‘Many Great Treasures’ of ‘Great Beauty’, or ‘Crude and Cramped’? The Appraisal of ‘Nineveh’s Remains’ by Austen Henry Layard, Stratford Canning, and Henry Rawlinson

IF 1.2 0 ARCHAEOLOGY Bulletin of the History of Archaeology Pub Date : 2018-06-28 DOI:10.5334/BHA-594
Robin Hoeks
{"title":"‘Many Great Treasures’ of ‘Great Beauty’, or ‘Crude and Cramped’? The Appraisal of ‘Nineveh’s Remains’ by Austen Henry Layard, Stratford Canning, and Henry Rawlinson","authors":"Robin Hoeks","doi":"10.5334/BHA-594","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One need only point to the destruction caused to the archaeological sites of Iraq and Syria by Islamic State to see an example of the role heritage plays in the construction of identities, and of a past serving a contemporary agenda. Credit for the ‘discovery’ of the antiquities of Mesopotamia goes to Paul-Emile Botta (1802–1870), and Austen Henry Layard (1817–1894). Most British scholars had long considered the Mesopotamian antiquities to be inferior to Greco-Roman antiquities. Before the 1840’s, this group of upper-class critics had been the most important public of the British Museum. During the middle of the nineteenth-century, however, Layard’s Assyrian remains became both symbols of, and stakes in, a struggle for wider public access. Their rejection by the critics was contrasted with both historical and aesthetic admiration by the middle- and working classes. Simultaneously, the critics stood on one side of a developing rift between themselves and the archaeologists of a new discipline. In this article I analyse the appraisal of the Mesopotamian sculptures through a critical appraisal of the historiography and an analysis of the Layard Papers, in order to gain a better insight into the reception of the Assyrian antiquities in Victorian Great-Britain.","PeriodicalId":41664,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5334/BHA-594","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the History of Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/BHA-594","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One need only point to the destruction caused to the archaeological sites of Iraq and Syria by Islamic State to see an example of the role heritage plays in the construction of identities, and of a past serving a contemporary agenda. Credit for the ‘discovery’ of the antiquities of Mesopotamia goes to Paul-Emile Botta (1802–1870), and Austen Henry Layard (1817–1894). Most British scholars had long considered the Mesopotamian antiquities to be inferior to Greco-Roman antiquities. Before the 1840’s, this group of upper-class critics had been the most important public of the British Museum. During the middle of the nineteenth-century, however, Layard’s Assyrian remains became both symbols of, and stakes in, a struggle for wider public access. Their rejection by the critics was contrasted with both historical and aesthetic admiration by the middle- and working classes. Simultaneously, the critics stood on one side of a developing rift between themselves and the archaeologists of a new discipline. In this article I analyse the appraisal of the Mesopotamian sculptures through a critical appraisal of the historiography and an analysis of the Layard Papers, in order to gain a better insight into the reception of the Assyrian antiquities in Victorian Great-Britain.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“伟大的美丽”的“许多伟大的宝藏”,还是“粗糙和狭窄”?奥斯汀·亨利·莱亚德、斯特拉特福·坎宁和亨利·罗林森对“尼尼微遗迹”的评价
只要看看伊斯兰国(Islamic State)对伊拉克和叙利亚考古遗址造成的破坏,就能看出遗产在身份建构中发挥的作用,以及过去为当代议程服务的例子。保罗-埃米尔·博塔(1802-1870)和奥斯汀·亨利·莱亚德(1817-1894)是“发现”美索不达米亚古物的人。大多数英国学者长期以来一直认为美索不达米亚的文物不如希腊罗马的文物。在19世纪40年代以前,这群上层批评家一直是大英博物馆最重要的公众。然而,在19世纪中叶,莱亚德的亚述遗骸成为争取更广泛的公众进入的斗争的象征和赌注。批评家们对他们的排斥与中产阶级和工人阶级在历史和美学上的赞赏形成了鲜明对比。与此同时,批评家们站在他们自己与新学科的考古学家之间不断发展的裂痕的一边。在本文中,我通过对史学的批判性评价和对莱亚德文件的分析来分析对美索不达米亚雕塑的评价,以便更好地了解维多利亚时代大不列颠对亚述文物的接受情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
‘Archaeology is but Ethnology in the past tense’. Theoretical Proofs and Intellectual Technologies in André Leroi-Gourhan’s Archived Archéologie du Pacifique-Nord, 1946 Mr Miles, Mr Oldfield and Professor Huxley: Early Thoughts on the Origins of the Australians Rewriting the Past for the Changing Present: The Need for New and Pluriversal Histories of Archaeology Smuggling Cuneiform Tablets in Aniseed Bags: Profile of a Sale Made by Elias Gejou to the British Museum in 1896 Christian Archaeology in Malta between the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries from Two Unknown Letters
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1