See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328281096

SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR IN THE

COLLECTIONS OF THE IRAQ MUSEUM

Article  in  Iraq · September 2018

DOI: 10.1017/irq.2018.14

CITATIONS READS

0 1,983

1 author:

Abather Saadoon
Al Muthanna University
36 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

‫ ﻣﺪﻳﻨﺔ ﮔﺮﺷﺎﻧﺎ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﺗﻠﻮل اﻟﻨﺎﺻﺮﻳﺔ‬View project

‫ أﺛﺮ اﻟﺘﺠﺎوزات ﻓﻲ ﺗﺨﺮﻳﺐ اﻟﻤﻮاﻗﻊ اﻷﺛﺮﻳﺔ واﻟﺘﺮاﺛﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻌﺮاق‬View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abather Saadoon on 11 December 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

IRAQ (2018) 80 213–231 Doi:10.1017/irq.2018.14 213

SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS

ŠĀT-EŠTAR IN THE COLLECTIONS OF THE IRAQ MUSEUM
By ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

The princesses in the royal family of the Ur III state had a role in developing and revitalizing the economy. In
ancient Iraqi society women operated in all fields of work. Cuneiform texts recorded their activities in the
processes of receiving, delivery, distribution and mediating between people. Living in the community, Iraqi
women played an important and positive role in ancient Iraq’s society. Šāt-Eštar first became known as a
princess in the texts treated in the author’s MA Thesis in 2010. The study of the texts which mention princess
Šat-Eštar shows that this character played an important role in processes of receiving, delivering, distributing
and mediating between people. She was specialized in trading several materials, primarily barley and flour
and then dates, as well as textiles and clothing types. The people she dealt with were Agatia, Šulgi-mudah,
Abituni, Šāt-Su’en, Šāt-Nūnu, Šeškala, and Lugal-nisaĝ-e.

Introduction1
While it is possible to know a great deal about women in the Ur III state due to the large amount
of documentation, comparatively little has been written on the topic.2 Any increase in the amount
of information available is therefore extremely precious. This article focuses on the publication of
seven tablets from the Iraq National Museum that form part of a dossier of texts which may have
belonged to an archive of a princess Šāt-Eštar. They are dated from the fifth year of Šū-Su’en
(2046–2028 BC) to the third year of Ibbi-Su’en (2028–2004 BC). In 2009 the Iraq National
Museum received 1500 tablets which had been confiscated from smugglers and come from the
region of Umma (modern Tell Jokha). The texts deal with various topics and are being studied by
scholars from Baghdad and Mosul. Among them are now thirty-four tablets which have been
identified thus far as belonging to a dossier associated with a princess Šāt-Eštar. Ten of these
tablets were initially treated in the author’s unpublished MA thesis,3 while a further seven have
since been identified and are presented here. The rest of the Šāt-Eštar tablets are being studied by
other scholars. It is currently unclear what the relationship was between these thirty-four Šāt-Eštar
tablets and the rest of the 1500 confiscated tablets from Umma, although it is hoped that this will
become apparent through further research.
The evidence of these texts supports views of the role of female members of the royal family in the
Ur III state as mediators between the court and non-royal agents, as well as having considerable
independence and authority over their own spheres of activity. Female royal family members such
as Abī-simtī, queen of Amar-Su’en and mother of Šū-Su’en, had significant power within the state
having considerable economic reserves as well as related cultic obligations throughout the
territories.4 It is clear that some Ur III princesses were married abroad for diplomatic reasons, and
that foreign princesses were married into the royal family of Ur, such as Tarām-uram from Mari
and Šulgi-simtī, who was most likely from Ešnunna, and most likely Abī-simtī herself who may
have come from Mari.5 They brought with them family members who themselves came to occupy
positions of great political and economic power in the Ur III state, such as Babati, brother of Abī-simtī.
Such methods of forging alliances on the international level through dynastic marriage are not
unusual as a means of securing peace. It is also quite apparent, however, that Ur III princesses

1
The article refers to texts using the abbreviations of the apparent only over the last few years. See also Such-
BDTNS database (accessed 31.12.2017, http://bdtns.filol.csic. Gutierrez 2012.
3
es/index.php?p=principal_bibliografia), while secondary Saadoon 2010.
4
literature is referred to using name and date of publication. Weiershäuser 2008: 148–150 regarding textile production
2
Most recently the comprehensive works of: Weiershäuser involving Ĝirsu and Ur; ibid. 135–143 concerning her
2008; Sharlach 2017. Neither of these works contains a involvement in the cult of Inanna from Uruk to Zabalam.
mention of Šāt-Eštar, whose profile has begun to become 5
Weiershäuser 2008: 261. Michalowski 2004: 232.

Iraq LXXX (2018) © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 2018
214 ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

married into the families of important officials as a means of securing loyalty but also very likely of
mobilising local social and economic capital resources in the interests of the state. Examples are
Arad-Nanna, whose family held the post of sukkal-mah, governing eastern and north-eastern
territories over four generations, or the generals Hašib-atal, Šarrum-bani and Lugal-magurre, who
were all married to princesses.6 By multiplying family relationships with connections to the centre,
the patrimonial Ur III state was able to reproduce and expand its somewhat fragmentary power-
base, which relied in the extreme on local families and power-structures to implement its
administrative reach.7 To an extent it could be said that the princesses were inserted into such
structures as an attempt to consolidate central state executive power through having a presence in
the main families which supported it. As will be seen, they were able to do this with great
independence and autonomy.
The texts presented here throw a light on the way in which spheres of influence over economic
activity could intersect and reinforce each other in the Ur III patrimonial state. The princess
Šāt-Eštar is married to an important official called Šarakam, who is a scribe. She appears to be
based in Umma, as is her husband, but has interests in Irisaĝrig where she may have her own
representatives and economic resources. She is also able to mobilise the contacts and resources
that are associated with her husband’s own spheres of influence, particularly in her relationships
with a fuller from his entourage, and she demonstrates an involvement in various economic areas,
such as textiles and sheep, dates and barley. Just as with Abī-simtī, the queen and later dowager
queen, her involvement with textiles is doubtless related to wool-production and sheep-herding,
thus significant capital interests.8 And as with other royal women of the Ur III period, she also
appears to have had cultic responsibilities.

Background
The Third Dynasty of Ur ruled much of Southern Mesopotamia, or Sumer and Akkad, from 2112–
2004 BC. This was a period of revival and renaissance for Sumerian culture in all its aspects during
the reigns of its five kings Ur-Namma (2112–2095), Šulgi (2094–2047), Amar-Su’en (2046–2038),
Šū-Su’en (2037–2029) and Ibbi-Su’en (2028–2004). Thousands of cuneiform tablets and
administrative documents have been divided among museums and private collections around the
world, in most cases having been illicitly excavated from cities in the south of Iraq such as Ur
(Tell al-Muqayyar), Lagaš (al-Hiba), Nippur (Nuffar), and especially the three main sites of
Ĝirsu (Telloh), Umma (Tell Jokha) and Puzriš-Dagan (Drehem). According to the estimate of
Manuel Molina (2016) there are nearly 120,000 tablets in the world’s cuneiform collections that
date to this period, providing us with invaluable evidence concerning economy and daily life.
Additionally there is a large number of texts housed in the Iraq Museum, and there are likely to
be hundreds if not thousands also in private collections around the world that are as yet
undocumented.
The fact that the vast majority of Ur III tablets does not come from regular excavations means that
their archival contexts have to be reconstructed on the basis of their content, particularly the month-
names which are particular to specific ancient cities, as well as information concerning the histories of
their accessions to the various collections in which they are found today. In the following an attempt is
made to collect the already published information about princess Šāt-Eštar, which is supplemented by
the texts published herewith.

