-*.
- ---y -- - - - - - --- I --~~~
º
º
-
% |
||
%














Cbe pigtorical ºtrieg for Bible Šetubcmtg.
EDITED BY
PROFEssoR CHARLES F. KENT, PH.D., of Yale University,
And
Professor FRANK K. SANDERS, Ph.D., of Yale University.
Čfolume VI.
A HISTORY
OF THE
BABY LONIANS AND ASSYRIAN S.


THE HISTORICAL SERIES FOR BIBLE STUDENTS,
Edited by Professor CHARLEs F. KENT, Ph.D., of Yale University,
and Professor FRANK K. SANDERS, Ph.D., of Yale University.
In response to a widespread demand for non-technical yet scholarly and reli.
able guides to the study of the history, literature, and teaching of the Old
and New Testaments, and of the contemporary history and literature, this series
aims to present in concise and attractive form the results of investigation and
exploration in these broad fields. Based upon thoroughly critical scholarship, it
will emphasize assured and positive rather than transitional positions. The series
as a whole is intended to present a complete and connected picture of the social,
political, and religious life of the men and peoples who figure most prominently in
the biblical records.
Each volume will be complete in itself, treating comprehensively a given sub-
ject or period. It will also refer freely to the biblical and monumental sources,
and to the standard authorities. Convenience of size, clearness of presentation,
and helpfulness to the student, will make the series particularly well adapted for
(1) practical text-books for college, seminary, and university classes; (2) hand-
books for the use of Bible classes, clubs, and guilds; (3) guides for individual
study; and (4) books for general reference.
I. HISTORY OF THE HEBREW PEOPLE.
1. The United Kingdom. Sixth edi- CHARLEs, F. KENT, Ph.D., Professor of
tion. Biblical Literature, Yale University.
2. The Divided Kingdom. Sixth edi-
tion.
II. History of THE JEWISH PEOPLE.
3. The Babylonian, Persian, and Greek CHARLEs F. KENT, Ph.D., Professor of
Periods. Biblical Literature, Yale University.
4. The Maccabean and Roman Period JAMrs S. RIGGs, D.D., Professor of Bib-
(including New Testament Times). lical Criticism, Auburn Theological Sem-
1nary.
III. CONTEMPORARY OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY.
5. History of the Egyptians. JAMEs H. BREASTED, Ph.D., Assistant
Professor of Semitic Languages and
Egyptology, The University of Chicago.
6. History of the Babylonians and George S. Goodspeed, Ph.D., Professor
Assyrians. of Ancient History, The University of
Chicago.
IV. NEW TESTAMENT HISTORIES.
7. The Life of Jesus. Rush RHEes, President of the University
of Rochester.
8. The Apostolic Age. George T. Purves, Ph.D., D.D., late
Professor of New Testament Literature
and Exegesis, Princeton Theological
Seminary.
V. OUTLINES FOR THE STUDY OF BIBLICAL
HISTORY AND LITERATURE.
9. From Earliest Times to the Cap- Frank K. SANDERs, Ph.D., Professor
tivity. of Biblical Literature, Yale University.
Io. From the Exile to 200 A.D.
Volumes 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 Now Ready.








A HISTORY
OF THE
BABYLONIANS AND ASSYRIANS
BY
GEORGE STEPHEN GOODSPEED, Ph.D.
PROFESSOR OF ANCIENT HISTORY IN THE
- UNIVERSITY of CHICAGO
WITH A MAP AND PLANS
N E W YORK
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
1902
C.


Copyright, 1902
BY CHARLEs Scrub NER's SoNs
Published October, 1902
º
- º --
ſº - º
FEB 4 1903
UNIVERSITY PRESS - JOHN WILSON
AND SON - CAMBRIDGE, U. S. A.


3m 99¢moriam
C. R. G.
JANUARY 20, 1900





PR E FA C E
THE preparation of this volume has occupied a much
longer time than was anticipated when the invitation
of the editors to contribute to this series was accepted.
The new materials, constantly supplied by the inde-
fatigable activity of excavators and by the scientific
investigation of philological and historical scholars,
require the unceasing adjustment, enlargement, and
revision of historical conclusions, and force one quite
to despair of reaching anything like finality. The his-
torian of Babylonia and Assyria, therefore, must be
satisfied to sum up fairly and fully the information at
present in hand without undue appreciation of new
and tentative theories. Accordingly, the present work
finds its justification in the desirability of putting a
compact, popular, and fairly comprehensive sketch of
the history of these ancient states, as it is to-day con-
ceived, into the hands of all who are interested in the
progress of human civilization in its earliest stages,
and especially in the development of the peoples who
came into so close relations with the Hebrews. It is
becoming increasingly evident that the Old Testament
in all its elements—literary, historical, and religious—
cannot be adequately understood without relating them
to the history of all the peoples round about Israel,
and especially to that of the Babylonians and Assyri-


viii PREFACE
ans, who exercised so potent and permanent an influ-
ence upon the fortunes and the thoughts of the Chosen
People.
A word is desirable concerning some special features
of the book.
(1) The “Bibliography” does not pretend to be com-
plete, but only to contain the outstanding works in the
vast field.
(2) The “References” are intended not merely to
aid the reader in widening the range of his knowledge
of facts and details concerning the subject under con-
sideration, but also to guide him in special investigation
of important topics.
(3) The spelling of the proper names does not rigidly
follow any body of principles. When a name has be-
come domesticated in a popular form, that form has
usually been chosen. Otherwise it has been sought
to give an orthographically accurate reproduction of
the original. Often, at the first use of a name, hyphens
have been employed to indicate its component parts.
In the index of persons and places, an attempt, doubt-
less quite imperfect, has been made to indicate the
proper pronunciation of each name. No one can be
more cognizant than the author of the inadequate re-
sults achieved in respect to the whole matter.
(4) The map has been prepared with the purpose of
indicating the larger number of the places mentioned
in the text. Accordingly, some localities, the positions
of which with our present knowledge can be deter-
mined only tentatively, have been set down with what
may seem to scholars not a little audacity. The de-
sirability of being able to follow the description of a
campaign or to fix the location of a city mentioned


PREFACE ix
has induced me to run the risk of seeming to be wise
above what is known.
My obligations to the scholars who for half a cen-
tury have been working in the Assyriological field are
manifest on every page of this work. Special mention
should, however, be made where unusual service has
been rendered, although I despair of making anything
like complete acknowledgment. Abundant use has
been made of the admirable series of translations
contained in the Assyrian and Babylonian Literature,
edited by Professor R. F. Harper. I am grateful to my
colleague and friend, Professor Harper, for the cordial
way in which he has assented to my request to employ
these translations. To my colleagues, Professors Ira
M. Price and Benjamin Terry, who have read the
proofs of the work throughout with critical and pains-
taking zeal, I am indebted far more than words can
express for their invaluable assistance. I am likewise
under obligation to my uncle, Dr. T. W. Goodspeed,
who has rendered a similar service in connection with
the manuscript. I have been favored with the gen-
erous help of another colleague, Professor W. Muss-
Arnolt, who has placed at my disposal his admirable
bibliographical knowledge and his wide and thorough
acquaintance with the Assyrian field. If the work shall
be found to represent, in some approximate measure,
the present standard of Assyriological science, and to
be reasonably free from faults of expression, the result
is due in large part to the genial and sympathetic ser-
vice of these friends, although they are not to be held
accountable for either its defects or its opinions. To
the editors of the series to which the volume belongs
I would express my thanks for their encouragement


X PREFACE
and criticism in the course of its preparation ; to the
publishers, Messrs. Charles Scribner's Sons, for their
generous co-operation in securing its typographical ex-
cellence, and to the many friends who have shown so
warm an interest in the appearance of the book. I
hope that to some extent it may serve the cause of
sound learning, and be worthy, both in spirit and con-
tent, to stand beside the preceding volumes of the
series.
G. S. G.
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO,
August, 1902.


CON TENTS
INTRODUCTION
PAGE
I. THE LANDs OF THE EUPHRATES AND TIGRIs . 3
II. THE ExcAvATIONS IN BABYLONIA AND Assyria 14
III. THE LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE . . . . . 25
IV. CHRONoLogY AND History . . . . . . . 37
PART I
THE CITY STATES OF BABYLONIA AND THEIR UNIFICATION
UNDER BABYLON TO 2000 B. C.
I. THE DAWN OF HISTORY . . . . . . . . 49
II. Movements TowARD ExPANSION AND UNIFICA-
TION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
III. CIVILIZATION OF OLD BABYLONIA: PoliticAL
AND SOCIAL LIFE . . . . . . . . . . 71
IV. CIVILIZATION OF OLD BABYLONIA: LITERATURE, ,
ScIENCE, ART, AND RELIGION . . . . . . 86
V. THE TIMEs of KHAMMURABI of BABYLoN.
2300–2100 B.C. . . . . . . . . . . . 107


CONTENTS
WIII. THE LAST DAYS OF SPLENDoR. As HURBANIPAL.
668–626 B.C. . . . . . . . . . . .
IX. THE FALL OF Assyr1A. 626–606 B. C. - - -
PART IV
THE NEW BABYLONIAN (OR KALDEAN) EMPIRE
I. THE HEIRS OF ASSYRIA . . . . . . .
II. NEBUCHADNEzzAR AND HIs SUCCESSORS
III. BABYLONIA UNDER THE KALDEANS .
IV. THE FALL OF BABYLON
PAGE
302
320
333
337
367
CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY . . . . . . . . .
A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . .
REFERENCES . . .
INDEx of NAMES AND SUBJECTs . . . . . . . .
INDEx of OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCEs . . . . .
377
385
393
405
422
MAP – THE World of ORIENTAL ANTIQUITY Frontispiece
PLANs of NINEveH AND BABYLON . . Opposite page 278





INTRODUCTION





I
THE LANDS OF THE EUPHRATES AND TIGRIS
1. IN the lofty table-land of Armenia, lying some
seven thousand feet above sea level, and guarded on the
south by mountain walls, the rivers Tigris and Euphra-
tes have their origin. Breaking through the southern
range, the one stream on its eastern, the other on its
western flank, they flow at first speedily down a
steep incline from an altitude of eleven hundred feet
in a general southeasterly direction, draw closer to one
another as they descend, and, after traversing a region
measuring as the crow flies over eight hundred miles
in length, issue as one stream into the Persian gulf.
This region from the northern mountains to the
southern sea, dominated and nourished by the two
rivers, is the scene of the historical development to be
traced in this volume. A striking difference in geo-
logical structure divides it into two parts of nearly
equal length. For the first four hundred miles the
country falls off from the mountains in a gentle slope.
The difference in elevation between the northern and
southern extremities aggregates about a thousand
feet. A plain of “secondary formation ” is thus made,
composed of limestone and selenite, through which
the rivers have cut their way. From this point to the
gulf succeeds a flat alluvial district, the product of


4 INTRODUCTION
the deposit of the rivers, made up of sand, pebbles,
clay, and loam, upon which the rivers have built their
channels and over which they spread their waters in
the season of inundation.
2. The former of these two divisions was called by
the Greeks Mesopotamia, a term which they probably
borrowed from the Semites, to whom the district, or
at least a part of it, was known in Hebrew phrase as
Aram naharayim, “Aram of the two rivers,” or to
the Arameans as Béth naharin, “region (house) of the
rivers.” Marked out by the rivers and the northern
mountains into an irregular triangle, drifting out over
the Euphrates into the desert on the southwest, and ris-
ing over the Tigris to the Zagros mountains on the east
and northeast, this region occupies an area of more than
fifty-five thousand square miles, in size about equal to
the State of Illinois. Its physical contour and charac-
teristics separate it into two fairly well-defined districts.
In the northern and higher portion, isolated ranges,
thrown off from the central chains, diversify the plain,
which is watered by the mountain streams gather-
ing into rivers of considerable size, like the Balikh
and the Khabur. Limestone and, in some places,
volcanic rock form the basis of a fertile soil. South
and southeast of the Khabur the waters cease, gypsum
and marl predominate, and the plain, down to the
beginning of the alluvium, becomes a veritable steppe,
the home of wandering Bedouin. The northern part,
at least that west and north of the Khabur, was prob-
ably the region known to the Egyptians as Nahrina,
and in the Roman period constituted the province of
Mesopotamia. On the other hand, Xenophon seems
to call the southern portion Arabia; the term is


THE BABYLONIAN PLAIN 5
a striking evidence of the character of the district as
steppe land, hardly to be distinguished from the west-
ern desert, and occupied by the same wandering tribes.
3. The second and southern division of the great
Tigro-Euphrates valley is entirely the gift of the
rivers, a shifting delta, over which they pour them-
selves from the higher and solider formation of Meso-
potamia. The proximity of the mountains in the
northeast gives the whole plain a southwestern slope
with the result that the Euphrates has spread over a
portion of the southwestern desert and thereby added
a considerable district to the proper alluvial region.
Moreover, the process of land-making still continues
in the south, the waters of the gulf being pushed
back at the rate of about seventy-two feet every year.
At present, this division comprises about thirty thou-
sand square miles, but calculations, based upon the
increase of the land about the Persian gulf, make it
appear that in the ancient period it contained only
twenty-three thousand square miles. Thus it was
about equal in area to the southern half of the State
of Louisiana, which it also resembled in being largely
made up of alluvial and swampy districts that are the
deltas of river systems. It lay also between the same
degrees of latitude (about 30–33° N.). This was the
land known to the Greeks, from the name of its
capital city, Babylon, as Babylonia. It is an “inter-
minable moorland,” slightly undulating in the central
districts and falling away imperceptibly toward the
south into swamps and marshes, where the waters of
the rivers and the gulf meet and are indistinguishable.
The plain also stretches away toward the east, as
in Mesopotamia, beyond the Tigris for a distance of


6 INTRODUCTION
from thirty to fifty miles, until it meets the mountains;
while, on the western side, across the Euphrates, it
merges into the desert at a distance of twenty or
thirty miles, where a line of low hills checks the
river's overflow and gathers it into lakes and morasses.
4. In these regions of Mesopotamia and Babylonia,
so diversified in physical characteristics, the one essen-
tial unifying element was the rivers. To them a large
section of the land owed its existence; the fertility and
the prosperity of the whole was dependent upon them;
they were the chief means of communication, the main
channels of trade, the distributors of civilization. It
was in recognition of this that the ancient inhabitants
called the Euphrates “the life of the land,” and the
Tigris “the bestower of blessing.” Both are inunda-
ting rivers, nourished by mountain snows. Yet, though
they lie so near together and finally become one, they
exhibit many striking differences. The Euphrates is
the longer. It rises on the northern side of the Taurus
range and winds its way through the plateau in a
southwesterly direction as though making for the
Mediterranean which is only a hundred miles away.
At about latitude 37° 30', it turns due south and breaks
into the plain. It runs in this direction for a hun-
dred miles, then bending around toward the east, finds
at last its true southeastern course and, covering in
all a distance of seventeen hundred and eighty miles,
unites with the Tigris and the sea. Unlike most great
rivers, its lower course is less full and majestic than
its upper waters. In its passage through the Mesopo-
tamian plain it receives but two tributaries, the Balikh
and the Khabur, and these from the upper portion.
Thereafter it makes its way alone between desert and


THE EUPHRATES AND TIGRIS 7
steppe with waning power. From the mouth of the
Khabur to the alluvium its width gradually diminishes
from four hundred to two hundred and fifty yards;
its velocity, from four to two and one half miles an
hour. At the southern boundary of Mesopotamia
it spreads out in canals and pools and swamps, some
of its water reaching the Tigris; but it recovers its
former greatness farther down, receiving in its turn
contributions from its sister stream. The Tigris has
its source on the southeastern slopes of the Taurus,
and makes a much more direct and speedy journey
to the sea. Its length is eleven hundred and forty-six
miles; its depth, volume, and velocity much greater
than those of the Euphrates. It receives numerous
tributaries from the eastern mountains not far distant
— in the north the Subnat, toward the middle of its
course the upper and lower Zab, farther to the south
the Turnat and the Radanu, -- all streams of con-
siderable size, which swell its waters as they descend.
The inundation of the Tigris begins earlier and is fin-
ished before that of the Euphrates. The latter, with
its more northern source, rises more slowly and stead-
ily, and its high waters continue longer. Accordingly,
the whole inundation period, including that of both
rivers, is spread over half the year, from March to
September (Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies, I. pp.
12 f.). The water sometimes rises very high. Loftus,
in the spring of 1849, found that the Tigris had risen
twenty-two and one half feet, which was about five
feet above the ordinary height (Chaldaea and Susiana,
. 7).
p 5. In consequence of the pouring down of these
immense volumes of water, the rivers have dug chan-


8 INTRODUCTION
nels through the rock of the Mesopotamian plain.
The Euphrates, in particular, flows through a can-
yon from two to three miles wide and sunk from
one hundred to three hundred feet below the surface
of the steppe. On the flats at the base of the
cliffs, and on the islands in mid-stream, thick groves
of tamarisk alternate with patches of arable land,
where usually stand the few towns which the traveller
finds in his journey along the river and which consti-
tute the stations of his pilgrimage. Likewise, the
streams running into the Tigris are said to burrow
deep in the marl, forming ditches in the plateau, diffi-
cult to cross. In the alluvial region, on the other
hand, the rivers raise themselves above the surround-
ing country, while hollowing out their beds, so
that to-day the sides of the ancient canals rise like
formidable ridges across the level plain and their
dry beds form the most convenient roads for the
Cara, VanS.
6. Mesopotamia and Babylonia, although lying be-
tween latitude 31° and 37°, do not show climatic con-
ditions so widely diverse as might be expected. The
year is divided into two seasons. From November to
March the rains fall; then the drought ensues. The
heat in summer is oppressive throughout the entire
valley, and, when the frequent sand storms from
Arabia are raging, is almost unbearable. The rainy
season shows greater diversity of temperature. The
northern plain, cut off from the mild airs of the Med-
iterranean by the western ranges, is exposed to the
wintry blasts of the northern mountains. Snow and
ice are not uncommon. In Babylonia, however, frost
is rarely experienced. It is probable that, when the


THE FERTILITY OF BABYLONIA 9
canals distributed the waters more generally over the
surface of the country, the extremes of temperature
were greatly reduced. Even in modern times, travel-
lers in Babylonia speak of the remarkable dryness and
regularity of the climate, the serenity of the sky and
the transparency of the air, the wonderful starlight,
soft and enveloping, and the coolness of the nights,
even in the hot season.
7. The fertility of Babylonia was the wonder of the
ancient world. The classical passage of Herodotus is
still the best description: “This territory is of all that
we know the best by far for producing grain; as to
trees, it does not even attempt to bear them, either
fig or vine or olive, but for producing grain it is so
good that it returns as much as two hundred-fold for
the average, and, when it bears at its best, it produces
three hundred-fold. The blades of the wheat and bar-
ley there grow to be full four fingers broad; and from
millet and sesame seed, how large a tree grows, I know
myself, but shall not record, being well aware that
even what has already been said relating to the
crops produced has been enough to cause disbelief in
those who have not visited Babylonia” (Herod., I.
193). This marvellous yield, however, was under
the hand of man, who by a system of canals brought
the water of the rivers over every foot of ground.
Apart from that, the land, rich as was its soil, lay ex-
posed to floods in the winter and to parching heat and
desert sand in the summer. Thick masses of reeds,
springing up in the water-courses, produced morasses.
The absence of trees of any size was a serious defect.
To man, also, is due the introduction of the date-palm,
the fig, and the vine, the two former flourishing in


METALS, STONE AND BITUMEN 11
9. There was neither metal nor stone to be found
in all the borders of Babylonia. Northern Mesopota-
mia was better supplied because of neighboring moun-
tains. From them were procured limestone and
basalt, marble and alabaster. Copper and lead were
obtained from the same source, as well as iron. The
waters of the steppe supplied salt. In both north and
south a substance was found which made the region
famous in the ancient world. This was bitumen.
On the northern edge of the alluvium, at the modern
town of Hit on the Euphrates, were the renowned
bitumen springs. A recent traveller describes them as
follows: “Directly behind the town are two springs
within thirty feet of one another, from one of which
flows hot water, black with bitumen, while the other
discharges intermittently bitumen, or, after a rain-
storm, bitumen and cold water. . . . Where rocks
crop out in the plain about Hit, they are full of
seams of bitumen’’ (Peters, Nippur, I. p. 160). The
less known bitumen wells of the north are on the
plain east of the Tigris at the modern Karduk.
10. The present condition of these lands illustrates
their primitive aspects. The alluvial deposits, indeed,
have steadily pushed back the waters of the gulf
which once washed the shores of Mesopotamia, but
the rivers still pour their turbid floods through the
gypsum canyons and overspread the lowlands in times
of inundation. Traces of human occupation and
activity intensify the impression of the recurrence
of nature's former supremacy. Canals have silted up
and at their mouths, where the water gathers in the
pools, luxuriant wild growths of reeds and rushes
flourish in the slime. The sand swirls unhindered


12 INTRODUCTION
over the steppe and heaps up about the mounds where
once cities stood. Lions lurk in the jungles, and
wandering Arabs camp over the plains. Extremes of
heat and cold alternately parch and freeze the ground.
Fevers hang about the marshes, and the pestilence
breeds in the lagoons. The Tigris and the Euphrates,
now flowing between “avenues of ruins,” sweep away
dykes, once reared to curb the power of these mighty
streams, tear down their banks, once lined with pal-
aces, riot at their will through channels made by their
own irresistible waters, and bring with them the de-
posits of the mountain sides to enrich the soil of
their deltas. A country of still splendid possibilities,
destined sometime again to be the highway of the
nations, it is a speaking testimony to the power of
man. Before his advent it was uninhabitable and
wild. When he had subdued it and cultivated it, it
was the garden of the earth, the seat and the symbol
of Paradise.
11. The valley of the Tigris and Euphrates was
anything but an isolated region. Unlike Egypt, it
was open on almost every side. On the south, was
the Persian gulf, along whose western shore lay the
rich coasts of Oman, opening into southern Arabia,
and beyond them, to the far southeast, India. To the
east rose the massive and complex ranges of Zagros,
over which led the passes up to the eastern plateau,
and from whose heights the descent was easy, by
pleasant stages of hill and plain, into the fertile
Babylonian bottoms. Northward was the same moun-
tain wall, behind which stretched out the high and
diversified Armenian plateau, with its lakes and fertile
valleys, opened up by the upper reaches of the Tigris


GEOGRAPHY AND HISTORY 13
and its tributaries. Westward the plain melted into
the Arabian desert, except at the upper extremity,
where the Euphrates swung around by the slopes of
the Syrian hills, and thus made the highway into the
regions watered by the moist wind of the Mediter-
ranean, -into Syria and Palestine and to the islands
of the sea.
12. Such was the theatre of the activities of the
peoples who made the earliest history of mankind and
about whom centred the life of the ancient East. The
land was admirably fitted, nay, rather, predestined, by
its physical characteristics and position to produce
and foster such a history. A world in itself, it lay
in close touch, in unavoidable contact, with the
larger world on every side, upon whose destinies
its inhabitants were to exercise so impressive and so
permanent an influence.


II
THE EXCAVATIONS IN BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
13. THE kingdoms which in the regions just de-
scribed flourished during the millenniums of the
world's youth, while they left a deep impression upon
the imagination of later ages, were cut off suddenly and
by an alien race, at a time when interest in preserving
the annals of the past by means of historical narrative
had not yet been born among men. Their names
appeared in the records of that Jewish people which,
though conquered by them, had outlived its masters,
or survived in traditions which magnified and dis-
torted the achievements of kings who had flourished
during some brief years of Babylonio-Assyrian
history. Soon the centre of human progress
passed from the Mesopotamian valley westward to
the regions of southern Europe. Assyria and
Babylonia were forgotten. Their cities, too, reared
upon platforms of sun-dried bricks, and raised in
solid masses of the same fragile material to no great
height, had been ruined by fire and sword, and grad-
ually melted away under the disintegrating forces
of nature until they became huge and shapeless
mounds of earth without anything to identify them
as having been once the abodes of men. The im-
pression made by these ruins has been strikingly de-
scribed by Layard:


THE CENTURIES OF FORGETFULNESS 15
[The observer] is now at a loss to give any form to
the rude heaps upon which he is gazing. Those of whose
works they are the remains, unlike the Roman and the
Greek, have left no visible traces of their civilization, or
of their arts: their influence has long since passed
away. The more he conjectures, the more vague the re-
sults appear. The scene around is worthy of the ruin
he is contemplating; desolation meets desolation; a
feeling of awe succeeds to wonder; for there is noth-
ing to relieve the mind, to lead to hope, or to tell of
what has gone by. These huge mounds of Assyria
made a deeper impression upon me, gave rise to more
serious thought and more earnest reflection, than the
temples of Balbec or the theatres of Ionia (Nineveh and
its Remains, I. p. 29).
14. It is not surprising, therefore, that men came
to have only vague and often fantastic notions of
these ancient empires, and that the very sites of their
long famous capitals were lost. For fifteen hundred
years Nineveh was but a name. Babylon came to be
identified with Bagdad on the Tigris, or with the ruin-
heap, not far distant, at Akerkuf. Here and there was
a traveller, like the Jew, Benjamin of Tudela, who in
1160 visited Mosul and beheld on the other side of the
Tigris what he thought to be the site of Nineveh, and
at a three days’ journey from Bagdad found, near Hillah
on the Euphrates, ruins identified by him with those
of Babylon and of the tower of Babel. Both of these
sites afterwards were proved to be the true locations
of these cities. European geographers, even at the
end of the sixteenth century, were in complete uncer-
tainty on the subject. A century and a half passed
before trustworthy scientific observations were made


THE PREPARATORY PERIOD 17
British East India Company in Bagdad, in 1811, visited
and studied the ruins of Babylon, and, beginning in
1820, made similar investigations of the mounds of
Nineveh. In these visits he made surveys, opened
trenches, and prepared careful plans of the sites.
He afterwards published his results in memoirs. The
inscriptions, engraved gems, and other objects
gathered by him in these researches were forwarded
to England and deposited in the British Museum,
forming at that time the most considerable collection
of the kind in the world. Some years before, the
British East India Company had ordered its represen-
tatives in Babylonia to gather and forward to Eng-
land ancient Babylonian antiquities, and among the
objects obtained was the now famous cylinder of
Nebuchadrezzar II., known as the East India House
inscription. Michaux, a French botanist, working in
the vicinity of Ctesiphon a little before 1802, had
chanced upon a marble object marked with strange
signs and figures. It proved to be a fine “boun-
dary stone" with an inscription of Mardukbal-
iddin I. Yet so inconsiderable were all these
objects that Layard was justified in his statement,
made about 1845, that four years before “a case
scarcely three feet square inclosed all that remained,
not only of the great city, Nineveh, but of Babylon
itself!” (Nin. and its Rem., I. p. 17). Rich's results
aroused wide-spread interest, not only in England,
but in America. In 1849 Edward Robinson, referring
to them, declared, “we can all remember the pro-
found impression made upon the public mind, even
by these cursory memorials of Nineveh and Baby-
lon” (Preface to American ed. of Layard's Nin.
2


18 INTRODUCTION
and its Rem.). Twenty years were to pass before
this interest was to issue in practical activity, years
filled indeed with the work of scholars, seeking to
solve the riddle of the language of the inscrip-
tions, and particularly with the splendid labor of
Sir Henry Rawlinson in copying and studying
the Behistun inscriptions of Persia. During this
time, however, the mounds of Mesopotamia were
untouched.
17. In 1842, P. C. Botta was sent from France as
consul to Mosul, and with his arrival begins a new
period (1842–1854) which, by reason of the character
both of the work and the workers, may be termed the
Heroic Period of excavation. Botta began digging on
the two great mounds of Nineveh, marked off by Rich,
and called Nebiyunus and Kouyunjik. Failing of suc-
cess here, in 1843, at the suggestion of a peasant, he
removed to Khorsabad, a mound about four miles to
the northeast, where his digging immediately resulted
in the discovery of a series of buildings of great ex-
tent, adorned with wonderful sculptures, though
in parts damaged by fire. The site proved to be Dur
Sharrukin, a fortress, palace, and temple of Sargon,
Assyria's greatest king. Botta and his successor,
Victor Place, spent more than ten years in uncovering
this palace and working upon other neighboring sites.
The material was sent to Paris, and constitutes one
of the chief treasures of the Louvre. In 1845, A. H.
Layard, an English traveller and government official,
familiar by many years of wandering in the Orient
with the peoples and languages of Mesopotamia, was
enabled, through the munificence of the English min-
ister at Constantinople, to fulfil a long-cherished


LAYARD AND RASSAM 19
desire by beginning excavations in this region. He
chose the mound of Nimrud, fifteen miles south of
Nineveh. Here, within two years (1845—1847), he
unearthed three palaces belonging, respectively, to
Ashurnaçirpal, Shalmaneser II., and Esarhaddon, in
one of which was found the famous black obelisk that
contains the name of Jehu of Israel. The site itself
was found to be the city of Kalkhi (Calah), made the
capital of Assyria by Shalmaneser I. During the
years 1849–1851 Layard devoted himself to the two
mounds of Nineveh, and uncovered at Kouyunjik
the palace of Sennacherib, and at Nebiyunus those
of Adadmirari III., Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon. In
the spring of 1852 his excavations, pursued at Kalah
Sherghat, forty miles south of Nimrud, resulted in
the identification of that mound as Assur, the earli-
est Assyrian capital, and the discovery of the cylinder
inscription of Tiglathpileser I. Layard's work was
continued from 1852 to 1854 by Hormuzd Rassam, his
assistant, who opened the palace of Tiglathpileser I.
at Assur and obtained two other copies of his cylin-
der inscription. At Nineveh he discovered in 1853,
on the northern part of the mound Kouyunjik, the
palace of Ashurbanipal, from one chamber of which
he removed the famous library of over twenty thou-
sand tablets. Nimrud yielded to him the Shamshi
Adad monolith, and Nineveh, also, the two obelisks
of Ashurnaçirpal. The larger part of the objects ob-
tained by both Layard and Rassam was sent to the
British Museum, and became the basis of its incom-
parable collection of Assyrian antiquities.
18. In Babylonia, during these years, the work done
was considerable, but not so brilliant in results. Lay-


20 INTRODUCTION
ard visited Babylonia in 1851, and experimented with
diggings at Babylon and Niffer, the ancient Nippur,
with little success. From 1849 to 1854, with the ex-
ception of a year spent at Susa, W. K. Loftus worked
on the mounds of Senkereh and Warka, the latter
of which he identified beyond doubt with Uruk, the
former being the ancient Larsam. From both cities
he obtained metal and clay ornaments, and some
choice clay tablets, besides coffins illustrative of the
ancient methods of burial. In 1854 J. E. Taylor
excavated at the ruins of a temple at Mugheir
which was found to be the city of Ur, and at Abu
Shahrein, identified with Eridu, the southernmost
and oldest city of Babylonia. The same year Sir
Henry Rawlinson, directing diggings at Birs Nimrud
near Babylon, opened up the great temple there,
and obtained from its foundations some cylinder in-
scriptions of Nebuchadrezzar II. A French expedi-
tion led by Fresnel and Oppert was occupied from
1852 to 1854 in and around Babylon, the results of
which, while not rich in objects obtained, were of
special value for Babylonian topography. With the
year 1854 the excavations halted. The twelve years
had been productive of results brilliant beyond all
expectation. These had been gained in large meas-
ure by men who labored for the most part alone,
having usually small sums of money available, hin-
dered and harassed on every side by fever, famine,
and flood, by attacks of Arabs, by the outbreaks of
fanatical populations, and by the stolid obstinacy
and arrant cupidity of Turkish officials, — obstacles
which would have daunted less resolute and enthusi-
astic workers.


THE MODERN SCIENTIFIC PERIOD 21
19. Another gap of two decades now intervened.
The vast mass of material accumulated by the exca-
vators had satiated the appetite. A new world of
ancient life had, within a short space of twelve years,
been thrown open to science, — a world speaking an
unknown tongue and revealing a great, but strange,
literature, architecture, and art. The demand was
for the study of what was already in hand, not for
the search after new things; for the organization
and publication of the results of excavation, not for
the further heaping up of what could not be under-
stood. These decades saw the issue of the first three
volumes of “The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western
Asia,” edited for the British Museum by Sir Henry
Rawlinson, — an indispensable companion for all future
students. During the same period, also, the secret of
the language was penetrated, and Assyrian documents
were being read with increasing ease and accuracy.
20. In 1873 the revival of excavation began with
the expedition of George Smith to Nineveh. His
purpose illustrates the new point of view reached dur-
ing the intervening decades. Among the clay tablets
brought back by Rassam from Ashurbanipal's library,
were fragments of the Babylonian story of the Deluge.
These, as translated by George Smith, aroused im-
mense interest, which led to the desire that search be
made for the missing fragments. The explorers of
the Heroic Period had uncovered palaces, bas-reliefs,
and statues, but had given the insignificant tablets
secondary consideration. From the library chamber
of Ashurbanipal's palace Rassam had extracted only
those tablets which could be conveniently reached.
With the power to read attained meanwhile, the tab-


22 INTRODUCTION
lets had become fully as important as the sculptures,
if not more so. George Smith's expedition indicated,
therefore, that the Modern Scientific Period of excava-
tion had begun. Its end is not yet in sight, since its
goal is the investigation of all feasible localities in
the Mesopotamian valley, with the purpose of throw-
ing all available light upon the history and life of
these ancient peoples. Another characteristic of this
period is the careful selection of locations, and the
studied organization of parties of excavators, well
financed and provided with all desirable tools for in-
vestigation. The results have already been startling.
George Smith's work, begun in 1873, was continued
in 1874 and 1876. In that year, on his return from
Nineveh, he died at Aleppo, a martyr to his self-sacri-
ficing devotion to his task. He had obtained many
more books from the Ashurbanipal library, including
some of the precious Deluge fragments, and had pur-
chased for the British Museum some valuable tablets
from Babylonia. H. Rassam, the veteran of the earlier
period, was sent out to take his place. From 1877
to 1882 he had great success. In Assyria his chief
“finds” were the Ashurnaçirpal temple in Nimrud, the
splendid cylinder of Ashurbanipal at Kouyunjik, and
the unique and historically important bronze doors of
the temple of Shalmaneser II., found at Balawat, fif-
teen miles east of Mosul. His work in Babylonia
was equally brilliant. At Babylon, the problem of
the location of the ancient buildings in the different
mounds, a subject beset with extraordinary difficul-
ties, was attacked by him, and he identified the
famous Hanging Gardens with the mound known as
Babil. A palace of Nebuchadrezzar II. at Birs Nim-


RECENT EXCAVATIONS 23
rud (Borsippa) was also uncovered by him. His
excavations at Tell Ibrahim proved that it was the
site of the ancient city of Kutha. An experimental
examination of the mound at Abu Habba, in 1881,
opened up to this fortunate excavator the famous
temple of the sun at Sippar. There he found cylin-
ders of Nabuna'id (Nabonidus), and the stone tablet
of Nabu-apal-iddin of Babylon with its ritual bas-
relief and inscription, besides some fifty thousand
clay tablets containing the temple accounts.
21. Within recent years, beginning in 1877, a series
of discoveries of first-rate importance has been made
by the French consul at Bassorah, de Sarzec, in the
Babylonian mound of Tello. He has identified this
spot with the city of Shirpurla (Lagash), which had
a prominent place in early Babylonian history. In
the course of his several campaigns he has unearthed
a truly bewildering variety of materials illustrative
of these primitive ages. Palaces and statues, stelae
and bas-reliefs, vases of silver, and a library contain-
ing as many as thirty thousand tablets, are among his
treasures, which were purchased, or otherwise secured,
by the French government for the Louvre Museum.
Kings hitherto unknown, and a world of artistic
achievement undreamed of for these early ages, have
come into view. A similar result has followed the
work of the American Expedition, under the auspices
of the University of Pennsylvania, which began, in
1888, to excavate at Niffer, the site of old Nippur, a
centre of early Babylonian religious life. The massive
temple called Ekur has been uncovered, on which
kings of all periods of Babylonian history built. Dur-
ing each successive year of the expedition's activity,


24 INTRODUCTION
new architectural and artistic features, and an increas-
ing number of historical and religious records, have
come to light. More than thirty thousand tablets have
already been obtained, and the recent discovery of the
great temple library opens up a wealth of material
throwing light upon all sides of that ancient life over
which hitherto there has lain almost complete dark-
ness. The Turkish government, stimulated by the
example of other nations, has begun to take steps to
collect material for its museum at Constantinople, to
protect its antiquities from destruction and removal,
and to make excavations upon Assyrian and Babylo-
nian soil. Work at Sippar in 1893 has resulted in
the securing of a number of clay tablets; an important
stele of Nabuna'id has been found at Babylon, and a
bas-relief of Naram Sin, obtained at the head-waters
of the Tigris, has been conveyed to the museum at
Constantinople. A German expedition, excavating
on the site of Babylon, has already made some impor-
tant discoveries. Thus the interest in seeking for the
original records of Assyrian and Babylonian civiliza-
tion was never more keen and active than at the pres-
ent day. Joined, as this interest is, to large resources
and a scientific temper, and enlightened by the experi-
ence of the past, it is destined to push the work of
exploration and excavation in these countries to
still further lengths, until, so far as lies in the power of
the original records to furnish material, the history
and life of these peoples become as well known as are
those of Greece and Rome.


III
THE LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
22. THE discoverers of the long-buried memorials
of Assyria and Babylonia were at first and for a long
time unable to read their message. But side by side
with the work of the explorer and excavator went
continually the investigations of the scholar. The
objects sent back by European excavators and installed
in museums immediately attracted the attention and
enlisted the energetic activity of many students, who
gave themselves to the task of decipherment. Begin-
ning with Georg Friedrich Grotefend, of Hannover,
who, in 1815, published a translation of some brief
inscriptions of the Achemaenian kings of Persia, this
scientific activity was immensely stimulated by the
discoveries and investigations of Sir Henry Rawlinson,
who, after more than fifteen years of study in the East,
published, in 1851, his “Memoir on the Babylonian
and Assyrian Inscriptions” containing the text, trans-
literation, and translation of the Babylonian part of
the Behistun inscription, which records the triumph
of Darius I. of Persia over his enemies. During the
same period the brilliant French savant Jules Oppert,
the Irish scholar Edward Hincks, and the Englishman
Fox Talbot had been making their contributions to the
new linguistic problem. In 1857 the accuracy and


26 INTRODUCTION
permanence of their results were established by a
striking test. Copies of the inscription of Tiglath-
pileser I. of Assyria, recently unearthed, were placed
in the hands of the four scholars, Rawlinson, Oppert,
Hincks, and Fox Talbot, and they were requested
to make, independently of one another, translations
of the inscription in question. A comparison of these
translations showed them to be substantially identical.
A new language had been deciphered, and a new chap-
ter of human history opened for investigation. Since
that time these and other scholars, such as E. Schra-
der, Friedrich Delitzsch, Paul Haupt, A. H. Sayce,
and many more in Europe and America have enlarged,
corrected, and systematized the results attained, until
now the stately science of Assyriology, or the or-
ganized knowledge of the language, literature, and
history of Babylonia and Assyria, has a recognized
place in the hierarchy of learning.
23. The Babylonio-Assyrian writing, as at first dis-
covered in its classical forms, appears at a hasty
glance like a wilderness of short lines running in every
conceivable direction, each line at one end and some-
times at both ends, spreading out into a triangular
mass, or wedge. From this likeness to a wedge is
derived the designation “wedge-shaped” or “cunei-
form " (lat. cuneus), as applied to the characters and
also to the language and literature. Closer examina-
tion reveals a system in this apparent disorder. The
characters are arranged in columns usually running
horizontally, and are read from left to right, the great
majority of the wedges either standing upright or
pointing toward the right. These wedges, arranged
singly or in groups, stand either for complete ideas


THE CUNEIFORM WRITINU, 27
(called “ideograms,” e. g. a single horizontal wedge
represents the preposition in) or for syllables (e. g. a
single horizontal crossed by a single vertical wedge
represents the syllable bar). It would be natural
that, in course of time, the wedges used as signs for
ideas would also be used as syllables, and the same
syllable be represented by different wedges, thus pro-
ducing confusion. This was remedied by placing
another character before the sign for a particular idea
to determine its use in that sense (hence, called a
“determinative ; ” e. g. before all names of gods a
sign meaning “divine being ”) or, after it, a syllabic
character which added the proper ending of the word
to be employed there (hence, called “phonetic com-
plement”). In spite of these devices, many signs
and collocations of signs have so many possible syl-
labic values as to render exactness in the reading very
difficult. There are about five hundred of these dif-
ferent signs used to represent words or syllables,
Their origin is still a subject of discussion among
scholars. The prevailing theory is that they can be
traced back to original pictures representing the ideas
to be conveyed. But, at present, only about fifty out
of the entire number of signs can be thus identified,
and it may be necessary to accept other sources to
account for the rest.
24. The material on which this writing appears is
of various sorts. The characters were incised upon
stone and metal. — on the marbles of palaces, on the
fine hard surfaces of gems, on silver images and on
plates of bronze. There are traces, also, of the use
as writing material of skins, and of a substance re-
sembling the papyrus of ancient Egypt. But that


28 INTRODUCTION
which surpassed all other materials for this purpose
was clay, a fine quality of which was most abundant
in Babylonia, whence the use spread all over the
ancient oriental world. This clay was very carefully
prepared, sometimes ground to an exceeding fineness,
moistened, and moulded into various forms, ordinarily
into a tablet whose average size is about six by two
and one-half inches in superficial area by one inch in
thickness, its sides curving slightly outwards. On
the surface thus prepared the characters were im-
pressed with a stylus, the writing often standing in
columns, and carried over upon the back and sides of
the tablet. The clay was frequently moulded into
cones and barrel-shaped cylinders, having from six
to ten sides on which writing could be inscribed.
These tablets were then dried in the sun or baked in
a furnace, — a process which rendered the writing
practically indestructible, unless the tablet itself was
shattered.
25. This prevailing use of clay was doubtless the
cause of the disappearance of the picture-writing.
The details of a picture could not easily be reproduced;
circles gave way to straight lines joined together;
these were gradually reduced in number; the line
was enlarged at the end into the wedge, for greater
distinctness, until the conventional form of the signs
became established.
26. This method of writing by wedges was adopted
from Babylonia by other peoples, such as those of
ancient Armenia, for their own languages, just as
German may be written in Latin letters. A problem
of serious moment and great difficulty has arisen
because of a similar use of the cuneiform in Babylonia


THE SUMERIAN QUESTION 29
itself. Side by side with cuneiform documents of
the language represented in the bulk of the literature
which has come down to us, and which may be called
the Babylonio-Assyrian, there are some documents,
also in cuneiform, in which the wedges do not have
the meanings which are connected with them in the
Babylonio-Assyrian. In some cases the same docu-
ment is drawn up in two forms, written side by side,
in which the way of reading the characters of one
will not apply to those of the other, although the
meaning of the document in both forms is the same.
Evidently the cuneiform signs are here employed for
two languages. What the philological relations of
these languages may be, has given rise to a lively
controversy. On the one hand, it is claimed that the
two show marked philological similarities which carry
them back to a common linguistic ground, and indi-
cate that they are two modes of expressing one lan-
guage, namely, the Semitic Babylonian. The one
mode, the earlier, which stood in close relation to
the primitive picture-writing, and may be called the
“hieratic,” was superseded in course of time by the
other mode, which became the “common" or “de-
motic,” and is represented in the great mass of Baby-
lonio-Assyrian literature. The former had its origin
in the transition from the ideographic to the phonetic
mode of writing, — a transition which was accom-
panied with “the invention of a set of explanatory
terms, mainly drawn from rare and unfamiliar and
obsolete words expressed by the ideograms.” It was
later developed into an “artificial language” by the
industry of priestly grammarians (McCurdy, History
Prophecy and the Monuments, I. sects. 82 f.). On the


30 INTRODUCTION
other hand, the majority of scholars maintains that
the earlier so-called “hieratic " is an independent and
original language whose peculiar linguistic features
point decidedly to a basis essentially different from
that of the Semitic Babylonian. This language they
regard as hailing from a pre-Semitic population of
Babylonia, the “Sumerians,” whose racial affinities
are not yet satisfactorily determined. The Semitic
Babylonians, coming in later, adopted from them the
cuneiform writing for their own language, while per-
mitting the older speech to continue its life for a
season. Divergence of view so radical in regard to
the same body of linguistic facts can have only one
explanation, — the facts are not decisive and the fun-
damental questions must await final adjudication till
a time when either new documents for philological
investigation are discovered, or light is obtained from
other than linguistic sources.
27. As the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates
formed the common home of Babylonians and Assyr-
ians, so the two peoples possessed a common language,
and their literatures may be regarded as parts of one
continuous development. Centuries before the name
of Assyria appeared in history, the Babylonians pos-
sessed a written language and developed an ample
literature. Both language and literature passed over
to the later nation on the upper Tigris, and were
cherished and continued there. Comparatively slight
differences in the forms of the cuneiform signs, and
a greater emphasis upon certain types of literature
are all that distinguish the two peoples in these
regards. Indeed, the kings of Nineveh filled their
libraries in large part with copies of ancient Baby-


RELIGIOUS IITERATURE 31
lonian books, a practice which has secured to us some
of the choicest specimens of Babylonian literature.
In sketching their literatures, therefore, the typical
forms are the same and serve as a basis for a common
presentation.
28. Religion was the inspiration of the most
important and the most ample division of the litera-
ture of Babylonia. Scarcely any side of the religious
life is unrepresented. Worship has its collections of
ritual books, ranging from magical and conjuration
formulae, the repetition of which by the proper priest
exorcises the demons, delivers from sickness, and
secures protection, to the prayers and hymns to the
gods, often pathetic and beautiful in their expressions
of penitence and praise. Mythology has been pre-
served in cycles which have an epic character, the
chief of which is the so-called Epic of Gilgamesh, a
hero whose exploits are narrated in twelve books,
each corresponding to the appropriate zodiacal sign.
The famous story of the Deluge has been incorporated
into the ninth book. Less extensive, but of a like
character, are the stories of the Descent of Ishtar into
Arallu, or Hades, of the heroes Etana and Adapa,
and the legends of the gods Dibbara (Girra) and Zu.
The cosmogonic narratives are hardly to be separated
from these, the best known of which is the so-called
Creation Epic of which the fragments of six books
have been recovered. The poetry of these epics is
quite highly developed in respect to imagery and
diction. Even metre has been shown to exist, at
least in the poem of creation. Among the rest of the
religious texts may be mentioned fragments of “wis-
dom” and tables of omens for the guidance of rulers.


32 INTRODUCTION
29. If the Babylonians had a passion for religion,
the Assyrians were devoted to history, and the bulk
of their literature may be described as historical.
The Babylonian priests, indeed, preserved lists of
their kings; business documents were dated, and
rulers left memorials of their doings. But the first
two can hardly claim to be literature, and the royal
texts, in fulness and exactness, are surpassed by those
of the Assyrian kings. The series of Assyrian his-
torical texts on the grand scale begins with the
inscription of Tiglathpileser I. (about 1100 B.C.),
written on an eight-sided clay cylinder, and contain-
ing eight hundred and nine lines. The inscription
covers the first five years of a reign of at least fifteen
years. It begins with a solemn invocation to the gods
who have given the king the sovereignty. His titles
are then recited, and a summary statement of his
achievements given. Then, beginning with his first
year, the king narrates his campaigns in detail in
nearly five hundred lines. The description of his
hunting exploits and his building of temples occu-
pies the next two hundred lines. The document
closes with a blessing for the one who in the future
honors the king's achievements, and a curse for him
who seeks to bring them to naught. This, for its
day, admirable historical narrative formed a kind of
model for all later royal inscriptions, many of which
copy its arrangement and almost slavishly imitate its
style. Its combination of summary statement with
an attempt at chronological order, somewhat unskil-
fully made, is dissolved in the later inscriptions.
They are of two sorts, either strictly annalistic,
arranged according to the years of a king's reign, or


LITERATURE OF DIPLOMACY 33
a splendid catalogue of the royal exploits organized
for impressiveness of effect, and hence often called
“laudatory” texts. Examples of one or both forms
have been left by all the great Assyrian kings. The
most important among them are the inscriptions of
Ashurnaçirpal, Shalmaneser II., Sargon, Sennacherib,
Esarhaddon, and Ashurbanipal.
30. Closely connected with the historical docu-
ments is the diplomatic literature. An example of
this is the so-called “Synchronistic History of Assyria
and Babylonia,” a memorandum of the dealings, diplo-
matic or otherwise, of the two nations with one
another, from before 1450 B.C. down to 700 B.C., in
regard to the disputed territory lying between them.
To the same category belong royal proclamations,
tribute lists, despatches, and an immense mass of
letters from officials to the court, — correspondence
between royal personages or between minor officials.
Such correspondence begins with the reign of Kham-
murabi of Babylon (about 2275 B.C.), and is espe-
cially abundant under the great Assyrian kings from
Sargon to Ashurbanipal. Not belonging to the epis-
tolary literature of Assyria and Babylonia, but written
in the cuneiform character, and containing letters from
kings of Assyria and Babylonia as well as to them, is
the famous Tel-el-Amarna correspondence, taken from
the archives of Amenhotep IV. of Egypt, — in all
some three hundred letters, – which throws a won-
derful light upon the life of the world of Western
Asia in the fifteenth century B. C. The numerous
inscriptions describing the architectural activities of
the kings belong here as well as to religious litera-
ture. Among the earliest inscriptions as well as the
3


34 INTRODUCTION
longest which have been discovered are the pious
memorials of royal temple-builders. The inscriptions
of Nebuchadrezzar II. the Great deal almost entirely
with his buildings.
31. The literature of law is very extensive. While
no complete legal code for either Babylonia or Assyria
has been discovered, some fragments of a very ancient
document, containing what seem to be legal enact-
ments, indicate that such codes were not unknown.
Records of judicial decisions, of business contracts,
and similar documents which are drawn up with
lawyer-like precision, attested by witnesses and after-
wards deposited in the state archives, come from
almost all periods of the history of these peoples,
and testify to their highly developed sense of justice
and their love of exact legal formalities.
32. Science and religion were most closely related
in oriental antiquity, and it is difficult to draw the
line between their literatures. Studies of the heavens
and the earth were zealously made by Babylonian
priests, in the practical search after the character and
will of the gods, who were thought to have their
seats in these regions. In their investigations, how-
ever, the priests came upon many important facts
of astronomy and physical science. These materials
were collected into large works, of which some mod-
ern scholars have believed an example to exist in the
so-called “Illumination of Bel,” which, in seventy-two
books, may go back to an age before 2000 B.C. Other
similar collections are geographical lists, rudimentary
maps, catalogues of animals, plants, and minerals.
The ritual calendars which were carefully compiled
for the priests and temple worshippers illustrate the


36 INTRODUCTION
to reappear from age to age with wearisome monot-
ony. Lack of true imaginative power, and, at the
same time, a realistic sense for facts show themselves;
the one in the grotesqueness of the poetical imagery,
the other in the blunt straightforward statements of
the historical inscriptions. Yet even in the earliest
poetical composition, the principle of “parallelism,”
or the balancing of expressions in corresponding
lines, was employed, a device which, supplying the
place of rhyme, became so powerful a means of
expression in the mouth of the Hebrew prophet. A
progress in ease and force of utterance is traceable
also in the royal inscriptions, if one compares that
of Tiglathpileser I. with those of Esarhaddon or
Ashurbanipal. Babylonia and Assyria, indeed, in
this sphere as in so many others, were great not so
much in what they actually wrought as in the ex-
ample they gave and the influences they set in motion.
They planted the seeds which matured after they
themselves had passed away.


IV
CHRONOLOGY AND HISTORY
35. AN essential condition for adequate knowledge
of an ancient people is the possession of a continuous
historical tradition in the form of oral or written
records. This, however, in spite of the mass of con-
temporaneous documents of almost every sort, which
the spade of the excavator has unearthed and the
skill of the scholar deciphered, is not available for
scientific study of Babylonian or Assyrian antiquity.
From the far-off morning of the beginnings of the
two peoples to their fall, no historians appeared to
gather up the memorials of their past, to narrate and
preserve the annals of these empires, to hand down
their achievements to later days. Consequently, where
contemporaneous records fail, huge gaps occur in the
course of historical development, to be bridged over
only partially by the combination of a few facts with
more or less ingenious inferences or conjectures.
Sometimes what has been preserved from a particular
age reveals clearly enough the artistic or religious
elements of its life, but offers only vague hints of its
political activity and progress. The true perspective
of the several periods is sometimes lost, as when
really critical epochs in the history of these peoples are
dwarfed and distorted by a lack of sources of knowl-


38 INTRODUCTION
edge, while others, less significant, but plentifully
stocked with a variety of available material, bulk large
and assume an altogether unwarranted prominence.
36. What the Babylonians and Assyrians failed to
do in supplying a continuous historical record was
not accomplished for them by the later historians of
antiquity. Herodotus, in the first Book of his “His-
tories,” devotes twenty-three chapters to Babylonian
affairs (Bk. I. 178–200), and refers to an Assyrian
history in which he will write more at length of these
events (I.184). But the latter, if written, has been
utterly lost, and the chapters just mentioned, while
containing information of value, especially that
which he himself collected on the ground, or drew
from an earlier traveller, presumably Hecataeus of
Miletus, give distorted and fantastic legends where
sober history might be expected. Ctesias of Cnidos,
physician at the court of Artaxerxes Mnemon (415–
398 B.C.), who seems to have had access to some
useful Assyrian material from Persian sources, intro-
duced his Persian History with an account of Baby-
lonio-Assyrian affairs, in which the same semi-mythical
tales were interspersed with dry lists of kings in so
hopeless a jumble of truth and falsehood as to recon-
cile us to the disappointment of having only a few
fragments of it.
37. It is, however, a cause of keen regret that the
three books of Babylonian or Chaldean History, by
Berosus, have come down from the past only in scanty
excerpts of later historians. Berosus was a Babylo-
nian priest of the god Bel, and wrote his work for
the Macedonian ruler of Babylonia, Antiochus Soter,
about 280 B.C. As the cuneiform writing was still


40 INTRODUCTION
By this means, not only is a chronological basis of
special value laid for this later age of Babylonian
history, but a starting-point is given for working
backward into the earlier periods, provided that ade-
quate data can be secured from other sources.
38. Happily for historical science, the original
documents of Babylonia and Assyria are unexpectedly
rich in material available for this purpose. As already
stated (sect. 29), the Assyrians were remarkably
gifted with the historic sense, and not only do their
royal annals and other similar documents contain many
and exact chronological statements, but there was in
vogue in the royal court a practical system which went
far toward compensating for the lack of an era accord-
ing to which the dates of events might be definitely
fixed. From the royal officers one was appointed
each year to give his name to the year. He or
his official status during that period was called limu,
and events or documents were dated by his name. The
king usually acted as limu for the first full year of his
reign. He was followed in succession by the Turtan,
or commander-in-chief, the Grand Vizier, the Chief
Musician, the Chief Eunuch, and the governors of
the several provinces or cities. Lists of these limi
were preserved in the royal archives, forming a fixed
standard of the greatest practical value for the
checking off of events or the dating of documents.
While this system was in use in Assyria as early
as the fourteenth century, the lists which have
been discovered are of much later date and of vary-
ing length, the longest extending from 893 B.C. to
about 650 B.C. Sometimes to the mere name of the
limu was added a brief remark as to some event


BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY 41
of his year. Such a reference to an eclipse of the
sun occurring in the limu of Pur-Sagali in the
reign of Ashurdan III., has been calculated to have
taken place on the fifteenth of June, 763 B.C., a fact
which at once fixes the dates for the whole list and
enables its data to be compared with those derived
from the synchronisms of the canon of Ptolemy and
other sources. The result confirms the accuracy
of the Assyrian document, and affords a trustworthy
chronological basis for fully three centuries of Assy-
rian history. For the earlier period before 900 B.C.
the ground is more uncertain, but the genealogical
and chronological statements of the royal inscriptions,
coupled with references to contemporaneous Baby-
lonian kings whose dates are calculable from native
sources, supply a foundation which, if lacking in
some parts, is yet capable of supporting the structure
of historical development.
39. The Babylonians, while they possessed nothing
like the well wrought out limu system of Assyria, and
dated events by the regnal years of their kings, had
in their kings' lists, compiled by the priests and
preserved in the temples, documents of much value
for historical purposes. The “Great List,” which
has been preserved, arranges the names in dynasties,
and gives the regnal years of each king. At the end
of each dynasty, the number of the kings and the sum
of their regnal years are added. Though badly broken
in parts, this list extends over a millennium, and con-
tains legible names of at least seventy kings arranged
in about nine dynasties. As the last division con-
tains names of rulers appearing in the Assyrian and
Ptolemaic canon, the starting-point is given for a


42 INTRODUCTION
chronological organization of the Babylonian kings,
which unfortunately can be only approximately
achieved, owing to the gaps in the list. The two
other lists now available cover the first two dynasties
only of the great list. Not only do they differ in
some respects from one another, but they do not help
in furnishing the missing names in the great list.
These can be tentatively supplied from inscriptions of
kings not mentioned on the lists, and presumably be-
longing to periods in which the gaps occur. Using
all the means at their disposal, scholars have generally
agreed in placing the beginning of the first dynasty of
Babylon somewhat later than 2500 B.C.
40. For the chronology of Babylonian history be-
fore that time, the sources are exceedingly meagre,
and all results, depending as they do upon calculation
and inference from uncertain data, must be regarded
as precarious. Numerous royal inscriptions exist, but
connections between the kings mentioned are not
easy to establish, and paleographic evidence, which
must be invoked to determine the relative age of the
documents, yields often ambiguous responses. A
fixed point, indeed, in this chaos seems to be offered
in a statement made by Nabuna'id, a king of the New
Babylonian Empire. In searching for the foundations
of the sun temple at Sippar, he came, to use his own
words, upon “the foundation-stone of Naram Sin,
which no king before me had found for 3200 years.”
As the date of the discovery is fixed at about 550 B.C.,
Naram Sin, king of Agade, whose name and inscrip-
tions are known, may be placed at about 3750 B.C.,
and his father, Sargon, at about 3800 B.C. While
much questioning has naturally been raised concern-


PERIODS OF HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT 43
ing the accuracy and trustworthiness of this date
thus obtained, no valid reasons for discarding it have
been presented. It affords a convenient and useful
point from which to reckon backward and forward
in the uncertain periods from the third to the fifth
millennium B. C. By all these aids, to which are
added some genealogical statements in the inscrip-
tions, a series of dynasties has been worked out for
this early age, and their chronological relations to one
another tentatively determined.
41. It is possible, therefore, with a reasonable de-
gree of accuracy, to determine chronologically not
only the great turning points in Babylonio-Assyrian
history, but even the majority of the dynasties and
the reigns of the several kings. Founded upon this,
the historical structure may be reared, and its various
stages and their relations determined. A bird’s-eye
view of these will facilitate further progress. First
in order of time comes the Rise and Development of
the City-States of Old Babylonia to their unification in
the City-State of Babylon. In the dawn of history
different primitive centres of population in the lower
Tigro-Euphrates valley appeared, attained a vigorous
and expanding life, came into contact one with an-
other, and successively secured a limited supremacy,
only to give place to others. The process was already
in full course by 5000 B. c. By the middle of the
third millennium, the city of Babylon pushed forward
under a new dynasty; one of its kings succeeded in
driving out the Elamites, who had invaded and were
occupying the southern and central districts; the
victory was followed by the city's supremacy, which
was not only more widely extended, but, by the wis-


44 INTRODUCTION
dom of its kings, was more deeply rooted, and was
thus made permanent. With Babylonia united under
Babylon, the first epoch closed about 2000 B.C.
42. The second period covers the Early Conflicts
of Babylonia and Assyria. The peaceful course of
united Babylonia was interrupted by the entrance of
the Kassites from the east, who succeeded in seating a
dynasty of Kassite kings upon the throne of Babylonia,
and maintaining them there for nearly six hundred
years. But this foreign intrusion and dominance
had roused into independent life a Semitic community
which had its centre at Assur on the central Tigris,
and in all probability was an offshoot from Baby-
lonia. This centre of active political life developed
steadily toward the north and west, but was domi-
nated chiefly by its hostility toward Babylonia under
Kassite rule. Having become the kingdom of Assyria,
it warred with the southern kingdom, the advan-
tage on the whole remaining with the Assyrian until,
toward the close of the epoch, a great ruler appeared
in the north, Tiglathpileser I., under whom Assyria
advanced to the first place in the Tigro-Euphrates
valley; while Babylonia, its Kassite rulers yielding to
a native dynasty, fell into political insignificance.
The forces that controlled the age had run their
course by 1000 B.C.
43. The third period is characterized by the Ascen-
dancy of Assyria. The promise of pre-eminence
given in Tiglathpileser I. was not fulfilled for two
centuries, owing to the flooding of the upper Meso-
potamian plain with Aramean nomads from the Ara-
bian steppes. At last, as the ninth century began,
Ashurnaçirpal led the way in an onward movement


PERIODS OF HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT 45
of Assyria which culminated in the extension of the
kingdom over the entire region of western Asia.
Shalmaneser II., Tiglathpileser III., and Sargon,
great generals and administrators, turned a kingdom
into an empire. The first wore out the resistance of
the Syrian states, the second added Babylonia to the
Assyrian Empire, and the third, as conqueror of the
north, ruled from the Persian gulf to the border of
Egypt and the upper sea of Ararat. The rulers that
followed compelled Egypt to bow, and reduced Elam
to subjection, but at the expense of the vital powers
of the state. New peoples appeared upon the eastern
border, revolt deprived the empire of its provinces,
until, in less than two decades after the death of the
brilliant monarch Ashurbanipal, Nineveh, Assyria's
capital, was destroyed, and the empire disappeared
suddenly and forever. Four centuries were occupied
with this splendid history and its tragical catastrophe.
The age closed with the passing of the seventh cen-
tury (600 B.C.).
44. Of the partners in the overthrow of Assyria,
the rebellious governor of the province of Babylonia
received as his share of the spoil the Tigro-Euphrates
valley and the Mediterranean provinces. He founded
here the New Babylonian Empire. Its brief career
of less than a century concluded the history of these
peoples. Under his son, the famous Nebuchadrezzar
II., the empire was consolidated, its resources enlarged,
its power displayed. His feeble successors, however,
were beset with manifold difficulties, chief of which
was the rising energy of the Medes and Persians who
had shared in the booty of Assyria. United under
the genius of Cyrus, they pushed westward and north-


46 INTRODUCTION
ward, until the hour came for advancing on Babylon.
The hollow shell of the empire was speedily crushed,
and the Semitic peoples, whose rulers had dominated
this world of western Asia for more than four millen-
niums, yielded the sceptre in 538 B.C. to Cyrus the
Persian. -


P A R T I
THE CITY STATES OF BABYLONIA AND
THEIR UNIFICATION UNDER BABYLON
TO 2000 B.C.


I
THE DAWN OF HISTORY
45. THE earliest indications of human settlement
in the Tigro-Euphrates valley come from the lower
alluvial plain (sect. 3) known as Babylonia. It is not
difficult to see how the physical features of this region
were adapted to make it a primitive seat of civiliza-
tion. A burning sun, falling upon fertile soil enriched
and watered by mighty, inundating streams, – these
are conditions in which man finds ready to his hand
everything needed to sustain and stimulate his ele-
mental wants. Superabounding fruitfulness of nature,
plant, animal, and man, contributes to his comfort and
progress. Coming with flocks and herds from the
surrounding deserts, he finds ample pasturage and
inexhaustible water everywhere, an oasis inviting him
to a permanent abiding-place. He cannot but abandon
his nomadic life for settlement. The land, however,
does not encourage inglorious ease. Wild nature
must be subdued and waste tracts occupied as popu-
lations increase. The inundations are found to occur
at regular intervals and to be of definite duration.
They may be regulated and their fruitful waters
directed upon barren soils, making them fertile. All
suggests order and requires organization on the part
of those settled along the river banks. From the
same generous source are supplied mud and bitumen
4


50 OLD BABYLONIA
for the erection of permanent dwellings. The energies
of the inhabitants of such a country would naturally
be absorbed in developing its abundant resources.
They would be a peaceful folk, given to agriculture.
Trade, also, is facilitated by the rivers, natural
highways through the land, and with trade comes
industry, both stimulated by the generous gifts of
nature, among which the palm-tree is easily supreme.
Thus, at a time when regions less suggestive and
responsive to human activity lay unoccupied and
barren, this favored spot was inevitably the scene
of organized progressive human activity already
engaged upon the practical problems of social and
political life. It furnishes for the history of man-
kind the most ancient authentic records at present
known.
46. The position of the Babylonian plain is like-
wise prophetic of its history. It is an accessible land
(sect. 11). Races and civilizations were to meet and
mingle there. It was to behold innumerable political
changes due to invasion and conquest. In turn, the
union of peoples was to produce a strong and abiding
social amalgam, capable of absorbing aliens and pre-
serving their best. This civilization, because it lay thus
open to all, was to contribute widely to the world's
progress. It made commercial highways out of its
rivers. The passes of the eastern and northern
mountains were doorways, not merely for invading
tribes, but also for peaceful armies of merchants
marching to and from the ends of the world, and
finding their common centre in its cities.
47. At the period when history begins, all these
processes of development were already well advanced.


