See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/341987822

The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia

Article · January 2010

CITATIONS READS

4 1,014

1 author:

Gianni Marchesi
University of Bologna
37 PUBLICATIONS   78 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

QADIS Project View project

The Royal Mound of A'ali View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gianni Marchesi on 07 June 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 UNIVERSITÀ DI ROMA « LA SAPIENZA »
DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE STORICHE ARCHEOLOGICHE E ANTROPOLOGICHE
DELL’ANTICHITÀ
SEZIONE VICINO ORIENTE

QUADERNO V

ana turri gimilli

studi dedicati al Padre Werner R. Mayer, S.J.

da amici e allievi

ROMA 2010
 VICINO ORIENTE – QUADERNO V

ana turri gimilli

studi dedicati al Padre Werner R. Mayer, S.J.
da amici e allievi

a cura di
M.G. Biga – M. Liverani

ROMA 2010
 VICINO ORIENTE
Annuario del Dipartimento di Scienze Storiche Archeologiche
e Antropologiche dell’Antichità - Sezione Vicino Oriente
I-00185 Roma - Via Palestro, 63

Comitato Scientifico: M.G. Amadasi, A. Archi, M. Liverani, P. Matthiae, L. Nigro,

F. Pinnock, L. Sist
Redazione: L. Romano, G. Ferrero
Copertina: Disegno di L. Romano da Or 75 (2006), Tab. XII
La foto di Padre Mayer è di Padre F. Brenk

UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI ROMA «LA SAPIENZA»

 SOMMARIO

Presentazione 3
M.G. Amadasi Guzzo - Encore hypothèses à Karatepe 7
L. Barbato - Esarhaddon, Na’id-Marduk e gli šībūtu del Paese del Mare 23
th
M.G. Biga - War and Peace in the Kingdom of Ebla (24 Century B.C.)
in the First Years of Vizier Ibbi-zikir under the Reign of the Last King
Išar-damu 39
F. D’Agostino - Due nuovi testi dal British Museum datati all’epoca più
antica di Ur III 59
P. Dardano - La veste della sera: echi di fraseologia indoeuropea in un
rituale ittito-luvio 75
G.F. Del Monte - Su alcune tecniche contabili delle amministrazioni di
Nippur medio-babilonese 85
F. Di Filippo - Two Tablets from the Vicinity of Emar 105
F.M. Fales - The Jealous Superior (ABL 211) and the Term ýābtu in Neo-
Assyrian ‘Everyday’ Texts 117
P. Fronzaroli - Les suffixes éblaïtes de la première personne du duel 129
M. Giorgieri - Osservazioni sull’uso di accad. kubbutu e kubburu in EA
20:64-70 137
M. Liverani - The Pharaoh’s Body in the Amarna Letters 147
P. Mander - The Mesopotamian Exorcist and his Ego 177
M. Marazzi - Pratiche ordaliche nell’Anatolia hittita 197
G. Marchesi - The Sumerian King List and the Early History of
Mesopotamia 231
L. Mori - The City Gates at Emar. Reconsidering the Use of the
Sumerograms KÁ.GAL and KÁ in Tablets found at Meskené Qadime 249
P. Notizia - Ðulibar, Duðduð(u)NI e la frontiera orientale 269
F. Pomponio - Assiriologia e letteratura poliziesca: rapporti tra due
nobili avventure intellettuali 293
M. Ramazzotti - Ideografia ed estetica della statuaria Mesopotamica del
III millennio a.C. 309
D.F. Rosa - Middle Assyrian ginā’ū Offerings Lists: Geographical
Implications 327
M. Salvini - Contributo alla ricostruzione del monumento epigrafico
degli Annali di Sarduri II, re d’Urartu 343
C. Saporetti - Qualche nota dai testi di Ešnunna 353
S. Seminara - ‘Uno scriba che non conosca il Sumerico, come potrà
tradurre?’ I Proverbi bilingui: fra traduzione e reinterpretazione 369
C. Simonetti - Note in margine ad alienazioni immobiliari d’età paleo-
babilonese 375
G. Torri - The Scribal School of the Lower City of Hattuša and the
Beginning of the Career of Anuwanza, Court Dignitary and Lord of
Nerik 383
L. Verderame - Un nuovo documento di compravendita neo-sumerico 397
P. Xella - Su alcuni termini fenici concernenti la tessitura (Materiali per
il lessico fenicio - IV) 417
[Quaderni di Vicino Oriente V (2010), pp. 231-248]

THE SUMERIAN KING LIST

AND THE EARLY HISTORY OF MESOPOTAMIA

Gianni Marchesi - Bologna∗

Of course, there is no such thing as a Sumerian king list. The text usually
referred to as the Sumerian King List (hereafter SKL) is a composition half-
way between a literary text and a list proper, which deals with the history of
kingship in Babylonia from the beginning of time to the early centuries of
the second millennium BC1. In fact, the native original title of this
composition was simply, after its first word, nam-lugal, ‘Kingship’2.
nam-lugal an-ta e11-da-ba / kišiki lugal-àm / kišiki-a ÆIŠ.ÙR-e / mu
600×3+60×6 ì-na, ‘When kingship came down from heaven, (the city of) Kiš
was sovereign; in Kiš, Æušur exercised (kingship) for 2,160 years’. So
begins the oldest extant manuscript of SKL, which dates to the time of
Sulgi(r) (= ‘Šulgi’)3. Later compilers might have felt uncomfortable with

∗ The present paper originates from my PhD dissertation at Harvard University. I have
greatly benefited from the help of several people. Piotr Steinkeller, my advisor at Harvard,
put his photos of the Ur III version of the Sumerian King List at my disposal; Andrew
George generously shared with me his unpublished copies of MS 3175 and MS 3429 (two
new manuscripts of the Sumerian King List in the Schøyen Collection); Jacob Klein
kindly sent me his copy and transliteration of the exemplar in the Brockmon Collection
before its publication; Yoram Cohen, Jeremiah Peterson and Aage Westenholz provided
photographs of other manuscripts. I am most grateful to all of them. My thanks are due to
Glenn Magid for revising my English. This study was made possible by a research grant
from the Department of Archaeology of the University of Bologna.
1 Cf. most recently Glassner 2004, 55-70. The editio princeps is still that by Jacobsen
(1939). The most complete manuscript of SKL – W(eld-)B(lundell) (1923.)444 (= OECT
2, pls. I-IV) – has been re-edited by Glassner (2004, 117-127). An electronic
transliteration and translation of a composite text, based on Old Babylonian sources, is
also available on the website of the Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature
(ETCSL 2.1.1). For an Ur III forerunner, which differs in many respects from the various
Old Babylonian recensions, see Steinkeller 2003 (also cf. the remarks by Glassner 2005b).
In the references to SKL, the line numbering of the ETCSL online version is followed
here (unless reference is made to a specific manuscript).
2 See Kramer 1961, 171 line 25, 174 ad loc.
3 See Steinkeller 2003.

