Skip to main content

Full text of "The Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania. Series A: Cuneiform texts"

See other formats


^^x^^ Insc^^ 

Chiefly from Nippur 



presentcJ) to 

tTbe Xibrarp 

of tbe 

"inniversit^ of Toronto 

The Department of Oriental 

Jy Of ■ uoo in tho » 
''rlr n t n l n rm lini L 








Part II, Plates 51-100 



fleprint from the Transactions of the Amer. Philos. Society, N. S., Vol. XVIII, No. 3 

MacCalla & Company Incorpobatj:d, Pkinters 
D. Anson Partridge, Printer and Lithoobapheu 







Plates 36-70 and XVI-XXX 


By H. V. HILPKECHT, Ph.D., D.D. 

Professor of Assyrian and Comparatite Semitic Philology and Curator of the Babylonian 
Museum in the University of Pennsylvania 




Provost of the University of Pennsylvania 


President of the Department of Archmology and Palmontology 


Chairman of the Babylonian Section of the Department of Archmology and Palaeontology 


Chairman of the Publication Committee and Treasurer of the Department of Avchaology 

and Paleontology 







Old Babylonian Inscriptions Chiefly from Nippur. 



The publication of the history of the American Expedition to Nnffar, announced 
in the Preface to the first part of the present work, has been delayed by unforeseen 
circumstances. In view of the increased interest ^ in these excavations, it seems now- 
necessary to summarize the principal results' and submit them to a wider circle of 

The expedition left America in the summei-, 1888, and has continued to the pres- 
ent day, with but short intervals required for the welfare and temporary rest of the 
members in the field and for replenishing the exhausted stores of the camp. The 
results obtained have been extraordinary, and, in the opinion of the undersigned editor, 
have fully repaid the great amount of time and unselfish devotion, the constant sacri- 
fice of health and comfort, and the large pecuniary outlay, which up to date has reached 
the sum of $70,000. Three periods can be distinguished in the history of the exca- 

' Gf. especially the official report on the results of the excavations sent by Hon. A. W. Terrell, the United States 
Minister in Constantinople, to his government in Washington, summer, 1894. 

'For details cf. the "Bibliography of the Expedition," in Part I, p. 45. To the list there given may be added 
Peters, " Some Eecent Results of the University of Pennsylvania Excavations at Nippur," in The American Journal 
of Archaeology X, pp. 13-46, 353-368 (with copious extracts from Mr. Playnes' veeekly reports to the Committee in 
Philadelphia) ; Hilprecht, "Aus Briefen an C. Bezold," in Zeitschrift fur Assy riologieYIlI, pp. 386-391 ; Assyriaca, 
Sections I, III-VI. A brief sketch of the history and chief results of the " American Excavations in Nuffar " will be 
found in Hilprecht, Recent Research in BOile Lands, pp. 45-63. 


First Campaign, 1888-18S9.— Staff: John P. Peters, Director; H. V. Hil- 
precht and R. F. Harper, Assyriologists ; J. H. Haynes, Business Manager, Commis- 
sary and Photographer ; P. H. Field, Architect ; D. Noorian, Interpreter ; Bedry 
Bey, Commissioner of the Ottoman Government.^ Excavations from February 6 to 
April 15, 1889, with a maximum force of 200 Arabs. Principal results : Trigonomet- 
rical survey of the ruins and their surroundings, examination of the whole field by 
trial trenches, systematic excavations chiefly at III, V, I and X.- Many clay coffins 
examined and photographed. Objects carried away : Over 2000 cuneiform tablets and 
fragments (among them three dated in the reign of King Ashuretililani of Assyria), 
a number of inscribed bricks, terra-cotta brick stamp of Naram-Sin, fragment of a 
barrel cylinder of Sargon of Assyria, inscribed stone tablet (PI. 6), several fragments 
of inscribed vases (among them two of King Lugalzaggisi of Erech), door-socket of 
Kurigalzu; c. 25 Hebrew bowls; a large number of stone and terra-cotta vases of 
various sizes and shapes ; terra-cotta images of gods and their ancient moulds ; reliefs, 
figurines and toys in terra-cotta ; weapons and utensils in stone and metal ; jewelry in 
gold, silver, copper, bronze and various precious stones ; a number of weights, seals 
and seal cylinders, etc. 

Second Camptaign, 1889-1890. — Staff: J. P. Peters, Director ; J. II. Haynes, 
Business Manager, Commissary and Photographer ; D. I^oorian, Interpreter and Su- 
perintendent of Workmen; and an Ottoman Commissioner. Excavations from January 
14 to May 3, 1890, with a maximum force of 400 Arabs. Principal results : Examina- 
tion of ruins by trial trenches and systematic excavations at III, V and X continued. 
Row of rooms on the S. E. side of the ziggurrat and shrine of Bur-Sin II excavated. Ob- 
jects carried away : About 8000 cuneiform tablets and fragments (most of them dated 
in the reigns of Cassite kings and of rulers of the second dynasty of Ur); a number of 
new inscribed bricks ; 3 brick stamps in terra-cotta and three door-sockets in diorite of 
Sargon I ; 1 brick stamp of Naram-Sin ; 61 inscribed vase fragments of Alusharshid ; 
2 vase fragments of Entemena of Shii-purla ; 1 inscribed unhewn marble block and 
several vase fragments of Lugalkigubnidudu ; a few vase fragments of Lugalzaggisi ; 
2 door-sockets in diorite of Bur-Sin II ; over 100 inscribed votive axes, knobs, intag- 
lios, etc., presented to the temple by Cassite kings ; c. 75 Hebrew and other inscribed 
bowls ; 1 enameled clay coffin and many other antiquities similar in character to those 
excavated during the first campaign but in greater number. 

• D. G. Prince, of New York, was the eighth member of the expedition, but during the march across the Syrian 
desert he fell so seriously sick that he had to be left behind at Bagdad, whence he returned to America. 

'These numbers refer to the corresponding sections of the ruins, as indicated on the plan published in Part I, 
PI. XV. 


Tllircl Campaign, 1893-1 89G.— Staff: J. H. Haynes, Director, etc.; and an Ot- 
toman Commissioner; Joseph A. Meyer, Architect and Dranghtsman, from Jnne to 
^^Tovember, ISDi. Excavations from April 11, 1893, to February 15, 1896 (with an in- 
terruption of two months, April 4 to June 4, 1894), with an average force of 50-60 
Arabs. Principal results: Systematic excavations at III, I, II, YI-X, and searching 
for the original bed and banks of the Shatt-en-N"il. Examination of the lowest strata 
of the temple, three sections excavated down to the water level ; critical determination 
of the different layers on the basis of uncovered pavements and platforms ; the later 
additions to the ziggurrat studied, photographed and, whenever necessary, removed ; 
the preserved portions of Ur-Gur's ziggurrat uncovered on all four sides ; systematic 
study of the ancient system of Babylonian drainage ; the two most ancient arches of 
Babylonia discovered ; structures built by I^aram-Sin and pre-Sargonic buildings and 
vases unearthed ; c. 400 tombs of various periods and forms excavated and their con- 
tents saved. Objects carried away: About 21,000 cuneiform tablets and fragments 
(among them contracts dated in the reign of Diingi and of Darius II and Artaxerxes 
Mnemon) ; many bricks of Sargon I and Naram-Sin; the first inscribed brick of 
Dungi in Nii)pur; 15 brick stamps of Sargon I, 1 of Naram-Sin; inscribed torso of a 
statue in diorite (| of life size, c. 3000 B.C.) and fragments of other statues of the 
same period; incised votive tablet of Ur-Eiilil; 3 unfinished marble blocks of Lugal- 
kigub-nidudu and over 500 vase fragments of pre-Sargonic kings and patesis ; c. 60 in- 
scribed vase fragments of Alusharshid, 1 of Sargon, 3 of Entemena; 1 door-socket 
and 1 votive tablet of Ur-Gur ; 1 votive tablet of Dungi ; a number of inscribed lapis 
lazuli discs of Cassite kings ; fragment of a barrel cylinder of the Assyrian period ; 
fragments of an Old Babylonian terra-cotta fountain in high relief; water cocks, drain 
tiles, a collection of representative bricka from all the buildings found in Nippur; c. 
50 clay coffins and burial urns, and many other antiquities of a character similar to 
those excavated daring the first two campaigns but in greater number and variety. 

With regard to the wealth of its results this Philadelphia expedition takes equal 
rank with the best sent out from England or France. The systematic and careful 
manner of laying bare the vast ruins of the temple of Bel and other buildings in 
Nuffar, with a view to a complete and connected conception of the whole, is equal to 
that of Layard and Victor Place in Assyria and something without parallel in previous 
expeditions to Babylonia. Only an exhaustive study and a systematic publication of 
selected cuneiform texts, which will finally embrace twelve volumes of two to three 
parts each, can disclose the manifold character of these documents — syllabaries, letters, 
chronological lists, historical fi-agments, astronomical and religious texts, building 
inscriptions, votive tablets, inventories, tax lists, plans of estates, contracts, etc. The 


results so far obtained have already proved their great importance in connection with 
ancient chronology, and the fact that nearly all the periods of Babylonian history are 
represented by inscriptions from the same ruins will enable us, ia these publications, 
to establish a sure foundation for palaiographic research. 

Each of the three expeditions which make up this gigantic scientific undertaking 
has contributed its own peculiar share to the total results obtained. The work of the 
first, while yielding many inscribed documents, was principally tentative and gave us 
a clear conception of the grandeur of the work to be done. The second continued in 
the line of research majjped out by the fii'st, deepened the trenches and gathered a 
richer harvest in tablets and other inscribed monuments. But the crowning success 
was reserved for the unselfish devotion and untiring efforts of Haynes, the ideal Baby- 
lonian explorer. Before he accomplished his memorable task, even such men as were 
entitled to an independent opinion, and who themselves had exhibited unusual cour- 
age and energy, had regarded it as practically impossible to excavate continuously 
in the lower regions of Mesopotamia. On the very same ruins of Nippur, situated 
in the neighborhood of extensive malarial marshes and "amongst the most wild 
and ignorant Arabs that can be found in this part of Asia," ^ where Layaid himself 
nearly sacrificed his life in excavating several weeks without success," Haynes has 
spent almost three years continuously, isolated fi-om all civilized men and most of the 
time without the comfort of a single companion. It was, indeed, no easy task for any 
European or American to dwell thirty-four months near these insect-breeding and \)es- 
tiferous Affej swamps, where the temperature in perfect shade rises to the enormous 
height of 120° Fahrenheit (= c. 39° Reaumur), where the stifling sand-storms from the 
desert rob the tent of its shadow and parch the human skin with the heat of a furnace, 
while the ever-present insects bite and sting and buzz through day and night, while 
choleia is lurking at the threshold of the camp and treacherous Arabs are planning rob- 
bery and murder — and yet during all these wearisome hours to fulfill the duties of three 
ordinary men. Truly a splendid victory, achieved at innumerable sacrifices and under 
a burden of labors enough for a giant, in the full significance of the woid, a moaumen- 
ium cere perennius. 

But I cannot refer to the work and success of the Babylonian Exploration Fund 
in Philadelphia without saying in sorrow a word of hira who laid down his life in 
the cause of this expedition. Mr. Joseph A. Meyer, a graduate student of the De- 
partment of Architecture in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in Boston, 

' Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, p. 565. 

' Layard, I. c, pp. 556-562. " On the whole, I am much inclined to question whether extensive excavations car- 
ried on at Niffer would produce any very important or interesting results " (p. 562). 


had traveled through India, Turkey and other Eastern countries to study the histoi-y 
of architecture to the best advantage. In May, 1894, he met Mr. Ilaynes in Bagdad 
and was soon full of enthusiasm and i-eady to accompany him to the ruins of Nuffar. 
By his excellent drawings of trenches, buildings and objects he has rendered most 
valuable service to this expedition. But in December of the same year his weakened 
frame fell a victim to the autumnal fevers on the border of the marshes, where even 
before this the Syrian physician of the second campaign and the present writer had 
absorbed the germs of malignant typhus. In the European cemetery of Bagdad, on 
the banks of the Tigris, he rests, having fallen a staunch fighter in the cause of 
science. Even if the sand-storms of the Babylonian plains should eiface his solitary 
grave, what matters it? His bones rest in classic soil, where the cradle of the race 
once stood, and the history of Assyriology will not omit his name from its pages. 

The Old Babylonian cuneiform texts submitted in the following pages have again 
been copied and prepared by my own hand, in accordance with the principle set forth 
in the Preface to Part I. The favorable reception which was accorded to the latter by 
all specialists of Europe and America has convinced me that the method adopted is 
the correct one. I take this opportunity to express my great regret that this second 
part of the first volume could not appear at the early date expected. The fact that 
two consecutive summers and falls were spent in Constantinople, completing the reor- 
ganization of the Babylonian Section of the Impei'ial Museum entrusted to me ; that 
during the same period three more volumes were in the course of preparation, of which 
one is in print now ; ^ that a large portion of the time left by ray duties as professor 
and curator was to be devoted to the interest of the work in the field ; that the first 
two inscriptions published on Pis. 36-42 required more than ordinary time and labor 
for their restoration from c. 125 e.Kceedingly small fragments ; and that, finally, for 
nearly four months I was deprived of the use of my overtaxed eye.«, will, I trust, in 
some degree explain the reasons for this unavoidable delay. In connection witht'ii^ 
statement I regard it my pleasant duty to express my sincere gratitude to George 
Friebis, M.D., my valued confrere in the American Philosophical Society, for his un- 
ceasing interest in the preparation of this volume, manifested by the great amount of 
time and care he devoted to the restoration of my eyesight. 

The publication cf this second part, like that of the first, was made possible by 
the liberality and support of the American Philosophical Society, in whose Transac- 
tions it appears. To this venerable body as a whole, and to the members of its Pub- 
lication Committee, and to Secretary Dr. George H. Horn, who facilitated the print- 

' Vol. IX, Tablets Dated in the Reigns of Darius Hand Artaxerxes Mnemon, prepared in connection willi my pupil, 
Rev. Dr. A. T. Clay, now instructor of Old Testament Theology in Chicago. 


ing of this work in the most cordial mannei', I return my heartiest thanks and my 
warm appreciation. 

No endeavor has been made to arrange Nos. 86-117 chronologically. Although 
on palaographic evidence certain periods will be readily recognized in these texts, the 
cuneiform material of the oldest phase of Babylonian history is still too scanty to allow 
of a safe and definite discrimination. In oi-der to present the monumental texts from 
Nippur as completely as possible, the fragment of a large boundary stone now in Ber- 
lin has found a place in these pages. For permitting its reproduction and for provid- 
ing me with an excellent cast of the original. Prof A. Erraan, Director of the Royal 
Museums, has my warmest thanks. I acknowledge likewise my obligations to Dr. 
Talcott Williams of Philadelphia and to Rev. Dr. W. Hayes Ward of New York for 
placing the fragment of a barrel cylinder of Marduk-shabik-zerim and the impression 
of a Babylonian seal cylinder respectively at my disposal. If the text of the latter had 
been published before, Prof. Sayce would not have di-awn his otherwise very natural 
inference (The Academy, Sept. 7, 1895, p. 189) that the Hyksos god Sutekh belongs 
to the language and people of the Cassites.' I do not need to offer an apology for in- 
cluding the large fragment of Naram-Sin's inscription (No. 120), the only cuneiform 
tablet found in Palestine (No. 147) and the first document of the time of Marduk- 
ahe-irba,- a member of the Pashe dynasty, in the present series. In view of the great 
importance which attaches to these monuments, a critical and trustworthy edition of 
their inscriptions had become a real necessity. 

The Httle legend. No. 131, the translation of which is given in the " Table of 
Contents," will prove of exceptional value to metrologists. At the same time I call 
the attention of Assyriologists to the interesting text published on PI. 63, which was 
restored from six fragments Ibund among the contents of as many different boxes of 

Nos. 124 and 126, which were copied during the time of the great earthquakes in 
Constantinople, 1894, belong to the collection designated by me as Coll. Rifat Bey. 
Together with several bundled other tablets they were presented to the Imperial Otto- 
man Museum by Rifat Bey, military physician of a garrison stationed in the neigh- 

' Prof. Sayce'a view rests on Mr. Pinclies's hasty transliteration made in connection witli a brief visit to America in 
1893 and published in Dr. Ward's Seal Cylinders and Other Oriental Seals (Handbook No. 13 of the Metropolitan 
Museum of Art in New York), No. 391, wliere the Cassite god Shugab (= Nergal, cf. Delilzsch, Kossaer, p. 25, 1. 12) 
was transliterated incorrectly by Shu-tah. I called Dr. Ward's attention to this apparent mistake and gave the correct 
reading in my Assyriaca, p. 93, note. 

' A boundary stone. The Inscription has suffered much from its long exposure to the rain and sun of Babylo- 
nia. The original, which the proprietor kindly permitted me to publish, is in Constantinople. The stone is so import- 
ant that it should be purchased by an American or European museum. My complete transliteration and translation of 
this text and of Nos. 151 and 153 will appear in one of the next numbers of Zcitschrifljur Assyriolagie. 


borhood of Tello, and were catalogued by the undersigned writer. His Excellency, 
Dr. Hanidy, Director General, and his accomplished brother, Dr. Ilalil, Director of 
the Archaeological Museum on the Bosphorus, who in many ways have efficiently pro- 
moted the work of the American Expedition, and who by theii- energetic and intelli- 
gent efforts have placed the rapidly growing Ottoman Museum on a new, scientific 
basis, deserve my heartiest thanks for permitting the publication of these texts, and 
for many other courtesies and personal services rendered during my repeated visits to 
the East. 

For determining the mineralogical character of the several stones, I am greatly 
indebted to my colleagues, Profs. Drs. E. Smith and A. P. Brown, of the University 
of Pennsylvania. 

The systematic excavations of the last decenniums have revolutionized the study 
of ancient history and philology, and they have opened to us long-forgotten centuries 
and millenniums of an eventful past. Hieroglyphics and cuneiform inscriptions were 
deciphered by human ingenuity, and finally the brilliant reasoning and stupendous 
assiduity of Jensen in Marburg have forced the '' Hittite " sphinx to surrender 
her long-guarded secret. He who has taken the pains to read and read again and 
analyze the results of Jensen's extraordinary work critically and sine ira et studio, 
must necessarily arrive at the conclusion as to the general correctness of his system. 
I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet, but I see the day not very far, when the 
world will wonder — just as we wonder now when we glance back upon the sterile years 
following G rot efend's great achievement — that at the close of the nineteenth century 
years could elapse before Jensen's discovery and well-founded structure created 
any deep interest and received that general attention which it deserves. The beautiful 
marble slab recently found near Malatia' has ofieied a welcome opportunity to test the 
validity of his theory. But the great desideratum seems to be more material than is 
at present at our disposal. Excavations in the mounds of Malatia would doubtless 
yield it. But what European government, what private citizens, will furnish the 
necessary funds ? May the noble example given by a few liberal gentlemen of Phila- 
delphia find a loud echo in other parts of the world, and may the work which they 
themselves have begun and carried on successfully and systematically for several 
years in Nippur, never lack that hearty support and enthusiasm which characterized 
its past history. The high-towering temple of BlI is worthy of all the time and labor 

'May 23, 1894, together with two other smaller fragments, and now safely deposited in the Imperial Ottoman Mu- 
seum. With Hamdy Bey's permission published in Ililprccht, Recent Research in Bible Lands, p. 160. Cf. also Ho- 
garth in Itecueil, XVII, p. 25 f. Tlie inscription cannot be older than 750-700 B.C. The artist took as his motive a 
hunting scene from the royal i)aliicts of Nineveh. A critical analysis of the well-preserved text will be given by Jen- 
sen in the next number of Rixucil. 


and money spent in its excavation. Though now in rnins, the vast vpalls of this most 
ancient sanctuary of Shumer and Akkad still testify to the lofty aspirations of a by- 
gone race, and even in their dreary desolation they seem to reecho the ancient hymn 
once chanted in their shadow : 

Shad-ii raVu UuBel Jmharsag O great mountain of Bel, Imkharsag, 
sha reshathu shamami shanna whose summit rivals the heavens, 

apiii ellim nhurshudu ushsJiwhu whose foundations are laid in the briglit abysmal sea, 
tna matati kima rimi ekdu rabm resting in the lands as a mighty steer, 

karn&ihu kima tharttr il"S/Mmaah shittananbitu wliose liorns are gleaming lilie the radiant sun, 
kima kakkab shame nabu malu sihuti. as the stars of heaven are filled with lustre. 

(IV n. 27, No. 2, 15-24.) 


Fkbrcary 15, 1896. 



Tlie vast ruins of the temple of Bel are situated on the E. side of the now empty 
bed of the Shatt-en-Nil, which divided the ancient city of Nipjxir into two distinct 
parts,^ At various times the space occupied by each of the two quarters differed in 
size considerably from the other. Only during the last centuries before the Christian 
era, when the temple for the last time had been restored and enlarged on a truly grand 
scale by a king whose name is still shrouded in mystery,- both sides had nearly the 
same extent. This became evident from an examination of the trial trenches cut in 
different parts of the present ruins and from a study of the literary documents and 
other antiquities obtained from their various strata. As long, however, as the temple 
of Bel existed, the E. quarter of the city played the more important role in the history 
of Nippur. 

Out of the midst of collapsed walls and buried houses, which originally encompassed 
the sanctuary of Bel on all four sides and formed an integral part of the large temple en- 
dosuie, there rises a conical mound to the height of 29 m.' above the plain and 15 m. above 
the mass of the surrounding diibris. It is called to-day Bint-el-Am\r ("daughter of 
the prince ")* by the Arabs of the neighborhood and covers the ruins of the ancient 
ziggurratu or stage tower of Nippur, named Imgarsag^ or SagasW^ in the cuneiform 

'Layard {Nineneh and Babylon, p. 551) and Loftus {Travels and Researches, p. 101) stated this fact clearly. Not- 
■witbstandiDg their accurate description, on most of our modern maps the site of the city is given inaccurately by 
being confined to the E. side of the canal. 

' He cannot have lived earlier than c. 500 B C, and probably later. 

'Loftus's estimate of seventy feet (J. c, p. 101) is too low. 

*Layard, I. c, p. 557. Cf. Loftus, I. c, pp. 102f. 

'"Mountain of heaven," pronounced \nler Imursag. Cf. Jensen in SchTa,ieT' a Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek III, 
Part 1, p. 22, note 5, and Horamel, Svmerisehe Lesetiucke, p. 26, No. 306. 

" " High towering " (on the ending sfi cf. Hommel, I. c, p. 141, 3a). Cf. II E. 50, 5-6 a, b. A third name existed 
but is broken away on this tablet (4 a). For Iinyarsag cf. also IV R. 27, No. 2, 15 and 17. 


inscriptions (ef. Pis. XXIX and XXX). A number of Babylonian kings ^ applied 
themselves to (he care of this temple by building new shrines, restoring old walls and 
repairing the numerous drains and pavements of the large complex, known under the 
nameofjEXv<r ("mountain house"].- But the three great monarchs who within the 
last three millenniums before Christ, above all others,' devoted their time and energy 
to a systematic restoration and enlargement of the ziggurrat and its surroundings, and 
who accordingly have left considerable traces of their activity in Nutfar,^ are Ashur- 
banapal (G68-626 B.C.),' Kadashman-Turgu (c. 1250 B.C.)" and Ur-Gur (c. 2800 
B.C.)." The structures of each of these builders have been, one after the other, 
cleared, measured, photographed and examined in all their details by Mr. Haynes, the 
intrepid and successful director of the American expedition during the last four years. 
He is soon expected to communicate the complete results of his work, iUustrated by 
numerous drawings and engravings, in Series B of the present publication. There- 
fore, referring all Assyriologists to this proposed exhaustive treatise on the history of 
the excavations, I confine myself to a brief examination of the lowest strata of ancient 
Ekur, which will enable us to gain a clearer conception of the earliest phase of Baby- 
lonian history. "Whenever it seems essential, Haynes's own words will be quoted from 
his excellent weekly reports to the Committee in Philadelphia. 


At the time of King Ur-Gur the ziggurrat of Xippur stood on the X.-W. edge 
of an immense platform, which formed the pavement of the entire temple enclosure. 
It was laid about 2.5 m. above the present level of the plain and had an average thick- 
ness of 2.40 m. In size,** color and texture the sun-dried and uninscribed bricks of 

' Among them Dungri (PI- 53, No. 133, cf. his brick legend in Part III of the present work), Ur-Ninib (PI. 18, 
No. 10, and PI. XXIII, No. 65), Bur-Sin I (PI. 11, No. 19), Lshme-Dagan (PI. 9, No. 17, cf. his brick legend 
in Part III), Bur-Sill II (Pis. 13f , Nos. 30-33), Kurigalzu (PI. 20, No. 38), Raniinan-sliumusur (PI. 28, 
No. 81). Esarliaddon (cf. Vol. X of the present work and Hilprecht in Z. A., VIII, pp. 390f.). As to the 
earliest builders cf. below. 

2 Cf PI. 1, No. 1, 8 ; PI. 2, No. 2, 10 ; Pi. 20, No. 38, 7 ; PI. 28, No. 81, 8 ; PI. 39, No. 82, 8 ; PI. 51, No. 121, 8 ; 
also Jensen, Koamologie, pp. 185fF. 

' With the exception of the unknown builder above referred to, who enlarged the base of the early ziggurrat con- 
siderably and changed its form entirely by adding a peculiar cruciform structure (each arm being 16.48 m. long by 
6.16 m. wide) to the centre of its four sides. Each side appeared to liave a gigantic wing. 

'Cf. Part I, p. 5, note, and Noldeke in Hilprecht, Assyriaca, p. 86, note 1. 

^Cf PI. 29, No. 83, and Hilprecht in Z. A., VIII, pp. 389ff. 

• Cf. PI. 24, No. 8. 8. His brick legend will be published in Part III. 

'Cf I li. 1, No. 8f , and Pis. 51f of the present work. 

"23 X 15 4 X 7.7 cm., practically the same size as UrGur's bricks found in the Buwariyya of Warka. Cf Loftus, 
I. c, p. 168. 


this pavement are identical with the mass of crude bricks forming the body of the 
ziggiirrat, while in size and general appearance they closely resemble the burned bricks 
which bear the name of Ur-Gur. The natural inference would be that Ur-Gur him- 
self erected this large terrace to serve as a solid foundation for his lofty temple. Yet so 
long as the inside of the massive ruins has not been thoroughly explored, there remains 
a slight possibility that the body of the ziggurrat and the pavement existed before 
Ur-Gur, and that this king only repaired and restored an older building, using in the 
manufacture of his bricks the mould of his predecessor. On the basis of the present 
almost convincing evidence, however, I favor the former view and, with Haynes, doubt 
very much whether before Ur-Gur's time a ziggurrat existed iu ancient N'ippur.^ 

The base of Ur-Gur's ziggun-at formed a riglit-angled parallelogram nearly 59 m. 
long and 39 m. wide.- Its two longest sides faced l^'.-W. and S.-E. respectively,'^ and 
the four corners ])ointed approximately to the four cardinal points.* Three of the 
stages have been traced and exposed (cf PI. XXX). It is scarcely possible that 
formerly other stages existed above.' The lowest story was c. 6J m. high, while the 
second (leceding a little over 4 m. from the edge of the former) and the third are so 

'The ancient name of the temple, Ekar, in use even at Sargon's time, proves nothing agaiast this theory. On the 
basis of Taylor's, Loftus's and his own excavations, Haynes inclines to the view tliat Ur-Gur was the first builder of 
ziggurrats in Babylonia. As these two English excavators however did not examine the strata below Ur-Gur's ter- 
races, it will be wiser to suspend our judgment for the present, although the absence of a ziggurrat in Tello favors 
Haynes's view. 

'In size practically identical with Ur-Gur's structure in Muqayyar (ratio of 3 : '2). Cf Loftus, I. c, p. 129. 

' The longest sides of the ziggurrat in Ur faced N. E. and S. W. respectively. Cf. Loftus, I. c, p. 123. 