THE EARLIEST SEATS OF CULTURE 51
Not only are the beginnings of civilization in Babylo-
nia quite hidden from our eyes, but the various stages
in the course of that first civilization, extending over
thousands of years, are equally unknown, except as
they may be precariously inferred from that which
the beginnings of historical knowledge reveal. The
earliest inscriptions which have been unearthed dis-
close social and political life already in full operation.
Not only has mankind passed beyond the period of
savage and even pastoral existence, but agriculture is
the chief occupation; the irrigating canals have begun
to distribute the river water to the interior of the
land; the population is gathered into settled com-
munities; cities are built; states are established, ruled
over by kings; the arts of life are developed; lan-
guage has already been reduced to written form, and
is employed for literary purposes; religion is an
essential element of life, and has its priests and
temples.
48. The seat of the most advanced and presumably
the most ancient historical life appears to have
been the southernmost part of the Euphrates valley.
As the river reached the gulf, which then stretched
more than a hundred miles northwest of its present
shore line, it spread out over the surrounding country
in a shallow sea. Upon the higher ground to the east
and west of the lowlands made marvellously fertile
by this natural irrigation, the earliest cities were
planted. Farthest to the south, presumably close to
the gulf and west of the river mouth, was the ancient
Eridu (now Abu Shahrein or Nowawis), the seat of a
temple for the worship of Ea, the god of the waters.
Here, no doubt, was told the story of Oannes, the being


52 OLD BABYLONIA
that came up daily from the sea to converse with men,
to teach them letters, arts, and sciences, everything
which could tend to soften manners and humanize
mankind, and at night returned to the deep, —a myth
of the sun, perhaps, associated with the recollection of
the beginnings of culture in this coast city which,
without tradition of political importance, was hal-
lowed as a primitive centre of civilization and religion.
Some ten miles to the west lay Ur, “the city” (at
present called Mugheir), now a few miles west of
the river in the desert, but once, like Eridu, a com-
mercial city on the gulf. Here was the temple of
Sin, the moon god, the ruins of which rise seventy
feet above the plain. Across the river, thirty miles
to the northeast, stood Larsam (now Senkereh), the
biblical Ellasar, where the sun god Shamash had his
temple. Twelve miles away to the northwest was
Uruk, the biblical Erech (now Warka), the seat
of the worship of the goddess Ishtar. Mar (now
perhaps Tel Ede), a little known site, lay about the
same distance north. Thirty-five miles east of Mar,
on the ancient canal now known as Shatt-el-Hai, con-
necting the Tigris with the Euphrates, was Shirpurla,
or Lagash (now Tello), looking out across the eastern
plain, the frontier city of the early period, although
fifty miles from the Tigris. These six cities, lying at
the four corners of an irregular square, form the
southernmost body of primitive communities already
flourishing at the dawn of history.
49. Situated almost exactly in the centre of the
ancient plain between the rivers, about fifty miles
north of Uruk, was the already famous city of Nip-
pur (now Niffer). Here the patron deity was En-lil,


THE FIRST NORTHERN CITIES 53
“chief spirit,” called also Bel, the “lord,” god of the
terrestrial world. A long period of prehistoric politi-
cal prominence must be assumed to explain the reli-
gious prestige of this city and of its god. Religion is
its sole distinction at the time when records begin.
But how great must have been that prominence to
have secured for the city a claim to stand with Eridu
as one of the two earliest centres of religion En-lil
was a father of gods, and his fame made Nippur the
shrine where many kings were proud to offer their gifts.
50. North Babylonia had also its group of primitive
cities, chief among which was Kutha (now Tel Ibra-
him), the biblical Cuthah, more than fifty miles north-
west of Nippur in the centre of the upper plain. Its
god, Nergal, was lord of the world of the dead. Still
further north, not far from the eastern bank of the
Euphrates, was Sippar (now Abu Habba), where the
sun god, Shamash, had his temple, and in its vicinity,
probably, was Agade, once the famous capital of the
land of Akkad. More uncertain are the sites of those
northern cities which played an important part in the
political activity of the earlier days, but soon disap-
peared, Kulunu (the biblical Calneh), Gishban (?),
and Kish. It is a question whether Babylon and its
sister city Borsippa should be included in this enu-
meration. If they were in existence, they were insig-
nificant communities at this time, and their gods,
Marduk and Nabu, do not stand high in the ranks of
the earliest deities. The greatness of the two cities
was to come, and to compensate by its splendor for
the lateness of their beginnings.
51. Who were the people by whose energy this
region was transformed into so fair and flourishing


54 OLD BABYLONIA
a land, at a time when elsewhere, with hardly an
exception, the upward course of humanity did not
yet reveal any trace of orderly and civilized condi-
tions? What are their antecedents, and whence did
they come to occupy the alluvial plain? These ques-
tions cannot be satisfactorily answered, because our
knowledge of the facts involved is insufficient and
the conclusions drawn from them are contradictory.
Reference has already been made (sect. 26) to the
linguistic phenomena of the early Babylonian in-
scriptions, and the opposite inferences drawn from
them. The historical facts bearing on the question
render a clearer answer, if also a more limited one.
Whatever may be the conjectures based upon them as
to prehistoric conditions and movements, these facts
at the beginning of history testify that the civiliza-
tion was that of a Semitic people. Inscriptions of
an undoubtedly Semitic character are there, and the
social, political, and religious phenomena presented
by them have nothing that clearly demonstrates a non-
Semitic character. Nor do any inscriptions, myths, or
traditions testify, indubitably, either to a pre-Semitic
population, or to the superimposing upon it of the
Semitic stock. To the historian, therefore, the prob-
lem resolves itself into this: how and when did the
Semitic people begin to occupy this Babylonian plain 2
As the consensus of judgment to-day seems to favor
Central Arabia as the primitive home of the Semites,
their advent into Babylonia must have been made from
the west, by moving either upward, from the western
side of the Persian gulf, or downward, along the
Euphrates, – a drift from the desert as steady and
continuous as the sand that creeps over the Babylo-


THE EARLY BABYLONIAN WORLD 55
nian border from the same source. When this move-
ment began can only be conjectured from the length of
time presumably required to develop the civilization
which existed as early as 5000 B.C., back to which date
the earliest materials must certainly be carried. The
processes already indicated as having preceded this
time (sects. 45,47), suggest to what distant ages the
incoming of the first settlers must be assigned.
52. The Babylonian primitive civilization did not
stand alone or isolated in this dawn of history. It lay
in the midst of a larger world, with some regions of
which it had already entered into relations. To the
northwest, along the Euphrates, nomadic tribes still
wandered, although there are indications that, on the
upper river, in the vicinity of the old city of Haran,
a Semitic culture was already appearing. The Bed-
ouin of the western desert hung on the frontier as a
constant menace, or wandered into the cultivated
land to swell the Semitic population. To the north,
along the eastern banks of the upper Tigris, and on
the flanks of the mountains were centres of primitive
organization, as among the Guti and the Lulubi, whose
kings, some centuries later, left Semitic inscriptions.
But particularly active and aggressive were the peo-
ple of the highlands east of Babylonia known by
the collective name of Elam. The country sloped
gently down to the Tigris, and was watered by
streams descending from the hills. The people
were hardy and warlike. They had already devel-
oped or acquired from their neighbors across the
river the elements of organization and civilization.
Through their borders ran the trade-routes from the
east. Among the earliest memorials of history are


II
MOVEMENTS TOWARD EXPANSION AND
UNIFICATION
53. THE cities whose existence at the dawn of
history has already been noted, were, from the first,
full of vigorous activity. The impulses which led to
the organization of social life sought further develop-
ment. Cities enlarged, came into touch with their
neighbors, and sought to dominate them. The vary-
ing success of these movements, the rise, splendor,
and decay of the several communities, their struggles
with one another, and the ever-renewed activity
which carried them beyond the confines of Babylonia
itself, make up the first chapter in the story. It is
impossible to give a connected and detailed account
of the period, owing to the scantiness of the materials
and the difficulty of arranging them chronologically.
The excavations of the last quarter of a century have
only begun to suggest the wealth of inscriptions and
archaeological matter which will be at the disposal of
the future student. Much new light has been gained
which makes it possible to take general views, to
trace tendencies, and to prepare tentative outlines
which discoveries and investigations still to come
will fill up and modify.
54. Some general titles borne by rulers of the
period afford a striking evidence of the character of


58 OLD BABYLONIA
this early development. Three of these are worthy
of special mention, namely, “King of Shumer and
Akkad,” “King of the Totality (world),” “King
of the Four (world-) Regions.” It is evident that
two of these titles, and possibly all, refer to districts
and not to cities, although great uncertainty exists as
to their exact geographical position. The second and
third would suggest universal empire, though they
might be localized upon particular regions. The
“Kingdom of the Totality” is thought by Winckler
and other scholars to have its centre in northern
Mesopotamia about the city of Haran. “Shumer
and Akkad" are regarded as including the north-
ern and southern parts of Babylonia. The “Four
Regions,” synonymous with the four points of the
compass, would include the known world from the
eastern mountains and the Persian gulf to the
Mediterranean. Whatever may be learned in the
future respecting the exact content of these titles,
they illustrate the impulses and tendencies which
were already potent in these primitive communities.
55. This period of expansion and unification occu-
pies more than two millenniums (about 4500–2250
B.C.). Three stages may be distinguished in what
may truly be called this wilderness of years. (1)
The first is marked by the struggles of cities within
Babylonia for local supremacy. The chief rivalry lay
between those of the north and those of the south.
(2) With the career of Sargon I. (3800 B.C.), a new
era opened, characterized by the extension of author-
ity beyond the borders of Babylonia as far as the
Mediterranean and the northern mountains, while yet
local supremacy shifted from city to city. (3) The


BEGINNINGS OF CONFLICT 59
third epoch, which is, at the same time, the termi-
nation of the period and the opening of a new age,
saw the final consolidation of Babylonian authority at
home and abroad in the city-king of Babylon, which
henceforth gave its name to land and government and
civilization. In each of these ages, some names of
rulers stand out as fixed points in the vast void,
gaps of unknown extent appear, and historic relations
between individual actors upon the wide stage are pain-
fully uncertain. Some account in the barest outline
may be given of these kings, in some cases hardly
more than shadows, whom the progress of investiga-
tion will in time clothe with flesh and blood, and assign
the place and significance due to their achievements.
56. The struggle has already begun when the
first known king, Enshagsagana (about 4500 B.C.) of
Kengi, probably southwestern Babylonia, speaks of
offering to the god of Nippur the spoil of Kish,
“wicked of heart.” Somewhat later the representa-
tive of the south in the wars with the northern cities,
Kish and Gishban, was Shirpurla (sect. 48). Mesilim
of Kish (about 4400 B.C.) made Shirpurla a vassal
kingdom. It recovered under the dynasty of Ur
Nina (about 4200 B.C.), who called himself king,
while his successors were satisfied with the title of
patesi, or viceroy. Two of these successors of Ur
Nina, Eannatum (Edingiranagin) and Entemena, have
left inscriptions of some length, describing their vic-
tories over cities of the north and south. Gishban,
rivalling Kish in its hostility to the south, found
a vigorous antagonist in Eannatum, whose famous
“Vulture Stele" contains the terms imposed by him
upon the patest of that city.


60 OLD BABYLONIA
Not long after, a king of Gishban, Lugalzaggisi
(about 4000 B.C.), proclaimed himself “king of Uruk,
king of the Totality,” brought also Ur and Larsam
under his sway, and offered his spoil at the sacred
shrine of Nippur. He was practically lord of Baby-
lonia. His inscription, moreover, goes on to declare
that “from the lower sea of the Tigris and Euphrates
to the upper sea (his god) made straight his path;
from the rising of the sun to the setting of the same
he gave him tribute.” His authority extended from
the Persian gulf to the Mediterranean. A later king
of Kish, Alusharshid (about 3850 B.C.), wrote upon
marble vases which he offered at Nippur, his boast
of having subjugated Elam and Bara'se, the elevated
plains to the east and northeast of Babylonia.
57. It is tempting to generalize upon these six
centuries and more of history. The most obvious
fact has already been mentioned, namely, that the
movement toward expansion, incorporation, and uni-
fication is in full course. But more definite con-
clusions may be reached. There are those who see,
in the arraying of north against south, the inevitable
reaction of a ruder civilization against an older and
higher one. The earlier culture of the south, and its
more fully developed organization had pressed upon
the northern communities and attempted to absorb
them in the process of giving them civilization. But
gradual decay sapped the strength of the southern
states, and the hardier peoples of the north, having
learned the arts of their conquerors, thirsted for
their riches, and at last succeeded in overthrowing
them. A more definite view is that which beholds in
the aggressions of north upon south the steady ad-


SARGON OF AGADE 61
vance of the Semitic people upon the Sumerians
(sect. 26), and the process of fastening the yoke of
Semitic political supremacy upon Babylonia, with the
accompanying absorption of Sumerian culture by the
conquerors. Another conclusion (that of Radau,
Early Babylonian History) finds the Semites com-
ing in from the south at the very beginning of the
period and pushing northward beyond the confines of
Babylonia. Then the Semites of the south, having be-
come corrupted by higher civilization of the Sumerians,
were objects of attack on the part of the more virile
Semites of the north who, turning back upon their
former track, came down and occupied the seats of
their brethren and renewed the purer Semitic element.
There may be some truth in all these generalizations,
but the positions are so opposed, and their foundations
are as yet so precarious, that assent to their definite
details must, for the present, be withheld from all of
them.
58. Shargani-shar-ali, or, as he is more commonly
called, Sargon I., king of the city of Agade (sect. 50),
introduces the second stage in early Babylonian
history. His son, Naram Sin, is said by Nabuna'id,
the last king of the New Babylonian Empire, to have
reigned three thousand two hundred years before his
own time, that is, about 3750 B. C. Sargon lived,
therefore, about 3800 B.C., the first date fixed, with
reasonable certainty, in Babylonian history, and a
point of departure for earlier and later chronology
(sect. 40). The inscriptions coming directly from
Sargon himself and his son are few and historically
unimportant. Some, found at Nippur, indicate that
both were patrons of the temple and worshippers of


62 OLD BABYLONIA
its god. A tablet of omens, written many centuries
after their time, ascribes to them a wide range of
activity and splendid achievement. While such a
document may contain a legendary element, the truth
of its testimony in general is substantiated by similar
statements recorded in contract tablets of the Sargonic
age. The very existence of such legends testifies to
the impression made by these kings on succeeding
generations. An interesting example of this type of
document is the autobiographical fragment which
follows:
Sargon, the powerful king, King of Agade, am I.
My mother was of low degree, my father I did not know.
The brother of my father dwelt in the mountain.
My city was Azupirani, situate on the bank of the
Euphrates.
(My) humble mother conceived me; in secret she
brought me forth.
She placed me in a basket-boat of rushes; with pitch
she closed my door.
She gave me over to the river, which did not (rise) over
Ine.
The river bore me along; to Akki, the irrigator, it
carried me.
Akki, the irrigator, in the . . . brought me to land.
Akki, the irrigator, reared me as his own son.
Akki, the irrigator, appointed me his gardener.
While I was gardener, Ishtar looked on me with love
[and]
. . . four years I ruled the kingdom.
(Assyrian and Babylonian Literature, p. 1.)
59. Sargon was a great conqueror. Within Baby-
lonia, he was lord of Nippur, Shirpurla, Kish, Babylon,


THE EMPIRE OF SARGON 63
and Uruk. Beyondits borders, he and his son carried
their arms westward to the Mediterranean, northward
into Armenia, eastward into Elam and among the
northeastern peoples, and southward into Arabia and
the islands of the Persian gulf. To illustrate the
character of these wars, reference may be made to the
omen tablet, which, under the seventh omen, records
a three years' campaign on the Mediterranean coast,
during which Sargon organized his conquests, erected
his images, and carried back the spoil to his own land.
Possessed of so wide authority, Naram Sin assumed
the proud title, for the first time employed by a Baby-
lonian ruler, “King of the Four (world-) Regions.”
60. The achievements of these kings were both a
culmination of the activities of the earlier city-kings,
and a model for those who followed. The former had
from time to time gathered parts of the larger world
under their own sway, as Lugalzaggisi the west, and
Alusharshid the east. But the incorporation of
the whole into a single empire was the work of the
Sargonids, and no dynasty followed which did not
strive after this ideal. The immediate descendants of
Naram Sin, however, have left no monuments to indi-
cate that they maintained their fathers’ glory, and the
dynasty of Agade disappeared in a darkness which
stretches over nearly half a millennium. The scene
shifts once more to Shirpurla. Here the patesi Ur Bau
(about 3500 B.C.) ruled peacefully, and was followed
by other princes, whose chief distinction in their own
eyes was the building of temples and the service of
the gods. Foremost among these in the number of
inscriptions and works of art which commemorate his
career, was Gudea (about 3100 B.C.). The only


64 OLD BABYLONIA
warlike deed recorded by him was his conquest of
Anshan in Elam, but the wide range of countries
laid under contribution for materials to build his
temples and palaces has led to the conviction that he
must have been an independent and vigorous ruler.
The absence of any royal titles in his inscriptions,
however, coupled with the slight reference to military
expeditions, suggests, rather, that his building opera-
tions were made possible because his state formed part
of the domains of a broad empire, like that which
Sargon founded and his successors ruled.
61. Peace, however, in an oriental state is the sign
of weakness, and the extensive works of Gudea may
have exhausted the resources of Shirpurla so that, after
a few generations, its patesis acknowledged the sway of
the kings of Ur, who came forward to make a new con-
tribution to the unification of Babylonia. Ur Gur of
Ur and his son Dungi (about 3000 B.C.) were, like
their predecessors of Shirpurla, chiefly proud of their
temples, if the testimony of the great mass of the in-
scriptions from them may be accepted. But they are
distinguished from Gudea in that they built their
temples in all parts of the land of Babylonia, from
Kutha in the north to Shirpurla, Nippur, Uruk, and Ur
in the south. The title which they assumed, that of
“King of Shumer and Akkad,” now first employed by
Babylonian kings, indicates that the end which they
had attained was the union of all Babylonia, north and
south, under one sceptre. The building of the various
temples in the cities was the evidence both of their
interest in the welfare of the whole land and of their
authority over it. They realized the ideal which ruled
all succeeding dynasties, namely, a united Babylonia,


DYNASTY OF UR 65
although it is probable that their authority over the
different districts was often very slight. Patesis still
maintained themselves in Shirpurla and, doubtless,
elsewhere, although they acknowledged the supremacy
of the king of Ur. It is not without reason, therefore,
that two dynasties ruling in other cities are assigned to
the period immediately following that of the dynasty
of Ur. These are a dynasty of Uruk, consisting of
kings Singashid and Singamil the former of whom
calls himself also king of Amnanu, and a dynasty of
Isin, a city of southern Babylonia, whose site is as
yet unknown. The latter group of kings claimed
authority also over Nippur, Ur, Eridu, and Uruk, and
called themselves “Kings of Shumer and Akkad.”
As such, they would be successors of the kings of Ur,
in control of united Babylonia.
62. Ur came forward again after some generations
and dominated the land under a dynasty whose founder
was Gungunu ; its members were Ine Sin, Bur Sin II.,
Gimil Sin, some others less known, and, probably, a
second Dungi (about 2800–2500 B.C.). The various
forms of titles attached to some of the kings of Ur have
led some scholars to group them in several dynasties,
but the evidence is not at present sufficient. The
kings above mentioned, considered together, are no
longer called kings of Shumer and Akkad, but bear
the prouder title of “King of the Four Regions.”
Our knowledge of their activities fully justifies them
in assuming it. Numerous contract tablets, dated
from events in their reigns, testify to campaigns
in Syria, Arabia, and Elam. The most vigorous
of these rulers was Dungi II., who reigned more
than fifty years. He built temples in various cities,
5


66 OLD BABYLONIA
made at least nine expeditions into the west, and
seems to have placed members of his own family as
governors in the conquered cities, if one may trust the
interpretation of inscriptions to the effect that his
daughters were appointed rulers in Syria and Anshan.
He was worshipped as a god after his death, and his
successors named the eighth month of the year in his
honor. This dynasty may, not unreasonably, be re-
garded as one of the most notable thus far ruling in
Babylonia, uniting, as it did, authority over the home-
land with vigorous movement into the surrounding
regions, and control over the east and the west.
63. A period of some confusion followed the passing
of this sovereignty of Ur (about 2400–2200 B.C.). A
dynasty of the city of Babylon, the first recorded by
the priests in the dynastic tablets, was founded by
Sumu-abu (about 2400 B.C.) and contested the world-
wide supremacy of Ur. Larsam was the seat of another
kingdom, the first king of which was Nur Adad, who
was succeeded by his son Siniddinam. The latter
called himself “king of Shumer and Akkad,” as though
he would again bring about that unity which had
disappeared with the downfall of Ur. But other
movements were preparing which, apparently threat-
ening the overthrow of Babylonian civilization and
governments as a whole, were to bring about an
ultimate and permanent establishment of Babylonian
unity. The Elamites upon the eastern highlands,
between whom and the communities of eastern Baby-
lonia war had been frequent, and who had been more
than once partially conquered, reacted under the pres-
sure and entered the land, bent upon conquest. The
southern cities suffered the most severely from this


THE ELAMITE CONQUEST 67
inroad, as they lay nearest the line of advance of the
invading peoples. At first the Elamites raided the
cities and carried off their booty to their own land,
but later were able to establish themselves in Babylo-
nian territory. How early these incursions began is
quite uncertain. In the fragments of Berosus, a
“Median * dynasty of eight kings is mentioned the
approximate date of which is from 2450 B.C. to 2250
B. C. This statement may vaguely suggest the pres-
ence of Elamites in Babylonia during two centuries,
and the culmination of their inroads in the possession
of supreme authority over at least part of the land.
That new dynasties appeared in Babylon and Larsam,
succeeding to that of Ur about 2400 B.C., may have
some connection with these inroads, and inscriptional
evidence makes it certain that Elamite supremacy
was felt in Babylonia by 2300 B.C. Native dynas-
ties disappeared before the onslaught. One of these
invading bodies was led by King Kudurnankhundi,
whose exploits are referred to by the Assyrian king
of the seventh century, Ashurbanipal. The Elamite
had carried away a statue of the goddess Nana from
Uruk 1635 years before, that is, about 2290 B.C.
Ashurbanipal restored it to its temple. The region
in which Uruk and Larsam were situated seems to
have borne the brunt of the assault. The former
city was devastated and its temples sacked. The
latter became a centre of Elamite power. A prince
whose Semitic name is read Rim Sin, the son of a cer-
tain Kudurmabuk, ruler of Iamutbal, a district of
west Elam, set up his kingdom at Larsam, apparently
on the overthrow of Siniddinam, and for at least a
quarter of a century (about 2275 B.C.) made himself


68 OLD BABYLONIA
a power in southern Babylonia. He claimed author-
ity over Ur, Eridu, Nippur, Shirpurla, and Uruk, con-
quered Isin, and called himself “king of Shumer
and Akkad.” Evidently the Elamite element was
well on the way toward absorption into Babylonian
life.
64. What the Elamites really brought to pass in
Babylonia was a general levelling of the various
southern city-states which had contested the suprem-
acy with one another. Their rulers overthrown, their
people enslaved, their possessions carried away, rude
foreigners dominating them, they were no longer in
a position to maintain the ancient rivalry with one
another, or to contest the supremacy with the cities
of the north. When the foreigners had weakened
themselves by amalgamation with the conquered and
by accepting their religion and culture, the way was
opened for a purely Babylonian power, hitherto but
slightly affected by these invasions, to drive out the
enemy, and bring the whole land under one authority
which might hope for permanence. This power was
the city-state of Babylon.
65. It is tempting to seek further light on this
Elamite period from two other sources. The first
of these is the native religious literature. In the so-
called omen tablets and the hymns, are not infrequent
references to troubles from the Elamites. A hymn,
associated with Uruk (RP, 2 ser. I. pp. 84 ff.),
lamenting a misfortune which has fallen upon the
city, is, by some scholars, connected with the expedi-
tion of Kudurnankhundi (sect. 63). In one of the
episodes of the Gilgamesh epic (sect. 28), the deliver-
ance of Uruk from a foreign enemy, Khumbaba, forms


THE WAR OF THE RINGS 69
the background of the scene. It may embody a tradi-
tion of this period, and preserve the name of another
Elamite invader. But the allusions are all too indefi-
nite to serve any historical purpose other than as
illustrations of the reality and severity of invasions
from Elam. The Hebrew religious literature has also
furnished material which is thought to bear on this
epoch. In Genesis xiv. it is said, “It came to pass in
the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of
Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of
Goiim; that they made war with Bera king of Sodom,
and with Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of
Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king
of Bela. . . . Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer,
and in the thirteenth year they rebelled. And in the
fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that
were with him.” In the situation here depicted, and
the names of the kings and localities mentioned, have
been found grounds for assigning the episode to the
Elamite period of Babylonian history. Arioch of
Ellasar would be Rim Sin (in another reading of his
name, Eri-Aku) of Larsam; Amraphel of Shinar is
identified with Khammurabi of Babylon; Tidal of
Goiim, with Thargal of Gutium; while Chedorlaomer
is a good Elamite name in the form Kudurlagamar.
On this hypothesis, the latter would be the overlord
of the Babylonian kings and the heir to the Baby-
lonian authority over Syria and Palestine which
had been maintained by Sargon and others of the
earlier time. All this is not improbable, and adds
interest to our study of this dark period, but it is not
sufficiently substantiated, either by the connection in
which it stands, or by the evidence of contemporaneous


70 OLD BABYLONIA
Babylonian material, to warrant the acceptance of it as
actual historical fact. It is true that names similar to
these have also been found in Babylonian tablets of
various periods, but the reading of the texts is not so
certain, or their relation to this epoch so clear, as to
offer any substantial support to the narrative.


III
CIVILIZATION OF OLD BABYLONIA: POLITICAL AND
SOCIAL LIFE
66. WHILE the materials for sketching the historical
development of the early Babylonian communities are
often quite inadequate, fragmentary, and difficult to
organize, those which illustrate the life of the people
are not only more numerous, but they also afford a
more complete picture. To present a history of the
civilization in its progress is, indeed, equally impos-
sible, but, as a compensation, it may be remembered
that oriental life in antiquity passed through few
changes. Kings and empires might flourish and
disappear, but manners, customs, and occupations
continued from century to century much as they had
been in the beginning. Therefore it is possible to
gather up in a single view the various aspects of the
civilization of this people which, in its political
career of more than two thousand years, was subject
to the vicissitudes which the preceding chapters have
described.
67. The earliest occupations of the inhabitants
were agricultural. Great flocks of sheep and herds
of cattle and goats, enumerated in the lists of temple
property, indicate that pastoral activities were not
neglected. Herdsmen and shepherds formed a nu-
merous class, recruited from the Bedouin constantly
floating in from the desert. The chief grazing-


72 OLD BABYLONIA
grounds were to the west of the Euphrates. Here
were gathered together herds belonging to different
owners under the care of independent herdsmen who
were paid to watch and protect their charges. But
the raising of grain and fruits was by far more
common, as might be expected from the nature of the
country. The yield from the fertile soil was often
two hundred-fold, sometimes more. All Babylonian
life was affected by this predominating activity.
The need of irrigation of the fields fostered an im-
mense development of the canal system. At first,
the lands nearest the rivers were watered by the
primitive devices even now employed on their banks.
It was a genial thought of King Urukagina to con-
struct a canal, and wisely did he name it after the
goddess Nina (Records of the Past, 2 ser. I. p. 72), for
the work was worthy of divine approval. Soon the
canal became the characteristic feature of the Baby-
lonian landscape and the chief condition of agricul-
tural prosperity. Land was named according to that
which it produced, and some scholars hold that it
was measured according to the amount of seed which
could be sown upon it. At least three of the months
had names connected with agriculture. The fruits of
the fields were the chief gifts to the temples, and the
king exacted his taxes in grain which was stored in
royal granaries. It seems that the agricultural year
began in September (the month tashritu, “begin-
ning”). Then the farmer, usually a tenant of a rich
noble, made his contract. The rent was ordinarily
one-third of the farm's production, although some-
times tenant and landlord divided equally. Great
care was taken that the tenant should keep everything


BABYLONIAN INDUSTRIES 73
in good order. Oxen were used for farm-work, and nu-
merous agricultural implements were employed. Sow-
ing and reaping, ploughing and threshing, irrigating
and cultivating, — these constituted the chief events
in the lives of the great mass of the Babylonian
people, and made their land one of the richest and
most prosperous regions in all the world.
68. The pursuits of industry appear from the be-
ginning to have engaged the activities of the Baby-
lonians. Differentiation of labor has already taken
place, and the names of the workers illustrate the
variety of the occupations. The inscriptions men-
tion the carpenter, the Smith, the metal-worker,
the weaver, the leather-worker, the dyer, the potter,
the brick-maker, the vintner, and the surveyor. The
abundance of wool led very early to the manufacture
of woollen cloths and rugs, in which the Babylonians
surpassed all others. The city of Mar (sect. 48) was
famous for a kind of cloth, called after it Mairatu.
Gold, silver, copper, and bronze were worked up into
articles of ornament and utility. The making of
bricks was a most important industry in a country
where stone was practically unobtainable. The
month simanu (May–June) was the “month of
bricks,” during which the conditions for their manu-
facture were most favorable ; inundations had
brought down the sifted alluvium which lay con-
veniently at hand; the sun shone mildly enough to
bake the clay slowly and evenly; the reeds, used as a
platform on which to lay the bricks for drying, or
chopped finely and mixed with the clay, were fresh and
abundant. Innumerable quantities were used yearly.
Sun-dried bricks were poor building material, and


74 OLD BABYLONIA
houses needed constant repairing or rebuilding after
the heavy rains of the winter. The bricks baked in
the kiln, of much more durable character, were used
for the outer lining of temples and palaces.
69. The position of Babylonia gave it commercial
importance, the evidences of which go back to the
earliest times. Its central and accessible position,
its wealth in natural products of an indispensable
kind, its early industrial activity, all contributed to
this end. Its lack of some materials of an equally
indispensable character was an additional motive for
exchange. Over the Persian gulf teak-wood found
at Eridu was brought from India. Cotton also
made its way from the same source to the southern
cities. Over Arabia, by way of Ur, which stood at
the foot of a natural opening from the desert, and
owed its early fame and power, it may be, in no
small degree, to its consequent commercial impor-
tance, were led the caravans laden with stone, spices,
copper, and gold from Sinai, Yemen, and Egypt.
Door-sockets of Sinaitic stone found at Nippur attest
this traffic. To the north led the natural highways
afforded by the rivers, and from thence, at the dawn
of history, the city-kings brought cedar-wood from
the Syrian mountains for the adornment of palaces
and temples. From the East, down the pass of
Holwan, came the marble and precious metal of the
mountains. Much of this raw material was worked
over by Babylonian artisans, and shipped back to the
less favored lands, along with the grain, dates, and
fish, the rugs and cloths, of native production. All
this traffic was in the hands of Babylonian traders
who fearlessly ventured into the borders of distant


SOCIAL CLASSES 75
countries, and must have carried with them thither
the knowledge of the civilization and wealth of their
own home, for only thus can the wide-spread in-
fluence of Babylonian culture in the earliest periods
be explained.
70. Babylonian society was well differentiated. At
the basis of it lay the slave population, the necessary
condition of all economic activity in antiquity. Slaves
were employed upon the farms, by the manufacturers
and in the temples. The sources of the supply were
various. War furnished many; others had fallen
from the position of free laborers; still others were
purchased from abroad, or were children of native
bondsmen. Rich private owners or temple corpora-
tions made a business of hiring them out as laborers.
They were humanely treated; the law protected them
from injury; they could earn money, hold property,
and thus purchase their freedom. Laws exist which
suggest that young children could not be separated
from their slave-parents in case of the sale of the
latter. Next in the scale stood the free laborer who
hired himself out for work like that of the slave, and
was his natural competitor. How he could continue
to secure higher wages — as seems to be the case —
is a problem which Peiser thinks explicable from the
fact that his employer was not liable for damages in
case of an injury, nor forced to care for him if he
were sick. In both of these situations the law secured
the reimbursement and protection of the slave (Mit-
eilungen der Vorderasiatischen Gesellschaft, 1896,
3), who could therefore safely work for less money.
There are some references to wages in the contracts of
the time which indicate that the free laborer received


76 OLD BABYLONIA
from four to six shekels ($3.00 to $4.50) a year, and
food. He made a written contract with his employer,
in which were specified the rate and the length of time
of employment. It is evident, however, that such
laborers must have been few in comparison with
slaves, and have steadily declined toward the lower
position. The tenant-farmer must have been an
important constituent of the social body, although
he does not play a very prominent part. He rented
the farm, hired the laborers, and superintended the
agricultural operations. Great proprietors seem to
have preferred the method of cultivating their estates
by tenant-farmers, as many contracts of this kind
attest. Of the rent paid in kind mention has been
made. The free peasant proprietor had by this time
well-nigh disappeared before the rich and aristocratic
landowner, and the tenant-farmer had taken his
place. In the cities tradesmen and artisans were
found in great numbers, and held in high esteem.
Whether at this time they had been formed into
guilds according to their several trades, as was the
case later, is uncertain. Merchants had their business
organized; firms carried on their mercantile operations
from generation to generation, records of which have
been preserved; and this class of citizens must have
been increasingly influential. At the summit of the
social system was the aristocracy, headed by the king.
The nobles lived on their estates and at the court of
the king, alternately. The scanty evidence suggests
that they held their estates from the king by a kind of
feudal tenure. They owed military service and trib-
ute. They had numerous dependants and slaves who
labored for them and in turn enjoyed their protection.


PROPERTY AND ITS USES 77
71. The right of holding private property in land
was already in force in Babylonia. It may be that
pasture-land was still held in common, and the cus-
tom of deeding property to a son or adopted slave, on
condition of the parent receiving his support during
his lifetime from the property, is a relic of the transi-
tion from family to individual ownership. The king,
theoretic owner by divine right of all the land, had
long ago distributed it among his vassals, either in
fee or perpetual possession. Careful surveys were
made, and inscribed stones, set up on the limits of a
property, indicated the possessor and invoked the
curse of the gods on any who should interfere with
property rights. Ground could be leased or handed
down by will. In a community where trade was so
important, wealth other than in land was common.
Grain and manufactured goods, stored in warehouses
in the cities, and precious metals formed no small
part of the resources of the citizens. There still
survived, in some transactions, payment in kind,
grain or cattle; but in general the use of metals for
exchange was in vogue. Naturally they became
standards of value. They were weighed out and
fashioned in bars. The shekel, weighing somewhat
more than half an ounce avoirdupois, the mina of
sixty shekels, and the talent of sixty minas were the
standard weights, though there were other systems in
use. Money was loaned, at first on condition of the
borrower performing a certain amount of labor for it,
later on an agreement to pay interest, usually at a
very high rate.
72. On the whole, Babylonian life from the mate-
rial point of view must have been active and agreeable.


78 OLD BABYLONIA
Cities were protected by high and thick walls to
guard against enemies. Some sort of local organ-
ization existed for town government. Houses were
simple and low, built with thick mud walls and flat
roofs of reeds and mud. The streets were narrow and
dirty, the receptacles of all the sweepings of the
houses. When the street filled up to the level of the
house doors, these were closed, the house built up
another story, the floor raised to correspond, and a
new door provided. Many houses were manufac-
tories and shops at the same time, the merchant
having his slaves or laborers do their work on the
premises. On higher points stood the palaces of
nobles and king, or the stately temples of the patron
gods. In the country, the houses of the proprietors
were surrounded by palm-trees and gardens. The
furniture was very simple, – chair and stool to sit on
by day, and a mat on which to sleep at night, flint
and metal knives and a few terra-cotta bowls and jars
for cooking and eating purposes, the oven for baking,
and the fire-stick for kindling the fire. For food, the
Babylonian had his inevitable grain and dried fish;
the grain he ground and ate in round cakes seasoned
with dates or other fruit; his drink was wine and beer.
To wear much clothing in such a land was a super-
fluity. Rulers are depicted with quilted skirts reach-
ing to the ankles, with no upper garment or head-
gear. Others wear thick flat quilted caps. Naram
Sin of Agade appears in a pointed hat with tunic
thrown over his left shoulder and breast. Less
important personages have hardly more than the loin-
cloth. As for hair and beard, men of the earliest
period seem to have been smoothly shaven, unless one


THE FAMILY 79
is to suppose that the artist felt himself unequal to
representing hair. Later, by the time of Sargon, the
beard and hair are worn long, and the custom
continued to be followed.
73. An important element of early Babylonian
society was the family. It had its laws and its
religion. While private property was recognized, yet
often the consent of the family was required for the
sale of land belonging to one of its circle. The father
was already the recognized head. Some traces of a
primitive right of the mother exist, but they are sur-
vivals of what is quite antiquated. Ancient laws,
preserved in late copies, illustrate family relations
which long prevailed:
If a son say to his father, “Thou art not my father,”
he can cut off (his locks), make him a slave, and sell him
for money. If a son say to his mother, “Thou art not
my mother,” she can cut off his locks, turn him out of
town, or (at least) drive him away from home (i. e., she
can have him deprived of citizenship and of inheritance,
but his liberty he loses not). If a father say to his son,
“Thou art not my son,” the latter has to leave house and
field (i. e., he loses everything). If a mother say to
her son, “Thou art not my son,” he shall leave house
and furniture (ABL, p. 445).
Giving in marriage was an affair of the father, and
was entirely on a mercantile basis. The prospective
bridegroom paid a stipulated sum for his bride, vary-
ing according to his wealth, sometimes a shekel, some-
times a mina. Some religious ceremonies accompanied
the marriage celebration. The wife usually brought
a dowry to her husband. Polygamy and concubinage
Awere not uncommon. The wife was completely under


80 OLD BABYLONIA
her husband's control. In certain circumstances she
could be sold as a slave, or put to death. Divorce
was very easy, since the husband had merely to bid
the wife depart, giving her a writ of divorcement.
The only restraint, and that probably a strong one, in
the case of a Babylonian, was that he was generally
required to restore to the wife the value of her dowry.
Sometimes by contract the wife had the control of her
property, and was thereby in a much better position.
To have children was the supreme end of marriage,
and sterility was a serious misfortune. In that case
adoption was a not uncommon recourse, accomplished
by carefully drawn up legal forms. Children thus
adopted had full rights. Adoption also was evidently
an easy way of obtaining additional hands for service
at home and in the fields, being really another form
of hiring servants; hence often an adult was thus
taken into a family.
74. The position occupied by the family in the
social sphere was taken by the state in the domain of
political life. It is held that the state was formed
out of the union of families, indeed was a greater
family with the king as father at its head (Peiser,
MVAG, 1896, 3). In its first recognizable form, how-
ever, the state was a city gathered about a temple,
the centre of worship. As has already been noted
(sect. 48), each of the city-states of Babylonia had its
god with whom its interests were identified. Religion,
therefore, was fundamental in Babylonian politics, the
bond of civic unity, the ground of political rights,
authority, and progress. With it, no doubt, was also
closely associated the economic element. The depen-
dence of prosperity, and even of life itself, upon the


THE KING 81
proper regulation of the water supply encouraged
settlement in the most favorable localities, and required
organization of the activities centred there. Only by
co-operation under a central authority could the canals
be kept open, due regard be paid to the claims of all
upon the common supply, and dangers from flood or
famine be grappled with energetically and in time to
safeguard the common interests. Self-protection from
enemies contributed to the same end. The nomads
from the desert and the mountain tribes of the east
were equally eager to enjoy the fruits of the fertile
Babylonian fields; their inhabitants must needs com-
bine to ward off inroads from all sides. All these
elements entered into and modified the character and
course of Babylonian politics, and they gave a particu-
lar firmness and prominence to the idea of the state
into which, from the earliest period, all family, clan,
and tribal interests had been completely merged.
75. These Babylonian city-states have kings at their
head. The earliest name given to the ruler is patesi,
a term which is most satisfactorily explained as having
a religious significance, and as testifying to the funda-
mental position and prerogative of the ruler as a
priest of the city god. It suggests that, in the primi-
tive Babylonian community, the place of supreme
importance and influence was occupied by the priest
as the representative of deity, as the mediator between
the clans and the gods on whom they depended. The
attitude and activity of the early kings confirm this
suggestion. They are, first of all, pious worshippers
of the gods. They build temples and adorn them
with the wealth of their kingdoms. They bestow
upon the gods the richest gifts. The favor of deity is
6


82 OLD BABYLONIA
their supremest desire. Piety is their highest virtue.
The duties of religion are an indispensable and inter-
minable element of their life. Before the gods they
come, as dependants and slaves, to make their offer-
ings. They are girded about with burdensome ritual
restrictions, the violation of which would entail dis-
aster upon themselves and their people, and to which,
therefore, they conform with constant alacrity and
even with zeal. On the other hand, they claim before
their subjects regard and reverence due to these inti-
mate divine relations. Their inscriptions declare that
they are nourished on the milk of the gods, or are
their offspring, sons begotten of them; that power and
sovereignty are by right of divine descent or appoint-
ment. It is not wonderful that, while these rulers
placed their statues in the temples to be constantly
before the eye of deity, their subjects should offer
them divine homage. Indeed, from the time of Sargon
of Agade, kings claim to be gods and do not hesitate
to prefix the sign of divinity to their names (Radau,
Early Babylonian History, pp. 307 ff.). All these
prerogatives, however, do not free them from respon-
sibility to their subjects, but rather intensify the
expectations centred in them. They must obtain
divine blessing for the state; they must themselves
battle in defence of their people. Thus the Baby-
lonian king is a warrior, going out to protect his
dominions against wild beasts or hostile men. To
kill the lion or the wild ox is an indispensable part
of his duties, and he goes forth in the strength of
the gods for these heroic struggles. He is as proud
of the trophies of the chase as of those of the
battlefield, and both alike he dedicates to the divine


CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT 83
powers by whose aid he has conquered. He repre-
sents, also, the more peaceful interests of the state
as the patron of industry; he appears like king Ur
Nina, with the basket of the mason on his head, or
rehearses his services in opening new canals, building
granaries, and importing foreign trees to beautify and
enrich the land, thus establishing his claim to be the
father and shepherd of his people.
76. The constitution of a state ruled by a king with
such prerogatives and position is naturally summed
up in the ruler. The citizen, while he expects
protection and justice, is a subject; the officials are
the king's dependants; his will is law; and the
strength of the state depends upon the personality
of its head. Yet it is also true that, where industry
and commerce were so early and so highly developed
as in Babylonia, the arbitrariness of the ruler was
modified by the necessity of a well-ordered and strictly
administered body of constitutional principles. Trade
was dependent on the admission and protection
of foreigners while in the country, and they seem
to have had no difficulty in securing citizenship, and
even in obtaining official positions. The revenues
were secured by various systems of taxation. Surveys
of state property were made, on the basis of which
land taxes were levied. The temples took their
tithe. Customs duties were paid at the city gate.
In time of war, the king rode in his chariot at the
head of his troops, as illustrated in the stele of the
Vultures, where Edingiranagin (sects. 56, 85) holds
in his hand the curved weapon for throwing, and his
warriors are armed with spears. At the close of the
battle he beats out the brains of captives with his


84 OLD BABYLONIA
club in honor of the gods. The city of the same king
seems to have possessed a coat of arms, “the lion-
headed eagle with outspread wings,” its claws in the
backs of two lions, significant of the corporate con-
sciousness of the state even at this early day.
77. But what shows most clearly the idea of politi-
cal organization as established in Babylonia is the
legal system. Fragments of law codes are still in
existence governing the relations of the family
(sect. 73), and, from the abundance of legal docu-
ments containing decisions, agreements, penalties,
etc., might be drawn up a body of law which bore
on such various topics as adoption, exchange, marriage,
divorce, stealing, adultery, and other crimes, renting
and sale of property, inheritance, loans, partnership,
slavery, and interest. No business arrangement seems
to have been complete without a written contract,
signed by the parties concerned in the presence of
witnesses, who also affixed their signatures to the
document. Should a difficulty or question in dispute
arise, the contestants had several methods of pro-
cedure. They could choose an arbitrator by whose
decision they agreed to abide; or, sometimes, the
complainant appealed to the king, who with his elders
heard the complaint and rendered judgment. Some-
times a court of judges was established, before which
cases were brought. Whatever was the process, the
decision, when rendered, was written down in all
the fulness and formality of legal phraseology, duly
signed and sealed with the finger-nail or the private
or official seal of all the parties. That the king him-
self was not above the law, at least in the ideal
conception of political philosophers of the time,


IV
CIVILIZATION OF OLD BABYLONIA: LITERATURE,
SCIENCE, ART, AND RELIGION
78. A PEOPLE as far advanced in social and politi-
cal organization as were the ancient Babylonians
could not have failed to make similar progress in the
higher elements of civilization. They were, indeed,
pre-eminently a practical folk, and were guided in all
their activities by the material ends to be gained.
Their literary remains will serve as an illustration in
point. Writing, in use among them from the earliest
times, was primarily employed for business purposes, in
contracts and other legal documents. Likewise the
very practical conjuration formulae were the most
numerous of the religious texts. The art of writing
was confined in great measure to priestly circles, to
scribes taught in the priestly schools and associated
with the temples. Documents of all kinds were
written to order by these scribes, and the signature
affixed by pressing the thumb-nail or a seal into the
clay. The difficulty of acquiring the complicated
cuneiform script cut off the majority of the people
from ever using it. For teaching it, a number of
text-books were employed which were copied by the
students. Some of the most valuable inscriptional
material, like the kings' lists, have come down to us
in these students’ copies. In Sippar, an inscription
on a small round tablet has been found, the con-


WRITING AND LITERATURE 87
tents of which suggest that it may have been an
ancient diploma or medal of that famous priestly
school. It reads, “Whosoever has distinguished him-
self at the place of tablet-writing shall shine as the
light” (Hilprecht, Recent Research, etc., p. 86). The
scribes were, indeed, not only an honorable, but even
an indispensable element of Babylonian society; upon
them depended social and political progress. The
large number of letters now in our museums from
officials and private persons, both men and women,
shows that communication by means of writing was
widespread, but all letters were probably put into
writing by scribes, and it is to be presumed that
scribes were employed to read them to their recipients.
One cannot safely argue from these letters or from the
business documents that ability to read and write be-
longed to the people at large.
79. Old Babylonia was, from the earliest historical
period, not merely in possession of a highly conven-
tionalized form of writing, but already had also
begun to produce a literature which embraced no
narrow range of subjects. The chief element in it
was religious, consisting of hymns, psalms, myths,
ritual prescripts, and votive inscriptions. Even
where religion is not directly the subject, the docu-
ments show its influence. Thus the astronomical
and astrological texts are from priestly circles, and
the epic and descriptive poetry deals with the gods
and heroes of mythology. Reference has already
been made to the legal codes and to fragments of
political wisdom, while our knowledge of the history
of the age comes from the various royal inscriptions
written on palace walls, cylinders, steles, and statues.


88 OLD BABYLONIA
The origin of this literary activity lies back of the
beginning of history. Before the age of Sargon,
once thought primitive, extends a long period from
which important royal texts have been preserved.
Sargon, indeed, is thought to have focussed the
literary activity of his time in a series of religious
works prepared for his royal library in Agade, and
no doubt every ruler who obtained wider dominion
than that over a single city-state took occasion to
foster science and literature. Even Gudea of Shir-
purla, whose political position is uncertain, had long
narratives of his pious acts carved on his statues for
the enlightenment and praise of posterity. Chief
among these patrons of learning was the founder of
Babylonian unity, Khammurabi, under whom the pre-
vious achievements of scholars, theologians, and poets
were gathered together and edited into literary works
of prime importance. In his time or shortly after,
the cosmogonic narratives, the rituals, the epics, the
laws, and the astronomical works were put into the
form in which they are now preserved.
80. The characteristics of all Babylonio-Assyrian
literature, as already enumerated (sect. 34), were
stamped upon it in this early period. The material
in stone and clay, upon which alone from the first
men wrote, compelled simplicity of utterance. Re-
ligion, the first subject for literary effort, determined
the style and dominated the content of subsequent
literature. Religion is responsible for the stereo-
typed phraseology and the repetitiousness approaching
monotony, the expressions having become fixed at
an early period and employed in sacred ceremonials
at a time when literature was looked upon as a


LITERATURE HIGHLY DEVELOPED 89
gift of the gods and set apart for their service.
Thus what at the beginning was a desirable repetition
of holy words became at last the accepted form for
all literary utterance. Poetry evidently was the
earliest and most favored medium of literature, for it
reached a comparatively high stage of development.
The lyric appears in hymns, prayers, and psalms for
use in the liturgical worship. Narrative poetry is
represented in a variety of fragments which describe
the adventures of early heroes who have dealings
with gods and monsters of the primeval world. Even
the culminating achievement of an epic has been
reached in the story of Gilgamesh, preserved in
twelve books, a Babylonian Odyssey. This poetry
is not naïve in character; already epithets have
become conventional; rhythm pervades it, rising
into parallelism, the balancing of expressions in
corresponding lines, phrases, or sentences, which ex-
press now antithetic ideas, now the same idea in
different forms. Even metre and strophical arrange-
ment are regarded by some scholars as discoverable
in the hymns and epic fragments. How far back in
the unknown past must be placed the beginnings of
this literary activity which has attained such develop-
ment in this early age of Babylonial
81. The authors of these writings are unknown.
A few names have come down in connection with
certain poems, but it is not unlikely that they are
names of scribes who copied, or of priests who
recited the epics or the hymns. The fact is signifi-
cant, for it indicates that the literature is the work
of a class, not of individuals; that it grew into form
under the shaping of many hands; that what has


90 OLD BABYLONIA
survived is, in its well-organized whole, the flower
of uncounted generations of priestly activity. The
books were made up of pages, numbered according
to the number of tablets required; each tablet was
marked for identification with the opening words of
the book; the tablets were deposited in the temples
in chambers prepared with shelves for the purpose.
Editors and commentators were already busy, arrang-
ing and revising the literature of the past. Scholars
have concluded that the narrative of the deluge in
the Gilgamesh epic is composed of two earlier ver-
sions joined together by such a reviser. Whether
these temple libraries were open to the public is
questionable, and indeed one is not to conclude from
this splendid outburst of early literature that the
Babylonians were therefore a literary people, even as
one cannot argue from the abundance of written
business documents that there was a general ability
to read and write. That the production of literary
works and interest in them were confined primarily to
the priests, and secondarily to the upper classes, is,
in our present scarcity of information, the safest
conclusion.
82. What has already been said will prepare the
reader for a judgment upon the general character of
this literature. The material on which it must needs
be written, the early age in which it appears, and the
priestly influence which dominates it are to be taken
into account in such an estimate. It is not just to
bring into comparison the literary work of later
peoples, such as the Hebrews or the Greeks; the
Egyptian literature of the same period may more
properly be regarded as a competitor. Thus tested,


ESTIMATE OF THE LITERATURE 91
the Babylonian undoubtedly comes off superior. Its
imagery, while sometimes fantastic, is often bold and
strong, sometimes weird, even fresh and delicate. Its
form, particularly in the poetry, is highly developed,
rhythmical, and flowing. Its thought is not seldom
profound with the mysteries of life and death and
vigorous in grappling with these problems. Es-
pecially remarkable is the fine talent for narration,
as Tiele has observed in his estimate of the litera-
ture (BAG, pp. 572 f). Over against Maspero's
strange dictum that “the bulk of Chaldean literature
seems nothing more than a heap of pretentious
trash” (Dawn of Civ., p. 771), may be placed
Sayce's general remark that “even if we judge it
from a merely literary point of view, we shall find
much to admire” (Babylonian Literature, p. 70), and
the more detailed conclusion of Baumgartner, par-
ticularly as to the Gilgamesh Epic, that, “regarded
purely as poetry, it has a kind of primitive force,
haunting voices that respond to the great problems of
human life, suffering, death, and the future, dramatic
vividness of representation and utterance, a painting
of character and a depicting of nature which pro-
duce strong effects with few strokes” (Geschichte
der Weltlitteratur, I. p. 84). The influence which
this literature exerted upon other peoples is a proof
of its power. Its mythological conceptions reappear
in Hebrew imagery; its epic figures in Greek reli-
gious lore. The dependence of the Hebrew narratives
of the creation and deluge upon the similar Babylonian
stories may be uncertain, but the form of the hymns,
their lyrical and rhythmical structure, has, in all
probability, formed the model for Hebrew psalmody,


92 OLD BABYLONIA
while many of the expressions of religious feeling
and aspiration, first wrought out in the temples of
Babylonia, have entered into the sacred language of
universal religion.
83. The ancient Babylonians had made some impor-
tant advances in the direction of scientific knowledge
and its application to life. Both the knowledge and
its application, however, were inspired and dominated
by religion, a fact which has its good and evil aspects.
No doubt, religion acted as a powerful stimulus to
the entering of the various fields of knowledge on
the part of those best fitted to make discoveries, the
priests; to this fact is due the remarkably early acqui-
sitions of the Babylonians in these spheres. On the
other hand, knowledge sought not for its own sake,
but in the interests of religion, was conceived of under
religious forms, employed primarily for religious pur-
poses, and subordinated to religious points of view.
The notion of the universe, for example, was pri-
marily that of a region where men and gods dwelt;
its compartments were arranged to provide the proper
accommodations for them. The earth was figured
as an inverted basket, or bowl (the mountain of the
world), its edges resting on the great watery deep.
On its outer surface dwelt mankind. Within its crust
was the dark abode of the dead. Above, and encom-
passing it, resting on the waters, was another hemi-
sphere, the heaven, on the under side of which moved
the sun, moon, and stars; on the outer side was sup-
ported another vast deep, behind which in eternal
light dwelt the gods. On the east and west of
heaven were gates through which the sun passed
at morning and night in his movement under the


SCIENCE 93
heavenly dome. In a chamber just outside the east-
ern gate, the gods met to determine the destinies of
the universe. The movements of the world, the rela-
tions of nature to man, were likewise regarded as the
activities of the divine powers in making revelations
to humanity or in bringing their wills to bear on man-
kind. Since to know their will and way was indis-
pensable for happiness, the priest studied the stars
and the plants, the winds and the rocks, and inter-
preted what he learned in terms of practical religion.
Medicine consisted largely in the repetition of formulae
to drive out the demons of disease, a ritual of exor-
cism where the manipulations and the doses had little
if any hygienic basis. Yet an ancient book of medi-
cal praxis and a list of medicinal herbs show that
some real progress was made in the knowledge of the
body and of actual curative agencies.
84. The high development of mathematical science
began in the same sacred source. The forms and rela-
tions of geometry were employed for purposes of au-
gury. The heavens were mapped out, and the courses
of the heavenly bodies traced to determine the bearing
of their movements upon human destinies. Astrology
was born in Babylonia and became the mother of As-
tronomy. The world of nature in its various physical
manifestations was studied for revelations of the di-
vine will, and the resulting skill of the priests in the
science of omens was unsurpassed in the ancient
world. Yet, withal, they had worked out a numeri-
cal system, compounded of the decimal and the sexa-
gesimal series. The basis was the “soss,” 60; the
“ner” was 600; the “sar,” 3600. The metrology
was accurate and elaborate, and formed the starting-


94 OLD BABYLONIA
point of all other systems of antiquity. All measures
of length, area, capacity, and weight were derived
from a single standard, the hand-breadth. The divi-
sion of the circle into degrees, minutes, and seconds
on the sexagesimal basis (360°, 60', 60") hails from
this period and people. The ecliptic was marked off
into the twelve regions, and the signs of the zodiac,
as we know them, already designated. The year of three
hundred sixty-five and one-fourth days was known,
though the common year was reckoned according to
twelve months of thirty days each, and equated with
the solar year by intercalating a month at the proper
times. Tables of stars and their movements, of eclipses
of moon and sun, were carefully prepared. The year
began with the month Nisan (March–April); the
day with the rising of the sun; the month was di-
vided into weeks of seven days; the day from sunrise
to sunrise into twelve double hours of sixty minutes.
The clepsydra and the sun-dial were Babylonian in-
ventions for measuring time.
85. The materials from which are obtained a knowl-
edge of the history of early Babylonia offer, at the same
time, testimony as to the artistic development, which
may be traced, therefore, through the three historic
epochs. In the pre-Sargonic period almost all the
available material is that in stone and metal found
at Shirpurla. On a bas-relief of King Ur Nina he
stands with a basket upon his head, his shoulders and
bust bare, a skirt about his waist descending to his
feet. Before him his children, represented as of
much smaller stature, express their obeisance by the
hands clasped across the breast. The heads and feet
are in profile, while the bodies are presented full to


ART 95
the spectator, thus producing a contorted effect. The
whole, while full of simplicity and vigor, is crude and
rough. The long sharp noses, retreating foreheads,
and large deep-set eyes give a strange bird-like ap-
pearance to the faces. The so-called “vulture stele "
of Edingiranagin (sect. 76) is much more complex in
its design. It is a large piece of white stone carved
on both faces. On the one side four scenes in
the war are represented — the battle, the victory, the
funeral rites and thank-offering, the execution of the
captives. On the other side, the booty is heaped up
before the gods, and the coat of arms of Shirpurla is
held aloft in the king's hand. The scenes are spirit-
edly sketched, and artistic unity is sought in the com-
plicated representation. The silver vase of Entemena
(sect. 56) is the finest piece of metal work of the
time. It rises gracefully from a bronze pedestal,
rounds out to one-half its height, and ends in a wide
vertical collar. Its sides are adorned with eagles, goats,
lions, and other animals. The age of Sargon is intro-
duced by the splendid bas-relief of Naram Sin, found
on the upper Tigris. What remains of it is a frag-
ment only, but it represents a royal figure, bearded,
with conical cap, a tunic thrown over the breast and
left shoulder, leaving bare the right arm, which grasps
a weapon. The work is singularly fine and strong
(Hilprecht, OBT, I. ii, pl. xxii). The height of
the plastic art of the time is reached in the statues
of Gudea of Shirpurla (sect. 60). They are of very
hard stone, but the artist has neglected no detail.
The king is represented in the attitude of submission
before the gods, his hands clasped upon his breast.
The head is gone from every statue, but heads of


96 OLD BABYLONIA
other statues have been found which illustrate the
method of treatment. A thick cap or turban is worn
on the head, and the tunic, as in the Naram Sin bas-
relief, leaves the right arm bare and descends to the
feet. Special study is given to this drapery; the
very folds are somewhat timidly reproduced. In
mastery of his material the artist has made much
progress since the early days. The impression given
is one of severe simplicity, directness, attention to
detail, and concentrated power (Maspero, DC, pp.
611 ff.).
86. The works just mentioned are the highest
achievements of the sculptor's and goldsmith's art.
But, in a variety of smaller objects, similar artistic
skill appears. The alabaster vases, dedicated by the
earliest kings at Nippur, the terra-cotta vases, orna-
mented with rope patterns, found in the same place,
the copper and bronze statuettes and vessels of various
kinds, the glazed and lacquered clay coffins made in
the form of a slipper, and numerous other implements
and objects are testimonies to the same artistic ability.
Particularly are the seal cylinders worthy of mention.
Reference has already been made to the use of the
seal by the Babylonians. Hard pebbles of carnelian,
jasper, chalcedony, and porphyry were rounded into
cylinders from two to three fifths of an inch in
diameter and from three-quarters of an inch to an
inch and a half in length; then upon the surface were
incised scenes from mythology or figures of holy
beings, such as Gilgamesh in his contest with the
lion, or the sun or moon god receiving homage from
his servant. Stamped upon the soft clay of a docu-
ment, the seal imparted, as it were, the sanction of


ESTIMATE OF THE ART 97
the gods to the agreement as well as certified to the
good faith of the signer. The work of the engraver
of these seals is remarkable. The best of them, such
as that of the scribe of Sargon of Agade (Maspero,
DC, p. 601; compare B. M. Guide, pl. xxiii) show
extraordinary fineness of workmanship, breadth of
treatment, and realistic fidelity to fact. Indeed, of all
the art of early Babylonia it may be said that it is emi-
nently realistic ; the artist has little sense of the ideal
or the general. To present the fact as it is, with sim-
plicity verging on bareness, and with a directness that
is almost too abrupt, — this was at the same time the
weakness and the strength of the Babylonian sculptor
or engraver. This trait is specially evident in his con-
ception of the gods. He was the first to present them
as human beings. But his anthropomorphism is rude
and crude. The divine beings are not greater or
grander than the men who worship them. The con-
ception, indeed, was original and epoch-making. But
it was reserved for the Greeks to improve upon it by
glorifying and idealizing the human forms under
which they represented their Apollo and their Zeus.
Another peculiarity which worked to the disadvantage
of Babylonian art was the convention which demanded
drapery in the representation of the human form.
Here too is realism, for the changeable climate doubt-
less required men to wear thicker clothing, and that
more constantly, than, for example, in Egypt. Hence
the study of the nude body and the sense of beauty
and grace which it develops were absent. The long
robes give a stiffness and sameness to the figures for
which the greater skill attained in the representation
of drapery hardly compensated.
7


98 OLD BABYLONIA
87. Although the early Babylonians had little stone
or wood with which to build, they used clay bricks
with architectural originality and effectiveness. The
palace or temple was not built upon the level of
the ground, but upon a rectangular brick platform.
At Shirpurla this was forty feet high; at Nippur
forty-five feet above the plain. Upon it stood the
palace structure of brick, one story high, with its cor-
ners usually facing the cardinal points. The walls
were very thick, the chambers small and dark, the pas-
sages narrow and often vaulted. Vertical walls and
flat roofs were the rule. The rooms, courts, galleries,
and passages stretched away interminably, yet with a
definite plan, within the rectangle. Huge buttresses
of brick sustained the platform, and pilasters supported
the walls of the structure built upon it. Access to
the building was obtained by a staircase rising from
the plain. To protect all from the tremendous rains
which would tend to undermine the walls, the solid
mass of the platform was threaded by terra-cotta drains
which carried the water down to the plain. Ventilating
shafts, likewise, were used to let in the air and drain
off the moisture. The temple was sometimes, like
the palace, a series of one-story buildings, but usually
culminated in what was a type of temple construction
peculiar to Babylonia, the ziggurat, a series of solid
masses of brick, placed one above the other, each suc-
cessive story smaller than the one beneath it. A
staircase or an inclined plane led from the shelf of one
story to the next; shrines were placed on the shelves
or hollowed out of the brick ; the shrine of the chief
deity was at the top. At Nippur the earliest ziggurat
upon the massive temple platform, built by Ur-Gur,


ARCHITECTURE 99
was a rectangular oblong, about one hundred and
seventy-five feet by one hundred, and composed of
three stages resting one upon the other (Peters, Nip-
pur, II. p. 124). The massiveness and monotony of
these structures were relieved by the use of stucco to
cover and protect the bricks both without and within.
Conical nails of colored terra-cotta were embedded in
this stucco, or decorative designs were painted upon
it. Enamelled bricks likewise were employed for ex-
terior coatings of walls. For supports of the roofs
tree trunks were used, which were covered with metal
sheathing. Thus Babylonia became the birthplace of
the decorated wall and the slender column (Sayce,
Babylonia and Assyria, p. 9). The earliest known
keyed arch has been unearthed at Nippur. The doors
of the palaces were hung in huge blocks of stone
hollowed out in the centre to receive the door-posts,
almost the only use of stone found in these buildings.
Remembering the material at the disposal of these
architects, one cannot but admire the originality and
utility of the designs wrought out by them. They
made up for lack of stone by the heaping together of
great masses of brick. The elevation of the build-
ings and the thickness of the walls served, at the
same time, to make the effect more imposing, to
supply a surer defence against enemies, and to afford
protection from heat and storms.
88. It has frequently been noted hitherto how the
life of the ancient Babylonian was deeply interfused
with his religion. The priests are judges, scribes, and
authors. Writing is first employed in the service of
the gods. Both the themes and the forms of litera-
ture are inspired by religion. Art receives its stimu-


100 OLD BABYLONIA
lus from the same source, the royal statues standing
as votive offerings in the temples and the seal cylin-
ders being engraved with figures of divine beings.
Science, whether it be medicine or mathematics, has,
as its ground, the activity of the heavenly powers, or,
as its end, the enlarging of religious knowledge.
Therefore it is fitting to close this review of early
Babylonian civilization with a sketch of the religion.
Already the fact has been observed that, from the
beginning, the city-states possessed temples, each the
centre of the worship of a particular god (sect. 48).
Thus at Eridu was Ea; at Ur, Sin, the moon god;
at Larsam, Shamash, the sun god; at Uruk, the god-
dess Ishtar; at Shirpurla, Ningirsu; at Nippur, Enlil
or Bel; at Kutha, Nergal; at Sippar, Shamash; at
Agade, the goddess Anunit; at Babylon, Marduk ;
and at Borsippa, Nabu. From this list of gods it is
evident at first glance that religion was local and that
the gods were in some cases powers of nature. Clearly
a more than primitive stage of development had been
reached, since the same god was worshipped in two
different cities. Investigation has made these facts
more certain by showing that Ningirsu, Nergal, and
Marduk are, probably, forms of the sun god; that
Anunit is but another name for Ishtar; that Enlil
was a storm god; that at each of these cities a mul-
titude of minor deities was worshipped; and that
similar local worship was carried on at less known
centres of population. The religious inscriptions of
Gudea of Shirpurla (sect. 60) show a well-organized
pantheon consisting of a variety of male and female
deities with Ningirsu in the lead. Here appears the
god Anu, “the heaven,” who, though not prominent


SPIRIT WORSHIP 101
in local worship, stands theoretically at the head of all
the gods. The religion of early Babylonian history,
then, was a local nature worship which was passing
into a more or less formal organization and unifica-
tion of deities as a result of political development or
theological formulation.
89. Behind this advanced stage was another and
very different phase of Babylonian religion testified
to by a body of conjuration formulae and hymns of
similar tenor. In the great mass of this literature
the names of the gods just enumerated are hardly
mentioned. The world is peopled with spirits, Zi,
good and evil beings, whose relations to man deter-
mine his condition and destiny. If he suffers from
sickness, it is an attack of a demon who must be
driven out by a formula, or by an appeal to a stronger
spirit of good. These powers are summed up under
various names indicative of the beginnings of organi-
zation, as, for example, “spirit of heaven” (zi ana),
“spirit of earth’’ (zi kia); “lord of demons’’ (en lil);
“lord of earth” (en ki). As the sense of good,
of beneficent, powers got the better of the fear of
harm and ruin in the minds of men, the spirit-powers
passed into gods. Thus the “spirit of heaven”
became Anu; the “lord of earth” or the “spirit of
earth” was identified with Ea of Eridu ; the “lord
of demons” was found again in Bel of Nippur. A
first triad of Babylonian gods was thus consti-
tuted in Anu, Bel, and Ea. As religion grew in
firmness of outline and organization, the hosts of
spirits retreated before the great gods, and, while not
disappearing, took a subordinate place, in private or
individual worship, and continued to exercise an


102 OLD BABYLONIA
important influence upon the faith and practice of
the people. The divine beings, whether rising out
of local spirits or spirits of nature or the combination
of both, took the field and marked the transition to the
new phase of religion in which the beneficent powers
were recognized as the superior beings, and received
the worship and gifts of the community.
90. The general notion of divine beings entertained
by the old Babylonian is illustrated by the term for
god, ilu, which conveys the root idea of power,
might. It was as “strong" ones that the spirits
came into contact with man from the beginning. It
was the heavenly powers of sun and moon and stars
and storm that of all nature-forces had most im-
pressed him. He indicated his attitude toward them
also by the favorite descriptive term “lord ” (en, bel).
They were above him, supreme powers whom he
served and obeyed in humility and dependence. Yet
mighty as were the gods, and exalted as they were
above humanity, the Babylonian was profoundly
conscious of the influences brought to bear by the
divine world upon mankind. From the period when
he felt himself surrounded by manifold spirits of the
natural world, to the time when he sought to do the
will of the great heavenly powers, he was ever
the centre of the play of the forces of the other world.
They were never far from him in purpose and action.
The stars moving over the sky spoke to him of their
will and emitted divine influences; the wind, the
storm, the earthquake, the eclipse, the actions of
animals, the flight of birds, – all conveyed the divine
messages to him who could interpret them. Hence
arose the immense mass of magical texts, the


THE RELIGIOUS TEMPER 103
pseudo-science of astrology, and the doctrine of
omens. The religious temper produced by such an
idea of god was twofold. On the one hand the divine
influence was felt as pure power, arbitrary, undefined,
and not to be counted on ; hence to be averted at all
hazards, restrained by magical means, or rendered
favorable by an elaborate ritual. Or, the worshipper
felt in the divine presence a sense of ill-desert, and,
in his desire for harmony with the divine ruler, flung
himself in confession and appeal upon the mercy
of his god in those remarkable Penitential Psalms in
which fear, suffering, and a sense of guilt are so
joined together as almost to defy analysis and to for-
bid a final judgment as to the essence of the ethical
quality. Those who first felt the emotions which
these psalms reveal were certainly on the road leading
to the heights of moral aspiration and renewal. The
difficulty was that the element of physical power in
the gods was ineradicable and, corresponding to it,
the use of magic to constrain the divine beings crept
into all religious activity and endeavor, thus thwart-
ing all moral progress. Though men recognized
that their world had been won from chaos to cosmos
by the gods under whose authority they lived, - for
this was the meaning of the victory of Marduk over
Tiamat, — they conceived of the victory in terms of
the natural physical universe, not as a conquest of
sin by the power of holiness and truth.
91. The conduct of worship was no doubt originally
the task of the priest. He afterward became king,
and carried with him into his royal position many
of the prerogatives and the restrictions attending the
priestly office. He was the representative of the


104 OLD BABYLONIA
community before the gods, and therefore girt about
with sanctity which often involved strict tabu. But
he soon divided his powers with others, priests
strictly so called, who performed the various duties
connected with the priestly service and whose names
and offices have in part come down to us. Rituals
have been preserved for various parts of the service;
many hymns have survived which were sung or recited.
Sacrifices of animals were made, libations poured out,
and incense burned. Priests wore special dresses,
ablutions were strongly insisted upon, clean and un-
clean animals were carefully distinguished, special
festivals were kept in harmony with the changes of
the seasons and the movements of the heavenly
bodies. Religious processions, in which the gods
were carried about in arks, ships, or chests, were
common. A calendar of lucky and unlucky days
was made. A Sabbath was observed for the purpose of
assuaging the wrath of the gods, that their hearts might
rest (Jastrow, in Am. Jour. of Theol., II. p. 315 f.).
Every indication points to the existence of a powerful
priesthood whose influence was felt in all spheres of
social and national life.
92. The outlook of the Babylonians upon the life
beyond was sombre. Burial customs indicate that
they believed in future existence, since drink and
food were placed with the dead in their graves. But,
in harmony with the severer conception of God, the
Babylonian thought of the future had an uncertain
and forbidding aspect. The poem which describes
the descent of the goddess Ishtar to the abode of the
dead, called Arallu, conceives of this region as dark
and dusty, where the shades flit about like birds in


DOMINANT FORCES OF LIFE 105
spaces shut in by bars, whence there is no egress.
There is the realm of Nergal, and of queen Allat who
resents the presence of Ishtar, goddess of life and
love, and inflicts dire punishments upon her. Yet in
this prison-house there is a fountain of life, though
sealed with seven seals; and in the Epic of Gil-
gamesh are heroes who have reached the home
of the blessed, - indications that the higher religious
aspiration was seeking after a conception of the future
more in harmony with the belief in great and benefi-
cent deities dwelling in the light and peace of the
upper heaven. It was the darker view, however, that
passed from Babylonia to the west and reappeared in
the dusky Sheol of the Hebrews, into which all,
whether good or bad, descended, there to prolong a
sad and shadowy existence.
93. In concluding this presentation of early Baby-
lonian life it is possible to sum up the dominant
forces of history and progress under three heads:
(1) Religion is the inspiring and regulative element
of the community. In its representatives govern-
ment finds its first officials. In the centre of each
city is the temple with its ruling and protecting deity.
Political growth is indicated by the wider worship of
the local god. The citizens and their lords are
servants of the god. He is the fount of justice, and
his priests are guardians of culture. Industry and
commerce have their sanctions in the oaths of the
gods, and the temples themselves are centres of mer-
cantile activity; they are the banks, the granaries, and
the seats of exchange. All life is founded on religion
and permeated by its influence. (2) The energizing
element of these communities is the ruler. Already


106 OLD BABYLONLA
the power of personality has made itself felt. Politi-
cal organization has crystallized about the individual.
He exercises supreme and unlimited power, as
servant of the deity and representative of divine
authority. He is the builder, the general, the judge,
the high priest. All the affairs of his people are an
object of solicitude to him. His name is perpetuated
upon the building-stones of the temple and the palace.
His figure is preserved in the image which stands
before the god in his temple. He is sometimes, in
literal truth, the life of his people. (3) From these
two forces united, religion and the ruler, springs the
third element, the impulse to expansion. Neither god
nor king is satisfied with local sovereignty. The
ambition of the one is sanctified and stimulated by the
divine commendation, encouragement, and effectual
aid of the other. The god claims universal sway.
The king, his representative, goes forth to conquer
under his command. The people follow their human
and their divine lords whithersoever they lead. In that
period circumstances were also particularly favorable
to such forward movements. Communication between
the different cities was made easy by the innumerable
watercourses threading the plain. The mighty rivers
offered themselves as avenues for wider expansion.
Such was Old Babylonia in its essential characteristics.
Such was the philosophy of its early history, illus-
trated by the details of the struggles which have al-
ready been described (Part I. chap. II.). The end
was a united Babylonia, achieved by the great king
Khammurabi, in whom all these forces culminated.