Ur III texts concerning Šāt-Eštar

Before the accession of the new tablets from Umma to the Iraq Museum only a few tablets were
known which mentioned this name, and even less which specifically mentioned the individual who
seems to have been a princess with this name. Most of the tablets belong to the collection that
seems to have come from Irisaĝrig/Āl-Šarrākī and was published by D.I. Owen.9 Prior to this only

6
Michalowski 1987: 48. 8
For Abī-simtī’s herds in Ĝirsu see Waetzoldt 1972: 35.
7 9
Garfinkle 2013. Owen 2013a+b.
 SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR 215

two tablets (from Umma and Ĝirsu) had been published that referred to a Šāt-Eštar of the Ur III
period,10 almost certainly not the same Šāt-Eštar as the princess in question here. Table 1 presents
the already published attestations of the name Šāt-Eštar in Ur III documents in their order of
publication.11 The tablets that were treated in the author’s unpublished MA dissertation are
summarised in Table 2.

TABLE 1: Previously published Ur III tablets mentioning Šāt-Eštar.

Text Museum or Date City Transaction Title/Filiation

Collection
CST 639, 71 JRL 0639 IS 03 Umma še-ba —
TCTI 2, 2804, 42 Ist L 02804 — Ĝirsu še-ba geme2-arad2-da —
Sumer 55, 151: 3 rev. 1 IM 204869 ŠS 09 Umma Receipt of Emmer by Š-E3
Sumer 55, 151: 4, IM 204889 IS 01 Umma Receipt for barley from Š-E4 —
obv. 2
Sumer 55, 152: 5, IM 204930 IS 04 Umma receipt of barley by Š-E5 —
obv. 3
Nisaba 15/2 0457a + b Kress 169 ŠS 08 Iri-Saĝrig receipt of barley6 dam dšara2-kam
Nisaba 15/2 0589 Adra 129 IS 01 Umma ì-dab5 of ewe from Š-E7 —
Nisaba 15/2 0649 SBen 02 IS 01 Iri-Saĝrig? Disbursal of garments by Š-E8 —
Nisaba 15/2 0953 i 17 Adra 047 IS 03 Iri-Saĝrig še-ba geme2 arad2 nin-sa6-ga9 munus
…
Nisaba 15/2 0985, 3 CUNES 58-06-006 ? Umma? receipt of sheep hides from —
Š-E10
Nisaba 15/2 0985 – ditto ? Umma? seal-impression on above dumu-munus
seal lugal
a-ga-ti-a
KA al-DU-a
1
Fish 1932. Rectangular tablet.
2
Lafont and Yıldız 1996. Square tablet.
3
Salah 2010: 151, emmer of the arable land of the god Nin-ildum received from Ur-Mamit by Šāt-Eštar.
4
Salah 2010: 151, receipt of barley by Urani from Šāt-Eštar.
5
Salah 2010: 152, small square tablet with pinched corners.
6
Owen 2013b: 230. Square tablet with envelope. The barley of Šāt-Eštar, wife of Šarakam, is received ([šu ba-a]n-ti) by an
individual whose name is broken ([x-x-]ni-rum) under the seal of one Bēlī-kasip (for later –kašip) from one Abu-ṭāb.
7
Owen 2013b: 272–273; Small square tablet with two pinched corners and seal-impression. Scribe: lu2-diğir-ra. Owen (loc. cit.
272 fn. 270) thinks this tablet may have belonged to the Iri-Sağrig archive, even though it comes from Umma.
8
Owen 2013b: 290–291; rectangular sealed tablet, disbursal by Šāt-Eštar under the seal of Abintuni, with seal of a-bu-tu9-ni son
of NE-NE-a, azlag7-lugal? (royal? fuller) on the tablet, according to Owen’s reading of the title (loc. cit.). This title will need to
be revised in light of new attestations below. The BDTNS database currently reads a-bu-DIB-NI on the seal (revised text by
M. Molina from 2013, accessed 1.11.2017). It is suggested here that the writing is a-bu-tu9-ni, using the same sign tu9 = TÚG in
the writing of the name as is used in the writing of the profession lúazlag (= LÚ.TÚG). The value tu9 for TÚG is contained in
Proto-Ea (Borger, MZL 2004, 206 no. 809).
9
Owen 2013b: 415–420. This large multi-columned tablet contains disbursals of grain to families of different types of
dependent workers, and contains the name Šāt-Eštar five times: i 17 (munus); ii 2 (munus); ii 14 (munus dumu-ni, i.e. the
daughter of Ahubaqar, who exercises the profession bar-tab); v 11 (munus); rev. i 11 (munus); rev. i 34 (no title). Clearly these are
not Šāt-Eštar the princess. A list of the filiations of these women is given at Owen 2013a: 523, with the caveat that the title munus
saĝ-rig7 listed there is not correct: it is solely munus “woman”, with saĝ-rig7-me being the heading of the next paragraph.
10
Owen 2013b: 430. Received (šu ba-t[i]) by Agatia.

The New Texts Concerning Šāt-Eštar

Table 3 details the registration numbers, dates and contents of the new tablets from Umma concerning
Šāt-Eštar that are presented below.

10
Owen 2013a: 523 fn. 682. 2013a: 297 fn. 292. The town of Irisaĝrig is attested as early
11
Nisaba 15/2, 668 is not included here, due to doubts as the Fara period (ED IIIa) at least as far as year 14 of
about its status as an independent document, see Owen Warad-Sîn, when the city is last attested (Owen 2013a: 34).
216 ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

Text 1: Fig. 1–2

Obv. Rev.
1. [x.x.x] še.gur Seal Impression
2. kišib3 a-a-zi-mu 1. ša-at-eš18-tar2
3. ki lu2-diĝir-ra/-ta 2. dumu-[munus] lugal
4. ša-at-eš18-tar2 3. dam dšara2-kam
5. ba-an-dib (LAGABxPA) 4. dub-sar
1. ⌜mu⌝-us2-sa bad3
2. [mar-t]u ba-du3

Translation: (Obv. 1) (concerning) [x] gur of barley (2) received by Aya-zimu (3–4) Šāt-Eštar
transferred from Lu-diĝira. (Rev. Seal Impression) Šāt-Eštar, daughter of the king, wife of
Šarakam the scribe (Rev. 1–2) (Date): ŠS 05.

Commentary
(1) The verb dib means “to transfer”, “cause to pass”, presumably from one office to another. (2) The
phrase kišib3 a-a-zi-mu is attested at Umma in UTI 6, 3741 rev. 4; 3749 rev. 2. A person called
Aya-zimu (“Aya is my life”) is further attested at Umma in SAT 2, 0816 obv. 4, and the name also
occurs at Lagaš, Ĝirsu, Umma and Irisaĝrig (3) Lu-diĝira is a commonly attested name at Umma.

Text 2: fig. 3–4

Obv. Rev.
1. 9.4.0 še-ba gur 1. ša3 e2 [x] x/ al-šu(-)
2. mu ša-at-eš18-tar2-še3 Seal-impression:
3. ki gu3-de2-a-ta 1. dšara2-kam
4. d
šul-gi-mu-dah 2. dub-sar
5. šu ba-ti 3. dšul-gi-mu-/dah
4. arad-su
2. iti ri
3. mu en dinana
4 unugki-ga maš2-e i3-pa3

Translation: (Obv. 1–5) Šulgimudah received 2940 litres of grain ration in gur from Gudea on behalf
of Šāt-Eštar. (Rev. 1) In the house …. (Seal Impression): Šarakam, scribe, Šulgi-mudah (is) his
servant. (Date): IS 02-05-00.

Commentary
Šulgimudah seems to be acting on behalf of Šāt-Eštar in receiving grain from Gudea. The name Šulgi-
mu-dah (or Šulgi-mu-du8) is attested in three tablets from Umma or Umma region: AAICAB 1/4, Bod.
S 355 rev. 9; BIN 5, 001, 18; Sigrist and Gabbay 2014: 295 no. 5), while the name Gudea is quite frequent
there (202 attestations according to BDTNS). The seal-impression makes it clear that this Šulgimudah
is in some sense dependent on Šarakam, another indication of the high social status of this personage.
(Obv. 1) The phrase še-ba gur is apparently only attested in Umma. (Rev. 2): the verb-form al-šu(-) is
unclear. Seal-impression 4: the use of the sibilant –su rather than –zu is unexpected in Ur III Akkadian
with arad, while arad-zu is attested on Saadoon 2010: 52 no. 21, seal 3. An alternative interpretation
would read the noun-phrase in Sumerian: “Šulgimudah (is) your! servant”.

