Jagersma, B.
Citation
Jagersma, B. (2010, November 4). A descriptive grammar of Sumerian. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/1887/16107
Version: Not Applicable (or Unknown)
License: Licence agreement concerning inclusion of doctoral thesis in the
Institutional Repository of the University of Leiden
Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/16107
Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if applicable).
A Descriptive Grammar of Sumerian
Cover illustration: The Sumerian scribe Dudu (statuette dedicated to the god Ningirsu; Old Sumerian period; Iraq Museum, IM 55204)
Cover design: Oblong Grafisch Ontwerp Jet Frenken
A descriptive grammar of Sumerian
Proefschrift
ter verkrijging van
de graad van Doctor aan de Universiteit Leiden,
op gezag van Rector Magnificus prof.mr. P.F. van der Heijden, volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties
te verdedigen op donderdag 4 november 2010 klokke 16.15 uur
door
Abraham Hendrik Jagersma
geboren te Ede
in 1955
Promotor: Prof.dr. F.H.H. Kortlandt
Overige leden: Prof.dr. H. Gzella Dr. M.G. Kossmann Prof.dr. M.P.G.M. Mous
Prof.dr. W. Sallaberger (universiteit München)
Prof.dr. W.H. van Soldt
Chapter overview
Preface and acknowledgements ...xv
Abbreviations and conventions for the examples...xvii
1. Introduction...1
2. The writing system...15
3. Phonology ...31
4. Words and word classes...69
5. The noun phrase and its parts ...87
6. Nouns ...101
7. The cases...137
8. Pronouns...207
9. Numerals ...241
10. Adjectives...267
11. Verbs and verbal clauses...285
12. The verbal stem...309
13. The final person-prefixes ...327
14. The person suffixes ...343
15. The perfective and imperfective ...359
16. The dimensional prefixes and initial person-prefixes...381
17. The dimensional prefixes: the indirect-object prefixes ...399
18. The dimensional prefixes: the oblique-object prefixes ...415
19. The dimensional prefixes: the prefixes {da}, {ta}, and {ši}...445
20. The dimensional prefixes: the local prefixes ...465
21. The prefix {ba} as a middle marker ...487
22. The ventive prefix {mu} ...497
23. The prefix {nga} ...513
24. The preformatives: the vocalic prefixes {÷u}, {÷i}, and {÷a}...517
25. The preformatives: the modal and negative verbal forms ...551
26. The preformatives: {ši} and non-negative {na}...577
27. The complex sentence...583
28. Non-finite verbal forms...627
29. Copular clauses ...677
30. Nominal clauses ...715
31. The nominalizing suffix {÷a}...719
Bibliography...729
Appendix: Diagram of the finite verb...743
Detailed table of contents Table of contents...v
Preface and acknowledgements ...xv
Abbreviations and conventions for the examples...xvii
1. Introduction...1
1.1. History of the language and its speakers ...1
1.2. The Sumerian language...2
1.2.1. Genetic and areal relationships...2
1.2.2. Sources...4
1.2.3. Dialects...6
1.2.4. The death of Sumerian...9
1.2.5. Previous grammars...10
1.3. This grammar ...11
1.3.1. Grammatical terminology ...11
1.3.2. Notational conventions for the examples ...12
2. The writing system...15
2.1. Introduction...15
2.2. An outline of Sumerian orthography ...15
2.3. The early development of Sumerian writing ...17
2.4. The spelling of syllable-final consonants ...19
2.5. The spelling of vowel length...23
2.6. Spelling variation ...26
2.7. The transliteration of the Sumerian script...27
3. Phonology ...31
3.1. Introduction...31
3.2. The stops ...34
3.2.1. General remarks ...34
3.2.2. The voiceless aspirated stops /p/, /t/, and /k/ ...35
3.2.3. The voiceless stops /b/, /d/, and /g/...36
3.2.4. The glottal stop ...38
3.3. The affricates...41
3.3.1. The /z/ ...41
3.3.2. The /ř/...43
3.4. The fricatives...45
3.4.1. The /s/...45
3.4.2. The /š/...47
3.4.3. The /h~/ ...47
3.4.4. The /h/ ...48
3.5. The nasals...49
3.5.1. General remarks ...49
3.5.2. The /m/ ...49
3.5.3. The /n/ ...50
3.5.4. The /ĝ/ ...50
3.6. The /l/ ...51
3.7. The /r/...52
3.8. The /j/ ...53
3.9. Vowels ...55
3.9.1. The short vowels ...55
3.9.2. The long vowels...56
3.9.3. Old Sumerian vowel harmony ...57
3.9.4. Vowel changes ...60
3.10. Syllable structure...62
3.11. Stress ...63
4. Words and word classes...69
4.1. Introduction...69
4.2. The Sumerological concept of ‘Kettenbildung’ ...69
4.3. Phonological and grammatical words...71
4.3.1. Introduction...71
4.3.2. Orthographic word...72
4.3.3. Phonological word ...72
4.3.4. Grammatical word ...74
4.3.5. Conclusion ...75
4.4. Basic structure of a Sumerian word...76
4.4.1. Introduction...76
4.4.2. Morphemes ...76
4.4.3. Stems, affixes, and clitics...77
4.4.4. The relative order of the clitics...78
4.5. Word classes (parts of speech) ...80
4.5.1. Introduction...80
4.5.2. The word classes and their main properties...81
4.5.3. The ‘adverbs’ ...83
4.5.4. The ideophones...85
5. The noun phrase and its parts ...87
5.1. Introduction...87
5.2. Basic structure of the noun phrase...88
5.3. Appositive noun phrases...92
5.4. Coordinate noun phrases...95
6. Nouns ...101
6.1. Introduction...101
6.2. Gender...101
6.3. The plural marker {enē} ...105
6.3.1. Introduction...105
6.3.2. Forms and spellings ...106
6.3.3. Usage...109
6.4. Reduplication ...113
6.5. Noun formation through compounding ...116
6.5.1. Introduction...116
6.5.2. Noun-noun compounds...117
6.5.3. Adjective-noun and noun-adjective compounds ...119
6.5.4. Noun-participle compounds...122
6.5.5. Compounds of a noun and a case marker ...125
6.5.6. Coordinative compounds...125
6.5.7. Word-like phrases ...126
6.6. Noun formation through conversion...127
6.6.1. Introduction...127
6.6.2. Deverbal nouns ...127
6.6.3. De-adjectival nouns ...130
6.7. Noun formation through derivation ...130
6.8. Proper nouns ...130
6.8.1. Introduction...130
6.8.2. Noun phrases as proper nouns ...131
6.8.3. Clauses as proper nouns...133
6.8.4. Shortened proper nouns ...134
7. The cases...137
7.1. Introduction...137
7.2. The genitive case...139
7.2.1. The genitive case marker {ak} ...139
7.2.2. Spellings...144
7.2.3. Dependent use of a genitive...147
7.2.4. Headless genitives...152
7.3. The ergative case...154
7.4. The absolutive case...159
7.5. The dative case...161
7.5.1. The dative case marker {ra} ...161
7.5.2. Uses...164
7.6. The directive case ...165
7.6.1. The directive case marker {e} ...165
7.6.2. Uses...169
7.7. The locative case...172
7.7.1. The locative case marker {÷a}...172
7.7.2. Uses...176
7.8. The terminative case ...180
7.8.1. The terminative case marker {še}...180
7.8.2. Uses...183
7.9. The adverbiative case...189
7.10. The ablative case...191
7.11. The comitative case ...196
7.11.1. The comitative case marker {da} ...196
7.11.2. Uses...200
7.12. The equative case...202
8. Pronouns...207
8.1. Introduction...207
8.2. Independent personal pronouns ...207
8.3. Possessive pronouns ...212
8.3.1. General remarks ...212
8.3.2. First and second person {ĝu} ‘my’ and {zu} ‘your’ ...213
8.3.3. Third person {ane} ‘his/her’ and {be} ‘its’...214
8.3.4. The plural forms...217
8.4. Demonstratives...219
8.4.1. General remarks ...219
8.4.2. Enclitic demonstratives...220
8.4.3. Independent demonstratives ...225
8.5. Interrogative pronouns...228
8.6. Indefinite pronoun...231
8.7. Reflexive pronoun...234
