The development of Turkish nationalism was one of the prominent phenomena in the Young Turk Era (1908-1918). The Türk Yurdu (Turkish Homeland) was a leading nationalist periodical in the era. Studies on this periodical carried out until now, however, show a serious deficiency; they cannot perceive the difference between the thoughts of two groups who co-operated in publishing the periodical: Ottoman Turks and immigrants from Russia. The latter directed nationalist movements to free themselves from czarist rule prior to their emigration to the Ottoman Empire. Accordingly, Pan-Turkism was a dominant characteristic of their thought. Ottoman Turkish nationalists who issued the Genç Kalernler (Young Pens) and contributed to the Türk Dernegi (Turkish Association) before publishing the Türk Yurdu advocated, in these periodicals, political integration of the Ottoman state, which was denied by Yusuf Akçura, an immigrant, in his 1904 article “Üç Tarz-i Siyaset” (Three Ways of Policy). In this paper, I make a comparison among the articles of these groups.
The Türk Yurdu was founded owing to the initiative of the immigrants and Turks under czarist rule. The management was taken by them as well, especially by Akçura. A half of the informations collected in Turkish Affairs (Türklük Süunu) columns of the periodical was concerned with Turks under Russian and Chinese rules. A half of the newspapers whose articles were reproduced in the Press (Matbuat) columns also was published in Russian Empire although numbers of immigrant contributors were not so high. They definitely advocated Pan-Turkism, or national integration of Turks, and rejected the compatibility of Turkish nationalism with Ottomanism.
The most urgent problem for Ottoman Turkish nationalists was preserving the political integration of the Ottoman Empire even after the Balkan Wars. Consequently they supported the centralistic Ottomanism. Ziya Gökalp and Fuad Köprülü, for example, emphasized that Turkish nationalism was required for strengthening the integration of the Ottoman state. Moreover, Gökalp regarded Pan-Turkism as an aid for the Ottoman state (Osmanlilik).

抄録全体を表示

Terumasa OSHIRO, Some Aspects of Hieroglyphic Luwian: The purpose of this brief paper is to clarify some obscure linguistic aspects of Hieroglyphic Luwian, a member of the Luwian branch. This language, which is used in the Hieroglyphic inscriptions of the 1st millennium B. C., was formerly recognized as ‘Hieroglyphic Hittite’, but this term is now abandoned. It is important to note that there should be a clear distinction between the cultural use of the term ‘Hittite’ and its linguistic use. Thus Hieroglyphic Luwian obviously inherited various linguistic elements from Pre-Luwian. However, we can point out some peculiar elements in this language. Especially we shall be concerned with the linguistic characteristics compared with Hittite, such as the -hi conjugation of -i/-ia, -tisa, subordinate conjunctions of kuman, REL-i, REL-à, and the local adverb INFRA-ta.
On the -hi conjugation we might suggest that Hieroglyphic Luwian first inherited the contrast between -mi and -hi conjugations from Common Anatolian and then lost it, except the -ti/-i contrast (prs. sg. 3). Incidentally -tisa (prs. sg. 2) and -ta (prt. sg. 2) endings might be considered as the remains of -hi conjugation. The -ti/-i contrast in Hieroglyphic Luwian will be similar to that in Hittite. But it is difficult to understand why the -mi/-hi contrast is preserved only in the third person singular present in this language. Further, kuman is clearly compared with kuitman in Hittite, which can be analyzed into *kuit and *man, though the Hieroglyphic Luwian form is different from the early compound form as the result of the linguistic Luwoid innovation. And we can indicate two forms of the local adverbs meaning “under”: SUB-na-na (*anan) parallel to annan in Cuneiform Luwian and ene in Lycian, and INFRA-ta (*kata) compared with katta in Hittite. The distinction between the two forms can't be clearly defined from the functional point of view, but it is probable that there is a functional contrast between them.
The evidences mentioned above ought to suggest one of the two posibilities: either Hieroglyphic Luwian inherited some archaic elements from Common Anatolian, or Hieroglyphic Luwian originally created and innovated them, perhaps under the indirect influence of Hittite. Therefore, this problem will be discussed in future from the viewpoint of the comparative study.