Text 3: fig. 5–6

Obv. Rev.
ĝeš ĝeš
1. 24 zu2 / ur3 1. ⌜ki?⌝ ⌜e?2⌝ ša /ĝeštukul?
2. ki ša-at-eš18-tar2/-ta 2. iti ri
3. be-li2-ba-ni 3. mu en dinana
4. šu ba-ti 4 maš2-e i3-pa3

Translation: (Obv. 1–4) Bēlī-bāni received 24 harrow-teeth from Šāt-Eštar (Rev. 1) From the house of
tools. IS 02-05-00.
 SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR 217

TABLE 2: Provisional summary of texts mentioning Šāt-Eštar edited in Saadoon 2010.

Text = Iraq Date City Transaction Other data

Saadoon Museum
2010 no.
Text 2 204859 ŠS 09-09-00 Umma Transfer of textiles from Seal of Šāt-Eštar, daughter of
Abituni to Š-E the king, wife of Šarakam, the
scribe
Text 20 204924 IS 03-04-00 Umma Transfer of barley from Š-E Seal of Šulgimudah, servant
to Šulgimudah of Šarakam
Text 21 204949 AS 05-04-00 Umma Receipt of harrows from Š-E —
by Zariq
Text 22 204919 IS 02-01-00 Umma Transfer of textiles from Š-E Seal of Abituni, son of NI-
to Abituni NI-a, fuller of Šara
Text 23 204963 IS 01-08-00 Umma Transfer of gypsum from Š-E Seal of Abituni, son of NI-
to Abituni NI-a, fuller of Šara
Text 24 204064 IS 01-11-00 Umma Transfer of goats from Š-E to —
Engar-zi, herdsman
Text 25 204895 IS 02-07-00 Umma Receipt of textiles from Š-E Seal of Abituni, son of NI-
by Abituni NI-a, fuller of Šara
Text 26 204905 IS 02-09-00 Umma Transfer of textiles from Š-E —
to Abituni
Text 27 204913 IS 03-10-00 Umma Receipt of barley from Š-E Seal of Šeškalla
by Šeškalla
Text 28 205055 IS 03 - - Umma Balanced account of
Šeškalla, mentioning Š-E as
recipient of dates

TABLE 3: The New Tablets Concerning Šāt-Eštar.

Text Iraq Museum Measurement Date Transaction

no.
1 204472 4.5 × 4.1 × 1.6 cm ŠS 05-00-00 Transfer of barley from Lu-diĝira to Šāt-Eštar
2 204165 4.7 × 3.8 × 1.3 cm IS 02-05-00 Transfer of barley from Gudea to Šulgi-mudah.
3 204186 4.4 ×3.8 × 1.7 cm IS 02-05-00 Transfer of harrows with teeth from Šāt-Eštar to
Bēlī-bani
4 201722 3.8 × 3.5 × 1.5 cm IS 02-11-00 Transfer of barley from Šāt-Eštar to Lugal-nesag-e
5 204702 5.3 × 4.1 × 1.7 cm IS 01-08-00 Transfer of various textiles from Šāt-Eštar to Abituni
6 204248 2.5 × 2.8 × 1.4 cm [— xx]-08-00 Levy (ba-zi) of dates and barley (of/for) porter of
Nergal from Šāt-Eštar
7 221012 2.8 × 2.6 × 1.4 cm — Impression of seal of Šāt-Eštar

Commentary
Obv. 1: ĝešur3 has the meaning “roof-beam”, Akkadian gušūrum, but is also used in the sense of
Akkadian šakākum “to harrow”, and is attested frequently in Ur III texts with this meaning
(Civil 1994: 77). Harrow-teeth, referring to the blades of the harrow, are thus far only otherwise
attested in UTI 6, 3781, 5 (Yıldız and Ozaki 2001), a letter-order from Umma containing also
“hoe-teeth”. Obv. 3: Bēlī-bāni “my lord is the creator”, the name is well attested, including in 7
texts from Umma dating from AS 07 to ŠS 09, where the year-dating is preserved.12 The reading
of rev. 1 as ki e2 ša ĝeštukul “house of tools” is highly speculative and the traces are difficult to
read. A receipt of harrows from a Šāt-Eštar is also involved in Saadoon 2010 Text 21, which is
dated to AS 05.

12
Texts dated by year: Nik 2 357 (ŠS 09-02-15); Nisaba 01 258 (AS 07-01-22); Ontario 2 215 (ŠS 03-XX-00).
218 ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

Fig. 1 photos of Text 1 obv. and rev.

Fig. 2 copy of Text 1 obv. and rev.

Fig. 3 photos of Text 2 obv and rev.

SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR 219

Fig. 4 copy of Text 2 obv and rev.

Fig. 5 photos of Text 3 obv and rev.

Fig. 6 copy of Text 3 obv. and rev.

220 ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

Text 4: fig. 7–8

Obv. Rev.
1. 3.0.0 še gur 1. iti pa4-u2-e
2. ki ša-at-eš18-tar2-ta Seal-impression:
3. lugal-nesaĝ-e 1. lugal-nesaĝ-[e]
4. šu ba-ti 2. ⌜dumu a-hu-wa-qar⌝
2. mu ⌜en⌝ erasure
3. [maš2]-⌜e⌝? unuki / ì3-pa3

Translation: Obv. 1–4: Lugal-nesaĝ-e received 900 litres of barley from Šāt-Eštar, IS 02.11.00,
Seal-impression: Lugal-nesaĝ-e son of Ahuwaqar.

Commentary
Lugal-nesaĝ-e receives barley from (the estate of) Šāt-Eštar. This personal name is frequently attested
at Umma and in Ur III texts more generally. The personal name Ahu-waqar, on the other hand, is
only found in two Umma texts dated to Š 36 and ŠS 09.13 It is frequently attested in texts from
Garšana and Puzriš-Dagan, as well as being attested at Ur, Nippur, Susa and other places. Two
tablets (although not from Umma) attest children of someone called Ahuwaqar, but none called
Lugal-nesaĝ-e.14

Text 5: fig. 9–11

Obv. Rev.
tug2
1. 1 niĝ2-lam2 lugal 1. 2 tug2gu2-e3 guz-za 3-kam us2
2. 1 tug2niĝ2-lam2 us2 2. ša-at-nu-nu
3. 2 tug2bar-si us2 3. 1 tug2gu2-e3 guz-za 4-kam us2
4. 1 tug2guz-za 3-kam us2 4. geme2-den-lil2
5. 1 tug2bar-dul5-AB 4-kam us2 5. 6 tug2 saĝ uš-bar
6. 5 tug2niĝ2-lam2 4-kam us2 6. 7 <tug2> uš-bar tur
7. 2 tug2guz-za 4-kam us2 7. ki ša-at-eš18-tar2-ta
8. 3 tug2ša3-ga-du3 ba-tab-du8-hu-um 8. kišib3 a-bi2-tu-ni
9. 1 tug2gu2-e3 nig2-lam2 4-kam us2 9. iti e2 iti-6
10. 2 tug2gu2-e3 guz-za 4-kam us2 10. mu di-bi2-dZU:EN lugal
11. ša-at-dZU:EN Seal-impression
1. a-bi?2/bu?-tu?9-ni
2. dumu NE-NE-a
3. azlag7 dšara2-kam

Translation: Obv. 1–11: 1 royal ceremonial garment, 1 ceremonial garment second quality, 2
headbands second quality, 1 tufted textile third quality, 1 over-garment fourth quality, 5
ceremonial garments fourth quality, 2 tufted textiles fourth quality, 3 šagadu-garments of the
batabduhhûm variety, 1 ceremonial nahlaptum-garments fourth quality, 2 tufted nahlaptum-
garments: Šāt-Su’en. Rev. 1–2: 2 tufted nahlaptum-garments third quality: Šāt-Nūnu. Rev. 3–4:
1 tufted nahlaptum-garment fourth quality: Geme-Enlil. Rev. 5–8: 6 top quality weaver’s textiles,
7 small weaver’s <textiles>, from (the estate of) Šāt-Eštar. Received by Abituni. Seal-impression:
Abituni, son of NE-NE-a, fuller of Šarakam. IS 01-08-00.