9. Numerals ...241
9.1. Introduction...241
9.2. Numeral system...241
9.3. Syntax of the cardinals...246
9.3.1. Attributive use: quantifying nouns...246
9.3.2. Attributive use: metrological expressions...251
9.3.3. Independent use of the cardinals...255
9.4. Ordinals...256
9.5. Fractions...260
9.5.1. Preliminaries ...260
9.5.1. The phrase igi-...-ĝál ‘one-...th’...260
9.5.1. The expression šu-ru-a ‘one-half’...263
9.5.1. The ma-na system ...264
10. Adjectives...267
10.1. Introduction...267
10.2. The adjectives as a distinct word class ...268
10.3. Reduplication ...270
10.4. Syntax...272
10.4.1. Attributive use...272
10.4.2. Predicative use ...275
10.5. De-adjectival verbs ...276
10.5.1. Overview...276
10.5.2. Intransitive statives ...277
10.5.3. Forms with the nominalizing suffix {÷a}...278
10.6. De-adjectival nouns ...281
10.7. Comparison...283
11. Verbs and verbal clauses...285
11.1. Introduction...285
11.2. Morphology of the finite verb...285
11.2.1. General remarks...285
11.2.2. Basic structure of a finite verbal form ...287
11.3. Semantic types of verbs ...291
11.4. Basic clause structure...292
11.4.1. Introduction...292
11.4.2. The verb as the centre of the clause...293
11.4.3. Ergative and non-ergative patterns ...295
11.4.4. Indirect and oblique objects; Adjuncts ...296
11.4.5. Coreference...297
11.4.6. Word order...299
11.4.7. Clause types ...301
11.5. Voice and valency-changing mechanisms...303
11.5.1. Introduction...303
11.5.2. Middle...303
11.5.3. Passives ...303
11.5.4. Causatives ...307
11.6. A note on grammatical terms in Sumerology ...307
12. The verbal stem...309
12.1. Introduction...309
12.2. Verb formation...309
12.3. Imperfective stems ...311
12.4. Verbal number ...314
12.4.1. Introduction...314
12.4.2. Stem alternation ...315
12.4.3. Reduplication ...319
12.5. The plural suffix {en} ...322
12.6. Stem modifications under inflection: the verb ak ‘make’...323
13. The final person-prefixes ...327
13.1. General remarks ...327
13.2. Forms and spellings ...329
13.2.1. General remarks...329
13.2.2. The final person-prefix {b} ...329
13.2.3. The final person-prefix {n} ...331
13.2.4. The final person-prefix {e}...334
13.2.5. The final person-prefix {÷}...337
13.3. Strategies for expressing plurality ...339
13.3.1. Major strategies...339
13.3.2. The final person-prefix {nnē}...339
14. The person suffixes ...343
14.1. Introduction...343
14.2. The first person singular suffix {en} ...344
14.3. The second person singular suffix {en} ...345
14.4. The third person singular or non-human suffix {Ø} ...347
14.5. The third person singular or non-human suffix {e} ...348
14.6. The first person plural suffix {enden} ...349
14.7. The second person plural suffix {enzen} ...350
14.8. The third person plural suffix {eš} ...351
14.9. The third person plural suffix {enē}...353
14.10. Changes to the initial /e/ of the person suffixes...353
14.11 Spellings of the initial /e/ after consonants...356
15. The perfective and imperfective ...359
15.1. Introduction...359
15.2. Subject and object marking in the finite verb...359
15.2.1. Overview...359
15.2.2. The perfective inflection...361
15.2.3. The imperfective inflection...361
15.2.4. Non-human direct-object marking in the imperfective inflection ...363
15.2.5. The irregular verb tùm ...366
15.3. Perfective and imperfective stem forms ...367
15.3.1. Introduction...367
15.3.2. Forms and spellings of the suffix {ed} ...369
15.3.3. The paradigm of the intransitive verb...370
15.4. Uses of the perfective and imperfective ...372
15.4.1. Introduction...372
15.4.2. Main uses of the perfective...373
15.4.3. Main uses of the imperfective...376
16. The dimensional prefixes and initial person-prefixes...381
16.1. Introduction...381
16.2. Forms and spellings of the initial person-prefixes...382
16.2.1. The initial person-prefix {b} ...382
16.2.2. The initial person-prefix {n} ...384
16.2.3. The initial person-prefix {nnē}...385
16.2.4. The initial person-prefix {e}...387
16.2.5. The initial person-prefix {÷}...388
16.2.6. The initial person-prefix {mē}...389
16.3. Usage of the dimensional prefixes and initial person-prefixes...390
16.3.1. Dimensional prefixes and person prefixes...390
16.3.2. Dimensional prefixes and verbs...392
16.3.3. Dimensional prefixes and noun phrases ...395
16.3.4. External possession constructions ...396
17. The dimensional prefixes: the indirect-object prefixes ...399
17.1. Introduction...399
17.2. Forms and spellings of the IO-prefixes...400
17.2.1. The prefix {ba} ...400
17.2.2. The prefix {nna} ...401
17.2.3. The prefixes {nnē} and {nnē÷a}...404
17.2.4. The prefix {ra}...405
17.2.5. The prefix {ma}...408
17.2.6. The prefixes {mē} and {mē÷a} ...409
17.3. The indirect object ...410
18. The dimensional prefixes: the oblique-object prefixes ...415
18.1. Introduction...415
18.2. Forms and spellings of the OO-prefixes...416
18.2.1. General remarks...416
18.2.2. The prefixes {bi} and {b}...417
18.2.3. The prefixes {nni} and {n}...421
18.2.4. The prefixes {ri} and {e} ...423
18.2.5. The prefixes {mu} and {÷}...425
18.2.6. The plural prefixes...426
18.2.7. A historical note on the OO-prefixes...428
18.3. The oblique object ...428
18.3.1. Introduction...428
18.3.2. Causative constructions ...429
18.3.3. The oblique object expressing ‘in(to) contact with’...434
18.3.4. Human oblique object for non-human locational ‘on’ ...439
18.4. Restrictions on co-occurrence with other prefixes ...442
19. The dimensional prefixes: the prefixes {da}, {ta}, and {ši}...445
19.1. General remarks ...445
19.2. The prefix {da} ‘(together) with’ ...448
19.2.1. Forms and spellings ...448
19.2.2. Usage...450
19.3. The prefix {ta} ‘from’...454
19.3.1. Forms and spellings ...454
19.3.2. Usage...456
19.4. The prefix {ši} ‘to’ ...459
19.4.1. Forms and spellings ...459
19.4.2. Usage...460
20. The dimensional prefixes: the local prefixes ...465
20.1. Introduction...465
20.2. The local prefix {ni} ‘in’ ...466
20.2.1. Forms and spellings ...466
20.2.2. Usage...473
20.3. The local prefix {e} ‘on’...476
20.3.1. Forms and spellings ...476
20.3.2. Usage...482
21. The prefix {ba} as a middle marker ...487
21.1. Introduction...487
21.2. Forms and spellings ...487
21.3. The middle uses of {ba} ...489
21.3.1. General remarks...489
21.3.2. Indirect reflexive...490
21.3.3. Change of state...493
21.3.4. Passive...494
22. The ventive prefix {mu} ...497
22.1. Introduction...497
22.2. Forms and spellings ...497
22.3. Meaning ...504
22.4. Restrictions on co-occurrence with the person prefix {b} ...509
23. The prefix {nga} ...513
24. The preformatives: the vocalic prefixes {÷u}, {÷i}, and {÷a}...517
24.1. Introduction...517
24.2. The relative-past prefix {÷u} ...517
24.2.1. Forms and spellings ...517
24.2.2. Usage...521
24.3. Forms and spellings of the prefixes {÷i} and {÷a}...526
24.3.1. Loss in open syllables ...526
24.3.2. Forms and spellings of the prefix {÷i}...528
24.3.3. Forms and spellings of the prefix {÷a}...532
24.4. Usage of the prefixes {÷i} and {÷a} in Southern Sumerian ...535
24.4.1. General remarks...535
24.4.2. Usage in main clauses...535
24.4.3. Usage in subordinate clauses ...537
24.4.4. Usage in forms with a single prefix ...541
