Home Region:  Mesopotamia (Southwest Asia)

Uruk

EQ 2020  iq_uruk / IqUruk*

The name of this polity derives from the site of Uruk (modern Warka) located c. 35 km east from the Euphrates River, in south Iraq. This period is perceived as a time of deep transformations and significant inventions (such as wheel, fast wheel, plough, using alloys - bronze, writing system, etc.). There is very little known about the people living in Mesopotamia during that time (so-called Sumerian problem). There are some voices suggesting that Uruk population might have been identified as Sumerians, however there is no direct evidence to support this hypothesis. On the contrary, there is a lack of traces of invasion or appearance of completely new group of people. There is rather highlighted undisturbed continuation between previous polities, such as Ubaid and Uruk, and endurance of some cultural patterns, which are especially visible in architecture (construction of temples at Eridu or Uruk). [1] , [2] , [3] The nature of relations between Mesopotamia and Susiana land in this period deserves the special attention. There are few main ideas regarding the relationships between these two geographical areas. According to Algaze, the Susiana was colonized by group of people from southern Mesopotamia in the Uruk period and he indicates cultural homogeneity these two lands in Uruk period. [4] The opposite opinion is presented by Amiet, who suggested that Susiana was inhabited by two different ’ethnic’ group (so called - ’Elamite’ and ’Mesopotamian’ type). The culture of this land, hence, was seen as some kind of hybrid and the alternately appearance of ’Elamite’ or ’Mesopotamian’ cultural elements is related to some sort of ’fashion’ or ’trends’. [5] , [6] The Uruk polity is perceived by Algaze as some kind of proto-state organism and he describes it as “an early instance of an "informal empire" or "world system" based on asymmetrical exchange and a hierarchically organized international division of labour that differs from modern examples only in degree.” [7] He emphasizes very rapid and intense cultural growth of Uruk polity and he considers few types of Uruk expansions: “(1)new form of spatial distribution: the growth of cities and their dependencies; (2)new form of socio-political organization: the explosive growth of social differentiation, the emergence of encumbered labour, and the crystallization of the state; (3) new forms of economic arrangements and of record keeping: state control of a substantial portion of the means of production and of its surplus, craft and occupational specialization on an industrial scale; and, finally, (4)the new forms of symbolic representation needed to validate the changes taking place in the realm of social and political relationship-leading to the creation of an artistic tradition and iconographical repertoire that were to set the framework for pictorial representation in Mesopotamia for millennium to come.” [8] There are many hypotheses regarding the political system of Uruk polity. Most of the researchers (e. g. Frangipane, Rothman, Pollock, Wright) perceived the Uruk polity as some kind of united (in cultural sense) community which shares number of features (particularly in material culture) and they represent some early stage of city-state organization with dominant position of some cities and the group of elite. [9] , [10] However, other archaeologists believed (e. g. Algaze) that some cities have been already ruled by one person - ruler which collected all political, religious and military power. There are many images of this person on seals, sealing, vase, furniture inlays where he is showed as a warrior, bearded man in cap, hunter and master of animals. Algaze even writes: “comparison with inscribed statues of later Sumerian rulers in strikingly similar poses leaves no doubt that the analogous Uruk-period images are stylized and standardized representations of kings.” [11]

