Editing Sumerian King List (section)

=== Dating, redaction and purpose ===
[[File:Scheil dynastic tablet (1911).jpg|thumb|400px|The [[Scheil dynastic tablet]], containing a part of the Sumerian King List, from [[Uruk|Uruk II]] to [[Ur III]].<ref name=":9" /> Transcription and translation in French (1911).]]
All but one of the surviving versions of the ''Sumerian King List'' date to the Old Babylonian period, i.e. the early part of the second millennium BC.<ref name=":4">{{Cite book|last=Postgate|first=J. N.|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/24468109|title=Early Mesopotamia : society and economy at the dawn of history|date=1992|publisher=Routledge|isbn=0-415-00843-3|location=London|oclc=24468109}}</ref><ref name=":5" /><ref name=":6">{{Cite book|last=Crawford|first=Harriet E. W.|author-link=Harriet Crawford|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/20826485|title=Sumer and the Sumerians|date=1991|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-38175-4|location=Cambridge|oclc=20826485}}</ref> One version, the ''Ur III Sumerian King List'' (''USKL'') dates to the reign of Shulgi (2084–2037 BC). By carefully comparing the different versions, especially the ''USKL'' with the much later Old Babylonian versions of the ''SKL'', it has been shown that the composition that is now known as the ''SKL'' was probably first created in the Sargonic period in a form very similar to the ''USKL''. It has even been suggested that this precursor of the ''SKL'' was not written in [[Sumerian language|Sumerian]], but in [[Akkadian language|Akkadian]]. The original contents of the ''USKL'', especially the pre-Sargonic part, were probably significantly altered only after the Ur III period, as a reaction to the societal upheaval that resulted from the disintegration of the Ur III state at the end of the third millennium BC. This altering of the composition meant that the original long, uninterrupted list of kings of Kish was cut up in smaller dynasties (e.g. Kish I, Kish II, and so forth), and that other dynasties were inserted. The result was the ''SKL'' as it is known from Old Babylonian manuscripts such as the Weld-Blundell prism. The cyclical change of kingship from one city to the next became a so-called ''[[Leitmotif]]'', or recurring theme, in the ''Sumerian King List''.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":11" />

It has been generally accepted that the main aim was not to provide a [[Historiography|historiographical]] record of the political landscape of ancient Mesopotamia.<ref name="Mieroop">{{Cite book|last=Van De Mieroop|first=Marc|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oknsEhcALLEC|title=A History of the Ancient Near East|publisher=Blackwell|year=2004|isbn=0-631-22552-8|pages=}}</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Michalowski|first=Piotr|date=1983|title=History as Charter Some Observations on the Sumerian King List|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/601880|journal=Journal of the American Oriental Society|volume=103|issue=1|pages=237–248|doi=10.2307/601880|jstor=601880 |issn=0003-0279}}</ref><ref name=":4" /><ref name=":13">{{Cite book|last=Pollock|first=Susan|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/40609053|title=Ancient Mesopotamia : the eden that never was|date=1999|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=0-521-57334-3|location=Cambridge|oclc=40609053}}</ref> Instead, it has been suggested that the ''SKL'', in its various redactions, was used by contemporary rulers to legitimize their claims to power over Babylonia.<ref name=":9" /><ref name=":12" /> Steinkeller has argued that the ''SKL'' was first created during the Akkad dynasty to position Akkad as a direct heir to the hegemony of Kish. Thus, it would make sense to present the predecessors to the Akkadian kings as a long, unbroken line of rulers from Kish. In this way the Akkadian dynasty could legitimize its claims to power over Babylonia by arguing that, from the earliest times onwards, there had always been a single city where kingship was exercised.<ref name=":11" /> Later rulers then used the ''Sumerian King List'' for their own political purposes, amending and adding to the text as they saw fit. This is why, for example, the version recorded on the Weld-Blundell prism ends with the Isin dynasty, suggesting that it was now their turn to rule over Mesopotamia as the rightful inheritors of the Ur III legacy.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":1" /> The use of the ''SKL'' as political propaganda may also explain why some versions, including the older ''USKL'', did not contain the antediluvian part of the list. In its original form, the list started with the hegemony of Kish. Some city-states may have been uncomfortable with the preeminent position of Kish. By inserting a section of primordial kings who ruled before a flood, which is only known from some Old Babylonian versions, the importance of Kish could be downplayed.<ref name=":12" />