ARCL 0009
Potential changes in light of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic Please note that information regarding teaching, learning and assessment in this module handbook endeavours to be as accurate as possible. However, in light of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the changeable nature of the situation and the possibility of updates in government guidance, there may need to be changes during the course of the year. UCL will keep current students updated of any changes to teaching, learning and assessment on the Students’ webpages. This also includes Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) which may help you with any queries that you may have.
ARCL 0009 TEXTS IN ARCHAEOLOGY
2020–21, Term 1
Year 1 Module 15 credits
Co-ordinator: Dr Rachael Sparks [email protected]
Institute of Archaeology Room B55 Online office hours: Monday-Wednesday 10.00–12.00, 1:00-4:00 pm. Meetings will take place via MS Teams; please email for an appointment.
Working with cuneiform texts - the tools of the trade. (Image courtesy of Klaus Wagensonner)
Please refer to the online IoA Student Handbook (https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/current- students/ioa-student-handbook) and IoA Study Skills Guide (https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/current-students/ioa-study-skills-guide) for instructions on coursework submission, IoA referencing guidelines and marking criteria, as well as UCL policies on penalties for late submission. See also the resources at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/current- students.
1 ARCL 0009
Table of Contents
1. MODULE OVERVIEW 2 1.1 Description 1.2 Aims 3 1.2 Objectives 3 1.3 Learning outcomes 3 1.4 Methods of assessment 3 1.5 Communications 3 1.6 Week-by-week summary 3 1.7 Weekly module plan 4 1.8 Workload 4
2. ASSESSMENT 5 2.1 Assessment 1: object biography report 2.2 Assessment 2: thematic essay 5
3. RESOURCES AND PREPARATION FOR CLASS
3.1 Preparation for class 6 3.2 Recommended basic texts 6 3.3 Online resources 7
4. SYLLABUS AND ESSENTIAL READINGS
4.1 Introduction to the module 7 4.2 The nature of the surviving evidence 8 4.3 The development and operation of early writing systems 9 4.4 Text and object. Uses of alphabetic writing in the Greek world 10 4.5 Taking writing to the west. 11 4.6 Reading week 12 4.7 Writing and society in ancient Egypt 12 4.8 The Hebrew Bible and the archaeology of Iron Age Israel 13 4.9 Texts and visual imagery in the Neo-Assyrian empire 14 4.10 Text, architecture and landscape in ancient Egypt 15 4.11 Reviewing course themes and concepts 16
2 ARCL 0009
1. MODULE OVERVIEW
1.1 Description
This module examines how textual evidence may be used by students of different disciplines to study past societies, with a particular focus on archaeological research. It draws on written sources from the Near East and Eastern Mediterranean to explore issues such as the materiality of texts, literacy and orality, the relationship between texts, physical space and visual media, and the social and cultural contexts in which writing was used.
1.2 Aims • To introduce students to the nature of written sources for ancient societies. • To examine methods and approaches of working with texts in archaeology. • To consider how to integrate textual and non-textual approaches to the past. • To discuss and analyse specific case-studies of texts, sampled from a wide range of past literate societies, to show how they contribute to our understanding of the archaeological record.
1.2 Objectives
On successful completion of this module a student should: • Have a broad overview of how texts can be studied from an archaeological perspective, and understand the value of this approach. • Appreciate the significance of written texts as evidence from the past. • Recognise the importance of critical and integrated approaches to the use of archaeological and textual sources when investigating past societies.
1.3 Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of the module students should be able to demonstrate: • Understanding and critical awareness of a range of primary and secondary sources. • Appreciation of, and ability to apply, methods and theories of archaeological and textual analysis. • Written skills in analysis and presentation.
1.4 Methods of Assessment
This module is assessed by means of: • One essay, of 1000 words, worth 33% of the final grade for this module, due 11 November 2020. • One essay, of 2000 words, worth 67% of the final grade for this module due 13 January 2021.
