DOCSLIB.ORG

“Bathtub” Coffins in the Context of 8Th-6Th Century B.C.E

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
“Bathtub” Coffins in the Context of 8Th-6Th Century B.C.E Bronze “Bathtub” Coffins In the Context of 8th-6th Century B.C.E. Babylonian, Assyrian and Elamite Funerary Practices Yasmina Wicks Honours Thesis 2012 From left to right: bronze “bathtub” coffins from Arjān, Rām Hormuz, Ur (PG1), Ur (PG2) Nimrud and Zincirli Abstract Central to this thesis are a small number of unique bronze “bathtub” coffins found in 8th–6th century B.C.E. Babylonian, Assyrian and Elamite burial contexts. These fascinating burial containers have not previously been subject to an in-depth analysis, but rather have been treated by archaeologists as little more than convenient receptacles for a body and numerous precious objects deemed more worthy of scholarly interest. This thesis takes the opportunity to narrow this gap in scholarship, by firstly drawing together the available evidence for the excavated coffins, investigating the method and place of their manufacture, and establishing a possible date range for their production and use. Then, to progress towards an understanding of the bronze “bathtub” coffin burials within the broader context of regional funerary practices, they are incorporated into an analysis of Neo-Babylonian, Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Elamite mortuary evidence, with a particular focus on burial typology, grave goods and burial location. The use of the bronze “bathtubs” as burial receptacles also demands that they be viewed in light of Mesopotamian and Elamite beliefs about what happens to people upon their death, and what the funerary ritual should involve. This thesis therefore explores the coffins in the context of these beliefs and then, building upon this analysis, considers possible ideological aspects of the coffins with emphasis on motifs, form and material, and why these may have been appropriate in a burial context. Underpinning this study is the principle that mortuary evidence is the product of intentional behaviour and that the bronze coffins, and indeed all burial containers, were not simply incidental to the funerary process. Instead they represent a deliberate choice by the burying group and each would have been the central feature of an emotionally and symbolically charged burial act. One feature of the bronze coffin burials that emerges throughout much of the analysis is their undeniable role in the expression, or even construction, of social rank. This role is consistent across all of the burials, which evidently belonged to individuals (or burying groups) of extremely high-status (measured by wealth). Based on the understanding that the bronze “bathtubs” were used in the construction and maintenance of socio-cultural ideology in Babylonia, Assyria and Elam, the known historical interaction between these three cultures is examined in the final section of the thesis, with a view to establishing the extent to which the coffins can be considered as belonging to a shared funerary practice. i Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................................. i List of Figures ....................................................................................................................... v 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 2. Literature Review .............................................................................................................. 3 2.1. Death and Burial in Ancient Mesopotamia and Elam .................................................. 3 2.2. Early-Mid First Millennium Death and Burial............................................................. 5 2.2.1. Burial Data .......................................................................................................... 5 2.2.2. Beliefs about Death, the Afterlife and Funerary Ritual ....................................... 10 2.2.3. The Bronze Coffins ............................................................................................ 10 2.3. Closing the Gap ........................................................................................................ 12 3. Methodology ................................................................................................................... 13 3.1. Method ..................................................................................................................... 13 3.2. Limitations and Biases .............................................................................................. 16 4. The Bronze “Bathtub” Coffin Corpus .............................................................................. 18 4.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 18 4.2. The Bronze “Bathtub” Coffins .................................................................................. 18 4.2.1. The Ur Coffins ................................................................................................... 18 4.2.2. The Nimrud Coffins ........................................................................................... 20 4.2.3. The Arjān Coffin ............................................................................................... 24 4.2.4. The Rām Hormuz Coffins .................................................................................. 26 4.2.5. The Zincirli Coffin ............................................................................................. 28 4.2.6. Unprovenanced Examples .................................................................................. 28 4.3. Manufacture ............................................................................................................. 31 4.4. Workshops ............................................................................................................... 33 4.5. Dating ...................................................................................................................... 35 ii 5. Burial Typology .............................................................................................................. 37 5.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 37 5.2. Babylonia ................................................................................................................. 37 5.2.1. Burial Typology ................................................................................................. 