User:SomeGuyWhoRandomlyEdits/History of Sumer

The history of Sumer is taken to include: the prehistoric period of the Ubaidians, the protoliterate period of the Urukeans, and the historic periods of the archaeological culture of Jemdet Nasr, the Early Dynasties (ED), the Akkadian, Guti, Ur III empires, and Isin-Larsa kingdoms (c. 5500 BCE). The Sumerian people claimed that their civilization had been brought—fully formed—to the city of Eridu by one of their gods (Enki) or by his advisor (Adapa). The first people at Eridu may have introduced elements from the Samarra culture in upper Mesopotamia to the Ubaid culture of lower Mesopotamia; but, it is not yet known whether the founders of Eridu were Sumerian. The Sumerian King List (SKL) is an ancient regnal list (written using the cuneiform script)—listing kings of Sumer—including several foreign dynasties. Some of the earlier dynasties on the SKL may be mythical; the historical record does not open up before a time of the earliest archaeologically-attested rulers—while conjectures and interpretations of archaeological evidence may vary for earlier events.

The culture of the Ubaidians developed during the Late Neolithic and continued into the Late Chalcolithic. The name is derived from Tell al-'Ubaid in lower Mesopotamia (where the earliest large excavation of Ubaid material was conducted). In southern Mesopotamia: the Ubaid period is the earliest-known period along the alluvial plain; although, it is likely earlier periods exist obscured underneath the alluvium. In the south: it has a very long duration between c. 6500 BCE—until replaced by the Uruk culture. In the north: the Ubaid period runs only between c. 5300 BCE.

Most historians have suggested that Sumer was first permanently settled (c. 5500 BCE) by a west Asian people who spoke the Sumerian language; however, the ethnic composition of Mesopotamia throughout the Ubaid and/or Uruk period(s) cannot be determined with certainty. It is connected to the problem of the origins of the Sumerians in lower Mesopotamia and the dating of their emergence (assuming that they were thought of as natives), or their arrival (assuming that they were thought of as foreigners). There is no agreement on the archaeological evidence for a migration, or on whether the earliest form of writing already reflects a specific language. Some argue that it is actually Sumerian (in which case the Sumerians would have been its inventors), and would have already been present in the region by the final centuries of the fourth millennium BCE. Whether or not other ethnic groups were also present—especially the East Semitic ancestors of the Akkadians and/or one or several pre-Sumerian peoples—is also debated and cannot be resolved easily by excavation alone.

The Sumerian city-states may have risen to power at some point throughout the Ubaid, Uruk, Jemdet Nasr, and/or ED period(s). The recorded history of Sumer may go as far back as the 29th century BCE (and/or even centuries before); however, the historical record remains obscure until the Early Dynastic III (EDIII) period (c. 2600/2500 BCE) when a (now-deciphered) syllabary writing system was developed—which has allowed archaeologists to read contemporary records and inscriptions. Classical Sumer ends with the rise of the Akkadian empire in the 23rd century BCE. There was a brief, Neo-Sumerian revival and renaissance during the 21st century BCE—cut short in the 20th century BCE by the invasions of a West Semitic people—the Amorites. The predominantly Amorite dynasties of the Isin-Larsa period persisted until c. 1736 BCE—when Mesopotamia was re-united by an Amorite dynasty of Babylonia.

Earliest city-states
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 centres of Eridu and Uruk, two of the earliest cities, had successively elaborated large temple complexes built of mudbrick. Developing as small shrines with the earliest settlements, by the ED period, they had become the most imposing structures in their respective cities, each dedicated to its own respective god.

Ubaid period


Eridu was a settlement founded during the Eridu phase of the Ubaid period (c. 5400 BCE) and may have been abandoned during the Late Ubaid/Early Uruk period (c. 4200 BCE). Eridu is named as the city of the first kings on the SKL and was long considered the earliest city in lower Mesopotamia. The settlement of Eridu may have been at the confluence of three separate ecosystems from where three peoples (each with distinct cultures and/or lifestyles) came to an agreement about access to fresh water in a desert environment. Eridu had already recovered by the EDI (c. 2900 BCE) and may have had anywhere from 4,000—20,000 citizens. It was abandoned again sometime during the Neo-Babylonian period (626 – 539 BCE).



Ever since the decipherment of the Sumerian cuneiform script; it has been the subject of much effort to relate it to a wide variety of languages. Proposals for linguistic affinity sometimes have a nationalistic background because it has a peculiar prestige as one of the most ancient written languages. Such proposals enjoy virtually no support among linguists because of their unverifiability.



Some have argued that by examining the structure of the Sumerian language, its names for occupations; as well as toponyms and hydronyms, one can suggest that there was once an ethnic group in the region that preceded the Sumerians. These pre-Sumerian people are now referred to as Proto-Euphrateans (or Ubaidians), and are theorized to have developed out of the culture centered at the Samarra Archaeological City (c. 6200 BCE). The Ubaid culture spread into northern Mesopotamia and was adopted by the Halaf culture c. 5000 BCE. This is known as the Halaf-Ubaid Transitional period of northern Mesopotamia.



Proto-Euphratean is considered by some to have been the substratum language of the people that introduced farming into southern Mesopotamia during the Early Ubaid period (c. 5300 BCE). Proto-Euphratean may have exerted an areal influence on it (especially in the form of polysyllabic words that sound "un-Sumerian")—making researchers suspect them of being loanwords—and untraceable to any other known language. There is little speculation as to the affinities of this substratum language; therefore, it remains unclassified. A related proposal is that the language of the proto-literary texts from the Late Uruk period (c. 3350 BC) is really an early Indo-European language termed Euphratic. Sumerian was once widely held to be an Indo-European language; but, that view later came to be almost universally rejected. It has also been suggested that Sumerian descended from a late prehistoric creole language.

Other scholars think that the Sumerian language may have originally been that of the hunting and fishing peoples who lived in the Mesopotamian Marshes and the Eastern Arabia littoral region; additionally, were part of the Arabian bifacial culture. Some archaeologists believe that the Sumerians lived along the Persian Gulf coast of the Arabian Peninsula before a flood at the end of Last Glacial Period c. 10000 BCE. Many scholars have proposed historical and genetic links between the present-day Marsh Arabs and the Sumerians of ancient Iraq based off of: their methods for house-building (mudhifs), homeland (Mesopotamian Marshes), and shared agricultural practices; however, there is no written record of the marsh tribes until the ninth century CE—and the Sumerians had already lost their distinct ethnic identity some 2,700 years prior.

Others have suggested that the Sumerians migrated from North Africa (during the Green Saharan period) into West Asia and were responsible for the spread of farming throughout the Fertile Crescent. Although not specifically discussing Sumerians, researchers have suggested a partial North African origin for some pre-Semitic cultures of the Near East (particularly Natufians) after testing the genomes of Natufian and Pre-Pottery Neolithic culture-bearers; alternatively, a genetic analysis of four ancient Mesopotamian skeletal DNA samples suggests an association of the Sumerians with the inhabitants of the Indus Valley Civilization (possibly as a result of ancient Indus-Mesopotamia relations). Sumerians (or at least some of them) may have been related to the original Dravidian population of India.

Uruk period
Named after the city of Uruk, this period saw: the urban revolution, the very beginning of the Early Bronze Age (c. 3300 BCE), and the gradual emergence of the cuneiform script; also, it has been described as the "protoliterate period". The Uruk period is a continuation and an outgrowth of the Ubaid with pottery being the main visible change. The archaeological transition from the Ubaid period to the Uruk period is marked by a gradual shift from domestically-produced, painted pottery on slow potter's wheels to a great variety of mass-produced (by specialists), unpainted pottery on faster wheels. It was during this period that pottery-painting declined as copper started to become popular, along with cylinder seals.

The traditional chronology of the Uruk period is very imprecise and is based on some key soundages in the religious precinct of Uruk (Eanna). The most ancient, archaeological levels of these soundages ("Early Uruk"; levels XIX through to XIV) belong to the Ubaid V period.

The Uruk period is traditionally divided into many phases:

By the time of the Uruk period (c. 4000 BCE), the volume of trade goods transported along the canals and rivers along the Tigris–Euphrates river system facilitated the rise of many large, stratified, temple-centered cities (with populations of over 10,000 people) where centralized administrations employed specialized workers. During this period Uruk became the most urbanized city in the world, surpassing for the first time 50,000 inhabitants. Urukean settlements were probably theocratic and were most likely headed by priest-kings (ensis)—assisted by councils of elders (including both men and women). It is quite possible that the (later) Sumerian pantheon was modeled upon this political structure. The SKL includes the early dynasties of several prominent cities from this period. The first set of names on the list is of kings said to have reigned before a major flood occurred. These early names may include fictional figures from Sumerian religion and literature such as: Meshkiangasher, Enmerkar, Lugalbanda, and Dumuzid.



