The Ancients - The Sumerians

Episode Date: July 17, 2022

Despite being one of the first civilisations in human history, Sumer is not as well-known as other Bronze Age societies such as Babylonia and, of course, Ancient Egypt.Recent research indicates that the first ever writing system emerged in the Sumerian heartland of southern Mesopotamia around 3500 BC. So who were these Near Eastern pioneers forming some of the first urban settlements along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers?In this episode, Tristan is joined by Dr Paul Collins from the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, to help unravel the mysteries of the Sumerians and their trailblazing civilisation.For more Ancients content, subscribe to our Ancients newsletter here.If you'd like to learn even more, we have hundreds of history documentaries, ad free podcasts and audiobooks at History Hit - subscribe today!

Hi, I'm Tristan Hughes, and if you would like the Ancient ad-free, get early access and bonus episodes, sign up to History Hit. With a History Hit subscription, you can also watch hundreds of hours of original documentaries, including my recent documentary all about Petra and the Nabataeans, and enjoy a new release every week. Sign up now by visiting historyhit.com slash subscribe. It's the Entrance on History Hit. I'm Tristan Hughes, your host, and in today's podcast, while I'm recording this intro out on location, we are currently at Dun Telv Broch at Glenelg in Scotland in western Scotland just south of Skye we are talking all about prehistoric Scotland for a new series for History Hit we are covering the Neolithic the Bronze Age and the Iron Age with the climax of it being these Brochs these incredible ancient Iron Age towers the remains of which you can see all across the Scottish mainland,

not largely the northern part of the Scottish mainland, but also surrounding islands too. It's an incredible story. We are telling it for history here. It's been a great shoot so far and we've still got a far way to go, but stay tuned for that being released in due course. And of course, a couple of podcasts around prehistoric Scotland too. Now for today's episode something completely different because we are going to ancient iraq to the ancient middle east mesopotamia thousands of years ago to talk about a perhaps i think it's fair to say a lesser known ancient civilization one which is shrouded in quite a lot of mystery i think it's fair to say. The Sumerians. The Sumerians these people. We've got names such as Ur, Uruk, the great ziggurat of Ur, the early development of writing,

Sumerian, the Sumerian king list and so on and so forth. It's an intriguing culture that you've probably heard the name of but might not know too much about well we're going to clear that up today because our expert is none other than dr paul collins from the ashmolean museum in oxford i was lucky enough to head up to the ashmolean museum roughly a week ago to chat to paul he's a lovely person and he knows so much about the sumerians it was wonderful to get him on the show and the ashmolean museum i must say, it also has an extraordinary ancient Middle East, ancient Mesopotamian gallery, including an original Sumerian king list written in Sumerian. Paul explains all in the podcast episode today, and I really do hope you enjoy. So without further ado, to talk all about the Sumerians, here's Paul.

Paul, it is wonderful to have you on the podcast today. Thank you very much. Delighted to be here. And it's great to be doing it in person at the Ashmolean Museum. And this is an incredible place when talking about the Sumerians, isn't it? Straight off the bat. We're extraordinarily lucky here. I mean, we've got such a rich collection, which means we can explore 10,000 years of ancient Middle Eastern history. And of course, within that, a great deal of material which relates to the Sumerians. First of all, Paul, this is a really intriguing ancient Mesopotamian culture, isn't

it? Because it feels almost… we mentioned it just before we started talking about the Phoenicians and the Assyrians. The Sumerians is another name that I'm sure most people have heard of but probably don't know actually too much about. Well, the Sumerians may seem familiar because of course they've been credited in lots of books, usually just the first few pages when exploring history with the invention of writing, sometimes with the invention of the wheel, with the invention of cities. So they sit very much in people's minds, if they know anything at all, as the roots of our modern way of life. And so who are the Sumerians? When and where are we talking? Well, traditionally, one thinks of the Sumerians as a people who occupied the southern region of modern Iraq, ancient Mesopotamia at the head of the Persian Gulf. And in a period between roughly 3500 and 2000 BC, they created some of

the world's first cities. So this is before the Assyrians, before the Akkadians, before the Babylonians. This is going back, you say, millennia. So this is the moment we move from prehistory to history because again, it is that moment when writing is developed. So what sorts of sources? I think I know the answer to this already then, Paul. What sorts of sources do we have when trying to learn more about the Sumerians? Well, there is our challenge because, of course, we have lots of excavated sites dating to this period, but we see the emergence of technologies of writing which begin to then express spoken languages. And by around 3000 BC, 2800 BC, scholars are able to read in that writing the Sumerian language.

