The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State
13 Aug 1999-
TL;DR: Elam: what, when, where, environment, climate, and resources as mentioned in this paper The immediate precursors of Elam 4. Elam and Awan 5. The dynasty of Shimashki 6. The kingdom of Susa and Anshan 8. The Neo-Elamite period 9. Elymais 11. Eemen under the Sasanians and beyond 12. Conclusion
Abstract: 1. Elam: what, when, where? 2. Environment, climate, and resources 3. The immediate precursors of Elam 4. Elam and Awan 5. The dynasty of Shimashki 6. The grand regents of Elam and Susa 7. The kingdom of Susa and Anshan 8. The Neo-Elamite period 9. Elam in the Achaemenid empire 10. Elymais 11. Elam under the Sasanians and beyond 12. Conclusion.
•01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: Yoffee as discussed by the authors argues that early states were not uniformly constituted bureaucratic and regional entities, but had slaves and soldiers, priests and priestesses, peasants and prostitutes, merchants and craftsmen.
Abstract: In this ground-breaking work, Norman Yoffee shatters the prevailing myths underpinning our understanding of the evolution of early civilisations. He counters the emphasis in traditional scholarship on the rule of 'godly' and despotic male leaders and challenges the conventional view that early states were uniformly constituted bureaucratic and regional entities. Instead, by illuminating the role of slaves and soldiers, priests and priestesses, peasants and prostitutes, merchants and craftsmen, Yoffee depicts an evolutionary process centred on the concerns of everyday life. Drawing on evidence from ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, China and Mesoamerica, the author explores the variety of trajectories followed by ancient states, from birth to collapse, and explores the social processes that shape any account of the human past. This book offers a bold new interpretation of social evolutionary theory, and as such it is essential reading for any student or scholar with an interest in the emergence of complex society.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a new archaeological synthesis concerning the earliest formation of mobile pastoralist economies across central Eurasia, arguing that Eurasian steppe pastoralism developed along distinct local trajectories in the western, central, and (south)eastern steppe, sparking the development of regional networks of interaction in the late fourth and third millennia BC.
Abstract: In this article I present a new archaeological synthesis concerning the earliest formation of mobile pastoralist economies across central Eurasia. I argue that Eurasian steppe pastoralism developed along distinct local trajectories in the western, central, and (south)eastern steppe, sparking the development of regional networks of interaction in the late fourth and third millennia BC. The “Inner Asian Mountain Corridor” exemplifies the relationship between such incipient regional networks and the process of economic change in the eastern steppe territory. The diverse regional innovations, technologies, and ideologies evident across Eurasia in the mid-third millennium BC are cast as the building blocks of a unique political economy shaped by “nonuniform” institutional alignments among steppe populations throughout the second millennium BC. This theoretical model illustrates how regional channels of interaction between distinct societies positioned Eurasian mobile pastoralists as key players in wide-scale i...
TL;DR: Yoffee as mentioned in this paper argues that the focus on the origins of the state has stifled rather than stimulated our understanding of early state development, and stresses the diversity of the early Mesopotamian state.
Abstract: For more than a century, archaeologists have frequently been drawn to understand the human past in broadly evolutionary terms, applying Darwinian thinking to the development of human societies. The unilinear models of human development that often result typically regard the state as the culmination of human progress, the end-point of a journey through intervening stages of bands, tribes and chiefdoms. Neo-evolutionary thinking was especially prevalent from the 1940s onwards, in the work of Julian Steward and others writing on the origins of the state. In the volume reviewed, Norman Yoffee challenges the former dominance of the neo-evolutionary approach, arguing that over the past half century it has stifled rather than stimulated our understanding of early state development.Yoffee contests the idea that states develop through a series of programmatic stages from less complex kinds of society. Instead, he stresses the diversity of the archaic state, drawing heavily on his specialist knowledge (drawn from texts as well as archaeology) of early Mesopotamia. Here we see city-state societies in which heterarchies play a role alongside hierarchies, and in which the varieties of lived experience varied considerably from place to place, even though all may at some level be considered to have been part of a shared Mesopotamian civilization.Yoffee's book is not, however, concerned solely with Mesopotamia; far from it, he draws comparative evidence from Egypt, South and East Asia and Central and South America to demonstrate the diversity and fluidity of the entities he is describing. Few of them conform to models that might be drawn from ethnography, and each state may in many ways be considered unique. Yet in a broader perspective, all states arise through a widespread pattern of change that has taken place in human society since the end of the Pleistocene in which individuals and groups have competed for control of resources.Yoffee concludes that ‘The central myth about the study of the earliest states ... is that there was something that could be called the archaic state, and that all of the earliest states were simply variations on this model’. The methodological alternative is to consider each society (of whatever type) as individual and unique, and constantly in a state of flux. In this review feature we invite a series of archaeologists specializing in the study of early states to address this and other issues raised by this important book. We begin, however, with an opening statement from the author himself.