There was little evidence of organized warfare or professional soldiers during the Uruk period (towns were generally unwalled). The Urukean civilization, exported by traders and colonists, had an effect on all surrounding peoples, who gradually evolved their own comparable, competing economies and cultures. Artifacts, and even colonies of this civilization have been found over a wide area from: Nippur, Girsu, Ur, Abu Salabikh, Shuruppak, Adab, Larsa, Sippar, Mashkan-shapir, and Eridu (in lower Mesopotamia)—to the north in Kish, Eshnunna, Tutub, and Tell Uqair (in upper Mesopotamia)—to even further north in Habuba Kabira and Nagar (in Syria)—to as far north as Melid (in Turkey)—to Susa (in Iran)—to as far west as the Mediterranean sea. The cities of Sumer could not maintain remote, long-distance colonies by military force; nonetheless, it is fairly certain that it was during the Uruk period that cities began to make use of slave labor captured from the hill country, and there is ample evidence for captured slaves as workers in the earliest texts.

The end of the Uruk period also marked the end of a warm and wet climatic period from c. 7000 BCE called the Holocene climatic optimum and the beginning of a cold and wet climatic period called the Piora oscillation from c. 3200 BCE.

Jemdet Nasr period
The Jemdet Nasr period is an archaeological culture with a geographical distribution limited to south-central Iraq. Older scientific literature often used c. 3200 BCE as the beginning and end dates of the Jemdet Nasr period. The period is nowadays dated from c. 3100 BCE based on radiocarbon dating. It is named after the Tell Jemdet Nasr, where the assemblage typical for this period was first recognized. The culture of the proto-historical Jemdet Nasr period is a local development out of the preceding Uruk period and continues into the ED. The Jemdet Nasr period is contemporaneous with early-Ninevite V and Proto-Elamite, and shares with these two periods characteristics such as inequality and an emerging bureaucracy.



The hallmark of the Jemdet Nasr period is its distinctive painted monochrome and polychrome pottery. Designs are both geometric and figurative; the latter displaying trees and animals such as birds, fish, goats, scorpions, and snakes. Nevertheless, this painted pottery makes up only a small percentage of the total assemblage and at various sites it has been found in archaeological contexts suggesting that it was associated with high-status individuals or activities. At the type site of Jemdet Nasr, the painted pottery was found exclusively in the settlement's large central building, which is thought to have played a role in the administration of many economic activities. Painted Jemdet Nasr period pots were found in similar contexts at Shuruppak and Tell Gubba, both in the Hamrin Mountains.

Apart from the distinctive pottery, the period is known as one of the formative stages in the development of the cuneiform script. The oldest clay tablets come from Uruk and date to the late fourth millennium BCE, slightly earlier than the Jemdet Nasr period. By the time period of Jemdet Nasr, the script had already undergone a number of significant changes. It originally consisted of pictographs, but by the time of Jemdet Nasr it was already adopting simpler and more abstract designs. It is also during this period that the script acquired its iconic wedge-shaped appearance.

While the language in which these tablets were written cannot be identified with certainty, it is thought to have been Sumerian. The texts deal without exception with administrative matters such as the rationing of foodstuffs or listing objects and animals. Literary genres like hymns and king lists, which become very popular later in Mesopotamian history, are absent. Two different counting systems were in use: a sexagesimal system for animals and humans, for example, and a bisexagesimal system for things like grain, cheese, and fresh fish. Contemporary archives have been found at Tutub, Uruk, and Tell Uqair.

Settlements during this period were highly organized around a central building that controlled all aspects of society. The economy focused on local agricultural production and sheep-and-goat pastoralism. The homogeneity of the Jemdet Nasr period across a large area of southern Mesopotamia indicates intensive contacts and trade between settlements. This is strengthened by the find of a sealing at Jemdet Nasr that lists a number of cities that can be identified, including Ur, Uruk and Larsa. Since the first excavations at Tell Jemdet Nasr, the Jemdet Nasr Period has been found at numerous other archaeological sites across much of south-central Iraq, including Ur, Nippur, Uruk, Shuruppak, Tutub, Abu Salabikh, Tell Uqair.

Protohistory
Protohistory is a period between prehistory and history during which a culture or civilization has not yet developed writing. It may refer to the transition period between the advent of literacy in a society and the writings of the first historians. The term can also refer to a period in which fragmentary or external historical documents, not necessarily including a developed writing system, have been found. As with prehistory, determining when a culture may be considered prehistoric or protohistoric is sometimes difficult for anthropologists. The preservation of oral traditions may complicate matters, as they can provide a secondary historical source for even earlier events.

Writing was long thought to have been invented in a single civilization, a theory related to monogenesis. Scholars believed that all writing originated in Sumer and spread over the world from there via a process of cultural diffusion. According to this theory, the concept of representing language by written marks, though not necessarily the specifics of how such a system worked, was passed on by traders or merchants traveling between geographical regions. However, the discovery of the scripts of ancient Mesoamerica, far away from Middle Eastern sources, proved that writing had been invented more than once. Scholars now recognize that writing along the Fertile Crescent may have been independently developed in at least two civilizations: Sumer (between c. 3400 BCE) and Egypt (around c. 3250 BCE).

The Sumerian archaic (pre-cuneiform) writing and Egyptian hieroglyphic systems are generally considered the earliest true writing systems, both evolving convergently out of their ancestral protoliterate symbol systems from c. 3500 BCE, with the earliest coherent texts from c. 2600 BCE. Regarding Egypt, several scholars have argued that, "the earliest solid evidence of Egyptian writing differs in structure and style from the Mesopotamian and must therefore have developed independently. The possibility of 'stimulus diffusion' from Mesopotamia remains, but the influence cannot have gone beyond the transmission of an idea." The Proto-Elamite script is also dated to the same approximate period.

Symbolic communication systems are distinguished from writing systems. With writing systems, one must usually understand something of the associated spoken language to comprehend the text. In contrast, symbolic systems, such as information signs, painting, maps, and mathematics, often do not require prior knowledge of a spoken language. Every human community possesses language, a feature regarded by many as an innate and defining condition of humanity (see Origin of language). However the development of writing systems, and their partial supplantation of traditional oral systems of communication, have been sporadic, uneven, and slow. Once established, writing systems on the whole change more slowly than their spoken counterparts and often preserve features and expressions that no longer exist in the spoken language.

There are considered to be three writing criteria for all writing systems. The first being that writing must be complete. It must have a purpose or some sort of meaning to it. A point must be made or communicated in the text. Second, all writing systems must have some sort of symbols which can be made on some sort of surface, whether physical or digital. Lastly, the symbols used in the writing system must mimic spoken word/speech, in order for communication to be possible.

Stages of cuneiform development
The development of cuneiform may be divided into the following stages:


 * Pictographic stage (c. 3500 BCE)
 * Archaic stage (c. 3000 BCE)
 * Early Dynastic stage (c. 2600 BCE)
 * Neo-Sumerian stage (c. 2334 BCE)
 * Late Sumerian stage (c. 2004 BCE)
 * Post-Sumerian stage (c. 1736 BCE)

Precursors to writing
The origins of writing may have appeared during the Neolithic. During the period c. 9000 BCE, the Mesopotamian agriculturalists needed a way to keep records of their animals and goods. Small, clay tokens were formed and shaped by the palms to represent certain animals and goods; furthermore, were used to record quantities of livestock and/or other commodities. These tokens were initially impressed on the surface of round, clay envelopes (bullae) and then stored in them.

Clay tokens allowed for agriculturalists to keep track of animals and food that had been traded, stored, and/or sold. Because grain production became such a major part of life, they needed to store their extra grain in shared facilities and account for their food. This clay token system went unchanged for about 4,000 years until the tokens started to become more elaborate in appearance. The tokens were similar in size, material, and color but the markings had more of a variety of shapes. As the growth of goods being produced grew and the exchanging of goods became more common, changes to tokens were made to keep up with the growth.

Transactions for trading needed to be accounted for efficiently, so the clay tokens were placed in clay envelopes, which helped to prevent dishonesty and kept all the tokens together. In order to account for the tokens, the clay envelopes would have to be crushed to reveal their contents. Seals were impressed into the openings of the clay envelopes to prevent tampering. Each party had its own unique seal to identify them. Seals would not only identify individuals, but it would also identify their offices. Sometimes, the tokens were impressed onto the wet, clay envelopes before they dried so that the owners could remember what exactly was in the clay envelopes without having to break them.

