Monetary role of silver and its administration in Mesopotamia during the Ur III period (c. 2112-2004 BCE): a case study of the Umma province [1 ed.] 8400096797, 9788400096793

Citation preview

XIAOLI OUYANG

MONETARY ROLE OF SILVER AND ITS ADMINISTRATION IN MESOPOTAMIA DURING THE UR III PERIOD (C . 2112-2004 BCE): A CASE STUDY OF THE UMMA PROVINCE

BIBLIOTECA DEL PRÓXIMO ORIENTE ANTIGUO 11 Director Manuel Molina Secretario José Manuel Galán Allué Comité Editorial Guillemette Andreu (Musée du Louvre) John Baines (University of Oxford) Miguel Civil (University of Chicago) Ignacio Márquez Rowe (CSIC) Miquel Molist Montañà (UAB) Walther Sallaberger (Universität München) José Miguel Serrano Delgado (Universidad de Sevilla) Consejo Asesor Marilina Betrò (Università di Pisa) Barbara Böck (CSIC) Andrés Diego Espinel (CSIC) Raymond Johnson (University of Chicago) Bertrand Lafont (CNRS - IFPO) David I. Owen (Cornell University) Richard Parkinson (British Museum) Wilfred van Soldt (Rijksuniversiteit Leiden)

XIAOLI OUYANG

MONETARY ROLE OF SILVER AND ITS ADMINISTRATION IN MESOPOTAMIA DURING THE UR III PERIOD (C . 2112-2004 BCE): A CASE STUDY OF THE UMMA PROVINCE

CONSEJO SUPERIOR DE INVESTIGACIONES CIENTÍFICAS MADRID 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abbreviations and Conventions ................................................................................................. List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. Preface ........................................................................................................................................ Chapter One: Money in Ancient Mesopotamia? ........................................................................

9 11 13 15 17

1.1. Money, Silver, and Coinage .......................................................................................................... 1.2. Goal and Chapter Outline ............................................................................................................. 1.3. Evidence and Methodology .......................................................................................................... 1.4. Typology of Silver Texts ..............................................................................................................

17 21 23 25

Chapter Two: The Ur III Kingdom and the Umma Province ..................................................... 27 2.1. Political History of the Ur III Kingdom ........................................................................................ 2.2. Administrative and Economic Organization ................................................................................. 2.3. Writing as an Administrative Instrument ...................................................................................... 2.4. The Umma Province during the Ur III Period ..............................................................................

29 32 37 40

Chapter Three: Silver Revenue of the Umma Province ............................................................. 45 3.1. Terminology .................................................................................................................................. 3.2. Silver Payments of Irrigation Fee ................................................................................................. 3.3. Silver Payments from Grain Cultivation ....................................................................................... 3.4. Silver Payments from Animal Husbandry .................................................................................... 3.5. Silver Payments Related to Cash Crops ........................................................................................ 3.5.A. Silver Payments Related to Salt .......................................................................................... 3.5.B. Silver Payments Related to Sesame ..................................................................................... 3.5.C. Silver Payments Related to gazi .......................................................................................... 3.5.D. Silver Payments Related to mun-gazi ................................................................................. 3.5.E. Silver Payments Related to Fruits and Vegetables .............................................................. 3.5.F. Silver Payments Related to Fish and Bird Plumage ............................................................ 3.5.G. Administering Production and Allocation of Cash Crops ................................................... 3.6. Silver Payments Related to á ........................................................................................................ 3.7. Silver Payments from Professionals ............................................................................................. 3.8. Silver Payments from Groups ....................................................................................................... 3.9. Silver Payments from Unidentified Sources ................................................................................. 3.10. Identification of Four Major Recipients ..................................................................................... 3.11. Monetary Role of Silver ..............................................................................................................

45 52 62 67 72 72 74 76 77 79 81 83 85 87 90 93 96 97

Chapter Four: Silver Expenditures of the Umma Province ........................................................ 99 4.1. Silver Expenditures for Paying Royal Taxes ................................................................................ 4.2. Other Silver Expenditures for the Crown ..................................................................................... 4.3. Silver Expenditures for Cultic Purposes ....................................................................................... 4.4. Silver Expenditures for Making Purchases ................................................................................... 4.5. Other Silver Expenditures ............................................................................................................. 4.6. Balanced Accounts on Silver ........................................................................................................ 4.7. Monetary Role of Silver and Procurement of Gold ......................................................................

7

99 101 102 103 103 104 106

MONETARY ROLE OF SILVER AND ITS ADMINISTRATION IN MESOPOTAMIA DURING THE UR III PERIOD

Chapter Five: Silver and Merchants ........................................................................................... 109 5.1. Evidence and Terminology .......................................................................................................... 5.1.A. Silver Account versus Merchant Account .......................................................................... 5.1.B. Individual Merchants versus Merchant Groups .................................................................. 5.2. Capital Goods Received by Umma Merchants ............................................................................ 5.2.A. Silver ................................................................................................................................... 5.2.B. Barley .................................................................................................................................. 5.2.C. Wool .................................................................................................................................... 5.2.D. Dates ................................................................................................................................... 5.2.E. Fish and Fish Oil ................................................................................................................. 5.2.F. Sheepskins and Leather Products ........................................................................................ 5.2.G. Other Capital Goods ........................................................................................................... 5.3. Products Supplied by Umma Merchants ...................................................................................... 5.3.A. Gold .................................................................................................................................... 5.3.B. Silver ................................................................................................................................... 5.3.C. Copper, Tin, and su-gan ...................................................................................................... 5.3.D. Alkaline Plants .................................................................................................................... 5.3.E. Gypsum ............................................................................................................................... 5.3.F. Bitumen ............................................................................................................................... 5.3.G. Resins .................................................................................................................................. 5.3.H. Condiments and Spices ....................................................................................................... 5.3.I. Oil and Fats .......................................................................................................................... 5.3.J. Fruits and Honey .................................................................................................................. 5.3.K. Vegetables ........................................................................................................................... 5.3.L. Timber and Timber Products ............................................................................................... 5.3.M. Miscellaneous ..................................................................................................................... 5.4. Operations of the Umma Merchants ............................................................................................ 5.4.A. Disposal of Capital Goods .................................................................................................. 5.4.B. Acquisition of Products Supplied ....................................................................................... 5.4.C. Special Cases of Lard and Wool ......................................................................................... 5.4.D. Monetary Functions of Silver, Barley, and Copper ............................................................ 5.5. Trade Agents or Independent Entrepreneurs? ..............................................................................

109 111 116 117 118 119 121 121 122 122 122 123 124 125 127 128 129 130 132 133 133 134 135 135 136 139 140 140 145 147 148

Chapter Six: Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 153 Appendix: Tables ....................................................................................................................... 163 Tables for Chapter Three ..................................................................................................................... 165 Tables for Chapter Four ...................................................................................................................... 205 Tables for Chapter Five ....................................................................................................................... 217

Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 299 Indices ........................................................................................................................................ 315 Index of Proper Names ........................................................................................................................ 315 Index of Sumerian Words .................................................................................................................... 319 Index of Texts ...................................................................................................................................... 323

8

ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONS

This book follows the Database of Neo-Sumerian Texts (BDTNS: http://bdtns.filol.csic.es) for the sigla of all the Sumerian texts cited or quoted. An easy search of bibliographical details or abbreviations is available on the website of this database. The book follows the same database for line numbers of any text cited or quoted, except for the texts quoted in full or excerpt in the prose part, to which the author applies her own numbering. In the prose part, this book usually does not provide line numbers for a text citation or quotation, unless the text concerned appears too long to locate specific lines with ease (such as those cited in chapter 5 about the merchants). In the tables of the appendix, however, line numbers are often provided, and readers are advised to consult the appendix for further information. Any text cited in this study is followed by its date in parentheses. Dates are provided in the order of regnal year, month (lower case Roman numeral), and day (Arabic numeral). Abbreviations for regnal years and their absolute dates are as follows: UN = Ur-Namma (2112-2095 BCE; 17 years) Š = Šulgi (2094-2047 BCE; 48 years) AS = Amar-Sin (2046-2038 BCE; 9 years) ŠS = Šu-Sin (2037-2029 BCE; 9 years) IS = Ibbi- Sin (2028-2004 BCE; 24 years) Exceptions to the above format appear in the following cases: (1) If a text does not mention any date, it is marked as “no date”; (2) if it does not preserve any date, it is marked as “date broken”; (3) if it can be dated to the reign of a certain king but not to any specific regnal year, its date is indicated by the initials of the king’s name; and (4) if it has more than two possible dates, then it is marked as “date uncertain.” Each table in the appendix lists the texts chronologically. Texts with specific dates appear before those whose dates are uncertain, broken, or not recorded. For texts dated to the same year, those dated to a specific month or day or both appear before those dated without such precision. For convenience’s sake, translations (in parentheses) of metrological notations and the numerical relationship between them are listed as follows: Capacity 1 gur (bushel) = 5 barig = 30 bán = 300 sìla (liter) Weight 1 gún (talent) = 60 ma-na (mina) = 3,600 gín (shekel) = 648,000 še (grain) ≈ 30 kilograms ≈ 66.08 pounds Surface Area 1 bùr = 6 èše = 18 iku = 1,800 sar ≈ 6.48 hectares ≈ 16.01 acres Metrological units not followed by English translations in parentheses appear not translated in this study.

9

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Large silver coils from the Diyala region ................................................................... Figure 2: Southern Mesopotamia during the Ur III period ........................................................ Figure 3: Territorial extent of the Ur III kingdom ...................................................................... Figure 4: Land tenure system in the Ur III core region .............................................................. Figure 5: Standard structure of a balanced account ................................................................... Figure 6: Organization of agricultural personnel in Umma ....................................................... Figure 7: Topographic units subject to the irrigation fee and their payers in Umma ................. Figure 8: Administration of irrigation fee payments in Umma .................................................. Figure 9: Administration of silver payments from grain cultivation ......................................... Figure 10: Administration of silver payments from animal husbandry ..................................... Figure 11: Administration of silver paid by a fuller ................................................................... Figure 12: Genealogy of the four major recipients of silver payments in Umma ...................... Figure 13: Movement of silver and gold in Ur III Umma ..........................................................

11

18 28 31 36 39 42 56 62 67 72 90 97 158

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Recipients of irrigation fee payments .......................................................................... Table 2: Recipients of silver payments from grain cultivation .................................................. Table 3: Recipients of silver payments from animal husbandry ................................................ Table 4: Recipients of silver payments related to salt ................................................................ Table 5: Recipients of silver payments related to sesame .......................................................... Table 6: Recipients of silver payments related to gazi ............................................................... Table 7: Recipients of silver payments related to mun-gazi ...................................................... Table 8: Recipients of silver payments related to fruits and vegetables .................................... Table 9: Recipients of silver payments related to fish and bird plumage .................................. Table 10: Recipients of silver payments related to labor ........................................................... Table 11: Recipients of silver payments from professionals ..................................................... Table 12: Recipients of group silver .......................................................................................... Table 13: Recipients of silver from unidentified sources .......................................................... Table 14: Breakdown of Gududu’s silver expenditures in ŠS 9 and IS 1 .................................. Table 15: Distribution of evidence among the Ur III Umma merchants .................................... Table 16: Annual maximum of major capital goods received by Umma merchants ................. Table 17: Annual maximum of products supplied by Umma merchants ................................... Table 18: Recipients of silver supplied by Umma merchants .................................................... Table 19: Comparison of silver received and paid back by the Umma merchants .................... Table 20: Recipients of all silver payments in Umma ............................................................... Table 21: Ranking the sources of silver revenue in Umma .......................................................

13

53 64 69 73 75 76 78 80 82 86 88 92 95 105 110 117 123 125 139 153 154

PREFACE

This book represents a substantial and systematic rework of my dissertation defended in the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations at Harvard University in November 2008. During the year 2010-2011, a Noble Group Fellowship at the W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research (AIAR) in Jerusalem granted me an extended period of time free from any obligation, so that I was able to focus on and complete the bulk of the book manuscript. Subsequent editing and revision were completed between 2011 fall and 2013 spring. My heartfelt thanks go to both the Noble Group Company based in Hong Kong (which funds the first fellowships ever for Chinese students and scholars studying the ancient Near East) and the AIAR. I owe most to my family for the publication of this book. Many of my family members made extraordinary efforts for me to take the Noble Group fellowship at AIAR. My husband, Feng, supported my decision to go there and stayed behind in New York City to take care of our baby girl while working full time. My mother and step-father flew in from China again to help us out, after returning to China only three months before. My mother-in-law, despite being in her late seventies, also traveled to NYC to help after my parents had finished their stint. My daughter, Inanna, always greeted me with smiles and hugs every time I flew back to NYC to visit my family during the fellowship year. She was a nine-and-a-half-month-old crawling baby when I first left for Jerusalem, but grew into a toddler who loved to run and babble after my fellowship ended. At the age of one and half, she started to understand the meaning of work and could restrain herself from disturbing me when I worked on the book manuscript. I feel extremely blessed to have their love and support, which always motivate me to work better and harder. My former adviser, Professor Piotr Steinkeller at Harvard University, did me an enormous favor by reading the entire manuscript, offering many critical yet constructive comments, and seeing me through the painstaking revision process. I cannot thank him enough for all this help. Professor Beate Pongratz-Leisten at the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, New York University, shared with me her ideas of the overall structure of this book and the strategies to make it appeal to a broader audience. Professor Norman Yoffee at the University of Michigan and Professor Tonia Sharlach at Oklahoma State University provided me with plenty of advice on the publication process, which I have benefitted greatly. Professor Johannes Renger at Free University of Berlin kindly sent me copies of his articles difficult to obtain in Jerusalem or the USA, which I deeply appreciate. My stay at the AIAR has been one of the best and most productive years in my life. The room and half board provided on site, the dedicated staff, the daily company of other fellows, the accidental but interesting conversations with visitors to the Albright, and the library accessible 24/7 in combination made it the best place on earth to carry out research and warp up projects. Both the substance and format of this book have benefited tremendously from conversations and discussions with the scholars I met during the year, particularly Dr. Sy Gitin (Dorot Director and Professor of Archaeology, AIAR), Dr. Andrea Berlin (NEH fellow and James R. Wiseman Professor of classical archaeology at Boston University), and Dr. Wu Xin (Noble Group Fellow). Whenever I had any kind of problem, they always embraced me with their wide-open arms, inexhaustible patience, cheering encouragements, and insightful advice. It has been a huge pleasure to know and become acquaintance with all the fellows for that year, which turned out to be more significant than the completion of my book manuscript. Two other institutes in Jerusalem, the École Biblique et Archéologique Française and the Institute of Archaeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, generously granted me access to

15

MONETARY ROLE OF SILVER AND ITS ADMINISTRATION IN MESOPOTAMIA DURING THE UR III PERIOD

their libraries, whose extraordinary collections on Assyriology and Near Eastern Studies saved me tons of time in looking up references. I feel very grateful towards Dr. Manuel Molina, who accepted this book for publication in the Biblioteca del Próximo Oriente Antiguo series and shepherded me through the publication process. He is the best editor one could ask for and never minds extra work for a green hand like me in the publication business. I would like also to thank the reviewers, whose comments called my attention to neglected references, enhanced the accuracy of my writing, and made me think twice about some of the points made in this book. Any mistake, error, or omission, though, remains my sole responsibility. Whenever I reach a milestone in my life, I cannot help thinking about my father, who died of liver cancer on October 25, 1998, shortly after I graduated from college. As someone who did not even finish high school because of the turmoil caused by the Cultural Revolution in China (19661976), he dreamed of a better education for me and my sister. I always try to picture how exhilarated and fulfilled he would have felt should he know how far my sister and I have advanced beyond college. I miss you, dad!

16

CHAPTER ONE

MONEY IN ANCIENT MESOPOTAMIA?

1.1. Money, Silver, and Coinage Did money exist in ancient Mesopotamia? The majority of Assyriologists accept the existence of money in this region as self-evident and beyond doubt. M. A. Powell (1996a, 225) articulates this position most eloquently: “Money, of course, did exist in ancient Mesopotamia. To answer in any other way would violate the basic principle of language, namely, communication, which prohibits the definition of words in defiance of common usage. Usage of terms like ‘money,’ ‘currency,’ ‘cash,’ etc. by cuneiformists to describe silver is so ubiquitous in the literature of the last century and a half that, if money were not recorded in cuneiform documents, one would have to make the improbable inference that everyone who had used this term had entirely misunderstood the texts.” Therefore, scholars who work under this assumption tend to focus their research on understanding the terminology related but ancillary to the existence of money and on identifying the possible forms of money. The terms most likely describing money in circulation, h a r (Sumerian) and šewirum (Akkadian), both often refer to objects made of silver. They generally mean “ring,” a piece of jewelry or ornament, but can also designate a special type of “coil” or “spiral,” which served as money. The earliest references to h a r appear in documents from the Old Akkadian/Sargonic period (c. 2340-2159). For the following Ur III dynasty (c. 2112-2004), text attest to “rings” made of not only silver but also gold, bronze, and copper. By the time of the Old Babylonian period (c. 20th-16th century), the “rings” were used to pay for purchases. In addition to the “ring” money, texts from the Sargonic period down to the Persian Empire in the second half of the first millennium attest to another form of silver described as šibirtu, “scrap, snippet” (Powell 1978). The identification of other forms of money, such as “cakes,” “loaves,” or “ingots,” remains uncertain (Powell 1996a, 236-239). Concerning archaeological evidence, Powell (1978, esp. 239-243) has associated the “ring” money with a group of coils, which may come from the Diyala region east of the Tigris and date between the mid-third millennium and the Old Babylonian period.1 Further support for identifying these coils with the “ring” money consists in the observation that some coils bear traces of small, snipped-off pieces, and others have broken parts reattached to them perhaps to prevent the parts from getting lost. The term šibirtu may refer to these snippets. The smallest coil weighs 0.55 g, and the largest one 492.5 g, with the majority weighing between 0.55 g and 30 g (ibid., 232-233, 240). Figure 1 shows some of the larger coils. Similar objects have come to light at other sites in and outside Mesopotamia. For instance, the site of Mari (Tell Hariri) has produced two sets of coils, one of silver and the other of copper, dating to the Pre-Sargonic period.2 The diameter of

–––––––––––––––––

1 All but one of these coils were purchased by the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago in 1930, and their provenience is given as Tutub (Khafaje). The only coil with an established provenience comes from Tell Agrab and is dated to the Early Dynastic period (c. 2900-2350). At another site from the same region called Tell Asmar (Ešnunna), scrap silver and a silver bar/ingot were found in a pot excavated from a private house and date to the Old Akkadian period. For all this, see Powell 1978. 2 Parrot and Dossin 1968, 24, 44, 53-55, and Pl. XI. The coils were found in a jar buried underneath the courtyard XXVII of a palace dated to the Pre-Sargonic period. In the same jar there were nude statuettes, jewelry items (bracelets,

17

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

each coil ranges between 4.5 and 6 cm, and the width of the band between 0.8 and 1 cm; the publication, however, does not specify their weight. Other examples include gold and silver coils from the Royal Cemetery of Ur dating to the same era (Zettler and Horne 1998, 108) and silver coils from a hoard excavated at Assur with a date between the eighth and seventh century (Postgate 1994, 243). All these coils from Ur and Assur might have functioned also as hair ornaments.3 J. Dayton (1974) examined seventy-seven coils likewise from the Ur Royal Cemetery and found that they weigh between 3 g and 86 g and appear to follow a progressive pattern in weight with a binary system. P. R. S. Moorey (1999, 238) lists more archaeological examples.

Figure 1: Large silver coils from the Diyala region. From Powell 1996a, 240.

Evidence for the use of money also comes from two large, significant corpora outside Mesopotamia proper. K. R. Veenhof (1972, 349-351) argues that the Old Assyrian merchant archive (c. 1810-1740) from Kaneš (Kültepe) in Anatolia, which documents the long-distance trade between this region and Assyria, attests to the use of silver as money.4 Regarding the use of silver as recorded in the Old Babylonian archive from Mari, J.-R. Kupper (1982) has demonstrated that it did change hands as a means of payment and concluded that it played a role as money.5 The texts allude to the manufacturing of up to several hundred silver rings but speak little of their distribution, except that the recipients included foreigners (ibid., 165-166). Gold might have supplanted silver in its role as the primary money in Mesopotamia during the Kassite period (c. 1374-1155). At that time gold became the predominant means of payment and the standard of value (Powell 1990, 79) probably as a result of the increasing trade in the form of gift exchanges between Mesopotamia and Egypt, which brought more gold to Mesopotamia (Edzard 1960). In addition to high-range money, such as silver and gold, a number of other goods supplemented them as cheap money (barley, lead, copper, and bronze) or middle-range money (tin) (Powell 1990, 76-87; 1996a, 227-230). Coming to the first millennium, graphic details emerge about the use of money. According to K. Radner (1999), three metals, silver, copper, and bronze, served as money during the Neo-

––––––––––––––––– pendants, rosettes, necklaces, beads), pins, amulets, and cylinder seals, all of which seem to have been assembled in haste. 3 See reconstructed headdress of Queen Pu’abi in Zettler and Horne 1998, 90. 4 Seaford has challenged this view and pointed out that in the Kaneš archive, silver did not fulfill the function as a medium of indirect exchange, a definitive function of money; see Seaford 2004, 326-331. 5 Kupper 1982, 163: “[L]’argent y servait effectivement de metal monétaire.”

18

1. M ONEY IN A NCIENT M ESOPOTAMIA ?

Assyrian period (c. early first millennium-end of seventh century). Beginning with the reign of Aššurbanipal (668-627), three terms appeared to specify the quality of silver in legal memos: danqu, “good,” masiu, “washed,” and qaliu, “burnt.” Radner further suggests that “[t]he metals changed hands in the form of conveniently sized ingots which were cut into smaller pieces when needed” (ibid., 135). The weighing of silver appears attested and on one occasion, under the supervision of a “master of the weighing of the silver” (bēl hi’āṭi ša ṣarpi), yet the ultimate authority of weighing precious metals seemed to rest with the treasurer (masennu). Iconographic evidence for the official weighing of large silver ingots is preserved on a fragmentary obelisk of King Aššurnaṣirpal from Kalhu (Nimrud) and on the relief series in the palace of King Sargon II at Dur-Šarrukin (Khorsabad). The metal was sealed after weighing, but it remains unclear whether the officials sealed the ingot itself or only its wrapping. The empire obtained precious metals used as money through military force seeking booty and tribute (details in Müller 1997) as well as through territorial expansion and annexation of regions that produced these metals. In the Neo-Babylonian period (626-539), silver continued to function as a high-range money, while products such as barley, dates, and wool served as cheaper money (Bongenaar 1999). Major sources of silver revenue and expenditures of the Ebabbar temple at Sippar and the Eanna temple at Uruk demonstrate that silver money fulfilled an indispensable role in these two institutional economies.6 The most common description of silver’s purity, KÙ.BABBAR ša ina 1(DIŠ) GÍN bitqa, “silver which has one-eighth (of alloy) per shekel” (see also Powell 1996a, 231-233) appears mostly in loan documents often belonging to private archives. Most recently, M. Jursa (2010, 469754) has contributed a systematic study of the Ebabbar and Eanna archive as well as the private documents from this period with respect to the use of silver as money and monetized exchanges. Those scholars who accept the use of money in Mesopotamia find a more pressing issue in whether or not coinage, an invention credited to the Lydians in Anatolia in the mid-seventh century,7 could have occurred earlier in Mesopotamia. By definition, coinage describes the practice of minting metal pieces and stamping them with marks of certified weight and fineness, which facilitate their use as money. It is usually agreed that coinage did not appear in Mesopotamia until the Achaemenid period (Vargyas 2010), and indigenous coins appeared even later. According to Moorey (1999, 237), “[t]he earliest coins of local origin from Babylonia are silver staters issued in the governorship of Mazaeus, 331-328 BC. They have very erratic weights, suggesting that they were still passing by weight rather than by a standard face-value.” Two plausible forerunners of coinage in Mesopotamia—the “sealed silver,” k ù -b a b b a r kanku, and the “half-shekel pieces” cast by King Sennacherib (704-681)—have generated a good amount of controversy. The so-called sealed silver appears in Old Babylonian sources, which specify it as investment in a business partnership (k ù n a m -ta b -b a ), commercial profit (himṣu), price of oxen, or loans, in some cases entrusted and taken to another city. The amounts attested range from five to sixtytwo shekels (Stol 1999, 579-580), but in the Sin-kašid archive from Uruk (c. late nineteenth century), the amounts of the “sealed silver” appear much smaller at 1/12, ⅓, ½, and one shekel of silver.8 One text records 2,825 pieces of “sealed silver” given out as gifts (n íg -b a ) to people, many of whom served in the troops.9 Most scholars have now concluded that kanku refers to a bag or a pouch tied with a string after having silver placed into it. A clay bulla was then applied to the

––––––––––––––––– 6

Major sources of revenue included: (1) bequeathal from the king; (2) payments, such as rents and tithes, from people affiliated with the temple; (3) commercial activities of the temples themselves, such as sale of animals, agricultural products, and textiles; (4) votive gifts. Significant expenditures were: (1) paying dues to the king; (2) paying its own personnel as well as for the hire of labor and boats; (3) paying for products the temple did not produce. 7 See Snell 1995, 1494. The earliest known coin was discovered at Ephesus, Lydia, and dates to the time of Gyges (687652). The invention of coinage soon spread to Greece. We have found Greek coins that date to around 575, and they became widespread after 550. 8 E.g., Sanati-Müller 1990, Nr. 110 (W 20472, 83); Sanati-Müller 1993, end of Nr. 202 (W 20472, 153). 9 Sanati-Müller 1993, Nr. 202 (W 20472, 153).

19

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

bag or pouch, and a seal impressed on the bulla. The association of “sealed silver” with the verb, petû, “to open”, provides the key to this reconstruction.10 Bullae bearing traces of cords and used to seal small bags have been found in excavations on the Ur III level of the Inanna temple at Nippur (Zettler 1987, 225) and the Old Babylonian level of the Ebabbar Temple at Larsa.11 As for the alleged half-shekel coins minted by Sennacherib, they are mentioned in the context of his boast of making huge colossi of bronze as easily as half-shekel pieces (ki-i pi-ti-iq ½ GÍN.TA.ÀM).12 P. Vargyas (2002) has pointed out two major problems with this reading. First, Mesopotamian weight metrology used the basic unit of one shekel, not half a shekel. Second, since the half-shekel pieces appear in the context of bronze working, they were probably made of bronze or copper too, and coins made of half a shekel of bronze or copper would have had too little value to function as a standard of value. In fact, such a small value is never attested. To solve the problems, Vargyas (ibid., 115) proposed to read the phrase slightly differently as ki-i pi-ti-iq ina 1(DIŠ) GÍN.TA.ÀM,13 “as in pouring into one-shekel pieces,” which he interpreted as a simile that “speaks of pouring bronze into huge molds as easily as if they were small molds for casting tiny figures of one shekel’s weight.” For J. Renger (1995), whether money was used in Mesopotamia or not depends upon its definition. In order to identify “money stuff” (i.e., objects fulfilling some or all the functions characteristic of money), Renger has adopted the four criteria established by Polanyi (Dalton 1971, 175-203): (1) as a medium of exchange (A→money→B); (2) as a means of payment (to discharge obligations); (3) as a standard of value (to compare apples and oranges); and (4) as a means for storing wealth. The “money stuff” he identified through these criteria included all the metals discussed above as well as barley, dates, wool, textiles, and other products (Renger 1995, 286-287, fig. 2). Meanwhile, Renger turned to the ethnologist J. Höltz for the distinction between money in the broad sense and money in the strict sense. Money in the broad sense refers to a type of product adopted absolutely more often than any other product as a medium of exchange in one exchange or trade sphere, while money in the strict sense designates a type of product that assumes the same status in all exchange or trade spheres of a society (ibid., 282-285). With a careful analysis of the dominant economic system in different periods,14 he discerned three operational spheres that attested to the use of “money stuff”: subsistent agricultural production on a family basis, institutional households in the household or the palace economy, and urban elites. He then investigated what kind of “money stuff” fulfilled which function of money. Renger concluded that money in the strict sense did not exist in Mesopotamia until the Neo-Babylonian dynasty of the sixth century, when the use of silver began to appear in multiple economic spheres of entrepreneurs, institutional households, and state institutions. Money in the broad sense, however, could hark back to the middle of the third millennium. In the view of outside experts, such as the Classicists (e.g., Schaps 2003; Seaford 2004), silver in Mesopotamia performed all the monetary functions prescribed by Polanyi but still fell

–––––––––––––––––

10

See most recently, Stol 2004, 902-903 with previous literature. Arnaud, Calvet and Huot 1979, 6, 13, and figs. 11, 57, 58. 12 Col. vii 16. ki-i ṭe-im ili-ma zi-’-pi ṭi-iṭ-ṭi / 17. ab-ni-ma e-ra-a ki-rib-šu aš-tap-pa-ka / 18. ki-i pi-ti-iq ½ GÍN.TA.ÀM / 19. ú-šak-li-la nab-ni-su-un. “[A]t the command of the god, I built a form of clay and poured bronze into it, as in making half-shekel pieces, and finished their (i.e., lion-colossi, bull-colossi, and cow-collossi, made respectively of bronze, alabaster, and white limestone) construction.” Translation after Luckenbill 1924, 109. The same lines reappear in ibid., 123: 28-30. 13 The same reading had been suggested earlier by Powell, who understands this phrase as hyperbole “implying that the huge bronze figures were cast as though they weighed only half a shekel each”; see Powell 1996a, 231. 14 In broad strokes, the economic life in third-millennium Mesopotamia was dominated by the household economy, otherwise known as the oikos economy, which features redistribution, self-production, self-sufficiency, and autoconsumption. Down to the Old Babylonian period, the palace economy replaced the household economy as the prevailing force. Since the palace economy demanded the eventual payment in barley or silver from middlemen whom the government commissioned to collect taxes, one may alternatively call it the tribute economy. This type of economy lasted through the end of Mesopotamian history and even into the Persian period. For further details, see Renger 1984, 1990, 1993, 1994, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2005a, 2005b, and 2007. 11

20

1. M ONEY IN A NCIENT M ESOPOTAMIA ?

short of what they would call money due to its inadequacy in other aspects. They do not observe in silver the combination of general and exclusive acceptability crucial for the development of money. Nor do they detect any trace of state involvement in the issuance of silver, the certification of its quality or fineness, or the enforcement of its acceptability, all of which proves indispensable for the fiduciary money.15 In the words of D. M. Schaps (2003, 51), “[t]here was still, however, a step that the Assyrians and Babylonians had not taken. Silver, whatever its commercial function, was still only silver; there was no visible distinction between silver serving as money and silver serving as jewelry or utensils. Indeed, for this very reason, its functions could be and in various circumstances were served by other metals or even by grain, without any sign of inconvenience. ... [Silver] had not yet become an identifiable item that represented nothing but money.” Whether money existed in Mesopotamia or whether the Mesopotamian economy operated without money for most of its history depends on how scholars define this term, but no single, generally accepted definition of money has yet emerged. 1.2. Goal and Chapter Outline This book does not enter into the argument about whether or not silver functioned as money during the Ur III period. It tracks instead the movement of silver in Umma because this site represents the home of the largest Ur III corpus and the best documented economy of the kingdom. In view of the four essential features of money identified by Polanyi and agreed upon across the board, this book investigates the monetary function that silver fulfilled as it moved from one stage to another through a major economic sphere, the institutional economy, in the Umma province. Moreover, it attempts to unravel the effects of the monetary role of silver upon the participants—workers, craftsmen, merchants, administrators, and the governor—as well as upon operations of the Umma institutional economy. In other words, this book adopts a nominalist approach toward the issue of money and deals with the question of “how silver functioned” in a specific model instead of “whether or not silver served as money” from the perspective of a general model. The identification of the major players in the movement of silver in Umma comprises the other direction of research pursued in this book. Scholars have observed that four officials from the gubernatorial family in Umma—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu— respectively received most of the silver attested in the texts for a certain period of time.16 T. Maeda (1996) interprets their control over the circulation of silver as a sign that the gubernatorial family dominated the public organizations in this province. P. Steinkeller (1987, 76 n. 17; 2003, 42; 2004a, 97-109) reconstructs behind activities of these four officials the “Fiscal Office” of Umma, which focused on the collection of silver from tax payments and other dues and advanced most of it to merchants for the acquisition of goods necessary for the institutional economy; as such, this office probably functioned as the center of command for the economy. J. L. Dahl has proposed a virtual position called “chief household administrator” held by these four officials, which concerned itself with the daily business of the province as well as the supply and the bala-tax of the governor’s household.17

––––––––––––––––– 15

Schaps 2003, 42-52; Seaford 2004, 16-20, 318-337. “General acceptability” requires that silver fulfilled all the four roles in various spheres of the economy, including subsistence farming of rural areas. “Exclusive acceptability” means that no other product but silver meets the four criteria across different sectors of the economy. “Fiduciary” refers first to the excess of the marked value of silver over its intrinsic value and second to public confidence in that excess. 16 Jones and Snyder 1961, 247; Maeda 1996. The dates according to Jones and Snyder are: Akala (Š 35-46), Dadaga (Š 47-AS 3), Lu-kala (AS 4-ŠS 6), and Gududu (ŠS 7-IS 4). Those proposed by Maeda are slightly different: Akala (Š 3343), Dadaga (Š 43-47), Lu-kala (AS 2-ŠS 6), and Gududu (ŠS 7-IS 3). 17 Dahl 2007, 64, 105-109. The dates when the four officials held this position are: Akala (Š 33-39), Dadaga (Š 39-48), Lu-kala (AS 2-ŠS 6), and Gududu (ŠS 9-IS 2).

21

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

The apparent dominance of these four officials in the collecting of silver revenue in Umma, nonetheless, has not yet had the support of a quantitative study. Assisted by the fast digitalization of Ur III records and the latest publication of new texts, this book conducts a quantitative analysis of the silver moving through the institutional economy of Umma and proves statistically to what degree the four officials from the gubernatorial family controlled the silver revenue there. As such, it represents a systematic attempt at quantifying the amount of silver circulated in a particular archival context in accordance with what Renger has proposed.18 This book consists of six chapters in total. Following the introduction, chapter 2 summarizes the basic facts of Ur III Mesopotamia and the Umma province and sets the stage for discussions in chapters 3 to 5. Chapter 3 breaks down the silver revenue in Umma according to the categories of the various products or uses associated with individual payments. It then analyzes each category with respect to the recipients, payers, reasons for paying, and administration of the payments. The payments made to the government best illustrate the function of silver as a means to discharge obligations. Chapter 4 concentrates on the four major recipients of silver previously identified and investigates the silver expenditures they incurred. Their largest expenditure comprised two types of taxes, kašde’a and mašdare’a, designated for the crown and sometimes paid in the form of nose-rings for oxen. As disbursed by the provincial administration, silver not only continued to serve as a means of payment to fulfill Umma’s obligation toward the king but also transformed into a medium for storing wealth as royal taxes delivered in the form of objects. Chapter 5 concerns the merchants, who exercised a unique, dual role in the movement of silver. Although the Umma administration distributed significant amounts of silver to them as their purchase funds, they paid back even more and thus made a net contribution to the overall silver revenue of the province. A scrutiny of the non-silver products entrusted to them versus those they supplied to the government is crucial for exploring how they accomplished this task. The so-called merchant accounts testify most compellingly to the role of silver as a standard of value, and the documentary evidence of merchants in general hints at the function of silver as a medium of exchange. Chapter 6 concludes the book with the statement that the monetary function of silver proved essential to the smooth running of the institutional economy in Umma by injecting some flexibility into an otherwise controlled and centralized redistributive economy. As substitutive payments for tax obligations in kind and in corvée, silver provided people with some leeway at times of poor harvests and gave professionals more time to ply their specialized trade for better return. As a medium of exchange and wealth storage, silver allowed the Umma administration, with the assistance of merchants, to dispose of staple goods for the acquisition of silver and other products in order to satisfy royal interests. As a standard of value, silver provided an accounting tool for the Umma administration to manage transactions with the merchants. Most advantages materialized by silver depended upon the existence of local marketplaces where people could sell their surplus products for silver. The four officials, who received and expended the vast majority of silver payments in Umma, came from the gubernatorial family. Moreover, two of them succeeded as governor years after their control over the revenue and expenditures of silver ended. These findings suggest that such a control might have served as a training program for future governorship.

–––––––––––––––––

18

Renger 2005b, 56: “One might also venture to quantify the amount of silver mentioned in credit notes during the Old Babylonian period or of silver mentioned in particular administrative documents from the time of the Third of Ur (2100-2000 B. C.). But this is only advisable—if ever possible—for very restricted economic environments documented in specific archival contexts than can be determined in terms of time, place and protagonists.”

22

1. M ONEY IN A NCIENT M ESOPOTAMIA ?

1.3. Evidence and Methodology The foundation for this book lies in a particular type of document called the “silver texts.” Any Umma text classified as such needs to satisfy four criteria. In the first place, it should contain the Sumerian word for silver, k ù -b a b b a r, sometimes abbreviated as k ù . Since the texts tend to convert the value of two types of gold—regular gold (k ù -s ig 1 7 ) and “red” gold (k ù -s ig 1 7 h u š )19—into silver,20 these two types of gold may count as “silver” in a broad sense. The silver concerned should exist in its plain form rather than molded into small figurines, jewelry pieces, drinking vessels, or other personal items, which often appear as ex-voto gifts to deities.21 This book excludes silver artifacts because in a great many Umma texts, such artifacts did not bear directly on the economic activities in this province and therefore have little relevance to the topic of this book. Two exceptions are accommodated to this rule of thumb to study only silver in its raw form. One exception deals with a kind of silver object called h a r, “ring, coil,” which seemingly refers to jewelry pieces such as finger rings or bracelets, but in most cases probably designates a form of silver used as a means of payment or a medium of exchange (see discussion above). Therefore, silver designated as h a r falls under the scope of this book. The other exception has to do with plain silver registered in inventory records.22 These records often lack information about the origin of the silver concerned and about the people who handled it. Although considered plain silver, it does not bear directly on the economic production in Umma, and thus the analysis excludes it. To meet the second criterion, a silver text needs to represent an administrative record generated in an institutional context rather than a document drafted without the participation of the state or any temple or provincial organization. This requirement rules out sale documents, which do often involve silver but not in an institutional setting.23 As for loan contracts, while this book does consider records of institutional loans, such loans attested in Umma were usually made in barley instead of silver (Steinkeller 2002, 116-117). Two likely examples of institutional silver loans, BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i) and CST 542 (IS 2 vi), are commented on in §3.9 and §4.5 respectively. As the third criterion, a silver text should document silver that changed hands in the process of receiving, expending, or transfer rather than record silver functioning only as a standard to convert the value of other products into silver. This separates out documents in which silver functions as an accounting unit as indicated by the expression x A k ù -b i y, “x quantity of A

––––––––––––––––– 19

According to Waetzoldt 1985, h u š does not designate the red color, but rather refers to the bright yellow luster that high-quality gold radiates. He demonstrates that “red” gold on average ranked as the most valuable type of gold in ancient Mesopotamia; if it had looked red, it would have actually been an alloy of gold and copper and could not have been the most valuable type of gold. 20 Examples can be found with ease in the tables accompanying chapter 4 in the appendix, especially Table 4.1. 21 One example is MVN 16 1156 (ŠS 2): obv. 1. 1 ( d i š ) n í g - l u h k ù - b a b b a r / 2. k i - l á - b i 4 ( d i š ) ⅓ m a - n a 5 ( d i š ) g í n / 3. m u - D U d š á r a / 4. k i l u g a l - n i r - t a ; rev. 1. k i š i b d š á r a - z i - d a / 2. m u m á d e n - k i b a - a b - d u 8 ; seal: d š á r a - ⌈ z i ⌉ : d a / l ú - ì - ⌈ r á ⌉ - [ r á ] / d u m u š e š - k a l - l a / l ú - ì - [ r á - r á ] . “One lustration vessel? made of silver / its weight 4 ⅓ minas 5 shekels / delivery to the god Šara / from Lugal-nir / a sealed tablet of Šara-zida / year ‘when the boat of the god Enki was caulked’ / Šara-zida / oil presser / son of Šeš-kala / oil presser.” One may reconstruct the story behind the text as follows: an unrevealed source had offered a silver vessel to the god Šara; sometime later, Šara-zida the oil presser received it from Lugal-nir, who might have served as a custodian of the property of the god, perhaps in order to hold oil needed for lustration. Presumably, the oil presser would return this valuable vessel to Lugal-nir after using it. 22 For instance, AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-483 (ŠS 6 x) lists a significant amount of gold and silver—close to two minas and fifty-four minas respectively—in the warehouse of an establishment called é-maš (obv. 1-2: é - k i š i b - b a é m a š g á l - l a ). Literally meaning “house of goats, corral,” é - m a š played a key role in the distribution of carcasses of domestic animals in Umma and was associated with rituals honoring the goddess Nin-egal there; see Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 248-249; Stępień 1996, 97-98. 23 For a systematic study of Ur III sale documents, see Steinkeller 1989. Of the 137 documents studied there, only thirteen come from Umma.

23

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

product, its (value in) silver y amount.”24 The “silver texts” of Umma provide plenty of clues suggesting that the silver in question indeed existed and moved. They describe silver as “weighed” (lá )25 or taken “from a leather pouch” (k u š d u 1 0 -g a n -ta ),26 refer to its weight adjustment (s a g -[n a 4 ]) and production loss (izi-gu7),27 and mention the involvement of silversmiths (k ù -d ím ).28 One text, MVN 2 23 (ŠS 6 diri), furnishes compelling evidence for the movement of silver and deserves some comments (see also §3.8). This text bears the hallmark k ù m u - D U (rev. ii 12), “silver deliveries.” It lists nearly three minas of silver received from about thirty individuals (beginning -obv. ii 9) and itemizes the expenditure of 1 5/6 minas of silver (obv. ii 10-rev. i 30) during a eight-month period from month vi to month xiii. The surplus of approximately one mina of silver is described as n íg g á l-la (rev. ii 11), “possessions.” This document is unique in the sense that for each silver disbursement, it repeats the name(s) of the person or the people who had contributed to the silver disbursed and the amount of each delivery, even though this information has appeared earlier in the text when it calculates the silver revenue. For instance, the text notes near the beginning five shekels of silver from the gardener Ur-lugal (obv. i 10. 5 [d iš] g ín u r-lu g a l n u - g i š k iri 6 ), only to repeat this line later and to further disclose that the five shekels of silver from the gardener was offered to the goddess Nin-ebgal (obv. ii 11. 5 [d iš ] g ín u r-lu g a l n u - g i š k iri 6 / 12. d n in -e b -g a l). The recording of all remaining expenditures adopts the same format of specification of payers and amounts followed by the use of silver.29 This format demonstrates that the silver concerned was

–––––––––––––––––

24

E.g., AUCT 1 144 (Š 40 ix): obv. 1. 4 ( d i š ) m a - n a ⌈ x ⌉ / 2. k ù - b i ⅔ g í n / 3. 4 ( d i š ) m a - n a z a - b a - l u m / 4. k ù - b i ½ g í n / 5. 1 ( b á n ) š i m - g a m - g a m - m a ; rev. 1. k ù - b i i g i - 6 - g á l / 2. 5 ( d i š ) m a - n a < š i m > - g i / 3. k ù b i i g i - 6 - g á l / 4. 1 ( b á n ) š i m - g u 4 - k u - r u / 5. k ù - b i i g i - 6 - g á l / 6. k i l ú - d š á r a - t a / 7. l ú - g u - l a / 8. š u b a - t i / 9. i t i d l i 9 - s i 4 ; l. e. m u ú s - s a é p u z u r 4 - d a - g a n b a - d ù . “4 minas of ... / its (value in) silver ⅔ shekel / 4 minas of 1 so-and-so resin / its (value in) silver ½ shekel / 10 liters of so-and-so resin / its (value in) silver /6 shekel / 5 minas of 1 1 so-and-so resin / its (value in) silver /6 shekel / 10 liters of so-and-so resin / its (value in) silver /6 shekel / from LuŠara / Lu-gula / received / month of the goddess Lisi / year after Puzriš-Dagan was built.” Some texts from the Old Babylonian period disguise silver actually serving as a standard of value as silver used as a means of payment that physically moved; see Sweet 1958, 143-149. In the words of Sweet, “a statement that an amount of silver was to be paid or had been paid may often mean no more than that non-specified goods to the value of the silver mentioned were to be paid or had been paid” (ibid., 149). Similar instances from the Ur III Umma corpus remain unknown. 25 E.g., Umma 79 (Š 47) rev. 2: k ù l á - a e z e m - m a h - š è , “silver weighed for the Grand Festival.” 26 E.g., BPOA 6 942 (ŠS 4 viii) rev. 2: k u š d u 1 0 - g a n - t a d e 6 - a , “(silver) taken from a leather pouch.” UTI 3 2020 (ŠS 5 ix) rev. 5: š u - n í g i n ⅔ m a - n a 8 ( d i š ) ½ g í n / 6. š à k u š < d u 1 0 > - g a n - n a - t a / 7. z i - g a b a - b a - t i , “a total of ⅔ mina 8 ½ shekels of silver / from a leather pouch / expenditure of Babati.” UTI 3 2011 (ŠS 6) rev. 1: š à k u š d u 1 0 - g a n - t a , “(silver) from a leather pouch.” 27 For commentary on these two terms, see Van De Mieroop 1986a, 137-143. In his sample, the production loss amounts to around 0.5% (⅓ shekel per mina) and the weight adjustment 1.6% (1 shekel per mina) of the total weight. Attestations of the two terms available in Table 4.1 in the appendix. Additional ones are: Santag 6 82 (Š 47) obv. 1-2: 8 ( d i š ) m a - n a 1 ( u ) g í n l á 1 ( u ) 2 ( d i š ) š e k ù - b a b b a r / s a g n u - t u k u , “8 minas 10 shekels minus 12 grains of silver / without weight adjustment.” MVN 15 108 (AS 3) rev. i 10: s a g - n a 4 - b i 1 ( d i š ) ⅓ g í n ⅔ š e k ù , “its weight adjustment 1 ⅓ shekels ⅔ grain of silver.” SNAT 407 (AS 8 iii) rev. 2: k ù s a g t u k u , “silver with weight adjustment.” 5 5 MVN 20 155 (ŠS 1 vi) obv. 1: 1( u ) / 6 g í n k ù š e s a g t u k u , “10 /6 shekels of silver (in lieu) of barley, with weight adjustment.” Further explanation of k ù š e in §3.3. RIAA 128 (ŠS 3 xi) obv. 1: 9 ( d i š ) ½ g í n 1 ( u ) 5 ( d i š ) š e k ù - b a b b a r s a g t u k u , “9 ½ shekels 15 grains of silver with weight adjustment.” 28 E.g., UCP 9-2-2 77 (ŠS 1)—Ur-Šulpa’e the silversmith conveyed 1 shekel of silver for making the standard of the Gu’edena district (§4.3). SAT 3 1309 (ŠS 2 iv)—Ur-Šulpa’e the silversmith received 4 shekels of silver for the same cause. BRM 3 148 (Š 47 ix)—Ur-Šulpa’e the silversmith to repay 4/9 shekel of silver. 29 Other expenditures include 5 shekels from the gudu-priest Albanidu for the goddess Nin-ura (obv. ii 13-14); 9 shekels from Ayakala the overseer and Ur-nigar for the deities Haya and Dumuzi (obv. ii 15-17); 31? shekels from nine? individuals for buying gold in Tummal (obv. ii 18-rev. i 3); 2 shekels for the singer Ur-Sin in Tummal (rev. i 4-6); 30 shekels from four people for buying gold in Ur (rev. i 6-15); 16 shekels from four people for buying gold to be brought

24

1. M ONEY IN A NCIENT M ESOPOTAMIA ?

physically delivered and expended. Had the silver served merely as a standard of value and an accounting unit that existed only on the books, it would have been superfluous for the text to differentiate silver payments from different sources upon the expenditure of a particular payment. The fourth criterion applies to the date rather than to the content of a text. Umma texts meeting all three preceding conditions tend to cluster within a window of thirty-seven years between Š 33 and IS 3; those dated outside this period appear few and far between and disconnected from each other. Therefore, this book considers only “silver texts” dated from Š 33 on to IS 3. Such a chronological distribution corresponds with the time frame of the Umma texts and the Ur III corpora in general.30 Within the constraints of these four criteria, the online Database of Neo-Sumerian Texts (BDTNS) turned about six hundred such “silver texts,” which account for approximately 2.6% of the Umma corpus digitized in BDTNS.31 1.4. Typology of Silver Texts Most of the silver texts thus identified occur in the format of receipts; the rest represent balanced accounts (§2.3) and, occasionally, letter-orders. Examples of receipts and balanced accounts appear in full and explained in §3.1.32 The text below presents a rare example of a silver text in the format of a letter order: BiOr 8 52 (AS 1) Obv. 1. ur-dšára-⌈ra⌉

To Ur- Šara

2. ù-na-a-du11

speak:

3. 1(diš) ma-na kù-babbar

“1 mina of silver

ki

4. mu ki-maš ba-hul

year ‘when Kimaš was destroyed’ (Š 46),

5. ½ ma-na kù-babbar 6. 4(aš) gú 5(u) 1(diš) ⅔ ma-na síg gi(-r)

½ mina of silver 33

(and) 4 talents 51 ⅔ minas of wool

Rev. 1. sag-na4-bi 8(diš) ⅓ ma-na ki

its weight adjustment 8 ⅓ minas

2. mu ús-sa ki-maš ba-hul

year ‘after Kimaš was destroyed’ (Š 47),

3. ½ ma-na kù-babbar

½ mina of silver

4. mu ha-ar-šiki ba-hul

year ‘when Harši was destroyed’ (Š 48),

5. 1(diš) ma-na kù-babbar

1 mina of silver

d

6. mu amar- suen lugal

year ‘when Amar-Sin became king’ (AS 1);

––––––––––––––––– into the royal palace (rev. i 16-23); 2 shekels from Ur-Šereda for a governor in Nippur (rev. i 24-26); and 10 shekels from the gudu-priest Šakuge for Guyugu’a (rev. i 27-28). 30 The vast majority of the Umma texts date between Š 25 and IS 3, and most Ur III texts between Š 25 and IS 8; see Molina 2008, 47-48 and beginning of chapter 2. 31 http://bdts.filol.csic.es/. The total number of Umma texts used to calculate this ratio, 27,944 (note 35 below), includes some 1,500 texts digitized without transliteration in BDTNS. Most of these texts are published in AAICAB 1/2, 1/3, and 1/4 (personal communication with Manuel Molina, director of BDTNS). 32 Receipts quoted there include (in order of appearance) Atiqot 4 pl. 21 44 (ŠS 9 xii), SAT 2 269 (Š 41), AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-147 (Š 46), MVN 14 119 (Š 35), Santag 6 67 (Š 45/AS 2), Umma 82 (Š 45/AS 2). The balanced account exemplified is SNAT 518 (ŠS 7). 33 A type of coarse wool; see §5.2.C.

25

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD 7. ki énsi ummaki-⌈ta⌉ d

from the governor of Umma

8. utu-ul4-gal

Utu-ulgal

9. šu ba-an-ti

received.

10. gaba-ri mu-DU-bi

(This is) a copy (of the record) of these deliveries.”

This letter informs Ur-Šara about the four receipts of silver and wool by Utu-ulgal from the governor of Umma in the four consecutive years from Š 46 to AS 1. The addressee Ur-Šara was likely to be the well-attested archivist in Umma, whom we often meet in chapter 3. The recipient, Utu-ulgal, took the deliveries of silver and wool on behalf of the crown (Michalowski 1993, 5354).

26

CHAPTER TWO

THE UR III KINGDOM AND THE UMMA PROVINCE

The Ur III dynasty (c. 2112 to 2004) has produced the most documents of any period throughout the history of ancient Mesopotamia. The latest estimate places the number of known Ur III texts at around 90,000, and scholars have published more than 80 percent of them. The total number of documents surviving this period may exceed 120,000 (Molina 2008, esp. 20). Two online projects, the Database of Neo-Sumerian Texts (BDTNS) and the Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative (CDLI),34 have made systematic efforts to digitalize the Ur III tablets and to provide open access to them in one or more of the following formats: transliteration, hand-copy, photo, or catalogue. More than 95 percent of the records originated from five provinces or sites located in the southern part of the kingdom: Umma, Girsu, Puzriš-Dagan, Ur, and Nippur. Figure 2 shows the location of all these sites except Puzriš-Dagan, which lies less than ten kilometers southeast of Nippur. The site of Umma leads all the others in the volume of documentation with a total of 27,944 tablets, and Girsu follows with 24,460 tablets.35 Small finds of Ur III documents, numbering between dozens and several hundred tablets, come from about two dozen other sites as far east as Susa and as far west as Mari (Sallaberger 1999, 207-211; Molina 2008, 52-53). The Ur III texts appear not only massive in quantity but also similar in content. Prepared by various state or local administrative officials in an institutional context for the purpose of documenting economic activities, the overwhelming majority of the texts deal with the receipt, expenditure, and transfer of a wide range of commodities. This context applies in particular to the texts from Umma, as Steinkeller (2003, 40-41) has observed: “The extant documents are almost without exception official, or public, records, prepared by various departments of the Umma administration to document the workings of the government and economy throughout the entire province.” As such, these institutionally generated texts fall into the category of administrative documents. Other genres attested among the Ur III texts include letters, loan contracts, sale records, and court minutes (Sallaberger 1999, 211-227). The dates of the texts span the regnal years of the five Ur III kings, and a heavy concentration of the texts occurs during the half century between the twenty-fifth year of Šulgi, the second king and the eighth year of Ibbi-Sin, the last king (Molina 2008, 47). An Ur III text is dated with the initials of a king followed by his regnal year. The initials include the following: Š = Šulgi; AS = Amar-Sin; ŠS = Šu-Sin; IS = Ibbi-Sin.

––––––––––––––––– 34

See respectively, http://bdts.filol.csic.es/ and http://cdli.ucla.edu/. Molina 2008, 52-53. Both numbers include a small number of texts, 260 and 126 respectively, with an uncertain provenience. Moreover, texts from two sites, Girsu and the much smaller Lagaš, are both counted as Girsu texts because they were sister sites located in the same administrative province we call Girsu or Girsu-Lagaš.

35

27

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Figure 2: Southern Mesopotamia during the Ur III period. After Steinkeller 1991a, 18, fig. 1

One fundamental problem, however, occurs with the Ur III written sources. The vast majority of them lack archaeological context because of looting.36 Take the texts attributed to Umma for an example. Tell Jokha, the major site in the Umma province and the seat of the provincial capital, never underwent scientific excavation; nor did archaeologists excavate the surrounding smaller sites such as Apisal and Zabalam. Tablets looted from these locations poured into the antiquities market after 1911. Likewise, the site of Puzriš-Dagan (Drehem) was plundered around 1908 and 1909. The case of Girsu, which produced the second largest body of Ur III texts, provides little comfort. French teams excavated the site (Tello) intermittently from 1877 to 1933, yet artifacts from it had already started to flow into the British Museum since 1851. From 1894 on, the antiquities market was inundated with Ur III tablets from Girsu (Verderame 2008, 237-243), probably as a result of illicit diggings. Another site in the same province excavated by archaeologists, the ancient city of Lagaš (al-Hiba), yielded merely a handful of Ur III tablets.37 The Ur III documents from Ur present a different problem. Archaeologists did excavate Ur, but the tablets emerged from secondary context as construction fills in structures erected during the Isin-Larsa period (c. 2000-1800) (Widell 2003, 91-101) or below a baked-brick pavement of the later Kassite era (c. sixteenth-twelfth century) (Zettler 2008, 287). The Nippur corpus, however, contains a significant number of texts from a secure archaeological context thanks to the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Chicago, whose excavations lasted until the late 1980s. Of the total 2,032 tablets and fragments retrieved

–––––––––––––––––

36

For general information on different Ur III corpora and their history, see Allred 2006, 36-38, 43-44, 106-107, 144145; Sharlach 2004, 1-6; Sallaberger 1999, 201-206; Jones 1975. Additional references for particular sites are supplemented here. 37 RlA 6, 422-430, s.v. “Lagaš”: B. Archäologisch; Molina 2008, 53.

28

2. T HE U R III K INGDOM AND THE U MMA P ROVINCE

from the area of the Inanna temple, 1,163 date to the Ur III period and include about 200 tablets discovered in primary context. The rest of the Ur III texts turned up as part of the fill of the foundation platform of a Parthian building (SB Level II), but they can be connected to the administration of the Ur III Inanna temple based on the prosopography and typology of tablets (Zettler 1992, 50-55, 91-92).38 Small archives of not more than a hundred tablets also came from House J, perhaps a public building with residential quarters, of the so-called Area TB building (Zettler 1992, 17-20; 1996)39 and at Level IV of the same building (Zettler 2008).40 Another more implicit problem with the documentary evidence consists in how “to assess the degree of fit between the stated or inferred decisions and rationales of the scribal administrators and the realm of practical action that constituted the empire’s economic and agricultural infrastructure” (Adams 2006, 145). By nature, administrative documents concern more about distribution than production, and “focus only on a handful of control points chosen to meet a given set of state goals for resource expropriation” (ibid., 165). Consequently, these documents deliver little information about the daily, contemporary life of the masses of people, who tilled the land, bred the livestock, practised the crafts, and built and maintained the infrastructure of the kingdom. The documentary evidence, thus, leaves us in the dark about the technical know-how (e.g., Adams 2004). Such an extraordinary body of written evidence raises the question of why the Ur III dynasty produced so many records during its reign of about a century. A sketch of the political and economic history of the kingdom may assist in the attempt to offer an explanation. 2.1. Political History of the Ur III Kingdom A. Kuhrt (1995, 56-73) and M. Van De Mieroop (2007, 73-84) have published general histories of the Ur III period. Kuhrt incorporates a considerable quantity of literary sources, while Van De Mieroop provides a concise analysis of the social and economic circumstances of this era. The treatise of W. Sallaberger (1999, 131-178) offers a deeper, comprehensive investigation of the period and forms the basis of the following synopsis, to which the latest references are added. After the collapse of the Sargonic kingdom, the Ur III dynasty reunited southern Mesopotamia into one political entity. Details about its rise to power remain obscure. The founder of the dynasty, Ur-Namma, was a general stationed in the city of Ur and probably a brother of Utu-hegal from Uruk. The latter defeated decisively the Gutians from the Zagros Mountains in the east and terminated their dominance in Mesopotamia, which they had held since the demise of the Sargonic kingdom. Ur-Namma remained king for seventeen years, during which he continued battling to expel the Gutians out of Mesopotamia and to pacify the eastern and northeastern border of the kingdom. On the western front, he pursued a more peaceful strategy and arranged for his son, the future king Šulgi, to marry a princess from Mari, who adopted the new name TaramUriam, “she loves Ur” (Sharlach 2001, 61-62; Michalowski 2004, 225-226). On the domestic front, Ur-Namma might have reorganized southern Mesopotamia into a number of provinces according to the so-called Cadastre texts,41 thus laying the groundwork for the bala-taxation system later established by his son and successor Šulgi. Ur-Namma undertook many infrastructure projects of canals, harbors, roads, and temples, which conduced to the economic prosperity under Šulgi. Ur-Namma also commissioned the law code named after him, which represents the earliest example of its genre in Mesopotamia and appears preserved on an Ur III cylinder probably from

––––––––––––––––– 38

Van Driel questions the reconstruction of Zettler regarding the origin of the documents found in secondary context and suggests that they may have come from elsewhere; see Van Driel 1995, 395. 39 This archive is mostly administrative and focuses on a state functionary called Ur-Sin, who carried the title nu-bànda, a supervisor of some sort. 40 This archive shows more diversity and features administrative records as well as private documents such as loan contracts and sale records. It is attributed to Lama-palil, who held the title r á - g a b a , “courier.” 41 See recently RlA 11, 37, s.v. “Provinz” and Steinkeller 2011a.

29

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Umma and Old Babylonian tablets from Ur, Nippur, and Sippar.42 The Ur III copy on the fragmentary cylinder from the Schøyen collection contains further clues to attribute this law code to Ur-Namma (Civil 2011, 221) rather than Šulgi:43 a clause concerning the sale of slaves (§E3ab) contrasts the stipulation under the reign of Ur-Namma with that of the previous Gutian times. King Šulgi stayed in office for nearly half of a century and oversaw the apogee of the Ur III kingdom.44 The names of his regnal years provide a chronology to the significant and crucial events that took place during his reign. In order to consolidate and to expand his heritage, Šulgi launched a sweeping reform, which comprised new measures on many fronts, as follows: (1) selfdeification; (2) establishment of a standing army; (3) reorganization of temple households; (4) creation of a unified administrative system for Babylonia; (5) introduction of the bala-taxation system and establishment of redistribution centers; (6) creation of bureaucracy and scribal school system; (7) reform of the writing system; (8) introduction of new accounting and archival practices; (9) standardization of weights and measures; and (10) introduction of the Reichskalender.45 These measures lasted beyond his reign and toward the end of the dynasty. For example, whereas textual evidence attests to his deification—manifested by the addition of the determinative for gods, d in g ir, before his own name—sometime between the tenth and twentieth year of his rule, his three successors adopted this practice as soon as they took the throne. In his thirty-ninth year, Šulgi established a clearing-house at Puzriš-Dagan for the collection and redistribution of domestic animals delivered as taxes. This center functioned until the second year of the last king of the dynasty, Ibbi-Sin, as attested by the last batch of documents from this site dated according to Ibbi-Sin’s year formula. From his twentieth year on, King Š ulgi set off a series of military campaigns against locations to the east (Anšan and perhaps Susa) and north(east) (Karahar, Simurrum, Harši, Lullubum, Kimaš, Hurti, Urbilim, and Šašrum) of his kingdom (Figure 3). Although the year names without exception describe all these places as “destroyed” (h u l), the campaigns succeeded more in plundering their people, domestic animals, and valuables intead of annihilating them. The texts describe also booty from the west (k u r m a r-tu ) and Šimaški. Alongside the exercise of military power, Šulgi deployed the strategy of dynastic marriage to forge alliances with the neighboring regions (see also Weiershäuser 2008, 261-264). In addition to a princess from Mari, he married the princess Šulgi-simtum from Ešnunna in the Diyala area. He sent his daughters off to marry the local rulers in Pašime, Anšan, Marhaši, Hamazi (between the Great Zab and the Diyala region), Zabšali, and Šimanum. This strategy appears most successful with Anšan and Mari, as Šulgi directed probably only one campaign against the former and none against the latter. King Amar-Sin, son and successor of Š ulgi, continued to wage battles in the northern direction against Urbilum and Šašrum. At the same time, he undertook extensive construction projects and left behind building inscriptions at a number of sites from Sippar in the north to Eridu in the south. The delivery records from Puzriš-Dagan furnish plenty of evidence for most events commemorated in the year formulae of his nine-year reign.

–––––––––––––––––

42

For recent editions of the Ur-Namma law code, see Michalowski and Walker 1989; Wilcke 2002; Civil 2011. For assessment of both sides of the controversy, see Michalowski and Walker 1989, 383-386; Wilcke 2002, 296-297. 44 See most recently RlA 12, 270-280, s.v. “Šulgi.” 45 Selz examines these measures in light of earlier evidence, especially the texts from Early Dynastic Lagaš, and argues for the long-term historical tradition underlying the so-called reform of Šulgi; see Selz 2010. 43

30

2. T HE U R III K INGDOM AND THE U MMA P ROVINCE

Figure 3: Territorial extent of the Ur III kingdom. After Steinkeller 1991a, 31, fig. 6.

The next king, Šu-Sin, identified in the Sumerian King List as a son of King Amar-Sin (although these two may also have been brothers),46 likewise stayed on the throne for nine years. Before that, he served as a general in Durum (near Uruk). The activities of King Šu-Sin fall into the usual pattern of building and campaigning, but compared with his predecessors, his building program appears modest, with the construction of the Šara temple in Umma plus the Anunitum temple and the temple for the god Nanna in Ur. He resumed military campaigns in the east (Zabšali) and the north (Šimanum), but the Amorites from the west posed an increasing threat to the kingdom, as indicated by the wall built in his fourth year to prevent their infiltration. King ŠuSin enforced some malicious measures against his predecessor Amar-Sin, such as the abolishment in ŠS 2 of the month named after a festival in honor of Amar-Sin (e z e m d a m a r- d su e n ) in the Umma calendar. Instead, he introduced a new month name after a festival for himself (ezem dšud suen) in the so-called Reichkalender, which appeared in use in Puzriš-Dagan and other state establishments from his third year on. The last king, Ibbi-Sin, a son of Šu -Sin, ruled for twenty-four years and experienced a dramatic decline of the fortune of the kingdom. The only building project attested of his reign was a great wall (bàd gal) constructed in Ur and Nippur during his sixth year, but the exact nature of this wall escapes us. Another sign of the impending disaster lies in the findings that texts dated with the year names of Ibbi-Sin ceased to appear at the major sites during the earlier period of his reign: by IS 2 in Puzriš-Dagan, IS 3 in Uruk, IS 4 in Umma, IS 5 in Girsu, and IS 8 in Nippur. Several factors might have proven responsible for the final collapse of the Ur III kingdom. A shortage of grain due to unknown causes led to a sharp rise of its price. Consequently, the barley

––––––––––––––––– 46

A Puzriš-Dagan text, Nesbit 66 (ŠS 4 vii 21), attests to a personal name Šu-Sin-walid-Šulgi, “Šu-Sin-born-of-Šulgi,” which might have been the full name of King Šu-Sin according to Owen 2001.

31

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

wage paid to workers was substituted with dates and oil in some cases. During the years IS 1-2, barley ceased to be attested as fodder distributed for domestic animals, a phenomenon that corresponds to the end of the operations at the clearing center Puzriš-Dagan. Around the same time, a famine might have afflicted the capital city of Ur, and the rebellion of the general Išbi-Erra exacerbated the crisis. In the eighth year of Ibbi-Sin, this general Išbi-Erra established an independent dynasty in the city of Isin and soon annexed the religious center Nippur. By then the Ur III kingdom had already shrunk to encompass only the capital city of Ur and its surroundings. Finally, troops from Elam and Šimaški captured Ur and King Ibbi-Sin,47 who was never heard of again. 2.2. Administrative and Economic Organization The Ur III economy was essentially a redistributive economy embedded in a patrimonial household system. “Such households consisted of owners, managers, dependent workers, animals, buildings, fields, orchards, and other property; and they could be quite large. Almost all productive activity took place within these households, which coordinated and managed the entire labor force of the state” (Schloen 2001, 262). The three-tiered, pyramid-structured household system operated throughout the kingdom. On the top, the household of the king, tantamount to the kingdom in spatial terms, encompassed all the people and territories within its confines. The household of the king subsumed dozens of provincial households under the control of governors in the core region or military generals in the periphery. Each provincial household further consisted of individual households organized around temples or certain administrative units, which undertook the bulk of the economic production. Such a household system renders the modern dichotomy of public versus private sectors problematic for the Ur III period (Steinkeller 2004a, 91-93). “[T]he terms ‘public’ and ‘private,’ if they are used at all, should be applied not to separate groups of households and personnel ... but to the alternation of activity within each dependent household between work done on behalf of the master household (ultimately a royal or temple household) and work done for the direct benefit of the dependent household itself” (Schloen 2001, 263). Therefore, replacing the terms public versus private with the terms institutional versus non-institutional appears preferable for the purpose of defining these two types of work done for different interests (Garfinkle 2005). The redistributive nature of the Ur III economy manifested itself as the quota system on the level of individual households. Dependent workers pursued economic activities at the cost of these households and had the obligation to deliver predetermined quantities of goods and corvée labor. In return, they received rations mostly in the form of grain, wool, and oil. The tax paid by the provincial households to the central government, called b a la or g ú n m a -d a , illustrates the operation of the redistributive economy on a higher and grander state level. In order to siphon income from the surplus generated by temple households, King Šulgi installed the rotational taxation system called b a la ,48 whereby each province in the core region, depending on its specialization, had to provide the central government with a month’s or several months’ supply of livestock, grain, reeds, manufactured products, and corvée labor. The core region covered southern Mesopotamia (Babylonia) and could have comprised as many as twenty-

–––––––––––––––––

47

For deterioration of the relationship between King Ibbi-Sin and two powerful Šimaškian rulers Yabrat (Ebarat) and his son Kindattu, see Steinkeller 2007a, 228. 48 The bala system incorporated elements of a tax, a redistributive economy, a fund, and an entitlement. “It was a tax in the sense that the payment was fixed by the government, a forced contribution of wealth paid to government agents. The bala was a fund in that credits and debits could be issued on it. It contained elements of redistribution in that the province seems to have received some of the value of its payment back in the form of livestock. Finally, one could view the bala payment itself as an entitlement fee, allowing a province to participate in the livestock allocation system. Yet, in my opinion, the best characterization for the bala system is the term ‘tax,’ because the primary function of the system was the forced contribution of the province’s wealth to support the central government”; Sharlach 2004, 20-21.

32

2. T HE U R III K INGDOM AND THE U MMA P ROVINCE

one provinces.49 In contrast to the bala-tax, the tax g ú n m a -d a , “burden of the land,” targeted livestock and applied to the peripheral provinces where the royal sector existed without the traditional temple sector. The periphery region covered newly conquered territories and “formed a large belt extending southeastward from the left bank of the Tigris and running parallel to the Zagros range. In the northwest its farthest extensions appear to have been Assur and Urbilum (modern Erbil), while in the southeast it reached as far as Sabum, Susa, and Adamdun” (Steinkeller 1991a, 28). After paying the b a la or g ú n m a -d a tax, each province could claim entitlement to a share, allocated through the coordination of the central government, of other products that it produced less abundantly or not at all. The present study will take a closer look at the core region where the Umma province was located. The Core Region The binary structure of the core versus the periphery on the state level paralleled the symbiosis of the provincial and the royal sectors in individual provinces in the core region. The model proposed by Steinkeller (1991a) illuminates the local economic organization of the core region. In his words (ibid., 22), [T]he core comprised the following three basic sectors: 1. Temple domain: landed and other property held nominally by the temple households and managed by the provincial administration (é n s i ). 2. Royal domain: land distributed among the dependents of the king (primarily military personnel) in exchange for services and certain taxes (š a g i n a ); industrial complexes run directly by the central government (e.g., the weaving establishments at Ur, the workshops at PuzrišDagan); royal flocks and herds. 3. Private sector: land held in private possession; merchants; independent craftsmen, shepherds, fishermen, etc.

According to Steinkeller, the private sector appears poorly documented and economically insignificant, but some scholars contest this conclusion as an argument from silence (e.g., Van Driel 1998; Van De Mieroop 1999, 106-108; 2004, 59). In a later study on land tenure conditions in Babylonia during the third millennium, Steinkeller explains the ecological factors that rendered private possession of land economically disadvantageous in southern Babylonia.50 Both the temple and the royal domains had their roots in the past before the Ur III period. The royal sector appeared as a new institution in southern Babylonia during the Sargonic period.51 The Sargonic kings might have initiated the policy of granting arable land to reward generals and soldiers for their military service during the conquest of the south and the consolidation of the whole area of Babylonia. One source of arable land came from the deserted estates of landowners in the rebellious Sumerian city-states that King Rimuš had crushed (Foster 1985; Westenholz 1999, 50). The king confiscated their land and incorporated it into the so-called royal or crown sector. Another source of arable land came from fields newly opened for cultivation. After the Ur III dynasty replaced the Sargonic dynasty, its second king Šulgi continued in Babylonia this

––––––––––––––––– 49

From north to south they were: Sippar, Tiwe, Urum, Puš, Kutha, Babylon, Kiš, Kazallu, Apiak, Marad, Nippur, Urusagrig, Isin, Adab, Šuruppak, Umma, Girsu, Uruk, and Ur; see Sharlach 2008a, 81 with previous literature. Two provinces in the Diyala region, Ešnunna and Išim-Šulgi, saw their status shifting between in the core and in the periphery. 50 According to Steinkeller 1999, 303: “[T]he fallow requirement, the need for extensive irrigation works, and the shifting nature of the alluvium’s hydrological system preclude (or, at the very least, significantly hinder) the existence of small- and medium-sized landed holdings in the form of permanently fixed fields. This, in turn, makes impossible the existence of small, individually owned farms.” 51 See Foster 1993 for an overview of the administration of this period.

33

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

policy of establishing a separate category of land for military personnel and other royal dependents. He placed the new land grants in the charge of a general, who reported directly to the king. The king also bestowed large tracts of land upon members of the royal family and senior state officials, who pledged their loyalty to the king. Thus the royal or crown sector of the Ur III period developed (Steinkeller 1991a, 17). The temple sector has an even longer history going further back into the late stage of the Early Dynastic period (ED III B; c. 2430-2340), when autonomous individual city-states spread over Babylonia. For these city-states in southern Babylonia, the ideology prevailed in which all land belonged to the local pantheon led by a chief deity. This ideology appeared more influential in cities in the farthest south, such as Lagaš, Umma, Ur, and Uruk (Steinkeller 1993, esp. 116129). Accordingly, agricultural and other productions pivoted around temple households of various sizes staffed with a workforce. As remuneration for their work, members of the workforce received a sustenance plot or allotments of daily necessities or both commensurate with their ranking in the community. In practice, all temple households fell under the control of the governor (é n si) of the city-state, who had the status of steward of the divine and thus gained unlimited access to the wealth nominally belonging to gods. Taking advantage of this privileged position, a governor could reap huge economic benefits for himself and his family. For instance, the sustenance land (see below) of Lugal-anda, a governor of Lagaš in the ED III B period, added up to as much as 591 iku (≈ 212.76 hectares), and that of his successor’s wife Šagšag amounted to even more at 918 iku (≈ 330.48 hectares) (Steinkeller 1999, 290-291, 295). During the Sargonic period, the status of temple households in southern Babylonia remains undefined due to the scarcity of documentation. According to B. R. Foster (1982, 115): There is no evidence in any of the Sargonic records for temple ownership of land, which Deimel assumed was normative in third millennium Mesopotamia. Nor, as one might expect, is there any evidence in these texts for private or communal ownership of land, the importance of which Diakonoff and Gelb have stressed. Only royal or institutional ownership can be documented in these records, but it is clear that the king did not own or dispose of all land.

In the Ur III period, King Šulgi tried to undermine, without detriment to local stability, the tight control that governors wielded over temple households. To achieve this, Šulgi preserved, on the one hand, the basic organization of temple households, but started, on the other hand, to make his own appointments of governors (i.e., measure 3 of his reform; Steinkeller 1991a, 17).52 Thus, he planted deputies, who advanced the interest of the crown in provincial affairs. His successors adhered to this policy as a way to minimize local opposition to a new king, but they had mixed results. First of all, the practice of rotating governors did not appear typical for the Ur III period (Hallo 1953, 74-80). Among the three provinces with the best evidence for the office of governor, only Girsu had a governor appointed by the king and serving for a fixed term.53 The governorship in the two other provinces remained for all or most of the time within one family with entrenched local roots: the Ur-nigar family in Umma and the Ur-Meme family in Nippur.54

–––––––––––––––––

52

King Sargon of the previous dynasty might have also appointed Akkadians he trusted as governors in southern Babylonia, but such a policy probably failed in his case; see Westenholz 1999, 39. 53 A list of the Girsu governors can be found in Falkenstein 1956-57, vol. 1, 5-7 as follows (dates adjusted according to footnotes): Lu-kirizal (Š 25), Ur-Lama (Š 32-39), Al-la (Š 40), Ur-Lama (Š 41-AS 3), Nanna-zišagal (AS 4), Šarakam (AS 5-6), Lu-saga (AS 7?), Gudea (AS 7), and Arad-Nanna (AS 8-IS 2). Two partial lists with different dates appear in Maekawa 1996a, 177-178 (Ur-Lama [Š 32-38], Al-la-(lu5) [Š 38-41], Ur-Lama [Š 41-AS 3], and Nanna-zišagal [from AS 3 on]) and Sharlach 2004, 62 (Lu-kirizal [Š 28-32], Ur-Lama [Š 33-AS 2], Nanna-zišagal [from AS 4 on], Šara-kam [AS 3-6], Arad-Nanna [AS 7-IS 4]). In two other articles, Maekawa interprets é - d u 6 - l a as “confiscated property” and builds thereupon the argument that the Ur III king actively interfered or even played a decisive role in the local politics of Lagaš, Umma, and Ur, especially in choosing the gubernatorial candidate; see Maekawa 1996b and 1997. Heimpel has questioned such an interpretation and suggested instead, based on parallels from Mari, a more neutral meaning of “a household which has come to its end” for é - d u 6 - l a ; see Heimpel 1997. 54 For Umma, see Dahl 2007. For Nippur, see Hallo 1972; Zettler 1984, 1991, and 1992, 177-213.

34

2. T HE U R III K INGDOM AND THE U MMA P ROVINCE

In terms of land holdings, the quantitative relationship between the temple domain and the royal domain changed across different periods. While the temple domain dominated during the Early Dynastic times, the royal domain did the same for the following Sargonic dynasty. For the Ur III period, however, the proportion of land holdings between these two sectors remains disputed. G. Van Driel (1999-2000, 12) believes that “there are no clear signs that this section [meaning the royal] was sizable in the provinces [i.e., Umma and Lagaš] from which we have information,” whereas Steinkeller (forthcoming a) produces evidence that in Umma, the royal sector controlled more than two-thirds of the natural and human resources. The appellatives of these two sectors, temple and royal, for the Ur III era require some clarification. Since the temple as an economic institution has far better documentation than the royal sector, scholars refer to the temple as the institutional sector. Hence, this generic term, institutional sector, has acquired a narrowed meaning and become a synonym of the temple sector in studies of the Ur III economy. In addition, because the provincial governor held nominal jurisdiction of the temple sector, scholars often refer to it as the provincial sector as well. As for the royal sector, it is alternatively designated as the state sector. Land Tenure and Economic Administration in the Provincial Sector At least two categories of land appeared within the provincial or temple sector: (1) domain land (g á n -g u 4 ) held and directly exploited by temple households to meet their own needs and (2) sustenance land (š u k u ) allotted to temple personnel and administrative officials of the governor as compensation for their service. Domain land can be considered as under a collective ownership, and accordingly, its cultivation took place not at the family level but at the institutional level. Temple households provided the necessary implements, draft animals, and manpower, and organized them into plowing teams. Typically, a plowing team would consist of a seeding plow, two pairs of oxen, a plot manager (e n g a r), and three plowing assistants (š à -g u 4 ). Sustenance land, on the other hand, presents a more complicated notion. The size of an individual’s allotment varied proportionately to his social status: the higher one sat on the managerial hierarchy, the more land one received. An individual could have holdings scattered in different places,55 and even the location of a single plot in one place might change from year to year due to the volatile topographical conditions in southern Babylonia (Steinkeller 1999, 303). How the sustenance land was cultivated remains ambiguous (Waetzoldt 1987, 128-132). Steinkeller speculates that the granting institution did it en masse, although probably not by the same plowing teams responsible for the domain land. A sustenance-land holder held title to a portion of the total yield from his assigned plot.56 Van Driel (1998, 34-35) points out that leaders of plowing teams could tap institutional resources to cultivate their own sustenance plots. He expresses skepticism, however, about the idea that the temple institution would cultivate sustenance land in general. A third category of land, leased land (a p in -lá /u ru 4 -lá ), although attested, present few specifics. Steinkeller (1981, 121) first suggests that temple households might have rented out land under their control (i.e., land belonging to the temple sector) to tenants, but his later model of the land tenure system does not account for leased land (Steinkeller 1999). In his configuration of the institutional sector, Van Driel (1998, 34-35) treats leased land as a separate category alongside domain land and sustenance land. This scheme reflects best the case in the Girsu province, where leased land constituted one of the three categories of land belonging to (temple) households under

––––––––––––––––– 55 56

For textual evidence, see BM 105330 (Š 43) in Gomi 1985, 2-6. See Steinkeller 1999, 320 n. 52; for textual evidence, see BM 106075 (no date) in Gomi, ibid., 6-7.

35

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

the control of the governor.57 The same tripartite model applies to the landed holdings of the Inanna temple at Nippur.58 Evidence is meager concerning leased land in Umma. Sustenance land provided one source for it: the text BM 105330 (Š 43), mostly a list of sustenance fields assigned to a large group of people in the Da’Umma district, notes three cases of such tenancy. In each case, the name of the tenant follows that of the holder of a sustenance plot.59 Temple households could serve as another source: the text OrSP 47-49 213 (Š 40) mentions “leased land of various shrines” (a p in -lá èš d id li) in the context of irrigation fee payments (§3.2). Figure 4 below summarizes the results of this discussion.

Royal/State sector Ur III provinces in the core

Domain land Temple/ Institutional/ Provincial sector

Land sublet

Sustenance land

Leased land

Land not sublet

Figure 4: Land tenure system in the Ur III core region.

The economy in the core region operated as a quota system. Starting at the provincial level, individual provinces had to pay the bala-tax to the crown in the form of a large assortment of cultivated and manufactured products, such as the most important grain and domestic animals, as well as corvée work. The crown established accountability at different levels in order to accomplish this goal. Broadly speaking, the governor and his top officials held managers of various industries and workshops and supervisors of work crews accountable for producing a predetermined quantity of products or a precalculated number of workdays. The managers and supervisors in turn made the male (g u ru š) and female (g é m e ) workers in their charge toil to meet the imposed quotas.60 Such an arrangement imposed harsh demands on the workers according to R. K. Englund, who concludes that “the expected labor performance was in all likelihood simply beyond the capabilities of the normal worker” and “an incentive for the workers to produce more was nonexistent” (1991, 280).

–––––––––––––––––

57

For the general renting rates and the proportion of the three types of land in one particular case, see respectively Maekawa 1977 and 1986. 58 Zettler 1992, 115-134. Note that he translates g á n - g u 4 as subsistence land instead of domain land, and š u k u as land allotments instead of sustenance land. 59 Gomi 1985, 2-6: ix 11. 3 i k u 4 ( a š ) 2 ( b a r i g ) 3 ( b á n ) g u r / 12. u r - g i š g i g i r n u - b à n d a g u 4 / 13. g i š - b i g á b - ú s ì - d a b 5 ; x 7. 2 i k u 3 ( a š ) g u r / 8. u r u 4 - l á a - b í - a / 9. i - t i - m u ì - d a b 5 ; xi 7. 1 ( b ù r ) [...] i k u 1 ( u ) g u r / 8. u r u 4 - l á d u m u l a - l a - a / 9. AN-g u - b u ì - d a b 5 . 60 For a diagram of the Ur III administrative hierarchy, see Englund 1990, 59.

36

2. T HE U R III K INGDOM AND THE U MMA P ROVINCE

Organization of Workforce The systematic study of the Ur III labor force by B. Studevent-Hickman (2006) has confirmed the long-held argument that during this period, the male population consisted of two basic groups: (1) the éren “soldier, collective laborer” or d u m u -g ir 1 5 61 “native, conditionally free(d) person”; and (2) UN.ÍL62 “carrier, menial.” Members of the é re n group worked only halftime, an obligation also called b a la ,63 for the government. In return, they received compensations both in kind and in sustenance fields. In contrast, the UN.ÍL workers toiled fulltime year-round in exchange for rations of daily necessities such as barley, oil, wool, and garments.64 Although in isolated cases UN.ÍL people had access to sustenance land and held managerial positions (see also Koslova 2008), their organization remains ambiguous. Studevent-Hickman further establishes that within the group of é re n , the half-time arrangement applied not only to ordinary workers but also to their managers. The same half-time arrangement extended to female workers designated as g é m e , who worked overwhelmingly in the textile industry. The halftime status of the é re n /d u m u -g ir 1 5 group had two effects. One effect took place at the managerial level and resulted in a near one-to-one ratio between managers at work and their replacements (š e š -ta b -b a ) in reserve. Such an arrangement ensured the replenishment of the management at times of necessity. The other effect took place after the workers and managers from the éren/dumu-gir15 group had fulfilled their obligation to the government (b a la -[a ] g u b b a , “stationed in the bala”). Once in their free time (b a la-[a ] tuš -a , “sitting out the bala”), they could hire themselves out (h u n -g a ) to work for the government.65 2.3. Writing as an Administrative Instrument The sudden outpouring of written economic records during the Ur III period may have an explanation at two levels: the origin of writing in Mesopotamia and its function for this particular era. D. Schmandt-Besserat (1996) has advanced an evolutionary model for the development of writing in Mesopotamia, according to which the cuneiform script derived from an archaic counting device called tokens. These tokens refer to small clay counters of many shapes that served the purposes of counting and accounting in prehistoric cultures of the Near East. In contrast, P. Michalowski (1994a) proposes that writing in Mesopotamia emerged as a system instead of as a result of a gradual, evolutionary process. More specifically, the emergence of complex societies and the formation of state on the one side did not cause the beginning of writing on the other, even though writing as a new form of communication facilitated the process of state formation. He points out that in the ancient Near East, the highest-ranking members of society, who could neither read nor write, dictated what to write. Along similar lines, Steinkeller (2004b, 79) remarks that “[i]t was only when an office was required to report to higher authorities that written documentation became necessary.” Thus writing not only satisfied the need of accountability but also fulfilled the more crucial function of providing information for economic planning. He concludes that the volume of documentation bears a positive, direct relationship to the degree of centralization and planning rather than to the internal complexity of the system. This elevated level of centralization during the Ur III period found expression in the expansion of the

–––––––––––––––––

61 It is clarified in Studevent-Hickman 2008a that the term d u m u - g i r 1 5 refers exclusively to male workers in Umma, but overwhelmingly to female workers in Girsu. 62 Alternatively read as ù g - g a 6 in, e.g., Englund 1990. 63 “Although these two systems called b a l a (provincial taxation and corvée) were in principle independent of one another, it is clear at times they could intersect, especially in cases when the provincial administration used local corvée workers on behalf of the crown. ... The difficulty is to determine where these points of intersection were ....” See Sharlach 2004, 91. 64 Based on evidence from Umma, Koslova has proposed that the term š e š u k u - r a denotes barley allocated to members of the eren-class, while š e - b a refers to bareley distributed to the UN.ÍL workers; see Koslova 2005 and 2006. 65 Note that in the Umma corpus, there seems to be no specific evidence for the b a l a g u b - b a a n d b a l a t u š - a , and the latter phrase may not even be attested there; see Studevent-Hickman 2008a.

37

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

economic interests of the king and the consequential growth in the officialdom (Garfinkle 2008a). Regarding legal and economic texts in Mesopotamia in general, Van De Mieroop (1997) identifies two conditions for writing: the transfer of commodity with a monetary value and the potential use for the future. The so-called balanced account, a peculiar type of Ur III administrative text, best illustrates the function of writing in economic management. Balanced Accounts The Ur III government determined the fulfillment of an individual’s or a household’s obligation by means of a special type of document called “balanced account,” which the administration compiled from its own perspective. Figure 5 below illustrates the standard structure of such a document, accompanied by an introduction to its basic form.66 Van De Mieroop (1999-2000) illustrates how an Ur III scribe could have compiled a balanced account from separate receipts. A balanced account usually bears the hallmark n íg -k a s 7 (ŠID)-a k near the end. This phrase frequently appears in conjunction with the personal names, professional titles, products, obligations (e.g., b a la ), or organizations (e.g., a temple household) that specify to whom the balanced account belongs or what it concerns or both. People attested as the active party responsible for all activities in such an account include the governor, his administrators at all levels, and the professionals such as merchants, herdsmen, fishermen, potters, brewers, and foresters. As their names always appear at the end of a balanced account, the present study refers to them as “subscribers” for the sake of simplicity, even though the phrase n íg -k a s 7 -a k PN means “the balanced account of PN.” The main body of the account consists of two sections. The beginning section, titled sa g n íg -g u r 1 1 -ra -k a m (hereinafter abbreviated as S), “it is the head of goods,” lists the products either received by or made available to the subscriber for which the administration would hold him accountable. Scholars have tried to capture the connotation of S with several translations, such as “assets, capital, or debit,”67 but none of these terms has found universal adoption. This study will translate the term S relative to its most appropriate use in the context. Products attested within the S section of an account range from comestibles (grain, fruits, vegetables, domestic animals, fish, or their byproducts), to manufactured goods (sickles, hoes, textiles, shoes, leather sacks, animal skins, or pottery), to raw materials (reeds, bronze, or copper), to labor output of work crews calculated in workdays (á -b i u 4 x),68 and even to silver and real estate (agricultural land).

–––––––––––––––––

66

See esp. Snell 1982, 11-54; Englund 1990, 25-55, 69-90; Englund 1991; Dahl 2003, 16-48. See Curtis and Hallo 1959, 108 for the translation “assets”; Snell 1982, 24-27 for “capital”; Englund 1990, 30-32 and Dahl 2003, 28-32 for “debit.” 68 See Englund 1988 for terminology. 67

38

2. T HE U R III K INGDOM AND THE U MMA P ROVINCE

Section 1

(s i - ì - t u m = l á -NI carried over from the preceding period(s)) + Product1 k ù - b i x1 + ... + Productn k ù - b i xn s a g - n í g - g u r 1 1 - r a - k a m (S) “assets”/ “capital”/ “debit”

Section 2

šà-bi-ta Product1’ k ù - b i x1’ + ... + Productn’ k ù - b i xn’ + (d i r i carried over from preceding period(s)) z i - g a - à m (Z) “expenditures”/ “withdrawals”/ “credit”

Section 3

S>Z → S-Z = l á -NI “positive balance”/ “deficit” SZ), the third section designates the difference as lá - NI,70 “deficit.” Depending on the context, lá - NI may mean either that the subscriber did not expend all the products placed under his disposal or that the subscriber had unfulfilled obligation toward the administration. If S ends up less than ( -n a à m -d e 6 -š è lu g a l-n e sa g -e n u b à n d a g u 4 , “arrears repaid in place of whatever a chief plot manager may bring; Lugal-nesage (being) the chief plot manager.”121 An abbreviated version of the same description reappears in two texts—Aegyptus 10, 281 52 (ŠS 4 x) and UTI 5 3486 (IS 3) rev. 5—as follows: lá -NI s u -g a g u 4 -e a -n a à m -d e 6 . These examples hark back to the discussion in §2.3 that the Umma government held supervisors accountable when they failed to deliver expected amounts of goods. In another example, one shekel of silver was paid by people authorized to make withdrawals, in this case, for the purpose of settling their arrears (lá -NI m u -DU s ila-ta è -a lú -n íg -d a b 5 -b a k e 4 -n e ).122 Payments with Other Designations Payments not labeled as arrears may appear specified as silver paid in lieu of barley, bran, or flour (k ù še /d u h /e š a).123 Such description of payments may have omitted the phrase, lá -NI s u -g a “repaid arrears,” as shown by two texts that designate a payment as both k ù š e and lá -NI s u g a .124 Silver payments may precede a description that connects them to grain or to agricultural personnel. For example, the text OrSP 47-49 197 (Š 37 xi) labels 21.33 shekels of silver as m u n u -b à n d a g u 4 -4 -b a -š è , “on behalf of a chief plot manager (in charge) of four demain units”;125

–––––––––––––––––

119 Examples include the following texts: Princeton 1 543 (Š 44); BPOA 6 1221 (Š 44); Torino 2 654 (Š 46); BIN 5 330 (Š 47); Santag 6 215 (ŠS 1 vi); SAT 3 1308 (ŠS 2 x); BCT 2 83 (IS 1 v); MVN 16 1043 (IS 3). 120 SNAT 407 (AS 8 iii) obv. 6-9; TCL 5 6045 (AS 8 xii) obv. i 6-7. 121 The first gu4 may function as an abbreviation of the title n u - b à n d a g u 4 , “chief plot manager,” followed by the ergative suffix -e. 122 UTI 4 2880 (ŠS 2) and BIN 5 122 (Š 43 x); the latter text replaces the phrase m u -DU s i l a - t a è - a with the term s u g a . The word s i l a , “street,” often appears as part of an accounting term in Puzriš-Dagan texts, and the expression s i l a - a g á l - a refers to domestic animals not on hand at the moment but expected to be delivered in the immediate future; see Steinkeller 1985; Sigrist 1992, 112-113. Similarly, sila-ta è-a, “getting out from the street,” may describe the situation in which the outstanding dues have been collected and remain in the process of being credited against the people who owed the dues. As for the term l ú - n í g - d a b 5 - b a - k e 4 - n e , in Puzriš-Dagan texts it refers to a circle of people who took over livestock for certain purposes such as making offerings; see Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 49 n. 205 with previous literature. 123 For barley, see BCT 2 72 (Š 43); YOS 4 290 (AS 5); MVN 20 155 (ŠS 1 vi); MVN 10 177 (ŠS 9 xii); Vicino Oriente 8/1 69 (IS 1 viii). For bran and flour, see respectively TCL 5 6045 (AS 8 xii); RA 98 8 11 (ŠS 2 vi). 124 See note 120 above. These examples belie the suggestion of Snell 1982, 61-62, which takes silver sums marked as k ù + name of a product as proceeds from the sale of that product. 125 Literally, “four ox(-teams),” with one ox-term cultivating one domain unit.

63

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

in the text SAT 3 1530 (ŠS 4 xii), ten shekels of silver carry the note m u -š e -š è , “for the sake of barley.”126 The silver payments may often appear accompanied by their value measured in barley (x k ù -b a b b a r š e-b i y, “x silver, its barley y”) at the rate of one shekel of silver equivalent to one bushel of barley.127 In three other cases, the conversion rate varies to 1.04 shekels, two shekels, and 0.6 shekel of silver per bushel of barley.128 Although D. C. Snell (1982, 189) perceives the formula x k ù -b a b b a r š e-b i y as one of the several to express prices, this study chooses the term “conversion rate” over “price” to denominate the quantitative relationship between a silver payment and the equivalent amount of a non-silver product (barley in this case). Such a choice is made out of the concern that “it is difficult to set up a typology of the texts that use various pricing formulae” (ibid.). Therefore, the author prefers to maintain the literal difference between this formula and the Sumerian term s á m /s a m x (SA10), which, as noted below, scholars often translate as “price.” Further explanation in §5.1.A shows that the choice of terminology does not affect the research in this book. Three other texts specify the silver concerned as the price s á m /s a m x (SA10) of copper, oxen, and unknown goods.129 The term of price and related phrases will come under scrutiny in §3.9. Recipients Table 2 shows that three of the four officials—Akala, Dadaga, and Lu-kala—who received the majority of the irrigation fee payments, again took in most of the silver payments related to grain cultivation. The last major recipient Gududu, however, received a share that accounts for less than half of what two other contemporary recipients, Lu-Šara in the year ŠS 9 (MVN 10 177) and LuŠulgira in the year IS 3 (UTI 5 3486), together received. Since the calculation of Gududu’s share excluded two payments that he received but with broken numbers,130 however, one may expect his actual share would turn out higher than his calculated share of 30.33%. Table 2 also presents evidence that Dadaga started receiving some silver in the period when the largest percentage of payments went to Akala. A closer look at the evidence reveals that the receipts of Dadaga took place in the year Š 43 (BCT 2 72), the last year of the period Š 33-43 during which Akala received the highest percentage of the silver payments. Therefore, Dadaga might have replaced Akala as a major recipient sometime in the year Š 43. Table 2: Recipients of silver payments from grain cultivation Period Recipient Akala Dadaga

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

7.29%

All periods

87.71% 50.47%

Gududu

3.23% 30.33%

Governor

12.61%

Other

Total (shekels)

Undated

56.71%

Lu-kala

Unavailable

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

1.36%

19.42%

36%

10.93%

17.51%

123.44

170.90

222.75

69.67% 96.77% 29.67

31

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

–––––––––––––––––

126

Similar examples with a note bracketed by m u ... š è are SAT 3 1983 (IS 2) and SAT 3 1635 (no date). Aleppo 457 (Š 43 x); Nebraska 44 (AS 3); SAT 2 669 (AS 1); RA 9 158 (AS 1); SNAT 434 (AS 9 xi). 128 Respectively, BPOA 6 560 (AS 6 diri); SAT 3 1652 (ŠS 6); AUCT 3 334 (month xi). 129 Respectively, MVN 20 155 (ŠS 1 vi); Nik. 2 406 (ŠS 2 vi); Nebraska 44 (AS 3) rev. iii 237-241. 130 SAT 3 1983 (IS 2); MVN 16 1043 (IS 3). 127

64

577.76

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

Alongside the four major recipients, a total of eight people received occasional payments, including Ur-Šara son of Basa (1.33 shekels in Š 47), Ur-Šara the archivist (1 shekel in AS 1), Lubuluga (3.17 ? shekels in AS 5), the governor (28.08 shekels in AS 8), Ur-e’e (19.83 shekels in AS 7 and 0.25 shekel in AS 8), Lu-gina (20 shekels in AS 9), Lu-Šara (0.67 shekel in ŠS 9), and LuŠulgira (20 shekels in IS 3).131 The annual amounts of their receipts range between 0.25 shekel and 28.08 shekels, and the largest receipt went to the governor in the year AS 8. The known recipients include the following two : Lu-Šulgira, a scribe and a son of the archivist Ur-Šara,132 and Ur-e’e, whom one may recognize as the top administrator in the Apisal district based on the evidence concerning his name (§3.2). For the rest of the recipients, the texts reveal nothing more than their names and titles (in some cases), none of which connects them to grain cultivation. Payers In about half of the cases, the texts either identify the occupation of the payers, or one may propose it based on the evidence from the context or from the previous discussion about the irrigation fee (§3.2). Thus emerge the following occupations: one gudu-priest, one throne-bearer (g u -z a -lá ), one silversmith, one fattener (k u ru š d a), a shepherd group, five chief plot managers,133 two plot managers, two majordomos, one chief granary officer, and two scribes.134 According to this list, more than half of the payers engaged in the cultivation of domain land. In addition, the agricultural officials, from the scribe in charge of multiple domain units down to the plot manager, made silver payments related to grain, often in order to repay their arrears. Since agricultural officials had the obligation to deliver a predetermined amount of grain to the Umma government, they might have intended their silver payments to resolve their unfulfilled quota from previous periods. The agricultural officials made occasional silver payments to substitute for deliveries of specific products. In a certain year a manager might not produce enough grain to meet his obligation but still managed to have some silver at his disposal (§6). Therefore, he would have delivered grain as well as silver in order to fulfill his quota. The rest of the identified payers might not have engaged in grain cultivation but still made grained-related payments ranging from nearly twenty shekels to less than one shekel. Their payments appear divided in approximately equal measure between those labeled as repaid arrears and those labeled as substitutes for grain products. The absence of further details in the texts obscures the reason for their payments. Administration of Payments The evidence suggests that the payments moved upward from payers to recipients along tiers of the administrative hierarchy. Middle-level officials (chief plot managers) and senior officials (majordomos or scribes) could hand over their payments directly to the recipients, while junior administrators (plot managers) might have first submitted the payments to their immediate superiors, who then passed them on to the recipients. Examples of the first situation include the texts Princeton 1 539 (Š 46) and Aegyptus 10, 281 52 (ŠS 4 x). One can best understand the second situation by looking at the text below:

––––––––––––––––– 131

Documentation appears in Table 3.3. UTI 5 3486 (IS 3). 133 Including Gu-TAR in Aegyptus 10, 281 52 (ŠS 4 x) and Egal-esi in UTI 5 3486. This study infers their title from the description of their silver payments; see Silver Payments Designated as Repaid Arrears in §3.3. 134 Including Lu-Haya, who appears not identified in Vicino Oriente 8/1 69 (IS 1 viii), but whose unusual name allows his identification as the scribe of twenty domain units in the district of Apisal discussed in §3.2. 132

65

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Nik. 2 406 (ŠS 2 vi) obv. 1. 5(diš) gín kù-babbar 2. sám gu4 a-du engar 3. ki lugal-iti-da nu-bànda gu4-ta 4. mu-DU Rev. 1. iti šu-numun 2. mu má den-ki ba-ab-du8

5 shekels of silver, price of an ox (paid by) Adu the plot manager, (received) from Lugal-itida the chief plot manager, (as a) delivery. Month of Seed Sowing; year “when the boat of Enki was caulked.”

According to the principles introduced in §3.1, one can identify the plot manager Adu as the payer of the five shekels of silver. The silver, however, was not received from Adu, but from a chief plot manager named Lugal-itida. Thus, Adu had first submitted the payment to Lugal-itida, his immediate supervisor judging from the title, and Lugal-itida then passed it on to the recipient, whose name the text does not record. In another example, BIN 5 330 (Š 47), one mina of silver paid by a plot manager went first to Lugal-kugani, whose title the text does not specify, and then to Dadaga, who appeared as one of the four major recipients. In some cases, an archivist named Ur-Šara intervened for no apparent reason between a recipient and the middle-level or senior agricultural officials, as in the following text: SNAT 401 (AS 8) obv. 1. 5(diš) gín lá igi-4-gál kù-babbar 2. ki da-a-ga nu-bànda gu4-ta ... 9. gìr a-tu kuš7 10. ù ur-dšu-zi-an-ka rev. ... 5. šu-nígin ½ ma-na 3(diš) gín igi-4-gál 5(diš) še kù 6. lá-NI-ta su-ga 7. ki ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba-ta 8. kišib énsi-ka 9. gìr ur-gi6-par4 10. mu en nun-e en eriduki ba-hun

5 shekels minus ¼ shekel of silver, from Dayaga the chief plot manager, conveyed by Atu the chief livestock administrator and Ur-Šuzi’an ;

in total ½ mina 3 ¼ shekels and 5 grains of silver, as repaid arrears; from Ur-Šara the archivist, a receipt tablet of the governor, conveyed by Ur-gipar. Year “when the en-priestess of the ‘prince’ (i.e., the god Ea), the en-priestess in Eridu, was installed.”

In this example, Ur-Šara (rev. 5-7) first collected the arrears paid by the chief plot manager (obv.1-2) together with other payments (omitted in the quotation). He then submitted the payments to the governor (rev. 8). Another example of this arrangement occurs in SNAT 407 (AS 8 iii). The exact role that Ur-Šara played in this process eludes analysis. In two later texts UTI 4 2880 (ŠS 2) and SAT 3 1497 (ŠS 4 ix), a person named Ur-Nungal appears to assume the same intermediary role as Ur-Šara. One text, SAT 3 1308 (ŠS 2 x), shows that an official as junior as a plot manager could have had direct interaction with the recipients. Thus Adu—whom one can identify as the same plot manager in the text Nik. 2 406 (ŠS 2 vi) studied above—submitted a payment worth 5.67 shekels of silver to Lu-kala, who appeared as the third of the four major recipients, in order to redeem arrears of barley. 66

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

Plot managers

Chief plot managers

Ur-Šara the archivist/ Ur-Nungal

Recipients

Figure 9: Administration of silver payments from grain cultivation. Movement of silver payments Contingent situation

Compared with the irrigation fee payments, the grain-related payments have fewer attestations and appear more scattered among different payers, who left no evidence beyond their names. This situation undermines the effectiveness of the prosopographical study of the payers and diminishes the likelihood of correlating the payers with the districts or estates where they might have worked. As a result, the administrative procedure reconstructed above will remain rudimentary and amenable to further modifications. 3.4. Silver Payments from Animal Husbandry (Table 3.4) A silver payment may come from animal husbandry if it meets one of the following criteria: (1) It appears associated with products available through animal husbandry, such as the following: domestic animals (mostly sheep and cattle), dairy products (butter [ì-n u n ] or ghee [g a -à r]), or raw materials (wool, hides, skins, and sinews [s a ]). (2) It was paid by people who engaged in the breeding and caring of domestic animals, including the following occupations: shepherds (sipa), cowherds (ù n u ), herdsmen (n a -g a d a ), and animal fatteners (k u ru š d a) (Stępień 1996, 39-40). Of these professional titles, s ip a has the broadest meaning and can refer to all kinds of animal keepers, who herded a wide range of domesticated animals from sheep and cattle to donkeys, pigs, and poultry. The title n a -g a d a applies to shepherds and goatherds, and the title ù n u refers to cowherds.135 The Umma records indicate no hierarchical differentiation between s ip a and n a g a d a .136 These two titles seem interchangeable in the documentary evidence, with sip a (-d è -n e ) appearing more often in the summary to refer collectively to th e n a -g a d a herdsmen mentioned previously in the same text. An animal fattener (k u ru š d a) took the responsibility to fatten the animals transferred to his authority and then to distribute them afterward. Payments Designated as Repaid Arrears As with payments from grain cultivation, the silver payments linked to animal husbandry may appear designated either as repaid arrears or otherwise. For those payments bearing this designation, the name of the product may follow the term lá -NI (s u -g a ), “repaid arrears,” and thus specify the object of the arrears. The products attested include sheep, butter, ghee, and wool; examples of these products appear in Table 3.4. A similar phrase, k ù x, “silver (in lieu) of x product,” precedes the term lá -NI “arrears” in the text AnOr 1 52 (Š 44).

–––––––––––––––––

135 The title ù n u indicates a higher social status than s i p a g u 4 . For a detailed discussion about ù n u , see Selz 1993, vol. 2, 86-87. 136 However, the archive of SI.A-a, a chief shepherd (n a - g a d a ) active in northern Babylonia from the year Š 40 to IS 2, indicates that “the position of s i p a was subordinate to that of n a - g a d a ;” see Garfinkle 2003, 164 n. 11.