Commentary
This is apparently a laundry list for various high-status women, sealed by Abituni, the “fuller of
Šarakam”. Šāt-Eštar is the wife of Šarakam, as we learn from the seal in Text 1 and she is the only
woman’s name with ki … –ta “from (the estate of)” in the text, while the others are simply placed
in apposition to lists of garments. Her access to or relationship with Abituni thus seems to be

13 14
An Or 01 142; Nik 2 355. Ea-malik in 2 NATN 837 (Nippur, undated);
Ur-dAmmibada in BPOA 6 0737 (possibly from Puzriš-
Dagan, IS 02-10-00).
SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR 221

Fig. 7 photos of Text 4 obv. and rev.

Fig. 8 copy of Text 4 obv. and rev.

Fig. 9 photos of Text 5 obv. and rev.

222 ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

Fig. 10 photos of Text 5 rev. from angles.

Fig. 11 copy of Text 5 obv. and rev.

highlighted. Interestingly a Šāt-Su’en is attested at Irisaĝrig in a text from around the same time as
this one.15 A Šāt-Su’en “daughter of the king” is also attested there in a document from ŠS 03.16
There is also a Šāt-Su’en dumu-munus lugal in tablets from Puzriš-Dagan from the time of the end
of the reign of Šulgi.17 The fact that Šāt-Su’en is associated with more garments than any other in
our document may be significant. The name Šāt-nūnu is attested in a document from Irisaĝrig
dated to IS 01-00-00, where she seems to be one of a group of female millers, so unlikely to be
identical with this one.18 The name Geme-Enlila is attested in a number of documents from
Umma, one of which has an association with “tufted” textiles.19 There is also queen Geme-Enlila,
spouse of Ibbi-Su’en, a princess of the same name from the same period and a lukur-woman of
Ninurta.20 For Abituni and his seal see Nisaba 15/2 0645 and 0649, where the name on the seal is
clearly spelled differently to the way it is spelled here on the tablet (rev. 8): a-bu?-tu9-ni. This spelling
may be reflected in the seal on Text 5, however (fig. 12), although it is dificult to see. The spelling of
his name and that of his father also appears to be different on the seals edited in Saadoon 2010
Texts 22, 23 and 25: a-bi2-tu-ni, where the cuneiform copies also indicate that he is son of NI-NI-a,
rather than NE-NE-a. The garments listed are high quality items which would have taken a long
time to produce.21 As fuller to Šarakam Abituni would have occupied an important position. It is
unclear why he is also taking responsibility for the clothes belonging to the other women mentioned

15
Owen 2013a: 523–524; Nisaba 15/2, 0953 (IS 03).
16
Nisaba 15/2: 255.
17
OIP 115: 187 (Š 46-06-27); PDT 1 593 (Š 37-08-00); SAT
2 0995 (Š 42-01-06).
18
Nisaba 15/2 668 obv. iii 32 (= Nisaba 15/2 1032 iii 110).
There is some question about whether these two documents
(668 vs 1032) are in fact the same document in different
transliterations, see Owen 2013b: 447 fn. 441.
19
BIN 05 174 rev. 1 (ki geme2-den-lil2-la2-ka-ta). No yearly
date.
20
For discussion of the various women of this name from
the time of Ibbi-Su′en see Weiershäuser 2008: 164–165.
21
For discussion of textile terminology and production see
Waetzoldt 1972; Maekawa 1980; Waetzoldt 1980–83: 197–
203; Waetzoldt 2007: 114; Waetzoldt 2011.
 SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR 223

Fig. 12 detail of seal of Abi/utuni, fuller of Šarakam

in this document and why only Šāt-Eštar’s clothes are designated as “from (the estate of) PN”, but these
details may indicate that she is the primary agent in the transaction.

Text 6: fig. 13–14

Obv. Rev.
[….] 1. ki ša-at-deš18-tar2/-ta
1′. 0.2.0 zu2-lum 2. ba-zi
2′. 0.0.2 še ga-il2 3. iti e2-ti-6
d
3′. ne3-eri11-gal 4. […] x x x

Translation: (Obv. 1′–3′) […] 160 (litres of) dates, 20 (litres of) barley for the porter of Nergal
(Rev. 1.–2) booked from (the estate of) Šāt-Eštar. Date: xx.08.xx

Commentary
Tablet attesting a levy of dates and barley (as well as other materials lost in the break) from (the estate
of) Šāt-Eštar for the “porter of Nergal”. Porters of deities are attested: Inana (ITT 4, 07311 ii 12,
Ĝirsu); Šara of Umma (BPOA 1, 1624 obv. 2, Umma); and Lamma-Šū-Su’en (BPOA 1, 1409 obv.
3, Umma). A temple of Nergal is not yet attested at Umma, but there appears to have been one at
Irisaĝrig.22 One document from Umma mentions temples of Nergal at Garšana and at Niĝsuda, a
place-name which is apparently only mentioned on Umma tablets during the Ur III period.23

Text 7: fig. 15–16

Seal-impression
1. ša-at-eš18-tar2
2. dumu-munus lugal
3. dam šara2-kam
4. dub-sar

Translation: Šāt-Eštar, daughter of the king, wife of Šarakam, the scribe.

Commentary
A square-shaped rectangular nodule with traces of attachment to something else on both sides,
impressed with a seal of Šāt-Eštar, which is identical to the seal-impression on Text 1.

Discussion
There are two main divisions among the texts that are currently available. On the one hand we have
the documents from Irisaĝrig, and on the other we have documents from Umma. Šāt-Eštar was

22 23
Nisaba 15/2 1070, 8; Nisaba 15/2 0177, 6. MVN 01 100 obv. 17–18 (Garšana); ibid. rev. 7
(Niĝsuda).
224 ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

Fig. 13 photos of Text 6 obv. and rev.

Fig. 14 copy of Text 6 obv. and rev.

obviously a popular name in Irisaĝrig, as the attestation of various daughters of dependent workers
attests in the large document Nisaba 15/2 0953 demonstrates. A further document with envelope from
Irisaĝrig (Nisaba 15/2 0457a+b) records a receipt by someone of barley (belonging to) a Šāt-Eštar
wife of Šarakam. This was presumably a socially higher individual than the women mentioned in
Nisaba 15/2 0953. The new texts published herewith in fact confirm that this is the same person as
the one who is mentioned on the tablets from Umma whose seal tells us she is a princess.
This means that there must have been a close connection between Irisaĝrig and Umma as far as
Šāt-Eštar’s affairs were concerned. According to M. Molina it took four days to tow a boat
upstream from Umma to Irisaĝrig, a distance which he calculates on the basis of the evidence
presented by Nisaba 15/2 1036 at around 62 km.24 Nisaba 15/2 0985 contains a receipt for sheep
hides from the estate of Šāt-Eštar, taken in receipt by Agatia. According to what is preserved of
the month-name, it could either be an Umma tablet or one from Irisaĝrig. The seal calls Šāt-Eštar
a dumu-munus lugal, and also mentions Agatia, with a further epithet or predicate that is not easy
to decipher: KA al-DU-a. D.I. Owen excludes this document from the Irisağrig archive due to the

24
Molina 2013: 74.
 SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR 225

Fig. 15 photos of Text 7 obv. and rev.

