Notes and Links on Umma

[inimgina]

Umma (modern: Umm al-Aqarib, Dhi Qar province in Iraq) was a Mesopotamian city-state that was founded by the beginning of the third millennium. Umma was not recorded on the Sumerian King List.

The Umma province is estimated (by Steinkeller) to have been on the order of 2,000 square kilometers in size (say, 40 x 50 kms or 25 x 30 miles). The population of the province of Umma is estimated to have reached its height at almost 20,000 people during the Ur III period (An Interdisciplinary Overview of a Mesopotamian City and its Hinterlands, Robert McC.Adams CDLI 2008)

Specifically turning to the city of Umma, Adams and Nissen estimated the size of the elevated area of the site to be 1,500 meters in diameter (1972: site 197).

The economy of Umma was largely agricultural. The farm land that surrounded the city of Umma was divided into four quarters. To the North West there was the Da-Umma quarter. To the North East there was the Apisala quarter. To the South West there was the Mušbiana quarter. To the South East there was the Guedina quarter. The main crop of the region was barley.

The patron deity of the city of Umma was the god Šara. The é-mah (Magnificent house) and the ébursigsig (House with beautiful bowls) were the names of the temple of Šara at Umma. Nin-ura was the wife of Šara and his mother was the goddess Inana. In the myth Inana's descent to the netherworld, Inana dissuades demons from taking Šara by convincing them to take Dumunzid the king of Uruk instead. Šara is sometimes associated with war however little is known of the nature of Šara. The city also had a local cult to the goddess Inana and her temple there was called the ibgal.

[inimgina]

A balbale to Šara

etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/etcsl.cgi?text=t.4.30.1#

[inimgina]

A Brief History of Umma during the Dynastic period

Umma is often remembered for its long war with its southern neighbor Lagash over control of the Guedina. The two city-states fought over the Guedina until Mesalim, King of Kish, declared a border that divided the land and marked it with a now lost inscription. Ush was the first known ruler of Umma to violate the terms of the treaty. He marched across the border and destroyed Mesalim’s stele. During the reign of Ur-Nanshe Lagash struck back against Umma as indicated by a text excavated from the Bagara Temple of Girsu in the 1970's (FAOS 05/1, Urn 51, CDLI P222390). The text indicates Ur-Nanshe defeated Pabilgaltuku king of Umma and it's allied city of Ur in battle and captured some of its leaders as prisoners. Pabilgaltuku was probably the son of Ush. Usurdu was probably the next ruler of Umma that preceded Enakale who ruled over Umma during the reign of Eannatum. Eannatum restored the border stele of Mesalim and he declared that part of the Guedena would be “a field with no owner." He had Enakale swear, “By the life of Enlil, king of heaven and earth, the fields of Ningirsu I shall exploit as an interest-bearing loan”, meaning that Umma could farm the fields for the payment a share of the crops as rent. Next to rule over Umma was Ur-luma, the son of Enakale.

Upon the death of Eannatum the kingship passed to his brother Enannatum. At the time, Enannatum had his hands full trying to quell the many rebellions in different parts of his dead brother's crumbling empire. This is when Ur-luma attacked Lagash and once again destroyed the border marker in the Guedina.

The first battle occurred in the Ugiga fields. A tablet (CDLI P222496) tells us that Ur-luma “by the Hill of the Black Dog brought up his vanguard”. Ur-luma was defeated and fled the battle. Enannatum of Lagash died shortly after and rulership was passed to his son Enmetna. In Umma Il, who was a temple administrator in Zabalam, seized rule over Umma. Il and Enmetna continued to dispute control over the Guedina. Il was succeeded by Gish-shag-kidug (2400-2391 BC), then next by Lugal-kinishe-dudu (2380-2361 BC) who was succeeded by lugalzagesi (2360-2336). Lugalzagesi began his career as ensi of Umma. He went onto defeat the other city-states of Kiengir thus uniting the lands. In Lagash he defeated Urukagina. He defeated the cities of Uruk, Ur, Nippur, and Larsa. In Kish he defeated Ur-Zababa. He established his new capital in Uruk where he ruled from until he was defeated by Sargon of Akkad. This defeat marks the transition from the Dynastic period to the Sargonic period.

It is not known how exactly Umma managed to hold its own against the city of Lagash for over a hundred years of intermediate warfare. Lagash is estimated to have been around three to four times the size of Umma in both land and population (Elizabeth Stone's survey of the region found in "Settlement and Society: Essays dedicated to Robert McCormick Adams" Cotsen Institute, UCLA, and Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, 2007) Economic documents continue to reflect that the economic superiority of Lagash continued through to the Ur III period. It not only cultivated roughly four times as much barley in spite of having extensive marshes and a large workforce of fishermen, but also supported herds of sheep two and half times larger than Umma’s.

[inimgina]

In addition to the city and its four agricultural quarters Umma was surrounded by settlements that, by the Ur III period, ranged in size from tiny hamlets to small towns.

Over several decades, while systematically examining almost all of Umma’s 20,000 or so earlier known collections of tablets, Steinkeller has assembled a list of about 150 settlements mentioned in them. Not even part of the list, moreover, are references to hundreds of individuals in isolated small clusters of dwellings (Steinkeller on pg. 194 in “City and Countryside in Third Millennia Southern Babylonia,” in E. C. Stone, ed.,Settlement and Society: Essays dedicated to Robert McCormick Adams. Cotsen Institute, UCLA, and Oriental Institute, University of Chicago)

[inimgina]

The Sumerian term for farmer was "ensik" or "engar" The Sumerian term "eren" was a designation of free dependents of the state, who possessed full social, economic, and legal rights. The Sumerian term for an unskilled laborer was "guruš". The Sumerian term for a female laborer was "geme". The Sumerian term for a slave was " arad".