67

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

The evidence concerning the animal husbandry payments attests to new ways of providing further details about the silver payments labeled as lá -NI su -g a . One of these new ways involves the conversion of the silver value of the arrears into other products by means of the following formula: x k ù -b a b b a r A-bi y “x amount of silver, its (value in) A product y quantity.” For instance, the text AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-666 (AS 3) records in the following transaction: 4 (d iš ) ⅓ m a -n a 2 (d iš ) g ín k ù -b a b b a r / síg -b i 4 (u ) 3 (a š) g ú 4 (u ) m a -n a / lá - N I s u g a sip a-d è -n e (rev. ii 17-19), “4 ⅓ minas 2 shekels of silver / its (value in) wool 43 talents 40 minas / repaid arrears of shepherds.” The conversion rate137 in this text amounts to 0.09 shekel of silver per mina of wool, slightly less than the 0.1 shekel of silver per mina attested in another text CHEU 51 (no date). The conversion rate between silver and unshorn sheep amounts to half a shekel per head, as recorded in the text SET 130 (AS 4). A second way to explain the phrase lá -NI su -g a involves the addition of the term g ú -n a (genitive of g ú n /g ú -u n , “tax”)138 to a payment, as it appears in the text Aleppo 446 (ŠS 9 iii) as follows: 9 (d iš) ⅔ g ín 1 (u ) 5 (d iš ) š e k ùb a b b a r / k ù lá - N I s u -g a u d u g ú -n a -k a , “9 ⅔ shekels 15 grains of silver / silver repaying arrears of the tax (paid in) sheep.” A third way to explain the phrase lá -NI su -g a involves the specification of the arrears as the s á m , “price,” for a certain product. For instance, the text MVN 20 68 (AS 6) refers to repaid arrears worth 14.11 shekels of silver as follows: sá m u d u n a m -e n -n a -k a , the “price of sheep of the en-priesthood.” More examples of s á m will come. The amounts of the payments designated as repaid arrears may fall between several shekels to dozens of shekels of silver, and can even increase to several hundred shekels. The text AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-666 (AS 3) records a payment of 342 shekels of silver from groups of shepherds to Lu-kala, the third major recipient, in lieu of wool (rev. ii 17-24). Another text, AnOr 1 52 (Š 44), mentions 690 shekels of silver paid for the same purpose. Payments Designated Otherwise Payments not labeled as repaid arrears may carry a variety of other descriptions. The most common payments specify silver as a substitute for certain products (kù x) such as goats or wool. The texts may also record the conversion of the value of a silver payment into other products by means of the same formula, x k ù -b a b b a r A-bi y, “x amount of silver, its (value in) A product y quantity,” discussed above. The products attested and their conversion rates (§3.3) into silver include the following: wool (0.1/0.09/0.08 shekel per mina of wool),139 goats (0.33/0.26 shekel per head),140 sheepskins, sinews of sheep, carcasses of sheep,141 butter (about 0.1 shekel per liter),142 oxen (5 shekels per head),143 and donkeys (5.83 shekels per head).144 The two terms, g ú n “tax” and s á m “price”, may appear with the silver payments as supplementary information. For instance, the text SNAT 389 (AS 7) records a payment in lieu of wool worth 22.67 shekels of silver that helped to pay for the copper and tin needed for a door dedicated to the goddess Gula (rev. 7: s á m u ru d a n a g g a g i š ig d g u -la ). The text Babyl. 6 53 A (IS 2?) describes a payment of 13.33 shekels of silver, equivalent to 160 minas of wool, which was paid as the price of a person’s wife and children (rev. 6: s á m d a m d u m u lú -sa 6 -g a 3 -a -

–––––––––––––––––

137

For “conversion rate” instead of “price,” see §3.3. The term g ú n refers generally to taxes during the Ur III period. A special type of g ú n is called g ú n m a - d a , “taxes of the provinces,” paid annually by the military personnel stationed in the peripheral area of the Ur III kingdom and consisting of sheep and cattle often at the ratio of ten to one. See Steinkeller 1991a, esp. 24-33; Sharlach 2004, 162-163. 139 BIN 5 149 (Š 37 x); AnOr 1 70 (Š 48); Santag 6 107 (AS 1); AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-666 (AS 3) rev. ii 17-24; Santag 6 269 (ŠS 3); Babyl. 6 53 A (IS 2?). 140 Kyoto 30 (Š 37 xi); Nebraska 44 (AS 3); BPOA 6 421 (IS 1). 141 The skins (k u š u d u ), sinews (s a u d u ), and carcasses (a d 6 u d u ) appear in Nebraska 44 (AS 3). 142 MVN 15 108 (AS 3). 143 SNAT 419 (AS 9); SNAT 420 (AS 9). 144 Nisaba 9 244 (ŠS 1). 138

68

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

b a ).145 The text Santag 6 213 (ŠS 1 v) records a payment of five shekels of silver that then paid the ox-tax (i.e., tax paid in oxen) of somebody named Agugu (m u g u 4 < g ú > -n a a -g u -g u -k a šè ). Three more documents attest to the use of silver to pay the ox-tax.146 The amounts of the payments, which do not appear designated as repaid arrears, may fall into a range similar to those designated as such above, except that in this second group, the largest payment attested, which appears in the text Santag 6 107 (AS 1), by comparison has a larger worth of 144 shekels of silver. Recipients Table 3 below shows that three of the four officials—Akala, Lu-kala, and Gududu—each received the majority of payments from animal husbandry for certain years. The case of Dadaga presents the exception: his share from the year Š 44 to AS 2 appears smaller than that of the other, concurrent recipients combined. The recipient with the largest share of the payments during Dadaga’s period, Ur-Šara the archivist, took in two payments totaling 700 shekels including one worth 690 shekels in Š 44.147 The texts Aleppo 442 and 443, both dated to Š 44, suggest that UrŠara received (k iš ib ) silver payments in order to transfer them to the account of Dadaga (ú g u d a -d a -g a b a -a -g a r). Thus, the 690 shekels received by Ur-Šara might have found their way to Dadaga. This possibility will lead to a higher share of Dadaga during the period Š 44-AS 2 than the number presented in Table 3. Table 3: Recipients of silver payments from animal husbandry Period Recipient Akala Dadaga

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

1.24%

All periods

24.63% 86.29%

Gududu

87.11%

Governor 7.45%

12.86%

0.98%

62.51%

2.43%

Unavailable Total (shekels)

Undated

91.30%

Lu-kala

Other

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

12.89%

10.30% 80.49

1119.75

705.25

100% 103.39

7

2015.88

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

In addition to Ur-Šara, the other occasional recipients include the following: Lugal-ebansa (6 shekels in Š 37), the governor (144 shekels in AS 1 and 6.88 shekels in AS 8), Ur-e’e (14.11 shekels in AS 6), Atu (3 shekels in AS 7),148 and Ur-Nungal the scribe and son of the archivist UrŠara. Among these recipients, Ur-e’e and Atu appear attested as payers as well, which suggests that the silver received by them did not remain with them but passed on to a higher authority. Concerning the rest of the occasional recipients, the texts provide no clear explanation for their involvement.

––––––––––––––––– 145

Discussed also in §2.3. SNAT 419 (AS 9); SNAT 420 (AS 9); Aleppo 463 (IS 1). 147 AnOr 1 52 (Š 44) and AnOr 1 70 (Š 48). Although the earlier text does not specify the occupation of Ur-Šara, the same name and association with silver in lieu of wool make it certain that he was the archivist appearing in the later text. 148 Although the Ur-e’e and Atu are not identified by occupation in their receipts MVN 20 68 (AS 6) and SNAT 382 (AS 7), we recognize them as the two well-known chief livestock managers based on the context. 146

69

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Payers More than half of the texts in Table 3.4 do not identify the occupations of the payers, even though in some instances, one can infer the occupation of a payer from a prosopographical study, as in the case of the three chief livestock managers: Atu, Kaš, and Ur-e’e. Still, one knows nothing but the names of more than one third of the payers. Among the payers, the following occupations occur: one archivist (Ur-Šara), six animal fatteners (Inim-Šara, Ur-nigar, Lu-Sin, Ur-Šara, Alulu, Bida), eight shepherds (Ur-gigir, Ur-Mami, Daya, Lugal-ušur, Abi’a, Ur-Utu, Lu-ebgal, Lugalemahe), two cowherds (Šeš-ani, [...]-DU), three herdsmen (Lugal-ušur, Girni-isa, Hesaga), four chief livestock managers (the three named above plus Lugal-azida), and one group of shepherds. These payers, except for the archivist, engaged in the work of animal husbandry. No labeling exists to distinguish between the payments made by people, who practiced different trades of animal husbandry. The texts may describe the silver paid by animal fatteners as repaid arrears, and on occasion associate it with the ox-tax of somebody else, a delivery to the governor, or barley-fattened sheep (m u u d u -n ig a -š è ).149 In a similar vein, payments from shepherds, herdsmen, and cowherds appear designated as repaid arrears. In the case of the four chief livestock managers, however, one can detect a certain degree of correlation between the designation of their payments and their job responsibilities. The title of chief livestock manager, k u š 7 ,150 presents a convoluted case. It entails duties and responsibilities that do not appear well defined and consistent (e.g., Stępień 1996, 39-40). Previous studies have shown that three of the four chief livestock managers attested here—Atu, Kaš, and Lugal-azida—worked in animal husbandry. Kaš worked for the temple of Šara and supervised about twenty of its affiliated shepherds or herdsmen (Stępień 1996, 50-52, 124, 192194). Lugal-azida and Atu focused on the management of cattle instead of sheep. They worked for the same temple household for which Kaš worked, and Atu succeeded Lugal-azida by the year AS 3 in the supervision of perhaps more than two dozen cowherds (ibid., 58, 61-62, 195-196). That Atu worked exclusively with the cowherds appears ascertained by Englund’s study (1995, esp. 428) of the dairy production in the Ur III period, which demonstrates that Atu held a leading position in this industry of Umma. The present study of the silver payments related to animal husbandry corroborates previous conclusions that other scholars have reached concerning Kaš and Atu. For example, whenever specified, silver from Kaš has to do with wool, and silver from Atu deals with butter. The activities of the third chief administrator of livestock, Ur-e’e, present a more complex picture. Like Kaš, he worked with sheep and goats, but had twice that many shepherds or herdsmen in his charge. His charges, moreover, had affiliations with multiple temple households151 located in the districts of Apisal (the town of Zabalam) and Da’Umma (the capital city of Umma) (Stępień 1996, 51-52, 94-97, 192-194; Dahl 2007, 92-96). Silver payments from Ur-e’e may concern either wool or dairy products. In addition to his involvement in animal husbandry, Ur-e’e functioned as the top agricultural official in the district of Apisal (§3.2). In view of his front role in the two most fundamental industries in this district, one can propose that he worked as the de facto top administrator for Apisal. Therefore, Ur-e’e may represent a case in which a holder of the title k u š 7 “chief livestock manager” exercised responsibilities more extensive than the title suggests. The previous discussion concerning the designations of silver payments has touched upon the reasons why the payers made them. The payments labeled as repaid arrears settled the unfulfilled obligations of the payers that had carried over from previous periods. Depending on the

–––––––––––––––––

149

Respectively Santag 6 213 (ŠS 1 v); Torino 2 657 (ŠS 5 x); Atiqot 4 pl. 21 43 (ŠS 8 diri). The conventional reading is followed here. Beal has proposed a new reading, š ù š , for the sign IŠ in the meaning of equerry and pointed out that in the lexical entries presumably reading IŠ as ku-uš, the KU sign is actually ŠU; see Beal 1992. 151 Including major temple households such as those belonging to the patron god Šara and his spouse Nin-ura as well as the Inanna of Zabalam. 150

70

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

occupation of a payer, the obligations might have involved sheep, goats, wool, butter, or ghee. In one case, the text further describes the arrears as u d u g ú -n a , “sheep-tax (i.e., tax paid in sheep).” Payments not tagged as repaid arrears substituted for products that the payers had to deliver. They might not have resulted from deficits in deliveries in previous periods but rather from outstanding obligations for the current period. The payers thus chose to deliver silver either because of insufficient production of the products or for other unknown reasons. Administration of Payments During the Ur III period, domestic animals, for the most part sheep, underwent an artificial fattening process before their consumption. In Umma, a group of professionals called animal fatteners operated this process separately from the daily grazing and breeding of livestock (Stępień 1996, 197-198). Therefore, the administration of payments made by animal fatteners will be analyzed separately from that of the payments coming from animal husbandry in general. A total of six animal fatteners paid silver, as follows: Lu-Sin, Ur-nigar (twice), Inim-Šara, Ur-Šara, Alulu, and Bida. Except for three payments that do not specify a recipient, their payments went either straight or via an unidentified person to the four major recipients. No evidence appears of a hierarchy among the animal fatteners, who might have operated on a par with each other. Thus, the evidence here does not verify the findings of M. Stępień (ibid.) that two administrators, Alulu and Nigar-kidu, controlled respectively the fattening operations of sheep and cattle in Umma. The silver received from shepherds, herdsmen, and cowherds found its way into the hands of the major recipients through the intermediation of one of the three chief livestock administrators, as the example below shows: Aleppo 445 (Š 46 i) obv. 1. 6(diš) gín kù-babbar 2. lá-NI su-ga 3. ur-dma-mi sipa 4. ki kaš4-ta rev. 1. da-da-ga 2. šu ba-ti 3. iti še-kin-ku5 4. mu ús-sa ur-bí-lumki 5. ba-hul

6 shekels of silver, repaid arrears, of Ur-Mami, the shepherd, from Kaš, Dadaga received. Month of Barley Harvesting; year after Urbilum was destroyed.

In this text, the shepherd Ur-Mami did not make a direct payment to Dadaga but an indirect payment through his superior Kaš. Several more texts document a similar process,152 which one can generalize as follows: Payments moved from shepherds, herdsmen, and cowherds through the intermediate chief livestock managers to the four principal recipients. The workers, however, could also bypass the chief livestock managers and made direct payments to a recipient.153 On occasion the archivist Ur-Šara might mediate between the payers and the recipients, as shown in the following text:

––––––––––––––––– 152

CST 547 vi (Š 46/AS 3); Santag 6 86 (Š 47); RIAA 128 (ŠS 3 xi); NABU 1992 60 (ŠS 8 i). AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-147 (Š 46); Ashm. 1924-666 (AS 3); SET 130 (AS 4); NABU 1992 60 (ŠS 8 i); BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i).

153

71

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD Aleppo 443 (Š 44) obv. 1.1(u) gín [ ... še] kù-babbar 2. lá-NI su-ga udu 3. ki ur-gišgigir sipa-ta 4. úgu da-da-ga ba-a-gar rev. 1. kišib ur-dšára 2. Blank line 3. mu si-mu-ru-umki lu-lu-bu a-rá 1(u) lá 1(diš)kam ba-hul

10 shekels [ ... grains] of silver, repaid arrears concerning sheep, from Ur-gigir the shepherd, transferred to the account of Dadaga; a receipt tablet of Ur-Šara. Year “when Simurum (and) Lulubu were destroyed for the ninth time.”

In this case, the shepherd did not make a direct payment to the recipient Dadaga nor go via his supervisor (a chief livestock manager), but appears to have transferred his payment to the account of the recipient through Ur-Šara, whom one may identify as the same archivist in the texts AnOr 1 70 (Š 48) and SNAT 401 (AS 8). In the later text, Ur-Šara helped to bring to the governor 6.88 shekels, which the chief livestock administrator Atu had paid. One has yet to define the parameters of the activities of the archivist Ur-Šara. Figure 10 summarizes the results concerning the administration of silver payments from animal husbandry: Animal fatteners Atu/Ur-e’e/Kaš Chief livestock administrator Shepherds / Herdsmen / Cowherds

Ur-Šara Archivist

Recipients

Ur-Šara Archivist

Figure 10: Administration of silver payments from animal husbandry. Movement of silver payments Contingent situation

3.5. Silver Payments Related to Cash Crops In addition to grain cultivation and animal husbandry, sideline industries, such as salt producing, forestry, gardening, and fishing, generated payments of silver. This section examines the payments related to salt, spices, fruits, vegetables, and fish. 3.5.A. Silver Payments Related to Salt (Table 3.5.A) A silver payment may count as related to salt when it satisfies one of the two criteria: (1) It has an explicit link to salt. (2) People known to produce salt (lú -m u n ) made it. As in the previous analysis, one may divide the silver payments into two categories: those designated as repaid arrears (lá -NI su -g a ) and those paid for other purposes. The category designated as repaid arrears 72

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

attests far less evidence among the salt-related silver payments analyzed here than in the case of the silver payments from grain cultivation or animal husbandry analyzed in the previous sections. Two out of the three attestations of repaid arrears appear preceded by the remark k ù m u n , “silver (in lieu) of salt.”154 Payments of the latter category, not specified as repaid arrears, may be designated as one of the following: k ù m u n , “silver (in lieu) of salt,” k ù lú -m u n , “silver of a salt producer,” and k ù g ú -n a , “silver (in lieu) of tax.” Recipients Table 4 below shows that among the four officials, Akala and Lu-kala received salt-related silver. The other recipient attested in the text SA 56 (ŠS 6 x), a sanga-priest named Ayakala, received ten shekels of silver as the price of “red” gold (s á m k ù h u š -a ; obv. 1-2). Table 4: Recipients of silver payments related to salt Period Recipient Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

Undated

All periods

100%

Dadaga Lu-kala

9.76%

Gududu Governor Other

19.51%

Unavailable

70.73%

Total (shekels)

129

51.25

180.25

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

Payers Two types of payers emerge from the evidence: One type of payer called lú -m u n , which indicates a generic name for salt producers, made payments ranging in value from ten to sixty shekels of silver. The other type of payer consists of named individuals, such as the following: Basig, Na’u’a, Guyugug, and Lu-Enlila. The best-attested individual, Guyugug, appears in five texts and in the year ŠS 2 contributed the largest salt-related payment from these individual payers, which amounted to fifteen shekels. The texts identify none of the named individuals by occupation. Administration of Payments Compared with the studies done on grain cultivation and animal husbandry, salt production in ancient Mesopotamia has not attracted much research. K. Butz (1984, 286-316) surveys the lexical evidence of salt and discusses its vocabulary as attested in separate periods, while D. Potts (1983; 1984) focuses on the sources, procurement, and distribution of salt. According to Potts, salines (i.e., briny lakes and marshes) constituted the most important source of salt in Mesopotamia. From these salines, one can extract salt by means of natural evaporation of water in the sun during the summer. Potts (1984, 240-241) describes the process as follows: “The saline of Beni-Malek consisted of a great number of pits excavated by the El bou-Mohammed tribe down

––––––––––––––––– 154

Nik. 2 400 (ŠS 1 xi).

73

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

to the water table (c. 2 m.). Saline water was taken from these pits and put into ‘basins’ dug in the surface. The water evaporated in the sun, producing crystalline salt in the process.” In the late nineteenth century Ottoman Empire, most of the salines were located west of the Euphrates and east of the Tigris. Extrapolating from the state organization of salt production under the Ottoman administration, Potts hypothesizes that the state administration, or large temple households, in Mesopotamia might have likewise dominated the salt production during the early third millennium. He proposes that the administration might have employed pastoralists like the Amorites as seasonal workers, provided them with the necessary outfit of leather bags and clay containers, received the salt that the workers produced, and then distributed it to the urban population for dietary, manufacturing, and cultic uses. The evidence that Potts adduces for the involvement of the nomadic people, however, appears indirect and anachronistic. It consists of a group of texts that come from Isin in southern Babylonia, date to the early second millennium, and record distribution of leather bags—as Potts presumes, for the transportation of salt—to recipients with assumed Amorite names (1983, 209-210; 1984, 255-258). Potts stresses, nevertheless, that one’s affiliation with the state or temple did not provide the sole means by which to procure salt. People could have obtained it through their private gathering or through exchange, either monetary or barter, with nomads, who could bring salt for sale in the market. External nomadic groups, such as the Amorites, could have formed part of the labor force of the salt industry in Ur III times, but Steinkeller (2004a, 106 n. 55) argues further that the Ur III kingdom had incorporated the salt producers into its social structure. According to Steinkeller, “it is notable that the regular suppliers of salt to the Umma government were firmly part of the state organization, as demonstrated by their being holders of ŠUKU plots and tax-payers.” He drew this conclusion from the cases of the two payers, Guyugug and Na’u’a, discussed above. The texts that mention Guyugug and Na’u’a and the silver texts that concern salt, however, do not identify either of these two payers as a salt producer. Previous discussions have suggested that the payers of silver for a certain product did not have to engage in the production of the same product. Therefore, to identify these two specific payers as salt producers in Ur III Umma may involve some risk. The lack of knowledge concerning salt production during the Ur III period, the limited amount of evidence, and the laconic style of the texts hinder the probe into the administration of salt-related payments. As far as one can tell, the silver payments moved without intermediaries from the salt producers to the major recipients. 3.5.B. Silver Payments Related to Sesame (Table 3.5.B) As a primary source of fat, sesame ([še -]g i š-ì), comprised an essential component of Mesopotamian diet. A silver payment may count as one related to sesame if it was associated with the product itself or paid by plot managers who grew sesame (e n g a r g i š-ì-k a ), or if it meets both criteria. One can divide the payments again into the same two categories as above: those labeled as repaid arrears (lá -NI su -g a ) and those paid for other purposes at about a one-to-one ratio. The designation of repaid arrears may appear on its own or followed by the name of sesame. The largest payment in this category reached 69.67 shekels in the year Š 46 (Princeton 1 559). As for the payments not designated as repaid arrears, one payment worth 2.17 shekels of silver, recorded in the text YOS 4 290 (AS 5), served as a monetary substitute for sesame (k ù g i š-ì-k a , “silver of sesame”); two other payments appear provided with a value in sesame (x k ù -b a b b a r š e-g i š-ìb i y, “x silver, its sesame y”) at the conversion rate of 1/60 shekel of silver per liter.155

–––––––––––––––––

155

UCP 9-2-1 78 (Š 47) rev. 19-20; Nebraska 44 (AS 3) rev. ii 214-217. For “conversion rate” instead of “price,” see §3.3.

74

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

A new description of the silver payment, á or á b a la (-a ), appears in the following texts: SNAT 407 (AS 8 iii), BCT 2 78 (ŠS 7 xii), and TJAMC IOS 29 (ŠS 9 xi). This study will explore the meaning of this phrase later in §3.6 with other examples. Recipients Table 5 shows that two of the four major officials, Dadaga and Gududu, received a high percentage of the sesame-related silver payments. Three other recipients appeared with them, as follows: Lugal-ezem the scribe (5 shekels in the year Š 44),156 Lu-buluga (2.17 shekels in the year AS 5), and the governor (1.33 shekels in the year AS 8). Table 5: Recipients of silver payments related to sesame Period Recipient

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

Undated

All periods

Akala Dadaga

95.63%

Lu-kala Gududu

100%

Governor Other

38% 4.37%

62%

114.34

3.50

Unavailable Total (shekels)

30

147.84

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

Payers Two types of payers appear in the context of the sesame-related payments: individuals and groups. The individual payers, known by name alone, include Pada, Ur-Bau, and Lu-buluga. A plural, collective term—e n g a r g i š-ì-k a -k e 4 -n e , “plot managers of sesame”—indicates a group payer. Except for the payment of Ur-Bau recorded in the text Vicino Oriente 8/1 65 (Š 46 vi), a group payer paid more than an individual payer. The designations of the silver payments evince that the payers, whether individual or group, made them either to redeem arrears concerning sesame or to substitute silver for deliveries of the product itself. Administration of Payments Although no direct knowledge of the organization of sesame cultivation in Umma has emerged from the texts, the appellative of sesame growers may shed light upon this issue. As mentioned above, the payers bore the collective, group designation e n g a r g i š-ì-k a -k e 4 -n e . In the administrative records of Umma, the term e n g a r refers to the leader of a plowing team that tilled one unit of domain land in the institutional sector (§2.4). The association of e n g a r with sesame may allow the proposal that the plowing teams responsible for cultivating grain might have undertaken the cultivation of sesame as well. Evidence in favor of this possibility comes from the text MCS 6 83 BM 105334 (AS 2), which comprises a survey of the land controlled by the institutional sector in Umma and its assignment of that land to groups of people. The share of land

––––––––––––––––– 156

Discussed in note 93 above.

75

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

that went to the one hundred plowing teams and their managers (obv. i 8-ii 4) consisted of domain land, sustenance land, vegetable plots (k i n isig ), and sesame fields (a -š à g iš-ì-k a ). The limited evidence allows one to chart the tentative course for the silver payments related to sesame, as follows: payments went from sesame plot managers to recipients with intermediate administrators, whose titles remain unknown, sometimes involved.157 3.5.C. Silver Payments Related to g a zi (Table 3.5.C) The exact identification of the product g a z i remains a controversy.158 Steinkeller (1987, 92) identifies it as wild licorice, while M. Stol (1994, 175-179) writes that in the late periods of Mesopotamia, g a z i might have referred to types of cuscuta. Despite their differences, these scholars agree that g a z i represents the name of a spice plant. Ambiguities surrounding the identification of g a z i do not prevent the identification of its producers. Large quantities of g a z i, 3,522 liters in one case and 4,800 in another, appear among the records of the supplies from the Umma foresters (lú -tir).159 Significant amounts of g a z i, ranging from several dozen to more than 2,000 liters, are recorded either as (repaid) arrears (lá -NI [su -g a ]) of or as deliveries from gardeners (n u - g i š k iri 6 ).160 The g a zi-related payments share one common designation: k ù g a z i, “silver (in lieu) of g a z i.” Recipients Table 6 below indicates that two of the four major recipients, Dadaga and Lu-kala, each received 100% of the gazi-related silver during their respective periods. Table 6: Recipients of silver payments related to g a z i Period Recipient

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

Undated

All periods

Akala Dadaga

100%

Lu-kala

100%

Gududu Governor Other Unavailable Total (shekels)

8.50

13

21.50

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

–––––––––––––––––

157

Such as Ur-Bau in Princeton 1 559 (Š 46 i) and Santag 6 78 (Š 47); Nig-ginazu in TJAMC IOS 26 (pl. 55) (ŠS 9 diri). 158 “Mustard has been sought in Akkadian kasû, like “cress” grown for seed, but g a z i , the corresponding Sumerian term (or graphic representation) is still troublesome and may refer to two (or more) plants”; see RlA 10, 20, s.v. “Obst und Gemüse.” 159 See respectively MVN 1 106 (AS 3) obv. i 1-14 and BIN 5 8 (AS 8), both translated in Steinkeller 1987, 104-105, 110-111. Additional evidence includes SACT 2 251 (Š 46/AS 2)—125 liters; Santag 6 204 (AS 9 xii)—120 liters. 160 See JMEOS 12 46 3509 (Š 42/AS 6)—1,105 liters; STA 11 (AS 1) rev. i 7 & 17—75 liters; Nik. 2 341 (AS 9)— 2,029 liters; SAT 2 763 (AS 3)—1,002 liters; MVN 4 70 (ŠS 2)—2191 liters; UTI 5 3481 (IS 3?)—50 liters; UTI 5 3478 (date lost)—213 liters.

76

3. SILVER REVENUE OF THE UMMA PROVINCE

Payers Three individuals, whom the texts identify as foresters, appear attested as payers of the gazirelated silver: Ur-silaluh, Ur-emaš, and Ur-Šara. Each of their payments amounts to no more than several shekels of silver. According to the administrative hierarchy of the Umma foresters that Steinkeller (1987, esp. 88-90) reconstructs, a grand-foreman (ugula [tir]) stood on the top of the hierarchy and took charge of about thirty forests under the control of the Umma government. Three lieutenants, each of whom assumed the title ugula and managed about ten forests with a number of workers, assisted the grand-foreman. In the year AS 8 when information about the foresters appeared complete, Ur-emaš succeeded his father Ur-silaluh in the position of grandforeman, and another person named Ur-Šara functioned as one of his three lieutenants. Following the analysis of Steinkeller, one may identify the Ur-silaluh, who made gazi-related silver payments in the evidence, as head of Umma’s forest sector, the payer Ur-emaš as his son and successor, and the payer Ur-Šara as one of the three ugulas reporting to Ur-emaš. The relationship between the foresters and the gazi-related silver payments appears congruent with the proposal that the foresters in Umma harvested gazi among other plants. On the other hand, no such payment made by gardeners, who, as pointed out above, also produced gazi in Umma, appears in the evidence. Administration of Payments The little available evidence shows that the three payers submitted direct payments to the recipients Dadaga or Lu-kala. 3.5.D. Silver Payments Related to mun-gazi (Table 3.5.D) Scholars used to understand the term mun-gazi as a generic expression for condiments, but Maekawa (1985, 99-100) has pointed out that it subsumes a wide range of plants and products including but not limited to the following: chickpeas (gú-gal), lentils (gú-tur), coriander (šelú), garlic (sum), and onions (sum-sikil). The balance account Santag 6 340 (IS 2 xii), discussed further below in §3.5.G, clarifies that the term mun-gazi may cover still more types of product. The attested products include the following: (1) Condiments and herbs, such as garlic, gazi, zi-bí-tum (an aromatic seed), coriander, cumin? (ú gámun[TIR] babbar/gi 6 ),161 mint (ú KUR), cress (zà-hi-li), ú U.EN, úgiš kiri 6 , and ú- GU.GU.TUM; (2) Vegetables, such as turnip (lu-úb s a r ), ga-ma-am-tum,162 chickpeas, lentils, and onions; (3) Pigeons (ir 7 m u š e n ),163 doves (tu-gur 4 m u š e n ),164 and ducklings (amar-sag uz-tur);165 (4) Different kinds of fish, such as k u 6 kun-zi sig 5 , k u 6 gír-ús, k u 6 šà-bar, k u 6 suhur, ku6 sag-kúr, and ku 6 šeg 6 (“smoked fish”); (5) Other products not understood, such as NÍG.NAGAR, MUG.LU.SAR, GÁN.ŠÈ, hu-rí-alum, and sa gu 4 (“sinews of oxen?).

–––––––––––––––––

161

See Steinkeller and Postgate 1992, 77; RlA 10, 24, s.v. “Kräuter.” Also written as g a - m a - à m - t u m . For its identification as a vegetable, see Maekawa 1985, 99 and CAD K s.v. kamamtu. 163 Read as ir7 according to Veldhuis 2004, 257. Pigeons have a bigger body than doves. 164 Alternatively read as t u m 1 2 - g u r 4 m u š e n . It represents a subspecies of tu m 1 2 m u š e n and may refer to the rock dove, a domesticated kind; ibid., 292-293. 165 For understanding of a m a r - s a g as “fledglings,” see ibid., 299-301. 162

77

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Since the term m u n -g a z i has a semantic field too broad to determine its producers, this study will proceed with the analysis of silver payments that have explicit association with the m u n -g a z i product itself. The texts designate the payments as k ù m u n -g a z i, “silver (in lieu) of m u n -g a z i,” and three out of the fourteen such payments appear further labeled as repaid arrears.166 Several payments carry additional details about their use or destination. For example, the text Nisaba 9 271 (ŠS 4) describes a payment as š à b a la, “within b a la ,” and JCS 31 242 16 (IS 1) allocates a payment to a road house (é -k a š 4 -š è ). The largest annual payment, 18.01 shekels of silver, appears in the text Santag 6 340 (IS 2 xii) obv. iii : 9-14.167 Recipients Table 7 shows that Lu-kala and Gududu received the largest percentage of silver payments concerning m u n -g a z i during their respective periods. Although Dadaga’s share during the period Š 44-AS 2 turns out smaller than that of his two contemporary recipients combined, Ur-Sin (4.13 shekels in the year Š 46) and Ur-Šulpa’e (2.5 shekels in the year AS 1), his share of the receipts remains the single largest one for the period Š 44-AS 2. Moreover, the payments attested in this period add up only to 10.88 shekels of silver, which amounts to a sum of statistical insignificance in comparison with silver payments of other categories attested in the same period. Yet another recipient, the governor, received 3.73 shekels in the year AS 8, but the background of this payment remains little understood. Table 7: Recipients of silver payments related to m u n - g a z i Period Recipient

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

Undated

All periods

Akala Dadaga

39.06%

Lu-kala

66.53%

Gududu

99.08%

Governor Other

21.79% 60.94%

Unavailable Total (shekels)

11.68%

0.92%

17.12

19.61

10.88

47.61

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

Payers The payers of the silver related to m u n -g a z i had various occupations, which included the following: a group of gardeners from the district of Mušbi’ana (n u - g i š k iri 6 m u š-b i-a n -n a k e 4 -n e ), a garlic grower (lú -s u m -m a ), and a forester. The occupations of the majority of the payers, however, remain unidentified. Such payers included the following: Ur-e’e, Agudu, Urašar, Lugal-kuzu, Gududu, Kuli, Lu-Haya, and Lu-Ninura. Because of the unusual names of Ure’e and Lu-Haya here, one may identify them as the father and son administrators in the Apisal district (§3.2), and likewise identify payer with the rare name Gududu as one of the four major recipients of silver payments. In his capacity as a payer in the texts Nisaba 9 271 (ŠS 4) and

–––––––––––––––––

166 167

See payments in UCP 9-2-2 86 (Š 46); BPOA 1 506 (Š 46); SNAT 407 (AS 8 iii). The silver was paid in lieu of m u n - g a z i and two types of birds.

78

3. SILVER REVENUE OF THE UMMA PROVINCE

BPOA 1 1084 (ŠS 5 ix), Gududu might have served as a subordinate to the then major recipient Lu-kala, whom he succeeded during the year ŠS 7. Administration of Payments Some payments that concern mun-gazi appear linked to separate districts of Umma. In the text STA 11 (AS 1), for instance, gardeners from the district of Mušbi’ana made a joint payment (rev. i 16-17). Among other payers, one can identify two of them, Ur-e’e and Lu-Haya, as the top agricultural administrators from the separate district Apisal. This evidence indicates that some of the production of mun-gazi was organized according to the districts. Therefore, district officials could have first collected silver payments from individual producers and then submitted them to the recipients. The evidence hints for the first time at the existence of a special account for recording silver. In a balanced account on mun-gazi ascribed to Gududu, Santag 6 340 (IS 2 xii), which deals with a wide range of other products as well, his funds (sag-níg-gur 1 1 -ra-kam) feature two silver payments worth a total of about eighteen shekels of silver (obv. iii 9-14). Later in the expenditure section (zi-ga) of the same text, these two payments appear transferred to an account concerning silver (níg-kas 7 kù-ga úgu ba-a-gar; rev. iii 8-10). This study will return to this special account in §4.6. 3.5.E. Silver Payments Related to Fruits and Vegetables (Table 3.5.E) This section concerns silver payments linked to fruits or vegetables. The products attested include the following: dates (zú-lum), figs (g i š pèš), apples? ( g i š hašhur),168 grapes (geštin), raisins (geštin hád), garlic (sum), and garlic seeds (numun sum-ma). Payments linked to dates appear in the texts far more often than those linked to other fruits or vegetables. Payments made by gardeners (nu- g i š kiri 6 /santana), as the producers of these products, fit into this discussion as well. Among the dozens of silver payments attested, three appear designated as repaid arrears (láNI su-ga). The remaining payments represented monetary substitutes, which refer to silver paid in lieu of a certain product (kù x). The prevalence of this designation among the silver payments related to fruits and vegetables appears unprecedented so far in this study. One text, OrSP 47-49 196 (Š 37 xi), converts the value of silver into dates at the rate of about 0.6 shekel of silver per bushel of dates. The largest single payment appeared in the year Š 35 (AAS 67) and amounted to 161.83 shekels of silver to substitute for dates. Other descriptions of payments, which may accompany the designation kù x, appear as well. The text MVN 14 39 (Š 40 x) specifies sixty shekels of silver as the price of “red” gold (sám kù huš). In the text SA 55 (ŠS 2 iv), a gardener paid five shekels for the dues imposed on his now destroyed garden (kù ⌈nam⌉ - DU mu g i š kiri 6 -hul-a-šè). The text Nik. 2 408 (ŠS 7 ix) records half a shekel of silver paid by a gardener to substitute for his corvée obligation toward the king (á bala-a; discussed in §3.6). In the text Syracuse 416 (no date), sixteen shekels of silver paid in lieu of dates “entered the (royal) palace” (é-gal ku 4 -ra). As pointed out in §5.3.I, this phrase depicts the bala-tax paid to the crown.

–––––––––––––––––

168

The scarcity of apple seeds at Near Eastern sites casts doubt on this identification. Apple cultivation in southern Mesopotamia is further problematic because apple buds require low winter temperatures to break bud rest; see RlA 10, 27, s.v. “Obst und Gemüse”: B. Archäobotanisch. Cf. the support for the identification of apple in Heimpel 2011b, 116118.

79

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Recipients Table 8 shows that the same four officials—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu—together received the overwhelming majority of silver payments concerning fruits and vegetables. The case of Lu-kala needs some explanation. During the period AS 3-ŠS 6 of Lu-kala’s activity, the administrative chief of the Apisal district, Ur-e’e, replaced him as the principal recipient and took three payments totaling 16.10 shekels of silver. Since the overall amount of silver attested of fruits and vegetables for this period—about thirty shekels—appears small, one may blame this irregularity on the fragmentation of the data. Aside from the four major recipients and Ur-e’e, the texts list two other recipients, as follows: Akala son of Lugal-nesage (16.45 shekels in Š 39) and Enlila-isa (0.50 shekel in IS 1 i). Table 8: Recipients of silver payments related to fruits and vegetables Period Recipient Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

Undated

All periods

97.75%

Dadaga

100%

Lu-kala

38.12%

Gududu

98.50%

Governor Others

2.25%

Unavailable Total (shekels)

731.96

47.21%

0.75%

14.67%

0.75%

100%

34.10

66.83

16

344.23

1193.12

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

Payers The names of the payers do not often appear with their occupations. The texts that identify the occupation of the payer depict either an individual gardener169 or a gardener group (n u - g i š k iri 6 k e 4 -n e or s a n ta n a-k e 4 -n e ),170 and the groups paid more than the individuals. Of the unidentified payers, perhaps one and a half dozen of them, several familiar names, including Dadaga and Ur-e’e, occur. Dadaga received the majority of silver payments between the years Š 44 and AS 2. Earlier in Š 35 i (AAS 67) and Š 40 (MVN 14 39), however, Dadaga had delivered to Akala, the major recipient preceding him, two payments of 161.83 and sixty shekels that substituted for dates. Ur-e’e, the administrative chief for the Apisal district (§3.4), here made two modest payments of thirteen shekels, recorded in the text Nebraska 71 (Š 35 xii), and ten shekels, recorded in the text Syracuse 413 (Š 45/AS 2), in lieu of dates. Lack of evidence prevents the identification of the rest of the payers. Administration of Payments Payers not identified by occupation and the lack of in-depth knowledge about the production of fruits and vegetables during the Ur III period complicate the effort to reconstruct the administration of the silver payments. Current evidence, however, will allow some preliminary thoughts.

–––––––––––––––––

169 170

SA 55 (Pl. 89) (ŠS 2 iv) = BPOA 6 544 (ŠS 2); BCT 2 76 (ŠS 7 viii); Princeton 1 547 (ŠS 7 ix); Nik. 2 408 (ŠS 7 ix). Umma 81 (Š 34); MVN 14 3 (Š 39); WCMA 20.1.18 (ŠS 7); MVN 16 922 (ŠS 9 ix).

80

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

This study will proceed first to examine the following text: BCT 2 76 (ŠS 7 viii) obv. 1. [ ... ] gín lá 1(u) še kù-babbar 2. ⌈ur⌉-dsuen nu-giškiri6 3. [ ... ]+1 gín lá 2(diš) še kù-babbar 4. lú-eb-gal nu-giškiri6 5. ki é-gal-e-si-ta 6. gu-du-du šu ba-ti rev. 1. gìr ur-dnun-gal 2. Blank line 3. iti é-iti-àš 4. mu dšu-dsuen lugal/-e ma-da za-ab/-ša-liki mu-hul

[ ... ] shekels minus 10 grains of silver, of Ur-Sin the gardener; [ ... ]+1 shekels minus 2 grains of silver, of Lu-ebgal the gardener; from Egal-esi, Gududu received; conveyed by Ur-Nungal. Month of E’itiaš; year “when King Šu-Sin destroyed the country of Zabšali.”

In this text, a third person other than the payers and the recipient, Egal-esi, first collected payments from the two gardeners and then submitted them, by way of the conveyor Ur-Nungal, to Gududu. In more general terms, the gardeners did not make direct payments to a recipient but paid through intermediate officials. District administrators like Ur-e’e could function as such intermediaries. The evidence documents his receipts of silver from an undisclosed source in the years AS 7 and AS 8 (TCL 5 6045 obv. 9, 11, 12) as well as his delivery of silver to the two major recipients Akala in the year Š 35 (Nebraska 71) and Dadaga in Š 45/AS 2 (Syracuse 413). Some of the unidentified payers, who paid larger amounts of silver worth dozens of shekels or more, might have acted in such a mediating capacity as well. These payers include the following: Lugalezem171 in MVN 14 154 (Š 33); Lugal-nesage in BPOA 7 1983 (Š 33 x) and Aleppo 455 (Š 34 x); Ur-Nisaba in OrSP 47-49 196 (Š 37 xi); Dadaya in Aleppo 459 (Š 46); and Ur-Šulpa’e in ASJ 18 79 11 (Š 47) and BPOA 6 201 (Š 47). Nonetheless, individual gardeners could also bypass the collectors and submit their direct payments to the recipients. This option occurs in the text Princeton 1 547 (ŠS 7 ix) in which a gardener made a payment, of which the exact amount has broken off, to Gududu. One may make a tentative depiction of the administration of payments related to fruits and vegetables as follows: Payments proceeded from the individual gardeners (to the intermediary officials) to the recipients with the parentheses indicating an optional step. 3.5.F. Silver Payments Related to Fish and Bird Plumage (Table 3.5.F) Here the study will proceed to examine silver payments concerning fish (ku6) and by extension payments from fishermen (š u -k u 6 ) and fishery inspectors (e n k u /e n -k ù ).172 The text Nik. 2 401 (ŠS 2) shows that fishermen made silver payments related to bird plumage (p a -m u še n ), although one expects such payments to come from fowlers (m u š e n -d ù ) instead. This anomaly implies a degree of overlap between the means of production of fish and bird plumage.

––––––––––––––––– 171

See note 93 above. For reading ZÀ.HA a s e n k u k u 6 , see Green 1984. According to Englund 1990, 185 n. 587, 228-229 with previous scholarship, this term refers to a tax collector who also dealt in transactions of fish. During the Ur III period, it might have become an uncommon designation of an administrator who received fish deliveries from fishermen and passed them on to a higher authority. 172

81

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

The prevalent designation of payments in this category remains k ù x, “silver (in lieu) of product x,” in which x could represent fish, salted fish (k u 6 m u n ), or bird plumage. Other designations, such as repaid arrears (lá -NI s u -g a )173 or á (b a la-a ),174 appear less common. Scant information appears available on the spending of the payments. In the text SAT 3 1309 (ŠS 2 iv), a silversmith received one shekel of silver first paid in lieu of salted fish (k ù k u 6 m u n ) for making a so-called Gu’edena standard (š u -n ir g ú -e d e n -n a ; see §4.3). Two texts, AOS 32 C16 (AS 4) and BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i), record payments from fishermen intended as mašdare’a tax for the governor and for the New Year Festival (á -k i-ti) in the first month. A discussion of this tax will follow in §4.1. Recipients The statistics in Table 9 demonstrate that the four officials—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu—received the largest percentage of the silver payments. Akala, the first major recipient, appears under the new title of captain (n u -b à n d a ) in the text Bull. Buffalo SNS 11-2 146 13 (Š 39). Occasional recipients include the following: Ur-e’e (two shekels in AS 7), Ur-Šulpa’e the silversmith (one shekel in ŠS 2 iv), and Lu-Haya (3.67 shekels in ŠS 7). The two familiar names, Ur-e’e and Lu-Haya, may represent the father and son in charge of the Apisal district (§3.2). Table 9: Recipients of silver payments related to fish and bird plumage Period Recipient Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

Undated

All periods

60.51%

Dadaga

100%

Lu-kala

82.10%

Gududu

91.57%

Governor Other

19.22%

7.62%

Unavailable

20.28%

10.28%

Total (shekels)

492.64

88.67

39.38

8.43%

43.52

664.21

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

Payers The texts identify the payers by occupation in about half of the cases. Those payers identified include the following: fishermen groups (šu -k u 6 -e -n e ), four fishery inspectors (Lugal-kugani, Umani, Lugal-nesage, and Ur-Utu), several individual fishermen (Ur-Sin, Lugal-kugani, Adaga, Lugal-itida, and Lu-duga), and one fowler (Ur-gigir). An individual fisherman, whose payment did not exceed fifteen shekels, tended to pay less than a fisherman group, which paid between ten and twenty-five shekels. In turn, the fishermen groups made payments smaller than those from the fishery inspectors, each of whom paid between ninety-nine and 120 shekels. The largest payment from a fowler amounted to three shekels of silver in the year Š 39 (Bull. Buffalo SNS 11-2 146 13 obv. 5’). Payments in lieu of bird plumage exhibit unusual consistency in the text MVN 21 344 (ŠS 3), which registers an annual payment worth a quarter of a shekel for five consecutive years from AS 8 to ŠS 3 (obv. 1-2, 5-6, 8-11, 13-14).

–––––––––––––––––

173 174

MVN 1 245 (Š 38); SAT 2 311 (Š 42); Syracuse 18 (Š 43 vii). SAT 2 532 (Š 47); Santag 6 80 (Š 47); NABU 1989 95 12 (ŠS 7 vii).

82

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

Administration of Payments A legal text without date, published by M. Sigrist (2006), may help to understand the organization of the fishing industry in Umma. This legal text reveals the criminal activities of Ur-Emah, who took advantage of a negligent warehouse guardian and sold175 the fish that he caught, as well as fish oil, to the fishermen from Girsu, the capital city of the neighboring Lagaš province. These fishermen from Girsu were responsible for making offerings (sá -d u 1 1 ) to the patron god of Lagaš. According to another deposition recorded on the same tablet, one night the authorities captured the same Girsu fishermen poaching from a pond in Umma after the person, who colluded with them, aroused suspicion. A list of fish caught from different estates at the end of the text proves relevant to the discussion here. The estates include the following: a -š à a -g e štin , a -š à lá -tu r, Kamari, a -š à d š á ra , a -š à a -b a -g a l, and Ukunuti. These estates, except a -š à a -b a g a l, have been attested as agricultural fields and towns located in the Da’Umma district.176 This correlation between the estates as attested geographical origins of fish and the agricultural estates identified in other contexts suggests that the fisheries in Umma might have had distribution and management similar to the agricultural land. Two silver payments in Table 3.5.F further support the correlation suggested above between the fisheries and the agricultural land in Umma: one payment worth ten shekels is specified as “silver (in lieu) of fish of a -š à d š á ra ” in BIN 5 109 (Š 42); the other payment worth six shekels is mentioned as “silver (in lieu) of fish of a -š à lá-tu r” in MVN 14 157 (Š 43). Both estates, a -šà lá -tu r and a -š à d š á ra , appear in the legal record above as locales that produced fish. This lawsuit attests to the trading of fish, a product that the institutional sector produced in abundance, without the authorization of the Umma government. That Ur-Emah could sell the fish and the fish oil that he had embezzled to people from a neighboring province testifies to trading activities out of the control of the government and indicates the existence of a marketplace. This study will further explore the significance of this text in chapter 6. The contrast between the small amounts of silver from individual fishermen and the larger amounts from the fishery inspectors hints that the Umma administration had organized the fishermen into groups led by the inspectors. The inspectors took the responsibility of collecting the silver payments from the fishermen and then delivering those payments to a recipient. The data in Table 3.5.F also shows that fishermen could often hand in their payments directly to a recipient without the involvement of any intermediary. In view of both situations, one may reconstruct the administration of fish-related silver payments as follows: Payments proceeded from the individual fishermen first to the fishery inspector(s) in a district and then to the recipients, but the fishery inspectors played a dispensable role. As for payments related to bird plumage, the lack of evidence prevents a study of their administration. 3.5.G. Administering Production and Allocation of Cash Crops The text Santag 6 340 (IS 2), a balanced account of Gududu that concerns m u n -g a z i (n íg k a s 7 -a k m u n -g a z i g u -d u -d u ), deals with most of the cash crops studied heretofore. It provides an opportunity to probe the way in which the Umma administration organized the production of m u n -g a z i and allocated the products. The tablet which records the text Santag 6 340 (IS 2) has seven columns on both the obverse and the reverse with up to forty-two lines in one column. The s a g -n íg -g u r 1 1 -ra -k a m section registers huge quantities of products that Gududu received during the year IS 2 plus his balance that carried over from the year before. The products totaled (obv. v 5-vi 17) at: (1) about forty bushels of vegetables; (2) nearly 111 bushels plus 6 ⅔ talents of condiments; (3) almost eight and

––––––––––––––––– 175 176

The verb that describes this action, s a 1 0 , appears in obv. i 6, ii 5; see Sigrist 2006, 392. See Figure 7 in §3.2 and Maekawa 1987, 35-36, field 6, 11, 14.

83

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

a half bushels plus 20 ⅔ talents plus 8882.5 bundles of herbs; (4) 4,276 units of fish and 89.8 bushels of smoked fish; (5) 122 birds and seven ducks?; and (6) nearly two bushels of other products.177 People making deliveries to Gududu include the following: two vegetable growers (lú -su m ; one named UŠ? and the other Lu-Šara), two groups of gardeners (n u - g i š k iri 6 šà u m m a k i a n d s a n ta n a -k e 4 -n e ), the governor, an anonymous merchant, and individuals identified by name and, in one case, by patronymic.178 That Gududu received deliveries of these cash crops in the year IS 2 in addition to an overwhelming share of the silver payments related to them during the period ŠS 7-IS 3 indicates that he both managed the silver revenue generated by the cash crops and supervised their production during the same period. The expenditure section (š à -b i-ta ... z i-g a ) of this account itemizes the disbursements that Gududu made in the year IS 2. A withdrawal (n íg -d a b 5 ) of fish, vegetables, herbs, and condiments appears in the first place (obv. vi 21-vii 4), but the text does not preserve the name of the beneficiary. Next come the offerings (sá -d u 1 1 ) dedicated to the following gods and goddesses: Šara of Umma, Šara of KI.AN, Nin-ura of Ummaki, Nin-e’e, Ninda of Lagaš, the three deified Ur III kings Šulgi, Amar-Sin, and Šu-Sin, and the goddess Lisi (obv. vii 5-rev. i 33). The offering to Šara of Umma comprises the largest quantity and variety, while the offerings to each king feature the same products with the same amounts.179 In the third place follow two offerings for the funeral chapels (k i-a -n a g ) of two Umma governors (rev. i 34-36), putatively Ur-Lisi and Ayakala, who had died by the year IS 2. The next batch of disbursements consists of products distributed as seeds (n u m u n -š è a -š à -g a b a -a n -g a r) to eight individuals (rev. ii 2-29), of whom four, including two vegetable growers, appear attested as deliverers in the previous s a g n íg -g u r 1 1 -ra -k a m section.180 Making the bala-payment due to the crown accounts for Gududu’s largest expenditure in this text. Large quantities of goods were placed on a bala-account (rev. ii 38-iii 7), which include the following: 2,598 liters of chickpeas; 2,646 liters of coriander; 2,645 ⅔ liters of g a z i; at least 60 liters of something with a broken name; 64 liters of aromatic seeds; 669 liters of garlic; 78 liters of crushed onions; 30 bundles of ú.EN; and 420 bales (k ilib ) of crushed onions. Gududu made still more disbursements to people identified mostly by name (rev. ii 30-37; iii 11-30). This text may help to explain several important issues. It first shows that the Umma institutional economy engaged in the production of some m u n -g a z i products (i.e., chickpeas, lentils, garlics, onions, and an herb named ú g á m u n b a b b a r) because Gududu both received deliveries of these products from the growers and provided seeds for them. A considerable portion of what Gududu received came from an anonymous merchant.181 This observation implies that the Umma administration had to secure through the intermediacy of merchants additional and external supplies of certain goods that the institutional economy itself produced. The ultimate source of such supplies might have come from local producers, who either enjoyed a surplus after meeting their quota or took their own initiative in production outside the institutional economy (§5.4.B-C). Second, the text discloses that Gududu expended the products delivered to him as

–––––––––––––––––

177

See §3.5.D for specific products that each category comprises. The individuals include: Ur-Enlila, Ur-dùr-BAR×TAB, E-urbidu, Ur-Bau, Lugal-hegal dumu Ur-Sin, Lu-Haya, and ŠuNisaba. 179 Each offering to the deified kings consists of 5 liters of ground chickpeas, 5 liters of second-class (ú s - s a ) lentils, 60 liters of coriander, 3 liters of crushed coriander, 60 liters of licorice, 3 liters of crushed g a z i , 1 quart of crushed herbs, and 720 bundles of herbs. 180 The eight individuals include: UŠ, Lu-Šara the vegetable grower, Aba-gina, Ur-Šara, Ur-ama, Lu-Šulgira, Ur-dùrBAR×TAB and Ur-Enlila. The first two and last two people are attested as deliverers. The products intended as seeds included chickpeas, lentils, garlics, onions, coriander, and ú g á m u n b a b b a r . 181 Products received from the merchant include the following: 234.67 liters of ú g á m u n b a b b a r ; 25 liters of coriander; 19 liters of g a z i ; 12 bales of crushed onions; 150 bundles of ú U.EN; 1000 liters of garlics; 68.5 liters of ú g á m u n g i 6 (Santag 6 340 obv. iv 22-v 2). 178

84

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

offerings for local and national gods and as bala-tax payments to the crown, and invested a small share as seeds for the reproduction of these products. 3.6. Silver Payments Related to á (Table 3.6) In previous sections (§3.5.B, E, F), scattered examples of silver payments related to the term á have turned up. This term has the original meaning “arm, strength, labor,” but can by derivation also refer to the wage of hirelings or the rent for facilities. Table 3.6 lists more examples of such payments, which appear designated as á , and examples of two more complex designations, á g u l-la 182 and á b a la -a . 183 The two texts SAT 3 1583 (ŠS 5) and YOS 4 219 (year uncertain) further clarify the á -related payment as arrears (lá -NI). The precise connotation of á associated with silver payments depends on the context.184 It may refer to wage or rent when connected to hired labor or rental facilities. For instance, the text BIN 5 136 (Š 45/AS 2) records 19.67 shekels of silver as the rent for boats (á m á h u n -g á ); the text YOS 4 290 (AS 5) obv. 12 mentions one-third of a shekel as the wage of a worker hired to reap barley (á lú h u n -g á š e g u r 1 0 -a ); and the text AnOr 1 47 (Š 43) documents 102.17 shekels of silver received from the governor perhaps to pay for the labor to caulk boats (á m á d u 8 -b i). A payment designated as á may serve as a monetary compensation for a certain type of service or work. For instance, the text BPOA 6 1229 (AS 9) describes forty shekels of silver as equivalent to 2,400 workdays (á -b i 2 4 0 0 u 4 -1 -š è ; rev. 2-3). This payment amounts to 1/60 shekel of silver, or five liters of barley (at the conventional rate of 300 liters per shekel of silver), per workday, which represents the low end of the daily wage for hired labor during the Ur III period (Maekawa 1989). In another text, Iraq 6 185 BM 105346 (ŠS 5 xi), a person named Adaga must submit forty shekels of silver, one may assume to the Umma authorities, as the á payment of a herdman’s son, who deserted from his military service (g i š-g íd -d a -ta b a -z à h ) and whom they captured four years later from the place of Adaga (Englund 1990, 160-162). Since one year in Mesopotamia had 360 days, the equivalent wage of one workday of the deserter would turn out to be 1/36 shekel of silver, or 8 ⅓ liters of barley, which appears higher than the daily wage of hired labor (between five and eight liters) attested during the Ur III period (Maekawa 1989, 48). The rate of 8 ⅓ liters of barley per workday of the deserter would have represented a punitive wage for Adaga. Given that b a la can denote an individual’s corvée duty toward the government (§2.2), payments designated as á b a la -a might have substituted for the corvée work of payers, who could or would not fulfill this obligation. The expression á b a la -a , then, could refer to “(silver in lieu of) work required by the bala-obligation toward the crown.” Such payments amount to no more than one shekel of silver except for the one in the text Aleppo 465 (IS 1), which has a value of ten shekels. The same document designates the payment as k ù -b a b b a r á b a la -a à r-à r, “silver (in lieu) of the bala-obligation of milling.” The effort to explain, in the absence of further evidence, silver payments labeled as á alone proves more difficult. Such payments do not exceed ten shekels, and a single payment can amount to as little as half a shekel. They might have served as monetary substitutes for corvée work, but the texts do not provide the details. Considering that possibility, the designation á might have represented an abbreviated form of á b a la -a . In the text NABU 1989 95 8 (IS 2 xii), one shekel of silver was paid for work outside the city (á u ru -b a r-re ). In the text SA 56 (Pl. 96) (ŠS 6 x), a

––––––––––––––––– 182

BPOA 6 949 (Š 41); MVN 14 200 (Š 44); SAT 2 453 (Š 45/AS 2); MVN 20 62 (Š 47); MVN 13 247 (ŠS 6); SAT 3 1810 (ŠS 7); Santag 6 333 (IS 1 v); SAT 3 1983 (IS 2). 183 SAT 3 1583 (ŠS 5); NABU 1989 95 12 (ŠS 7 vii); SAKF 72 (IS 1 vi); Aleppo 465 (IS 1); MVN 14 447 (IS 2); UTI 3 2144 (month x). 184 According to Wilcke 2007, 87 n. 55, the silver payments dubbed as á ( b a l a - a ) represent the revenue of the governor’s household from hiring out its specialists. His opinion does not convince the author for the lack of explanations concerning the potential employers of these specialists.

85

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

payment of three shekels of silver was paid as á and specified as the price of “red” gold (obv. 45). The effort to determine the precise meaning of another designation, á gul-la, also proves difficult. S. F. Monaco (1986, 10-11) proposes the translation “workdays lost.” A search in the databases BDTNS and CDLI turned up fewer than thirty Ur III texts that attest to this phrase, which appears at similar frequencies in the Girsu and Umma corpora. Among the silver texts from Umma, payments designated as á g u l-la range from several to dozens of shekels of silver. They appear associated with eren-workers in the text SAT 3 1983 (IS 2) and a group of blacksmiths in the text Santag 6 333 (IS 1 v). In the record MVN 14 200 (Š 44), the á g u l-la payment is accompanied by the description g i u ri 5 k i -š è d e 6 -a , “transporting reeds to the city of Ur.” This evidence indicates that á g u l-la payments, like most á payments, dealt with work or labor and may thus remain within the semantic field of the á payment. In other non-silver contexts, the á g u l-la payment had to do with workdays, barley, or domestic animals.185 Along the lines of Monaco’s translation above, the á g u l-la payments in silver, barley, and domestic animals might have substituted for the workdays lost due to unstated reasons. Recipients Table 10 shows that Akala and Dadaga each received 100%, while Gududu received an overwhelming share of the silver payments attested during their respective periods. The small share taken by Lu-kala from the year AS 3 to the year ŠS 6 appears anomalous. A scribe named Ur-abba became the recipient of the largest amounts during this period because of his receipt of thirty shekels of silver designated as á g u l-la in the year ŠS 6 (MVN 13 247). The uneven chronological distribution of the evidence stands out: More than two thirds of the texts recording silver payments of á date to the period between ŠS 7 and IS 3 when Gududu appeared as the major recipient. Table 10: Recipients of silver payments related to labor Period Recipient Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

12.28%

6.60%

Undated

All periods

100%

Dadaga

100%

Lu-kala Gududu

80.93%

21.51%

78.49%

Governor Other

56.26%

0.73%

Unavailable

31.46%

11.74%

130.33

68.17

Total (shekels)

161.50

37.96

9.30

407.26

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

Payers The texts identify some payers of á -related silver by name or patronymic and others additionally by occupation, familial affiliation, or the foreman under whom they worked. Among those

–––––––––––––––––

185

E.g., BPOA 7 1783 (ŠS 5; Umma) obv. 1-2: 2 ( u ) 6 ( d i š ) g u r u š u 4 1 ( d i š )- š è / á g u l - l a b a l a - a ; MVN 16 901 (ŠS 5; Umma) obv. 1-2: 1 ( a š ) 1 ( b a r i g ) š e g u r / á g u l - l a ; MVN 6 294 (date broken; Girsu) rev. v 3’ & 8’: 1(diš) gu4 á gul-la šeš-kal-la / 2(diš) anše á gul-la gìr ur-mes.

86

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

identified by occupation, the following appear: two foremen (Dada and Arad-mu)186, a silversmith named Kaya,187 a blacksmith named Lu-dingira,188 a blacksmith group (s im u g -n e ),189 and perhaps a plot manager named Šeš-kala.190 Evidence from previous discussions indicates that fishermen, gardeners, and sesame plot managers also made silver payments related to á . When familial affiliation serves as a means of identification, the texts invoke more often the name of the father191 than that of the brother.192 The text NABU 1989 95 12 (ŠS 7 vii) provides the one example of a payer, Ur-Eanna, identified by his foreman Lu-duga. Administration of Payments The efforts to reconstruct the administration of á -related payments have achieved mixed results. Akala, the first major recipient, received one large payment from the governor. The second major recipient Dadaga received some payments from the payers as recorded in the texts BIN 5 136 (Š 45/AS 2) and SAT 2 453 (Š 45/AS 2). Dadaga received other payments via the foremen, who had first collected the silver from the payers and then passed it on to him with or without the registration by Ur-Šara the archivist beforehand.193 The last two major recipients, Lu-kala and Gududu, took their payments from the payers. 3.7. Silver Payments from Professionals (Table 3.7) In addition to the silver payments linked to specific industries and products studied above, occasional silver payments came from professionals, whose spectrum of activities in the Umma corpus remains as yet unreconstructed. Table 3.7 in the appendix indicates that the majority of such payments from the professionals appear designated as (repaid) arrears, lá -NI (s u -g a ). Although several more informative texts connect these arrears to people authorized to make withdrawals (lú -n íg -d a b 5 -b a ),194 the lack of details does not allow one to probe further into the question of whether the arrears resulted from insufficient deliveries of products or from other unfulfilled obligations. Recipients Table 11 shows that Akala (Š 33-43) and Gududu (ŠS 7-IS 3) each received the highest percentage of the silver payments coming from professionals during their respective periods. Although Lu-kala’s share appears modest, he still received the largest share from the year AS 3 to the year ŠS 6. Dadaga received but a fraction of the payments attested between the years Š 44 and AS 2. The recipient of the largest percentage of payments from this period, an otherwise unidentified Utu-ulgal, received 210 shekels of silver from the governor in the text BiOr 8 52 (AS 1).195 The governor received three payments that totaled 10.21 shekels of silver in the text SNAT 401 (AS 8) (obv. 7, 11, 13; rev. 1).

––––––––––––––––– 186

Respectively MVN 14 200 (Š 44); SAKF 72 (IS 1 vi). BCT 2 75 (ŠS 7 vi). 188 BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i). 189 Santag 6 333 (IS 1 v). 190 SAKF 72 (IS 1 vi). 191 SAT 2 453 (Š 45/AS 2); SAT 3 1583 (ŠS 5); NABU 1989 95 12 (ŠS 7 vii); SAKF 61 (ŠS 7 xi); TJAMC IOS 26 (pl. 55) (ŠS 9 diri); StBibFran. 4 7 (IS 1 vi); MVN 14 191 (IS 1); UTI 3 2144 (month x). 192 MVN 14 200 (Š 44). 193 See respectively MVN 14 200 (Š 44); MVN 20 62 (Š 47). Identification of Ur-Šara in the earlier text as the wellknown archivist is based on parallelism with texts discussed in §3.2-4. 194 SNAT 286 (Š 42/AS 6); BIN 5 122 (Š 43 x); BPOA 7 2074 (Š 47); SNAT 378 (AS 7); UTI 4 2880 (ŠS 2). 195 Quoted in §1.4. 187

87

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD Table 11: Recipients of silver payments from professionals Period Recipient Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

99.38%

Dadaga

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

All periods

39.38% 35.75%

Gududu

79.82%

Governor

15.21%

Other

Total (shekels)

Undated

31.54%

Lu-kala

Unavailable

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

60.05%

2.98%

17.72%

0.62%

0.57%

14.52%

2.46%

1709.26

349.72

67.13

81.43

2207.54

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

Payers The texts attest to the governor as a frequent and important payer. He paid a total of 1,585.67 shekels to Akala in several silver payments as follows: 300 shekels in the year Š 33 (MVN 14 154), 125 shekels in Š 34 (YOS 4 262), 217.67 shekels in Š 37 (Umma 95), 33 shekels in Š 38 (OLP 4 17-70 no. 40), and 910 shekels in Š 42 (BIN 5 109). The last payment of 910 shekels represents the single largest payment of silver attested in the evidence. From the year Š 46 to AS 1 (BiOr 8 52), the governor made multiple payments totaling 210 shekels to Utu-ulgal, as mentioned above. None of these texts contains further details about the governor’s payments, and that lack of evidence leaves open the questions concerning where the governor obtained such a large amount of silver and why he gave it to these two recipients. The same governor, Ur-Lisi, did receive some silver during the same period (i.e., Š 33-AS 1) when he made these payments, but his receipts add up to just over 150 shekels.196 The governor of Umma received silver payments from a variety of sources,197 but the sum of his receipts during the entire period from Š 33 to IS 3, 719.4 shekels, amounted to just a fraction of what the four major recipients—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu—collected. Moreover, the aggregate amount of silver that the governor paid out far exceeded his receipts in the same period, as noted in the case of Ur-Lisi above. This contrast raises the question of where the governor could have obtained the extra silver beyond the modest amounts of his receipts attested in the Umma corpus. This study proposes one explanation that the governor might have received some silver from sources outside Umma. The so-called gift texts from Puzriš-Dagan record that the administrators of the royal treasury there bestowed silver rings upon foreign guests, members of the royal family and their entourage, state officials and their dependents, professionals, and other unidentified

–––––––––––––––––

196 197

See the first two texts in the next note. The governor received the following payments: BM 106557(Š 34)—8 shekels of irrigation fee; Santag 6 107 (AS 1)—144 shekels from animal husbandry; Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. i 9-16—205 shekels from the merchant Ur-Dumuzida; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 26-27—1.67 shekels from the merchant Ur-Dumuzida; SNAT 407 (AS 8 iii)—23.33 shekels from grain cultivation + 1.33 related to labor + 3.73 related to mun-gazi; SNAT 401 (AS 8)—4.75 shekels from grain cultivation + 6.88 from animal husbandry + 10.21 from professionals + 11.33 shekels from unidentified sources; BPOA 1 856 (ŠS 4)—12 shekels of irrigation fee; Ledgers pl. 23 13 (ŠS 5) rev. 16-18—284.67 from unidentified sources; UTI 5 3347 (IS 3)—2.5 shekels from an unidentified source.

88

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

individuals. The receipts took place either in Puzriš-Dagan or in cities nearby (Nippur and Urusagrig), and the value of each gift ranges from several to dozens of shekels of silver.198 One text, CT 32 25 BM 103439 (ŠS 6 i), mentions that the governor of Kutha (located north of Nippur) was granted six silver rings that weighed seven shekels each. Despite the lack of direct evidence, one could argue that the governor of Umma might have received some silver from the treasury in Puzriš-Dagan, which functioned as a branch of the royal treasury in the capital city of Ur (Paoletti 2008). One may also infer that the silver rings disbursed as gifts in these texts might have come as taxes from separate provinces of the Ur III kingdom. Thus, the two-way movement of silver between the central government and the provinces corroborates the redistributive nature of the Ur III economy. Another explanation for the governor’s additional silver revenue may involve the temple households in Umma. Individuals offered silver artifacts to gods as ex-voto gifts separate from the silver payments made to the Umma government, but these gifts still appeared to fall under the control of the governor.199 If this observation proves verifiable, it may indicate that the governor retained access to the coffers of the gods in Umma, and such a situation would hark back to the Early Dynastic period. The rest of the payers fall into several categories. One category would comprise craftsmen and professionals, such as the following: doctors (Urzu200), potters (g u ru š b á h a r 201), fullers (UrIškur202 ), leather workers (Akala203), brewers (Ur-Enki,204 Ur-mes,205 Ur-gipar,206 Lugal-balasig,207 and two anonymous208), and blacksmiths (Ur-Zabalam209 ). Another category described as administrative or religious personnel would include foremen (Ušmu,210 Duga,211 and Huwawa212), kitchen administrators (Akala213 and Še š-kala214), scribes (A.KA,215 Dingira,216 and Kugani217), priests (gudu-priests Ur-nigar218 and Lugal-isa;219 an anonymous lú -m a h 220 ), attendants (g ìr-s è g a ) waiting on the King Amar-Sin,221 and people authorized to make withdrawals (lú -n íg -d a b 5 b a 222). The third category comprises doorkeepers (ì-d u 8 ; Ur-Emah) and boatmen (m á -la h 5 ; Lugal-magure), and both professions appear attested in the text Bull. Buffalo SNS 11-2 146 13 (Š 39) (obv. 2’, 6’).

––––––––––––––––– 198

Michalowski 1978; Sallaberger 1999, 240-252; Paoletti 2008. A brief discussion of the ex-voto gifts from the Umma merchants appears in §5.5. The author is planning to publish an article on the administration of these temple treasures in Umma. 200 BPOA 6 949 (Š 41). 201 MVN 14 154 (Š 33). 202 Umma 82 (Š 45/AS 2); Santag 6 67 (Š 45/AS 2). 203 AAS 72 (Š 46). 204 Aleppo 444 (Š 44). 205 YOS 4 308 (Š 48 v). 206 AOS 32 C16 (AS 4). 207 AOS 32 C16 (AS 4). 208 Christie’s 20001207: 8 (ŠS 3 xii); Santag 6 309 (ŠS 6). 209 SNAT 401 (AS 8) rev. 1, but the payment worth zero. 210 BIN 5 329 (Š 47). 211 SNAT 401 (AS 8) obv. 7. 212 Santag 6 328 (ŠS 9 xii). 213 AOS 32 C16 (AS 4). 214 MVN 14 175 (IS 2 vi). 215 BIN 5 143 (Š 39). 216 BIN 5 122 (Š 43 x). 217 SNAT 401 (AS 8) obv. 11. 218 AOS 32 C16 (AS 4). 219 SNAT 401 (AS 8) obv. 13. 220 MVN 5 85 (IS 2). 221 Designated as g ì r - s è - g a d a m a r - d s u e n - k a - m e and including a kitchen administrator, two brewers, and a gudupriest in AOS 32 C16 (AS 4). 222 BPOA 7 1817 (Š 45/AS 2); BPOA 7 2074 (Š 47); SNAT 378 (AS 7) obv. ii 16; TJAMC IOS 1 (pl. 49) (ŠS 7). 199

89

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

The payments from these payers, modest in general, seldom exceed twenty shekels of silver each. Regarding the use of these payments, the text AOS 32 C16 (AS 4) specifies the silver as the mašdare’a tax paid to the governor. Administration of Silver Payments The evidence from the records of these professionals proves too tenuous to reconstruct the administration of the payments in general, but a comparison of two separate records of the same payment, which happen to have survived, provides an opportunity to trace the journey of a particular silver payment from a fuller to one of the major recipients Dadaga. From these two texts quoted earlier in §3.1, Santag 6 67 (Š 45/AS 2) and Umma 82 (Š 45/AS 2), one may reconstruct the following course of events. Ur-Iškur, the fuller, owed the Umma government eight shekels of silver as arrears and proceeded to pay them back. He first submitted the silver to Ikala (perhaps his supervisor). Ikala then passed it on to Ur-Šara (the well-attested archivist bearing the same name). Ur-Šara had this transaction written down on a tablet with the remark to transfer the silver to the account of Dadaga, and then had it impressed with his own seal.223 This situation appears in Santag 6 67. Afterward, Ikala conveyed this payment to the final recipient Dadaga. Upon receiving the payment, Dadaga had it recorded alongside his other receipt in a summary tablet, which survived as Umma 82 and spells out the role of Ikala as the conveyor. The following illustration may illuminate the process: Dadaga 4 3

4Ikala ? Supervisor 1

Ur-Šara Archivist

2 1 Ur-Iškur Fuller

Figure 11: Administration of silver paid by a fuller. 1, 2, 3, 4

Movement of silver Order of movement

3.8. Silver Payments from Groups (Table 3.8) A special category of text details silver payments from a group of individuals. Such texts share the striking feature that the name of an individual follows each silver payment (k ù -b a b b a r PN). The individuals counted in one text, as Table 3.8 summarizes, may fall between several and dozens but can reach 3,610 in the text TCL 5 6166 (no date). As for the nature of these payments, the silver dealt with outstanding arrears, for example, in the text BCT 2 84 (no date). The designation, lá -NI sila-a g á l-la , “arrears on the street (i.e.,

–––––––––––––––––

223

Another text, AOS 32 C16 (AS 4) in Table 3.7, also attests to the registration of payments by the archivist Ur-Šara before their transfer to the account of Lu-kala. Note that in this case, the seal actually impressed belonged to the son of Ur-Šara, Ur-Nungal the scribe.

90

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

outstanding),” indicates that the payers had fallen short of their obligation toward the Umma government as required by their positions,224 even though their positions remain unknown. In the text TCL 5 6166 (no date), 3,610 eren-people each had to pay between 0.02 and 0.07 shekel of silver.225 Given the many payers and the small amount of a single payment, the payments in this case might represent a tax imposed on the general population. For most of the silver coming from these groups of individuals, however, the underlying rationale remains unclear. Some texts carry sporadic notes that allow a glimpse of the origin or the intended use of the payments. For example, the text BCT 2 84 (no date) records nearly 400 shekels of silver as outstanding arrears (lá -NI s ila -a g á l-la ) due from more than ten people. The text UTI 3 2020 (ŠS 5 ix) describes silver taken out of a leather bag (š à k u š < d u 1 0 > -g a n -n a -ta ), which had stored individual payments. Payments in the text OrSP 6 60 Wengler 48 (Š 38 viii) appear marked as “silver of the temple in KI.AN (a town located in the Umma province).”226 Payments in the text Santag 6 282 (ŠS 4 ix) originated from the district of Apisal, and those in the text MVN 20 199 (no date) came out of the (royal) palace (é -g a l-ta è -a ).227 Other texts describe the expenditure of the collected silver as follows: celebrating the Grand Festival (e z e m -m a h ),228 making a standard,229 exchanging for gold (k ù k ù -s ig 1 7 ),230 defraying losses related to gold (k ù ì-b í-z a k ù -sig 1 7 ),231 purchasing wool (k ù síg sa 1 0 -a ),232 or paying the price of donkeys (s á m a n š e ).233 The text MVN 2 23 (ŠS 6 diri) supplies comprehensive information on the spending of the payments and records silver expended to meet the following needs: (1) as offerings to gods (obv. ii 10-16); (2) as the price of “red” gold (sá m k ù h u š-a ; rev. i 1-3, 7-23); (3) as payment to a singer in Tummal234 (rev. i 4-6); and (4) as payment to an unnamed governor in Nippur (rev. i 22-23). Recipients The majority of the records of these group payments do not either specify the recipients or preserve the names of the recipients. Among the four major recipients, Akala remained the

––––––––––––––––– 224

See the discussion about l á -NI in §2.3 and s i l a - a g á l - l a in note 122 above. Most of these people were members of the royal sector according to Steinkeller forthcoming b. One has to wait for a full study of this text by Steinkeller to appreciate his argument. In any case, his conclusion will have little impact on the analysis here because of the modest amount of silver (80.33 shekels) involved. 226 Noted as kù é KI.ANki-ka (rev. 20). As listed in Edzard and Farber 1974, 97-98, gods and goddesses such as Dumuzi, Geštinana, Gula, Nin-e’e, Nin-ura, and Šara appeared all associated with KI.AN. One cannot tell whose temple this line refers to. 227 For é - g a l , see note 298 below. 228 Umma 79 (Š 47). 229 AnOr 1 287 (no date). 230 SAT 3 1238 (ŠS 1). 231 SAT 3 1849 (ŠS 7). Van de Mieroop follows CAD I-J, s.v. ibissû, in accepting the meaning “restitution for a loss sustained” for i - b í - z a used in Ur III documents, adding that “[p]erhaps the loss is due to the use of the gold standard, as the discrepancies between gold and silver standards may cause loss”; see Van De Mieroop 1986b, 10 n. 29. 232 AnOr 7 125 (AS 1). 233 UTI 3 2050 (ŠS 7 i). 234 MVN 2 23 rev. i 4. 2 ( d i š ) é - g a l [ k i u r - é - m a h - t a ] / 5. u r - d s u e n n a r [ š u b a - t i ] / 6. š à t u m - a l x (TÙR)k i [...]. An earlier text, MVN 15 390 (Š 37 vii), mentions 43 singers who left Umma for corvée labor in a project at Tummal (rev. xi 19), which Steinkeller forthcoming b identifies as the construction of a royal palace during the second half of King Šulgi’s reign. Yoshikawa proposes that Tummal was located midway between Nippur and Šuruppak and identifies it with Tell Dlihim; see Yoshikawa 1989. Tummal hosted a prominent sanctuary of the goddess Ninlil, spouse of the main god Enlil, but offerings to Enlil and the moon-god Nanna/Sin are also attested. The most celebrated event there, the so-called Tummal Festival, took place in month viii from the year Š 47 on but in month vi or vii in the preceding years. Participants of this festival included not only the king, his entourage, and court officials, but also foreign emissaries mostly from places east of the Tigris River. For all this, see Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 131-143 and Sharlach 2005. Tummal was also the focus of the funerary cult of King Ur-Namma and served as the most important administrative center in the kingdom after the capital city of Ur (Steinkeller, ibid.). A branch of Puzriš-Dagan, the livestock clearinghouse, operated in Tummal as well (Sallaberger, ibid.). 225

91

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

recipient of the largest percentage of the group payments during his period Š 33-43. Dadaga had no attested receipts. Instead, a gendarme (à g a -ú s ) of the governor, who received forty-three shekels of silver in the year AS 1 (AnOr 7 125), replaced him as the recipient of the largest percentage between the years Š 44 and AS 2. In the similar case of Gududu, someone named UrŠulpa’e emerged with a receipt of forty-eight shekels in the year ŠS 7 i (UTI 3 2050) as the recipient of the largest percentage for the period ŠS 7-IS 3. Considering the preponderant share of payments without a recorded or preserved recipient from the two periods, however, one cannot exclude the possibility that Dadaga and Gududu might have remained the major recipients for these two periods. The major recipient during the period AS 3-ŠS 6, Lu-kala, took less than 4 percent of the silver payments attested, as the remaining payments do not spell out or preserve the names of the recipients in the records. Table 12: Recipients of group silver Period Recipient Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

Undated

All periods

100%

Dadaga Lu-kala

3.28%

Gududu

3.68%

Governor Other(s)

42.52%

Unavailable

57.48% 101.12

Total (shekels)

605.33

29.88%

1.55%

96.72%

66.44%

98.45%

360.66

160.64

1118.65

2346.40

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

Payers The evidence identifies the payers of group payments by occupation or social status (é re n ), classified as follows: (1) Workers and administrators in agriculture: plowing assistant (š à -g u 4 ), chief plot manager, majordomo (2) Workers and administrators in animal husbandry: shepherd, cowherd, animal fattener, chief livestock administrator (3) Producers of cash crops: gardener, fisherman (4) Craftsmen: silversmith, carpenter (n a g a r), metal worker (tib ira ), reed worker (a d KID), brewer (5) Temple personnel: gudu-priest, steward (a g rig ), watcher (ig i-d u 8 )235 (6) Various administrators: foreman, overseer, kitchen administrator, scribe, secretary, chief granary officer (7) Local officials: mayor (8) Royal attendants: cupbearer, throne-bearer (9) Other professionals: forester, doorkeeper, singer, merchant, gendarme (10) Unclassified: é re n 236

–––––––––––––––––

235 236

MVN 2 23 (ŠS 6 diri); for the meaning of i g i - d u 8 as a cultic person, see Bauer 1972, 353. TCL 5 6166 (no date).

92

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

The payers of the group payments undertook a wide spectrum of occupations, most of which have emerged in previous discussions. The amount that comes from a single payer varies from less than one shekel, as in the text TCL 5 6166 (no date), to 120 shekels of silver, as attested in the text BCT 2 84 (no date). No evidence has indicated a correlation between the social or economic status of an occupation and the amount of silver that comes from payers, who undertook that occupation. For example, in the text OrSP 6 60 Wengler 48 (Š 38 viii), a mayor (h a -z a -n u m ) paid two shekels of silver (obv. 7), which amounted to half what a metal worker (tib ira ) paid, as recorded in the same text (obv. 6). Nor does any consistency appear among payments made by people from the same occupation. For instance, three overseers (a g a r 4 n íg in ), recorded in the text MVN 2 23 (ŠS 6 diri), made individual payments of one, three, and five shekels of silver (obv. i 3, 5-6). Administration of Payments Some evidence suggests that an intermediary administrator first collected the payments from the individual payers and then passed silver to a recipient. This case emerges in three texts, OrSP 6 60 Wengler 48 (Š 38 viii), SAT 3 1238 (ŠS 1), and MVN 1 250 (ŠS 2 xii). A person named Ur-Šara, likely the well-known archivist, functioned as the collector in the first and the third text. Meanwhile, other evidence also shows that individual payers directly submitted their payments to a recipient.237 3.9. Silver Payments from Unidentified Sources (Table 3.9.A and B) The silver payments studied so far exhibit features that enable one to link them to a specific industry or to separate them out as a distinct group. Still, about 200 payments remain in evidence, and these payments do not fit into a category heretofore advanced for classification either because the payment itself does not bear a connection to a specific industry or because its payer appears anonymous or unidentified by occupation. The texts refer to the payments from this group as lá -NI su -g a , “repaid arrears,” or m u -DU, “delivery,” or both, without further specification. Beneficiaries of the m u -DU payments include the king and his spouse238 and the governor.239 On occasion, the texts may refer to silver paid as a substitute for products (k ù x), such as the following: an unidentified herb,240 garments,241 beer,242 tin,243 gold,244 or the g ú n -tax obligation.245 The smallest payment, according to the text YOS 4 290 (AS 5), had a value of 0.05 shekel of silver and was associated with a boatload of bitumen (k ù m á é sir). Sporadic payments of silver, ranging from one to four shekels, appeared either to pay the mašdare’a tax246 or to fund the Gu’edena standard presumably in the Umma city (§4.3).247 The texts attest to payments of the bala-tax too.248

––––––––––––––––– 237

DoCu EPHE 251 (Š 36); AnOr 7 125 (AS 1); UTI 3 2050 (ŠS 7 i); Torino 2 659 (ŠS 7 xi); Nik. 2 410 (no date). OrAnt 22 203 HSM 911 523 (ŠS 2). 239 Torino 2 657 (ŠS 5 x). 240 Read as g i š ÚR×A.⌈HA⌉ in ASJ 18 79 11 (Š 47) obv. 1, but as g i š ÚR×Ú in BPOA 6 201 (Š 47) obv. 1. They certainly record the same silver payment. 241 Santag 6 324 (ŠS 8 i): l á -NI s u - g a t ú g ; UTI 5 3076 (IS 1): l á -NI s u - g a [ t ú g ] u š - b a r - b i 2 ( u ) . 242 BCT 2 73 (Š 44) & JCS 54 10 67 (month vi): k ù k a š . 243 YOS 4 290 (AS 5): k ù AN.NA. 244 See k ù ( - b a b b a r ) k ù - s i g 1 7 / k ù h u š - a in YOS 4 290 (AS 5); MVN 10 185 (ŠS 7 xii); MVN 20 201 (ŠS 8 xii). 245 Babyl. 8 Pupil 5 (ŠS 5): l á -NI s u - g a g ú - n a - k a m . 246 OrSP 47-49 197 (Š 37 xi); YOS 4 270 (ŠS 3 diri). 247 BPOA 6 1012 (Š 41 iv). 248 AAS 77 (Š 36)—30 shekels; UTI 3 2011 (ŠS 6)—32 ⅓ shekels; MVN 4 168 (month ix)—1 shekel. The juxtaposition of é - g a l k u 4 - r a , “entering the (royal) palace,” and š à b a l a - a , “within b a l a ,” in UTI 3 2011 makes it 238

93

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

The text BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i) records an unusual transaction. Among the silver payments that Gududu collected to pay the mašdare’a tax in order to finance the Akiti festival, three payments bear the following description: m á š d a m -g à r g á -g á , “to apply the ‘merchant’s interest’.”249 The one payment with the amount preserved amounts to one mina and came from Šara-kam, whom one may identify as the merchant with the same name attested elsewhere250 because of the interest clause and the substantial amount of silver involved. This payment may indicate that Gududu had borrowed silver in order to pay this tax, which the governor later delivered to the crown (§4.1). Four payments made in gold appear in these texts in the following amounts: 0.6 shekel (= 4 shekels of silver), one shekel, twenty shekels (= 140 shekels of silver), and thirty shekels (= 450 shekels of silver).251 Akala the major recipient took the payment worth twenty shekels from someone named Lugal-ezem252 for an unspecified reason. The last payment of thirty shekels of gold constituted the assets (s a g -n íg -g u r 1 1 -ra -k a m ) of a short balanced account that does not name the person to whom the account belonged. Purchases with Silver Silver payments from unidentified sources may appear specified as prices of or for the purchase of a wide range of products. One may classify the products attested here and those associated with the silver payments discussed before as follows: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Metals: “red” gold,253 regular gold,254 bronze,255 copper,256 tin257 Livestock: oxen,258 sheep259 Raw materials: bitumen,260 roof beams,261 reeds262 Plants and vegetables: tamarisk and an unknown product (LAM),263 onions264 Craft goods: g i š k á b -k u l containers,265 doors,266 boats267

––––––––––––––––– certain that these two expressions are synonymic; see also §5.3.I. Thus one can recognize the payment described as é g a l k u 4 - r a in AAS 77 as a bala-tax payment to the crown. 249 Steinkeller has noted that some Ur III texts mention the “merchant’s interest” without specifying the exact rate, and suggested it might correspond to the conventional rate on loans (i.e., 33% for grain, 20% for silver); see Steinkeller 2004a, 109 n. 63. For a general discussion on the phrase m á š g á - g á , see Garfinkle 2004, 9-16. 250 In a text dated only three year later, AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-227 (IS 3 i), the merchant Šara-kam offered at least 10 linen pieces (obv. 3-4) for the deity Alim-mah. 251 See in order AUCT 2 173 (Š 40 v); SAT 3 1216 (ŠS 1 vi); Ledgers pl. 36 20 (Š 42); MVN 1 251 (ŠS 5 vi). 252 Discussed in note 93 above. 253 MVN 14 39 (Š 40 x) in Table 3.5.E: k ù z ú - l u m ... s á m k ù h u š ; SA 56 (ŠS 6 x) in Table 3.5.A & 3.6, with k ù m u n and (k ù ) á designated as s á m [ k ù ] h u š - a ; MVN 2 23 (ŠS 6 diri) in Table 3.8: s á m k ù h u š - a (rev. i 3, 11, 20); UTI 3 2011 (ŠS 6): s á m k ù h u š - a é - g a l - l a k u 4 - r a ù z i - g a d i d l i . 254 AAS 71 (Š 46): kù- s i g 1 7 - t a s a 1 0 - a . 255 Ledgers pl. 23 13 (ŠS 5) rev. 16: s á m [...] z a b a r u r u d a š u - n i r - r a . 256 MVN 20 155 (ŠS 1 vi) in Table 3.3: k ù š e s a g - t u k u / s á m u r u d a ; SNAT 389 (AS 7) in Table 3.4: k ù s í g ... s á m u r u d a n a g g a g i š i g d g u - l a (obv. 4-5, rev. 7); Ledgers pl. 23 13 (ŠS 5) rev. 16: s á m [...] z a b a r u r u d a š u n i r - r a ; JCS 31 242 16 (IS 1): s á m u r u d a . 257 SNAT 389 (AS 7) in Table 3.4: k ù s í g ... s á m u r u d a n a g g a g i š i g d g u - l a (obv. 4-5, rev. 7). 258 Nik. 2 406 (ŠS 2 vi) in Table 3.3: s á m g u 4 ; SAT 2 124 (Š 35): g u 4 - a s a 1 0 ; Aleppo 456 (Š 37): g u 4 - a s a 1 0 ; MVN 13 761 (AS 5 iii): n í g - s á m g u 4 - t a . 259 MVN 20 68 (AS 6) in Table 3.4: s á m u d u n a m - e n - n a - k a . 260 SAT 2 337 (Š 43): s á m é s i r é - a . 261 AUCT 2 287 (Š 36): g i š ù r s a 1 0 . 262 BIN 5 145 (Š 47) & MVN 20 21 (Š 47): g i - t a s a 1 0 - a . 263 Santag 6 52 (Š 43): LAM g i š k i r i 6 d u 6 u r - n a - a - k a s a 1 0 - a (obv. 1); g i š š i n n i g g i š ì - š u b - k a s a 1 0 - a (obv. 3). 264 SAT 3 2123 (Š 41 vii): s u m - s i k i l - k a s a 1 0 ; Ledgers pl. 37 21 (ŠS 4) rev. 14: n u m u n s u m - s i k i l - k a s a 1 0 . 265 BPOA 7 2693 (ŠS 6) : s a m x (SA10) g i š k á b - k u l . See Steinkeller 1991b for a discussion of the name of this container, which was used as a case for weapons, mirrors, musical instruments, and bowls. 266 YOS 4 277 (IS 2): n í g - s a 1 0 g i š i g .

94

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

(6) Others: people,268 gem stones,269 orchards,270 the gún-tax271 (7) Unspecified272 All the above products appear on the list of purchases with silver that C. Wilcke (2008, 267281) has compiled from Ur III Umma documents, except for tamarisk, the unknown product (LAM), g i š k á b -k u l containers, gem stones, orchards, and the g ú n -tax. Recipients Table 13 shows that the three officials—Akala, Dadaga, and Gududu—continued to receive the majority of silver payments from unidentified sources during their respective periods. The explanation for the small share that Lu-kala received in the period AS 3-ŠS 6 may lie in the many such payments that do not name a recipient. During this period Lu-kala still appeared as the recipient with the third largest percentage of receipts, after the governor in the first place, who received 284.67 shekels of silver (including 14.67 shekels as the price of bronze and copper) in the text Ledgers pl. 23 13 (ŠS 5), and a certain Ur-Bau known by name alone, who took 120 shekels, as recorded in the text OrAnt 22 203 HSM 911 523 (ŠS 2). Table 13: Recipients of silver from unidentified sources Period Recipient Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

6.57%

2.08%

Undated

89.99% 0.29%

Gududu

88.16%

Governor

16.31%

0.74%

0.15%

Other(s)

27.96%

5.45%

23.05%

1.14%

79.48%

Unavailable

0.74%

4.56%

54.07%

7.87%

20.37%

1646.63

710.36

1813.94

336.08

330.92

Total (shekels)

All periods

71.01%

Dadaga Lu-kala

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

4837.93

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

The evidence identifies other recipients either by name or familial affiliation or both. Among the recipients further identified by occupation, scribes appear common and usually sealed their tablets. Additional attested recipients include the following professions: archivists, foremen, majordomos, shepherds, silversmiths, barbers (š u -ì), and sanga-priests. Recipients who took in significant amounts of silver included the following: Akala son of Lugal-nesage took in 234.94 shekels of silver to make purchases (n íg -s á m -k a sa 1 0 -a ), as recorded in the text BIN 5 332 (Š 38), and Kuli took in 202 shekels, as recorded in Santag 6 359 (no date).

––––––––––––––––– 267

SAT 2 178 (Š 37) obv. 2: s á m m á i n i m - k u 5 - n i . Nik. 2 401 (ŠS 2) obv. 8: s á m á r a d ; Babyl. 6 53 A (IS 2?) in Table 3.4: s á m d a m d u m u l ú - s a 6 - g a 3 - a - b a (rev. 6). 269 BPOA 6 77 (Š 45/AS 2): s á m n ì r - i g i ù m u š - g í r . 270 MVN 11 170 (AS) obv. 7: k ù s á m g i š k i r i 6 b a l a a - š à l á - t u r - k a . 271 Aleppo 462 (ŠS 9): s á m g ú - n a ; Aleppo 463 (IS 1) in Table 3.4: s á m g u 4 g ú - n a . 272 Nebraska 44 (AS 3) in Table 3.3: k ù s a m x (SA10) (rev. iii 237); BIN 5 332 (Š 38) obv. 6: ( k ù ) n í g - s a 1 0 - k a s a 1 0 - a ; Rochester 130 (ŠS 9) obv. 1-3: s á m s í g ? - š è ú - g u - d é - a - š è ; Ledgers pl. 37 21 (ŠS 4) rev. 12: ( k ù ) n í g samx-ma a-pi4-sal4ki. 268

95

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Payers and Administration of Payments The texts identify the majority of payers by name alone. Since no successful prosopographical research for the Ur III period can be conducted with the evidence of names only, the broader role of these payers in the institutional economy of Umma remains unexplored. Other payers may have supplementary identifications according to family affiliation (father, brother, or husband), but such information does not boost our understanding of a payment. The lack of details about the payer, the recipient, or the payment itself thus makes it difficult to reconstruct the setting of these payments. 3.10. Identification of Four Major Recipients The statistics in Tables 1-13 have shown that for most types of silver payments, four officials— Akala (Š 33-43), Dadaga (Š 44-AS 2), Lu-kala (AS 3-ŠS 6), and Gududu (ŠS 7-IS 3)—received in turn the largest percentage of the silver for a specific period of time (shown in the parentheses). When somebody else replaced them as the recipient of the largest percentage of payments in a particular category during their respective periods, either the total amount of silver involved appears modest, or a significant part of the silver payments of that category do not spell out or preserve the name of the recipient. Such exceptions, therefore, do not affect the proposed conclusion. After examining the silver payments from merchants below in chapter 5 and calculating the global share that these four officials received (Table 20 in §6), the case for their control over the silver revenue in Umma will become more compelling. This study will also postpone an analysis of the silver revenue in Umma and a ranking of its sources until chapter 6, after the study of merchants in chapter 5. For the present time, the evidence suggests that irrigation fees account for the largest portion of the silver revenue. Concerning the identification of these four officials, that of the first major recipient Akala proves the easiest. His seal impressions identify him as a scribe and as the son of Ur-nigar the chief livestock administrator (k u š 7 ).273 His patronymic identifies him further as a member of the gubernatorial family in Umma. In the year AS 8, about a dozen years after he stopped receiving the majority of the silver payments in Umma, Akala succeeded his brother Ur-Lisi as governor and stayed in office until ŠS 7 ii (Dahl 2007, 63).274 The next major recipient Dadaga never sealed his receipts of silver payments and had nothing more than his name recorded there. His uncommon name, however, helps to identify him as a brother of Akala, the first major recipient, and as another son of Ur-nigar the chief livestock administrator. Long after his last connection to a significant amount of silver, in ŠS 7 ii, he succeeded Akala as governor of Umma and remained in power until at least the year IS 3. Since he carries the title scribe in his seal inscriptions on receipts of non-silver goods, one may propose that he received silver payments under the same title (Maeda 1990, 72; Dahl 2007, 69-73). The identification of Lu-kala turns out controversial. He had a popular name in Umma and, like Dadaga, never sealed his receipts of silver. T. B. Jones and J. W. Snyder (1961, 330-336) identify him as a son and subordinate of Ur-e’e, whose activities concerned mostly the Apisal district and who, as one knows now, was a brother of Akala and Dadaga (Figure 12 below). Snell cautions against identifying Lu-kala as a son of Ur-e’e because at least two people named Lu-kala appear in the evidence attested under different titles.275 H. Waetzoldt (1986, esp. 330) echoes the

–––––––––––––––––

273

Examples of his seal impressions appear in the notes to Table 3.2.A; 3.3; 3.4; 3.5.A; 3.5.E; 3.6; 3.7; 3.8; 3.9.A. As noted by Maeda 1990, 75, his name tends to be spelled as a - a - k a l - l a instead of a - k a l - l a in documents dated after he became governor. Wu suggests that “[t]he ensi seal of Akala was probably made in the court of Ur so the writing of his name as a - a - k a l - l a may have been according to the Ur/Puzriš-Dagan orthography”; see Wu 1995, 134. Still, Wu’s suggestion does not explain the spelling a - k a l - l a that appears on a number of Akala’s governor seals, such as the one rolled on BRM 3 47 (AS 8). 275 Snell 1982, 78-81. In addition to the Lu-kala in charge of silver but without a title, Snell takes into account another Lu-kala with the title k a - g u r 7 , “chief granary officer,” in the Girsu text ITT 3 5494 (Š 43). The author cannot find the 274

96

3. S ILVER R EVENUE OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

same concern as Snell and quotes a seal inscription as evidence for the identification of Lu-kala as yet another son of Ur-nigar and thus as a brother of Akala and Dadaga. Yet no scholar has published a copy of this seal inscription.276 On the other hand, Dahl (2007, 109 n. 384) points out that the appearance of the patronymic Ur-nigar instead of Ur-e’e in the seal inscriptions of Lukala might have resulted from a copying error. A search in the database BDTNS supports the conclusion of Dahl. Including the text TCS 1 277 cited by Waetzoldt above, a total of seventeen texts have a seal inscription that claims Lu-kala as a son of Ur-nigar the chief livestock administrator. Fifteen of them appear published only in transliteration.277 In the two texts published with a cuneiform copy, CHEU 99 and MVN 13 357, the authors misread the name u re 1 1 -e as u r-n i 9 -g a r. Therefore, the present study would agree with Jones and Snyder on the identification of Lu-kala as a son of Ur-e’e and a nephew of Akala and Dadaga. The seal impressions of Lu-kala on non-silver documents identify him as a scribe,278 which means that he bore the same title once carried by his two uncles in their capacity as the major recipient of silver. The last major recipient, Gududu, rolled his seal but once on his receipt of silver, MVN 16 1043 (IS 3), and that seal inscription identifies him as a scribe and as a son of the then governor Dadaga, who had been the major recipient of silver payments Š44-AS 2. This unique reference and his unusual name may render his identification beyond doubt (Dahl 2007, 81-83). Figure 12 illustrates the relationship among the four major recipients of silver payments in Umma: Ur-nigar

Ur-Lisi

Akala1

Dadaga2

Ur-e’e

Gududu4

Lu-kala3

Figure 12: Genealogy of the four major recipients of silver payments in Umma. Numbers in superscript indicate the chronological order in which they appear attested. Adapted from Dahl 2007, 45 fig. 6.

3.11. Monetary Role of Silver The foregoing process of identifying and categorizing the sources of silver revenue in Umma has shown that silver played a role as a means of payment. People used silver to pay for the fee concerning irrigation, to settle arrears of tax deliveries in kind (lá -NI su -g a ), and to substitute for certain products, especially cash crops, demanded by the government (k ù x). Silver payments from grain cultivation and animal husbandry appear more often designated as repaid arrears, while those related to cash crops (salt, sesame, g a z i, m u n -g a z i, fruits, vegetables, fish, and bird plumage) more frequent as substitutive payments. One explanation for this phenomenon takes into account the varying degrees of control that the Umma government exercised over separate

––––––––––––––––– other text that Snell cites, OrSP 15: 60: 54, in which a person named Lu-kala appears under the title š a x - d u b , “archivist”. 276 The seal inscription appears on TCS 1 277 (no date) and reads l ú - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 . A copy of the tablet was published without the seal inscription; see Sollberger 1966, Plate XVI. 277 SNAT 410, 460, 495; Rochester 197, 198; UTI 6, 3826; BPOA 1 1009, 1122, 1135, 1137; BPOA 2 2074, 2131, 2143, 2220; Nisaba 23 140. 278 Maeda 1996, 254; Dahl 2007, 105-106, 111. For the two seals of Lu-kala with different iconography but the same inscription, see Pomponio 1992.

97

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

industries. Since grain cultivation and animal husbandry constituted the two fundamental and important industries in the Umma province, the government organized the production in these two industries and provided the necessary infrastructure, which included the irrigation system, manpower, animals, implements, and other means of production (such as seeds and fodder). In return, the government demanded deliveries of products at prescribed volumes, or quotas, from the workers and their supervisors. When the people did not meet their quotas for a certain period, they could settle the resultant arrears with a silver payment, as the findings here testify. The cash crops, on the other hand, had a less centralized and less controlled means of production outside the oversight of the Umma government. Although the producers still operated under a quota system, they appear to have had the option of delivering in kind or paying in silver, as suggested earlier by Steinkeller (2004a, 106-108) and supported here by the present study of the silver payments concerning cash crops. Silver served both to discharge tax obligations involving specific products and to pay off corvée work (á ) owed to the government. Attestations of the more specific phrase, á b a la (-a ), links this payment to the bala-obligation imposed on the workforce in the Ur III kingdom (§2.2). The evidence remains silent concerning the appearance or quality of the silver payments studied in this chapter. While functioning as a means of payment, silver often simultaneously fulfilled the role as a standard of value that measured itself against the labor and various products for which it substituted. The result finds expression in the following formula: x k ù -b a b b a r A-b i y, “x amount of silver, its (value in) A product y quantity.” Products attested include barley, wool, livestock, animal parts (sheepskins, sinews, or carcasses), butter, and sesame. The texts do not yield any clue about the basis of determination for the conversion rates between silver and the products or labor, and even the rate for the same product (wool) in the same document appears to change.279 We will revisit this formula and other related ones in §5.1.A. The industry of handicrafts generated fewer silver payments compared with those of agriculture and animal husbandry. Payments from potters, carpenters, metalsmiths, and reed workers thus appear attested but once for each group, and those from silversmiths appear just twice (§3.8-9). The accident of discovery has had an impact on the uneven distribution of the evidence and may explain the different frequencies of attestation for these kinds of silver payments. On the other hand, the decentralized, home-based organization of these crafts, as Steinkeller (1996) has argued from the case of the Umma potters,280 may also help to explain the imbalance of silver payments from the craftsmen. Considering “that the overwhelming majority of Ur III craftsmen worked at home, in their own workshops, and that their professional activities were to a large extent independent from the state” (ibid., 252), the quota system that underlay the silver payments from agriculture, animal husbandry, and fishing might not have applied to the industry of handicrafts.

–––––––––––––––––

279

In AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-666 (AS 2), the conversion rate is 0.1 shekel of silver per mina of wool in rev. ii 1720, but decreases to 0.09 shekel of silver per mina in the immediately following lines rev. ii 21-24. 280 For a counterargument, see Dahl 2010.

98

CHAPTER FOUR

SILVER EXPENDITURES OF THE UMMA PROVINCE

Chapter 3 has demonstrated that four officials from the gubernatorial family— Akala (Š 33-43), Dadaga (Š 44-AS 2), Lu-kala (AS 3-ŠS 6), and Gududu (ŠS 7-IS 3)—collected the greatest percentage of the silver payments in Umma over their respective periods of time as specified in the parentheses. This chapter now traces the silver expenditures of these four officials, which reflect the spending of the silver revenue in the province of Umma. In addition to possessing the characteristics of a silver text as defined in chapter 1, a disbursement needs to meet one of the following three criteria in order to qualify as made by one of the four officials: (1) The disbursement specifies the silver or gold281 concerned as coming from any of the four officials (k i-PN-ta ); (2) it labels the silver or gold in question as an expenditure of any of the four officials (z i-g a PN); or (3) it comes from the expenditure section (šà -b i-ta ... z i-g a ) of a balanced account (n íg -k a s 7 -a k ) belonging to one of the four officials. Some transactions do not bear the hallmarks listed above, but one can still identify them as expenditures of the four officials because of their parallelism to attested texts. Expenditures thus identified will appear with an explanation. The overwhelming amount of data thus collected concerns Akala, Lu-kala, and Gududu, while a meager portion of it deals with Dadaga. This chapter covers the expenditures of the four officials except for their disbursements of silver and gold to the merchants, which the next chapter will examine. 4.1. Silver Expenditures for Paying Royal Taxes (Table 4.1) Two types of taxes designated for the king and occasionally for a lady named Nin-kala (a junior wife of King Šulgi),282 m a š-d a -re -a lu g a l/n in 9 -k a l-la and k a š-d é -a , constitute the largest expenditure of Akala, Lu-kala, and Gududu. The name of the first tax, mašdare’a, derives from the compound verb d a ... ři (Selz 1995) and means “goat led at one’s side.” In Ur III documents, however, it refers to a tax that the provinces paid to the king rather than to an offering dedicated to the divine, even though the mašdare’a-payments financed the cultic celebrations in the capital city Ur (see the three akiti-festivals discussed below) under the direction of the king (Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 160-161, 170).283 The name of the other tax, kašde’a, means “beer pouring,” and may represent a metonym for banquets in connection to gods, kings, queens, and prominent officials (Michalowski 1994b, 29-30). Evidence from Nippur indicates that deliveries labeled as kašde’a lugal, “beer pouring of the king,” went to a festival in Tummal.284 In Ur III records, both taxes feature but are not limited to payments in gold or silver. Regarding the silver texts from Umma, gold appears more often in the payments of the kašde’a tax than those of the mašdare’a

––––––––––––––––– 281

This study considers gold as a type of silver in the broad sense, for gold also served as a means of payment and a medium of storage, and in Ur III Umma texts, the value of gold often appears converted into silver; see discussion under Evidence and Methodology in chapter 1. 282 See most recently Weiershäuser 2008, 211-226, esp. 218-222 with previous literature. 283 The mašdare’a tax is also attested as one of the several taxes imposed on the periphery and could be paid in livestock, timber, sesame, wine, silver, etc.; see Steinkeller 1991a, 32. 284 Products delivered included flour, bread, domestic animals, drinking vessels, bitumen, and resins; see Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 143-144, 169.

