Lesson plan

Apiaká

Apiak/Api'ak (a-pi-ak ki or a-pi 5 -ak ki ), sited between Kish and Marad to the south. It was active from the late 3rd millennium Akkadian Empire period, through the Ur III period, and Isin-Larsa period before disappearing from history. It is known to have lain, as did Kiritab to the north, on the Abgal Canal which branched off from the Euphrates river south of Kish. After passing Apiak the Abgal Canal continued south to Marad. This territory was controlled for a time by the Manana Dynasty with two year names of ruler Halium mentioning the Abgal. A year name of Marad ruler Sumu-ditan also mentions the Abgal. The "Canal of Me-en-ili" is known to have bordered the Apiak province on the east in Ur III times. A location at the modern town of Fallujah has been suggested. It was speculated at one point, based on a thousand year later Neo-Babylonian text, that the city of Apak was the same city as Apiak and that it was in the vicinity of Babylon (being donated to support the god Bel there). Apak was also mentioned in an annal of Neo-Assyrian ruler Sennacherib. A god, Ḫuškia (name suggested to mean "Furious one of the netherworld"), associated with Nergal is said to have had a temple at Apiak. A Rubātum is known to have been a nadītu of Nergal at Apiak in the Old Babylonian period.

Back to article

Article summary

Apiak/Api'ak (a-pi-ak ki or a-pi 5 -ak ki ), sited between Kish and Marad to the south. It was active from the late 3rd millennium Akkadian Empire period, through the Ur III period, and Isin-Larsa period before disappearing from history. It is known to have lain, as did Kiritab to the north, on the Abgal Canal which branched off from the Euphrates river south of Kish. After passing Apiak the Abgal Canal continued south to Marad. This territory was controlled for a time by the Manana Dynasty with two year names of ruler Halium mentioning the Abgal. A year name of Marad ruler Sumu-ditan also mentions the Abgal. The "Canal of Me-en-ili" is known to have bordered the Apiak province on the east in Ur III times. A location at the modern town of Fallujah has been suggested. It was speculated at one point, based on a thousand year later Neo-Babylonian text, that the city of Apak was the same city as Apiak and that it was in the vicinity of Babylon (being donated to support the god Bel there). Apak was also mentioned in an annal of Neo-Assyrian ruler Sennacherib. A god, Ḫuškia (name suggested to mean "Furious one of the netherworld"), associated with Nergal is said to have had a temple at Apiak. A Rubātum is known to have been a nadītu of Nergal at Apiak in the Old Babylonian period.

Key claims

  1. P1394: apia1248 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  2. P1627: api — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  3. P17: Q155 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  4. P1999: Q20672090 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  5. P2192: 656 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  6. P220: api — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  7. P2341: Q42824 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  8. P2341: Q39517 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  9. P2355: 1507 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  10. P279: Q34070 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  11. P2888: http://publications.europa.eu/resource/authority/language/API — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  12. P305: api — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  13. P31: Q34770 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  14. P31: Q1288568 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  15. P3823: Q29051560 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  16. P4839: Entity["Language", "Apiaka::35x9v"] — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  17. P646: /m/02hx2vn — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95
  18. P910: Q33660015 — source: Wikidata · confidence 0.95

Discussion questions

  1. Summarise the article in your own words. Which single claim would you verify first, and why?
  2. The record states that the P1394 is "apia1248". What evidence would count against this claim?
  3. The record states that the P1627 is "api". What evidence would count against this claim?
  4. The record states that the P17 is "Q155". What evidence would count against this claim?
  5. The record states that the P1999 is "Q20672090". What evidence would count against this claim?
  6. The record states that the P2192 is "656". What evidence would count against this claim?
  7. The record states that the P220 is "api". What evidence would count against this claim?
  8. The record states that the P2341 is "Q42824". What evidence would count against this claim?
  9. The record states that the P2341 is "Q39517". What evidence would count against this claim?
  10. The record states that the P2355 is "1507". What evidence would count against this claim?
  11. The record states that the P279 is "Q34070". What evidence would count against this claim?
  12. The record states that the P2888 is "http://publications.europa.eu/resource/authority/language/API". What evidence would count against this claim?
  13. The record states that the P305 is "api". What evidence would count against this claim?
  14. The record states that the P31 is "Q34770". What evidence would count against this claim?
  15. The record states that the P31 is "Q1288568". What evidence would count against this claim?
  16. The record states that the P3823 is "Q29051560". What evidence would count against this claim?
  17. The record states that the P4839 is "Entity["Language", "Apiaka::35x9v"]". What evidence would count against this claim?
  18. The record states that the P646 is "/m/02hx2vn". What evidence would count against this claim?
  19. The record states that the P910 is "Q33660015". What evidence would count against this claim?
  20. Which claim in this article is most likely to be revised as the sources update? How would you check its current status?
  21. If two sources disagreed about one of these facts, what would you need in order to trust one over the other?

Bibliography

No sources recorded.

Key claims and bibliography are generated from the same tracked claims and sources as the article page.