Fig. 16 copy of Text 7 obv. and rev.

fact that it mentions the princess Šāt-Eštar on the seal, and due to the presence of Agatia, who also
appears in Saadoon 2010 Text 3, and is connected with the receiver Abituni in Saadoon 2010 Text 2,
which also mentions the princess Šāt-Eštar.25 However, given the clear connection between Šāt-Eštar
the wife of Šarakam who is attested in Irisaĝrig (Nisaba 15/2 0457a+b) and the Šāt-Eštar wife of
Šarakam attested at Umma, the fact that Agatia is associated with Abituni, also known from
Umma, should not exclude that she is also active in Irisaĝrig.
Agatia could be used as a female name, as a tablet from Irisaĝrig informs us.26 Possibly Agatia is
acting as a representative of the princess Šāt-Eštar and this is the signification of the epithet or
predicate KA al-DU-a (“carrying the word for”?) given to Agatia as preserved on the seal of Šāt-
Eštar on Nisaba 15/2 0985. This would mean that the seal on Nisaba 15/2 0985 is actually the seal
of Agatia. The other character who appears in connection with the princess Šāt-Eštar at Umma is
Abi(n)tuni, whose seal on Nisaba 15/2 0649 tells us he is the son of NE-NE-a, and by profession a
(“royal?” according to Owen’s interpretation) fuller. There was also some doubt about the
provenance of this tablet, whether it was from Irisaĝrig or not, as the month name is a common
one.27 The similar content with regard to a transfer of specific textiles again involving Abituni in
text no. 5 presented above now makes it very likely that Nisaba 15/2 0649 is in fact from Umma.
Text 5 (above) also clarifies the fact that Abituni is the fuller of Šarakam, rather than being a
fuller of the king.28 Abituni is thus far attested only in texts from Umma, but the name Agatia is
attested in texts from Umma and Irisaĝrig without any assurance that this is the same person, and
Šāt-Eštar wife of Šarakam is attested in texts from both Umma and Irisağrig. It thus does not
seem possible to decide on the basis of the currently available data which of the towns Umma or

25 27
Owen 2013b: fn. 417. Owen 2013b: 291.
26 28
CUSAS 03, 1485 obv. i 14: a-ga-ti-a dumu-munus ul-luh- Text 5 seal-impression: a-bi2-tu9-ni dumu NE-NE-a
ki
uri5 . It is of course not clear that this is the same person as the azlag7 dšara2-kam.
one associated with Šāt-Eštar the princess at Umma.
226 ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

Irisaĝrig the document Nisaba 15/2 0985 comes from, although the close economic and political
relationship between the two seems to be well established. The princess Šāt-Eštar, at least
according to the data provided by the new documents, seems to have been based in Umma, a
central province with royal estates, but clearly had economic interests in Irisaĝrig, a slightly more
peripheral city from the perspective of the dynastic centre of the Ur III state.
Princess Šāt-Eštar’s husband Šarakam is attested on seal-impressions on Text 1, Text 2, Text 5 and
Text 7, i.e. from ŠS 5 to IS 2. Šarakam (“the one of Šara”) was a popular name at Umma, due to the
temple (e2-mah) of Šara which was located there. The BDTNS database currently contains 994
instances of this name in Umma texts attested from Šulgi year 22 as far as Ibbi-Su’en year 3. On
the basis of patronymic data, at least 22 separate individuals with this name can be identified at
Umma. There are attestations of a name and profession dšara2-kam dub-sar on 21 tablets, five of
which come from Umma and partially overlap in time with the mentions of Šarakam on seal-
impressions on the documents published here.29 Additionally a Šarakam, scribe and son of Nūr-
Su’en, appears on two seals found on a group of homogeneous looking documents from Garšana
dated from ŠS 09–11 to IS 03–07, thus overlapping with our documents chronologically.30 There is
also a reference to a Šarakam, governor of Ĝirsu in a document from Garšana, dated to AS 5.31
Attempts by Steinkeller to locate Garšana have most recently put it to the southeast of the Umma
region bordering Ĝirsu, although it is also positioned by others to the north(west) of Umma.32
There is a Šarakam who is director of operations at Puzriš-Dagan during the period of
Amar-Su’en,33 and there is a further Šarakam “scribe” in a number of documents from Irisaĝrig
from the very end of Amar-Su′en and beginning of Šū-Su’en’s reigns.34
Šarakam the governor of Ĝirsu under Amar-Su’en is tentatively identified by F. Weiershäuser with
the Šarakam son of Inim-Šara, whose family (in particular his wife) is closely associated with the
business of the estate of queen Šulgi-simtī in the years Š 40–46.35 This could be an earlier
Šarakam to Šarakam husband of Šāt-Eštar. However, there is no substantive reason to
disassociate Šarakam the scribe who is the husband of princess Šāt-Eštar from Šarakam governor
of Ĝirsu in the reign of Amar-Su’en. If Šarakam the scribe is attested at Umma in Amar-Suen
year 6, it is perfectly possible (although not necessary), for the same person to have carried the
title ensi2 at Ĝirsu at the same time.36 See for comparison the career of Šū-Kabta, general and
doctor, also married to a princess, Simat-Ištaran, as illustrated by the Garšana-archives.37
On the other hand it is possible that Šarakam the scribe in our texts is identical with Šarakam the
director of operations at Puzriš-Dagan during part of the reign of Amar-Suen, especially if this
Šarakam can in turn be identified with Šarakam the scribe who appears as an “officer” (maškim)
on a later tablet from Puzriš-Dagan.38 Here Šarakam the scribe appears in the role of maškim
along with Babati, who was the uncle of king Šū-Su’en himself.39 It would thus appear that
Šarakam the scribe of this document could appear in the same context and role as the highest of

29
Nisaba 23 003 rev. i 14 (ŠS 04-00-00); Organisation
administrative, Diss., T.14, Talon-Vanderroost 7, p. 232 (ŠS
07-03-00); Nisaba 26 022 obv. 2 (ŠS 08-00-00); BPOA 6
0555 obv. 2 (AS 06-05-00); UTI 4 2623 rev. 6 (AS 09-00-00).
30
CUSAS 3 1064, rev. 5 (ŠS 09-11-00); CUSAS 3 1211 obv.
4, seal A 1 (IS 02-03-00); CUSAS 3 1366 obv. 3, seal A 1 (IS
02-08-00); CUSAS 3 1367 rev. 1, seal A 1 (IS 02-08-00);
CUSAS 3 1395 obv. 4, seal A 1 (IS 02-09-00); CUSAS 3
1221 obv. 3, seal A 1 (IS 02-09-00); CUSAS 3 1239 obv. 3,
seal B 1 (IS 03-06-00); CUSAS 3 1371, seal B 1 (IS 03-07-
00). For the seals see Owen and Mayr 2007: 429–439.
31
Garšana 1548, 3: dšara2-kam ensi2 ĝir2-suki involving a
mu-DU transaction for (the estate of) princess Simat-
Ištaran (Owen 2011: 246). He was governor at least until
AS 07, when Arad-Nanna (the sukkal-mah) took over.
Allred 2013: 117; Lafont 2017: 194.
32
Steinkeller 2013. Northwest of Umma nearer to
Zabalam according to Heimpel (2009: 9; 2011, 153–156).
See now Molina and Steinkeller 2017.
33
Liu 2015: 389.
34
Nisaba 15/2 0165 rev. v 19 (AS 09-01-00); ibid. 0146 rev.
12′ (AS 09-01-20+); ibid. 0148 rev. 1 (AS 09-01-30); ibid. 150
rev. 22 (AS 09-01-30); ibid. 151 rev. 6 (AS 09-01-30); Owen,
Studies Milano, p. 351 no. 16 rev. v 5 (AS 09-01-30?);
Nisaba 15/2 0195 obv. 4 (ŠS 01-01-30).
35
Weiershäuser 2008: 44–45.
36
See BPOA 6 0555, fn. 29 above. If the sukkal-mah could
also be ensi2 at Ĝirsu (see fn. 32 above) one can argue that
Šarakam the scribe could also have exercised two functions
at once. In fact this was frequently the case.
37
Owen and Mayr 2007; Kleinerman 2011; Garfinkle
2013: 156–157.
38
Nisaba 08 059 obv. ii 13 (ŠS 03-11-29?).
39
ibid. obv. i 17. For Babati see Weiershäuser 2008: 106
with further literature. In OIP 121 589 (AS 05-11-00 –
Puzriš-Dagan) Babati also receives three oxen from
Šarakam (Liu 2015: 359), possibly re-inforcing the idea of a
link between the earlier Šarakam at Puzriš-Dagan and
Šarakam the scribe in the same place.
 SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR 227