V
THE TIMES OF RHAMMURARI OF RARYLON.
2300–2100 B.C.
94. IT is clear that the city of Babylon did not play
a prominent part in early Babylonian history (seet,
50). It was not like Agade, Shirpurla, Uruk, or Ur,
the centre of a flourishing and aggressive state, nor
had it any religious pre-eminence such as was en-
joyed by Nippur or Eridu. Such an assertion is not
based merely on a lack of inscriptional information
which future excavation may be trusted to supply.
Existing inscriptions of the early time take no ac-
count of the city. This would not be the ease if its
importance had been recognized. The religious hymns
do not mention it. Its god Marduk takes a secondary
place in the later pantheon, below Bel of Nippur, Ea
of Eridu, Sin of Ur, and Shamash of Sippar. In the
time of the kings of Agade, Babylon is said to be a
part of their dominions and Sargon built a temple
there. The fact is significant, and suggests that the
city was overshadowed by the greater power and fame
of Sargon's capital. Only when the political and
commercial pre-eminence of the more northern state
passed away, was an opportunity given to Babylon.
By that time, however, the southern cities had seized
the leadership and had held it for a thousand years.
Accordingly, not till the middle of the third millen-
nium B. c. (sect. 63), did the first historical Baby-


108 OLD BABYLONIA
lonian king appear and the city push forward into
political importance. Its progress, thereafter, was
rapid and brilliant.
95. The first five kings of the first dynasty were as
follows:
Sumu-abu . . . . . about 2399–2384.
Sumula-ilu . . . . “ 2384–2349.
Zabum . . . . . . “ 2349–2335.
Abil Sin . . . . . “ 2335–2317.
Sin-muballit . . . . “ 2317–2297.
Immerum (usurper ?).
From none of these kings have inscriptions been
recovered, but what has been called a “Chronicle' of
their doings year by year, and business documents
dated in their reigns, together with references to
some of them by later kings, give an insight into
their affairs. The Babylonian kings' list indicates
that, beginning with Zabum, son succeeded father.
Immerum appears in the business documents, but
without indication of his place in the dynasty. The
kings' list does not name him, and he is therefore
regarded as a usurper. No light has been shed on
the events connected with the accession of the first
king to the Babylonian throne. From the names of
the kings it has been inferred that the dynasty was of
Arabian origin, and that the new outburst of Babylo-
nian might which now ensues is due to the infusion
of new blood in consequence of an Arabian invasion
which placed its leaders on the throne. The hypothe-
sis is certainly plausible. The events of Sumuabu's
reign are largely peaceful, temple building and the
offering of crowns to the deities being the chief matters


EARLY KINGS OF BABYLON 109
of moment. Toward the close, however, the city of
Kaçallu, presumably in the vicinity of Babylon, was
laid waste, – a suggestion that Babylon was already
beginning to let its power be felt in the north. A
later king of this dynasty, Samsu-iluna, states that
he rebuilt six great walls or castles which had been
built in the reign of Sumulailu, the second king, who
also fortified Babylon and Sippar, overthrew Kaçallu
again, and destroyed the city of Kish. He, too, was
a devout worshipper of the gods. A king of New
Babylonia (Nabuna'id) refers to a sun-temple in Sippar
which dated back to Zabum, and the “Chronicle "
speaks of other temples and shrines. The inference
from these relations with cities outside Babylon sug-
gests that by Zabum's time Babylon had extended
its sway in north Babylonia and was ready to enter
the south. It was, accordingly, with Sinmuballit
that complications arose with southern Babylonia,
then under the hegemony of Rim Sin of Larsam, an
Elamite conqueror. The chronicle states that Isin
was taken in the seventeenth year of the Babylonian
king. If business documents which are dated by the
capture of this city are properly interpreted, it appears
to have been the centre of a conflict between the two
powers, since it was apparently captured alternately
by both. The issue of the war is unknown.
96. While so scanty an array of facts avails for the
history of these early kings, with the sixth king,
Khammurabi (about 2297–2254 B.C.) a much clearer
and wider prospect is opened. The fact that an
unusually large amount of inscriptional material
comes from his reign is an indication that a change
has taken place in the position and fortunes of his


110 OLD BABYLONIA
city. The first and most striking confirmation of the
change, furnished by this material, is its testimony
to the overthrow of the Elamite power (sect. 64).
Knowledge of the causes which brought Khammurabi
into collision with Rim Sin of Larsam, as well as of
the events of the struggle, is not, indeed, furnished
in the inscriptions. Sinmuballit and Rim Sin had
already met before Isin, and the new conflict may
have been merely a renewal of the war. From the
narrative contained in Genesis xiv. 1, 2, it has been
inferred that Khammurabi (Amraphel) had been a
vassal of the Elamite king and rebelled against him
(sect. 65). However that may be, the Babylonian
represented the native element in a reaction against
invaders and foreign overlords which resulted in
their expulsion. There is probably a reference to
the decisive moment of this struggle in the dating
of a business document of the time “in the year in
which king Khammurabi by the might of Anu and
Bel established his possessions [or “good fortune”]
and his hand overthrew the lord [or “land,” ma-da],
of Iamutbal and king Rim Sin.” The Elamites seem
to have retired to the east, whither the king's lieuten-
ants, Siniddinam and Inuhsamar, pursued them, cross-
ing the river Tigris and annexing a portion of the
Elamite lowland (King, Letters and Inscriptions of
Hammurabi, I. xxxvi. ff.) which was thereafter
made more secure by fortifications. In the south of
Babylonia the king reduced to subjection cities which
opposed his progress, and destroyed their walls. His
dominion extended over the whole of Babylonia and
eastward across the Tigris to the mountains of Elam.
He could proclaim himself in his inscriptions “the


PUBLIC WORKS 111
mighty king, king of Babylon, king of the Four
(world-) Regions, king of Shumer and Akkad, into
whose power the god Bel has given over land and
people, in whose hand he has placed the reins of gov-
ernment (to direct them),” thus uniting in his own
person the various titles of earlier kings.
97. Though Khammurabi “was pre-eminently a
conquering king ” (Jastrow, Religion of Babylonia
and Assyria, p. 119), he was not behind in his arrange-
ments for the economic welfare of his kingdom. One
of his favorite titles is bani matim, “builder of the
land,” descriptive of his measures for the recovery of
the country from the devastations of the years of war
and confusion. Of his canals, at least two are de-
scribed in his inscriptions. One he dug at Sippar,
apparently connecting the Tigris and Euphrates. In
connection with it he fortified the city and surrounded
it with a moat. Another and more important canal
was commemorated in the following inscription which
illustrates his interest in the agricultural prosperity of
Babylonia:
“When Anu and Bel gave (me) the land of Shumer
and Akkad to rule and entrusted their sceptre to my
hands, I dug out the Khammurabi-canal (named) Nukh-
ush-nishi, which bringeth abundance of water unto the
land of Shumer and Akkad. Both the banks thereof I
changed to fields for cultivation, and I garnered piles of
grain, and I procured unfailing water for the land of
Shumer and Akkad.”
This canal was probably a great channel, passing
from Babylon in a southeasterly direction parallel
with the Euphrates, whose waters it received and


112 OLD BABYLONIA
distributed by smaller canals over the neighboring dis-
tricts, while also draining the adjoining marshes. The
waste lands were replanted by distribution of seed-
corn to the husbandmen; depopulated districts were
refilled by the return of their inhabitants or the set-
tlement of new communities; the prosperity and per-
manence of the irrigating works were secured by the
building of a castle, which was doubtless at the same
time a regulating station for the supply of water, at
the mouth of the canal. Among other building
operations we hear of a palace in the vicinity of
Bagdad, a great wall or fortification along the Ti-
gris, serving as well for protection from the floods
as from the Elamite invaders. Other fortifications in
various parts of the land are mentioned. Yet more is
known about the temple building. As the Babylonian
temples were as useful to business as to religion, their
restoration was a contribution to material as well as
religious well-being. The king built at Larsam a tem-
ple for Shamash; at Kish one for Zamama (Ninib) and
Ishtar, others at Zarilab and at Khallabi, at Borsippa
and Babylon. It is not improbable that in the two
latter cities he was the founder of the famous and
enduring structures in honor of the gods, called
respectively through all periods of Babylonian history
Ezida and Esagila.
98. Five kings succeeded Khammurabi before this
dynasty gave way to another. Each king seems to
have been the son of his predecessor, and the long
reigns which all enjoyed illustrate the condition of
the times. Of inscriptions directly from them only a
few are known. One from Samsuiluna (about 2254–
2216), Khammurabi's son, mentions his rebuilding the


KHAMMURABI'S SUCCESSORS 113
walls or fortresses of his ancestor (sect. 95) and
enlarging his capital city. In its proud and swelling
words it reflects the consciousness of greatness and
power which Khammurabi's achievements had be-
gotten in his successor. “Fear of my dreaded lord-
ship covered the face of heaven and earth. Wherefore
the gods inclined their beaming countenances unto me,
. . . to rule in peace forever over the four quarters
of the world, to attain the desire of my heart like a
god, daily to walk with uplifted head in exultation
and joy of heart, have they granted unto me as
their gift” (Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek, III. i. 130–
132). The “Chronicle " tells of conflicts with the
Kassites, and of rebellions in the cities of Isin and
Kish which were put down by him, but by far the
more numerous events there referred to relate to
the digging of canals and the service of religion.
From Abeshu, his successor, a few letters, and
inscriptional fragments only remain. A late copy of
an inscription from Ammiditana (about 2188–2151),
besides stating that he was the eldest son of Abeshu,
the son of Samsuiluna, proclaims him “King . . . of
Martu,” that is, presumably, “the westland,” Syria.
The last two kings were Ammizaduga, who reigned
ten years according to the “Chronicle,” but twenty-
two years according to the kings' list, and Samsudi-
tana who reigned thirty-two years. During the one
hundred and fifty years and more of the rule of
these kings, everything speaks in testimony of the
permanence and development of the strong political
structure whose foundations had been laid by Kham-
murabi, and of the peace and prosperity of the several
communities united into the empire.
8


114 OLD BABYLONIA
99. Of the significance of this imperial organiza-
tion and development for the social and industrial
life of the land there are many illustrations. A
centralized administration bound all the districts
hitherto separated and antagonistic into a solid unity.
Khammurabi “ was not content merely to capture a
city and exact tribute from its inhabitants, but he
straightway organized its government, and appointed
his own officers for its control” (King, Let. and Ins.
of Ham., III. xx.). Communication was regularly
kept up between the court and the provincial cities,
which were thus brought administratively into close
touch with the capital. An immensely increased
commercial activity followed this new centralization,
as is shown by the enormous mass of business
documents from this age. Increased prosperity was
followed by rising values. The price of land under
Khammurabi was higher than ever before. The ad-
ministration of justice was advanced through the
careful oversight of the courts by the king himself,
and by the creation of a royal court of appeal at Baby-
lon, access to which was open to the humblest citizen.
A calendar was established for the state and regulated
by the royal officials, whose arrangements for it were
approved by the king, and published throughout the
country. A royal post-system, the device of an
earlier age, was elaborated to make easy all this
intercommunication of the various districts. Con-
sequent upon it came greater security of life and
property as well as regular and better means of
transit, — blessings which were shared by all the in-
habitants. It is also true, on the other hand, that
this centralization involved the economic and political


RELIGION UNDER KHAMMURABI 115
depression of the other cities before the capital.
They gradually lost their independent significance,
as the currents of trade set steadily toward Babylon,
and became provincial towns, contributory to the
wealth and power of the royal city. It was the
statesmanship of Khammurabi that, for good or ill,
laid the foundations of this mercantile and monetary
supremacy of Babylon, before which the other com-
munities passed quite out of sight. Ur, Larsam,
Uruk, and Sippar are heard of no more, except as
seats of local worship or of provincial administration.
100. The sphere of religion, likewise, was signifi-
cantly influenced by the new imperial organization.
As might be expected, Marduk, the city-god of
Babylon, now became the head of the Babylonian
pantheon. The change is thought to have been some-
thing more than the natural result of the new situa-
tion; it seems to have been deliberately and officially
undertaken as the potent means of unifying the state.
That this god's supremacy was not left to chance
or to time is seen by the systematic abasement of
that other god who might reasonably contest the head-
ship with the new claimant, namely, Bel of Nippur
(sect. 88). The religious pre-eminence of his temple,
E-kur, in that ancient city, passed away, and it is
even claimed that the shrine was sacked, the images
and votive offerings destroyed, and the cult inter-
mitted by the authority of the kings of Babylon
(Peters, Nippur, II. pp. 257 f.). The proud title of
Bel (“lord”) passed to Marduk, and with it the
power and prerogative of the older deity. It may
not, however, be necessary to assume so violent an as-
sumption of power by Marduk. The political suprem-


116 OLD BABYLONIA
acy of Babylon, the larger power and greater wealth
of the priesthood of its god, the more splendid cult,
and the influence of the superior literary activity of
the priestly scholars of the capital may be sufficient
to account for the change. However, the unifying
might of a common religious centre, symbolized in
the worship of the one great god of the court, was
not to be despised, and Khammurabi was not the man
to overlook its importance. As the provinces looked
to Babylon for law and government, so they found in
Marduk the supreme embodiment of the empire.
101. A striking corollary of this change in the
divine world is found in the transformation of the
literature. Reference has already been made to
the revival of literary activity coincident with the
age of Khammurabi (sect. 79). Under the foster-
ing care of the priesthood of Babylon, the older
writings were collected, edited, and arranged in the
temple libraries of the capital city. A common
literary culture was spread abroad, corresponding to
the unity in other spheres of life. But the priests
who gathered these older writings subjected them to
a series of systematic literary modifications, whereby
the rôle of the ancient gods, particularly that of Bel
of Nippur, was transferred to Marduk of Babylon.
The Creation Epic is a case in point. In the culmi-
nation of that poem — the overthrow of Tiamat, the
representative of chaos—the task of representing the
Babylonian gods in the struggle is assigned to Mar-
duk, and the honors of victory are awarded to him.
But it is probable that in the earlier form of the Epic
both contest and victory were the part of another deity
of the earlier pantheon. A careful analysis of this


TRANSFORMATION OF LITERATURE 117
and other religious documents of the period has been
made by Professor Jastrow, who has brilliantly demon-
strated that “the legends and traditions of the past,”
were “reshaped and the cult in part remodelled so as
to emphasize the supremacy of Marduk’” (Rel. of
Bab and Assyr., chaps. vii., xxi.). In addition to
this special activity on behalf of their favorite god,
the priests of the time now began to build up those
systems of cosmology and theology which successive
generations of schoolmen elaborated into the stately
structures of speculation that so mightily influenced
the philosophy and religion of the ancient world.





P A R T II
THE RISE OF ASSYRIA AND ITS STRUGGLES
WITH KASSITE BABYLONIA





I
THE KASSITE CONQUEST OF BABYLONIA AND THE
APPEARANCE OF ASSYRIA. 2000–1500 B.C.
102. WITH the last king of the dynasty of Kham-
murabi (about 2098 B.C.) a period of darkness falls
upon the history of the land between the rivers. A
new dynasty of the Babylonian kings' list begins with
a certain Anmanu, and continues with ten other kings
whose names are anything but suggestive of Babylo-
nian origin. The regnal years of the eleven reach
the respectable number of three hundred and sixty-
eight. The problem of their origin is complicated
with that of deciphering the word (Uru-azagga?)
descriptive of them in the kings' list. Some think
that it points to a quarter of the city of Babylon.
Others, reading it Uru-ku, see in it the name of the
ancient city of Uruk. The length of the reigns of the
several kings is above the average, and suggests peace
and prosperity under their rule. It is certainly
strange in that case that no memorials of them have
as yet been discovered, -a fact that lends some plausi-
bility to the theory maintained by Hommel that this
dynasty was contemporaneous with that of Kham-
murabi and never attained significance.
103. The third dynasty, as recorded on the kings’
list, consists of thirty-six kings, who reigned five hun-
dred seventy-six years and nine months (about 1717–
1140 B.C.). About these kings information, while


122 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
quite extensive, is yet so fragmentary as to render ex-
act and organized presentation of their history exceed-
ingly difficult. The kings’ list is badly broken in the
middle of the dynasty, so that only the first six and
the last eleven or twelve of the names are intact,
leaving thirteen or fourteen to be otherwise supplied
and the order of succession to be determined from
imperfect and inconclusive data. Only one royal
inscription of some length exists, that of a certain
Agum-kakrime who does not appear on the dynastic
list. The tablets found at Nippur by the University
of Pennsylvania's expedition have added several names
to the list and thrown new light upon the history of the
dynasty. The fragments of the so-called “Synchro-
nistic History” (sect. 30) cover, in part, the relations
of the Babylonian and Assyrian kings of this age, and
the recently discovered royal Egyptian archives known
as the Tel-el-Amarna tablets contain letters from and
to several of them. From these materials it is pos-
sible to obtain the names of all but three or four of the
missing thirteen or fourteen kings, and to reach some-
thing like a general knowledge of the whole period and
some details of single reigns and epochs. Yet it is
evident that the absence of some royal names not only
makes the order of succession in the dark period un-
certain, but throws its chronology into disorder. Nor
is the material sufficient to remove the whole age from
the region of indefiniteness as to the aims and achieve-
ments of the dynasty, or to make possible a grouping
into epochs of development which may be above
criticism. With these considerations in mind it is
possible roughly to divide the period into four epochs:
first, the beginnings of Kassite rule; second, the


124 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
about them, the Kassites appear at an early day to
have figured in the annals of the Babylonian kingdom.
In the ninth year of Samsuiluna, of the first dynasty,
they were invading the land. This doubtless isolated
invasion was repeated in the following years until by
the beginning of the seventeenth century B.C., they
seem to have gained the upper hand in Babylonia.
Their earlier field of operations seems to have been in
the south, near the mouth of the rivers. Here was
Karduniash, the home of the Kassites in Babylonia,
a name subsequently extended over all the land. It
is not improbable that a Kassite tribe settled here in
the last days of the second dynasty, and, assimilated
to the civilization of the land, was later reinforced by
larger bands of the same people displaced from the
original home of the Kassites by pressure from behind,
and that the combined forces found it easy to over-
spread and gain possession of the whole country.
Such a supposition is in harmony with the evident
predilection of the Kassites for southern Babylonia, as
well as with their maintenance of authority over the
regions in which they originally had their home. It
also explains how, very soon after they came to power,
they were hardly to be distinguished from the Semitic
Babylonians over whom they ruled. They employed
the royal titles, worshipped at the ancient shrines,
served the native gods, and wrote their inscriptions
in the Babylonian language.
106. Of the six kings whose names appear first on
the dynastic list nothing of historical importance is
known. The gap that ensues in that list, covering
thirteen or fourteen names, is filled up from sources
to which reference has already been made. Agum-


AGUMKAKRIME 125
kakrime (sect. 103), whose inscription of three
hundred and thirty-eight lines is the most important
Kassite document as yet discovered, probably stands
near the early kings, is perhaps the seventh in order
(about 1600 B.C.). This inscription, preserved in an
Assyrian copy, was originally deposited in the temple
at Babylon, and describes the royal achievements on
behalf of the god Marduk and his divine spouse
Zarpanit. The king first proclaims his own glory by
reciting his genealogy, his relation to the gods and
his royal titles:
I am Agumkakrime, the son of Tashshigurumash; the
illustrious descendant of god Shuqamuna; called by Anu
and Bel, Ea and Marduk, Sin and Shamash; the power-
ful hero of Ishtar, the warrior among the goddesses.
I am a king of wisdom and prudence; a king who
grants hearing and pardon; the son of Tashshigurumash;
the descendant of Abirumash, the crafty warrior; the
first son among the numerous family of the great Agum;
an illustrious, royal scion who holds the reins of the
nation (and is) a mighty shepherd. . . .
I am king of the country of Kashshu and of the
Akkadians; king of the wide country of Babylon, who
settles the numerous people in Ashnunak; the King
of Padan and Alman; the King of Gutium, a foolish
nation; (a king) who makes obedient to him the four
regions, and has always been a favorite of the great
gods (I. 1–42).
107. Agumkakrime found, on taking the throne,
that the images of Marduk and Zarpanit, chief deities
of the city, had been removed from the temple to the
land of Khani, a region not yet definitely located,
but presumably in northern Mesopotamia, and pos-


126 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
sibly on the head-waters of the Euphrates. This
removal took place probably in connection with an
invasion of peoples from that distant region, who
were subsequently driven out; and it sheds light on
the weakened and disordered condition of the land
at the time of the appearance of the Kassites. These
images were recovered by the king, either through
an embassy or by force of arms. The inscription is
indefinite on the point, but the wealth of the king as
intimated in the latter part of the inscription would
suggest that he was at least able to compel the surren-
der of them. On being recovered they were replaced
in their temple, which was renovated and splendidly
furnished for their reception. Gold and precious
stones and woods were employed in lavish profusion
for the adornment of the persons of the divine pair
and the decoration of their abode. Their priesthoods
were revived, the service re-established, and endow-
ments provided for the temple.
108. In the countries enumerated by Agum-
kakrime as under his sway no mention is made of a
people who were soon to exercise a commanding
influence upon the history of the Kassite dynasty.
The people of Assyria, however, although, even
before that time, having a local habitation and rulers,
the names of some of whom have come down in
tradition, could hardly have been independent of a
king who claimed authority over the land of the
Kassites and the Guti, Padan, and Alman, – districts
which lie in the region of the middle and upper
Tigris, or on the slopes of the eastern mountains
(Delitzsch, Peradies, p. 205). According to the
report of the Synchronistic History, about a century


ASSYRIAN ORIGINS 127
and a half later Assyria was capable of treating
with Babylonia on equal terms, but, even if the
opening passages of that document (some eleven
lines) had been preserved, they would hardly have
indicated such relations at a much earlier date. The
sudden rise of Assyria, therefore, is reasonably ex-
plained as connected with the greater movement
which made the Kassites supreme in Babylonia.
109. The people who established the kingdom of
Assyria exhibit, in language and customs and even in
physical characteristics, a close likeness to the Baby-
lonians. They were, therefore, not only a Semitic
people, but, apparently, also of Semitic-Babylonian
stock. The most natural explanation of this fact is
that they were originally a Babylonian colony. They
seem, however, to be of even purer Semitic blood than
their Babylonian ancestors, and some scholars have
preferred to see in them an independent offshoot from
the original Semitic migration into the Mesopotamian
valley (sect. 51). If that be so, they must have come
very early under Babylonian influence which domi-
nated the essential elements of their civilization and
its growth down to their latest days. The earliest
centre of their organization was the city of Assur on
the west bank of the middle Tigris (lat. n. 35° 30'),
where a line of low hills begins to run southward
along the river. Perched on the outlying northern
spur of these hills, and by them sheltered from the
nomads of the steppe and protected by the broad
river in front from the raids of mountaineers of the
east, the city was an outpost of Babylonian civiliza-
tion and a station on the natural road of trade with
the lands of the upper Tigris. A fertile stretch of


128 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
alluvial soil in the vicinity supplied the necessary
agricultural basis of life, while, a few miles to the
north, bitumen springs furnished, as on the Euphrates,
an article of commerce and an indispensable element
of building (Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, II.
chap. xii.). The god of the city was Ashur, “the
good one,” and from him the city received its name
(Jastrow, Rel. of Bab. and Assyria, p. 196).
110. The early rulers of the city of Assur were
patesis (sect. 75), viceroys of Babylonian rulers.
Some of their names have come down in tradition,
as, for example, those of Ishme Dagan and his son,
Shamshi Adad, who lived according to Tiglathpileser
I. about seven hundred years before himself (that is,
about 1840–1800 B.C.). Later kings of Assyria also
refer to other rulers of the early age to whom they
give the royal title, but of whom nothing further is
known. The first mention of Assur is in a letter of
king Khammurabi of the first dynasty of Babylon,
who seems to intimate that the city was a part of the
Babylonian Empire (King, Let. and Inscr. of H., III.
p. 3). In the darkness that covers these beginnings,
the viceroys became independent of Babylonia and
extended their authority up the Tigris to Kalkhi,
Arbela, and Nineveh, cities to be in the future cen-
tres of the Assyrian Empire. The kingdom of Assyria
took form and gathered power.
111. The physical characteristics of this region
could not but shape the activities of those who lived
within its borders. It is the northeastern corner of
Mesopotamia. The mountains rise in the rear; the
Tigris and Mesopotamia are in front. The chief cities
of Assyria, with the sole exception of Assur, lie to


RISE OF ASSYRIA 129
the east of the great river and on the narrow shelf
between it and the northeastern mountain ranges.
They who live there must needs find nature less
friendly to them than to their brethren of the south.
Agriculture does not richly reward their labors.
They learn, by struggling with the wild beasts of
the hills and the fierce men of the mountains, the
thirst for battle and the joy of victory. And as they
grow too numerous for their borders, the prospect,
barred to the east and north, opens invitingly towards
the west and southwest. Thus the Assyrian found
in his surroundings the encouragement to devote
himself to war and to the chase rather than to the
peaceful pursuits of agriculture; the preparation for
military achievement on a scale hitherto unrealized.
112. It is not difficult to conceive how the Kassite
conquest of Babylonia profoundly influenced the de-
velopment of Assyria. The city of Assur, protected
from the inroads of the eastern invaders by its position
on the west bank of the Tigris, became, at the same
time, the refuge of those Babylonians who fled before
the conquerors as they overspread the land. The
Assyrian community was thus enabled to throw
off the yoke of allegiance to the mother country, now
in possession of foreigners, and to establish itself as
an independent kingdom. Its patesis became kings,
and began to cherish ambitions of recovering the
home-land from the grasp of the enemy, and of ex-
tending their sway over the upper Tigris and be-
yond. It is not unlikely that this latter endeavor
was at least partially successful during the early
period of the Kassite rule. It is certainly signifi-
cant that Agumkakrime does not mention Assyria
9


130 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
among the districts under his sway and if, as has
been remarked (sect. 108), his sphere of influence
seems to include it, his successors were soon to learn
that a new power must be reckoned with, in settling
the question of supremacy on the middle Tigris.


II
THE EARLY CONFLICTS OF BABYLONLA AND
ASSYRIA. 1500–1150 B.C.
113. THE half millennium (2000–1500 B.C.), that
saw the decline of Old Babylonia, its conquest by the
Kassites and the beginnings of the kingdom of
Assyria, had been also a period of transition in the
rest of the ancient oriental world. In Egypt the
quiet, isolated development of native life and forces
which had gone on unhindered for two thousand years
and had produced so remarkable a civilization, was
broken into by the invasion of the Hyksos, Semitic
nomads from Arabia, who held the primacy of power
for three hundred years and introduced new elements
and influences into the historical process. In the re-
gion lying between the Euphrates and the Nile, which
in the absence of a common name may be called
Syria, where Babylonian civilization, sustained from
time to time by Babylonian armies, had taken deep
root, similar changes, though less clearly attested by
definite historical memorials, seem to have taken
place. The Hyksos movement into Egypt could not
but have been attended with disturbances in southern
Syria, reflected perhaps in the patriarchal traditions
of the Hebrews. In the north, peoples from the
mountains that rim the upper plateau began to de-
scend and occupy the regions to the east and west of


132 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
the head-waters of the Euphrates, thus threatening
the security of the highways of trade, and, conse-
quently, Babylonian authority on the Mediterranean.
114. Had the Babylonian kingdom been unham-
pered, it might have met and overcome these adverse
influences in its western provinces and continued its
hegemony over the peoples of Syria. But to the
inner confusion caused by the presence of foreign
rulers was added the antagonism of a young and
vigorous rival, the Assyrian kingdom on the upper
Tigris. Through the absorption of both powers in
the complications that ensued, any vigorous move-
ment toward the west was impossible. It was from
another and quite unexpected quarter that the politi-
cal situation was to be transformed. In Egypt by
the beginning of the sixteenth century a desperate
struggle of the native element against the ruling Hyk-
sos began, resulting, as the century drew to a close, in
the expulsion of the foreigners. Under the fresh im-
pulses aroused by this victorious struggle the nation
entered an entirely new path of conquest. The Pha-
raohs of the New Empire went forth to win Syria.
115. The fifteenth century B.C., therefore, marks
a turning-point in the history of Western Asia. The
nations that had hitherto wrought out largely by
themselves their contributions to civilization and
progress came into direct political relation one with
another in that middle zone between the Euphrates
and the Nile, which was henceforth to be the battle-
ground of their armies and the reward of their
victories. From that time forth the politics of the
kings was to be a world-politics; the balance of
power was to be a burning question; international


EGYPT MISTRESS OF SYRIA 133
diplomacy came into being. The three great powers
were Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia. Lesser king-
doms appeared as Egypt advanced into the East, —
Mitanni in northwestern Mesopotamia, whose people
used the cuneiform script to express a language
which cannot yet be understood, Alasia in north-
western Syria, and the Hittites just rounding into
form in the highlands of northeastern Syria and des-
tined to play so brilliant a part, if at present a
puzzling one, in the history of the coming centuries.
At first, Egypt carried all before her. Under the
successive Pharaohs of the eighteenth dynasty, her
armies passed victoriously up and down along the
eastern Mediterranean and even crossed the Eu-
phrates. All Syria became an Egyptian province,
paying tribute to the empire of the Nile. Egyptian
civilization was dominant throughout the whole
region.
116. The effect of this Egyptian predominance in
Syria upon the kingdoms of the Tigro-Euphrates
valley was significant. The Egyptians obtained the
monopoly of the trade of its new provinces, and the
eastern kingdoms were cut off. They were crowded
back as Egypt pressed forward. It is not improbable
that Assyria's northern movement (sect. 112) was by
this pressure forced to the east, and therefore the
centre of Assyrian power shifted to the other side of
the Tigris over against the eastern mountains. The
image of Ishtar, goddess of Nineveh, had fallen during
this time into the hands of the king of Mitanni, who
sent it to Egypt (Winckler, Tel-el-Amarna Letters,
20). The pent up forces of the two peoples declined
and exhausted themselves in reviving and pursuing


134 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
with greater intensity and persistence the struggle
for local supremacy. Assyria was numbered by
Thutmose III. of Egypt (1480–1427 B.C.) among his
tributaries for two years, although this may have been
little more than a vainglorious boast, arising out of the
endeavor of the Assyrian king to obtain the Egyptian
alliance by means of gifts. That Egypt was courted
by both Babylonian and Assyrian rulers is testified
to by the archives of Amenhotep IV., as preserved in
the Tel-el-Amarna letters, which contain communica-
tions from kings of both nations to the Pharaohs,
intimating that these negotiations had been going on
for half a century. The Pharaohs, having won their
provinces in Syria by force of arms, were willing to
maintain possession by alliances with bordering peoples
whom they regarded as inferior, even while treating
with them on the conventional terms imposed by
the diplomacy of the time. Thus they exchanged
princesses with Mitanni, Babylon, and Assyria, and
made presents of gold, the receipt of which the kings
of these lands acknowledged by asking for more.
Their deferential attitude toward Egypt, however,
goes somewhat beyond what must have been the
diplomatic courtesy of the time, and shows how Egypt
stood as arbiter and head among them. A perfect
illustration of the situation is given in the following
paragraph from a letter of the king of Babylon to
Amenhotep IV. of Egypt:
In the time of Kurigalzu, my father, the Canaanites as
a body sent to him as follows: “Against the frontier of
the land, let us march, and invade it. Let us make an
alliance with thee.” Then my father sent them this
(reply), as follows: “Cease (trying) to form an alliance


INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 135
with me. If you cherish hostility against the king of
Egypt, my brother, and bind yourselves together (with
an oath), as for me, shall I not come and plunder you?
—for he is in alliance with me.” My father, for the
sake of thy father, did not heed them. Now, (as to) the
Assyrians, my own subjects, did I not send thee (word)
concerning their matters? Why has (an embassy) entered
thy country 2 If thou lovest me, let them have no good
fortune. Let them secure no (advantage) whatever
(ABL, p. 221).
While Egypt must needs be on friendly terms with
the Mesopotamian states in order to keep them from
interfering in Syria, it was with each one of them a
vital matter to gain her exclusive alliance, or prevent
any other of them from securing it.
117. In these conditions of world-politics, the com-
plications between the rival states in Mesopotamia,
as already remarked, were increased and intensified.
The problem of a boundary line, a frequent source of
trouble between nations, occasioned recurring diffi-
culties. Kara-indash for Babylon and Ashur-bel-ni-
sheshu for Assyria settled it (about 1450) by a treaty
(Synchr. Hist., col. I. 1–4). The same procedure was
followed about half a century later by the Babylonian
Burnaburyas I.(?) and the Assyrian Puzur-ashur (Ibid.,
col. I. 5–7). Of Kadashman Bel (Kallima Sin), who
reigned at Babylon in the interval, four letters to
Amenhotep III. of Egypt are preserved in the Tel-el-
Amarna tablets, together with one from the Pharaoh to
him, but beyond the mention of exchanging daugh-
ters as wives they contain no historical facts of impor-
tance. Kurigalzu I. (about 1380 B.C.), the son and
successor of Burnaburyas (I.2), is mentioned in the


136 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
same collection of documents as on good terms with
Egypt, but no record remains of his relations with
Assyria, where Ashur-nadin-akhi ruled. The same is
true of the latter's son, Ashur-uballit and the Baby-
lonian Burnaburyas II. (about 1350 B.C.), son of
Kurigalzu I., who refers to his rival in the boastful
terms already quoted (sect. 116), which, however,
must be interpreted as the language of diplomacy.
His six letters to the Pharaoh Amenhotep IV. are,
otherwise, historically barren. Ashuruballit, “the
vassal,” succeeded in marrying his daughter Mubal-
litat-sirua to the Babylonian king's son, Karakhardash,
who followed his father upon the throne (about 1325
B. C.). The two kings also renewed the boundary
treaty of their fathers (RP, 2 ser. V. p. 107, and
Winckler, Alt. Or. Forsch. I., ii. pp. 115 f.). Here the
first stage of the rivalry may be said to close. From
a position of insignificance the Assyrian kingdom had
been raised, by a series of able rulers, to an equality
with Babylonia, and the achievement was consum-
mated by the union of the royal houses.
118. The son of this union, Kadashman-kharbe,
succeeded his father on the Babylonian throne while
his grandfather, Ashuruballit, still ruled in Assyria.
To him, apparently, a Babylonian chronicle fragment
ascribes the clearing of the Euphrates road from the
raids of the Bedouin Suti, and the building of fort-
resses and planting of colonies in Syria (RP, 2 ser.
V., and Winckler, AOF, l.c.). But it is not improb-
able that, if done by him, it was in connection with
his grandfather, who, in his letter to the Pharaoh
Amenhotep IV., expressly mentions the Suti as infest-
ing the roads to the west, evidently the trade routes


KURIGALZU II 137
of the upper Mesopotamian valley (Winckler, Tel-el-
Amarna Letters, pp. 30 f.). This close relation to
Assyria was not pleasing to the Kassite nobles, who
rebelled against their king, killed him, and set a cer-
tain Suzigas, or Nazibugas, upon the throne. But
the aged Ashuruballit hastened to avenge his grand-
son, marched into Babylonia, and put the usurper to
death. In his stead he placed on the throne the son
of Kadashman-kharbe as Kurigalzu II., who, called
the “young ” one, was evidently still a child. With
this agrees the probable reading of the years of his
reign as fifty-five upon the kings' list. He must at
first have reigned under the tutelage of Ashuruballit,
who, however, could not have lived long after his
great-grandson's accession. The Assyrian throne was
taken by his son Bel-nirari, who was followed by his
son Pudi-ilu. Kurigalzu outlived both these kings,
and saw Pudi-ilu's son, Adad-nirari I., succeed his
father. The Babylonian king seems not to have
altered his friendly attitude toward Assyria during
the reigns of the first two kings. He waged a bril-
liantly successful war with the Elamites, captured
their king Khurba-tila with his own hands, sacked
Susa, his capital, and brought back great spoil. At
Nippur he offered to the goddess of the shrine an
agate tablet which, after having been given to Ishtar
of Uruk in honor of Dungi of Ur more than a thou-
sand years before, had been carried away to Elam in
the Elamite invasion of the third millennium and was
now returned to its Babylonian home. In his last
years the king came into conflict with Adadnirari I. of
Assyria. Was it owing to the ambition of a young
and vigorous ruler who hoped to get the better of his


188 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
aged rival? Or was it the Babylonian's growing
distrust of the power of Assyria, which, under one of
the kings of his time, Belnirari, had attacked and
overthrown the Kassites in their ancestral home to
the east of the Tigris? Whatever was the occasion,
the two armies met, and the Assyrian was completely
defeated (RP, 2 ser. V. pp. 109 ft., cf. IV. p. 28;
Winckler, AOF, p. 122). A readjustment of boun-
daries followed. Kurigalzu II. was an industrious
builder. Whether the citadel of Dur Kurigalzu,
which lay as a bulwark on the northern border of
the Babylonian plain, was built by him or his prede-
cessor, the first of the name, is uncertain. The same
confusion attaches to most of the Kurigalzu inscrip-
tions, though the probabilities are in favor of ascrib-
ing the majority of them to Kurigalzu II. The temples
at Ur and Nippur were rebuilt by him as well as that
of Agade. A statement of the Babylonian chronicle
suggests that he was the first Kassite king who
favored Babylon and its god Marduk. He gives
himself in his inscriptions, among other titles, that of
“Viceroy of the god Bel” and may well be that
Kurigalzu whom a later ruler, in claiming descent
from him, proudly calls the “incomparable king ”
(sharru la Sanaan).
119. The period of peace with the Kassite rulers of
Babylonia had been improved by the Assyrian kings
in extending their boundaries toward the north and
east. An inscription of Adadnirari I. (KB, I. 4ff.)
ascribes the beginning of this forward movement to
his great-grandfather, Ashuruballit, who conquered
the Subari on the upper Tigris. Belnirari and
Pudi-ilu campaigned in the east and southeast in the


140 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
in this the natural direction of her expansion. It was
a turning-point in the world's history when this nation
set its face toward the west. Shalmaneser followed
up the Tigris, crossed its upper waters, planted
Assyrian outposts among the tribes, and marched
along the southern spurs of the mountains to the
head-waters of the Euphrates. The chief peoples
conquered by him were the Arami, by whom are to
be understood the Arameans of western Mesopotamia,
and the Muqri, concerning whose position little is
known unless they are the people of that name living
in northern Syria. In this case Shalmaneser was
the first Assyrian king to carry the Assyrian arms
across the Euphrates. The large additions to
Assyria's territory on all sides thus made probably
lay at the bottom of Shalmaneser's transfer of the
seat of his administration from the ancient city of
Assur to Kalkhi (Calah), forty miles to the north,
and on the eastern side of the Tigris just above the
point where the upper Zab empties into the great
river. The strategic advantages of the site are
obvious, – the protection offered by the Zab and the
Tigris, the more central location and the greater acces-
sibility from all parts of the now much enlarged state.
Here the king built his city, which testified to the
sagacity of its founder by remaining one of the great
centres of Assyrian life down to the end of the
empire. The title of Shar Kishshate, “king of the
world,” which he and his father Adadnirari were
the first Assyrian kings to claim, is a testimony both
of their greatness and of the consciousness of national
enlargement which their work produced.
121. Of the Kassite kings who held Babylonia


TUKULTI NINIB LORD OF BABYLON 141
during these years little is known beyond their names
and regnal years (sect. 103). An uncertain passage
on the broken Ashur-naçir-pal (?) obelisk seems to
refer to a hostile meeting between Kadashman-burias
and Shalmaneser I. of Assyria (Hommel, GBA,
p. 437). A much more important contest was that
between Shalmaneser's son, Tukulti Ninib (about
1250) and the Kassite rulers. From fragments of a
Babylonian chronicle (RP, 2 ser. V. p. 111), it is
clear that the Assyrian king entered Babylonia, and
for seven years held the throne against all comers,
defeating and overthrowing, it is probable, four
Babylonian kings who successively sought to main-
tain their rights against him. At last, owing perhaps
to the dissatisfaction felt in Assyria at the king's
evident preference for governing his kingdom from
Babylonia, Tukulti Ninib was himself murdered by a
conspiracy headed by his own son Ashurnaçirpal.
Here the second stage of the struggle may be said to
terminate. It had been accompanied by a remarkable
development of Assyria which brought the state,
though hardly yet of age, to a position of power that
culminated in the humiliation and temporary sub-
jection of her rival under Assyrian rule. During the
reign of Tukulti Ninib Assyria was the mistress of
the entire Tigro-Euphrates valley from the mountains
to the Persian gulf.
122. During these evil years Babylonia had suffered
from Elamite inroads (RP, 2 ser. V. pp. 111 f.) as
well as borne the yoke of the Assyrian. But the
murder of Tukulti Ninib gave the opportunity for a
new and successful rebellion which placed Adad-shum-
uçur (Adad-nadin-akhi) upon the throne. He ruled,


III
CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE IN THE KASSITE PERIOD
123. THE earliest and by no means the least im-
pressive instance of the power of civilization to
dominate a rude people and mould them to its will is
furnished in the relations of Babylonia to the Kassites.
Tribes, vigorous and wild, hitherto possessing but
slight traces of organization and culture, descended
from the hills upon a region in which dwelt a nation
of high social and political development, possessing
a long history of achievements in culture, distin-
guished for the peaceful acquisitions of wealth and
the enjoyment of the refinements of civilization. The
outcome, it might seem, was likely to be the over-
throw of the political structure, and the disappearance
of the high attainment in science and the arts of
life, reached by slow stages through two thousand
years, to be followed by a painful rebuilding of the
political and social edifice on new foundations. In
reality the very opposite of this took place. The
splendid work of Babylonian civilization stood intact;
the conquerors entered into the inheritance of its
traditions and achievements, and within a century
were found laboring for its advancement and perfec-
tion. The Kassites were absorbed into the Babylo-
nian life without a struggle. They even lost all
attachment to the mountain homes whence they came


144 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
and to the peoples from which they sprang, and per-
mitted them, at last, to pass into the possession of
Assyria.
124. The Kassite régime was not, however, without
its influence upon Babylonian history and life. The
direct contributions of purely Kassite elements were,
indeed, few. Some words enriched the language; the
new speech became a dialect which must be mastered
by the scholars; some cults of Kassite gods were
established and remained. A new racial ingredient
was poured into the already varied complex which
made up the Babylonian people, – an ingredient not
without value in infusing fresh and vigorous elements
into the doubtless somewhat enfeebled stock. For
the incoming of the invaders was sufficient evi-
dence that the native population was no longer able
to defend itself against assaults, and the service of
Agumkakrime, of which he boasts in his inscrip-
tion (sect. 106), is an example of what the Kassites
were to do for Babylonia. That such a work was
not only necessary but appreciated by the nation is
abundantly proved by the length of time during
which the Kassite kings sat upon the throne, in
spite of the difficulties which encompassed them.
125. Not as Kassite but as Babylonian kings, there-
fore, did these rulers contribute to the development
of the land between the rivers. Entering into the
heritage of preceding dynasties, they ruled like them
in accordance with Babylonian precedent, and in
many respects were worthy of the succession. In
one thing they surpassed their predecessors; they
gave to Babylonia a common name. Up to their
time, the kings had been rulers of cities whose


BABYLONIAN UNIFICATION 145
authority extended over districts round about, a state
of things true even of the age of Khammurabi, when
all the land was united under the sway of the city-
state of Babylon. Yet these foreign conquerors were
able to succeed where that great king had failed.
They called themselves kings of Karduniash. This
name was not that of a city, and while it was at first
attached to one of the southern districts (sect. 105),
soon came to be applied to the whole country, so
that, when later kings of Assyria would assert their
lordship over their ancestral enemy in the south, they
proudly assumed the old Kassite designation “King
of Karduniash.” This achievement was significant of
the new unity attained under this dynasty. Reference
has already been made (sect. 100) to the religious
policy which guided the unifiers of Babylonia in the
days of Khammurabi. It centred in the exaltation of
the city-god Marduk of Babylon, and the systematic
abasement of the other religious shrines, particularly
that of Nippur. But in this period that very temple
of Bel at Nippur seems to have returned to promi-
nence and its god received high honor. The Ameri-
can explorers on that site note that one of the
Kurigalzus rebuilt the ancient ziggurat, another Kas-
site king “built the great structure containing the
Court of Columns,” and the memorials of this dynasty,
in the shape of votive offerings and temple archives,
are the characteristic and dominating element among
the objects unearthed on the site (Peters, Nippur,
II. p. 259 and passim). Moreover, among the few
Kassite inscriptions found elsewhere, are records of
temple-building at other points. Kara-indash built
at Uruk, Burnaburiash at Larsam, and Kurigalzu at
10


INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 147
nian kings and the Pharaohs are given in the Tel-el-
Amarna letters. We hear now for the first time of
the “brotherhood of nations.” “First establish good
brotherhood between us” are words contained in a
letter of Amenhotep III. to Kadashman Bel (Winck-
ler, TAL, letter 1). Ambassadors pass to and fro
between the courts on the Euphrates and the Nile.
They carry safe-conducts for passage through the
Egyptian provinces of Syria. Their persons are sa-
cred, and the king in whose provinces an insult has
been offered to them must punish the offender. Be-
tween the royal personages who figure in these letters,
it has been thought that the relations were something
more than formal, and the message of a Mitannian
king to Amenhotep IV. on hearing of the death of
his father, has a pathetic ring: “Never did Nimmu-
riya, your father, break his promises—I have mourned
for him deeply, and when he died, I wished to die my-
self! May he, whom I loved, live with God” (Tiele-
Western Asia, p. 12).
127. The influence of Egypt upon the life of the
Babylonians, resulting from this enlarged intercourse,
cannot be followed into detail with any materials at
present available. Medical science may have been
improved. One might expect that religion would
have been affected. The dogma of the divinity of
the Pharaoh might be regarded as likely to emphasize
and encourage claims of the Babylonian kings for like
honors not unknown in the past (sect. 75); yet not
only is no evidence presented for this, but it is even
maintained that the Kassite kings definitely set aside
the remnants of the Babylonian usage in the case, and
regarded themselves as delegates and representatives


148 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
of the gods of whom they were the adopted sons
(Sayce, BA, p. 171). In the sphere of trade and
commerce the influence of Egypt was unmistakable
and far reaching. No doubt, at the beginning of the
advance of Egypt into Asia and throughout her dom-
ination of Syria, Babylonian commerce with the west
suffered, and was at times entirely cut off. But the
traders on the Euphrates directed their energies only
the more toward opening and developing new markets
in the north and east. According to testimony drawn
from the “finds " at Nippur, they brought gypsum
from Mesopotamia, marble and limestone from the
Persian mountains, cedar and cypress from the Za-
gros, lapis lazuli from Bactria, and cobalt for coloring
material, “presumably" from China (Peters, Nippur,
II. p. 134). It is not impossible that the eastern
affinities of the Kassite kings assisted the develop-
ment of trade in this direction. On the other hand,
when with some possible restrictions commerce was
revived with the Egyptian provinces of Syria under
royal agreements, the unification of these regions
under one authority gave at that time, as often
later, a substantial stimulus to trade both in its se-
curity and its extent. This fact is proved by the
striking discovery at Nippur of votive offerings of
magnesite, which must have been brought for the
Kassite kings from the island of Euboea (Nippur,
ibid.). Egypt itself had, in its Nubian mines, the
pre-eminent source of gold for the oriental world,
and the letters of the eastern kings to their breth-
ren the Pharaohs are full of requests for gifts of
more of the precious metal and of better quality,
for which they send in return lapis lazuli, enamel,


INDUSTRY AND ART 149
horses and chariots, slaves, costly furniture, and
works of art.
128. From the facts already stated it is clear that
Karduniash flourished under its Kassite rulers. In-
dustry was active. Manufacturing was represented
not only by the objects already enumerated as gifts
to the Pharaohs, but by a multitude of materials
found at Nippur and mentioned in the royal in-
Scriptions. Among the former were the ornamental
axe-heads. These analysis has disclosed to be made
of glass colored with cobalt and copper and resembling
in character “the famous Venetian glass of the four-
teenth century A. D.,” moulded probably by Phoenician
artists employed at the temple (Nippur, II. p. 134)
Agumkakrime's description of his rehabilitation of
the deities Marduk and Zarpanit of Babylon gives
a picture of the superabounding wealth of the king,
who clothes the images of the deities with gold-
embroidered robes, heavy with jewels, and houses them
in a cella of cedar and cypress woods made by cun-
ning workmen, its doors banded with bronze, and
its walls lined with strange carved animal figures.
Unfortunately, no large sculptures of these kings
have yet been discovered, nor do the remains of the
Nippur temple ascribed to them afford any judgment
as to the architecture of the time. The so-called
boundary stones of Milishikhu and Mardukbaliddin I.,
carved with rude representations of animals and of the
heavenly bodies, symbols of uncertain significance,
were probably the work of provincial artists (Smith,
AD, pp. 236 ff.). It is strange that these stones are
the chief evidence for the legal element in the life of
the time. The inscription on that of Mardukbaliddin


150 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
I. conveys a tract of land to one of his officials as a
reward. The boundaries of the tract are carefully
stated, the ancestry of the beneficiary is traced to the
fifth generation, witnesses are named, and curses are
invoked upon all who in the future may interfere
with this award. Excavations yet to be made on
temple sites like that of Nippur will probably reveal
in sufficient abundance the deeds, contracts, and
other documents which were indispensable in so
active and enterprising a commercial and industrial
community as was Babylonia in those days. A
similar silence broods over the literature. Beyond
the few royal inscriptions and letters already suffi-
ciently described, no evidence exists to show either
that the masterpieces of old were studied or that
new works were being produced. This gap in our
knowledge will also sometime be filled.
129. If the successful seizure of the Babylonian
throne by the Kassites had given a mighty impetus to
the development of Assyria as an independent kingdom
(sect. 112), their continued possession of Babylonia
affected deeply the history of the northern people.
The Assyrians were not thereby alienated from the
civilization of the south, for this had already been
wrought too deeply into the structure of their body
politic. It is maintained, indeed, that the Assyrian
cuneiform script of the time tends to resemble the
north Mesopotamian forms rather than the Babylonian
(Winckler, GBA, p. 165); but in all that may be
regarded as fundamental in a people's culture Assyria
remained in Babylonian leading-strings. The sur-
prising thing is that, as time wore on, the hostility
between the Kassite and Assyrian rulers did not re-


ECONOMIC CONDITIONS OF ASSYRIA 151
lax, nor did it yield even when all interests were in
favor of peace. The facts seem to show that the
primary part in this aggressive activity was taken by
Assyria. In other words, it became the settled policy
of the northern state to strive for the possession of
Babylonia, even when the actual Kassite element had
long been absorbed into the Semitic Babylonian.
The mere lust of conquest will not explain this
persistence. It must have its ground in the political
or economic conditions of the state. The original
Assyria (sect. 111) had neither a natural frontier
nor sufficient arable land to protect and sustain a
nation. Hence the people, if they were not constantly
to stand on guard, must expand until a natural bar-
rier was met; they must also reach out to control
the only other source of wealth in the ancient world,
commerce. In the way of the attainment of both
these objects stood, primarily, Babylonia. The Baby-
lonian war was, therefore, a vital condition of As-
syria's progress. Other motives may have entered in,
— the feeling that the south was the home-land, the
seat of religion and culture, and therefore must be
recovered. Nor is it unlikely that there was in
Babylonia itself a longing for union with Assyria,
and consequently a pro-Assyrian party, always ready
to encourage interference from the north. Yet the
deeper motive is that first mentioned.
130. The fateful influence of this course into
which Assyria was drawn was to intensify a military
bent already sufficiently encouraged by physical
surroundings. The king became the warrior, the
defender of his people from wild beasts and from
human enemies, the leader of an army. “He breaks


152 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
in pieces the mass of his foes, he tramples down their
countries,” “he scatters their armies"—are phrases
of Adadmirari I. in his own inscription. The gods
were those representing the fierce, wild elements of
nature, as Adad (Ramman), the god of the storm, the
wind, and the rain, or Ishtar, the goddess of Arbela,
the fierce companion in arms of the warriors, or the
other Ishtar, of Nineveh, the mistress of the soldier
returned from the wars, the goddess of love and lust.
Above them stood Ashur, the divine king of the
military state, of whom the human king was the
representative and servant, — the god, who went out
with the army to battle and received the spoils.
The nation, thus affected and inspired, gathered close
about its divine head, and followed the king his vice-
gerent with unquestioning obedience. The city where
he had his seat, whether Assur or Kalkhi or Nineveh,
became the headquarters of all activity. All other
cities, Arbela excepted, were overshadowed and left to
drag out a petty and insignificant existence, their
names hardly known. Here the court with its aris-
tocracy of warriors, chiefs with their clansmen, formed
the centre of national life. The king usually gave his
name to the first full year of his kingship; it was the
limu of the king by which all events were recorded;
then followed, given as official designation to year
after year, the names of the warriors of the court in
due succession. As king succeeded king, the limu
lists were preserved, formed a chronological frame-
work for history (sect. 38), and fostered the self-
consciousness of the state as a living organism,
having a past wrought out by men of might, and
moving on toward the future. This system had


ASSYRIAN CIVILIZATION OF THIS AGE 153
already been adopted by the time of Adadnirari I.,
whose stele was set up in the year when Shalmanu-
asharid (Shalmaneser) was limu. It was Assyria’s
original contribution to historical progress, and passed
over from the east to reappear in Athens, where a
similar official was called the archon eponymos.
131. In this military state all spheres of life felt the
impulse to realize practical results. Religion was at
the service of the kings. They were devoted to the
gods, indeed, since they were proud constantly to build
temples. Ashuruballit and his descendant Shalma-
neser I. repaired and enlarged a temple to Ishtar of
Nineveh, and Adadnirari I., another to Ashur at the
capital. They were equally proud of erecting palaces.
The Adadmirari stele deals more fully with the warlike
achievements of the king and his ancestors than with
his religious foundation. The remains of literature
and art and the evidences of industry and manufac-
turing in this age are too scanty to warrant any judg-
ment, the few royal inscriptions, some alabaster jars,
and a bronze sword of Adadmirari I. (Maspero, SN,
p. 607), chariots and horses, lapis lazuli, slaves, and
precious vases mentioned as gifts sent to the Egyp-
tian kings (Winckler, TAL, 15) being about all the
available material, - enough perhaps to indicate that
Assyrian scribes and merchants were following in the
footsteps of their brethren on the Euphrates. Phoe-
nician artists may have wrought in this period the
ivory carvings which were found on the site of Kalkhi,
the capital of Shalmaneser I. (BMG, p. 23). While
it is certain from documents of later periods that the
same legal forms were employed in business transac-
tions as were in use in Babylonia, no tablets of that


154 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
character belonging to this time, with possibly one
exception, have been found.
132. If the power of an ancient civilization to dom-
inate a rude people was impressively exhibited in the
victory of Babylonian culture over the Kassites (sect.
123), not less significant was the spectacle of the
renaissance of that culture as the Kassite domination
began to wane. Contemporaneous with the splitting
off of Assyria and its incessant inroads upon Karduni-
ash was the advance of Egypt into Syria and its
appearance upon the Euphrates. The reign of the
Semite in Western Asia and the long era of Babylo-
nian leadership in civilization seemed about to come
to an end. But so deeply rooted and so vigorous was
this culture, even in Syria, that the Egyptian con-
querors were compelled to use the Babylonian speech
in their diplomatic correspondence with the princes
and governors of the provinces and to teach it to
their officials in the Egyptian capital. And when the
authority of the Pharaohs decayed and their armies
disappeared from Syria, the new kingdom on the
Tigris came forward and girded itself for the task
of unifying under its own leadership the Semitic
peoples of Western Asia, and of making that same
Babylonian culture prevail from the Persian gulf to
the Mediterranean.