Proto-writing
In the history of how writing systems evolved among different civilizations, more complete writing systems were preceded by proto-writing (systems of ideographic and/or early mnemonic symbols—symbols or letters that made recollection easier—to represent a limited number of ideas and concepts). True writing (in which the content of a linguistic utterance was encoded so that another reader could reconstruct—with a fair degree of accuracy—and the exact utterance written down) was a later development. Writing is distinguished from proto-writing (the latter of which typically avoided encoding grammatical words and affixes—making it extremely difficult or even impossible to reconstruct the exact meaning intended by the writer unless a great deal of context was already known in advance). Cuneiform is one of the earliest forms of written expression.

Proto-writing consists of visible marks communicating limited information. Such systems emerged from earlier traditions of symbol systems in the early Neolithic. They used ideographic and/or early mnemonic symbols to represent a limited number of concepts (in contrast to true writing systems, which record the language of the writer). The transition from proto-writing to the earliest fully-developed writing system took place from the late-fourth to early-third millennia BCE.

Pictographs
During the Early Bronze Age, urban economies developed due to urban settlements and the development of trade. The recording of trade became necessary because production, shipments, inventories, and wage payments had to be noted, and merchants needed to preserve records of their transactions. As clay tokens and envelopes became too cumbersome to store and handle, impressing the tokens onto flat, clay tablets became increasingly popular. Clay tablets were easier to store, neater to write on, and less likely to be lost. Impressing the tokens onto clay tablets was efficient; but, using reed styli to inscribe the impression on the clay tablet was shown to be even more efficient and faster for the scribes. Tokens were replaced by pictographic tablets that could express not only "how many" but also "where, when, and how."

The Kish tablet (dated to c. 3350 BCE), reflects the stage of proto-cuneiform, when what would become the Sumerian cuneiform script was still in the proto-writing stage. This was the beginning of the first known writing system. The cuneiform script was developed from pictographic proto-writing in the late-4th millennium BCE, stemming from the Near Eastern token system used for accounting. Early tokens with pictographic shapes of animals, associated with numbers, were discovered in Nagar, and date to the mid-4th millennium BCE. It has been suggested that the token shapes were the original basis for some of the Sumerian pictographs.



Mesopotamia's proto-literate period spans c. 3500 BCE. The first unequivocal written documents start in Uruk IV period (dated to c. 3300 BCE), followed by tablets found in Uruk III (dated to c. 2900 BCE). Originally, pictographs were either drawn on clay tablets in vertical columns with a sharpened reed stylus or incised in stone. This early style lacked the characteristic wedge shape of the strokes.



By the end of the 4th millennium BCE, this symbol system had evolved into a method of keeping accounts, using a round-shaped stylus impressed into soft clay at different angles for recording numbers. This was gradually augmented with pictographic writing using a sharp stylus to indicate what was being counted. Originally, pictographs were either drawn on clay tablets (in vertical columns) with a sharpened stylus or incised in stone. This early style lacked the characteristic wedge shape of the strokes. Certain signs to indicate names of gods, countries, cities, vessels, birds, trees, etc., are known as determinatives and were the Sumerian signs of the terms in question (added as a guide for the reader).

Archaic to Post-Sumerian cuneiform
The Sumerian system of administration led to the development of archaic tablets c. 3500 BCE and ideographic writing (c. 3200). Mesopotamia's proto-literate period spans c. 3500 BCE. The first unequivocal written documents start with the Uruk IV phase (c. 3300 BCE), followed by tablets found in the Uruk III phase (c. 2900 BCE). Proper names continued to be usually written in purely logographic fashion. The Sumerian system of administration led to the development of archaic tablets c. 3500 BCE and ideographic writing (c. 3100 BCE).



Archaic Sumerian is the earliest stage of inscriptions with linguistic content, beginning from c. 3000 BCE. This is the time when some pictographic element started to be used for their phonetical value, permitting the recording of abstract ideas or personal names. Many pictographs began to lose their original function, and a given sign could have various meanings depending on context. The sign inventory was reduced from some 1,500 signs to some 600 signs, and writing became increasingly phonological. Determinative signs were re-introduced to avoid ambiguity. Cuneiform writing proper thus arises from the more primitive system of pictographs at about that time.



Cuneiform was developed into logographic writing c. 2500 BCE (and a mixed form by c. 2334 BCE).

Some versions of the chronology may omit the Late Sumerian phase and regard all texts written after c. 2004 BCE as Post-Sumerian. Post-Sumerian is meant to refer to the time when the language was already extinct and preserved by the Babylonians and Assyrians only as a liturgical and classical language for religious, artistic, and scholarly purposes. The extinction has traditionally been dated approximately to the end of the Ur III period, the last predominantly Sumerian state in Mesopotamia, c. 2004 BCE. However, that date is very approximate, as many scholars have contended that Sumerian was already dead or dying as early as c. 2112 BCE, by the beginning of the Ur III period, and others believe that Sumerian persisted, as a spoken language, in a small part of southern Mesopotamia (Nippur and its surroundings) until as late as the Isin-Larsa (c. 2000 BCE), Old Babylonian (c. 2000 BCE), and/or even the first Sealand dynasty (c. 1750 BCE) periods.

Whatever the status of spoken Sumerian between 2004 and 1736 BCE, it is from then that a particularly large quantity of literary texts and bilingual Sumero-Akkadian lexical lists survive, especially from the scribal school of Nippur. They and the particularly-intensive official and literary use of the language in Akkadian-speaking states during the same time call for a distinction between the Late Sumerian and the Post-Sumerian periods.

Timeline
Relative stratigraphic chronology
 * Uruk III = Jemdet Nasr period
 * Dates are approximate, consult particular article for details

A: Pictographs B: Numerical tablets C: Kish tablet D: Numerical tablets with logograms E: Cuneiform script with phonograms F: Uruk Vase G: Ideographic writing H: Lexical script (archaic cuneiform) I: Logographic writing (Early Dynastic cuneiform) J: Mixed form (Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform)

Sumerian King List


The SKL is an ancient regnal list written using cuneiform script, listing: the kings of Sumer, their supposed reign lengths, and the locations of kingship. This text is preserved in several recensions. The list of kings is sequential; although, modern research has indicated that many were contemporaries–reflecting the belief that kingship was handed down by the gods and could be transferred from one city to another–asserting to a hegemony in the region. The SKL is important to the chronology of the Ancient Near East (ANE) for the third millennium BCE. However, the fact that many of the dynasties listed reigned simultaneously from varying localities makes it difficult to reproduce a strict linear chronology.



Most of the dates for the predynastic kings have been approximated to certain centuries (rather than specific years), and are only partially based on any available archaeological data. For most kings listed, the SKL is itself the lone source of information. The SKL initially (and presumably) mixes mythical, pre-dynastic kings enjoying implausibly lengthy reigns; then, gradually working its way into the more plausible, historical dynasties. Although the primal kings are historically unattested, this does not necessarily preclude their possible correspondence with the historical (some of which may have later been mythicized, deified, and/or demonized). Some sumerologists and assyriologists think of the primal monarchs as fictional characters that were invented several centuries and/or even millennia after their purported reigns.



While there is no evidence that they ever reigned as such, the Sumerians purported the predynastic kings to have lived in a mythical era before a flood. None of the antediluvian kings have been verified as being historical through archaeological excavations, epigraphical inscriptions, or otherwise. The antediluvian reigns were measured using two Sumerian numerical units (a sexagesimal system). There were "sars" (units of 3,600 years each) and "ners" (units of 600 years). Attempts have been made to map these numbers into more reasonable regnal lengths.



Some modern scholars believe the Sumerian deluge story corresponds to localized river flooding at Shuruppak and various other cities as far north as Kish (as revealed by a layer of riverine sediments radiocarbon dated to c. 2900 BCE) which interrupt the continuity of settlement. Polychrome pottery from the Jemdet Nasr period was discovered immediately below this Shuruppak flood stratum. Archaeologists have confirmed the presence of a widespread layer of riverine silt deposits shortly after the Piora oscillation that interrupted the sequence of settlement. It left a few feet of yellow sediment in the cities of Shuruppak and Uruk and extended as far north as Kish. The polychrome pottery characteristic of the Jemdet Nasr period below the sediment layer was followed by EDI artifacts above the sediment layer.

The mythological, predynastic period of the SKL portrays the passage of power in antediluvian times from Eridu to Shuruppak in the south, until a major deluge occurred. Some time after that, the hegemony reappears in the northern city of Kish at the start of the ED period. The earliest tablets from this period were retrieved from Jemdet Nasr in 1928. They depict complex arithmetic calculations such as the areas of field-plots. However, they have never been fully deciphered, and it is not even certain that the few words on them represent the Sumerian language.

Predynastic period
"After the kingship descended from heaven, the kingship was in Eridu. In Eridu, Alulim became king; he ruled for 28,800 years. 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. 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 241,209 years. Then the flood swept over."