99

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

tax, yet the value of the gold payments is converted into silver. The mašdare’a tax has far more attestations than the kašde’a and names both the king and his consort as beneficiaries, while the kašde’a tax designates the king alone as the beneficiary. Among the four major recipients of silver, Akala alone paid the kašde’a tax. His payment in the year Š 42 comprised the following items: a gold cup weighing one mina, an unidentified wooden object (g i š a -g i 4 ) inlaid with lapis-lazuli and gold, and twenty-two shekels of gold.285 They add up to a total value of 892.39 shekels of silver. The established relationship between Akala and the kašde’a tax in this case allows one to deduce that the same type of tax recorded in an earlier text, Ledgers pl. 39 22 (Š 38), may thus indicate a payment by Akala despite the absence of his name therein. The payment in that earlier text includes a gold cup of the same weight and the same amount of gold but replaces the wooden item with silver nose-rings weighing 920.08 shekels for oxen (k ù k ìri-g u 4 ) and another type of ring whose name and weight have broken off. Concerning the mašdare’a tax, Akala and Lu-kala together accounted for the large majority of the payments made in silver and gold by the province of Umma.286 Payments from Akala tend to feature both gold and silver, and the silver usually appears in the form of rings or nose-rings. Akala’s earliest payment dates to the year Š 37 and included 40.67 shekels of gold and 244 shekels of silver.287 Several years later in Š 41, his payment rose to fifty shekels of gold and 305.33 shekels of silver, and then in Š 42 to forty-seven shekels of gold and 490.67 shekels of silver.288 The explicit association of Akala with the mašdare’a tax in these three instances may lead to the identification of more such payments from him, even though their records do not mention his name. These proposed payments amounted to the following: 734.03 shekels of silver in Š 33 and 34, forty-seven shekels of silver in Š 35, 734.03 shekels of silver in Š 36; sixty shekels of gold plus 368.03 shekels of silver in Š 38 and Š 39, and sixty-three shekels of gold plus 368.03 shekels of silver in Š 40.289 Akala collected the highest percentage of the silver revenue in Umma from the year Š 33 to Š 43 (§3) and paid the largest amount of mašdare’a tax to the king and the queen for every year of the same period except Š 43. Compared with the payments made by Akala, payments made by Lu-kala featured less gold and replaced regular gold (k ù -s ig 1 7 ) with “red” gold (k ù h u š -a ). Lu-kala’s payments were connected to three festivals as follows: e z e m š e -sa g 1 1 -k u 5 ,290 e z e m š u -n u m u n -n a , 291 and e z e m -m a h .292 Parallelism with other Umma texts suggests that the festival e z e m š e -s a g 1 1 -k u 5 may stand for á -k i-ti še -s a g 1 1 -k u 5 ,293 and e z e m š u -n u m u n -n a may represent á -k i-ti e z e m šu -n u m u n . 294 The celebration of these three festivals might have taken place in the capital city Ur in their corresponding months: month i (š e -s a g 1 1 -k u 5 ), month vii (šu -n u m u n -n a ), and

–––––––––––––––––

285

Ledgers pl. 34 19 (Š 42). See also Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 167-169. Note that his Table 59 in ibid., vol. 2, 99-100 summarizes examples of mašdare’s in silver and gold instead of only what the four major recipients paid; cf. Table 4.1 in the appendix of this book. One of Salaberger’s examples, Orient 16 37 (ŠS 1 x), comes not from Umma but Puzriš-Dagan; see the provenience of this text in BDTNS (text abbreviated as Orient 16 49 37) and CDLI (both databases accessed September 2012). 287 NABU 1989 95 2 (Š 37). 288 OrNs 55 134-135 4 (Š 41); Ledgers pl. 34 19 (Š 42). 289 See respectively SAT 2 82 (Š 33); Princeton 2 411 (Š 34) = BCT 2 71(Š 34) rev. 14-16; Ledgers pl. 29 16 (Š 35); BPOA 6 1361 (Š 36); Ledgers pl. 39 22 (Š 38); MVN 11 165 (Š 39); MVN 11 166 (Š 40). 290 MVN 4 138 (ŠS 2); UTI 6 3680 (ŠS 3). Although both texts describe the payment as mašdare’a instead of mašdare’a lugal, their parallelism with UTI 6 3688 (AS 6) shows that the expression mašdare’a lugal can be abbreviated as mašdare’a. 291 UTI 3 2209 (AS 7); see also the preceding note. 292 UTI 6 3688 (AS 6). 293 In BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i) rev. 18, Gududu received ten silver payments labeled as m á š - d a - r e - a á - k i - t i š e - s a g 1 1 k u 5 - š è , “mašdare’a for the akiti-festival in month i.” 294 In ArOr 62 238 I 867 (Š 41), Akala received twenty shekels of gold designated as m a š - d a - r e 6 - a á - k i < - t i > e z e m š u - n u m u n , “mašdare’a for the akiti-festival in month vii”; in AAS 149 (Š 43 vii), Akala received two minas of silver specified a s m a š - d a - r e 6 - a á - k i - t i e z e m š u - n u m u n . 286

100

4. S ILVER E XPENDITURES OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

month x (e z e m -m a h ) according to the Ur calendar (also known as the Reichskalender) (Cohen 1993, 140-144, 150-157, 174-175; Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 160-194). The later the festival fell in the year, the more valuable the mašdare’a payment became. For instance, the payment for the earliest festival consisted of silver nose-rings weighing 120 shekels and small silver rings (h a r d id i) of the same weight (240 shekels in total), the payment for month vii increased by about sixty shekels of small silver rings (300 shekels in total), and the payment for month x included twenty shekels of “red” gold (equivalent to 300 shekels of silver) and 300 shekels of silver in the form of nose-rings or small rings (600 shekels in total). The incumbent Umma governors, Ur-Lisi until the year AS 8 and Ayakala thereafter, appear identified as the recipients, with their seals rolled on the receipts of the mašdare’a payments from Lu-kala. Although the evidence does not testify to a single year in which Lu-kala paid the mašdare’a tax for all the three festivals in the months i, vii, and x, it suggests that he did so. In that case, the annual maximum of the mašdare’a tax payments from Lu-kala would have reached an approximate sum of 1,140 shekels of silver,295 or about one-third more than the annual maximum paid by Akala in the year Š 42. The mašdare’a tax paid by Akala, Lu-kala, and Gududu featured gold with the silver: Regular gold appeared in the payments from Akala, and “red” gold appeared in the payments from Lu-kala and Gududu. The maximum annual value of the mašdare’a tax attested amounted to 861.25 shekels of silver in the case of Akala (Š 42), 661.67 shekels in the case of Lu-kala (AS 6), and 1,009 shekels in the case of Gududu (ŠS 1). Akala paid an additional due designated as kašde’a to the crown. In the two years for which evidence of the kašde’a occurs, its value exceeded that of the contemporaneous mašdare’a tax payments in the year Š 38 and more than doubled it in Š 42. These two taxes account for the largest share of silver that Akala, Lu-kala, or Gududu disbursed in their respective periods of control over the silver revenue in the Umma province. In the case of Lu-kala and Gududu, the Umma governor tended to appear as the recipient of the tax payments, which suggests that the governor might have assumed the responsibility of delivering it to the crown. Lu-kala made additional mašdare’a payments related to other special events. For instance, ten shekels of “red” gold from him were linked to Tummal in the year AS 8;296 the next year, he paid twenty shekels of “red” gold when King Šu-Sin ascended onto the throne.297 4.2. Other Silver Expenditures for the Crown (Table 4.2) In addition to the two taxes mašdare’a and kašde’a paid to the king, Akala and Lu-kala incurred other, sporadic expenditures that benefitted the crown. In the year Š 34, Akala spent twenty shekels of silver on a statue of the king; later in Š 39, he expended two shekels of gold destined for the (royal) palace (é -g a l-š è ).298 Likewise in AS 4, Lu-kala expended 260 shekels of silver described as “entering the (royal) palace” (é -g a l-la k u 4 -ra ) for the sake of “fattened sheep that were not returned” (m u u d u -n ig a -n u -g u r-ra -šè ).299 An expenditure called ig i-k á r, “provisions,” appeared intended for members of the royal family. In the year ŠS 1 (SNAT 442), the governor received from Lu-kala a silver ring weighing twenty shekels for the provisions of someone named Iddin-Dagan, perhaps a member of the royal

––––––––––––––––– 295

Total value of the payments in three texts: UTI 6 3688 (AS 6); UTI 3 2209 (AS 7); UTI 6 3680 (ŠS 3). For Tummal, see note 234 above. 297 Respectively UTI 4 2658 (AS 8 ix); OLZ 17 241 (AS 9). 298 Respectively BCT 2 71 (Š 34) rev. 13; MVN 11 165 (Š 39) obv. 6-8. As discussed in §4.1, the inclusion of a mašdare’a payment in these two texts leads to the deduction that they record the expenditures of Akala. Concerning the term é - g a l , although the Umma texts do not specify whether it refers to the king’s palace or the governor’s palace, the present evidence seems to indicate the king’s palace, because some texts that mention deliveries as the bala-tax to the king describe them as entering the palace at the same time (contra Sharlach 2004, 48). See also §5.3.I. 299 AOS 32 D04 (AS 4). 296

101

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

family, in Uruk.300 Later in ŠS 3 (MVN 16 837), Lu-kala contributed five shekels of “red” gold to cover the provisions for the visit of an anonymous queen to the town of Zabalam (ig i-k á r n in z à b a la m k i -š è g in -n a ). Gifts (n íg -b a ) for royal messengers and foreign dignitaries are attested among the expenditures of Lu-kala. In the year AS 4, Lu-kala dispensed a silver ring weighing twenty shekels to a man from Mari named Šu-Dagan.301 Later in AS 6, Lu-kala offered a one-mina silver ring as a gift for Lugal-andul, presumably a royal messenger, who had announced in Umma the victorious news of the destruction of Šašrum.302 Foreigners and royal heralds likewise appear among the recipients of silver rings in the so-called gift texts from Puzriš-Dagan (Michalowski 1978).303 The Umma governor sealed the receipts of these provisions and gifts except the receipt that recorded the silver ring given to the Mari man Šu-Dagan, which does not bear any seal impression. 4.3. Silver Expenditures for Cultic Purposes (Table 4.3) Recurring expenditures for cultic purposes involve three standards: the Gu’edena standard in the Umma city (š u -n ir g ú -e d e n -n a š à u m m a k i ), the Gu’edena standard in the Apisal district (š u n ir g ú -e d e n -n a a -p i 4 -s a l 4 k i ), and a standard of the governor (š u -n ir é n si-k a ). “In some cases such š u -n ir’s were weapons ...; in other cases they bore emblematic animals ...” (Selz 1997, 191 n. 79). Three of the four major recipients made an annual disbursement of four shekels of silver for the standard in the Umma city, as follows: Akala in the years Š 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 41, and 43;304 Lu-kala in the years AS 4, 6, and 7;305 and Gududu in the year ŠS 8.306 Lu-kala paid an additional three out of the four shekels of silver for this standard in ŠS 2.307 The standard in Apisal could cost one and a half shekels a year: Dadaga paid for it in Š 44, Lu-kala in AS 4 and 7, and Gududu in ŠS 8.308 The same standard might have also cost one shekel or three shekels of silver.309 The disbursements for the two standards in the Umma city and the Apisal district during AS 4 and ŠS 8 appear labeled as “withdrawals of the New Year” (n íg -d a b 5 z à-m u -k a ). The governor’s standard, the most expensive one, required six shekels of gold and eleven shekels of silver a year. Akala made the disbursement in the two years Š 37 and 39.310 The text, SAT 3 1309 (ŠS 2 iv), indicates that the silversmith Ur-Šulpa’e received the four shekels of silver that Lu-kala and another person had first paid for a Gu’edena standard. The modest amounts of silver and gold involved in the transactions suggest that the metals did not serve as raw materials for the manufacture of the standards. Incorporating evidence of other allocations (flour and dates) for the Gu’edena standard, Salaberger (1999, 248-250)

–––––––––––––––––

300

A Puzriš-Dagan account dated to the same year, TLB 3 24 (ŠS 1 xii), attests to expenditures of sheep and cattle as libation offerings (k i - a - n a g ) for Iddin-Dagan in Uruk, side by side with expenditures of sheep for Bizu’a and Babati, who were siblings or cousins of Queen Abi-simti; see Michalowski 2004, 225-235, and 2005. 301 Santag 6 127 (AS 4). Šu-Dagan was one of the approximately two dozen people from Mari attested in Ur III sources; see Owen 1992, 129; Michalowski 1995, esp. 184. Some of those people served as envoys or messengers. 302 UTI 4 2315 (AS 6). 303 See also §3.7. 304 BCT 2 71 (Š 34); Ledgers pl. 29 16 (Š 35); NABU 1989 95 2 (Š 37); Ledgers pl. 39 22 (Š 38); MVN 11 165 (Š 39); AAS 80 (Š 41); Santag 6 58 (Š 43). Although only two of them, NABU 1989 95 2 (Š 37) and AAS 80 (Š 41), specify that Akala expended the silver, one can deduce that he made the same kind of expenditure in other texts based on the parallelism between these two and the others. 305 SAT 2 775 (AS 4); SAT 2 963 (AS 6); BIN 5 69 (AS 7). The parallelism between SAT 2 963 (AS 6) and the other two texts allows us to deduce that Lu-kala was the expender in the former text. 306 SET 173 (ŠS 8). 307 SAT 3 1309 (ŠS 2 iv). 308 See respectively MVN 10 194 (Š 44); SAT 2 775 (AS 4) and BIN 5 69 (AS 7); SET 173 (ŠS 8). 309 See respectively SAT 2 288 (Š 40) and Aleppo 466 (no date). 310 NABU 1989 95 2 (Š 37); AAS 80 (Š 41).

102

4. S ILVER E XPENDITURES OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

concludes that the disbursements concerning that standard took place in month iv as part of the overall harvest offering.311 Lu-kala and Gududu incurred several haphazard expenditures. Two such expenditures included silver for the provision of adornment for gods. In the two years AS 5 and ŠS 1, Lu-kala disbursed 0.25 shekel of gold for the earrings (n íg -g e š tu ) of the goddess Lamma-Amar-Sin and three shekels of silver for a toggle pin (tu -d i-d a ) of the goddess Nin-ebgal.312 Gududu spent four shekels of “red” gold as perhaps an offering at harvest (n íg -b u ru 1 4 -d a k u 4 -ra , “entering with crops”).313 4.4. Silver Expenditures for Making Purchases (Table 4.4) The four major recipients disbursed silver for making purchases in amounts varying between 2.11 and over fifty shekels. The evidence may specify these expenditures as the prices of donkeys,314 bitumen,315 and “red” gold,316 or for the purchase of resins,317 onion seeds,318 reeds,319 bird plumage,320 and copper.321 All except bird plumage appear on the list of products purchased with silver that Wilcke (2008, 267-281) has compiled from the Ur III Umma corpus. The texts may also designate the silver concerned as purchase funds (n íg -sa m x -m a ),322 in one case for the purchase of goods delivered as the bala-tax to the crown323 and in another for products destined for Puzriš-Dagan and Šuruppak.324 The texts spell out the names of those who received silver disbursements from Akala, Dadaga, and Lu-kala and identify the occupations of some recipients, who included a sanga-priest and the governor Ayakala. 4.5. Other Silver Expenditures (Table 4.5) The four officials, Akala in particular, made occasional disbursements of silver or gold, but the use of those payments remains either obscure or undisclosed. The amount of one disbursement ranged from 0.44 shekel of silver to the silversmith Ur-Šulpa’e325 to 219 shekels to a person named Lugal-ezem.326 The second official, Dadaga, disbursed eighty grains of silver to the same silversmith Ur-Šulpa’e, for the probable manufacture of an object.327 Two expenditures of Lukala, the third major recipient of silver in Umma, went to cities outside the Umma province: one payment worth five shekels of “red” gold entered the city of Uruk together with tablets

––––––––––––––––– 311

Evidence in support of Sallaberger’s point appears in the text MVN 3 349 (no date), which mentions 5 ½ shekels of silver concerning the Gu’edena standard (rev. 25) that adds to the sá-du11 offering (s á - d u 1 1 - e d a h - [ h a ] ). 312 SACT 2 119 (AS 5); MVN 8 248 (ŠS 1). For a systematic study of toggle pins, see Klein 1983. 313 Nik. 2 399 (IS 2). 314 UTI 3 2050 (ŠS 7 i) rev. 11: s á m a n š e . 315 BPOA 7 1749 (Š 37): s a m x (SA10) é s i r < é > - a - š è . 316 SA 56 (Pl. 96) (ŠS 6 x) obv. 8: s á m k ù - h u š - a . 317 BPOA 1 1005 (ŠS 5) obv. 2: k ù š i m - a s a 1 0 - a . 318 MVN 11 166 (Š 40) obv. 4: n u m u n s u m - s i k i l s a 1 0 - a . 319 Aleppo 447 (Š 33 x): g i s a 1 0 - s a 1 0 - d è . 320 BPOA 6 998 (Š 48): p a - m u š e n s a 1 0 - s a 1 0 - d è . 321 BCT 2 71 (Š 34) obv. 1: u r u d a s a 1 0 - a . 322 JCS 40 112 3 (Š 38 vii): k ù n í g - s a m x (SA10)-m a . 323 MVN 13 833+834 (Š 39): n í g - s á m - m a b a l a - a . 324 YOS 4 286 (Š 34 vi): n í g - s a 1 0 é - s a g - d a - n a š u r u p p a k k i - š è . 325 BRM 3 148 (Š 47 ix), which notes that the silversmith was expected to repay (s u - s u - d a m ). 326 Ledgers pl. 29 16 (Š 35); see note 93 above for further details about Lugal-ezem. 327 BRM 3 148 (Š 47 ix): obv. 1. i g i - 3 - g á l 2 0 š e k ù - b a b b a r / 2. k i d a - d a - ⌈ g a ⌉ - t a / 3. u r - d š u l - p a - è k ù - d í m / 4. s u - s u - d a m ; rev. 1. ⌈ i t i ⌉ d l i 9 - s i 4 / 2. m u ú s - s a k i - m a š k i b a - h u l ; seal: u r - d š u l - p a - è / d u m u k ù - s a 6 - g a / k ù - d í m . “⅓ (shekel) 20 grains of silver / (received) from Dadaga / Ur-Šulpa’e the silversmith / (is) to repay (it) / month ix / year after Kimaš was destroyed / Ur-Šulpa’e / son of Ku-saga / silversmith.” Judged from the occupation of Ur-Šulpa’e, this text may document a fictitious loan as discussed in Garfinkle 2004, 4 and represents a work order that Dadaga placed with the silversmith, to whom the silver was “loaned” in return for his future transfer of a manufactured artifact.

103

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

concerning an estate,328 and the other payment of thirty shekels of silver went to Nippur.329 The fourth major recipient, Gududu, spent eighteen grains of gold and seventeen grains of silver on an ambiguous object (d a lla e m e 5 -g a l).330 An expenditure of the second major recipient, Dadaga, presents a rare case. In the text CST 542 (IS 2 vi), Dadaga appears to make an interest-bearing loan of forty shekels of silver to a person named Lugal-dubla’e in the presence of eight witnesses. A note, s i-ì-tu m n íg -k a s 7 -a k / d u 1 1 -g a g i-n a , “carried-over balance (§2.3) of the balanced account—verified,” appears after the name of the borrower and before the list of the witnesses. If this note indicates the origin of the silver involved, it follows that the four major recipients of silver might have had the authority to loan out the silver that they had collected. 4.6. Balanced Accounts on Silver (Tables 4.6.A & B) So far this study has garnered evidence of silver scattered in various administrative records from Umma and studied it as either the revenue or the expenditures of the provincial government. Several examples of a special balanced account, however, have survived, and these examples record the silver accounts (n íg -k a s 7 -a k k ù -g a ) belonging to the four major recipients and juxtapose their revenue with expenditures. The following text, although fragmentary, provides the earliest, unequivocal attestation of such a special account: OLZ 17 241 (AS 9) 1’. 5(diš) gín kù huš-a 15-ta

2’. kù-bi 1(diš) ma-na 1(u) 5(diš) gín 3’. im é-šu-sum-ma-da ⌈ku4⌉-ra 4’. šà unugki 5’. ⅓ ma-na kù huš-a 15-ta 6’. kù-bi 5(diš) ma-na 7’. máš-da-re-a dšu-dsuen lugal-e [àga] šu ti-a 8’. níg-kas7-ak kù-ga lú-kal-la

5 shekels of “red” gold, each (shekel equivalent to) 15 (shekels of silver), its (value in) silver 1 mina 15 shekels, entered together with the tablets of the estate in Uruk; ⅓ mina of “red” gold, each (shekel equivalent to) 15 (shekels of silver), its (value in) silver 5 minas, (as) the mašdare’a tax to King Šu-Sin who received the crown; a balanced account concerning silver of Lu-kala.

The colophon at the end identifies this text as a balanced account concerning the silver managed by Lu-kala the third major recipient. The two expenditures, of five shekels and twenty shekels of “red” gold respectively, formed part of his annual spending in the year AS 9, as discussed above. The last major recipient of the silver revenue in Umma, Gududu, likewise kept a balanced account to manage silver in his charge. The text Santag 6 340 (IS 2), his balanced account concerning m u n -g a z i, records two silver payments that totaled about eighteen shekels, as “charged to an account concerning silver” (n íg -k a s 7 k ù -g a ú g u b a-a -g a r).331 This account concerning silver may refer to his special account of silver. The most compelling and informative evidence of such a special account emerges from two texts, ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) and ZA 95 191 (IS 1) (D’Agostino and Pomponio 2005), which appear

–––––––––––––––––

328

OLZ 17 241 (AS 9) obv. 3’: i m é š u - s u m - m a - d a k u 4 - r a š à u n u k i . AoF 35 239 1 (ŠS 4). 330 Santag 6 336 (IS 1 xii). 331 Santag 6 340 (IS 2) rev. iii 8-10; the silver payments discussed at the end of §3.5.D. 329

104

4. S ILVER E XPENDITURES OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

itemized in Table 4.6.A and 4.6.B. Both texts have the format of a balanced account. The tablets have suffered damages at the beginning and the end and do not preserve the names of the people to whom they belonged. Yet a comparison of the expenditures in these two texts with those just discussed leads to the firm conclusion that they represent the balanced accounts of Gududu, the last major recipient of silver active during the period ŠS 7-IS 3, rather than the accounts of Ur-e’e, the top administrator from the Apisal district, as suggested by F. D’Agostino and F. Pomponio (2005, 172). Both texts feature a disbursement of four shekels of “red” gold as a harvest offering (n íg b u ru 1 4 -d a k u 4 -ra ), which appears elsewhere attributed to Gududu (§4.3). They include a number of expenditures characteristic of the other three major recipients: Akala, Dadaga, and Lukala. For instance, both texts register the mašdare’a tax to the king for three festivals (m á š-d a re -a lu g a l e z e m 3 [d iš ]-a -b a ); each tax payment consisted of 724 shekels of silver in the form of small rings and nose-rings plus five shekels of “red” gold (cf. §4.1). Both records contain two disbursements, one worth four shekels for the Gu’edena standard in the Umma city and the other worth one and a half shekel for the Gu’edena standards in the Apisal district (cf. §4.3). Once established that these two silver accounts belonged to Gududu, they add vivid details about two types of expenditures, n íg -b a “gifts” and ig i-k á r “provisions”, first attested in the case of Lu-kala. The text ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) records that Gududu distributed three silver rings that weighed forty shekels each as gifts for three people: (1) a cupbearer (s a g i), who escorted a statue of King Šu-Sin into the temple of Šara; (2) a “man of the crown” (lú -à g a ), who brought another statue of the king into the temple of Gula; and (3) a royal messenger (lú -k in -g i 4 -a lu g a l), who proclaimed the coronation of the new king Ibbi-Sin (rev. ii 24-iii 9). The incumbent governor first received the three rings from Gududu to give them out as gifts. In the following year IS 1, Gududu disbursed thirty-two shekels of silver as provisions for the governor Ayakala, who had died three years earlier (ZA 95 191 rev. iii 14-17). The two accounts testify to additional mašdare’a payments other than those associated with the three festivals celebrated in the months i, vii, and x in the capital city of Ur. The text ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) mentions two expenditures related to the succession of the throne. Gududu provided four shekels of “red” gold for the deceased king Šu-Sin buried(?) in Tummal332 and ten shekels for the newly enthroned king Ibbi-Sin (rev. ii 18-22). This corroborates the previous observation that in addition to the regular mašdare’a tax levied for the three festivals, the Umma province made ad hoc payments of this tax on special occasions (cf. §4.2). A new expenditure never attested before appears in ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) rev. ii 15-17, as Gududu expended four shekels of “red” gold destined for Nippur together with fish and vegetables (k u 6 -n isig -d a k u 4 -ra šà n ib ru k i ).333 Table 14 provides an overview of the expenditures of Gududu as documented in the two accounts discussed above. Table 14: Breakdown of Gududu’s silver expenditures in ŠS 9 and IS 1 Year

Paying mašdare’a tax

Disbursed to merchants

Gifts

Balancing deficit from year before

Others

Total value in silver (shekels)

ŠS 9

67.14%

11.52%

7.98%

5.01%

8.35%

1502.82

IS 1

55.30%

27.28%

0.00%

10.67%

6.75%

1444.89

These two accounts verify the sources of the silver revenue in Umma as identified in chapter 3. The revenue section (s a g -n íg -g u r 1 1 -ra -k a m ) of ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) enumerates the silver

––––––––––––––––– 332

See note 234 above. Fish was placed in the same group as vegetables instead of domestic animals because both were considered as nonbloody offerings; see Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 200. 333

105

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

payments that substituted for the following: barley, flour, butter, wool, m u n -g a z i, fruits, bird plumage, reeds, and labor (á ). In addition, silver appears paid as the price of sheep, goats, and oxen. The same section of ZA 95 191 (IS 1) lists payments of even more diversity that include the following: irrigation fee payments; silver paid in lieu of a wide range of products (barley, flour, sheep, goats, oxen, butter, wool, fruits, fish, and bird plumage) and the bala-obligation toward the king; and silver from gardeners, felters (tú g -d u 8 ),334 blacksmiths, gudu-priests, merchants, people authorized to make withdrawals, and the governor. These two texts thus provide a list of the categories of payments that corresponds to those studied in chapter 3.335 Thanks to their comprehensiveness, these two texts allow an estimate of the annual quantity of silver that moved through the Umma economy. The earlier text, ZA 95 175, documents a revenue totaling 1348.61 shekels of silver and expenditures adding up to 1502.82 shekels, with a deficit of 154.21 shekels of silver for the year ŠS 9. These numbers appear close to those for the next year IS 1, which show a revenue of 1276.81 shekels, disbursements amounting to 1444.89 shekels, and a deficit of 168.08 shekels of silver. Both years experienced a deficit slightly more than 10% of the annual revenue. These two sets of numbers, which date to the years of the last major recipient of silver, Gududu, may not reflect the circumstances when the other three earlier officials took charge of the silver revenue in Umma. For example, the annual expenditures of Akala, the first major recipient, peaked at more than 2585.14 shekels of silver in the year Š 38,336 and that total exceeded the annual maximum of Gududu in ŠS 9 by over one thousand shekels. Along with the four major recipients of silver, the district administrators in Umma kept special accounts on silver too. The chief livestock manager Ur-e’e, the de facto top official in the Apisal district, subscribed the silver account TCL 5 6045 (AS 8 xii). This text records a total revenue of 167.06 shekels from irrigation fee payments and from silver paid in lieu of bird plumage, fruits, and grain. Entries in the expenditure section show that Ur-e’e submitted most of his revenue (135.63 shekels) to the then major recipient Lu-kala. The son of Ur-e’e, Lu-Haya, a scribe in charge of twenty domain units in the same district, likewise had a silver account SNAT 518 (ŠS 7) ascribed to him (quoted in §3.1). Lu-Haya passed on to Gududu, the major recipient at that time, nearly all the 67.64 shekels of silver that he had received as irrigation fee payments and as the silver in lieu of bird plumage. These two accounts show that district officials would later submit the bulk of the silver payments they had received to one of the four major recipients. 4.7. Monetary Role of Silver and Procurement of Gold The expenditures of the four major recipients—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu—show that silver continued to perform as a means of payment and a standard of value but in a new economic sphere that involved the Umma provincial economy as a whole and the Ur III state. While producers, workers, or administrators in Umma made silver payments to the four major recipients to settle their accounts with the provincial administration, those four officials expended silver that they had collected to discharge the tax obligations of the Umma province toward the crown. As a standard of value, silver attested in the spending records of the four officials measured itself against one type of product alone—gold—rather than against the broad spectrum of agricultural and animal husbandry products as well as labor, as discussed in the previous chapter.

–––––––––––––––––

334

“[T]hese craftspeople made strings, ropes, different types of plaited straps, mats and similar products;” see Waetzoldt 2007, 112. 335 Chapter 3 considers no payment from these two texts except the irrigation fees due to the large number of lines broken or missing; cf. note a to Tables 20 and 21. 336 Total of JCS 40 112 3 (Š 38 vii) and Ledgers pl. 39 22 (Š 38); the latter lists expenditures made presumably by Akala.

106

4. S ILVER E XPENDITURES OF THE U MMA P ROVINCE

The expenditures imply that the four major recipients might have transformed some of the silver payments that they had first collected into a medium for storing wealth before their subsequent disbursement. While the silver payments examined in chapter 3 carry no description of their appearance, the silver disbursed by the four officials, such as the mašdare’a and the kašde’a tax or that silver spent to meet other demands of the crown, assumed three forms: coils (h a r), nose-rings for oxen (h a r k ìri-g u 4 ), and small coils (h a r d id i). One may explain this contrast through both aesthetic and practical concerns. The silver that the four officials delivered to the king or bestowed as gifts to dignitaries and foreigners would have required a regular yet pleasant appearance in the form of the coils or rings described. At the same time, these regular shapes might have facilitated the calculation of the weight of the rings or coils. In addition to silver, expenditures for the royalty featured gold or “red” gold, of which the amount peaked at 144 shekels in the year Š 38.337 Akala, alone among the four major recipients of silver, received one gold payment worth 20 shekels in Š 42.338 The variance between their receipts and expenditures of gold and the attestations of the purchase of gold with silver (§3.9) indicate that the four major recipients exchanged some of their silver revenue for gold. A silversmith named Ur-Šulpa’e might have helped in the procurement of the gold for he received thirty shekels of silver as the price of “red” gold in the city of Ur (MVN 2 23 rev. i 7-13). The Umma merchants played an important and key role in this process, which the next chapter will investigate.

––––––––––––––––– 337 338

Recorded in Ledgers pl. 39 22, an account presumably of Akala. See Ledgers pl. 36 20 discussed in §3.9.

107

CHAPTER FIVE

SILVER AND MERCHANTS

The Umma merchants (d a m -g à r) played a unique role in the circulation of silver in this province. They not only made many silver payments to the provincial administration, but also received from it large amounts of silver as part of their purchasing funds. In order to understand the two-way movement of silver between the merchants and the Umma government, however, this study goes beyond the transactions of merchants that involved silver and examines their activities as a whole, because in addition to silver, the merchants received from and supplied to the administration enormous quantities of other products. The textual evidence for this chapter, therefore, consists of both the silver texts and all the other records (administrative or otherwise) that bear on the merchants. The association of merchants with silver has also sparked debates about the existence and function of prices and markets in Mesopotamia at the end of the third millennium BCE. A study of the merchants will get entangled with these issues and, therefore, need to address them as well as the products involved in order to better explain the operations of the merchants. 5.1. Evidence and Terminology The data for this chapter comes from a search for the key word d a m -g à r in all the Ur III Umma texts available in the database BDTNS through the end of 2010. This search turned up a list of individuals and groups that carry the title d a m -g à r, or its plural form d a m -g à r-e -n e , with the records in which they appear. An unpublished tablet from the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, A 2697 (AS 8 vi), mentions the Umma merchant Ur-lugal unknown elsewhere (courtesy of P. Steinkeller). All together, 189 Umma texts attest to the title d a m -g à r compared with 206 records mentioned by S. J. Garfinkle (2010, 308 n. 5). The list includes sixty-one named merchants and about three dozen anonymous merchants and merchant groups. They all appear listed in Table 5.1 in the appendix with their documentation. The number of merchants named here almost doubles that of the merchants previously recognized (Neumann 1979, 24-27)339 and approaches the aggregate of sixty-seven as mentioned in one Umma text, TCL 5 6166 (no date) obv. 6. The Umma merchants appear most often in administrative texts, especially in receipts and balanced accounts, which testify to their receipt, disbursement, or conveyance of a wide range of products. In addition, some rosters list them alongside other professionals. Court records and sale or loan contracts frequently invoke them as witnesses. The merchants can appear in sale documents as the buyer or the seller. The evidence (see Table 15 below) concentrates on three

––––––––––––––––– 339

Additional differences between the list of merchants in this study and that of Neumann include: (1) This study reads the name l ú - š e - g á differently as l ú - b ù l u g - g á . (2) This study excludes a merchant named Šu-Erra attested in the text YOS 1 17 (Š 34), a votive inscription that identifies him as father of Lu-Inanna. Although this inscription comes from Umma according to Steible 1991, vol. 2, 190, this family might have been based in the neighboring Girsu province because the same Lu-Inanna reappears in an administrative text from Girsu, SAT 1 227 (AS 4 viii 20), which lists some domestic animals from him. (3) This study excludes Igi-dingirše (corrected as ér-dingir-šè) because of his uncertain Umma origin. Forde identifies him as a Puzriš-Dagan merchant without any explanation; see Forde 1963, 65. The tablet MVN 11 77 HSM 6346 (no date), which mentions this merchant (obv. 11), however, does not have an established provenience according to Dr. James Armstrong, former associate curator of the Harvard Semitic Museum.

109

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

merchants: Ur-Dumuzida, Pada, and Šeš-kala. Together they appear in about 30 percent of all Umma documents that attest to the title d a m -g à r and account for nearly 60 percent of the merchant accounts. The relative abundance of their records has allowed a prosopographical study to find texts in which they appear without the title d a m -g à r but identified with high confidence as the same three merchants. These additional texts appear in italics in Table 5.1. Table 15: Distribution of evidence among the Ur III Umma merchants Evidence General texts

a

Merchant accounts

b

Total

Ur-Dumuzida

Pada

Šeš-kala

Number (%)

Number (%)

Number (%)

Number (%)

189 (100%)

33 (17%)

15 (8%)

9 (5%)

42 (100%)

11 (26%)

8 (19%)

6 (14%)

Notes a Any Ur III Umma text that attests to the title dam-gàr. b See §5.1.A for terminology.

Of the sixty-one merchants attested in Umma, Ur-Dumuzida appears as the best documented one. The seal inscription of MVN 13 860 (IS 3) names him as the “merchant of the god Šara” (d a m -g à r d š á ra -k a ), which may indicate his affiliation with the temple household(s) of this god. His activities spanned twenty-six years from Š 38 to ŠS 6 and covered most of the same years that the Umma archive does.340 Some documents invoked his name as a patronymic until the year IS 3. Based on the evidence of his merchant accounts, the records concerning Ur-Dumuzida fall into three periods: (1) Š 38-AS 2 (thirteen years), during which we find no such account that belongs to him; (2) AS 3 i-ŠS 2 (nine years), from which all eleven of his accounts came; and (3) ŠS 3-6 (four years), which again saw no account of his. Alongside his sustaining business, Ur-Dumuzida had a prosperous family, which carried on the profession of merchants for at least three generations (Neumann 1993, 77-78; 1999, 49). Two of his sons, Ayakala and Ur-Šulpa’e, appear attested as merchants.341 He had at least two more sons, Ur-Ašar and Lugal-ursag, who might also have worked as merchants.342 According to the seal inscription of AR RIM 4 8 (Š 46), which reads u r- d d u m u -z i / d u m u lu g a l-z a r ? -[...] / d a m -g à r, the father of Ur-Dumuzi might have served as a merchant too. Even though this text does not identify Ur-Dumuzi (orthographic variant of Ur-Dumuzida) as a merchant, the context, which concerns the purchase of copper and bitumen with barley, indicates that he must have been the merchant in question here. Based on the attestation of Pada’s merchant accounts, his records fall into two periods: (1) Š 32-AS 2 (nineteen years), which saw no merchant account of his; and (2) AS 3-IS 1 (seventeen years), to which all his accounts are dated. Since Pada’s records do not identify him beyond his name and occupation, his family and institutional affiliation remain unknown. The name Šeš-kala turns up as one of the most popular names in the corpus of Ur III Umma with at least a dozen people in different administrative capacities so named. The popularity of this name has complicated a prosopographical study of Šeš-kala the merchant. As a result, his identification in texts that do not specify him as a merchant involves more uncertainty than in the

–––––––––––––––––

340

Neumann specifies that the activities of Ur-Dumuzida lasted from the year Š 36 to IS 1; see Neumann 1993, 79 n. 58; Neumann 1999, 49. Two problems exist with the evidence of Neumann: (1) He dates the text BIN 5 197 to the year Š 36 instead of Š 46 by mistake; and (2) his identification of Ur-Dumuzida as a d a m - g à r in BJRL 64 109 56 (IS 1) appears not convincing. 341 For Ayakala as a merchant and a son of Ur-Dumuzida, see respectively TJAMC IOS 1 (pl. 49) (ŠS 7) and Ledgers pl. 27 15 (ŠS 7); for the profession and patronymic of Ur-Šulpa’e, see respectively MVN 16 942 (ŠS 3) and MVN 13 860 (IS 3). 342 For Ur-Dumuzida as their father, see respectively MVN 16 718 (no date) and Rochester 136 (IS 2 xii); for Ur-Ašar as a merchant, see MVN 16 682 (ŠS 6); for Lugal-ursag as a merchant, see Rochester 136 (IS 2 xii).

110

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

case of Ur-Dumuzida and Pada. Šeš-kala operated for more than three decades. His activities began as early as in the year Š 22 and lasted at least until the end of the reign of King Amar-Sin (AS 9). As with Ur-Dumuzida and Pada, all his merchant accounts date from the year AS 3 on. Although other, major Ur III corpora also feature texts about merchants (Neumann 1979, 2131; Garfinkle 2010, 308 n. 5), the most informative evidence for their study comes from Umma, which has produced all but a few of the balanced accounts on merchants.343 Such accounts tend to have multiple columns and provide rich details about the products that the merchants traded and the administrators with whom they interacted. Scholars call this type of document either silver accounts or merchant accounts. The interchangeability between these two terms can cause confusion, and this book prefers the term merchant accounts according to the explanations below. 5.1.A. Silver Account versus Merchant Account J. B. Curtis and W. W. Hallo (1959, 106) describe silver accounts as “[balanced accounts] which designate the silver equivalents of all the listed commodities.” This means that in such documents, every non-silver product appears followed by an amount of silver equivalent to the value of that product, according to the following formula: x (quantity) A (product name) k ù -bi y, “x quantity of A product, its (value in) silver y amount.” Curtis and Hallo (ibid., 107) further observe that except for TCL 6 5045 (AS 8), the remaining fifteen silver accounts that they collected “are all merchants’ balanced accounts.”344 Since then, the two terms, merchant account and silver account, have become synonymous, even though not all silver accounts concern merchants. Snell (1982) has examined the most common type of silver account, the merchant account, and spelled out the four criteria that qualify a text as a merchant account (ibid., 36-40): (1) It must carry the subscription n íg -k a s 7 -a k “balanced account”; (2) silver must function as the unit of account, and the text must calculate only one total for the capital (s a g -n íg -g u r 1 1 -ra -k a m ), one for the output (z i-g a ), and one for the balance (lá -NI or d iri); (3) it must list all commodities priced in silver; and (4) it must include a merchant in the subscription. This study prefers the term “merchant account” to “silver account” as a more accurate term to designate silver accounts ascribed to merchants. Reference to a merchant account thus avoids confusion with the special account on the revenue received and expenditures made in silver by non-merchant senior administrators (§4.6). As pointed out above, moreover, not all silver accounts as described by Curtis and Hallo had to do with merchants. The following text illustrates an example of a merchant account from Umma: Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) obv. col. i 1. [...] 2. [...] 3. [si-ì]-tum 4. [mu] ⌈damar⌉-dsuen [lugal-e] ur-bí-lumki mu-hul 5. [x] zú-lum gur

... ... carried-over balance (from) the year “when King Amar-Sin destroyed Urbilum” (AS 2); ... dates

––––––––––––––––– 343

Curtis and Hallo 1959, 117; Young 1979, 196-197 n. 2; Snell 1982, 15-17. Of the sixteen silver accounts identified in Curtis and Hallo 1959, 117, all but one had been published before. Among these sixteen accounts, one came from Ur, three from Girsu, and the rest from Umma. It remains unclear why their table also includes the text TUT 121 (Š 30). A majordomo (š a b r a ) rather than a merchant subscribed this text, and not all the products enumerated therein are followed by a silver value.

344

111

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD 6. [kù-bi x] ⅓ gín 1(u) 7(diš) še [mu damar-dsuen lugal-e] ⌈ur⌉-bí-lumki mu-hul 7. [...] 8(diš)? [... x] kù še ⌈énsi⌉ [...] 8. ⌈1(diš)⌉ ma-na kù ⌈sám⌉ 9. ⌈gìr⌉ lú-d⌈nanna⌉ dam-[gàr] 10. 1(diš) ma-na kù ⌈sám⌉ 11. ⌈gìr⌉ ur-ddumu-⌈zi⌉-da ⌈dam⌉-gàr 12. ki lú-kal-la-ta 13. 1(géš) še gur 14. kù-bi 1(diš) ma-na 5(diš) gín 15. gìr Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6 16. ki énsi-ka-ta 17. 2(diš) 5/6 ma-na 2(diš) ⅓ gín kù-babbar 18. kù še kù síg é énsi-ka-ta 19. Blank line 20. šu-nígin 1(u) 2(diš) ⅓ ma-na 2(diš) ⅔ gín 2(diš) še kù-babbar 21. Blank line 22. sag-níg-gur11-ra-kam 23. šà-bi-ta 24. 8(diš) ma-na eren 25. kù-bi ⅔ gín 26. 1(diš) ma-na bulugx(ŠIM×ÙH) 27. kù-bi igi-6-gál 28. 3(diš) sìla šim-gána col. ii 1. [kù-bi igi]-4-gál 2. 1(diš) ½ ma-na NI-gi4-tum 3. kù-bi igi-6-gál 3(diš) ½ še 4. 1(diš) ma-na šim-IM 5. kù-bi 9(diš) še 6. 1(diš) ma-na šim-hi 7. kù-bi 9(diš) še 8. 1(diš) ma-na ar-ga-núm 9. kù-bi 9(diš) še 10. [1(diš)] ma-na en-HAR 11. kù-bi 3(diš) še 12. ⌈2(diš)⌉ ma-na dam-ši-lum 13. kù-bi 1(u) 2(diš) še 14. [1(diš)] ⌈sìla⌉ šim-GAM.GAM-ma kù-bi 3(diš) ½ še 15. ⌈1(diš)⌉ [sìla gu4-ku-ru kù-bi] ⌈1(u)? ½⌉ še 16. 5(diš) sìla pa-li kù-bi igi-6-gál 17. 2(diš) á dàra kù-bi ⌈2(u) 2(diš) ½⌉ še 18. 1(aš) 1(barig) 3(bán) naga si-è [gur]

its (value in) silver ⅓ shekel 17 grains, during the year “when King Amar-Sin destroyed Urbilum” (AS 2) ... silver (paid in lieu) of barley of the governor, 1 mina of silver as purchase price via Lu-Nanna the merchant, 1 mina of silver as purchase price via Ur-Dumuzida the merchant, from Lu-kala; 60 bushels of barley its (value in) silver 1 mina 5 shekels via Lugal-ebansa from the governor, 2 5/6 mina 2 ⅓ shekels of silver silver (paid in lieu) of barley and wool from the house of the governor, in total: 12 ⅓ mina 2 ⅔ shekels 2 grains of silver

the capital; from its within 8 minas of cedar resin its (value in) silver ⅔ shekel, 1 mina of resin its (value in) silver 1/6 shekel, 3 liters of resin its (value in) silver ¼ shekel, 1 ½ mina of resin its (value in) silver 1/6 shekel 3 ½ grains, 1 mina of resin its (value in) silver 9 grains, 1 mina of resin its (value in) silver 9 grains, 1 mina of resin its (value in) silver 9 grains, 1 mina of resin its (value in) silver 3 grains, 2 minas of resin its (value in) silver 3 grains, 1 liter of resin, its (value in) silver 3 ½ grains, 1 liter of resin, its (value in) silver 10 ½ grains, 5 liters of resin, its (value in) silver 1/6 grain, 2 ibex horns, its (value in) silver 22 ½ grains, 390 liters of sprouting alkali 112

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS 19. kù-bi igi-4-gál 1(diš) ½ [še] 20. 1(diš) sìla 1(u) 5(diš) gín ì-HI-nun-[na] 21. kù-bi 1(diš) gín igi-4-gál 22. iti pa4-ú-e ù iti ddumu-zi 23. mu damar-dsuen lugal-e ur-bí-lumki mu-hul 24.-obv. iii 23 (Omitted) 24. 1(bán) 2(diš) sìla lí-iq-tum al-la-ha-ru 25. kù-bi 1(diš) gín igi-6-gál ⌈6(diš)⌉ še 26. 3(aš) gú im-bábbar 27. kù-bi igi-6-gál lá 3(diš) še 28. Blank line 29. níg-dab5 ezem nesag ù ezem é-iti-6 30. lú-dnin-šubur šu ba-ti 31. 2(aš) gú 4(u) 4(diš) ½ ma-na lá 1(diš) gín uruda 32. kù-bi 1(diš) ½ ma-na 6(diš) ⅓ gín rev. col. i 1. 2(diš) ma-na AN.NA 2. kù-bi 8(diš) gín 3. 4(diš) ½ ma-na 3(diš) gín lá 1(u) 5(diš) še su-gan 4. kù-bi 5/6 gín 3 še 5. kišib lú-den-líl-lá 6. 7(diš) ma-na níg-SAR 7. kù-bi 2 ⅓ gín 8. kišib énsi-ka 9. 2(diš) ma-na kù-babbar 10. gìr lú-kal-la 11. ⅓ ma-na kù-babbar 12. gìr ur-dšul-pa-è 13. 1(diš) ma-na 5(diš) gín kù-babbar 14. sám kù huš-a 15. [šà tum]-malx(TÙR)ki 16. [kišib] ⌈énsi⌉-ka 17. [...] 18. [...] 19. [...] 20. kù-[bi] ⌈2(diš)⌉ gín 6(diš) še 21. 4(aš) gú 1(u) 7(diš) ma-na šu-úr-me 22. kù-bi 1(u) 2(diš) 5/6 gín 3 še 23. 2(u) 4(diš) ma-na za-ba-lum 24. kù-bi 1(diš) gín igi-6-gál 6(diš) še 25. níg-gál-la šà é-maš 26. 1(aš) 2(barig) naga si-è gur

its (value in) silver ¼ (shekel plus) 1 ½ grain, 1 liter 15 shekels of aromatized oil its (value in) silver 1 ¼ shekel; during the month of “Dikes” (xi) and the month of Dumuzi (xii), in the year “when King Amar-Sin destroyed Urbilum” (AS 2); a resin list similar to obv. i 24-ii 21 12 liters of ... (a kind of mineral) its (value in) silver 1 1/6 shekels 6 grains, 3 talents of gypsum its (value in) silver 1/6 (shekel) minus 3 grains, withdrawal for the nesag-festival (month iv) and the e’itiaš festival (month viii); Lu-Ninšubur received. 2 talents 44 ½ minas minus 1 shekel of copper its (value in) silver 1 ½ minas 6 ⅓ shekels,

2 minas of tin its (value in) silver 8 shekels, 4 ½ minas 3 shekels minus 15 grains of s u - g a n its (value in) silver 5/6 shekel 3 grains, sealed receipt of Lu-Enlila; 7 minas of ... its (value in) silver 2 ⅓ shekels, sealed receipt of the governor; 2 minas of silver via Lu-kala, ⅓ mina of silver via Ur-Šulpa’e, 1 mina 5 shekels of silver price of “red” silver in Tummal, sealed receipt of the governor; ... ... ... its (value in) silver 2 shekels 6 grains, 4 talents 17 minas of resin its (value in) silver 12 5/6 shekels 3 grains, 24 minas of resin its (value in) silver 1 1/6 shekel 6 grains, possessions in Emaš; 420 liters of “sprouting” alkali

113

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD 27. ur-dnin-tu šu ba-ti 28. 4(barig) naga si-è 29. a-kal-la ašgab šu ba-ti 30. 1(bán) naga túgsag-bar-šè 31. lú-dnagar-pa-è túg-du8 šu ba-ti 32. kù-bi igi-3-gál 1(u) 3(diš) še 33. kišib lú-kal-la col. ii 1. ⅓ ma-na kù-babbar 2. kù huš-a sa10-sa10-dè 3. ur-ddumu-zi-da šu ba-ti 4. 4(diš) ma-na kù-babbar 5. lú-kal-la šu ba-ti 6. iti ezem-dšul-gi 7. 1(diš) gín 7(diš) še kù huš 1(u) 6(diš)-ta 8. kù-bi 1(u) 6(diš) ½ gín 2(u) 2(diš) še 9. ezem-mah šà uri5ki-ma 10. kišib nu-ra-a 11.-37. (Omitted) col. iii 1. [šu]-nígin 1(u) 1(diš) ⅓ ma-na 2(diš) ⅔ gín 8(diš) še kù-babbar 2. [zi]-⌈ga⌉-àm 3. [lá-NI 1(diš)] ma-na kù-babbar 4. [níg-kas7]-ak ur-ddumu-[zi]-da [dam-gàr] 5. [iti] ⌈ezem⌉-dšul-gi 6. Blank space 7. [mu] ⌈kù⌉ gu-⌈za⌉ den-líl-⌈lá⌉ [ba]-⌈dím⌉

Ur-Nintu received it, 240 liters of “sprouting” alkali Akala the leather worker received, 10 liters of alkali for garments Lu-Nagarpa’e the felter received, its (value in) silver ⅓ (shekel) 13 grains sealed receipt of Lu-kala; ⅓ mina of silver to buy “red” gold Ur-Dumuzida received, 4 minas of silver Lu-kala received, during the month “Festival of Šulgi” (month x); 1 shekel 7 grains of “red” silver, each (unit) 16 times (the value of silver) its (value in) silver 16 ½ shekels 22 grains during (the month of) “Grand Festival” in Ur (month x) the seal was not rolled (on the receipt recording this transaction); a resin list similar to obv. i 24-ii 21; total: 11 ⅓ minas 2 ⅔ shekels 8 grains of silver expended; arrears 1 mina of silver; the balanced account of Ur-Dumuzida the merchant (compiled) in the month of “Festival of Šulgi” (month x), during the year “when the holy throne of Enlil was made” (AS 3).

As a subtype of balanced account, a merchant account has the typical, tripartite structure of a balanced account introduced in §2.3. The first part, summarized as s a g -n íg -g u r 1 1 -ra -k a m , “assets, capital,” starts with any balance carried over from the preceding accounting period (si-ìtu m ) and continues with the goods that a merchant received from the Umma administration during the current period. These goods served as the merchant’s capital. In the example above, the capital section (ending at obv. i 22) records the dates, silver, and barley received by the merchant Ur-Dumuzida. The dates came from an unspecified source, and the amount does not appear preserved (obv. i 5-6). The barley, totaling sixty bushels, came from the governor (obv. i 13-16). The silver capital of the merchant included two minas from the third official controlling the silver revenue in Umma (Lu-kala; obv. i 8-12) and almost three minas from the household of the governor (obv. i 17-18). The note accompanying the silver provided by the governor, k ù š e k ù síg , “silver (paid in lieu) of barley (and) wool,” indicates that the governor’s dependents had paid the silver first to him as substitutive payments for deliveries in these two products (§3.3 and 3.4). The account further converts the value of the dates and the barley into silver in order to calculate the aggregate value of the capital goods in silver (obv. i 20). 114

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

The second part—bracketed by š à -b i-ta ... z i-g a -à m , “from within (the capital) ... expended”—itemizes the products that the merchant supplied to the Umma administration in return for the capital received from it and withdrawn from him by various administrators. Just as the preceding capital section does, this section converts the value of each non-silver product into silver in order to reach an aggregate value of the goods provided by the merchant (rev. iii 1). Supplies from a merchant differed from the merchant’s capital goods and exhibited greater variety. In the example above, the goods withdrawn from the merchant Ur-Dumuzida included more than a dozen types of resin, base metals, minerals, alkaline plants, gypsum, silver, and “red” gold (obv. i 24-rev. ii 37). No other kind of product appeared among the capital goods of the merchant except for silver. Even in the case of silver, the amount of 8 ¾ minas withdrawn from the merchant (rev. i 9-16; ii 1-6) far exceeds the five minas or so that he received as his capital (obv. i 8-12, 17-18).345 As proof of their withdrawal, the administrators gave the merchants their sealed receipts to which the recurring expression k iš ib PN, “sealed tablet of PN (the withdrawer),” refers (rev. i 5, 8, 16, 33). Toward the end of the accounting cycle, Ur-Dumuzida, the merchant, submitted these receipts to the administration as evidence of the expenditures that he had made on its behalf. The administration then compiled this balanced account on the basis of these receipts and the records of the capital goods taken by the merchant (Steinkeller 2003, 52-54; 2004a, 99-100). Since the total value of the goods supplied by the merchant, 11 ⅓ minas 2 ⅔ shekels 8 grains of silver (rev. iii 1), amounts to nearly one mina less than that of the capital that he received from the Umma administration, 12 ⅓ minas 2 ⅔ shekels 2 grains of silver (rev. i 20), the account records a deficit (lá -NI) of one mina of silver on the merchant’s part (rev. iii 3). This result means that the merchant Ur-Dumuzida had yet to provide the government more goods worth one mina of silver, which the government would add to the value of his capital goods for the next accounting period as si-ì-tu m , “carried-over balance” (cf. obv. i 3-4). A critical step in the compilation of a merchant account involves converting the value of nonsilver goods into that expressed in silver using the formula x (quantity) A (product name) k ù -b i y, “x quantity of A product, its (value in) silver y amount.” Assuming that the ratio y/x represents the unit price of product A, a number of studies proceed to track the price trends of the goods attested in merchant accounts. Such studies, however, lead to contradictory conclusions or at best indicative results346 and do not prove to be productive. For example, based on 424 individual prices for 146 different products, Curtis and Hallo (1959, 111) conclude that “the basic commodities which the merchant had on hand [e.g., those studied in §5.2] and evaluated as assets have a more or less fixed value, whereas the commodities which he purchased [e.g., those in §5.3] show rather wide variations in price.” They name these basic commodities as “exchangeable commodities ... subject to equivalences established by the Kings of Ur and were typically deposited with (or perhaps ‘for the account of’) the merchant” (ibid., 112). A larger sample, 913 prices for 131 products, allows Snell to reach the opposite conclusion about the so-called basic commodities: “[T]he prices of the capital products, some of which appear to come from the state, are not uniform... . I doubt this represents even a timid effort at state control of the prices ...” (Snell 1982, 191). He (ibid., 189) further concludes that “[t]he analysis of the prices from the silver accounts is not productive if one hopes to find consistent trends or to follow microeconomic decisions. The prices of many products are completely stable, or they hover around a central point, or they deviate wildly.” The insufficiency of price studies, the ambiguities of different pricing formulae, and the decision to maintain the literal difference between the above formula and s á m /s a m x (SA10) prompt this study to reserve the translation of “price” for phrases featuring s á m /s a m x . On the other hand, the term “conversion rate” applies to the quantitative relationship between silver and a

––––––––––––––––– 345 346

The approximate amount of five minas of silver excludes the broken numbers in obv. i 7. See comments on Brunke and Sallaberger 2010 in §5.4.B.

115

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

non-silver product rendered by the two formulae x A k ù -b i y (characteristic of merchant accounts), “x quantity of A product, its (value in) silver y amount,” and x k ù -b a b b a r A-b i y (often met in chapter 3), “x amount of silver, its (value in) A product y quantity”. 5.1.B. Individual Merchants versus Merchant Groups The rubric “individual merchants” subsumes two types of merchants: (1) all the named merchants; and (2) any anonymous merchant identified as d a m -g à r, the singular form of the title.347 In some texts, the title appears followed by a description, which may represent one of the following: a personal name (d a m -g à r lú - d h a -ìa , “merchant of Lu-Haya”),348 a toponym (d a m -g à r š à u ri 5 k i -m a , “merchant within Ur”),349 or a hint at the bala-tax to the crown (d a m -g à r šà b a la -a , “merchant within the b a la ”).350 The personal name following the title d a m -g à r may refer to the supervisor of the merchant concerned. In the case of d a m -g à r lú - d h a -ìa , the name Lu-Haya may represent the scribe in charge of domain land in the Apisal district (§3.2), but his exact relationship with the unnamed merchant appears elusive. The toponym after d a m -g à r may indicate the place where the merchant conducted his business. If this understanding proves correct, then the expression d a m g à r š à u ri 5 k i -m a would refer to a merchant from Umma, who operated in the capital city of Ur. Frequent associations of Ur with goods received or supplied by the Umma merchants (§5.2 and §5.3) may support this understanding. The meaning of d a m -g à r š à b a la -a , “merchant within the b a la ,” hinges upon the interpretation of the phrase š à b a la-a , which may designate either the month(s) when the Ur III provinces made their bala-tax deliveries to the crown (Dahl 2006a, 7980) or the tax payments themselves (Sharlach 2004, 16-21, 39-43). Neither interpretation makes full sense in the context of the two merchant accounts that belonged to d a m -g à r š à b a la-a , because the accounts do not specify a bala-delivery to the crown, and, dated by year only, cannot be correlated to the time of year when Umma paid its bala-tax.351 The evidence also attests to the plural form, d a m -g à r(-e )-n e , of the Sumerian term for merchant. When appearing without further explanation, this plural form may either refer to an organized body of merchants with formal membership and cooperation between each other, or may mean that it involved more than one merchant. The merchants designated as d a m -g à r(-e )n e may include some of the named, individual merchants identified so far. In two merchant accounts, a personal name follows the plural form: d a m -g à r-n e a b -b a g i-n a , 352 “merchants/merchant group of Aba-gina,” and d a m -g à r-n e lú -k a l-la ,353 “merchants /merchant group of Lu-kala.” The name Lu-kala may represent a son of Ur-e’e and the same official, who controlled the silver revenue in Umma from the year AS 3 to ŠS 6 (see also Van Driel 2002, 6). In that case, d a m -g à r-n e lú -k a l-la would refer to the merchants under his supervision. One text, SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4), supports such a possibility. This balanced account concerns the barley that Lu-kala took from the chief granary officer Arad (n íg -k a s 7 -a k š e / lú k a l-la / á ra d -ta ). The income section (s a g -n íg -g u r 1 1 -ra -k a m ) lists thirteen individuals, who received 828.4 bushels of barley on behalf of Lu-kala. Nine of those individuals had the same

–––––––––––––––––

347

The singular form d a m - g à r in the evidence may refer to the professional category of merchants instead of one single merchant, but the texts do not distinguish these two connotations. This study takes d a m - g à r as referring to one merchant unless otherwise specified. 348 End of SNAT 504 (ŠS 6). 349 End of SNAT 490 (ŠS 4). 350 End of AAS 65 (AS 8) and Nik. 2 403 (AS 9). 351 “[T]he š a g 4 b a l a - a month at Umma was not the same each year. It tended to occur between months i to x, especially month v to viii. From year to year, the š a g 4 b a l a - a month tended to fall behind one month”; see Sharlach 2004, 57. 352 End of Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6). 353 End of TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6).

116

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

names as nine known Umma merchants354 including the well-attested names of Ur-Dumuzida, Pada, and Š eš-kala. The other six names included Inim-manizi, Šara-kam, Kuda, Bazige, LuInanna, and Nigar-kidu (see Table 5.1). This coincidence and the knowledge that the Umma merchants received most of their barley from the chief granary officer (§5.2.B) allow the identification of all nine recipients in the above text as merchants. They formed the merchant group designated as d a m -g à r-n e lú -k a l-la under the supervision of Lu-kala. Since this group included the three best documented merchants in Umma, it may have operated as the largest merchant group there. In a similar way, the expression d a m -g à r-n e a b -b a -g i-n a may designate the merchants overseen by Aba-gina. The following titles suggest that organizations of merchants existed during the Ur III period: u g u la d a m -g à r-n e , “overseer of merchants,” d a m -g à r 10, “merchant in charge of ten (merchants)”, ha-z a -n ú m d a m -g à r-n e , “mayor of merchants,” and d u b -s a r d a m -g à r, “scribe of merchant(s).”355 The Turam-ili archive from northern Babylonia illustrates various activities conducted by the overseer of merchants Turam-ili,356 and texts from Nippur in southern Babylonia bear witness to a d a m -g à r 10 called Ur-Nusku (Garfinkle 2000, 172-224). Evidence from different proveniences indicates that such organizations of merchants functioned as self-governing bodies that represented individual merchants, dealt collectively with the government, and regulated business among their members. The Umma corpus attests to one such title, u g u la d a m -g à r-n e , which a witness named Lu-Nanna bears in the text Nik. 2 447 (AS 3 xi) rev. 13 (Steinkeller 2004a, 102). This Lu-Nanna came from Drehem, and texts from there attest to him as a leader of the merchants. Lu-Nanna provided silver for other merchants to acquire gold and collected gold from them (Garfinkle 2008b, 68).357 5.2. Capital Goods Received by Umma Merchants Table 16 overviews the most important products that the Umma merchants received as capital or purchasing funds. Among the individual merchants, Ur-Dumuzida had at his disposal the largest volume of capital goods. A merchant group tended to take in more goods than an individual merchant, in particular barley, dates, fish, fish oil, sheepskins, and leather products. Table 16: Annual maximum of major capital goods received by Umma merchants Product(s)

Year

Annual maximum

Silver value (shekels)

Grain (often barley)

ŠS 6

416952 liters a

991.99

About 86% from Šara-izu the scribe in charge of granaries

Silver

AS 3

621.79 shekels

621.79

All from Lu-kala (third major recipient of silver) and governor

Wool

AS 7

5747.5 minas

574.75 b

All from unspecified source

Remarks

––––––––––––––––– 354

The other four recipients included Ani-[...], Luduga son of Nigar-kidu, Pu’udu, and Ur-e’e the top administrator in charge of the Apisal district in Umma. This Pu’udu might have been the same person as the long-distance trader “who shipped barley to Makkan (modern Oman) on behalf of the state and supplied precious stones to the court of Ur”; see Steinkeller 2004a, 104. 355 Neumann 1999, 52-53; Steinkeller 2004b, 102-103. 356 See Van De Mieroop 1986b; Garfinkle 2002, 2000, 119-171; Mayr 2002. This archive survives in fifty-nine tablets and originated from northern Babylonia, probably in the area of the city of Urum north of Tell al-Wilayah and possibly at the city of A.HA. 357 Two Drehem texts mention Lu-Nanna among a group of merchants. Ontario 1 135 (ŠS 2 xi 11) names him along with Gudea, Burmama, Lugal-ane, and Ku-Nanna, each of whom gave a lamb (obv. 1-5). In Ontario 1 128 (ŠS 5 vii 13), he appears with Ku-Nanna, Lugal-ane, and Lu-Enlila, each of whom contributed a lamb (obv. 6-9).

117

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Product(s)

Year

Annual maximum

Silver value (shekels)

Dates

ŠS 6

176492 liters

294.40

All from Šara-kam (title unknown)

Fish

AS 4

81120 units

98.68

About 52% from the fishery inspector Ur-Mami

Sheepskins & Leather goods

AS 4

3088 units

78

Flour

AS 6

2700 liters

53.33

All from unidentified source

Resins

Š 45

208 minas + 18 liters

36.20

All from Lu-pa’e (title unknown)

Smoked fish

AS 4

13860 liters

23.01

All from Ur-e’e (top official in Apisal district) and the scribe Ur-Šulpa’e

Fish oil

AS 4

540 liters

18

Remarks

All from Lu-kala (title unknown)

All from Ur-Šulpa’e the scribe

Notes a Including 18,300 liters of wheat (g i g ) whose value is converted to 120 minas of copper (TCL 5 6037 obv. i 12-13) and thus not counted in the correspondent silver value. b Calculated by applying to the wool recorded in NATN 805 (AS 7) the rate of 0.1 shekel of silver per mina of wool attested in two other texts dated to the same year, Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) and Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix).

5.2.A. Silver (Table 5.2.A) The four major recipients of the silver revenue in Umma—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu—also provided most of the silver capital for the merchants. Each of them served as the largest source of silver for the merchants during their period of control over the silver revenue. The amounts received from Lu-kala and Gududu exceeded those from Akala and Dadaga. During the period when Lu-kala served as the largest provider (AS 3-ŠS 6), the governor also supplied significant amounts of silver to the merchants.358 The text, Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x), connects the silver from the governor to the barley and wool of his household (k ù še k ù síg é é n si-k a ; obv. i 18). The annual total of silver distributed to the merchants peaked in the year AS 3 when three merchants, Ur-Dumuzida, Pada, and Šeš-kala, received 621.79 shekels from Lu-kala (59 percent) and the governor (41 percent). A number of other people also provided modest quantities of silver, not more than twenty shekels, for the merchants, but lack of further information prevents their identification.359 The two texts previously discussed in §4.6, ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) and ZA 95 191 (IS 1), disclose that the amount of silver disbursed to the merchants accounts respectively for 11 percent and 27 percent of the total expenditures by Gududu, the last official in control of the silver revenue in Umma, for these two years. Of all the individual merchants and merchant groups during the period covered by the evidence studied here, Ur-Dumuzida received the greatest amount of silver. In some instances, the texts designate the silver received by the merchants as the price of unspecified products (k ù sá m )360 or as the price of specific goods (s á m x), such as “red” gold361 or regular gold.362 At times they label the silver as merchandise (n íg -s a m x [SA10]-ma-ka),363

–––––––––––––––––

358

172.33 shekels of silver in Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) obv. i 17-18; 82.5 shekels in Ledgers pl. 2 2 (AS 3) obv. 1; 50 shekels in TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) obv. i 1-6; 210 shekels in MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) obv. i 1-4. 359 Ur-nigar—4 shekels in Santag 6 29 (Š 36 xii); Lugal-ezem—8 shekels in NABU 1989 95 6 (Š 45); Ur-Utu—2 shekels in RO 5 9 8 (AS 2 diri) obv. 10; Inim-ku5 and Lu-Inanna—3.33 shekels in STA 22 (AS 4 i) obv. i 7-8; LuInanna—6.33 shekels in ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS 1 vii) obv. 3; Lugal-nesage—17 shekels in UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) obv. i 7. 360 Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) obv. i 10-12; orthography of the term different from samx(SA10) in §3.9. 361 Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. i 15-19; MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) obv. i 1-4. 362 YOS 4 47 (ŠS 1 iii).

118

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

which in one case went to Puzriš-Dagan and Šuruppak (n íg -s á m é -s a g -te -n a šu ru p p a k šè ).364 The texts could also specify the silver for the purchase of barley (š e -a sa 1 0 -s a 1 0 -d è ).365 In none of these texts did the merchant or merchants fulfill the order for barley or gold with the silver received. The texts use another common designation for the silver taken by the merchants, k ù x, “silver (paid in lieu) of x,” in which x refers to dates,366 wheat,367 barley,368 or fish.369 This phrase may point to the origin of the silver as substitutive payments made by producers to the Umma administration (§3), which then disbursed it to the merchants as part of their capital. 5.2.B. Barley (Table 5.2.B) Several individuals stand out as providers of huge quantities of grain (barley and some wheat) for the merchants. The earliest attested provider, Arad, supplied barley to the merchants in the years Š 44 and AS 4. The barley coming from him reached 175,800 liters in the year AS 4, and three merchants (Ur-Dumuzida, Šeš-kala, and Pada) and one unidentified merchant group (d a m -g à rn e ) received it.370 The association of Arad with massive volumes of barley leads to his identification as the chief granary officer (k a -g u r 7 ) of the Umma government and a brother of the incumbent governor (Dahl 2007, 115-121). He held this position until at least the end of the reign of King Amar-Sin and perhaps much longer thereafter. The next important supplier, LuŠulgira, distributed to the merchants 15,000 liters of barley in the year AS 7371 and 108,000 liters in AS 9.372 His uncommon name and access to large quantities of barley help to identify him as the overseer in charge of cultivating domain land in the districts of Gu’edena and Mušbi’ana (Vanderroost 2008, 136-137, 139).373 The largest provider of grain for the merchants, named Šaraizu, supplied 342,779 liters of barley and 18,300 liters of wheat to a merchant group in the year ŠS 6.374 His name and connection to gigantic amounts of grain identify him as a son and the successor of the chief granary officer Arad (Dahl 2007, 115-116). Although he held the title of scribe, which differed from that of his father, Šara-izu fulfilled the same responsibility in advancing large amounts of grain to the merchants. A number of other people distributed volumes of barley to the merchants: Lu-kala supplied 17,040 liters in AS 2 and 65,340 liters in the year AS 3;375 the governor distributed 18,000 liters in AS 3;376 Ada sent out the same amount as the governor in AS 9;377 and a person identified only by the title “chief granary officer” provided 27,480 liters in ŠS 2 and 18,000 liters in ŠS 6.378 The evidence may point to this Lu-kala as the same Lu-kala who controlled the silver revenue in

––––––––––––––––– 363

JCS 24 158 46 (Š 44). YOS 4 287 (Š 34 vi). 365 TJAMC IOS 6 (pl. 49) (ŠS 9 xii). 366 Studies Jones 216 (AS 3 i) obv. ii 3. 367 STA 22 (AS 4 i) obv. i 7-8. 368 Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) obv. 5; STA 1 (AS 8 vii) obv. i 9. 369 UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) obv. i 5-6. 370 SA 134 (Pl. 76) obv. 1-6—108,000 liters; TCL 5 6046 rev. i 17-19—67,800 liters. In the text SA 134, Arad may have provided an addition of 103,020 liters of barley for the Umma merchants if the six named individuals in obv. i 716 (Inim-anizi, Šara-kam, Kuda, Bazige, Lu-Inanna, and Nigar-kidu) turned out to be merchants as argued in §5.1.B. 371 Ledgers pl. 19 11 obv. i 19-21. 372 ASJ 11 204-216 obv. i 1-4. 373 Dahl has distinguished in the Umma corpus three people named as Lu-Šulgi(ra) with different lineages; see Dahl 2007, 78-80. It remains unclear which one of them supplied the barley to the merchants, or whether the supplier represented a fourth person with the same name. 374 TCL 5 6037 obv. i 5-10, 12-13. 375 Respectively BPOA 6 311 and Studies Jones 216 obv. i 12-14, 15-18. 376 Santag 6 119 obv. i 13-16. 377 ASJ 11 204-216 obv. i 10-11. 378 Respectively TCL 5 5680 obv. i 11’-15’ and Ledgers pl. 27 15 obv. i 1-4. 364

119

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Umma. The anonymous chief granary officer could refer to the Arad discussed above (Dahl 2007, 115). Data concerning the year ŠS 6 offer a glimpse into the scale of the grain trade that the merchants conducted in Ur III Umma. During that year, the merchants received a total of 416,952 liters of grain. The estimate of the area of arable land in the provincial sector of Umma settled on 33,541 iku (≈ 1,863.4 bur) in the year AS 2 and 39,798 iku in a year unknown (≈ 2,211 bur) (§2.4). If half of that land lay fallow every year, the annual acreage of land under cultivation would fall between 931.7 and 1,105.5 bur. Based on the text BM 110116 (IS 3), Maekawa (1987, 44) calculates that the average yield of cereals, including barley, wheat, and emmer, would reach approximately 5,488 liters in Umma. Using this number to estimate the annual production of grain in the provincial sector will arrive at 5,113,169.6 liters (= 931.7 x 5,488) at the low end and 6,066,984 liters (= 1,105.5 x 5,488) at the high end. The high-end number appears closer to the total yield of 7,033,432.5 liters (about 16 percent more) attested in the year Š 46 and 7,320,246 liters (about 21 percent more) in AS 2.379 Therefore, the total amount of grain advanced to the merchants in ŠS 6 accounted for between 6.9 percent (= 416,952/6,066,984) and 8.2 percent (=416,952/5,113,169.6) of the estimated total yield from the institutional sector in Umma. The lack of comparable evidence from other years precludes considering this range as representative. Barley received by the merchants may carry tags that feature the verb sa 1 0 , “to purchase,” or sá m , “price.” Thus barley appeared as either the price (s a m x [SA10]-m a -k a ) of unspecified products380 or as the price (s á m x) of a number of goods including reeds,381 livestock (oxen and donkeys),382 copper,383 and wool.384 Some texts designate barley for the purchase (x-[a ] sa 1 0 -a ) of copper385 or bitumen.386 Barley could serve as the merchandise in exchange for bitumen (n íg sa m x -m a é sir)387 or whatever products required as the bala-tax to the king (n íg -s a m x -m a b a la -a [-šè ]),388 or as expenditures in the city of Ur (n íg -s á m z i-g a u ri 5 k i -m a ).389 Although in about half of the cases cited above, the merchant(s) did not in fact deliver the product or fulfill the obligation attached to the barley that they received from the government, the products to be acquired above appeared among what the merchants as a whole supplied (§5.3). Another type of description, š e x (-k a ), “barley of product x,” in which x stands for lard390 or wool,391 often appears too. In the year AS 9, the merchant Ur-Dumuzida took 108,000 liters of barley designated as š e ì-š á h .392 According to the same text, Ur-Dumuzida supplied more than three thousand liters of lard to the Umma administration,393 which allows the interpretation that š e ì-šá h (-k a ) may mean “barley (in exchange) for lard.” In about half of the cases, the merchant(s) concerned did provide lard as required.

–––––––––––––––––

379

Based on UCP 9-2-1 88 (Š 46) and SAT 2 695 (AS 2); Steinkeller forthcoming a discusses both texts. BPOA 6 311 (AS 2 xi 6). 381 SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4) rev. i 4-5. 382 SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4) rev. i 7-8. 383 ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. i 8-11 (cf. copper supplied in rev. iii 34-35); TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. i 11’-15’ (cf. copper supplied in obv. iii 16-17); TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. i 7 (cf. copper supplied in rev. iii 4-7). 384 For distribution as rations to plowing assistants (s í g - b a š à - g u 4 - k a ) in TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. i 11’-15’; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. i 8 (cf. goat hair supplied in obv. iv 11-12). 385 AR RIM 4 8 (Š 46). 386 AR RIM 4 8 (Š 46). 387 Bitumen for a shipyard (m a r - s a ) in TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. i 9-11 (cf. bitumen supplied in obv. ii 9-12). 388 TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. i 7’-10’; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. i 9-11. 389 Ontario 2 221 (IS xx). 390 See TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) rev. i 17-19; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) obv. i 10-11 (cf. lard supplied in rev. ii 9-11); TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) rev. 1-2 (cf. lard supplied in rev. 9-11); TCL 5 6052 (AS 5) (obv. i 4-7); Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) obv. 2-3; Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) obv. i 19-21 (cf. lard supplied in rev. i 16’-17’); ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. i 1-7 (cf. lard supplied in rev. ii 36-39). 391 Studies Jones 216 (AS 3 i) obv. i 15-18. 392 ASJ 11 204-216 obv. i 1-4. 393 ASJ 11 204-216 rev. ii 36-39. 380

120

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

Toponyms that provide clues to the geographical origin of the barley entrusted to the merchants include the following: the city of Ur,394 the estate a -šà lá-m a h ,395 the threshing floors (ki-su7) of the town Kamari and a hamlet named é -d u ru 5 -g u -la ,396 the granary of a locale called “Golden Mound” (g u r 7 d u 6 -k ù -s ig 1 7 -ta ),397 and a waterfront location (íd sa l 4 -la k i ).398 Two texts indicate that the merchants concerned might have received their barley in Ur (šà u ri 5 k i -m a ) and Nippur (š à n ib ru k i ).399 5.2.C. Wool (Table 5.2.C) About half of the cases reveal information about the people who provided wool for the merchants. The governor provided the most wool and, in the year AS 4, supplied 4,876 minas of wool to the merchant Ur-Dumuzida and a merchant group.400 Other significant or frequent suppliers included Lu-kala (300 minas in AS 5 and 600 minas in AS 6),401 Nin-melam (1,800 minas in AS 9),402 and Lugal-nesage (up to 350 minas in ŠS 2).403 Some texts404 specify the wool received as síg g i(-r), a type of coarse wool shorn from a breed of sheep called u d u u li-g i (Waetzoldt 1972, 6). Three texts connect the wool received by the merchants to gold by the use of the following designations: s íg k ù -s ig 1 7 ,405 “wool (to buy) gold,” or (síg ) sá m k ù -s ig 1 7 ,406 “(wool as) price of gold.” A fourth text specifies the wool as (síg ) sá m k u -m u l, “(wool as) price of cumin.”407 In the last case, the merchant Šeš-kala, who received the wool, did supply some cumin to the Umma government according to the same text.408 5.2.D. Dates (Table 5.2.D) As with the evidence concerning the wool received by the merchants, about half of the texts concerning the dates disclose the persons from whom the merchants received their dates. The most attested provider, Ur-Šulpa’e, supplied tens of thousands of liters annually in the years Š 47, AS 3, AS 4, AS 6, and AS 8.409 His largest supply appeared in the year Š 47 when according to the text BPOA 7 1898, he provided 158,520 liters of dates to the merchant Ur-Dumuzida. The same text identifies him as a scribe and a son of Lugal-kugani. The provider Šara-kam supplied an even larger amount of dates, 176,942 liters, to a merchant group supervised by Lu-kala (d a m g à r-n e lú -k a l-la ) in ŠS 6.410 The one-time attestation of Šara-kam and lack of further information encumber the efforts at his identification. Another supplier, Lu-kisal the gardener, provided the merchant Ur-Dumuzida with at least 1,023 liters of dates in AS 6.411

––––––––––––––––– 394

MVN 3 186 (Š 40) obv. 2. SET 184 (no date) obv. 2. See §3.2 for the location of this estate in the Da’Umma district of the Umma province. 396 See respectively Studies Jones 216 (AS 3 i) obv. i 13; BRM 3 80 (AS 7 x) rev. 16. 397 BPOA 1 1748 (Š 35 xii). 398 ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. i 2. 399 See respectively Syracuse 481 (Š 31 ix); ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. i 4. 400 Respectively Ledgers pl. 4 3 obv. i 7-9, ii 10-12; TCL 5 6046 rev. i 20-22. 401 SNAT 365 (AS 6) obv. i 3-4, 1-2. 402 ASJ 11 204-216 obv. i 16-19. Nin-melam was a consort of the governor Ur-Lisi; see Dahl 2007, 59-60. 403 TCL 5 5680 obv. i 4’-6’. 404 Salesianum 4 174 1 (Š 38 xi); AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-666 (AS 3) rev. ii 26-27; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. i 1214. 405 Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) obv. i 8-10; Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) obv. i 16-17. 406 NATN 805 (AS 7) obv. 10. 407 BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. i 13-15. 408 BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 21-23. 409 Respectively BPOA 7 1898 (Š 47); Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) obv. i 3-6; TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) rev. i 23-25; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. i 4-5; BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. i 10-12; STA 1 (AS 8 vii) obv. i 3-5; MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) obv. i 5-7. 410 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. i 15-17. 411 Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. i 12-14. 395

121

MONETARY ROLE OF SILVER AND ITS ADMINISTRATION IN MESOPOTAMIA DURING THE UR III PERIOD

5.2.E. Fish and Fish Oil (Table 5.2.E) The merchants received different kinds of regular fish,412 smoked fish (ku 6 šeg 6 ), and fish oil (ì ku 6 ) as their purchasing funds. Details about the people, who provided fish for the merchants, remain sparse. From the few texts that bear this information, evidence of several major suppliers emerges. The largest supplier, the fishery inspector Ur-Utu, provided 54,000 units of fish in the year AS 6 and an estimated 79,920 units in Š S 9.413 Another fishery inspector, Ur-Mami, contributed 42,420 units in AS 4.414 Other suppliers of smaller volumes included the scribe UrŠulpa’e,415 the top administrator in the Apisal district Ur-e’e,416 and the otherwise unknown Lugal-kuga.417 The largest annual supply of fish products appeared in the year AS 4 and consisted of 81,120 units of fish, 13,860 liters of smoked fish, and 540 liters of fish oil. An anonymous merchant group (TCL 5 6046)418 and the merchant Ur-Dumuzida (STA 22 obv. i 3-6) received them all. 5.2.F. Sheepskins and Leather Products (Table 5.2.F) Other products provided to the merchants included sheepskins (kuš udu ug 7 ), leather sacks (k u š ùmmu), waterskins (k u š a-gá-lá), and sandals (k u š ésir). The largest volume of goods transferred appeared in the year AS 4 when Lu-kala provided a merchant group with 228 pairs of shoes, 460 leather sacks and water skins, and 2,400 sheepskins.419 This text alone spells out the name of the person, Lu-kala, who provided animal skins and leather goods for the merchants, but no further information concerning this Lu-kala emerges. 5.2.G. Other Capital Goods (Table 5.2.G) In addition to the products attested above, the merchants received a variety of other goods as part of their purchasing funds: (1) (2) (3) (4)

Flour,420 sesame,421 and sesame oil.422 Vegetables (gú-gal and gú-tur),423 figs,424 apples? (hašhur),425 and honey.426 Resins427 and alkaline plants (naga si-è).428 Willow boughs (pa g i š ma-nu),429 roof beams,430 branches (li),431 and g i š ÚRgunu.432

–––––––––––––––––

412

Names attested include k u 6 - g í r - ú s , k u 6 - š à - b a r , k u 6 - s a g - k ú r , k u 6 - g a m - g a m , k u 6 - s u h u r , a n d k u 6 gír. 413 Respectively Nisaba 6 34 obv. ii 6-7; UTI 5 3406. 414 TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) obv. i 1-10. 415 Same as the person discussed in §5.2.D. Ur-Šulpa’e provided 6,000 liters of smoked fish in the year Š 47 (BPOA 7 1898); 5,280 liters of smoked fish, 16,200 units of fish, and 540 liters of fish oil in AS 4 (TCL 5 6046 obv. ii 2-3, 4-13, 14-15). 416 8,580 liters of smoked fish in AS 4 i (STA 22 obv. i 3-6). 417 22,500 units of fish in AS 4 (TCL 5 6046 obv. i 13-19). 418 Analyzed by Englund 1990, 185-189. 419 TCL 5 6046 rev. i 5-14. 420 TLB 3 153 (Š 40 vi); STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. i 9-10; YOS 18 73 (month vii). 421 Nik. 2 331 (Š 33 i). 422 Santag 6 29 (Š 36 xii). 423 YOS 4 295 (Š 45); BM 105345 (AS 1). 424 RO 5 9 8 (AS 2 diri) obv. 7-8. 425 BPOA 2 1849 (ŠS 9 iii). For identification of h a š h u r , see also note 168. 426 YOS 4 295 (Š 45); identification of the product discussed in §5.3.J. 427 YOS 4 295 (Š 45). 428 SAKF 67 (Š 46); BIN 5 197 (Š 46). 429 Aleppo 120 (Š 33 viii). 430 RA 16 19 (Š 36 ix) rev. iv 26-29.

122

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

The volume of the products varied. The texts attest to 1,250 liters of sesame, 120 jars of sesame oil, 1,620 liters of vegetables, 1,800 liters of alkaline plants, and almost 3,500 liters of flour. The 300 liters of flour in TLB 3 153 (SH 40 vi) is allocated for the purchase of “red” gold (sa 1 0 -a k ù h u š -a -š è ). 5.3. Products Supplied by Umma Merchants Table 17 offers a glimpse into all but few products that the Umma merchants supplied to the government. Table 17: Annual maximum of products supplied by Umma merchants Product(s)

Year

Annual maximum a

Silver value (shekels)

Silver

AS 5

841.71 shekels

841.71 c

Remarks 93% received by Lu-kala b All supplied by an anonymous merchant; to be transferred to Gududu (major recipient of silver ŠS 7-IS 3)

Copper

ŠS 9

1203 minas

656.18

Gold

AS 3

25.67 shekels

421.58

All supplied by the merchant Ur-Dumuzida; 95.95% to Lukala b

Wool

ŠS 6

3099 minas

239.64

Most supplied by merchant group of Lu-kala b

Lard

AS 9

3585 liters

272.75 d

Most supplied by merchant UrDumuzida as nidba-offering for the god Enlil

Sesame oil

ŠS 6

1546 liters

118.87

Almost all supplied by merchant group of Lu-kala b

Bitumen

ŠS 2

33292.33 liters + 16660 minas

>87.39 e

Most supplied by merchant UrDumuzida with unspecified use

Resins

ŠS 6

308.09 liters + > 432.83 minas

75.38+[...]

Most supplied by merchant group of Lu-kala b

Sheep & Goats

ŠS 6

109 heads

50

Most supplied by merchant group of Lu-kala b

Timber & Timber products

ŠS 6

1002+[...] units

46.57 f

Most supplied by merchant groups of Aba-gina and Lukala b

Reeds

AS 5

12600 bundles

21.03 g

All supplied by merchant UrIštaran

Vegetables

ŠS 2

1647 liters

16.90

All supplied by merchant UrDumuzida

Condiments & Spices

ŠS 2

17.60

All supplied by merchant UrDumuzida

Tin

AS 8

4 minas

12

Honey

Š 38

18 liters

10.83

1698 liters

––––––––––––––––– 431 432

SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) obv. 3-4. STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. i 6-8.

123

All to Lu-kala (unidentified) for making pegs for governor All supplied by a merchant group

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Year

Annual maximum a

Silver value (shekels)

Multiple h

18000 units

10

All as bala-tax paid to crown

Dates

AS 4

3000 liters

7.16

All supplied by merchant UrDumuzida

Alkaline plants

AS 6

7405+[...] liters

5.66+ [...]

About 40% as bala-tax paid to crown

Gypsum

ŠS 6

5443 minas + 10 liters

4.55

c. 95% supplied by merchant group of Lu-kala b

Fish

Š 38

750 liters + 255 units

2.23

All supplied by a merchant group

Beer

Š 44

360 liters

2

All supplied by merchant Pada as bala-tax to crown

Containers

AS 5

20 units

2

All supplied by merchant Šeškala

Minerals

ŠS 2

25 liters

1.67

Date-palm fibers

Š 39

21600 minas

1

su-gan

AS 3

4.55 minas

0.85

Product(s) Bird plumage

Remarks

80% for treating garments of the god Šara All supplied by merchant LuŠara All to Lu-Enlila, virtual chief of Metal Bureau in Umma

Notes a In terms of the corresponding silver value of the product concerned. b Major recipient of silver AS 3-ŠS 6. c Estimated according to the overall median price of 0.55 shekel of silver per mina of copper according to Snell (1982, 150). d Excluding unspecified silver value of 292.5 liters of lard. e Excluding unspecified silver value of 1,064 liters and 8,640 minas of bitumen. f Excluding unspecified silver value of 40 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 for making punting poles. g Estimated value of 6,310 liters of barley, which are equivalent to 12,600 bundles of reeds according to MVN 1 238 (AS 5 ix?); see also Table 5.3.M-4 and Wilcke (2007, 93 n. 74). Estimation based on the conventional price of 1 shekel of silver per 300 liters of barley. h The years AS 3, 5; Š S 4, 6. Two other years—Š 45 and 46—also attest to 18,000 units of bird plumage from an anonymous merchant group, but the texts do not specify the equivalent silver value. In still another year, AS 6, the same quantity of bird plumage from the merchant Kateša was equivalent to 9 shekels of silver.

5.3.A. Gold (Table 5.3.A) Three merchants, Ur-Ninsu, Ur-Dumuzida, and Inima-dingir, provided gold for the Umma government, and the total amount of their supply went just over seventy shekels. Two major recipients of the silver revenue in Umma, Akala (with twenty shekels of gold in the year Š 41)433 and Lu-kala (with 24.63 shekels of gold in AS 3),434 took in about two thirds of the gold supplied by the merchants. Other recipients of gold included the governor (0.25 shekel) and a silversmith named Ur-Šulpa’e (six shekels).435 The Umma government reserved most of the gold for the akitifestival celebrated in month vi436 and month x437 in the capital city of Ur. The amounts of the

–––––––––––––––––

433

ArOr 62 238 I 867. Jones Studies 216 (AS 3 i) obv. ii 7-8, 15; rev. i 1-3. 435 Respectively Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 24-25; AOS 32 KK26 (ŠS 2 v). 436 ArOr 62 238 I 867 (Š 41); specified as m a š - d a - r e 6 - a . 437 Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. ii 7-10; Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) rev. i 23-25. For e z e m - m a h as a reference to the akitifestival in month x, see §4.1. 434

124

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

supply from the merchants show that they provided only a portion of the gold that the Umma government paid to the crown as the mašdare’a tax (§4.1). The government also designated one shekel of gold for a standard of the governor438 (§4.3) and 0.25 shekel of gold for the earrings (n íg -g e š tu ) of the goddess Lamma-Amar-Sin.439 5.3.B. Silver (Table 5.3.B) As Table 18 shows below, the same four members of the gubernatorial family—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu—who emerged as the major recipients of the silver payments studied in chapter 2, likewise received the overwhelming share of the silver coming from the merchants. Other recipients included the governor, who took 205 shekels of silver in the year AS 3 but 1.67 shekels in AS 6,440 and the silversmith Ur-Šulpa’e, who received 156 shekels in AS 8.441 The merchant Ur-Dumuzida emerged as the single most important supplier of silver for the Umma government. His contribution of silver added up to 280 shekels in the year Š 43,442 489.93 shekels in Š 47,443 776 shekels in AS 3,444 81.5 shekels in AS 4,445 135.34 shekels in AS 6,446 and 274.56 shekels in AS 8.447 An unspecified merchant group (d a m -g à r[-e ]-n e ) provided substantial quantities of silver as well: 126.21 shekels in the year AS 4,448 328.73 shekels in AS 5,449 301.33 shekels in ŠS 9,450 and 200 shekels in IS 1.451 The merchant Pada provided 229.2 shekels in AS 5,452 and the merchant group supervised by Lu-kala supplied 247.42 shekels in ŠS 6.453 Table 18: Recipients of silver supplied by Umma merchants Period Recipient Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

85.54%

Lu-kala

9.82%

63.49%

Gududu

98.99%

Governor

7.49% 1.86%

Unavailable Total (shekels)

All periods

98.14%

Dadaga

Other(s)

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

366.83

4.23%

17.53%

0.41%

11.48%

1.01%

610.76

2759.07

692.46

4429.12

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

––––––––––––––––– 438

Jones Studies 216 (AS 3 i) obv. ii 7-8. Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 24-25. 440 See respectively Santag 6 119 rev. i 9-15; Ledgers pl. 15 9 rev. iii 26-27. 441 MVN 1 240 rev. i 13-17. 442 AAS 149—120 shekels; Princeton 1 565—160 shekels. 443 Santag 6 82. 444 Jones Studies 216 obv. ii 9-14, rev. i 4-5—251 shekels; Santag 6 119 rev. i 9-15, ii 1-5—525 shekels. 445 STA 22 obv. ii 12-16, rev. i 24-ii 2. 446 Ledgers pl. 15 9 obv. ii 1-2, rev. ii 37, iii 11-13, 26-27. 447 STA 1 rev. i 37-38—65 shekels; MVN 1 240 rev. i 8-9, 13-17—209.56 shekels. 448 TCL 5 6046 rev. ii 7-12. 449 BPOA 7 2186. 450 ZA 95 175 rev. i 4-5. 451 ZA 95 191 rev. i 16-17. 452 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 rev. i 29, ii 17-18, 23-24—131.95 shekels; Ledgers pl. 8 5 obv. 4-5—38 shekels; Ledgers pl. 6 4 (AS 5) rev. i 4-5—59.25 shekels. 453 TCL 5 6037 rev. ii 3-5, v 5-6. 439

125

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Silver from the merchants helped either to pay the mašdare’a tax to the crown for celebrating the three akiti-festivals in the capital city454 or to procure gold required by this tax (cf. §4).455 The Umma merchants thus played a significant role in supplying the silver to the provincial government, which then expended it for the benefit of the royalty. Records of silver supplied by the merchants may feature the terms sa 1 0 , “to purchase,” or sá m , “price.” Silver appears labeled as the price of a wide range of products (k ù sá m x [-šè ]), such as the following: “red” gold,456 gold,457 bronze,458 copper,459 wooden containers,460 alkaline plants,461 timber,462 bitumen,463 and people.464 Texts may also specify silver for the purchase of “red” gold (k ù h u š -a s a 1 0 -s a 1 0 -d è ),465 reeds (g i-a sa 1 0 -a ),466 or timber (g i š ù -s u h 5 -a sa 1 0 ).467 Two texts designate silver from the merchants as merchandise (n íg -s a m x [SA10]-m a x) for offerings to the god Enlil468 or for the exchange of other products intended for delivery as the bala-tax to the crown.469 With the exception of the g i š k á b -k u l containers, all these types of purchases with silver appear on the list of goods bought with silver that Wilcke (2008, 267-281) has compiled from Ur III Umma documents. Concerning the volume of silver transactions, the silver designated as the price of gold, or in exchange for gold, far exceeds the amount specified for the purchase of other products. Several texts hint that the acquisition of gold might have occurred in the two religious centers, Tummal470 and Nippur,471 close to each other in the Ur III kingdom. The small amount of gold supplied by the Umma merchants indicates that the Umma government had other channels to procure gold and that the merchants provided the silver for this purpose (§5.4.A). The silver that the texts designate for the exchange for non-gold goods, which amounts to not more than twenty shekels in total, poses a problem. Since the Umma merchants supplied most of the non-gold goods to the government, why they would still provide silver designated to buy such goods remains puzzling. In addition to royal taxes, the Umma merchants provided silver to meet other needs of the crown. Examples are the two minas of silver to pay for provisions of the queen472 (ig i-k á r n in ; discussed in §4.2) and possibly the six shekels for the “Holy Mound” (d u 6 k ù -g a ).473 Records of silver supplied by the merchants may carry another type of designation, k ù x, in which x stands for bitumen,474 copper,475 tin,476 bird plumage (p a -m u š e n ),477 salt,478 or dates.479

–––––––––––––––––

454

MVN 14 77 (Š 41 xi); AAS 149 (Š 43 vii); Princeton 1 565 (Š 43); YOS 4 270 (ŠS 3 xii); Ledgers pl. 27 15 (ŠS 7) obv. 10; Santag 6 327 (ŠS 9 xi). 455 MVN 3 197 (Š 42 x); ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. iv 29-31. 456 Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. i 13-15; HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) rev. 27-28; MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) rev. i 13-14; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. iv 29-31. 457 STA 22 (AS 4 i) rev. i 28-ii 2; TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) rev. ii 11-12, with gold for the crown of King Amar-Sin; 458 HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) rev. 29. 459 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. ii 23-24. 460 giš káb-kul in AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. ii 17-18; see note 265 for identification of the object. 461 Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 26. 462 g i š ù - s u h 5 , “fir”, in Ledgers pl. 27 15 (ŠS 7) obv. 11. See §5.3.L for identification of this tree. 463 Ledgers pl. 27 15 (ŠS 7) obv. 11. 464 Perhaps a slave (s a g ) in MVN 9 212 (ŠS 1 xii); a woman in BJRL 22 173 (IS 2 ii). 465 Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. ii 1-3. 466 TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) rev. i 1-4. 467 g i š ù - s u h 5 , “fir”, in Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 27. See §5.3.L for identification of this tree. 468 n i d b a ù n e s a g d e n - l í l in STA 22 (AS 4 i) obv. ii 12-16. 469 TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) rev. ii 9-10. 470 Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. i 13-15; for Tummal, see note 234. 471 MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) rev. i 13-14. 472 MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) rev. i 15-17. 473 TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iv 25-27. Two opinions exist concerning the meaning of d u 6 k ù - g a attested in Umma texts. Snell suggests that it formed part of the household of the god Šara, because Lugal-niglagare, the official who frequently withdrew goods from merchants for d u 6 k ù - g a , also received goods on behalf of Šara; see Snell 1982, 8990. Sallaberger links the d u 6 k ù - g a in Umma texts to the cosmic locality associated with the god Enlil in Nippur and understands it as a metonym of Nippur or the eighth month (i t i d u 6 - k ù ) there named after the cosmic locality; see Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 253-254.

126

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

The phrase may mean silver in lieu of or in exchange for product x. The total amount of silver attested amounts to less than one mina. Since the Umma merchants supplied all these products to the government, why they would need to provide silver payments associated with the same products remains difficult to explain. The two designations involving copper link it to the capital city of Ur, where the Umma merchants might have traveled in order to acquire this metal (§5.4.A). 5.3.C. Copper, Tin, and s u -g a n (Table 5.3.C) The Umma merchants supplied three base metals: copper (u ru d a ), tin (AN.NA),480 and su -g a n . The identification of s u -g a n remains disputed, but scholars agree that it refers to an expensive additive applied in small quantities in metallurgy.481 This conclusion finds support in the evidence here, according to which the annual supply of su -g a n does not exceed five minas. The amount of tin provided by the merchants appears to be on a similar scale,482 but the larger volume of copper could reach as high as 1,203 minas in a year.483 Based on the value measured in silver (Snell 1982, 146, 149-150), tin had the highest price followed in order by the less expensive s u -g a n and then copper. The texts record two other metals, lead (a -g a r 5 )484 and bronze,485 each of which appeared once among the supplies from the merchants and in the amount of no more than several minas. Two texts spell out the use of the metal concerned. The text Orient 16 62 71 (Š 47 xi) records 0.08 mina of tin applied on a gold finger-ring (šu -g u r) of the governor. The other text, MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii), mentions a much larger amount of tin, four minas, set aside for making pegs (k a k g a l) for the governor (rev. i 10-13). Among the recipients, Lu-Enlila received the most frequent supplies of metals from the merchants. Snell (1982, 81-82) and H. Neumann (1987, 115-118) have already observed his involvement with base metals in Umma. The present evidence never identifies Lu-Enlila by occupation, but he might have acted as a top administrator in the Metal Bureau in Umma where one of the responsibilities involved receiving metals from merchants and distributing them to artisans. Other recipients included two blacksmiths (Layamu486 and Ur-nigar487), Ur-gigir,488 Dadaga,489 Lu-kala,490 and Gududu.491 While the first three people received small amounts of metals measured in dozens of minas a year, the last three (identified elsewhere as the three people

––––––––––––––––– 474

RO 5 9 8 (AS 2 diri) rev. 4; Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) rev. 10; Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) rev. ii 9-10. TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) rev. 18-19; Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) rev. 36. 476 STA 1 (AS 8 vii) rev. i 38. 477 MVN 16 910 (AS 9) obv. i 14. 478 Santag 6 205 (AS 9). 479 Vicino Oriente 8/1 66 (ŠS 8 vii). 480 For its identification as tin instead of lead, see Landsberger 1965. He has reservations about transcribing AN.NA into n a g g a ; ibid., 294-295. 481 Candidates include an arsenic compound, antimony, or a deoxidizing agent such as fine charcoal or borax (tincal); see Moorey 1999, 241. 482 Cf. the amount of tin attested in the Nippur text JCS 11 41 (no date), which mentions 10 minas of tin to be weighed in exchange for 20 shekels of silver. 483 MVN 15 355 (ŠS 9). 484 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. v 34-rev. i 1. 485 UTI 3 2263 (ŠS 9). 486 BPOA 7 2552 (Š 32 vi)—20 minas of copper; Ontario 2 393 (Š 32 vii)—half a mina of s u - g a n and copper; BPOA 6 1369 (Š 32)—10 minas of copper. 487 RA 12 20 3 (Š 35 vi)—10 minas of copper + 0.17 mina of s u - g a n . 488 AUCT 1 774 (AS 7 vii) rev. 7-8—10 minas of copper. 489 MVN 20 160 (Š 47)—238 minas of copper + 4.22 minas of s u - g a n + 0.08 mina of tin. 490 Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) obv. i 17-20—21.75 minas of copper; Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) rev. 28-29—at least 10 minas of copper; MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) rev. i 10-13—4 minas of tin; MVN 16 910 (AS 9)—2.33 minas of tin; ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS 1 vii)—1.33 mina of s u - g a n . 491 MVN 15 355 (ŠS 9)—1,203 minas of copper. 475

127

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

controlling the silver revenue in Umma) could receive much larger amounts measuring from several hundred to more than a thousand minas. The largest annual supply of base metals, 1,203 minas of copper, went to Gududu in the year ŠS 9. 5.3.D. Alkaline Plants (Table 5.3.D) The Umma merchants supplied three types of alkaline plants all measured by volume, as follows: n a g a , “alkaline plants,” n a g a g a z /g a z x (KUM), “crushed alkaline plants,” and n a g a si-è , “sprouted alkaline plants” (Snell 1982, 121-123).492 Alkaline plants constituted a bulky, low-value product with a conversion rate at less than two grains of silver per liter. The annual supply from the Umma merchants could reach several thousand liters. Most merchants handled this product, and the major providers included the merchant Ur-Dumuzida and the merchant group supervised by Lu-kala. Ur-Dumuzida supplied 5,220.33 liters in the year AS 9,493 while Lu-kala’s group delivered 6618.33 liters in ŠS 6.494 A large portion of alkaline plants from the merchants served to meet the bala-obligation toward the crown. In the year ŠS 6, 3148.33 liters (c. 45 percent of the annual total) were to be transferred onto an account on the bala-tax.495 One text spells out the use of the alkaline products withdrawn as b a la (z i-g a b a la-a ): 1,020 liters went to make garments for the king (níg -d a b 5 túg a -g i 4 -u m lu g a l) and 240 liters in two years went for garments of the queen (n íg -d a b 5 tú g n in ).496 Likewise, another text discloses that the 120 liters of alkaline plants withdrawn as b a la went for a crown of the king (n íg -d a b 5 à g a -lu g a l).497 The regular juxtaposition of b a la with royal titles suggests that the naming of royal members, especially the king, as the beneficiary may amount to using the term b a la . If so, more instances of alkaline plants withdrawn from the merchants may count as bala-deliveries, as follows: for a crown of the king,498 his garments,499 his lustration rite (a -tu 5 -a ),500 or his cleaner (g á b -d a n 6 ).501 In addition to satisfying the personal needs of the royalty, withdrawals labeled as b a la , such as the 120 liters of alkaline plants recorded in the text SAT 2 646 (AS 1), also served the needs of workshops (g i š-k in -ti). This specific link of b a la to the workshops allows the identification of other withdrawals as bala.502 Withdrawals involving the capital city of Ur counted as yet another subcategory of bala-payment (Sharlach 2004, 35-36).503 The Umma merchants supplied alkaline plants to meet the local needs for the manufacture of leather and textiles. According to the document MVN 16 1002 (AS 3 v), local craftsmen used alkaline plants to clean the flax for the manufacturing of linen (g u g a d a d a n 6 -d a n 6 -d è ).

–––––––––––––––––

492

According to Butz 1984, 282-285 (with previous literature), the term n a g a functions as a rubric and may sometimes refer to soda. The term n a g a s i - è , on the other hand, refers to potash, with s i - è meaning “crystallization.” In records of the textile industry, n a g a may appear as an abbreviated form of n a g a s i - è . See also Waetzoldt 1972, 172. 493 ASJ 11 204-216 obv. ii 15-18, 30-31, 35-41, iii 6-7, 11-12, iv 5-7, 16, 24, v 30-31, 40, rev. iii 8-10, 29-33. 494 TCL 5 6037 obv. ii 13-14, rev. i 11-12, ii 18-19, 33-34, iii 29-30, 34-iv 2. 495 TCL 5 6037 obv. ii 13-14. 496 STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 20-21, 31-32, iii 8. 497 BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 8-10. 498 RA 49 91 25 (Š 39)—60 liters; TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) obv. ii 2-3—60 liters; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) obv. ii 18-20, 24-26—570 liters; BPOA 1 491 (AS 9 viii) = ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. ii 15-16—120 liters; AOS 32 S23 (date broken) obv. 9’-10’—2,970 liters. 499 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) obv. ii 12-13—1,020 liters; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. ii 17-18—1,020 liters. 500 RA 49 91 25 (Š 39)—10 liters; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 16-17—15 liters; Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. ii 4-5—3 liters; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. iv 16—5 liters. 501 TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) obv. ii 6-7—450 liters. 502 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) obv. i 20-22, ii 2-3, rev. ii 14—851 liters; Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) obv. ii 15-16, 22-23, iii 5-7—851 liters. 503 Santag 6 83 (Š 47)—1,789 liters; HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) obv. 10-11—515 liters; SNAT 356 (AS 5) obv. 10-11—515 liters; SNAT 365 (AS 6) rev. i 3-4—660 liters; AOS 32 S23 (date broken) rev. 21’—515 liters.

128

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

A(ya)kala the leather worker (a šg a b ),504 Lu-Nagarpa’e the felt-maker (tú g -d u 8 ),505 and Ušmu the fuller (lú -á z la g )506 withdrew between dozens of and more than one thousand liters from the merchants in a given year. None of them, however, can compare with Ikala, who took in 2,100 liters annually in AS 6 and AS 8, 900 liters in AS 7, and 3,000 liters in AS 9.507 Although the present evidence never specifies Ikala’s occupation, the large volume of alkaline plants withdrawn may help to identify him as the “scribe of linen garments” (d u b -sa r tú g -g a d a ) known elsewhere (Waetzoldt 1972, 101-102; Studevent-Hickman 2006, 73-74). The text TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) designates the 2,418 liters of alkaline plants taken by Ušmu the fuller and A(ya)kala the leather worker, as well as four other people, as z i-g a š à u ru -k a , “withdrawal within the city.”508 If the city concerned turned out to be the provincial capital, also named Umma, then such an understanding would connect the alkaline plants withdrawn to the fulfillment of local needs. The last bit of evidence attests to two people, Lugal-ezem the scribe509 and Lanimu,510 who withdrew several thousand liters of alkaline plants from the merchants, but their function in the larger provincial economy escapes characterization. 5.3.E. Gypsum (Table 5.3.E) Just as with the alkaline plants, records of gypsum (im -b á b b a r) indicate a low-value product with a conversion rate as low as 0.1 grain of silver per mina. The texts present it as measured by weight except in a special form, im -b á b b a r g a z x (KUM), “crushed gypsum,”511 which they record as measured by volume. The year ŠS 6 attests to the largest annual supply of gypsum, when two merchant groups supervised by Aba-gina and Lu-kala together provided 5,443 minas of gypsum.512 Ikala, the scribe of linen garments identified above, received more than one third of it.513 The gypsum from the merchants served the local needs of the Umma province, in particular the textile industry, “as an abrasive in the process of cleaning and making a felted surface on the fabric” (Firth 2011, 6.5.3). For example, Ikala the scribe of linen garments withdrew 9,260 minas for the period AS 4-ŠS 6,514 and the fuller Ušmu took 1,500 minas in the year ŠS 2.515 The 596 minas of gypsum for the temple of Šara516 benefited the locals too. On the other hand, the texts attest to withdrawals to meet the bala-obligation toward the king, which include general

––––––––––––––––– 504

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. i 28-29—240 liters; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. ii 25-26—volume broken; Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) obv. iii 29—180 liters; MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) obv. ii 15-17—30 liters; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. iii 29-30—120 liters; TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iv 5-6—90 liters. 505 Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. i 30-31—10 liters; Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. i 5-6—40 liters; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. iii 31-33—30 liters. 506 TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iii 33-iv 1—1,200 liters. 507 See respectively Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 14-15; Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) rev. i 13’-15’; STA 1 (AS 8 vii) rev. i 33-35; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. iii 8-10 = BPOA 1 999 (AS 9). 508 obv. iii 13-15, 33-iv 1, iv 5-6, 12-14, 19-20, rev. i 13-14. 509 SAT 2 188 (Š 38)—300 liters; BCT 2 134 (Š 38) obv. 1-2—3,600 liters; RA 49 91 25 (Š 39)—450 liters. 510 OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) obv. 3—2,058 liters; Syracuse 483 (Š 46) obv. 2—1,959 liters; Santag 6 83 (Š 47)—1,789 liters. 511 Firth proposes that i m - b á b b a r k u m refers to plaster of Paris; see Firth 2011, 5.4. “Plaster of Paris is made by heating gypsum to temperatures of 150-200º C, which converts it from CaSO4.2H2O to the hemihydrate, CaSO4.0.5H2O. This can be mixed with water to form a paste that can be used as a plaster. Plaster of Paris is often referred to as gypsum plaster ” (ibid., 2.1). 512 Ledgers pl. 25 14 obv. 12-13; TCL 5 6037 obv. ii 15-19, v 32-33, rev. ii 20-23, 35-37. 513 TCL 5 6037 rev. ii 35-37. 514 STA 22 (AS 4 i) rev. i 13-15, 21-23—380 minas; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 16-18—1,380 minas; Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. i 16-18—1,800 minas; Ledgers pl. 19 11(AS 7 ix) rev. i 11’-12’—1,260 minas; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. iii 6-7—2,400 minas; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. ii 35-37—2,040 minas. 515 TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iv 2-4. 516 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. ii 20-23.

129

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

withdrawals labeled as b a la -(a ) 517 and special withdrawals with designated use (§5.3.D). The special withdrawals include the following: gypsum withdrawn for the capital city of Ur,518 for a crown,519 a special type of garment (t ú g a -g i 4 -a -u m ),520 and boots (k u š s ú h u b ) of the king,521 for garments of the queen,522 and for royal workshops.523 One particular withdrawal, attested at 285 minas in the year Š 44 and 225 minas annually from the year AS 4 to AS 6,524 concerns the “Holy Mound” (n íg -d a b 5 d u 6 -k ù -g a )525 and exhibits unusual consistency in quantity over time. In this case, the use of the gypsum remains unknown. 5.3.F. Bitumen (Table 5.3.F) The Umma merchants provided two types of bitumen, as follows: é sir é -a , “bitumen of Ea,”526 and é sir h á d , “dried bitumen.”527 The texts show that the é sir é -a was measured by volume, and the é sir h á d by weight but sometimes by volume as well.528 The annual supply peaked in the year ŠS 2 at 33,292.33 liters plus 16,660 minas,529 of which most came from the merchant UrDumuzida.530 The Umma merchants, who supplied the bitumen, met the demand of the bala-tax to the crown as a priority. Similar to the withdrawals of alkaline plants and gypsum, the present evidence documents withdrawals of bitumen dubbed as b a la 531 and those intended for specific use of the crown. Among those intended for specific use, the texts record the following withdrawals: for bathrooms (d u 1 0 -ú s ),532 workshops,533 boats,534 warehouses (é -k iš ib ),535 roofs (ù r),536 the crown,537 the lustration rite (a -tu 5 -a ) of the king,538 the coating (b a -a b -su -u b ) of the

–––––––––––––––––

517

BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 3-4—10 minas; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 30—768 minas; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. iv 3-4—40 minas; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. ii 15-16—10 liters; AOS 32 S23 (date broken) rev. 14’—1,800 minas. 518 Santag 6 83 (Š 47)—220 minas; HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) rev. 18-19—250 minas; SNAT 356 (AS 5) obv. 12-13—275 minas; SNAT 365 (AS 6) rev. i 5-6—580 minas; AOS 32 S23 (date broken) rev. 22’-23’—275 minas. 519 TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) obv. ii 1—120 minas; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) obv. ii 22-23—300 minas; BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 6-7—120 minas; BPOA 1 491 (AS 9 viii)—120 minas; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. ii 13-14— 120 minas; AOS 32 S23 (date broken) obv. 12’-13’—125 minas. 520 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) obv. ii 14-17—360 minas; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 33-34—360 minas; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. ii 19-21—360 minas. 521 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) obv. ii 27-30—10 liters; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 25-27—10 liters. 522 STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 22-24, iii 9-11—120 minas for two years. 523 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) obv. i 18-19, ii 4-7, rev. ii 15-16—753 minas; Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) obv. ii 17-19, iii 3-4—618 minas. 524 See respectively Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) obv. 5-7; STA 22 (AS 4 i) obv. ii 9-11; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. ii 4-6; BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 23-25. 525 A cosmic locality in association with the god Enlil in Nippur; see note 473 for further discussion. 526 According to Heimpel 2009a, 55, even though é s i r é - a seems to mean “house bitumen,” no evidence links this type of bitumen to house construction. He explains convincingly that é - a refers to the god Ea in Mesopotamia, who appeared manifested as the god River (d Íd) of the bitumen wells of Madga (older name of Hit), which served as the principal source of bitumen for southern Mesopotamia. See also the discussion of bitumen in §5.4.B 527 Both translations follow Snell 1982, 125-129. 528 E.g., SAT 2 613 (Š 47) obv. 1: 4 ( u ) 1 ( a š ) 4 ( b a r i g ) é s i r h á d g u r l u g a l ; Orient 16 63 75 (Š 48) obv. 1: 1(u) 2(aš) ésir hád gur lugal. 529 Nisaba 9 57—144 liters; BPOA 2 2199—600 minas; BPOA 2 2161—1,920 minas; BPOA 1 1165—920 liters + 6,120 minas; TCL 5 5680 obv. iii 7-8, 21-32, iv 15-18, 22-24, rev. i 16-17, 21-23, ii 4-7, 14-15, 21-24—32,228.33 liters + 8,020 minas. 530 See Nisaba 9 57, BPOA 2 2199, and TCL 5 5680 above. 531 Syracuse 174 (Š 44)—510 liters; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 28-30, iii 21-22, rev. i 2-8, 14-17—538 liters+18 minas; BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 3-5, 14-16, ii 27-iii 1—95 liters; AOS 32 S23 (date broken) rev. 15’—1,500 liters. 532 Umma 98 (Š 33 viii)—20 minas. 533 SAT 2 646 (AS 1)—100 liters; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) obv. i 16-17, rev. ii 13—283.5 liters; Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) obv. iii 1-2—29 liters. 534 Torino 2 651 (AS 7 iii)—60 liters; BPOA 6 922 (AS 7 iv)—80 liters. 535 Princeton 1 532 (Š 34)—10 liters. 536 Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) rev. 7-9—20 liters. 537 AOS 32 S23 (date broken) obv. 11’—770.17 liters.