37 5.2.2. Grave Goods ...................................................................................................... 41 5.2.3. Burial Location .................................................................................................. 41 5.2.4. Summary Discussion ......................................................................................... 42 5.3. Assyria ..................................................................................................................... 43 5.3.1. Burial Typology ................................................................................................. 43 5.3.2. Grave Goods ...................................................................................................... 46 5.3.3. Burial Location .................................................................................................. 47 5.3.4. Summary Discussion ......................................................................................... 47 5.4. Elam ......................................................................................................................... 48 5.4.1. Burial Typology ................................................................................................. 48 5.4.2. Grave Goods ...................................................................................................... 50 5.4.3. Burial Location .................................................................................................. 51 5.4.4. Summary Discussion ......................................................................................... 52 5.5. Summarising the Burial Data and a Return to the “Bathtub” Coffins ......................... 53 6. Death, the Afterlife and the Funeral ................................................................................. 56 6.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 56 6.2. Death, the Afterlife and the Funeral in Mesopotamia ................................................ 56 6.2.1. The Underworld ................................................................................................. 56 6.2.2. The Ghost .......................................................................................................... 58 6.2.3. The Funeral ....................................................................................................... 60 6.2.4. Ongoing Care for the Dead ................................................................................ 65 6.3. Death, the Afterlife and the Funeral in Elam ............................................................. 67 iii 6.4. Bronze “Bathtub” Coffins in the Context of Beliefs about Death and the Afterlife and Funerary Ritual ....................................................................................................... 69 7. Ideological Aspects of the Bronze “Bathtub” Burials ....................................................... 72 7.1. Introduction
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fort Leavenworth Ethics Symposium
    Fort Leavenworth Ethics Symposium Ethical and Legal Issues in Contemporary Conflict Symposium Proceedings Frontier Conference Center Fort Leavenworth, Kansas November 16-18, 2009 Edited by Mark H. Wiggins and Ted Ihrke Co-sponsored by the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College and the Command and General Staff College Foundation, Inc. Special thanks to our key corporate sponsor Other supporting sponsors include: Published by the CGSC Foundation Press 100 Stimson Ave., Suite 1149 Fort Leavenworth, Kansas 66027 Copyright © 2010 by CGSC Foundation, Inc. All rights reserved. www.cgscfoundation.org Papers included in this symposium proceedings book were originally submitted by military officers and other subject matter experts to the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. The CGSC Foundation/CGSC Foundation Press makes no claim to the authors’ copyrights for their individual work. ISBN 978-0-615-36738-5 Layout and design by Mark H. Wiggins MHW Public Relations and Communications Printed in the United States of America by Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas iv Contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... ix Foreword by Brig. Gen. Ed Cardon, Deputy Commandant, CGSC & Col. (Ret.) Bob Ulin, CEO, CGSC Foundation ......................................................................... xi Symposium Participants ............................................................................................................
    [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]
  • Benjamin FM Final.Indd
    PREVIEW: INTRODUCTION • The Task of Introductions • Types of Introductions: Organized around • Archaeological Calendar • The Canon of the Bible • Daily Life • Archaeological Sites • Travel • History of Archaeology • Popular Interest • Organization of This Introduction • Popular Archaeology • Cultural History • Annales Archaeology • Processual Archaeology • Post-Processual Archaeology Introduction THE TASK OF INTRODUCTIONS TO the world of the Bible—and about the Bible itself. ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE Together archaeology and the Bible unlock the most profound responses to the challenges that Th e three Rs of archaeology are to recover, to confront humans who want not only to make a read, and to reconstruct the cultural property living but also to make a diff erence in the world of now-extinct cultures (Magness 2002, 4–13; that is their home. Darvill 2002). Archaeologists listen to the sto- ries that stones—like architecture, art, pottery, Archaeology is the recovery, jewelry, weapons, and tools—have to tell. Stones interpretation, and reconstruction of and Stories: An Introduction to Archaeology and the cultural property of now-extinct the Bible describes how archaeologists listen, what cultures. they are hearing, and what a diff erence it makes for understanding the Bible. Archaeology is not the plunder of the trea- Archaeology in the world of the Bible does sures of ancient cultures, nor proving that the not prove the Bible wrong, any more than biblical Bible’s descriptions of people and events are his- archaeology proves the Bible right. Archaeology torically accurate, nor a legal remedy for deter- off ers new ways of defi ning the Bible in relation mining which people today have a legal right to to its own world, and of using it more eff ectively the land.
