Journal of Ancient Civilisations 33, II (2018), 141–163, 2018

In the inscriptions of E-ana-tum, ruler of Lagaš, listing his victories over various cities, there is a four-line long passage that describes E-ana-tum’s defeat over the city called Arawa. The translations of this grammatically difficult passage vary greatly; there seems to be no agreement either about its exact meaning or about its grammatical analysis. This paper first evaluates the translations and analyses proposed so far, then, in its second part, a new translation is offered. This translation is based on an analysis of the passage that takes into consideration not only verbal and nominal morphology and syntax, but also the information structure of the passage and the arrangement of the cuneiform signs. Eanatum, Lagash, Sumerian grammar, royal inscriptions

in Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2020-1 (2020), pp. 33-36, no. 16, 2020

NABU Nouvelles assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires 2001/2. , 2001

2) Again on DeZ 3281, Middle-Assyrian toponymy and a lºmu from Tell fi™⁄ ∑amad/Dªr Katlimmu -The barley delivery DeZ 328 1 from Tell fi™⁄ ∑amad, commented upon previously 2 , carries a list of personal and place-names offering information on the western regions of the Middle-Assyrian kingdom. The texts appears to provide, in a sequence, a listing of places and people starting from the western border areas and following on with the eastern frontier. The delivery mentions two personal names and then a number of sites: uru.pa-a-tu-[ ], Dunni-Aßßur, ·uzirånu, ·arrånu, Ayya, ·abayatu, Araziqu, bu-ßa-ia-ú, Ni⁄rºya, the cities of the Upper Land of ·ånu, uru.⁄u-um-na-⁄u-Ωa. Two further personal names close the sequence 3 .

Kleber, K. / Neumann, G. / Paulus, S. (Hg.), unter Mitarbeit von Ch. Möllenbeck, Grenzüberschreitungen. Studien zur Kulturgeschichte des Alten Orients. Festschrift für Hans Neumann zum 65. Geburtstag am 9. Mai 2018 (dubsar 5. Münster 2018) 349-363

2007

When we think of the Neo-Assyrian "chief scribe", rab \upšarri, 1 or "palace scribe", \upšar ēkalli, 2 most of us probably associate their jobs almost solely with scribal work. * An earlier version of this paper was presented on the 20 th of October, 2005, in Verona. Access to the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project's database facilitated the preparation of this paper. I am grateful to Dr. J.R. Novotny, Profs. S. Parpola and R.M. Whiting, who all read the manuscript of this article and suggested numerous valuable improvements, as well as to Prof. S. Ponchia for not only accepting this contribution to the Proceedings of the workshop in Verona but also for her full support before, during, and after the workshop. 1. The only attested syllabic spelling of the title is LÚ.rab-\up-šar-re in a colophon of Issar-šumu-ereš (Hunger 1968, no. 344, 2); in Neo-Assyrian texts, the title is regularly written LÚ/LÚ*.GAL-A.BA (passim), once GAL-A.BA (NWL 35 ii 10¥); in addition, the spelling LÚ.GAL-DUB.SAR is attested twice by Issar-šumu-ereš (SAA 8, 13, r.1; 33 r. 1) and once in a letter by the Babylonian scholar Bel-ušezib (SAA 10, 116 r. 6¥). In colophons of Nabû-zuqup-kenu, the title of his ancestor Gabbu-ilani-ereš is mostly written as LÚ.GAL-DUB.SAR.MEŠ (see PNA 1/II, pp. 414-415 s.v. Gabbu-ilani-ereš [1a.]), a spelling that also occurs in colophons of Inurta-uballissu (see Hunger 1968, no. 313) and Adad-šumu-u#ur (PNA 1/I, p. 38 no. 5.a). Note, however, that Nabû-zuqup-kenu also wrote at least twice LÚ.GAL-A.BA.MEŠ. The plural sign MEŠ is attached to the title only in colophons. A further, learned spelling for rab \upšarri, LÚ.GAL-GI.U, is attested thrice referring to Nabû-šallimšunu (TCL 3, 428; cf. fn. 17, below) and Nabûzeru-lešir (Hunger 1968, no. 344, 4, and 4 R 2, 9; see Parpola, LAS II, p. 470). 2. Also often translated "scribe of the palace". This title is always written logographically in Neo-Assyrian; the attested spellings are: LÚ/LÚ*.A.BA-É.GAL (passim, once A.BA-É.GAL only, ND 2088, 10; note, exceptionally followed by a royal name, Nabû-kabti-a~~ešu LÚ.A.BA-É.GAL ša %LUGAL-GI.NA, "palace scribe of Sargon", SAA 6, 31, r. 4) and (LÚ/LÚ*.)A.BA-KUR (likewise passim; administrative and legal documents tend to omit the determinative). The spelling LÚ.DUB.SAR-É.GAL, found in two Neo-Baby-

2018

Studia Mesopotamica, 2017

I) The sign NIM, used with a topographic value, is first attested without any doubt through Eanatum inscriptions (KUR NIMki), who ruled Lagaš around the third quarter of the 3rd millennium BC. It is proposed to consider as unsuitable the systematic translation of this sign by ‘Elam’, at least in 3rd millennium BC Mesopotamian texts. The different meanings and values of this sign are reviewed here, in a strictly chronological way, and more particularly the changing topographic reality this sign encompassed. II) Then the distribution area of the ‘Elamite’ language speakers will be examined, through an evaluation of the onomastic features (above all anthroponomy) available in the cuneiform texts. Finally, hypotheses about Susa will be proposed, distinguishing three different and independent spheres of data: the material assemblage (archaeology), records of political control and indications of linguistic / cultural identity.

