A major innovation of the Neo-Sumerian period (first seen in the literature of [[Gudea]] of [[Lagash]], which possibly inspired that of Ur III kings{{sfn|Klein|1995|p=855}}) is the celebration of the king’s prominence was achieved during Shulgi’s reign primarily through the writing of hymns that seem to have been written primarily to highlight his many qualities and thus consolidate royal ideology and legitimacy. These hymns are more generally part of a court literature that seems to have been composed during this period, as it serves the same ideological objectives. The royal hymns are the most important, highlighting the remarkable qualities of the glorified king, commemorating his pious achievements and military exploits, as well as his intelligence and charisma. A group of love hymns with erotic overtones, notably dedicated to [[Shu-Sin]] and the divine couple [[Dumuzi]]-[[Inanna]], is linked to the theme of [[sacred marriage]].{{sfn|Klein|1995|p=847-856}} These hymns are not just literature, since the were composed to be sung with musical accompaniment, notably during religious ceremonies (an hymn to Shulgi evokes their declamation in the temple of Enlil), which implies the presence of singers and court musicians, documented for the reigns of Shulgi’s successors<ref>{{cite journal|language=de|last= Pruzsinszky|first= Regine |title= Die königlichen Sänger der Ur III-Zeit als Werkzeug politischer Propaganda|journal=Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes |volume=97|issue= Festschrift für Hermann Hunger zum 65. Geburstag gewidmet von seinen Freunden, Kollegen und Scülern|year=2007 |pages= 329-351|jstor= 23861424}}.</ref>
A major innovation of the Neo-Sumerian period (first seen in the literature of [[Gudea]] of [[Lagash]], which possibly inspired that of Ur III kings{{sfn|Klein|1995|p=855}}) is the celebration of the king’s prominence was achieved during Shulgi’s reign primarily through the writing of hymns that seem to have been written primarily to highlight his many qualities and thus consolidate royal ideology and legitimacy. These hymns are more generally part of a court literature that seems to have been composed during this period, as it serves the same ideological objectives. The royal hymns are the most important, highlighting the remarkable qualities of the glorified king, commemorating his pious achievements and military exploits, as well as his intelligence and charisma. A group of love hymns with erotic overtones, notably dedicated to [[Shu-Sin]] and the divine couple [[Dumuzi]]-[[Inanna]], is linked to the theme of [[sacred marriage]].{{sfn|Klein|1995|p=847-856}} These hymns are not just literature, since the were composed to be sung with musical accompaniment, notably during religious ceremonies (an hymn to Shulgi evokes their declamation in the temple of Enlil), which implies the presence of singers and court musicians, documented for the reigns of Shulgi’s successors<ref>{{cite journal|language=de|last= Pruzsinszky|first= Regine |title= Die königlichen Sänger der Ur III-Zeit als Werkzeug politischer Propaganda|journal=Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes |volume=97|issue= Festschrift für Hermann Hunger zum 65. Geburstag gewidmet von seinen Freunden, Kollegen und Scülern|year=2007 |pages= 329-351|jstor= 23861424}}.</ref>
Epic literature flourished with the writing down of several stories once again linked to the royal dynasty, the myths relating to the exploits of three semi-legendary kings of [[Uruk]]: [[Enmerkar]], [[Lugalbanda]] and [[Gilgamesh]]. The kings of Ur III, whose dynasty originated in Uruk, presented themselves as the relatives of these past heroes. [[Ur-Namma]] and [[Shulgi]] even called themselves “brothers” of Gilgamesh in certain inscriptions, since they claimed to be descendants of the latter’s parents, including the goddess [[Ninsun]]{{sfn|Klein|1995|p=846-847}}<ref>A. R. George, ”The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic: Introduction, Critical Edition and Cuneiform Texts”, Oxford, 2003, {{p.}}7-17.</ref>
Epic literature flourished with the writing down of several stories once again linked to the royal dynasty, the myths relating to the exploits of three semi-legendary kings of [[Uruk]]: [[Enmerkar]], [[Lugalbanda]] and [[Gilgamesh]]. The kings of Ur III, whose dynasty originated in Uruk, presented themselves as the relatives of these past heroes. [[Ur-Namma]] and [[Shulgi]] even called themselves “brothers” of Gilgamesh in certain inscriptions, since they claimed to be descendants of the latter’s parents, including the goddess [[Ninsun]]{{sfn|Klein|1995|p=846-847}}<ref> R. The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic: Introduction, Critical Edition and Cuneiform Texts 2003 7-17</ref>