Ur III officialdom with close relations to the throne. It does not have to be thought unlikely that an
official as important as Šarakam appears to have been at Puzriš-Dagan during the middle years of
Amar-Su’en should now be called “Šarakam the scribe” at the beginning of the reign of Šū-Suen.
Multiple posts could be held at the same time, and his qualification as scribe is not necessarily
indicative of a demotion nor is it an indication of rank in the same fashion as the office of maškim
might indicate, however temporarily.
As a methodological principle, however, one should strive to keep these different names in different
places provisionally separate, even when they have the same title, until incontrovertible evidence, such
as patronymic and other prosopographical data are found. However, if Šarakam the scribe and
husband of princess Šāt-Eštar was a sufficiently important person, it is perfectly possible that he
was operating in more than one of these geographically close locations. A very similar mobility
(Nippur, Puzriš-Dagan, Irisaĝrig, Zabalam, Garšana and Ĝirsu) is also attested for the
comparable couple Šū-Kabta and princess Simat-Ištaran.40 Unfortunately there does not appear at
the current stage of research to be a significant prosopographical overlap in the present
documentation between any of these identifiable individuals named Šarakam the scribe and the
group of names associated with Šāt-Eštar, wife of Šarakam the scribe, apart from that of the fuller
Abituni. A more in depth investigation than can be the subject of this publication may yet bring
such results.
As stated, the princess Šāt-Eštar would appear to have been based in Umma, as the majority of
texts mentioning her thus far seem to come from there. According to an analysis advocated among
others by P. Michalowski, the Ur III kings married their daughters to high officials or their sons in
order to secure their loyalty while they were in post.41 The business of her estate included dealing
with textiles and sheep, dates, barley and probably agricultural implements. As mentioned earlier,
this hints at access to considerable capital reserves, which may have derived either from her
husband’s estate or from royal holdings, if the distinction can in fact be said to make any
difference. She may have been represented in Irisaĝrig by a woman called Agatia, if Nisaba 15/2
0985 in fact comes from there, and the epithet applied to Agatia can be interpreted as indicating
that she is Šāt-Eštar’s advocate. Such a connection, although tentative, allows an insight into the
way in which a member of the royal family with estates in a central province (Umma) could utilise
connections in order to extend her economic activity and thus that of the royal family into areas
that were slightly further away from the dynastic seat. Unless a connection is attested between
Agatia and the sphere of Šarakam, it appears that this is independent activity of Šāt-Eštar that is
being conducted here, in a similar manner to the way it is attested for Simat-Ištaran in Garšana,
who continues in economic activity independently from her husband Šū-Kabta after his death.42
Connections between the estate of Šū-Kabta and princess Simat-Ištaran in Garšana also appear to
be upheld with the city of Irisaĝrig, as these figures appear in the texts from there. References are made
in Garšana texts to an a-ga-ti, who is the sister of Šū-Kabta.43 It cannot be assumed that this is the
same person as a-ga-ti-a who is the “representative” of Šāt-Eštar, especially given that another
person called a-ga-ti-a is mentioned in the same text (dumu-munus ul-luh-uriki 5 ).
44 However, it also

cannot be excluded that they are the same, and a sister of Šū-Kabta, also married to a princess
and thus likely a relative of Šāt-Eštar, would make an excellent contact for her. Further research
into the prosopographical relationships between Garšana, Irisaĝrig and the circles of Šū-Kabta
and Simat-Ištaran, Šarakam and Šāt-Eštar would be promising.
Šāt-Eštar seems to have collaborated closely in textile conservation or cleaning with Abituni, the
fuller of Šarakam, her husband, and this occasionally - as per Text 5 - on behalf of other women of
Umma, although the precise relationship between the participants is not clear. Two of the women
share names with princesses: Šāt-Su’en and Geme-Enlila, the latter also being the name of Ibbi-Su′
en′s queen. If these identities in name correspond to personal identities, then Text 5 throws an
interesting light on the organisation of everyday life among the female members of the royal

40 43
Owen 2011: 233. CUSAS 3, 1485 obv. i 18; CUSAS 3, 1474 obv. 2.
41 44
Michalowski 1987: 48–49; Weiershäuser 2008: 264–5. CUSAS 3, 1485 obv. i 14–15.
42
Kleinerman 2011.
228 ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

household. Šāt-Eštar has connections to a fuller via her husband’s circle of dependents. This is not to
say that the other princesses did not have such access, but possibly hints at an occasion where Šāt-
Eštar needs to intervene on their behalf in procuring a fuller’s services.
Furthermore, Šāt-Eštar also conducted dealings using other intermediaries who were servants of
her husband, as shown by the intercession of Šulgi-mudah in the transaction recorded in Text 2. These
relationships demonstrate the way in which the infrastructure of the Ur III state was supported by
networked structures belonging to semi-independent hierarchies outside of the royal family’s direct
chain of command. Šarakam had his own dependents or servants, and Šāt-Eštar, a member of the
royal family, is able to mobilise these in addition to her own dependents, such as Agatia.
Women of the Ur III royal family typically had cultic responsibilities. The recent book of T.M.
Sharlach has focussed on the role played by Šulgi-simtī, queen of king Šulgi, in sponsoring
religious institutions and a similar role was clearly filled by Abī-simtī.45 Text 6 may indicate
support on the part of Šāt-Eštar’s estate for the institution of the porter of Nergal, although it is
unclear whether there was a Nergal temple in the city of Umma during the Ur III period.
Nevertheless, this would be a pattern of behaviour comparable with that observed for royal women
throughout the Ur III state. If the transaction in Text 6 in fact refers to the temple of Nergal at
Irisaĝrig or indeed at Garšana (a district of Umma), then this further underscores the close
connection between Šāt-Eštar and either of these places, which has been remarked on previously in
this discussion.

Who was Šāt-Eštar?

The question of how we divide up the different attestations of the name Šarakam, especially with the
professional designation “scribe”, has an effect on how we imagine Šāt-Eštar might have been related
to the royal family. There may be some grounds for thinking her a daughter of Šulgi, possibly
supported by her connection to a Šāt-Su’en who may be identical with the Šāt-Su’en who is
attested as a princess at the end of the reign of Šulgi. On the other hand she is also associated in
the same document with Geme-Enlila, the name for two royal women of the time of Ibbi-Su’en,
and there is a Šāt-Su’en from the time of Šū-Su’en as well at Irisaĝrig. One might also consider
that Šulgi had a son called Šū-Eštar, the masculine counterpart to Šāt-Eštar. However, such an
early date for Šāt-Eštar and Šarakam is prosopographically difficult.
If we associate, for example, our Šarakam with the son of Inim-Šara whose family was involved in
business with the estate of queen Šulgi-simtī at the end of the reign of king Šulgi, then he would have
been in a fairly advanced middle age by the time of our documents, which start in ŠS 05. He would
also have to have become separated from or lost his wife of the Šulgi period and married Šāt-Eštar. In
the mean time he might have filled a very senior post at Puzriš-Dagan during the reign of Amar-Su’en,
while also being ensi at Ĝirsu (unless this is a different person), and then started calling himself dub-
sar during the reign of Šū-Su’en. However, this may not be the most convincing biography and it does
not account for the fact that none of the documents mentioning Šāt-Eštar as a princess are attested
before ŠS 05.46
Given that it is obvious that there were many people of the name Šarakam living at around the
same time, and quite possibly more than one calling themselves Šarakam dub-sar, we should
perhaps exploit the fact that Šāt-Eštar is first attested as a “daughter of the king” in the reign of
Šū-Su’en and suppose that said king might be her father. Šū-Su’en’s primary wife or queen was
Kubātum.47 Daughters of the king are mentioned during Šū-Su’en’s reign, but also specifically a
“daughter of Kubātum”, whom W. Sallaberger has identified with Geme-Enlila, the queen of Ibbi-
Su’en.48 Note that we saw a connection between Šāt-Eštar and a Geme-Enlil in Text 5 presented

