WHAT WAS THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT IN MESOPOTAMIA LIKE? - HISTORY - 2025

The main form of government in Mesopotamia was through the figure of a King, who did not dominate the entire region, but rather existed one for each city of considerable size, ruling it independently and according to its own moral and religious principles. Despite this apparent independence, the cities shared certain formal structures of government among themselves.

Mesopotamia is the name that has been given to the region that today includes Iraq and part of Syria, it was the home of civilizations such as the Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians, settled in different city-states, in which they were counted as the main Babylon and Assyria.

The king, the figure that marks the form of government of Mesopotamia

The recorded history of Ancient Mesopotamia dates back more than 3,000 years, before the invasion and conquest of the Persian Empire in 539 BC.

The succession of power was carried out within the same monarchical dynasties, in a hereditary way. Some studies handle the possibility of a power figure subordinate, or parallel, to the King, who was in charge of the administration and implementation of policies within the city.

With the expansion of Assyria and Babylon, this official gained more importance below the figure of the emperor; Among the many titles attributed to him, there is one that translates as "governor."

During the first periods of Mesopotamia, the figure of the King was attributed divine qualities, and he came to act as a deity.

Until the fall of the last of the Mesopotamian cities, the divine figure of the King was used for planned political and ideological purposes within society.

History and political evolution of Mesopotamia

The Sumerian civilization was the first to develop an organized society in the region. The invention of the cuneiform script made it possible to provide government affairs with formal record and support.

Sumerian governments are credited with the first form of bureaucracy. From this stage, through the first city-states founded: Ea, Eridu, Kis, Lagas, Uma, Ur and Uruk, the figure of the King was established as absolute ruler.

The expansion of the Sumerian empire allowed new cities and social orders to be established; writing allowed not only to capture these births, but also to develop the hierarchy of power.

The mobilization and settlements of nomadic groups, or the great Arab migratory stream, were one of the first signs of tension and conflict, and that a long period of conquest and imposition of new policies would begin.

The constant conflicts that faced the different city-states led to a decline of the Sumerian Empire.

The arrival of Sargon and the founding of the Akkadian empire served to establish a system of "independent" government between cities under the figure of an emperor. This period would last approximately 130 years (2350 BC - 2220 BC).

Centuries of conflicts, skirmishes and attempts by some cities or ethnic groups to impose themselves in the region would pass, until the arrival of Hammurabi to the throne of what was then little Babylon.

The expansionist campaign that he began was successful and he was able to adhere to his empire most of the existing cities in Mesopotamia.

Hammurabi's reign lasted no more than 100 years, before the succession of his son and the eventual fall of Babylon at the hands of another culture, the Casitas.

However, during his reign, Hammurabi unified the existing codes until then and drew up a body of laws known as the Hammurabi Code, which was based on a principle of reciprocity, to be able to execute a crime committed, issuing a similar punishment.

Governance structure

The concept of city-states was maintained even during the Babylonian empire, and under the rule of the emperor, the former Kings, or rulers of the different cities, came to be perceived as administrators of these regions, obeying a higher will if necessary.

During this stage, a kind of primitive democracy developed, in the sense that it starts from a portion of power stratified in institutions that, although not completely defined, offered citizens, under certain conditions, the possibility of taking sides in some political decisions.

Babylon Gardens

The politically participating citizens were divided into "big" or "wise" men and "small" men.

Small assemblies were formed, but many studies affirm that it is still difficult to know the specific activities and the scope that the resolutions and citizen projects had in the city-states of the Empire.

Citizen power

Some actions that, it has been inferred, citizens could exercise:

1- Citizens could choose, to a certain extent, who to recognize as their representative or lord-in-chief.

2- Citizens could outline a military structure, direct or propose foreign policy measures, conduct a war, conclude a peace deal, and they had the same responsibility as the military body to defend the city and the corresponding territory.

3- Citizens could form civil bodies with certain legal functions recognized by the chief city administrator.

These functions allowed them to deal with smaller-scale matters, such as the distribution of inheritances and land; labor disputes and commercial disputes; sale of slaves; resolution of crimes such as fraud and theft; payment of debts and organization of community projects.

4- Citizens had the power to represent their city-state on official occasions, and may have had some control over communal funds.

5- The citizens maintained a religious responsibility with the Empire and had to allocate part of their communal organization to the performance of ceremonies.

Just as happened with the fall of the Sumerian empire, which led to changes in the forms of governance of the city-states of Mesopotamia, the constant uprising and imposition of some regions on others did not allow the development of a definitive political structure that could withstand the passage of the years, of wars and invasions, and of rulers.

The invasion of the Persian Empire was decisive to finish discarding a previous model and establish its own, thus burying the political behaviors of a good number of previous civilizations, but which were already beginning to have similar elements that would be found much later in other forms of government. monarchical or participatory.

References

1. Barjamovic, G. (2004). Civic Institutions and Self-Government in Southern Mesopotamia in the Mid-First Millennium BC.
2. Held, CC, & Cummings, JT (2013). Middle East Patterns: Places, People, and Politics. Hachette UK.
3. Jacobsen, T. (1943). Primitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamia. Journal of Near Eastern Studies.
4. Launderville, D. (2003). Piety and Politics: The Dynamics of Royal Authority in Homeric Greece, Biblical Israel, and Old Babylonian Mesopotamia. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
5. Nemet-Nejat, KR (1998). Daily Life in Ancient Mesopotamia. Greenwood Publishing Group.
6. Vidal, J. (2014). Royal Divinization in Mesopotamia: A Political Theology. Arys, 31-46.