The Neo-Sumerian period is characterized by the cultural and political revival of Sumerian peoples after a century-and-a-half of domination by Semitic Akkadians. The collapse of the Akkadian empire was in part caused by, and at the same time facilitated, the migration of highlander warlords known as Gutians into Mesopotamia. For over half a century these foreign warlords dominated local peoples, but were never accepted by them as legitimate leaders. Sumerian kings first achieved local independence, and then ousted the foreign warlords, creating the culturally dynamic Third Dynasty of Ur. The Neo-Sumerian age lasted less than a century-and-a-half, however, ending with a second wave of outsiders invading Mesopotamia. This time, Semitic Amorite warlords from Syria were successful in integrating themselves into Mesopotamian civilization, creating a new political and military order that transitioned into the Middle Bronze Age.1
Gutian warlords {c. 2190–2115}2
At the death of Shar-kalli-shari the military crisis of Akkad was exacerbated by an apparent civil war in which four kings ruled in only three years {2192–2190}. There are vague allusions in the inscriptions to inter-city warfare during this period (R2:209–18), which the Sumerian King-list succinctly summarizes: “Who was king? Who was not king? Igigi, the king; Nanum, the king; Imi, the king; Elulu, the king – the four of them were kings but reigned only three years.” (KS 330). Although Dudu {2189–2169} finally emerged as ruler of Akkad, by that time his domain had been reduced to one city-state among many in central Mesopotamia.
During this period of chaotic anarchy, Gutian highlanders emerge as a major military power in Mesopotamia. Earlier vague allusions to Gutians appear in Akkadian texts, where they are described as highlanders of the Zagros Mountains to the east of Akkad (ME 24–7), but their first major reference is to the defeat of the Gutian king Sharlak by Shar-kalli-shari, mentioned on pp. 100–1 (R2:183). Thereafter, Gutian warbands appear in Mesopotamia, first as devastating raiders,3 and eventually as conquerors. The specific pattern of Gutian conquest is unclear. From the military perspective, the fall of Akkad was characterized by both internal revolts and outside invasion. The city-states of Sumer, Elam, and northern Mesopotamia all became independent, while outsiders simultaneously invaded Mesopotamia. Mountain highlanders from many surrounding regions seem to have participated in his migration, including the Hurrians (from the northern mountains), Lullubi (neighbors of the Gutians in the Zagros mountains), Elamites from the south of Zagros, Amorites from the Jebel Bishri region of Syria, and perhaps the obscure Umman-Manda.4 Archaeological data confirms the devastation of a number of cities in northern Mesopotamia during this period (RA3:710). Later epic literature describes, with considerable hyperbole, the panic and devastation of these invasions.5 The Akkadian armies are defeated, the land devastated, cities are destroyed, and the rites of the gods blasphemed (LKA 271–7); all of Mesopotamia is overrun (LKA 315).
The most important invaders were the Gutians, described as fierce and lawless barbarians from the mountains. Some of the Gutian warlords managed to establish themselves as kings over some of the city-states of Mesopotamia. The Sumerian King-list mentions twenty-one Gutian rulers reigning for a period of about 90 years, with each king ruling for only a few years (KS 330); an alternative possibility is that many of these Gutian kings were contemporaries. They should not be seen, however, as forming a coherent dynasty ruling all of Mesopotamia. It is more likely they were loosely allied warlords who ruled as a foreign military aristocracy over a number of city-states. Perhaps it is best to view them as broadly similar to the Germanic kingdoms following the fall of Rome.
The Sumerians viewed this period as one of chaos and devastation:
The Gutians [are] the fanged serpent of the mountain, who acted with violence against the gods, who carried off the kingship of the land of Sumer to the mountain land, who filled the land of Sumer with wickedness, who took away the wife from the one who had a wife, who took away the child from the one who had a child, who put wickedness and evil in the land of Sumer.
(R2:284)
Military sources for this period range from vague to non-existent. Only the campaigns of the Gutian king Erridu-pizir have substantial documentation. An inscription describing the revolt of one of his rebellious vassals, the king of Madga, is perhaps reflective of the anarchy of the age:
Erridu-pizir, the mighty, king of Gutium and the four quarters, hastened [to confront] him [the rebellious king of Madga]. [Since the Gutian ruler of Madga] feared [Erridu-pizar] he retreated [into his own original] mountain [homeland], and [Erridu-pizir] hunted him down, captured him, led him away [captive, and executed] him. Erridu-pizir, the mighty, king of Gutium and the four quarters took [him] away by force through the gate of the god of Gutium, struck him, and killed him, the king [of Madga].
(R2:221–2)
Here we see a Gutian warlord ruling a city in Mesopotamia as the vassal of another Gutian. When a conflict arises between the two, the vassal flees back to his original mountain homeland, hoping vainly to escape the wrath of his lord.
Erridu-pizir's greatest victory was a campaign against the rival highlander Lullubi tribe in the Zagros. Erridu-pizir provides an itinerary for his campaign into the mountains, forcing mountain passes and capturing the enemy commanders and mountain strongholds:
KA-Nisba, king of Simurrum, instigated the people of Simurrum and Lullubi [highlanders] to revolt. Amnili, general of [the enemy Lullubi] … made the land [rebel] … Erridu-pizir, the mighty, king of Gutium and of the four quarters hastened [to confront] him. He proceeded [through] the peaks of Mount Nisba. In six days he conquered the pass at Mount Hamemepir … entered its pass. Erridu-pizir, the mighty, pursued him [Amnili] and conquered the pass at Mount Nuhpir. Further, he struck down Amnili, the [Lullubi] … on its summit … In a single day he … conquered the pass of Urbillum at Mount Mumum. Further, he captured Nirishuha.
(R2:226–7)
Gutian domination in Mesopotamian was not universal. Many Sumerian cities, like Ur, Uruk, Umma, Lagash, and Mari, achieved some degree of independence during this period. Their few inscriptions, however, provide little concrete military information. From these independent Sumerian city-states arose a nationalistic anti-Gutian movement aimed at ousting the hated invaders. The most successful leader of this movement was Utuhegal of Uruk {2117–2111}, who is credited with driving out the Gutians and inaugurating the Neo-Sumerian period (see pp. 105–7).
Gudea, Second Dynasty of Lagash {2155–2122}6
While the Gutians dominated much of Sumer, the city of Lagash remained independent under the kings of its Second Dynasty. Although this period is renowned as a cultural golden age under king Gudea {2141–2122}, the Second Dynasty of Lagash has not produced many military inscriptions, leaving our understanding of warfare during this period rather vague. The corpus of inscriptions from Lagash focuses instead on temple building and other ritual activities. When compared to his lovingly detailed description of temple building, Gudea's most important campaign is laconically described: “Gudea defeated the cities of Anshan and Elam and brought the booty there from to Ningirsu in his Eninnu [temple]” (R3/1:35). Indeed, the allusion to the campaign only occurs in the context of describing the materials gathered to build his beloved temples.
From the inscriptions of Lagash, it would seem that there was relative peace during the reign of Gudea. Gudea praises the god Ningirsu, who “opened for him all the roads leading from the Upper to the Lower Sea” (R3/1:33), which presumably meant for trade rather than for warfare. His inscriptions describe bringing building materials, precious metals and jewels from Lebanon, Elam, the Persian Gulf, Magan (Oman), and the Meluhha (Indus valley) (R3/1:33–4, 78). None of Gudea's numerous splendid statues depicts the king in any martial context (SDA 202–17). This is generally true of the next several centuries of Mesopotamian art; for whatever reason, martial themes are seldom depicted (SDA 196–251);7 martial art essentially disappears during the Neo-Sumerian period.
Unlike the first dynasty, described in Chapter Two, the second dynasty of Lagash was not an expansionist state, but apparently had a sufficiently strong military to insure its own survival. Several of the year-names are associated with the construction of ritual divine weapons for dedications at temples. These include “the year the wooden [shaft] of the [divine weapon of Ningirsu] ‘Mow-down-a-myriad’ was made”; “[the war-god] Ningirsu's mace with fifty heads was fashioned” (R3/1:27, 33, 75). But even these are, strictly speaking, ritual rather than military activities. It remained for the warlike king Utuhegal of Uruk finally to drive the hated Gutians from Sumer.