    [Show full text]
  • P'. RS Moorey, MA, Dphil, FBA
    P'. R. S. Moorey, MA, DPhil, FBA, FSA (1937-2004) Roger Moorey, formerly Keeper of Antiquities at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford and widely regarded as the leading scholar of Near Eastern archaeology of his generation, died on 23 December 2004 at the age of 67. Following an era of discovery and research dominated by the excavators of the major sites, he brought an intellectual nimbleness and breadth of scholarship that set new benchmarks of balance, rigour and interpretive sophistication. His range and depth of knowledge were legendary. In a career based entirely in the Ashmolean Museum, he made seminal contribu­ tions to the understanding of many aspects of ancient material culture across the Near East: from Egypt and the Levant through Syria and Mesopotamia to Iran, and from the prehistoric to Achaemenian periods. The cogency, integrity and graciousness of his scholarship (one looks in vain for a mean-spirited put-down) were reflections of a mind that compromised none of its incisiveness for being, as he once said, "appreciative rather than critical"; and his natural collegiality cut across the divides of contemporary Middle Eastern politics. At once a specialist in many things and a generalist of rare breadth and insight, he was for a generation of colleagues and students an inspiring example of the "compleat scholar". Although his excavation experience was limited, Moorey's approach to understanding ancient cultures was always founded very firmly on direct scrutiny of the material remains, supplemented by innovative use of scientific analysis and close attention to the historical and other textual evidence. He was not inclined to abstract theorizing but read widely and was sensitive to new methodologies without being captive to intellectual fashion.
    [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]
  • Oriental Institute Staff Newsletter January 2005
    OI NEWSLETTER - SECOND MONDAY - JANUARY 2005 FROM THE EDITOR THE DIRECTOR'S OFFICE UNITS COMPUTER LAB / John Sanders DEVELOMENT / Monica Witczak MUSEUM / Geoff Emberling MUSEUM EDUCATION / Wendy Ennes PUBLICATIONS (Department Head Report) / Thomas A. Holland RESEARCH ARCHIVES / Chuck Jones WEBSITE / Chuck Jones - John Sanders PROJECTS EPIGRAPHIC SURVEY / Ray Johnson INDIVIDUALS GENE GRAGG WALTER KAEGI IN THE NEWS +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ FROM THE EDITOR +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ The OI Newsletter appears by way of the automated mailing list: https://listhost.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/oi-newsletter The archive of all issues of the newsletter dating back to early 1998 is accessible only to members of the list. If you wish to have access to the archive, please request your password from: [email protected] Please send any other inquiries about the newsletter to the same address. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ THE DIRECTOR'S OFFICE +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Hoping Everyone had a Happy Holiday The month of December was a short work period for many at the OI. We hope you all had a wonderful holiday break and were able to spend time with family and friends. We know that any time off in December will be repaid in full in January as activities and events pick up. Special thanks to all of you who worked over the holidays, especially students who filled in. Also, special thanks to staff in security functions, education programs and the Suq which all remain open for much of the holidays so visitors can enjoy the museum. Thanks to everyone involved and we hope that you were able to free up alternative time to recharge. Faculty Award Congratulations to Tony Brinkman who has received the Mellon Emeritus Fellowship.