231
 Gianni Marchesi

such an incipit, and with the prominence accorded to Kiš. They provided a
new beginning to the composition by devising a prior descent of kingship in
the Sumerian city of Eridu(g). A pre-existing separate tradition concerning
kings who reigned before the Flood supplied them with the raw material for
reconstructing an antediluvian era of sovereigns with millennium-long
reigns4. According to the redacted tradition, the Deluge came and swept
everything away, putting an end to this primordial age. Kingship came down
from heaven again. The northern (and non-Sumerian) city of Kiš was
selected this time.
In the original version, however, it is likely that Kiš was recorded as the
first seat of kingship. In that city a certain Æušur (‘Tree-Trunk’?) reigned for
hundreds and hundreds of years5. There follows an enumeration of similarly
long-lived kings of Kiš with their respective regnal years6, until the city was
defeated and kingship was transferred to Uruk, or rather to Eƒana(k), the
sacred precinct of Uruk – the city of Uruk proper having not yet been
founded. Various kings succeeded one another in Eƒana(k)/Uruk in the
exercise of kingship. Then Uruk was defeated and kingship moved to
another city. The same story is repeated many times; according to SKL,
kingship continued to shift from one city to another. In this narrative
framework, all the rulers who allegedly held sovereignty over the whole of

4 Cf. Jacobsen 1939, 55-68; Finkelstein 1963; Hallo 1963; idem 1970, 61-66; Civil 1969a,
139; Lambert - Millard 1969, 15-18; Glassner 2004, 56-58, 108-109; Friberg 2007, 236-
241; Peterson 2008. It is also possible, however, that the addition of the antediluvian
section to SKL was not motivated by any particular political or ideological bias, but rather
by the desire of some ancient scholar to combine and reconcile different traditions.
5 For Æušur, see also Frayne - George 1990. Note the variant l ú - ÆIŠ.ÙR - r a in MS 3175
rev. i 9′ (collation courtesy of Andrew George).
6 There is some uncertainty concerning the names of the immediate successors of Æušur.
The name of the second king of Kiš is variously written ku-la-zi-na-be-el (BT 14 i 6
[Klein 2008, 89]; PBS 13, 2 i 3′), kul-la-zi-na-bé-el (MS 3175 rev. i 11′), gul-la-zi!{-an}-
na-‹be›-el (OECT 2, pl. I: WB 444 i 46; cf. Civil 1969b), […]-na-i-be<-el> (Scheil 1934,
160 frag. A i′ 4′) and ‘‹x(-x)-la?›-na-bi-ir’ (Steinkeller 2003, 269 i 5). The first four
spellings are undoubtedly writings of the name Kullassina(i)bêl, ‘He-Rules-over-All-of-
Them’ (cf. Hallo 1963, 52). This name is the re-interpretation of a corrupted original
name, which I would reconstruct as [ku-u]l-‹la›-na-bi-ir (cf. photo in Steinkeller 2003,
289; the identification of the second sign as UL is also supported by a collation by Renee
Kovacs), i.e., /kulla-nawir/, ‘Kulla-Is-Shining’ (cf. ibidem, 277 ad loc.). As regards the
name of the third king of Kiš, previously read ‘Nangišlišma’ (Jacobsen 1939, 78 note 44;
Hallo 1963, 53), the unpublished manuscript MS 3175 rev. i 13′ gives it as na-an-zi-iz-li-
dar-ku. The same spelling probably also occurs in BT 14 i 8 (collated from a cast in the
University Museum; cf. Klein 2008, 89). Other sources bear the variants [n]a-‹zíl›-zíl-tar-
ku-um (Steinkeller 2003, 269 i 7; cf. photo, ibidem, p. 289), na-an-iz-li-‹dar›-ku (PBS 13,
2; collated) and […]-li-tar-ku (Scheil 1934, 160 frag. A i′ 6′).

232
 The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia

Babylonia are listed one after the other uninterruptedly, except for one break
– a time of political confusion and anarchy, during which it was not clear
who the king was7. Apart from this, SKL provides us with an unbroken
sequence of kings who exercised kingship. Some of them ruled for hundreds,
or even thousands, of years; others ruled for more ‘human’ periods of time.
Legendary kings of the distant past are followed by kings known from
historical sources.
Some manuscripts add short biographical notes about particularly
remarkable figures. Thus, for instance, we are told that certain personages,
before becoming king, were either a shepherd, a fisherman, a smith, a fuller,
a boatman, a leatherworker, a low-ranking priest, etc.8. Even a female
tavern-keeper seems to have exercised kingship, and not for a short time9.
Other notes refer to ‘historical’ events, such as a successful military raid or
the foundation of a city10. Elements from anecdotal literature and fragments
of historical traditions found their way into SKL11. Some quite obscure
myths and legends, probably transmitted only orally, are also alluded to12.
SKL, therefore, is not simply a list of kings and dynasties: it is a complex
and composite literary work with a long redactional history. The most
ancient source is from Ur III, but we have several clues to the existence of an
earlier version dating back to the Sargonic period13, and possibly written in
the Akkadian language14. Clearly SKL underwent a number of changes over
the course of time. Some of these changes were accidental, due simply to
errors and lack of accuracy in the transmission process. Others were the
result of deliberate manipulations or the interpolations of other textual
sources15.
Although the circumstances under which SKL was created are still
unknown, it is probable that SKL originally served to legitimize, in some

7 SKL 284-289. Cf. Steinkeller 2003, 272 iv 26′ - v 4′, 275, 280 ad iv 29′.
8 Cf. Jacobsen 1939, 142-143; Vincente 1995, 259-260.
9 See Appendix below.
10 See ibidem.
11 Cf. Jacobsen 1939, 142-147; Wilcke 1988, 122-126.
12 Such as a lost myth about animal kings (cf. Wilcke 1989, 567); the story of the first king
of Uruk, Meskiƒaæ-the-Mighty, who ‘entered the see and went up to the mountain ranges’
(see Appendix below); the legend of the birth of Gilgameš (see ibidem).
13 Cf. Wilcke 2001, 108-115; Steinkeller 2003, 281-283; Glassner 2004, 95-96; idem 2005a.
14 Traces of an older (?) Akkadian version of SKL or at least evidence that it originated in an
Akkadian-speaking milieu are found in the oldest preserved manuscript: cf. Steinkeller
2003, 272 iv 26′-29′, 279 ad iv 26′-27′, 280 ad iv 29′.
15 Cf. Steinkeller 2003, 283-286.

