DOCSLIB.ORG

Sumerian Verbal Paradigms: the Texts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sumerian Verbal Paradigms: the Texts Cuneiform Digital Library Preprints <http://cdli.ucla.edu/?q=cuneiform-digital-library-preprints> Hosted by the Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative (<http://cdli.ucla.edu>) Number 1 Titel: “On the Old Babylonian Understanding of Sumerian Grammar” Author: Peter J. Huber (Altendorf, Switzerland) Posted to web: 4 September 2015 Peter J. Huber: On the Old Babylonian Understanding of Sumerian Grammar Abstract This essay is concerned with a closely knit collection of Old Babylonian bilingual verbal paradigms (OBGT VI-X, originally published in Materialien zum Sumerischen Lexikon IV, here reproduced with added English translations). It represents the results of my effort to understand the OB understanding of Sumerian grammar and the methodological differences between their way of operating and ours. I have consciously restricted myself to extract the Sumerian grammatical structure, as it was understood by the Babylonians, from their own grammatical texts alone. These highly sophisticated paradigms are the earliest serious grammatical documents in existence, and their richness is absolutely fascinating. They are hardly known outside of Sumerological circles and deserve wider publicity. The paradigms provide a detailed layout of the Sumerian verbal morpho- syntax. They seem to put special emphasis on precisely those aspects that still are controversial in modern Sumerian grammars. The views of the ancient grammarians sometimes diverge considerably from those of modern Sumerologists, possibly indicating that we are concerned with different languages (say a theoretical learned version underlying the OB scholarly tradition, and the language prevalent in the unilingual text corpus used by modern linguists). For example, the paradigms give a conscious, admirably clear segmentation of the so-called conjugation prefixes, somewhat different from the still controversial modern views. Flatly against modern opinion, they conspicuously separate the conjugation prefix /mu/, the ventive /m/, and the 1st person pronoun /mu/. OB Sumerian Grammar Contents Prefatory Note. ........................................................................................................................................ 5 1 Introduction. .................................................................................................................................... 6 2 The overall structure of the paradigms. .......................................................................................... 7 2.1 The texts.................................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 The underlying grid structure. .................................................................................................. 9 2.3 Implied goals of the paradigms. .............................................................................................. 10 2.4 Normative systematization? ................................................................................................... 10 3 Comparing widely different languages.......................................................................................... 12 4 Peculiarities of the Akkadian column. ........................................................................................... 13 4.1 Non-assimilation of pronouns. ............................................................................................... 13 4.2 Peculiar use of Akkadian pronouns......................................................................................... 13 4.3 Nt-stems. ................................................................................................................................. 13 4.4 Negations. ............................................................................................................................... 13 5 Dialectal(?) variability. ................................................................................................................... 14 6 Sumerian verbal morpho-syntax: an overview. ............................................................................ 16 6.1 Subject and direct object. ....................................................................................................... 17 6.2 Subordinate subject. ............................................................................................................... 19 6.3 Oblique cases and oblique case pronouns. ............................................................................ 20 6.4 Conjugation prefixes. .............................................................................................................. 23 7 Conjugation and split ergativity. ................................................................................................... 24 7.1 Sumerian versus Akkadian conjugation: split ergativity. ........................................................ 24 7.2 Transitive and intransitive constructions. ............................................................................... 26 8 OBGT VII: an intransitive verb. ...................................................................................................... 28 8.1 OBGT VII: Compact listing of the non-indicative forms. ......................................................... 29 8.2 OBGT VII: Compact listing of the indicative forms. ................................................................. 30 8.3 OBGT VII: the systematic construction of the grid. ................................................................ 31 8.4 OBGT VII: directional prefixes /m/, /ba/ and /mma/. ............................................................ 31 8.5 OBGT VII: the ventive /m/ and the first person pronoun /mu/. ............................................. 32 8.6 OBGT VII: the stative inserts. .................................................................................................. 34 8.7 OBGT VII: the ittallak niāti inserts. ......................................................................................... 35 9 OBGT VI and X: transitive verbs. .................................................................................................... 36 9.1 OBGT VI: the grid structure of the paradigm. ......................................................................... 38 9.1.1 Some peculiarities of OBGT VI and X. .............................................................................. 