1.5 Communications
3 ARCL 0009
• Moodle is the main hub for this course; you may access this at:
Week Live Class Topic 1 9 October Introduction to the module 2 16 October The nature of the surviving evidence. 3 23 October The development and operation of early writing systems 4 30 October Text and object: uses of alphabetic writing in the Greek world 5 6 November Taking writing to the west: script diversity and the social contexts of writing in Etruscan Italy 6 READING WEEK 7 20 November Writing and society in ancient Egypt 8 27 November The Hebrew Bible and the archaeology of Iron Age Israel 9 4 December The relationship between texts and visual imagery in the Neo-Assyrian empire 10 11 December Text, architecture and landscape in ancient Egypt 11 18 December Reviewing course themes and concepts
1.7 Weekly Module Plan The module is taught through lectures and discussions. Students will be required to participate in a range of pre-class activities, including viewing lecture presentations and other videos, undertake set readings, contribute to discussion forums or online wikis. Weekly activities should be completed by Friday of the relevant week, unless an earlier deadline is indciated on Moodle. Students will also be expected to attend an online seminar every Friday, either at 9:00 (Group 1) or 10:00 am (Group 2). Meetings will take place via Blackboard Collaborate, which you access via the course Moodle page, and will last approximately 50 minutes.
1.8 Workload
This is a 15-credit module which equates to 150 hours of learning time including session preparation, background reading, seminar attendance and researching and writing your assignments. With that in mind you should expect to organise your time in roughly this way:
4 ARCL 0009
10 hours Staff-led live teaching sessions (Friday seminars). 70 hours Self-guided session preparation (reading, listening, note-taking and other online activities). This equals about 7 hours a week (including asynchronous online lectures). 23 hours Reading for, and writing, Assignment 1 47 hours Reading for, and writing, Assignment 2
2. ASSESSMENT Students are required to complete two pieces of written work, as outlined below. Each assignment and possible approaches to it will be discussed in class, in advance of the submission deadlines. If students are unclear about the nature of an assignment, they should discuss this with the Module Co-ordinator in advance (via office hours or class Moodle forum). You will receive feedback on your written coursework via Moodle, and have the opportunity to discuss your marks and feedback with the co-ordinator during their office hours.
For more details see the ‘Assessment’ section on Moodle. The IoA marking criteria can be found in the IoA Student Handbook (Section 12- information on assessment) and the IoA Study Skills Guide provides useful guidance on writing different types of assignment. Penalties for late submission: see UCL guidance on penalties (Academic Manual 3.12).
2.1 Assessment 1: Object biography report Word length: 1,000 words. Due date: Wednesday, 11 November 2020.
Write a short biography about ONE of the objects listed below, considering both the object, and the text that it is written on it. Discuss the life-cycle of your object (manufacture, use/reuse in its original setting, how it entered the archaeological record, subsequent recovery and modern usage). Your answer should explore both your object's original meaning or value, and its current significance.
Each object is provided with a bibliography of suggested readings; see the 'Assessments' section in Moodle for details. These are not exhaustive, and you are encouraged to identify relevant additional material yourselves.
1.1 Copper foundation figurine from Ur, Iraq 1.2 The Statue of Idrimi from Tell Atchana, Turkey 1.3 Alabaster cup from the Tomb of Tutankhamun, Egypt 1.4 The gold tablets from Pyrgi, Italy 1.5 The Euphronios krater
2.2 Assessment 2: Thematic Essay Word length: 2,000 words Due date: Wednesday, 13 January 2021
5 ARCL 0009
Choose ONE of the following essay questions:
2.1 Discuss the archaeological evidence for the emergence of writing in at least two different ancient societies. How does writing appear there and why? What problems or questions does this material raise?
2.2 Compare and contrast the archaeological evidence for official and personal uses of writing in the ancient world. How might the purpose of a text influence its physical form?
2.3 Discuss the archaeological and textual evidence for ancient literacy, using case studies from at least two different cultures. What questions, methodological problems or biases does this study raise?
2.4 Discuss the potential ethical issues surrounding the study and use of ancient texts. How might these be addressed?
There is no set reading list for assignment 2; you are expected to identify relevant material from your course reading lists. However some guidance for potentially suitable essay reading is given in the electronic reading list notes:
There will be time scheduled for discussion of the nature of the assignment and possible approaches to it in the live session in week 10. You are also welcome to discuss your choice of question and how to approach it with the Module Coordinator at any time.
3. RESOURCES AND PREPARATION FOR CLASS.
3.1 Preparation for Class Each week, you will be expected to complete a series of activities before our Friday seminar class. This will include reading up to four articles or chapters, flagged up as essential readings, watching pre-recorded lectures and videos, and participating in online discussion forums or wikis. Full details may be found in the Moodle page for this course <>. You can keep track of your weekly progress by 'ticking off' each activity as it is completed online.
