Mann and Hammurabi

In the beginning of Van De Mieroop's biography of Hammurabi we have a very different way of discussing power in the ancient near east. He primarily focuses on the political and military sources of power established in Mann's The Sources of Social Power and barely even talks about economic or ideological power.

The emphasis on military and political power seem to stem from the scale in which Hammurabi extends. It covers a vast region with multiple competing city-states and several centers of power rather than the focus on Uruk in Liverani and Gilgamesh. These sources discussed only one major center out of the main context of its neighbors, and therefore ideology and economics can be shown to have much greater influence because they act at a much more local level. Ideology only extends as far as the ideas and other powers supporting them can travel and not lose meaning, i.e. the boundaries of a state or the kingdom of Gilgamesh. Similarly, economics do involve long distance trade, but when the economies of all the states were not dependent on international trade and instead dependent on the local economies of its region. In Hammurabi, the scope the lands affected by Hammurabi are much greater and different powers come into play such as the balance of power politics between rival, neighboring city-states and diplomacy between allies and enemies. Primarily, the impetus behind the political machinations is usually military might. Military power is much more global because it enables the expansion of the state and is a mobile power, unlike economics, politics (which is far reaching but tied to the regions under that government) and to some extent ideology (which is tied to a population, but can spread to others).