Puzur-Inshushinak (Kutik-Inshushinak) and the Elamites {c. 2120–1990}8
The collapse of Akkadian power allowed local nobles in Elam to gain independence for the first time in a century, recreating their Elamite kingdom based at Susa. Puzur-Inshushinak, who began as an Akkadian vassal viceroy in Elam, eventually asserted his independence, taking the title “mighty king of Awan [Elam]” by the end of his reign. His main martial inscription describes his rise to power in Elam, capturing two rival kings “Kimash and Hurtum” and “crushing under his feet in one day 81 towns and regions”. The king of Shimashki, a land east of Elam, “grabbed his feet”, begging for mercy, and was allowed to live as a vassal of Puzur-Inshushinak (PAE 123). Claiming imperial titles from the crumbling Akkadians, Puzur-Inshushinak proclaimed that “[the god] Inshushinak looked graciously upon him and gave him the four quarters of the earth” (C1/2:653).
Predominant in Elam, Puzur-Inshushinak turned his attention to Mesopotamia. A text from Ur from the reign of Urnammu lists several regions of central Mesopotamia as being under the rule of Puzur-Inshushinak, including Eshnunna and Akkad itself. This brought Puzur-Inshushinak into conflict with the rising power of Urnammu of Ur (see pp. 108–9). Urnammu claims he “liberated Akshak, Marad, Girkal, Kazallu, and their settlements, and for Usarum, whatever [territories] were under the subjugation of [Puzur-Inshushinak] of Anshan” (CS 2:409a; PAE 124–5). Elamite incursions into Mesopotamia were thus temporarily forestalled, but a century later they would return to sack Ur itself (see p. 120).
Utuhegal of Uruk {2117–2111}9
The overthrow of the Gutian warlords occurred in the reign of Utuhegal, king of Uruk. Seizing the opportunity afforded by the uncertainty surrounding the ascension of a new Gutian monarch named Tirigan, Utuhegal rebelled against his Gutian overlord. He left a vivid inscription of his victory over the Gutians which contains one of the most detailed military narratives of the third millennium, illustrating one of the fundamental principles of ancient Near Eastern warfare: that the decisions of the gods, even if inscrutable, control the course of history.
The god Enlil, lord of the foreign lands, commissioned Utuhegal, the mighty man, king of Uruk, king of the four quarters, the king whose utterance cannot be countermanded, to destroy [the Gutian] name. Thereupon Utuhegal went to the [war] goddess Inanna, his lady, and prayed to her, saying: “My lady, lioness of battle, who butts the foreign lands, the god Enlil has commissioned me to bring back the kingship of the land of Sumer. May you be my ally.”
The enemy [Gutian] hordes had trampled everything. Tirigan, the king of Gutium, had [seized kingship in Sumer] … but no [Sumerian lord] set out against him [in battle]. He had seized both banks of the Tigris River. In the south, in Sumer, he had blocked water from the fields. In the north, he had closed off the roads and caused tall grass to grow up along the roads of the land.
The foundation of Utuhegal's success was that the god Enlil chose him to “destroy [the Gutian] name”. What this meant in practical terms is uncertain, but it likely has reference to oracles presented by the prophets of Uruk calling upon Utuhegal to overthrow the Gutians. Utuhegal, however, does not act alone.
Utuhegal, the mighty man, went forth from Uruk and set up [a war banner?] … in the temple of the god Ishkur [in Uruk]. He called out to the citizens of his city [Uruk], saying: “The god Enlil has given Gutium to me. My lady, the goddess Inanna, is my ally” … Utuhegal made the citizens of Uruk and Kullab [a suburb of Uruk] happy. His city followed him [in the decision to go to war] as if they were just one person.
Having received oracles of victory from the gods Enlil and Inanna, Utuhegal summons a city council at the plaza before the temple of Ishkur. He announces the oracles and he rallies the citizens of Uruk to support his rebellion against the Gutians. This incident emphasizes that Sumerian kings had to rely on the support of their citizens for war, and that oracles could sway public opinion in these matters one way or another. With the support of the city, Utuhegal launches his campaign.
Utuhegal arranged in correct array his select elite troops. After Utuhegal departed from the temple of the god Ishkur [in Uruk], on the fourth day he set up [camp] in the city of Nagsu on the Iturungal canal. On the fifth day he set up [camp] in the shrine Ilitappe. He captured Ur-Ninazu and Nabi-Enlil, generals whom [Tirigan, king of the Gutians] had sent as envoys to the land of Sumer, and put handcuffs on them. After he departed from the shrine Ilitappe, on the sixth day he set up [camp] at Karkar. He proceeded to the god Ishkur and prayed to him, saying: “O god Ishkur! The god Enlil has given me his weapon. May you be my ally.”
The reference to “select elite troops” is important, demonstrating a ranking of the quality and value of soldiers. Utuhegal's itinerary is our most detailed description of a Sumerian army on the march. He emphasizes his daily piety, repeatedly calling on the gods for assistance, attempting to act in accordance with the will of the gods in battle. A rough estimate of a day's march for a Sumerian army can be determined from Utuhegal's itinerary. The next passage notes that battle took place “upstream from Adab” some fifty miles north of Uruk, which was reached after a six-day march, thus averaging about eight to nine miles a day. Utuhegal then describes the day of battle.
In the middle of that night [Utuhegal] got up, and at daybreak proceeded to a point upstream from Adab. … In that place, against the Gutians, he laid a trap and led his troops against them. Utuhegal, the mighty man, defeated their generals. Then Tirigan, king of Gutium, fled alone on foot to Dabrum.… Since the citizens of Dabrum realized that Utuhegal was the king to whom the god Enlil had granted power, they did not let Tirigan go. The envoys of Utuhegal captured Tirigan along with his wife and children at Dabrum. They put handcuffs and a blindfold on him. Utuhegal made him lie at the feet of the god Utu and placed his foot on his neck. [Thus Utuhegal] removed [the Gutians and] … brought back the kingship of the land of Sumer.
(R2:284–7)
Utuhegal's use of a stratagem to trick the Gutian should remind us that, although relying on the will of the gods for victory, the Sumerians none the less also fought wars in the real world of weapons, supplies, and tactics. Even if Enlil had promised victory, Utuhegal still used a stratagem. This auspicious victory over Tirigan was remembered in later years in books of divination (C1/2:462). The mention that Tirigan “fled [the battle] alone on foot” undoubtedly has reference to the standard use of war-carts in battle at this time.
Utuhegal's victory, although decisive, was apparently not complete. Most of southern Mesopotamia rallied to his support, but the full extent of his domain is not certain. He did not, however, found a stable dynasty. After a reign of only seven years he died, according to legend, by accidental drowning while inspecting a dike. Real political power in Sumer passed into the hands of Urnammu, the onetime governor of Ur, founder of the glorious Third Dynasty of Ur.
The Third Dynasty of Ur {2112–2004}10
The Third Dynasty of Ur (or Ur III) witnessed the last flowering of Sumerian cultural achievement; indeed, most of the literature, art, and architecture generally associated with Sumer was produced during Ur III. Militarily, this was also a period of Sumerian ascendancy in Mesopotamia, in which the kings of Ur were the dominant military force in the region.
Urnammu {2112–2095}11
Although best known for his cultural achievements in law, literature, and art, and for the building of the magnificent ziggurat of Ur, Urnammu also played an important military role as well. Unfortunately, his surviving inscriptions focus on his building projects, leaving us with fragmentary information about his military activities. Furthermore, as is often the case in early Mesopotamian military history, a precise chronology of Urnammu's campaigns cannot be established from the fragmentary evidence.
Under Utuhegal of Uruk, Urnammu had served as governor of Ur; some scholars suspect that he was the son-in-law of Utuhegal (R3/2:9). While governor of Ur for Utuhegal, Urnammu engaged in a border dispute with Lagash, defeating them and annexing a portion of their land with the acquiescence of Utuhegal (R3/2:10). Upon the death of his suzerain Utuhegal, Urnammu declared himself an independent king {2112}, initially ruling only the city-state of Ur and its surrounding land; the fortifications of Ur were significantly strengthened early in his reign (R3/2:11, 19, 25–6). Later the fortifications of Nippur were also refurbished (R3/2:76).
The anarchy of the Gutian period left brigands and pirates infesting both Mesopotamia and the Persian Gulf. Part of Urnammu's achievement was to “put the road in order from the south to the north” (R3/2:14) and to resume trade with Magan (Oman) in the Persian Gulf (R3/2:41, 47). This restoration of order and trade in Mesopotamia laid the foundation for the economic and cultural renaissance of the Neo-Sumerian period. One of Urnammu's claims was to have cleared out the brigands and to have made river and land travel secure (CS 2:409). As part of this process he mentions the “sea-captains” who “had control of the foreign maritime trade” in the Persian Gulf; Urnammu “established freedom” for the Sumerian maritime traders (CS 2:409a). These “sea-captains” can be interpreted in one of two ways. It could simply refer to non-Sumerian merchants who had taken control of ocean trade during the Gutian anarchy. On the other hand, they may be Persian Gulf pirates who were pillaging Sumerian merchants, in which case Urnammu is describing the first anti-pirate naval campaign in history. He also mentions the return of a “Magan-boat” at Ur, probably a reference to a boat capable of sailing the Persian Gulf to Magan-Oman (CS 2:409a).
