No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 April 2016
The Near East glyptic collection in the Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore, has been virtually unknown except for the original ‘Tarkondemos’ seal rediscovered and published by Dr. Dorothy K. Hill (Archiv Orientálni, IX, 1937, 307–10). The collection, though numbering only 128 pieces, is interestingly varied. Unfortunately, there is no record of where any of the seals were found; all were purchased from dealers.
The plaster impressions that have found their way into the Walters Art Gallery are included in this study. No information regarding the whereabouts of the originals is available.
The literature on the glyptic art of Mesopotamia and the surrounding countries is large and very scattered. No one has attempted to compile a complete bibliography, and the best available list of publications is Von der Osten's. At present there is much scholarly activity focussed on the study of seals, as is exemplified by the recent and the forthcoming contributions of Frankfort, Herzfeld, Van Buren, et al.
page 3 note 1 This study has been made possible by the interest and co-operation of Mr. C. Morgan Marshall, Director of the Walters Art Gallery, and his able staff. I am also deeply grateful to my colleagues, Professor Win. F. Albright And Mr. A. Sachs, for their constant helpfulness.
page 3 note 2 For seal impressions on Old Assyrian tablets in the Gallery, see Lewy, J., Archives d'Histoire du Droit Oriental, I, 1937, pl. IIGoogle Scholar.
page 3 note 3 Oriental Institute Publications, XXII (= Newell Collection), Chicago, 1934, 168–90Google Scholar; continued in vol. XXXVII (= Brett Collection), 1936, pp. 62–70.
page 3 note 4 Frankfort is about to publish a general study on Mesopotamian glyptics.
page 3 note 5 Mrs. Van Buren is preparing a series of monographs on ‘fauna’ for Analecta Orientalia.
page 3 note 6 Frühe Bildkunst in Sumer (Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatisch-aegyptischen Gesellschaft, XL, 3), 1935 Google Scholar.
page 3 note 7 Die bildende Kunst des alten Orients und die Bergvölker, Berlin, 1932 Google Scholar.
page 3 note 8 Die Kunst des zweiten Jahrtausends in Vorderasien (Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran, VIII, 1937, 103–60; ix. 1938, 1–79)Google Scholar.
page 4 note 1 i.e. Moortgat's ‘nordsyrisch’; often called ‘Syro-Hittite’.
page 4 note 2 Rowe, A., A Catalogue of Egyptian Scarabs (&c), Cairo, 1936, pl. XXVI, S. 4Google Scholar.
page 5 note 1 The similar appearance of the two gods is attributed to the phonetic resemblance between *Asura (> Ahura) and Assur.
page 6 note 1 Cf. Perrot, Nell, L'Arbre sacré (Babyloniaca, XVII, 1937, pp. 1 ff.)Google Scholar.
page 6 note 2 Its position over a crescent here, suggests that it may stand for the starred disk (cf. § xxv).
page 6 note 3 Actually this may be a fertility symbol depicting the vulva; see No. 36 (next to the nude goddess).
page 6 note 4 Nos. 50–54 are North-Mesopotamian (= ‘Kir-kuk’ seals).
page 6 note 5 I am indebted to Professor Herzfeld, who improved on my datings of Nos. 79, 85, 99–103, and 121, while this catalogue was in proof.
page 7 note 1 Dimensions need not be given because the photographs are very nearly actual size.
page 7 note 2 All the seals in this collection are pierced.
page 7 note 3 Cf. Legrain, apud Woolley, , Ur Excavations, II, 1934 Google Scholar, pls. 195 ff., Nos. 46, 73, 74.
page 7 note 4 See Meyer, E., Geschichte des Altertums, 13, 506 Google Scholar, and Frankfort, , Oriental Institute Communications, No. 16, 1933, 40–6Google Scholar.
page 8 note 1 Cf. Sennacherib's Taylor Prism, col. vi, line 21 Delitzsch, , Assyrische Lesestücke, Leipzig, 1912, 75)Google Scholar.
page 8 note 2 [Herzfeld informs me that my objections to the authenticity of this seal are not insurmountable.]
page 9 note 1 Cf. De Clbrcq, NO. 68 and Menant, , La Haye, 1878, pl. III, no. IIGoogle Scholar.
page 9 note 2 See Syria, XVIII, 1937 Google Scholar, pl. XXXIX (opposite p. 336).
page 10 note 1 See preceding note.
page 12 note 1 Cf. Buren, Van, Flowing Vase, Berlin, 1933 Google Scholar.
page 14 note 1 The fact that an inscription is meaningless does not necessarily imply that it is a modern forgery. It is possible that ‘ancient fake’ inscriptions were sometimes palmed off on unsuspecting customers. Indeed, in some cases it would also seem that inscriptions have been forged on otherwise genuine seals.
page 15 note 1 For this value of SAL, cf. Gelb, I., A.J.S.L., LIII, 186, No. 262Google Scholar.
page 15 note 2 Nos. 32 and 33 are probably of Western origin and date from about 1500 B.c.
page 21 note 1 Cf. Hogarth, , Carchemish, 1, 1914, pl. B. 14Google Scholar.
page 22 note 1 [Herzfeld is probably right in interpreting each man (wearing a dress) and a lion with forelegs ‘chimera’ as a combination of an entire winged forelegs out front.]
page 24 note 1 See Hogarth, , Hittite Seals, Oxford, 1920, 75, fig. 79Google Scholar.
page 25 note 1 Cf. Delaporte, L., Catalogue du Musée Guimet: Cylindres orientaux, Paris, 1909, Nos. 128–35Google Scholar; Starr, R. F. S., Nuzi, 11, Cambridge (Mass.), 1937, pl. 119 HGoogle Scholar.
page 28 note 1 See now Herzfeld, , Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran, ix, 35 Google Scholar.
page 30 note 1 [Professor Rhodokanakis considers ‘rby the probable reading.]
page 32 note 1 Cf. Delaporte, L., Catalogue des Cylindres (Louvre), II, 1923, pl. 94, No. 7Google Scholar.
page 34 note 1 Addendum: WAG 42.449 (no photograph given) is a red and blue breccia cylinder. The scene depicts a deity offering a nest (?) to a seated god. An attendant holds a mace (?) in one hand and a pot on a cord in the other. The seal looks like a forgery.