Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T22:49:00.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Negotiating Imperialism and Resistance in Late Bronze Age Ugarit: The Rise of Alphabetic Cuneiform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 December 2018

Philip J. Boyes Open the ORCID record for Philip J. Boyes [Opens in a new window]
Philip J. Boyes*
Affiliation:
Faculty of ClassicsUniversity of CambridgeSidgwick Avenue Cambridge CB3 9DAUK Email: pjb70@cam.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ugarit was a highly cosmopolitan, multilingual and multiscript city at the intersection of several major Late Bronze Age political and cultural spheres of influence. In the thirteenth century bc, the city adopted a new alphabetic cuneiform writing system in the local language for certain uses alongside the Akkadian language, script and scribal practices that were standard throughout the Near East. Previous research has seen this as ‘vernacularization’, in response to the city's encounter with Mesopotamian culture. Recent improvements in our understanding of the date of Ugarit's adoption of alphabetic cuneiform render this unlikely, and this paper instead argues that we should see this vernacularization as part of Ugarit's negotiation of, and resistance to, their encounter with Hittite imperialism. Furthermore, it stands as a specific, Ugaritian, manifestation of similar trends apparent across a number of East Mediterranean societies in response to the economic and political globalism of Late Bronze Age élite culture. As such, these changes in Ugaritian scribal practice have implications for our wider understanding of the end of the Late Bronze Age.

Type
Research Article
Information
Cambridge Archaeological Journal , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , May 2019 , pp. 185 - 199
Copyright
Copyright © McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altman, A., 2003. Rethinking the Hittite system of subordinate countries from the legal point of view. Journal of the American Oriental Society 123, 741–56.Google Scholar
Altman, A., 2008. Ugarit's political standing in the beginning of the 14th century BCE reconsidered. Ugarit-Forschungen 40, 25–64.Google Scholar
Areshian, G.E. (ed.), 2013. Empires & Diversity. On the crossroads of archaeology, anthropology, & history. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.Google Scholar
Beckman, G., 1992. Hittite administration in Syria in the light of the texts from Hattuša, Ugarit, and Emar, in New Horizons in the Study of Ancient Syria, eds. Chavalas, M.W. & Hayes, J.L.. Malibu (CA): Undena, 41–9.Google Scholar
Beckman, G., 1995. Hittite provincial administration in Anatolia and Syria: the view from Masat and Emar, in Atti del II Congresso Internazionale di Hittitologia, eds. Carruba, O., Giorgieri, M. & Mora, C.. Pavia: Gianni Iuculano Editore, 19–37.Google Scholar
Bhabha, H., 1994. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bordreuil, P. & Pardee, D., 2009. A Manual of Ugaritic. Winona Lake (IN): Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Boyes, P.J., 2013. Social Change in ‘Phoenicia’ in the Late Bronze/Early Iron Age Transition. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Boyes, P.J., forthcoming. Variation in alphabetic cuneiform: rethinking the ‘Phoenician’ inscription from Sarepta, in Understanding Relations Between Scripts II: Early alphabets, eds. Boyes, P.J. & Steele, P.M.. Oxford: Oxbow.Google Scholar
Caldwell, M.L. & Lozada, E.P., 2008. The fate of the local, in The Blackwell Companion to Globalization, ed. Ritzer, G.. Oxford: Blackwell, 498–515.Google Scholar
Callot, O. & Monchambert, J.-Y., 2011. Les sanctuaires de l'acropole d'Ougarit: les temples de Baal et de Dagan. (Ras Shamra-Ougarit XIX.) Lyons: Publications de la maison de l'orient et de la Méditerranée.Google Scholar
Calvet, Y., 2012. La région d'Ougarit au Bronze récent, in Études Ougaritiques II, eds. Matoïan, V., Al-Maqdissi, M. & Calvet, Y.. (Ras Shamra-Ougarit XX.) Leuven: Peeters, 1–10.Google Scholar
Dalix, A.-S., 1997. Iloumilkou, scribe d'Ougarit au XIIIe siècle avant J.C. Unpublished PhD thesis, Institut Catholique de Paris.Google Scholar
Devecchi, E., 2013. Suppiluliuma's Syrian campaigns in light of the documents from Ugarit, in New Results and New Questions on the Reign of Suppliluliuma, eds. de Martino, S. & Miller, J.L.. Florence: LoGisma editore, 81–97.Google Scholar
Di Paolo, S., 2013. Changing space, time, and meaning: the seal of Yaqaru from Ugarit – a reconversion?, in Time and History in the Ancient Near East. Proceedings of the 56th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Barcelona, 26–30 July 2010, eds. Feliu, L., Llop, J., Millet Albà, A. & Sanmartín, J.. Winona Lake (IN): Eisenbrauns, 79–90.Google Scholar
