Proper names of Babylonia and Assyria
From Free net encyclopedia
Current revision
Contents |
Reading cuneiform script
In the early days of the decipherment of cuneiform inscriptions, the reading of the proper names borne by Babylonians and Assyrians prompted great difficulties. Most of these difficulties have been overcome, and there is now a general agreement among scholars as to the principles underlying both the formation and the pronunciation of the thousands of names found in historical records, business documents, votive inscriptions and literary productions, though a few minor differences still remain.
Sumerian ideograms
The main difficulty in reading Babylonian and Assyrian proper names arises from the preference given to the "ideographic" method of writing them. According to the developed cuneiform system of writing, words may either be written by means of a sign (or combination of signs) expressive of the entire word, or they may be spelled out phonetically in syllables. So, for example, the word for "name" may be written by a sign MU, or it may be written out by two signs s/lu-mu, the one sign MU representing the Sumerian word for "name". In the case of a Babylonian or Assyrian text this must be read as shumu — the Akkadian equivalent of the Sumerian MU.
Similarly, the word for "clothing" may be written SIG-BA, again the Sumerian word, whereas, the Akkadian equivalent being lubushtu it is so pronounced in Assyrian and Babylonian texts, and may therefore be also phonetically written lu-bu-ush-tu. This double method of writing words arises from the fact that the cuneiform syllabary is non-Semitic in origin -- being derived from the earlier Sumerians.
Syllabic signs
This script, together with the general Sumerian culture, was adapted by the Babylonians to their Semitic language. In this transfer, the Sumerian words — largely monosyllabic — were reproduced, but pronounced as Semitic, and at the same time the advanced step was taken of utilizing the Sumerian words as a means of writing the Babylonian words phonetically.
In this case, the signs representing Sumerian words were treated as mere syllables, and utilized for spelling Babylonian words without regard for their original meaning. The Babylonian syllabary thus arose, and as the culture passed on to Assyria, it became the "Babylonian-Assyrian" syllabary. It was gradually enlarged and modified, the Semitic equivalents for many of the signs becoming distorted or abbreviated to form new "phonetic" values that were thus of "Semitic" origin; but, on the whole, the "non-Semitic" character of the signs, used as phonetic syllables to write Semitic words, was preserved. Furthermore, until the end of the Babylonian and Assyrian empires, this "mixed" method of writing continued, although there were periods when "purism" was in fashion, meaning there was a more marked tendency to spell out the words laboriously, in preference to using signs with a phonetic complement. Yet even in those days, the Babylonian syllabary remained a mixture of ideographic and phonetic writing.
Determinants
Certain signs to indicate names of gods, countries, cities, vessels, birds, trees, etc., are known as "determinants", and were the Sumerian signs of the terms in question, added as a guide for the reader. Aside from this, proper names in particular continued to be usually written in purely "ideographic" fashion.
Akkadian Proper Names
The name of a deity, entering as an element in most proper names, was almost invariably written with the special sign or signs representing this deity, and it is rare that this name is spelled phonetically. Thus, the name of the chief god of the Babylonian pantheon, Marduk, is written by two signs to be pronounced AMAR-UD, to describe the god as the "young bullock of the clay". The moon-god Sin is written with the sign for thirty, a reference to the monthly course; or the name is written by two signs to be pronounced EN-ZU, to describe the god as the "lord of wisdom." The god Nebo appears as PA -- the sign of the stylus, associated with this deity as the originator and patron of writing and knowledge; or it is written with a sign AK, to describe the god as a "creator".
Until the exact phonetic reading of these divine names was determined, through parallel passages or explanatory lists, scholars remained in doubt, or had recourse to conjectural or provisional readings.
Besides the divine element, given names often had a verbal form attached, and a third element representing an object. Even when the sign indicative of the verb is clearly recognised, there still remains to be determined the form of the verb intended. Thus in the case ofthe sign KUR, which is the equivalent of na~ãru, "protect," there is the possibility of reading it as the active participle nd~ir, or as an imperative uriiur, or even the third person perfect i~ur. Similarly in the case of the sign MU, which, besides signifying "name" as above pointed out, is also the Sumerian word for "give," and therefore may be read iddin, "he gave," from nadanu, or may be read nãdin, "giver"; and when, as actually happens, a name occurs in which the first element is the name of a deity followed by MU-MU, a new element of doubt is introduced through the uncertainty whether the first MU is to be taken as a form of the verb naddnu and the second as the noun shumu, "name," or vice versa.