"Leaving aside the special skills of plowing teams, agricultural labor, often characterized in general as guruš, fell into several distinguishable classes or categories (Studevent-Hickman 2006). The more privileged erin2 enjoyed full rights as members of the community, and had half-time corvée responsibilities granting them daily barley remuneration of two liters during that period. But they were further divided into upper and lower groups. The former, officials and skilled professionals in addition to some privileged cultivators, received the allotments of land for cultivation called šuku, adding substantially to their security and livelihood. The lower group (its proportionate size is uncertain) did not. Markedly less numerous than the erin2—no more than perhaps a fifth at most of the number of the latter that can be recognized in the fairly exhaustive Umma labor rosters covered by Studevent-Hickman (2006)—was a decidedly unprivileged lower status group, UN-il2 or “carriers”. It was tied to full-time employment at a lower daily allowance of only one liter of barley and no šuku land allotment (Steinkeller 2003: 44-45)."

An Interdisciplinary Overview of a Mesopotamian City and its Hinterlands (Robert McC.Adams, CDLI 2008)

[inimgina]

"The Umma archive’s many relevant records attests to only modest variability over reported aggregates. The recorded area of what is characterized as provincial domain land cultivated for barley, under the direct control of the ensi2, is generally given as about 785 bur3 (4,984 hectares). Held in reserve for alternate years in fallow was the same amount. Allotment land was also part of the domain, amounting to 680 bur3 (4,318 ha.). This was apportioned (without right of alienation) as šuku in return for alternate months of corvée service by a relatively privileged, presumably quite limited, but presently inestimable part of the population designated as guruš or erin2.

The limited scale of cultivated land in the province, at least as recorded in the archive, must be emphasized. Even allowing for fields held in fallow, out of an approximate total area of 2,000 km2 only about 127 km2 or 7 percent (Dahl 2007: 36) were recorded as in use. If we posit that there were probably ten or a dozen primary canals in use that drew their water supply from the Idigna or the Iturungal, it would follow that as little as ten kilometers or so of their individual lengths (not necessarily continuously) were all that would be needed. Along each bank, furthermore, the area actually cultivated would not need to exceed a half-kilometer or so in depth. The relatively modest total water withdrawals needed for this limited area may help to account for the near-invisibility of deep secondary and tertiary canalization. But this could have been complemented in some cases by the use of manual, heavily leveraged lifting devices like those employed along the larger, deeper bed of the Idigna (according to Steinkeller 2001: 29, with up to 300-liter vessels)."

An Interdisciplinary Overview of a Mesopotamian City and its Hinterlands (Robert McC.Adams, CDLI 2008)

[inimgina]

"The period of field cultivation lasted seven months in the agricultural calendar, from beginning plowing in the early fall through in-gathering the barley harvest in the late spring. Excluding the harvest itself, we have records of the allocations and division of labor for most of this process. These permit us to determine the number of “man-days” per hectare needed for major categories of work, e.g., planting, harrowing, clodbreaking, etc. (Maekawa 1990: 124, tables 2-7).

A clearly incomplete total of 19 man-days per hectare excludes unrecorded irrigation time as well as harvest labor (the latter often, perhaps normally, requiring special recruitment efforts). If this applied both to the domain and to the 4-iku (1.4 ha) individual šuku plots, as would seem natural, the latter alone would consume a full month of an individual farmer’s efforts. At critical times, some conflict seems unavoidable between šuku and corvée requirements, particularly if virtually half of domain land output was being drawn off as bala tax for the royal regime.

Roughly 9,000 ha of barley cultivation (aggregating šuku and domain) under the authority of the ensi2 would in any case have required more than 170,000 man-days at 19 per hectare. This amounts to 24,000 man-days per month, even if evenly divided throughout the seven-month growing season—and the greater part of the effort would have been needed in the early months. If we accept the recorded estimates, there must have been a full-time provincial agricultural workforce of around a thousand or more available during the growing season. With only half-time corvée assignments available, this becomes 2,000 erin2, with their families an additional multiple of from 3 to 5."

An Interdisciplinary Overview of a Mesopotamian City and its Hinterlands (Robert McC.Adams, CDLI 2008)


"The 680 bur3 (4,318 ha) set aside for šuku plots of 4 iku (1.4 ha) each could, in principle, easily provide for a full 3,000 erin2 with assigned šuku allotments. But, as also noted earlier, the proportion with this benefit is not directly known. And a large other proportion was reserved for higher-status recipients. Those included, for example, 60 bur (381 ha) for the ensi2 alone."

An Interdisciplinary Overview of a Mesopotamian City and its Hinterlands (Robert McC.Adams, CDLI 2008)

Notes on Barley production from: "Mesopotamian civilization: the material foundations" By Daniel T. Potts
- It should be emphasized that most of the agriculture which we are concerned with in southern Mesopotamia was significantly more efficient than what is practiced by families on an individual level.

- If we consider yields during the very well documented Ur III period we find the average yield was 30 gur (9, 000 L) per bur (6.48 ha.) or 1, 388 l. per ha. (Maekawa 1984:85)

- Actual as opposed to projected yields varied greatly, coming in 104%, 61% and94% of expected yield based on the RTC 407 text from Tello covering 6 years (three harvests because half the land was fallow.)