[1]: Roux 1998, 75-78

[2]: Crawford 2004, 16-18

[3]: Kuhr 1997, 22-23

[4]: Algaze 1993, 15-17

[5]: Amiet 1979

[6]: Amiet 1992: 80

[7]: Algaze 1989, 571

[8]: Algaze 1989, 590-91

[9]: Nissen 2001, 161

[10]: Pollock 2001, 181-233

[11]: Algaze 2001, 34

General Variables
Identity and Location
Utm Zone:
38 S  
Original Name:
Uruk  
Capital:
NO_VALUE_ON_WIKI  
Temporal Bounds
Peak Years:
[3,200 BCE ➜ 3,050 BCE]  
Duration:
[4,000 BCE ➜ 3,000 BCE]  
Political and Cultural Relations
Suprapolity Relations:
unknown [---]  
Supracultural Entity:
suspected unknown  
Succeeding Entity:
Early Dynastic Sumer  
Relationship to Preceding Entity:
suspected unknown  
Preceding Entity:
Ubaid  
Degree of Centralization:
unknown  
Language
Linguistic Family:
suspected unknown  
Language:
suspected unknown  
Religion
Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
[7,000 to 20,000] people 4000 BCE 3501 BCE
[40,000 to 50,000] people 3500 BCE 3000 BCE
Polity Territory:
[2,000 to 2,100] km2 4000 BCE 3501 BCE
[1,600 to 2,200] km2 3500 BCE 3000 BCE
Polity Population:
[20,000 to 38,540] people 4000 BCE 3501 BCE
[21,300 to 41,000] people 3500 BCE 3000 BCE
Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
4  
Professions
Professional Soldier:
unknown  
Professional Priesthood:
unknown  
Professional Military Officer:
unknown  
Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
inferred absent  
Merit Promotion:
unknown  
Full Time Bureaucrat:
absent  
Examination System:
unknown  
Law
Professional Lawyer:
unknown  
Judge:
unknown  
Formal Legal Code:
unknown  
Court:
unknown  
Specialized Buildings: polity owned
Market:
unknown  
Irrigation System:
present  
Food Storage Site:
present  
Drinking Water Supply System:
unknown  
Transport Infrastructure
Road:
unknown  
Port:
unknown  
Canal:
present  
Bridge:
unknown  
Special-purpose Sites
Mines or Quarry:
present  
Information / Writing System
Written Record:
present  
Script:
present  
Phonetic Alphabetic Writing:
absent  
Nonwritten Record:
present  
Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
inferred absent  
Sacred Text:
unknown  
Religious Literature:
inferred absent  
Practical Literature:
inferred absent  
Philosophy:
inferred absent  
Lists Tables and Classification:
present  
History:
inferred absent  
Fiction:
inferred absent  
Calendar:
unknown  
Information / Money
Token:
present  
Precious Metal:
present  
Paper Currency:
absent  
Indigenous Coin:
absent  
Foreign Coin:
absent  
Article:
unknown  
Information / Postal System
Postal Station:
unknown  
General Postal Service:
unknown  
Courier:
unknown  
Information / Measurement System
Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
  Wooden Palisade:
unknown  
  Stone Walls Non Mortared:
unknown  
  Stone Walls Mortared:
unknown  
  Settlements in a Defensive Position:
present  
  Modern Fortification:
absent  
  Moat:
unknown  
  Fortified Camp:
unknown  
  Earth Rampart:
unknown  
  Ditch:
unknown  
  Complex Fortification:
present  
Military use of Metals
  Steel:
unknown  
  Iron:
unknown  
  Copper:
present  
  Bronze:
unknown  
Projectiles
  Tension Siege Engine:
inferred absent  
  Sling Siege Engine:
inferred absent  
  Sling:
present  
  Self Bow:
inferred present 4200 BCE 3501 BCE
present 3500 BCE 3000 BCE
  Javelin:
inferred present 4200 BCE 3501 BCE
present 3500 BCE 3000 BCE
  Handheld Firearm:
inferred absent  
  Gunpowder Siege Artillery:
inferred absent  
  Crossbow:
inferred absent  
  Composite Bow:
absent  
  Atlatl:
inferred absent  
Handheld weapons
  War Club:
present  
  Sword:
present  
  Spear:
present  
  Polearm:
unknown  
  Dagger:
inferred present 4200 BCE 3501 BCE
present 3500 BCE 3000 BCE
  Battle Axe:
present  
Animals used in warfare
  Horse:
absent  
  Elephant:
absent  
  Donkey:
unknown  
  Dog:
unknown  
  Camel:
absent  
Armor
  Wood Bark Etc:
unknown  
  Shield:
unknown  
  Scaled Armor:
unknown  
  Plate Armor:
unknown  
  Limb Protection:
unknown  
  Leather Cloth:
unknown  
  Laminar Armor:
unknown  
  Helmet:
unknown  
  Chainmail:
unknown  
  Breastplate:
unknown  
Naval technology
  Specialized Military Vessel:
unknown  
  Small Vessels Canoes Etc:
unknown  
  Merchant Ships Pressed Into Service:
unknown  
Religion Tolerance Nothing coded yet.
Human Sacrifice Nothing coded yet.
Crisis Consequences Nothing coded yet.
Power Transitions Nothing coded yet.

NGA Settlements:

Year Range Uruk (iq_uruk) was in:
 (4200 BCE 3000 BCE)   Southern Mesopotamia
Home NGA: Southern Mesopotamia

General Variables
Identity and Location


Capital:
NO_VALUE_ON_WIKI

Probably there was no single capital seen as main and dominant city gathering whole power, but instead of it, there were many centres - big cities and associated with them smaller towns, villages etc. Therefore there is impossible to pinpoint which city was the most important. However, according to Steinkeller, the city of Uruk might have played a role of religious capital since Uruk and Jemdet Nasr Period. He based his assumption of the tables from Jemdet Nasr Period saying that individual cities and towns were sending some resources and foodstuff to Temple of Inanna in Uruk as some kind of ritual offering. [1] [2]

[1]: Algaze 2001, 32

[2]: Steinkeller 1999, 1-22


Temporal Bounds
Peak Years:
[3,200 BCE ➜ 3,050 BCE]

Late Uruk period is a time of cultural, social and territorial expansion, however the beginning of the Uruk expansion is dated to Early Middle Uruk - 3700 BCE. [1] [2]

[1]: Rothman 2014, 93

[2]: Sundsdal 2011, 164


Duration:
[4,000 BCE ➜ 3,000 BCE]

4000-3000 BCE [1] . Note that the period 3100-2900 BCE is contested, and unclear if Uruk were still in control of S Mesopotamian territory at this time. "There is the issue of the Jemdet Nasr period, which may not be completely real or present in all regions of southern Mesopotamia, but that period seems to fit between 3100-2900, with the Early Dynastic from 2900-2350." We do not code the Jemdet Nasr directly here [1] . Algaze proposed a little bit different periodization: Early Uruk: 3900-3600 BCE, Middle Uruk: 3600-3300 BCE, Late Uruk: 3300-3100 BCE. [2] [3] ; Early Uruk Period: 4100/4000-3800 BCE; Early Middle Uruk (Late Chalcolithic 3): 3800-3600 BCE; Late Middle Uruk (Late Chalcolithic 4): 3600-3300 BCE; Late Uruk: 3300-3000BCE. [4] The most problematic is Jemdet Nasr Period (3100-2900 BCE), which some researchers treated as separated polity, others as a continuation and later stage of the Uruk polity [5]

[1]: Pers. comm Mark Altaweel, Dec. 2021

[2]: Algaze 2005, 5-6

[3]: Pollock 1992, 299

[4]: Ur 2010, tab. 1, 392

[5]: Matthews 1992, 196-203


Political and Cultural Relations


Succeeding Entity:
Early Dynastic Sumer

Relationship to Preceding Entity:
suspected unknown



Language

Language:
suspected unknown

However, some researchers believed that Sumerian language was in use in this period. [1]

[1]: Roux 1998, 70


Religion

Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Population of the Largest Settlement:
[7,000 to 20,000] people
4000 BCE 3501 BCE

"By the Early Uruk period {4000-3500}, Uruk (Warka, Erech, Unu)2 encompassed 70 hectares, two other cities were 50 hectares, and a final two 30 hectares each (M. = CAM 58-9). The population in these cities might have ranged fi.-om 7000 to 20,000." [1]

[1]: (Hamblin 2006: 36) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD.

Population of the Largest Settlement:
[40,000 to 50,000] people
3500 BCE 3000 BCE

"By the Early Uruk period {4000-3500}, Uruk (Warka, Erech, Unu)2 encompassed 70 hectares, two other cities were 50 hectares, and a final two 30 hectares each (M. = CAM 58-9). The population in these cities might have ranged fi.-om 7000 to 20,000." [1]

[1]: (Hamblin 2006: 36) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD.


