Mari Texts Research Articles

Characterizing a Middle Bronze palatial wine cellar from Tel Kabri, Israel.

Scholars have for generations recognized the importance of wine production, distribution, and consumption in relation to second millennium BC palatial complexes in the Mediterranean and Near East. However, direct archaeological evidence has rarely been offered, despite the prominence of ancient viticulture in administrative clay tablets, visual media, and various forms of documentation. Tartaric and syringic acids, along with evidence for resination, have been identified in ancient ceramics, but until now the archaeological contexts behind these sporadic discoveries had been uneven and vague, precluding definitive conclusions about the nature of ancient viticulture. The situation has now changed. During the 2013 excavation season of the Kabri Archaeological Project, a rare opportunity materialized when forty large storage vessels were found in situ in an enclosed room located to the west of the central courtyard within the Middle Bronze Age Canaanite palace. A comprehensive program of organic residue analysis has now revealed that all of the relatively uniform jars contain evidence for wine. Furthermore, the enclosed context inherent to a singular intact wine cellar presented an unprecedented opportunity for a scientifically intensive study, allowing for the detection of subtle differences in the ingredients or additives within similar wine jars of apparently the same vintage. Additives seem to have included honey, storax resin, terebinth resin, cedar oil, cyperus, juniper, and perhaps even mint, myrtle, or cinnamon, all or most of which are attested in the 18th century BC Mari texts from Mesopotamia and the 15th century BC Ebers Papyrus from Egypt. These additives suggest a sophisticated understanding of the botanical landscape and the pharmacopeic skills necessary to produce a complex beverage that balanced preservation, palatability, and psychoactivity. This new study has resulted in insights unachievable in the past, which contribute to a greater understanding not only of ancient viticulture but also of Canaanite palatial economy.

The Siege of Razama – An example of aggressive defence in Old-Babylonian times

This paper analyses the aggressive defence practised by the inhabitants of Razama during the siege of the city by an army led by Atamrum in 1765 BCE, as it is described in several Mari texts. Special attention is payed to the reconstruction of the defensive action described in ARM 14 104+, a text which reflects the expertise of the Razameans in this kind of military action as well as the inability of the besiegers to counteract it.

マリ文書における ha. na の解釈をめぐって

The term “ha. na” found in the Mari texts from the Old Babylonian period has been interpreted as a proper noun referring to a “Hanean”. However, in his paper of 1992, J. -M. Durand concluded that ha. na did not designate a certain ethnicity, but was used as a common noun meaning “nomad” or “bedouin”. Since then his explanotion has been generally accepted. Meanwhile D. E. Fleming took ha. na as Sim'al pastoralists, and W. Heimpel took ha.na in three ways: (1) the ancestral tribal unit, (2) nomad or pastoralists, and (3) Sim'al pastoralists. But is it possible to consider ha.na as meaning a “nomad” or “bedouin” or “Sim'al pastoralist”?As Heimpel wrote, it is clear from a number of the kispum-rituals and the Assyrian King List that ha. na designates a certain group of tribes claiming common ancestry among the northern Mesopotamian nomads (e. g., hana Yamin (a), hana Sim'al, pursat hanû). I think it probable that throught this consciousness of unity, the nomads in northern Mesopotamia called themselves “Haneans”. Namely, the term ha. na was the general term for those nomadic tribes: accordingly, the term ha. na must be considered as a proper noun, “Hanean”.In the administrative texts of Mari, the majority of names of tribes (Yamin and Sim'al) and of clans (ga'um) appear in designations of individuals. ha. na also appears thus. However, in about half of the texts, ha. na does not refer to personal identity, especially when mentioned among occupational names. In these cases, ha. na is clearly meant to be a common noun, a “pastoralist”. Moreover, the texts of tebibtum (census) employ the term ha. na to designate nomads in general in the target region of the census.From these observations, I argue that the term ha.na was originally used as proper noun referring to a “Hanean” and that from it a common noun was derived with the meaning “pastoralist”. However, it does not seem that the word meant a “Sim'al pastoralist”.

The Expression ûqsāmîm b e yâdâm (Numbers 22:7) in Light of Divinatory Practices from Mari

The expression ûqsāmîm b e yâdâm (Num 22:7) has been explained variously as "diviner's salary," "divinatory equipment," or "power of divination in their hands." None of these interpretations has been accepted universally. Parallels from newly published and republished Mari texts (Durand AEM I/1) suggest two new possibilities. The q e sāmîm may be substitutes for Israel upon which divination is to be performed. More likely, they are models of omens concerning Israel which are dispatched to Balaam for an expert, more advantageous opinion. The biblical q e sāmîm are functionally and semantically equivalent to the Mari têrētum which are baked and sent from one diviner to another for authoritative interpretation.