*"The N. corner is 123 e. of N." (Peters in The American Journal of Archaeology, X, p. 18). The Babylonian 
orientation was influenced by the course of the Euphrates and Tigris, as the Egyptian by the trend of the Nile valley 
(Hagen in Beitrage zur Assyfiologiell, p. 246, note). The Assyrian word for "North," Uh{litan,u, means "No. 
I." From this fact, in connection with the observation tlut in the B,ibyl)nian ontract literature, etc., in most cases 
the upper smaller side (or front) of a field faces N., it foil )ws that the Babylonians luoked towards N. in determining 
the four cardinal points, and accordingly could not very well designate " West" by a word which means originally 
"back side " (Delitzscli, Assyrischei Ilindoiirterbuch, p. 4tf , and Schrader in SUzuagsberichte der Kiinijl. Preussisch. 
Ahidemie der WCssenschaften, 1894, p. 1301) like the Hebrews, who faced E. Besides, it is grammatically scarcely 
correct to derive ^'^1K, a Babylonian loanword in the Talmud, from a supposed Babylonian ah'i(u)rra instead of 
avurru [for this very reason I read the bird mentioned in II li. 37, 13 e. f., not a-\i?t,r-sh'i-nu (Delitzscli, I. c, p. 45) but 
a-niur»Au nu^Wa'llS (cf. Halevy in Reoue SimUiq'ie III, p. 91)]. Consequently the only possible reading is a,m(^v)urru, 
" West," as proposed by Delattre, in view of ^i^tAviu ri and <UuA-mnur-ra in tlie Tell el-Aniarna tablets (cf. also a 
Babylonian (sic !) village or town A-mu-ur-rii^i in Meissnet, Beitrage zun Altbabylonischen Prhatrecht, No. 43, 1 and 
21). Indipendently a similar result was reached l)y Hommel in Zeittchrift der Beatschen ilorgenl'andischen OeselUehaft 
XLIX, p. 524, note 3. 

*No trace of a fourth story could be discovered, and the accumulation oi debris on the tDp of Biat-el-Aniii' is not 
large enough to warrant the assumption of more than three stages. In Ur Loftus discovered but two distinct stages 
{I. c, p. 128). 


utterly ruined that the original dimensions can no more be given.^ The whole ziggur- 
rat appears like an immense altar, in shape and construction resemhling a smaller one 
discovered in a building to the S.-W. of the temple. 

As stated above, the body (and faces) of the zigguriat consist of small, crude 
bricks,'- with the exception of the S.-E. side of the lowest stage, which had an exter- 
nal facing of burned bricks of the same size.^ To preserve snch a stiucture for any 
length of time it was necessary to provide it with ample and substantial drainage. 
Thanks to the untiring efforts of Ilayncs, who for the first time examined the ancient 
Babylonian system of canalis^ation ci-itically, we learn that the ziggui-rat of Nippur 
had water conduits of baked brick^ in the centre of each of the three unprotected 
sides. They were found in the lower stage and possibly existed also in the upper' 
ruined portions. On all four sides around the base of the walls was a plaster of bitu- 
men,'' 2.75 cm. wide and gradually sloping outward from the ziggurrat towards a 
gutter, which carried the water away (cf PI. XXIX, No. 74).' By this very simple 
arrangement the falling rain was conducted to a safe distance and the unbaked brick 
foundations were thoroughly protected. 

Unlike the ziggurrat of Sin in Ur, which had its entrance on the N.-E. side,** the 
ascent to thediffeient stages in Nippur was at the S.-E. Two walls of burned bricks,* 
3.40 m. high, 16.'62 m. long and 7 m. distant fi om each other, ran nearly parallel,'" at 

' The surface of these stages " was covered with a very tenacious plaster of clay mixed with cut straw," in order 
to protect them against storm and rain. "In places this plaster is still perfect, while in other places several coatings 
are visible, plainly showing that from time to time the faces of the ziggurrat were replastercd" (Flaynes, Report of 
Sept. 1, 1894). 

'Cf. above, p. 16, note 8, "Traces of decayed straw were discovered in these bricks " (Haynes, Report of Feb. 
9, 1895). 

'In Ur the exterior of the whole lower story was faced by Ur-Gur with baked bricks (Loftus, I. c, pp. 129f.), 
while in Watka "unlike other Babylonian structures" the lower stage of the Buwaiiyya "is without any external 
facing of kiln-baked brickwork " (Loftus, I. c, p. 107). 

* Each c. 1 m. wide by 3.25 deep. To judge from the height of the " buttresses " in Waika, the true meaning of 
which Loftus failed to recognize, the lowest stage of the Buwariyya had the same height as that of the ziggurrat of 
Nippur. Cf. Loftus, I. c, p. 169. 

5 Cf. Loftus. I. c, p. 129. 

'This plaster rested upon "a level pavement of two courses of bricks also laid in bitumen, and was 28 cm. thick 
where it flunked the walls, and 7.7 cm. at its outer edge " (Ilaynes, Report of Feb. 10, 1894). 

'The projecting casing wall at the base (1.38 m. high) consists of sixteen courses of (stamped) bricks and was 
built by Kadashman-Turgu around the tliree unprotected sides of the ziggurrat. In the middle distance of the picture 
is seen a section of the latest crude brick superstructure (cf. above, p. 16 and note 3) with a tunnel tracing the face of 
the lowest stage of Ur-Qur's and Kadashman-Turgu's ziggurrat. 

« Loft us, I. c, p. 129. 

"Many of which were stamped with Ur-Gur's well-known legend 1 R. 1, No. 9. 

'"Where they joined the wall of the ziggurrat the distance between them (7 m.) was 1 65 m. greater than at Iheir 
outer end. 


right angles from the face of the ziggurrat, into the larg^ open court, which extended 
to the great fortification of the temple. This causeway ^ was filled up with crude 
bricks of the same size and mould and formed a kind of elevated platform, from which 
apparently steps, no longer in existence, led up to thj top of the ziggui-rat and down 
into the open court in fi-ont of it. 

The whole temple enclosure was surrounded by a large inner and outer wall built 
of sun-dried bricks. To the ;N".-W. of Ekur "30 courses of these bricks are still 
plainly visible "- They compose the ridge of the outer wall and, like the pavement' 
of Ur-Gur's ziggurrat, rest on an older foundation. The complete excavation of the 
inner wall will be undertaken in connection with the systematic examination and 
removal of the ruins around the zio:srurrat. 


Immediately below "the crude brick platform of Ur-Gur," under the E. corner 
of the ziggurrat, was another pavement consisting of two courses of burned bricks of 
uniform size and mould.' Each brick measures c. 50 cm. in square and is 8 cm, thick. 
This enormous size is quite unique. among the more than twenty-five different forms of 
bricks used in ancient Nippur, and enables us to determine the approximate date of 
other structures built of similar material in other parts of the city. Fortunately 
most bricks of this pavement are stamped. A number of them contain the well- 
known inscription of Shargani-shar-ali, while the rest bears the briefer legend of 
Naram-Sin (Part I, Pis. 3 and II). This fact is significant. As both kings used 
the same peculiar bricks, which were never employed again in the buildings of Nip- 
pur, and as they are found near together and intermingled in both courses of the same 
pavement, the two men must necessarily be closely associated with each other. This 
ancient brick pavement becomes therefore a new and important link in the chain of my 
arguments in favor of the identity of Shargani-shar-ali ' with Sai-gon I, father of 

' BoUj tlie walls of the causeway and Uiose of the ziggurrat were battered, the hatter of the former (1 :8) heiag 
exactly half the hatter of the latter (1 :4), according to Ilaynes's Report of Feb. 9, 1895. Cf. Loftus, I. c, p. 138. 

'Ilaynes, Keport of Sept. 8, 1894. 

'Niebuhr's very recent remarks on the historicity of Sargon I and Naram-Sin iChronologie der Oeschiehte Israels, 
^ijyptens, Bahyloniens und Assyriera, Leipzig, 1896, p. 75) should never have been made after the publication of their 
inscriptions in the first part of tlie present work. His iusinuations against the priests of Nippur read like a carnival 
joke, in the light of the facts presented in the following sketch. 

*0ppert'8 proposed reading of this name as Binganisar-iris {Revue d' Assyriologie III, pp. 25f.) is impossible and 
was declined in Assyrinca, p. 30, note 1. The original picture of the sign Shar in our name is not " I'hifiroglyphe de 
I'arbieen feui'.les" (Oppert, I. c), but an enclosed piece of land covered with plants, in other words a plantation, 
garden, orchard (kirxi). Cf. Bertin, Origin and Development of the Cuneiform Syllabary, p. 7. 


l^arara-Sin^ (Part I, pp. 16-19). It was apparently laid by Sargon and relaid by his 
&on, Naram-Sin, who utilized part of his father's bricks, and it must therefore be rec- 
ognized as the true level of the Sargon dynasty in the lower strata of the temple at 
Nuffar. K"© bricks of either of the two kings have been found below it, nor in fact 
any other inscribed objects that can be referred to them.^ But another, even more 
powerful witness of Naram-Sin's activity in Nippur ' has arisen from some ruins in 
the neighborhood of Ekur. 

On the plan of Nuffar published in Part I, PI. XV, a ridge of low insignificant- 
looking mounds to the N.-W. of the temple' is marked YII. They represent a portion 
of li^imit-MarduTc, the outer wall of the city.^ Its upper part, as stated above, was 
constmcted by Ur-Gur. During the summer of 1895 Mr, Ilaynes excavated the 
lower part of this rampart. He selected a piece of 10 m. in length and soon after- 
wai'ds rejjorted the following surprising results. The foundation of the wall was placed 
on solid clay c. f m. below the water level or c. 5 m. below the plain of the desert. It 
was " built of worked clay mixed with cut straw and laid up en masse with roughly 
sloping or battered sides " to a total height of c. 5.5 m. Upon the top of this large 
base, which is c. 13.75 m. wide, a wall of the same enormous width, made of sun-dried 

'More recently {Altorientaliiche Forschungen 111, p. 238) Winckler refers to Shargani sharali as the possible his- 
torical basis of "the mythical Sargon of Agade." I trust the day is not very far when he will regard Sargon as histori- 
cal and identical with Shargani-sbar-ali, as I do. 

'The brick stamp of Sargon, mentioned below, p. 29, as having been unearthed underneath the wall of Ur-Gur's 
archive, indicates that this underground archive or cellar existed at Sargoa's time at that very spot and was rebuilt 
by Ur-Gur. 

•Inscribed burned bricksof Naram-Sin were also found in mound X, on the W. bank of the Shatt, en-Nil at a very 
low level. All the stamped bricks of Naram-Sin "show evident traces of red coloring on their under or inscribed 
face" (Haynes, Report of Nov. 24, 1894). 

* Originally these mounds continued a little farther N. W. than they can be traced on the map, until suddenly 
tliey turned to the W., reaching the Shatt en-Nil apparently not far from II. A large open space, " 414 m. long by 
276 m. wide and covering more than 2(5 acres of ground," was enclosed by this wall, by the mounds called Vlli and 
by tho temple complex (III). As far as the present evidence goes, this court was never occupied by any brick build- 
ings. Its real purpose can therefore only be surmised. According to Haynes (Report of August 3, 189)) it served as 
a caravanserai for the accommodation and safety of pilgrims and their animals. Such a view is possible, but it seems 
to me more probable to regard this enclosed place as a court where the numerous c.ittle, sheep, etc., received by the 
temple administration as regular income and for special sacrifices, were kept and sheltered. Perhaps it served both 
purposes. Besides in the time of war the inhabitants of Nippur readily found a sife refuge behind its walls. On the 
N. E. side of this court, "at the foot of the enclosing wall, a bubbling spring was discovered. On either side of the 
spring are still seen the brick platforms and curbs where the water pots resteJ." From the siza of the bricks, which 
"appear to be the half bricks of NaramSin," the spring existed at the time of this great builder. " After the court 
had become filled to a depth of about 1 m , a diagonal wall of burned bricks, 5 J m. loag, six courses high, placed on 
a raised base of clay, was built before the spring to divert the course of drifiing sand and debris from the court." 

'Cf. II J{. 50, 29 a, b. The inner fortification (duru) was called Imgur-Marduk {ibidem, 23 a, b). Of. Delilzsch, 
Vio lag das Paradiesf p. 221. Both names seem to be of comparatively late date and cannot be applied to Naiam Sin's 
fortifications. According to II R. .50, 30f, a, b, two other names existed for the outer wall {shaVsu). 


bricks, was raised to an unknown height.^ We may well ask in amazement, Who was 
the builder of this gigantic wall, constructed, as it seems, ana um sate ? Nobody else 
than the great liTaram-Sin, whom Niebuhr of Berlin finds hard to regard as a histori- 
cal person ! Perhaps this scholar will now release me from presenting " wirkliche 
Inschriften politischer nnd als soleher glaubhafter- Natur, damit man ihrer [namely, 
Sargon's and Naram-Sin's] einstmaligen Existenz vollkommen traue." ' The bricks 
had exactly the same abnormal size as the burned biicks of the pavement below the 
ziggui-rat and, in addition, although unbaked, bore N'aram-Sin's usual stamped inscrip- 
tion of three lines. " They are dark gray in color, firm in texture and of regular form. 
In quality they are unsurpassed by the work of any later king, constituting by far the 
most solid and tenacious mass of unbaked brick that we have ever attempted to cut 
our way through." ' A large number of " solid and hollow terra-cotta cones in great 
variety of form and color," ' and many fragments of water spouts were found in the 
debris at the bottom of the decaying wall. The former, as in Erech,'' were used for 
decoration, the latter apparently for the drainage of the rampart.^ Possibly there 
were buildings of some kind on the spacious and airy summit of the wall,^ although 
nothing points definitely to their previous existence. 

' I have summarized the details of Haynes's report, according to which the original base was c. 5 m. high and 
c. 10.75 m. wide. " Directly upon this foundation Naram-Sin began to build his wall, 10.75 m. wide and six courses 
high. For some reason unknown to us, the builder changed his plan at this point and widened the wall by an addition 
of c. 3 m. in thickness to the inner face of the wall, making the entire thickness or width of the wall c. 13.75 m. 
This addition, like the original foundation, was built of worked clay mixed with cut straw, and from the clay bed was 
built up to the top of the moulded brick wall, making a new and wider base, c. 5.5 m. high by c. 13.7.) m. wide. Upon 
this new and widened base a new wall of equal width was built by Naram-Sin, whose stamped bricks attest his work- 
manship. In the construction of the original base, c. 5 m. high and c. 10.75 m. wide, there is nothing to furnish a clue 
to its authorship " (Report of August 3, 1895). In the same letter Ilaynes argues very plausibly, as follows : " Had 
the superstructure been built upon the original base, as it was begun, it would naturally appear that the entire struc- 
ture from its foundation was tlic work of NaramSin ; yet because NaiamSin changed the proportions of the wall, it 
may with some show of reason be assumed that NaramSin himself began to build upon the foundation of a prede- 
cessor, perhaps of his father Sargon, with the intention of completing the original design, and that his own ideas then 
began to fix upon a different or at least upon a larger plan requiring a wider base to build upon." 

' I am afraid Niebuhr's use of " politisch " und " glaubhaft " as two corresponding terms is very " unhistorisch." 
Apparently he has a very curious conception of the significance of an inscribed Babylonian brick as a historical doc- 
ument over against the "political inscriptions " too often subjectively colored. Cf. Maspero, The Dawn of Vimliza- 
tion, p. 626, with whom I agree. 

' Carl Niebuhr, I. c. p. 75. 

* Haynes, Report of Sept. 8, 1895. 

'"Red and black color are abundant. The hollow cones are of larger size than the solid cones" (Repoit of July 
27, 1895). 

«Cf. Loftus, I. c. p. 187ff. 

'It is doubtful whether the cones and spouts belonged to Naram Sin's or Ur-Gui's structure ; the water spouts 
point to the time of the former, however. 

'Ilaynes inclines strongly to the view that there e.tisted "a tier of rooms flush with the outer face of the wall, 
and a broad terrace before them overlooking the great enclosure" (Report of Aug. 3, 189.j). This view is closely 


The construction of so gigantic a fortification by Naram-Sin proves tlie political 
importance of Nippiir at an early time, and reveals, in its own peculiar way, the relig- 
ious influence which Ekur exercised in the ancient history of the country. A number 
of scattered references in the oldest cuneiform inscriptions extant — as, e. g., the fact 
that the supreme god of Lagash is called gad lalil by several kings and governors of 
Tello,^ that Edingiranagin' bears the title mupadx Inlila-ge, that Urukagina' as well as 
Entemena ' built a shrine to Inlil, that the rulers of Kish,^ Erech" and of other early 
Babylonian centres,' who lived about the period of the kings of Shirpurla, paid their 
respect to B31, repeatedly making valuable offerings and numerous endowments, and 
claimed as im'esi gal Inlila ** the right of chief officer in his sanctuary and domain — 
and the interesting passage in the bilingual text of the creation story,' where Nippur 
seems to be regarded as the oldest city of Babylonia, find a welcome confirmation in 
the results obtained by our systematic excavations. 

A comparatively small portion of the enormous temple area has so far been thor- 
ouo'hly examined, although for more than five years the constant hard lab:)r of fifty to 
four hundred Arabic workmen has been devoted to its exploration. The results have 
already been extra oidi nary ; they will become more so when our work shall be com- 
pleted. That no independent buildings of Sargon have as yet been discovered will be 
partly explained in the light of the statement just made. The huge number of Sar- 
gon's brick stamps^" excavated at different times chiefly within the temple enclosure, 

connected wilh his theory as to the use of the court, aboye referred to. " In a hot country, infested with robbers and 
swarming willi insects, the rooms on tlie wall and the terrace in front of them would have offered admirable sleeping 
quarters for the hosts of pilgrims at Bel's most famous shriue (ibidem)." 

^ E. g , by Urulcagina [De Sarzec, Decouvertes en, Chaldee, p. XXX, squeeze (cf. p. 109f.), col. I, 2 ; and PI. 5, 
No. 1, 2f. (also Amiaud, on p. XXX)], Euaiiatiiina I [inscription published by Heuzey in Revue d'Assyriologie 
III, p. 3 , 2], Eutcmeiia [De Sarzec, I c, PI. 31, No. 3, col. I, 2 ; and Revue d' Assi/riologie II, p. 148, col. I, 2], 
Enanatiiiua II [De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 6, No. 4, 2]. 

" De Sarzec, I. c , PI. 31, No. 2, col. I, 5f. (cf. Reoue d' Assyriologie II, p. 81). 

8 De Sarzec, I. e., PI. 5, No. 1, 35-38 ; PI. 33, col. Ill, 1-3 ; squeeze (p. XXX), col. Ill, 7-9. 

* De Sarzec in Revue d' Assyriologie II, p. 149, col. IV, 4-7 (to be supplemented by De Saizec, Decouvertes, pas- 
sages quoted in the preceding note). 

5 Hilprecht, Old Babylonian TuscripHons, Part II, PI. 43, No. 3. Cf. PI. 40, No. 108. 

«nilprecht, I. c.. Pis. 38-42, No. 87. 

' B. g.. Ur, cf. Iliiprecht, I. c. Pis. 36f., No. 85 ; PI. 42, No. 88 and No. 89. Cf. also PI. 42, No. 90 ; PI. 43, 
Nos. 9 If. 

« Lugalzaggisi. Cf. Hilprecht, ?. c, PI. 38, No. 87, col. I, 15f. 

•Pinches in Records of the Pasf, Vol. Vf, p. 109, 6. 

'"Not less than eighteen (either whole or fragmentary) terracotta stamps have been unearthed, seven of them 
■within one fortnight in December, 1895. Most of them are without handles. Apparently several broke while in use 
at Sargon's lime and were then thrown away. Otheis were doubtless broken intentionally in connection ■with the 
disastrous event meotioncd below, p. 30. 


his stamped bricks ' found under the platform of Ur-Gur, and the regular title MnP 
Ekur hit Btl in Nifjmv occurring in all his inscriptions from IS'ufFar' indicate that 
important structures, similar to those of his son, must have existed in some part of 
these high and extended accumulations. The perplexing question is, at which partic- 
ular spot have we to search for them ? And shall we ever really find them? Just as 
the bricks of Ur-Gur lie directly upon the splendid structure of Naram-Sin in the 
large enclosing wall {Nimit-Marduli), so "the great crude brick platform of Ur-Gur's 
ziggurrat practically rests upon Naram-Sin's pavement."^ This fact is of importance, 
for we draw the natural conclusion from it that all the buildings that once stood upon 
this latter pavement were razed by Ur-Gur, in order to obtain a level ground for his 
own extended brick pavement, which served as the new foundation for Ekur. 


The average accumulations of debris above the pavement of Naram-Sin measure 
a little over 11 m. in height and cover about 4000 years of Babylonian history. Have 
any traces of an earlier temple beneath the pavement of the Sargon dynasty been 
found in Nuffar? Several sections on the S.-E. side of the ziggurrat have been exca- 
vated by Mr. Ilaynes down to the water level.'' I am therefore fully prepared to make 
the following statement, which will sound almost like a faiiy tale in the ears of Assyr- 
iologists and historians who have been accustomed to regard the kingdom of Sargon 
as legendaiy and the person of Naram-Sin as the utmost limit of our knowledge of 
ancient Babylonian history. The accumulations oi debris from ruined buildings, partly 
preserved drains, broken pottery and many other remnants of human civilization 
between Naram-Sin's platform and the virgin soil below, are not less than 9.25 m. 
"J'he age of these niins and what they contain can only be conjectured at the present 

'The fragment of the first Sargon hrick excavated in Nuffar at the beginning of 1894 is published on PI. XXI, 
No. 63. It proves that Sargon did not only stamp his legend upon the bricks but sometimes wrote it. For a stamped 
specimen cf. Part III. 

' Written ha QIM^ (bo)bani or (ba-)ban, in other words expressed by an ideogram and preceding phonetic com- 
plement (the earliest example of this kind in Semitic cuneiform texts). Cf. Ililprecht, Assyriaca, p. 70, note (end). 
Examples for this peculiar use of a phonetic complement are extremely rare and will be found in Assyriaea, Part II. 

' Pis. 1-3, Nop. 1-3. 

* Haynes, Report of Aug. 3, 1895. In advance I warn all those who seem to know Babylonian chronology 
better (?!) than KingNabonidos of Babylon, not to use this fact against the king's 3200 years, and to keep in mind 
that also Ur-Gur, Kadashman-Turgu and.Ashurbanapal follow each other immediately in their work at the ziggurrat. 

'To illustrate the amount of time, patience and labor needed for the systematic exploration of these lowest strata, 
it may be mentioned that one of the sections excavated contained "more than 60,000 cubic feet " of earth, which had 
to be carried away in basketfuls a distance of 120 m. and at the same time to be raised to a height of 1.5-24 m. Ilaynes, 
Report of Oct. 5, 1895. 


time. But as no evidence of an ancient ziggurrat previous to Ur-Gur and Naram- 
Sin has been discovered, the accumulations must have necessarily been slower and 
presuppose a longer period than elapsed between Naram-Sin and the final destruction 
of Ekur in the first post-Christian millennium. I do not hesitate, therefoi-e, to date 
the founding of the temple of B31 and the first settlements in Nippur somewhere 
between 6000 and 7000 B.C./ possibly even earlier. I cannot do better than repeat 
llaynes' own words, written out of the depth of this most ancient sanctuary of the 
world so far known : " We must cease to apply the adjective earliest to the time of 
Sargon or to any age or epoch within 1000 years of his advanced civilization."^ " The 
golden age of Babylonian history seems to include the reign of Sargon and of Ur- 

Somewhat below the pavement of Karam-Sin, between the entrance to the zig- 
gurrat and the E. corner, stood an altar of sun-dried brick, facing S.-E. and 4 m. long 
by 2.4G m. wide. The upper surface of this altar ^ was sun-ounded by a rim of bitu- 
men (18 cm. high), and was covered with a layer of white ashes (G.5 cm. thick), 
doubtless the remnant of burned sacrifices. To the S.-"W. of it Haynes discovered a 
kind of bin built of crude brick and likewise filled with (black and white) ashes to the 
depth of c. 30 cm.^ At a distance of nearly 2 m. from the altar (in front of it) and 
c. 1.23 m. below the top was a low wall of bricks, whose limits have not yet been 
found. Apparently it mai'ked a sacred enclosure around the altar, for it extended far 
under the pavement of Naram-Sin " and reappeared under the W. corner of the ziggur- 
rat.' The bricks of which this curb was built are j^lano- convex in form.* They are 
laid in mud seven coui-scs (= 45 cm.) high," the convex surface, which is " curiously 
creased lengthwise," being placed upward in the wall. 

At a distance of 4.02 m. outside of this low enclosure and c. 36 cm. below its 
bottom stood a large open vase in terra-cotta with rope pattern'" (cf. PI. XXVIT, No. 
T2). It will serve as an excellent specimen of early Babylonian pottery in the fifth 
millennium before Christ. Undisturbed by the hands of later builders, it had remained 

• A similar conclusion was reached by Peters in TJie American Journal of Archaology X, pp. 45f. 
2 Report of August 30, 1895. 

'Report of August 3, 1895. 

• Wliich was 0.92 m. below the level of NaramSin's pavement. 

' Hajnes, Rcpoit of Feb. 17, 18C4 (alto Aug. 24, 1895). Hayncs's cbcmical analysis of the while ashes showed 
evident traces of bones. 

'Tlie facts concerning this curb have been gathered from Haynes's Reports of Feb. 17 and March 17, 1894; 
Aug. 3, 1895. 

' Cf. Peters, The American Journal of Archaology X, pp. 31 and 44. 

" Wilh an average length and breadth of 24.5 X 18 cm. 

• "Being placed lengthwise and crosswise in alternate courses" (llaynes, Report of March 17, 189'1), 
»» Haynes, Report of Aug. 21, 1895. 


in its original upright position for more than GOOO years, and it was buried under a 
mass of earth and dehris long before Sargon I was born and ISTaram-Sin fortified the 
temple of Nippur.^ 

A second vase of similar size but different pattern^ was discovered 77 cm, below 
the former and neai-ly double the distance from the ancient brick curb. There is little 
doubt in my mind that both vases, which stood in front of the altar, on its S.-S.-E. 
side, one behind the other as one approached it, served some common purpose in con- 
nection with the temple service at the pre-Sargonic time. 

Another section of earth adjoining the excavation which had yielded these 
remarkable results was removed by Haynes. 

To the S.-B. of the altar described above, almost exactly under the E. corner of 
Ur-Gur's ziggnrrat and immediately below the pavement of Naram-Sin, stood another 
interesting structure.' It is 3 38 m. high,^ 7 m. square, " with a symmatrical and 
double reentrant angle at its northern corner and built up solidly like a tower." Its 
splendid walls, which exhibit no trace of a door or opaning of any kind, are made 
of large unbaked bricks of tenacious clay ' somewhat smaller in size than those of 
Naram-Sin's rampart. While examining the surroundings of this building, Haynes 
found ten basketfuls of archaic water vents and fragments thereof on its S.- HI side 
and on a level with its foundation. His curiosity was aroused at once, and after a 
brief search underneath the spot where the greatest number of these terra-cotta vents 
and cocks had been gathered, he came upon a drain which extended obliquely under 
the entire breadth of this edifice. At its outer or discharging orifics hs found the 
most ancient keystone ai-ch yet known in the history of architecture. The question 
once asked by Perrot and Chipiez" and answered by them with a "probably not," has 
been definitely decided by the American expedition in favor of ancient Chaldsea. The 
bottom of this valuable witness of pre-Sargonic civilization" was c. 7 m. below the 
level of Ur-Gur's crude brick platform, 4.57 m. below the pavement of l!^'aram-Sin, 
and 1.25 m. below the foundations of the aforesaid building. The arch is 71 cm. high, 
elliptical in form, and has a span of 51 cm. and a rise of 38 cm. Cf PI. XXVIII, 

' It stood 3.05 m. below the pavement of Naram-Sin. 

' la the form of a large jar, its diameter in the centre being larger than that at the top (Elaynes, Report of Aug. 
24, 1895). 

'The following facts have been g;ithered from Elaynes's Reports of Oct. 13, Nov. 24, 1894. 

*Its foundations are tlierefore 3.33 m. below the level of NaramSin's pavement. 

' "Thoroughly mixed with finely cut straw and well kneaded." 

^ A Hittory of Art in, Chaldcea and Assyria, Vol. II, p. 234. 

'Haynes, Reports of Oct. 13, 20, Nov. 24, 1894 ; Jan. 12, March 3, 1895. 


No. 73.^ The bricks of which it is constructed are well baked, plano-convex in shape, 
and laid in clay mortar, the convex side being turned upward. A few months after 
its discovery the arch was forced out of shape, " probably from the unequal pressure 
of the settling mass above it, which had been drenched with rain water." 

