Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers

Expand Messages
  • Peter T. Daniels
    The internets turned up a complete copy of Christopher Walker s Index volume to CT 1-50, from which we see that (by 1974) very few tablets bearing that
    Message 1 of 8 , Jul 2 8:26 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      The internets turned up a complete copy of Christopher Walker's Index volume to
      CT 1-50, from which we see that (by 1974) very few tablets bearing that
      accession date had been published (in that series).

      I googled both the date number and the eventual number and got lots of hits for
      catalog numbers of a wide variety of things for sale, but no further information
      on the BM's group of objects.

      Irving doesn't answer emails ... --
      Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
      still Jersey City
      From: Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...>
      >To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
      >Sent: Fri, July 2, 2010 11:10:25 AM
      >Subject: RE: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
      >

      >Peter,
      >
      >The British Museum number (BM #) is the accession number & strikes me as
      >remarkably low. Items from Ur excavated in the 1930s have numbers in the
      >120000 series. BUT the kicker is that in the more distant past objects
      >did not necessarily receive BM accession numbers the day they entered
      >the museum (current practice in most museums). Also before the renaming
      >of the Middle East Dept (was West Asiatic Antiquities), numbers often
      >carried a WA prefix.
      >
      >98-2-16,690 looks like a field number which is normally assigned to each
      >item as it is uncovered. One might expect a complicated number like
      >that for a large cache of tablets. There is no regular system used by
      >all excavators now & the past was even more varied. Much of the "minor"
      >Nimrud material from Layard's excavations still bears just "registration
      >numbers" -N.1, N.2, etc.
      >
      >The BM's WA collections are relatively searchable on line. You could try
      >that or just contact the ME Dept directly & ask.
      >
      >Trudy Kawami
      >
      >________________________________
      >
      >From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
      >Peter T. Daniels
      >Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 9:14 AM
      >To: ANE-2 list
      >Subject: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
      >
      >How were BM accession numbers assigned?
      >
      >I have only just learned of the "Babylonian ABC" identified by Civil,Finkel,
      >and Geller back in 1998, and would very much like to know where the tablet came

      >from. British Museum Magazine (or, as some refer to it, "Bulletin" or
      >"Publication") 31 (1998) is unavailable to me (in case Irving Finkel mentioned
      >its provenience). Geller's publication in JEOL 35-36: 144-46, which says nothing
      >
      >on this point but dates it centuries later than Finkel, is overwhelmed by
      >typographic errors, and Geller's transliteration differs from that by Finkel as

      >it is reported by Jursa & Weszeli in ZA 90: 78, and Geller's version is followed
      >
      >by Cross & Huehnergard, Or. 72: 223-28, in their attempt to connect the
      >syllables used with the West Semitic letter names.
      >
      >Does the accession number 98-2-16,690 mean that a particular group of objects,
      >whose origin was recorded, was processed on that day in February 1898? Is there

      >any way of learning where those materials came from? Or does it bear no relation
      >
      >to anything at all and 689 could be a Sanskrit manuscript and 691 a campaign
      >button for a local by-election?
      >
      >The current number is BM 25636, in case there is an index using that system.
      >
      >Thank you.
      >--
      >Peter T. Daniels grammatim@... <mailto:grammatim%40verizon.net>
      >
      >Jersey City

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Trudy Kawami
      Go to the top; try John Russell. Trudy Kawami PS What was accession date? ... From: Peter T. Daniels [mailto:grammatim@verizon.net] Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010
      Message 2 of 8 , Jul 2 8:39 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Go to the top; try John Russell.
        Trudy Kawami
        PS What was accession date?

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Peter T. Daniels [mailto:grammatim@...]
        Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 11:26 AM
        To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers

        The internets turned up a complete copy of Christopher Walker's Index
        volume to
        CT 1-50, from which we see that (by 1974) very few tablets bearing that
        accession date had been published (in that series).

        I googled both the date number and the eventual number and got lots of
        hits for
        catalog numbers of a wide variety of things for sale, but no further
        information
        on the BM's group of objects.