- Sumerian King List

As these kings were said on the SKL to have reigned implausibly lengthy reigns (8 kings ruled for up to 241,209 years), their reigns can be reduced (down to 67 years). Assuming that they were not purely fictional kings, they may have ruled at some point during the 30th and/or 29th centuries BCE. Bad-tibira, Larak, Sippar, and Shuruppak may have each had anywhere from 10,000—20,000 citizens by the EDI.



The Uruk List of Kings and Sages (ULKS) pairs seven antediluvian kings each with his own apkallu. An apkallu was a sage in Sumerian literature and/or religion. The first apkallu (Adapa) is paired up with Alulim. Adapa has been compared with the Biblical figure Adam. The ULKS lists another eight (postdivulian) kings also paired up with apkallu.

Dumuzid is listed on the SKL twice as an antediluvian king of both Bad-tibira and Uruk. He may have been posthumously deified and has been identified with the god Ama-ušumgal-ana (who was originally the tutelary deity worshipped in the city Lagash). The E-mush temple of Bad-tibira) was originally dedicated to Dumuzid when it was built before being re-dedicated to Lulal when the goddess Inanna appointed Lulal god of the city. He was the protagonist in the Dream of Dumuzid and Dumuzid and Geshtinanna. He was also mentioned in Inanna's Descent into the Underworld, Inanna Prefers the Farmer, and Inanna and Bilulu.

The name of En-men-dur-ana 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"). The ULKS pairs him up with the apkallu Utuabzu. He has been compared with the Biblical patriarch Enoch. 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.

First dynasty of Kish


The SKL stated that Kish was the first city to have kings following a flood (beginning with Jushur); moreover, it indicated the existence of a Semitic population in the regions of the Diyala river and upper Mesopotamia. Jushur's successor is referred to as Kullassina-bel; additionally, this is an East Semitic sentence meaning all of them were lord. Thus, some scholars have suggested that this may have been intended to signify the absence of a central authority in Kish for a time. The names of the next ten kings of Kish (preceding Etana) are: Nangishlishma, En-tarah-ana, Babum, Puannum, Kalibum, Kalumum, Zuqaqip, Atab, Mashda, and Arwium. Most of these names are East Semitic words for animals (e.g. Zuqaqip means scorpion); in fact, most of the names of the first dynasty of Kish (aside from Enmebaragesi and Aga) may have been Kishite names.



The Semitic nature of their names revealed that the city's population may have had a strong Semitic component from the dawn of recorded history. A Bayesian analysis suggested an origin for all known Semitic languages with a population of ancient Semitic-speaking peoples migrating from the Levant c. 3750 BCE; furthermore, spreading into Mesopotamia and possibly contributing to the collapse of the Uruk period c. 3100 BCE. Kish has been identified as the center of the earliest known East Semitic culture—its own civilization. This early East Semitic culture is characterized by linguistic, literary, and orthographic similarities extending across settlements such as Ebla, Mari, Abu Salabikh, and Nagar.



The similarities include the use of a writing system that contained non-Sumerian logograms, the use of the same system in naming the months of the year, dating by regnal years, and a measuring system (among many others). However, the existence of a single authority ruling those lands has not been assumed as each city had its own monarchical system, in addition to some linguistic differences for while the languages of Mari and Ebla were closely related, Kish represented an independent East Semitic linguistic entity that spoke a sort of dialect (Kishite), different from both pre-Sargonic Akkadian and Eblaite. The East Semitic languages are one of three divisions of the Semitic languages, and is attested by three distinct languages: Kishite, Akkadian, and Eblaite (all of which have been long extinct). Kishite is the oldest known Semitic language.

Throughout the third millennium BCE, an intimate cultural symbiosis developed between Sumerians and Semites (which included widespread bilingualism). The influence of the Sumerian and East Semitic languages on each other is evident in all areas, from lexical borrowing on a substantial scale to syntactic, morphological, and phonological convergence. This has prompted scholars to refer to Sumerian and the East Semitic languages during the third millennium BCE as a sprachbund.

After a flood occurred in Sumer, kingship is said to have resumed at Kish. The earliest dynastic name on the SKL known from other legendary sources is Etana. He was estimated to have (r. c. 2800 – c. 2700). The earliest ruler on the SKL whose historical existence has been independently attested through archaeological inscription is Enmebaragesi ((r. c. 2750 – undefined)), said to have defeated Elam and built Ekur in Nippur. Aga ((r. c. 2700 – undefined)) is said to have fought against Gilgamesh of Uruk.

First dynasty of Uruk
Meshkiangasher ((r. c. 3175 – undefined)) is listed on the SKL as the first king of Eanna.

He was followed by his son Enmerkar ((r. c. 3150 – undefined)). The legend Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta relates that Enmerkar constructed Eanna (which also served as Uruk's religious precinct after merging with Kulaba). Based off of information gathered from the poem, Enmerkar is credited with the invention of writing; thus, his reign may mark the very beginning of recorded history during Uruk V—III.

"Because the messenger's mouth was heavy and he couldn't repeat (the message), the Lord of Kulaba patted some clay and put words on it, like a tablet. Until then, there had been no putting words on clay."

- Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta

Despite his and his father's proclaimed divine descent, neither Enmerkar nor his father were posthumously deified as their successors Lugalbanda, Dumuzid, and Gilgamesh were. The aforementioned three are also known from fragmentary legends. The most famous ruler of this dynasty is 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.

Uruk may have had anywhere from 40,000—82,500 citizens (with up to 90,000 people living within its environs) making it the largest urban area in the world by the Final Uruk period c. 3100 BCE. The Urukeans established colonies such as Habuba Kabira (in Syria) and Melid (in Turkey); furthermore, trading colonies near pre-existing settlements such as Hamoukar c. 3500 BCE. There is evidence of prehistoric warfare at Hamoukar and the nearby Urukean trading colony dated to c. 3500 BCE. The empire of Uruk may have stretched across anywhere from 10,000—30,000 out of a total of up to 65,000 square kilometers occupied by the Sumerian people c. 2800 BCE.

First dynasty of Ur


The first dynasty of Ur is dated to c. 2600 BCE. It was preceded by the first dynasty of Uruk on the SKL. Only four of the final kings of the first dynasty of Ur are mentioned on the SKL. The first dynasty may have been preceded by one other dynasty of Ur unnamed on the SKL which had extensive influence over the area of Sumer, and apparently led a union of south Mesopotamian polities. Ur may have had <6,000 citizens c. 2800 BCE.



Ur-Pabilsag is the first archaeologically recorded ruler of Ur said to have held the Sumerian title for king. He was preceded by his father A-Imdugud (who ruled over Ur with the Sumerian title for governor) and succeeded by his son Meskalamdug (who (r. c. 2600 – c. 2550) as a king). Mesannepada ((r. undefined – undefined)) is the first king of Ur listed on the SKL. Two other rulers earlier than Mesannepada are known from other sources, namely Puabi (probably (r. undefined – undefined) with the Sumerian title for queen) and Akalamdug ((r. c. 2600 – undefined) as king). It would seem that both Akalamdug and Mesannepada may have been sons of Meskalamdug, according to an inscription found on a bead in Mari, and Meskalamdug may have been the true founder of the first dynasty.



Mesilim ((r. c. 2550 – c. 2500)) may have enjoyed suzerainty over Ur and Adab. He is also mentioned in some of the earliest monuments as arbitrating a border dispute between Lagash and 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 SKL. Some have suggested that Mesilim and Mesannepada were in fact one and the same; however, others have disputed this theory. Both Mesilim and Mesannepada also seem to have subjected Kish, thereafter assuming the title king of Kish for themselves. The title king of Kish would be used by many kings of the preeminent dynasties for some time afterward.



The Royal Cemetery at Ur held the tombs of several rulers of the first dynasty of Ur. The tombs are particularly lavish, and testify to the wealth of the first dynasty. One of the most famous tombs is that of Puabi. The artifacts found in the royal tombs of the dynasty show that foreign trade was particularly active during this period, with many materials coming from foreign lands, such as carnelian likely coming from the Indus or Iran, lapis Lazuli from the Badakhshan area of Afghanistan, silver from Turkey, copper from Oman, and gold from several locations such as Egypt, Nubia, Turkey or Iran. Carnelian beads from the Indus were found in Ur tombs dating to 2600-2450, in an example of Indus-Mesopotamia relations. In particular, carnelian beads with an etched design in white were probably imported from the Indus Valley, and made according to a technique developed by the Harappans. These materials were used into the manufacture of beautiful objects in the workshops of Ur.

The Ur I dynasty had enormous wealth as shown by the lavishness of its tombs. This was probably due to the fact that Ur acted as the main harbour for trade with India, which put her in a strategic position to import and trade vast quantities of gold, carnelian or lapis lazuli. In comparison, the burials of the kings of Kish were much less lavish. High-prowed Summerian ships may have traveled as far as Meluhha, thought to be the Indus region, for trade.