24.5. Usage of the prefixes {÷i} and {÷a} in Northern Sumerian ...543
24.5.1. General remarks...543
24.5.2. Usage in perfective forms ...543
24.5.3. Usage in imperfective forms...546
24.6. A brief history of {÷i} and {÷a}...548
25. The preformatives: the modal and negative verbal forms ...551
25.1. Introduction...551
25.2. The negative proclitic {nu} ...551
25.3. The imperative ...556
25.4. The modal proclitic {h~a} ...558
25.4.1. Forms and spellings ...558
25.4.2. Usage...561
25.5. The negative modal prefix {na(n)}...565
25.6. The modal prefix {ga} ...569
25.7. The negative modal prefix {bara} ...572
26. The preformatives: {ši} and non-negative {na}...577
26.1. Introduction...577
26.2. The preformative {ši} ...577
26.3. Non-negative {na} ...579
27. The complex sentence...583
27.1. Introduction...583
27.2. Coordinate clauses ...583
27.3. Subordinate clauses: formal categories ...585
27.3.1. Introduction...585
27.3.2. Clauses with subordinating conjunctions ...585
27.3.3. Forms and spellings of the suffix {÷a} in finite verbal forms ...586
27.3.4. Nominalized clauses with the suffix {÷a}...591
27.3.5. Nominalized clauses without the suffix {÷a} ...592
27.3.6. Nominalized clauses with the verb ak ‘do, make’...593
27.4. Finite relative clauses...594
27.4.1. Relative clauses with an explicit head noun ...594
27.4.2. Headless relative clauses ...599
27.5. Finite complement clauses...600
27.5.1. Introduction...600
27.5.2. Finite complement clauses with verbs ...601
27.5.3. Finite complement clauses with nouns ...603
27.6. Finite adverbial clauses...606
27.6.1. Overview...606
27.6.2. Temporal clauses meaning ‘when’ ...607
27.6.3. Temporal clauses meaning ‘after’ or ‘since’ ...610
27.6.4. Temporal clauses meaning ‘until’ or ‘before’ ...612
27.6.5. Reason clauses ...614
27.6.6. Conditional clauses ...617
27.6.7. Comparative clauses ...622
27.6.8. Residual types ...624
28. Non-finite verbal forms...627
28.1. Introduction...627
28.2. The present participle ...630
28.2.1. Form and meaning ...630
28.2.2. Use as a verbal adjective...631
28.2.3. Use as a verbal noun ...634
28.2.4. Uses with the stative verbs zu ‘know’ and tuku ‘have’ ...636
28.3. The past participle...638
28.3.1. Form and meaning ...638
28.3.2. Form and spellings of the suffix {÷a}...640
28.3.3. Use as a verbal adjective...643
28.3.4. Use as a verbal noun ...650
28.3.5. Uses with the stative verbs zu ‘know’ and tuku ‘have’ ...655
28.4. The imperfective participle...655
28.4.1. Form and meaning ...655
28.4.2. Forms and spellings of the suffix {ed} ...659
28.4.3. Use as a verbal adjective...662
28.4.4. Use as a verbal noun ...665
28.5. The imperfective participle with the nominalizing suffix {÷a}...671
28.6. The “pronominal conjugation” (a non-finite temporal clause)...672
28.7. The participles of the verb ak ‘do, make’...674
29. Copular clauses ...677
29.1. Introduction...677
29.2. The copula...677
29.2.1. Introduction...677
29.2.2. The forms of the independent copula ...678
29.2.3. The forms of the enclitic copula ...681
29.3. The subject of a copular clause...687
29.4. The predicate of a copular clause ...689
29.4.1. General remarks...689
29.4.2. Predicative nouns...690
29.4.3. Predicative numerals...694
29.4.4. Predicative pronouns ...695
29.4.5. Predicative adjectives ...696
29.4.6. Predicative present participles ...696
29.4.7. Predicative past participles ...697
29.4.8. Predicative imperfective participles ...698
29.4.9. Predicative clauses...701
29.5. Adjuncts and other optional constituents...704
29.6. Subordinate copular clauses ...705
29.6.1. Introduction...705
29.6.2. Relative clauses...706
29.6.3. Complement clauses ...710
29.6.4. Adverbial clauses...710
29.7. The copula in highlighting constructions...712
30. Nominal clauses ...715
30.1. Introduction...715
30.2. Proper nouns ...715
30.3. Interrogative clauses ...716
30.4. Negative declarative clauses...717
30.5. Other nominal clauses...718
31. The nominalizing suffix {÷a}...719
31.1. Introduction...719
31.2. Form and spellings...719
31.3. Uses...721
31.3.1. Copula ...721
31.3.2. De-adjectival verbs ...721
31.3.3. Numerals ...722
31.3.4. Non-finite verbal forms...723
31.3.5. Finite nominalized clauses...725
31.4. Conclusions...726
Bibliography...729
Appendix: Diagram of the finite verb...743
Samenvatting in het Nederlands ...745
Curriculum vitae...749
This grammar has been long in the making. After my graduation in 1988, I wanted to do a PhD on the grammar of the Old Sumerian texts from Lagash, with the aim to write a synchronic grammar of a single Sumerian dialect. Help came from many directions. Theo Krispijn shared with me his lists of verbal forms and his glossary of the Gudea texts. Gebhard Selz was most generous with manuscripts of Old Sumerian texts editions he was working on. In July 1990 the first meeting of the Sumerian Grammar Discussion Group took place, to which Jeremy Black and Joachim Krecher kindly invited me as an interested PhD student. This meeting and those of the following years were an excellent environment to confront my own developing ideas with those of scholars who had studied the various problems for dozens of years: Jeremy Black, Miguel Civil, Dietz Otto Edzard, Daniel Foxvog, Thorkild Jacobsen, Joachim Krecher, Piotr Michalowski, Claus Wilcke, and Mamoru Yoshikawa.
A first version of my grammar, a brief sketch of 61 pages, was discussed with Joachim Krecher, Annette Zgoll and Thomas Balke in the summer of 1990. Krecher’s comments revealed so many shortcomings that I decided to start again from scratch. A second version (1991) fared somewhat better. Claus Wilcke kindly agreed to read it and provided several pages with comments, which led to several improvements. I also gave this second version to Gábor Zólyomi, which was the start of a long series of intense discussions during the 1990s, which led to numerous new analyses and refinements of old ones, especially in matters syntac- tic.
By the end of 1992, it became clear to me that I needed help from a linguist. I had been trained as a philologist with a focus on Semitic languages and was somewhat out of my depth with writing a grammar of a language that has an entirely different structure. A number of people suggested me to contact Frederik Kortlandt, who had already supervised PhD gram- mars on a wide range of languages. He kindly agreed to be my supervisor and I happily set out to write the third and “final” version. His comments led to several crucial improvements, especially in the phonology. It was also on his advice that I started glossing all the examples.
After writing a number of chapters, I realized that the Old Sumerian texts from Lagash were too limited a corpus to write a proper linguistic grammar on. Their spelling simply ignores too many case markers and verbal prefixes, so that my grammar would be riddled with examples containing invisible grammatical elements. It led to the decision to widen the corpus to include all Sumerian texts from the second half of the third millennium. In 1997 I began therefore writing a fourth version which, after a break from late 1999 to early 2005, I was able to finish this year.