        Irving doesn't answer emails ... --
        Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
        still Jersey City
        From: Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...>
      • Charles E. Jones
        The BM object registry is online. You can search it here http://www.britishmuseum.org/research.aspx or since I already have done that, I can tell you that
        Message 3 of 8 , Jul 2 9:01 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          The BM object registry is online. You can search it here
          http://www.britishmuseum.org/research.aspx

          or since I already have done that, I can tell you that there
          are nice legible photographs of the inscribed surfaces of the
          tablet; that it was acquired in 1898, purchased from Selim
          Homsy & Co ("This family firm sold a number of cuneiform
          tablets to The British Museum between 1889 and 1902, during at
          least part of the time of which they were based in London.
          Correspondence to Budge from D. Messayeh and N. Ghanima
          [jointly signed] of Baghdad and dated 1894, confirms this as
          they refer to Selim Homsy as "of your city", and clearly use
          Homsy as a London distributor. Roger Homsy (q.v.) and K. Homsy
          (q.v.) are members of the same family business during the
          1930s and 1970s respectively"), and that the BM has 5302
          registered objects from that source; and more...

          -Chuck Jones-
          NY


          ---- Original message ----
          >Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 08:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
          >From: "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...>
          >Subject: Re: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
          >To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          > The internets turned up a complete copy of
          > Christopher Walker's Index volume to
          > CT 1-50, from which we see that (by 1974) very few
          > tablets bearing that
          > accession date had been published (in that series).
          >
          > I googled both the date number and the eventual
          > number and got lots of hits for
          > catalog numbers of a wide variety of things for
          > sale, but no further information
          > on the BM's group of objects.
          >
          > Irving doesn't answer emails ... --
          > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
          > still Jersey City
          > From: Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...>
          > >To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
          > >Sent: Fri, July 2, 2010 11:10:25 AM
          > >Subject: RE: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
          > >
          > > 
          > >Peter,
          > >
          > >The British Museum number (BM #) is the accession
          > number & strikes me as
          > >remarkably low. Items from Ur excavated in the
          > 1930s have numbers in the
          > >120000 series. BUT the kicker is that in the more
          > distant past objects
          > >did not necessarily receive BM accession numbers
          > the day they entered
          > >the museum (current practice in most museums). Also
          > before the renaming
          > >of the Middle East Dept (was West Asiatic
          > Antiquities), numbers often
          > >carried a WA prefix.
          > >
          > >98-2-16,690 looks like a field number which is
          > normally assigned to each
          > >item as it is uncovered. One might expect a
          > complicated number like
          > >that for a large cache of tablets. There is no
          > regular system used by
          > >all excavators now & the past was even more varied.
          > Much of the "minor"
          > >Nimrud material from Layard's excavations still
          > bears just "registration
          > >numbers" -N.1, N.2, etc.
          > >
          > >The BM's WA collections are relatively searchable
          > on line. You could try
          > >that or just contact the ME Dept directly & ask.
          > >
          > >Trudy Kawami
          > >
          > >________________________________
          > >
          > >From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
          > [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          > >Peter T. Daniels
          > >Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 9:14 AM
          > >To: ANE-2 list
          > >Subject: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
          > >
          > >How were BM accession numbers assigned?
          > >
          > >I have only just learned of the "Babylonian ABC"
          > identified by Civil,Finkel,
          > >and Geller back in 1998, and would very much like
          > to know where the tablet came
          >
          > >from. British Museum Magazine (or, as some refer to
          > it, "Bulletin" or
          > >"Publication") 31 (1998) is unavailable to me (in
          > case Irving Finkel mentioned
          > >its provenience). Geller's publication in JEOL
          > 35-36: 144-46, which says nothing
          > >
          > >on this point but dates it centuries later than
          > Finkel, is overwhelmed by
          > >typographic errors, and Geller's transliteration
          > differs from that by Finkel as
          >
          > >it is reported by Jursa & Weszeli in ZA 90: 78, and
          > Geller's version is followed
          > >
          > >by Cross & Huehnergard, Or. 72: 223-28, in their
          > attempt to connect the
          > >syllables used with the West Semitic letter names.
          > >
          > >Does the accession number 98-2-16,690 mean that a
          > particular group of objects,
          > >whose origin was recorded, was processed on that
          > day in February 1898? Is there
          >
          > >any way of learning where those materials came
          > from? Or does it bear no relation
          > >
          > >to anything at all and 689 could be a Sanskrit
          > manuscript and 691 a campaign
          > >button for a local by-election?
          > >
          > >The current number is BM 25636, in case there is an
          > index using that system.
          > >
          > >Thank you.
          > >--
          > >Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
          > <mailto:grammatim%40verizon.net>
          > >
          > >Jersey City
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been
          > removed]
          >
          >
        • Joe Zias
          As I was curator with the IAA responsible for antiquities from ca. WW I  and before up to 1948 (British Mandate period) I m a bit familiar with the British
          Message 4 of 8 , Jul 2 10:06 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            As I was curator with the IAA responsible for antiquities from ca. WW I  and before up to 1948 (British Mandate period) I'm a bit familiar with the British system. All objects were assigned 2-3 numbers, the first being the object as it was brought in from the field and then all objects from that venue/excavation were registered under one number called the R. number which was the yearly registry. E.g R.123 Hundreds of objects could have the same R. number. Once the object was cataloged it was given a final number with the first two digits being the year in which it was cataloged, which in many cases was years later. E.g an object with the number 25.123 was object 123 cat. in 1925 which could have been excavated in 1920 or before. The Brits had it down to a 'science' in terms of accuracy with their cataloging.