Whether the altar, the two large vases and the massive building, under which the 
ancient arch was found, had any original connection with each other, is at present 
impossible to prove. Accoiding to my calculations and our latest news from the field 
of excavation, the bottom of the lower vase and the foundation of the massive build- 
ing were not on the same level. The diffei'ence between them is nearly 0.5 m. As 
the highest vase, however, stood 77 cm. above the othei-, and as the section S.-E. from 
them has not j'ct been excavated, it is highly probable that a third vase stood at some 
distance below the second. However this may be, so much we can infer from the 
facts obtained even now, that an inclined passage from the plain led alongside the 
two vases to the elevated enclosure around the solitary altar. I am therefore disposed 
to assign to the tower-like building, the character of which is still shrouded in mys- 
tery, the same age as the altar, curb and vases. The keystone arch and drain, on the 
other hand, are doubtless of a higher antiquity. Whether the 3200 ^-ears given by 
Nabonidos as the period which elapsed between his own government and that of 
Sai-gon I, be correct or not, the arch cannot be placed lower than 4000 B.C., and in all 
probability it is a good deal older. 

The two sections which contained all the buildings and objects described above 
were carried down to the virgin soil, where water stopped our progress. A third 
section removed in their neighborhood yielded similar results. But it is impossible to 
enumerate in detail all the antiquities which were nncovei-cd below the S.-E. side of 
the ziggurrat. The lowest strata did not furnish any ti-easures similar to those found 
in the upper layers ; they showed a large proportion of black ashes and fine charcoal 
mingled with earth, but they also produced many smaller objects of great interest and 
value, especially fragments of copper, bronze and terra-cotta vessels. Several pieces 
of baked clay steles, bearing human figures in relief upon their surface, will be treated 
at another place and time.- An abundance of fragments of red and black lacquered 

' A kind of pointetl arch of unlinked brick (60 cm. liigli and 48 cm. wide at tlie bottom) was found by llaynes in 
mound X (cf. PI. XV), on the S. W. side of the canal bed. From the depUi in which it was discovered, Haynes 
reasoned correctly that it was older than 2000 B.C. Prom the inscribed objects excavated in connection with it, I 
determined that it must have existed at the time of the dynasty of Isin (c. 2500 B.C.). In all probability it dates back 
to Ur-Gur's period. For the wall in which this arcli is placed was built of the same sun-dried bricks which compose 
the body of the ziggurrat (Haynes, Reports of April 27, Dec. 21, 189j). Tor the general form of this pointed arch 
cf. Perrot and Chipiiz, I. c, p. 229, Fig. 92. 

'One of Ibem was found at a depth of 7 m. below the pavement of Naiiim-Sin and 2.44 m. lower than the bottom 
of the arch, within about 2 m. of the lowest trace of civilization (Haynes, Report of Sept. 7, 189.5). Another was 
discovered 7.70 ra. below NaiamSiu's pavement (Report of Sept. 14, 1895). 


pottery was discovered at a depth of 4.G m. to 8 m. below the pavement of ISTarara- 
Sin.^ "Had these pieces been found in the higher strata, one would unhesitatingly 
declare them of Greek origin, or at least ascribe them to the influence of Greek art." 
For they are, as a rule, of great excellence and in quality far superior to those found 
in the strata subsequent to the period of Ur-Gur. 

The results of our excavations in the deepest strata of Ekur will change the cur- 
rent theory on the origin and antiquity of the arch, will clear our views on the devel- 
opment of pottery in Babylonia, and will throw some welcome rays on one of the 
darkest periods of history in the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates. But first of all, 
they again have brought vividly and impressively before our eyes the one fact that 
Babylonian civilization did not spring into existence as a deus ex machina^ that behind 
Sargon I and Naram-Sin there lies a long and uninterrupted chain of development cov- 
ering thousands of years ; and that these two powei-ful rulers of the fourth millennium 
before Christ, far from leading us back to " the dawn of civilization," are at the best 
but two prominent figures from a middle chapter of the early history of Babylonia. 

' A vase of ordinary gray pottery, 23 cm. high, was found 7.40 m. below this pavement "directly beneath the line 
of the very ancient curb, and near to a perpendicular let fall from the E. corner of the altar." The stratum whicli 
produced this vase, according to Haynes, " was literally filled with potsherds of small size and generally brick red in 
color " (Report of Sept. 14, 1895). 




Although more than 500' mostly fragmentary antiquities of Sargon and his 
predecessors have been excavated in Nuffar, it may at first seem strange that nearly 
all of them were discovered out of place, above the platfoi-m of Ur-Gur. But if we 
examine the details more closely, we will easily find the explanation of this remarkable 
fact. Almost all these monuments that, on the basis of strong pala^ographic evi- 
dence and for various other reasons, must be ascribed to this early phase of Babylo- 
nian history,^ were found in a stratum on the S.-E. side of the ziggurrat, between the 
facing of the latter and the great fortified wall which surrounded the temple. This 
stratum varies in thickness. " In some places it lies directly upon the crude brick 
pavement of Ur-Gur, while in other places it reaches a height of c. 1 m. above this 
platform." ' Few of the objects found were whole, the mass of them was broken and 
evidently broken and scattered around on purpose. Most of the fragments are so 
small that during the last three years it needed my whole energy and patience, com- 
bined with much sacrifice of the eyesight, to restore the important inscriptions pub- 
lished on the following pages (particularly Pis. 36-42). The apparent relation in 
which this stratum stands to a peculiar building in its immediate neighborhood will 
furnish the key to the problem. 


Directly below the great fortification wall of the temple to the S.-E. of the zig- 
gurrat, Mr. Haynes discovered recently a room 11 m. long, 3.54 m. wide and 2.60 m. 
high. It showed nowhere a door or entrance in its unbroken walls, and there can be 
no doubt "that the room was a vault entered by means of a ladder, stairway or other 
perishable passage from above." This structure " was erected on the level of 
Naram-Sin's j)avement," and yet it was made of the same bricks which coinpose the 

'Stamped bricks being excluded. 

•Cf. proof below. 

» Haynes, Report of Dec. 14, 1895. 


body of Ur-Gur's ziggiirrat and platform. How is this discrepancy to be explained? 
By the simple assertion, suggested already by the absence of a door in the walls of the 
building, that the room was underground, a cellar reaching from the top of Ur-Gur's 
platform down to the level of Naram-Sin's pavement.^ The access from above being 
on the Ur-Gur level, it is clear that the vault was built by this king himself Our 
interest in the unearthed building is still increased by the discovery of another smaller- 
room of exactly the same construction and material below it. Separated from the 
later vault by a layer of earth and dchris 60 cm. deep, it lies wholly below the level 
of Naram-Sin's platform. In its present form this lower cellar cannot, however, 
antedate Sai-gon, nor was it built by this king himself or by his immediate successor, 
Fiom the fact that the bricks of both rooms are identical "in size, form and sreneral 
appearance," ' and that a brick stamp of Sargon was discovered beneath the founda- 
tions of the lower walls, we draw the following conclusions : (1) At the time of Sargon 
a cellar existed at this very spot, as indicated by the piesence of his stamp below the 
level of his dynasty;* (2) Ur-Gur found and used this cellar, but rebuilt it entirely 
with his own bricks. And as he raised the foundation of his ziggurrat far above the 
old level, he also raised the walls of the old chamber to the height of his new platform. 
(3) For some unknown reason — probably because the jjressure of the neighboring 
temple fortifications from above, together with the yearly rains, the principal enemies 
of Babylonian sun-dried brick structures, had ruined the vault'* — he changed its foun- 
dation afterwards and laid it on a higher level, at the same time widening the space 
between its two longer walls. 

It can be easily proved that this underground building was the ancient storeroom 
or archive of the temple. " A ledge c. 0.5 m. wide and 0.75 m. above tlie floor extended 
entirely around the room, serving as a shelf for the storage of objects in due form and 
order."' *' A ciicular clay tablet together with two small tablets of the ordinary form 
and five fragments were found on it,"' and five brick stamps without handles were 
lying within its walls. And finally a similar room filled with about 30,000 clay tab- 
lets, inscribed pebbles, cylinders, statues, etc., was discovered by de Sarzec, 1894, in a 

'The lieight of its walls agrees with the distance between the tops of Ur-Gur's and Naram-Sin's platforms. 

'•'It is only 2.15 m. wide, and the walls are 92 cm. high in their present ruined condition. 

' Haynes, Report of Dec. 14, 189o. 

* Cf. above, p. 20, note 2. 

*0n this theory it can be easily explained why a few tablets were found on the ledge of the lower room and 
brick stamps without handles were discovered on the floor of the same room. 

'Ilaynes, Report of Dec. 14, 1895. This ledge existed in both chambers. It was built up with the walls and 
consisted of crude bricks capped by a layer of burned bricks (Report of Dec. 31, 1893). 

' In the lower vault (Haynes, Report of Dec. 21, 1895). In the midst of this lower chamber was "a hemispheri- 
cal basin of pottery set in a rim of stone," the original use of which is still unknown (Report of Dec 14, 18D5). 


small mound at Tello,^ by which the true character of our building is determined be- 
yond question. The French explorer was more fortunate than Mr. Haynes in finding 
his archive undisturbed, but it will always remain a serious loss to science that the 
contents of the archive of Tello could not have been saved and kept together.' 

The vault of Nippur had been robbed by barbaiians of the third millennium before 
Christ, as I infer from the following facts and indications : 

1. Nearly all the objects above referred to were excavated from a well-defined 
stratum in the neighborhood of this storeroom. From the position in which they were 
found, from the fact that none, except door-sockets in diorite, were whole, and from the 
extraordinarily small size of most fragments, it becomes evident that the contents of 
the archive were broken and scattered intentionally, as previously stated. 

2. Three of the rulers of the dynasty of Isin built at the temple of Nippur,^ and 
an inscribed brick of Ur-Ninib was found among the fragments recovered from this 
stratum. It is therefore clear that the destruction of the vases, brick stamps, etc., did 
not antedate Ur-Ninib's government. As no document later than his time has been 
rescued from this stratum, it is also manifest that the deplorable disaster occurred not 
too long after the overthrow of his dynasty. 

3. The archive existed however as late as the second dynasty of Ur. For Bur- 
Sin II wrote his name on an unhewn block of diorite, presented to Bel many centuries 
before by Lugal-kigub-nidudu, a pre-Sargonic' king of Ur and Erech, and turned it into 
a door-socket for his own shrine in Nippur." That the archive could not have been de- 
stroyed in the brief interval between Ur-Ninib and Bur-Sin II, so that the latter 
might have rescued his block from the ruins, results from a study of the general his- 
tory of that period, however scanty our sources, and of the history of the city of Nip- 
pur at the time of Ine-Sin, Bur-Sin II and Gimil (Krit)-Sin" in particular. All the 

' Cf. Heuzey, Retue d'Auyriologie III, pp. 65-68. The description of Ihis archive chamber excavated in Tello 
may find a place here : " Ces plaquettes de terre cuite, regulierement superposees sur cinq ou six rangs d'epaisseur, 
remplissaient des galeries ^iroites, se coupant a angle droit, conslruites en briques cms et garnies des deux coles de 
banquettes, sur lesquelles s'etendaient d'aulre couches de seuiblables monuments. Les galeries formaient deux 
groupes distincts, niais voisins I'un de I'autre." 

'The thievish Arabs seem to have scattered their rich harvest everywhere. So far, I have examined about 3000 of 
these tablets myself. But not less than c. 10,000 have been offered to me for sale by dealers of Asia, Europe and 
America within the last year. They all come from Tello. Cf. Ililprecht, Recent Research in Bible Lands, p. 80. 

' Cf. Part I, pp. 87 f. and above, p. l(i, note 1. 

*For the proof of this statement cf. below. 

'Cf. PI. 13, No. 21, and Part I, "Table of Contents," p. 49. Bur-Sin II repeated only what had been done by 
Sargon I long before. Cf. Part I, "Table of Contents," p. 47 (No. 1), and below. 

"That Giniil-Sin was the diiect successor of Bur-Sin II follows from PI. 58, No. 127, and tliat Ine-Sin was the im- 
mediate predecessor of Bur-Sin was inferred by Scheil from a contract tablet {Recueil XVII, p. 38, note 3). The men- 
tion of the devastation of Shashru on this Tello tablet is only of secondary importance in itself, as the same event 


three kings mentioned devoted their attention to the interests of InHl and Ninlil and 
other gods won-hiped in l^ippiir, as we learn from excavated bricks and door-sockets 
(PI. 12 f ),' from two chionological lists (PI. 55, No. 125, and PI. 58, No. 127),^ and 
from the large number of dated conti-acts discovered in Tello, Nuffar and other Babylo- 
nian mounds.' That the country as a whole was quiet and enjoyed peace and prosper- 
ity under their government, is evident from the many business contracts executed 
everywhere in Babylonia and from certain statements contained in them. The con- 
stant references to successful expeditions carried on by Ine-Sin against the countries of 
Karhar^', Harshi''', Simurrum'",'' LnluM', Anslian''' and Shashru^',^ by Bur-Sin II 

occurred at other times (e. g., in BurSin's sixth year, PI. 58, No. 127, Obv. 6). But the fact that this conquest is 
phiccd between BurSin's accession to the tlirone and a very characteristic event at the close of Ine-Sin's govern- 
ment (cf. PI. 55, No. 125, Rev. 18-21) settles the question. IneSin ruled at least forty-one years, according to the 
chronological list on PI. 55. As, however, a part of it is wanting, it will be safe to assign a reign of c. 50 years to 
him. Bur-Sin II ruled at least twelve years (PI. 58, No. 127), and in all probability not more than sixteen to eighteen 
years. That the events mentioned on the two tablets are arranged chronologically, is beyond question. For (1) 
events which happened more than once are quoted in their consecutive order, but often separated from each other by 
other events which occurred between them. Cf. PI. 55, Rev. 3 and 10 ; Rev. 4, 5 and 11, and especially Obv. 5 and 
Rev. 15 (between the two similar events lie twenty-eight years!). (2) In case a year was not cliaracterized by an 
event prominent enough to give it its name, such a year is quoted as "joined to" or " following" the previous year in 
which a certain event took place (ushsa). Cf. PI. 55, Rev. 7-8, 11-12, 13-14, 16-17, 18-20. (3) As we expect in a 
list arranged chronologically, PI. 58, No. 127, opens with "the year in which Bur-Sin became king." If the king 
accomplished something worth mentioning in the year of his accession, this deed was added. Cf. PI. 58, No. 127, 
Hay. 4 : MwH^ffirQijnU.dingirSin lugal Drumki-mage mada Zaap-shalV'i mugul-a "In the year when (Gimil-Sin 
became king and =) King Gimil-Sin brought evil upon the land of Zapshali." 

' Cf. also Peters in The American Journal of Arcliaology X, p. 16 f. 

'Cf. No. 125, Obv. 2, 4, 10, 17, 18 (Ine Sin), No. 137, Obv. 3, Rev. 3 (Bur-Sin II). 

' Cf. for the present Schcil in Recueil XVII, p. 37 f. 

* On a tablet in Constantinople written at the time of Ine Sin, we read the following date : mu Simu-ur-ru-um>^i Lu- 
lu hu^iba yul. From the fact that Simurru and LuluhuaTe here mentioned together, Scheil (Recueil XVII, p. 38) draws 
the conclusion that "Sinuiru setrouvait done dans les memes parages que la oil la stele deZohab fixe lepaysdeLulubi." 
Tiiis assertion is by no means proven. The king may have conquered two countries far distant from each other in the _ 
same year. I call attention to Scheil's theory in order to prevent conclusions similar to those which for several years 
were draw n fiom the titles of Nebuchadrezzar I (col. I, 9-11 : >//a dauna '«<!'" Lvluli unhamkitu ina kakki, kashid 
mdiuAmurri, shalilu Kaahuhl) and led to curious conceptions about the land Amunx (cf. «. g. Eduard Meyer, Geschichte 
de» Allerthums, p. 329, and especially WinckUr, Untenuchnngen, p. 37, note 2). Hommel's identification of Simurru 
with Simyra in Pheiiicia is by far more probable {Au» der hahyUniichen Altertumskunde, p. 9). 

°P1. 55, No. 125, Rev. 3 ; resp. Rev. 6, 10 ; resp. Rev. 4, 5, 11 ; resp. Scheil, I. c, p. 37 (beginning); resp. Rev. 13 ; 
rcsp. Rev. 21. In connection with Anslian it may be mentioned that Sclieil in liecueil XVII, p 38 (especially note G), 
translated PI. 55, No. 125, Rev. 9: mu dumuaal lugal pate-si An-sha-anl<l-ge ba-tug by "annee ou la fille du roi 
devint patesi dans le pays d'Anslmn." Notwithstanding that Homniel (Aus der babylonitchen Altertumskunde, p. 9) 
and Sayce (in The Academy of Sept. 7, 1805, col. b) reproduce this translation, which grammatically is possible, I 
reject it on the ground that there is no evidence that in ancient Babylonia women were permitted to occupy the high- 
est political or religious positions independently, and translate : "In the year when the patesi of Anshan married a 
daughter of the king {lug = alhzu, "to take a wife, to marry," cf. Deliizsch, Assyrisches IJandicorterbucfi, p. 43). 


against Urhillum}', ShasTiru''' and Bite-tar (J)Jvii'',^ and by Gimil (Krit)-Sin against 
ZapshaW''',- testify to the same effect. Moreover, a number of other tablets which 
belong to members of the same dynasty, but cannot yet be referred to definite kings, 
mention KimasTi'''', Humurti' and Huhu{nu)ru'''' '^ as devastated or invaded by Babylo- 
nian armies.* Several of these cities and districts w^ere situated on the east side of 
the Tigi'is and must be sought in Elara and its neighboring countries. "VVe begin now 
to understand why the Elamites soon afterwards when they invaded Babylonia made 
such a terrible havoc of the temples and cities of theii- enemies ; they simply retaliated 
and took revenge for their own former losses and defeats. 

4, When the Cassite kings conquered Babylonia, the site of the ancient archive 
chamber was long forgotten and buried under a thick layer of debris. Their own store- 
room, in which all the votive objects published on Pis. 18-27 and Pis. GO f., Nos. 133- 
142, were discovered, was situated at the edge of a branch of the Shatt-cn-Nil outside 
of the great S.-E. wall of the temple of Bel.^ The destruction of the archive under 
discussion must therefore have taken place between the overthrow of the second 

' PI. 58, No. 127, Obv. 2 ; resp. Obv. 6 ; resp. Obv. 7. 
••'PI. 58, No. 127, Rev. 4. 

'Cf. Scheil, I. c, p. 38. The cily of Marhathi (in N. Syria, according to Homrael, I. e., p. 9) is mentioned in con- 
nection with a daughter of IneSin on PI. 55, No. 125, 01)V. 14. 

*In view of all these facts above mentioned, Hommel will doubtless change his view (tliat the kings of the second 
dynasty of Ur "were apparently confined to this cily, as they did not possess Sumer and also lost Akkad "). That 
they were not confined to Ur, but possessed the whole south is proven by their buildings in Eridu (I. B. 3, No. XII, 1, 2) 
and in Nippur (cf. also the statements of the two chronological lists). If Winckler's theory as to the seat of the s/tarrtiJ 
kibrat irbitli was generally acrei)led (Hommel apparently does not accept it), the second dynasty of Ur by this very 
title would also have claimed N. Babylonia. Whatsoever our position may be as to the meaning of this and other 
titles, as a n)atter of fact, the kings of the second dynasty of Ur possessed the south of Babylonia, and it is impossible 
to believe that kings who were the lords of S. Babylonia and conquered parts of Arabia, Syria, Elam and other dis- 
tricts between tlie four natural boundaries defined in Part I. p. 35, note 4, and who doubtless in consequence of their 
conquests assumed the proud title " king of the four quarters of the world," should not have been in the possession of 
all Babylonia (the case of Gudta is entirely diflferenl). Thekingsof the second dynasty of Ur changed the tiUe of their 
predecessors, not because they had lost Sumer and Akkad, but because they owned more than the old title indicated. 
The title of Sumer and Akkad— as I understand its meaning— is practically contained in that of " king of the four 
quarters of the world " (Part I. pp. 24 f ), and the kinps of the second dynasty of Ur dropped it therefore for the 
same reason as Dungi, when he assumed the title shar kibrat atba'im (Z. A , III, p. 94). As to the meanings of the 
different titles, Hommel (whose latest opinion is briefly stated in Aus der bahylonischen AUertumskunde, p. 8) and I agree 
entirely, differing from Winckler csrecially in liis interpretation of 8?iar kibrat arba'im and shar riuUuShumeri u 
Akkadi in tlie oldest Babylonian insciiplions down to Hammurabi. Notwithstanding that, or rather because I read 
and studied \m Altorientaliiche Forschungenlll, pp. 201-243, and all his previous papers on tlie same subject siue 
ira et stiulio again aud aji^ain, I have been unable to convince myself of the correctness of his views. 
Tiele (Z. A., VII, p. 368), Lchmann {Shamathshumuhin, pp. C8 ff.), Hommel (J,, c.) and I apparently reached similar 
conclusions on this important question. 

' Cf. Part I, " Table of Contents," p. <8 (PI. 8, No. 15). Cf. also Peters in The American Journal of Arclueology 
X, p. 15. 



dynasty of Ur and the beginning of the Cassite rule in Babylonia. The history of the 
temple of Bel during this period is enveloped in absolute darkness. No single monu- 
ment of the members of the so-called first and second Babylonian dynasties has yet 
been excavated in NufFar. Apparently our temple did not occupy a very prominent 
place during their government. And how could it be otherwise ? Their rule marks 
the period of transition from the ancient central cult of BSl in Nippur to the new 
rising cult of Marduk in Babylon. Bel had to die that Mardnk might live and take 
his place in the religious life of the united country. Even the brief renaissance of the 
venerable cult of " the father of the gods " under the Cassite sway did not last very 
long. It ceased again as soon as the national uprising under the dynasty of Pashe 
led to the overthrow of the foreign invaders, who had extolled the cult of Bel at the 
expense of Mai-duk in Babylon,' and to the restoration of Semitic power and influence 
in Babylonia, until under the Assyrian kings Esarhaddon and xVshurbanapal a last 
attempt was made to revive the much neglected temple service in the sanctuary of 

5. The breaking and scattering of the vases point to a foreign invasion and to a 
period of great political disturbance in the country. No Babylonian despot, however 
ill-disposed toward an ancient cult, and however unscrupulous in the means taken to 
suppress it, would have dared to commit such an outrage against the sacred property 
of the temple of Bel. In all probability therefore the ancient archive chamber of the 
temple was ransacked and destroyed at the time of the Elamitic invasion (c. 2285 B.C.), 
when Kudur-Nankhundi and his hordes laid hands on the temples of Shumer and Akkad. 
That which in the eyes of these national enemies of Babylonia appeared most valu- 
able among its contents was carried to Susa' and other places ; what did not find favor 
with them was smashed and scattered on the temple court adjoining the storehouse. 
From the remotest time until then apparently most gifts had been scrupulously pre- 
served and handed down from generation to generation. Only those movable objects 
which broke accidentally in the regular service, or which purposely were buried in con- 
nection with religious rites, may be looked for in the lowest strata of Ekur. 


Having explained why the most ancient documents so far excavated in Nuffar were 
found in pieces above the platform of Ur-Gur's ziggurrat, I now proceed to determine 
the general age of these antiquities and their relation to the inscriptions of Sargon I. 

' Cf. Part I, pp. 30 f. 
'Cf. Parti, p. 31. 


The inscriptions Xos. 86-112 have many palaeographic features in common and doubt- 
less belong to the same general period, the precise extent of which cannot be given. 
Two groups, however, may be clearly distinguished within it, diffeiing from each other 
principally in the forms used for mu (Briinnow, List 1222) and dam (ibid., 11105). 
Instead of the two familiar Old Babylonian characters, in mu the two pairs of parallel 
lines found at or near the middle of the horizontal line, sometimes cross each other 
(Nos, 92, 5 ; 98, 3 ; 99, 4 ; 101, 3, etc.), while dam occasionally has a curved or straight 
line between the two elements of which it is composed (No. Ill, 3 and 6 ; Ko. 98, 2 
and 5 ; cf. No. 94, 3).^ This peculiar form of dam has so far not been met with outside 
of a very limited number of inscriptions from JS'ippur; that o£ mu occurs also on the 
barrel cylinder of Urukagina," although in a more developed stage. Whenever one 
of these characters has its peculiar form in an inscription of Nippur, the other, if 
accidentally occurring in the same inscription, also has its peculiar form as described 
above (ef. No. 94, 3 and 4 ; No. 98, 2 (5) and 3 ; No. Ill, 3 and 0). The two char- 
acters represent therefore the same peiiod in the history of cuneiform writing, to the 
end of which the cylinder of Urukagina also belongs. This period has not yet been 
definitely fixed. As various historical considerations seemed unfavorable to placing this 
luler after the other kings of Shirpurla, Jensen provisionally placed him before them;* 
Heuzey was less positive ;'' HommeP and Winckler" regarded him as later, while Mas- 
pero, without hesitation, but without giving any reasons, made him " the first in date 
of the kings of Lagash." ' Aside from the reasons given by Jensen, and a few simi- 
lar arguments which could be brought forth in favor of his theory, the following pala- 
ographic evidence proves the chronological arrangement of Jensen and Maspero to 1 e 
correct : 

1. The peculiar foi-m of mu occurs in inscriptions from Nippur which, if deter- 

' Tliis short line, about the i-ignifJcancc of which I rt-fer to my greater woik, Genehichte und Syttem der Keilschrift, 
■was oiigiiially curved, berame then straight and was later jilaced at the eud of the character (No. 93, 6 ; OG, 4 ; 113, 
12), finally developing into a full sized wedge (De Sarzeo, iJecouvertes en ChaUee, PI. 26, No. 1, col. II, 1 ; Heuzey 
in litvue d' Atfyriologie II, p. 79, No. 1, 13 [a duplicate of this inscription is in M. I. O , Constantinople], and the 
present work. No. 123, Obverse, 1). Sometimes this line is entirely omitted (No. 1 13, 6). 

^ De Sarzeo, I. c, PI. 32, col. I, 7 ; col. II, 1, 4, 12 ; col. Ill, 3, 7. The foim of mu is more developed in Uruka- 
gina's inscription, indicating that the latter is somewhat later than the corresponding Kippiir texts. On the other 
monuments of Urukagina the regular Old ISabylonian form is used exclusively. 

^ In Schradcr's KtilinsclirifllicJie Bibliothk, Vol. Ill, Part 1, p. 8. 

* Formerly he regarded hiin as decidedly later than the other kings of Lagash (in De Saizec. Lecouvertes en Chal- 
dee, pp. 110, 112). More recently he expressed himself as doubtful : "II en resulte que le roi Ourou kaghina dolt 
etre tenu, soit pour appartenir a une dynastie anleiieurc a celle du roi Our-Nina, soit pour avoir, apies I'lipparilion 
des premiers palesi, relcA^ le titre royal a Sirpourla" {Revue d' Asiyriologie II, p. 84). 

' Getchichte Babylouiens und Jstyriens, pp. 290f. 

" OescfiieJite Dabyloniens und Ani-yrieno, p. 41. 

' Ihe Dawn cf Cimlization, p. 004. 


mined by the character of dam alone, must be classified as older than the royal in- 
seiiptions of Tello. 

2. The form of mu employed in Urukagina's cylinder does not occur in any other 
inscription of Tello. The cylinders are therefore to be regarded as older than the 
other monuments, if it can be shown that this peculiar form of mu represents a more 
ancient stage of writing ' and did not originate from an accidental prolongation of 
certain lines in mu by a careless scribe.'- 

3. The very pronounced forms cut iu stone vases (as, e. g., found in Xo. 98, 3 ; 
101, 4; 92, 5, and first of all in No. 94, 4) force us to eliminate the element of acci- 
dent. But, besides, it can be proved by an analysis of the character mu itself that the 
regular Old Babylonian sign is only a later historical development of a more ancient 
form. The corieet interpretation of the original picture will, at the same time, enable 
us to catch an interesting glimpse of certain prehistoric conditions in ancient Shumar. 
According to Houghton,'^ a close relation exists between the character for mu and hii 
(Briinnow, I. c, 2014) and the first part of the character for nam {ibid., 2087). I trust 
no Assyriologist of recent date has ever taken this attempt at solving a palasogi-aphic 
problem very seriously. The sign for nim has no connection with the other two char- 
acters and is no compound ideogram, but, in its original form, represents a flying bird 
with a long neck.* Since in Babylonia, as iu other countries of the ancient world, the 
future was foretold by observing the fliglit of birds, this picture became the regular 
ideogram for " fate, destiny " {shhnhi) in Assyrian. The original picture for mu, on 
the other hand, is no bird, but an arrow whose head foi'merly pointed downward, and 
whose cane shaft bears the same primitive marks or symbols of crossed lines as are 
characteristic of the most ancient form of arrow used in the religious ceremonies of 
the N^oi-th American Indians.'^ As the shaft was represented by a single line in Baby- 

• This argument is conclusive, as llie theory, according to which later writers occ.isionally imitate older forms of 
cuneiform (or linear) characters, in the sense generally understood by Assyriologists, is without any foundation and 
against all the known facts of IJahylonian paUcography. Cf. my remarks in Part I, pp. 12f. 