- If we round the 1, 388 l. per ha. up to 1, 400 l. per ha. and if we recall the amount of seed required per bur then a 1400 l. yield per ha. represents a yield of 1:30 (1, 400 sila/ha = c. 1, 000 kg/ha.) and even higher yields (up to 1:76) are attested in the pre-Sargonic era (Maekawa 1984:85)

- Paul Halstead has suggested that the efficiency of the Sumerian yield can be accredited to the efficiency of the Sumerian seeding plough in relation to other pre-modern societies where broadcast sowing was the norm. For example where seed sown was 1 gur per 1 bur, this represents 46 sila/l. or c. 32 kg per ha. If we compare this with broadcast barely sowing in modern Iraq we find that anywhere from 50 to 128 kg of seed are expended on every ha. sown. Roughly 1.5-4 times as much as the Ur III figure. Thus only 25-64 per cent of the modern Iraqi figure.



Oates on Barley yields: "With a minimum acceptable cereal yield of 550 kg per hectare on a simple fallow system of one to four years and a diet supplemented by hunting, fishing and gathering such as the evidence from all early sites attest, the land requirement would be about one and a half hectares of cultivable land per head of population. A six person family would probably consume no more than 600 kg in a year which would leave plenty ;left over for seed and spoilage even using Oates ultra-conservative estimate of 550 kg/ha., Poyck’s mildly conservative figure of 720 kg/ha., Iraqi governments figure of 800 kg/ha. or Adams very high Diyala yields of almost 1400 kg/ha."

[inimgina]

"Conditions of life and work at the base of the economy were clearly harshly regulated in many respects. As the most comprehensive study of the labor system recently reported, their lives were extremely difficult, as reflected in two phenomena: illness and incarceration. “UN-il2 and geme2 were routinely incapacitated, in some cases for over a year, and death was often the final result…. Prison sentences for the UN-il2 and geme2 workers are very common, reflecting the fact that they routinely fled their work obligations” (Studevent-Hickman 2006: 100; cf. Dahl 2003: 80-81)."

An Interdisciplinary Overview of a Mesopotamian City and its Hinterlands (Robert McC.Adams, CDLI 2008)

[inimgina]

"Demographic projections based on survey data have tended, therefore, to rely on questionable average densities that were derived partly from relatively tiny excavated exposures and partly from modern settlements. Nicholas Postgate, a participant in the winter 2007 meeting, who re-examined this issue in an important 1994 paper, heavily discounted the notion of a single average density figure and made a strong case for the existence of a four-fold range of variation (specifically from 248 to 1,204 inhabitants per hectare) (1994: 64) on the basis of excavated data alone."

An Interdisciplinary Overview of a Mesopotamian City and its Hinterlands (Robert McC.Adams, CDLI 2008)

[inimgina]

"The heavy overlay of dunes makes this subject to considerable error, but if one assumes that an area if this size was uniformly occupied by 20,000 people its density would have been about 113 persons per hectare. The large harbor, perhaps 14 ha in extent, that is visible in the satellite imagery and the suggestion of unoccupied central space accompanying public buildings there immediately elevate this densite estimate for residential areas. And it seems reasonable to assume that there were areas, probably concentrated near the harbor, with storehouses and industrial and shipping facilities, and a market-place, rather than residences."

An Interdisciplinary Overview of a Mesopotamian City and its Hinterlands (Robert McC.Adams, CDLI 2008)

[inimgina]

"Its two principal watercourses framing it to the north and west, the Idigna and the Iturungal, were both its crucial resource and its major lifelines of integration. The former, a branch of the ancient Tigris, was of quite secondary size and hence hydrological importance, but played a decisive part in third and early second millennium Mesopotamian history. Its clearly canalized offshoot to the south, the Iturungal, ultimately joined a major branch of the ancient Euphrates not far downstream from ancient Uruk, the better known, largest and earliest of southern Mesopotamia’s cities. South of the Idigna, all the way to the next major network of canalization connecting Uruk, Larsa and Bad Tibira, there was no comparable nexus of waterways."

Early Dynastic I period or in the preceding Jemdet Nasr period (Adams 1981: figs. 18 and 21)

[inimgina]

Numerous consignments of mixed cargoes, typically in the 25 to as much as 50 ton range per vessel, moved in roundtrip journeys taking up to a month or so around the network of great southern Mesopotamian cities, under the motive power (when not traveling downstream) of a half-dozen or so workmen for each one.

Not less than 30 merchants (dam-gar3) can be identified as resident in Umma. Organized in a guild under its own foreman (ugula) and with some self-regulating powers while still embedded in the government, they formed an interesting interface between the official and the secular economy.

An Interdisciplinary Overview of a Mesopotamian City and its Hinterlands (Robert McC.Adams, CDLI 2008)

[inimgina]