Polity Territory:
[2,000 to 2,100] km2
4000 BCE 3501 BCE

in squared kilometres. Adams discerned two settlement areas: northern and southern. In the Early Uruk period, the southern area had 2010 km2, and the northern area had 2087 km2. In the Late Uruk Period: southern enclave: 2231 km2 and the northern area: 1619 km2. [1]

[1]: Adams 1981, 90

Polity Territory:
[1,600 to 2,200] km2
3500 BCE 3000 BCE

in squared kilometres. Adams discerned two settlement areas: northern and southern. In the Early Uruk period, the southern area had 2010 km2, and the northern area had 2087 km2. In the Late Uruk Period: southern enclave: 2231 km2 and the northern area: 1619 km2. [1]

[1]: Adams 1981, 90


Polity Population:
[20,000 to 38,540] people
4000 BCE 3501 BCE

People. Adams proposed estimations for northern and southern enclaves. The southern enclaves had 20,110 inhabitants and the northern enclave had 38,540 people in Early-Middle Uruk Period. The northern enclave had 21,300 people and southern enclave had 41,020 people in the Late Uruk period [1] The available data concerns also the Susiana Plain. The population of whole Uruk polities is unknown. Early Uruk Period: 6,290-12,580 people; Middle Uruk: 8,860-17,520; Late Uruk Period: 4,560-9,120 people. [2]

[1]: Adams 1981, 90

[2]: Wright 2001, 129-131

Polity Population:
[21,300 to 41,000] people
3500 BCE 3000 BCE

People. Adams proposed estimations for northern and southern enclaves. The southern enclaves had 20,110 inhabitants and the northern enclave had 38,540 people in Early-Middle Uruk Period. The northern enclave had 21,300 people and southern enclave had 41,020 people in the Late Uruk period [1] The available data concerns also the Susiana Plain. The population of whole Uruk polities is unknown. Early Uruk Period: 6,290-12,580 people; Middle Uruk: 8,860-17,520; Late Uruk Period: 4,560-9,120 people. [2]

[1]: Adams 1981, 90

[2]: Wright 2001, 129-131


Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
4

levels. cities (1), towns (2), villages (3), hamlets (4) [1] [2] ; The biggest cities had between 40 to even 100 ha in extent in the Early Uruk Period, towns reached size of 10 ha. The huge agglomarations had even more than 100 ha (Uruk - 250 ha), big towns had - 50 ha, smaller towns - 25 ha, but there are known also smaller towns, ar. 15 ha. [3]

[1]: Crawford 2004, 16

[2]: Algaze 2012, 73

[3]: Algaze 2012, 73-74


Professions
Professional Soldier:
unknown

Full-time specialists


Professional Priesthood:
unknown

Full-time specialists


Professional Military Officer:
unknown

Full-time specialists


Bureaucracy Characteristics
Specialized Government Building:
absent

Though administrative artifacts have been found dating to the entire Uruk sequence (see e.g. Pollock 1992, 314-320 for a summary), sources do not indicate that these artifacts have been found in buildings that appeared to specialise in administrative activities; instead, whenever sources associate these kinds of artifacts to a specific kind of building, it is a building that likely also fulfilled ritual functions, e.g.:"Seeking to reconcile the tripartite floor plan of many of the Eanna buildings with the widespread evidence for contemporary administrative activities found in their general vicinity (below), many archaeologists refer to the Eanna structures simply as ’religious/administrative’ in nature." [1]

[1]: (Algaze 2008: 77) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/FJ63HECN.



Full Time Bureaucrat:
absent

[1]

[1]: Wright 2001, 138



Specialized Buildings: polity owned

Irrigation System:
present

[1]

[1]: Niessen et al. 1993, 10


Food Storage Site:
present

The big granaries were uncovered at many sites dated to Uruk Period.


Drinking Water Supply System:
unknown

Is there a piped network that connects the drinking water to individual settlements?


Transport Infrastructure


irrigation canals [1]

[1]: Kennet & Kennet 2006, 89



Special-purpose Sites
Mines or Quarry:
present

e.g. copper mines at Ergani in Late Uruk Period [1]

[1]: Rothman 2014, 96


Information / Writing System

Script:
present

archaic pictographic script & early cuneiform script [1] ; c. 3400-3200 BCE (Early and Middle Uruk Period)- ’beginning of Proto-Cuneiform’- mainly numerical tablets and clay bullae; c. 3200/3100- 3000/2900 BCE - (Late Uruk Period and Jemdet Nasr Period) - ’beginning of Proto-Elamite’ - texts discovered at Uruk (Uruk III and Uruk IV). [2]

