Martin Worthington | Trinity College Dublin (original) (raw)
Papers by Martin Worthington
Written with Martin Worthington, Cambridge
Le Journal des Médecines Cunéiformes, 2023
Henoch, vol. 42/2, 2020
and George Heath-Whyte. I am profoundly grateful to all these scholars for useful comments and re... more and George Heath-Whyte. I am profoundly grateful to all these scholars for useful comments and references and, in several cases, for encouraging me to think more critically about some of the examples. I further thank the Editors for their patience during the paper's long gestation and numerous changes at proof stage, and Rosemary Rodd for help with electronically generated bibliographical references. For abbreviations (!) see http://cdli.ox.ac.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=abbreviations_for_ assyriology; also W.
State Archives of Assyria Bulletin, 2021
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 21/4, 2011
Eft waes an-raed, nalas elnes laet, maerda gemyndig maeg Hylaces. Hygelac's kinsman kept thinking... more Eft waes an-raed, nalas elnes laet, maerda gemyndig maeg Hylaces. Hygelac's kinsman kept thinking about his name and fame: he never lost heart.
Medical History, Apr 1, 2007
Mesopotamian medicine is a burgeoning field of research which deserves, and will reward, increase... more Mesopotamian medicine is a burgeoning field of research which deserves, and will reward, increased attention by medical historians. Both books under review are well suited to promoting this. They both vaunt an excellent command of primary sources and secondary literature, offering thorough coverage of the topics studied, and exhibit high standards of philological accuracy. They both enshrine substantial advances in knowledge and understanding of Mesopotamian medicine, and present themselves in a fashion which is accessible to non-specialists. They deserve to be widely read and consulted. Despite the similarity in titles, the two volumes are very much complementary rather than overlapping. They approach the ancient evidence with different questions (the primary orientation of Heesel is cultural, that of Scurlock and Andersen medical), and the textual corpora which they study are not conterminous. Heesel's book, originally a Heidelberg PhD thesis, specifically studies “diagnostic” tablets (not diagnoses or symptoms on “therapeutic” tablets). The great majority of currently known diagnostic tablets are manuscripts of a 40 tablet series known today as the Diagnostic Handbook, redacted by a Babylonian scholar in the eleventh century BCE. This work, last edited in full by the French scholar Rene Labat in 1951, is the primary concern of Heesel's book. After the introduction (chapter 1), the discussion embraces the structure of the Diagnostic Handbook and its division into sub-series (ch. 2), the composition and logic of entries on diagnostic tablets (ch. 3), the function of the Diagnostic Handbook and its actual use in medical treatment (ch. 4), and the diachronic development of the genre of diagnostic tablets (ch. 5), with particular attention to the redactorial activity of Esagil-kīn-apli (ch. 5.2). Chapters 6 and 7 are devoted to textual reconstruction. They list all the manuscripts of the Diagnostic Handbook known to Heesel in 2000 (a sizeable number having been identified by himself), and present an exemplary edition (comprising score transliteration, translation and philological commentary) of tablets 15–33. Throughout, the discussion skilfully interweaves existing knowledge with new insights. The introduction of the distinction between Ursache (cause/reason) and Verursacher (instigator) of a disease, and the observation that diagnostic tablets are usually concerned with identifying the latter not the former (ch. 4.1.2), are especially welcome. One might dissent from the level of significance accorded in the same section to the fact that the basic meanings of verbs used to express affliction by disease (“to strike, to grasp, to seize, to touch” and the like) imply physical contact: a figurative dimension is possible, and it is questionable whether disease was always thought to presuppose physical contact with a supernatural being (whatever “physical” contact might mean in such a context). But quibbles and philological trivia (discussed by earlier reviewers) aside, Heesel's book has established itself as the standard work on diagnostic tablets. The volume by Scurlock and Andersen (an Assyriologist and a medical doctor) draws on all known therapeutic and diagnostic tablets, and to a lesser extent even other textual genres. The authors have collected from them all the symptoms, diagnoses and prognoses, and arranged them in separate chapters according to the type of disease. Thus, after introductory discussions of ‘The ancient Mesopotamian context’ and ‘General health and public health practices’, the chapter headings resemble those of a modern medical textbook: infectious diseases, sexually transmitted diseases, genitourinary tract diseases, gastrointestinal diseases, metabolic and nutritional diseases, heart+ circulatory system+lungs, eyes+ ears+nose, skin and hair, bones and joints, obstetrics and gynaecology, neurology, trauma and shock, poisons, mental illness, paediatrics, dental and oral diseases. There are also chapters on the naming of ancient disease patterns and prognostics, a general conclusion, and a number of appendices. The ancient sources are accompanied by a detailed commentary which seeks to identify the conditions described (retrospective diagnosis). Along the way, a large number of exciting suggestions are made, for example, that Mesopotamian physicians knew of peristalsis (p. 118). The combination of philological and medical expertise, coupled with the generous amount of translations, render this volume outstandingly rich in precious details and indispensable for anyone interested in Mesopotamian medicine. In a work of this size and scope there is inevitably room for dissenting interpretation (the authors modestly disavow definitiveness on p. xvii). The cogency of the medical identifications varies from case to case (for example, the identification of “If a woman gives birth and (the child) rejects its mother” as “autism”, p. 407, is dubious). Chapter 19, one of the most innovative sections…
Ancient Egyptian Literature, 2013
This chapter operates in the sphere of influence-free literary comparison, comparing what Babylon... more This chapter operates in the sphere of influence-free literary comparison, comparing what Babylonian and Middle Egyptian literature say about speech. It argues that in Middle Egyptian literature, speech is allotted an ideological charge which it lacks in Babylonian works. This asymmetry reveals differences in broader cultural attitudes which deserve attention from future researchers. Along the way, structural-stylistic and editorial-linguistic comments are made on individual compositions.
Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 2010
A conundrum that has divided students of Akkadian phonology is that of “doubly long syllables,” t... more A conundrum that has divided students of Akkadian phonology is that of “doubly long syllables,” that is, whether etymologically long vowels were shortened when they were found in a closed syllable (so ‘our house’ = bītni or bitni?, ‘sorceress’ = kassāptu or kassaptu?, etc.). The hypothesis of shortening is at least as old as Ungnad’s Babylonisch-Assyrische Grammatik1 and was adopted by numerous scholars, including E. Reiner in her A Linguistic Analysis of Akkadian.2 It was originally motivated by reference to other Semitic languages (notably Arabic and, to some extent, Hebrew), but the comparative evidence is not univocal, since it has been observed that certain Arabic dialects do not support the hypothesis of shorten-
Bibliotheca Orientalis, 2004
Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale, 2015
Tous droits réservés pour tous pays. La reproduction ou représentation de cet article, notamment ... more Tous droits réservés pour tous pays. La reproduction ou représentation de cet article, notamment par photocopie, n'est autorisée que dans les limites des conditions générales d'utilisation du site ou, le cas échéant, des conditions générales de la licence souscrite par votre établissement. Toute autre reproduction ou représentation, en tout ou partie, sous quelque forme et de quelque manière que ce soit, est interdite sauf accord préalable et écrit de l'éditeur, en dehors des cas prévus par la législation en vigueur en France. Il est précisé que son stockage dans une base de données est également interdit.
Le Journal des Médecines Cunéiformes 15, 2010
Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 100, 2010
KASKAL 7, 2010
It is natural, and well known, that the study of ancient literatures goes hand in hand with that ... more It is natural, and well known, that the study of ancient literatures goes hand in hand with that of the languages they are written in. This is most obvious for issues such as clarifying the meaning of words, or explaining the use of tenses. But the study of literature and the study of language can also interact in other, subtler ways. One such domain is the elucidation of the resonances mobilised by phrasing, i.e. determining what effects a particular choice of phrasing would have had on audiences, and how that choice was informed by conventions and habits in the various registers of the language. 1 We are here in the realm of idiom rather than grammar. A method with great potential in pursuing such issues is to search for patterns and tendencies in usage. If a pattern or tendency can be found in the way things are phrased, this encourages us to look closely at departures from it ('defamiliarised elements'), and to ask what effects these unusual formulations aimed to achieve. It is such a pattern, or tendency, which will form the subject of this paper: we will study the ways in which Babylonian literature expresses the notion of 'no-one'. More specifically, we will study how Babylonian deals with cases where, if one were to express the relevant meaning directly and prosaically, 2 'no-one' would be the subject of an assertive (i.e. non-precative, non-imperative) main 124 Martin Worthington clause. 3 (See numbers [1]-[6] below for examples of what we mean by this). 4 We will restrict our analysis to unilingual compositions, as bilingual ones could be influenced by Sumerian idiom and should therefore be studied separately. The reasons why the present analysis is confined to literature will become clear later. 1.1 mamma(n) ... ul and its 'alternatives' Babylonian's closest match to English 'no-one' as subject of an assertive main clause is the construction mamma(n) 5 ... ul (which translates super-literally as 'anyone ... not ...'). 6 For example: [1] mamman ul uwaššarakkiš super-literally: 'Anyone will not release her to you' i.e. 'No-one will release her to you' (ARM X (=Dossin-Finet 1978) 100: 24) The mamma(n) ... ul construction was not, however, the only way in which one could convey the idea of 'no-one' as subject of an assertive main clause. The other main ways of doing this were: a) A rhetorical question with 'who?' (mannu), e.g. 