"Ancient Demographic Data on Umma’s Population

Among the sources bearing on the population of the city of Umma, of particular importance are TCL 5 6166 and its near duplicate Nisaba 26 85, here designated as Texts A and B respectively. Editions of these two documents are appended at the end of this contribution. Text A is a truly remarkable source, the likes of which cannot be found in the entire corpus of economic documentation from ancient Mesopotamia. It offers exceedingly important information on the demography and social composition of a major Babylonian urban center in Ur III times. In particular, it shows that the overwhelming majority of Umma’s dwellers were members of the royal organization, i.e., individuals directly subordinated to the king — as contrasted with the dependents of the governor (so-called “institutional” sector), who represented only one-fourth of the total population. Written toward the end of Íulgi's reign, Text A is, for all practical purposes, a census of the entire free citizenry of the city of Umma. To be more exact, it enumerates all of the male dwellers of Umma enjoying the status of free state dependents (éren). In terms of its internal organization, Text A is a listing composed of identical entries, with each entry specifying (1) a number of éren, (2) their professional or familial/household identification, and (3) the amount of silver due from each group. In the instances where only one éren is listed, the number is omitted. The same pattern is found in text B, with an exception that no amounts of silver are specified there. See in detail commentary to Text B. Throughout the text the amount of silver assigned to each éren is 4 grains (Še) of silver. The only apparent exceptions to this rule are found in entries iii 15 and iv 1, where a figure of 12 grains per person is given. However, as shown by the corresponding entries of Text B:42 and 43, either of these two examples hides three éren paying 4 grains each. If one makes this adjustment, the numbers of the éren listed in Text A add up to a total of 3,614. Text A concludes with a total of silver due (1 mina and 20 1/3 shekels = 14,460 grains 8) and a statement that the “éren of Umma are to restore (this silver)” (iv 6-7). The purpose of these payments is explained by the Umma text SNAT 541 (no year),9 which concerns a herd of sheep and goats, belonging to a certain Íi-a-a, a citizen of Uruk, which, after it had been lost, turned up in the city of Umma (or its environs). Fourteen of those animals were eventually recovered by Íi-a-a, while the remainder (163) remained still missing, having been, apparently, appropriated by various citizens of Umma. This case was subsequently tried by a collegium of judges (who included Ur-Lisi, the governor of Umma) at Ur.10 As recorded in SNAT 541:14-15, their judgment said that “(these sheep and goats) are to be restored by the sundry (private) households of Umma” (Ummaki-a é dil-dil-bi susu-dam)."

An Estimate of the Population of the City of Umma in Ur III Times
By Piotr Steinkeller (Harvard University, 2014)

[inimgina]

"The next stage of this case is described in Text B, which begins with a listing of 163 sheep and goats (plus 68 lambs, which are not mentioned in SNAT 541), followed by their silver equivalent (2 minas and 9 ½ shekels) and a statement identifying the animals in question as “the lost sheep of Uruk, (which were) found in Umma, to be restored by Umma” (lines 6’-9’). Text B continues then with a listing of the éren of Umma, who must be identical with the sundry “households of Umma” referred to in SNAT 541:14-15. Save for some discrepancies (noted in commentary to Text B), this listing is a virtual duplicate of Text A. The only significant difference between the two is that Text B does not specify the amounts of silver due from individual éren (or their groups), as is the case in Text A. Although the end of text B is missing, it undoubtedly read (mirroring the concluding lines of Text A): kug-babbar-bi / 2 ma-na 9 ½ gín kug-babbar kugbabbar éren Ummaki-ke4 su-su-dam, “this silver / 129 ½ shekels of silver is to be restored by the éren of Umma.” All in all, Text B establishes beyond any doubt that the indemnity for the pilfered herd was to be shared collectively by all the éren of the city of Umma."

An Estimate of the Population of the City of Umma in Ur III Times
By Piotr Steinkeller (Harvard University, 2014)

[inimgina]

''Who then exactly were the éren of the city Umma? The 3,614 men itemized in Text A can be divided to four basic groups: 1) royal dependents sensu stricto; 2) members of Umma's “institutional” sector; 3) various professionals; 4) various individuals without profession, identified by name or family/household affiliation. I discuss each of these four groups in the following. Royal dependents sensu stricto The bulk of this group are 2,580 éren Ummaki, who constituted a local branch of the central Ur III military organization. These royal residents of the city of Umma, whose subsistence fields must have been situated in Umma’s relative vicinity, were controlled by the local military led the “general” (Šagina) of Umma and his subordinates, in the ranks of nu-bànda, “colonel,” ugula-gésh-da, “officer in charge of 60 (men)” or “captain,” and ugula “lieutenant.” The figure of 2,580 éren of Umma is closely corroborated by TCL 5 6041 i 15 (Amar-Suen 2), which lists 2,600 éren Ummaki. For this source, see Steinkeller 2013: 374-377. In addition, this group included various professionals and other individuals directly connected with the crown:

120 àga-ús lugal (i 12) 10 nar lugal (i 14) 6 nagar lugal (ii 6) 4 báhar lugal (iii 11) 30 nu-gißkiri6 dNanna (iii 4) 3 lú en Unugki (iii 6) 2 nu-gißkiri6 Nin9-tur-tur (iii 9) 30 dub-sar lugal (iv 2)

royal elite soldiers royal singers royal carpenters royal potters gardeners of the god Nanna (of Ur) men of the en priest (of Inana) of Uruk gardeners of (the princess) Ninturtur royal scribes The presence of royal carpenters and potters at Umma is confirmed by other sources. Thus, ASJ 18 80 13:23-27, 30 (AS 4/-), an account of income from the allotment fields of the “royal personnel” (gìr-sè-ga lugal-me), lists two carpenters, who held 15 and 18 iku of land respectively. A related source, SNAT 340:36, 39 (AS 3/-), mentions seven potters, likewise belonging to the “royal personnel,” each of whom held 6 iku of allotment land. Resident royal scribes are documented in other Umma texts as well. See, especially, Nisaba 23 52:1-9 and SNAT 340:20-27, which list eight and four scribes respectively, recipients of allotment land, as part of the royal personnel. The reason why the individuals associated with the cults of Ur and Uruk (iii 4, 6) should be included among the éren of Umma is somewhat unclear. The text implies that they permanently resided in the city of Umma. If that indeed was the case, these men may have worked for the estates of the high priests (en) of Nanna and Inana (both of whom were Íulgi’s children) that conceivably existed in Umma’s vicinity. This explanation seems to find support in the fact that this group of éren includes also the gardeners of the princess Ninturtur (likewise a daughter of Íulgi), who is known to have owned a rural estate in the Umma province. For a detailed discussion of Ninturtur, see commentary to iii 9. When all these individuals are added up, one arrives at a figure of 2,785 royal dependents sensu stricto. However, the actual number of such éren was probably closer to 2,900, since, as we shall see below, a significant number of the éren in groups (3) and (4) were likewise associated with the crown (especially, the 33 a-zu, “physicians”)."

