Royal Cities and Fortified Cities

Ikeda, Yutaka

doi:10.2307/4200102

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Inscriptions and settlement survey indicate a general pattern in which each kingdom possessed a few dozen agricultural villages that lay in the hinterland of three to five larger towns, all of which surrounded a single major urban centre (Ikeda 1979;Liverani 1992, 125;Mazzoni 1994, 326;Osborne 2013). Not surprisingly, archaeological effort has traditionally concentrated on the capital cities, which include a number of famous Near Eastern sites, Carchemish foremost among them.…”

Section: The Syro-anatolian City-statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Settlement Planning and Urban Symbology in Syro-Anatolian Cities

Osborne¹

2014

CAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few subjects have excited the imagination of archaeologists working in ancient complex societies as have monumentality and urban planning. Yet the two topics are rarely explicitly theorized in a sustained integrated investigation within a single study, despite the fact that monumental architecture is often considered a primary basis for identifying the presence of urban planning. This article makes the related methodological arguments that both phenomena benefit from a more full consideration of one another, and that the meaningful aspect of monumentality and urban symbology needs to be considered in conjunction with the formal aspect of monuments and urban layouts. These positions are then implemented in a study of the Syro-Anatolian city-state system that existed in the ancient Near East during the early first millennium bc. The capital cities of these polities were characterized by a program of monumentality that brought royalty, city walls, gates and monumental sculpture into an unmistakable constellation of associations. The consistency of this pattern of monumentality and urban form suggests that at least a degree of urban planning existed.

show abstract

Section: The Syro-anatolian City-statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Settlement Planning and Urban Symbology in Syro-Anatolian Cities

Osborne¹

2014

CAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The difference between the descriptions in the two sources may be the result of the literary character of the' Azekah Inscription'. The city most probably resisted the Assyrians 8 Mittmann's arguments in favour ofthe identification ofthe Philistine city with Ekron are as follows: a) the city is called "a royal city ofthe Philistines" whereas Gath was a secondary city within the territory of Ashdod (for the term "royal city" [iii sarriitl] in the Assyrian royal inscriptions, see Ikeda 1979); b) the participation of Ekron in the rebellion is explicitly mentioned in Sennacherib's annals; c) the Assyrian royal inscriptions give selective information and we must be careful not to draw conclusions from what is not explicitly said. It is possible that following the siege, Ekron surrendered and opened its gates, thus avoiding a total destruction.…”

Section: The Date Of the 'Azekah Inscription'mentioning

confidence: 99%