Symbol Systems used in Administration
Apr 12, 2009 20:34:19 GMT -5
Post by us4-he2-gal2 on Apr 12, 2009 20:34:19 GMT -5
Thread Orientation: In this thread I attempt to sum Pittman's definitions of the chief symbol elements that appear in the seals around the time of the Glazed Steatite Seals (post Uruk III period).
As we noted in the process of the Glazed Steatite thread, Pittman has observed that the main sorts of imagery that contribute to the administrative use of seals are systems of script and systems of glyptic imagery. The following follows the brief explanations Pittman gives:
Uruk IV a-III/
Pittman: "The earliest documented script appear in Level IVa at Uruk and is referred to as the Uruk script. The underlying language of this script is unknown but is assumed to be Sumerian. The script is referred to as proto-cuneiform and is considered to be the ancestor [of] the cuneiform writing system."
About Uruk III... "The next stage in the development of this script is known in texts found at the sites of Level III of the Eanna sounding at Uruk, Tell Uqair, Jemdat Nasr, and Ur. Three inscribed tablets, one numerical tablet, and two that are paleographically similar to those from Jemdat Nasr and Uqair were found as well at the sites in the Diyala River Valley."
Proto-Elamite Script/
Pittman: "The name "proto-Elamite" was given to the script that was written on the more than 1400 tablets found in the early excavations at Susa by Scheil, the first scholar to study these texts. Although then, and now, there is no evidence identifying the underlying language of this script as the Elamite language, the name proto-Elamite is retained because evidence for the script has been found in greatest quantity and elaboration at Susa, a major center of the later Elamite-speaking people...
The distribution of the texts inscribed with the proto-Elamite script is remarkable. Unlike the Uruk script, which has been found only in a tightly circumscribed area in southern Mesopotamia, the proto-Elamite system is spread along the periphery of the Iranian plateau both to the south and the north. It has been found together with the other tools of the proto-Elamite administration at a half-dozen Iranian sites."
Miscellaneous Markings/
Sometimes tablets and other administrative devices (see relevant thread here
for information storage devices) were marked with elements not from the script or from seals - the author states that the most common alternative marking was of a drawing of an abstract form or of an object. These drawings occurred on in the proto-Elamite sphere, but can also be seen on the Ur Seal Impression Strata, and Pittman points to Legrain, plates 3, 4 and 5. Another sort of drawing is made specifically on non-tablet sorts of devices (i.e. door locks) and underneath the cylinder seal impression - examples are Legrain pl. 43 nos. 126, 128, 129, 237, 286, 368, 378, 393.
Pittman is hard pressed to explain why the addition of drawings and markings sometimes accompanied seals, since these are reproducible and could be easily faked.
Legrain plate 14
Here is Legrain plate 14 where we can see examples of some of the drawings Pittman refers to. I notice that the item in the top right of the lower right register, appears to be like a the archaic cosmic map depicting the 4 corners of the earth that Madness alludes to in reply 12 of the following thread (image here. This map at the same time seem to bear resemblence to the depictions of edinnu that fature elsewhere in Legrains survey of the Ur seals, as Sheshki mentioned to me today (example here.
Seal imagery in the Uruk period is basically divided into two categories a) "schematic seals" or "simple" seals which were "constructed of individual drillings" and b) "complex" seals, which contained more naturalistic imagery and were more elaborately engraved. (For the differences in use simple versus complex seals, please refer to this thread, post 1, under "Nissen's Stance".)
Following the UrukIVa period however, abstract imagery began to appear and it became a matter not only of how seals were cut, but of the differing sort of design elements. Pittman recognizes 5 main styles which were used concurrently with the GSS seals in the post UrukIVa period:
For the following images, I must apologize for the image quality. Unfortunately, I have only limited access to a scanner these days and must make due with a camera. I have photographed for the examples the author gives, which are considered "typical" examples of each category.
Classic Style/
This term "classic" is used to indicate the style of iconography, largely naturalistic in proportions of figures etc., that continued in use in the period in question and stems directly from the stylistic traditions of the Late Uruk period iconography.
Examples of the Classic style are found at Uruk (Heinrich 1936:tf 17a), Jemdat Nasr (Amiet 1980a pl. 122), Tell Uqair (Lloyd and Safar 1943L pl 31 top), and Nippur (Hansen 1987 pl. 12, no. 2) and in the Diyala River Valley region (Frankfort 1955: pl. 6, no 34; pl. 21 no. 219.) Proto-Elamite seals also made extensive use of the Classic style, though the images are cut distinctively and tend to involve animals, even animals in human roles.
Glazed Steatite Style/
For description here, please see the GLAZED STEATITE STYLE thread, reply number 1.
Wheelcut Style/
The Wheelcut style is defined by its method of cutting, by the use of a cutting wheel, resulting in "distinctly biconical forms that make up the images." It is like the GSS imagery in that it is also abstract, but unlike GSS has a heavy distribution in southern Mesopotamia. Figural images are rarely cut by wheel though exceptions are the scorpion and horned quadruped. Some examples of this style appear in Frankfort 1955 pl. 5
Incised Style/
Another style using geometric patterns, such as rhombs, triangles and crosses as well as hatching and interlocking triangles which related them to the GSS style. Incised style designs also incorporated chevrons, crossed lines and zigzag patterns. Incised style "continues in use for some time after the glazed steatite style, the classic style and the proto-Elamite style had ceased to be used." (for examples see Mackay 1931: pl 73; Frankfort 1955 pl 3, no 7; Ameit 1972 nos. 1238 and 1291.)
