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

Re: Relative Popularity of Egyptology and Assyriology since 1800

Expand Messages
  • MarcC
    My attempt to insert a file into a Yahoo post failed, so I uploaded a .pdf of the table to our Files directory. You can access it here:
    Message 1 of 12 , Dec 18, 2010
      My attempt to insert a file into a Yahoo post failed, so I uploaded a .pdf of the table to our "Files" directory. You can access it here:


      http://tinyurl.com/2d36td5

      Marc Cooper
      Missouri State University
    • Peter T. Daniels
      (It was a trivial matter to turn your pasteup into a table; view with Courier for the full effect.) Note that this search returns only English-language
      Message 2 of 12 , Dec 18, 2010
        (It was a trivial matter to turn your pasteup into a table; view with Courier
        for the full effect.)

        Note that this search returns only English-language materials, which will skew
        the results badly; and surely the vast majority of hits is to Bible-related
        material rather than Egyptology or Assyriology.

        I wonder when the word "cuneiform" entered English, so that both the first lines
        may be spurious in that column, too; common terms were "wedge-writing" and
        "nail-writing."

        Hincks's first publication relating to the decipherment was in 1846.--
        Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
        Jersey City




        ________________________________
        From: MarcC <marc.cooper@...>
        To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Sat, December 18, 2010 1:41:12 PM
        Subject: [ANE-2] Relative Popularity of Egyptology and Assyriology since 1800

         

        Instead of grading papers this morning, I did some data mining in Google
        Books. Since Google has reduced several million vlumes into searchable
        electronic form, I wondered if it is possble to determine the relative
        popularity of Assyriology and Egyptology over the last 200 years. So I
        ran searches for sets of words that are specific to these fields in
        English, "egyptian hieroglyphic", "babylonian cuneiform", and akkadian.
        Google's date limited search engine turns out to be imperfect. For
        instance, a journal run beginning in 1824 will occasionally produce
        Google references from later periods in earlier period, so the numbers
        below cannot be taken as the true number of instances in any given
        period, but the relative numbers are, I think, meaningful. Here are my
        quickie findings:

                   Egyptian Hieroglyphic Babylonian Cuneiform Akkadian
        1800-1820           5780                   91                0
        1820-1840          21900                  744                7
        1840-1860          32500                 6700               58
        1860-1880          27400                15500              991
        1880-1900          32900                35000            14500
        1900-1920          21200                33100             5190
        1920-1940          14300                13700             6670
        1940-1960          11300                12900            11900
        1960-1980          43100                25200            66600
        1980-2000          45100                33900            89400

        The actual date constraints are more precise than suggested above. I
        used January 1, 1800 to December 31, 1819 for the first period and
        similar date constraints for those which follow. Also note that the
        earliest references to Akkadian are all spurious.

        My first reaction to the table is that the era prior to WW I was a
        golden age for Ancient Near Eastern Studies. The wars nearly destroyed
        the field, but it has returned to prominence since 1960.

        Marc Cooper

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • MarcC
        ... That s good to know. ... True. That s why I use the term relative. Google books is itself skewed to English materials. ... Cuneiform was a bone before it
        Message 3 of 12 , Dec 18, 2010
          --- In ANE-2@yahoogroups.com, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...> wrote:
          >
          > (It was a trivial matter to turn your pasteup into a table; view with Courier
          > for the full effect.)

          That's good to know.
          >
          > Note that this search returns only English-language materials, which will skew
          > the results badly; and surely the vast majority of hits is to Bible-related
          > material rather than Egyptology or Assyriology.

          True. That's why I use the term relative. Google books is itself skewed to English materials.

          >
          > I wonder when the word "cuneiform" entered English, so that both the first lines
          > may be spurious in that column, too; common terms were "wedge-writing" and
          > "nail-writing."