Literature of a historiographical nature also has royalty as a major subject. An hymn probably commissioned by Shulgi or his mother, the ”Death of Ur-Namma”, is a lament, mainly in the mouth of the goddess Inanna, about the death in battle of the king Ur-Namma, his funeral and descent to the Netherworld.{{sfn|Klein|1995|p=843-844}}{{sfn|Michalowski|2011b|p=17-18|id=MICH2}} The earliest known copy of the [[Sumerian King List]] dates from the Ur III period. It offers a largely fictional reconstruction of past dynasties that ruled before losing it to another, from the legendary times when kingship was handed down from the heavens to the time of the king of Ur. It conveys an idea of ​​an immemorial ‘imperial’ power unifying Mesopotamia through several legitimate dynasties, which is fictitious but serves the political discourse of the Ur III kings well.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Steinkeller|first=Piotr|chapter=An Ur III Manuscript of the Sumerian King List|url=https://www.academia.edu/35603955|title=Literatur, Politik und Recht in Mesopotamien: Festschrift für Claus Wilcke|date=2003|year=267–292}}</ref>{{sfn|Michalowski|2011b|p=15-16|id=MICH2}}
Literature of a historiographical nature also has royalty as a major subject. An hymn probably commissioned by Shulgi or his mother, the ”Death of Ur-Namma”, is a lament, mainly in the mouth of the goddess Inanna, about the death in battle of the king Ur-Namma, his funeral and descent to the Netherworld.{{sfn|Klein|1995|p=843-844}}{{sfn|Michalowski|2011b|p=17-18|id=MICH2}} The earliest known copy of the [[Sumerian King List]] dates from the Ur III period. It offers a largely fictional reconstruction of past dynasties that ruled before losing it to another, from the legendary times when kingship was handed down from the heavens to the time of the king of Ur. It conveys an idea of ​​an immemorial ‘imperial’ power unifying Mesopotamia through several legitimate dynasties, which is fictitious but serves the political discourse of the Ur III kings well.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Steinkeller|first=Piotr|chapter=An Ur III Manuscript of the Sumerian King List|url=https://www.academia.edu/35603955|title=Literatur, Politik und Recht in Mesopotamien: Festschrift für Claus Wilcke|date=2003|year=267–292}}</ref>{{sfn|Michalowski|2011b|p=15-16|id=MICH2}}
Culture
Religion
The official pantheon of the Ur dynasty was dominated by the god Enlil, king of the gods and god of kingship, worshipped in the holy city of Nippur. His spouse Ninlil was also an important divine figure. Her sanctuary at Tummal, near Nippur, was a major holy site in the kingdom, doted by the kings. An attempt to centralize the cults in the province of Nippur may have taken place at this time, in order to consolidate the cults of Enlil and Ninlil. The literary corpus also testifies to the primary role of Nippur in royal ideology. The cults of gods from foreign lands were also introduced into the main religious centers of Lower Mesopotamia, perhaps also as part of the concentration of cults in the capital cities.[1]
Enthroned by the gods, the king is invested with a heavy responsibility. He must organize the smooth running of their cult and thus follow the example of the pious king. Ur III kings thus constantly built and restored numerous temples and provided them with sumptuous offerings: divine furnishings such as thrones, or means of transport such as chariots or boats. These acts were deemed worthy of inclusion in their year names, alongside their military exploits. Monarchs also participated in certain important rituals. They were assisted in this task by members of the royal family, including their wives and their sons and daughters who were enthroned as high priests or high priestesses of several important sanctuaries (Ur, Uruk, etc.). The provincial governors are responsible for the cult in their provinces, reproducing on their scale the role of the king.
One of the peculiarities of the Ur period is the deification of kings, which took place from Shulgi (who follows the model of Naram-Sin of Akkad) and whose exact theological implications are debated. It resulted in the existence of a cult intended for the sovereigns during their lifetime, with the creation of cult statues of the deified kings, the accomplishment of sacrifices and festivals in their honor and the erection of several places of worship such as the temple of Shu-Sin excavated at Eshnunna.
Shulgi’s integration into the divine sphere is also reflected in his elevation to the status of husband of the goddess Inanna. The king is thus assimilated to her divine husband, the god Dumuzi. He also becomes the son-in-law of the god Nanna (Inanna’s father), the brother-in-law of the god Utu (Inanna’s brother), and the brother of the goddess Geshtinanna (Dumuzi’s sister). The question of the existence of a “sacred marriage” (hierogamy) ritual symbolically representing the union of the king and the goddess is debated: some hymns evoke such a relationship, but no source documenting daily cult attests to the actual existence of such a rite..