An Estimate of the Population of the City of Umma in Ur III Times
By Piotr Steinkeller (Harvard University, 2014)

[inimgina]

"How Large was Umma’s Population?

The 3,614 éren listed in Text A were males liable for corvée and military service. In order to estimate the number of their dependents (wives, children, and grandparents), one may employ the multiplying factor of between 3 and 4, which is used by the economic historians to calculate the populations of Medieval Europe, based on such data as the records of head tax and the lists of military conscripts. By using the lower factor of 3, one arrives at a figure of 10,842 individuals. If the higher factor of 4 is applied, the figure rises to 14,456. It seems safe to conclude, therefore, that the total number of the free citizens and their dependents living in the city of Umma was between 11,000 and 15,000. However, an estimate of the population of Umma would not be complete without including in it the members of two other social groups that are known to have lived in Umma: the menial and slave populations. The menials, usually designated by the terms UN-íl, “carrier” or “coolie,” and géme, “female servant/slave,” represented dependent laborers, almost always unskilled, who were permanently attached to temple, royal, and private households. These individuals worked for their home institutions all year round, and were supported by those institutions with food allotments. Only exceptionally did some of them possess allotment fields. It is likely that some of the menials (especially the UN-íl) had family life. While the male menials worked mainly as carriers and boat-towers, the women worked primarily in weaving and grain-processing. Both groups were routinely assigned to various agricultural tasks, such as the maintenance of the irrigation systems, harvest work, and reed and grass collecting. My own extensive study of the relevant Umma data indicates that the number of the UN-íl employed by the entire “institutional” economy of the Umma province did not exceed 400. Assuming that at least some of them had dependents, one may estimate that this group numbered somewhere around 800 individuals. The corresponding number of the female géme, who worked as weavers and cereal processors, may be put at 600-700. It appears that the géme had no family life (though many of them had small children). If one assumes that the majority of these menial workers lived in the city of Umma (which is plausible, but far from certain), this would add up to ca. 1,500 (certainly not more than 2,000) individuals. It is considerably more difficult to estimate the number of slaves living in the city of Umma. All such individuals undoubtedly were of the domestic variety. Since slaves were expensive, it is a fair assumption that no more than one-third of the éren listed in Text A could afford a domestic slave. I will venture to suggest, therefore, that the total number of domestic slaves was not higher than 1,000. This permits us to put the total number of menials and slaves at ca. 3,000. Adding those to the 11,000/15,000 éren we calculated earlier, we arrive at a grand total of between 14,000 and 18,000 individuals. Whatever the exact figure may have been, we may be confident that it was less than 20,000 people. We need, finally, to compare the estimate thus obtained with the archaeological data bearing of the physical extent of Umma. As I noted at the beginning of this article, the cursory surface examination of this site conducted by R. McC. Adams indicates a size of ca. 225 ha. If we confront this figure with the 14,000/18,000 individuals of my estimate, one arrives at a population density of between ca. 62 and 80 people per hectare. This is markedly below the estimate of 100 people per hectare, which is often used by archaeologists in reconstructing the populations of ancient Near Eastern urban centers — and dramatically less than the 200 people per hectare that has been posited at the other end of the scale. However, such a relatively low population density does not come as a great surprise, since, as the other Umma sources make it clear, the space-use on that site was far from uniform. While the center of the city, which included residential quarters and the complex of the temple of Íara, was very densely built up, other, apparently quite large, sections of Umma lacked any domestic architecture. One detects in those areas the presence of various industrial structures, such as grain-processing facilities, weaving houses, pigsties, and warehouses. Moreover, it is highly likely that the intramural part of the city included additionally significant areas that were occupied by orchards and vegetable gardens. All in all, it is probable that such nonresidential areas accounted for as much as one-half of the entire city. Be that as it may, the case of Umma offers a strong indication that the large third-millennium urban centers of Babylonia were characterized by a high degree of internal diversity."

An Estimate of the Population of the City of Umma in Ur III Times
By Piotr Steinkeller (Harvard University, 2014)

[inimgina]

Schoyen collection (MS 2426)

Translation of a royal dedicatory inscription of giš-šag-kidug of Umma:

When Šara spoke to Enlil the prayers gathered in his heart, and when he approached him, giš-šag-kidug, the beloved Shepherd of Šara, the one born... A warrior Prince, the fear-inspiring leader of Sumer, who has no rival in all the foreign lands, the En-priest attached to the side of Ninura, counseled by Enki as by his own mother, the beloved friend of Ištaran, the might governor of Enlil, the king selected by Inana, at that time he constructed this boundary dyke.

Transliteration:
column 1
1. u4 {d}szara2
2. {d}en-lil2-ra
3. ra2-zu# ur4 sza3-ga
4. e-na-du11-ga
5. e-na-gen-na
6. gesz-sza3-ki-du10 sipa# ki-ag2-ga2
7. {d}szara2-ke4#
8. a x x-sze3#? tu#-da#
9. nir#-gal2# sag husz ki-en#-[gi-ke4]

column 2
1.
moved to preceding line
2. gaba-gal2 [nu]-gi4 kur-kur-ke4#
3-4. en za3 kesz2 {d}nin-ur4-ke4
5-6. ama sza3 kusz2 {d}en-ki-ka-ke4
7. ku-li ki-ag2#
8. {d#}isztaran#-ke4
9. ensi2# kal#-ga#
10. {d#}en-lil2-ke4#
11-12. lugal# mu# pa3# {d}inanna#-[ke4]
13. e#-[bi] mu#-[ak]

column 3
broken

Schøyen Collection (Museum no: MS 2426) Oslo, Norway

Period Early Dynastic IIIb (ca. 2500-2340 BC)