          "Cuneiform" was a bone before it was used to describe writing. That's why my search term includes "babylonian." I thought that the cuneiform bone is so named because it reminds anatomists of cuneiform writing, but that can't be correct since the term "cuneiform" to describe bones of the foot was in use from at least 1661 according to Google Books.
          >
          > Hincks's first publication relating to the decipherment was in 1846.--

          But the term "cuneiform inscription" was already in use prior to 1820. Google books offers Hoeck

          http://tinyurl.com/36zgae4

          which uses the term in Latin from 1818. I imagine a better collection of antique books would supply earlier references.

          > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...
          > Jersey City
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • gtosiris@mpx.com.au
          ... [snip] Hi Marc, I find the tinyurl link does not work. Regards, Gary Thompson Australia (No academic affiliation.)
          Message 4 of 12 , Dec 18, 2010
            On 18 Dec 2010 at 18:51, Marc Cooper wrote:

            > My attempt to insert a file into a Yahoo post failed, so I uploaded
            > a .pdf of the table to our "Files" directory. You can access it
            > here:
            >
            >
            > http://tinyurl.com/2d36td5
            [snip]

            Hi Marc,

            I find the tinyurl link does not work.

            Regards,
            Gary Thompson
            Australia
            (No academic affiliation.)
          • Charles E. Jones
            OED cites: 1818 W. Taylor in Monthly Rev. 85 486 The cuneiform character is so simple in its component parts, that it consists only of two elements, the
            Message 5 of 12 , Dec 18, 2010
              OED cites:

              "1818 W. Taylor in Monthly Rev. 85 486 The cuneiform character is so simple in its component parts, that it consists only of two elements, the wedge and the rectangle."

              as their earliest reference to cuneiform script.

              Are those of you citing Google data using http://ngrams.googlelabs.com/
              which is a very nice new tool?

              -Chuck Jones-
              Harlem, USA
            • MarcC
              If the tinyurl link doesn t work, just go to the ANE-2 Yahoo web site, open the Files directory on the left, and find the table. Marc Cooper Missouri State
              Message 6 of 12 , Dec 18, 2010
                If the tinyurl link doesn't work, just go to the ANE-2 Yahoo web site, open the "Files" directory on the left, and find the table.

                Marc Cooper
                Missouri State

                --- In ANE-2@yahoogroups.com, gtosiris@... wrote:
                >
                > On 18 Dec 2010 at 18:51, Marc Cooper wrote:
                >
                > > My attempt to insert a file into a Yahoo post failed, so I uploaded
                > > a .pdf of the table to our "Files" directory. You can access it
                > > here:
                > >
                > >
                > > http://tinyurl.com/2d36td5
                > [snip]
                >
                > Hi Marc,
                >
                > I find the tinyurl link does not work.
                >
                > Regards,
                > Gary Thompson
                > Australia
                > (No academic affiliation.)
                >
              • Peter T. Daniels
                Click on Messages in this topic near the end of the message and it takes you to the group s page; then click on Files at the left, and Marc s table is the
                Message 7 of 12 , Dec 18, 2010
                  Click on "Messages in this topic" near the end of the message and it takes you
                  to the group's page; then click on "Files" at the left, and Marc's table is the
                  last item. (The first one added since 2006.)
                   --
                  Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...




                  ________________________________
                  From: "gtosiris@..." <gtosiris@...>
                  To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Sat, December 18, 2010 8:43:23 PM
                  Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Re: Relative Popularity of Egyptology and Assyriology since
                  1800

                   
                  On 18 Dec 2010 at 18:51, Marc Cooper wrote:

                  > My attempt to insert a file into a Yahoo post failed, so I uploaded
                  > a .pdf of the table to our "Files" directory. You can access it
                  > here:
                  >
                  >
                  > http://tinyurl.com/2d36td5
                  [snip]

                  Hi Marc,

                  I find the tinyurl link does not work.

                  Regards,
                  Gary Thompson
                  Australia
                  (No academic affiliation.)


