Early Dynastic Period (Mesopotamia)
|Geographical range||Lower Mesopotamia|
|Dates||fl. c. 2900 BCE — c. 2350 BCE|
|Type site||Tell Agrab, Tell Asmar|
|Major sites||Tell Abu Shahrain, Tell al-Madain, Tell as-Senkereh, Tell Abu Habbah, Tell Fara|
|Preceded by||Jemdet Nasr Period|
|Followed by||Akkadian Period|
The Early Dynastic period (abbreviated ED period or ED) is an archaeological culture in southern Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq) that is generally dated to approximately 2900–2350 BCE. It was preceded by the Uruk period and Jemdet Nasr period, which saw the formation of the first states, the first cities and the invention of writing. The ED period itself was characterized by the existence of multiple city-states: small states with a relatively simple structure that developed and solidified over time. This development ultimately led to the unification of much of southern Mesopotamia under the rule of Sargon of Akkad, the first king of the Akkadian Empire. Despite this political fragmentation, the Early Dynastic city-states shared a relatively homogeneous material culture. Sumerian cities like Uruk, Ur, Lagash, Umma and Nippur, located in the south of Mesopotamia, were very powerful and influential. To the north and west stretched states centered on cities such as Kish, Mari, Nagar and Ebla.
The study of central and southern Mesopotamia has long been given priority over neighbouring regions. Archaeological sites in southern and central Mesopotamia, notably Girsu, but also Eshnunna, Khafajah, Ur and many others, have been excavated since the 19th century, yielding cuneiform texts and many other important artefacts. As a result, this area was always better known than neighbouring regions. The excavation and publication of the archives of Ebla have changed this perspective, shedding more light on surrounding areas such as southwestern Iran, Upper Mesopotamia and western Syria. These new findings revealed that southern Mesopotamia shared many socio-cultural developments with neighbouring areas and the entire Ancient Near East participated in an exchange network in which material goods and ideas were circulated.
History of research
The term Early Dynastic Period (ED) was coined by archaeologist Henri Frankfort, analogous to the similarly named period in Egypt. The periodization was developed in the 1930s during excavations that were conducted by Frankfort on behalf of the University of Chicago Oriental Institute on the sites of Tell Khafajah, Tell Agrab, and Tell Asmar in the Diyala region in Iraq. The subdivision into ED I, II, and III was primarily based on complete changes through time in the plan of the Abu Temple of Tell Asmar, which had been rebuilt multiple times on exactly the same spot. Since then, the ED I–III has been widely applied to excavations elsewhere in Iraq.
During the 20th century, many archaeologists also tried to impose the scheme of ED I–III upon archaeological remains of the third millennium excavated elsewhere in Iraq and in northeastern Syria. However, accumulating evidence from sites elsewhere in Iraq has shown that the ED I–III periodization as reconstructed for the Diyala region cannot be directly applied to other regions.
Research in Syria has likewise shown that developments there were quite different from those in the Diyala or southern Iraq, rendering the traditional southern Mesopotamian chronology useless. During the 1990s and 2000s, attempts were made by various scholars to arrive at a local northern Mesopotamian chronology, resulting in the Early Jezirah (EJ) 0–V chronology that encompasses the entire third millennium BCE. The use of the ED I–III chronology is now generally limited to southern Mesopotamia, with the ED II period sometimes being further restricted to the Diyala region, or discredited altogether.
The ED period is preceded by the Jemdet Nasr period and succeeded by the Akkadian Period, when for the first time in history large parts of Mesopotamia were united under a single ruler. The entire ED period is now generally dated to approximately 2900–2350 BCE according to the Middle Chronology, or 2800–2230 BCE according to the Short Chronology. The ED period is further divided into sub-periods ED I, ED II, ED IIIa, and ED IIIb. ED I–III are more or less contemporary with the Early Jezirah (EJ) I–III periods in northern Mesopotamia. The exact dating of the ED sub-periods varies between scholars, with some abandoning the ED II altogether and using Early/Late ED instead, or by extending ED I and letting ED III begin earlier so that they follow immediately upon each other.
The ED scheme is strictly an archaeological subdivision that does not reflect political developments, as is the case for the periods that follow upon it. The reason for this is that the political history of the ED period is unknown for most of its duration. As with the archaeological subdivision, the reconstruction of political events is hotly debated among researchers.
|Period|| Middle Chronology
All dates BCE
| Short Chronology|
All dates BCE
The ED I (2900–2750/2700 BCE) is relatively poorly known. In southern Mesopotamia, it shares characteristics with the final stretch of the Uruk period (3300–3100 BCE) and the Jemdet Nasr period (3100–2900 BCE). Elsewhere, ED I is contemporary with the so-called Scarlet Ware (Diyala area), Ninevite 5 (Upper Mesopotamia) and the Proto-Elamite cultures (southwestern Iran).
During the ED II (2750/2700–2600 BCE), new artistic traditions developed in Lower Mesopotamia. These in turn influenced the surrounding regions. According to later Mesopotamian historical tradition, this was the time when famous kings such as Lugalbanda, Enmerkar, Gilgamesh of Uruk and Aga of Kish ruled over Mesopotamia. Archaeologically, this period has not been well attested to in excavations in southern Mesopotamia, leading some researchers to abandon it altogether.
ED III (2600–2350 BCE) saw an expansion in the use of writing and increasing social inequality. It is usually subdivided in ED IIIa (2600–2500/2450 BCE) and ED IIIb (2500/2450–2350 BCE). ED IIIa is the period of the Royal Cemetery at Ur and the archives of Fara and Abu Salabikh. The ED III is especially well-known through the archives of Girsu (part of Lagash) in Sumer and of Ebla in Syria. During this period, larger political entities developed in Upper Mesopotamia and southwestern Iran.
The end of the Early Dynastic period is not defined archaeologically, but politically. The conquests of Sargon of Akkad and his successors upset the political equilibrium in Mesopotamia, Syria and Elam. Their political impact is undeniable, especially because they lasted over many years into the reign of Naram-Sin of Akkad and because they built on ongoing conquests during the Early Dynastic period. On the other hand, the transition is much harder to pinpoint within an archaeological context; it is virtually impossible to date a site to either ED III or Akkadian based on ceramic or architectural evidence alone.
Each city-state was centered on a temple dedicated to the patron deity of its respective city-state and ruled over by both/either a king ("lugal") and/or a priestly governor ("énsí"). Kingship was seen as handed down by the deities, and could be transferred from one city-state to another (reflecting perceived hegemony in the region). Hegemony (which came to be conferred by the Nippur priesthood) alternated among a number of competing dynasties, hailing from Sumerian city-states traditionally including: Eridu, Bad-tibira, Larsa, Sippar, Shuruppak, Kish, Uruk, Ur, Adab and Akshak, additionally; some from outside of the Tigris-Euphrates river system in Iraq such as: Hamazi, Awan (believed to have been located in present-day Iran), and Mari (which lies in present-day Syria, but which is credited on the SKL as having "exercised kingship" during the ED II period.)
There are different theories regarding the meaning of the title "lugal" during the ED Period. Some scholars believe that a ruler of an individual city-state was usually referred to as the "énsí" of that city-state, additionally; the ruler of a confederacy or dominion composed of multiple city-states (perhaps even the whole of Sumer) may have been referred to as the "lugal". A lugal during this time has been assumed to have been, "normally a young man of outstanding qualities from a rich landowning family." Renowned scholar Thorkild Jacobsen theorized that a "lugal" was originally an elected war leader, as opposed to the likewise elected "en" (who dealt with internal issues.) The functions of such a lugal would include: military defense against enemies, arbitration in border disputes, along with certain ceremonial and cultic activities. Once the lugal died, the eldest son of the lugal would become the successor. Among the earliest rulers whose inscriptions refer to them as "lugals" are: both Enmebaragesi and Mesilim of Kish, additionally; Meskalamdug, Mesannepada, and several of Mesannepada's successors at Ur.