            Joe Zias www.joezias.com
            Anthropology/Paleopathology

            Science and Antiquity Group - Jerusalem
            Jerusalem, Israel

            --- On Fri, 7/2/10,
            Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...> wrote:

            From: Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...>
            Subject: RE: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
            To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Friday, July 2, 2010, 11:39 AM







             









            Go to the top; try John Russell.

            Trudy Kawami

            PS What was accession date?



            -----Original Message-----

            From: Peter T. Daniels [mailto:grammatim@...]

            Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 11:26 AM

            To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com

            Subject: Re: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers



            The internets turned up a complete copy of Christopher Walker's Index

            volume to

            CT 1-50, from which we see that (by 1974) very few tablets bearing that

            accession date had been published (in that series).



            I googled both the date number and the eventual number and got lots of

            hits for

            catalog numbers of a wide variety of things for sale, but no further

            information

            on the BM's group of objects.



            Irving doesn't answer emails ... --

            Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...

            still Jersey City

            From: Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...>




















            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Peter T. Daniels
            Thank you. (So much for google.) No suggestion of where it might have come from -- with over 5000 items from that source acquired in just a few years, it might
            Message 5 of 8 , Jul 2 10:21 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Thank you. (So much for google.)

              No suggestion of where it might have come from -- with over 5000 items from that
              source acquired in just a few years, it might be possible to tell from colophons
              in other tablets some likely locations. --
              Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...


              >
              >From: Charles E. Jones <cejo@...>
              >To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
              >Sent: Fri, July 2, 2010 12:01:23 PM
              >Subject: Re: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
              >