Dynasty of Hamazi


Hamazi first came to the attention of archaeologists with the discovery of a vase with an inscription in very archaic cuneiform commemorating the victory of Uhub ((r. c. 2570 – c. 2550) as an early ruler of Kish) over Hamazi, resulting in speculation that Hamazi was to be identified with Carchemish (in Syria). Its exact location is unknown; but, it's now generally considered to have been located somewhere along the vicinity of the Diyala river and/or the western region of the Zagros mountains—possibly near Nuzi (in Iraq) or Hamadan (in Iran). The earliest mention of Hamazi is on the Bowl of Utu (dated to c. 3245, 2750, or 2600 BCE). It was also mentioned in two legends: Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta and Enmerkar and En-suhgir-ana.



A copy of a diplomatic message sent from Irkab-Damu ((r. undefined – undefined) as the malikum of Ebla) to Zizi ((r. undefined – undefined) as a ruler of Hamazi) was found among the Ebla tablets. According to the SKL, king Hadanish of Hamazi ((r. c. 2450 – c. 2430)) held the hegemony over Sumer after defeating Kish; however, he was in turn defeated by Enshakushanna of Uruk.

Hamazi was one of the provinces under the reign of Amar-Suen ((r. c. 2047 – undefined)) of the third dynasty of Ur. Ur-Adad, Lu-nanna (son of Nam-mahani), Ur-Ishkur, and Warad-Nannar may have ruled as governors of Hamazi up until the province was plundered c. 2010 BCE by Ishbi-Erra ((r. c. 2018 – undefined)) of Isin. The rulers of Hamazi are believed to have (r. c. 3245 – c. 2010).

Dynasty of Awan
According to the SKL: a dynasty from Awan exerted hegemony in Sumer after defeating the first dynasty of Ur. It mentions three Awanite kings, who supposedly reigned for a total of 356 years. Their names have not survived on the extant copies, apart from the partial name of the third king, "Ku-ul...", who it says ruled for 36 years. A separate regnal list discovered in Susa names an additional twelve Elamite rulers beside the three on the SKL: Peli, Tata, Ukku-Tanhish, Hishutash, Shushun-Tarana, Napi-Ilhush, Kikkutanteimti, Luh-ishan, Hishep-Ratep, Helu, Khita, and Puzur-Inshushinak. Some have suggested that the first three on the Susanian dynastic list may have been the same three on the SKL said to have ruled over both Elam and Sumer.



The dynasty of Awan was the first from Elam of which anything is known today. The dynasty corresponds to the Old Elamite period (c. 2700 BCE). Awan was a city-state or possibly a region of Elam with an uncertain location, but it has been variously conjectured to have been in the: Khuzestan, Kermanshah, Lorestan, Ilam, and/or Fars provinces of Iran. This dynasty may have exerted hegemony in Sumer after defeating Ur at some point c. 2600 BCE, and may have continued ruling independently over Elam from Awan up until c. 2220 BCE after losing the hegemony. This information is not considered reliable, but it does suggest that Awan had political importance in the 3rd millennium BCE.



As there are very few other sources for this period, most of these names are not certain. Little more of these rulers' reigns is known, but the Elamites were likely major rivals of neighboring Sumer from remotest antiquity; they were said to have been defeated by Enmebaragesi, who is the earliest archaeologically attested Sumerian king, as well as by a later monarch, Enannatum I. It is also known that the Elamites carried out incursions into Mesopotamia, where they ran up against the most powerful city-states of this period, Kish and Lagash. One such incident is recorded in a tablet addressed to Enetarzi, a minor ruler or governor of Lagash, testifying that a party of 600 Elamites had been intercepted and defeated while attempting to abscond from the port with plunder.

Luh-ishan ((r. c. 2350 – undefined)) is the eighth ruler on the Susanian dynastic list, while his father's name "Hishiprashini" is a variant of that of the ninth listed ruler, Hishepratep—indicating either a different individual or (if the same)—that the order of rulers on the Susanian dynastic list has been jumbled. Events become a little clearer at the time of the Akkadian empire, when historical texts tell of campaigns carried out by the kings of Akkad on the Iranian plateau. Luh-ishan was a vassal of Sargon of Akkad around the time that Sargon boasted of defeating Luh-ishan. Sargon's son and successor (Rimush) is said to have conquered Elam, defeating its king named Emahsini. Khita may have signed a peace treaty with Naram-Suen of Akkad c. 2280 BCE.

After the death of Emahsini, Elam became a vassal state ruled by several Akkadian governors. Among these governors were: Eshpum, Epirmupi, and Ili-ishmani. The last two ruled with both the Sumerian title for governor and the Akkadian title for military governor. They (r. c. 2300 – undefined).

Second dynasty of Kish
Two rulers (neither appear on the SKL) are known to have ruled from Kish in between the first and second dynasties: Uhub ((r. c. 2570 – c. 2550)) and Mesilim ((r. c. 2550 – c. 2500)). The SKL names another eight kings for this dynasty: Susuda, Dadasig, Mamagal, Kalbum, Tuge, Mennuna, Enbi-Ishtar, and Lugalngu. Next to nothing is known about the aforementioned eight.

Second dynasty of Uruk
Enshakushanna ((r. c. 2440 – undefined)) was said to have reigned for sixty years on the SKL. An inscription stated that his father was "Elili" (possibly Elulu of the first dynasty of Ur). He is said to have conquered Ur, Akshak, Kish (where he overthrew Enbi-Ishtar), Akkad, Hamazi, and Nippur—effectively claiming hegemony over all of Sumer and adopting the title Lord of Sumer and King of all the Land. He was preceded by three rulers who (r. c. 2500 – undefined): Lugalnamniršumma, Lugalsilâsi, and Urzage (all of whom assumed the title king of Kish; nonetheless, neither are mentioned on the SKL). He was succeeded by Lugalkinishedudu ((r. c. 2430 – undefined)).

Lugalkinishedudu may have retained some of the power inherited by his predecessors—which included rule over Uruk, Ur, and assumed the title king of Kish. The oldest known written mention of a peace treaty between two kings is on a clay nail found in Girsu, commemorating the alliance between Lugalkinishedudu and Entemena of Lagash.

Second dynasty of Ur
The rulers from the second dynasty of Ur may have (r. c. 2455 – undefined). It was preceded by the second dynasty of Uruk on the SKL. Only two, three, or four rulers are mentioned: Nanni, Meskiagnun (son of Nanni), and two unnamed rulers with unknown fathers. Likewise on the SKL: the second dynasty of Ur was succeeded by a dynasty from Adab. Little more is otherwise known about this dynasty; in fact, the once supposed second dynasty of Ur may have never existed.

Dynasty of Adab
Nin-kisalsi ((r. undefined – undefined)) was a governor of Adab and probably the suzerain of Mesilim. Nin-kisalsi may have been succeeded by Lugaldalu. Following this period, the region of Mesopotamia seems to have come under the sway of Lugalannemundu ((r. undefined – undefined)). According to inscriptions, king Lugalannemundu of Adab is said to have subjugated the Four Quarters of the World. However, his empire fell apart with his death; the SKL indicates that Mari in upper Mesopotamia was the next city to hold the hegemony.



First dynasty of Mari
Mari did not start off as a small settlement that later grew; but, more of a planned city that was founded c. 2900 BCE (by Sumerians or possibly even by East Semites) to control the waterways of the trade routes along the Tigris–Euphrates river system. The city was built about 1 to 2 kilometers away from the Euphrates river to protect it from floods, and was connected to the river by an artificial canal that was between 7 and 10 kilometers long, depending on which meander it used for transport, which is hard to identify today. The city is difficult to excavate as it is buried deep under later layers of habitation. A defensive system against floods composed of a circular embankment was unearthed, in addition to a circular 6.7 m thick internal rampart to protect the city from enemies. An area 300 meters in length filled with gardens and craftsmen quarters separated the outer embankment from the inner rampart, which had a height of 8 to 10 meters and was strengthened by defensive towers. Other findings include one of the city gates, a street beginning at the center and ending at the gate, and residential houses. Mari had a central mound, but no temple or palace has been unearthed there. A large building was however excavated (with dimensions of 32 meters X 25 meters) and seems to have had an administrative function. It had stone foundations and rooms up to 12 meters long and 6 meters wide. The SKL records a dynasty of six kings from Mari enjoying hegemony between the first of Adab and the third of Kish: Anbu, Anba, Bazi, Zizi, Limer, and Sharrumiter. It has been suggested that only Sharrumiter held the hegemony after Lugalannemundu. The city was abandoned c. 2550 BCE for reasons unknown.