Jacobsen used Sumerian epics, myths, and historical records to identify what he referred to as a primitive democracy. Jacobsen described a government in which ultimate power rested with the mass of free male citizens, however; he added, "the various functions of government are as yet little specialised [and] the power structure is loose." Kings such as Gilgamesh of the First Dynasty of Uruk did not appear to hold the autocratic power that later Mesopotamian rulers wielded. Rather, major city-states functioned with both councils of elders and “young men” (likely free men bearing arms) that possessed the final political authority, and had to be consulted on all major issues such as war. Although pioneering in nature, the work has invoked little serious discussion and gained little outright acceptance. Scholars criticized the use of the word "democracy" in this context since the same evidence can also be interpreted convincingly to demonstrate a power struggle between primitive monarchs and noble classes (a struggle in which the common people function more like pawns rather than any kind of sovereign authority.) Jacobsen conceded that the vagueness of the evidence prohibits the separation between the Mesopotamian democracy from a primitive oligarchy.
"Lugal" (Sumerian: 𒈗, as a Sumerogram is a ligature of two signs: "𒃲" meaning "big" or "great" while "𒇽" means "man"; a Sumerian language title translated into the English language as either "king" or "ruler") was one of the three titles that a ruler of a Sumerian city-state could bear (alongside both: "EN" and "énsí", the exact difference being a subject of debate.) The sign for "lugal" eventually became the predominant logograph for "king" in general. In the Sumerian language, "lugal" could have been used to mean either "owner" (such as the owner of a boat or a field) or "head" (such as the head of a unit or a family.) The cuneiform sign for "lugal" serves as a determinative in cuneiform texts, indicating that the following word would be the name of the king.
There are different theories regarding the meaning of the title "lugal" during the ED Period of Mesopotamia. Some scholars believe that a ruler of an individual city-state was usually referred to as the "énsí" of that city-state, additionally; the ruler of a confederacy or dominion composed of multiple city-states (perhaps even the whole of Sumer) may have been referred to as the "lugal". A lugal during this time has been assumed to have been, "normally a young man of outstanding qualities from a rich landowning family." Jacobsen theorized that a "lugal" was originally an elected war leader, as opposed to the likewise elected "en" (who dealt with internal issues.) The functions of such a lugal would include: military defense against enemies, arbitration in border disputes, along with certain ceremonial and cultic activities. Once the lugal died, the eldest son of the lugal would become the successor. Among the earliest rulers whose inscriptions refer to them as "lugals" are: both Enmebaragesi and Mesilim of Kish, additionally; Meskalamdug, Mesannepada, and several of Mesannepada's successors at Ur.
"Ensí" (Sumerian: ; meaning "Lord of the Plowland") is a Sumerian language title designating the ruler or prince of a city-state. The énsí was considered a representative of a city-state's patron deity. Ensí may have originally been a designation of the ruler restricted to the city-states of Lagash and Umma, however; in later periods the title presupposed subordinance to a lugal. Although an énsí may have normally been seen as subordinate to a lugal, nevertheless; some rulers of the Second Dynasty of Lagash were satisfied with the title “énsí”. Interestingly, the énsís of the city-state Lagash would sometimes refer to their city's patron deity (Ningirsu) as their “lugal”.
"EN" (Sumerian: 𒂗; Sumerian cuneiform for "lord" or "priest") seems to have originally been used to designate a high priest or priestess of a Sumerian city-state's patron deity — a position that entailed political power as well. It may also have been the original title of the ruler of Uruk. All of the above is connected to the possibly priestly or sacral character of both of the titles "énsí" and especially "en" (the latter term continued to designate priests in subsequent times.) Other scholars consider ensi, en and lugal to have merely been three local designations for the sovereign, accepted respectively in the city-states: Lagash, Uruk and Ur (although the various terms may have expressed different aspects of the Mesopotamian concept of kingship.)
Sumer was divided into about thirteen independent city-states (which were divided by canals and boundary stones) during its ED Period. According to the SKL, the first five city-states (listed alongside their principal temple complexes and the gods they served) to have exercised kingship before the "Flood" were:
|City-state||Archaeological site||Principle temple complex||Patron deity|
|1.||Eridu||Tell Abu Shahrain||E-abzu||Enki|
|2.||Bad-tibira||Tell al-Madain||E-mush||Dumuzi and Inana|
|4.||Sippar||Tell Abu Habbah||E-babbar||Utu|
The next seven city-states to have exercised kingship after the Flood were:
|City-state||Archaeological site||Principle temple complex||Patron deity|
|6.||Kish||Tell Uheimir and Ingharra||?||Ninhursag|
|7.||Uruk||E-anna district, Bit Resh (Kullaba), and Irigal||E-anna||Inana and An|
|12.||Mari 3||Tell Hariri||?||Mer|
1 (The exact location of this city-state is uncertain, but is probably somewhere in what is today referred to as the "Islamic Republic of Iran".)
2 (The exact location of this city-state is uncertain, but is probably somewhere in what is today referred to as the "Republic of Iraq".)
3 (The location of this city-state is at an outlying archaeological site in the territory of what is today referred to as the "Syrian Arab Republic".)
Uruk (one of Sumer's largest city-states) has been estimated to have had a population of 50,000 — 80,000 at its height. Given the other city-states in Sumer (and its large agricultural population), a rough estimate for Sumer's population might have been somewhere between 800,000 — 1,500,000. The global human population at this time has been estimated to having been about 27,000,000. Permanent year-round urban settlement may have been prompted by intensive agricultural practices. The work required in maintaining irrigation canals called for, and the resulting surplus food enabled, relatively concentrated populations. The centers of Eridu and Uruk (two of the earliest cities) had successively elaborated large temple complexes built out of mudbrick. Developing as small shrines with the earliest settlements, by the ED I period, they had become the most imposing structures in their respective cities, each dedicated to its own respective god. The earliest cities in history appear in the ancient Near East. The area of the ancient Near East covers roughly that of the modern Middle East; its history begins in the 4th millennium BCE. The largest cities of the Bronze Age Near East housed several tens of thousands. Ur in the Middle Bronze Age is estimated to have had some 65,000 inhabitants. The KI 𒆠 determinative was the Sumerian term for a city or city state.
|City-state||2800 BCE||2600 BCE||2500 BCE||2300 BCE|
Northern Mesopotamia and central-western Syria
At the beginning of the third millennium BCE, the Ninevite V culture flourishes in Northern Mesopotamia and the region of the Middle Euphrates. It extends from Yorghan Tepe (later Nuzi) in the east to the Khabur Triangle in the west. Ninevite V is contemporary with ED I and marks an important step in the urbanization of the region, but remains archaeologically poorly known. It seems as if this period was characterized by some sort of decentralisation, reflected by the absence of the kind of large monumental buildings and complex administrative systems that had existed at the end of the fourth millennium BCE.
Starting in 2700 BCE, and accelerating after 2500, the main urban sites grew considerably in size and were surrounded by towns and villages that fell inside their political sphere of influence. This indicates that the area was home to many political entities. Many sites in northern Mesopotamia (for example Tell Chuera and Tell Beydar) share a similar layout: a main tell surrounded by a circular lower town. German archaeologist Max von Oppenheim called them Kranzhügel, or “cup-and-saucer-hills”. Among the important sites of this period are Tell Brak (Nagar), Tell Mozan, Tell Leilan and Chagar Bazar in the Jezirah and Mari on the middle Euphrates.
Urbanization is also increasing in western Syria, notably after the middle of the third millennium. At sites like Tell Banat, Tell Hadidi, Umm el-Marra, Qatna, Ebla, Al-Rawda state structures are developing, as evidenced by the written documentation of Ebla. Substantial monumental architecture such as palaces, temples and monumental tombs appears in this period, and there is evidence for the existence of a rich and powerful local elite.
The two cities of Mari and Ebla dominate the historical record for this region. According to the excavator of Mari, the circular city on the middle Euphrates was founded ex nihilo at the time of the Early Dynastic I period in southern Mesopotamia. Mari was one of the main cities of the Middle East during this period, and it fought many wars with Ebla during the 24th century BCE. The archives of Ebla, capital of a powerful kingdom during the ED IIIb period, indicate that writing and the state were well-developed, contrary to what had been believed about this area before its discovery. However, few buildings from this period have been excavated at the site of Ebla itself.
The territories of these kingdoms were much larger than in southern Mesopotamia. Population density, however, was much lower than in the south, and subsistence agriculture and pastoralism were less intensive. Towards the west, agriculture takes on more “Mediterranean” aspects: cultivation of olive and grape were very important in Ebla. Sumerian influence was notable in Mari and Ebla. At the same time, these regions with a Semitic population shared characteristics with the Kish civilization, while also maintaining their own unique cultural traits.