I have received help from many persons in addition to those already mentioned. In the area of Ur III texts, the support of Remco de Maaijer has been invaluable. Hundreds of discussions with him have clarified for me many issues involving the content and background of these texts. In addition, his supply of atypical spellings and strange forms has been inexhaustible.
Likewise, in their usual kindness, Marcel Sigrist, Natasha Koslova, and David Owen have shared numerous unpublished texts with me. Thanks are also due to the Trustees of the British Museum for allowing me to quote from unpublished texts from the British Museum. Natasha Koslova and Joachim Oelsner kindly collated a few crucial verbal forms for me.
Thanks are also due to Sabine Ecklin, who generously put her unpublished paper (Ecklin 2004/2005) on the verbal prefix {na} at my disposal and allowed me to use it in preparing chapter 26. Jan Keetman generously shared his list of Sumerian loanwords from Von Soden’s Akkadisches Handwörterbuch with me. Thomas Balke made available to me many of his own manuscripts on matters Sumerian, whether published or unpublished. He and I also had many
pleasant and stimulating discussions during the 1990s.
Annette Zgoll read parts of the manuscript and brought an important discussion by Krecher on Sumerian appositions to my attention. Pascal Attinger, whose own grammatical study from 1993 has been invaluable in preparing the present grammar, read an almost complete version of the manuscript. His comments have saved me from several serious errors. Maarten Koss- mann likewise provided me with several pages of very useful comments on the entire manu- script.
My utmost thanks are for my partner and best friend, Els Woestenburg, without whose loving support during dozens of years this grammar never could have been finished.
To all those named above go my sincere thanks for their help in making this book. None of them, however, is responsible for any of its shortcomings.
See §1.3.2 for an explanation and overview of the more general notational conventions used in examples.
• In transliterations of Sumerian, word signs are in bold type and sound signs in bold italics (see §2.7 for a motivation).
• The morpheme {bi} consists of the phonemes /bi/, is written bí, and is pronounced [bi].
Symbols and abbreviations used in the glosses:
- Separates affixes or stems from other affixes or stems in a word
= Separates clitics from the other parts of a word : Separates multiple glosses for a single element . Separates the parts of a single gloss
() Enclose dropped vowels of basic morphemes / Separates alternative glosses for a single affix
1SG First person singular human 2SG Second person singular
human
3SG Third person singular human
1PL First person plural human 2PL Second person plural
human
3PL Third person plural human 3N Third person non-human
A Transitive subject
(mnemonic: ‘Agent’)
ABL Ablative case
ABS Absolutive case ADV Adverbiative case CAT.NEG Categorical negation COM Comitative case
DAT Dative case
DIR Directive case
DO Direct object
ERG Ergative case
EQU Equative case
FUT Future
GEN Genitive case
IO Indirect object
IPFV Imperfective
LOC Locative case (marker {÷a})
LOC2 Locative case (marker {ne})
MM Middle marker
MOD Modal
NEG Negative
NFIN Non-finite
NOM Nominalizing suffix
OO Oblique object
ORD Ordinal
PFM Preformative
PL Plural (nominal number) PLUR Plural action or state (verbal
number)
RDP Reduplication
S Intransitive Subject (mnemonic: ‘Subject’) SING Non-plural action or state
(verbal number) TERM Terminative case
VENT Ventive
VP Vocalic prefix
AAICAB J.-P. Grégoire, Archives administratives et inscriptions cunéiformes de l’Ashmolean Museum et de la Bodleian Collection d’Oxford, I/1-4 (Paris 1996-2002).
AAS J.-P. Grégoire, Archives administratives sumériennes (Paris, 1970).
AfO Archiv für Orientforschung (Berlin/Graz/Horn 1923ff.).
Amherst T.G. Pinches,The Amherst tablets (London 1908).
Angim Edition: J.S. Cooper, The return of Ninurta to Nippur (Roma 1978).
AnOr Analecta Orientalia (Rome 1931ff.).
AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament (Neukirchen-Vluyn 1969ff.).
22: H.A. Hoffner (ed.), Orient and Occident (1973).
25: B. Eichler (ed.), Kramer anniversary volume (1976).
240: M. Dietrich (ed.), Vom Alten Orient zum Alten Testament (1995).
274: G.J. Selz (ed.), Festschrift für Burkhart Kienast (2003).
AoF Altorientalische Forschungen (Berlin 1974ff.).
ARET Archivi Reali di Ebla, Testi (Roma 1985ff.).
ASJ Acta Sumerologica (Hiroshima 1979ff.).
AUCT Andrews University Cuneiform Texts (Berrien Springs, Mich. (1984ff.).
AuOr Aula Orientalis (Barcelona 1983ff.).
AWAS G.J. Selz, Altsumerische Wirtschaftsurkunden aus amerikanischen Sammlungen (FAOS 15,2) (Stuttgart 1993).
Ax of Nergal Edition: H. Behrens in: E. Leichty (ed.), A scientific humanist (Philadelphia 1988) pp. 27-32.
BAOM Bulletin of the Ancient Orient Museum (Tokio 1979ff.).
BBVO Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient (Berlin 1982ff.).
11: R.L. Zettler, The Ur III temple of Inanna at Nippur (Berlin 1992).
BCT Ph. J. Watson, Catalogue of cuneiform tablets in Birmingham City Museum, Vol. 1-2 (Warminster 1986-1993).
BE The Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania. Series A:
Cuneiform Texts (Philadelphia 1893ff.).
Bedale STU C.L. Bedale, Sumerian tablets from Umma in the John Rylands Library, Manchester (Manchester 1915).
Berens T.G. Pinches, The Babylonian Tablets of the Berens Collection (Asiatic Society Monographs 16) (London 1915).
BIN Babylonian Inscriptions in the Collection of James B. Nies, Yale University (New Haven 1917ff.).
BM British Museum (London), museum signature.
BM 3 R.D. Biggs, Inscriptions from Al-Hiba–Lagash, The first and second seasons (Malibu 1976).
BPOA Biblioteca del próximo oriente antiguo (Madrid 2006ff.).
Bridges Mesag S.J. Bridges, The Mesag Archive: a study of Sargonic society and economy. Dissertation Yale university (1981)
BRM Babylonian records in the library of J. Pierpont Morgan (New Haven 1912-1923).
CHEU G. Contenau, Contribution à l’histoire économique d’Umma (Paris 1915).
Civil FI M. Civil, The Farmer’s Instructions. A Sumerian agricultural manual (Barcelona 1994).
CLAM M.E. Cohen, The canonical lamentations of ancient Mesopotamia (Potomac 1988).
CM 26 T.M. Sharlach, Provincial taxation and the Ur III state (Cuneiform monographs 26) (Leiden 2004).
CST T. Fish, Catalogue of Sumerian tablets in the John Rylands Library (Manchester 1932).
CT Cuneiform texts from Babylonian tablets in the British Museum (London 1986ff.).
CTMMA I I. Spar (ed.), Cuneiform texts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Volume I (New York 1988).
CTNMC Th. Jacobsen, Cuneiform texts in the National Museum, Copenhagen (Leiden 1939).
Curse of Agade Edition: J.S. Cooper, The curse of Agade (Baltimore 1983).
CUSAS Cornell University studies in Assyrioloy and Sumerology (Bethesda 2007ff.).
Cyl Inscriptions of Gudea on cylinders. Edition: D.O. Edzard, Gudea and his dynasty (RIM E3/1) (Toronto 1997).
DAS B. Lafont, Documents administratifs sumériens provenant du site de Tello et conservés au Musée du Louvre (Paris 1985).
DC E. de Sarzec, Découvertes en Chaldée (Paris 1884-1912).
DI Dumuzi-Inanna songs. Edition: Y. Sefati, Love songs in Sumerian literature (Ramat Gan 1998).
DP F.-M. Allotte de la Fuÿe, Documents présargoniques (Paris 1908-1920).
