|
Notes on the Nippur Expeditions of the University of Pennsylvania
Richard
Franklin Bishop
©
Copyright 2013
by Richard Franklin Bishop
|
|
I
have just
finished reading
all 810
pages of
a book
covering the
four Nippur
(modern day
Iraq) Expeditions
of the
University of
Pennsylvania conducted
at the
turn of
the 20th
Century. 280
pages are
devoted to
this geographical
area with
Professor H.
V. Hilprecht
serving as
the author.
The remaining
530 pages
cover Egypt,
Palestine, Hittites
and other
areas and
were written
by other
authors.
The
book is
a "used"
First Edition,
complete with
golden painted
and trimmed
pages at
the top,
but untrimmed
pages at
the side
and bottom
with 4
maps and
nearly two
hundred illustrations.
With the
glossy paper,
it weighs
in at
about 5
lbs. They
don't
make them
like that
any more!
The citation:
Herman
Volrath Hilprecht,
Editor
Explorations
In
Bible
Lands
During
The
19th
Century
A.
J. Holman
and Company,
Philadelphia, 1903
The
Nippur Expeditions
(called Nuffar
in this
book) were
four explorations
and were
described on
pages 289
- 568 and
took place
during the
years:
I 1888-1889 II 1889-1890 III 1893-1896 IV 1898-1900
The
main participants:
Dr. John
Punnett
Peters
(1852-1921),
Director of
the early
excavations.
Mr.
John
Henry
Haynes
(1849-1910),
Photographer; much
later took
over as
Field Director.
Dr. Herman
Volrath
Hilprecht
(1859-1925),
Secretary &
Assyriologist and
overall Director,
the fourth
Expedition.
The
author, Professor
H. V.
Hilprecht, was
involved with
all the
administrative phases
of the
four expeditions;
mostly as
the Assyrian
language expert
who oversaw
the handling
of the
thousands of
crumbling cuneiform
tablets found
there. As
he documented
everything, it
was easy
for him
to be
critical and
to make
himself look
good and
others look
less than
capable. On
page 308
of his
book, he
said:
- "It will always remain a source of deep regret that Dr. Peters did not rely more upon the judgement and scientific advice of his Assyriologists in deciding strictly technical questions, but that in his anxious but useless efforts to arrange all the essential details of this first expedition in person, he allowed himself frequently to be led by accidents and secondary considerations rather than by a clearly definite plan of methodical operations."
His
colleagues pointed
out that
Hilprecht rarely
involved himself
"in the
trenches" of
the "digs"
like everyone
else. He
was also
the later
target of
a deadly
storm of
criticism (fanned
mostly by
Peters and
Haynes and
their fans)
who in
all seriousness
claimed he
was only
interested in
stealing the
credit for
any sensational
findings of
the expeditions
and with
his publishing
position they
said that
he actually
did so.
On
the very
first expedition,
he severely
criticized the
Expedition Director,
Dr. John
Punnett Peters,
for only
searching willy-nilly
for such
spectacular items
as would
draw spectators
to say,
a P.
T. Barnum
type museum.
This involved
a slam-bang
method of
search that
overlooked the
permanent damage
done to
a site
by incautious
tunneling, dumping
trash on-the-spot
instead of
out of
the way,
and all-around
wrecking the
place so
that present
and future
Archaeologists would
have no
chance to
glean relative
dates or
associations --- which,
supposedly, is
the fundamental
purpose of
all Archaeology
at the
"digs."
He
also
took
the
Director
to
task
for
refusing
to
regularly
take
along:
(1)
an
American
Assyrian
language
Specialist
for
whatever
intelligence
the
cuneiform
tablets
might
provide
about
what
the
layers
of
a
site
had
been
and
when;
(2)
an
American
Engineer
or
Draftsman
capable
of
visualizing
and
drawing
plans
of
the
buildings,
towers,
and
temples
found
in
the
layers
of
a
site.