45
Sharlach 2017.
46
The document Saadoon 2010 Text 21 possibly involves
harrows from Šāt-Eštar, and dates to AS 05, but she is not
noted as a princess there or in the document published here
as Text 3 and dating to IS 02, which also concerns harrow’s
teeth. If the readings are secure, and Šāt-Eštar in these
documents is the same as Šāt-Eštar the princess, then this
would put Šāt-Eštar’s activity back into the reign of Amar-
Su’en, which would of course make her contemporary with
Šarakam at Puzriš-Dagan and add weight to speculation
that she is a daughter of Šulgi, or possibly of Amar-Su’en.
47
Weiershäuser 2008: 153–164.
48
Sallaberger 1992: 134.
 SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR 229

here. Šū-Su’en also had three further secondary wives that we know the names of, one of whose
“water-drinking place” receives a posthumous offering in ŠS 06: Takūn-mātum (lukur lugal).49
Unless she died young, this may indicate that she was at that time at the very least of a reasonably
advanced age and she may also have been dead for some time. So Šāt-Eštar may have herself at
least have been grown up by the time of her death. Whoever her mother was, and there are
doubtless many women in the royal household who have thus far not been identified in the
documentation, Šāt-Eštar would have needed to be of marriageable age at least by the time of ŠS 05.
It is also possible that Šāt-Eštar is a daughter of Amar-Su’en by Abī-simtī, for example. She has
connections with a woman called Agati(a), who may appear in a document from Garšana in which
Abī-simtī also occurs.50 Furthermore, many of Šāt-Eštar’s activities in Umma and further abroad
appear to mirror those of the better attested Simat-Ištaran in the Garšana archive and elsewhere,
who was herself perhaps a daughter of Amar-Su’en.51 This is of course no probative argument,
but it is quite possible that two princesses acting in similar ways over the same time period in
neighbouring areas might themselves be related, both having been married into important local
families at around the same time as part of a concerted imperial strategy to gain more traction in
the significant families of the administration on whom the state was itself all too dependent.

Conclusion
The tablets published herewith do not yet provide us with enough information to identify precisely
how the princess Šāt-Eštar was related to the royal family of Ur. She would appear to have been
married to a high-status official of the Ur III state, although it is difficult to work out precisely
which attestations of the name Šarakam correspond to which historical individuals. Šarakam the
scribe, the husband of Šāt-Eštar, may have shared roles with individuals close to the king, such as
the uncle of Šū-Su’en, even if a broader biography is not yet definitely visible. He had a personal
fuller in his wider household or retinue, with whom Šāt-Eštar had some dealings which may have
been further connected to other female members of the royal family. Šāt-Eštar also conducted her
own business, using both her husband’s and her own resources and intermediaries, and may have
been involved in the support of specific religious institutions in a similar fashion to other Ur III
royal women. The documents of the Šāt-Eštar dossier that are currently available provide
invaluable detail on the relationship between the local authority of officials and that of the royal
family. They are especially useful as regards the prospects they offer for studying the relations
between Umma as a central provincial city with royal estates and the not too distant cities of
Irisaĝrig, where Šāt-Eštar appears to have had contacts, and Garšana (part of the district of
Umma), where the somewhat comparable figures of princess Simat-Ištaran and Šū-Kabta had an
estate. Like Simat-Ištaran, who conducted affairs in Nippur, Zabalam and Garšana, she may well
have had estates outside of the city of Umma. The documents also extend our knowledge
concerning royal women in the Ur III period considerably, by throwing light on a figure who until
very recently was not represented or identified in the documentation at all.

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my thanks to the Director General of Iraqi Museums, Mr Oais Huseen Rashed
for allowing me to study these texts. I would also like to thank the manager of the cuneiform
department in the Iraq Museum, Ms Elham Shaker Jawad and all members of her team. The
author would also like to acknowledge a debt of gratitude to Dr Mark Weeden, SOAS University
of London, and to Prof. Steven J. Garfinkle of Western Washington University, for valuable
insights, and to Prof. Manuel Molina, Centre of Humanities and Social Studies (CSIC) in Madrid
for suggesting the topic in the first place.

49 51
AR RIM 02 03 obv. 15-rev. 2; Weiershäuser 2008: 231– Heimpel 2009: 2–3, with further literature; Such-
232 “Totenopfer”. Gutiérrez 2011: 505.
50
CUSAS 3 1485 obv. ii 3.
230 ABATHER RAHI SAADOON

Bibliography
Allred, L. B. 2013. “The Tenure of Provincial Governors: Some Observations.” In: S.J. Garfinkle, M. Molina
(eds.), From the 21st Century B.C. to the 21st Century A. D. Proceedings of the International
Conference on Sumerian Studies Held in Madrid 22–24 July 2010. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, pp.
115–24.
Civil, M. 1994. The Farmer’s Instructions. A Sumerian Agricultural Manual. Aula Orientalis - Supplementa
5. Sabadell: Editorial Ausa.
Fish, T. 1932. Catalogue of Sumerian Tablets in the John Rylands Library, Manchester: Manchester University
Press.
Garfinkle, S. J. 2013. “The Third Dynasty of Ur and the Limits of State Power in Early Mesopotamia”, in: S. J.
Garfinkle and M. Molina (eds) From the 21st Century B.C. to the 21st Century A.D.: Proceedings of the
International Conference on Sumerian Studies Held in Madrid 22–24 July 2010. Winona Lake:
Eisenbrauns, pp. 153–168.
Heimpel, W. 2009. Workers and Construction Work at Garshana. CUSAS 5. Bethesda, MD: CDL Press.
—— 2011. “On the Location of the Forests of Garšana”, in: D.I. Owen (ed.) Garšana Studies. Cornell University
Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 6. Bethesda: CDL Press, pp. 153–159.
Kleinerman, A. 2011. “Doctor Šu-Kabta’s Family Practice”, in: D.I. Owen (ed.) Garšana Studies. Cornell
University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 6. Bethesda, MD: CDL Press, pp. 177–182.
Lafont, B. 2017. “Game of Thrones: the Years when Šu-Sin Succeeded Amar-Su’en in the Kingdom of Ur”, in:
Ll. Feliu, F. Karahashi, G. Rubio (eds.) The First Ninety Years. A Sumerian Celebration in Honor of
Miguel Civil. Boston and Berlin: De Gruyter, 189–204.
Lafont, B. and Yildiz, F. 1996. Tablettes cunéiformes de Tello au Musée d’Istanbul. Datant de l’époque de la IIIe
Dynastie d’Ur, II (ITT II/1, 2544–2819, 3158–4342, 4708–4713). Uitgaven van het Nederlands
Historisch-Archaeologisch Institut te Istanbul 77. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabie
Oosten.
Liu, Ch. 2015. Organization, Administrative Practices and Written Documentation at Puzriš-Dagan during the
Reign of Amar-Suen. PhD Dissertation, Universität Heidelberg. Available on 30.12.2017 at: http://
archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/19005/1/Liu_PhD%20dissertation.pdf
Maekawa, K. 1980. “Female Weavers and Their Children”. Acta Sumerologica 2, 81–125.
Michalowski, P. 1987. “Charisma and Control”, in: M. Gibson, R. D. Biggs (Eds), The Organization of Power.
Aspects of Bureaucracy in the Ancient Near East. SAOC 46, 55–68.
—— 2004. “The Ideological Foundations of the Ur III state”, in : J.-W. Meyer and W. Sommerfeld (eds) 2000
v. Chr. Politische, wirtschaftliche und kulturelle Entwicklung im Zeichen der Jahrtausendwende.
3. Internationales Colloquium der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft, 4.–7. April 2000 in Frankfurt/
Main und Marburg/Lahn. Saarbrücken: Saarbrücker Druckerei und Verlag, pp. 219–235.
Molina, M. 2013. “On the Location of Irisaĝrig”, in: S. Garfinkle - M. Molina (Eds), From the 21st Century BC
to the 21st Century AD. Proceedings of the International Conference on Neo-Sumerian Studies Held in
Madrid, July 22–24, 2010. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 59–87
—— 2016. “Archives and bookkeeping in Southern Mesopotamia during the Ur III period”. Revue d’ Histoire
des Comptabilités 8, 1–19.
Molina, M. and Steinkeller, P. 2017. “New Data on GARšana and the Border Zone between Umma and Girsu/
Lagaš”, in: Ll. Feliu, F. Karahashi, G. Rubio (Eds) The First Ninety Years. A Sumerian Celebration in
Honor of Miguel Civil. Boston and Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 231–249.
Owen, D. I. 2011. “Supplemental Texts Related to the Garšana Archives,” in: D.I. Owen (ed.) Garšana Studies.
Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 6. Bethesda: CDL Press, pp. 233–334.
—— 2013a. Cuneiform Texts Primarily from Irisaĝrig / Āl-Šarrākī and the History of the Ur III Period. Volume 1:
Commentary and Indexes. Nisaba 15/1. Bethesda MD: CDL Press.
—— 2013b. Cuneiform Texts Primarily from Irisaĝrig / Āl-Šarrākī and the History of the Ur III Period. Volume 2:
Catalogue and Texts. Nisaba 15/2. Bethesda MD: CDL Press.
Owen, D. I. and Mayr, R. H. 2007. The Garšana Archives. With the assistance of Alexandra Kleinerman Cornell.
University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 3. Bethesda: CDL Press.
Saadoon, A. 2010. Unpublished Cuneiform Texts in the Iraqi Museum from UR III Dynasty (2112–2014 B.C) [in
Arabic]. Unpublished MA Thesis. Baghdad.
Salah, S. 2010. “New Cuneiform Texts from the Third Dynasty of Ur in the Iraq Museum” [in Arabic], Sumer 5,
133–152.
Sallaberger, W. 1992. Review of Fatma Yıldız, Tohru Gomi, Die Puzriš-Dagan-Texte der Istanbuler
Archäologischen Museen. Teil II: Nr. 726–1379 (FAOS 16), Wiesbaden 1988, ZA 82 (1992),
131–137.
Sharlach, T. M. 2017. An Ox of One’s Own. Royal Wives and Religion at the Court of the Third Dynasty of Ur.
Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Records (SANER) 18. Berlin: De Gruyter.
 SUMERIAN TEXTS FROM THE ARCHIVE OF THE PRINCESS ŠĀT-EŠTAR 231