' Jensen's hesitation, so far as founded upon the form of the character ka, can be abandoned, as the form of this 
character is surely far older than Gudea. 

"In the 7'ransaclions of the Society of Biblical Archceology Vf, pp. 4G4f. 

*This fact becomes evident from a study of the oldest forms in the inscriptions of Tello and Nippur. The original 
picture is still found on the most ancient Babylonian document in existence, unfortunately scarcely known among 
Assyriologists. It is (or was) in llic possession of Dr. A. Blau and was publislied by Dr. W. Hayes Ward in the 
Proceedin.g» nf the American, Oriental Society, October, 1885. The bird represented is tlierefore no "swallow" (Ilom- 
mel, Smnerische Lesestucke, p. 6, No. 67), but a large bird with a long neck, such as a goose or a similar water bird 
found on the Babylonian swamps. Later our picture was also used as the idiiogram for "swallow," designating her 
as the flying bird par excellence, as the bird nearly always in motion when seen at day time. 

'As I learned through the courtesy of Mr. Frank Hamilton Gushing of the Bureau of American Ethnology in 
the Smithsonian Inst'.luiion at Washington. After a correspondence on this subject it became evident that we had 


Ionian writing, the original mark carved upon its surface had to be drawn across it. 
Instead of J=' j^ " J^, we find, therefore, - /o{ / , fiom which, by short- 
ening the crossed lines, the regular form — ^^^ — ^ developed at a later time. The 

correctness of this explanation is assured by the otherwise inexplicable absence of an 
Ideogram for ussu, " arrow," in Assyrian. For it is impossible to conceive that a people 
using the bow in their system of writing should have altogether excluded the arrow, 
which played such a conspicuous role in the daily life and religious ceremonies of 
ancient nations in general. But how is it to be explained that our ideogram does not 
mean "arrow" at all, but signifies "name?" Just as the picture of a flying bird in 
writing proper was used exclusively with reference to its religious significance, in order 
to express the abstract idea of " fate, destiny," so the arrow with the marks or symbols 
of ownership (originally two crossing lines ') carved on the shaft became the regular 
ideogram for " personality " or " name." The same association of ideas led to exactly 
the same symbolism and usage among the North American Indians, with whom "the 
arrow " is the symbol of personality." It becomes now very evident that the Babylo- 
nian seal-cylinder, with its peculiar shape and use, has developed out of the hollow' 
shaft of an arrow marked with symbols and figures, and is but a continuation and 
elaboration in a more artistic form of an ancient primitive idea. 

From palaographic and other considerations it is therefore certain that Urukagina 
lived before the ancient kings of Shirpuria, while the inscriptions published in the 
present work as Nos. 90, 91, 92, 94, 98, 99, 101, 111 are still older than Urukagina. 
The interval between him and the following rulers of Tello who style themselves 
" kings " cannot have been very great, however. They all show so many pahvographic 
features in common that they must be classified as an inseparable group. To the 

bolh reached tlie fame conclusions as to the oldest form and significance of the arrow in piclure writing by pursuing 
entirely different lines of research. My arguinents, corroborated by Mr. Ciishing's own investigations and long resi- 
dence among tribes which still practice many of the ancient primitive rites and customs, become therefore conclusive 
in regard to the original form of the character mu. I quote from Mr. Cushing's letter the interesting fact that the 
above drawn arrow with two pairs of crossing lines on its shaft is called by the Zuni a'thlua "speeder (commander) 
of all " (namely, of all the other arrows used in their religious ceremonies). A treatise on the ceremonial use of the 
arrow among the Indians, by Mr, Gushing, is in press. 

' Still used with the same significance in Europe and America by persons who cannot write, if they have to afB.^ 
their names to legal documents. The crossed lines on the Indian arrows have a deep religious significance, according 
to Gushing. 

■^Gf on this whole subject Gulin, Korean Oamen, pp. XXIf. To Prof. Dr. Brinlou and Mr. Stuan Culiii I am 
indebted for recent information on this subject. 

'Because made of bulrushes, growing abundantly along tlie marshes and canals of lower Babylonia. 


same age doubtless belong most, if not all, of the other inscriptions published on Pis. 
3G-i7 (No. 112). I shall prove my theory in detail by the following arguments : 

I. Pateographically they exhibit most important points of contact with Uruka- 
gina, Ui--Nina, Edingiranagin, Enanatuma I, Entemena, Enanatuma II, especially 
with the first three mentioned. 

rt. Characteristic signs are identical in these I^ippur and Tello inscriptions. Cf , 
(\ (/., gish, Xo. 87, col. I, 10, col. II, 37, IS'o. 110, 4 f. e., with the same sign in the 
texts of Ur-Nina and Edingiranagin ;^ ban, No. 87, col. I, 10, col. II, 37 (cf No. 
102, 2) with the same sign in the te.Kts of Edingiranagin ; a, No. 80, 8 (Var.), 1 f e.. 
No. 87, passim; No. 96, 2; No. 104, 3; lOG, 4 ; 110, 8 f e., 112, 7, with the sign 
used by Ur-Nina, Edingiranagin, Enanatuma I, Entemena (cf. also the present work. 
No. 115, col. I, 7, col. JI, 1, 2, etc.); shu, No. 87, col. Ill, 34 (and Yar ) with Uru- 
kagina, Edingiranagin ; da, No. 86, 7, No. 87, col. I, 19, col. II, 18, 20, 29, etc., with 
the sign used by Ur- Nina, Edingiranagin, Entemena; a (ID), No. 87, col. II, 41 
(Var.) with Entemena (No. 115, col. I, 5) ; ta. No. 87, col. I, 46, col. If, 4, 12, with 
the same sign used by Urukagina, Ur-Nina, Edingiranagin, Entemena; ma, No. 88, 
col. Ill, 2, with the same sign used by Urukagina, Endigiranagin ;' ma, No. 87, col. 
II, 40 ff., with the same sign used by Urukagina, Edingiranagin; and many other 

b. The script is almost entirely linear like that of Urukagina,'' Ur-Nina and 

c. They show certain peculiarities in the script, which so far have been observed 
only in the most ancient texts of Tello: (1) Lines of linear signs running parallel 
to a separating line (marking columns and other divisions) frequently fall together 
with this latter so that the character now appears attached to the separating line 
above, below, to the right or left. Sometimes characters ai"e thus attached to two sep- 
arating lines at the same time. Cf No. 87, col. I, 5 {ma), 12 (Jen), col. II, 9 (shu), 17 
{lo), 29 (/^), col. Ill, 36 (mv). No. 106, 2 (mti), and many others written on difi'erent 
fragments of No. 87.' (2) In accordance with this principle two or more characters 

' In Uicse quotations, as a rule, I shall abslain from giving the exact passages, as I expect that everybody who 
examines my arguments has made himself familiar with the paheography and contents of the most ancient inscriptions 
of Telle before, and to those who have not done so, I do not intend to give introductory lessons in the limited number 
of pages here at my disposal, in fact for those I do not write. 

'Also used by NaramSin, cf No. 130, col. II, 4. 

'Except of course his barrel cylinder, which has cuneiform characters, as it was inscribed with a stylus. 

* For this pahieographic peculiarity in the inscriptions of Tello, cf. Urukagina (De Sarzec, Deeouvertrs, PI. 33, 
col. II, 9, 10, col. Ill, 2, 5. col. IV, 3, 9, col. V, 2, 4) ; Ur-Nina (De Sarzec, I. c , PI. 2, No. 3, col. I, 1, 3, Rctue d'As- 
syriologie II, p. 84, 3 and 4 ; p. 147, col. I, 3, 5, col. III, 3, 0, col, IV, 3, 5); Edingiranagin (De Sarzec, I c , PI. 4, 
Frag. A, col. I, 6, col. II, 3, 4, 5, 10, etc.; PI. 31, No, 2, col. I, 1-4, 6, col. II, 1-3, 5, etc ); Enanatuma I (.Revue 


standing in close proximity to each other frequently enter into a combination, forming 
so-called ligatures.^ Cf. 'No. 8(5, 5 Var. (ma-na), 8 (lah-ba, cf also Variants), 15 
Var. (M-gub) ; Part I, PI. 14, 2 (da-da) ; No. 87, col. IT, 9 (ma-shu), 20 Var. (da- 
gd), 34 (ki-ag), 45 (da-gi, cf. Var. gi-c/i),' col. Ill, 21 (ha-dag); 34 (PA [first half 
of the character sib] '-gal) ; No. 93, 7 ( Shul-pa) ;' No. 9 1, 1 {Nin-dia-dug (?) ) ;' No. 98, 
2 {dam-dumu); No. Hi, G (nada).' On the monuments of Tello this tendency to 
unite two characters into one is almost entirely confined to the inscriptions of Ur- 
Nina.* The best illustration is afforded by the writing of the name of his son, Nina- 
shu-banda. The four signs which compose the name are contracted into one large 
sign, the earliest example of a regular monogram in the history of writing (De Sar- 
zec, I. c, PI. 2"', No. 1). A number of signs which occurred always" in the same 

d' Assyriologie III, p. 3t, 1-5. 9, 1 1, 14 f.); Eilteiiicna (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 5, Nos. 2, 4 and 5 ; PI. 31, No 3, col. I, 
2, 4, 5, col. II, 3 ff ; lietue d'Asnyriologie If, p. 148, col I, 1-6, etc.) ; l<:iianatiiiiia II (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 6, No. 
4, 2-5, 7 f.) For oUier examples of Entemena's text io Uie present work, cf. Nos. 115-117. Appirjatly Dr. Jastrow 
bad not seen a Tello insciiption when he wrote his remark in Z. A. VIII, p. 217. 

'In a limited measure the same peculiarity occurs in several Assyrian inscriptions, c. 3000 years later. Cf., e. g., 
ina, in the inscription of Tiglathpileser I (I 11., Off), inapa, Salm. Obel., 1. 180, 176 (Elilprecht, Assyriaca, p. 37, 
note), etc. 

^Col. II, 43. ki nin Unugki ga, 4t. ganam-yad-shakir-a dim, 43. sUg mu-da-gi-gi. The last character in 1. 38, 
which remained unidentified for such a long time (cf. Amiaud et Mecliineau, Tableau Compare, No. 123, Jensen in 
Schrader's K D. Ill, part 1, p. 16, note 4 ; Scheil in Recueil XV, p. 63 ; Ilommel, Samerische Leustucke, p. 33, No. 
376) is identical with Biiinnow, LM 5410. It has in the ancient inscriptions the two values go, and ma (for the latter 
cf , e. ^., No. 87, col. II, 19 (AaZam-ma), 39 (i7r!/m*-» ma) ). On P1.50, col. II, 4, read NA-GA = isAAiu^ (and col. Ill, 
4 f., KI-GAL (= kigalla) ishpu-uk, against Scheil iu Recueil XV, 62 f.). 

'Col. Ill, 19. namti-mu, 20. nam ti, 21. ^a-6a-(io£?-yj— "unto my life he may add life." 

'PA gal LU sag gud, read nb {I'A-LU sng-guda-gal, "the shepherd having the head of an ox" = "the ox- 
hcaded shepherd," a synonym of king, according to Jensen. 

'On the god Shul pa-nd du, cf. Jensen, Kusmologie, pp 136 f., and in Schrader's E. B., Ill, part I, p. 6.5, note 11 
(_Umunpauddu). Oppert read Uun-pa-e. 

«"The goddess who destroys life," an ideogram of Bau or Gula (Briinnow, Lint 11034, cf. Ill It., 41, col. II, 
29-31 -.Ulli, 43, col. IV, 15-18, and the present work, PI. 67, col. IU, 1-5). The same deity is mentioned No. 95, 1, 
No. 106, 1, No. Ill, 1. On the value oi dug cf. Ilommel, Sumeriaehe Lesesiueke, p. 5, No. 55, and p 13, No. 115. 

'Cf. No. 99,5. 

»Cf. Betve d'Assyrivlogie II, p. 147, col. Ill, 6 and 7, col. V, 1, 3, 6. 

»Cf. No. 87, col. I, .5, 40, 43, etc. The linear sign is composed of e (canal) + gi (reed) and originally denotes a 
piece of land intersected by canals and covered with reeds (cf. No. 87. col. IU, 39). The land par excellence with 
these two characteristic features was to the Babylonians their own country, which therefore was called by the oldest 
inhabitants Ei + e + gi — Eengi, " the land of canals and reeds." From this correct etymology of Eengi and it* use 
in the earliest texts (.b'lr bar Eengi, No. 87, col. II, 21, and Eiigh<ig>agnna en Eengi, No. 90, 3) it follows that the name 
does not signify " low-lands " or " Tiefebene " in general in the ancient inscriptions, which alone have to decide its 
nuaning (against Winckler in Milteilungen des Akademisch- Orientalistischen Vereina za Berlin, 1887, p. 12), but that it 
is the geographical designation of a well-deflned district. Babylonia proper. As, however. Babylonia and low- 
lands are equivalent ideas, Eengi could also be used in a wider sense for " low-lands " (mi'itu) in general. 


combination and served to express but one idea or object, were regularly contracted 
at this early time and became compound ideograms, e. g., Tcalama " country," gisMin^ 
" wine," etc. (3) Lines of linear signs which run parallel to a separating line are 
often omitted, even if the sign is not directly connected with this latter. Cf. No. 

'The peculiar way in wliich it is written in the oldest inscriptions of Tello, leaves no doubt as to its composition 
(fftV/j -f dii,). The analysis of this ideogram by Pinches {Sign List, No. 76 a = kaah + din), accepted by Delitzsch 
(Ati>yriiic/if8 nnuluorUrbvch, p. 854;, Jensen (in Schrader's K. B. Ill, pait 1, p. 27, note 6), Ilommel (^Sumerische 
Lesetivcke, No 180) and others, must therefore be abandoned. For examples cf. Edingiranagin's inscription un- 
earthed in London (/Voc. Sec. Bibl Arch., Nov. 1893), col. IV, 3, 7, col. V, 3 : gishdin zu-zu-n; or Gudea D (De Sarzec, 
I.e., PI. 9): 6. Miiganki, 7. i/elvy-ya'-i, 8. Ouliln, 9. kur Ni-tagki, 10. gu gishmu na galla-aan, 11. mamhru-a 
githdin (nie !), 13. t<hirpur-la''-i-shu, 13. mu m-iu/n— "Magan, Meluha. Gubi, Dilmun, each (a/t) of which possesses 
every kind of tree, brought a ship (laden) with timber aud wine to Shirpurla." Jensen's qiieslicn (in Sclirader's Z^. 
B. III. part 1, p. 13, note 13), as to what Amiaud may have read in Ur-Nina's inscriplion (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 3, No. 

1, col IV, 1-3, which Jensen left untranslated) is answered by leferring him to the Gudea passage just translated, 
and to Utnu d' As^riologie II, p. 147, col. V, 3-0, together with De Saizec, J c , PI. 2Ws, No. 1 (lower section, charac- 
ters standing immediately before the king). Amiaud, however (in Becord» of the Fasti I, p. 6.5i, as well as Oppert (in 
Btriie d' Asfyriologie II, p. 147) and Heuzey (in Benue d' Assyriologie III, p. 16, aud Decoueertea en Chaldee, p. 170) 
wrongly read ginh din (notwithstanding the passage from Gudea just quoted, lines 6 and 10, where the two respective 
characters are very diffcrenl from each other !) as gan (kan) finding the name of Magan in the first line. The passage 
reads rather : 1. ma gishdin, 2. kura-ta, 3. gu gith gal, 4. mu-tum (?)— "a ship (laden) with wine he brought from the 
ccmnlry which every kind of tree." We are now enabled to understand the full significance of Ur-Nina's 
perforated has relief (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 2bis) which remained obscure to Heuzey in his treatise mentioned below. 
These bas-reliefs and incised slabs (cf. the present work, I'l. XVI, Nos. 37 f.) did not servo "a maintcnir dresses, sur 
des autels ou sur dcs massifs de hriques, divers engins consaciei aux dieu.v et parlic ilieremeiit des masses d'armes 
volives " (Heuzey, Les Armovies Chnldeennes de Sirpourla, pp. 11 f., cf. pp. 6 f.). For they would have been too small 
and weak for such a puipose. The true facts are rather these : (1) They accompanied donations of any kind made to 
the temple. But while such donations were consumed in the interest of the temple service (cf. Ililprecht, Z. A. VIII, 
p. 191 f.) or decayed in time (buildings) or died (slaves), etc., these tablets were preserved in the temple as lasting 
memorials to their munificent donors and served at the same time to induce other worshipers to similar acts of piety. 
(2) The hole in the middle of the tablets served to fasten it, by the aid of a nail, in the wall or floor of the temple, 
possibly on the altar itself (3) Tlie scenes, objects and inscriptions <>n these tablets generally illustrate and describe 
tiie person and work of the donor in relation to his dcit}'. Ur Nina's more elaborate votive tablets (of which the 
smaller is only an exceipt, cf. De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 2Ws, pp. 168-17M), accordingly represent two sides of the king's 
work undertaken in the service of his god. In the upper section he has the dupshig (^ dupshikhu), the symbol of 
masons, upon his head (exactly as Nabopolatser describes himself in the present work, PI. 33, col. II, 57 ft".), and is 
surrounded by his children and \iagc {Un-nita " at his side "=" page," not "in his hand," — 0\^xiexl\n Rtvue d' Assyr- 
iologie III, p. 16, note 1). This picture illustrates the accompanying statement : " Ur-Nina, king of Shirpurla, son of 
Nigalnigin, built the temple of Ningirsu, built the abzu banda (cf. Jensen in K. B. Ill, part 1, p. 13, note ft), built the 
temple of Nina." In the lower secliim the same king, seated and surrounded by his children and his chief butler 
{Sag antug ' he is the chief"), offers a libation of wine. This picture illustrates tlie words standing below the cup, "a 
ship of wine he brought from the country which possesses every kind of tree." The inscription of the bas-relief published 
by Heuzey in Let Armoirits Chalde, nnesde Sirpouila readu : 1. Lay (DU-DU = a&a/u "to bring," nazaiu "to set up"), 

2. snnga (Briinuow, List 5QS0) may, 3. 'I'no-r Aingir su-ka, 4. dinr/ir NingirSM, 5. E-ninhura, 6. lag. 7. sanga (cf. 

the present work. No. 87, col. I, 30, and No. 113 ,3) 'Ungi-r Nin gir-su-ka ye, 8 *' ta, 9. mu-na-taud-dti, 10. GAG 

-[- GISH (not gisal, Ilommel, Sum. Lesest , No. 30.j) ura-sha, 11. mu na yim—" Gift of the high priest of Ningirsu to 
Ningirsu of the temple Euini.Q. The gift of the priest of Ningirsu he brought from .... and worked it into a . . . ." 


86, 3 Yar. (ra), 4 Var. (li), 5 Var. (na) ; No. 87, col. I, 4 ( Unug), 14 and 20 Var. 
{dingir), 19 Var., col. II, 37 Var., 45, III, 34 Var. (da), 40 Yar. (kalama) ; col. JI, 
31 Yar. {gim) ; col. Ill, 2 (wm), 23, 41 Yar. (a), 29 (ma), 37 Yar. (wanO. etc. Out- 
side of the Nippur texts this peciiliaritj is almost confined' to the inscriptions of Ur- 
Nina. Cf., e. g., De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 2 ''", No. 2, upper section (da in the name of Ab- 
da), ibid. ( Ur in the name of Ur-Nina), Revus d'Assyriologie II, p. 147, col. Y, 4. 

II. The pala^ographic evidence brought forth is conclusive. Nos. 86, 87 and the 
other texts referred to above, show all the characteristic features of the inscriptions of 
Urukagina, Ur-Nina and Edingiranagin. But besides they exhibit a number of palaeo- 
graphic peculiarities whicli are altogether absent from the inscriptions of Tello, and 
must be regarded as characteiistic features of an earlier stage of writing. They will 
be treated in full at another place.- I confine myself here to a brief statement of the 
following fact. A number of signs have a form representing almost the original pic- 
ture, othei's have at least a more original form than the iuscriptions from Tello, even 
those of Urukagina not excepted. Cf. sum (No. 87, col. I, 17, the ear of a corn, cf. 
also 1. 45), gi (ibid., col. I, 3, a reed, bulrash)\ a (ibid, col. I, 31 in egi-a, a tattooed 
forearm with hand)," bar (ibid., col. ]I, 21; No. 98, 4 (the skin of an animal or) a 
coarse rug),^ lah (ibid., col. 1, 21, water poured out, therefore, "to wash")," ra (ibid., 

'One example is lound in a text of Entemena {ne, cf. lievve d' Assyriologie II, p. 149, col. IV, 2). The way in 
■which Ur is written in the name of UiuIiagina*(Du Sarztc, I. c, PI. 32, col. 1, 1), fuinislies llie key to tlie origin of this 
peculiariiy. For details on this subject I rtier to my GencMchte und Syalem der KeiUchrift, which has been in prepa- 
ration for the last nine years. 

' In advance I warn Assyriologists not to regard a fourth palicographic peculiarity (so far confined to these Nippur 
texts) as a mistake of the scribes : (4) If two linear signs wliich are to be connected grammatically stand close 
together in writing, yet wiiliout toucliing each other, frequently one line ol the second running parallel to a line in 
the first is omitted entirely and has to be supplemented from the first sign, Cf. No. 87, col. Ill, 37 : la-i\\ {sic!), 39 : 
ugawi (tic!), 40 Var. : rnwiia (tic!) ; No. 103, 3 : mana. {sic!). 

' In order to obtain a clear conception of the original picture, this sign must not be turned to the left (as Hough- 
ton, I. c, p. 473, and others did). For it is a law in cuneiform writing "that the characters are all and always 
reversed in the same way ; what (originally) was the right Iiand side became (later) the top" (Berlin, I. c, p. 6). 
The triangle on the lelt of our picture does not represent the lower end of the stem of a reed, but rather its top 
or Cob. Ct. the corresponding pictures ou the Assjiian monuments publislied in Layard, 'Jlte MoitumtnU of J\ineteh, 
Second Series, e. g., PI. 12, No. 1 (reproduced by Aluspero in The Dawn oj Uitilizalion, p. 501). 

*The crossed lines do not represent "an oinamented sleeve" (Bertin, I. c, p. 9), but marks of tattooing (cf. 
Berger, "Rapport sur les tatouages Tunisiens," in lietue d'Assyriologie III, pp. 33-41). Tlie cuneiform sign without 
these maiks means 'side " {da) ; with them, it denotes him who is at somebody's side for assistance ; he who has 
the same marks of tattooing upon liis arm, therefore has become his "brother." The sign for s7iesh, "brother," 
denotes a person as the second child of the same family, while the loriner expresses tiibal relations represented by a 
common symbol. 

'According to Oppert {Ixpedition en Mhopotaruie, Tome II, p. 04) and Bertin ((. c, p. 8) an altar. Impossible I 
It repreeents the skin of an anin al or better a coarse iiig spread upon the ground for peisous of rank (and images 
of deities) to til upon ; In other words, it denotes the place of honor, in exact harmony with tlie custom prevailing 
ill the tents of Arabia and Mesopotamia to day. Lelinjann {SliainaihishnmnKin, p. 122) is therefore correct in giving 


col. I, 37 Yar., col. Ill, 15 Var., " canal " + " to fill " (si = horn), ^. e., " to irri- 
gate"),^ lugal (ibid., col. I, 1-3, the sign shows the remnant of the original arm.^ Cf. 
also the ideogram zng (ihid., col. I, 3, 38, etc.), gur (ibid., col. Ill, 42 Var.),'' Kish 
(]S"o. 92, 3 ; :N'o 102, 3 ; 103, 4),^ ag (l^o. 83, 11 and 14),' and many others for whose 
explanation I must refer to my Geschichte und System der Keilschrift.'' All the stone 
inscriptions of Urukagina have the regular Old Babylonian sign for mu^ jnst as the 
Nippur texts here treated. On the other hand, the Nippur texts have a large number 
of far more original forms of signs than the Urukagina and Ur-Nina inscrijjtions 
published.** In view of these facts I can only draw one conclusion — that most of these 
Nippur texts are older than those of Urukagina. 

III. Another important fact corroborates my determination of the age of these 

tobara^g) the original meaning, "seat," instead of "cliamber." Tliis sign occurs frequently in the contracts of 
Nuffar (in a much more developed form) and was identified with bar by Scheil independently of me. Cf. Recueil 
XVII, p. 40d. 

' 8u,k{k)aUu denotes the servant {gal) who pours out (su) [namely water over his master's hands and feet]. A 
word with similar meaning (zw) is apparently contained in zu-ah, "ocean," which Hommel translated half correctly 
"house of water (?)," cf. Siirnerische Lesestueke, No. 6. Originally zu and six had the same ideogram, which repre- 
sents a vessel (cistern?) into which water flows. Zu means, therefore, "to flow into," or trans., "to pour into, to 
add," then figur., "to increase one's linowledge, to learn, to know." Za-ab denotes "the house (abode) into which 
all the waters flow." Sukkallu may be translated "chamberlain" (Kiimmerer), later it received a more general 

'Oppert already recognized the general significance of the picture (I. c, p. 64). But tlie exact analysis of the 
compound ideogram, which I discovered long before we excavated in Nuffar, remained obscure to him, Houghton, 
Sayce {Transaclions of 8oc. Bibl. Arch. VI, p. 475) and others. Cf. a very curious form, which is but a mutilated 
"ra," in col. I, 37, second Var. 

' The two elements lu + gal appear separated in No. 83, 2 Var., 13 Var. ; No. 101, 7 ; No. 105, 7. 

'Successfully analyzed by Ball in Proc. 8oc. Bibl. Arch. XV, p. 49. The line which continues beyond the head 
is, however, no continuation of the forearm, but represents the cushion between the head and the vessel upon which 
the latter rests. Originally the arm reached further to the rim of the vessel, as in the corresponding Egyptian hiero- 
glyphics and as illustrated by PI. XVI, No. 37, of the present work. 

* It closely approaches the original picture explained by a Babylonian scribe on the famous fr. from Kuyunjik, 
col in, 6 (Trans. Soe. Bibl. Arch. VI, p. 455). 

* Cf. also the same sign on the very ancient monument preceding Urukagina's time (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. l^is b., 
col. IV, 1). 

* As I have to dispose of more urgent matters at present, some years may still pass before its publication. 
'Only his barrel cylinder in clay exhibits traces of the older form for mu, as shown above. 

' Nobody can object that a few cliaracters in these Nippur inscriptions seem to show the beginning of wedge- 
writing and that a few others seem to liave a later form. Lugalziggisi presented c. 103 large inscribed vases, all 
apparently bearing tlie same long inscription here publislied, to Inlil of Nippur. Every stonecutter available was 
employed. Several of tliem understood but little of writing, and consequently some very ridiculous forms were 
produced. Cf., « g., col. II, 16 (second variant), dug-a (sic!), 29 (second variant) da, 39 (variants) aga, 4i gur, 
44 (fourth variant) ganam, 45 shig, and others. In order to understand the enormous difiiculties which I liad to over- 
come in restoring this text, Assyriologisls will bear tliis fact in mind. 


insci'lptions very strongly. In the inscriptions of Edingiranagin, or Edingiranatum,^ 
the grandson of Ur-Isina, a city, generally transliterated as Is-ban''', plays a very 
important role. In fact the annihilation of the power of this city in S. Babylonia is the 
one prominent feature which characterizes his government, and to which (in connection 
■with Ereeh, Ur and some other cities) the king refers again and again." The most 
intei'esting object yet found in Tello, the so-called stele of vultures, was doubtless set 
up by this sovereign in commemoration of his great victory ovei* "'"'BAI^*'."^ How- 
ever this may be, so much is certain that at some time previous to Edingiranagin, a 
foreign power whose centre was "'''BAN*', had succeeded in invading and conquering 
a lai'ge portion, if not the whole, of Babylonia, Ei-ech and Ur included. The same 
city of ""''BAN" is also mentioned in the long [Nippur text No. 87, and here again it 
occurs in connection with Erech and Ur (and Larsam). We learn at the same time 
from this very important histoiical document that Lugalzaggisi, son of a certain Ukush 
"patesi of """BAN*"" (col. I, 3,9, 10) had conquered all Babylonia and established 
an empire extending from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea, in size there- 
fore not inferior to that founded much later by Sargon I. This first " king of the 
world" (lugal Tcalama, col. I, 4, 36-41, col. Ill, 4) of whom Babylonian documents 
give us information, selected Erech as his capital, and by his great achievements raised 
'"'■''BAN'', his native city, "to great power" [a mag mu-um-yxir, col. II, 41f.). The 
two documents, Nippur, No. 87, and the stele of vultures from Tello, belong closely 
together and supplement each other, the one giving a resume of the rise and height of 
the power and influence of ""'BAN*', the other illustiating its downfall. The former 
must therefore antedate the monument of Edingiranagin. As doubtless some time 
elapsed between the rise and downfall of this foreign power ; as, moreover, Shirpurla 
is not mentioned in Lugalzaggisi's inscription, apparently because it did not as yet 
exercise any political influence ; ^ and finally as palajographically this inscription from 
Nippur shows more traces of oi-iginality than the texts of Urukagiua and Ur-Nina, as 

'In view of De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 31, No. 3, col. Ill, 5 (&'fZtnjft>a-«(i<um-ma= " Brought into tlie house of his 
god " (by his parents after his birth). 