IV
THE TIMES OF TIGLATHPILESER I.
1100 B.C.
133. THE splendid extension of Assyrian authority
to the northwest, achieved by Shalmaneser I. and his
successors (sect. 120), had not been lasting. The
incursion and settlement of the Khatti in Syria
proved to be merely the beginning of a series of simi-
lar migrations from the north and northwest into the
regions of Western Asia. Half a century before his
own time, according to the testimony of Tiglath-
pileser I. of Assyria, the Mushki had advanced over
the boundaries of Assyria's conquests along the head-
waters of the Euphrates, had conquered the Alzi
and the Purukuzzi, her tributary peoples, and were
sifting into the nearer region of Qummukh. The
bulk of the invading peoples, indeed, poured down
into Syria, and broke in pieces the loose confederation
of the Khatti, but the latter in turn were thereby
pushed eastward to hamper Assyrian progress. The
effect of this reverse may be observed in the revival
of Babylonia under the later Kassite kings (sect. 122).
It was, probably, late in his long reign that Ashurdan
I. of Assyria was able to make headway against his
southern rivals, and inflict on the next to the last
Kassite ruler a defeat which three years after seems
to have cost this foreign dynasty its supremacy over
Babylonia. Ashurdan died soon after, and was fol-


156 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
lowed by his son Mutakkil-nusku, of whom little is
known; presumably he reigned but a few years (about
1135 B.C.).
134. The dynasty which wrested the Babylonian
throne from the Kassites was, as the names of its
kings indicate, of native origin, and is called in the
kings' list “the dynasty of Pashe.” Unfortunately,
that important document is imperfectly preserved at
this point, and seven names out of the whole number
of eleven are quite illegible. By a strange chance the
names of those kings who from other documents are
known to belong to this dynasty, are among those
missing from the kings' list, and it is therefore im-
possible to determine accurately their chronological
order and the length of their reigns. Of these the
greatest was Nebuchadrezzar I. A highly probable
argument has been made by Hilprecht (OBT, I, i,
pp. 41 ff.) to prove that he was the founder of the
dynasty and its first king (about 1140–1123 B.C.), but
paleographic grounds render it inconclusive, though
not impossible. He was followed in turn by Bel-
nadin-aplu (about 1122–1117 B. C.), and Marduk-
nadin-akhi (about 1116–1105). The dynasty held the
throne over one hundred and thirty-two years to about
1010 B.C.
135. The name Nebuchadrezzar, meaning “May the
god Nabu protect the boundary,” is significant of
the work of this energetic Babylonian ruler. Baby-
lonia had been the tramping-ground of the nations.
For centuries foreigners had ruled in the land and
had warred with the Assyrians for its possession.
In the last Kassite years the Elamites had renewed
their inroads from the east, penetrating to the very


THE BABYLONIAN REVIVAL 157
heart of the land. The province of Namar, famous
for its horses, was already occupied by them. This
deep humiliation, coupled with the Assyrian success,
drove the Kassite from his ascendency and opened the
way for more successful defenders of the ancient state.
Nebuchadrezzar undertook the task. He found the
Elamites already at Der. In spite of the scorching
heat of midsummer he pushed on, driving them before
him. Across the Tigris, on the banks of the Ula, the
final stand was made by the Elamite army, but, in the
fierce battle that ensued, the king, in the words of his
own inscription (ABL, p. 8), “remained the victor”
and “overthrew the country of the king of Elam . . .
carrying away its possessions.” Other expeditions to
the northeast into the old Kassite land and beyond it
to the highlands of the Lullumi, were intended to give
warning to future marauders from that region. A
governor of the district was stationed at the fortress
of Holwan.
136. Among the first tasks confronting such a ruler
was the rewarding of his followers, – a work which
at the same time meant the restoration of the Semitic-
Babylonian element to its former social and political
supremacy. An interesting example of his procedure
in this respect is found in a document of the king, the
most considerable inscription which has been preserved
from his reign, containing a deed of gift. Ritti Mar-
duk, of the house of Karziyabkhu, in the province of
Namar, which had fallen into the hands of the Flam-
ites, had valiantly supported his lord in the trying
Elamite campaign. Indeed, he seems to have per-
formed a signal personal service to Nebuchadrezzar
when hard pressed by the enemy. On the return of


158 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
the army the king issued a proclamation, giving back
to the prince and sealing for all time former privi-
leges by which Karziyabkhu was made a free domain,
over which the royal officials were not to exercise
authority, upon which they were not to levy taxes,
from which no requisitions for state purposes of any
sort were to be made. Of the wisdom of establishing
such feudal domains in the kingdom there may be
some question. It was a return to the older system
of land tenure which, by weakening the force of royal
authority, had made defence against invaders difficult.
But, for the present at least, restoration was the order
of the day, and Nebuchadrezzar proudly styles himself
“the sun of his country, who makes his people to
prosper, who preserves boundaries and establishes
landmarks (?), the just king, who pronounces right-
eous judgment.” According to another similar docu-
ment, he rescued in his campaign a statue of the
god Bel, which the Elamites may have taken from
Babylon. He seized the opportunity on this occasion
to re-establish, by “taking the hands of Bel,” his own
right to the Babylonian throne, and proceeded to re-
new in a yet more striking and magnificent way the
ancient glories of his kingdom.
137. Centuries had passed since any Babylonian
ruler either had set up the ancestral claim to posses-
sion of the “West-land,” or had done anything to
make that claim good. The Kassite kings had found
Egypt in possession of the field, and Assyria was,
from time to time, pushing forward to cut off the
road by occupying the upper waters of the Euphrates.
But Nebuchadrezzar, in the spirit of a glorious past
which he felt that he represented, not only called


NEBUCHADREZZAR AND ASHURRISHISHI 159
himself “conqueror of the West-land,” but seems
actually to have reached the Mediterranean and left
his name upon the cliffs of the Nahr-el-Kelb.
138. Such an expedition was certain to bring him
into contact with Assyria, and, indeed, was possible
only by reason of Assyrian weakness. His activities
in the northeast were equally offensive to the rival
state. It is no wonder, therefore, that the Syn-
chronitic History records a clash between the two
kingdoms. Neither the time nor the details of the
campaigns can be satisfactorily determined. It may
be presumed that they took place toward the close
of the king's reign (about 1125 B.C.). A new ruler,
Ashur-rish-ishi, was king in Assyria and eager to try
conclusions with the Babylonian veteran. He in-
vaded the south, but was driven back and followed
by Nebuchadrezzar, who laid siege to a border for-
tress. The Assyrian king succeeded in beating him
off and destroying his siege-train. In a later expe-
dition which the Babylonian sent against Assyria,
another and more serious repulse was suffered; the
Babylonian general Karastu was taken prisoner and
forty chariots captured. Nebuchadrezzar, near the end
of his career, made no further attempt to avenge this
disgrace, but left the renewal of the contest to his
successors (Syn. Hist., col. II.). Belnadinaplu (sect.
134), indeed, seems to have taken no steps in this
direction, nor did the Assyrian king pursue his ad-
vantage, unless his campaigns in the east and south-
east against the highland tribes, Ahlami, Guti, and
Lullumi, are to be regarded as an intrusion into
territory already claimed as the conquest of Nebu-
chadrezzar (sect. 135). Evidently neither party was


160 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
anxious to come to blows. Babylonia needed yet a
longer period of recuperation from the exhausting
struggles for deliverance from Kassite and Elamite,
while the Assyrian had his task awaiting him in
the restoration of Assyrian power in the north and
northwest.
139. The king who was to achieve this task for
Assyria and to add a brilliant page to her annals of
victory was already in the field. For at least three
generations the Assyrian crown had passed from
father to son, when Tiglathpileser I., the fourth of
the line, in the flower of his youth, mounted the
throne (about 1110 B.C.).
140. To understand the significance of the career
of this great king, so fully detailed in his own
inscription, a glance must be given at what had come
to be the traditional political policy of Assyria.
Linked to Babylonia by ties of blood and culture, the
state was constantly drawn into complications with
the mother-land. The vicissitudes of these relations
have been traced in preceding chapters. But, apart
from this fundamental influence, was the problem,
presented to each state, of the relation to the larger
environment. For Babylonia, this problem had
already been solved. Her central position on the
Euphrates — the connecting link between east and
west — indicated that her sphere of influence reached
out through western Mesopotamia to Syria and the
Mediterranean coast-lands. This predominance, real-
ized long before Assyria was born, had been main-
tained, with frequent lapses, indeed, and long
intervals of inactivity, down to the days of Nebuchad-
rezzar I. From Babylon to Haran and from Haran to


THE SCENE OF ASSYRIAN EXPANSION 161
the sea stretched the recognized highroad as well of
Babylonia's merchants as of her armies. Assyria,
newly arrived upon the scene, and once secure of her
position as an independent power by the side of her
more ancient rival, found the outlook for progress
leading to the more rugged pathways of the high-
lands to the north and northwest. To this field her
position in the upper corner of the Mesopotamian
plain invited her. The Tigris had broken through
the mountains and opened up the road thither. And
when the Assyrian merchant, moving westward in
the shadow of the mountain wall which formed the
northern boundary of the plain, was halted at the
Euphrates by Babylonian authority, he turned north-
ward into the highlands through which the upper
Euphrates poured, and thus brought to light wider re-
gions for the extension of Assyrian commerce. In all
this mountain-land the soldier had followed hard upon
the heels of the trader, so that for more than three
centuries the campaigns of kings like Ashuruballit,
Adadnirari, and Shalmaneser had built up the tradi-
tion that Assyria's sphere of influence was this north-
ern highland. Though in after years, when Babylonia
had yielded her supremacy of the west-land, the As-
syrian kings devoted themselves to conquest in the
richer lands of Syria, they never forgot the field of
their earlier campaigns; they kept open the trade
routes, and held in check the restless peoples of this
rugged region.
141. This region, in classical times known as
Armenia, containing in its fullest extent sixty thou-
sand square miles, is an irregular rectangle, its
greatest length five hundred miles, its width two
11


162 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
hundred and fifty miles. A vast plateau, lifted some
seven thousand feet above sea-level, it is girt about
and traversed by mountain ranges. On its northern
boundary lies the Caucasus; along the southern
border, overlooking the Mesopotamian valley, runs
Mt. Masius, called by the Assyrians Kashiari. Be-
tween these mountain boundaries two chains (the Ar-
menian Taurus and the Anti-Taurus) cross this lofty
region from west to east at about equal distances from
one another. At its eastern border the mountains
turn sharply to the southeast, and the country becomes
a trackless tangle of peaks and ravines. Toward the
northwest the plain runs out onto the plateau of Asia
Minor, or drops to the Black Sea. To the southwest
the Taurus throws out the ranges that pierce Arme-
nia, and then itself turns off to the south in the
Amanus range which forms the backbone of Syria.
In this disintegration of the Taurus the entire surface
of the land, like its eastern counterpart, is tossed
about in a shapeless confusion of high and well-nigh
impassable summits. Within Armenia, between the
long ranges, lie fair and smiling plains. Between
Kashiari and the Armenian Taurus the springs of the
Tigris gather to form that mighty stream which
breaks through the former range on the east and
pours down to the sea. Behind the Armenian Tau-
rus are the sources of the Euphrates which flows at
first parallel to the Tigris, but in the opposite direc-
tion, until, turning to the southward, it tears its way
through the knot of mountains in southwestern
Armenia by innumerable windings, and debouches on
the plain, at first to fall swiftly, then to spread out
more widely on its way to the Persian gulf. The


ARMENIA 163
land, threaded by the head-waters of these rivers, is
wild and romantic, with deep glens, lofty peaks, and
barren passes. In the midst of it lies the broad,
blue salt lake of Van, eighty miles long. The moun-
tains are thickly wooded, the valleys are genial.
Mineral wealth in silver, copper, and iron abounds.
Inexhaustible pasturage is found for flocks and herds.
All the fruits of the temperate zone grow in the
valleys, and harvests of grain are reaped in the plains.
The winters are cold and invigorating. It is a
country of rare picturesqueness, capable of support-
ing a large population. The people, vigorous and
hardy, till the soil of the plains, or lead flocks and
herds over the hillsides. The tribal organization pre-
vails. Villages nestle at the base of hills surmounted
by rude fortresses. The larger towns, situated on
the main roads which lead from Asia Minor to Meso-
potamia, are centres of trade in raw materials, wool,
goat's hair, and grain, or in the rude vessels of copper
and silver, the spoil of the mines, or in the coarse
cloths of the native weaver. The larger plains afford
to the tribes opportunities for closer organization, un-
der chiefs mustering no inconsiderable number of war-
riors. Border forays and the hunting of wild beasts
vary the monotony of agricultural and pastoral exist-
ence. At times, under pressure of invasion, the
tribes unite to defend their valleys, but fall apart
again when the danger is past. A free, healthy, and
abundant, if rude, life is lived under the open sky.
142. To secure control over the borders of this
upland, then, Assyrian kings had girded themselves
in preceding centuries. But the foothold attained by
them on the upper waters of the Euphrates had been,


164 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
as has been indicated (sect. 133), all but lost before
Tiglathpileser became king. Scarcely had he taken
his seat, when a new disaster was announced from
the land of the Qummukhi. This people occupied
the extensive valley between the Armenian Taurus
and the Kashiari range at the sources of the Tigris,
to the east of the gorge by which the Euphrates
breaks through the former range to seek the Meso-
potamian plain. Tribes from the northwest, known
collectively as the Mushki, not content with over-
powering the Alzi and Purukuzzi (sect. 133),
suddenly hurled themselves under their five kings
with twenty thousand warriors upon the Qummukhi.
Tiglathpileser hurried, with an army, from Assur to
the scene, more than three hundred miles away. His
route led him up the Tigris, half-way across the
upper Mesopotamian plain, then northward over
the range of Kashiari, to a point where he could
overlook the valley at its centre, not far from the
ancient town of Amid, the modern Diyarbekr.
From here he descended with chariots and infantry
upon the invaders below and crushed them in one
tremendous onslaught. Surprised and overwhelmed,
fourteen thousand were cut down, and the remainder
captured and transported to Assur. The Qummukhi,
restless and rebellious, were subdued with fire and
sword; one of their clans that fled into the eastern
mountains the king followed across the Tigris, and,
though they were aided by the Kirkhi (Kurti), a neigh-
boring people in the eastern plateau, he defeated them
and captured their stronghold. Returning, he marched
against the capital of another of their clans farther
to the north. They fled at his approach; their chief


NORTHERN CAMPAIGNS 165
submitted without fighting and was spared. The
king closed the campaign by taking a detachment of
infantry and thirty chariots for a dash over the
northern mountains into the “haughty and unsub-
missive country of Mildish,” which was likewise
reduced to subjection. Upon all the peoples he laid
the obligation of regular tribute and, laden with
booty, returned to Assyria. By one vigorous advance
he had not only removed the danger from the invad-
ing peoples, but had re-established Assyrian authority
over one of the largest and most important of these
mountain valleys, – that one which formed the en-
trance into the Mesopotamian plain.
143. The second campaign, undertaken in the first
full year of his reign, – the year of his accession
counting as only “the beginning,” — was directed
chiefly against the still rebellious Qummukhi, who
were made again to feel the weight of Assyrian dis-
pleasure. On their western border were settled the
Shumashti (Shubarti), whose cities had been invaded
by a body of tribes of the Khatti, four thousand
strong in infantry and chariots. These invaders
submitted on the king's advance and were transported
to Assyria. Two minor events of the year were
the re-establishment of authority over the Alzi and
Purukuzzi, and the subjugation of the Shubari, an
eastern hill-tribe.
144. In the narrative of the first year's exploits
occurs a phrase which suggests that the plan sub-
sequently followed by the king was already conceived.
Not only had Ashur, the nation's god, bidden him
subdue rebellious vassals, but, to use the king's own
words, “now he commanded me to extend the boun-


166 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
daries of my country.” It had become clear that, to
hold the peoples of these northern valleys to their
allegiance, a systematic extension of Assyrian territory
there must be undertaken. The task was formidable,
leading Tiglathpileser I. into far districts hitherto un-
heard of by Assyrian kings, and requiring a display
of energy and resource that his predecessors had not
approached. Three well-conceived campaigns are re-
corded. In the first — that of his second regnal year
— the tribes to the east of Qummukhi and the sources
of the Tigris, between Kashiari and the Armenian
Taurus, were subdued. In the second — that of his
third regnal year—the king climbed the Taurus and
descended upon the sources of the Euphrates. Here
were the tribes known to the Assyrians as the Nairi,
living to the west of Lake Van. The army pushed
steadily westward through the mountains, fighting as
it advanced, crossed the Euphrates, marched along its
right bank, and reached the city of Milid, the western
end of the main road from Asia Minor, later called
the “Royal Road,” and the chief city of a district
separated from the Qummukhi only by the lofty
Taurus mountains. There remained only the peoples
to the far west, and against these, after the interval of
a year, the king proceeded in his fifth regnal year. In
this region, between Qummukhi and the gulf of Issus,
lived the Muqri, whom Shalmaneser I. had already
encountered (sect. 120). In these mountain valleys
had flourished, centuries before, one of the main
branches of the wide kingdom of the Khatti, and
from thence this warlike people had descended upon
the Syrian plain. Here Tiglathpileser found great
fortresses, with walls and towers, blocking his ad-


SUMMARY OF CAMPAIGNS 167
vance. His reduction of the Mugri stirred up their
neighbors and allies to the northwest, the Qumani,
and sent him still farther away into the endless
confusion of rugged mountain ranges to accomplish
their overthrow. One fierce battle with an army of
twenty thousand warriors drove the defenders back
upon Khunusa, their triple-walled fortress, which was
stormed by the king with great slaughter and de-
molished. The way now lay open to their capital,
which surrendered on his approach. Thereupon he
accepted the submission of the tribes and laid the
usual tribute upon them. The first stage of his
stupendous task was now practically completed.
The Assyrian border in this vast mountain region
stretched in a huge arc from the upper Tigris and
Lake Van around the head-waters of the Euphrates
to the northeastern corner of the Mediterranean.
Indeed it extended even farther, for, to use his own
proud words:
I conquered in all, from the beginning of my reign to
my fifth regnal year, forty-two countries and their
princes, from the left bank of the lower Zab and the
border of distant forest-clad mountains as far as the
right bank of the Euphrates, the land of the Khatti,
and the Upper Sea of the setting sun (Prism Inscription,
col. vi. 39–45).
145. During the strenuous years of these campaigns
the king had found occasion to make at least two
expeditions in other directions. The overthrow of
the Shubari in the eastern hills took place in his first
regnal year. In the fourth, he made a raid upon the
Bedouin, who were crossing the Euphrates into


168 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
western Mesopotamia, apparently for the purpose of
settling in the upper plain. They were the advance
guard of the Arameans. Crossing the plain due
west from Assur, Tiglathpileser drove them before
him along the river from the Khabur to the city of
Karkhemish, followed them across into the desert,
burned their villages, and carried off their goods and
cattle to his capital. Necessary as such a campaign
was for Assyria's protection, it had entered territory
under Babylonian influence, and could hardly have
failed to stir up the Babylonian ruler to action against
Assyria. Marduknadinakhi (sect. 134) was a vigor-
ous ruler, and he seems to have responded by an
invasion of Assyrian territory in the tenth year of
his reign, in which may have occurred the capture
of the city of Ekallati, and the removal of its gods
to Babylon, an event to which a later Assyrian king,
Sennacherib, refers. In the hostilities which inevi-
tably ensued and continued for two years, possibly
the seventh and eighth regnal years of Tiglathpileser,
the Babylonian was severely beaten. In the first
campaign Marduknadinakhi had advanced beyond
the lower Zab into Assyrian territory, when he was
driven back. In the second, the Assyrian king took
the offensive and swept all before him. The decisive
defeat was administered in northern Babylonia.
Tiglathpileser captured, one after another, the chief
northern cities, Upi, Dur Kurigalzu, Sippar, and
Babylon, and then marched up the Euphrates to the
Khabur, thereby bringing the river from Babylon
to Karkhemish under Assyrian control. Satisfied
with this assertion of his superiority, and the control
of the chief trade routes, he did not attempt to usurp


TIGLATHFILESER I. IN THE WEST 169
the Babylonian throne, but left Marduknadinakhi to
resume his discredited authority.
146. A few more campaigns of the great Assyrian
are recorded. An expedition against Elam may
belong to his ninth year. Other visits to the lands
of the Nairi are mentioned, in the last of which he
set up, at the mouth of a grotto whence flows one of
the sources of the Tigris, a stone slab upon which
a full-length effigy of the conqueror is sculptured,
with a proclamation of his victories over these north-
ern peoples. It would not be surprising if he reigned
little more than ten years. The numerous and fa-
tiguing campaigns in which he led his troops, some-
times in his chariot, oftener on foot, over rugged
mountains, amidst incessant fighting, must early have
exhausted even his iron endurance. In the intervals
of warfare he hunted with indefatigable zeal. Lists
of lions slain by the king when on foot or from the
chariot, of wild oxen and elephants, the trophies of his
lance and bow, appear in his annals, and reveal another
side of his activity. Not by himself, but by later
kings, is another expedition referred to, which if, as
it seems, properly assigned to him, rounds out his
career. On the broken obelisk of Ashurnaçirpal III.
are some lines which describe achievements parallel
to his, though the ruler's name has not been pre-
served. Of this unknown it is further said that he
sailed in ships of Arvad, a city of Phoenicia, killed
a nakhiru (sea monster of some sort) in the great sea,
captured wild cattle at the foot of Lebanon, and was
presented by the king of Egypt with a pagutu (hippo-
potamus?) and a crocodile. Shalmaneser II. speaks
of the cities of Ashurutiraçbat and Mutkinu, lying


170 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
over against one another on either side of the Eu-
phrates, as once captured by Tiglathpileser. These
statements imply that, in the years after his Babylo-
nian victory, he completed his western conquests by
a campaign in Syria that carried him to the Mediter-
ranean and to the Lebanons. The fame of this ex-
ploit extorted a tribute of respect from an Egyptian
ruler.
147. Enough has been said to show that the king's
military activity was no purposeless series of plunder-
ing raids. His campaigns are linked together in a
well-ordered system. The first item of his policy is
stated in his plain but significant assertion, “The feet
of the enemy I kept from my country.” Even more
important is his second boast, “One word united I
caused them to speak.” Once conquered, the peoples
were organized under Assyrian rule. Of the details in
the realization of this plan he himself has recorded
little beyond the establishment of a regular tax and the
requirement of hostages. The deportation of captured
tribes is not uncommon. The conquered peoples
swear solemn oaths of allegiance by the Assyrian
gods. Rebels are treated with ruthless cruelty, for
they have sinned against gods and men. Peoples who
resist attack are exposed to slaughter and the plunder-
ing of their goods. Tribes that submit are spared,
their property respected, their chiefs restored to
power under Assyrian supremacy. These principles,
acted upon by Tiglathpileser, formed a body of pre-
cedents for future rulers.
148. At first thought, it seems unlikely that so
eager a warrior would be solicitous for the economic
welfare of his country. He was statesman, however,


BUILDING ACTIVITIES 171
as well as conqueror. From the conquered lands he
brought back flocks and herds; he sought out use-
ful and valuable trees for transplanting into Assyrian
forests, oaks, cedars, and fruit trees of a kind unknown
to Assyrian orchards. He rebuilt the crumbling walls
of cities; repaired the storehouses and granaries and
heaped them high with grain. Royal palaces in his
various provincial cities were restored, forming cita-
dels for defence. Most splendid of all were the
temples which he built and adorned with inimitable
splendor. Of the restored temple of Anu and Adad
he says:
I built it from foundation to roof larger and grander
than before, and erected also two great temple towers,
fitting ornaments of their great divinities. The splendid
temple, a brilliant and magnificent dwelling, the habita-
tion of their joys, the house for their delight, shining as
bright as the stars on heaven's firmament and richly
decorated with ornaments through the skill of my artists,
I planned, devised, and thought out, built, and completed.
I made its interior brilliant like the dome of the heavens;
decorated its walls like the splendor of the rising stars,
and made it grand with resplendent brilliancy. I reared
its temple towers to heaven, and completed its roof with
burned brick; located therein the upper terrace contain-
ing the chamber of their great divinities; and led into the
interior Anu and Adad, the great gods, and made them to
dwell in their lofty house, thus gladdening the heart of
their great divinities (Prism Ins., col. vii. 85–114, trans.
in ABL, pp. 25 f.).
149. The height of Assyria's attainment in the arts
of life may be inferred from a passage like the fore-
going, which is characteristic of the inscription as a


172 BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
whole, written as it is in a vigorous, flowing, and some-
what rhetorical style, significant of no little literary
culture. The ruler who could achieve such things and
find expression for them in so lofty a fashion was far
from being a mere ruthless general, and his state much
more than a mere military establishment. Justly could
he declare that he had “enhanced the welfare of his
nation,” and made his people “live and dwell in
peaceful homes.” Well might he pray, to use his
own words, that the gods
may turn to me truly and faithfully, accept graciously
the lifting up of my hands, hearken unto my devout
prayers, grant unto me and my kingdom abundance of
rain, years of prosperity and fruitfulness in plenty (Prism.
Ins., col. viii. 24–29, trans. in ABL, p. 26).
150. Tiglathpileser was followed on the throne by
his son Ashur-bel-kala, and he by his brother Shamshi
Adad. The two reigns seem to have been peaceful
and prosperous. The former king appears to have con-
tinued to rule over the wide domains of his father and,
in addition, to have come to terms with Babylonia.
There Marduk-sapik-zerim followed Marduknadi-
nakhi, and entered into an alliance with his Assyr-
ian neighbor. When a rebellion drove the Babylonian
from his throne, the successful usurper, “son of no-
body,” Adad-aplu-iddin, was recognized by the son of
Tiglathpileser, who took his daughter into the harem
on payment of a princely dowry by her father. It
has been inferred, from the finding of a statue in
Nineveh hailing from the king's palace, that Ashur-
belkala removed the capital from Assur to Nineveh.
Such a change is quite possible, since it would place.


DESCENDANTS OF TIGLATHPILESER I. 173
him nearer the centre of his realm. His brother, who
was perhaps his successor, is known to have built on
the temple of Ishtar in the latter city. The name
of the son of Shamshi Adad, Ashurnaçirpal II., has
been preserved, but though his striking prayer to
Ishtar is in our hands (BMG, p. 68), a record of his
deeds has not come down to posterity. The Assyrian
kingdom goes out in darkness. The first chapter of
her imperial history is finished (about 1050 B.C.).





P A R T III
THE ASCENDANCY OF ASSYRIA





I
THE ANCIENT WORLD AT THE REGINNING OF THE
FIRST MILLENNIUM 1000 S.C.
151. ABOUT the year 1000 B.C. a strange and
well-nigh unaccountable state of things confronts the
student of the empires of the Mesopotamian valley.
For a scene of vigorous activity is substituted a
monotonous vacancy. Aggressive expansion yields
to inertness. In place of the regal personalities
whose words proclaim their achievements in sonorous
detail, appear mere names, scattered here and there
over the wider spaces of the years, that tell nothing
of import or interest concerning the progress of the
states over which these phantom rulers held feeble
sway. The sources of knowledge have slowly dried
up or have been cut off by the accidents to which
historical memorials are always subject. Here and
there a brick inscribed with a king's name, or an
occasional reference in later inscriptions to some other-
wise unknown rulers of the time, is all that remains
of Assyrian material. The Babylonian kings' lists
and chronicles are confused or discondant, and at a
critical point, where they are practically the only
source, are quite broken away, leaving the whole
chronological structure hanging in the air. Such
facts carry their own important lesson. They speak
of decay or downfall, and invite inquiry into its
CallSeS.
12


178 ASSYRIA
152. The information directly gleaned from these
scanty memorials may be briefly stated. Three
Assyrian rulers are known to belong somewhere
within the period. Ashurkirbi (?) is said by Shal-
maneser II., who ruled Assyria two centuries later,
to have left a memorial of himself at the Mediterra-
nean, presumably in token of a western expedition,
and also to have lost to the Arameans the two cities
on opposite sides of the Euphrates, captured and prob-
ably fortified by Tiglathpileser I. to guard Assyrian
ascendancy at that point (sect. 146). On the so-called
broken obelisk of Ashurnaçirpal III. are mentioned
kings Irba Adad and Ashurnadinakhi II., who, prob-
ably in these days, built at the city of Assur. In
Babylonia the dynasty of Pashe came to an end about
1007 B.C., and was followed by three dynasties in
rapid succession. The fifth in the order of the kings'
list consisted of three kings who ruled between twenty-
one and twenty-three years, and was called the “Dy-
nasty of the Sea.” The sixth, the “Dynasty of Bazi,”
also of three kings, endured for but twenty years.
An Elamite followed, reigning for six years, constitut-
ing by himself alone the seventh dynasty. The names
of the kings of the eighth dynasty are quite broken
away on the list, and apparently the sum of their
regnal years also. How long they ruled, therefore,
is quite uncertain, and, when the gap closes, the kings
that begin the new series belong to the eighth cen-
tury. Half a dozen names, found in other docu-
ments, occupy the vacant space over against Assyrian
kings of the ninth century, from whom ampler infor-
mation has come down.
153. While only a broken and baffling story of the


CAUSES OF ASSYRIAN DECLINE 179
course of these kingdoms can be drawn from such
sources, it does not follow that the years gathering
about the beginning of the first millennium B. c. were
not of real significance to the history of Babylonia
and Assyria. The kingdoms themselves pass for the
time into eclipse, and the centre of interest is shifted
from their capitals to the lands that hitherto have
been the scene of their aggression. In those lands,
however, are to be found the causes of the decline,
and there a veritably new political world was forming
in those years, – a world in which the leaders of the
Assyrian renaissance were later to carry their arms
to wider and more splendid victories.
154. It may be correct to ascribe the decline of
Assyria, at least in part, to internal exhaustion, due
to the tremendous strain of the numerous and costly
campaigns of Tiglathpileser I. Vigorous citizens had
been drafted for the armies, many of whom perished
on distant battlefields. The economic resources of the
land absorbed in military campaigns were by no
means compensated for by the inflowing of treas-
ure from the conquered lands, most of which went into
the royal coffers. These losses could not but disable
the national strength. Yet the great king seems to
have sought to guard against this danger by the
statesmanlike measures already described (sect. 148),
and during the reigns of his two sons some oppor-
tunity for recuperation was afforded. The prime fact
was that, coincident with this period of internal de-
cline, a series of mighty movements of peoples took
place in the world without, which swept away As-
syria's authority over her provincial districts, en-
croached upon her territory, threw Babylonia into civil


180 ASSYRIA
war, paralyzed all foreign trade, and afforded oppor-
tunity for the consolidation of rival powers on the
borders of both nations. The most important of
these movements was a fresh wave of Aramean migra-
tion, which welled up in resistless volume from the
Arabian peninsula. At various periods during pre-
ceding centuries, these nomads had crossed the
Euphrates, and roamed through the middle Mesopo-
tamian plain as far as the Tigris. At times they
were a menace to the commerce of the rivers, but
usually were held in check by the armies of the great
states, driven back by systematic campaigns, or ab-
sorbed into the settled population. But in these years
they came in overwhelming multitudes. Apparently
by the mere force of numbers they crowded back the
Assyrians and Babylonians and occupied the entire
western half of the plain. They poured over into
Syria as well, until stopped by the sea and the moun-
tains. At the first they may have moved to and fro,
fighting and plundering, and not without reason has
it been held (Tiele, BAG, pp. 167, 178) that they
carried fire and sword into the heart of Assyria itself.
In course of time they yielded to the influences of
civilization, and began to settle down in the rich
country of upper Mesopotamia around the Euphrates,
where their states are found a century after. The
causes of such a movement are difficult to determine.
In this case something more than the ordinary impulse
to migration seems to be required. May it not be
found in the rise of the kingdoms of southern Arabia
which, whether Minean or Sabean, seem to have
reached the acme of their prosperity just before this
period? Their extension toward the north and east


THE KALDI IN BABYLONIA 181
may have driven the Bedouin upward and precipitated
the onward movement which forced the Arameans out
into Mesopotamia and Syria.
155. Such a cause would account also for the other
irruption from the same Arabian region, which in this
period brought confusion to Babylonia. It has al-
ready been remarked (sect. 69) that Babylonian trade
with southern Arabia centred about the border city
of Ur near the mouth of the rivers. Along this open
and attractive highway came a new horde that fell
upon the coast-lands and river-bottoms, and appear
henceforth in Babylonian history as the Kaldi. They
pressed forward up the river, ever falling back, when
defeated, into their almost inaccessible fastnesses in
the swamps of the coast, and ever reappearing to con-
test the sovereignty of the land. The kings that fol-
lowed the dynasty of Pashe were called Kings of the
Sea Land; the name suggests that they may have
belonged to the Kaldi. At any rate, they felt the in-
fluence of the troubles occasioned by the Arameans
to the north, for an inscription of Nabu-abal-iddin of
the ninth century, mentions the plundering of Akkad
by the Suti, and the failure of two of the kings of the
dynasty in an endeavor properly to restore the wor-
ship of the god Shamash in Sippar (KB, III. 1, p. 174).
The rapid succession of dynasties in Babylonia from
about 1000 to 950 B.C. is naturally explained in view
of a series of incursions such as this inscription men-
tions and other facts suggest.
156. In the northern regions, also, the scene of the
victories of Tiglathpileser, Assyrian ascendancy ap-
pears early to have been swept away. The facts are
much more obscure and indecisive, but the entrance of


182 ASSYRIA
new peoples on the scene seems fairly certain. Some-
where about or just before this time, the Phrygians
entered Asia Minor from Europe, and, like a wedge,
forced apart the peoples of the east and west. Vague
traditions exist of a Cilician kingdom, which rivalled
that of the earlier Khatti, and united the peoples to
the north and east of the gulf of Issus as far as Ar-
menia (Maspero, SN, p. 668). It may be that the as-
saults of the Assyrian king, coupled with the Phrygian
invasion, had resulted in welding these tribes into
a semblance of unity under some powerful chieftain,
before whom the authority of Assyria speedily disap-
peared, and the mountain passes were closed to her
trade. Even more significant for the later history of
Assyria was the advance from the northeast to the
shores of the “Upper Sea” (Lake Van) of a new
people, the Urarti, who were to exercise a predomi-
nating influence in these regions. Their advent was
followed by great confusion. The northern tribes
were pressed down to the south and southwest, and
thereby the Assyrian ascendancy in the eastern and
northern mountains was broken.
157. Behind these obstructions which effectually
closed in around the Mesopotamian kingdoms, the
opportunity was given for the formation of new na-
tionalities, or the larger development of those already
in existence. Especially on the Mediterranean coast
was the opportunity improved. Here the warlike
people known as the Philistines had established them-
selves as lords in the cities on the southeast coast,
where the roads run up from Egypt into Syria, and
were pressing up into the hill country behind. On
these plateaus the Hebrews had been feeling after that


NEW DEVELOPMENT OF SYRIA 183
national organization to which their worship of Je-
hovah led the way and gave the inspiration. By the
impact of Philistine aggression the nation was brought
into being, and sprang into full vigor under the genial
leadership of David and the wise statesmanship of
Solomon (about 1000-930 B.C.). Higher up along
the coast the aggressive activity of the royal house
of Tyre, and especially the reign of Hirom I., so
strengthened and enriched that city as henceforth
to make it the centre of the Phoenician communi-
ties, the commercial mart of the eastern and western
worlds. In the interior of Syria, city-states, like
Hamath and Khalman, Patin and Samal, grew pros-
perous and warred with one another and with the
encroaching Arameans. The latter, while settling
down in states on either side of the Euphrates, had
pushed over into Syria as far as Zobah, and laid the
foundations of the kingdom of Damascus, the famous
trading-post and garden spot of eastern Syria. As
for Egypt, she was broken by internal conflict; and
though the Pharaohs of Tanis were fairly vigorous
kings, and from time to time even ventured into
southern Palestine, to check and dominate the Philis-
tines (Müller, Asien und Europa, p. 389), these kings
were not masters of all Egypt, and could do little
to support their claims upon the Asiatic provinces
possessed by the earlier dynasties. Thus the new
states grew and older communities put on new life,
under the impulse of the fresh masses of population,
now that there was freedom from the pressure of the
powers on the Tigris and the Nile. The whole
face of the oriental world was changed and the centre
of gravity seemed to have moved beyond the western


II
ASHURNACIRPAL III. AND THE CONQUEST OF
MESOPOTAMIA. 885–860 B. C.
158. THE year 950 B.C., by which date the confu-
sion of the past century had spent itself and in the
various districts bordering on the Mesopotamian
valley was beginning to yield to order and progress,
affords a convenient point from which also to observe
the revival of the ancient kingdoms whose activity had
been so suddenly interrupted during the preceding
years. In Egypt a Libyan general, Sheshonk, high in
position at the court, had usurped the throne and
founded the twenty-second dynasty. His accession was
soon followed by a forward movement into Palestine
and an attack upon the Hebrew kingdoms. In Baby-
lonia the eighth dynasty (sect. 152) ruled under a king
of unknown name and origin, who remained on the
throne for thirty-six years and was followed by ten
or eleven rulers of the same line. Assyria, however,
showed most clearly the beginnings of recovery.
There also a new dynasty occupied the throne, and
thenceforth the crown descended in the same family,
from father to son, through at least ten generations.
Of Tiglathpileser II., the founder of the line, nothing
is known. His son, Ashurdan II. about 930 B.C.,
comes forward somewhat clearly as a canal-builder, a
founder of fortresses, and a restorer of temples in
Assur. With Adadnirari II. his son (911–890 B.C.),


186 ASSYRIA
the upward movement was accelerated. The Assyrian
limu list (sect. 38), that invaluable document of
ancient chronology, begins with him, as though the
compiler regarded his reign as a new epoch in the
national history. He built upon the walls of Assur,
and, according to one of his descendants, “overthrew
the disobedient and conquered on every side.” No
record has been preserved of any of his wars except
that with Babylonia. A difficulty about boundaries
between the countries seems to have brought on the
conflict. A forward movement by the Babylonian
king Shamash-mudammiq was met by Adadmirari near
Mount Yalman (Holwan) in the eastern mountains.
The Babylonians were driven back, and the defeat
apparently cost their king his life, for he was imme-
diately succeeded on the throne by a usurper, Na-
bushumishkun. Adadnirari advanced against him,
defeated his army, spoiled several cities, and brought
him speedily to terms. A treaty was made in which
the kings exchanged daughters, and the boundaries
were adjusted, no doubt to the satisfaction of Assyria.
The son of Adadmirari II. was Tukulti Ninib II., in
whose case the direct report of a campaign in the
north has been preserved. At the sources of the Ti-
gris, where Tiglathpileser I. had recorded his victories
(sect. 146), his successor also inscribed his name and
exploits, how with the help of his god he traversed
the mighty mountains from the rising of the sun to
its setting, and reduced their peoples to submission.
It is evident that the work of his predecessor of two
centuries before had to be done over again. He val-
iantly undertook the task. It is not probable that
his own campaigns extended beyond the valley of the


ACCESSION OF ASHURNACIRPAL 187
upper Tigris between the first two ranges of moun-
tains. He reigned but six years (890–885 B.C.), giving
promise of what Assyria was about to achieve and
winning from his successors characteristic apprecia-
tions of his valor; his son asserted that he “laid the
yoke on his adversaries and set up their bodies on
stakes,” and his grandson, that “he subjugated all his
enemies and swept them like a tempest.”
159. With Ashurnaçirpal III. (885–860 B.C.), the
son and successor of Tukulti Ninib II., dawns the
bright morning of the Assyrian revival. The brief
reign of his father brought him to the throne at an
early age, and, like Tiglathpileser I., he plunged im-
mediately into a series of warlike activities. Of the
eleven campaigns recorded in his inscriptions, out of
his twenty-four full years on the throne, seven were
carried through before the first quarter of his reign
was over. His first concern was with the north,
whither his father had already led the way. There
important changes had taken place since Tiglathpileser
had made his campaigns. The commotions in the far
north had pushed the tribes and peoples out of their
old seats, crowded them together, or brought new
peoples on the scene. The Nairi (sect. 144) were
now to the southwest of Lake Van, and partly within
the southern valley to the east of the sources of the
Tigris. The Kirkhi had been pressed together and
lay toward the south of the same valley. On the
western side Aramean tribes had crowded up on the
east of the Qummukhi, and formed several commu-
nities about Amid and to the west of the upper
Tigris, pushing the Qummukhi back towards the
mountains through which the Euphrates flows. Sev-


188 ASSYRIA
eral tribes about the upper Tigris had retired into
Kashiari, and there occupied the passes and valleys
on the border of the Mesopotamian plain. On the
east and northeast the mountain peoples had been
thrown forward to the ridges overlooking the valley,
and constituted a new problem for the Assyrian
rulers. Ashurnaçirpal marched into the very centre
of the disturbed region to check the advance of the
Nairi, found their easternmost tribe (the Nimme)
already to the south of Lake Van, and crushed them.
A dash over the mountains to the east brought the
Kirruri to terms, and secured the homage of peoples
to the far east in the upper valleys of the greater Zab
(Gilzan and Khubushkia). -
160. The western plateau south of the Armenian
Taurus was then entered. Back and forth and up
and down from the Bitlis to Qummukh and from
Taurus to Kashiari, he marched and fought in the
four campaigns of the years 885, 884, 883, and 880 B. c.
The upper Tigris was first cleared by the over-
throw of the Kirkhi, and the tribute of Qummukh
was gathered. At this time apparently the Aramean
communities of that valley submitted. Then fol-
lowed the recovery of the southwestern part of the
plateau, where vigorous opposition had developed
under the leadership of a city which had once been
an Assyrian outpost. The trouble was spreading
northward among the Aramean cities. Reaching the
sources of the Tigris, where he set up his image by
the side of those of his predecessors, Ashurnaçirpal
marched southward along the ridge overlooking Qum-
mukh to Kashiari, on whose southwestern flanks were
the strongholds of the enemy. Here the cities of the


EASTERN CAMPAIGNS 189
Nirbi were destroyed, and a fortified post on the
right bank of the Tigris was established in the city
of Tushkha, as the centre of Assyrian influence in the
southwestern plateau. The reduction of the Nairi in
the northern valleys was undertaken in the campaign
of 880 B.C., and their tribute brought to Tushkha.
With this the conquest of the various peoples of
these districts was completed. A governor was
appointed for the whole region, with his seat in that
city.
161. The king's movement into the north, in the
beginning of his reign, seems to have been regarded
by the hill peoples of the eastern border as a menace,
against which it behooved them to prepare. That
they were growing into a sort of confederacy is shown
in the common name attached to the region — Zamua.
A chieftain whose tribe occupied the outermost
fringe of mountains at the head of the pass of Babite,
succeeded after two years in uniting all Zamua in an
alliance. The united tribes presented an independent
front to Assyria and proceeded to fortify the pass.
To Ashurnaçirpal this move was equivalent to
rebellion. Besides, it threatened the security of his
eastern border as well as the control of the trade with
the hinterland. He withdrew, therefore, from active
operations in the northwest, and for two years (882–
881 B.C.) campaigned among these eastern mountains.
His first attack had for its purpose the opening of
the pass. The struggle was a severe one, and the
summer was gone before the first line of defences
was pierced. The king then withdrew to the Assyrian
border. Winter came on early in the high mountain
valleys, and the inhabitants must have felt secure for


190 ASSYRIA
the time, but in September the Assyrian army ap-
peared again within the mountain barrier. A forti-
fied camp was established, and expeditions sallied out
in all directions into the heart of the enemy's country,
striking hard blows, and retiring swiftly on their
base of operations. All Zamua was terrified and
hastened to do homage. The next year's campaign
was in the southeast, where some Zamuan chiefs
continued in rebellion. A rapid march to the sources
of the Turnat brought the king into the centre of the
disaffected region, which was laid waste; thence the
army turned northward, burning and plundering
through the upper valleys, and descended to the
fortified camp of the previous winter. A second
time all the chieftains of Zamua came and kissed the
king's feet. While the leading rebels had escaped
the vengeance of the king, the confederacy had been
broken up, and the country severely punished. From
the northern border were brought down the gifts of
Gilzan and Khubushkia, lands which had tendered
their submission in his opening year. Fortified posts
were established in Zamua, and a governor was
appointed with his seat at Kalkhi.
162. These six years of campaigning (885–880 B.C.)
make up a cycle of vigorous achievement of which
any warrior might be proud. From the head-waters
of the river Turnat on the southeast, to the north-
western mountains through which the Euphrates
flowed, the long arc of mountain borderland had
been brought under Assyrian authority. The ad-
vancing tribes had been repressed and Assyria's
borders relieved. A change of capital followed,
possibly was occasioned by this extension of


ARAMEAN TROUBLES 191
territory. In connection with his eastern wars the
attention of Ashurnaçirpal had been directed to
Kalkhi. Its favorable situation, in the angle where
the greater Zab falls into the Tigris, and equidistant
from the eastern and northern mountain borders,
may have been the ground which induced him to
remove the seat of government thither. His first
work was piously to rebuild the temple of his patron
god, Ninib, and place in it a colossal statue of that
divinity, to set up his shrine and appoint his festal
seasons. Building went forward from this time upon
the various edifices which were to adorn the site,
while the king himself turned to a new field of war-
fare, and undertook a series of expeditions that oc-
cupied him for at least four years.
163. While in Qummukh, on the expedition of
884 B.C., word was brought to Ashurnaçirpal that
the communities on the Khabur River were in com-
motion. The Arameans had already established petty
principalities in the rich plains bordering on the
Euphrates from the Khabur to the mountains (sect.
154). One of these states was aspiring to some-
thing more than local supremacy. This community,
to the north of the Balikh, and situated in a fertile
region, the seat of an ancient civilization, and an
immemorial centre of trade, was called by the As-
syrians Bit Adini from a certain Adinu, probably the
founder of a dynasty of ambitious chiefs. How far
it had extended its influence by this time cannot be
determined, but its interference in the affairs of Suru
on the Khabur had brought about a revolution there,
whereby a chief from Bit Adini was raised to the
throne. When the king heard of it, he at once recog-


192 ASSYRIA
nized the gravity of the situation. A union of these
communities was a serious danger to Assyria, and, as
in the case of the tribes of the eastern mountains, he
regarded it as an act of “rebellion,” warranting im-
mediate action on his part. Marching southward to
the upper waters of the Khabur, he descended along
the river bank to the scene of disturbance. A portion
of the inhabitants of Suru submitted. The remainder,
showing resistance, were cruelly punished, and their
new chief carried off to be flayed alive at Nineveh.
The neighboring tribes up and down the Euphrates
brought tribute.
164. The four years following saw the completion
of the work undertaken in the north and east (sects.
160, 161). Not till 879 B. C. did the king undertake
another western expedition. Unfortunately, the three
expeditions that follow 879 B.C. are left undated in
his inscriptions, and it is uncertain whether these
occupied the years immediately following (i.e. 878–
876 B.C.), though it is usually assumed that they
did. In the first two campaigns (879–878) he
took Suru on the Khabur as a base of operations,
and chastised the tribes north and south on either
bank of the Euphrates. The southern tribes, the
Sukhi, were supported by Babylonian troops under
the command of Zabdanu, the brother of Nabupalid-
din, king of Babylonia, and Ashurnaçirpal proudly
claims to have “stricken with terror” the land of
Babylonia and the Kaldi, by taking prisoner the
Babylonian general and three thousand of his troops.
He obtained boats, and, Sailing across and down the
Euphrates, plundered the villages, burned the grain-
fields, and marched into the desert. Somewhere in the


TO THE MEDITERRANEAN 193
region between the Khabur and the Balikh he built
two fortresses on either side of the Euphrates, called
Kar Ashurnaçirpal and Nibarti Ashur. The third
expedition (877 ?) was aimed directly at Bit Adini,
and the resistance offered by Akhuni, its king, col-
lapsed with the storming of his citadel of Kaprabi.
With the submission of this Aramean kingdom Ash-
urnaçirpal was in control of all upper Mesopotamia.
165. The last western campaign (876?) had the
Mediterranean for its objective point. From Bit
Adini the Euphrates was crossed, and Karkhemish,
the capital of Sangara, king of the Khatti, surrendered
without fighting. Ashurnaçirpal now had before him
the plateau of upper Syria, which, lying behind the
Euphrates hills, stretched away westward to the
mountains and the seacoast in a series of fruitful
plains, filled with inhabitants. Petty city-states
divided the land between them and occupied them-
selves in perpetual warfare. At this time the leading
state was that of Patin, which, under its king Lubarna,
controlled the country about the lower Orontes and
its northern affluents. Ashurnaçirpal marched di-
rectly on Patin. Lubarna offered no resistance, and
was left in possession of his kingdom as an Assyr-
ian vassal. The march led across the Orontes south-
ward through the mountains. The city of Aribua
was selected as an Assyrian outpost and base of sup-
plies. From thence the march may be told in the
king's own words:
Then I approached the slopes of Lebanon. To the
great sea of Akharri [i. e. the Mediterranean] I ascended.
In the great sea I purified my weapons and offered
sacrifices to the gods. Tribute of the kings on the
13


194 ASSYRIA
shores of the sea, of Tyre, Sidon, Byblos, Makhallata,
Maiga, Kaiga, Akharri, and Aramada [Arvad] in the
midst of the sea, silver, gold, lead, copper, copper vessels,
variegated and linen garments, a large and small pagutu,
wshu and ukarimu wood, tusks of the nakhiri, the sea
monster, I received in tribute. They embraced my feet
(Standard Inscr., col. iii. 84–88).
Returning northward, he went up into the Amanus
mountains to cut choice timber for his palaces and
temples, and, after setting up the usual image of him-
self with a memorial of his deeds, made his way back
to Assyria.
166. The chronicle of these conquests naturally
suggests comparison with those of Tiglathpileser I.
That warrior undoubtedly extended Assyria's fame
and influence more widely than did Ashurnaçirpal,
whose campaigns did not carry him beyond the upper
Euphrates, or the boundaries of Babylonia. In many
of his measures the later king imitated the earlier, —
in the personal leadership of his troops, in the imposi-
tion of tribute upon conquered countries and the
requirement of hostages, in the deportation of subdued
populations, and in the treatment of enemies. On
the other hand, in some respects, Ashurnaçirpal shows
himself in advance of his predecessor. His army was
improved by the addition of a cavalry squadron,
supplementing the infantry and chariots. This first
appears in the Zamuan campaigns, and is developed in
the western wars, where it may have been modelled
after the Aramean cavalry. It was certainly useful
in following up the Bedouin when foot-soldiers and
chariots would have been useless; it formed thence-
forth a constantly enlarging division of the Assyrian


MILITARY IMPROVEMENTS 195
force. Another measure of the king was the incor-
poration of the troops of subject peoples in his army.
This appears on the largest scale in his Syrian expedi-
tion, in which he added, successively, the soldiers of
the Aramean communities on the Euphrates, of Kar-
khemish, and of Patin. While the desire to leave no
enemies in his rear may have been a partial ground
of this action, it is probable that these detachments
continued to remain under his control and were
carried with him to Kalkhi. There he seems to have
established a great military centre, where these and
other troops were maintained and drilled. In this
procedure he solved a standing problem of Assyrian
politics, namely, how to continue the wars without
drawing too heavily on Assyria's citizens. While
thereby introducing elements of serious danger into
the state, he was, nevertheless, enabled thus to hand
down to his successor an undiminished power, and
make it possible for him to undertake an even greater
series of military operations.
167. In organizing his conquered territory the king
made a distinct advance. A line of Assyrian outposts
was established. Some of these guarded exposed dis-
tricts; others formed the central points of regions
more or less geographically compacted. Of the former
class were Atlila, called Dur Assur, in Zamua on the
Elamite-Babylonian border, the fortified post of
Tukulti-ashur-açbat among the eastern mountains,
the city of Ashurnaçirpal at the sources of the Tigris,
the “royal cities” Damdamusa in the northwest
and Uda in Kashiari, the two fortresses on opposite
sides of the Euphrates (sect. 164), and Aribua in
Patin, apparently guarding the Orontes valley. To


196 ASSYRIA
the latter type belonged Kakzi, in the eastern
Assyrian plain, the starting-point of the Zamuan cam-
paigns, and Tushkha in Kirkhi, where the king built
a palace and granaries. Various officials represented
Assyria in these districts. Their names and jurisdic-
tion are not altogether clear. Sometimes the former
rulers were confirmed in their dignities on submission
to the conqueror, or native nobles were chosen,
whose exaltation to posts of honor and influence
would be expected to insure their fidelity. Thus, the
zabil kuduri, stationed among the northern peoples, had
charge of the collection and delivery of tribute to the
king. The exact duties of a qipu, the honorable title
given to local chiefs, are not defined. An office of
higher and wider jurisdiction is that of shaknu, which
may be held by a native chief or, in some cases appar-
ently, by an Assyrian noble who, in important terri-
tories like those of the Kirkhi and Nairi, is responsible
directly to the king. The position of the urasi,
another personage mentioned in the inscriptions, may
have been hardly more than that of “resident” in
cities under Assyrian control. The placing of Assyr-
ian colonists in some of the cities, though not a new
measure, is with all the rest a significant indication
of the new beginning of systematic endeavors toward
close supervision and control of the subjugated
lands.
168. The method of Ashurnaçirpal in reducing
many of these regions to subjection was so severe as
potently to aid in holding them to Assyrian allegiance.
One illustration, drawn from the conqueror's own
account of the overthrow of Tela on the slopes of
Kashiari, is sufficient:


THE TREATMENT OF ENEMIES 197
I drew near to the city of Tela. The city was very
strong; three walls surrounded it. The inhabitants
trusted to their strong walls and numerous soldiers;
they did not come down or embrace my feet. With
battle and slaughter I assaulted and took the city.
Three thousand warriors I slew in battle. Their booty
and possessions, cattle, sheep, I carried away; many
captives I burned with fire. Many of their soldiers I
took alive; of some I cut off hands and limbs; of others
the noses, ears, and arms; of many soldiers I put out
the eyes. I reared a column of the living and a column
of heads. I hung up on high their heads on trees in
the vicinity of their city. Their boys and girls I burned
up in the flame. I devastated the city, dug it up, in
fire burned it ; I annihilated it (Standard Inscr., col. i.
113–118).
Such punishment was reserved for those communities
which once under Assyrian authority now offered
opposition. This was regarded as rebellion and pun-
ished by extermination, or by penalties which rendered
the unhappy survivors a warning to their neighbors.
Native officials, once trusted by their Assyrian mas-
ters, but afterwards rebellious, were, when captured,
flayed alive and their skins hung upon the city walls.
Communities for the first time summoned to submit
to Assyria, if they resisted, were subject to the ordi-
nary fate of the conquered, but not otherwise treated
with special cruelty. The opposition encountered by
Ashurnaçirpal was usually not very strong; the cities
were beaten in detail; they had not yet learned how
to unite against the common enemy. The numbers
definitely mentioned in the inscriptions indicate a
total of less than thirty thousand soldiers slain by
the Assyrians in all these campaigns, but this esti-


198 ASSYRIA
mate does not probably include more than a third of
the persons who perished in the storming of the cities.
Without doubt the stress of suffering fell upon the
northern mountaineers, for more than half of the
slain recorded by the king belong to this region,
which evidently had caused the chief trouble and
required the most strenuous efforts to keep under
control. In fact, the last campaign of Ashurnaçir-
pal, in his eighteenth year (867 B.C.), directed
against the districts to the northwest, was some-
thing of a failure. The city of Amid seems to have
held out, and further trouble was promised for the
future.
169. The importance of the conquests is shown in
the long lists of the spoil and tribute obtained, beside
which the booty of Tiglathpileser I. seems insignifi-
cant. Least productive were the lands of Zamua, yet
they had one important and indispensable product, the
splendid horses raised on their plateaus and famed
throughout the Orient. From all the mountain re-
gions came cattle and sheep in countless numbers,
besides wine and corn. Of precious metals, these
districts produced copper, which was manufactured in
various forms, and gold and silver. The Aramean
communities of the western Mesopotamian plain were
the most remunerative, and their spoil reveals the
wealth and civilization of that region. Even the
Aramean states to the west of the sources of the Tigris
contributed, besides horses, cattle, and sheep, chariots
and harness, armor, silver, gold, lead, copper, varie-
gated garments and linen cloths, wood and metal
work, and furniture in ivory and gold. To these the
chief of Bit Adini added ivory plates, couches and


ASHURNAQIRPAL’S PALACE 199
thrones, gold beads and pendants and weapons of
gold; the king of Karkhemish, cloths of purple light
and dark, marvellous furniture, silver baskets, pre-
cious woods and stones, elephant tusks and female
slaves; and Syria, her fragrant cedars and the other
Woods of her mountain-forests.
170. Abundant opportunity for the use and bestow-
ment of these spoils of war was given in the king's
building enterprises at his capital of Kalkhi. Besides
the temple already referred to (sect. 162), his crown-
ing work was his magnificent palace. This stood on
the western side of a rectangular platform which was
reared along the east bank of the Tigris from north
to south. Around its base to the north and east lay
the city. The palace itself was about three hundred
and fifty feet square; its entrances looked northward
upon the great temple structure that occupied the
northwestern corner of the platform and overhung the
city and the river. A series of long narrow galleries,
lined with sculptured alabaster slabs, surrounded a
court in size one hundred and twenty-five by one
hundred feet. The chief of these rooms, probably
a throne chamber, one hundred and fifty-four by
thirty-three feet, still contains at its eastern end the
remains of a dais which once may have supported
the throne. On the slabs were wrought, in low relief,
scenes from the life and experiences of the king.
Now he offers thanksgiving for the slaying of a wild
ox or a lion; now he pursues the fleeing enemy in
his chariots; now his army besieges a city, or advances
to the attack across a river, or, led by the king,
marches through the mountains. Everywhere inscrip-
tions commemorate his achievements and recite his ti-


200 ASSYRIA
tles. At the doorways stood the monstrous man-headed
bulls, or lions, only head and shoulders completely
wrought out, as if leaping forth from the wall, the
rest still half sculptured in the stone, – divine spirits
guarding the entrances. Scenes of religious worship
abound, gods, spirits, and heroes engaged in exercises
of which the meaning is not yet clear. Everywhere
is the combination of energy with repose, of massive
strength with dignity; though crude and imperfect in
the technique of the sculptor, the reliefs are the most
vivid and lifelike achievements of Assyrian art, the
counterpart in stone of the grandiose story of the
king's campaigns, which is written above and on either
side of them. The narrow galleries were spanned
with cedar beams and decorated with silver and gold
and bronze. The priceless ivories of the west, show-
ing by subject and style the unmistakable influence of
Egypt, have been picked up from the palace floors by
modern explorers. All was a wonderful commentary
upon Ashurnaçirpal's own words:
A palace for my royal dwelling-place, for the glorious
seat of my royalty, I founded for ever and splendidly
planned it. I surrounded it with a cornice (?) of copper.
Sculptures of the creatures of land and sea carved in
“alabaster,” I made and placed them at the doors.
Lofty door-posts of . . . wood I made, and sheathed
them with copper and set them up in the gates. Thrones
of “costly” woods, dishes of ivory containing silver,
gold, lead, copper, and iron, the spoil of my hand, taken
from conquered lands I deposited therein. (Monolith
Inscr., concl. 12–24).
The king had a palace in Nineveh also, and built
temples there and elsewhere. The evidence of his


ESTIMATE OF ASHURNAQIRPAL 201
having contributed to the inner development of his
country is not abundant. An aqueduct to supply
Kalkhi with water drawn from the upper Zab was re-
ferred to; it brought fruitfulness to the surrounding
country, as its name “producer of fertility” proves.
The rebuilding of Kalkhi, and the wealth in cattle and
sheep, as well as other property, brought in by the
successful wars, must be regarded as most important
contributions to Assyrian economic resources.
171. Varying judgments have been passed on the
character of Ashurnaçirpal. Of his energy there can
be no question. As hunter and warrior he was
untiring and resistless. But to some he is chiefly a
monster of remorseless cruelty, whose joy it was to
maim, flay, burn, or impale his conquered enemies.
If this verdict is finally to be rendered, he will be
convicted out of his own mouth, for the evidence
is derived solely from his frank, unsoftened narra-
tive of his own ruthless barbarities. But while they
are not to be palliated, it must be remembered that
war has since engendered even more hideous crimes,
of which his narrative shows him to be guiltless; that
in an iron age, when Assyria was recovering from
a century of dishonor and collapse, fierce and bloody
vengeance had come to be the rule; and that in almost
every instance these last penalties were inflicted upon
communities which, from the Assyrian point of view,
had violated their pledges to God and man. It is evi-
dent, moreover, that the statements of the king are
not inspired by the lust of cruelty and blood, but
have been inscribed with the same purpose as that
with which the punishments were inflicted, – to strike
terror into the heart of the opposer and to warn the


202 ASSYRIA
intending rebel of his fate. That this verdict is more
reasonable is strengthened by the probability that,
with the sole exception of the campaign of 867 B.C.,
the king's wars ceased before his reign was half over.
The lesson had been learned, and the king, having
taught it in this savage fashion, was well content to
turn his energies to the pursuits of peace. Of these
latter years there is but scanty record. Wisely to
govern a peaceful empire had not yet come to stand
among the glories of monarchs. Nevertheless in the
remarkable statue of Ashurnaçirpal found in the tem-
ple of Ninib, not far from his palace, “the only extant
perfect Assyrian royal statue in the round,” a sugges-
tion is given of the statesman as well as the warrior.
A rude heroic figure, he stands upright before the
god, looking straight forward, his brawny arms bare,
the left hand holding to his breast the mace, weapon
of the soldier, but the right dropped by his side,
grasping the sceptre, emblematic of the shepherd of
his people.


III
THE ADVANCE INTO SYRIA AND THE RISE OF
URARTU : FROM SHALMANESER II. TO THE FALL
OF HIS HOUSE. 860–745 B.C.
172. FOR more than a century after the death of
Ashurnaçirpal (860 B.C.) his descendants occupied
the throne of Assyria. The period is one of great
variety in details; new peoples come upon the scene
as the empire widens; new political problems appear
for solution in the increasing complexity of the
field and the factors involved; inner difficulties arise
the presence of which is not easily to be accounted
for, though of obvious significance; the dynasty at
last gives way to a successful revolution. But, in the
main features, the historical development of Assyria
continues as before, with the same lines of policy,
the same unwearied military activity, the same un-
ceasing effort after expansion, the same methods of
government, the same relations to peoples without.
Accordingly, to trace in repetitious detail the cam-
paigns of the several kings in turn, would be weari-
some and unprofitable. Their work may be considered
as a whole, its general features described, and its
results summarized, while the special achievements
of each ruler are properly appreciated. Ashurnaçirpal
was succeeded by his son Shalmaneser II., whose
thirty-five years of reigning (860–825 B.C.) were one


204 ASSYRIA
long military campaign. Either under his own
leadership, or that of his commanding general, the
Turtan, his armies marched in all directions, coercing
rebellious vassals, and collecting their tribute, or
seeking new peoples to conquer. An obelisk of black
basalt records in brief sentences, year by year, thirty-
two of these expeditions, and its testimony is supple-
mented on the other monuments of the king by
fuller accounts of particular achievements. His son,
Shamshi Adad IV., reigned less than half as long as
his father (825–812 B.C.), and has left, as his
memorial, a monolith, the inscription of which covers
only half of his years. Adadmirari III. followed
(812–783 B.C.), ascending the throne of his father,
apparently, in early youth, but ruling with great
energy and splendor for nearly thirty years. Un-
fortunately, no satisfactory annals of his reign have
been preserved. Royal inscriptions from the next
three kings utterly fail. Shalmaneser III. (783–
773 B.C.), Ashurdan III. (773–755 B. c.), and
Ashurnirari II. (755–745 B.C.) are known to us
from the limu list alone, where the brief references
to years without campaigns, to pestilence and revolt,
tell the melancholy story of imperial decay, until,
with the last of the three, the dynasty fell, and a
usurper seized the crown.
173. Beyond a few facts, little is known of the
political organization and economic development of
Assyria during this century. In the time of Shalma-
neser II. and his two successors, the spoil of subject
peoples continued to flow in abundantly, precious
metals and manufactured articles from the west,
corn, wine, and domestic animals from the north and


ORGANIZATION OF TRIBUTE 205
east. Among the latter, two-humped dromedaries, re-
ceived from the far northeast, obtained special mention
as novelties, and point to the control of a trade route
from the upper Iranian plateau. Shalmaneser seems
to have taken a step forward, in the imposition of a
regular and definite yearly tribute upon certain com-
munities. Thus the kingdom of Patin paid one
talent of silver, two talents of purple cloth, and two
hundred (?) cedar beams; another king, at the foot
of Mount Amanus, ten mina of silver, two hundred
cedar beams, and other products of cedar; Kar-
khemish paid sixty mina of gold, one talent of silver,
and two talents of purple cloth; Qummukh, twenty
mina of silver, and three hundred cedar beams. A
prescribed number of horses broken to the yoke was
required from the northern tribes. These requisitions
are more moderate than were the spoils gained in the
descents of the armies upon the various subject
regions, and indicate that already the Assyrian kings
perceived the wisdom of adjusting their demands to
the resources of the lands under their sway. Much
less harshness in the wars is recorded. Measures
like those of Ashurnaçirpal were reserved for the few
peoples whose rebellious spirit or persistent hostility
seemed to justify extreme penalties. Indeed, revolts
became less frequent, because during this period the
empire was becoming more compact by the direct
incorporation of regions long subject to Assyrian
authority. A striking illustration of this fact is
found in the limu list, in which a regular order in the
succession of officials seems to be established. In it
appear governors of cities and districts along the
borders, such as Raçappa (Reseph) on the right bank


206 ASSYRIA
of the Euphrates, Arpakha on the Elamite border,
Naçibina (Nisibis) in northern Mesopotamia, Amid
and Tushkha in the northern mountains, Guzana
(Gozan) in western Mesopotamia, Kirruri, and
Mazamua, in the northeastern mountains. To have
occupied places in this honorable list, the occupants
of such posts must have been in intimate association
with the court, and their administrative activity in
immediate dependence on the central power.
174. The usual internal troubles that beset oriental
monarchies appeared in this century in Assyria.
Family difficulties in the reigning house broke out
in the rebellion of Shalmaneser's son Ashurdaninpal
in the thirty-third year of his father's reign. The
cause is not difficult to comprehend. Six years
before, Shalmaneser had handed over the leadership
of his military expeditions to his Turtan, Dain Ashur.
To this evidence of his own growing weakness, and
the natural fear, on the part of his sons, of the usur-
pation of the throne by this general, is, perhaps, to
be added a palace intrigue, which threatened the
future accession of Ashurdaninpal by the putting
forward of another son of Shalmaneser, Shamshi Adad,
as a candidate for the throne. The rebellion was a
very serious one, involving twenty-seven cities of the
empire, among which were Nineveh, Assur, Arbela,
Imgur Bel, Amid, and Til-abni. Kalkhi and, appar-
ently, the army were, however, faithful to the king.
In the midst of this civil war Shalmaneser died,
and, only after it had endured six years, was Shamshi
Adad able to bring it to a close and make sure his
title to the crown. The blow inflicted upon the
centres of Assyrian life must have been very severe.