Iranian plateau and beyond
In southwestern Iran, the first half of the Early Dynastic period corresponds with the Proto-Elamite period. This period is characterized by indigenous art and a script that has not yet been deciphered. This culture disappears toward the middle of the third millennium, to be replaced by a less sedentary way of life. Elaborate metallurgy developed in the Lorestan region. However, due to the absence of written evidence and a lack of archaeological excavations targeting this period, the socio-political situation of southwestern Iran is not well-understood for this period. The Mesopotamian texts indicate that the Sumerian kings dealt with political entities in this area. For example, legends relating to the kings of Uruk refer to conflicts with Aratta, an as yet unidentified kingdom that might have been located in southwestern Iran. In the middle third millennium, Elam emerged as a powerful political entity in the area of southern Lorestan and northern Khuzestan. Susa (level IV) was a central place in Elam and an important gateway between southwestern Iran and southern Mesopotamia. Hamazi was located in the Zagros Mountains to the north of Elam, possibly between the Great Zab and the Diyala River, near Halabja. The powerful polity of Hamazi appeared toward the end of the third millennium BCE, possibly east of Elam. This is also the area where the still largely unknown Jiroft culture emerged in the third millennium, as evidenced by excavation and looting of archaeological sites. The areas further north and east were important participants in the international trade of this period due to the presence of tin (central Iran and the Hindu Kush) and lapis lazuli (Turkmenistan and northern Afghanistan). Settlements such as Tepe Sialk, Tureng Tepe, Tepe Hissar, Namazga-Tepe, Altyndepe, Shahr-e Sukhteh and Mundigak served as local exchange and production centres, but were apparently not the capitals of larger political entities.
With the further development of maritime trade in the Persian Gulf, contacts between souther Mesopotamia and other regions increased. From the previous period onward, the area of modern-day Oman, known in ancient texts as Magan, had seen the development of the oasis settlement system. This system relied on irrigation agriculture in areas with perennial springs. Magan thanked its position in the trade network to its copper deposits. These were located in the mountains, notably near Hili, where copper workshops and monumental tombs testifying to the area’s affluence have been excavated. Further to the west was an area called Dilmun, in later periods corresponding to modern Bahrain. However, while Dilmun was mentioned in contemporary ED texts, no sites from this period have been excavated there. This may indicate that Dilmun may have rather indicated the coastal areas serving as a place of transit for the maritime trade network. The maritime trade in the Gulf extended as far east as the Indian subcontinent, where the Indus Valley Civilisation flourished. This trade intensified during the third millennium and reached its peak during the Akkadian and Ur III periods.
Code of Urukagina
The énsi Urukagina of the city-state of Lagash is best known for his reforms to combat corruption (the "Code of Urukagina" is sometimes cited as the earliest known example of a legal code in recorded history.) The Code of Urukagina has also been widely hailed as the first recorded example of government reform, seeking to achieve a higher level of freedom and equality. Although the actual "Code of Urukagina" text has yet to be discovered, much of its content may be surmised from other references to it that have been found. In the Code of Urukagina: Urukagina exempted widows and orphans from taxes, compelled the city to pay funeral expenses (including the ritual food and drink libations for the journey of the dead into the lower world), and decreed that the rich had to use silver when purchasing from the poor, and if the poor does not wish to sell, the powerful man (the rich man or the priest) cannot force him to do so. The Code of Urukagina: limited the power of both the priesthood and large property owners, took measures against usury, burdensome controls, hunger, theft, murder, and seizure (of people's property and persons); as Urukagina stated: "The widow and the orphan were no longer at the mercy of the powerful man."
Despite these apparent attempts to curb the excesses of the elite class, it seems elite or royal women enjoyed even greater influence and prestige in Urukagina's reign than previously. Urukagina greatly expanded the royal "Household of Women" from about 50 persons to about 1,500 persons, then renamed it to "Household of Goddess Bau", gave it ownership of vast amounts of land confiscated from the former priesthood, and placed it under the supervision of Urukagina's wife (Shasha, or Shagshag.) During the second year of Urukagina's reign, his wife presided over the lavish funeral of his predecessor's queen (Baranamtarra, who had been an important personage in her own right.)
In addition to such changes, two of Urukagina's other surviving decrees (first published and translated by Samuel Kramer in 1964) have attracted controversy in recent decades:
- Urukagina seems to had abolished the former custom of polyandry in his country, on pain of the woman taking multiple husbands being stoned with rocks upon which her crime was written.
- In a statute where it was written: "If a woman says [text illegible...] to a man, her mouth is crushed with burnt bricks."
No comparable laws from Urukagina addressing penalties for adultery by men have survived. The discovery of these fragments has led some modern critics to assert that they provide: "The first written evidence of the degradation of women."
Imports to Ur were being exported from many parts of the world. Discoveries of goods from far-away locations such as: obsidian from Anatolia, lapis lazuli from Badakhshan, beads from the Dilmun civilization, and seals inscribed with the script from the Indus Valley civilization suggest a remarkably wide-ranging network of ancient trade centered on the Persian Gulf. Metals of all types had to be imported. Both Sumerian masons and jewelers knew and made use of: gold, silver, lapiz lazuli, chlorite, ivory, iron, and carnelian. The Epic of Gilgamesh referred to trade with far lands for goods (such as Lebanon cedar wood, which was scarce in Mesopotamia.) The finding of resin in the tomb of Queen Puabi at Ur, indicates that resin was traded from as far away as Mozambique. Sumerian potters decorated pots with cedar oil paints. The potters used a bow drill to produce the fire needed for baking the pottery.
Imports to the city-state of Ur reflected the cultural and trade connections of the Sumerian city. During the ED III Period, Ur was importing elite goods from geographically distant places. These objects included: precious metals (such as: gold, sliver) and semi-precious stones (such as: lapis lazuli and carnelian.) These objects were all the more impressive considering the distance from which they traveled to reach Mesopotamia (and the city-state of Ur, specifically.) Mesopotamia was very well-suited for the agricultural production of plants and animals, however; was lacking in: metals, minerals and stones.
The combination of these means of transportation allowed access to a vast trading network connecting distant places. Most of the gold known from archaeological contexts during the ED Period of Mesopotamia is concentrated at the Royal Cemetery of Ur. Textual evidence indicates that gold was reserved for prestige and religious functions. It was gathered in: royal treasuries and temples, and used for the adornment of the elites as well as for the elites' funerary offerings (such as: at the graves of the Royal Cemetery of Ur.) Gold was used for: personal ornaments, weapons, tools, sheet-metal cylinder seals, fluted bowls, goblets, imitation cockle shells, and sculptures.
Silver was mainly used for uncoined currency, however; it was also used for objects (which is the state in which silver is found at the Royal Cemetery of Ur.) Silver was used for objects including: belts, vessels, hair ornaments, pins, weapons, cockle shells, and sculptures. There are very few literary references to sources for silver. It is also difficult to identify the actual origin of the silver and the mines from those areas in which the majority of trade occurred. Because silver was used as currency it is even more difficult to pinpoint an area of origination due to its vast circulation.
Lapis lazuli is the best-known and well-documented gemstone at the city-state of Ur and in Mesopotamia in general. In the Royal Cemetery of Ur, lapis lazuli was discovered to have been used for: jewelry, plaques, gaming boards, lyres, ostrich-egg vessels, and also used for parts of a larger sculptural group referred to as the “Ram in a Thicket”. Some of the larger objects included: a spouted cup, a dagger-hilt, and a whetstone. Because of its prestige and value, lapiz lazuli played a special role in cult practices and the term "lapis-like" is a commonly-occurring metaphor for unusual wealth and as an attribute used to described both deities and heroes. It has commonly been found associated alongside gold.
During the ED Period, chlorite stone artifacts were very popular (and thus traded very widely.) Chlorite stone artifacts included: disc beads, ornaments, and stone vases. These carved dark stone vessels have been found in ancient archaeological sites across all of Mesopotamia. They rarely exceeded twenty-five centimeters in height, and may have been filled with precious oils. They often carried both human and animal motifs inlaid with semi-precious stones.