Vicino Oriente

The correspondence between text and imagery on the Stele of the Vultures is a long-debated question. Even the meaning and the sequence of the images on the reverse of the Stele, as well as their relationship to the text are still obscure. Given that perfect correspondence was not a priority, this article proposes an overall interpretation of the monument. According to the author, the topic of rebellion, which is alluded to in the text through threats and curses upon anyone who would violate the oaths, and which is just implied (ellipsis) in the visual account, is the key to understanding the message of the monument.

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 2005

This eagerly awaited grammar presents an account of the Sumerian language in eighteen chapters: the first three provide an introduction to the features, affiliation and sounds of Sumerian, plus a guide to how it was written; these are followed by twelve chapters on the various parts of speech; the book rounds off with three further chapters to discuss Emesal and the influence of Akkadian on Sumerian, and to offer a few words to tie up loose ends. The book is modern in a number of ways. As could be expected, it incorporates recent advances in our understanding of the language, including some that have very recently appeared and even some yet to appear (the long-awaited results of the sixth Sumerian grammar discussion group, held in Oxford in 1999). It also draws on the ISSL (http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/psd/ www/ISSL-form.html) and provides references to ETCSL (http://www-etcsl. orient.ox.ac.uk/), demonstrating the utility of Internet-based Assyriological materials. But more striking is the adoption of the transliteration style which has started to become more common among Sumerologists in recent times, giving us readings such as ninta 'male' and ses 'brother'. Looking for criticisms, one might point to proofreading. Works intended as reference tools-especially those aimed at students-require even more rigorous attention than others, since students can easily be confused. Spare a thought for the beginner who learns that 'city' is read eri (passim; p. 19 URU), as in the name of the ED ruler of Lagas (pp. 19, 104, 124, 153 Lagaš), Irikagina (p. 102, Erikagina), whose inscriptions are referred to using the abbreviation Ukg. Likewise, 'wood' is g teš and G t EŠ (except for: pp. 103, 146 giš ; p. 8 GIŠ; p. 31 g t iš-gi-g t iš-gi 'cane-brakes'), as used phonetically in g téštug (p. 8; passim g téštu and g t éštu(-g)), which is written GIŠ.TÚG.PI (pp. 8, 150) and may alternatively be rendered giš-túg g t eštug (p. 8). Again in the interests of student sanity, perhaps it would have been better to have kept length marks off Sumerian vowels, e.g. p. 13, where some vowels have length marks, others accents; note also '50' read ninnû (passim; see esp. p. 65), although [û] is absent from the repertory of Sumerian vocalic phonemes listed in 3.1.1. Given that the author extends his remit to take in elements of the writing system, a brief note on modern transliteration habits-especially with reference to accents and subscript numbers-would have been welcome. That the author does extend his remit in this way is a positive thing, however, since he thus greatly facilitates the difficult journey from transliteration to the transcription of grammatical analysis. There are a few slips of the pen. In the list of determinatives, LÚ (the use of which is not actually reserved for male professions) is exemplified with (p. 9) lú nu-kiri 6 , although the lú determinative in Sumerian texts is not normally, REVIEWS An example for the ventive dimensional indicator for 3 rd pl. dative-locative (33 on p. 93) is provided by NBC 8058 ((6.1.02) proverb 2.7 source WWWW): zu-a ùr-ra mu-ne-a-e 11. The ventive 1 st pl. comitative indicator (38) might also be found as meda, as in 1.8.1.5 Gilgameš and Huwawa A 10: d utu šul d utu h b é-me-da-an-zu 'Utu, der junge Utu, sollte es von uns erfahren haben' (p. 171). Both meda and mueda are more commonly found marking 2 nd sg. forms. An example for the ventive 2 nd pl. dative-locative indicator may be found in proverb 5 A 71 = B 74: g tá-e ga-mu-e-ne-h b a-la 'Let me share out for you' (said by a fox to nine wolves). A possible example of a personal pronoun with terminative ending (see p. 56) might be found in (6.1.13) proverb 13.26: g t á-šè. Diachronic and geographic variations in Sumerian receive little attention but a sensible balance must be struck, as it has been here. To provide a coherent, comprehensive, detailed introduction to Sumerian in 200 pages is no mean feat. Inevitably the author did not have space to discuss issues in as much detail as one might have liked, but there are plenty of references to more detailed discussions and divergent opinion elsewhere. The HdO series aims carefully to select 'scholarly reference works of lasting value, under the editorship of major scholars in the field', criteria easily fulfilled by this volume. Throughout the book, one is struck by the learning and insight, as well as the humanity, which the author injects into his work. This grammar is a must for anyone concerned with Sumerian, at whatever level.