Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 11 – uploaded by Joost Blasweiler

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Part of a map of Lorenzo Nigro 2007 (aside the spring: bublos and Jericho from village to town in the second half of the 4th mil. BC>). Hieroglyphs of Crete

Figure 11 Part of a map of Lorenzo Nigro 2007 (aside the spring: bublos and Jericho from village to town in the second half of the 4th mil. BC>). Hieroglyphs of Crete

Related Figures (19)

n the period before and after the destruction of the city Kanesh around 1700 BC many language: ind dialects were spoken in Anatolia. Anatolia was a very suitable land to develop languages and lialects in a quite isolated form or to maintain their isolated forms, because the many different andscapes are often separated by mountains and large rivers. Probably many unknown language vave existed in Anatolia. They were not written or their tracks have not been found yet. Anatolia ituated between Asia, Africa and Europe, so many different languages had a lot contact ypportunities. Peoples were not settling in Anatolia, because the ‘bridge function’ of the land, bu \natolia was a suitable land for agriculture and for tending a herd or cattle. Minerals and metals ould easily be found, as well. The tracks of the great languages groups like Indo European and emitic languages, next to the smaller ones like Hurrian, Proto- Etruscan and Hattic have been fol n Anatolia. The map (a co-production with Alessio Palmisano) shows the language situation short ifter the destruction of the karum and the city of Kanesh around 1700 BC. after the destruction of the karum and the city of Kanesh around 1700 BC.
n the period before and after the destruction of the city Kanesh around 1700 BC many language: ind dialects were spoken in Anatolia. Anatolia was a very suitable land to develop languages and lialects in a quite isolated form or to maintain their isolated forms, because the many different andscapes are often separated by mountains and large rivers. Probably many unknown language vave existed in Anatolia. They were not written or their tracks have not been found yet. Anatolia ituated between Asia, Africa and Europe, so many different languages had a lot contact ypportunities. Peoples were not settling in Anatolia, because the ‘bridge function’ of the land, bu \natolia was a suitable land for agriculture and for tending a herd or cattle. Minerals and metals ould easily be found, as well. The tracks of the great languages groups like Indo European and emitic languages, next to the smaller ones like Hurrian, Proto- Etruscan and Hattic have been fol n Anatolia. The map (a co-production with Alessio Palmisano) shows the language situation short ifter the destruction of the karum and the city of Kanesh around 1700 BC. after the destruction of the karum and the city of Kanesh around 1700 BC.
A map of the discourse of the Festvortrag von Prof. Dr. H.C. Manfred Korfmann Troia im Lichte der neuen Forschungsergebnisse 12-11-2003. © Fundkonzentrationen zwischen Kilikien und der Troas in der Fruhen Bronzezeit -T. Efe. © Studia Troica: The Late Bronze Age Citadel and the Lower City area showing the course of the fortification ditch as verified by 2008. Preliminary Report on Work at Troia 2007 and 2008 Peter Jablonka und Ernst Pernicka page 18: “The fortification ditch, which was laid out in Middle Troia VI and filled up by the end of Late Troia VI, continues to the north-east. Hence it is becoming ever more likely that it also encloses the city area in the east. Its course has by now been verified by magnetic prospection and excavations in ten different places toa length of 830 metres (Fig. 20). The area it enclosed was probably larger than hitherto suspected and amounted to about 35 ha”.
A map of the discourse of the Festvortrag von Prof. Dr. H.C. Manfred Korfmann Troia im Lichte der neuen Forschungsergebnisse 12-11-2003. © Fundkonzentrationen zwischen Kilikien und der Troas in der Fruhen Bronzezeit -T. Efe. © Studia Troica: The Late Bronze Age Citadel and the Lower City area showing the course of the fortification ditch as verified by 2008. Preliminary Report on Work at Troia 2007 and 2008 Peter Jablonka und Ernst Pernicka page 18: “The fortification ditch, which was laid out in Middle Troia VI and filled up by the end of Late Troia VI, continues to the north-east. Hence it is becoming ever more likely that it also encloses the city area in the east. Its course has by now been verified by magnetic prospection and excavations in ten different places toa length of 830 metres (Fig. 20). The area it enclosed was probably larger than hitherto suspected and amounted to about 35 ha”.