233
 Gianni Marchesi

manner, the domination of the kings of Akkad over the whole of Babylonia.
In point of fact, SKL anachronistically and fictionally projects the political
situation of the Sargonic period – when the entire land of Sumer and Akkad
was for the first time unified – into the distant past. At any one time, SKL
argues, there was only one legitimate seat of kingship and only one
legitimate king, whose authority extended over the entire country. So it has
been from time immemorial. Such is the leitmotif of SKL. Of course, the
political reality of the region before the advent of the Akkadian dynasty was
actually quite different. Early Dynastic Babylonia was subdivided into
several territorial political entities – the so-called city-states – each with its
own political leader, whether he was styled en, lugal or ‘énsi’16. However,
historic reality is not what SKL is concerned with. Once it became a
traditional authoritative text, it is likely that SKL was utilized again and
again by later Babylonian sovereigns, or by political circles close to them,
for their own ideological and political purposes17. Finally, the addition of
biographical notes to SKL might reflect a genuine interest in history and
indicate, moreover, that a shift was underway in the very uses of the King
List from the primarily political/ideological to the historiographical18.
Therefore, SKL is a document of exceptional interest: it provides us with
a unique reconstruction of the history of early Babylonia by the Babylonians
themselves. The absence of any theological speculation in SKL is also
noteworthy, and unique in Sumerian literature. No deity plays a role in the
numerous dynastic changes that are related in SKL: kingship is transferred
from city to city as a consequence of military events only19. The sole divine
entity in SKL is kingship itself, which, by virtue of its descending from
heaven, was conceptualized as a divine institution.
On the other hand, the history told by SKL is largely fictional and
mythical in character. Though acknowledging this fact, scholars in the past
have relied heavily on SKL data for reconstructing the dynasties and
chronology of third millennium Mesopotamia20. The most strenuous

16 Cf. Marchesi 2006b, 220-229.

17 Cf. Jacobsen 1939, 137-141; Kraus 1952, 46-49; Michalowski 1983; Wilcke 1989; idem
2001, 100-116; Vincente 1995, 267-268; Steinkeller 2003, 283-286; Glassner 2004, 96-
110. Such ‘political’ uses are, however, denied by Westenholz (1999, 27), who remarks
that ‘none of the kings who supposedly commissioned the work ever referred to it,
however obliquely, in justification of their rule’ (cf. also Steiner 1992).
18 Cf. Steinkeller 2003, 286. Such notes are totally absent in the Ur III version of SKL.
19 Cf. Cooper 1983, 29.
20 See, for example, most recently Frayne 2008, 5-6, 18, 35-36, 38, 50-53, 295, 297, 377-
378, 410.

234
 The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia

defender of the historical value of the information that SKL provides was its
editor, Thorkild Jacobsen21. Jacobsen was of the opinion that, even though
the arrangement of SKL and the succession of the various dynasties is ‘a
later construction of no significance’, the actual materials from which it was
built up (i.e., names of kings, reign lengths, etc.) represent ‘a historical
source of high value, from which only some exaggerated reigns occurring
with the earliest rulers should be segregated’22.
Jacobsen’s belief in the general historical veracity of SKL led him to
arbitrarily emend the text or restore broken portions of it with the names of
kings known from historical sources23, and to suggest unlikely ad hoc
readings for some of the royal names in SKL in order to approximate the
names of known historical sovereigns. So, for instance, Jacobsen
reconstructed the badly preserved name of the penultimate king of the
Second Dynasty of Kiš in WB 444 iv 31 as ‘i-enbini-ib-eš4-‹tár›’ and identified
it with en-bí-aš11-dar (= ‚Inbi‚aštar)24, the name of the Pre-Sargonic king of
Kiš who was defeated and taken prisoner by Enšagkušuƒanak, king of
Uruk25. However, WB 444 iv 31 actually reads i-bi-‹x.x.x› and an
unpublished duplicate has i-bí-dEN.Z[U] (= Ibbisuy–n/Ibbisîn) instead26.
As Jacobsen had done, so did other scholars. Geller wanted to recognize
the names of NI-zi and Śaƒūmum – respectively a ‘king’ (LUGAL) and a
‘lord’ (EN) of Mari who are known from the Ebla archives – in the section
of SKL that deals with a Pre-Sargonic dynasty of Mari27. Accordingly, he
read ‘‹ná›-zi’ and ‘[s]a-ƒu-me’ in two manuscripts of SKL (PBS 13, 1 v 12
and WB 444 v 29, respectively). However, the former reading, though
possible epigraphically, is unlikely28, and the latter is incorrect29. Equally
unlikely is Klein’s tentative restoration ‘lugal-ki-‹ni?›-š[è?-du7-du7]’ (one of
the various spelling of the name of a well-known Early Dynastic king of

21 Cf. Jacobsen 1939, 165-190.

22 Ibidem, 167. Also cf. Klein 1991, 127 note 20.
23 See Jacobsen 1939, 92-95 iii 41a -41c, 100-101 iv 47a - v 7.
24 Ibidem, 96 with note 159, and 169.
25 Cf. Steible 1982, 293-294 Enšak. 1; Frayne 2008, 430 E1.14.17.1.
26 MS 3429 ii 6′.
27 Geller 1987, 144-145.
28 Cf. Michalowski 1992, 248; Vincente 1995, 258 ad ii 25′.
29 WB 444 v 29 (OECT 2, pl. III) reads: [li?-im?]-er gudu mu 10×3 ì-ak (collated from
4
photograph; cf. Vincente 1995, 242 ii 28′; and ibidem, 258-260).

235
 Gianni Marchesi

Uruk) in BT 14 v 8′30: the preserved traces of the sign after KI rules out the
possibility that this was NI, and there are no traces of ŠÈ31.
Very few of the Pre-Sargonic royal names mentioned in SKL are actually
attested in sources from the Early Dynastic period. In fact, are only seven
that do32:

Enmeparagêsi aka Meparagêsi of Kiš33 SKL 83

Pabilgames (‘Gilgameš’) of Uruk34 SKL 112
Mesƒanepadda of Ur SKL 135
Meskiƒaænuna(k) aka Mesnunekiƒaæ of Ur35 SKL 137
Elulu aka Elili of Ur36 SKL 141

30 Klein 2008, 83.

31 Cf. Klein 2008, 89 (copy) and 91 (photo). Another manuscript of SKL, Ni. 9712b
(Kramer 1976, pl. 125), reads, at this point, lugal-uraš-e (col. iii′ 4′).
32 Note: 1) the identification of Nanne (SKL 193) with Ayaƒanepadda, king of Ur (cf. Gadd
1925, 25-26; Jacobsen 1939, 93 note 145), has no real grounds; 2) the alleged inscriptions
of two kings of Akšak - Uædalulu (SKL 234) and Urƒur (SKL 235) - which were reported
to have been found at Tell ‚Umar, ancient Seleucia (Waterman apud Barton 1928, 18;
Waterman 1931, 6), turned out to not exist (see Barnett 1963, 19 note 90); 3) the
attribution of a mace-head inscription from Ur to king ‘Anbu/Ansud/Ilšu/Ilum-pû’ of Mari
(SKL 211; cf. Burrows 1934, 322; Jacobsen 1939, 103 with note 189; Sollberger - Kupper
1971, 88 note 1 to IG1a; Kupper 1976-80; Steible 1982, 286 AnUr 13; Cooper 1986, 86
Ma 1.1; Vincente 1995, 257 ad ii 24′; Frayne 2008, 300-301 E1.10.1.2) is incorrect: the
inscription in question, in fact, reads: dutu / ŠEŠ.‹KI›.[N]A / ‹mu›[-gub] (or: [a] ‹mu›[-
ru]), ‘ŠEŠ.KI.NA [set up] (this mace) for Utu’ (or: ‘… [presented] to Utu’) (Woolley
1934, pl. 183c; for the PN ŠEŠ.KI.NA, see Pomponio 1987, 226-227; Gelb et alii 1991,
177; etc.).
33 Cf. Edzard 1959. As suggested by Edzard, it is quite possible that the name
Enmeparagêsi, which is usually written en-me-para10-ge(4)(-e)-si (cf. Klein 1991, 126 note
12; Oelsner 2003, 213 lines 1 and 3; Steinkeller 2003, 270 ii 7 and 9), stems from the
misinterpretation of an original *en me-para10-ge-si, ‘lord Meparagêsi’. For a dissenting
opinion, cf. Michalowski 2003. According to Michalowski, en-ME-para10-ge(4)(-e)-si was
a fictitious name to be read ‘Enishibbaragesi’. However, note the variant spelling an-mi-
para10-ge-sa6 in an unpublished text from Meturan (quoted by Cavigneaux - al-Rawi 1993,
93), which supports a reading of the sign ME as me, rather than išib.
34 For Pabilgames as the original form of Gilgameš’s name, cf. A. George 2003, 71-74; and
Marchesi 2004, 195-197. The PN pabilgax(‘ÆIŠ’.PAP.NE)-utu-pàd-da (‘Pabilgames-Is-
the-Chosen-One-of-Utu’) in UET 2, 281 ii 5 points to the historicity of the king of Uruk
(cf. Marchesi 2004, 195-197).
35 Cf. Marchesi 2004, 168 note 97.
36 Cf. ibidem.