39 9.2 OBGT VI: the non-indicative forms. ........................................................................................ 40 9.2.1 OBGT VI: differentiation between ventive and 1st person dative. .................................. 40 9.2.2 OBGT VI: the causative pronominal prefixes. .................................................................. 41 9.2.3 OBGT VI: dissimilation of bi2 to ni after labial + vowel. ................................................... 42 9.3 OBGT VI: regular indicative forms and the conjugation prefixes. .......................................... 43 9.3.1 On the use of the conjugation prefixes. .......................................................................... 44 9.4 OBGT VI: inserts and other irregularities. ............................................................................... 45 9.4.1 OBGT VI: unexpected stative constructions. ................................................................... 45 9.4.2 OBGT VI: the bi2-inserts and intransitive constructions. ................................................. 47 9.4.3 OBGT VI: N-stems. ........................................................................................................... 49 9.4.4 OBGT VI: curious -ta- forms. ............................................................................................ 49 Peter J. Huber 3 OB Sumerian Grammar 9.4.5 OBGT VI: Nt-stems. .......................................................................................................... 50 9.4.6 OBGT VI + X: present tense forms. .................................................................................. 52 10 OBGT VIII and IX: two-part verbs. ............................................................................................... 53 10.1 OBGT VIII: the structure of §1-23. ....................................................................................... 54 10.2 OBGT IX: the structure of §1-49. ......................................................................................... 55 10.3 OBGT VIII + IX: comparative discussion of the Ni-forms. .................................................... 57 10.4 OBGT VIII + IX: comparative discussion of the indicative forms. ........................................ 60 10.5 Dative or accusative? .......................................................................................................... 64 10.6 What did we gain from working through OBGT VIII and IX? ............................................... 65 11 N3513+N3592: a unilingual paradigm. ...................................................................................... 66 12 Varia. ........................................................................................................................................... 67 12.1 OBGT VIII: the paragraphs §24-38. ...................................................................................... 67 12.2 Baffling forms: unclear 1st person Sumerian imperatives. .................................................. 68 12.3 On the use of vowels. .........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Amarna Period Down to the Opening of Sety I's Reign
    oi.uchicago.edu STUDIES IN ANCIENT ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION * NO.42 THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO Thomas A. Holland * Editor with the assistance of Thomas G. Urban oi.uchicago.edu oi.uchicago.edu Internet publication of this work was made possible with the generous support of Misty and Lewis Gruber THE ROAD TO KADESH A HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE BATTLE RELIEFS OF KING SETY I AT KARNAK SECOND EDITION REVISED WILLIAM J. MURNANE THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO STUDIES IN ANCIENT ORIENTAL CIVILIZATION . NO.42 CHICAGO * ILLINOIS oi.uchicago.edu Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 90-63725 ISBN: 0-918986-67-2 ISSN: 0081-7554 The Oriental Institute, Chicago © 1985, 1990 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. Published 1990. Printed in the United States of America. oi.uchicago.edu TABLE OF CONTENTS List of M aps ................................ ................................. ................................. vi Preface to the Second Edition ................................................................................................. vii Preface to the First Edition ................................................................................................. ix List of Bibliographic Abbreviations ..................................... ....................... xi Chapter 1. Egypt's Relations with Hatti From the Amarna Period Down to the Opening of Sety I's Reign ...................................................................... ......................... 1 The Clash of Empires
    [Show full text]
  • The Epic of Gilgamesh
    Semantikon.com presents An Old Babylonian Version of the Gilgamesh Epic On the Basis of Recently Discovered Texts By Morris Jastrow Jr., Ph.D., LL.D. Professor of Semitic Languages, University of Pennsylvania And Albert T. Clay, Ph.D., LL.D., Litt.D. Professor of Assyriology and Babylonian Literature, Yale University In Memory of William Max Müller (1863-1919) Whose life was devoted to Egyptological research which he greatly enriched by many contributions PREFATORY NOTE The Introduction, the Commentary to the two tablets, and the Appendix, are by Professor Jastrow, and for these he assumes the sole responsibility. The text of the Yale tablet is by Professor Clay. The transliteration and the translation of the two tablets represent the joint work of the two authors. In the transliteration of the two tablets, C. E. Keiser's "System of Accentuation for Sumero-Akkadian signs" (Yale Oriental Researches--VOL. IX, Appendix, New Haven, 1919) has been followed. INTRODUCTION. I. The Gilgamesh Epic is the most notable literary product of Babylonia as yet discovered in the mounds of Mesopotamia. It recounts the exploits and adventures of a favorite hero, and in its final form covers twelve tablets, each tablet consisting of six columns (three on the obverse and three on the reverse) of about 50 lines for each column, or a total of about 3600 lines. Of this total, however, barely more than one-half has been found among the remains of the great collection of cuneiform tablets gathered by King Ashurbanapal (668-626 B.C.) in his palace at Nineveh, and discovered by Layard in 1854 [1] in the course of his excavations of the mound Kouyunjik (opposite Mosul).