Second dynasty of Mari
The names of the kings from the first Mariote kingdom were damaged on earlier copies of the SKL, and those kings were correlated with historical kings that belonged to the second kingdom. However, an undamaged copy of the SKL that dates to the old Babylonian period was discovered in Shubat-Enlil, and the names bear no resemblance to any of the historically-attested rulers of the second Mariote kingdom, indicating that the compilers of the SKL had an older (and probably legendary) dynasty in mind that predates the second kingdom.



The rulers of the second Mariote kingdom held the Sumerian title for king, and many are attested in the city, the most important source being a letter written by king Enna-Dagan c. 2350 BCE to Irkab-Damu of Ebla. The chronological order of the kings from the second kingdom era is highly uncertain; nevertheless, it is assumed that the letter of Enna-Dagan lists them in a chronological order. Many of the kings were attested through their own votive objects discovered in the city, and the dates are highly speculative. The kings of the second Mariote kingdom may have (r. c. 2550 – undefined).



The earliest attested king in the letter of Enna-Dagan is Ansud, who is mentioned as attacking Ebla, the traditional rival of Mari with whom it had a century-long war, and conquering many of Ebla's cities, including the land of Belan. The next king mentioned in the letter is Saʿumu ((r. c. 2416 – c. 2400)), who conquered the lands of Ra'ak and Nirum. King Kun-Damu ((r. c. 2400 – c. 2380)) of Ebla defeated Mari in the middle of the 25th century BCE. The war continued with Ishtup-Ishar ((r. c. 2400 – c. 2380)) of Mari's conquest of Emar at a time of Eblaite weakness in the mid-24th century BCE. King Igrish-Halam ((r. c. 2360 – c. 2340)) of Ebla had to pay tribute to Iblul-Il ((r. c. 2425 – undefined)) of Mari, who is mentioned in the letter, conquering many of Ebla's cities and campaigning in the Burman region.

Enna-Dagan also received tribute; his reign fell entirely within the reign of Irkab-Damu of Ebla, who managed to defeat Mari and end the tribute. Mari defeated Ebla's ally Nagar in year seven of the Eblaite vizier Ibrium's term, causing the blockage of trade routes between Ebla and southern Mesopotamia via upper Mesopotamia. The war reached a climax when the Eblaite vizier Ibbi-Sipish made an alliance with Nagar and Kish to defeat Mari in a battle near Terqa. Ebla itself suffered its first destruction a few years after Terqa c. 2300 BCE, during the reign of the Mariote king Hidar. According to Alfonso Archi, Hidar was succeeded by Ishqi-Mari whose royal seal was discovered. It depicts battle scenes, causing Archi to suggest that he was responsible for the destruction of Ebla while still a general.

Third dynasty of Mari
Mari was deserted for two generations before being restored by the Akkadian king Manishtushu. The third Mariote kingdom was ruled by two dynasties: the Shakkanakkus and the Lim. For the Shakkanakkus, the lists are incomplete. A governor appointed to govern the city held the Akkadian title for military governor. Akkad kept direct control over the city, which is evident by Naram-Suen's appointment of two of his daughters to priestly offices in the city.

The first member of the Shakkanakku dynasty on the lists is Ididish, who was appointed in c. 2266 BCE. According to the lists, Ididish ruled for 60 years. He was followed by his son Shu-Dagan. Ishma-Dagan r. c. 2190-2146 BCE after Shu-Dagan. According to the dynastic lists, Ishma-Dagan ruled for 45 years, and was the third military governor. Ishma-Dagan was probably contemporaneous with the Akkadian Empire ruler Shar-Kali-Sharri. Ishma-Dagan had two sons who succeeded him in turn as Shakkanakkus of Mari: Nûr-Mêr and Ishtup-Ilum.

The third Mari followed the second city in terms of general structure, phase P0 of the old royal palace was replaced by a new palace for the military governors. Another smaller palace was built in the eastern part of the city, and contained royal burials that date to the former periods. The ramparts were rebuilt and strengthened while the embankment was turned into a defensive wall that reached 10 meters in width. The former sacred inclosure was maintained, so was the temple of Ninhursag. However, the temples of Ninni-Zaza and Ishtarat disappeared, while a new temple called the "temple of lions" (dedicated to Dagan), was built by the military governor Ishtup-Ilum and attached to it, was a rectangular terrace that measured 40 x 20 meters for sacrifices.

Akkad disintegrated during Shar-Kali-Sharri's reign, and Mari gained its independence, but the use of the Shakkanakku title continued during the following third dynasty of Ur period. A princess of Mari married the son of king Ur-Nammu of Ur, and Mari was nominally under Ur hegemony. However, the vassalage did not impede the independence of Mari, and some Shakkanakkus used the Sumerian title for king in their votive inscriptions, while using the title of Shakkanakku in their correspondence with the Ur's court. The dynasty ended for unknown reasons not long before the establishment of the next dynasty, which took place in the second half of the 19th century BCE.

Third dynasty of Kish
The third dynasty of Kish is unique in that it is represented by a woman named Kubaba ((r. c. 2450 – undefined)). The SKL adds that she had been a tavern-keeper before overthrowing the hegemony of Mari and becoming monarch. According to the Weidner Chronicle: the god Marduk handed over the kingship to Kubaba of Kish during the reign of Puzur-Nirah of Akshak; although, according to the SKL: the Akshak dynasty succeeded the third of Kish. Although its military and economic power was diminished, Kish retained a strong political and symbolic significance. Just as with Nippur to the south, control of Kish was a prime element in legitimizing dominance over the north of Mesopotamia (Assyria and/or Subartu).

Kubaba's dynasty is sometimes said to include her son Puzur-Suen ((r. c. 2365 – c. 2340)) and grandson Ur-Zababa ((r. c. 2340 – c. 2334)). The SKL ascribes a 100-year-long reign for the matriarch, 25 for her son, and (varyingly) 4, 6, or even up to 400 years to her grandson. Altogether they ruled for 131 years.

Sargon of Akkad came from an area near Kish called Azupiranu. He would later declare himself the king of Kish, as an attempt to signify his connection to the religiously important area. Because of the city's symbolic value, strong rulers later claimed the traditional title "king of Kish", even if they were from Akkad, Ur, Assyria, Isin, Larsa, or Babylon. Kubaba was later deified as the goddess Kheba.

Dynasty of Akshak


Akshak achieved independence with a line of five or six kings extending from Unzi, Undalulu, Urur to Puzur-Nirah, Ishu-Il, and Shu-Suen (son of Ishu-Il). These kings of Akshak (r. c. 2459 – c. 2360) before being defeated by the kings in the fourth dynasty of Kish. One ruler preceding Unzi by the name of Zuzu ((r. undefined – undefined)) may have been smited by Eannatum of Lagash.

First dynasty of Lagash


The rulers of this dynasty are believed to have (r. c. 2570 – undefined). Although the first dynasty of Lagash has become well-attested through several important monuments, many archaeological finds, and well-known based off of mentions on inscriptions contemporaneous with other dynasties from the EDIII period; it was not inscribed onto the SKL. One fragmentary supplement names the rulers of Lagash. The first dynasty of Lagash preceded the dynasty of Akkad in a time in which Lagash exercised considerable influence in the region.



Enhengal ((r. c. 2570 – undefined)) is recorded as the first known ruler of Lagash, being tributary to Uruk. His successor Lugalshaengur ((r. c. 2510 – c. 2494)) was similarly tributary to Mesilim. Following the hegemony of Mesannepada, Ur-Nanshe ((r. c. 2494 – c. 2465)) succeeded Lugalshaengur as the new high priest of Lagash and achieved independence, making himself king. He defeated Ur and captured the king of Umma, Pabilgaltuk. In the ruins of a building attached by him to the temple of Ningirsu, terracotta bas reliefs of the king and his sons have been found, as well as onyx plates and lions' heads in onyx reminiscent of Egyptian work. One inscription states that ships of Dilmun (Bahrain) brought him wood as tribute from foreign lands. He was succeeded by his son Akurgal ((r. c. 2466 – undefined)).



Although short-lived, one of the first empires known to history was that of Eannatum ((r. c. 2457 – undefined)), grandson of Ur-Nanshe, who made himself master of the whole of the country of Sumer by annexing the cities of Uruk, Ur, Nippur, Akshak, and Larsa. Umma was made tributary (after he vanquished Ush)—a certain amount of grain being levied upon each person in it, that had to be paid into the treasury of the goddess Nina and the god Ningirsu; in addition, Eannatum's campaigns extended beyond the confines of Sumer as he overran a part of Elam, took the city of Az on the Persian gulf, and exacted tribute as far as Mari. Many of the realms he conquered were often in revolt; furthermore, he seems to have used terror as a matter of policy. His Stele of the Vultures depicts vultures pecking at the severed heads and other body parts of his enemies. During his reign, temples and palaces were repaired or erected at Lagash and elsewhere; the town of Nina—that probably gave its name to the later Niniveh—was rebuilt, and canals and reservoirs were excavated. He also annexed the kingdom of Kish; however, it recovered its independence after his death. His empire collapsed shortly after his death.