FEVOLTS IN THE CITIES 207
Sixty years after this, another revolt is chronicled,
the causes of which are to be found in the foreign
politics of Assyria. The rising kingdom of Urartu
was steadily encroaching upon Assyria all along the
northern border as far as the Mediterranean, and the
kings were being forced into a defensive attitude in
spite of all their efforts. Thus Assyrian military
pride was wounded, and mercantile prestige was
crippled. A total eclipse of the sun occurring on
June 15, 763 B.C., was thought the favorable moment
for raising the standard of rebellion in the city of
Assur. A line drawn across the limu list at this
year suggests the setting up of a rival king in that
city. The revolt spread to Arbakha in the east, and
Gozan in the west, but was finally subdued. In
746 B. C., however, another insurrection broke out
in the imperial military city of Kalkhi. Ashurnirari
II. had been satisfied to spend more than half his
regnal years without making any military expeditions,
and, though in itself the fact does not account for
the revolt, since the latter half of the great Ashur-
naçirpal's reign is likewise unmarked by wars, it
reveals the manifest inability of this ruler to cope
with the threatening foreign difficulties. The atti-
tude of the army was decisive, and Ashurnirari
disappeared before a military leader who became king
in 745 B. C. under the title of Tiglathpileser III.
175. While in these last troubled years the pros-
perity of the state must have been severely shaken,
the earlier and more successful kings show, in their
inscriptions and public works, that they were not be-
hind Ashurnaçirpal in the development of the higher
life of the nation. Shalmaneser II. seems to have


CULTURE AND RELIGION 209
independence in the details of literary expression, but
otherwise the same annalistic form and traditional
figures of speech prevail. Few other literary remains
have survived. To Shalmaneser II. is ascribed the
foundation at Kalkhi of the royal library. It had a
librarian who cared for its collections. The works
were chiefly Babylonian classical religious texts, either
in originals brought from the south as the spoil of
war, or copies made by scribes. The stock of books
was still further increased under Adadmirari III. and
Ashurnirari II. Under the former king was produced
the diplomatic document known as the “Synchronistic
History of Assyria and Babylonia,” a summary of the
political relations between the kings of these countries
from the earliest period (sect. 30). The influence of
Assyrian culture of the time on its environment is
illustrated by the royal inscriptions of the kings of
Urartu, who at first write in the Assyrian language,
and later employ the Assyrian script for their native
speech.
176. The religious life of the times receives light
from several sides. The inscriptions of the kings,
while still emphasizing the warlike side of religion
and glorifying the gods of war, reveal a tendency to
exalt the ethical element. Particularly the ranging
of the sun-god Shamash alongside of the national
deity Ashur as the guide and inspirer of the king,
and the epithets applied to him such as “judge of the
world,” “ordainer of all things,” “director of man-
kind,” and — though this is uncertain — “lord of
law,” suggest the development of a sense of order
and justice in the government (Jastrow, Rel. of Bab.
and Assyr., p. 210). A new emphasis on culture is
14


210 ASSYRIA
indicated by the high place ascribed in the reign of
Adadnirari III. to the Babylonian god of wisdom and
learning, Nabu. A temple was built for him on the
mound of Kalkhi, and his statues were placed within
it. On one of them, prepared in honor of the king and
the queen, an inscription, glorifying the god as the
clear-eyed, the patron of the arts, the holder of the pen,
whose attribute is wisdom, whose power is unequalled,
and without whom no decision in heaven is made,
closes with the exhortation “O Posterity, trust in
Nabu; trust not in any other god!” Whatever may
have been the occasion to make so much of this god
at this time, it is clear that he represented to the
Assyrians an ideal of life never before so attractive
to them and suggestive of their higher aspirations.
177. Turning to the first of those fields of aggres-
sive activity in which Assyria made distinct advance,
it appears that in the year 852 B. C. Babylonia engaged
the attention of Shalmaneser II. Nabupaliddin, its
king, a vigorous defender of his state against the
Arameans, had succeeded in keeping free from hos-
tilities with Ashurnaçirpal and had even made alliance
with Shalmaneser II. After a long reign of at least
thirty-one years, his people deposed him, and his son
Marduknadinshum succeeded to the throne, which was
contested by his brother, Mardukbelusate. The latter,
having his strength in the eastern provinces with their
more vigorous population, was pressing hard upon his
brother, who held Babylon and the other cities of
eastern and middle Babylonia. Marduknadinshum
appealed to Shalmaneser II. for aid, which was
promptly granted. In the two campaigns of 852–
851 B. c. the Assyrian king overthrew and killed the


RELATIONS WITH BABYLON 211
usurper, and restored the kingdom to Marduknadin-
shum, who naturally became a vassal. As a sign of
supremacy and with the customary reverence of an
Assyrian king for the shrines of Babylonia, Shalma-
neser visited the temples of Babylon, Borsippa, and
Kutha, and made rich offerings to the gods. Two
hundred and fifty years had passed since an Assyrian
king had entered Babylon, and now the Assyrian
suzerainty was acknowledged by the legitimate Baby-
lonian king, of his own accord. Shalmaneser found
the kingdom beset by its southern neighbors, the
Kaldi (sect. 155), who had organized petty kingdoms
and were constantly pushing up from the coast. He
advanced against them, defeated one of their kings,
and laid tribute upon them. The suzerainty of
Assyria was thrown off by Babylon, possibly in the
time of the rebellion of Ashurdaninpal, and was re-
established by Shamshi Adad in 818 B. C., who, how-
ever, according to the limu list, occupied the last five
years of his reign in expeditions to Babylonian cities,
and bequeathed the problem to his successor. Adad-
nirari III., after an expedition in his first years, in
which he fully restored Assyrian supremacy, appears
to have entered into very close relations with the
southern kingdom. The completion of the so-called
“Synchronistic History” in his reign marks a final
stage in the boundary dispute between the two states.
The building of the Nabu temple at Kalkhi is an
evidence of his regard for things Babylonian. The
mention in the inscription on the statue of Nabu
(sect. 176) of the Queen Sammuramat, the “lady of
the palace,” to whom, together with the king, the
statue is dedicated, has given rise to a variety of


212 ASSYRIA
interesting comment. That she should be named in
this connection suggests that she was, active in the
new Babylonian worship, and that, therefore, she may
have been herself a Babylonian princess, either wife
or mother of the king. The similarity of the name
Semiramis, the famous queen mentioned by Herodotus
(I. 184) as ruling over Babylon, has suggested the
identity of the two royal ladies, but without much
gain to history thereby. The activity of the three
last kings of the family, so far as Babylºnia was con-
cerned, was consumed in expeditions against the
Ituha, Aramean tribes in lower Mesopotamia, who
evidently interfered with the communications between
the two countries. Adadnirari had already found
them troublesome. Whether the later kings of the
dynasty exercised supremacy over the southern king-
dom is uncertain with the probabilitiés against it in
view of the growing weakness of the royal house. A
remarkable and as yet inexplicable fact is that with
Nabunagir, who became king in Babylonia in 747 B.C.,
the famous Canon of Ptolemy begins, as well as the
Babylonian Chronicle, as though the accession of this
ruler marked an epoch in the development of the
state. Yet no historical memorials in our possession
suggest any special change in Babylonian affairs.
178. The Babylonian problem was neither so serious
nor so insistent as those of the west and the north.
Ashurnaçirpal had subdued the west Mesopotamian
states up and down the Euphrates, and, in his one
Syrian expedition, had made the Assyrian name
known as far as the Mediterranean. His successors
proceeded to make that name supreme between the
great river and the sea, from the Amanus to the Leb-


214 ASSYRIA
which at any particular time might be the temporary
suzerainty of the one or the other. Ever since Asa
of Judah had made the fatal blunder of inviting the
king of Damascus to attack Baasha of Israel in his
interest, Damascus had been involved with Israel.
Omri, founder of a new dynasty and of a new capital
of his country at Samaria, had been worsted in the
war. His son, Ahab, seems also to have reigned
under Damascene influence. In the face of Shal-
maneser's advance and in imitation of the example of
Akhuni, a coalition was made under the leadership
of the three kings, Irkhuleni of Hamath, Benhadad
II. of Damascus, and Ahab of Israel, to which the
kings of nine other peoples contributed troops.
With an army of nearly four thousand chariots, two
thousand cavalry, one thousand camel riders, and
sixty-three thousand infantry, they met the Assyr-
ian king at Qarqar on the Orontes, twenty miles north
of Hamath (854 B.C.). The Assyrian won the bat-
tle, no doubt, as he claims, but the victory was inde-
cisive, and he retired beyond the Euphrates without
capturing any of the capitals of his enemies or receiv-
ing their tribute. Indeed, his own domains in Syria
withheld tribute, and in 850 B.C. he was compelled
to chastise the kings of Karkhemish and Bit Agusi.
In the next year, 849 B.C., he encountered the south-
ern coalition again, and again withdrew. In 846 B. C.
he called out the militia of Assyria and attacked the
twelve allied kings with an army of one hundred and
twenty thousand soldiers, but without any recorded
success in the form of tribute. The situation was
critical. Three years later (843 B.C.) he visited his
Syrian provinces, marching to the Amanus without


THE SYRIAN CAMPAIGNS 215
venturing southward. Meanwhile, either his intrigues
or the inconstancy of Syrian princes had been work-
ing for him. Revolutions had taken place in Damas-
cus and Israel. Benhadad II. had been overthrown
by Hazael, and the house of Omri by Jehu. Shalma-
neser II. developed new tactics. Marching westward,
in 842 B.C., as though making for the sea at the
mouth of the Orontes, he suddenly turned southward,
leaving Khalman, Hamath, and Damascus on his left.
He thus took the allied states unprepared and divided.
Hazael was isolated, but met the Assyrians on the
eastern slopes of Mount Hermon. They drove him back
to Damascus and ravaged the territory down into the
Hauran, but could not capture his city. The cities
of Tyre and Sidon sent “tribute.” Hamath appears
to have submitted, though the fact is not mentioned.
More significant still was the attitude of Israel, whose
king Jehu sent “tribute,” “silver, gold, golden bowls,
golden chalices, golden cups, golden buckets, lead, a
royal sceptre and spear shafts (?).” Yet so long as
Hazael remained unsubdued, these gifts were empty.
A last expedition against him in 839 B.C. was
equally unsuccessful in subjugating him, though the
Phoenician cities again sent presents. Assyria had
been virtually halted. Shalmaneser’s armies never
again marched south of Hamath. Hazael was free
to take vengeance on his recreant southern allies,
and soon was lord of the south, as far as the
Egyptian border. Israel was humiliated; Jehu and
his son Jehoahaz became vassals. Shalmaneser II.
was forced to be content with northern Syria; but
with the southern trade routes cut off, he must find
new outlets for Assyrian commerce. He therefore


216 ASSYRIA
turned toward the northwest where Tiglathpileser I.
had warred with the same purpose (sect. 144). Three
campaigns are recorded against Qui (Cilicia), where he
reached Tarzi (Tarsus) in the rich Cilician plain (840,
835, 834 B.C.); in 838 B. C. Tabal, in the vicinity of
the modern Marash, was his objective point; in 837
B.C. he renewed Assyrian authority over Milid (sect.
144). In 832 B.C. his Turtan put down a rebel-
lion in Patin. Thus the land route to the west and
with it the rich trade of Asia Minor were secured for
Assyria, and the civilization of the Tigris began di-
rectly to affect the less advanced peoples of these
regions.
180. The civil war in Assyria was not without
influence in the west. Khindanu, on the western
bank of the Euphrates, and Hamath are mentioned
among the rebellious cities. Shamshi Adad gives no
indication that he ever crossed the Euphrates, and
the presumption is that Assyrian authority in these
districts was at a discount. Adadnirari, however, has
another story to tell. In the summary of his achieve-
ments he says, “From above the Euphrates, Khatti,
Akharri to its whole extent, Tyre, Sidon, the land
of Omri, Edom, Palastu as far as the great sea of
the setting sun I brought to submission, [and] taxes
and tribute I laid upon them " (see ABL, p. 52).
Special mention is made of an expedition to Damas-
cus, where a certain Mari (Benhadad III. 2), who had
succeeded to Hazael, was shut up in his capital, and
compelled to submit and pay tribute. In the limu
list the objective points of attack are Arpad (806 B.C.),
Azaz (805 B.C.), Bahli (804 B.C.), the seacoast
(803 B.C.) that is, the Mediterranean (?), Mançuate


ASSYRIAN DECLINE IN THE WEST 217
(797 B.C.). The two former cities are in northern
Syria, the others in the central region. It is impos-
sible, therefore, to date the victory over Damascus, and
to determine whether the king ever traversed Israel
and Palestine with his armies, or merely received
“tribute” from them. The latter is more probably the
case. The situation suggested is the breaking down
of the dominance of Damascus in the south, and the
practical recovery of independence on the part of the
southern communities, by the easy method of sending
gifts to the Assyrian conqueror. The subjugation of
Damascus would signify to the king authority over
all the regions owning Damascene supremacy. It is
thought that some indication of what this victory
meant for Israel still lingers in the late passage of
2 Kings xiii. 5, where the “saviour.” may be
identified with the Assyrian king. At any rate, as no
expedition of Adadnirari after 797 B.C. is recorded,
and Mançuate, situated not far from Damascus, was
the objective point of that year, Israel, with its north-
ern enemy weakened, was able to recover strength,
and, unmolested by Assyrian authority, make head-
way against its foes. Nor did the Assyrian kings
that belong to the following years of decline disturb the
southern states. A new centre of opposition to Assyria
developed at Hatarika (Hadrach), south of Hamath,
against which Ashurdan is said to have marched in
772 B.C. and 765 B. C. Either he or his successor
attacked it again in 755 B.C., and one expedition of
Ashurnirari against Arpad took place the next year
(754 B.C.). It is evident that, if northern Syria
remained faithful, the central and southern regions
were practically free from Assyrian control after the


218 ASSYRLA
reign of Adadnirari III. It is easy to understand,
therefore, how in this period so brilliant a reign
as that of Jeroboam II. of Israel was possible (2
Kings xiv. 23–29).
181. The relations to the peoples of the northern
and eastern frontier form a not less important phase
of Assyrian history during this period. The moun-
tain valleys through which the upper Tigris flows had
been subjugated and brought under direct Assyrian
control by Ashurnaçirpal (sects. 159 f.) These gave
the later kings little trouble. But the movements of
peoples to the east and north of this district, already
in progress in his time (sect. 159), had produced a
remarkable change in the political situation. In the
mountains from the southern slopes of which the
Euphrates takes its rise, peoples were forming into
a nation calling itself Khaldia, after the name of its
god Khaldis, but to the Assyrians known as Urartu.
They appear in history as they come down from the
flanks of Ararat in the far northeast, or from homes
on the banks of the Araxes, and move toward. the
southwest in the direction of Lake Van, attracted by
the rich valleys on its eastern shore. Ashurnaçirpal
is the first to mention them as in this region, but does
not fight with them. The first kings of the new nation
were Lutipris and Sarduris I., followed—whether
immediately or not is uncertain—by Arame. Under
this ruler the state made great strides westward
and southward, controlling the valley north of the
Taurus almost to Milid, and the eastern shores of
Lake Van. Young, vigorous, aggressive, and eager
for progress, Urartu was ready to take part in the
larger life of the world. Already it had borrowed


WARS WITH URARTU 219
from Assyria its alphabet (sect. 175), and was prepar-
ing to dispute the older nation's pre-eminence in the
northern lands.
182. Disturbances in the northeast brought Shal-
maneser II., in the year of his accession (860 B.C.),
into conflict with this new state. He traversed the
land of Khubushkia, lying to the southwest of Lake
Urmia, and thence fell upon Urartu. In 857 B.C.,
after defeating Akhuni on the Euphrates (sect. 178),
he suddenly turned northward and marched along
the western slope of Mount Masius over the Taurus
to the upper waters of the Euphrates. Laying waste
this region, he faced eastward and made for Urartu.
Far up on the slopes of Ararat he destroyed Arzashku,
Arame's capital, devastated the land and returned
through Gilzan (Kirzan), on the northwestern shores
of Lake Urmia, whence came the two-humped drome-
daries, and through Khubushkia, coming out of the
mountains above Arbela, a march of nearly a thousand
miles. Similar expeditions from the sources of the
Tigris to those of the Euphrates are recorded for
845 B.C. and 833 B.C. The latter was under command
of the Turtan. In the interval Arame had been
succeeded by Sarduris II., whom the Turtan of
Shalmaneser II. attacked again in 829 B.C. In the
Ushpina of “Nairi,” with whom the general of
Shamshi Adad fought in 819 B.C., has been recognized
Ishpuinis, successor of Sarduris II. The steady ex-
pansion of Urartu toward the south and west in these
years caused uneasiness among the peoples already
settled along the Assyrian border, and compelled the
kings to make many expeditions into districts which
hitherto had not come within the range of Assyrian


220 ASSYRIA
aggression. A large extension of Assyrian territory,
therefore, is traceable, although the royal authority
was not at all times very insistent. Thus appear the
Mannai, to the west and northwest of Lake Urmia;
Mazamua and Parsua, to the south of the same lake,
and the Madai, or Medians, further to the east. In
these latter people is to be recognized the first wave of
that Indo-European migration which was to exercise
so important an influence upon the later history of
Western Asia. It has been plausibly conjectured that
the movement of the Medes from the steppes of cen-
tral Asia had forced the advance of Urartu toward the
south, and that, swinging off to the southeast, they were
pressing on along the mountain barrier that overlooks
the eastern Mesopotamian plain. As in the case of
Urartu, so with them, the Assyrian kings, without
being conscious of the magnitude of the interests
involved, felt that they must be stopped, if Assyria
was to keep its position in the oriental world. Adad-
nirari III. marched against them in not less than eight
campaigns. From him, indeed, they received more
attention than did Urartu. The latter under the son of
Ishpuinis, Menuas, pushed east, west, and north, from
the Araxes to the land of the Khatti (Hittites) and
Lake Urmia. His son Argistis I. passed beyond the
Araxes in the north; in the west he conquered Milid,
and in the southeast overran the Mannai, Khubushkia,
and Parsua. Shalmaneser III. for more than half
his years fought with him without success. The
Assyrians were compelled to see their northern
and eastern provinces torn away by this vigorous
rival, whose intrigues in the west were also threat-
ening their possessions there. It was in this fierce


SUMMARY OF THIS EPOCH 221
storm of assault upon the outworks of the empire
that the house of Ashurnaçirpal III. and Shalma-
neser II. fell.
183. In summing up this epoch of Assyrian history,
the first impression created is that of intense and
superabounding energy. The long roll of military
expeditions is kept up almost to the end. Where
details are given, as in the reign of Shalmaneser II.,
these campaigns are seen to involve long marches,
often in mountainous countries, and frequent battles
with not insignificant antagonists. Both method and
design in the expeditions are traceable, revealing the
fact that they were planned in advance and with a
broad outlook. The outcome of the whole was two-
fold. On the one hand, was a significant extension of
Assyrian territory. New regions were opened up.
Thus Shalmaneser II. made Assyria dominant on
Lake Urmia. It is inferred, from hints in the inscrip-
tions of Adadnirari III., that he reached the Caspian
sea. Indeed, a remarkable summary of the wide
range of Assyrian predominance is given in the lauda-
tory inscription of the latter king:
Who conquered from the mountain Siluna, toward
the rising sun . . . as far as the great sea of the rising
of the sun; from above the Euphrates, Khatti, Akharri
to its whole extent, Tyre, Sidon, the country of Omri,
Edom, Palastu as far as the great sea of the setting of the
sun, I brought to submission, (and) taxes and tribute I
placed on them. . . . The kings of Kaldu, all of them,
became servants. Taxes (and) tribute for the future I
placed on them. Babylon, Borsippa (and) Kutha sup-
ported the decrees of Bel, Nabu (and) Nergal (Slab Insc.,
5–24; see ABL, pp. 51 f.).


222 - ASSYRIA
184. On the other hand, obstacles of a character
not hitherto encountered and, in part, rising out of
the very policy of Assyria, confronted these kings.
Nations, contemplated in their plans of conquest,
began to unite for self-defence. To overcome this
concentration of opposition called forth might and
skill never before required. Assyrian pressure com-
bined with movements of peoples as yet without the
zone of historical knowledge, moulded border tribes
into nations with national impulses and aspirations
that rivalled those of the Assyrians themselves. New
and vigorous tribes were at the same time brought
upon the horizon of Assyrian territory. In grappling
with such problems, the royal family, which had con-
tributed so many warriors and statesmen to the throne
of Assyria, found its strength failing and was con-
strained to disappear. Would the state itself go
down before the same combination of difficulties, or
would it regather its energies, and, under other and
abler leaders, rise superior to opposition and hold its
place of predominance for years to come 2 The next
century contains the answer to this question.


IV
THE ASSYRIAN REVIVAL. TIGLATHEPILESER III.
AND SHALMANESER IV. 745–722 B.C.
185. THE gloomy outlook for the future of the
Assyrian state, consequent upon the encroachments
of hostile peoples from without and the inner convul-
sions that shook the government and overthrew the
ruling dynasty, was speedily transformed upon the
accession of the new king. With him opens an in-
spiring chapter of splendid Assyrian success. This
sudden change makes it likely that the causes of
disaster were due, not so much to decline in the
energies of the body politic, as to the weakness
or unwisdom of the later members of the ruling
dynasty. It has been plausibly conjectured that
these rulers identified their interests with the
priestly class, the centre of whose power was the
city of Assur and who dominated the commercial
activities of the realm. As in Babylonia, the temple
was the bank and the trading centre of every com-
munity as well as the seat of the divine powers.
Over against these heads of the spiritual and mer-
cantile world stood the army, recruited chiefly from
the free peasantry, and led by their local lords, as
royal officers. The disasters on the frontiers brought
commercial stringency, which, as in every ancient
state, bore most heavily, not upon the men of wealth,


226 ASSYRIA
removed and redressed, preparatory to their use in
the walls of the later building. This fragmentary
and confused condition of his inscriptions makes the
task of reconstructing the historical order and the de-
tails of his activities difficult. No certain conclusions
can in some instances be attained. Happily, the
limu list for the king's reign is complete, and its brief
notes form a basis for arranging the rest of the
material. The contributions of the Old Testament,
also, become now of special value.
188. Nearly all of the eighteen years of the king's
reign (745–727 B.C.) were marked by campaigns on the
various borders of the realm. These expeditions were
characterized, even more clearly than those of his pre-
decessors, by imperial purposes. The world of Western
Asia, in expanding its horizon, had become at the same
time more simple in its political problems, owing to the
disappearance of the multitudinous petty communities
before the three or four greater racial or political
unities that had come face to face with one another.
In the south the Kaldi were becoming more eager to
lay hold on Babylon. In the north Urartu was
spreading out on every side to absorb the tribes that
occupied the mountain valleys, and even to reach
over into northern Syria. In the west the tendency
to unification brought this or that state to the front,
as the suzerain of the lesser cities of a wider territory,
and the representative of organized opposition to
invasion. Egypt was preparing again to appear on
the scene and to recover its place as a world-power
west of the Euphrates. Thus, everywhere, with the
exception of the eastern mountain valleys where
the Medes had not yet realized that nationality the


ARAMEANS IN BABYLONIA 227
advent of which was to mark the new order, the
movement toward a larger unity, based on political
rather than on racial grounds, was growing stronger.
The politics of the day were international in a new
and deeper sense, and the ideal of world-empire was
appearing more and more distinctly, as the controlling
powers assumed more concrete and imposing forms.
Thus, while the details of Assyrian activities are
more complex, the main issues in them are more
easily grasped and followed.
189. Tiglathpileser III. ascended the throne to-
ward the last of April 745 B.C. Six months were
occupied in establishing himself in his seat, and late
in the year (September–October) he took an army
to the south. Aramean tribes, forever moving rest-
lessly across the southern Mesopotamian plain from
the Euphrates to the Tigris, had grown bolder during
these years, and, in spite of the endeavors of the
Assyrian kings (sect. 177), had entered Babylonia,
occupied the Tigris basin from the lower Zab to the
Uknu, and were in possession of some of the ancient
cities of Akkad. Aramean states were forming,
similar to those of western Mesopotamia which had
been overcome with so much difficulty by Ashurnaçir-
pal III. and Shalmaneser II. The king fell upon
the tribes furiously, blockaded and stormed the cities,
drove the intruders from Dur Kurigalzu, Sippar, and
Nippur, and deported multitudes to the northeastern
mountains; he also built two fortresses, dug out the
canals, and organized the country under direct Assyr-
ian rule. From Babylon, Borsippa, and Kutha came
the priests of the supreme divinities, offering their
rikhat (“gifts of homage"?) to the deliverer, who


228 ASSYRIA
returned to Assyria, claiming the ancient and proud
title of “ King of Shumer and Akkad.”
190. A natural corollary of this campaign was the
expedition of the second year (744 B.C.) to the south-
east, which, with the expedition of 737 B.C. to Media,
completed the operations in the east. In this direc-
tion the Assyrian armies reached Mount Demavend,
which overlooks the southern coast of the Caspian
sea. Fortresses were built, Assyrian rule established
among the Namri, the restless Medes chastised, and
made temporarily at least to respect the Assyrian
power.
191. The four years (743–740 B.C.) following the
first eastern campaign were occupied in the west,
where a striking illustration was given of the new
international situation. All the region west of the
Euphrates had practically been lost to Assyria in the
last years of the house of Ashurnaçirpal. The centre
of reorganization in northern Syria was the city-state
of Arpad, lying a few miles north of Khalman
(Aleppo), the capital of King Mati’ilu of Agusi.
That state had apparently succeeded in breaking up
the formerly strong kingdom of Patin (sect. 165),
the western part of which formed a separate prin-
cipality called Unqi (Amq), and was, with the other
contiguous districts, under the suzerainty of Arpad.
The work of his predecessors must apparently be
done over again by Tiglathpileser. But that was
not all. Hardly had he reached the scene of opera-
tions, when he learned that he must confront a more
formidable antagonist in the king of Urartu. Not
contented with robbing Assyria of her tributaries on
the northern frontier from Lake Urmia to Cilicia, the


THE AREAD CAMPAIGNS 229
armies of Urartu had descended through the valleys
along the upper Euphrates, overran Qummukh, and
were supporting the north Syrian states in opposition
to Assyria. The Urartian throne was occupied at
this time by Sarduris III., successor of the brilliant
conqueror, Argistis I. (sect. 182). He had advanced
over the mountains into the upper Euphrates valley
as the Assyrian king moved westward into Syria.
Whether Tiglathpileser III. had already reached
Arpad is not clear, but, if so, he retraced his steps,
and crossing again the Euphrates, marched northward
into Qummukh, where his unexpected arrival and
sudden attack threw the army of Sarduris III. into
confusion. The king himself barely escaped and,
with the relics of his force, ignominiously fled north-
ward over the mountains, pursued by the Assyrians
as far as the “bridge of the Euphrates.” This defeat
effectually cured Sarduris of meddling in Syrian
politics, but by no means crippled the resistance of
the Syrian states under Mati’ilu. Three years longer
the struggle went on before Arpad. It must have
fallen in 740 B.C. The fragments of the annals give
only scattered names of kings and states that hastened
to pay their homage after its overthrow. Qummukh,
Gurgum, Karkhemish, Qui, Damascus, Tyre, are
mentioned in the list, to which in all probability
should be added Milid, Tabal, Samal, and Hamath.
Tutammu of Unqi held out and was severely punished.
His kingdom was made an Assyrian province, as
was doubtless the former state of Agusi. Thus all
of northern Syria again became Assyrian territory,
and the chief states of the central region paid
tribute.


230 ASSYRIA
192. In 738 B.C. the king made another step
forward in the west. Middle Syria, about Hamath,
became involved in trouble with Assyria. Just how
this arose it is very difficult to understand, owing to
the confused and fragmentary condition of the in-
scriptions. They mention a certain Azriyau of Jaudi,
as inciting these districts to rebellion against the
king. At first thought, this personage would seem
identical with Azariah (Uzziah) of Judah; but
chronological and historical obstacles outweigh the
probability of this view, and serve, with other more
positive considerations, to lead to the conclusion
that the state of Jaudi was situated in northern
Syria, adjoining and at times a part of Samal. A
prince of this state, Panammu, the son of Karal, had
already headed an uprising against the reigning king,
Bar-gur, and cut him off with seventy of his house,
though, unfortunately, as it proved for the new ruler,
a son of Bar-gur, also called Panammu, succeeded in
making his escape. It is not unlikely that Azriyau
was a successor of the ambitious usurper and, as lord
of Jaudi and Samal, was seeking, like so many other
princes, to make his principality the centre of a larger
Syrian state. This would inevitably bring him into
hostility to Assyria. But, with considerable shrewd-
ness, he sought to avoid conflict as long as possible by
intriguing with cities of middle Syria as yet unvisited
by Tiglathpileser III., among which the most promi-
ment was the city of Kullani. The Assyrian king
overthrew the rebel leader, devastated the districts
about Hamath, and placed them under an Assyrian
governor. Subject states hastened to pay tribute.
Among them, besides the rulers of northern and


232 ASSYRIA
citadel in vain. At last, having ravaged and ruined
the country far and wide, from the lakes to the
Euphrates as far as Qummukh, they retired, leaving
to Sarduris III. a desolate land and an impoverished
people. The years of Assyrian humiliation were
thus amply avenged.
194. After three years of peace in the west, Tiglath-
pileser III. was again called thither in 734 B. C. The
occasion was one of which the Assyrians had else-
where often taken advantage. In Israel a new king,
Pekah, had joined with Rezon, king of Damascus
(2 Kings xvi. 5; Isa. vii. 1 f.), and the princes of
the Philistine cities (2 Chron. xxviii. 18), chief
of whom was Hanno of Gaza, in a vigorous attack
upon the little kingdom of Judah. Edom, also, took
up arms against her (2 Chron. xxviii. 17). It
has been conjectured that these states had organized
a league to resist Assyrian aggression, and were
seeking to force Judah to join it. But of this there
is no evidence. The real purpose seems to have been
to take advantage of the weakness of Judah, and of
the youth and incapacity of Ahaz its king, to plunder
and divide the country among the assailants. In his
extremity, Ahaz, in opposition to the urgent advice
of Isaiah the prophet (Isa. vii. 3 ff.), determined to
appeal to Tiglathpileser III., preferring vassalage to
Assyria to the almost certain loss of kingdom and
life at the hands of the league. The Assyrian king
seems promptly to have responded to so attractive an
invitation to interfere in the affairs of Palestine,
hitherto undisturbed by his armies. For three years
(734–732 B.C.) he campaigned from Damascus to the
border of Egypt. The order of events cannot be


THE ATTACK ON ISRAEL 233
determined with certainty. The limu list gives for
734 B.C. an expedition against Philistia. This sug-
gests that he made in that year a rapid march to the
far south in order to relieve Judah from the immedi-
ate and pressing danger of overthrow at the hands
of her enemies, and then proceeded at his leisure to
punish them, beginning with the nearest, the Philis-
tines. Gaza suffered the most severely; Hanno fled
southward to Mugri; the city was plundered, but a
vassal king was set up, perhaps Hanno himself, on
making his submission. The other cities yielded
without much resistance.
195. Israel next received attention. The Book of
Kings (2 Kings xv. 29) tells how all Israel, north
of the plain of Esdraelon, and east of the Jordan, was
overrun. Pekah had thrown himself into his cita-
del of Samaria, where the Assyrian king would
have soon beleaguered him and taken possession
of the rest of the country, had not a conspiracy
broken out in which Pekah was killed, and Hoshea,
its leader, made king. His immediate submission
to Tiglathpileser III. was accepted, and his posi-
tion as vassal king confirmed. The northern half
of his kingdom remained, however, in Assyrian
possession.
196. In dealing with Damascus, Tiglathpileser
III. first defeated Rezon in the field, and then shut
him up in the city. How long the siege lasted is
uncertain. The entire district was mercilessly de-
vastated. During the siege Panammu II. of Samal,
who brought his troops to the aid of his Assyrian
suzerain, died, and his son and successor, Bar Rekub,
thus records the event upon the funeral stele:


234 ASSYRIA
Moreover my father Panammu died while following
his lord, Tiglathpileser, king of Assyria, in the camp
. . . And the heir of the kingdom bewailed him. And all
the camp of his lord, the king of Assyria, bewailed him.
And his lord, the king of Assyria, (afflicted) his soul, and
held a weeping for him on the way; and he brought my
father from Damascus to this place. In my days (he
was buried), and all his house (bewailed) him. And
me, Bar Rekub, son of Panammu, because of the
righteousness of my father, and because of my righteous-
ness, my lord (the king of Assyria) seated upon (the
throne) of my father, Panammu, son of Bar-Qur; and I
have erected this monument for my father, Panammu,
son of Bar-gur.
The Assyrian account of the capture of the city
has not been preserved, but the summary statement
of 2 Kings xvi. 9 tells what must have been the
final result: “The king of Assyria . . . took it and
carried (the people of) it captive to Kir and slew
Rezin.” The kingdom of Damascus was destroyed,
and the district became an Assyrian province.
197. In the course of the three years other states
of middle Syria and Palestine came under Assyrian
authority. Samsi, Queen of Arabia, who had with-
held her tribute, was followed into the deserts, and,
after the defeat of her warriors, paid for her rebellion
with the loss of many camels, and the assignment
of an Assyrian qipu, or resident, to her court. Other
Arabian tribes to the southwest, among whom the
Sabeans appear, sent gifts, and, as qipu over the
region of Muqri, a certain Idibi’il was appointed. In
the tribute list of the years 734–732 B.C. appear the
kings of Ammon, Moab, Edom, and various cities of


AHAZ OF JUDAH 235
Phoenicia, hitherto independent. Even the king of
Tyre, Mitinna, was compelled to recognize Assyrian
suzerainty with a payment of one hundred and fifty
talents of gold. The authority of Tiglathpileser III.
was supreme from the Taurus to the Gulf of Aqaba
and beyond. To slight it meant instant punishment.
The king of Tabal, in the far north, ventured to
absent himself from the king's presence, and was
promptly deposed by the royal official. The king of
Askalon, encouraged by the resistance of Rezon,
suffered his zeal for Assyria to cool, and merely the
news of the fall of Damascus threw him into a fit
of sickness which forced him to resign his throne
to his son whom the Assyrian king graciously per-
mitted to ascend it. Ahaz of Judah, according to
2 Kings xvi. 10 ff., paid his homage in person to
his lord Tiglathpileser III. in Damascus after the
fall of that city, and caused to be built in Jerusalem
a model of the Assyrian altar, set up in the Syrian
capital for the worship of Assyrian gods. It has been
thought, not without reason, that the biblical narra-
tive intimates that this Jerusalem altar was prepared
for the use of the Assyrian king himself, who honored
his Judean vassal with a personal visit to his capital
(Klostermann, Komm. Sam. u. Kön., in loc.). Such
a visit was certainly due to that king whose personal
appeal to Tiglathpileser III. had opened the way for
this unprecedented extension of Assyrian power.
198. It was reserved for the last years of this
vigorous king to see the crowning achievement of
his vast ambitions. Thirteen years had passed since
he had entered Babylonia and re-established Assyrian
suzerainty over that ancient kingdom. Meanwhile


236 ASSYRIA
Nabunagir (sect. 177) had been succeeded (in 734 B.C.)
by his son, Nabunadinziri (Nadinu), and he after two
years was killed by one of his officials, who became
king under the name of Nabushumukin. This usur-
pation was sufficient pretext for the interference of
the Kaldi. Ukinzir, chief of the Kaldean principality
of Bit Amukani, swept the pretender out of the way
two months after his usurpation, and seated himself
on the Babylonian throne (732 B.C.). On Tiglath-
pileser's return from the west he must needs inter-
vene to restore Assyrian influence. In 731 B.C. he
advanced against Ukinzir, moving down the Tigris to
the gulf, and attacking Bit Amukani. He shut the
Kaldean up in his capital, Sapia, cut down the palm-
trees and ravaged his land and that of other neighbor-
ing princes. Evidently he found the enterprise a
serious one, for he remained in Assyria the next year,
preparing, it seems, for a decisive stroke. The cam-
paign of 729 B. C. resulted in the capture of Sapia and
the complete overthrow of Ukinzir, who disappeared
from the scene. Among the Kaldean princes who
offered gifts to the victor was a certain Mardukbalid-
din, chief of Bit Jakin, far down on the gulf, who is
to be heard of again in the years to come. With the
passing of the usurper, the Babylonian throne was
vacant, and in 728 B.C. the Assyrian king “took the
hands of Bel” as rightful heritor of the prize. Not
as Tiglathpileser, but as Pulu, either his own per-
sonal name or a Babylonian throne-name, did he reign
as Babylonian king. The cause of this change of
name is thought by some to be a rescript of Babylonian
law, which forbade a foreign king to rule Babylon
except as a Babylonian. It may be that the compli-


TIGLATHFILESER KING OF BABYLON 237
cated mass of legal and ritual requirements which in
the course of the centuries had gathered about the
position of the king of Babylon made it necessary,
particularly in the case of the Assyrian ruler, to dis-
tinguish thus formally between his authority in the
two countries. In his native land he was political
and military head; in Babylon his authority consisted
chiefly in his relation to the gods and their priesthoods.
As such, the new position may be considered as much
a burden as an honor, and Maspero thinks that this
act of Tiglathpileser III. saddled Assyria with a
heavy load. On the other hand, it marks the cul-
mination of the centuries of struggle between the
motherland of immemorial culture and the younger
and more aggressive military state of the north. It
was the attainment of the goal toward which, with
deep sentiment and inextinguishable expectation, king
after king of Assyria had been striving, and which
Tukulti Ninib five centuries before had achieved
(sect. 121). To rule and guard the ancient home at
the mouth of the rivers, as suzerain of its kings, was
not enough ; it was far worthier to assume in person
the holy crown, to administer the sacred laws, to come
face to face with the ancestral gods, and to mediate
between them and mankind. Something of this feel-
ing may have come to Tiglathpileser III. at this
supreme moment. He enjoyed the honor only a little
over a year, however, for in 727 B.C. he died, and in
his stead Shalmaneser IV. became king in the two
lands. -
199. Tiglathpileser III., in his eighteen years of
ruling, had succeeded in raising Assyria from a
condition of degenerate impotence to be the first power


238 ASSYRIA
of the ancient world, with an extent of territory and
an efficiency of administration never before attained.
He combined admirable military skill and energy with
a genius for organization, to which former kings had
not, indeed, been by any means strangers, but which
they had not exercised with such ability, or with
results so solid. The custom of establishing fortified
posts in conquered countries and of appointing
military officials to represent Assyrian authority in
them was continued by Tiglathpileser III., but it is
his merit to have undertaken to attach these sub-
jugated lands much more closely to Assyria, and to
give these officials much more significant administra-
tive duties. Taking as a basis the local unit of the
city and the land dependent upon it, he united a not
too large number of these districts under a single
government official, called, ordinarily, the shupar-
shaku, whose duty it was to administer the affairs of
these districts in immediate dependence on the court.
As such, he was called bel pikhati, “lord of the dis-
tricts.” In other words, the king introduced a
system of provincial government corresponding to
the social and political organization of the Semitic
world. Of these provinces, two were established in
eastern Babylonia, two in the eastern highlands, one
in northern Syria out of the kingdom of Unqi
(sect. 191), two in central Syria, that of Damascus,
and that of the nineteen districts about Hamath, two
in Phoenicia, and one in northern Israel. The col-
lection of a regular tribute and the preservation of
order were, as before, the chief duties of these
provincial officers. They served also as protectors
of the districts from attack, and as guardians of


NEW POLITICAL MEASURES 239
Assyrian interests in surrounding tributary states.
Such tributary states with their vassal kings were
permitted to continue on the same terms as of old.
Tiglathpileser III. also followed his predecessors in
the custom of carrying away the peoples of conquered
lands, but his genius is seen in the system and method
introduced. In the first place, the deportations were
made on an immensely larger scale, and, second, the
majority of those deported were sent, not to Assyria
as before, but to other regions already subjugated.
In other words, immense exchanges of conquered
populations were made by him. Thus, more than
one hundred and thirty-five thousand persons were
removed from Babylonia, sixty-five thousand from
the eastern highlands, seventy thousand from the
northern highlands, and thirty thousand from the
districts about Hamath, and these are not all that
the inscriptions mention. The Syrians were taken to
the north and east ; the Babylonians to Syria. The
result of this policy was to remove the dangers of
insurrection arising out of local or national spirit,
and to strengthen the Assyrian administration in the
provinces. It has been admirably stated by Maspero
as follows:
The colonists, exposed to the same hatreds as the
original Assyrian conquerors, soon forgot to look upon
the latter as the oppressors of all, and, allowing their
present grudge to efface the memory of past injuries, did
not hesitate to make common cause with them. In
time of peace the governor did his best to protect them
against molestation on the part of the natives, and in
return for this they rallied round him whenever the
latter threatened to get out of hand, and helped him to


240 ASSYRIA
stifle the revolt, or hold it in check until the arrival of
reinforcements. Thanks to their help, the empire was con-
solidated and maintained without too many violent out-
breaks in regions far removed from the capital, and
beyond the immediate reach of the sovereign (Passing
of the Empires, pp. 200, 201).
200. Receiving from the hands of so able an
administrator an empire thus organized, Shalmaneser
IV. might look forward to a long and successful
reign. Certain badly mutilated inscriptions, if they
have been read correctly by modern scholars, indicate
that he was the son of Tiglathpileser III. and had
already been entrusted by him with the governorship
of a Syrian province. No inscriptions of his own
throwing light upon his reign have been discovered.
This is not strange, as the limu list indicates that his
reign lasted but five years (727–722 B.C.) The
Babylonian Chronicle states that he succeeded to the
Babylonian throne, and the Babylonian kings' list
gives his throne name as Ulula'a. The limu list,
containing the brief references to campaigns, is here
badly mutilated and affords little help. All the more
important, therefore, are the biblical statements
concerning his relations to Israel, and a difficult
passage of Menander of Tyre (in Josephus, Ant., IX.
14, 2) in regard to his dealings with that city.
201. The west had been quiet since the decisive
settlement of its affairs made by Tiglathpileser III.
in 782 B.C. (sect. 197). The accession of Shalmaneser
IV. was generally acquiesced in, and tribute was
promptly paid. The Babylonian Chronicle mentions
the destruction of the city of Sabarahin (in Syria?,
Ezek. xlvii. 16), which may have taken place in


THE PASSING OF ISRAEL 241
his first year (727 B.C.), at which time the payment
of tribute by Hoshea of Israel (2 Kings xvii. 3)
may have been made. The year 726 B.C. was spent
by the king at home. The policy of Tiglathpileser
III. seemed to insure the fidelity and peace of the
empire. Trouble, however, soon appeared among the
tributary kings of Palestine, owing to the intrigues
of a certain “Sewe (So), king of Egypt (Migraim),”
(2 Kings xvii. 4), the Assyrian equivalent for
whose name is probably Shabi. According to some
scholars, the trouble was made by the north Arabian
kingdom of Mugri over which Tiglathpileser III.
had appointed a qipu (sect. 197). Whatever may be
the solution of that question, the results of the intrigue
were successful. Hoshea of Israel refused to pay
tribute, and it is probable that the king of Tyre
followed suit. Shalmaneser IV. came upon the
ground in 725 B.C. Menander states that he “over-
ran the whole of Phoenicia, and then marched away
after he had made treaties and peace with all; ” and a
broken inscription, containing a treaty of the king
of Tyre with a later Assyrian king appears to sub-
stantiate this account (Winckler, AOF, II., i, 15)
so far as the submission of Tyre is concerned.
202. Israel was not as easily mastered. Hoshea
and his nobles saw clearly that no mercy could be
hoped for, in the face of their repeated contumacy,
and prepared for the worst. They threw themselves
into Samaria, hoping to be able to hold out until
their allies brought them relief. By 724 B.C. the
blockade began. No help came, yet still they defied
the Assyrian army. The country must have been
utterly laid waste. The siege continued through
16


242 ASSYRIA
the year 723 B.C. The next year Shalmaneser IV.
died. The circumstances are not known. The
rebellious and beleaguered capital was left to be
dealt with by his successor, Sargon, who ascended
the throne in January of 722 B.C.


V
THE ASSYRIAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT
SARGON II. 722-705 B. C.
203. ALTHOUGH Sargon gives no indication in his
inscriptions that he was related by blood to his im-
mediate predecessors, the fact that he ascended the
throne without opposition in the month that Shalma-
neser IV. died, shows that he was no usurper, but
was recognized as the logical successor of that king.
In his foreign politics and his administrative activity
he followed in the footsteps of Tiglathpileser III., and
thereby carried forward the empire to a height of
splendor, solidity, and power hitherto unattained. In
one respect, indeed, and that a very important one,
it is claimed that he reversed the policy of the two
preceding kings. He favored the commercial and
hierarchical interests as over against the peasantry
(sects. 185 f.). I, “who preserved the supremacy of
(the city) Assur which had ceased,” and “extended ”
my “protection over Haran and in accordance with
the will of Anu and Dagan wrote its charter,” – are
two statements in his cylinder inscription which, as
doing honor to these centres of priestly rule, illustrate
his friendly, attitude toward the hierarchy and their
interests. His name in one of its forms, Sharru-
ukin, “the king has set in order,” may embody a
reference to this policy, which he conceived of as a
restoration of the old order, the re-establishment of


244 ASSYRIA
justice and right, ignored by his predecessors. While
the king's opposition to them may not have been so
intense or express as to warrant the claim that he
deliberately threw himself into the hands of the
other party, facts like those already mentioned and
others, which will later appear, are explicable from
this point of view.
204. The abounding religiosity of his inscriptions
is in manifest contrast to the ritual barrenness of
those of Tiglathpileser III. Long passages glorify
the gods, whose names make up a pantheon sur-
passing in number and variety those of any preceding
ruler. A devotion to ecclesiastical archaeology, char-
acteristic of a priestly régime, appears in the resusci-
tation of old cults like that of Ningal, the recognition
of half-forgotten divine names such as Damku,
Sharru-ilu, and Shanitka (?). The reappearance of
the triad of Anu, Bel, and Ea (sect. 89) suggests
a revival of the old orthodoxy. Sin, Shamash, Ninib,
and Nergal are honored with temple, festival, or gift.
As though in express contrast with Tiglathpileser
(sect. 187), though perhaps unconsciously, Sargon,
when he built his lordly palace and city, gave its
gates names which testified directly to the over-
mastering power and presence of the gods and
illustrate the extent of his pantheon.
In front and behind, on both sides, in the direction
of the eight winds I opened eight city-gates: “Shamash,
who granted to me victory,” “Adad, who controls its
prosperity,” I named the gates of Shamash and Adad
on the east side; “Bel, who laid the foundation of my
city,” “Belit, who gives riches in abundance,” I named
the gates of Bel and Belit on the north side; “Anu, who


THE FALL OF SAMARIA 245
gave success to the work of my hands,” “Ishtar, who
causes its people to flourish,” I made the names of the
gates of Anu and Ishtar on the west side; “Ea, who
controls its springs,” “Belit-ilani, who grants to it
numerous offspring,” I ordered to be the names of the
gates of Ea and Belit-ilani on the south side. (I called)
its inner wall “Ashur, who granted long reign to the
king, its builder, and protected his armies; ” and its
outer wall “Ninib, who laid the foundation of the new
building for all time to come" (Cyl. Inscr., 66–71).
205. The siege of Samaria, a bequest of Shalma-
neser IV. (sect. 202), was in its final stage when
Sargon became king, and the city fell in the last
months of 722 B.C. The flower of the nation, to the
number of twenty-seven thousand two hundred and
ninety persons, was deported to Mesopotamia and
Media. The rest of the people were left in the wasted
land, and a shuparshaku (sect. 199) was appointed to
administer it as an Assyrian province. Later in the
king's reign, captives from Babylonia and Syria were
settled there.
206. Sargon could hardly have been present at the
fall of Samaria, though, doubtless, the measures
connected with its organization into a province were
directed by him. The necessary adjustments of his
home government and, particularly, the problem of
Babylonia would require his presence in Assyria.
Three months after his accession in Assyria, he
would have to be in Babylon on New Year's day
(Nisan) to “take the hands of Bel ” as lawful
Babylonian king. But what must have been an un-
expected obstacle brought his purpose to naught.
Tiglathpileser's annihilation of the Kaldean prin-


246 ASSYRIA
cipality of Bit Amukani (sect. 198) had served to
consolidate and strengthen the power of another
Kaldean prince, Mardukbaliddin, of Bit Jakin,
who at that time had paid rich tribute and now
pressed forward to seize the vacant throne. He was
supported, if not in his claims to the throne, at least
in his opposition to Assyria, by Elam, a power which
for centuries had not interfered in the affairs of the
Mesopotamian valley. The Babylonian kings' list,
indeed, records the rule of an Elamite over Babylon
somewhere in the eleventh century, but nothing is
known of his relation to the Elamite kingdom. Two
new forces brought Elam upon the scene, and made
it, from this time forth, an important element in
Babylonio-Assyrian politics. First, the pressure of
the new peoples from the far east, represented by the
Medes in the northeastern mountains, was being felt
in the rear of Elam, insensibly cramping and irri-
tating the eastern and northern Elamites and forcing
them westward. Second, the aggressive campaign of
Tiglathpileser III. against the Aramean tribes on
the lower Tigris had cleared that indeterminate
region between the two countries and brought the
frontier of Assyria up to the border of Elam. Colli-
sion was, therefore, as inevitable as between Assyria
and the Median tribes farther north. Elam entered
promptly into the complications of Babylonian politics
and naturally took the anti-Assyrian side. While
Mardukbaliddin advanced northward, Khumbanigash,
the Elamite king, descended from the highlands and
laid siege to Dur Ilu, a fortress on the lower Tigris.
Sargon moved rapidly down the east bank of the
river and engaged the Elamite army before the


THE SITUATION IN THE WEST 247
Kaldeans came up. The result of the battle was
indecisive, a fact which practically meant defeat for
the Assyrians. After punishing some Aramean tribes
that had taken the side of the Kaldi and transport-
ing them to the far west (Samaria), he turned back,
leaving Mardukbaliddin to the possession of Babylon
and the kingship, which he assumed in the lawful
fashion on the first day of the new year (Bab. Chr.,
I. 32).
207. This serious set-back in Babylonia involved,
at the beginning of Sargon's reign, a loss of prestige
that had its effect upon all sides. It encouraged
the rivals of Assyria to intrigue more actively in the
provinces, and gave new heart to those among the
subject peoples inclined to rebellion. In the west,
Egypt, after centuries of impotence, was ready to
engage in the affairs of the larger world. The in-
numerable petty princes who had divided up the
imperial power among them had been formed into
two groups, – one, the southern group, under the
dominance of Ethiopia; the other, the northern group,
under the authority of the prince of Sais, a certain
Tefnakht. His son, Bok-en-renf (Greek, Bocchoris),
unified his power yet more distinctly. He has gained
a place in the Manethonian list as the sole representa-
tive of the twenty-fourth dynasty. About the year
722 B.C. he assumed the rank of Pharaoh. Shut off
from the south by his Ethiopian rivals, he looked
to the north for the extension of his power, and
naturally began to interfere in the affairs of Syria,
whither, both by reason of immemorial Egyptian
claims to the suzerainty and in view of commercial
interests, his hopes were directed. His representatives


248 ASSYRIA
began to appear at the courts of the vassal kings,
and made large promises of Egyptian aid to those
who would throw off the Assyrian yoke. Already
representations of this sort had induced Hoshea
of Israel to refuse the tribute, though in his case
rebellion had been disastrous (sect. 201). Now a
new conspiracy was formed, and the unlucky Baby-
lonian campaign of Sargon gave the occasion for its
launching. A certain Ilubidi, also called Jaubidi of
Hamath, a man of the common people, usually the
greatest sufferers from Assyrian oppression, had suc-
ceeded in deposing the king of that city, and took the
throne as representing the anti-Assyrian party. He
secured adherents in the provinces of Arpad, Qimirra,
Damascus, and Samaria. Allied with him was Hanno
of Gaza, who was ready to try once more the danger-
ous game, relying upon his Bedouin friends. Gaza,
the end of the caravan routes from south and east,
was a centre of trade for the Bedouin, and they were
likewise hampered by Assyrian authority. Among
these Arabian communities were the Muqri, already
referred to (sect. 197), the likeness of whose name
to that of Egypt (Mugur) probably led the Assyrian
scribes into a confusion of the two peoples, which
was encouraged by the geographical proximity of
the localities. This confusion appears also in the
Hebrew writings, where Sewe (So) is called “king
of Egypt” (Migraim) rather than of Mugri; here it
is due to the fact that the impulse to conspiracy came
from the Egyptians, although the Mugri were mem-
bers of the league against Assyria (sect. 201).
208. Sargon hastened to the west in 720 B.C. and
took the rebels in detail. Ilubidi was met at Qarqar,


250 ASSYRIA
prophet Isaiah, who was moved to the strange
action mentioned in Isaiah xx. 2. He kept it up for
three years, at the end of which time the air had
cleared. In Ashdod King Azuri openly favored the
new movement, but so vigilant were the Assyrians
that he was promptly deposed, and his brother Akh-
imiti substituted. This seems only to have added
fuel to the flame, and by 711 B.C. the fire broke out.
Akhimiti was overthrown; the leader of the merce-
naries, a man from Cyprus, was made king, and
allegiance to Assyria thrown off. The Assyrian, how-
ever, was now wide awake, and the conspirators were
again taken unprepared. Sargon sent some of his
finest troops in a forced march to Ashdod. The
rebel leader was driven from his city before his allies
could gather, and fled into the desert, where, in the
fastnesses of the Sinaitic peninsula, he fell into the
hands of a chieftain of Milukhkha, who delivered
him up to the Assyrians. Ashdod and its dependen-
cies, Gath and Ashdudimma, were put under a
provincial government. Judah, Edom, and Moab
hastened to assure the Assyrian of their faithfulness,
and fresh gifts were required of them by way of
punishment for their evil inclinations. Some time
later, even Ashdod was permitted to resume its own
government under a king Mitinti. Another instruc-
tive evidence had been given the Palestinians of the
folly of seeking the aid of “Pharaoh of Egypt, a king
who could not save them.”
209. By far the greater number of Sargon's ex-
peditions were directed toward the north, and occa-
sioned by the renewed efforts of the kingdom of
Urartu to unite the northern tribes against the


THE NORTHERN COALITION 251
Assyrians. Sarduris III. had left Assyria in peace
after his punishment by Tiglathpileser III. in 735
B. C. (sect. 193), and was succeeded about 730 B. C.
by Rusas I., called in the Assyrian inscriptions
Rusa or Ursa. Under his vigorous and ambitious
measures, Urartu entered upon its supreme effort
for the control of the north and the overthrow of
Assyrian supremacy. A combination was formed
of states extending from the upper Mediterranean to
the eastern shores of Lake Urmia, and the struggle
that ensued lasted, in its various ramifications, for
more than ten years (719–708 B.C.). The eastern
peoples were led by Urartu itself; in the west the
Mushki were the leading spirits under their king,
Mita; both nations, however, evidently in mutual
understanding and sympathy sought the same ends
and used the same means.
210. After the humiliation of Urartu, Tiglath-
pileser III. had sought to build up, in the district
between the two lakes, Van and Urmia, a kingdom
which, in close dependence on Assyria, would offset
the influence of Urartu. This was the kingdom of
the Mannai, which had already attained some degree
of unity under its king, Iranzu, and controlled a
number of principalities, among which were Zikirtu,
Uishdish, and Bit Daiukki. Unable to break down
Iranzu's fidelity to Assyria, Rusas succeeded in
drawing away the principalities from their allegiance
and even detached some cities of the Mannai from
Iranzu. Sargon promptly punished these latter in
719 B.C. In 716 Iranzu was succeeded by his son
Aza, whose declared fidelity to his Assyrian overlord
provoked a storm. The chiefs of the rebellious


THE NORTHWESTERN TROUBLES 253
country, and even to interfere in Assyrian affairs,
but with no success. The aggressive power of the
state was broken, and the Assyrians were satisfied to
let well enough alone. That Urartu was practically
left to itself and yet was closely watched, is illustrated
by a despatch which has been preserved from the
Crown Prince Sennacherib, who in the last years of
Sargon was the commanding general, stationed on
the frontier between Urartu and Assyria.
211. In the northwest the Mushki were situated
as advantageously for disturbing the Assyrian
borders as was Urartu in the east. Perched high up
among the Taurus mountains, they saw beneath them
Qui (Cilicia) to the southwest, Tabal and the north
Syrian states to the south, Qummukh to the south-
east, and Milid to the east, beyond which Urartu
extended to the mountains of Ararat. They them-
selves were moved to activity, doubtless, by the
pressure of peoples behind them, caused by the west-
ward movement of the Indo-European tribes, of whom
the Medes in the east formed one branch, and who
were to make themselves felt more distinctly within
half a century. They entered heartily, therefore, into
the schemes of Rusas of Urartu, and did their part
toward breaking down Assyrian influence on these
frontiers. A beginning was made in Tabal in 718 B.C.
by a rebellion in Sinukhtu, one of its principalities.
The rising was put down, the guilty tribe deported, and
its territory given to a neighboring prince. The next
year, tempted by the promise of help from Mita, King
of Mushki, Pisiris, king of Karkhemish, threw off the
yoke, but, if a general rising was expected, it was
prevented by the vigilance and promptness of Sargon,


254 ASSYRIA
who stormed the ancient city, carried away its in-
habitants, and settled Assyrians in their places. The
city became the capital of an Assyrian province.
Mita had, meanwhile, been making advances to Qui.
Its king had been faithful to Assyria at first. He was
consequently attacked by the Mushki and lost some of
his cities. Finally he fell away to the enemy, how-
ever, and was punished with the loss of his kingdom
for, later in Sargon's reign, an Assyrian provincial
governor administered Qui and conducted campaigns
against the Mushki. In 713 B.C. the king of Tabal,
son of the prince raised to the throne by Tiglath-
pileser III. (sect. 197), and himself married to an
Assyrian princess, declared his independence, in spite
of the fact that his territory had been twice enlarged
by Sargon. The Assyrian overran the country,
carried away the king and his people, settled other
captives in the land, and brought it directly under
Assyrian authority. The year following, it was
the turn of Milid to revolt. Its king had overrun
Kammanu, a land under Assyrian protection, and
had annexed it. Sargon punished this aggression
by the removal of the royal house, the deportation of
the inhabitants, and the settlement of people from
the Suti in the land. The country was fortified by a
line of posts on either side over against Mushki and
Urartu. Certain of its cities were conferred upon
the king of the Qummukhi. In Gamgum, a small
kingdom on the southern slopes of the Taurus, the
reigning king had been murdered by his son, who
seized the throne. Sargon, regarding this usurpation
as inspired from the same source as the other move-
ments in these regions, sent, in 711 B. C., a body of


VICTORIES IN THE NORTHWEST 255
troops thither, by whom the same measures were
carried through as elsewhere, and a new Assyrian
province established. Meanwhile the governor of
Qui had succeeded in his campaigns against Mita of
Mushki, who in 709 B.C. made his formal submission
to Sargon. At the same time seven kings of the
island of Cyprus, who had somehow been involved
in the wars of these states in the northwest, sent
gifts to the king, who, in return, set up in that island
a stele in token of his supremacy. That an As-
syrian administration was introduced there, is not
clear. Finally, the hitherto faithful kingdom of
Qummukh, seduced by Argistis II., the new king of
Urartu, threw off the Assyrian yoke. Sargon was
then engaged in the thick of the struggle with his
Babylonian rival. With its triumphant conclusion
in 708 B.C., the king of Qummukh lost heart and did
not await the advance of the Assyrian army. His
land was overrun, and another province was added
to the empire. Already, during these years, the
kingdom of Samal, whose kings had been so loyal to
Tiglathpileser III. (sect. 196), had disappeared, so
that now all the west and north, with the exception
of some of the Palestinian and Phoenician states, was
directly incorporated into the Assyrian empire.
212. The overthrow of the northern coalition, by
the defeat of Rusas of Urartu and Mita of Mushki,
left Sargon free to finish the task which he had
abandoned in the first year of his reign after the
doubtful victory over the king of Elam (sect. 206).
For more than a decade had Mardukbaliddin ruled in
Babylon, undisturbed by his Assyrian rival. But
now his turn had come to feel the weight of Assyrian


256 ASSYRIA
vengeance, made all the heavier by delay, and by the
added might of the Assyrian power, everywhere
else victorious. The Kaldean king had, meanwhile,
found it no easy task to administer his new domain.
The Babylonian priesthood, while nominally acquiesc-
ing in his supremacy, were at heart enemies of
Kaldean rule and devoted to Assyria, especially since
Sargon was inclined to favor hierarchical assumptions.
Nor had Mardukbaliddin seized the throne with any
other purpose than to give his Kaldeans the supreme
positions in Babylonia, and, in pursuing this policy,
he appears to have dispossessed not a few Babylonian
nobles in favor of his own partisans. A document
which has been preserved recites his purpose “to
give ground-plots to his subjects in Sippar, Nippur,
Babylon, and the cities of Akkad,” and describes
such a gift to Bel-akhi-erba, mayor of Babylon, who
was most probably one of his own people (ABL,
64 ff.). While Sargon's claims that his rival de-
spised the Babylonian gods are disproved by the
pious tone of that document, it appears that southern
Babylonia particularly had been so rebellious that the
Kaldean king had carried away the leading citizens
of such cities as Ur and Uruk along with their city-
gods to his capital, and even held confined there
people of Sippar, Nippur, Babylon, and Borsippa.
The Aramean tribes, also, had been permitted to
resume their former independence as a bulwark
against Assyria on the lower Tigris, and the Suti
were active along the northern frontiers of Babylonia.
Moreover, in 717 B.C., Khumbanigash of Elam, the
ally of the Kaldean king, was succeeded by Shutur-
nakhundi, whose zeal for his support had not yet


THE BABYLONIAN WAR 25T
been put to the test. Under such conditions Mar-
dukbaliddin was forced to meet the advance of
Sargon.
213. The campaigns of the years 710–709 s.c.
were occupied with this war in Babylonia. The
weakness of the Kaldean king was apparent immedi-
ately. Sargon's account of his operations has been
variously interpreted. Some assume two Assyrian
armies, – one directed toward the east of the Tigris
and the other, led by Sargon himself, moving west of
the Euphrates. No good reason for the western trans-
euphratean movement can possibly be imagined :
indeed it was the worst sort of taeties to separate the
two armies so widely. The campaign becomes clear
however, if, in the annals (l. 287), we read “Tigris "
for “Euphrates.” The Assyrian army advanced
down the eastern bank of the Tigris without oppo-
sition from Elam, and encountered only the Aramean
tribes. The chief resistance was offered by the
Gambuli, whose city of Duratkhara, though garri-
soned by a corps of Kaldean troops in addition to its
native defenders, was taken by storm, rebuilt and, as
Dur Nabi, made the capital of an Assyrian province,
The whole region down to the Uknu, and eastward into
the borders of Elam, was overrun, devastated, and
made Assyrian territory. Thus Elamite intervention
was cut off. The Elamite king drew back into the
mountains. Then the army turned westward toward
Babylonia, crossed the Tigris (?), and entered the
Kaldean principality of Bit Dakurri. Now Sargon
stood between Mardukbaliddin and his Kaldean base;
hence the Kaldean king must meet his enemy in
Babylon. But his resources were not yet exhausted.
17


258 ASSYRIA
He recognized his danger, abandoned Babylon, and
hurried eastward with his forces into the region just
traversed by the Assyrians, to the border of Elam,
to unite with the Elamite forces, and follow up the
Assyrian army. It was a bold, but thoroughly
strategic move. Shuturnakhundi, however, had lost
heart, and no inducements could avail to secure his
co-operation. Now one resource only remained for
the Kaldean. He moved rapidly to the south, eluded
the Assyrians, and threw himself into a citadel of his
own principality, Bit Jakin, and there, fortifying it
strongly, awaited the Assyrian attack.
214. Sargon, meanwhile, had fortified the capital of
Bit Dakurri, and was preparing to advance northward
toward Babylon. The news of Mardukbaliddin's
escape was followed by the coming of the priesthoods
of Borsippa and Babylon, who brought their rikhat
(sect. 189) and, accompanied by a deputation of the
chief citizens, invited Sargon to enter the city. He
accepted the invitation, and showed his gratification
by royal gifts and services befitting a devoted wor-
shipper of the gods of Babylon. Sippar, which had
been seized by an Aramean tribe driven westward by
his advance down the Tigris, was recovered by a
detachment sent out from Babylon. The next year
(709 B.C.), Sargon “took the hands of Bel” and
became lawful king of Babylon. The punishment
of Mardukbaliddin followed. His principality of
Bit Jakin was fiercely attacked, his citadel stormed
in spite of a desperate resistance, the land laid waste,
the inhabitants deported, and new peoples settled
there. The Kaldean prince, however, succeeded in
making his escape, and was destined still to be a


DUR SHARRUKIN 259
troubler of Assyria. The landowners, dispossessed
under the Kaldean régime, were restored to their
estates. The imprisoned Babylonians were released,
and the city-gods of Uruk, Eridu, and other ancient
shrines were brought back and honored with gifts.
From the king of Dilmun, an island “which lay like
a fish thirty kasbu out in the Persian gulf,” came
gifts in token of homage.
215. Little is known of the course of events in Sar-
gon's reign after 708 B. c. It is clear, however, that
during this period his city and palace of Dur Sharrukin
were completed and occupied. The king had lived
principally at Kalkhi, where he had restored the fa-
mous Ashurnaçirpal palace (sect. 170). But his
overmastering ambition suggested to him an achieve-
ment which had not entered into the minds of his
predecessors. They had erected palaces. He would
build a city in which his palace should stand. For
this purpose, with an eye to the natural beauty of the
location, he chose a plain to the northeast of Nineveh,
well watered and fertile, in full view of the mountains.
A rectangle was marked out, its sides more than a
mile in length, its corners lying on the four cardinal
points. It was surrounded by walls nearly fifty feet
in height, on which at regular intervals rose towers to
a further height of some fifteen feet. Eight gates
elaborately finished and dedicated to the gods (sect.
204) gave entrance through these walls into the city,
which was laid out with streets and parks in a thor-
oughly modern fashion, and was capable of housing
eighty thousand people. Upon the northwest side
stood the royal palace on an artificial elevation raised
to the height of the wall. This mound was in the


260 ASSYRIA
shape of the letter T, the base projecting from the
outer wall, the arms falling within and facing the
city. An area of about twenty-five acres thus ob-
tained was completely covered by the palace, which
consisted of a complex of rooms, courts, towers, and
gardens, numbering in all not less than two hundred.
The main entrance was from the city front through a
most splendid gateway which admitted to the central
Square. From its three sides opened the three main
quarters of the palace, to the right the storehouses, to
the left the harem, and directly across, the king's
apartments and the court rooms. This latter por-
tion was finished in the highest artistic fashion of
the period. The halls were lined with bas-reliefs of
the king's campaigns; the doorways were flanked
with winged bulls, and the archways adorned with
bands of enamelled tiles. In the less elaborate
chambers colored stucco and frescoes are found.
The artistic character of the bas-reliefs, however,
is not distinctly higher than that of previous periods.
The variety of detail already noted as appearing in
the bronzes of Shalmaneser II. (sect. 175) is the
most striking characteristic of these sculptures. It
is in the mechanical skill displayed, in the finish of
the tiling, in the coloring of the frescoes, in the
modelling of the furniture, in the forms of weapons
and the like, that the art here exhibited is chiefly
remarkable. In addition, the colossal character of the
whole design of city and palace, culminating in the
lofty ziggurat, with its seven stories in different col-
ors, rising to the height of one hundred and forty feet
from the court in the middle of the southwest face of
the palace mound, gives a vivid impression of the


SARGON'S POLITICAL POLICY 261
wealth, resourcefulness, and magnificent powers of the
Assyrian empire as it lay in the hand of Sargon,
who brought it to its height and gave it this unique
monument.
216. Sargon's administration of the empire reveals
a curious mixture of progressiveness and conservatism,
of strength and weakness, which makes the task of
estimating his ability and achievement not a little
difficult. His reign was one series of wars, yet a large
number of his campaigns were against petty tribes and
insignificant peoples. Over against his good general-
ship, illustrated in the skilful campaign of 710 B.C.
against Mardukbaliddin, must be placed the serious
reverse in the same region in 721 B. C. Good fortune
did much for him in Babylonia and in the west, where
rebellious combinations never materialized. He over-
threw his enemies in detail or found them deserted by
those who had promised help. It is evident that
Urartu itself offered him nothing like the resistance
it had shown to Tiglathpileser III. His system of
provincial government, involving the exchange of
populations, was an inheritance from his predecessors.
He carried it out more extensively, establishing prov-
inces on all borders and deporting peoples from one
end of the empire to the other in enormous numbers.
His new city of Dur Sharrukin was composed almost
entirely of the odds and ends of populations from every
part of his domains. So intent on making provinces
was he, that he seems at times to take advantage of
insignificant difficulties in vassal kingdoms to over-
turn the government and incorporate them into the
empire. Was he wise in this? Or was the policy
of Tiglathpileser III. more far-sighted? He, while


DEFECTS IN SARGON'S POLICY 263
wars to keep them active and secure them booty.
When these fail, they sell themselves to a higher bid-
der, or turn their arms against the state. The policy
of Sargon also involved the subordination of the As-
Syrian peasantry to the commercial and industrial in-
terests of the state or to the possessors of great landed
estates. The burdens of taxes fell upon the farmers
even more heavily. They dwindled away, became
serfs on the estates, or slaves in the manufactories, and
their places were supplied by aliens from without,
transplanted into the native soil. Thus the state
as organized by Sargon became more and more an
artificial structure, of splendid proportions, indeed, but
the foundations of which were altogether insufficient.
Whether this judgment is unduly severe or not, it is
clear that none of these evils appeared in the king's
time. Assyria was never so great in extent, never so
rich in silver and gold and all precious things, never
so brilliant in the achievements of art and architecture,
never more devoted to the gods and their temples.
Nor was Sargon unmindful of the economic welfare of
his country, as his inscriptions testify. He directed
his attention to the colonization of ruined sites, to the
planting of fields, to making the barren hills produc-
tive, and causing the waste dry lands to bring forth
grain, to rebuilding reservoirs and dams for irrigation.
He sought to fill the granaries with food, to protect
the needy against want, to make oil cheap, to make
sesame of the same price with corn, and to establish a
uniform price for all commodities. When he had set-
tled strangers from the four quarters of the earth in
his new city, he sent to them Assyrians, men of knowl-
edge and insight, learned men and scribes, to teach


264 ASSYRIA
them the fear of God and the king (Cyl. Inscr., ABL,
pp. 62 ft.). These were high conceptions of the respon-
sibilities of empire, however imperfectly they may
have been realized.
218. Hardly had Sargon been settled in his new city
and palace when his end came. A violent death is
recorded, but whether in battle or by a murderer's
hand in his palace, the broken lines of the inscription
do not make clear. His son and heir, Sennacherib,
was summoned from the frontier, where he was acting
as general, and without opposition ascended the
throne toward the close of July, 705 B.C.