              >The BM object registry is online. You can search it here
              >http://www.britishmuseum.org/research.aspx
              >
              >or since I already have done that, I can tell you that there
              >are nice legible photographs of the inscribed surfaces of the
              >tablet; that it was acquired in 1898, purchased from Selim
              >Homsy & Co ("This family firm sold a number of cuneiform
              >tablets to The British Museum between 1889 and 1902, during at
              >least part of the time of which they were based in London.
              >Correspondence to Budge from D. Messayeh and N. Ghanima
              >[jointly signed] of Baghdad and dated 1894, confirms this as
              >they refer to Selim Homsy as "of your city", and clearly use
              >Homsy as a London distributor. Roger Homsy (q.v.) and K. Homsy
              >(q.v.) are members of the same family business during the
              >1930s and 1970s respectively"), and that the BM has 5302
              >registered objects from that source; and more...
              >
              >-Chuck Jones-
              >NY
              >
              >---- Original message ----
              >>Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 08:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
              >>From: "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...>
              >>Subject: Re: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
              >>To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> The internets turned up a complete copy of
              >> Christopher Walker's Index volume to
              >> CT 1-50, from which we see that (by 1974) very few
              >> tablets bearing that
              >> accession date had been published (in that series).
              >>
              >> I googled both the date number and the eventual
              >> number and got lots of hits for
              >> catalog numbers of a wide variety of things for
              >> sale, but no further information
              >> on the BM's group of objects.
              >>
              >> Irving doesn't answer emails ... --
              >> Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
              >> still Jersey City
              >> From: Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...>
              >> >To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
              >> >Sent: Fri, July 2, 2010 11:10:25 AM
              >> >Subject: RE: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
              >> >
              >> > 
              >> >Peter,
              >> >
              >> >The British Museum number (BM #) is the accession
              >> number & strikes me as
              >> >remarkably low. Items from Ur excavated in the
              >> 1930s have numbers in the
              >> >120000 series. BUT the kicker is that in the more
              >> distant past objects
              >> >did not necessarily receive BM accession numbers
              >> the day they entered
              >> >the museum (current practice in most museums). Also
              >> before the renaming
              >> >of the Middle East Dept (was West Asiatic
              >> Antiquities), numbers often
              >> >carried a WA prefix.
              >> >
              >> >98-2-16,690 looks like a field number which is
              >> normally assigned to each
              >> >item as it is uncovered. One might expect a
              >> complicated number like
              >> >that for a large cache of tablets. There is no
              >> regular system used by
              >> >all excavators now & the past was even more varied.
              >> Much of the "minor"
              >> >Nimrud material from Layard's excavations still
              >> bears just "registration
              >> >numbers" -N.1, N.2, etc.
              >> >
              >> >The BM's WA collections are relatively searchable
              >> on line. You could try
              >> >that or just contact the ME Dept directly & ask.
              >> >
              >> >Trudy Kawami
              >> >
              >> >________________________________
              >> >
              >> >From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
              >> [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
              >> >Peter T. Daniels
              >> >Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 9:14 AM
              >> >To: ANE-2 list
              >> >Subject: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
              >> >
              >> >How were BM accession numbers assigned?
              >> >
              >> >I have only just learned of the "Babylonian ABC"
              >> identified by Civil,Finkel,
              >> >and Geller back in 1998, and would very much like
              >> to know where the tablet came
              >>
              >> >from. British Museum Magazine (or, as some refer to
              >> it, "Bulletin" or
              >> >"Publication") 31 (1998) is unavailable to me (in
              >> case Irving Finkel mentioned
              >> >its provenience). Geller's publication in JEOL
              >> 35-36: 144-46, which says nothing
              >> >
              >> >on this point but dates it centuries later than
              >> Finkel, is overwhelmed by
              >> >typographic errors, and Geller's transliteration
              >> differs from that by Finkel as
              >>
              >> >it is reported by Jursa & Weszeli in ZA 90: 78, and
              >> Geller's version is followed
              >> >
              >> >by Cross & Huehnergard, Or. 72: 223-28, in their
              >> attempt to connect the
              >> >syllables used with the West Semitic letter names.
              >> >
              >> >Does the accession number 98-2-16,690 mean that a
              >> particular group of objects,
              >> >whose origin was recorded, was processed on that
              >> day in February 1898? Is there
              >>
              >> >any way of learning where those materials came
              >> from? Or does it bear no relation
              >> >
              >> >to anything at all and 689 could be a Sanskrit
              >> manuscript and 691 a campaign
              >> >button for a local by-election?
              >> >
              >> >The current number is BM 25636, in case there is an
              >> index using that system.
              >> >
              >> >Thank you.
              >> >--
              >> >Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
              >> <mailto:grammatim%40verizon.net>
              >> >
              >> >Jersey City

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Peter T. Daniels
              February 16, 1898. (98-2-16).-- Peter T. Daniels grammatim@verizon.net ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Message 6 of 8 , Jul 2 10:23 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                February 16, 1898. (98-2-16).--
                Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...


                >
                >From: Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...>
                >To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                >Sent: Fri, July 2, 2010 11:39:41 AM
                >Subject: RE: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
                >

                >Go to the top; try John Russell.
                >Trudy Kawami
                >PS What was accession date?
                >
                >-----Original Message-----
                >From: Peter T. Daniels [mailto:grammatim@...]
                >Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 11:26 AM
                >To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                >Subject: Re: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers
                >
                >The internets turned up a complete copy of Christopher Walker's Index
                >volume to
                >CT 1-50, from which we see that (by 1974) very few tablets bearing that
                >accession date had been published (in that series).
                >
                >I googled both the date number and the eventual number and got lots of
                >hits for
                >catalog numbers of a wide variety of things for sale, but no further
                >information
                >on the BM's group of objects.
                >
                >Irving doesn't answer emails ... --
                >Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
                >still Jersey City

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.