'Who can do X?' as a way of conveying the idea that 'No-one can do X'. 7 [2] mannu pâ iptil u\\ata uka##ir 'Who has (ever) twisted chaff (into a rope), tied barley together?' 3. Thus, for example, the rhetorical question 'Who is a great as you?' has the underlying prosaic sense 'Noone is as great as you', and accordingly it falls within the purview of our investigation, even though the question itself neither is, nor contains, an assertive main clause. 4. The reason for restricting ourselves to cases of this type is that it is only cases of this type which enable the full range of alternative ways of conveying the idea of 'no-one' as subject of an assertive main clause. For example, as seen in the previous footnote, an assertion such as 'No-one is as great as you' can be turned into a rhetorical question, but this is impossible with subordinate clauses, and (at least in Babylonian) unidiomatic with commands. 5. Our 'mamma(n)' subsumes what are historically two different words rather than variant forms of a single word: mamma (= man+ma) and mamman (= man+man). Nonetheless, at least in the contexts we shall study, literary Babylonian seems to have used them interchangeably, so it is practical to conflate them. The difference(s) between them will play no role in our analysis. 6. We will not consider cases in which mamma(n) is used attributively (super-literally meaning 'any'), e.g. ina sab sišu uzzašu ul ima~~aršu ilu mamman 'When he is angry, no god shall (super-literally: 'any god shall not') match his fury' (VII 154). 7. This is also common in personal names expressing the incomparability of a deity, e.g. mannum k ma iliya 'Who is like my god?' (i.e. 'No-one is like my god'). See Stamm 1939, § 33. If proof were needed of the functional equivalence of assertions with mamma(n) ... ul and questions with mannu, one could find it in Enuma eliš II 88, where the two expressions occur as variants of each other on different manuscripts of the same line. See below § 3.6, below. mamma(n) ... ul and its Alternatives in Babylonian Literature 125
Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 2010
A conundrum that has divided students of Akkadian phonology is that of "doubly long syllables," t... more A conundrum that has divided students of Akkadian phonology is that of "doubly long syllables," that is, whether etymologically long vowels were shortened when they were found in a closed syllable (so 'our house' = bītni or bitni?, 'sorceress' = kaššāptu or kaššaptu?, etc.). The hypothesis of shortening is at least as old as Ungnad's Babylonisch-Assyrische Grammatik 1 and was adopted by numerous scholars, including E. Reiner in her A Linguistic Analysis of Akkadian. 2 It was originally motivated by reference to other Semitic languages (notably Arabic and, to some extent, Hebrew), but the comparative evidence is not univocal, since it has been observed that certain Arabic dialects do not support the hypothesis of shorten-*Di erent drafts of this paper were read by N. J.
Bibliotheca Orientalis, 2004
Written with Martin Worthington, Cambridge
Le Journal des Médecines Cunéiformes, 2023
Henoch, vol. 42/2, 2020
and George Heath-Whyte. I am profoundly grateful to all these scholars for useful comments and re... more and George Heath-Whyte. I am profoundly grateful to all these scholars for useful comments and references and, in several cases, for encouraging me to think more critically about some of the examples. I further thank the Editors for their patience during the paper's long gestation and numerous changes at proof stage, and Rosemary Rodd for help with electronically generated bibliographical references. For abbreviations (!) see http://cdli.ox.ac.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=abbreviations_for_ assyriology; also W.
State Archives of Assyria Bulletin, 2021
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 21/4, 2011
Eft waes an-raed, nalas elnes laet, maerda gemyndig maeg Hylaces. Hygelac's kinsman kept thinking... more Eft waes an-raed, nalas elnes laet, maerda gemyndig maeg Hylaces. Hygelac's kinsman kept thinking about his name and fame: he never lost heart.