Eannatum was succeeded by his brother, Enannatum I ((r. c. 2424 – undefined)). During his rule, Umma once more asserted independence under Ur-Lumma, who attacked Lagash unsuccessfully. Ur-Lumma was replaced by a priest-king, Illi, who also attacked Lagash.



His son and successor Entemena ((r. c. 2420 – undefined)) restored the prestige of Lagash. Illi of Umma was subdued, with the help of his ally Lugal-kinishe-dudu of Uruk, successor to Enshakushana and also on the king-list. Lugal-kinishe-dudu 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 frieze of lions devouring ibexes and deer, incised with great artistic skill, runs round the neck, while the eagle crest of Lagash adorns the globular part. The vase is a proof of the high degree of excellence to which the goldsmith's art had already attained. A vase of calcite, also dedicated by Entemena, has been found at Nippur. After Entemena, a series of weak, corrupt rulers is attested for Lagash: Enannatum II, Enentarzi, Enlitarzi, and Lugalanda who altogether (r. c. 2392 – undefined). The last of these, Urukagina ((r. c. 2361 – undefined)), was known for his judicial, social, and economic reforms (as part of the Code of Urukagina), and his may well be the first legal code known to have existed.

Later, Lugal-Zage-Si, the priest-king of Umma, overthrew the primacy of the Lagash dynasty in the area, then conquered Uruk, making it his capital, and claimed an empire extending from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean. He was the last ethnically Sumerian king before Sargon of Akkad.



First dynasty of Umma


Umma was an ancient city in Sumer best known for its century-long border war against Lagash over the Gu-Edin plain between Umma's earliest known ruler Pabilgagaltuku ((r. c. 2600 – undefined)) and Lagash's Ur-Nanshe. Pabilgagaltuku was subsequently defeated, seized, vanquished by Ur-Nanshe and succeeded by a governor Ush ((r. c. 2520 – undefined)). Ush is mentioned on the Cone of Entemana as having violated the frontier with Lagash—a frontier which had been solemly established by king Mesilim of Kish. It is thought that Ush was severely defeated by Eannatum. The Stele of the Vultures suggests that Ush was killed in a rebellion in his capital city of Umma after the loss of 3,600 soldiers on the field.

Fourth dynasty of Kish
The kings of the fourth dynasty of Kish are believed to have (r. c. 2360 – undefined). Some versions of the SKL lists 6, 7, or 8 kings (including the son and grandson of Kubaba from the third dynasty). Beside the aforementioned two related to the third dynasty, there is: Zimudar, Usiwater, Eshtar-muti, Ishme-Shamash, Shu-ilishu, Nanniya. Zimudar and his successors seem to have been vassals for Sargon of Akkad, and there is no evidence that they ever exercised hegemony in Sumer.

Third dynasty of Uruk


Urukagina was overthrown and his city Lagash captured by Lugalzagesi ((r. c. 2355 – undefined)), the governor of Umma. Lugalzagesi also took Ur, Adab, Larsa, Nippur, Kish, Zabala, Ki’ana, and made Uruk his capital. In a long inscription that he made engraved on hundreds of stone vases dedicated to the god Enlil of Nippur, he boasts that his kingdom extended "from the Lower Sea, along the Tigris and Euphrates, to the Upper Sea." He in turn was overthrown by Sargon of Akkad.

Dynasty of Akkad
The Akkadians were an East Semitic people and their language came into widespread use as the lingua franca of Mesopotamia during this period; but, literacy remained in the Sumerian language. Three stages to the Old Akkadian language have been differentiated, that of the: pre-Sargonic, Akkadian empire, and "Neo-Sumerian Renaissance". The Akkadian language is first attested in proper names of the kings of Kish c. 2800 BCE, preserved in later king lists. There are texts written entirely in Old Akkadian dating from c. 2500 BCE. Use of Old Akkadian was at its peak during the rule of Sargon; however, even then most administrative tablets continued to be written in Sumerian (the language of the scribes).

Akkad was both the name of a city and its surrounding region localized in the general confluence area of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The city is known from various textual sources; although, it has yet to be identified at ground-level. Among these textual sources is at least one text predating the reign of Sargon. Together with the fact that the name Akkad is of non-Akkadian origin, this suggests that the city of Akkad may have already been occupied in pre-Sargonic times. The city of Akkad may have had 36,000 citizens and the region may have occupied up to 30,000 square kilometers by c. 2350 BCE.

Sargon ((r. c. 2335 – undefined)) is sometimes said to have founded the first empire in history by expanding the total surface area occupied by the Akkadians from 30,000 up to 600,000 or even 650,000 square kilometers c. 2350 BCE in the process of invading, conquering, and/or destroying up to 34 cities including: Kish, Uruk, Ur, Lagash, Umma, Kazallu, Nippur, Simurrum, Uru'a, Parahshum, Awan (where he overthrew Luh-ishan), Susa, Mari, Tuttul, Yarmuti, and possibly even Ebla; although, the meaning of the term "empire" is imprecise, and there are earlier Sumerian claimants. Sargon was succeeded by his son (Rimush) who had to face widespread revolts; then, reconquer and/or embark on campaigns against the cities of: Ur, Umma, Adab, Lagash, Der, Kazallu, Elam, and Barakhshe before having himself assassinated and succeeded by Sargon's other son (Manishtushu). The Sargonic dynasty reached its zenith under Sargon's grandson (Naram-Suen, the son of Manishtushu, (r. c. 2255 – undefined)), who began the trend for rulers to claim divinity for themselves once the empire reached its maximal territorial extent at 800,000 square kilometers c. 2250 BCE. The Akkadians further developed the Sumerian irrigation system with the incorporation of large weirs and diversion dams into the design to facilitate the reservoirs and canals required to transport water across vast distances.



The Akkadian empire lost power after the death of Naram-Suen (or shortly before), and was eventually invaded from the Zagros mountains by the Gutian people c. 2244 BCE. It has been hypothesized that the empire declined due to a wide-ranging, centuries-long drought as a result of the 4.2-kiloyear event subsequently influencing widespread abandonment of the agricultural plains in northern Mesopotamia and dramatic influxes of refugees (the Gutians being among them) migrating into southern Mesopotamia. Naram-Suen may have passed on his empire to his son Sharkalisharri (more or less) intact upon his death c. 2218 BCE. The total surface area occupied by the empire is estimated to have been 250,000 or even as low as 200,000 square kilometers c. 2200 BCE. After Sharkalisharri’s death, Sumer fell into anarchy, with no king able to achieve dominance for long.



The inroads of the Gutians seem to have caused a fairly rapid collapse of Akkadian power during this period of instability, and it has even been suggested that one of the four named rivals for the throne (Igigi, Imi, Nanum, and Elulu) was himself a Gutian ruler. The SKL indicated that Shu-turul was the last king of Akkad, ruling for fifteen years after succeeding his father Dudu. Dudu may have been the son of Sharkalisharri, or otherwise related to the Sargonic dynasty. Shu-turul appears to have restored some centralized authority; however, he was unable to prevent the empire eventually collapsing outright from the invasion of the Gutians.



Fourth dynasty of Uruk
The SKL, describing the confusion of the decline of the Akkadian empire after the death of Sharkalisharri, mentions the dynasty of up to five rulers: Ur-nigin, Ur-gigir, Kuda, Puzur-ili, and Ur-Utu. According to the SKL, Ur-Nigin ((r. c. 2254 – undefined)) destroyed the Akkadian empire, which had probably already been weakened by the Gutians, and established a short-lived fourth dynasty of Uruk. However, there are no known year-names and there is otherwise very little archaeological evidence verifying these later rulers of Uruk. These rulers may have been governors of Uruk under the Akkadian empire, but in any event could not have been very prominent. They may have (r. c. 2254 – undefined).

Dynasty of Gutium
It is likely that some of the earlier Gutian kings ruled simultaneously alongside the Akkadians. Sargon mentioned Gutium among his subject lands. According to one stele, Naram-Suen's army of 360,000 soldiers defeated the Gutian king Gula'an, despite having 90,000 slain by the Gutians. Naram-Suen may have passed on his empire to his son Sharkalisharri more or less intact upon his death c. 2218 BCE, or he may have passed on little more than Akkad itself. Sarlagab may have been a contemporary of the Akkadian king Sharkalisharri, assuming that he was the same Gutian king whom Sharkalisharri captured (according to one of his year-names).