Dietrich, M. & Loretz, O., 1988. Die Keilalphabete: Die phönizisch-kanaanaïschen und altarabischen Alphabete in Ugarit. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.Google Scholar
Dietrich, M., Loretz, O. & Sanmartín, J., 2013. The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places (KTU3). Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.Google Scholar
Feldman, M.H., 2002. Ambiguous identities: the ‘marriage’ vase of Niqmaddu II and the elusive Egyptian princess. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 15, 75–99.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, I. & Sass, B., 2013. The West Semitic alphabetic inscriptions, Late Bronze II to Iron IIA: archeological context, distribution and chronology. Hebrew Bible and Ancient Israel 2(2), 149–220.Google Scholar
Freu, J., 2006. Histoire politique du royaume d'Ugarit. Paris: Harmattan.Google Scholar
Gachet-Bizollon, J. 2007. Les ivoires d'Ougarit et l'art des ivoiriers du Levant. Paris: Éditions Recherche sur les Civilisations.Google Scholar
Glatz, C., 2013. Negotiating empire – a comparative investigation into the responses to Hittite imperialism by the vassal state of Ugarit and the Kaska peoples of the Anatolian Black Sea region, in Empires and Diversity: On the crossroads of archaeology, history and anthropology, ed. Areshian, G.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, 21–56.Google Scholar
Gosden, C., 2004. Archaeology and Colonialism. Cultural contact from 5000 BC to the present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grivelet, S. (ed.), 2001. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 150.Google Scholar
Haring, B., 2015. The Sinai alphabet: current state of research, in Proceedings of the Multidisciplinary Conference on the Sinai Desert, Saturday 20 and Sunday 30 November, 2014, held at the Netherlands-Flemish Institute in Cairo, eds. de Jong, R.E., van Gool, T.C. & Moors, C.. Cairo: Netherlands-Flemish Institute in Cairo, 18–32.Google Scholar
Haring, B., forthcoming. Ancient Egypt and the earliest known stages of alphabetic writing, in Understanding Relations Between Scripts II: Early alphabets, eds. Boyes, P.J. & Steele, P.M.. Oxford: Oxbow.Google Scholar
Hawley, R., Pardee, D. & Roche-Hawley, C., 2015. The scribal culture of Ugarit. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History 2(2), 229–67.Google Scholar
Huehnergard, J., 1989. The Akkadian of Ugarit. Atlanta (GA): Scholars Press.Google Scholar
Imparati, F., 1975. ‘Signori’ e ‘figli’ del re. Orientalia New Series 44, 80–95.Google Scholar
Kamwangamalu, N.M., 2013. English in language policies in Africa. Challenges and prospects for vernacularization, in The Oxford Handbook of Sociolinguistics, eds. Bayley, R., Cameron, R. & Lucas, C.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 545–62.Google Scholar
Lehmann, R., 2005. Dynastensarkophage mit szenischen Reliefs aus Byblos und Zypern. Teil 1.2: Die Inschrift(en) des Aḥīrōm-Sarkophags und die Schachtinschrift des Grabes V in Jbeil (Byblos). Mainz: Zabern.Google Scholar
Lehmann, R., 2008. Calligraphy and craftsmanship in the Aḥīrōm inscription: considerations on skilled linear flat writing in early 1st millennium Byblos. Maarav 15(2), 119–64.Google Scholar
Lyons, C.L. & Papadopoulos, J.K. (eds.), 2002. The Archaeology of Colonialism. Los Angeles (CA): Getty.Google Scholar
Maner, Ç., 2017. Fortification architecture of Late Bronze Age Anatolia: where are the borders?, in Bordered Places/Bounded Times. Cross-disciplinary perspectives on Turkey, eds. Baysal, E. & Karakatsanis, L.. (BIAA Monograph 51.) Oxford: Oxbow, 73–84.Google Scholar
Marsman, H.J., 2003. Women in Ugarit and Israel: Their social and religious position in the context of the ancient Near East. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Monroe, C.M., 2009. Scales of Fate: Trade, tradition, and transformation in the eastern Mediterranean ca. 1350–1175 BCE. (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 357.) Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.Google Scholar
Moran, W. L., 1992. The Amarna Letters. Baltimore (MD): Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Morrow, W.S., 2008. Resistance and hybridity in Late Bronze Age Canaan. Revue biblique 115, 321–39.Google Scholar
Nougayrol, J., 1955. Le palais royal d'Ugarit III: Textes accadiens et hourrites des archives est, ouest et centrales. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.Google Scholar
