Journals / Anadolu Araştırmaları / 2017 / Sayı: 20

RETHINKING: ON THE URARTIAN IVORY ARTEFACTS

Pages
135–159
Publication Date
2017-11-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Technical competence seen in these artefacts brings up the question of whether they came to the Urartian lands via commercial activities such as import and export between these small states or it was Urartu’s own development of turning this art into local production.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Öz Ivory carving, which is thought to enter Anatolia as a result of highly advanced commercial and cultural relations of the 1st Millennia BC, spread to a wider area and every region created their own school once it became a tradable product.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The ivory artefacts found in Urartian settlements such as Altıntepe, Toprakkale and Kamir Blur suggest that Urartu was not indifferent to ‘Ivory Artefact Carving’, which is also known to exist in the 1st Millennia BC in Syria, Iran, Assyria, Phoenicia, Phrygia, and some of the Neo-Hittite Kingdoms.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Technical competence seen in these artefacts brings up the question of whether they came to the Urartian lands via commercial activities such as import and export between these small states or it was Urartu’s own development of turning this art into local production.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Anahtar Kelimeler Urartu · Urartian Art · Ivory Artefacts

Özet

Öz Ivory carving, which is thought to enter Anatolia as a result of highly advanced commercial and cultural relations of the 1st Millennia BC, spread to a wider area and every region created their own school once it became a tradable product. The ivory artefacts found in Urartian settlements such as Altıntepe, Toprakkale and Kamir Blur suggest that Urartu was not indifferent to ‘Ivory Artefact Carving’, which is also known to exist in the 1st Millennia BC in Syria, Iran, Assyria, Phoenicia, Phrygia, and some of the Neo-Hittite Kingdoms. Technical competence seen in these artefacts brings up the question of whether they came to the Urartian lands via commercial activities such as import and export between these small states or it was Urartu’s own development of turning this art into local production.

🔖

Cite This Article

ALP, E. (2017). RETHINKING: ON THE URARTIAN IVORY ARTEFACTS. Anadolu Araştırmaları, Sayı: 20, 135–159. https://ajindex.com/articles/94459

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Barnett, R. D. 1950 “The Excavations of the British Museum at Toprakkale near Van”, Iraq XII/1: 1-43. 1957
  2. A Cataloque of the Nimrud Ivories, London. 1982
  3. Ancient Ivories in the Middle East, Qedem: 14 Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Bittel, K. 1957
  4. Boğazköy III, Berlin. Bossert, T. H. 1942
  5. Altanatolien, Berlin. Boysal, Y. 1961 “Aznavur’da Definecilerin Meydana Çıkardığı Urartu Eserleri”, Belleten 98: 199212. Burney, C.A. 1966 “A First Season of Excavation at the Urartian Citadel of Kayalıdere”, Anatolien Studies 16:55-111.
  6. Hermann, G. 2012 “Some Assyrianizing İvories Found at Nimrud: could they be Urartian?”, S. Kroll- C. Gruber- U. Hellwag- M. Roaf- P. Zimansky (eds), Biainili-Urartu (Leuven: Peeters), 339-350.
  7. Kantor, H. J. 1958 “The İvories from Floor 6 of Sounding IX”, C. W. McEwan (ed.), The Soundings at Tell Fakhariyah (OIP 79), Chicago. Kyrieleis, H. 1965 ‘Urartäische Elfenbeinrelielf aus Nimrud’, Berliner Jahrbuch für Vor und Frühgeschicte 5: 199-206
  8. Luckenbill, D. D. 1968 Ancient Records of Assyria and Babilony Vol. I, Chicago. Mallowan, M.E.L. 1966
  9. Nimrud and its Remains II, Aberdeen and Newyork. Özgüç, T. 1969 Altıntepe II: Mezarlar, Depo Binası ve Fildişi Eserler (Tombs, Storehouse and İvories), 5. Seri, no. 27, Ankara. 1966 Altıntepe I. Mimarlık Anıtları ve Duvar Resimleri/ Architectural Monuments and Wall Paintings, Ankara. 1959
  10. Kültepe-Kaniş, Asur Ticaret Kolonilerinin Merkezinde Yapılan Yeni Araştırmalar/ New Reseaches at the Centre of the Assyrian Trade Colonies, Ankara.
  11. Piotrovsky, B. B. 1967 Urartu: the Kingdom of Van and its Art, London. Riefstahl, E. 1943 “Doll, Queen or Goddess?”, Brooklyn Museum Journal 44:7-21.
  12. Sağlamtimur, H. 2009 “Urartu Krallığı’nda Fildişi Oymacılığı, Ayanis Kalesi Taş Kapları Ve Haldi Tapınağı”, H. Sağlamtimur- E. Abay- Z. Derin- A. Ü. Erdem- A. Batmaz- F.Dedeoğlu- M. Erdalkıran- M. B. Baştürk- E. Konakçı (eds), Altan Çilingiroğlu’na Armağan. Yukarı Denizin Kıyısında Urartu Krallığı’na Adanmış Bir Hayat / Studies in Honour of Altan Çilingiroğlu. A Life Dedicated to Urartu on the Shores of the Upper Sea, İstanbul: 485-499.
  13. Simpson, E. 2013 “An Early Anatolian Ivory Chair: The Pratt Ivories in the Metropolitan Museum of Art”, R.B. Koehl (ed.), In Amilla: The Quest for Excellence. Studies Presented to Guenter Kopcke in Celebration of His 75th Birthday, Philadelphia: INSTAP Academic Press: 221-262.
  14. Van Loon, M.N. 1966
  15. Urartian Art, Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch