History of Sumerian Cities and Kingdoms

Between about 3200 and 2000 BCE, southern Mesopotamia, in modern Iraq, shifted from city-states to kingdoms ruling across several cities. Uruk’s monumental buildings and clay accounts, Lagash and Umma’s canal boundary, and Ur III’s provincial livestock records show how authority shaped construction, irrigation and deliveries of food and animals.

On this page5 sections

Uruk and the first cities

People had lived in southern Mesopotamia for millennia before urban kingship. During the Ubaid period, about 5500–4000 BCE, farming and fishing communities occupied the plain. Excavations at Eridu exposed eighteen mudbrick temples built one above another. The earliest, from Ubaid I around 5300–4700 BCE, was a small room; later builders placed new temples over earlier ones. By around 3200 BCE, Uruk had grown into one of the region’s largest settlements. Its monumental buildings used mudbrick and bright clay-cone mosaics, while officials used clay tablets to record commodities and rations distributed to workers. These pictographic records were among the precursors of cuneiform, a script made by pressing wedge-shaped signs into clay. A cylinder seal, rolled over wet clay, left an image identifying a person or office in a transaction. Uruk joined monumental construction to new ways of tracking goods and people.

City-states and contested farmland

During the third millennium BCE, rulers governed cities and surrounding fields, canals and villages. Lagash was a political territory with several centers, including Lagash and Girsu, rather than a single compact city. Neighboring Umma disputed the Gu’edena, a cultivated district whose fields depended on boundary canals and irrigation access.

The Cuneiform Digital Library dates Enmetena, ruler of Lagash, to about 2403–2375 BCE, in the twenty-fourth century BCE. His inscription describes a boundary channel and a measured strip of land assigned under earlier agreements. It then recounts damage to the boundary dikes and chapels, followed by Enmetena’s reconstruction of the dike from the Tigris to the Nun-canal. The dispute concerned both the fields and water moving through them: controlling a boundary dike affected which community could irrigate cultivated land. Enmetena’s account presents Lagash’s position in that conflict.

At Uruk, Lugal-zage-si established his rule. His royal inscription claims authority over a wider “Land,” and the Sumerian King List places him just before the rulers of Agade. Sargon of Akkad then defeated him and brought southern cities under a kingdom centered farther north. This campaign shifted authority from a rivalry among southern city-states toward a wider territorial court.

Akkadian kings and local rulers

The Akkadian period, conventionally dated to about 2350–2150 BCE, saw kings campaign across the south and bring several cities under an empire centered farther north. Akkadian, a Semitic language, appeared alongside Sumerian in the region’s written record. After Akkadian power weakened, rulers of individual cities again gained prominence. Gudea ruled Lagash in the twenty-second century BCE, around 2144–2124. His inscriptions describe rebuilding the temple of Ningirsu, Lagash’s patron deity, at Girsu.

The historian Samuel Noah Kramer recounts Utu-hegal of Uruk’s defeat of Tirigan, a Gutian ruler. The later Sumerian King List gives a compressed succession of cities and kings, placing Gutian rule after Agade and Uruk before the Third Dynasty of Ur. Around 2112 BCE, Ur-Namma established that dynasty and made Ur a political center.

Ur III and the movement of goods

The Ur III period, conventionally dated 2112–2004 BCE, began under Ur-Namma. A foundation figure dated to his reign shows the king carrying a basket of earth above his head. Its inscription identifies the figure as a temple deposit for a building Ur-Namma restored or built; the image presents royal temple construction as a ceremonial duty. His son Shulgi and later kings governed a kingdom whose officials recorded fields, workers, animals and deliveries.

Provinces supplied recurring obligations known as bala, a term associated with rotation or turn-taking. One visible part of this system was the livestock center at Puzrish-Dagan, near modern Drehem. Its tablets document animals allocated to temples, the royal household, officials, envoys and army units.

Historian Christina Tsouparopoulou reconstructs how the center handled these contributions. Some provincial shares were entered as accounts even when animals were not physically brought to Puzrish-Dagan. Officials recorded receipts and transfers of responsibility; some animals were fattened before distribution to royal, military and religious recipients. The records name receiving, accounting and herding roles, linking local obligations to institutions across the kingdom.

The loss of Ur and the memory of Sumer

An Old Babylonian literary composition, copied in the early second millennium BCE, presents itself as a letter from Ishbi-Erra, a governor at Isin, to King Ibbi-Sin. In the text, Ishbi-Erra says he brought a large grain supply into Isin, took control of its fortifications as Amorite forces advanced, and could not deliver the grain without barges and secured boat landings. The episode describes the supply problem as Ishbi-Erra presents it: grain was available, but control of transport and strongholds was contested. Elam, a kingdom in southwestern Iran, eventually captured Ur around 2004 BCE, bringing Ur III to an end; the Isin dynasty became one of the successor powers.

A later poem, “The Lament for Sumer and Ur,” remembers the disaster through abandoned houses, disrupted canals, empty fields and the withdrawal of divine protection. It describes the fall of political centers as a religious and social catastrophe. Sumerian writing continued after Ur III ended. In the Old Babylonian period, scribes copied Sumerian compositions in school settings even as Akkadian was also widely used. The Sumerian King List organizes kingship as a sequence of cities, including Uruk, Agade, Ur and Isin, and gives its pre-flood rulers impossibly long reigns. Its city-by-city sequence presents how later scribes arranged the political past.