Sigrist, M. and Gabbay, U. 2014. “Eighteen Cuneiform Inscriptions from the Ur III and Old-Babylonian
Periods”. In: Z. Csabai (ed.), Economic History and Economic Theory in the Ancient Near East.
Papers dedicated to the Memory of Péter Vargyas. Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean Studies
2. Budapest: Department of Ancient History, University of Pécs, 283–315.
Steinkeller, P. 2013. “The Umma Field Ušgida and the Question of GARšana’s Location”. In: B. J. Collins and
P. Michalowski (eds), Beyond Hatti: A Tribute to Gary Beckman. Atlanta: Lockwood Press,
295–308.
Such-Gutiérrez, M. 2011. “Simat-dIštaran”, in: Reallexikon der Assyriologie 12 (7/8), 505.
—— 2012. “Neue Erkenntnisse zu den königlichen Gemahlinnen der Ur III-Zeit”, in: G. Wilhelm (ed.),
Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the
54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Würzburg 20–25 July 2008: 327–345. Winona Lake:
Eisenbrauns.
Waetzoldt, H. 1972. Untersuchungen zur neusumerischen Textilindustrie. Rome: Istituto per l’Oriente.
—— 1980–83. Kleidung A: Philologisch. Reallexikon der Assyriologie 6, 18–31.
—— 2007. The Use of Wool for the Production of Strings, Ropes, Braided Mats and Similar Fabrics. In: C. Gillis
and B. M. L. Nosch (eds), Ancient Textiles, Production, Craft and Society. Oxford, 112–121.
—— 2011. Die Textilproduktion von Garšana. In: D. I. Owen (ed.), Garšana Studies (CUSAS 6). Bethesda MD:
CDL Press, 405–454.
Weiershäuser, F. 2008. Die Königlichen Frauen der III. Dynastie von Ur. Göttinger Beiträge zum Alten Orient
Band 1. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag.
Yildiz, F. and Ozaki, T. 2001. Die Umma-Texte aus den Archäologischen Museen zu Istanbul. Band VI (Nr. 3501–
3834). Bethesda MD: CDL Press.

Dr. Abather Rahi Saadoon

University of Al-Muthana
Department of Archaeology
Province of Al-Muthana / Samawa
Iraq
abodaar.rahee@mu.edu.iq

‫ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺳﻮﻣﺮﻳﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺃﺭﺷﻴﻒ ﺍﻷﻣﻴﺮﺓ ﺷﺎﺕ ﻋﺸﺘﺎﺭ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﺎﻣﻴﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﻒ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺍﻗﻲ‬

‫ﺃﺑﺎﺫﺭ ﺭﺍﻫﻲ ﺳﻌﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﺪﻱ‬.‫ ﺩ‬. ‫ﻢ‬
‫ ﻗﺴﻢ ﺍﻵﺛﺎﺭ‬/ ‫ ﻛﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻵﺩﺍﺏ‬/ ‫ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺜﻨﻰ‬

‫ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺨﺺ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺃﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺍﻗﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻤﺔ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻛﺒﻴﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺍﻗﻲ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻣﺸﺎﺭﻛﺔ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﻞ ﻓﻲ ﺻﻨﻊ ﺍﻟﺤﻀﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺍﻗﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﻤﺔ ﻛﺄﻡ‬
‫ )ﻭﺍﺣﺪﺓ ﻣﻦ ﺗﻠﻚ‬Šat-eštar‫ﻭﻛﻤﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﻟﻸﻃﻔﺎﻝ ﻭﻛﻌﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﻟﺼﻨﺎﻋﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺰﺭﺍﻋﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺠﺎﺭﺓ ﻭﻏﻴﺮﻫﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺎﺓ ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻣﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻷﻣﻴﺮﺓ ﺷﺎﺕ ﻋﺸﺘﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺃﻳﻀﴼ ﻓﻲ ﺗﻨﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﺃﻧﺘﻌﺎﺵ ﺍﻷﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺍﻗﻲ ﻭﻟﻢ ﺗﻜﻦ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻓﺔ ﻛﺄﻣﻴﺮﺓ ﻟﻮﻻ ﻭﺭﻭﺩ ﻃﺒﻌﺔ ﺧﺘﻤﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻧﺼﻮﺹ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫ ﻭﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﻮﺹ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻭﺭﺩ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﺳﻢ ﺷﺎﺕ – ﻋﺸﺘﺎﺭ ﻭﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﺗﺒﻴﻦ ﺃﻥ ﻫﺬﻩ ﺍﻟﺸﺨﺼﻴﺔ ﻟﻌﺒﺖ ﺩﻭﺭﴽ ﻫﺎﻣﴼ ﻓﻲ‬،2010 ‫ﻟﻠﻤﺎﺟﺴﺘﻴﺮ‬
، ‫ ﻭﻓﻲ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﺸﻌﻴﺮ ﻭﺍﻟﺪﻗﻴﻖ ﻭﻣﻦ ﺛﻢ ﺍﻟﺘﻤﺮ‬، ‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺳﺘﻼﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﻮﺳﺎﻃﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻷﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﻭﻗﺪ ﻛﺎﻥ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﴼ ﺑﺘﺠﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﺪﺓ ﻣﻮﺍﺩ‬
، ‫ ﻭﺷﺎﺕ – ﺳﻴﻦ‬، ‫ ﻭﺍﺑﻴﺘﻮﻧﻲ‬، ‫ ﻭﺷﻮﻟﻜﻲ – ﻣﻮﺩﺍﺥ‬، ‫ ﺃﻣﺎ ﺍﻷﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﺍﻟﺬﻳﻦ ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻌﻬﻢ ﻓﻜﺎﻧﻮﺍ ﻛﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻛﺎﺗﻴﺎ‬، ‫ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻨﺴﻮﺟﺎﺕ ﻭﺃﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﺍﻟﺜﻴﺎﺏ‬
.‫ ﻭﻟﻮﻛﺎﻝ – ﻧﻴﺴﺎﻙ – ﺍﻱ‬، ‫ ﻭﺷﻴﺸﻜﺎﻻ‬، ‫ ﻭﺩﺍﺧﺸﺎﺗﺎﻝ‬,‫ﻭﺷﺎﺕ – ﻧﻮﻧﻮ‬

View publication stats