level 15
酷酷游戏
楼主
阿卡德国王萨尔贡及其后继者等人所使用的“卢伽尔-基什”(基什之王)这一头衔,并没有限定符号[ki]。从某种意义上来说,阿卡德诸王可能从未宣称自己是“基什城的国王”。
然后属于阿卡德时期的原始铭文中,基什城守护神兼战神-扎巴巴,并没有在阿卡德诸王铭文中出现,最被推崇的是阿卡德军神兼国神-Ilaba(伊拉巴,注:其他学者认为伊拉巴是扎巴巴写法上的变体。),以及Ištar Annunitum。
For this understanding of the title, see in essence already Jacobsen 1939a, cited above in n. 43. Since some Assyriologists still think that, as used by Sargon, Rimuš, and Maništušu, LUGAL KIŠ means “king of Kiš,” I offer an additional clarification. That the title meant šar kiššatim already in Sargonic times is shown by the fact that, in the same inscriptions, LUGAL KIŠ invariably lacks the indicator KI, whereas the toponym Kiški is always written with it (Steinkeller 1993: 120 n. 35). Here it is also significant that Sargon and his followers never claimed to be the kings of the city of Kiš, their own particular kingship being localized in the city of Akkade. Until the time of the Great Revolt during the reign of Naram-Suen, Kiš was governed by a semi-independent ruler, apparently holding the title of ensik, who was a vassal of the king of Akkade. Here notice also that Zababa, the titulary god of Kiš, is never mentioned in the original Sargonic royal inscriptions. In that period, the martial deities par excellence were Ilaba, the god of Akkade, and Ištar Annunitum of Ulmaš (part of Akkade).
《An archaic “prisoner plaque” from kis》节选内容,引文。
作者:Piotr Steinkeller,哈佛大学-近东研究学院,2013年发表于《亚述学和东方考古学杂志》(《Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale)。
这细节实在过于……如若深究,可以引出各路讨论。
单纯看文本内容,没有更多描述情况下,萨尔贡原籍极有可能就是基什城。(新亚述时期那个描述萨尔贡出身的故事,与《乌尔扎巴巴与萨尔贡》内容矛盾重重。能不能取信,这是个严肃且值得思考的问题。)
然而Steinkeller教授,文中给出另外看法,虽然《王表》WB版,说萨尔贡是乌尔扎巴巴的持杯官,但极有可能根本是一个"基什的局外人"。
有关萨尔贡的铭文其实不多(不排除本人孤陋寡闻),若考虑那些铭文的时期,更是存疑。印象里,好像真没有“萨尔贡宣称基什王”的铭文内容,采用“基什王”的,是他的后继者(Rimuš, and Maništušu),萨尔贡是否宣称过这一头衔,个人真没留意过哪块铭文有说。
另外,《乌尔扎巴巴与萨尔贡》故事中似乎讲解(暗示?但结尾残缺,结局的确不明)萨尔贡如何登上基什权力顶峰。可这些内容与《王表》WB版、《王表》乌尔第三王朝时期手稿版内容,存在矛盾。《王表》显示,乌尔扎巴巴之后,仍有其他国王统治基什。除非另有资料显示说,这个时期的基什王全是萨尔贡附庸,否则很难取信。

贴张梗图,转换一下台词,搞笑一下:“亚述学的事情,你们不用搞这么清楚,知道没”。
2019年07月18日 10点07分
1
然后属于阿卡德时期的原始铭文中,基什城守护神兼战神-扎巴巴,并没有在阿卡德诸王铭文中出现,最被推崇的是阿卡德军神兼国神-Ilaba(伊拉巴,注:其他学者认为伊拉巴是扎巴巴写法上的变体。),以及Ištar Annunitum。
For this understanding of the title, see in essence already Jacobsen 1939a, cited above in n. 43. Since some Assyriologists still think that, as used by Sargon, Rimuš, and Maništušu, LUGAL KIŠ means “king of Kiš,” I offer an additional clarification. That the title meant šar kiššatim already in Sargonic times is shown by the fact that, in the same inscriptions, LUGAL KIŠ invariably lacks the indicator KI, whereas the toponym Kiški is always written with it (Steinkeller 1993: 120 n. 35). Here it is also significant that Sargon and his followers never claimed to be the kings of the city of Kiš, their own particular kingship being localized in the city of Akkade. Until the time of the Great Revolt during the reign of Naram-Suen, Kiš was governed by a semi-independent ruler, apparently holding the title of ensik, who was a vassal of the king of Akkade. Here notice also that Zababa, the titulary god of Kiš, is never mentioned in the original Sargonic royal inscriptions. In that period, the martial deities par excellence were Ilaba, the god of Akkade, and Ištar Annunitum of Ulmaš (part of Akkade).
《An archaic “prisoner plaque” from kis》节选内容,引文。
作者:Piotr Steinkeller,哈佛大学-近东研究学院,2013年发表于《亚述学和东方考古学杂志》(《Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale)。
单纯看文本内容,没有更多描述情况下,萨尔贡原籍极有可能就是基什城。(新亚述时期那个描述萨尔贡出身的故事,与《乌尔扎巴巴与萨尔贡》内容矛盾重重。能不能取信,这是个严肃且值得思考的问题。)
然而Steinkeller教授,文中给出另外看法,虽然《王表》WB版,说萨尔贡是乌尔扎巴巴的持杯官,但极有可能根本是一个"基什的局外人"。
有关萨尔贡的铭文其实不多(不排除本人孤陋寡闻),若考虑那些铭文的时期,更是存疑。印象里,好像真没有“萨尔贡宣称基什王”的铭文内容,采用“基什王”的,是他的后继者(Rimuš, and Maništušu),萨尔贡是否宣称过这一头衔,个人真没留意过哪块铭文有说。
另外,《乌尔扎巴巴与萨尔贡》故事中似乎讲解(暗示?但结尾残缺,结局的确不明)萨尔贡如何登上基什权力顶峰。可这些内容与《王表》WB版、《王表》乌尔第三王朝时期手稿版内容,存在矛盾。《王表》显示,乌尔扎巴巴之后,仍有其他国王统治基什。除非另有资料显示说,这个时期的基什王全是萨尔贡附庸,否则很难取信。

贴张梗图,转换一下台词,搞笑一下:“亚述学的事情,你们不用搞这么清楚,知道没”。