Urnammu undertook a number of campaigns which resulted in the hegemony of Ur in Sumeria. His armies conquered Lagash in battle, absorbing the city into his domain, although leaving it to be governed by local aristocrats (R3/2:47). He also defeated his former masters at Uruk (R3/2:16). Eventually he “banished malediction, violence and strife” – which is to say he defeated his rivals and subdued brigands. Ur's predominance in Mesopotamia was ritually recognized in a coronation festival at Nippur, culminating in his declaration as “king of the lands of Sumer and Akkad” who “restored the ancient state of affairs”, which is to say, he restored Sumerian rule in a unified Mesopotamia.12
Although Urnammu's direct military power was limited to central and southern Mesopotamia, he formulated an alliance with Mari to the north-west in Syria to oppose the growing power of the Amorite nomads in the Syrian steppe, who increasingly threatened Mesopotamia throughout Ur III.13 This alliance was sealed by the marriage of Urnammu's son with Taram-Uram, the daughter Apil-Kin, king of Mari (R3/2:86).
At some point in his reign Urnammu began to campaign to the east outside of Mesopotamia. As noted above, the Elamite kingdom under Puzur-Inshushinak had taken advantage of the power vacuum in Mesopotamia following the collapse of Gutian power in Mesopotamia to sieze several Sumerian city-states (R3/2:48). Urnammu campaigned into “highland Elam”, defeated the coalition of the Elamite king, and liberated the Sumerian city-states (R3/2:19–20, 65–6; PAE 124–5).
There are fragmentary inscriptions describing campaigns by Urnammu against the Gutians as well. Although driven from dominance in Mesopotamia by the campaigns of Utuhegal, the Gutians had not been decisively crushed, and still represented a serious potential threat to Mesopotamia. Gutarla, king of the Gutians, still had garrisons in parts of Mesopotamia, from which he conducted raids (R3/2:67). Urnammu campaigned victoriously against the Gutians “in their mountain”, binding “the bloody hands of the Gutian” prisoners (R3/2:11, 21). Even this victory did not fully break the Gutians, however, for, according to Urnammu's funerary lament, he died in battle against them in 2095, when his army broke and fled, leaving him stranded on the battlefield: “in the place of slaughter they [the army of Ur] abandoned [their king] Urnammu [in battle] like a broken pitcher”.14 This is one of the rare examples of Mesopotamian royal inscriptions describing the defeat and death of a king in battle.
Shulgi {2094–2047}15
Shortly after the death of his father Urnammu in battle, Shulgi carried out a punitive campaign against the Gutians to avenge his death (R3/2:20). Thereafter, for the most part, the early years of Shulgi's reign are generally associated in his year-names with peaceful religious and building activities. There were, however, some military undertakings; in his seventh year {2088}, the highlander “Su people, and the lands of Zabshali [northwest Iran], from the border of Anshan to the Upper Sea, rose like locusts” and invaded Mesopotamia. Shulgi undertook a punitive expedition against them (DZ 138–9).
In the second half of his reign {2076–2047}, however, war becomes increasingly common, with about half the year-names associated with campaigning. In the last part of his reign Shulgi undertook a generally expansionist policy, leading to conquests throughout Sumer and hegemony abroad, which was continued by his son Amarsin, creating a Sumerian empire.
Shulgi's campaign against Der {2076} contains some interesting tactical details. On the eve of battle Shulgi apparently destroyed some irrigation dikes, flooding the enemy's positions: “The banks of the River Diyala and the River Taban he smashed, and in a swamp he annihilated the enemy. [In] the land which he inundated he smashed his enemy's weapon” (R3/2:142–3). Thereafter, Shulgi undermined the walls of Der and destroyed the city: “I [Shulgi] arrived at the rebellious land [of Der]; [my army] ripped out the brickwork [of its walls] by its foundation. May the city I have smitten not be restored! The houses which I destroyed were ruined heaps” (R3/2:103). After the destruction of Der, Shulgi built two fortresses – Shulgi-Nanna and Ishim-Shulgi – to maintain Sumerian control of the region (R3/2:103), assigning Ur-Suena as military governor of the area (R3/2:190).
Thereafter Shulgi was at war on a regular basis. One of his major efforts was in the north against the Hurrian invaders, who had migrated into much of northern Mesopotamia during the Gutian period. Shulgi launched three multi-year wars against them in the upper Tigris region. Although he was generally successful in these campaigns, the Hurrians remained an important and growing military power.16 Most of Shulgi's campaigns are only vaguely described, with standardized formula such as “the year X was destroyed”. Some of these sites cannot be securely identified. Shulgi claimed victory over Karahar {2071}, Harshi {2068}, Shasru {2053}, and Simashki (R3/2:104, 108; 451). At some point in the latter part of his reign, Shulgi added to his original title “mighty man, king of Ur”, the title “king of the Lands of Sumer and Akkad” and “king of the four quarters [of the world]” (R3/2:149), indicating his claim to military pre-eminence in Mesopotamia (R3/2:111–16).
We are given more detail on a few of his campaigns. Over the course of twenty years Shulgi campaigned against the recalcitrant Hurrian stronghold of Simurrum five times {2069, 2068, 2062, 2050, 2049}, eventually capturing the city and its king Tappan-Darah. This was considered a great victory, as it is referenced several times in later oracular literature (R3/2:104–5). Attempting to improve relations with Elam, Shulgi married his daughter to the “governor of Anshan” in 2065. The alliance was unstable, however, and he invaded and defeated Anshan in 2061 (R3/2:104–5).
There are signs in the later part of Shulgi's reign of increasing military stress. In 2059 he built the “Wall of the Land”, also known as the “Wall Facing the Highland”. The location of Shulgi's wall is not certain, but it was probably aimed at preventing incursions by the Tidnumite nomad tribe of the Amorites (R3/2:106). The “highlands” possibly refers to Mount Bishri (Bashar) to the west of the Upper Euphrates, which had been a haunt of Amorite nomads since the days of NaramSin two centuries earlier. If so, the wall was the first attempt to limit or control the access of the Amorites into central Mesopotamia. The building of the wall was left in the care of his general Puzur-Shulgi; part of the letter in which Shulgi orders the building of the wall has survived:
The wall is to be finished in the period of one month! There are to be no further inquiries pertaining to these building activities! For now the Tidnum [tribe of the Amorite nomads] have come down from the mountain.
(R3/2:106)
This letter seems to indicate that the building of the wall was taking longer than expected and presumably going over budget, and that part of the reason for this was that the Tidnum nomads were harassing the builders, having already “come down from the mountain”.
This wall seems to be the first phase of the more famous “wall that repels Amorites” which was built by Shusin against incursions by Amorite nomads, representing the beginning of a shift from an offensive posture against highlanders to defensive walls to limit their raids. This represents a significant psychological shift in the martial mentality of the age: the Amorites, Hurrians, and Gutians cannot be decisively defeated – the best we can do is hold them at bay. This “great wall” mentality, more famous in its monumental Chinese manifestation, became fundamental to the Ur III martial policy in the twenty-first century. The wall was accompanied by the development of military garrison colonies and cities along a defensive zone facing the Zagros Mountains to attempt to prevent incursions from highlanders (DZ 153–6). The wall and defensive zone may have been initially successful, for we hear of no further Tidnum incursions for over twenty years. On the other hand, as noted below, the policy was ultimately to fail.
In the last five years of Shulgi's reign {2051–2047} Ur was involved in repeated campaigns against coalitions of partially subdued Hurrian city-states in northern Mesopotamia. The problems began with a coalition between the city of Simurrum – which Shulgi had already defeated three times – and the highlanders of Lullubu. Shulgi claims to have defeated them in 2051. If so, it was not a decisive victory, for in 2050 they were back in alliance with Urbillum (modern Arbil) and Karahar. The campaigns of 2049–2047 were directed against another rebel coalition of Kimash, Hurti, and Harshi (R3/2:107–9; 455), whose defeated dead he “heaped up [in] a pile of corpses” (R3/2:141). The need for repeated campaigns against Hurrian and Lullubi coalitions again points to declining military strength, perhaps associated with the fact that Shulgi was by now probably in his sixties or seventies, and may have been too old to effectively rule or lead his armies. Despite such mixed success in warfare, Ur was none the less the predominant military power of Mesopotamia at the death of Shulgi.