Completing module readings is essential for your effective participation in the activities and discussions that we will do, and it will greatly enhance your understanding of the material covered. Further readings are provided via the online-reading list for you to get a sense of the range of current work on a given topic and for you to draw upon for your assessments.
Online reading list:
The following works provide useful background information for this course.
6 ARCL 0009
Hooker, J.T. 1990. Reading the Past: Ancient Writing from Cuneiform to the Alphabet. London: British Museum Publications. INST ARCH GC HOO; SENATE HOUSE PALAEOGRAPHY North Block Ground Floor Small Hall CC25.1 [Hooker]; SOAS A411.09 /607197. Not available online.
Robinson, A. 2009. Writing and Script: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. INST ARCH GC ROB; SOAS Main Library A302.2244/732322; SENATE HOUSE palaeography 4th floor, CC25.1 [Robinson]. ONLINE.
3.3 Online Resources
An electronic reading list of is available online via a link within Moodle
4. SYLLABUS AND ESSENTIAL READINGS
All shelf marks in the reading lists below have prefixed to indicate the appropriate library location: ‘INST ARCH’, 'MAIN', 'SCIENCE' (another UCL branch library), LangSpeechSci (The Language and Speech Science library, located at Chandler House, 2 Wakefield Street (just off Tavistock Place),
Please treat all books and journals with respect; marking, underlining or otherwise defacing library materials is considered a serious offence as well as being disrespectful to your fellow students.
4.1 WEEK 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE MODULE Online course activities 5–8 October, live session Friday, 9 October 2020.
This week we will be learning about the aims and format of the module, and why texts are important to archaeologists. You'll also get a chance to familiarise yourself with the various online technologies and resources used in the course, and learn what is expected of you in terms of reading, participation and written work. The live session will be used to explore how we might define a 'text', and the different forms that texts may take.
7 ARCL 0009
ESSENTIAL READING
Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C. 2003. To Write or Not to Write, in: T. Potts, M. Roaf & D. Stein (eds), Culture Through Objects: Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of P.R.S. Moorey, Griffith Institute Oxford, 59–75. INST ARCH IOA ISSUE DESK POT 3; DBA 300 POT; SOAS FR /900282. ONLINE.
Powell, B.B. 2009. What is Writing? In: Writing: Theory and History of the Technology of Civilization, Willey-Blackwell: Chichester, 11-18. INST ARCH GC POW; SENATE HOUSE PALAEOGRAPHY 4th Floor CC24.1 [Powell]. ONLINE.
Robinson, A. 2009. Writing and Script: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. INST ARCH GC ROB; SOAS Main Library A302.2244/732322; SENATE HOUSE palaeography 4th floor, CC25.1 [Robinson]. ONLINE. Read Chapter 4 (Decipherment and Undeciphered Scripts, 52–73) and Chapter 5 (How Writing Systems Work, 74–91).
4.2 WEEK 2. THE NATURE OF THE SURVIVING EVIDENCE Online course activities 12–15 October, live session Friday 16 October 2020.
What constitutes a 'text' and how do we go about reading it? Does the accidental and random survival of texts colour our views of the past? And what role should ethics play in the study of this type of material?
SEMINAR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• How were texts stored in the Near East? • What does this tell us about the way they were accessed and used? • What effect does the material used for recording texts have on their survival? • Is incomplete survival of some materials distorting our understanding of how writing was used? • Does the exact findspot or provenance of a text matter?
ESSENTIAL READING
Brodie, N. 2011. Scholarship and Insurgency? The Study and Trade of Iraqi Antiquities, paper delivered at: Illicit Traffic of Cultural Objects: Law, Ethics, and the Realities. An Institute of Advanced Studies Workshop, 4–5 August 2011, University of Western Australia, 1–28. ONLINE.
Matthiae, P. 1980. Ebla: An Empire Rediscovered. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 150–163. INST ARCH ISSUE DESK MAT 5 and DBD 10 MAT; MAIN ANCIENT HISTORY H52 MAT; SENATE HOUSE HISTORY 5th Floor (63) LKF EBL Mat; SOAS QHG939.4 /428526. ONLINE.
Postgate, J.N., Wang, T. and T. Wilkinson, 1995. The Evidence for Early Writing: Utilitarian or Ceremonial?, Antiquity 69 no. 264, 459–80. ONLINE.