We will delve into the language, but first of all, you mentioned the scholars figuring out the Sumerian language. So let's actually talk about the discovery of the Sumerians first of all, because this is interesting in itself. I guess in human history, our knowledge of the Sumerians, it comes quite late. It does. The Sumerians were unknown until about 150 years ago. So whereas people in the West could read about the Assyrians, they could read about the Babylonians, the Phoenicians, the other people of the ancient Middle East through both the classical sources, but also

primarily the biblical texts, the Hebrew Bible recorded stories of these people. But the Sumerians are not mentioned. And so when the ancient texts of Mesopotamia began to be uncovered and read, what was first discovered were the languages of some of these familiar people, the languages of the Assyrians and the Babylonians. It was only through close analysis of those texts that the Sumerians began to emerge. So talk me through how these people and who these people were who deciphered, who discovered the Sumerian language.

Well, the work began really in the middle of the 19th century with big excavations in northern Iraq at places like Nineveh and Nimrud. And there was revealed lots and lots of texts using the cuneiform script of Mesopotamia, this wedge-shaped writing system. And scholars began to investigate what these signs actually represented. Lots of scholars engaged in this activity in France and in England. One scholar in particular made a fundamental breakthrough. This was a man who gets very little credit in the literature, someone called Edward Hinks. He's actually a vicar in Ireland, and he was a brilliant linguist. And in 1846, he realized that

these cuneiform signs were actually syllabic. They were used to build up using sound values, words, and meanings. And he recognized that the language encoded in that script was a Semitic language, like Arabic and Hebrew, which was the language of the Assyrians and Babylonians. But he also then recognised, about three years later, that some of these signs were being used in a rather peculiar way, which suggested that there was an underlying other language there. This is the language which we now recognise as Sumerian. At the time, of course, this was completely unknown and it had a very different grammatical structure to Semitic. It was something new. This is so interesting, Paul, because for

a joblogger, when looking at, let's say, cuneiform, I guess it's perhaps easy to think that cuneiform is just one sort of language, shall we say, which stays the same. But from what you're saying, for the scholars, looking at cuneiform tablets, when you delve into the detail, you can see different cuneiform languages within the cuneiform tablets that survive. Cuneiform is an incredibly flexible system, actually, because of course, the signs represent essentially sound values. It can be used to write any language. It can be used to write English, essentially. But with using that system, you can use also signs to represent entire words or signs to represent a sense of meaning. Although the earliest languages recognized within this system were

these Semitic languages, they were actually relatively late in terms of recording. Hidden within these late recorded languages were these elements which pointed to this earlier recorded language. And just to clarify quickly, what do we mean by a Semitic language? Semitic is the way in which a language is formed grammatically, so the way in which it functions in terms of the structure of the verbs, the way in which it organizes itself, essentially. And I say Semitic languages include modern-day Arabic and modern-day Hebrew. So they have basically the same grammatical structure. And that's what we find with these earlier Semitic languages like Assyrian and Babylonian. Now, the language that was being teased out from these ancient

texts, which we now call Sumerian, had a very different structure. And so grammatically, it's unique. It doesn't belong to the Semitic family of languages, and in fact, may have belonged to a much wider family of languages, which no longer spoken. It's often now described as an isolate rather like modern-day Basque. It has no connection with other spoken languages. How does this language get the name Sumerian? Do the people who were writing this thousands of years ago not consider themselves Sumerians? The scholars who were discovering this language didn't know what to call it because there was no word essentially in the text that helped them do

that. Another scholar in the late 1860s came up with a suggestion which he offered to the scholarly community, which he based actually on a Semitic text. And this was a phrase which read, King of Sumer and Akkad. But this is Semitic, this is Babylonian. But because Sumerian was so poorly known, it was agreed among the scholars that they would use this term Sumer and Sumerian as the way forward. And so, it sort of stuck. So, we're actually left with a Semitic term to refer to this other language. It's quite interesting, isn't it? Semitic terms refer to a non-Semitic language. But Paul, that is really interesting and I want to keep on the writing a bit longer because I want to delve more into this. So what sorts of writings have survived in the cuneiform tablets that are in Sumerian? So the earliest tablets in Sumerian that are readable are very bureaucratic. They are lists of things. They're created by administrators, designed to manage big

