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

Re: [ANE-2] British Museum numbers

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 8 , Jul 2, 2010
    • 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 2 of 8 , Jul 2, 2010
      • 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.