The Third Dynasty of Ur promoted the formation, especially during the reign of Shulgi, of an impressive set of scribal functionaries, responsible for the administration and recording of the empire’s economic activities (both in terms of production and redistribution). This process stimulated the creation and development of a scribal culture. Scribal activities were chiefly administrative and for this reason they were mainly employed by the state. However, in the Third Dynasty of Ur, scribes also developed two other areas of expertise, namely, the transmission of scribal knowledge and the writing of literary texts.
The transmission of scribal knowledge took place in the scribal ‘school’ (the edubba, ‘house of tablets’) under the supervision of expert scribes (the ummia, someone similar to a ‘professor’). These scribes taught their students to master the difficult scribal repertoire of signs and words (both in terms of writing and memorising), the administrative and legal formulas and various writing styles. The school was an institution linked to the temple. The latter was the unit at the heart of the state administration, and was only accessible to the sons of the ruling class (sons of ensi and high officials, as well as scribes).
Therefore, scribal culture was transmitted internally among those people who already belonged to the ruling class. After all, scribal knowledge was an essential prerequisite to access and progress in the administrative profession. Scribal training was tough, and life in the edubba inspired the composition of literary texts emphasising the need for full commitment, the relationship between masters and students, and the prospective earnings and social advancements available to the scribe. These aspects turned scribal schools into prestigious intellectual institutions only frequented by a closed caste, who mastered a technical knowledge that was inaccessible to the majority of people. This allowed the scribal elite to control the political and economic activities of the empire.
Scribal culture already existed in the earlier temple-cities in a more or less developed way. Now, however, the pan-Mesopotamian unification of the state made scribal culture more uniform and of a better quality. This was due to the clarity of its conceptualisation and the systematic application of this key structure in any administrative document. The expected outcome of scribal activities was to document the undertakings of the administration. However, by doing that, scribal schools also improved and transmitted those instruments developed from the earliest phases of writing. Sign lists and lexical lists became almost like ‘encyclopaedias’, organising all the knowledge of the period in a canonical way.
One of the most important collateral productions of scribal schools were texts defined as ‘literary’, although this ‘literary’ intent was always a side effect of the original cultic, political, or scholastic purpose of these texts. Collections of literary texts are fundamental for the understanding of Neo-Sumerian culture. In fact, the ambition of scribes to control knowledge and to transmit it to their students resulted in an involuntary transmission of this culture to us. For instance, the Sumerian Georgics (also known as the Farmer’s Almanac) was a series of teachings written by a father to his son. It provides information on the Neo-Sumerian agricultural calendar, with a list of operations to be done and the proper way to do them. The educational intent of these texts often provided a platform for the transmission of proverbs and erudite knowledge. These are crucial for the reconstruction of the social context, not of Neo-
Sumerian society as a whole, but at least of its public functionaries. This allows us to catch a glimpse of their attempts to maintain their reputation before their superiors, overcome rivalries, keep their behaviour impeccable, and so on.
Another typical form used for the transmission of knowledge was that of the debate. In these types of compositions, two characters (the shepherd and the farmer) or two personified objects (copper and silver, the date palm and the tamarisk), chosen as opposites or extremes of a certain set of values, debate against each other. They therefore emphasise their own qualities and belittle their opponents’. The general conclusion of the debate is usually that both opponents have useful qualities, and those aspects that at first seemed more prestigious are not necessarily the most desirable ones upon closer examination. The structure of these debates emphasises the competitive nature ofNeo-Sumerian society, which was becoming increasingly hierarchical and specialised. It also emphasises the desire to re-examine opposites to develop a more balanced view, able to promote less prestigious functions in the public eye, thus showing a desire for social cohesion.
A large portion of literary texts deal with cults and cannot be treated in detail here. However, these texts contain strong references to the events and ideology of the Third Dynasty of Ur. In this phase, royal hymns began to appear, modelled on earlier hymns of the gods. This was a clear outcome of the deification of the kings of Ur. Royal hymns were usually written in the first person (Text 9.5). Kings spoke in a self-laudatory and self-celebratory tone, indicating that they had not completely taken over the role of the gods. This new form of kingship propaganda complemented royal inscriptions. In the latter, the main focus was on the kings’ military victories and building activities. In the hymns, kings emphasised their talents, which were celebrated through anecdotes that had little to do with those accomplishments recorded in the inscriptions. This wider range of celebratory texts perhaps constituted an attempt to appeal to different audiences. In fact, inscriptions visibly displayed and supported by depictions were probably addressed to a wider audience. Royal hymns had a more selected audience, such as functionaries working for the court.
World History
