Global ETD Search

51	Weapons, warfare and skeleton injuries during the Iron Age in the Ancient Near East Pretorius, Johan 06 1900 (has links) Due to the nature of war, persons are killed with various types of weapons. Throughout the history of humanity, weapons were used in this regard and these weapons left injuries on the victims that are distinguishable. The type of force conveyed by the ancient weapons effected injuries that enable modern-day bioarchaeologists to extrapolate which weapons caused which injuries. The Assyrians depicted their wars and battles on reliefs. An analysis of these depictions, with an extrapolation of the lesions expected in skeletal remains, could contribute to better understanding of the strategies of war in ancient times. This dissertation will discuss how the evaluation of human remains in comparison to Assyrian reliefs may contribute to the chronological knowledge of war and warfare in the Iron Age Ancient Near East – especially at Lachish. A discourse of the approaches available to researchers regarding access to data in the forensic bioarchaeological field will be presented. / Biblical and Ancient Studies / M.A. (Biblical Archaeology) Ancient Near East Assyrian reliefs Bioarchaeology Blunt force trauma Chronology Forensic anthropology Human remains Iron Age Lachish Lachish reliefs Radiocarbon dating Sharp force trauma Skeletal remains War Warfare Weaponry Wound patterns 220.930956 War -- Biblical teaching Iron age -- Middle East Weapons, Ancient -- Middle East Assyrians -- Middle East Blunt trauma -- Middle East Forensic archaeology -- Middle East Radiocarbon dating -- Middle East Iron age -- Israel -- Lachish Weapons, Ancient -- Israel -- Lachish Warfare, Prehistoric -- Middle East Assyrians -- Israel -- Lachish Blunt trauma -- Israel -- Lachish Radiocarbon dating -- Israel -- Lachish
52	Aspects of ancient Near Eastern chronology (c. 1600-700 BC) Furlong, Pierce James January 2007 (has links) (PDF) The chronology of the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age Near East is currently a topic of intense scholarly debate. The conventional/orthodox chronology for this period has been assembled over the past one-two centuries using information from King-lists, royal annals and administrative documents, primarily those from the Great Kingdoms of Egypt, Assyria and Babylonia. This major enterprise has resulted in what can best be described as an extremely complex but little understood jigsaw puzzle composed of a multiplicity of loosely connected data. I argue in my thesis that this conventional chronology is fundamentally wrong, and that Egyptian New Kingdom (Memphite) dates should be lowered by 200 years to match historical actuality. This chronological adjustment is achieved in two stages: first, the removal of precisely 85 years of absolute Assyrian chronology from between the reigns of Shalmaneser II and Ashur-dan II; and second, the downward displacement of Egyptian Memphite dates relative to LBA Assyrian chronology by a further 115 years. Moreover, I rely upon Kuhnian epistemology to structure this alternate chronology so as to make it methodologically superior to the conventional chronology in terms of historical accuracy, precision, consistency and testability.

Search results

Weapons, warfare and skeleton injuries during the Iron Age in the Ancient Near East

Aspects of ancient Near Eastern chronology (c. 1600-700 BC)