The cultic calendars of the various cities was punctuated by numerous festivals (ezen) dedicated to the main gods, which generally took place at regular intervals (every day, several times a month, or once a year).[8] The most important ones brought together the main officials of the kingdom as well as foreign emissaries,and generated substantial expenditure recorded by administrative texts. Some festivals followed the cycle of the seasons, or that of the stars, others had funerary symbolism or were linked to royalty or the families of provincial governors, etc. Among the most important are festivals linked to the lunar cycle which take place three times a month (èš-èš)[9]; the festival of the celestial boat (ezem-má-an-na) dedicated to Inanna at Uruk[10]; various rituals of divine journeys such as the one which saw the statue of the goddess Ninlil travel on her sacred boat from Nippur to Tummal, commemorated by an hymn and a year-name of Shulgi; the great festival of Inanna at Nippur which had takes place during the sixth month of the year[13], etc.
Literature
During the Ur III period, royal inscriptions and texts relating to “belles-lettres” or rituals were almost exclusively written in Sumerian. This flourishing was greatly driven by the royal power, notably Shulgi, who sponsored the creation of a scholastic institution (the “é-dubba,” often translated as “house of tablets”) and thus the reform of the training of scribes. This explains the strong political coloring of literary works, which are the product of “court literature,” and are also sometimes labelled “propaganda.” However, the known versions of works datable to the time of the kings of Ur are essentially 18th-century copies, mostly from Nippur (a major cultural center and probably the place of origin of many of these literary pieces), written in schools by apprentice scribes. Changes could therefore have been made to these texts between these two periods.
The royal ideology of Shulgi’s reign is in many ways a continuation of that of the Akkadian period, in particular the reign of Naram-Sin (who also claimed to be a god), while seeking to distinguish itself from it in various ways. The Third Dynasty of Ur is a phase of return to properly Sumerian traditions, since official texts are written in this language (while it is spoken less and less in everyday life). However, the notion of a Sumerian ‘revival’ or ‘renaissance’ to describe this period is misleading because archaeological evidence does not offer evidence of a previous period of decline.[19]
A major innovation of the Neo-Sumerian period (first seen in the literature of Gudea of Lagash, which possibly inspired that of Ur III kings) is the celebration of the king’s prominence was achieved during Shulgi’s reign primarily through the writing of hymns that seem to have been written primarily to highlight his many qualities and thus consolidate royal ideology and legitimacy. These hymns are more generally part of a court literature that seems to have been composed during this period, as it serves the same ideological objectives. The royal hymns are the most important, highlighting the remarkable qualities of the glorified king, commemorating his pious achievements and military exploits, as well as his intelligence and charisma. A group of love hymns with erotic overtones, notably dedicated to Shu-Sin and the divine couple Dumuzi–Inanna, is linked to the theme of sacred marriage. These hymns are not just literature, since the were composed to be sung with musical accompaniment, notably during religious ceremonies (an hymn to Shulgi evokes their declamation in the temple of Enlil), which implies the presence of singers and court musicians, documented for the reigns of Shulgi’s successors[21]
Epic literature flourished with the writing down of several stories once again linked to the royal dynasty, the myths relating to the exploits of three semi-legendary kings of Uruk: Enmerkar, Lugalbanda and Gilgamesh. The kings of Ur III, whose dynasty originated in Uruk, presented themselves as the relatives of these past heroes. Ur-Namma and Shulgi even called themselves “brothers” of Gilgamesh in certain inscriptions, since they claimed to be descendants of the latter’s parents, including the goddess Ninsun[23]
Literature of a historiographical nature also has royalty as a major subject. An hymn probably commissioned by Shulgi or his mother, the Death of Ur-Namma, is a lament, mainly in the mouth of the goddess Inanna, about the death in battle of the king Ur-Namma, his funeral and descent to the Netherworld. The earliest known copy of the Sumerian King List dates from the Ur III period. It offers a largely fictional reconstruction of past dynasties that ruled before losing it to another, from the legendary times when kingship was handed down from the heavens to the time of the king of Ur. It conveys an idea of ​​an immemorial ‘imperial’ power unifying Mesopotamia through several legitimate dynasties, which is fictitious but serves the political discourse of the Ur III kings well.[26]
Architecture
The kings of Ur were very active builders. The majority of the official inscriptions (as well as some year names) from this period commemorate the constructions and restorations they sponsored, as well as those undertaken by several of their governors. Administrative tablets also document public construction.[28]
The kings of Ur are best known for the work they carried out in the great Sumerian religious complexes: Ur, Eridu, Uruk and Nippur. The center of Ur is the best known: the sanctuary of the god Nanna was organized around two large courtyards, the largest, built on a terrace including shrines and the ziggurat (É-temen-ni-gur, “House whose foundation is clad in terror”). To the south were other major buildings: the Giparu, divided between the part serving as the residence of the high priestess of Nanna and the temple of the goddess Ningal, the Ganunmah which probably served as a treasury and store house, while the Ehursag was a royal palace. Further south still stood a religious building with underground vaulted tombs, often identified as the mausoleum of Shulgi and Amar-Sin.
