352 economy: The Middle East contributed to increased production efficiency Such centers, for example, appeared toward the end of the fourth millennium b.c.e in the southern city-state of Uruk To what extent these centers were set up and run by the priests and bureaucrats remains unknown It is possible that the centers came into existence not because of official sponsorship but because they were located in areas that, unlike other regions, had access to the resources necessary for the items they produced By the middle of the third millennium b.c.e the distributive economy of the Sumerian city-states centered on the great household, often referred to by the Greek term oikos A great household could be a temple, a palace, or a large, wealthy estate Each oikos controlled the production, labor, and consumption of its members, who unlike those of the traditional small household were not kinfolk Small kin-based households still existed, but most of the economic activity was now in the hands of the oikoi The head of an oikos could be a man or a woman These oikoi leaders were among the highest-ranking members of Sumerian society, and thus Sumerian kings and queens headed their own oikoi, as did prominent government officials and wealthy merchants Each oikos had its own fields, pastures, herds, orchards, workshops, and storage depots Each also had managers and a labor force The latter were recruited from the large pool of city residents; by the third millennium b.c.e some 80 percent of southern Mesopotamians are estimated to have lived in the cities Oikos laborers were often specialists—farmhands, animal handlers, cooks, gardeners, brewers, potters, weavers, and metalworkers With such material and human resources, an oikos was able to meet most of the needs of its members In exchange for this labor the oikos provided its members with certain basics—oil, beer, wool, and flour and, on special occasions, milk, fruit, salt, and fish Age, gender, and the type of work determined how much an oikos member received Generally, oikos members had to process these distributions further: thus they had to make the flour into bread and the wool into cloth Each oikos also gave out plots of land to its highest-ranking members; the higher the rank, the larger the land grant Among those eligible for land were political leaders, priests and priestesses, scribes, canal inspectors, managers, soldiers, and skilled artisans In addition to these grants, an oikos also rented out land to nonmembers of the household for a share of the plot’s crops THE SPREAD OF THE SUMERIAN ECONOMIC SYSTEM The Sumerian city-states were not the only ancient Near Eastern societies to have a distributive economy, payment in kind, and a corvée Indeed, by the early third millennium b.c.e such were to be found in the growing urban centers of northern Mesopotamia and the Levant To what extent these economic forms existing elsewhere in the region were due to other peoples having independently developed them and to what extent they were imported from Sumer is unclear How- ever, Sumerian traders, sometimes living in colonies next to other Near Eastern cities, had business connections throughout much of the region It is certainly possible that these traders brought with them Sumerian economic concepts Another method for the export of the Sumerian economic system may have been conquest In the early 24th century b.c.e Sargon the Great created the Akkadian Empire, which he would rule for almost half a century Under Sargon and his successors the empire incorporated the Sumerian city-states, northern Mesopotamia, Elam, and Armenia The distributive economy of Sumer was already present in northern Mesopotamian cities It may also have developed previous to conquest in such Elamite cities as Susa or been brought to the region by the Akkadians The economy of Armenia at this time is unknown, but the later Armenia-based society of Urartu possibly had a distributive economy THE AKKADIANS The Akkadian rulers did not change the local economies of their subject cities Instead, they required the payment of tribute, with each conquered city having to send a portion of its collected food and goods to the imperial capital of Agade in northern Mesopotamia The collection of tribute was already an old idea by the time of the Akkadian Empire Among the Sumerians, after a successful war against an enemy city, a victorious king brought back rich loot and later received tribute from the conquered The king added this newfound wealth to the palace treasury, sharing some of it with high-ranking military officers and bureaucrats Some of it was also presented to the city temple Trade, another important part of the state income, also benefited from such conquest, as traders soon arrived to claim a piece of the city’s increased prosperity, and taxes on their operations also enriched the city Where in Sumer conquest was generally modest, often with only one city dominating another, and short-lived, frequently in terms of years, the Akkadian Empire held an extensive territory for a century and a half In order to manage the finances of the empire, the Akkadians introduced a common accounting practice in all their conquered territories Accounting had to be done using the same cuneiform signs and tablets having the same shape and layout Additionally, since payment was in kind, the Akkadians standardized weights and measures by introducing the gur One gur was equal to about 43 gallons of barley Valuing goods by comparing them to a quantity of barley, the most common grain that was grown in Mesopotamia, had been a longtime practice of the Sumerians The gur would continue to be used, at least in Mesopotamia, for the next two millennia The Akkadians were succeeded by other states, such as the Third Dynasty of Ur and the Old Babylonian kingdom, who each in turn ruled much of Mesopotamia, north and south No matter the state, the old Sumerian distributive economy remained in place in each Mesopotamian city Payment in kind likewise survived, though it was supplemented by occasional payments in silver; along with weights of barley,