Comparative size Troy in relation to other cities of Anatolia and the Near East (© Joachim Latacz 2004,Troy and Homer)
Comparative size Troy in relation to other cities of Anatolia and the Near East (© Joachim Latacz 2004,Troy and Homer)
Emin Bilgig 1954, Die Einheimischen Appellativa der Kappadokischen Texte und ihre bedeutung fiir die Anatolischen Sprachen- Ankara University Dil ve Tarih-Cografya). Also Old Assyrian had some influence on Nisili and other Anatolian languages- Veysel Donbaz 1996, Old Assyrian influence on the Hittite onomasticon and toponyms, Anadolu Arastirmalarn 14(1996): 229-241. Nesa: In the territory of Nesa on the eastside of the Kizilirmak river Nisili (Hittite) was generally spoken in1700 BC. Luwian and Assyrian are attested in the trade-city Kanesh, as well. Hurrian was probably not a often spoken language in Kanesh, but also Hurrian merchants did had trade relations with the Assyrians in Kanesh and controlled a substantial part of the trade. Intriguing are the names of King Zuzu of Kanesh c. 1730 BC and his Chief of the royal court IStar-ebri, in which a Hurrian origin seems to appear. However they are just usual Kussaran personal names. The scribes of Hittite have mentioned frequently the language of the Kingdom Hattusa: “*ni-si-li or na-a-si-li in the language of Nesa or Ne-es- um-ni-li in the manner of the Nesites. Ten thousands texts parts with Nisili has been found in Hattusa, Ortak6y (Sabinuwa), Masat (Tapikka) and Kusakli (Saressa). Some texts with Nisili has been found in Syria (Ugarit and Emar) and in Amarna in Egypt. In the Old Assyrian texts of Kanesh (Nesa) are just a few words of Nesili attested, but many personal names and place- names indicate Nesili ,Luwian and other Anatolian origins.
Emin Bilgig 1954, Die Einheimischen Appellativa der Kappadokischen Texte und ihre bedeutung fiir die Anatolischen Sprachen- Ankara University Dil ve Tarih-Cografya). Also Old Assyrian had some influence on Nisili and other Anatolian languages- Veysel Donbaz 1996, Old Assyrian influence on the Hittite onomasticon and toponyms, Anadolu Arastirmalarn 14(1996): 229-241. Nesa: In the territory of Nesa on the eastside of the Kizilirmak river Nisili (Hittite) was generally spoken in1700 BC. Luwian and Assyrian are attested in the trade-city Kanesh, as well. Hurrian was probably not a often spoken language in Kanesh, but also Hurrian merchants did had trade relations with the Assyrians in Kanesh and controlled a substantial part of the trade. Intriguing are the names of King Zuzu of Kanesh c. 1730 BC and his Chief of the royal court IStar-ebri, in which a Hurrian origin seems to appear. However they are just usual Kussaran personal names. The scribes of Hittite have mentioned frequently the language of the Kingdom Hattusa: “*ni-si-li or na-a-si-li in the language of Nesa or Ne-es- um-ni-li in the manner of the Nesites. Ten thousands texts parts with Nisili has been found in Hattusa, Ortak6y (Sabinuwa), Masat (Tapikka) and Kusakli (Saressa). Some texts with Nisili has been found in Syria (Ugarit and Emar) and in Amarna in Egypt. In the Old Assyrian texts of Kanesh (Nesa) are just a few words of Nesili attested, but many personal names and place- names indicate Nesili ,Luwian and other Anatolian origins.
Rural and Urban Zones is Syro-Mesopotamia third and seconds millenniums - Giorgio Buccellati 1992, Ebla and the Amorites, Eblaitica Vol. 3, 92
Rural and Urban Zones is Syro-Mesopotamia third and seconds millenniums - Giorgio Buccellati 1992, Ebla and the Amorites, Eblaitica Vol. 3, 92
Figure 4. Developmental stages of Early North Semitic, Giorgio Buccellati 1992, Ebla and the Amorites, Eblaitica Vol.3, 92 (R.M. Whiting 2004 , Amorite Tribes and Nations of Second-Millennium Western Asia, CANE).
Figure 4. Developmental stages of Early North Semitic, Giorgio Buccellati 1992, Ebla and the Amorites, Eblaitica Vol.3, 92 (R.M. Whiting 2004 , Amorite Tribes and Nations of Second-Millennium Western Asia, CANE).
Schematic Climatological Map of Syro-Mesopotamia (black dots are major urban centers) Buccellati 1992:89
Schematic Climatological Map of Syro-Mesopotamia (black dots are major urban centers) Buccellati 1992:89
Igor M. Diakonoff 1968, The Pre-history of the Armenian People.
