Can the transfer of 'kingship' recorded in the king list reflect changes in the power center within the Anunnaki?

Okay, let's talk about this fascinating topic. This question actually hits right at a core point in the study of Sumerian civilization.

---

The Transfer of Kingship and the Anunnaki "Power Game": What Does the Sumerian King List Tell Us?

To answer your question directly: Yes, to a large extent, it can be understood that way.

The transfer of "kingship" (Sumerian: Nam-lugal) recorded in the Sumerian King List between different cities can be seen as the shift of human power on earth. Behind this, on the level of mythological narrative, it precisely reflects the changes in "power" or "influence" within the Anunnaki gods themselves.

Let's break it down and discuss it in plain terms.

1. First, what is "Kingship"?

In the Sumerian worldview, "Kingship" wasn't a simple concept. It wasn't just about whoever had the strongest army becoming king. It was a divine mandate bestowed from heaven.

The very first line of the Sumerian King List states: "Kingship descended from heaven..."

You can think of this "Kingship" as a unique, flowing "Mandate of Heaven" or "badge of authority." At any given time, only one city and its ruler possessed it. When one city declined and another rose, the Sumerians would say that "Kingship" was "carried" from City A to City B.

(A simple concept diagram to help understand the fluidity of Kingship)

2. How is the Transfer of Kingship Related to the Anunnaki?

This brings us to the Sumerian concept of the "City Patron God."

In Sumerian mythology, every major city had a primary Anunnaki god as its protector.

• Eridu's patron god was Enki, the god of wisdom.
• Nippur was the holy city of Enlil, the king of the gods, equivalent to the "capital" of the divine realm.
• Uruk's patron goddess was Inanna, goddess of love and war.
• Ur's patron god was Nanna, the moon god.

Now, let's connect these two points:

When the King List states "Kingship was in Eridu," on the mythological level, it meant that the city of the wise god Enki was the center of earthly power. When kingship later transferred to "Kish," it meant that Kish's patron god had gained favor among the gods during that era, achieving a dominant position.

Therefore, the transfer of kingship between cities is like the Anunnaki gods voting in a "Divine Board Meeting" to decide which god and their city would "govern" in the next phase. The human kings were more like "agents" or "CEOs" representing these great gods on earth. The achievements of the king were also the glory of his patron god.

3. What Do Historians Think? Were the Anunnaki Really Holding Meetings?

Of course, from a rigorous historical perspective, there were more practical reasons behind this:

• Military Conquest: One city defeating another naturally became the new hegemon.
• Shift in Economic Centers: Changes in trade routes, agricultural abundance or failure could lead to one city surpassing others in economic power.
• Political Propaganda: The Sumerian King List itself is a piece of political propaganda. It was compiled by later rulers (likely the Isin dynasty) to demonstrate that "since ancient times, there has been only one kingship, and it is now legitimately held by us," thereby justifying their own rule. It deliberately simplified history, portraying many contemporaneous city-states as successive.

However, this doesn't prevent us from understanding it from a "mythological perspective."

For a Sumerian living thousands of years ago, they wouldn't think in terms of "the economic base determines the superstructure." When they saw the city-state of Uruk rise, they would naturally think: "Ah, the great goddess Inanna must have gained the approval of Enlil, the father of the gods, which is why her protected city of Uruk is so powerful!"

Conclusion

So, back to your question: Can the transfer of 'kingship' between cities recorded in the King List reflect changes in the power center within the Anunnaki?

• From the perspective of myth and ancient belief: Absolutely. The transfer of earthly kingship was a direct reflection of the shifting influence of the heavenly gods. This was their way of understanding the world.
• From the perspective of modern historical research: It is a symbolic reflection. It doesn't mean the Anunnaki were literally holding meetings, but rather that the ancient Sumerians used the change in "divine authority" to explain and record the shift in "human authority." This King List is a political history written in the language of myth.

In short, you can view the Sumerian King List as an ancient "Game of Thrones." Only, the protagonists include not only the earthly kings but also the Anunnaki gods in heaven. The wars and peace on earth are reflections of the "power game" being played in the heavens.