    [Show full text]
  • Sumerian Liturgies and Psalms
    UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA THE UNIVERSITY MUSEUM PUBLICATIONS OF THE BABYLONIAN SECTION VOL. X No. 4 SUMERIAN LITURGIES AND PSALMS STEPHEN LANGDON PROFESSOROF ASSYRIOLOGY AT OXFORDUNIVERSITY PHILADELPHIA PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY MUSEUM 1919 DI'IINITY LIBRARY CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION .................................. 233 SUMERIAN LITURGIES AND PSALMS: LAMENTATIONOF ISHME-DAGANOVER NIPPUR ..... LITURGYOF THE CULTOF ISHME-DAGAN.......... LITURGICALHYMN TO INNINI ..................... PSALMTO ENLIL LAMENTATIONON THE PILLAGEOF LAGASHBY THE ELAMITES................................... LAMENTATIONTO ~NNINI ON THE SORROWSOF ERECH. LITURGICALHYMN TO SIN........................ LAMENTATIONON THE DESTRUCTIONOF UR........ LITURGICALHYMNS OF THE TAMMUZCULT ........ A LITURGYTO ENLIL,Elum Gud-Sun ............. EARLYFORM OF THE SERIESd~abbar&n-k-ta .... LITURGYOF THE CULTOF KESH................. SERIESElum Didara, THIRDTABLET .............. BABYLONIANCULT SYMBOLS ...................... INTRODUCTION With the publication of the texts included in this the last part of volume X, Sumerian Liturgical and Epical Texts, the writer arrives at a definite stage in the interpretation of the religious material in the Nippur collection. Having been privi- leged to examine the collection in Philadelphia as well as that in Constantinople, I write with a sense of responsibility in giving to the public a brief statement concerning what the temple library of ancient Nippur really contained. Omitting the branches pertaining to history, law, grammar and mathematics,
    [Show full text]
  • AD 67 Mixteco
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES KIVI’I NA LOHO’O NUMERO CASO INFORMACION NA KUU MA’A, ÑA SA’AKAKU NA LO’OHO KIVI’Í NA KU’U TRABAJADOR NA SATCHU’U CASO YO’O KIVI’Í AGENCIA TU’UHU NISXHI NTAKUTÚ KUE TUTU YO’O • Lapicero ña tinta’a kuachu’u ní cha va’aha ná kuna’aha letra ní. • Ntasa kutú ní ni’i so nu’u tutu yo’o. Tátu kue sxhini ní nchi’i ña kua cha, cha’a ní, “Kue sxhini yu’u” • Forma ña AD 67 cha uvi kua ku’u ña. Sxhio nu’u Ka’aha, (Seccion l) cha katchi “identificado” (nu’ú ku’u ntakani ní, sxha’ahá mi’í ní) cha kue tu’uhu yo’oho cha ma ntákani na ña nu’u se’ehe ní na ku’u ntaki’ihi na sakuahnu na / há nu’u na yivi’i na kuntaki’ihi ná mancha, tátu mi’i ní na sa’va’aha tutu ña sxha’aha ní permiso. Cha sxhio nu’u katchi (Seccion II) “no identificado” (ña kue kuni ní ña kuni na yivi’i hana ku’u ní). Tisxi ley ña California cha kue na kuenta adopcion cha tasxhi na hi’i copia ña tutu ña Seccion II, nu’u ntaka’a tutu ní ña kuenta doctor, ña há ye’e va’aha ní cha ha va’aha ntatu’uhu ni sxhi kue na yivi’i, cha tasxhi ná hi’i copia tutu yo’o nu’u na/kue na yivi’i na kuntaki’ihi se’ehe ní sakuahnu na, antes ka ña kunta’a ña kunta ki’i hi na se’ehe ní, sxhi tátu ná ka’aha se’ehe ní sxha’aha ña na keta rá/ña 18 kuiya.