agricultural estates. So it's about moving resources between storerooms or distributing things to workers. But among those very early texts, around 2800 BC, are also contracts. So, a record of the transfer of property or other goods between individuals. And those are very often carved on stone because they're intended to last as a legal document. Whereas all the other documents, the administrative texts, are on clay, which were not intended to last. They're rather ephemeral post-it notes almost, which was just for business. So are we quite lucky to have those clay tablets that do survive? I mean, are these ones which would have been excavated at particular sites and were under the ground

and have been uncovered by archaeologists, let's say? We're very lucky in digging sites within ancient Iraq because the clay tablets survive. Even the sun-dried tablets survive extraordinarily well. In other cultures, say for example in Egypt where they're using perishable materials, you have to rely on other factors to preserve the papyrus or the parchment. But clay survives remarkably well. And so we've got these very, very early records surviving in their thousands. And clay, of course, is cheap. It's everywhere in southern Iraq. That's the world that it's based on. You're building your houses from it, you're making

your pottery from it, and you're using it to write on. So it's an incredibly flexible material. Because it's cheap and flexible, you have a system which is sufficiently complex to record a spoken language. All the ideas that come out of that last for thousands of years. Do we have any idea if there were any other languages that were being spoken alongside Sumerian during this Sumerian period? Almost certainly. And we get hints of that in the texts themselves. So within texts that are written in Sumerian, there are grammatical elements which suggest that there are Semitic languages in the background, as it were. And it may well be that the scribes of Mesopotamia in this period were taught to

write Sumerian, even if their spoken language in the street was Semitic or another language. And so it was the tool of administration and that you had to learn Sumerian essentially just to function as an administrator. So, as we wrap up writing there, from the latest archaeological evidence that we have, can we still say that we believe that the Sumerians, these people, are the first people that we know of who developed writing? I think we can be relatively confident that the person who developed writing spoke Sumerian. That, however, is an assumption because the earliest texts, we can't read the language behind the signs. They are simply recording information which could essentially be written by anybody speaking any language. But after several

centuries of using those techniques of recording, we find the Sumerian language as the first one to be expressed grammatically. So that most scholars, I think, agree that the likelihood is that the majority of the population in southern Iraq in the late 4th millennium, early 3rd millennium, are speaking Sumerian. And it was one of them who came up with this idea. You mentioned southern Iraq. So what does this area of Mesopotamia look like at the time of the Sumerians? Certainly in the late 4th millennium, through much of the 3rd millennium BC, it's an incredibly watery place. The waters of the Persian Gulf were much further north than they are today. And so cities that are very familiar in the Sumerian world like Ur and Eridu and Uruk

would have been almost maritime worlds, looking out to the Persian Gulf on one side, but then looking inland to an incredibly rich agricultural world of lagoons and waterways and marshland. And it's in that marshy environment of which pockets survive in modern Iraq that this Sumerian culture emerged. So where transport was easy along all the river streams, and of course, the alluvial soil that the rivers had been depositing over millennia was incredibly rich for agricultural produce. It's interesting when you mentioned the Sumerian culture emerging. So I'm guessing this is really shrouded in the mystery of the origins of the Sumerians, but I'm guessing it's more to rethink that they are the population of that area and

then they become the Sumerian civilization or that they came from elsewhere and settled there. Sumerian civilization or that they came from elsewhere and settled there? Well, it's a difficult question because, of course, we talk about the Sumerians but only from the point of view really when we can understand their language. So before, we're in prehistory, and then we don't know about population groups or the languages indeed that they're speaking. But there's sufficient archaeological continuity from deep prehistory actually to suggest that large parts of the population are simply there and not changing. So it's possible that they're already speaking, as it were, Sumerian in those places. We have good evidence now for the sort of watery worlds where areas of land which were above the floodwaters became the focus for these early settlements.

