The Main form of government of Mesopotamia Was through the figure of a King, who did not dominate the whole region, but there was one for each city of considerable size, governing it independently and according to their own moral and religious principles.
Despite this apparent independence, cities shared certain formal government structures.
Mesopotamia is the name that has been given to the region that today comprises Iraq and part of Syria, was home to civilizations such as the Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians, settled in different city-states, which 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 3000 years, before the invasion and conquest of the Persian Empire in 539 BC.
The succession of power was realized within the same monarchical dynasties, of hereditary form. Some studies deal with the possibility of a subordinate power figure, or parallel, to the King, who was in charge of the administration and materialization of policies within the city.
With the expansion of Assyria and Babylon, this official took on more importance below the figure of the emperor; Among the many titles attributed to him, is one that translates as"governor."
During the early periods of Mesopotamia, the King's character was attributed divine qualities, and this came to act as a deity .
Until the fall of the last of the Mesopotamian cities, the divine figure of the King was used with planned political and ideological ends within the society.
History and Political Evolution of Mesopotamia
The Sumerian civilization was the first to develop an organized society in the region. The invention of cuneiform writing enabled government affairs to be formally recorded and supported.
Sumerian governments are credited with the first form of bureaucracy. From this stage, through the first established city-states: 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; The writing allowed not only to shape these births, but also to develop the Hierarchy of power .
The mobilization and settlements of nomadic groups, or the great Arab migratory current, were one of the first signs of tension and conflict, and that would initiate a long period of conquest and imposition of new policies.
The constant conflicts that faced the different city-states led to a decay of the Sumerian Empire.
The arrival of Sargon and the founding of the Akkadian empire served to establish an"independent"system of government between cities under the figure of an emperor. This period would last about 130 years (2350 a.C. - 2220 a.C.).
Centuries of conflicts, skirmishes and attempts of some cities or ethnic groups would pass to be imposed in the region, until the arrival of Hammurabi to the throne of the then small Babylon.
The expansionist campaign that began was successful and could accede to its empire the majority of the existing cities in Mesopotamia.
The reign of Hammurabi did not last 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 elaborated a body of laws known as the Code of Hammurabi, which was based on a principle of reciprocity, to be able to execute a committed crime, pronouncing a similar punishment.
Governance structure
The concept of city-states was maintained even during the Babylonian empire, and under the dominion of the emperor, the former Kings or rulers of the different cities came to be perceived as administrators of these regions, obeying a superior will to be necessary.
During this stage a kind of primitive democracy developed, in the sense that part of a portion of power stratified in institutions that, although not completely defined, provided citizens, under certain conditions, the possibility of taking sides in some political decisions.
Politically participating citizens were divided into"big"or"wise"men and"small"men.
Small assemblies were formed, but many studies claim that it is still difficult to know the specific activities and scope of the resolutions and citizen projects in the city-state of the Empire.
Citizen power
Some actions that, it has been inferred, citizens could exercise:
1 - Citizens could choose, to some extent, who to recognize as their representative or boss.
2 - Citizens could outline a military structure, direct or propose foreign policy measures, conduct a war, conclude a peace treaty, and had the same responsibility as the military to defend the city and the corresponding territory.
3- Citizens could form civil bodies with certain legal functions recognized by the city's chief administrator.
These functions allowed them to deal with small-scale issues such as inheritance and land distribution; Labor disputes and trade disputes; Sale of slaves; Resolution of crimes such as fraud and theft; Payment of debts and organization of communal 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 cultural responsibility with the Empire and they had to destine part of their communal organization to the accomplishment of ceremonies.
As with the fall of the Sumerian Empire, which brought about changes in the forms of governance of the Mesopotamian city-states, the constant uprising and imposition of some regions on others did not allow a definitive political structure to be developed to withstand the passage of The years of wars and invasions, and rulers.
The invasion of the Persian Empire was decisive to finish discarding a previous model and instituting its own, thus burying the political behaviors of a good number of Previous civilizations , But that they began to have similar elements that would be found much later in other forms of government monarchical or participative.
References
- Barjamovic, G. (2004). Civic Institutions and Self-Government in Southern Mesopotamia in the Mid-First Millennium BC.
- Held, C.C., & Cummings, J.T. (2013). Middle East Patterns: Places, People, and Politics. Hachette UK.
- Jacobsen, T. (1943). Primitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamia. Journal of Near Eastern Studies.
- Launderville, D. (2003). Piety and Politics: The Dynamics of Royal Authority in Homeric Greece, Biblical Israel, and Old Babylonian Mesopotamia. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
- Nemet-Nejat, K. R. (1998). Daily Life in Ancient Mesopotamia. Greenwood Publishing Group.
- Vidal, J. (2014). The real divinization in Mesopotamia: a political theology. Arys, 31-46.