»Cf. De Sarzi-c, I. c, PI. 3, Fragm. A, col. I, 5, 8, col. II, 4, 13, col. Ill, 5; PI. 4, Fragm. A, col. II, 2, 11 : 
Fragm. B, col. III. 3. col. V, 4 ; PI. 31, No. 2, col. I, 6. 

'For details cf. Ileuzey's explanation of the figurative representations in his work, i<» Origines OrientaUs. 
pp. 49-84, and in De Sarzec, I. c, pp. 174-184. I agrie with this scholar that the people whose defeat Is illustrated on 
this monument belong to the city (and country) of si'hQk'^kl (De Sarzec, I. c, pp. 18J). 

* This was the original reading of 1. 10; the traces preserved on two fragments establish my text restoration of 
this line beyond doubt. 

•The fragment of an inscribed object, apparently dedicated by a king of ff'^'iBAN'^' to Ningirsu, was found in 
Tello (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 5, No. 3, and p. 119). From the character used for " king" I draw the conclusion (with 
Ileuzey) that the object belongs to a somcwliat later period. Apparently y'sABAN^' played a second important ible in 
the Babylonian history. 


stated above, we are justified in placing Lngalzaggisi before these two rulers of Shir- 
purla and in regarding most of the inscriptions published as ISTos. 86-112 as older than 
the earliest rojal inscriptions from Tello/ At any rate, they are not later than these. 
A question of fundamental importance for our correct conception of the earliest 
phase of Babylonian history has been repeatedly discussed within the last ten years : In 
which relation did Sargon I (and Naram-Sin) stand to the early kings of Tello? Did 
he antedate or succeed them ? Winckler ' and Maspero ' expressed themselves decidedly 
in favor of the former view,^ while Hommel," Heuzey " and myself (Part I, p, 19),' with 
more or less emphasis placed Sargon I and his son after Ur-Kina and Edingiranagin 
I will now briefly give the definite proof of the validity of our theory. 

1. The results of the exploration of the lowest strata of Ekur will have convinced, 
us that Babylonian civilization had a history antedating the kingdom of Sargon I by 
several thousand years. This pre-Sargonic period must have had a system of writing ; 
for the earliest texts at our disposal, however closely approaching the original picture in 
Q, number of cases, presuppose an earlier stage of writing, such as is testified to have 
existed in Babylonia by the monument " Blau " ^ and by the famous fragments from 
Kuyunjik.' Pieces of inscribed objects unearthed below the Sargon level prove posi- 
tively that writing existed in Nippur long before Sargon I. It seems, therefore, at the 
very outset, impossible to believe that not one document antedating the highly devel- 
oped style of writing in Sargon's monuments should have been excavated in Nuffar 
or Tello. In fact, it would be altogether unreasonable to regard the inscriptions of 
Sargon and Narum-Sin as the first written records of the ancient Babylonian civili- 

2. Everybody who has studied the earliest inscriptions of Babylonia from their 
originals, and has devoted that special pains to all the details of paLcography, which 

'The liule fragment No. 107 cannot be referred to the lime of Entemena, the only other ruler of Tello who, 
according to our present knowledge, presented an inscribed vase to Inlil. Perhaps it is the first indication of 
the rising of Sbirpurla in the South and of the extending of its sphere of influence northward at the expense of 

^ Ontermchungen, p. 43 ; Oeschichte, pp. 40f. (but cf. on the other side p. 43 !) ; AUorientalische Fonchungen III, 
pp. 236 ff. 

' In lUcueil XV, pp. 65f. ; The Dawn of Civilization, p. 605, note 3 (end). 

* Recently adopted by Rogers, Outlines of t/ie Uistory of Early Babylonia, Leipzig, 1S93, p. 11, note 1 [but given 
up again after hearing my address. Contributions to the Uistory of Sargon land His Predecessors, before the Oriental 
Club of Philadelphia]. 

' Zeitschrift fur Keilschriflforschung IF, p. 182 ; Oeschichte Bahyloniens und Assyriens, p. 291. 

•Cf., «. g., Les Origines OrientaUs, pp. 50, 84 ; Revue d' Assyriulogie III, pp. 54, 57. 

' Cf. also Recent Research in Bible Lands, pp. 66f. 

' Called so for the sake of brevity. Cf above, p. 35, note 4. 

•Published by Houghton in Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch,, p. 454, and reproduced in several other works. 


I have a right to expect from those who criticise my statements on this subject, must 
necessarily come to the conclusion that a much longer period of development lies be- 
tween Lugalzaggisi, Urukagina, Ur-Nina and Edingiranagin, on the one hand, and 
Sargon and Naram-Sin, on the other, than between the latter and Ur-Ba'u Gudea, 
Ur-Gur, etc. It is surely remarkable that Monsieur Heuzey ' and myself, who have 
devoted years of constant study to the palaography of the earliest original inscriptions 
of Babylonia, quite Independently of each other, have reached exactly the same 
conclusions. It is out of regard for the view of those who do not accept Nabonidos' 
3200 years as correct, that on paheographic evidence alone I assign to Lugalzaggisi 
the minimal date of 4000 B.C. My own personal conviction, however, is that he can- 
not have lived later than 4500 B.C. 

3. 1 hat my determination of the age of Lugalzaggisi is not too high is proved 
by the discovery of an uninscribed vase of precisely the same material and character- 
istic shape- as most of the vases which bear Lugalzaggisi's inscription. It was found 
1.54 m. below the pavement of Naram-Sin, and must therefore considerably antedate 
the rule of the latter. 

4. From pateographic and other reasons, I came to the conclusion above, that the 
inscrijitions of Lugalzaggisi and of the other kings, patesis, etc., from Nipjnir 
grouped together with them, are surely older than Edingiranagin. Heuzey, on the 
basis of other arguments, had inferred that the stele of vultures and the reliefs of Ur- 
Nina are "surely older than Naram-Sin." Hence it would follow, that if Ileuzey's 
judgment of the age of these specimens of art is correct, also the monuments of Lu- 
galzaggisi, etc., antedate Naram-Sin. I am now in the position to prove the correct- 
ness of Ileuzey's view beyond question. Since a specimen of the workmanship of the 
artists at Nartm-Sin's time was recently discovered (cf. PI. XXH, IS^o. 64), showing 
exactly the same high degree of execution as the script on his monuments, every Assyri- 
ologist is enabled to judge for himself as to the value of Ileuzey's judgment. There 
are, however, a few fragments of a relief in clay lately discovered in Nippur, which must 
be regarded as the strongest evidence in favor of the French scholar's determination. 
While Heuzey declared LTr-Nina's and Edingiranagin's reliefs to be of greater anti- 

' It is needless to quote passages from Mr. Ileuzey's works in aildition to those given on p. 43, note 6. In connec- 
tion with his discussion of the age of the stele of vultures he makes the emphatic statemenl, "le type lineaire de 
r^criture est assurement plus ancien que celui des inscriptions de Naram-Sin, etc." (cf. L(» Origines Orientales, p. 50). 

^Haynes reported on lliis vase, August 10, 1895, expressing the hope that I might be able to use it in support of 
my theory as to the age of most of the other ancient vase fragments from Nippur. He found it covered with earth 
and black a&hes. It consists of white calcite stalagmite and has a very characteristic shape never found at a later period 
in Nippur again. In general this class of vases resembles a flower-pot, the diameter at the top being larger than that 
at the bottom, while the walls frequently recede a little at the middle. The size of the above-mentioned vase is : h., 
26.5 ; d. at the top, 18 ; at the bottom, 14.8 ; at the middle, 13.8 cm. 


quity than Narani-Sin's monuments, he characterized the relief which opens the splen- 
did series of De Sarzec's finds (PI. I, ISTo. 1), and has several points of contact with 
the art exhibited in the stele of vultures, as " plus primitif, meme que celui de la 
grossiere tablette du roi Our-ISIina" [De Sarzec, I.e., PI. 1, No. 2], and as "une ceuvre 
d'une antiquite prodigieuse, un monument des plus precieux, que nous devons le placer 
avec respect tout a fait en tete des series orientales, comme le plus ancien example 
connu de la sculpture chaldeenne." These words of a true master of his subject have 
found a splendid confirmation in the clay reliefs of Nippur just referred to, which 
in their whole conception and execution show a striking resemblance to the oldest spe- 
cimen of art recovered from Tello. They were found 7-7.70 m. below the level of 
Naram-Sin's pavement, and within about 1.50 m. of the lowest trace of Babylonian 
civilization.' Truly the genius and critical penetration of Heuzey could not have won 
a more brilliant victory. 

5. In connection with my examination of the pre-Sargonic strata of Ekur, I twice 
called attention to the fact that baked bricks found below Naram-Sin's pavement are 
plano-convex in form.- I might have added that no other form of baked brick has so 
far been discovered anywhere in the lowest strata of Nippur, and that these biicks as 
a rule bear a simple thumb mark upon their convex side. The form of these baked 
bricks, until the contrary has been proved, must therefore be regarded as a character- 
istic feature of all structures previous to the time of Sargon I and Naram-Sin. It is 
quite in accordance with this view that the only inscribed bricks of Tello which show 
this peculiar form, bear the legend of Ur-Nina, whom on other evidence I placed before 
Sargon and Naram-Sin. 

G. AVe draw a final and conclusive argument from a door-socket of Sargon him- 
self In Part I, PI. 14, Nos. 23-25, I published three brief legends of a king whom, 
influenced by Pinches's reading (Garde), I read Gande (pp. 28 ff".), and whom I 
regarded as identical with Gandash, the founder of the Cassite dynasty. All that I 
brought forward in favor of this identity 1 herewith withdraw ; when I wrote those 

'Cf. above, p. 26, note 2. They will be published in Series B of the expedition work edited by myself. 

'The bricks of the ancient cuib around the allar, p. 24, and Ihe bricks of the ancient arch, p. 26. In his report 
of Oct. 26, 1895, Haynes refers to the discovery of a terra -cotta floor with a rim a little below the pavement of Naram- 
Sin. He regards it as a combination of bath and closet, "proving that the present customs and methods of preparing 
the body forworship, as practiced by Moslems [in the immediate neighborhood of their mosques], is of very great anti- 
quity. The drainage from this floor was conducted into a large vertical tile drain, which is 2 m. long and has an 
average diameter of 85 cm." This tile drain is "supported by a double course of bricks, piano convex in form, with 
finger marks on the convex side." For a specimen of Ur-Nina's bricks cf. De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 31, No. 1. Specimens 
of this class of Nippur bricks were given by Peters in The American Archmological Journal X, p. 34 (two drawings 
from the hand of the late Mr. Mayer, f 20 Dec, 1894, in Bagdad). The peculiar shape of these bricks in llie arch is 
scarcely distinguishable on PI. XXV III of the present work. 


pages, I was still somewhat influenced by the current view of Assyriologists, that 
later kings occasionally imitated older patterns in their script. Since then I have 
completely shaken oflFthis old theory as utterly untenable when contrasted with all the 
known facts of Babylonian palaeography. The observation, however, which I made on 
p. 29, note 2, that the chai-acters represent the peculiarities of Ur-Kina's inscriptions 
was entirely correct. Since then a large number of vase fragments have been exca- 
vated, by which I was enabled to confii-m and strengthen my previous judgment based 
upon the study of a few squeezes of badly effaced inscriptions and to analyze the pal- 
seogi-aphic peculiarities of this whole class of ancient texts completely. I arrived at 
once at the result that the three legends published on PI. 14 were wiitten by Lugal- 
kigub-nidudu, " lord of Erech, king of Ur," who left us No. 86. Among other gifts, 
such as vases, dishes, etc.,' this sovereign presented a number of unhewn diorite, 
calcite, stalagmite and other blocks- to the temple as raw material for future use ' At 
the time of Bur-Sin II several of these blocks, of which one is published on PI. XVII, 
were still unused.' They had been handed down from a hoary antiquity and scrupu- 
lously preserved for c. 1500-2000 years in the temple archive. Bur-Sin II selected a 
diorite block from among them, left the few words of its donor respectfully on its side,^ 
tni-ned it into a door-socket, wrote his own inscription on its polished surface and pre- 
sented it in this new form to the temple. But something similar happened many hun- 
dred years before. According to Part I, p. 29, section 1,'' the same rude inscription is 
scratched upon the back side of a door-socket of Sargon I. From the analogous case 
just treated it follows that Lugal kigub-nidudu must have lived even befoi-e Sargon I, 
and consequently that all other inscriptions which have the same palatograph ic peculi- 
arities as his own can only be classified as pre-Sargonic. 

' Cf. PI. XVIir, 40-48. 

*Cf. Part I, p. 29. 

'These blocks received therefore only a kind of registering mark scratched merely upon their surface [Dinglr En- 
lil(la) Lugal-ki-gub ni dudu (n«) amuna-nhub, "To Inlil L. presented (this" z=?ie)). The inscription on the block, 
PI. XVII, No. 39, had originally 8 li. according to the traces left. On the diorite blocks these inscriptions are well 
preserved; on the calcite blocks however, whose surface corroded and crumbled in the course of six millenniums, they 
have suffered considerably. Cf. on the whole question of presenting stones as raw material to the temple, Hilprecht 
in Z. A. VIII, pp. 190 S. 

* As shown above. 

'Cf. The curses on the statue B of Gudea, col. VII, 59 ff., on Ihe door-sockets of Sargon, PI. 1, 12 ff., PI. 2, 13 ff., 
on the lapis lazuli block of Kadashman-Turgu, PI. 24, pp. 14-20. In the latter case the lapis lazuli was likewise pre- 
sented as raw material to be used in the interest of the temple. But the inscription— this was the intention of the 
donor— was to be preserved (a thin piece of lapis lazuli being cut off, cf. PI. XI, No. 2.j) in remembrance of the gift. 

»Cf. Parti, "Table of Contents," p. 47. 



In the briefest possible way I will indicate the general results which I di'aw from 
a combined study of the most ancient Kippur and Tello inscriptions. With the very 
scanty material at my disposal this sketch can only be tentative in many points. For 
every statement, however, which I shall make, I have my decided reasons, which will 
be found in other places.^ 

At the earliest period of history which inscriptions reveal to us, Babylonia has a 
high civilization and is known under the name of Kengi, "land of the canals and 
reeds,"- which includes South and Middle Babylonia and possibly a part of the North. 
Its first ruler of whom we know is '■'■ En-shagsag-ana, lord of Kengi.'" Whether he 
was of foreign origin or the shaykh of a smaller Babylonian " city " which extended its 
influence or the regular descendant of the royal family of one of the larger cities, can- 
not be decided. It is therefore impossible to say whether he belonged to the Sumei-ian 
or Semitic race, or traced his origin to both. That the Semites were already in the 
country results, aside from other considerations,'' from the fact that the human figures on 
the stele of Ur-Enlil, which belongs to about the same period,' show the characteristic 

•In Asiyriaca, part II, in Z. A., and in response to a repealed invitation from the President and Secretary of tlie 
Philosophical Society of Great Britian, in the Transactions of the latter society, where I expect to give a more 
complete sketch of the political and social conditions of ancient Babylonia. 

'Cf. No. 90, 4 (also No. 87, col. II, 21) and above p. 33, note 9. 

' Ills inscriptions (Nos. 90-93) have the oldest form of mu, have older forms for sag and show other characteristic 
features of high antiquity, llis'namo siguifles "lord is the king of heaven." 

* Cf. for the present only the important argument drawn from Lugalzaggisi's inscription No. 87, col. HE, 38. Here 
we have the same writing DA- OR, which from the inscriptions of Nebuchadrezzir II and other latest Babylonian 
kings, is known to be a Semiticism for daru. Cf Deliizsch, Asuyrisclies Uandworterbuch, p. 213. 

* It has the most ancient forms for dam and mu and shows a very characteristic feature of the oldest period cf 
V riling by contracting the name of Jiin-din-dug(-ga), or Ba'u (cf. above p. 38) into a monogram. The primitive 
style of art, and such details as the headdress of the god, the short garment of the two persons following the sheep 
and goat, the nakedness of Ur-Eiilil, the fact that his figure and the other two have tiieir hair shaved off, corrob- 
orate my determination of the age of this monument. On the other hand, this stele and No. 38 of the same plate, 
which doubtless belongs to the same age, show us a real Old Babylonian master, who produced a beautiful ensemble 
with a few simple lines, and knew how to breathe life into his very realistic but very graceful figures. Cf. the great 
skill he exhibits in his drawing of the graceful outlines of a gazel, and his remarkable knowledge of animal locomo- 
tion ! The two animals in No. 37 "represent very characteristically two species, the near one a goat and the far one a 
sheep. The goat shows more characteristics of the wild species of Eastern Persia and Afghanistan than of the Per- 
sian, and so may be a domestic hybrid between the two (i. e., Caprafalconerii Gapra mgagrus). The sheep is 
probably also derived front Eastern Persia and is perhaps the ' urial ' Oois vignei, which is an ally of the domestic 
sheep. It has resemblance also to the Armenian wild sheep Oois gmelinii, but tlie rugosity of the horns is too great, 
and the lines are too vertical " (communication from my colleague. Dr. Edward D. Cope, Professor of Zoology and 
Compaiative Anatomy, who kindly examined the monument). 


features of a mixed race.^ The capital of this early kingdom is likewise unknown.^ 
In all probability it was Erech/' The religious centre of Kengi was the sanctuai*y of 
Inlil at Nippur.' It stood under the especial care of every ruler who claimed supreme 
authority over the country, and who called himself patesi gal Inlil,^ to define his posi- 
tion as being obtained by divine authority. The chief local administrator of the tem- 
ple in ^Nippur seems to have had the title damJcar gaU This I infer from my analysis 
of the meaning of damhar and from the inscriptions of IS^os. 94 and 95 in connection 
with Ko. 96, where a certain Aba-Inlil {== KUhit-Bel) who has the title of damJcar, 
presents a vase to I^inlil '• for the life of Ur-Inlil, patesi of ^Nippur."' Ur'* and Larsam^ 
and doubtless other places whose names are not yet known from inscriptions, were 
prominent cities in this early Babylonian kingdom. They had their own sanctuaries, 
which stood under the control of a patesi. This title characterizes its bearer, according 
to his religious position, as sovereign lord of a temple and chief servant of the god 
worshiped in it. The fact that a patesi, in addition, often occupied a political position 
as king or governor, does not interfere with this view. He is first of all the highest 
official of his god, representing him in his dealings with his subjects ; in other words, 

' Prof. Cope wrote me on this subject : "The shortness of the jaws however is certainly not a Semitic character in 
human faces, and this character renders the physiognomy very peculiar. The hooked nose and large eyes on the con- 
trary are Semitic. As a result I should say the figures represent an Aryan race with some Semitic tendencies. The 
identification of such a ruce is of much interest [indeed it is of vital importance for the whole Sumerian question ! 
— H.]. The people evidently have no Mongolian tendencies." 

'It may have stood in No. 90, 5, lugal which is only preserved in part. The traces do not point to the ideo- 
gram of Unug, more to kalama. 

'Cf. Nos. 86, 4-14 ; also the fact that Erech is the capital of Lugal kigub-nidudu and Lugalzaggisi and is promi- 
nently mentioned in Edingiranagin's inscriptions. Cf. also Hommel, QescMchte, p. 306, and especially p. 300, observe 
the important position which Erech holds in the titles of the kings of the dynasty of Isin en (shega) Unuga^i \_N. B. 
Winckler's reading of Part I, No. 26, 3, as Sin-ga-mil, is an absolute palseographic impossibility. If anything, the 
reading of this line as Unugki.gage is sure beyond question (against Winckler, Altorientalische Forachungen III, p. 

*Cf. above, p. 23, and among other points, especially No. 87, col. I, 36-41. 

' Cf. No. 87, col. I. A similar title occurs in the inscriptions of Tello, patesi gal Ningirsu (Entemena and his son 
Enanatuma). Apparently at an early time the god Ninib received the W\.\e patent gal Inlil (PI. 55, Obv. 17), and the 
kings and governors were satisfied with the title pateni Inlil. 

•Cf. No. 94: \. Dingir Nin-din-dug, 3. Ur-dmgir En-lil, S. dam-kar gal, i. amu shub, "To Ba'u Ur-Enlil the chief 
agent {scil. of Inlil) devoted (it)." The current translation of damkar, "merchant," is too narrow in many passages. 
Cf also No. 95: 1. [^mgir ji-]in.din-dug ga 2. Ur-Mu-ma 8. [djam-kar 4. [««£])irW(] 5. la-muna sJmb], "To Ba'u Ur- 
Mama, agent of Enlil presented it." For dingir Ma-ma cf. the ideogram of Gula, 'li7iffir Meme in later texts (e. g., 
Strassmaier, Camhyset, 145, 3) and the goddess Mami II R. 51, 55a, and in old Bnbylonian contracts (the last two 
references I owe to Jensen). From the fragment of an inscribed stone in Bagdad I copied the phrase " dam kar 
dingir DUN-GI, preceded by the titles of a king of the second dynasty of Ur, and followed by dingir Uru'^i-ka. 

' Cf No. 97, which seems to have been devoted by this very [Ur]-Enlil, patesi of Nippur, to Bel. 

'Cf. Nos. 80 and 87, col. II, 30-33, mentioned also by Edingiranagin. 

»Cf No. 87, col. II, 33-37. 


he is the legitimate possessor of all the privileges connected with this title. These 
privileges vary according to the sphere of power which a god exercises beyond the 
limits of his temple or city, and depend chiefly upon the popularity of his cult, the per- 
sonal devotion and energy of his human representative, and, more than anything else, 
upon the strength and valor of the city's army. In order to define them accurately, it 
is first of all necessary to determine the political power of the god's city in each indi- 
vidual case. As soon as we have a clear conception of the latter, we have the key to 
a correct understanding of the position and privileges of its patesi. But the title itself 
does not express any reference either to the political dependence or independence of its 

A troublesome enemy of Babylonia at this early period was the city of Kish, 
which therefore did not form part (any longer ?) of Kengi proper. It had apparently 
its own peculiar cult and stood under the administration of a patesi,- who was eager to 
extend his influence far beyond the limits of his cit}', and sought ereiy opportunity to 
encroach upon the territory of his southern neighbor. For Kish is styled yul shag ' 
" wicked of heart," or ga yul ' " teeming with wickedness." The very fact that one 

' Winckler, Altorientalise7ie Fonchungen III, pp. 233ff. gives a very good analysis of the relalioQ of a god to his 
city and of the origin and growth of Oriental stales in general, and of the Babylonian kingdom in particular, but his 
view as to the meaning and use of the word patesi is entirely incorrect ("diegebrauchliclie Bezeichnuog fiir die unter- 
worfenen Konige ist in Babylonien putesi," p. 234). An interesting monument from Tello, recently published by 
Hc-uzey in Revue d' AayHologie, serves as an excellent illustration of tlie correctness of my definition, which I share 
with Tiele {Z. A. VIE, p. 373), H'lmmel {Oesehichle, p. 29t f.) and other Assyriologists. The inscription to which I 
refer had defied the united efforts of Oppert, Fleuzey and myself for a long while. But I am now able to offer the 
following correct interpretation. 81! Lugal Kish, sanga i^'iNin-su-gir (sic!) it"- Sin, S'l-gir mu-gin, Lugal-kurum-zigam 
pa-ie-si S/u>-[pur]-i[o*'], "Ddcision ! Nmsugir has appointed the king of Kish as priest of Ninsugir. Lugil-kurum 
zigura is patesi of Sliirpurla." This valuable document is important in more than one way. The whole phraseology 
seems to be Semitic rather than Sumerian (cf. also «a?»ja artificial ideogram composed of sa + ga). The name means 
Sharrukurumat-shame, "The king is food of heaven " (" Der Koaig ist Himmelsspeise"). A foreign conqueror of 
Shirpurla, who is already a king, in addition styles himself patesi of Lagash, expressly declaring that Ningirsu him- 
self, the highest god of the city, called him to fill this office. The condition of affairs is here plain. The conqueror 
seeks to represent to the people and to the priesthood his violent act as having been committed in the service of their 
god and carrying out his decision. Therefore he does not call himself king — which he already was — nor patesi in the 
sense of our governor, because he cannot designate himself as his own subject, but patesi as tlie highest official of the 
god Ningirsu, in the care of his temple and in the adrainistration of that territory over which Ningirsu ruled ; ia 
other word:', as the legitimate possessor of all the privileges which, up to the time of his conquest, had been connected 
with this title. Cf. Ililprechl, Recent Research in Bible Lands, pp. 71 ff. 

'Cf. Nos. 108 and 109 (portions of the same vase). The beginning (No. 108) is to be restored as follows: 
1, DinijirZa\ma-ma'\ 2. U-diig- .... 3. pat{e si'i 4. 7i«[s/t«'i]- 

' No. 93, 4. 

*No. 103, 4. Oa is written plionetically im ga(n), Briinnow, Z/J«i 4039, as becomes clear from a comparison of 
No. 113, 4 with 8 and No. 112, 4. No. 1 13 reads as follows : 1. Di/ijjirjifinUl 2. DingirEnUl-la{l) 3. dumu ad-dage 
4. ga tillashu 5. nam-ti 6. damdamunashu 7. a-munashub, "To Ninlil and Inlil the son of the ada (sct'J. of the 
temple of Inlil, No. 113, 6f.) presented it for abundance of life, for the life of his wife and child." Apparenlly a sjn 


patesi of K^sh presented a large sandstone vase to Inlil of Nippur, shows us that tem- 
porarily he was even in possession of an important part of Kengi, including the sanc- 
tuary of Bel. Enshagsagana himself waged war against his northern enemy, and 
presented the spoil of this expedition to Inlil of Nippur.' The same was done by an- 
other king of Kengi, who lived shoitly before or after. He infested Kish and defeated 
or even captiu'ed its king, Enne-Ugun.'- " His statue, his shining silver, the utensils, 
his property," he carried home victoriously, and deposited in the same sanctuary as his 

was born unto him, and tlie liappy fiitlier presented a vase to the temple. Cf. Jensen in Sehrader's K. B. Ill, part 1, 
p. 25, II (where Jensen and Amiaud, however, mif-rcad the name of the donor. As tlie sepaialing lines tlearly prove, 
the name is not Ur-Eidil hut rr-Enlil dalidvdv). No. 113 reads : 1. Dhiairj^in.ui-ra 2. I'm na-budabi 3. snrig 
(Amiaud et Mechineau, Tableau, No. 134) dingir/in-lil 4. gan-til lanliu 5. L'rSimvg (Amiaud ct Mechineau, I c, No. 
117) -ga (<'i'"mrSimvga = E&\) 6. dubsar ada 1. e fUnmrlCn-lilka-ge 8. ga-tila-shu 9. nam-ti 10. ama dvg(,sic.')-zi-thu 
11. namti 12. damdvmuria-ihu 13. a mu-na-i/ivb, "To Ninlil Uiunabadabi, priest of Inlil, for abundance of life, 
and Ur-Siuiuga ('servant of Ea'), scribe of the ada of the temple of Inlil (.ada e identical with the frequent title of 
the later contract literature abu litH), for abundance of life presented it for the life of his (distributive := their !) good 
and faithful molhtr, and lor the life of his (their) wife and child." Apparently two brothers who held two different 
positions in the temple of Eel presented together this beautiful vase for their mother, wives and children. Cf. 
also No. 106: 1. Divgir^incl[in'\dvg-ga 2. Hin-cnnu (cf. Lvgalen-nv, No. 114, 5) 3. ga-iU-la-shu 4. a-mu- 
7ia[-«7;«J], "To'Qa.'n Ninerinuihr en-nun ^ na> !) presented it lor abundance of life." My constant transliteration 
of the postposition " ku" by sJm needs a word of explanation. I believe with Jensen, that no Sumerian postposition 
ku exists, and that the old Babylonian sign ol this postposition transliterated by ku is rather identical with the cliarac- 
ter in Part I, PI. 1, 13 ; PI. 2, 13, which I identifitd as shu (I. c, pp. 13 f.). 

