Log In

Sign up for access to the world's latest research

Mesopotamian history tends to be phrased in terms of stages: Early Dynastic city-states replaced by imperial Akkad, bureaucratic Ur III replaced by the more individualistic Isin-Larsa and Old Babylonian periods thanks to the influence of the Amorites, etc. Lost in this process is a sense of the longue duree of Mesopotamian civilization, the basic and largely unchanging aspects of its society, economy and politics. In this paper I will explore one of these transitions, that between Ur III and Isin-Larsa/Old Babylonian times, by examining the nexus between the cuneiform and archaeological records.

From the 21st Century BC to the 21st Century AD, Proceedings of the International Conference on Neo-Sumerian Studies Held in Madrid, 22-24 July, 2010, 2013

2021

In this paper we investigate the scale and extent of the political institutions of Ur during the beginning of the Early Dynastic period (28 th century BC), a historical juncture that saw the rise of city-states in southern Mesopotamia. We provide a fresh analysis of a group of administrative texts related to field management, originating from the temple household of Nanna, in order to identify patterns of institutional land use, the organizational hierarchy of institutional farming, and the resources at the disposal of the temple. We also combine archaeological, textual and survey data to estimate demographics and agricultural production in the agrarian state of Ur. We provide proof that temple households in the early 3 rd millennium BC controlled land estates that could virtually sustain entire urban sites and exploited them through increasingly complex arrangements with the farming sector. 1 C. Lecompte wrote § § 3, 4, 5.2, and the Appendixes; G. Benati wrote § § 2 and 5.1; § § 1 and 6 were written together. We thank Emmert Clevenstine for having corrected our English, the editors of this volume for useful comments that helped us strengthen the article, and R. Rattenborg for discussing with us relevant methodological aspects of the approach employed in this work. 2 State capacity at the dawn of the Bronze Age: H. Wright's model of agricultural political economy According to the analysis carried out by H. Wright (1969, 27-28), Ur at the beginning of the 3 rd millennium was a town of ca. 21 ha populated by ca. 4,000 people. The institutional sector was formed by at least one large temple household, the temple of Nanna, headed by saĝĝa-officials, and by a palatiallike sector headed by an ensi-official (cf. Benati 2015, § 4.4.5; Sallaberger 2010; Visicato 2000, 18 fn. 17). These political institutions performed functions that largely correspond to those traditionally attributed to the state, i.e. organizing agricultural activities, levying taxes, providing public goods, etc. In the surroundings of Ur were located two small towns-Tell al-Sakheri, and Sakheri Sughir-and some small agricultural villages (Wright 1969, 117; Benati / Leoni / Mantellini 2016; Hammer 2019). The total rural population is estimated to have been around 6,000 individuals (Wright 1969, 27). The center of Ur had at working distance ca. 9,000 ha of arable land, watered by a branch of the Euphrates river and by a network of small channels bringing water to the fields (Wright 1969, 34 fig. 4; Hammer 2019, 196 fig. 19). By analyzing the cuneiform records stemming from the administration of the temple of Nanna, Wright (1969, 27) concluded that the temple household was formed by a class of 2 It has been formerly demonstrated that the agricultural domain mentioned in the ED I texts from Ur belonged to the temple household of the god Nanna, see

This paper investigates the royal court in Babylon as well as the role of Assyrian officials active in Babylonia during the period of Assyrian domination. Although many offices at the Neo-Babylonian court are attested for the first time already during the Neo-Assyrian period (Jursa 2010), the Babylonian court of this period has not yet been studied in detail. This study examines these officials, beginning with the reign of Tiglath-pileser III, the first Neo-Assyrian sovereign to exercise direct kingship over Babylonia. During the following century we witness for the first time direct rule over Babylonia exercised by Assyrian princes acting on behalf of the king, and one of the main questions of this study is how this new situation affected the development of the local court in Babylon. I address this issue first by examining the functions of the Assyrian court officials active in Babylonia, and then by comparing their tasks with those of their counterparts in Assyria. For this task I rely especially on the state correspondence and on some Babylonian documents (the kudurrus). It is clear from studying the Babylonian court representatives that they were more involved in state affairs and military operations than their counterparts in the north, and it seems that this situation also had an effect on the function and rank of some court officials working in the Assyrian homeland, including the post-canonical eponyms.