130

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

parts of a royal barge (m á -g u r 8 ),539 the coating of the pegs (g i š k a k ) of a palace of King AmarSin,540 transportation in jars (g ir-ra b a -a -g a r) that went to Puzriš-Dagan,541 and the capital city of Ur.542 The bitumen destined for Puzriš-Dagan added up to 16,617 liters for the two years Š 4748. Some withdrawals, although not labeled as b a la , served the royal or state interest nonetheless. They dealt with bitumen for the following: the caulking of the boats for the god Nanna and the goddess Lamma-Amar-Sin;543 the nidba-offering for the god Enlil;544 and the town of Ga’eš545 (located outside Ur the capital city), where celebrations of the akiti-festival took place.546 The merchants provided bitumen to meet the needs of the Umma province, the governor, and the patron god Šara. Bitumen was withdrawn to caulk boats and barges as well as, once, chariots of the governor.547 Likewise, the texts attest to frequent withdrawals for caulking the barges of Šara,548 for coating the reeds or reed mats of his temple,549 and for an ambiguous object (TU) of Šara and the gods Anunnak.550 The bitumen withdrawn for a shipyard (m a r-s a ) in the Apisal district551 served local needs too. The quantity of bitumen expended for all these local purposes, however, amounted to far less than the bitumen delivered as bala-payments to the king. Some other expenditures of bitumen appear attested, but the texts do not provide adequate information to tell whether they served the royal or the local interests. These withdrawals included bitumen designated for coating vessels (some made of reeds),552 wooden parts,553 and ropes that tightened roof beams (é š g i š ù r-ra -k e 4 ),554 and for unlocated shipyards.555 The texts attest to huge amounts of bitumen whose use remains undetermined. For instance, the text TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) mentions nearly 30,000 liters of bitumen withdrawn by two people from the merchant Ur-Dumuzida, but mentions nothing about this transaction other than the names of the withdrawers: Ur-Nungal and Lu-Sin. No overall pattern has emerged regarding those

––––––––––––––––– 538

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 15—0.17 quart; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. ii 28-29—0.17 quart. Such as railings? (g i š m e - d í m ) and punting poles (g i š m i - r í - z a ): Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. i 24-27—26 liters. 540 Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. i 28-ii 1—15 liters. 541 SAT 2 613 (Š 47)—12,540 liters of dried bitumen + 120 liters of bitumen of Ea; AOS 32 7 (Š 48)—357 liters of bitumen of Ea; Orient 16 63 75 (Š 48)—3,600 liters of dried bitumen. Note that SAT 2 613 obv. 4 should be read as: g i r (instead of e ) b a - a - g a r based on pictures of this tablet (courtesy of Dr. Elizabeth Payne from the Yale Babylonian Collection); cf. the GIR sign in Orient 16 63 75 obv. 3. The type of vessel called g i r appears in Ur III documents (often in association with bitumen) and the craft archive from Isin. The writing of g i r does not seem to be an orthographic variant of g i r 4 , “oven,” which appears written as GIR4 in Ur III evidence. For details, see Sallaberger 1996, 75 n. 298. 542 HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) rev. 20—10 liters; SNAT 365 (AS 6) rev. i 1-2—269 liters. 543 Respectively BPOA 1 1400 (ŠS 3 xii)—300 liters; Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. i 9-12—440 liters. 544 ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. ii 41-43—250 liters. 545 Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 1-2—20 liters; BPOA 7 2288 (AS 6)—20 liters; Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. ii 11-14—180 liters (for a temple). The temple mentioned in Ledgers pl. 17 10 may refer to the Karzida temple of the moon god Nanna, which was a major project constructed during the reign of King Amar-Sin; see Steinkeller forthcoming b. 546 Celebrations of the akiti-festival in month i and vii involved a trip of Nanna to Ga’eš; details in Sallaberger 1993, vol. 1, 170-172. 547 Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. ii 18-21—180 liters; Nisaba 9 57 (ŠS 2 xii)—144 liters; BPOA 2 2161 (ŠS 2 xii)— 1,920 minas; TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) rev. i 16-17—16 liters (for both chariots and barges); BPOA 2 2380 (ŠS 3 iv)—60 liters; BPOA 1 1199 (ŠS 3 ix)—600 liters; BPOA 1 1019 (ŠS 3)—20 liters. 548 Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 7-10—360 minas; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. iv 11-15—330 liters + 1,200 minas; SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) rev. 8, 12-13—440 liters + 1,200 minas. 549 ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. iii 39-42—10 liters; TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iii 29-32—690 liters. 550 SAT 3 1621 (ŠS 5 iv)—5 liters + 240 minas. 551 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. iv 3-5—600 liters. 552 CTNMC 19 (Š 41 iv)—18 liters; BPOA 1 1437 (ŠS 3 iii)—10 liters; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. iii 11-14—65 liters; TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iv 15-18, rev. i 21-23—40 liters. 553 Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. ii 2-3—3 liters. 554 TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iv 22-24—70 liters. 555 BM 113129 (AS 9)—2,740 liters + 6,600 minas; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. i 20-21—3,901 liters. 539

131

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

who withdrew bitumen from the merchants. The texts attest to dozens of people in this capacity, but identify them by name alone or further as a scribe plus a patronymic. Even in the latter case, the title of scribe proves too general to reflect any specific responsibility that the holder might have exercised in the Umma institutional economy. 5.3.G. Resins (Table 5.3.G) Resins, as a rubric, subsume a broad range of products supplied by Ur III merchants. The list compiled by Snell (1982, 156-168) and updated by H. Brunke and W. Sallaberger (2010) covers the types of resins attested in the merchant accounts from Umma, as follows: á d (“myrtle”), a rg a -n ú m , b u lu g x /m u lu g x (ŠIM×ÙH), d a m -š e -lu m , e n -HAR, eren (“cedar”), g i(-d u 1 0 -g a ) (“good/sweet reeds”), NI-g i 4 -tu m , s a g -h irin x -n a , (še )-li (“pine/juniper seeds”), š im ? GAM.GAM-m a (“terebinth ”), š im -g á n a , š im -g i, šim -g ig , (š im -)g u 4 -k u -ru , š im -h i (measured by weight), š im -h i-a (measured mostly by volume), š im -IM, šu -ú r-m e (“cypress”), and z a -b a -lu m (“juniper”).556 This study counts two more products, ì- H I -n u n -n a 557 and p a -li, as resins. Although classified by Snell (ibid., 151, 181) respectively as oil and miscellaneous, ìH I -n u n -n a and p a -li appear in the resin cluster and as a constant part of the resin list (ibid., 3032). The resins were measured either by volume or by weight. The largest annual supply, attested in the year ŠS 6, consisted of 308.09 liters plus at least 432.83 minas of different kinds of resins.558 Most of that large supply came from the merchant group of Lu-kala.559 Contemporary recipes from Umma list these types of resins as necessary ingredients for making fragrant oil (ì du10-ga) (Brunke and Sallaberger 2010, esp. 54-62).560 While alkaline plants, gypsum, and bitumen withdrawals served the needs of the crown first, the resins provided by Umma merchants served the local needs of the province first. Nin-hiliya, the spouse of the governor Ayakala, withdrew large amounts of resins from the merchant UrDumuzida.561 The inventory of the Emaš establishment (n íg -g á l-la é -m a š) registered even more resins from the merchants.562 The patron god of Umma, Šara, consumed plenty of resins as well. Withdrawals were made for his temple,563 his barge,564 his garment,565 and another littleunderstood cause (NI.KAM?.GI d š á ra -k e 4 d a h -h a ).566 Bala-deliveries for the interest of the crown appear often in the texts, but in smaller quantities. The merchants provided resins to the king for the following: making spices? (ù r lu g a l-k a ),567 drinks (n a g lu g a l),568 ointment (ì ú g u lu g a l),569 offering (s á -d u 1 1 lu g a l),570

–––––––––––––––––

556

Among them, á d is misread as m u n (“salt”) in Snell 1982, 157-158; b u l u g x misread as š i m , ibid., 161; e r e n misread as SÍG.ÙZ, ibid., 159; g i ( - d u 1 0 - g a ) classified as reed, ibid., 155; s a g - h i r i n x - n a as vegetables, ibid., 176. 557 Possibly a kind of pricey vegetable oil according to Brunke and Sallaberger 2010, 47 558 SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) obv. 12-rev. 3, 9—11 liters + 32.17 minas; TCL 5 6037 obv. iv 11-v 23, 26-27, rev. ii 1-2, 8-9, iv 6-23, 28-29—297.09 liters + 400.66 minas. 559 See TCL 5 6037 in the preceding note. 560 Other ingredients included premium beer (k a š s i g 5 ), good sourdough (b á b i r s i g 5 ), flour (e š a ), malt porridge (b a - b a m u n u 4 ), a dairy product (g a m u r u b 4 ), dates, and fig strings (g i š p è š š e - e r - g u ). 561 JCS 26 100 2 (ŠS 1)—10 liters + 123.83 minas; JCS 26 102 4 (ŠS 2)—27 liters + 82 minas; JCS 26 106 8 (ŠS 4)— 12 minas. 562 BPOA 6 1243 (AS 2 v)—364.67 minas; Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. i 21-25—281 minas. For é - m a š , see note 22 above. 563 ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. iv 8-10—18 minas; TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) rev. i 29-ii 2—20 minas; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. ii 8-9—2.5 liters. 564 SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) obv. 12-rev. 3, 9—11 liters + 32.17 minas. 565 UTI 4 2307 (ŠS 2 iv)—2.5 liters. 566 Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. i 27’-32’, 35’-rev. ii 11—at least 1 quart + 5.16 minas. Note that totals exclude the broken number in rev. i 40’, which is written on the edge and probably represents a subtotal of some sort. 567 Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) obv. 8-17—3.33 liters + 13.33 minas; MVN 16 910 (AS 9) rev. i 12-ii 3—3.33 liters + 13.33 minas; AOS 32 S23 (date broken) obv. 1’-7’—62.83 liters + 9 minas. The phrase ù r l u g a l - k a may well be an abbreviated form of l ú - ù r - r a l u g a l - k a , “spice-millers of the king.”

132

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

the palace,571 and the lustration rite.572 Other withdrawals of resins appear linked to offerings for the funeral chapel (k i-a -n a g ) of King Ur-Namma.573 Similar to the situation with the bitumen withdrawals, the beneficiaries of some withdrawals of resins remain unknown. Some of the resin withdrawals went to the offering for the diviner (m a š-šu -g íd -g íd ),574 the nidba-offering for the god Enlil,575 and an unlocated shipyard.576 Withdrawals of bitumen discussed in §5.3.F attests to the latter two uses. 5.3.H. Condiments and Spices (Table 5.3.H) In contrast to the great variety of resins, the Umma merchants supplied only five kinds of condiments or spices, as follows: cumin (k u -m u l or ú g á m u n [b a b b a r/g i 6 ]),577 coriander (š e lú ), g a z i,578 and an aromatic seed? (z i-b a -tu m ). All of them were measured by volume except for z i-b a -tu m , which was done by weight. The evidence records supplies of coriander in far greater quantities than any other product in this category. For instance, compared with 198 liters of cumin in the year ŠS 2,579 the merchant Ur-Dumuzida supplied 1,500 liters of coriander in the same year.580 The present evidence discloses the use of but a small part of the condiments and spices supplied by the Umma merchants. The bala-tax that the Umma province paid to the crown581 —to the spice-millers582 and the capital city of Ur583 respectively—included condiments and spices. The supplies from the merchants also served the needs of the Kitchen (é -m u h a ld im ).584 5.3.I. Oil and Fats (Table 5.3.I) The Umma merchants supplied four types of oil or fats, as follows: sesame oil (ì-g i š), lard (ìšá h ), sheep fat (ì u d u ), and ì- UD.KA whose identification remains ambiguous. Another product, ì- H I -n u n -n a , counted as a resin in §5.3.G, might have qualified as a type of oil as well. All these products were measured by volume. While supplies of sesame oil and lard might reach hundreds or thousands of liters in a year, the records attest to supplies of sheep fat and ì- UD.KA but once at a mere twenty and two liters respectively.585 The largest annual supply of oil and fats occurred in

––––––––––––––––– 568

TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) obv. ii 8-10—11 liters + 31.5 minas; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 34-iii 4—6.5 liters + 19.5 minas; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. ii 1-6—9.5 liters + 28.5 minas. In the latter two texts, brewers withdrew the resins. 569 TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) obv. ii 15-20—38.33 liters + 7 minas; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 7-16—38.33 liters + 7 minas; Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) obv. ii 3-14—38.33 liters + 7 minas. 570 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. i 21-27—0.67 liter + 1 mina. 571 SNAT 356 (AS 5) rev. 1-11—6.67 liters + 9 minas. 572 Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 13-14, 18-20—2.5 liters; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. ii 24-27, 32-33—2.67 liters. 573 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. i 16-17—3 liters; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 9-11—3 liters; TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) rev. iii 11-13—3 liters. 574 TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) obv. ii 21-22—1 mina; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. ii 7-9—1 mina. 575 ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. ii 3-32—42 liters + 67 minas. 576 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. ii 1-2—0.33 minas. 577 See note 161 for its identification. 578 Identification discussed in §3.5.C. 579 TCL 5 5680 rev. ii 8-9, iii 6-7, 18-19. 580 TCL 5 5680 rev. iii 16-17. 581 BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 21-23—63 liters of cumin; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. ii 3-4—62.90 liters of cumin. 582 Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) obv. 20-rev. 1—63.33 liters of cumin. For the understanding of ù r as an abbreviation of l ú ù r - ( r a ) , see also note 567 above. 583 HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) rev. 22-26—20 liters of g a z i ; SNAT 365 (AS 6) obv. ii 5-7, 16-19—22 liters of coriander + 22.5 liters of g a z i + 2.5 liters of cumin + 195 liters of salt. 584 TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) obv. i 19-20—63 liters of cumin. The Kitchen appears attested in all the major corpora of the Ur III period and took charge of both preparing food and serving meals to a large number of people. For a systematic study, see Allred 2006. 585 For sheep fat, see Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. i 1; for ì - UD.KA, see Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 3-6 repeated in BPOA 7 2288 (AS 6).

133

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

the year ŠS 6 when the merchant supervised by Lu-Haya and the merchant group of Lu-kala together supplied 1,546 liters of sesame oil and 3,252 liters of lard.586 Similar to the lack of details about the resins, condiments, and spices, the texts contain further information about but a small portion of the oil and fats provided by the merchants. The nidba-offering for the god Enlil consumed around 400 liters of sesame oil and 3,300 liters of lard.587 Withdrawals as bala-deliveries for the crown,588 including one designated for the festival honoring King Šulgi,589 ranged between less than ten to several hundred liters of lard and sesame oil. Small quantities also went for a barge of the local god Šara.590 A withdrawal of lard and sesame oil, marked in a receipt as é -g a l k u 4 -ra , “entering the (royal) palace,” later reappears in a balanced account as a bala-delivery to the king.591 This correspondence establishes the synonymous meanings of the terms é -g a l k u 4 -ra and b a la . A scribe named Ur-Šulpa’e received the largest supplies, in terms of both frequency and volume, of lard and sesame oil from the merchants. The leather worker Akala (see §5.3.D) withdrew small amounts of oil and fats.592 5.3.J. Fruits and Honey (Table 5.3.J) The Umma merchants provided four kinds of fruits, as follows: dates, figs (g i š p è š), apples? (g i š h a š h u r),593 and raisins (g e š tin h á d). All of these fruits were measured by volume except for a type of fig counted in strings (g i š p è š š e-e r-g u ). The Sumerian term là l, often translated as honey, might have referred in Ur III documents to date syrup (Limet 1977, 54-55). The annual supply of honey did not exceed two dozen liters, while the supply of dates could amount to 3,000 liters in a year.594 In the year AS 4, two merchants, Ur-Dumuzida and Sag-ku, provided the largest volume of fruits and honey attested for any year. Their supply consisted of twenty-one and a half liters of honey, 115 liters of dried figs, twenty-four strings of figs, 81.67 liters of raisins, and three thousand liters of dates.595 Again, scholars understand but a few of the uses of the fruits and honey withdrawn from the merchants. Fulfilling the bala-obligation to the crown appeared to take priority. The texts attest to withdrawals designated as b a la 596 or specified for particular royal causes, such as making spices,597 offerings (s á -d u 1 1 ),598 ointment599 for the ruling king, and preparations for offerings for

–––––––––––––––––

586

SNAT 504 rev. 6-7—12 liters of sesame oil + 29 liters of lard, by d a m - g à r l ú - d h a - ì a ; TCL 5 6037 rev. i 4-8, ii 31-32, iii 25-28, iv 24-27—1,534 liters of sesame oil + 3,223 liters of lard, by d a m - g à r - n e l ú - k a l - l a . 587 ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. ii 33-34, 36-39. 588 SAT 2 706 (AS 2)—325.67 liters of sesame oil + 449.67 liters of lard, transaction duplicated in Ledgers pl. 2 2 (AS 3) obv. 8-12; TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) rev. ii 13-15—600 liters of sesame oil; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. ii 9-11—390 liters of lard; BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 24-26—2 liters of sesame oil. 589 AUCT 1 540 (Š 39) obv. 1-2—6.5 liters of sesame oil + 2.5 liters of lard. 590 SNAT 504 (ŠS 6)—12 liters of sesame oil + 29 liters of lard. 591 See in order SAT 2 706 (AS 2); Ledgers pl. 2 2 (AS 3) obv. 8-12. 592 Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. i 1—20 liters of sheep fat; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. iii 25-28—5 liters of sesame oil + 7 liters of lard. 593 Further divided into g i š h a š h u r d u r u 5 , “fresh apples,” versus g i š h a š h u r h á d , “dry apples”; for problems of identifying g i š h a š h u r , see note 168. 594 Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) rev. i 20-22. 595 STA 22 obv. ii 1-3, 5-8; Ledgers pl. 4 3 rev. i 20-22; TCL 5 6162 obv. ii 23-25. 596 BIN 5 76 (AS 1)—2 liters of honey; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) rev. i 9-13—24.5 liters of raisins + 5 strings of figs; BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 11-13—15 liters of honey; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. ii 5-8—39.67 liters of raisins + 16 strings of figs. 597 Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) rev. 2-3—500 liters of apples; see note 567 above. 598 TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) rev. 12—6 liters of raisins. 599 STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 1-6, iii 12-20—5 liters of dates + 3 liters of dried apples? + half a string of figs, annually for two years. Among the fruits, dates and figs are attested as ingredients (together with different kinds of resins) for making fragrant oil; see Brunke and Sallaberger 2010, 54-62.

134

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

the funeral chapel of the deceased king Ur-Namma.600 In addition, withdrawals of figs, raisins, apples, and honey601 went to the “Holy Mound.”602 As for those who withdrew fruits and honey from the merchants, the texts often identify them by name alone. 5.3.K. Vegetables (Table 5.3.K) The Umma merchants supplied four main vegetables, as follows: chickpeas (g ú -g a l), lentils (g ú tu r), garlic (s u m ),603 and onions (su m -s ik il).604 The largest annual volume of vegetables, all for an undisclosed purpose, appeared in the year ŠS 2 when the merchant Ur-Dumuzida provided 147 liters of garlic, 300 liters of chickpeas, and 1,200 liters of onion.605 The texts often lack details about any use of the vegetables withdrawn from the merchants, but when they do mention information in this regard, it points to the crown as the ultimate beneficiary. In addition to general bala-deliveries for the crown,606 withdrawals from the merchants went for processing spices for the king607 or for some purpose in connection with the crown of the king608 and the capital city of Ur.609 The present evidence attests to one withdrawal of vegetables for the “Holy Mound” (see §5.3.J) perhaps located in Nippur.610 5.3.L. Timber and Timber Products (Table 5.3.L) The most common type of timber supplied by the Umma merchants, denominated as g i š ù -su h 5 , refers to either fir or the indigenous Calabrian pine.611 The latest publication of W. Heimpel (2011b, 103-111) introduces further evidence in support of its identification as pine. The texts often designate g i š ù -s u h 5 for making parts of boats with a capacity up to 120 bushels, including punting poles (m i-rí-z a or g i-m u š), mast poles (d im -g a l), and planks (g i š a -ra ). The evidence also designates it for the manufacture of doors, door parts (b a r-d a , “crossbars”), and plows (a p in ). The merchants could provide other types of timber or timber parts, such as: g i š d ú b -d ú b , giš h a š h u r (“apple tree?”),612 g i š íld a g (“black poplar”),613 m i-s ír g i š ig (“door ties”),614 g i š še -

––––––––––––––––– 600

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. i 14-15, 18-20—0.33 quart of honey + 2 liters of raisins; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 5-8—0.67 quart of honey + 4 liters of raisins + 4 strings of figs; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. iii 35-38—0.67 quart of honey + 4 liters of raisins + 4 strings of figs. 601 STA 22 (AS 4 i) obv. ii 1-3, 5-8—115 liters of dried figs + 18 strings of figs + 71.67 liters of raisins + 2.5 liters of honey; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. ii 2-3—79 liters of raisins + 2.5 liters of honey; BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 13-20—80 liters of dried figs + 180 liters of dried apples + 72 liters of raisins + 2.5 liters of honey; ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS 1 vii) obv. 13-16—78.66 liters of raisins. 602 A cosmic location associated with the god Enlil and may have been located in Nippur; see note 473 for details. 603 Including four sub-types: s u m z a - h a - d i n , s u m z a - h a - d i n i g i n u - s i g 5 , s u m z a - h a - d i n i g i - s i g 5 , and sum gaz. 604 Including s u m - s i k i l i g i n u - s i g 5 , s a g s u m - s i k i l i g i n u - s i g 5 , s a g s u m - s i k i l , and n u m u n s u m - s i k i l . 605 TCL 5 5680 rev. iii 8-10, 14-15, 20-25. 606 STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 26-27—83.67 liters of chickpea flour 607 Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) obv. 18-19—200 liters of chickpeas; MVN 16 910 (AS 9) rev. i 8-11—153 liters of chickpeas; see also note 567 above. 608 AOS 32 S23 (date broken) obv. 8—132.33 liters of onions. 609 HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) obv. 12-17—29.5 liters of onions + 17 liters of garlic; SNAT 356 (AS 5) obv. 7-9—29.5 liters of onions + 17 liters of garlic; SNAT 365 (AS 6) obv. ii 4, 8-13—90 liters of chickpeas + 14 liters of garlic + 25 liters of onions; AOS 32 S23 (date broken) rev. 18’-20’—29.5 liters of onions + 17 liters of garlic. 610 BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 21-22—30 liters of chickpeas. 611 For the identification of g i š ù - s u h 5 as “fir,” see, e.g., Snell 1982, 222 with previous literature; for “pine,” see, e.g., Stol 1979, 18-19 n. 68. As Powell 1992, 116-118 reviews, evidence in favor of “pine” includes: (1) fir does not grow in southern Mesopotamia; and (2) pine proved more suitable for building merchantile ships because it does not decay, while fir provided a better timber for building warships because of its light weight. The problem with the identification of g i š ù - s u h 5 as “pine” lies in that the spread of pine in Mesopotamia may have happened later than the third millennium. In addition, as g i š ù - s u h 5 appeared among the supply of the merchants, it did not have to be indigenous to Mesopotamia. See also §5.4.B. 612 See note 168 above for problem with identification.

135

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

d u 1 0 (an indigenous type of juniper),615 g i š s u k u 5 ig (“doors?”), g i š u r-lu m , g i š z a -b a -lu m (“juniper”), and g i š k a b (an indigenous type of willow).616 The annual supply peaked in the year ŠS 6 when the two merchants groups of Aba-gina and Lu-kala, along with an anonymous merchant, supplied a total of 1,002 units of timber and timber products.617 Timber and timber parts withdrawn from the merchants served the needs of the crown. In addition to those timber products described as the bala-tax,618 withdrawals went toward the following building projects: bathrooms (é -d u 1 0 -ú s -sá ) of the king619 and doors of royal palaces;620 props? of a stele (m u d a l n a -rú -a -š è );621 a sheepfold;622 the “fattening houses” (n a k a b -tu m ) ,623 one of which was located in the capital city of Ur;624 and unspecified projects in Tummal,625 which concerned a donkey stable (é a n š e ) in one case.626 The Umma merchants also provided significant volumes of timber and timber parts for unspecified purposes. These products went to workshops (g i š-k in -ti)627 and an unlocated shipyard,628 or were transferred to a balanced account on timber and reeds (n íg -k a s 7 g iš-g i-k a ú g u g á -g á -d a m ).629 A few of the people who withdrew timber and timber products from the Umma merchants included the Umma governor,630 his son Gududu,631 and three scribes— Lu-sa’izu,632 Nig-urum,633 and Lu-Dani.634 5.3.M. Miscellaneous (Tables 5.3.M.1-5) Alongside the major categories above, the Umma merchants supplied a wide range of other products, albeit in smaller volumes or on a less regular basis, including: (1) fish, birds, and domestic animals; (2) animal parts and byproducts; (3) barley, beer, dairy products, and sesame; (4) plants, reeds, herbs, and their byproducts; and (5) minerals, craft goods, and dyes.

–––––––––––––––––

613

Cultivated exclusively in gardens according to Heimpel 2011b, 135. “[T]ies in the form of horizontal metal bands that hold the door slats together and attach them to the door frame. The Ur III references document wooden ties that were often embellished with metal knobs ...”; see Heimpel 2009b, 181 n. 113. 615 A small or medium-sized tree, the wood of which was used for making poles and other parts of carts/wagons as well as bows; see Powell 1992, 115-116. For its identification and other attestations, see Heimpel 2011b, 128-130. 616 Indigenous to southern Mesopotamia, this type of willow, Salix alba, grows by streamsides in the mountains or near water on the plains and may reach up to 30 meters high; see Heimpel 2011b, 125-126. 617 SNAT 504 rev. 22, 24-26—267 units of timber; Ledgers pl. 25 14 rev. 8-13—100 units of timber (parts); TCL 5 6037 obv. iii 12-iv 7, rev. i 9-10, 28-33, ii 6, 26-30—635 + [...] units of timber (parts). 618 Syracuse 108 (Š 35)—10 punting poles + 10 units of unknown timber; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) rev. i 20-22—3 units of giš h a š h u r ; SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) rev. 22, 24-26—267 units of timber products; AOS 32 S23 (date broken) rev. 16’-17’— 240 units of planks. 619 Prima dell’alfabeto no. 22 (ŠS 5)—6 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 & g i š í l d a g . 620 BPOA 6 1323 (AS 6) obv. 1-6—8 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 . 621 MVN 16 1099 (ŠS 5 vi 11)—4 units of gišù-suh5. The term ( g i š ) d a l is understood as Querhölz, “transom, crossbar,” for strengthening purpose in Sallaberger 1989, 319. 622 UTI 4 2579 (ŠS 5)—30 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 . 623 Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 16-22—49 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 . 624 Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) obv. 14-17—6 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 . 625 UTI 6 3532+3552 (ŠS 5 vi) obv. 1-3—180 units of gišù-suh5. 626 BPOA 2 2371 (AS 8)—20 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 . 627 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. ii 12—10 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 ; SNAT 365 (AS 6) rev. i 14-17, ii 2-6— 3 units of g i š s u k u 5 i g + 5 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 . 628 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. i 28-33—200 units of g i š ù - s u h 5 . 629 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) obv. iii 12-iv 7—233 + [...] units of g i š ù - s u h 5 . 630 Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) obv. 14-17. 631 UTI 6 3532+3552 (ŠS 5 vi) obv. 1-3. 632 BPOA 2 2371 (AS 8). 633 MVN 16 1099 (ŠS 5 vi 11). 634 UTI 4 2579 (ŠS 5). 614

136

5. SILVER AND MERCHANTS

Fish, Birds, and Domestic Animals Smoked fish (ku 6 šeg 6 ) accounted for most of the fish supplied by the Umma merchants. The largest annual supply appeared in the year AS 6 when the merchant Ka-teša provided 360 liters in the capital city of Ur.635 The texts attest once to two kinds of pigeons, ir 7 m u š e n and tugur 8 m u š e n . 636 Domestic animals included donkeys, cows, sheep, and goats. In the year ŠS 6 the merchant supervised by Lu-Haya and the merchant group by Lu-kala supplied 109 sheep and goats for a purpose not disclosed.637 Animal Parts and Byproducts The category of animal parts and byproducts subsumed the following products: ibex horns (á dàra), shells of a marine creature (múrgu-ba), beeswax (eš-ku-ru-um),638 bird plumage (pamušen), goat hair (síg ud 5 ), and wool. The annual supply of ibex horns and marine shells never exceeded ten units each. As for the use of the marine shells, in one case four shells decorated a statue of King Šu -Sin.639 Evidence elsewhere suggests the use of ibex horns to make a special kind of salt called “Hirschhornsalz” for the purpose of purification (Brunke and Sallaberger 2010, 46). Beeswax, a rare product, appears to have had its largest annual supply at only 2.17 minas, of which all went to the temple of Šara.640 One text mentions two minas of beeswax in connection with a type of resin.641 The merchants provided wool and goat hair in far greater volumes. The annual supply of wool peaked at more than 3099 minas in the year ŠS 6, of which 2,465.67 was transferred to a balanced account on wool642 and 633.33 minas withdrawn for a barge of the god Šara. 643 As for goat hair, the largest annual supply appeared in the same year at eighty minas, and half of it went to an unlocated shipyard.644 The supply of bird plumage maintained remarkable stability in its annual volume provided by the merchants. For seven years spanning the reigns of three kings (Š 45, 46; AS 3, 5, 6; ŠS 4, 6), the Umma merchants supplied a consistent 18,000 units of this product.645 Since in the years AS 3, 5, and 6, the evidence indicates that the bird plumage was shipped to the capital city of Ur in order to satisfy the interest of the crown, the bird plumage attested during the other four years might have served the same purpose. Barley, Beer, and Dairy Products (Table 5.3.M-3) The Umma merchants twice supplied barley, at thirty liters and sixty liters respectively, to meet the bala-obligation of the province to the crown.646 The texts attest to beer but once, wherein all 360 liters withdrawn went for making spices for the king as a bala-payment.647 Concerning dairy

–––––––––––––––––

635

SNAT 365 (AS 6) rev. i 10-13. MVN 15 127 (AS 9) rev. 30—15 units in total. Identification discussed in note 163 and 164 above. 637 Respectively SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) rev. 17-18—18 head of sheep; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. iii 11-21—91 head of sheep and goats. 638 The term for beeswax appears as a loanword in both Sumerian and Akkadian and suggests the foreign origin of the product that it refers to, as there exists no evidence for beekeeping in Babylonia; see Powell 1996b, 103. 639 TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) rev. i 18-20. 640 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. ii 12-13. 641 SAT 3 1613 (ŠS 5) obv. 2. 642 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. iv 39-v 4. 643 SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) rev. 4-5. 644 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. i 13-15, 24-25. 645 OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) obv. 1; Syracuse 483 (Š 46) obv. 6; HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) obv. 8-9; SNAT 356 (AS 5) obv. 14-15; SNAT 365 (AS 6) obv. ii 3; SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) rev. 4-6; Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6) rev. 5-7. 646 BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 17-20; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. iii 23-25. 647 Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) rev. 4-6; see also note 567 above. 636

137

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

products, the merchants provided 120 liters of sour milk (g a SIG7),648 two liters of butter (ìn u n ),649 and three liters of some sort of milk (g a g a z i).650 Plants, Reeds, Herbs, and Their Byproducts (Table 5.3.M-4) The merchants supplied the following plant products: sesame (š e -g i š-ì), date-palm fibers (m a n g a g a ), willow branches (g i š m a -n u ), reeds, four kinds of herbs (ú -s ik il; ú Ú.EN; ú n in 9 ; ú n in n i 5 ), and a product named n íg -SAR. The texts attest to large quantities of reeds and datepalm fibers. The largest annual supply of reeds reached 12,600 bundles in the year AS 5;651 that of date-palm fibers amounted to 21,600 minas in Š 39.652 In neither case do the texts mention the use of the product involved. The identification of n íg -SAR remains problematic.653 The term may refer to a luxury product because its annual supply amounted to no more than seven minas,654 and it appeared associated with a type of resin, the temple of Šara, and the lustration rite of the king.655 The merchants supplied sesame but one time as well, at the amount of ten liters.656 Withdrawals of these products often fulfilled the bala-obligation of Umma toward the crown. For instance, twenty minas and 180 minas of date-palm fibers went respectively to a royal warehouse and to Tummal;657 300 minas of ú -sik il appeared as a bala-payment;658 120 minas of willow branches went to make ointment for the king;659 and nearly 1,800 bundles of ú Ú.EN and reeds were expended for the sake of Ur, the capital city.660 Craft Goods, Minerals, and Dyes (Table 5.3.M-5) The Umma merchants provided three types of craft goods, as follows: vessels (d u g -h i-a ; dug k u r-k u -d ù ), waterskins (k u š ù m m u ), and wooden containers (g i š k á b -k u l). The texts attest, however, just to vessels supplied in large quantity. In the year Š 46, an anonymous merchant group supplied 104 vessels.661 At another time, the merchant Pada supplied three wooden containers as a bala-payment to the crown.662 Two types of minerals used as tanning agents, (lí-iq -tu m ) a l-la -h a -ru and im k ù -s ig 1 7 , came from the Umma merchants. The largest annual supply amounted to forty-eight liters in the year AS 7.663 Akala the leather worker received most of the minerals.664 Two withdrawals of the minerals concerned the god Šara: one for his temple665 and the other for treating his garments.666 The Umma merchants provided one plant, lí-iq -tu m , used as a dye. Its annual supply remained

–––––––––––––––––

648

BM 105345 (AS 1); for identification of g a SIG7, see Stol 1993, 100-101. MVN 15 127 (AS 9) rev. 23. 650 MVN 15 127 (AS 9) rev. 26. 651 MVN 1 238 (AS 5 ix?) rev. 10’. 652 AUCT 1 540 (Š 39) rev. 18-19. 653 Snell reads the product name as n í g - k é š and translates it as “bound (reed) or (reed for) binding”; see Snell 1982, 156. Waetzoldt reads it as n í g -SAR and questions the meaning proposed by Snell without offering his own; see Waetzoldt 1986, 334. 654 Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. i 6-8. 655 Respectively, SAT 3 1613 (ŠS 5) obv. 1; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. ii 10-11; ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) obv. iv 17-19. 656 Syracuse 16 (Š 34). 657 See respectively, Princeton 1 532 (Š 34); UTI 6 3532+3552 (ŠS 5 vi) obv. 5. For Tummal, see note 234. 658 OrSP 47-49 330 (Š 46 vi). 659 STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 17-19. 660 SNAT 365 (AS 6) obv. ii 14-15, rev. i 7-9. 661 Syracuse 483 (Š 46) rev. 8. 662 STA 23 (AS 6 xi) rev. i 18-19. 663 Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) obv. iii 27-28, 30-31. 664 Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) rev. i 14-16—10 liters; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. ii 21-22—15 liters; STA 23 (AS 6 xi) rev. ii 6-8—20 liters; Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) obv. iii 27-28, 30-31—48 liters; TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iv 7-8—5 liters; SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) rev. 19-21—10 liters; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. iii 31-33—5 liters. 665 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. ii 14-15—1 quart. 666 TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) rev. i 25-28—20 quarts. For the use of al-la-ha-ru in the textile industry, see Waetzoldt 1972, 174. 649

138

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

at twelve liters during the years when this product appears attested (AS 6, AS 7, AS 9, ŠS 2, and ŠS 5).667 Ur-Šulpa’e withdrew lí-iq -tu m from the merchants in all these years but ŠS 5. 5.4. Operations of the Umma Merchants The foregoing survey of the entire spectrum of goods handled by the Umma merchants clarifies the unique role that they played in the movement of silver within this province. Table 19 below shows that during the period Š 33-IS 3 the merchants received a total of 2,842.22 shekels of silver as part of the capital supplied to them by the Umma administration,668 mostly by the same four officials—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu—who collected the majority of the silver payments within the province. At the same time, the merchants paid back an even greater volume of silver to the provincial government, primarily to the same four administrators, who had provided them with the silver capital. The four administrators thus collected more silver from the merchants, often by several hundred shekels each, than they had provided as capital. The total silver that the merchants paid back to the government exceeds their receipt from it by 1581.07 shekels (4429.12 minus 2848.05). This number ranks the merchants as the third largest source of silver revenue for the Umma government (§6). This discovery leads to the conclusion that the merchants traded some of their non-silver capital goods for silver. To understand how they managed this business, this study will explore their trading activities. Table 19: Comparison of silver received and paid back by the Umma merchants Period Received from Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

175.48

All periods

108.25

Lu-kala

1144.74

Gududu

42.83

627.26

Governor

499.83 9.83

10

20.33

Unavailable Total (shekels)

Undated

5

Dadaga

Others

ŠS 7-IS 3 (6 years)

204.5 14.83

228.31

1869.4

627.26

108.25

2848.05

Paid back to Akala

360

Dadaga

522.43

Lu-kala

60

1751.79

Gududu

688.5

Governor Others

206.67 6.83

Unavailable Total (shekels)

366.83

25.83

483.64

2.5

316.97

3.96

610.76

2759.07

692.46

4429.12

See notes to Table 1 in §3.2.

––––––––––––––––– 667

See in order Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. i 12’; Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) obv. iii 10-11; MVN 15 127 (AS 9) rev. 35; TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iii 5-6; TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) rev. i 16-18 (transaction dated to ŠS 5). 668 Including the 108.25 shekels of silver received from Dadaga in an undatable text Aleppo 436.

139

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

5.4.A. Disposal of Capital Goods Snell (1977) and Van Driel (2002, 8-10) have published an overview of the goods traded by the Umma merchants and have documented the local origin of most of those products including the capital goods of the merchants. Five main categories of products constituted the bulk of the nonsilver capital that the Umma merchants received, as follows: barley, wool, dates, fish and fish oil, as well as sheepskins and leather goods. All indigenous to southern Mesopotamia, these major categories were produced in abundance within the institutional economy of Umma. Except for the sheepskins and leather goods, these bulky or heavy products might have posed transportation problems; in addition, the non-smoked fish and fish oil could not sustain long-term storage. The merchants either sold these capital goods for silver on the local market or in the proximity of the Umma province (Snell 1982, 64), or bartered them for the non-silver products that they supplied to the Umma administration. Indirect evidence in support of the theory of the merchant’s selling of goods for silver comes from two balanced accounts. One account of the governor, Ledgers pl. 23 13 (ŠS 5), registers 115,200 liters of barley sold for silver (obv. 11: š e k ù -š è s a 1 0 -a ) from the year ŠS 1 to ŠS 3. Another account without any subscriber, OrAnt 22 203 HSM 911 523 (ŠS 2), mentions the proceeds of 6 ¾ minas of silver from the sale of barley.669 Many descriptions that accompany the non-silver capital goods of the merchants, however, hint at the practice of barter without the facilitation of silver. These descriptions appear most common with the barley capital (§5.2.B) and designate the products, including bitumen, reeds, copper, livestock, and wool, which the Umma administration expected the merchants to procure with barley. 5.4.B. Acquisition of Products Supplied In comparison with the limited range of their capital goods, the products supplied by the Umma merchants display far greater variety. The supplies included raw materials (metals, minerals, alkaline plants, gypsum, bitumen, timber, reeds, date-palm fibers, herbs, and goat hair), foodstuffs (sesame oil, lard, vegetables, fruits, honey, dairy products, barley, and beer), spices, condiments, resins, household utensils, and luxury items (shells, ibex horns, beeswax, pigeons, doves, and bird plumage). Two products attested as the merchants’ capital, fish and wool, also appeared often on the lists of the supplies. On occasion, the merchants supplied domestic animals, such as sheep, goats, and donkeys. The present evidence does not disclose the means through which the merchants secured their supplies. By extrapolating from the possible sources of these products, however, this study can divide the products into three groups and infer some of the trade mechanisms. Products Available through Long-Distance Trade To the first category of long-distance trade goods belonged gold, copper, tin, s u -g a n , and lead.670 Certain types of resins fell into this category as well. Mesopotamia had but one native species of

–––––––––––––––––

669

OrAnt 22 203 HSM 911 523 obv. 1: 6 ( d i š ) ⅔ m a - n a 5 ( d i š ) g í n k ù - b a b b a r š e - t a s a 1 0 - a 1 ( a š ) 1 ( b a r i g ) g u r - t a ; “6 ⅔ minas 5 shekels of silver bought with barley (at the rate of one shekel of silver) every 1 1/5 bushel (of barley).” 670 Gold: According to Moorey 1999, 220, “there were no sources of gold exploited in antiquity in Mesopotamia, Syria, or Palestine,” but it was widely available in the surrounding regions, such as western and southwestern Turkey, Egypt, Nubia, western and southern Arabia, northern Iran, Afghanistan, and possibly India. Silver: Important source regions in the ancient Near East included Iran and Anatolia, and the latter may have supplied silver to Mesopotamia from the fourth millennium to the Achaemenid period; ibid., 234-235. Copper: Major source areas in the ancient Near East were located in Anatolia, Cyprus, Iran, and the Persian Gulf. Documentary evidence identifies Magan (modern Oman) as the source of copper for third millennium BCE Mesopotamia. Ibid., 245-248.

140

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

plant, the Calabrian pine P. brutia, which yields resin (Hepper 1987, esp. 113). Exotic resins, such as frankincense (š im -h i-a ) and myrrh, came from southern Arabia and northern Somaliland (Van Beek 1964, 103-106). Brunke and Sallaberger (2010, 62-72) distinguish imported resins from those indigenous to Mesopotamia based on a price drop of the former after the interval between the years Š 40 and AS 2, when King Šulgi campaigned victoriously against Hurti, Kimaš, and Harši and secured the trade routes in the Iranian highlands. Their theory awaits the test of a price analysis of other imported goods during the Ur III period and more accurate identification of the different types of resins. The evidence concerning copper indicates two channels through which the Umma merchants might have procured this product. First, they could have organized direct long-distance trade with an external source region, which a Girsu text TCTI 2 3573 (month ix) identifies as a -d a m - DUN, a large settlement in the periphery of the Ur III kingdom located in southwestern Iran (Steinkeller 1991a, 30-31). This document mentions two liters of beer, two liters of bread, and one ladle (idgúr) of oil for an armed person (lú - g i š tu k u l) named Šeš-kala, who came from Adam-DUN with copper (u ru d a -d a a -d a m - DUN< k i > -ta / im -d a -g e n -n a ). Another Girsu text, RA 19 39 9 (month iv/4) (rev. 24-26), records similar provisions—three liters of beer, two liters of bread, and two shekels of oil671—given to Ur-Dumuzi, perhaps the same well-documented merchant in the Umma corpus, for his trip to an undisclosed location to get copper (u ru d a -šè g e n -n a ). As a second possible channel, the Umma merchants could have travelled to other cities in the Ur III kingdom, which may have served as entrepôts where the goods had arrived first from outside southern Mesopotamia. Two texts link small amounts of silver that two merchants, Pada and Šeškala, supplied with the purchase of copper in the capital city of Ur,672 which functioned as the port of entry for copper produced in Magan (Oman) (Oppenheim 1954, 13-15; Steinkeller 2004a, 104105). The acquisition of gold, on the other hand, relied upon different mechanisms. The merchants provided most of the gold received by the Umma government (§5.3.A), but the government expended much more than the merchants’ supply (cf. §4.1). The origin of the government’s major supply of gold appeared undisclosed. The discrepancy leads this study to the deduction that the Umma authorities had other channels to obtain gold rather than through the trading of the merchants. The merchants remained instrumental, however, because they supplied to the Umma government significant amounts of silver reserved for the acquisition of gold in Tummal and Nippur.673 The discussion in §4.7 points to the capital city of Ur as another location with gold available. All three cities held a status of national significance and hosted either the royal court or the most important temples and shrines of the entire kingdom. The coffers of the king and the treasuries of the gods would have hoarded much gold. Although no known Umma text traces the gold mentioned to sources in Ur, Nippur, and Tummal, documents from other archives do. For instance, a text from Ur, UET 3 702 (IS 13 xii), dated toward the end of the Ur III dynasty, mentions more than thirty-six minas of gold together with even larger amounts of silver, copper, and bronze, which, at a time of crisis, were taken out from temples and shrines to pay for

––––––––––––––––– Tin: Currently, Afghanistan is identified as the most likely source of tin documented in written sources from the third and early second millennium BCE Mesopotamia. The metal reached Mesopotamia “either by land through Iran in a trade often controlled by the Elamites, or by sea up the Gulf where Dilmun controlled distribution northwards. This tin was then traded westwards into Syro-Palestine and Turkey”; ibid., 301. s u - g a n : Problems of its identification (see note 481) complicate our search for its source regions. Lead: Anatolia was the primary source of this product used in Mesopotamia; ibid., 293. 671 Equivalent to one ladle of oil; Veldhuis 2001, 98. 672 See AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. ii 23-24: 9 ( d i š ) ½ g í n 6 ( d i š ) š e k ù s á m u r u d a u r i 5 k i - m a / g ì r u r - d l a m m a ù é - u d u - b i - z u ; TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) rev. 18-19: 8 ( d i š ) ½ g í n k ù u r u d a u r i 5 k i - m a / g ì r u r - d l a m m a ù é - u d u - b i - z u . Both summarized in Table 5.3.B. 673 See two texts summarized in Table 5.3.B: Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) rev. i 13. 1 ( d i š ) m a - n a 5 ( d i š ) g í n k ù b a b b a r / 1 4 . s á m k ù h u š - a / 15. [ š à t u m ] - m a l x k i / 16. [ k i š i b ] ⌈ é n s i ⌉ - k a ; MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) rev. i 13. ½ m a - n a k ù - b a b b a r / 14. k ù s á m k ù h u š - a š à n i b r u k i .

141

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

purchases in another city Isin.674 A group of Puzri š-Dagan texts records the sale of gold by administrators of the goldsmith bureau to senior court officials for silver revenue.675 The evidence from these texts suggests that the Umma administration could have bought gold either from members of the royal court or from the temple treasuries in Ur, Nippur, and Tummal. The present texts from Umma never specify the provenience of the silver attested. This study assumes that by the time of the Ur III period, interregional trade would have already circulated silver into the economy of Mesopotamia. Later evidence of the Old Assyrian trade in the early second millennium indicates that silver came to Mesopotamia from Anatolia. The Kaneš archive (c. 1910-1830) excavated at Kültepe, Turkey, document the activities of merchants from the citystate Assur in northern Mesopotamia, who exported tin from Iran and textiles to Anatolia in exchange for silver and gold widely available there.676 Products Available through Regional Trade The category of products available through regional trade in and around southern Mesopotamia comprises three types of goods, as follows: timber, gypsum, and bitumen. With respect to timber, southern Mesopotamia hosts the Euphrates poplar (g i š á sa l) and willow (g i š m a -n u ), which served for building boats and houses as well as for manufacturing furniture and tools (Moorey 1999, 348349). Willow branches appear once among the supply list from the merchants (§5.3.M), but g i š ù su h 5 , a type of pine from northern Mesopotamia (§5.3.L) (Moorey, ibid., 358), emerges as the most common type of timber that they provided. The texts designate the g i š ù -s u h 5 pine for the building of boats with a capacity of 36,000 liters. The merchants could have transported the g i š ù su h 5 timber to Umma by boats from the source region.677 Gypsum and bitumen, both bulky and heavy, had a low value. The Umma merchants supplied up to 5,443 minas of gypsum or 33,292.33 liters plus 16,660 minas of bitumen in a year (Table 17). Gypsum was available in both the south and north of Mesopotamia, but much more so in the western desert between Babylon, Hit, and Anah (Moorey 1999, 330). Sources of bitumen exhibit a similar distribution, as follows: in the vicinity of Kirkuk; around Abu Jir, Hit (with the old name Madga), and Ramadi on the west bank of the Euphrates; and in south-western Iran (Moorey 1999, 333; Schwartz and Hollander 2000; Heimpel 2009a, 55). The Umma merchants could have travelled to these peripheral regions for the g i š ù -su h 5 timber, gypsum, and bitumen678 considering their trips to other Ur III cities. References to their domestic journeys appear in the records below. In the text ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9), the capital goods of the merchant Ur-Dumuzida included 54,000 liters of barley, described as š à n ib ru k i (obv. i 3-4), “in Nippur.” From Umma, the merchant would have had to travel in person, or to send some assistant, or to run a local branch there in order to deal with the barley. The colophon of the text SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) mentions the city of Ur: n íg -k a s 7 -a k d a m -g à r šà u ri 5 k i -m a g ìr

–––––––––––––––––

674

rev. 2’. š u - n í g i n [...] m a - n a 6 ( d i š ) g í n k ù - s i g 1 7 h u š- a / 3’. š u - n í g i n 2 ( d i š ) m a - n a 1 ( u ) 6 ( d i š ) g í n k ù - s i g 1 7 HI- d a / 4’. š u - n í g i n 3 ( u ) 3 ( d i š ) ½ m a < - n a > 7 ( d i š ) g í n k ù - s i g 1 7 s i - s á / 5’. š u - n í g i n 2 ( a š ) g ú 5 1 ( u ) 3 ( d i š ) /6 m a - n a 7 ( d i š ) g í n k ù - b a b b a r / 6’. š u - n í g i n 1 ( u ) 9 ( a š ) g ú 3 ( u ) 1 ( d i š ) m a - n a z a b a r / 7’. š u - n í g i n 9 ( a š ) g ú 4 ( u ) 7 ( d i š ) m a - n a u r u d a / 8’. k ù - s i g 1 7 k ù - b a b b a r z a b a r u r u d a k i - l á n í g - d í m d í m - m a / 9’. é d i n g i r è š - d i d l i - t a è - a / 10’. m u n í g - s a m x - m a i n - s i - i n k i - š è ; discussed in Paoletti 2008, 129 with previous literature. 675 Ibid., 132-135. E.g.: AUCT 1 502 (AS 4 xii); RA 17 207 1 (AS 8 vi); SAT 2 1105 (AS 8 xi); TRU 387 (ŠS 6 x). 676 Veenhof 1995 provides a survey of the trade. See Veenhof 2008 for a recent overview of the Old Assyrian period and Barjamovic 2011 for a historical geography of contemporaneous Anatolia. 677 In the Girsu text RA 19 41 42 (viii 3) rev. 17-21, an “armed person” (l ú - g i š t u k u l ) received 6 liters of beer, 6 liters of bread, and 3 ladles of oil for his trip to load timber into boats ( g i š m á - a g á - g á - d è g e n - n a ). The same text records similar provisions for three other “armed people,” who traveled to Susa, Sabum, and an unspecified location. 678 See Snell 1982, 63 for possible evidence concerning the travel of the merchant Ur-Dumuzida; for trips taken by merchants attested in other corpora to Oman, the Diyala region, and Iran, see Snell 1982, 63-64; Steinkeller 2004a, 104105.

142

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

a b -b a -g i-n a , “the balanced account of a merchant in Ur, conveyed by Aba-gina.” Since the content of this text guarantees its Umma provenience, this anonymous merchant could have gone from Umma to do business in Ur. Similarly, the colophon of the text RA 16 19 (Š 36 ix), n íg k a s 7 -a k m u < é > š e r 7 (NIR)-d a -< š è > / š à tu m -m a -a l k i , states “a balanced account concerning the house for the criminals in Tummal,” and thus suggests that the receipt of seventythree roof beams by two Umma merchants Ur-gigir and Ur-Ašar (rev. iv 26-29) took place in the town of Tummal to the south of Nippur.679 Local Products The third category of local products includes almost all the products, other than those discussed above, that the Umma merchants supplied.680 Their local nature finds confirmation in about 300 “private” letters dated to the late Old Babylonian period (c. 1822-1595), of which most come from Sippar. These letters testify to the request for or the exchange for a wide range of products, of which many overlap with those provided by the Umma merchants (Renger 1984, 99-123). The quantity of supplies of the products from the merchants varied. According to the text STA 11 (AS 1) (obv. ii 16-rev. i 17), a number of products—such as g a z i, zibitum-seeds, kabkulcontainers, date-palm fibers, pigeons (ir 7 m u š e n ), and doves (tu -g u r 8 m u š e n )—came from local gardeners in the districts of Apisal and Mušbi’ana. Other products of local origin—such as barley, dates, wool, fish, and leather goods—accounted for the bulk of the capital that the merchants received from the Umma government. Why the administrators still needed to withdraw these products from the merchants remains unclear. The merchants either refunded their unused capital to the Umma officials or assisted in the distribution of these products within the provincial economy. As for condiments, spices, herbs, foodstuffs in general, and bird plumage, the merchants could have acquired them from local producers with silver or other means of payment.681 The exchange for silver had occurred before the producers paid their taxes on these products in silver instead of in kind. The taxes paid in silver took the form of substitutive payments studied in chapter 3 (esp. §3.5). The producers chose the most convenient method for them to get silver, which meant selling their products to the merchants (Steinkeller 2004a, 105-109). Likewise, the merchants purchased pots and reeds from local sources. The pots could have come from the potters, who, like some other craftsmen during the Ur III period (such as leather workers and carpenters), worked at home with their own resources and free from the direct oversight from the government (Steinkeller 1996). After finishing their orders for the state, the craftsmen could manufacture goods for sale in a marketplace (§3.11). With respect to reeds, although the production of reeds in southern Mesopotamia fell under the control of state- and temple-households, supervisers of the working teams, such as n u -b à n d a , after delivering their quota, might have sold their surplus of reeds for grain or silver (Wilcke 2007, 92-100). The uncertainty concerning the identification of the products such as honey, shells, ibex horns, beeswax, minerals, and alkaline plants, hinders the efforts to explore the means of their production and acquisition. Local people might have produced, or collected them from the

––––––––––––––––– 679

For Tummal, see also note 234. The products attested in the letters included barley, emmer, šegūšum (a type of barley), flour, bread, oil, sesame, beer, beerbread, beermash, wine, dates, figs, apples, garlic, onions, leek, legumes and legume products (peas, lentils, pea flour, other legumes and vegetables), fish, meat, fowl, other animals (e.g., livestock, mice, locusts), seeds/spices (cumin, mustard? [kasûm], coriander), condiments (Ammi, fish sauce, salt, vinegar), ghee, dough, wool, garments, fabric, shoes/sandals, household utensils and implements, date-palm fibers, reeds and reed products, timber, straw/bran, bitumen, and fertilizer. 681 For example, certain products that the Umma merchants supplied, such as g a z i (a condiment/spice), n í g -SAR (unidentified), i r 7 m u š e n and t u - g u r 8 m u š e n (two types of pigeon), g i š k á b - k u l (a type of container), and m a n g a g a (date-palm fiber) are listed as from gardeners in the text STA 11 (AS 1) (obv. ii 16-rev. i 17). For local origin of more condiments, spices, and herbs provided by the Umma merchants, see §3.5.D & G. 680

143

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

ecological margins, such as the marshlands and the uncultivated fields of the Umma province, without any involvement of the government. With the exception of the alkaline plants, the merchants supplied these products in small volumes. Local and Regional instead of Long-Distance Trade A comparison with their counterparts in contemporaneous Ur, during the preceding Sargonic period, and at the following Old Babylonian times further highlights that the Umma merchants focused on local and regional trade rather than long-distance trade. A long-distance, sea-faring merchant (g a -e š 8 a -a b -b a ) named Lu-Enlila has emerged from a small group of texts from the capital city Ur dated toward the end of the Ur III period. He received wool, fish, sesame oil, garments, and leather goods in order to buy copper in Magan (Oman) and brought back not only copper but also beads made of precious stones, ivory, and the so-called Magan-onions (Oppenheim 1954, 13-14; Leemans 1960, 18-22). Compared with LuEnlila, the Umma merchants dealt in a broader range of products but did not seem to provide luxury goods such as precious stones and ivory. The supplies from the Umma merchants came closer to those from the merchants based in southern Mesopotamia in the early stage (c. 20001800) of the Old Babylonian period. Those merchants exported barley, sesame oil, wool, animal skins, leather products, tin, textiles, and paint to the surrounding regions and imported gold, copper, tin, precious stones, ivory, timber, various kinds of resins, wine, and slaves (Leemans 1960). Items among their supplies but not attested in the records of the Umma merchants included slaves, textiles, paint, and certain luxury goods (precious stones,682 ivory, and wine). The Ur III Umma merchants had most in common with the merchants attested of the previous Sargonic period. The Sargonic merchants traded in silver, grain, wool, dates, flour, oils, fats, aromatics, extracts of various trees (i.e., resins), base metals (copper and bronze), different kinds of timber, garments, textiles, livestock (sheep and cattle, donkeys, asses, and pigs), and chattel slaves (Foster 1977). Except for chattel slaves, garments, textiles, and pigs, all the other products appeared as the capital goods of or among the supplies from the Umma merchants. Moreover, neither the Sargonic merchants nor the Ur III Umma merchants provided precious or semi-precious stones. Therefore, the conclusion of Foster (1977, 37) about the business operations of the Sargonic merchants likewise applies to the Ur III Umma merchants: “There is in short no evidence in the available records that the Sargonic dam-gàr played any significant role in the acquisition of products foreign to Mesopotamia, or was anyone other than a businessman who sought profits for clients, including the state, in Mesopotamian markets with mostly Mesopotamian goods.” In contrast to the above three groups of merchants, the Ur III Umma merchants did not receive any textiles as their capital goods. Considering that textiles served as a traditional export item of Mesopotamia because of its high added-value and ease of transportation (Larsen 1987, 51), their absence among the capital goods of the Umma merchants may indicate a lack of motivation for profits on the part of the Umma government, the source of their capital.683 The government appeared to trade with whatever staple goods it happened to have in surplus from its institutional economy rather than focus on products with a larger profit margin and more apt for exchange such as textiles. It concerned itself with the procurement of desirable products rather

–––––––––––––––––

682

According to the text SAT 3 2082 (no date) discussed in §5.5, eight beads made of precious stones appear among the goods stolen from the Umma merchant Lu-dingira (rev. 12-13), but one cannot tell whether the stones came from the merchant’s own supply or from other sources. 683 The underdevelopment of the textile industry in Umma may also have accounted for the lack of textiles among the capital goods of the Umma merchants. Compared with the tens of thousands of weavers attested in the Girsu texts, the number of weavers in Umma might not exceed several hundred. Moreover, the Umma weavers often received other assignments such as agricultural work and milling. In addition, the textile industry in Umma usually processed lowquality wool of the fourth, fifth, and an even lower class. See Waetzoldt 1972, 91-102.

144

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

than the pursuit of profits. From the perspective of the Umma government, the merchants functioned as its trade agents. 5.4.C. Special Cases of Lard and Wool Of all the products supplied by the merchants, lard presents the most special case. The annual supply of lard peaked at 3,585 liters in the year AS 9.684 In terms of its annual maximum value measured in silver, it surpassed the other products that the merchants provided with the exception of precious metals and copper (Table 17). Moreover, the merchants often received tens of thousands of liters of barley designated for the procurement of lard (š e ì-š á h [-k a ]; §5.2.B). The high profile of lard in the merchants’ documentation contrasts with the scarcity of similar products, such as sheep-fat (ì udu) and butter (ì-nun), produced from sheep and cattle, two kinds of animals that comprised the focus of animal husbandry in Umma. The Umma corpus attests to tens of thousands of sheep and cattle, but the total number of pigs mentioned there does not exceed 800.685 The meager evidence of pig farming in Umma coincides with the poor documentation of this industry for the Ur III period in general (Owen 2006; Dahl 2006b, 35-37). The records show, however, that the Umma administration allocated barley as fodder for pigs,686 granted sustenance land to pig farmers (s ip a š á h ),687 and compensated the farmers in barley (š e -b a ).688 Thus pig farming, although less significant than the husbandry of sheep and cattle, represented an attested component of the institutional economy in Umma. The inadequate production of pigs within the institutional sector may explain why the Umma government relied upon the merchants for the large amount of additional lard. Where, then, did the Umma merchants procure the lard that they supplied to the government? Given the nature of the product, that lard could not sustain long-term storage in warm weather, and the biological traits of pigs, this study proposes that local, individual families raised small numbers of pigs on their premises with their own means and free from the direct control or support of the institutional sector (Renger 2007, 192). Unlike sheep and goats, pigs do not adapt well to long-distance pastoralism under the climatic conditions in Mesopotamia because of their high water requirements and their inability to digest cellulose-rich plants, and the tendency of pigs to fight makes them difficult to herd in large numbers. Therefore, pigs fare better in small groups in a sedentary life near settlements. Moreover, the omnivorous pigs can thrive on a combination of fodder (grass or grain), leftovers from family meals, and forage.689 These factors make smallscale, sty-based pig-breeding more feasible and economical than large-scale, centralized rearing

––––––––––––––––– 684

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. ii 36-39—3292.5 liters; MVN 15 127 (AS 9) rev. 25—292.5 liters. The largest number of pigs—578! of them—appears in SNAT 436 (ŠS 1) obv. 15, which is discussed in Stępień 1996, 31. The other references to pigs and their number in the Umma texts are listed as follows: BPOA 7 2004 (Š 25 x)—5; BPOA 6 958 (Š 36) rev. 3—14; Santag 6 19 (Š 38?) obv. iii 7—2; BPOA 1 886 (Š 41 i) obv. 3—1; BIN 5 124 (Š 42/AS 6 i 25)—1; MCS 1 37 BM 106055 (Š 45 i) rev. i 25’—3; Umma 28 (Š 46)—1; SACT 2 247 (Š 46)—11; Nisaba 11 14 (Š 46) obv. ii 16—10; BCT 2 5 (Š 48 vii)—2; AOS 32 W34 (AS 2)—3; YOS 4 197 (AS 3)—1; Nebraska 44 (AS 3) obv. iv 120—2; UTI 3 2014 (AS 5)—15; SACT 2 263 (AS 7 xii)—1; Princeton 1 177 (AS 8 xii)—6; Rochester 252 (AS 9 viii)—10; SAT 3 1227 (ŠS 1 x) rev. i 9—2; SAT 3 1837 (ŠS 7)—1; SAT 3 1796 (ŠS 7)—76; Studies Pettinato 312 (IS 2) rev. 13—1; OrSP 47-49 476 (month iv)—32; Santag 6 354 (month viii)—2; BOPA 6 734 (no date) obv. 4— 4; BPOA 6 1473 (no date)—5; OrSP 47-49 460 (date ambiguous)—21; SAT 3 1635 (no date) rev. 23—3; TLB 3 169 (date broken) obv. iii 19—2. 686 The amount attested is often less than 1 bushel with the following exceptions: SAT 2 32 (Š 31)—5 ⅓ bushels; SACT 1 194 (Š 35 vi)—425 bushels 33 liters for pigs, oxen, sheep, goats, donkeys, and birds; Princeton 2 445 (Š 42 iv)—3 bushels 277 liters; MVN 15 342 (Š 46) obv. 4-6—3 1/5 bushel; OrSP 18 pl. 7 24 (Š 47 ii) obv. i 11-12—268 3/5 bushels for goats, donkeys, and pigs; Princeton 1 177 (AS 8 xii)—6 2/5 bushels. 687 UCP 9-2-1 100 (AS 4) lists 6 iku sustenance land received by the pig farmer Lugal-hegal (rev. i 27’-29’). 688 E.g., Nisaba 11 42 (Š 46 i) rev. i 6—40 liters for Urgu; BPOA 1 569 (AS 7 vi) obv. 2 & rev. 1—300 liters for Lukirizal; SNAT 453 (ŠS 1 diri) obv. 6—40 liters for an anonymous pig farmer. 689 Evidence culled from about 1,400 texts from the royal estate GARšana in Umma (§2.4) attests to the distribution of barley, bran, wheat, low-quality flour, dates, and reeds as fodder of pigs; see Owen 2006, 78-80. 685

145

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

(Zeder 1991, 30-32; Hesse and Wapnish 1998). The local families would have produced lard from the pigs and sold it to the merchants, who then supplied it to the Umma government. Despite the remarkable volume of lard attested in Umma, scholars know few specifics about its use. In the one text that contains information on this aspect, the merchant Ur-Dumuzida supplied 3,292.50 liters of lard as n id b a d e n -líl-lá , “nidba-offering for the god Enlil.”690 Lard could serve dietary, ritualistic, and industrial (processing leather and textile) needs (Owen 2006, 81-83; Dahl 2006b, 36-37). The lard mentioned above might have been distributed to temple personnel as part of their emolument, used as ingredients in rituals honoring the god, or added to cleanse hides and wool processed in the temple household. The government’s dependence upon merchants for supplies of lard from individual households offers a rare instance of interaction between the institutional economy and the private businesses in Umma. Although the institutional economy dominated the cultivation of grain and dates as well as the breeding of sheep, cattle, and fish, technological requirements and economic concerns facilitated the engagement of individual families in the production of pigs, which, as discussed above, fare better in a family setting. As a steady and substantial source of protein, the meat produced by pig-raising could also serve as a subsistence strategy for the individual households and thus equip them with some degree of autonomy and independence from the control of the centralized economy (Zeder 1991, 30-32; Hesse and Wapnish 1998). The merchants connected the demand from the institutional economy with the supply from the individual producers by purchasing lard from the local marketplace and providing it to the government. Unlike the supply of lard, which came from the private sector but not the institutional economy, the additional supply of wool from the merchants demonstrates the dependence of the Umma administration upon these professionals for the acquisition of a product that the institutional economy produced in significant volumes. The Umma merchants received from the administration substantial amounts of barley tagged for the purchase of wool and by means of that barley provided considerable amounts of wool. For example, the capital of the merchant UrDumuzida once included 91.6 bushels of barley from the chief granary officer designated as the “price of the wool ration for plowing assistants and price of copper from the harbor.”691 The merchant group supervised by Lu-kala received on one occasion even more barley, 420 bushels, for the acquisition of wool692 and, according to the same text, did supply as much as 2,465.67 minas of wool.693 Another time an anonymous merchant supervised by Lu-Haya supplied 633.33 minas of wool for a barge of the god Šara (n íg -d a b 5 m á -g u r 8 d š á ra).694 Although the annual maximum supply of wool from the merchants (2,465.67 minas in the year ŠS 6) amounts to less than half of the annual maximum of the wool capital that the merchants received from the Umma government (5,327.5 minas in the year AS 7),695 the volume from the merchants still shows that on occasion, the institutional economy in Umma needed large quantities of wool from outside sources. A shortage of wool in the institutional sector might have led to this demand, for the supplies of wool from the merchants appear documented during the reign of King Šu-Sin, when they received only small amounts of wool as their capital.696 The administrators, who withdrew wool from the merchants, at the same time took wool from the institutional economy in Umma to meet their needs. Of the three officials who received wool from the merchant Ur-Dumuzida as the ration for plowing assistants in the text MVN 21 332

–––––––––––––––––

690

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. ii 36-39. TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2): obv. i 11.’ 1 ( g é š ) 3 ( u ) 1 ( a š ) 3 ( b a r i g ) š e g u r / 12.’ k ù - b i 1 ( d i š ) ½ m a - n a 1 ( d i š ) ½ g í n 1 ( u ) 8 ( d i š ) š e / 13.’ s á m s í g - b a š à - g u 4 - k a ù s á m u r u d a / 14.’ k a r - t a / 15.’ k i k a - g u r 7 - t a . 692 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6): obv. i 8. 7 ( g é š ) š e g u r s á m s í g . 693 TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6): rev. iv 39-v 4. 694 SNAT 504 (ŠS 6): rev. 4-5, 14. 695 See respectively Table 16 in §5.2 and Table 17 in §5.3. 696 See the last four texts in Table 5.2.C. UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) obv. i 8-10—50 minas for the merchant Ur-Dumuzida; AnOr 7 262 (ŠS 2 iii) rev. iii 11’-12’—50 minas for the same merchant; TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. i 4’-6’—300 minas for the same merchant; Ledgers pl. 21 12 (ŠS 5) obv. 3-5—20 minas for the merchant Pada. 691

146

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

(ŠS 1),697 two of them—Gududu (obv. 7) and Egal-esi (rev. 2)—reappear in a later text Santag 6 269 (ŠS 3) as recipients of wool from the chief livestock administrator, Ur-e’e, for the same purpose. Gududu received 180 minas (rev. i 5) and Egal-esi received 272 minas (rev. i 6-7). These wool transactions suggest that incidental shortages could have compelled the Umma institutional economy to fall back on the merchants for supplementary supplies of goods in which it specialized. The evidence does not point out the source of the wool purchased by the merchants though. The demand of the Umma government for extra supplies of wool appears similar to its need of additional quantities of reeds, a product that the institutional economy specialized in and produced in abundance. The purchase of reeds appears documented throughout the period Š 36-IS 3, and the annual volume ranged from dozens to thousands of bundles (Wilcke 2007, 115-121; 2008, 275-278). For example, a ten-day period during the bala-month of Umma in the year ŠS 6 saw the purchase of 28,078 bundles of reeds (≈ 168,468 minas = 84.23 tons), along with 5,467 bundles (≈ 32,802 minas = 16.40 tons) reaped from the Engabare area.698 Accidental shortages caused by disasters may have led to external procurement of reeds, as indicated by the Umma text Syracuse 465 (AS 8 iv). In this text, a fire destroyed 264.5 iku (≈ 95.22 hectares ≈ 235.29 acres) land in the reed-producing Engabare area, which could have generated 211,550 bundles of reeds (Wilcke 2007, 96). Another text dated to the same year, BPOA 1 961 (AS 8 viii), mentions 9,855 liters of barley for the purchase of reeds, which would have acquired 19,710 bundles of reeds according to the rate of about two bundles per liter of barley attested in a balanced account of the Umma merchant Ur-Ištaran MVN 1 238 (AS 5 ix) rev. 1’-2’. Whereas the texts hint at the neighboring Girsu province as an external source of the reeds bought by Umma, as an alternative source Wilcke (2007, 96-100, 112-113) has postulated that members of a Umma household, supervisors and workers alike, could have sold to the government the remaining reeds and other products after they had fulfilled their obligation toward it. 5.4.D. Monetary Functions of Silver, Barley, and Copper Nowhere does the function of silver as a universal standard of value appear more conspicuous than in the documentary evidence of the Umma merchants where it measures the value of a broad spectrum of products ranging from luxury items to raw materials, craft goods, and daily necessities. Moreover, silver served as both a direct (x→silver or silver→y) and indirect (x→silver→y) medium of exchange. Products described as “sold for silver” (k ù -šè s a 1 0 -a ),699 such as barley, or “bought with silver” (k ù -ta sa 1 0 -[a ]),700 such as base metals, alkaline plants, gypsum, bitumen, resins, timber parts, and date-palm fibers, testify to the role of silver as a direct means of exchange. Additional evidence of this function comes from the frequent designations of silver as “the price of” (s á m x), “for the purchase of” (e.g., x -[a ] sa 1 0 -[a ]), or “in exchange for” (k ù x) non-silver goods discussed in §5.2.A and §5.3.B. Evidence for silver as an indirect means of exchange appears more implicit. Since the merchants repaid more silver to the Umma administration than they received, they must have turned some of their non-silver capital into silver. The capital goods “sold for silver” and supplies “bought with silver” thus suggest that the merchants paid their suppliers in part with the silver that they obtained from selling the capital

––––––––––––––––– 697

This text presents a balanced account on the barley in the charge of the merchant Ur-Dumuzida. Of the 143.8 bushels of barley at his disposal, he spent 82.2 bushels to buy wool intended as the ration for plowing assistants (s á m s í g - b a š à - g u 4 ) and the rest of the barley to buy copper. 698 See YOS 4 323 (ŠS 6) discussed in Wilcke 2007, 95 n. 76. One bundle of reeds weighed about 6 minas (≈ 3 kg) (ibid., 92). 699 See the barley in Ledgers pl. 23 13 (ŠS 5) obv. 11. 700 See the bitumen in BPOA 1 812 (AS 9) and JRAS 1939 38 (AS 9); gypsum and alkaline plants in BPOA 1 999 (AS 9); copper and the metal s u - g a n in BPOA 2 2278 (ŠS 2) (which specifies the metals as conveyed by the merchants [g ì r PN] rather than coming from the merchants [ k i - PN- t a ] ); timber parts, resins, and date-palm fibers in UTI 6 3532+3552 (ŠS 5 vi).

147

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

goods. Silver that the merchants repaid to the administration served as a means of payment to discharge their obligation. Some texts attest to monetary functions fulfilled by barley. Like silver, barley functioned as a standard of value into which the value of bitumen, fish, and reeds was converted.701 It might have served as a medium of exchange based on the designations of the barley that the merchants received from the government (§5.2.B). These designations spell out the barley as the price of some products (reeds, livestock, copper, and wool), for the purchase of others (copper and bitumen), or in exchange for still others (lard and wool). The amount of barley involved in the barter trade could reach several hundred bushels in a year. Of the 828.4 bushels of barley documented in the text SA 134 (Pl. 76), perhaps up to nine Umma merchants may have received 703.4 bushels (see §5.1.B and 5.2.B) and spent more than one third of what they received on the purchase of gold?, reeds, oxen, donkeys, and wool.702 One merchant account records that copper served as a standard of value. That account, TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6), mentions two talents of copper as the equivalent of sixty-one bushels of wheat: 6(u) 1(aš) g ig g u r / u ru d a -b i 2 (a š) g ú (obv. 12-13). 5.5. Trade Agents or Independent Entrepreneurs? The nature of the relationship between the merchants and the state remains at the core of the debate about the economic role of these professionals during the Ur III period (Neumann 1993, 72). Two main arguments have arisen concerning this issue. One argument proposes that the merchants acted like commercial agents, who relied upon the state administration for their capital and whose business operations went under its close control. The other argument regards the merchants as independent and profit-seeking private entrepreneurs, who dealt with the state as their most important client (Neumann 1992a, 84-86; 1999, 44-45). Scholars have recognized that the first argument rests on the administrative or public documents from Umma, while the second argument relies on the private records from Nippur703 and the unprovenienced Turam-ili archive (§5.1.B). Both arguments generalize their conclusions for all the merchants of the Ur III times, and each position has shaped its conclusion according to its overall view of the contemporary economy and the assumptions under which it interprets the evidence. Thus, the argument that regards the merchants as government trade agents conceives of the Mesopotamian economy during the third millennium BCE as one dominated by temple households and the state and denies the presence of private economic activities, marketplaces, and market forces (supply, demand, and price). The argument that considers the merchants as private entrepreneurs, on the contrary, presupposes a significant private economy and a functioning market. When one examines the different types of evidence (public, institutional versus private, non-institutional) retrieved from different archaeological sites as a whole, these two positions complement rather than contradict each other and so together offer us a more complete picture of the merchants’ undertakings. Except for certain legal documents, which invoke the merchants as witnesses, the Umma records concerning the merchants stem from institutional contexts. A scrutiny of the evidence not only divulges new details about their integration into the social and economic structure of the provincial household, but also allows new glimpses into their transactions and activities outside the sphere of the institutional economy.

–––––––––––––––––

701

See respectively JCS 46 24 13 (Š 38) in Table 5.3.F; OrSP 2 64 8 Wengler 28 (Š 39 v) in Table 5.3.M-1; MVN 1 238 (AS 5 ix?) rev. 10’ in Table 5.3.M-4. 702 SA 134 (Pl. 76) obv. ii 12-rev. i 13, rev. ii 5-7. 703 “A much higher proportion of private documents—but no private records corresponding to the Ur III balanced accounts—has been discovered at Nippur, but whether this is to be explained as an accident of archaeological discovery or whether one should assume that Nippur was some kind of financial and business emporium remains unclear ...”; Powell 1977, 27-28. For details about the Nippur evidence on merchants, see Neumann 1992a, 1992b, 1999; Van Driel 1994, 2002, 24-26; Garfinkle 2000, 172-224.

148

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

Records of allotments of sustenance land and orchards as well as the corvée obligation support the argument for the Umma merchants as state-dependent trade agents. Direct evidence of sustenance land granted to an Umma merchant appears in the text CST 676 (ŠS 2 vi), which lists the merchant Inim-anizi (rev. 16) as a recipient of barley that represented his share of the harvest from his sustenance land (š e š u k u -ra ). The text does not preserve the exact amount of his share, but judging from the context, the merchant might have received as much barley as several gudapriests. A merchant’s compensation package from the Umma government might have also included date-palm orchards.704 Concerning the corvée duty of merchants, Steinkeller (2004a, 98 n. 18) has observed an Umma merchant named Ur-Ištaran identified as a half-time worker in accordance with the é re n status (§2.2) of merchants in general. Several rosters list merchants, who formed work gangs with members of other professional groups, such as singers, shepherds, craftsmen, fowlers, and fishermen.705 Two texts specify the duration of the merchants’ corvée work, which lasted forty-five in one case and 100 days in the other.706 The corvée obligation, moreover, applied not only to the merchants themselves but also to their family members.707 Instead of carrying out the corvée obligation in person, the merchants had the option to provide a substitute708 or to make a silver payment.709 Although the constant shortage of labor left the government with no choice but to mobilize professionals, such as merchants, for non-specialized work (Garfinkle 2010, 315), the merchants could tap into their personal wealth to relieve their corvée obligation. The sources of the capital goods support the argument for the Umma merchants as government trade agents. As analyzed in §5.2, the bulk of their capital came from the administrators in charge of certain industries or products in the provincial economy. The merchants received barley primarily from three administrators: Arad, Lu-Šulgira, and Š ara-izu. Arad held the position of chief granary officer in Umma, which his son Šara-izu then inherited, and Lu-Šulgira acted as the top agricultural official in the districts of Gu’edena and Mušbi’ana. The merchants obtained most of their silver from the four officials, who controlled the silver revenue in Umma, and received their fish and fish oil from the fishery inspectors Ur-Mami and Ur-Utu. Concerning the sources of the products wool, dates, sheepskins, and leather goods, lack of information prevents the establishment of an attested correlation between the job

––––––––––––––––– 704

In UTI 3 2284 (ŠS 5 vi), a survey of three orchards, the orchard of the merchant Lu-Utu has 36 date-palm trees and a total yield estimated at 290 liters (obv. 9-19). His orchard appeared smaller than the other two: one with 57 trees belonged to Ur-dubla, a foreman of sixty ( u g u l a g é š - d a ) ; the other with 145 trees belonged to Ur-gigir, a chief plot manager. 705 OrSP 47-49 484 (no date) records three merchants, Lugal-gigire, Ur-ama, and Ur-Ninsu, alongside a donkey shepherd (s i p a a n š e ), a cultic singer (g a l a ), a leather worker, and a fuller, among others. CST 686 (no date) seems to be another roster which mentions a merchant named Ur-Šulpa’e. In Nisaba 23 56 (no date), a list of people who carried out earthwork, the merchant Ur-Dumuzida (rev. ii 2-3) appears together with builders (š i d i m ), blacksmiths, felters (t ú g - d u 8 ), and others. A basket label AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-176 (AS 8) registers twelve tablets as head counts (kurum7-ak) of twelve groups, including a merchant group who worked in different temple households and orchards. Other groups included fishermen, fowlers, and potters. 706 The merchant Sag-ku worked for 55 days in a row in Š 45 according to Aleppo 254. He reappears with nine other people on a roster MVN 1 243 (no date). In MVN 15 390 (Š 37 vii), a huge text that records work-days due from a large group of é r e n , at least four merchants each had to work a total of 100 days starting from month iii to month vii. The merchants were Lugal-emahe, Pada, Ur-Lamma, and Lugal-saga. The 100 days included three days in month iii (obv. vii 57), the whole month of month iv (obv. vii 58), month v (rev. iii 52), month vi (rev. xi 27), and seven days in month vii (rev. xi 28). For where the merchants appear in this text, see Table 5.1. 707 TCL 5 5666 (no date) lists the spouse of a merchant (rev. 7) among 56 female household members—spouses, daughters, and g é m e s —of scribes, brewers, gendarmes, gardeners, foresters, and other people whose professions remain unidentified. 708 In BPOA 1 1273 (Š 46?), the merchant Aya-gina provided a half-time servant (s a g - n í t a ) to work for ten months (Š 45 vii to Š 46 iv), likely on his behalf. 709 The text BCT 2 83 (ŠS 9 v) records four shekels of silver from the merchant Pada as a monetary replacement for his corvée work; another example is Rochester 239 (no date) rev. 2. Both texts describe the silver as á (PN) d a m - g à r .

149

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

responsibilities of the sources and their provisions to the merchants, but the limited evidence still shows that some of the providers held positions as senior officials of the provincial government.710 The Umma merchants served as trade agents by procuring the many products that, to a large degree, helped Umma meet its tax-obligation (bala, mašdare’a, and kašde’a) to the crown711 and, to a lesser degree, satisfied its own internal needs, whether industrial or ritualistic. As elaborated earlier in this chapter, the merchants supplied a wide range of goods—alkaline plants, bitumen, lard, timber, bird plumage, fruits, and vegetables—as bala-deliveries to the crown. Often these deliveries went either to royal workshops located in Umma or to the capital city of Ur and other national religious or economic centers, such as Nippur, Tummal, and Puzriš-Dagan. The indispensible silver and gold provided by the merchants contributed to paying the mašdare’a and kašde’a tax (§4). The crucial role of the merchants in ensuring the bala-tax deliveries of Umma to the crown resembles the situation reflected in the private archive of the merchant overseer Tūramili from northern Babylonia during the same period. Tūram-ili and the merchants that he oversaw collected silver (most often), barley, bitumen, and ship’s planks from provincial authorities as payments of the bala-tax to the crown and facilitated the transportation of these products to their destinations. In the process of tax collection, Tūram-ili and his subordinates could have engaged in tax-farming through the exchange of non-silver goods for silver and made profits for themselves (Garfinkle 2000, 150-153, 166-171; 2010, 314). The Umma merchants operated, however, as private entrepreneurs when they handled their capital goods or procured the products that the government demanded, despite the rare evidence of their private economic activities. Even for the lending business typical of the merchants attested in the corpora from two other sites, Nippur and Puzriš-Dagan,712 the Umma merchants have left but a handful of examples of private loans issued.713 Nevertheless, the present study can deduce from a group of little-studied documents that the Umma merchants secured finanacial gains for themselves while working for the government. These little-studied documents either carry the hallmark m u -DU DN, “deliveries to a deity,” or their content indicates such an implicit hallmark. The texts register the ex-voto gifts contributed by merchants along with those gifts coming from other people, whom the evidence sometimes identifies by title. Merchants whose names appear attested with such a gift included the following: Agaga, Anini, Bazige, Kaka, Šara-kam, Ur-nigar, Ur-Sin, Ur-Šulpa’e, Utu-sig, and an anonymous merchant.714 In an illustrative case, the merchant Agaga dedicated a drinking vessel made of silver and weighing one mina to the god Šara. The value of his offering exceeds that of an offering from any other worshipper, including the wife of a scribe and the son of a lu k u r, and ranks second

–––––––––––––––––

710

The merchants received most of the wool from the governor and his consort, the dates first from the scribe UrŠulpa’e and then from Šara-kam, and the sheepskins and leather goods from Lu-kala. Lack of information prevents the identification of Šara-kam and Lu-kala. 711 Snell first comments on the involvement of merchants in b a l a and suggests that in Umma, b a l a might refer to a fund under the direction of Lu-kala; see Snell 1982, 93-95. His understanding of b a l a turned out not to be correct. Snell reaches the same conclusion that goods withdrawn from the Umma merchants served mostly royal interests, by calculating the silver value of their expenditures to institutions and people connected with the royal establishment versus the silver value of their total exependitures; see Snell 1988. Note, however, that he (ibid., 2) counts as “royal” any expenditure associated with the governor, vis-à-vis “cultic” ones for the temple of the main god Šara. 712 For loan documents of the Nippur merchants in general and the merchant Ur-Nusku in particular, see Neumann 1992b, 167-176; Garfinkle 2000, 178-187; Van Driel 2002, 24-26. A good example of the loans from the Puzriš-Dagan merchants appears in the text Ontario 1 169 (AS 8 x), which records that Adalal the majordomo borrowed 120 bushels of barley from the merchant Guli-isa at the conventional interst rate of ⅓. 713 One example concerns one mina of silver that Šara-kam loaned to Gududu in BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i) (discussed in §3.9). Another example appears in ASJ 18 166 8 (no date), which classifies thirty shekels of silver from the merchant Ludingira (rev. ii 2-3), along with silver, barley, copper items, and bronze, under the two categories l á -NI ù u r 5 (rev. ii 14), “arrears and loans.” The category of u r 5 , “loan,” may apply to the silver. As for other evidence, Steinkeller 2004a, 105 n. 51 mentions two barley loans and one silver loan from someone called Šeš-kala, who might have been the Umma merchant that bore the same name. Van Driel 2002, 26-28 identifies some texts concerning Urša-kidug as possible loan records of merchants, but the texts never identify this Urša-kidug as a merchant. 714 See texts listed under them in Table 5.1.

150

5. S ILVER AND M ERCHANTS

only to the offering from the governor, which consisted of six sheep, three lambs, one ox, and two gold rings weighing twenty shekels.715 This text implies that the wealth of the merchants surpassed that of most people and set them among the wealthiest residents in Umma. Since the remuneration received by the merchants from the government did not distinguish them from other state dependents, their unusual wealth could have come from their trading operations. The affluence of the merchants might have made them well known among their fellow citizens and thus a target for criminals. The text SAT 3 2082 (no date) may reflect this possibility as it comprises a list of items that a certain Lulu stole from the merchant Lu-dingira. The list included two bronze objects (a -s a l 4 ), two copper objects (z i-a -š i and še n -šú ), ten shekels of copper in the form of rings with silver inlay? (u ru d a h a r k ù ), three copper rings? (h a r g i-ib tu -u m -m a ), one bronze toggle pin (tu -d i-d a ) weighing four shekels, one lapis-lazuli seal weighing one shekel, half a shekel of silver, six gold beads? (z a -h a r), six carnelian beads?, and two nir-stones (ZA.NIM) in an unknown shape. The nature of the stolen goods coincides with the image of merchants that emerges from the institutional records as suppliers of metals, which Mesopotamia did not produce. The Umma merchants might have taken advantage of the massive amounts of capital goods at their disposal to make profit for themselves. The contemporaneous evidence from the Nippur texts and the Turam-ili archive suggests that similar interest-bearing loans in silver and barley from the purchasing funds of the Umma merchants constituted one important source of their revenue. The Umma merchants could have issued such loans at their own discretion as part of their private, independent business aside from their service to the provincial authorities, and perhaps with the knowledge and acquiescence of the government. Their participation in regional and local trade provided another source of income, as Steinkeller (2004a, 105-109) has proposed. Thus the Umma merchants might have made profits from a retail trade in which they purchased cash crops (those studied in §3.5 and lard in §5.4.C) from their producers at one price and, after satisfying the demands of the government, resold the remaining products at a higher price in the local marketplaces. This proposal acknowledges at least “the presence in the Ur III economy of various market-like reflexes or behaviors” (ibid., 111). The current evidence of the Umma merchants and the results from the present study support Van Driel’s assertion that “a kind of market, some system of supply and demand which required the intervention of specialists [i.e., merchants] already [existed] at a provincial level in the Ur III period” (Van Driel 2002, 23).

––––––––––––––––– 715

Santag 6 192 (AS 8 vii). Although this text does not specify the conversion rate of gold to silver, according to Young 1979, 214, such a rate fell between 7:1 and 20:1 during the Ur III period. Therefore, the governor’s offering has a higher value than that of Agaga. The offering of a scribe’s wife consisted of a silver ring weighing 8 ⅓ shekels and one sheep (obv. 3-5), and that of a l u k u r ’ s son a date-palm orchard measuring 3 ¼ iku (obv. 17-18). The value of this orchard could not be estimated because its value would depend on the number of date-palm trees growing therein; see Steinkeller 1989, 135. The l u k u r in this text might have referred to one of the several dozen priestesses who waited on the god Šara; see Sharlach 2008b.

151

CHAPTER SIX

CONCLUSIONS

Control of Silver and Office of Governor This book has examined the silver that moved through the institutional economy in the Umma province during the Ur III period. It has demonstrated with statistical and chronological precision that four officials from the gubernatorial family—Akala (Š 33-43), Dadaga (Š 44-AS 2), Lu-kala (AS 3-ŠS 6), and Gududu (ŠS 7-IS 3)—each received the largest percentage of the silver revenue for a definite period of time (Figure 12 in §3.10). As Table 20 below shows, the case of Akala and Gududu proves compelling: they each received more than 80 percent of the silver payments attested in their respective periods of control. Although Dadaga’s share during his period does not appear as high as that of Akala and Gududu in theirs, it approaches two thirds of the total. Other significant recipients of silver between the years Š 44 and AS 2 included Ur-Šara (690 shekels in Š 44) and Utu-ulgal (210 shekels from Š 46 to AS 1).716 For each of these two recipients, the record of his silver receipt appears in a single text, which hints at a random incident. Ur-Šara, the well-known archivist, might have received that much silver in order to submit it to Dadaga (§3.4). The case of Lu-kala does not appear obvious, as his share amounts to just over one third of the total for the period AS 3-ŠS 6. Lu-kala’s smaller share may pertain to one factor unique to this period: More than one third of the payments attested during the period of Lu-kala, compared with less than 15 percent for the other three periods, do not specify or preserve the names of their recipients. Despite his not-so-overwhelming global share, Lu-kala received the largest percentage of payments in amount and had the highest number of attested records of receipt of silver for this period. Moreover, the silver expenditures that he incurred correspond with those of Akala, Dadaga, and Gududu (§4). This evidence thus suggests that Lu-kala occupied the position as the major recipient of silver during the period Š 45-AS 2, just as Akala, Dadaga, and Gududu did in their respective periods. Table 20: Recipients of all silver payments in Umma Period Recipient Akala

Š 33-43 (11 years)

Š 44-AS 2 (7 years)

AS 3-ŠS 6 (13 years)

85.37%

Undated

0.46%

Dadaga

0.11%

63.97%

Lu-kala

0.05%

1.29%

-7.41% b 36.35%

-0.92% b

Gududu

ŠS 7-IS 3 a (6 years)

0.36%

0.07%

91.15%

0.17%

Governor

0.09%

3.10%

1.42%

0.08%

Other(s)

7.00%

22.04%

24.69%

3.38%

19.69%

Unavailable

7.37%

10.51%

37.08%

5.04%

87.48%

9026.68

4646.52

4568.12

3222.69

1460.67

Total (shekels)

––––––––––––––––– 716

See respectively AnOr 1 52 (Š 44) in Table 3.4; BiOr 8 52 (AS 1) in Table 3.7.

153

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD Notes For method of calculations, see note a to Table 1 in § 3.2. a Statistics for this period include the total of the revenue section (s a g - n í g - g u r 1 1 - r a - k a m ) in two silver accounts, ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) and ZA 95 191 (IS 1), which one can attribute to Gududu (§4.6). This section in both cases comprises individual payments, of which an unknown number are broken. None of these payments has been counted in previous tables except those paid as the irrigation fee and from the merchants. b Numbers appear negative because for the period concerned, the recipient disbursed silver to merchants without receiving any from them; see also Table 19.

Table 21 below ranks the sources of silver revenue in Umma. The evidence reveals few specifics about the payments from unidentified sources, because the texts mention the names of the payers alone and nothing about their occupation or family affiliation. Similarly, the texts do not disclose the economic realities behind the payments from groups (although some members of a group may be identified by occupation) and professionals, despite the fact that some payments of these two categories appear specified as (repaid) arrears. The first major recipient Akala received the largest amount of silver revenue from the incumbent governor, classified as a professional in this study, who provided Akala with a total of 1,687.84 shekels of silver during the period Š 33-43.717 Excluding these three ambiguous categories of payments—those from unidentified sources, groups, and professionals—irrigation fees emerge as the largest source of the silver revue in Umma, followed in turn by payments related to cash crops (salt, sesame, fruits, vegetables, g a z i, m u n -g a z i, fish, bird plumage), payments from animal husbandry, and silver contributed by merchants. Table 21: Ranking the sources of silver revenue in Umma Percentage (shekels)

Source Unidentified sources

23.25%

Irrigation fees

22.02%

Payments from groups

11.28%

Payments from professionals

10.61%

Payments related to cash crops

10.83%

Payments from animal husbandry

9.69%

Payments from merchants

7.60%

Payments from grain cultivation

2.78%

Payments related to labor

1.96%

Total:

100%

a

Notes For method of calculations, see note a to Table 1 in § 3.2. a Calculated without consideration of the individual payments from the revenue section (s a g - n í g - g u r 1 1 - r a - k a m ) of two silver accounts, ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) and ZA 95 191 (IS 1), except those paid as the irrigation fees and from merchants. See note a to Table 20.

–––––––––––––––––

717

Table 3.6: AnOr 1 47 (Š 43)—102.17 shekels. Table 3.7: MVN 14 154 (Š 33)—300 shekels; YOS 4 262 (Š 34)— 125 shekels; Umma 95 (Š 37)—217.67 shekels; OLP 4 17-70 no. 40 (Š 38)—33 shekels; BIN 5 109 (Š 42)—910 shekels.

154

6. C ONCLUSIONS

The four major recipients meanwhile issued the highest percentage of the silver expenditures attested within the respective time frames of their receipts. Two taxes paid to the crown, kašde’a and mašdare’a, comprised the largest expenditure of these officials except for Dadaga, for whom little evidence attests to his disbursements. The tax payments usually feature silver rings, but sometimes objects made of gold too. The second largest expenditure of these four officials constituted the silver that they advanced to merchants as purchase funds. The control that these four officials exercised over the silver revenue may reflect their leadership in supervising the institutional economy in Umma, although one cannot dispense with the possibility that they focused on the management of silver alone rather than the larger provincial economy. Evidence in favor of their leading role in the provincial economy consists in the irrigation fee payments and the silver payments from animal husbandry, which the four officials often received from the senior agricultural administrators or the managers of animal husbandry. The interaction with the senior management in agriculture and animal husbandry suggests that the four officials might have presided over the administration of these two industries. Additional evidence along the same lines includes payments related to g a z i, m u n g a z i, and fish, which the four officials received from the foremen of foresters, the district administrators, and the fishery inspectors respectively. The control over the silver revenue does not appear to have fallen under the purview of a defined, actual office, since the four officials claimed the title of “scribe,” which does not pertain to a particular office, when exercising this control. According to Steinkeller (§1), however, each of the four officials functioned as head of the Fiscal Office, which served as the center of command for the institutional economy in Umma. This office supervised and coordinated the economic production in the different industries, kept track of the silver and the other goods that the Umma administration provided for and withdrew from the merchants, and collected taxes for the king. Dahl has named the virtual position held by these four officials as “chief household administrator” of the governor (§1). Previous research has established that in Ur III Umma, the hereditary office of governor passed along the fratrilineal line within the gubernatorial family. Since Akala and Dadaga, the first two of the four officials, both took office as governor after they had ceased to control the silver revenue in Umma and to issue expenditures concomitant with that control, the fulfillment of those responsibilities might have groomed them for the governorship. The evidence thus indicates that candidates in line to succeed as governor performed these duties that involved the control of the silver revenue. Whereas we do not know, for lack of evidence, who succeeded Dadaga as governor after the year IS 3, Lu-kala (if he survived Dadaga)718 or Gududu might have taken his place. The incumbent governor played a minor part in the management of silver in Umma with the single task of delivering the royal taxes of Umma to the crown. Even though the four officials issued the silver and gold as the mašdare’a and kašde’a tax to the king, the tax payments did not flow from them to the king but went to the governor first. The course of the payments implies that the governor took the responsibility to deliver or to send the taxes to the king. Thus, the governor did not engage in the management of the economy in Umma, but functioned rather as the economic liaison between the Umma province and the crown.

––––––––––––––––– 718

Dahl (2007, 81-83) thinks that Gududu was the more likely candidate because Lu-kala could have died near the end of Akala’s governorship (late AS 8-ŠS 7 ii). However, we have evidence showing that Lu-kala was still active several years after the death of Akala; see AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-227 (IS 3 i) obv. 1-2: [n] t ú g u š - b a r / ⌈ l ú ⌉ - k a l - l a dub-sar.

155

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Merchants and Marketplaces A question arising from the results of this study concerns the means by which those people, who made silver payments to the Umma government, attained access to that silver. In addition to merchants, these payers of silver included workers in agriculture and animal husbandry, craftsmen, administrators at various levels, and provincial officials. The Umma government disbursed silver to the merchants as part of their capital, but no explicit evidence shows that it distributed silver to the general population on a regular basis. It follows that those who paid silver would have secured their own sources of silver income. What, then, constituted their sources? One immediate answer would point to loans or to the sale of property (houses, gardens, and building plots), slaves, and family members as a source of silver. The problem with taking loans lies in the fact that silver borrowed required repayment on a future date and, therefore, did not increase a family’s silver income in the long run.719 The sale of family possessions too, could not provide a sustainable source of silver and did not take place often. A mere dozen or so sale records have turned up among the nearly 28,000 Umma texts.720 A regular channel through which the common people could obtain silver was to hire themselves out to the institutional economy after the fulfillment of their corvée obligation toward the Umma government. The institutional economies in the Ur III kingdom suffered a chronic shortage of labor, which became exacerbated at harvest times. As a remedy, the institutional economies employed workers from among their own dependents (é re n ) for a pay higher than that which the dependents received for their mandatory labor contribution. An administrative record from Umma, Princeton 1 396 (Š 40), documents that the government bought 1,533 workdays with silver (obv. 3-4: 1533 g u ru š u 4 1 -šè / k ù -ta sa 1 0 -a ) (Wilcke 2007, 91; Steinkeller forthcoming b). The merchants, however, appear as a more plausible and stable source of silver for the common people. As this study elaborates in chapter 5, some of the goods that the merchants supplied to the Umma administration had local origins, such as the following: oil, fats, fruits, vegetables, beer, domestic animals, goat hair, wool, dairy products, birds, bird plumage, cheap timber, and alkaline plants. The merchants could have bought most of these goods from their local producers either with silver or by other means of payment. Thus one may propose that the following two conditions existed in Ur III Umma. (1) The producers of these products either enjoyed a surplus after delivering their quota to the government, or undertook their independent, individual production on the ecological margins free from the control of the institutional economy. (2) Despite the dominance of the institutional economy characterized by selfsufficiency and auto-consumption, small, localized marketplaces functioned to facilitate the purchase and sale of these products in Umma. When the merchants made purchases with silver in such marketplaces, their transactions disseminated silver to the producers, who could then pay off their obligations to the government with silver. “[I]t is the interstitial role of the public or private trader ... that provides a vehicle by which the role of precious metals might have mobilized the circulation of capital between private, state and temple lands, depositories and commercial ventures” (Marfoe 1987, 30). Although the references in Ur III texts to marketplaces where people met to barter or transact with the medium of silver appear less straightforward than the references in texts from later periods,721 the present scrutiny of goods handled by the Umma merchants leads to the proposal that local marketplaces functioned during the Ur III period. The case of the production and procurement of lard (§5.4.B) calls for the likelihood that individual families undertook much of the swine herding in Umma without the direct support and control of the institutional sector. One could thus postulate that the merchants might have acquired their several thousand liters of lard –––––––––––––––––

719

For Ur III lending practices in general, see Steinkeller 2001 and 2002; Garfinkle 2004. See note 23 above. 721 For evidence of marketplaces for the Old Babylonian period and later, see Röllig 1976; Powell 1999, 9-14. 720

156

6. C ONCLUSIONS

annually through the local marketplaces where they could meet with and buy the product from individuals, who engaged in small-scale, family-based pig farming. The lawsuit that this study discussed in §3.5.F accuses that a certain Ur-Emah embezzled the fish that he had caught from ponds of the institutional sector and sold it to people from the neighboring Girsu province responsible for preparing offerings for the patron god Ningirsu. Such a crime presupposes the inadequate supply of a certain product within the institutional economy (the one in Girsu in this case), the availability of non-institutional sources (embezzled fish) to meet the unsatisfied demand, and the people’s awareness of and access to such sources. These three factors composed a local marketplace. These two examples further suggest that the institutional economy in Ur III Umma, although dominated by redistribution and characterized by self-sufficiency and auto-consumption, would still have required supplies from external, non-institutional sources in order to satisfy certain demands at the institutional level. Contrary to the conventional wisdom that such demands consisted of luxury or strategic goods (which would include metals, stones, and premium timber for southern Mesopotamia), the present results unveil an Umma institutional economy that sought after local cash crops as well as cheap, bulky, and heavy non-metal raw materials from neighboring regions. Limited as they appeared, such demands created an opportunity for the members of the Umma institutional sector to earn supplementary income and led to the development of marketplaces. This conclusion appears congruent with what Wilcke (2008) has concluded from an examination of the products that the Umma administration bought with or without the intermediacy of the merchants. “State households of the Ur III time undoubtedly did produce on their own most of what they needed and consumed also the majority of their products. Yet they were by no means self-sufficient and had not only to procure plenty of goods—not just “exotics” and luxury goods—but also to hire human labor and draft animals as well as implements (e.g., plow-oxen and boats with crew members) to no small degree” (ibid., 261).722 The Umma institutional economy may also rely on the wealth of its members as a source of credit. On occasion, the government officials would take interest-bearing loans from the merchants to finance its mašdare’a tax to the king, as Gududu did in BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i) analyzed in §3.9. This transaction brings to one’s mind the lending activities of SI.A-a, a contemporaneous chief shepherd from northern Babylonia, whose clients included “members of the institutional and military hierarchies of the Ur III state” (Garfinkle 2003, 168). The monetary functions of silver as a means of payment to discharge obligations and as a standard of value to measure non-silver products, in conjunction with the access to silver that the merchants facilitated, provided some desirable flexibility for the participants of the institutional economy in Umma. The silver income from their non-institutional undertakings would give laborers and administrators some cushion against adverse circumstances. This scenario appears in the text SA 55 (Pl. 89) (ŠS 2 iv), in which a gardener named Ur-sigar paid five shekels of silver in lieu of dues in kind from his destroyed garden.723 For skilled workers like merchants, the option of paying silver instead of carrying out the corvée duty in person (§5.5) allowed them more time to ply their trade. Thus the monetary functions of silver boosted the specialization of labor. Two issues regarding the movement of silver and gold in the Umma institutional economy require further study. The first issue concerns additional sources of silver for the merchants other ––––––––––––––––– 722

Translation of the author. The original reads: “Denn ,staatliche‘ Haushalte der Ur III-Zeit brachten zwar zweifellos das meiste, was sie benötigen, selbst hervor, und sie verbrauchten auch wieder das Gros ihrer Produkte. Sie waren jedoch keineswegs autark und mussten viele Waren—nicht nur ,exotische‘ und Luxusgüter—hinzuerwerben und auch menschliche wie tierische Arbeitskräfte und Geräte (z.B. Pflugrinder und Boote samt Besatzung) in nicht geringer Zahl anmieten.” 723 The text reads: obv. 1. 5 ( d i š ) g í n k ù - b a b b a r / 2. k ù ⌈ n a m ? ⌉ - DU m u g i š k i r i 6 h u l - a - š è / 3. k i u r - s i - g a r n u - g i š k i r i 6 - t a / 4. g ì r d i n g i r - r a ; rev. 1. i t i n e s a g / 2. m u m á d à r a d e n - k i b a - a b - d ú . “Five shekels of silver / silver (in lieu of) whatever he should bring concerning the destroyed garden / from Ur-sigar the gardener / conveyed by Dingira / month iv / year when the boat of Enki, ‘ibex,’ was caulked.” For grammatical analysis of n a m -DU, see §3.3. Another record of the same transaction is BPOA 6 544 (ŠS 2).

157

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

than their silver capital that the Umma administration supplied. According to the comparison conducted at the beginning of §5.4, the merchants repaid more silver to the administration than they had received. The analysis above suggests that neither the institutional economy nor the members of the institutional sector could have provided the extra source. Therefore, one may posit that the merchants sold for silver a portion of their non-silver capital goods to the royal sector in Umma or to people and organizations outside of the Umma province. The transactions that the merchants conducted with a third party outside of the institutional economy fell out of the scope of the Umma administrative records and thus have left few traces behind. The second issue deals with the source of gold as attested in the Umma administrative records that this book covers. The amount of gold that the Umma government paid as taxes to the crown far exceeds what it received (mostly from the merchants) at the same time. For reasons unclear, the requisition of gold by the Umma administration was often associated with the two cities, Tummal (the most important administrative center after the capital city of Ur) and Nippur (the religious capital).

Loans; Sale of property; Silver wage

Other recipients

Tummal; Nippur

Payers of silver

Four major recipients

Governor

Merchants

Umma royal sector; Outside Umma

Crown ?

Figure 13: Movement of silver and gold in Ur III Umma.

?