DTBM J. Politi - L. Verderame, The Drehem texts in the British Museum (Nisaba 8) (Messina 2005).
DTCR M. Sigrist, Documents from tablet collections in Rochester, New York (Bethesda 1991).
Dumuzi’s Dream Edition: B. Alster, Dumuzi’s dream (Copenhagen 1972).
Ean. Inscriptions of Eannatum. Edition: H. Steible, Die altsumerischen Bau- und Weihinschriften (FAOS 5/1) (Wiesbaden 1982), pp.120-181.
ECTJ A. Westenholz, Early cuneiform texts in Jena (Kobenhavn 1975).
Ed B Edubba B. Edition: Å.W. Sjöberg, ‘Der Vater und sein missratener Sohn’, Journal of cuneiform studies 25 (1973) pp.105-169.
EEs Edition: A. Berlin, Enmerkar and Ensuh~kešdanna (Philadelphia 1979).
ELA Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta. Edition: C. Mittelmayer, Enmerkara und der Herr von Arata (Fribourg/Göttingen 2009).
En. I Inscriptions of Enannatum I. Edition: H. Steible, Die altsumerischen Bau- und Weihinschriften (FAOS 5/1) (Wiesbaden 1982), pp.182-210.
ENam Edition: M. Civil, Enlil and Namzitarra, Archiv für Orientforschung 25 (1974-1977) pp.65-71.
ENh Edition: P. Attinger, Enki et Ninh~ursaĝa, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie 74 (1984) pp.1-52.
Enlil and Ninlil Edition: H. Behrens, Enlil und Ninlil. Ein sumerischer Mythos aus Nippur (Roma 1973).
Ent. Inscriptions of Enmetena. Edition: H. Steible, Die altsumerischen Bau- und Weihinschriften (FAOS 5/1) (Wiesbaden 1982), pp.211-272.
ErH Enki’s journey to Nibru. Edition: A.A. Al-Fouadi, Enki’s journey to Nippur, Dissertation University of Pennsylvania (1969).
EWO Edition: C.A. Benito: “Enki and Ninmah” and “Enki and the World Order”, Dissertation University of Pennsylvania (1969).
FAOS Freiburger altorientalische Studien (Wiesbaden/Stuttgart 1975ff.).
5/2: H. Steible, Die altsumerischen Bau- und Weihinschriften, Teil II (1982).
7: I.J. Gelb - B. Kienast, Die altakkadischen Königsinschriften des Dritten Jahrtausends v. Chr. (1990).
9: H. Steible, Die neusumerischen Bau- und Weihinschriften (1991).
12: M.J. Geller, Forerunners to Udug-hul (1985).
17: P. Steinkeller, Sale documents of the Ur-III-period (1989).
19: B. Kienast - K. Volk, Die sumerischen und akkadischen Briefe des III. Jahrtausends (1995).
FI Farmer’s Instructions. Edition: M. Civil, The Farmer’s Instructions. A Sumerian agricultural manual (Barcelona 1994).
FS A Elegy on the death of Nannaya. Edition: ÅW. Sjöberg, ‘The first
Pushkin Museum elegy and new texts’ Journal of the American Oriental Society 103 (1983) pp.315-320.
GA Edition: W.H.Ph. Römer, Das sumerische Kurzepos ‘Bilgameš und Akka’ (Neukirchen-Vluyn 1980).
Genava Genava. Bulletin du Musée d’Art et d’Histoire de Genève (Genève 1923ff).
GH A Edition: D.O. Edzard, ‘Gilgameš und Huwawa A’, ‘I. Teil’ Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 80 (1990) pp.165-203. ‘II. Teil’ Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 81 (1991) pp.165-223.
GH B Edition: D.O. Edzard, ‘Gilgameš und Huwawa’. Zwei Versionen der sumerischen Zedernwaldepisode nebst einer Edition von Version ‘B’
(Sitzungberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Philosophisch-historische Klasse 4) (München 1993).
HAV Hilprecht Anniversary Volume (Leipzig 1909).
Hirose T. Gomi, Neo-Sumerian administrative texts of the Hirose Collection (Potomac 1990).
HLC G.A. Barton, Haverford Library collection of cuneiform tablets or documents from the temple archives of Telloh (Philadelphia 1905-1914).
HSS 4 M.I. Hussey, Sumerian tablets in the Harvard Semitic Museum, Part II:
From the time of the Dynasty of Ur (Cambridge 1915).
HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual (Cincinatti, Ohio 1924ff.).
Iddin-Dagan A Edition: D. Reisman, ‘Iddin-Dagan's Sacred Marriage Hymn’, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 25 (1973) pp.185-202.
IE Edition: G. Farber-Flügge, Der Mythos ‘Inanna und Enki’ unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Liste der m e (Rome 1973).
Inanna B Edition: A. Zgoll, Der Rechtsfall der En-hedu-Ana im Lied nin-me-šara (Münster 1997).
Inanna E Edition: A. Falkenstein, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 48 (1944) pp.105- 113.
Inanna C Edition: Å.W. Sjöberg, ‘in-nin šà-gur4-ra: a hymn to the goddess Inanna by the en-Priestess Enh~eduanna’, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 65 (1975)
pp.161-253.
Inanna’s Descent Edition: W.R. Sladek, Inanna’s descent to the Netherworld, Dissertation The Johns Hopkins University (1974).
Instr.Shur. The Instructions of Šuruppak. Edition: B. Alster, The wisdom of ancient Sumer (Bethesda 2005) pp.31-220.
Iraq Iraq (London: British School of Archaeology in Iraq, 1934ff.).
ISET İstanbul Arkeologji Müzelerinde bulunan Sumer edebî tablet ve parçaları (Ankara 1969-1976)
1: M. Çiğ - H. Kızılyay - S.N. Kramer (1969) 2: S.N. Kramer (1976).
Ishme-Dagan J Edition: J. Klein, ‘The sweet chant of the churn: a revised edition of Išmedagan J’. In: M. Dietrich - O. Loretz (eds.), d u b s a r a n t a - m e n . Studien zur Altorientalistik: Festschrift für Willem H.Ph. Römer
(Münster 1998) pp.205-202.
ITT Inventaire des tablettes de Tello conservées au Musée Impérial Ottoman I-V (Paris 1910-1921).
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society (New Haven etc. 1849ff.).
JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies (New Haven etc. 1947ff.).
Jean SA C.-F. Jean, Šumer et Akkad (Paris 1923).
LAK A. Deimel, Liste der archaischen Keilschriftzeichen (Leipzig 1922).
LB Tablets from the Collection de Liagre Böhl, Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten (Leiden), museum signature.
Letter A Edition: F.A. Ali, Sumerian letters. Two collections from the Old Babylonian schools, Dissertation University of Pennsylvania (1964).
LfEM P. Michalowski, Letters from early Mesopotamia (Atlanta 1993).
Limet Documents H. Limet, Etude de documents de la période d’Agadé appartenant à l’Université de Liège (Paris 1973).
Lipit-Eštar D Edition: W.H.Ph. Römer, Sumerische ‘Königshymnen’ der Isin-Zeit (Leiden 1965) pp.6-9.
LSU Edition: P. Michalowski, The lamentation over the destruction of Sumer and Ur (Winona Lake 1989).
LU Edition: W.H.Ph. Römer, Die Klage über die Zerstörung von Ur (Münster 2004).
Lugalbanda I Partial edition: C. Wilcke, Das Lugalbandaepos (Wiesbaden 1969) pp.81-84, etc.
Lugalbanda II Edition: C. Wilcke, Das Lugalbandaepos (Wiesbaden 1969).
Lugal-e Edition: J. van Dijk, LUGAL UD ME-LÁM-bi NIR-ĜÁL (Leiden 1983).
LW Edition: M.W. Green, ‘The Uruk lament’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 104 (1984) pp.253-279.
