A.S.T. : City Signs
Mar 19, 2009 17:12:21 GMT -5
Post by us4-he2-gal2 on Mar 19, 2009 17:12:21 GMT -5
Thread Orientation: Mesopotamian cities from archaic times were represented by different symbolic devices. In this thread we are looking particularly at representation of cities or communities (where the term city is an overstatement) in the archaic cuneiform as seen in the publication ZATU.
CITY SIGNS
I should first mention I have begun to abbreviate the term "Archaic Symbolic Technology" to A.S.T. In this thread the particular interest is in the signs which, by various means, signify and represent various archaic Mesopotamian cities and communities. For this insight I have relied on Petr Charvat, and on the section of his Mesopotamia Before History which discusses Uruk culture. In discussing Society in the Uruk period, Charvat explains his belief that the signs representing the communities can be seen as having "crucial importance." He references the ZATU list of archaic cuneiform form signs exclusively for his discussion.
Four part discussion/
In the 92 signs from ZATU thought to represent a city or a community, Charvat has observed 4 different sorts of Symbol: a) 44 of these signs represent the city by depicting a resemblance of a temple or building. b) 16 resemble a "peculiarity of nature". c) 12 represent a community by referring to a particular professional class. d) And 9 communities are signified by signs which represent Standard/emblems. On this thread I hope to present Charvats remarks on each category in turn, starting with a)
a) City signs resembling a temple or building/
In his survey of signs used to depict cities Charvat observes that almost half of the communities choose man made icons to represent them - temples and buildings. He remarks: "The fact that the communities in question, by far the most numerous in our sample, are symbolized by images of creations made by both human hands most probably in the course of collective labor undertakings, and the human mind, carries a considerable significance. No symbols from uncultivated nature or reality, which might be expected to represent the essence of tribal or clan groups, are present here. The communities revealed their social affiliations by means of images of 'temples', houses, enclosures or even 'civilized' establishments, material incarnations of a particular spiritual construct. This brings out the more universal but perhaps also more artificial character of such communities in which kinship ties of a more elaborate nature, such as may be expected in a tribal society, hardly played roles crucial for identification. A major segment of the social landscape was obviously characterized by communities symbolically equated with man-made buildings and settlements, not with beasts, birds, insects, rivers, stars, winds and the like."
So in other words, Charvat maintains the presence of a tribal social structure, a kinship based social structure in this period, while at same time he notes that most of the communities are represented by man made administrative type buildings that one wouldn't expect from a society with strong tribal leanings.
_______________________________________
AB/EŠ3 (ZATU 7, duplicated)
The AB/EŠ3 sign features in 14 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. Charvat believes the AB sign to represent a Temple building on elevated terrace.
_________________________________________________
E2 (ZATU 129)
The E2 sign features in 13 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. Charvat says it appears to be a "A frontal view of a facade of a rectangular building with buttresses."
___________________________________________
Ezen (ZATU 150)
The Ezen sign features in 10 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. I sum the author's remarks here as follows: "... main feature is its quintuple structure...brings it very close [to seeming like] the Mesopotamian notions of the early component of the universe, consisting of center, civilized in the proper sense of the word, and of four peripheral mythical regions... I suggest it best be interpreted as ''civilized center.' "
____________________________________
URU (ZATU 597)
The URU sign features in 4 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. Charvat: "Seems to denote an enclosed or walled area"
____________________________________
IM (ZATU 264)
The IM sign features in 2 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. Charvat: "Seems to denote an enclosed or walled area"
Still to come... b) 16 resemble a "peculiarity of nature"
CITY SIGNS
I should first mention I have begun to abbreviate the term "Archaic Symbolic Technology" to A.S.T. In this thread the particular interest is in the signs which, by various means, signify and represent various archaic Mesopotamian cities and communities. For this insight I have relied on Petr Charvat, and on the section of his Mesopotamia Before History which discusses Uruk culture. In discussing Society in the Uruk period, Charvat explains his belief that the signs representing the communities can be seen as having "crucial importance." He references the ZATU list of archaic cuneiform form signs exclusively for his discussion.
Four part discussion/
In the 92 signs from ZATU thought to represent a city or a community, Charvat has observed 4 different sorts of Symbol: a) 44 of these signs represent the city by depicting a resemblance of a temple or building. b) 16 resemble a "peculiarity of nature". c) 12 represent a community by referring to a particular professional class. d) And 9 communities are signified by signs which represent Standard/emblems. On this thread I hope to present Charvats remarks on each category in turn, starting with a)
a) City signs resembling a temple or building/
In his survey of signs used to depict cities Charvat observes that almost half of the communities choose man made icons to represent them - temples and buildings. He remarks: "The fact that the communities in question, by far the most numerous in our sample, are symbolized by images of creations made by both human hands most probably in the course of collective labor undertakings, and the human mind, carries a considerable significance. No symbols from uncultivated nature or reality, which might be expected to represent the essence of tribal or clan groups, are present here. The communities revealed their social affiliations by means of images of 'temples', houses, enclosures or even 'civilized' establishments, material incarnations of a particular spiritual construct. This brings out the more universal but perhaps also more artificial character of such communities in which kinship ties of a more elaborate nature, such as may be expected in a tribal society, hardly played roles crucial for identification. A major segment of the social landscape was obviously characterized by communities symbolically equated with man-made buildings and settlements, not with beasts, birds, insects, rivers, stars, winds and the like."
So in other words, Charvat maintains the presence of a tribal social structure, a kinship based social structure in this period, while at same time he notes that most of the communities are represented by man made administrative type buildings that one wouldn't expect from a society with strong tribal leanings.
Signs used to make temple/building typed City Signs
AB/EŠ3, E2, EZEN, URU, IM
_______________________________________
AB/EŠ3 (ZATU 7, duplicated)
The AB/EŠ3 sign features in 14 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. Charvat believes the AB sign to represent a Temple building on elevated terrace.
_________________________________________________
E2 (ZATU 129)
The E2 sign features in 13 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. Charvat says it appears to be a "A frontal view of a facade of a rectangular building with buttresses."
___________________________________________
Ezen (ZATU 150)
The Ezen sign features in 10 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. I sum the author's remarks here as follows: "... main feature is its quintuple structure...brings it very close [to seeming like] the Mesopotamian notions of the early component of the universe, consisting of center, civilized in the proper sense of the word, and of four peripheral mythical regions... I suggest it best be interpreted as ''civilized center.' "
____________________________________
URU (ZATU 597)
The URU sign features in 4 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. Charvat: "Seems to denote an enclosed or walled area"
____________________________________
IM (ZATU 264)
The IM sign features in 2 of the 44 city signs resembling temples/buildings. Charvat: "Seems to denote an enclosed or walled area"
Still to come... b) 16 resemble a "peculiarity of nature"