                  Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
                  Messages in this topic (6)


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Joan Griffith
                  In searching for various items in Google Books, it does not seem that they show everything they claim is there. Some time ago, I was looking for something
                  Message 8 of 12 , Dec 18, 2010
                    In searching for various items in Google Books, it does not seem that they
                    show everything they claim is there. Some time ago, I was looking for
                    something fairly old, so I thought it would show up at the end of the
                    search, which appeared to be latest to oldest. However, the search ran out
                    before the books did. I think Google goes on for 30 pages, at least that one
                    did. But there appeared to be more since the page showed thousands of
                    related books.

                    i was wondering what else I could do to tease out well-hidden items.
                    Usually I can find most things I look for, but this reminds me of the first
                    time I was on Lexus-Nexus and decided to start with "murder" which called up
                    a shocking bazillion search results. Does anyone have particular search
                    strategies?

                    I will most gratefully check out the Google Lab.


                    Joan Griffith
                    Independent


                    On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@...>wrote:

                    >
                    >
                    > Click on "Messages in this topic" near the end of the message and it takes
                    > you
                    > to the group's page; then click on "Files" at the left, and Marc's table is
                    > the
                    > last item. (The first one added since 2006.)
                    >
                    > --
                    > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@... <grammatim%40verizon.net>
                    >
                    > ________________________________
                    > From: "gtosiris@... <gtosiris%40mpx.com.au>" <gtosiris@...<gtosiris%40mpx.com.au>>
                    >
                    >
                    > To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>
                    > Sent: Sat, December 18, 2010 8:43:23 PM
                    > Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Re: Relative Popularity of Egyptology and Assyriology
                    > since
                    > 1800
                    >
                    >
                    > On 18 Dec 2010 at 18:51, Marc Cooper wrote:
                    >
                    > > My attempt to insert a file into a Yahoo post failed, so I uploaded
                    > > a .pdf of the table to our "Files" directory. You can access it
                    > > here:
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > http://tinyurl.com/2d36td5
                    > [snip]
                    >
                    > Hi Marc,
                    >
                    > I find the tinyurl link does not work.
                    >
                    > Regards,
                    > Gary Thompson
                    > Australia
                    > (No academic affiliation.)
                    >
                    > Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
                    > Messages in this topic (6)
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >
                    >


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Peter T. Daniels
                    Here are some strategies: In the left-hand menu, choose Full view only. This will block everything less than 100 years old (except for a few items that may
                    Message 9 of 12 , Dec 19, 2010
                      Here are some strategies:

                      In the left-hand menu, choose "Full view only." This will block everything less
                      than 100 years old (except for a few items that may have special dispensation;
                      some American Philosophical Society items still show up).

                      If you're looking for a journal issue, find any occurrence of that journal and
                      click "other editions." For a while, that brought up complete runs of journals
                      in reverse chronological order. But that no longer happens; they now appear in
                      indeterminate order.

                      Sometimes -- I cannot tell when -- if you search a name, it offers you the
                      options "books by" and "books mentioning" (or something like that).

                      I have the impression that when a commercial publisher reprints an old item,
                      they may pressure google to take it off google books, because some things
                      formerly available appear no longer to be available.

                      If something refuses to appear in books.google.com, then try things like
                      books.google.de and books.google.fr. They seem to access the same copies of
                      things as the American one, but they also seem to be able to get at things the
                      American one can't.--
                      Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...




                      ________________________________
                      From: Joan Griffith <despinne@...>
                      To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Sun, December 19, 2010 2:48:14 AM
                      Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Re: Relative Popularity of Egyptology and Assyriology since
                      1800

                       
                      In searching for various items in Google Books, it does not seem that they
                      show everything they claim is there. Some time ago, I was looking for
                      something fairly old, so I thought it would show up at the end of the
                      search, which appeared to be latest to oldest. However, the search ran out
                      before the books did. I think Google goes on for 30 pages, at least that one
                      did. But there appeared to be more since the page showed thousands of
                      related books.

                      i was wondering what else I could do to tease out well-hidden items.
                      Usually I can find most things I look for, but this reminds me of the first
                      time I was on Lexus-Nexus and decided to start with "murder" which called up
                      a shocking bazillion search results. Does anyone have particular search
                      strategies?