JANEH, 2020

The paper examines the cuneiform evidence from sixth-century Babylonia (and beyond) for information on the form and aims of Neo-Babylonian imperial rule over its western provinces. While new texts, which hitherto have not been considered in this context, can be brought to bear on the issue, direct evidence from these provinces is still scarce. These documents will thus be supplemented by drawing on the rich information concerning state institutions and resource extraction in the imperial centre. It is argued that in the first half of the Neo-Babylonian period, until ca. 585 BCE, Babylonian imperial rule in the western periphery can be conceptualized primarily as a straightforward exploitative tributary regime. From about the mid-reign of Nebuchadnezzar onwards, however, there is a shift towards a more sustainable resource extraction through the creation of stable pockets of Babylonian presence in the periphery. This diachronic shift was meant to steady and organize the initial ad hoc Babylonian approach. These measures, however, did not prevail, and the chaotic years which followed the 43 years reign of Nebuchadnezzar illustrate the fragility of the relatively short-lived Babylonian imperial age.

in: R. de Boer and J.G. Dercksen (eds), Private and State in the Ancient Near East. Proceedings of the 58th Rencontre Assyriologique at Leiden 16-20 July 2012. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2017

Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 2015: 2, 2015

Political economies of early Mesopotamia are traditionally modeled upon text-oriented research and unilinear schemes. These approaches are flawed in many ways and often over-emphasized the agency of élite groups. An integrated strategy combining archaeological, textual and anthropological theories is used here to draw a more nuanced picture of social arrangements in early 3rd millennium BC Ur. The aim of this paper is to shed light on the changes of political organization and on the manifold economic strategies put in place by political powers in an early urban system in southern Mesopotamia

for organising the workshop, to Stephan Kroll for his help with the image, and to Karen Radner for reading a draft version. This article will be comple-mented by a study with a more pronounced philological approach to be published elsewhere ( VAN KOPPEN forthc.). For abbreviations see the end of this paper. 2 I hint here at the emendation of the royal genealogy in the Agum-kakrime inscription in GASCHE et al. 1998: 88.

Constituent, Confederate, and Conquered Space, 2014

In this brief essay I consider aspects of the conference papers on the "transition to Mittani". The papers have discussed the history of periods and places before the formation of the Mittani state (including Ebla, the Old Assyrian period, Shemshāra and Leilan and Mari) and roughly contemporaneous material from Hittite archives and from Alalakh and other Levantine sites. There were also discussions of environment and subsistence patterns and about pastoral nomads and archaeological data, especially changes in settlement patterns. The organizers asked the participants to focus on the interrelations among local politics ("constituent space"), regional interconnections ("confederate space"), and imperial strategies ("conquered space"). This sense of place is in recent years a regular subject of inquiry, certainly among archaeologists. 1 For these and many other authors, including geographers and historians, landscapes are constructs of the mind as well as physical and measurable entities. Landscapes are ways of seeing that are projected onto the land and express cultural attitudes. Furthermore, politics operates through space, according to Adam T. Smith (2003), in which space reproduces structures and/or constrains agents. 2 History is where events occurred as well as when they occurred, and landscapes are constant reminders of history. In the Epic of Gilgamesh, of course, the hero tells his audience that if they doubt his story, they have only to look upon the walls of Uruk to see its verification. Landscapes of the past are also created by historians. The cartography of political landscapes is mainly approached in this volume by those papers (and in some histories of Mesopotamia) that portray the transition to Mittani rule as the aftermath of a crisis in which landscapes change utterly. This is in particular reference to the end of the Old Babylonian period in Mesopotamia and the long period between the end of the Old Assyrian period and the resumption of centralized political systems in the Middle Assyrian period (under Assuruballit) and the Mittani state. This is often referred to as a "dark age" (since we have no documents from Assyria for several hundred years). In Babylonia the term dark age is now less apt, for reasons to be discussed below. In this paper I wonder about the usefulness of the term dark age, as well as summarizing the presented

A Companion to the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, 2012

Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, 1998

During the Ur III period in southern Mesopotamia, artisans were engaged in the production of crafts that required enormous technical skill and yet craft production appears not to have been an avenue to prestige and power. This paper draws on archival records from artisan workshops and literary sources to demonstrate the intricate fusion of a powerful political ideology and a rigidly controlled economy in which rulers legitimated their authority at the same time that they suppressed the mobility of craft producers. The establishment of a wide range of economic, social and legal differentiation was based on a state strategy designed to promote efficiency and to achieve control of artisan production. Craft producers during this period negotiated their social identity in a variety of domains that were legal, kinship, ethnic and gender based.

