The site of Karkemish has not given overly abundant glyptic documents from the Iron Age thus far. If one excludes the Yunus necropolis (Boardman–Moorey 1986), from the site itself few seals from that period have been published (Hogarth 1920: figs. 98, 106; Woolley 1921: pl. 269; Woolley–Barnett 1952: figs. 74, 75, 76, 81, 83). The Turco-Italian excavations have yielded three specimens which on the grounds of their diverse stratification, iconography and chronology are of great interest for aiding in reconstructing the cultural history of this town from a glyptic point of view. In fact, they highlight a chronological pattern of importation of foreign imagery extending from the earlier Neo-Assyrian period to the final phases of Neo-Assyrian occupation of the site down to the Persian period (in a sequence which archaeologically we may equate with the Iron II, IIIA and IIIC phases).
Three Glyptic Documents from Karkemish
Pizzimenti S
2014-01-01
Abstract
The site of Karkemish has not given overly abundant glyptic documents from the Iron Age thus far. If one excludes the Yunus necropolis (Boardman–Moorey 1986), from the site itself few seals from that period have been published (Hogarth 1920: figs. 98, 106; Woolley 1921: pl. 269; Woolley–Barnett 1952: figs. 74, 75, 76, 81, 83). The Turco-Italian excavations have yielded three specimens which on the grounds of their diverse stratification, iconography and chronology are of great interest for aiding in reconstructing the cultural history of this town from a glyptic point of view. In fact, they highlight a chronological pattern of importation of foreign imagery extending from the earlier Neo-Assyrian period to the final phases of Neo-Assyrian occupation of the site down to the Persian period (in a sequence which archaeologically we may equate with the Iron II, IIIA and IIIC phases).I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.