7/22/2015
CDLN 2015:13
Cuneiform Digital Library Notes
2015:13
« ‹ ♦ › »
General Links Archive
A note on a new manuscript of ED Lu2 A
and its colophon*
Klaus Wagensonner
< klaus.wagensonner@orinst.ox.ac.uk >
University of Oxford
No other lexical text in the third millennium BC was handed down to us in so many copies as the socalled Standard Profession List (also Lu2 A or NAMEŠDA; henceforth EDLu-A). This word list is among
the earliest representatives of lexical texts in the cuneiform record with precursors reaching back into
the Uruk IV period (c. 3350-3200). In the course of the third millennium this composition was widely
known throughout Mesopotamia and beyond, for manuscripts found their way to Ebla and Tell Brak in
Syria as well as Susa in Iran. Together with many of the other archaic word lists it was still copied in the
Old Babylonian period. In this short contribution I aim to introduce a new manuscript, which has not
been considered earlier and, in particular, would like to discuss its colophon.
The third millennium sources that already contain a standardized text come from places such as
Fāra, Tell Abū Salabikh, Ebla, and now also Kiš; for the last-mentioned site see Wagensonner 2014a;
2014b and Westenholz 2014: no. 14. Maybe it is due to this popularity, which triggered the emergence
of adapted versions and exegetical literature in the late Early Dynastic period and beyond. Such
attempts can be seen, for instance, in the so-called Ebla Sign-List (ESL), whose first half comments on
sign readings occurring in EDLu-A (Archi 1987; Civil 2009: 64-66). A similar attempt to comment on
EDLu-A can still be found on the Old Babylonian extract tablet Wilson 2008, 129 dealing with entries
13-19 and providing for each entry a pronunciation gloss as well as an analytical writing. However,
entries of EDLu-A are also recycled in other lexical texts, such as SF 72 from Fāra, which uses several
titles found in the same sequence as in the parent list adding the sign MIN or Ax. (I do not attempt here
to discuss SF 72, but its interpretation as list of river and canal names is substantiated by the long
tradition of naming such proper names after occupations and titles; see for a similar passage in UM 2916-239 discussed in Taylor 2008: 205. For a different view of SF 72 see Civil 2009: 64, n. 5)
The most recent list of text witnesses to EDLu-A (Q000003) can be found either in the overview of
the lexical tradition in Mesopotamia by Niek Veldhuis (Veldhuis 2014a: 63-64) or on the respective page
of DCCLT. During the cataloguing and imaging mission at the Louvre Museum a new source came up,
which originates from the excavations at Tellō by Ernest de Sarzéc in 1881 and therefore entered the
collection quite early. The excavations during that campaign concentrated on Tell A of the site.
The seven-sided prism AO 337 (131 × 92 × 85 mm) was hitherto not recognised as a manuscript of
EDLu-A. The museum number AO 337 must not be confused with the already known manuscript DP
337, which is a small school lentil probably from ED IIIb Girsu containing the first two entries of the list
together with a student’s copy on its reverse (Veldhuis 2014a: 66). AO 337, on the other hand, contains
a whole copy of the lexical text. Prisms as scribal media for lexical texts were first introduced in the Old
Akkadian period and continued to be used until the Old Babylonian period (see also Taylor 2008: 206).
This prism contains nineteen entries per column, which corresponds to a standard amount of
http://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdln/php/single.php?id=66
1/6
7/22/2015
CDLN 2015:13
entries per column for this lexical text from the ED IIIb period onwards. Rather revealing from this
perspective is the school text Erm 15000 dating to the Old Akkadian period and probably originating
from Girsu (see also Lambert 1988: 251). The first two faces of this six-sided prism contain a regular
copy of EDLu-A with nineteen entries on each face. The content of the second face, however, is copied
on the three subsequent faces. The sixth face contains a dedication to the goddess Nisaba and a
colophon in calligraphic script. Units of nineteen entries are already confirmed by the sources at Ebla as
well as by Old Babylonian copies on tablets, which introduce a double ruling after each group of
nineteen entries and therefore faithfully copy source material (Wagensonner 2015a).
The entries of EDLu-A on AO 337 contain no surprises as far as they are preserved. It should be
noted that copies of EDLu-A in the Old Babylonian period came down to us in various types:
Copies on tablets with traditional layout
Copies on prisms with traditional layout (Cohen 2010; AO 337; SLT 113+)
Copies on tablets (with double rulings) without glosses (SLT 112+; N 5566+)
Copies on tablets with double rulings and glosses ([SLT 24]; UET 6, 682; UET 7, 86; BM 58680)
Extracts and school lentils (MS 2268/24; MS 2319/6; Erm 15000; Wilson 2008, 129)
The copies on prisms usually follow the traditional layout. In the case of EDLu-A both prisms and
cylinders were used. The unpublished manuscript BM 30041 + BM 90096 is a quite fragmented
cylinder (studied February 2015; see Taylor 2008: 206). Jon Taylor refers to YOS 1, 12 as being a
cylinder (studied October 2009), but which is in fact another seven-sided prism quite similar to both,
AO 337 and Cohen 2010, except for the fact that the length of its faces diverts from the afore-mentioned
custom. The scribal hand on prisms usually has archaizing features. In this respect the prism AO 337 is
quite similar to further examples, such as, in particular, the prism published by Mark Cohen in Fs.