NY - Charles Scribner Sons - UNIVERSITY Press- John Wilson And Son's - CAMBRIDGE, U.S.A., 1902

is a rare and insightful work that delves into the rich and complex history of ancient Babylon. Published in the early 20th century, this scholarly volume provides a comprehensive account of Babylonian civilization, tracing its origins, development, and influence over the millennia. Goodspeed meticulously explores the political, social, and cultural aspects of Babylon, from its early foundations and the rise of its empire to its eventual decline and legacy. The book offers a detailed examination of key historical figures, monumental achievements, and the socio-economic structures that defined Babylonian life. Goodspeed's work is notable for its thorough analysis of Babylon's contributions to science, literature, and law, including the famed Code of Hammurabi. Through a meticulous review of archaeological findings, historical records, and contemporary scholarly interpretations, Goodspeed presents a nuanced and authoritative narrative of one of history's most influential civilizations. This rare volume is indispensable for historians, archaeologists, and scholars interested in ancient Mesopotamia, providing an in-depth understanding of how Babylon shaped the ancient world and its lasting impact on subsequent cultures INTRODUCTION PART I: THE CITY-STATES OF BABYLONIA AND THEIR UNIFICATION • The Lands of the Euphrates and Tigris - Page 3 • The Excavations in Babylonia and Assyria - Page 14 • The Language and Literature - Page 25 • Chronology and History - Page 35 • The City States of Babylonia and Their Unification Under Babylon to 2000 B.C. • I. Dawn of History - Page 49 • II. Movements Toward Expansion and Unification - Page 59 • III. Civilization of Old Babylonia: Political and Social - Page 69 • IV. Civilization of Old Babylonia: Literature, Science, Art, and Religion - Page 86 • V. The Times of Khammurabi of Babylon, 2300-2100 B.C. - Page 95 PART II: THE RISE OF ASSYRIA AND ITS STRUGGLES WITH BABYLONIA • The Kassite Conquest of Babylonia and the Appearance of Assyria, 2000-1500 B.C. - Page 121 • The Early Conflicts of Babylonia and Assyria, 1500-1150 B.C. - Page 131 • Civilization and Culture in the Kassite Period - Page 143 • The Times of Tiglath-pileser I, 1100 B.C. - Page 155 PART III: THE ASCENDANCY OF ASSYRIA • The Ancient World at the Beginning of the First Millennium, 1000 B.C. - Page 185 • and the Conquest of Mesopotamia, 885-860 B.C. - Page 203 • The Advance into Syria and the Rise of Urartu: From Shalmaneser II to the Fall of His House, 860-745 B.C. - Page 223 • The Assyrian Revival: Tiglath-pileser III and Shalmaneser IV, 745-722 B.C. - Page 265 • The Assyrian Empire at Its Height: Sargon II, 722-705 B.C. - Page 285 • The Struggle for Imperial Unity: Sennacherib, 705-681 B.C. - Page 293 • Imperial Expansion and Division: Esarhaddon, 681-668 B.C. - Page 305 • The Last Days of Splendor: Ashurbanipal, 668-626 B.C. - Page 317 • The Fall of Assyria, 626-606 B.C. - Page 327 PART IV: THE NEW BABYLONIAN (OR CHALDEAN) EMPIRE • The Heirs of Assyria and the Rise of Babylon - Page 337 • Nebuchadnezzar and His Successors - Page 351 • Babylon Under the Chaldeans - Page 365 • The Fall of Babylon - Page 377 CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY - Page 385 BIBLIOGRAPHY - Page 393 INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS - Page 405 INDEX OF OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCES - Page 422 Frontispiece: The World of Oriental Antiquity Plans of Nineveh and Babylon - Opposite page 278 Tags Ancient History, Babylonian Empire, Assyrian Civilization, Mesopotamian Culture, Euphrates River, Tigris River, Cuneiform Script, Code of Hammurabi, Sumerian Myths, Akkadian Legends, Neo-Babylonian Dynasty, Chaldean Kings, Sumerian Religion, Babylonian Astronomers, Assyrian Art, Mesopotamian Gods, Babylonian Mathematics, Assyrian Military Tactics, Neo-Assyrian Empire, Ancient Near East, Akkadian Language, Mesopotamian Trade, Babylonian Science, Assyrian Architecture, Sumerian Inventions, Babylonian Law Codes, Assyrian Kings, Chaldean Astronomers, Mesopotamian Myths, Babylonian Magic, Assyrian Reliefs, Sumerian Temples, Babylonian Economy, Assyrian Historical Records, Mesopotamian Agriculture, Sumerian Kings, Babylonian Legends, Assyrian Empire Collapse, Mesopotamian Rituals, Akkadian Myths, Babylonian Cultural Practices, Assyrian Conquests, Sumerian Writing Systems, Mesopotamian Beliefs, Babylonian Calendars, Assyrian Tablets, Chaldean Priests, Sumerian Economy, Mesopotamian History, Babylonian Inscriptions, Assyrian Warfare, Sumerian Music, Chaldean Astronomy, Mesopotamian Society, Babylonian Artifacts, Assyrian Temples, Sumerian Artifacts, Akkadian Culture, Babylonian Dynasty, Assyrian Religion, Mesopotamian Civilization, Sumerian Legends, Babylonian Society, Assyrian Kingship, Chaldean Society, Mesopotamian Warfare, Babylonian Contributions, Assyrian Trade Routes, Sumerian Rituals, Akkadian Literature, Babylonian Religion, Assyrian Artifacts, Chaldean Kingdoms, Sumerian