Sumerian King List
None of the following pre-dynastic antediluvian rulers have been verified as historical via archaeological excavations, epigraphical inscriptions, or otherwise. While there is no evidence they ever reigned as such, the Sumerians purported them to have lived in the mythical era before the "Flood". The antediluvian reigns were measured in Sumerian numerical units known as "sars" (units of 3600), "ners" (units of 600), and "sosses" (units of 60.) Early dates are approximate, and are based on available archaeological data; for most pre-Sargonic rulers listed, the "Sumerian King List" (SKL) is itself the lone source of information. The SKL is an ancient manuscript originally recorded in the Sumerian language, listing kings of Sumer from both Sumerian and neighboring dynasties, their supposed reign lengths, and the locations of kingship. Throughout its Bronze Age existence, the document evolved into a political tool. Its final and single attested version, dating to the Middle Bronze Age, aimed to legitimize Isin's claims to hegemony when Isin was vying for dominance with Larsa and other neighboring city-states in Lower Mesopotamia.
The SKL blends prehistorical, presumably mythical pre-dynastic rulers enjoying implausibly lengthy reigns with later, more plausibly historical dynasties. Although the primal kings are historically unattested, this does not preclude their possible correspondence with historical rulers who were later mythicized. Some Assyriologists view the predynastic kings as a later fictional addition. Only one ruler listed is known to be female: Kug-Bau, “the (female) tavern-keeper,” who alone accounts for the Third Dynasty of Kish. The earliest listed ruler whose historicity has been archaeologically verified is Enmebaragesi of Kish, c. 2600 BCE.
Reference to both Enmebaragesi of Kish and his successor (Aga of Kish) in the Epic of Gilgamesh has led to speculation that Gilgamesh himself may have been a historical king of Uruk. Three dynasties are absent from the list: the Larsa dynasty, which vied for power with the (included) Isin dynasty during the Isin-Larsa period; and the two dynasties of Lagash, which respectively preceded and ensued the Akkadian Empire, when Lagash exercised considerable influence in the region. Lagash in particular is known directly from archaeological artifacts dating from c. 2500 BCE. The SKL is important to the Bronze Age chronology of the ancient near east. However, the fact that many of the dynasties listed reigned simultaneously from varying localities makes it difficult to reproduce a strict linear chronology.
The following extant ancient sources contain the SKL (or fragments): the Apkullu-list, Babyloniaca, Dynastic Chronicle, Scheil dynastic tablet, California Tablet, WB 62, and Weld-Blundell Prism. The last two sources (WB 62 and Weld-Blundell Prism) are a part of the “Weld-Blundell collection” donated by Herbert Weld Blundell to the Ashmolean Museum. WB 62 is a small clay tablet, inscribed only on the obverse, unearthed from Larsa. It is the oldest dated source (c. 2000 BCE) containing the list. WB 444 in contrast is a unique inscribed vertical prism, dated c. 1817 BC, although some scholars prefer c. 1827 BC.
The mythological antediluvian section of the SKL has the following entry:
After the kingship descended from Heaven, the kingship was in Eridu. In Eridu, Alulim became king; he ruled for 28,800 years.
William H. Shea suggests that Alulim was a contemporary of the Biblical figure Adam (whose name and character may have been derived from "Adapa" of ancient Mesopotamian religion. In a chart of antediluvian generations in both Babylonian and Biblical traditions, professor William Wolfgang Hallo associated Alulim with Adapa. The earliest known use of the name "Adam" as a genuine name in historicity is "Adamu". The "Assyrian King List" stated that Tudiya (the earliest named Assyrian king) was succeeded by Adamu. The Assyriologist Georges Roux stated that Tudiya would have lived c. 2450 BCE — c. 2400 BCE.
The SKL has the following entries for Alulim's succesors:
Alalngar ruled for 36,000 years. 2 kings; they ruled for 64,800 years. Then Eridu fell and the kingship was taken to Bad-tibira. In Bad-tibira, En-men-lu-ana ruled for 43,200 years. En-men-gal-ana ruled for 28,800 years.
Dumuzid, the shepherd, ruled for 36,000 years.
However, in these tablets he is associated not with Bad-tibira but with Uruk, where a namesake ("Dumuzid, the Fisherman") was king sometime after the Flood (in between Lugalbanda and Gilgamesh.) Following Dumuzid (the Shepherd), the SKL has these entries:
3 kings; they ruled for 108,000 years. Then Bad-tibira fell and the kingship was taken to Larak. In Larak, En-sipad-zid-ana ruled for 28,800 years. 1 king; he ruled for 28,800 years. Then Larak fell and the kingship was taken to Sippar. In Sippar, En-men-dur-ana became king; he ruled for 21,000 years. 1 king; he ruled for 21,000 years. Then Sippar fell and the kingship was taken to Shuruppak. In Shuruppak, Ubara-Tutu became king; he ruled for 18,600 years. 1 king; he ruled for 18,600 years. In 5 cities 8 kings; they ruled for 241,200 years.
En-men-dur-ana's name means: "Chief of the Powers of Dur-an-ki" while "Dur-an-ki" (in turn) means: "The Meeting-Place of Heaven and Earth" (literally: "Bond of Above and Below".) A myth written in a Semitic language tells of En-men-dur-ana being taken to heaven by the gods Shamash and Adad, and taught the secrets of heaven and of earth.
The SKL has the following entry for the Flood:
Then the Flood swept over.
The SKL relied on the flood myth motif to divide its history into "pre-Flood" (antediluvian) and "post-Flood" (postdiluvian) periods. The pre-Flood kings had enormous lifespans, whereas post-Flood lifespans were much reduced. The Sumerian flood myth found in the Deluge tablet was the "Epic of Ziusudra". Ziusudra (recorded on the SKL versions: "WB-62" and "WB-67", also on ancient literature such as the: "Epic of Ziusudra” and "Eridu Genesis") reigned as both king and gudug priest for 10 "sars" (periods of 3,600 years), although; this was probably a copy error for 10 years. In this version, Ziusudra inherited from his father (father is named: Shuruppak, who ruled for 10 sars) the kingship of their home city (the city is likewise named: Shuruppak.)
The tale of Ziusudra is known from a single fragmentary tablet written in the Sumerian language (dated to c. 1700 BCE, and published in AD 1914 by Arno Poebel.) The tablet stated that the deities had decided to send a Flood to destroy mankind. The deity Enki then warned Ziusudra to build an ark. A terrible storm raged for seven days: "the huge boat had been tossed about on the great waters." Once the Flood was over, Ziusudra was given "breath eternal" by the deities An and Enlil.
Atra-Hasis was the protagonist of an epic poem, the "Epic of Atra-Hasis". A few general histories can be attributed to the Mesopotamian Atra-Hasis by ancient sources; these should generally be considered mythology but they do give an insight into the possible origins of the character. The "Epic of Gilgamesh" labeled Atra-Hasis as the son of Ubara-Tutu (king of Shuruppak) on Tablet XI, "Gilgamesh spoke to Utnapishtim (Atrahasis), the Faraway… O man of Shuruppak, son of Ubara-Tutu." The "Instructions of Shuruppak" instead labeled Atra-Hasis (under the name "Ziusudra") as the son of the eponymous "Shuruppak" (who was himself labeled as the son of "Ubara-Tutu".) At this point we are left with two possible fathers for Atra-Hasis: Ubara-Tutu and Shuruppak.
Ziusudra being a king from Shuruppak is supported by the Gilgamesh XI Tablet making reference to “Utnapishtim” (the Akkadian language translation of the Sumerian name "Ziusudra") with the epithet "man of Shuruppak" at line 23. On the eleventh tablet of the Babylonian "Epic of Gilgamesh", Utnapishtim was described as having been the wise king of the Sumerian city-state of Shuruppak (Utnapishtim, along with his unnamed wife, survived the Flood after having built the giant ship "The Preserver of Life".) Overcome with the death of his friend Enkidu, the hero of the epic (Gilgamesh) set out on a series of journeys to search for his ancestor (Utnapishtim) who lived at the mouth of the rivers. Utnapishtim counseled Gilgamesh to abandon his search for immortality but told him about a plant that could make him young again. Gilgamesh obtained the plant from the bottom of the sea in Dilmun, however; a serpent stole it, and Gilgamesh returned home to the city-state of Uruk having abandoned hope for both immortality and renewed youth.