Movement of silver Movement of gold Deduction without direct evidence

Figure 13 depicts the circulation of silver and the movement of gold as reconstructed from the silver texts of Umma. This figure shows two spheres in which the silver circulated. One sphere, which represents the institutional economy of Umma, involved the following participants: (1) dependent workers and administrators, who paid silver; (2) the four major recipients of silver payments—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu—and other, lesser recipients; and (3) the merchants, who received their silver capital from (2) and paid (1) with silver for the purchase of the local products. The other sphere of the circulation of silver concerned the Umma province as a whole and the central government. As head of the provincial government, the governor paid two taxes, mašdare’a and kašde’a, to the king with the silver that he took from the four major recipients. The king, in return, bestowed gifts in the form of silver rings upon the governor. Unlike the circulation of the silver, the gold attested in the evidence moved unilaterally from the Umma province to the crown as payments of the same two taxes—mašdare’a and kašde’a—that the governor made to the king, who preferred gold to silver for its prestige, suitability for storage, and use as a strategic resource and seldom disbursed gold as gifts to his subjects. The four major recipients of silver—Akala, Dadaga, Lu-kala, and Gududu—played a pivotal role in both the 158

6. C ONCLUSIONS

circulation of silver and the movement of gold. For the participants in the circulation and movement of silver and gold, these two precious metals furnished a far more liquid means of converting, circulating, and accumulating wealth because of their portability, divisibility, and susceptibility to standardization (Marfoe 1987, 33). Physical Form of Silver in Circulation Documentary evidence from the Ur III period seldom describes the physical attributes of the silver that changed hands. This absence of specifics about the physical attributes of silver constitutes one argument against the position that silver served as money for the Ur III period (e.g., Renger 1989, 239; 1995, 301-302). Powell (e.g., 1996a, 234-235) has dismissed this argument by maintaining that ancient Mesopotamians did not write down information obvious to them at the time. The silver texts from Umma only mention that the two taxes paid to the crown, mašdare’a and kašde’a, might feature silver nose-rings for oxen and small rings, and gifts presented to royal guests and messengers might include these two types of rings as well (§4.1-2). In texts found at Ur, however, specifications of silver do occur, as the following terms indicate: k a la -g a , “strong, polished,” and z a -rí-in (meaning unclear).724 Another expression, k ù -b a b b a r b a b b a r, appears attested in both legal and administrative contexts. Some scholars interpret it as an equivalent of the Neo-Babylonian phrase kaspu peṣû, “shining silver,”725 while others understand k ù -b a b b a r b a b b a r as an archic writing of k ù -b a b b a r.726 In contrast to the abundant textual references to the four monetary functions of silver—a means of payment, a medium of exchange, a standard of value, and a medium of storage—in Mesopotamian history, “[t]he material evidence for silver as currency is scattered and varied, and not always easily identified” (Moorey 1999, 237). Powell (1996a, 235) identifies several factors responsible for the lack of archaeological evidence: “One is that metal monies were never thrown away to be discovered in a trash heap. Even the relatively cheap ones would normally have been recycled. So we cannot expect an abundance of this type of artifact. A second (frequently overlooked) is that Mesopotamia simply has not been as extensively or intensively explored as many other areas of the Mediterranean. A third is: how are we to recognize “money” when we see it? Coins are relatively easy to recognize, and they are duly registered as such in excavation reports and in museum catalogues, but the basic paradigms for Mesopotamian monies still remain to be established.” Based on the calculation of the standard deviation in Mesopotamian weights mostly from the period 2500-1500, Powell (1979, esp. 83; 1999, 16) postulates that the margin of error in small weights would approximate 3 percent of the total mass. If the silver changing hands weighed one shekel, then the 3-percent error would have amounted to the value of one day’s work during the Old Babylonian period and even more during the Ur III period. In that case, the parties involved would have preferred a cheaper money with a less expensive margin of error, such as barley or base metals, to conduct their transactions. The function of barley as a medium of exchange finds plenty of evidence in the broad range of products purchased with barley that the Ur III Umma corpus attests to.727 ––––––––––––––––– 724

UET 3 1498 (IS 15 xii) obv. iii 28, 29, 32 and rev. ii 35; see Limet 1960, 47. See Oppenheim 1948, 24; Limet 1960, 47. For the attestation of k ù - b a b b a r b a b b a r in administrative records, e.g., Nik. 2 439 (Š 29 xii) from Umma, ITT 5 6924 (ŠS 4) from Girsu; for that in sale and loan documents, e.g., YOS 4 2 (Š 40), YOS 4 16 (AS 5 ix), YOS 4 22 (IS 3 ii), YOS 4 20 (IS 4 xii), all from Umma. 726 See Steinkeller 1989, 214 with previous literature. 727 The list in Wilcke 2008, 267-281 includes livestock (sheep, oxen, pigs, donkeys), foodstuff (beer, fish, fish oil, sesame, bran [d u h ]), household items (wooden objects [g i š k á b ], textiles, cups [d u g g a l ]), oven [d ú - r u - n a ]),metals (silver, copper, tin, bronze, s u - g a n ), raw materials (wool, bitumen, reeds), construction materials (roof beams, bricks), means of agricultural production (harrowing prongs [g i š z ú g i š - g á n - ù r ], seeds of onion and garlic), and others (slaves, birds, precious stones [n a 4 d u 8 - š i - a ]). 725

159

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

More than 90 percent of the silver payments attested in the Umma silver texts weigh more than one shekel. The smallest fraction recorded in the present evidence reaches four grains (c. 0.19 gram) in an irrigation fee payment in the text Princeton 1 409 (AS 2) obv. 4. It amounts to one grain more than the smallest weight, which weighs three grains (= 1/60 shekel = c. 0.14 gram), ever discovered in Mesopotamia. This weight comes from Ur but has no established date (Hafford 2005). The discovery of this three-grain weight indicates that the Ur III Umma could have attained the technical sophistication required to weigh tiny amounts of silver in order to use it as money. Silver Money in the Larger Economy Even though the Umma texts testify to the circulation of silver and its fulfillment of the four monetary functions (as defined by Polanyi), the institutional economy of Umma still operated largely in kind and came nowhere close to using silver as a daily money, as the two following facts testify. (1) The evidence attests to a modest total amount of silver; and (2) the circulation of the silver involved a small minority of the population. The small annual volume of revenue and expenditure in silver indicates the distance of the Umma institutional economy from the broad adoption of silver as money. The two balanced accounts discussed in §4.6 provide an example: The revenue reached 1,348.61 shekels in the year ŠS 9 and 1,276.81 shekels in the following year IS 1, while expenditures totaled 1,502.82 shekels and 1,444.89 shekels respectively in these two years. One can reckon a deficit slightly more than 150 shekels of silver for both years. These low numbers indicate the minor importance of the silver as money in Ur III Umma compared with statistics from the Neo-Babylonian period, for which scholars have reached consensus about the use of silver as money and agreed on the elevated level of monetization of the economy. The Eanna temple in Uruk could receive from the palace more than 3,120 shekels of silver in a single month of the twenty-sixth year of Nebuchadnezzar II (579); earlier in his twentieth year (585), more than 16,680 shekels of silver were paid to this temple for its wool (Jursa 2005, 181). The volume of silver attested in the Umma institutional economy over the course of about four decades accounts for but a fraction of that attested for one temple household of the NeoBabylonian period during one year. The annual amount of silver that circulated in the Umma economy appears modest even when compared with the amount of the silver attested in other Ur III corpora, especially in the texts from Puzriš-Dagan, which often designate silver for the purchase of gold and other products. For instance, the text NBC 6641 (ŠS 8 ix) registers 4,200 shekels of silver entrusted to a group of merchants for the purchase of gold (Garfinkle 2008b); AOS 32 D1 (Š 44 ii) mentions nearly 2,570 shekels of silver for the purchase of resins of cedar; and AUCT 2 289 (date broken) records 3,620 shekels of silver for the purchase of tin.728 Since the treasury in Puzriš-Dagan served as a branch of the royal treasury in the capital city of Ur (Paoletti 2008), the large quantities of silver attested in the Puzriš-Dagan texts might have come from the tax payments of the provinces such as Umma. Concerning the extent of the circulation of silver, even Powell, who assumes the existence of money in Mesopotamia, admits that “I cannot imagine silver circulating from hand to hand on a daily basis throughout the whole populace—including rural areas—in the Old Babylonian period or in any later period” (Powell 1999, 16). The high value of silver at one shekel conventionally exchanged for 300 liters of barley and the complications of weighing the silver prevented it from circulating on a large scale as a means of quotidian payment and medium of exchange. As a result, other cheaper, less valuable products fulfilled these two functions alongside silver. In Ur III Umma, barley seemed the most likely candidate for such a cheap money, as the merchant –––––––––––––––––

728

Although the two databases BDTNS and CDLI (both accessed September 2012) list AUCT 2 289 as a text of unknown provenience, this text comes certainly from Puzriš-Dagan in light of the signs preserved in the last line of the reverse: ki pù-⌈zur8⌉-[...], which contains the beginning of the name Puzriš-Dagan.

160

6. C ONCLUSIONS

accounts from Umma often earmark barley for the purchase of other products or designate it as their prices (§5.2.B). The inconveniences posed by the weighing and the high value of silver, however, by no means confined the use of silver to the circles of the elite and the privileged. The analysis in chapter 3 reveals that the people, who possessed silver, might have held an office as senior as governor or as low as doorkeeper. The silver texts from Ur III Umma thus provide both evidence of the monetary use of silver in the institutional economy and evidence of the intersection between this economy and the noninstitutional, private activities undertaken by the same members of the institutional sector. Although not significant in volume, the non-institutional activities nonetheless proved indispensible for the smooth running of the overwhelming, powerful, and redistributive institutional economy, as they offered to the participants in the controlled and centralized economy some leeway to earn supplementary income and supplied the institutional sector with the products it chose not to or could not produce on its own. The performance of these activities presupposes the existence and functioning of local marketplaces (or market substitutes as some scholars call them) and requires the facilitation of the merchants, who connected the institutional economy to the private economic activities and, by making purchases with silver, served as the major source of silver for the common people. Given the evidence of similar silver texts identified among records from Girsu (Lambert 1963a; 1963b) and Puzriš-Dagan (Paoletti 2008), the second and third largest Ur III corpora, these conclusions may apply to the other provinces in the kingdom.

161

APPENDIX: TABLES

Tables for Chapter Three ..................................................................................................... 165 Table 3.2.A. Silver payments of irrigation fee .................................................................... 165 Table 3.2.B. Actual payer(s) of irrigation fee ..................................................................... 170 Table 3.2.C. Attested uses of irrigation fee ......................................................................... 171 Table 3.3. Silver payments from grain cultivation .............................................................. 171 Table 3.4. Silver payments from animal husbandry ........................................................... 174 Table 3.5.A. Silver payments related to salt ....................................................................... 178 Table 3.5.B. Silver payments related to sesame .................................................................. 179 Table 3.5.C. Silver payments related to g a z i ..................................................................... 180 Table 3.5.D. Silver payments related to m u n -g a z i ........................................................... 180 Table 3.5.E. Silver payments related to fruits and vegetables ............................................ 181 Table 3.5.F. Silver payments related to fish and bird plumage ........................................... 184 Table 3.6. Silver payments related to á .............................................................................. 186 Table 3.7. Silver payments from professionals ................................................................... 188 Table 3.8. Silver payments from groups ............................................................................. 191 Table 3.9.A. Silver payments from unidentified sources (Š 33-AS 2) ............................... 194 Table 3.9.B. Silver payments from unidentified sources (AS 3-IS 3) ................................ 198 Tables for Chapter Four ..................................................................................................... 205 Table 4.1. Silver expenditures for paying royal taxes ......................................................... 205 Table 4.2. Other silver expenditures for the crown ............................................................. 207 Table 4.3. Silver expenditures for cultic purposes .............................................................. 208 Table 4.4. Silver expenditures on for making purchases .................................................... 209 Table 4.5. Other silver expenditures ................................................................................... 210 Table 4.6.A. Itemization of silver account ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) ............................................ 211 Table 4.6.B. Itemization of silver account ZA 95 191 (IS 1) .............................................. 213 Tables for Chapter Five ..................................................................................................... 217 Table 5.1. List of merchants and their records .................................................................... 217 Table 5.2.A. Silver received by Umma merchants ............................................................. 233 Table 5.2.B. Barley received by Umma merchants ............................................................. 236 Table 5.2.C. Wool received by Umma merchants .............................................................. 239 Table 5.2.D. Dates received by Umma merchants .............................................................. 241 Table 5.2.E. Fish and fish oil received by Umma merchants ............................................. 243 Table 5.2.F. Sheepskins and leather goods received by Umma merchants ........................ 245 Table 5.2.G. Other capital goods received by Umma merchants ........................................ 246 Table 5.3.A. Gold supplied by Umma merchants ............................................................... 248 Table 5.3.B. Silver supplied by Umma merchants .............................................................. 248 Table 5.3.C. Base metals supplied by Umma merchants .................................................... 253 163

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Table 5.3.D. Alkaline plants supplied by Umma merchants ............................................... 256 Table 5.3.E. Gypsum supplied by Umma merchants .......................................................... 261 Table 5.3.F. Bitumen supplied by Umma merchants .......................................................... 264 Table 5.3.G. Resins supplied by Umma merchants ............................................................ 271 Table 5.3.H. Condiments and spices supplied by Umma Merchants .................................. 276 Table 5.3.I. Oil and fats supplied by Umma merchants ...................................................... 279 Table 5.3.J. Fruits and honey supplied by Umma merchants ............................................. 282 Table 5.3.K. Vegetables supplied by Umma merchants ..................................................... 285 Table 5.3.L. Timber and timber products supplied by Umma merchants ........................... 288 Table 5.3.M-1. Fish, birds, and domestic animals supplied by Umma merchants ............. 291 Table 5.3.M-2. Animal parts and byproducts supplied by Umma merchants ..................... 292 Table 5.3.M-3. Barley, beer, and dairy products supplied by Umma merchants ................ 295 Table 5.3.M-4. Plants, reeds, herbs, and their byproducts supplied by Umma merchants . 295 Table 5.3.M-5. Craft goods, minerals, and dyes supplied by Umma merchants ................ 297

164

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Tables for Chapter Three Table 3.2.A. Silver payments of irrigation fee Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

From

Field a

SAKF 58 (Š 33 v)

A-kal-la

Ur-dnin-su

a-šà lugal

21.85

BPOA 1 1319 (Š 33 x)

A-kal-la

A-ab-ba

gú-eden-na

14.25

MVN 14 188 (Š 33 xi)

A-kal-la

Ôtsuka Kôko 11 131 (Š 33 xii)

A-kal-la b

A-ab-ba-ni

⌈a-šà⌉ lugal c

OrSP 47-49 163 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

Lugal-é-mah-e

a-šà dšára

160.89

Nisaba 9 77 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

Ur-e11-e

a-pi4-sal4ki

148.36

BPOA 6 554 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

Ur-e11-e

a-pi4-sal4ki

2.08

MVN 14 190 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

Lugal-é-mah-e šeš a-ab-ba

Aleppo 448 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

Lugal-giškiri6

a-šà muš-bi-an-na

98.25

Vicino Oriente 8/1 62 (Š 34 v)

A-kal-la

[Lugal]-é!-mah-e

a-šà dšára ù a-šà lá-mah

110.38

BM 106557 (Š 34)

énsi

AOS 32 F01 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

a-šà ka-ma-rí

Ur-dšára

gìr ur-dnin-su

15

a-⌈šà⌉ dšára

Seal: [ur-dšára] dub[sar] dumu lugal-ušur4 nu-bànda gu4 dšára

a-pi4-sal4ki

gìr ur-e11-e

280.78

gú-eden-na

gìr a-ab-ba

47.35

d

a-šà šára gìr lugal-é-mah-e (+? a-šà lá-mah) d šeš lugal-giškiri6 A-kal-la

A-ab-ba-ni

(a-šà) dnin-ur4!-ra

BM 105574 (Š 34)

[...]

A-tu

a-šà ka-ma-rí

BIN 5 144 (Š 35)

A-kal-la

Ur-dnin-⌈su⌉

a-šà lugal

BPOA 7 1554 (Š 35)

A-kal-la

Šeš-kal-la

me-en-kár

A-kal-la

94.29

103.50

Princeton 1 541 (Š 34)

Umma 85 (Š 35)

Description

8

83.18 21 42.17?

⌈diri?⌉ maš a-šà-ga

2.67 29.23

Níg-lagar-e

maš giškiri6

1

Na-ú-a

ditto; kù ha-ni-ni

7

Ma-an-sum

maš

Lugal-e-ba-sa6

ditto

165

giš

kiri6

9 22

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

From

Field a

Description

AnOr 1 36 (Š 36)

A-kal-la

Ur-e11-e

a-pi4-sal4ki

maš a-šà-ga a dé-a

241.50

AnOr 1 35 (Š 36)

A-kal-la

Da-da-ga

gú-eden-na

a dé-a; gìr a-ab-ba

53.08 e

Nisaba 9 238 (Š 36)

A-kal-la

Lugal-nesag-e

èš-didli

a dé-a

12.69

Ur-dnin-su

da-ummaki

234.40 22.40

AAS 73 (Š 36) f BPOA 6 1325 (Š 36)

A-kal-la

Šeš-kal-la

me-en-kár

BPOA 7 1988 (Š 36)

A-kal-la

Lugal-giškiri6

muš-bi-an-na

Aleppo 450 (Š 37)

a dé-a

Ki-lul-la

2

Ma-an-ba

2.25

Ni9-gar-ki-du10

2.83

A-kal-la AAS 75 (Š 37)

A-kal-la b

SAKF 92 (Š 37)

A-kal-la

Lugal-nesag-e

AAS 74 (Š 37)

A-kal-la

Lugal-giš[gigir]

RO 41 121 1 (Š 37)

A-kal-la

Ur-gišgigir

Aleppo 456 (Š 37)

Lugal-ezem

2 a-pi4-sal4ki

a dé-a; gìr ur-e11-e

41 a-šà ka-ma-rí

a dé-a

MVN 14 148 (Š 38)

a-šà muš-bi-an-na gìr lú-igi-sa6-sa6

75.60 62.14

me-en-kár

10

A-ab-ba

gú-eden-na

2.81

Ur-e11-e

ki

a-pi4-sal4

20.33

Lugal- kiri6

muš-bi-an-na

16.89

Lugal-nesag-e

èš-didli

8.54

giš

d

A-kal-la

a dé-a; gìr ur-e11-e

Šeš-kal-la

Ur-e11-e

OrSP 47-49 213 (Š 40)

97.75 7

a-pi4-sal4ki

Vicino Oriente 8/1 71 (Š 39)

173.25 20.88 g

èš-didli

Princeton 1 548 (Š 38)

Santag 6 35 (Š 38?)

75.85

ki

163.52

ki

79.29

a-pi4-sal4

Ur- nàm-nun-ka

da-umma

A-ab-ba

gú-eden-na

Lugal-é-mah-e

Lugal-nesag-e

d

6.11

a-šà šára a dé-a (+? a-šà lá-mah) d

49.04

apin-lá èš-didli

13.13

apin-lá a-šà muš-bi-an-na

24.81

166

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

From

Field a

Umma 78 h (Š 41 xii)

A-kal-la

A-ab-ba-ni

(a-šà) dnin-ur4-ra

Description

Silver (shekels) 1.33?

síg-bi 8(aš) gú 2(u) 7(diš) ½ ma-na; síg maš a-šà-ga; úgu ure11-e ba-a-gar

50.75

a dé-a

15.52

JCS 54 10 68 (Š 41)

Da-da-ga

BPOA 7 1652 (Š 42)

A-kal-la b

Ur-dšára

èš-didli

SNAT 291 (Š 43 viii)

A-kal-la b

Ur-dun

a-šà lá-tur

1.67

Liber Annuus 37 1 (Š 43) j

⌈A-kal⌉-[la] b

Ur-gišgigir

a-šà ka-ma-rí ù a-šà lugal

63.46

Ur-dun

a-šà lá-tur

1.92

OrSP 15 57 IB43 k (Š 44) MVN 4 5 (Š 44)

BIN 5 108 (Š 44)

a-šà dšára

Da-[da-ga] Lugal-é-mah šeš al-la

Da-da-ga

sag-⌈du5-ke4⌉-ne

gìr lugal-é-mah-e

12.15

gìr lú-bàn-da

3.17

a-pi4-sal4ki

gìr ur-e11-e

muš-bi-an-na

⌈gìr⌉ da-a-gi4

20.77

gú-eden-na

⌈gìr⌉ a-ab-ba

11.81

gìr lugal-é-mah-⌈e⌉

12.15

d

a-šà šára da-umma

ki

d

èš-didli

120.75 l

gìr ur- nàm-nun-ka

5.79

gìr lugal-nesag-e

6.67

ki

Aleppo 451 (Š 45)

Da-da-ga

Ur-gišgigir

a-šà ka-ma-rí ù a-šà lugal

122.48

Aleppo 452 (Š 45)

Da-da-ga

Šeš-kal-la dumu na-silim

a-šà den-me-kár

22.63

BPOA 6 1320 (Š 46)

Da-da-ga

Ur-dnàm-nun-ka

da-ummaki

26.69

èš-didli

4.50 níg-kas7-ak maš a-šà-ga a dé-a; gìr sag-du5-ke4-ne

SAT 2 553 (Š 47) BPOA 1 980 (AS 1)

Níg-ú-rum dubsar dumu dnannaì-zu

a-šà ì-sum ù a-šà a-šim

167

371.64

2.74

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

Princeton 1 409 (AS 2)

TCL 5 6045 (AS 8 xii)

Recipient

Da-da-ga

From

sag-du5-ke4-ne

Field a

Description

Silver (shekels)

ka-ma-ríki ù a-šà lugal

gìr ur-gišgigir

114.06

a-šà dšára ù a-šà lá-mah

gìr lugal-é-mah-e

28.02

a-šà lá-tur

gìr ur-dun

9.73

da-umma

ki

gìr ur- nàm-nun-ka

40.44

èš-didli

gìr lugal-nesag-e

10.33

zàbalamki

gìr šeš-kal-la dumu na-silim

3.42

a-pi4-sal4ki

gìr ur-e11-e

252.27

muš-bi-an-na

gìr lugal-kù-zu

10.41

gú-eden-na

gìr a-ab-ba

7.17

obv. i 2-3; AS 7 m

57.63 n

obv. i 14-15; AS 6 m

21.92

ki

Ur-e11-e

a-pi4-sal4

BPOA 1 1229 (ŠS 1)

Lú-kal-la

Gu-ú-gu-a

Santag 6 242 (ŠS 2 xii)

Lú-kal-la

Lugal-kù-zu

d

30.17 muš-bi-an-na

7.72 obv. 4 ; AS 9 m

MVN 21 344 (ŠS 3)

obv. 7; ŠS 1

m

obv. 12

1.34 10.21 14.63

AAICAB I/1, Ashm. 1911-148 (ŠS 3 vii)

⌈Lú⌉-kal-la

Gu-ú-gu-a

SAT 3 1378 (ŠS 3 viii)

Lú-kal-la

Lugal-kù-zu

muš-bi-an-na

maš a-šà-ga nin-melám

7.71

Torino 2 656 (ŠS 3 xi)

Lú-kal-la

Lugal-nesag-e

èš-didli

a dé-a

3.33

A-ab-ba

gú-eden-na

gìr za-a-a

4.50

⌈zi⌉-re kišib-ba

10.33

BPOA 7 2754 (ŠS 6 vi)

17.52

RA 8 157 AO 5652 (ŠS 6 xi)

Lú-kal-la

Gu-ú-gu-a

Santag 6 309 (ŠS 6)

Lú-kal-la

Lú-dingir-ra

9.83

Aleppo 453 (ŠS 7 iv)

Gu-du-du

Lugal-á-zi-da

8.63

SNAT 518 (ŠS 7)

Lú-dha-ìa

Aleppo 440 (ŠS 9 iv)

Gu-du-du

a-pi4-sal4ki Unken-né

obv. 1-2; at least 60 shekels later received by Gu-du-du (obv. 7-8) mu-DU

168

63.40

20.06

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

ZA 95 191 (IS 1?)

[...]

TJAMC IOS 5 (pl. 51) (IS 1)

Field a

Description

Lú-dšul-gi-ra

ma!-da ummaki

obv. 2’-4’

[...] + 9.07

Lugal-nesag-e

èš-didli

obv. 5’-7’

2.40

máš a-šà-ga sag-bi gídda

0.50

d

Ur- šul-pa-è dub-sar dumu basa6-ga

Silver (shekels)

From

Ab-ba-gi-na a-šà a-pi4-sal4ki

MCS 6 78 AO 19775 (no date)

gìr lú-dha-ìa

44 7.96

Notes a

Field names in italics mean that a m á š a- š à - g a payment does not appear connected to any field in a text, but one can deduce the connection between them based on prosopographical evidence from parallels. Blank cells mean that no field can be connected to a payment. b Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 . c T. Ozaki (2002, 51 no. 79) restores line 2 as k ù ⌈ m á š a - š à ⌉ l u g a l - k a and notes that the signs for a - š à were written over the sign for m á š . d The toponyms a - š à d š á r a and a - š à l á - m a h do not always appear together (§3.2). e

Calculated by reading obv. 1 as 5 / 6 ! m a - n a 3 ( d i š ) g í n 1 ( u ) 5 ( d i š ) š e k ù - b a b b a r .

f

The year name may refer to either Š 36 or AS 9, but the earlier date appears more likely because of Ur-Ninsu’s involvement in SAKF 58 (Š 33 v) and BIN 5 144 (Š 35).

g

Calculated by reading obv. 1 as ⅓ m a - n a 5 / 6 ! g í n 8 ( d i š ) ½ š e k ù - b a b b a r . The sign standing for 5/6 was copied as KÙ by mistake. h Included on the basis of reading obv. 2 as k ù m á š d n i n - u r 4 - r a . j

The year name in rev. 9 can refer to Š 15, Š 17, Š 43, AS 4, or AS 9 (Vuk 1987, 361), but the involvement of Akala (§3.2) makes Š 43 the most likely date.

k l

Repeated in BIN 5 108 (Š 44) obv. 11-13. Based on restoring the sign before gín in obv. 1 as [⅔].

m

Date of payment earlier than that of text.

n

Based on restoring the sign before ma-na as ⌈ /6⌉.

5

169

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Table 3.2.B. Actual payer(s) of irrigation fee Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Field

Description

Lugal-hé-gál

3.25

Ab-ba ⌈báhar?⌉

0.67

Kù-dun

1.83

La-a YOS 4 98 (Š 36?)

AUCT 2 287 (Š 36)

1

In-na-sal-la

3.44

Lú-bùlug-gá

2

Na-silim

1.17

Ur-ab-zu šeš muhaldim

0.5

Lú-ga-mu šu-ku6

0.5

Lugal-sa6-ga

2 a-šà a-ba-gal-dengìr kaš4 líl-lá

Ur-dsuen nar

0.38 0.5

a-šà sipa-da

I-šar-ru-um

0.08

giš

0.11

Guzza-ni lunga

Ur-é-diri dumu lugal-émah-e

a-šà da-gi4-a

Da-da-ga

a-šà lá-tur a-šà muru13

MVN 21 343 (ŠS 3)

Silver (shekels)

Kaš4 agar4-nígin

0.04 0.21 šuku lugal-unken-né ù dumu-na lú-den-líl-lá dumu daa-gi4

1.33

šuku lugal-á-zi-da

0.17 0.08

giš

Ur- gigir šabra

1

Ba-an-sa6

a-šà ka-ma-rí

0.33

Ur-sipa-da

0.06

Uš-mu

0.67

Lú-kal-la šabra

0.83

dam pisan-dub-ba

1.83

Šeš-kal-la dumu tir-gu Ur-zu

0.25 d

a-šà nin-ur4-ra

ka-gur7 Gu-ú-gu-a

1.5 1.5

a-šà ša-ra-hu-umma

170

0.33

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Field

Description

šuku énsi-ka

All received from Lugal-kù-zu; kišib-bi nu-zi-zi

d

Šul-gi-uru-mu

BPOA 1 856 (ŠS 4)

énsi

Šu-ì-lí Puzur4-eš4-tár

SAT 3 2068 (no date)

Silver (shekels) 4.5 3.75 3.75

Gù-dé-a

3.92

Ur-sipa

0.06

A-né-bí-kúš

0.11

Table 3.2.C. Attested uses of irrigation fee Text

Provider

Recipient

Use

Description

Silver (shekels)

Aleppo 447 (Š 33 x)

A-kal-la

Lugal-é-mah-e

gi sa10-sa10-dè

maš a-šà-ga

20

Aleppo 449 (Š 35)

A-kal-la

sag-níg-gur11-ra [...]

maš a-šà-ga sù

19.13

SAT 2 269 a (Š 41)

Lugal-nesag-e

Lugal-giškiri6

giš

maš a-šà-ga; kišib da-da-ga

1.5

UTI 3 2020 (ŠS 5 ix)

Lú-dha-ìa

Ba-ba-ti

zi-ga

maš a-šà-ga; šà kuš-gan-nata; rev. 11-12

6.5

eme-a sa10

Notes a

Seal inscription : u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / é n s i u m m a k i / l ú - d u 1 0 - g a / d u b - s a r / d u m u d u 1 0 - g a / g a l 5 - l á g a l / árad-zu.

Table 3.3. Silver payments from grain cultivation Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

lá-NI su-ga; mu šuku 2(bùr) gán-šè; obv. 1-2 Ur-absu nu-bànda gu4-4-ba lá-NI su-ga; obv. 3-4

OrSP 47-49 197 (Š 37 xi)

giš

Silver (shekels) 11.11 12

mu nu-bànda gu4-4-ba-šè; obv. 5-6

21.33

BIN 5 122 (Š 43 x)

A-kal-la a

Ur- gigir šabra

lá-NI-ta su-ga lú-níg-dab5-ba-ke4-ne; received from Ur-dšára

10

Aleppo 457 (Š 43 x)

A-kal-la a

Lugal-ezem

še-bi 6(u) gur

60

Ur-dšára

kù še GAR níg-gál-la-ka; mu-2-kam

8.15

Ur-dšára gudu4 ánzumušen -bábbar

še mu-DU

0.85

BCT 2 72 (Š 43)

Da-da-ga

171

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

Silver (shekels)

Princeton 1 543 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

La-ni-mu

lá-NI su-ga še

9.75

BPOA 6 1221 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

Árad ka-gur7

lá-NI su-ga še

Torino 2 654 (Š 46)

Da-da-ga

Inim-dinanna

lá-NI su-ga še

Princeton 1 539 (Š 46)

Da-da-ga

Ur-gišgigir šabra

lá-NI-ta su-ga

20

BIN 5 330 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Lugal-gišgigir-re engar

lá-NI su-ga še; received from Lugal-kù-ga-ni

60

še-bi 1(aš) 4(barig) 3(bán) gur; kišib ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba; obv. iii 81-89; dated to Š 47 b

1.90

Da-da-ga

Nebraska 44 (AS 3)

[...] Ur-dšára dumu ba-sa6

Ì-kal-la

Da-da-ga

14.75

še-bi 1(u) 8!(diš) 3(barig) 2(bán) gur; obv. iv 130-133; dated to Š 44 b

18.67

še-bi 1(aš) 1(barig) 4(bán) gur; kù sám ki ì-kal-la; rev. iii 237-241; dated to Š 47 b

1.33

še-bi 2(u) gur; kišib ur-dšára; rev. iii 249-255; dated to Š 46 b

20

Ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba

Da-gi kurušda

še-bi 1(aš) gur

RA 9 158 (AS 1)

Da-da-ga

Inim-dšára

še-bi 1(u) gur; ummaki-a níg-kas7 DU igi kár-kár-dam; obv. 9-rev. 11

YOS 4 290 (AS 5)

Lú-bùlug-gá

BPOA 6 560 (AS 6 diri) SNAT 407 (AS 8 iii)

ensi

d

TCL 5 6045 (AS 8 xii)

Ur-e11-e

SNAT 401 (AS 8)

énsi d

SNAT 434 (AS 9 xi)

10

še-bi 1(u) 4(aš) 3(barig) 4(bán) 5(diš) sìla gur; kišib ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba; obv. iii 95-iv 103; dated to Š 47 b

SAT 2 669 (AS 1)

Ur-gišgigir c

3.5

[kù] še iti šu-numun; obv. 14-15

1 10 ⌈3?⌉+ 0.17

Šeš-kal-la

še-bi 2(u) 6(aš) 4(barig) 2(bán) 4(diš) sìla gur

28

Du10-ga-mu

kù še; lá-NI lugal-ezem-ta su-ga; kù sag-tuku; recieved from Ur-dšára

20

Šeš-a-ni dub-sar

ditto

sipa-dè-ne

kù še lá-NI su-ga; dated to AS 7 b; obv. i 6-7

3.33 19.83

kù duh; obv. i 16

0.25

Da-a-ga nu-bànda gu4

lá-NI-ta su-ga; received from Ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba

4.75

Lú-gi-na

Kù-ga-ni

še-bi 2(u) gur; kišib árad; rev. i 15-16

20

MVN 20 155 (ŠS 1 vi)

Lú-kal-la

d

Santag 6 215 (ŠS 1 vi)

Lú-kal-la

Kù-ga-ni

Šára-mu-DU

kù še sag-tuku; mu-DU; sám uruda

10.83

lá-NI su-ga še ur5-ra; received from Lú-gi-na

20

172

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

Nik. 2 406 (ŠS 2 vi)

Silver (shekels)

Payer(s)

Description

A-du engar

mu-DU; sám gu4; received from Lugal-itida nu-bànda gu4

5

kù eša-da zàbalamki iti-6-kam; mu-DU

6

RA 98 8 11 (ŠS 2 vi) SAT 3 1308 (ŠS 2 x)

Lú-kal-la

A-du

lá-NI su-ga še

UTI 4 2880 (ŠS 2)

Lú-kal-la

Da-a-ga šabra

lá-NI mu-DU sila-ta è-a lú-níg-dab5-ba-ke4ne / ki ur-gi6-par4-ta / ur-dnun-gal-ke4 baan-dib; obv. i 12-13

Nik. 2 407 (ŠS 3 xii)

Lú-kal-la

A-a-kal-la gu-za-lá

lá-NI su-ga zì-kal; mu-DU

SAT 3 1497 (ŠS 4 ix)

Lú-kal-la

Lugal-nesag-e nu- lá-NI su-ga; mu gu4-e na-àm-DU-šè; bànda gu4 received from Ur-dnun-gal

5.67 1 2.92 12

Aegyptus 10, 281 Lú-kal-la 52 (ŠS 4 x)

Gú-TAR

lá-NI su-ga gu4!-e a-na-àm-DU

10

SAT 3 1530 (ŠS 4 xii)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-dšul-pa-è kù-dím

mu-še-šè; mu-DU

10

SAT 3 1652 (ŠS 6)

Lú-kal-la

Lugal-é-mah-e

še-bi 2(u) gur; obv. 10-rev. 12; dated to ŠS 4 b

40

MVN 10 177 (ŠS 9 xii)

Lú-dšára e

A-tu

kù-babbar še; igi lú-dnanna-šè

0.67

BCT 2 83 (IS 1 v) f

Gu-du-du

Unken-né

lá-NI su-ga še; mu-DU

5

Vicino Oriente 8/1 69 (IS 1 viii)

⌈Gu⌉-du-du

Lú-dha-ìa

kù še

4

SAT 3 1983 (IS 2)

Gu-du-du

Lú-dšul-gi-ra

mu šà-gal ur-[...] gá-la dag-ga-šè

[...]

MVN 16 1043 (IS 3)

[Gu-du]-du g

Du11-ga-[zi]-⌈da⌉

[lá]-NI su-ga še [...]

[...]

UTI 5 3486 (IS 3)

Lú-dšul-gi-ra h

É-gal-e-si

lá-NI su-ga gu4-e a-na-àm-[DU]; received from Gu-du-du; obv. 7-8

20

AUCT 3 334 (month xi)

Lú-kal-la j

Lú-dšára

še-bi 1(aš) 3(barig) 2(bán) 4(diš) sìla gur

1

A-hu-um-ma

mu še 40?-gur-šè; obv. 1-2

SAT 3 1635 (no date)

[30]

Notes a Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 . b

Date of payment earlier than that of text.

c

Based on reading rev. 3 a s u r - g i š g i g i r - k e 4 instead of u r - g i š g i g i r s u k k a l in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). d

Seal inscription in completeness: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l - a n - u b - d a límmu-ba / ur-dli9-si4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

e

Seal inscription: l ú - d š á r a / ⌈ d u m u ? ⌉ k a 5 - [ . . . ] . f Dated to ŠS 9 by mistake in BDTNS (accessed September 2012). g

Seal inscription: d i - b í - d s u e n / l u g a l - k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l - a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / g u - d u du / dub-sar / dumu da-da-ga / énsi / ummaki / árad-[zu].

173

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD h

Seal inscription: l ú - d [ š u l - g i - r a ] / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - b a - k a . j Seal inscription: l ú - k a l - l a / d u m u ù l u (GISGAL)-di.

Table 3.4. Silver payments from animal husbandry Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

Aleppo 458 (Š 33 vii)

A-kal-la

Ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba

kù máš šu-nir ki-maški

BIN 5 149 (Š 37 x)

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6 Inim-dšára

Kyoto 30 (Š 37 xi)

A-kal-la

MVN 14 162 (Š 37)

A-kal-la

BPOA 6 949 (Š 41)

BIN 5 122 (Š 43 x)

A-kal-la

3.33

síg-bi 1(aš) gú

6

Inim-dšára

máš-bi 1(diš)

0.33

Ba-sa6

kù máš

27.83

Ur-ni9-gar kurušda Lugal-á-zi-da kuš7

A-kal-la b

Silver (shekels)

obv. 6-7; sealed by governor Ur-dli9-si4 a

10 10

Inim-dšára kurušda

lá-NI-ta su-ga lú-níg-dab5-ba-ke4-ne; received from Ur-dšára

10

Ur-ni9-gar kurušda

ditto

6

Aleppo 441 (Š 43 x)

A-kal-la b

Lú-dsuen kurušda

lá-NI su-ga

6

BCT 2 72 (Š 43)

Da-da-ga

En-ú-a

kù síg šu-nir-ra dšára a-pi4-sal4ki; received from Ur-dšára

1

NABU 1989 97 1 Da-da-ga (Š 44 i)

Ur-ni9-gar kurušda

lá-NI su-ga

Aleppo 442 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

Ba-sa6

lá-NI su-ga udu; kišib ur-dšára

Aleppo 443 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

Ur-gišgigir sipa

lá-NI su-ga udu?/síg?; kišib ur-dšára

AnOr 1 52 (Š 44)

Ur-dšára

Ur-ru & Ur-dištaran

kù síg lá-NI

690

Umma 82 (Š 45)

Da-da-ga

Inim-dšára kurušda

lá-NI su-ga

10

Syracuse 413 (Š 45)

Da-da-ga

Ur-e11-e

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun

15

Aleppo 445 (Š 46 i)

Da-da-ga

Ur-dma-mi sipa

lá-NI su-ga; received from Kaš4

6

BPOA 7 1569 (Š 46)

Da-da-ga

Ur-e11-e

ì-nun-bi 3(barig) [...] lá-NI su-ga ì-nun

20

Princeton 1 302 (Š 46/AS 3 iv)

Da-da-ga

Lugal-ezem

kù síg

30

CST 547 (Š 46/AS 3 vi)

Da-da-ga

Seš-a-ni ùnu

lá-NI su-ga; received from Kaš4

5

174

9.58 39 10+[...]

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

BIN 5 333 (Š 46 vii)

Da-da-ga

A-tu

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun

Vicino Oriente 8/1 64 (Š 46 x)

Da-da-ga

Ur-e11-e

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun ga-àr

Ur-gišgigir sipa

lá-NI su-ga

1.33 c

Da-a-a sipa

ditto

0.83 c

Lugal-ušurx(LÁL. ditto TÚG) sipa

0.72 c

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-147 (Š 46)

Santag 6 86 (Š 47)

SAT 2 563 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Da-da-ga

Da-da-ga d

16.25 20

Lugal-ušurx (LAL.TUG) nagada

lá-NI su-ga udu nam-en-na; received from Ur-e11-e

30

Gìr-ni-ì-sa6 na-gada

ditto

10

Ur-e11-e

lá-NI su-ga síg

⌈25⌉

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun; a-rá-1-kam

9.21

A-tu

ditto; a-rá-2-kam

10 10

AnOr 1 70 (Š 48)

Ur- šára pisan-dub-ba

Kaš4

síg-bi 1(aš) gú 4(u) ma-na

Santag 6 107 (AS 1)

énsi

Ur-e11-e

síg-bi 2(u) 4(aš) gú

144

máš-bi 3(u) 1(diš); obv. ii 59-63; dated to Š 46 d

7.83

kuš-udu-bi 7(diš), [sa-udu]-⌈bi⌉ 8(u) 2(diš), [ad6]-udu-bi 8(u) 2(diš); rev. i 172-ii 179; dated to Š 46 d

1.33 c

kuš-udu-bi 6(diš), sa-udu-bi 4(u), ad6-udubi 4(u); rev. ii 186-194; dated to Š 47 d e

0.83 c

sa-udu-bi 6(u), ad6-udu-bi 6(u); kišib ur- dšára pisan-dub-ka; rev. ii 195-202; dated to Š 46 d

0.72 c

lá-NI su-ga; síg-bi 4(u) 3(aš) gú 4(u) ma-na; expenditure in níg-kas7-ak síg énsi-ka; rev. ii 17-20

262

lá-NI su-ga; síg-bi 1(u) 4(aš) gú 5(u) mana; expenditure in níg-kas7-ak síg énsi-ka; rev. ii 21-24

80

88.25

Nebraska 44 (AS 3)

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-666 (AS 3)

Da-da-ga

Lú-kal-la

sipa-dè-ne

MVN 15 108 (AS 3)

Lú-kal-la

A-tu kuš7

[sá-du11 a-rá]-1-kam; ì-nun-bi 2(aš) 4(barig) 5(bán) 5(diš) [sìla] 1(u) 2(diš) gín gur; sag-na4-bi 1(diš) ⅓ gín ⅔ še kù; rev. i 1-11

SET 130 (AS 4)

Lú-kal-la

A-bí-a sipa udu-emegirx(GI)-ra

udu bar-gál-bi 1(u)-àm; lá-NI su-ga udu nam-en-na; obv. 64-68, 72 & rev. 364-368

MVN 20 68 (AS 6)

Ur-e11-e

Àm-ma

sám udu nam-en-na-ka; lá-NI su-ga of the preceding year

175

5 14.11

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

Recipient

SNAT 389 (AS 7)

Payer(s)

Description

Kaš4

kù-síg; sám uruda nagga gišig dgu-la; obv. 4-5

Silver (shekels) 22.67

SNAT 382 (AS 7)

A-tu

[...]-DU ùnu

(silver + 1[aš] še gur) ì-nun-bi 4(bán); obv. 5-8

SNAT 401 (AS 8)

énsi f

A-tu kuš7

lá-NI-ta su-ga; received from ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba

SNAT 419 (AS 9)

Lú-kal-la

A-gu-gu

gu4-bi 1(diš); gu4 gú-na; obv. 9-11

SNAT 420 (AS 9)

Lú-kal-la

A-gu-gu

gu4-bi 1(diš); [gu4] gú-na; obv. ii 13-15

Ur-dšára kurušda

mu gu4 -na a-gu-gu-ka-šè

5

Kaš4

lá-NI su-ga síg

30

Bí-du11-ga

kù-síg; mu-DU [...]

5

Santag 6 213 (ŠS 1 v) Santag 6 215 (ŠS 1 vi)

Lú-kal-la

MVN 1 249 (ŠS 1 xii)

3 6.88 5g [5] g

Nisaba 9 244 (ŠS 1)

Lú-kal-la

Uš-mu

anše-bi 1(diš)-àm

5.83

YOS 4 221 (ŠS 2 v)

Lú-kal-la

Lugal-hi-li

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun

2

MCS 8 93 BM 105390 (ŠS 2 vi)

Lú-kal-la

Kaš4 kuš7

síg-bi 1(u) 8(aš) gú; obv. 7-12; 40 shekels dated to AS 9 d; 50 shekels dated to ŠS 1 d

90

Nik. 2 401 (ŠS 2)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-ru

kù ⌈síg⌉; mu-DU

1.75

RIAA 128 (ŠS 3 xi)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-dutu sipa

lá-NI su-ga; received from Kaš4; kù-babbar sag-tuku

9.58

Santag 6 269 (ŠS 3)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-e11-e

síg-bi 5(aš) gú 2(u) 8(diš) ma-na; 3 times in total; rev. i 12-18

27.33

SAT 3 1528 (ŠS 4)

Lú-kal-la

A-tu

lá-NI-ta su-ga ì-nun

1.85

MVN 20 96 (ŠS 5 x)

Ur-ni9-gar kurušda

mu-DU; received from Šu-dnisaba

20

Torino 2 657 (ŠS 5 x)

A-lu5-lu5 kurušda

mu-DU énsi

20

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun

8

BCT 2 79 (ŠS 7)

Gu-du-du

A-tu kuš7

NABU 1992 60 (ŠS 8 i)

⌈Gu⌉-du-du

Lú-eb-gal sipa

Vicino Oriente 8/1 70 (ŠS 8 xi)

Gu-du-du

Atiqot 4 pl. 21 43 Gu-du-du (ŠS 8 diri)

lá-NI su-ga síg; received from Ur-e11-e

3.66

lá-NI su-ga síg-NI níg-gur11 énsi-ka

3.34

Kaš4

lá-NI su-ga

20

A-tu

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun

5

Bí-da kurušda h

kù nam-DU; mu-udu-niga-šè; ⌈mu⌉-DU

4?

176

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

Silver (shekels)

Payer(s)

Description

Lú-eb-gal ⌈sipa⌉

kù síg; máš-da-re6-a á-ki-ti month i

3.17

Lugal-é-mah-e sipa

ditto

0.70

lá-NI su-ga udu gú-na-ka

9.75

BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i)

Gu-du-du

Aleppo 446 (ŠS 9 iii)

Gu-du-du

A-du

MVN 16 922 (ŠS 9 ix)

Gu-du-du

A-DU.DU dumu ékù síg; mu-DU u6-e

2

Santag 6 329 (ŠS 9 diri)

Gu-du-du

Uš-mu

lá-NI su-ga udu máš; mu-DU

10

Aleppo 463 (IS 1)

Gu-du-du

Uš-mu

sám gu4 gú-na

14

Lú-eb-gal

kù síg su-ga-šè ze-ra; mu-DU

7.13

Lú-eb-gal

lá-NI su-ga síg; mu-DU

3.19

Šà-kù-ge

kù síg su-ga-šè ze-ra; mu-DU

3.46

A-lu5-lu5

máš-bi 4(u); received from Uš-mu

13.33

Umma 86 (IS 1)

Gu-du-du

BPOA 6 421 (IS 1)

Babyl. 6 53 A (IS 2?)

AAS 117 (IS 2) CHEU 51 (no date)

Ur-dnun-gal j

síg-bi 4(u) 8(diš) ma-na; rev. 1-3; dated to IS 2

k

Gu-du-du

Gu-du-du

síg-bi 2(aš) gú 4(u) ma-na; sám dam dumu lú-sa6-ga 3-a-ba; rev. 4-7; datd to IS 2 Kù-dnin-ur4-ra

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun

Hé-sa6-ga na-gada

síg-bi 1(aš) gú 1(u) ma-na; mu-DU; lá-NI-ta su-ga sipa-dè-ne; obv. 5

4 13.33 0.33+ [...] 7

Notes a

Seal inscription: d š u l - g i / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu. b Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 . c d e

Same set of payments. Date of payment earlier than that of text. Probably a mistake for the year Š 46 in light of the parallel entry in AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-147 (Š 46) obv. 3-4.

f

Seal inscription in completeness: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l - a n - u b - d a l í m m u ba / ur-dli9-si4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu. g Same payment. h

Misread as simug in both BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012).

j

Seal inscription: d š u - d s u e n / l u g a l k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d n u n gal / dub-sar / dumu ur-dšára / pisan-dub-ba-ka / árad-zu. k

With two seal inscriptions: (1) d š u - d s u e n / l u g a l k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - b a - k a / á r a d - z u ; (2) i n - t a - è - a / d u b - s a r / dumu lú-sa6-ga.

177

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Table 3.5.A. Silver payments related to salt Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

AAS 70 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

Ba-sig5

kù-babbar lú-mun-[ur4?]

Princeton 1 541 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

BIN 5 304 (Š 37)

A-kal-la

BMC Roma 8 13 7 (Š 38)

A-kal-la

Silver (shekels) 5

kù gú-na lú-mun

10

lú-mun

kù-mun

40

lú-mun

kù gú-na

10

Bull. Buffalo SNS A-kal-la 11-2 146 13 nu-bànda (Š 39)

Ur-dun

receivd from Na-ú-a; lá-NI su-ga; [...] érin? mun; Obv. 3’-4’

[...]

Syracuse 12 (Š 41)

A-kal-la a

Na-ú-a

BPOA 6 949 (Š 41)

A-kal-la

lú-mun

Received from Da-da-ga; sealed by governor Ur-dli9-si4 c

[...]

BIN 5 109 (Š 42)

A-kal-la

lú-mun

kù mun

60

Gu-ú-gu-ug!

MVN 1 247 d (AS 8)

Nik. 2 400 (ŠS 1 xi)

d

kù mun for Š 40 b

1

kù mun

3

mu-DU; kù mun dated to AS 7 b

Lú- en-líl-lá

Lú-kal-la

Gu-ú-gu-ug

!

11.25 10

kù mun lá-NI su-ga; mu ù-ma-ni-šè mu-DU

3

kù mun lá-NI su-ga; mu a-ga-ga-šè mu-DU

2

MVN 5 70 (ŠS 2)

Gu-ú-gu-ug

kù mun; mu-DU

15 e

SAT 3 1275 (ŠS 2)

Gu-ú-gu-ug

kù mun; mu-DU

15 e

Gu-ú-gu-ug

kù mun; sám [kù] huš-a; obv. 1-2

10

SA 56 (Pl. 96) (ŠS 6 x)

A-a-kal-la ⌈sanga?⌉

Notes a Seal inscription: u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / é n s i / u m m a k i / a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - [ n i 9 - g a r ] k u š 7 / á r a d - z u . b

Date of payment earlier than that of text.

Seal inscription: d š u l - g i / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

c

d

Although labeled as “provenience unclear” in both BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012), this tablet certainly comes from Umma because of its parallelism with MVN 5 70 (ŠS 2) and SAT 3 1275 (ŠS 2). e Same payment.

178

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Table 3.5.B. Silver payments related to sesame Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

SAT 2 383 (Š 44)

Lugal-ezem a

Pàd-da

lá-NI ì-giš-ka-ta su-ga

Princeton 1 559 b (Š 46 i)

Da-da-ga

engar-giš-ì-kake4-ne

lá-NI su-ga; received from Ur-dba-ú

Vicino Oriente 8/1 65 c (Š 46 vi)

Da-da-ga

Ur-dba-ú

lá-NI su-ga giš-ì-ka

Santag 6 78 (Š 47)

Da-da-⌈ga⌉

engar-giš-ì-kake4-ne

lá-NI su-ga; received from Ur-dba-ú

15.67 e

UCP 9-2-1 78 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Ur-dba-ú

še-giš-ì-bi 3(aš) 4(bán) gur; níg-kas7-ak ur-dba-ú; rev. 19-20

15.67 e

Nebraska 44 (AS 3)

Da-da-ga

YOS 4 290 (AS 5)

Lú-bùlug-ga

SNAT 407 (AS 8 iii)

5 69.67 24 d

še-giš-ì-bi 4(aš) 4(barig) gur; rev. ii 214-217; dated to Š 46 f

24 d

Ur-gišgigir g

kù giš-ì-ka; obv. 11

2.17

énsi h

Ur-dba-ú

á šu-ku6 ù engar giš-ì; received from Ur-dšára

1.33

BCT 2 78 (ŠS 7 xii)

Gu-du-du

engar-giš-ì-ke4-ne

á bala-a; mu-DU

10

TJAMC IOS 29 (pl. 57) (ŠS 9 xi)

Gu-du-du

engar-giš-ì-kake4-ne

á bala; mu-DU

10

TJAMC IOS 26 Gu-du-du (pl. 55) (ŠS 9 diri)

engar-giš-ì-kake4-ne

lá-NI su-ga; mu-DU; received from Níg-gi-na-zu

10

Notes a

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - m a h - e / š a b r a .

b

Seal inscription: l u g a l - é - m a h - e / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - k ù - g a - n i . c Mistakenly dated to Š 44 in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). d e f

Same payment. Same payment. Date of payment earlier than that of text.

g

Based on reading rev. 3 a s u r - g i š g i g i r - k e 4 i n s t e a d o f u r - g i š g i g i r s u k k a l in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). h

Seal inscription: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d l i 9 si4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

179

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Table 3.5.C. Silver payments related to gazi Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

Nisaba 9 313 (Š 46/AS 3 i)

Da-da-ga

Ur-sila-luh lú-gištir

kù gazi

3.50

Syracuse 417 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Ur-sila-luh -tir

kù gazi

5

Nik. 2 400 (ŠS 1 xi)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-é-maš

kù gazi; mu-DU

5

Nik. 2 401 a (ŠS 2)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-é-maš

kù gazi; mu-DU; obv. 1-2

5

Ur- šára

ditto; obv. 3-4

3

Ur-é-maš lú-tir

kù gazi; mu-DU

5

Ur-dšára lú-tir

ditto

3

Nisaba 9 294 (ŠS 2)

a

d

Notes a Recording same two payments.

Table 3.5.D. Silver payments related to mun-gazi Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

UCP 9-2-2 86 (Š 46)

Da-da-ga

Ur-e11-e

lá-NI su-ga mun-gazi

0.58

BPOA 1 506 (Š 46)

Ur-dsuen dumu ur-kù-ga-ni

kù mun-gazi; lá-NI su-su du11-ga gi-na

4.13

Syracuse 420 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Lú-dšára lú-sum-ma

kù mun-gazi

3.67

A-gu-du & Ur-a-dhi

kù mun-gazi; obv. ii 14-15

0.50

STA 11 (AS 1)

SNAT 407 (AS 8 iii)

d

Ur- šul-pa-è

énsi a

Santag 6 197 (AS 8?)

nu-giškiri6 ditto; muš-bi-an-na-ke4rev. i 16-17 ne Lugal-níg-lagar-e -⌈tir⌉

kù mun-gazi; lá-NI-ta su-ga; mu ur-dšára-šè; received from Ur-dšára

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

kù mun-gazi; rev. ii 3-5; dated to AS 6 b

2

3.73 2

Santag 6 242 (ŠS 2 xii)

Lú-kal-la

Lugal-kù-zu

kù mun-gazi

2.78

Nisaba 9 271 (ŠS 4)

Lú-kal-la

Gu-du-du

kù mun-gazi; šà bala-a

3.61

BPOA 1 1084 (ŠS 5 ix)

Lú-kal-la

Gu-du-du

Aleppo 461 (ŠS 8 xii)

Gu-du-du

Ku-li

kù mun-gazi kù mun-gazi; mu-DU

180

5 1.42

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

JCS 31 242 16 (IS 1)

Payer(s)

Description

Silver (shekels)

Lú-dha-ìa

kù mun-gazi; é-kaš4-šè

0.18

Lú- ha-ìa

kù mun-gazi ù ir7mušen tu-gur4mušen; níg-kas7 kù-ga úgu ba-a-gar; obv. iii 9-11; rev. iii 8-10

Lú-dnin-ur4-ra

ditto; obv. iii 12-14; rev. iii 8-10

d

Santag 6 340 (IS 2 xii)

Gu-du-du

10.57 7.44

Notes a Seal inscription: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d l i 9 si4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu. b

Date of payment earlier than that of text.

Table 3.5.E. Silver payments related to fruits and vegetables Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

BPOA 7 1983 (Š 33 x)

A-kal-la

Lugal-nesag-e

kù zú-lum

127.17

MVN 14 154 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

Lugal-ezem

kù sum-ma

120

Aleppo 455 (Š 34 x)

A-kal-la

Lugal-nesag-e

kù zú-lum

48.74

BPOA 7 1690 (Š 34 x)

A-kal-la

nu-giškiri6-ke4-ne

received from Lugal-nesag-e

61.83

Umma 81 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

nu-giškiri6-ke4-ne

lá-NI; received from Lugal-nesag-e

13

AAS 67 (Š 35 i)

A-kal-la

Da-da-ga

kù zú-lum-ma

161.83

Nebraska 71 (Š 35 xii)

A-kal-la a

Ur-e11-e

kù zú-lum-ma

13

OrSP 47-49 196 (Š 37 xi)

A-kal-la

Ur-dnisaba

zú-lum-bi 1(géš) 4(u) 4(barig) gur lugal

60

Bull. Buffalo SNS A-kal-la 11-2 146 13 dumu lugal(Š 39) nesag-⌈e⌉ MVN 14 3 (Š 39)

A-kal-la b

MVN 14 39 (Š 40 x)

A-kal-la c

ArOr 62 243 I 873 (Š 41)

A-kal-la c

Kù-ga-⌈ni⌉

Syracuse 421 (Š 44 x)

Da-da-ga

Kù-ga-ni

kù zú-lum; rev. 6’

8.92

kù numun sum-ma; rev. 7’

7.53

santana-ke4-ne

kù-babbar gu

10

Da-da-ga

kù zú-lum; sám kù huš

60

kù zú-lum kù zú-lum-⌈ma⌉

181

39.94 25

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

Árad-hu-la JCS 54 14 83 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

d

Lú- nin-šubur

Silver (shekels) 2

kù zú-lum-ma

Šà-gú

5 3.50

Syracuse 413 (Š 45/AS 2)

Da-da-ga

Ur-e11-e

kù zú-lum-ma

10

BIN 5 147 (Š 45/AS 2)

Da-da-ga

Lugal-kù-zu

kù zú-lum šu-nu-kúš

14

Aleppo 459 (Š 46)

Da-da-ga

Da-da-a

kù zú-lum kù

ASJ 18 79 11 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Ur-dšul-pa-è

pèš

kù gišhašhur; ditto

4.06

giš

pèš; ditto

kù zú-lum-ma; gìr da-da-a

BPOA 7 2074 (Š 47)

TCL 5 6045 e (AS 8 xii)

Da-da-ga

Da-da-ga j

Ur- šul-pa-è

Da-da-ga j

Ur-e11-e

SA 55 (Pl. 89) (ŠS 2 iv) Santag 6 242 (ŠS 2 xii)

d

Lú-kal-la

1? ⌈156.39⌉ f

kù gišhašhur; ditto

1.1

kù zú-lum-ma; gìr lugal-kù-zu; dated to Š 46 e

15

kù zú-lum-ma; gìr ur-e11-e; dated to Š 46 e

13 ⌈6.88⌉ g

kù zú-lum-ma; gìr lú-eb-gal; dated to Š 46 e

26.26

kù gišhašhur; ditto

4.06

kù

h

10 26.26

kù zú-lum-ma; gìr ur-e11-e

BPOA 6 201 d (Š 47)

41.04

kù zú-lum-ma; [gìr] lú-eb-gal; dated to Š 46 e

kù d

giš

giš

pèš; ditto

kù zú-lum; gìr da-da-a

1 156.39

kù gišhašhur; ditto

1.1

kù zú-lum-ma; gìr ur-e11-e; dated to Š 46 e

15

kù zú-lum-ma; gìr ur-e11-e

6.88

kù sum-ma

10

kù zú-lum-ma; obv. 9; dated to AS 7 e

9.33

kù zú-lum-ma; obv. 11

6.07

kù gišhašhur; obv. 12

0.70

Ur-si-gar nu-giškiri6

kù ⌈nam⌉-DU mu-giškiri6-hul-a-šè

5k

Lugal-kù-zu

kù zú-lum

10

182

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

Nik. 2 401 (ŠS 2)

Lú-kal-la

A-gu-gu

kù [zú-lum]-ma; mu-DU

3

Ur-si-gar nu-giškiri6

kù nam-DU mu-giškiri6-hul-a-šè; mu-DU

5k

⌈Ur⌉-dsuen nu-giškiri6

Received from É-gal-e-si

[...]-0.06

Lú-eb-gal nu-giškiri6

ditto

[...]+0.89

Ur-dšul-pa-è nu-gišgiri6

kù gišhašhur; mu-DU

[...]

Lú-eb-gal nu-giškiri6

á bala-a; mu-DU; received from Lú-dingir-ra

0.50

BPOA 6 544 (ŠS 2) BCT 2 76 (ŠS 7 viii)

Gu-du-du

Princeton 1 547 (ŠS 7 ix)

Gu-du-du

Nik. 2 408 (ŠS 7 ix) WCMA 20.1.18 (ŠS 7)

Gu-du-du

nu-giškiri6-ke4-ne

lá-NI su-ga; received from dŠára-kam

MVN 16 922 (ŠS 9 ix)

Gu-du-du

nu-giškiri6-ke4-ne

kù zú-lum; mu-DU

22+[...]

Santag 6 328 (ŠS 9 xii)

Gu-du-du

d

kù geštin; mu-DU

1

Aleppo 460 (ŠS 9)

Gu-du-du

Ur-kun

kù gišpèš; mu-DU; received from Lugal-ùšur?

4

d

Ur-dsuen

lá-NI geštin hád; iti-nesag-šè (month iv) su-su-dam

0.50

Gu-du-du

Kù-dnin-ur4-ra

lá-NI su-⌈ga⌉ zú-lum

18

Si-NE-e

kù zú-lum; é-gal ku4-ra

16

UTI 3 1954 (IS 1 i) AAS 117 (IS 2) Syracuse 416 (no date)

En-líl-lá-ì-sa6 l

En-líl-lá-ì-sa6

20

Notes a Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u [ u r - n i 9 - g a r . . . ] . b

Seal inscription in completeness: u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / é n s i / u m m a k i / a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r kuš7 / árad-zu.

c

Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r / k u š 7 .

d

These two texts record the same set of payments except for the one worth 13 shekels, which appears only in ASJ 18 79 11(Š 47) rev. 2-3.

e

Date of payment earlier than that of text.

f

Restored according to parallel in BPOA 6 201 (Š 47) obv. 8. Restored according to parallel in BPOA 6 201 (Š 47) obv. 14.

g h

Seal inscription: u r - d š u l - p a - è / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - k ù - g a - n i . It needs collation.

j

Payer and recipient have the same name. This text needs collation. Same payment.

k l

Seal inscription: d e n - l í l - l á - ì - [ s a 6 ] / d u m u l ú - [ . . . ] .

183

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Table 3.5.F. Silver payments related to fish and bird plumage Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Princeton 1 541 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

Lugal-kù-ga-ni enku Da-a-ga

YOS 4 262 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

MVN 14 26 (Š 37 vii)

A-kal-la a

Ontario 2 345 (Š 37 xii)

A-kal-la a

Description

Silver (shekels) [...]

kù-babbar ku6

Ù-ma-ni enku

5 120

Na-ú-a

kù ku6-mun

3

Na-ú-a

kù ku6-mun

9

MVN 1 245 (Š 38)

Lugal-nesag-e en-kù

lá-NI [...] ZAG [...]; total of Š 37 and Š 38; sealed by Lugal-nesag-e b

Bull. Buffalo SNS A-kal-la 11-2 146 13 nu-bànda (Š 39)

Ur-gišgigir mušenobv. 5’ dù A-kal-la

kù ku6; rev. 4

91.67

BPOA 6 949 (Š 41)

A-kal-la

Ur-dutu

kù enku; received from Da-da-ga; rev. 8; sealed by governor c

110

BIN 5 109 (Š 42)

A-kal-la

hu-un-lah5 (DU.DU)

kù ku6 a-šà dšára

SAT 2 311 (Š 42)

A-kal-la

šu-ku6-e-ne

lá-NI-ta su-ga; received from Ur-ki-dagal

23.60

Syracuse 18 (Š 43 vii)

A-kal-la a

šu-ku6-e-ne

lá-NI su-ga; received from Ur-dšára

11.47

MVN 14 157 (Š 43)

A-kal-la

Ur-dsuen šu-ku6

kù ku6 a-šà lá-tur

SAT 2 532 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Ur-dba-ú

á šu-ku6

14.09

Santag 6 80 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Ur-dba-ú

á šu-ku6

19.83

Da-da-ga

d

BPOA 6 1004 (AS 2)

Ur- utu enku

99.90 3

10

6

kù ku6; for the first time

10

ditto; for the second time

30

ditto; for the third time

14.75

[...] maškim; máš-da-re-a énsi-ka; kišib ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba d; payer further identified as gìr-sè-ga of king

10

kù pa-mušen dated to AS 7 e; obv. 4

2

MU HA

AOS 32 C16 (AS 4)

Lú-kal-la

TCL 5 6045 (AS 8 xii)

Ur-e11-e

d

Ur- suen šu-ku6

MVN 9 212 (ŠS 1 xii)

Ur-dsuen šu-ku6

UCP 9-2-2 77 (ŠS 1)

Lugal-nir

mu-DU kù ku6-mun; šu-nir gú-eden-na; gìr ur-dšul-pa-è kù-dím

184

1.80+ [...] 1

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

SAT 3 1309 (ŠS 2 iv)

Ur-dšul-pa-è kùdím

Lugal-nir

kù ku6-mun; šu-nir gú-eden-na

1

BPOA 7 2920 (ŠS 2 iv)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-dsuen šu-ku6

gaba-ri kišib

6

Nik. 2 401 (ŠS 2)

Lú-kal-la

Lugal-kù-ga-ni šu-ku6

kù pa-mušen; mu-DU; received from A-gu-gu

1.33 f

kù pa-mušen; obv. 1-2; dated to AS 8 e

0.25

kù pa-mušen; obv. 5-6; dated to AS 9 e

0.25

kù pa-mušen; obv. 8-9; dated to ŠS 1 e

0.25

kù pa-mušen; obv. 10-11; dated to ŠS 2 e

0.25

kù pa-mušen; obv. 13-14

0.25

MVN 21 344 (ŠS 3)

AOS 32 G05 (ŠS 4 ix)

Lú-kal-la

A-da-ga šu-ku6

kù ku6 ; mu-DU

10

JCS 39 126 15 (ŠS 6 viii)

Lú-kal-la

Lugal-iti-da šu-ku6

⌈kù ku6⌉ [...]

5

NABU 1989 95 12 (ŠS 7 vii)

Gu-du-du

šu-ku6 ugula lugal-sig5

á bala-a mu-DU

Santag 6 315 (ŠS 7 ix)

Gu-du-du

⌈Lú⌉-dingir-ra

kù pa-mušen

⌈2 ?⌉+[...]

TJAMC IOS 1 (pl. 49) (ŠS 7)

Gu-du-du

Lugal-nir

kù ku6-mun

3

SNAT 518 (ŠS 7)

Lú-dha-ìa

kù pa-mušen

3.67

Vicino Oriente 8/1 67 (ŠS 8 xi)

Gu-du-du

BCT 2 81 (ŠS 8)

Lú-du10-ga šu-ku6

kù ku6

Lú-dingir-ra

kù pa-mušen

Gu-du-du

Lú-du10-ga šu-ku6

BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i)

Gu-du-du

Lú-du10-ga šu-[ku6]

Aleppo 464 (IS 1 xii)

Gu-du-du

Lú-dšára

0.50

5 1 ?

kù-babbar ku6 ; kišib ur-dnun-gal g

⌈12.52⌉

níg-gur11 gu-du-du; máš-da-re-a á-ki-ti month i

10

kù ku6; máš-da-re-a á-ki-ti month i

4.83

kù ku6-mun

1

Notes a Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 . b Seal inscription: l u g a l - n e s a g - e / e n - k ù / d u m u u r - d s u e n . c Seal inscription: d š u l - g i / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu. d Seal impressed belonged to his son: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - b a . e Date of payment earlier than that of text. f Both BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012) misread this number in rev. 11 as 1(u) ⅓ g í n ; cf. the total in rev. 15.

185

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD g

Seal inscription: d š u - d s u e n / l u g a l k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d n u n gal / dub-sar / dumu ur-dšára / pisan-dub-ba-ka / árad-[zu].

Table 3.6. Silver payments related to á Text

BPOA 6 949 (Š 41)

AnOr 1 47 (Š 43)

MVN 14 200 (Š 44)

Recipient

A-kal-la

A-kal-la b

Da-da-ga

Silver (shekels)

Payer(s)

Description

Bí-du11-ga

á gul-la; sealed by governor Ur-dli9-si4 a; obv. 1-3

A-tu

ditto; obv. 4-5

énsi

á má-du8-bi 3(u); mu má a è-a níg ⌈maš-kánki E?.TUM ?ki-a⌉-šè

Da-da ugula

á gul-la gi uri5ki-šè DU-a; kišib ur-dšára

10

Ur-e11-e šeš lú-dingir-ra

á gul-la; kišib ur-dšára; received from Da-da ugula

1

45 14.33 102.17

BIN 5 136 (Š 45/AS 2)

Da-da-ga

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6 á má hun-gá

SAT 2 453 (Š 45/AS 2)

Da-da-ga

Šeš-kal-la dumu a-rí-bi

á gul-la

MVN 20 62 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

É-ṣur-ì-lí

á gul-la; received from Unken-né ugula

2.29

YOS 4 290 (AS 5)

Lú-bùlug-gá

Ur-gišgigir c

á lú-hun-gá še gur10-a; obv. 12

0.33

BPOA 6 1229 (AS 9)

Lugal-ezem

Ur-dšára

á-bi 2400 u4-1-šè; rev. 2-3

40

Nik. 2 401 (ŠS 2)

Lú-kal-la

A-gu-gu

á MA pú-sag-gá; mu-DU

6

Iraq 6 185 BM 105346 (ŠS 5 xi)

A-da-ga

á of ME.PI.ZU, a fleeing slave who stayed with A-da-ga for 4 years; rev.

40

SAT 3 1583 (ŠS 5)

Ur-dsuen dumu lú-du10-ga

lá-NI á bala-a; received from A-gu-du

1

19.67 5

BPOA 6 736 (ŠS 5)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-dnun-gal

á dumu ur-dsuen-ke4-ne

10

SA 56 (Pl. 96) (ŠS 6 x)

A-a-kal-la ⌈sanga ?⌉

Lú-d⌈nanna⌉

á; sám [kù] huš-a; received from Lugalnesag-e; obv. 4-5

3

MVN 13 247 (ŠS 6)

Ur-ab-ba d

Lú-dutu

á gul-la; šim-ì-bi 1(aš) gur

30

BCT 2 75 (ŠS 7 vi)

Gu-du-du

Ka5-a kù-dím

á; kù mu-DU

3

Lugal-hé-gál

ditto

1

186

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

NABU 1989 95 12 (ŠS 7 vii)

Recipient

Gu-du-du

Silver (shekels)

Payer(s)

Description

Lugal-kù-zu dumu ì-lí-mu

á bala-a; mu-DU

Ur-é-an-na ugula lú-du10-ga

ditto

0.50

dumu árad-dam gúda

ditto

1 5

1

SAKF 61 (ŠS 7 xi)

Gu-du-du

Lú-dnanna dumu šeš-kal-la

á; mu-DU

SAT 3 1810 (ŠS 7)

Lú-kal-la

Ma-an-zi-za

á gul-la; sealed by Ur-dnun-gal e

Torino 2 658 (ŠS 8)

Gu-du-du

dumu ga-ti

á; mu-DU

SAKF 76 (ŠS 8 ix)

Gu-du-du

Lú-dingir-ra

á [...]

Vicino Oriente 8/1 70 (ŠS 8 xi)

Gu-du-du

Ba-zi-ge

á; mu-DU

BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i)

Gu-du-du

Lú-dingir-ra simug

á [...]; máš-da-re6-a á-ki-ti month i; rev. 15

Vicino Oriente 8/1 68 (ŠS 9 iv)

Gu-du-du

É-lú

á; mu-DU

2

MVN 16 922 (ŠS 9 ix)

Gu-du-du

É-lú-bi-zu

á; mu-DU

3

Santag 6 328 (ŠS 9 xii)

Gu-du-⌈du⌉

Lú-dingir-ra

á; mu-DU

0.50

Santag 6 329 (ŠS 9 diri)

Gu-du-du

Ur-dma-⌈mi⌉

á; mu-DU

2

TJAMC IOS 26 Gu-du-du (pl. 55) (ŠS 9 diri)

Ur-dma-⌈mi⌉ ⌈dumu⌉ šeš-kal-la

á; mu-DU

1

UTI 6 3610 (ŠS 9)

Gur4-za-an

á

1

Gu-du-du

simug-⌈ne⌉

á gul-la; mu-DU; received from Ha-lu5-lu5

10

Gu-du-du

Arad-mu ugula

á bala-a; kù BAD.DU

1

Šeš-kal-la engar ?

á bala-a

0.25

Ur-dun

á; mu-DU

2

dumu ur-dutu

á; mu-DU; dated to AS 9 f

2

dumu ur-dutu

á; mu-DU

2

á-guruš-⌈àm⌉; mu-DU

1

á; received from Ur-dsuen

1

á bala-a àr-àr; sá-du11

10

Santag 6 333 (IS 1 v) SAKF 72 (IS 1 vi)

StBibFran. 4 7 (IS 1 vi)

AAS 66 (IS 1 ix) MVN 14 191 (IS 1)

Gu-du-du

Aleppo 465 (IS 1)

Gu-du-du

Ur-ni9-gar dumu puzur4-é-[a]

187

4.50 3 1 6 0.42

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

NABU 1989 95 8 Gu-du-du (IS 2 xii)

Description

Silver (shekels)

á uru-bar-re; mu-DU

1

MVN 14 447 (IS 2)

Ur-dištaran g

Ur-dsuen

á bala-a; u4-3-kam su-su-dam

0.50

SAT 3 1983 (IS 2)

Gu-du-du

Lugal-ùšur

á gul-la érin-na

1.50

Lú-dingir-ra

á; mu-⌈DU⌉

1

dumu árad-dam

á bala-a; mu-⌈DU⌉

1

Lú-ga-mu

á lá-NI

UTI 3 2144 (month x)

Gu-du-⌈du⌉

YOS 4 219 (uncertain) h

Ur-e11-e

7.30

Notes Seal inscription: d š u l - g i / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

a

b

Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r .

c

Based on reading rev. 3 as u r - g i š g i g i r - k e 4 instead of u r - g i š g i g i r s u k k a l in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). d Seal inscription: u r - a b - b a / d u b - s a r / d u m u [ . . . ] . e Seal inscription: d š u - d s u e n / l u g a l - k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d n u n gal / dub-sar / dumu ur-dšára / pisan-dub-ba-ka / árad-zu. f g h

Date of payment earlier than that of text. Seal inscription: u r - d i š t a r a n / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - k ù - z u . The abbreviated year name reads m u s i - m u - r u - u m k i b a - h u l , which may refer to Š 25, 32, 44 or IS 3.

Table 3.7. Silver payments from professionals Text

Recipient

MVN 14 154 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

YOS 4 262 (Š 34)

Payer(s)

Description

guruš báhar

Received from Ur-dutu

Silver (shekels) 20

énsi

300

A-kal-la

énsi

125

Umma 95 (Š 37)

A-kal-la

énsi

217.67

OLP 4 17-70 no. 40 (Š 38)

A-kal-la

énsi

33

Bull. Buffalo SNS A-kal-la 11-2 146 13 nu-bànda (Š 39) BIN 5 143 (Š 39)

A-kal-la

Ur-é-mah ì-du8

obv. 2’

5

Lugal-má-gur8-re má-lah5

obv. 6’

3

A.KA dub-sar

20

188

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

BPOA 6 949 (Š 41)

A-kal-la

Ur-zu a-zu

šà-ki ur-zu a-zu; rev. 8; sealed by governor Ur-dli9-si4 a

BIN 5 109 (Š 42)

A-kal-la

énsi

SNAT 286 (Š 42/AS 6)

BIN 5 122 (Š 43 x) Aleppo 444 (Š 44)

A-kal-la b Da-da-ga

30 910

Hu-wa-wa

[lá]-NI lú-níg-dab5-ba-ke4-ne; received from Ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba; lúsa6-ì-zu ba-an-dib; obv. i 8-9

2.31

Níg-ú-rum

ditto; obv. i 12

0.25

ditto; obv. i 20; šà kišib-ba

8.03

Dingir-ra ⌈dub⌉-sar

lá-NI-ta su-ga lú-níg-dab5-ba-ke4-ne; received from Ur-dšára

10

Ba-sa6

ditto

25

Ur- en-ki lunga

lá-NI su-ga

1

d

AuOr 8 84 12 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

Ur-gišgigir ⌈dub-sar⌉

lá-NI su-ga

5

Umma 82 (Š 45/AS 2)

Da-da-ga

Ur-diškur lú-ázlag

lá-NI su-ga; gìr ì-kal-la

8c

Santag 6 67 (Š 45/AS 2)

Da-da-ga

Ur-diškur lú-ázlag

lá-NI su-ga; received from Ì-kal-la; sealed by Ur-dšára d

8c

BPOA 7 1817 (Š 45/AS 2)

Da-da-ga

lú-níg-dab5-bake4-ne

lá-NI su-ga; received from Lugal-ezem

60

AAS 72 (Š 46)

Da-da-ga

A-kal-la ašgab

BIN 5 329 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Uš-mu ugula

lá-NI su-ga

BPOA 7 2074 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga e

lú-níg-dab5-ba bala-a-ka

lá-NI su-ga; received from Da-da-ga e

Ur-mes lunga

mu-DU; rev. 21-22

2

In a letter-order to Ur-dšára; dated to Š 46 f

60

ditto; dated to Š 47 f

30

f

60

YOS 4 308 (Š 48 v)

BiOr 8 52 (AS 1)

AOS 32 C16 (AS 4)

d

Utu-ul4-gal

énsi ummaki-ka

5.83

ditto; dated to Š 48

Lú-kal-la

5 52.89

In a letter-order to Ur-dšára

60

A-kal-la muhaldim

máš-da-re-a énsi-ka; payer(s) identified as gìr-sè-ga of king; kišib ur-dšára g

5

Ur-gi6-pàr lunga

ditto

5

Ur-ni9-gar gudu4

ditto

5

Lugal-bala-sig5 lunga

ditto

[...]

189

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text SNAT 378 (AS 7)

SNAT 401 (AS 8)

Silver (shekels)

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

Ur-é-nun-na

lú-níg-dab5-bake4-ne šà a-pi4sal4ki gú-eden-na ù muš-bi-an-na

lá-NI gìr lugal-ezem; é-gal-e-si ba-an-dib; obv. ii 16

2

Du10-ga ugula

lá-NI-ta su-ga; received from Ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba; obv. 7

1

Kù-ga-ni dub-sar

ditto; obv. 11

4.94

ditto; obv. 13

4.27

énsi h

Lugal-ì-sa6 gudu4 Ur-zàbalam simug

ki

ditto; rev. 1

[0]

CST 544 (AS 9)

A-kal-la

énsi

UTI 4 2880 (ŠS 2)

⌈Lú⌉-[kal-la]

⌈Ur⌉-[...]

lá-NI mu-DU sila-ta è-a lú-níg-dab5-ba-ke4ne / ki ur-gi6-par4-ta / ur-dnun-gal-ke4 baan-dib; obv. ii 27-29

lú-lunga

lá-NI su-ga; received from Kù-ga-ni

9.75

Christie’s 20001207: 8 (ŠS 3 xii)

21.17

4

Santag 6 309 (ŠS 6)

Lú-kal-la

lú-lunga

lá-NI su-⌈ga⌉; received from Kù-ga-ni

5

TJAMC IOS 1 (pl. 49) (ŠS 7)

Gu-du-du

lú-níg-dab5-bake4-ne

lá-NI su-ga; received from Ur-dnun-gal

60

Santag 6 328 (ŠS 9 xii)

Gu-du-⌈du⌉

Hu-wa-wa ugula kíkken

lá-NI su-ga; mu-DU

5

MVN 14 175 (IS 2 vi)

[...]

⌈Šeš-kal⌉-la ⌈muhaldim⌉

lá-NI ⌈su-ga⌉

2

MVN 5 85 (IS 2)

Ab-ba-kal-la j dub-sar

lú-mah

BUL PAD

giš

tukul dgiš-bar-è

14.43

Notes a

Seal inscription: d š u l - g i / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

b

Seal inscription in completeness: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 .

c

Recording same payment at different accounting stages. Seal inscription: u r - d š á r a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - u š u r 4 .

d e

Same person attested in two different capacities? This text needs collation.

f

Date of payment earlier than that of text. Seal applied belonged to his son: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - b a .

g h

Seal inscription in completeness: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l - a n - u b - d a límmu-ba / ur-dli9-si4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

j

Seal inscription: a b - b a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - k i s a l .

190

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Table 3.8. Silver payments from groups Recipient

Payers

Description a

Silver (shekels)

A-kal-la

12 individuals, including 1 dub-sar 1 muhaldim 1 nagar 1 gudu4 1 šabra 1 nu-bànda

max = 10, min = 0.25

22.83+[...]

OrSP 6 60 Wengler 48 (Š 38 viii)

A-kal-la

14 individuals, including 2 ugula 1 tibira 1 ha-za!-num

Received from Ur-dšára; kù é KI.ANki-ka; max = 5, min = 1

35.50

BPOA 6 1247 (Š 38)

A-kal-la

14 individuals, including 1 gudu4

Max = 180 Min = 10

547

Umma 79 (Š 47)

9 individuals

kù lá-a ezem-mah-šè; max = 12, min = 4

AnOr 7 125 (AS 1)

àga-ús énsi

> 21 individuals, including 1 muhaldim 1 kù-dím 1 ì-du8 1 ugula

kù síg sa10-a; max = 6, min = 4

SAT 3 1238 (ŠS 1)

Lú-kal-la

8 individuals, including 1 gu-za-lá

kù kù-sig17 ; received from Inim-dšára; max = 1 shekel, min = ⅓

3.83

MVN 1 250 (ŠS 2 xii)

Lú-kal-la

4 individuals, including 1 šabra

Received from Ur-dšára; max ≥ 3 shekels, min = 1

8+[...]

UTI 5 3210 (ŠS 3)

5 invididuals, including 1 sipa 1 lú-tir

mu-DU; max = 10, min = 2

BPOA 6 942 (ŠS 4 viii)

7 individuals, including 1 gudu4 1 maškim 1 igi-du8

Santag 6 282 (ŠS 4 ix)

5 individuals, including 2 ugula 1 sipa

a-pi4-sal4ki-ta; max = 10, min = 5

40

UTI 3 2009 (ŠS 4 xii)

4 individuals, including 1 ad-KID 1 ùnu

mu-DU; max = 30, min = 3

43

UTI 3 2020 (ŠS 5 ix)

9 individuals, including 1 sipa 1 agar4-nígin

šà kuš-gan-na-ta; zi-ga ba-ba-ti; max = 10, min = 3

Text

DoCu EPHE 251 (Š 36)

kuš

du10-gan-ta de6-a zi-ga-àm; max = 2, min = 0.08

191

58.12+[...]

43

36

7.33

48.50 c

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

Recipient

MVN 2 23 (ŠS 6 diri)

Payers

Description a

32? individuals, including 2 gu-za-lá 3 gudu4 3 agar4-nígin 1 agrig 1 šabra 1 šu-ku6 1 šà-gu4 1 igi-du8 2 nu-giškiri6 1 àga-ús

mu-DU month vii-diri; max = 20, min = 1

Silver (shekels)

174 d

UTI 3 2050 (ŠS 7 i)

Ur-dšul-pa-è

7 individuals, including 1 gu-za-lá 1 sukkal

sám anše 3 gín ki sukkal-mah-šè; max =30, min = 1

Torino 2 659 (ŠS 7 xi)

Gu-du-du

3 individuals

mu-DU

SAT 3 1849 (ŠS 7)

72 individuals, including 2 kurušda 1 kù-dím 1 šu-ku6 1 sagi 5 gudu4 1 lunga 1 lú-tir-ra 1 agrig 1 sukkal 1 nu-bànda gu4 1 ka-gur7 2 ugula

mu-DU; kù ì-bí-za kù-sig17 ; max = 6, min = ½

106.73

A 158 (no date)

> 15 individuals, including 1 kuš7 1 ⌈kurušda?⌉ 1 engar 1 nu-[giškiri6] 1 dam-gàr

max = 20, min = 2

109+[...]

AnOr 1 287 (no date)

> 8 individuals, including 1 gudu4 1 nu-bànda

[...] šu-nir

16+[...]

lá-NI sila-a gál-la; max = 120, min = 30; gìr ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba

392.83

BCT 2 84 (no date)

[...]

> 10 individuals

48

5.91

BPOA 6 1184 (no date)

12 individuals

max = 2, min = ⅓; mostly as è-a or gá-la-àm

11.5

MVN 15 126 (no date)

>16 individuals, including several dubsar

max = 90, min = 10

361+ [...]

MVN 20 199 (no date)

4 individuals, including 1 ugula uš-bar

kù-ta sa10-a é-gal-ta è-a; kù-bi gur-dam; max = 8 ½ , min = 7

31.5

192

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Silver (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payers

Description a

Nik. 2 410 (no date)

Du10-ga-mu

6 individuals, including 1 kurušda, 1 nar

max = 8, min =

/6

17.33

SAT 3 1635 (no date)

7 individuals, including 1 muhaldim

max = 25, min = 1; in addition to textiles, vessels, beer, sheep, wheat and pig,

40.33

TCL 5 6166 (no date)

3610 e éren, with different affiliations f

érin ummaki-ke4 su-su-dam; max = 12 grains, min = 4 grains

80.33

UTI 3 2007 (month xi)

12 individuals

kù-è; received from lú-dEN.⌈ZU?⌉; 1 shekel from each person

UTI 3 2264 (no date)

UTI 5 3212 (no date)

>4 individuals, including 1 igi-du8 8 individuals, including 1 muhaldim, 1 gudu4, 1 šu-ku6, 1 nar

5

12

mu-DU ba-zi; min = 1, max uncertain

20.33

zi-ga-àm; max = 8, min = ½

26.50

Notes a Metrological unit after the numbers is shekel unless otherwise specified. b

Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 .

c

Including 6.50 shekels of silver of irrigation fee from Lu-Haya discussed in §3.2. d Out of this total, 110 shekels were expended: 5 shekels for d N i n - e b - g a l , 5 for d N i n - u r 4 - r a , 9 for d H a - ì a & d D u m u - [ z i ] , [31?] as š á m ⌈ k ù ⌉ - h u š - a , 2 for U r - d s u e n n a r in Tummal, 30 as š á m k ù - h u š - a k i b a - b a - t i , received by U r - d š u l - p a - è the silversmith in Ur, 16 for the same cause received by A - a - k a l - l a the messenger, for the a-tu5-a ritual in month xii, k a é - g a l - l a k u 4 ra, 2 received by the governor of Nippur, 10 received by G u - ú - g u - a . e f

Calculated by reading obv. i 12 as 2 ( g é š ) á g a - ú s l u g a l and rev. i 16 as 1 ( g é š ) é i n i m - š á r a . Including 2,580 designated as é r i n u m m a k i and 600 affiliated with the governor.

193

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Table 3.9.A. Silver payments from unidentified sources (Š 33-AS 2) Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Aleppo 437 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

Lugal-é-mah-e šeš lugal-giškiri6

SAKF 91 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

Lu5-lu5-ma

YOS 4 262 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

Lugal-ezem

Nisaba 9 223 (Š 35 xii)

A-kal-la b

Šeš-kal-la

Description

Silver a (shekels) 25.49

kù giš-lá ús-sa?

5 100 6

SAT 2 124 (Š 35)

gu4-a sa10; zi-ga lugal-šè nu-DU

10

Sealed by Ur-dšára c

3

MVN 14 119 (Š 35)

Ur-gišgigir

Ur-e11-e

AAS 68 (Š 36 i)

A-kal-la

Lugal-ezem

60

Aleppo 438 (Š 36 vi)

A-kal-la b

Ba-sa6

10

BIN 5 142 (Š 36)

A-kal-la

Ur-da-šár

Received from Lugal-ezem

60

Princeton 1 542 (Š 36)

A-kal-la

Šu-eš18-⌈tár⌉

Received from Lugal-ezem

60

Umma 83 (Š 36 x)

Lugal-ezem

A-rí-ik-tum-ma

Received from A-ab-ba; sealed by Ur-dšára c pisan-dub-ba giš

ùr sa10

AUCT 2 287 (Š 36)

Lú-kal-la Ur- suen dumu lugal-dalla Lugal-sa6-ga

AAS 77 (Š 36)

Lugal-ezem

SAT 2 161 (Š 37 v)

Lugal-sa6-ga d

OrSP 47-49 197 (Š 37 xi)

engar-e-ne

MVN 14 149 (Š 37 diri)

A-kal-la

SAT 2 178 (Š 37)

Lugal-e-ba-ansa6 e

1 0.50

d

MVN 13 863 (Š 36)

10.50

0.25

Lugal-ezem

lá-NI

3.16

kù den-ki-a-rí-ik-tum-šè; é-gal ku4-ra

30

w/ 40 strings of figs

6

maš-da-re-a; rev. 5-6; before governor and two other witnesses

3

Lugal-á-zi-da

lá-NI-ta su-ga

58

Lugal-ezem

sám má inim-ku5-ni; obv. 1-2; w/ many other products

25

Lugal-ezem

194

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

Aleppo 456 (Š 37)

Ba-sa6

Šeš-kal-la

gu4-a sa10-a

BIN 5 332 (Š 38)

Silver a (shekels) 3

Lugal-ezem

kišib da-da-ga

43.38

A-kal-la dumu lugalnesag-e

níg-sa10-ka sa10-a; kišib da-da-ga

Unken-né

kišib da-da-ga

20 10

234.94

MVN 14 49 (Š 39 vi)

A-kal-la b

Dingir-ra

lá-NI su-ga

MVN 14 89 (Š 39 vii)

A-kal-la b

Lú-kal-la

lá-NI-ta su-ga

Santag 6 37 (Š 39 vii)

A-kal-la

Árad

AUCT 1 701 (Š 39 vii)

⌈Ni9⌉-[gar]-kidu10

Lú-dšára

0.83

MVN 15 122+a (Š 39 xii)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-dšára

4.83

BIN 5 143 (Š 39)

A-kal-la

Lú-bàn-da dumu du10-ga

Bull. Buffalo SNS 11-2 146 13 (Š 39)

A-kal-la nu-bànda

14.92 15

20

Ba-ne-a

obv. 7’

A-kal-la

rev. 4’

5 91.67 3

Value of /5 gín kù-sig17

4

AUCT 2 173 (Š 40 v)

Dan-né-gi4

Lú-dšára

SAT 2 257 (Š 40)

Inim-ku5 f

Lugal-ezem

MVN 3 186 (Š 40) g

A-kal-la h

Arad

Tablet and envelope

BPOA 6 1012 (Š 41 iv)

A-kal-la j

Lugal-ezem

šu-nir gú-eden-na

4

SAT 3 2123 (Š 41 vii)

Ga-ti k

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

sum-sikil-ka sa10

2.33

OrSP 47-49 221 (Š 41)

A-kal-la b

Ur-giš-šà-ga

kù má šuku diri PA ŠIM E

5

Al-ba-ni-du11

níg-gur11 gál-la zàbalamki; obv. 8-9

10

Ha-ha-du

níg-gur11 gál-la; obv. 10-11

16.67

En-ú-šim-e

níg-gur11 gál-la; obv. 12-13

32

BPOA 6 949 l (Š 41)

SAT 2 942 (Š 42 i)

A-kal-la

d

Nanna-ì-sa6

2 1 23?

Šeš-kal-la dumu lugalrev. 1 má-gur8-re

6

Hu-du-du

rev. 3-4

60

Da-da-a

rev. 5

30

Ur-diškur

60

195

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text BIN 5 109 (Š 42)

Recipient

A-kal-la

Payer(s)

Description

Ur-dgilgameš

kù gi-NE

Árad

Value of

1 5

/6 gín kù-sig17

Nin-me-lám Ledgers pl. 36 20 (Š 42) m

A-kal-la b

SAT 2 322 (Š 43 v)

Sa6-sa6-ga

Umma 84 (Š 43 x) MVN 14 157 (Š 43)

Santag 6 52 (Š 43)

6.67 49.33

Equivalent to ⅓ ma-na kù-sig17

Lugal-ezem

140 194.58 n

Ur-gišgigir

obv. 9 + rev. 1

0.98

Ur- en-ki

obv. 10 + rev. 1

0.54

A-kal-la b

Bí-da

lá-NI su-ga; received from Ur-dnisaba

17.89

A-kal-la

Nin-me-lám

d

32

SAT 2 337 (Š 43) Torino 2 653 (Š 43)

Silver a (shekels)

Ù-ma-ni p

d

Šára-za-mì

sám ésir-é-a é-a 4(bán)-kam; é-kišib-ba-ta ba-zi

0.50

lá-NI-ta su-ga

4.75

Lugal-kù-zu sukkal

LAM giškiri6 du6 ur-na-a-ka sa10-a

Lugal-ezem šabra

giš

ASJ 11 323 6 (Š 44 vi)

šinnig gišì-šub-ka sa10-a

⌈Ur⌉-sila-luh

lá-NI-ta su-ga

1 0.92 26.17

BCT 2 73 (Š 44)

Lú-bàn-da

Lugal-é-mah-e

kù kaš

10

Nisaba 9 11 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

Lugal-giškiri6

lá-NI su-ga

10

BPOA 7 2025 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

Uš-mu

BIN 5 331 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

U-ma-ni

NABU 1989 95 3 (Š 44)

6 lá-NI su-ga

13.70 3

Da-da-ga

mu-DU énsi-ka

2 20

BIN 5 146 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

Da-gi

Aleppo 439 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

d

Šára-za-mì

Umma 80 (Š 45 ix)

Received from A-kal-la nu-bànda

6.33

Role of recipient deduced from context

0.36

lá-NI-ta è-a; 3 shekels later received by Lú-dninšubur santana as ur5

5.25

CST 548 (Š 45/AS 2)

Da-da-ga

Ur-dma-mi

lá-NI su-ga

20

MVN 1 246 (Š 45/AS 2)

Da-da-ga

Inim-ku5

lá-NI su-ga

1.83

196

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text BPOA 6 77 (Š 45/AS 2)

Recipient

Silver a (shekels)

Payer(s)

Description

Nin-me-lám

a-rá-1-kam

180

a-rá-1-kam

23.83

Da-da-ga

sám nìr-igi ù muš-gír

60

mu-DU énsi-ka

14

YOS 18 121 (Š 46/AS 3 iv)

Da-da-ga

Princeton 1 538 (Š 46)

Da-da-ga

Ab-ba-mu lú-gír-suki-ka

lá-NI su-ga; received from Lugal-gišgigr

AAS 71 (Š 46)

Da-da-ga

Lú-igi-sa6-sa6

kù-sig17-ta sa10-a

10

SAT 2 538 (Š 47 ix)

Lugal-ezem q

A-kal-la unuki

lá-NI-ta su-ga

6

Nebraska 19 (Š 47)

9.17

Ha-lu5-lu5 dumu du10-ga

kišib lú-nu-ub-da-su-su-da-ne; rev. 35-37

4.17

Lú-dšára dumu en-nun-gá

ditto ; rev. 40-41

1.67

BPOA 7 2074 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Da-da-ga

Needs collation because recipient and payer had same name

BIN 5 145 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Lú-sig5

gi-ta sa10-a

ASJ 18 79 11 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Ur-dšul-pa-è

kù gišUR×A.⌈HA⌉; obv. 1; dated to Š 46 s

2t

kù-babbar gišÚR×Ú; obv. 1; dated to Š 46 s; sealed by Ur-dšul-pa-è u

2t

lá-NI su-ga a-rá-1-kam

10

lá-NI su-ga a-rá-2-kam

6

56.54 r 0.92

BPOA 6 201 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Ur- šul-pa-è

Santag 6 79 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Da-du-mu

MVN 20 21 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Da-da

gi-ta sa10-a

8

Santag 6 81 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Lugal-nesag-e

lá-NI su-ga

0.67

Santag 6 84 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Ba-sa6

lá-NI su-ga

20

BIN 5 186 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Lú-gi-na

lá-NI su-ga a-rá-1-kam

20

lá-NI su-ga a-rá-2-kam

15 2

d

d

BIN 5 328 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Lú- nin-šubur dumu šeš-kal-la

lá-NI su-ga

SAT 2 564 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga

Lugal-ezem

lá-NI su-ga šà-zé; sag nu-tuku

MVN 13 785 (Š 48 vi)

Lugal-ezem

Bí-du11-ga

Sealed by Lugal-ezem q

In-sa6-sa6

mu-DU; rev. 23-24

1

kišib ur-dšára

6

YOS 4 308 (Š 48 v) Nisaba 9 167 (Š 48)

Da-da-ga

Ur-e11-e

Santag 6 110 (AS 1)

La-ni-mu

Ur-dšára

111.87 6.88

10

197

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD Notes a

Italic numbers represent the silver value of non-silver precious metals.

b

Seal inscription in completeness: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r / ( k u š 7 ) .

c

Seal inscription: u r - d š á r a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - ù š u r / n u - b à n d a g u 4 d š á r a .

d

Seal inscription: l u g a l - s a 6 - g a / d u m u u m m a k i - d u 1 0 - g a .

e Seal inscription: u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / é n s i / u m m a k i / l u g a l - e - b a - a n - s a 6 / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d i š t a r a n / á r a d zu. f

Seal inscription: i n i m - k u 5 / d u m u u r - [ . . . ] / d a m - g à r .

g

The year name on the envelope refers to the year Š 39, but that on the tablet refers to the year Š 40. The earlier date may have been a mistake.

h

Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - n e s a g - e .

j

Seal inscription in completeness: u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / é n s i / u m m k i / a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 / árad-zu. k

Seal inscription: g a - t i d u m u / l u g a l - d a m - g à r .

l

Sealed by governor: d š u l - g i / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

m

Given the involvement of A - k a l - l a , this text is more likely dated to the year Š 42 than the year AS 6 (§3.10).

n

Calculated by deducting the number in obv. 7 from the total in rev. 1.

p

Seal inscription: ù - m a - n i / d u b - s a r / d u m u [ n a m - h a - n i ] .

q

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - m a h - e / š a b r a .

r

Based on reading end of rev. 1 as k ù z i - < g a > (CDLI) instead of k ù - s i g 1 7 ! (BDTNS); both databases accessed September 2012.

s

Date of payment earlier than that of text.

t

Same payment.

u

Seal inscription: u r - d š u l - p a - è / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - k ù - g a - n i .

Table 3.9.B. Silver payments from unidentified sources (AS 3-IS 3) Silver a (shekels)

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Description

JCS 31 134 2 (AS 4)

Šeš-kal-la

Hu-wa-wa

obv. 5

5

Nik. 2 402 (AS 4)

Lugal-hé-gál

obv. 1

13.33

MVN 13 761 (AS 5 iii)

Á-ni-ni

Lú-ddumu-zi

níg-sám gu4-ta

13.50

BPOA 7 2567 (AS 5 ix)

Lugal-gišgigir-re b muhaldim

A-rá-mu

šà bala-a

YOS 4 290 (AS 5)

Lú-bùlug-gá

Ur-gišgigir d

198

0.5

kù ezem-mah; dated to AS 4 c; obv. 3-4

4.25

kù mah-ù; ditto; obv. 5

0.67

kù-babbar kù-sig17; ditto; obv. 6

0.67

kù AN.NA; ditto; obv. 7

0.07

kù má ésir; ditto; obv. 8

0.05

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

Payer(s)

Silver a (shekels)

Description

Hu-wa-wa SNAT 401 (AS 8)

1

Ba-al-šar-ru-um énsi

e

lá-NI-ta su-ga; received from Ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba

Kù-ga-ni d

Ur- ba-ú

MVN 11 170 f (AS) BPOA 6 572 (AS 9 xii)

0.33 c

kù-[...]; dated to AS 7 ; obv. 5

Ur-e11-e Lú-eb-gal

5 1

A-gu-gu TCL 5 6045 (AS 8 xii)

4

Ur-dnàm-nun-ka

lá-NI su-ga; before 4 witnesses kù sám

giš

kiri6 bala a-šà lá-tur-ka

29.67 16 10

Lú-kal-la

Lú-dingir-ra

4.86

giš

Ki-[...]-dal

11.33

Lú-kal-la

A-du

lá-NI su-ga

A-lu5-lu5

obv. 12; expended by Lú-hé-gál; dated to AS 8 c

4

⌈Níg⌉-ba-sig5

obv. 13; ditto

2

Níg-ba-sig5

expended by Lú-hé-gál; obv. 16

2

YOS 4 317 (ŠS 1 v)

A-ab-ba

kù ì-bí-za kù-sig17; mu-DU

2

Nik. 2 517 (ŠS 1 vi)

Lugal-á-zi-da dumu da-da

mu-DU

2

1 gín kù-sig17

1g

Ontario 2 481 (AS 9) MVN 1 248 (AS 9) MVN 21 330 (AS 9)

Tukul-gar-ni

Lú-kal-la

SAT 3 1216 (ŠS 1 vi)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-i7-da

Christie’s 20001207: 7 (ŠS 1 vi)

Lú-kal-la

A-rá-mu

1.89

1

Ur-dnun-gal

mu-DU; a-da-ga-šè; [a]-rá-2-kam

A-tu

lá-NI su-ga

Hu-wa-wa

lá-NI su-ga; mu-DU

3

MVN 1 249 (ŠS 1 xii)

Bí-du11-ga

lá-NI su-ga; mu-DU [...]; [...] a-lu5-lu5

10

MVN 9 212 (ŠS 1 xii)

Ur-é-maš

mu-DU

20

Lú-kal-la

Ur-dutu

lá-NI su-ga; received from Lú-den-líl-lá

2

Lú-kal-la

A-ga-[ga]

mu-DU; obv. 7

1

Šeš-kal-la

sám árad; mu-DU; obv. 8-9

8

Nik. 2 400 (ŠS 1 xi)

IRAIMK 1 251 (ŠS 2 iii) Nik. 2 401 (ŠS 2)

Lú-kal-la

SAT 3 1299 (ŠS 2)

mu-DU; sag-na4 [...]

199

15 9.33

3.14

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

Recipient

Nisaba 9 219 (ŠS 2)

OrAnt 22 203 HSM 911 523 h(ŠS 2)

Silver a (shekels)

Payer(s)

Description

Lugal-é-mah-e

lá-NI su-ga uruda; received from Lú-den-líl-lá

5

mu-DU lugal

60

mu-DU nin

30

mu-DU ezem-mah

60

sukkal mah

60 zi-ga didli ki sukkal

180

Lugal-má-gur8-re

30

Ba-ba-ti

60

d

120

Ur- ba-ú Nisaba 9 351 (ŠS 3 iii)

Bù-ú-du

UTI 5 3336 (ŠS 3 iv)

⌈Ur!⌉-dingir-⌈ra⌉

mu-DU

Ha-da

Received from Lugal-nesag-e

d

ditto

1.06

maš-da-⌈re6-a⌉ ezem še-[kin-ku5]-šè ba-⌈zi⌉

3.58

Torino 2 656 (ŠS 3 xi)

Lú-kal-la

1

Šára-ba-zi-ge

YOS 4 270 (ŠS 3 diri)

Al-⌈la?⌉

Nisaba 9 253 (ŠS 4 vii)

-kal-la

Šà-nin-gá

Santag 6 283 (ŠS 4 x)

Lú-kal-[la]

In-sa6-sa6

Nik. 2 405 (ŠS 4 x)

Ur-dutu dumu al-la

BCT 2 74 (ŠS 4 xii)

⌈Al⌉-la-pálil

MVN 1 251 (ŠS 5 vi)

1

1 lá-NI su-ga

⌈2?⌉ 7.06

⌈mu⌉-DU

5

kù níg-samx-ma a-pi4-sal4ki ; zi-ga of an unascribed silver account; rev. 12-13

16.96

kù numun sum!-sikil-ka sa10-a; zi-ga of an unascribed silver account; rev. 14-15

17

Lú-sa6-ì-zu

zi-ga

10

Níg-gi-na-zu

ditto

10

Ledgers pl. 37 21 (ŠS 4)

AnOr 1 216 (ŠS 5 v)

1+[...]

j

Value of ½ ma-na kù ⌈huš⌉-[a] 15-⌈ta⌉

450 1.96

SAT 3 1598 (ŠS 5 viii)

Lú-kal-la

A-du

lá-NI su-ga mu-DU

Torino 2 655 (ŠS 5 ix)

Lú-kal-la

Lú-dha-ìa

kù kù-sig17

7

Šeš-kal-la dumu na-silim

mu-DU; received from Šu-dnisaba

30

Lú-kal-la

ditto

MVN 20 96 (ŠS 5 x)

200

⌈10⌉

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

Torino 2 657 (ŠS 5 x) Babyl. 8 Pupil 5 (ŠS 5)

Lú-kal-la

Description

Lugal-ezem

mu-DU énsi

30

Uš-mu

lá-NI su-ga ⌈gú-na⌉-kam

15

Ledgers pl. 23 13 énsi (ŠS 5) CST 545 (ŠS 6 x)

BPOA 7 2693 (ŠS 6)

Santag 6 309 (ŠS 6) SAT 3 1779 (ŠS 6)

14.67

rev. 17

270

En-u4-sù

mu ur-dba-ú-šè

2

A-a-kal-la ⌈sanga?⌉

Lú-kal-la

sám [kù] huš-a; obv. 3

3

I7-pa-è [...] Ur-dnun-[...]

rev. 12

[...]

a-rá mu ki [...]dnin-mug-ga rev. 13

⌈5⌉

Du10-ga

UTI 3 2011 (ŠS 6)

sám [...] zabar uruda šu-nir-ra [...]; rev. 16

A-hu-ni sipa

SA 56 (Pl. 96) (ŠS 6 x)

Rochester 125 (ŠS 6)

rev. 14 d

2

Ì-kal-la

ur- a-šár ba-an-dib; also sealed by Ur-da-šár k

6

Ur-zu

šà-bala-a; sám kù huš-a é-gal-la ku4ra ù zi-ga didli; received from Lugal-šà-lá

5

Lú-dsuen

šà-bala-a; sám kù huš-a é-gal-la ku4ra ù zi-ga didli; šà kušdu10-gan-ta

27.33

A-gu

sa10 giškáb-kul; sealed by Lugalnesag-e l

1.33

Ù-ma-ni

sealed by Lugal-nesag-e l

5.25

Lugal-inim-gi-na

d

⌈Ur⌉- šul-pa-è

Lú-kal-la

Lú-kal-la

AUCT 1 146 (ŠS 7 v)

⌈Kù⌉-ga-ni

lá-NI su-ga

1

Lugal-inim-gi-na

ditto

2

Hu-wa-wa

ditto

1.98

Ur-dba-ú

30

I-din-diškur

mu-DU

BRM 3 146 (ŠS 7 viii)

Gu-du-du

Lú-dšul-gi-ra

SAKF 9 (ŠS 7 ix)

Gu-du-du

Lugal-kù-zu

lá-NI su-ga; received from Lú-kal-la

NABU 1987 4 (ŠS 7 xi)

Gu-du-du

Ur-dutu

mu-DU

BCT 2 77 (ŠS 7 xii)

A-du-du

A-du-du dumu é-u6-e

MVN 10 185 (ŠS 7 xii)

Silver a (shekels)

Payer(s)

11 7 10 ⌈2.94?⌉ 0.50

Ur-da-šár m

kù-babbar kù huš-a ki-a-⌈nag?⌉

201

1.50

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

Recipient

Silver a (shekels)

Payer(s)

Description

Lugal-hé-gal

níg-kas7-ak lá-NI sila-ta è-a; rev. 4 & 20

2

Lugal-kù-zu

ditto; rev. 6 & 20

5

Nik. 2 279 (ŠS 7)

Lú-kal-la

TJAMC IOS 1 (pl. 49) (ŠS 7)

Gu-du-du

Santag 6 324 (ŠS 8 i)

Gu-du-du

SAKF 76 (ŠS 8 ix)

Gu-du-du

Gìr-ì-lí dumu inim-ma-ni

Received from A-a-kal-la árad? dšára

Vicino Oriente 8/1 67 (ŠS 8 xi)

Gu-du-du

Lú-dingir-ra dumu lugal-é-mah-e

lá-NI su-ga; received from Ur-dnun-gal

Kaš4

kù kù-sig17; mu-DU

Lú-dingir-⌈ra⌉ dumu ha-ba-lu5-ge

kù kù-sig17; mu-DU; received from Lú-⌈du10-ga⌉

A-rá-mu

ditto

Kù-dnin-ur4-ra

kù kù-sig17; mu-DU; received from Lú-kal-la

1

Lugal-nesag-e

ditto

1

máš-da-re6-a á-ki-ti month i; máš dam-gàr gá-gá; obv. 1-3

60

Lú-kal-la

64.23

Šà-kù-ge

lá-NI su-[ga] túg

Lugal-igi-huš

MVN 20 201 (ŠS 8 xii)

13.83

d

Šára-kam

BCT 2 82 (ŠS 9 i)

Gu-du-du

⌈10?⌉

Gìr-ì-lí-sa6

2.50 3 3.96 2 ⌈2⌉

ditto; obv. 4-5

[...]

Kù- šára

ditto; obv. 6-7

[...]