Military themes in the Shulgi hymns (TSH)
The court of king Shulgi of Ur {2094–2047} – who proclaimed himself a divinity – prepared a number of panegyric hymns praising the king's divine qualities, including his military prowess. It goes without saying that the king is handsome, strong, courageous and brave (TSH 73–5). By all accounts Shulgi was a superb athlete; he boasts of having run from Nippur to Ur (over 100 miles) some 1500 years before Phidippides’ more famous effort in Greece (R3/2:97, 157; Her. 6.106), in which he was later emulated by Ishme-Dagan of Isin (R4:37).
The Shulgi hymns provide us with some detailed literary narratives of actual combat in Neo-Sumerian times. One of Shulgi's hymns gives an epic description of a battle against the Gutians. Despite its hyperbole, poetic language and ritual setting, the hymn provides a useful window into the characteristics of Sumerian battle. The battle begins with an exchange of missile fire:
I will raise my spear against [the enemy]
I will set up my banner against the border of the foreign land I will fill my quiver,
My bow will distend, ready to shoot, like a raging serpent,
The barbed arrows will flash before me like lightening
The barbar-arrows, like swiftly flying bats
Will fly into the “mouth of its battle”.
Slingstones will pour down on its people;
Heavy clay lumps, like the “hand stones”,
Will be striking on their back.
The crushed people of the rebellious land,
I will cut down with my bow and sling like locusts.
(TSH 79)
Following the missile exchange, the battle transforms into a bloody melee with maces and axes:
My [mace?] will sharpen its teeth at the “head of the land”
My mitum-weapon will shed the blood of the people like water.
My weapon, the double-edged axe,
Will [spill?] their blood, which will cover the [land]
Having been spilled on the highland, the contents of a broken wine-jug …
In its wadis the blood will flow like water.
(TSH 79)
In many periods of history, being taken captive after a battle or siege was often only marginally more satisfactory than dying. But in the ancient Near East the plight of the prisoner was particularly miserable. Royal prisoners were often marched naked and in stocks back to the capital of the victorious king, where they were paraded in triumph, brought before the gods, and ritually debased by having the victorious king stand on their heads or bodies in the courtyards before the temples of the gods. The great hero Shulgi boasts that he will “set my foot on his [the defeated king's] head … I will make him die amid dripping blood” (TSH 77); the enemy was ritually executed by being disemboweled (TSH 77) in what probably amounted to a form of human sacrifice.
In the aftermath of the battle the adults were often killed, children were enslaved, and the fields and city destroyed.
The children of the foreign land, he made them embark on his ships
The adults he killed in revenge.…
The hero avenged his city,
Whatever has been destroyed in Sumer, he destroyed in the foreign [Gutian]
land … In its cultivated fields of shining barley, he caused weeds to grow,
He destroyed its wide and large trees with the axe.…
The king, after he destroyed the city, ruined the city walls …
He dispersed the seed of the Gutians like seed-grain. (TSH 85)
Many other prisoners were kept as slaves and sent to work on agriculture, canal digging, mining, and quarrying or building projects (USP 47–50).
After the victory, great plunder is brought back to Sumer in a triumphal procession:
The pure lapis-lazuli of the foreign land he loaded into leather-bags
He heaped up all its treasures
Amassed all the wealth of the foreign land,
Its fattened oxen and fattened sheep.
He invokes the name of [the god] Enlil,
He invokes the name of [the god] Ninlil
The hero [Shulgi], having carried out a noble revenge in the foreign land
[The king rode in] his shining royal magur-boat …
Shulgi, the righteous shepherd of Sumer,
Placed his feet upon [his enemy's neck]
Upon a throne he took seat.
The sim and ala-drums resounded for him,
The tigi-drums played for him music:
“My king has destroyed the foreign land, you have plundered its cities
Like a wild bull in the mountain”,
Sang the singers a song for him.
(TSH 85–7)
Shulgi then enters the temple of Enlil, dedicating the plunder to the gods, and receiving in return a divine decree of long, prosperous, and victorious rule (TSH 87–9). In another context it is clear that the soldiers also received their fair share of plunder. After defeating the Elamites, the king “brought the booty to the god Enlil, my lord, in Nippur, and marked it for him. The remainder I presented as a gift to my troops” (R3/2:66).
Amarsin (Amar-Suena) {2046–2038}17
Overall the reign of Amarsin is rather poorly documented for military affairs. Amarsin succeeded his father Shulgi in the midst of an ongoing war with Urbillum, against which he dispatched his general Niridagal in 2045 (R3/2:236), Niridagal seems to have decisively defeated that city, which is later listed as having an Ur-appointed military governor (R3/2:324). Thereafter Amarsin turned his attention to the north, launching two expeditions under general Haship-atal against Shashrum and Shuruthum in 2043 and 2041. According to the reconstruction of events by Frayne (R3/2:238–9), the campaign went northwest from the Diyala river, also conquering the cities of Rashap and Arrapha. In 2040 Amarsin invaded Huhnuri in Elam (R3/2:239). At some point in his reign he built a “watchtower” in Ur, but its precise military function, if any, is obscure (R3/2:259).
Some idea of the size of the empire of Ur can be discerned by the seal inscriptions of Ur-appointed city governors. Eventually the rulers of Ur are known to have had dependent governors in at least sixteen Mesopotamian cities, including Umma, Push, Kish, Lagash, Kazallu, Nippur, Sharrakum, Adab, Ishkun-Sin, Shuruppak, Marad, Simudar, Kutha, Uruk, and Eresh (R3/2:xli–xliv, 3, 271–7). There were undoubtedly other governors as well, for whom we lack records, along with additional vassal states. There were other cities with known Sumerian governors outside of Sumer itself, including Ashur, Babylon, Eshnunna, Simurrum, and Susa in Elam (R3/2:271–7); Ashur was governed by a general (GIR.NITA) named Zarriqum (R3/2:278, A1:9).
At the height of its power the empire of Ur III was divided into three zones, each with a different relationship to the city of Ur.18 In the central heartland of Sumer and Akkad (southern and central Mesopotamia), the cities were ruled by governors directly appointed by the king of Ur, directly paying taxes (bala) of goods and services. The second zone, along the central Tigris valley and parts of Elam, were conquered lands which had garrisons of soldiers (erin) with military commanders (shagina) appointed from Ur. These provinces paid the “tribute of the provinces” (gun mada) in livestock and other products. In one year alone this tribute amounted to 28,000 cattle and 350,000 sheep (CAM 102). The third zone consisted of allied and vassal states, who had their own independent rulers but who were dependent in some way on Ur. This region is rather amorphous and informal, with changeable relations with specific cities, but included at different times parts of western Iran, the upper Tigris, the middle Euphrates and parts of Syria. These regions sent ambassadors to Ur, intermarried with the royal family, and sent various forms of tribute or diplomatic gifts (HE2:85–101). The middle Euphrates, including Mari and Ebla, seemed to have some type of tributary status to Ur (HE 2:125–33), while ambassadors were received from as far away as Byblos on the Mediterranean coast (EH2:122). In 2048 Shulgi received tribute (gun) from Ebla consisting of”500 tilpānu-weapons of sudiānum-wood and 500 containers (c, S.kab-kut) of the same wood” (HE2:128–9), which I interpret to be 500 bows and quivers (see p. 91). This substantial tribute in weapons points to some type of vassalage on the part of Ebla to Ur, and further emphasizes the importance of archery in Neo-Sumerian armies.
Amarsin's overall predominance in Mesopotamia is reflected in his continuing claim to the title “king of the four quarters [of the world]”. Later legends remember that, during Amarsin's reign, “the homeland revolted” (R3/2:236), but this cannot be confirmed by any contemporary documents. It seems succession occurred without incident.
Shusin {2037–2029} and the Amorite Wars
Militarily speaking, Shusin's reign is one of the better documented of the Ur III dynasty (R3/2:285–359). As noted above, most of Shusin's predecessors had focused their attention on the conquest of the Tigris valley in north-eastern Iraq. With this flank stabilized, Shusin turned his attention to the west and the middle Euphrates basin. Early in his reign he entered into a military alliance with the north Euphrates city-state of Simanum (north-east Syria) through the marriage of his daughter Kunshi-matum to Arib-atal, son of king Pusham.19 Although the details are unknown, in 2036 a coup occurred in which Pusham and his family were ousted from power. The perpetrators of the coup are not named, but they may have been Hurrians, and they received assistance from the Amorite nomads. With the help of the gods Enlil and Inanna, Shusin – who “makes the foreign country tremble” – launched a campaign against the rebels in Simanum in 2035, which quickly turned into a much larger extended war with the Amorites.