Abusch and which is currently in a private collection. Cohen refers, however, to a hole which runs down
the center of the prism (Cohen 2010: 19). In the complex graphemes in entries 40-43 (GA2 × {inscribed
grapheme} .ME) the inscribed grapheme usually occurs in the sequence DI – GAR – SAL – UD. Cohen
notices that the last-mentioned three entries on his manuscript attest to the sequence UD – GAR – SAL
(Cohen 2010: 20-21). The prism AO 337 also diverts from the usual sequence: the list of inscribed signs
starts with a rather simplified DI and goes on with GAR – UD – SAL.
There are some further intriguing variants on AO 337, which shall be addressed here rather briefly.
The variation occurs particularly in the later parts of the list. This is per se not unusual. In the group of
entries of the enkudx(ZAG) official the entries containing the sign PA (82, 84 and 85) are grouped
together. Entry 83 of the list occurs just after these on AO 337, preceding entry 86. Entries 121-122 are
inverted as well. Entry 121 contains the complex grapheme MUŠ×MUŠ+KAK in other recensions. AO
337 on the other hand crosses the signs MUŠ and writes HI afterwards.
The intriguing feature of the prism AO 337, nevertheless, is its colophon, which is written in a
rather cursive script on the prism’s top side. Hence the prism has no central hole. In his overview Niek
Veldhuis briefly discusses colophons on such prisms (Veldhuis 2014a: 70-71). The colophons mentioned
by Veldhuis either contain the rather short dedicatory formula “(for) Nisaba” (dnisaba) or are more
explicit by mentioning the scribe and – according to Veldhuis – resemble dedicatory seal inscriptions,
since they are inscribed within a box. Amid its damaged areas, the colophon on the top side of AO 337
differs from the other hitherto known examples. It appears to list a higher amount of epithets for the
goddess.
http://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdln/php/single.php?id=66
2/6
7/22/2015
CDLN 2015:13
Fig. 1: Hand copy of the top side of AO 337
The colophon has a parallel in a royal inscription known to originate from Girsu. Douglas R. Frayne
incorporated this inscription, which was hitherto only known from the fragment of a clay bowl rim in
his Royal Inscriptions from Mesopotamia and assigned it to an unnamed ruler (RIME 3/2.2.3.1001).
The clay bowl rim MLC 1823 is a rather unusual piece. Although there seem to be quite a few erasures in
the text, the sign forms appear rather archaizing. The inscription is written on the rim’s inner surface.
Both this rim as well as the top side of the prism AO 337 contain the same inscription, although their
final parts appear to differ quite substantially. Following is an attempt to correlate both the colophon on
AO 337 (up to line 8) and this inscription:
AO 337
1.
d
2.
RIME 3/2.2.3.1001
1.
d
munus zi munus sag10
2.
munus zi
3.
munus sa6-ga
3.
munus mul-mul-e
4.
munus mul-mul-la
4.
ki-ag̃2 an-na
5.
ki-ag̃2 an-na
5.
hi-li e2 kur-kur-ra
6.
munus hi-li kur-kur
6.
g̃eštu2(GEŠ.TUG2.PI) 7(diš) 7.
munus DUR2 7(diš)
7.
× 6(diš)
8.
ga x 7(diš)
8.
g̃eštu2 ki-ku3
9.
g̃eštu3 ki-ku3
nisaba
nisaba
Unfortunately, the final lines of the colophon on AO 337 (lines 9-11) are badly damaged and quite a few
uncertainties remain. In any case, its content does not appear to follow the text on the clay bowl rim
containing two further epithets of Nisaba: “chief scribe of An, chief land recorder of Enlil.” But there are
other options. Some lexical prisms contain shorter dedications to the goddess Nisaba followed by the
name of the scribe. Veldhuis refers to the unpublished name list NBC 8495, whose beginning resembles
http://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdln/php/single.php?id=66
3/6
7/22/2015
CDLN 2015:13
lines 1-3 of the clay bowl rim, but then continues with the scribe’s name, his occupation and patronym
and last but not least the expression a r a d 2-z u i n - s a r , “your servant wrote it” (Veldhuis 2014a: 70).