Ur-dnun-gal

máš-da-re6-a á-ki-ti month i; rev. 16

40.33

d

Santag 6 327 (ŠS 9 xi)

Gu-du-du

Kù-dnin-ur4-ra

mu-DU

13

Santag 6 328 (ŠS 9 xii)

Gu-du-du

Lú-tur-tur

mu-DU

0.50

Atiqot 4 pl. 21 44 Gu-du-du (ŠS 9 xii)

Lugal-kù-zu dumu lugal-é-⌈mah-e⌉

lá-NI su-ga; mu-DU

1

Aleppo 462 (ŠS 9)

Gu-du-du

Lú-dšul-gi-ra

sám gú-na; received from Uš-mu

7

Aleppo 460 (ŠS 9)

Gu-du-du

Lú-sig5

mu-DU; received from Lugal-ùšur?

4.72

Lugal-ùšur?

mu-DU; apin-lá ki-maški

1.33

sám⌈síg?⌉-šè; ú-gu-dé-a-šè

1.33

Rochester 130 (ŠS 9)

Lugal-má-gur8re n

Ì-kal-la

MVN 14 150 (IS 1 xii)

Gu-du-du

Šà-ki dam lú-du10-ga

SAKF 85 (IS 1)

Gu-du-du

23

Árad-mu

lá-NI su-ga; mu-DU

[...]-la

mu-DU

202

0.98 1+[...]

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Recipient

JCS 31 242 16 (IS 1)

Gu-du-du

Payer(s)

Description

Lú-dha-ìa

mu-DU; obv. 7-8

Silver a (shekels) 10

sám uruda; obv. 9

3 c

lá-NI su-ga dated to ŠS 7 ; [túg] uš-bar-bi 2(u) p; sealed by Ì-kal-la q

10

Lú-den-líl-lá

lá-NI su-ga; mu-DU

2

Gu-du-du

Lú-sa6-ì-zu

lá-NI su-ga; received from pisan-dub-ba

Akkadica 7 pl. 2 4 (IS 2 viii)

Gu-du-du

Lú-sa6-ga dumu ur-ki-ág muhaldim

lá-NI su-ga; received from Ur-lugal

CST 552 (IS 2 xi)

Lugal-ušumgal

Ur-dlamma

mu urudašen-šè

0.50

níg-samx(SA10) gišig

3.50

UTI 5 3076 (IS 1)

Gu-du-du

AuOr 8 85 13 (IS 2 vi)

Gu-du-du

UCP 9-2-1 49 (IS 2 vii)

YOS 4 277 (IS 2) UTI 5 3347 (IS 3)

BIN 5 148 (month iv)

4

2 énsi

MVN 4 168 (month ix) Torino 2 660 (month i)

0.93+ [...]

Da-da-a

Ur-dsuen

urudu-bi 2(diš) ½ ma-na-⌈ta⌉; gu-du-du ba-an-dib; sealed by Gu-du-du r

Lu5-ú-lu5

mu-DU bala-a

Ni9-gar-ki-du10

2.50 1 15

Má-gur8-re

ma-sá-tum-ma gá-gá-dè níg-za-ha in-[...] GA GAG [...]

6 0.50

YOS 4 82 (month v)

Ku-li

Ni9-gar-ki-du10

šà uri5ki su!-ga

JCS 54 10 67 (month vi)

Gu-du-⌈du⌉

d

kù kaš

d

Šeš-kal-la dumu du10-ga

lá-NI ù ur5; rev. i 4-5

2

Ur-ni9-gar dumu ha-ba-lu5gé

rev. i 6

3

Da-da-a

šà ummaki-ta; šà dub-ba ku-li; obv. 18

25

mu-DU a-hu-a dumu nin-ki-sur-ra

20

ASJ 18 166 8 (no date)

BPOA 6 936 (no date)

Utu-⌈á⌉-dah šu-i

BPOA 6 996 (no date)

En-líl-lá-ì-sa6

Ni9-gar-ki-du10

Santag 6 359 (no date) Santag 6 377 (no date)

10 ⌈0.50⌉

⌈lá⌉-NI dingir-ra-ka mu-3-kam

45.92

Šu-eš18-tár

Perhaps repaid by Ur-dli9-si4 to Ku-li; obv. 9-10

112

Ba-sa6

ditto; obv. 11-rev. 1

Ku-li

203

90

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD Notes a Italic numbers represent the silver value of non-silver precious metals. b

Seal inscription: l u g a l - g i š g i g i r - r e / [ . . . ] . Date of payment earlier than that of text.

c d

Based on reading rev. 3 as u r - g i š g i g i r - k e 4 i n s t e a d o f u r - g i š g i g i r s u k k a l in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012).

e Seal inscription: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d l i 9 si4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu. f Seal inscription restored as: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / [ d š á r a - k a m ] / d u b - [ s a r ] / d u m u u r - [ d š á r a ] / s a g - [ d u 5 l u g a l - k a ] / á r a d - z u . It remains unclear on what evidence the restoration of d Š á r a - k a m ’s name was based. g Amount of gold whose value not converted into silver. h

A balanced account on silver. Only the z i - g a section is listed here because its total amount equals that of the presumably s a g - n í g - g u r 1 1 - r a - k a m .

j k l

A balanced account. Only the s a g - n í g - g u r 1 1 - r a - k a m section is listed here. Seal inscription: u r - d a - š á r / d u m u s a g - g u 7 / l ú - á z l a g . Seal inscription: lugal-nesag-e / dub-sar / da-a-gi4.

m

Seal inscription: u r - d a - š á r d u b - s a r / ⌈ d u m u ⌉ [ . . . ] . n Seal inscription: l u g a l - m á - g u r 8 - r e / d u m u b a - r a - a n . p q

Restored as 2 0 - [ k a m ] in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012); restoration unnecessary. Seal inscription: ì - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l ú - s a 6 - g a .

r Seal inscription: d i - b í - d s u e n / l u g a l k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / g u - d u du / dumu da-da-ga / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

204

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Tables for Chapter Four Table 4.1. Silver expenditures for paying royal taxes Text

Expender a

SAT 2 82 (Š 33)

A-kal-la

BCT 2 71 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

Princeton 2 411 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

Ledgers pl. 29 16 (Š 35)

A-kal-la

BPOA 6 1361 (Š 36)

A-kal-la

NABU 1989 95 2 = AAS 150 (Š 37)

Ledgers pl. 39 22 (Š 38) d

Recipient

Description kù kù-sig17

366

kù kìri gu4

368.03

maš-da-re6-a lugal maš-[da]-re6-a lugal; kù kù-sig17 ditto; kù kìri gu4

A-kal-la

maš-da-re6-a ⌈lugal⌉; kù kù-sig17 šu-nir [...]

A-kal-la

A-kal-la

368.03 47

maš-da-re6-a lugal; kù kìri gu4

368.03

maš-da-re6-a lugal; ⌈har kù⌉-sig17

⌈40.67⌉ c 244

maš-da-re6-a lugal; value of 1 ma-na har kù-sig17

421.17

ditto; har kìri gu4

368.03

kaš-dé-a lugal; value of 22 gín har kù-sig17 huš-a

441.17

ditto; value of 1 ma-na gal kù-sig17

421.17

ditto; kù kìri gu4

920.08 [...]

maš-da-re6-a lugal; value of 1 ma-na har kù-sig17

421.17

ditto; kìri gu4

368.03

maš-da-re6-a lugal; value of 3 gín kù-sig17 20-ta MVN 11 166 (Š 40)

366

366

ditto; har [...]-za-ka MVN 11 165 (Š 39)

720+[...]

maš-da-re6-a lugal; kù kù-sig17

ditto; kìri gu4

A-kal-la

Silver b (shekels)

63.17

ditto; kìri gu4

368.03

ditto; value of 1 ma-na kù-sig17 7-ta

421.17

205

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

OrNs 55 134135 4 (Š 41)

Ledgers pl. 34 19 (Š 42) e

Expender a

Recipient

A-kal-la

A-kal-la

Description maš-da-re6-a nin9-kal-la; níg-buru14-da ku4-ra; value of 3 gín kù-sig17 20-ta

60

maš-da-re6-a nin9-kal-la; value of 2 gín kù-sig17 20-ta

40

ditto; value of 5 gín kù-sig17 10-ta

50

ditto; har-šè

60

maš-da-re6-a lugal; kìri gu4

245.33

ditto; value of ⅔ mina kù-sig17 7-ta

280.78

maš-da-re6-a nin9-kal-la; value of 5 gín kù-sig17 10-ta

50.14

ditto; value of 2 gín kù-sig17 20-ta

40.11

maš-da-re6-a lugal; value of ⅔ ma-na kù-sig17 7-ta

280.33

ditto; kìri gu4

490.67

kaš-dé-a lugal; value of 1(diš) gal kù-sig17 ki-lá-bi 1(diš) ma-na

421.17

kaš-dé-a lugal; 1(diš) giša-gu4 za-gìn kù-sig17 gar ditto; value of ⅓ ma-na 2(diš) gín kù-sig17 20-ta UTI 6 3688 (AS 6)

Lú-kal-la

énsi f

máš-da-re6-a lugal ezem-mah; value of ⅓ ma-na kù huš-a 15-ta ditto; har kù kìri gu4 ditto; har kù didi

UTI 3 2209 (AS 7)

Lú-kal-la

UTI 4 2658 (AS 8 ix)

Lú-kal-la

OLZ 17 241 (AS 9)

Lú-kal-la

MVN 4 138 (ŠS 2)

Lú-kal-la

UTI 6 3680 (ŠS 3)

Lú-kal-la

énsi

f

énsi f

énsi h

énsi h

Silver b (shekels)

máš-da-re6-a ezem šu-numun-na; [har] ⌈kìri gu4⌉

30 441.22 300 120.67 181 120.67

ditto; har didi

181

máš-da-[re6-a] ⌈lugal⌉-e a-kal-la [...] du8-a šà tum-malxki; value of 10 gín kù huš-a 15-ta

150

máš-da-re6-a dšu-dsuen lugal-e [àga] g šu-ti-a; value of ⅓ ma-na kù huš-a 15-ta

300

máš-da-re6-a ezem še-kin-ku5; har kìri gu4

120

ditto; har didi

120

máš-da-re6-a ezem še-kin-ku5; har kìri gu4

120

ditto; har didi

120

206

A PPENDIX : T ABLES Notes a Italics indicate names that do not appear in the texts, but their connection to the texts can be deduced based on other parallel texts that mention the same names. b

Italic numbers represent the value of gold ( k ù - s i g 1 7 ) converted to silver. All numbers include allowances for weight adjustment ( s a g - n a 4 - b i ) and production loss ( i z i - g u 7 - b i ) whenever they apply.

c

Amount of gold whose value not converted to silver in the text.

d

Year name may refer to either the year Š 38 or the year ŠS 5, but the former date appears more likely based on parallelism between this text and two other texts—MVN 11 165 (Š 39) and MVN 11 166 (Š 40).

e

For this date instead of the year AS 6, see Van De Mieroop (1986a, text 5).

f

Seal inscription in completeness: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u ba / ur-dli9-si4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu. g Restored based on ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) rev. iii 21-22. Seal inscription in completeness: d š u - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / a-a-kal-la / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu. h

Table 4.2. Other silver expenditures for the crown Description

Silver b (shekels)

A-kal-la

har alan lugal

20

MVN 11 165 (Š 39)

A-kal-la

é-gal-šè; value of 2 gín kù-sig17

40

AOS 32 D04 (AS 4)

Lú-kal-la

mu udu-niga-nu-gur-ra-šè; é-gal-la ku4-ra

Santag 6 127 (AS 4)

Lú-kal-la

níg-ba šu-dda-gan lú-ma-ríki; in the form of har

20

UTI 4 2315 (AS 6)

Lú-kal-la

énsi c

níg-ba lugal-an-dùl á-ág-gá-sig5 ša-aš-ruumki hul-a de6-a; in the form of har

60

SNAT 442 (ŠS 1)

Lú-kal-la

énsi d

igi-kár! i-din-da-gan šà unuki; in the form of har

20

MVN 16 837 (ŠS 3)

Lú-kal-la

énsi d

igi-kár nin zàbalamki-šè gin-[na]; value of 5 gín kù huš-a 17-ta

85

Text

Expender a

BCT 2 71 (Š 34)

Recipient

260

Notes a

Italics indicate an expender whose name does not appear in the text, but to whom the expenditures recorded therein can be attributed based on the attestation of the mašdare’a tax in the same text; see also table 4.1.

b

Italic numbers represent the value of gold ( k ù - s i g 1 7 ) converted to silver.

c

Seal inscription in completeness: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u ba / ur-dli9-si4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu. d

Seal inscription in completeness: d š u - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u ba / a-a-kal-la / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

207

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Table 4.3. Silver expenditures for cultic purposes Silver b (shekels)

Text

Expender a

BCT 2 71 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

šu-nir gú-eden-na (šà ummaki) c

4

Ledgers pl. 29 16 (Š 35)

A-kal-la

šu-nir gú-eden-na (šà ummaki) c

4

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà ki

4

šu-nir énsi-ka; kù-sig17

6d

šu-nir énsi-ka

11

šu-nir gú-eden-na (šà ummaki) c

4

šu-nir gú-eden-na (šà ummaki) c

4

šu-nir énsi-ka

11

ditto; value of 6 gín kù-sig17

42

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà a-pi4-sal4ki; kišib nam-šà-tam

1

NABU 1989 95 2 (Š 37) Ledgers pl. 39 22 (Š 38) e MVN 11 165 (Š 39)

Recipient

A-kal-la

A-kal-la

A-kal-la

Description

SAT 2 288 (Š 40)

A-kal-la

AAS 80 (Š 41)

A-kal-la

Santag 6 58 (Š 43)

A-kal-la

šu-nir gú-eden-na (šà ummaki) c

4

MVN 10 194 (Š 44)

Da-da-ga

kù šu-nir gú-eden-na a-pi4-sal4ki

1.50

Ur-e11-e g

šu-nir gú-eden-na (šà ummaki) c

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà ummaki; níg-dab5 zà-mu-ka

4

4

SAT 2 775 (AS 4)

Lú-kal-la

SACT 2 119 (AS 5)

Lú-kal-la

énsi f

níg-geštu dlamma damar-dsuen-ka-šè; value of ¼ gín kù-sig17

SAT 2 963 (AS 6)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-e11-e g

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà a-pi4-sal4ki; kišib nam-šà-tam

BIN 5 69 (AS 7)

Lú-kal-la

MVN 8 248 (ŠS 1)

Lú-kal-la

énsi h

tu-di!-da dnin-eb-gal

3

SAT 3 1309 (ŠS 2 iv)

Lú-kal-la

Ur-dšul-pa-è kùdím

šu-nir gú-eden-na; in addition to 1 shekel from Lugal-nir

3

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà ummaki; níg-dab5 zà-mu-ka

4

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà ummaki

Gu-du-du

Nik. 2 399 (IS 2)

Gu-du-du

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà a-pi4-sal4ki; ditto énsi j Kù-ga-ni

1.50 2 1.50 4

ki

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà a-pi4-sal4

SET 173 (ŠS 8)

Aleppo 466 (no date)

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà a-pi4-sal4ki; ditto

1.50

1.50

níg-buru14!-da ku4-ra; value of 4 gín kù-sig17! huš-a 15-ta

60

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà ummaki

4

šu-nir šà a-pi4-sal4ki

3

208

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Expender a

Recipient

MVN 3 349 (no date)

Description šu-nir gú-eden-na; sá-du11-e dah-[ha]; rev. 25

Silver b (shekels) 5.50

Notes a

Italics indicate an expender whose name does not appear in the text, but to whom the expenditures recorded therein can be attributed based on the attestation of the mašdare’a tax; see also table 4.1. b

Italic numbers represent the value of gold ( k ù - s i g 1 7 ) or “red” gold ( k ù h u š - a ) converted to silver.

c

Deduced based on parallelism with SAT 2 775 (AS 4), BIN 5 69 (AS 7), and SET 173 (ŠS 8). d Amount of gold whose value not converted into silver. e

Year name may refer to either the year Š 38 or the year ŠS 5, but the former date appears more likely based on similarities between this text and two other texts—MVN 11 165 (Š 39) and MVN 11 166 (Š 40).

Seal inscription in completeness: d a m a r - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u ba / ur-dli9-si4 / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu. g Seal inscription: u r - e 1 1 - e d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r . f

h

Seal inscription in completeness: d š u - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / a-a-kal-la / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

j

Seal inscription in completeness: d i - b í - d s u e n / l u g a l k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u ba / da-da-ga / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

Table 4.4. Silver expenditures on for making purchases Silver (shekels)

Text

Expender a

Recipient

Description

Aleppo 447 (Š 33 x)

A-kal-la

Lugal-é-mah-e

gi sa10-sa10-dè; first received by A-kal-la as maš a-šà-ga

20

YOS 4 286 (Š 34 vi)

A-kal-la

Lugal-sa6-ga

⌈níg⌉-sa10 é-sag-da-na šuruppakki-šè

15

BCT 2 71 (Š 34)

A-kal-la

Ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba

uruda sa10-a; obv. 1-2

50

BPOA 7 1749 (Š 37)

A-kal-la

Lugal-e-ba-ansa6

samx ésir -a-šè

29.92

JCS 40 112 3 (Š 38 vii)

A-kal-la

Ur-dlamma

kù níg-samx-ma

9.52

MVN 13 833+834 (Š 39)

A-kal-la

A-kal-la dumu lugalnesag-e

níg-sám-ma bala-a

52.61

MVN 11 166 (Š 40)

A-kal-la

Ur-gišgigir

numun sum-sikil sa10-a; obv. 4-5

15

BPOA 6 998 (Š 48)

Da-da-ga

La-ni-mu

pa mušen sa10-sa10-dè

10

BPOA 1 1005 (ŠS 5)

Lú-kal-la

A-a-kal-la b

šim-a sa10-a

Lú-kal-la

A-a-kal-la ⌈sanga⌉

sám kù huš-a; obv. 3, 8-rev. 10; received with 13 shekels from two other people

SA 56 (Pl. 96) (ŠS 6 x)

209

2.11

3

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text

UTI 3 2050 (ŠS 7 i)

Expender a

Lú-kal-la

Recipient

Silver (shekels)

Description sám anše 3 gín ki-sukkal-mah-šè; obv. 1-2; received with 28 shekels from 6 other individuals

d

Ur- šul-pa-è

20

Notes a

Italics indicate an expender whose name does not appear in the text, but to whom the expenditures recorded therein can be attributed based on the attestation of the mašdare’a tax; see also table 4.1.

b Seal inscription: d š u - d s u e n / n i t a k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / a - a - k a l - l a / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

Table 4.5. Other silver expenditures Text

BCT 2 71 (Š 34)

Expender a

A-kal-la

Silver (shekels)

Recipient

Description

Lugal-ezem

kišib ur-dšára pisan-dub-ba

Lugal-ezem

25

Lugal-é-mah-e

kišib lú-bàn-da

108.17

Da-a-ga Ledgers pl. 29 16 (Š 35)

A-kal-la

Aleppo 449 (Š 35)

A-kal-la

BIN 5 325 (Š 37)

A-kal-la

OrSP 47-49 190 (Š 37)

A-kal-la

20

Lugal-ezem

219

Lugal-ezem

zi-zi-da; sag-níg-gur11-ra [...]; first received by A-kal-la as maš a-šà-ga sù?

19.13

Dated to Š 36; first received by Ur-dšára

42.92

d

Da-Da-ga

First received by Ur- šára

10

urudu-bi 2(aš) gú 5(diš) ma-na; sealed by Ur-dšára b

60

Lugal-ezem MVN 11 165 (Š 39)

MVN 11 166 (Š 40)

A-kal-la

A-kal-la

5

A-kal-la dumu lugalnesag-e

kišib da-da-ga

85

Lugal-níg-lagare

5 5 kišib da-da-ga

Da-da-ga

OLZ 17 241 (AS 9)

Lú-kal-la

AoF 35 239 1 (ŠS 4)

Lú-kal-la

Santag 6 336 (IS 1 xii)

Gu-du-du

122.56

Lugal-ezem

Šeš-kal-la BRM 3 148 (Š 47 ix)

17.33

d

Ur- šul-pa-è kù-dím

énsi e

c

3.67 0.44

im é-šu-sum-ma-da ⌈ku4⌉-ra; šà unuki; value of 5 gín kù huš-a 15-ta

75 d

šà nibruki

30

dalla eme5-gal-šè

0.09

ditto; kù-sig17

0.10 f

210

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text

Expender a

Recipient

Description

CST 542 (IS 2 vi)

Da-da-ga

Lugal-dub-lá-e

si-ì-tum níg-kas7-ak du11-ga-gi-na; máš-bi ì-íb-gar; before 8 witnesses

MVN 16 864 (IS 3)

Gu-du-du

⌈Ha-ba-gi-na⌉

lá-NI du11-ga-gi-na; Seal inscription of Ha-ba-gi-na broken

Silver (shekels) 40 0.50

Notes a

Italics indicate an expender whose name does not appear in the text, but to whom the expenditures recorded therein can be attributed based on the attestation of the mašdare’a tax; see also table 4.1. b Seal inscription: u r - ⌈ d ⌉ š á r a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - u š u r 4 / n u - b à n d a g u 4 d š á r a . c

Seal inscription: u r - d š u l - p a - è / d u m u k ù - s a 6 - g a / k ù - d í m . d Value of gold converted to silver. Seal inscription in completeness: d š u - d s u e n / l u g a l k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u ba / a-a-kal-la / énsi / ummaki / árad-zu.

e

f

Amount of gold whose value not converted into silver.

Table 4.6.A. Itemization of silver account ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) sag-níg-gur11-ra-kam Payer(s)

Silver a (shekels)

Description

An unknown number of lines lost [...] Kù-dnin-ur4-ra A-tu

[...]; obv. iii 1’

[...]+⌈60⌉

kù zú-lum; obv. iii 3’ kù

giš

hašhur; obv. iii 4’

⌈23.83⌉ [...]+1.03

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun; obv. iii 8’-10’

16.78

kù sám udu máš; obv. iii 11’

[...]

sám gu4; obv. iii 13’

[...]

d

Šára-ì-zu

[...]

Gu-du-du

[...]

Uš-mu

[...] [...]

Two or three lines lost Lugal-nesag-e d

Ur- nin-su sipa

kù eša dinanna zabalam4ki; obv. iv 1’-3’

[...]+2

lá-NI su-ga síg kuš-bi-šè ze-ra; received from Lú-dha-ìa; obv. iv 4’-7’

1.50

kù mun-gazi; obv. iv 8’

6.79

kù mun-gazi; obv. iv 10’

4.85

Šeš-kal-la dumu a-rí-bi

kù lá-NI su-ga gi; obv. iv 12’

5.50

Lugal-hé-gal dumu ur-dsuen

kù á šu-ku6-e-ne; obv. iv 14’-15’

10

Ur-dutu ⌈enku⌉

obv. iv 16’-17’

32

[...]

obv. iv 18’

Šà-kù-ge sipa

3

20+[...]

Two or three lines lost

211

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

⌈Gu⌉-du-du

rev. i 1

lú-SAR-ke4-ne

kù Ú.[...]; rev. i 2-3

dam-gàr-ne

rev. i 4-5

en-ku ù agar4-nígin-e-ne

kù pa-mušen; rev. i 6-7

Árad-mu dumu gú-TAR

rev. i 8-9

Na-ba-sa6 Šeš-a-ni

[...] 5 311.33 10 1.83

lá-NI su-ga á érin-na; rev. i 10-12

sipa a-a-kal-la énsi

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun; rev. i 13-14

Kù-dnin-ur4-ra

lá-NI su-ga še lú-níg-dab5-ba-bala-a-ka; rev. i 16 lá-NI su-ga ì-nun; rev. i 17

Ur-é-maš

lá-NI su-ga máš; received from A-du; rev. i 19-20

A-tu

lá-NI su-ga ì-nun; dated to ŠS 6; rev. i 22-23 rev. i 25-26 Subtotal 1

1 2 1.50 40 8.83 6 3.22 185.05 ⌈1163.56⌉ b

rev. ii 1 Subtotal 2 rev. ii 4 Total

1348.61

šà-bi-ta ... zi-ga-àm Recipient

énsi

Silver a (shekels)

Description máš-da-ri-a lugal ezem-3-a-ba; har kìri-gu4 & har-didi; rev. ii 7-8

724

ditto; value of 5 gín kù-sig17-huš-a 15-ta; rev. ii 9-12

75

níg-buru14-da ku4-ra; value of 4 gín kù-sig17-huš-a 15-ta; rev. ii 13-14

60

⌈ku6⌉ nisig-da ku4-ra šà nibruki; ditto; rev. ii 15-17

60

máš-da-ri-a dšu-dsuen; šà tum-malxki; ditto; rev. ii 18-20

60

máš-da-ri-a di-bí-dsuen lugal-e àga šu-ti-a; value of 10 gín kù-sig17-huš-a 15-ta; rev. ii 21-23

150

[níg-ba] dsuen-dingir-šu sagi alan dšu-dsuen é-dšára-ka ku4-ra; har; rev. ii 24-iii 1

40

níg-ba ur-dig-alim lú-àga alan dšu-dsuen é-dgu-la-ka ku4-ra; har; rev. iii 2-5

40

níg-ba ha-ba-at lú-kin-gi4-a lugal á-ág-gá sig5 di-bíd suen-e nam-lugal šu ti-a de6-a; har; rev. iii 6-7

40

212

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

[diri]

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà ummaki; níg-dab5-zà-mu-ka; rev. iii 10-12

4

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà a-pi4-sal4ki; ditto; rev. iii 13-17

1.50

úgu dam-gàr ba-a-gar; rev. iii 18-19

173.08

diri níg-kas7-ak ŠS 8; rev. iii 20

⌈75.24⌉

Total

1502.82

1502.82 minus 1348.61

[154.21]

Notes a

Italic numbers represent the value of red gold (kù-sig17-huš) converted to silver. All numbers include allowances for weight adjustment (sag-na4-bi) and production loss (izi-gu7-bi) whenever they apply.

b

Calculated by restoring rev. ii 1 as ⌈šu-nígin⌉ 1(u) 9(diš) ⌈ma-na⌉ [2(u) 3(diš)] ½ gín 1(u) 2(diš) še kù-babbar (= rev. ii 4 minus rev. i 25-26). This restoration amounts to 19 shekels more than that of D’Agostino and Pomponio (2005, 178).

Table 4.6.B. Itemization of silver account ZA 95 191 (IS 1) sag-níg-gur11-ra-kam Payer(s)

Silver a (shekels)

Description

About 12 lines broken Lú-dšul-gi-ra

maš a-šà-ga ma-da ummaki; obv. i 2’-4’

Lugal-nesag-e

[maš a-šà]-ga èš-didli; obv. i 5’-7’

d

ki

[Lú]- šul-gi-ra

kù ku6 ma-da umma ; obv. i 10’-12’

d

Ur- utu ⌈enku⌉

kù nam-enku; obv. i 13’-15’

[...]

kù ku6; obv. i 17’

[...]+9.07 2.40 [...]+5 [...]+0.13 5

About 10 lines broken [...] dumu a-lu5-lu5

obv. ii 1’-2’

[...]

d

giš

20

d

giš

10

Lú- nin-šubur nu- kiri6 Lú- nin-ur4-ra nu- kiri6 d

Ur- -muš-da d

giš

Ur- a-šár nu- kiri6 d

Šára-zi-da lú-ì-gár

3 kù nam-DU; obv. ii 3’-11’

4 3

Al-la dumu ur-ur

1

Á-nin-gá-ta gudu4 dgu-la

10

sanga-ne

lá-NI su-ga lú-níg-dab5-ba bala-a; obv. ii 12’-13’

27.33

kù še lá-NI su-ga gur7; obv. ii 14’-15’

100

d

lá-NI su-ga; gìr lú- šára; obv. ii 16’

4

lá-NI su-ga; gìr uš; obv. ii 17’-18’

3

gìr lú-nam-ha-ni; obv. ii 19’-20’

[...]+0.90

213

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

[...-dnin]-ur4-ra

lá-NI su-ga dated to ŠS 9?; obv. ii 21’-24’

[...]+0.02

[Lugal]-nesag-e

sám udu gú-na; obv. iii 1’-2’

[...]+0.17

énsi

obv. iii 3’-4’

[...]

É-gal-e-si

lá-NI su-ga; obv. iii 5’-6’

3.50?

About 5 lines broken

É-lu-bi-zu

5

La-ni-mu

5

Gur4-za-an

5

Ur-an-zi-za

3

Ur-dun

1

Pàd-da

5

Lú-dingir-ra

5

d

5

d

5

Lú- nanna Ur- ma-mi Ba-zi-ge

6

kù á; obv. iii 7’-27’

d

Lú- nin-šubur

6

Uru-bar-re

5

Igi-sa6-sa6

4

Lugal-hi-li

4

d

Inim- šára

6

d

Ur- nun-gal túg-du8

1

d

Ur- suen dumu lugal-bàd

5

Im-ta-è-a!-ta

3

Ur-dni9-gar (dumu puzur4-é-a)

2

About 3 lines broken A-du d

lá-NI su-ga; obv. iv 2’-3’

10

Ur- šára dumu gú-ù-la

lá-NI su-ga kù udu máš; obv. iv 4’-5’

Ha-lu5-lu5

á gul-la simug-ne; obv. iv 6’-7’

10

Lugal-dištaran gudu4

lá-NI su-ga; received from Ur-dnun-gal; obv. iv 8’-10’

7

Lú-dha-ìa

kù gu4 gú-na ŠS 9; obv. iv 11’-13’

7

Lú-du10-ga gudu4

Received from Šeš-a-ni; obv. iv 14’-15’

3

Šeš-kal-la

Received from Lú-du10-ga ugula; obv. iv 16’-17’

1

Be-lí

Received from árad-mu; obv. iv 18’-19’

1

Gìr-ni dumu lú-še-[...]

Received from Ur-gú-eden-na; obv. iv 20’

1

Á-ni-[...]

Received from Ur-gú-eden-na; obv. iv 21’-22’

1

214

0.67

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

dumu lú-[dnin]-ur4-ra

0.50

NE.⌈ NE⌉-[...]

1

Inim-⌈ ma⌉-[ni-zi] dumu ba-a-⌈mu⌉

0.50

A-ba-ki

0.50

?

1

Ur- ⌈ gigir⌉

0.50

PA.HU

.[...]

giš

HAR.HAR

Ur-[...]

0.50

kù á ⌈bala⌉-[a]; obv. iv 23’-rev. i 9

0.25

Šeš-kal-la [...]

0.92

d

Ur- šul-pa-⌈è⌉ dumu a-ni-[mu?]

1

dumu al-⌈ba⌉-[ni-du11]

1

A-a-kal-la

0.33

Lú-du10-ga [...]

0.50

Gìr-mu-[...]

0.50

Lugal-[...]-šu-[...]

1.67

enku ù agar4-[nígin-e-ne]

kù pa-mušen; rev. i 10-11

10

dam lú-du10-ga dumu ni9-gar-ki-du10

rev. i 12-13

23

Lú-dšára

kù ku6-mun; rev. i 14-15

1

dam-gàr-e-ne

rev. i 16-17

200

kù zú-lum; rev. i 18 d

Kù- nin-ur4-ra

kù ì-nun; rev. i 19 kù geštin

Du-du

160.45

giš

hašhur

9.67 giš

pèš; rev. i 20-21

ki

kù eša zabalam ; rev. i 22-23

13.33 12

lá-NI su-ga síg; rev. i 24

2.70

kù síg kuš-bi-šè ze-ra; rev. i 25

0.90

[...]

kù kuš-bi-šè ze-ra; rev. i 27

0.50

[...]

kù kuš-bi-šè ze-ra; rev. i 28’

1

Šeš-kal-la ugula uru

An unknown number of lines broken Ur-dnin-su na-gada Lú-eb-gal na-gada

kù síg kuš-bi-šè ze-ra; received from Lú-[...]; rev. ii 1-8

Šà-kù-ge na-gada Lú-[...]

1.67 6.13 3.46

kù ⌈sám⌉; rev. ii 9-10

2

rev. ii 11-12 Subtotal 1

301.29 b

rev. ii 13 Subtotal 2

976.51 b

rev. ii 15 Total

1276.81 b

215

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

šà-bi-ta ... [zi]-ga-àm Recipient

Silver a (shekels)

Description máš-da-re6-a lugal ezem 3-kam; kìri-gu4 & har-didi; rev. ii 18 ditto; value of 5 gín kù-sig17 huš-a 15-ta; rev. iii 1-4

75

níg-buru14-da ku4-ra; value of 4 gín kù-sig17 huš-a 15-ta; rev. iii 5-7

60

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà ummaki; níg-dab5 zà-mu-ka; rev. iii 8

4

šu-nir gú-eden-na šà a-pi4-sal4ki; ditto; rev. iii 9-11 úgu dam-gàr-e-ne ba-a-gar; rev. iii 12-13 Ba-ba-ti

igi-kár a-a-kal-la énsi ba-úš-a ŠS 7; rev. iii 14-17 diri níg-kas7-ak ŠS 9; rev. iii 18 rev. iv 1 Total

[diri]

⌈724⌉

1.50 394.18 32 154.21 1444.89

rev. iv 3 (=1444.89 minus 1276.81)

168.08

Notes a

Italic numbers represent the value of red gold (kù-sig17-huš) converted to silver. All numbers include allowances for weight adjustment (sag-na4-bi) and production loss (izi-gu7-bi) whenever they apply.

b

All three numbers are calculated according to the transliteration of D’Agostino and Pomponio 2005, 193, rev. ii 11-15. Note that the total recorded in the text amounts to one shekel less than the sum of the two subtotals.

216

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Tables for Chapter Five Table 5.1. List of merchants and their records Name

Text

Summary

A-a-gi-na

BPOA 1 1273 (Š 46 iv)

Da-da-ga receiving from him a slave working for 10 months (Š 45 vii-46 iv)

TJAMC IOS 1 (ŠS 7)

65 ⅔ shekels of silver from him to be transferred to Gu-du-du

Ledgers pl. 27 15 (ŠS 7)

níg-kas7-ak kù a-a-kal-la ⌈dumu⌉ ur-ddumu-zi-[da]

Santag 6 327 (ŠS 9 xi)

Gu-du-du receiving from him 50 shekels of silver

TJAMC IOS 6 (pl. 49) (ŠS 9 xii)

Receipt of silver to buy barley

UTI 5 3406 (ŠS 9)

Receiving from Ur-dutu 79,920 units of fish

Nisaba 9 18 (Š 38/ŠS 5 xii)

Supposedly sealing for 180,000 liters of barley received by Lú-du10-ga the sanga-priest of dEn-líl

Santag 6 192 (AS 8 vii)

Offering 1 drinking vessel made of silver weighing 60 shekels as mu-DU dšára

RA 49 88 13 (AS 6)

Offering a lamb for dGu-la on tour

A-za-za-mu

TLB 3 153 (Š 40 vi)

Receiving 300 liters of flour from Ur-zu?; sealed by Akal-la, scribe & son of Ur-ni9-gar

Á-zi-da

MVN 14 219 (month ii)

As a witness (lú-inim-⌈ma⌉-bi) to 1,800 liters of barley received by Lugal-me-du10-ga

Ba-sig5

SAT 2 188 (Š 38)

Receiving 5 /6 shekels of silver from Pada; sealed tablet passed from Pada to the scribe Lugal-ezem, who sealed SAT 2 188

SACT 2 289 (no date)

Offering [2] garments as mu-DU den-ki

obv. 8

AnOr 7 374 (no date)

Renting 2 ½ iku of land from Sag-ku5

obv. iii 5’-8’

Bur-ma-ma

BPOA 7 2490 (no date)

níg-sám-ma-šè bur-ma-ma dam-gàr

Dingir-kal-la

BIN 5 346 (ŠS 9 i)

Identified as father of Ur-sa6-ga who purchased 3 slaves & of Lugal-á-zi-da, one of the 6 such witnesses (lú-inim-ma-bi)

Dingir-sa6-ga

YOS 18 73 (month vii)

Receiving a total of 600 liters of flour; verified by Dada-a

A-a-kal-la son of Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Á-dingir

A-ga-ga

Location

obv. 5-rev. 2 rev. 3 rev. 1-3

rev. 5

5

Ba-zi-ge

217

Beginning of rev.

rev. 4 obv. 8 & rev. 13

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Name

Inim-ma-dingir

Inim-ma-ni-zi

Text

Summary

SNAT 321 (AS 2)

As one of the 4 such witnesses (lú ki-ba gub-ba) to a loan transaction

rev. 8

BM 106495 (AS 5 ix)

As one of the 3 such witnesses (lú ki-ba gub-ba) to a legal case

rev. 4

BM 110171 (AS 7 xii)

As one of the 8 such witnesses (igi PN-šè) to the sale of a date-palm orchard measuring 77 sar

rev. 8

AOS 32 KK26 (ŠS 2 v)

6 shekels of high-quality gold of him received by the silversmith Ur-dšul-pa-è from Lú-kal-la

BM 106451 (no date)

As one of the 5 such witnesses (igi PN-šè) to a legal case concerning possibly the legacy of the head gardener Ur-lugal

TCL 5 6052 (AS 5)

níg-kas7-ak inim-ma-ni-zi dam-gàr

MVN 9 212 (ŠS 1 xii)

10 shekels of silver of him labeled as repaid arrears and price of a slave (sám sag)

CST 676 (ŠS 2 vi)

Receiving probably 120 liters of barley as šuku

Inim-téš-ša

Location

rev. 10

rev. 16

See Ka-téš-ša

Ka-ka

Nisaba 6 27 (Š 32 v)

Contributing 15 liters of barley for his a-ru-a as part of še-ba géme-tur é dšára

Ka-téš-ša

SNAT 365 (AS 6)

níg-kas7-ak ka-téš-ša

Ku5-da

Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii)

níg-kas7-ak ku5-da dam-gàr

Kù-dšára

Nisaba 23 26 (ŠS 5)

A number of individuals are described as ki kù-dšára dam-gàr

rev. 18

Sale Documents 89 (Š 36 xi 1)

As one of the 3 such witnesses (lú-ki-inim-ma) to the sale of a 3-sar house

Line 7

AnOr 12 102 3 (no date)

Buying a slave named Ì-sa6-ga from her father Urd ištaran for 2 ½ shekels of silver

StBibFran. 4 5 (month xii)

2,100 liters of barley of him listed among various amounts of 5 other people; relationship between barley and people unclear; colophon é-KU-SAL-ka / iti dli9-si4 ù d dumu-zi

obv. 4

ASJ 18 166 8 (no date)

Taking? a loan worth 30 shekels of silver; colophon láNI ù ur5 / níg-gur11 šeš-kal-la dumu du10-ga

rev. i 2-3

SAT 3 2082 (no date)

A list of valuable items made of metals and precious stones Lu5-lu5 stole from him

Santag 6 377 (no date)

In association with oil & silver but without specific amounts; colophon ur5 ku-li ur-dli9-si4-ke4 in-su

rev. 4-6

Father of Níg-sig5 who sold a 3-sar house to Ni9-garki-du10

Line 4

Lú-bùlug-gá

Lú-dingir-ra

Lú-gu-la father of Sale Documents 89 Níg-sig5 (Š 36 xi 1)

218

obv. vii 37-38

Line 3 & 7

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Name

Text

Summary

AOS 32 18 (Š 46 i)

Conveying 12 ½ shekels of silver received by Da-daga from Ur-[ddumu]-zi-da

RO 5 9 8 (AS 2 diri)

Receiving 6 shekels of silver in the zi-ga section of níg-kas7-ak ur-sila-luh dam-gàr

Ledgers pl. 11 7 (AS 5)

níg-kas7-ak lú-dinanna dam-gàr

SNAT 356 (AS 5)

níg-kas7-ak lú-dinanna

AnOr 7 374 (no date)

Renting? 7 ½ iku of land from Lú-bala-sig5 the overseer

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x)

Conveying 60 shekels of silver in the sag-níg-gur11-rakam section of [níg-kas7]-ak ur-ddumu-[zi]-da [damgàr]

Nik. 2 447 (AS 3 xi)

Identified as ugula dam-gàr-ne; as one of the 10 such witnesses (igi-PN-šè) in a legal case concerning the property of Ur-sila-luh

rev. 13

AnOr 12 101 1 (ŠS 4 ix)

As one of the 4 such witnesses (lú ki-ba gub-ba) to a lawsuit concerning a wrecked boat

rev. 6

OrSP 2 64 8 Wengler 28 (Š 39 v)

Á-bí-lí-a receiving from him 240 liters of fish

Sale Documents 90 (Š 39)

Purchasing a female slave of Šeš-kal-la for 4 shekels of silver.

AUCT 1 540 (Š 39)

Ur-dda-mu the majordomo receiving from him sesame oil, lard, reeds, wool, silver, & date-palm fibers

YOS 4 48 (Š 44/IS 3 xii)

As one of the 3 such witnesses (igi-PN-šè) to a loan worth 1 shekel of silver dÈr-ra-gur took from [Urd ]⌈si4⌉-an-na

Chicago Oriental Institute A 2697 (AS 8 vi)

Offering 16 minas + 8 liters of resins & condiments as mu-DU dšára; offering also described as á lú-dšára

UTI 3 2284 (ŠS 5 vi)

His garden of 36 date-palm trees, w/ total yield estimated at 290 liters

Aleppo 120 (Š 33 viii)

Receiving from Šeš-a-ni 60 minas of willow boughs

MVN 15 390 (Š 37 vii)

His arrears of 100 work-days due from month iii to month vii calculated

BM 105364 (ŠS 1 v)

Receiving some barley (amount lost); diri-šè kišib lú-níg-dab5-ba-ke4-ne

rev. 23

MVN 21 329 (no date)

Receiving 93,600 liters of barley

rev. i 6

Lugal-gišgigir-re

OrSP 47-49 484 (no date)

One of the 5 people assigned to work in a hamlet located in a-šà lá-mah

obv. 2

Lugal-kù-zu

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. Simply being mentioned; context unclear due to 1924-666 (AS 3) broken lines

Lú-dinanna

Lú-dnanna

d

Lú- šára

Lú-dutu

Lugal-é-mah-e

Location

219

rev. 5

obv. iii 1’-4’ obv. i 8-9

obv. 4-rev. 3

obv. 9-19

obv. i 39-40; viii 16-17; rev. iv 21-22

rev. iii 2

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Name

Text

Summary

AOS 32 18 (Š 46 i)

Conveying 20 shekels of silver received by Da-da-ga from Ur-[ddumu]-zi-da

MVN 16 685 (ŠS 2)

Providing 11,196 bundles of reeds in the virtual sagníg-gur11-ra-kam section of níg-kas7-ak ur-dšul-pa-è ù lú-dšára

obv. 5

ASJ 11 154 (ŠS 2)

Purchasing an unknown amount of reeds & barley as bala

rev. 15-16

BPOA 7 1995 (no date)

Identified as son of Na-ba-sa6

SA 53 (Pl. 75) (no date)

4,775 liters of bitumen & 20 units of timber received from him

Syracuse 481 (Š 31 ix)

Receiving 1,800 liters of barley from Ma-an-sum

YOS 4 287 (Š 34 vi)

Receiving from A-kal-la 5 shekels of silver

MVN 15 390 (Š 37 vii)

His arrears of 100 work-days due from month iii to month vii calculated

MVN 3 186 (Š 40)

Receiving 6,000 liters of barley

BJRL 22 173 (IS 2 ii)

Gu-du-du receiving from him 3 ½ shekels of silver as price (sám) of nin-ù-šim-e dumu-munus al-lu

Lugal-si-NE-e

BPOA 6 1149 (Š 25 v)

Providing 3 donkeys for A-kal-la the chief plot manager

Lugal-zar-[...]

AR RIM 4 8 (Š 46)

Appearing in the seal inscription as father of Urd dumu-zi

NE.NE

Christie’s 2001xxxx a (Š 48)

Lugal-níg-lagar-e son of Na-ba-sa6

Lugal-sa6-ga

Lugal-sig5

Ni9-gar-ki-du10

Níg-ú-rum son of Ur-d⌈nin?⌉-[...]

Pàd-da

Location

As one of the witnesses (igi-PN-šè) in a legal case

Santag 6 205 (AS 9)

Lú-kal-la receiving from him 10 shekels of “silver of salt”

UTI 3 2263 (ŠS 9)

Ha-lu5-⌈lu5⌉ receiving from him 3 ¼ minas of bronze

MVN 13 864 (no date)

Taking a loan of 60 shekels of silver from Ur-éš-dam to be repaid on the 15th day of month x; before 2 witnesses (igi-PN-šè)

Ontario 2 393 (Š 32 vii)

La-a-mu receiving from him ½ mina of su-gan & copper

BPOA 7 2552 (Š 32 vi)

La-a-mu receiving from him 20 minas of copper

RA 12 20 3 (Š 35 vi)

Ur-ni9-gar the blacksmith receiving from Lú-bàn-da 10 minas of copper & 0.17 mina of su-gan provided by him

MVN 15 390 (Š 37 vii)

His arrears of 100 work-days due from month iii to month vii calculated

SAT 2 174 (Š 37)

Lugal-ezem, scribe & son of Lugal-é-mah-e the majordomo, receiving from him sealed tablets of UrNisaba, which record 235 liters of sesame oil & 4 liters+3 minas of resins

220

rev. 1

obv. iii 59-60; xx: 65-66; rev. vi 16-17

obv. 15

obv. 1-2

obv. i 41-42; viii 20-21; rev. iv 25-26

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Name

Pàd-da

Text

Summary

Location

MVN 3 374 (Š 38)

Lugal-ezem, scribe & son of Lugal-é-mah-e the majordomo, receiving from him 60 liters of lard

SAT 2 188 (Š 38)

Lugal-ezem, scribe & son of Lugal-é-mah-e the majordomo, receiving from him sealed tablets concerning wool?, bitumen, alkali, & silver, which he supplied to Dingir-ra and Ba-sig5

Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44)

Lugal-⌈bàd⌉ receiving from him gypsum, bitumen, resins, spices, fruits, vegetables, beer

OrSP 47-49 249 (Š 45)

Conveying a purchased boat loaded with bitumen and other plants weighing 2,700 minas; the boat received by Lú-sa6-ì-zu from Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6

rev. ii 92

YOS 4 295 (Š 45)

Receiving a variety of products including resins, reeds, lentils, etc. from Lú-pa-è, a maškim; cf. SAT 2 434 (Š 45)

rev. 18-19

SAT 2 434 (Š 45)

Receiving a variety of products from Lú-pa-è; cf. YOS 4 295 (Š 45)

MVN 4 132 (Š 45/AS 2)

Lugal-ezem receiving from him 14

OrSP 47-49 330 (Š 46 vi)

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6, scribe & son of Ur-dištaran, receiving from him 300 minas of ú-sikil

SAT 2 510 (Š 46)

Ka5-a, chief kitchen administrator & son of Lugal-kùga-ni, receiving from him 20 liters of onions

BM 105345 (AS 1)

Receiving 60 liters of chick peas & 60 liters of dates from Ur-ddumu-zi-da; his lá-NI of each product reckoned

SAT 2 706 (AS 2)

Ur-dšul-pa-è, scribe & son of Lugal-kù-ga-ni, receiving from him 325.67 liters of sesame oil & 449.67 liters of lard; repeated in Ledgers pl. 2 2 (AS 3) obv. 8-12.

SAT 2 392 (Š 44 viii)

Supplying 5 shekels of silver as repaid arrears to Lugal-ezem the scribe

Ledgers pl. 2 2 (AS 3)

níg-kas7-ak pàd-da dam-gàr

SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4)

Receiving 36,000 liters of barley in the sag-níg-gur11ra-kam section of níg-kas7-ak še lú-kal-la ki árad-ta

5

/6 shekels of silver

obv. 13-14 rev. 15’-16’

obv. i 3-4

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. níg-kas7-ak pàd-da dam-gàr 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Ledgers pl. 8 5 (AS 5)

níg-kas7-ak pàd-da dam-gàr

Ledgers pl. 6 4 (AS 5)

níg-kas7-ak pàd-da

STA 23 (AS 6 xi)

níg-kas7-ak pàd-da dam-gàr

BPOA 6 1323 (AS 6)

Supplying 6 units of timber for making a door of éd amar-dsuen

Nisaba 6 34 (AS 6)

Receiving 54,000 units of fish to be transferred to Lúkal-la; in the zi-ga section of ⌈níg⌉-kas7-ak nam-enku ⌈ur⌉-dutu-ka

AUCT 1 774 (AS 7 vii)

Ur-gišgigir, son of Lugal-gaba, receiving from him c. 5 ⅔ minas of copper

221

obv. ii 6-7

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Name

Pàd-da

Puzur4-a-šur5 father of Ìl-su-rabí

Sag-ku5

d

Šára-kam

Šeš-kal-la

Text

Summary

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix)

níg-kas7-ak pàd-da

NATN 805 (AS 7)

566 minas of wool transferred onto his account; úgu níg-kas7 dam-gàr ⌈gá⌉-gá-dam

UTI 3 1693 (AS 9 x)

Conveying 3 workers towing a boat loaded with lard from Nag-su to Nippur

ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS 1 vii)

níg-kas7-ak pàd-da

BPOA 2 2161 (ŠS 2 xii)

Ur-é-mah, scribe & son of Da-da, receiving from him 1,920 minas of bitumen

BPOA 1 1199 (ŠS 3 ix)

Ab-ba-gi-na, scribe & son of Lugal-má-gur8-re, receiving from him 120 minas of bitumen

YOS 4 270 (ŠS 3 diri)

Paying 1 shekel of silver as repaid arrears, labeled as maš-da-⌈re6-a⌉

Ledgers pl. 21 12 (ŠS 5)

níg-kas7-ak pàd-da dam-gàr

BCT 2 83 (IS 1 v)

Gu-du-du receiving a total of 5 shekels of silver as his “wage” in both ŠS 9 and IS 1

UTI 6 3800 (no date)

Location

Mentioned as father of Ìl-su-ra-bí who contributed a piece of jewelry, probably as mu-DU

Ontario 2 239 (Š 39)

Receiving 5,230 liters of barley; sealed by La-ni-mu, scribe & son of Ur-ni9-gar

Aleppo 254 (Š 45)

Working 55 days under the overseer A-a-gi-na; sealed by La-ni-mu

TCL 5 6162 (AS 4)

níg-kas7-ak sag-ku5 dam-gàr

MVN 1 243 (no date)

One of the 10 people working under dŠára-a-mu the overseer

Nebraska 39 (month xi)

Receiving 5,830 liters of barley; in the zi-ga section of níg-kas7-ak la-ni-mu

MVN 1 243 (no date)

Mention on a roster?

obv. 3-4

rev. ii 1-2 obv. 5-6 obv. 4

obv. 1 rev. i 71-72

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. Offering at least 10 linen pieces as mu-DU dalim-mah 1911-227 (IS 3 i)

obv. 3-4

SAT 2 639 (Š 22)

Allocated? 446 onions

rev. i 13

MVN 20 198 (Š 27 xii)

A-ab-ba receiving from him 4,800 minas? of bitumen?

NATN 218 (Š 30 vii)

1,050 liters of barley loaded? into his boat in the zi-ga section of níg-kas7-ak ù-ma-ni

Umma 98 (Š 33 viii)

Lú-dšára receiving from him 20 minas of bitumen

Princeton 1 532 (Š 34)

Lugal-inim-gi-na, scribe & son of Lugal-nesag-e, receiving from him 10 liters of bitumen & 20 minas of date-palm fibers

Syracuse 108 (Š 35)

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6 receiving from him 10 punting poles & 10 gišlá-⌈X⌉

222

obv. 12

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Name

Šeš-kal-la

Šu-dnisaba

Text

Summary

Location

SET 243 (Š 35)

Simply being mentioned

SAT 2 613 (Š 47)

Na-ba-sa6!, scribe & son of A.KA.DUL, receiving from him 12,660 liters of bitumen

Orient 16 63 75 (Š 48)

Na-ba-[sa6], scribe & son of A.KA.[DUL], receiving from him 3,600 liters of bitumen

AOS 32 7 (Š 48)

Na-ba-sa6, scribe & son of A.⌈KA⌉.[ DUL], receiving 357 liters of bitumen from him

SAT 2 646 (AS 1)

Lú-igi-sa6-sa6, scribe & son of Ur-gišgigir, receiving from him 100 liters of bitumen & 120 liters of alkali

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3)

níg-kas7-ak šeš-kal-la dam-gàr

Santag 6 120 (AS 3)

níg-kas7-ak šeš-kal-la dam-gàr

SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4)

Receiving 36,000 liters of barley in the capital section of níg-kas7-ak še lú-kal-la ki árad-ta

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5)

níg-kas7-ak šeš-kal-la dam-gàr

Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5)

níg-kas7-ak šeš-⌈kal-la⌉

BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi)

níg-kas7-ak šeš-kal-la dam-gàr

AUCT 1 774 (AS 7 vii)

Ur-gišgigir, son of Lugal-gaba, receiving from him c. 5 minas of copper

NATN 805 (AS 7)

630 minas of wool transferred onto his account; úku níg-kas7 dam-gàr ⌈gá⌉-gá-dam

MVN 16 910 (AS 9)

níg-kas7-ak šeš-kal-la dam-gàr

YOS 4 54 (AS 9)

Ama-ni-ba-an-sa6-ga taking from him an interest-free loan of 675 liters of barley before 2 witnesses; loan to be repaid in month iv

MVN 16 1195 (ŠS 3 vi)

Ab-ba-gi-na receiving from him chick peas, lentils, & coriander; sealed by Lú-d[šára], scribe & son of Ur⌈ša⌉-[ga]

Prima dell’alfabeto no. 22 (ŠS 5)

Šà-kù-ge son of Hé-sa6-ga receiving from him 6 units of timber

CUT CUA b (ŠS 9)

Šára-kam receiving from him 120 liters of gišhašhur duru5; recorded on tablet passed to Ur-dnun-gal, scribe & son of Ur-d⌈šára⌉ the archivist, who sealed CUT CUA b

Rochester 160 (no date)

Contributing 1 garment

Torino 2 654 (Š 46)

Conveying 10 shekels of silver as repaid arrears of barley received by Da-da-ga from Inim-dinanna

223

rev. i 99

obv. i 5-6

obv. 5-6

obv. ii 32

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Name

d

Ur- a-šár son of Ur-ddumuzi-da

Ur-ab-zu

Ur-àm-ma

Ur-dingir-ra

Ur-ddumu-zi-(da)

Text

Summary

Location

SET 243 (Š 35)

240 liters of barley of him conveyed by A-kal-la from the threshing floor íd sal4-laki; 20,400 liters of barley of him conveyed by dŠára-muDU from the threshing floor of a-šà sipa-NE; colophon še apin-lá / a-šà dšára / ù a-šà lá-mah

RA 16 19 (Š 36 ix)

Receiving 30 roof beams in the zi-ga section of nígkas7-ak mu-NIR-da šà tum-ma-alki

UTI 5 3362 (ŠS 4)

4 date-palm trees of his located in KI.AN; total yield 120 liters

MVN 16 682 (ŠS 6)

5 date-palm trees of his located in KI.AN; total yield 85 liters

obv. 4-7

MVN 16 718 (no date)

60 liters of barley of his; identified as son of Urd dumu-zi-da

obv. 4-5

SET 184 (no date)

Receiving >13,950 liters of barley produced in a-šà lámah; in association with another 1,260 liters; both in the zi-ga section of a virtual balanced account

UTI 5 3336 (ŠS 3 iv)

5 shekels of silver of him listed as mu-DU

A 158 (no date)

5 shekels of silver? of him listed among silver of a group of people

Line 18

Sale Documents 90 (Š 39)

As one of the 4 such witnesses (lú-inim-ma) to a female slave purchased by Lú-dšára the “merchant”

rev. 12

OrSP 47-49 484 (no date)

One of the 7 people working under the [overseer] Urgú-eden-na

rev. 10

Ontario 2 72 (Š 46 xii)

Identified as dam-gàr? in the seal inscription; text about 270 liters of barley received by Ur-dingir-ra the chief livestock manager from Árad

BPOA 6 1369 (Š 32 v)

La-a-mu the blacksmith receiving 10 minas of copper from him

JCS 46 24 13 (Š 38)

Lugal-ezem, scribe & son of [Lugal-é-mah-e] the majordomo, receiving from him 600 liters of bitumen

RA 49 91 25 (Š 39)

Lugal-ezem, scribe & son of Lugal-é-⌈mah-e⌉ the majordomo, receiving from him a total of 450 liters of alkali for a variety of purposes

CTNMC 19 (Š 41 iv)

Ù-ma-ni, scribe & son of Nam-ha-ni, receiving from him 18 liters of bitumen

MVN 3 197 (Š 42 x)

A-kal-la, scribe & son of Ur-ni9-gar, receiving from him 20 shekels of silver

AAS 149 (Š 43 vii)

A-kal-la, scribe & son of Ur-ni9-gar, receiving from him 120 shekels of silver

Princeton 1 565 (Š 43)

A-kal-la, scribe & son of Ur-ni9-gar the chief livestock manager, receiving from him 160 shekels of silver

MVN 14 157 (Š 43)

Conveying 32 shekels of silver received by A-kal-la from Nin-me-lám

Syracuse 174 (Š 44)

Lú-igi-sa6-sa6, scribe & son of Ur-gišgigir-re, receiving from him 510 liters of bitumen

NABU 1989 95 6 (Š 45)

8 shekels of silver transferred to him from Lugal-ezem

224

obv. i 22 obv. ii 46-47 rev. iv 28-29

obv. 6-rev. 14

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Name

Ur-ddumu-zi-(da)

Text

Summary

Location

AOS 32 18 (Š 46 i)

Da-da-ga receiving from him a total of 32 ½ shekels of silver

AR RIM 4 8 (Š 46)

[Receiving] 18,000 liters of barley from Árad; identified in the seal inscription as son of Lugal-zar[...] the merchant

SAKF 67 (Š 46)

Receiving 1,800 liters of alkali from Lugal-ezem; cf. BIN 5 197 (Š 46)

BIN 5 197 (Š 46)

Receiving 1,800 liters of alkali from Lugal-ezem; cf. SAKF 67 (Š 46)

Orient 16 62 71 (Š 47 xi)

Na-ba-sá, scribe & son of [A.KA.DUL], receiving from him 5 shekels of tin

BPOA 7 1848 (Š 47)

Receiving from Da-da-ga ca. 3 minas of silver

BPOA 7 1898 (Š 47)

Receiving 158,520 liters of dates & 60,000 liters of smoked fish from Ur-dšul-pa-è, scribe & son of Lugalkù-ga-ni

MVN 21 160 (Š 47)

Conveying 600 bundles of reeds received by La-ni-mu from énsi; identified as dam-gàr uri5ki-ma-ka

MVN 20 160 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga receiving from him copper, su-gan, & tin

Santag 6 82 (Š 47)

Da-da-ga receiving from him c. 490 shekels of silver

Santag 6 83 (Š 47)

La-ni-mu receiving from him alkali & gypsum

OrSP 47-49 295 (Š 48)

Providing 1,800 liters of sesame oil & 14 jars in the sag-níg-gur11-ra-kam section of níg-kas7-ak ì-lí-⌈dan⌉ [...]

BM 105345 (AS 1)

Four presumed-to-be dam-gàrs and a servant of the governor receiving from him vegetables, fruits, spices, ga SIG7; receiving 240 liters of barley of Ur-sila-luh as mu-DU

obv. 6-9 obv. 17 rev. 3’-4’

d

BIN 5 76 (AS 1)

Lú- nin-šubur, scribe & son of Du10-ga the majordomo, receiving from him 2 liters of honey

Santag 6 109 (AS 1)

A-du receiving from him 243 liters of alkali

SA 138 (Pl. 224) (AS 1)

Receiving from Lú-kal-la 895 liters of barley

SAT 2 722 (AS 2 xi)

Ur-dšul-pa-è receiving from him 5 liters of sesame oil

ASJ 9 317 9 (AS 2)

Šeš-sig5 receiving from him 300 liters of alkali; probably repeated in SET 274 (AS 2) obv. ii 25-26

SET 274 (AS 2)

300 liters of alkali received from him; probably repeated in ASJ 9 317 9 (AS 2)

Studies Jones 216 (AS 3 i)

níg-kas7-ak ur-ddumu-zi-da dam-gàr

MVN 16 1002 (AS 3 v)

Ur-dnin-tu receiving from him 300 liters of alkali; sealed by Lú-du10-ga, scribe & son of Du10-ga

225

obv. ii 25-26

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Name

Text

Summary

Location

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x)

[níg-kas7]-ak ur-ddumu-[zi]-da [dam-gàr]

MCS 2 69 BM 105442 (AS 3)

Ur-dšul-pa-è, scribe & son of Lugal-kù-ga-[ni], receiving from him figs, resins, honey, & gypsum as níg-dab5 du6-kù-ga; repeated in STA 22 (AS 4 i) obv. ii 1-11

Receiving 2,520 minas of wool in the zi-ga section of AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. níg-kas7-ak síg énsi-ka; repeated in Studies Jones 216 1924-666 (AS 3) (AS 3 i) obv. i 9-11 & i 19-ii 2

Ur-ddumu-zi-(da)

rev. ii 26-27

STA 22 (AS 4 i)

níg-kas7-ak ur-ddumu-zi-da dam-gàr

SAT 2 829 (AS 4 ix)

Taking a half-time worker Ur-dištaran from Lú-kìrizal; sealed by Lú-kal-la, scribe & son of Ur-e11-e the chief livestock manager

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4)

níg-kas7-ak ur-ddumu-zi-da dam-gàr

TCL 5 6046 (AS 4)

Conveying 55 shekels of silver in the zi-ga section of a virtual balanced account ascribed to dam-gàr-ne

rev. ii 9-12

TCL 5 6036 (AS 4)

Conveying 120 liters of bitumen received from Lú-kalla in the sag-níg-gur11-ra-kam section of [níg-kas7]-ak a-gu [dub]-⌈sar⌉ gašam

obv. iii 10

SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4)

Receiving 36,000 liters of barley in the sag-níg-gur11ra-kam section of níg-kas7-ak še lú-kal-la ki árad-ta; Conveying 4,475 liters of barley in zi-ga section

obv. i 1-2 rev. i 4-6

TCS 25 (AS 5 vii)

Ur-dnin-tu receiving from him 360 liters of alkali

RA 11 27 (AS 5 ix)

Lending 4,200 liters of barley to the spouse of Amarsi4 before 7 witnesses (4 lú-ki-inim-ma-me & 3 lú-kiba-gub-ba-me)

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi)

[níg-kas7]-⌈ak⌉ur-ddumu-zi-da

Syracuse 486 (AS 6)

Lú-kal-la, scribe & son of Ur-ni9-gar the chief livestock manager, receiving from him 10 shekels of resin

BPOA 7 2288 (AS 6)

Ab-ba-gi-na, scribe & son of Lugal-má-gur8-re, receiving from him 20 liters of bitumen & 2 liters of oil; repeated in Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) rev. iii 1-6.

BPOA 6 1323 (AS 6)

Supplying 2 units of timber for making a door of é d amar-dsuen

Torino 2 651 (AS 7 iii)

Lugal-nir-gál, scribe & servant of dŠára, receiving from him 60 liters of bitumen

BPOA 7 1616 (AS 7 iii)

Lú-dnin-šubur, scribe & son of Šeš-kal-la the scribe, received from him 120 liters of alkaline plants & 2 talents of gypsum; repeated in Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) obv. iii 19-23

BPOA 6 922 (AS 7 iv)

Níg-lagar-e, scribe & son of Lugal-gaba, receiving from him 80 liters of bitumen; repeated in Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) rev. i 13-15

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii)

níg-kas7-ak ur-ddumu-zi-da dam-gàr

226

rev. 3

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Name

Ur-ddumu-zi-(da)

Text

Summary

Location

AnOr 1 107 (AS 7 vii)

Uš-mu receiving from him 5 liters of bitumen

AUCT 1 774 (AS 7 vii)

Ur-gišgigir, son of Lugal-gaba, receiving from him 10 minas of copper

BRM 3 80 (AS 7 x)

Receiving a total of 24,000 liters of barley from the threshing floor of a hamlet

obv. 3-4, 9

NATN 805 (AS 7)

1,274 ½ minas of wool transferred onto his account; colophon úgu níg-kas7 dam-gàr ⌈gá⌉-gá-dam

obv. 1-2

STA 1 (AS 8 vii)

níg-kas7-ak ur-ddumu-zi-da dam-gàr

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii)

níg-kas7-ak ur-ddumu-zi-da

MVN 9 215 (AS 8)

Perhaps an inventory list: níg ur-ddumu-zi-da dam-gàr gál-la

BPOA 2 2371 (AS 8)

Lú-sa6-ì-zu, scribe & son of A-kal-la, receiving from him 20 units of timber

BPOA 1 491 (AS 9 viii)

Ur-dnun-gal, scribe & son of Ur-dšára, receiving from him 120 minas of gypsum & 120 liters of alkali; repeated in ASJ 11 204-216 obv. ii 13-16

BPOA 1 999 (AS 9)

Ì-kal-la receiving from him 2,400 minas of gypsum & 3,000 liters of alkali; repeated in ASJ 11 204-216 rev. iii 6-10

JRAS 1939 38 (AS 9)

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6, scribe & son of Ur-dištaran, receiving from him 2,740 liters + 6,600 minas of bitumen; his identification based on the parallel in ASJ 11 204-216 rev. iii 24-28 c

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9)

níg-kas7-ak níg-samx-ma ur-ddumu-zi-da dam-gàr

YOS 4 47 (ŠS 1 iii)

Receiving together w/ Ur-dšul-pa-è 510 shekels of silver from Lú-kal-la before 4 witnesses (igi-PN-šè)

UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri)

níg-kas7-ak ur-ddumu-zi-da dam-gàr

JCS 26 100 2 (ŠS 1)

Nin9-hi-lí-a, wife of then governor A-a-kal-la, 5 receiving from him 123 /6 minas+10 liters of resins

MVN 21 332 (ŠS 1)

Receiving 43,140 liters of barley in the virtual sag-níggur11-ra-kam section of níg-kas7-ak še dam-gàr

obv. 1-2

SAT 3 1201 (ŠS 1)

Conveying alkali, flour, bitumen, & clay to a kiln

obv. 1-4

AnOr 7 262 (ŠS 2 iii)

Receiving 50 minas of wool in the zi-ga section of nígkas7-ak síg

UTI 4 2307 (ŠS 2 iv)

Lú-dnin-šubur, scribe & son of Du10-ga a majordomo of dŠára, receiving from him >2 liters of ì-HI-nun-na; probably repeated in TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iv 10-11

UTI 4 2413 (ŠS 2 iv)

Šeš-kal-la, scribe & son of Du10?-⌈ga⌉, receiving from him 10 liters of bitumen; reduplicated in TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) obv. iv 15-18

Nisaba 9 57 (ŠS 2 xii)

Ur-é-mah, scribe & son of Da-da, receiving from him 144 liters of bitumen

227

rev. iii 11’-12’

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Name

Ur-ddumu-zi-(da)

Text

Summary

BPOA 2 2199 (ŠS 2 xii)

Ur-é-mah, scribe & son of Da-da, receiving from him 600 minas of bitumen

JCS 26 102 4 (ŠS 2)

Nin9-hi-lí-a, spouse of then governor A-a-kal-la, receiving from him 82 minas+27 liters of resins

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2)

níg-kas7-ak ur-[d]dumu-zi-da dam-gàr

JCS 24 165 78 (ŠS 3 iii)

Adding bronze to a copper cup received by Ha-lu5-lu5 from the cupbearer Ma-an-ba

BPOA 1 1437 (ŠS 3 iii)

Lú-dnám-an-ka, scribe & son of Lú-d[šára] the land surveyor, receiving from him 10 liters of bitumen

BPOA 2 2380 (ŠS 3 ix)

Ab-ba-gi-na, scribe & son of Lugal-má-gur8-re, receiving from him 60 liters of bitumen

BPOA 1 1400 (ŠS 3 xii)

Lugal-kù-zu, scribe & son of Ur-ni9-gar the chief livestock manager, receiving from him 300 liters of bitumen

BPOA 1 1019 (ŠS 3)

Ab-ba-gi-na, scribe & son of Lugal-má-gur8-re, receiving from him 20 liters of bitumen

JCS 26 106 8 (ŠS 4)

Nin9-hi-lí-a, wife of then governor A-a-kal-la, receiving from him 12 minas of resins

Ledgers pl. 37 21 (ŠS 4)

Receiving a total of 217 ½ shekels of silver to purchase various products in the zi-ga section of a virtual balanced account without ascription

SAT 3 1621 (ŠS 5 iv)

Lú-dnin-šubur, scribe & son of Du10-ga the majordomo of dŠára, receiving from him 240 minas+5 liters of bitumen

UTI 6 3532+3552 (ŠS 5 vi)

Gu-du-du receiving from him timber, resins, & datepalm fiber; sealed by Gu-du-du’s brother Inim-dšára the scribe

MVN 1 251 (ŠS 5 vi)

Conveying 25 shekels of silver in the zi-ga section of a virtual balanced account without ascription

MVN 16 1099 (ŠS 5 vi 11)

Níg-ú-rum, scribe & son of Lú-dšára, receiving from him 4 units of timber

UTI 4 2579 (ŠS 5)

Lú-dda-ni, scribe & son of Lugal-gišgigir-[re], receiving from him ⌈30⌉ units of timber

SAT 3 1613 (ŠS 5)

Lugal-nir, scribe & son of Ur-dšára the archivist, receiving from him ⅓ mina of níg-kešda & 2 minas of wax

SAT 3 1707 (ŠS 6)

Location

obv. 6-7

obv. 5-9

rev. 12-13

d

Šára-kam, scribe & son of Lugal-gišgigir, receiving from him 20 liters of bitumen

ASJ 9 234 5 (ŠS 6 xii)

In association with 18,000 liters of wheat

Santag 6 310 (ŠS 6)

785 liters of bitumen received from him in the sag-níggur11-ra-kam section of níg-kas7-ak lú-dnin-šubur

Ledgers pl. 27 15 (ŠS 7)

Identified as father of A-a-kal-la in the colophon

Rochester 136 (IS 2 xii)

Identified as father of Lugal-ur-sag in the seal inscription

MVN 13 860 (IS 3)

Identified as father of Ur-dšul-pa-è & dam-gàr dŠára in the seal inscription

228

obv. 1-2 obv. 5

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Name

d

Ur- dumu-zi-(da)

Ur-gišgigir

Text

Summary

Location

Nebraska 39 (month xi)

Identified as father of [A-a]-kal-la

obv. ii 33

Aleppo 436 (no date)

Receiving from Da-da-ga 108 ¼ shekels of silver

MVN 16 718 (no date)

Identified as father of Ur-da-šár

obv. 5

Nisaba 23 56 (no date)

Assigned with earthwork on a roster

rev. ii 3

Orient 10 104 165 (no date)

Associated with 2 chests made of copper

obv. 3-4

UTI 5 3274 (no date)

Conveying a wide range of products to the “house of a silversmith”

TCL 5 6047 (no date)

Selling off a boat with a capacity of 60 bushels

Sale Documents 93 =AUCT 1 949 (month vi)

Selling a male slave to Lú-dšára for 3 shekels of silver before 4 witnesses

RA 16 19 (Š 36 ix)

Receiving 43 roof beams in the zi-ga section of nígkas7-ak mu-NIR-da šà tum-ma-alki

Salesianum 4 174 1 (Š 38 xi)

Receiving from Lugal-ezem 240 minas of wool; supposedly sealed by A-kal-la

BPOA 7 2279 (Š 38 x)

Conveying 120 minas of wool received from Lugalezem by A-kal-la, scribe & son of Ur-ni9-gar the chief livestock manager

JCS 52 15 77 (ŠS 1 xi)

80 liters of barley of his listed among še ur5-ra mu-DU ⌈lugal⌉-ke4

AUCT 1 444 (ŠS 2 vi)

In association w/ a total of 11 minas of wool

obv. 18’-rev. 13 rev. ii 3

rev. iv 26-27

rev. 15

OrSP 47-49 500 (no date)

No barley allocated? to him from the yield of a-šà lámah; 2,725 liters of barley allolcated? to him from the threshing floor Da-bára of a-šà dšára; colophon KU še gub-ba-ka / lú apin-lá DAG de6-a / a-šà da-ummaki

MVN 1 238 (AS 5 ix?)

níg-kas7-ak ur-dištaran dam-gàr šà-bala-a iti-[...]

SAT 2 829 (AS 4 xii)

Taken by Ur-ddumu-zi-da as a half-time worker

Ur-kal-la

Santag 6 29 (Š 36 xii)

Receiving from Ur-ni9-gar silver, sesame oil, & barley

Ur-kal-la-mu son of Lugal-gišgigirre

Nik. 2 331 (Š 33 i)

Receiving 1,250 liters of sesame from Lú-dšára, son of Ni-a-mu; himself identified as son of Lugal-gišgigir-[re] in the seal inscription

MVN 15 390 (Š 37 vii)

His arrears of 100 work-days due from month iii to month vii calculated

TCL 5 5666 (no date)

His wife listed among wives & slaves of scribes, gendarmes as well as brewers

rev. 11

Nisaba 11 39 (no date)

Listed among a group of people

rev. 1

d

Ur- ištaran

Ur-dlamma

229

obv. iii 12 rev. i 2

obv. i 43-44; viii 18-19; rev. iv 23-24

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Name

Text

Summary

Ur-lugal

Chicago Oriental Institute A 2697 (AS 8 vi)

Offering a ma-al-tum bowl made of stone as mu-DU d šára

Ur-ni9-gar

YOS 4 267 (AS 7 vii)

Offering 27 items made of precious metals and stones as mu-DU dšára

Ur-dnin-mug-ga

BPOA 1 1748 (Š 35 xii)

Receiving from Ad-da 1,500 liters of barley from a granary at du6-kù-sig17

ArOr 62 238 I 867 (Š 41)

Supplying maš-da-re6-a á-ki- month vi; value of ⅓ ma-na kù-sig17 = 140 shekels of silver received from Lugal-ezem

MVN 14 77 (Š 41 xi)

Supplying 60 shekels of silver for ezem-mah-šè; received from Árad by A-kal-la

Studies Jones 216 (AS 3 i)

Contributing 120 shekels of silver in the sag-níg-gur11ra-kam section of níg-kas7-ak ur-ddumu-zi-da dam-gàr

obv. i 3-4

OrSP 47-49 484 (no date)

One of the 7 people working under the [overseer] Urgú-eden-na

rev. 11

BM 111052 (no date)

As one of the 5 such witnesses (igi-PN-šè) in a dispute concerning property

rev. 5

BCT 2 156 (AS 1)

His deposition before 5 witnesses that he does not have the seal of Ba-sa6-ga

BPOA 6 311 (AS 2 xi 6)

Receiving from Lú-kal-la 17,040 liters of barley for making purchases; identified as son of Ip-ti-dingir in the seal inscription

RO 5 9 8 (AS 2 diri)

níg-kas7-ak ur-sila-luh dam-gàr

RA 11 27 (AS 5 ix)

As one of the 5 such witnesses (igi-PN-šè & lú-kiinim-ma) to a loan of 4,200 liters of barley

obv. 7

SACT 2 289 (no date)

Offering 1 garment as mu-DU den-ki

rev. 13

Ur-dnin-su

Ur-sa6-ga-mu

Ur-sila-luh son of Ip-ti-dingir

d

Ur- suen

MVN 16 942 (ŠS 3) Ur-dšul-pa-è son of Ur-ddumu-zi-da CST 686 (no date) Ur-dutu

d

Utu-sig5

Location obv. 2 obv. ii 20-29

Offering 1 kid for dGu-la on tour Listed with other people on a roster?

obv. 4’

Vicino Oriente 8/1 66 (ŠS 8 vii)

Gu-du-du receiving from him 5 shekels of “silver of dates”

YOS 4 246 (month xii)

Offering a silver object (KU-an-na-gi4) weighing ½ ma-na in month ix

obv. iii 53-55

Nisaba 11 15 (no date)

Identified as father of Lugal-zà-ge-si & Lugal-gišgigirre on a list

obv. ii 23-25

JCS 24 158 46 (Š 44)

42⌈ /6?⌉ shekels of silver transferred from Gu-du-du to him

BPOA 1 1232 (Š 48)

A basket label for tablets concerning copper & damgàr

CHEU 70 (AS 1 i)

Appearing in the seal inscription as father of Lú-sa6-ìzu, who is identified as a potter in SAT 2 615 (Š 48 vii)

dam-gàr

5

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. Appearing in the seal inscription as father of Šeš-a-ni, 1912-1147 (AS 1) a potter

230

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Name

Text

Summary

Location

MVN 14 565 (AS 5)

Ur-dnun-gal taking tablet(s) of Lú-kal-la from a basket; the tablet(s) recording huge amounts of dates, fish, & fish oil transferred to a dam-gàr

SAT 2 883 (AS 6)

Lú-kal-la receiving two people É-lú-bi-su & Im-ta-è-a who worked? from month i to the 20th day of month vi on behalf of a dam-gàr

BPOA 1 675 (AS 7)

1,740 bundles of reeds & 192 liters of salt withdrawn from níg-kas7 dam-gàr dated to AS 6 to be transferred to níg-kas7 bala-a in AS 7; sealed by Lú-kal-la, scribe & son of Ur-e11-e the chief livestock manager; probably repeated in SNAT 365 (AS 6) obv. ii 18 & rev. i 7

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. A roster of merchants put together with 11 rosters of 1911-176 (AS 8) fishermen, fowlers, potters, etc. in a basket MVN 10 122 (AS 8)

Uš-mu receiving 1 cow from Lú-kal-la as repaid arrears of a dam-gàr

JRAS 1939 38 (AS 9)

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6, scribe & son of Ur-dištaran, received from him 2,740 liters + 6,600 minas of bitumen for a shipyard; for identification of this anonymous merchant as Ur-ddumu-zi-da, see the same text listed under Ur-ddumu-zi-da

BPOA 1 999 (AS 9) dam-gàr

rev. 13 obv. 5-rev. 6

Ì-kal-la received from him 2,400 minas of gypsum + 3,000 liters of alkaline plants; for identification of this anonymous merchant as Ur-ddumu-zi-da, see the same text listed under Ur-ddumu-zi-da

BPOA 1 812 (AS 9)

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6, scribe & son of Ur-dštaran, receiving from him 2,220 minas of bitumen

Santag 6 310 (ŠS 6)

In association with 1,085 liters of bitumen in the zi-ga section of níg-kas7-ak lú-dnin-šubur

SAT 3 1829 (ŠS 7)

A note: a tablet from him to be transferred

BPOA 2 1849 (ŠS 9 iii)

Receiving 674 liters of hašhur

Nisaba 9 255 (ŠS 9 xii)

Offering a lance? made of bronze to dNin-marki as mud ki DU šára ki-an

MVN 15 355 (ŠS 9)

Ur-dnun-gal, scribe & son of Ur-d[šára] the archivist, receiving from him 1,203 minas of copper; the copper transferred to Gu-du-du

ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9)

173.08 shekels of silver transferred onto his account in the zi-ga section of [níg-kas7-ak kù gu-du-du] c

UTI 6 3513 (IS 1)

40 liters of dates received from him in the sag-níggur11-ra-kam section of [níg-kas7-ak xxx] / ⌈santana⌉

obv. ii 1-2

Santag 6 340 (IS 2 xii)

Resins, spices, & vegetables received from him in the sag-níg-gur11-ra-kam section of níg-kas7-ak mun-gazi gu-du-du

obv. iv 22-v 2

Ontario 2 221 (IS xx)

Some barley (amount lost) to be transferred onto his account from the chief granary officer

Rochester 239 (no date)

Silver in lieu of á dam-gàr mentioned in a basket label

rev. 10

BCT 2 154 (no date)

A basket label with one line reading níg-kas7 še kù uruda ⌈lá⌉ dam-gàr ugula uš-[...]

obv. 2

231

obv. 15

rev. iii 18-19

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Name

Text

Summary

dam-gàr lú-dha-ià

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6)

níg-kas7-ak dam-gàr lú-dha-ià

AAS 65 (AS 8)

níg-kas7-ak dam-gàr šà bala-a ⌈gìr⌉ a-gu

Nik. 2 403 (AS 9)

níg-kas7-ak dam-gàr šà bala-a gìr árad-mu ù ur-dnumuš-da

SNAT 490 (ŠS 4)

níg-kas7-ak gìr ab-ba-gi-na

BCT 2 134 (Š 38)

Lugal-ezem, scribe & son of Lugal-é-⌈mah⌉-[e] the majordomo, withdrawing from them a variety of goods

MVN 3 208 (Š 45 vii)

Conveying 8 cows & 9 oxen purchased w/ grain

OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45)

La-ni-mu receiving from them a variety of products

rev. 14

Syracuse 483 (Š 46)

La-ni-mu receiving from them a variety of products

rev. 11

BPOA 6 1243 (AS 2 v)

Lú-kal-la receiving from them 364 ⅔ minas of resins

TCL 5 6046 (AS 4)

Colophon sag-níg-gur11-ra dam-gàr-ne; but actually a full balanced account

SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4)

10,115 liters of barley transferred to their account; Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6 receiving 2,940 liters of barley to pay for using their boats; colophon níg-kas7-ak še lú-kal-la ki árad-ta

dam-gàr šà bala-a

dam-gàr šà uri5kima

dam-gàr-ne

Location

rev. i 7-10 rev. ii 8-10

?

BPOA 7 2186 (AS 5)

Lú-kal-la receiving from them ca. 5 ½ minas of silver as repaid arrears

NATN 805 (AS 7)

900 minas of wool transferred onto their account; colophon úku níg-kas7 dam-gàr ⌈gá⌉-gá-dam

Ur-dšul-pa-è receiving from them a variety of goods; MVN 15 127 (AS 9) receipts passed to Ur-dnun-gal, scribe & son of Urd šára the archivist, who sealed this text BPOA 1 1227 (AS 9)

Conveying 103 liters of tanning materials from Lú-kalla

BPOA 1 1165 (ŠS 2)

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6, scribe & son of Ur-dištaran, receiving from them 3 types of bitumen and 1 unknown plant

BPOA 2 2278 (ŠS 2)

Conveying 95 minas of copper & 11.34 minas of sugan

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6)

níg-kas7-ak dam-gàr-ne lú-kal-la

Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6)

níg-kas7-ak dam-gàr-ne ab-ba-gi-na

ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9)

301 ⅓ shekels of silver from them in the sag-níg-gur11ra-kam section of [níg-kas7-ak kù gu-du-du] c

ZA 95 191 (IS 1)

200 shekels of silver from them in the sag-níg-gur11-rakam section of [níg-kas7-ak kù gu-du-du] c; about 394 shekels of silver transferred to their account in the ziga section

232

obv. 10 rev. 38

rev. i 4-5 rev. ii 16-17 rev. iii 16-17

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Name

dam-gàr-ne

Text

Summary

Location

Santag 7 168 (month ix)

Reeds & fish (quantity uncertain) from them conveyed by Lú-làl-túm to Gír-suki

AOS 32 S23 (no date)

[Lú?]-kal-la receiving a wide variety of goods from them

ASJ 11 182-200 (no date)

12 érin-people identified as dam-gàr

rev. i 32-37

Notes Named merchants are listed alphabetically before anonymous ones, who include both individuals ( d a m - g à r ) and groups ( d a m - g à r - n e ) . A text siglum in roman type means that the text identifies the merchant (group) concerned. A text siglum in italics means that the text does not spell out the occupation of the person, whom this study identifies as a merchant based on the context and parallelism with other texts. The texts listed under the three names—P à d - d a , Š e š - k a l - l a , and U r - d d u m u - z i - d a —include both the texts that identify them as merchants and those that do not specify their occupation (§5.1). For the rest of the merchants, this table lists only the texts that identify them as such except for their silver accounts. If a silver account belongs to a person with the same name as a known merchant, this person was likely to be the merchant despite the lack of explicit evidence, for few silver accounts are attributed to non-merchant people. Table 5.1 lists such silver accounts in italics. a

Its Umma provenience uncertain according to BDTNS (accessed September 2012).

b

In the latter text, the volumes amount to 9 bushels 100 liters and 101 talents respectively. Since T. Gomi (1981, 44) collates JRAS 1939 38, the numbers there may be more reliable than those in ASJ 11 204-216. c

For the restoration, see §4.6.

Table 5.2.A. Silver received by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

From

Description

YOS 4 287 (Š 34 vi) Lugal-sa6-ga

A-kal-la

níg-sám é-sag-te-na šuruppak-šè

Santag 6 29 (Š 36 xii) Ur-kal-la

Ur-ni9-gar

SAT 2 188 (Š 38) Ba-sig5

Pàd-da

obv. 8-rev. 9; recorded on tablet taken from Pada by Lugal-ezem, who sealed SAT 2 188 a

JCS 24 158 46 (Š 44) dam-gàr

Gu-du-du

níg-samx-ma-ka

NABU 1989 95 6 (Š 45) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-ezem

BPOA 7 1848 (Š 47) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Da-da-ga

233

Quantity (shekels)

Annual Total (shekels)

5

5

4

4

5.83

5.83

42.83 b

42.83

8

8

175.48

175.48

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

From

Description

RO 5 9 8 (AS 2 diri) Ur-sila-luh

Ur-dutu

obv. 10

Jones Studies 216 (AS 3 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Ledgers pl. 2 2 (AS 3) Pàd-da

Lú-kal-la

Quantity (shekels)

Annual Total (shekels)

2

2

kù ur-dnin-su dam-gàr; obv. i 3-4

120

kù lú-kal-la; obv. i 5-6

60

kù ur-e11-e; obv. i 7-8

40

kù zú-lum ur-pa4-ú-e; obv. ii 3

9.40

Lú-kal-la

kù sám; obv. i 8-11

120

énsi

kù še kù síg é-énsi-ka; obv. i 17-18 kù [...] énsi-ka; obv. 1

172.33 ⌈82.50⌉ c

Lú-kal-la

obv. 5

5

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-kal-la

obv. 1

12.56

STA 22 (AS 4 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Inim-ku5 & Lú-dinanna

kù gig; obv. i 7-8

3.33

gìr lú-kal-la; obv. i 1-2 TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) Sag-ku5

énsi

35 53.33

gìr lugal-kù-zu; obv. i 3-4

9.67

gìr énsi-ka; kišib sag-ku5 nu-zi-ir; obv. i 5-6

5.33

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 19240667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

gìr lú-gi-na; obv. i 8

5

gìr ur-dnun-gal; obv. i 9

2

Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

obv. 4

4.86

kù še-ka; obv. 5

6.67

SNAT 356 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

Lú-kal-la

obv. 3

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-kal-la

sám kù ⌈huš?⌉šà nibruki; obv. i 15-19

621.79

21.53

3

234

20+[...]

20+[...]

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

From

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da STA 1 (AS 8 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Description

Quantity (shekels)

kù má su-a; gìr lugal-má-gur8-a; obv. i 14-15

20

kù ì-bí-za kù-sig17; obv. i 18

[...]

kù še; obv. i 9

40

20+[...]

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

énsi

sám kù huš-a; gìr ur-dšul-pa-è kù-dím; obv. i 1-4

210

AAS 65 (AS 8) dam-gàr šà bala-a

Lú-kal-la

obv. 1-2

[...]

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-kal-la

obv. i 23-24

Nik. 2 403 (AS 9) dam-gàr šà bala-a

Lú-kal-la

obv. 1-2

YOS 4 47 (ŠS 1 iii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-kal-la

kù-sig17-ga sa10-sa10-dè; a joint receipt w/ Ur-dšul-pa-è before 4 witnesses

510

ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS 1 vii) Pàd-da

Lú-⌈dinanna⌉

obv. 3

6.33

Lú-kal-la

[kù?] ku6; obv. i 5-6

14.14

Lugal-nesag-e

obv. i 7

17

obv. i 16’

23

UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) Ur-ddumu-zi-da TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

250+[...]

118.97 141.64

Lú-kal-la

22.67

kù šà-bala-a; obv. i 17’ kù sìg-ga; obv. i 18’

UTI 5 3336 (ŠS 3 iv) Ur-ab-zu Ledgers pl. 21 12 (ŠS 5) Pàd-da

Annual Total (shekels)

mu-DU Lú-kal-la

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú-dha-ìa TJAMC IOS 6 (pl. 49) (ŠS 9 xii) A-a-kal-la

Gu-du-du

ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) dam-gàr

[Gu-du-du] d

60+[...]

obv. 1-2

5.83

lá-NI su-ga pàd-da; obv. 6

5.83

níg-kas7-kù-ta; obv. 1-2

95.81

rev. iii 18-19

235

83.17+[...]

0.17 3

še-a sa10-sa10-dè; before 4 witnesses including son of a silversmith

547.47

3

11.66

95.81

60 233.08 173.08

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

From

Description

Quantity (shekels)

Annual Total (shekels)

ZA 95 191 (IS 1) dam-gàr-ne

[Gu-du-du] d

rev. iii 12-13

394.18

394.18

Aleppo 436 (no date) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Da-da-ga

108.25

108.25

Notes a

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - m a h - e / š a b r a .

b

Calculated by reading the fraction in obv. 1 as ⌈

5

/6⌉.

c

Partly restored by subtracting the amounts of silver (value) in obv. 2-5 from the total in obv. 6; 1 mina more than the restoration of BDTNS and ⅓ mina less than that of CDLI; both databases accessed September 2012. d

Restoration based on discussion in §4.6.

Table 5.2.B. Barley received by Umma merchants Quantity (liters)

Silver value (shekels)

šà uri5ki-ma

1800

N/A

še ur5-ra zì-da; mu árad-dnanna nu-bànda-šè; gur7 du6-kù-sig17-ta

1500

N/A

300

N/A

5230

N/A

6000

N/A

Text & Merchant

From

Description

Syracuse 481 (Š 31 ix) Lugal-sa6-ga

Ma-an-sum

BPOA 1 1748 (Š 35 xii) Ur-dnin-mug-ga Santag 6 29 (Š 36 xii) Ur-kal-la

Ad-da

Ur-ni9-gar

Ontario 2 239 (Š 39) Sag-ku5

obv. 5-6; summary tablet sealed by La-ni-mu / dub-sar dumu ur-ni9-gar

MVN 3 186 a (Š 40) Lugal-sig5

še uri5ki-ta; obv. 1-3

AR RIM 4 8 (Š 46) Ur-ddumu-zi-da b

Árad

uruda sa10-a ù esir-a sa10-a; lá-NI-ta su-ga; inim-ma uruki

18000

N/A

BPOA 6 311 (AS 2 xi 6) Ur-sila-luh c

Lú-kal-la

še samx-ma-ka; ka-ma-ríki-šè

17040

N/A

RO 5 9 8 (AS 2 diri) Ur-sila-luh

a-rá-1-kam; obv. 1-3

14700

65.33

a-rá-2-kam; obv. 4-6

750

3.13

Studies Jones 216 (AS 3 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-kal-la

ki-su7 ka-ma-ríki-ta; month xi; obv. i 12-14

54000

225

še síg; month xi; obv. i 15-18

2340

9.75

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

énsi

18000

65

obv. i 13-16

236

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (shekels)

9000

30

obv. 1-2

36000

N/A

Text & Merchant

From

Description

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-kal-la

obv. 2

SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Árad

SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4) Pàd-da

Árad

obv. 3-4

36000

N/A

SA 134 (Pl. 76) (AS 4) Šeš-kal-la

Árad

obv. 5-6

36000

N/A

Árad

še ì-šáh; rev. i 17-19

67800

188.33

še lú-du10-ga; rev. ii 1-3

16500

37.50

8700

N/A

TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) dam-gàr-ne MVN 1 238 (AS 5 ix?) Ur-dištaran

Lugal-iti-da

obv. 1-2

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

še ì-šáh; obv. i 10-11

18000

60

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

še ì-šáh-ka; rev. 1-2

18000

60

Ledgers pl. 11 7 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

obv. 3-4

12000

33.33

50

27000

75

6000

20.60

⌈15000⌉

50

24000

N/A

9000

40

íd sal4-laki-ta; še ì-šáh; obv. i 1-2

54000

180

šà nibruki; še ì-šáh; obv. i 3-4

54000

180

Ad-da

sám uruda; obv. i 10-11

18000

60

Šu-deš18-tár

obv. i 6-8

1500

5

TCL 5 6052 (AS 5) Inim-ma-ni-zi

A-kal-la nu-bànda

Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) Ku5-da Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

še ì-šáh; obv. 2-3 obv. i 8-12 Lú-dšul-gi-ra

BRM 3 80 (AS 7 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la

še ì-šáh; obv. i 19-21 ki-su7 é-duru5-gu-la-ta; obv. 3-4, 9

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

še ì-šáh engar-gu4 diri; obv. i 4-7

obv. i 8-9

d

Lú- šul-gi-ra

237

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

From

Description

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (shekels)

[...]

N/A

BM 105364 (ŠS 1 v) Lugal-é-mah-e

diri-šè kišib lú-níg-dab5-ba-ke4-ne

MVN 21 332 (ŠS 1) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

obv. 1-2

43140

N/A

month vi níg-samx-ma bala-a-šè; inim ma-lu-ta; obv. i 7’-10’;

28500

83.83

sám síg-ba šà-gu4-ka ù sám uruda kar-ta; obv. i 11’-15’

27480

91.60

4500

20

⌈26280⌉ d

62.57

120000

285.72

18000

530.43

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

ka-gur7

SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) Lugal-nesag-e dam-gàr šà uri5ki-ma

obv. 1-2 še-ba; níg-kas7-síg-ta; obv. i 2-4 obv. i 5-6

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lúkal-la

sám uruda; obv. i 7 d

Šára-ì-zu

sám síg; obv. i 8

126000

níg-samx-ma bala-a ù níg-samx-ma ésir mar-sa; obv. i 9-10

78779

obv. i 12-13

18300 e

N/A f

obv. 1-2

11593

27.60

ka-gur7

obv. 1-4; dated to ŠS 6 g

18000

85.67 h

Lugal-nesag-e

obv. 5-7; dated to ŠS 5 g

1800

6.06 j

Ontario 2 221 (IS xx) dam-gàr

ka-gur7

níg-sám zi-ga uri5ki-ma

[...]

N/A

Nebraska 39 (month xi) Sag-ku5

La-ni-mu

kišib-bi 3-àm; rev. i 71-72

5830

N/A

rev. 6

93600

N/A

sá-du11 simug-ta; barley from a-šà lá-mah; rev. 8-11

13050

N/A

[...]-ta; barley from a-šà lá-mah; rev. 12-14

900+[...]

N/A

Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne ab-bagi-na Ledgers pl. 27 15 (ŠS 7) A-a-kal-la

MVN 21 329 (no date) Lugal-é-mah-e

SET 184 (no date) Ur-da-šár k

HA

Notes a

Tablet and envelop differ in obv. 3: k i š i b l u g a l - s i g 5 d a m - g à r versus mu l u g a l - s i g 5 - š è . Seal inscription: a k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - n e s a g - e . The year name on the envelope refers to the year Š 39, while that on the tablet refers to the year Š 40.

238

A PPENDIX : T ABLES b

Seal inscription: u r - d d u m u - z i / d u m u l u g a l - z a r ? - [ . . . ] / d a m - g à r . c Seal inscription: u r - s i l a - l u h / d a m - g à r / d u m u i p - t i - d i n g i r . d

Restoring obv. 2 as ⌈ 1 ( g é š ) 2 ( u ) 7 ( a š ) ⌉ 3 ( b a r i g ) [ š e ] g u r , based on the conversion rate of about 420 liters of barley per shekel of silver attested in the same text. e f g h

Grain concerned is g i g , “wheat.” Value of wheat converted into copper: 18,300 liters of wheat were equivalent to 120 minas of copper. Date of transaction earlier than that of text. Calculated based on restoring obv. 2 a s k ù - b i 1 ( d i š ) ⅓ m a - n a 5 ( d i š ) ⌈ ⅔ ⌉ [ g í n ] .

j

Calculated based on restoring obv. 5 as k ù - b i 6 ( d i š ) g í n [ 1 ( u ) š e ] .

k

Relationship with the additional 4 bushels 60 liters of barley in rev. 5-7 ambiguous.

Table 5.2.C. Wool received by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

From

Description

Quantity (minas)

Silver value (shekels)

Salesianum 4 174 1 (Š 38 xi) Ur-gišgigir

Lugal-ezem

síg! sig17; kišib a-kal-la

240

6.67? a

Studies Jones 216 b (AS 3 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-kal-la

gìr énsi-ka; obv. i 9-11

600

60

a-rá-2-kam; obv. i 19-ii 2

1920

192

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-666 b (AS 3) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

énsi

síg sig17; rev. ii 26-27

2520

N/A

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

énsi

976

108.44

a-rá-2-kam; obv. i 10-12

1200

130

TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) dam-gàr-ne

énsi

rev. i 20-22

2700

300

a-rá-1-kam; obv. i 3

600

83.33

a-rá-2-kam; obv. i 4

180

na-lá-a; obv. i 7

420

33.33

Ledgers pl. 6 4 (AS 5) Pàd-da

obv. i 1-2

360

40

Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

obv. 6

360

40

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

šà kišib-ba; obv. 6-7

360

40

TCL 5 6052 (AS 5) Inim-ma-ni-zi

obv. i 8

360

40

Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) Ku5-da

obv. 1

[360?]

40

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

a-rá-1-kam; obv. i 7-9

239

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

From

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la

Silver value (shekels)

2280

228

obv. i 5-6; dated to AS 5 c

300

33.33

obv. i 7-8

420

42

sám ku-mul; obv. i 13-15

[...]

0.28

obv. i 11-14

1201

120.11

600

60

Dated to AS 5 ; obv. i 3-4

300

33.33

obv. i 3

630

63

a-rá-1-kam; obv. i 4-6

580

58

síg kù-sig17; obv. i 8-10

300

30

gìr lú-den-líl-lá; obv. i 5-7

567

56.70 d

[300?]

30

obv. i 3-4

énsi

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

Quantity (minas)

Description

obv. i 1-2 Lú-kal-la

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

c

síg kù-sig17; obv. i 16-17

NATN 805 (AS 7) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

obv. 1-2

1274.50

N/A

NATN 805 (AS 7) Pàd-da

obv. 3-4

566

N/A

NATN 805 (AS 7) Šeš-kal-la

obv. 5-6

630

N/A

NATN 805 (AS 7) dam-gàr-ne

sám kù-sig17; obv. 10

900

N/A

STA 1 (AS 8 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da UTI 5 3187 e (ŠS 1 diri) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

énsi

obv. i 6-8

1153

96.08

énsi

síg sig17; obv. i 12-14

2160

180

Nin-me-lám

šà é šu-sum-ma; obv. i 16-19

1800

150

Lugal-nesag-e

obv. i 20-22

7

0.58

Lugal-nesag-e

obv. i 8-10

50

4.17

rev. iii 11’-12’

50

N/A

obv. i 4’-6’

300

25

AnOr 7 262 (ŠS 2 iii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-nesag-e

240

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

From

Description

Ledgers pl. 21 12 (ŠS 5) Pàd-da

Lugal-nesag-e

obv. 3-5

Quantity (minas)

Silver value (shekels)

20

1.67

Notes a b c d

The silver value is unexpectedly low. Collation of this tablet is necessary. Recording same transactions. Date of payment earlier than that of text. Mistakenly read as one shekel more in BDTNS and CDLI (obv. 6); both databases accessed September 2012.

e BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012) read the product in obv. i 8 as gazi. But this study agrees with Van Driel (2002, 14n45) that the sign read as GAZI in fact represents SÍG, because the product gazi does not appear measured by weight elsewhere in Ur III Umma texts.

Table 5.2.D. Dates received by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

From

Description

BPOA 7 1898 (Š 47) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

Tablet sealed by ur-dšul-pa-è / dub-sar / dumu lugal-kù-ga-ni

BM 105345 (AS 1) Pàd-da

Ur-ddumu-zi-da

obv. 2

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (shekels)

158520

N/A

60

N/A

3600

12

Ledgers pl. 2 2 (AS 3) Pàd-da

obv. 2 Dated to AS 2 ; obv. 3-4

5400

12.90

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Dated to AS 2 a; obv. i 5-6

[...]

[...]+0.43

a

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

Dated to AS 3 a; obv. i 3-6

65750

156.56

TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) dam-gàr-ne

Ur-dšul-pa-è

rev. i 23-25

52500

⌈116.67⌉

Ledgers pl. 6 4 (AS 5) Pàd-da

Dated to AS 4 a; obv. ii 7-9

18932

42.08

obv. ii 10-12

18000

40

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

Dated to AS 4 a; obv. i 12-14

19200

42.67

obv. i 15-17

15000

33.33

Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

Dated to AS 3 a; obv. i 1-3

9000+ [...]

25+[...]

129566

N/A

MVN 14 565 (AS 5) dam-gàr

241

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

From

TCL 5 6052 (AS 5) Inim-ma-ni-zi Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) Ku5-da Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (shekels)

obv. ii 11-13; dated to AS 4 a

7460

16.58

obv. ii 14-16

29100

64.67

a-rá-2-kam; obv. 20-22

36154

80.34

obv. i 5-7

28800

60

é-kišib-ba; obv. i 8-9

8100

16.67

1023+[...]

5.61

Description

⌈Lú⌉-kisal nu-giškiri6

obv. i 12-14

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

obv. i 4-5

22250

49.44 b

BJRL 22 167 Šeš-kal-la (AS 6 xi)

Ur-šul-pa-è

obv. i 10-12

27000

60

SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

obv. 6-7

9000

20

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

obv. i 13-14

9000

25

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

obv. i 3-4

12000

33.33

STA 1 (AS 8 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

obv. i 3-5

36360

93.25

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

obv. i 5-7

21600

60

obv. i 9-10

3600

10

Lú-kal-la

obv. i 3-4

966

2.48

d

obv. i 15-17

176942

294.40

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) Ur-ddumu-zi-da TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lú-kal-la

Šára-kam

Notes a Date of transaction earlier than that of text. b

Calculated based on reading the fraction before GÍN obv. i 5 as ⅓.

242

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Table 5.2.E. Fish and fish oil received by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

From

Product & description

Quantity (units)

BPOA 7 1898 (Š 47) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

Santag 6 120 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la STA 22 (AS 4 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-e11-e

Ur-dma-mi enku

Lugal-kù-ga dumu ur-den-[...] TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) dam-gàr-ne

ku6 šeg6; tablet sealed by Ur-dšul-pa-è / dub-sar / dumu lugal-kù-ga-ni

6000

N/A

ku6 šeg6

7800

15.90 a

ku6 šeg6; ku6 gán-mah obv. i 3-6

8580

14.21

ku6-gír-ús; obv. i 1-2

27600

35.38

ku6-gír-ús; obv. i 3-4

6540

5.35

ku6-šà-bar; obv. i 5-6

900

2

ku6-šà-bar; obv. i 7-8

3000

8.33

ku6-sag-kúr; obv. i 9-10

4380

4.87

16200

20.75

ku6-šà-bar; obv. i 16-17

1740

1.93

ku6-gam-gam; obv. i 18-19

4560

5.07

ku6-gír-ús; obv. i 13-15; ku6 nesag-šè má-a ba-a-gar-ra íb-ta-zi

ku6 šeg6; obv. ii 2-3; é-kišib-ba erinx(KWU-896)

Ur-dšul-pa-è

5280

⌈8.80⌉

ku6-šà-bar-[sig?]; obv. ii 4-5; é-kišib-ba erinx(KWU-896)

3000

1.94

ku6-sag-[kúr]; obv. ii 7-10 é-kišib-ba ur-d[...]; ku6 ur-dsuen [...]

3300

2.06

ku6-sag-[kúr]; obv. ii 11-13; ka i7-da [...]

9900

11

ì ku6; obv. ii 14-15 MVN 14 565 (AS 5) dam-gàr

(liters)

Silver value (shekels)

ku6-sag-kúr ì ku6

540 9600

N/A 540

243

18

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

From

Product & description

Quantity (units)

Ledgers pl. 6 4 (AS 5) Pàd-da

ku6-gír-ús; obv. i 13-14

8640

11.37

ku6-šà-bar gíd b; obv. i 15-16

600

0.38

ku6-sag-kúr gíd c; obv. i 17-18

[...]

0.42+[...]

ku6 šeg6; obv. i 19-20

[...] 1920

2.13

ku6-sag-kúr; obv. ii 3-4

2190

2.43 120

12570

16.11

ku6-šà-bar; obv. i 20-21

1380

4.27

ku6-sag-kúr; obv. ii 1-2

1980

2.20 984

600

0.38

ku6-sag-kúr sig; obv. ii 7-8

660

0.42

ku6-gam-gam; obv. ii 9-10

960

1.07

ku6-sag-kúr; šà kišib; obv. 3-4

1980

2.2

ku6-šà-bar; šà kišib; obv. 5

720

2

ku6-gír-ús; dated to AS 4?; obv. 8

3300

4.28

ku6-sag-kúr; dated to AS 4?; obv. 9-10

2190

2.43 120

11970

15.35

ku6-šà-bar; obv. 6-7

1380

4.27

ku6-sag-kúr; obv. 8-9

1980

2.20

ku6-šà-bar sig; obv. 10

600

0.38

ku6-sag-kúr sig; obv. 11

660

0.42

ku6-gam-gam; obv. 13

1200 720

ì ku6; obv. 23 ⌈Ur⌉-dutu enku

4

ku6-gír-ús; obv. 4-5

ku6 šeg6; obv. 12

Nisaba 6 34 (AS 6) Pàd-da

1.64

ku6-šà-bar sig; obv. ii 5-6

ì ku6; dated to AS 4?; obv. 11

Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) Ku5-da

4

ku6-gír-ús; obv. i 18-19

ku6 šeg6; obv. ii 3-4

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

0.06+[...]

ku6-gam-gam; obv. ii 1-2 ì ku6; obv. ii 5-6

TCL 5 6052 (AS 5) Inim-ma-ni-zi

(liters)

Silver value (shekels)

ku6-gír-ús; obv. ii 6-7; úgu lú-kal-la-ka gá-gá-dam

244

0.80 60

54000

2

2 N/A

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

From

Quantity

Product & description

(units)

UTI 5 3406 (ŠS 9) A-a-kal-la

Ur-dutu

ku6-šà-bar; é-gal-la ku4-ra

1680 d

ku6-gír-ús; ditto

1620 d

ku6-gam-gam; ditto

(liters)

Silver value (shekels) N/A

10200 d

ku6-suhur

3240

ku6-gír

49680

ku6-gam-gam

13500

Notes a Deduced from the context. b c d

Subsumed under k u 6 - š à - b a r - é r i n in Snell (1982, 133-134). Misread as k u 6 - s a g - k é š g í d in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). Phrasing of text makes it difficult to determine whether or not the merchant A - a - k a l - l a received all the fish.

Table 5.2.F. Sheepskins and leather goods received by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

From

Quantity

Silver value (shekels)

e-sír é-ba-an; rev. i 5-6

198 pairs

13

e-sír ŠU.LI.LA é-ba-an; rev. i 7-8

30 pairs

1.50

Product & description kuš kuš

TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) dam-gàr-ne

Lú-kal-la

kuš

ùmmu: rev. i 9-10

160 units

16

kuš

a-gá-[lá]; rev. i 11-12

300 units

7.50

2400 units

40

kuš udu ug7; obv. i 3-4

420 units

4.67

kuš

ùmmu; obv. i 5-6

20 units

1.11

kuš

e-sír; obv. i 7-8

48 units

3.20

e-sír ŠU kuš gu4; obv. i 9-10

5 units

0.25

kuš udu; rev. i 13-14

Ledgers pl. 6 4 (AS 5) Pàd-da

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

Ledgers pl. 11 7 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

kuš

kuš

a-gá-lá; obv. i 11-12

40 units

1.11

kuš

ùmmu; obv. 18-19

10 units

0.56 a

kuš

e-sír; obv. 20-21

10 units

0.67

kuš

ùmmu; obv. 5-6

10 units

0.56

kuš

a-gá-lá; obv. 7-8

40 units

0.89

24+[...] units

⌈1.67⌉ b

5 units

0.25

[...]; obv. 9-10 kuš

e-sír é-ba-an ŠU kuš gu4; obv. 11-12

245

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

From

Product & description

Quantity

Silver value (shekels)

kuš udu ba-ug7; obv. i 9-10

420 units

4.67

25 units

1.39

65 units

1.81

kuš

TCL 5 6052 (AS 5) Inim-ma-ni-zi

ùmmu; obv. i 11-12

kuš

a-gá-lá máš-lí-um; obv. i 13-14 kuš

e-sír é-ba-an; obv. i 15

40 pairs

e-sír é-ba-an ŠU.LI.LA; obv. i 16-17

5 pairs

kuš

Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) Ku5-da

2.92

kuš

ùmmu; obv. 14

25 units

1.39

kuš

a-gá-lá; obv. 15

70 units

1.94

420 units

4.67

kuš udu; obv. 16 kuš

e-sír é-ba-an; obv. 17-18 kuš

e-sír ŠU.SU.HI é-ba-an obv. 17-18

40 pairs 2.92 5 pairs

Notes a Calculated based on restoring obv. 19 as k ù - b i ½ g í n ⌈ 1 ( u ) š e ⌉. b

Calculated by restoring the fraction in obv. 10 as ⌈⅔⌉.

