-
Definition. Dependent workers were defined before scoring, from the Oracc lemmatization of the Early Dynastic IIIb administrative texts. D1 takes the personal names in texts that have both a ration term (šeba, sikiba) and a dependent term: geme (female worker), arad (slave) or iginudu (unskilled or foreign worker). D2 is D1 without names on lines carrying an official title and without names attested in 30 or more texts. D3 takes names on the same line as a dependent term. ED IIIa has no ration lists lemmatized in this form [@bartash2018age].
-
Result. D1 has 6,894 names in 99 texts: 60% carry an element, odds ratio 4.72 (4.57–4.87). D2 has 5,142 names: 65%, odds ratio 4.60 (4.45–4.77). D3 has 35 names: odds ratio 3.25 (1.57–5.08). All of ED IIIb gives 4.47, and the Uruk III dependents give 1.35.
Sumerian dependent workers' names carry the stock name elements as strongly as anyone's; the Uruk III dependents' names do not
Odds ratio of Englund's Sumerian name elements in names against the corpus's other words, 95% bootstrap intervals; Oracc ePSD2 ED IIIb and CDLI Uruk III
- Reading. Dependents in Early Dynastic Lagash have fully Sumerian name profiles, so dependent status does not by itself produce the archaic pattern. H-NAMES-NOTSUMERIAN passes the kill test it was given. Three readings of the archaic names remain [@englund2009smell] [@damerow2006origins]. The people may have been a foreign workforce that kept its own names, where later institutions often gave dependents Sumerian names. The scribes may not have spoken Sumerian. Or the name entries may have been labels rather than spellings of names.