The style of architecture, for example, continues then through into the historic period. We don't need to necessarily look for people coming from outside. However, early scholars from the mid-19th century assumed from the beginning that they could talk about people as groups of mobile groups that moved as one, and they came, according to their theories, from outside, bringing Sumerian civilisation with them. Millions dead, a higher proportion of civilian casualties than in the Second World War. America, Britain, Russia and China all involved in a conflict that technically remains active to this day. So why is the Korean War of 1950-53 called the Forgotten War. This July, we're dedicating a special series of episodes to finding out what this unique conflict was all about. Join me, James Rogers, throughout July on the Warfare podcast from History Hit, as we remember the war the world forgot. As you said, it's only been 150 years or so since the Sumerians have been

discovered. But over that time, there's been a lot of development of ideas, of theories, and I think that's probably a great example of one of those, isn't it? It is. And the Sumerians were caught up very much with 19th and early 20th century ideas around race, which came with the understanding that people belong to certain groups by their physical characteristics, by the way in which they thought, the way in which they worked together, the way in which they thought, the way in which they worked together, the way in which they spoke their languages. So you had these groups of people emerging in different parts of the world and then were placed on a sliding scale of how they compared to essentially Western civilization. So you could move along that sliding scale both in the contemporary world but also in

the past. And the Sumerians, because they were envisaged as having this language different than the Semitic people of the Middle East, were thought to come from outside the region, bringing with them this extraordinary development of cities and writing. So you had a model that was being imposed essentially on the evidence, one that of course we now completely reject. Absolutely. Let's move on back onto the Sumerians because you did mention something else that I know a lot of us will be keen, I'd love to ask that now, and that is of course cities. We know from this area of southern Iraq, we know of many, shall we say, many cities or city-states linked to the Sumerians.

Well, cities is a difficult term in a way because how do you define a city? That's open to debate, and it was assumed from the early excavations in the late 19th, early 20th century that southern Iraq, this great alluvial floodplain of the region, was the place where the world's first cities emerged, tied very much to this idea of the Sumerian population. And of course, there are enormous settlements there. Around 3000 BC, the city of Uruk is about one square mile, which makes it probably the largest settlement on the planet at that date with tens of thousands of people. We now know, however, since those excavations began in the early 20th century, that the idea of urban centers is actually much older.

that the idea of urban centers is actually much older. We can look to sites further up the river Euphrates in modern-day Syria to places like Tel Brak, way north of the alluvial plains of Iraq, where about 4,000 BC, so a thousand years earlier, we have a large urban center with monumental architecture and some of the technologies that would eventually lead to administrative ideas like writing. So we can now trace back some of those ideas much, much earlier beyond the world usually associated with the Sumerians. From research such as that at other places like Tel Brak, is it giving people like yourself more of an idea of how cities, well, I'll put cities in their marks, in the Sumerian area settlements interacted with other settlements

perhaps further away, perhaps trade or resources that were available, and of course, just relations in general? Are we learning a bit more about that too? Oh, incredible new evidence coming to light, and very often the result of new areas being explored by archaeologists simply because they haven't looked, they haven't found it. And you're finding examples of not just urban complexity, large numbers of people coming together, but also dispersed settlements which are effectively doing the same things as cities. These smaller communities are all working together, and cities are in effect just clumping together types of living in a more compact arrangement, which you can find in other patterns elsewhere. So, different ways of people sharing ideas, sharing materials,

but over long, long distances. It's absolutely remarkable. I love that. We're learning more about that too. I guess one thing I'd also like to ask about, and I kind of hinted at it with the city-states idea, do we think there's one Sumerian overlord in Southern Iraq during this period, or is it divided between the various settlements with a powerful local figure ruling over that particular area? It's very difficult to determine what's happening in the early third millennium. So from around 3000 to 2600, that sort of period, the evidence just isn't sufficient. And of course, they're not actually telling us very much in their writing, it's largely bureaucratic. But by around 2500 BC, the texts begin to be used to document the achievements of kings. And you then start to

be able to identify not just in the text, but in the architecture of palaces and larger buildings, the emergence of powerful centres. You get a clearer picture of a divided world of city-states, rather like classical Greece or Renaissance Italy, competing centres sharing a common culture. Ur versus Uruk could be like Thebes versus Athens or something like that if you wanted a parallel. Correct, yes. Well, I would like, therefore, you mentioned the art and architecture. I'd love to focus in.