Some Remarks on the Iltani Archive from Tell al Rimah

The so-called “Iltani archive” is not only one of the few cuneiform archives we know which belonged to a woman, but also so far the only larger group of Old Babylonian texts from northern Mesopotamia which may essentially date to a period after the sack of Mari, when Babylon gained ascendancy in the north, and is therefore of considerable interest. In spite of the excellent editio princeps of the archive and admirable efforts of its reviewers, many difficulties of interpretation, even with regard to quite basic issues, persist, mainly because the letters in Iltani's archive are too short and cursive to permit a coherent reconstruction of its historical context. Building on previous analyses this paper discusses possible solutions to some of these difficulties, and although necessarily of a tentative character, the following brief remarks may hopefully further the understanding of this interesting archive and its setting. With its more than 200 texts the Iltani archive is by far the largest group among the Old Babylonian texts found at Rimah. The archive consists of 151 letters, 50 administrative texts, 1 school text and a few fragments found in two rooms, VI and XIV, of the phase 3b palace. As shown by her seal inscription Iltani was a daughter of Samu-Addu, king of Karana in the time of the “Assyrian interregnum” at Mari, and married to the diviner Aqba-Hammu, known from the Mari texts to have been a highly placed official under Askur-Addu, king of Karana during the latter part of Zimri-Lim's reign, and presumably Iltani's brother. It is generally agreed that her archive must date mainly after the fall of Mari, at a time when Hammurapi of Babylon had extended his power over much of Upper Mesopotamia, and Aqba-Hammu ruled Karana as a vassal of Babylon. Zimri-Lim and Askur-Addu are never mentioned in the texts, Aqba-Hammu, in one of his two extant seal inscriptions declared himself “servant of Hammurapi” and brought tribute to Babylon, local scribes in the Karana area used “southern” styles, and finally many of the letters in the archive generally show quite clearly that the Sinjar area now was linked with Southern Mesopotamia.

Thoughts of Zimri-Lim

A scholar who has been immersed in the study of the Mari texts for twenty years presents an imaginative portrait of the last king to occupy the famous palace. This unique work also provides extensive supporting information, including many texts translated into English for the first time.

Mari, the Bible, and the Northwest Semitic World

The Mari texts, when viewed in the proper context, can help us understand the oldest traditions of the Bible.

マリにおける公的祭儀と民間信仰 -パンテオンに関連にして-

This paper is a comparative study of the official and popular pantheons of Old Babylonian Mari. The official pantheon is known from the so called Mari “Pantheon List, ” while the popular pantheon is considered to be reflected in the configuration of deities mentioned in the Mari personal names. Of some 130 deities known from the thus far published OB Mari texts, 20 who are the most important either in the official pantheon or in the popular pantheon are chosen for this study (References are made to other deities as well.). These 20 deities neatly fall into three distinct groups. Addu, Dagan, Šamaš and Ea of Group A are most important in both pantheons. Here, the two pantheons are in complete agreement. Diritum, Belet-ekallim, Itur-Mer, Nergal, Ninhursagga and Annunitum of Group B are highly regarded in the official pantheon, but are almost totally unknown in the popular pantheon. Most of these deities are well established members of the Babylonian pantheon. No West Semitic deities are included in this group. In a sharp contrast with this, El/Il, Sin, Ištar, Annu (m), Hammu, Erah, Lim, Išhara, Amum and Mamma of Group C are either completely ignored or poorly regarded in the official pantheon, but are quite popular in the popular pantheon. To be noted are the four West Semitic deities found in this group. Thus, differences between the two pantheons are clearly indicated by Groups B and C. Historically speaking, Groups A and B show no break between the Ur III period and the OB period. However, the four West Semitic deities in Group C appearing for the first time in OB Mari indicate a break between the two periods. This “discrepancy” can be explained by the double structure of Mari population consisting mainly of the Akkadian population and the new Amorite population.

マリにおける楽器 kinnaru とウガリトにおける knr

C. H. Gordon holds that the early Hebrews and the early Greeks share a common East Mediterranean heritage. We can find the parallels that form the core of his “Before the Bible” fit into a historical frame work in the wake of the Amarna Age during the closing centuries of the second millennium.However, it is quite true that prior to the Amarna Age (i. e. before 1400 B. C.) a kind of international order of commerce was formed to let Canaanite, Syrian, Mesopotamian, Anatolian, Aegean and the other cultures meet around the East Mediterranean. That is what we can make sure of according to Mari texts in the eighteenth century B. C.Mari texts tell us that such international order of commerce had been formed during the beginning centuries of the second millennium before the Amarna Age synthesis which Gordon called appeared.Some aspects of the common culture we notice in the areas mentioned above. Musical instrument “kinnaru” is one of them.

Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study. Herbert Bardwell Huffmon

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewsAmorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study. Herbert Bardwell Huffmon Michael C. AstourMichael C. Astour Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Journal of Near Eastern Studies Volume 26, Number 3Jul., 1967 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/371915 Views: 1Total views on this site Copyright 1967 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study

Book Review| September 01 1966 Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study, Herbert B. Huffmon. M. Noth M. Noth Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Journal of Biblical Literature (1966) 85 (3): 365–368. https://doi.org/10.2307/3264256 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation M. Noth; Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study. Journal of Biblical Literature 1 September 1966; 85 (3): 365–368. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/3264256 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All Scholarly Publishing CollectiveSBL PressJournal of Biblical Literature Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Copyright 1966 Society of Biblical Literature1966 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study

Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts: A Structural and Lexical Study

REMARKS ON THE SIXTH VOLUME OF MARI TEXTS

Journal Article REMARKS ON THE SIXTH VOLUME OF MARI TEXTS Get access MARTIN NOTH MARTIN NOTH Bonn Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Journal of Semitic Studies, Volume 1, Issue 4, October 1956, Pages 322–333, https://doi.org/10.1093/jss/1.4.322 Published: 01 October 1956