Cuneiform Sign SUM

Context chooses among its several readings. In Sumerian, an ancient language, 𒋧 can write šum₂, a word for garlic or onion, or the verb šum₂, “to give.” Some sign lists also connect SUM with readings for applying something, laying it down, and a sheaf of grain.

SUM is the scholarly label for the sign, not the English word “sum.” A form such as šum₂ is a transliteration: an editor’s way of writing a sign’s reading in a text. The isolated glyph cannot tell you which reading applies.

How does 𒋧 fit into early writing?

Its history belongs to cuneiform’s early record keeping. Cuneiform writing is attested at Uruk IV (about 3500–3200 BCE), when growing cities used marks to track goods and services. An early proto-cuneiform inventory—a list from an early stage of the script—records SUM-A separately; later sign lists identify SUM, pointing to a sign tradition that changed over time.

Garlic cultivation in Sumer is attested by at least the Uruk III period. The relationship between the Sumerian and Akkadian forms is debated.

In Akkadian, another ancient language written in cuneiform, the pair 𒋧𒈠 is transliterated šum-ma, “if,” and opens a conditional clause—an if-statement. Some sign lists analyze ZAR as LAGAB × SUM, a compound sign made from LAGAB and SUM.

Why does 𒋧 look different in different fonts?

The same sign can have different historical outlines. Cuneiform fonts look different because sign forms vary by period, region, writing surface, and hand. Font guidance treats these as stylistic forms of a sign, so fonts modeled on Old Babylonian, cursive, or Neo-Assyrian writing may draw 𒋧 differently.

Font-dependent rendering may show a box or fallback shape if the font lacks Cuneiform coverage. When an inscription needs to be read precisely, check the font’s historical style alongside the transliteration.