kish" in Pre-Sarogonic Sumer
    "KING OF KISH" IN PRE-SAROGONIC SUMER* TOHRU MAEDA Waseda University 1 The title "king of Kish (lugal-kiski)," which was held by Sumerian rulers, seems to be regarded as holding hegemony over Sumer and Akkad. W. W. Hallo said, "There is, moreover, some evidence that at the very beginning of dynastic times, lower Mesopotamia did enjoy a measure of unity under the hegemony of Kish," and "long after Kish had ceased to be the seat of kingship, the title was employed to express hegemony over Sumer and Akked and ulti- mately came to signify or symbolize imperial, even universal, dominion."(1) I. J. Gelb held similar views.(2) The problem in question is divided into two points: 1) the hegemony of the city of Kish in early times, 2) the title "king of Kish" held by Sumerian rulers in later times. Even earlier, T. Jacobsen had largely expressed the same opinion, although his opinion differed in some detail from Hallo's.(3) Hallo described Kish's hegemony as the authority which maintained harmony between the cities of Sumer and Akkad in the First Early Dynastic period ("the Golden Age"). On the other hand, Jacobsen advocated that it was the kingship of Kish that brought about the breakdown of the older "primitive democracy" in the First Early Dynastic period and lead to the new pattern of rule, "primitive monarchy." Hallo seems to suggest that the Early Dynastic I period was not the period of a primitive community in which the "primitive democracy" was realized, but was the period of class society in which kingship or political power had already been formed.
    [Show full text]
  • Ideology, Social Space & Power in Uruk Societies
    IDEOLOGY, SOCIAL SPACE & POWER IN URUK SOCIETIES. – A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF NORTH AND SOUTH MESOPOTAMIAN SETTLEMENTS IN THE 4th MILLENNIUM B.C. KJETIL SUNDSDAL MASTERTHESIS IN ARCHAEOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN MAY 2008 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all I would like to thank my dearest girlfriend Veslemøy for endless listening to wining about social theories, ideology and material culture. Her patience and support has been indispensable. She has been responsible for getting me up in the morning, and without her I would never have made it! I owe a special thanks to Nils Anfinset. His inspiring lesson about the Uruk culture caught my interest in the subject, and his guidance has been most valuable. Without him this thesis would not have been written. I would like to thank Professor of Religion Einar Thomassen for discussions and literature about Mesopotamian religion. I would also like to thank my English teacher Elisabeth Hornemann who has corrected my endless mess of fouls, learned and guided me in use of the English language, and Kari Nordmo at the library, who has helped me with orders of books and articles. To my fellow students, and especially Lars Aas and Kjetil Lofsgaarden, I thank you for useful discussions, help and a pleasant working environment. Mr Aas has also lightened the office with inspiring songs. I will thank the archaeological football association for gymnastic lessons between all the studying, and Tor Arne Waraas for a discussion about Gordon Childe. I will thank Professor Guillermo Algaze at university of California, San Diego, Professor Roger Matthews at UCL, Professor Hans Nissen at Freie Universität Berlin and Whiting Professor Glen Schwartz at the John Hopkins University, who have responded to questions on e-mail, and for their inspiring and essentials works.
    [Show full text]
  • A Group of Cylinder Seals from the Diyarbakir Museum
    Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi SUSBID Journal Of Social Sciences Institute 2020: 32 - 56 SAYI: 15 ISSN: 2147-8406 Research Article / Araştırma Makalesi A GROUP OF CYLINDER SEALS FROM THE DİYARBAKIR MUSEUM Çağatay YÜCEL1 Umut PARLITI2 Abstract The geometric cylindrical seals that were brought to the museum through confiscation and acquisition were handled in the works stored in the purchasing depot of the Diyarbakır Archaeological Museum. The period of cylinder seals, their function and the expression scenes on them are examined. As a result of the evaluation of the cylinder seals included in the study, historical and cultural framework was tried to be formed by considering the socio-cultural structure of the age. The origin of the Mesopotamian societies, their life- styles, religions and their relations with each other are also discussed in connection with the cylinder seals chosen as the subject of the study. Parallel to this, the general definition of the seal has been made with respect to the cylinder seals included in the study. As a re- sult of the evaluation of cylinder seals, their contributions to Anatolian Archaeology were examined. The period of cylinder seals, their function and the expression scenes on them are examined. As a result of the evaluation of the cylinder seals included in the study, historical and cultural framework was tried to be formed by considering the socio-cultural structure of the age. Because cylinder seals are the most important works of art that reflect the belief and mythology of ancient societies. They are also the most important tool seals that deter- mine the economic activities of ancient societies.
    [Show full text]