CDLI no.P247677

Primary publication: RIME 1.12.06.02, ex. 03
Frayne, Douglas R. (2007)

Secondary publication: Steinkeller, Piotr, CUSAS 17 (2011)



www.schoyencollection.com/history-collection-introduction/sumerian-history-collection/gishshag-kidug-umma-ms-2426



cdli.ucla.edu/search/search_results.php?SearchMode=Text&PrimaryPublication=&MuseumNumber=MS+2426&Provenience=&Period=&TextSearch=&ObjectID=&requestFrom=Submit



MS in Sumerian on limestone, Umma, Sumer, ca. 2385 BC, 1/3 of a truncated cone, h. 11,9 cm, originally ca. 35 cm, diam. 5,3-7,3 cm, 2 columns, compartments with 30 lines in a transitional linear script between pictographic and cuneiform script.

The same inscription known for 2 other exemplars, one on British Museum terracotta vase, former Erlenmeyer Collection (Christie's 13.12.1988:60), and a limestone vase. Also related to The Louvre AO 19225, a gold beard from a statue which alludes to the existence of King Gishakidu.

All 3 edited by Frayne 2008:372-74, as Gisha-kidu.

For another foundation inscription of Gishakidu of Umma, see MS 4983.

The cone and the vase relate to the Umma-Lagash border conflict that lasted over the reign of many kings between ca. 2450 and 2300 BC, with many bloody battles. This conflict is the earliest well documented piece of history. All the written and artistic materials came from Lagash, such as the stele of the vultures in The Louvre. The cone and the vase for the first time tell the history from Umma's point of view. The present MS also reveals the unknown king of the British Museum vase, and dates it to ca. 2385 BC. Published by Andrew George, ed.: Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions and Related Texts in the Schøyen Collection, Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology, vol. 17, Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, Cuneiform texts VI. CDL Press, Bethesda, MD, 2011, text 6, p. 6, pl. V.

[inimgina]

The settlements of the Umma province during the Ur III period

The cities located in the Umma province that were of economic significance during the well documented Ur III period were Da-Umma (sometimes called aša Umma) and Apisal. Da-Umma was main city of the province and was by far the most significant economically. Another settlement of the Umma province which was close to and directly administered by the city of Umma was Kissa or Gisha (The Routledge Handbook of the Peoples and Places of Ancient Near East, 2009).

The city of Apisal (perhaps modern Muhallaqiya) was the second most significant part of the Umma province and seems to of have been an important center for herding activities within the Umma province.

The city of Zabalam (or Zabala) was another city located within the Umma province. Zabalam was not as significant economically however the city was an important cult center for the deity Inana. Inana's temple in Zabalam was the e-sherzi-guru (House clad in splendour). By the beginning of the reign of Shu-Suen traveling to Zabalam had become an annual pilgrimage for the Queen. Abi-simti the "Queen-dowager" visited Zabalam four out of the first five years of the reign of Šhu-Suen. Although there is no records mentioning a visit during the year šs 2 there is no reason to assume there was no visit that year (Jacob Dahl "The Ruling Family of Ur III Umma" 2007). The Queen's visits were on the forth month of the year.

The economic records from Zabalam reflect what a major event the visit from the Queen was for the city of Zabalam and its professionals. Deliveries to Zabalam from Ur-šulpa'e, a representative of the Royal court, were sealed by Ur-Lisi the governor of Umma (Jacob Dahl "The Ruling Family of Ur III Umma" 2007)

In the tablet SNAT 436 (šs 1) Lu-kirizal, the pig herder, readied pigs for the Queen. {See Jacob Dahl, 2006, for a brief introduction to pig herding in ancient Mesopotamian}

Three texts from šs 1 reference Ennum-ili, the equestrian (ra-gaba). He may have been the Queen's commissary. He known from other texts to have been an imperial administrator and he may perhaps also be the same well referenced official responsible for deliveries to the Dreheim administration. (Jacob Dahl "The Ruling Family of Ur III Umma" 2007)

One text (Torino 2, 524) records oil rations (i ba) from the sukkulmah for Ennum-ili, the equestrian, šu-mamitum, the door keeper (i-du) and ereš-dingir priestess of Inana at Zabalam.

Another text (BPOA 2, 2548 (BM 105353)) records the Royal offerings via Ninmar(ka), the cup bearer (sagi) for Inana.

A Girsu texts (ITT 5 6983) from the third month of the year reflect the large amounts of man power used shipping flour to Zabalam from Girsu.

Other texts show goods from Ur-šulpa'e received by a person named Gurzan in Zabalam.

Another text, Ontario 2 5 (ROM 967.287.39) from šs 1 is a simple receipt for the allocation of 10 sila of good beer to the general, from Alli, the chief Brewer of A(ya)kala the governor of Zabalam.

One text (UTI 4, 2602) mentions the work days of a team of workers under a lu-balasag in preparation for the visit by the "Queen-dowager".

A few texts reference a Lu-kala who was the chief household administrator for A(ya)kala the governor of Zabalam. (Jacob Dahl "The Ruling Family of Ur III Umma" 2007)

In a šs 3 text (MVN 16, 916) mentions Queen Abi-simti receiving animals from Ušmu (known from other texts as a leading Umma animal fattener).