8 ARCL 0009
Van den Hout, T. 2003. Miles of Clay: Information Management in the Ancient Near Eastern Hittite Empire. ONLINE [webpage]:
Vaughn, A.G. and C.A. Rollston. 2006. The Antiquities Market, Sensationalized Textual Data, and Modern Forgeries: Introduction to the Problem and Synopsis of the 2004 Israeli Indictment. ONLINE [website]:
4.3 WEEK 3. THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF EARLY WRITING SYSTEMS. Online course activities 19–22 October, live session Friday 23 October 2020.
This week we will use case studies from Bronze Age Mesopotamia, Egypt and the Levant to investigate the development of pictographic, syllabic and early alphabetic writing systems, and the different ways in which these can be used to record language.
SEMINAR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• What are the similarities, and differences between early Mesopotamian, Egyptian and Levantine writing systems? • How does our evidence for the earliest writing in each region differ? • Are the differences due to archaeological bias, or is there some other cause? • What can we learn about a text from studying the object beneath it?
ESSENTIAL READING
Cruz-Uribe, E., Goldwasser, O., Silberman, D.P. and Wente, E.F., Johnson, J.H. and Callahan, A.D. 2005. Scripts. in: D.B. Redford (ed.), The Oxford Encylopedia of Ancient Egypt. ONLINE: < https://www-oxfordreference- com.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/view/10.1093/acref/9780195102345.001.0001/ac ref-9780195102345-e-0621?rskey=FgcUdL&result=622>, accessed on 20 July 2020.
Damerow, P. 2006. The Origins of Writing as A Problem of Historical Epistemology, Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 2006.1, ONLINE
Haring, B. 2019. Chapter 4. Ancient Egypt and the Earliest Known Stages of Alphabetic Writing, in: P. Steele and P.J. Boyes (eds), Understanding Relations Between Scripts II. Early Alphabets, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 53–67. ONLINE.
9 ARCL 0009
Regulski, I. 2016. The Origins and Early Development of Writing in Egypt, in: Oxford Handbooks Online, doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935413.013.61. ONLINE.
Selz, G.J. 2020. The Uruk Phenomenon, in K. Radner, N. Moeller and D.T. Potts (eds), The Oxford History of the Ancient Near East. Volume I: From the Beginnings to Old Kingdom Egypt and the Dynasty of Akkad, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 163–244. ONLINE.
Walker, C.B.F. 1987. Chapters 1–2: Cuneiform: Origin and Development and Tablets and Monuments, in: J.T. Hooker (ed.), Reading the Past. Ancient Writing from Cuneiform to the Alphabet New York: Barnes and Noble, 17– 42. ONLINE.
4.4 WEEK 4. TEXT AND OBJECT: USES OF ALPHABETIC WRITING IN THE GREEK WORLD. Online course activities 26–29 October, live session Friday 30 October 2020.
We will consider of the spread of the alphabet across the Mediterranean world in the first millennium BC,s the role played by Greek script, and the importance of archaeological context in identifying patterns of use and development.
SEMINAR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• How were texts stored in the Near East? • What does this tell us about the way they were accessed and used? • What effect does the material used for recording texts have on their survival? • Is incomplete survival of some materials distorting our understanding of how writing was used? • Does the exact findspot or provenance of a text matter?
ESSENTIAL READING
Bourogiannis, G. 2018. The Transmission of the Alphabet to the Aegean, in: K. Niesiolowski-Spanò and M. Wecowski (eds), Change, Continuity, and Connectivity. North-Eastern Mediterranean at the Turn of the Bronze Age and in the Early Iron Age, Wiesbaden, Harrasowitz Verlag, 235-257. ONLINE.
British Museum: ONLINE [website]
Carraro, F. 2007. The ‘Speaking Objects’ of Archaic Greece: Writing and Speech in the First Complete Alphabetic Documents, in: K. Lomas, R.D. Whitehouse & J.B. Wilkins (eds), Literacy and the State in the Ancient Mediterranean, London: Accordia Research Institute, 65–80. INST ARCH DAG 100 Qto LOM. ONLINE.
10 ARCL 0009
Papadopoulos, J.K. 2016. The Early History of the Greek Alphabet: New Evidence from Eretria and Methone, Antiquity 90, no. 253, 1238–1254. ONLINE.