Igor M. Diakonoff 1968, The Pre-history of the Armenian People.
city Samuha is situated at the west side of the Marassantiya, with a view to the river. Kingdom made a difference between the low land along the river and the upper land. The
city Samuha is situated at the west side of the Marassantiya, with a view to the river. Kingdom made a difference between the low land along the river and the upper land. The
Luwian inhabitants were already present in Kanesh, according to the Old Assyrian texts. Luwians ha at that time great cultural and political power in central and southern Anatolia *. Professor Craig Melchert reports that the linguistic influence already started in prehistory, thus before the 2° millennium. Petra Goedegebuure, , has examined the influence of Nesili and Luwian on the Hattic language. In an impressive article “Central Anatolian Languages and Language Communities in the Colony Period: A Luwian-Hattian Symbiosis and the independent Hittites”, 2008 Phians Cx! NINO Leiden 137 180. She reports that Hattian underwent a contact-induced change under the heavy influence of an Indo-European language. This linguistic change cannot have been occasioned by Nesili >. The most probable scenario for the change is, according to Petra Goedegebuure, that, before king Anitta’s conquest of Hattusa, quite a few people with an Indo-European language had already migrated to Luwian inhabitants were already present in Kanesh, according to the Old Assyrian texts. Luwians had PuruShanda was conquered in the time of Labarna | of the Old Kingdom, therfore the heartland of the Luwians became part of the Kingdom of Hatti. In the text of the old laws the land of Pala mentioned is also as a discrete entity, separate from the land of Hatti and not belonging to an enemy land. In Pala Palaic was spoken, a language closely related to Nesili and Luwian. Pala does not appear in many clauses of the laws , leading Trevor Bryce to note that Pala probably lost her independence in the early history of the Old Kingdom (Trevor Bryce, “History” in The Luwians, 2003: 29). In the later laws the special relationship between Hatti and Luwiya was preserved, when compared with the other Anatolian territories. Sometime after the beginning of the Old Kingdom, where kings with mainly Hattian names appear, more kings with Luwian names appear. Furthermore, Nesili and Luwian influenced each other linguistically. The scholar E. Rieken * shows how structural the influence of Luwian was on the Nesili language. Petra Goedegebuure of the University of Chicago’s Oriental Institute stated that, if that was true, then a large portion of Luwian speakers had to be present in the area of Hattusa in the Old Kingdom.
Luwian inhabitants were already present in Kanesh, according to the Old Assyrian texts. Luwians ha at that time great cultural and political power in central and southern Anatolia *. Professor Craig Melchert reports that the linguistic influence already started in prehistory, thus before the 2° millennium. Petra Goedegebuure, , has examined the influence of Nesili and Luwian on the Hattic language. In an impressive article “Central Anatolian Languages and Language Communities in the Colony Period: A Luwian-Hattian Symbiosis and the independent Hittites”, 2008 Phians Cx! NINO Leiden 137 180. She reports that Hattian underwent a contact-induced change under the heavy influence of an Indo-European language. This linguistic change cannot have been occasioned by Nesili >. The most probable scenario for the change is, according to Petra Goedegebuure, that, before king Anitta’s conquest of Hattusa, quite a few people with an Indo-European language had already migrated to Luwian inhabitants were already present in Kanesh, according to the Old Assyrian texts. Luwians had PuruShanda was conquered in the time of Labarna | of the Old Kingdom, therfore the heartland of the Luwians became part of the Kingdom of Hatti. In the text of the old laws the land of Pala mentioned is also as a discrete entity, separate from the land of Hatti and not belonging to an enemy land. In Pala Palaic was spoken, a language closely related to Nesili and Luwian. Pala does not appear in many clauses of the laws , leading Trevor Bryce to note that Pala probably lost her independence in the early history of the Old Kingdom (Trevor Bryce, “History” in The Luwians, 2003: 29). In the later laws the special relationship between Hatti and Luwiya was preserved, when compared with the other Anatolian territories. Sometime after the beginning of the Old Kingdom, where kings with mainly Hattian names appear, more kings with Luwian names appear. Furthermore, Nesili and Luwian influenced each other linguistically. The scholar E. Rieken * shows how structural the influence of Luwian was on the Nesili language. Petra Goedegebuure of the University of Chicago’s Oriental Institute stated that, if that was true, then a large portion of Luwian speakers had to be present in the area of Hattusa in the Old Kingdom.
Ancient East Anatolia and North Iran.
Ancient East Anatolia and North Iran.
ca. 2000 AD The Kurdish language belongs to the Indo-European family of languages. Kurdish dialects are members of the northwest branch of the Iranian languages. Kurdish is related to the language of the old Meden and Parthen en to the current Beloetsji. | don’t know, who is the (Scandinavian) author of this map .(the names of Irak and Iran have to be changed their places in the map).
ca. 2000 AD The Kurdish language belongs to the Indo-European family of languages. Kurdish dialects are members of the northwest branch of the Iranian languages. Kurdish is related to the language of the old Meden and Parthen en to the current Beloetsji. | don’t know, who is the (Scandinavian) author of this map .(the names of Irak and Iran have to be changed their places in the map).
© Martin Kimmel Iranian languages- 2006.
© Martin Kimmel Iranian languages- 2006.
Related topics:
HistoryCultural HistoryCultural GeographyHistorical GeographyEgyptologyMaritime ArchaeologyNear Eastern ArchaeologyLanguages and LinguisticsNear Eastern StudiesAssyriology
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved