| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| uruk_mod._warka [2011/12/13 17:34] – englund | uruk_mod._warka [2011/12/13 17:40] (current) – englund |
|---|
| It is important to note that the purpose of all of these early forms of writing, including the Uruk IV and Jemdet Nasr period texts, along with their precursors, was to record economic transactions. Writing itself developed out of a need to remember exchanges of large numbers of goods among the inhabitants of those cities whose population had increased throughout the Uruk period so that face-to-face contact was no longer the norm. It was a tool of economic administration, not a means to record literature, history, or sacred ideas. | It is important to note that the purpose of all of these early forms of writing, including the Uruk IV and Jemdet Nasr period texts, along with their precursors, was to record economic transactions. Writing itself developed out of a need to remember exchanges of large numbers of goods among the inhabitants of those cities whose population had increased throughout the Uruk period so that face-to-face contact was no longer the norm. It was a tool of economic administration, not a means to record literature, history, or sacred ideas. |
| |
| {{ http://static.cdli.ucla.edu/images/wiki/P000744?400}} | {{ http://static.cdli.ucla.edu/images/wiki/P000744.jpg?200}} |
| |
| {{ http://static.cdli.ucla.edu/images/wiki/P001972.jpg?400}} | {{ http://static.cdli.ucla.edu/images/wiki/P001972.jpg?200}} |
| It took several centuries for the written language to develop so that it could represent the complexities of grammar and syntax. The earliest signs used in the Uruk texts, which were either pictographic representations of objects, symbols representing deities, abstract images, or numerical signs, eventually developed into the more abstract cuneiform signs characterized by horizontal and vertical wedges. In the Uruk IV and Jemdet Nasr phases, signs represented concepts or nouns, and perhaps simple verbs, but there is no grammatical relationship between those ideas represented on the texts. Sometimes signs were combined to form ideas related to both signs (such as the sign for disbursement which combines the sign for head with the sign for ration), and other times signs were combined to form words that sounded like those signs. In this way, signs which originally had a pictographically assigned meaning became associated with abstract concepts that sounded similar. For example, the Sumerian word for “life” is pronounced “til,” and the word for “arrow” is pronounced “ti.” In writing, the same sign, TI, is used for both ideas presumably because it is easier to draw an arrow than it is to draw the more abstract notion of life. | It took several centuries for the written language to develop so that it could represent the complexities of grammar and syntax. The earliest signs used in the Uruk texts, which were either pictographic representations of objects, symbols representing deities, abstract images, or numerical signs, eventually developed into the more abstract cuneiform signs characterized by horizontal and vertical wedges. In the Uruk IV and Jemdet Nasr phases, signs represented concepts or nouns, and perhaps simple verbs, but there is no grammatical relationship between those ideas represented on the texts. Sometimes signs were combined to form ideas related to both signs (such as the sign for disbursement which combines the sign for head with the sign for ration), and other times signs were combined to form words that sounded like those signs. In this way, signs which originally had a pictographically assigned meaning became associated with abstract concepts that sounded similar. For example, the Sumerian word for “life” is pronounced “til,” and the word for “arrow” is pronounced “ti.” In writing, the same sign, TI, is used for both ideas presumably because it is easier to draw an arrow than it is to draw the more abstract notion of life. |
| |
| |
| {{ http://static.cdli.ucla.edu/images/wiki/Development.jpg?400}} | {{ http://static.cdli.ucla.edu/images/wiki/Development.jpg?400}} |
| {{ http://static.cdli.ucla.edu/images/wiki/P005987.jpg?400}} | {{ http://static.cdli.ucla.edu/images/wiki/P005987.jpg?200}} |
| The form of the signs also changed over time. Originally, pictographs were incised in clay using a sharp stylus. By the Jemdet Nasr phase, the sharp stylus was replaced by an angled stylus with a triangular tip. The result of pushing a stylus of this shape into wet clay is a wedge with a triangular shaped “head” and a long straight “tail.” The shape of these wedges provide the name we use for the writing system of Mesopotamia, “cuneiform,” Latin for wedge-shaped. As the use of the triangular stylus continued, the signs themselves became more and more abstracted into combinations of horizontal and vertical wedges that no longer bore much resemblance to their original forms. The range of sign forms used also decreased as the number of similar-looking signs reduced. | The form of the signs also changed over time. Originally, pictographs were incised in clay using a sharp stylus. By the Jemdet Nasr phase, the sharp stylus was replaced by an angled stylus with a triangular tip. The result of pushing a stylus of this shape into wet clay is a wedge with a triangular shaped “head” and a long straight “tail.” The shape of these wedges provide the name we use for the writing system of Mesopotamia, “cuneiform,” Latin for wedge-shaped. As the use of the triangular stylus continued, the signs themselves became more and more abstracted into combinations of horizontal and vertical wedges that no longer bore much resemblance to their original forms. The range of sign forms used also decreased as the number of similar-looking signs reduced. |
| <br> | <br> |
| == References == | == References == |
| |
| *''Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka.'' Berlin: Mann. 17 volumes. 1946-2001 | //Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka//. Berlin: Mann. 17 volumes. 1946-2001 |
| |
| *''Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka, Endberichte'' Mainz: Philipp von Zabern GmbH. 25 volumes. 1987-2003. | //Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka, Endberichte//. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern GmbH. 25 volumes. 1987-2003. |
| |
| *Boehmer, R. M. "Uruk-Warka." In ''Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East,'' vol. 5, 294-298. New York: Oxford University, 1997. | Boehmer, R. M. Uruk-Warka In //Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East,// vol. 5, 294-298. New York: Oxford University, 1997. |
| |
| *Crawford, H. ''Sumer and the Sumerians.'' Cambridge: Cambridge, 1991. | Crawford, H. //Sumer and the Sumerians.// Cambridge: Cambridge, 1991. |
| |
| *Englund, R. K. "Texts From the Late Uruk Period." In ''Mesopotamien 1: Späturuk-Zeit und Frühdynastische Zeit.'' OBO 160, 15-233. Freiburg and Göttingen: Universitätsverlag and Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998. | Englund, R. K. Texts From the Late Uruk Period In //Mesopotamien 1: Späturuk-Zeit und Frühdynastische Zeit. OBO// 160, 15-233. Freiburg and Göttingen: Universitätsverlag and Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998. |
| |
| *Nissen, H., P. Damerow, and R. K. Englund. ''Archaic Bookkeeping: Writing and Techniques of Economic Administration in the Ancient Near East.'' P. Larsen, trans. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1993 | Nissen, H., P. Damerow, and R. K. Englund. //Archaic Bookkeeping: Writing and Techniques of Economic Administration in the Ancient Near East.// P. Larsen, trans. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1993 |
| |
| *Postgate, J. N. ''Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy at the Dawn of History.'' London: Routledge, 1992. | Postgate, J. N. //Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy at the Dawn of History.// London: Routledge, 1992. |
| |
| *Roaf, M. ''The Cultural Atlas of Mesopotamia and the Ancient Near East.'' Oxford and New York: Facts on File, 1990. | Roaf, M. //The Cultural Atlas of Mesopotamia and the Ancient Near East.// Oxford and New York: Facts on File, 1990. |
| |
| [[Site Descriptions]] | [[Site Descriptions]] |
| |