    [Show full text]
  • Track 1 3 Stories Transcription
    CD Track 1 3 Stories: 1 short story, then 1 long, then 1 short Speaker (S) Adogtoo Responder (R) Abii 2nd Responder (R2) Akabare Story 1 (short) S: Bua n boe R: Bua n boe S. ɛɛ, nyaa dɔgɛ a kɔma R: Dɔgɛ la a kɔma S: Bayii R: (unhuh) S: Nyaa ni doose ba sige bu’ɔ puan ta ɔbera R: unhuh S: Ti Asàseŋa ta sa’ɛ ba R: Unhuh S.: ti a nyɔkɛ R: Unhuh S: Ti a zoe la a kɔma lá !dóe R: Unhuh S: So, eŋa ta paɛ yire la, eŋa ta paɛ yire la, a yele a kɔma la yeti ya R: Unhuh S: zi’an sɛka ti ba kiŋɛ ta obe la, ba beere da le lebe bine R: Unhuh! S: Dee zúgɔ n ye ti a nyɔke bà R: Unhuh S: Ti ba yeti òóo R: unhuh S: Wimbéere ti bua la ayɛma wee yire… naɛ la a ma la wee yire, gee bua la ayɛma le kiŋɛ bu’ɔ puan ti a ta obe R: Unhuh S: ti Asaseŋa ta nyɔkɛ ĩ. R: Saseŋa nyɔkɛ ya! S: nyaa ku R: Unhuh S: Ti a yele Asɔ’ɔŋa ti ya a gu’ura dee tí a wa’ana. Ti Asɔ’ɔŋa kɔ’ɔm nyɔkɛ tuba, bua la tuba bayi la zaa kɔ’ɔm foe. R: Unhuh! S: kɔ’ɔm obe R: A obe ya! 1 S: Asaseŋa nyaa paam, nyaa yeti ya, bua wa, eŋa n ku ĩ la, ti tuba bo mɛ. R: Unhuh S: Asɔ’ɔŋa yeti a parum mɛ, bua la tuba ka bo mɛ.
    [Show full text]
  • Selections from the Tell El-Amarna Letters
    LaAsy _L-^_ jns from the -1-Amarna Lei TEXTS FOR STUDENTS. No. 16. SELECTIONS FROM THii TELL EL-AMARNA LETTERS BY PERCY HANDGOGK. M.A Vice 4d. net, HELPS FOR STUDENTS OF HISTORY. No. 1. EPISCOPAL REGISTERS OF ENGLAND AND WALES. By R. C 6d. net. No. 2. MUNICIPAL RECORDS. By F. ]. C. HEARNSHAW, M.A. 6d. net. No. 3. MEDIEVAL RECKONINGS OF TIME. By REGINALD L. POOLE, LL.D., L No. 4. THE PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE. CHARLES JOHNSON. 6d. net. No. 5. THE CARE OF DOCUMENTS. CHARLES JOHNSON. 6d. net. No. 6. THE LOGIC OF HISTORY. By C. G. CRUMP. 8d. net. No. 7. DOCUMENTS IN THE PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, DUBLIN. By R. H. MURRAY, LittD. Sd. net. No. 8. THE FRENCH WARS OF RELIGION. By ARTHUR A. TILLEV, M.A. 6d. net. BY SIR A. W. WARD, Litt.D., F.B.A.: No. 9. THE PERIOD OF CONGRESSES, I. Introductory. 8d. net. No. 10. THE PERIOD OF CONGRESSES, II. Vienna and the Second Peace of Paris, is. net. No. 11. THE PERIOD OF CONGRESSES, III. Aix-la-Chapelle to Verona, is. net. (No 10, and ii in one volume, cloth 35. 6d. net.) No. 12. SECURITIES OF PEACE. A Retrospect 2s. (1848 1914). Paper ; cloth3s.net. TEXTS FOR STUDENTS. No. 16 GENERAL EDITORS: CAROLINE A. J. SKEEL, D.LlT. ; H. J. WHITE, D.D. ; J. P. WHITNEY, D.D., D.C.L. SELECTIONS FROM THE TELL EL-AMARNA LETTERS BY PERCY HANDCOCK, MA. BARRISTER- AT-I.AW FORMERLY ASSISTANT TO THJE KKBPBK OF BGVPTIAN AND ASSYKIAN ANTIQUITIES, BRITISH MUS'.UM LONDON SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE NEW YORKi THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 1920 SELECTIONS FROM THE TELL EL-AMARNA LETTERS INTRODUCTION IN 1887, some fellahin, digging at a spot called Tell El- Amarna, about 170 miles south of Cairo, the site of Ajjetaton (Horizon of Aton), the new capital built by Amenhetep IV.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Sumerian Grammar”