                      I will most gratefully check out the Google Lab.

                      Joan Griffith
                      Independent

                      On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Peter T. Daniels <grammatim@...>wrote:

                      >
                      >
                      > Click on "Messages in this topic" near the end of the message and it takes
                      > you
                      > to the group's page; then click on "Files" at the left, and Marc's table is
                      > the
                      > last item. (The first one added since 2006.)
                      >
                      > --
                      > Peter T. Daniels grammatim@... <grammatim%40verizon.net>
                      >
                      > ________________________________
                      > From: "gtosiris@... <gtosiris%40mpx.com.au>"
                      ><gtosiris@...<gtosiris%40mpx.com.au>>
                      >
                      >
                      > To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>
                      > Sent: Sat, December 18, 2010 8:43:23 PM
                      > Subject: Re: [ANE-2] Re: Relative Popularity of Egyptology and Assyriology
                      > since
                      > 1800
                      >
                      >
                      > On 18 Dec 2010 at 18:51, Marc Cooper wrote:
                      >
                      > > My attempt to insert a file into a Yahoo post failed, so I uploaded
                      > > a .pdf of the table to our "Files" directory. You can access it
                      > > here:
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > http://tinyurl.com/2d36td5
                      > [snip]
                      >
                      > Hi Marc,
                      >
                      > I find the tinyurl link does not work.
                      >
                      > Regards,
                      > Gary Thompson
                      > Australia
                      > (No academic affiliation.)
                      >
                      > Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
                      > Messages in this topic (6)
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >
                      >

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Trudy Kawami
                      Of course we all say that WW I and WW II damaged scholarship, but this is an interesting angle with hard data. Could we take it a step further & say that
                      Message 10 of 12 , Dec 20, 2010
                        Of course we all say that WW I and WW II damaged scholarship, but this
                        is an interesting angle with "hard" data. Could we take it a step
                        further & say that Assyriology & Egyptology were seen as "modern" in the
                        19th century, but now have a retro glow? What I have in mind is the
                        success of the Indiana Jones series which relied on much earlier themes
                        & imagery. Even the invasion of Iraq and the looting of the museum has
                        not produced any updating of the themes.

                        Since I lagged badly in keeping up with post this weekend, I'd better
                        read all the rest before tripping over my own feet (or tongue).

                        Trudy



                        ________________________________

                        From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                        MarcC
                        Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2010 1:41 PM
                        To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [ANE-2] Relative Popularity of Egyptology and Assyriology since
                        1800






                        Instead of grading papers this morning, I did some data mining in Google
                        Books. Since Google has reduced several million vlumes into searchable
                        electronic form, I wondered if it is possble to determine the relative
                        popularity of Assyriology and Egyptology over the last 200 years. So I
                        ran searches for sets of words that are specific to these fields in
                        English, "egyptian hieroglyphic", "babylonian cuneiform", and akkadian.
                        Google's date limited search engine turns out to be imperfect. For
                        instance, a journal run beginning in 1824 will occasionally produce
                        Google references from later periods in earlier period, so the numbers
                        below cannot be taken as the true number of instances in any given
                        period, but the relative numbers are, I think, meaningful. Here are my
                        quickie findings:

                        Egyptian Hieroglyphic Babylonian Cuneiform Akkadian 1800-1820 5780 91 0
                        1820-1840 21900 744 7 1840-1860 32500 6700 58 1860-1880 27400 15500
                        991 1880-1900 32900 35000 14500 1900-1920 21200 33100 5190 1920-1940
                        14300 13700 6670 1940-1960 11300 12900 11900 1960-1980 43100 25200
                        66600 1980-2000 45100 33900 89400

                        The actual date constraints are more precise than suggested above. I
                        used January 1, 1800 to December 31, 1819 for the first period and
                        similar date constraints for those which follow. Also note that the
                        earliest references to Akkadian are all spurious.

