The Early Dynastic Period (abbreviated ED Period or ED) is an archaeological culture in Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq) that is generally dated to and was preceded by the Uruk and Jemdet Nasr periods. It saw the development of writing and the formation of the first cities and states. The ED itself was characterized by the existence of multiple city-states: small states with a relatively simple structure that developed and solidified over time. This development ultimately led, directly after this period, to broad Mesopotamian unification under the rule of Sargon, the first monarch of the Akkadian Empire. Despite their political fragmentation, the ED city-states shared a relatively homogeneous material culture. Sumerian cities such as Uruk, Ur, Lagash, Umma, and Nippur located in Lower Mesopotamia were very powerful and influential. To the north and west stretched states centered on cities such as Kish, Mari, Nagar, and Ebla.

The study of Central and Lower Mesopotamia has long been given priority over neighboring regions. Archaeological sites in Central and Lower Mesopotamia—notably Girsu but also Eshnunna, Khafajah, Ur, and many others—have been excavated since the 19th century. These excavations have yielded cuneiform texts and many other important artifacts. As a result, this area was better known than neighboring regions, but the excavation and publication of the archives of Ebla have changed this perspective by shedding more light on surrounding areas, such as Upper Mesopotamia, western Syria, and southwestern Iran. These new findings revealed that Lower Mesopotamia shared many socio-cultural developments with neighboring areas and that the entirety of the ancient Near East participated in an exchange network in which material goods and ideas were being circulated.

History of research

Dutch archaeologist Henri Frankfort coined the term Early Dynastic (ED) period for Mesopotamia, the naming convention having been borrowed from the similarly named Early Dynastic (ED) period for Egypt. The periodization was developed in the 1930s during excavations that were conducted by Henri Frankfort on behalf of the University of Chicago Oriental Institute at the archaeological sites of Tell Khafajah, Tell Agrab, and Tell Asmar in the Diyala Region of Iraq.

The ED was divided into the sub-periods ED I, II, and III. This was primarily based on complete changes over time in the plan of the Abu Temple of Tell Asmar, which had been rebuilt multiple times on exactly the same spot. During the 20th century, many archaeologists also tried to impose the scheme of ED I–III upon archaeological remains excavated elsewhere in both Iraq and Syria, dated to 3000–2000 BC. However, evidence from sites elsewhere in Iraq has shown that the ED I–III periodization, as reconstructed for the Diyala river valley region, could not be directly applied to other regions.

Research in Syria has shown that developments there were quite different from those in the Diyala river valley region or southern Iraq, rendering the traditional Lower Mesopotamian chronology useless. During the 1990s and 2000s, attempts were made by various scholars to arrive at a local Upper Mesopotamian chronology, resulting in the Early Jezirah (EJ) 0–V chronology that encompasses everything from 3000 to 2000 BC. The use of the ED I–III chronology is now generally limited to Lower Mesopotamia, with the ED II sometimes being further restricted to the Diyala river valley region or discredited altogether.

Chronology

Periodization

The ED was preceded by the Jemdet Nasr and then succeeded by the Akkadian period, during which, for the first time in history, large parts of Mesopotamia were united under a single ruler. The entirety of the ED is now generally dated to approximately 2900–2350 BC according to the widely accepted middle chronology or 2800–2230 BC according to the short chronology, which is increasingly less accepted by scholars. The ED was divided into the ED I, ED II, ED IIIa, and ED IIIb sub-periods. ED I–III were more or less contemporary with the Early Jezirah (EJ) I–III in Upper Mesopotamia. The exact dating of the ED sub-periods varies between scholars—with some abandoning ED II and using only Early ED and Late ED instead and others extending ED I while allowing ED III begin earlier so that ED III was to begin immediately after ED I with no gap between the two.

Many historical periods in the Near East are named after the dominant political force at that time, such as the Akkadian or Ur III periods. This is not the case for the ED Period. It is an archaeological division that does not reflect political developments, and it is based upon perceived changes in the archaeological record, e.g. pottery and glyptics. This is because the political history of the ED is unknown for most of its duration. As with the archaeological subdivision, the reconstruction of political events is hotly debated among researchers.

Period Middle ChronologyAll dates BC Short ChronologyAll dates BC ED I 3000/2900–2750/2700 2800–2600 ED II 2750/2700–2600/2575 2600–2500 ED IIIa 2600/2575–2500/2475 2500–2375 ED IIIb 2500/2475–2350/2300 2375–2230

Historical outline

The transition between the 4th and 3rd millennia BC is very poorly understood in Lower Mesopotamia (and in the Middle East in general). This region saw the flourishing of the so-called Jemdet Nasr culture, which succeeded the Uruk culture and lasted approximately from 3200 to 3000/2900 BC. It notably marks the return of painted pottery and a radical transformation of the monumental center of the "metropolis" of Uruk, indicating a period of significant social and political change. This period is contemporary with the culture of the Scarlet Ware pottery typical of sites along the Diyala in Lower Mesopotamia, the Ninevite V culture in Upper Mesopotamia, and the Proto-Elamite culture in southwestern Iran.Francesco Del Bravo, 'Scarlet Ware': Origins, Chronology and Developments, in M. Lebeau - P. de Miroschedji (eds), ARCANE Interregional Vol. I: Ceramics (ARCANE Interregional I), Turnhout (Brepols), 2014: 131–147