    Cuneiform Digital Library Preprints <http://cdli.ucla.edu/?q=cuneiform-digital-library-preprints> Hosted by the Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative (<http://cdli.ucla.edu>) Editor: Bertrand Lafont (CNRS, Nanterre) Number 2 Title: “Introduction to Sumerian Grammar” Author: Daniel A. Foxvog Posted to web: 4 January 2016 INTRODUCTION TO SUMERIAN GRAMMAR DANIEL A FOXVOG LECTURER IN ASSYRIOLOGY (RETIRED) UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY Revised January 2016 CONTENTS PREFACE 4 THE SUMERIAN WRITING SYSTEM 5 PHONOLOGY 17 NOUNS AND ADJECTIVES 22 THE NOMINAL CHAIN 27 PRONOUNS AND DEMONSTRATIVES 30 SUMMARY OF PERSONAL PRONOUN FORMS 37 THE ADNOMINAL CASES: GENITIVE AND EQUATIVE 38 THE COPULA 44 ADVERBS AND NUMERALS 49 THE ADVERBAL CASES 53 INTRODUCTION TO THE VERB 60 DIMENSIONAL PREFIXES 1: INTRODUCTION 68 DIMENSIONAL PREFIXES 2: DATIVE 73 DIMENSIONAL PREFIXES 3: COMITATIVE, ABLATIVE-INSTRUMENTAL, TERMINATIVE 78 CORE PREFIXES: ERGATIVE, LOCATIVE-TERMINATIVE, LOCATIVE 84 THE VENTIVE ELEMENT 91 RELATIVE CLAUSES: THE NOMINALIZING SUFFIX -a 97 PREFORMATIVES (MODAL PREFIXES) 104 THE IMPERATIVE 111 IMPERFECTIVE FINITE VERBS 119 PARTICIPLES AND THE INFINITIVE 130 APPENDIX 1: CHART OF VERBAL PREFIX CHAIN ELEMENTS 155 TABLE OF SYLLABIC SIGN VALUES 156 APPENDIX 2: THE EMESAL DIALECT 158 INDEX 159 EXERCISES 161 3 PREFACE Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem William of Ockham This grammar is intended primarily for use in the first year of university study under the guidance of a teacher who can describe the classic problems in greater detail, add current alternative explanations for phenomena, help the student parse and understand the many textual illustrations found throughout, and provide supplementary information about the history of the language and the culture of early Mesopotamia.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Word
    Hunter taken to the deer cave Este hvmket Fayvyēt arvyvntvs, makesasvtēs, mahokvnts. ísti hámkit fa:yayí:t a:łayántas ma:kisâ:sati:s má:ho:kánts I was going about hunting, someone once said, it was said. Mont omet fayet arvyisan, mónt o:mít fa:yít a:łayêysa:n As I was hunting, eco-ecket 'cucvlke 'sēyvpvyepēt nanopet akhvyakpēt ocēt omvntvs, pelofv vfopken... ico-íckit 'cocâlki si:yapayipí:t ná:no:pít akhayákpi:t ó:ci:t o:mántas 'piló:fa afó:pkin I came to a clearing and saw a doe with her little fawns grazing in a clearing commonly found along a wooded area... Mvn erorvyan, mvn aknanopēpet eco-ecke ecucvlke 'sēyvpvyusēt 'sak-vrē̜pen hehcit... mán iło:łayâ:n mán akná:nopi:pít