WI
THE STRUGGLE FOR IMPERIAL UNITY
SENNACHERIB. 705-681 B. C.
219. THE reign of Sennacherib, though longer by
six years than that of his father, is marked by fewer
military expeditions, but the campaigns recorded are,
with one or two exceptions, of a much more serious
character than those which brought Sargon booty and
fame. It is true that for his last eight years (689–
681 B.C.) he has left no memorials of his activities.
Yet that very fact indicates how Assyrian rule was
changing from aggression and conquest to the admin-
istration of an organized and compact state as the out-
come of a long series of experiments in government,
brought to a climax in the reign of Sargon. A
demonstration of Assyrian strength by a raid into
the southeastern mountains in 702 B.C., when the
Kassites and Illipi were again punished, an expedi-
tion to the northwest among the tribes of Mount
Nipur and into Tabal, which, perhaps, reached as far
as Cilicia, in 697 B. C., and a campaign among the
Arabian tribes in his later years, – these constitute the
sum total of the minor wars waged by Sennacherib,
Along the eastern and northern borders and in Syria
provincial governors kept strict ward over the motley
populations under their sway, and carefully watched
all signs of movement in the outlying peoples beyond,


266 ASSYRLA
among whom, for a season, a strange and perhaps
portentous quiet seemed to prevail.
220. Only on the two extremities of the long semi-
circle of lands making up the empire did serious
difficulty appear. Babylonia and Palestine, the former
especially, were the two problems given to Sennacherib
to solve. The complexities which they involved, the
new factors appearing there, the daring attempts at
solution, and the tragic elements concerned in them
make Sennacherib's reign one of the most interesting
and baffling studies in all Assyrian history.
221. The Babylonian difficulties were not new.
How they troubled his predecessors has already been
described (sects. 189, 198, 206). Babylonia was no
longer a unity under the rule of kings of Babylon,
but a number of separate principalities, each eager
for possession of the capital city and thus the nomi-
nal headship of the land. Aramean communities lay
on the north and east, Arabians on the west, and
Kaldean states on the south, while over the borders
were the rivals Assyria and Elam, the latter just
beginning to assert itself, both determined to enter
and possess the land. Babylon itself, the genial
fountain-head of religion, culture, and mercantile
activity, alike flattered and preyed upon by these
various states, containing a great population made up
of heterogeneous elements with inclinations divided
between all the parties that invited their favor, had no
unity except in the self-interest concerned with the
maintenance of its religious authority and its commer-
cial supremacy. Tiglathpileser III. had entered the
city as a deliverer from the anarchy threatened by the
incursions of Arameans and Kaldeans, and, as king by


THE OUTBREAK IN THE WEST 269
the king proceeded more boldly with his rebellious
plans. A visit of emissaries from Mardukbaliddin
(2 Kings xx. 12 f.), who, though driven from Babylon,
was still active in organizing opposition to Assyria
(702 B.C.), secured Hezekiah's adherence to a league
which included the Tyrian and Palestinian states,
Ammon, Moab, and Edom, the Bedouin on the east
and south, as well as the Egyptians. All disguise
was thrown off. Padi, the king of the Philistine city
of Ekron, who would not join the rebels, was deposed
and delivered to Hezekiah. Open defiance was thus
offered to Sennacherib.
223. The Assyrian was, however, apparently well
apprised of the designs of the leaguers, and determined
to forestall them. Early in 701 B.C. he appeared on
the Mediterranean coast and received the submission
of the Phoenician cities with the exception of Tyre.
Ammon, Moab, and Edom hastened, also, to pay hom-
age at that time. Luli of Tyre, called king of Sidon
in the Assyrian account, retired to Cyprus, and his
newly acquired Phoenician kingdom fell to pieces.
The omission of Tyre from the submissive cities makes
it evident that Sennacherib was unable to capture it
at this time. But he determined to set up a rival
which would effectually prevent it from giving him
trouble and from re-establishing its influence among
the Phoenician cities. For this purpose he chose
Sidon, appointed, as king over it, Itobaal (Assyr.
Tubalu), and gave him suzerainty over the cities which
had acknowledged the authority of Tyre. It is prob-
able that an attack was made upon Tyre by a naval
force collected from these cities, under Sidon's leader-
ship; but the assailants were repulsed, and Tyre


270 ASSYRIA
remained independent (Menander in Jos. Ant., IX.
14, 2).
224. Sennacherib, without waiting for the issue
of the attack on Tyre, hurried forward, down the
coast road, to strike at Askalon, the southernmost
of the Philistine cities that was in rebellion. Hav-
ing reduced it and captured its king, Çidda, he
turned toward the northeast, and, on his advance
to Ekron, was confronted at Altaqu with an army
led by the chiefs of Muqri and Ethiopian-Egyptian
generals. The force, hastily gathered and poorly
commanded, was dispersed without difficulty. Altaqu
and Timnath were despoiled, and Ekron surrendered.
All opposition on the coast was thus crushed. Heze-
kiah was isolated, and the Assyrian attack could
concentrate on Judah. The king therefore marched
up the valleys leading to the plateau. His own
words describe the punishment he inflicted upon the
unhappy land:
But as for Hezekiah of Judah, who had not submitted
to my yoke, forty-six of his strong walled cities and the
smaller cities round about them, without number, by the
battering of rams, and the attack of war-engines (?),
by making breaches by cutting through, and the use of
axes, I besieged and captured. Two hundred thousand
one hundred and fifty people, small and great, male and
female, horses, mules, asses, camels, cattle, and sheep,
without number, I brought forth from their midst and
reckoned as spoil. (Hezekiah) himself I shut up like
a caged bird in Jerusalem, his royal city. I threw up
fortifications against him, and whoever came out of the
gates of his city I punished. His cities, which I had
plundered, I cut off from his land and gave to Mitinti,


SUBMISSION OF HEZEKIAH 271
Ring of Ashdod, to Padi, King of Ekron, and to Çil-Bel,
Ring of Gaza, and (thus) made his territory smaller.
To the former taxes, paid yearly, tribute, a present for
my lordship, I added and imposed on him. Heze-
kiah himself was overwhelmed by the fear of the bril-
liancy of my lordship, and the Arabians and faithful
soldiers whom he had brought in to strengthen Jeru-
salem, his royal city, deserted him. Thirty talents of
gold, eight hundred talents of silver, precious stones,
guhli daggassi, large lapis lazuli, couches of ivory,
thrones of elephant skin and ivory, ivory, ushu and
wrkarinu woods, of every kind, a heavy treasure, and
his daughters, his palace women, male and female
singers, to Nineveh, my lordship's city, I caused to
be brought after me, and he sent his ambassador to give
tribute and to pay homage (Taylor Cyl., III. 11–41).
225. The course of the campaign, as here
presented, is also described in 2 Kings xviii. and
xix. (see Isa. xxxvi. and xxxvii.), and a harmoni-
zation of the narratives, though difficult, is not
impossible. Sennacherib did not, at first, attack
Jerusalem, but only blockaded it, and leaving fear
and famine to accomplish its surrender, moved south-
ward, devastating the land on every side, until he came
to Lachish and Libnah. The capture of these towns
made an end of rebellion in the southeastern plain, and
completed his Palestinian campaign, which had swung
around in a great circle from Askalon in the south-
west to these southeastern cities. Meanwhile Heze-
kiah had decided to submit; he set free Padi, king of
Ekron, and sent to Sennacherib, at Lachish, for terms
of surrender, which were promptly forthcoming and
as promptly met. His failure to present himself in
person, however, angered the Assyrian. Recognizing


THE NAVAL EXPEDITION 273
grated in a body down the eastern coast of the gulf
into a district of Elam. He must have died soon
after, for he played no part in the succeeding events.
Bit Jakin, his principality, was utterly devastated.
A new experiment was tried at Babylon. Sennach-
erib made his eldest son, Ashur-nadin-shum, king of
the city, and carried Belibni and his counsellors, in
disgrace, back to Assyria. The failure of the coali-
tion against Assyria caused, also, the downfall of
the Elamite king, who was dethroned by his brother
Khallushu. The way seemed, thus, to be cleared
for the new régime in Babylonia and, in fact, Ashur-
nadinshum occupied the throne for six years (700–
694 B. C.). But the end of his career was tragical,
and opened another period of trouble for the unhappy
land.
227. Sennacherib employed these years of quiet
in preparations for a military expedition which was
as unique in its method as it was audacious in its
conception. The Kaldi, whom Mardukbaliddin had
carried off with him in ships to the eastern shore of
the Persian gulf and brought under the immediate
shelter of Elam, were settled on the lower courses
of the river Karun, the waterway from the south
into the heart of Elam. If an army could be landed
here, it might be able not only to destroy these enemies,
but even make its way to the Elamite capital Susa,
and strike a deadly blow at the power of Elam. Two
conditions were essential for the success of this enter-
prise, a fleet at the head of the gulf for the transport
of troops, and secrecy as to the goal and the prepara-
tions for the expedition. Accordingly Phoenician
ship-builders and sailors from the vassal state of
18


BABYLONIAN AND ELAMITE WARS 275
returned. He made Uruk his headquarters, and
awaited the coming of the enemy, who were occupied
about Nippur. The battle between the two armies
took place in September (693 B.C.), and Nergalu-
shezib was defeated, captured, and carried off to
Assyria.
228. Whatever arrangements Sennacherib had made
for the government in Babylon, on the fall of the
usurper, were speedily brought to naught by the
Babylonians themselves, who made the Kaldean prince
Shuzub (sect. 226) their king, under the name of
Mushezib Marduk (693 B.C.). Meanwhile another
revolution had broken out in Elam by which Khal-
lushu was set aside and Kudur-nakhundi became
king. The Assyrian king was, as it seems, already
marching down the eastern bank of the Tigris again
to settle affairs in Babylonia, when the news from
Elam induced him to turn his arms against that
enemy. He swept through the lower valleys with
fire and sword, and, though the winter was approach-
ing, determined to advance into the mountains
whither the Elamite king had withdrawn. But
hardly had he entered the highlands when the in-
clemency of the weather forced him to retire (692
B. C.). He had, however, broken the prestige of
Kudurnakhundi, who lost his throne to his brother,
Umman-menanu, after hardly a year's reign. Mu-
shezib Marduk knew that his turn would soon come
for punishment, and made a vigorous effort to defend
himself. He called for aid upon the new Elamite
king, who for his own security must also show a
bold front to Assyria. The Babylonians likewise
felt that vengeance would fall upon them for their


DESTRUCTION OF BABYLON 277
Assyrian deities, which Marduknadinakhi had carried
away from Ekallati (sect. 145), were carefully removed
and restored to their city. The canal of Arakhtu
was turned from its bed so as to flow over the ruins.
The immense spoil was made over to the soldiers.
The district was then placed under a provincial
government, as had already been the case with the
lands of the Kaldeans and Arameans round about it.
Sennacherib thus ruled Babylon till his death. The
Babylonian kings’ list names him as “king ” both
for the years 705–703 B.C. and also during this last
period, 689–681 B.C., although the source from which
Ptolemy drew his information denominated both these
periods “kingless.” The Assyrian had made a soli-
tude and called it peace.
230. The last years of Sennacherib were evidently
embittered by family difficulties, of which some traces
appear in the inscriptions. When the unfortunate
Ashurnadinshum was carried away to Elam, another
son of the king, Ardi-belit, was recognized as crown
prince. Two other sons are mentioned, Ashur-munik,
for whom a palace was built, and Esarhaddon. This
latter prince, for reasons not now discoverable, began
gradually to supplant his brothers in the king's favor.
It seems probable, though absolute proof is not yet
available, that he was appointed governor of the
province of Babylon (680 B.C.), and a curious docu-
ment has been preserved in which his father confers
upon him certain gifts, and changes his name from
Esarhaddon (Ashur-akh-iddin, that is, “Ashur has
given a brother ”) to Ashur-itil-ukin-apla, that is,
“Ashur the hero has established the son.” The be-
stowal of the name suggests the choice of him as heir


278 ASSYRIA
and successor to the throne in preference to his elder
brother. His mother, Naqia, who plays an important
rôle in her son's reign, may have had her part in the
affair. At any rate, the embittered and disgraced
brother sought betimes the not unusual revenge.
Associating, it may be, another brother with him, as
2 Kings xix. 36 f. states, he slew his father while
worshipping in a temple of “Nisroch’” (Nusku?).
Thus, once more, a brilliant reign ended in shameful
assassination, and revolution was let loose upon the
empire.
231. The name of Sennacherib is intimately asso-
ciated with the city of Nineveh, which owes its fame,
as the chief capital of the Assyrian empire, to his
choice of it as a favorite dwelling-place. He planned
its fortifications, gave it a system of water-works,
restored its temples, and built its most magnificent
palaces. The city, as it came from his hands, was an
irregular parallelogram that lay from northwest to
southeast along the eastern bank of the Tigris, its
western side about two and one-half miles long,
its northern over a mile, its eastern more than three
miles, and its southern half a mile in length, making
in all a circuit of about seven miles. Through the
middle of the city flowed, from east to west, the river
Khusur, an affluent of the Tigris. Sennacherib built
massive walls and gates about the city, and on the
eastern side toward the mountains added protecting
ramparts. A quadruple defence was made on this
side. A deep moat, supplied with water from the
Khusur, was also led along the eastern face. Diodo-
rus estimates the height of the walls at one hundred
feet. Their general width was about fifty feet, and


º
N
y ! *
A
-
ecauay a co-, -Y.


THE ROYAL WORKS AT NINEVEH 279
excavations have indicated that in the vicinity of the
gates they were more than one hundred feet wide.
The arrangements for furnishing the city with water
are described by the king in an inscription, carved
upon the cliff of Bavian, a few miles to the northeast
of Nineveh among the mountains. Eighteen moun-
tain streams were made to pour their waters into the
Khusur, thus securing a constant flow of fresh water.
A series of works regulated at the same time the
storing and the distribution of the water, and made
it possible for the city to maintain an abundant sup-
ply in time of siege. Two lofty platforms along the
Tigris front of the city had served as the foundations
of the palaces already erected, but both palaces and
platforms had fallen into decay. The northern plat-
form, now known as the mound of Kouyunjik, lay
in the upper angle formed by the junction of the
Khusur and the Tigris. Sennacherib restored and
enlarged this platform, changed the bed of the
Khusur so that it half encircled the mound, and
built in the southwest portion of it his palace. It
has been only partially excavated, yet already seventy-
one rooms have been opened; in the judgment
of competent investigators, the palace is the greatest
built by any Assyrian monarch. On the southern
platform, now called Nebiyunus, the king built an
arsenal for the storing of military supplies. His
ideal for these buildings is stated by himself to be
that they should excel those of his predecessors in
“adaptation, size, and artistic effect.” His success
in the latter respect is no less remarkable than in the
two former. No series of bas-reliefs hitherto executed
in Assyria, or even in the ancient world, reaches


280 ASSYRIA
the height of artistic excellence attained by those of
Sennacherib. In variety of subject-matter, strength
and accuracy of portraiture, simplicity and breadth
of composition, they are among the most remarkable
productions of antiquity. The tendency to the de-
velopment of the background and setting of the princi-
pal subject, already observed in previous work (sects.
175, 215), has reached its climax. The delineation
of building operations and the sense for landscape
are two new features which illustrate the larger
outlook characteristic of the higher civilization and
broader culture of the time. Similar characteristics
appear in the literary remains of the king. Official
as they are, they reveal, as compared with similar
documents of earlier kings, a feeling for literary
effect, an element of subjectivity, a color and breadth
of composition, which are unusual. The description
of the battle of Khalule, in the Taylor inscription
(ABL, pp. 77–79), in spirit and vigor leaves little
to be desired, while the free characterization of
personages and measures, indulged in throughout the
inscription, introduces a distinctly fresh note into these
usually arid and stereotyped annalistic documents.
The culture of the time may, perhaps, also
be illustrated by the subtle and effective speech
of the Assyrian royal officer to the people of
Jerusalem, preserved in 2 Kings xviii. 19–35, – an
argument in content and form worthy of a modern
diplomatist.
232. What, after all, shall be said of the central
figure of this brilliant time and of the work which he
did for Assyria? The verdict has, in general, been
unfavorable, ranging from the moderate statement


ESTIMATE OF SENNACHERIB 281
that, “though great, he was so by no desert of his
own,” to the thoroughgoing condemnation of him as
“boastful, arrogant, cruel, and revengeful,” whose
“vindictive cruelty was only equalled by his almost
incredible impiety,” exhibiting “blind rage" and the
“ruthless malignity of the narrow-minded conqueror.”
The chief basis for the extreme view must lie, in part,
in the striking subjectivity of his inscriptions as
already referred to, and, for the rest, in the judg-
ment passed on his destruction of Babylon. But the
former ground is a very hazardous basis for estimat-
ing the character of an Assyrian king, since he cannot
be regarded as the author of the inscriptions in which
he thus speaks. Nor should the destruction of Baby-
lon be singled out from his whole career as the sole
test of his character and work. A broader view may
be able to make a fairer estimate of his contribution
to Assyrian history, and thereby to see even in the
overthrow of Babylon something more than one of
“the wildest scenes of folly in all human history.”
As a soldier he was active and brave even to personal
rashness in the day of battle. In his conduct of a
campaign he will, in energy and rapidity of move-
ment, bear comparison with any of his predecessors,
and in the daring and originality of his strategy he
surpasses them. His Palestinian campaign and his
naval expedition to southern Elam are conclusive
illustrations. It is true that disasters attended both
these campaigns, but they were such as could hardly
have been foreseen and prepared for. The most
that can be said against him as a soldier is that
he may have been hasty in forming plans, and
possibly obstinate in carrying them through, and


282 ASSYRIA
that unexpected difficulties robbed him of complete
Success.
233. From the larger point of view his dealings with
Babylon may, perhaps, be most justly estimated. As
the heir of the political programme of Sargon, he found
himself face to face with the problem of Babylonian
prerogative. The unity of the empire, with its sys-
tem of vassal kingdoms and of provincial government,
could not harmonize with the claims of Babylonian
equality. Sennacherib tried various methods of in-
corporating that ancient city into the scheme of
imperial unity, but in vain. Finally, he chose, with
characteristic audacity and impetuousness, to cut the
knot, to maintain the unity of the empire upon the
ruins of Babylon. The solution was one which only
a man of genius would have conceived and a man of
intense and fiery spirit have carried through. It
may be that he also desired the ruin of Babylon
to redound to the higher glory of Nineveh, or that
he was inspired to the act by his anti-hierarchical in-
clinations and his wrath at Babylonian obduracy and
treachery. These were, however, surely secondary to
his main impulse, his determination that the unity of
the empire should be secured, so far as it involved
Babylonia, even by the destruction of the proud city
that would not lower her head and for whose favor
the nations round about were forever at strife. So
far as the immediate problem was concerned, he was,
indeed, successful, but he overestimated his power, if
he thought himself able to wipe out a past so ancient
and glorious, and to prevent the gathering of man-
kind to a spot so manifestly intended by nature
and history as a centre of commerce and culture.


VII
IMPERIAL EXPANSION AND DIVISION
ESARHADDON. 681–668 B.C.
234. No contemporary narrative has been preserved
which gives in clear detail the story of the critical
months that followed the murder of Sennacherib.
The deed was done on the twentieth of Tebet (early
in January), according to the Babylonian Chronicle.
Second Kings xix. 37 states that his murderers es-
caped into the land of “Ararat,” that is, Urartu.
The Chronicle adds that the insurrection in Assyria
ceased on the second of Adar (middle of February),
and that Esarhaddon became king sixteen (?) days
thereafter (18th (?) of Adar). An inscriptional frag-
ment of Esarhaddon seems to refer to events of these
days and describes the climax of the struggle:
I was fierce as a lion, and my heart (liver) was en-
raged. To exercise the sovereignty of my father's house
and to clothe my priestly office, to Ashur, Sin, Shamash,
Bel, Nabu and Nergal, Ishtar of Nineveh, Ishtar of
Arbela, I raised my hands, and they looked with favour
on my petition. In their eternal mercy they sent me an
oracle of confidence — viz.: “Go, do not delay ; we will
march at thy side and will subjugate thine enemies.”
One day, two days, I did not wait, the front of my army
I did not look upon, the rear I did not see, the appoint-
ments for my yoked horses, the weapons for my battle I
did not inspect, provisions for my campaign I did not
issue. The furious cold of the month of Shebat, the


286 ASSYRIA
cient fulness and with a variety of picturesque
detail that suggests the influence of the literary
school of the time of Sennacherib. No such splendid
battle-scenes as that of Khalule (sect. 231) decorate
the narratives, which, indeed, reveal a decline in energy
and an inclination to fine writing that reaches its
climax in the following reign. The numerous build-
ing inscriptions illustrate a prominent and important
feature of the king's rule. On the southern platform
of Nineveh, he erected a palace and arsenal on the site
of the building of Sennacherib (sect. 231), which had
grown too small. At Kalkhi his palace occupied the
southwestern corner of the mound; it was partially ex-
cavated by Layard. The indications are that it was
unfinished at the time of the king's death. Curiously
enough, there were found piled up in it a number of
slabs, from the palace of Tiglathpileser III. ; these had
been trimmed off, preparatory to recarving and fitting
them for use in the new edifice (sect. 187). A char-
acteristic of both of his palaces, indicative perhaps
of a new architectural impulse, is the great hall of
unusual width, its roof supported by pillars and
a medial wall. Another striking feature is the use
of sphinxes in decoration. No bas-reliefs of any
significance have as yet been discovered. A tunnel
was built by the king to bring the waters of the upper
Zab to Kalkhi, a renewal of the channel dug by
Ashurnaçirpal. Esarhaddon was also pre-eminently
a temple-builder. He rebuilt the temple of Ashur
at Nineveh. In Babylonia he was especially active,
the temples at Uruk, Sippar, Dur Ilu, Borsippa, and
elsewhere being restored by him. Not less than thirty
temples in all bore marks of his work.


REBUILDING OF BABYLON 287
237. His crowning achievement in this respect was
the reconstruction of the city of Babylon, to the
account of which he devotes several inscriptions.
The wrath of Marduk at the spoiling of his treasure
in order to send it to Elam (sect. 228) had been the
cause of the city's destruction. “He had decreed
ten years as the length of its state of ruin, and the
merciful Marduk was speedily appeased and he drew
to his side all Babylonia. In the eleventh year I
gave orders to re-inhabit it ’’ (The Black Stone Inscr.,
ABL, p. 88). For Marduk had chosen him in prefer-
ence to his elder brothers for this work. With pro-
foundly solemn and impressive religious ceremonies,
the enterprise was undertaken, all Babylonia being
summoned for service and the king himself assuming
the insignia of a laborer. The temple, Esagila, the
inner wall, Imgur-bel, the ramparts, Nemitti-Bel, began
to rise in surpassing strength and magnificence. The
royal bounties for the service of the sanctuary were
renewed. The scattered population was recalled. It
is not unlikely that the city had not been so utterly
destroyed as Sennacherib's strong language suggests.
The walls, temples, and palaces were, indeed, demol-
ished, but there is no evidence that the site had been
utterly abandoned during these years. As the destruc-
tion involved the taking away of the religious, political,
and commercial supremacy of the city in punishment
for its rebelliousness, but not necessarily its complete
desolation, so the rebuilding signified that its former
headship and prerogative were restored under the fos-
tering favor of the ruler of the empire. Hence the king
called it “the protected city.” The same conclusion
follows from the fact that the work was practically


288 ASSYRIA
completed in three years (680–678 B.C.). The estates
of the nobility in the vicinity of the city, which had
been appropriated by the Kaldeans of Bit Dakurri,
were restored to them, and the king of that princi-
pality paid for his crime by the loss of his throne.
238. This important enterprise had a political as well
as an architectural significance. It involved the re-
versal of Sennacherib's policy, and reinstated Babylon
among the problems of imperial rule. The motives
which induced Esarhaddon to take this step have been
variously conceived. He himself ascribes it to the
mercy and forgivingness of the gods. But religion
in antiquity, particularly official religion, usually gave
its oracles in accordance with royal or priestly policy,
and the question therefore still remains. A clew may
be found in the personal interest taken by the king
in Babylon and its affairs owing to his residence there
as governor, or to family ties, if, as is assumed,
his mother or wife belonged to the Babylonian no-
bility. He may have thus paid off a political debt,
as his accession to the throne had been made possible
by the immediate acknowledgment of him as king in
Babylon and through the aid furnished him by Baby-
lonian troops. By some scholars the fundamental
political division in the empire is assumed to account
for the undertaking. This division appeared origi-
nally between hierarchy and army (sect. 185), but now
took the more concrete form of Nineveh against Baby-
lon without losing the inveterate opposition of a mili-
tary and secular policy to a peaceful and commercial,
a cultural and religious ideal. Sennacherib devoted
himself to the interests of Nineveh and the army;
Esarhaddon took the opposite course, and the rehabili-


BABYLONIAN INFLUENCES AT THE COURT 289
tation of Babylon naturally followed. This theory is
too rigorously maintained and applied by its advo-
cates; one cannot conceive that any Assyrian ruler or
party would voluntarily undertake to set Babylon
above Nineveh, or that the ambitions of the Babylo-
nian hierarchy would not be offset by the equally pre-
tentious claims of the Assyrian priesthood. Yet it is
quite probable that at the Assyrian court Babylonian
influences emanating from personal, religious, and com-
mercial interests alike, were strong, and at this time
may have overruled, in the king's mind, the counsel
of those who regarded the rebuilding of the city as
inimical to the welfare of the state. The very violence
of Sennacherib's measures would tend to produce a
reaction of which the representatives of Babylon's
wrongs would not fail to take advantage. Whatever
may have been Esarhaddon's motive, his inscriptions
reveal the lively interest he took in the work, and the
importance he attached to its completion.
239. In connection with the rebuilding of the city
Esarhaddon, as shakkanak of Babylon (sect. 216), was
engaged in the reorganization and administration of
Babylonia. During the troubles connected with the
succession, the Kaldi, under the leadership of a son of
Mardukbaliddin, named Nabu-zer-napishti-lishir, took
up arms and besieged Ur. The energetic advance of
the provincial governor of southern Babylonia into
his domain compelled the Kaldean to retreat and
finally to flee to Elam, his father's old resort in time
of trouble. There Ummanmenanu had been succeeded
by Khumma-khaldash I., and he by another of the same
name. Khummakhaldash II., however, contrary to
the policy of his predecessors, put the fugitive to
19


290 ASSYRIA
death. His brother Na'id Marduk, who had accom-
panied him, fled to Assyria and threw himself on the
mercy of Esarhaddon, who promptly made him vassal-
lord of the Kaldi, and thereby not only widened the
breach between the Kaldi and Elam but also secured
the allegiance of the former. The Gambulians, an
Aramean tribe of the southeast, were likewise won
to the Assyrian side, and their capital fortified
against Elam. Still, though thus isolated, the Elam-
ites ventured a raid into northern Babylonia (674
B. C.), while Esarhaddon was in the west, and his
mother, Naqia, was acting as regent. They stormed
Sippar and carried away the gods of Agade, but were
evidently prevented from doing further damage by
the well-organized system of Assyrian defence. It
seems that this somewhat unsuccessful expedition
cost Khummakhaldash II. his throne. The same
year he died “without being sick,” and was succeeded
by his brother, Urtagu (Urtaki), who signalized his
accession by returning the gods of Agade. He
continued the policy of peace with Assyria during
Esarhaddon's reign. It is probable that not only
the Assyrian defensive arrangements, but also
troubles arising on his northern and eastern frontiers
from the encroachments of the Medes, explain this
attitude.
240. Assyria, likewise, had her problem to solve
upon the northern frontier. During the quiet which
reigned here in the years of Sennacherib (sect. 219),
the Medes of the northeast had been passing from the
condition of tribal independence into a somewhat con-
solidated confederacy, which now acknowledged as
leader a certain Mamitiarshu, who is called in Assyr-


APPEARANCE OF THE KIMMERIANS 291
ian documents “lord of the cities of the Medes.” In
the north the kingdom of Urartu was held in check by
the Mannai, who owed their place and power to Assyr-
ian favor (sect. 210); but in the last years of Senna-
cherib, a new wave of migratory peoples came rolling
down from the Caucasus. It broke on the Assyrian
border and produced confusion and turmoil. These
peoples were called by the Assyrians Gimirrai (angli-
cized, through the Greek, as “Kimmerians”). Reach-
ing the high and complex mountain-mass behind
which lay Urartu, they seem to have split into two
divisions, one moving westward along the Anti-
Taurus into Asia Minor, the other likewise follow-
ing the mountains in their southeasterly trend toward
Iran. In both directions they emerged upon territory
under Assyrian influence, and came into conflict with
Assyrian troops. The western body came out above
the upper Euphrates, in the provinces of Milid and
Tabal, where Esarhaddon met them under the leader-
ship of a certain Teushpa, whom he claims to have de-
feated. If the restoration of the reading in a broken
place in the Babylonian Chronicle is correct, this
battle took place as early as 678 B. C. The result of
it seems to have been to drive the Gimirrai farther to
the northwest, where they fell upon the kingdom
of Phrygia. The complications in the northeast were
much more formidable. Urartu became restless, and
it is not surprising therefore, that the sons of Sen-
nacherib, who murdered him, fled northward, made
their stand on the upper Euphrates, and finally took
refuge in Urartu. Their presence there may have
had something to do with the disturbances which soon
arose on the frontiers. These broke out, however, not


292 ASSYRLA
in Urartu, but in the pro-Assyrian state of the Mannai,
which seems to have united with the Gimirrai, and
threatened Assyrian supremacy in the mountains.
Then, as the Gimirrai pushed farther to the southeast,
they sought alliance with the Medes. Before the
Assyrians were awake to the situation, they were
startled to find that the Gimirrai, Mannai, and Medes
were forming a league under the leadership of Kash-
tarit, lord of Karkashshi. A series of curious docu-
ments, apparently official inquiries made of the sun
god with reference to these disturbances and the
king's measures taken to quiet them, reveals at the
same time the gravity of the situation and the pro-
cedure prerequisite to Assyrian diplomatic and mili-
tary activity (Knudtzon, Assyrische Gebete). The
Assyrian plan is laid before the god for his approval;
an oracle as to the outcome of the king's policy or of
the enemy's reported movements is requested in a
fashion which, though introduced and accompanied
with a stately and elaborate ritual, is in essence sim-
ilar to that employed by the kings of Israel (1 Sam.
xxx. 8; 1 Kings xxii. 5, 15). From Esarhaddon's
own report and the hints given in these prayers, the
details of the wars can be recovered and the general
result stated. How many years the struggle contin-
ued is quite uncertain; it was brought to an end
before 673 B. C. The league against Assyria failed to
do serious harm, as much because of its own weakness
as through Esarhaddon's attacks upon it. Promises
which were made to some tribes detached them from
the alliance; a King Bartatua seems to have secured
as his reward a wife from the daughters of Assyria's
royal house; some Median chieftains, who were being


THE SITUATION IN THE WEST 293
forced into the league, made their peace with Assyria
and sought protection. Campaigns were made against
the Mannai and their Kimmerian or Scythian ally,
king Ishpaka, of Ashguza (Bibl. Ashkenaz 2), and
against Median tribes in the eastern mountains. In-
trigues were set on foot to array the different peoples
one against another. Urartu, even, came to terms
with Assyria, and in 672 B.C., when Esarhaddon was
recovering from the Gimirrai the fortress of Shu-
pria, he set free Urartians who were found there and
permitted them to return home. Esarhaddon had suc-
ceeded in averting the storm and in protecting his
frontiers, as well as in inflicting punishment upon the
intruders by campaigns which he had made into the
regions of disturbance; but there is no evidence that
he extended Assyrian authority there, or even that
he established on a firm basis in the border-lands
the Assyrian provincial system. On this side of
his empire the stream of migration was neither
turned aside nor dissipated; it was merely halted
at the frontier. In such a situation the future was
ominous.
241. If Esarhaddon had been able to do little more
in the north than maintain his frontier intact, his
activity in the west was productive of a far more
brilliant result. It is a signal testimony to Sen-
nacherib's administration of the empire that for more
than twenty years after the expedition of 701 B.C. no
troubles appeared in the western provinces, not even
when the new king came to the throne in circum-
stances so favorable to uprisings in dependent states.
Several years after the accession of Esarhaddon the
first difficulty arose, in connection with Sidon. This


294 ASSYRIA
city owed its power and prosperity to Assyria,
favored as it had been by Sennacherib as a rival to
Tyre (sect. 223). Its king, Itobaal, had been suc-
ceeded by Abdimilkuti. He proceeded to withhold
the usual tribute (about 678 B.C.), relying appar-
ently upon a league formed with Sanduarri, a king
of some cities of Cilicia (?), and hoping also for
assistance possibly from the kings of Cyprus and
Egypt. In this he was disappointed, and when
Esarhaddon appeared (676 B. C.?), he made little re-
sistance, fled to the west, and, together with his ally,
was after a year or two caught and beheaded. Sidon
was treated as Babylon; it was utterly destroyed, the
immense booty transported to Assyria, and a new
city built near the site, called Kar Esarhaddon, in the
erection of which the vassal kings of the west gave
assistance. In the list of these kings appears Baal
of Tyre, who, either at this time or in Sennacherib's
reign, had yielded to Assyria. The same kings,
together with the kings of Cyprus who renewed their
allegiance on Sidon’s downfall, contributed materials
for the building of Esarhaddon's palace in Nineveh.
The list is instructive, as showing the states which
at this date (about 674 B.C.) retained their autonomy
in vassalage to Assyria.
Ba'al of Tyre, Manasseh of Judah, Qaushgabri of
Edom, Muguri of Moab, Qil-Bel of Gaza, Metinti of
Askelon, Ikausu of Ekron, Milkiashapa of Byblos,
Matanbaal of Arvad, Abibaal of Samsimuruna, Buduil of
Ammon, Ahimilki of Ashdod, twelve kings of the sea-
coast; Ekishtura of Edial, Pilagura of Kitrusi, Kisu of
Sillua, Ituandar of Paphos, Eresu of Sillu, Damasu of
Kuri, Atmesu of Tamesu, Damusi of Qartihadashti,


THE ADVANCE ON EGYPT 295
Unasagusu of Sidir, Bu-qu-su of Nure, ten kings of
Cyprus in the midst of the sea, in all twenty-two kings
of Khatti (Cyl. B, Col. v. 13–26; ABL, p. 86).
242. Esarhaddon’s activities in the west, however,
contemplated something more than the restraining
of uneasy vassals or the conquest of rebellious states.
Egypt was his goal. It is conclusive for the view
that the enmity of Egypt had for a long time been
the chief hindrance to Assyrian aggression in the
west, and its overthrow a standing purpose of the
Sargonids, that Esarhaddon, at the first moment of
freedom from complications elsewhere, proceeded to
lay plans for attacking it. The breadth of the plans
and the persistency of his activities show that he re-
garded Egypt as “an old and inveterate foe.” Ever
since the Ethiopian dynasty had unified Egypt, the
interference of Egypt with Syria and Palestine, first
under Sabako, then under his successor, Shabitoku
(about 703–693 B.C.), and now under the vigorous
and enterprising Taharqa (about 693–666 B.C.), had
been offensive and persistent. It was now, at last, to
be grappled with in earnest by Esarhaddon. In the
light of his Egyptian goal his Arabian campaigns are
comprehensible. The Assyrian yoke was fixed more
firmly on the Aribi, to whose king, Hazael, were re-
turned his gods captured by Sennacherib. A Queen
Tabua was appointed to joint sovereignty with Hazael,
and, upon his death, his son Yailu was seated on the
throne. The districts of Bazu and Hazu, somewhere in
southwestern Arabia, were subjugated after a march
the appalling difficulties of which are imaginatively
described in the king's narrative. These campaigns


THE CONQUEST OF EGYPT 297
I instituted regular offerings to Ashur and the great
gods, my lords, for all time. I placed on them the
tribute and taxes of my lordship, regularly and without
fail (Mon. 38–51; ABL, p. 92).
243. Twenty Egyptian city-princes, headed by Necho
of Sais, were said to have yielded to Esarhaddon, and,
after taking the solemn oath of fidelity to Ashur,
were confirmed in their authority, subject to the
oversight of Assyrian officials (qipami, sect. 167).
The usual tribute was required. Last named among
these princes was the king of Thebes; yet he could
have paid but nominal homage at this time, for only
after some years did his city fall into the hands of
Assyria. It is evident that Esarhaddon proposed,
by these measures, to incorporate at least lower Egypt
into his empire. On his return he set up the stele
at Samal, in which he appears, endowed with heroic
proportions, and holding a cord attached to rings in the
lips of two lesser figures, his captives, one of whom
on his knees is evidently Taharqa of Egypt, and
the other presumably Baal of Tyre. The inscription,
however, says nothing of Baal's surrender, and his
submission, if offered, was merely nominal. A
similar image and superscription appears graven on
the cliffs of the Nahr-el-Kelb, side by side with the
proud bas-reliefs of Egyptian conquerors of former
centuries. Another long-sought goal of Assyrian
kings had been attained, and Esarhaddon was the
first of their line to proclaim himself “King of the
kings of Egypt.” But a year had hardly passed
when he was summoned to Egypt again by a fresh
inroad of Taharqa. He set out in 668 B.C., but
never returned, dying on the march in the last


298 ASSYRIA
of October. The expedition was concluded tri-
umphantly by his son and successor.
244. As if anticipating that he would never return
from the campaign, Esarhaddon had, in that very
year, completed the arrangements for the succession
to the throne. At the feast of Gula (last of April,
668 B.C.) the proclamation was made to the people
of the empire that Ashurbanipal, his eldest son, was
appointed king of Assyria, and a younger son, Sham-
ash-shum-ukin, was to be king of Babylon. Other
sons were made priests of important temples. This
procedure seems to have been necessitated by court
or dynastic difficulties which troubled the last years
of the king. The Babylonian Chronicle, at the year
669 B.C., has the significant statement: “The king
remained in Assyria; he put to death many nobles
with the sword.” It is easy to conjecture that this
record testifies to a revolt of the Assyrian party
against the pro-Babylonian tendencies of the king
(sect. 238), and that Ashurbanipal represented this
party and succeeded in carrying his point (so KAT”,
91 f.), whereby he secured the Assyrian throne and
the primacy in the empire. But this is only conjec-
ture, against which much might be urged. It is suf-
ficient to observe that Esarhaddon, before his death,
himself determined upon this method of administering
the empire, either to avoid a war of succession, or
to secure the future establishment of that form of
government which to him appeared likely to be the
wisest and the most successful for the state.
245. The verdict upon Esarhaddon has been as
uniformly favorable as that upon his father has been
condemnatory. He is characterized by a “reasonable


ESTIMATE OF ESARHADDON 299
and conciliatory disposition,” a “largeness of aim
peculiarly his own; ” he was “a wise and strenuous
king who left his vast domains with a fairer show of
prosperity and safety than the Assyrian realm had
ever presented at the demise of any of his predeces-
sors.” He “is the noblest and most sympathetic
figure among the Assyrian kings.” These are high
commendations of both the personal and public worth
of the king. The facts, however, require a more
balanced judgment. The king's action regarding
Sidon was peculiarly cruel. Not only was the city de-
stroyed, and its king beheaded, but, as the royal
record declares, on the triumphal march into Nineveh,
the heads of the monarchs slaughtered in that cam-
paign were hung upon the necks of their great men.
The restoration of captured gods and the establish-
ment of submissive kings upon their thrones must be
regarded as political rather than personal acts, a part
of the policy followed in other periods of Assyrian
history. The king's generalship, personal courage,
and force are all that any king before him exhibited,
and his success was brilliant. Yet he, too, suffered
military disasters as in Egypt and on the northern
frontier. In the latter region, moreover, his energy
was exhibited rather in beating off his enemies than
in aggressive warfare. A Tiglathpileser, it may be
said, would have followed up and broken the power
of his assailants. In Esarhaddon, also, appears more
distinctly than before something of that orientalism
in manners and taste which is accustomed to be asso-
ciated with eastern monarchs. He is the first of the
Sargonids to boast of his lineage and to trace it back
to a fabulous royal ancestry. Kings from all parts


300 ASSYRIA
of his realm throng his court and are summoned
regularly to do him homage at his capital. As cap-
tives, they are represented as in his stele of Samal, as
beasts crouching at his feet, with rings in their lips.
His religiosity, amounting almost to dependence upon
the priesthood and their oracles, is another marked and
not altogether favorable trait of character. It is not
a mere chance that the largest number of oracle texts
of the temples of Ishtar and Shamash come from his
reign and relate to his affairs. “A pious man and a
friend of priests from the beginning ” is Tiele's esti-
mate of him from this point of view, and it is illus-
trated yet more completely by his temple-building
and his restoration of the city of Babylon. But piety
in Assyria was not far removed from superstition, and
the facts suggest that this was not absent from the
king's disposition.
246. As a statesman, Esarhaddon in many respects
shows himself a worthy follower of his predecessors.
The provincial system and the policy of deportation
are employed by him in the reorganization of Sidon
and the province of Samaria (Ezra iv. 2). His re-
lations with vassal kings, indeed, are perhaps more
uniformly successful than was the case with former
rulers, and in the Kaldean and Arabian states, where
he combines various districts under native rulers, he
reveals distinct and admirable diplomacy. His larger
foreign policy was, however, in every case inade-
quate, if not disastrous. In the north he stood on
the defensive; but under such conditions mere defence
was worse than useless. His conquest of Egypt was
brilliant, yet in the end it weakened more than it
strengthened the empire. Our larger knowledge of


THE FATAL BILUNDER 301
his organization of Egypt makes it clear that he in-
tended to incorporate it into the state by setting up
an administrative system, in part directly, in part
indirectly, related to the central government. The
system failed completely, and the drain on the im-
perial resources was severe.
247. His internal policy is revealed in his splendid
building operations that culminated in the new Baby-
lon. In this direction no king had approached the
lavish outlay of treasure which these enterprises must
have required. That this treasure was available was
due to the resources laid up by Sennacherib in his years
of peace, and it is a question whether their dissipation
in such operations was wise. No doubt can rest upon
the political inexpediency of the rebuilding of Baby-
lon. It revived at once the Kaldean and Elamite
problems, as well as the most perplexing problem of
all, that of Babylon itself. It led directly to that act
which even the most ardent admirers of Esarhaddon
concede to have been “an act of folly ” and “a co-
lossal failure,” — the division of the empire between
two rulers, the king of Assyria and the king of Baby-
lon. Sennacherib may have been violent, ruthless,
and short-sighted. He was not so witless as his son,
who, while he added Egypt to the empire, gave the
state, by his deliberately adopted policy of decentra-
lization, a start upon the downward road at the end
of which lay sudden and complete destruction.


NEW EGYPTIAN CAMPAIGNS 303
activities, the Assyrian ruler to guard and extend
the boundaries of the empire.
249. The affairs of Egypt were the first to require
the attention of Ashurbanipal. Esarhaddon's death,
while on the march to Egypt to drive back a new
invasion of Taharqa, apparently had not caused
a more than temporary delay of the expedition. The
presence of an army in the western provinces, indeed,
at the time of a change of rulers in Assyria was
desirable for holding disaffected peoples to their
allegiance. The general of the forces seems to have
improved the moment to obtain renewal of homage
and gifts, as well as a substantial contingent of
troops, from the twenty-two vassal kings of the
states already mentioned by Esarhaddon as sub-
ject to him (sect. 241). The only new royal
names in the list of Ashurbanipal are Iakinlu of
Arvad and Amminadbi of Ammon. Manasseh king
of Judah again appears there, as also Baal of Tyre,
who had evidently submitted so far as nominally
to recognize Assyrian supremacy. The Ethiopian
king was already in Memphis, and his troops met
the Assyrians somewhere between that city and the
border. The battle went against Taharqa, who
retired to the vicinity of Thebes. Whether the
Assyrians pursued him thither, as one of the several
somewhat contradictory inscriptions states, is doubt-
ful. With good reason it has been held that the
Assyrians were content to renew their sway over
lower Egypt only, restoring the vassal princes to
their cities under oath of fidelity to Assyria, and
did not attempt to advance farther up the river.
In the years that followed stirring events occurred.


304 ASSYRIA
The princes, led by Necho, Sharruludari, and Paqruru,
were discovered to be intriguing with Taharqa; their
cities were severely punished, and the two chief cul-
prits sent to Nineveh for punishment. Ashurbanipal
determined to try a new policy similar to that employed
for Babylon; he pardoned Necho and returned him
as a kind of vassal ruler of Assyrian Egypt, sus-
tained by Assyrian troops. The plan worked well.
Taharqa was quiet till his death (666 B.C.), and his
successor, Tanutamon (Assyr., Tandamani), made no
move for at least three years. Then he, in conse-
quence of divine monitions, and also invited, no
doubt, by the petty princes who were jealous of
Necho, marched northward. Necho and his Assyr-
ians fought bravely, but were too few to make
a successful resistance. Necho was slain, and Pisa-
milku (Psamtik), his son, with his troops, was driven
out. In 661 B. C. — the date is attested astrono-
mically — Ashurbanipal sent an army against the
Ethiopian invader, to which the latter made but
feeble opposition, retiring at last into Ethiopia, never
again to return to Egypt. The Assyrian army now
for the first time captured Thebes and carried away
abundant spoil, returning “with full hands” to Nine-
veh. The administration of Egypt under Assyrian
supremacy continued as before. People from Kirbit
in Elam were deported thither, after Ashurbanipal's
conquest of that rebellious district. Pisamilku occu-
pied the position held by his father, Necho, sustained,
as he had been, by Assyrian troops.
250. During these years, or at the close of this
second campaign of 661 B.C., the affairs of the west
were placed in order. Baal of Tyre, whose allegiance


GYGES OF LYDIA 305
to Assyria varied according to Assyrian success in
Egypt, had finally roused Ashurbanipal's wrath, and
was shut up in his island-city so strictly that famine
forced him to make terms. He sent his son, as a
hostage, and his own daughter with the daughters of
his brother for the king's harem, with rich gifts. The
women and the gifts Ashurbanipal graciously accepted,
but returned the son to his father. Iakinlu of Arvad,
who had shown himself only nominally submissive
hitherto, now, likewise, sent his daughter to the king,
as did also Mukallu of Tabal and Sandasarme, a prince
of Cilicia. Some special reason induced the Assyrian
king to remove the king of Arvad and place his son
Azibaal upon the throne. Tribute was laid upon all
these states. It is not improbable that the difficulties
which these northwestern communities were having
with the Kimmerians induced their kings to seek
Assyria's aid in opposing these new enemies. This
is the reason assigned by Ashurbanipal for the appeal
of king Gyges of Lydia, for Assyrian help. This
ruler, under whom the Lydian state comes forth into
the world’s history, was establishing and extending
his power chiefly through the employment of mercenary
soldiers from Caria. The Kimmerians assailing him
in fresh swarms, he was led, by the revival of As-
syrian influence in Tabal and Cilicia, to send ambassa-
dors to Ashurbanipal. Before, however, any aid was
rendered, it appears that the Kimmerian crisis had
passed away, and Gyges had no intention of paying
tribute to the far-off monarch on the banks of the
Tigris. The latter, however, did not hesitate in his
inscriptions to make the most of the appeal. The
affair is notable, chiefly as showing how the world of
20


306 ASSYRIA
international politics was widening toward the west,
and new factors were entering to make more complex
the political relations of the times.
251. The friendly relations with Elam which
characterized the later years of Esarhaddon (sect. 239)
gave place, soon after his death, to a renewal of
hostilities. By 665 B.C. Urtaki of Elam, in conjunc-
tion with Kaldean and Aramean tribes, raided
northern Babylonia and besieged Babylon. Ashur-
banipal was satisfied to drive the invaders back into
their own land, where in a short time Urtaki was
succeeded by his brother Te-umman, who attempted to
kill off all members of the royal house. Sixty of
them succeeded in escaping to Assyria. Teumman
demanded that they be given up to him. Ashur-
banipal's refusalled to another Elamite invasion which
was checked by the advance of an Assyrian army to
Dur Ilu and thence toward Susa, the Elamite capital.
The decisive battle was fought at Tulliz on the Ula
River before Susa, and resulted in an overwhelming
defeat for Elam. The king and his son were killed;
the army cut to pieces. The event marked, according
to Billerbeck (Susa, p. 105), the end of the old king-
dom of Susa. The Assyrians made Khumbanigash,
son of Urtaki, king of Elam ; his son, Tammaritu,
became prince of Khidal, one of the royal fiefs.
The division of power was evidently made with the
purpose of intensifying the dynastic conflicts in the
kingdom, which hitherto had contributed more to
the overthrow of the Elamite power than had the
defeats of its armies. The punishment of the Gambu-
lians, the Aramean tribe whose secession from Assyria
had played so large a part in inducing hostilities,


THE SITUATION IN BABYLONIA 307
formed another and concluding stage of the war.
Their chiefs were captured and suffered shameful
deaths in Assyria (about 660 B.C.).
252. For some years affairs in Babylonia and Elam
remained on a peaceful footing. The latter country
had been too frightfully devastated and left too
thoroughly in confusion to permit hostile movements
there. In Babylonia, too, Shamashshumukin had
ruled in harmony with his brother, content to admin-
ister the affairs of his city, to direct the religious
ceremonial, and to enjoy the prerogatives which were
the prized possession of the king of that wealthy
capital and the holy seat of the great gods. In the
very nature of the situation, however, contradictions
existed which were bound to produce trouble. Baby-
lon's claims to supremacy were secular as well as reli-
gious, and her nobles never relinquished their rights to
supremacy over the world of nations as well as over
the world of the gods. Their king, too, was an
Assyrian, with the ambitions of a warrior and a states-
man as well as the aspirations of a priest. Yet, in the
very nature of things, Ashurbanipal was lord of the
empire and the army, the protector of the peace, and
conqueror of the enemies of the state, the defender of
Babylon from assailants, its head in the political
sphere. A clash was therefore inevitable, and it
speaks well for the brotherly confidence of both
rulers that for fifteen years they worked together
peacefully. Nor is it possible to indicate any special
reasons which brought on the conflict that in its vari-
ous ramifications shook the state to its foundations.
The ambition of the younger brother was doubtless
intensified by the intrigues of his priestly advisers, and


308 ASSYRIA
his pride wounded by the achievements of Ashurbani-
pal and the glorification of them. It appears, also, that
an economic crisis, caused by a series of bad harvests,
was imminent in Babylonia about this time, which may
have brought things to a head. Shamashshumukin
determined to declare his independence. The course
of events shows how carefully he laid his plans and
how wide a sweep was taken by his ambitious design,
which in its fulness comprehended nothing less than
the substitution of Babylon for Assyria as ruler of the
world. Two main lines of activity were followed:
(1) agents were employed to foment rebellion in the
vassal states; (2) the treasures of the temples were
freely used to engage the help of the peoples about
Babylon in driving the Assyrians from Babylonia, and
to raise an army of mercenaries to defend and main-
tain the new centre of the empire. How far these
emissaries succeeded in the former work is not certain,
but Ashurbanipal found traces of their activity in the
provinces of southern Babylonia, along the eastern
mountains, in Syria, and Palestine and in western
Arabia, while Egypt and far-off Lydia are supposed
to have been tampered with by them. Northern
Babylonia was already secure for Shamashshumukin,
and his gold had found acceptance in Elam, Arabia,
and among Kaldean and Aramean tribes. Even some
Assyrian officers and garrisons had been corrupted.
253. The conspiracy was well advanced before any
knowledge of it came to the surface. The prefect of
Ur, who had been approached in the interests of the
plot, sent word to his superior officer, the prefect of
Uruk, that Shamashshumukin’s envoys were abroad
in that city. The news was immediately sent to


REBELLION OF SHAMASHSHUMUKIN 309
Ashurbanipal, who seems to have been taken utterly
by surprise. If he had had suspicions, they had been
allayed by a recent embassy of noble Babylonians who
had brought to him renewed assurances of loyalty on
the part of his brother. His feelings are expressed
in the following words of his inscription:
At that time Shamashshumukin, the faithless brother,
to whom I had done good, and whom I had established
as king of Babylon, and for whom I had made every pos-
sible kind of royal decoration, and had given him, and had
gathered together soldiers, horses, and chariots, and had
intrusted them to him, and had given him cities, fields,
and woods, and the men dwelling in them, even more
than my father had commanded — even he forgot that
favor I had shown him, and he planned evil. Outwardly
with his lips he spoke friendly things, while inwardly his
heart plotted murder (Rm Cyl., III. 70–81; ABL, p. 107).
254. Shamashshumukin now threw off the mask
and launched the rebellion (652 B.C.). He closed the
gates of his fortresses and cut off the sacrifices offered
on his brother's behalf before the Babylonian gods.
The various kings and peoples were either summoned
to his aid, or invited to throw off the Assyrian yoke.
The southern Babylonians responded by besieging and
overcoming Ur and Uruk. The king of Elam entered
Babylonia with an army. Ashurbanipal, though taken
unawares, was not disconcerted. Obtaining a favor-
able oracle from the moon-god, he mustered his troops
and sent them against the rebels. Meanwhile his
partisans in Elam also set to work. Suspicion
and intrigue, however, brought to naught all assist-
ance expected by the Babylonians from that quarter.