Knowledge about the period from 3000 to 2600 BC is very fragmented and the chronology very imprecise. Since the sites in southern Mesopotamia do not demonstrate a clear break between an ED I and an ED II period, the relevance of this chronology for the region has been questioned; the term ED I-II, with its vague boundaries, is now more commonly used. Dating of tablets from this period is extremely uncertain, within a range from 2900 to 2700 BC.Bartash, Vitali. Review of NEW TEXTS FROM THE EARLY DYNASTIC I-II PERIOD*, by C. Lecompe and L. Verderame. Rivista Degli Studi Orientali 88, no. 1/4 (2015): 121-122. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24754110.

It is therefore not possible to reconstruct the history of this first part of the Early Dynastic period. It is sometimes seen as a "heroic age" of Mesopotamia, during which King Gilgamesh, the subject of legends whose historicity as yet to be proven, is supposed to have lived. But this rests largely on the assumption that the Sumerian King List, a historiographical text from the late 3rd millennium BC listing the names of kings who supposedly reigned over Mesopotamia from a very distant past, is reliable for these periods, which is doubtful. The main corpus of texts from this period, found in Ur, shows at the very least the continuation of the administrative system inherited from the Uruk period. City-seals dating to this period perhaps indicate the existence of a religious coalition (or "amphictyony"). The consolidation of state and urban institutions continued, perhaps centered around the cities of Uruk and Kish, which appear to have been among the most politically important (which would confirm later traditions about the kings of these cities). In northern Mesopotamia and Syria, the period from 3100 to 2600 BC is characterized by a process of decline of urban life, in favor of nomadism and rural life.

The ED III (2600–2350/2300 BC) saw an expansion in the use of writing and increasing social inequality. Larger political entities developed in Upper Mesopotamia and southwestern Iran. The period that saw an expansion of writing and the appearance of the first royal inscriptions is much better known, even if its political history remains impossible to reconstruct. ED IIIa () is the period of the royal tombs of Ur, the archives of Fara (ancient Shuruppak), and Abu Salabikh. It is often referred to as the "Fara period," due to the importance of this corpus, which also indicates the existence of a league of cities. Kish seems to have played a preeminent role, perhaps in rivalry with Ur. Political relations, particularly cooperation, were nonetheless probably unstable. In northern Mesopotamia and Syria, archaeology indicates that after 2600 BC urban life rapidly returned, with the emergence of centralized political power in the largest cities (Mari, Aleppo, Qatna, Ebla, Tell Brak, Tell Mozan, etc.).

The ED IIIb period () is much better known in terms of events, principally thanks to the texts from Girsu (Tello), in the state of Lagash, as well as Ebla (Tell Mardikh) in central Syria. This period saw the development of political powers in Upper Mesopotamia, Syria, and also in western Iran, which became integrated into a broader diplomatic network. Lower Mesopotamia was marked by rivalries between cities, notably Lagash and Umma, but also Ur, Uruk, and Akshak; in contrast, Kish appears to have been less prominent. Some rulers managed to impose a hegemony over other city states during their life times, such as Enshakushana of Uruk and Lugal-zage-si of Umma. These constitute what has been called "proto-imperial" experiments at the end of the period. Beyond southern Mesopotamia, strong political entities are known in western Iran, especially in the region called "Elam" by Sumerian sources, such as Arawa and Pashime, and Syria, thanks to the Eblaite palatial archives, and also textual and archaeological data from Mari and Tell Beydar, which show rival kingdoms engaged in recurring wars, the major powers being Mari, Nagar (Tell Brak) and Ebla.

The end of the Early Dynastic period occurs according to the latest proposals around 2300 BC. Contrary to the preceding chronological breaks, it is not defined archaeologically but rather politically. The conquests of Sargon of Akkad and his successors upset the political equilibrium throughout Iraq, Syria, and Iran. The conquests lasted many years into the reign of Naram-Sin of Akkad and built on ongoing conquests during the ED. The transition is much harder to pinpoint within an archaeological context. It is virtually impossible to date a particular site as being that of either ED III or Akkadian period using ceramic or architectural evidence alone.

Sources

The contemporary sources from the Early Dynastic Period do not allow the reconstruction of a political history. Royal inscriptions only offer a glimpse of the military conflicts and relations among the different city-states. Instead, rulers were more interested in glorifying their pious acts, such as the construction and restoration of temples and offerings to the gods.

For the ED I and ED II periods, there are no contemporary documents shedding any light on warfare or diplomacy. Only for the end of the ED III period are contemporary texts available from which a political history can be reconstructed. The largest archives come from Lagash and Ebla. Smaller collections of clay tablets have been found at Ur, Tell Beydar, Tell Fara, Abu Salabikh, and Mari. They show that the Mesopotamian states were constantly involved in diplomatic contacts, leading to political and perhaps even religious alliances. Sometimes one state would gain hegemony over another, which foreshadows the rise of the Akkadian Empire.