These religious complexes also featured imposing stepped temples, the ziggurats, which are generally considered innovations of this period, although they are a continuation of earlier temples built on terraces during the Uruk and Early Dynasty periods. In the Ur III period, these buildings are rather known by the Sumerian term gi-gù-na, and the kings of Ur may have planned to build one in each of their provincial capitals (erosion of the sites has led to the disappearance of an unknown number of them).[30] These were vast buildings with a rectangular base (c. 60 × 45 meters at Ur), composed of at least two superimposed terraces, probably surmounted by a high temple. Their religious function remains controversial, but their monumental aspect is evident. They constitute the best architectural illustration of the capacity of the kingdom of Ur to mobilize significant resources and to plan large-scale works thanks to its administrative apparatus. To build them, the master builders took up and perfected the architectural techniques they had inherited from their predecessors: development of standardized bricks, ingenious architecture alternating bricks laid on edge and bricks laid flat, mass of raw bricks covered with a coating of more solid baked bricks, chaining of reeds and anchoring with braided reed ropes.[32]
Visual Arts
Art from the Ur III period come in several forms of sculptures. Most of what is known is a celebration of the royal figure, reflecting the same ideology as the court literature of this period.[33]
Monumental reliefs are particularly well represented by the stele of Ur-Namma, carved from limestone and measuring over 3 meters high (10 ft.), which is preserved in fragmentary form. It consists of several registers commemorating the king’s construction activities for the gods of Ur, Nanna and Ningal, as well as the festivities celebrating the construction, with offerings and musicians, in a narrative style reminiscent of the hymns of that period. One register shows Ur-Namma pouring libations in front of the enthroned gods, Nanna holding the rod and the ring that symbolize royalty.
Texts tell us that royal statues were produced during this period, particularly for the cult of deified kings. But almost none of these works of art have survived. Fragmentary sculptures of Shulgi and heads that were originally part of statues bear witness to this art form. Their style is similar to that of the statues from the reign of Gudea of ​​Lagash (a contemporary of Ur-Namma). Small sculptures of animals and supernatural creatures were used as votive offerings, and also as weights.
Another form of sculpture was not intended for display: foundation figures. They were buried beneath a temple built or restored by a king, along with an inscription commemorating this pious act. During the earlier periods, they usually took the form of clay or copper pegs, sometimes surmonted by a carved god, but most foundation figures from this period, made in copper alloy, depict the king. He holds a basket above his head, containing bricks and mortar, symbolizing his role as king-builder.
The iconography of cylinder-seals was less varied during the Ur III period than it had been during the Akkadian period, since mythological and narrative scenes were set apart. The most typical composition in Ur III glyptic art is the presentation scene, showing the owner of the seal being presented by a protective goddess before a king seated on a throne. Sometimes the king is depicted as a god; in some cases, a god replaces the king. A short inscription often identifies the owner of the king, an official, and the king he serves, praying for the latter’s health. These seals thus seem to be linked to the existence of a high class of high officials of the state close to the sovereign and to the affirmation of the sacred aspect of the latter’s function.[38][39]
Aftermath and legacy
The kingdom of Ur III laid the foundations for the great kingdoms that would succeed it. A new era began in Mesopotamian history, the Paleo-Babylonian period or [[Amorite period]. The dynasties succeeding Ur (above all Isin and Larsa) assumed its heritage: their title took over that of the kings of Ur, they continued for a time to be deified and patronized an art and literature in the continuity of those of the Neo-Sumerian period. Under the kings of Isin, texts of “lamentations” were written, which commemorated the fall of the kingdom of Ur and its great cities (Ur, Uruk, Nippur and Eridu)[40]. They are in fact intended to justify the fall of Ur and to legitimize the domination of the new masters of southern Mesopotamia by presenting them as divine decisions. Hymns and stories relating to the kings of Ur III, especially Ur-Namma and Shulgi, are still copied and perpetuate the memory of their brilliant reigns, as are the apocryphal letters of the kings of Ur which are copied in schools.