Let's look at a case study of one of these cities that has been excavated and look at the art and architecture from it. And I've got top of my list. I've got Uruk, but first I want to get to Ur because this is a very, very interesting one, isn't it? Talk to me about the excavations at Ur. Was it in the 20th? Was it the 19th century? Which seems to be really significant

in the uncovering of archaeology at this centre. There had always been the focus for exploration. Visitors in the 19th century, Europeans passing through the region as merchants or diplomats, were always intrigued by the ancient mound at this site, which was known as the Mound of Pitch-tel-El-Mukya in Arabic. And it was from that site that some of the first bricks inscribed in cuneiform were recovered and brought back to Europe. So it was always well known. And early explorations in the 19th century began to uncover some other monuments from the site, but it really only began to be excavated

in an extensive way with hundreds of workers digging enormous holes in the soil when a joint excavation was undertaken between the British Museum and the University Museum of Pennsylvania. That joint excavation was led by Leonard Woolley, who was an experienced archaeologist and was chosen by the two museums to lead the dig from 1922. What did he uncover? Did he start in one of the main areas? I know he goes to the cemeteries, which we're kind of hinting at as well. What leads him, therefore, to talk us through his excavations? What do we know about him uncovering so much incredible archaeology from this area of the world? Well, the site is enormous, and there's very much that's visible on the ground,

as it were, the remains of decayed mud brick structures. And dominating the site is an enormous mound, which is the decayed remains of the so-called ziggurat. The stepped tower, which was a feature of all Mesopotamian cities, part of the religious complex built from thousands of bricks which piled up to create effectively a step pyramid, almost certainly with a little shrine at the summit and led up by staircase. Most of that had disappeared, but nonetheless, you had this mound of decayed brick. So that was the focus for Woolley, surrounding temples at the foot of the ziggurat mound and palace complex. So he was really digging the sacred heart of the city where royalty and religion came together. Was the ziggurat in use in Sumerian times or slightly later? Because you can see the reconstructed version today,

can't you? Was this the focal point of the ancient Sumerian city of Ur? Yes. Temples were built on raised platforms from the 4th millennium BC. Much earlier, and almost certainly at Ur as well as at other sites, your house of your god, relatively small building, was raised up above the level of everybody else's houses on a brick platform. And those gradually got higher through time. And by the end of the 3rd millennium BC, so around 2100 BC, the idea of creating these massive stepped towers really became a feature of the kings that were dominating the region. So lots of cities had been built, and the one at Ur was at that time the capital city

and was almost certainly the grandest and most obvious marker in the landscape. It's an absolutely stunning building. Were these excavators able to get into the ziggurat itself? Was it like an inside chamber? What did they really find from it? The ziggurat is solid. It's unlike an Egyptian pyramid, for example. It's not designed to hold anything. It's a solid mountain brick. And the idea was very much to raise up a monument. And one has to remember that Southern Iraq is immensely flat. It's a landscape which is an alluvial plain. And so, traveling from a distance, you'd be able to see this effective mountain in the distance over the city walls. And it may

well be that the ziggurat is an attempt to bring the mountains where the gods were believed to live, out there to the east in the mountains of Iran, down onto the plain and bring their home into the center of Iran down onto the plain and bring their home into the center of the city. I'm delighted that we have talked about that monumental ziggurat because it is an incredible structure. But I would also like to go to something else. We go back to Woolley's excavations, which seems to be really remarkable.

Talk me through how they discover these royal tombs, these cemeteries. Woolley has workmen all over the site digging various parts. Some of his workmen begin very early on in 1925-26 to uncover burials within this religious complex. It's actually just to the edge of the Ziggurat area. But he realizes that his workmen aren't sufficiently skilled in digging graves. These are very complex things to dig because although they're pits in the ground, the soil, decayed soil, has fallen in and there's very little surviving of the bodies. The soil is very acidic, so there's very little skeletal remains. They come with challenges, but little beads of lapis lazuli and carnelian and gold were revealed, and he paused the excavations in that area until he felt his workforce was

sufficiently skilled. So by 1927, 1928, he returned to that area of the site and began to uncover thousands of graves. Now, these were generally ordinary pits in the ground, as it were, just simple pits in which an individual has laid out either in a coffin or wrapped up in a reed mat with a few of their possessions. But within the cemetery of thousands of individuals, there were 16 graves he uncovered which were completely different in scale, enormous in scale, and contained extraordinary material. So, tell me a bit more about these 16 particular graves. What sorts of materials were uncovered and what did they believe that they were associated with? These are enormous pits in the ground, sometimes 10 meters deep. At the bottom of