'Cf. Nos. 91 and 92, which supplement each other: 1. [Dlnglr E'\n-Ul-la 2. En-sliag aagan-na 3. nig-ga EUli'^i 
4. yul shag 5. a-mu-na-ihvb, " To Inlil E. presented the pioperty of Kish, wicked of heart (refening to Kish)." In 
connection with this text I call attention to the fuct that the woid nnmrag "spoil," the etymology of which was ob- 
scure (cf. Part I, p. 21) is purely Sumerian, being composed of nam-j-n-faff (V iJ. 20, 13c), corresponding to Assyrian 
shallatu shah'du (cf Delilzsch, Auyr. Gram., gg 73, 132), a synonym of shallatu " spoil." 

'Several vase fragments mention this event, but the whole iriscriptitn cannot jet be restored from them. Nos. 
103-1-110 belong to the same vase. Nop. 104 and 105, which contain portions of the same inscription and supplement 
part of the text, belongtolwoothervases. Thefragment of afourth vase. No. 102, contains part of the same inscription. 
For C. B. M. 9297, which has remnants of 1. 1-4 of No. 102, agrees in thickness, material and characters of writing 
«ntiiely with Nos. 103 -|- 110 and belonged doubtless to the same vase. No. 105 had a briefer inscription than the rest. 
Of the longer insciiption the bcginnirg is wanting, the first preserved portion. No. 1C3, is to be supplemented by No. 
104, to be continued by No. 102, 2, and (alter a break of sivcial lines) to be closed with No. 110. I restore the in- 
scription as follows : 1. [DingirEnlil-la 2. [Ivgal lvi-hvr-ra 3. Name of the king 4. [en Ki-engi'\ 5. (No. 103 begins) 
[lv'\gal .... 6. i/d dingi-rlEn-liUi] 6. mana-ni-yun-a (cf No. 86, 1-5) 7. EisltK 8. mu-gvl 9. En-ne-Vgun (Biiin- 
now, list 88C2, cf Jensen in Z. A. I, p. 57f.) 10. Ivgal Ei>7J=i 11. mv-dvr 12. Ivgal erim ffin'iBAWi-ka-ge 13. higal 
EUhi<i-ge 14. vru-na ga (written phonetically =gan, Biiinnow, List 4039, for cf No. 113, 4, with 8 and No. 112, 4) 

yul 15. nig-ga 10 bil 17-18 (or more) wanting 19. mu-ne-gi 20. alana-bi (observe the peculiar sign for bi in 

Nos. 105 and WQl),^!. azag-tagina-U 22. ginJinig-ga-bi 2S. di^ffirJSn-lil-la 24. [&']re W*-i-s/m 25. a mu-na-s7iub ["To 
Inlil, lord o( lands, N. N., lord of Shumer (king of Erech)]— when he had looked favorably upon him (=nas7i« ska 
hii, Biiinnow, List 10545), he inlestcd Kish, he cast dovin (or bound? cf Jensen in Sehrader's A'. J3. Ill, part 1, 
p. 48) Enne-Ugun, king of Kish ; the king of the hordes of ,'/'«''BAN*"*, king of Kisli^ — his city teeming with ma- 
lignity, the property . . . .- he burned, .... he l)rought l)ack, and his statue, his shining silver, the utensils (t.«M = 
anu, II i?. 23, 9 e.f ), his property, he presented unto Inlil of Nippur." The reading of the name of the king of Kish 
is of course only provisional. He was apparently a Semite. 


predecessor. It is highly interesting to learn from the votive inscription with which 
the Babylonian ruler accompanied his gift (No. 102), that the king of Kish apparently 
had connections with the city of "'"''BAN'. For he is styled " king of the hosts of 
"'"'BAX*', king of Kish." In other words, we find the two mentioned cities in exactly 
the same close association as they appear on Edingiranagin's famous stele of vultures. 
It is therefore evident that the king of Kish was not only an ally of '""'BAT^T', but as 
commander of an army of this country, was in all probability himself a native of 
"^''BAN^*-'. In other words, I infer from this and other passages, that Kish (which I 
believe formed originally part of Kengi) at this early time was already under the 
control of a foreign people, which came from the ISTorth, appealed at the threshold of 
the ancient Sumerian kingdom of Kengi, and was constantly pushing southward. 
Kish formed the basis of its military opsrations, and at this tini3 was, in fact, tha ex- 
treme outpost of the advancing hordes of '""''BAIS'*', serving as a border fortification 
against Kengi. The success of the Babylonian monarch who defeated Enne-Ugun, 
cannot have lasted very long. For another king of Kish, Ur-Shulpauddn,^ presented 
several inscribed vases " to Inlil, lord of lands, and to Ninlil, mistress of heaven and 
earth, consort of Inlil" (N^o. 93), and was therefore in the possession of Nippur, lie 
must have dealt a fatal blow to the kingdom of Kengi, for besides his usual title lugcil 
K\sh he assumed another, which unfortunately is broken away.' To judge from the 
analogy of other inscriptions of this period, I have no doubt it contained the acquired 
land or province of which Kish had now become the capital, ' scarcely, however, Kengi 
itself How long he ruled, how far his kingdom extended, and whether he was able to 
hold his conquests, we do not know. So much is C2rtain, ths great centre in the 
North which conti'olled the movements of its warriors in the South, continued to send 
out its marauding expeditions against Babylonia. And even if a temporary reaction 
occasionally should have set in, the weakened South could not withstand the youthful 
strength and valor of its northern enemies for any length of time. At last ""''BAN' 
was prepared to deal the final blow to the ancient kingdom of Kengi, however little 
of it there may have been left. The son of " Ukush, patesi of "'"'BAN'V was this 
time himself the chief commander of the approaching army. Erech opened its doors, 
and the rest of Babylonia down to the Persian gulf fell an easy prey to the conquer- 
ing hero. A hero indeed, Lugalzaggisi was, if we can trust his own long inscription 

' "Servant of SliulpauJdu." The same name occurs occasionally in the early contracts of Nippur and Telle. Cf. 
Scheil in Recr.uil XVIf, p. 41. 

^Traces of lugal are clearly visible in 1. 8. 

' No. 87, col. I, 5. 

*/. «., "The king is filled with unchangeahle power." Cf. Nimrod Ep., 13, 39 ; Oilgamesh gitmala emitka. The 
name is possibly to be read Semitic. 


of 132 lines,' carved over 100 times on as many large vases, which he presented to the 
old national sanctuary of the country in Nippur. 

The titles themselves with which he opens his dedication are a reflex of the great 
achievements he could boast of : Col, I, 3. " Lugalzaggisi, 4. king of Erech, 5. king 
of the woi-ld, G. priest of Ana, 7. hero 8, of Nidaba, 9. son of Ukush, 10. patesi of 
"'^'BAN", U. hero 12. of Nidaba, 13-14. he who was favoiably looked upon by the 
faithful eye of Lugalkurkura (^. e., Inlil), 15. great patesi IG. of Inlil, 17. unto whom 
intelligence was given 18. by Enki - (== Ea), 19. he who was called (chosen) 20. by 
Utu, 21. sublime minister^ 22. of Enzu (=Sin), 23. he who was invested with power 
24. by Utu,^ 25. fosteier of Xinna. 2G. a son begotten 27. by Nidaba, 28. he who was 
nourished with the milk of life 29. of Nin-harsag,'^ 30. servant of Umu, priestess of 
Erech, 31. a slave brought up 32. by Nin-a-gid-ga'-du, 33. mistiess of Erech, 34. the 
great abarahku of the gods." ^ He was one of the gi'eatest monarchs of the ancient 

'It is the longest complete inscription of llie fourth and fifth pre Christian millenniums so far obtained from Baby- 
lonia, and as a historical document of this ancient period it is of fundamental importance. The text published on Pis. 
38-42, No. 87, was restored by myself from 88 fragments of 64 different vases under the most trying circumstances. The 
work was just as much a mathematical task as it was a palocographical and philological problem. On the basis of 
palajographical evidence I selected c. 150 pieces out of aheap of c. COO fragments and particles. Then I succeeded in 
placing the five fragments on PI. XIX, No. 49, together. By doing this I obtained the beginnings and ends of each 
column. I noticed that the lines of each of the first two columns must be identical, as the separating lines run from 
the first to the last column. The difference of the numbers of lines between the second and third lines I could easily 
determine by a simple calculation. It was more difficult to find out the exact number of lines of which the first and 
second columns originally consisted. By calculating the original circumference, and making a number of logical 
combinations, I arrived at the conclusion, which finally proved to be correct, that each of the first two columns had 
forty-six and the third only forty lines. Then followed the tedious work of arranging the liltle Iragments and deter- 
mining their exact position, although often enough not more than a few traces of the original cliaracters were left to 
guide me. I had the complete translation prepared for this volume, but I am obliged to withdraw it from want of 
space. In the previous and following pages nearly two-thirds of the whole inscription have been treated, according to 
the passages needed. A complete coherent transliteration and translation will be found in another place very soon. 
Since the restoration of my text, Haynes has found many duplicates, which in every case confirmed the correctness of 
my arrangement. Col. Ill, 25f. can now be restored completely. 

'Cf. Jensen in Schraiier's K. B. Ill, Part 1.' The titles of Lugalzaggisi are not unsimilar to those of kings und 
patesis of Tello. 

^Cf. above, p. 41, note 6. 

*One expects rather the ideogram for shakkanakku (Briinnow, List 919.)). Ne ("power") + jrj»7t ("man") 
apparently is its synonym. Cf. sag gith, I fi , 3, No. 5, 1 (and 2), 3 ; the present work. Part I, No. 81, 7. 

'Literally "ate" (akalv) or "was filled wiih " {shuznunu). 

^The variant is a peculiar form of ga (not =iyi), cf. col. Ill, 21, 23 and variants. 

'No. 87, col. I, 1. DiiigirEnAil 2. lugal kur kur-ra 3. Lugal-zag-gisi 4. Ivgal Unugkiga 5. lugal kalam-ma G. shib 
An7,a7. galu mag 8. d"i'JirNidiiba 9. dvmu U-kush 10. [pa-<]e-si!7«Afij4iV*« 11. gala mug \2.<im'rNidnba-ka X^.igizi 
bar-ra 14. dinai^Lvgalkur kur ra 15. pa te si gal 16. MngirEn-lil 17. gishPl-SUU-svvi-ma 18. dlngirEN-Kl 19. mupad- 
da 20 ''ingirutu 21. lug mag 33. flwgirKn zu 23. ne-guh 34. dingirutu 35. u-a <''»girMnnn 36. dicmu tu-da 27. dmjirm.daba 
28. ga zi ku. a 39. dingirjifin-Tiar sag 30. galu di-ngirUtuu sanga Unug^i-ga 31. sag eyi-a 32. d'ngirNina gid yadu 33. nin 
Unvgkigaka 34. Hi {?) mug 35. dingirri-ite-ra. 


East, and yet his very name had been forgotten by later generations. He lived long 
before Sargon I founded his famous empire, and he called a kingdom his own which 
in no way was inferior to that of his well-known successor, extending from the Persian 
Gulf to the shores of the Mediterranean. I quote the king's own poetical language : 
""When Inlil, lord of the lands, invested Lugalzaggisi with the kingdom of the 
woild and gi-antcd him success before the world, when he filled the lands with his 
renown (power) (and) subdued (the countiy) from the rise of the sun to the setting 
of the sun — at that time he straightened his path from the lower sea of the Tigris and 
Euphrates to the upper sea and granted him the dominion of everything (?) from the 
rise of the sun to the setting of the sun and caused the countries to rest (dwell) in 
jieace." ^ It becomes evident from this passage, in which Lugalzaggisi declares him- 
self to have been invested with the kingdom of the world by Inlil of A'ippur, "lord 
of the lands," that only IS^ippur can have been the ancient seat of the sharrut kihrat 
arhaHm, which manifestly is but the later Semitic rendering of the ancient Sumerian 
nam-lcgal lalama. I have examined all the passages in the fresh light of this text 
and find that Nippur fulfills bj' far better the required conditions than Kutha or any 
other city which has been proposed in Xorthern Babylonia. But, be it remembered, to 
the early kings of Babylonia this title meant more than a mere possession of the city 
whose god claimed the right of granting the sJtarrut Tiibrai arhaHm. Down to the 
time of Hammurabi only those laid claim to this significant title who really owned 
territory far beyond the north and south of Babylonia, who, in the Babylonian sense 
of the word, had conquered a quasi worldwide dominion, defined by the foiu* natural 
boundaries (Part I, p. 25). The later Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions are of 
value for the determination of the meaning of this title at their own time, but they 
have little importance for the question as to its origin and earliest localization, if the 
title must be localized at all hazards. 

According to the manner of usurpers,' Lugalzaggisi retained Erech, the old 
metropolis of the counti-y, as his own new capital of this first great Oi'iental state, of 
which Kengi became now the chief province. Babylonia, as a whole,^ had no fault 

' Col. I, 36. Ud divgirEn-lil 37. Ivgal hur-kur-ra 38. Lugalzaggisi 39. nam-lugal 40. kalam-ma 41. ma nasum maa 
42. igi kalam-ma-ge 4Z. simanadi-a 44. kur-kur{a)ne na 4). ma-ni-sig ga-a 46. Uta eQi)ta. Col. II, 1. Ulu shu{n). 
nhu 2. gu n,anagar-ra-a 3. wta-bii 4. a ab ba 5. sigta ta 0. Idigna 7. Baranunu{vi\\.ho\xi (leteriii.)-6i(=: "and"') 8. a- 

ab-ba9. iginimma-sJiulO. gira-bi 11. Ki-mi-nadi \2. i'ta e(a)-la 13. Ufa shu(,a)-ahu H. [^U"'j'trE'\n-lilli 15 nin, 

16 mu-ni dug,!!, kur kvrOO u sttl la 18. mu-da-na. 

^ Of Dungi we know loo little lo call liiin an exception. Of the kings of llie second dynasty of Ur, who assumed 
the proud title, we know now from Pis. 53 and 58 (cf. above, p. '61 and note 4) that thoy h:id made conquests as far 
as Syiia and Elam. 

^ Well stated by Wincklcr, Altorientalische Forschungen III, p. 234. 

' Cf. col. II, 19. kithim ma 30. a.'</ul la mu-da-ga (;= shaLanu) 21. Kien-gi 23. pn-te-si kur kur-ra, etc., etc. 


to find with tills new and powerful regime. The Sumerlan civilization was directed 
into new channels and prevented from stagnation ; tiic ancient cults between the lower 
Tigris and Euphrates began to revive and its temples to shine in new splendor. Erech, 
Ur,' Larsa - and Nippur^ received equal attention from their devoted patesi. But first 
of all, "'"''BAX*' itself, the native city of the great conqueror, was raised by his energy 
and glory to a position of unheard-of Influence and political power. Lugalzaggisl 
stands out from the dawn of Babylonian history as a giant who deserves our full 
admiration for the work he accomplished. He did not appear unexpectedly on the 
scene of his activity. We had been prepared for the collapse of the ancient monai'chy 
on the Persian Gulf, with its long but unknown history, by the preceding invasions 
and victories of the Xorthern hordes to which he belonged. And yet when suddenly 
this great empire of Lugalzaggisl stands before our eyes as a fait accompli, we can 
scarcely conceive, whence it came and how it arose. 

There is no doubt in my mind that Lugalzaggisi's achievements in Babylonia 
represent the first signal success of the invading Semites from the Xorth. On the 
previous pages we have seen how these hordes were pushing gradually southward. 
After for a number of years they had concentrated their attacks upon the border forti- 
fications of Northern Babylonia and had established a military station and kingdom in 
Kish, it was but a question of time when the whole country in the South had to suc- 
cumb to their power. The oldest written monuments of Babylonia do not designate 
these enemies by any single definite name: they are the hordes of the city of "'"'B AX*' 
and Kish combined, apparently but two centres of the same powerful people which 
was roaming over the fertile steppes of Mesopotamia, and whose chief stronghold 
doubtless was '""'BAN*'. What ancient city, then, is this "'"'B AX*'? That we have 
not to place it "in Suslan territory," as Maspero' is tempted to do, Is beyond question. 
The ideogi-am for lugal on an inscribed object of Tello and presented by a king of 
"'"'BAX*' (De Sarzec, I. c, PI. 5, Xo. 3), points with necessity to the north for the 
location of our city. As this peculiar form of the character for lugal so far has only 
been found in such cuneiform inscriptions as contain Semitic words written phoneti- 
cally, or in other texts which are written ideograi^hically, but, on the basis of strong 
arguments ' must be read as Semitic, we are forced to the conclusion that this charac- 

'Col. II, 30-3'3. UrunJ'i ma guda-gim »ng ana-shu mu-um gur, "Ur like a steer he raised to llie top of heaven." 

'Col. U, 33-37. Larsam''i ur king dingirUtu-ge a-ne-yiilla mu-da ga. F(irffi«*BAN'"' cf. ibidim, 38-43. 

'As becomi's evident from liia titles and from the extraordinary number of vases presented to Inlil. 

' The Paitniif CitHhaiion, p. 608, Cf. also Ileuzcy in De Saizuc, I c, p. 183. 

'Cf. for the present al)Ove, p. 49, note 1. More on this suliject and on "the Semitic influence in early cuneiform 
writing in general in another place. My above statement is the result of a complete and exliaustive examination of 
all the published cuneiform material in which the peculiar form of lugnl occurs. 


ter, while doubtless derived from the well-known Sumerian form, was invented and 
employed by a Semitic nation. Furthermoi-e, I call attention to the important fact 
that Lugalzaggisi, who was surely a Semite,' shows his nationality in various ways, 
such as the use of certain phrases, which look very suspicious in an ancient Sumerian 
inscription,- and especially in his use of the ideogram da-ur, doubtless of Semitic 
origin (= <Za?*«), for " eternal."^ There is only one ancient place in Northern Meso- 
potamia which could have been rendered as "the city of the bow" ideograph ically by 
-the Sumcrians, namely Harran, with which '^'BAN*' is doubtless identical. For 
according to Arabic writers, esipeclaW j Albiruni (ed. Sachau, p. 204),'' the ground-plot 
of Ilarran resembled that of the moon (?". e., the crescent or half-moon), and Sachau, 
who gave us the first accurate sketch of this city, finds it very natural that " Arabic 
writers could conceive the idea of comparing it with the form of the half-moon." ^ 
Excellent, however, as this Arabic description is, and valuable as it proves for our final 
location of ""'BAX*', the ancient Babylonian ideographic rendering as " city of the 
bow " was a more faithful description of the peculiar way in Avhich Ilarran was built 
than any other, as everybody can easily convince himself by throwing a glance upon 
Sacliau's plan in his Heise in Syrien and Mesopotamien. This correct solution of a 
vexed problem becomes of fundamental importance for our whole conception of the 
history of the ancient East. First of all, I have furnished a better basis for Winckler's 
ingenious theoiy of the original seat of the sharrut Mslishati. All that could be gath- 
ered from later historical sources, beginning with the end of the second millennium 
before Christ, Winckler brought together to formulate a view which never found much 
favor with Assyiiologists and historians.'' I opposed it myself^ on the ground that his 
reasons proved nothing for the ancient time, because Harran was never mentioned in 
a text before the period just stated, and that in view of the total absence of a single 

' If he did not adopt a Sumerian name when ascending the throne of Kengi and of the " kingdom of the world," 
which is very probable, the name of the king must be read something like Sharru.-mali-emxl'ci-ken.i (emuia is masc. 
and tern, in the singular). But the name cannot be regarded as the prototype of Sargon I (:^ S/tarru-ke iiu) , because, 
aside from other reasons, this kind of abbreviation of a fuller name is without parallel in the history of Assyrian proper 
names. They aie abbreviated at the beginning or end, but not in the middle. Cassite names, etc., are foreign names. 

'^Cf., e.g., " from the lower sea of the Tigris and Euphrates to the upper sea," " from the rising of the sun to the 
setting of the tun " and others, which remind us forcibly of the phraseology of the latest Assyrian monarchs. 

' Col. Ill, 36. da-ur yeme, " he may pronounce (speak) forever !" 

* Cf. also >[iz, Geschichte dtr Stadt Harran, in ifesopotamien, p. 9. The remark of the Arabic writer is therefore 
more than a "Treppenwilz, " and is of great historical importance, showing us that not only the ancient Babylonians 
but other peoples were struck by the remarkable form in which Harriin was built. 

' Sachau, I{eise in Syrien vnd ifesopotamien, p. 223. 

' Cf. especially Winckler, Altorientalisehe Forschangen I, pp. 75ff ; III, pp. 201 ff. 

'Part I, pp. 23 f. I was supported in this, e. g., by Jensen in Z. A. VIII, pp. 228 ff. 


reference to this city in our whole ancient literature previous to 1500 B. C, we could 
not speak of it as the seat of a kingdom until we first proved that the city really ex- 
isted. From the fact that (1) Kish and Kisli (shatu) did not only sound alike but 
were even used interchangeably in the inscriptions,' (2) that many other ancient 
Babylonian cities (cf Shirpurla)- are frequently written without a determinative, (3) 
that the city of Kish played a very important role in the inscriptions of Edingirana- 
gin,' (4) that all the ancient empires arose from city kingdoms, and from several other 
considerations,' I inferred that shai' KISH meant originally " king of Kish," a com- 
bination which Winckler himself regarded " naheliegend. "' But notwithstanding 
the great importance which must be attached to the kingdom of Kish in connection 
with the final overthrow of the ancient empire of Kengi, Kish was not the principal 
leader in this whole conquest, but was controlled by a greater power in the Xorth, 
Harran, as I have shown above. Having therefore demonstrated the existence of the 
city of Harran at the threshold of the fifth and fourth pre-Christian millenniums, which 
Winckler failed to do, although Edingiranagin's inscriptions, which necessarily formed 
the starting point of my operations, had been at his disposal for some time, and hav- 
ing furthermore indicated the powerful position which Harran must have occupied as 
the great Semitic centre of the ancient Orient, I am now prepared to accept Winckler's 
theory of the original seat of the sJiarrut kishshati without reserve. I regard the title 
as the Assyrian equivalent of the Sumerian nam-lugal Jcalarna. In view of the lead- 
ing part that Harran had taken in the establishment of the first " kingdom of the 
world " under Lugalzaggisi, Harran became the seat of the Semitic sJiarrtd kishshati 
just as ^Nippur was the centre of the Sumerian nam-lvgol kaloma. When after many 
vicissitudes under Sargon I and K^aram-Sin finally the northern half of ancient 
Kengi, including Tsippur, was definitely occupied by a Semitic population, which 
spoko and wrote its own language, the old Sumerian title nam-lugal kalama, which 
carried the same meaning for the inhabitants of Babylonia as sliarrCd kislishati did for 

' Cf. Wiuckler, I. c, pp. 144 f. 

' In the inscriptions of Ur-Nina wriltcn wilUoul ki. 

'Not only in his stele of vultures, but also in the inscription uncartlied in London {Proe. Soe. DM. Arch., Nov., 
1890). Ilommel was of the opinion (,Die Identitat der alteslen babylonUchen und cigyptisehen Oottergenealogie, p. 
242), that tlie passage in the latter text escaped my attention. I simply had no use for it : (1) lugal Kish an ki 'u some- 
thing entirely ditlerent from lugal an-uh da tab iab-ba or lugal KISil; for if it was possible to say so in Sumerian, it 
could only mean " king of the whole heaven and earth," which the king of course did not want to say. (3) The text 
docs not offer this at all, but must be translated lagal Kish':' -bi-na-dib-bi, "and the king of KiA," inotherwords biia 
copula =: "and," connecting A'tsW' with what stood before. Cf. in the present work, PI. 87, col. II, 7 ("and " the 

•Cf. Parti, pp. 23 f. 

'' AUorientaliiche Furschungen II, p. 11.5, note 1. 


the Semites of Xorthem Mesopotamia, disappeared and was translated into the Sem- 
itic sliarrid Tcihrat arhaHm. The later Sumerian nam-lugal ""ub-da-tah-tab-ha is 
nothing but a translation from the Semitic title back into the sacred Sumerian lan- 
guage bj Semitic scribes of the third millennium B. C. 

l^ot long after Lugalzaggisi's death a reaction seems to have set in. Sugir gen- 
erally transliterated as Girsu, which Urukagina or one of his predecessors raised from 
the obscurity of a provincial town to the leading position in the new kingdom of Shir- 
purla, must be regarded as the centre of a national Sumerian movement against the 
Semitic invaders. '• The lord of Sugir," Nin-8ugir, became the principal god, and 
his emblem -the lion-headed eagle with outspread wings, occasionally appearing in 
connection with two lions, which are victoriously clutched in its powerful talons^ — ba- 
came the coat-of-arms of the city and characterizes best the spirit of independence 
which was fostered in its sanctuary. Urukagina's successors, especially' Ur-]N^ina, 
devoted their time to building temples and fortifying the city of Shirpurla and, as 
faithful patesis, imijressed the power and glory of their warlike deity upon their sub- 
jects. The cult of Nin-Sugir cannot be separated from the national uprising which 
started from his sanctuai'v. Edingiranagin at last felt strong enough to shako off the 
obnoxious yoke of the Semitic oppressors of Kish and Harran. The decisive battle 
which was fought must have been very bloody. The Sumeriaus won it, and they cel- 
ebrated their victoiy, which restored a temporary power and influence over the greater 
part of Kengi to them, in the famous stele of vultures set up by Edingiranagin. 
Erech and Ur played a prominent part in this national war. The former retained its 
place as the capital of the nam-en (of Kengi), but Ur seems to have furnished the 
new dynasty, as I infer from No. 86. 

Although No. 80 of my published texts belongs doubtless to the same general 
period as No. 87, a detailed examination of its pal8eograi)hic peculiarities leads me to 
place it somewhat later, and to regaid it as about contemporary with the inscriptions of 
the kings of Shirpurla, especially with those of Edingiranagin. We learn from it the 
following:' "When Inlil, the loid of the lands, announced life unto Lugal-kigub- 
nidudu, when he added lordship to kingdom, establishing Erech as (the seat of) the 
lordship (the empire) and Ur as (the seat of) the kingdom, Lugal-kigub-nidudu pre- 
sented this for the great and joyful lot (which he received) unto Inlil, his beloved 

' Cf. Heuzey's treatise Le» Armoiries C/ialdeennes. 

^Five different legends liave been found of tliis ruler: (1) X brief legend of three lines (cf. PI. 14), (3) one 
of seven or eight lines (cf PI. X VII, No. 39), (3) one of nineteen lines, ( I) an even larger one of c. thirty lines, (5) 
No 88. Of the lliird class a fragment was e.xcavated after the preparation of my plates, wliich contained the closing 
lines 17-19. The precise connection l)etwecn the upper and lower porlions on PI. .37 cannot be given at present. 


lord for his life.'" In Lngal-kigiib-nidudu- and his son (?) Lugal-ki?al-si' we have 
therefore the first representatives of the first dynasty of Ur. Ur-Gnr and Dungi, etc., 
who lived about 1000 years later, must hereafter be reckoned as members of the second 
dynasty of Ur.' The relation of this dynasty to Edingiranagin is shrouded in absolute 
mystery. It is not impossible that its members ruled before him and were Semites 
who overthrew the dynasty of Lugalzaggisi. 

How long the restored Sumerian influence lasted we do not know. Apparently 
the Semites were soon again in possession of the whole country. The old name 
Kevgl continued to live as an ideogram in the titles of kings, but the name of Shumer, 
by which Southern Babylonia was known to the later Semitic populations, was derived 
from the city of Sugir or Sungir,^ which was the centre of the national uprising of 
the South against the foreign invaders from Kish and Harran. Sargon I finally 
restored what had been lost against Edingiranagin. In his person and work we see 
but a repetition of that which had happened under Lugalzaggisi centuries before. 
From the city of Agade," which became the capital of the Sargonic empire, I derive 
Akkad, the name of Northern Babylonia. The names of Shumer and Akkad are 
therefore but the historical reflex of the final struggle between the Sumerian and Sem- 
itic races, and they were derived from the two cities which took the leading part 
in it.'' 