236
 The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia

Enkušušaƒana(k)37 aka Enšagkušuƒanak of Uruk38 SKL 186

Lugalzagêsi of Uruk SKL 259

The great majority of the Pre-Sargonic rulers listed in SKL are not
attested in Early Dynastic texts and their names do not even occur in the
Sumerian and Akkadian onomasticon of the third millennium BC39. These
facts alone are quite telling about the historical reliability of SKL. Moreover,
the durations of the reigns attributed to the few kings who do occur in Early
Dynastic sources are either wholly unrealistic, or clearly artificial (round
figures, multiples of six, etc.):

37 This name, written en-PIRIÆ.DU-an-na, is traditionally read ‘en-šákan-ša -an-na’.

4
However, it should be noted that šákan is a value of the sign ÆÌR, not of PIRIÆ (in the
Old Babylonian period, the two signs, ÆÌR and PIRIÆ, have not yet merged). An
alternative reading en-kušux-ša4-an-na is suggested by the variant spelling en-kušu-ša4-
an-na in BT 14 v 6′ (Klein 2008, 89). For the value kušux of PIRIÆ, cf. Alster 1990, 80 ad
TIM IX 20:5. Note also the further variant [en]-kušux-šà-an-‹na›, in the Leilan recension
of SKL (Vincente 1995, 241 and 244 ii 16′).
38 Written en-šag -KÚŠ-an-na. Note that šag -KÚŠ is an Early Dynastic spelling for
4 4
šag4/šà-KÚŠ.Ù(= kušuxù).
39 This is true of Alulima(k) (SKL 3), Alalæar (SKL 5), Enmenluƒana(k) (SKL 11),
Enmengalƒana(k) (SKL 13), Dumuzi(d) (SKL 15 and 109), Ensipa(d)zi(d)ƒana(k) (SKL
20), Enmendurƒana(k)/Enmendurƒankî(k) (SKL 26), Uburtutu (SKL 32), Æušur (SKL 43;
Steinkeller 2003, 269 i 3; cf. note 5 above), Kullassina(i)bêl/Kullanawir* (?) (SKL 46;
Steinkeller 2003, 269 i 5*; cf. note 6 above), Nanzizlidarku/Nazizziltarkum* (SKL 48;
Steinkeller 2003, 269 i 7*; cf. note 6 above), Entaraðƒana(k) (SKL 50; Steinkeller 2003,
270 i 9), Babum (SKL 52; Steinkeller 2003, 270 i 11), Pūƒan(n)um (SKL 54; Steinkeller
2003, 270 i 13), Zuqaqīp (SKL 58), Atabba (SKL 60), Etana (SKL 64), Balið/Pālið (?)
(SKL 68), Enmenuna(k) (SKL 71; Steinkeller 2003, 270 ii 1), Melamkišî(k) (SKL 72),
Barsalnuna(k) (SKL 74; Steinkeller 2003, 270 ii 3), Z(/S)amug (SKL 76),
Ilqû/Iltaśadûm/Ilqeśadûm* (SKL 80-81; Steinkeller 2003, 270 ii 5*, 277 ad loc.),
Meskiƒaæ(gašer) (SKL 96), Enmerkar (SKL 102), Udulkalama(k) (SKL 119),
Ennuntaraðƒana(k) (SKL 124), Mesðe (?) (SKL 126), Melamƒana(k) (SKL 127), Lugal-
KI.TÙN (SKL 129), Kišiƒišk(/q)issu (Steinkeller 2003, 270 ii 11 = SKL 160),
Dadase(LUM*) (SKL 163; Steinkeller 2003, 270 ii 13*), Mamagal (SKL 164; Steinkeller
2003, 270 ii 15), TÚG-e (SKL 169) Mennuna(k) (SKL 170), Ðadaniš (SKL 179),
Lugalƒuraše (SKL 188), Argandeƒa (SKL 189), Meskiƒaænannâ(k) (SKL 196),
Lugalƒanemundu (SKL 205), Lim‚er (SKL 217), Śarrumīṭer (SKL 218), Uæzi(g) (SKL
232) Uædalulu (SKL 234), Zimudar (SKL 250; Steinkeller 2003, 271 iii 6), Uñiwatar
(SKL 251).

237
 Gianni Marchesi

Enmeparagêsi of Kiš 900 years

Pabilgames (‘Gilgameš’) of Uruk 126 years
Mesƒanepadda of Ur 80 years
Meskiƒaænuna(k) of Ur 30/36 years
Elulu of Ur 25 years
Enkušušaƒana(k) of Uruk 60 years
Lugalzagêsi of Uruk 25 years

In view of these facts it is clear that SKL has a little to offer us in

reconstructing the historical chronology of the Early Dynastic period. Any
such reconstruction should be based on Early Dynastic sources only. The
picture that emerges when we do rely exclusively on such sources is, of
course, dramatically different from that presented by SKL40.