the pit, which was generally accessed by a shaft from above, would be a stone tomb. The stone tomb contained various different shapes and sizes. Some contained little rooms, some were just simply almost like little huts, single one-room creations. And inside those stone buildings, what Woolley took to be the primary burial, the king or the queen, in his interpretation, was buried there, surrounded by the most extraordinary material, metal, copper, but also silver and gold. And remember, there is no metal in Iraq. This all has to be imported. So this again, expresses wealth just by virtue of bringing the stuff to Ur, let alone the material itself. Beads of lapis lazuli and carnelian, again, all imported from vast distances reflecting

the wealth of these individuals. Spectacular stuff in themselves, but on the floor of some of these pits, outside the stone tomb, lay the bodies of individuals who appear to be sacrificial victims. This was a unique phenomenon, indeed, it remains the same for Mesopotamia. One of these pits, the so-called Great Death Pit, had 69 individuals lying in neat rows, covered in extraordinary jewelry, mirroring that found on the principal burial in the stone chamber, but reproduced in vast amounts. So 69 bodies were found in there. Yeah.

And these, from analysis, and again, remember the skeletons were preserved very, very poorly, but they appear to be all women. There are six apparent soldiers, again, based on what they're wearing, at the foot of the shaft leading down into the pit. And so they're presumably guarding the entrance in some way, but the rest of the bodies are all female. And so they appear to be, in some sense, the servants of the queen, perhaps, courtiers, perhaps in life, killed for the purpose in death. Do we have any idea from the archaeology that survived of how they died? Is there evidence of trauma? As you said, there's probably poor condition that they survived, but do we have any ideas? We do. Now, again, thanks to modern techniques. Woolley himself came up with a rather romantic tradition. Again, he's imagining the Sumerians as terribly civilized and therefore wouldn't indulge in anything too barbaric. So, he imagines that everybody willingly takes poison

and lays down to die to journey into the next world with their king or queen. And indeed, little cups were found next to some of the bodies. But we now know from analysis of the few skulls that were recovered, at least those individuals that were analyzed died horribly. Their skulls were smashed in with axes, essentially. Their bodies were then embalmed by being heated, and they were treated with mercury. Now, this may have been an attempt to preserve the body. these individuals having been killed, preserve the body for the length of time it would take to then lay them out and decorate them with this extraordinary jewellery before the entire tomb was closed.

It's amazing what the modern techniques can tell us. You know a bit more about the last moments of these people. Let's keep moving on, but keep actually talking about women in these tombs because there's this one particular tomb, I've got my notes here, the Queen's tomb. Now, what is this? It does seem to be one of the most extraordinary of all of them. Extraordinary really because it was one of the few that survived intact. Most of these graves have either been looted in the past, probably soon after they were buried potentially, and so Woolley was able to reconstruct what he thought the whole rituals behind the interment were from

just a few surviving tombs. And this queen's tomb was one of the best surviving examples, where the floor of the pit again contained sacrificial victims, these individuals, and then the queen herself was buried in a stone tomb in one corner of the pit. Do we have any idea who this particular woman was? There's huge debates around who these individuals were in terms of their profession. Were they queens or were they high priestesses? Probably, it'd be difficult to separate those out. These are clearly

important individuals in the city of Ur. We do, however, know this individual's name. That's because associated with her body, actually lying close to her body, was a cylinder seal, a cylinder made of lapis lazuli carved with an image of a banquet and a cuneiform inscription, which was read-Ad. So Queen Shu-Ad was suddenly revealed to the public as a Sumerian queen because it was assumed that the signs should be read as Sumerian because it was assumed she must be a Sumerian queen in this great city. It's an interesting time that you mentioned that being announced to the press because of course, this is a few years later, but still, let's say, hot on the heels of Tutankhamun or even the Trepain treasure in Scotland. But there's the discovery of all these incredible new archaeological finds and it feels like the announcing to the press of this, it's that interesting time of archaeological discovery,

isn't it? You then have this Sumerian discovery being announced, this particular woman also being announced to the press too. Yes, and of course, at this time, it was imagined from the chronology that was being reconstructed as the excavations continued, these tombs dated much earlier than the first earliest tombs in Egypt. much earlier than the earliest tombs in Egypt. And it was tied in very much with this idea of the Sumerians as being at the roots of civilization, so they must be much earlier, but also tied in with the notion that the Sumerians were somehow connected to people in the West, that they weren't Semitic. They potentially could be actually the ancestors, as Leonard Woolley himself would say in print, perhaps even of the Neolithic barrow builders