From his base at Ashur, Shusin led the army of Ur northward up the Tigris, capturing Nineveh, Talmush, and Habura. At this time Nineveh seems to have been in the domain of the Hurrian king Tish-atal of Urkish (modern Mozan), who appears to have dominated the upper Tigris during the early Ur III period, and who may have been Shusin's uncle.20 Shusin continued his march up the Tigris, eventually reaching Simanum, where Shusin “smote the heads of Simanum, Habura, and the surrounding districts”. With the rebels defeated, Pusham and his family were restored to the throne.
We are provided with some details of the fate of prisoners from this campaign, who were deported and settled in a new town on the frontier of Nippur, perhaps to work on Shusin's defensive wall described below. Shusin boasts: “Since the [mythical] days of decreeing the fates [at the foundation of the world], no king has established a town for the god Enlil and the goddess Ninlil on the frontier of Nippur, with people he had captured.” This type of mass deportation of citizens from defeated cities would become a standard practice throughout Mesopotamian history. Conquered people became in many ways a form of war plunder, to be collected and transported just like silver or lapis lazuli or building timber. Warfare created a mobile market of displaced migrant workers whom the kings could move to support new agricultural or building projects.
Despite this victory, Shusin was forced to deal with an ongoing threat from the Amorite nomads, which his grandfather Shulgi had temporarily suppressed twenty years earlier, in around 2059. The Amorite nomads of the Tidnum tribe had apparently been raiding, or migrating into, the agricultural land along the middle Euphrates, since Shusin's continuing campaign in 2034 is said to have been undertaken in order to “remove any cause for complaint from the [people who work the] furrows of the [agricultural] land [by] vengeance [against the] Tidnum [nomadic raids]” (R3/2:290). Perhaps using the newly conquered Simanum as a base, in 2035 Shusin launched an attack against the Tidnum Amorite nomads, possibly advancing as far as Aleppo (Yamhad) (R3/2:290, 299, 301). He claimed that “the big mountains [where the Amorites live] were subdued … the towns, the populations, and their settlements, were turned into ruins”.
Despite these claims, the campaign was far from decisive, for in the following year, 2034, Shusin decided to build “the Amorite wall called ‘It keeps [the] Tidnum [nomads] at a distance’ “ (R3/2:290, 328). A letter from the building commissioner to king Shusin provides an informative description of the wall:
To Shusin, my king … thus says Sharrum-bani, the high commissioner, your servant. You have sent me as an envoy in order to build the great wall “It keeps Amorites at a distance”. I am presenting to you how matters stand. The Amorites are descending upon the land. You have instructed me to build the wall, to cut off their path so that they may not overwhelm the fields by a breach between the Tigris and Euphrates…. As a result of my building activities the wall is now 26 danna long. When I sent for word to the area between the two mountains it was brought to my attention that the [Amorites] were encamped in the mountains. [The Hurrians at] Simurrum had come to their aid. Therefore I proceeded to the area “between” the mountain ranges of Ebih in order to do battle.21
The text is somewhat vague, but it seems the Amorites had already crossed the Euphrates, probably in the north, and were raiding southward between the Euphrates and the Tigris. The wall was being built from the banks of the Tigris to the Euphrates to forestall further penetration southward into central and southern Mesopotamia. Ruins of this earth and clay wall – estimated to have been about 170 miles (280 km) long – can still be seen north of Baghdad.22 The wall would thus be similar to Nebuchadnezzar's later “Wall of Media”. The “mountain ranges of Ebih” have not been identified with certainty, but might perhaps have reference to the twin mountains Abd al-Aziz and Sinjar in northern Mesopotamia. The building of this wall shows the concern over the growing military threat from the Amorites, who would eventually participate in the destruction of the empire of Ur. None the less, Shusin's campaigns were successful in temporarily holding the Amorite threat at bay.
The Zagros highlanders posed a simultaneous threat which was opposed with a vigorous campaign in 2031 against Indasu, king of Zabshali (R3/2:301–6). Shusin describes their depredations as being “like a swarm of locusts from the border of Anshan (in south-east Iran] to the Upper [Mediterranean] Sea”, listing over a dozen subsidiary tribes or city-states who formed a confederation against Ur. Details of the battle are lacking; attention is paid to killing, scattering, and decapitating the enemy, finally piling their corpses into a heap. The captured leaders were bound and brought as captives before the god Enlil. Others scattered, attempting to …
save their lives by fleeing to their cities, [but Shusin marched] against their cities, screeching like an Anzu [dragon]. He turned their cities into ruined heaps; he destroyed their walls. He blinded the men of those cities … and established them as slaves in the orchards of the gods … [the women] he offered as a present to the weaving mills of the god Enlil and the goddess Ninlil.
(R3/2:309–12)
Other captives were enslaved and forced to work in the silver and gold mine at Bulma, one of the conquered cities. In addition to slaves, Shusin lists livestock and “leather sacks filled with gold and silver” and bronze as his booty. In triumph, Shusin created a monument depicting himself trampling the captive king Indasu, along with the names of ten other captured leaders of the coalition.
A fragmentary inscription describes a naval campaign of Shusin to “Magan [Oman], along with its provinces … [and] the other side of the sea …” (R3/2:201), which could have been an extension of Shusin's Elamite campaign. The combination of his campaigns on the Upper Euphrates, against Elam, and in the Persian Gulf allowed Shusin to claim the ancient Akkadian title of ruler from the “Lower to the Upper Sea” (R3/2:302, 317), maintaining the Third Dynasty of Ur as the dominant power in Mesopotamia.
Ibbisin (Ibbi-Suen) {2028–2004} and the fall of Ur23
Ibbisin's reign marked the decline and collapse of the Ur III dynasty, unleashing an ensuing period of invasion and chaos. Ibbisin's year names and inscriptions show far more concern with religious ritual than with the collapsing military and political situation of Ur. None the less, a number of campaigns are mentioned. For the most part these were defensive in nature, against provinces or cities which had earlier submitted to Ur, but had now gained independence.
In 2023 {Y6} Ibbisin undertook repairs and expansion on the walls of Nippur and Ur, perhaps reflecting a perception of an increasing threat to the heartland (R3/2:363). In a propagandistic inscription describing the building of the walls, Ibbisin wrote: “in order to make the land secure and to make the highlands and lowlands bow down before him, he surrounded his city with a great wall, whose loop-holes cannot be reached, and which is like a yellow mountain” (R3/2:369). How a defensive wall on a city in Sumer would make the highlanders “bow down” before the king of Ur is not explained. The defensive attitude, perhaps an extension of the great wall mentality, could not mask an increasingly desperate military situation.
The fall of the empire of Ur is rather well documented by the standards of the Early Bronze Age. Psychologically for Mesopotamians it was rather like the fall of Rome in the West, and from the military perspective it marks the end of the Early Bronze Age and the beginning of the Middle Bronze. A number of factors contributed to the fall of Ur. Internal political instability is reflected in the defection and independence of a number of city-states in both the heartland and the periphery of the empire, which had been brought into submission by the campaigns of Shulgi, Amarsin, and Shusin. “The lands that had been in obedience to Ur were split into factions” (LD 43). By 2027 {Y2} Eshnunna and the province of Simurrum had cast off allegiance, leading Ibbisin to send an army against them the next year (R3/2:366, 362). The campaign was apparently a failure, because the defections increased rapidly: Susa and Elam in 2026 {Y3}, Lagash in 2024 {Y5}, Umma in 2023 {Y6}, and Nippur in 2022 {Y7}. Girsu became independent under kings Ur-Ningirsu and Ur-Nanshe (R3/2:427–31).