APPENDIX: HISTORICAL NOTES IN SKL

a)
1) e-ta-na sipa lú an-šè / b)ba-e11-da / c)lú kur-kur mu-un-ge-na /
d)
lugal-àm, ‘Etana, the shepherd, the one who ascended to
heaven41, the one who stabilized all the lands, became king’ (SKL
64-67)42.

a: WB 444 ii 16; PBS 5, 2 i 13′-14′; PBS 5, 3 i 13′-14′ (‹e›-ta-na

sipa / [lú] ‹an-šè›); PBS 5, 5 i 12′. The Susa recension has ‹e›-da-
na, in the place of e-ta-na (Scheil 1934, 150 i 12′), and an-še for
an-šè (ibidem, line 13′).
b: PBS 5, 3 i 14′ (‹ba-e11›-da). WB 444 ii 17 has ba-e11-dè instead.
Other manuscripts: ba-e11-‹x› (Scheil 1935, 150 i 13′); ì-ib-e11-da
(PBS 5, 2 i 14′; collated); ‹íb-x›-[…] (PBS 5, 5 i 12′).
c: WB 444 ii 18. Other manuscripts have: lú kur-kur{-ra} mu-un-
ge/ge4*-na (PBS 5, 2 i 15′; Scheil 1934, 150 i 14′*); or: [… mu-un-
ge]-né (PBS 5, 3 i 15′).
d: WB 444 ii 19. Omitted in PBS 5, 2 (Nippur recension A) and in
the Susa recension (Scheil 1934, 150).

40 Cf. Marchesi 2010, tables 1-2.

41 This note clearly refers to the well-known legend of Etana (cf. Kinnier Wilson 1985;
Alster 1989; Steinkeller 1992, 248-255; Selz 1998).
42 Cf. Alster 2005, 302 line 10 (‘Ballade of Early Rulers’) and the omen BRM 4, 13:33
(quoted by Selz 1998, 154) – both of which derive from this passage of SKL.

238
 The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia

1a) [e-ta-na sipa lú an-šè] ‹ba›-a[n-e11]-dè / [lugal? k]ur-kur-ra,

‘[Etana, a shepherd, the one] who [ascend]ed [to heaven], [the
sovereign] of all the lands (?)’, (ruled for x years) (Leilan
recension: Vincente 1995, 244 i 7′-8′)43.
a)
2) en-me-para10-ge-si / b)lú ma-da elamki-ma / c)æeštukul-bé íb-ta-an-
ðaš!(GAM)<-a>44 / d)lugal-àm, ‘Enmeparagêsi, the one <who>
broke the weapons of the land of Elam45, became king’ (SKL 83-
86)46.

a: PBS 5, 5 i 22′ (‹en›-me-para10-ge-si). Other manuscripts have the

variants en-me-[para10-ge4]-e-si (BT 14 ii 13 [Klein 2008, 89]) and
en-me{-en}-para10-ge-si (WB 444 ii 35).
b: WB 444 ii 36; PBS 5, 5 i 22′ (lú ‹ma›-da el[amki-m]a). BT 14 ii
14 (Klein 2008, 89) seems to have the variant [ela]m‹ki-da› or
[ela]m‹ki-ta› (cf. Klein 2008, 86 ad loc.).
c: WB 444 ii 37 (collated by J. Dahl); PBS 5, 3 ii′ 1′ (ÿeš‹tukul›-bé
‹íb-ta›-[…]).
d: WB 444 ii 38. Possibly omitted in BT 14 + PBS 5, 3 (Nippur
recension B; cf. Klein 2008, 81 ii 16).

2a) [en-me-para10-ge]-si lú ma-da lú [el]am-ma / tukul-b[é …],

‘[Enmeparagê]si, the one [who broke] the weapons of the land of
the [El]amites’, (ruled for x years) (Leilan recension: Vincente
1995, 244 i 17′).

43 Cf. Vincente 1995, 240 and 247.

44 Although WB 444, the only source available for the final part of this line, has GAM, the
similar sign TAR (with the value ðaš) is, however, expected here (cf. the following note).
As far as I know, GAM is never used in conjunction with æeštukul.
45 Cf. Frayne 1990, 175 E4.2.9.13 lines 24-25: æeštukul lú érim-ma-na / íb-ta-an-ðaš-a-ta,
‘After he had broken the weapons of his enemy’; ibidem, 124 E4.2.6.1 lines 22-23:
æeš
tukul-né ðé-eb-ta-ðaš-e, ‘may (the god Ninæirsû(k)) break his weapon(s)’; Šulgi B 47
(ETCSL 2.4.2.02): æeštukul igi-nim-ma du10-æá bí-ðaš, ‘I broke the weapons of the
highlands over my knees’; etc.
46 This note is not present in the Susa recension (cf. Scheil 1934, 160 frag. A ii′ 2′-3′).

239
 Gianni Marchesi

a)
3) é-an-na-ka / b)mes-ki-áæ-ga-še-er / c)dumu dutu en-àm / d)lugal-àm,
‘In the Eƒana(k), Meskiƒaæ-the-Mighty47, son of the Sun-god,
became the en-priest (of Inƒana(k)) and became king’ (SKL 95-98).

a: WB 444 ii 47; PBS 5, 2 ii 4′; Wilcke 1987, 90 ii 4 ([…]-ka);

Vincente 1995, 244 i 22′ ([…]-‹x-ka›).
b: WB 444 iii 1 ([mes-ki]-áæ-ga-[še-er]); Wilcke 1987, 90 ii 5
([mes-ki-á]æ?-[ga-še]-er); Vincente 1995, 244 i 22′ (mes-ki-áæ-[ga-
š]e-er). PBS 5, 2 ii 5′ has mes-ki-in-ga-še-er instead.
c: WB 444 iii 2 ([dumu] dutu en-à[m]); PBS 5, 2 ii 6′-7′; Wilcke
1987, 90 ii 6 ([…-à]m?); Vincente 1995, 244 i 22′ (dumu ‹d›[utu]
‹en›-àm).
d: WB 444 iii 3 ([lugal]-àm); PBS 5, 2 ii 8′; Wilcke 1987, 90 ii 7
([lu]gal-à[m]). Expected (cf. Vincente 1995, 247 ad i 7′-8′), but
apparently omitted in the Leilan recension (cf. Vincente’s copy, on
p. 244, col. i 22′-23′).
a)
4) mes-ki-áæ-ga-še-er / b)ab-ba ba-an-ku4 / c)ður-saæ-šè ba-e11,
‘Meskiƒaæ-the-Mighty entered the sea and went up to the mountain
ranges’ (SKL 99-101)48.

a: WB 444 iii 4 ([mes]-ki-áæ-ga-[še-er]); Wilcke 1987, 90 ii 8

([mes-ki-áæ?-g]a-še-er); Vincente 1995, 244 i 24′. PBS 5, 2 ii 10′
has mes-ki-in-ga-še-er instead.
b: WB 444 iii 5; PBS 5, 2 ii 11′ (‹ab-ba› ba-an-ku4); Wilcke 1987,
90 ii 9 ([…]-k[u4]); Vincente 1995, 244 i 24′.
c: WB 444 iii 6. Other manuscripts have the variants ba-
‹a?›(possibly erased)-e11 (PBS 5, 2 ii 12′), [ba-a]n-‹e11› (Wilcke
1987, 90 ii 10) and ba-an-‹e11›-dè (Vincente 1995, 244 i 24′).

5) en-me-kár dumu mes-ki-á[æ-ga-še-er] / lugal unugki-ga lú un[ugki] /

mu-un-dù-a / lugal-àm, ‘Enmerkar, the son of Meskiƒa[æ-the-
Mighty], the king of Uruk, the one who built Ur[uk], became king’
(WB 444 iii 7-10 = SKL 102-105).