- ^ Sharlach, Tonia (2020). “Innovation in Religion in the Third Dynasty of Ur: Contemporary Evidence and Later Reflections”. In Gabbay, Uri; Pérennès, Jean-Jacques (ed.). Des polythéismes aux monothéismes mélanges d’Assyriologie offerts à Marcel Sigrist. Louvain: Peeters. pp. 438–440.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link) - ^ Sallaberger, Walther (1993). Der kultische Kalender der Ur III-Zeit (in German). Berlin and New York.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - ^ Sigrist, Marcel (1977). “Les fêtes ès-ès à l’époque néo-sumérienne”. Revue Biblique (in French). 84: 375–392.
- ^ Cohen, Michael (1993). The Cultic Calendars of the Ancient Near East. Bethesda: CDL Press. pp. 215–220.
- ^ Zettler, Richard L.; Sallaberger, Walther (2011). “Inana’s Festival at Nippur under the Third Dynasty of Ur”. Zeitschriftfür Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie. 101: 1–71.
- ^ Cooper, Jerrold S. (2016). “Sumerian literature and Sumerian identity”. Problems of canonicity and identity formation in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Kim Ryholt, Gojko Barjamovic, Københavns universitet, Denmark) Problems of Canonicity and Identity Formation in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia (2010 : Copenhagen, Denmark) Literature and Identity Formation (2010 : Copenhagen. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press. pp. 1–18. ISBN 978-87-635-4372-9. OCLC 944087535.
- ^ Pruzsinszky, Regine (2007). “Die königlichen Sänger der Ur III-Zeit als Werkzeug politischer Propaganda”. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes (in German). 97 (Festschrift für Hermann Hunger zum 65. Geburstag gewidmet von seinen Freunden, Kollegen und Scülern): 329–351. JSTOR 23861424..
- ^ George, Andrew R. (2003). The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic: Introduction, Critical Edition and Cuneiform Texts. Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 7–17.
- ^ Steinkeller, Piotr (2003). “An Ur III Manuscript of the Sumerian King List”. Literatur, Politik und Recht in Mesopotamien: Festschrift für Claus Wilcke.
- ^ Sauvage, Martin (2015). “La gestion de la construction publique sous la Troisième dynastie d’Ur”. In MSH (ed.). De la maison à la ville dans l’Orient ancien : bâtiments publics et lieux de pouvoir (PDF) (in French). Nanterre. pp. 130–115.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - ^ Waetzoldt, Hartmut (2005). “Tempelterrassen und Ziqqurrate nach der sumerischen Ãœberlieferung”. In Sefati, Yagmur (ed.). An experienced scribe who neglects nothing: Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Jacob Klein (in German). Bethesda: CDL Press. pp. 322–342..
- ^ Sauvage, Martin (1998). “The construction of ziggurats under the third dynasty of Ur”. Iraq (in French). 60: 45–63.
- ^ Suter, Claudia (2010). “Ur III Kings in Images: A Reappraisal”. In Baker, Heather D.; Robson, Eleanor; Zólyomi, Gábor (ed.). Your Praise Is Sweet: A Memorial Volume for Jeremy Black from Students, Colleagues and Friends. London: British Institute for the Study of Iraq. pp. 319–349.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link) - ^ Winter, Irene (1987). “Legitimation of Authority through Image and Legend: Seals Belonging to Officials in the Administrative Bureaucracy of the Ur III State”. In McGuire Gibson and Robert D. Biggs (ed.). The Organization of Power: Aspects of Bureaucracy in the ancient Near East. Chicago: The Oriental Institute if the University of Chicago. pp. 69–106.
- ^ Fischer, Claudia (2008). “Of Kings and Cups”. In Garfinkle, Steven J.; Johnson, J. Cale (ed.). The growth of an Early State in Mesopotamia: Studies in Ur III administration. Proceedings of the First and Second Ur III Worshops at the 49th and 51st Rencontre assyriologique internationale. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientÃficas. CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
- ^ J. Cooper in Sumer & 1999-2002, col. 242-243. Transclusion error: {{En}} is only for use in File namespace. Use {{langx|en}} or {{in lang|en}} instead. S. N. Kramer, Lamentation over the Destruction of Ur, Chicago, 1940; Transclusion error: {{En}} is only for use in File namespace. Use {{langx|en}} or {{in lang|en}} instead. P. Michalowski, The Lamentation over the Destruction of Sumer and Ur, Winona Lake, 1989; Template:De W. H. P. Römer, Die Klage Ãœber die Zerstörung von Ur, Münster, 2004. “Transclusion error: {{[[Template:En|En]]}} is only for use in File namespace. Use {{[[Template:Langx|langx]]|en}} or {{[[Template:In lang|in lang]]|en}} instead.[[Category:Lang and lang-xx template errors]] Transcriptions and translations available on the ETCSL website”. .