On
page
320
of
his
book,
he
documents
this
in
the
preparations
for
the
second
exploration:
- "But, at the special desire of Dr. Peters, this time an American scientific staff was entirely dispensed with, though Field and Hilprecht would have been willing to accompany the expedition again, without salary but with increased responsibility."
This
wrangling continued
for years,
because John
Punnett Peters
and his
follower, John
Henry Haynes
(who started
out as
the photographer
and later
became the
business manager)
never changed
their winsome
ways of
crashing and
bashing their
way around
an excavation
like "Rassam's
Gangs." (Over
the
years,
other
Excavators
have
been
accused
of
the
same
unscientific
and
unplanned
plowing
of
the
earth
at
a
"dig"
--- some
even
used
Dynamite).
Sometime
after the
publication of
his book
in 1903,
this all
climaxed in
an investigation
into the
conduct of
Herman Volrath
Hilprecht where
he was
cleared by
the University
of Pennsylvania
of any
wrongdoing
("credit-grabbing"
or anything
else) in
connection with
the Explorations.
But the
sides had
already been
chosen and
formed and
hardened; to
include public
opinion.
A
hundred years
later, author
Susan Frith,
whose article
is shown
in the
Internet (ã
2003 The
Pennsylvania Gazette,
01/05/03)
was taking
Professor H.
V. Hilprecht
to task
because he
wore a
“handlebar”
mustache with
the tips
curled up!
(Many
gentlemen
did
this
in
the
19th
Century
-- probably
even
some
of
her
relatives).
Come
on, now. A little
fairness could
be used
here -- such
a very
long time
after these
events! "Old-time"
Politicians know
about that
tactic: if
you don’t
have the
"goods"
(something definite)
on somebody,
then attack
their character
or peccadilloes.
Even so
much more
effective, if
they are
dead and
cannot defend
themselves. We
must
keep
a
balance
here.
But
he probably
was a
"headline-grabbing"
SOB. So
were many
others (join
the
club!).
Heinrich
Schliemann was
also accused
of this
and reported
his sensational
discoveries directly
to the
press: "announced
with considerable
showmanship and
delight in
publicity." In
the late-19th
Century (after
the vast
Civil War
coverage in
the Newspapers)
prominent persons
were just
learning how
to use
the "media."
There
was an
exhibition at
the PENN
MUSEUM running
from 26
September 2010
to 6
February 2011
entitled "Archaeologists
& Travelers
In
Ottoman
Lands."
One of
the text
displays was
a masterful
compendium entitled:
"3 Intersecting
Lives" by
Professor Robert
G. Ousterhout. The seemingly
objective comparisons
made here
were very
revealing as
to the
conditions prevalent
in both
Iraq and
Philadelphia during
the latter
part of
the 19th
Century. The
three persons
whose lives
were reported
on were:
John
Henry Haynes
Osman
Hamdi Bey
Hermann
(sic) Vollrath
Hilprecht
After
all this
time, nothing
much ever
has been
said to
highlight his
few moments
of fairness.
Professor Hilprecht
did, in
fact, give
copious credit
in his
1903 book
to Peters
(and later
to Haynes)
for the
avalanche of
objects actually
found and
removed to
museums as
well as
any successful
tactical decisions
made by
them on
site. And
he did
this in
the cited
book, over
and over
again. A
couple of
examples:
- ". . . . we recognize that he (Peters) brought to light, a number of facts and antiquities, which enable us to establish at least some of the more general features of this latest reconstruction. He showed that a considerable area around the ziggurrat was enclosed by two gigantic walls protected by towers. ... He arrived at the conclusion that the various constructions belonged together and formed an organic whole."
- ".
. . . Peters very wisely decided to send part of his material out of the country,
' to insure the preservation of something in case of disaster.
' . . . To prevent an attack planned by the enemy upon his camp for the night preceding the final departure of the expedition, Peters
'resorted once more to strategem, and gave a second exhibition of fireworks,' which again had the desired effect.