Fortunately, in the case of a large number of names occurring on business documents as the interested parties or as scribes or as witnesses-and it is through these documents that we obtain the majority of the Babylonian-Assyrian proper names-we have variant readings, the same name being written phonetically in whole or part in one instance and ideographically in another. Certain classes of names being explained in this way, legitimate and fairly reliable conclusions can be drawn for many others belonging to the same class or group. The proper names of the numerous business documents of the Khammurabi period, when phonetic writing was the fashion, have been of special value in resolving doubts as to the correct reading of names written ideographically. Thus names like Sin-na-di-in-shu-mi and Bel-na-di-in-shu-mi, i.e. "Sin is, the giver of a name " (i.e. offspring), and "Bel is the giver of a name," form the model for names with deities as the first element followed by MU-MU, even 'though the model may not be consistently followed in all cases. In historical texts also variant readings occur in considerable number. Thus, to take a classic example, the name of the famous king Nebuchadrezzar occurs written in the following different manners:
- Na-bi-um-ku-du-ur-ri-u-~u-ur
- AK-DU u-~u-ur
- AK-ku-dur-ri-SHES
- PA-GAR-DU-SHES
from which we are permitted to conclude that PA or AK (with the determinative for deity AN = Ncf-bi-um or Nebo), that GAR-DU or DU alone = kudurri, and that SHES = u~ur. The second element signifies "boundary" or "territory"; the third element is the imperative of nasdrw, "protect"; so that the whole name signifies, "0, Nebo! protect my boundary" (or "my territory").
It is not the purpose of this note to set forth the principles underlying the formation of proper names among the Babylonians and Assyrians, but it may not be out of place to indicate that by the side of such full names, containing three elements (or even more), we have already at an early period the reduction of these elements to two through the combination of the name of a deity with a verbal form merely, or through the omission of the name of the deity. From such names it is only a step to names of one element, a characteristic feature of which is the frequent addition of an. ending -turn (feminine), an, a, urn, atuin, ati~a, s/ia, etc., most of these being "hypocoristic affixes," corresponding in a measure to modern pet-names.
Sumerian Names
Lastly, a word about genuine or pseudo-Sumerian names. In the case of texts from the oldest historical periods we encounter hundreds of names that are genuinely Sumerian, and here in view of the multiplicity of the phonetic values attaching to the signs used it is frequently difficult definitely to determine the reading of the names. Our knowledge of the ancient Sumerian language is still quite imperfect, despite the considerable progress made, more particularly during recent years. It is therefore not surprising that scholars should differ considerably in the reading of Sumerian names, where we have not helps at our command as for Babylonian and Assyrian names. Changes in the manner of reading the Sumerian names are frequent. Thus the name of a king of Ur, generally read Ur-Bau at one time, is now read Ur-Engur; for Lugal-zaggisi, a king of Erech, some scholars still prefer to read Ungal-zaggisi; the name of a famous political and religious centre generally read Shir-pur-la is more probably to be read Shir-gul-la; and so forth. There is reason, however, to believe that the uncertainty in regard to many of these names will eventually be resolved into reasonable certainty. A doubt also still exists in regard to a number of names of the older period because of the uncertainty whether their bearers were Sumerians or Semites. If the former, then their names are surely to be read as Sumerian, while, if they were Semites, the signs with which the names are written are probably to be read according to their Semitic equivalents, though we may also expect to encounter Semites bearing genuine Sumerian names. At times too a doubt may exist in regard to a name whose bearer was a Semite, whether the signs composing his name represent a phonetic reading or an ideographic compound. Thus, e.g. when inscriptions of a Semitic ruler of Kish, whose name was written Uru-mu-ush, were first deciphered, there was a disposition to regard this as an ideographic form and to read phonetically Alu-usharshid ("he founded a city," with the omission of the name of the deity), but scholarly opinion finally accepted Urumu-ush (Urumush) as the correct designation.
References
For further details regarding the formation of Sumerian and Babylonian-Assyrian proper names, as well as for an indication of the problems involved and the difficulties still existing, especially in the case of Sumerian names, see the three excellent works now at our disposal for the Sumerian, the old Babylonian, and the neoBabylonian period respectively, by Huber, Die Personennamen in den Keilschrifturkunden aus der Zeit der Konige von Ur und Nisin (Leipzig, 1907); Ranke, Early Babylonian Proper Names (Philadelphia, 1905); and Tallqvist, Neu-Babylonisches Narnenbuch.
See also
This article was originally based on content from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica. Update as needed.