ico-ícki icocâlki si:yapáyosi:t sakkałĭ:ⁿpin híhceyt As I approached, I spotted the doe grazing about with her little fawns... Momusen vyopkit ayit omvyan mô:mosin ayo:pkéyt a:yéyt o:mayâ:n And I crept up on them cvhecvkē 'svmmont oman, cahicakí: sammônt o:mâ:n and felt as though they could see me, pefatkekut akfullet omen, pifá:tkikot ákfollít o:mín but they didn't run and kept grazing, vneu vyopkit omikv, vneu ayvyē monket, anió ayo:pkéyt o:méyka anió a:yayí: mônkit and I kept on creeping closer and closer, vwolēn erorin, eco-ecket okat, awóli:n iło:łéyn ico-íckit o:kâ:t and as I got near, the doe said, Iepuyopket ometskeko? Mv epuyopkat wihket, mont eccvo wvkehcet avtes! cvkicet omen... á:ipoyo:pkít o:míckiko:ˇ ma ipóyo:pkâ:t wéyhkit mónt íccaó wakíhcit a:atís cakeycít o:mín You're creeping up on us, aren't you? Quit creeping up on us, lay that gun down, and come here! she said to me..
    [Show full text]
  • Cuneiform Digital Library Preprints <
    Cuneiform Digital Library Preprints <http://cdli.ucla.edu/?q=cuneiform-digital-library-preprints> Hosted by the Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative (<http://cdli.ucla.edu>) Editor: Bertrand Lafont (CNRS, Nanterre) Number 13 Title: Early Linguists Author: Peter J. Huber Posted to web: 7 November 2018 Early Linguists Peter J. Huber Abstract This article was written to draw attention to the earliest serious linguistic documents in existence: a set of sophisticated bilingual Sumerian-Akkadian paradigms dating to the early 2nd millennium BC, when Sumerian was dead or dying as a spoken language. The fascinating material is relevant for the early history not only of linguistics, but of history of science in general. 1. Introduction. The tablet collection of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago contains a remarkable set of five closely knit Old Babylonian bilingual Sumerian-Akkadian verbal paradigms, totaling almost 900 lines, dating to the early second millennium BC, when Sumerian was dead or dying as a spoken language. These sophisticated texts are by far the earliest serious grammatical documents in existence. Their relevance to the history of science – more precisely: the history of linguistics – is comparable to, or even surpassing, that of the mathematical texts of the same period to the history of mathematics. Regrettably, these texts are hardly known outside of Sumerological circles and deserve wider publicity. This article was written with the hope to remedy the situation. Modern science – more precisely: the modern presentation of science – follows the discursive style inspired by Greek role models such as Aristotle, Euclid and Ptolemy. Pre-Greek learning does not know this style, it relies on lists, examples and recipes.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Are the Habiru of the Amarna Letters?
    Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 12/1 (2001): 31Ð42. Article copyright © 2001 by S. Douglas Waterhouse. Who are the HÓabiru of the Amarna Letters? S. Douglas Waterhouse Andrews University Despite numerous studies devoted to the question of who the ÒHabiruÓ were, a lively controversy still continues. The heart of the controversy pertains to that portion of the people referred to as ÒHabiruÓ who were attempting to take over the land of Canaan. In urgent dispatches sent to the Egyptian Court of Pharaohs Amenhotep III and his son, Akhenaten, the chieftains of the land of Canaan speak of the Habiru as a perilous threat to their city-states. It was the discovery in 1887 of over 350 cuneiform letters at Tell el-Amarna in Middle Egypt, the site of Pharaoh AkhenatenÕs capital, which opened up to the modern world new vistas on what had been occurring at a crucial time when Egypt was losing her grip upon her Asiatic Empire. These clay tablets, which were part of the Egyptian royal archives, the so-called ÒAmarna Letters,Ó con- tinue to raise a good deal of interest. And it is within this Amarna archival cor- respondence that the Habiru appear as powerful foes of Egyptian authority; a major force that had important effects upon events within the region of Pales- tine-Syria.1 The present interest in the Habiru is primarily caused by three factors: (1) the resemblance between the names Habiru and Hebrew, (2) the chronological relationship between the Amarna Habiru and the Israelites, and (3) the proximity of their location within the land of Canaan to that of the Hebrews in JoshuaÕs time.
    [Show full text]
  • Sumerian Language Use at Garíana on Orthography, Grammar, and Akkado-Sumerian Bilingualism* WALTHER SALLABERGER LMU MÜNCHEN
    Sumerian Language Use at GarÍana On Orthography, Grammar, and Akkado-Sumerian Bilingualism* WALTHER SALLABERGER LMU MÜNCHEN Among the administrative texts from the Ur III period, the GarÍana documents stand out for their rich vocabulary and a relatively high quota of phonographic writings. This evidence becomes most fascinating since almost all scribes, who wrote the doc- uments in the prestigious Sumerian language, bore Akkadian names. This study cov- ers various aspects of language that contribute to our topic: writing and phonology, morphology, and syntax; thereby frequencies and proportions are given much atten- tion. The fact that the GarÍana scribes were mostly native Akkadians transpires rela- tively rarely in various impositions in morphology and syntax, mostly in the message domain of single speakers. The mastering especially of the diversified verbal mor- phology or the invariably Sumerian basic vocabulary is a clear sign of a high degree of language acquisition, and the phonographic spellings even hint at imitation of Sumerian phonemes. The integration of special expressions from Akkadian in a ba- sically Sumerian vernacular agrees well with the fact of a far-reaching acquisition of the non-native Sumerian language. The active Akkado-Sumerian bilingualism of the GarÍana scribes would have been unthinkable without constant communicative contacts with the native speakers of Sumerian in the region. The archive from GarÍana, a settlement in the the GarÍana documents stand out by their rath- province of Umma at the banks of the lower er frequent use of a variety of verbs and the for- Tigris, provides a unique occasion to investi- mulation in phrases. Furthermore, this homo- gate the usage of Sumerian at the end of the geneous corpus boasts a relatively high quota of third millennium.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gilgameš Epic at Ugarit
    The Gilgameš epic at Ugarit Andrew R. George − London [Fourteen years ago came the announcement that several twelfth-century pieces of the Babylonian poem of Gilgameš had been excavated at Ugarit, now Ras Shamra on the Mediterranean coast. This article is written in response to their editio princeps as texts nos. 42–5 in M. Daniel Arnaud’s brand-new collection of Babylonian library tablets from Ugarit (Arnaud 2007). It takes a second look at the Ugarit fragments, and considers especially their relationship to the other Gilgameš material.] The history of the Babylonian Gilgameš epic falls into two halves that roughly correspond to the second and first millennia BC respectively. 1 In the first millennium we find multiple witnesses to its text that come exclusively from Babylonia and Assyria. They allow the reconstruction of a poem in which the sequence of lines, passages and episodes is more or less fixed and the text more or less stable, and present essentially the same, standardized version of the poem. With the exception of a few Assyrian tablets that are relics of an older version (or versions), all first-millennium tablets can be fitted into this Standard Babylonian poem, known in antiquity as ša naqba īmuru “He who saw the Deep”. The second millennium presents a very different picture. For one thing, pieces come from Syria, Palestine and Anatolia as well as Babylonia and Assyria. These fragments show that many different versions of the poem were extant at one time or another during the Old and Middle Babylonian periods. In addition, Hittite and Hurrian paraphrases existed alongside the Akkadian texts.
    [Show full text]