Sumerian Cuneiform Tablet, 2032 BCE
Clay
2.04 x 2.99
CT.019
Sumerian cuneiform is one of the earliest known forms of written expression. First appearing in the 4th millennium BC in what is now Iraq, it was dubbed cuneiform (‘wedge-shaped’) because...
Sumerian cuneiform is one of the earliest known forms of written expression. First appearing in the 4th millennium BC in what is now Iraq, it was dubbed cuneiform (‘wedge-shaped’) because of the distinctive wedge form of the letters, created by pressing a reed stylus into wet clay. Early Sumerian writings were essentially pictograms, which became simplified in the early and mid 3rd millennium BC to a series of strokes, along with a commensurate reduction in the number of discrete used (from c.1500 to 600). The script system had a very long life and was used by the Sumerians as well as numerous later groups – notably the Assyrians, Elamites, Akkadians and Hittites – for around three thousand years. Certain signs and phonetic standards live on in modern languages of Middle and Far East, but the writing system is essentially extinct. It was therefore cause for great excitement when the ‘code’ of ancient cuneiform was cracked by a group of English, French and German Assyriologists and philologists in the mid 19th century AD. This opened up a vital source of information about these ancient groups that could not have been obtained in any other way.
Cuneiform was used on monuments dedicated to heroic – and usually royal – individuals, but perhaps its most important function was that of record keeping. The palace-based society at Ur and other large urban centres was accompanied by a remarkably complex and multifaceted bureaucracy, which was run by professional administrators and a priestly class, all of whom were answerable to central control. Most of what we know about the way the culture was run and administered comes from the cuneiform tablets, which record the everyday running of the temple and palaces complexes in minute detail, as in the present case. The Barakat Gallery has secured the services of Professor Lambert (University of Birmingham), a renowned expert in the decipherment and translation of cuneiform, to examine and process the information on these tablets. The following is a transcription of his analysis of this tablet:
The obverse of this tablet is quiet well preserved, but the reverse is very damaged, with salt crystals adhering to broken surfaces. However, the content is clear: it is an administrative document from the period of the Third Dynasty of Ur, dated (in a damaged year name) to the 6th year of Shu-Sin, fourth king of the dynasty, c. 2032 BC. It is a record (on the obverse) of the remuneration of a particular serf. Some of the terms are not yet understood, but the general content is clear:
Translation:
60 sila of barley, 4 minas of wool: Adallal . . . . . . . . . Mr. Ni’etga, son of Ilum-bani, at the command of Ilum-bani.
Total: 1 serf: 60 sila of barley, 4 minas of wool.
The barley: 60 sila, for 1 month.
The clothing: 4 minas for 1 year.
Provided and taken.
(break)
[Year: Ibbi-Sin, king of Ur, erected a] magnificent [stele] for the (the gods) Enlil and Ninlil.
A sila was a measure of capacity: about .85 of a litre. A mina was a weight, about 500 grams. Thus, with a month of about 30 days, the serf received nearly 2 litres of barley a day, but that had to supply his whole family. A serf was tied to his job and could not negotiate his pay and conditions.
Cuneiform was used on monuments dedicated to heroic – and usually royal – individuals, but perhaps its most important function was that of record keeping. The palace-based society at Ur and other large urban centres was accompanied by a remarkably complex and multifaceted bureaucracy, which was run by professional administrators and a priestly class, all of whom were answerable to central control. Most of what we know about the way the culture was run and administered comes from the cuneiform tablets, which record the everyday running of the temple and palaces complexes in minute detail, as in the present case. The Barakat Gallery has secured the services of Professor Lambert (University of Birmingham), a renowned expert in the decipherment and translation of cuneiform, to examine and process the information on these tablets. The following is a transcription of his analysis of this tablet:
The obverse of this tablet is quiet well preserved, but the reverse is very damaged, with salt crystals adhering to broken surfaces. However, the content is clear: it is an administrative document from the period of the Third Dynasty of Ur, dated (in a damaged year name) to the 6th year of Shu-Sin, fourth king of the dynasty, c. 2032 BC. It is a record (on the obverse) of the remuneration of a particular serf. Some of the terms are not yet understood, but the general content is clear:
Translation:
60 sila of barley, 4 minas of wool: Adallal . . . . . . . . . Mr. Ni’etga, son of Ilum-bani, at the command of Ilum-bani.
Total: 1 serf: 60 sila of barley, 4 minas of wool.
The barley: 60 sila, for 1 month.
The clothing: 4 minas for 1 year.
Provided and taken.
(break)
[Year: Ibbi-Sin, king of Ur, erected a] magnificent [stele] for the (the gods) Enlil and Ninlil.
A sila was a measure of capacity: about .85 of a litre. A mina was a weight, about 500 grams. Thus, with a month of about 30 days, the serf received nearly 2 litres of barley a day, but that had to supply his whole family. A serf was tied to his job and could not negotiate his pay and conditions.