Snodgrass, A. 2000. The Uses of Writing on Early Greek Painted Pottery, in: N.K. Rutter and B.A. Sparkes, Word and Image in Ancient Greece, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 22–34. ONLINE [digitised chapter]. INST ARCH YATES A 70 RUT; SENATE HOUSE ART South Block 4th Floor Mx South Gallery V3AG Wor. ONLINE.
4.5 WEEK 5. TAKING WRITING TO THE WEST. SCRIPT DIVERSITY AND THE SOCIAL CONTEXTS OF WRITING IN ETRUSCAN ITALY Rachael Sparks, Online course activities 2–5 November, live session Friday 6 November 2020.
This week we will learn about the emergence and development of writing across in Etruria by looking at the various material objects which were inscribed and the archaeological contexts and uses of inscriptions.
SEMINAR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• How was writing being used in Orientalising and Archaic period Italy? • Was writing socially exclusive? • Was writing a gendered phenomenon? • What are the problems with our evidence for the social contexts and uses of writing at this time? • How can we identify literacy in the archaeological record?
ESSENTIAL READING
Becker, H. 2009. The Economic Agency of the Etruscan Temple: Elites, Dedications and Displays, in: M. Gleba and H. Becker (eds), Votives, Places and Rituals in Etruscan Religion, Leiden: Brill, 87–99. INST ARCH DAF 100 GLE. ONLINE.
Bonfante, G. and L. 2002. Chapter 1: Archaeological Introduction, in: The Etruscan Language, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 3–45. MAIN COMPARATIVE PHILOLOGY B32 BON; SENATE HOUSE LANGUAGE/LITERATURE South Block 6th Floor (3) WUT Bon. ONLINE.
Hodos, T. 1998. The Asp’s Poison: Women and Literacy in Iron Age Italy, in: R.D. Whitehouse (ed.) Gender and Italian Archaeology: Challenging the Stereotypes, London: Accordia Research Institute, 197–208. INST ARCH DAF Qto WHI. ONLINE.
Stoddard, S. and J. Whitley. 1988. The Social Context of Literacy in Archaic Greece and Etruria, Antiquity 62 no. 237, 761–772. ONLINE.
Wallace, R.E. 2008. Muluvanice Inscriptions at Poggio Civitate (Murlo), American Journal of Archaeology 112.3, 449–458. ONLINE.
11 ARCL 0009
4.6 WEEK 6. READING WEEK – No scheduled classes
4.7 WEEK 7. WRITING AND SOCIETY IN ANCIENT EGYPT Online course activities 16–19 November, live session Friday 20 November 2020.
This week we will be examine the role of the scribe within Egyptian society. Who had access to writing, and how was it used? And how should our source material, including representations of scribes and equipment, be 'read' by modern audiences?
SEMINAR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• How were Egyptian scribes trained to read and write? • How does this compare with scribal training elsewhere? • How can we tell who was literate in ancient Egypt? • Who was using writing in ancient Egypt, and for what purposes?
Before the class, you should read a translation of the Tale of Wenamun (Wente 2003, below), and be prepared to discuss the following:
• What role does writing, and documentation of past events play in Wenamun's adventures?? • What sort of archaeological evidence for these uses of writing might we expect to find? • What might we learn from studying the physical copies of the Wenamun text, that we can't investigate through English translations of it?
ESSENTIAL READING
Baines, J. R. & C. J. Eyre, 1983. Four Notes on Literacy, Göttinger Miszellen 61, 65– 96. Republished (with new commentary) in: Baines, J. 2007. Visual and Written Culture in Ancient Egypt. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 63–94 and 172–178. INST ARCH EGYPTOLOGY B 20 BAI; IOA ISSUE DESK BAI. ONLINE [digistised chapter].
Janssen, J.J. 1992. Literacy and Letters at Deir el-Medina, in: R. J. Demarée and A. Egberts (eds), Village Voices: Proceedings of the Symposium "Texts from Deir el-Medîna and their Interpretation”, Leiden: Centre of Non-Western Studies, Leiden University, 81–94. INST ARCH EGYPTOLOGY V 50 DEM; SOAS Level F Mobiles QSA893.1 /725247. ONLINE.
Lazaridis, N. 2010. Education and Apprenticeship, in: UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology. ONLINE [encyclopedia]
Shubert, S.B. 2001. Does She or Doesn’t She? Female Literacy in Ancient Egypt, in: Proceedings of the Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations Graduate Students' Annual Symposia 1998–2000, Toronto: Benben Publications, 55– 76. INST ARCH DBA 100 NEA. ONLINE [digitised chapter].
