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 signs
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
the 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 court
control. Most of what we know about the
way the culture was run and administered
comes from cuneiform tablets, which record
the everyday running of the temple and
palace 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:
‘It is an administrative document, but a rare
one, from the period of the Third Dynasty of
Ur, dated to the 9th year of Shu-Sin, fourth
king of the dynasty, c. 2029 BC. It gives first
details of the materials used in the making
of a wooden door, then a list of the
craftsmen in the employ of the relevant
institution (which is not named, but was no
doubt a big temple of the palace), and ends
with some bureaucratic details and the date.
Translation:
1 door with bands of fir, overlaid with
bitumen: its height: 4 2/3 cubits, its width:
2 1/3 cubits, its thickness: 1 2/3 [fingers?]
with 7….s of the leather worker’s art, one
day’s work its bitumen: 15 sila, 3 beams of
fir, the…. 6 cubits each, their….28 each, 2
gates of fir, the….of 4 cubits each, 2 gates of
fir, the ….of 3 cubits each: their….s 14, 42
beams of fir, 8 cubits each, with their…..3
minas of paint, 6 minas of obsidian, 10
mats, half a sar each [Seal inscription:
Lugal-imru’a, scribe, son of Lu-Abu], 19
cabinet makers, 278 carpenters, 19
goldsmiths, 237 metal workers, 18 gem
engravers, 422 reed workers, 92 leather
workers, 33 carders. One day’s work: a wall
of fired bricks. Shu-Sin-shane….put to the
account of Shu-Sin. Via Basmum, Shu-
Mamma and Adallal. A disbursement. Year:
Shu-Sin, king of Ur, built the temple of
Shara in Umma.
There is much that is obscure in this tablet.
Other tablets mention doors with just basic
information about size, but this appears to
be unique for the many details it gives,
using measures not in ordinary use at this
time, and terms not so far intelligible. The
list of craftsmen is also very interesting for
the numbers it supplies. The obsidian was
used for inlay.’
