4.4.2 Status
Although slaves were regarded as property that could be sold, hired,
pledged, and inherited, they were accorded some legal standing. If
their freedom was at issue, they could appear before the court and
conduct their own case, calling witnesses (NG 37, 169:2–16; Sigrist
1) and testifying themselves. They could also conclude a valid mar-
riage (NG 44, 199:III 3'–15'; Steinkeller 78). The offspring would
be regarded as legitimate; reference is occasionally made to a slave’s
paternity (NG 32, 205:27–42—daughters) and occasionally a slave’s
name bears a patronymic (e.g., in NG 55, where the father is dead
and irrelevant to the transaction; also NG 99). According to LU 5,
if a slave married a free woman (dumu-gi 7 ), the offspring of the
union were free, save for one male child only, selected by the slave.
If, on the other hand, he married a slave, his manumission would
not automatically free his wife (LU 4).^664.4.3 Creation
War is only mentioned as a source of slavery for public institutions
(NG 190). The most frequently mentioned method of enslavement
was sale of children by their parents. Most are women, evidently
widows, selling a daughter (NG 37, 45, 46, 175:2–14); in one instance
a mother and grandmother sell a boy (NG 55). Fathers also sell
daughters (NG 37, 204:21–33, Steinkeller 81), and both parents sell
a son (NG 53). There are also examples of self-sale (Steinkeller 20,
127). All these cases clearly arose from poverty; it is not stated, how-
ever, whether debt was specifically at issue. In NG 38, a mother
sold her son but apparently died in the interim, so that the price
was paid to the son himself. Since he remained a slave, the price
was most probably paid out again to the mother’s creditor(s). In NG
32, a man received rations “for his slavery” in the house of the
claimant, with the result that his son born in the claimant’s house
was also his slave—possibly a case of famine slavery.
Slavery could be imposed as a contractual penalty on a guaran-
tor, to replace a slave whose services were lost (Steinkeller 45, 127).
Finally, the victims of crimes were entitled to enslave or sell as slaves
the family of the culprit (NG 41, 42, 203).^67(^66) Following the interpretation of Yaron, “Quelques remarques...”
(^67) Possibly the culprit himself for peculation; see Kutscher, “From the Royal
Court.. .,” 186–87.
- ( ) 199
WESTBROOK_F5_182-226 8/27/03 1:42 PM Page 199