5a) en-me-er-kár / dumu mes-ki-in-ga-še-er / lugal unugki-ga / lú unugki

/ mu-un-da-dù-a / lugal-àm, ‘Enmerkar, the son of Meskiƒaæ-the-

47 Lit. ‘Meskiƒaæ – He Is Mighty’ (cf. Edzard 1993-97).

48 For a different interpretation, cf. Glassner 2004, 121 and 151.

240
 The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia

Mighty, the king of Uruk, the one under whom Uruk was built,
became king’ (Nippur recension A: Ni. 9712a i′ 2′-7′ [Kramer
1976, pl. 125]; PBS 5, 2 ii 13′-17′49).

5b) en-me-kár dumu mes-ki-áæ-ga-še-er-‹ra›-ke4 lú unugki{-ga} / mu-

un-dù-a, ‘Enmerkar, son of Meskiƒaæ-the-Mighty, the one who
built Uruk’, (ruled for x years) (Leilan recension: Vincente 1995,
244 i 25′-26′).
a)d
6) dumu-zi šu-ðadx(PEŠ) / b)eriki-né ku6-aki, ‘Dumuzi(d), a
fisherman, whose city (of birth) was Kūƒar’, (ruled for x years)
(SKL 109-110)50.

a: WB 444 iii 14; PBS 5, 2 ii 21′. The Leilan recension has šu-ða,
instead of šu-ðadx (Vincente 1995, 245 lower edge i 1), while BT
14 reads, at this point, dumu-zi šu-ða/[ð]adx (Klein 2008, 89 iii
6)51.
b: WB 444 iii 15; PBS 5, 2 ii 22′; Vincente 1995, 245 lower edge i
1. BT 14 iii 6 (Klein 2008, 89) has eri-‹né›, instead of eriki-né.
a)d
7) ÆIŠ.BILga-mes / b)ab-ba-né líl-lá / c)en kul-ab-ba-ke4, ‘Gilgameš,
whose father was a ghost52, the lord of Kulƒāb(a)’, (ruled for x
years) (SKL 112-114).

a: WB 444 iii 17. PBS 5, 2 ii 24′ has the spelling variant

d
ÆIŠ.BÍLga-[mes], which may also occur in the Susa recension (cf.
Scheil 1934, 150 ii 7′).
b: WB 444 iii 18; PBS 5, 2 ii 25′. Scheil 1934, 150 ii 8′ has ab-né
[…] instead.
c: WB 444 iii 19. Other manuscripts bear the variants
KUL.UNU[G …] (PBS 5, 2 ii 26′) and k[ul]-la-ba-ke4 (Vincente
1995: 245 lower edge i 2).

7a) ‹šu›(sic!) en-me-‹para10-ge4-e-si-ta› / nam-ra ‹AK› / dÆIŠ.‹BIL/

BÍLga›-mes / ab-ba-né líl-lá / en kul-ab‹ki›-ke4 / ‹lugal-àm›, ‘He

49 Bearing the erroneous variant mes-ki-in-ga-še-er-ke on line 14′.

4
50 For this personage, cf. Marchesi 2004, 166 note 86.
51 For the reading of šu-PEŠ as šu-ðad , cf. Sjöberg 1996, 126 ad 23.
x
52 Cf. Wilcke 1989, 562-563.

241
 Gianni Marchesi

who took (away) the booty from the hands of Enmeparagêsi,

Gilgameš53, whose father was a ghost, the lord of Kulƒāb(a),
became king’ (Nippur recension B: BT 14 iii 9-14)54.
a)
8) kišiki-a kù-dba-ú / b)munuslú-kaškúrun-na / c)suðuš kišiki mu-un-ge-na
/ d)lugal-àm, ‘In Kiš, Kubbāwû(k) (= ‘Kubaba’)55, the woman
innkeeper who consolidated the foundations of Kiš, became king’
(SKL 224-227).

a: BM 108857:9 (Scheil 1912; Thureau-Dangin 1918, 59); WB 444

v 36 ([…-d]ba-ú); Vincente 1995, 245 lower edge ii 2 (with the
variant kù-dbu-ú56).
b: BM 108857:9 (Scheil 1912; Thureau-Dangin 1918, 59); WB
444 v 37 ([…]-na); Wilcke 1987, 92 v 1′ ([munus]lú-kaškúrun-[na]);
Vincente 1995, 245 lower edge ii 2 (munus[…]).
c: BM 108857:9 (Scheil 1912; Thureau-Dangin 1918, 59); WB 444
v 38 ([…]ki mu-un-ge-na); Wilcke 1987, 92 v 2′ (suðuš kišiki mu-
u[n-…]); Vincente 1995, 245 lower edge ii 2 ([…] mu-u[n-…]).
d: BM 108857:10 (Scheil 1912; Thureau-Dangin 1918, 59); WB
444 v 39 ([lugal]-àm); Wilcke 1987, 92 v 3′ (lugal-‹àm›).

8a) [kišiki]-a{-an} / kù-dba-ú / munuslú-kaškúrun-na / suðuš kišiki / mu-un-

ge4-na, ‘In [Kiš], Kubbāwû(k), a woman innkeeper, the woman
who consolidated the foundations of Kiš’, (ruled for x years) (Susa
recension: Scheil 1934, 162 frag. B ii 4-8).

8b) kišiki-šè lugal [nu?-æál?] / kù-dba-ú ‹munus?-kaš?›k[úrun-na] / ‹suðuš›

kišiki / [mu]-un-ge-‹na›, ‘As for Kiš, [there was not a] king.
Kubbāwû(k), the woman innkeeper who consolidated the

53 Cf. Šulgi O 56-59 (ETCSL 2.4.2.15): é ‹kiši›ki!-šè æeštukul-zu ba-ta-a-è / ur-‹saæ› 7-bé ðeš!-
a mi-ni-dab5 / [lugal] ‹kiši›ki en-me-para10-ge4-e-si / [muš?-gin7?] ‹saæ›-æá-na æìri mu-na-
ni-ús, ‘You (Gilgameš) went out to war against the house of Kiš and captured its seven
warriors. [As for the king] of Kiš, Enmeparagêsi, you trampled upon his head [as if he
were a snake]’ (transliteration and translation modified; cf. Michalowski 2003, 202).
54 Collated from a cast in the University Museum of Philadelphia. Cf. Klein 2008, 82 and
89. Note that Klein (ibidem, pp. 78-79) proposes a completely different (and, in my
opinion, ungrammatical) interpretation of this passage.
55 On this legendary queen of Kiš, cf. Wilcke 1988, 126; Marchesi 2004, 167 with note 93.
56 Cf. Marchesi 2002, 171. For other ‘syllabic’ writings of the name kù-dba-ú, ‘Silver-of-
Bāwu’ (cf. Marchesi 2006a, 73 and 109), see ibidem, 163 with note 24, and 166 sub A/1.