^ \ . Dinffir En-Ul. 2. Ivgal kur-kur{a)-ye. 3. Lvgal-kigub-ni-du-dura 4. ud di'nairEn-Ul-H 5. gu-zi manade a 
6. nam-en 7. namlugal(a)da 8. ma-na-da-tubbaa 9. Vniig^ go, 10. nam-en 11. mu-ag-ge 12. UrumJ''--ma 13. nam- 
Ivgal 14. muagge 15. Lvgal-ki-gvb-nidu-du ne \%. nam galyullada 17. dingi'rEn-lU hignl ki-a[ga-ni 18. nam-ti- 
lanithu 19. aniv-nas!ivb'\. The use of rfa =; «/(«, "unio, for," in this text is interesting, cf. 1. 7 and 1. 16. We 
meet the same use in No. Ill : 1. l>mgirNindin-dug ga 2. amanin 3. dam 4. ff. . . . . 3 f. e. Lvgal-sfdrge 2. f.e. 
nam-ti 1 f. e. dam- dumu-na-da, amu-shnb. 

' "The king finished Ihe place" := Sliarru-mavzaiu-vs?iaklU. 

' Or Lvgal-si-kisal, i. e., "The king is the builder of the terrace," Sharru thapik-kisalU. From the close connec- 
tion in which Lvgal-kignb-nidvdu. who left many fragitents of vases in Nippur, stands with Lvgal-ii-kieal on PI. 37, 
No. 86, 11 f. e. — 1, I am inclined to regard them as father and son. Cf. also No. 89. 

* Cf. Hilprecht, Recent Research in Bible Lands, p. 67. 

* Cf. already Amiaud in The Babylonian and Oriental Record I, pp. 120 ff. On the reading of Sugir instead of Oirsu 
cf. also Honimel, Oachichte, j p. 290, 292, 296, etc., and Jensen, in Schrader's K. B. Ill, part 1, pp. 11 f. (note). 

' With George Smith, Amiaud, Hommel and others (against Lehmann, Shamaslmhumukin, \>. IZ). ThaX Agade 
can go over into Akkad philologically, I can prove from other examples. But even if this was not the case, the clear 
statement of George Smith (cf. Delilzsch, Paradies, p. 198) should be sufficient. I cannot admit the possibility of a 
original mistake on the part of George Smith. Master in reading cuneiform tablets as he was, he could not have made 
a blunder which would scarcely happen to a beginner in Assyriology. 

'That Akkad became finally identical with "the Babylonian empire in its political totality and unity," was dem- 
onstrated by Lehmann, I. c, pp. 71 ff. 

Table ok Contents 

And Description of Objects. 

Part II, Plates 36-70 ayid XVI-XXX. 

Ab bee viations. 

ang'ill., angular; beginn., beginning; c, circa; ca., cast; C. B. M., Catalogue of the Babylonian Museum. 
University of Pennsylvania (prepired by the editor); cf., confer; col., column(8); Coll., Collection; d., diameter; 
Dyn., Dynasty; E., East(ern); f., following page; ff., following pages; f. e.,from (the) end; follow., following; 
fr. or fragin., fragment(s), fragmentary; h., height; horizont., horizontal; ibid., ibidem; inscr., inscription; 
1. orli., line(s); m., meter; JVI. I. Q., Mus6e Imperial Oltoman; N., North(ern); Nippur I, II, III, etc., refers 
to the corresponding numbers on Plate XV; No., Number; Nos., Numbers; Obv., Obverse; omit., omitted; oriff., 
original(ly) ; p., page; pp., pages; perpend., perpendicular; Pbo., Photograph ; PL, Plate; re. or resp., 
respectively; Keciieil, Recueil de travaux relalifs a la philologie et a I'archeologie figyptiennes et assyrlennes, edited 
by G. Maspero; restor., restored; Rev., Reverse; S., South(ern); sq., squeeze; T., Temple of Bel; var., vari- 
ants; vol., volume; W., West(ern); Z., Ziqqurratu; Z. A., Zeltschrift fiir Assyriologie, edited by 0. Bezold. 

Measurements are given in centimeters, length (height) X width x thickness. Whenever the object varies ia 
size, the largest measurement is given. 

The numbers printed on the left, right and lower margins of Plates 36-43 refer to C. B. M. and denote the vase 
fragments used in restoring the cuneiform texts here published. If more than one fragment is quoted, they are 
arranged according to their relative importance. On fragments placed in parentheses, as a rule less tlian one or two 
complete cuneiform characters are preserved. Fragments originally belonging to the same vase are connected by 
-1- or 4- X -|-, the former indicating that the breaks of fragments thus joined fit closely together, the latter that an 
unknown piece is wanting between them. 

I. Autograph Eeproductions. 

Plate. Text. Date. Description. 

36 86 Lugal-klgub-nidudu. Fragra. of a large vase in serpentine, 20.5 X 9.45 X 2.8, orig. d. c. 2-5.4. 

Nippur III, beneath the rooms of T. on the S. E. side of Z., a 
little above Ur-Ninib's pavement in the same stratum as has pro- 
duced nearly all the fragments of the most ancient stone vases so 
far excavated in Nuffar (approximately therefore the same place 
as PI. 1, No. 1). Inscr. 15 (orig. at least 30) 11. C. B. M. 9825. 
Portions of these 15 11. preserved on the follow. 21 other fragm. 
of vases in calcite stalagmite (from which the text had been 
restored before 9825 was found and examined): C. B. M. 9657 -f 
9607 4- 9609 (cf. PI. XVIII, Nos. 41-43), 9581 + 9643, 9608 + 9679 
+ 9)91 (belonging to the same vase as 9000, cf. PL 37 and PI. 


Plate. Text. 
























42 90 En-sbagsag<?)-anna. 

43 91 En-shagsag(V)anna. 


Date. Descbiption. 

XVIII, No. 47), 9901, 9902, 9903, 9904 (cf. PI. 37), 9905, 9632 (be- 
longing to the same vase as 9635 + 9620 + 9627 + 9606, cf. PI. 37), 
9605 (cf. PI. XVIII, No. 44), 9599, 96.33, 9680, 9703, 10001 (cf. PI. 
XVIII, No. 48). Cf. also 9634 (cf. PI. 37 and Pi. XVIII, No. 46). 

The same inscr. continued. On the scale of fr. 9325 restored from 16 
fragm. of vases in white caleite stalagmite. Nippur III, 
approximately same place as PI. 36. C. B. M. 10001 (cf. PI. 36 
and PI. XVIII, No. 48), 9900 (cf. PI. XVIII, No. 47, belonging 
to the same vase as 9608 + 9679 + 9591, cf. PI. 36), 9904 (cf. PI. 
36), 9620 + 9627 + 9635 + 9606 (belonging to the same vase as 
9632, cf. PI. 36), 9604, 9630, 9631, 9917 (red banded), 9639,9644. 
Cf. also 9634 (cf. PI. 36 and PI. XVIII, No. 46), 9607 (cf. PI. 36 
and PI. XVIII, No. 41), 9613 (cf. PI. XVIII, No. 40). 

Five fragm. of a vase in white caleite stalagmite (glued together), 
16 X 13 X 1.9. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, 
No. 86. Inscr. 3 col., 13 + 17+8 = 3811. C. B. M. 9914 + 9910 
+ 9915 + 9913 + 9320. Cf. PI. XIX, No. 49. On the basis of 
these five fragm. the complete text published on Plates 38-42 has 
been restored by the aid of the follow. S3 other fragm. belonging 
to 63 different vases: C. B. M. 8614, 8615, 9300, 9301, 9304, 9306, 
9307 + X + 9668, 9308, 9309 + 9924 + 9311 + 9316 + 9314 + 9916. 
9312 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 59), 9317, 9318 + 9645, 9583, 9584 + 9315, 
9587,9595, 9598, 9601 + 9305, 9602, 9611 + X + 9610 (cf. PI. XIX, 
Nos. 50, 51),9619,9624, 9625, 9628 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 53), 9638, 
9642, 9646 + x + 9310, 9651+9911, 9654, 9650 + 9685 (cf. PI. XIX, 
No. 58), 9659+9660+9319, 9662 + 9665, 9663, 9666, 9667, 9670, 
9671, 9673,9674,9683 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 60), 9687 (cf. PI. XIX, 
No. 61), 9689, 9692 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 56), 9695 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 
57), 9696 + 9637 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 52), 9697 + x + 9927, 9698, 9700 
(cf. PI. XIX, No. 55), 9701, 9702, 9903, 9905, 9906, 9907, 9908, 9912 
+ 9658, 9921 + 9313, 9922, 9923,9925 (cf. PI. XIX, No. 51), 9926, 
9928, 9929. 

The same, continued. 

The same, continued. 

The same, continued. 

The same, continued. 

Fragm. of a vase in white calciLe stalagmite, 2 7 x 10 X 2. Nippur 
III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 3 col., 1 + 
3 + 2 = 6 11. C. B. M. 9900. 

Two fragm. of a vase in white caleite, probably stalagmite (glued 
together), 4.85 X 4.9 x 2. Nippur III, approximately same place 
asPl. l,No. 1. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. M. 9648 a and b. Cf. PI. 37, 
No. 86, li. 7-5 f. e. 

Fragm. of a vase in white caleite stalagmite, 5.8x7.8x1 .8. Nippur 
III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 5 li. C. 
B. M. 9930. 

Two fragm. of a vase in white caleite stalagmite (glued together), 4.8 
X 5.5 X 1.2. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, 































Date. Description. 

No. 86. Inscr. 3 (orig. 5) li. C. B. M. 9963 + 9998. For the end 
of the inscr. cf. PI. 43, No. 92. 
Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 4.5 x 9 X 16. Nippur 
III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 3 (orig. 5) 
li. C. B. M. 9618. For the beginn. of the inscr. cf. PI. 43, 
No. 91. 
Two fragm. of a vase in while calcite stalagmite (glued together), 
12.5 X 6 XI. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 
1. Inscr. 8 li. U. B. M. 9616 + 9931 (the former excavated 1890, 
the latter 1893). Parts of li. 2-7 written also on C. B. M. 9622. 
Votive tablet in impure bluish gray limestone, round hole in the 
centre, 2 groups of figures and an inscription incised ; 20.6 x 
19.3 X 2.6, d. of the hole 3.2. Nippur X, found out of place in 
the loose earth along the S. W. side of the Shatt-en-Nil, c. i m. 
below surface. Between the figures of the upper group 4 li. of 
inscr., beginning on the right, the last 2 li. separated by a line. 
Sq. Cf. PI. XVI, No. 37. 

Ur-Mama. Fragm. of a vase in biownish limestone with veins of white calcite, 

5.8 X 6.9 X 1. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, 
No. 1. Inscr. 4 (orig. probably 5) li. C. B. M. 96)2. 

Aba-Enlil. Two fragm. of an alabaster bowl (badly decomposed), 12.2 X 7.2 X 

1 .1. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 
10 li. C. B. M. 9621+9617. 

[Ur ?]-Enlil. Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 5.1 x 3.3 x 1.4. Nippur 

III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 4 li. U. 
B. M. 9932. 

Same Period. Two fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite (glued together), 

8.4 X 6.9 X 1. Nippur III, approximately same place as PL 36, 
No. 86. Inscr. 7 li. C. B. M. 9952 + 9699 (the former excavated 
1893, the latter 1890). 

Same Period. Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 9.7x6.3X1.6. 

Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 
6 li., beginn. of each li. wanting. U. B. M. 9953. 

Same Period. Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 3.8 x 5.8 x 1.1. 

Nippur III, approximately same place aa PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 2 
li. C. B. M. 9636. 

Same Period. ^ Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 4.2 x 4.5 x 0.5. 

Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 3 
li. C. B. M. 968C. 
ne of Ur-Shulpauddu. Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 8.5 x 9.5 x 2.7. 

Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 7 
li. C. B. M. 9614. Parts of li. 1-4 written also on C. B. M. 9297 
(dark brown sandstone), which apparently belongs to the same 
vase as PI. 45, No. 103 and PI. 46, No. 110. 

Same Period. Two fragm. of a vase in dark brown sandstone (glued together), 7.6 

X4.3X 1.3. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, 
No. 86. Inscr. 5 li. C. B. M. 9954 + 9924. To the same vase be- 
longs PI. 46, No. 110. Text supplemented by the follow, two 



Plate. Text. Date 

45 104 Same Period. 

45 105 Same Period. 

45 106 Same Period. 

45 107 A patesi ('?) of Shirpurla. 

46 108 A patesi of Kisli. 

46 109 A patesi of Kish. 

46 110 Time of Ur-Shulpauddu. 

47 111 Time of Ur-Enlil. 

47 112 Time of Ur-Shulpauddu. 

47 113 A little later. 

47 114 Same Period. 

48 115 Entemena. 

48 116 Entemena. 

49 117 Entemena. 

Fragm. of a vase in dark brown tufa (decomposed igneous rock), 7.4 
X 7.3 X 1. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 
86. Inscr. 7 li. C. B. M. 9951. Text supplemented by PI. 45, 
Nos. 103, 105 aud PI. 46, No. 110. 
Fragm. of a vase in dark brown tufa, 5.4 x 4.9 x 0.8. Nippur III, 
approximately sameplaceas Pi. 1, No. 1. In3or.51i. O.B.M.9623. 
Text supplemented by PI. 45, Nos. 103, 101 and PI. 46, No. 110. 
Two fragm. of. a vase in bluish banded calcite stalagmite (glued 
together), 4.4 x 6.1 X 0.8. Nippur III, approximately same place 
as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 4 11. C. B. M. 9682 + 9629. 

Fragm. of a vase in grayish calcite stalagmite, 3.1 X 5 6 X 0.8. 
Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 2 
li. C. B. M. 9597. 

Fragm. of a vase in dark brown sandstone, 13.3 x 7.5 x 1.7. Nippur 
III, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 4 li. C. B. 
M. 9572. To the same vase belongs the follow. No. 

Two fragm. of the same vase (glued together), 13 x 14.5 x 1.7. 
Nippur III, approximately same place as previous No. Inscr. 4 
li. C. B.M. 9571 + 9577. 

Three fragm. of a vase in dark brown sandstone (glued together), 
16.7 X II X 1.5. Nippur III, approxitaately same place as PI. 1, 
No. 1. Inscr. 9 li. C. B. M. 9574 + 9675 4-9579. To the same 
vase belongs PI. 45, No. 103. Text supplemented by PI. 45, Nos. 
104, 105. 

Two fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, orig. h. c. 14, d. at 
the bottom c. 16.5. Fragm. 9302 : 9.5 X 8.9 X 1.9. Fragm. 9600 : 
8.2 X 11.8 X 1.9. Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, 
No. 86. Inscr. (beginn. and end) 3 + 3 = 6 li. C. B M. 9302, 

Fragm. of a vase in bluish banded calcite stalagmite, inside black- 
ened, 13.2 X 15.4 X 2.3, orig. d. 17.4. Nippur III, approximately 
same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 8 X 4.5, 7 li. C. B. M. 9329. 

Fragm. of a vase in brownish gray calcite stalagmite, 17.1 X Ux 1.35, 
orig. d. at the centre 17.3. Nippur 111, approximately same 
place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 10 X 3, 13 li. C. B. M. 9330. 

Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 6.8 X 6.5 X 1.1. Nippur 
111, approximately same place as PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 6 li. C. B. 
M. 9655. 

Two fragm. of a large vase in white calcite stalagmite, outside black- 
ened, 13.4 X 14.8 X 3. Nippur III, approximately same place as 
PI. 1, No. 1. Inscr. 2 col., 8 + 6 = 14 li. C. B. M. 9163 + 9690 
(both excavated 1890). To the same vase belong the follow, two 

Fragm. of the same vase, 9.4 x 7.2 x 2.7. Nippur III, approximately 
same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 2 col., 4 + 3 = 7 li. C. B. M. 
9328 (excavated 1893). 

Two. fragm. of the same vase, 7.1 x 9.9 x 2.6. Nippur III, approxi- 
mately same place as previous No. Inscr. 2 col., 5 + 2 = 7 li. C. 
B. M. 9919 + 9920 (both excavated 1893). 



Plate. Text. Date. 

49 118 Dyn. of Kish. 

49 119 Sargon I. (?) 

50 120 Kaiam-Sin. 
















56 126 Bur-Sin II. 

57 126 Bur-Sin II. 

58 127 Gimil (Kat)-Sin. 

58 128 Rim-Aku. 


Fragm. of a vase in coarse-grained diorite, 12 X 12.2 x 1.6. Nippur 
III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 6 li. C. 
B. M. 9918. 

Fragm. of a vase in white calcite stalagmite, 4.8 X 8.4 x 1. Nippur 
HI, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. laser. 4 (orig. 
6)li. C. B. M. 9331. 

Fragm. of an inscribed bas-relief in basalt, 52.5 X 39.7 x 8.5. Diar- 
behir. Inscr. 19.1 X 18.4, 4 col., 2+ 6 -f8-f 8 = 24 li. Ca. Orig. 
M. I. O., Constantinople. Cf. PI. XXII, No. 64 ; also Scheil in 
Recueil XV", pp. 62-64, Maspero, ihid., pp. 65f. and Tlie Dawn of 
Civilizatimi, ■pp. 601f., Hilprecht, Recent Besearch in Bible Lands, 
pp. 87-89. 

Door socket in a black dense trachytic rock, 41 x 25 X 18. Nippur 
III, 12i m. below surface, underneath the W. corner of the S. E.' 
buttress of Z. Inscr. 19.7 X 7.5, 10 li. Sq. 

Gray soapstone tablet, Obv. flat, Rev. rounded, 12 2 X 7.7 X 1.7. 
Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 
5 li. (identical with that on his bricks). C. B. M. 9932. Cf. I 
R. 1, No. 9. 

Dark gray soap-stone tablet, Obv. flat. Rev. rounded, 8.3 x 5.6 X 1.6. 
Nippur X, found out of place in the rubbish at the foot of a 
mound, c. 1 m. above the surface of the plain. Inscr. 6 (Obv.) 
+ 2 (Rev.) =8 11. Sq. 

Fragm. of a baked clay tablet, reddish brown with black spots, Obv. 
flat. Rev. rounded, 20.1 X 18.5 X 4.3. Tello. Obv., 6 col. (23 + 
SO -t- 35 + 22 -f 22 + 25 =) 157 li. Orig. in M. I. O. , Constantino- 
ple (Coll. Rifat Bey, No. 212), copied there 1894. PI. f of orig. 

The same, Rev., 6 col. (21 + 15 -f 10 -f 27 -f 35 -f 18 =) 126 li. Copied 
in Constantinople 1894. PI. f of orig. size. 

Two fragm. of a baked clay tablet, light brown (glued together), Obv. 
flat, Rev. rounded, 12.8X6.1X2.8. Nippur X. Inscr. 19 (Obv.) 
+ 22 (Rev.)=41 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied 
there 1893. Cf. Hilprecht, Assyriaca, pp. 22f., Scheil, in Recueil 
XVII, pp. 3(f. 

Baked clay tablet, reddish brown , Obv. flat. Rev. rounded, 20.5 x 
19.9 X 3.8. Tello. Obv., 7 col. (parts of col. I-IIt, VI, VII 
wanting, 32 + 19 + 32 + 31 + 31 + 30 + 21 =) 196 li. Orig. in M. 
I. O., Constantinople (Coll. Rifat Bey, No. 256), copied there 1894. 
PI. I of orig. size. 

The same. Rev., 7 col. (part of col. I wanting, 30 + 23 + 21 + 20 -f 23 
+ 15+10=) 142 li. Copied in Constantinople 1894. PL f of 
orig. size. 

Fragm. of a clay tablet, slightly baked, dark brown, Obv. flat. Rev. 
rounded, 7X5x2. Nippur X. Inscr. 9 (Obv.) + 4 (Rev.) =^ 13 
li. C. B. M. 

Fragm. of a baked clay phallus, light brown, h. 14 3, largest circum- 
ference 14.7. Nippur X. Inscr. 17 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Con- 
stantinople, copied there 1893. 



Plate. Text. Date. Descriptiok. 

59 129 Ammizaduga. Two fragm. of a clay tablet, slightly baked, brown, 11.6 x 10.8 x 3.2. 

Nippur X. Obv., 3 col. of inscr., middle col. Sumerian in Old 
Babylonian characters, first and third col. Semitic Babylonian in 
Neo-Babylonidn script, Eev. badly damaged, traces of second 
and third col. The tablet was written c. 600 B.C. Grig, in M. I. 
O., Constantinople. 

60 130 Cassite Dyn. Fragm. of a slab in white marble with reddish veins, 24.5 X 21 X 6.7. 

Nippur III, approximately same place as PI. 36, No. 86. Inscr. 
2 col., 6 + 5=11 li. Ca. (C. B. M. 9794). Oiig. in M. I. O., 
60 131 c. 2500 B.C. Brown hematite weight, ellipsoidal and symmetrical, complete, weight 

85.5 grams, length 7.3, d. 2.1. Nippur X (.June, 1895). Inscr. 
1.9 X 1.8, 3 li. (1. X shiklu 2. din hurdsi 3. datn-kar= "10 
shekels, gold standard of merchants ; " according to this standard 
1 mana= 513 gr.). Sq., sent from the ruins. 
60 132 Burnaburiash. Seal cylinder in white chalcedony, length 3.4, d. 1.5. Babyhmia, 

place unknown. A bearded standing figure in a long robe, one 
hand across the ,breast, the other lifted. A border line at the 
top. Inscr. 9 li. Impression on gulta percha (in possession of 
the editor). Grig, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New 
York. Cf. Hllprecht, Assyriaca, p. 93, note, Ward, Seal Cylin- 
ders and other Oriental Seals (Handbook No. 12 of the Metropol. 
Mus.),N'o. 391. 

Fragm. of a lapis lazuli disc, 3 2 x 3. Nippur X, found in the loose 
debris on the slope of a moiiud, and near to its summit (1895). 
Inscr. 6 (Obv.) + 6 (llev.) = 12 li. Pencil rubbing, sent from 
the ruins. 

Fragm. of an agate cameo, 3.95 x 1. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, 
No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied 
there 1893. 

Fragm. of an agate cameo, 2.8 x 1. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, 
No. 15. Inscr. 3 li. Orig. in M. I. G., Constantinople, copied 
there 1893. 

Fragm. of an axe in imitation of lapis lazuli, 6.75 X 4.25 x 1-5. 
Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 7 li. Orig. in M. 
I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1893. To the same axe belongs 
the follow. No. 

Fragm. of the sau.e axe, 4.2 x 3.6 X 1.1. Nippur III, same place as 
PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. 4 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, 
copied there 1893. 

Lapis lazuli disc, 2.75 x 0.3. Nip)pur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15, 
luser. of 5 li. (I. [A-naY''^Nusku 2. be-R-sIm 3. [Ka-dasli-manl- 
Tur-gu 4. a-[na ha^-l la-(i-sh]u 5. i-lkil-ish) erased in order to 
use the material. Grig, in M. I. 0., Constantinople, copied there 
61 139 Cassite Dyn. Agate cameo, hole bored parallel with the li., 2.4 x 1.65 x 0.8. Nip- 

pur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inscr. Oi»gir£n-lil. Orig. 
in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1893. 

















[ Kadashman ] -Turgu 



Platb. Text. Date. 

61 140 CassiteDyn. 

61 141 CassiteDyn. 

61 142 Cassite Dyn. 

61 143 CassiteDyn. (?) 









Cassite Dyn. 

Cassite Dyn. 

Cassite Dyn. 

c. 1400 B.C. 

64 148 Marduk-shabikzerim. 

65 149 Marduk-alie-irba. 


Remnant of a lapis lazuli tablet the material of which had been used, 
2.1 X 2.2. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. Inser. 3 II. 
Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1893. 

l^apis lazuli disc, 1.2 X 0.15. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. 
Inscr. ^"sr'''Nin-lil. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied 
there 1893. 

Lapis lazuli disc, 1.2 x 0.15. Nippur III, same place as PI. 8, No. 15. 
Inscr. J>ingirEn-lil. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied 
there 1893. 

Tragm. of a light black stone tablet, 2.15 x 2.4 X 0.5. Nippur III, 
same place, as PI. 8, No. 15. Obv., meaning of characters un- 
known, Rev., animal rampant. Probably used as a charm. Orig. 
in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1893. Cf. Loftus, 
Travels and Besearches, p. 236f. 

Unbaked clay tablet, dark brown, Obv., nearly flat. Rev., rounded, 
6.15 X 4.75 X 1.8. Nippur X. Plan of an estate. Orig. in M. I. 
O., Constantinople, copied there 1893. Cf. Scheil in Recueil 
XVI, pp. 36f. 

Fragm. of an unbaked clay tablet, dark brown, Obv. nearly flat. 
Rev. rounded, 3.8X6X2.35. Nippur X. Plan of an estate. 
C. B. M. 5135.. 

Six fragm. of a slightly baked clay tablet, brown (glued together) 
Obv. flat, Rev. rounded, 16.5x10.5X3. Nippur X. Inscr., 
Obv., 4col., 39 + 40 + 43 + 15=137 li., Rev. uninscribed. Orig. 
in M. I. O., Constantinople, copied there 1894. 

Baked clay tablet, dark brown, nearly flat on both sides, upper left 
corner wanting, 5.9 X 5.2 X 1.6. Tell el-Hesy (Palestine), found 
by F. J. Bliss, at the N. E. quarter of City III, on May 14, 1892. 
Inscr. 11 (Obv.) + 2 (lower edge) +11 (Rev.) + 1 (upper edge) 
+ 1 (left edge) = 23 li., irregularly written. Orig. in M. I. O., 
Constantinople, copied there 1893. Cf. PI. XXIV, Nos. 66, 67 ; 
also Bliss, A Mound of Many Cities, pp. 52-60 ; Sayce, in Bliss's 
book, pp. 184-187, Scheil in Recueil XV, pp. 137f., Conder, The 
Tell Aniarna Tablets, pp. 130-134 (worthless!). 

Fragm. of a baked clay cylinder, barrel shaped, solid, light brown ; 
h. of fragm. 7.98, orig. d. at the top c. 5.3, at the centre c. 7.8. 
Place unknown. Inscr. 2 (orig. 4) col., 16 + 22 + 1 (margin)= 39 
li. Orig. in possession of Dr. Talcott Williams, Philadelphia, 
Pa. Cf. PI. XXIV, No. 68 ; also Jastrow, .Jr., in Z. A. IV, pp. 
301-325, VIII, pp. 214-219, Knudtzon, ibid., VI, pp. 163-165, Hil- 
precht, ibid,, VIII, pp. 116-120, and Part I of the present work, 
p. 44, note 4. 

Boundary stone in grajish limestone, irregular, 48.5 x 24.5 X 18. 
Babylonia, place unknown. Figures facing the right. Upper 
section : Turtle (on the top of the stone) ; scorpion, crescent, disc 
of the sun, Venus (all in the first row below) ; 2 animal heads 
with long necks (cf. V R. 57, sect. 4, fig. 1), bird on a post, object 
similar to V R. 57, sect. 2, with an animal resting alongside (sim- 


Plate. Text. 




c. 1100 B.C. 





152 Nebuchadrezzar II. 


ilar to V R. 57, sect. 3, fig. 1), same object without animal (all 
in the second row below) ; object similar to V R. 57, sect. 6, but 
without animal (below the 2 animal heads). Lower section : A 
seated figure, botli hands lifted (cf. V R. 57, sect. 5, fig. 1), object 
similar to V R. 57, sect. 6, last object, but reversed, large snake. 
Inscr. 3 col., 22 + 23 + 11= 56 li. Sq. Orig. in private posses- 
sion, Constantinople. Cf. Hilprecht, Assyriaca, p. 33, Scheil in 
Eecueil XVI, pp. 32f. PI. § of orig. size. 

The same, continued. PI. f of orig. size. 

The same, continued. PI. | of orig. size. 

Upper part of a black boundary stone, 33 X 38 X 20. Nippur. Inscr. 
2 col., 6 + 6 = 12 li. Ca. Orig. in the Koyal Museums, Berlin. 
Cf. PI. XXV, No. 69; also Verzeichniss der (in den Kiiniglichen 
Musien zu Berlin heflndlichen) Vorderasiatischen Altertumer und 
Oipsabgusse, p. 66, No. 213. 

Fragm. of a baked brick, yellowish, partly covered with bitumen, 
18.5 (fragm.) X 7.3 (fragm.) X 8 (orig.). Babylon. Inscr. (written 
on the edge) 15 x 6, 11 li. C. B. M. 14. 

Fragm. of a baked brick from the outer course of a column, 22.2 
(fragm.) X 35 (orig.) X 9.2 (orig.). Alu Hahba. Inscr. (writ- 
ten on -tlie outer surface) 33.6 x 8, 3 col., 8 + 8 + 8 = 24 li. Sq. 
Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople. 