MAD I.J. Gelb, Materials for the Assyrian Dictionary (Chicago 1957ff.).
MBI G.A. Barton, Miscellaneous Babylonian inscriptions, Part I: Sumerian religious texts (New Haven 1918).
MCS Manchester cuneiform studies (Manchester 1915ff.).
MDP Mémoires de la Délégation en Perse (Paris 1900ff.).
28: V. Scheil, Mélanges épigraphiques (1939)
57: R. Labat - D.O. Edzard, Textes littéraires de Suse (1974).
MEE Materiali epigrafici di Ebla (Roma 1979ff.).
Mesopotamia Mesopotamia, rivista di archeologia, epigrafia e storia orientale antica
(Firenze 1966ff).
MSL Materialien zum sumerischen Lexikon (Roma 1937ff.).
MTBM M. Sigrist, Messenger texts from the British Museum (Potomac 1990).
MVAG Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatischen Gesellschaft (Berlin 1896ff.).
MVN Materiali per il vocabolario neosumerico (Roma 1974ff.).
Nanshe hymn Edition: W. Heimpel, ‘The Nanshe Hymn’, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 33 (1981) pp.65-139.
NATN D.I. Owen, Neo-Sumerian archival texts primarily from Nippur (Winona Lake 1982).
NATU Neo-Sumerian administrative texts from Umma kept in the British Museum (Messina 2005ff).
1: F. ar-Rawi - F. D’Agostino (Nisaba 6) (2005).
3: F.N.H. al-Rawi - L. Verderame (Nisaba 23) (2009).
Nebraska N.W. Forde, Nebraska cuneiform texts of the Sumerian Ur III dynasty (Lawrence 1972).
NFT G. Cros, Nouvelles fouilles de Tello (Paris 1910).
NG A. Falkenstein, Die neusumerischen Gerichtsurkunden (München 1956- 1957).
Nik 1 M.V. Nikol’skij, Documenty chozjajstvennoj otčetnosti drevnejšej epochi Chaldei iz sobranija N.P. Lichačeva (St. Petersburg 1908).
Nik 2 M.V. Nikol’skij, Documenty chozjajstvennoj otčetnosti drevnej Chaldei iz sobranija N.P. Lichačeva, II (Moskva 1915).
NinTu Edition: B. Alster, ‘Ninurta and the Turtle’, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 24 (1971/72) pp.120-125.
Nisaba Nisaba. Studi assiriologici Messinesi (Messina 2002ff.).
NRVN 1 M. Çiğ - H. Kızılyay, Neusumerische Rechts- und Verwaltungsurkunden aus Nippur I (Ankara 1965).
OECT Oxford editions of cuneiform texts (Oxford 1923ff.).
OIP Oriental Institute Publications (Chicago 1924ff.).
OrNS Orientalia Nova Series (Roma 1932ff.).
OrSP Orientalia Series Prior (Roma 1920-1930).
OSP A. Westenholz, Old Sumerian and Old Akkadian Texts in Philadelphia, 1: Literary and lexical texts and the earliest administrative documents from Nippur (Malibu 1975).
2: The ‘Akkadian’ texts, the Enlilmaba texts, and the onion archive (Copenhagen 1987).
PBS Publications of the Babylonian Section, University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia 1911ff.).
PDT Die Puzriš-Dagan-Texte der Istanbuler Archäologischen Museen.
1: M. Çiğ - H. Kızılyay - A. Salonen (Helsinki 1954).
2: F. Yıldız - T. Gomi (Wiesbaden 1988).
Pettinato L’uomo G. Pettinato, L’uomo cominciò a scrivere (Milano 1997).
PIOL 19 H. Sauren, Les tablettes cunéiformes de l’époque d’Ur des collections de la New York Public Library (Louvain-la-Neuve 1978).
PPAC Yang Zhi, Sargonic inscriptions from Adab (Changchun 1989).
PRAK H. de Genouillac, Premières recherches archéologiques à Kich (Paris 1924-1925).
Proverb Collection Edition: B. Alster, Proverbs of ancient Sumer (Bethesda 1997).
PSD Å.W. Sjöberg (ed.), The Sumerian dictionary of the University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia 1984ff).
RA Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale (Paris 1884ff.).
RIAA L. Speleers, Recueil des inscriptions de l’Asie antérieure des Musées Royaux du Cinquantenaire à Bruxelles (Brussel 1925).
RIM E The royal inscriptions of Mesopotamia. Early periods (Toronto 1987ff.).
2: D.R. Frayne, Sargonic and Gutian periods (1993).
3/2: D.R. Frayne, Ur III period (1997).
4: D.R. Frayne, Old Babylonian period (1990).
RTC F. Thureau-Dangin, Recueil de tablettes chaldéennes (Paris 1903).
SACT 1 Sh.T. Kang, Sumerian economic texts from the Drehem archive (Urbana 1972).
SACT 2 Sh.T. Kang, Sumerian economic texts from the Umma archive (Urbana 1973).
SANTAG 6 N. Koslova, Ur III-Texte der St. Petersburger Eremitage (Wiesbaden 2000).
SAT M. Sigrist, Sumerian Archival Texts (Bethesda 1993ff.).
SEL Studi epigrafici e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente Antico (Verona 1984ff.).
SET T.B. Jones - J.W. Snyder, Sumerian economic texts from the Third Ur Dynasty (Minneapolis 1961).
Shukaletuda Edition: K. Volk, Inanna und Šukaletuda (Wiesbaden 1995).
Shulgi A Edition: J. Klein, Three Šulgi hymns (Ramat-Gan 1981).
Shulgi B Edition: unpublished manuscript Geerd de Haayer.
Shulgi D Edition: J. Klein, Three Šulgi hymns (Ramat-Gan 1981).
Shulgi G Edition: J. Klein, ‘The coronation and consecration of Šulgi in the Ekur (Šulgi G)’. In: M. Cogan (ed.), Ah, Assyria. Studies in Assyrian history and ancient Near Eastern historiography presented to Hayim Tadmor (Jerusalem 1991) pp.292-313.
Shulgi P Edition: J. Klein, The royal hymns of Shulgi, king of Ur: man’s quest for immortal fame (Philadelphia 1981).
Shulgi R Edition: J. Klein, ‘Šulgi and Išmedagan’, in: J. Klein - A. Skaist (eds.), Bar-Ilan studies in assyriology dedicated to Pinhas Artzi (Ramat-Gan 1990) pp.65-136.
Shulgi X Edition: J. Klein, Three Šulgi hymns (Ramat-Gan 1981).
SLTNi S.N. Kramer, Sumerian literary texts from Nippur in the Museum of the Ancient Orient at Istanbul (1944).
Smith College C.H. Gordon, Smith College Tablets (Northampton 1952).
SNAT T. Gomi - S. Sato, Selected Neo-Sumerian administrative texts from the British Museum (Abiko 1990).
SRU D.O. Edzard, Sumerische Rechtsurkunden des III. Jahrtausends aus der Zeit vor der III. Dynastie von Ur (München 1968).
St Inscriptions of Gudea on statues. Edition: D.O. Edzard, Gudea and his dynasty (RIM E3/1) (Toronto 1997)..
STA E. Chiera, Selected temple accounts from Telloh, Yokha and Drehem (Philadelphia 1922).
STH 1 M.I. Hussey, Sumerian tablets in the Harvard Semitic Museum, Part I, Chiefly from the reigns of Lugalanda and Urukagina of Lagash (Cambridge 1912).
StOr Studia Orientalia (Helsinki 1925ff.).
STTIAM V. Donbaz - B. R. Foster, Sargonic Texts from Telloh in the Istanbul Archaeological Museums (Philadelphia 1982).
STVC E. Chiera, Sumerian texts of varied contents (Chicago 1934).
Studies Borger S.M. Maul (ed.), Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65. Geburtstag am 24.Mai 1994 (Groningen 1998).