    [Show full text]
  • Garments, Parts of Garments, and Textile Techniques in the Assyrian
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Centre for Textile Research Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD 2017 Garments, Parts of Garments, and Textile Techniques in the Assyrian Terminology: The eoN - Assyrian Textile Lexicon in the 1st-Millennium BC Linguistic Context Salvatore Gaspa University of Copenhagen Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/texterm Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, Art and Materials Conservation Commons, Classical Archaeology and Art History Commons, Classical Literature and Philology Commons, Fiber, Textile, and Weaving Arts Commons, Indo-European Linguistics and Philology Commons, Jewish Studies Commons, Museum Studies Commons, Near Eastern Languages and Societies Commons, and the Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Gaspa, Salvatore, "Garments, Parts of Garments, and Textile Techniques in the Assyrian Terminology: The eN o-Assyrian Textile Lexicon in the 1st-Millennium BC Linguistic Context" (2017). Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD. 3. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/texterm/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Centre for Textile Research at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Garments, Parts of Garments, and Textile Techniques in the Assyrian Terminology: The Neo- Assyrian Textile Lexicon in the 1st-Millennium BC Linguistic Context Salvatore Gaspa, University of Copenhagen In Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Women in the Ancient Near East: a Sourcebook
    WOMEN IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST Women in the Ancient Near East provides a collection of primary sources that further our understanding of women from Mesopotamian and Near Eastern civiliza- tions, from the earliest historical and literary texts in the third millennium BC to the end of Mesopotamian political autonomy in the sixth century BC. This book is a valuable resource for historians of the Near East and for those studying women in the ancient world. It moves beyond simply identifying women in the Near East to attempting to place them in historical and literary context, follow- ing the latest research. A number of literary genres are represented, including myths and epics, proverbs, medical texts, law collections, letters and treaties, as well as building, dedicatory, and funerary inscriptions. Mark W. Chavalas is Professor of History at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, where he has taught since 1989. Among his publications are the edited Emar: The History, Religion, and Culture of a Syrian Town in the Late Bronze Age (1996), Mesopotamia and the Bible (2002), and The Ancient Near East: Historical Sources in Translation (2006), and he has had research fellowships at Yale, Harvard, Cornell, Cal-Berkeley, and a number of other universities. He has nine seasons of exca- vation at various Bronze Age sites in Syria, including Tell Ashara/Terqa and Tell Mozan/Urkesh. ROUTLEDGE SOURCEBOOKS FOR THE ANCIENT WORLD HISTORIANS OF ANCIENT ROME, THIRD EDITION Ronald Mellor TRIALS FROM CLASSICAL ATHENS, SECOND EDITION Christopher Carey ANCIENT GREECE, THIRD EDITION Matthew Dillon and Lynda Garland READINGS IN LATE ANTIQUITY, SECOND EDITION Michael Maas GREEK AND ROMAN EDUCATION Mark Joyal, J.C.
    [Show full text]
  • DESENVOLVIMENTO DO ESQUEMA DECORATIVO DAS SALAS DO TRONO DO PERÍODO NEO-ASSÍRIO (934-609 A.C.): IMAGEM TEXTO E ESPAÇO COMO VE
    UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO MUSEU DE ARQUEOLOGIA E ETNOLOGIA PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM ARQUEOLOGIA DESENVOLVIMENTO DO ESQUEMA DECORATIVO DAS SALAS DO TRONO DO PERÍODO NEO-ASSÍRIO (934-609 a.C.): IMAGEM TEXTO E ESPAÇO COMO VEÍCULOS DA RETÓRICA REAL VOLUME I PHILIPPE RACY TAKLA Dissertação apresentada ao Programa de Pós-Graduação em Arqueologia do Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia da Universidade de São Paulo para obtenção do título de Mestre em Arqueologia. Orientadora: Profª. Drª. ELAINE FARIAS VELOSO HIRATA Linha de Pesquisa: REPRESENTAÇÕES SIMBÓLICAS EM ARQUEOLOGIA São Paulo 2008 RESUMO Este trabalho busca a elaboração de um quadro interpretativo que possibilite analisar o desenvolvimento do esquema decorativo presente nas salas do trono dos palácios construídos pelos reis assírios durante o período que veio a ser conhecido como neo- assírio (934 – 609 a.C.). Entendemos como esquema decorativo a presença de imagens e textos inseridos em um contexto arquitetural. Temos por objetivo demonstrar que a evolução do esquema decorativo, dada sua importância como veículo da retórica real, reflete a transformação da política e da ideologia imperial, bem como das fronteiras do império, ao longo do período neo-assírio. Palavras-chave: Assíria, Palácio, Iconografia, Arqueologia, Ideologia. 2 ABSTRACT The aim of this work is the elaboration of a interpretative framework that allow us to analyze the development of the decorative scheme of the throne rooms located at the palaces built by the Assyrians kings during the period that become known as Neo- Assyrian (934 – 609 BC). We consider decorative scheme as being the presence of texts and images in an architectural setting.