TL;DR: Oppenheim as mentioned in this paper used his intimate knowledge of long-dead languages to put together a distinctively personal picture of the Mesopotamians of some three thousand years ago, and after his death, Erica Reiner used the author's outline to complete the revisions he had begun.
Abstract: \"This splendid work of scholarship . . . sums up with economy and power all that the written record so far deciphered has to tell about the ancient and complementary civilizations of Babylon and Assyria.\" Edward B. Garside, \"New York Times Book Review\" Ancient Mesopotamia the area now called Iraq has received less attention than ancient Egypt and other long-extinct and more spectacular civilizations. But numerous small clay tablets buried in the desert soil for thousands of years make it possible for us to know more about the people of ancient Mesopotamia than any other land in the early Near East. Professor Oppenheim, who studied these tablets for more than thirty years, used his intimate knowledge of long-dead languages to put together a distinctively personal picture of the Mesopotamians of some three thousand years ago. Following Oppenheim's death, Erica Reiner used the author's outline to complete the revisions he had begun. \"To any serious student of Mesopotamian civilization, this is one of the most valuable books ever written.\" Leonard Cottrell, \"Book Week\" \"Leo Oppenheim has made a bold, brave, pioneering attempt to present a synthesis of the vast mass of philological and archaeological data that have accumulated over the past hundred years in the field of Assyriological research.\" Samuel Noah Kramer, \"Archaeology\" A. Leo Oppenheim, one of the most distinguished Assyriologists of our time, was editor in charge of the \"Assyrian Dictionary\" of the Oriental Institute and John A. Wilson Professor of Oriental Studies at the University of Chicago.\
29 Apr 1983
TL;DR: This article explored examples of this process of invention -the creation of Welsh Scottish national culture, the elaboration of British royal rituals in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the origins of imperial ritual in British India and Africa, and the attempts by radical movements to develop counter-traditions of their own.
Abstract: Many of the traditions which we think of as very ancient in their origins were not in fact sanctioned by long usage over the centuries, but were invented comparative recently. This book explores examples of this process of invention - the creation of Welsh Scottish 'national culture'; the elaboration of British royal rituals in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries; the origins of imperial ritual in British India and Africa; and the attempts by radical movements to develop counter-traditions of their own. This book addresses the complex interaction of past and present, bringing together historicans and anthropologists in a fascinating study of ritual and symbolism which possess new questions for the understanding of our history.
TL;DR: In this article, leading historians, anthropologists and ethnographers explore the relationship between collective memory and national identity in diverse cultures throughout history, placing commemorations in their historical settings, the contributors disclose the contested nature of these monuments by showing how groups and individuals struggle to shape the past to their own ends.
Abstract: In this volume, leading historians, anthropologists and ethnographers explore the relationship between collective memory and national identity in diverse cultures throughout history. Placing commemorations in their historical settings, the contributors disclose the contested nature of these monuments by showing how groups and individuals struggle to shape the past to their own ends. The volume is introduced by John Gillis's broad overview of the development of public memory in relation to the history of the nation-state. Other contributions address the usefulness of identity as a cross-cultural concept, the connection between identity, heritage, and history, national memory in early modern England, commemoration in Cleveland, the museum and the politics of social control in modern Iraq and many other issues.
01 Jan 1969
TL;DR: In this paper, an important change in subsistence pattern, midway through the Upper Palaeolithic in the Near East, set the stage for domestication of plants, and a possible mechanism, a model of population pressure and disequilibrium relative to environmental carrying capacity, was described.
Abstract: This chapter discusses an important change in subsistence pattern, midway through the Upper Palaeolithic in the Near East, set the stage for domestication of plants. A basic problem in human ecology is why cultures change their modes of subsistence at all. The chapter describes, one possible mechanism, a model of population pressure and disequilibrium relative to environmental carrying capacity and draws from enthnographic data on hunting and gathering groups. It examines the equilibrium model proposed by L. R. Binford as a means of explaining post-Pleistocene changes in the archaeological record. This model will be used to offer tentative explanations for subsistence changes which took place in the Near East at the three critical points mentioned: the Upper Palaeolithic, the beginning of domestication, and the beginnings of irrigation. The chapter also describes advance for viewing the rest of South-western Asia through Iranian eyes.
01 Jan 1995
Related Papers (5)
01 Jan 2019
01 Jan 1979
01 Jan 2003