[1]: Roux 1998, 70-71

[2]: Nissen et al. 1993, 5-6



Nonwritten Record:
present

e. g. pottery decoration, seals, sealings as the expression of symbolic language and ideology [1]

[1]: Sundsdal 2011, 167


Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
absent

[1]

[1]: Nissen et al. 1993, 30



Religious Literature:
absent

[1]

[1]: Nissen et al. 1993, 30


Practical Literature:
absent

[1]

[1]: Nissen et al. 1993, 30


Philosophy:
absent

[1]

[1]: Nissen et al. 1993, 30


Lists Tables and Classification:
present

[1] One of the first written ’documents’ were numerical tablets, discovered e. g. at Uruk, Susa, Godin and Jebel Aruda. [2] Most of the archaic texts had administrative character and were used as ’as an instrument in the management of economic transaction’ [3] However, there are few exceptions, there were found also the texts which were dedicated to educate scribes and were used as ’copy book’. [4]

[1]: Nissen et al. 1993, 11

[2]: Cooper 2004, 75-76

[3]: Nissen et al. 1993, 30

[4]: Nissan et al. 1993, 30


History:
absent

[1]

[1]: Nissen et al. 1993, 30


Fiction:
absent

[1]

[1]: Nissen et al. 1993, 30



Information / Money

e. g. at site of Uruk [1] , Jemdet Nasr, Tello, Fara, Ubaid, Susa, Choga Mish, Habuba Habira, Jebel Aruda [2]

[1]: Charvat 2008, 120

[2]: Schmandt-Besserat 1979, 20


Precious Metal:
present

e.g. copper, gold [1] , but also other materials, e.g. obsidian, lapis lazuli [2]

[1]: Crawford 2004, 17

[2]: Sundsdal 2011, 170


Paper Currency:
absent

Monetary system did not exist in the Uruk polity.


Indigenous Coin:
absent

Monetary system did not exist in the Uruk polity.


Foreign Coin:
absent

Monetary system did not exist in the Uruk polity.



Information / Postal System



Information / Measurement System

Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications



Settlements in a Defensive Position:
present

e.g. Hasek Höyük and Godintepe V were located at the top of rocky hills [1]

[1]: Chavrat 2008, 158







Complex Fortification:
present

e. g. at Hasek Höyük [1] , Choga Mish, Abu Salabikh, Tell Bleibis, Tell Sheikh Hassan, Grai Resh [2] , also Habuba Kabira [3]

[1]: Chavrat 2008, 140

[2]: Chavrat 2008, 158

[3]: Wright 2001, 143


Projectiles
Tension Siege Engine:
absent

There are no archaeological records regarding the invention of this machine before 4th century BC [1]

[1]: Marsden 1969, 5, 16, 66.


Sling Siege Engine:
absent

This type of engine is known from ancient time, and the first evidence came from 4th century BC. [1]

[1]: Campbel 2003,3, 8.


The slingshots are known from e. g. Tepe Gawra [1]

[1]: Charvat 2008, 136


Self Bow:
present
4200 BCE 3501 BCE *Bad Years, polity duration: [-4000, -2900]

A Late Uruk cylinder seal "shows an early arms factory making bows and bronze daggers, and perhaps javelins as well". [1]

[1]: (Hamblin 2006:40) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD.

Self Bow:
present
3500 BCE 3000 BCE

A Late Uruk cylinder seal "shows an early arms factory making bows and bronze daggers, and perhaps javelins as well". [1]

[1]: (Hamblin 2006:40) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD.


Javelin:
present
4200 BCE 3501 BCE *Bad Years, polity duration: [-4000, -2900]

A Late Uruk cylinder seal "shows an early arms factory making bows and bronze daggers, and perhaps javelins as well". [1]

[1]: (Hamblin 2006:40) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD.

Javelin:
present
3500 BCE 3000 BCE

A Late Uruk cylinder seal "shows an early arms factory making bows and bronze daggers, and perhaps javelins as well". [1]

[1]: (Hamblin 2006:40) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD.


Handheld Firearm:
absent

The first very simple firearms came from China and are dated to 13th century AD [1]

[1]: Ho Peng Yoke 1997, 389.


