The second element signifies 'wild boar,' and from other sources we know that this animal was a sacred one in Babylonia, as among other Semitic nations.[81] Its flesh, on certain days of the Babylonian calendar, was forbidden to be eaten, from which we are permitted to conclude that these days were dedicated to the animal, and the prohibition represents perhaps the traces of some old religious festival.

May Nin-shakh therefore have been a 'swine deity,' just as Nergal is symbolized by the 'lion'?
In both cases the animal would be a symbol of the violent and destructive character of the god.
The ferocious character of the 'swine' would naturally result in assigning to Nin-shakh warlike attributes; and as a matter of fact he is identified at times with Ninib.

His subordinate position, however, is indicated by his being called the 'servant,' generally of En-lil, occasionally also of Anu, and as such he bears the name of Pap-sukal,[82] _i.e._, 'divine messenger.' Rim-Sin builds a temple to Nin-shakh at Uruk, and from its designation as his 'favorite dwelling place' we may conclude that Rim-Sin only restores or enlarges an ancient temple of the deity.

In the light of this, the relationship above set forth between Nin-girsu, Nin-gish-zida, and Nin-shakh becomes somewhat clearer.

The former, the local deity of Girsu, would naturally be called by the kings 'the lord of the true sceptre,' while the subordination of Girsu as a quarter of Lagash finds its reflection in the relationship of master and servant pictured as existing between En-lil and Nin-girsu.
Again, the warlike character of the patron deity of Girsu would lead to an identification with Nin-shakh of Uruk, possessing the same traits; and the incorporation of Uruk as a part of the same empire which included Lagash and its quarters, would be the last link bringing about the full equation between the three.