An impact event theory suggests that a bolide hit the Indian Ocean c. 3000 BCE — c. 2800 BCE (suggested date for the impact event: 2807 BCE, based on a May 10 solar eclipse, and an analysis of flood stories), created the 19-mile-wide undersea Burckle Crater, the Fenambosy Chevron, and generated a megatsunami that flooded coastal lands. Excavations in Iraq have revealed evidence of localized flooding at the archaeological site of the ancient city-state Shuruppak and the sites of various other Sumerian city-states. A layer of riverine sediments (radiocarbon-dated to c. 2900 BCE) interrupted the continuity of settlement (extending as far north as the city-state of Kish) which took over hegemony after the Flood. Polychrome pottery from the Jemdet Nasr period (fl. c. 3000 BCE — c. 2900 BCE) was discovered immediately below the Shuruppak flood stratum, and the Jemdet Nasr Period immediately preceded the ED I Period. The city-state of Kish flourished in the ED Period soon after an archaeologically-attested river flood in Shuruppak and various other Sumerian city-states.
After a flood occurred in Sumer, kingship is said to have resumed at Kish. The earliest Dynastic name on the list known from other legendary sources is Etana, whom it calls "the shepherd, who ascended to heaven and consolidated all the foreign countries". He was estimated by Roux to have lived c. 3000 BCE. Among the 11 kings who followed, a number of Semitic Akkadian names are recorded, suggesting that these people made up a sizable proportion of the population of this northern city. The earliest monarch on the list whose historical existence has been independently attested through archaeological inscription is En-me-barage-si of Kish (c. 2600 BCE), said to have defeated Elam and built the temple of Enlil in Nippur. Enmebaragesi's successor, Aga, is said to have fought with Gilgamesh of Uruk, the fifth king of that city. From this time, for a period Uruk seems to have had some kind of hegemony in Sumer. This illustrates a weakness of the Sumerian kinglist, as contemporaries are often placed in successive dynasties, making reconstruction difficult.
The SKL has the following entry for the Second Dynasty of Kish:
In Kish, Susuda, the fuller, became king; he ruled for 201 years. Dadasig ruled for 81 years. Mamagal, the boatman, ruled for 360 years. Kalbum, the son of Mamagal ruled for 195 years. Tuge ruled for 360 years. Men-nuna, the son of Tuge, ruled for 180 years. …… ruled for 290 years. Lugalgnu ruled for 360 years. 8 kings; they ruled for 3195 years. Then Kish was defeated and the kingship was taken to Ḫamazi.
The SKL has the following entry for the Third Dynasty of Kish:
In Kish, Kubaba, the woman tavern-keeper, who made firm the foundations of Kish, became king; she ruled for 100 years. 1 king; she ruled for 100 years. Then Kish was defeated and the kingship was taken to Akshak.
Kubaba of the Third Dynasty of Kish is the only queen on the SKL (the SKL stated that she reigned for 100 years.) The SKL adds that she had been a tavern keeper following the defeat of Sharrumiter of the First Dynasty of Mari. Most versions of the SKL placed her alone in the Third Dynasty of Kish. However, other versions combined the Third Dynasty of Kish with the Fourth Dynasty of Kish. The Third Dynasty of Kish was preceded by the First Dynasty of Akshak (which was then succeeded by the Fourth Dynasty of Kish.)
The Weidner Chronicle (also known as: the Esagila Chronicle) is a religious text written in ancient Babylonia and also referred to Kubaba as "Kugbaba". In fact, it is not a chronicle but a piece of propaganda in the form of a letter, although it contains after line thirty-one a part that resembles a chronicle. The presumed author (the author was possibly King Damiq-ilisu of Isin) wrote to King Apil-Sin of Babylon about the blessings that the gods bestowed upon earlier rulers who sacrificed to the supreme god Marduk in the Esagila shrine of Babylon. Most of the kings named on the Weidner Chronicle fl. c. 3000 BCE — c. 2000 BCE (when Babylon and the shrine probably did not exist.) It contains a brief account of rise of: "the House of Kubaba" occurring during the reign of Puzur-Nirah of the First Dynasty Akshak:
In the reign of Puzur-Nirah, king of Akšak, the freshwater fishermen of Esagila were catching fish for the meal of the great lord Marduk; the officers of the king took away the fish. The fisherman was fishing when 7 (or 8) days had passed [...] in the house of Kubaba, the tavern-keeper [...] they brought to Esagila. At that time BROKEN anew for Esagila [...] Kubaba gave bread to the fisherman and gave water, she made him offer the fish to Esagila. Marduk, the king, the prince of the Apsû, favored her and said: "Let it be so!" He entrusted to Kubaba, the tavern-keeper, sovereignty over the whole world. (lines 38-45)
The SKL has the following entry for the Fourth Dynasty of Kish:
In Kish, Puzur-Suen, the son of Kubaba, became king; he ruled for 25 years. Ur-Zababa, the son of Puzur-Suen, ruled for 4 years. 131 are the years of the dynasty of Kubaba. Zimudar ruled for 30 years. Usi-watar, the son of Zimudar, ruled for 6 years. Eštar-muti ruled for 17 years. Išme-Šamaš ruled for 11 years. Šu-ilīšu ruled for 15 years. Nanniya, the jeweller, 3 years. 8 kings; they ruled for 586 years. Then Kish was defeated and the kingship was returned a third time to Uruk.
Ur-Zababa's mother is unknown. It is known that King Lugal-zage-si of the Third Dynasty of Uruk destroyed Kish toward the end of his reign, before he was himself deposed by Sargon the Great of the Akkadian Empire. It is often assumed that Sargon also played a role in Ur-Zababa's downfall, but the relevant texts are too fragmentary to be explicit. Ur-Zababa's successors in Kish as named on the SKL (beginning with Zimudar) seem to have been vassals of Sargon the Great, and there is no evidence that they ever exercised hegemony in Sumer.
Mesh-ki-ang-gasher is listed as the first King of Uruk. He was followed by Enmerkar. The epic Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta tells of his voyage by river to Aratta, a mountainous, mineral-rich country up-river from Sumer. He was followed by Lugalbanda, also known from fragmentary legends, and then by Dumuzid, the Fisherman. The most famous monarch of this dynasty was Dumuzid's successor Gilgamesh, hero of the Epic of Gilgamesh, where he is called Lugalbanda's son. Ancient, fragmentary copies of this text have been discovered in locations as far apart as Hattusas in Anatolia, Megiddo in Israel, and Tell el Amarna in Egypt.
Enshakushanna was a king of Uruk in the later 3rd millennium BCE who is named on the Sumerian king list, which states his reign to have been 60 years. He was succeeded in Uruk by Lugal-kinishe-dudu, but the hegemony seems to have passed briefly to Eannatum of Lagash.
The SKL has the following entry for the Third Dynasty of Uruk:
In Uruk, Lugal-zage-si became king; he ruled for 25 years. 1 king; he ruled for 25 years. Then Uruk was defeated and the kingship was taken to Akkad.
King Urukagina of the First Dynasty of Lagash (fl. c. 2359 BCE — c. 2335 BCE short chronology timeline of the ancient near east) was overthrown and his city Lagash captured by Lugal-zage-si (lugal-zag-ge4-si = LUGAL.ZAG.GI4.SI 𒈗𒍠𒄄𒋛; frequently spelled Lugalzaggesi, sometimes Lugalzagesi or "Lugal-Zaggisi"), the high priest of Umma. Lugal-zage-si began his career as énsi of Umma, from where he conquered several of the Sumerian city-states including: Kish (where he overthrew Ur-Zababa), Lagash (where he overthrew Urukagina), Ur, Nippur, Larsa, Uruk, where Lugal-zage-si established the capital city of his empire. In a long inscription that Lugal-zage-si of Uruk made engraved on hundreds of stone vases dedicated to the deity Enlil of the city-state Nippur, he boasted that his kingdom extended: “from the Lower Sea, along the Tigris and Euphrates, to the Upper Sea" (or, “from the Persian Gulf, along the Tigris river and Euphrates river, to the Mediterranean Sea.”) Although his incursion to the Mediterranean Sea was (in the eyes of some modern scholars) not much more than “a successful raiding party” the inscription: “marks the first time that a Sumerian prince claimed to have reached what was, for them, the western edge of the world.” Sargon of the Akkadian Empire captured Lugal-zage-si after destroying the walls of Uruk, then led Lugal-zage-si in a neck-stock to Enlil's temple in Nippur (according to later Babylonian versions of Sargon's inscriptions.)
This dynasty is dated to the 26th century BCE. Meskalamdug is the first archaeologically recorded king (Lugal from lu=man, gal=big) of the city of Ur. He was succeeded by his son Akalamdug, and Akalamdug by his son Mesh-Ane-pada. Mesh-Ane-pada is the first king of Ur listed on the king list, and it says he defeated Lugalkildu of Uruk. He also seems to have subjected Kish, thereafter assuming the title "King of Kish" for himself. This title would be used by many kings of the preeminent dynasties for some time afterward. King Mesilim of Kish is known from inscriptions from Lagash and Adab stating that he built temples in those cities, where he seems to have held some influence. He is also mentioned in some of the earliest monuments from Lagash as arbitrating a border dispute between Lugal-sha-engur, ensi (high priest or governor) of Lagash, and the ensi of their main rival, the neighbouring town of Umma. Mesilim's placement before, during, or after the reign of Mesannepada in Ur is uncertain, owing to the lack of other synchronous names in the inscriptions, and his absence from the king list.
The SKL has the following entry for the Second Dynasty of Ur:
In Ur, Nanni became king; he ruled for 54 years. Meš-ki-aĝ-Nanna, the son of Nanni, ruled for 48 years. ……, the son of ……, ruled for 2 years. 3 kings; they ruled for 120 years. Then Ur was defeated and the kingship was taken to Adab.
This dynasty is dated to the 26th century BCE. According to the Sumerian king list, Elam, Sumer's neighbor to the east, held the kingship in Sumer for a brief period, based in the city of Awan.
The First Dynasty of Lagash (flourished circa 2500 BCE — circa 2271 BCE) is not mentioned in the SKL, though it is well known from inscriptions. One extremely fragmentary supplement has been found written with the Sumerian cuneiform script (written as “the rulers of Lagash”.) This fragmentary supplement recounts how after the Flood mankind was having difficulty growing food for itself, being dependent solely on rainwater; it further relates that techniques of irrigation and cultivation of barley were then imparted by the gods. At the end of the list is the statement: “Written in the school,” suggesting this list was written in a scribal school production. A few of the names from the Lagash rulers listed below may be made out, including: Enhengal, Lugal-sha-engur, Ur-Nanshe, Akurgal, Eannatum, En-anna-tum I, Entemena, Enanatum II, Enentarzid, Lugalanda, and Urukagina.
En-hegal is the earliest known ruler of First Dynasty of Lagash. The city-state Lagash was (during En-hegal's reign) tributary to the city-state of Uruk. En-hegal was preceded by Lugalngu of the Second Dynasty of Kish. En-hegal was then succeeded by Lugal-sha-engur (also known as “Lugal-Suggur”.) Lagash was (during Lugal-sha-engur's reign) similarly tributary to Mesilim of the city-state of Kish.
Following the hegemony of Mesannepada of Ur, Ur-Nanshe succeeded Lugal-sha-engur as the new high priest of Lagash and achieved independence, (making himself the first king of an independent Lagash during the ED III.) Ur-Nanshe was succeeded by his son Akurgal. Eannatum (grandson of Ur-Nanshe) made himself master of Sumer. Eannatum was succeeded by his brother, En-anna-tum I. During En-anna-tum I's rule, Lagash was unsuccessfully attacked by Ur-Lumma as Umma once more asserted independence.
En-anna-tum I's son and successor (Entemena) restored the prestige of Lagash after Illi of Umma's attack on Lagash. With the help of Entemena's ally in the city-state of Uruk (Lugal-kinishe-dudu), Entemena defeated Illi of Umma. Lugal-kinishe-dudu of Uruk seems to have been the prominent figure at the time, since he also claimed to rule Kish and Ur. A silver vase dedicated by Entemena to his god is now in the Louvre. A series of weak, corrupt priest-kings is attested for Lagash after Entemana's reign: En-anna-tum II, Enentarzid, and Lugalanda.
Lugalanda (also known as: Lugal-anda) was a Sumerian king of the First Dynasty of Lagash. Lugalanda was appointed as king by his father (who was the high priest of Lagash.) All documents mentioning the reign of Lugalanda described him as a wealthy and corrupt king. After nine years in power, Lugalanda was overthrown by Urukagina. Urukagina was known for his judicial, social, and economic reforms, and his reign may well be the first legal code known to have existed.
The SKL has the following entry for the First Dynasty of Hamazi:
In Hamazi, Hadanish became king; he ruled for 360 years. 1 king; he ruled for 360 years. Then Hamazi was defeated and the kingship was returned a second time to Uruk.
Following this period, the region of Mesopotamia seems to have come under the sway of a Sumerian conqueror from Adab, Lugal-Ane-mundu, ruling over Uruk, Ur, and Lagash. According to inscriptions, he ruled from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean, and up to the Zagros Mountains, including Elam. However, his empire fell apart with his death; the king-list indicates that Mari in Upper Mesopotamia was the next city to hold the hegemony.
The SKL has the following entry for the First Dynasty of Mari:
In Mari, Anbu became king; he ruled for 30 years. Anba, the son of Anbu, ruled for 17 years. Bazi, the leatherworker, ruled for 30 years. Zizi, the fuller, ruled for 20 years. Limer, the gudug priest, ruled for 30 years. Šarrum-īter ruled for 9. 6 kings; they ruled for 136 years. Then Mari was defeated and the kingship was taken to Kish.
The SKL recorded a dynasty of six kings between the two Sumerian dynasties of the city-states Adab and Kish centered at the capital city of the First Mariote Kingdom, Mari. Archaeologist Georges Dossin noted that the name of city-state "Mari" was spelled identically to the name of an ancient storm deity of Upper Mesopotamia who was considered the patron deity of the city-state and thus Dossin concluded that the city was named after the deity. Mari is not considered a small settlement that later grew, however; it was instead a planned city that was built by the Sumerians during the ED I c. 2900 BCE (as a method of controlling the trade routes connecting Sumer to the Levant along the Euphrates river's waterways.) The city of Mari was built about one to two kilometers away from the Euphrates river to protect the city against flooding, and the city was also connected to the river with an artificial canal that was between seven and ten kilometers long (the canal's length depends on which old meander it used to be attached with, which is hard to identify today.) Mari is difficult to excavate as it is buried deep under later layers of habitation, however; a defensive system has already been unearthed at the present-day archaeological site of Mari which includes: a circular embankment (the circular embankment defended the city against floods), an outer embankment which had a height of eight to ten meters (the outer embankment was strengthened by defensive towers), a circular 6.7-meter-thick inner rampart (the inner rampart defended the city against its enemies), and an area 300 meters long filled with gardens and craftsmen quarters (the garden-filled area separated the outer embankment from the inner rampart.)
The site of Mari was abandoned at the end of the ED II (c. 2550 BCE) for reasons unknown. Around the beginning of the ED III (c. 2500 BCE), the site was revived and subsequently repopulated to be transformed into the capital city of a prosperous political center and great power of Mesopotamia: Second Mariote Kingdom. The kings of the Second Mariote Kingdom held the title of "lugal". An important source of information for the Second Mariote Kingdom is the letter of king Enna-Dagan (dated to c. 2350 BCE) which was sent to Irkab-Damu of Ebla (in the letter the Mariote king mentioned his predecessors and their military achievements.) However, the reading of this letter is still problematic and many interpretations have been presented by scholars.
The SKL has the following entry for the First Dynasty of Akshak:
In Akshak, Unzi became king; he ruled for 30 years. Undalulu ruled for 6 years. Urur ruled for 6 years. Puzur-Niraḫ ruled for 20 years. Išu-Il ruled for 24 years. Šu-Suen, the son of Išu-Il, ruled for 7 years. 6 kings; they ruled for 99 years. Then Akšak was defeated and the kingship was taken to Kish.
King Enshakushanna (he adopted the Sumerian title en ki-en-gi lugal kalam-ma, which may be translated as "Lord of Sumer and King of all the Land", or possibly as "En of the Region of Uruk and Lugal of the Region of Ur", and could correspond to the later title lugal ki-en-gi ki-uri "King of Sumer and Akkad" that eventually came to signify kingship over Mesopotamia as a whole) of the Second Dynasty of Uruk is recorded as having plundered the city-state Akshak. King Eannatum of the First Dynasty of Lagash became embroiled in a war against the city-state of Akshak, where one inscription has Eannatum claim that he had King Zuzu of Akshak smitten after Akshak was captured. King Puzur-Nirah of the First Dynasty of Akshak is mentioned in the Weidner Chronicle as having reigned when Queen Kubaba of the Third Dynasty of Kish was appointed overlordship over Sumer. King Lugal-zage-si of the Third Dynasty of Uruk defeated Akshak c. 2350 BCE.