Table 5.2.G. Other capital goods received by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

From

Product & description

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (shekels)

Nik. 2 331 (Š 33 i) Ur-kal-la-mu

Lú-dšára dumu ni-a-mu

še giš-ì

1250 liters

N/A

60 minas

N/A

43 units

N/A

ùr 8-kùš-ta; rev. iv 28-29

30 units

N/A

Aleppo 120 (Š 33 viii) Lugal-é-mah-e a

Šeš-a-ni

RA 16 19 (Š 36 ix) Ur-gišgigir

pa gišma-nu; naga sa10-dè; šà bala-a giš

ùr 6-kùš-ta; rev. iv 26-27

RA 16 19 (Š 36 ix) Ur-da-šár

giš

Santag 6 29 (Š 36 xii) Ur-kal-la

Ur-ni9-gar

ì-giš

120 jars

N/A

TLB 3 153 b (Š 40 vi) A-za-za-mu

Ur-zu?

dabin; sa10-a kù-huš-a-šè

300 liters

3

246

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

YOS 4 295 (Š 45) Pàd-da

From

⌈Lú-pa-è maškim?⌉ c

Product & description

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (shekels)

resins;

208 minas

33.20

18 liters

3

gú-gal; ditto

1200 liters

6.67

gú-tur; ditto

360 liters

2

làl; ditto

13 liters

6.50

šim sa10-a

SAKF 67 (Š 46) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-ezem

naga si-è

1800 liters d

2

BIN 5 197 (Š 46) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-ezem

naga si-è

1800 liters d

N/A

BM 105345 (AS 1) Pàd-da

Ur-ddumu-zi-da

gú-gal; obv. 14

60 liters

N/A

giš

22 strings

0.82

giš

26 liters

é-kišib

giš

120 liters

0.33

Ur-dšul-pa-è

giš

210 liters

0.58

2700 liters

53.33

li; obv. 3-4

4.5 liters

0.08

BPOA 2 1849 (ŠS 9 iii) dam-gàr

hašhur; giš kiri6 nag-su-⌈šè⌉

674 liters

N/A

YOS 18 73 (month vii) Dingir-sa6-ga

zì-gu sig5, zì-gu ús, & dabin; mu ab-ba-mu dub-sar-šè / da-da-a íb-gi-né

480 liters

N/A

pèš še-er-gu ⌈è?⌉-a; obv. 7

RO 5 9 8 (AS 2 diri) Ur-sila-luh Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) dam-gàr

pèš! 11-MA e; obv. 8 [...]; obv. i 10-11 ÚRgunu; obv. i 6-8

obv. i 9-10; zì dated to AS 5 f Lugal-nesag-e

Notes a The merchant had the same name as the person who sealed the tablet: l u g a l - é - m a h - e / š a b r a / d u m u u r dingir-ra. b

Seal inscription: u r - d l i 9 - [ s i 4 ] / é n s i / u m m a k i / ⌈ a ⌉- k a l - l a / d u b - [ s a r ] / d u m u u r - [ n i 9 - g a r ] / á r a d zu.

c

The author reads rev. 3-5 as š i m s a 1 0 - a ⌈ k i l ú - / p a - è m a š k i m ? ⌉ / ⌈ i n i m l ú - p a - è - t a ⌉ . A note to the autographed copy says all the signs after s a 1 0 - a have been erased. d e f

Same transaction. Following the reading of Snell 1982, 135, which is based on a collation. Date of transaction earlier than that of text.

247

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Table 5.3.A. Gold supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant ArOr 62 238 I 867 (Š 41) Ur-dnin-su

Jones Studies 216 (AS 3 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Recipient

A-kal-la

a

Description maš-da-re6-a á-ki- ezem šunumun (month vi); 1 gín kù-sig17 7-gín-ta; received from Lugal-ezem 7-ta; šu-nir énsi-ka; obv. ii 7-8

Lú-kal-la

16-ta; obv. ii 15-rev. i 1 17-ta; rev. i 2-3

Quantity (shekels)

Silver value (shekels)

20

140

1

7

3.96

63.38

19.67

334.23

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

ezem-mah šà uri5ki-ma; kišib nu-ra-a; rev. ii 7-10

1.04

16.87

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

kù huš-a 15-ta; ezem-mah šà uri5[ki-ma]; rev. i 23-25

20

300

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

énsi

[níg-geštu dlamma] b-damar⌈dsuen⌉-ka-šè; rev. iii 24-25

0.25 c

2

AOS 32 KK26 (ŠS 2 v) Inim-ma-dingir

Ur-dšul-pa-è kù-dím

kù-⌈sig17⌉ [9 ½ -ta] d; received from Lú-kal-la before 5 witnesses; inim-ma-dingir gi4-gi4-dè

[6] d

57

Notes Unless specified as k ù h u š - a “red gold,” in the Description column, the product concerned was k ù - s i g 1 7 “regular gold.” a

Seal inscription: u r - d l i 9 - s i 4 / é n s i / u m m a k i / a - ⌈ k a l ⌉ - [ l a ] / d u b - ⌈ s a r ⌉ / d u m u u r - ⌈ n i 9 ⌉ - g a r / [ á r a d zu]. b Restoration according to SACT 2 119 (AS 5). c d

Misread as i g i - 6 - g á l (rev. iii 24) in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). Restoration according to A. L. Oppenheim (1948, 106-107).

Table 5.3.B. Silver supplied by Umma merchants Quantity (shekels)

Annual total (shekels)

obv. 8-rev. 9; recorded on tablet received by Lugal-ezem, who sealed SAT 2 188 a

5.83

5.83

Ur-dda-mu šabra

síg-ud5-šè / an-né-ba-ab-du7 túgdu8; rev. 21-22

1

1

A-kal-la b

ezem-mah-šè; received from Árad

60

60

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Description

SAT 2 188 (Š 38) Pàd-da

Ba-sig5 dam-gàr

AUCT 1 540 (Š 39) Lú-dšára MVN 14 77 (Š 41 xi) Ur-dnin-su

248

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Quantity (shekels)

Annual total (shekels)

kù-sig17 maš-da-re6-a lugal-ka sa10-sa10!-dè ezem-mah-šè

20

20

maš-da-re6-a á-ki-ti ezem šunumun

120

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Description

MVN 3 197 (Š 42 x) c Ur-ddumu-zi-da

A-kal-la b

AAS 149 (Š 43 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

A-kal-la b

280

Princeton 1 565 (Š 43) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

A-kal-la

SAT 2 392 (Š 44 viii) Pàd-da

Lugal-ezem a

lá-NI-ta su-ga

MVN 4 132 (Š 45/AS 2) Pàd-da

Lugal-ezem

AOS 32 18* (Š 46 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Da-da-ga

Santag 6 82 (Š 47) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Da-da-ga

sag nu-tuku

Lú-kal-la

ki ur-sila-luh mu-⌈DU?⌉; rev. 2-3

RO 5 9 8 (AS 2 diri) Ur-sila-luh

b

5

mu da-da-ga-šè

14.83

14.83

gìr lú-dinanna dam-gàr

12.50

kù ésir; kišib nu-ra-a; rev. 4

Lú-kal-la

2.50

šu-nir énsi-ka; obv. ii 9-10

11

a-rá-1-kam; obv. ii 11-12

120

a-rá-2-kam; obv. ii 13-14

60

kù-sig17-ta gur-ra; rev. i 4-5

60

sám kù huš-a [šà tum]-malxki; rev. i 13-15

65

Ur-ddumu-zi-da

kù huš-a sa10-sa10-dè; dated to month x; rev. ii 1-3

80

Lú-kal-la

Dated to month x; rev. ii 4-5

240

Lú-kal-la

ku6-šeg6-bi 2(u) 6(aš) gur; mu-DU

15.90

Ur-dšul-pa-è

sám kù-huš-a PA.A.TÚG; rev. 27-28

Lú-kal-la

sám zabar; rev. 29 rev. 30

5 [...]+1.11 20.33

249

68.50

120 20

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

489.93

60

gìr ur- šul-pa-è kù-dím; rev. i 11-12

⌈énsi⌉

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

489.93

6

d

32.50

20

rev. 5

gìr lú-kal-la; rev. i 9-10

Santag 6 120 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

160

5

gìr lugal-níg-lagar-e dam-gàr

Lú-dinanna Jones Studies 216 (AS 3 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

maš-da-re6-a ezem-mah

818.34+[...]

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

STA 22 (AS 4 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) Sag-ku5 TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) dam-gàr-ne

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

Description

Lú-kal-la

gìr ur-dšul-pa-è kù-dím; kišib nu-ra-a; rev. i 24-27

30

Ur-ddumu-zi-da

sám kù-sig17-šè; rev. i 28-ii 2

50

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

níg-samx-ma nidba ù nesag denlíl in AS 4; obv. ii 12-16

1.50

Lú-ib-gal

gi-a sa10-a; rev. i 1-4

12.43

rev. ii 7-8

61

d

Utu-ul4-gal

Lú-kal-la A-gu

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

kù níg-samx-ma bala-a; rev. ii 9-10

rev. i 29 sám

Annual total (shekels)

220.14

kù sám kù-sig17 àga damar-dsuen ba-a-gar; rev. ii 11-12

10.21 55 121.42

giš

káb-kul; rev. ii 17-18 ?

1

ki

sám uruda uri5 -ma; gìr ur-dlamma ù é-lu-bi-zu; rev. ii 23-24

Ledgers pl. 8 5 (AS 5) Pàd-da Ledgers pl. 6 4 (AS 5) Pàd-da

Quantity (shekels)

Recipient

9.53

mu-DU; obv. 4-5

38

Lú-kal-la

rev. i 4-5

59.25

Lú-kal-la

rev. 5

79.61 ki

kù uruda uri5 -ma; gìr ur-dlamma ù é-lu-bi-zu!; rev. 18-19 Lú-kal-la

rev. 5-6; dated to AS 4

d

Dated to AS 5; rev. 7-8

8.50 841.71 20 10

Šà-kù-ge dumu a-ab-ni

kù ésir; rev. 10

0.50

TCL 5 6052 (AS 5) Inim-ma-ni-zi

Lú-kal-la

a-rá-1-kam; rev. 3-4

19.50

Ledgers pl. 11 7 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

Lú-kal-la

BPOA 7 2186 (AS 5) dam-gàr-ne

Lú-kal-la e

a-rá-2-kam; rev. 5-6

55

a-rá-1-kam; obv. 15

13

a-rá-2-kam in month i; rev. 16-17

2

lá-NI su-ga

250

328.73

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Quantity (shekels)

Description rev. 30-31; dated to AS 5 d iv;

Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) Ku5-da

60? d

Lú-kal-la

rev. 32; dated to AS 5 vi; Dated to AS 6 ii; rev. 33-34 ki

kù uruda uri5 -ma; gìr é-lú-bi-su; rev. 36

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

30 9.50 121.67 f

obv. ii 1-2

Ur-dnu-muš-⌈da⌉

na-kab-tum-ma ku4-ra; rev. ii 37

2

Ur-ddumu-zi-da

mu kišib kaš4 tùm-⌈da⌉-šè; rev. iii 11-13

10

sám naga [...]; rev. iii 26

1

Lú-kal-la Lú-kal-la

kù gišù-suh5-a sa10; rev. iii 27

276.84

0.67

rev. i 2-3

40

kišib nu-ra-a; rev. i 4-6

20

obv. i 12-13

25 d

Ka-téš-šá

kù-babbar šu- nisaba; mu kišib énsi-ka tùm-da-šè; rev. i 18-ii 1, ii 5-6

17

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

Ur-dnun-gal

kù ésir é-a; rev. ii 9-10

1

STA 1 (AS 8 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-kal-la

ni9-gar-ki-du10 ba-an-gi4; rev. i 36-37

60

kù an-na; rev. i 38

5

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

See above

35.67

Lú-kal-la

énsi

Annual total (shekels)

Lú-kal-la Ur-dšul-pa-è kù-dím

diri níg-kas7-ak; rev. i 8-9 ki

53.56

sám kù huš-a šà nibru ; rev. i 13-14

30

igi-kár nin; rev. i 15-17

126

A-gu

obv. iii 34

Lú-kal-la

obv. iv 25-26

[...]

A-da

obv. iv 27-28

2+[...]

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Lú-kal-la

274.56

4

sám ⌈kù⌉ huš-a; a-rá-1-kam; níg-dab5 month viii; obv. iv 29-30

[...]

sám ⌈kù⌉ huš-a ezem-mah; níg-dab5 month viii; obv. iv 31

[...]

kù gu7-ú-du; níg-dab5 month viii; obv. iv 32

4+[...]

sìla lugal sám; zi-ga in AS 9; obv. v 41-rev. i 1

0.54

251

1

[...]+29.54

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Description

Quantity (shekels)

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la

Ab-ba-gi-na

kù pa-mušen; obv. i 14

9

Santag 6 205 (AS 9) Ni9-gar-ki-du10

Lú-kal-la

kù mun!; mu [lú]-den-líl-lá-šè

10

See above

lá-NI su-ga; mu-DU sám sag

10

10

níg-dab5 du6-kù-ga; zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iv 25-27

6

6

YOS 4 270 (ŠS 3 xii) Pàd-da

máš-da-re6-a ezem še-[kin-ku5]šè ba-⌈zi⌉

1

1

SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) dam-gàr šà uri5ki-ma

diri níg-kas7-ak ŠS 3; rev. 7-8

2.52

2.52

MVN 9 212 (ŠS 1 xii) Inim-ma-ni-zi TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne ab-ba-gina

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

Lú-kal-la

rev. 14

10

uruda

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lú-kal-la

Ledgers pl. 27 1 (ŠS 7) A-a-kal-la

Gu-du-du

Annual total (shekels)

257.42

hu-pu-um zu-hu-re-dè marsa-aš; rev. ii 3-5

0.75

níg-kas7 kù-ga úgu-a ba-a-gar; rev. v 5-6

246.67

máš-da-re-a ezem month i; obv. 10

60

⌈sám⌉ gišù-suh5 ù ésir; obv. 11

3 132.63

[diri níg]-kas7-ak ŠS 6; rev. 18-19

⌈3.96⌉ 65.67

TJAMC IOS 1 (ŠS 7) A-a-kal-la

Gu-du-du

obv. 1-2

Vicino Oriente 8/1 66 (ŠS 8 vii) Ur-dutu

Gu-du-du

kù zú-lum

5

Santag 6 327 (ŠS 9 xi) A-a-kal-la

Gu-du-du

máš-da-re-⌈a⌉ ezem-mah-šè; mu-DU

50

ZA 95 175 (ŠS 9) dam-gàr-ne

[Gu-du-du]

g

rev. i 4-5

ZA 95 191 (IS 1) dam-gàr-e-ne

[Gu-du-du]

g

rev. i 16-17

200

200

BJRL 22 173 (IS 2 ii) Lugal-sig5

Gu-du-du

sám nin-ù-šim-e dumu-munus al-lu; mu-DU

3.50

3.50

5

351.33 301.33

252

A PPENDIX : T ABLES Notes a Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - m a h - e / š a b r a . b c d

Seal inscription in completeness: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 . Dated to the year Š 42 rather than the year AS 6 because of the involvement of Akala (§3.10). Date of transaction earlier than that of text.

e

His action described as d u 1 1 - g a g i - n a . f Based on restoring obv. ii 1 as 2 ( d i š ) m a - n a 1 ⅔ [ g í n k ù ] . g

Restoration based on discussion in §4.6.

Table 5.3.C. Base metals supplied by Umma merchants Quantity (minas)

Silver value (grains)

20

N/A

0.50

N/A

uruda

10

N/A

uruda; received from Lú-bàn-da a

10

N/A

0.17

N/A

0.08

N/A

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Metal & Description

BPOA 7 2552 (Š 32 vi) Pàd-da

La-a-mu

uruda

Ontario 2 393 (Š 32 vii) Pàd-da

La-a-mu

su-gan! & uruda

BPOA 6 1369 (Š 32) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

La-a-mu simug

RA 12 20 3 (Š 35 vi) Pàd-da

Ur-ni9-gar simug

Orient 16 62 71 (Š 47 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Na-ba-sá b dub-sar

MVN 20 160 (Š 47) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Da-da-ga

AN.NA

šu-gur kù-sig17 énsi-ka ba-a-gar uruda

238

su-gan

4.22

AN.NA

0.08

uruda; obv. iii 31-32

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú- en-líl-lá

STA 22 (AS 4 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-den-líl-lá

d

d

Lú- en-líl-[lá]

Lú-[den-líl-lá]

N/A

164.48

17340

2

1440

su-gan; rev. i 3-4

4.55

153

uruda; rev. i 16-17

7.75

836

2.50

225

21.75

2610

[...]+2.08

[...]

[su-gan]; kišib 3(diš); obv. ii 1-2

0.25

22.50

[uruda]; kišib-bi 4(diš)-àm; obv. ii 4-5

69.50

8460

su-[gan]; kišib-bi 4(diš)-àm; obv. ii 6-7

1

90

AN.NA;

rev. i 1-2

su-gan; rev. i 18-19 Lú-⌈kal⌉-la

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

su-gan; ditto a

c

uruda; dated to AS 3 ; obv. i 17-20 uruda; kišib 3(diš); obv. i 21-22

253

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Quantity (minas)

Silver value (grains)

[...]+0.07

⌈1248?⌉

uruda; rev. i 1-3

19.83

2380

uruda; rev. 6-8

38.50

4620

18

2160

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Metal & Description

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

Lú-den-líl

kišib-bi 3(diš)-àm; rev. i 37-ii 1

Ledgers pl. 6 4 (AS 5) Pàd-da

Lú-en-líl-lá

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-den-líl-lá

uruda; rev. 2-4

Ledgers pl. 11 7 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

Lú-den-⌈líl⌉-lá

uruda; rev. 19-21

6.63

796

TCL 5 6052 (AS 5) Inim-ma-ni-zi

Lú-den-líl-lá

uruda; rev. i 11-13

4.47

535

Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) Ku5-da

Lú-kal-la

uruda; dated to AS 5 d iv; rev. 28-29

10+[...]

820+[...]

[...]+0.20

1080

uruda; rev. ii 32-33

15.02

73

su-[gan]; rev. ii 34-35

1.49

180

15

1800

uruda; rev. i 19-20

131.63

13680

su-gan; rev. i 21-22

2.32

415.5

AN.NA;

rev. ii 30-31

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú- en-líl-lá

SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

Lú-den-líl-lá

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-den-líl-lá

AUCT 1 774 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-gišgigir dumu lugal-gaba

uruda; rev. 7-8

10

N/A

AUCT 1 774 (AS 7 vii) Pàd-da

Ur-gišgigir dumu lugal-gaba

uruda; obv. 1-2

5.65

N/A

AUCT 1 774 (AS 7 vii) Šeš-kal-la

Ur-gišgigir dumu lugal-gaba

uruda; obv. 3-4

4.97

N/A

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

[uruda]; rev. i 4’-5’

39.83

3600

Lú-den-líl-lá

[su-gan]; rev. i 6’-7’

0.67

147

1

900

STA 1 (AS 8 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-den-líl-lá

uruda; obv. i 13-14

70

6873

su-gan; obv. i 15-16

1.82

327

uruda; obv. ii 1-2

65

6435

su-gan; obv. ii 3-4

0.20

67

4

2160

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

d

uruda; obv. i 13-ii 2

AN.NA;

Lú-den-líl-lá Lú-kal-la

AN.NA;

rev. i 8’-9’

gag gal énsi-šè; rev. i 10-13

254

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Recipient

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-den-líl-lá

Quantity (minas)

Silver value (grains)

uruda; rev. iii 34-35

70.50

7614

⌈su-gan⌉; rev. iii 36-37

1.03

186

Metal & Description

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-den-líl-lá

uruda

21.45

2316.50

Lú-kal-la

AN.NA

2.33

1680

ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS 1 vii) Pàd-da

Lú-kal-la

su-gan

1.33

240

uruda

9.83

966

su-gan

0.23

42

uruda; obv. iii 26-27

10

1200

su-gan; obv. iii 28-29

0.50

90

1

180

uruda; zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iii 16-17

53.67

7245

su-gan; zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iii 18-19

1

90

Lú-den-líl-lá

uruda; dated to ŠS 5 c; obv. 3-5

3.75

540

Lú-dha-ìa

uruda; rev. 10-11

12.08

2032.50

uruda; [...]-ku6-ta sa10-a; rev. iii 4-5

[...]

UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú-dha-ìa

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lú- kalla

Lú-den-líl-lá Lú-den-líl-[lá] Lugal-nir

d

Lú- en-líl-lá

Lú-den-líl-lá

su-gan; rev. i 18-21 description incomprehensible

uruda; rev. iii 6-7 AN.NA;

rev. iii 8-9 d

Šára-kam

8197.50 9.33+ [...]

a-gar5 uruda; obv. v 34-rev. i 1

0.17

60

9

180

MVN 15 355 e (ŠS 9) dam-gàr

Gu-du-du

uruda

1203

N/A

UTI 3 2263 f (ŠS 9) Ni9-gar-ki-du10

Ha-lu5-⌈lu5⌉

zabar

3.25

N/A

Notes a

Since both kinds of metals are described as uruda pàd-da dam-gàr, the author believes that they were originally provided by the merchant even though the blacksmith received them from Lu-banda.

b c d

Seal inscription: n a - b a - ⌈ s á ⌉ / d u b - [ s a r ] / d u m u [A.KA.DUL]; restoration based on SAT 2 613 (Š 47). Date of transaction earlier than that of text. Since the text is dated to month ii of the year AS 6, month iv may have referred to month iv of the previous year.

e

Seal inscription: d š u - d s u e n / n i t a - k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d [ n u n gal] / dub-sar dumu ur-d[šára] / pisan-dub-ba-ka. f

obv. 2 reads: š à k i n i 9 - g a r - k i - d u 1 0 ⌈ d a m ⌉ - g à r , approximately “from within the place of Nigar-kidu, the merchant.”

255

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Table 5.3.D. Alkaline plants supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant Recipient

Description

SAT 2 188 (Š 38) Pàd-da

Dingir-ra

obv. 5-6; recorded on tablet received by Lugal-ezem, who sealed SAT 2 188 a

BCT 2 134 (Š 38) dam-gàr-ne

Lugal-ezem a

zi-ga; obv. 1-2

RA 49 91 25 (Š 39) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-ezem

a

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

300

45

3600

438

àga UŠ×X; šà bala-a

300

d

šul-gi-ir ; ditto

30

àga lugal; ditto

60

lugal a-tu5-a; ditto

10

na-hi-iš-tum; ditto

30

kù-dím; ditto

10

gú-ne-sag; ditto

10

!

N/A

OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

obv. 3

2058

N/A

Syracuse 483 (Š 46) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

obv. 2

1959

N/A

Santag 6 83 (Š 47) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

La-ni-mu

níg-dab5 gu-ru-ru-a šà uri5ki-ma

1789

N/A

Santag 6 109 (AS 1) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

A-du

243

N/A

SAT 2 646 (AS 1) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-igi-sa6-sa6 b

120

N/A

ASJ 9 317 9 (AS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Šeš-sig5

300

N/A

300

N/A

SET 274 (AS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da MVN 16 1002 (AS 3 v) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

obv. ii 25-26

gu gada dan6(KWU-712)-dan6dè; kišib lú-du10-ga c

300

Dated to month xi & xii in AS 2 d; níg-dab5 ezem month iv & viii; obv. ii 18-19

390

46.50

níg-dab5 ezem month iv & viii; obv. iii 22-23

780

93.50

Ur-dnin-tu

kišib lú-kal-la; rev. i 26-27

420

A-kal-la ašgab

ditto; rev. i 28-29

240

Lú-dnagar-pa-è túg-du8

ditto; rev. i 30-31

10

Ur-dnin-tu

Lú-dnin-šubur Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki a-a-mu; šà bala-a

256

N/A

73

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

515

120

rev. i 5-6

5

0.50

sá-du11 na-he-éš-tum-ma; obv. i 10-11

30

4.50

ki SIG4-te-lá-ni; obv. i 15

30

4.50

àga lugal; obv. ii 2-3

60

9

gáb-dan6 lugal; obv. ii 6-7

450

67.50

360

N/A

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki a-bu-ni; obv. i 20-22

41

6

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki puzur4d en-líl-lá; obv. ii 2-3

750

112.50

níg-dab5 ⌈túg⌉ a-gi4-a-um lugal ki dutu-ul4-gal; obv. ii 12-13

1020

153

níg-dab5 àga-lugal ki li-še-na; obv. ii 18-20

450

⌈67.5⌉

[120]

18

níg-dab5 dabin sa-a ki zabar; obv. ii 31-rev. i 1

30

⌈4.50?⌉

níg-dab5 é kù-dím ùr-ra-ka ki lugal-kù-zu; rev. i 3-5

20

4.50

⌈100?⌉

15

Text & Merchant Recipient

Description

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

Ur-dnin-marki

níg-dab5 uri5ki-ma; obv. 10-11

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) Sag-ku5

e

TCS 25 (AS 5 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

Ur-dnin-tu

Lú-kal-la

níg-dab5 àga-lugal ki lugal-dublá; obv. ii 24-26

Lú-den-líl

[x x x] ki lugal-an-dùl; rev. i 35-36

A-gu

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti; rev. ii 14

60

9

Ledgers pl. 8 5 (AS 5) Pàd-da

obv. 8-9

[...]

[...]

SNAT 356 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

[zi]-⌈ga⌉ uri5ki; obv. 10-11

515

62

gú-ne-sag-gá-šè; obv. ii 10-12

30

4.50

a-tu5-a lugal; obv. ii 16-17

15

2

níg-dab5 é ⌈kù⌉-dím; obv. ii 26-27

[...]

27

rev. i 10’

1170

[...]

rev. i 17’-18’

10

1.50

rev. i 24’-26’

10

1.50

rev. ii 25-26

[...]

18

rev. iii 14-15

2100

315

Lú-kal-la Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è A-gu A-kal-la ⌈Ì-kal⌉-la

f

257

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant Recipient BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la

Description

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

Lú-kal-la

níg-dab5 àga-lugal; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 8-10

120

24

Lú-den-líl-lá

zi-ga bala-a; obv. iii 2

100

15

níg-dab5 túg nin; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 20-21

120

18

níg-dab5 túg a-gi4-um lugal; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 31-32

1020

153

níg-dab5 túg nin; obv. iii 8 zi-ga bala-a dated to AS 5 d

120

18

zi-ga bala-a; obv. iii 28-29

850

127.50

rev. i 26-27

1200

[180]

Lú-kal-la STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

A-gu SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

A-du

zi-ga uri5ki; rev. i 3-4

660

132

BPOA 7 1616 (AS 7 iii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-dnin-šubur g

gada-mah ÚR×KAL.ÚR×KAL-dè

120

N/A

Ur-dšul-pa-è

dam bù-bù; kišib nu-ra-a; obv. iii 6-7

780

90

Lú-dnin-šubur

obv. iii 19-20

120

14

A-kal-la ašgab

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

obv. iii 29

180

21.50

d

Lú- nagar-pa-è

rev. i 5-6

40

5

Igi-gùn

rev. i 7-8

60

7

3

[...]

rev. ii 6-7

65

7

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti; obv. ii 15-16

750

75

níg-dab5 [giš-kin-ti ] [...]; obv. ii 22-23

41

4

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki a-a-mu; obv. iii 5-7

60

6

Lú-[...]

obv. iii 19-20

100

[10]

Ì-kal-la

rev. i 13’-15’

900

90

2100

315

d

Lú-kal-la

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

d

a-tu5-a amar- suen; rev. ii 4-5

d

STA 1 (AS 8 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ì-kal-la

kišib ur- nun-gal; rev. i 33-35

[...]

obv. ii 26-27

850

127.50

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

[...]

obv. ii 10-11

20

[...]

A-kal-la ašgab

obv. ii 15-17

30

3

obv. 6-7

851

170 h

AAS 65 (AS 8) dam-gàr šà bala-a

258

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant Recipient

Description

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

BPOA 1 491 (AS 9 viii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dnun-gal j

àga-lugal-šè

120 k

N/A

MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

Ur-dšul-pa-è

recorded on tablet passed to Urd nun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 j; rev. 33-34

1385

N/A

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la

Ab-ba-gi-na

obv. ii 1-2

402

80

BPOA 1 999 (AS 9) dam-gàr

Ì-kal-la

kù-ta sa10-a

3000 l

N/A

níg-dab5 àga-lugal; obv. ii 15-16

120 k

24

níg-dab5 túg a-gi4-a-um lugal; obv. ii 17-18

1020

204

níg-dab5 a-tu5-a; obv. ii 30-31

15.33

3

níg-dab5 dabin sa-a; obv. ii 35-37

30

6

[...]-na-hi-iš-tum; obv. ii 38-41

30

9m

níg-dab5 é kù!-dím n; obv. iii 6-7

60

36

níg-dab5 a-da-[mìn]-na; obv. iii 11-12

360

72

šà bala-a; obv. iv 5-7

20

4

[níg-dab5] [a]-⌈tu5⌉-a šul-gi-ra; obv. iv 16

[5]

1

obv. iv 24

[10]

2

níg-dab5 month viii; obv. v 30-31

390

78

zi-ga; obv. v 40

10

2

zi-ga AS 8; rev. i 37-38

390

Ur-d⌈šul-pa-è⌉

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

d

Lú-kal-la

UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ì-kal-la

rev. iii 8-10

A-kal-la ašgab

rev. iii 29-30 d

3000

78 l

600

120

24

A-kal-la

kišib lú- nagar-pa-è; rev. iii 31-33

30

6

Ur-dšul-pa-è

obv. iii 5-6

780

78

⌈Ur⌉-[...]-ga

obv. iii 31-rev. i 1

90

10?

Lugal-nir

4(bán) im-duru5 [d]šára ba-ra-su; rev. i 16-17

180

18

259

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant Recipient

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

1000

120

Uš-mu lú-ázlag

ditto; obv. iii 33-iv 1

1200

144

A-a-kal-la ašgab

ditto; obv. iv 5-6

90

10.66

Lú-dnin-šubur

ditto; obv. iv 12-14

60

7

Lú-du10-ga

ditto; obv. iv 19-20

60

7

8

1

d

ditto; rev. i 13-14

d

Ur- nun-gal

rev. ii 16-17

495

50

Ab-ba-gi-na

rev. 2-3

402

60

obv. 10-11

402

60

3148.33

471

1250 p

186.50 q

240

36

[níg]-⌈kas7⌉ bala-a-ka ⌈úgu⌉-a gá-gá-dam; obv. ii 13-14 d

Šára-kam

AOS 32 S23 (date broken) dam-gàr-ne

Silver value (grains)

zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iii 13-15

Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne ab-ba-gi-na

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lú-kal-la

Quantity (liters)

Ur-dšul-pa-è

Lú- nàm-an-ka

SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) dam-gàr šà uri5ki-ma

Description

rev. i 11-12

Lugal-nir

zi-ga é dšára-ka; rev. ii 18-19

Ì-kal-la

rev. ii 33-34

1380

252

A-a-kal-la ašgab

rev. iii 29-30

210

31.50

Lú-du10-ga

rev. iii 34-36

360

54

Ba-sig5

rev. iii 37-39

20

4

Lú-du10-ga

rev. iii 40-iv 2

10

2

àga-lugal-šè; obv. 9’-10’

2970

N/A

515

N/A

?

[Lú ]-kal-la

zi-ga uri5ki-ma; rev. 21’

Notes a b

Seal inscription in completeness: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - m a h - e / š a b r a . Seal inscription: l ú - i g i - s a 6 - s a 6 / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - g i š g i g i r .

c

Seal inscription: l ú - d u 1 0 - g a / d u b - s a r / d u m u d u 1 1 - g a .

d

Date of transaction earlier than that of text.

e

In this text, a silver value does not follow each withdrawal from the merchant. Instead, a silver value appears at the end for the total volume withdrawn of each product. This study calculates the silver value of individual withdrawals according to the numerical relationship between the total volume of a specific product and the corresponding silver value. f Restored according to STA 1 (AS 8 vii) rev. i 33-34. g

Seal inscription: l ú - d n i n - š u b u r / d u b - s a r d u m u š e š - k a l - l a / š a b r a . h Calculated based on reading the number within the LÁ sign in obv. 7 as 1(u). j

Seal inscription in completeness: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - b a - k a .

260

A PPENDIX : T ABLES k l

Same transaction. Same transaction.

m

Total of the two numbers in obv. ii 39 and 41. This study restores line 41 as k ù - b i [ 3 ( d i š ) ] š e based on the overall median price of sprouted alkaline plants calculated by Snell (1982, 122-123).

n

Misread as b a - d í m (obv. iii 10) in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). Cf. parallels in RA 49 91 25 (Š 39) rev. 2; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. i 5; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 32. p Possibly several liters higher, as shown by the cuneiform for rev. i 11. q

Possibly several grains higher, as shown by the cuneiform for rev. i 12.

Table 5.3.E. Gypsum supplied by Umma merchants Quantity (minas)

Silver value (grains)

níg-dab5 du6 ⌈kù⌉; obv. 5-7

285

45

La-ni-mu

obv. 2

765

N/A

Syracuse 483 (Š 46) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

obv. 3

755

N/A

Santag 6 83 (Š 47) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

La-ni-mu

níg-dab5 gu-ru-ru-a šà uri5ki-ma;

220

N/A

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-dnin-šubur

níg-dab5 ezem month iv & viii; obv. iii 26-27

180

27

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

Ur-dnin-marki

níg-dab5 uri5ki-ma; rev. 18-19

250

45

STA 22 (AS 4 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

níg-dab5 du6 kù-ga; obv. ii 9-11

225

45

Ì-kal-la

rev. i 13-15, 21-23

380

61

5

3.60

120

86.40

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki a-bu-ni; obv. i 18-19

⌈135⌉

27

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki puzur4-den-líllá; obv. ii 4-7

600

120

níg-dab5 ⌈tíg⌉a-gi4-a-um lugal ki dutuád-gal; obv. ii 14-17

[360]

72

níg-dab5 àga lugal ki lugal-dub-lá; obv. ii 22-23

[300]

60

níg-dab5 kušsúhub lugal ki šu-eš18tár; obv. ii 27-30

10 b

2

Lú-den-líl

[x x x] ki lugal-an-dùl; rev. i 34

10

2

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

níg-dab5 du6 kù-ga; rev. ii 4-6

225

33

A-gu

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti; rev. ii 15-16

18

3

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Description

Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) Pàd-da

Lugal-bàd

OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) dam-gàr-ne

TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) Sag-ku5

a

sá-du11 na-he-éš-tum-ma; obv. i 12-13 àga lugal; obv. ii 1

Lú-kal-la AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

261

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Recipient

SNAT 356 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-kal-la Ur-dšul-pa-è ⌈Ì-kal⌉-la

BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

c

Description

Quantity (minas)

Silver value (grains)

[zi]-⌈ga⌉ uri5ki; obv. 12-13

275

36

níg-dab5 é ⌈kù⌉-dím; obv. ii 30-32

10

1

rev. i 11’

180

[...]

1380

125

rev. iii 16-18

Lú-kal-la

níg-dab5 àga-lugal; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 6-7

120

36

Lú-den-líl-lá

zi-ga bala-a; obv. iii 3-4

10

1

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

níg-dab5 kù-ga; obv. iii 23-25

225

22.50

níg-dab5 túg nin; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 22-24

60

6

níg-dab5 kušsúhub lugal; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 25-27

10 b

2

níg-dab5 túg a-gi4-um lugal; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 33-34

360

36

níg-dab5 túg nin; obv. iii 9-11 zi-ga bala-a dated to AS 5 d;

60

6

zi-ga bala-a; obv. iii 30 & rev. i 1

768

76.50

rev. i 24-25

1200

120

Lú-kal-la

A-gu SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

A-du

zi-ga uri5ki; rev. i 5-6

580

110

BPOA 7 1616 (AS 7 iii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-dnin-šubur e

gada-mah ÚR×KAL.ÚR×KAL-dè

120 f

N/A

Ur-dšul-pa-è

dam bù-bù; kišib nu-ra-a; obv. iii 8-9

480

45

Lú-dnin-šubur

obv. iii 21-23

120 f

14

Ì-kal-la

rev. i 16-18

1800

216

Lú-kal-la

rev. ii 8-10

10

1

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti; obv. ii 17-19

600

60

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki a-a-mu; obv. iii 3-4

18

1.67

1260

126

obv. 8-9

750

150

àga-lugal-šè

120

N/A

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da Ì-kal-la AAS 65 (AS 8) dam-gàr šà bala-a BPOA 1 491 (AS 9 viii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dnun-gal g

rev. i 11’-12’

262

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Ur-d⌈šul-pa-è⌉

Quantity (minas)

Silver value (grains)

níg-dab5 àga-lugal; obv. ii 13-14

120

60

níg-dab5 túga-gi4-a-um lugal; obv. ii 19-21

360

72

5

1

níg-dab5 é kù!-dím h; obv. iii 8-10

10

2

šà bala-a; obv. iv 3-4

40

8

Description

[...] na-hi-iš-tum; obv. iii 1-3

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Lú-kal-la d

Ur- šul-pa-è

d

nidba en-[líl-lá]; rev. ii 44-45

3

0.50 j

480

Ì-kal-la

rev. iii 6-7

2400

BPOA 1 999 (AS 9) dam-gàr

Ì-kal-la

kù-ta sa10-a

2400 j

N/A

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la

Ab-ba-gi-na

obv. ii 6-7

295

80

MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

Ur-dšul-pa-è

recorded on tablet passed to Urd nun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 g; rev. 34

3

N/A

Ur-dšul-pa-è

obv. iii 11-12

180

36

A-gu

obv. iii 18-20

40

8

Lú- ha-ìa

rev. i 9-10

20

4

d

rev. i 25-27

2

0.33

420

63

UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

[d]

Šára-kam

Ur-dšul-pa-è

zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iii 11-12

Uš-mu lú-ázlag

ditto; obv. iv 2-4

1500

225

Ur-dnun-gal

rev. ii 18-20

120

18

SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) dam-gàr šà uri5ki-ma

Ab-ba-gi-na

obv. 16-rev. 1

295

60

Ledgers pl. 21 12 (ŠS 5) Pàd-da

Šà-kù-ge

rev. 20-21

10

2

obv. 12-13

295

45

[níg]-⌈kas7⌉ bala-a-ka ⌈úgu⌉-a gá-gádam; obv. ii 15-16

10 b

3

ditto: obv. iii 17-19

1542

231

960

144

596

89.50

2040

⌈306⌉

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne ab-ba-gina

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lú-kal-la

d

Šára-kam

obv. v 32-33 d

Lugal-nir

zi-ga é šára-ka; rev. ii 20-23

Ì-kal-la

rev. ii 35-37

263

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

AOS 32 S23 (date broken) dam-gàr-ne

Recipient

[Lú?]-kal-la

Description

Quantity (minas)

àga-lugal-šè; obv. 12’-13’

125

zi-ga bala-a; rev. 14’

1800

zi-ga uri5ki-ma; rev. 22’-23’

Silver value (grains)

N/A

275

Notes a

In this text, a silver value does not follow each withdrawal from the merchant. Instead, a silver value appears at the end for the total volume withdrawn of each product. This study calculates the silver value of individual withdrawals according to the numerical relationship between the total volume of a specific product and the corresponding silver value. . b The metrological unit was liter rather than mina, as a different type of gypsum, i m - b á b b a r k u m , was involved. c

Restored based on parallel in STA 1 (AS 8 vii) rev. i 33-34.

d

Date of transaction earlier than that of text. Seal inscription: l ú - d n i n - š u b u r / d u b - s a r d u m u š e š - k a l - l a / š a b r a .

e f

Same transaction.

g

Seal inscription in completeness: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - b a - k a .

h

Misread as b a - d í m (obv. iii 10) in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). Cf. parallels in RA 49 91 25 (Š 39) rev. 2; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. i 5; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 32. j

Same transaction.

Table 5.3.F. Bitumen supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters) MVN 20 198 a (Š 27 xii) Šeš-kal-la

A-ab-ba

Umma 98 (Š 33 viii) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-dšára

Princeton 1 532 (Š 34) Šeš-kal-la

lugal-gir-šè; Lugal-inim-gi-na b é-kišib lugal-šè; šà bala-a

JCS 46 24 13 (Š 38) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-ezem c

še-bi 8(aš) gur

SAT 2 188 (Š 38) Pàd-da

Dingir-ra

obv. 3-4; recorded on tablet received by Lugal-ezem, who sealed SAT 2 188 c

BCT 2 134 (Š 38) dam-gàr-ne

Lugal-ezem c

CTNMC 19 (Š 41 iv) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ù-ma-ni e

du10-ús-šè; šà bala-a

(minas)

Silver value (grains)

4800

N/A

20

N/A

10

N/A

600

N/A d

30

360

zi-ga; obv. 3

3600

1586

ditto; rev. 21

15

37?

gi

18

N/A

gur zì-da ésir! su-bu-dè

264

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters) Syracuse 174 (Š 44) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-igi-sa6-sa6 f

šà bala-a

Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) Pàd-da

Lugal-⌈bàd⌉

OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

Syracuse 483 (Š 46) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

SAT 2 613 (Š 47) Šeš-kal-la

Na-ba-sá g

AOS 32 7* (Š 48) Šeš-kal-la

(minas)

Silver value (grains)

510

N/A

níg-dab5 ùr-lugal-ka; rev. 7-9

20

36

obv. 4

89 79 l

obv. 9-rev. 10 obv. 1

734

N/A N/A

83 l

rev. 9-10 12540

N/A

šà é-puzur4-da-gan

120

N/A

Na-ba-[sa6] h

gir-ra ba-a-gar; šà bala-a; šà é-puzur4-da-gan

357

N/A

Orient 16 63 75 (Š 48) Šeš-kal-la

Na-ba?-[sá?] j

gir-ra ba-a-gar; šà bala-a; šà é-puzur4-da-gan;

3600

N/A

SAT 2 646 (AS 1) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-igi-sa6-sa6 f

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki a-amu; šà bala-a

100

N/A

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

Ur-dnin-marki

níg-dab5 uri5ki-ma; rev. 20-21

10

20

Ur-dšul-pa-è

rev. i 5-6

110

220

Níg-lagar-e

rev. i 10-12

630

1380

Níg-lagar-e

rev. i 17-19

STA 22 (AS 4 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da TCL 5 6162 (AS 4) Sag-ku5

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

1800

ki SIG4-te-lá-ni; obv. i 14 Lú-kal-la

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki abu-ni; obv. i 16-17

A-gu

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti; rev. ii 13

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6

rev. iii 19-20

Ledgers pl. 8 5 (AS 5) Pàd-da Ledgers pl. 11 7 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

gir ba-a-gar;

A-gu

540

0.17

0k

254.50

381

29

47.50? 780

234

obv. 6-7

259

510

rev. 22-24

180

432

265

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters) a-tu5-a lugal; obv. ii 15 Lú-kal-la

0k

0.17 26.67

níg-dab5 gi i7; obv. ii 21-22 níg-dab5 é ⌈kù⌉-dím; obv. ii 28-29

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

(minas)

Silver value (grains)

8

45

54

20

24

Ur-dšul-pa-è

rev. i 13’

250

375

A-gu

rev. i 22’-23’

120

144

Lú-sa6-ì-zu

rev. ii 12-14

1345

2025

Níg-lagar-e

rev. ii 15-17

300

450

Dingir-ra

má-gur8 énsi-ka-šè; rev. ii 18-21

180

270

Da-a-gi4

rev. ii 22-24

380

570

ki

20

24

Ab-ba-gi-na

ga-eš -šè; rev. iii 1-2 d

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

Lú-d⌈nin-šubur⌉

má-gur8 šára ù [...] ŠIM ba-ra-ab-[...]; rev. iii 7-10

Lú-kal-la

níg-dab5 é-AŠ.GIŠ; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 28-30

70

84

Igi-gùn

zi-ga bala-a; obv. iii 21-22

90

108

A-gu

ditto; rev. i 2-3

328

360

ditto; rev. i 4-8

108

392 18

l

9.50

Lugal-[...]

ditto; rev. i 14-15

20

[24]

d

ditto; rev. i 16-17

30

36

A-gu

rev. ii 1-3

210

252

Nin-me-lám

rev. ii 4-5

300

360

60

72

KA×UD-zi

Lú-kal-la

rev. ii 12-14

BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-kal-la

níg-dab5 tu-ru-hu-um; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 3-5

25

30

AN.BÙ.ZI

zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 14-16

60

72

BPOA 7 2288 (AS 6) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ab-ba-gi-na m

ga-eški-šè

20

N/A

A-du

zi-ga uri5ki; rev. i 1-2

269

450

Lugal-nir-gál n

mar-sa-aš; má-gur8 damar-dsuen

60

N/A

SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá Torino 2 651 (AS 7 iii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

266

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters)

(minas)

Silver value (grains)

BPOA 6 922 (AS 7 iv) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Níg-lagar-e p

má a-KIN lugal-šè

80

N/A

AnOr 1 107 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Uš-mu

inim-énsi-ta; rest too broken

5

N/A

Ur-dšul-pa-è

dam bù-bù; kišib nu-ra-a; obv. iii 2-3

105

189

A-gu

obv. iii 24-26

190

340

360

648

80

144

26

46.50

15

27

3

5

d

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

d

d

Lugal-nir-gál

má lamma- amar- suenka-šè; rev. i 9-12

Níg-lagar-e

má-a-ni-šè; rev. i 13-15 giš

me-dím gišmi-rí-za mágur8 lugal-ka-ke4 ba-absu-ub; rev. i 24-27

Da-da-ga

giš

kak é-a-ni-šè damarsuen-ka-ke4 ba-ab-su-ub; rev. i 28-ii 1 d

Uš-mu

giš

bul5 (LAGAB×SUM) gigir-ke4 ba-ab-su-ub; rev. ii 2-3

Lú-kal-la

giš

Da-a-gi

é ga-eški-šè; rev. ii 11-14

180

324

níg-dab5 [...]; obv. ii 20-21

228

342

níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki a-a-mu; obv. iii 1-2

29

42.50

A-gu

obv. iii 8-10

60

90

[...]

obv. ii 8-9

20

20+[...]

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

obv. ii 18-19

A-du muhaldim

obv. ii 19-rev. i 1 obv. 4-5

AAS 65 (AS 8) dam-gàr šà bala-a BPOA 1 812 (AS 9) dam-gàr JRAS 1939 38 (AS 9) dam-gàr

20460 1323

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6

1584

423.50

635 q

obv. 12-13

9.50

obv. 14-15

8.50

3

2220

N/A

6060

N/A

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6 r kù-ta sa10

r

5580

kù-ta sa10-a; mar-sa-aš; parallel to ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) rev. iii 24-28

267

2740

14

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters) MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

Ab-ba-gi-na

obv. i 19-ii 1

257

obv. ii 4-5

Ur-dšul-pa-è

Ur- ⌈šul-pa-è⌉

Hu-wa-[wa] d

Lú- en-líl-lá

recorded on tablet passed to Ur-dnun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 s; rev. 31

1550

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

níg-dab5 a-tu5-a; obv. ii 28-29

0k

níg-dab5 é kù!-dím t; obv. iii 4-5

20

24

obv. iii 22-23

60

72

obv. iii 24-26

3780

945

obv. iii 31-33

3

[3.60]

330

396

má-gur8 šára ba-a-gar; obv. iv 11-12

nidba den-[líl-lá]; rev. ii 41-43 gur5 (URU×GU) su-budè; rev. iii 11-14

65

78

A-gu

rev. iii 15-16

70

84

A-du muhaldim

rev. iii 21-23

gi

360

rev. iii 24-25

2800

rev. iii 26-28 d

106 3720

6060

1512

?

Lugal-nir

gi é šukud -eb-ka é d šára-ka-ke4 ba-ab-su-ub; rev. iii 3942

A-du ⌈muhaldim⌉

obv. 7-rev. 2

Ur-dšul-pa-è

obv. iii 13-15

180

216

A-gu

obv. iii 16-17

50

60

obv. iii 21-22

1500

1800

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6 Lú-[d]ha-ìa

Nisaba 9 57 (ŠS 2 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

324 300

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6

UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

1200 250

Dingir-ra

ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS i vii) Pàd-da

N/A

0.17

ditto; obv. iv 13-15 Ur-dšul-pa-è

10.50

1560

d

Lú-kal-la

462 35

ditto; rev. 32 d

(minas)

Silver value (grains)

10

12

5880

1620+[...]

obv. iii 23-25

7260

2178

rev. i 11-12

2400

720

rev. i 13-15

300

360

Lugal-kù-zu

rev. i 22-24

120

144

Ur-é-mah u

má énsi-ka-šè

144

N/A

268

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters)

(minas)

Silver value (grains)

BPOA 2 2199 (ŠS 2 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-é-mah u

ditto

600

N/A

BPOA 2 2161 (ŠS 2 xii) Pàd-da

Ur-é-mah u

má énsi-ka-šè

1920

N/A

BPOA 1 1165 (ŠS 2) dam-gàr-ne

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6 r

obv. 1 obv. 2-3

N/A 6120

Ur-dšul-pa-è

zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iii 7-8

180

216

A-gu

ditto; obv. iii 21-23

725

930

ditto; obv. iii 24-25

600

780

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6

ditto: obv. iii 26-28 gi

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

920

?

8020

2406

d

Lugal-[...]

kid ù kid é šára-ke4 baab-su-⌈ub⌉; zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iii 29-32

690

1230

Šeš-kal-la

gur še bala-e-dè su-bu-dè; zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iv 15-18

10

12

Dingir-ra

éš gišùr-ra-ke4 ba-ab-suub; zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iv 22-24

70

108

gigir ù má-gur8 énsi-ka; zi-ga šà uru-ka; rev. i 16-17

16

19.50

gur še bala-e-dè su-bu-dè; zi-ga šà uru-ka; rev. i 21-23

30

36

11757.33

4142

18150

5850

giš

d

Lú- nàm-an-ka

Ur-dnun-gal d

rev. ii 4-7; 14-15

Lú- suen

rev. ii 21-24

BPOA 1 1437 (ŠS 3 iii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-dnám-an-ka v

ba-rí-ga ba-ab-su-ga(sic)

10

N/A

BPOA 2 2380 (ŠS 3 iv) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ab-ba-gi-na m

mar-sa má-gur8 énsi-ka

60

N/A

má-gur8 énsi-ka-šè

600

N/A

300

BPOA 1 1199 (ŠS 3 ix) Pàd-da

Ab-ba-gi-na m

BPOA 1 1400 (ŠS 3 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-kù-zu w

má-gur8 dnanna du8 [...]

BPOA 1 1019 (ŠS 3) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ab-ba-gi-na m

má-gur8 énsi-ka-šè mi-rí-za su-bu-dè

269

20

N/A

N/A

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters) Ledgers pl. 21 12 (ŠS 5) Pàd-da

SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) dam-gàr šà uri5ki-ma SAT 3 1621 (ŠS 5 iv) Ur-ddumu-zi-da SAT 3 1707 (ŠS 6) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Santag 6 310 (ŠS 6) Ur-ddumu-zi-da SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú-dha-ìa

Ur-dma-[mi]

obv. 10

120

obv. 11-12

1290

Šà-kù-ge

rev. 16-17

300

450

A-[...]

rev. 22-23

10

15

Dated to ŠS 3; obv. 6-7

10

15

obv. 11-12

258

387

Ab-ba-gi-na

obv. 14-15

35

Lú-dnin-šubur x

TU dšára TU da-nun-nake4-ne ba-ra-ab-du8

240

d

Šára-kam y

Lú-dnin-šubur

d

Lú- ha-ìa

d

Šára-kam

A-gu

N/A

In the sag-níg-gur11-ra[kam] section of níg-kas7ak lú-dnin-šubur; obv. 5

785

N/A

níg-dab5 má-gur8 dšára; rev. 8

140

258

ditto; rev. 12

300

540 1200

360

[níg]-⌈kas7⌉ bala-a-ka ⌈úgu⌉-a gá-gá-dam; obv. ii 9-10

2147.67

3221.50

ditto; obv. ii 11-12

17890

4472.50

341

511.50

obv. v 28-29

1200

450

mar-sa-aš; rev. i 20-21

3901

[...]

rev. ii 24-25

1006

1810.50

rev. ii 38-39

300

665 z

mar-sa a-pi4-sal4ki-šè; rev. iv 3-5

600

1350

rev. iv 30-31

440

792 1200

obv. 14-15

139+[...]

rev. 2-3

[Lú?]-kal-la

N/A

20

rev. iv 32-33 Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne ab-bagi-na

10.50

5

obv. v 30-31

Lú-dha-ìa

AOS 32 S23 (date broken) dam-gàr-ne

180 5160

ditto; rev. 13

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lú-kal-la

(minas)

Silver value (grains)

540 5+[...]

àga-lugal-šè; obv. 11’

770.17

zi-ga bala-a; rev. 15’

1500

330

10.50

N/A

270

A PPENDIX : T ABLES Notes a Inclusion based on restoring obv. 1 as 8 ( u ) ⌈ g ú ? ⌉ ⌈ é s i r ? g u l ⌉ - g u l . b

Seal inscription: l u g a l - i n i m - g i - n a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - n e s a g - e . Seal inscription in completeness: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - m a h - e / š a b r a .

c d

Equivalent to 3,200 liters of barley.

e

Seal inscription: [ ù - m a - n i ] / d u b - s a r / d u m u n a m - h a - n i . Seal inscription: l ú - i g i - s a 6 - s a 6 / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - g i š g i g i r ( - r e ) .

f g

Seal inscription: n a - b a - s á / [ d u b - s a r ] / d u m u

A.KA.DUL.

h

Seal inscription: n a - b a - s a 6 / d u b - s a r / d u m u A.⌈KA⌉.[DUL]. j Seal inscription: n a - b a - [ s á ? ] / d u b - ⌈ s a r ⌉ / d u m u A.KA.[DUL]. k l

Silver value of so little bitumen must have been too tiny to take into account. Including a new type of bitumen igi ésir.

m

Seal inscription: a b - b a - g i - n a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - m á - g u r 8 - r e .

n

Seal inscription: l u g a l - n i r - g á l / d u b - s a r / á r a d d š á r a . Seal inscription: n í g - l a g a r - e / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - g a b a / [ š a b r a ] .

p q r

Featuring a new type of bitumen i g i é s i r . Seal inscription: l u g a l - e - b a - a n - s a 6 / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d i š t a r a n .

s

Seal inscription: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - [ b a - k a ] .

t

Misread as ba-dím (obv. iii 10) in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). Cf. parallels in RA 49 91 25 (Š 39) rev. 2; AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) rev. i 5; Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 32. u Seal inscription: u r - é - m a h / d u b - s a r / d u m u d a - d a . v

Seal inscription: l ú - d n á m - a n - k a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l ú - d [ š á r a ] / s a g - d u 5 - k a .

w

Seal inscription: l u g a l - k ù - z u / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 . Seal inscription: l ú - d n i n - š u b u r / d u b - s a r / d u m u d u 1 0 - g a / š a b r a d š á r a - k a .

x y

Seal inscription: d š á r a - k a m / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - g i š k i r i 6 .

z

The cuneiform shows this number in rev. ii 39 might be a few grains higher.

Table 5.3.G. Resins supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters)

SAT 2 174 (Š 37) Pàd-da

Ur- Nisaba

Recorded on tablet passed to Lugal-ezem a, who sealed SAT 2 174; obv. 2-rev. 9

BCT 2 134 b (Š 39) dam-gàr-ne

Lugal-ezem c

obv. 5-7, 9-13; rev. 22

Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) Pàd-da

Lugal-⌈bàd⌉

BPOA 6 1243 (AS 2 v) dam-gàr-ne

Lú-kal-la

d

níg-dab5 ùr-lugal-ka; obv. 8-17 níg-gur11 gál-la šà émaš

271

(minas)

4

Silver value (grains) 12

3

48

27

1812.50

20.5

1845

3.33

120 13.33

700

364.67

3282

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Quantity

Recipient

Description

Lú-dnin-šubur

Dated to month xi & xii in AS 2 d; níg-dab5 ezem month iv & viii; obv. i 24-ii 16, 20-23

(liters)

níg-dab5 ezem month iv & viii; obv. ii 24-iii 17, 20-21

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Ur-dnin-tu

níg-gál-la é-maš; rev. i 21-25

Ur-dšul-pa-è

rev. ii 11-28, 31-37

(minas)

314?

11.25 16.50 27+[...]

obv. ii 17-rev. i 4

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-dšul-pa-è d Ur- dumu-zi-da

obv. ii 9-34

36

528

281

2529

10+[...]

153

12

A-tu sagi

32.17+ [...]

TCL 5 6162 e (AS 4) Sag-ku5

7.50

10

30

11

ì úgu-lugal; obv. ii 15-20

níg-dab5 é-lugal-ka; rev. 1-11 (with rev. 1 restored as [3(diš)] ⅓ ma-na ád)

36

38.33

520

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

Lú-kal-la

73.50

1

18

9

200 200?

0.50

d

ki-a-nag ur- namma; rev. i 16-17

6

3

24 1

Lú-den-líl

[x x x] ki lugal-an-dùl; rev. i 33

Lú-kal-la

níg-dab5 ì úgu-a lugal; obv. ii 7-16

272

13

0.17

é-muhaldim sá-du11 Lugal; rev. i 21-27

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

7

6.67

níg-dab5 dugútul ki dšul-gi-uru-mu; rev. i 6-13

46.50

1

maš-šu-gíd-gíd; obv. ii 21-22 SNAT 356 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

1134 396

2

níg-dab5 é-uz-ga; obv. ii 11-14

990.50+[...]

2.50

31.50

níg-dab5 nag-lugal; obv. ii 8-10

52.50 178+[...]

79.17

obv. ii 4-5

394 66

4.67

ki SIG4-te-lá-ni; obv. i 16-18

225.50 726

32 STA 22 Ur-dšul-pa-è (AS 4 i) d Ur- dumu-zi-da

Silver value (grains)

36+[...]

0.67

24

2

12 7

38.33

63 1046

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters) 1

kin-gi4-a-aš; obv. ii 8-9

ki-a-nag ur-dnamma; obv. iii 9-11 Ur-dšul-pa-è

20

2.50

lú-lunga nag-lugal íbdab5; obv. ii 34-iii 4

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Urd dumu-zi-da

90 1

a-tu5-a lugal; obv. ii 13-14, 18-20

obv. iii 28-rev. i 8’, 14’

15 19.50

Lú-kal-la

NI.KAM .GI

d

šára-ke4 dah-ha; rev. i 27’- ii 11

Syracuse 486 (AS 6) Lú-kal-la f d Ur- dumu-zi-da

ú-gu-uš zà-bar-šè

Ledgers pl. 17 Ur-dšul-pa-è 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

dam-bù-bù; kišib nu-ra-a; obv. i 18-iii 1

Ur-dnun-gal

585

3

30

51

720+[...]

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

11.50 5.83+ [...]

88+[...]

0.17

20

77.33

1977.17 151

2570

[7] g

63

38.33

859

4

9+[...]

rev. i 22’-ii 8

gìr hu-u4-da dam pàdda; rev. ii 11-13 [...]

1470+[...]

1+[...]

níg-dab5 ì úgu-a lugal; obv. ii 3-14

5.50+ [...]

12+[...]

3

54

72.33+ [...]

obv. i 18-ii 23, 28-29

1553+[...] 164.50

STA 1 Lú-dha-ìa (AS 8 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Kù-ga-ni

rev. i 3-27

Lú-kal-la

rev. ii 1-7

7

h

rev. i 28-32

rev. i 5-7

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la

níg-dab5 ùr-lugal; rev. i 12-ii 3

19.67 h

330.50 h

4

63

1

4.50 j

20

273

40.50 45

13.33 3.33

3002+[...] 86.33 h

3.05 MVN 1 240 (AS 8 diri) Lú-dnin-šubur d Ur- dumu-zi-da

1170

6.50

106 ?

Silver value (grains) [120?]

2

níg-dab5 a-da-ga; obv. ii 3-7

Lú-kal-la

(minas)

390 130

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Quantity

Description

(liters)

28.50

níg-dab5 lú-lunga naglugal; obv. ii 1-6

d

Ur- ⌈šul-pa-è⌉

9.50

níg-dab5 máš:šu-gídgíd; obv. ii 7-9 2.67

níg-dab5 a-da-[mìn]-na; obv. iii 13-16 obv. iii 17-21

níg-dab5 month viii; obv. iv 34-v 27, 32-36 úgu ur-e11-e ba-a-gar; obv. v 37-39

24

150

Ur-dšul-pa-è

A-gu

0.25

[...]

18

324

47

885.50 k

18.67

305

2

60

18.67

d

42

nidba en-[líl-lá]; rev. ii 3-32

357

0.50

d

Ur- šul-pa-è

recorded on tablet passed to Ur-dnun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 p; obv. 1-18, 20-21

UTI 5 3187 Ur-dšul-pa-è (ŠS 1 diri) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Lú-[d]ha-ìa

obv. ii 1-iii 2, 7-10

JCS 26 100 2 Nin9-hi-lí-a q (ŠS 1) d Ur- dumu-zi-da

é énsi-ka-šè; kišib nu-ra-a

8

142.42 266.83 106 43.08

rev. i 7-8

N/A

1998.67 784.23

5 10 123.83 r

JCS 26 102 4 Nin9-hi-lí-a q (ŠS 2) d Ur- dumu-zi-da UTI 4 2307 (ŠS 2 iv) Lú-dnin-šubur s d Ur- dumu-zi-da

1119 1.50

1 MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

776.50 m 370

n

67

rev. iii 18-20

120 [...]

41 l

zi-ga AS 8 d; rev. i 3-34, 39-41

18

1

níg-dab5 é-dšára; obv. iv 8-10 Lú-kal-la

2052

28.50 2

níg-dab5 ùr-ra; obv. iii 41-iv 2

ASJ 11 204216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Silver value (grains)

342 1

níg-dab5 a-tu5-a; obv. ii 24-27, 32-33

Ur4-šà-bi-ta

(minas)

27

90 N/A

N/A 82

túg!-ní d⌈šára-ke4?-ak?⌉

t

274

⌈2.50⌉

N/A

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Recipient

Description

Ur-dšul-pa-è

zi-ga šà-uru-ka; obv. i 23’-iii 4

Lú-dnin-šubur

ditto; obv. iv 10-11

Lú-dnàm-an-ka

ditto; obv. iv 28-rev. i 12

Quantity (liters)

158.67+[...] 92.50+[...]

1715.33

2.50

450

23.25+[...]

135+[...] 11.50+[...]

162+[...]

20

276

é- šára-ka temen-si-ga; zi-ga šà-uru-ka; rev. i 29-ii 2

Ur-dnun-gal

rev. ii 10-13

2.50

24+[...]

rev. iii 3-5

10

120

3

36

Lú-kal-la

d

ki-a-nag ur- namma; rev. iii 11-13

JCS 26 106 8 (ŠS 4) Nin9-hi-lí-a q d Ur- dumu-zi-da SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú-dha-ìa

12 níg-dab5 má-gur8 dšára; obv. 12-rev. 3, 9 obv. iv 11-v 23, 26-27

11 32.17 283.59

mar-sa-aš; rev. ii 1-2 zi-ga é dšára-ka; rev. ii 8-9

Lú-dha-ìa

rev. iv 6-23, 28-29

368.33 +[...]

9039+[...]

0.33

6

2.50

450

11 v

86 32

[Lú?]-kal-la

d

Utu-ul4-gal

62.83

àga-lugal-šè; obv. 1’-7’

544 2793.33+[...]

u

Šára-kam

Lugal-nir

N/A 110

d

BPOA 7 2490 (no date) Bur-ma-ma

3306+[...]

Lú-kal-la

Lú- nin-šubur

AOS 32 S23 (date broken) dam-gàr-ne

Silver value (grains)

d

d

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lúkal-la

(minas)

540+[...]

w

9w

obv. 7-rev. 1

90

N/A

4050

Notes a b c d

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - m a h - e / š a b r a . Transliteration in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012) does not match cuneiform. Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - ⌈ m a h ⌉ - [ e ] / š a b r a . Date of transaction earlier than that of text.

e

In this text, a silver value does not follow each withdrawal from the merchant. Instead, a silver value appears at the end for the total volume withdrawn of each product. This study calculates the silver value of individual withdrawals according to the numerical relationship between the total volume of a specific product and the corresponding silver value. f

Seal inscription: l ú - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 .

g

Restoration of this number in obv. ii 3 based on a parallel in STA 23 (AS 6 xi) obv. ii 7-8. Calculated assuming that resins are not recorded in the missing lines at the end of obv. and beginning of rev.

h

275

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD j

Calculated by restoring the number in rev. ii 1 as ⌈ 2 ( d i š ) ⌉ and reading the product in rev. ii 5 as š i m ? - d u 1 0 in light of Syracuse 486 (AS 6). k Calculated by reading the number before the fraction ½ as 7 ( d i š ) in obv. v 8. l

Calculated by reading the number in rev. i 3 as 1( u ) 7 ( d i š ) .

m n p q

Calculated by reading the number in rev. i 21 as 4 ( d i š ) ½ . Calculated by reading the number in rev. ii 27 as 1 ( b á n ) . Seal inscription: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - [ b a - k a ] . Seal inscription: n i n 9 - h i - l í - a / d a m a - a - k a l - l a / é n s i / u m m a k i .

r

Calculated by reading the number in rev. 1 as 1 ( u ) l á 1 ( d i š ) .

s

Seal inscription: l ú - d n i n - š u b u r / d u b - s a r / d u m u d u 1 0 - g a / š a b r a d š á r a - [ k a ] . Restoration based on a parallel in TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) rev. i 27.

t u

Calculated by reading the number in obv. iv 23 as 2 ( u ) 3 ( d i š ) .

v

Calculated by restoring rev. iv 18 as [ 2 ( d i š ) s ì l a ] š e - l i , based on the rate of 8 liters per shekel of silver for this type of resin attested in obv. v 6-7. w Actual numbers possibly higher as the beginning of the text has been lost.

Table 5.3.H. Condiments and spices supplied by Umma Merchants Text & Merchant BCT 2 134 a (Š 39) dam-gàr-ne

Recipient

(liters)

Lugal-ezem

b

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

ú

(grains)

60

810

30.83

233

63.33

365

ú

gámun babbar/gi6; níg-dab5 ùr-lugal-ka; obv. 20-rev. 1

60

zà-hi-li; obv. 4

10

Ur-dutu

še-lú; obv. 9

30

Ur-dnin-marki

gazi; níg-dab5 uri5ki-ma; rev. 22-26

20

10

ku-mul; níg-dab5 é-muhaldim; obv. i 19-20

63

756

63

670

22

12

22.50

14

gámun; ditto; obv. ii 16-17

2.50

7

mun; ditto; obv. ii 18-19

195

60

Lú-dinanna

ku-mul; Lugal-níg-lagar-e zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 21-23 še-lú; zi-ga uri5ki; obv. ii 5-6

SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

(minas)

Silver value

še-lú; obv. 2

TCL 5 6162 c (AS 4) Sag-ku5 BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la

ku-mul; obv. 14 gámun babbar; rev. 15-16

Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) Lugal-⌈bàd⌉ Pàd-da

BM 105345 (AS 1) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Quantity

Product & Description

A-du

gazi; ditto; obv. ii 7 ú

276

N/A

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Quantity

Product & Description

(liters)

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) A-kal-la ašgab Ur-ddumu-zi-da

zi-ba-tum; rev. i 2-4

Silver value

(minas)

(grains)

8

90

Ledgers pl. 19 11 še-lú; Lugal-níg-lagar-e (AS 7 ix) obv. iii 11-13 Pàd-da

140

168

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la

še-lú; obv. ii 12-13

10

20

ku-mul; níg-dab5 níg-sig5; obv. ii 10-12

60

540

ku-mul; zi-ga AS 8 d; kišib lú-kal-la; rev. i 42-44

60

540

še-lú; obv. 10-12

390

702

še-lú; níg-kas7 mun-gazi íldam; rev. 13-15

780

1404 e

170

306

60

540

78

468

1500

1800

gámun; rev. iii 18-19

60

360

še-lú; obv. 3; ki-sum-ma ì-sum-šè; sealed by Lú-d[šára] f

15

N/A

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Nik. 2 403 (AS 9) dam-gàr šà bala-a ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS 1 vii) Pàd-da

Ab-ba-gi-na

Ur-d⌈šul-pa-è⌉

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

še-lú; Lugal-níg-lagarníg-dab5 du6--ga; [e] obv. 11-12 Ur-dnun-gal

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

Lú-kal-la

MVN 16 1195 (ŠS 3 vi) Šeš-kal-la

Ab-ba-gi-na

ku-mul; rev. ii 8-9 ú

gámun; rev. iii 6-7 še-lú; rev. iii 16-17 ú

ú

UTI 6 3532 + 3552 (ŠS 5 vi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Gu-du-du

gámun g; šà bala-a; kù-ta sa10-a tum-malxšè; obv. 4; sealed by Gududu’s brother Inim-dšára dubsar

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú-dha-ìa

ú

Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne abba-gi-na

ú

gámun babbar; níg-dab5 bíl-ga; rev. 15-16

120

N/A

5

45

gámun; obv. 5

2

6

še-lú; obv. 6

10

8

277

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Quantity

Product & Description

(liters)

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lúkal-la

(grains)

ku-mul; obv. ii 3-4; [níg]-⌈kas7⌉ bala-a-ka ⌈úgu⌉-a gá-gá-dam

62.90

585

še-lú; níg-kas7 mun-gazi úgu-a gá-gá-dam; obv. ii 24-25;

1360

1628

2

6

gámun; rev. iv 34-35

5

15

še-lú; obv. iv 23

25

gazi; obv. iv 24

19

ú

gámun; ditto; obv. ii 26-iii 1 ú

Santag 6 340 (IS 2 xii) dam-gàr

(minas)

Silver value

Gu-du-du

N/A

ú

gámun babbar; obv. iv 22, 28

234.67

ú

gámun gi6; obv. iv 29

68.50

Notes a Transliteration and cuneiform mismatched in BDTNS and CDLI (accessed September 2012). b

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - ⌈ m a h ⌉ - [ e ] / š a b r a .

c

In this text, a silver value does not follow each withdrawal from the merchant. Instead, a silver value appears at the end for the total volume withdrawn of each product. This study calculates the silver value of individual withdrawals according to the numerical relationship between the total volume of a specific product and the corresponding silver value. d e f

Date of transaction earlier than that of text. Calculated by reading the fraction in rev. 14 as ⅔. Seal inscription: l ú - d [ š á r a ] / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - ⌈ s a 6 ⌉ - [ g a ] .

g The product concerned may have been úninni5 (written as one TIR sign on top of the other) instead of ú g á m u n (TIR) because úgámun appeared measured by volume while ú n i n n i 5 measured by weight (see TCL 5 6037 [ŠS 6] in table 5.3.M-4).

278

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Table 5.3.I. Oil and fats supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

SAT 2 174 (Š 37) Pàd-da

Ur- nisaba

ì-giš; recorded on tablet passed to Lugalezem, a who sealed SAT 2 174; obv. 1

BCT 2 134 (Š 38) dam-gàr-ne

Lugal-ezem a

ì-šáh; rev. 23

AUCT 1 540 (Š 39) Lú-dšára

d

Ur-dda-mu šabra

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

235

N/A

60

660

ì-giš; ezem dšul-gi-ka; obv. 1

6.50

ì-šáh; ditto; obv. 2;

2.50

ì-giš; obv. 4-5; a-rá-1-kam

7

ì-giš; a-rá-2-kam; obv. 6-7

7

ì-šáh; za-rí-iq; obv. 9

1

ì-šáh; iz-bu-um lú-ázlag; obv. 10 ì-giš; ur-digi-zi-bar-ra má alan-lugal; obv. 11

N/A

1.33 1

MVN 3 374 (Š 38) Pàd-da

Lugal-ezem a

ì-šáh

60

N/A

OrSP 47-49 295 (Š 48) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ì-lí-⌈dan⌉

ì-giš; obv. 6

1800

N/A

SAT 2 722 (AS 2 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-giš

5

N/A

ì-giš; é-gal-la ku4-ra

325.67 c

N/A

ì-šáh; ditto

449.67 d

N/A

ì-giš; bala AS 2 e; obv. 8-9

325.67 c

4885

ì-šáh; ditto; obv. 10-12

449.67 d

6270

SAT 2 706 (AS 2) Pàd-da

d

Ur- šul-pa-è

Ledgers pl. 2 2 (AS 3) Pàd-da

b

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-šáh; rev. 32-34

51

714

STA 22 (AS 4 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-šáh; rev. i 7-9

514

7196

ì-giš; bala-šè má-a ba-a-DU; rev. ii 13-15

600

8100

TCL 5 6046 (AS 4) dam-gàr-ne

279

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-šáh; é-gal-la ku4-ra; rev. ii 9-11

390

3510

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-šáh; rev. 9-11

466

4194

ì-giš; obv. 9-10

118

1587

ì-šáh; obv. 11-12

173.50

1735

Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

Ur- šul-pa-è

Ledgers pl. 11 7 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-šáh; rev. 25-27

98.25

885

TCL 5 6052 (AS 5) Inim-ma-ni-zi

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-giš; rev. i 8-10

120

1620

Ledgers pl. 13 8 (AS 6 ii) Ku5-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-giš; rev. 26-27

[180?]

2430

A-du

ì-giš; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 24-26

2

30

Ì-kal-la

ì-šáh; obv. iii 7-9

33.67

303

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-šáh; obv. iii 10-12

912

8208

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-šáh; rev. ii 9-11

907.33

8167

Lú-kal-la

ì-giš; kišib kaš4; obv. iii 13-15

15

225 f

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-šáh; rev. i 19’-21’

1112

10008

Ab-ba-gi-na

ì-UD.KA; ga-eški-šè; rev. iii 3-6

2g

30

ì-UD.KA; ga-eški-šè

2g

N/A

A-kal-la ašgab

ì-udu; rev. i 1

20

180

Ur-dšul-pa-è

ì-giš; dam bù-bù; kišib nu-ra-a; obv. iii 12-18

100

1680

ì-šáh; rev. i 16’-17’

1169.33

14032

ì-giš; rev. i 18’-19’

2

30

BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

BPOA 7 2288 (AS 6) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

d

Ab-ba-gi-na h

d

Ur- šul-pa-è

280

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

STA 1 (AS 8 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

[...]

ì-[giš]; obv. ii 30-31

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

[...]

ì-giš; obv. ii 7-8

Lú-kal-la

ì-[giš]; NINDA.GIŠ.AŠ ba-ab-[...] ; obv. iii 27-30

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú-dha-ìa

d

Ur- šul-pa-è

Ur-dšul-pa-è

d

Lú- ha-ìa

d

Šára-kam

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lú-kal-la

Ì-kal-la

A-a-kal-la ašgab

d

Lú- ha-ìa

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

12

[...]

36.75

660

10.50

189

401.92

7234.50

3292.50

49095

ì-giš; rev. 24; recorded on tablet passed to Urd nun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 k

305.08

N/A

ì-šáh; rev. 25; ditto

292.50

N/A

ì-giš; rev. 6; níg-dab5 má-gur8 dšára

12

180

ì-šáh; rev. 7; ditto

29

261

ì-giš; rev. i 4-6

1517

21003

ì-šáh; rev. i 7-8

3127

37524

ì-šáh; rev. ii 31-32

60

720

ì-giš; rev. iii 25-26

5

69

ì-šáh; rev. iii 27-28

7

70

ì-giš; rev. iv 24-25

12

144

ì-šáh; rev. iv 26-27

29

261

j

ì-giš; nidba den-[líl-lá]; rev. ii 33-34 ì-šáh; ditto; rev. ii 36-39

Notes a

Seal inscription in completeness: lugal-ezem dub-sar / dumu lugal-é-mah-e / šabra.

b

Seal inscription: ur-dšul-pa-è / dub-sar / dumu lugal-kù-ga-ni. Same transaction.

c d

Same transaction.

e

Date of transaction earlier that that of text. f Calculated by reading the fraction in obv. iii 14 as igi-4-gál.

281

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD g h

Same transaction. Seal inscription: a b - b a - g i - n a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - m á - g u r 8 - r e .

j

CDLI reads this term as n í g - m a r - b a - a b - ⌈ z i ? ⌉ (obv. iii 29), but the cuneiform copy of the tablet shows that two signs (GIŠ and AŠ) instead of one sign (MAR) appear after the sign NÍG. The term NINDA.GIŠ.AŠ may have referred to a bakery (Sharlach 2004, 47n106). k

Seal inscription: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - [ b a - k a ] .

Table 5.3.J. Fruits and honey supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

BCT 2 134 (Š 38) dam-gàr-ne

Lugal-ezem a

làl; zi-ga; obv. 8

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

18

1950

500

300

giš

Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) Pàd-da

Lugal-⌈bàd⌉

OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

Syracuse 483 (Š 46) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

hašhur duru5; obv. 4

BIN 5 76 (AS 1) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-dnin-šubur b

làl; šà bala-a

Lú-dinanna

zu-lúm; obv. 2

120

Ur-dutu

zu-lúm; obv. 10

60

Pàd-da

zu-lúm; obv. 13

60

BM 105345 (AS 1) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

hašhur duru5; níg-dab5 ùr-lugal-ka; rev. 2-3 giš

hašhur duru5; rev. 13 giš

giš

pèš hád; níg-dab5 du6 kù-ga; obv. ii 1-2 giš

STA 22 (AS 4 i) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

480

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-dinanna

TCL 5 6162 d (AS 4) Sag-ku5

Ur-dšákkan

480

N/A

2

N/A

N/A

115 780

pèš! še-er-gu; ditto; obv. ii 3

18

geštin hád; ditto; obv. ii 5-6

71.67

360

làl; ditto; obv. ii 7-8

2.50

270

zú-lum; rev. i 20-22

3000

1288

làl; obv. ii 23

19

1350

geštin hád; obv. ii 24

10

30

c

90

giš

pèš še-er-gu; obv. ii 25

282

6

c

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Lú-kal-la

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

0.33

12

2

6

5.50

225 e

geštin hád; ditto; rev. i 32

10

30

geštin [hád]; níg-dab5 du6 kù-ga; rev. ii 2

79

[240?]-4.50

2.50

[...]+45

pèš še-er-gu; rev. ii 7-8

4c

48

geštin hád; sá-du11 lugal; rev. 12

6

geštin hád; rev. 13-14

2

zu-lúm; níg-dab5 ì úgu-a lugal; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 1-2

5

2

3

1

Product & Description làl; ki-a-nag ur-dnamma; rev. i 14-15 geštin hád; ditto; rev. i 18-20

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

d

Lú- en-líl

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

làl; [x x x] ki lugal-an-dùl; rev. i 31

làl; ditto; rev. ii 3 Lú-dnin-šubur TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

A-gu

giš

giš

hašhur hád; ditto; obv. ii 3-4 giš

Lú-kal-la STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

pèš še-er-gu; ditto; obv. ii 5-6 zu-lúm; obv. iii 12-13; níg-dab5 ì úgu-a lugal; zi-ga bala-a dated to AS 5 f giš

hašhur hád; obv. iii 14-15; ditto giš

pèš še-er-gu; obv. iii 16-20; ditto

Ab-ba-gi-na

geštin! hád; zi-ga bala-a; rev. i 9-10

5

2

3

1

0.5 c 24.50

7.50 110

làl sig5; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 11-13

15

1800

80

135

hašhur hád; ditto; obv. iii 15-16

180

108

geštin hád; ditto; obv. iii 17-18

72

360

làl; ditto; obv. iii 19-20

2.50

225

pèš hád; níg-dab5 du6 kù; obv. iii 13-14 giš

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

7.50

5c

giš

BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la

0.5 c

giš

pèš še-er-gu; ditto; rev. i 11-13 Lú-kal-la

30

283

75

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Recipient

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

0.67

120

4

17

4c

60

4.50

270

geštin hád; obv. iii 16-18

26

60

Product & Description làl; ki-a-nag ur-dnamma; obv. iii 5

Lú-kal-la

geštin hád; ditto; obv. iii 6 giš

pèš še-er-gu; ditto; obv. iii 7-8 làl; obv. iii 14-15

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

Lú-⌈dnin⌉-[šubur]

MVN 1 240 (AS 8 xii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-dnin-šubur

geštin hád; rev. i 3-4

20

60

Ur-d⌈šul-pa-è⌉

geštin hád; níg-dab5 a-tu5-a; obv. ii 22-23

1

4.50

0.67

30

4

14

pèš še-er-gu; ditto; obv. iii 37-38

4c

[60]

geštin hád; obv. iv 22-23

[6]

21

làl; rev. 22; recorded on tablet passed to Ur-dnun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 g;

1.83

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

giš

làl; ki-a-nag ur-d[namma]; zi-ga bala-a; obv. iii 35 Lú-kal-la

geštin hád; ditto; obv. iii 36 giš

MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

Ur-dšul-pa-è

geštin hád; rev. 27; ditto

2

giš

pèš še-er-gu; rev. 28; ditto

1c

zú-lum; rev. 29; ditto

3

N/A

ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS 1 vii) Pàd-da

Lugal-níg-lagar[e]

geštin hád; níg-dab5 du6--ga; obv. 13-16

78.66

314.66

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 6) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-dnin-šubur

làl; rev. ii 30-31

1.25

75

geštin hád; [níg]-⌈kas7⌉ bala-a-ka ⌈úgu⌉-a gá-gádam; obv. ii 5-6;

39.67

178.50

16 c

192

120

N/A

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lú-kal-la CUT CUA b (ŠS 9) Šeš-kal-la

giš

pèš še-er-gu; ditto; obv. ii 7-8 giš

Šára-kam

hašhur duru5; recorded on tablet passed to Urd nun-gal, who sealed CUT CUA b h

284

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

UTI 6 3513 (IS 1) dam-gàr

[...] ⌈santana⌉

zú-lum; obv. ii 1-2

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

40

N/A

Notes a b c

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - ⌈ m a h ⌉ - [ e ] / š a b r a . Seal inscription: l ú - d n i n - š u b u r / d u b - s a r / d u m u d u 1 0 - g a / š a b r a . Counted in strings (š e - e r - g u ).

d

In this text, a silver value does not follow each withdrawal from the merchant. Instead, a silver value appears at the end for the total volume withdrawn of each product. This study calculates the silver value of individual withdrawals according to the numerical relationship between the total volume of a specific product and the corresponding silver value. e Based on reading the end of rev. i 31 as 1 ( d i š ) g í n i g i - 4 - < g á l > < < š e > > . f

Date of transaction earlier than that of text.

g

Seal inscription: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - [ b a - k a ] .

h

Seal inscription: d š u - d s u e n / l u g a l k a l a - g a / l u g a l u r i 5 k i - m a / l u g a l a n - u b - d a l í m m u - b a / u r - d n u n gal / dub-sar / dumu ur-d⌈šára⌉ / pisan-dub-ba-⌈ka⌉ / arád-⌈zu⌉.

Table 5.3.K. Vegetables supplied by Umma merchants Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

gú-gal; zi-ga; rev. 20

270

390

gú-gal; níg-dab5 ùr-lugal-ka; obv. 18-19

200

240

Text & Merchant Recipient

Product & description

BCT 2 134 (Š 38) dam-gàr-ne

Lugal-ezem a

Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) Pàd-da

Lugal-⌈bàd⌉

OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

sum-sikil; obv. 5

80

sum ha-din; obv. 6

66

gú-gal; obv. 7

45

gú-tur; obv. 8

45

Syracuse 483 (Š 46) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

sum ha-din; obv. 5

SAT 2 510 (Š 46) Pàd-da

Ka5-a b

61.50

N/A

sum EN-[...]

20

120

gú-gal; obv. 1

180

gú-tur; obv. 1

60

Lugal-ì-sa6 árad-lugal-ka

gú-gal; obv. 6

240

Ur-dutu

gú-gal; obv. 9

120

Pàd-da

gú-gal; obv. 13

60

Ur-sila-luh

gú-gal ga SIG7; obv. 15

Lú-dinanna BM 105345 (AS 1) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

N/A

285

120

N/A

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant Recipient

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

12.50

75

sum-sikil; ditto; obv. 14-15

17

60

sum gaz; ditto; obv. 16-17

17

60

108

1296

Product & description sum ha-din; níg-dab5 uri5ki-ma; obv. 12-13

Ur-dnin-marki

TCL 5 6162 c (AS 4) Sag-ku5

Lú-ib-gal

sum -ha-din; obv. ii 27

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

Lú-kal-la

zì gú-gal; níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti ki a-a-mu; obv. ii 8-11

20

24

sum-sikil; [zi]-⌈ga⌉ uri5ki; obv. 7

17

17

sum gaz; ditto; obv. 8

17

17

sum ha-din; ditto; obv. 9

12.50

112.50

83.67

150

SNAT 356 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

A-gu

zì gú-gal; zi-ga bala-a; obv. iii 26-27

BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

gú-gal; níg-dab5 du6 kù; obv. iii 21-22

30

60

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

gú-gal; rev. i 15’-16’

30

54

gú-gal; zi-ga uri5ki; obv. ii 4

90

160

sum-sikil; ditto; obv. ii 8-9

14

45

sum gaz; ditto; obv. ii 10-11

14

45

sum ha-din; ditto; obv. ii 12-13

11

66

gú-gal; rev. i 20’-21’

57

68

zì gú-gal; obv. 10-11

23.67 d

80

gú-gal; obv. i 15-16

61.50

184.50

gú-tur; obv. i 17-18

12

36

sum-sikil; obv. ii 8-9

11

60

sum za--din; obv. ii 10-11

8

60

153

549

SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

Ledgers pl. 19 11 (AS 7 ix) Pàd-da

A-du

Ur-dšul-pa-è

AAS 65 (AS 8) dam-gàr šà bala-a

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la

Ab-ba-gi-na

A-gu

gú-gal; níg-dab5 ùr-lugal; rev. i 8-11

286

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

sum-sikil; gìr árad-mu; obv. 5-6

300

360

gú-gal; ditto; obv. 7-9

900

1620

Lú-kal-la

sum-sikil igi nu-⌈sig5⌉; obv. 8-10

245

735

Lugal-níg-lagar-e

sum za-ha-din igi nu-sig5; rev. iii 8-10

27

162

gú-gal; rev. iii 14-15

300

540

sag sum-sikil igi nu-sig5; rev. iii 20-21

900

1080

numun sum-sikil; rev. iii 22-23

300

720

sum -ha-din; rev. iii 24-25

120

540

gú-gal; ki-sum-ma ì-sum-šè

15

N/A

gú-tur; ditto

15

N/A

sum za-ha-din; obv. 9

8

30

53+ [...]

18+[...]

Text & Merchant Recipient Nik. 2 403 (AS 9) dam-gàr šà bala-a ASJ 14 99 1 (ŠS 1 vii) Pàd-da

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

MVN 16 1195 e (ŠS 3 vi) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-kal-la

Ab-ba-gi-na

SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) dam-gàr šà uri5kima Ledgers pl. 21 12 (ŠS 5) Pàd-da

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú-dha-ìa

Product & description

Lú-kal-la

sum-[sikil?] ⌈igi nu⌉-sig5; rev. 24-26

Lú-bala-sig5

sum ha-din igi nu-sig5; rev. 27-29

56

168

numun sum-sikil; obv. 6-7; dated to ŠS 5 f

225

540

sag sum-sikil; obv. 8-11; ditto

120

75

gú-gal; níg-kas7 mun-gazi úgu-a gá-gádam; obv. ii 20-21

10+ [...]

35.50?

gú-tur; ditto; obv. ii 22-23

78

99

numun sum-sikil; ditto; obv. iii 2-3

900

1350

sum-sikil igi-nu-sig5; ditto; obv. iii 4-6

600

360

sum-sikil igi-sig5; ditto; obv. iii 7-8

490

747

104.25

1256

300

720

d

Ur- nun-gal

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lú-kal-la

(sum) za-ha-din igi-sig5; ditto; obv. iii 9-10 Lú-dha-ìa

numun sum-sikil; rev. iv 36-37

287

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant Recipient Santag 6 340 (IS 2 xii) dam-gàr

AOS 32 S23 (date broken) dam-gàr-ne

Gu-du-du

[Lú?]-kal-la

Product & description

Quantity (liters)

sum gaz; obv. iv 25

Silver value (grains)

12 g N/A

numun sum-sikil; obv. v 1-2

⌈1000⌉

sum ha-din àga-lugal-šè; obv. 8’

132.33

sum-sikil; zi-ga uri5ki-ma; rev. 18’

17

sum gaz; ditto; rev. 19’

17

sum ha-din; ditto; rev. 20’

N/A

12.50

Notes a

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - ⌈ m a h ⌉ - [ e ] / š a b r a .

b

Seal inscription: k a 5 - a m u h a l d i m / d u m u l u g a l - k ù - g a - n i .

c

In this text, a silver value does not follow each withdrawal from the merchant. Instead, a silver value appears at the end for the total volume withdrawn of each product. This study calculates the silver value of individual withdrawals according to the numerical relationship between the total volume of a specific product and the corresponding silver value. d Calculated by reading the number before the fraction in obv. 10 as 3 ( d i š ) . e

Seal inscription: l ú - d [ š á r a ] / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - ⌈ s a 6 ⌉ - [ g a ] .

f

Date of transaction earlier than that of text. The measurement unit was k i l i b , “bundle.”

g

Table 5.3.L. Timber and timber products supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description giš

Syracuse 108 (Š 35) Šeš-kal-la

Lugal-e-ba-an-sa6

OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

gi

lá-⌈x⌉; ditto dúb-dúbub5; rev. 11

Silver value (grains)

10

N/A

10

N/A

37

N/A

10

240

6

1980

15

450

34

945

giš

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 (AS 5 xi) A-gu Pàd-da Ledgers pl. 9 6 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

gi-muš; šà bala

Quantity (units)

giš

ù-suh5 gi-muš; níg-dab5 giš-kin-ti; rev. ii 12 giš

énsi

ù-suh5 dar-gal gišig-šè; na-kab-tum uri5ki-ma ku4-ra; gìr kal-ì-lí lú-kin-gi4-a lugal; obv. 14-17 giš

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-[...]

ù-suh5 giša-ra má-60-gur; na-kab-tum-ma ku4-ra; zi-ga bala-a; obv. iii 16-17 giš

ù-suh5 giša-ra má-20-gur; ditto; obv. iii 18-22

288

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

Recipient

Product & Description

Quantity (units)

Silver value (grains)

3

15

6

480

2

120

3

720

5

540

20

N/A

129

180

5

240

4

N/A

giš

hašhur 3-kuš-ta; zi-ga bala-a; rev. i 20-22

d

KA×UD-zi

BPOA 6 1323 (AS 6) Pàd-da

giš

BPOA 6 1323 (AS 6) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

giš

ù-suh5; ig é damar-dsuen-ka; é-maš-a ku4-ra; obv. 1-3 giš

ù-suh5; ig é damar-dsuen-ka; é-maš-a ku4-ra; obv. 4-6 giš

giš

SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

BPOA 2 2371 (AS 8) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

suku5(MÚŠ) ig; giš-kin-ti-a ba-an-ku4; rev. i 14-17

Šeš-kal-la

giš

ù-suh5 gal; ditto; rev. ii 2-6

Ka-téš-šá

giš

Lú-sa6-ì-zu

a

ù-suh5 mi-rí-za má-40-gur; [é] anše tum-malx-ka; [má-a] gá-ra [ki]-su7 gub-ba; a-pi4-sal4ki-ta giš

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da MVN 16 1099 (ŠS 5 vi 11) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

ù-suh5 mi-rí-za; rev. ii 25-26

d

Lú- suen

giš

ù-suh5 gal; rev. ii 27-29 Níg-ú-rum b

giš

ù-suh5 a-ra má-60-gur; šà bala u4 11-kam; mu dal na-rú-a-šè giš

UTI 6 3532+3552 (ŠS 5 vi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

UTI 4 2579 (ŠS 5) Ur-ddumu-zi-da Ledgers pl. 21 12 (ŠS 5) Pàd-da Prima dell’ alfabeto no. 22 (ŠS 5) Šeš-kal-la

Gu-du-du

ù-suh5 gi-muš; šà-bala-a; kù-ta sa10-a tum-malx-šè; sealed by Inim-dšára c; obv. 1 giš

ù-suh5 mi-rí-za má-20-gur; ditto; obv. 2-3 Lú-dda-ni d

40 N/A 140

giš

ù-suh5 mi-rí-za; šà bala-a; é-udu den-líl-dingir-šu-šè

30

N/A

4

12

6

N/A

20

225

20

225

60

180

giš

hašhur gíd 2-kuš-ta; mi-sír gišig-šè; rev. 18-19

Šà-kù-ge

giš

Šà-kù-ge

e

ù-⌈suh5⌉; íldag [...]; é-du10-ús-sá lugal-šè giš

giš

Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne ab-ba-gi-na

kab6-kuš-ta; rev. 8-9 Ab-ba-gi-na

giš

ù-suh5 a-ra má-30-gur; rev. 10-11 giš

ù-suh5 mi-rí-za; rev. 12-13

289

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

Quantity (units)

Silver value (grains)

6

720

8

480

22

255

92

552

50

225

15

45

[...]

180

2

120

18

810

20

225

⌈30⌉

240

40

720

100

360

160

480

40

N/A

30

180

2

120

giš

ù-suh5 šu-dím má-120-gur; níg-kas7 giš-gi-ka úgu gá-gá-dam; obv. iii 12-13 giš

ù-suh5 šu-dím má-60-gur; ditto; obv. iii 14-15 giš

ù-suh5 šu-dím má-30-gur; ditto; obv. iii 16-17 giš

ù-suh5 gi-muš ditto; obv. iii 18-19 giš

ù-suh5 mi-rí-za má-40-gur; ditto; obv. iii 20-21 giš

ù-suh5 mi-rí-za má-30-gur; ditto; obv. iii 22-23 giš

ù-suh5 bar-gál; ditto; obv. iii 24-iv 1 giš

ù-suh5 apin ù SAR ig gišHAR-ra; ditto; obv. iv 2-3

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lúkal-la

giš

giš

ù-suh5 apin ù SAR ig é; ditto; obv. iv 4-5 giš

kab gíd 6-kùš-ta; ditto; obv. iv 6-7 d

Šára-kam

giš

ù-suh5 šu-dím má-20-gur; rev. i 9-10 giš

ù-⌈suh5⌉ [...] má-120-gur; mar-sa-aš; rev. i 28-29 giš

ù-suh5 mi-rí-za má-60-gur; ditto; rev. i 30-31 giš

ù-[suh5] mi-rí-za má-40-[gur]; ditto; rev. i 32-33 giš

ù-suh5 šu-dím má-20-gur; rev. ii 6 giš

A-gu

ù-suh5 bar-da-aš nígin-na; rev. ii 26-27 giš

še-du10; rev. ii 28-30

giš

ù-suh5 giša-ra má-60-gur; bala-šè; rev. 22

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú-dha-ìa AOS 32 S23 (date broken) dam-gàr-ne

giš

ù-suh5 mi-rí-za ù gi-muš; bala-šè; rev. 24-26

2040 244

giš ?

[Lú ]-kal-la

a-ra má-60-gur; zi-ga bala-a; rev. 16’-17’ giš

BPOA 7 2490 (no date) Bur-ma-ma

23

d

Utu-ul4-gal

za-ba-lum; obv. 4-6 giš

ur-lum; rev. 2-3

290

240

N/A

53 f

318

5

900

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description giš

ù-suh5 dim-gal; rev. 19’ giš

ù-suh5 šu-dím má-60-gur; rev. 20’

SA 53 (Pl. 75) (no date) Lugal-níg-lagar-e

giš

ù-suh5 šu-dím má-30-gur; rev. 21’ giš

ù-suh5 gi-muš má-60-gur; rev. 22’ giš

hašhur gíd 2-kùš-ta; rev. 23’

Quantity (units)

Silver value (grains)

8 1 N/A

3 5 3

Notes a b c d

Seal inscription: l ú - s a 6 - ì - z u / d u b - s a r / d u m u a - k a l - l a . Seal inscription: n í g - ú - r u m d u b - s a r / d u m u l ú - d š á r a . Seal inscription: i n i m - d š á r a / d u b - s a r / d u m u d a - d a - g a . Seal inscription: l ú - d d a - n i / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - g i š g i g i r - [ r e ] .

e

Seal inscription: šà- k ù - g e d u m u / h é - s a 6 - g a .

f

Measured in mina.

Table 5.3.M-1. Fish, birds, and domestic animals supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

BPOA 6 1149 (Š 25 v) Lugal-si-NE-e

A-kal-la nu-[bànda] gu4

BCT 2 134 (Š 38) da-gàr-ne

Lugal-ezem

OrSP 2 64 8 Wengler 28 (Š 39 v) Lú-dšára

Á-bí-lí-a

OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

a

Quantity

Silver value (grains)

anše giš

3 head

N/A

ku6 šeg6; rev. 17

750 liters

281

ku6-sag-kúr; rev. 18-19

255 units

120

ku6 NAM

120 liters

N/A b

ku6 gazi (GÁ×ÁŠ)

120 liters

N/A c

ku6 šeg6; rev. 12

360 liters

N/A

ku6 šeg6; zi-ga uri5ki; rev. i 10-13

360 liters

180

1 head

N/A

360 liters

108

MVN 10 122 (AS 8) dam-gàr

Uš-mu

áb-máh; lá-NI su-ga dam-gàr; ki lú-kal-la-ta

MVN 16 910 (AS 9) Šeš-kal-la

Ab-ba-gi-na

ku6 šeg6; rev. ii 14-16

291

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

Recipient

Product & Description

Ur-dšul-pa-è

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú- dha-ìa

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lúkal-la

Ur-dšára

Uš-mu

Quantity

Silver value (grains)

ir7mušen tu-gur8mušen; rev. 30; recorded on tablet passed to Ur-dnun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 d

15 units

N/A

udu bar-gál; rev. 17-18

18 head

1080

u8 bar-gál; kišib ur-dnun-gal; rev. iii 11

31 head

udu-níta bar-gál; ditto; rev. iii 12

6 head

sila4 bar-gál; ditto; rev. iii 13

4 head

ud5; ditto; rev. iii 14

7 head

máš-níta; ditto; rev. iii 15-17

1 head

udu-níta bar-gál; ditto; rev. iii 18-21

42 head

4140

3780

Notes a

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - ⌈ m a h ⌉ - [ e ] / š a b r a .

b

Equivalent to 120 liters of barley. Equivalent to 60 liters of barley.

c d

Seal inscription: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - [ b a - k a ] .

Table 5.3.M-2. Animal parts and byproducts supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

Quantity

Silver value (grains)

SAT 2 188 (Š 38) Pàd-da

Dingir-ra

síg? a; obv. 1-2; recorded on tablet received by Lugal-ezem, who sealed SAT 2 188 b

1200+[...] minas

528

AUCT 1 540 (Š 39) Lú-dšára

Ur-dda-mu šabra

síg ud5; rev. 16-17

20 [ma-na]

90

OrSP 47-49 253 (Š 45) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

pa-mušen; obv. 1

18000 units

N/A

Syracuse 483 (Š 46) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

pa-mušen; obv. 6

18000 units

N/A

292

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Text & Merchant

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

HUCA 30 113 (AS 3) Šeš-kal-la

Recipient

d

Lú- nin-šubur

Ur-dnin-marki

Product & Description

Quantity

Silver value (grains)

á dàra; dated to month xi & xii in AS 2 c; níg-dab5 ezem month iv & viii; obv. ii 17

2 units

22.50

á dàra; níg-dab5 ezem month iv & viii; obv. iii 18-19

4 units

45

18000 units

1800

2 units

18

pa-mušen; níg-dab5 uri5ki-ma; obv. 8-9

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 Lú-kal-la (AS 5 xi) Pàd-da

múrgu-ba; rev. i 28

SNAT 356 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

pa-mušen; [zi]-⌈ga⌉ uri5ki; obv. 14-15

18000 units

1800

Lú-kal-la

eš-ku-ru-um; obv. iii 23-24

[...] mina(s)

20

Ur-dšul-pa-è

á dàra; rev. i 9’

6 units

[...]

A-du

pa-mušen; zi-ga uri5ki; obv. ii 3

18000 units

1620

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-dšul-pa-è Ur-ddumu-zi-da

á dàra; dam-bù-bù; kišib nu-ra-a; obv. iii 4-5

5 units

75

STA 1 (AS 8 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

á dàra; obv. ii 24-25

4 units

45

á dàra; obv. 19; recorded on tablet passed to Ur-dnun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 d

6 units

N/A

múrgu:ba; rev. 36; ditto

2 units

á dàra; obv. iv 20-21

[2] units

20

múrgu-ba; obv. iv 33

[2] units

5

á dàra; níg-dab5 month viii; obv. v 28-29

2 units

20

á dàra; rev. i 35-36; dated to AS 8 c

2 units

20

A-gu

múrgu-ba; rev. iii 17

2 units

5

Ur-dšul-pa-è

á dàra; obv. iii 3-4

4 units

40

MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

UTI 5 3187 (ŠS 1 diri) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

[...]

Ur-dšul-pa-è

Lú-kal-la

293

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Quantity

Silver value (grains)

á dàra; obv. iii 9-10

4 units

40

Lú-dnàm-an-ka

múrgu-ba; alan dšu-dsuen; zi-ga šà uru-ka; rev. i 18-20

4 units

36

SNAT 490 (ŠS 4) dam-gàr šà uri5ki-ma

Ab-ba-gi-na

pa-mušen; rev. 4-6

18000 units

1800

SAT 3 1613 (ŠS 5) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lugal-nir e

eš-ku-ru sa6; tám-še-lu-um dam-šè; gìr dsuen-dingir-šu sagi; obv. 2

2 minas

N/A

18000 units

1800

á dàra; obv. v 24-25

6 units

72

síg [ud5]; rev. i 13-15

40 minas

180

síg ud5; mar-sa-aš; rev. i 24-25

40 minas

180

2.17 minas

195

2465.67 minas f

34585

633.33 minas

8550

[...] minas

4500

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Recipient

Product & Description

Ur-dšul-pa-è

Ledgers pl. 25 14 (ŠS 6) Ab-ba-gi-na dam-gàr-ne abba-gi-na d

Šára-kam

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lúkal-la

Lugal-nir

pa mušen; rev. 5-7

eš-ku-rum; zi-ga é dšára-ka; rev. ii 12-13 síg; níg-kas7 síg-ka úgu-a ba-a-gar; rev. iv 39-v 4

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr lú- dha-ìa Ledgers pl. 27 15 (ŠS 7) A-a-kal-la

Lú-dha-ìa

síg; níg-dab5 má-gur8 dšára; rev. 4-5 síg; dated to ŠS 6 c; obv. 14-rev. 17

Notes a

Wool seems unlikely to have been the product concerned, because its conversion rate here, about 1/410 shekel of silver per mina, counts less than 1/40 of the overall median price of wool (Snell 1982, 178-179). Pictures of the tablet (YBC 984) from Dr. Elizabeth Payne, conservator of the Yale Babylonian Collection, show that only one horizontal stroke on the bottom remains left of the sign representing the product. b

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - m a h - e / š a b r a .

c

Date of transaction earlier than that of text. Seal inscription: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - [ b a - k a ] .

d e

Seal inscription: l u g a l - n i r / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - b a - k a .

f

Calculated by restoring rev. iv 39 as [ 2 ( u ) ] 6 ( a š ) g ú 4 ( u ) m a - n a s í g , based on the cuneiform and the suggestion of Snell (1982, 179).

294

A PPENDIX : T ABLES

Table 5.3.M-3. Barley, beer, and dairy products supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

Recipient

Ledgers pl. 30 17 (Š 44) Lugal-⌈bàd⌉ Pàd-da

Product & Description kaš; níg-dab5 ùr-lugal-ka; rev. 4-6

Quantity (liters)

Silver value (grains)

360

360

Lú-dinanna

ga SIG7; obv. 3

60

Lugal-ì-sa6 árad énsi

ditto; obv. 6

30

Ur-dutu

ditto; obv. 11

30

BJRL 22 167 (AS 6 xi) Šeš-kal-la

Lú-gi-na

še; šà-gal anšekúnga hu-li-bar; zi-ga bala-a; obv. ii 17-20

30

20

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

Igi-gùn

še; zi-ga bala-a; obv. iii 23-25

60

36

ì-nun; rev. 23; recorded on tablet passed to Urd nun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 a

2

ga gazi; rev. 26; ditto

3

BM 105345 (AS 1) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

Ur-dšul-pa-è

N/A

N/A

Notes a Seal inscription: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - [ b a - k a ] .

Table 5.3.M-4. Plants, reeds, herbs, and their byproducts supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

Syracuse 16 (Š 34) Pàd-da

A-kal-la a

Princeton 1 532 (Š 34) Šeš-kal-la

Lugal-inim-gina b

AUCT 1 540 (Š 39) Lú-dšára

Ur-dda-mu šabra

Syracuse 483 (Š 46) dam-gàr-ne

Quantity

Silver value (grains)

še-giš-ì

10 liters

N/A

mangaga; é-kišib lugal-šè; šà bala-a

20 minas

N/A

gi; obv. 14-rev. 15

3 bundles

90

mangaga; rev. 18-19

21600 minas c

180

La-ni-mu

gi; obv. 7

2420 bundles

OrSP 47-49 330 (Š 46 vi) Pàd-da

Lugal-e-ba-ansa6 d

ú sikil; šà bala-a

300 minas

N/A

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

énsi

níg-SAR; rev. i 6-8

7 minas

420

295

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

Quantity

Silver value (grains)

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

níg-SAR; rev. i 9-10

0.25 mina

15

12600 bundles

N/A e

MVN 1 238 (AS 5 ix?) Ur-dištaran

gi; rev. 10’ giš

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

Lú-kal-la

ma-nu; níg-dab5 ì úgu-a lugal; obv. ii 17-19

120 minas

12

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-kal-la

níg-SAR; obv. iii 25-27

0.05 mina

3

U.EN; zi-ga uri5ki; obv. ii 14-15

37.50 bundles

20

gi; ditto; rev. i 7-9

1740 bundles

1044

[0.05] mina

3

ú

SNAT 365 (AS 6) Ka-téš-šá

A-du

ASJ 11 204-216 (AS 9) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Lú-kal-la

níg-SAR; [níg-dab5] [a]-⌈tu5⌉-a dšul-gi-ra; obv. iv 17-19

MVN 16 685 (ŠS 2) Lugal-níg-lagar-e

Lú-ur4-šà-ga

gi; obv. 4

11196 bundles

N/A

BPOA 1 1165 (ŠS 2) dam-gàr-ne

Lugal-e-ba-ansa6 d

ú-nin9; obv. 4

60 minas

N/A

Gu-du-du

mangaga; šà-bala-a; obv. 5; kù-ta sa10-a tum-malx-šè; sealed by Inim-dšára f

180 minas

N/A

295 bundles

120-[...]