Pardee, D., 2007. The Ugaritic Alphabetic Cuneiform writing system in the context of other alphabetic systems, in Studies in Semitic and Afroasiatic Linguistics presented to Gene B. Gragg, ed. Miller, C.L.. Chicago (IL): Oriental Institute, 181–200.Google Scholar
Parker, S.B., 1997. Ugaritic Narrative Poetry. Atlanta (GA): Scholars Press.Google Scholar
Payne, A., 2010. Writing systems and identity, in Anatolian Interfaces: Hittites, Greeks and their neighbours, eds. Collins, B.J., Bachvarova, M.R. & Rutherford, I.. Oxford: Oxbow, 117–22.Google Scholar
Rehm, E., 2004. Dynastensarkophage mit szenischen Reliefs aus Byblos und Zypern. Teil 1.1: Der Ahiram-Sarkophag. Mainz: Zabern.Google Scholar
Roche-Hawley, C. & Hawley, R., 2013. An essay on scribal families, tradition, and innovation in thirteenth century Ugarit, in Beyond Hatti: A tribute to Gary Beckman, eds. Collins, B.J. & Michalowski, P.. Atlanta (GA): Lockwood Press, 241–64.Google Scholar
Rollston, C., 2008. The dating of the early royal Byblian Phoenician inscriptions: a response to Benjamin Sass. Maarav 15(1), 57–93.Google Scholar
Rollston, C., 2010. Writing and Literacy in the World of Ancient Israel: Epigraphic evidence from the Iron Age. Atlanta (GA): Society of Biblical Literature.Google Scholar
Sanders, S.L., 2004. What was the alphabet for? The rise of written vernaculars and the making of Israelite national literature. Maarav 11, 25–56.Google Scholar
Sass, B., 2005. The Alphabet at the Turn of the Millennium: The West Semitic alphabet ca. 1150–850 BCE. The antiquity of the Arabian, Greek and Phrygian alphabets. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
Sass, B., 2017. The emergence of monumental West Semitic alphabetic writing, with an emphasis on Byblos. Semitica 59, 109–41.Google Scholar
Sasson, J.M., 2013. Zimri-Lim of Mari, in The Encyclopedia of Ancient History, eds. Bagnall, R.S., Broderson, K., Champion, C.B., Erskine, A. & Huebner, S.R.. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 7175–6.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, C.F.-A., 1939. Ugaritica I: études relatives aux découvertes de Ras Shamra. Paris: Geuthner.Google Scholar
Schloen, J.D., 2001. The House of the Father as Fact and Symbol: Patrimonialism in Ugarit and the ancient Near East. Winona Lake (IN): Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Schmidt-Brücken, D., Schuster, S. & Wienberg, M. (eds.), 2016. Aspects of (Post)Colonial Linguistics. Current perspectives and new approaches. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sherratt, S., 2003. The Mediterranean economy: ‘globalization’ at the end of the second millennium BCE, in Symbiosis, Symbolism, and the Power of the Past: Canaan, ancient Israel and their neighbours from the Late Bronze Age through Roman Palaestina, eds. Dever, W.G. & Gitin, S.. Winona Lake (IN): Eisenbrauns, 37–62.Google Scholar
Singer, I., 1999. A political history of Ugarit, in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies, eds. Watson, W. & Wyatt, N.. Leiden: Brill, 603–733.Google Scholar
Sparks, R.T., 2003. Egyptian stone vessels and the politics of exchange (2617–1070 BC), in Ancient Perspectives on Egypt, eds. Matthews, R. & Roemer, C.. London: UCL Press, 39–56.Google Scholar
Stieglitz, R.R., 1971. The Ugaritic cuneiform and Canaanite linear alphabets. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 30, 135–9.Google Scholar
Van den Hout, T., 2006. Institutions, vernaculars, publics: the case of second-millennium Anatolia, in Margins of Writing, Origins of Cultures, ed. Sanders, S.. Chicago (IL): Oriental Institute, 217–56.Google Scholar
van Soldt, W.H. 2003. The use of Hurrian names at Ugarit. Ugarit-Forschungen 35, 681–707.Google Scholar
van Soldt, W.H., 2005. The Topography of the City-State of Ugarit. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.Google Scholar
Vidal, J., 2006. The origins of the last Ugaritic dynasty. Altorientalische Forschungen 33(1), 168–75.Google Scholar
von Dassow, E., 2004. Canaanite in cuneiform. Journal of the American Oriental Society 124(4), 641–74.Google Scholar
Yakubovich, I., 2008. Hittite-Luvian bilingualism and the development of Anatolian hieroglyphs, in Colloquia Classica et Indo-Germanica IV. Studies in Classical Philology and Indo-European Languages, ed. Kazansky, N.N.. St Petersburg: Nauka, 9–36.Google Scholar
Zamora López, J.-Á., 2007. Les utilisations de l'alphabet lors du IIe millénaire av. J. C. et le développement de l’épigraphie alphabétique: une approche à travers la documentation ougaritique en dehors des tablettes (I), in Le royaume d'Ougarit de la Crète à l'Euphrate. Nouveaux axes de recherche (Actes du Congrès International, Sherbrooke 2005), ed. Michaud, J.-M.. Sherbrooke: GGC Éditions, 9–47.Google Scholar