Andrew Schumann | University of Information Technology and Management in Rzeszow
In this paper, I show that we can find some foundations of logic and legal argumentation in the tablets of
Mesopotamia at least since the dynasty of Ur III. In these texts, we see the oldest correct application of logical inference rules
(e.g. modus ponens). As concerns the legal argumentation established in Mesopotamia, we can reconstruct on the
basis of the tablets the following rules of dispute resolutions during trials: (1) There are two parties of disputants: (i) a
protagonist who formulates a standpoint and (ii) an antagonist who disagrees with the protagonist’s standpoint and formulates an
alternative statement. (2) There is a rational judge represented by high-ranking citizens who should follow only logical
conclusions from facts and law articles as premises.
2006On invention, The best kind of orator, Topics (trans: Hubbell, H. M.; Loeb Classical Library 386). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
Cole, S. W.
1996Nippur IV. The Early Neo-Babylonian Governor’s Archive from Nippur. Oriental Institute Publications. Volume 1141. Chicago: the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
Culbertson, L. E.
2009Dispute Resolution in the Provincial Courts of the Third Dynasty of Ur. A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Near Eastern Studies) in the University of Michigan.
Culbertson, L.
Local Courts in Centralizing States: The Case of Ur III Mesopotamia, [in:] Social Theory in Archaeology and Ancient History, 185–202.
Friberg, J.
2007A Remarkable Collection of Babylonian Mathematical Texts. Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection Cuneiform Texts I. New York: Springer.
2014Neo-Babylonian Trial Records. Society of Biblical Literature Atlanta.
Kienast, B., Volk, K.
1995Die Sumerischen und Akkadischen Briefe des III Jahrtausends aus der Zeit vor der III Dynastie von Ur. Freiburg: F. Steiner Verlag.
Lafont, B.
2000Les texts judiciaries sumériens, [in] Joannes (ed.), Rendre la justice en Mesopotamie. Presses Universitaires de Vincennes, pp. 35–68.
Mercer, S. A. B.
1913The Oath in Cuneiform Inscriptions, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 331, 33–50.
Michalowski, P., Walker, C. B.
1989A New Sumerian “Law Code”, [in] H. Behrenset al. (eds.), Dumu-e2-dub-ba-a: Studies in Honor of Ake W. Sjoberg. Philadelphia.
Molina, M.
2000La ley mas Antigua: Textes legales sumerios. Madrid.
Molina, M.
2008New Ur III Court Records Concerning Slavery, [in:] P. Michalowski (ed.). On the Third Dynasty of Ur: Studies in Honor of Marcel Sigrist. Journal of Cuneiform Studies Supplementary Series 1. ASOR, pp. 125–143.
Roth, M.
2001Reading Mesopotamian Law Cases PBS 5 100: A Question of Filiation, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 44/31:243–292.
Roth, M. T.
1995Law collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor. With a contribution by Harry A. Hoffner, Ir.; edited by Piotr Michalowski. Scholars Press Atlanta, Georgia.
Schumann, A.
2019aDid the Neo-Babylonians Construct a Symbolic Logic for Legal Proceedings?, Journal of Applied Logics – IfCoLoG Journal of Logics and their Applications, 6(1): 31–82.
Schumann, A.
2019bOn the Origin of Indian Logic from the Viewpoint of the Pāli Canon, Logica Universalis,
van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B., Krabbe, E. C. W., Francisca, A., Henkemans, S., Verheij, B., Wagemans, J. H. M.
2014Handbook of Argumentation Theory. Dordrecht Heidelberg New York London: Springer.
van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R.
2004A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D.
1995Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Series: Studies in Argumentation Theory. Routledge.
Weisberg, D. B.
2003Neo-Nabylonian Texts in the Oriental Institute Collection. Oriental Institute Publications. Volume 1141. Chicago: the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Schumann, Andrew
2020. Judgments and Truth: Essays in Honour of Jan Woleński. Studia Humana 9:3-4 ► pp. 1 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 april 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.