抄録全体を表示

Romance poetry in classical persian literature attains its distinct maturity in the twelfth century. While, at first glance maintaining a kind of fantastic story-telling appearance, the romance poem is outstanding for its remarkable expression of human will and desire as well as, in the midst of all the mystical poems that dominate classical Persian literature, for its extremely practical manner of description.
In an effort to trace images of women described in the romance poems, we meet with the figure of the ideal woman: Shirin in Khusrau u Shirin written by Nizami.
Within Shirin, we find a strong human sensitivity, by no means uncommon among women figures in earlier romance poetry before the appearance of Shirin and at the same time, symbolic mysticism seen in the women in romance epics after Shirin. Indeed, Shirin seems to be endowed with both the sacred and secular, and this ideal image of women, possessing both contrasting features, seems to continue to the present day.

抄録全体を表示

We can find in the Ugaritic personnel lists šrm “singers” which derives from the verb šr “to sing”. We can identify several personal names of šrm in the KTU 4.35: 11-15, 4.183: II: 2-3 and 4.609: 17, 31, 37. Of those personal names we have bn. kdgdl in the KTU 4.183: II: 3. We can construe kdgdl as kdg-dl and kdg seems to be non-Semitic. It may be a word of Hurrian origin.
The duties of šrm is to sing in several scenes. We can see from the KTU 1.106 that one of their duties is to sing in the ritual of a fixed month. In the KTU 1.106: 15-17, after the sacrifices are offered to the various gods, a singer (šr) sings 10 times befor the king and the king opens his hand as an act of prayer.
The rations of šrm are identified in the KTU 4.168: 3-4 and 4.609. In the KTU 4.103: 41-43, we encounter the description of the land (šd) of bn. hrmin who is one of the šrm. Therefore some of the šrm are landowners (b'l šd).
Singers have to pay tribute in some cases. In the list of tribute for the emperor levied on cities and personnels (KTU 4.610), the term šrm occurs together with the figure of 20 (shekel). This figure 20 is about average and seems to be neither too large nor too small. We can also find šrm in the lists of bowmen supplied by towns and personnels (KTU 4.68).
Šrm is counted as a member of the bnš mlk “personnels of king” in the KTU 4.609 and 4.141. Therefor the rations of šrm is allocated by the king of Ugarit. Assuming that šrm would do their duties mainly in the temples of Ugarit together with the priests, we may count them among the “temple personnels”.
Our conclusions are as follows. The main duty of šrm was to sing in the rituals performed in the Ugaritic kingdom. They were under the control of the king of Ugarit in an administrative sense and under the partonage of the king in the economic sense.

抄録全体を表示

In this paper I shall discuss the ki-a-nag (the libation place for the dead) of the Pre-Sargonic Lagaš, especially the ki-a-nag of Enentarzi who was the first ruler of the new dynasty after that of Urnanše. We have many records about ki-a-nag in the administrative-economic archives of the é-mí (the house of the wife (of the ruler)). There are some kinds of ki-a-nag as follows: ki-a-nag, the ki-a-nag of Enentarzi, the ki-a-nag of lugal of Lagaš (district), the ki-a-nag of NINA (district) and the ki-a-nag of Urub (district). The most significants results of my investigation are the following:
1. We find the ki-a-nag of Lagaš and of NINA in níg-giš-tag-ga texts, detailed account books of offerings for deities and temples. It is the point at issue why these two places were involved in the records of offerings to deities, though ancestors were generally differenciated from deities.
2. The ki-a-nag of Urub in which maš-da-ri-a offerings were brought seems to be identical with that of Enentarzi, because he was the only one departed spirit who was given those in his ki-a-nag.
3. The ki-a-nag of ensi is identical with that of Enentarzi according to DP 56 and Nik. I, 161.
4. The ki-a-nag of Enentarzi was built in the first year of his reign according to RA 11, 61.
5. Lugalanda and Barnamtarra, his wife, gave many offerings to the ki-a-nag of Enentarzi, but they did not directly bring those to this place.
6. The ki-a-nag in gar lists, lists of monthly expenditure of barley and emmer, seems to be identical with that of Enentarzi, because Dudu, father of Enentarzi and sanga of Ningirsu, had been received and Lugalanda and his wife had individually given same quantity of emmer and barley to it every month until the first year of Uruinimgina, ensi.
7. Dudu was enshrined in the é-ki-šál-la, not his ki-a-nag.
8. I can find the ki-a-nag of Enentarzi but can not find that of Lugalanda, his son, in the records.
9. Uruinimgina suspended the giving of cereal to ki-a-nag of Enentarzi from the first year of lugal. Therefore he seemed to have had the obligation to worship his ki-a-nag. He, however, gave emmer to Enentarzi and Lugalanda in the fifth and sixth year of his reign according to DP 53, Fö 14 and Nik. I, 89.
10. The ki-a-nag in VAT 4875 and DP 57 might have been identical with that of Uruinimgina, because he as well as Enentarzi was the first ruler of the dynasty and also must have built his ki-a-nag.
The ki-a-nag was the sacred place that the first ruler of the dynasty must have built and the successors and their wives must have been enshrined together. Urnanše also may have built his ki-a-nag, because he was the first ruler of the dynasty. Some of the ancestors such as Gilgameš must have become a deity. When the ancestor who had been enshrined in a ki-a-nag was deified, his ki-a-nag became the holy place such as the temple of Ningirsu. The ki-a-nag of lugal of Lagaš must have been that of Urnanše, because he had assumed the title of lugal.
Enentarzi, the first ruler of the dynasty, built his ki-a-nag and Lugalanda, his successor, was enshrined together with him in the same ki-a-nag. It had been the private libation place in which the ruler's family worshipped. Under the reign of Uruinimgina, his ki-a-nag became the place that the ruler worshipped officially. He attemped to make his rulersnip stronger in relation to his reform policy.