242
 The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia

foundations of Kiš’, (ruled for x years) (Ur recension: UET 6/3,

505 i′ 3′-6′).
a)
9) a-ga-dè<ki-a> sar-ru-ki-in / b)ab!-ba-né nu-æeškiri6 / c)sagi ur-dza-
ba4-ba4 / d)lugal a<-ga>-dèki lú a-ga-dèki / e)mu-un-dù-a / f)lugal-àm,
‘In Akkad, Śarrukīn (= ‘Sargon’), whose father was a gardener, the
cupbearer of (king) Urzababâ(k)57, the king of Akkad, the one who
built Akkad, became king’ (SKL 266-271 after WB 444 vi 31-36).

a: Other manuscripts have the variants sar-ru-GI (BT 14 vii 11′:

Klein 2008, 89) and sar-ru-um-ki-in (Wilcke 1987, 92 v 35′;
Vincente 1995, 242 iii 22).
f: Omitted in the Leilan recension (cf. Vincente 1995, 242 and 245
iii 23).

9a) [a-ga-dèki-a / sar-ru(-um)-ki-in/sar-ru-GI / ab-ba-né nu-(æeš)kiri6 /

sag]i ur-dza-ba4-ba4 / lugal a-ga-dèki / lú a-ga-dèki / mu-un-da-dù-a /
lugal-àm, ‘[In Akkad, Śarrukīn (= ‘Sargon’), whose father was a
gardener, the cupbear]er of (king) Urzababâ(k), the king of Akkad,
the one under whom Akkad was built, became king’ (Nippur
recension A: PBS 13, 1 vii 1′ ff.).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ALSTER, B.
1989 The Textual History of the Legend of Etana: JAOS 109 (1989), pp. 81-
86.
1990 Contributions to the Study of Sumerian Texts in the Iraq Museum,
Baghdad: 1. Collations to In-nin-šà-gur4-ra: TIM IX 20-26: NABU
1990/100.
2005 Wisdom of Ancient Sumer, Bethesda 2005.
BARNETT, R.D.
1963 Xenophon and the Wall of Media: Journal of Hellenic Studies 83
(1963), pp. 1-26.
BARTON, G.A.
1928 Report of the Director of the School in Baghdad: BASOR 32 (1928),
pp. 17-19.

57 This passage alludes to the so-called Sumerian Sargon Legend, where Sargon acts as a
cupbearer in the service of Urzababâ(k), king of Kiš (cf. Cooper - Heimpel 1983; ETCSL
2.1.4; Black et alii 2004, 40-44).

243
 Gianni Marchesi

BEHRENS, H. - LODING, D. - ROTH, M.T. (eds)

1989 DUMU-E2-DUB-BA-A. Studies in Honor of Åke W. Sjöberg (OPSNKF
11), Philadelphia 1989.
BLACK, J. - CUNNINGHAM, G. - ROBSON, E. - ZÓLYOMI, G.
2004 The Literature of Ancient Sumer, Oxford-New York 2004.
BURROWS, E.
1934 Inscribed Materials: WOOLLEY 1934, pp. 311-322.
CAVIGNEAUX, A. - AL-RAWI, F.N.H.
1993 New Sumerian Literary Texts from Tell Haddad (Ancient Meturan): A
First Survey: Iraq 55 (1993), pp. 91-105.
CIVIL, M.
1969a The Sumerian Flood Story: LAMBERT - MILLARD 1969, pp. 138-145
and 167-172.
1969b Sur le nom d’un roi de Kiš: RA 63 (1969), p. 179.
COOPER, J.S.
1983 The Curse of Agade, Baltimore-London 1983.
1986 Sumerian and Akkadian Royal Inscriptions, I. Presargonic
Inscriptions, New Haven 1986.
COOPER, J.S. - HEIMPEL, W.
1983 The Sumerian Sargon Legend: JAOS 103 (1983), pp. 67-82.
EDZARD, D.O.
1959 Enmebaragesi von Kiš: ZA 53 (1959), pp. 9-26.
1993-97 Mes-kiag-gašer: RlA 8, p. 93.
ELLIS, M. DEJ. (ed.)
1992 Nippur at the Centennial. Papers Read at the 35e Rencontre
Assyriologique Internationale, Philadelphia, 1988 (OPSNKF 14),
Philadelphia 1992.
FINKELSTEIN, J.J.
1963 The Antediluvian Kings: A University of California Tablet: JCS 17
(1963), pp. 39-51.
FRAYNE, D.R.
1990 Old Babylonian Period (2003-1595 BC) (RIME 4), Toronto-Buffalo-
London 1990.
2008 Presargonic Period (2700-2350 BC) (RIME 1), Toronto-Buffalo-
London 2008.
FRAYNE, D.R. - GEORGE, L.
1990 The “Rake’s” Progress: A Phantom King of Kiš: NABU 1990/30.
FRIBERG, J.
2007 A Remarkable Collection of Babylonian Mathematical Texts, New
York 2007.
FRONZAROLI, P. (ed.)
1992 Literature and Literary Language at Ebla (Quaderni di Semitistica
18), Firenze 1992.
GADD, C.J.
1925 On Two Babylonian Kings: StOr 1 (1925), pp. 25-33.

244
 The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia

GELB, I.J. - STEINKELLER, P. - WHITING, R.M.

1991 Earliest Land Tenure Systems in the Near East: Ancient Kudurrus
(OIP 104), Chicago 1991.
GELLER, M.J.
1987 The Lugal of Mari at Ebla and the Sumerian King List: GORDON et
alii (eds) 1987, pp. 141-145.
GEORGE, A.R.
2003 The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic. Introduction, Critical Edition and
Cuneiform Texts, Oxford-New York 2003.
GLASSNER, J.-J.
2004 Mesopotamian Chronicles, Atlanta 2004.
2005a La date de composition de la chronique de la monarchie une: SEFATI
et alii (eds) 2005, pp. 138-141.
2005b La chronique de la monarchie une et l’écriture de l’histoire à la fin du
3e millénaire: NABU 2005/46.
GORDON, H.C. - RENDSBURG, G.A. - WINTER, N.H. (eds)
1987 Eblaitica: Essays on the Ebla Archives and Eblaite Languages, I,
Winona Lake 1987.
HALLO, W.W.
1963 Beginning and End of the Sumerian King List in the Nippur
Recension: JCS 17 (1963), pp. 52-57.
1970 Antediluvian Cities: JCS 23 (1970), pp. 57-67.
HROUDA, B. (ed.)
1987 Isin - Išān Baïrīyāt, III. Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 1983-1984
(ABAW NF 94), München 1987.
JACOBSEN, TH.
1939 The Sumerian King List (AS 11), Chicago 1939.
KINNIER-WILSON, J.V.
1985 The Legend of Etana. A New Edition, Warminster 1985.
KLEIN, J.
1991 A New Nippur Duplicate of the Sumerian Kinglist in the Brockmon
Collection, University of Haifa: AuOr 9 (1991), pp. 123-129.
2008 The Brockmon Collection Duplicate of the Sumerian Kinglist (BT
14): MICHALOWSKI (ed.) 2008, pp. 77-91.
KRAMER, S.N.
1961 New Literary Catalogue from Ur: RA 55 (1961), pp. 169-176.
1976 Sumer edebî tablet ve parçaları / Sumerian Literary Tablets and
Fragments in the Archaeological Museum of Istanbul, II, Ankara
1976.
KRAUS, F.R.
1952 Zur Liste der älteren Könige von Babylonien: ZA 50 (1952), pp. 29-
60.
KUHN, D. - STAHL, H. (eds)
2001 Die Gegenwart des Altertums. Formen und Funktionen des
Altertumsbezugs in den Hochkulturen der Alten Welt, Heidelberg
2001.