12 ARCL 0009
Tinney, S. 1998. Texts, Tablets and Teaching. Scribal Education in Nippur and Ur, Expedition 40.2, 40–50. ONLINE.
Wente, E.F. 2003. The Report of Wenamun, in: Simpson The Literature of Ancient Egypt, New Haven: Yale University Press, 116–124. INST ARCH EGYPTOLOGY V 20 SIM. ONLINE.
4.8 WEEK 8. THE HEBREW BIBLE AND THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF IRON AGE ISRAEL. Online course activities 23–26 November, live session Friday 27 November 2020.
For centuries, the Old Testament was the only source material for the history of the peoples of Iron Age Israel and Judah. However the discovery of a wider range of textual sources from neighbouring cultures and extensive archaeological exploration has led to the development of alternative, often contradictory, histories for the region.
SEMINAR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
You will be asked to read a translation of the Mesha stela (Routledge 2004, below)
• What is the object biography of the Mesha stela? • What is the Mesha stela about? • What does it contribute to our understanding of the Moabites and their neighbours? • How does this type of text fit into wider Near Eastern practice?
The rest of the class will be concerned with questions of textual materiality:
• What kinds of texts have survived from Iron Age Israel and Judah? • How might a study of their material aspects help us understand their meaning and significance?
ESSENTIAL READING
Arie, E., Goren, Y. and I. Samet. 2011. Indelible Impression: Petrographic Analysis of Judahite Bullae, in: I. Finkelstein & N. Na’aman (eds), The Fire Signals of Lachish. Studies in the Archaeology and History of Israel in the Late Bronze Age, Iron Age, and Persian Period in Honor of David Ussishkin, Eisenbrauns: Winona Lake, 1–16. INST ARCH DBE 100 FIN; SOAS Main library FW/738808. ONLINE.
The Bible: 2 Kings 3: 4–27. ONLINE [website]:
Dever, W. 2001. Chapter 4, Getting at the 'History Behind the History', in: What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?: What Archaeology
13 ARCL 0009
Can Tell Us About the Reality of Ancient Israel. Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 97–157. INST ARCH IOA ISSUE DESK DEV and DBE 100 DEV. ONLINE.
Finkelstein, I. and Silberman, N. 2000. The Conquest of Canaan, in: The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origins of its Sacred Texts. New York: The Free Press, 72–96. INST ARCH IOA ISSUE DESK FIN and DBE 100 FIN. ONLINE.
Routledge, B. 2004. Mesha and the Naming of Names, in: Moab in the Iron Age. Hegemony, Polity, Archaeology, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 133–153. INST ARCH DBE 100 ROU. ONLINE [digistised chapter].
Ussishkin, D. 2014. Sennacherib’s Campaign to Judah: The Archaeological Perspective with an Emphasis on Lachish and Jerusalem, in: I. Kalimi and S. Richardson (eds), Sennacherib at the Gates of Jerusalem. Story, History and Historiography, Leiden: Brill, 75–103. ONLINE.
4.9 WEEK 9. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEXTS AND IMAGERY IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN EMPIRE. Online course activities 30 November – 3 December, live session Friday 4 December 2020.
In this session, we will examine the visual setting of Near Eastern texts, and the way in which imagery can be used to enhance or reinforce written content. How much influence did the intended audience have on the way textual and visual information is presented?
SEMINAR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• What role do texts play on monumental Assyrian art, such as reliefs, sculpture, stele and obelisks? • What is their relationship to images in these kinds of contexts? • Should we consider Assyrian narratives as 'history'? • Who were Assyrian texts written for? How can we tell?
ESSENTIAL READING
Laato, A. 1995. Assyrian Propaganda and the Falsification of History in the Royal Inscriptions of Sennacherib, Vetus Testamentum 45.2, 198–226. ONLINE.
Niehr, H. 2018. Questions of Text and Image in Ancient Samʾal (Zincirli), in: P. Attinger, A. Cavigneaux, C. Mitermayer and M. Novak (eds), Text and Image. Proceedings of the 61e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Geneva and Bern, 22–26 June 2015, Leuven: Peeters Press, 309–319. ONLINE.