KI.ANki was another city that like Zabalam lacked economic significance but has some documentation due to the importance of cultic activities. Numerous records mention deliveries to the Cult of šara there. Names of shrines of other deities as well as other cultic activities are mentioned as well. Evidence from KI.ANki lacks the direct connection to the Royal family at Ur or the gubernatorial rulers at Umma the Zabalam had. (Jacob Dahl "The Ruling Family of Ur III Umma" 2007)

[inimgina]

e.u.ra (The House of Sleep) was the temple of Ninurra "The mother of Umma". It was rebuilt by the city governor Nammahani during the reign of Yarla-gan of Gutium (Gelb and Keinast, FAOS 7, p 296, Gutium 2). Ninurra's temple was second only to Šara according to Ur III administrative documents (see Englund, acta sum 14, 1992)

House Most High: the temples of ancient Mesopotamia
A.R. George, Eisenbrauns 1993

[inimgina]

Provincial Taxation and the Ur III State
By Tonia M. Sharlach (Brill, 2003)

Pg.24
"The ensis were responsible for the administration of various economic units with the province. These economic units may have taken form in " bureaus" or "offices". Although the tablets never refer to these "offices" by name, Steinkeller has identified at least ten key offices at Umma. Temple households also existed as economic, administrative and religious establishments, and the Umma texts attests to a number of these establishments for the gods of the local pantheon (the chief god Shara, and also Dumunzi, Gula, Inanna, Lisi, Ninurra and the divine King Shulgi) it is important to note that the ensi's "offices", not the temple households, seem to have been the principle economic infrastructure in the Umma province.
For the four decades or so in which the bala system is attested, the provincial governors were, Ur-Lisi (from Shulgi 31 to Amar-Sin 8), Ayakalla (from Amar-Sin 8 to Shu-Sin 6) and Dadaga (from Shu-Sin 6 to Ibbi-Sin 2)."

Pg.27
"It can be estimated that the Umma province produced approximately 20,000 gur of Barley per year. A little less than one half was delivered to the crown."

Pg.30
"Maekawa's detailed studies on the domain land at Umma concluded that the total size of the domain land was approximately 1,200 bur, with have of this area under cultivation in any given year. Van Driel estimated a very similar size of the domain of the ensi of Umma on a diffrent basis, by counting the number of ploughing teams attested. He found at Umma 173 plough teams, each cultivating 6 to 7 bur. Thus the total area of land under their control would be approximately 1,210 bur, which is almost the exact same figure (1,200 bur) obtained by Maekawa. Most recently Steinkellers analysis of land surveys in the Umma area, which will shortly be published, has proved that the domain of the provincial administration was 21,600 iku or almost exactly 1,200 bur. We should keep in mind that the 1,200 but was not the total amount of arable land in the province of Umma, but rather only the land under the administration of the ensi. Additional, the Umma province contained large royal estates."

Pg.31
"According to Maekawa's calculations, on half if this total, or 600 bur, was under cultivation and this was divided into 100 plots of 6 bur each. The average yield according to Umma documents was 30-34 gur per bur. So 600 bur ought to have produced between 18,000 and 20,400 gur of Barely per year.
One document from Umma, UCP 9/2/1.88 may preserve the total barley production for Shulgi's 46th regnal year. The total was 23,444 gur, 232 1/2 sila. This means that ever but of land produced between 33 and 39 gur of barley, again with a total production of approximately 20,000 gur of barely per year."

[inimgina]

The Ruling family or Umma during the Ur III period

Umma, like Nippur, retained a local ensi during rule under the Ur III dynasty unlike its neighbor Lagash which had rulers appointed by the administration at Ur. In Umma, a local ensi ruled and a military general (Sumerian: šagina) was appointed by the royal government at Ur.

Robert. McC. Adams on the relationship between the ensi and šagina:
"ensi2 and šagina, the administrators of the provincial and royal domains in Ur III provinces, respectively, were both high officials. ensi2 had roots of familial authority, extending back into older, pre-Ur III city-states. The appointment of šagina reflected closer, sometimes in fact familial, ties to the dynasty in Ur. They were often involved in activities calling for ad hoc inter-provincial authority, and particularly for military leadership. "

The GIRI3.NI family was a well documented ruling family in Umma during the Ur III period. Jacob Dahl considers GIRI.NI to be a semi-legendary founder of the ruling family due to the lack of textual evidence of GIRI.NI himself. GIRI.NI held both the titles Chief of the police (Sumerian: gallagal) and Chief Livestock Administrator (Sumerian: šuš).

GIRI.NI's sons were Ur-Nigar, Nigar-kidu and Basag. He may have also had a possible fourth son named Lugal-Niglagare but that relationship is uncertain. After the death of GIRI.NI Nigar-kidu took on the title of gallagal and Ur-Nigar took on the title of šuš. Basag whose titles remain unknown.

Nigar-kidu had two sons Lu-duga and Atu. It was Atu who took upon the title of gallagal after his father died.

Ur-Nigar had many children. He had three son's that would rule over Umma as ensi; Ur-Lisi and his two of his brothers A(ya)kalla and Dadaga. He also had several other children including Ur-E'e, ARAD(mu), Lu-duga, Lugal-Kuzu, Inim-Šara, Lu-Šulgi(ra) and Gudea. Lugal-hegal, Mansum, Lu-Dingira and Ur-Nisaba are all possible children of Ur-Nigar whose relation remain uncertain. Ur-E'e, succeeded his father as šuš (Chief Livestock Administrator). The children of Ur-E'e were Lu-kala and Lu-haya. It was Lu-haya that succeeded Ur-E'e as šuš and held the title until the end of Ur's domination of Umma in IS4.

Ur-Lisi became ensi of Umma during the 33rd year of the reign of King Šulgi and ruled until the end of the reign of Amar-Suen in AS8. He had previously held the title of chief of the grannary (Sumerian: KA-guru). After Ur-Lisi became ensi the title passed to his brother ARAD(mu). He remained chief of the grannary until the end of the reign of Amar-Suen and several years after. He was succeeded by his son Šara-izu.