Sargon the Great of the Akkadian Empire may have played a role in Ur-Zababa's downfall. Sargon then had the army of Kish follow him to attack Uruk (leading into the "Battle of Uruk" — one of the decisive battles which allowed Sargon to subdue Sumer and bring it under his control.) The defenders seem to have fled Uruk and joined with an army led by fifty ensis of other Sumerian provinces (which were under the leadership of king Lugal-zage-si) to fight against Sargon. This Sumerian force fought two pitched battles against Sargon, as a result of which the remaining forces of Lugal-zage-si were routed. Lugal-zage-si himself was captured and taken to Nippur; Sargon inscribed on the pedestal of a statue (preserved in a later tablet) that he brought Lugal-zage-si "in a dog collar to the gate of Enlil."
There is considerable evidence that the Sumerian people loved music (which seems to have been an important part of religious and civic life in Sumer.) Lyres were popular in Sumer, among the best-known examples being: the "Lyres of Ur". "The Lyres of Ur" (also known as the: "Harps of Ur") are considered to be the world's oldest surviving stringed instruments. British archaeologist Leonard Woolley led a team of archaeologists to excavate the Royal Cemetery of Ur between 1922 — 1934 which led to the discovery of the instruments. They discovered pieces of three lyres and one harp in the archaeological site for the city-state of Ur (located in what was Sumer and is today Iraq.)
The lyres are over 4,500 years old (from the ED III Period.) The decorations on the lyres are fine examples of the art of Mesopotamia during the ED III Period. Woolley discovered the lyres among the bodies of ten women in the Royal Cemetery at Ur (the lyres were discovered in the year 1929.) One body was even said to be laying against the lyre with her skeletal hand placed where the strings would have been. Upon this discovery, Woolley was quick to pour in a liquid plaster to recover the delicate form of the wooden frame.
Examples of inlay have been found at several sites, using materials such as nacre (mother of pearl), white and coloured limestone, lapis lazuli and marble. Bitumen was used to attach the inlay in wooden frames, but these have not survived in the archaeological record. The inlay-panels usually showed mythological or historical scenes. Like bas-reliefs, these panels allow the reconstruction of early forms of narrative art. However, this type of work seems to have been abandoned in subsequent periods.
The best preserved inlaid object is the Standard of Ur, found in one of the royal tombs of this city, which represents two principal scenes on its two sides: a battle and a banquet that probably follows a military victory. The "dairy frieze" found at Tell al-`Ubaid represents, as its name suggests, dairy activities (milking cows, cowsheds, preparing dairy products). It is the document that provides us with the most information on this type of practices in ancient Mesopotamia
Similar mosaic elements were discovered at Mari, where a mother-of-pearl engraver's workshop was identified, as well as at Ebla where marble fragments were found from a 3m-high panel decorating a room of the royal palace. The scenes of the two sites have strong similarities in their style and themes. In Mari the scenes are of military (a parade of prisoners) or religious (a ram’s sacrifice) nature. In Ebla, they show a military triumph and mythological animals.
- Pruß, Alexander (2004), "Remarks on the Chronological Periods", in Lebeau, Marc; Sauvage, Martin, Atlas of Preclassical Upper Mesopotamia, Subartu, 13, pp. 7–21, ISBN 2503991203
- Evans, Jean M. (2007), "The Square Temple at Tell Asmar and the Construction of Early Dynastic Mesopotamia, ca. 2900-2350 B.C.E.", American Journal of Archaeology, 111 (4): 599–632, doi:10.3764/aja.111.4.599, JSTOR 40025265
- Pollock, Susan (1999), Ancient Mesopotamia. The Eden that never was, Case Studies in Early Societies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 9780521575683
- Postgate, J.N. (1992), Early Mesopotamia. Society and Economy at the Dawn of History, London: Routledge, ISBN 9780415110327
- van de Mieroop, M. (2007), A History of the Ancient Near East, ca. 3000-323 BC, Malden: Blackwell, ISBN 0631225528
- Huot, Jean-Louis (2004), Une archéologie des peuples du Proche-Orient. Des peuples villageois aux cités-États (Xe-IIIe millénaire av. J.-C.), Paris: Errances
- Lormier, M. (2008), Stratigraphies comparées au IIIe millénaire au pays de Sumer. Études de cas de Kish, Nippur et des cités de la vallée de la Diyala, UVSQ
- Nissen, H. (1993). "Settlement Patterns and Material Culture in the Akkad Period: Continuity and Discontinuity". In Liverani, M. Akkad, the first World Empire: Structure, Ideology, Traditions. Padua. pp. 91–106.
- Gibson, McGuire; McMahon, A. (1995), "Investigation of the Early Dynastic-Akkadian Transition: Report of the 18th and 19th Seasons of Excavation in Area WF, Nippur", Iraq, 57: 1–39
- Matthews, D. (1997), "The Early Dynastic-Akkadian Transition Part I: When Did the Akkadian Period Begin?", Iraq, 59: 1–7
- Gibson, McGuire; McMahon, A. (1995), "The Early Dynastic-Akkadian Transition Part II: The Authors' Response", Iraq, 59: 1–14
- Van De Mieroop, Marc (2004). A History of the Ancient Near East. Blackwell. p. 41. ISBN 0-631-22552-8.
- Westenholz, Aage (2002), Hansen, Morgens Herman, ed., ""The Sumerian city-state" A comparative study of six city-state cultures: an investigation conducted by the Copenhagen Polis Center", Historisk-filosofiske Skrifter, Copenhagen: C.A. Reitzels Forlag, 23-42. (27): 34–35
- Plamen Rusev, Mesalim, Lugal Na Kish: Politicheska Istoriia Na Ranen Shumer (XXVIII-XXVI V. Pr. N. E.), Faber, 2001 (in Bulgarian) Mesalim, Lugal of Kish. Political History of Early Sumer (ХХVIII–ХХVI century BC.)
- Jacobsen, 1943, pp. 159–172
- Isakhan, B. (2007). Engaging "Primitive Democracy," Mideast Roots of Collective Governance. Middle East Policy, 14(3), 97–117.
- Bailkey, 1967, pp. 1211–1236
- Robinson, 1997, p. 20
- John Allan Halloran: Sumerian Lexicon. Logogram Publishing, Los Angeles (Cal.) 2006.
- Saggs, H. W. F. 1988, The Greatness That Was Babylon (revised edition)
- Horst Klengel (ed.): Kulturgeschichte des alten Vorderasiens. Akademie Verlag, Berlin 1989.
- Saggs, H. W. F. 1988, The Greatness That Was Babylon (revised edition)
- George, Andrew (1993), House Most High. The Temples of Ancient Mesopotamia (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns)
- Harmansah, Ömür, The Archaeology of Mesopotamia: Ceremonial centers, urbanization and state formation in Southern Mesopotamia, 2007, p.699
- Colin McEvedy and Richard Jones, 1978, Atlas of World Population History, Facts on File, New York, ISBN 0-7139-1031-3.
- Electronic Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary (EPSD)
- Archived May 20, 2007, at the Wayback Machine.
- Forest, Jean-Daniel (1996), Mésopotamie. L'apparition de l'État, VIIe-IIIe millénaires, Paris: Paris-Méditerranée
- Weiss, H.; Rova, E. (2003), The Origins of North Mesopotamian Civilization: Ninevite 5 Chronology, Economy, Society, Turnhout: Brepols
- Matney, T. (2012), "Northern Mesopotamia", in Potts, D.T., A Companion to the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Malden, pp. 562–564
- Genz, H. (2012), "The Northern Levant", in Potts, D.T., A Companion to the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Malden, pp. 613–621
- Benoit, Agnès (2003), Art et archéologie: les civilisations du Proche-Orient ancien, Manuels de l'école du Louvre, Paris: RMN
- Aruz, Joan (2003), Art of the first cities. The Third millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus, New Haven: The Metropolitan Museum of New York
- Margueron, J.-C. (2008), "Tell Hariri/Mari : Archéologie", Supplément au Dictionnaire de la Bible, 77–78: 35–48
- Matthiae, P. (1996), Aux origines de la Syrie, Ebla retrouvée, Paris, pp. 48–99
- Gelb, I. (1981), "Ebla and the Kish Civilization", in Cagni, L., La Lingua di Ebla, Naples, pp. 9–72
- Gelb, I. (1992), "Mari and the Kish Civilization", in Young, G.D., Mari in Retrospect, Winona Lake, pp. 121–202
- Steinkeller, P. (1993), "Early Political Development in Mesopotamia and the Origins of the Sargonic Empire", in Liverani, M., Akkad, the first World Empire : structure, ideology, traditions, Padua, pp. 107–129
- Potts, D.T. (1999). The Archaeology of Elam. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-56496-4.
