93248_BIOR_2010-1-2_01 08-06-2010 17:26 Pagina 56 107 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LXVII N° 1-2, januari-april 2010 108 by the abundant documentation from Umma,1) and on the other hand by the fact that starting in the year Sulgi 33, the majority of the strategic offices were in the hands of one family that uninterruptedly controlled both provincial and temple households. Furthermore, Dahl proposes a model for understanding the genealogy of the royal family and other Ur III elite families, for which comparable data is not available. In chapters 1 and 2, after a brief introduction to the orga- nization of the Ur III state,2) the author describes the patterns of hereditary succession: lineal, when power is passed from generation to generation, versus non-lineal, or lateral, when power is passed within the same generation. Lineal succes- sion can be matrilineal or patrilineal, the latter can be further divided into succession by primogeniture and seniority. Dahl discusses the historicity of the so-called Sumerian King List and he questions whether the prevailing Mesopotamian sys- tem of succession, and in particular that adopted by the Third Dynasty of Ur, was strictly patrilineal primogeniture. Although all of the dynasties following the end of the Ur III reign adopted a lineal primogeniture pattern of succession, Dahl tentatively suggests that a system of seniority prevailed throughout the third millennium (p. 11). In chapter 3 Dahl provides an updated picture of the House of Ur-Namma, which lasted, according to Dahl, three gener- ations, Amar-Suen, Su-Suen and Ibbi-Suen possibly all being sons of Sulgi. Dahl also provides a list of the most important royal princes and princesses that are documented and tries to depict their career and familial ties with high-ranking offi- cials of the empire as well as with foreign kings.3) What seems important to the discussion is that several sons of the kings of Ur never held important military positions or civil offices; in fact many of them are attested just a couple of times in tablets from Puzris-Dagan and Girsu. A parallel sit- uation is found in the ruling family of Umma, where many of the sons of the governors, who never became governors themselves, appear only in a handful of texts. In addition, Dahl gives an account of the cadet branches of the royal fam- ily, namely that of the sukkalmah (especially Aradgu/- Nanna), of Abi-simti, who was the wife either of Amar-Suen or Sulgi and the mother of Su-Suen, and of Ea-nisa, one of the concubines (lukur) of Sulgi.4) Chapter 4 represents the core of Dahl’s study. He first ASSYRIOLOGIE investigates the origin of the clan of Ur-nigar and the earli- est Ur III governors of Umma before the year Sulgi 33, when the family of Ur-nigar monopolized power in Umma and DAHL, J. — The ruling family of Ur III Umma. A prosopo- four of his sons simultaneously occupied the four strategic graphical analysis of an elite family in southern Iraq offices of the provincial administration. He then goes on to 4000 years ago. (PIHANS 108). Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, Leiden, 2007. (26,5 cm, XII, 180). ISBN 978-90-6258-319-5. / 28,89. 2) It remains obscure to me why the author does not cite either T.M. The book under review is the revised version of a PhD Sharlach, Provincial Taxation and the Ur III State, Cuneiform Monograph dissertation submitted in 2003 to the University of Califor- 26, Leiden, 2004, or his review article of Sharlach’s volume (J.L. Dahl, “Revisiting Bala”, JAOS 126 [2006]), pp. 77-88), when he gives an account nia, Los Angeles. As is clear from the title, the study aims of the bala contribution of the provinces (p. 3, note 10). to reconstruct the genealogy and the line of succession of 3) One may also add Namnine-hedu, possibly Sulgi’s daughter or his the strategic offices of the Umma provincial administration sister and the daughter of Ur-Namma (see C. Tsouparopoulou, “Namnine- during the Ur III period, by using a prosopographical hedu, Yet another Ur III Princess,” JCS 60 (2008), 12) to the family tree of the royal family (p. 31). approach to the data. This choice is justified on the one hand 4) The important remarks by A. Hattori (“The Return of the Governor,” in A.K. Guinan, et al. (eds.), If a Man Builds a Joyful House. Assyriologi- cal Studies in Honor of Earle Verdun Leichty, Cuneiform Monographs 31, Leiden, 2006, 197-208) should be added to the preliminary survey provided 1) Among the unpublished texts consulted by Dahl, the following have by Dahl (p. 25-26) regarding the power struggle between the House of Ur- now been published: BM 104774 (= Nisaba 11, 39), BM 107994 (= Nis- Meme and the royal family of Ur and the order of the governors of Nippur d d aba 9, 67), BM 108004 (= Nisaba 9, 77), BM 108269 (= Nisaba 9, 323). as well as that of the sabra inanna and ugula e2 inanna offices. 