Although we lack full documentation, other cities undoubtedly followed suit, while “brigands roamed the roads” (LD 42). More ominously, the Elamites were not only independent, but becoming increasingly hostile towards Ur, which would culminate in their destruction of the city. In an effort to stabilize the situation in Elam, Ibbisin “marched [eastward] with heavy forces against Huhnuri [near modern Behbehan] the ‘open mouth’ of the land of Anshan” in 2020 {Y9} (R3/2:363). This operation was indecisive, however, for he was back in 2015 {Y14}: Ibbisin “roared like a storm against Susa, Adamdun and the land of Awan [in Elam]; he made them submit in a single day and took their lords as bound captives”, dedicating part of the plunder to the gods. The booty from this war appears to have caused a temporary economic boom in Ur, but was insufficient to save the state (R3/2:364, 371–2). Overall, prices of foodstuffs increased manifold during this period.24
At the same time the situation was also rapidly degenerating on the north-west frontier, where the Amorites were becoming an increasing military threat. A series of letters exchanged between Ibbisin and his governors in the north-west shed an interesting light on the unfolding crisis. Despite the defection of south-eastern Mesopotamia, Isin remained temporarily loyal under its governor Ishbi-Irra. From 2020 to 2010 {Y9–19}, the degenerating situation began to threaten the grain supply to Ur. Ishbi-Irra, governor of Isin, wrote to Ibbisin explaining the situation:
Thus says Ishbi-Irra, your servant: You have instructed me to proceed on an expedition to Isin and Kazallu in order to purchase grain. The market price of grain has reached one gur [of grain] per shekel [of silver].… Word having reached me that the hostile Amorites had entered into the midst of your land I brought all of the 72,000 gur of grain into Isin. And now all of the Amorites have entered into the land. One by one they have seized all the fortifications. Because of the Amorites I have been unable to thresh the grain. They are too strong for me, I am trapped [in the city of Isin].25
Here we see a countryside overrun by Amorite nomads to the extent that the Sumerians are simply hiding in their cities, unable to harvest their fields as the price of grain skyrockets. At some point Ishbi-Irra, exasperated with the weakness of Ibbisin, declared his independence, leading to war with his former overlord (see pp. 159–62).
In 2013 {Y17} Ibbisin made the enigmatic claim that “this year the Amorites of the southern border, who from ancient times have known no cities, submitted to Ibbisin, king of Ur” (R3/2:364; AUP 94). Importantly, the text does not a claim military victory over the Amorites, but only that they “submitted”, perhaps in return for a payment of tribute. This “submission”, however, apparently represented the formation of some type of coalition between Ibbisin and the Amorites against Ishbi-Irra, the erstwhile governor of Isin; it may be alluded to in mythic terms in the following inscription: “[the god] Enlil, my helper, has summoned the Amorites from their mountain, Elam will come to my side and catch Ishbi-Irra [rebel governor of Isin]” (AUP 95). Thus, as has happened on occasion in history, when two rivals are locked in a civil war for the control of an empire, one may turn to outside barbarians for assistance, buying short-term victory at the cost of long-term security. What exactly this submission or coalition entailed is unclear; while it may have represented a temporary set-back for Ishbi-Irra, it was a major victory for the Amorite invaders, whose spread throughout Mesopotamia was thereby facilitated.
Instead of providing military assistance to his beleaguered governor, Ibbisin berated Ishbi-Irra for dereliction of duty and malfeasance:
Thus says your king Ibbi-Sin: … You received twenty talents of silver to buy grain and you proceed to buy two gur of grain for each shekel, but to me you send one gur for each shekel. How is it that you permitted the Amorites, the enemy, to enter my land against Puzur-Numushda, the commandant of Badigihursagga? I sent you weapons with which to strike; how is it that you sent the “men without heads” [fools? decapitated soldiers?] who are in the land against the Amorites from the north?
(R3/2:367)
The degenerating relations between Ibbisin and his governor eventually led to civil war. By 2010 {Y19} Ishbi-Irra of Isin had declared independence from the ineffectual Ibbisin, and had begun carving out his own state in central Mesopotamia. The situation was described by Puzur-Shugli, governor of Kazallu, apparently the last governor in the region loyal to Ibbisin:
[Ishbi-Irra] has built the wall of Isin.… He has taken Nippur, set his men as the garrison, and captured Nigugani, the highest priest of Nippur. He has made [his general] Idi enter Malgium and plundered Hamasi. He has put Zinnum, governor of Subartu, in prison. He has returned Nur-Ahum, governor of Eshnunna, Shu-Enlil, governor of Kish, and Puzur-Tut, governor of Borsippa, to their [former] positions [from which Ibbisin had removed them for disloyalty?].… Ishbi-Irra proceeds at the head of his army.… He captured the banks of the Tigris, Euphrates, [and] the Abgal and Me-Enlila canals. He brought in Idin-Malgium [as an ally.] He quarreled with Girbubu, the governor of Girkal … and took him prisoner. His battle cry lies heavy upon me. Now he has set his eye upon me. I have no ally, no one to go [to battle] with! Although his hand has not yet reached me, should he descend upon me, I shall have to flee.26
By this time, however, Ibbisin was in no position to help his last loyal governor in central Mesopotamia. “Ur's king sat immobilized in the palace, all alone. Ibbi-Sin was sitting in anguish in the palace, all alone. In the Enamtila, the palace of his delight, he was crying bitterly” (LD 43).
By 2007 {Y22} the chaos had reached the capital of Ur. Amorite nomads from the north, along with Gutian highlanders and Elamites, overran all of Mesopotamia. Ibbisin records an obscure inscription: “Ibbisin, king of Ur, held firm the city of Ur … which had been devastated by the ‘flood’ which had been commanded by the gods and which shook the whole world” (R3/2:365). Many scholars view this statement as a euphemistic metaphor: the “flood” is a flood of enemies who overran much of the kingdom, but were unable as yet to capture Ur itself. Indeed, this same flood metaphor is used to describe the attack of Gutians and Elamites against Ur (LD 41).27 The next year, 2006 {Y23} Ibbisin also describes the coming of a “stupid monkey” to Ur, which some scholars see as a euphemism for an attack by an enemy king (R3/2:365). In 2005 {Y24}, the final year of Ibbisin's reign, a fragmentary inscription describes the Elamites as “smiting Ur”, ending the dynasty (R3/2:366); Ibbisin was dragged in chains to Elam (LD 39; PH 7).
The Lament for Ur
An important document describing the fall of Ur is The Lamentation over the Destruction of Sumer and Ur (LD) – a kind of Sumerian City of God. Although clearly a literary text filled with hyperbole, it none the less contains a vivid description of how the Sumerians viewed the fall of their civilization, with numerous details on military matters. As with all affairs in human life, the destruction of Ur is, from the Sumerian perspective, the result of the inscrutable decrees of the gods: “the gods An, Enlil, Enki, and Nimah decided its fate. Its fate, which cannot be changed, who can overturn it – who can oppose the commands of An and Enlil?” (LD 39, 37). For although “Ur was indeed given kingship [by the gods] … it was not given an eternal reign” (LD 59). The war goddess “Inanna handed over victory in strife and battle to a rebellious land … revolt descended upon the land [of Sumer], something that no one had ever known, something unseen [until now]” (LD 41).
To accomplish this decreed destruction, the gods unleashed the foreign barbarians, the Amorites, Gutians, and Elamites. The god “Enlil then sent down Gutium from the mountains. Their advance was as the flood of Enlil that cannot be withstood, … the teeming plain [of Sumer] was destroyed [by the Gutian invaders], no one moved about there” (LD 41). The Gutians settled in the land like a nest of vipers: “the snake of the mountain [the Gutians] made his lair there, it became a rebellious land; the Gutians bred there, issued their seed” (LD 45). The Elamites, who would actually destroy Ur, were also unleashed by the gods. “Enlil brought down the Elamites, the enemy, from the highlands … Fire approached [the god] Ninmar in the shrine Guabba, large boats were carrying off its precious metals and stones [as plunder]” (LD 47). Likewise the nomadic Amorites from the west joined in the slaughter: “To the south, the Elamites stepped in, slaughtering … To the north, the [Amorite] vandals, the enemy … The [Amorite] Tidnumites daily strapped the mace to their loins [for battle]” (LD 51–3).
The culmination of these invasions was the siege of Ur by the Elamites. The lament of the poet, who may have been an eyewitness, provides our most vivid account of a siege from ancient Mesopotamia:
Laments sounded all along its city wall,
Daily there was a slaughter before it.
Large axes were sharpened in front of Ur,
The spears, the arms of battle, were being launched,
The large bows, javelin, and siege-shield gather together to strike,
The barbed arrows covered its outside [wall] like a raining cloud,
Large stones [from slings], one after another, fell with great thuds.…
Ur, which had been confident in its own strength, stood ready for slaughter,
Its people, oppressed by the enemy, could not withstand their weapons.
Those in the city who had not been felled by weapons died of hunger,
Hunger filled the city like water, it would not cease.…
Its people dropped their weapons, their weapons hit the ground.…
Ur – inside it there is [only] death, outside it there is [only] death,
Inside it we are being finished off by famine,
Outside it we are being finished off by the Elamite weapons.…
Elam, like a swelling flood wave, left only the spirits of the dead.…
[Ur's] refugees were unable to flee, they were trapped inside the walls.