Porter, B.N. 2003. Assyrian Propaganda for the West: Esarhaddon’s Steles for Til Barsip and Sam’al, in: Trees, Kings, and Politics: Studies in Assyrian Iconography. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 59–79. MAIN ANCIENT HISTORY D 52 POR; SOAS main library FRM /902217. ONLINE.
14 ARCL 0009
Reade, J.1979. Ideology and Propaganda in Assyrian Art, in M.T. Larsen (ed.) Power and Propaganda. A Symposium on Ancient Empires, Mesopotamia Copenhagen Studies in Assyriology 7, Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag, 329– 343. INST ARCH DBA 200 LAR and IOA ISSUE DESK LAR 3; SCIENCE ANTHROPOLOGY PM 5 LAR; SENATE HOUSE HISTORY (SHL) South Block 7th Floor (63) LI7 Pow; SOAS QB930 /416841. ONLINE.
Siddall, L.R. 2017. Text and Context: The Question of Audience for Sennacherib's 'Public' Inscriptions, in: K.H. Keimer and G. Davis (eds), Registers and Modes of Communication in the Ancient Near East: Getting the Message Across, Routledge, 59-68. ONLINE.
Winter, I.J. 1997. Art in Empire: The Royal Image and the Visual Dimensions of Assyrian Ideology, in: On Art in the Ancient Near East, Volume I, Brill, 71– 108. ONLINE.
4.10 WEEK 10. TEXT, ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE IN ANCIENT EGYPT. Online course activities 7–10 December, live session Friday 11 December 2020.
While some texts are portable, and can be used in a variety of settings, other texts are tied to a particular physical location, as parts of buildings, natural features such as rock faces, or installations such as stele and statuary. This week we will look at the environments of static texts, to see what a deeper investigation of context can tell us about their makers and users.
SEMINAR DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• What are the rules behind the visual composition of Egyptian hieroglyphic texts in architectural spaces, like temples and tombs? • Do any aspects of the visual presentation of Egyptian texts help or hinder the reader? • What problems do we face when trying to understand the ancient settings and landscapes in which monumental texts were placed?
The Rosetta Stone
• What was the original function of the Rosetta Stone? • How was the Rosetta stone rediscovered, and what happened to it afterwards? • How has its meaning, and relevance, changed over time? • What can we learn from studying the material aspects of this object?
ESSENTIAL READING
Assmann, J. 2001 [1984]. The Temple as Cosmos, in: The Search for God in Ancient Egypt. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press, 35–40. INST ARCH EGYPTOLOGY R5 ASS; SENATE HOUSE HISTORY (SHL) South Block 7th Floor (63) LMF Ass; ONLINE.
15 ARCL 0009
British Museum: ONLINE [website]
Collier, M. and W. Manley, 2003 [1998]. Chapter 1: Hieroglyphs, in: How to Read Egyptian Hieroglyphs, London: British Museum Press, 1–14. INST ARCH EGYPTOLOGY V5 COL; SENATE HOUSE LANGUAGE/LITERATURE South Block 6th Floor (3) WVF Col. ONLINE.
Frood, E. 2013. Egyptian Temple Graffiti and the Gods: Appropriation and Ritualization in Karnak and Luxor, in: D. Ragavan (ed.), Heaven on Earth: Temples, Ritual, and Cosmic Symbolism in the Ancient World, Chicago: Oriental Institute Publications, 285–318. ONLINE.
Ragazzoli, C. 2017. The Scribes' Cave: Graffiti and the Production of Social Space in Ancient Egypt circa 1500 BC, in: C. Ragazzoli, O. Harmansah, C. Salvador and E. Frood (eds), Scribbling Through History. Graffiti, Places and People from Antiquity to Modernity, London: Bloomsbury Academic, 23–36. ONLINE.
Simpson, R.S. No date. The Rosetta Stone: Translation of the Demotic Text. Archived at:
Thum, J. 2016. When Pharaoh Turned the Landscape into a Stela: Royal Living- Rock Monuments at the Edges of the Egyptian World, Near Eastern Archaeology 79.2, 68–77. INST ARCH PERS N; ONLINE.
4.11 WEEK 11. REVIEWING COURSE THEMES AND CONCEPTS Online course activities 14–17 December, live session friday 18 December 2020.
In the final week of the module, we'll be re-examining some of the underlying ideas and concepts explored in the previous sessions, consolidating existing knowledge and developing ways to better integrate textual analysis with archaeological research.
There is no set reading for this week.
16