Now, however, another parallel of the long type of colophon on AO 337 can be identified. The
publication history of this object in recent times is comparatively complex. The completely preserved
six-sided prism NMB 78411 contains on its various faces a copy of the list AD-GI4 (previously Tribute).
Similar to AO 337, its top side is inscribed with an unusually long colophon. This colophon received two
rather different treatments. The prism was first presented by Daniel Arnaud, who understood this
difficult part of the text as follows: “il fit tenir et voua [au seigneur] auguste, le roi des Igigi, le dragon
qui frappe la haute ste[pp]e, le lion de l’univers. (Dans) le pays de Kumidu, Šarrī-El plaça pour lui dans
un coin du rempart de la ville” (Arnaud 2006: 226). This curious colophon was reexamined by Bertrand
Lafont in 2008 in the National Museum of Beirut, who came to a completely different solution and
interpreted the text as copy of AD-GI4. However, the prism was first studied and copied by Markham
Geller at a London antiquities dealer in 2001, whose copy then was passed on to Theo Krispijn, who
published a separate study on this text in 2012 unaware of Lafont’s earlier discussion (see also Krispijn
and Lafont 2013).
The text on the top side of this prism indeed leaves many problems, since the scribal hand is rather
cursive and attests to a relative inexperienced scribe (see also Krispijn 2012: 302). But it is also its state
of preservation, which hampers sign identifications. Lafont proposed a new reading of lines 7-9, which
are repeated here (Lafont 2008: 291):
NMB 78411
7.
[x? geš]tug2(=[GIŠ].TÚG.PI) ki-ERIM
8.
dub-sar-mah An-na
9.
sag?-tun3 dEn-líl
In light of the new manuscript of EDLu-A and the link to the royal inscription on the clay bowl rim
presented above it is quite certain that the colophon of NMB 78411 contained the same dedicatory
inscription for the patron goddess of the scribes Nisaba. Miguel Civil in his latest edition and discussion
of the composition AD-GI4 refers to Lafont’s interpretation and states that it “invites a certain
skepticism”, since lines 4-6 “seem to consist mostly of numerals” (Civil 2013: 53, note 115). These
numerals are, however, part of the royal inscription containing two epithets ending in the numeral
7(diš) or Sumerian i m i n , which is now confirmed by AO 337. The final part of the colophon on NMB
78411 is better preserved than on AO 337. Comparing all three inscriptions, it becomes quite clear that
RIME 3/2.2.3.1001 and NMB 78411 stand closer together, whereas AO 337 diverts and obviously ends
in a different set of epithets:
RIME 3/2.2.3.1001
NMB 78411
1.
d
nisaba
1.
d
2.
munus zi
2.
munus zi
3.
munus sa6-ga
3.
[munus] sa6-ga
4.
munus mul-mul-la
4.
5.
ki-ag̃2 an-na
6.
munus hi-li kur-kur
7.
munus DUR2 7(diš)
8.
9.
AO 337
1.
d
2.
munus zi munus sag10
munus mul-mul-la
3.
munus mul-mul-e
5.
ki-[ag̃2] an-na
4.
ki-ag̃2 an-na
6.
hi-[li] e2
5.
hi-li e2 kur-kur-ra
7.
kur-kur-ra
8.
munus DUR2? 3+n(diš)
6.
g̃eštu2(GEŠ.TUG2.PI) 7(diš)
ga x 7(diš)
9.
munus [(×)] 7(diš)
7.
× 6(diš)
g̃eštu3 ki-ku3
10.
g̃eštu2 ki-ku3
8.
g̃eštu2 ki-ku3
http://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdln/php/single.php?id=66
nisaba
nisaba
4/6
7/22/2015
CDLN 2015:13
10.
dub-sar mah
11.
an-na
12.
[sag]-sug5 mah
13.
den-lil2
11.
dub-sar mah an-na
9.
× × dig̃ir?-re?-e?-ne?
12.
× × mah d+en-lil2
10.
× × ZU? mah?
13.
×××
11.
[...] × × [...]
Despite its obvious variants in the latter part it is quite intriguing to find this inscription on the top sides
of two lexical prisms, one containing a copy of EDLu-A, the other a copy of AD-GI4. Both texts received
great attention in the third millennium and were copied throughout Mesopotamia and beyond.
Dedications to the goddess Nisaba are of course not rare. The prism BM 86271, which contains a list of
personal names starting with the element n i n is inscribed with the dedication dnisaba on its top side
(Lambert 1988: 259).
