As noted previously, the kings of Lagash seem to have succeeded in maintaining a degree of independence and prosperity even when “wild mountaineers” roamed freely across other parts of Sumer. But in general, the Gutian period was remembered as a chaotic age. In one telling anecdote, the landowner Ishkun-Dagan commanded his foreman, Lugal-ra, not to neglect the planting of crops despite the danger posed by Gutian raiders.

Ishkun-Dagan also instructs Lugal-ra to safeguard the livestock. “Post armed guards,” and if any livestock are stolen, “Lugal-ra will be held liable for them.” Besides learning what a miserable landlord Ishkun-Dagan was, the text opens a window onto a period when Sumerian farmers cultivated their fields with a weapon by their side. But fields were still sown and harvested; men and woman married and had children; and some regions, such as Lagash, even seem to have flourished. Citing the example of Lagash, Hans Nissen warns that our tendency to view “Intermediate” or “Gutian” periods as ages of darkness and chaos may not have been quite that bad.

Because ancient history is primarily a record of the deeds of kings and of their victories and losses, we are bound to have a somewhat distorted view of life back then. We mustn’t forget that our grandparents lived through two world wars, the likes of which would have been inconceivable to an ancient Sumerian. No doubt if they could read a history of modern times, they would be glad to have lived when they did. But then again, they too would come away with an overly dark view of what life is like in our own era.

Code of Ur-Nammu

The next chapter of Sumerian history opens with the decisive defeat of the Gutians by a king of Uruk named Utu-Hegel. He was succeeded by his brother, Ur-Nammu, who moved the capital from Uruk back to Ur, a move which marks the beginning of the Third Dynasty of Ur. Combined with Lagash II these periods are often referred to collectively as the Neo-Sumerian period. The Ur III period was characterized by great building projects undertaken by an increasingly centralized and bureaucratic government. Having consolidated his position in Sumer, Ur-Nammu led several military campaigns against northern mountain peoples. However, his most lasting achievement was a collection of laws, the earliest known compilation unless we include the short list of laws found at the conclusion of the Urukugina Reform Text.

Year Names

The Akkadians were the first to use “year names” to commemorate important events, a tradition which will continue in Mesopotamia until the end of the Old Babylonian period. Year names are an important historical source and offer unique insight into which events were deemed worthy of a year name. The year names of Ur-Nammu are primarily focused on the digging of roads and canals, and the building of temples.

A mesharum was declared in Ur-Nammu’s third year. This was an economic reset in which debt slaves were set free and debts written off, like the Hebrew Jubilee except the former was called by the king rather than fixed in the calendar like the Jubilee.

The year names of Ur-Nammu present a striking contrast with those of Naram-Sin, of which seventeen out of the nineteen have to do with military campaigns. It is somewhat ironic, therefore, that Ur-Nammu should have fallen in battle fighting the Guti. Hamblin notes that Ur-Nammu’s funerary lament is a rare example of a cuneiform text which describes the defeat and death of a king.

In the annals of Mesopotamian history you are not likely to find a year named: The year the king left everyone alone. Certainly not in the annals of the kings of Akkad who invariably numbered the years of their reign by the battles they fought. But Gudea and Ur-Nammu seem to have cared most about building projects and law-codes. Judging by their surviving monuments and inscriptions, it was for these that they wished to be remembered.