Gunpowder Siege Artillery:
absent

The gunpowder was invented around 9th century AD, but the gunpowder artillery was in use since Middle Age. [1]

[1]: Needham 1987, 266.


Crossbow:
absent

It is well documented that crossbows have not been in use before 5th century BCE. [1]

[1]: Needham 2003, 135


Composite Bow:
absent

"The later third-millennium development of the composite bow revolutionized warfare." [1]

[1]: (McIntosh 2005: 188) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/KK2E3KMD.


Atlatl:
absent

Weapon of the Americas


Handheld weapons
War Club:
present

"The Priest-king, armed variously with spear, mace, and bow, is thus shown in a whole sequence of martial activities". [1]

[1]: (Hamblin 2006: 39) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD.


The swords were discovered at Arslantepe and are dated to 3000 BCE [1]

[1]: Di Nocera 2010, 257-261


The spears were discovered among many other weapons in Uruk. [1] [2]

[1]: Chavrat 2008, 123

[2]: Di Nocera 2010, 257



Dagger:
present
4200 BCE 3501 BCE *Bad Years, polity duration: [-4000, -2900]

A Late Uruk cylinder seal "shows an early arms factory making bows and bronze daggers, and perhaps javelins as well". [1]

[1]: (Hamblin 2006:40) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD.

Dagger:
present
3500 BCE 3000 BCE

A Late Uruk cylinder seal "shows an early arms factory making bows and bronze daggers, and perhaps javelins as well". [1]

[1]: (Hamblin 2006:40) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/4WM3RBTD.


Battle Axe:
present

The maceheads and axes are common finds in Uruk period (e. g. Tepe Gawra, Uruk). [1]

[1]: Chavrat 2008, 123, 136


Animals used in warfare

Donkey was domesticated first. "In Iraq and Syria domesticated donkey appeared during the Late Uruk period (ca. 3600-3100 BCE) at Uruk (Boessneck et al., p. 166), Tell Rubeidheh (Payne, pp. 99-100), and Habuba Kabira (Strommenger and Bollweg, pp. 354-55)". [1]

[1]: (Potts 2012) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DWHJQHHJ.


Elephant:
absent

Donkey was domesticated first. "In Iraq and Syria domesticated donkey appeared during the Late Uruk period (ca. 3600-3100 BCE) at Uruk (Boessneck et al., p. 166), Tell Rubeidheh (Payne, pp. 99-100), and Habuba Kabira (Strommenger and Bollweg, pp. 354-55)". [1]

[1]: (Potts 2012) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DWHJQHHJ.


Donkey:
unknown

"In Iraq and Syria domesticated donkey appeared during the Late Uruk period (ca. 3600-3100 BCE) at Uruk (Boessneck et al., p. 166), Tell Rubeidheh (Payne, pp. 99-100), and Habuba Kabira (Strommenger and Bollweg, pp. 354-55)". [1]

[1]: (Potts 2012) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DWHJQHHJ.


There are known seals or sealings depicting the dogs, so they were kept at the sites as a pets or hunting dogs. However there is no clear evidence for used them in warfare. [1]

[1]: Rothman 1994, 115


Donkey was domesticated first. "In Iraq and Syria domesticated donkey appeared during the Late Uruk period (ca. 3600-3100 BCE) at Uruk (Boessneck et al., p. 166), Tell Rubeidheh (Payne, pp. 99-100), and Habuba Kabira (Strommenger and Bollweg, pp. 354-55)". [1]

[1]: (Potts 2012) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DWHJQHHJ.


Naval technology

Small Vessels Canoes Etc:
unknown

There are known some depictions of boats from the glyptic, but is seems that boats were rather used in ceremonial activities or transport than in warfare. [1]

[1]: Carter 2012, 352


Merchant Ships Pressed Into Service:
unknown

There are some proves for using the boats in river trade between southern and northern Mesopotamia, therefore the used the merchant ships cannot be completely excluded. [1]

[1]: Carter 2012, 356-7



Human Sacrifice Data
Human Sacrifice is the deliberate and ritualized killing of a person to please or placate supernatural entities (including gods, spirits, and ancestors) or gain other supernatural benefits.
- Nothing coded yet.
- Nothing coded yet.
- Nothing coded yet.