Texts, Mesopotamian Ritual Practices, Babylonian Gods, Assyrian Expansion, Akkadian Deities, Sumerian Beliefs, Babylonian Mythology, Assyrian Art History, Mesopotamian Technology, Babylonian Social Structure, Chaldean Empire, Sumerian Society, Akkadian Economy, Babylonian Conquests, Assyrian Engineering, Mesopotamian Chronicles, Sumerian Science, Chaldean Literature, Babylonian Kingship, Assyrian Monuments, Mesopotamian Artifacts, Akkadian Kings, Babylonian Architecture, Sumerian Social Hierarchy, Assyrian Historical Records, Chaldean Mathematics, Mesopotamian Gods and Goddesses, Babylonian History, Sumerian Contributions, Akkadian Astronomical Records, Assyrian Empire Structure, Mesopotamian Language, Babylonian Royalty, Chaldean Conquests, Sumerian Astronomy, Akkadian Social Structure, Babylonian Knowledge, Assyrian Rituals, Mesopotamian Dynasties, Sumerian Myths and Legends, Babylonian Rituals, Assyrian Cultural Practices, Akkadian Histories, Mesopotamian Festivals, Babylonian Historiography, Chaldean Social Structure, Sumerian Religion Practices, Akkadian Astronomical Records, Assyrian Artifacts and Relics, Babylonian Administrative Systems, Mesopotamian Historical Texts, Sumerian Knowledge, Chaldean Astronomy and Science, Assyrian Dynasties, Babylonian Trade Practices, Akkadian Religion, Mesopotamian Myths and Legends, Sumerian Administrative Systems, Chaldean Military Tactics, Babylonian Contributions to Science, Assyrian Writing Systems, Mesopotamian Economic Systems, Akkadian Literary Works, Sumerian Astronomy and Mathematics, Babylonian Governance, Chaldean Kingship, Assyrian Social Structure, Mesopotamian Innovations, Sumerian Contributions to Culture, Babylonian Ritual Practices, Akkadian Historical Records, Assyrian Empire History, Chaldean Contributions, Mesopotamian Texts and Inscriptions, Sumerian Art and Culture, Babylonian Calendar Systems, Akkadian Innovations, Assyrian Religious Practices, Mesopotamian Political Structures, Chaldean Artifacts, Sumerian Astronomy and Science, Babylonian Knowledge Systems, Akkadian Cultural Practices, Assyrian Trade and Commerce, Mesopotamian Contributions to Civilization, Chaldean Social Hierarchy, Sumerian Science and Mathematics, Babylonian Ritual Texts, Akkadian Language and Literature, Assyrian Contributions to Science, Mesopotamian Art and Culture, Chaldean Administrative Systems, Sumerian Beliefs and Practices, Babylonian Innovations, Akkadian Historical Accounts, Assyrian Myths and Legends, Mesopotamian Administrative Systems, Chaldean Political Structures, Sumerian Technological Achievements, Babylonian Royal Inscriptions, Akkadian Contributions to Culture, Assyrian Astronomy and Mathematics, Mesopotamian Scientific Contributions, Chaldean Historical Texts, Sumerian Administrative Texts, Babylonian Cultural Practices, Akkadian Religious Texts, Assyrian Innovations, Mesopotamian Scientific Records, Chaldean Society and Culture, Sumerian Historical Records, Babylonian Knowledge and Learning, Akkadian Rituals, Assyrian Cultural Contributions, Mesopotamian Rituals and Festivals, Chaldean Contributions to Astronomy, Sumerian Scientific Texts, Babylonian Social Practices, Akkadian Contributions to Science, Assyrian Historical Texts, Mesopotamian Innovations in Science, Chaldean Social Practices, Sumerian Contributions to Astronomy, Babylonian Contributions to Mathematics, Akkadian Technological Innovations, Assyrian Social Hierarchy, Mesopotamian Textual Traditions, Chaldean Science and Technology, Sumerian Historical Texts, Babylonian Art and Artifacts, Akkadian Scientific Contributions, Assyrian Administrative Systems, Mesopotamian Science and Technology, Chaldean Innovations in Science, Sumerian Ritual Texts, Babylonian Cultural Innovations, Akkadian Contributions to Mathematics, Assyrian Scientific Records, Mesopotamian Innovations in Astronomy, Chaldean Technological Achievements, Sumerian Textual Traditions, Babylonian Social Hierarchy, Akkadian Historical Records and Texts, Assyrian Ritual Practices, Mesopotamian Cultural Contributions, Chaldean Ritual Texts, Sumerian Technological Innovations, Babylonian Scientific Contributions, Akkadian Ritual Practices, Assyrian Innovations in Science, Mesopotamian Cultural Innovations, Chaldean Historical Records, Sumerian Scientific Contributions, Babylonian Innovations in Astronomy, Akkadian Social Practices, Assyrian Textual Traditions, Mesopotamian Technological Achievements, Chaldean Contributions to Mathematics, Sumerian Ritual Practices, Babylonian Scientific Records, Akkadian Contributions to Astronomy, Assyrian Historical Contributions, Mesopotamian Ritual Innovations, Chaldean Scientific Innovations, Sumerian Historical Innovations, Babylonian Contributions to Culture, Akkadian Technological Records, Assyrian Ritual Texts, Mesopotamian Historical Contributions, Chaldean Innovations in Mathematics, Sumerian Textual Innovations, Babylonian Social Innovations, Akkadian Scientific Texts, Assyrian Cultural Contributions, Mesopotamian Technological Contributions, Chaldean Ritual Practices, Sumerian ...

