I don't think there is any contradiction here. Upon his defeat of Ur-Zababa the king of Kish, Lugalzaggesi became "King of the World", which included Erech/Uruk. In one of his inscriptions, Lugalzaggesi refers to himself as "King of Erech, King of the Land." (See Kramer, The Sumerians, p 59.) Attributions that a great king was from one city or another are quite arbitrary. For example, according to the king-list Sargon carried the kingship of Lugalzaggesi off to Agade. However, at the time of Sargon's triumph Agade did not even exist! Perhaps, Sargon became "Sargon of Adade", but he did not begin this way. To borrow a phrase from the movie, Something About Mary", try to visualize the ancient royal family in their "totalitarianism." They were simultaneously from everywhere and nowhere.
Responses To This Message
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.