Sumerian King List

Langdon1923 WB444 study, printedpage 6

6 WELD-BLUNDELL COLLECTION VOL. II Pace Kines LENGTH OF DYNASTIES 11. Third dynasty of Kish 1 100. 12. AkSak 6 93. 18. Fourth dynasty of Kish 7 ; 97. 14, Third dynasty of Erech 1. 25. 15. Agade 11 181. 16. Fourth dynasty of Erech 5 30. 17. Gutium 21 125. 18. Fifth dynasty of Erech 1 a5 19. Third dynasty of Ur 5 108. 20. Isin 14 208, In this list there are 11 cities of the post-diluvian period, and 125 kings. It contains 39 kings in the four dynasties of Kish ; P. No. 2 XI 1 has also 39.? The total of the figures actually given for these four dynasties is 28.296. For the five kingdoms of Erech the list has 20 names but the entry concerning the second Erech dynasty is defective. P. No. 2 XI 7 has 22 kings for 5 Erech kingdoms, and consequently that tablet contained three names for the second dynasty of Erech. It is extremely probable that Enygduanna, the only name preserved here, is - an error for EnSagkuganna who in his vase inscription of Nippur claims to have devastated Kish and to have captured Enbi-Ashtar, king of Kish and of Ak8ak. This may mean that the last king of the second kingdom of Kish whose name is given “ Lugal-mu» or “A king by name», ‘is a substitute for a name which our late compiler did not know.’ The intervening kingdom of Hamasi is probably contemporary with the second kingdom of Erech. It is altogether obvious that the dynastic lists for the early period are totally inadequate. The early inscriptions of Lagash make frequent mention of an ancient king Mesilim, a powerful -ruler of Kish ; from his own inscriptions left at Lagash and Adab it is evident that he belonged to an early dynasty whose power was recognized in Sumer and Accad.* The epigraphy of these two inscriptions indicates a period long before Ur-Nind and his successors at Lagash. Moreover it is clear from the inscriptions of Eannatum that Mesilim lived before his period. Since Ur-Nina, Eannatum and their successors are about contemporary with Kug-Bau and her son Gimil-Sin who actually formed one dynasty. at Kish, obviously Mesilim should belong to the second dynasty of Kish. His name does not appear at all in this dynasty! And what about Ur-zag-ed king of Kish who dedicated a vase * to Enlil and Ninlil to Nippur? « Lugal-tarsi king of Kish », whose lapis lazuli tablet has been preserved, is no-where mentioned in any Kish dynasty. *° Another king of Kish’ by name Lugal-?-? is mentioned on a huge spear-head. * In the case of Lugaltarsi and Lugal-?-(?) the title may mean simply sar kigsati, « king of universal dominion ». * See note on Col. VI 21, where 491 is corrected to 97 2/3. 2 See photograph, Pl. 90. 3 See also Col. VII 28 * SAK, 160, No. 2 and AJSL. 30, 221. 5 OBI. 93. ° CT. Til 1, BM. 12155. The epigraphy of the last two mentioned inscriptions seems to indicate a period immediately before Sargon of Agade. 7 KIS without determinative as on BM. 12155, § RA. IV 111.