抄録全体を表示

As for the investiture of Ardashir II (379-83), L. Trümpelmann and G. Azarpay propounded that it represented the victory of Shahpur II (307-79) over Julian II (360-63) and was produced by him from 363 to 379 A. D., rejecting the traditional identification of the invested king with Ardashir II. The present author partly agrees at this new theory and concludes that this rock-cut relief represents both the victory of Shahpur II and the investiture of Ardashir II, and also that it was produced by Shahpur II before his death and Ardashir II's enthronement.
The main reason why it was produced by Shahpur II might be that he wanted to declare the contract between him and Ardashir (II) to the effect that he designated Ardashir (II) as heir apparent but only under the strict condition that Ardashir (II) would hand over the royal crown to Shahpur (III), son of Shahpur II in the future. The reason why Mithra is included in the relief might be that the above-mentioned contract was concluded witnessed by Mithra, God of Contract or Ardashir (II) swore to fulfill that contract in the presence of Mithra.
As for the images of Shahpur II and III in the Smaller Grotto, the present author concludes that they were not produced by Shahpur III but his father, Shahpur II before his death. His argument depends upon the fact that the crown of Shahpur III on the relief does not coincide with those on silver coins issued by him but rather similar to that on gold commemorative coin issued by Shahpur II before 379 A. D.. The purpose of making the confronted images of father and son was to enhance the legitimacy to rule which which was to be given to Shahpur (III) as the Sasanian king of kings.

抄録全体を表示

There is no established theory about the origin of the hemispherical bowl with facet decoration which was excavated at the tomb 126 of the Niizawasenzuka in Kashiwara, Nara-prefecture, Japan (Type II). But some similar hemispherical bowls are found at the vestiges of the roman glass vessels—Tanais in the northern shore of the Black sea, Karanis in Egypt, Sardis in Turkey, Dura Europos in Syria, Himlingøje in Denmark, Köln in Germany, etc (Type I). And recently, some Type I examples are excavated at Gulougang in Nanjing and Wulidun in Hebei Province, China.
About the western vestiges as Tanais, Dura Europos and Karanis, the buried dates can be fixed practically (Tanais was broken down by the great fire in the 240's, the glass bowls I mentioned above were excavated at the stratum just before the fire. Dura Europos was in existance at most as long as 256, when it was ruined by the attack of Shapur I, the Sassanian King. So the date of the vestiges are almost equal). On the other hand, about the examples excavated in China, even if the epitaph is not found, but the buried date can be settled by comparing with the remains which are excavated at the other similar dated tombs (the date is Xijin or early Dongjin period, from the end of the third century to early forth century.).
So as far as Type I is concerned, in the west, they were made in the middle of the third century, and in the east, in the middle of the third century or at the beginning of the forth century. And this disparity of the term shows the term which was needed for its diffusion.
In turn, the hemispherical bowls with facet decoration like the excavation from the Niizawasenzuka (Type II) are found at some vestiges of early Sassan period—at Tell Mahuz, Choche in Mesoptamia. They are the preceding form of the Shosoin-Type, which are excavated at Kish in Mesopotamia, etc. (produced in the middle of the Sassan period).
In this thesis, standing on these facts, the eastern diffusion of the hemispherical bowl with facet decoration is considered.

抄録全体を表示