Dating AO 337
The aforementioned clay bowl rim coming from the antiquities market with an inscription of an
“Unnamed Ruler from Girsu” (RIME 3/2.2.3.1001) is dated to the Ur III period mainly based on
palaeographical reasons. It is therefore included into the respective volume of the Royal Inscriptions of
Mesopotamia (see also Selz 1989a: 494). A date for prisms such as AO 337 is generally difficult to
achieve so long as there is no stratigraphic archaeological evidence. The upper part of the colophon on
AO 337 shows some orthographical features, which make an Old Babylonian date more likely. A
diagnostic element is, in particular, the writing of the genitive in line 3: n i n m u l - m u l - e instead of
n i n m u l - m u l - l a on the the clay bowl rim and probably the NMB 78411. Another intriguing feature
is the writing m u n u s s a g 10 on AO 337 instead of m u n u s s a 6-g a on the other two inscriptions.
It should be noted that on both AO 337 and NMB 78411 the colophon is aligned according to the
beginning of the text on face a. The same orientation is attested on the afore-mentioned prism YOS 1,
12.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Archi, Alfonso
1987
“The “Sign-list” from Ebla”. Eblaitica 1:91-113.
Arnaud, Daniel
2006
“Un prisme de fondation de Šarrī-El”. BAAL 10:225-241.
Civil, Miguel
2009
“The Mesopotamian Lexical Lists: Authors and Commentators”. In: (ed.) Reconstruyendo el
Pasado Remoto. Estudios sobre el Próximo Oriente Antiguo en homenaje a Jorge R. Silva
Castillo / Reconstructing a Distant Past. Ancient Near Eastern Essays in Tribute to Jorge R.
Silva Castillo (Aula Orientalis – Supplementa 25; Editorial AUSA: Barcelona):63-69.
2013
“On AD-GI4 (A.K.A. “Archaic Word List C” or “Tribute”)”. JCS 65:13-67.
Cohen, Mark E.
2010
“An Old Babylonian Prism of Early Dynastic L&ucute; A”. In: J. Stackert, B. Nevling Porter and
D. P. Wright (ed.) Gazing on the Deep. Ancient Near Eastern and Other Studies in Honor of
Tzvi Abusch (CDL Press: Bethesda):19-25.
Frayne, Douglas R.
http://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdln/php/single.php?id=66
5/6
7/22/2015
CDLN 2015:13
1997
Ur III Period (2112–2004 BC), RIME 3/2. University of Toronto Press: Toronto, Buffalo &
London.
Krispijn, Theo J. H.
2012
“An Old-Babylonian Version of the Tribute List”. In: T. Boiy, J. Bretschneider, A. Goddeeris, H.
Hameeuw, G. Jans & J. Tavernier (ed.) The Ancient Near East, A Life! Festschrift Karel Van
Lerberghe (OLA 220; Peeters: Leuven, Paris & Walpole):297-304.
Krispijn, Theo J. H. and Bertrand Lafont
2013
“A prism displaying a recension of the lexical “Word List C””. NABU 2013/2.
Lafont, Bertrand
2008
“Le prisme cunéiforme conservé au Musée National de Beyrouth”. BAAL 12:289-297.
Lambert, Wilfred G.
1988
“An Old Akkadian List of Sumerian Personal Names”. In: E. Leichty et al. (ed.) A Scientific
Humanist. Stuides in Memory of Abraham Sachs (OPSNKF 9; ):251-260.
Selz, Gebhard J.
1989a
“Nissaba(k) “Die Herrin der Getreidezuteilungen””. In: H. Behrens, D. Loding and M. T. Roth
(ed.) DUMUE2DUBBAA: Studies in Honor of Åke W. Sjöberg (OPSNKF 9; The University
Museum: Philadelphia):491-497.
Taylor, Jon
2008
“Lexicographical Study of the Already-Ancient in Antiquity”. In: R. D. Biggs, J. Myers and M.
Roth (ed.) Proceedings of the 51st Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale Held at the
Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago July 1822, 2005 (SAOC 62; Chicago):201-208.
Veldhuis, Niek
2014a
History of the Cuneiform Lexical Tradition, GMTR 6. Ugarit-Verlag: Münster.
Wagensonner, Klaus
2014a
“Lu2 A Again!”. CDLN 2014:15.
2014b
“Addendum to CDLN 2014:015”. CDLN 2014:24.
2015a
“A, B, C, ... Word List Z”. CDLN 2015:8.
Westenholz, Aage
2014
*
A ThirdMillennium Miscellany Of Cuneiform Texts, CUSAS 26. CDL Press: Bethesda, MD.
I would like to thank the Louvre Museum in allowing me to study AO 337. Thanks go to Mahmoud Alassi at the Louvre, who
provided me with information regarding the origin of the prism in de Sarzéc’s excavations at Tellō. Further thanks go to Elizabeth
Payne at the Yale Babylonian collection, who kindly sent me photographs of MLC 1823.
ISSN 15466566 © Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative | Preprint: 20150701
http://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdln/php/single.php?id=66
6/6
Klaus Wagensonner