Studies Finkelstein M. de Jong Ellis (ed.), Essays on the Ancient Near East in memory of Jacob Joel Finkelstein (Hamden 1977).
Studies Greenfield S. Gitin et al. (eds.), Solving riddles and untying knots: biblical, epigraphic, and Semitic studies in honor of Jonas C. Greenfield (Winona Lake 1995).
Studies Pettinato H. Waetzoldt (ed.), Von Sumer nach Ebla und zurück. Festschrift Giovanni Pettinato (Heidelberg 2004).
Studies Sigrist P. Michalowski (ed.), On the third dynasty of Ur. Studies in honor of Marcel Sigrist (Boston 2008).
Studies Veenhof W. van Soldt (ed.), Veenhof anniversary volume (Leiden 2001).
TAD St.H. Langdon, Tablets from the archives of Drehem (Paris 1911).
TCABI F. Pomponio et al., Le tavolette cuneiformi di Adab delle collezioni della Banca d’Italia (Roma 2006).
TCL Textes cunéiformes, Musée du Louvre (Paris 1910ff.).
TCND A. Archi - F. Pomponio, Testi cuneiformi neo-sumerici da Drehem (Milano 1990).
TCNU A. Archi - F. Pomponio - G. Bergamini, Testi cuneiformi neo-sumerici da Umma (Torino 1995).
TCS 1 E. Sollberger, The business and admnistrative correspondence under the kings of Ur (Locust Valley 1966).
TCTI B. Lafont - F. Yıldız, Tablettes cunéiformes de Tello au Musée
d’Istanbul datant de l’époque de la IIIe dynastie d’Ur (Leiden 1989ff.).
TCVPBI F. Pomponio et al., Tavolette cuneiformi di varia provenienza delle collezioni della Banca d’Italia (Roma 2006).
TENS M. Sigrist, Textes économiques néo-sumériens de l’Université de Syracuse (Paris 1983).
TIM 9 J. van Dijk, Cuneiform texts. Texts of varying content (Texts in the Iraq Museum IX) (Leiden 1976).
TJAMC É. Szlechter, Tablettes juridiques et administratives de la IIIe dynastie d’Ur et de la Ire dynastie de Babylone (Paris 1963).
TLB 3 W.W. Hallo, Sumerian archival texts (Leiden 1963).
TMHC Texte und Materialien der Frau Professor Hilprecht Collection of Babylonian Antiquities im Eigentum der Universität Jena.
NF 1/2: A. Pohl, Rechts- und Verwaltungsurkunden der III. Dynastie von Ur (Leipzig 1937).
NF 4: S.N. Kramer - I. Bernhardt, Sumerische literarische Texte aus Nippur, Band II (Berlin 1967).
6: J.J.A. van Dijk - M.J. Geller, Ur III incantations (Wiesbaden 2003).
TMTIM P. Steinkeller - J.N. Postgate, Third-Millennium legal and administrative texts in the Iraq Museum, Baghdad (Winona Lake 1992).
Touzalin Aleppo M. Touzalin, L’administration palatiale à l’époque de la troisième dynastie d’Ur: Textes inédits du Musée d’Alep. Thèse de doctorat de
troisième cycle, université de Tours (1982).
TPTS 1 M. Sigrist, Tablettes du Princeton Theological Seminary, Époque d’Ur III (Philadelphia 1990).
TrD H. de Genouillac, La trouvaille de Dréhem (Paris 1911).
TROM 2 M. Sigrist, Neo-Sumerian Texts from the Royal Ontario Museum, II, (Bethesda 2004).
TRU L. Legrain, Le temps des rois d’Ur (Paris 1912).
TSA H. de Genouillac, Tablettes sumériennes archaiques (Paris 1909).
TSDU H. Limet, Textes sumériens de la IIIe Dynastie d’Ur (Brussel 1976).
TSŠ R.R. Jestin, Tablettes sumériennes de Šuruppak conservées au Musée de Stamboul (Paris 1937).
TuT G. Reisner, Tempelurkunden aus Telloh (Berlin 1901).
UDT J.B. Nies, Ur dynasty tablets (Leipzig 1920).
UDU G. Contenau, Umma sous la dynastie d’Ur (Paris 1916).
UET Ur Excavations, Texts (London 1928ff.).
Ukg. Inscriptions of Urukagina. Edition: H. Steible, Die altsumerischen Bau- und Weihinschriften (FAOS 5/1) (Wiesbaden 1982), pp.278-358.
UMTBM 2 M.E. Milone - G. Spada, Umma messenger texts in the British Museum, Part two (Nisaba 3) (Messina 2003).
UNT H. Waetzoldt, Untersuchungen zur neusumerischen Textilindustrie (Roma 1972).
Urn. Inscriptions of Ur-Nanshe. Edition: H. Steible, Die altsumerischen Bau- und Weihinschriften (FAOS 5/1) (Wiesbaden 1982), pp.79-117.
USP B. R. Foster, Umma in the Sargonic period (Hamden 1982).
UTAMI Die Umma-Texte aus den archäologischen Museen zu Istanbul, III-VI (Bethesda 1993-2001).
VO Vicino Oriente (Roma 1978ff.).
VS Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der Königlichen/Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin (1907ff.).
2: H. Zimmern, Sumerische Kultlieder aus altbabylonischer Zeit. Erste Reihe (Leipzig 1912).
10: H. Zimmern, Sumerische Kultlieder aus altbabylonischer Zeit.
Zweite Reihe (Leipzig 1913).
14: W. Förtsch, Altbabylonische Wirtschaftstexte aus der Zeit Lugalanda’s und Urukagina’s (Leipzig 1916).
25: J. Marzahn, Altsumerische Verwaltungstexte aus Girsu/Lagaš (Berlin 1991).
27: J. Marzahn, Altsumerische Verwaltungstexte und ein Brief aus Girsu/Lagaš (Mainz 1996).
WdO Die Welt des Orients (Göttingen 1947ff.).
YNER Yale Near Eastern Researches (New Haven 1967ff.).
6: R. Kutscher, Oh angry sea (a-ab-ba hu-luh-ha) (1975).
8: D.C. Snell, Ledgers and prices (1982).
YOS Yale oriental series, Babylonian texts (New Haven 1915ff.).
ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie (Berlin 1886ff.).
Zinbun Zinbun. Memoirs of the Research Institute for Humanistic Studies, Kyoto University (Kyoto 1957ff.).
1.1. History of the language and its speakers
Sumerian is an ancient Near Eastern language spoken more than four thousand years ago in southern Mesopotamia. It is documented as a living language from the late fourth millennium, the date of the earliest cuneiform documents, until the early second millennium. Though no longer spoken, Sumerian continued to be used as a language of scholarship and cult until the end of the first millennium BCE.
Sumerian is a language isolate with no known relatives. Its position in a remote corner of the Near East shows it to be a last remnant of the languages that preceded the arrival of Semitic languages in the area. In this sense, its position is much like that of Basque in Europe, which is a remnant of what existed there before the arrival of the Indo-European languages.
The name Sumerian comes from the Akkadian šumeru ‘Sumerian’, of unknown origin. The Sumerians themselves called their language eme-gi7.r, which contains the noun eme ‘tongue, language’ and a stem gi7.r of uncertain meaning, perhaps ‘native’.
The Sumerians lived in what is now southern Iraq, in the plain of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers, in the area by the Persian Gulf. In the time of the Sumerians, the geography of this area differed radically from that of today. The shoreline of the Persian Gulf was about 200 km further inland from its current location. Also, the Euphrates and Tigris rivers did not follow their modern channels but flowed much closer to each other and discharged separately into the Persian Gulf.
The southern alluvial plain where the Sumerians lived is by itself hardly a hospitable region.
The climate is hot and dry. The amount of rainfall is so small that agriculture is only possible through irrigation. The region lacks metals and other minerals. Even wood and stone are scarce. The flatness of the plain makes that the rivers overflow their banks easily and are prone to shift their courses. Moreover, the seasonal flood of the rivers comes at harvest time, too late for irrigation purposes and potentially even harmful because of the flooding risk. Nevertheless, once the water flow is controlled by an irrigation system, agriculture can sustain a large popu- lation.
