applies properly speaking only to the last third of the reign of Shulgi,
after the latter in a number of military expeditions had conquered
territory far from the heartland of Sumer. This empire lasted no
more than forty years or so, until the beginning of the reign of Ibbi-
Suen. It may most conveniently be seen as consisting of a “core,”
represented by the traditional regions of Sumer and Akkad, and a
“periphery,” which developed mainly in the Transtigridian region
and in the direction of modern-day Iran.^10
During this period there are signs of a concerted effort to estab-
lish bureaucratic control over the society and the economy. Many
new institutions and administrative procedures were created, as attested
by the enormous quantities of documentation discovered. The struc-
tural reforms that led to this imperial administration are usually
attributed to Shulgi, although the attribution has been disputed.^11
The machinery of state installed and organized at this time contin-
ued to function as a framework and point of reference for several
centuries after the fall of Ur III.2.2 The King
Ur III was an hereditary monarchy based on the dynastic principle,
although the succession was often problematic. The evolution of the
royal titulature is indicative: Ur-Namma at first declares himself “king
of Ur” (lugal urim 2 ki-ma), then “king of Sumer and Akkad” (lugal
ki-en-gi ki-uri) after he gains control of Nippur. His son and suc-
cessor Shulgi then proclaims himself “king of the four quarters (of
the world)” (lugal an-ub-da limmu 2 -ba) and places the determinative
of a god before his name, as do his successors. These official titles
were propagated throughout the empire, appearing, for example, on
the seals of royal administrators.
The king stands at the pinnacle of the state apparatus, with com-
prehensive powers. As head of the administration, he wages war and
dispenses justice, appoints provincial governors, generals, judges, and
high officials. The assertions of certain literary texts have led to spec-
ulation on the existence of an assembly or council with authority to
debate royal decisions or even oppose them.^12 If such a body existed,
however, it finds no reflection in the documents of practice.(^10) Steinkeller, “Administrative...”
(^11) Sallaberger, “Ur-III-Zeit.. .,” 148; Maekawa, “Temples...”
(^12) Wilcke, “Politische Opposition...”
186
WESTBROOK_F5_182-226 8/27/03 1:42 PM Page 186