阿什莫尔博物馆外的“基什”新巴比伦法律文件的来源

Stanisław Chmielowski
{"title":"阿什莫尔博物馆外的“基什”新巴比伦法律文件的来源","authors":"Stanisław Chmielowski","doi":"10.14746/FPP.2019.24.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The majority of currently known Neo-Babylonian legal and administrative documents from Kish come from excavations held on this site by the joint expedition of Oxford – Field Museum (Chicago) between 1923–1933. They are now housed in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. However, ca. 40 Neo-Babylonian ‘Kish’ tablets, i.e., written in Ḫursagkalamma or Kiš, are present in other collections. How did they end up in these museums assuming that most of them was acquired in the last quarter of the 19th century, 30–50 years before the expedition mentioned above? I suppose that they were not found in Kish, even though their Ausstellungsort indicates quite the opposite. They instead come from nearby Babylon or Borsippa cities. The analysis conducted in the article seems to confirm this assumption, and for most cases, the provided attribution should be considered. Additionally, tablets under discussion are testimonies of the vivid economic life of entrepreneurial Babylonians in the first millennium BC.","PeriodicalId":330472,"journal":{"name":"Folia Praehistorica Posnaniensia","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The provenance of Neo-Babylionian legal documents from ‘Kish’ outside the Ashmolean Museum Collection\",\"authors\":\"Stanisław Chmielowski\",\"doi\":\"10.14746/FPP.2019.24.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The majority of currently known Neo-Babylonian legal and administrative documents from Kish come from excavations held on this site by the joint expedition of Oxford – Field Museum (Chicago) between 1923–1933. They are now housed in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. However, ca. 40 Neo-Babylonian ‘Kish’ tablets, i.e., written in Ḫursagkalamma or Kiš, are present in other collections. How did they end up in these museums assuming that most of them was acquired in the last quarter of the 19th century, 30–50 years before the expedition mentioned above? I suppose that they were not found in Kish, even though their Ausstellungsort indicates quite the opposite. They instead come from nearby Babylon or Borsippa cities. The analysis conducted in the article seems to confirm this assumption, and for most cases, the provided attribution should be considered. Additionally, tablets under discussion are testimonies of the vivid economic life of entrepreneurial Babylonians in the first millennium BC.\",\"PeriodicalId\":330472,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Folia Praehistorica Posnaniensia\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Folia Praehistorica Posnaniensia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14746/FPP.2019.24.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Folia Praehistorica Posnaniensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/FPP.2019.24.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前已知的基什的新巴比伦法律和行政文件大部分来自牛津-菲尔德博物馆(芝加哥)在1923年至1933年间的联合探险队在该遗址进行的发掘。它们现在被收藏在牛津的阿什莫尔博物馆。然而,约有40个新巴比伦“基什”碑,即用Ḫursagkalamma或基什语写的,在其他收藏中出现。假设它们中的大多数是在19世纪最后25年获得的,也就是上述探险之前的30-50年,那么它们是如何在这些博物馆里结束的呢?我想它们不是在基什发现的,尽管它们的Ausstellungsort表明情况恰恰相反。相反,他们来自附近的巴比伦或博尔西帕城市。文章中的分析似乎证实了这一假设,在大多数情况下,应该考虑提供的归因。此外,正在讨论的石板是公元前一千年巴比伦人生动的经济生活的见证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The provenance of Neo-Babylionian legal documents from ‘Kish’ outside the Ashmolean Museum Collection
The majority of currently known Neo-Babylonian legal and administrative documents from Kish come from excavations held on this site by the joint expedition of Oxford – Field Museum (Chicago) between 1923–1933. They are now housed in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. However, ca. 40 Neo-Babylonian ‘Kish’ tablets, i.e., written in Ḫursagkalamma or Kiš, are present in other collections. How did they end up in these museums assuming that most of them was acquired in the last quarter of the 19th century, 30–50 years before the expedition mentioned above? I suppose that they were not found in Kish, even though their Ausstellungsort indicates quite the opposite. They instead come from nearby Babylon or Borsippa cities. The analysis conducted in the article seems to confirm this assumption, and for most cases, the provided attribution should be considered. Additionally, tablets under discussion are testimonies of the vivid economic life of entrepreneurial Babylonians in the first millennium BC.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信