Cuneiform Clay Bulla, 2038 BCE
Clay
1.96
CT.040
Sumerian cuneiform is one of the earlies known forms of written expression. Firs appearing in the 4th millennium BC in wha is now Iraq, it was dubbed cuneifor (‘wedge-shaped’) because...
Sumerian cuneiform is one of the earlies known forms of written expression. Firs appearing in the 4th millennium BC in wha is now Iraq, it was dubbed cuneifor (‘wedge-shaped’) because of the distinctiv wedge form of the letters, created b pressing a reed stylus into wet clay. Earl Sumerian writings were essentiall pictograms, which became simplified in th early and mid 3rd millennium BC to a serie of strokes, along with a commensurat reduction in the number of discrete sign used (from c.1500 to 600). The scrip system had a very long life and was used b the Sumerians as well as numerous late groups – notably the Assyrians, Elamites,
Akkadians and Hittites – for around thre thousand years. Certain signs and phoneti standards live on in modern languages o the Middle and Far East, but the writin system is essentially extinct. It wa therefore cause for great excitement whe the ‘code’ of ancient cuneiform was cracke by a group of English, French and Germa Assyriologists and philologists in the mi 19th century AD. This opened up a vita source of information about these ancien groups that could not have been obtained i any other way.
Cuneiform was used on monument dedicated to heroic – and usually royal –
individuals, but perhaps its most importan function was that of record keeping. Th palace-based society at Ur and other larg urban centres was accompanied by remarkably complex and multifacete bureaucracy, which was run by professiona administrators and a priestly class, all o whom were answerable to central cour control. Most of what we know about th way the culture was run and administere comes from cuneiform tablets, which recor the everyday running of the temple an palace complexes in minute detail, as in th present case. The Barakat Gallery ha secured the services of Professor Lamber (University of Birmingham), a renowne expert in the decipherment and translatio of cuneiform, to examine and process th information on these tablets. The following i a transcription of his analysis of this tablet:
Clay bulla with cuneiform inscription and seal impressions. This has three not flat sides and is hollow. It was made to put around a rope at the mouth of a sack or other container to secure the contents with the authority of the person who ordered its making and inscribing. There are two lines of cuneiform writing about the matter involved, and three lines giving the date. The latter are clear:
Month: Shunigal. Year: the high priestess of Nanna of Karzida was installed. The year is the 9th of Amar-Sin, king of the Third Dynasty of Ur, c. 2038 BC. The lines about the matter involved are partly covered with incrustation and cannot be read for the moment. There are multiple rollings of a cylinder seal in addition to the inscription. The artwork shows a seated deity and a worshiper standing in front. There is also a three-line inscription of the seal owner, giving his name, title, and one further line, but the impressions are too feint to be read. Bullae were meant to be broken when the sack or other container was opened, so complete specimens are rare.
Akkadians and Hittites – for around thre thousand years. Certain signs and phoneti standards live on in modern languages o the Middle and Far East, but the writin system is essentially extinct. It wa therefore cause for great excitement whe the ‘code’ of ancient cuneiform was cracke by a group of English, French and Germa Assyriologists and philologists in the mi 19th century AD. This opened up a vita source of information about these ancien groups that could not have been obtained i any other way.
Cuneiform was used on monument dedicated to heroic – and usually royal –
individuals, but perhaps its most importan function was that of record keeping. Th palace-based society at Ur and other larg urban centres was accompanied by remarkably complex and multifacete bureaucracy, which was run by professiona administrators and a priestly class, all o whom were answerable to central cour control. Most of what we know about th way the culture was run and administere comes from cuneiform tablets, which recor the everyday running of the temple an palace complexes in minute detail, as in th present case. The Barakat Gallery ha secured the services of Professor Lamber (University of Birmingham), a renowne expert in the decipherment and translatio of cuneiform, to examine and process th information on these tablets. The following i a transcription of his analysis of this tablet:
Clay bulla with cuneiform inscription and seal impressions. This has three not flat sides and is hollow. It was made to put around a rope at the mouth of a sack or other container to secure the contents with the authority of the person who ordered its making and inscribing. There are two lines of cuneiform writing about the matter involved, and three lines giving the date. The latter are clear:
Month: Shunigal. Year: the high priestess of Nanna of Karzida was installed. The year is the 9th of Amar-Sin, king of the Third Dynasty of Ur, c. 2038 BC. The lines about the matter involved are partly covered with incrustation and cannot be read for the moment. There are multiple rollings of a cylinder seal in addition to the inscription. The artwork shows a seated deity and a worshiper standing in front. There is also a three-line inscription of the seal owner, giving his name, title, and one further line, but the impressions are too feint to be read. Bullae were meant to be broken when the sack or other container was opened, so complete specimens are rare.