Chronology of Ancient Mesopotamian Kings of Sumeria

Sequence of Ancient Mesopotamian Kings of Sumeria Mesopotamia, the Land Between Two Rivers, was situated in present-day Iraq and Syriaâ and was home to one of the most old human advancements: the Sumerians. Between the Tigris and Euphrates waterways, Sumerian urban areas, for example, Ur, Uruk, and Lagash give the absolute soonest proof of human social orders, alongside the laws, composing, and horticulture that made them work. Sumeria in southern Mesopotamia was countered by Akkad (just as Babylonia and Assyria) in the north. Opponent traditions would move the focal point of intensity starting with one city then onto the next more than a huge number of years; the Akkadian ruler Sargon joined the two social orders during his rule (2334-2279 B.C.) The fall of Babylon to the Persians in 539 B.C. saw the finish of indigenous standard in Mesopotamia, and the land was set apart by further victories by Alexander the Great, the Romans, and before going under Muslim guideline in the seventh Century. This rundown of old Mesopotamian lords originates from John E. Morby. Notes dependent on Marc Van De Mieroops. Sumerian Timelines First Dynasty of Ur c. 2563-2387 B.C. 2563-2524... Mesannepadda 2523-2484... Aannepadda 2483-2448... Meskiagnunna 2447-2423... Elulu 2422-2387... Balulu Line of Lagash c. 2494-2342 B.C. 2494-2465... Ur-Nanshe 2464-2455... Akurgal 2454-2425... Ennatum 2424-2405... Enannatum I 2402-2375... Entemena 2374-2365... Enannatum II 2364-2359... Enentarzi 2358-2352... Lugal-anda 2351-2342... Uru-inim-gina Line of Uruk c. 2340-2316 B.C. 2340-2316... Lugal-zaggesi Line of Akkad c. 2334-2154 B.C. 2334-2279... Sargon 2278-2270... Rimush 2269-2255... Manishtushu 2254-2218... Naram-Suen 2217-2193... Shar-kali-sharri 2192-2190... political agitation 2189-2169... Dudu 2168-2154... Shu-Turul Third Dynasty of Ur c. 2112-2004 B.C. 2112-2095... Ur-Nammu 2094-2047... Shulgi 2046-2038... Amar-Suena 2037-2029... Shu-Suen 2028-2004... Ibbi-Suen (The last ruler of Ur. One of his commanders, Ishbi-Erra, built up an administration in Isin.) Line of Isin c. 2017-1794 B.C. 2017-1985... Ishbi-Erra 1984-1975... Shu-ilishu 1974-1954... Iddin-Dagan 1953-1935... Ishme-Dagan 1934-1924... Lipit-Ishtar 1923-1896... Ur-Ninurta 1895-1875... Bramble Sin 1874-1870... Lipit-Enlil 1869-1863... Erra-imitti 1862-1839... Enlil-bani 1838-1836... Zambiya 1835-1832... Iter-pisha 1831-1828... Ur-dukuga 1827-1817... Sin-magir 1816-1794... Damiq-ilishu Line of Larsa c. 2026-1763 B.C. 2026-2006... Naplanum 2005-1978... Emisum 1977-1943... Samium 1942-1934... Zabaya 1933-1907... Gunnunum 1906-1896... Abi-sare 1895-1867... Sumu-el 1866-1851... Nur-Adad 1850-1844... Sin-iddinam 1843-1842... Sin-eribam 1841-1837... Sin-iqisham 1836... Silli-Adad 1835-1823... Warad-Sin 1822-1763... Edge Sin (most likely an Elamite. He crushed an alliance from Uruk, Isin, and Babylon and obliterated Uruk in 1800.)

How To Calculate the Margin of Error

The most effective method to Calculate the Margin of Error Commonly political surveys and different uses of measurements express their outcomes with a room for give and take. It isn't remarkable to see that an assessment of public sentiment expresses that there is support for an issue or up-and-comer at a specific level of respondents, in addition to and less a specific rate. It is this in addition to and short term that is the room for mistakes. In any case, how is the room for mistakes determined? For a basic arbitrary example of an adequately huge populace, the edge or mistake is extremely only a repetition of the size of the example and the degree of certainty being utilized. The Formula for the Margin of Error In what tails we will use the equation for the room for mistakes. We will get ready for the most pessimistic scenario conceivable, in which we have no clue what the genuine degree of help is the issues in our survey. In the event that we had some thought regarding this number, potentially through past surveying information, we would wind up with a littler wiggle room. The equation we will utilize is: E zî ±/2/(2√ n) The Level of Confidence The principal snippet of data we have to ascertain the room for mistakes is to figure out what level of certainty we want. This number can be any rate under 100%, however the most widely recognized degrees of certainty are 90%, 95%, and 99%. Of these three the 95% level is utilized most every now and again. In the event that we take away the degree of certainty from one, at that point we will get the estimation of alpha, composed as ÃŽ ±, required for the recipe. The Critical Value The subsequent stage in ascertaining the edge or blunder is to locate the fitting basic worth. This is demonstrated by the term zî ±/2 in the above recipe. Since we have expected a basic arbitrary example of a huge populace, we can utilize the standard typical circulation of z-scores. Assume that we are working with a 95% degree of certainty. We need to look into the z-score z*for which the territory between - z* and z* is 0.95. From the table, we see that this basic worth is 1.96. We could have additionally discovered the basic incentive in the accompanying manner. On the off chance that we think as far as ÃŽ ±/2, since ÃŽ ± 1 - 0.95 0.05, we see that ÃŽ ±/2 0.025. We presently search the table to discover the z-score with a territory of 0.025 on its right side. We would wind up with the equivalent basic estimation of 1.96. Different degrees of certainty will give us distinctive basic qualities. The more prominent the degree of certainty, the higher the basic worth will be. The basic incentive for a 90% degree of certainty, with a relating ÃŽ ± estimation of 0.10, is 1.64. The basic incentive for a 99% degree of certainty, with a relating ÃŽ ± estimation of 0.01, is 2.54. Test Size The main other number that we have to utilize the recipe to compute the safety buffer is the example size, meant by n in the equation. We at that point take the square foundation of this number. Because of the area of this number in the above recipe, the bigger the example size that we use, the littler the room for give and take will be. Huge examples are consequently desirable over littler ones. In any case, since measurable examining requires assets of time and cash, there are limitations to the amount we can expand the example size. The nearness of the square root in the recipe implies that quadrupling the example size will just a large portion of the room for give and take. A Few Examples To understand the recipe, let’s take a gander at two or three models. What is the room for mistakes for a basic arbitrary example of 900 individuals at a 95% ​level of confidence?By utilization of the table we have a basic estimation of 1.96, thus the wiggle room is 1.96/(2 √ 900 0.03267, or about 3.3%.What is the safety buffer for a basic irregular example of 1600 individuals at a 95% degree of confidence?At a similar degree of certainty as the principal model, expanding the example size to 1600 gives us a wiggle room of 0.0245 or about 2.5%.