https://urkesh.org / RECORD / GRAMMAR / bibl

A Grammar of the Archaeological Record (Version 2)

Bibliography

Annotated bibliography

February 2025

This page lists bibliographical entries mentioned in some of the digital books of the UGR, which are placed here and not added to the e-Library because they do not have a main topic clearly referring to Urkesh/Tell Mozan.

A brief summary of the content is provided after each bibliographical entry and in some cases wider abstracts are offered. In these abstracts, sized in paragraphs, some peculiar keywords or relevant passages are bolded to strees the topic of each section.

When a review of a publication is available, it is indicated within curly brackets, with the link to the review itself.

All bibliographical entries are contained in this single file, which is sorted alphabetically by the name of the author(s). Please refer to the left side bar as a jump-off point for the retrieval of given items.

A separate file lists the entries chronologically.

Another separate file lists the entries in an alphabetical order, with only the name of the author and a short mention of the title.

NOTES:

  • the “chain-like”/hyperlink symbol () at the left of each bibliographical entry provides, by hovering the mouse cursor over it, the hyperlink to that very entry;
  • to the right of each bibliographical entry, the reader will find a cross-reference link to the page where the entry is mentioned.

Total entries: 6.


A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   X   Y   Z

Buccellati, Federico ; Nicolò Dell’Unto ; Maurizio Forte

2005 “The Tell Mozan/Urkesh Archaeological Project: an Integrated Approach of Spatial Technologies”
in Forte, Maurizio (ed.), The Reconstruction of Archaeological Landscapes through Digital Technologies
Oxford: BAR International, pp. 171-183

This paper presents the application of new technologies in the study of archaeological remains (mostly structures).

After an introduction about Urkesh (paragraph 1) and its geography and history (paragraph 2), stressing the importance of the Royal Palace [see The Royal Palace Seals and seal impressions] for the recognition of the Hurrian identity of Urkesh’s inhabitants, the author describes the conservation strategy applied for the preservation of the Royal Palace (paragraph 3) [see Preservation Record and Buccellati 2006 Buccellati 2006], explaining the usefulness of such a publishing approach.

Paragraph 6 defines the benefits of using digital technologies (mostly 3D renderings and reconstructions), allowing to (re)create a ‘virtual heritage’, outlined as “the digital information derived by perception, interpretation, learning, knowledge, communication of a cultural item; […] the virtual heritage [considered as] an ontology of the cultural heritage” (p. 175); the paragraph further investigates the modern technologies usually applied in archaeology.

Paragraph 7 relates with ‘Remote Sensing Applications’, offering “the reconstruction of a spatial virtual reality system dedicated to the investigation of the ancient Urkesh” (p. 176) [Figs. 6-8 displays respectively a Corona imagery, a Landsat 7 ETM 8 bands imagery and a SPOT Panchromatic imagery of Urkesh].

Paragraph 8 describes the use of LandStar-DGPS, “a satellite delivered GPS correction service providing 24 hour accurate and reliable real time precise positioning on land” (p. 178).

Paragraph 9 discusses the virtual reconstruction of the archaeological landscape within a diachronic interpretation of the territory.

Paragraph 10 reports photo modelling techniques used at Urkesh, while paragraph 11 give an account of the digital processing system.

Paragraph 12 relies with two case studies (the Royal Palace and a Hurrian tablet), testing the potentiality of the aforementioned techniques on both a macro and micro scale context.

The conclusions (paragraph 13) summarize the possible development of this system and its remarkable features: 1) the portability of the system; 2) a desktop virtual reality; 3) the development of a timeline of the site; 4) 3D renderings of both structures and finds (and the creation of a 3D archaeological, spatial georeferenced, environment; 5) a cultural and methodological contextualization; 6) simulations of an artificial ancient environment; 7) the multimedia and upgradeability of the system; 8) a friendly interface for scientific communication and edutainment; 9) fast time in data dissemination; 10) the accessibility of heterogeneous data in the same environment.

See full text

See abstract

– Marco De Pietri, 2019

Back to top



Buccellati, Giorgio

2006 “A Browser Edition of the Royal Palace of Urkesh: Principles and Presuppositions”
in Butterlin, P. et al. (eds), Les espaces syro-mésopotamiens: dimensions de l’experience humaine au proche-orient ancien : volume d’hommage offert à Jean-Claude Margueron
Turnhout: Brepols, pp. 49-55

The recording system for data from Tell Mozan’s excavation bases on a digital perspective structured within the frame of the so-called ‘Urkesh Global Record’, a ‘browser edition’ set up by means of a specific ‘grammar’ and of a ‘structured fluidity’ of the archaeological record.

See full text

See abstract

– Marco De Pietri, 2019
2006 “On (e)-tic and -emic”
Backdirt (Winter 2006), pp. 12-13

The authors reflects in this paper about the distinction between the concepts of -emic and ethic under a linguistic and archaeological perspective: «In my view, the basic underlying concept is the distinction between an open and a closed system, where -etic refers to the first, and -emic to the second» (p. 12). The last concept is then well-explained with a concrete example, i.e. the perception and formal definition of colours in the archaeological recording process and in the common life, too (mentioning the example of the spotlights).

See full text

– Marco De Pietri, 2020
2017 Critique of Archaeological Reason. Structural, Digital and Philosophical Aspects of the Archaeological Record.
New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cited as CAR in this website. See publisher’s link.
2017 “Iconology in the Light of Archaeological Reason”
in Avestisyan, Pavel S. and Grekyan, Yervand H. (eds), Bridging Times and Spaces: Papers in Ancient Near Eastern, Mediterranean and Armenian Studies: Honouring Gregory E. Areshian On the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday
Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 49-60 [eISBN: 978-1-78491-700-5]

The thrust of the iconological approach was to identify a unifying point of reference behind the formal details of iconography. This can help us approach cultural traditions for which there are no longer any living carriers. ‘Archaeological reason’ defines the conditions of possibility for reaching behind the gap and suggests ways to re-appropriate the lost experience. In this way we develop a semiotics that can be controlled formally, particularly through distributional and perceptual analysis (Author’s abstract).

See full text

DOI

– Marco De Pietri, 2022

Back to top



Buccellati, Giorgio ; Marilyn Kelly-Buccellati

2008 “The Ceramics of Urkesh: Statistics for a Browser Edition”
D. Bonatz et al. (eds.) Fundstellen Gesammelte Schriften zur Archäologie und Geschichte Altvorderasiens ad honorem Hartmut Kühne
Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, pp. 315-326.

The peculiar ‘digital thought’, implying a ‘digital edition’ of data, is applied at Urkesh also for ceramic recording. This coherent system led to the creation of a ‘digital database of pottery’ which consists of ‘minimal constituents’, ‘frequencies’, and ‘correlations’ allowing a whole understanting of the ceramic assemblage at Urkesh.

See full text

See abstract

– Marco De Pietri, 2019

Back to top