The economy of the Sumerians was based on agriculture. Their main crops were barley and, to a lesser extent, wheat. They also grew pulses such as beans, peas, and lentils, in addition to onions, garlic, leek, cucumber, and other vegetables. Sesame was their oil crop. They had vineyards, date palm plantations, and orchards with various fruit trees. In addition, the Sume- rians kept sheep, goats, pigs, and cattle for their wool, meat, leather, and various milk products.
Oxen and donkeys were used as draught animals, for ploughing as well as for drawing wagons and chariots. A further source of foodstuffs was fishery. Fishermen were either specialized in catching fresh water fish in rivers and canals, or in fishing along the sea coast.
Agricultural production was large enough to make trade possible. In exchange for wool and barley, the Sumerians could obtain the metals, minerals, wood, and stone which they lacked in their own environment. Particularly important was the tin and copper trade because those metals were essential for the production of bronze which was at the time (the Bronze Age) a prominent raw material for making tools. Certain types of wood (cedar, for instance) and natural stone were imported as building materials for large constructions like temples, supple- menting the mudbrick that was always the chief building material. Precious metals and stones were imported for making jewellery. Silver was also used as a means for measuring or storing value but only rarely as a means of payment. Usually goods were bartered or paid for with barley.
The Sumerians also practiced a variety of crafts. To mention only a few, there were potters, leatherworkers, carpenters, and smiths. Special craftsmen produced basketry and mats from reeds. Milling, spinning, and weaving were female occupations.
The rivers and canals were not only used for irrigation and fishery but were also the main ways of communication between localities. In fact, the principal form of transport was the boat. Boats transported goods and people between settlements and farmland, and did so much faster and much more easily than was possible by land. Consequently, people did not have to live close to the land they tilled. This excellent transport system and the high agricultural productivity laid at the basis of the highly urbanized character of Sumerian society. Perhaps as many as two-thirds of the population dwelled in towns. The more important of them were Nippur, Shuruppak, Isin, Uruk, Larsa, and Ur along the Euphrates, as well as Adab, Umma, Girsu, and Lagash, more to the east and closer to the Tigris.
Thus, Sumerian society knew a high level of urbanization and an extensive division of labour. Both came about together with a third important trait of ancient Mesopotamia: it was the home of early states, which arose well before the third millennium. As a result, Sumerian society was anything but egalitarian. The economy was dominated by the palace and the temples, and these were controlled by a small number of families, with the king and the royal family at the top. Together they controlled most of the economic resources, including arable land, livestock, labour, and water. And they managed these resources by means of a meticulous administration and accounting system. It was, in fact, precisely for this purpose that the Sumerian cuneiform script was invented at all.
Most of the third millennium, southern Mesopotamia was divided into several small states, each based on a major city with its surrounding area. Depending on the circumstances, these states had friendly or less friendly relations. We are relatively well documented about the quarrels between Umma and Lagash. These two states had a border conflict about land and water, which led to three military conflicts within a century. Such periods of political fragmen- tation alternated, however, with attempts at unification. The best-known of these attempts are the Akkad and Ur III empires. The Akkad empire existed during the 23rd century BCE and was established by Sargon, a king from the Semitic North. It was followed by another period of political fragmentation. During the 21st century BCE another empire came into existence, this time established from the South, under the so-called Third Dynasty of Ur. At the turn of the century, it also disintegrated again into a number of smaller states.1
1.2. The Sumerian language
1.2.1. Genetic and areal relationships
Sumerian is a language isolate and it is highly unlikely that we will ever find a language related to it. Nearly all of the six thousand or so languages known to us today are separated from Sumerian by a time gap of thousands of years, which is all but impossible to bridge with the methods of historical and comparative linguistics. More crucially, the linguistic landscape of which Sumerian was a part is largely unknown and has long since disappeared, mostly without
1 Postgate (1992) is still the best overview of Mesopotamian society from ca. 3000-1500 BCE. Pollock (1999) is a highly influential analysis that pays more attention to prehistoric developments, treating the period 5000-2100 BCE. Historical overviews with a wider scope are Edzard (2004) and Van de Mieroop (2004). The fundamental survey of ancient settlement and land use is Adams (1981).
a trace. Linguistically, modern Iraq is three language shifts removed from Sumerian: from Sumerian to Akkadian to Aramaic to Arabic. Similar language shifts have happened in neigh- bouring Iran, Turkey, and the rest of the Middle East. Any traces of related languages have thus been obliterated thousands of years ago.
In the third millennium BCE, Sumerian was surrounded by unrelated languages. In Meso- potamia itself, Sumerian was spoken in the area closest to the Persian Gulf, while the Semitic language Akkadian was at home in the neighbouring area more upstream on the Euphrates and Tigris. Farther away, in northern Syria, we find other Semitic languages, Eblaite and Amorite.
Since the Semitic languages belong to the Afro-Asiatic language family, their ultimate origin lies in Africa, but they spread into the Middle East very early. By 2600 BCE, they had ex- panded so far into Syria and Mesopotamia that Akkadian was already used in parts of southern Mesopotamia, steadily reducing the area where Sumerian was spoken. This process of lan- guage shift in Mesopotamia did not only lead to the death of the Sumerian language itself, but most probably also obliterated its closest relatives (Michalowski 2000: 180).
The most important neighbour of Sumerian outside Mesopotamia was Elamite (Stolper 2004), at home in present-day Iran. The earliest documents date from about 3100 BCE but are written in an as yet undeciphered script, so that their linguistic assignment to Elamite is uncer- tain. The oldest unambiguously Elamite texts date to about 2300 BCE. Although the language is still poorly understood, enough is known to make language comparison possible. Elamite seems to be related to the Dravidian languages. The language became extinct in the late first millennium BCE, being replaced by Iranian languages. Although there were trade relations and wars between Elamite and Sumerian speaking areas, Elamite seems to have had hardly any linguistic impact on Sumerian: no Elamite loanwords have as yet been identified in Sumerian.
Elamite was not the only language spoken in the neighbouring areas of Iran in Sumerian times, but very little is known about the others (Rubio 2005: 316-7). A people called the Gutians are attested from about 2300 BCE onwards, but of their language we know little more than a few proper names. Coming from the modern area of Iran, the Kassites first turn up in Babylonia during the second millennium BCE. Of their language we know a few dozen words and proper names. Both Gutian and Kassite, as well as any other ancient pre-Indo-European language from Iran, became extinct thousands of years ago.
Directing our attention further west, we find traces of two more ancient Near Eastern lan- guages from Sumerian times: Hurrian (Wilhelm 2004) and Hattic (Klinger 1996). The former was spoken in present-day northern Iraq, northern Syria and southeast Turkey from at least the later third millennium BCE until the end of the second millennium BCE. Hurrian is closely related to Urartian, which is another ancient Near Eastern language and which was in use during the first millennium BCE in the area from the Caucasus to northeastern Iraq. Some scholars have argued for a genetic relationship between Urarto-Hurrian and Northeast Cauca- sian, but others remain unconvinced.
Hattic is a language indigenous to Anatolia. It became extinct in the early second millen- nium, being replaced by the Indo-European language Hittite. Hattic is mainly known from loanwords into Hittite and from some Hittite sources which document the use of Hattic in a cultic context. For Hattic, too, genetic links with Caucasian languages have been proposed but without decisive proof.
There is little or no evidence of linguistic contact between any of these ancient Near Eastern languages and Sumerian, with one important exception. Sumerian and Akkadian were not only neighbouring languages but there was also extensive linguistic contact between the two, so extensive in fact that we can speak of a Sumero-Akkadian linguistic area in Mesopotamia (Edzard 2000; 2003: 173-8). In a general situation of widespread bilingualism and language