of Wessex. So there was a sense of ownership from the West over the Sumerians. And here was this queen decked out in the most extraordinary jewellery with this apparent Sumerian name, which made that connection all the more explicit. You mentioned that apparent Sumerian name. There's more of a story to this, isn't there? There is because the reading of those signs on that cylinder seal is now much better understood. In the decades since the excavations, our understanding of these ancient languages and the way that the cuneiform script worked has of course improved dramatically. And so Queen Shubhad, her name is now understood to be read in fact as Pu-Abi. Very different readings of those two signs, but actually with much more meaning. Shubhad is meaningless, but Puabi actually is a Semitic way of writing a name, which

means it relates her to her father, essentially. And so we now know her as Queen Puabi. But the point is, of course, that if language and names associate you with group identity, then Puabi is no longer Sumerian but actually is Semitic. Well, there you go. See, that's an interesting twist in the whole story. Let's talk about art for a bit because you've mentioned all these incredible objects that show the connections that these people had, the Sumerians. I know that you've got examples of these incredible statues of vases from a rook and so many other places. I'd like to focus on one particular example which also comes from these particular cemeteries.

It is quite an iconic example and this is the standard of Ur. Now Paul, what is this? I wish I could tell you. This remains something of a mystery. It's an object which came to the British Museum as part of the so-called Division of Finds when the material excavated at Ur was shared between the museum in Baghdad, the Iraq Museum, and the University Museum in Pennsylvania, and the British Museum, a division of finds which was practiced at the times but is no longer the current way of doing things. But the British Museum got the standard of war as part of that. And what it is was reconstructed really by Woolley's ideas that this is some sort of box.

You have two rectilinear panels of some size which are inlaid with scenes of procession of material and animals being led up towards a king in the top register. And on the other panel, you have a scene of banqueting, again, the movement of material towards that. Two images of kingship, one in which the king is shown as the warrior and one in which he's shown in a peaceful banqueting scene. Well, these two panels, the inlay originally on wood which had decayed, Woolley thought must have belonged to some sort of object which had been carried on the top of a pole as a standard. Why did he think that? Well, the inlay was found next to the shoulder of the body in the tomb. And so, we have this idea of a box, a truncated arrangement with no obvious purpose.

Some people have thought, well, maybe it's the sounding box of a musical instrument and just lost the elements above. Not many people, I think, accept that as meaningful. And I wonder myself whether what you're looking at is actually a series of panels which would have decorated a wall. This we know from other examples where squares, rectangles of wood inlaid with precious materials and carved scenes were set up in palaces and temples really as images of kingship or of religion. These may have been stacked up against a wall perhaps in this tomb, the idea being that the tomb would be the palace for eternity for the individual. But when the tomb collapsed, the bricks from the top of the tomb fell down, smashing a lot of this inlay work. And so Woolley found two panels, one on top of each other,

separated by a thin layer of dust, which he then assumed had been a box that had been crushed. In fact, I suspect they may well have been just separate panels. But you visit it now in the British Museum as a single object, as this mysterious box. But it is still an extraordinary piece of art, isn't it? Thousands of years old, and the detail that it shows, you say that peaceful scene and that more military scene too. Yes, and it's comprised again of this extraordinary blue lapis lazuli stone which would have reached southern Iraq from Afghanistan, the only source we know of, many thousands of miles to the east. Such a precious material that the Sumerians really

valued it as evoking notions of the gods and that mysterious world to the east. Absolutely. Now, quickly, before we just quickly move on to, I'll ask a small question about the military king list and then we'll wrap up. But as hinted at earlier, we've got so many other examples of art from the Sumerian period, don't we? What sorts of examples and what shapes and forms do we have other examples of art from the ancient Sumer? We're talking about at least a thousand years, of course, when the Sumerian language is being recorded in cuneiform. And so the material ranges from the sorts of things found in temples. Votive figurines is one particular class of art which is very familiar to this world. is very familiar to this world. Images of both men and women made of stone, 30 centimetres or so high in general, carved to represent those individuals with their hands clasped before them in prayer, perhaps, so intended to be taken into the temple to be in the presence of the god for all time.

temple to be in the presence of the god for all time sumerian temples were small spaces these are these are homes of the gods so only the priests could probably gain access so if you were wealthy enough if you had sufficient status or a position in society you could have an image made of yourself, men or women, and carried into the presence of the God. They are absolutely extraordinary. And people can learn more about it looking up the Sumerians, for instance, at your book and so on and so forth. But we will keep going on because I'd like to talk about one other thing before we talk about wrapping up. And that is quickly, very quickly, on the military. Do we have any idea from that? I believe I'm seeing something about this, but do we have a slight idea of how the Sumerian military functioned? We have representations of armies on some of these royal images.