Ur-Lisi had a son, Lu-Emah, with his wife Nin-Melam. He had another son, I-kala, and a daughter Nin-Ekuta with his concubine (Sumerian: lukur). I-kala held the scribal title dubsar tug-gada and was also the Chief of the weaving mill. Ur-Lisi ruled over Umma for 23 years until his bother A(ya)kala became ensi of Umma at the end of the reign of Amar-Suen-Suen.

The life of A(ya)kala is well documented. Prior to becoming ensi he held the titles of Scribe (dubsar), chief household administrator of the governor (Šabra e) from Š36 month 10 until Š39 month 2 when he was succeeded by his brother dadga. A(ya)kalla then became a captain (nubanda) from Š40 until AS8. A(ya)-kala ruled over Umma as ensi from the end of AS8 until he died of old age in ŠS7 a total of 32 years. A(ya)kala was a common personal name at the time. A separate A(ya)kala was also chief of the leather workers at Umma. This A(ya)kala is not to be confused with A(ya)kala son of Ur-Nigar.

The next ensi of Umma was dadaga who was the third son of Ur-Nigar to rule as ensi of Umma. Dadaga was ensi of Umma from ŠS7 month 2 until at least the year IS3 when sources become scarce and it becomes difficult to determine who was ensi of Umma. Dadaga's wife was named Nin-giškimzi. His six children were Gududu, Lu-Šulgi(ra), Namzitara, Inim-Šara, Ur-Igalum and Lu-Šara.

The title of ensi of Umma transitioned from brother to brother within three of Ur-Nigar's children however succession never passed down to any of the grandchildren of Ur-Nigar. The final ensi of the family, Dadaga, had six children however the only one of his children that is well documented and is known to have held an official title is Gududu. Gududu remains an important figure in the Umma texts until the end of Ur's rule over Umma in IS4. According to Jacob Dahl, although he never did become ensi, Gududu was to succeed his father during the end of the reign of Dadaga.*

*The ruling family of Ur III Umma: a prosopographical analysis of an elite family in Southern Iraq 4000 years ago
By Jacob Dahl, Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 2007

[inimgina]

In her 2009 dissertation titled "Silver Management in Umma: A Case Study of Provincial Economic Administration in Ur III Mesopotamia" Xiaoli Ouyang of Harvard University demonstrated that four members of the gubernatorial family---A-kal-la, Da-da-ga, Lu-kal-la, and Gu-du-du---received the majority of silver payments documented in Umma. Silver paid as the irrigation fee ranked as the largest source of their silver revenue. Silver coming from merchants (dam-gar), who helped the Umma government to trade staple goods for silver and other desirable products, ranked second.

[sheshki]

Ummaki

(GIŠ.KUŠU2KI)

[us4-he2-gal2]

What a fantastic contribution on Umma! I assume you have been studying cities for weeks or months inimgina I took a note on the fairly recent digging in Umma by an Iraqi team, information presented at the recent Rencontre in Philadelphia, so I will have to share that information on this thread. At the moment, my fiancee seems to have put my black binder somewhere, and thats where my note is (arg).

[us4-he2-gal2]

Notes from a Talk:

Larsa Period Bullae from the Shara Temple of Umma (Djokha)

I found my note. So on July 13th 2016, at the 62nd Rencontre Internationale in Philadelphia, I was able to attend a talk given by N. al-Mutawalli Mahmood, the Iraqi trained archaeologist who directed the 1999-2000 excavation of Umma. This excavation was undertaken by an Iraqi team and came several years before the massive and destructive looting of Umma following the American invasion of Iraq. Walter Sallaberger, who acted as linguistic consultant to the dig, also presented along with al-Mutawalli Mahmood. The following is the official abstract of the paper presented:



"al-Mutawalli Mahmood, Nawala (College of Arts, University of Baghdad) and Walther Sallaberger
(Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München)


Larsa Period Bullae from the Shara Temple of Umma (Djokha)

The excavations of the Iraqi State Board of Antiquities and Heritage conducted at Umma (Djokha)
between 1999 and 2002 discovered various cuneiform text groups from the Ur III and the early Old
Babylonian period. The latest text group, found in 2001–2002, stems from a room of the Shara Temple
(Room 21), and dates to the Larsa king Sumuel. We present our work in progress on the texts dealing
with the management of grain."

I was able to take a few rough notes, although the pace at which information was presented was a bit fast (each talk at the Recontre lasted only 20 minutes). Of interest is the following:


- To date, and following the 1999-2000 excavation, some 28,000 cuneiform tablets have been excavated from Umma. These date from the ED period through the Ur III and Isin-Larsa period. A group of 550 tablets from the Isin period was found on the main hill in season 3-4. By the Old Babylonian period, Umma and its god, Šara, have all but vanished and there is little trace of Umma in the literature thereafter. Despite substantial settlement at Umma in the OB period, there is no evidence for OB texts, except text present on clay Bullae (which Sallaberger discusses).


- In the OB period, 2/3 of names attested at Umma are Akkadian.


- In the 1999-2000 excavation, al-Mutawalli Mahmood excavated the temple of Šara built by Ur III king Šu-Suen. Double niched decoration, gate leading to main courtyard, door sockets found in situ, inscription of Šu-Suen found on sockets. Objects in temple courtyard include: statue of a monkey, relief of Lamma. A number of Ur III tablets found in room 25 were published in by al-Mutawalli Mahmood in the periodical named Sumer (year?).


- As for the OB clay bullae, Sallaberger notes that the clay of the bullae was wrapped around a rope and probably they were tied together (uncertain); their purpose was to facilitate the administration of grain collections for sacrifices to the god Šara; they were inscribed and sealed.