0.33 mina

N/A

240 minas

60

300 minas

90

150 bundles

N/A

1628 bundles

670

0.67 mina

40

UTI 6 3532+3552 (ŠS 5 vi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ledgers pl. 21 12 (ŠS 5) Ur-dma-[mi] Pàd-da

gi; obv. 13-15

SAT 3 1613 (ŠS 5) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

níg-SAR; tám-še-lu-um dam-šè; obv. 1; gìr dsuen-dingir-šu sagi

TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lúkal-la Santag 6 340 (IS 2 xii) dam-gàr TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lúkal-la

Lugal-nir g

ú

⌈ninni5⌉; rev. i 26-27; mar-sa-aš Lugal-e-ba-ansa6

ú

ninni5; rev. iii 22-24 ú

Gu-du-du

U.EN; obv. iv 26

gi ŠID; níg-kas7 giš-gi-ka úgu-a gá-gá-dam; obv. iv 8-10 Lugal-nir

níg-SAR; zi-ga é dšára-ka; rev. ii 10-11

296

A PPENDIX : T ABLES Notes a Seal inscription: a - k a l - l a / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - n i 9 - g a r k u š 7 . b c

Seal inscription: l u g a l - i n i m - g i - n a / d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - n e s a g - e . Following the reading of CDLI for this number in rev. 18.

d

Seal inscription: l u g a l - e - b a - a n - s a 6 / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d i š t a r a n .

e

Equivalent to 6,310 liters of barley. Seal inscription: i n i m - d š á r a / d u b - s a r / d u m u d a - d a - g a .

f g

Seal inscription: l u g a l - n i r / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - b a - k a .

Table 5.3.M-5. Craft goods, minerals, and dyes supplied by Umma merchants Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

BCT 2 134 (Š 38) dam-gàr-ne

Lugal-ezem a

im kù-sig17; rev. 24

Syracuse 483 (Š 46) dam-gàr-ne

La-ni-mu

dug-hi-a; rev. 8

OrSP 47-49 295 (Š 48) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Quantity

Silver value (grains)

5 liters

60

104 units

N/A

dug

Ì-lí-⌈dan⌉

kur-ku-dù; 1(barig) ⌈4(bán)⌉-ta; obv. 7-8

14 units

N/A

Lú-dnin-šubur

lí-iq-tum al-la-ha-ru; níg-dab5 ezem month iv & viii; obv. iii 24-25

12 liters

216

Ur-dšul-pa-è

al-la-ha-ru; rev. ii 29-30

5 liters

60

im kù-sig17; rev. i 7-8

0.33 liter

1

al-la-ha-ru; rev. i 11-13

1 liter

9

A-kal-la Ašgab

al-la-ha-ru; rev. i 14-16

10 liters

90

AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 A-kal-la (AS 5 xi) ašgab Pàd-da

al-la-ha-ru; rev. ii 21-22

15 liters

135

20 units

360

1 unit

10

12 liters

[...]

[20] liters

180

3 units

30+[...

20 liters

180

Santag 6 119 (AS 3 x) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ledgers pl. 4 3 (AS 4) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

d

Ur- šul-pa-è

TCL 5 6056 (AS 5) Šeš-kal-la

A-gu

Ledgers pl. 11 7 (AS 5) Lú-dinanna

A-kal-la ašgab

kuš

Ledgers pl. 15 9 (AS 6 xi) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

Ur-dšul-pa-è

lí-iq-[tum]; rev. i 12’

A-kal-la

al-la-ha-ru; rev. ii 27-29

STA 23 (AS 6 xi) Pàd-da

d

giš

A-kal-la ašgab

al-la-ha-ru; rev. ii 6-8

giš

KA×UD-zi

káb-kul; rev. 15-17 ùmmu; rev. 29-30

káb-[kul] zi-ga bala-a

297

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Text & Merchant

Recipient

Product & Description

Quantity

Silver value (grains)

Ur-dšul-pa-è

lí-iq-tum; obv. iii 10-11

12 liters

180

im kù-sig17; obv. iii 27-28

40 liters

90

al-la-ha-ru; obv. iii 30-31

8 liters

90 b

káb-kul; obv. 16-rev. 17

12 units

180

Ur- šul-pa-è

lí-iq-tum; recorded on tablet passed to Urd nun-gal, who sealed MVN 15 127 c; rev. 35

12 liters

N/A

Ur-dšul-pa-è

lí-iq-tum; obv. iii 5-6

12 liters

180

A-a-kal-la ašgab

al-la-ha-ru; zi-ga šà uru-ka; obv. iv 7-8

5 liters

60

Lú-dnin-šubur

al-la-ha-ru; túg ní-gal dšára-šè; zi-ga šà uru-ka; rev. i 25-28

20 liters

240

lí-iq-tum al-la-ha-ru; rev. 19-21

10 liters

90

lí-iq-tum al-la-ha-ru; rev. i 2-3

12 liters

180

lí-iq-⌈tum⌉; rev. i 16-18; dated to ŠS 5 d

12 liters

180

al-la-ha-ru; zi-ga é dšára-ka; rev. ii 14-15

1 liter

9

im kù-sig17; ditto; rev. ii 16-17

7 liters

11.67

im kù-sig17; rev. iii 31-33

5 liters

7.50

Ledgers pl. 17 10 (AS 7 vii) Ur-ddumu-zi-da A-kal-la ašgab AAS 65 (AS 8) dam-gàr šà bala-a MVN 15 127 (AS 9) dam-gàr-ne

TCL 5 5680 (ŠS 2) Ur-ddumu-zi-da

giš

d

SNAT 504 (ŠS 6) A-a-kal-la ašgab dam-gàr lú-dha-ìa

Šára-kam TCL 5 6037 (ŠS 6) dam-gàr-ne lúkal-la

Lugal-nir

A-a-kal-la ašgab

Notes a Seal inscription: l u g a l - e z e m d u b - s a r / d u m u l u g a l - é - ⌈ m a h ⌉ - [ e ] / š a b r a . b

This study agrees with Snell (1982, Pl. XVII, Col. III: 31) that there may exist an erasure before the cuneiform sign representing the fraction ½ ; otherwise, the silver value would be too high for 8 liters of a l - l a - h a - r u . c

Seal inscription: u r - d n u n - g a l / d u b - s a r / d u m u u r - d š á r a / p i s a n - d u b - [ b a - k a ] . d Date of transaction earlier than that of text.

298

BIBLIOGRAPHY Adams, R. McC. 2004 “The role of writing in Sumerian agriculture: Asking broader questions,” in Assyria and beyond: Studies presented to Morgens Trolle Larsen, ed. by J. G. Dercksen (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten), 1-8. 2006 “Shepherds at Umma in the Third Dynasty of Ur: Interlocutors with a world beyond the scribal field of ordered vision,” JESHO 49: 133-169. 2008 “An interdisciplinary overview of a Mesopotamian city and its hinterlands,” CDLJ 2008: 1, 23 pp. Allred, L. B. 2006 Cooks and kitchens: Centralized food production in late third millennium Mesopotamia, Ph. D. Diss., The Johns Hopkins University. Arnaud, D., Y. Calvet, et al. 1979 “Ilšu-Ibnišu, orfèvre de l’E.BABBAR de Larsa: La jarre L.76.77 et son contenu,” Syria 56: 1-64. Barjamovic, G. 2011 A historical geography of Anatolia in the Old Assyrian colony period, Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum. Bauer, J. 1972 Altsumerische Wirtschaftstexte aus Lagasch, Rome: Biblical Institute. Beal, R. H. 1992 “Is KUŠ7 the reading of IŠ = kizû?,” NABU 1992/48: 38-39. Bongenaar, A. C. V. M. 1999 “Money in the Neo-Babylonian institutions,” in Trade and finance in ancient Mesopotamia: Proceedings of the First MOS Symposium (Leiden 1997). MOS Studies 1, ed. by J. G. Dercksen (Istanbul: Nederlands historisch-archaeologisch Instituut) 159-174. Brunke, H. and W. Sallaberger 2010 “Aromata für Duftöl,” in Why should someone who knows something conceal it?: Cuneiform studies in honor of David I. Owen on his 70th birthday, ed. by A. Kleinerman and J. M. Sasson (Bethesda, Maryland: CDL) 41-74. Butz, K. 1984 “On salt again... Lexikalische Randbemerkungen,” JESHO 27: 272-316. Civil, M. 1994 The Farmer’s instructions. Aula Orientalis Supplementa 5, Barcelona: AUSA. 2011 “The law collection of Ur-Namma,” in Cuneiform royal inscriptions and related texts in the Schøyen collection. CUSAS 17, ed. by A. R. George (Bethesda, Maryland: CDL) 221286. 299

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Cohen, M. E. 1993 The cultic calendars of the ancient Near East, Bethesda, Maryland: CDL. Curtis, J. B. and W. W. Hallo 1959 “Money and merchants in Ur III,” HUCA 30: 103-139. D’Agostino, F. and F. Pomponio 2005 “Due bilanci di entrate e uscite di argento da Umma,” ZA 95: 172-207. Dahl, J. L. 2003 The ruling family of Ur III Umma: A prosopographical analysis of a provincial elite family in southern Iraq ca. 2100-2000 BC. Ph. D. Diss., UCLA. 2006a “Revisiting bala,” JAOS 126: 77-88. 2006b “Early swine herding,” in De la domestication au tabou: Le cas des suidés dans le Proche-Orient ancient. ed. by B. Lion and C. Michel (Paris: Diffusion de Boccard) 31-38. 2007 The ruling family of Ur III Umma: A prosopographical analysis of an elite family in southern Iraq 4000 years ago. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten. 2010 “A Babylonian gang of potters: Reconstructing the social organization of crafts production in the late third millennium BC southern Mesopotamia,” in City Administration in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 53e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale 2. Babel und Bibel 5, ed. by L. Kogan, N. Koslova, S. Loesov, and S. Tishchenko (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns) 275-305. Dalton, G., ed. 1971 Primitive, archaic, and modern economies: Essays of Karl Polanyi, Boston: Beacon. Dayton, J. 1974 “Money in the Near East before coinage,” Berytus 23: 41-52. Edzard, D. O. 1960 “Die Beziehungen Babyloniens und Ägyptens in der mittelbabylonischen Zeit und das Gold,” JESHO 3: 38-55. Edzard, D. O. and G. Farber 1974 Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der Zeit der 3. Dynastie von Ur. RGTC 2, Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag. Englund, R. K. 1988 “Administrative timekeeping in ancient Mesopotamia,” JESHO 31: 121-185. 1990 Organisation und Verwaltung der Ur III-Fischerei. BBVO 10, Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag. 1991 “Hard work-where will it get you?: Labor management in Ur III Mesopotamia,” JNES 50: 255-280. 1995 “Regulating dairy productivity in the Ur III period,” OrNs 64: 377-429. Falkenstein, A. 1956-57 Die neusumerischen Gerichtsurkunden, Munich: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. 300

B IBLIOGRAPHY

Firth, R. 2011 “A discussion of the use of im-babbar2 by the craft workers of ancient Mesopotamia,” CDLJ 2011: 3, 9 pp. Forde, N. W. 1963 The Sumerian DAM-KÀR-E-NE of the Third Ur dynasty. Ph. D. Diss., University of Minnesota. Foster, B. R. 1977 “Commercial activity in Sargonic Mesopotamia,” Iraq 39: 31-43. 1982 Administration and use of institutional land in Sargonic Sumer, Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag. 1985 “The Sargonic victory stele from Telloh,” Iraq 15: 15-30. 1993 “Management and administration in the Sargonic period,” in Akkad: The first world empire: Structure, ideology, traditions. HANES 5, ed. by M. Liverani (Padova: Sargon) 25-39. Frayne, D. R. 1997 Ur III period (2112-2004 BC). RIME 3/2, Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Garfinkle, S. J. 2000 Private enterprise in Babylonia at the end of the third millennium BC. Ph. D. Diss., Columbia University. 2002 “Turam-ili and the community of merchants in the Ur III period,” JCS 54: 29-48. 2003 “SI.A-a and his family: The archive of a 21st century (BC) entrepreneur,” ZA 93: 161198. 2004 “Shepherds, merchants, and credit: Some observations on lending practices in Ur III Mesopotamia,” JESHO 47: 1-30. 2005 “Public versus private in the ancient Near East,” in A companion to the ancient Near East, ed. by D. C. Snell (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell) 384-396. 2008a “Was the Ur III state bureaucratic?: Patrimonialism and bureaucracy in the Ur III period,” in The growth of an early state in Mesopotamia: Studies in Ur III administration. BPOA 5, ed. by S. J. Garfinkle and J. C. Johnson (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas) 55-61. 2008b “Silver and gold: Merchants and the economy of the Ur III state,” in On the Third Dynasty of Ur: Studies in honor of Marcel Sigrist. JCS SS 1, ed. by P. Michalowski (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research) 63-70. 2010 “What work did the damgars do? Towards a definition of Ur III labor,” in City Administration in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 53e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale 2. Babel und Bibel 5, ed. by L. Kogan, N. Koslova, S. Loesov, and S. Tishchenko (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns) 307-316. Gomi, T. 1981 “Kollationen zu den von T. Fish in Manchester Cuneiform Studies veröffentlichten neusumerischen Texten in Grossbritannien, I,” Orient 17: 19-48. 1985 “Kollationen zu den von T. Fish in Manchester Cuneiform Studies veröffentlichten neusumerischen Texten in Grossbritannien, III,” Orient 21: 1-9.

301

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Green, M. W. 1984 “Early Sumerian tax collectors,” JCS 36: 93-95. Hafford, W. B. 2005 “Hanging in the balance: Precision weighing in antiquity,” Expedition 47(2): 35-37. Hallo, W. W. 1953 The ensi’s of the Ur III dynasty. Master Oriental Institute, The University of Chicago. 1972 “The house of Ur-me-me;” JNES 31: 87-95. Heimpel, W. 1997 “Disposition of household of officials in Ur III and Mari,” ASJ 19: 63-82. 2009a “The location of Madga,” JCS 61: 25-61. 2009b Workers and construction work at Garšana. CUSAS 5, Bethesda, Maryland: CDL. 2011a “On the location of the forests of Garšana,” in Garšana studies. CUSAS 6, ed. by D. I. Owen (Bethesda, Maryland: CDL) 153-160. 2011b “Twenty-eight trees growing in Sumer,” in Garšana studies. CUSAS 6, ed. by D. I. Owen (Bethesda, Maryland: CDL) 75-152. Hepper, F. N. 1987 “Trees and shrubs yielding gums and resins in the ancient Near East,” BSA 3: 107-114. Hesse, B. and P. Wapnish 1998 “Pig use and abuse in the ancient Levant: Ethnoreligious boundary-building with swine,” MASCA Research Papers in Science and Archaeology 15: 123-135. Jones, T. B. 1975 “Sumerian administrative documents: An essay,” in Sumerological studies in honor of Thorkild Jacobsen on his seventieth birthday: June 7, 1974. AS 20, ed. by S. J. Lieberman (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press) 41-61. Jones, T. B. and J. W. Snyder 1961 Sumerian economic texts from the Third Ur dynasty: A catalogue and discussion of documents from various collections, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Jursa, M. 2005 “Money-based exchange and redistribution: The transformation of the instituional economy in first millennium Babylonia,” in Autour de Polanyi: Vocabulaires, théories et modalités des échanges, ed. by P. Clancier, F. Joannès, P. Rouillard and A. Tenu (Paris: De Boccard) 171-186. 2010 Aspects of the economic history of Babylonia in the first millennium BC: Economic geography, economic mentalities, agriculture, the use of money and the problem of economic growth. AOAT 377, Münster: Ugarit-Verlag. Klein, J. 1983 “Tudittum,” ZA 73: 255-284.

302

B IBLIOGRAPHY

Koslova, N. V. 2005 “Feld oder Gerste?: Zur Versorgung der landwirtschaftlichen Arbeiter in Umma der Ur III-Zeit,” in Memoriae Igor M. Diakonof. Babel und Bibel 2 (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns) 703-712. 2006 “Barley rations in Umma during the Third Dynasty of Ur,” Babel und Bibel 3: 41-58. 2008 “Bezeichnungen der Arbeitskräfte in Umma der Ur III-Zeit,” in The growth of an early state in Mesopotamia: Studies in Ur III administration. BPOA 5, ed. by S. J. Garfinkle and J. C. Johnson (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas) 149-206. Krecher, J. 1987 “DU = kux(-r) ‘eintreten’, ‘hineinbringen’,” ZA 77: 7-21. Kuhrt, A. 1995 The ancient Near East: c. 3000-330 BC, New York and London: Routledge. Kupper, J.-R. 1982 “L’usage de l’argent à Mari,” in Zikir šumim: Assyriological studies presented to F. R. Kraus on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, ed. by G. Van Driel, T. J. H. Krispijn, M. Stol, and K. R. Veenhof (Leiden: Brill) 163-172. Lambert, M. 1963a “L’usage de l’argent-métal à Lagash: Au temps de la IIIe Dynastie d’Ur,” RA 57: 79-92. 1963b “L’usage de l’argent-métal à Lagash: Au temps de la IIIe Dynastie d’Ur (suite),” RA 57: 193-200. Landsberger, B. 1965 “Tin and lead: The adventures of two vocables,” JNES 24: 285-296. Larsen, M. T. 1987 “Commercial networks in the ancient Near East,” in Centre and periphery in the ancient world, ed. by M. Rowlands, M. Larsen, and K. Kristiansen (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 47-56. Leemans, W. F. 1960 Foreign trade in the Old Babylonian period as revealed by texts from southern Mesopotamia, Leiden: Brill. Limet, H. 1960 Le travail du métal au pays de Sumer au temps de la IIIe dynastie d’Ur, Paris: Société d’Édition “Les Belles Lettres”. 1977 “Les schemas du commerce neo-Sumerien,” Iraq 39: 51-58. Luckenbill, D. D. 1924 The annals of Sennacherib, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Maeda, T. 1990 “Father of Akala and Dadaga, governors of Umma,” ASJ 12: 71-78. 1996 “Ruler’s family of Umma and control over the circulation of silver,” ASJ 18: 254-260.

303

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Maekawa, K. 1977 “The rent of the tenant field (gán-APIN.LAL) in Lagash,” Zinbun 14: 1-54. 1985 “Cultivation of legumes and mun-gazi plants in Ur III Girsu,” BSA 2: 97-118. 1986 “The agricultural texts of Ur III Lagash of the British Museum (IV),” Zinbun 21: 91-157. 1987 “The management of domain land in Ur III Umma: A study of BM 110116,” Zinbun 22: 25-82. 1989 “Rations, wages and economic trends in the Ur III period,” AoF 16: 42-50. 1996a “The governor’s family and the ‘temple households’ in Ur III Girsu,” in Houses and households in ancient Mesopotamia. Papers read at the 40e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Leiden, July 5-8, 1993), ed. by K. R. Veenhof (Leiden: Nederlands historisch-archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul) 171-179. 1996b “Confiscation of private properties in the Ur III period: A study of é-dul-la and níg-GA,” ASJ 18: 103-168. 1997 “Confiscation of private properties in the Ur III period: A study of é-dul-la and níg-GA (2): Supplement 1,” ASJ 19: 273-291. Marchesi, G. 2001 “Alleged SIG7=agar4 and related matters,” OrNs 70: 313-317. Marfoe, L. 1987 “Cedar forest to silver mountain: Social change and the development of long-distance trade in early Near Eastern societies,” in Centre and periphery in the ancient world, ed. by M. Rowlands, M. Larsen, and K. Kristiansen (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press) 25-35. Mayr, R. H. 2002 “The seals of the Turam-ili archive,” JCS 54: 49-65. Michalowski, P. 1978 “The Neo-Sumerian silver ring texts,” Syro-Mesopotamian Studies 2: 1-16. 1983 “Cuneiform tablets from the National Geographic Society,” OrAnt 22: 191-203. 1993 Letters from early Mesopotamia. SBL Writings from the Ancient World 3, Atlanta: Scholars. 1994a “Writing and literacy in early states: A Mesopotamianist perspective,” in Literacy: Interdisciplinary conversations, ed. by D. Keller-Cohen (Cresskill, New Jersey: Hampton) 49-70 1994b “The drinking gods: Alcohol in Mesopotamian ritual and mythology,” in Drinking in ancient societies: History and culture of drinks in the ancient Near East. HANES 6, ed. by L. Milano (Padova: Sargon) 27-44. 1995 “The men from Mari,” in Immigration and emigration within the ancient Near East: Festschrift E. Lipiński. OLA 65, ed. by K. Van Lerberghe (Leuven: Peeters) 181-188. 2004 “The ideological foundations of the Ur III state,” in 2000 v. Chr. Politische, wirtschaftliche und kulturelle Entwicklung im Zeichen einer Jahrtausendwende: 3. internationales. Colloquien der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 3, ed. by J.-W. Meyer and W. Sommerfeld (Saarbrücken: Saarbrücker Druckerei und Verlag) 219-235. 2005 “Iddin-Dagan and his family,” ZA 95: 65-76.

304

B IBLIOGRAPHY

Michalowski, P. and C. B. F. Walker 1989 A new Sumerian ‘law code’,” in DUMU-E2-DUB-BA-A: Studies in honor of Åke W. Sjöberg. OPKF 11, ed. by H. Behrens, D. Loding, and M. T. Roth (Philadelphia: The University Museum) 383-396. Molina, M. 2008 “The corpus of Neo-Sumerian tablets: An overview,” in The growth of an early state in Mesopotamia: Studies in Ur III administration. BPOA 5, ed. by S. J. Garfinkle and J. C. Johnson (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas) 19-53. Monaco, S. F. 1986 “Parametri e qualificatori nei testi economici della terza dinastia di Ur: II. Qualificatori non numerici,” OrAnt 25: 1-20. Moorey, P. R. S. 1999 Ancient Mesopotamian materials and industries: The archaeological evidence, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. Müller, G. G. W. 1997 “Gedanken zur neuassyrischen ‘Geldwirtschaft’,” in Assyrien im Wandel der Zeiten: XXXIXe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (6-10. Juli 1992 Heidelberg). HSAO 6, ed. by H. Waetzoldt and H. Hauptmann (Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag) 115-121. Neumann, H. 1979 “Handel and Händler in der Zeit der III. Dynastie von Ur,” AoF 6: 15-67. 1987 Handwerk in Mesopotamien: Untersuchungen zu seiner Organisation in der Zeit der III. Dynastie von Ur, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. 1992a “Nochmals zum Kaufmann in neusumerischer Zeit: Die Geschäfte des Ur-dun und anderer Kaufleute aus Nippur,” in La circulation des biens, des personnes et des idées dans le Proche-Orient ancien: Actes de la XXXVIIIe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Paris, 8-10 juillet 1991), ed. by D. Charpin and F. Joannès (Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations) 83-94. 1992b “Zur privaten Geschäftstätigkeit in Nippur in der Ur III-Zeit,” in Nippur at the Centennial: Papers read at the 35e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Philadelphia. OPKF 14, ed. by M. deJong Ellis (Philadelphia: The University Museum) 161-176. 1993 “Zu den Geschäften des Kaufmanns Ur-Dumuzida aus Umma,” AoF 20: 69-86. 1999 “Ur-Dumuzida and Ur-dun: Reflections on the relationship between state-initiated foreign trade and private economic activitiy towards the end of the third millennium BC,” in Trade and finance in ancient Mesopotamia: Proceedings of the First MOS Symposium (Leiden 1997). MOS Studies 1, ed. by J. G. Dercksen (Istanbul: Nederlands historischarchaeologisch Instituut) 43-53. Oppenheim, A. L. 1948 Catalogue of the cuneiform tablets of the Wilberforce Eames Babylonian Collection in the New York Public Library, New Haven: American Oriental Society. 1954 “The seafaring merchants of Ur,” JAOS 74: 6-17.

305

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Ouyang, X. 2010 “Administration of the irrigation fee in Umma during the Ur III period (ca. 2112-2004 BCE),” in City Administration in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 53e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale 2. Babel und Bibel 5, ed. by L. Kogan, N. Koslova, S. Loesov, and S. Tishchenko (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns) 317-349. Owen, D. I. 1992 “Syrians in Sumerian sources from the Ur III period,” in New horizons in the study of ancient Syria. BiMes 25, ed. by M. W. Chavalas and J. L. Hayes (Malibu, California: Undena) 107-175. 2001 “On the patronymy of Šu-Suen,” NABU 2001/82: 19-20. 2006 “Pigs and pig by-products at Garšana in the Ur III period,” in De la domestication au tabou: Le cas des suidés dans le Proche-Orient ancient. ed. by B. Lion and C. Michel (Paris: Diffusion de Boccard) 75-87. Owen, D. I. and R. H. Mayr (with the assistance of A. Kleinerman) 2007 The Garšana Archives. CUSAS 3, Bethesda, Maryland: CDL. Ozaki, T. 2002 Keilschrifttexte aus japanischen Sammlungen. Santag 7, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Paoletti, P. 2008 “Elusive silver? Evidence for the circulation of silver in the Ur III state,” Kaskal 5: 127158. Parrot, A. and G. Dossin 1968 Le “trésor” d’Ur, Paris: Librairie orientaliste Paul Geuthner. Pomponio, F. 1992 “Lukalla of Umma,” ZA 82: 169-179. Postgate, J. N. 1994 “Rings, torcs and bracelets,” in Beiträge zur Altorientalischen Archäologie und Altertumskunde: Festschrift für Barthel Hrouda zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. by P. Calmeyer, K. Hecker, L. Jakob-Rost, and C. B. F. Walker (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz) 235-245. Potts, D. 1983 “Salt of the earth: The role of a non-pastoral resource in a pastoral economy,” OrAnt 22: 205-215. 1984 “On salt and salt gathering in ancient Mesopotamia,” JESHO 27: 225-271. Powell, M. A. 1977 “Sumerian merchants and the problem of profit,” Iraq 39: 23-29. 1978 “A contribution to the history of money in Mesopotamia prior to the invention of coinage,” in Festschrift Lubor Matouš. 2, ed. by B. Hruška and G. Komoróczy (Budapest: ELTE) 211-243. 1979 “Ancient Mesopotamian weight metrology: Methods, problems and perspectives,” in Studies in honor of Tom B. Jones. AOAT 203, ed. by M. A. Powell and R. H. Sack (Kevelaer: Neukirchener Verlag) 71-109. 306

B IBLIOGRAPHY

1990

“Identification and interpretation of long term price fluctuations in Babylonia: More on the history of money in Mesopotamia,” AoF 17: 76-99. 1992 “Timber production in Presargonic Lagaš,” BSA 6: 99-122. 1996a “Money in Mesopotamia,” JESHO 39: 224-242. 1996b “Wine and the vine in ancient Mesopotamia: The cuneiform evidence,” in The origins and ancient history of wine. ed. by P. E. McGovern, S. J. Fleming, and S. H. Katz (Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach) 97-122. 1999 “Wir müssen alle unsere Nische nutzen: Monies, motives, and methods in Babylonian economics,” in Trade and finance in ancient Mesopotamia: Proceedings of the First MOS Symposium (Leiden 1997). MOS Studies 1, ed. by J. G. Dercksen (Istanbul: Nederlands historisch-archaeologisch Instituut) 5-23. Radner, K. 1999 “Money in the Neo-Assyrian empire,” in Trade and finance in ancient Mesopotamia: Proceedings of the First MOS Symposium (Leiden 1997). MOS Studies 1, ed. by J. G. Dercksen (Istanbul: Nederlands historisch-archaeologisch Instituut) 127-157. Renger, J. 1984 “Patterns of non-institutional trade and non-commercial exchange in ancient Mesopotamia at the beginning of the second millennium B. C.,” in Circulation of goods in non-palatial context in the ancient Near East, ed. by A. Archi (Rome: Edizioni dell’Ateneo) 31-123. 1989 “Zur Rolle von Preisen und Löhnen im Wirtschaftssystem des alten Mesopotamien an der Wende vom 3. zum 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr.: Gründsätzliche Fragen und Überlegungen,” AfO 16: 234-252. 1990 “Different economic spheres in the urban economy of ancient Mesopotamia: Traditional solidarity, redistribution and market elements as the means of access to the necessities of life,” in The town as regional economic center in the ancient Near East, ed. by E. Aerts and H. Klengel (Leuven: Leuven University Press) 20-28. 1993 “Formen des Zugangs zu den lebensnotwendigen Gütern: Die Austauschverhältnisse in der altbabylonischen Zeit,” AoF 1993: 87-114. 1994 “On economic structures in ancient Mesopotamia,” OrNs 63: 157-208. 1995 “Subsistenzproduktion und redistritutive Palastwirtschaft: Wo bleibt die Nische für das Geld?,” in Rätsel Geld: Annäherungen aus ökonomischer, soziologischer und historischer Sicht, ed. by W. Schelkle and M. Nitsch (Marburg: Metropolis-Verlag) 271-323. 2000 “Das Palastgeschäft in der altbabylonischen Zeit,” in Interdependency of Institutions and private enterpreneurs, ed. by A. C. V. M. Bongenaar (Leiden: Nederlands HistorischArchaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul) 151-183. 2002 “Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Alten Mesopotamien: Versuch einer Standortbestimmung,” in Material culture and mental spheres: Rezeption archäologischer Denkrichtungen in der Vorderasiatischen Altertumskunde, ed. by A. Hausleiter, S. Kerner, and B. Müller-Neuhof (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag) 239-265. 2004 “Oikos-Wirtschaft und tributäre Wirtschaftsformen-Die dominanten Strukturen der Wirtschaft in Mesopotamien im 3. und 2. Jt. v. Chr.,” in 2000 v. Chr. Politische, wirtschaftliche und kulturelle Entwicklung im Zeichen einer Jahrtausendwende: 3. internationales. Colloquien der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 3, ed. by J.-W. Meyer and W. Sommerfeld (Saarbrücken: Saarbrücker Druckerei und Verlag) 141-154. 2005a “Archaic versus market economy,” Topoi 12-13: 207-214. 307

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

2005b “K. Polanyi and the economy of ancient Mesopotamia,” in Autour de Polanyi: Vocabulaires, théories et modalités des échanges, ed. by P. Clancier, F. Joannès, P. Rouillard and A. Tenu (Paris: De Boccard) 45-65. 2007 “Economy of ancient Mesopotamia: A general outline,” in The Babylonian world, ed. by G. Leick (New York: Routledge) 187-197. Röllig, W. 1976 “Der altmesopotamische Markt,” WO 8: 286-295. Sallaberger, W. 1989 “Zum Schilfrohr als Rohstoff in Babylonien,” in Der Orientalische Mensch und seine Beziehungen zur Umwelt. Beiträge zum 2. Grazer Morgenländischen Symposium (2.-5. März 1989), ed. by B. Scholz (Graz: GrazKult) 311-330. 1993 Der kultische Kalender der Ur III-Zeit. UAVA 7/1-2, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 1994 [Review of Economic texts from Sumer (Yale Oriental Series, Babylonian Texts 18), by Daniel Snell and Carl H. Lager], ZA 84: 305-308. 1995 [Review of M. Sigrist, Drehem, Bethesda 1992], BiOr 52: 440-446. 1996 Der babylonische Töpfer und seine Gefässe: Nach Urkunden altsumerischer bis altbabylonischer Zeit sowie lexikalischen und literarischen Zeugnissen, Ghent: University of Ghent Press. 1999 “Ur III-Zeit,” in Mesopotamien: Akkade-Zeit und Ur III-Zeit. Annäherungen 3. OBO 160/3, ed. by P. Attinger and M. Wäfler (Freiburg: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht) 121-414. Sanati-Müller, S. 1990 “Texte aus dem Sînkāšid-Palast: Dritter Teil: Metalltexte,” BaM 21: 131-213. 1993 “Texte aus dem Sînkāšid-Palast: Fünfter Teil: Texte verschiedenen Inhalts II,” BaM 24: 137-184. Schaps, D. M. 2003 The invention of coinage and the monetization of ancient Greece, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Schloen, J. D. 2001 The house of the father as fact and symbol: Patrimonialism in Ugarit and the ancient Near East, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. Schmandt-Besserat, D. 1996 How writing came about, Austin: University of Texas Press. Schwartz, M. and D. Hollander 2000 “Annealing, distilling, reheating and recycling: Bitumen processing in the ancient Near East,” Paléorient 26(2): 83-91. Seaford, R. 2004 Money and the early Greek mind: Homer, philosophy, tragedy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

308

B IBLIOGRAPHY

Selz, G. J. 1993 Altsumerische Wirtschaftsurkunden aus amerikanischen Sammlungen. FAOS 15/2/1-2, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. 1995 “Maš-da-ři-a und Verwandtes: Ein Versuch über da-ři ‘an der Seite führen’: Ein zusammengesetztes Verbum und einige nominale Ableitungen,” ASJ 17: 251-274. 1997 “’The holy drum, the spear, and the harp’: Towards an understanding of the problems of deification in third millennium Mesopotamia,” in Sumerian gods and their representations. CM 7, ed. by I. L. Finkel and M. J. Geller (Groningen: Styx) 159-213. 2010 “‘He put in order the accounts...’: Remarks on the Early Dynastic Background of the Administrative Reorganizations in the Ur III State,” in City administration in the ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 53e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale 2. Babel und Bibel 5, ed. by L. Kogan, N. Koslova, S. Loesov, and S. Tishchenko (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns) 1-30. Sharlach, T. M. 2001 “Beyond chronology: The šakkanakkus of Mari and the kings of Ur,” in Seals and seal impressions: Proceedings of the XLVe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale. Part II, ed. by W. W. Hallo and I. J. Winter (Bethesda, Maryland: CDL) 59-70. 2004 Provincial taxation and the Ur III state. CM 26, Leiden: Brill. 2005 “Diplomacy and the rituals of politics at the Ur III court,” JCS 57: 17-29. 2008a “To everything there is a season, turn, turn, turn”. in The growth of an early state in Mesopotamia: Studies in Ur III administration. BPOA 5, ed. by S. J. Garfinkle and J. C. Johnson (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas) 79-97. 2008b “Priestesses, concubines, and the daughters of men: Disentangling the meaning of the word lukur in Ur III times,” in On the Third Dynasty of Ur: Studies in honor of Marcel Sigrist. JCS SS 1, ed. by P. Michalowski (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research) 177-183. Sigrist, M. 1992 Drehem, Bethesda, Maryland: CDL. 2006 “Droit de Pêche: Tablette St. Étienne 26,” in If a man builds a joyful house: Assyriological studies in honor of Erle Verdun Leichty. CM 31, ed. by A. K. Guinan, M. d. Ellis, A. J. Ferrara, et al. (Leiden: Brill) 391-399. Snell, D. C. 1977 “The activities of some merchants of Umma,” Iraq 39: 45-50. 1982 Ledgers and prices: Early Mesopotamian merchant accounts, New Haven: Yale University Press. 1988 “The allocation of resources in the Umma silver account system,” JESHO 31: 1-13. 1995 “Methods of exchange and coinage in ancient Western Asia;” in Civilizations of the ancient Near East, 3, ed. by J. M. Sasson, J. Baines, G. Beckman, and K. S. Rubinson (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons) 1487-1497. Sollberger, E. 1966 The business and administrative correspondence under the kings of Ur. TCS 1, Locust Valley, NY: J. J. Austin.

309

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

Steible, H. 1991 Die neusumerischen Bau- und Weihinschriften. FAOS 9/1-2, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner. Steinkeller, P. 1977 “Seal practice in the Ur III period,” in Seals and sealing in the ancient Near East. BiMes 6, ed. by M. Gibson and R. D. Biggs (Malibu, California: Undena) 41-53. 1979 “Notes on Sumerian plural verbs,” OrNs 48: 54-67. 1981 “The renting of fields in early Mesopotamia and the development of the concept of ‘interest’ in Sumerian,” JESHO 24: 113-145. 1985 “Three Assyriological notes,” ASJ 7: 195-196. 1987 “The foresters of Umma: Toward a definition of Ur III labor,” in Labor in the ancient Near East. AOS 68, ed. by M. A. Powell (New Haven: American Oriental Society) 73115. 1989 Sale documents of the Ur-III-period. FAOS 17, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. 1991a “The administrative and economic organization of the Ur III state: The core and the periphery,” in The organization of power: Aspects of bureaucracy in the ancient Near East. SAOC 46, ed. by M. Gibson and R. D. Biggs (Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago) 15-33. 1991b “The container kabkūru,” NABU 1991/4: 3-4. 1993 “Early political development in Mesopotamia and the origins of the Sargonic empire,” in Akkad: The first world empire: Structure, ideology, traditions. HANES 5, ed. by M. Liverani (Padova: Sargon) 107-129. 1996 “The organization of crafts in third millennium Babylonia: The case of potters,” AoF 23: 232-253. 1999 “Land-tenure conditions in third-millennium Babylonia: The problem of regional variation,” in Urbanization and land ownership in the ancient Near East, ed. by M. Hudson and M. Van De Mieroop (Cambridge, Massachusettes: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard University) 289-329. 2001 “The Ur III period,” in Security for debt in ancient Near Eastern law, ed. by R. Westbrook and R. Jasnow (Leiden: Brill) 47-63. 2002 “Money-lending practices in Ur III Babylonia: The issue of economic motivation,” in Debt and economic renewal in the ancient Near East, ed. by M. Hudson and M. Van De Mieroop (Betheda, Maryland: CDL) 109-137. 2003 “Archival practices at Babylonia in the third millennium,” in Ancient archives and archival traditions: Concepts of record-keeping in the ancient world, ed. by M. Brosius (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 37-58. 2004a “Toward a definition of private economic activity in third millennium Babylonia,” in Commerce and monetary systems in the ancient world: Means of transmission and cultural interaction, ed. by R. Rollinger and C. Ulf (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag) 91112. 2004b “The function of written documentation in the administrative praxis of early Babylonia,” in Creating economic order: Record-keeping, standardization, and the development of accounting in the ancient Near East, ed. by M. Hudson and C. Wunsch (Bethesda, Maryland: CDL) 65-88. 2007a “New light on Šimaški and its rulers,” ZA 97: 215-232. 2007b “City and countryside in third millennium southern Mesopotamia,” in Settlement and society: Essays dedicated to Robert McCormick Adams, ed. by E. C. Stone (Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology) 185-211. 310

B IBLIOGRAPHY

2011a “The cadastre of Ur-Namma,” in Cuneiform royal inscriptions and related texts in the Schøyen collection. CUSAS 17, ed. by A. R. George (Bethesda, Maryland: CDL) 25-28. 2011b “On the location of the town of GARšana and related matters,” in Garšana studies. CUSAS 6, ed. by D. I. Owen (Bethesda, Maryland: CDL) 373-390. forthcoming a “Population density and settlement of patterns in southern Babylonia under the Ur III dynasty: The case of the province of Umma.” forthcoming b “The employment of labor on national building projects in the Ur III period.” Steinkeller, P. and J. N. Postgate 1992 Third-millennium legal and administrative texts in the Iraq museum, Baghdad, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. Stępień, M. 1996 Animal husbandry in the ancient Near East: A prosopographic study of third-millennium Umma, Bethesda, Maryland: CDL. Stol, M. 1979 On trees, mountains, and millstones in the ancient Near East [With a chapter by K. Van Lerberghe], Leiden: Ex Oriente Lux. 1994 “Beer in Neo-Babylonian times,” in Drinking in ancient societies: History and culture of drinks in the ancient Near East. HANES 6, ed. by L. Milano (Padova: Sargon) 155-183. 1999 “Nach dem Gewichtsstein des Šamaš,” in Munuscula Mesopotamica: Festschrift für Johannes Renger. AOAT 267, ed. by B. Böck, E. Cancik-Kirschbaum, and T. Richter (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag) 573-589. 2004 “Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft in altbabylonischer Zeit,” in Mesopotamien: die altbabylonische Zeit. Annäherungen 4. OBO 160/4, ed. by P. Attinger, W. Sallaberger, and M. Wäfler (Freiburg: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht) 643975. Studevent-Hickman, B. 2006 The organization of manual labor in Ur III Babylonia. Ph. D. Diss., Harvard University. 2008a “The workforce at Umma: Some new questions,” in The growth of an early state in Mesopotamia: Studies in Ur III administration. BPOA 5, ed. by S. J. Garfinkle and J. C. Johnson (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas) 141-147. 2008b “Quantitative aspects of land tenure in Ur III Babylonia,” in On the Third Dynasty of Ur: Studies in honor of Marcel Sigrist. JCS SS 1, ed. by P. Michalowski (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research) 193-199. Sweet, R. F. G. 1958 On prices, moneys, and money uses in the Old Babylonian period, Ph. D. Diss., The University of Chicago. Van Beek, G. W. 1964 “Frankincense and myrrh,” in The biblical archaeological reader, 2, ed. by J. Edward, F. Campbell, and D. N. Freedman (Garden City, New York: Doubleday): 99-126. Van De Mieroop, M. 1986a “Gold offerings of Šulgi,” OrNs 55: 131-151. 1986b “Tūram-ilī: An Ur III merchant,” JCS 38: 1-80. 311

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

1997 “Why did they write on clay,” Klio 79: 7-18. 1999 Cuneiform texts and the writing of history, London and New York: Routledge. 1999-2000 “An accountant’s nightmare: The drafting of a year’s summary,” AfO 1999-2000: 111-119. 2004 “Economic theories and the ancient Near East,” in Commerce and monetary systems in the ancient world: Means of transmission and cultural interaction, ed. by R. Rollinger and C. Ulf (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag) 54-64. 2007 A history of the ancient Near East: ca. 3000-323 BCE, Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell. Van Driel, G. 1994 “Private or not-so-private: Nippur Ur III files,” in Cinquante-deux reflexions sur le proche-orient ancien: Offertes en hommage à Léon De Meyer, ed. by H. Gasche, M. Tanret, C. Janssen, and A. Degraeve (Leuven, Peeters) 181-192. 1995 “Nippur and the Inanna temple during the Ur III period” [Review article of R.L. Zettler, The Ur III Temple of Inanna at Nippur. BBVO 11, Berlin 1992], JESHO 38: 393-406. 1998 “Land in ancient Mesopotamia: ‘That what remains undocumented does not exist’,” in Landless and hungry?: Access to land in early and traditional societies, ed. by B. Haring and R. De Maaijer (Leiden: Research School CNWS) 19-49. 1999-2000 “The size of institutional Umma,” AfO 46-47: 80-91. 2002 Elusive silver: In search of a role for a market in an agrarian environment: Aspects of Mesopotamian society, Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabue Oosten. Vanderroost, N. 2008 “Distribution géographique et organization administrative des équipes agricoles de la province d’Umma,” in The growth of an early state in Mesopotamia: Studies in Ur III administration. BPOA 5, ed. by S. J. Garfinkle and J. C. Johnson (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas) 129-139. Vargyas, P. 2002 “Sennacherib’s alleged half-shekel coins,” JNES 61: 111-115. 2010 “Silver and money in Achaemenid and Hellenistic Babylonia,” in From Elephantine to Babylon: Selected studies of Péter Vargyas on ancient Near Eastern economy, ed. by Z. Csabai (Budapest: L’Harmattan) 121-129. Veenhof, K. R. 1972 Aspects of Old Assyrian trade and its terminology, Leiden: Brill. 1995 “Kanesh: An Assyrian colony in Anatolia,” in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. 2, ed. by J. M. Sasson, J. Baines, G. Beckman, and K. S. Rubinson (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons) 859-871. 2008 “The Old Assyrian period,” in Mesopotamia: The Old Assyrian period. Annäherungen 5. OBO 160/5, ed. by M. Wäfler (Freiburg: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht) 1-264. Veldhuis, N. 2001 “A multiple month account from the Gu’abba rest house,” ZA 91: 85-109. 2004 Religion, literature, and scholarship: The Sumerian composition “Nanše and the Birds”. CM 22, Leiden and Boston: Brill and Styx. 312

B IBLIOGRAPHY

Verderame, L. 2008 “Rassam’s activities at Tello (1879) and the earliest acquisition of Neo-Sumerian tablets in the British Museum,” in On the Third Dynasty of Ur: Studies in honor of Marcel Sigrist. JCS SS 1, ed. by P. Michalowski (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research) 231-244. Vuk, T. 1987 “Eine Feldpachturkunde aus Umma im Museum des Studium Biblicum Franciscanum,” Liber Annuus 37: 356-363. Waetzoldt, H. 1972 Untersuchungen zur neusumerischen Textilindustrie, Rome: Centro per le antichità e la storia dell’arte del vicino Oriente. 1985 “Rotes Gold?,” OrAnt 24: 1-16. 1986 [Review of D.C. Snell, Ledgers and Prices. Early Mesopotamian Merchant Accounts, New Haven and London 1982], OrNs 55: 327-336. 1987 “Compensation of craft workers and officials in the Ur III period,” in Labor in the ancient Near East. AOS 68, ed. by M. A. Powell (New Haven: American Oriental Society) 117141. 1990 “Zu den Bewässerungseinrichtungen in der Provinz Umma,” BSA 5: 1-29. 2007 “The use of wool for the production of strings, ropes, braided mats, and similar fabrics,” in Ancient textiles: Production, craft and society, ed. by C. Gillis and M.-L. B. Nosch (Oxford: Oxbow Books) 112-121. Waetzoldt, H. and M. Sigrist 1993 “Haftung mit Privatvermögen bei Nicht-Erfüllung von Dienstverpflichtungen,” in The tablet and the scroll: Near Eastern studies in honor of William W. Hallo, ed. by M. E. Cohen, D. C. Snell, and D. B. Weisberg (Bethesda, Maryland: CDL) 271-280. Weiershäuser, F. 2008 Die königlichen Frauen der III. Dynastie von Ur. GBAO 1, Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen. Westenholz, A. 1999 “The Old Akkadian period: History and culture,” in Mesopotamien: Akkade-Zeit und Ur III-Zeit. Annäherungen 3. OBO 160/3, ed. by P. Attinger and M. Wäfler (Freiburg: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht) 17-117. Whiting, R. M. 1976 “Tiš-atal of Nineveh and Babati, uncle of Šu-Sin,” JCS 28: 173-182. Widell, M. 2003 The administrative and economic Ur III texts from the city of Ur, Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias. Wilcke, C. 2002 “Der Kodex Urnamma (CU): Versuch einer Rekonstrucktion,” in Riches hidden in secret places: Ancient Near Eastern studies in memory of Thorkild Jacobsen, ed. by T. Abusch (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns) 291-333. 313

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD

2005 2006 2007

2008

“The liability of superiors for deficits of their subordinates,” NABU 2005/74: 79-81. “kišíb gíd: ‘eine (Schuld)urkunde prolongieren’,” NABU 2006/21: 18-19. “Markt und Arbeit im Alten Orient am Ende des 3. Jahrtausends v. Chr.,” in Menschen und Märkte: Studien zur historischen Wirtschaftsanthropologie, ed. by W. Reinhard and J. Stagl (Vienna: Böhlau) 71-132. “Der Kauf von Gütern durch den ‘staatlichen’ Haushalt der Provinz Umma zur Zeit der III. Dynastie von Ur: Ein Beitrag zu ‘Markt und Arbeit im alten Orient am Ende des 3. Jahrtausends vor Christus’,” in On the Third Dynasty of Ur: Studies in honor of Marcel Sigrist. JCS SS 1, ed. by P. Michalowski (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research) 261-285.

Wu, Y. 1995 “High-ranking ‘scribes’ and intellectual governors during the Akkadian and Ur III periods,” JAC 10: 127-145. Yoshikawa, M. 1989 “Looking for Tummal,” ASJ 11: 285-291. Young, G. 1979 “A merchant’s balanced account and NeoSumerian gold,” in Studies in honor of Tom B. Jones. AOAT 203, ed. by M. A. Powell and R. H. Sack (Kevelaer: Neukirchener Verlag) 195-217. Zeder, M. A. 1991 Feeding cities: Specialized animal economy in the ancient Near East, Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution. Zettler, R. L. 1984 “The genealogy of the house of Ur-me-me: A second look,” AfO 31: 1-9. 1987 “Sealings as artifacts of institutional administration in ancient Mesopotamia,” JCS 39: 197-240. 1991 “Administration of the temple of Inanna at Nippur under the third dynasty of Ur: Archaeological and documentary evidence,” in The organization of power: Aspects of bureaucracy in the ancient Near East. SAOC 46, ed. by M. Gibson and R. D. Biggs (Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago) 101-114. 1992 The Ur III temple of Inanna at Nippur: The operation and organization of urban religious institutions in Mesopotamia in the late third millennium B. C. BBVO 11, Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag. 1996 “Written documents as excavated artifacts and the holistic interpretation of the Mesopotamian archaeological record,” in The study of the ancient Near East in the twenty-first century: The William Foxwell Albright centennial conference, ed. by J. S. Cooper and G. M. Schwartz (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns) 81-101. 2008 “Context and text: Nippur area TB level IV and the ‘archive’ of Lama-palil,” in On the Third Dynasty of Ur: Studies in honor of Marcel Sigrist. JCS SS 1, ed. by P. Michalowski (Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research) 287-301. Zettler, R. L. and L. Horne, eds. 1998 Treasures from the royal tombs of Ur, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. 314

INDEX OF PROPER NAMES*

Aba-gina ........... 84 n.180, 116, 117, 123, 129, 136, 143 Abi’a ............................................. 36 n.59, 70 Abu Jir ...................................................... 142 Adaga .......................................................... 85 Adalal .............................................. 150 n.712 Adam-DUN ................................................ 141 Adu ............................................................. 66 Agaga ...................................... 150, 151 n.715 Akala ...................................... (see A[ya]kala) Akala the kitchen administrator .................. 89 Akala the leather worker ..... 89, 114, 134, 138 Ala ....................................................... 34 n.53 Albanidu ..................................................... 24 d Alim-mah ......................................... 94 n.250 Alulu ..................................................... 70, 71 Amar-Sin ........... 30, 31, 84, 89, 111, 119, 126 n.457, 131, 131 n.545 Anah .......................................................... 142 Anini ......................................................... 150 d Anunnak .................................................. 131 Apisal ...... 28, 41-43, 54-57, 59, 65, 65 n.134, 70, 78-80, 82, 91, 96, 102, 105, 106, 116, 117 n.354, 118, 122, 131, 143 Arad ................ 116, 119, 119 n.370, 120, 149 Arad-Nanna ......................................... 34 n.53 Assur ............................................. 18, 33, 142 a-šà a-ba-gal ................................................ 83 a-šà a-geštin ................................................ 83 a-šà a-šim ........................................ 54, 56, 57 a-šà den-me-kár ............................... 55, 56, 60 a-šà ì-sum ........................................ 54, 56, 57 a-šà lá-mah ..... 43 n.79-80, 54, 56, 58-60, 121 a-šà lá-tur .................. 54, 56, 59, 83, 95 n.270 a-šà lugal ................................... 54, 56, 58, 59 a-šà dnin-ur4-ra ................................ 54, 56, 59 a-šà dšára .............................. 54-56, 58, 59, 83 a-šà ša-ra-hu-um-ma ................................... 54 Atu ...................... 56, 66, 69, 69 n.148, 70, 72 Ayabba .................................. 56, 58, 58 n.110 Aya-bani ............................... 56, 59, 59 n.114

Aya-gina ......................................... 149 n.708 A(ya)kala ............ 21, 21 n.16-17, 24 n.29, 41, 51-53, 53 n.91, 55, 64, 69, 73, 75, 76, 78, 80-82, 84, 86-88, 91, 92, 94-97, 96 n.274, 99-103, 100 n.294, 101 n.298, 102 n.304, 105-107, 106 n.336, 107 n.337, 118, 124, 125, 132, 139, 153-155, 155 n.718, 158 Ayakala the merchant ............. 110, 110 n.341 Ayakala the sanga-priest ............................ 73 Babati .......................... 24 n.26, 62, 102 n.300 Babylon ....................................... 33 n.49, 142 Basa ............................................................ 65 Bazige ............................. 117, 119 n.370, 150 Bida ....................................................... 70, 71 Dadaga ................... 21, 21 n.16-17, 41, 48-53, 53 n.91, 64, 66, 69, 71-73, 75-78, 80-82, 86-88, 90, 92, 95-97, 99, 102-106, 103 n.327, 118, 125, 127, 139, 139 n.668, 153, 155, 158 Dadaya ........................................................ 81 Da’Umma ......................... 36, 41-43, 42 n.77, 43 n.78-79, 54-56, 58-60, 70, 83, 121 n.395 Daya ...................................................... 49, 70 Dayaga ........................................................ 66 Dayagi ................................................... 56, 62 Dingira ...................................... 89, 157 n.723 Diyala .............. 17, 18, 30, 33 n.49, 142 n.678 Duga ............................................................ 89 du6 kù-sig17 “Golden Mound” 121, 121 n. 397 du6 kù-ga “Holy Mound” ...... 126, 126 n. 473, 130, 130 n.525, 135, 135 n.602 d Dumuzi .............................. 24 n.29, 91 n.226 é-duru5-gu-la ............................................. 121 E-urbidu ............................................ 84 n.178 Egal-esi ............................... 65 n.133, 81, 147 Elam(ites) .................................. 32, 141 n.670 Engabare ................................................... 147 èš-didli “various shrines” ............... 36, 51, 52, 52 n. 89, 55, 56, 60, 62, 142 n.674 Ga’eš ................................ 131, 131 n.545-546 GARšana .................... 41, 55 n.100, 145 n.689 Girni-isa ...................................................... 70

––––––––––––––––– * The terms with English translations are indexed with both the Sumerian and the translation.

315

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD Girsu (Tello) ....... 27, 27 n.35, 28, 31, 33 n.49, 34, 34 n.53, 35, 37 n.61, 41, 52, 53 n.91, 83, 86, 86 n.185, 96 n.275, 109 n. 339, 111 n.344, 141, 142 n.677, 144 n.683, 147, 157, 159 n.725, 161 Gudea ................................ 34 n.53, 117 n.357 Gududu ...... 21, 21 n.16-17, 45, 46, 52-54, 64, 69, 73, 75, 76, 78-84, 86-88, 92, 94-97, 99, 100 n.293, 101-106, 118, 123, 125, 127, 128, 136, 139, 147, 150 n.713, 153-155, 155 n.718, 157, 158 Gu’edena ............ 24 n.28, 41-43, 43 n.79, 46, 54-58, 82, 93, 102, 103 n.311, 105, 119, 149 d Gula ........... 41, 68, 91 n.226, 94, n. 256-257, 105 Guli-isa ............................................ 150 n.712 Guyugug ................................................ 73, 74 d Haya ................................................... 24 n.29 Hesaga ......................................................... 70 Huwawa ...................................................... 89 Iddin-Dagan ............................ 101, 102 n.300 Ikala ......................................... 50, 51, 90, 129 d Inanna ........ 20, 29, 36, 41, 54 n.99, 70 n.151 Inim-ku ........................................... 118 n. 359 Inim-kuni ................................................... 118 Inim-manizi ............................................... 117 Inim-Šara ......................................... 51, 70, 71 Inima-dingir .............................................. 124 Inta’e’a ........................................................ 40 Isin ................ 32, 33 n.49, 74, 131 n.541, 142, 142 n.674 Kaka .......................................................... 150 Kamari ............... 54, 55 n.100, 56, 58, 83, 121 Kaneš (Kültepe) ...................... 18, 18 n.4, 142 Kaš ........................................................ 70-72 Kirkuk ....................................................... 142 Kuda ........................................ 117, 119 n.370 Kugani ......................................................... 89 Lagaš (al-Hiba) .............. 27 n.35, 28, 28 n.37, 30 n.45, 34, 34 n.53, 35, 62 n.117, 83, 84 d Lamma-Amar-Sin .................... 103, 125, 131 d Lisi ............................................................. 84 Lu-buluga .................................. 75, 109 n.339 Lu-dani ...................................................... 136 Lu-dingira .......................... 87, 144 n.682, 151 Lu-duga ........... 40 n.72, 48, 82, 87, 117 n.354 Lu-ebgal ................................................ 70, 81 Lu-Enlila .............. 61, 62, 73, 113, 117 n.357, 124, 127, 144

Lu-gina ........................................................ 65 Lu-Haya ....... 46, 53, 54, 56, 57, 59, 65 n.134, 78, 79, 82, 84 n.178, 106, 116, 134, 134 n.586, 137, 146 Lu-igisasa .................................................... 56 Lu-Inanna ............. 109 n.339, 117, 118 n.359, 119 n.370 Lu-kirizal ............................................. 34 n.53 Lu-kisal ..................................................... 121 Lu-Nanna ........................ 112, 117, 117 n.357 Lu-saga .......................................... 34 n.53, 40 Lu-Sin ........................................... 70, 71, 131 Lu-Šara ...... 24 n.24, 64, 65, 84, 84 n.180, 124 Lu-Šulgira ............... 56, 60, 65, 84 n.180, 149 Lu-Utu ............................................. 149 n.704 Lugal-andul ............................................... 102 Lugal-azida ........................................... 62, 70 Lugal-balasig ............................................... 89 Lugal-ebansa ....................................... 69, 112 Lugal-emahe ................. 45, 56, 58, 149 n.706 Lugal-ezem ........ 53, 53 n.93, 54, 75, 94, 103, 103 n.326, 118 n.359, 129 Lugal-gu’e ........................................... 40 n.72 Lugal-hegal ..................... 84 n.178, 145 n.687 Lugal-isa ..................................................... 89 Lugal-itida ............................................. 66, 82 Lugal-kiri ......................................... 48, 55-57 Lugal-kugani ........................... 58, 66, 82, 121 Lugal-kuzu .......................... 45, 56, 57, 61, 78 Lugal-magure .............................................. 89 Lugal-nesage ........ 48, 51, 52, 52 n.89, 56, 60, 63, 80, 81, 82, 95, 118 n.359, 121 Lugal-nir ............................................. 23 n.21 Lugal-saga ....................................... 149 n.706 Lugal-unkene ........................................ 61, 62 Lugal-ursag ............................. 110, 110 n.342 Lugal-ušur ....................................... 49, 50, 70 ma-da umma ki .................................. 55, 56, 60 Madga (Hit) ............................. 130 n.526, 142 Magan (Oman) ............. 117 n.354, 140 n.670, 141, 142 n.678, 144 Mari (Tell Hariri) ............... 17, 18, 27, 29, 30, 34 n.53, 102, 102 n.301 me-en-kár ...................................... 43 n.79, 56 Mušbi’ana ............... 41-43, 54-57, 62, 78, 79, 119, 143, 149 Na’u’a ................................................... 73, 74 Nanna-zišagal ...................................... 34 n.53 Nig-ginazu ......................................... 76 n.157

316

I NDICES Nig-urum ....................................... 53, 54, 136 Nigar-kidu .................. 48, 71, 117, 117 n.354, 119 n.370 d Ninda ......................................................... 84 d Nin-e’e ....................................... 84, 91 n.226 d Nin-ebgal ........................................... 24, 103 d Nin-egal ............................................. 23 n.22 Nin-hiliya .................................................. 132 Nin-kala ...................................................... 99 Nin-melam .............................. 121, 121 n.402 d Nin-ura ............ 24 n.29, 41, 54, 55, 59 n.114, 70 n.151, 84, 91 n.226 d Nin-Zabalam .............................................. 41 Nippur ................... 20, 25 n.29, 27, 28, 30-32, 33 n.49, 34, 34 n.54, 36, 52, 89, 91, 91 n.234, 99, 104, 105, 117, 121, 126, 126 n.473, 127 n.482, 130 n.525, 135, 135 n.602, 141, 141 n.673, 142, 143, 148, 148 n.703, 150, 150 n.712, 151, 158 Pada ............ 75, 110, 111, 117, 118, 119, 124, 125, 138, 141, 146 n. 696, 149 n.706, 149 n.709 Puzriš-Dagan (Drehem) ......... 24 n.24, 27, 28, 30, 31, 31 n.46, 32, 33, 47, 47 n.83, 48, 63 n.122, 88, 89, 91 n.234, 96 n.274, 100 n.286, 102, 102 n.300, 103, 109 n.339, 117, 117 n.357, 119, 131, 142, 150, 150 n.712, 160, 160 n.728, 161 Puzur-Eštar ................................................. 61 Ramadi ...................................................... 142 Sag-ku ..................................... 134, 149 n.706 Sin-kašid ..................................................... 19 Sippar .............................. 19, 30, 33 n.49, 143 Susa ............................... 27, 30, 33, 142 n.677 Šakuge ................................................. 25 n.29 d Šara ..................... 23 n.21, 31, 41, 45, 54, 55, 70 n.151, 84, 91 n.226, 105, 110, 124, 126 n.473, 129, 131, 132, 134, 137, 138, 146, 150, 150 n.711, 151 n.715, Šara-izu ..................................... 117, 119, 149 Šara-kam .............. 34 n.53, 94, 94 n.250, 117, 118, 119 n.370, 121, 150, 150 n.710, 150 n.713 Šara-zida ............................................. 23 n.21 Šeš-ani ......................................................... 70 Šeš-kala ........... 23 n.21, 56, 59, 60, 86 n. 185, 87, 89, 110, 111, 117-119, 121, 141, 150 n.713 Šu-Dagan ................................ 102, 102 n.301 Šu-Erra ........................................... 109 n. 339 Šu-ili ........................................................... 61 Šu-Nisaba .......................................... 84 n.178

Šulgi ................. 27, 29, 30, 30 n.44-45, 32-34, 84, 91 n.234, 99, 134, 141 Šulgi-urumu ................................................ 61 Šuruppak .................... 33 n.49, 91 n.234, 103, 103 n.324, 119 Tummal .......... 24 n.29, 91, 91 n.234, 99, 101, 105, 113, 126, 136, 138, 141-143, 150, 158 Turam-ili ........................... 117, 148, 150, 151 Ukunuti ....................................................... 83 Umani ......................................................... 82 Ur ......... 18, 24 n.29, 27-34, 33 n.49, 34 n.53, 86, 89, 91 n.234, 96 n.274, 99, 100, 105, 111 n.344, 114, 116, 117 n.354, 120, 121, 124, 126-128, 130, 131, 133, 135-138, 141, 141 n.672, 142-144, 150, 158-160 Ur-abba ....................................................... 86 Ur-ama ........................... 84 n. 180, 149 n.705 Ur-Ašar ........................... 110, 110 n.342, 143 Ur-Bau .................. 75, 76 n.157, 84 n.178, 95 Ur-Dumuzi(da) ................. 88 n.197, 110, 110 n.340-342, 111, 112, 114, 115, 117, 118125, 128, 130-135, 141, 142, 142 n.678, 146, 146 n.696, 147 n.697, 149 n.705 Ur-dun ................................... 56, 59, 59 n.113 Ur-e’e ...... 50, 52-57, 65, 69, 69 n.418, 70, 72, 78-82, 96, 97, 105, 106, 116-118, 117 n.354, 122, 147 Ur-Emah ....................... 83, 89, 91 n.234, 157 Ur-emaš ...................................................... 77 Ur-Enki ....................................................... 89 Ur-Enlila ................................ 84 n.178, n.180 Ur-gigir ...... 36 n.59, 49, 50, 56, 58, 59 n.114, 70, 72, 82, 127, 143, 149 n.704 Ur-gipar ................................................ 66, 89 Ur-Iškur .................................... 50, 51, 89, 90 Ur-Ištaran .................................. 123, 147, 149 Ur-Lamma ... . 34 n.53, 141 n. 672, 149 n.706 Ur-Lisi .......... 41, 48, 53, 84, 88, 96, 97, 101, 121 n.402 Ur-lugal ............................................... 24, 109 Ur-Mami ....................... 70, 71, 118, 122, 149 Ur-meme ..................................................... 34 Ur-mes ........................................ 86 n.185, 89 Ur-Namma ............. 29, 30, 30 n.42, 91 n.234, 133, 135 Ur-Namnunka ................ 56, 59, 59 n. 115, 60 Ur-nigar ......... 24 n.29, 34, 70, 71, 89, 96, 97, 97 n.276, 118 n.359, 127, 150 Ur-Ninsu 56, 58, 59, 59 n.115, 124, 149 n.705 Ur-Nintu ................................... 59 n. 114, 114 Ur-Nisaba .................................................... 81 317

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD Ur-Nungal ......... 66, 67, 69, 81, 90 n.223, 131 Ur-Nusku ................................. 117, 150 n.712 Ur-sigar ................................... 157, 157 n.723 Ur-silaluh .................................................... 77 Ur-Sin ................ 24 n. 29, 29 n.39, 78, 81, 82, 84 n.178, 150 Ur-Šara ............. 25, 26, 49, 50, 56, 65, 66, 67, 69, 69 n.147, 70, 71, 72, 77, 84 n.180, 87, 87 n.193, 90, 90 n.223, 93, 153 Ur-Šereda ............................................ 25 n.29 Ur-Šulpa’e ................ 24 n.28, 53, 53 n.91, 54, 78, 81, 82, 92, 102, 103, 103 n.327, 107, 110, 110 n.341, 113, 118, 121, 122, 122

n.415, 124, 125, 134, 139, 149 n.705, 150, 150 n.710 Ur-Utu ................. 70, 82, 118 n.359, 122, 149 Ur-Zabalam ................................................. 89 Uruk ............ 19, 29, 31, 33 n.49, 34, 102-104, 102 n.300, 160 Urzu ............................................................. 89 Utu-sig ....................................................... 150 Utu-ulgal ................................. 26, 87, 88, 153 Zabalam ................ 28, 41, 54, 54 n.99, 56, 57, 59, 60, 70, 70 n.151, 102

318

I NDICES

INDEX OF SUMERIAN WORDS

dub-sar “scribe” ......... 38, 42, 47, 47 n.84, 48, 50, 53, 53 n.93, 57-61, 59 n.114, 65, 65 n.134, 69, 75, 86, 89, 90 n.223, 92, 95-97, 97 n.276, 106, 116-119, 121, 122, 129, 132, 134, 136, 149 n.707, 150, 150 n.710, 151 n.715, 155, 155 n.718 dub-sar gu4-x “scribe of x domain units” ... 42, 106 dub-sar túg-gada “scribe of linen garments” ............................................ 129 duh “bran” ......... 62, 63, 63 n.123, 143 n. 680, 145 n.689, 159 n.727 dumu-gir15 ..................................... 37, 37 n.61 é-gal “(royal) palace” ............. 25 n.29, 79, 91, 91 n.234, 93 n.248, 94 n.253, 101, 101 n.298, 131, 133, 134, 136, 160 é-kas4 “road house” .................................... 78 é-maš ................................... 23 n.22, 113, 132 é-muhaldim “kitchen” ............. 133, 133 n.584 giš eme “plowshares” .................................... 48 engar “plot manager” ...................... 35, 41-43, 43 n.78-79, 60, 65-67, 74-76, 87 enku/en-kù “fishery inspector” ............. 81-83, 81 n.172, 118, 122, 149, 155 énsi “governor” ................ 21, 22, 25 n.29, 26, 32-36, 34 n.52-53, 38, 40-42, 40 n.72, 48, 52-54, 56 n.106, 61, 62, 64-66, 69, 70, 72, 73, 75, 76, 78, 80, 82, 84, 85-97, 85 n.184, 88 n.197, 96 n.274, 101-103, 101 n.298, 105, 106, 112-114, 117-119, 121, 121 n.402, 123-125, 127, 131, 132, 136, 139, 140, 141 n.673, 150 n.710-711, 151, 151 n.715, 153-155, 158, 161 éren .................... 37, 37 n.64, 86, 91, 92, 149, 149 n.706, 156 ésir “bitumen” .............. 53 n.93, 93, 94 n.260, 99 n.284, 103, 103 n.315, 110, 120, 120 n.387, 123, 124, 126, 130-133, 130 n.526, n.528, 131 n.541, 140, 142, 147, 147 n.700, 148, 150, 159 n.727 kuš ésir ......................................................... 122 eš-ku-ru-um “beeswax” ......... 137, 137 n.638, 140, 143 ezem “festival” ........ 31, 82, 91 n.234, 94, 99, 100, 100 n. 294, 101, 105, 113, 114, 124, 124 n.437, 126, 131, 131 n.546, 134

a dé-a ........................................................... 52 kuš a-gá-lá .................................................... 122 a-gar5 “lead” ............. 18, 127, 127 n.480, 140, 141 n.670 giš a-ra “planks” ................ 135, 136 n.618, 150 a-tu5-a “lustration rite” ...... 128, 130, 133, 138 a-zu “doctor” ............................................... 89 á bala-(a) ................................... 75, 79, 85, 98 á dàra “ibex horns” ........... 112, 137, 140, 143 á gul-la .................................. 85, 86, 86 n.185 á-ki-ti “akiti-festival” ............. 82, 94, 99, 100, 100 n.293-294, 124, 124 n.437, 126, 131, 131 n.546 ad-KID “reed worker” ............................ 92, 98 àga-ús “gendarme” .................... 92, 149 n.707 agar4-nígin ............................................. 61, 93 agrig “steward” ........................................... 92 al-la-ha-ru ....................... 113, 138, 138 n.666 amar-sag uz-tur “duckling” ......................... 77 AN.NA “tin” ...... 18, 68, 93, 93 n.243, 94, 113, 123, 126, 127, 127 n.480, n.482, n.489-490, 140, 141 n.670, 142, 144, 159 n.727, 160 apin “plow” ............................................... 135 apin-lá “rental/leased land” ....... 35, 36, 61, 62 giš ásal “Euphrates poplar” ......................... 142 báhar “potter” .. 38, 61, 89, 98, 143, 149 n.705 bala ............ 21, 29, 30, 32, 32 n.48, 33, 36-38, 37 n.63, n.65, 41, 75, 78, 79, 82, 84-86, 85 n.184, 86 n.185, 93, 93-94 n.248, 95 n.270, 98, 101 n.298, 103, 103 n.323, 106, 116, 116 n.351, 120, 124, 126, 128-138, 147, 150, 150 n.711 bar-da ....................................................... 135 dab5 .......... 36 n.59, 47, 47 n.83, 63, 63 n.122, 84, 87, 89, 102, 113, 128, 130, 146 dam-gàr .... 94, 94 n.249, 109, 110, 110 n.340, 114, 116, 116 n.347, 117, 119, 125, 134 n.586, 142, 144, 149 n.709 dan6 ........................................................... 128 dim-gal ...................................................... 135 diri ................................................. 39, 40, 111 kuš du10-gan ..................................... 24, 24 n.26 du10-ús ............................................... 130, 136 giš dúb-dúb .................................................. 135

319

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD ezem-mah “Grand Festival” ......... 24 n.25, 91, 100, 101, 114, 124 n.437 ga-àr “ghee” ........................ 67, 71, 143 n.680 ga gazi ....................................................... 138 ga SIG7 .................................... 138, 138 n.648 gáb-dan6 “cleaner” .................................... 128 gaba-ri ................................................... 26, 47 gal5-lá-gal .................................................... 48 ú gámun (babbar/gi6) ..... 77, 84, 84 n.180-181, 133 gán-gu4 “domain land” ........... 35, 36, 36 n.58, 41-43, 43 n.79, 54, 58, 60, 61, 65, 75, 76, 116, 119 gazi ...... 76, 76 n.158, 77, 84, 84 n.179, n.181, 97, 133, 133 n.583, 143, 143 n.681, 154, 155 géme .................................... 36, 37, 149 n.707 geštin ........................................................... 79 geštin hád “raisin” ............ 79, 134, 134 n.596, n.598, 135, 135 n.600, n.601 gi-muš ........................................................ 135 gìr PN ........................... 55, 56, 60, 147 n.700 gìr-sè-ga “attendants” .................. 89, 89 n.221 gir-vessel ......................................... 131 n.541 giš-kin-ti “workshops” ...... 128, 130, 136, 150 gú-gal “chickpeas” ....... 77, 84, 84 n.179-180, 122, 135, 135 n.606, n.607, n.609- n.610 gú-tur “lentils” .............. 77, 84, 84 n.179-180, 122, 135 gu-za-lá “throne-bearer” ....................... 65, 92 gudu-priest ................ 24 n.29, 65, 89, 92, 106 gún/gú-na/gú-un ....... 32, 33, 68, 68 n.138, 71, 73, 93, 93 n.245, 95, 95 n.271 guruš .............................. 36, 86 n.185, 89, 156 har “coils, rings” ......... 17, 17 n.1, n.2, 18, 23, 107, 151 har kìri-gu4 “nose-rings” .... 22, 100, 101, 105, 107, 159 har didi “small rings” ........ 101, 105, 107, 159 giš hašhur “apple” ......... 79, 79 n.168, 122, 134, 134 n.593, n.597, n. 599, 135, 135 n.601, 136 n.618 ha-za-núm “mayor” ................. 41, 92, 93, 117 hun-ga .................................................... 37, 85 ì-du8 “doorkeeper” ........................ 89, 92, 161 ì-HI-nun-na ................................ 113, 132, 133 ì ku6 .......... 83, 117, 118, 122, 122 n.415, 140, 149, 159 n.727 ì-nun “butter” 67, 68, 70, 71, 98, 106, 138, 145

ì-šáh “lard” ....... 53 n.93, 120, 120 n.390, 123, 124, 133, 134, 134 n.586, 134 n.588-590, n.592, 140, 145, 146, 148, 150, 151, 156 ì-UD.KA .................................... 133, 133 n.585 ì udu .................................................. 133, 145 igi-du8 .......................................... 92, 92 n.235 igi-kár ................................ 101, 102, 105, 126 giš íldag ...................................... 135, 136 n.619 im-bábbar “gypsum” ........ 113, 115, 124, 129, 129 n.511, 130, 132, 140, 142, 147, 147 n.700 im kù-sig17 ................................................. 138 ir7MUŠEN ........ 77, 77 n.163, 137, 143, 143 n.681 izi-gu7 .......................................................................................... 24 ka-gur7 “chief granary officer” ...... 61, 65, 92, 96 n.275, 116, 117, 119, 120, 146, 146 n.691, 149 giš kab .......................................................... 136 giš káb-kul .... 94, 94 n.265, 95, 126, 126 n.460, 138, 143, 143 n.681 kak “pegs” ................................. 123, 127, 131 kašde’a ......... 22, 99, 100, 101, 107, 150, 155, 158, 159 ki-a-nag ..................... 84, 102 n.300, 133, 135 ki-PN-ta ......... 50-52, 55, 55 n.104, 56, 60, 99, 147 n.700 giš kiri6 “garden, orchard” ..... 52, 79, 94 n.263,95 n.270, 136 n.613, 156, 157, 157 n.723 kišib PN ..................... 47, 47 n.84, 48, 50, 115 ku-mul ............................................... 121, 133 kù-(babbar) x “silver in lieu of product x” .. 24 n.27, 46, 53 n.93, 63, 67, 68, 69 n.147, 73, 76, 78-80, 78 n.167, 82, 83, 93, 97, 106, 112, 114, 119, 126, 127, 147, 157, 157 n.723 kù-(babbar) A-bi y “silver, its (value in) A product y” ................................ 68, 98, 116 kù-(babbar) PN .......................... 51, 60, 61, 90 kù-babbar babbar .................... 159, 159 n.725 kù-bi “its (value in) silver” .......... 23, 24 n.24, 39, 40, 104, 111-116, 146 n.691 kù-dím “silversmith” ........ 24, 24 n.28, 65, 82, 87, 92, 95, 98, 102, 103, 103 n.325, n.327, 107, 124, 125 kù mu-DU .................................................... 24 kù-sig17 “gold” ........ 17, 18, 23, 23 n.19, n.22, 24 n.29, 91, 91 n.231, 93, 93 n.244, 94, 99104, 99 n.281, 100 n.286, n.294, 106, 107, 117-119, 121, 123-127, 126 n.457, 140142, 140 n.670, 144, 148, 150, 151, 151 n.715, 155, 157-160

320

I NDICES maš-šu-gíd-gíd .......................................... 133 mi-rí-za ................................... 131 n.539, 135 mi-sír gišig .................................................. 135 mu-DU .......... 23 n.21, 24, 26, 45, 45 n.81, 63, 63 n.122, 66, 93, 150 muhaldim “kitchen administrator” ............ 89, 89 n.221, 92 mun “salt” ................. 73, 94 n.253, 132 n.556 mun-gazi ................... 77-79, 78 n.167, 83, 84, 88 n.197, 97, 104, 106, 154, 155 múrgu-ba “shell” ....................... 137, 140, 143 mušen-dù “fowler” ..... 81, 82, 149, 149 n.705 na-gada “herdsman” .. 38, 67, 67 n.136, 70-72 naga “alkaline plants” ........ 112-115, 122-124, 126, 128-130, 128 n.492, 132, 140, 143, 144, 147, 147 n.700, 150, 156 nagar “carpenter” .......................... 92, 98, 143 nar “singer” 24 n.29, 61, 91, 91 n.234, 92, 149 nidba ....... 123, 126 n.468, 131, 133, 134, 146 níg-ba .......................................... 19, 102, 105 níg-buru14-da ............................................. 103 níg-dab5 ....................... 84, 113, 128, 130, 146 níg-dab5 zà-mu-ka ..................................... 102 níg-geštu “earring” ........................... 103, 125 níg-kas7-(ak) ........ 38, 39, 46, 79, 83, 99, 104, 111, 114, 116, 136, 142, 143 níg-sám/samx(SA10) ............ 94 n.258, 95, 103, 103 n.322, n.323, 118-120, 126, 142 n.674 nu-bànda ......................... 29 n.39, 41, 82, 143 nu-bànda gu4 “chief plot manager” ... 36 n.59, 40 n.72, 41, 42, 50, 57, 60, 63, 63 n.121, 65-67, 82, 92, 149 n.704 nu-giškiri6 “gardener” .......... 24, 76-81, 84, 87, 92, 106, 121, 143, 143 n.681, 149 n.707, 157, 157 n.723 pa-li ................................................... 112, 132 pa mušen “bird plumage” ......... 46, 81-83, 97, 103, 103 n.320, 106, 124, 126, 137, 140, 143, 150, 154, 156 giš pèš “fig” ..... 79, 122, 134, 134 n.596, n.599, 135, 135 n.600-601 pisan-dub-ba “archivist” ..... 26, 49, 61, 65-67, 69, 69 n.147, 70-72, 87, 87 n.193, 90, 90 n.223, 93, 95, 97 n.275, 153 rá-gaba ................................................ 29 n.40 sá-du11 ............................ 83, 84, 103 n.311, 132, 134 sa10-(a) ............ 48, 91, 95, 114, 119, 120, 123, 126, 140, 147, 156 sag-du5 .................. 55, 56, 56 n.106, 59 n.115 sag-(na4) .................................. 24, 24 n.27, 25

kù(-sig17) huš(-a) “‘red’ gold” ..... 23, 23 n.19, 73, 79, 86, 91, 93 n.244, 94, 94 n.253, 100105, 107, 103 n.316, 113-115, 118, 123, 126, 141 n.673, 142 n.674 ku6 mun ....................................................... 82 ku6-nisig-da ............................................... 105 ku6 šeg6 “smoked fish” ........ 77, 84, 118, 122, 122 n.415-416, 137 ú KUR ............................................................ 77 dug kur-ku-dù .............................................. 138 kurušda “animal fattener” ........ 47, 51, 65, 67, 70-72, 92 kuš7 (SAHAR) “chief livestock manager” ... 57, 66, 70-72, 92, 96, 97, 97 n.276, 106, 147 lá “weigh” ........................................... 24 n.25 lá-NI .......... 39, 40, 40 n.71, 46, 67, 76, 85, 87, 90, 91, 91 n.224, 111, 114, 115, 150 n.713 lá-NI-(ta) su-ga “repaid arrears” ........... 40, 45, 49-51, 63, 65-74, 76, 78, 79, 82, 87, 93, 93 n.241, n.245, 97, 154 làl “honey” ...... 122, 123, 134, 134 n.596, 135, 135 n.600-601, 140, 143 lí-iq-tum .................................... 113, 138, 139 lú-ázlag “fuller” 50, 51, 89, 90, 129, 149 n.705 lú-kin-gi4-a “messenger” ....... 102, 102 n.301, 105, 159 lú-mun “salt producer” ......................... 72, 73 lú-níg-dab5-ba ................. 63, 63 n.122, 87, 89 lú-sum(-ma) .......................................... 78, 84 lú-tir “forester” ................... 38, 76, 77, 78, 92, 149 n.707, 155 giš lú- tukul ................................. 141, 142 n.677 lu-úbsar ......................................................... 77 lunga “brewer” ......... 38, 61, 89, 89 n.221, 92, 133 n.568, 149 n.707 má “boat” ....... 85, 93, 94, 95 n.267, 130, 131, 135, 142, 142 n.677, 157 má-gur8 “barge” ..... 131, 131 n.547, 132, 134, 137, 146 má-lah5 ........................................................ 89 giš ma-nu ..................................... 122, 138, 142 mangaga “date-palm fiber” ...... 124, 138, 140, 143, 143 n.681, 147, 147 n.700 mar-sa “shipyard” .......... 120 n.387, 131, 133, 136, 137 maš/máš a-šà-ga “irrigation fee” ... 36, 46, 48, 51-65, 52 n.89, 67, 88 n.197, 96, 106, 106 n.335, 154, 155, 160 mašdare’a ............. 22, 82, 90, 93, 94, 99-101, 99 n.283, 100 n.290, n.293-294, 101 n.298, 104, 105, 107, 124 n.436, 125, 126, 150, 155, 157-159 321

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA DURING THE U R III P ERIOD sag-níg-gur11-ra-(kam) ........... 39, 47 n.85, 62, 79, 83, 94, 105, 111, 112, 114, 116, 154 sagi “cupbearer” .................................. 92, 105 sám/samx(SA10) “price” ............ 64, 66, 68, 73, 79, 86, 91, 94 n.253, n.255-260, n.265, 95, 95 n.267-272, 103, 103 n.314-316, 106, 107, 112, 113, 115, 118, 118 n.360, 120, 121, 126, 141 n.672-673, 146 n.691-692, 147, 147 n.697, 148, 161 sanga-priest ............................. 59, 73, 95, 103 santana ............................................. 79, 80, 84 si-ì-tum .......................... 39, 40, 104, 111, 115 sila ................... 63, 63 n.122, 90, 91, 91 n.224 simug “blacksmith” ................ 86, 87, 89, 106, 127, 149 n.705 sipa .......... 49, 67, 67 n.135, n.136, 68, 71, 72, 145, 149 n.705 su-gan ....................................... 113, 124, 127, 127 n.486-487, n.489-490, 140, 141 n.670, 147 n.700, 159 n.727 kuš súhub ...................................................... 130 giš suku5 ..................................... 136, 136 n.627 sum “garlic” ..... 53 n.93, 77-79, 84, 84 n.180, n.181, 135, 135 n.603, n.609, 159 n.727 sum-sikil “onion” ......... 77, 84, 84 n.180-181, 94, 94 n.264, 103 n.318, 135, 135 n.604, n.608-609, 159 n.727 šà bala(-a) .......... 78, 93 n.248, 116, 116 n.351 šà-bi-ta ....................... 39, 46, 84, 99, 112, 115 šà-gal “fodder” ...... 32, 62, 98, 145, 145 n.689 šà-gu4 “plowing assistant” ............. 35, 42, 92, 120 n.384, 146, 146 n.691, 147 n.697 šabra “majordomo” ........ 42, 43 n.79, 53 n.93, 57-59, 57 n.109, 58 n.110, 59 n.114, 61, 65, 92, 95, 111 n.344, 150 n.712 šagina .............................................. 33, 41, 62 še x ............................................................. 120 še-ba ............................................ 37 n.64, 145 še-bi “its (value in) barley” ......................... 64 giš še-du10 ............................................ 135-136 (še-)giš-ì “sesame, sesame oil” ...... 74-76, 87, 97, 98, 99 n.283, 122, 123, 133, 134, 134 n. 586, n. 588-590, n.592, 136, 138, 140, 144, 154, 159 n.727

še-lú “coriander” ........... 77, 84, 84 n.179-181, 133, 133 n.583 šu-gur ........................................................ 127 šu-í “barber” ................................................ 95 šu-ku6 “fisherman” .............. 33, 38, 61, 81-83, 81 n.172, 87, 92, 149, 149 n.705 šu-nir “standard” ........ 24 n.28, 46, 82, 91, 93, 94 n.255, 102, 103, 103 n.311, 105, 125 šuku “sustenance land/field/plot” ......... 34-37, 36 n.58, 37 n.64, 42, 43, 43 n.80, 54, 60-63, 74, 76, 145, 145 n.687, 149 šu ... ti ............ 24 n.24, 26, 45, 47, 47 n.83-84, 48-51, 71, 81, 91 n.234, 104, 113, 114 tibira ...................................................... 92, 93 tu-di-da “toggle pin” ....... 103, 103 n.312, 151 tu-gur4mušen ................................................... 77 túg-du8 “felter” ........ 106, 114, 129, 149 n.705 ú U.EN .................................... 77, 84 n.181, 138 giš ù-suh5 ....... 124, 126, 126 n.462, n.467, 135, 135 n.611, 136 n.619-629, 142 ùg-ga6 ............................................... see UN.ÍL úgu(A.KA) .............. 47-50, 47 n.85, 69, 72, 79, 104, 132, 136 ugula “supervisor, overseer, foremen” ....... 42, 57, 77, 117, 149 n.704 kuš ùmmu ............................................. 122, 138 UN.ÍL “menials” ............................. 37, 37 n.64 ùnu “cowherd” ........... 67, 67 n.135, 70-72, 92 (giš) ùr “roof beams” ............. 94, 94 n.261, 122, 131, 143, 159 n.727 giš ur-lum ..................................................... 136 uru4-lá “rental/leased land” ............ see apin-lá uruda ......... 68, 94 n.255-257, 103 n.321, 113, 127, 141, 141 n.672, 142 n.674, 146 n.691, 148, 151 giš za-ba-lum “juniper” . 24 n.24, 113, 132, 136 zà-hi-li ......................................................... 77 zi-ba-tum ................................................... 133 zi-bí-tum ...................................................... 77 zi-ga-(àm) ................... 24 n.26, 39, 46, 79, 84, 94 n.253, 99, 111, 115, 120, 128, 129 zú-lum “dates” ..... 79, 80, 94 n.253, 102, 111, 114, 117-119, 121, 124, 126, 132 n.560, 134, 134 n.599, 140, 143, 143 n.680, 144, 145 n.689, 146, 149, 150 n.710

322

I NDICES

INDEX OF TEXTS*

A 2697 (Oriental Institute, Chicago) ........ 109 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-147 ........ 25 n.32, 48, 49, 71 n.153 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-148 ........ 55 n.104 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-176 ...... 149 n.705 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-227 ....... 94 n.250, 155 n.718 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-228 .......... 43 n.80 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1911-483 .......... 23 n.22 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1912-1143 ................ 42 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-666 ................. 68, 68 n.139, 71 n.153, 98 n.279, 121 n.404 AAICAB 1/1, Ashm. 1924-667 ..... 120 n.390, 125 n.452, 126 n.459-460, 128 n.498n.499, n.502, 130 n.519-521, 130 n.523n.524, n.533, 133 n.570, n.573, 134 n.588, 135 n.600-601, 136 n.627, 138 n.664, 141 n.672 AAS 67 ................................................. 79, 80 AAS 71 ............................................. 94 n.254 AAS 77 ............................................. 93 n.248 AAS 80 ................................ 102 n.304, n.310 AAS 83 ....................................................... 43 AAS 149 ..... 100 n.294, 125 n.442, 126 n.454 Aegyptus 10, 281 52 ............. 63, 65, 65 n.133 Aleppo 254 ...................................... 149 n.706 Aleppo 442 .................................................. 69 Aleppo 443 ............................................ 69, 72 Aleppo 445 .................................................. 71 Aleppo 446 .................................................. 68 Aleppo 447 ................................ 62, 103 n.319 Aleppo 448 ............................................ 55, 57 Aleppo 449 .................................................. 62 Aleppo 451 .................................................. 58 Aleppo 455 .................................................. 81 Aleppo 456 .......................... 53 n.93, 94 n.258 Aleppo 459 .................................................. 81 Aleppo 462 ........................................ 95 n.271 Aleppo 463 ........................ 69 n.146, 95 n.271 Aleppo 465 .................................. 85, 85 n.183 AnOr 1 35 ................................................... 58

AnOr 1 47 ................................. 85, 154 n.717 AnOr 1 52 ........... 67, 68, 69 n.147, 153 n.716 AnOr 1 70 ................... 68 n.139, 69 n.147, 72 AnOr 7 125 ................ 91, n.232, 92, 93 n.237 AnOr 7 262 ..................................... 146 n.696 AOS 32 C16 ............. 82, 89 n.206-207, n.213, n.218, n.221, 90, 90 n.223 AOS 32 D1 ............................................... 160 ArOr 62 238 I 867 ....... 100 n.294, 124 n.433, n.436 AR RIM 4 8 ................. 110, 120 n.385, n.386 ASJ 11 204-216 .................. 119 n.372, n.377, 120 n.383, n.390, n.392-393, 121 n.398n.399, n.402, n.404, 126 n.455-456, 128 n.493, n.498-500, 129 n.504-505, n.507, n.514, 130 n.517, n.519-520, 131 n.538, n.544, n.548-549, n.552, 132 n.563, 133 n.568, n.572, n.574-575, 134 n.587, 135 n.600, 138 n.655, 142, 145 n.684, 146 n.690 ASJ 18 79 11 ............................... 81, 93 n.240 ASJ 18 166 8 ................................... 150 n.713 Atiqot 4 pl. 21 44 .......................... 25 n.32, 45 AUCT 1 144 ....................................... 24 n.24 AUCT 2 287 ..................................... 94 n.261 AUCT 2 289 ........................... 160, 160 n.728 Babyl. 6 53 A ........ 40, 68, 68 n.139, 95 n.268 BCT 2 71 ... 100 n.289, 101 n.298, 102 n.304, 103 n.321 BCT 2 72 .................................... 63 n.123, 64 BCT 2 76 .................................... 80 n.169, 81 BCT 2 78 .................................................... 75 BCT 2 82 ............................. 23, 71 n.153, 82, 87 n.188, 94, 100 n.293, 150 n.713, 157 BCT 2 83 ........................ 63 n.119, 149 n.709 BCT 2 84 ........................................ 90, 91, 93 BCT 2 288 .................................................. 59 BIN 5 69 .............................. 102 n.305, n.308 BIN 5 108 ............ 54, 55 n.103, 56 n.105, 59, 59 n.112 BIN 5 109 ........................... 83, 88, 154 n.717

––––––––––––––––– * This list includes all the texts cited in the prose part of this book and the texts appearing with some form of comment in the footnotes. It excludes the texts simply cited in the footnotes. The sigla follow the conventions of BDTNS (http://bdtns.filol.csic.es).

323

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA BIN 5 111 .................................................... 60 BIN 5 122 .......... 63 n.122, 87 n.194, 89 n.216 BIN 5 136 .............................................. 85, 87 BIN 5 145 .......................................... 94 n.262 BIN 5 197 ...................... 110 n.340, 122 n.428 BIN 5 330 .................................... 63 n.119, 66 BIN 5 332 .................................... 95, 95 n.272 BiOr 8 52 ....................... 25, 87, 88, 153 n.716 BJRL 22 173 ................................... 126 n.464 BJRL 64 109 56 .............................. 110 n.340 BM 19972 ........................................... 40 n.71 BM 103439 ................................................. 89 BM 105330 ..................... 35 n.55, 36, 43 n.80 BM 105334 ..................................... 42, 43, 75 BM 105346 ................................................. 85 BM 106059 ......................................... 40 n.71 BM 106557 ......... 53 n.92, 59 n.112, 88 n.197 BM 110116 ........................... 42 n.77, 43, 120 BPOA 1 856 ............. 52 n.90, 53 n.92, 61, 62, 88 n.197 BPOA 1 909 ................................................ 59 BPOA 1 961 .............................................. 147 BPOA 1 980 .................................. 53 n.94, 54 BPOA 1 1005 .................................. 103 n.317 BPOA 1 1084 .............................................. 79 BPOA 1 1273 .................................. 149 n.708 BPOA 2 2278 .................................. 147 n.700 BPOA 6 77 ........................................ 95 n.269 BPOA 6 201 ................................ 81, 93 n.240 BPOA 6 544 .................... 80 n.169, 157 n.723 BPOA 6 942 ........................................ 24 n.26 BPOA 6 998 .................................... 103 n.320 BPOA 6 1229 .............................................. 85 BPOA 7 1554 .............................................. 60 BPOA 7 1749 .................................. 103 n.315 BPOA 7 1783 .................................... 86 n.185 BPOA 7 1898 ........ 121, 121 n.409, 122 n.415 BPOA 7 1983 .............................................. 81 BPOA 7 1988 .............................................. 55 BPOA 7 2693 .................................... 94 n.265 BRM 3 47 .......................................... 96 n.274 BRM 3 148 ............. 24 n.28, 103 n.325, n.327 Bull. Buffalo SNS 11-2 146 13 ............. 82, 89 CHEU 51 ..................................................... 68 CHEU 99 ..................................................... 97 CST 542 .............................................. 23, 104 CST 676 .................................................... 149 CST 686 .......................................... 149 n.705 ITT 3 5494 ........................................ 96 n.275

JCS 11 41 ........................................ 127 n.482 JCS 31 242 16 ............................. 78, 94 n.256 JCS 40 112 3 ................. 103 n.322, 106 n.336 Ledgers pl. 2 2 .... 118 n.358, 134 n.588, n.591 Ledgers pl. 4 3 ..................... 121 n.400, n.409, 124 n.437, 127 n.490, 134 n.594-595, 138 n.664 Ledgers pl. 6 4 ................................. 125 n.452 Ledgers pl. 8 5 ................................. 125 n.452 Ledgers pl. 9 6 .............. 119 n.368, 127 n.474, 136 n.624, n.630 Ledgers pl. 13 8 .. 120 n.390, 127 n.475, n.490 Ledgers pl. 15 9 .............. 88 n.197, 118 n.361, 121 n.411, 124 n.435, 125 n.439-440, n.446, 126 n.461, n.467, 128 n.500, 129 n.504, 129 n.507, n. 514, 131 n.538, n.545, n.547548, 132 n.566, 133 n.568, n.572- n.573, n.585, 135 n.600, 136 n.623, 139 n.667 Ledgers pl. 17 10 .................... 118, 121 n.405, 128 n.500, 129 n.504, 129 n.505, n.514, 131 n.539-540, n.543, n.545, n.553, 133 n.585, 134 n.592, 138 n.663-664, 139 n.667 Ledgers pl. 19 11 .................... 118, 119 n.371, 120 n.390, 121 n.405, 127 n.474, 128 n.502, 129 n.507, n.514, 130 n.523, n.533, 133 n.569, Ledgers pl. 21 12 ............................. 146 n.696 Ledgers pl. 23 13 ....... 88 n.197, 94 n.255-256, 95, 140, 147 n.699 Ledgers pl. 25 14 ......... 116 n. 352, 129 n.512, 136 n. 617, 137 n.645 Ledgers pl. 27 15 .......... 110 n.341, 119 n.378, 126 n.454, n.462-463, Ledgers pl. 30 17 ................. 130 n.524, n.536, 132 n.567, 133 n.582, 134 n.597, 135 n.607, 137 n.647 Ledgers pl. 34 19 .................. 100 n.285, n.288 Ledgers pl. 37 21 ............... 94 n.264, 95 n.272 Ledgers pl. 39 22 .................... 100, 100 n.289, 102 n.304, 106 n.336, 107 n.337 MCS 2 72 HSM 6761 ......................... 53 n.91 MVN 1 238 ... 124, 138 n.651, 147, 148 n.701 MVN 1 240 ......................... 118 n.358, n.361, 121 n.409, 125 n.441, n.447, 126 n.456, n.471-472, 127, 127 n.490, 129 n.504, 141 n.673 MVN 1 243 ..................................... 149 n.706 MVN 1 250 ................................................. 93 MVN 2 23 ............ 24, 91, 91 n.234, 92 n.235, 93, 94 n.253, 107 MVN 3 349 ..................................... 103 n.311 MVN 4 138 ..................................... 100 n.290 324

I NDICES MVN 6 294 ....................................... 86 n.185 MVN 9 212 ..................................... 126 n.464 MVN 10 177 ............................... 63 n.123, 64 MVN 11 77 ..................................... 109 n.339 MVN 11 165 100 n.289, 101 n.298, 102 n.304 MVN 11 166 ................. 100 n.289, 103 n.318 MVN 11 170 ..................................... 95 n.270 MVN 13 247 ............................... 85 n.182, 86 MVN 13 357 ............................................... 97 MVN 13 761 ..................................... 94 n.258 MVN 13 833+834 ........................... 103 n.323 MVN 13 860 ........................... 110, 110 n.341 MVN 14 39 ........................... 79, 80, 94 n.253 MVN 14 119 ................................. 25 n.32, 50 MVN 14 154 .......... 53 n.93, 81, 88, 89 n.201, 154 n.717 MVN 14 157 ............................................... 83 MVN 14 200 .............. 85 n.182, 86, 87 n.186, n.192-193 MVN 15 108 ....................... 24 n.27, 68 n.142 MVN 15 390 .................... 57 n.109, 58 n.110, 91 n.234, 149 n.706 MVN 16 682 ................................... 110 n.342 MVN 16 718 ................................... 110 n.342 MVN 16 837 ............................................. 102 MVN 16 901 ..................................... 86 n.185 MVN 16 942 ................................... 110 n.341 MVN 16 1043 ............. 63 n.119, 64 n.130, 97 MVN 16 1156 ..................................... 23 n.21 MVN 20 68 ................. 68, 69 n.148, 94 n.259 MVN 20 155 ...................... 24 n.27, 63 n.123, 64 n.129, 94 n.256 MVN 20 199 ............................................... 91 MVN 21 139 ............................................... 58 MVN 21 332 ............................................. 146 MVN 21 341 ............................................... 43 MVN 21 342 ............................................... 55 MVN 21 343 ......................................... 54, 61 MVN 21 344 ............................................... 82 NABU 1989 95 2 100 n.287, 102 n.304, n.310 NABU 1989 95 8 ........................................ 85 NABU 1989 95 12 ........... 82 n.174, 85 n.183, 87, 87 n.191 NATN 805 .............................. 118, 121 n.406 Nebraska 44 ............... 48-50, 64 n.127, n.129, 68 n.140-141, 74 n.155, 95 n.272, 145 n.685 Nebraska 71 .......................................... 80, 81 Nesbit 66 ............................................. 31 n.46 Nik. 2 401 ................................... 81, 95 n.268

Nik. 2 406 ................... 64 n.129, 66, 94 n.258 Nik. 2 407 ................................................... 63 Nik. 2 408 ................................... 79, 80 n.169 Nik. 2 447 ................................................. 117 Nisaba 9 77 ................................................. 55 Nisaba 9 96 ....................................... 59 n.114 Nisaba 9 238 ......................................... 51, 52 Nisaba 9 271 ............................................... 78 Nisaba 23 56 ................................... 149 n.705 OLP 4 17-70 no. 40 .................. 88, 154 n.717 OLZ 17 241 .......... 101 n.297, 104, 104 n.328 Ontario 1 128 .................................. 117 n.357 Ontario 1 135 .................................. 117 n.357 Ontario 1 169 .................................. 150 n.712 OrAnt 22 203 HSM 911 523 ........... 93 n.238, 95, 140, 140 n.669 Orient 16 49 37 ............................... 100 n.286 Orient 16 62 71 ......................................... 127 Orient 16 63 75 ............. 130 n.528, 131 n.541 OrSP 6 60 Wengler 48 .......................... 91, 93 OrSP 47-49 163 .......................... 58, 59 n.112 OrSP 47-49 196 .................................... 79, 81 OrSP 47-49 197 ........................... 63, 93n.246 OrSP 47-49 213 .................................... 36, 62 OrSP 47-49 230 ................................ 59 n.115 OrSP 47-49 253 ............ 129 n.150, 137 n.645 OrSP 47-49 484 .............................. 149 n.705 Princeton 1 396 ......................................... 156 Princeton 1 409 .......... 54, 55 n.103, 56 n.105, 59, 160 Princeton 1 539 ........................................... 65 Princeton 1 541 ........................................... 59 Princeton 1 547 ........................... 80 n.169, 81 Princeton 1 559 ........................... 74, 76 n.157 RA 16 19 ................................. 122 n.430, 143 RA 19 39 9 ................................................ 141 RA 19 41 42 .................................... 142 n.677 RIAA 128 ........................... 24 n.27, 71 n.152 RO 41 121 1 ................................................ 58 Rochester 130 ................................... 95 n.272 Rochester 136 ................................. 110 n.342 Rochester 239 ................................. 149 n.709 SA 55 .................................. 79, 80 n.169, 157 SA 56 .................. 73, 85, 94 n.253, 103 n.316 SA 134 ...... 116, 119 n.370, 120 n.381, n.382, 148, 148 n.702 SAKF 92 ..................................................... 60 Santag 6 29 ............. 47, 118 n.359, 122 n.422 Santag 6 52 ....................................... 94 n.263 325

M ONETARY R OLE OF S ILVER AND I TS A DMINISTRATION IN M ESOPOTAMIA Santag 6 58 ...................................... 102 n.304 Santag 6 67 ........ 25 n.32, 50, 51, 89 n.202, 90 Santag 6 82 ........................ 24 n.27, 125 n.443 Santag 6 107 ................ 68 n.139, 69, 88 n.197 Santag 6 119 ............. 88 n.197, 111-114, 118, 118 n.358, n.360, 119 n.376, 124 n.437, 125 n.440, n.444, 126 n.456, n.465, n.470, 129 n.504-505, 132 n.562, 138 n.654, 141 n.673 Santag 6 127 .................................... 102 n.301 Santag 6 192 .................................... 151 n.715 Santag 6 213 ................................ 69, 70 n.149 Santag 6 269 .............................. 68 n.139, 147 Santag 6 282 ................................................ 91 Santag 6 333 ................ 85 n.182, 86, 87 n.189 Santag 6 340 ................... 77-79, 83, 84 n.181, 104, 104 n.331 Santag 6 359 ................................................ 95 SAT 1 227 ....................................... 109 n.339 SAT 2 124 ......................................... 94 n.258 SAT 2 178 ......................................... 95 n.267 SAT 2 269 ............................... 25 n.32, 48, 62 SAT 2 337 ......................................... 94 n.260 SAT 2 453 ................... 85 n.182, 87, 87 n.191 SAT 2 613 ..................... 130 n.528, 131 n.541 SAT 2 646 ............................... 128, 130 n.533 SAT 2 695 ....................................... 120 n.379 SAT 2 775 ............................ 102 n.305, n.308 SAT 2 963 ....................................... 102 n.305 SAT 3 1238 ................................. 91 n.230, 93 SAT 3 1308 ................................. 63 n.119, 66 SAT 3 1309 ......... 24 n.28, 82, 102, 102 n.307 SAT 3 1497 ........................................... 63, 66 SAT 3 1530 ................................................. 64 SAT 3 1583 ................. 85, 85 n.183, 87 n.191 SAT 3 1983 ...... 64 n.126, n.130, 85 n.182, 86 SAT 3 2082 ............................. 144 n.682, 151 SAT 3 2123 ....................................... 94 n.264 SET 130 ....................................... 68, 71 n.153 SNAT 291 ................................................... 59 SNAT 314 ................................................... 60 SNAT 382 ......................................... 69 n.148 SNAT 389 ........................... 68, 94 n.256-257 SNAT 401 ...................... 66, 72, 87, 88 n.197, 89 n.209, n.211, n.217, n.219 SNAT 407 .............. 24 n.27, 63 n.120, 66, 75, 78 n.166, 88 n.197 SNAT 420 ........... 40 n.72, 68 n.143, 69 n.146 SNAT 436 ....................................... 145 n.685 SNAT 442 ................................................. 101

SNAT 490 .................... 116 n.349, 123 n.431, 137 n.645, 142 SNAT 518 ......... 25 n.32, 46, 53 n.96, 54, 106 STA 11 .............. 76 n.160, 79, 143, 143 n.681 STA 22 ................. 118 n.359, 119 n.367, 122, 122 n.416, 125 n.445, 126 n.457, n.468, 129 n.514, 130 n.524, 134 n.595, 135 n.601 Syracuse 413 ......................................... 80, 81 Syracuse 416 ............................................... 79 Syracuse 465 ............................................. 147 TCL 5 5666 ..................................... 149 n.707 TCL 5 5680 ....... 119 n.378, 120 n.383- n.384, n.388, 121 n.403, 126 n.473, 129, 129 n.504, n.506, n.515, 130 n.529-530, 131, 131 n.547, n.549, n.552, n.554, 132 n.563, 133 n.573, n.579-580, 135 n.605, 137 n.639, 138 n.664, n.666, 139 n.667, 146 n.691, n.696 TCL 5 6037 .......... 116 n.353, 118, 119 n.374, 120 n.383-384, n.387-388, 121 n.410, 125 n.453, 127 n.484, 128 n.494-495, 129 n.512-514, n.516, 130 n.517, 131 n.551, n.555, 132 n.558-559, n.563, 133 n.576, n.581, 134 n.586, n.592, n.596, 136 n.617, n.628-629, 137 n.637, n.640, n.642, n.644, 138 n.655, n.664-665, 139 n.667, 146 n.692-693, 148 TCL 5 6045 .................. 52 n.90, 54, 63 n.120, n.123, 81, 106 TCL 5 6046 .................. 119 n.370, 120 n.390, 121 n.400, n.409, 122, 122 n.414-415, n.417, n.419, 125 n.448, 126 n.457, n.469, 134 n.588 TCL 5 6056 .................. 120 n.390, 127 n.475, 134 n.598, 141 n.672 TCL 5 6166 ............. 90, 91, 92 n.236, 93, 109 TCS 1 277 ................................... 97, 97 n.276 TCTI 2 3573 .............................................. 141 TJAMC IOS 1 ................. 89 n.222, 110 n.341 TJAMC IOS 29 ........................................... 75 TLB 3 24 ......................................... 102 n.300 TLB 3 153 ............................... 122 n.420, 123 TUT 121 .......................................... 111 n.344 UCP 9-2-1 88 .................................. 120 n.379 UCP 9-2-2 77 ...................................... 24 n.28 UET 3 702 ................................................. 141 Umma 79 ............................. 24 n.25, 91 n.228 Umma 82 ................. 25 n.32, 51, 89 n.202, 90 Umma 85 ..................................... 52, 55 n.104 Umma 95 ................................... 88, 154 n.717 UTI 3 1648 ........................................ 59 n.114 326

I NDICES UTI 3 2011 .......... 24 n.26, 93 n.248, 94 n.253 UTI 3 2020 .............................. 24 n.26, 62, 91 UTI 3 2050 91 n.233, 92, 93 n.237, 103 n.314 UTI 3 2284 ...................................... 149 n.704 UTI 4 2880 .................. 63 n.122, 66, 87 n.194 UTI 5 3187 .. 118 n.359, 119 n.369, 146 n.696 UTI 5 3347 ........................................ 88 n.197 UTI 5 3486 ................. 63, 64, 65 n.132, n.133 UTI 6 3680 .................... 100 n.290, 101 n.295 UTI 6 3688 ......... 100 n.290, n.292, 101 n.295 Vicino Oriente 8/1 62 ................................. 58 Vicino Oriente 8/1 65 ................................. 75 Vicino Oriente 8/1 69 ....... 63 n.123, 65 n.134

Vicino Oriente 8/1 71 ................................. 55 YBC 9818 ............................................. 43, 55 YOS 1 17 ........................................ 109 n.339 YOS 4 219 .................................................. 85 YOS 4 262 ................................ 88, 154 n.717 YOS 4 277 ........................................ 94 n.266 YOS 4 286 ...................................... 103 n.324 YOS 4 290 ..................... 63 n.123, 74, 85, 93, 93 n.243, n.244 YOS 4 323 ...................................... 147 n.698 ZA 95 175 ........ 104-106, 118, 125 n.450, 154 ZA 95 191 ..................... 52, 60, 104-106, 118, 125 n.451,154

327