93248_BIOR_2010-1-2_01 08-06-2010 17:26 Pagina 57 109 BOEKBESPREKINGEN — ASSYRIOLOGIE 110 describe the careers of the three well-known governors of economic sector. However, as Dahl correctly remarks, since Umma (Ur-Lisi and his two brothers, Ayakala and Dadaga) no definitive evidence of private economic activity exists and discusses all of the attested consorts and concubines of during the Ur III period, it could also mean that these indi- the ruling family. Dahl convincingly proves that governor- viduals had no career at all. ship succession passed from brother to brother and that Dahl concludes his study with two interesting excursuses. potential heirs to the governorships were chosen from the In the first he takes as a comparative example the modern generation of the sons of Ur-nigar. For that reason many ruling family of Saudi Arabia (the House of Saud) whose sons of the ensuing ensis, as Dahl rightfully suspects, were pattern of succession, largely fratrilineal and based on probably forced to venture into the private sector of the seniority, resembles in many aspects that adhered to by the economy and are therefore poorly attested in texts pertain- royal house of Ur and the clan of Ur-nigar. In the second ing to the state-run administration. Some of them appear excursus the author presents a survey of the fratrilineal kin- only in a few tablets in relation to obligations they still had ship terminology during the Ur III period. As the author to fulfil to the state on special occasions. According to Dahl, points out, people claiming their affiliation to the ruling clan only one member of the younger generation of the ruling through fraternal ties belong to three groups: the brothers family, Gududu, son of Dadaga, the last known governor of (ses) of the king, the brothers of the sukkalmah, and those Umma who held the strategic office of chief household of other high-ranking officials; the brothers or sisters (nin9) administrator, seems to have had the chance of becoming the of the queen or of a concubine to the king and of the wife next governor. Unfortunately, due to the meagre sources for of a provincial governor; the brothers of an (unnamed) lukur Umma during the later part of the Ur III period, this hypoth- (ses lukur). The terms lukur and ses lukur deserve further esis cannot be confirmed. Apart from the chief household remarks. In a recent article Sharlach states that lukur origi- administrator (*sabra e2) which possibly represented a kind nally designated a type of priestess, the concubine of a god, of apprenticeship position for the aspiring governor, both the but during the Ur III period the term also qualified women offices of the chief of the granary (KA-guru7) and chief live- as being royal consorts or consorts of other high-ranking 7 stock administrator (sus3) were closely connected with the officials. ) Dahl states that ses lukur is used as a claim of line of succession to the seat of the Umma governorship. affiliation by persons “without any relation to the ruling However, unlike the ensiship and chief household adminis- group except the marital link of their sister” (p. 155). I am trator office, the chief of the granary and chief livestock somewhat sceptical about this theory. Dahl does not explain administrator positions were inherited lineally, from father what ki ses lukur attested in SAT 1, 112 (-/i/-) means (Table to son.5) Dahl extensively analyses both the titles, focusing 12).8) Does it literally mean “the place of the ses lukur?” especially on the figure of Ur-E’e, the chief livestock admin- Dahl, following Sigrist, reads la-bi-ru-um ki ses lukur mu ki istrator, and his son Lu-Haya, depicting their responsibili- ha-gar gibil-se3, and omits the following a-ab-ba-se3 gen- ties.6) The chapter ends with a discussion of the careers of na. As far as I know a toponym ha-garki is not attested in any the other sons of Ur-nigar who never occupied high ranking other Ur III text, thus it is better to interpret the line as: (food positions in the Umma central administration. allotments for five days) la-bi-ru-um ki ses lukur mu ku6- In the final chapter, the author briefly presents his con- nig2-ki seg6-se3 a-ab-ba-se3 gen-na “Labirum, (who stands) clusion, affirming that no common “law” of succession at the place of the ses lukur, having gone to the sea for the existed in late third millennium Mesopotamian society and, smoked nig2-ki-fish.” This line is very interesting since in as shown by the case of the ruling family of Umma, the rules two other occasions, SAT 1, 151 (-/iii/-) and Szlechter, RA of office inheritance were more complex than the simple 59, FM 56 (-/iii/-), a certain Baba’a, the ses lukur, is con- opposition between frarilineal and non-frarilineal succession.