City Seals/
Because of our earlier reading on City seals, I have made a detailed indivudual thread on Pittman's discussion about these uniquely Southern Mesopotamian devices, see this thread
Symbol Systems
As we noted in the process of the Glazed Steatite thread, Pittman has observed that the main sorts of imagery that contribute to the administrative use of seals are systems of script and systems of glyptic imagery. The following follows the brief explanations Pittman gives:
Scripts
[Uruk IV a-III/
Pittman: "The earliest documented script appear in Level IVa at Uruk and is referred to as the Uruk script. The underlying language of this script is unknown but is assumed to be Sumerian. The script is referred to as proto-cuneiform and is considered to be the ancestor [of] the cuneiform writing system."
About Uruk III... "The next stage in the development of this script is known in texts found at the sites of Level III of the Eanna sounding at Uruk, Tell Uqair, Jemdat Nasr, and Ur. Three inscribed tablets, one numerical tablet, and two that are paleographically similar to those from Jemdat Nasr and Uqair were found as well at the sites in the Diyala River Valley."
Proto-Elamite Script/
Pittman: "The name "proto-Elamite" was given to the script that was written on the more than 1400 tablets found in the early excavations at Susa by Scheil, the first scholar to study these texts. Although then, and now, there is no evidence identifying the underlying language of this script as the Elamite language, the name proto-Elamite is retained because evidence for the script has been found in greatest quantity and elaboration at Susa, a major center of the later Elamite-speaking people...
The distribution of the texts inscribed with the proto-Elamite script is remarkable. Unlike the Uruk script, which has been found only in a tightly circumscribed area in southern Mesopotamia, the proto-Elamite system is spread along the periphery of the Iranian plateau both to the south and the north. It has been found together with the other tools of the proto-Elamite administration at a half-dozen Iranian sites."
Miscellaneous Markings/
Sometimes tablets and other administrative devices (see relevant thread here
for information storage devices) were marked with elements not from the script or from seals - the author states that the most common alternative marking was of a drawing of an abstract form or of an object. These drawings occurred on in the proto-Elamite sphere, but can also be seen on the Ur Seal Impression Strata, and Pittman points to Legrain, plates 3, 4 and 5. Another sort of drawing is made specifically on non-tablet sorts of devices (i.e. door locks) and underneath the cylinder seal impression - examples are Legrain pl. 43 nos. 126, 128, 129, 237, 286, 368, 378, 393.
Pittman is hard pressed to explain why the addition of drawings and markings sometimes accompanied seals, since these are reproducible and could be easily faked.
Legrain plate 14
Here is Legrain plate 14 where we can see examples of some of the drawings Pittman refers to. I notice that the item in the top right of the lower right register, appears to be like a the archaic cosmic map depicting the 4 corners of the earth that Madness alludes to in reply 12 of the following thread (image here. This map at the same time seem to bear resemblence to the depictions of edinnu that fature elsewhere in Legrains survey of the Ur seals, as Sheshki mentioned to me today (example here.
Seals: Categories of Seal Imagery
Seal imagery in the Uruk period is basically divided into two categories a) "schematic seals" or "simple" seals which were "constructed of individual drillings" and b) "complex" seals, which contained more naturalistic imagery and were more elaborately engraved. (For the differences in use simple versus complex seals, please refer to this thread, post 1, under "Nissen's Stance".)
Following the UrukIVa period however, abstract imagery began to appear and it became a matter not only of how seals were cut, but of the differing sort of design elements. Pittman recognizes 5 main styles which were used concurrently with the GSS seals in the post UrukIVa period:
1) the classic figural groups
2) the glazed steatite group
3) the wheelcut group
4) the incised group
5) the city seals
2) the glazed steatite group
3) the wheelcut group
4) the incised group
5) the city seals
For the following images, I must apologize for the image quality. Unfortunately, I have only limited access to a scanner these days and must make due with a camera. I have photographed for the examples the author gives, which are considered "typical" examples of each category.
Classic Style/
This term "classic" is used to indicate the style of iconography, largely naturalistic in proportions of figures etc., that continued in use in the period in question and stems directly from the stylistic traditions of the Late Uruk period iconography.
Examples of the Classic style are found at Uruk (Heinrich 1936:tf 17a), Jemdat Nasr (Amiet 1980a pl. 122), Tell Uqair (Lloyd and Safar 1943L pl 31 top), and Nippur (Hansen 1987 pl. 12, no. 2) and in the Diyala River Valley region (Frankfort 1955: pl. 6, no 34; pl. 21 no. 219.) Proto-Elamite seals also made extensive use of the Classic style, though the images are cut distinctively and tend to involve animals, even animals in human roles.
Glazed Steatite Style/
For description here, please see the GLAZED STEATITE STYLE thread, reply number 1.
Wheelcut Style/
The Wheelcut style is defined by its method of cutting, by the use of a cutting wheel, resulting in "distinctly biconical forms that make up the images." It is like the GSS imagery in that it is also abstract, but unlike GSS has a heavy distribution in southern Mesopotamia. Figural images are rarely cut by wheel though exceptions are the scorpion and horned quadruped. Some examples of this style appear in Frankfort 1955 pl. 5
Incised Style/
Another style using geometric patterns, such as rhombs, triangles and crosses as well as hatching and interlocking triangles which related them to the GSS style. Incised style designs also incorporated chevrons, crossed lines and zigzag patterns. Incised style "continues in use for some time after the glazed steatite style, the classic style and the proto-Elamite style had ceased to be used." (for examples see Mackay 1931: pl 73; Frankfort 1955 pl 3, no 7; Ameit 1972 nos. 1238 and 1291.)
City Seals/
Because of our earlier reading on City seals, I have made a detailed indivudual thread on Pittman's discussion about these uniquely Southern Mesopotamian devices, see this thread