Medical History, Apr 1, 2007
Mesopotamian medicine is a burgeoning field of research which deserves, and will reward, increase... more Mesopotamian medicine is a burgeoning field of research which deserves, and will reward, increased attention by medical historians. Both books under review are well suited to promoting this. They both vaunt an excellent command of primary sources and secondary literature, offering thorough coverage of the topics studied, and exhibit high standards of philological accuracy. They both enshrine substantial advances in knowledge and understanding of Mesopotamian medicine, and present themselves in a fashion which is accessible to non-specialists. They deserve to be widely read and consulted. Despite the similarity in titles, the two volumes are very much complementary rather than overlapping. They approach the ancient evidence with different questions (the primary orientation of Heesel is cultural, that of Scurlock and Andersen medical), and the textual corpora which they study are not conterminous. Heesel's book, originally a Heidelberg PhD thesis, specifically studies “diagnostic” tablets (not diagnoses or symptoms on “therapeutic” tablets). The great majority of currently known diagnostic tablets are manuscripts of a 40 tablet series known today as the Diagnostic Handbook, redacted by a Babylonian scholar in the eleventh century BCE. This work, last edited in full by the French scholar Rene Labat in 1951, is the primary concern of Heesel's book. After the introduction (chapter 1), the discussion embraces the structure of the Diagnostic Handbook and its division into sub-series (ch. 2), the composition and logic of entries on diagnostic tablets (ch. 3), the function of the Diagnostic Handbook and its actual use in medical treatment (ch. 4), and the diachronic development of the genre of diagnostic tablets (ch. 5), with particular attention to the redactorial activity of Esagil-kīn-apli (ch. 5.2). Chapters 6 and 7 are devoted to textual reconstruction. They list all the manuscripts of the Diagnostic Handbook known to Heesel in 2000 (a sizeable number having been identified by himself), and present an exemplary edition (comprising score transliteration, translation and philological commentary) of tablets 15–33. Throughout, the discussion skilfully interweaves existing knowledge with new insights. The introduction of the distinction between Ursache (cause/reason) and Verursacher (instigator) of a disease, and the observation that diagnostic tablets are usually concerned with identifying the latter not the former (ch. 4.1.2), are especially welcome. One might dissent from the level of significance accorded in the same section to the fact that the basic meanings of verbs used to express affliction by disease (“to strike, to grasp, to seize, to touch” and the like) imply physical contact: a figurative dimension is possible, and it is questionable whether disease was always thought to presuppose physical contact with a supernatural being (whatever “physical” contact might mean in such a context). But quibbles and philological trivia (discussed by earlier reviewers) aside, Heesel's book has established itself as the standard work on diagnostic tablets. The volume by Scurlock and Andersen (an Assyriologist and a medical doctor) draws on all known therapeutic and diagnostic tablets, and to a lesser extent even other textual genres. The authors have collected from them all the symptoms, diagnoses and prognoses, and arranged them in separate chapters according to the type of disease. Thus, after introductory discussions of ‘The ancient Mesopotamian context’ and ‘General health and public health practices’, the chapter headings resemble those of a modern medical textbook: infectious diseases, sexually transmitted diseases, genitourinary tract diseases, gastrointestinal diseases, metabolic and nutritional diseases, heart+ circulatory system+lungs, eyes+ ears+nose, skin and hair, bones and joints, obstetrics and gynaecology, neurology, trauma and shock, poisons, mental illness, paediatrics, dental and oral diseases. There are also chapters on the naming of ancient disease patterns and prognostics, a general conclusion, and a number of appendices. The ancient sources are accompanied by a detailed commentary which seeks to identify the conditions described (retrospective diagnosis). Along the way, a large number of exciting suggestions are made, for example, that Mesopotamian physicians knew of peristalsis (p. 118). The combination of philological and medical expertise, coupled with the generous amount of translations, render this volume outstandingly rich in precious details and indispensable for anyone interested in Mesopotamian medicine. In a work of this size and scope there is inevitably room for dissenting interpretation (the authors modestly disavow definitiveness on p. xvii). The cogency of the medical identifications varies from case to case (for example, the identification of “If a woman gives birth and (the child) rejects its mother” as “autism”, p. 407, is dubious). Chapter 19, one of the most innovative sections…
Ancient Egyptian Literature, 2013
This chapter operates in the sphere of influence-free literary comparison, comparing what Babylon... more This chapter operates in the sphere of influence-free literary comparison, comparing what Babylonian and Middle Egyptian literature say about speech. It argues that in Middle Egyptian literature, speech is allotted an ideological charge which it lacks in Babylonian works. This asymmetry reveals differences in broader cultural attitudes which deserve attention from future researchers. Along the way, structural-stylistic and editorial-linguistic comments are made on individual compositions.
Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 2010
A conundrum that has divided students of Akkadian phonology is that of “doubly long syllables,” t... more A conundrum that has divided students of Akkadian phonology is that of “doubly long syllables,” that is, whether etymologically long vowels were shortened when they were found in a closed syllable (so ‘our house’ = bītni or bitni?, ‘sorceress’ = kassāptu or kassaptu?, etc.). The hypothesis of shortening is at least as old as Ungnad’s Babylonisch-Assyrische Grammatik1 and was adopted by numerous scholars, including E. Reiner in her A Linguistic Analysis of Akkadian.2 It was originally motivated by reference to other Semitic languages (notably Arabic and, to some extent, Hebrew), but the comparative evidence is not univocal, since it has been observed that certain Arabic dialects do not support the hypothesis of shorten-
Bibliotheca Orientalis, 2004
Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale, 2015
Tous droits réservés pour tous pays. La reproduction ou représentation de cet article, notamment ... more Tous droits réservés pour tous pays. La reproduction ou représentation de cet article, notamment par photocopie, n'est autorisée que dans les limites des conditions générales d'utilisation du site ou, le cas échéant, des conditions générales de la licence souscrite par votre établissement. Toute autre reproduction ou représentation, en tout ou partie, sous quelque forme et de quelque manière que ce soit, est interdite sauf accord préalable et écrit de l'éditeur, en dehors des cas prévus par la législation en vigueur en France. Il est précisé que son stockage dans une base de données est également interdit.
Le Journal des Médecines Cunéiformes 15, 2010
Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 100, 2010
KASKAL 7, 2010
It is natural, and well known, that the study of ancient literatures goes hand in hand with that ... more It is natural, and well known, that the study of ancient literatures goes hand in hand with that of the languages they are written in. This is most obvious for issues such as clarifying the meaning of words, or explaining the use of tenses. But the study of literature and the study of language can also interact in other, subtler ways. One such domain is the elucidation of the resonances mobilised by phrasing, i.e. determining what effects a particular choice of phrasing would have had on audiences, and how that choice was informed by conventions and habits in the various registers of the language. 1 We are here in the realm of idiom rather than grammar. A method with great potential in pursuing such issues is to search for patterns and tendencies in usage. If a pattern or tendency can be found in the way things are phrased, this encourages us to look closely at departures from it ('defamiliarised elements'), and to ask what effects these unusual formulations aimed to achieve. It is such a pattern, or tendency, which will form the subject of this paper: we will study the ways in which Babylonian literature expresses the notion of 'no-one'. More specifically, we will study how Babylonian deals with cases where, if one were to express the relevant meaning directly and prosaically, 2 'no-one' would be the subject of an assertive (i.e. non-precative, non-imperative) main 124 Martin Worthington clause. 3 (See numbers [1]-[6] below for examples of what we mean by this). 4 We will restrict our analysis to unilingual compositions, as bilingual ones could be influenced by Sumerian idiom and should therefore be studied separately. The reasons why the present analysis is confined to literature will become clear later. 1.1 mamma(n) ... ul and its 'alternatives' Babylonian's closest match to English 'no-one' as subject of an assertive main clause is the construction mamma(n) 5 ... ul (which translates super-literally as 'anyone ... not ...'). 6 For example: [1] mamman ul uwaššarakkiš super-literally: 'Anyone will not release her to you' i.e. 'No-one will release her to you' (ARM X (=Dossin-Finet 1978) 100: 24) The mamma(n) ... ul construction was not, however, the only way in which one could convey the idea of 'no-one' as subject of an assertive main clause. The other main ways of doing this were: a) A rhetorical question with 'who?' (mannu), e.g. 'Who can do X?' as a way of conveying the idea that 'No-one can do X'. 7 [2] mannu pâ iptil u\\ata uka##ir 'Who has (ever) twisted chaff (into a rope), tied barley together?' 3. Thus, for example, the rhetorical question 'Who is a great as you?' has the underlying prosaic sense 'Noone is as great as you', and accordingly it falls within the purview of our investigation, even though the question itself neither is, nor contains, an assertive main clause. 4. The reason for restricting ourselves to cases of this type is that it is only cases of this type which enable the full range of alternative ways of conveying the idea of 'no-one' as subject of an assertive main clause. For example, as seen in the previous footnote, an assertion such as 'No-one is as great as you' can be turned into a rhetorical question, but this is impossible with subordinate clauses, and (at least in Babylonian) unidiomatic with commands. 