It is clear that soon after the death of Naram-Suen, the Akkadian Empire came under increasing pressure from the more and more frequent Gutian incursions. Sharkalisharri came to the throne in an age of increasing troubles. The raids of the Gutian hill peoples of the Zagros mountains that began during Naram-Suen's reign were becoming more and more frequent, and Sharkalisharri was faced with a number of rebellions from vassal kings opposed to the high taxes they were being forced to pay to fund the defense against the Gutian threat. Out of the 24 years of Shar-Kali-Sharri's reign, names survive for some 18 of them, and indicated successful campaigns against the: Gutians, Amorites, and Elamites, as well as temple construction in Nippur and Babylon.

As the Akkadian empire went into decline, the Gutians began to practice hit-and-run tactics on Mesopotamia; they would be long gone by the time forces could arrive to deal with the situation. Their raids crippled the economy of Sumer. Travel became unsafe, as did work in the fields, resulting in famine. The Gutians proved to be poor rulers. Under their crude rule, prosperity declined.



They were too unaccustomed to the complexities of civilization to organize matters properly, particularly in connection with the canal network. This was allowed to sink into disrepair, with famine and death resulting. Thus, a "dark age" swept over Mesopotamia. Cuneiform sources suggested that the Gutians' administration showed little concern for maintaining agriculture, written records, or public safety; they reputedly released all farm animals to roam about Mesopotamia freely, and soon brought about famine and rocketing grain prices.

The Gutian horde displaced the Sargonic dynasty of the Akkadian dominion c. 2199 BCE. Their rulers (r. c. 2244 – undefined). The Gutian dynasty ruled for roughly one century; however, copies of the SKL vary from 4, 25, 80 up to 124 or even 125 years and 40 days. The Gutian people were native to a region known as Gutium presumably somewhere in present-day Kurdistan during ancient times. Next to nothing is otherwise known about their origin.

Second dynasty of Lagash
Although the second dynasty of Lagash ((r. c. 2260 – undefined)) has become well-known based off of mentions on inscriptions contemporaneous with other dynasties from the Old Elamite, Akkadian, Gutian, and/or Ur III periods; it was not inscribed onto the SKL. One fragmentary supplement names the rulers of Lagash. These rulers achieved a Sumerian revival, following the rise and fall of the Akkadian empire, and the conquests of the Gutians. The second dynasty of Lagash rose at the time the Gutians were ruling in central Mesopotamia. The rulers of Lagash, only taking the title of governors achieved a high level of independence from the Gutians in the southernmost areas of Mesoptamia. A native Sumerian ruler, Gudea of Lagash, rose to local prominence and continued the practices of the Sargonic kings' claims to divinity. The previous Lagash dynasty, Gudea and his descendants also promoted artistic development and left a large number of archaeological artifacts.

Second dynasty of Umma
Lugalanatum ((r. c. 2130 – c. 2113)) is known from a tablet in which he mentions his allegiance as a governor to the Gutian king Siium.

Fifth dynasty of Uruk


The Gutians were ultimately driven out by the Sumerians under Utu-hegal ((r. c. 2124 – undefined)). The SKL tells us that Utu-hengal had reigned for seven years (up to 26 or even 426 years in other copies), although only one year-name for him is known from records, that of his accession, suggesting a shorter reign. In the seventh year of the kingship he tragically died in an accident when inspecting a dam (leading some to suspect foul play), and was succeeded by his son-in-law Ur-Nammu. It is possible that Ur-Nammu was originally his governor and/or general. Following Utu-Hengal's reign, Ur-Nammu founded the third dynasty of Ur, but the precise events surrounding his rise are unclear.

Third dynasty of Ur
The kings of the third dynasty of Ur (also referred to as the Neo-Sumerian empire and/or Sumerian Renaissance) (r. c. 2112 – c. 2004). It was a Sumerian ruling dynasty based in the city of Ur and a short-lived territorial-political state which some historians consider to have been a nascent empire. The third dynasty of Ur is commonly abbreviated to Ur III by historians studying the period. It is numbered in reference to previous dynasties, such as the first dynasty of Ur, but it seems the once supposed second dynasty of Ur never existed. Power over the area finally went to the city-state of Ur, when Ur-Nammu ((r. c. 2112 – c. 2095)) founded the Ur III empire and conquered the Sumerian region.

Ur-Nammu rose to prominence as a warrior-king when he crushed the ruler of Lagash in battle, killing the king himself. After this battle, Ur-Nammu seems to have earned the title King of Sumer and Akkad. Ur's dominance over Sumer was consolidated with the famous Code of Ur-Nammu, one of the earliest known law codes (three centuries before the better-known Code of Hammurabi) for Mesopotamia since the Code of Urukagina of Lagash centuries earlier. Although the prologue credits Ur-Nammu, the author is still somewhat under dispute; some scholars attribute it to his son, Shulgi ((r. c. 2095 – c. 2047)). Under Shulgi, state control over industry reached a level never again seen in the region.



Many significant changes occurred in the empire under Shulgi's reign. He took steps to centralize and standardize the procedures of the empire. He is credited with standardizing administrative processes, archival documentation, the tax system, and the national calendar. He captured the city of Susa and the surrounding region, toppling Elamite king Kutik-Inshushinak, while the rest of Elam fell under control of Shimashki dynasty. It is unclear whether defensive forces were in the center or outside the kingdom as we have little evidence of how the kings organized their forces; however, we do know that Shulgi achieved some expansion and conquest.



Although Sumerian was again made official, Sumerian identity was already in decline, as the population became continually absorbed into the Akkadian population. The power of the Neo-Sumerians was waning by the time of Ibbi-Suen ((r. c. 2028 – c. 2004)). The Amorites had come to occupy much of the area to the west. Ibbi-Suen launched military campaigns against both the Amorites and Elamites, but did not manage to penetrate far into Elam. The Elamites, allied with the people of Susa and led by Kindattu, king of the Elamite Shimashki dynasty, managed to sack Ur and lead Ibbi-Suen into captivity, ending the third dynasty of Ur c. 2004 BCE. After this victory, the Elamites destroyed the kingdom, and ruled through military occupation for the next 21 years.

In the north, Assyria remained free of Amorite control until the very end of the 19th century BCE. This marked the end of city-states ruling empires in Mesopotamia, and the end of Sumerian dominance, but the succeeding rulers adopted much of Sumerian civilization as their own.

Dynasty of Larsa




Archaeologically, the fall of the Ur III dynasty corresponds to the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age. After the Ur III dynasty was destroyed by the Elamites c. 2004 BCE, a fierce rivalry developed between the city-states of Larsa, more under Elamite than Sumerian influence, and Isin, that was more Amorite (as the Western Semitic nomads were called). Over the next two centuries or so (the Isin-Larsa period) saw southern Mesopotamia dominated by the cities of Isin and Larsa, as the two cities vied for dominance. Although the dynasty of Larsa ((r. c. 2025 – c. 1736)) has become well-known based off of mentions on inscriptions contemporaneous with other dynasties from the Old Elamite, Ur III, Isin-Larsa, Old Assyrian, and/or Old Babylonian periods—it was not inscribed onto the SKL. Akkadian gradually replaced Sumerian as the spoken language of Mesopotamia somewhere around the turn of the third and the second millennium BCE (the exact dating being a matter of debate), but Sumerian continued to be used as a sacred, ceremonial, literary and scientific language in Mesopotamia until the first century CE.

The Semites ended up prevailing in Mesopotamia by the time of Hammurabi of Babylon, who founded the Babylonian Empire, and the language and name of Sumer gradually passed into the realm of antiquarian scholars. Nevertheless, Sumerian influence on Babylonia, and all subsequent cultures in the region, was undeniably great.

Fourth dynasty of Mari


The third Mariote kingdom was ruled by two dynasties: the Shakkanakkus and the Lim. Mari was deserted for two generations before being restored by the Akkadian king Manishtushu. A ruler was appointed to govern the city who held the title military governor. Akkad kept direct control over the city, which is evident by Naram-Suen's appointment of two of his daughters to priestly offices in the city. For the Shakkanakkus, the lists are incomplete and after Hanun-Dagan who ruled at the end of the Ur era c. 2004 BCE, they become full of lacunae. Roughly thirteen more Shakkanakkus succeeded Hanun-Dagan but only few are known, with the last known one reigning not too long before the reign of Yaggid-Lim who founded the Lim dynasty c. 1830 BCE, which was interrupted by Assyrian occupation in 1796 – c. 1776 BCE.

Sixth dynasty of Uruk
Uruk enjoyed brief periods of independence during the Isin-Larsa period, under kings such as (possibly): Ikūn-pî-Ištar, Sîn-kāšid, Sîn-irībam, Sîn-gāmil, Ilum-gāmil, Sîn-gāmil, Etēia, Anam, ÌR-ne-ne, Rīm-Anum, Nabi-ilīšu, and Narām-Sîn of Uruk.