Sharlay & Septim
Septim Septim
Sharlay, I’ve been cross‑referencing the Tell Abu Ghraib tablets with the Sumerian King List, and the dates seem to shift the reign of Lugalzagesi by at least a decade. Do you think this revision stands up to the stratigraphic data?
Sharlay Sharlay
If the clay at Abu Ghraib is playing coy with your dates, it’s probably not the stratigraphy that’s shifting Lugalzagesi, it’s your chronology. Stratigraphic layers usually stick to the sediment, not to a revised king‑list. Unless you have a new marker horizon in the Abu Ghraib sequence that linearly matches the ten‑year jump, I’d call it a suspect edit. Double‑check the radiocarbon dates on the pottery from those layers—if they don’t back up the shift, you’re probably dealing with a misdated tablet. And don’t forget, the Sumerian King List was a political statement, not a precise calendar. So be cautious before you rewrite history.
Septim Septim
I appreciate the caution, but my cross‑reference of the Abu Ghraib layers with the king‑list was based on the 1985 excavation sequence, not a modern reinterpretation. I will review the radiocarbon dates on the pottery again, but the ten‑year shift still fits the stratigraphic markers we have. As always, I rely on memory rather than a bookmark; I know exactly where each tablet sits in the record.