    [Show full text]
  • Women and Their Agency in the Neo-Assyrian Empire
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Helsingin yliopiston digitaalinen arkisto WOMEN AND THEIR AGENCY IN THE NEO-ASSYRIAN EMPIRE Assyriologia Pro gradu Saana Teppo 1.2.2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements................................................................................................................5 1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................6 1.1 Aim of the study...........................................................................................................6 1.2 Background ..................................................................................................................8 1.3 Problems with sources and material.............................................................................9 1.3.1 Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire ......................................................10 1.3.2 Corpus of Neo-Assyrian texts .............................................................................11 2. THEORETICAL APPROACH – EMPOWERING MESOPOTAMIAN WOMEN.......13 2.1 Power, agency and spheres of action .........................................................................13 2.2 Women studies and women’s history ........................................................................17 2.3 Feminist scholarship and ancient Near East studies ..................................................20 2.4 Problems relating to women studies of ancient Near East.........................................24
    [Show full text]
  • “Going Native: Šamaš-Šuma-Ukīn, Assyrian King of Babylon” Iraq
    IRAQ (2019) Page 1 of 22 Doi:10.1017/irq.2019.1 1 GOING NATIVE: ŠAMAŠ-ŠUMA-UKĪN, ASSYRIAN KING OF BABYLON By SHANA ZAIA1 Šamaš-šuma-ukīn is a unique case in the Neo-Assyrian Empire: he was a member of the Assyrian royal family who was installed as king of Babylonia but never of Assyria. Previous Assyrian rulers who had control over Babylonia were recognized as kings of both polities, but Šamaš-šuma-ukīn’s father, Esarhaddon, had decided to split the empire between two of his sons, giving Ashurbanipal kingship over Assyria and Šamaš-šuma-ukīn the throne of Babylonia. As a result, Šamaš-šuma-ukīn is an intriguing case-study for how political, familial, and cultural identities were constructed in texts and interacted with each other as part of royal self- presentation. This paper shows that, despite Šamaš-šuma-ukīn’s familial and cultural identity as an Assyrian, he presents himself as a quintessentially Babylonian king to a greater extent than any of his predecessors. To do so successfully, Šamaš-šuma-ukīn uses Babylonian motifs and titles while ignoring the Assyrian tropes his brother Ashurbanipal retains even in his Babylonian royal inscriptions. Introduction Assyrian kings were recognized as rulers in Babylonia starting in the reign of Tiglath-pileser III (744– 727 BCE), who was named as such in several Babylonian sources including a king list, a chronicle, and in the Ptolemaic Canon.2 Assyrian control of the region was occasionally lost, such as from the beginning until the later years of Sargon II’s reign (721–705 BCE) and briefly towards the beginning of Sennacherib’s reign (704–681 BCE), but otherwise an Assyrian king occupying the Babylonian throne as well as the Assyrian one was no novelty by the time of Esarhaddon’s kingship (680–669 BCE).
    [Show full text]
  • Madaktu and Badace
    MADAKTU AND BADACE D. T. Potts University of Sydney 1. INTRODUCTION In a recent study devoted to a strategic analysis of Assurbanipal's eighth campaign, J.M. C6doba sounded a justifiable note of caution regarding the identification of ~adaktu'. One of the principal cities of Elam and a royal "Residenzstadt", Madaktu was the subject of a general study in 1986 by Pierre de ~iroschedji~.Recent scholarship suggests, however, that his identification of Madaktu with Tepe Patak has not received general acceptance by ~ssyriologists~.Nor has the collateral problem of identifying Badace, a toponym mentioned by Diodorus (XIX.19.1)in his account of the conflict between Antigonus and Eumenes in 317 B.C., with Madaktu and hence with Tepe Patak been accepted by Classicists and ancient historians4. The present study has therefore been written in the hope that some further clarification of the identification of MadaktuJBadace is possible provided the Assyrian and Greek sources are read judiciously. and the geography of Susiana is kept clearly in mind. 2. MADAKTU = BADACE Before proceeding to the actual documentation on the city of Madaktu I shall begin with a necessary digression. The strong probability that the Elamite city known in Assyrian sources as Madaktu ("'"ma-dak-teli)is identical with the city known to Diodorus as Badace was apparently first voiced in 1882 by the French Assyriologist J. ~~~ert~.This was based 1 Cbrdoba, J.M. Die Schlacht am Ulaya-FluB: Ein Beispiel assyrischer Kriegfiihrung wiihrend der letzten Jahre des Reiches. In: Waetzoldt, H. and Hauptmann, H., eds. Assyrien im Wandel der Zeiten.
    [Show full text]