Kish (Sumer)

3rd Millennium BC

The Sumerian King List (SKL) states that Kish was the first city to have kings following the deluge.^[9] The 1st dynasty of Kish begins with Ĝushur. Ĝushur's successor is called Kullassina-bel, but this is actually a sentence in Akkadian meaning "All of them were lord". Thus, some scholars have suggested that this may have been intended to signify the absence of a central authority in Kish for a time. The names of the next nine kings of Kish preceding Etana are Nanĝišlišma, En-tarah-ana, Babum, Puannum, Kalibum, Kalumum, Zuqaqip, Aba, Mašda, and Arwium. Archaeological finds from the Uruk period indicate that the site was part of the Uruk Expansion and hence originally Sumerian language speaking.^[10] Ignace Gelb identified Kish as the center of the earliest East Semitic culture which he calls the Kish civilization, however the concept has been challenged by more recent scholarship.^[11][12]

Of the twenty-first king of Kish on the list, Enmebaragesi, who is said to have captured the weapons of Elam, is the first name confirmed by archaeological finds from his reign.^[4] He is also known through other literary references, in which he and his son Aga of Kish are portrayed as contemporary rivals of Dumuzid, the Fisherman, and Gilgamesh, early rulers of Uruk.

Some early kings of Kish are known through archaeology, but are not named on the SKL. It can be difficult to determine if these are actually rulers of Kish or had merely adopted the common appellation "King of Kish". This includes Mesilim, who built temples in Adab and Lagash, where he seems to have exercised some control. Two other examples were the sleeve of an Early Dynatic II bronze sword found at Girsu which read "Lugal-namni[r]-sum (is) king of Kis" and a statue fragment found at Nippur which read "Enna-il, king of Kis".^[4][13]

After its early supremacy, Kish declined economically and militarily, but retained a strong political and symbolic significance.^[16] Its influence reached as far west as the city of Ebla near the Mediterranean Sea, as shown by the Ebla tablets.^[17][18] According to the Ebla tablets, Kish was defeated in the time of Ebla ruler Ishar-Damu, probably by Uruk. Shortly afterward Kish joined Ebla in defeating Mari, followed by the marriage of the Eblan princess Keshdut to a king of Kish.^[19] Just as with Nippur to the south, control of Kish was a prime element in legitimizing dominance over the north of Mesopotamia. Because of the city's symbolic value, strong rulers later claimed the traditional title "King of Kish", even if they were from Akkad, Ur, Assyria, Isin, Larsa or Babylon.^[20] One of the earliest to adopt this title upon subjecting Kish to his empire was King Mesannepada of Ur.^[21]

Sargon of Akkad, the founder of the Akkadian Empire, came from the area near Kish, called Azupiranu according to a much later Neo-Assyrian text purporting to be an autobiography of Sargon.^[22]

Old Babylonian period

By the early part of the First Dynasty of Babylon Kish was under the control of Babylon with the tenth year name of ruler Sumu-abum (c. 1897–1883 BC) being "Year in which (Sumu-abum) made for Kish its city wall (reaching) heaven" (repeated in following year). Not long afterward, Kish was conquered by Sumuel of Larsa as reflected in his eleventh year name "Year the army of Kisz was smitten by weapons", repeated in the following three year names. In the 13th year of Sumu-la-El he reports destroying Kish (repeated in following four years) and then destroying the city wall of Kish in his 19th year and in his 30th year "Year the temple of Zababa, the Emeteursag / the house, ornament of the heros (Zababa), was built". At this point Kish came under the control of the city-state of Eshnunna under rulers ^DIpiq-Adad II and ^DNaram-Sin. By the time of Babylon ruler Sin-Muballit (c. 1813–1792 BC), father of Hammurabi, Kish was firmly under the control of Babylon and would stay that way until the waning days of the First Dynasty of Babylon. The rulers of Babylon at its peak of power, Hammurabi and Samsu-iluna, are known to have done extensive construction at Kish, including rebuilding the city wall. By this time, the eastern settlement at Hursagkalama had become viewed as a distinct city, and it was probably not included in the walled area.^[10]

At some period or periods within the Old Babylonian period, Kish was under the control of a series of rulers generally called the Manana Dynasty. Most of what is known comes from two illicitly excavated archive thought to be from the town of Damrum, near Kish.^[23][24][25] These rulers include Iawian, Halium, Abdi-Erah, Manana, and four others. Several year names of Iawium are known including "Year Sumu-ditana died". Samsu-Ditana was the last ruler of the First Dynasty of Babylon.^[26] One ruler, Ashduniarim is known from a long inscription on a clay foundation cone found at Kish.