5. Our 'mamma(n)' subsumes what are historically two different words rather than variant forms of a single word: mamma (= man+ma) and mamman (= man+man). Nonetheless, at least in the contexts we shall study, literary Babylonian seems to have used them interchangeably, so it is practical to conflate them. The difference(s) between them will play no role in our analysis. 6. We will not consider cases in which mamma(n) is used attributively (super-literally meaning 'any'), e.g. ina sab sišu uzzašu ul ima~~aršu ilu mamman 'When he is angry, no god shall (super-literally: 'any god shall not') match his fury' (VII 154). 7. This is also common in personal names expressing the incomparability of a deity, e.g. mannum k ma iliya 'Who is like my god?' (i.e. 'No-one is like my god'). See Stamm 1939, § 33. If proof were needed of the functional equivalence of assertions with mamma(n) ... ul and questions with mannu, one could find it in Enuma eliš II 88, where the two expressions occur as variants of each other on different manuscripts of the same line. See below § 3.6, below. mamma(n) ... ul and its Alternatives in Babylonian Literature 125
Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 2010
A conundrum that has divided students of Akkadian phonology is that of "doubly long syllables," t... more A conundrum that has divided students of Akkadian phonology is that of "doubly long syllables," that is, whether etymologically long vowels were shortened when they were found in a closed syllable (so 'our house' = bītni or bitni?, 'sorceress' = kaššāptu or kaššaptu?, etc.). The hypothesis of shortening is at least as old as Ungnad's Babylonisch-Assyrische Grammatik 1 and was adopted by numerous scholars, including E. Reiner in her A Linguistic Analysis of Akkadian. 2 It was originally motivated by reference to other Semitic languages (notably Arabic and, to some extent, Hebrew), but the comparative evidence is not univocal, since it has been observed that certain Arabic dialects do not support the hypothesis of shorten-*Di erent drafts of this paper were read by N. J.
Bibliotheca Orientalis, 2004
AfO 53, 2015
Marcos Such-Gutiérrez, Das ra (2)-gaba-Amt anhand der schriftlichen Quellen des 3.
R. Enmarch and V. Lepper (eds), Ancient Egyptian Literature: Theory and Practice = Proceedings of the British Academy 188, 2013
Der Habitus anderer Kulturen und fremder Epochen ist. .. auf sprachlichem Gebiet nicht allein dur... more Der Habitus anderer Kulturen und fremder Epochen ist. .. auf sprachlichem Gebiet nicht allein durch lexikalische und grammatische, vor allem auch stilistische und semasiologische Studien zu erfassen. In noch viel elementarerer Weise äußert er sich im jeweiligen Verhältnis einer Zeit zum generellen Gebrauch von Sprache, zum Reden an sich; in der Einstellung und Wertung dieser zentralen Äußerung des Menschen, auf der, angefangen vom primitiven Tun zu mehreren bis zur Vermittlung sublimster Formen des Denkens und Glaubens, alle Kulturarbeit gründet, muß sich ja wohl vor allem der Charakter einer Zeit kundtun. 2 1 Assyriological abbreviations follow the Chicago Assyrian Dictionary (CAD). In keeping with Assyriological practice, italics in translations of ancient writings signify uncertainty, and '/' in transliterations and normalisations denotes line divisions. 2 G. Lanczkowski, 'Reden und Schweigen im ägyptischen verständnis, vornehmlich des Mittleren Reiches', in O. Firchow (ed.), Ägyptologische Studien (Berlin, 1955), 186. 3 There is inevitably some overlap between the notions of speech and language, and indeed some reflections in the ancient works (notably the Egyptian composition The Words of Khakheperreseneb) are perhaps better described as being about language. Nonetheless, in the main we will be concerned with statements about spoken language, i.e. speech.
E. Cancer-Kirschbaum and J. C. Johnson (eds), Endoding Metalinguistic Awareness: Ancient Mesopotamia and beyond (PeWe Verlag), 2019
The contributions assembled in this volume stem from a group of researchers who came together in ... more The contributions assembled in this volume stem from a group of researchers who came together in the context of the Berlin-based Collaborative Research Center 980 "Episteme in motion", generously funded by the German Research Foundation. The center investigates processes of knowledge change in European and non-European pre-modern cultures. The meeting of the scholars took place in November 2014 on invitation of Research Group A01 "Episteme als Konfigurationsprozess," which was focused on processes of transmission in the ancient Near East. During the first phase (2012-2016) the project team consisted of
A. Attia and G. Buisson (eds), Advances in Mesopotamian Medicine from Hammurabi to Hippocrates, 2009