Cécile Michel offers an overview of the vagaries of cuneiform preservation.
Certainly our knowledge of Assyria - and of the reception-history of older lore in Assyrian society - is badly distorted by several accidents. One is that Assyria was sacked in antiquity, with much of its fabled museum carted downriver to Babylon. Another was... modern archaeology: the French carted hundreds of crates down the same river (Tigris) which pirates then hit at Qurnah. The pirates didn't find much gold, so settled for the crates: they then dumped the artwork and any cuneiform into the swamp.
As bad as that disaster was, I don't know that those excavators were shifting that many clay tablets. Those cargoes were meant for European museums, for display more than for research. What absolutely was being shifted were inscribed objects (some claimed precious, although I doubt the pirates would have skipped them) and bas-reliefs. These latter will be monumental stelae. Think: Sargon II's propaganda, assuming he hadn't made copies elsewhere. I've suspected the earlier sackings had inflicted the bulk of the damage here.
The main reason, I think, for our gaps in this culture is the sheer multitude of fragmentary tablets, not nearly so romantic as might be on-display. We lack the number of Akkadian (mostly) readers to sift through all this stuff. The Oxyrhynchus researchers are suffering the same problem out West, in Greek and Coptic. Hence why we're still piecing together legends, yea even unto Babylon.
No comments:
Post a Comment