"Ašdũni-iarīm, the mighty man, beloved of Ištar, favored by Zababa, king of Kiš, when the world quarters four became hostile to me, for eight years battle I waged, and in the eighth year my opponent to clay indeed turned. ... "^[27]

Later history

The succeeding Kassite dynasty moved the capital from Babylon to Dur-Kurigalzu and Kish was diminished. There is some evidence of Kassite activity in Kish.^[28] Afterward Kish appears to have significantly declined in importance, as it is only mentioned in a few documents from the later second millennium BC. During the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian periods, Kish is mentioned more frequently in texts. However, by this time, Kish proper (Tell al-Uhaymir) had been almost completely abandoned, and the settlement which texts from this period call "Kish" was probably Hursagkalama (Tell Ingharra).^[10]

After the Achaemenid period, Kish completely disappears from the historical record; however, archaeological evidence indicates that the town remained in existence for a long time thereafter.^[10] Although the site at Tell al-Uhaymir was mostly abandoned, Tell Ingharra was revived during the Parthian period, growing into a sizeable town with a large mud-brick fortress. During the Sasanian period, the site of the old city was completely abandoned in favor of a string of connected settlements spread out along both sides of the Shatt en-Nil canal. This last incarnation of Kish prospered under Sasanian and then Islamic rule, before being finally abandoned during the later years of the Abbasid Caliphate (750–1258).^[10]

Tell Uhaimir

This site consists of three subtells (T, X, and Z). Tell Z was the location of one of the main ziggurats and where temples had been built and rebuilt from the Old Babylonian to the Neo-Babylonian periods. At Tell X a 1st Millennium BC fort was uncovered and at Tell T some Old Babylonian structures were found. Between Uhaimir and Ingharra are three smaller tells and further east Tell W where Neo-Assyrian tablets as well as an entire Neo-Babylonian archive was found consisting of about 1000 tablets.

Tell Ingharra

Located in the eastern side of the ancient Kish, Tell Ingharra was extensively explored during the Chicago excavation and provided the best known archaeological sequence in the 3rd millennium BC site. The site consists of several subtells (A, B, D, E, F, G, H, and Tell Bandar which is made up of Tells C and V).^[52][53] In particular, the 1923 excavation concentrated heavily on mound E with its twin ziggurats, while the roughly 130 meter square Neo-Babylonian temple, built on an Early Dynastic plano-copnvex platform, was one of the two buildings that was properly described in a published report.^[37]

The twin ziggurats were built of small plano-convex bricks in a herringbone fashion on the summit of Tell Ingharra. The larger one is located on the south-west side of the temple and the smaller one on the south-east side.^[37] The excavation report mainly focused on the larger ziggurat while there had been only one report on the smaller one by Mackay. Based on the findings from the larger ziggurat, it is suggested that the structures were built at the end of the Early Dynastic IIIa period to commemorate the city.^[52] The fascination of the ziggurats was interesting to the excavators as it was the only Early Dynastic structure that was not destroyed or obscured by later reconstructions, which was why it provided valuable evidence of that time period.^[37]

As for the temple complex, the findings of the temple had determined that the mound was part of the city of Hursagkalama. It was used as an active religious centre until after 482 BC. They also had identified the builder as Nabonidus or Nebuchadnezzar II based on the bricks with inscriptions and barrel cylinder fragments reported in the temple.^[37]

An Early Dynastic I/IIIa cemetery extended to the south towards Mound A with a number of high status graves containing multiple burials and carts drawn by equids or bovids and are considered as predecessors to the royal burials at Ur.^[54]