- Frayne, Douglas (2008). The Royal inscriptions of Mesopotamia. Early periods, vol. 1, Presargonic Period (2700–2350 BC). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
- Madjidzadeh, Y.; Pittman, H. (2008), "Excavations at Konar Sandal in the Region of Jiroft in the Halil Basin: First Preliminary Report (2007-2008)", Iran, 46: 69–103
- Amiet, P. (1986), L'âge des échanges inter-iraniens, 3500-1700 av. J.-C., Paris, pp. 121–139
- Thornton, C.P. (2012), "Iran", in Potts, D.T., A Companion to the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Malden, pp. 596–606
- "Social Reform in Mesopotamia", Benjamin R. Foster, in Social Justice in the Ancient World, K. Irani and M. Silver eds., 1995, p. 169.
- "The Reforms of Urukagina". History-world.org. Retrieved 2009-02-17.
- Katherine I. Wright, Archaeology and Women, 2007, p.206.
- The Powers p. 40 by Walter Wink, 1992
- Marilyn French, From Eve to Dawn: A History of Women, 2008, p.100.
- Diplomacy by design: Luxury arts and an "international style" in the ancient Near East, 1400-1200 BC, Marian H. Feldman, University of Chicago Press, 2006, pp. 120-121
- The spelling of royal names follows the Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature
- von Soden, Wolfram (1994). The Ancient Orient. Donald G. Schley (trans.). Wm. B. Eerdmans. p. 47. ISBN 0-8028-0142-0.
- Langdon, OECT2 (1923), pl. 6.
- Stephen Langdon, Historical inscriptions, containing principally the chronological prism, W-B 444, Oxford University Press, 1923
- "WB-444 High Resolution Image from CDLI".
- "WB-444 Line Art from CDLI".
- Ancient Iraq: (Assyria and Babylonia), Peter Roger Stuart Moorey, Ashmolean Museum, 1976; The Sumerian King List, T. Jacobsen, University of Chicago Press, 1939, p. 77.
- Jona Lendering (2006). "Sumerian King List".
- Wang, Haicheng (2004). Writing and the Ancient State: Early China in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge University Press. p. 36. ISBN 1107785871. Retrieved 5 February 2015.
- William H. Shea (1977). "Adam in Ancient Mesopotamian Traditions".
- Hamilton, Victor (1995). The Book of Genesis, Chapters 1 - 17. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 9780802825216.
- Roux, Georges (1992). Ancient Iraq. Penguin Books Limited. ISBN 9780140125238.
- A. R. George. Babylonian topographical texts. p 261.
- Cambridge Conference Correspondence
- Did an Asteroid Impact Cause an Ancient Tsunami? - New York Times
- Carney, Scott (November 7, 2007). "Did a comet cause the great flood?". Discover Magazine. Retrieved 17 September 2010.
- Harriet Crawford (2004), Sumer and the Sumerians, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-53338-6
- Roux, Georges (1971) "Ancient Iraq" (Penguin, Harmondsworth)
- The Weidner Chronicle (ABC 19) or Esagila Chronicle.
- The Oxford Encyclopedia of Women in World History: Kaffka by Bonnie G. Smith
- Literatur, Politik und Recht in Mesopotamien: Festschrift für Claus Wilcke
- Kish at The History Files
- Identified by David Rohl with Nimrod the Hunter, mentioned in the Bible as founding Erech
- Crawford, Harriet E.W. Sumer and the Sumerians. Cambridge University Press, 2004. ISBN 0-521-53338-4. Page 33.
- Samuel Kramer, The Sumerians, 51-52.
- Alberto Ravinell Whitney Green (2003). The Storm-god in the Ancient Near East. p. 62. ISBN 9781575060699.
- Ulf Oldenburg (1969). Diss Ertationes : The Conflict Between El and Ba'al in Canaanite Religion. p. 60.
- Pierre-Louis Viollet (2007). Water Engineering in Ancient Civilizations: 5,000 Years of History. p. 36. ISBN 9789078046059.
- "The Emar Lexical Texts : Part 2 - Composite edition" (PDF). Openaccess.leideuniv.nl. Retrieved 2015-08-15.
- See e.g. Glassner, Jean-Jacques, 2000: Les petits etats Mésopotamiens à la fin du 4e et au cours du 3e millénaire. In: Hansen, Mogens Herman (ed.) A Comparative Study of Thirty City-State Cultures. The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters, Copenhagen., P.48
- La storia, Enrico Cravetto, Rotolito Lombarda, 2007 Instituto Geografico De Agostini S.p.a., p. 281
- Rice, Michael, The Archaeology of the Arabian Gulf, Routledge, 1994, ISBN 978-0-415-03268-1, p. 106
- "Ancient Iraqi harp reproduced by Liverpool engineers". University of Liverpool. 28 July 2005. Retrieved 2009-11-23.
A team of engineers at the University of Liverpool has helped reproduce an ancient Iraqi harp - the Lyre of Ur.
- Golden Lyre of Ur, Bill Taylor
- Queen's Lyre - From Ur, southern Iraq, about 2600-2400 BC, British Museum
- "Queen's Lyre". British Museum. Retrieved 2015-09-26.
- "The Lyre of Ur, Carl McTague". www.mctague.org. Retrieved 2015-09-26.
- Gouin, Ph. (1993), "Bovines and dairy products in Southern Mesopotamia in the 3rd millennium. Some comments on the "dairy frieze" of el-'Obeid", Iraq, 55: 135–145
- Ascalone, Enrico. 2007. Mesopotamia: Assyrians, Sumerians, Babylonians (Dictionaries of Civilizations; 1). Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-25266-7 (paperback).
- Bottéro, Jean, André Finet, Bertrand Lafont, and George Roux. 2001. Everyday Life in Ancient Mesopotamia. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Crawford, Harriet E. W. 2004. Sumer and the Sumerians. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Frayne, Douglas. 2008. Pre-Sargonic Period: Early Periods, Volume 1 (2700-2350 BC), University of Toronto Press.
- Leick, Gwendolyn. 2002. Mesopotamia: Invention of the City. London and New York: Penguin.
- Lloyd, Seton. 1978. The Archaeology of Mesopotamia: From the Old Stone Age to the Persian Conquest. London: Thames and Hudson.
- Nemet-Nejat, Karen Rhea. 1998. Daily Life in Ancient Mesopotamia. London and Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
- Kramer, Samuel Noah (1963). The Sumerians: Their History, Culture and Character. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-45238-7.
- Kramer, Samuel Noah. Sumerian Mythology: A Study of Spiritual and Literary Achievement in the Third Millennium BC.
- Roux, Georges. 1992. Ancient Iraq, 560 pages. London: Penguin (earlier printings may have different pagination: 1966, 480 pages, Pelican; 1964, 431 pages, London: Allen and Urwin).
- Schomp, Virginia. Ancient Mesopotamia: The Sumerians, Babylonians, And Assyrians.
- Sumer: Cities of Eden (Timelife Lost Civilizations). Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1993 (hardcover, ISBN 0-8094-9887-1).
- Woolley, C. Leonard. 1929. The Sumerians. Oxford: Clarendon
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Early Dynastic.|
- Ancient Sumer History --- The History of the Ancient Near East Electronic Compendium
- Iraq’s Ancient Past — Penn Museum
- The History Files: Ancient Mesopotamia
- Sumerian Language Page, perhaps the oldest Sumerian website on the web (it dates back to 1996), features compiled lexicon, detailed FAQ, extensive links, and so on.
- ETCSL: The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature has complete translations of more than 400 Sumerian literary texts.
- PSD: The Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary, while still in its initial stages, can be searched on-line, from August 2004.
- CDLI: Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative a large corpus of Sumerian texts in transliteration, largely from the Early Dynastic and Ur III periods, accessible with images.