                        My first reaction to the table is that the era prior to WW I was a
                        golden age for Ancient Near Eastern Studies. The wars nearly destroyed
                        the field, but it has returned to prominence since 1960.

                        Marc Cooper

                        Missouri State

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Raz Kletter
                        What this data reflects depends on varid factors, eg, if the querry retrieves the keywords from titles, or from any content of the books; if the keywords
                        Message 11 of 12 , Dec 20, 2010
                          What this data reflects depends on varid factors, eg, if the querry
                          retrieves the keywords from titles, or from any content of the books; if the
                          keywords appeared several times in the same book, does it counts as 1 or
                          n-times, etc. The keywords were linguistic, "Egyptian Hierogliphic" might
                          not fish out "Egyptology" in general. One needs to check other fields, and
                          best to compare to some field, whose popularity can be estimated by other
                          means.
                          I am not sure about a pre WW1 Golden age. Except for WW1-2 as noticed by
                          Trudy, the trend in general is of constant growth. It may reflect mainly
                          growth in academic production of books, not necessarily a "retro glow", or
                          popularity in the sense of a general public.
                          Raz Kletter

                          2010/12/20 Trudy Kawami <tkawami@...>

                          >
                          >
                          > Of course we all say that WW I and WW II damaged scholarship, but this
                          > is an interesting angle with "hard" data. Could we take it a step
                          > further & say that Assyriology & Egyptology were seen as "modern" in the
                          > 19th century, but now have a retro glow? What I have in mind is the
                          > success of the Indiana Jones series which relied on much earlier themes
                          > & imagery. Even the invasion of Iraq and the looting of the museum has
                          > not produced any updating of the themes.
                          >
                          > Since I lagged badly in keeping up with post this weekend, I'd better
                          > read all the rest before tripping over my own feet (or tongue).
                          >
                          > Trudy
                          >
                          > ________________________________
                          >
                          > From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:
                          > ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of
                          > MarcC
                          > Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2010 1:41 PM
                          > To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com <ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Subject: [ANE-2] Relative Popularity of Egyptology and Assyriology since
                          > 1800
                          >
                          > Instead of grading papers this morning, I did some data mining in Google
                          > Books. Since Google has reduced several million vlumes into searchable
                          > electronic form, I wondered if it is possble to determine the relative
                          > popularity of Assyriology and Egyptology over the last 200 years. So I
                          > ran searches for sets of words that are specific to these fields in
                          > English, "egyptian hieroglyphic", "babylonian cuneiform", and akkadian.
                          > Google's date limited search engine turns out to be imperfect. For
                          > instance, a journal run beginning in 1824 will occasionally produce
                          > Google references from later periods in earlier period, so the numbers
                          > below cannot be taken as the true number of instances in any given
                          > period, but the relative numbers are, I think, meaningful. Here are my
                          > quickie findings:
                          >
                          > Egyptian Hieroglyphic Babylonian Cuneiform Akkadian 1800-1820 5780 91 0
                          > 1820-1840 21900 744 7 1840-1860 32500 6700 58 1860-1880 27400 15500
                          > 991 1880-1900 32900 35000 14500 1900-1920 21200 33100 5190 1920-1940
                          > 14300 13700 6670 1940-1960 11300 12900 11900 1960-1980 43100 25200
                          > 66600 1980-2000 45100 33900 89400
                          >
                          > The actual date constraints are more precise than suggested above. I
                          > used January 1, 1800 to December 31, 1819 for the first period and
                          > similar date constraints for those which follow. Also note that the
                          > earliest references to Akkadian are all spurious.
                          >
                          > My first reaction to the table is that the era prior to WW I was a
                          > golden age for Ancient Near Eastern Studies. The wars nearly destroyed
                          > the field, but it has returned to prominence since 1960.
                          >
                          > Marc Cooper
                          >
                          > Missouri State
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                          >
                          >


                          --
                          Raz Kletter
                          Varsaallika 6a Tallinn 12013 Estonia


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