OWERTHROW OF ELAM 311
prison. Khummakhaldash III. remained, and met the
advance of the enraged Assyrians in their next cam-
paign. They would not be restrained, but drove the
Elamites back on all sides, devastated the land and
encompassed Susa, which was finally taken and plun-
dered (about 645 B.C.). The royal narrative dwells
with flowing detail upon the destruction wrought
upon palaces and temples, the indignities inflicted
upon royal tombs and images of the gods, and the
rescue and return to its shrine of the famous statue
of Nana of Uruk, carried away by the Elamites six-
teen hundred and thirty-five years before (sect. 63).
Again Ashurbanipal demanded the surrender of the
Kaldean fugitive, but the latter saved the wretched
Elamite king the shame of yielding him up by falling
upon the sword of his shield-bearer. Khummakhal-
dash himself, together with another claimant to the
Elamite throne, Pa'e, finally fell into the hands of the
Assyrians. Elam was thus at last subdued under the
Assyrian yoke, and disappeared from the scene (about
640 B.C.).
256. The Arabians, also, felt the weight of Assyrian
displeasure. Yailu, king of Aribi, who had been
placed upon his throne by Esarhaddon (sect. 242),
had been persuaded to throw off allegiance to Assyria.
He sent a detachment to the aid of Shamashshum-
ukin, and also began to make raids into the Syrian
and Palestinian provinces. The Assyrian troops suc-
ceeded in holding him back and finally in defeating
him so completely that he fled from his kingdom and,
finding no refuge, was compelled to surrender. His
throne went to Uaite, who, in his turn, made common
cause with the enemies of Assyria, uniting with the


312 ASSYRIA
Kedarenes and the Nabateans, Bedouin tribes to the
south and southeast of Palestine, in withholding trib-
ute and harassing the borders of the western states.
Ashurbanipal sent an expedition from Nineveh,
straight across the desert, to take the Arabians in the
rear. After many hardships by the way, defeating
and scattering the tribes, it reached Damascus with
much spoil. Then the army marched southward,
clearing the border of the Bedouin and moving out
into the desert to the oases of the Kedarenes and
Nabateans. The chiefs were killed or captured, camels
and other spoil were gathered in such numbers that
the market in Nineveh was glutted, camels bring-
ing at auction “from a half-shekel to a shekel of
silver apiece (?).” In connection with this campaign
the Phoenician cities of Ushu (Tyre on the mainland)
and Akko (Acre) were punished for rebellion. It is
strange that other states of Palestine had not yielded
to the solicitations of the king of Babylon. The
Second Book of Chronicles (xxxiii. 11), indeed,
tells how Manasseh, king of Judah, was taken by the
captains of the host of the king of Assyria and carried
in chains to Babylon. Does a reminiscence of punish-
ment for rebellion along with Shamashshumukin
linger here? Possibly, though neither the Books
of Kings nor the Assyrian inscriptions refer to it.
Not improbably the excess of zeal on the part of the
rebellious Arabians, which led them to attack the
frontiers of these Palestinian states, soon discouraged
any inclination in these communities to rise against
Assyria, whose armies protected them against just
such fierce raids from their desert neighbors. Those
who had withheld tribute must have soon made their


AFFAIRS IN THE NORTH 313
peace, among them, it may be, Manasseh of Judah.
It was precisely the coast cities, because they were in
no danger from the Arabs, that persisted in the rebel-
liousness for which they now suffered.
257. The policy of his predecessors made the diffi-
culties of Ashurbanipal, upon his northern bor-
ders, of comparatively slight moment. That policy
which was followed and developed by him, consisted
essentially in arraying the northern tribes against
one another, and in avoiding, where possible, direct
hostilities with them. Thus, friendly relations were
cultivated with the kings of Urartu, Ursa (Rusa) III.
and Sarduris IV., whose deputations to the Assyrian
court were cordially received. The Mannai, however,
continued aggressively hostile, and their king,
Akhsheri, valiantly resisted an expedition sent
against him. When he had been defeated he fled;
a rising of his people against him followed in which
he was slain; his son, Ualli, was placed by Ashur-
banipal upon the throne as a vassal king. Other
chieftains of the Medes and Sakhi, and Andaria, a
rebellious prince of the Lubdi, were likewise sub-
dued. In the far northwest Gyges of Lydia (sect.
250) had fallen before a renewed attack of the Kim-
merians under Tugdammi, a fate in which Ashur-
banipal saw the reward of defection from Assyria.
His son, Ardys, renewed the request for Assyrian
aid, and the forces of Tugdammi were met by the
Assyrians in Cilicia, and beaten back with the loss
of their king (about 645 B.C.). Thus, all along these
mountain barriers, Ashurbanipal might boast that he
had maintained the integrity and the glory of the
Assyrian empire. He was not aware what momentous


314 ASSYRLA.
changes were in progress behind these distant
mountains, what states were rounding into form, what
new masses of migratory peoples were gathering to
hurl themselves upon the plains and shatter the huge
fabric of the Assyrian state.
258. By the year 640 B.C. the campaigns of
Ashurbanipal were over. The empire was at peace.
Its fame and splendor had never seemed so great,
nor, in reality, had they ever been so impressive.
The king, like his predecessors, sought the welfare
of his country, and thus bears witness to its pros-
perity under his rule:
From the time that Ashur, Sin, Shamash, Adad,
Bel, Nabu, Ishtar of Nineveh, Queen of Kidmuri, Ishtar
of Arbela, Ninib, Nergal, and Nusku graciously estab-
lished me upon the throne of my father, Adad has
let loose his showers, and Ea has opened up his springs;
the grain has grown to a height of five yards, the ears
have been five-sixths of a yard long, the produce of the
land — the increase of Nisaba — has been abundant, the
land has constantly yielded heavily, the fruit trees have
borne fruit richly, and the cattle have done well in
bearing. During my reign plenty abounded; during my
years abundance prevailed (Rassam Cyl. I. 42 ff.).
259. Ashurbanipal, too, was a builder. Temples in
Nineveh, Arbela, and Tarbish, in Babylon, Borsippa,
Sippar, Nippur, and Uruk were embellished or rebuilt
by him. Nineveh owed almost as much to him as to
his grandfather Sennacherib. He repaired and en-
larged its defences, and reared on the northern part of
the terrace, upon the site of the harem built by Sen-
nacherib, a palace of remarkable beauty. In form


THE ROYAL LIBRARY 315
this palace did not differ from other similar structures,
but it was adorned with an extraordinary variety and
richness of ornamentation, and with sculptures sur-
passing the achievements of all previous artists.
Sennacherib had led the way, but the sculptors of
Ashurbanipal improved upon the art of the former
day in the elaboration of the scenes depicted, the
delicacy and refinement of details, and the freedom
and vigor of the treatment. For some of these ex-
cellences, particularly the breadth and fulness of the
battle scenes, it has been said that the new knowledge
gained of Egyptian mural art was responsible. But in
the hunting sculptures and the representations of
animals, the Assyrian artist of Ashurbanipal's time
has attained the highest range of original and effective
delineation that is offered by antiquity. The reliefs
of the wounded lioness, of the two demonic creatures
about to clinch, and of a dozen other figures repre-
sented in the hunting scenes, are instinct with life
and power; they belong to the permanent aesthetic
treasures of mankind.
260. Within the palace was, also, the remarkable
library which has made this king's name famous
among modern scholars. Whether it was founded
upon the nucleus of the royal library which Sen-
macherib had gathered in Nineveh, or was an original
collection of Ashurbanipal, is uncertain, but in size
and importance it surpasses all other Assyrian
collections at present known. Tens of thousands of
clay tablets, systematically arranged on shelves for
easy consultation, contained, besides official de-
spatches and other archives, the choicest religious,
historical, and scientific literature of the Babylonio-


ASHURBANIPAL’S POLITICAL POLICY 317
vouched for by the many representations of the
king's hunting adventures, the pursuit of the gazelle
and the wild boar, the slaying of wild oxen and lions.
His was no effeminate or indolent life. This union
of culture and manly vigor is the characteristic of a
strong personality.
262. As an imperial administrator, he both resem-
bled and differed from his predecessors. He added
nothing to the methods of provincial government,
but was content to use the best ideas of his time.
Deportation was employed by him in Egypt, where
peoples from Kirbit in Elam were settled, and in Sa-
maria, where, on the testimony of Ezra iv. 10, he (there
called Osnappar) placed inhabitants of Susa, Baby-
lonia, and other eastern peoples, with the resulting
confusion of worships referred to in 2 Kings xvii.
24–41. His father's policy of uniting various
districts under one vassal king (sect. 246) was
continued; the most striking example of this is found
in his dealing with Egypt. His armies were recruited,
as before, from subject and conquered peoples. In
one remarkable respect, indeed, he departed from past
precedents. His armies were, rarely if ever, led by
himself in person; his generals usually carried on
the campaigns. This has been thought to reflect
upon his personal courage and manliness. Yet it
may be that the variety of demands made upon the
ruler of so vast an empire decided him in favor
of this reversal of immemorial policy. It is cer-
tain that in his case the change proved wise. No
whisper of rebellion among his generals has been
recorded. His armies, directed in their general
activities from one centre, and given free scope in


318 ASSYRIA
the matter of detail in the field, reflect credit upon
the new system by their almost uniformly brilliant
success. His predecessors had worn themselves out
by long and severe campaigns, which only iron con-
stitutions like that of Ashurnaçirpal or Shalmaneser
II. could endure for many years. During their con-
tinuance in the field, moreover, internal administra-
tion must be neglected. Ashurbanipal was able to
hold his throne for nearly half a century; the victories
of peace which he won in the fields of culture and
administration rivalled, if they did not surpass, the
achievement of his armies.
263. Under Ashurbanipal the tendencies toward
“orientalism" which appeared in his father's day
reached their height. The splendor of his court
was on a scale quite unequalled. It formed the
model for future kings, and served as the theme for
later tradition. Thus, the Greek historians have
much to tell of the famous Sardanapalus, the vo-
luptuary who lived in the harem clad in woman's
garb, and whose end came in the flames of his own
gorgeous palace. While Ashurbanipal was anything
but such a weakling, he loved pomp and show, the
pleasures of the court, and the splendor of the throne.
If the daughters of kings sent to his harem were,
in fact, pledges of political fidelity, it is clear
that the senders knew what kind of pledges were
pleasing to his royal majesty. A famous bas-relief
represents him in the garden, feasting with his queen,
while, hanging from one of the trees, is the head
of the conquered Teumman of Elam. In an ori-
ental court of such a type, pomp and cruelty were
not far separated. It is not strange, therefore, that


THE KING’S TRIUMPH 319
in his finely wrought sculptures and brilliantly
written inscriptions are depicted scenes of hideous
brutality. Plunder, torture, anguish, and slaughter
are dwelt upon with something of delight by the
king, who sees in them the vengeance of the gods
upon those that have broken their faith. The very
religiousness of the royal butcher makes the shadows
blacker. No Assyrian king was ever more devoted
to the gods and dependent upon them. Among all
the divine beings, his chief was the goddess Ishtar,
the well-beloved who loved him, and who appeared to
him in dreams and spoke oracles of comfort and
success. As her love was the more glowing, so her
hate was the more bitter and violent. Captive kings
were caged like dogs and exposed “at the entrance
of Temple street” in Nineveh. No more thrilling
and instructive picture of the union of religion and
personal glorification can be found than that given by
the king in the supreme moment of his proud reign
when, all his wars victoriously accomplished, he took
the four kings, Tammaritu, Pa’e, Khummakhaldash,
and Uaite, and harnessed them to his chariot. Then,
to use his own words, “they drew it beneath me to the
gate of the temple” of Ishtar of Nineveh. “Because
Ashur, Sin, Shamash, Adad, Bel, Nabu, Ishtar of
Nineveh, Queen of Kidmuri, Ishtar of Arbela, Ninib,
Nergal, and Nusku had subjected to my yoke those
who were unsubmissive, and with might and power
had placed me over my enemies, I threw myself upon
my face and exalted their deity, and praised their
power in the midst of my hosts" (R. Cyl. X. 31 ff.).


IX
THE FALL OF ASSYRIA. 626–606 B.C.
264. ABOUT the year 640 B.C. all records of the
reign of Ashurbanipal cease. That he remained on
the throne for yet fourteen years is evident from the
Ptolemaic canon, which gives twenty-two years to
the reign of Kineladanos (Kandalanu, sect. 254)
over Babylon, that is, 648–626 B. C. This silence
is properly interpreted as due in part to the tran-
quillity of these years and in part to the storm and
stress which fell upon the state as they were coming
to their close. While the victories of the past cen-
tury had placed Assyria at the height of its glory and
had extended its bounds to regions hitherto unsub-
dued, these achievements and acquisitions proved, in
the end, to weaken its power and gave to new enemies
the vantage-points for its ultimate overthrow. Egypt,
the scene of hard fighting and splendid conquest,
was already practically independent. Psamtik, its
vassal king, had taken advantage of the Elamite and
Babylonian troubles to withhold tribute, and, by an
alliance with Gyges of Lydia, another recreant, had
obtained Carian mercenaries to overthrow his Egyp-
tian opponents and maintain his independence against
his Assyrian overlord. He is the founder of the
twenty-sixth dynasty. Elsewhere, also, though in a
different fashion, the same results were preparing.


NEW ENEMIES 321
As has already been remarked, the incessant assaults
upon the Median tribes of the east were steadily
moulding them into a unity of national life, which,
once reached, could not be restrained, and which, in-
spired equally with hatred of its Assyrian enemy and
the sentiment of nationality, under proper leader-
ship was to prove a dangerous antagonist. The
breaking down of the vigorous nations of Urartu on
the north and of Elam on the southeast not only cost
Assyria heavily in men and treasure, but also made
it easier for the peoples who were advancing from the
north and east to grapple freshly and hand to hand
with her before time had been given for recuperation.
Indeed, these conquered territories could not be held
by the Assyrians. As Egypt, so Elam, once devas-
tated and made harmless, was practically abandoned;
within a few years Persian tribes entered and took
up the old feud with Assyria. Thus, instead of
peace and prosperity within the broad reaches of the
immense empire, as the outcome of the tremendous
energy of the century, the Assyrian kings found
themselves confronted with yet more serious and
threatening difficulties, and at a moment when the
state was least able to grapple with them.
265. The two sons of Ashurbanipal followed him
in the kingdom. The one, by name Ashur-etil-ili,
has left memorials of building activity at Kalkhi,
where he reconstructed the temple of Nabu (sect.
176). The remains of his palace bare and petty in
comparison with the structures of his predecessors,
are found upon the same terrace and speak signifi-
cantly of his limitations. His brother, Sin-shar-
ishkun, succeeded, and has the unenviable reputation
21


THE MEDO-PERSIAN TRADITION 323
in the fragments of Berosus found in other ancient
writers (sect. 37); third, Herodotus and the other
Greek historians who represent, in the full and pic-
turesque, often fantastic, details of their narratives,
the Medo-Persian tradition. From all of them to-
gether only approximate certainty on the most gen-
eral features can be reached, and the opportunity
for conjectural hypothesis is large.
267. The Medo-Persian tradition as represented
by Herodotus lays emphasis on the part taken by the
Medes. According to him Deioces, the founder of
the Median kingdom, about the beginning of the
seventh century, was followed by his son, Phraortes,
who attacked and subdued the Persians. Not satis-
fied with this success, Phraortes engaged in war with
Assyria, now shorn of its allies. The Assyrians,
however, defeated him; he lost his life in the deci-
sive battle. His son, Cyaxares, reorganized the Me-
dian army and proceeded against Nineveh to avenge
his father. The Assyrian army had been defeated
and Nineveh was besieged, when the Scythians, led
by Madyes, fell upon Media, compelled the raising
of the siege, and defeated and overcame Cyaxares.
They then overran all western Asia as far as the bor-
ders of Egypt, whence, by gifts and prayers, they
were induced by Psamtik to retire. Their dominion
lasted twenty-eight years. Cyaxares, however, suc-
ceeded in recovering his kingdom, by slaying the
Scythian leaders assembled at a banquet. He then
took Nineveh and brought the Assyrian state to
an end.
268. In the Babylonian tradition, Sardanapalus
(Ashurbanipal) is succeeded by Saracus (Sinshar-


324 ASSYRIA
ishkun ?). Hearing that an army like a swarm of
locusts was advancing from the sea, he sent Busalos-
sorus (Nabupaluçur?), his general, to Babylon. The
latter, however, allied himself with the Medes by
marrying his son, Nebuchadrezzar, to the daughter
of the Median prince, Ashdakos, and advanced
against Nineveh. Saracus, on hearing of the rebel-
lion of his vassal and the contemplated attack, set fire
to his own capital and perished in the flames. In
another form of the story, which seems to combine
elements of both traditions, it is said that the Baby-
lonian chief united with the Median in a rebellion
against Sardanapalus and shut him up in Nineveh
three years. In the third year the Tigris swept away
part of the walls of the city, and the king, in despair,
heaped up the treasures of his palace upon a funeral
pyre, four hundred feet high, and offered himself to
death in the fire, together with his wives.
269. The inscriptions of Nabupaluçur contain no
reference to his relations to Assyria, beyond his claim
to be king of Babylon and to have conquered the
Shubari, a people of North Mesopotamia (sect. 143).
The stele of Nabuna'id (ABL, p. 158), however,
set up about 550 B.C., while it offers difficulties of
its own, throws a welcome light upon the exaggera-
tions and confusions in the traditions. It declares
that Nabupaluçur found a helper in the “king of the
Umman-manda,” who “ruined the temples of the
gods of Assyria” “and the cities on the border of
Akkad which were hostile to the king of Akkad and
had not come to his help,” and “laid waste their
sanctuaries.” Both traditions, therefore, contain
elements of truth. The Babylonians were at war


CRITICISM OF THE TRADITIONS 325
with Assyria and in alliance with another people in
this war ; yet not the Babylonians, but this other
people, actually overthrew Assyria. Whether this
people, whom the royal chronicler calls the Umman-
manda, is to be identified with the Medes, or was one
of the Scythian hordes of which Herodotus writes, is
uncertain. So long as this is undetermined, an
important part of the historical situation cannot be
cleared up. What is tolerably plain, however, is
that, when Nabupaluçur set himself up as king in
Babylon, the Assyrian rulers sought to maintain their
power there and succeeded in bringing the Babylonian
usurper into straits. A happy alliance with the peo-
ple of the eastern mountains, whether Medes under
Cyaxares, as is, indeed, most probable, or Scyth-
ians, delivered him from his difficulties and opened
the war which closed with the destruction of Nineveh
and the disappearance of the Assyrian monarchy.
The vicissitudes of the struggle, the length and
details of the siege, and the fate of the last Assyrian
king may well have lived on in the Median and Baby-
lonian traditions, and in their essential features be
preserved in the narratives of Herodotus and Berosus.
In the series of references of the prophet Nahum to
the defences and dangers of the city of Nineveh, have
properly been thought to lie the observations of an
eyewitness of the splendors of that mighty capital.
His predictions of its overthrow and particularly of
the one soon to come, “that dasheth in pieces” (Nah.
ii. 1), may have had their occasion in his own
experiences upon Assyrian soil during these troubled
years. A gruesome memorial of the assault is a
fractured skull, preserved in the British Museum,


326 ASSYRIA
“supposed to have belonged to the soldier who was
on guard in the palace of the king ” (BMG, p. 102).
The date of the capture of the capital, the final blow
which crushed Assyria, while not exactly determined,
is probably 606 B. C. Scarcely twenty years after
the close of the brilliant reign of Ashurbanipal the
empire had disappeared.
270. Assyria's sudden collapse is so startling and
unexpected as properly to cause surprise and demand
investigation. The series of events which culminated
in the catastrophe and gave occasion for this fall were,
it is true, such as could not have been prepared for in
advance and they would have sorely strained the re-
sisting power of any state. Yet evidently the causes
for Assyria's disappearance before this combined on-
slaught of her enemies must lie deeper. The prob-
lem involves a consideration of the elements and
forces which made this monarchy so great and en-
abled it to attain so wide and magnificent an empire.
Attention has already been called to the conditions
of soil and climate in which a population hardy,
vigorous, and warlike would be nourished. This
people was from the first environed by adverse forces
that called forth its aggressive energies. The wild
beasts of the upper Tigris and the rude tribes of the
mountains must be held in check, while a hard living
was wrung from the ungracious soil. The effect was
to give to the nation a peculiarly warlike charac-
ter, and to weld the comparatively small population
into unity of spirit and action. Leaders were de-
manded and produced to whom large initiative
was given, and in whom the spirit of conquest was
supreme, – a spirit to which religion and culture


ASSYRIA’S CONTRIBUTION TO PROGRESS 329
by the site of Nineveh some two hundred years later,
they did not so much as know that any such capital
had ever existed there. The monarchy had stood in
proud isolation, ruling its empire from its palaces on
the Tigris; with its passing, the great fabric which
it reared was neither shattered nor shaken, since be-
tween the Assyrian monarchy and the Assyrian em-
pire no vital connection existed. Hence, when the
one disappeared, the other passed under the sway of
Babylon. In view of the absolutism and tyranny of
the monarchy the outburst of hate and exultation at
Assyria's overthrow is not surprising. It is voiced
most clearly by the prophets of that petty vassal
state upon the Judean hills, the history of which is
at the same time the wisest commentary upon the
career of its haughty and tyrannical master and his
severest condemnation.
273. Yet Assyria's contribution to world-history
was real and indispensable. Its rulers supplied, for
the first time, the realization of an ideal which has
ever attracted the world’s leaders, – the unification of
peoples in a world-empire, the dominance of one lord,
one authority, over all men. In this achievement it
worked out the beginnings, necessarily crude and im-
perfect, of political organization on a large scale. The
institutions, forms of government, methods of admin-
istration that were devised by its statesmen, formed
the basis on which later world-rulers built solider
structures. In this empire thus unified, it distributed
the elements of civilization, the most fruitful civili-
zation of that day, although not its own. Along the
roads under its control trade and commerce peace-
fully advanced from east to west, and, with these,


330 ASSYRIA
went art and culture to Asia Minor and to Greece.
Even its wars, cruel as they were, served the inter-
ests of civilization, in that they broke down and
annihilated the various petty and endlessly contend-
ing nationalities of western Asia, welding all into a
rude sort of unity, which prepared the way for the
next onward movement in the world’s history. A
true symbol of Assyria is offered by that most striking
form taken by its art, — the colossal figure standing
at the entrance of the royal palaces, a human head
upon a bull’s trunk; from its shoulders spring the
wings of an eagle, but its hinder parts seem still
struggling in vain to escape from the massive block
of alabaster in which the sculptor has confined them
forever.


P A RT IV
THE NEW BABYLONIAN (OR KALDEAN)
EMPIRE


334 NEW BABYLONIA
seem to have been held by the Assyrians for a time
before the fall of Nineveh (sect. 265), but there-
after they were united under Babylonian rule with
out a struggle. This fact, coupled with the tradition
of the army from the sea which he was sent to oppose
(sect. 268), but with which, it appears, he made
common cause, suggests that Nabupaluçur was a
Kaldean, and that with him these tribes, so long
struggling with Assyria for the supremacy over
Babylon, had at last attained their goal. Such, also,
was the opinion of the Jewish writers, who call the
king and his armies “Chaldean.” Hence the new
empire may be called the Kaldean Empire. Yet
during the past centuries of contact, so intermingled
in blood and united in common interests had Kal-
deans and Babylonians become, that the empire may
with equal propriety be called the New Babylonian
Empire. For its history the chief sources available
are the Greek writers of a later age. Its royal in-
scriptions, so far as discovered, are occupied more
with the buildings restored by the kings than with
the wars waged by them; with slight exceptions,
they are silent as to relations with the world without.
That the Greek historians were not always accurate
is convincingly proved in some crucial instances
(sect. 312), and hence the modern student of the
period, who is dependent so largely upon them, treads
often on uncertain ground. Happily, the contempora-
neous accounts of the Hebrew writers, prophets and
historians, throw much welcome light on some im-
portant details of foreign affairs.
276. Although Nabupalucur was king twenty-one
years (626–605 B.C.), it was not until the later


BATTLE OF KARKHEMISH 335
period of his reign that he became active outside
the limits of his capital. The alliance with the
Manda (Medes) and the beginning of active opera-
tions against Nineveh could hardly have been previous
to 610 B. C. The few inscriptions that are known to
be his, describe his works of peace, the rebuilding of
Etemenanki, the temple tower of Babylon, the re-
opening of the canal at Sippar, and the rearing there
of a temple to Belit, the consort of Shamash. One
inscription speaks vaguely of the destruction of his
enemies, and refers particularly to the overthrow of
the Shubari and the turning of “their land into
mounds and plough-land.” This would indicate a
campaign in northern Mesopotamia, and, were it not
for the statement of Nabuna'id (Nabonidus) that the
Babylonian king had nothing to do with the destruc-
tion of the temples of Assyria, might reasonably be
regarded as a reference to the final expedition in
which Nineveh fell. In fact, however, it suggests
that while the siege of Nineveh was going on, the
army of Nabupaluçur, under his son Nabu-kudurri-
uqur (Nebuchadrezzar), was operating in upper Meso-
potamia on the Euphrates. The whole region was in
confusion; wandering bands of mountaineers were
pillaging the towns; Haran's famous temple of the
moon-god was ruined by such a raid. The army of
Necho II. of Egypt (sect. 265) was also threatening
the fords of the river, and, having already taken
possession of Syria, was prepared to demand a still
greater share of the spoils of Nineveh. Nebuchad-
rezzar, after clearing the country east of the river,
crossed it and met the Egyptians on Syrian soil at
the famous city of Karkhemish in 605 B. c. (Jer.


336 NEW BABYLONIA
xlvi. 2). Necho was thoroughly beaten and fled
hastily southward, followed by the Kaldean army.
The vassal kings paid their homage to the new
conqueror. Among them was Jehoiakim of Judah
(2 Kings xxiv. 1). Nebuchadrezzar, at the border
of Egypt, received news of the death of his father.
Fearing difficulties regarding his accession, he
made a treaty with Necho by which the latter relin-
quished his claims to Palestine and Syria, and at once
marched rapidly across the desert to Babylon. At
Babylon he seems to have found all things in quiet,
and ascended the throne at the close of 605 B. C.
The heritage of Assyria, so far as it fell to the Baby-
lonian heir, had been secured, with the exception of
Egypt, and the new king, while ruling over a region
far less extensive than that of the great Assyrian
monarchs, possessed a territory that in size, posi-
tion, and resources still deserved to be called an
empire.


II
NEBUCHADREZZAR AND HIS SUCCESSORS
277. THE exact reason for Nebuchadrezzar's haste
in returning to Babylon to secure the throne may not
be easy to name, but the fear of trouble which such
an action suggests was prophetic. A curious passage
from the description of the ceremonial at the rebuild-
ing of the Marduk temple in Babylon, found in an
inscription of Nabupaluçur, may throw some light
upon the situation:
Unto Marduk, my lord, I bowed my neck; I arrayed
myself in my gown, the robe of my royalty. Bricks and
mortar I carried on my head, a dupshikku of gold and
silver I wore ; and Nebuchadrezzar, the first-born, the
chief son, beloved of my heart, I caused to carry mortar
mixed with wine, oil, and (other) products along with
my workmen. Nabu-shum-lisher, his talimu, the offspring
of my own flesh, the junior, my darling, I ordered to
take a basket and spade (?); a dupshikku of gold and
silver I placed (on him). Unto Marduk, my lord, as a
gift, I dedicated him (II.59–III. 18; see ABL, p. 132).
278. The struggle of two brothers for their father's
throne has already appeared in Assyrian history. In
this case the younger seems, from this passage, to
have been intended by his father for a special post in
the kingdom; the consecration to Marduk indicated,
probably, his elevation to the priesthood and, in
º
22


338 NEW BABYLONIA
connection with the epithet talimu, suggests to
Winckler (AOF, II. ii. pp. 193 ff.) an appointment
as king of Babylon, while the elder brother was to be
ruler of the empire and the suzerain. Thus the old
problem of Babylonian prerogative reappeared under
the Kaldeans. While the fully developed theory,
as held by Winckler (l.c.), of a division between
the hierarchy and the Kaldean rulers that runs all
through the history of this empire and finally causes
its ruin, is improbable, the existence of intrigue and
the danger of dynastic troubles are obvious. How to
be king of Babylon in all the ancient religious mean-
ing of that term and at the same time to harmonize
the demands of this position with the administration of
the greater state, remained, to the end, the standing
problem of the Mesopotamian dynasties. Nebuchad-
rezzar, however, by the promptness of his appearance
on the scene and through the fidelity of his father's
counsellors, overcame whatever opposition may have
existed, and in his long reign (605–562 B.C.) main-
tained his supreme position with power undisturbed
by revolt and splendor undimmed by rivalry.
279. If the Kaldean empire was of modest propor-
tions in comparison with that of Assyria, it had the
advantage of relief from the wearisome and costly
wars with mountain peoples. The absorption of all
the northern and eastern Assyrian provinces by the
Manda (Medes), and the firm alliance between them
and the Kaldean king, left him free to take possession
of the more compact and tractable districts which fell
to him and to organize their administration. How
this was done is not very clear, except as it may be
inferred from the details of his relations to the single


THE OVERTHROW OF JUDAH 341
same time emissaries from Tyre and Sidon were
present (Jer. xxvii. 3) to urge common cause against
Nebuchadrezzar. Twice, apparently, it was neces-
sary for Zedekiah to explain matters at Babylon, once
by sending ambassadors (Jer. xxix. 3), and once by
appearing in person before the king (Jer. li. 59).
The deported Jews in Babylonia were also intriguing
in the interests of rebellion, and even the burning
alive of two of the most outspoken of their leaders,
by the order of Nebuchadrezzar, could not restrain
them. Finally, Pharaoh Hophra, who had succeeded
Psamtik II., son of Necho, in 589 B.C. threw himself
vigorously into the cause of the conspirators and
Zedekiah joined them (588 B.C.). Nebuchadrezzar
bestirred himself and advanced in strong force as far
as Riblah on the middle Orontes. Thence he sent
out a division against Judah, that overran the
country and besieged the three strongholds which
held out, Azekah, Lachish, and Jerusalem (Jer.
xxxiv. 7). The defence of Jerusalem was particu-
larly desperate; only after a siege of one and a
half years was it taken (586 B.C.). The usual pun-
ishments were inflicted. The king was blinded by
Nebuchadrezzar's own hand; his sons and counsellors
were slain, the citizens deported, the city was de-
molished, and the booty carried away. The people
remaining in the land were left under the oversight
of a Jewish noble, Gedaliah, and, when later he was
slain by one of his fellow chieftains, the region was
still further desolated and abandoned. Thus the old
tragedy was re-enacted, and for the last time. It is
true that Hophra had made a demonstration against
the Kaldeans during the siege of Jerusalem that had


342 NEW BABYLONIA
compelled a temporary raising of the siege, but the
lack of concerted action on the part of the rebels was
followed by the usual disaster. Edom and Moab had
already made their peace with their overlord. Ammon
and Tyre do not seem to have played any active part
in the struggle. Judah stood alone and perished.
281. Nebuchadrezzar seems to have proceeded
against Tyre and besieged it. The siege is said to
have lasted thirteen years (585–573 B.C.), after which
the city came to terms, although it was not entered by
the Kaldean king. The death of its king, Itobaal II.,
coincided with its submission. Egypt was attacked
by Nebuchadrezzar in 568 B. C., at a time when
Hophra had been followed by Amasis as a result of
internal strife. Of the success or extent of the cam-
paign there is no definite knowledge. It was little
more than a punitive expedition, from which Egypt
speedily recovered.
282. If the knowledge of Nebuchadrezzar's wars
and the administration of his empire must be derived
largely from others than himself, the case is different
with respect to his activity in Babylonia. To this long
inscriptions are devoted, and small tablets, stamps,
and bricks from many famous sites add their testi-
mony. He describes, particularly, his building opera-
tions in the city of Babylon, the fortifications, the
palaces, and the temples reared by him. Utility and
adornment were his guiding principles, but not with-
out the deeper motives of piety and patriotism. In
Babylonia at large, he labored at the restoration of
the canal system, so important for agriculture, com-
merce, and defence. One canal which was restored by
him, led from the Euphrates south of Hit directly to


INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS 343
the gulf through the centre of Babylonia; another on
the west of the Euphrates opened up to irrigation and
agriculture the edge of the Arabian desert. The
river, as it passed along before Babylon, was lined
with bricks laid in bitumen, which at low water
are visible to-day. The city-canals were similarly
treated. Those connecting the two rivers and extend-
ing through the land between them were reopened. A
system of basins, dykes, and dams guarded and guided
the waters of the rivers, – works so various and colos-
sal as to excite the admiration of the Greeks, who
saw or heard of them. A system of defences was
planned by the erection of a great wall in north Baby-
lonia, stretching from the Euphrates to the Tigris; it
was flanked east and west, by a series of ramparts of
earth and moats filled with water, and extended south-
ward as far as Nippur. It was called the Median
wall. Restorations of temples were made in Borsippa,
Sippar, Ur, Uruk, Larsam, Dilbat, and Baz. More
than forty temples and shrines are mentioned in
the inscriptions as receiving attention. Bricks bear-
ing the king’s name are said to have come from every
site in Babylonia, from Bagdad to the mouth of the
rivers. He may well stand as the greatest builder
of all the kings of the Mesopotamian valley.
283. An estimate of the policy and achievements
of Nebuchadrezzar, while limited by the unequal
amount of information on the various phases of his
activity, and subject to revision in the light of new
material, can be undertaken with a reasonable expec-
tation of general accuracy. Tiele has called him one
of the greatest rulers of antiquity (BAG, p. 454),
and, when his operations in Babylonia are considered,


344 NEW BABYLONIA
that statement has weight and significance. A cen-
tury and a half of war, in which Babylonia had been
the field of battle, had reduced its cities to ruins
and its fields to waste lands. Its temples had been
spoiled or neglected, and its gods, in humiliation or
wrath, had abandoned their dwelling-places. War-
ring factions had divided up the country between
them, or vied with one another in handing it over to
foreign foes. The first duty of the king, who loved
his people and considered the well-being and pros-
perity of his government, was to restore and unite.
Recovery and consolidation, — these were the watch-
words of public policy for the time, and these Ne-
buchadrezzar set himself to realize. It is no chance,
then, that his inscriptions deal so uniformly with
Babylonian affairs, with matters of building and
canalization and religion. It has been pointed out,
also, that his far-seeing policy contemplated the
danger from the Medes, his present allies, and that
his elaborate scheme of defences was intended to
make Babylon impregnable in the conflict which he
saw impending. All this was sagacious and states-
manlike.
284. In the fulfilment of this policy, the king con-
ceived it indispensable to lay the emphasis on the
pre-eminence of his capital, the city of Babylon.
Here were his most extensive and costly buildings
erected. For its protection the vast system of forti-
fications was designed. To beautify and adorn its
streets and temples was his supremest desire, as the
exaltation of its gods was the deepest thought of his
heart. He, or his successors, even went so far as to
destroy the famous temple of the elder Bel in the


ADMINISTRATIVE WEAKNESS 345
immemorially sacred city of Nippur, the sanctuary
of the whole land, an act which has its explanation
only in this purpose to glorify Marduk of Babylon
(Peters, Nippur, II. p. 262). But one title is borne
by him in all his inscriptions, and that is “King of
Babylon; ” and in them he declares, “With the ex-
ception of Babylon and Borsippa I did not adorn a
single city,” and “Because my heart did not love the
abode of my royalty in another city, in no (other)
human habitation did I build a residence for my
lordship. Property, the insignia of royalty, I did
not establish anywhere else” (ABL, pp. 140, 141).
Reasonable question may be raised as to the wisdom
of this procedure. The Assyrian kings, while they
glorified Nineveh, or Kalkhi, always proclaimed
themselves rulers of the state or the empire, and the
title assumed was recognized to entail responsibility.
But Nebuchadrezzar chose to follow the less laudable
feature of the example of his predecessors, and, when
the city concerned was Babylon, with the jealousies
and rivalries which had gathered around it, the pref-
erence was doubtfully wise. To have developed the
religious, economical, and even defensive significance
of the other cities, while indicating his preference for
Babylon, would have removed difficulties which his
successors found insoluble.
285. The most serious modification of one’s high
estimate of Nebuchadrezzar must be made when his
administration of his empire is examined. The fun-
damental principles of his policy in this field are in-
volved in his preference of Babylonia and its capital.
It is true that the following passage in his inscriptions
must be given due weight:


346 NEW BABYLONIA
Far-off lands, distant mountains, from the Upper Sea
to the Lower Sea, steep trails, unopened paths, where
motion was impeded, where there was no foothold, diffi-
cult roads, journeys without water, I traversed, and the
unruly I overthrew; I bound as captives my enemies;
the land I set in order and the people I made to prosper;
both bad and good among the people I took under my
care (?); silver, gold, costly precious stones, bronze,
palm-wood, cedar-wood, all kinds of precious things, a
rich abundance, the product of the mountains, the wealth
of the seas, a heavy gift, a splendid present, to my city
Babylon I brought (EIH, II. 13 ff.).
This, however, is the only statement of the kind to
be found, and its limitations are obvious. The facts,
which his dealing with Judah and the other western
states reveals, lower its significance yet more. For a
century Assyria had maintained its supremacy there
with little or no trouble, with what success can be
measured in a single instance. On good grounds it
has been held that King Josiah’s opposition to Necho
of Egypt was inspired by his loyalty to Assyria,
though that state was now at its last gasp. Its
government had been severe, but it had organized
and protected its vassals. But the Jewish rebel-
lion against Nebuchadrezzar is explicable, chiefly
from the neglect of the Babylonian king to look
after the subject states in the west. There is no
evidence that anything but the most general super-
vision was exercised. Assyrian methods were ser-
vilely imitated. The punishment of Judah is a
most instructive example. The Jews were de-
ported, but no peoples were put in their place.
The system of dealing with a conquered city, de-


348 NEW BABYLONIA
great Semitic monarchs. From this point of view,
the picture of him in the Book of Daniel is, in not a
few respects, strikingly accurate. His inscriptions
reveal a loftiness of religious sentiment, unequalled
in the royal literature of the oriental world. As a
pious worshipper of Marduk and his son Nabu, he
utters prayers which, though they may not be of his
own composition, were sanctioned by him and bear
witness to the height of religious thought and feeling
reached in his day. The following is not the least
remarkable of these petitions:
O eternal prince 1 Lord of all being !
As for the king whom thou lovest, and
Whose name thou hast proclaimed
As was pleasing to thee,
Do thou lead aright his life,
Guide him in a straight path.
I am the prince, obedient to thee,
The creature of thy hand;
Thou hast created me, and
With dominion over all people
Thou hast intrusted me.
According to thy grace, O Lord,
Which thou dost bestow on
All people,
Cause me to love thy supreme dominion,
And create in my heart
The worship of thy god-head,
And grant whatever is pleasing to thee,
Because thou hast fashioned my life.
(EIH, I. 55.)
Similar utterances justify Tiele's statement that an
Israelite worshipper, by substituting Jehovah and
Jerusalem for Marduk and Babylon, could take them
upon his own lips. As coming from the king, they


NEBUCHADREZZAR'S SUCCESSORS 349
indicate a remarkable conception of sovereignty, its
ideals and obligations, as well as its source in the
righteous character and beneficent will of God Al-
mighty (Jastrow, RBA, pp. 298 f.).
287. The instability of the dynasty of Nebuchad-
rezzar, in spite of his own vigorous and successful
reign, is painfully manifest in the careers of his suc-
cessors. He was followed by his son Amel Marduk
(Evil-merodach), who was slain by his brother-in-law
Nergal-shar-uqur (Neriglissar) after a reign of two
years (562–560 B.C.). The latter ascended the throne
to rule but four years (560-556 B.C.), when he was cut
off, apparently, by an untimely yet not violent death.
His son, Labashi Marduk (Labosoarchod), followed
him as king, but, after ruling nine months (556 B. c.),
was made away with by a body of conspirators who
chose one of their number, Nabuna'id (Nabonidus),
to be king, the last to occupy that seat as ruler of
the New Babylonian Empire.
288. Nabuna'id has left an instructive commentary
upon the political situation of these years in his stele,
recently discovered, describing the events connected
with his own accession, the character of his predeces-
sors, and his rule of Babylonia. According to him,
Amel Marduk and Labashi Marduk had failed to keep
the precepts and follow the policies of their respective
fathers, Nebuchadrezzar and Nergalsharugur, and
hence fate carried them away before their time.
The fathers, however, had agreed in their politi-
cal policy, and this policy Nabuna'id set before
himself as ruler. In essential harmony with the
testimony of Nabuna'id is that of Berosus (Jos.
Cont. Ap., I. 20), who describes Amel Marduk as


350 NEW BABYLONIA
“lawless and impious" and Labashi Marduk as “not
knowing how to rule.” Such characterizations of
these kings, however, evidently made by their
enemies, are so vague as to leave large room for
hypothesis as to the particular policy they pursued.
Some modern students have regarded them as adher-
ents of the priestly party and, as such, overpowered
and removed by the military or official party. For
this view support has been sought in the one known
specific act of Amel Marduk, the release of Jehoiachin
of Judah (sect. 279) from prison and his admission
to the royal table (2 Kings xxv. 27 ff.). But the
motive for this act is uncertain, and the exactly
opposite hypothesis is held by others. All that can
be said with certainty is that, beneath the firm rule
of Nebuchadrezzar, intrigues and strifes of parties
had been secretly growing the manifestation of which
in the following years threw the government into
confusion and threatened the collapse of the state.
Had Nergalsharuqur lived longer, he might have
kept affairs in order and prolonged the life of the
empire, for his inscriptions indicate that he was a
man of capacity, active in the restoration of Baby-
lonian cities and temples, quite in the spirit of
Nebuchadrezzar. The reign of Nabuna'id introduces
new elements into the final scene of Babylon's down-
fall and deserves, therefore, a separate discussion.


III
BABYLONIA UNDER THE KALDEANS
289. THE accession of the Kaldi to supremacy in
Babylonia might be expected to result in the com-
munication of new and original impulses to the
somewhat stationary civilization of that ancient land.
They had proved their right to exist as a people and
their power both to endure hardness and to rise
superior to disaster, by centuries of conflict with the
mightiest organized force that had as yet appeared
in the world. They had even outlived Assyria and
divided her spoils, and, unhindered by opposition,
were now in a position to realize their national ideals
in the fairest region of the ancient world.
290. Materials exist in reasonable abundance from
which to gain knowledge of the contribution made
by this régime to human progress and to estimate its
character. It is true that the ruins of Babylon itself
have not, as yet, been so carefully investigated as to
yield much information concerning the art and archi-
tecture of the city in its Kaldean prime, although
this lack will, it is hoped, be supplied by the work
of the German commission now excavating there
(1902). But a thoroughly representative series of
royal inscriptions exists, as an evidence of the litera-
ture, and vast collections of business documents,
extending from the beginning to the end of the


354 NEW BABYLONIA
spice and incense traffic carried on through the
Arabian city of Gerrha. The undisturbed posses-
sion of the Euphrates valley and of the trade-routes
to the west gave impulses to larger commercial
energy in that direction. It is Nebuchadrezzar
who is doubtless referred to by Herodotus under
the name of Nitocris, to whom is ascribed the
making of the Euphrates to wind about in its
course, that thus its force might be diminished
and its use by the frail boats and rafts still employed
for traffic facilitated. The other improvements in
canals and in the Euphrates itself, and the building
of the quays, not only at Babylon but also at Bag-
dad and elsewhere by these kings, point to their
recognition of the importance of trade and com-
merce, which never was so enormous as in this
period. Ezekiel declares that his people had been
carried away into “a land of traffic ’’ and “set in
a city of merchants” (xvii. 4), though he also adds
that they were “planted in a fruitful soil” and
placed “beside many waters” and “set as a willow
tree" (ibid. v. 5).
293. The pre-eminence of industrial life illustrates
other changes which had come over Babylonian so-
ciety in this period. Social life, if it had preserved
its ancient distinctions of noble and common man, was
permeated by the spirit of business. Even kings and
princes appear in documents describing ordinary busi-
ness transactions. Nergalsharuqur borrows money
to buy a house. Belshazzar, son of Nabuna'id, sells
wool and takes security for the payment, as any other
merchant. Indeed, it has been thought that the old
aristocracy had practically disappeared, and that the


THE BABYLONIAN GENTLEMAN 355
merchant princes and ecclesiastical lords had taken
its place. Certain families, like that of the Egibi at
Babylon and the Murashu at Nippur, were prominent
financiers and handed down their talents, both mate-
rial and intellectual, through several generations.
Gold and silver were the standards of value, and it
has been calculated that the ratio between the two
was from eleven, or twelve, to one. Coinage had
improved, smaller portions of the precious metals
being stamped as five shekel and one shekel pieces.
Interest varied from twenty per cent to ten per cent.
294. Accompanying this industrial development
was the transference of the bulk of the population to
the cities, and chiefly to Babylon. In the capital,
doubtless, the refinement and luxury of civilized
society in the ancient world reached its highest
point. Herodotus has an interesting picture of the
Babylonian gentleman of the time:
The dress of the Babylonians is a linen tunic reach-
ing to the feet, and above it another tunic made in wool,
besides which they have a short white cloak thrown
round them, and shoes of a peculiar fashion, not unlike
those worn by the Boeotians. They have long hair,
wear turbans on their heads, and anoint their whole
body with perfumes. Every one carries a seal, and a
walking stick, carved at the top into the form of an
apple, a rose, a lily, an eagle, or something similar; for
it is not their habit to use a stick without an ornament
(Her., I. 195).
To this description may be added that of Ezekiel,
who pictured “the Chaldeans portrayed with vermil-
ion, girded with girdles upon their loins, with dyed


356 NEW BABYLONIA
turbans upon their heads, all of them princes to look
upon " (Ezek. xxiii. 14 f.).
295. The family life continued to be the basis of
social organization. Few changes are traceable, and
these were in the direction of a higher standard of
morals. The practice of polygamy or concubinage
appears to be much restricted, and the custom of
marriage by purchase was practically done away with.
The wife still brought her dowry. The position of
woman was still as free and as high as before. The
strange statement of Herodotus as to the religious
prostitution of the Babylonian women is, in itself,
incredible, as well as his stories of the marriage-market
(I. 196, 199). The contemporaneous documents bear
quite the opposite testimony.
296. The history of the Kaldean régime is a suffi-
cient illustration of the character of the state during
this period. It differed from the earlier Babylonian
organization, chiefly because the Assyrian Empire had
done its work. It was more centralized; the king
was less of a sacred personage and more of a warrior
and administrator. Yet there appears here the return
to the old-time conception of the ecclesiastical char-
acter of the ruler, inseparable from a king of Babylon,
and in harmony with this renaissance spirit. That
an imperial administration was possible at all was
due to the Assyrian system already in vogue in the
provinces, and to an army which was chiefly composed
of mercenaries gathered from the ends of the earth.
Tradition has preserved the name of a certain Anti-
menidas, a Greek of Mitylene, who was a prominent
figure among the soldiers of Nebuchadrezzar (Strabo,
XIII. 2, 3). The character of the soldiery was not


LITERARY DEVELOPMENT 357
high. The impression made upon subject peoples
is illustrated by the testimony of the Hebrew prophets.
Habakkuk declares, “Their horses also are swifter
than leopards, and are more fierce than the evening
wolves; and their horsemen spread themselves: yea,
their horsemen come from far; they fly as an eagle
that hasteth to devour. They come all of them for
violence; their faces are set eagerly as the east wind;
and they gather captives as the sand ” (Hab. i. 8, 9).
297. The glory of Babylonia, however, was in the
arts of peace, and this age was not behind in the cul-
tivation of science, asthetics, and literature. But
there is no evidence that, in this direction more than
in others, was there any endeavor to outdo the past.
The literary art showed, perhaps, greater elaboration
of details, but there was no new thought. Its quality
and influence are best estimated by the example of
the one people of genius that breathed its atmosphere.
Hebrew literature, of the exile and after, is in form
separated by a great gulf from that of the earlier
period. The peculiarities of the style of Ezekiel
and of Zechariah — the artificiality of form and the
grotesqueness of conception — are Babylonian. But
the mechanical correctness of these writers becomes
harmony and unity of presentation in such a literary
artist as the author of the second part of Isaiah.
“His discourse, serene, affluent, and glowing, is an
image of a Babylonian landscape. As it unrolls itself,
we think of fields and gardens and stately palms
and bending willows and gently flowing streams,
stretching away over an ample plain, and all standing
out clear in the light of a cloudless sky” (McCurdy,
HPM, III. p. 420). For a fuller knowledge of the


358 - NEW BABYLONLA
contribution of the Kaldean period to the artistic
development it will be necessary to await further
excavation on the site of Babylon; but already it is
known that the special type of artistic adornment in
the Kaldean palaces was the wall decorated in colors.
Bricks enamelled in colors are among the commonest
articles picked up on the mounds of Babylon. It
is the walls of Nebuchadrezzar's palace to which
Diodorus refers in speaking of “every kind of animal
imitated according to all the rules of art both as to
form and color; the whole represented the chase of
various animals, the latter being more than four
cubits high — in the middle Semiramis on horseback
letting fly an arrow against a panther, and on one
side her husband Ninus at close quarters with a lion "
(Diod., II. 8, 6). This description is confirmed by
the recent discovery of the throne-room of the palace
with beautifully colored decorations of this character,
which took the place of the bas-reliefs of Ninevite
kings.
298. In the sphere of religion the Kaldean period
was most active, and yet most characteristically con-
servative. It was the brief Indian summer of the
faith, cherished through so many centuries in the
temples by successive generations of zealous priests
and devout worshippers. Ancient cults were revived;
ruined shrines restored; old endowments renewed.
Yet the ideas of the gods and of their place and pre-
rogatives in the pantheon had changed but slightly.
Mention has already been made of the preference of
the kings for Marduk and Nabu (sect. 284), and of
the approach to monotheism and spirituality which
appears in the prayers of Nebuchadrezzar. Nabuna'id,


MORALS AND RELIGION 359
it is thought, sought to raise Shamash, the sun-god,
to the level of Marduk and Nabu, but the attempt
only cost him the enmity of the priests of the capital.
Everywhere priestly control made the cult the
dominant element in the religion; its materialistic
features, its demonology, its incantation ceremonials,
and its astrology continued to be the popular ele-
ments. The condition of morals was fluctuating,
affected, it is true, by noble expressions of faith and
devotion such as are found in the hymns and prayers,
but elevated and maintained at a worthy standard far
more by the secular activities of business. True, it
was a commercial and mercantile morality, but a
striking testimony is borne to it by a later writer
who mentions, among the other virtues of the Baby-
lonians, their imperturbability and their straightfor-
wardness (Nic. of Damascus, Fr. 131), characteristics
of which the Stoics were proud. The influence of
the religion upon outside peoples was, however, never
as potent as in this period. The international life of
east and west, now so close and reciprocal, afforded
the most favorable opportunity for the extension of
the profound cosmological and theological ideas
which, in strange and often grotesque forms, had
been wrought out on Babylonian soil. The fertile
and inquiring Greek mind was now brought within
close range, and the reports of eastern travellers
stimulated the curiosity and the thoughts of the
philosophers. The Jews, too, drank in the teach-
ings. “The finishing touches to the structure of
Judaism — given on Babylonian soil — reveal the
Babylonian trade-mark. Ezekiel, in many respects
the most characteristic Jewish figure of the exile, is


360 NEW BABYLONIA
steeped in Babylonian theology and mysticism; and
the profound influence of Ezekiel is recognized by
modern scholarship in the religious spirit that char-
acterizes the Jews upon the reorganization of their
commonwealth '' (Jastrow, RBA, pp. 696 f.).
299. This splendid renaissance of the past, which
is the achievement of the Kaldi for Babylonia, has
its shining example and supreme symbol in the city
of Babylon. The devotion of the great Nebuchad-
rezzar to his capital has already been indicated (sect.
284). To present, however imperfectly, a general
picture of the city as it came from the hands of its
Kaldean rulers is a service due to their memory.
At the same time this supreme interest is the
best illustration of the limitations as well as the
height of their ideals. It is possible at present, with
some certainty, to connect at least two of the three
great mounds on the site of the ancient city, now
called Babel, Kasr, and Amran, with the special
structures, palaces, temple, and gardens which are
ascribed to Nebuchadrezzar, even if the many other
ruin-heaps in the vicinity cannot be identified. The
many royal inscriptions of the Kaldi and the de-
scriptions of the Greek writers permit a sketch of
the Babylon of that day. The city proper, the
nucleus and heart of it, was that which lay along the
east bank of the Euphrates and within the inner wall
called Imgur Bel, which stretched in a kind of half-
circle out from the river. The chief buildings within
this wall were the temple and the palace. Around
this inner wall there ran a second wall called Ne-
mitti Bel, roughly parallel to it and at a considerable
distance from it, constituting the defence of the


THE ZIGGURAT OF BABYLON 361
larger city. Its circumference, including the river
front, was about eight miles. Each of these walls
had its moat. Though of about the same size as
Nineveh (sect. 231), Babylon was much more thickly
populated, the houses being three and four stories in
height. The streets of the city ran at right angles,
and all the spaces about the temple and between the
walls were probably occupied with private houses or
buildings for business.
300. The temple, the centre of the inner city,
consisted of a complex of structures, situated upon
its elevated platform and surrounded by its own wall.
Most conspicuous was the ziggurat, or temple-tower
of seven stages, which the king rebuilt. Of this
Herodotus says: “The ascent to the top is on the
outside by a path which winds round all the towers
(stages). When one is about half-way up, one finds
a resting-place and seats where persons are wont to
sit some time on their way to the summit. On the
topmost tower (stage) there is a spacious temple, and
inside the temple stands a couch of unusual size richly
adorned with a golden table by its side. There is
no statue of any kind set up in the place.” Beside
the tower was the shrine of the god Marduk, E-kua,
a magnificent structure whose walls glistened with
gold, precious stones, and alabaster, and whose roof
was of fragrant cedar of Lebanon. At the entrance
was the shrine of the goddess, his spouse, and else-
where were the sanctuaries of Nabu and other deities.
Of another sacred chamber Nebuchadrezzar records
that:
The shrine of the Fates, where, on Zagmuku, the
beginning of the year, on the eighth and the eleventh


362 NEW BABYLONIA
day, the king, the god of heaven and earth, the lord of
heaven, takes up his residence, where the gods of heaven
and earth reverently pay obedience and stand bowed
down before him; a fate of a far-distant day, as the
fate of my life, they determine therein: that shrine, the
shrine of royalty, the shrine of lordly power, belonging
to the leader of the gods, the Prince Marduk, which a
former king had constructed with silver, I decorated with
shining gold and brilliant ornaments (EIH, II. 54 ff).
From the door of the temple a passage led to the sacred
street, A-ibur-shabu, along which the sacred ships of
the gods were wont to be borne on festal days, while
by the temple's side the sacred canal ran from the
Euphrates eastward, bringing water for sacred uses.
301. To the north lay the palace between the canal
and the inner wall. Built or renewed by Nabu-
paluçur, it had fallen into decay and had to be re-
paired by his son. For so great a king, however, it
had become too small. Yet it could not be enlarged
without encroaching on the sacred domains of the
god. Nebuchadrezzar restored it, therefore, exactly
after the old dimensions, but across the inner wall,
either to the north or east, within the outer wall, he
cleared a space, and within fifteen days the turrets of
a splendid palace appeared, uniting the two walls and
making, with its own intersecting battlements, a cita-
del which protected alike the outer and the inner city.
Upon the furnishing of this palace were lavished all the
resources of his empire. Cedar, cypress, palm, and
other costly woods, gold, silver, bronze, copper, and
precious stones, brick and marble from the distant
mountains, were employed in its construction and
adornment.


364 NEW BABYLONIA
built in lofty terraces to solace his Median queen for
the absence of her beloved mountains. Across the
river, in the twin city of Borsippa, he rebuilt the city
wall and restored the temple tower of the god Nabu,
son of Marduk. In time the two cities became more
and more united. It is this double city which seems
to be in the mind of Herodotus when he describes
Babylon as a great square about fourteen miles on
each side, the walls making a circuit of fifty-six miles
and enclosing an area of two hundred square miles.
While the Babylon of the Kaldi was much smaller
than this, their devotion to it manifested itself in
these initial works that in course of time produced
the larger and more famous city. Already it con-
tained at least two of the seven wonders of the world,
and its beauty and wealth made it for a long time
thereafter the chief centre of the east. “From Nebu-
chadrezzar to the Mongol invasion ” it was well-nigh
“the greatest commercial city of the world.”
304. For Babylon remained, after the wreck of the
Semitic domination of the East, as glorious as before
and as imperious in the realm of commerce and of
culture. She had succeeded to the varying and petty
local powers that, in the beginnings of history, strug-
gled with one another for a transient pre-eminence.
She had laid, there and then, the foundations of the
state which had endured for millenniums. She had
outlasted the empire on the Tigris. She had been the
despair of the statesmen of Assyria, and a decisive
element in the downfall of that monarchy. She had
been the pride of the Kaldean monarchs, and was at
last the grave of their glory. She had given to the
ancient world its laws, its literature, its religion. In


IV
THE FAILL OF BABYLON
306. THE conspiracy which placed Nabuna'id upon
the throne (555–539 B.C.) seems to have involved
a transfer of emphasis in the politics of the state.
Nabuna'id was not a Kaldean but a Babylonian noble,
son of a prince, Nabu-balatsu-iqbi. In his long stele
inscription, to which reference has already been made
(sect. 288), he declares his purpose to conduct affairs
after the example of Nebuchadrezzar and Nabupal-
uçur. In fact, his rather numerous inscriptions
present him not only as a devout worshipper of the
gods and a restorer of temples, but also as a vigorous
and zealous defender of the imperial authority. The
empire stood intact within its old limits when he
came into possession of it, and in the first years of
his reign he paid no little attention to the mainte-
nance of his authority in the west. In the badly
broken first column of his so-called Annals, references
made to Hamath and the mountains of Amanus,
in connection with military movements, indicate that
he was active in Syria, and fragments of Menander
suggest that in his reign dynastic troubles in Tyre
led to his setting, first, Merbaal (555–552 B.C.), and
then Hirom III. (551–532 B.C.), both hostages at
his court, upon the Tyrian throne. The impulse to
these western expeditions may have been given by the


368 NEW BABYLONIA
new relations to the Manda (Medes) which the last
years had induced, and which may now be described
in some detail. -
307. During the lifetime of Nebuchadrezzar the
alliance with the Manda (Medes) had remained firm,
although to Cyaxares had succeeded (about 584 B.C.)
his son Ishtuvegu (Astyages). The rapid changes
which followed upon the death of the great Kaldean
monarch, and particularly the transference of the
succession from the Kaldean to the Babylonian line,
in the person of Nabuna'id, seem to have been the
occasion of estrangement between the two peoples.
Nabuna'id asserts that in the beginning of his reign
the Manda had been in possession of northern Meso-
potamia and were encamped about Haran. But one
of those sudden reversals of supremacy not uncom-
mon in the beginnings of great empires had taken
place in Media. Among the communities that ac-
knowledged the sway of Astyages was the province
of Anshan in northern Elam, occupied by the Per-
sians under their hereditary chieftains of the house of
Teispes. The king of Anshan during these years,
a certain Cyrus, raised a rebellion against his suzerain
(about 553 B. C.) which resulted in the downfall of
Astyages and the supremacy of Cyrus and the Per-
sians (550 B.C.). During these troubles the move-
ment of Astyages against Babylonia was given up,
and Nabuna'id reports that by 553 B.C. there were no
Manda about Haran. He also dwells with satisfaction
upon the overthrow of Astyages by Cyrus, king of
Anshan, as a divine intervention in his own favor.
The way was open for him to send an expedition not
only to Haran to rebuild the temple there, but to


NABUNA’ID'S ARCHAEOLOGICAL WORK 369
advance farther into the west. He was doubtless
gratified that inner troubles were breaking up the
Median Empire, as had so often been the case among
the loose agglomerations of peoples in the northern
mountains, and he felt that henceforth neither their
friendship nor their enmity was particularly signifi-
cant, little dreaming that within two decades the
young conqueror would be knocking at his own gates.
The career of Cyrus is one of the marvels of antiq-
uity. His victory over his Median suzerain was not
merely the substitution of one dynasty for another,
nor was it followed by internecine wars in which the
fresh and vigorous peoples of the north were crip-
pled. With consummate statesmanship the young
king united all elements, inspired them with a com-
mon spirit, and out of a kingdom in which tribes and
peoples had been joined in loose confederation about
a common overlord, he built the solid foundations of
the Medo-Persian Empire.
308. The immunity from hostile complications
with the Medes, enjoyed by Nabuna'id during the
years that followed, he improved by pursuing those
works of peace in which his prototype Nebuchadrez-
zar had gained such renown. With the details of
such building operations his inscriptions are filled.
The peculiar delight which they represent him as feel-
ing in these works and the unique method which he
adopted in the prosecution of them have led scholars
to regard him as a political weakling, a cultured
dilettante, an archaeological virtuoso, to whom the
discovery of an ancient foundation stone was more
significant than the conduct of the state or the
defence of the empire. Further knowledge has
24


370 NEW BABYLONIA
proved the accusation unjust, although the facts on
which it was based are evident enough. In his zeal
for the reconstruction of temples he was not satisfied
with clearing off the superficial rubbish of the mound,
but must dig down through the successive layers of
ruins, until the original foundation had been reached
and the inscription of the first builder had been un-
covered. Reference has already been made to the
value of the data which he thus published (sect. 40)
for the construction of a Babylonian chronology. A
passage may be here given from an inscription, illus-
trative at once of his devout piety and his archaeo-
logical perseverance and of its scientific value for
modern scholars:
For Shamash, the judge of heaven and earth, E-bab-
bara, his temple which is in Sippar, which Nebuchad-
rezzar, a former king, had rebuilt, after searching for its
platform-foundation without finding it—that house he
rebuilt, but in forty-five years its walls had fallen in.
I became anxious and humble; I was alarmed and much
troubled. When I had brought out Shamash from within
it and made him take residence in another house, I pulled
that house down and made search for its old platform-
foundation; and I dug to a depth of eighteen cubits, and
Shamash, the great lord of E-babbara, the temple, the
dwelling well pleasing to him, permitted me to behold
the platform-foundation of Naram Sin, the son of Sargon,
which during a period of thirty-two hundred years no
king among my predecessors had seen. In the month
Tishrit, in a favorable month, on an auspicious day, re-
vealed to me by Shamash and Adad in a vision, with
silver, gold, costly and precious stones, products of the
forest, sweet-smelling cedars, amid joy and rejoicing, I
raised its brick-work—not an inch inward or outward—


374 NEW BABYLONIA
flow of party strife at Babylon are quite unknown,
a gap occurring in the Annals at this point. The
inscription becomes again intelligible with the seven-
teenth and last year of Nabuna'id (739 B.C.). The
Babylonian king is now in the capital, and the usual
religious ceremonials are performed. Cyrus is on the
northeastern frontier. Has Nabuna'id been released
from his confinement at Tema in consequence of the
breaking down of the plans of his enemies? However
that may be, he has gathered into Babylon the images
of the gods from the length and breadth of Akkad,
excepting those of Borsippa, Kutha, and Sippar,
with a view either to their protection or to the aid
they may supply to the capital. The action was
ill-timed from the point of view of the priests of
Marduk, Babylon's city god, whose prerogative and
power were thus underestimated or even dishonored.
Cyrus's attack upon the great system of defences was
made at Upi (Opis), at the junction of the Tigris
and the Turnat, where he broke through and stood
on Babylonian soil in October, 539 B. C. Belshazzar
and his army were beaten back. Nabuna'id sought
in vain to organize the people for defence. Sippar
was taken early in October, and the king fled to
Babylon, closely pursued by a detachment of the
Persians under Gubaru (Gobryas). It might well be
thought that the broad and lofty walls of the capital
would long withstand the assaults of an enemy; the
narrative of Herodotus (I. 190, 191) tells how, after
a tedious siege, Cyrus, in despair, set about divert-
ing the main channel of the Euphrates and by march-
ing his troops into the city through the river gates,
thus laid open, took the defenders by surprise and


THE BETRAYAL OF BABYLON 375
captured the city. Nothing, however, could be farther
from the actual event. Gubaru found friends within
the walls who opened the gates soon after his arrival;
Babylon fell into the hands of the Persians without
a struggle. So deeply had the feuds of parties,
ecclesiastical and political, eaten into the body poli-
tic that the capital was betrayed by its own citizens.
The so-called Cyrus cylinder has perpetuated the
memory of this infamy. There, in words written
under the hand of Babylonian priests, it is said that
Marduk, in wrath at the loss of his prerogative and
the complaints of his servants, not only abandoned
the city, but —
He searched through all lands; he saw him, and he
sought the righteous prince, after his own heart, whom
he took by the hand. Cyrus, king of Anshan, he called
by name; to sovereignty over the whole world he ap-
pointed him. . . . Marduk, the great lord, guardian of
his people, looked with joy on his pious works and his
upright heart; he commanded him to go to his city
Babylon, and he caused him to take the road to Babylon,
going by his side as a friend and companion . . . with-
out skirmish or battle he permitted him to enter Baby-
lon. He spared his city Babylon in (its) calamity.
Nabonidus, the king, who did not reverence him, he
delivered into his hand. All the people of Babylon, all
Shumer and Akkad, nobles and governors, prostrated
themselves before him, kissed his feet, rejoiced at his
sovereignty, showed happiness in their faces (Cyrus Cyl.,
11 ff).
313. A few days later, Cyrus himself entered the
city. Nabuna'id had already been captured. He
was treated kindly and exiled to the east. Belshaz-


376 NEW BABYLONIA
zar was shortly afterward slain, while, as it seems,
making a last stand with the remnant of his forces.
The new lord worshipped at the ancient shrines,
glorified the gods that had given him headship over
their land and people, and received in his royal city
Babylon the kings, from all quarters of the world,
who came bringing their heavy taxes and kissed his
feet. He called himself by the old familiar titles —
“Cyrus, king of the world, the great king, the
powerful king, the king of Babylon, the king of
Shumer and Akkad, the king of the four quarters
of the world, . . . whose reign Bel and Nabu love,
whose sovereignty they longed for in the desire of
their hearts.” But the words are empty echoes of a
vanishing past. It was, in fact, a new master of
the nations, who stood upon the ruins of the mighty
Semitic communities that for millenniums had ruled
the world. A man of another race, to whom the
valley of the Tigris and the Euphrates was no longer
the centre of human power and human civilization,
whose ideals of the divine and the human world were
formed under other skies, and whose empire stretched
far away beyond the boundaries of Assyria in its
fairest splendor, was henceforth to direct the destinies
of the peoples, whose leadership of human history
has been followed from its dawn to its setting. A
new force had come to its own, and another chapter
of human progress began.


à
!
U. S. Congress.
## 5 # 2.
$2 £ 3 # 3
•- " - E -
* -> -- it: 35
§ 2 ºn a 5
5 : ... P. f.
> - O - -
3 o ... • 5
3 : 30, 1} .3
‘5 c = a, G
post-roads.
... Resolution relative to investigation of charges made
in the report of the fourth assistant postmaster-general
on the investigation of the Post-office department con-
cerning members of Congress ...
|
:
:
i
House.
pany H. Res. no. 118.X ...
1904,
218 p.
23cm.
(58th Cong., 2d sess.
*4- tº-
o O T.
Éo E *
.5 c Z
2 — =
- : E
*- K-
P Hº- #
*- ‘āo
... à
... to C
-
c
i
i
- - -
Qo --> O
# 3 #
P &
R- O
O 2 tº 5
3 : -5 §n 3
Q) +- r-
•= •r. ~ -
P = *- : * tº
3 o ż E
* Ts to ... •F
5 * * =
-3.5 & 5
Tº ce • * ~3
2-3 + 3 *-
3 : 3 & 5
Committee on Post-office and
House.
Rept. 1395)
Report. (To accom-
[Washington, Govt. print. off.,
Submitted by Mr. Overstreet; ordered printed, March 7, 1904.
J. L. Bristow, fourth assistant postmaster-general.
1. U. S. Post-office dept.
street, Jesse, 1859–
Library of Congress
HE6331 1904 c
2. Bristow, Joseph Little, 1861–
II. U. S. 58th Cong., 2d sess., 1903–1904.
I. Over-
House.
9–33516#
|


376 NEW BABYLONIA
zar was shortly afterward slain, while, as it seems,
making a last stand with the remnant of his forces.
The new lord worshipped at the ancient shrines,
glorified the gods that had given him headship over
their land and people, and received in his royal city
Babylon the kings, from all quarters of the world,
who came bringing their heavy taxes and kissed his
feet. He called himself by the old familiar titles —
“Cyrus, king of the world, the great king, the
powerful king, the king of Babylon, the king of
Shumer and Akkad, the king of the four quarters
of the world, . . . whose reign Bel and Nabu love,
whose sovereignty they longed for in the desire of
their hearts.” But the words are empty echoes of a
vanishing past. It was, in fact, a new master of
the nations, who stood upon the ruins of the mighty
Semitic communities that for millenniums had ruled
the world. A man of another race, to whom the
valley of the Tigris and the Euphrates was no longer
the centre of human power and human civilization,
whose ideals of the divine and the human world were
formed under other skies, and whose empire stretched
far away beyond the boundaries of Assyria in its
fairest splendor, was henceforth to direct the destinies
of the peoples, whose leadership of human history
has been followed from its dawn to its setting. A
new force had come to its own, and another chapter
of human progress began.


CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY
By 5000 B.C.
About 4500–2250
( &
4500
4400
4200
4000
3850
3800–3750
3500
3100
3000
2900
2800–2500
2450–2300
2400–2100
2290
2297–2254
2188–21.51
2085–1717
City-states flourish in South Babylonia.
Expansion and Conflicts of City-states.
Enshagsagana, of Kengi, victor over Kish.
Mesilim, king of Kish, victor over Shirpurla.
Dynasty of Ur Nina, king of Shirpurla,
victor over Gishban; Stele of Vultures.
Lugalzaggisi, king of Gishban, ruler as far
as the Mediterranean.
Alusharshid, of Kish, conqueror of Elam.
Sargon, king of Agade, and his son Naram
Sin, lords of the Mediterranean coast-land,
of northern Mesopotamia, and of Elam.
Ur Bau and other patesis of Shirpurla.
Gudea, patesi of Shirpurla.
Ur Gur and Dungi I., kings of Ur, kings of
Shumer and Akkad.
Kings of Uruk and Isin.
Second Dynasty of Ur; Dungi II., lord of
the West.
Migrations and Invasions: Arabians and
Elamites enter Babylon.
First Dynasty of kings of Babylon.
Rim Sin, Elamite king of Larsam, king of
Shumer and Akkad.
Khammurabi, king of Babylon, victor over
the Elamites, unifier of Babylonia.
Ammiditana, of Babylonia, king of the West.
Second Dynasty of Babylonian kings.
In the centuries before 2000 B. C. Babylonian influence, po-
litical and commercial, was predominant in the Mediterranean
coast-lands.


Babylonia B. C. Assyria Other Countries
Migrations and Invasions. The world of Western After Arameans appear in north-
'. disturbed on every side. Babylonia 2000 ern Mesopotamia and Khatti
entered by the Kassites in northern Syria
About Earliest Patesis and Kings of
1840–1700 Assyria. Ishme Dagan and Hyksos enter and dominate
Shamshi Adad I. : Shamshi Egypt for two hundred and
Adad II. son of Igur (Bel)- fifty years
kapkapu; Irishum son of
Khallu; Ikunum son of
Third Dynasty of Babylon: Kassite kings of About Irishum; Shushpi-aibi; Su
Karduniash 1717–1140 lili Hyksos driven out of Egypt
Agumkakrime, king of Babylon ab. 1600 Eighteenth Dynasty in Egypt
Boundary settlement between Kara-indash * 1450 conquers and rules between
of Babylon and Ashurbelnisheshu Ashurbelnisheshu of Assyria |_the Nile and the Euphrates
Kadashman Bel * 1425 Thutmose III. (ab. 1480–1427)
Burnaburyas I. ** 1400 Puzur Ashur
Kurigalzu I. ** 1380 Ashurmadinakhi I. The Tel-el-Amarna Letters
Burnaburyas II. “ 1350 Ashuruballit
Kara Khardash ** 1325
Marries daughter of Ashuruballit Nineteenth Dynasty in Egypt
Kadashmankharbe
Suzigas (Nazibugas), usurper
Kurigalzu II. ** 1310 Belnirari, extension of Assyria Khatti (Hittites) advance and
ictor over Elam and Assyria to the east dominate Syria; , Egypt
Pudi-ilu withdraws to Palestine
Adadmirari I.
Nazimaruttash
Kadashmanburyas ** 1280 Shalmaneser I., extension of
Assyrian power to the N. W.
Kalkhi made the capital
j


É
___ –--

Other Countries
Assyria
B. C.
Babylonia
Tiglathpileser II.: founder of a new line; begin-
ning of Assyrian recovery
Ashurdan II.
Adadmirari II. : victory over Babylonia; limu
list begins
Tukulti Ninib II.: campaigns in the north
Ashurnaçirpal III: Assyrian ascendancy es-
tablished (1) in the north, campaigns in 885,
884, 883, 880, 867; in the east, campaigns in
882, 881; in west Mesopotamia, campaigns in
884, 879, 878–875?: march to Mediterranean,
876? Capital at Kalkhi
Shalmaneser II.: incessant war; campaigns in
(1) Babylonia, 852,851, (2) west Mesopotamia,
859–856, (3) south Syria (Damascus), 854, 849,
846, 842, 839, (4) middle Syria, 850, 843, 841,
832, (5) north Syria and N. W., 840,838,837,
835, 834, (6) north, 860, 855, 853, 845,833, 831–
828, (7) east, 844, 836
Insurrection of Ashurdanimpal
Shamshi Adad IV. : insurrection quelled by
822; three campaigns in north, six in Baby-
lonia; the west abandoned.
About 1000
ab. 950
ab. 930
911–890
890–885
885–860
860–825
842
827-822
825–812
Eighth Dynasty of Babylonia
Shamashmudammiq
Nabushumishkun: peace with
Assyria
Nabuapaliddin
Marduknadinshum: vassal of
Shalmaneser II.
David and Solomon of Israel
Hiram I. of Tyre.
Recovery of Egypt. 22d dyn.
Sheshonk I.
Kingdom of Israel disrupted
Rise of kingdom of Damascus,
Ben Hadad I.
Formation of Kingdom of
Urartu : Kings Lutipris and
Sarduris I.
Kingdom of Urartu estab-
lished to the east of Lake
Wan. Kings Arame and
Sarduris II.
Jehu of Israel pays tribute to
Assyria
Ishpuinis of Urartu


Adadmirari III.: brilliant restoration of Assyrian
power in Syria, submission of Damascus, cam-
Nº. of 806-803,797; eight campaigns against
Medes, reached the Caspian; six campaigns in
N. E.; friendship with Babylonia.
Shalmaneser III. : decline; campaigns against
(1) Arameans of north Babylonia, (2) Urartu
(6 yrs.), (3) Damascus 773
Ashurdan III. : decline; campaigns in central
Syria (Hatarika), 772, 765
Eclipse of the Sun: rebellion in Assur
Ashurnirari II. : against Arpad 754
Rebellion in Kalkhi; collapse of the dynasty
Tiglathpileser III. : restoration of Assyrian au-
thority on all sides; campaigns in (1) Baby-
lonia against Arameans, 745, against Kaldi,
731, 729, 728, (2) east, 744, 737, (3) north, 739,
736, 735, (4) Syria, against Arpad, 743–740,
region of Hamath, 738, Damascus, Israel and
Philistia, 734–732
Shalmaneser IV.: campaign against rebellion in
Syria* Palestine, 725; siege of Samaria,
724-7
sº Assyria at its height; campaigns in
(1) Babylonia, 721, 710–709, (2) west, 722, 720
(Hamath), 715 (Arabia), 711 (Ashdod), (3)
812–783
783–773
773–755
763 (June 15)
755-7:45
746
747–734
745-727
734
734–732
732
732–729
730
728-727
727–722
722-705
Nabunacir : Canon of Ptolemy
and Babylonian Chronicle
begin with him
Nabunadinziri (Nadinu)
Nabushumukin, usurper
Ukinzir of Kaldu, usurper;
appearance of Mardukbalid-
§§ who pays tribute to Tig-
athpileser III.
Tiglathpileser III., king of
abylon under name of
ullu
Shalmaneser IV. king of Bab-
ylon under name of Ulula'a
Menuas of Urartu
“Mari” (Benhadad III.) of
Damascus Assyrian vassal
Argistis I. of Urartu; wide ex-
tension of the kingdom at
the expense of Assyria
Sarduris III. of Urartu de-
feated by Assyria
Ahaz of Judah (735–715) As-
syrian vassal. Kingdom of
amascus destroyed. Ho-
shea of Israel Assyrian
vassal
Rusas I. of Urartu
Kingdom of Israel destroyed
§


Assyria B. C. Babylonia 0ther Countries
north, 719, 716–714, (4) N. W., 718, 717, 715, 720–710 Mardukbaliddinking in Baby-Khumbanigash of Elam
713–708 lon; Elam joins the Kaldi
719–708 against Assyria
Assyria vs. Urartu; humiliation of Urartu
717 Shuturnakhundi of Elam
715 - Shabako, Ethiopian ruler of
Egypt; 25th dynasty
715–687 Hezekiah of Judah
ab. 710 Argistis II. of Urartu
709 Sargon king in Babylon: later
08 Shakkanak Bel
City of Dur Sharrukin built and made capital of
Assyria 705-681
Sennacherib : campaigns in (1) east, 702, (2) Mardukzakirshum
N.W.,697, (3) Babylonia,703,700,695-694,692 Mardukbaliddin
(Elam), 691, 690, (4) Phoenicia and Palestine,
701. Capital at Nineveh Belibni
701
Sidon favored by Assyria; Battle of Altaqu, Ashurnadinshum Kallushu of Elam
collapse of Palestinian rebellion 694–3 Nergalushezib
693 Mushezib Marduk Kudurnakhundi of Elam
691 Battle of Khalule Ummanmenanu of Elam
690 Destruction of Babylon
ab. 693-666 Taharqa of Egypt
689–681 Sennacherib king in Babylon;|Khummakhaldash I. and II.
Esarhaddon governor of
Babylon 7
of Elam
É


Esarhaddon: expansion of Assyria; campaigns
against northeastern coalition before 673,
against Arabia 675-674, against Egypt 674,
673, 670, 668
Kimmerians met in the N. W. and driven back
Rebellion of Sidon broken; city destroyed
Revolt and submission of Baal of Tyre
Lower Egypt becomes an Assyrian province
Division of Empire between sons of Esarhaddon
Ashurbanipal: campaigns in (1) Egypt, 668–666,
661, (2) Elam, (3) Babylonia, (4) Arabia and
the west, (5) north and N. W.
Important building operations; most brilliant
of Assyrian civilization
Ethiopians retire from Egypt: Assyrians capture
Thebes
Battle of Tulliz: Assyria defeats Elam
Gyges of Lydia sends gifts to Assyrian king
Elam devastated and kingdom destroyed
Rebellious chiefs and states in Arabia and
Palestine punished (Manasseh of Judah?)
Kimmerians defeated by Assyrians in Cilicia
Records of Ashurbanipal cease
681–668
680–678
678
ab. 676
673
670–669
669
668 April
668–626
668–648
661
660
652–648
648–626
ab. 645
after 645
ab. 640
Esarhaddon Shakkanak Bel
Rebuilding of Babylon
Shamashshumukin king of
Babylon
Rebellion of Shamashshumu-
kin and its repression
Ashurbanipal king of Baby-
lon under name of Kan-
dalanu
New migrations in the northern
mountains: Kimmerians
and Scythians appear
Urtaki of Elam
League of northern and
northeastern states shat-
tered by Assyrian war and
diplomacy
Tanutamon Ethiopian king in
Egypt
Teumman of Elam
Khumbanigash II. of Elam
Assyrian vassal
Tammaritu, Indabigash and
Khummakhaldash III. succes-
sively kings of Elam
Persians begin to take pos-
session of Elam
Practical independence of
Egypt under Psamtik I.
26th dynasty
§


A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. GENERAL HISTORIES OF ANTIQUITY
Abbreviations
DuPIA . . . . . . Duncker — The History of Antiquity (trans-
lated by Evelyn Abbott). 6 vols. Lon-
don, 1877–1882.
Mey GA . . . . . Meyer — Geschichte des Altertums. I. Ge-
schichte des Orients bis zur Begründung
des Perserreichs. Stuttgart, 1884.
MaDC ) . . . . Maspero — Histoire ancienne des peuples de
§ l'orient classique. Translated as three
MaFE separate volumes: I. The Dawn of Civili-
zation ; II. The Struggle of the Nations;
III. The Passing of the Empires. London,
SPCK, 1894–1900 (New York: Appleton).
McHPM . . . . . McCurdy – History, Prophecy, and the Mon-
uments; or, Israel and the Nations.
3 vols. New York, 1894–1901. (3d Ed.
revised of Vol. I. 1898, 2d Ed. of Vol.
II. 1897).
Rawl(; M . . . . . Rawlinson — The Five Great Monarchies of
the Ancient Eastern World. 3 vols.
New York, 2d Ed., 1871.
Len HA . . . . . Lenormant — Histoire ancienne de l'orient
jusqu'aux guerres médiques (continued
by Babelon). 6 vols. Paris, 1881–1888.
HeWG . . . . . Helmolt — Weltgeschichte. Band III. West-
asien (by Winckler). Leipzig, 1901.
Hommel — The Civilization of the East.
Temple Primer. (Trans. from the
author's Geschichte des alten Morgen-
landes. Stuttgart, 1895). London, n.d.
25


386 A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abbreviations
Belck — Beiträge zur alten Geographie und
Geschichte Worderasiens, I., II. Leipzig,
1901.
KrGAG . . . . . Krall — Grundriss der Altorientalischen Ge-
schichte. Erster Theil: Bis auf Kyros.
Wien, 1899.
WaleSG . . . . . Wachsmuth — Einleitung in das Studium
der Alten Geschichte. Leipzig, 1895.
Winckler — Die Völker Worderasiens. Leip-
zig, 1899.
II. BABYLONIO-ASSYRIAN HISTORY
TiBAG . . . . . Tiele – Babylonisch–Assyrische Geschichte.
Zwei Teile. Gotha, 1886–1888.
HoGBA . . . . . Hommel — Geschichte Babyloniens und As-
syriens. Berlin, 1885–1888.
WiGBA . . . . Winckler, Geschichte Babyloniens und As-
syriens. Leipzig, 1892.
MDelGBA . . . . Mürdter–Delitzsch — Geschichte Babyloniens
und Assyriens 2°Aufl. Calw und Stutt-
gart, 1891.
RoHBA . . . . . Rogers —- A History of Babylonia and As-
syria. 2 vols. New York, 1900.
HoHBD . . . . . Hastings' Bible Dictionary — Articles “As-
syria’’ and “Babylonia’’ by Hommel.
KiFBi . . . . . . Encyclopædia Biblica — Articles “Assyria”
and “Babylonia” by L. W. King.
MuBA . . . . . . Murison — Babylonia and Assyria: A
Sketch of their History. (Bible Class
Primers.) New York, 1901.
Winckler — Die politische Entwickelung
Babyloniens und Assyriens. Leipzig,
1900.
Radau – Early Babylonian History down
to the end of the fourth dynasty of Ur.
New York, 1900.
BiS . . . . . . . Billerbeck — Susa. Leipzig, 1893.


A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 387
III. TEXTS AND TRANSLATIONS
Abbreviations
Rawl . . . . . . Rawlinson — The Cuneiform Inscriptions of
Western Asia. 5 vols. London, 1861–1884.
SchkB . . . . . Schrader (editor) — Keilinschriftliche Bibli.
othek. Sammlung von assyrischen und
babylonischen Texten in Umschrift und
Uebersetzung. Bd. I. Historische Texte
des altassyrischen Reichs. Bd. II. His-
torische Texte des neuassyrischen Reichs.
Bd. III. 1-Hålfte, Historische Texte
altbabylonischer Herrscher; 2-Hålfte,
Historische Texte des neubabylonischen
Reichs. Bd. IV. Texte juristischen und
geschäftlichen Inhalts. Bd. V. Thonta-
feln von Tel-el-Amarna. (English Trans-
lation, New York, 1898). Bd. VI.
Assyrisch-Babylonische Mythen und
Epen. Leipzig, 1889–1901.
Layard — Inscriptions in the Cuneiform
Character. London, 1851.
Botta et Flandin, Monuments de Ninevé,
I., III, et IV. Paris, 1849.
RP” . . . . . . . Records of the Past — Being English Trans-
lations of the Assyrian and Egyptian
Monuments. I Series, 12 vols. London;
II Series, 6 vols. London, 1888–1892.
ABL . . . . . . . Assyrian and Babylonian Literature — Se-
lected Translations, with a Critical Intro-
duction by R. F. Harper (The World's
Great Books). New York, 1901.
HiOBI. . . . . . Hilprecht — Old Babylonian Inscriptions,
chiefly from Nippur. Philadelphia, 1893.
Editions of inscriptions of particular rulers
are given in the “References.”


388 A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
IV. GEOGRAPHY, TRAVEL, EXPLORATION, ETC.
Abbreviations
Rich – Narrative of a Journey to the Site
of Babylon in 1811. London, 1839.
Narrative of a Residence in Koordistan
and on the Site of Ancient Nineveh.
London, 1836.
Loftus — Travels and Researches in Chaldea
and Susiana. London, 1857.
Lay NR . . . . . Layard – Nineveh and its Remains. 2 vols.
New York, 1849.
Lay D . . . . . . Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh ani
Babylon. London, 1853.
Chesney — The Expedition for the Survey of
the Rivers Euphrates and Tigris. 2 vols.
London, 1850.
Rassam — Asshur and the Land of Nimrod.
New York, 1897.
Oppert — Expédition scientifique en Meso-
potamie. 2 vols. Paris, 1863–1867.
PeM. . . . . . . . Peters—Nippur; or, Explorations and Ad-
ventures on the Euphrates. 2 vols. New
York, 1897.
Sachau–Reise in Syrien und Mesopotamien.
Leipzig, 1883.
Am Euphrat und Tigris, 1897–1898.
Leipzig, 1900.
Sm AD . . . . . . G. Smith — Assyrian Discoveries: an Ac-
count of Explorations and Discoveries on
the site of Nineveh, during 1873 and
1874. New York, 1875.
Ka AuD . . . . . Kaulen — Assyrien und Babylonien nach
den neuesten Entdeckungen. 5te. Ausg.
Freiburg, 1899.
Schk0 . . . . . Schrader — Keilinschriften und Geschichts-
forschung. Giessen, 1878.
DelP. . . . . . . Delitzsch — Wo Lag das Paradies? Leipzig,
18S1.


390 A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abbreviations
Jeremias — (in Saussaye, Lehrbuch d. Re-
ligionsgeschichte, 2te Ausg. Bd. I. 163–
221)—“Die Babylonier und Assyrer.”
Freiburg, 1897.
Tiele — (in Geschichte der Religion im Alter-
tum, Bd. I. 127–216) — “Die Religion
in Babylonien und Assyrien.” Gotha,
1896.
Eerdmans — (in “Progress,” 3d ser. 6, 403–
415)—“Babylonian-Assyrian Religion.”
Chicago, 1897.
Jeremias — Hölle und Paradies bei den Baby-
loniern. Leipzig, 1900; English Trans-
lation, London, 1902.
VI. MANNERS AND CUSTOMS; ART AND
LITERATURE
SaBaA . . . . . . Sayce — Babylonians and Assyrians, Life
and Customs (The Semitic Series). New
York, 1899.
Babylonian Literature. London, n. d.
PeiSBG . . . . . . Peiser — “Skizze der babylonischen Gesell-
schaft,” in Mitteilungen der Worderasiat-
ischen Gesellschaft, I. 3, Berlin, 1896.
PCHACA . . . . Perrot and Chipiez — History of Ancient Art
in Chaldaea and Assyria. 2 vols. London.
BMG . . . . . . . A Guide to the Babylonian and Assyrian
Antiquities of the British Museum. Lon.
don, 1900.
Bezold — Kurzgefasster Ueberblick iiber die
Babylonisch-Assyrische Litteratur. Leip-
zig, 1886.
Ihering—The Evolution of the Aryan (trans.
from the German). New York, 1897.
Babelon — Manual of Oriental Antiquities.
New York, 1889.


A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 391
Abbreviations
Maspero — Life in ancient Egypt and
Assyria. London, 1892.
Speck — Handelsgeschichte des Alterthums
I. Leipzig, 1901.
VII. BABYLONIO-ASSYRIAN MONUMENTS
AND THE BIBLE
Price — The Monuments and the Old Testa-
ment. Chicago, 1900.
Driver — (in “Authority and Archaeology,”
edited by Hogarth) – “Hebrew Author-
ity.” pp. 1–152. New York, 1899.
Sayce — The Higher Criticism and the Ver-
dict of the Monuments. London, 1894.
Hommel—The Ancient Hebrew Tradition
as illustrated by the Monuments. Lon-
don, 1897.
Schrader — The Cuneiform Inscriptions and
the Old Testament. 2 vols.
KAT3 . . . . . . . Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testa-
ment. 3te Aufl. 1-Hålfte, bearb. von H.
Winckler. Berlin, 1902.
Cheyne — (in “The Hexateuch” by Carpen-
ter and Harford-Battersby, vol. I. pp.
164–171).
Wi. . . . . . . . . Winckler — (see above under Schrader).
Ball— Light from the East, or the Wit-
ness of the Monuments. London, 1899.
Vigouroux — La Bible et les découvertes
modernes. 6th ed. 4 vols. Paris, 1896.
VIII. COLLECTIONS OF ESSAYS, SERIES,
JOURNALS, ETC.
Wilj AG . . . . . Winckler — Untersuchungen zur Altoriental-
ischen Geschichte. Leipzig, 1889.
Alttestamentliche Untersuchungen. Leip-
zig, 1892. ,


392 A
SELECTED BIRLIOGRAPHY
Abbreviations
WiAOF . . . . .
MVAG . . . . .
EBi . . . . . . .
Winckler — Altorientalische Forschungen.
Erste Reihe, Heft 1–6; Zweite Reihe,
Bd. I., Bd. II. Heft l. Leipzig, 1893–
Delitzsch und Haupt — Beiträge zur Assyri-
ologie, Bd. I.-IV. Leipzig, 1890– .
Mittheilungen der Worderasiatischen Gesell-
schaft (yearly volumes in parts). Berlin,
1896–
Bezold (editor) — Zeitschrift für Keilschrift-
forschung. Leipzig, 1884–1885.
Zeitschrift für Assyriologie. Leipzig, 1886–
Encyclopædia Britannica.
Encyclopædia Biblica, edited by Cheyne.
A Dictionary of the Bible, edited by Hast-
ings.
The American Journal of Semitic Languages
and Literatures (continuing Hebraica).
IX. CHRONOLOGY
Lehmann — Zwei Hauptprobleme der altori-
entalischen Chronologie. Berlin, 1898.
Niebuhr — Die Chronologie der Geschichte
Israels, Aegyptens, Babyloniens u. Assyr-
iens. Leipzig, 1896.
Rost — Untersuchungen zur altoriental-
ischen Geschichte, MWAG, II. 2, 1897.
Winckler — Zur babylonisch - assyrischen
Chronologie. UAG. Leipzig, 1889.


R E E E R E N C E S
INTRODUCTION
I
TEIE LANDS OF THE EUPHRATES AND TIGRIS
The classical descriptions of Mesopotamia are those of Herodo-
tus, I. 193, Strabo, XVI. 1, and Pliny, N. H. XVIII. 17. The
most complete modern discussion still remains that of Rawlinson
in GM, I. 1–42 (“Chaldaea"), and 180–235 (“Assyria”), includ-
ing land, climate, and productions. Compare Ency Brit, arts.
“Babylonia,” “Mesopotamia; ” MaDC, 547-560; MaSN, 597–
602; RoHBA, I. 266–289; TiEAG, I. 50–58; HoGBA, 180–195;
KaAuE, ch. ii.; KiFBi, I. cols. 350, 420; HoHBD, I. 176,214.
The books of travel referred to in the Bibliography IV. may
also be profitably consulted. Excellent maps in HBD, I. 176;
EBi (art. “Assyria").
II
THE EXCAVATIONS IN BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA
The most exhaustive account of the exploration of the lands
of the Tigris and Euphrates, the excavation of the ruin-sites
and the decipherment of the monuments, is that in RoHBA,
I. 1-253. Less complete but accurate and more or less read-
able accounts are found in ABL, iii-xxxii (R. F. Harper); a
series of articles by the same scholar in the Old and New Testa-
ment Student, XIV. 1 and 2, and the Biblical World, I. 4 and
5; VIII. 1; HoGBA, 58–146; Ka Aub, chs. iii., v., vi.; De-
litzsch, “Assyrian Grammar,” 1–8. Compare also Lyon, “A
Half Century of Assyriology,” in Bib. World, VIII. 2.


396 REFERENCES
Great Cylinder Inscriptions (A and B) of Gudea,” I., and
English translations of these and other inscriptions of early
rulers are made by Amiaud in RP”, I. and II., “The Inscrip-
tions of Telloh.” The original publication of the Tello mate-
rial was made by De Sarzec-Heuzey, “Découvertes en Chaldée.”
Compare Evn L, ch. v.; HiRR, “Explorations in Babylonia,”
43 ff. Radau, “Early Babylonian History,” New York 1900,
collects and discusses thoroughly, though in a confused and
difficult fashion, all this early material, and is indispensable
for detailed study. On Gen. xiv. there are discussions in the
works mentioned under VII. “Babylonio-Assyrian Monuments
and the Bible" in the Bibliography. Compare King, “Letters
and Inscriptions of Hammurabi,” I. xlix f. and EBi, art.
“Chedorlaomer.” The chronological problems of this chapter,
revolving about the date of Sargon, have been recently attacked
by Lehmann, “Zwei Hauptprobleme d. altorient. Chronologie,”
1898. See Wi, “Die altmesopotamischen Reiche,” in UAG,
65–90, and “Die politische Entwickelung Altmesopotamiens,”
in AOF, I. i.
III AND IV
CIVILIZATION OF OLD BABYLONIA
Besides the works mentioned in Bibliography VI. “Manners
and Customs” and W. “Religion,” compare chapters on the
Babylonio-Assyrian civilization in DuBA, I. ii. chs. ii. and iii.;
MaDC, 535–546, 623–700, 703–784; TiEAG, II. 485 f. (sum-
marizes the whole subject under “Die babylonisch-assyrische
Kultur”); HoGBA, 375-406; McHPM, I. 27–76; WiGBA, 50–
56; RawlGM, I. 61 ff.; Len HA, V. livre vi. (summarizes the
whole as Tiele); MeyCA, I. 172–193; HeWG, 31–42, Simcox,
“Primitive Civilizations,” I. bk. ii. Texts of business docu-
ments with translations in SchkB, IV. and Meissner, “Beiträge
zum Altbabylonischen Privatrecht,” Leipzig 1893. On ancient
Babylonian science compare the standard work of Jensen,
“Die Kosmologie der Babylonier,” Strassburg 1890; HBD, art.
“Cosmogony ” and Ency Brit. under same head.
On art, besides the great work of Perrot and Chipiez (see


398 REFERENCES
Amarna), Winckler, “The Tel-el-Amarna Letters,” London
1896 (English trans. of entire collection). HiOBI, I. i. has a
valuable discussion of the Kassite kings. The “Synchronistic
History” is translated in ABL, 196ff., RP”, IV. 24ff. The
early texts of the “Babylonian Chronicle" are in RP”, V.
106 ff. For the other chronological documents, see “Refer-
ences” to Int. ch. IV.
The literature on the Tel-el-Amarna letters is large. Com-
pare EvNL, chs. vi.-viii.; Tiele, “Western Asia according to
the Most Recent Discoveries,” London; Ball, “Light from the
East,” 86 ff.; Sayce in RP”, II. —III., W. with translations. For
the early patesis of Assyria, see Johns, “A new Patesi of Ashur,”
in AJSL, XVIII. 3.
III
CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE IN THE KASSITE PERIOD
On the Kassite civilization and early Assyrian conditions, see
WiGBA, 101–110, 140–151, 163–168; MaSN,617–642; MeyCA,
I. 334–336; KiFBi, cols. 351 f., 363 f., 446 f.; HoHBD, 180 f.,
227. For the special interest of the Kassite kings in Nippur,
see HiOBI, I. i. 30 f., and PeM, index s. v. “Kossean.”
IV
THE TIMES OF TIGLATHPILESER I
MaSN, 642–670; TiBAG, 147–166; HoGBA, 514–537;
McHPM, I. 219–223; WiGBA, 171–176; KrCAG, 104–107;
MDelGBA, 150–156; RoHBA, II. 21–34. Texts and trans. are
found in SchRB, II. 14–49 and in Lotz, “Die Inschr. Tiglath
Pileser I.,” Leipzig 1880. Trans. in RP2, I. 86 f.; ABL, 11 ff.
On the dynasty of Pashe, see HiOBI, I. i. 38 f. The Neb. deed
of gift is trans. in ABL, 8ff. The relations of Assyr. and Bab.
are given in the Syn. Hist, col. ii. See Ency Brit. arts.
“Armenia” and “Kurdistan” for geography. See also Meiss-
ner, “Der elamitische Feldzug Tiglathpileser I.” in ZA, X, 101 f.
Map for period 1100–745 B. c. in HeWG, III. 55.


400 REFERENCES
PSBA, VII. 89-111. For the Babylonian Chronicle, see ABL,
200; RP”, I. 22 f. On the civilization of the time, see MeyGA,I.
420–424. On the western campaigns, see PaKHSP, 205–224.
On the kingdom of Urartu, see the inscriptions trans. by Sayce,
JRAS, new ser., XIV. 388 ff., RP” I. 163 f., IV. 114 f., and the
epoch-making discoveries and investigations of Belck and Leh-
mann, Zeitschr. f. Ethnol., 1892, 131 f.; Verhand. d. Ber. an-
throp. Gesellsch., 1892–1896; ZA, IX. 83 ff., XI. 197 ff., and
Streck, articles cited, ZA, XIV. 103 ff. (an excellent collection
of materials).
IV
THE ASSYRIAN REVIVAL. TIGLATHPILESER III. AND
SHALMANESER IV.
MaFE, 117–218; TiPAG, 217–238; HoGBA, 648–678
WiGBA, 221–235; McHPM, I. 323–338, 347–358, 372–395;
KrCAG, 141–146; RobiBA, II. 104–147; KAT", I. 49–63; arts.
Tp. III. and Shal. IV. in EBi and DB. Texts, etc.; Rost,
“Keilschrifttexte Tiglath Pileser III.” Leipzig 1893; ABL, 52–
58; RP2, W. 115 f.; KB, I. ii. 2–33; Sm/\D, ch. xiv. For the
north-Syrian campaigns, see the inscriptions from Samal in
MaOS, XI., Berlin 1893, and PaPHSP, 229–244; Jeremias,
“Tyrus,” Leipzig 1891, 27 ff.; Wi, “Das Syrische Land Jaudi,”
usw. in AOF, I. i.; Wi, Assyrien u. Tyrus seit Tp. III.,
AOF, II. i. 65–70.
V
THE ASSYRIAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT. SARGON II.
MaPE, 221–273; TibAG, 238–282; HoGBA, 678–741 (here
the house of Sargon is treated as a whole); WiGBA, 236-249;
McHPM, I. 395–401, II. 237–247, 266–271; KrCAG, 146–152;
RoHBA, II. 148–182; MeyGA, I. 460–463; KAT”, I. 63–75;
arts. “Sargon” in EBi and DB. Texts, etc. : Winckler, “Die
Keilschrifttexte Sargon's,” Leipzig 1889; Lyon, “Keilschrift-
texte Sargon's,” Leipzig 1883; KB, I. ii. 34–81; ABL, 59–64;
SmáD, ch. xv. For the Mardukbaliddin inscr., see ABL, 64-
68. On the civilization of the Sargonid age, see WiGBA, 293–


404 REFERENCES
Texts of business documents in SchRB, IV. 176 ff.; Kohler
u. Peiser, “Aus dem Babylonischen Rechtsleben,” Leipzig
1891; RP”, III. 124 f., IV. 96ff, W. 141 f. On Babylon, see a
popular sketch of recent discoveries by Jastrow, “The Palace
and Temple of Nebuchadnezzar,” Harper's Mag. Apr. 1902,
and the official reports in Mitteilungen d. Deu. Orient—Gesell-
schaft, 6ff.; also McGee, “Zur Topographie Babylons,” usw.
in BA, III. 520–560.
IV
THE FALL OF BABYLON.
MaFE, 567 f.; TiEAG, 459–484; HoGBA, 777-790; WiGBA,
315–319; McHPM, III. 393–414; Krg AG, 182–184; RoHBA,
II. 359-381; KAT”, I. 110–115. Texts, etc. : SchKB, III.,
ii. 80–139; ABL, 157–174; RP”, V. 144–176. See Hagen
“Keilschrifturkunden zur Gesch. d. k. Cyrus,” in BA, II. 1,
and the Bibliography under VII. “Bab. Assyr. Mon. and the
Bible.”


INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
REMARKs. – (1) The letter following the name indicates its
character, e.g.:
c = city; d, district; g, god or goddess; k, king;
m, mountain; n, noble; o, officer; p, people; q, queen; r, river.
(2) The pronunciation of Babylonio-Assyrian vowels and
consonants is as follows: a like a in father; e like e in they ; i
like e in thee; u like oo in too; G = ts; kh like an aspirate k;
q like k; g is hard as in get; j like y. Other consonants have
the corresponding English sounds.
cated by ', the secondary by '.
AB'-DI-MIL-KU'-T1, k, 294
A/-be-shu, k, 113
A'-bi-ba'-al, k, 294
A'-bil Sin, k, 108
A'-bi-ru’-mash, k, 125
A'-bu Hab'-ba, see “Sippar”
A/-bu Shah-rein', see “Eridu ’’
Ad’-ad-ap'-lu-id'-din, k, 172
Ad’-ad-na'-din-akh’-i, k, 141
Ad’-ad-ni-ra’-ri I., k, 137 f.;
memorials of, 153
Ad’-ad-ni-ra/-ri II., 185 f.
Ad’-ad-ni-ra-ri III., palace un-
earthed by Layard, 19; acces-
sion, 204; religion of his court,
210; relations with Babylon,
211 f.; western campaigns,
216 f.; eastern expeditions,
220; extent of his empire, 221
Ad’-ad-shum-ul-Qur, k, 141
A’-da-pa, hero, 31
Adoption, 80
Agriculture in Babylonia, 72
A'-gum-kak’-ri-me, k, inscription
The primary accent is indi-
of, 122, 124 f.; empire of,
126, 129; rebuilding of shrine
at Babylon, 149
A’-ga-de, c, 53
A-gu'-si, d, 228 f., see “Bit
Agusi”
A/-hab, k, 214
A/-haz, k, 232, 235, 268
A'-hi-mil/-ki, k, 294
Ah'-la-mi, p, 159
A'-i-bur-shab/-u, sacred street,
362
Ak-er-kufº, ruin-mound, 15
A-khar'-ri, d, 193, see “West-
land ”
'-khim-i-ti, k, 250
Akh-sher’-i, k, 313
A-khun'-i, k, 193, 213
Ak’-kad, d, 53, 324
Ak’-ko (Acre), c, 312
A'-la-si’-a, d. 133
A-lep'-po, c, 22
Al’-lat, g, 105
Alf-man, d, 125 f


408 INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
Babylon, explorations and exca-
vations on site of, 15, 20, 24;
late appearance in history of
Old Babylonia, 53, 107; first
dynasty of 66; the capital of
Khammurabi's empire, 115;
second dynasty, 121; third
dynasty, 121; later dynasties,
156, 178; destroyed by Sen-
nacherib, 276 f.; rebuilt by
Esarhaddon, 287; in rebellion
of Shamashshumukin, 307–
310; under the Kaldi, 360–
364; the pride of Nebucha-
drezzar II., 342–345; its con-
tributions to civilization,
364 f.; its fall, 374–376
Babylonia, geology and geog-
raphy, 3, 5; climate and
productions, 8–11; dominant
forces of its life in the early
period, 105 ; central situation
of, 49 f.; under Kassites, 148;
traditional policy of, 160; re-
lation to Egypt in Kassite
period, 133; its problem for
Assyria, 266; under the Kaldi,
$38, 342 f., 351 f.
Babylonian Chronicle, 212
Bactria, d, 148
Bagdad, c. 15, 112
Bag-dat’-ti, k, 252
Bah'-li, c, 216
Bal’-a-wat, c, 22
Ba'-likh, r, 4, 6, 191
Ba'-ra’-se, d, 60
Bar-eur’, k, 230
Bar-rek’-ub, k, 233 f.
Bar-ta/-tu-a, k, 292
Bav-i-an’, d. 27.9
Ba'-zi, d, 178
Ba'-zu, d, 295
Be-hist-un', inscription, 18, 25
Bel, god of Nippur, 53, 100, 115,
145; “taking the hands of,”
158; see “Marduk’”
Bel’-akh-i-er’-ba, o, 256
Bel-ib’-ni, k, 268, 272 f.
Bel’-ku-dur-ul-Qur, k, 142
Bel’-na-din-apº-lu, k, 156, 159
Bel’-ni-ra’-ri, k, 137
Bel pi-kha'-ti, 238
Bel'-shar-ul-Qur, k, 372
Belshazzar, k, 354, 372, 374–376
Bel’-shum-id’-din, k, 142
Benhadad II., k, 214 f.
Benhadad III. (Mari), 216
Benjamin of Tudela, 15
Berosus, 38, 323, 349
Beth na-ha-rin', 4
Birs Nimrud, c, 20, 22
Bit A-di’-ni, d, 191, 198, 213
Bit A-gu'-si, d, 214
Bit A-mu-ka/-ni, d, 236
Bit Da'-i-uk’-ki, d, 251
Bit Da-kurº-ri, d, 257 f., 288
Bit Ja’-kin, d, 236
Bitlis, r, 188
Bitumen, 11
Boc-chor’-is, k, 247, 249
Bok-en-renf', k, 247
Bor’-sip-pa, c, 53, 364
Botta, 18
Brick-making, 73
Brotherhood of nations, 147
Bu’-du-il, k, 294 -
Bur-na-bur’-y-ash I., k, 135 f.
Bur'-na-bur’-y-ash II., 136, 145
Bur Sin II., k, 65
Bu'-sa-los-sor’-us, o, 324
Byblos, c, 194
CA’-LAH, see “Kalkhi"
Cal'-neh, e, 53
º


INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
º
Canals, 72
Cañons of the Tigris and Eu-
phrates, 7 f.
Caspian sea, 221, 252
Cavalry in Assyrian army, 194
Caucasus, m, 162
Ched'-or-la/-o-mer, k, 69
China, 148
Chronicle of first Babylonian
dynasty, 108
Chronology, materials for, 39–43
Çid’-qa, k, 270
Çil Bel, k, 271, 294
Cilicia (see “Qui”), 182, 216,
294, 305, 313
Çi-mir'-ra, d, 248
Cities of Old Babylonia, 51–53;
of Assyria, 152
Classes of society in Old Baby-
lonia, 75
Clay, 28
Clothing in Old Babylonia, 78
Coat of arms, 84
Coinage, 71, 355
Colonies of Assyria, 196
Column in Old Babylonia, 99
Commerce in Old Babylonia, 74;
in New Babylonia, 353 f.
Contracts, 84
Correspondence, 33
Cosmogony of Old Babylonians,
92
Creation Epic, 31, 116
Croesus, k, 373
Ctesias, 38
Ctesiphon, c, 17
“Cuneiform Inscriptions
Western Asia,” 21
Cy-ax’-ar-es, k, 323, 333
Cyprus, 250, 255, 294 f.
Cyrus, 368 f., 371-376; cylinder
of, 375
of
409
DA’-GAN, g, 243
Day-in A'-shur, o, 206
Da'-i-uk/-ki, d, 252
Damascus, foundation of king-
dom, 83; relations with
Assyria, 213, 215, 229, 232–
234, 248
Dam-dam-u’-sa, c, 195
Dam-ku, g, 244
; by
David, 183
Decimal System, 93
Decipherment of Babylonio-
Assyrian language, 25 ff.
De’-i-o-ces, k, 323
Delitzsch, 26
Deluge, Babylonian story of,
21 f., 31, 90
Dem-a-vend', m, 228
Deportation, Assyrian policy of,
170, 239 f.
Der, c, 157
De Sarzec, 23
Descent of Ishtar, 31
Dib’-ba-ra, g, 31
Dilf-mun, island, 259
Diploma, ancient Babylonian,
86 f.
Diy-ar'-bekr, c, 164
Dun’-gi I., k, 64
Dunº-gi II., 65, 137
Dur Assur, c, 195
Dur'-at-ka/-ra, c, 257
Dur I’-lu, c, 246, 306
Dur Ku'-ri-gal’-zu, c, 138, 168,
227
Dur Na'-bu, c, 257
Dur Shar-ru’-kin, c, 18, 259–261
E’-A, g, 51, 100
Eclipse of June 15, 763 B.C.,
41, 207
E-din'-gir-a-na-gin, k, 59, 88


INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
Gath, c, 250
Gaza, c, 232, 248
Gedaliah, n, 341
Gerrha, c, 354
Gil’-ga-mesh Epic, 31, 68, 89,
91, 105
Gil'-zan, d, 188, 190, 219
Gif-mil Sin, k, 65
Gi-mir'-rai, p, 291, 293, 305
Gir’-ra, g, 31
Gish’-ban, c, 53, 59
God, idea of, in old Babylonian
religion, 102
Go/-zan, c, 206 f.
Grotefend, 25
Gu-baſ-ru, o, 374
Gu’-de-a, k, 63, 88; statues of,
95; pantheon of, 100
Gu'-la, g, 298
Gur'-gum, d, 229
Guº-ti, p. 55, 159
Gu’-ti-um, d, 69, 125 f.
Gu-za’-na, c, 206
Gyges, k, 305, 313, 320
HADRACH, c, 217
Halys, r, 333
Hamath, c, 183, 213, 216, 229 f.,
248, 367
Hanging Gardens, 22
Hanno, k, 232, 248 f.
Haran, c, 55, 58, 160, 243, 335,
368
Ha-ta/-ri-ka, c, 217
Haupt, 26
Hauran, d, 215
Hazael of Aribi, k, 295
Hazael of Damascus, k, 215
Ha/-zu, d, 295
Hebrew literature, influenced
by Babylonia, 91, 357; tradi-
tions, 131; kingdom, 182 f.
411
Hecataeus, 38
Hermon, m, 215
Herodotus, 38, 323, 356, 374
Hezekiah, k, 268, 270 f.
Hillah, 15
Hincks, E., 25 f.
Hiram I., k, 183
Hiram III., 367
Historical tradition, absence of
continuous, 37
Hit, c, 11, 342
Hittites, see “ Khatti”
Hol’-wan, pass, 74, 157, 186
Hophra, k, 341 f.
Hoshea, k, 233, 241
Hunting a kingly work, 82
I-A-KIN'-LU, k, 303, 305
I-a'-mut-bal, d, 67, 110
I-di'-bi-il, k, 234
I-ka-u’-su, k, 294
Il-li'-pi, d, 252, 265
“Illumination of Bel,” 84
I-lu-biº-di (Ja-u-bi-di), k, 248
Im’-gur Bel, c, 206, 208
Im-me'-rum, k, 108
In’-da-biº-gash, k, 310
India, 12, 74
Indo-European migrations in
Sargon's time, 253, 291; sup-
plant Semites in world-leader-
ship, 376
I'-ne Sin, k, 65
Interest, 77
International relations in Kas-
site period, 147 f.; politics in
15th century, 133 f.; in time
of Tiglathpileser III, 226 f.
I-nuh’-sa-mar, o, 110
Inundation of Tigris and Eu-
phrates, 7
I-ran’, 205


412
INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
I-ran’-zu, k, 251
Ir’-ba Ad’-ad, k, 178
Ir-khul-e'-ni, k, 214
Irrigation, 72
Isaiah, 232, 250, 268; second
Isaiah, 357
Ish'-me Da’-gan, k, 128
Ish'-pa-ka, k, 293
Ish-pu-i’-nis, k, 219
Ish'-tar, g, 37, 52, 100, 104,
133, 319
Ish-tu-ve’-gu, k, 368
Isin, city, 109; dynasty, 65
Israel, 213; see “Hebrew '' and
“West-land ”
Issus, 166
I-ta-ma’-ra, k, 249
I-to-ba'-al I., k, 269, 294
I-to-ba'-al II., 342
I-tu’-ha, p, 212
JA-U”-D1, d, 230
Jehoahaz, k, 215
Jehoiachin, k, 340, 350
Jehoiakim, k, 336, 339
Jehu, k, 215
Jeroboam II., k, 218
Jerusalem, c, 235, 341
Josiah, k, 322, 346
Judah, 230, 232; in Sargon's
time, 249 f.; under Senna-
cherib, 270 f.; under Nebu-
chadrezzar II., 339–342,346 f.;
see “West-land ”
Judaism, influenced by New
Babylonia, 359 f.
Judiciary under Khammurabi,
114
KA-QAL/-LU, c, 109
Kad-ash’-man Bel, k, 135, 147
Kad-ash'-man-bu’-ri-as, k, 141
Kad-ash'-man-khar'-be, k, 136
Kak’-zi, c, 196
Kal’-ah Sher-gat, c, 19
Kaldi, enter Babylonia, 181; re-
lations with Assyrian kings,
211, 236; lords of Babylonia,
334; civilization, 352 f.; see
“Mardukbaliddin”
Kalº-khi, 19, 128; capital of
Assyria, 140; under Assyrian
kings, 190 f., 201, 321
Kal-li’-ma Sin, k, 138
Kam-ma’-nu, d, 254
Kan-da-la/-nu, k, 310, 320
Ka'-ra-in/-dash, k, 135, 145
Ka'-ra-khar'-dash, k, 136
Ka-ral', k, 230
Kar Ashurnaçirpal, c, 193
Kar Esarhaddon, c, 294
Ka-rasſ-tu, o, 159
Kar-dun'-i-ash, d, 124, 145
Kar-kash’-shi, n, 292
Kar'-khem-ish, c, 193, 213, 229,
253 f.; spoil of, 199; tribute
of, 203; battle of, 335
Kar-zi-yabkº-khu, d, 157 f.
Ka'-shi-a/-ri, m, 162
Kash’-shu, see “Kassites”
Kash’-ta-rit, n, 292
Kasr, 360
Kasſ-si, 139
Kassites, native home, 123; ap-
pearance in Babylonia, 113,
124; conquest, 124; influence
on Babylonian life, 144; an-
tagonism of Assyria to, 132;
periods of their rule, 122 f.;
literature under, 145 f.; re-
ligious policy of, 145 f.
Kedarenes, p, 312
Ken’-gi, d, 59 -
Kha-bur', r, 4, 6 f., 191


INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
Khal'-di-a, d, 218
Khalf-dis, g, 218
Khal’-la-hi, c, 112
Khal-lu'-shu, k, 273–275
Khalº-man (Aleppo), 183, 213,
228
Kha-lu'-le, c, 276
Kham'-mu-ra'-bi, inscriptions of,
109; wars, 110; buildings
and canals, 111 f.; relation to
Assur, 128; organization of
his empire, 114; services to
religion and literature, 88,
115–117
Khaſ-ni, p, 125
Khaº-ti, p, 133
Khat'-ti, p, 139, 155, 165 f.
Khef-bar, r, 340
Khin-da/-nu, c, 216
Khor’-sa-bad, c, 18
Khub-ush’-ki-a, d,
219
Khum’-ba-ba, k, 68
Khum-baſ-ni-gash, k, 246, 306
Khum'-ma-khal'-dash I., k, 289 f.
Khum'-ma-khal'-dash II., 289 f.
Khum'-ma-khalf-dash III., 310 f.,
319 -
Khu-nu'-sa, c, 167
Khur'-ba-tiº-la, k, 137
Khus'-ur, r, 278 f.
Kimmerians, see “Gimirrai”
Ki'-ne-la-da’-nos, k, 320
King, in Old Babylonia, 81 f.,
105 f.; worshipped as god,
66, 82, 147 f.; significance of,
in Babylonia, 236 f., 307, 356
Kings' lists, 41 f.
Kir, c, 234
1(irº-bit, d, 304
Kirº-khi, p, 164, 187 f.
Kir-ru'-ri, p, 188, 206
188, 190,
413
Kir’-zan, d, 219
Kish, c, 53, 59, 109, 112, 267
Kou-yun'-jik, 18, 279
Ku'-dur-lag’-a-mar, k, 69
Ku'-dur-mab'-uk, k, 67
Ku'-dur-na-khun'-di, k, 67, 275
Kul-la/-ni, c, 230
Ku-lu'-nu, c, 53
Ku'-ri-gal’-zu I., k, 134 f.
Ku'-ri-gal’-zu II., 137 f., 145
Kur’-ti, p, 164
Ku’-tha, c, 23, 53
Ku’-ti, p, 139
LA/-BA-SHI MARDUK, k, 349
Labor, differentiation of, 73
La'-bo-so-ar'-chod, k, 349
Lachish, c, 271, 341
La’-gash, see “Shipurla"
Land-making at shore of gulf, 5
Land values under Khammu-
rabi, 114
Lar’-sam, c, 20, 52, 66, 67, 112
Law, literature of, 34; of family,
79; importance of, in Old
Babylonia, 83 f.
Layard, 14 f., 18 f.
Libnah, c, 271
Library, 90; of Assyrian kings,
209; of Ashurbanipal, 19, 21,
315 f.
Li'-mu, and limu lists in As-
syria, 40 f., 152, 186, 205 f.
Literature, relations of Baby-
lonian and Assyrian, 30;
under Khammurabi, 116;
under Kassites, 150; under
Sennacherib, 280; under Ash-
urbanipal, 315 f.; in New
Babylonia, 357; purpose of, in
Old Babylonia, 86; forms, 87;
religious element, 31; histor-
º
& Ž
A-
1203
* FFF 4


414
INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
ical element, 32; diplomatic
and legal, 33 f.; scientific, 34;
light, 35; general character-
istics, 35 f., 88 f.; value and
influence of, 90 f.
Loftus, 20
Lu-bar’-na, k, 193
Lub'-di, p, 313
Lu’-gal-zag"-gi-si, k, 60
Lu’-li, k, 268
Lull-lu-bi, p, 55, 139, 157, 159
Lu’-ti-pris, k, 218
Lydia, 305, 313, 320, 333, 373
MA’-DAI, 220 ; see “Media,”
etc.
Madyes, k, 323
Ma'-i-ga, c, 194
Ma'-i-ra/-tu, 73
Ma'-khal-la/-ta, c, 194
Ma'-mi-ti-ar'-shu, k, 290
Manasseh, k, 294, 303, 312
Man'-gu-a'-te, c, 216 f.
Man'-da, see “Media,” etc.
Man'-nai, p, 220, 251, 291 f., 313
Manufacturing in Old and New
Babylonia, 73 f., 353 f.
Mar, c, 52, 73
Ma-rash', c, 216
Mar’-duk, god of Babylon, 53,
100, 107, 115, 117, 125, 337,
348, 358, 375
Mar'-duk-bal-id’-din I., k, 17,
142, 149 f.
Mar'-duk-bal-id’-din II., of Bit
Jakin, first appearance of,
236; wars with Sargon, 246 f,
257–259; king in Babylon,
255–257, 267; wars with Sen-
nacherib, 267, 272; influence
in the west, 269; disappear-
ance of, 273 -
Marduk-bel-u-sa/-te, k, 210
Marduk-na-din-akh’-i, k,
168, 277
Marduk-na-din'-shum, k, 210
Marduk-sa-pik-zer’-im, k, 172
Marduk-za-kir’-shum, k, 269
Ma'-ri (Ben Hadad III), k, 216
Marriage in Babylonia, 79
Mar’-tu, see “West-land,” 113
Ma’-si-us, m, 162
Ma-tan-ba'-al, k, 294
Mathematics among the Baby-
lonians, 93
Ma'-ti-i’-lu, k, 228 f.
Maza'-mu-a, d, 206, 220
Medes, appearance, 220; under
Esarhaddon, 291; under As-
hurbanipal, 313, 321; tradi-
tions of, 323; Are they the
Manda? 333; relations to
Nabuna'id, 368
Media, 228
Median Wall, 343
Medicine, 93, 147
Megiddo, c, 322
Menahem, k, 231
Menander of Tyre, 240 f., 270,
367
Men'-u-as, k, 220
Mer-ba'-al, k, 367
Mercenaries in Assyria, 262 f.,
328
Merchants, 76
Mes/-i-lim, k, 59
Mesopotamia, geology and geog-
raphy of, 3 f.; climate and
productions, 8–10; fauna, 10
Metre in Babylonian poetry, 31
Michaux, 17
Migrations, 179 f.
Milº dish, d, 165
Mi’-lid, c,166,216, 220, 229, 254
156,


INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
Mi’-li-shi'-khu, k, 142, 149
Military, see “Army”
Mil’-ki-a-sha'-pa, k, 294
Mi-lukh'-kha, d, 250
Minean Kingdom, 180
Mi’-ta, k, 251, 253–255
Mi-tan’-ni, d, 133
Mi-tin'-na, k, 235
Mi-tin'-ti of Ashdod, k, 250,
270 f.
Mi-tin'-ti of Askalon, k, 294
Money, see “Coinage”
Mo-sulf, c, 15
Mu-bal'-li-tat-sir-u’-a, q, 136
Muç'-ri, p, (northern) 140, 166;
(southern) 233 f., 241, 248 f.,
270
Muç'-ur, d, 248
Muç-uſ-ri, 294
Mugheir, see “Ur”
Mu-kal’-lu, k, 305
Mu-ra'-shu, family, 355
Mu-she’-zib Marduk, k, 275 f.
Mush’-khi, p, 155, 251, 253–255
Mu'-tak-kil Nus'-ku, k, 156
Mut-ki’-nu, c, 169, 178
NABATEANs, 312
Nabonassar, see “Nabunagir,’
39
Na'-bu, g, 53, 100, 210, 321, 348,
358, 364
Na'-bu-a-pal-id’-din, k, 23, 181
Nabu-ba-lat-su-iq'-bi, n, 367
Nabu-bel-shu'-me, n, 310
Nabu-ku-dur'-ri-ul-Qur, k, 335
Nabu-na-gir, k, 212, 236
Nabu-na'-din-zi’-ri, k, 236
Nabu-na'-'id, k, memorials of,
23, 24, 322, 324, 335, 349 f.,
352; a Babylonian, 367; ac-
tivity in the west, 367 f.; re-
y
415
lation to Medes, 368; attitude
towards Cyrus, 368; his an-
tiquarian researches, 42, 369–
371; building, 371; policy,
371 f., 374; last year of his
reign, 374 f.
Nabu-pal-idº-din, k, 192, 210
Nabu-pal-u’-Qur, k, 322, 324,
325, 333–337
Nabu-shum-ish'-kun, k, 186
Nabu-shum-li’-sher, n, 337
Nabu-shum-uſ-kin, k, 236
Nabu-zerº-na-pish'-ti-li’-shir, n,
289
Na-gi-biº-na, c, 206
Na-di’-nu, k, 236
Nahr-el-kelb', r, 159, 297
Nah-ri’-na, d, 4
Nahum, 322, 325
Na'-id Marduk, n, 290
Na-i(-ri, p, 166, 169, 187 f., 231
Na-khi’-ru, sea monster; 169,
194
Na'-mar, d, 157
Nam’-ri, p. 228
Na’-na, of Uruk, g, 67
Na-qi'-a, q, 278, 290, 302
Na'-ram Sin, k, memorials of,
24, 61 ff, 78, 95; career of,
63; date of, 42, 61, 370 f.
Na'-zi-buſ-gas, k, 137
Na'-zi-mar-ut'-tash, k, 139
Neb-i-yun’.us, 18, 279
Nebuchadrezzar I., 156; ejects
the Elamites, 157; his deed
of gift, 157; his western cam-
paign, 158 f.
Nebuchadrezzar II., memorials,
17, 20; accession, 336 f.; cam-
paign against Necho II.,
335 f.; Median alliance, 324,
338; administration of, 338 f.;


418
INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
San’-ga-ra, k, 193
Sa'-pi-a, c, 236
Sar'-a-cus, k, 323 f.
Sar'-da-na-pa’-lus, k, 318, 323 f.
Sar-dur’-is I., k, 218
Sar-dur’.is II., 219
Sar-durr-is III., 229
Sar-durr-is IV., 313
Sargon I., of Agade, inscrip-
tions and career of, 61 ff.:
date of, 42, 370 ; services to
literature, 88
Sargon II., of Assyria, accession,
242 f.; political and religious
policy, 243–245; Babylonian
difficulties and triumphs, 245f.,
255–259; western expeditions,
248–250; in the north and
northwest, 250–255 ; his new
city and palace, 18, 259–261;
his administration and organ-
ization of the Empire, 261–
264; death, 264
Sayce, A. H., 26
Schrader, E., 26
Science in Old Babylonia, 34,
92
Scythians, 293, 323
Seal cylinders, 96, 355
Sem-ir'-a-mis, q, 212, 358
Semitic population of Babylonia,
54
Sen’-ke-reh, see “Larsam ”
Sen-nach’-er-ib, crown prince,
253; accession, 264; Baby-
lonian difficulties, 266–268,
272-277, 168; western cam-
paigns, 269-272, 265; naval
expedition, 273 f.; family
troubles, 277 f.; building op-
erations, 19, 278 f.; estimate
of his work, 280–283
Se’—we (So), k, 241
Sha'-ba-ko, k, 249
Sha'-bi, k, 241
Sha'-bi-toº-ku, k, 295
Shak’-kan-ak Bel, 262, 289
Shak’-nu, o, 196
Shal-man-e'-ser I., capital at
Kalkhi, 19, 140; campaigns,
139–141; temple-building, 153
Shalmaneser II., memorials, 19,
204, 208; tribute list, 205;
campaigns in Babylonia, 210 f.;
western expeditions, 213–
216 ; wars with Urartu, 219;
rebellion of his son, 206 ; his
public works, 207 f.; religion,
209; art of his time, 22, 208
Shalmaneser III., 204, 220
Shalmaneser IV., 237, 240–242
Shal-man'-u-a-shar'-i-du, 153
Sham’-ash, sun god, 52, 100,
292, 359, 370, 371
Sham'-ash-mu-dam’-miq, k, 186
Sham'-ash-shum-u’-kin, k, 298,
302, 307-310
Sham’-shi Ad’-ad I., k, 128
Sham’-shi Ad’-ad III., 172
Sham’-shi Ad’-ad IV., monolith,
19; campaigns in Babylonia,
211 ; wars with Urartu, 219
Sha-nitſ-ka, g, 244
Shar-ga'-ni-shar-a'-li, see “Sar-
gon I.”
Shar Kish-sha'-ti, o, 140
Shar'-ru-i'-lu, g, 244
Shar'-ru-lu-da/-ri, k, 304
Shar'-ru-u’-kin, k, 243
Shatt-el-Hai, canal, 52
Shesh’-onk I., k, 185
Shir-pur'-la, c, 23, 52, 59
Shu-baſ-ri, p, 165, 167, 324, 335
Shu-bar'-ti, p, 165


INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
Shu'-ka-mu’-na, g, 125
Shu-mash'-ti, p, 165
Shumer and Akkad, d, 58
Shu-par'-shak, o, 238, 245
Shup'-ri-a, c, 293
Shu'-tur-na-khun'-di, k, 256, 258
Shu'-zub, the Babylonian, 274
Shu'-zub, the Kaldean, 272, 275
Si'-bi, k, 249
Sidon, c, 194, 215; favored by
Sennacherib, 269, 274; re-
bellion and subjugation of,
293 f.
Si-ma’-nu, month, 73
Sin, moon god, 52, 100
Sinai, 74
Sin-id’-din-am, k, 66, 67
Sin-id’-din-am, o, 110
Sin-ga-mil’, k, 65
Sin-ga-shid', k, 65
Sin'-mu-bal/-lit, k, 108 f., 110
Sin'-shar-ish'-kun, k, 321 f.
Sin'-shum-li’-sir, k, 322
Sin-ukh/-tu, d, 253
Sipº-par, c, 23 f., 53, 112, 168,
374
Slavery and slaves, 75
Smith, George, 21 f.
So (Sewe), k, 248 f.
Solomon, 183
Sparta, 373
Spirit worship, 101
Saint Albert, Emmanuel de, 16
State, Early Babylonian, 80 f.
Sub-nat, r, 7
Su’-khi, p, 192
Sumerian problem, philological
side, 29 f.; historical side,
54; theoretic constructions of
early history, 61
Su’-mu-a/-bu, k, 108
Su-mu'-la-i-lu, k, 108 f.
419
Su’-ru, p, 191 f.
Surveying, 77
Su’-sa, c, 306, 311
Su’-ti, p, 136, 139, 181, 256
Su-zi’-gas, k, 137
“Synchronistic History,” 83,
126, 209
Syria, under Babylonian influ-
ence, 132, 154; under Egyp-
tian rule, 133; advance about
1000 B.C., 182–184; leading
states in time of Shalmaneser
II., 213; see “West-land”
TA-BAL’, d, 216, 229, 253 f.,
265, 305
Tablets of clay, 90
Tab'-u-a, q, 295
Ta-har'-qa, k, 295, 297, 303 f.
Talbot, Fox, 25 f.
Ta-li-mu, 337 f.
Tam'-ma-ri’-tu, k, 306, 310, 319
Tan'-da-ma’-ni, k, 304
Tanis, c, 183
Ta-nutſ-a-mon, k, 304
Tar'-qu, see “Taharqa’’
Tarsus, c, 216
Tar'-zi, c, 216
Tash-ri’-tu, month, 72
Tas'-shi-gu-ru'-mash, k, 125
Taurus, m, 6 f., 162
Taxation, 72, 83
Taylor, J. E., 20
Tef’-nakht, k, 247
Teſ-la, c, 196
Tel Ede, see “Mar”
Tel-el-A-mar'-na letters, 33, 134
Tel Ibrahim', see “Kutha’’
Tello', see “Shirpurla"
Teº-ma, c, 372
Temple, centre of ancient Baby-
lonian life, 80, 98, 223


INDEX OF NAMES AND SUBJECTS
with Tiglathpileser III.,
228 f., 231 f.; in Sargon's
time, 251 f.; in Esarhaddon's
time, 284 f., 291, 293; in time
of Ashurbanipal, 312, 321
Ur-aſ-si, o, 196
Ur Baſ-u, k, 63
Ur Gur, k, 64, 98
Ur-mi’-a, lake of, 219, 221
Ur Ni’-na, k, 59, 83, 94
Ursa III. (Rusas), 313
Ur-ta/-ki, k, 290, 306
Ur'-u-a-zagſ-ga, c, 121
Ur’-uk, c, excavations, 20; posi-
tion, 52; early history, 65,
67 f.; in later times, 275,
308 f., 322
Ur'-u-kag'-in-a, k, 72
Ur’-u-ki, c, 121
Ush-pi/-na, k, 219
U’-shu, wood, 194, 312
U-tar'-gu, k, 290
Uzziah, k, 230
VAN, lake of, 163; city of, 231
Vulture stele, 59, 83, 95
WAGES, 75
War'-ka, see “Uruk"
West-land, early conquests by
Babylonian kings, 60, 63, 66,
69, 113; in Kassite period,
154; entered by Nebuchad-
rezzar I., 158; by Tiglath-
pileser I., 169 f.; by Ashur-
naçirpal III., 193; under
Shalmaneser II., 213–216;
under his successors, 216 f.;
under Tiglathpileser III,
228 f., 232 f.; under Sargon,
421
245–250; under Sennacherib,
268-272; under Esarhaddon,
293–295; under Ashurbanipal,
308, 312; under Necho II.,
322; under Nebuchadrezzar
II., 338 f.; under Nabuna'id,
367
Wife in Old Babylonia, 80
“Wisdom,” Babylonian, 31
Women rulers, 66
Worship in Old Babylonia, 103 f.
Writing, origin, and character
of Babylonio-Assyrian, 26 f.;
material basis of, 27
YA-1'-LU, k, 295, 311
Yal’-man, m, 186
Year, agricultural, 72
Yem’-en, d, 74
ZAB, upper and lower, r, 7, 140
Za-bi'-bi, q, 231
Za'-bil ku-du'-ri, o, 196
Za'-bum, k, 108 f.
Zag-mu’-ku, festival, 361
Zagros, m, 4, 12
Za-maſ-ma, g, 112
Za-ma-ma-shum-id’-din, k, 142
Za'-mu-a, d, 189, 198
Zar'-i-lab, c, 112
Zar-pa’-nit, g, 125
Zechariah, 357
Zedekiah, k, 340 f.
Zi ki’-a, 101
Zi aſ-na 101
Zi-kir’-tu, d, 251 f.
Zig’-gu-rat, 98, 361
Zobah, d, 183
Zu. g. 31
x 8-2


422 INDEX OF OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCES
INDEX OF OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCES
Genesis xiv. 69, 110
I Samuel xxx. 8, 292
I Kings xxii. 5, 15, 292
II Kings xiv. 23–29, 218
xv. 19, 20, 231
xv. 26, 233
xvi. 5, 232
xvi. 9, 234
xvi. 10 f., 235
xvii. 3, 4, 241
xvii. 24–41, 317
xviii. 5, 217
xviii. and xix., 271
xix. 36 f., 278
xx. 1, 268
xx. 12 f., 269
xxiv. 1, 336
xxiv. 2, 340
xxiv. 3, 339
xxiv. 7, 339
II Kings xxv. 27 ff., 350
II Chronicles xxviii. 17, 18, 232
44 xxxiii. 11, 312
44 xxxvi. 6 f., 339
Ezra iv. 2, 300
“ iv. 10, 317
Isaiah vii. 1–4, 232
“ xx. 3, 250
“ xxxvi. and xxxvii., 271
Jeremiah xxvii, 3, 341
4% xxix. 3, 341
40 xxxiv. 7, 341
44 xlvi. 2, 335
“ xlix. 29, 340
“ li. 59, 341
Ezekiel xvii. 4, 5, 354
“ xxiii. 14 f., 356
“ xlvii. 16, 240
Nahum ii. 1, 325
Habakkuk i. 8, 9, 357