The standard of war, of course, is one good example where on this battle side, you have images of carts, essentially, which are often described as chariots, but they're four-wheeled vehicles being pulled by donkeys, trundling across this flat landscape. And inside, you have a spear thrower and sometimes an archer. a spear thrower and sometimes an archer. So, you have effectively heavy weapons of war alongside infantry, where rows of soldiers decked out in leather garments, we assume from the images, again carrying spears. Those appear also on monuments of stone where, again, we see kings in chariots leading forward his infantry with their spears ready to attack the enemy. And so what do we think ultimately happens to the Sumerians? Well, remember the Sumerians, as far as we know them, are only through their language.

know them are only through their language. So we don't have to envisage a single group of people. There's no texts that talk about, I am a Sumerian. There are only texts that record their language. And it becomes clear that by the end of the third millennium, that language is dying out as a spoken language. And this is a phenomenon that happens with languages around the globe over time. And indeed, with globalization, languages are disappearing today at a fast rate, as other languages like English, for example, become more dominant. So for reasons that are difficult to determine, Sumerian gradually declines as a spoken language in the street. The language, however, is preserved by those bureaucrats, by the scribes, and by the intellectuals

who associate the language with the ancient past and the heritage of the region, so it continues to be learned in scholarly communities and in the temple scribal communities. But in the street, most people are now speaking a Semitic language, become the Babylonian language essentially, and Sumerian ceases to be present. So we don't see people disappearing, we just see the language disappearing. It's interesting, as you say, looking at the Sumerians through the language, and then you do see it being removed as time goes on. With all of that knowledge that we therefore now have from the archaeology and the surviving cuneiform literature about the Sumerian language, how should we now look at the Sumerians today? How should we view the Sumerians? I think we can certainly talk about a civilization

of Sumer. Sumer was a term, and we started the conversation around how that term was so influential. Sumer was a place. It was thought of as a real place by the ancient scribes. So we have the civilization of Sumer, but within Sumer, there was almost certainly a multilingual population. The scribal tradition, perhaps the wealthy parts of the community may have spoken Sumerian as they wanted that language as the first to be recorded in the script they developed. But gradually over time, other parts of the population came to the fore in terms of their language. But that melding of different linguistic traditions created a single unified cultural tradition that we now describe as the Sumerian world. Well, Paul, this has been amazing. We've only just scratched the

surface. There's so much more we could have talked about. We've got to end it there, I'm afraid. Maybe we'll get you back on for a second podcast in due course. But it does also, it's really exciting for the future, I'm guessing, in the archaeology field of ancient Sumer and learning more about it. I'm guessing there's still so much more to find in the years ahead. Almost certainly. I mean, Iraq is extraordinarily rich archaeologically, and there are abandoned settlement mounds out there waiting to be uncovered. I also think it allows us to rethink our assumptions and presumptions based on our own more recent scholarship and revisit that.

Quite right, indeed. And last but not least, you've written a book on this topic, which is called? indeed. And last but not least, you've written a book on this topic, which is called? It's called The Sumerians. It's part of the so-called Lost Civilizations series and explores many of the things we've been discussing today. Well, Paul, absolute pleasure. Thank you so much for taking the time to come on the podcast today. My great pleasure. Thank you very much. Well, there you go. There was Dr. Paul Collins explaining all about the Sumerians. Such an extraordinary story of ancient Iraq. I really do hope you enjoyed the episode. I love it when we cover those ancient Middle Eastern, ancient Mesopotamian civilizations, and you can rest assured that we're going to be doing more of them in the future. Now, in the meantime, if you'd like

more ancients content, well, you can, can of course subscribe to our weekly ancients newsletter via a link in the description below every week i write a bit of a blurb for that newsletter so you can catch that newsletter every week and of course if you'd also be kind enough to leave us a lovely rating on either spotify apple podcast wherever you get your podcasts from we would greatly appreciate it the whole ancients team as we continue to spread to tell these incredible stories from our distant past. But that's enough from me, signing off from Duntail, Brough, and I will see you in the next episode.