This page provides the footnotes for Six Sumerian Prostitutes.

1)  Subur/Šubur 

There is some confusion about this word. The Sumerian Lexicon has šubur defined as a “servant/slave”. The ePSD spells it as subur. The CDLI spells it both ways. Šubur{ki} is also the name of a city. In addition, Šubur is also a Personal Name (although it’s beyond me why any parent would name their child, “servant/slave”). Šubur occurs 8 times on these three tablets, and it is translated as a Personal Name, in particular, the name of a specific ugula (overseer). However, on these tablets (and on many tablets in the CDLI) I think the proper translation is “servant/slave”. It seems there would be many more servants/slaves than
people named Subur.

2)  Names of the prostitutes 

In the Indices (see References below), there are many additional names of prostitutes,
but I do not agree with this interpretation. I have restricted my list to only the women
whose names are immediately followed by the classification of “prostitute”.

Note: Although the women have Sumerian names, it's possible that they are foreign-born slaves, as explained on the page about Babylonian Prostitutes (near the end of the page).

3)  Nin-gu-gal 

On the front of the tablet (CDLI 011028), the record for Nin-gu-gal reads “[…] Nin-gu-gal,
prostitute, sanga-GAR.” A sanga-gar is a Profession Name. It is "an official, the chief
administrator of a temple household". His job title is listed but his name is not. On the back
of the tablet, the record reads, “[…] Nin-gu-gal, prostitute, En-abzu-si.” This is a
Personal Name, but no profession is given. I suggest that En-abzu-si is the name of the
sanga-gar. Nin-gu-gal’s association with the sanga-gar seems to indicate that she was the
“personal prostitute” of En-abzu-si. In other words, she was his concubine.

This may explain why she got extra rations.

4)  Nin-ni-gi 

Like Nin-gu-gal listed above, Nin-ni-gi is associated with another person. Her record reads,
“[…] Nin-ni-gi, prostitute, pa4-NAM2.” The pa4-NAM2 is a Personal Name, suggesting that
Nin-ni-gi is also a concubine rather that a prostitute.

The other prostitutes on the list are not associated with anyone else, suggesting they are “freelancers”.

5)  Nin-ni-gi4 

CDLI tablet 011031 also lists a Nin-ni-gi4 (line r3,5). Gi and gi4 are similar signs that have
the same pronunciation, so Nin-ni-gi4 may be the same Nin-ni-gi that is listed above
(a scribal error?). Both are associated with pa4-NAM2. Nin-ni-gi4 may also be a musician (narX?). Perhaps she is both a prostitute and a musician.

 gi and gi4

6)  Šim-mu2 

I’m inclined to believe that Šim-mu is the man’s name, not his profession, because the standard practice is to identify a spouse by name, whether or not a job title is also given.
For instance, “Jane Doe, wife of John Doe”, or “Jane Doe, wife of John Doe, accountant”,
not “Jane Doe, wife of accountant”. However, many tablets of the ED III period do not always follow this standardized form. Sometimes the name is given, but not the profession. Sometimes the profession is given, but not the name. As a result, we cannot know
with absolute certainty if "Šim-mu" is the man's name or his profession.

References: 

Early Dynastic Administrative Tablets of Šuruppak. Pomponio, Francesco.; Visicato, Giuseppe.; Alberti, Amedeo. 1994  


Indices of Early Dynastic Administrative Tablets of Suruppak.
Visicato, Giuseppe. 1997