Area P

This area, north of tell W, was unearthed during the second excavation season (1923–1924) led by Mackay, which uncovered the 'Plano-convex building' (PCB).^[55][56] But outstanding discoveries in Palace A rapidly overshadowed the contemporary excavation here, and the building remained partially uncovered.^[55]

Revealed by its stratigraphy and pottery assemblage was the existence of three distinct architectural phases.^[55] The earliest archaeological occupation dates back to the ED II period.^[55] Above it, rested the massive ED III construction – the PCB. Multiple rooms in the PCB exhibited layers of ashes and charcoals with arrowheads and copper blades, attested that the PCB suffered significant destruction twice during the late ED III period.^[56] After its destruction, the PCB was abandoned.^[8][55][56] Located above later floors of the PCB were scattered burials during the Akkadian period.^[47][56]

The 'Plano-convex building'

The Plano-convex building was a fortified construction built extensively with plano-convex bricks.^[55][56] It displayed the socio-economic dynamics at Kish during the ED III period.^[56] No characteristic linking the building to a religious construct.^[37] Instead, the Plano-convex building is recognized as a public building associated with the economical production of beer, textile and oil.^[56] The PCB might have also housed the administrative center powered by the elites.^[56] First recognized by Margueron, scholars have divided the building into four main sectors based on the architectural layout:^[56]

• Sector A: Production area
• Sector B: Inconclusive but arguably an administration area
• Sector C: Unknown but exhibit a high degree of segregation
• Sector D: Private, domestic area for housing activities

Mound A

Mound A, which includes a cemetery and an Early Dynastic III palace, was discovered during 1922–1925 excavations conducted by Ernest Mackay, under the Field Museum and Oxford University.^[57][53] Although it was earlier a part of the Ingharra mounds lying about 70 meters to the north, it is now separated by an alluvial valley. The seals and other artifacts found in the graves, dating back to a later age than the palace, show that the site was used as a cemetery from the end of the Early Dynastic period until the early Akkadian Empire period.^{[58][57][59][60][61]}

The Sumerian Palace

The palace, which was unearthed beneath the mound, had fallen into decay and was used as a burial ground during Early Dynastic III. It comprises three sections – the original building, the eastern wing and stairway, and the annex. The original building, which was composed of unbaked plano-convex bricks (23 × 15 × 3.5–6 cm), had extremely thick walls, while the annex, which was added later to the south of the building, had comparatively thinner walls. A 2.30 m wide passage was constructed within the outer wall of the original building to prevent invaders from entering the structure.^[62]

The archaeological findings within the palace lack pottery items, the most remarkable among them was a fragment of slate and limestone inlay work, which represents the scene of a king punishing a prisoner.^[62]

Tell H

In the 1923–1933 Expedition, Tell H became the focus of its final three seasons (1930–1933). For personal reasons of the excavators, the Kish material in this section remained selective, mainly yielding Sasanian pottery, coins, incantation bowls and so on.^[37][38] The dating of this section crossed a range of periods, with layer upon layer built on the site. Evidence shows that in the Early Dynastic III Period, there once even existed a twin city.^[8] Therefore, the city occupies a relatively unsettled presence in chronology. But from the excavation, eight buildings were identified as from the Sasanian period, thus making this place primarily identified as the Sasanian Settlement. Researchers suspect that some of the buildings might function together as a complex serving different purposes, including royal residence, storage, and administration.^[37]

The most prominent finding is the stucco decoration in the first two buildings, while the 1923–1933 team also figured out the floor plan and architectural structure of others. It was partly through these stucco decorations that researchers identified the royal resident to be Bahram V (420–438 AD)—Sasanian kings had their distinctive crowns separately, and the unique crown pattern on stucco served as evidence to support this argument. In Kish, which once functioned as a transfer station between Ctesiphon and Hira, Bahram V built palaces for summer entertainment, which explains why one of the buildings has a huge water tank in the middle, probably functioning to cool down the court in summers. Around Bahram V's palaces, a group of Sasanian people also took residence and developed a system of settlement and commercial activities.^[37]