II. Photograph (half-tone) Eepkoductions. 

XVI 37 


XVI 38 

Same Period. 

XVII 89 


Votive tablet in impure bluish gray limestone, figures and inscrip- 
tion incised. Nippur. Upper section: A naked (uncircum- 
cised) worshiper (Ur-Enlil) standing before a seated god and 
offering a libation. Same group reverfed on the left. Between 
the figures 4 li. of inscr. Lower section : A goat and a sheep 
followed by two men, one carrying a vessel on his head, the 
other holding a stick in his right hand. Pho. taken from a sq. 
Cf. PI. 43, No. 94. 

Two fragm. of a votive tablet in impure bluish gray limestone, 
round hole in the centre, figures incised, 17.2 X 18.6 x 3, d. of 
the hole 1 .7. Nippur III, found out of place, in the debris fill- 
ing one of the rooms of T. to the S. W. of Z., not far below 
surface. Upper section : A naked worshiper standing before a 
seated god and offering a libation. The god reversed on the 
left. Lower section : A gazel walking by a bush (or nibbling 
at it ?), a hunter about to draw liis bow at her. Orig. in M. I, 
O., Constantinople. Pho. taken from a ca. (C. B. M. 4934). 

Unhewn block of white calcite stalagmite, 29 X 21 X 19.5. Nip- 
pier III, c. 10 m. below surface under the rooms of T. on the 
S. E. side of Z. Inscr. 10.3 x 6, 4 (orig. 8 V) li. C. B. M. 



Plate. Text. 
XVIII 40-18 


XIX 49-61 Lugalzaggisi. 

XX 63 


XXI 63 

Sargon I. 

XXII 64 




XXIV 66, 67 c. 1400 B.C. 

XXiV 68 

XXV 69 

XXV 70 


c. 1100 B.C. 



Fragm. of vases in white calcite stalagmite, from which (together 
with others) the text on Plates 36, 37 has been restored. Nip- 
pur. C. B. M. 9613, 9607 + 9657 + 9609, 9605, 9634, 9900, 9603, 
10001. Cf. Plates 36, 37, No. 86. 

Fragm. of vases in white calcite stalagmite, from which (together 
with others) the text on Plates 38-42 has been restored. Nippur. 
C. B.M. 9914 + 9910 + 9915 + 9913 + 9320, 9611 + X + 9610, 9696 
+ 9637, 9628, 9925, 9700, 9692, 9695, 9685, 9312, 9683, 9087. Cf. 
Plates 38-42, No. 87. 

White marble vase, an inscribed portion (containing parts of 11. 8, 
9, 11-13 and the whole of 11. 10) broken from its side. Nippur 
III, approximately same place as PI. 36, 37, No. 86. Inscr..20.6 
X 5.6, 13 li. Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople. Pho. taken 
from a ca. (C. B. M. 9793). Cf. PI. 4, No. 5 and PI. Ill, Nos. 

Fragm. of a brick of baked clay, yellowish, 23.5 (fragm.) X 18 
(fragm.) X 8 (orig.). Nippur III, found out of place on the S. 
E. side of Z., approximately at the same depth as PI. 36, No. 
86. Inscr. (written) 3 li. (orig. 2 col., 6 li.). The character 
Shar repeated on the upper left corner of inscribed surface. 
Orig. in M. I. O., Constantinople. Cf. PI. 3, No. 3. 

Fragm. of an inscribed bas-relief in basalt. Diafbekir. A god 
standing on the right, clad in a hairy garment, wearing a con- 
ical head-dress. Hair arranged in a net, long pointed beard, 
bracelets on both wrists, short staff (V) in each hand. Part of 
hair, left upper arm and both legs wanting. Pho. taken from 
a ca. (C. B. M. 9479). Cf. PI. 50, No. 120. 

Brick of baked clay, light brown, broken, 31 X 15 X 7. Nippur 
III, c. 10 m. below surface underneath the S. E. buttress of Z. 
from a pavement constructed by Ur-Ninib. Inscr. (written) 
22.4 X 10, 13 li., beginning at the bottom. Orig. in M. I. O., 
Constantinople. Cf. PI. 10, No. 18. 

Tablet of baked clay, Obv. and Eev. Tell eUHesy (Palestine). 
Pho. taken from a ca. (in possession of the editor). Cf. PI. 64, 
No. 147. 

Fragm. of a baked clay cylinder, barrel shaped, solid, light brown. 
Place unknown. Pho. tiiken from a ca. (C. B. M. 9553). Cf. 
PI. 64, No. 148. 

Upper part of a black boundary stone. Nippur. Upper section : 
Disc of the sun, crescent, Venus. Lower section : 2 col. of 
inscr. Pho. taken from a ca. (in possession of the editor). Cf . 
PI. 68, No. 150. 

Brown sandstone pebble (weight?), oblong, flat on both ends, 
weight 1067 grams, 8.2 x 14.7 X 6. Nippur, on S. E. side of Z., 
2i m. below surface. Meaning of characters inscribed on 
convex surface not certain, possibly " f of a mine + 15 " = 55 
shekels (equal to c. 1054 grams,'if referring to tlie Babylonian 
heavy silver mine [royal norm = 1146.1-1150.1 gr., according to 



Plate Text. 


XXVI 71 c. 350 B.C. 

XXVII 72 At least 4000 B.C. 

XXVIII 73 At least 4GO0 B.C. 

XXIX 74 Ur-Gur. 

XXX 75 1894 A.D. 

Lehmaiin in Actes du Jmitieme congres international des orien- 
talists, 1889, Semitic section B, p. 206]). C. B. M. 10049. 

Bas-relief in baked clay, brown, upper corner and part of lower left 
corner wanting, 14.3 X 17 X 3.7. Nippur III, approximately 
same place as PI. XVI, No. 38. Man figliling a lion. Bearded 
man With a conical bead-dress and mass of locks falling over 
bis neck, clad in a short, tight, sleeveless, fringed coat, his left 
knee resting on the ground. He is thrusting his sword into 
the flank of a lion, at the same time in defense raising his left 
arm against the lion's bead. The lion, having received a wound 
over his right foreleg, stands on bis hind legs, clutching the 
sides of his enemy with bis fore paws and burying his teeth in 
the man's left shoulder. Pait of man's left foot and of lion's 
tail and left hind leg wanting. On right side of plinth (0.6 
deep) traces of five Aramaic letters, left side broken off. Orig. 
in M.'I. O., Constantinople. Pho. taken from a ca. (C. B. M. 

Terra-cotta vase with rope pattern, in upright position as found in 
trench, an Arab on each side ; h. 63.5, d. at the top 53. Nippur 
III, 5.49 m. below the E. foundation of UrGur's Z. 

Arch of baked brick, laid in clay mortar, h. 71, span 51, rise 33. 
Bricks convex on one side, flat on the other. Front of arch 
opened to let light pass through. Nippur III, at the orifice of 
an open drain c. 7 m. below the E. corner of Ur-Gur's Z. 
View taken from inside the drain. 

N. W. fa9ade of the first stage of Ur-Gur's Z. A section of the 
drain which surrounded Z. is seen at the bottom of the trench. 
Nippur III. 

General and distant view of the excavations at T., taken from an 
immense heap of excavated earth to the E. of Z. Nippur III. 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe.. N. S. XVIII, 3. 

PL S6 



•" forms 1. 3 on 

•3 ,,f.r-, ^„„, 

9657. 990.3 

<=0 958. 

^ 9903 


>)^l> 9903 

» — « 

i( « 




^ 9634, 





I — r^ 9605 

// 9680 


'3 X 

/^ ) 9605 

" W^ 9679 


'4' j( 

^fl 959. 

a*r-; »=— ^ ^-_ 


i 1. 


Xoti:»L. J : Tin: !«;rihe fuiyut to erttsv. tiro lines druivii by iiii.itnkf 
L. IJf : Eriuiu-e. of mu-aG. 

': 9657-9607. 
9581, 99OT. 

2: ibid. (9903,9902). 

3: 9657 • 9607 9609, 


4: 9609+9607,9581,9903, 
9632, (9902, 9608). 

5: 9609-1^9607,9581+9643, 
9632, (9902, 9608, 9905). 

6: 9609+9607, 9643,9608, 


7 : 9609- 9607, 9643, 9608, 
(9905, 9634). 

8: 9643, 9608, 9605, (96S0, 

9: ibid., (9633, 9599, 
9680, 9703). 

:0; 9643. 9679. 9605, 
(9633. 9599. 9680, 9703). 

11 : 959H 9679, 9605, (9633, 
9599. 9680). 

12 : ibid. 

13: 9591. 9605. TOOOI, 


14. 9591, loooi, (9605,9633, 


15.. loooi, 9591, 9904, 


Trans. Am. Phil. Soe, . N. S. XVIII, 8. 

PI. 37 




9 f- e- .-■-< 


.S f. c. .--x 

7(. e. 

6 i. e. It.., 


"^^ 9630 


Seofritl llneti miiifiiiy. 

10 j: r. 

gi^i^ /p^ ) ctq^ 


'^ 'm 


? ^ 


'/'•W'V J,"^' 

1. 16-17: loooi; for 
1. 16 cf. also 99C», 

1. 1 1 f. e.: 9635. 

10 f. e. : 9635^ 9620. 

9 f. e. 9620, (9635). 

8 f. e. : 9620-9627 
• 9635- 9606. 

7 f. e. 9606, 9627, 

6 f. e. : 9606. 9630, 
9627, (9604). 

5 f. C. : 9604, (9630, 
9631, 9606, 9917 

4-1 f. e. : 9604, beginii. 
of 1. 3-1 restor. from 
9644, for 1. 4 cf. 

(9631, 9639, 9634, 

2 f. e. : (9917, 9639). 

I f. e. : (9607). 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVllI, 8. 

in. .is 


Col. I. 

9646 has 5 perpen- 
dicular li. 



Only 8615 has this 
oblique li. 

9674 has 3, 8614 
has 4 aiigul. li. 











* L- 9642 
7^ 9906 





^1^ 4: 

<H^1Sl ^ 


=f= <J>1] ^ 

] t -y 1. 1 1 . 1 ~~ ' 



. 9654 has 


*^B# <f 


¥ ^B II y>^ 






* Omit, on 9317 

•^"— ., 9317, 
■I 9660 


'/L 9300 

NOTE. — The above text has been restored from the following fragments, COL. I, L. I ; frr. 8614, 9646, (9313, 
9915, 961 1, 9923). L. a: 8614, 8615,9646, 9921 +9313, 91 15 J 9913,9611,(9674,9923). L. 3: 8614,8615,9913,9674,9662, 
(9313). L. 4: 8614,8615, 9674, 9913, 9662, (9587). L. 5: 8614, 8615, 9674, 9913, (9662, 9587). L. 6: 8615, 9610, (9913, 
9674. 9587). L. 7: 8615, 9610, (9587). L. 8-9 : Ibidem. L. 10 : (9692, 9642). L. 11 : 9696, (9692, 9642, 9689). L. 12 : 
9696 - 9637. 9642, 9692. (9689). L. 13 : 9642, 9637, 9689, 9583, (9692, 9654, 9906). L. 14 : 9642, 9654, (9689, 9583, 9906, 
96.17)- L. 15 : 9642, 9654, 9318, 9583, 9906, (9689, 9656). L. 16 : 9642, 9318, 9654, 9906, (9583, 9689, 9656, 965949319), 
L. 17: 9318, 9642, 9654, 9906, (9912-9658, 9583, 9659 T 9319)- L. 18: 9318,9642, [written on £,. 17], 
9906. (9912-i 9658, 9654.-9659). L. 19: 9318, 9642, (9317, 9651, 99124 965S, 9702, 9659, 9906). L. 20: 9317, 9318, 9651, 
(9642, 9702, 9906). L. 21 : 9317, 9911+9651, 9645, (9659). L. 23 : 9317, 9911, 9645, (9659, 9700). L. 23 : 9317, 9645, 9659, 
(9628, 9700). L. 24 : 9317, 9645, 9628, 9659. L. 25 : 9317, 9645, 9628, 96594 9660. L. 36 : 9317, 96604 9659, (9584, 9645, 
9300. 9301 )• L. 27: 9317,9660, 9584 f93i5, 9301, (9300). L. 28: 9584 r93i5.966o, 9317, 9301, (9300). L. 29:9584+9315, 
9317. 9301. 9660, (9300, 9307). L. 30 : 9584 J 9315, 9301, 9317, 9660, 9307, 9300. L. 31 : 9301, 9584 f 9315, 9660, 9307, 
9300. L. 32: 9301, 9300, '9307, 9315, 9907). 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe. N. S. XVIII, 3. 

Fl. 39 



Col. I. 



9301, 9907 each 
4 horii'.ont. li 






•9304 has 3, 8614 
has 4 angul. 

Col. J I. 






3'^^^ '^hr4) ^ 

9.10 1 

/" « 








9304, resp. 9625 

'til 9625. resp. 

Co/. If. 


TLD-^ <i> II 


<> < 




<>l=0 pz{> 




II 1=1:3 ^ 

^■^x Same varr. ;is li. 40. 
.// Illllll ffl 95 'o. re- 9625 

<>^ «H ^ 

II f=<l <^ 

<^^ ^ 

^g^ P-^ 

^ < 


^-4—^ 964 





resp. 9921, resp. 9915' 
Ip--^ 9915. 9921 

9921, re. 9015 
re. 9667, re. 9662 

|! 9665, 99!5- 99it> 

^T L ^1 9662, re. 9619 


HH 9903 

resp. 9673, re,sp. 9921 

' (^ 9913 *P=»> 9903, 
"on 91 13 the last 
sign omitted 
93 J8 

99i3> re. 



I 9313. 9913, 
' 961 1 

9683, re. 

Varr. 011 follow, plate 

L. 33'- 9907. 9301. 8614, 9300, (9306). L. 34: 9301,8614, 9907, (9306). L. 35: 9301,8614,9907, 9306. L. 36: 9301, 86j4 
[col. II begins], 9306, (9907, 9695). L. 37 : 8614, 9301, 9306, (9695, 9304). L. 38: S614, 9301, 9304, 9306, (9695, 9646). 
L. 39: 8614,9304,9646,9625,9306,(9595,9695,9638). L. 40: 8614,9304,9646,9625,9638,9306,(9695,9914). L. 41 : 
8614, 9304, 9646 [col. I ends], 9625, 9306, (9914, 9638, 9695). L. 42: 9304, 8614, 9619, 9625, 9306 [col. I ends], 9310 [col. 
II begins], (9914. 992i)- L. 43: 9619, 9304, 9662, 9701, (9921, 9914^ 991°. 93io)- L. 44: 9619, 96624 9665, 9915 t 9910, 

9921, 9701, (9922). L. 45: 9619, 9915 - 9910, 9662 - 9665, 9921, (9667,9922). L. 46: 9921, 9619, 9915, 9667, (9908, 9665, 

9922, 9318, 9662). Col. il, L. 1: 9913, 9921, 9667, 9903, (9318, 9662). L. 3: 9921 ^ 9313, 9667, 9913, 9903, 9673, (9318). 
L. 3: 9921, 9667, 9913, 9903, 9673, 9658, (9318). L. 4: 9913, 9313 [col. II begins], 9658, 9903, 9673, (9667). L. 5: 9913. 
93'3. 9658, 9903. (9673. 9667)- L. 6: 9913, 9313, 9658, 9642, (9903, 9645). L. 7: 9313, 9642, (9611, 9913, 9598). L. 8 : 
9313, 9611, 9642, (9598, 9913, 9683). L. 9: 9611 [col. II begins], 9642, 9905, (9683, 9598, 9313). L. 10: 9611, 9642, (96S3, 
9905,9598,8615,96741. L. 11: 961 1, 9642, 9683, (9905, 9674, 8615). L. 12: 9611, 9642, (9905, 9683, 9674, 8615). L.13: 
9611,9687,(9642,9674,9683,9905). L. 14: 9905,9687,(9611, 9671). L. 15: 9305 [col. II begins], (9905, 9671, 9687, 
9624). L. r6: 9305, 9624, (9671, 9905)- L. 17: 9624, 9610, 9305, (9300). 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 3. 

PI. 40 

14 X 



Col. 11. 
9611, 9671 

^^ between Ml 
and Ni on 9905 

IZj I 9305 

'7 K. 




'9 s 


^ I 9305 
II 9300 



»> 9651 

^5 «•— ' 



9319 c 



• 9300 has five, 

9319 six angul. li. 




Col. IT. 






t=ca # F^»» 


=t>F\F=r<}=i * B 






< 'ol. HI. 




II ?3>='<^ ™i 



p^ 31 

^V # 

pjl #^^ 

Hj '>3i7. 9319 
^ |>^ 9319 

R^ 93.9 

9654. 9659. 9317 

^^'^ 9319 has seven, 




->H fO 



7^^ "^^^->^>?l 

^ * ^ 



9314 eight perpend, li. 

II 9659 

<^3 9319 
/^3 9663 


I 96604 



9319, cf. 
86 1 4, 9665 

9314, 9319 



n<i> * 

Same van-, as I. 34 
'text and margin) 






•■//.?3'4> re. 9650, re. 9625 
Varr. on follow, pi. 

L. 18: 9610, 9624, 9300, 9305, (9668). L. 19: 9610, 9300 [includes the first three characters pf L. 20], 9305, (9624). 
L. 20: 96:0, 9300, 9305, (9651, 9308, 9685, 9668). L. 21 : 9610, 9651, 9300, 9685, (9305, 9668, 9308). L. 22: 9300, 9651, 
9610, 9656, (9319, 9305, 9308). L. 23 : 9300, 9319, 9656, (9651, 9610). L. 24 : 9300, 9319, 9656, 9925). L. 25: 9300, 

9319. (9309> 9315. 9925)- L. 26 : 9300, 9319, 9315, (9309, 9925). L. 27: 9319, 9300, 9315, (9309, 9925). L. 28: 9319, 
93'5. (9307. 9309. 9300. 9317)- L. 29 : 9319, 9307, 9315, (93:7, 9309). L. 30 : 9319, 9307, (9315, 9317, 9309). L. 31 : 
9659-9319. 9307, (9317. 9315. 9309. 9654)- L. 32: 9307, 9659-+ 9319, 9317, 9654. L. 33: 9307, 9659^9319, 9654, 9317, 
(9907. 9314)- L. 34 : 9307, 9659+9319, 9654, 9907, (9317, 9314). L. 35 : 9307, 96594 9319, 9654, 9907, 9314, (9317, 9663). 
L. 36: 9659- 9319, 9307, 8614, 9654, 9907, 9314, (9663, 9317). L. 37: 9307, 9660-; 9659 r 9319. 8614, 9665, 9314, 9312, 
(9654, 9663). L. 38 : 9307, 8614, 966019319, 9665, 9314, 9312, (9914, 9663, 9667). L. 39 : 8614, 9665, 9307, 9660^ 9319. 
9914, 9314, 9312, (9922, 9667, 9625). L. 40 : 8614 [col. Ill begins], 9665, 9914, 9307, 9625, 9660, 9314, (9922, 9667). L. 41 : 
9914, 8614, 9660, 9665, 9314, (9625, 9922, 9307). L. 42 : 9914- 9320, 8614, 9314 t 9316, (9b6o, 9665, 9922). I.. 43 : 99144 

9320, 8614, 9314- 9316, (9646- X - 9310, 9922, 9673). L. 44 : 9910+9914- 9320, 8614, 9314 ■ 9316, (9310 [col. Ill begins], 
9673,9922). L. 45: 9915-79910^9320,8614,9316,(9310). L. 46: 9915 99104 9320, S614, 9316, (9310, 9928). Col. ML 
L. 1 : 9913- 9320, 9928, 9316, (9903, 8614). L. 2 : 9913 - 9320, 9903, 9916 : 9316, (9928). 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII, 

PL 41 



Vol. III. 

■f' X. 







93 '4 


A i Q022 

9310, resp. 9673 
9310, resp. 8614 



3 < 




^h^:* . 9928 

I GP 9619 


^i « 3 perpend, li. on 




Vol. in. 



|^Hir- f</^^Qffi 









J< ^ ^ •=! 





^gx^-^ 1^ 


mil \ 
Hill / 





. 9668 

21 ^ 


resp. 9670 



26 , 




^^^ 9670 

jp^ I £7 resp. 9670 

p^/[j V 9670 




ji • < 



3 'T 

— ^ I 9601 
9309, resp. 9319 

P=fr}> 9601, 9319 

'Varr. on follow, pi. 

L. 3: 9916+9316, 9903, (9913, 9928). L. 4: 9903, 9913, (9928, 9926, 9916). L. 5: 9903, 9926, (9928, 9913, 9304). L. 6: 
9903. 9928, {9926, 9913, 9304). L. 7 : 9903, (9928, 9304, 9926). L. 8 : (9304, 9903, 9928). L. 9 : (9304, 9619). L. 10 : 
9304,(9308,9619,9313). L. 11: 9308, (9697, 9619, 9313). L. 13: 9308, 9697, (9313, 9619). L. 13:9308. L. 14:9308. 
L. 15: 9308, 9651, (9668). L. 16: 9308, 9651, (9698). L. 17: 9308, (9668, 9924). L. 18: 9308, (9929, 9927, 9668, 9924). 
L. 19 : 9308, 9929, (9666, 9927, 9924). L. 20 : 9666, 9929, 9308, (9927, 99^4)- L. 3i : 9666, 9670, (9924, 9927, 9671, 9929). 
L. 22: 9666, 9670, (9671, 9924). L. 23 : 9666, 9670, (9671, 9924). L. 24: 9666, 9670, (9671, 9924). L. 25: (9666, 
9671, 9670, 9305. 9924). L. 26 : 9305, (9309+9924, 9624). L. 27 : 9309-i 9924, 9305 [col. II ends], 19624, 9610). L. 28 : 
9601, 9309-rx-9924> 9624, (9663, 9319. 9638, <3(>io). L. 29: 9319, 9309^ x- 9924, 9601, 9663, (9665, 9624). L. 30: 
9601, 9663, 9319. 9309. (9665). L. 31 : 9601, 9663, 9319, 9309, (9665, 9312, 9307). L. 32 : 96014 9305, 9663, 9319, (9309+ 
9311, 9665, 9312, 9307). L. 33 : 9305, 9319, 93C9+9311, (9665, 9907, 9663). 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVII 

PI. A2 


Col. Ill, 


9665, resp. 9319 




93 '9 
9601 - 9305 



Col. in. 

' « <j a 


■H^r^ ^^ 


i/^H^ ^ 



U 9663 

la 3 9665. 

JS, 3 re. 9305, 


,3 V 9305 
-^l— ^ 9305 

VurianU confiit ued. 

3 I 9305 ^rH93o5 ' LLJ9319 'T^93".93i9 — ™ :^93i9 ^9311 ^V 

9305 ^3- 9602 \ l^TK. o3n5 131^9602 r/f 9319 1^^9602 7^ 9314^931649311 

■>(\ 9319 ">• ^9316,9311,9602 'CJ ^9319 H 9311 H'^^eoo l^^r 

11 9319, omitted on 9923 • ' 9310, 9316, 9319 ^^ i 





L.34: 9305. 9319. 93". (9665. 9307. S614). L.35; 9305, 9319, 9316+9311, 8614 [col. Ill ends], (9602, 9307.) L. 36 : 
9305. 93i4^93>6- 93". 93i9. 9602, (9307). L. 37 : 9305, 9602, 9314+9316 j 93", 93?9, (93'°. 9307)- L. 38 : 9305, 9602, 
9319. 9310, 93'4-t 9316^9311-9923. L. 39: 9305, 9602, 9316-9923, 9319, 93T0, (9320). L. 40: 9305, 931649923, 
9602, 9310, 9320, 9319. 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII. S. 





Nimiberiuij of liiu;t oil the b(uti» of 

No. 91. 


Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVUI. 8. 




Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3. 

PL Vy 


Mistake of iserib^ 

* Ob/lijKf Hi. 
miMakt of 
. KcrUm. 

^•''Vl\ NA. 

/!//«/• a break i>f nevera/ liiieft 
PL 46 No. nOfoUowK 
Cf. XoK J04 and 106. 

Numberhnj of linrx on th^ haMx of No lOH 
CJ. No. Wo. 

of ncribf. 


Numbering of linen on the ba>tu< of 
No.1. Jos and 204. 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIIl, 8. 

PI 46 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8. 

PI. 47 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, S. 

yv. 4^ 



Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3. 

PI. 4.9 



Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVllI, 8. 

PI. 50 

Trans. An-.. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIU. 8. 

PI. 51. 




fM^ El 


M^ I III >7 f JJL27 


T^ *v 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc N. S. XVIII, 8. 

PL 52. 





N§ ^ 


Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII, 8. 

PL 5S 

Trans. Am. Phil. See.. N. S. XVIII, 3. 

PI 54 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc N. S. X.VI 

PL 55 



Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 0. 

PL 56 




Col. I. 

CnL J I. 

Col. III. 

Col. IV. 

Col V. Col. VI Col. VII 






Trar.s. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 3. 

PL 57 

Col. VII. 

Col. VI. 

Col. I. 

'Co/. IV. U, U, G, jn-. Col. V, S, 10, 20: Eiwiire of the. acnbe. 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3. 

PL oS 





Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N S. XVIII. 8. 

n. r,9 



Tr«ns. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII. 3. 

Fl. 60 







Trans. Am. Phil Soc. N. S. XVIII, 8. 

PL 61 












Trans. Am. Phil. Soe.. N. S XVIII. a. 

PL ea 







Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8. 

Fl. 63 



'('oL III, 17: Renil ^ the tr"! i^ eruMire of the ncribe. 
Vol. Ill, S8: Rend -^t— the re-'it ix eiwiii-e tif the xerlbe. 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. K. S. XVIII, 3. 

PL 64 



1^ £ 




Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII. 8. 

PL 65 


Col I. 




Trans. Ain. Phil. Soo., N S. XVIII. 3. 

ri titi 





Col. J. 

Col. II. 

ASA. ^^^>JS««^' 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII, 8. 

Pi. 67 

Col. II. 


Col. III. 


■ ' ■<■■ •'- '■ ^^>'^ '^ ■ 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 8. 

PI. 68 

TiHiirs. Am Phil. So<- . N. S. XVIII. 8. 

Pi 611 



"L. 3: Erasure nf the scribe. 

Trans. Ann. Phil. Soc. N. S. XVIII, 8. 

PL 70 


Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, S. 



/' X 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3. 




Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3. 



:■ yi-^ 







Trans, Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII. 3. 



Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 3. 




Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII, 3. 




rrans. Am. Phil. Soo., N. S. XVIII. 8. 








Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVIII, 3. 



Inscription begins at bottom. 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe.. N. S. XVIII, 3. 






68. Pragm, of a barrel-cylinder of Mardukshabikzerim,— Place unknown, 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. 

xvni. 3. 


\ X \ 



69, Fragm, of a Boundary Stone, 70, Inscribed Pebble, 


Trans. Am. Pliil. Sop., N. S. XVllT, 3. 







Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIIl. 3. 


r ^i 


Heicjlit, 63.5 cm. ; dinnieter at the top, S3 cm. 

J-onild in an tiprijjht position ,s..49 ni. below tlie eastern fotnuiation of I'r-tiur'.s /iggnrrat, atui ."^.05 nl. b*low a pavement 
wliich consists rntii tlv of liurntil bricks of Sargon I and Narfini-Sin. It stood 7 ni. soTitli-cast from an altar, the top of 
which was c. 2..yi m. liij^lier than tliat of the vase. 

Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, N. S. XVIII. 8. 



71 cm. hiyh, 31 cm. span. 33 em. rise. 

At the orifice oi an open drain passing nndtr the eastern corner of L'r-Oiir's Xigjjnrrat, c. 7 m. below the foundation of the 
sante, and 4. 57 m. helow a pavement which consists entirely of burned bricks of Sargon I and Naruui-Siii. View taken from 
iusiUe the drain, l-ruut uf arcli opened to let light pass through. 

trans. Am. Phil. Soc. ^f. S. >iVIII, g. 





Trans. Am. Phil. Soe., N. S. XVUI, d. 




1.6 (8), 7 (9)— Three stairs of the Ziggurrat. i— Kast corner of Ir-Ciiir's Ziggurrat. 2— Kxcavated rooms on the south- 
east side of the temple and separated from the latter hy a street. 3— Causeway built by Ur-Gur, leading to the entrance of the 
Ziggurrat. 4— Deep trench extending from the great wall of the temple enclosure to the facade of Ur-Our's Ziggurrat. 5— Modern 
building erected by Mr. Haynes in 1S<J4, after an unsuccessful attempt by the Arabs to take his life.