(LD 61–3)
Surrounded and starving, the citizens of Ur finally give way to despair, dissension, and treachery:
In Ur no one went to fetch food, no one went to fetch drink,
Its people rush around like water churning in a well,
Their strength has ebbed away; they cannot even go on their way,
[The god] Enlil afflicted the city with an inimical famine,
He afflicted the city with something that destroys cities, that destroys temples,
He afflicted the city with something that cannot be withstood with weapons,
He afflicted the city with dissatisfaction and treachery.
(LD 55)
In the end, the Elamites breached the walls and sacked the city, and “Ur, like a city that has been wrought by the hoe, became a ruined mound” (LD 59). “The soldiers of Shimashki and Elam, the enemy, dwell in their [the Sumerians’] place, [Sumer's] shepherd [king] is captured by the enemy, all alone; Ibbisin is taken to the land of Elam in fetters” (LD 39).
Much of the rest of the Lamentation consists of poetic descriptions of the desolate scene after the fall of Ur, with temples deserted, cities destroyed, unplanted weed-infested fields, and livestock captured. People were massacred, leaving “corpses floating in the Euphrates” (LD 42), while others were enslaved (LD 53). The few survivors are “refugees, like stampeding goats, chased by dogs” (LD 47) who were “scattered as far as Anshan” (R4:17). The text lists many major Sumerian cities destroyed by invading Gutium and Elamites, repeating the refrain, “Alas, the destroyed city, my destroyed temple.” With these invasions the old Sumerian order and the Early Bronze Age ended. The new political and military order of Mesopotamia was to be forged by Amorite warlords (see Chapter Six).
Ideal warfare in the Epic of Ninurta
Though describing a mythical tale of the gods, the Epic of Ninurta (HTO 233–72) provides our most detailed literary account of the Neo-Sumerian army at war.28 Written in the twenty-second century, shortly after the overthrow of the Gutian highlanders from Mesopotamia, the myth centers around the great struggle between the god Ninurta and Azag, a demonic ruler of the Zagros Mountains to the north-east of Sumeria and personification of the Sumerian view of the highland warriors such as the Gutians. Azag is plotting to “take away the kingship and sacred offices” of Ninurta in Sumeria, just as the Gutians had done (HTO 239). Azag is a “fearless warrior”, a “killer out of the highland”, a “towering man” and “true fighter” whose highland “warriors constantly come raiding the cities” of Sumeria (HTO 237–8).
Ninurta is roused to anger by these incursions, and raises an army to destroy Azag. The advance of his army to battle is compared with the terror and destructiveness of a rising storm and flood:
Rising, the lord [Ninurta] abutted heaven
Ninurta marching to battle kept abreast of the hours
A very storm he went to war,
Rode on seven gales against the rebel country.
Javelins he held cradled in the arm,
The mittu-mace opened its mouth against the mountains,
The weapons raged at the hostile horde.
The evil wind and the south storm were tethered to him,
The flood storm strode at their flanks,
And before the warrior went a huge irresistible tempest,
It was tearing up the dust, depositing it again
Evening out hill and dale, filling in the hollows;
Live coals [lightening] it rained down [from heaven]
Fire burned, flames scorched.
(HTO 240–1)
Mesopotamia was a land criss-crossed by rivers and canals, and boats were used to transport troops and supplies in almost all campaigns. This is reflected in the epic, as Ninurta “hastened toward battle” in “the boat Makarnuntaea – ‘boat sailing from the royal quay’ “ (HTO 241). As Ninurta approached the land of Azag, he sent spies and agents “slipping into the rebel country” to “cut off communication between its cities” (HTO 241). His agents “brought an enemy captive back” to interrogate, while bringing additional information about the enemy's movements and preparations (HTO 242).
When combat finally came, Ninurta's “heart was brightening for him from pleasure in this lion-headed mace”. The pre-battle arming of Ninurta is described like “the embrace of the beloved”. In pre-battle preparations, a small portable shrine for the gods was established for prayer, sacrifice, and divination (HTO 243). The marshaling of troops for battle is described as preparations for a religious ritual, “the festival of manhood, [the war-goddess] Inanna's dance” (HTO 243). This may refer either to a pre-battle war-dance undertaken in honor of Inanna, or a description of actual combat as being a ritual dance honoring Inanna. This relationship of dancing with war may point to the rote-learning of combat actions and marching in unison in the form of a ritual war-dance. In some ways these war-dances are probably the origin of martial arts – the teaching of stylized patterns of combat through dance.
Throughout the myth, Ninurta's mace, named Sharur, is described as a sentient being who spies for Ninurta and gives him council (HTO 236–8). This may simply be the personification of a divine weapon, but may alternatively reflect a practice of giving weapon-titles to great champions of the king, just as Ninurta himself is called the sky-god “An's mace” (HTO 242). Elsewhere in the epic, Ninurta's soldiers armed with long spears are simply called his “long spears” (HTO 244). Ninurta holds a war council, and his councilors advise caution, fearing the power of Azag in his mountain retreats: “we will prove no match for Azag; we ought not to enter the highland!” (HTO 244).
Naturally, Ninurta is not dissuaded by their fears, but marshals his troops for combat.
The lord [Ninurta] stretched the thigh
[The chariot pulled by a] donkey steed was mounted
He girded himself with warbelt
Cast over the highland his long august shadow …
Unto Azag's stronghold [in the highland] he attained
And stood in the front line of battle.…
He gave his [regiment of] long spears instructions …
The lord called upon his weapons, set out most completely arrayed.
The battle itself is described as overwhelming natural chaos, with the sky darkening under the rising dust cloud caused by the combatants.
Into the fray the warrior [Ninurta] rushed …
Bow and battle-sling he wielded well,
Shattered was the [army of the] highland, it dissolved
Before Ninurta's battle array
As the warrior [Ninurta] ordered his weapons “gird yourself” [for battle].
The sun marched no longer [through the sky], it had turned into a moon;
In the highland the [mountain] peaks were wiped from [view]
The day was made black like pitch [from the dust]
(HTO 244).
The enemy king Azag, however, described as a gigantic dragon which struck fear into the hearts of the gods, was not yet defeated: “Azag rose to attack in the front line of battle” (HTO 245–6). At least in mythic texts, kings challenge each other to single combat (HTO 297), or use champions (HTO 309–10); one such champion is described as wearing a lion skin (HTO 316). Such a single combat occurs between Ninurta and Azag, described metaphorically as a struggle between the natural forces of desert and water (HTO 245–7). The enemy “sent arrows flying at [Ninurta] … and threw elite troops against him like bolts of lightening” (HTO 258). The combat culminated in Ninurta's final charge:
Howling like a storm, [carrying] his long spear,
Ninurta … rammed his battalion like a prod into the highland.…
The mittu-mace smote [enemy] heads with its bitter teeth,
The shita-weapon, which plucks out hearts, gnashed its teeth,
The long spear was stuck [through the enemy] into the ground
While blood flowed from the hole it made.
(HTO 248)
Ninurta is described as a “warrior, striding into battle, trampling down all before him, putting a fighter's hand to the mittu-mace, reaping like grain the necks of the [enemies]” (HTO 235). At last Azag's army begins to collapse:
The warrior [Ninurta] set up a howl loudly in the highland …
He battered the heads of the enemy horde,
The highland was brought to tears,
The lord [Ninurta] bound up [captured] soldier teams like looted goods …
Ninurta passed through the [dead] enemies
Laid them out as if they were fatted calves. (HTO 249–50)
Azag is killed by Ninurta, who celebrates his victory by ritually dismembering Azag's corpse, perhaps in imitation of the god Marduk's dismemberment of the monster Tiamat at creation (MFM 254–5). Abuse of enemy corpses in Mesopotamia should probably be understood in this mythic context.
The victory was followed a cleansing ritual in which the arms and body were cleaned from the gore of battle.
The lord [Ninurta] rinsed belt and weapon in water,
Rinsed the mittu-mace in water,
The warrior wiped his brow –
And sounded the victory cry over the corpse [of Azag];
He carved up Azag, who he had killed like a fatted calf (HTO 250).
This ritual is probably alluded to in several royal inscriptions in which the kings wash their weapons in the waters of the ocean (R2:11, 14, 17, 32, 97).
With Azag and the highland army defeated, Ninurta brings civilization, irrigation and agriculture to the area (HTO 250–4), including fortifications to protect Sumeria: “He made a bank of stones against the highland … and placed it as a bar before the country [of Mesopotamia] like a great wall” (HTO 252). He then is able to exploit the “gold and silver … copper and tin” of the region (HTO 255), as well as numerous types of stones and gems (HTO 256–68). Returning to his boat Makarnuntaea, which had been left in the river valley, Ninurta sails home in triumph, where he is met with hymns praising his great victory (HTO 268–71).