... the American slipped out of their hands before they realized that he had gone."
- ".
. . . He
(Haynes) was successful again beyond expectation. At the beginning of January, 1895, he had gathered several thousand tablets and fragments and had obtained a fair collection of pottery, seal cylinders, domestic implements, and personal ornaments mostly found in the loose earth or taken from graves in which the upper twenty feet of rubbish abound everywhere at Nuffar.
... He will always deserve great credit for having demonstrated for the first time, by his own example, that it is possible to excavate a Babylonian ruin even during the hottest part of the year without any serious danger to the life of the explorer."
But,
we must
concede that
Hilprecht did
complain and
criticize them
over and
over again,
in private
correspondence to
the University.
The
exoneration of
the University
left only
his hard-core
enemies
out
to "get"
him. When
he left
his Office
at the
University of
Pennsylvania locked
to go
on a
trip to
Europe; they
"fomented"
(rabble-roused)
the staff
to batter
down the
door. What
they found
there were
many items
collected at
the expeditions
still in
packing boxes.
When
Hilprecht heard
of this
trespass, he
immediately resigned
his Chair
in 1911
(probably with
a "Statue
of Liberty"
gesture saying:
"you can
jam it"
). The University
of Pennsylvania
surprised him
by accepting
the resignation.
But,
in a
back-handed
way, Professor
Hilprecht had
the last
laugh. There’s
an old
saying: “The
sweetest revenge
is to
outlive your
critics.” He died
in 1925.
Haynes and
Peters died
in 1910
and 1921,
respectively. But
that couldn't
have done
him much
good from
1921 until
1925, since
by now,
his critics
were legion.
The press
and public
had been
poisoned with
the words
“Scandal.”
And Haynes’s
mind was
gone; he
was institutionalized
at the
time of
his death
in 1910,
“no doubt”
as the
Public were
left to
conclude: “because
of Hilprecht’s
machinations.”
But,
notwithstanding the
shrill accusations,
most of
his criticism
about the
methodology used
in the
excavations was
right. His
academic insistence
on good
planning and
scientific excavation,
allowing object
"sequence-dating"
to be
documented, with
the identification
and recording
of the
smallest objects
or discoloration
of the
smallest stratum
to be
noted, was
in the
vein of
William
Matthew
Flinders
Petrie.
(He
was
the
"pioneer
of
genius"
whose
detailed
reporting
of
his
“digs”
in
Egypt
beginning
in
1884
together
with
the
resulting
"relative-dating"
are
still
held
up
as
a
model
of
the
best
“Textbook”
technique
ever
devised
(by
him)
in
founding
"Comparative”
Archaeology.
See
pp.
51-54,
Leo
Deuel,
Editor,
"The
Treasures
of
Time,"
AVON
BOOKS,
New
York,
1961).
“The
archaeological
value
of
an
object
found
is
in
an
inverse
ratio
to
its
intrinsic
value.”
Peters and
Haynes would
have none
of this.
They had
several chances
to change
their ways
and didn’t.
They always
insisted there
wasn’t enough
time or
funds for
such “extravagance
or luxury.”
Armchair
Archaeologists (such
as they
thought H.
V. Hilprecht
was) always
whine for
that. They
maintained that
in the
hustle and
bustle out
in the
field, that
doesn’t work.
The weather,
political conditions
at the
site, coping
with the
natives, and
staying within
the budget
were more
important than
the minute
documenting of
what and
where things
were found.
If
you are
only looking
for
fame
and
fortune
in the
objects you
seek, it
must hurt
double, after
you have
found them,
just to
“think” that
the
credit
for finding
them might
have been
pilfered right
out from
under you --- by someone
–
by anyone!
Contact
Richard
(Unless
you type
the author's
name
in
the subject
line
of
the message
we
won't know where to send it.)
Richard
Bishop's Biography and Story List
Book
Case
Home
Page
The
Preservation Foundation, Inc., A Nonprofit Book Publisher