in W. Sallaberger and I. Schrakamp (eds.), History & Philology (ARCANE 3; Turnhout), pp. 139-156, 2015

G. Marchesi's contribution provides a revised relative chronology of the Early Dynastic periods, including the most important Mesopotamian cities of Adab, Kish, Lagash, Mari, Nippur, Umma, Ur, and Uruk. Marchesi’s chronology is based on a combination of genealogical information and synchronism[s], a palaeographic and linguistic analysis of royal inscriptions, legal and administrative texts, and also considers the archaeological context and the art-historical placement of inscribed artifacts. Marchesi does not use the figures provided by the Sumerian King List (SKL), whose historical value is disputed, but bases his chronology strictly on monumental and administrative texts. New sources lead to a signifcantly refined sequence of rulers, especially for Umma and Adab. The most important results of Marchesi’s contribution are almost complete sequences of the rulers of Uruk, Ur, Umma, and Adab, in addition to various proposals for the chronology and history at the end of the Presargonic period, such as the insertion of Urni of Uruk as a contemporary of Urukagina and predecessor of Enshakushana and a considerable shortening of the latter’s reign. Since the final stage of the Presargonic period in Mesopotamia saw the rise of mightier rulers who extended their dominion far beyond the confines of the traditional city-states, Marchesi introduces a “ProtoImperial” period between the Presargonic/ED IIIb and the Sargonic periods; it encompasses the reigns of Enshakushana and Lugalzagesi of Uruk, Urukagina of Lagash, Meskigala of Adab, Sargon of Akkad, and their contemporaries. [Sallaberger and Schrakamp, ARCANE 3, p. 297.]

• Explore
• Papers
• Topics

• Features
• Mentions
• Analytics
• PDF Packages
• Advanced Search
• Search Alerts

• Journals
• Academia.edu Journals
• My submissions
• Reviewer Hub
• Why publish with us
• Testimonials

• Company
• About
• Careers
• Press
• Help Center
• Terms
• Privacy
• Copyright
• Content Policy