What we have in the epic of Ninurta is a complete description of the ideal Neo-Sumerian campaign, from its inception to the triumphal return of the king to his capital. Although this ideal model could not always be fully followed in reality, it is likely that Sumerian kings made conscious efforts to have their real campaigns conform as closely as possible to this ideal.
Triumphal procession
After victory the warriors celebrated a triumphal procession, to honor both the heroes and the gods. The “Hymn to Inanna”, the goddess of war, describes such a triumph, which concludes with the ritual sacrifice of prisoners of war.
Drums, silver inwrought, they are beating for her –
Before holy Inanna, before her eyes, they are parading –
The great Queen of Heaven, Inanna, I will hail!
Holy tambourines and holy kettledrums they are beating for her …29
The guardsmen [sag-ursag] have combed their hair for her …
They have made colorful for her the back hair with colored ribbons …
On their bodies are sheep skin robes, the dress of divinities …
They are girt with implements of battle …
Spears, the arms of battle, are in their hands …
Playfully, with painted buttocks, they engage in single combat …
Captive [enemy] lads in neck stocks bewail to her their fate …
Daggers and maces rage before her …
The kurgaru [warriors] mounted on chariots swing the maces …
Gore is covering the daggers, blood sprinkles …
In the courtyard of the place of assembly
The temple administrator-priests are shedding blood
As loudly resounds there the music of tigi-harps, tambourines and lyres. (HTO 115–17)
It is likely that celebrations like this were organized for most victorious armies, and probably represent the archaic origins of the later Roman triumphs.
Warfare in the Epic of Gilgamesh
The Epic of Gilgamesh is a Mesopotamian literary epic which tells of the adventures of Gilgamesh, king of Uruk. The historical Gilgamesh reigned as king in the early twenty-seventh century (see pp. 46–8), and is noted for constructing the walls of Uruk (EOG 1). He was worshipped as a deified king by the twenty-fourth century, by which time it is assumed oral tales were told of the famous ruler. The oldest extant parts of the Gilgamesh epic cycle date from the twenty-first century in Sumerian. By the eighteenth and seventeenth centuries, nearly a thousand years after the death of the historical Gilgamesh, the epic had reached its classical form in Old Babylonian (EOG lx). Thus, from a military perspective, the epic probably best reflects military practices of the late third or early second millennium.
The Epic of Gilgamesh provides a number of interesting descriptions of military activities associated with the battle against the monster Humbaba (EOG 22–47). Gilgamesh represents the ideal Mesopotamian martial king, who “has no equal when his weapons are brandished” (EOG 4). The first part of the epic focuses on Gilgamesh's battle with Humbaba on Mount Lebanon (EOG 19); although mythic, it none the less represents the military ideal, if not necessarily the reality.
The description of Gilgamesh's preparations and march to Lebanon probably reflect actual practices on military campaigns. When Gilgamesh conceives of the plan to attack Humbaba, his first act is to cast new bronze weapons: axes and daggers with “gold mountings” (EOG 20). He then summons the town assembly, composed of the elders and the “young men of Uruk who understand combat” (EOG 20–1). In other words, the assembly is composed of the military-age males who debate issues of war and peace, broadly paralleling similar institutions in early Greece. This body debates Gilgamesh's military proposal; the elders advise the king of the perils of his proposed undertaking, objecting that “you are young, Gilgamesh, borne along by emotion; all that you talk of you don't understand” (EOG 22). Gilgamesh laughs at their fears, and in the end the assembly gives him advice and prays to the gods to bless him (EOG 28–9). They advise Gilgamesh “not to rely on your own strength alone”, but to take Enkidu as counselor and war-companion (EOG 28). They also give advice in the form of a military proverb: “who goes in front will save his comrade, who knows the road shall guard his friend” (EOG 28), apparently meaning that proper scouting and intelligence will protect an army.
Gilgamesh's companion on the campaign against Humbaba, then, is Enkidu, a “savage man from the midst of the wild” (EOG 7); he probably represents the Mesopotamian view of highland hunters and nomads who are said to have never tasted bread and beer (EOG 14). Enkidu is explicitly said to have been “born in the uplands” where the monster Humbaba dwells (EOG 13, 18), which are associated with “the mountain of cedar” in Lebanon (EOG 34, 39). In strength and military prowess he is described as being the “equal” of Gilgamesh (EOG 11, 13) – although Gilgamesh defeats him in a wrestling match (EOG 16). He is repeatedly said to be as “mighty as a rock from the sky” (EOG 5, 10), possibly a reference to meteoritic iron, the hardest substance known to the Mesopotamians.
Having prepared his weapons, met with the council of the military assembly, and selected his companion-at-arms, there remains the crucial issue of consulting the will of the gods and gaining their support. For this Gilgamesh consults his mother, the goddess-priestess Ninsun. In historical terms the “goddess” Ninsun was probably represented by her mortal high priestess, who led divination rituals and presented oracular responses from the gods, broadly paralleling the Pythia at Delphi or the Sybil at Cumae. Ninsun performs various purification rituals, climbs to the top of a ziggurat, and invokes the blessings of Shamash the sun-god on Gilgamesh and Enkidu, concluding with a ritual in which she adopts Enkidu as her son, and thus as Gilgamesh's brother (EOG 24–7). In a badly damaged portion of the tablet, Gilgamesh and Enkidu also perform various rituals to insure their safety and victory in battle (EOG 27). Such divination and the reception of favorable oracles were crucial for any military undertaking; no one in Bronze Age Mesopotamia expected victory in battle if their plans were not approved by the gods (see pp. 186–92).
The Epic of Gilgamesh thus presents us with three phases of military preparation which were probably normative for most Bronze Age armies: 1, preparation of weapons, equipment, and supplies; 2, consultation with the assembly of military-age men to determine the battle plan and selection of those to participate in the expeditionary force; and 3, divination and invocation of the gods to insure divine authorization and blessing. Elements of these three phases of military preparation can be seen in many other historical and literary sources.
The march from Uruk to the Cedar Mountain is described, with regular stops for food and encampment. The emphasis in this section of the epic is on preparing a special evening ritual which allows Gilgamesh to receive five oracular dreams; each was a nightmare, filled with distressing images causing Gilgamesh to fear that his mission will fail. Enkidu, however, cleverly interprets each dream as reflecting a positive outcome for Gilgamesh (EOG 30–7). This doubtless reflects actual practices on campaigns. Oracular dreams were widely regarded as authentic communications from the gods throughout the Ancient Near East. As such, the dreams of the commander of an expedition were particularly important. Such dreams always needed professional dream interpreters to explain their meaning, and a clever interpreter like Enkidu could make almost any omen or dream seem to favor his ruler's plans.30
On the campaign, and in battle, Gilgamesh and Enkidu encourage each other. “Let your shout resound like a kettle drum, let the stiffness leave your arms, the tremors your knees,” Gilgamesh proclaims, encouraging his friend on to battle. “We shall go on together, let your thoughts dwell on combat; let him who goes first be on guard for himself, and bring his comrade to safety” (EOG 38–9). When Gilgamesh's courage fails him at the sight of the terrifying monster Humbaba, Enkidu berates him: “why, my friend, do you speak like a weakling? With your spineless words you make me despondent.… Don't draw back, don't make a retreat! Make your blow mighty!” (EOG 41).
As in heroic Greece, one of the principle goals of the warrior is to garner fame from battle. Gilgamesh decides to fight Humbaba in order to “establish for ever a fame that endures, how Gilgamesh slew ferocious Humbaba!” (EOG 43). Details of the battle itself are sparse. Gilgamesh and Enkidu fight hand to hand with dagger and axe; no missile weapons are mentioned (EOG 39, 44–5, 70). As with a Homeric duel, the battle begins with challenges and taunts; Humbaba boasts, “I will slit the throat and gullet of Gilgamesh, I will feed his flesh to the locust bird, ravening eagle and vulture” (EOG 41). Again paralleling Homeric literature, humans can also challenge and threaten the gods. Later in the epic, Enkidu threatens the goddess Ishtar that he will “drape your arms in your guts” (EOG 52). When, with the help of great winds sent by the god Shamash, they finally subdue Humbaba, the monster pleads for his life (EOG 43). When Gilgamesh refuses to relent, Humbaba curses them: “May the pair of them not grow old, besides Gilgamesh his friend, none shall bury Enkidu”, after which Gilgamesh slits his throat while Enkidu cuts out his lungs (EOG 44). Thereafter they plunder the cedar forest – Humbaba's kingdom – and take the timber back to be made into a monumental door for the temple of Enlil, while Gilgamesh carries the head of Humbaba home in triumph (EOG 47), where he purifies himself and washes his weapons (EOG 48).