245
 Gianni Marchesi

KUPPER, J.-R.
1976-80 Ilum-pû: RlA 5, pp. 62-63.
LAMBERT, W.G. - MILLARD, A.R.
1969 Atra-ðasīs. The Babylonian Story of the Flood, Oxford 1969.
MARCHESI, G.
2002 On the Divine Name dBA.Ú: Or 71 (2002), pp. 161-172.
2004 Who Was Buried in the Royal Tombs of Ur? The Epigraphic and
Textual Data: Or 73 (2004), pp. 153-197.
2006a LUMMA in the Onomasticon and Literature of Ancient Mesopotamia
(HANES 10), Padova 2006.
2006b Statue regali, sovrani e templi del Protodinastico: I dati epigrafici e
testuali: MARCHETTI 2006, pp. 205-271.
2010 Towards a Chronology of Early Dynastic Rulers in Mesopotamia and
Syria: SALLABERGER - SCHRAKAMP (eds) 2010.
MARCHETTI, N.
2006 La statuaria regale nella Mesopotamia protodinastica. Con
un’appendice di Gianni Marchesi, Roma 2006.
MICHALOWSKI, P.
1983 History as Charter. Some Observations on the Sumerian King List:
JAOS 103 (1983), pp. 237-248.
1992 Mari: The View from Ebla: YOUNG (ed.) 1992, pp. 243-248.
2003 A Man Called Enmebaragesi: SALLABERGER et alii (eds) 2003, pp.
195-208.
2008 (ed.), On Ur III Times: Studies in Honor of Marcel Sigrist (JCS,
Supplementary Series, 1), Boston 2008.
OELSNER, J.
2003 Aus den sumerischen literarischen Texten der Hilprecht-Sammlung
Jena: Der Text der Tummal Chronik: SALLABERGER et alii (eds) 2003,
pp. 209-224.
PETERSON, J.
2008 A New Sumerian Fragment Preserving an Account of the
Mesopotamian Antediluvian Dynasties: AuOr 26 (2008), pp. 257-262.
POMPONIO, F.
1987 La prosopografia dei testi presargonici di Fara (Studi semitici, nuova
serie, 3), Roma 1987.
SALLABERGER, W. - SCHRAKAMP, I. (eds)
2010 Historical and Epigraphic Data for a Chronology of Mesopotamia in
the Third Millennium BC (ARCANE 1), Turnhout 2010.
SALLABERGER, W. - VOLK, K. - ZGOLL, A. (eds)
2003 Literatur, Politik und Recht in Mesopotamien. Festschrift für Claus
Wilcke, Wiesbaden 2003.
SALLABERGER, W. - WESTENHOLZ, A.
1999 Mesopotamien. Akkade-Zeit und Ur-III-Zeit (OBO 160/3), Freiburg
(Schweiz)-Göttingen 1999.
SCHEIL, V.
1912 Narâm Sin - Šargani šarri: RA 9 (1912), p. 69.

246
 The Sumerian King List and the Early History of Mesopotamia

1934 Liste susienne des dynasties de Sumer-Accad: RA 31 (1934), pp. 149-

166.
SEFATI, Y. - ARTZI, P. - COHEN, C. - EICHLER, B.L. - HOROWITZ, V.A. (eds)
2005 “An Experienced Scribe Who Neglects Nothing”. Ancient Near
Eastern Studies in Honor of Jacob Klein, Bethesda 2005.
SELZ, G.J.
1998 Die Etana-Erzählung. Ursprung und Tradition eines der ältesten
epischen Texte in einer semitischen Sprache: ASJ 20 (1998), pp. 135-
179.
SJÖBER, Å.W.
1996 UET VII, 73: An Exercize Tablet Enumerating Professions: TUNCA -
DEHESELLE (eds) 1996, pp. 117-139.
SOLLBERGER, E. - KUPPER, J.-R.
1971 Inscriptions royales sumériennes et akkadiennes, Paris 1971.
STEIBLE, H.
1982 Die altsumerischen Bau- und Weihinschriften, II. Kommentar zu den
Inschriften aus “Lagaš”, Inschriften ausserhalb von “Lagaš” (FAOS
5/2), Wiesbaden 1982.
STEINER, G.
1992 Nippur und die sumerische Königsliste: ELLIS (ed.) 1992, pp. 261-
279.
STEINKELLER, P.
1992 Early Semitic Literature and Third Millennium Seals with
Mythological Motifs: FRONZAROLI (ed.) 1992, pp. 243-283.
2003 An Ur III Manuscript of the Sumerian King List: SALLABERGER et alii
(eds) 2003, pp. 267-292.
THUREAU-DANGIN, F.
1918 La chronologie des dynasties de Sumer et d’Accad, Paris 1918.
TUNCA, Ö. - DEHESELLE, D. (eds)
1996 Tablettes et images aux pays de Sumer et d’Akkad. Mélanges offerts à
Monsieur H. Limet, Liège 1996.
VON UNGERN-STERNBERG, J. - REINAU, H. (eds)
1988 Vergangenheit in mündlicher Überlieferung (Colloquium Rauricum
1), Stuttgart 1988.
VINCENTE, C.-A.
1995 The Tall Leilān Recension of the Sumerian King List: ZA 85 (1995),
pp. 234-270.
WATERMAN, L.
1931 Preliminary Report upon the Excavations at Tell Umar Conducted by
the University of Michigan and the Toledo Museum of Art, Ann Arbor
1931.
WESTENHOLZ, A.
1999 The Old Akkadian Period: History and Culture: SALLABERGER -
WESTENHOLZ 1999, pp. 17-117.

247
 Gianni Marchesi

WILCKE, C.
1987 Die Inschriftenfunde der 7. und 8. Kampagnen (1983 und 1984):
HROUDA (ed.) 1987, pp. 83-120.
1988 Die Sumerische Königliste und erzählte Vergangenheit: VON
UNGERN-STERNBERG - REINAU (eds) 1988, pp. 113-140.
1989 Genealogical and Geographical Thought in the Sumerian King List:
BEHRENS et alii (eds) 1989, pp. 557-571.
2001 Gestaltetes Altertum in antiker Gegenwart: Königlisten und
Historiographie des älteren Mesopotamien: KUHN - STAHL (eds) 2001,
pp. 93-116.
WOOLLEY, C.L.
1934 The Royal Cemetery. A Report on the Predynastic and Sargonid
Graves Excavated between 1926 and 1931 (UE 2), London-
Philadelphia 1934.
YOUNG, G.D. (ed.)
1992 Mari in Retrospect. Fifty Years of Mari and Mari Studies, Winona
Lake 1992.

248

View publication stats